The stuff Hacker News actually recommends.

Desktops and mini PCs · IBM PC

IBM PC XT

3owners with an opinion
–of verdicts positive
1/0positive/negative since 2024
0happy after 3+ years

Praised for reliability.

What people wrote

Neutral
First family PC was a used IBM PC XT, 8088 w/ 640kb ram and a cga card with an amber monochrome monitor attached. I remember getting a 14.4 modem on it, and it would freeze, had to force it to 9600bps. Then managed to wranle a 486sx w/ 4mb ram and an EGA card and display. First decent computer I built was an AMD 5x86 133mhz with the larger cache module and a whopping 64mb ram that I'd traded for some ANSi work. The irony is for some things it ran circles around the Pentiums that friends had, for others it just slogged. Ran OS/2 warp like a beast though. Ever since then, I've mostly maxed out the ram in my systems... I wend from 128gb down to 96GB for my AM5 build though since the most I've ever used is around 75gb, and I wanted to stick to a single pair at a higher speed.
Neutral
You're correct. My v2 comment was brought about by the marketing, not the technical facts. I had an Apple ][ and was excited by the Lisa, but couldn't afford one at the time. When the Macintosh came out, I found the screen far too small and I hated the the constant floppy disk shuffle. Obviously I didn't buy one. Ended up going down the IBM XT then AT path because I got to work with them and didn't have to buy anything. Back then a work perk was being a PC to work with. It wasn't until 2009 that I purchased my next Apple product, a MacBook Pro.
Likes it
If it was someone with an IBM PC XT, running MS-DOS and no hard disk, you'd lose every time. The ONLY hardware attack that worked that I'm aware of caused their monochrome monitor to fail, due to a design flaw. There wasn't anywhere you could tuck in a virus. We write protected our boot disks and important programs. We made copies and tested them. We knew what each program sounded like when it was working normally , and could hear each and every disk seek. We had capability based security, in a crude form... you don't.