[cctalk] Re: terminology [was: First Personal Computer]
On 2024-05-28 5:45 p.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: On 5/28/24 16:29, ben via cctalk wrote: On 2024-05-28 1:23 p.m., John via cctalk wrote: So what, then, consitutes a Real Operating System, and why? I am grumpy about OS's like MSDOS, in that programs kept by passing DOS to handle screen, and serial IO. I also favor OS's that don't require one to build a file control block. Do you mean like MSDOS (later functions use file handles, not FCBs)? Been like that since about DOS 2.0... --Chuck True, but serial IO was never fixed to my knowledge to use interrupts.
[cctalk] Re: terminology [was: First Personal Computer]
On 2024-05-28 1:23 p.m., John via cctalk wrote: So what, then, consitutes a Real Operating System, and why? I am grumpy about OS's like MSDOS, in that programs kept by passing DOS to handle screen, and serial IO. I also favor OS's that don't require one to build a file control block.
[cctalk] Re: First Personal Computer
On 2024-05-28 10:58 a.m., Tony Duell wrote: On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 5:56 PM ben via cctalk wrote: --First Appartment I lived in had gas refrigerator/stove AND still had some fixtures for gas lighting. washer/dryer/furnace/hot water were all shared in basement, real screw in fuses (not safety) so MAYBE had 220 if you used extension cords to two rooms, probably 10 amps. --townhouse my parents moved to had 220 at the circuit box, but intended for gas appliances and you either bought central AC before construction completed, or tough luck, so no 220 outlets. --my first two personal apartments again no 220, probably 15 A Still wanting a GAS Computer? :) I once repaired a gas radio (dating from the 1930s). No I am not joking. -tony Just what is a gas radio?
[cctalk] Re: Pragmatically [was: Experience using an Altair 8800 ("Personal computer" from 70s)]
Same concept as, if one guy living in a formerly industrial loft has water cooling, and 300 amp 3 phase power available, that does NOT make any computer requiring that "personal". For that I'd say must be able to plug into 50% of all homes, but realize more quibbling might apply there, such as 90% of all "middle class" homes. For me to have a computer, means taking it 3 flights of stairs. Thus most vintage computers, I don't even think about them.
[cctalk] Re: First Personal Computer
On 2024-05-28 8:43 a.m., CAREY SCHUG via cctalk wrote: so if ONE person maybe living in a loft formerly industrial space has water cooling, and 200 amp 3 phase in their house, that automatically makes EVERY computer using that power personal computer eligible? --First Appartment I lived in had gas refrigerator/stove AND still had some fixtures for gas lighting. washer/dryer/furnace/hot water were all shared in basement, real screw in fuses (not safety) so MAYBE had 220 if you used extension cords to two rooms, probably 10 amps. --townhouse my parents moved to had 220 at the circuit box, but intended for gas appliances and you either bought central AC before construction completed, or tough luck, so no 220 outlets. --my first two personal apartments again no 220, probably 15 A Still wanting a GAS Computer? :)
[cctalk] Re: First Personal Computer
On 2024-05-27 6:23 a.m., Christian Corti via cctalk wrote: On Sat, 25 May 2024, Chuck Guzis wrote: Offhand, if I were King of the World, I'd immediately eliminate from competition those computers that cannot be run from a US 120 volt 15 amp wall receptacle. The rationale being that anything that requires special power wiring cannot be "personal" I I were King of the World, I'd immediately ban everything non-standard like 110/120V, 208V two-phase and 60Hz ish as well as everything non-metric/SI based ;-) I would ban the eruo and the metric system. Bring back British rule. Long live the KING. So, for example, the PB-250 qualifies; the IBM 1130 does not. The The IBM 1130 *does* run on a simple wall power outlet if you don't have the 1133 I/O multiplexer. Christian I/O motors can be adapted I suspect for phase and power. Remember not needing a raised floor and AC was big selling point of the IBM 1130 in the 1960's. Four-Phase Systems, had a impressive system in the 1970's. One 24 bit box with up to 32 terminals in 1974. The IBM 1130 was retired around then,and it was good time for 24 bit computers.
[cctalk] Re: terminology [was: First Personal Computer]
On 2024-05-26 2:01 p.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: On 5/26/24 11:11, ben via cctalk wrote: On 2024-05-26 10:56 a.m., Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: I did use a CP/M machine once, but the 8" drive was a bit sticky. You rap the drive to get it unstuck, but if you rap it too hard the machine would reset. Fred, just forget it. We belong to a bygone era and there's no sense in trying to explain things to the younger folk. However, perhaps someone can tell me why an HP-41 or TI SR-52 isn't a "personal computer"... You can't play space invaders on it. --Chuck Since IBM defined the PC, let's leave it that for what a PC is. The technology was only ready at the 1981 ish time frame, for the personal market. I favor the IBM 1130 as the first personal computer. Most of my nit picking is with having low income, quality software and hardware is hard to find. My personal gripe, is that rather than building a cleaner text OS,every body jumped on having TV video game operating systems, like windows. The mac was better, but I don't think it did a 8x10 full page of text, like the original experimental operating systems.
