IBM PC: The beginnings of the PC revolution and MS-DOS (photos)
by Andy Smith | August 11, 2011 4:00am PDT | Image 1 of 12
Previous | Next
The original IBM 5150, the personal computer made its debut at a press conference at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel in New York on August 12, 1981. The IBM 5150 not only kicked off the PC industry, it propelled a company from nowhere to become the dominant force of the tech industry - Microsoft.
For more, read the story by CNET News' Jay Green on the launch of the IBM 5150 and ZDNet's blog on the birthday of MS-DOS by Adrian Kingley-Hughes.
Plus, look back at the early days of the PC with Ed Bott's My life before Windows and Jason Perlow's 1991's PC technology was unbelievable.
Photo by IBM
Captions by CNET News' Jay Greene and ZDNet's Andy Smith
.
Just In
My first computer was purchased in 1981 and was a Sanyo 550 with 64K of memory, an amber monitor, two single-sided 180K disk drives, DOS 1.0, Wordstar 1.0, Spellstar 1.0, and Datastar 1.0 - all running at a blazing 2.8 MHz. Those were the days!
...than your modern Windows-based PC with 3+GHz and gigabytes of RAM...
@JohnMcGrew@ : My circa 1994, 486DX laptop, 16Mb RAM and Windows 3.11 [most people forget the last 1, which was the one that added TrueType from Apple] booted in under 10 seconds, to a silent C:\> prompt.
Typing win, would trigger the Win.bat program and that took almost a minute to "boot" to the old and trusty Program Manager (which people think is the great grand father of the iOS Spring Board, but that shows they knew nothing about old windows).
To me, Windows dreaded boot times appear to lie not on the kernel, not on the services, but rather the Win95 inherited, post boot "pseudo services" (programs placed on the Startup Folder on the Start menu). Hope those are gone in Windows 9.
Typing win, would trigger the Win.bat program and that took almost a minute to "boot" to the old and trusty Program Manager (which people think is the great grand father of the iOS Spring Board, but that shows they knew nothing about old windows).
To me, Windows dreaded boot times appear to lie not on the kernel, not on the services, but rather the Win95 inherited, post boot "pseudo services" (programs placed on the Startup Folder on the Start menu). Hope those are gone in Windows 9.
@JohnMcGrew@... NO, it did not boot faster. I used one of those, with dual 5.25" floppys. It took forever to boot, even with dos 2.x, and one could hear the drive stepper motors working for any operation: read, write, load etc.
@cosuna...
actually there there were separate windows 3.1 and 3.11 releases, i have both on a shelf in my library
actually there there were separate windows 3.1 and 3.11 releases, i have both on a shelf in my library
@JohnMcGrew@... ever try to put dos and win3.1 in a new computer? Fast>>>>>>>! but we're spoiled now with the toys new os's have.
The photo of the 5150 has two glaring errors. First, the 5150 monitor was monochrome. Green to be specific. Second, the Epson FX-80 printer in the photo wasn't available until 1983.
@SteveRMann
The color monitor was an alternative, though I have to admit that I don't remember if it was available at the introduction of the 5150. I do remember that the cost of a PC with mono monitor and two floppy drives and, I believe, 512k of RAM was over $5000. I also remember that my first hard drive for the PC was a Corvus 10MB which was about 2'x1'x6" and as loud as a small aircraft and it also was over $5000.
The color monitor was an alternative, though I have to admit that I don't remember if it was available at the introduction of the 5150. I do remember that the cost of a PC with mono monitor and two floppy drives and, I believe, 512k of RAM was over $5000. I also remember that my first hard drive for the PC was a Corvus 10MB which was about 2'x1'x6" and as loud as a small aircraft and it also was over $5000.
Loverock always has had a very short memory. 
@SteveRMann I suspect that everything about the photo is incorrect since the printer wasn't available yet and the color monitor wasn't available either. All the early IBM pcs looked the same. The dual floppys are also a potential sign of a later model.
