A few weeks with the Pocket 386, an early-‘90s-style, half-busted retro PC
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
The date code on the CPU is 2001 and the display controller ('GPU' is pushing it) and sound chip are 1993. DRAM looks to be 2009, some of the glue logic is 2022. I'd be quite surprised if this isn't from ewaste - to buy those chips from distributors who supply obsolete chips would cost an arm and a leg.
Upvote
9
(9
/
0)
Not trying to be mean, but what possible reason could anyone have for buying anything with a 386 gen processor? I would actually be interested if they built a decent unit with a ryzen processor. Yes, I have worked on 386 and 486 and even an old AT with a 286 chip. Just don't. That is likely a couple of hours of your life you will never get back.
Upvote
-11
(2
/
-13)
If it's just small size you're looking for, something like a Koosmile P8 (or any one of the equivalents being manufactured in China) is almost the same size as the Pocket 386 (slightly smaller, IIRC) and has a 12th-gen N100, 12GB RAM, 1TB M.2 SSD, touchscreen and pen support. Also has the great swivel display you used to see on some of the old Sonys (screen swivels 180 degrees, and then lays flat over the keyboard for a tablet experience.)
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
Hobbyist curiosity and backup hardware for old embedded systems (ie, old CnC machines with pre-Pentium PCs running them). Some of them have very specific timing requirements or legacy interfaces that don't play well with newer hardware. Serial USB adapters are a notorious example.
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
Good review crappy consumer product. Spot on about 386CX it sucked. I refused one when offered at work said get me a DX. Did PC system utility development in C and ASM. Tools were slow enough in those days needed a DX. Funny no mention of Win 386 which worked for me being the predecessor to 3.x. Tried it when first shipped to OEMs for free before available retail. Being a computer programmer for 40 years, have used Windows at work for 35 years I reckon makes me a Windows old timer.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
We use 486 versions at work for machine control.
They come in a PC104 form factor, with an ISA bus in a stackable format, and a multi-pin connector carrying mouse, keyboard, serial ports etc.
There's no CMOS backup battery, because most uses don't need one, but it can be added.
They're a neat piece of kit for the job they are designed to do. We image a CF card, plug it in, and it just works.
That’s it - no software install, no bios configuration.
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
I still have my old plasma-screen car-battery-sized luggable (pop-up screen and fold-down keyboard) that contains a '386DX and a '387 math co-processor. The original '387 installed had the infamous FDIV bug and was replaced by Intel. The CMOS battery has long since died, and while I still have the manual, I've lost the desire to replace the battery and reconfigure the BIOS. It still boots to the CMOS error, with screen, keyboard and speaker still working. The beige plastic case has the expected color changes.
Anybody want it? If so, I'll list it on FB Marketplace, or wherever those interested would prefer.
Anybody want it? If so, I'll list it on FB Marketplace, or wherever those interested would prefer.
Upvote
0
(1
/
-1)
I... feel that I tried to run Win95 on my 486DX2/66 back in the day, and that was painful and prompted me to upgrade to a P133. I can't imagine running Win95 on a 386, much less an SX-class equivalent.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
You can get FreeGEM through the (GPL'd) OpenGEM project, no piracy required. It's an opened version of the formerly proprietary GEM source code.
The code hasn't been developed for about a decade but it's supposedly still able to run, especially on FreeDOS.
Still won't address the crappy hardware designs in this portable, sadly.
The code hasn't been developed for about a decade but it's supposedly still able to run, especially on FreeDOS.
Still won't address the crappy hardware designs in this portable, sadly.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
It’s not about speed or modern hardware. I want an authentic bare metal experience of dos games in the 486 speed range with sound blaster.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
For hobbyists, It's like people asking "Why would you want a classic car when modern cars go faster and don't need as much maintenance?"
Upvote
4
(5
/
-1)
I understand that perspective, but don't share it. With new computer hardware, one can still largely emulate the old (and yes, I do realize it's not quite the same thing). However, new cars don't emulate old ones very well (nor should they; I think that's a good thing).
Upvote
0
(1
/
-1)
It's not that clear cut in this instance, since the Pocket 386 isn't exactly "authentic" either with the modern battery and screen, and at least newer than "authentic" CPU, sound, and video parts. You can't get an authentic 386 laptop that's as small and light as it is. The same would be true of a similar Pocket 486 or Pentium, which is part of why Danathar wants one or something else small and light to play the games on. It's no longer actually "authentic" if you're not running it on actual vintage hardware, a compromise made for some modern conveniences like size, weight, screen quality, and battery life.