[cctalk] Re: terminology [was: First Personal Computer]
On 2024-05-26 10:56 a.m., Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: On Sun, 26 May 2024, ben via cctalk wrote: I think the most important thing for a Personal Computer, is the average Joe, can afford and use it. The second thing is to have ample memory and IO to run useful programs. The basic Apple I,II does not count as many others as it had BASIC in ROM and tape IO. The third thing is a real OS. Nobody has one, as a personal computer. CP/M and MSDOS does not handle IRQ's. Unix for the PDP-11 is real operating system but not personal as it requires a admin,and a swapping media. So, basically, the first "Personal Computer" does not yet exist, and all of those being discussed are merely predecessors for it. I can definitely agree with that, although not necessarily with your specific list of requirements. Although there need to be some that Joe Average can afford, they don't all need to be, as a requirement; Tony Cole can build a gold plated one, and billg can spec optional features that the rest of us can't afford - if I were designing billg's house, I'd build some "personal" computing capability in the walls, or filling the main rooms, and bedroom could be a cot in the walls. I want more books and shelves to with them. That a side, how many people here still use the 16Kb (favorite machine) with tape IO? I did use a CP/M machine once, but the 8" drive was a bit sticky. You rap the drive to get it unstuck, but if you rap it too hard the machine would reset. "Ample memory"??!? perhaps that should be TerrorBytes. I/O??!? Does that need to be built in, in the minimum purchase configuration, or merely provision for it externally? For non graphics, I say 64kb for a 8 bit machine with basic in rom. CP/M 32K. "Real OS"? While I don't agree with your specific examples of inadequacies, I will readily concede that nothing so far is ready for the title. CP/M was the cats meyow in the 1970's,but there was other systems out like flex for the 6800, or later OS/9 for the 6809. Don't they get a chance too for real OS. -- Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
[cctalk] Re: First Personal Computer
On 2024-05-25 3:57 p.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: On 5/25/24 13:41, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: On Sat, 25 May 2024, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: . . . or 100V or 220V in locations where those are the standard for household residential wiring. Woulld not want to automatically exclude UK machines, such as the Sinclair doorstop wedge. Okay, I'll refine it for the international crowd. Anything that requires over 1800 VA to run isn't a "personal computer" That's about 8 amps for the 220 volt world. --Chuck That means all the NEW gaming PC's have been deleted from this discussion, Good job. :)
[cctalk] Re: terminology [was: First Personal Computer]
On 2024-05-25 5:42 p.m., Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: I'm sorry but I beg to differ with you here. The DEC PDP line of single user interactive computers (as opposed to batch processing only systems) started in the late 1950's and early 1960's and spawned many generations as well as copies and other companies (Data General being the most well known of these).Yes multi user time sharing operating systems we added later on but initially they were single user interactive, (DEC 10 & 20 excepted).Does a computer lose its "Personal" identification if it can handle multiple users as an option. There were multiple user time sharing Operating Systems for many early personal computers (Unix, Xenix, MP/M, Uniflex, OS/9, etc.). Even the aforementioned PDP computers ran multi-user time sharing systems. Does that, then, invalidate them for consideration as a personal computer? Does that make any Linux machine not a personal computer, by definition, because it can handle more than one user or task? As I have said earlier in this thead and its fore bearers, the term Personal Computer is so non-specific that we can argue from here to Alpha Centauri and back without coming up with an agreed upon definition. So, until a concrete definition can be made, the discussion of the answer is completely moot. I stick by my original challenge, find a calculating device that predates the Antikythera Mechanism (36 BCE). Simple measuring devices like the sun dial and sextant don't count as they don't calculate, they measure. I think the most important thing for a Personal Computer, is the average Joe, can afford and use it. The second thing is to have ample memory and IO to run useful programs. The basic Apple I,II does not count as many others as it had BASIC in ROM and tape IO. The third thing is a real OS. Nobody has one, as a personal computer. CP/M and MSDOS does not handle IRQ's. Unix for the PDP-11 is real operating system but not personal as it requires a admin,and a swapping media.
