Joe - Re: "Intel won big because IBM picked Intel. After that, it was a perfect execution, I grant you that."
IBM did not pick Intel's name out of a hat.
IBM had been doing business with Intel since the mid 1970s.
IBM purchased full blown cache memory systems from Intel using Intel's high speed (at that time) 4K SRAM chips and built these up into cache memory systems by Intel's Memory Systems division.
These were turn-key boxes that plugged right into IBM S390 and 3080 mainframes.
IBM, in the latter part of the 1970s, contracted with Intel to provide DRAM memory chip modules - two 16K DRAMS stacked on top of each other - to make a 32K module.
Intel developed and delivered tens of millions of these to IBM's specifications in the late '70s, early '80s.
IBM's Word Processing Division designed in the Intel 8086 in their early Datamaster (I may not remember the exact name of the product). This was done in 1978/1979.
When the Boca Raton division needed a CPU, IBM corporate had already bought, designed in and QUALIFIED the Intel 8086 - so it's 8 bit cousin had a foot in the door.
And IBM wanted a system with an 8 bit bus to use existing 8 bit peripherals.
And Intel had the foresight in 1978 to modify the 8086 design for just this type of application, creating the 8088 in 1979.
And IBM wanted to bootstrap their new PC by making a machine with readily, or near-readily available - software.
Since CPM and MicroSOFT BASIC had been the software "giants" of the late '70s, and most of those products ran on 8080/Z80 processors, the Intel 8088 became the NATURAL CHOICE.
Furthermore, Intel designed, developed and manufactured COMPLETE DEVELOPMENT SYSTEMS to support their 8086/88 processors, These offered hardware and software support with Intel's own (Kludgy but workable) ISIS operating systems and languages - mainly ASM86 and PLM86.
Further, Intel designed developed and manufactured a complete family of support circuits for the 8086/88 CPU including clock generator chips, DMA chips, PIO chips, Serial I/O chips, etc., etc.
Intel offered the WHOLE PACKAGE - THERE WAS NO OTHER RATIONAL CHOICE.
If you have an original copy of IBM's PC manuals, check out their BIOS listings and check out MicroSOFT's system software. All the listings were generated on Intel development machines as the headers indicate.
Prior to that time, Microsoft did most of their software development on DEC 10 or DEC 20 machines using MicroSOFT cross compilers. The IBM program gave them the opportunity to use microprocessor development tools to make microprocessor-based systems.
Note - IBM looked at Motorola but Motorola had slipped their design schedule for the 68000 by more than a year. The entire design was done by hand - NO CAD TOOLS - and they couldn't figure out how to debug it for more than two years after Intel got their "Kludgy" 8086 to market.
IBM could not wait for the LATE 68000. They had a commitment to ship a machine in the fall of 1981 and the 68000 was not even available in late 1980 for them (IBM) to do serious design.
You should also note that Intel DID USE CAD tools (CALMA GDS I as well as their own internally developed Design Rule Checkers - first of their kind!) and was among the first to adopt these. This has always been a "hidden" advantage that Intel has possessed.
No - the choice of Intel by IBM was one of natural selection. All the groundwork that Intel did in systems, components, development systems, system support chips, IC DESIGN/Development and reliability - they all culminated in a logical choice for IBM.
The Intel 8088 and 8-bit MCS80 peripheral chips.
Paul |