So since the authenticity is already compromised, the line drawn on what is more or less "authentic" is somewhat arbitrary. Like, is running an eeePC in DOS using a modern created Sound Blaster emulator TSR for the more modern soundcard in it more authentic than just running the game in DOSBox? It's a preference, but arguments could be made either way.
To bring it back to the "classic car" analogy. It's like someone wanting to recreate the experience of driving an 80s classic car, but not actually an 80s classic car. So they want a modern reproduction of it with some modern conveniences built in (airbags, automatic transmission, Airplay car radio, etc.), but they draw the line at including an electric motor; they'll go with a modern ICE engine thanks. The authenticity has already been compromised, so it's just a question of how far one will go.
Last edited:
Upvote
8
(8
/
0)
Scummvm?
I remember an ancient interview with some Microsoft higher up that said the goal for windows 95 was performance similar to wfw311 with win32s extensions. But the performance of said combo on a 386 was already crap.
Last edited:
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
I bought a 486DX33 in 1992 when I went to college. It was a beefy machine at the time with 16MB of RAM when lots of people were still buying 386SXs with 2MB. That machine ran mostly DOS games, Windows 3.0 and 3.1 for fun, and later OS/2 2.1 and 3.0. It probably ran some Chicago betas and 95 release, as well, but it was long in the tooth at that point and had seen incremental upgrades.
Having spent my career in aerospace manufacturing, this makes a mountain of sense to me.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
The USB to PS2 adapters are passive most of the time and require the mouse or the keyboard to support the legacy protocol as well as USB.
So the author is wrong saying that the PS2 breakout is not good - it is as good as it gets.
So the author is wrong saying that the PS2 breakout is not good - it is as good as it gets.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
IIRC, the 386 was optimized for running 16-bit code, not 32-bit code, since that was the bulk of what existed at the time. Though I've read at least one article that suggested that was less of an intentional decision and more likely the result of shiat internals that couldn't cope well with 32-bit code.
/edit: spelling
Last edited:
Upvote
0
(1
/
-1)
Do aerospace manufacturing companies and other industry with a need for this kind of connectivity really rely on no-name PCs purchased from AliExpress from "whoever is selling these systems"? (Quote is from original Ars piece on this machine here.)
If so, I'll certainly believe it, but I am surprised. I would've thought there would've been a few other options by well-known companies with tech support, etc. for those kinds of uses. If there isn't, this sounds like a nice opportunity to court those who would prefer something better known.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
A lot of these niche portables source their key components from electronic waste. Hard to see a Western country taking that upon themselves for the components being discussed.
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Thanks for that. You explained it better than I could.
I understand that how far you go is a bit arbitrary. It’s like asking how authentic is using a real 6502 vs one implemented as an FPGA? Both are “bare metal” (I’m sure there are arguments there as well).
I’m leaning toward getting an early 90s 486 Thinkpad. That might suit my needs though it’s obviously not “portable” in the sense of this
Interestingly, enough there have been efforts to completely build a brand new Commodore 64 with components that are manufactured today and I don’t mean using FPGA but rather re-implementations of all the original chips. I think the only thing they’re not able to source are the Sid chips.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
I'm still torn on the idea of pulling parts from retro hardware for these sort of projects, but man for a product that seems as half-arsed as this it seems an fairly big waste.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
These are just outside what I’d consider a good pick for a retro themed system, my first non Amiga pc I owned myself was a second hand Epson 500 series 486 laptop.
It was not too big, not too heavy, and just fast enough to do win 95 and all the hits of the early 90s with about 2 hours in notepad or a half hour of doom on battery.
The super tiny 386 is too little in every metric, a 12 or 13 inch 486 with usb and vga out could be very tempting to myself and fellow elder millennials.
It was not too big, not too heavy, and just fast enough to do win 95 and all the hits of the early 90s with about 2 hours in notepad or a half hour of doom on battery.
The super tiny 386 is too little in every metric, a 12 or 13 inch 486 with usb and vga out could be very tempting to myself and fellow elder millennials.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Most of that retro hardware was being scrapped anyway, I suspect. I know I've personally sent hardware with these chips in it to the dump, in the past.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
9.6? Fucking check your privilege, brosephina.
<---- started at 1200. But I had an acoustic-coupled 300 for a bit, the kind that clamps onto the handset. That? That was... not awesome.
Ah, the good old days of BBS'ing on my TRS-80 Color Computer 3 with my 300-baud manual switch modem (not an acoustic coupler, but you had to pick up and dial the phone number of the BBS and flip the toggle switch to "originate" and then hang up the phone)
edit: or was it flip the switch to "receive"? I don't remember that clearly - it was over 35 years ago!