[cctalk] Re: interlace [was: NTSC TV demodulator ]
On 2024-05-20 12:16 p.m., Will Cooke via cctalk wrote: On 05/20/2024 1:02 PM CDT Wayne S via cctalk wrote: In the vt100, setup menu “B” had an interlace on or off setting. I just looked it up. That is almost certainly setting what type of signal is generated. Like a TV of the same era, the monitor (display) portion doesn't care; it just displays what it is sent. That is very different from a monitor setting that sets either interlaced or non-interlaced. Some reasons why you might prefer one over the other on the same screen: non-interlaced would have a horizontal gap between displayed lines whereas interlaced would fill them in. However, interlaced is more prone to flickering, which can be very tiring to the eyes and cause headaches. Will And you have Color VS B
[cctalk] Re: Thirties techies and computing history
Don't get your mind get old. It’s a choice. My mind is fine, it the eyes that are going. Screens are getting bigger and text is getting smaller. I must be dreaming that.
[cctalk] Re: Thirties techies and computing history
On 2024-05-19 9:14 a.m., Tarek Hoteit via cctalk wrote: A friend of a friend had a birthday gathering. Everyone there was in their thirties, except for myself, my wife, and our friend. Anyway, I met a Google engineer, a Microsoft data scientist, an Amazon AWS recruiter (I think she was a recruiter), and a few others in tech who are friends with the party host. I had several conversations about computer origins, the early days of computing, its importance in what we have today, and so on. What I found disappointing and saddening at the same time is their utmost ignorance about computing history or even early computers. Except for their recall of the 3.5 floppy or early 2000’s Windows, there was absolutely nothing else that they were familiar with. That made me wonder if this is a sign that our living version of classical personal computing, in which many of us here in this group witnessed the invention of personal computing in the 70s, will stop with our generation. I assume that the most engaging folks in this newsgroup are in their fifties and beyond. (No offense to anyone. I am turning fifty myself) I sense that no other generation following this user group's generation will ever talk about Altairs, CP/M s, PDPs, S100 buses, Pascal, or anything deemed exciting in computing. Is there hope, or is this the end of the line for the most exciting era of personal computers? Thoughts? Regards, Tarek Hoteit Well with the internet I have been finding a lot more about behind the history of the 1970's. The West Coast made the chips, and the East coast made the computers, while here in Canada,We just got to watch computers on TV with the blinking lights back then and the few chip sold by Radio Shack. Back then you could get to build a computer of some kind, on the kitchen table, as the knowledge was available, and parts Thu the hole. People are going retro simply because modern computers are too complex with documentation known to a few. The Z80 may be long gone, but I am sure lots of 8080's are sill for sale on ebay. I wanted to build a computer in my teens, and now I have time and the money. Looking back in time I see how bad the tech was back the for the average Joe. BASIC to rot your brain. 4K ram so you never learned how to comment stuff. Word lengths 4,8,16 so you spent all your time shoe horning a stuff to fit. Parts costing a arm and a leg, and three weeks for delivery. (Today parts from China 95 cents, 2 months delivery and arm and leg for shipping). My latest design on paper, requires 74LSXX,74H74,CY7C122 (25ns 256x4 ram),13 mhz osc, and lots of cmos 22V10's.A 18 bit serial cpu, with a memory cycle time of 2.25 uS. I am still working on my personal computer. Who knows,It might even work, but first the EMULATOR and cross assembler. Ben.
[cctalk] Re: DOS p-System Pascal: (Was: Saga of CP/M)
On 2024-05-10 1:01 p.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: There have been some minor skirmishes in the MCU world over what language should be used when programming. EASY! OCTAL! If it worked on the 8 it is good enough for me. C/C++ is very much top dog, probably because the development suites are written for that. There's a small group that advocates Python; and some say that Ada is best. But they represent a very small segment. --Chuck I think it is more the case UNIX was around, and written in assembler. The egg. Then we got B, a Archaeopteryx and flock of chickens that all start with C. C generates real code output and not some virtual machine, another important factor as well as having bit fields and structures. The late 70's , early 80's where the golden years of computing. C,Pascal and PL/M are the only big names for 8 bit cpu's, and what came later.
[cctalk] Re: DOS p-System Pascal: (Was: Saga of CP/M)
On 2024-05-09 1:23 p.m., John via cctalk wrote: Pascal never really made it on the microcomputer platform did it? I can be convinced otherwise but it seems like microcomputing Pascal was more of a staging environment for then upload into a production mainframe/mini Pascal was the language of choice over at Apple in the original MacOS days, and as Mike has noted Turbo Pascal was popular enough on the PC; it was more, I think, that the UCSD-style language-environment-as-OS paradigm never caught on in the microcomputer world. Early consumer micros of course had ROM BASIC, but once you got past that to a reasonably full-featured operating system, there was no compelling reason for it to be tightly coupled to one particular language/compiler when it could just as easily treat compilers as Yet Another Program and support arbitrarily many. And every one maxed out with small model for the IBM PC, and 48K for CP/M. Did any one make a REAL TIME OS the 386?
