Re: advice / suggestion wanted PDP 11/40 only boots XXDP, not RT11
RT11-SJ is less dependent on interrupts, I think, so that might be another thing to try. paul > On Jan 31, 2019, at 3:55 PM, Jerry Weiss via cctech > wrote: > > My recollection is that XXDP tries not to use Interrupts or DMA, unless it > has to. > > I would check out those areas first for problems if it hangs in RT-11. > > Jerry > > > On 1/31/19 2:26 PM, Bill Degnan via cctech wrote: >> My PDP 11/40 suddenly lost it's ability to boot RL02 disks except the XXDP >> disk. I have two drives, both boot up an XXDP (I have more than one) just >> fine, but any formerly-working RT-11 (v 5, 5.1, 5.3) no longer boots, it >> just hangs. I have been troubleshooting, running the 11/40 XXDP tests, but >> they seem to just hang too. And I am not a big fan of XXDP anyway. I have >> cleaned the drive heads, the disks are ok. I can load BASIC just fine from >> PDPGUI "tape" through the serial card (M7800) >> >> Any off the cuff suggestions why this specific issue would arise? Power >> seems ok, looking for dumb reasons that I missed. I have swapped out CPU >> cards, does not make any difference. I am pretty sure it's a UNIBUS >> interference issue, at least that's my working theory. I suppose there may >> be an RT-11 boot instruction call or routine of the CPU that XXDP does not >> exercise explaining why XXDP boots.Maybe RAM locations. >> >> In the end I just have to work through everything, but I am open to >> suggestions to help cut down the time spent diagnosing the problem. >> >> Thanks in advance, I will be around tonight (East Coast USA Time) >> >> Bill >
Re: advice / suggestion wanted PDP 11/40 only boots XXDP, not RT11
My recollection is that XXDP tries not to use Interrupts or DMA, unless it has to. I would check out those areas first for problems if it hangs in RT-11. Jerry On 1/31/19 2:26 PM, Bill Degnan via cctech wrote: My PDP 11/40 suddenly lost it's ability to boot RL02 disks except the XXDP disk. I have two drives, both boot up an XXDP (I have more than one) just fine, but any formerly-working RT-11 (v 5, 5.1, 5.3) no longer boots, it just hangs. I have been troubleshooting, running the 11/40 XXDP tests, but they seem to just hang too. And I am not a big fan of XXDP anyway. I have cleaned the drive heads, the disks are ok. I can load BASIC just fine from PDPGUI "tape" through the serial card (M7800) Any off the cuff suggestions why this specific issue would arise? Power seems ok, looking for dumb reasons that I missed. I have swapped out CPU cards, does not make any difference. I am pretty sure it's a UNIBUS interference issue, at least that's my working theory. I suppose there may be an RT-11 boot instruction call or routine of the CPU that XXDP does not exercise explaining why XXDP boots.Maybe RAM locations. In the end I just have to work through everything, but I am open to suggestions to help cut down the time spent diagnosing the problem. Thanks in advance, I will be around tonight (East Coast USA Time) Bill
advice / suggestion wanted PDP 11/40 only boots XXDP, not RT11
My PDP 11/40 suddenly lost it's ability to boot RL02 disks except the XXDP disk. I have two drives, both boot up an XXDP (I have more than one) just fine, but any formerly-working RT-11 (v 5, 5.1, 5.3) no longer boots, it just hangs. I have been troubleshooting, running the 11/40 XXDP tests, but they seem to just hang too. And I am not a big fan of XXDP anyway. I have cleaned the drive heads, the disks are ok. I can load BASIC just fine from PDPGUI "tape" through the serial card (M7800) Any off the cuff suggestions why this specific issue would arise? Power seems ok, looking for dumb reasons that I missed. I have swapped out CPU cards, does not make any difference. I am pretty sure it's a UNIBUS interference issue, at least that's my working theory. I suppose there may be an RT-11 boot instruction call or routine of the CPU that XXDP does not exercise explaining why XXDP boots.Maybe RAM locations. In the end I just have to work through everything, but I am open to suggestions to help cut down the time spent diagnosing the problem. Thanks in advance, I will be around tonight (East Coast USA Time) Bill
Re: 11/70 - original or 570 model more desirable?