Last edited:
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
I really don't understand a 386SX pick when they had a fast-XT in the bag already. The 486 is still pretty common in the embedded world even today. So, one of those, even an SX would be way nicer as most early games used integer math anyway and didn't benefit from the FPU... plus you could run dos,win3.x, win9x. Besides they have a full load of EDO anyways, so 32bit wide memory wouldn't be an issue except maybe during board layout, but TBH, looking at the pictures of the board, they could have done it easy... and the XT layout would need modifications for 16-bit memory anyway... 32bit memory would let them do a 386DX or a 486 SX/DX/SLC/DX2/DX4
I know they did sell a lot of 386SX in the day, but it was not really worth it in the beige-box-generic-land at the time as the only difference was just cost of the processor. I think most of the enthusiasts in my area at the time really skipped 36sx and waited for the 386DX costs to drop (and clocks to increase) as the 486-line hit the street.... pretty much skipping the 80286 too as the protected mode was weird and it came and went pretty fast. (we did have guys traveling to JAPAN to get FPU for 80286 laptops, but they upgraded desktops/laptops to max every generation anyway--way more cash than sense!)
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
I had that DCM, but attached to a CoCo2 with the RS232 card... shortly afterwards... got a Tandy 1000 and a 1200BPS... Next stop was a 386/DX-40 with a Hayes external 2400 that had error correction and a proprietary 9600/2400 BPS mode that was amazing for downloads! Had the good 16550's in that 386, so there were no buffer overflows
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Those processors would be hard to target as the branch prediction and such would still be sensitive. Now a 486DX4-100 or so... that would take care of nearly all of the win9x space.... however, it'd complete with this device (and vice versa) at the low end. And you'd not want that unless you had sold all of these.... but that's sort of available already... wonder if we could get one of these "https://winsystems.com/product/sat-dx4/" in this box using this display?
Upvote
-1
(0
/
-1)
Wasn't much of a benefit to them, as it led to the European Union Anti-Trust case that got them in all sorts of trouble.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
You can still buy a new, rack‑mounted, embedded 386 or 486 DOS system with genuine ISA slots that accepts your very specific ISA process control card that can't be adapted (because it works in DMA or takes over the ISA bus entirely) for all your manufacturing programming needs.
The only problem? They cost upwards of $1,000, sometimes even several thousands...
Most Ma & Pa embroidery shops, small machinist shops with two decades old CNC machines repaired over and over, small Chinese CNC shops and similar would not be able to afford it. And this machine is likely targeted at those small customers. That it might be some fun for hobbyists as well is just an added bonus.
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
What would you use it for? Doing anyhing online with OS/2 nowadays wouldn't be safe.... but probably safer that using Windows as very few people would bother to try to hack you.
OS/2 is also so old it predates any still active botnet.
Upvote
-2
(0
/
-2)
If this machine was targeted at customers with legacy needs it would come in the form of an ATX motherboard with actual legacy ports and ISA slots.
Furthermore $1000 is the price of nice brand new PC nowadays, it's not that much.
And you can probably get it for less if you're ordering from Aliexpress.
Here's a motherboard with Pentium 4 CPU and 512 MB RAM included for ~$150.
https://pt.aliexpress.com/item/1005005908676051.html
Upvote
1
(2
/
-1)
There's a new SID replacement that uses the pi pico. That's not the only project. It' the most prominent one I'm aware of.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
Using a Pi Pico to emulate the SID is a step further from using a newly produced SID chip than even an FPGA implementation would, which does exist:
https://www.fpgasid.de/
Here's a video comparing some of the SID replacements:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBl7VqTvaWQ
A list of SID replacements:
https://www.c64-wiki.com/wiki/SID_replacement
Upvote
1
(1
/
0)
Yea I’m aware of those. It’s not an original chip but I doubt we’ll ever have a modern remanufactured implementation of the original design.
I’m betting my ears couldnt tell the difference between an original or the FPGA. Even between different original SID chips it’s not unusual to hear slight differences
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Nobody used a 386 and barely anyone used a 486 for Windows 95. Why write an article when that is your main point? Go back to wired or wherever you went.
Upvote
-12
(0
/
-12)
Are you sure "barely anyone" used a 486 for Windows 95?
From an article from January 1995:
https://www.cecs.uci.edu/~papers/mpr/MPR/ARTICLES/090101.pdf
This marketing study from 1997 about Windows 98 shows that of the 23 million PCs in the US that were considered "Win 95 Capable," about half (11.7 million) were 486 PCs:
https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/atr/legacy/2006/03/03/447.pdf
That study also notes Windows 95 was on about 62% of primary household PCs at the time, So even if every Pentium PC was running Windows 95 by then, that's still probably 12% of Windows 95 installs running on 486s. And that's at 2 years after the launch of Windows 95.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)