Talk:Wintel

Visual Wintel

http://wintel.us/images/wintel.jpg is a wintel inside logo, marked as an (R) registered trademark of wintel.us.

Would be a representative image to make this article visual ...

Deserves at least a See Also link, I guess. Already is fifth hit of http://images.google.com/images?q=wintel

-- Pelavarre (talk) 15:38, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Old discussion

Really, is it WIntel, this is, W(indows) + INTEL ??

Wow! This is one of the worst pages I have ever seen here! Mav, you chopped out a lot of dross, but why did you leave the balance in? (And, damn it, I have other things I want to do tonight.) Tannin

I just got rid of the worst of it - hopefully somebody can salvage what is left and turn it into an article. --mav

Wilco. It ain't going to be a good one, but I'm on the case. Someone else can come along and add a little beauty to my bare bones a little later. Tannin

Moved this here, mistakes & all, in case it's not already covered in a computer history entry somewhere. Tannin

In the 19th century, a company emerged called International Business-Machines (IBM). IBM gave all of the new industry which have grown to large to manage themselves a solution -- business-automation. IBM specialized in ways of automating record-keeping, management, accounting, et cetera. By the early 20th century, a saying emerged:

"Noone ever got fired for buying IBM."

In the mid-1940s, a company called Remington-Rand (makers of electric shavers) started making computers. Since companies use computers for business-automation, IBM entered the computer-business, in the later 1940s, after Remington-Rand. Since none ever get fired for buying IBM, by the early 1950s, IBM made more computers than all other companies combined.

In the 1970s, the first personal computer, the Altaire came to be. The first successful computer -- indeed, one of the most successful computers of all time -- the Apple II. IBM wanted in on the market. In the late 1970s, IBM started development on its personal computer.

Tannin - The current figure is 90%, not 95%. Macs make up 5% and Linux/other make up the rest. --mav

Mav, I've gone back to 95% because (taking the Mac as 5%) and taking the broader definition used in the text, all other personal computers are Intel architecture and thus WinTel. Linux counts if we use a narrow definition (as does AMD & etc.), and that would give us a (very rough) 66% or, as in the text, "two-thirds". Sun servers and the like don't count because they ain't desktops or personal computers. Amigas and the like have such a tiny market share that we need not count them.)

My wild guess of two thirds is: AMD & assorted minor CPU vendors: ~ 25 to 30%. Throw in 'nix and assorted minor operating systems, and "two-thirds" sounds about right. -- Tannin

You lost me... Linux on Intel in LinTel, Mac is Mac and then there is Linux/Unix on many other chips (not to mention niche OSes). All that together is about 10% of the personal computer market. --mav

Tel remembers telecommunication to me User:Mac

Sorry Mav. I'll go a little more step by step. First, a "desktop computer" is your common or garden everyday variety (even though most of them are mini-towers and don't sit on desks!). It's either a PC or a Mac. No other competitors remain, unless we count really weird stuff. (Are they still making the Acorn Archimedies?) Industrial-strength machines don't count (Sun & HP servers, dedicated CAD workstations, S/400s & etc): they are either servers or workstations, not desktops or PCs. Now, to WinTel:

1. Narrow definition: Wintel = Windows & Intel. Windows ~90% market share, Intel ~70 to 75% market share: round figures, call it 2/3rds.
2. Broad definition: WinTel = anything that uses an industry standard X86 architecture, which is defined by Microsoft and Intel and detailed below. Everything uses an X86 architecture except the Mac: hence my 95%.

Industry standard X86 architecture = Intel, AMD, or Cyrix/VIA CPU, standardised methods of inerconnecting components (typically PCI, AGP, ATA or SCSI hard drives, USB, RS-232 serial ports, Centronics printer port, 168-pin SDRAM & the like), usually standard form factor, standard PSU specs, heavily regulated BIOS features, SVGA monitor specs, all that stuff.

It is heavily regulated by standards bodies that (in reality) do exactly what Intel and/or Microsoft tell them to do, except once in a very long while when Intel do something really stupid (such as the RDRAM fiasco, which led to the entire industry saying "to hell with this, we are going with DDR" and Intel, very reluctantly, giving the RDRAM dream away). I was going to cite an example where Microsoft did something really stupid and the industry united to say "to hell with you, Bill, we are doing it this way - but I can't think of one right now.

This regulation of the industry is the real meaning of "WinTel" This is why your Linux box and my OS/2 machines have to go through all sorts of software hoops that would otherwise not be needed. (Consider software modems and GDI printers.) This is why our keyboards have useless little windows keys on them, why the power supply in your Athlon has a surplus 5V connector dangling from it. And so on.

