Computing desk
< May 21	<< Apr \| May \| Jun >>	Current desk >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

May 22

First mass-produced home computer with a terminal

Which was the first mass-produced home computer with a terminal ? 223.191.16.212 (talk) 08:41, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

When you say "with a terminal" are you literally meaning a standalone computer attached (probably by RS232) to a separate terminal? Martin of Sheffield (talk) 08:49, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes .223.191.16.212 (talk) 09:33, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If we go very far back into the history of computers, Computer terminal means something very different from its modern usage. It is unlikely that we can pick a "first" unless we very clearly define what counts as a "terminal" and what counts as a "computer." For example, early Minitel hardware was a terminal - which could, in principle, be used at home - is this device a "computer"? How about a PhoneType home teletype terminal, from the mid-1960s? How about a 1930s-vintage printing-telegraph terminal? As we go farther back in history, "computers" and "terminals" are very different, almost entirely unrelated, pieces of technology. Nimur (talk) 12:08, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A difficult question. "Home computer" is usually seen as distinct from anything requiring a computer terminal. Instead they were the generation of computers with keyboards, but using the home TV as a display. A few very early home computers used terminals, the IMSAI 8080, Altair 8800 and the Heathkit H8 and H11 being examples, but there was a very short interval between computers like the Acorn System 1 which were too simple to operate with a terminal, through to those like the Apple II which didn't need one. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:58, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Computer History Museum maintains a free online exhibit of computer brochures, so you can see how companies evolved their technology and their marketing literature in the late 1970s and early 1980s as more people considered purchasing individual personal computers for use outside of their workplaces.

I'm inclined to say that the first "mass-produced home computer" looked more like the HP-35, or the later model HP-65 which could connect to peripherals for user programming. They're outwardly quite dissimilar to a modern personal computer, but inside they .

The Altair 8800 also seems like a good candidate - our article shows magazine covers calling it the "world's first minicomputer kit to rival commercial models..."

There were many early home computers, but the most successful ones with massive historical impact were probably the 1977 models: Commodore PET, TRS-80, and Apple II.

I am also partial to the IBM Personal Computer, and its later evolution into IBM Personal System/2. These models were later to the game than some early competition, but the IBM models were of great historical importance to the "home computer" market. These models were so impactful that for almost three decades, the term "PC" came to mean any personal computer that copied the specific hardware and software architecture of the IBM.

Nimur (talk) 11:50, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But the PET, TRS-80, Apple and PC didn't use a separate terminal, which is what the OP was asking. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 12:18, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, a home user could set these up as a terminal-server or dumb-terminal client, if the home user were really bored... but you'd run the risk of being called a nerd...

Really, though - most home users would not have been setting up home-networks with full-blown terminal servers and terminal clients until long after Linux became popular, in the mid 1990s, and a long time after the personal computer went mainstream. Terminals that shared access to a server would have been popular in schools, labs, and businesses, but home users probably didn't have cheap (zero-cost) or easy access to Unix, networking software, and other important bits, until Linux became widely available for i386 PS/2-type computers. See also, History of Linux.

Nimur (talk) 15:01, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need a terminal server to attach a terminal to a computer, just a suitable port or ports. The first machine I worked on professionally (a VAX 11/782) had a rack of 80 DB-25 outlets for RS-232 connections to other equipment. There was no ethernet (not even 10base5 thickwire) to attach a terminal server to.

At home, although I never actually used it, the ZX Interface 1 for the ZX Spectrum boasted RS-232 and IIRC claimed that you could use an industry standard terminal. Of course the terminal would cost more that the computer! Martin of Sheffield (talk) 16:53, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]