> > > > > > > Random question: > > Would you have bought this one if it were maroon instead of blue? > > > > > https://www.ebay.com/itm/DEC-PDP-11-70-Datasystem-570-/113553953503?nordt=true_cvip=true > > > As-is for $10K seems a little bit steep for a starting bid. But I haven't > tried to buy an 11/70 recently, so maybe it's reasonable? > > Pat > I was thinking they're not quite that valuable. Has one ever sold for more than even 5000? I admit I have never seen one on ebay or privately for sale to know.
Re: advice / suggestion wanted PDP 11/40 only boots XXDP, not RT11
> On Jan 31, 2019, at 12:26 PM, Bill Degnan via cctech > wrote: > > My PDP 11/40 suddenly lost it's ability to boot RL02 disks except the XXDP > disk. I have two drives, both boot up an XXDP (I have more than one) just > fine, but any formerly-working RT-11 (v 5, 5.1, 5.3) no longer boots, it > just hangs. I'd check things related to interrupts. My experience has been that XXDP monitors (at least the earlier ones) use polling, and can be boot and run even when disk controller interrupts aren't working because of this. --FritzM.
Re: 11/70 - original or 570 model more desirable?
While I love the original purple tones and the H960 cabinets, perhaps because they fit with most of the other DEC gear I've collected, I think that the commercial blue tones and Vax style cabinets are sexy as hell too. If I had loads of space, money and time, I would love to have all of the varieties. Unfortunately, I only have a minimal of money and time and my space is pretty full. I don't think that I am alone in these conditions or more people would have collected all styles of these machines. Finding a complete machine (sans disks) like the one recently on eBay is pretty rare any more and I would not be surprised if someone would pay the asking price. I recall passing on opportunities to add a Vax 11/780 to my collection and now I wish I had, but also don't know where I would have put it or how I would have moved it. That being said, I also worry that the number of people who even care any more are dwindling and so when it comes time for someone to decide what to do with my collection, it might not easily find a home. --tom
Tandy RS DWP-220 printer equivalent?
My google-fu is failing me; forgive me. Is the Tandy DWP-220 daisy-wheel printer a rebrand/OEM of someone else? In particular, can I find ribbons and font wheels under another manufacturer? KJ
DEC TKZ10 Tapes
Does anyone have any DC6525 tape cartridges they would be willing to part with? One of the Expansion boxes on my VAX has a TKZ10 but none of the older QIC tapes I have can handle the format from this drive. bill
Re: early PDP-11/45 info sought
> On Jan 31, 2019, at 12:02 PM, Jay Jaeger wrote: > > The parity change in the CPU was to change parity errors from vectoring > thru location 4 to vector through 114. Yes, but also, there was apparently rework of logic feeding the CONF console flag and associated abort signaling. Before the ECO's (as in my system) a UNIBUS parity error actually causes a machine halt, and not a trap. (After the ECO's, FASTBUS memory apparently could still do this, optionally, but would then continue on to trap 114 after front panel CONT.) Also, jumpers were added at some point to optionally disable detection of UNIBUS parity errors entirely. --FritzM.
Re: early PDP-11/45 info sought
On 1/31/2019 12:02 PM, Fritz Mueller via cctalk wrote: > > I don't actually have anything that uses the M8110; I am mostly interested in > that one to understand how it co-evolved with the parity changes in the CPU > (sometimes its easier to understand if you can see both sides). > >cheers (and thanks again!), > --FritzM. > Well, the short answer is the same: it seems to have been an absolute mess. So bad DEC eventually threw in the towel on it, apparently, and moved on and created the M8120. Perhaps foreshadowing the mess that MITS had with its first 4K dynamic memory board. ;) So, if you have one in there, you don't want it in any memory you will be addressing. I'd probably pull it, or at least put it way up high with a gap before it. The parity change in the CPU was to change parity errors from vectoring thru location 4 to vector through 114. My 1972 and 1973 11/45 processor handbooks do not mention location 114, just location 4. My 1976 pdp11/04/05/10/35/40/45 identify 114 as the vector for memory system errors. So software (and diagnostics) from sometime after 1973 would presumably expect that.
