222
This won't be controversial at all (thelemmy.club)
submitted 17 hours ago by to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev
61 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/68636679

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 7 points 7 hours ago* (3 children)

tbh, didn’t PC have a more strict definition back then?* specifically, an IBM PC compatible? so, intel processor + DOS (and later OS/2 or windows), which isn’t what apple sold

*(genuinely asking, i was not around in the 90s 😅)

(tho i guess even by that definition, intel macs were PCs lol, but that was way later)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 5 hours ago* (1 child)

    the two definitions (general Personal Computer, or IBM-compatible) always co-existed in different contexts.

    aside - even though Apple ads really drove the Macs Vs PCs thing - before they went Intel, Apple computers used to have IBM PowerPC architecture processors.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 6 hours ago

    You know that's another good point, while I was around then and even had a computer back then I'm from a non English country and just learned "PC == personal computer". It never occurred to me that Apple might have reacted to a US terms or definition up until this very moment it was always "they just wanna be different and fancy".

    Perhaps a USA person my age bracket can give insights!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent