Talk:Micro Channel architecture

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.


Back in the day (circa 1990), the word was that MCA had failed because only (numbers approximate) 50,000 distinct indentification codes were available for available for third party cards, and IBM had reserved half of them for their own use, and promised to disperse the others to anyone who asked for one. But it was this threatened layer of administration that sank the standard: hardware builders didn;t want to trust IBM. Am I remembering it wrong? If anyone says so, I'll shut up about it. --Crid 03:42, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Micro Channel vs MicroChannel?[edit]

Wasn't it officially written as "MicroChannel Architecture" (ie. without a space between Micro and Channel) or is my memory failing me? Letdorf 15:13, 22 June 2006 (UTC).

I believe the IBM way is to leave the words separate, and IBM rarely if ever used MCA as an acronym. I was once told from an informal IBM source that one reason for this was to avoid a trademark conflict with Music_Corporation_of_America. --Warphammer 07:58, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

In fact we in IBM Micro Channel Architecture world, were under stict instructions NEVER to use MCA because of Music Corporation of America's Trademark. At IBM, I wrote many of the Micro Channel Documents and presentations and I NEVER used MCA. The whole item needs MCA, as an abbreviation, expunging with a note as to why.— Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 12:01, 20 November 2011

We need to have a reliable source stating that the trademark for the music corporation was the reason IBM never used the three-letter acronym MCA, which has other uses.
That makes sense, but there are other guidelines for Wikipedia. When IBM announced their PS/2 line, they used "MICRO CHANNEL (TM) architecture". MOS:TM says to avoid using all caps, so the title of this article has been Micro Channel architecture since March 2004. And some sources (e.g., the LA Times) do conform to IBM's usage. However there are many sources that do not, e.g. Peter Norton in Inside the IBM PC and PS/2 (ISBN 0-13-467317-4) uses the Micro Channel Architecture or MCA. He then says that "informally", we often refer in general to the new PS/2 bus as "the Micro Channel". Per WP:COMMONNAME, Wikipedia prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in reliable English-language sources). MCA is a commonly used acronym, but "MicroChannel Architecture" is not a proper name, as "Micro Channel", IBM's trademark, is. Wbm1058 (talk) 03:08, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Streaming Mode[edit]

Does the section on Micro Channel bandwidth take into account the 'streaming' mode that could be used in later PS/2 and RS/6000 servers? This mode, as I recall, took a start address and an initial 32-bit data segment, and then took over the address bus for additional data to be written in sequence as if the Micro Channel were a 64-bit data bus at 10MHz for block transfers. IBM gave this as an 80MB/sec mode, but it is possible that overhead and other limitations led to the 66MB/sec figure here? --Warphammer 07:58, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

EISA Speed[edit]

The article reads "As a reaction to this, in late 1988 the "Gang of Nine", led by Compaq, announced a rival bus - EISA. Offering similar performance benefits, it had the advantage of being able to accept older XT and ISA boards"

But EISA never reached beyond about 60% of the speed that MCA had. EISA was marketed better and did offer better performance than ISA. It wasn't until VESA Local Bus that MCA was surpassed in speed.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Z07 (talkcontribs) 05:09, 25 April 2007

— Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 12:01, 20 November 2011