Re: early PDP-11/45 info sought
> On Jan 31, 2019, at 3:02 PM, Jay Jaeger via cctalk > wrote: > > On 1/31/2019 12:02 PM, Fritz Mueller via cctalk wrote: > > >> >> I don't actually have anything that uses the M8110; I am mostly interested >> in that one to understand how it co-evolved with the parity changes in the >> CPU (sometimes its easier to understand if you can see both sides). >> >> cheers (and thanks again!), >> --FritzM. >> > > Well, the short answer is the same: it seems to have been an absolute > mess. So bad DEC eventually threw in the towel on it, apparently, and > moved on and created the M8120. Perhaps foreshadowing the mess that > MITS had with its first 4K dynamic memory board. ;) > > So, if you have one in there, you don't want it in any memory you will > be addressing. I'd probably pull it, or at least put it way up high > with a gap before it. Interesting. By the way, a gap won't make any difference for RSTS. When it scans for memory, it examines the entire address space. So whether memory is contiguous or not, it will all be seen if it appears to be working. You can disable it (via memory options in DEFAULT) if you need to. > The parity change in the CPU was to change parity errors from vectoring > thru location 4 to vector through 114. > > My 1972 and 1973 11/45 processor handbooks do not mention location 114, > just location 4. > > My 1976 pdp11/04/05/10/35/40/45 identify 114 as the vector for memory > system errors. So software (and diagnostics) from sometime after 1973 > would presumably expect that. RSTS certainly requires that, yes. paul
Re: early PDP-11/45 info sought
> On Jan 31, 2019, at 11:47 AM, Jay Jaeger wrote: > > I have completed my transcription of what I felt would be the most > salient entries and information in those entries of the PDP-11/45 > DEC-O-Logs. > > The transcripts are available on my Google Drive at > > https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2v4WRwISEQRWWFFdVpCZWFTZEU Oh awesome -- thanks much! I've been looking for this info for a long time; should have asked on the list sooner. --FritzM.
Re: early PDP-11/45 info sought
I have completed my transcription of what I felt would be the most salient entries and information in those entries of the PDP-11/45 DEC-O-Logs. Curiously, there were no entries at all for the KB11-D. The transcripts are available on my Google Drive at https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B2v4WRwISEQRWWFFdVpCZWFTZEU under pdf/dec/fieldService/dec-o-log Of course, they won't be 100% accurate, but I did take special care to note areas where I had trouble making stuff out, and over signal names and FCO cuts/adds where available. Note/offer: If someone has a good way to scan fiche, I could send (one at a time) my JAN86 and JUL86 fiche sets (9 fiche) off to that someone to scan/print. On 1/27/2019 6:40 PM, Fritz Mueller via cctalk wrote: > Those reading through the recent "PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem" thread here > will know that I've gotten to some corners of my 11/45 CPU now that don't > match up with the commonly available engineering drawings. > > My /45 is an early serial number (#152). So far I've verified hardware > differences on at least my M8100 and M8105 cards and spares, relating to > parity error abort handling. I would really like to track down any of the > following resources: > > - PDP 11/45 system engineering drawings *earlier* than those currently > available on bitsavers (Jun '74) > > - Any PDP 11/45 backplane wire list (what looks to be a wire list in the > currently available engineering drawings is actually only a breakdown of the > power harness.) > > - PDP 11/45 ECO information, particularly the following: > > M8100 3 > M8103 5 > M8105 5 > M8106 7, 8, 00012, 00012A > M8110 8 > > KB11-A 00015 > > Bitsavers seems to have a DEC-O-LOG for M8105, but this does not contain > specifics on cuts and jumps for ECO 5, referring only to the associated > "kit". DEC-O-LOGs for the other processor boards are missing. > > If anybody thinks they might have any of this info squirreled away anywhere, > I'd really love to find out more about it! > > Parts of the ECO's are pretty easy to figure, just by comparing the state of > my existing boards to the '74 drawings. But other parts not so much... > > thanks much, > --FritzM. > > >
Re: 11/70 - original or 570 model more desirable?
Speaking of cabinet variants: if you ever run into a "Corita" cabinet, with the abstract art on the side, be sure to hang on to it. I'm not sure how many were built, probably not all that many. Another variation I know of: I think it was the Vaxstation-2 that came in a small roll-around cabinet. I once (at DEC) had a prototype version of that enclosure. I'm not sure if it ever made it outside DEC. You can tell it from the regular one because it's a bit slimmer, and especially because the top covery is a thick piece of hardwood (somewhat like a heavy cutting board) rather than the painted sheet steel with louvers that the production unit has. paul
RE: 11/70 - original or 570 model more desirable?