[cctalk] Re: FWIW CD & DVD demagnitizitation [was: Double Density 3.5" Floppy Disks]
On 2024-05-07 9:53 p.m., Tony Duell via cctalk wrote: Anyway, some of their engineers were setting up for an exhibition/demonstration when they realised they'd forgotten to bring any speaker cable. No problem, one of them goes to the local 'DIY Shed' (large hardware store) and buys some normal mains cable[1]. They use this and not surprisingly it sounds great. [1] Apparently there's a slogan on the wall of the QUAD workshop 'Ohm's Law rules here. Oxygen-free cable is not required' Next day, said chain of 'DIY sheds' gets a run on that mains cable. Audiophools were buying this magic speaker cable -tony Nice story. QUAD is a bit outdated. Australa is the place for electrostatic speakers, http://www.eraudio.com.au/
[cctalk] Re: FWIW CD & DVD demagnitizitation [was: Double Density 3.5" Floppy Disks]
On 2024-05-07 5:51 p.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: On 5/7/24 15:21, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: How difficult is it to measure and compare "With/Without" signals? If you peruse the old Bob Pease articles on "Electronic Design" magazine, I believe more than once, he alluded to a proposed "blind test"--two boxes; one filled with the latest audiophilatic super speaker cable and the other with standard lamp cord with splices. I don't believe that anyone took him up on the proposed challenge. --Chuck Orichalcum has been rediscovered. I say use that!
[cctalk] Re: APL (Was: BASIC
On 2024-05-02 4:55 a.m., Liam Proven via cctalk wrote: On Thu, 2 May 2024 at 00:51, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: What would our world be like if the first home computers were to have had APL, instead of BASIC? To be perfectly honest I think the home computer boom wouldn't have happened, and it would have crashed and burned in the 1970s, with the result that microcomputers remained firmly under corporate control. I have been watching the APL world with interest since I discovered it at university, and I still don't understand a word of it. I've been watching Lisp for just 15 years or so and I find it unreadable too. I think there are widely different levels of mental flexibility among smart humans and one person's "this just requires a small effort but you get so much in return!" is someone else's eternally impossible, unclimbable mountain. After some 40 years in computers now, I still like BASIC best, with Fortran and Pascal very distant runners-up and everything else from C to Python is basically somewhere between Minoan Linear A and Linear B to me. I think I lack the mental flexibility, and I think I'm better than most of hoi polloi. If the early machines had used something cryptic like APL or Forth I reckon we'd never have had a generation of child programmers. I have very poor memory, IF,REM,LET ect I can remember. Line noise like TELCO err APL I can not make sense at all. USA(IBM) pushed APL , Europe wanted ALGOL. What users got was STUPID ASCII and the useless accent marks. Without real IO lots of languages died, and we got C and Pascal but only for the US. That just left BASIC the standard as it just needed A-Z0-9[]+-=><;" BASIC would be still around in ALT UNIVERSE running off the cloud.
[cctalk] Re: What to take to a vintage computer show
On 2024-05-01 11:26 p.m., Ali via cctalk wrote: Don't forget to bring a towel. Sellam The fact that we all probably got that reference is the amazing part. -Ali What no white mouse trap!
[cctalk] Re: PCs in home vs businesses (70s/80s)
On 2024-04-27 2:29 p.m., Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
On Apr 27, 2024, at 1:15 PM, Tarek Hoteit via cctalk
wrote:
I came across this paragraph from the July 1981 Popular Science magazine
edition in the article titled “Compute power - pro models at almost home-unit
prices.”
“ ‘Personal-computer buffs may buy a machine, bring it home, and then spend the
rest of their time looking for things it can do’, said …. ‘In business, it’s
the other way around. Here you know the job, you have to find a machine that
will do it. More precisely, you have to find software that will do the job.
Finding a computer to use the software you’ve selected becomes secondary.”.
Do you guys* think that software drove hardware sales rather than the other way
around for businesses in the early days? I recall that computer hardware
salespeople would be knocking on businesses office doors rather than software
salesmen. Just seeking your opinion now that we are far ahead from 1981.
Not PCs, but the first systems I worked on for DEC were turnkey PDP-11 based
systems for newspaper production. Clearly the customer wanted to publish
newspapers, and the hardware involved wasn't what drove the decision. A lot of
our competitors were specialized companies concentrating on that particular
business, not computer makers. For example, arguably the top company at the
time (Atex, if I remember right) also used PDP-11s. That was around 1978.
