Category talk:IBM PC compatibles

Why this category?
Could someone make the intent of this article more clear? &mdash; David Remahl 03:23, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC) I really don't think Serial ATA, overclocking, northbridge and some of the other articles belong in this category. They're not exclusive to "IBM PC compatibles". Further, "IBM PC compatible" is a dated term, which according to its article is falling into disuse. I don't see the point of the category. It may be useful if its scope is less broadly defined. &mdash; David Remahl 03:36, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * The reason I established the category was to find a logical, clear (and hopefully, enlightening) way of dividing articles related to PC compatibles, or as we all know them today, "PCs", from more general articles on personal computers, which of course are very different things. Also, even if the articles you mention above aren't exclusively related to PCs, the huge majority of today's computer users know them from that area, so I see nothing wrong in grouping said articles into this as well as in more general categories.  I only aim to please  :-) --Wernher 04:54, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * Ok. We'll see how it turns out. I agree that one category too many is better than one too few. I just hope that people do not think that Serial ATA is a PC-only peripheral interface, just because it is in an IBM compatible category but not a Apple Macintosh or IBM POWER based categories. The solution may be to create those too. &mdash; David Remahl 05:12, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)