Bill D. wrote: >Random question >would you prefer having, if you had to pick only one, the original PDP >11/70 or the newer "blue cabinets" PDP 11/70, assuming both were complete >configurations with racks of storage etc as they would have been sold, more >or less. >Assume space and power are not issues, consider just the machine itself. If either one showed up at my place, I would most certainly not kick it to the curb! In fact, I'd figure out how to shoehorn it into the museum, spend the money to get the power needed, and upgrade the cooling. I'd want to be able to run it periods of time, limited only by my electric bill :-) Even running the 11/34A with three RL02's, an RK05 and RX02 for a day makes a definite jump on the little bar graph showing usage on our electric bill. The PDP 8/e system, with three RK05's and RX01 running for a day makes a bump on the graph also. If I run both for a full day, my wife complains about the electric bill going up enough that it attracts her attention as an anomaly. I can't imagine what impact it'd have on the electric bill to run a loaded up 11/70 system for a full day. I suspect if I by some miracle ended up with a system like this (which I've dreamt of since I was in high school), I'd have to take a second job to pay the electric bill to keep it running. -Rick
Re: 11/70 - original or 570 model more desirable?
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 12:57 PM Glen Slick via cctech < cct...@classiccmp.org> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 7:49 PM Bill Degnan via cctech > wrote: > > > > Random question > > would you prefer having, if you had to pick only one, the original PDP > > 11/70 or the newer "blue cabinets" PDP 11/70, assuming both were complete > > configurations with racks of storage etc as they would have been sold, > more > > or less. > > Random question: > Would you have bought this one if it were maroon instead of blue? > > https://www.ebay.com/itm/DEC-PDP-11-70-Datasystem-570-/113553953503?nordt=true_cvip=true Not for $9800, can't afford that much dough. The paddle color does not mean as much to me, more interested in whether it's serviceable and supportable. I don't really have a strong preference other than "can I make this run and do something with it". I just wanted to be sure I was not missing something about the 570 to justify what seems to me to be a high price. There is nothing that I could easily find that distinguishes the 570 from the original version. Thanks for replies... Bill Bill
Re: early PDP-11/45 info sought
> On Jan 31, 2019, at 9:19 AM, Jay Jaeger wrote: > > I am working on transcribing some DEC-O-Logs - more than are on > bitsavers that relate to the KB11-A and its cards. Oooh! I'm excited again! :-) > In the process, I came across KB11A-B0008 - which indicates that NPG, > PA, PB, LTC, ACLO, DCO and +15V are ALL missing in slots 26-28. That > FCO was dated SEP-72, and specifically mentions the DL11. I think you > had mentioned that issue in another post. Ah ha! This jives with what I've seen on my backplane. I eventually just put in a DD11 and walked away from slots 26-28, since I couldn't be sure how they were wired and what would work correctly in there. > Also, I have at least two sets of DEC-O-Logs. (JAN 86 and JUL 86) that > cover the 11/45. I would be happy to loan a set out to someone who > promised to scan or print/scan a set. I don't have any fiche gear, or I'd offer to help! I do hope somebody will take you up on this. > NOTE: The M8110 looks like a mess - lots of ECOs that culminate in > replacing with an M8120. You might not want to use it, and just use > other MS11s. I don't actually have anything that uses the M8110; I am mostly interested in that one to understand how it co-evolved with the parity changes in the CPU (sometimes its easier to understand if you can see both sides). cheers (and thanks again!), --FritzM.
Re: 11/70 - original or 570 model more desirable?
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 12:56 PM Glen Slick via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 7:49 PM Bill Degnan via cctech > wrote: > > > > Random question > > would you prefer having, if you had to pick only one, the original PDP > > 11/70 or the newer "blue cabinets" PDP 11/70, assuming both were complete > > configurations with racks of storage etc as they would have been sold, > more > > or less. > > Random question: > Would you have bought this one if it were maroon instead of blue? > > https://www.ebay.com/itm/DEC-PDP-11-70-Datasystem-570-/113553953503?nordt=true_cvip=true As-is for $10K seems a little bit steep for a starting bid. But I haven't tried to buy an 11/70 recently, so maybe it's reasonable? Pat
Re: 11/70 - original or 570 model more desirable?