Also about that time, I worked with some people running a computer store in the LA area
("Rainbow Computing") on a proposal for a business application. That was a
work scheduling and routing system for hospitals, and there too the point of it was the
application needed to solve the business problem, not the hardware on which it would run.
paul
Did any one need REAL BCD math like the Big Boys had?
[cctalk] Re: OFF TOPIC: Doctor Who
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJeu3LCo-6A Dr who ads for prime.
[cctalk] Re: Z80 vs other microprocessors of the time.
On 2024-04-24 2:55 p.m., Gordon Henderson via cctalk wrote: On Wed, 24 Apr 2024, David Brownlee via cctalk wrote: If we're talking about machines with a Z80 and 6502, it would be remiss not to link back to the machine mentioned in the original message - the BBC micro, with its onboard 6502 and "Tube" interface which could take a second processor option, including - Z80 - 65C02 / 65C102 - NS 16032 (ahem 32016) - 8088 (Torch) / 80186, 80286 (last developed but never released) - ARM1 (Original ARM development board. Rare as hens teeth :) / ARM7 (someone having a laugh in later years) Typically the second processor would run as primary, using the original 6502 to handle input, display and I/O (and on 32016 you *really* wanted someone else to deal with anything time critical like interrupts :) "later years" is .. Today where we connect a Raspbery Pi to the BBC Micros Tube interface and emulate all those CPUs and several more like the PDP/11. One of the 6502 emulations runs at the equivalent of a 275Mhz CPU... So if you want a Z80 then emulate it - it runs CP/M just as well as any other CP/M system. The original ARM2 is there too. The current list: n Processor - *FX 151,230,n 0 * 65C02 (fast) 1 65C02 (3MHz, for games compatbility) 2 65C102 (fast) 3 65C102 (4MHz, for games compatbility) 4 Z80 (1.21) 5 Z80 (2.00) 6 Z80 (2.2c) 7 Z80 (2.30) 8 80286 9 MC6809 11 PDP-11 12 ARM2 13 32016 14 Disable 15 ARM Native 16 LIB65C02 64K 17 LIB65C02 256K Turbo 18 65C816 (Dossy) 19 65C816 (ReCo) 20 OPC5LS 21 OPC6 22 OPC7 24 65C02 (JIT) 28 Ferranti F100-L Cheers, -Gordon This would be great, but I live on the other side of the pond and BBC anything is hard to find, let alone Micro's. Where is my "Dr. Who". Ben.
[cctalk] Re: Z80 vs other microprocessors of the time.
On 2024-04-23 8:40 p.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: On 4/23/24 17:18, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote: On 4/23/2024 8:06 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: Did the Dimension 68000 (a multi-processor machine) have Z80 and 6502? Couldn't Bill Godbout's CPU-68K board co-exist with other CPU boards? --Chuck I remember Bill Godbout's PACE ads. Now I got the $$$ and time I can't find any chips.
[cctalk] Re: Z80 vs other microprocessors of the time.
On 2024-04-22 1:02 p.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: I'd like to see a Z80 implemented with UV-201 vacuum tubes... :) --Chuck Real computers use glow tubes like the NE-2 or the NE-77.:)
[cctalk] Re: Z80 vs other microprocessors of the time.
>One other factor is that RISC machines rely on simple operations >carefully arranged by optimizing compilers (or, in some cases, >skillful programmers). A multi-step operation can be encoded in a >sequence of RISC operations run through an optimizing scheduler more >effectively than the equivalent sequence of steps inside the >micro-engine of a CISC processor. Lets call them LOAD/STORE architectures. Classic cpu designs like the PDP-1, might be better called RISC. Back then you matched the cpu word length to data you were using. 40 bits made a lot of sense for real computing, even if you had no RAM memory at the time, just drum. IBM set the standard for 8 bit bytes, 16, 32 bit words and 64 bit floating point. Things are complex because you need to pack things to fit the standard size boxes. Every thing is trade off. Why? Because the IBM 7030 Stretch (64 bits) was a flop. Save memory, CISC. Use memory, RISC. Simple memory, Microprocessors. Processor development, is always built around what memory you have around at the time, is my argument. How many Z80's can you think of USE core memory? I think only 1 8080A ever used core memory, from BYTE magazine. Improvements in memory often where improvements in logic as well for CPU design. If CPU's were designed for high level languages, why are there no stack based architectures around like for Pascal's P-code? (1970's yes, but not today) The Z80 may be gone, but the 8080 still can be emulated by bitslices. Did anyone ever use them? Ben.