@STAN113 : I think I remember that photo circa 1982. As always, it might be a prototype created exclusively for the photo shoot and maybe Epson was involved as an authorized partner.
The color monitor might be just the chassis and the image could have been created on a TV studio (remember that on those days, TV stations had 100k systems for Weather maps creation and could easily coax that image to a regular TV, housed on an IBM enclosure).
As for the dual floppies, I guess that was available from the start, just restricted to availability of the Floppy controller and the Drive unit themselves (made in America by Shugart Associates, owned by Xerox and with no business relation to Shugart Technology then called Seagate)
The color monitor might be just the chassis and the image could have been created on a TV studio (remember that on those days, TV stations had 100k systems for Weather maps creation and could easily coax that image to a regular TV, housed on an IBM enclosure).
As for the dual floppies, I guess that was available from the start, just restricted to availability of the Floppy controller and the Drive unit themselves (made in America by Shugart Associates, owned by Xerox and with no business relation to Shugart Technology then called Seagate)
@cosuna
I suspect that if the picture really is from 1981, then the image on screen is faked. The colors look suspiciously good for only CGA graphics, and EGA wasn't introduced until 1984.
I suspect that if the picture really is from 1981, then the image on screen is faked. The colors look suspiciously good for only CGA graphics, and EGA wasn't introduced until 1984.
@SteveRMann But IBM says in "The birth of the IBM PC": "The $1,565 price bought a system unit, a keyboard and a color/graphics capability. Options included a display, a printer..." Options: "A color/graphics monitor with 16 foreground and background colors and 256 characters for text applications. Its graphics were in four colors." The printer stand definitely says IBM and the photo is from IBM. - Andy
@andy7718: first PC which was actually PC (a complete universal personal computing device attachable to keyboard and monitor) was Apple II, brought in 1977. Before that, there were either "Do it yourself" assembly kits, or boxes with tumblers aka Altair, all of which were nothing like anyone would consider actual PC by any sane standards since late 1970s.
@DeRSSS
Not quite. Removal of the Apple goggles will reveal that the first non-kit 'mass produced' pc was the Micral N, the earliest commercial, non-kit microcomputer based on a microprocessor, the Intel 8008. It was built starting in 1972 and about 90,000 units were sold. In 1976 Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak sold the Apple I computer circuit board, which was fully prepared and contained about 30 chips. The first successfully mass marketed personal computer was the Commodore PET introduced in January 1977. It was soon followed by the TRS-80 from Radio Shack and then the more popular Apple II.
Not quite. Removal of the Apple goggles will reveal that the first non-kit 'mass produced' pc was the Micral N, the earliest commercial, non-kit microcomputer based on a microprocessor, the Intel 8008. It was built starting in 1972 and about 90,000 units were sold. In 1976 Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak sold the Apple I computer circuit board, which was fully prepared and contained about 30 chips. The first successfully mass marketed personal computer was the Commodore PET introduced in January 1977. It was soon followed by the TRS-80 from Radio Shack and then the more popular Apple II.
@whatagenda: reveal that computer you named was box with tumblers which is nothing like "PC" by contemporary standard that goes to 1977, release of Apple II (universal personal computer with (attachable) keyboard and monitor).
I still have my 5150-works great!8bit vga card,y2k bios card,30mb mfm controller/hdd,10mbps 3com nic,one com port card.Istill hve the cga vid card,but sold the monitor long ago.It gets maintenance every two years now,and runs dos 6.0
Weirdly, I still remember those dos text commands, and my finger still use them sometimes
Seriously, how can IBM take credit for the PC revolution (as what is considered a pc, today) and why would anyone give them credit. They were over 6 years late to the game. The PC ,as we know it, happened in 1975 and was growing by leaps and bounds well before IBM's entry into the "revolution." History becomes so skewed with time. The people that created the "revolution" deserve the credit . Readers of this article please research this and learn for yourself who really began the " PC revolution." The year was 1975. As for Microsoft, they were there at the beginning and deserve full credit for playing a huge role in the revolution.