On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 7:49 PM Bill Degnan via cctech wrote: > > Random question > would you prefer having, if you had to pick only one, the original PDP > 11/70 or the newer "blue cabinets" PDP 11/70, assuming both were complete > configurations with racks of storage etc as they would have been sold, more > or less. Random question: Would you have bought this one if it were maroon instead of blue? https://www.ebay.com/itm/DEC-PDP-11-70-Datasystem-570-/113553953503?nordt=true_cvip=true
Re: 11/70 - original or 570 model more desirable?
I have both (though the H960 variant needs restoration). I actually find that the corporate blue cabinets to be easier to deal with. One aspect is that it’s a “package” rather than multiple H960 racks. Why is that important? Because the corporate cabinets did nice things like provide cable runs to lay the various cables in so that they’re neat and tidy. Yes, it can be done with the H960 packaging but it’s more work as it’s not already provided. ;-) TTFN - Guy > On Jan 31, 2019, at 1:33 AM, Pontus Pihlgren via cctalk > wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 10:49:12PM -0500, Bill Degnan via cctech wrote: >> Random question >> would you prefer having, if you had to pick only one, the original PDP >> 11/70 or the newer "blue cabinets" PDP 11/70, assuming both were complete >> configurations with racks of storage etc as they would have been sold, more >> or less. >> >> Assume space and power are not issues, consider just the machine itself. > > Luckily for me the local computer club has both the maroon model in a > H960 as well as the blue corporate cab model. So while space is a bit > tight I don't have to consider it :) > > I have spent more time with the H960, so I might be biased. But ignoring > any subjective preference for color I do prefer the H960 simply because > it is easier to work with, less bulky metal panes to remove in order to > gain access to the CPU. And it is easier to move arround. > > This seems like a very pleasant problem to have, are you facing the > choice? > > /P
Re: early PDP-11/45 info sought
On 1/27/2019 6:40 PM, Fritz Mueller via cctalk wrote: > Those reading through the recent "PDP-11/45 RSTS/E boot problem" thread here > will know that I've gotten to some corners of my 11/45 CPU now that don't > match up with the commonly available engineering drawings. > > My /45 is an early serial number (#152). So far I've verified hardware > differences on at least my M8100 and M8105 cards and spares, relating to > parity error abort handling. I would really like to track down any of the > following resources: > > - PDP 11/45 system engineering drawings *earlier* than those currently > available on bitsavers (Jun '74) > > - Any PDP 11/45 backplane wire list (what looks to be a wire list in the > currently available engineering drawings is actually only a breakdown of the > power harness.) > > - PDP 11/45 ECO information, particularly the following: > > M8100 3 > M8103 5 > M8105 5 > M8106 7, 8, 00012, 00012A > M8110 8 > > KB11-A 00015 > > Bitsavers seems to have a DEC-O-LOG for M8105, but this does not contain > specifics on cuts and jumps for ECO 5, referring only to the associated > "kit". DEC-O-LOGs for the other processor boards are missing. > > If anybody thinks they might have any of this info squirreled away anywhere, > I'd really love to find out more about it! > > Parts of the ECO's are pretty easy to figure, just by comparing the state of > my existing boards to the '74 drawings. But other parts not so much... > > thanks much, > --FritzM. > > I am working on transcribing some DEC-O-Logs - more than are on bitsavers that relate to the KB11-A and its cards. In the process, I came across KB11A-B0008 - which indicates that NPG, PA, PB, LTC, ACLO, DCO and +15V are ALL missing in slots 26-28. That FCO was dated SEP-72, and specifically mentions the DL11. I think you had mentioned that issue in another post. Also, I have at least two sets of DEC-O-Logs. (JAN 86 and JUL 86) that cover the 11/45. I would be happy to loan a set out to someone who promised to scan or print/scan a set. I hope to be done transcribing later today. NOTE: The M8110 looks like a mess - lots of ECOs that culminate in replacing with an M8120. You might not want to use it, and just use other MS11s.
Re: 11/70 - original or 570 model more desirable?