[cctalk] Re: Last Buy notification for Z80 (Z84C00 Product line)
On 2024-04-21 5:26 p.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: On 4/21/24 12:11, ben via cctalk wrote: I keep finding I still need 74XX just for having 10 TTL loads, and 74LSXX just does not have the power. Ever try BiCMOS chips? IIRC, the 74ABTxxx will drive loads of up to 60 ma, far in excess of old 74xx parts. --Chuck Thru the hole and 5 volt and cheap and easy to find ( at one time ) and low edge rates , are important for me as I have kitchen table kind of projects. Before you say use XXX , I don't have the skills or the tools to layout and debug high tech boards or parts. I am very unlucky with FPGA stuff. My current bit slice computer design has some sort of dynamic problem, as only some instructions will run or read correctly. Halt and STOP don't work. Front panel works mostly. I need to rethink a whole new design,as something I can build and test and find parts for. The goal is a 20 bit word length computer, with 10 bit bytes,bit slices, Compact flash , UART's and blinking light front panel. I may run in emulation, until I can get hardware built and debugged but I have not found a host computer I like. So if any one wishes to take on this project, feel free using modern parts. Ben. * april 21 2024 sdc 1 Small Data Processor 1 .815 uS CYCLE TIME - BYTE BASED COMPUTER - INDEX REG'S - REGISTER OPS - CARRY BIT - AUTO/INDEX - LOGIC OPERATIONS - HEX FRONT PANEL MM 00 0 0 10 2 1 01 WRDwrd 11 SEXsx 54321 ++++++ |:|:B321|+###| NORMAL ++++++ OP TC 0 ST SUB ADD 1 ADD ADD RAMU Z SUB 2 SUB SUB RAMU C SBR 3 CAD SBR RAMU S OR 4 LD ORAND 5 OR OR RAMD Z BIT 6 AND AND RAMD C XOR 7 XOR XOR RAMD S XNR F C0 0 0... CF F C0 0 1... UART i = index , 0 # CCC COND TRAP (0) <- PC PC <- 2 ADR LOAD N 0 H/ZST 1 A LD RAMU Z 2 B ADDRAMU C 3 C(carry)SUBRAMU S 4 G OR 5 X ANDRAMD Z 6 Y XORRAMD C 7 F/F JMPRAMD S REG C is CARRY IR PC CTL 0 0 TEST 0 1 DSP 1 0 HLT 1 1 DI/EI --- M1 = a/m1 M2 = b/m2 M3 = idx M3,M2,M1 ST OP 0 0 0CTL OP # 0 8 bits 0 0 1HLT SCC1 0 1 0ST R+ OP R+ 2 0 1 1JSV R+2 JCC R+2 3 1 0 0- REG4 1 0 1- SFT5 1 1 0ST @R+ OP @R+ 6 1 1 1ST XST X 7 --- '/' LINE COMMENT 'star' BLOCK COMMENT BEGIN/END ONLY #OOOOCTAL PROGRAM COUNTER __ | KROMA.PLD | CP x---|1 24|---x Vcc AD7 x---|2 23|---x WR AD6 x---|3 22|---x PRA0 AD5 x---|4 21|---x PRA1 AD4 x---|5 20|---x PRA2 AD3 x---|6 19|---x PRA3 AD2 x---|7 18|---x PRA4 AD1 x---|8 17|---x PRA5 AD0 x---|9 16|---x PRA6 AUX x---|10 15|---x PRA7 x---|11 14|---x M3 GND x---|12 13|---x CLR_ |__| [II8,sft,no,ld,ra,m2,m1,op,w,WR] __ | KROMB.PLD | CP x---|1 24|---x Vcc AD7 x---|2 23|---x BY AD6 x---|3 22|---x PRB0 AD5 x---|4 21|---x PRB1 AD4 x---|5 20|---x PRB2 AD3 x---|6 19|---x PRB3 AD2 x---|7 18|---x PRB4 AD1 x---|8 17|---x PRB5 AD0 x---|9 16|---x PRB6 aux x---|10 15|---x PRB7 x---|11 14|---x RD GND x---|12 13|---x CLR_ |__| [RD,ctl,rx,rd',in',ir,mar,rd,b,BY] OCTAL CPU FOR 20 BITS ( RUN,ST)(M3,M2,M1) (cnt 3,2,1) 7 65 4 3 2 1 0 * / TIMES ARE IN MICROSECONDS #100 / IDLE PANEL ALL 4 CLOCKS 3.26 AC SWMAR NO PCCTL PCIR #110 / LOAD ADR AC LD WRD
[cctalk] Re: Last Buy notification for Z80 (Z84C00 Product line)
On 2024-04-21 3:27 p.m., Jerry Weiss wrote: While intention might have been to last XX years, I am becoming increasingly pessimistic about longevity of most electronic devices. A crystal radio with an open air capacitor seems like the only good bet. Between electrolytic capacitor aging challenges, discrete and integrated circuit hermetic failures, cost or other inherent technical flaws, I fear most electronics will become inert over time. Many of us have the skills to identify and replace bits to extend the lifetime of many items. I only hope the skills and suitable replacement parts are available as time goes on. But if you want upgrade your radio, try here: http://www.r-type.org/articles/art-028.htm Most electronic devices have a known life time, sadly most of this information is never on the data sheet.