PS: Is the RDRAM fiasco covered on Wikipedia? It sure ought to be. Rivetting stuff: all those ... um ... shall we say optimistic royalty claims and ... er ... innovative patent methods, the Intel $1 share option contract, an incredible $500 share price, then fraud trials, shares dropping to around $4 per ... it's got the lot. And it's all on the public record and all citable. I better check. Or better not - I wean to finish my CAC Boomerang aicraft entry. Tannin

OIC - BTW how did you know I am a Linux user with an Athlon box? You're freaking me out! ;-) -mav

Linux user: that was easy - you posted a screen shot of the front page some time ago. Athlon box: logic - (a) On average Athlons (bar certain specialised uses) offer around 10% to 20% better out-of-the-box performance per dollar of cost. (b) You are an intelligent man and ... er ... a maveric. (c) For you, an Athlon seemed like a safe bet. Tannin

Drat! I have become too predictable. :) --mav

---

I've hardly ever seen this written as "WinTel": it's almost always "Wintel". Can we make the change? The Anome 14:16 Feb 28, 2003 (UTC)

I thought it looked funny. Sometimes I'm a bit slow on the uptake. Consider it done, Mr A. -- Tannin

History

Slight correction: BSD was finnished in 1993, Linux 0.01 in 1991, and Minix for a long time before. User_Talk:Watsonladd

Todo

to do: write stuff about Microsoft/Intel cooperation, and recent tensions between them

I removed the above from the article since that sort of thing is for talk pages. Graue 04:52, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Macintosh with PowerPC

Doesn't look like staying for long now ... the alternatives to Wintel will be only Lintel and Mactel. The alternative to Intel is AMD, but as for x86 in general, it looks like we've attained CPU architecture monoculture. The invisible hand guiding the computer industry, as it were. No-one's taking a risc^Hk anymore. --Shlomital 13:22, 2005 Jun 11 (UTC)

palmtop

"with Palm Computing being the market leader in palmtops" This is no longer a case. Pocket PCs dominate palmtop market now.

Most successful computer of all time?

... It was called the IBM PC and it became the most successful single computer of all time.

Wasn't that the Commodore 64? Here's what that article says:

The Commodore 64 is the best-selling single personal computer model of all time.

Is success being measured by something other than sales? If yes, it would be best to clarify; if not, then which of the two statements is right? --Fibonacci 08:07, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Arm no longer made by Intel?

This text is about 2 years premature. Intel is still fabbing ARM processors and probably will for about 2 years or more as the business is transitioned to Marvell. Some of the higher end ones with PCI buss and memory controlers built in (like Verde) are still being sold under the Intel name. I'm going to strike the text. 12.159.72.39 09:54, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Wintelism

Hi, a search for the word "Wintelism" brought me here.

There is a reference for this:

Borrus, Michael [2000] “The Resurgence of US Electronics: Asian Production Networks and the Rise of Wintelism,” in Michael Borrus, Dieter Ernst and Stephan Haggard eds., International Production Networks in Asia: Rivalry or Riches? London and New York: Routledge: 57-79.

Just so the word is registered here.

Pgazknyau (talk) 07:13, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

WAMDEE?!

Seriously, what the duck? I removed the ridiculous "wamdee" part, I won't budge about it and if you disagree with me just google for it and you'll hopefully be enlightened. 84.216.46.248 (talk) 21:28, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Link to article about Vista and Office 2007

Your arguing was wrong - see my edit summary. And please do not remove the link again, the article has too few sources and any external info (in this case through an externa link) is valuable. Thank you!--Kozuch (talk) 13:20, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I missed the first reference to Wintel as I skimmed the article, but it's not about "Wintel" as a term for IBM PC derivative computers running Windows, but for code bloat in Office and Vista. If you want to use it as a source inline it so that we can see what it is being used as a reference for.

Keep in mind that if we are simply going to link articles mentioning Wintel we can get quite a few more:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-10787_3-10141326-60.html

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Murphy/?p=1180

http://www.eetimes.com/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=206503988

http://www.windowsvistaweblog.com/2008/06/27/wintel-what/

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/947/1009947/2007-time-for-the-wintel-end-game

But we don't link these as they only use the word. They (and your) article can be used as sources but are not 'on topic' enough for an external link.

--Anss123 (talk) 14:05, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

I am against removal as the link is the only article and not blog post mentioning Wintel I could find.--Kozuch (talk) 11:58, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Look at WP:EL and Wikipedia:Citing_sources#General_reference. I'm the only other editor that has objected to your link (and if another would support your position I'd back away), but the link you found is not a general reference nor a topic for further research on Wintel. It does discuss Office and Windows, and it does mention Wintel, but besides the last point there are other - better - articles we could link if we wanted to steer readers towards that.--Anss123 (talk) 12:17, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Deletion?

how has this article not been nominated for deletion? the very concept hardly encyclopedic. it seems to be okay up until "....is portmanteau of Windows and Intel", and then it is just total trash. all this info is found on articles like IBM, Personal computer, Intel, ect. id like to do a cleanup, but im afraid my definition of a cleanup would be to erase everything after "....is portmanteau of Windows and Intel". if that were done, this article wouldnt have enough info to hold Notability as an article. and then that leads me to question why the article exists in the first place. i tagged the article for Importance. i dont have the time right now to maintain an argument over this, but if someone wants to clean up this article, IMO it should lose everything after to the introduction line, and then something needs to be added to give reason why this "Wintel" concept is Notable. but in my opinion it isnt notable and should be deleted. Impreziv (talk) 08:59, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Biased, but INCREDIBLY accurate

I like how the author has done everything possible short of breaking into the designers house at night and shitting on his face to show his hatred of the IBM PC architecture. If any other company released that thing it would have bombed so hard it've left a smoking crater in the ground. Seriously, It was obsoleted about four years before it was even released. 170kb disks? no sound? text only display? monochrome? sign me up.