What did the 'turbo' button actually do?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
I remember the computer I played Commander Keen on as a child had a turbo button that I was forbidden to touch, what did this button actually do?
hardware ibm-pc
|
show 8 more comments
I remember the computer I played Commander Keen on as a child had a turbo button that I was forbidden to touch, what did this button actually do?
hardware ibm-pc
45
just because it could have been easily googled does not mean having a canonical answer on this site is not worthwhile.
– Neil Meyer
May 20 at 15:29
28
@NeilMeyer Originally, this site's rules were that questions needed to show research effort. I don't know if that rule is still applies, but the primary purpose of this site was to be a place where people could get information that was otherwise not accessible. I think that ship has sailed, though. Questions that can be answered with little to no effort of research typically get voted much higher than questions that actually add information to the web, simply because the former is applicable to larger audiences. Makes me almost want to post a question like, "What does the commandcat
do?"
– JoL
May 20 at 20:01
14
@JoL Or “How do I exit vim?”
– Davislor
May 20 at 21:49
16
@JoL askubuntu.com/questions/642942/what-is-cat-used-for
– Clonkex
May 20 at 23:31
4
@KamiKaze That's definitely not what the diamond mods should do. Stack Exchange is a user-driven community, the rules are set by the community, and enforced by voting.
– pipe
May 21 at 8:00
|
show 8 more comments
I remember the computer I played Commander Keen on as a child had a turbo button that I was forbidden to touch, what did this button actually do?
hardware ibm-pc
I remember the computer I played Commander Keen on as a child had a turbo button that I was forbidden to touch, what did this button actually do?
hardware ibm-pc
hardware ibm-pc
edited May 21 at 6:57
chicks
1972 silver badges11 bronze badges
1972 silver badges11 bronze badges
asked May 20 at 11:19
Neil MeyerNeil Meyer
8692 gold badges6 silver badges17 bronze badges
8692 gold badges6 silver badges17 bronze badges
45
just because it could have been easily googled does not mean having a canonical answer on this site is not worthwhile.
– Neil Meyer
May 20 at 15:29
28
@NeilMeyer Originally, this site's rules were that questions needed to show research effort. I don't know if that rule is still applies, but the primary purpose of this site was to be a place where people could get information that was otherwise not accessible. I think that ship has sailed, though. Questions that can be answered with little to no effort of research typically get voted much higher than questions that actually add information to the web, simply because the former is applicable to larger audiences. Makes me almost want to post a question like, "What does the commandcat
do?"
– JoL
May 20 at 20:01
14
@JoL Or “How do I exit vim?”
– Davislor
May 20 at 21:49
16
@JoL askubuntu.com/questions/642942/what-is-cat-used-for
– Clonkex
May 20 at 23:31
4
@KamiKaze That's definitely not what the diamond mods should do. Stack Exchange is a user-driven community, the rules are set by the community, and enforced by voting.
– pipe
May 21 at 8:00
|
show 8 more comments
45
just because it could have been easily googled does not mean having a canonical answer on this site is not worthwhile.
– Neil Meyer
May 20 at 15:29
28
@NeilMeyer Originally, this site's rules were that questions needed to show research effort. I don't know if that rule is still applies, but the primary purpose of this site was to be a place where people could get information that was otherwise not accessible. I think that ship has sailed, though. Questions that can be answered with little to no effort of research typically get voted much higher than questions that actually add information to the web, simply because the former is applicable to larger audiences. Makes me almost want to post a question like, "What does the commandcat
do?"
– JoL
May 20 at 20:01
14
@JoL Or “How do I exit vim?”
– Davislor
May 20 at 21:49
16
@JoL askubuntu.com/questions/642942/what-is-cat-used-for
– Clonkex
May 20 at 23:31
4
@KamiKaze That's definitely not what the diamond mods should do. Stack Exchange is a user-driven community, the rules are set by the community, and enforced by voting.
– pipe
May 21 at 8:00
45
45
just because it could have been easily googled does not mean having a canonical answer on this site is not worthwhile.
– Neil Meyer
May 20 at 15:29
just because it could have been easily googled does not mean having a canonical answer on this site is not worthwhile.
– Neil Meyer
May 20 at 15:29
28
28
@NeilMeyer Originally, this site's rules were that questions needed to show research effort. I don't know if that rule is still applies, but the primary purpose of this site was to be a place where people could get information that was otherwise not accessible. I think that ship has sailed, though. Questions that can be answered with little to no effort of research typically get voted much higher than questions that actually add information to the web, simply because the former is applicable to larger audiences. Makes me almost want to post a question like, "What does the command
cat
do?"– JoL
May 20 at 20:01
@NeilMeyer Originally, this site's rules were that questions needed to show research effort. I don't know if that rule is still applies, but the primary purpose of this site was to be a place where people could get information that was otherwise not accessible. I think that ship has sailed, though. Questions that can be answered with little to no effort of research typically get voted much higher than questions that actually add information to the web, simply because the former is applicable to larger audiences. Makes me almost want to post a question like, "What does the command
cat
do?"– JoL
May 20 at 20:01
14
14
@JoL Or “How do I exit vim?”
– Davislor
May 20 at 21:49
@JoL Or “How do I exit vim?”
– Davislor
May 20 at 21:49
16
16
@JoL askubuntu.com/questions/642942/what-is-cat-used-for
– Clonkex
May 20 at 23:31
@JoL askubuntu.com/questions/642942/what-is-cat-used-for
– Clonkex
May 20 at 23:31
4
4
@KamiKaze That's definitely not what the diamond mods should do. Stack Exchange is a user-driven community, the rules are set by the community, and enforced by voting.
– pipe
May 21 at 8:00
@KamiKaze That's definitely not what the diamond mods should do. Stack Exchange is a user-driven community, the rules are set by the community, and enforced by voting.
– pipe
May 21 at 8:00
|
show 8 more comments
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
The Turbo button originally adjusted the clock speed of the computer between the full speed of the machine and a slower speed intended to be compatible with something more industry standard. It wasn't at all uncommon for software to be written with a specific speed of hardware in mind and either fail to operate completely or operate in a way that was unusable at a faster speed.