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 9:49 PM Bill Degnan via cctech < > cct...@classiccmp.org> wrote: > >> Random question >> would you prefer having, if you had to pick only one, the original PDP >> 11/70 or the newer "blue cabinets" PDP 11/70, assuming both were complete >> configurations with racks of storage etc as they would have been sold, more >> or less. >> >> Assume space and power are not issues, consider just the machine itself. >> >> Bill >> At first i treated this as troll bait. Then thought about it some. First despite caveats I don't have space so the likelihood is nil. Also its outside what I do collect, that crates conflicts for space, power and documents. The reasons I could give for one or another are multidimensional. Esthetic, the early 11/70 was of an era and that had a look. The later one as well. Historical significance, thats limited to the general model the biggest fastest 11 made but having say serial number 001 or whatever was first off the line for sale is as significant as the last one off the line or both. Also any along the way that had a instruction set or major hardware difference of some historical note. An example of that would be an 11/74 as those were truly rare (maybe 4 assembled). Operational, as in running it. definitely a late model near last built as it would have all the ECOs, be the least old, and should run well Opportunity to save a machine that might be scrapped. In itself thats important and it would be model independent. Being a Qbus 11 collector there are still critters I might gather. Allison
Plug+Play for PDP-11/40 panels - BlinkenBone update
Hi guys, There is now a special 11/40 adapter board for the BlinkenBone system. With that you can plug a physical 11/40 panel to the extended SimH running on a BeagleBone. Surprisingly there was some demand for the 11/70 panel adapter, so adding the '40 panel may be worth mentioning. There is no own '40 documentation, see again the 11/70: http://www.retrocmp.com/projects/blinkenbone/physical-pdp-11-70-panels/288-pdp-11-70-console-panel-on-blinkenbone-plug-and-play-adapter If you want it: I made the '40 €10 cheaper then the '70. Entry to far-too-many web pages here: http://retrocmp.com/projects/blinkenbone All in all there are now at least 6 different (but compatible) ways to get a blinking PDP-11's with SimH. - Connect a real 11/40 or 11/70 panel. http://retrocmp.com/projects/blinkenbone/physical-pdp-11-70-panels - Run the virtual Java panels for 11/20, 11/40 or 11/70, also with play isntruction for the physical ones: http://retrocmp.com/projects/blinkenbone/simulated-panels/253-blinkenbone-simulated-pdp-11-20-panel http://retrocmp.com/projects/blinkenbone/simulated-panels/254-blinkenbone-pdp-11-20-running-papertape-basic http://retrocmp.com/projects/blinkenbone/simulated-panels/252-blinkenbone-playing-with-the-pdp11-40 http://retrocmp.com/projects/blinkenbone/simulated-panels/247-blinkenbone-simulated-pdp11-40-panel http://retrocmp.com/projects/blinkenbone/simulated-panels/243-blinkenbone-panelsim-pdp11-70 Download & run from github https://github.com/j-hoppe/BlinkenBone/releases - get Oscars Vermeulens PiDP11 http://obsolescence.wixsite.com/obsolescence/pidp-11 I will be at VCFPNW in Seattle with that stuff. kind regards, Joerg
Re: 11/70 - original or 570 model more desirable?
On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 10:49:12PM -0500, Bill Degnan via cctech wrote: > Random question > would you prefer having, if you had to pick only one, the original PDP > 11/70 or the newer "blue cabinets" PDP 11/70, assuming both were complete > configurations with racks of storage etc as they would have been sold, more > or less. > > Assume space and power are not issues, consider just the machine itself. Luckily for me the local computer club has both the maroon model in a H960 as well as the blue corporate cab model. So while space is a bit tight I don't have to consider it :) I have spent more time with the H960, so I might be biased. But ignoring any subjective preference for color I do prefer the H960 simply because it is easier to work with, less bulky metal panes to remove in order to gain access to the CPU. And it is easier to move arround. This seems like a very pleasant problem to have, are you facing the choice? /P
Re: 11/70 - original or 570 model more desirable?
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 2:49 PM Bill Degnan via cctech < cct...@classiccmp.org> wrote: > Random question > would you prefer having, if you had to pick only one, the original PDP > 11/70 or the newer "blue cabinets" PDP 11/70, ... > I think the decdatasystem 570 is pretty, but coloured like an ice-cream parlour. I prefer the darker motif of the standard 11/70 posed with a string of RP06 drives, much like the original cover of the PDP-11/70 processor handbook, I think that remains iconic for the "biggest" PDP-11 (biggest for the SSI logic implementations of the mid-1970s).
