Talk:IBM Personal Computer
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| High | This article is on a subject of High priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0. | |
|
CVG To-do:
|
||
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Technology, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to technology. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
 |
IBM Personal Computer was a good article candidate, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. Once the objections listed below are addressed, the article can be renominated. You may also seek a review of the decision if you feel there was a mistake.
Date of review: 18 July 2006 |
 Archives |
|---|
|
Contents |
[edit] Good Article nomination has failed
The Good article nomination for IBM Personal Computer has failed, for the following reason:
-
- Trivia contravenes WP:NOT. I don't actually think the fact there is trivial, so it should be integrated into the rest of the article, and the trivia section then deleted.
- I also think the bullet points at the end of the intro look really bad. You should probably create a section called 'terminology' to put this kind of thing in.
- I don't see why 'IBM PC models is bullet pointed.
- I don't think the character set needs to be included in an encyclopaedia article.
- I don't think the tables under 'IBM PC and PS/2 models' actually tell the reader very much at all about IBM PCs. If you really feel they're necessary, I would recommend some text explaining them, and putting them in collapsible boxes, but I don't think the article would be worse off without them. Worldtraveller 15:03, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- The bullets are changed for a list of page links of models only. Remaining text is reformatted as paragraphs.
- I zapped the char set table and added a sentence referring to the code page instead.
- The PS/2 table and PS/2 info was removed as the relevant info is on the PS/2 page.
- The trivia section was removed and replaced with a section called Longevity. A note on the continued use of old IBM PCs is included, absorbing the example that was in the trivia.
- The tables under the "IBM PC models" summarize some basic details and seem fine to me. Placed in collapsible boxes.
- Michael Daly 21:44, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Flowery crap
"The 'solution' of Third Parties came as an answer to a maiden's prayer."
I don't know exactly what the wikipedia term for this sort of nonsense is (NPOV?), but it probably wants a bit less of it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 160.5.98.139 (talk • contribs).
This is characteristic of User:Futureobservatory's contributions to date. He puts a lot of personal speculation and analysis into the articles he edits. The sections he has added need to be reviewed by other editors for NPOV. Gazpacho 18:35, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Please do review my contributions. As should be obvious, they are abstracted from my trade books and are, as such, more populistic. I keep on trying, but I will be delighted if your editors also can knock them into more suitable shape. Futureobservatory 10:37, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Price
Does anyone know what the original price was? Other PC pages (such as ZX-81) give some indication. I would find it interesting. Google shows that this page did used to have a price, but I can't see any record of it in the history. Thank you.peterl 01:49, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
This is a prime example of why entries in this site are routinely deemed unreliable - the only surprise being that one would have thought the entry on the IBM PC, the grand daddy of today's PC's, would be somewhat accurate. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.161.172.81 (talk • contribs) .
[edit] Irrelevant item
The current third paragraph (on Lenovo) is irrelevant here - this is about the PC and history, not IBM as such and certainly not about Lenovo or recent events. Even if it were appropriate, it's introduced in a completely dislocated way. It would be best to remove it but it should at the least be rewritten. 216.77.225.52 19:19, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
And redundancy: the trivia about the National Weather Service occurs both in Trivia and in the main body. 216.77.225.52 21:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Was IBM BIOS open or proprietary?
This is discussed at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_20th_century_in_review
IBM decided on an open architecture so that other manufacturers could produce and sell peripheral components and compatible software. The ROM BIOS source code was published. IBM did not anticipate that its competitors would find ways to legally duplicate the entire system.
and discussed further at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_PC
IBM made all specifications for their computer open rather than proprietary, with the exception of their BIOS. As the only impediment to an open system with interchangeable suppliers was this BIOS, it was reverse-engineered by Compaq, and the IBM PC became the first fully open-specification computer system, leading to its current dominance in the marketplace. Riding on this wave of popularity, the operating system vendors for the PC (Microsoft) leveraged their position to become the most powerful software company in the world.
--Flsaisalie 22:50, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Answered at Talk:Bill Gates. Gazpacho 00:23, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
- It was proprietary in the sense that IBM asserted intellectual property rights. My recollection is that the BIOS listing in the technical reference manual not only had a copyright notice, it had a conspicuous copyright notice and, I think, other warnings as well.
- It was open in the sense of "not being hidden or secret," i.e. anyone could buy the technical reference manual.
- Obviously, Compaq, Phoenix et. al. would not have had to perform complex and expensive "clean-room" cloning of the functionality of the BIOS if the BIOS had been "open" in the sense of being GPL-licensed or anything like that. Dpbsmith (talk) 03:12, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Cassette
Did it use a proprietary cassette drive or would any normal tape recorder work? How were tapes loaded? Were there special MS-DOS commands to deal with tape functions? Bastie 06:09, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Objectionable renaming
Could we put the article back where it was? The suffix "original" is unnecessary, the original article title was perfectly un-ambiguous. --Wtshymanski 21:41, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] KB / KiB Edit War
This is from WP:MOSNUM
"The use of the new binary prefix standards in the Wikipedia is not required, but is recommended… " "If a contributor changes an article's usage from kilo- etc. to kibi- etc. where the units are in fact binary, that change should be accepted."
It appears that you have to be a contributor to the article to have any say in this choice. A "Drive By" editor can not make the decision. SWTPC6800 00:18, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