(One example of this was the GATO submarine simulator, which was built to run on a stock IBM PC. The faster your computer, the faster your virtual submarine would go. By the 90's, it was easy to find hardware where you could zip across entire virtual world in a matter of seconds. The Turbo Pascal runtime had a more serious issue where programs built using it would fail to run entirely on machines fast enough to cause an overflow during a timing loop on startup.)
PC Accelerator boards had some interesting variations on the theme. Many of these boards could be disabled entirely with a switch to get back to the original, un-accelerated performance of the machine. (This feature wasn't completely without risk, because I remember at least one or two instances where I saw PC's that had these boards installed, but never enabled.) There were also a few boards that had finely adjustable clock rates. Much like overclocking today, the idea was to pick the fastest speed at which your specific hardware was stable. Some of these would also automatically defer selecting the faster clock rate at startup until the BIOS self check had passed. In an effort to avoid this sort of acceleration, IBM put a timing loop in the self check that would fail if the machine detected a faster clock rate... so waiting to select the faster rate would let the self check pass and then accelerate the machine.
All that said, the need for a button to slow a machine down wasn't all that commonplace. At the end of the era of Turbo Buttons, I think the biggest reason to have one was to put the text Turbo on the front of the machine, with whatever connotations of speed it implied.
19
Turbo Pascal fixup button.
– Janka
May 20 at 16:44
4
I used to play the games Gorillas on QBasic, that used an empty for loop to slow down the animations, and worked on a 25Mhz machine. When you ran it on a faster machine, the animations were very fast and the game almost unplayable
– fernando.reyes
May 20 at 18:47
9
I think it is also worth noting that many PC's had LED 'readouts' that showed the CPU speed when in/out of turbo mode. These LED displays had absolutely nothing to do with the actual speed of the computer, and were configured by an array of jumpers on the backplane that allowed you to configure whatever you wanted the display to show. For example, the LED display in a 486DX2/66 might be jumpered to show 66 when turbo was 'on' and 04 or 08 when the turbo was 'off'. But you could really set them to show anything...
– Geo...
May 21 at 11:31
5
@Geo A few of us spent a day reassembling an old machine in a HS programming class just so we could make the turbo readout say 'FU'. Ah, maturity...
– brhfl
May 21 at 20:49
3
@val Actually, there's no overlap. While there was a bug in Turbo Pascal's CRT (division by zero in a delay function if the computer clock didn't change when measuring the speed), it only happened around 300 MHz or so CPUs (early Pentiums, especially combined with the new tricks these employed to be even faster). There was no turbo button for those.
– Luaan
May 22 at 6:53
|
show 8 more comments
The turbo button was implemented on machines with CPUs faster than the original IBM PCs. Some software relied on the CPU running at a certain speed to work properly, rather than using some external timekeeping mechanism to avoid running to fast.
With the turbo mode disabled via the button the computer would run at approximately the speed of an original IBM PC, for compatibility with that software. With it enabled the computer would run as fast as it could.
7
The speed varied. On 8MHz 8086s, the button would switch between 4.77MHz (IBM speed) and 8MHz; but later models still had turbo buttons even though they didn’t have a setting identical to the speed of the original PC. I had a 33MHz 386 which would run at 16MHz when the turbo button was toggled.
– Stephen Kitt
May 20 at 12:37
7
Not to mention turbo buttons that simply disabled chache instead of changing clocks.
– Raffzahn
May 20 at 13:44
2
Not just software. You may have been saddled with a peripheral board that ran only at 4.77MHz speed so you'd have to boot without turbo mode if you wanted to use the device.
– davidbak
May 20 at 16:35
1
It might be noteworthy that as kids we were totally misled by the labeling at least in some cases - where enabling the (seemingly magic) Turbo button actually had the opposite of the expected effect. Also, an audible example would be Monkey Island, where the sound was distorted when running on a fast machine... IIRC, this seems to back this up.
– kubi
May 20 at 18:28
I assume “speed“ and “faster” refers to the clock rate only, not instruction times or MIPS?
– Michael
May 21 at 6:52
|
show 1 more comment
In addition to the other answers given:
I remember newer computers (up to the Pentium class) having such buttons.
I doubt that the Turbo button was connected at all in most later computers.
I suppose that the manufacturers of PC housings did not want change their production and therefore continued producing housings with a Turbo button (which was used for 8 MHz 8086 computers) although the button was not used for newer computers any longer (and Pentium computers could not be switched to 4.77 MHz frequency).
I remember some computers that could be switched between 33 and 66 MHz using the Turbo button. Maybe the manufacturers produced the housings to be compatible with such mainboards (but in 99% of all cases the button was not connected).
3
Certainly my first PC (an Escom Pentium 75 using the Intel Advanced/ZP motherboard) had a turbo button that wasn't connected to the motherboard - it still had fast (75MHz) and slow (25MHz) clock speeds, but these were selected using keystrokes, leaving the button redundant.
– john_e
May 20 at 19:58
I think the last PC I had with a turbo button that actually did something was a Cyrix 6x86 (Socket 7). The turbo button on that PC switched the L2 cache on the motherboard on and off.
– mnem
May 20 at 20:13
4
The turbo button on the case could sometimes be useful even if one's motherboard didn't have a connector for it. It could also be connected to the key-switch input if one wanted to disable the keyboard temporarily (e.g. in a household where cats might pounce an unattended keyboard), or--by cutting a couple wires and splicing them together--it could be used to mute the speaker.
– supercat
May 20 at 20:29
There's a lot of "doubt" and "suppose" and "maybe" here. Do you have anything to back this up?
– pipe
May 22 at 6:53
2
I had a Cyrix P150+ (roughly equivalent to a Pentium 100) that I ended up spending a day reinstalling Windows on because it had become dog-slow. When the fresh install of Windows was also slow, I hunted around for other causes, and eventually realised I had pressed the turbo button. So it was definitely connected on that 5th generation machine.
– RB.
May 22 at 12:41
|
show 1 more comment
The turbo button selected between normal and slow speeds. Slowing the system was done by slowing down the CPU clock speed or disabling cache memory
add a comment |
The turbo button altered the speed on the computer, as some games would reply on the CPU speed in order to determine on how fast the game would run, and this would cause the program to run faster than intended the newer the computer got (however this isn't a problem with today's computers as we can emulate another cpu), so the turbo button was made in order to slow to computer so that it could run these programs. However, some made the computer run faster.