[cctalk] Re: Last Buy notification for Z80 (Z84C00 Product line)
On 2024-04-21 8:45 a.m., Mike Katz wrote: As for the RP2040 being cheap crap, I beg to differ with you. It is a solid chip, produced in 10s of millions at least. And, I would bet, a better quality chip than your Z-80, if due only to improved IC manufacturing technologies. The pi looks like parts were picked for lowest cost,biggest profit, like most products today. RISC chips have been around for 40 years, and yet versions change like hotcakes every year. I just want a product that is more robust, than the bleeding edge of technology. I product must meet my needs,not what some sales man said I need. I keep finding I still need 74XX just for having 10 TTL loads, and 74LSXX just does not have the power. Just because it's old doesn't make it good. I worked on a 32KHz 4 Bit CPU (about 20 years ago) where the development hardware was very unstable and the tool chain not a whole lot better. Early Microsoft and Lattice C compilers for the PC were buggy as hell. If you want I can list a few bugs from each of them in another thread. The PC was buggy as hell. Other than the 68000 and the National 16032 I can't think what real cpu is with more than 64Kb. The 386 has problems. The IBM 360 or VAX never made it the home market. The ARM was UK product. One of the biggest features of the Z-80, the extra register set, was rarely used in open source software in order to maintain compatibility with the 8080. I thought the main problem was you could not keep track of what set you were using. Some of the early Z-80 CP/M tools did not work because they were derived from 8080 tools. After time the tools got better. That is the case with any piece of software. If it doesn't become obsolete and if maintained it will get better over time. Most places only up grades software, if somebody pays for it. You can never get the OK to upgrade of fix software, but when you do they want it yesterday. Ben. PS: Looking the reply email, I say 20 bits is the best.
[cctalk] Re: PDP8 @ 50
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXTQvlkYJvI=4s
[cctalk] Re: Last Buy notification for Z80 (Z84C00 Product line)
On 2024-04-20 8:33 p.m., Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: For anything more sophisticated than your coffee pot the RP2040 from Raspberry Pie is a fantastic little chip, dual core 133 MHz Cortex M0+ with 8 PIO engines, 264K of RAM, ADC, UART, SPI, I2C all for under a dollar. I designed a fully functional RP2040 with 16 Mb flash for under $2.00. In large enough quantities that's encroaching on 8 bit PIC territory at over 1000 times the memory and CPU power. I am wishing for a Quality Product, cheap crap is not always better. USB comes to mind. 256Kb ram is only 32K 64 bit words. Cache memory never works. My $5 internet toaster, just exploded after 3 days. So what? Just buy the new model that works with windows 12. Download a buggy new tool chain. The Z80 tools worked. The PDP8 was built to last. 50+ years and going strong. NOT the crappy PI PDP-8 or PDP-10. I give it 2 years max. Now a PI style computer with compact FLASH x 2, NO USB and 2 MEG ram , real serial and printer ports that will work in a noisy industrial setting, would be quite usefull. I'd pay even $3 for it. :)
[cctalk] Re: Last Buy notification for Z80 (Z84C00 Product line)
On 2024-04-20 12:20 p.m., Jim Brain via cctalk wrote: On 4/20/2024 1:16 PM, Wayne S wrote: Who still uses the Z80 line for new projects? Wouldn’t it be easier and cheaper to just use an Arduino or Raspberry Pi? Given the list you're posting on... :-) Jim True, but the Z80 is 5 volt logic. Still important in my mind plus timing is easy to figure out if you just need 8 bit logic.
[cctalk] Re: Last Buy notification for Z80 (Z84C00 Product line)
On 2024-04-19 8:07 p.m., Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: Gee! Have sales gone down? One more reason to use the 8080 subset when writing CP/M programs. There still are RADIO SHACK 8080A's still on ebay, with @RARE@ prices. NO thank you, z80's are the way to go. Aren't there already some licensed second sources? Now is a good time to stock up for any z80 projects or repair, while they are $10 or less on epay.
[cctalk] Re: Bomar 901b My wife found in my stuff. Is this as scarce at it seems?s,?
