Talk:IBM RT PC

PC RT

I don't think it's correct to state that the term "PC RT" is incorrect, when in fact, IBM themselves use this term (some in official documentation) to refer to this hardware. [1] Oregonerik 22:09, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

PC RT is not correct, it was labeled RT PC, and IBM admitted that it was mislabeled, ( marketing said that), but it is suspected that Management labeled it as such as to not complete with their mainframe business or mid range system/36. The references and reviews will bear this all out. 170.75.140.124 (talk) 06:37, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Microkernel

What's called a microkernel here seems to be what is normally referred to as a hypervisor. Housel (talk) 22:54, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

No. It really was a microkernel. The OS'es that sat on top of it were gutted, as they did not have control over virtual memory, drivers for keyboard, mouse, or even for accessing the various disk partitions. This caused a lot of pain when the rs/6000 came out, since all of these missing pieces had to be added to the AIX kernel. Of course, on a machine with 4MB-16MB of RAM total, everything was smaller, simpler back then.

By contrast, hypervisors trick the OS into thinking that it's running on "bare metal"; AIXv2 did *not* run on bare metal. -- However AOS did (and you could not run AIX if you were booted into AOS, because the microkernel was absent). linas (talk) 07:15, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

This seems a lot like paravirtualization, which is still a hypervisor. The RT's VM could host multiple OSes at once so it's not like the usual microkernel. 130.101.90.64 (talk) 22:08, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

X10R4 vs. X10.4

Someone changed X10.4 in the earlier article to X10R4. I'm pretty sure that the traditional notation was with the dot, not the letter R. The R should up sometime around X11R2 or R3 or somthing like that, right? Memory fading ... linas (talk) 07:23, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, it certainly seems to have been referred to as X10R4 at the time: eg. [2] [3]. Letdorf (talk) 11:54, 4 December 2008 (UTC).

Huh. OK. Maybe we just called it X10.4 within IBM only ... or maybe those old neurons are just remembering wrong. linas (talk) 23:44, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Pfft. Of course, typing in "X10.4 release" into the search bar also provides a number of hits too: [4]. So maybe my memory ain't so bad after all. 69 hits for "X10.4 release", 45 hits for "X10R4 release". linas (talk) 23:47, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Merged Academic Operating System into here

In case anybody was wondering why IBM Academic Operating System has been merged into here, that article cannot be expanded beyond a short paragraph. The AOS was a uncommon OS for a uncommon computer (the RT PC), based on BSD Unix with a few IBM-added extras, that was offered only to certain colleges and universities that qualified for IBM educational discounts. The article had no sources since its creation ~10 years ago, except for a copy of a USENET FAQ, which fails WP:RS. Searching Google Books, ProQuest, and Gale General OneFile finds no significant mentions of this OS. If the AOS content wasn't merged here, it would have certainly failed a WP:AfD debate. 99Electrons (talk) 02:57, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• IBM PC-RT 6151.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:37, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• IBM PC-RT 6151.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)