Welcome to Retrocomputing! Thank you for the answer, but it doesn't add anything that the other answers already have addressed.
– DrSheldon
May 23 at 2:02
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "648"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f11056%2fwhat-did-the-turbo-button-actually-do%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The Turbo button originally adjusted the clock speed of the computer between the full speed of the machine and a slower speed intended to be compatible with something more industry standard. It wasn't at all uncommon for software to be written with a specific speed of hardware in mind and either fail to operate completely or operate in a way that was unusable at a faster speed.
(One example of this was the GATO submarine simulator, which was built to run on a stock IBM PC. The faster your computer, the faster your virtual submarine would go. By the 90's, it was easy to find hardware where you could zip across entire virtual world in a matter of seconds. The Turbo Pascal runtime had a more serious issue where programs built using it would fail to run entirely on machines fast enough to cause an overflow during a timing loop on startup.)
PC Accelerator boards had some interesting variations on the theme. Many of these boards could be disabled entirely with a switch to get back to the original, un-accelerated performance of the machine. (This feature wasn't completely without risk, because I remember at least one or two instances where I saw PC's that had these boards installed, but never enabled.) There were also a few boards that had finely adjustable clock rates. Much like overclocking today, the idea was to pick the fastest speed at which your specific hardware was stable. Some of these would also automatically defer selecting the faster clock rate at startup until the BIOS self check had passed. In an effort to avoid this sort of acceleration, IBM put a timing loop in the self check that would fail if the machine detected a faster clock rate... so waiting to select the faster rate would let the self check pass and then accelerate the machine.
All that said, the need for a button to slow a machine down wasn't all that commonplace. At the end of the era of Turbo Buttons, I think the biggest reason to have one was to put the text Turbo on the front of the machine, with whatever connotations of speed it implied.
19
Turbo Pascal fixup button.
– Janka
May 20 at 16:44
4
I used to play the games Gorillas on QBasic, that used an empty for loop to slow down the animations, and worked on a 25Mhz machine. When you ran it on a faster machine, the animations were very fast and the game almost unplayable
– fernando.reyes
May 20 at 18:47
9
I think it is also worth noting that many PC's had LED 'readouts' that showed the CPU speed when in/out of turbo mode. These LED displays had absolutely nothing to do with the actual speed of the computer, and were configured by an array of jumpers on the backplane that allowed you to configure whatever you wanted the display to show. For example, the LED display in a 486DX2/66 might be jumpered to show 66 when turbo was 'on' and 04 or 08 when the turbo was 'off'. But you could really set them to show anything...
– Geo...
May 21 at 11:31
5
@Geo A few of us spent a day reassembling an old machine in a HS programming class just so we could make the turbo readout say 'FU'. Ah, maturity...
– brhfl
May 21 at 20:49
3
@val Actually, there's no overlap. While there was a bug in Turbo Pascal's CRT (division by zero in a delay function if the computer clock didn't change when measuring the speed), it only happened around 300 MHz or so CPUs (early Pentiums, especially combined with the new tricks these employed to be even faster). There was no turbo button for those.
– Luaan
May 22 at 6:53
|
show 8 more comments
The Turbo button originally adjusted the clock speed of the computer between the full speed of the machine and a slower speed intended to be compatible with something more industry standard. It wasn't at all uncommon for software to be written with a specific speed of hardware in mind and either fail to operate completely or operate in a way that was unusable at a faster speed.
(One example of this was the GATO submarine simulator, which was built to run on a stock IBM PC. The faster your computer, the faster your virtual submarine would go. By the 90's, it was easy to find hardware where you could zip across entire virtual world in a matter of seconds. The Turbo Pascal runtime had a more serious issue where programs built using it would fail to run entirely on machines fast enough to cause an overflow during a timing loop on startup.)
PC Accelerator boards had some interesting variations on the theme. Many of these boards could be disabled entirely with a switch to get back to the original, un-accelerated performance of the machine. (This feature wasn't completely without risk, because I remember at least one or two instances where I saw PC's that had these boards installed, but never enabled.) There were also a few boards that had finely adjustable clock rates. Much like overclocking today, the idea was to pick the fastest speed at which your specific hardware was stable. Some of these would also automatically defer selecting the faster clock rate at startup until the BIOS self check had passed. In an effort to avoid this sort of acceleration, IBM put a timing loop in the self check that would fail if the machine detected a faster clock rate... so waiting to select the faster rate would let the self check pass and then accelerate the machine.
All that said, the need for a button to slow a machine down wasn't all that commonplace. At the end of the era of Turbo Buttons, I think the biggest reason to have one was to put the text Turbo on the front of the machine, with whatever connotations of speed it implied.
19
Turbo Pascal fixup button.
– Janka
May 20 at 16:44
4
I used to play the games Gorillas on QBasic, that used an empty for loop to slow down the animations, and worked on a 25Mhz machine. When you ran it on a faster machine, the animations were very fast and the game almost unplayable
– fernando.reyes
May 20 at 18:47
9
I think it is also worth noting that many PC's had LED 'readouts' that showed the CPU speed when in/out of turbo mode. These LED displays had absolutely nothing to do with the actual speed of the computer, and were configured by an array of jumpers on the backplane that allowed you to configure whatever you wanted the display to show. For example, the LED display in a 486DX2/66 might be jumpered to show 66 when turbo was 'on' and 04 or 08 when the turbo was 'off'. But you could really set them to show anything...
– Geo...
May 21 at 11:31
5
@Geo A few of us spent a day reassembling an old machine in a HS programming class just so we could make the turbo readout say 'FU'. Ah, maturity...
– brhfl
May 21 at 20:49
3
@val Actually, there's no overlap. While there was a bug in Turbo Pascal's CRT (division by zero in a delay function if the computer clock didn't change when measuring the speed), it only happened around 300 MHz or so CPUs (early Pentiums, especially combined with the new tricks these employed to be even faster). There was no turbo button for those.