@hxh18
At the time, IBM was the "Business Standard". Prior to DOS, the Computing Industry was hardware driven. Either it had to be compatible with IBM or it had to be compatible with Apple. Most business' worked with IBM, since they already had a strong market share of business related machines... in fact, that's exactly what their name means.. International Business Machines...
As for DOS, it was the catalys that changed the world from a hardware priority to a software (driver) priority. You could take parts and match them up, with the OS bringing them together without the endless frustration of manually entering driver date, after backing up all batch files.. endless string of codes.. I remember the headaches!!
At the time, IBM was the "Business Standard". Prior to DOS, the Computing Industry was hardware driven. Either it had to be compatible with IBM or it had to be compatible with Apple. Most business' worked with IBM, since they already had a strong market share of business related machines... in fact, that's exactly what their name means.. International Business Machines...
As for DOS, it was the catalys that changed the world from a hardware priority to a software (driver) priority. You could take parts and match them up, with the OS bringing them together without the endless frustration of manually entering driver date, after backing up all batch files.. endless string of codes.. I remember the headaches!!
I am probobly preaching in the wrong place, considering the majority here were probobly PC devouts, but I do not consider the IBM PC/Clones to have a signifigant contributing factor to any inspirational beginnings. The most innovative or advanced designs for the time often go little to no credit for the PC 'revolution' or the 'beginnings' every article and documentary focus so much on IBM PC/Windows and Apple/Mac when in fact they were leaps and bounds behind the rest on all levels. The most advanced robust systems are extreemly overlooked (C64, Amiga, Atari XL/ST/Falcon) systems that did so much more, and were way more commonly found in households and were a fraction of the price. I knew many Computer enthusiests in the 'beginnings' very few bought IBM/Clones or Apple products for how limited they were compared to the powerhouse alternatives unless they were just copying the workplace or school, the freethinkers looked elsewhere. So if the article writer wants to give a fair shake to the 'beginnings' it's getting about time for a milestone release of the Commodore 64, you know, the #1 selling computer of the 80's?
@madtony71
The DOS for both Microsoft and Apple's version had a dramatic outcome on the future of Business systems AND Home users. You would be somewhat right with your analogy, if you only look at the small stuff. But when you compare the Business Capability, those you mentioned aren't even in the same ballpark.
IBM didn't care much for the "home" user. They were targeting Business personnel. And having the capability of having the heart and soul of the system small enough NOT to require a room larger than most break rooms was very key.
Many posters in here fail to see that one crux. DOS didn't allow the computer to do anything it didn't do already... It just allowed it to do it in a smaller space...
It's also survived 30+ years, and STILL is at the heart of both Windows and Mac's current OS...
The DOS for both Microsoft and Apple's version had a dramatic outcome on the future of Business systems AND Home users. You would be somewhat right with your analogy, if you only look at the small stuff. But when you compare the Business Capability, those you mentioned aren't even in the same ballpark.
IBM didn't care much for the "home" user. They were targeting Business personnel. And having the capability of having the heart and soul of the system small enough NOT to require a room larger than most break rooms was very key.
Many posters in here fail to see that one crux. DOS didn't allow the computer to do anything it didn't do already... It just allowed it to do it in a smaller space...
It's also survived 30+ years, and STILL is at the heart of both Windows and Mac's current OS...
@MutantBeingX: It's also survived 30+ years, and STILL is at the heart of both Windows and Mac's current OS...
Even the command processor in Windows, while allowing you to use "DOS" commands, is not DOS.
Even the command processor in Windows, while allowing you to use "DOS" commands, is not DOS.
@madtony71
And don't forget lesser seen but equally loved by some, the C128.
And don't forget lesser seen but equally loved by some, the C128.
@madtony71
i AGREE These were more popular. Hhowever they were mostly 8 bit systems. And the crux of the article talks about 16 BIT systems.
