On 2024May 31,, at 4:37 PM, Murray McCullough via cctalk
<cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 6:02 PM Dave Dunfield via cctalk
> <cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>> Liam Proven wrote:
>>> It needs to have a microprocessor to qualify.
>>> ... No µP = not a PC.
>>
>> Not entirely sure ...
>> http://dunfield.classiccmp.org/primitiv
>>
>> Dave
>>
> I quite agree. I do believe that a *u*P is the minimum that can be accepted
> to call a PC a microcomputer. Another is that it must be usable, i.e.,
> non-programmable, for the average PC owner. Like a car one doesn't need to
> know how it works in order to drive/use a car to get from one place to
> another. One can use a computer to solve a spreadsheet problem in an
> efficient manner without learning the inner-workings of such spreadsheet.
> Happy computing,
> Murray 🙂
With no expectation of changing the opinion of anyone who thinks they have the
definitive definition of ‘first’ or ‘personal’, I will just mention that:
• the HP9830 (1972),
• Wang 2200 (1973),
• IBM 5100 (1975)
were all:
• single-user,
• desktop (2200 with CPU and PS in pedestal)
• fully integrated (CPU, memory, storage, keyboard and display),
• boot-to-BASIC (or APL for the 5100)
machines.
None of them used a microprocessor.
And they all functionally look a lot like the common home/personal computer of
~10 years later.