– Luaan
May 22 at 6:53
|
show 8 more comments
The Turbo button originally adjusted the clock speed of the computer between the full speed of the machine and a slower speed intended to be compatible with something more industry standard. It wasn't at all uncommon for software to be written with a specific speed of hardware in mind and either fail to operate completely or operate in a way that was unusable at a faster speed.
(One example of this was the GATO submarine simulator, which was built to run on a stock IBM PC. The faster your computer, the faster your virtual submarine would go. By the 90's, it was easy to find hardware where you could zip across entire virtual world in a matter of seconds. The Turbo Pascal runtime had a more serious issue where programs built using it would fail to run entirely on machines fast enough to cause an overflow during a timing loop on startup.)
PC Accelerator boards had some interesting variations on the theme. Many of these boards could be disabled entirely with a switch to get back to the original, un-accelerated performance of the machine. (This feature wasn't completely without risk, because I remember at least one or two instances where I saw PC's that had these boards installed, but never enabled.) There were also a few boards that had finely adjustable clock rates. Much like overclocking today, the idea was to pick the fastest speed at which your specific hardware was stable. Some of these would also automatically defer selecting the faster clock rate at startup until the BIOS self check had passed. In an effort to avoid this sort of acceleration, IBM put a timing loop in the self check that would fail if the machine detected a faster clock rate... so waiting to select the faster rate would let the self check pass and then accelerate the machine.
All that said, the need for a button to slow a machine down wasn't all that commonplace. At the end of the era of Turbo Buttons, I think the biggest reason to have one was to put the text Turbo on the front of the machine, with whatever connotations of speed it implied.
The Turbo button originally adjusted the clock speed of the computer between the full speed of the machine and a slower speed intended to be compatible with something more industry standard. It wasn't at all uncommon for software to be written with a specific speed of hardware in mind and either fail to operate completely or operate in a way that was unusable at a faster speed.
(One example of this was the GATO submarine simulator, which was built to run on a stock IBM PC. The faster your computer, the faster your virtual submarine would go. By the 90's, it was easy to find hardware where you could zip across entire virtual world in a matter of seconds. The Turbo Pascal runtime had a more serious issue where programs built using it would fail to run entirely on machines fast enough to cause an overflow during a timing loop on startup.)
PC Accelerator boards had some interesting variations on the theme. Many of these boards could be disabled entirely with a switch to get back to the original, un-accelerated performance of the machine. (This feature wasn't completely without risk, because I remember at least one or two instances where I saw PC's that had these boards installed, but never enabled.) There were also a few boards that had finely adjustable clock rates. Much like overclocking today, the idea was to pick the fastest speed at which your specific hardware was stable. Some of these would also automatically defer selecting the faster clock rate at startup until the BIOS self check had passed. In an effort to avoid this sort of acceleration, IBM put a timing loop in the self check that would fail if the machine detected a faster clock rate... so waiting to select the faster rate would let the self check pass and then accelerate the machine.
All that said, the need for a button to slow a machine down wasn't all that commonplace. At the end of the era of Turbo Buttons, I think the biggest reason to have one was to put the text Turbo on the front of the machine, with whatever connotations of speed it implied.
edited May 20 at 14:44
answered May 20 at 14:30
mschaefmschaef
3,18610 silver badges15 bronze badges
3,18610 silver badges15 bronze badges
19
Turbo Pascal fixup button.
– Janka
May 20 at 16:44
4
I used to play the games Gorillas on QBasic, that used an empty for loop to slow down the animations, and worked on a 25Mhz machine. When you ran it on a faster machine, the animations were very fast and the game almost unplayable
– fernando.reyes
May 20 at 18:47
9
I think it is also worth noting that many PC's had LED 'readouts' that showed the CPU speed when in/out of turbo mode. These LED displays had absolutely nothing to do with the actual speed of the computer, and were configured by an array of jumpers on the backplane that allowed you to configure whatever you wanted the display to show. For example, the LED display in a 486DX2/66 might be jumpered to show 66 when turbo was 'on' and 04 or 08 when the turbo was 'off'. But you could really set them to show anything...
– Geo...
May 21 at 11:31
5
@Geo A few of us spent a day reassembling an old machine in a HS programming class just so we could make the turbo readout say 'FU'. Ah, maturity...
– brhfl
May 21 at 20:49
3
@val Actually, there's no overlap. While there was a bug in Turbo Pascal's CRT (division by zero in a delay function if the computer clock didn't change when measuring the speed), it only happened around 300 MHz or so CPUs (early Pentiums, especially combined with the new tricks these employed to be even faster). There was no turbo button for those.
– Luaan
May 22 at 6:53
|
show 8 more comments
19
Turbo Pascal fixup button.
– Janka
May 20 at 16:44
4
I used to play the games Gorillas on QBasic, that used an empty for loop to slow down the animations, and worked on a 25Mhz machine. When you ran it on a faster machine, the animations were very fast and the game almost unplayable
– fernando.reyes
May 20 at 18:47
9
I think it is also worth noting that many PC's had LED 'readouts' that showed the CPU speed when in/out of turbo mode. These LED displays had absolutely nothing to do with the actual speed of the computer, and were configured by an array of jumpers on the backplane that allowed you to configure whatever you wanted the display to show. For example, the LED display in a 486DX2/66 might be jumpered to show 66 when turbo was 'on' and 04 or 08 when the turbo was 'off'. But you could really set them to show anything...
– Geo...
May 21 at 11:31
5
@Geo A few of us spent a day reassembling an old machine in a HS programming class just so we could make the turbo readout say 'FU'. Ah, maturity...
– brhfl
May 21 at 20:49
3
@val Actually, there's no overlap. While there was a bug in Turbo Pascal's CRT (division by zero in a delay function if the computer clock didn't change when measuring the speed), it only happened around 300 MHz or so CPUs (early Pentiums, especially combined with the new tricks these employed to be even faster). There was no turbo button for those.
– Luaan
May 22 at 6:53
19
19
Turbo Pascal fixup button.
– Janka
May 20 at 16:44
Turbo Pascal fixup button.
