 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Processor Choice
editI think these used 80186 processors, which was odd, as XT clones were using 8088 and AT clones used 80206.
Main body suggests that Piconet was initially used as a networking system and was replaced by Z-Net. This is not true.
Z-Net was the primary networking technology used by the Nimbus computers, linking it to RM Net LM (Lan Manager)servers. It was a development of the Zilog inspired networking system and was similar to Ethernet in that it was a CSMA/CD system.
Piconet was (by design) a peripheral connect bus. The initial design meetings within RM were looking at ways in which the Nimbus PC deliver a computer with a single interface into which all connected devices (including keyboards and mice) could be linked and accessed by the PC. In many ways it was a technology that was before its time and the number of Piconet boxes created was pretty limited. One device was a box that emulated the I/O ports of the BBC Micro, another provided a Parallel printer port. In some respects it was a per-cursor to USB in design concept. It never really took off as it was too expensive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.168.229.226 (talk) 12:50, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Inaccuracies
editI was a member of of the team that developed the Nimbus PC-186 and the AX and VX machines that followed. This article is so full of inaccuracies it is ridiculous. Obvious errors:
- The Nimbus network originally used the PC-186 as both server and workstation. The AX and VX came later.
- The AX and VX were launched at the same time. The VX was not a replacement for the AX.
- Print jobs were never routed via the main server then copied to the print server. They were always routed direct to the print server.
- As the previous poster points out, Piconet was for connecting peripherals. The concept was similar to USB. The idea that it became redundant due to Z-Net's higher speeds is ridiculous.
- The RM Nimbus did not run a modified version of MS-DOS. It ran bog standard MS-DOS. All RM did was provide the correct device drivers (something all manufacturers had to do at that time) and a handful of utilities for configuring the machine.
- The Nimbus PC-186 was not IBM compatible at all and could not be used as an IBM compatible. IIRC SETMODE was for the later AX and VX PCs. These were IBM compatible. SETMODE (if that is the correct name) allowed them to run software that had been written to use the Nimbus PC-186 ROM BIOS (which had a totally different set of APIs to the IBM equivalent).
- The AX and VX were 100% IBM compatible all the time. You did not need to use SETMODE to select PC mode. The machines were fully compatible from the moment you turned them on.
There may be other inaccuracies but I wouldn't like to say for certain at this distance in time. --Prh47bridge (talk) 17:29, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
- Corrections now applied. Thanks for the feedback. Best wishes Guffydrawers (talk) 07:58, 20 January 2016 (UTC)