VOGONS


First post, by aries-mu

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Hey guys,

in my ideal world, the official name of the Intel Pentium CPU would have been simply 586. Same graphics style as 486s.

I know I know, trademark protection and stuff. I'm just saying, in my ideal world.

I was so drooling over the windows of magazines stores (there was no internet yet, rememba? 🤣), waiting for that huge "586" on the cover.... and then none... Pentium.

And, wanna laugh? Well, at a certain point, when the "586" was almost expected, first days of the month, like every month, I run to the magazines store to drool over the shelf. As usual, the first few days of the month they didn't get the new issue of my favorite computer magazine, and I would try again every day, until delivered.

One day, I enter one of the magazine stores of my little southern Italian town, I still remember which one and the scenery... All the magazines were exposed on the shelf, frontally, like you could see all the covers, except, every magazine partially overlapped the previous one, so that, for each magazine, you could only see about half-ish of its cover...
So I see it!!! there it is!!! The new issue!!! and guess what did stand on the cover? a HUGE:

58

Covered by the next magazine (that I don't remember what was it).
So I freak out and think: they made it! Intel released the 586 CPU!!!! And this issue of the magazine is all about that!!!!!

Until... the cover was saying:

58 386 SX

It was a review of 58 PCs with 386 SX CPUs.

Lol, can you imagine my disappointment?

They said therefore to him: Who are you?
Jesus said to them: The beginning, who also speak unto you

Reply 1 of 13, by Errius

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Just be grateful IBM didn't choose the Zilog Z8000 (zed-eighty-hundred) for the IBM PC. We would be on the z8000000000000 (zed-eighty-ten-billion) by now.

Is this too much voodoo?

Reply 2 of 13, by Cyberdyne

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

And curse history, that IBM did not use a 68000 or at least a 68008 cpu.

I am aroused about any X86 motherboard that has full functional ISA slot. I think i have problem. Not really into that original (Turbo) XT,286,386 and CGA/EGA stuff. So just a DOS nut.
PS. If I upload RAR, it is a 16-bit DOS RAR Version 2.50.

Reply 5 of 13, by Errius

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Apparently in U.S. law you can't copyright a number. You also can't copyright an acronym, which is why many companies insist that their acronym-like names "don't stand for anything" (AOL, Windows "NT", even our beloved GOG does this)

Is this too much voodoo?

Reply 6 of 13, by red_avatar

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Errius wrote:

Apparently in U.S. law you can't copyright a number. You also can't copyright an acronym, which is why many companies insist that their acronym-like names "don't stand for anything" (AOL, Windows "NT", even our beloved GOG does this)

This is also what I heard for why Intel went with Pentium: because the 386 & 486 had many "clone" CPU that used that name which confused consumers since it was often not mentioned which brand of CPU it was. I know a store not far from me, sold "clone PCs" which didn't have real Intel CPUs and the local IBM dealer was really trying to scare my dad about how clone PCs were unreliable, only a little bit cheaper, prone to break down, using cheap Chinese brands, etc. so I'm sure Intel wanted to distance themselves from these brands and use a name they could copyright.

Having said that, that Vietnamese store that sold these clone PCs was damn cheap for its games 🤣 . I never bought any hardware there but bought tons of classics: Command & Conquer, Warcraft II, Diablo, Touché (which turned out to become really rare and expensive to get these days), ...

Retro game fanatic.
IBM PS1 386SX25 - 4MB
IBM Aptiva 486SX33 - 8MB - 2GB CF - SB16
IBM PC350 P233MMX - 64MB - 32GB SSD - AWE64 - Voodoo2
PIII600 - 320MB - 480GB SSD - SB Live! - GF4 Ti 4200
i5-2500k - 3GB - SB Audigy 2 - HD 4870

Reply 8 of 13, by gdjacobs

User metadata
Rank l33t++
Rank
l33t++
Errius wrote:

Apparently in U.S. law you can't copyright a number. You also can't copyright an acronym, which is why many companies insist that their acronym-like names "don't stand for anything" (AOL, Windows "NT", even our beloved GOG does this)

Boeing has been able to previously, but Intel was unsuccessful at registering both 486 and 586. They were able to register "i586" and "Intel 486", but they probably felt it was too difficult to differentiate from clones that way.

All hail the Great Capacitor Brand Finder

Reply 9 of 13, by aries-mu

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Guys, what's more common than "apple"? And yet Apple is Apple. How did they manage to trademark their name???

They said therefore to him: Who are you?
Jesus said to them: The beginning, who also speak unto you

Reply 10 of 13, by LunarG

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
aries-mu wrote:

Guys, what's more common than "apple"? And yet Apple is Apple. How did they manage to trademark their name???

They actually breached a trademark when registering it. "Apple Records" was an already existing company, founded by The Beatles for releasing their music, and also others. They made an agreement with "Apple Computer Company" to allow them to use the "Apple" name, on the condition that they'd never attempt to enter the music industry.
Aaand we all know how that worked out.
Macintosh was also an existing name. A type of actual apple... As in the fruit.
iPhone was a name before Apple's smartphone. iCloud was as well. And many, many more. Mostly Apple Inc. has just bought the companies to shut down the lawsuits.

WinXP : PIII 1.4GHz, 512MB RAM, 73GB SCSI HDD, Matrox Parhelia, SB Audigy 2.
Win98se : K6-3+ 500MHz, 256MB RAM, 80GB HDD, Matrox Millennium G400 MAX, Voodoo 2, SW1000XG.
DOS6.22 : Intel DX4, 64MB RAM, 1.6GB HDD, Diamond Stealth64 DRAM, GUS 1MB, SB16.

Reply 11 of 13, by aries-mu

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Wow! I didn't know that!

But, wait a second, I'm not talking about lawsuits from other companies with similar names.

I'm talking about the process of having the application for the "name" approved by the government's bureaucrats in the first place. The legislation about trademarks says you cannot register such common/descriptive names. How did they manage to have "apple" approved in the first place, even if there wasn't any other company using it.

They said therefore to him: Who are you?
Jesus said to them: The beginning, who also speak unto you

Reply 12 of 13, by LunarG

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
aries-mu wrote:

Wow! I didn't know that!

But, wait a second, I'm not talking about lawsuits from other companies with similar names.

I'm talking about the process of having the application for the "name" approved by the government's bureaucrats in the first place. The legislation about trademarks says you cannot register such common/descriptive names. How did they manage to have "apple" approved in the first place, even if there wasn't any other company using it.

Because the name they registered was Apple Computer Company.

WinXP : PIII 1.4GHz, 512MB RAM, 73GB SCSI HDD, Matrox Parhelia, SB Audigy 2.
Win98se : K6-3+ 500MHz, 256MB RAM, 80GB HDD, Matrox Millennium G400 MAX, Voodoo 2, SW1000XG.
DOS6.22 : Intel DX4, 64MB RAM, 1.6GB HDD, Diamond Stealth64 DRAM, GUS 1MB, SB16.

Reply 13 of 13, by aries-mu

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
LunarG wrote:

Because the name they registered was Apple Computer Company.

oh I see! So like that it's allowed, thanks!

They said therefore to him: Who are you?
Jesus said to them: The beginning, who also speak unto you