– Janka
May 20 at 16:44
4
4
I used to play the games Gorillas on QBasic, that used an empty for loop to slow down the animations, and worked on a 25Mhz machine. When you ran it on a faster machine, the animations were very fast and the game almost unplayable
– fernando.reyes
May 20 at 18:47
I used to play the games Gorillas on QBasic, that used an empty for loop to slow down the animations, and worked on a 25Mhz machine. When you ran it on a faster machine, the animations were very fast and the game almost unplayable
– fernando.reyes
May 20 at 18:47
9
9
I think it is also worth noting that many PC's had LED 'readouts' that showed the CPU speed when in/out of turbo mode. These LED displays had absolutely nothing to do with the actual speed of the computer, and were configured by an array of jumpers on the backplane that allowed you to configure whatever you wanted the display to show. For example, the LED display in a 486DX2/66 might be jumpered to show 66 when turbo was 'on' and 04 or 08 when the turbo was 'off'. But you could really set them to show anything...
– Geo...
May 21 at 11:31
I think it is also worth noting that many PC's had LED 'readouts' that showed the CPU speed when in/out of turbo mode. These LED displays had absolutely nothing to do with the actual speed of the computer, and were configured by an array of jumpers on the backplane that allowed you to configure whatever you wanted the display to show. For example, the LED display in a 486DX2/66 might be jumpered to show 66 when turbo was 'on' and 04 or 08 when the turbo was 'off'. But you could really set them to show anything...
– Geo...
May 21 at 11:31
5
5
@Geo A few of us spent a day reassembling an old machine in a HS programming class just so we could make the turbo readout say 'FU'. Ah, maturity...
– brhfl
May 21 at 20:49
@Geo A few of us spent a day reassembling an old machine in a HS programming class just so we could make the turbo readout say 'FU'. Ah, maturity...
– brhfl
May 21 at 20:49
3
3
@val Actually, there's no overlap. While there was a bug in Turbo Pascal's CRT (division by zero in a delay function if the computer clock didn't change when measuring the speed), it only happened around 300 MHz or so CPUs (early Pentiums, especially combined with the new tricks these employed to be even faster). There was no turbo button for those.
– Luaan
May 22 at 6:53
@val Actually, there's no overlap. While there was a bug in Turbo Pascal's CRT (division by zero in a delay function if the computer clock didn't change when measuring the speed), it only happened around 300 MHz or so CPUs (early Pentiums, especially combined with the new tricks these employed to be even faster). There was no turbo button for those.
– Luaan
May 22 at 6:53
|
show 8 more comments
The turbo button was implemented on machines with CPUs faster than the original IBM PCs. Some software relied on the CPU running at a certain speed to work properly, rather than using some external timekeeping mechanism to avoid running to fast.
With the turbo mode disabled via the button the computer would run at approximately the speed of an original IBM PC, for compatibility with that software. With it enabled the computer would run as fast as it could.
7
The speed varied. On 8MHz 8086s, the button would switch between 4.77MHz (IBM speed) and 8MHz; but later models still had turbo buttons even though they didn’t have a setting identical to the speed of the original PC. I had a 33MHz 386 which would run at 16MHz when the turbo button was toggled.
– Stephen Kitt
May 20 at 12:37
7
Not to mention turbo buttons that simply disabled chache instead of changing clocks.
– Raffzahn
May 20 at 13:44
2
Not just software. You may have been saddled with a peripheral board that ran only at 4.77MHz speed so you'd have to boot without turbo mode if you wanted to use the device.
– davidbak
May 20 at 16:35
1
It might be noteworthy that as kids we were totally misled by the labeling at least in some cases - where enabling the (seemingly magic) Turbo button actually had the opposite of the expected effect. Also, an audible example would be Monkey Island, where the sound was distorted when running on a fast machine... IIRC, this seems to back this up.
– kubi
May 20 at 18:28
I assume “speed“ and “faster” refers to the clock rate only, not instruction times or MIPS?
– Michael
May 21 at 6:52
|
show 1 more comment
The turbo button was implemented on machines with CPUs faster than the original IBM PCs. Some software relied on the CPU running at a certain speed to work properly, rather than using some external timekeeping mechanism to avoid running to fast.
With the turbo mode disabled via the button the computer would run at approximately the speed of an original IBM PC, for compatibility with that software. With it enabled the computer would run as fast as it could.
7
The speed varied. On 8MHz 8086s, the button would switch between 4.77MHz (IBM speed) and 8MHz; but later models still had turbo buttons even though they didn’t have a setting identical to the speed of the original PC. I had a 33MHz 386 which would run at 16MHz when the turbo button was toggled.
– Stephen Kitt
May 20 at 12:37
7
Not to mention turbo buttons that simply disabled chache instead of changing clocks.
– Raffzahn
May 20 at 13:44
2
Not just software. You may have been saddled with a peripheral board that ran only at 4.77MHz speed so you'd have to boot without turbo mode if you wanted to use the device.
– davidbak
May 20 at 16:35
1
It might be noteworthy that as kids we were totally misled by the labeling at least in some cases - where enabling the (seemingly magic) Turbo button actually had the opposite of the expected effect. Also, an audible example would be Monkey Island, where the sound was distorted when running on a fast machine... IIRC, this seems to back this up.
– kubi
May 20 at 18:28
I assume “speed“ and “faster” refers to the clock rate only, not instruction times or MIPS?
– Michael
May 21 at 6:52
|
show 1 more comment
The turbo button was implemented on machines with CPUs faster than the original IBM PCs. Some software relied on the CPU running at a certain speed to work properly, rather than using some external timekeeping mechanism to avoid running to fast.
With the turbo mode disabled via the button the computer would run at approximately the speed of an original IBM PC, for compatibility with that software. With it enabled the computer would run as fast as it could.
The turbo button was implemented on machines with CPUs faster than the original IBM PCs. Some software relied on the CPU running at a certain speed to work properly, rather than using some external timekeeping mechanism to avoid running to fast.
With the turbo mode disabled via the button the computer would run at approximately the speed of an original IBM PC, for compatibility with that software. With it enabled the computer would run as fast as it could.
answered May 20 at 11:44
useruser
8,7172 gold badges15 silver badges35 bronze badges
8,7172 gold badges15 silver badges35 bronze badges
7
The speed varied. On 8MHz 8086s, the button would switch between 4.77MHz (IBM speed) and 8MHz; but later models still had turbo buttons even though they didn’t have a setting identical to the speed of the original PC. I had a 33MHz 386 which would run at 16MHz when the turbo button was toggled.
