As many of you may be aware,  Intel's 8088 chip is available 
in two styles.  The original chip,  which Intel released up until 
1982,  and  a new chip since 1982.  The reason for the release of 
the new chip is apparent;  the original chip does not conform  to 
the  specifications  that  Intel printed in the  Intel  Handbook. 
     A detailed  discussion is given in an article by Will Fastie 
in PC Tech Journal vol 1:  no 2,  p 106. The older chip allows an 
interrupt before the SP register is updated,  which may push  the 
CS and IP flags into the wrong area of memory.  The result can be 
a  system lockup,  crash,  etc.  There are two ways to  determine 
which  chip is in your PC.  The older chip bears a copyright date 
of 78. The newer chip bears a copyright date of 78,81. The second 
way to check is to use DEBUG to step through increments and check 
the  registers.  The following steps were printed in the  article 
mentioned above.
In DOS 2.0: enter DEBUG
      what you enter                            response
     -A 100                                    XXXX:0100
(use the value XXXX your system returns)
     XXXX:0100 MOV ES,AX
     XXXX:0102 INC AX
     XXXX:0103 INC AX
     XXXX:0104   press enter
     -T                                     display of  all 
                                            registers

For DOS 1.0 or 1.1 :enter DEBUG
     -E  100                                XXXX:0100  xx:8E 
                                             xx.CO xx.40 xx.40
     -T

    If  the  value returned for AX is 0 then you've got  the  old 
chip. A value of 1 will be returned by the new chip.
     I spoke to IBM regarding this,  and they have stated that as 
far  as  they  are  concerned,   the  old  chip  satisfies  IBM's 
requirements.  IBM  will not replace the defective chips  (unless 
you  pay the $200+ for the 8088/8087 pair).  While many PC  users 
eagerly await full implementation of the 8087 chip,  I feel  that 
it  is  a  bit tacky for a company that is cornering the  16  bit 
arena to take such a position. IBM has at least given lip service 
to  large  user  groups such as the CPC.  I  think  it  would  be 
appropriate  for the CPC to voice an objection to IBM's policy on 
the recall of these chips.




hink  it  would  be 
appropriate  for the CPC to voice an objection to IBM's policy on 
the recall of these chi