Non-PC compatible x86 computers (2007)

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Enthusiasts revisit a long-deleted Wikipedia article on “non-PC compatible” x86 machines, using a salvaged blog version to explore how many early DOS-era systems used Intel CPUs without adhering to IBM PC hardware standards. Commenters debate why such material struggles to fit Wikipedia’s sourcing and neutrality rules, while trading examples from Japanese PCs and school systems to industrial controllers, consoles, and hybrid cards that blurred boundaries between x86, compatibility, and emulation. The exchange highlights both the richness of obscure computing history and the tension between preserving it informally and documenting it in formal reference works.

Wikipedia article and deletion issues

  • The original piece was a Wikipedia article later deleted as an “unencyclopedic essay.”
  • Commenters note it violated core policies: no original research, lack of citations, non‑neutral tone, and argumentative structure.
  • Some suggest it could now be rebuilt as a neutral, sourced list article, but others point out:
    • A single personal blog is weak as a reliable/secondary source.
    • Notability and sourcing thresholds (multiple independent, reliable sources) would still be hard to meet.
  • Discussion touches on Wikipedia culture shifting from “be bold, enjoy editing” to a more rules‑heavy, gatekeeping feel.

Missing and additional non‑PC‑compatible x86 systems

  • Several x86 systems not in the original article are mentioned:
    • NEC PC‑98 and related APC, PC‑100, FM‑Towns; partially supported by MS‑DOS/Windows but with key differences (e.g., drive letter conventions).
    • RM Nimbus PC‑186 and other 80186‑based machines; various 8086/80186 coprocessor setups (e.g., Intergraph, Apple II cards).
    • DEC Rainbow 100 with Z80/8088 combo and proprietary floppies; Sirius/Victor, Apricot, Siemens PC‑D, CTOS machines.
    • Arcade boards and embedded gear using x86 (Livingston Portmaster, early Cisco PIX, Lucent/USRobotics gear).
  • Some borderline or unclear cases are raised (Nokia 9000, OLPC XO‑1, Zenfone 2).

PC‑compatible non‑x86 and hardware emulation concepts

  • A major subthread explores “PC‑compatible non‑x86” via heavy emulation:
    • Idea: ARM/RISC‑V SoC that emulates a complete x86 motherboard and exposes legacy buses (ISA/PCI) for industrial cards or retro hardware.
    • Existing partial analogues: PiStorm for Amiga, retro consoles with real cartridge/bus interfaces, FPGA systems (MiSTer, ZX Spectrum Next, Amiga/Q68 successors), and historic “sidecar” x86 boards for Amiga, SunPCi, AS/400 PC cards.
  • One key distinction: CPU‑only emulation vs full system/bus emulation that can drive original peripherals.

ARM/RISC‑V “PC‑like” platforms and standards

  • Discussion of building ATX‑form‑factor ARM/RISC‑V boards with UEFI, ACPI, PCIe, etc., reusing the PC ecosystem.
  • Challenges highlighted:
    • Internal SoC IP cores often lack ACPI/PCIe‑style discovery and generic drivers; they rely on DeviceTree and board‑specific integration.
    • ARM SBSA/SystemReady and Windows‑on‑ARM show a path, but driver coverage and ecosystem incentives lag x86.
  • Some see potential for vendors (e.g., GPU or CPU makers) to pair non‑x86 cores with mature PC‑style infrastructure.

Technical clarifications and terminology

  • Correction: 80286 could run “full Unix” with swapping; 80386 mainly added better demand‑paging.
  • Debate over what “PC” and “PC compatible” mean: originally “IBM PC” and compatibles, not just any personal computer.
  • IBM PS/2s are described as largely PC‑compatible at the software level despite a different expansion bus (MicroChannel).