– Stephen Kitt
May 20 at 12:37
7
Not to mention turbo buttons that simply disabled chache instead of changing clocks.
– Raffzahn
May 20 at 13:44
2
Not just software. You may have been saddled with a peripheral board that ran only at 4.77MHz speed so you'd have to boot without turbo mode if you wanted to use the device.
– davidbak
May 20 at 16:35
1
It might be noteworthy that as kids we were totally misled by the labeling at least in some cases - where enabling the (seemingly magic) Turbo button actually had the opposite of the expected effect. Also, an audible example would be Monkey Island, where the sound was distorted when running on a fast machine... IIRC, this seems to back this up.
– kubi
May 20 at 18:28
I assume “speed“ and “faster” refers to the clock rate only, not instruction times or MIPS?
– Michael
May 21 at 6:52
|
show 1 more comment
7
The speed varied. On 8MHz 8086s, the button would switch between 4.77MHz (IBM speed) and 8MHz; but later models still had turbo buttons even though they didn’t have a setting identical to the speed of the original PC. I had a 33MHz 386 which would run at 16MHz when the turbo button was toggled.
– Stephen Kitt
May 20 at 12:37
7
Not to mention turbo buttons that simply disabled chache instead of changing clocks.
– Raffzahn
May 20 at 13:44
2
Not just software. You may have been saddled with a peripheral board that ran only at 4.77MHz speed so you'd have to boot without turbo mode if you wanted to use the device.
– davidbak
May 20 at 16:35
1
It might be noteworthy that as kids we were totally misled by the labeling at least in some cases - where enabling the (seemingly magic) Turbo button actually had the opposite of the expected effect. Also, an audible example would be Monkey Island, where the sound was distorted when running on a fast machine... IIRC, this seems to back this up.
– kubi
May 20 at 18:28
I assume “speed“ and “faster” refers to the clock rate only, not instruction times or MIPS?
– Michael
May 21 at 6:52
7
7
The speed varied. On 8MHz 8086s, the button would switch between 4.77MHz (IBM speed) and 8MHz; but later models still had turbo buttons even though they didn’t have a setting identical to the speed of the original PC. I had a 33MHz 386 which would run at 16MHz when the turbo button was toggled.
– Stephen Kitt
May 20 at 12:37
The speed varied. On 8MHz 8086s, the button would switch between 4.77MHz (IBM speed) and 8MHz; but later models still had turbo buttons even though they didn’t have a setting identical to the speed of the original PC. I had a 33MHz 386 which would run at 16MHz when the turbo button was toggled.
– Stephen Kitt
May 20 at 12:37
7
7
Not to mention turbo buttons that simply disabled chache instead of changing clocks.
– Raffzahn
May 20 at 13:44
Not to mention turbo buttons that simply disabled chache instead of changing clocks.
– Raffzahn
May 20 at 13:44
2
2
Not just software. You may have been saddled with a peripheral board that ran only at 4.77MHz speed so you'd have to boot without turbo mode if you wanted to use the device.
– davidbak
May 20 at 16:35
Not just software. You may have been saddled with a peripheral board that ran only at 4.77MHz speed so you'd have to boot without turbo mode if you wanted to use the device.
– davidbak
May 20 at 16:35
1
1
It might be noteworthy that as kids we were totally misled by the labeling at least in some cases - where enabling the (seemingly magic) Turbo button actually had the opposite of the expected effect. Also, an audible example would be Monkey Island, where the sound was distorted when running on a fast machine... IIRC, this seems to back this up.
– kubi
May 20 at 18:28
It might be noteworthy that as kids we were totally misled by the labeling at least in some cases - where enabling the (seemingly magic) Turbo button actually had the opposite of the expected effect. Also, an audible example would be Monkey Island, where the sound was distorted when running on a fast machine... IIRC, this seems to back this up.
– kubi
May 20 at 18:28
I assume “speed“ and “faster” refers to the clock rate only, not instruction times or MIPS?
– Michael
May 21 at 6:52
I assume “speed“ and “faster” refers to the clock rate only, not instruction times or MIPS?
– Michael
May 21 at 6:52
|
show 1 more comment
In addition to the other answers given:
I remember newer computers (up to the Pentium class) having such buttons.
I doubt that the Turbo button was connected at all in most later computers.
I suppose that the manufacturers of PC housings did not want change their production and therefore continued producing housings with a Turbo button (which was used for 8 MHz 8086 computers) although the button was not used for newer computers any longer (and Pentium computers could not be switched to 4.77 MHz frequency).
I remember some computers that could be switched between 33 and 66 MHz using the Turbo button. Maybe the manufacturers produced the housings to be compatible with such mainboards (but in 99% of all cases the button was not connected).
3
Certainly my first PC (an Escom Pentium 75 using the Intel Advanced/ZP motherboard) had a turbo button that wasn't connected to the motherboard - it still had fast (75MHz) and slow (25MHz) clock speeds, but these were selected using keystrokes, leaving the button redundant.
– john_e
May 20 at 19:58
I think the last PC I had with a turbo button that actually did something was a Cyrix 6x86 (Socket 7). The turbo button on that PC switched the L2 cache on the motherboard on and off.
– mnem
May 20 at 20:13
4
The turbo button on the case could sometimes be useful even if one's motherboard didn't have a connector for it. It could also be connected to the key-switch input if one wanted to disable the keyboard temporarily (e.g. in a household where cats might pounce an unattended keyboard), or--by cutting a couple wires and splicing them together--it could be used to mute the speaker.
– supercat
May 20 at 20:29
There's a lot of "doubt" and "suppose" and "maybe" here. Do you have anything to back this up?
– pipe
May 22 at 6:53
2
I had a Cyrix P150+ (roughly equivalent to a Pentium 100) that I ended up spending a day reinstalling Windows on because it had become dog-slow. When the fresh install of Windows was also slow, I hunted around for other causes, and eventually realised I had pressed the turbo button. So it was definitely connected on that 5th generation machine.
– RB.
May 22 at 12:41
|
show 1 more comment
In addition to the other answers given:
I remember newer computers (up to the Pentium class) having such buttons.
I doubt that the Turbo button was connected at all in most later computers.