The Texas Instruments TI 99-4 was the first 16 bit at home PC. We illegally used it as an adjunct to the F-16 training program maintenance simulators at Hill
ABF in the late 70s to write our own trainer programs, as well as for home use. TI actually had a 9 inch CD read write platter and 7 inch floppy disks which we could use for storage as the Cassette tapes were just too small for our programs. but The home industry side it got axed in 79-80 because "no one will be using 16 bit computers at home" of course the IBM MICROSOFT group were right on the band wagon as soon as the better machine was taken off the market. Sound Familiar ???
i AGREE These were more popular. Hhowever they were mostly 8 bit systems. And the crux of the article talks about 16 BIT systems.
The Texas Instruments TI 99-4 was the first 16 bit at home PC. We illegally used it as an adjunct to the F-16 training program maintenance simulators at Hill
ABF in the late 70s to write our own trainer programs, as well as for home use. TI actually had a 9 inch CD read write platter and 7 inch floppy disks which we could use for storage as the Cassette tapes were just too small for our programs. but The home industry side it got axed in 79-80 because "no one will be using 16 bit computers at home" of course the IBM MICROSOFT group were right on the band wagon as soon as the better machine was taken off the market. Sound Familiar ???
My first PC was C-64 by Commodore I highly recommend the book 'On the Edge: the Spectacular Rise and Fall of Commodore ' "Between 1976 and 1994, Commodore had astounding success in the nascent personal computer business. Amid the chaos and infighting, Commodore was able to achieve some remarkable industry firsts. They were the first major company to show a personal computer, even before Apple and Radio Shack."
@rigo12
One of my first exposures to computing systems was also a Comm 64k. It was extremely limited on it's ability, but it failed to have an Operation System and there was no intergration between the Comm 64k and other peripherals, making it fairly useless beyond basic programming.
I could make a cool fireplace display, but it wouldn't do much else.
ADAM's were also much the same... except you could actually attach a printer with minimal problems... the problem came in the form of the tape drive... prone to failure and not very easy to find support. Coleco should have stuck to game consoles.
One of my first exposures to computing systems was also a Comm 64k. It was extremely limited on it's ability, but it failed to have an Operation System and there was no intergration between the Comm 64k and other peripherals, making it fairly useless beyond basic programming.
I could make a cool fireplace display, but it wouldn't do much else.
ADAM's were also much the same... except you could actually attach a printer with minimal problems... the problem came in the form of the tape drive... prone to failure and not very easy to find support. Coleco should have stuck to game consoles.
TRS-80 with a cassette player to save our little programs on!
CLOAD anyone?
CLOAD anyone?
I still have about 20 IBM PC's from the early 80's. Five different models, classic 5150 PC, XT, AT, Portable and Convertible. They all work! I also have lots of versions of DOS as well as Visicalc etc. When I want to write a C progam I first do it with Borland Turbo C then port it to a modern compiler.
My first computer was the c64 too. We bought it second-hand in 86 and it still was the biggest seller.There was just so much that machine could do.
Perhaps this article should have a different title, ie "the IBM/Clone wars?"
Perhaps this article should have a different title, ie "the IBM/Clone wars?"
...and their collusion with Intel and OEM's which inhibited innovation for over 10 years.
That's Awesome, back then I was young and my first machines were later than 1981... I was the Commodore Vic 20, Ti99-4A, Commodore 64 and and Atari 600XL.
I started with an Altos, if anyone remembers them. From there I went to a TRS 80 or trash 80, programing in basic and saving to a cassette (csave). Now yes "I'm a PC", but I do remember the old days. Yes the commodore and the Atari, oh damn they were the first gaming systems. Oh my life before a mouse. Yes Virgina there were computers that didn't have a mouse. Several years back I bought an unopened copy of windows 3.0 . My daughter of 20 at the time asked why I would want it. The article has reminded me why, "How soon we forget" how it began.
I came on board late, with a TRS-80 II, 64kb ram, program cartridges, a cassette recorder for storing data and a BASIC language interpreter built-in. 8-bit color, oh my, what a thrill.
Join the conversation!
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
Vendor Showcase
Facebook Activity