I suppose that the manufacturers of PC housings did not want change their production and therefore continued producing housings with a Turbo button (which was used for 8 MHz 8086 computers) although the button was not used for newer computers any longer (and Pentium computers could not be switched to 4.77 MHz frequency).
I remember some computers that could be switched between 33 and 66 MHz using the Turbo button. Maybe the manufacturers produced the housings to be compatible with such mainboards (but in 99% of all cases the button was not connected).
3
Certainly my first PC (an Escom Pentium 75 using the Intel Advanced/ZP motherboard) had a turbo button that wasn't connected to the motherboard - it still had fast (75MHz) and slow (25MHz) clock speeds, but these were selected using keystrokes, leaving the button redundant.
– john_e
May 20 at 19:58
I think the last PC I had with a turbo button that actually did something was a Cyrix 6x86 (Socket 7). The turbo button on that PC switched the L2 cache on the motherboard on and off.
– mnem
May 20 at 20:13
4
The turbo button on the case could sometimes be useful even if one's motherboard didn't have a connector for it. It could also be connected to the key-switch input if one wanted to disable the keyboard temporarily (e.g. in a household where cats might pounce an unattended keyboard), or--by cutting a couple wires and splicing them together--it could be used to mute the speaker.
– supercat
May 20 at 20:29
There's a lot of "doubt" and "suppose" and "maybe" here. Do you have anything to back this up?
– pipe
May 22 at 6:53
2
I had a Cyrix P150+ (roughly equivalent to a Pentium 100) that I ended up spending a day reinstalling Windows on because it had become dog-slow. When the fresh install of Windows was also slow, I hunted around for other causes, and eventually realised I had pressed the turbo button. So it was definitely connected on that 5th generation machine.
– RB.
May 22 at 12:41
|
show 1 more comment
In addition to the other answers given:
I remember newer computers (up to the Pentium class) having such buttons.
I doubt that the Turbo button was connected at all in most later computers.
I suppose that the manufacturers of PC housings did not want change their production and therefore continued producing housings with a Turbo button (which was used for 8 MHz 8086 computers) although the button was not used for newer computers any longer (and Pentium computers could not be switched to 4.77 MHz frequency).
I remember some computers that could be switched between 33 and 66 MHz using the Turbo button. Maybe the manufacturers produced the housings to be compatible with such mainboards (but in 99% of all cases the button was not connected).
In addition to the other answers given:
I remember newer computers (up to the Pentium class) having such buttons.
I doubt that the Turbo button was connected at all in most later computers.
I suppose that the manufacturers of PC housings did not want change their production and therefore continued producing housings with a Turbo button (which was used for 8 MHz 8086 computers) although the button was not used for newer computers any longer (and Pentium computers could not be switched to 4.77 MHz frequency).
I remember some computers that could be switched between 33 and 66 MHz using the Turbo button. Maybe the manufacturers produced the housings to be compatible with such mainboards (but in 99% of all cases the button was not connected).
answered May 20 at 19:53
Martin RosenauMartin Rosenau
1,3961 gold badge4 silver badges10 bronze badges
1,3961 gold badge4 silver badges10 bronze badges
3
Certainly my first PC (an Escom Pentium 75 using the Intel Advanced/ZP motherboard) had a turbo button that wasn't connected to the motherboard - it still had fast (75MHz) and slow (25MHz) clock speeds, but these were selected using keystrokes, leaving the button redundant.
– john_e
May 20 at 19:58
I think the last PC I had with a turbo button that actually did something was a Cyrix 6x86 (Socket 7). The turbo button on that PC switched the L2 cache on the motherboard on and off.
– mnem
May 20 at 20:13
4
The turbo button on the case could sometimes be useful even if one's motherboard didn't have a connector for it. It could also be connected to the key-switch input if one wanted to disable the keyboard temporarily (e.g. in a household where cats might pounce an unattended keyboard), or--by cutting a couple wires and splicing them together--it could be used to mute the speaker.
– supercat
May 20 at 20:29
There's a lot of "doubt" and "suppose" and "maybe" here. Do you have anything to back this up?
– pipe
May 22 at 6:53
2
I had a Cyrix P150+ (roughly equivalent to a Pentium 100) that I ended up spending a day reinstalling Windows on because it had become dog-slow. When the fresh install of Windows was also slow, I hunted around for other causes, and eventually realised I had pressed the turbo button. So it was definitely connected on that 5th generation machine.
– RB.
May 22 at 12:41
|
show 1 more comment
3
Certainly my first PC (an Escom Pentium 75 using the Intel Advanced/ZP motherboard) had a turbo button that wasn't connected to the motherboard - it still had fast (75MHz) and slow (25MHz) clock speeds, but these were selected using keystrokes, leaving the button redundant.
– john_e
May 20 at 19:58
I think the last PC I had with a turbo button that actually did something was a Cyrix 6x86 (Socket 7). The turbo button on that PC switched the L2 cache on the motherboard on and off.
– mnem
May 20 at 20:13
4
The turbo button on the case could sometimes be useful even if one's motherboard didn't have a connector for it. It could also be connected to the key-switch input if one wanted to disable the keyboard temporarily (e.g. in a household where cats might pounce an unattended keyboard), or--by cutting a couple wires and splicing them together--it could be used to mute the speaker.
– supercat
May 20 at 20:29
There's a lot of "doubt" and "suppose" and "maybe" here. Do you have anything to back this up?
– pipe
May 22 at 6:53
2
I had a Cyrix P150+ (roughly equivalent to a Pentium 100) that I ended up spending a day reinstalling Windows on because it had become dog-slow. When the fresh install of Windows was also slow, I hunted around for other causes, and eventually realised I had pressed the turbo button. So it was definitely connected on that 5th generation machine.
– RB.
May 22 at 12:41
3
3
Certainly my first PC (an Escom Pentium 75 using the Intel Advanced/ZP motherboard) had a turbo button that wasn't connected to the motherboard - it still had fast (75MHz) and slow (25MHz) clock speeds, but these were selected using keystrokes, leaving the button redundant.
– john_e
May 20 at 19:58
Certainly my first PC (an Escom Pentium 75 using the Intel Advanced/ZP motherboard) had a turbo button that wasn't connected to the motherboard - it still had fast (75MHz) and slow (25MHz) clock speeds, but these were selected using keystrokes, leaving the button redundant.
– john_e
May 20 at 19:58
I think the last PC I had with a turbo button that actually did something was a Cyrix 6x86 (Socket 7). The turbo button on that PC switched the L2 cache on the motherboard on and off.
– mnem
May 20 at 20:13
I think the last PC I had with a turbo button that actually did something was a Cyrix 6x86 (Socket 7). The turbo button on that PC switched the L2 cache on the motherboard on and off.
– mnem
May 20 at 20:13
4
4
The turbo button on the case could sometimes be useful even if one's motherboard didn't have a connector for it. It could also be connected to the key-switch input if one wanted to disable the keyboard temporarily (e.g. in a household where cats might pounce an unattended keyboard), or--by cutting a couple wires and splicing them together--it could be used to mute the speaker.
– supercat
May 20 at 20:29
The turbo button on the case could sometimes be useful even if one's motherboard didn't have a connector for it. It could also be connected to the key-switch input if one wanted to disable the keyboard temporarily (e.g. in a household where cats might pounce an unattended keyboard), or--by cutting a couple wires and splicing them together--it could be used to mute the speaker.
– supercat
May 20 at 20:29
There's a lot of "doubt" and "suppose" and "maybe" here. Do you have anything to back this up?
– pipe
May 22 at 6:53
There's a lot of "doubt" and "suppose" and "maybe" here. Do you have anything to back this up?
– pipe
May 22 at 6:53
2
2
I had a Cyrix P150+ (roughly equivalent to a Pentium 100) that I ended up spending a day reinstalling Windows on because it had become dog-slow. When the fresh install of Windows was also slow, I hunted around for other causes, and eventually realised I had pressed the turbo button. So it was definitely connected on that 5th generation machine.
– RB.
May 22 at 12:41
I had a Cyrix P150+ (roughly equivalent to a Pentium 100) that I ended up spending a day reinstalling Windows on because it had become dog-slow. When the fresh install of Windows was also slow, I hunted around for other causes, and eventually realised I had pressed the turbo button. So it was definitely connected on that 5th generation machine.
– RB.
May 22 at 12:41
|
show 1 more comment
The turbo button selected between normal and slow speeds. Slowing the system was done by slowing down the CPU clock speed or disabling cache memory
add a comment |
The turbo button selected between normal and slow speeds. Slowing the system was done by slowing down the CPU clock speed or disabling cache memory
add a comment |
The turbo button selected between normal and slow speeds. Slowing the system was done by slowing down the CPU clock speed or disabling cache memory
The turbo button selected between normal and slow speeds. Slowing the system was done by slowing down the CPU clock speed or disabling cache memory
answered May 20 at 18:33
JustmeJustme
1,9143 silver badges13 bronze badges
1,9143 silver badges13 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
The turbo button altered the speed on the computer, as some games would reply on the CPU speed in order to determine on how fast the game would run, and this would cause the program to run faster than intended the newer the computer got (however this isn't a problem with today's computers as we can emulate another cpu), so the turbo button was made in order to slow to computer so that it could run these programs. However, some made the computer run faster.
Welcome to Retrocomputing! Thank you for the answer, but it doesn't add anything that the other answers already have addressed.
– DrSheldon
May 23 at 2:02
add a comment |
The turbo button altered the speed on the computer, as some games would reply on the CPU speed in order to determine on how fast the game would run, and this would cause the program to run faster than intended the newer the computer got (however this isn't a problem with today's computers as we can emulate another cpu), so the turbo button was made in order to slow to computer so that it could run these programs. However, some made the computer run faster.
Welcome to Retrocomputing! Thank you for the answer, but it doesn't add anything that the other answers already have addressed.
– DrSheldon
May 23 at 2:02
add a comment |
The turbo button altered the speed on the computer, as some games would reply on the CPU speed in order to determine on how fast the game would run, and this would cause the program to run faster than intended the newer the computer got (however this isn't a problem with today's computers as we can emulate another cpu), so the turbo button was made in order to slow to computer so that it could run these programs. However, some made the computer run faster.
The turbo button altered the speed on the computer, as some games would reply on the CPU speed in order to determine on how fast the game would run, and this would cause the program to run faster than intended the newer the computer got (however this isn't a problem with today's computers as we can emulate another cpu), so the turbo button was made in order to slow to computer so that it could run these programs. However, some made the computer run faster.
answered May 22 at 20:03
scopessuckM8scopessuckM8
101
101
Welcome to Retrocomputing! Thank you for the answer, but it doesn't add anything that the other answers already have addressed.
– DrSheldon
May 23 at 2:02
add a comment |
Welcome to Retrocomputing! Thank you for the answer, but it doesn't add anything that the other answers already have addressed.
– DrSheldon
May 23 at 2:02
Welcome to Retrocomputing! Thank you for the answer, but it doesn't add anything that the other answers already have addressed.
– DrSheldon
May 23 at 2:02
Welcome to Retrocomputing! Thank you for the answer, but it doesn't add anything that the other answers already have addressed.
– DrSheldon
May 23 at 2:02
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Retrocomputing Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fretrocomputing.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f11056%2fwhat-did-the-turbo-button-actually-do%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
45
just because it could have been easily googled does not mean having a canonical answer on this site is not worthwhile.
– Neil Meyer
May 20 at 15:29
28
@NeilMeyer Originally, this site's rules were that questions needed to show research effort. I don't know if that rule is still applies, but the primary purpose of this site was to be a place where people could get information that was otherwise not accessible. I think that ship has sailed, though. Questions that can be answered with little to no effort of research typically get voted much higher than questions that actually add information to the web, simply because the former is applicable to larger audiences. Makes me almost want to post a question like, "What does the command
cat
do?"– JoL
May 20 at 20:01
14
@JoL Or “How do I exit vim?”
– Davislor
May 20 at 21:49
16
@JoL askubuntu.com/questions/642942/what-is-cat-used-for
– Clonkex
May 20 at 23:31
4
@KamiKaze That's definitely not what the diamond mods should do. Stack Exchange is a user-driven community, the rules are set by the community, and enforced by voting.
– pipe
May 21 at 8:00