On 2024-04-16 10:34 a.m., Van Snyder via cctalk wrote: On Tue, 2024-04-16 at 12:38 +0100, Adrian Godwin via cctalk wrote: 901B is the first pocket calculator I remember - I don't know if there were earlier ones. The first one I remember is the HP Digital Slide Rule, about 1965. Six digits. $600. Keep quiet, now all old calculators will be $600 on ebay.
[cctalk] Other input devices.
Did any one ever use a keyboard to magtape as input device?
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
On 2024-04-12 7:23 p.m., Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: On Apr 12, 2024, at 5:54 PM, CAREY SCHUG via cctalk wrote: ... my favorite terminal 3190 that was neon gas, so monochrome, but could take 5 addresses, and flip between 62 lines of 160 characters (always there), to 4 terminals of 62x80 any two visible at a time, or 4 terminals of 31x160 characters, any 2 visible at a time, or 4 terminals of 31x80 all visible at once. when given a choice, my new boss was surprised that I chose that instead of the color 3279 with graphics that everybody else wanted. Great for running virtual systems... Sounds like the plasma panel displays that were invented for the PLATO system, by Don Bitzer and a few others, at the U of Illinois. Inherent memory: if you lit a pixel it would stay lit, to turn it off you'd feed it a pulse of the opposite polarity. So it was a great way to do 512x512 bitmap graphics with very modest complexity, no refresh memory needed. paul But too slow I suspect to run a game like spacewar.
[cctalk] Re: IBM 360
On 2024-04-09 8:53 p.m., Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: I had not realized the IBM 360 was 60 yrs. old this month. I worked on such a computer in the late 60s in Toronto. What one could do with 8 Kbytes of ram was remarkable! Happy computing Murray Real time sharing, not a 16K PDP 8?
[cctalk] Re: Borland Turbo C++ and Turbo Basic - Books and Manuals
On 2024-04-07 3:33 p.m., Just Kant via cctalk wrote: What about cans? They don't shatter. What? Too American? I mean I won't drink out of anything but glass. But dad used to drink those tall boy Rheingold and Schaeffer. He was so nasty in the mornings. Sent with Proton Mail secure email. On Sunday, April 7th, 2024 at 4:14 PM, Harald Arnesen via cctalk wrote: ben via cctalk [07/04/2024 20.05]: I don't think bottles would be ship able. Now a keg of beer might be. Or a least the old oak kegs you read in stories. No problem to ship beer bottles, just pack them in diapers. We do this all the time in the Norwegian homebrew competitions. Now, diapers are the only thing really cheap in Norway. -- Hilsen Harald. But kegs are more fun.
[cctalk] Re: Borland Turbo C++ and Turbo Basic - Books and Manuals
On 2024-04-07 5:57 a.m., Christian Groessler via cctalk wrote: On 4/6/24 5:37 PM, Mike Norris via cctalk wrote: Additional I would like £5 beer money for this one please! Writing Open VMS Alpha Device Drivers in C - Margie Sherlock/Leonard Szubowicz I'd take it. I can send you beer money, or could send you 2 or 3 bottles of local beer. I'm living near Munich, Germany. Sending beer will likely be quite more expensive than 5 pounds, but has a fun factor bonus :-) regards, chris I don't think bottles would be ship able. Now a keg of beer might be. Or a least the old oak kegs you read in stories. Ben.
[cctalk] Re: oscilloscopes
On 2024-04-06 9:40 a.m., Phil Budne via cctalk wrote: Paul Koning wrote: Yes, and some emulations have done this, such as Phil Budne's famous work in SIMH. Famous?? I'm famous???!!! To be fair, I started with Douglas W. Jones' PDP8 Emulator. Which reminds me of: If I have seen farther than others, it is because I was standing on the shoulders of giants. -- Isaac Newton In the sciences, we are now uniquely privileged to sit side by side with the giants on whose shoulders we stand. -- Gerald Holton If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants were standing on my shoulders. -- Hal Abelson In computer science, we stand on each other's feet. -- Brian K. Reid It was certainly an awakening to the inherent parallelism of "analog" natural processes... I wrote and tuned the code twenty years ago, but haven't looked at whether better results might be possible by wasting the capabilities of current systems (SIMD libaries and/or multiple cores). I felt like I only was able to give a slim impression, and not an immersive experience. I've also wondered what could be done with 4K HDR displays: making points round(!) and simulating the "bloom" and intensity of repeatedly or highly intensified spots. phil I need to write a emulator for a new cpu design I have. The 1086 cpu, nice 20 bit cpu design from about 1968 using more modern parts. The problem is the modern parts are just too fast and I have timing issues. I can read/ write from memory using the front panel but not run code for some reason. Jumps seem to work but HALT does not. This requires a whole new bunch of PCB's with test points and other bug fixes, and I have few weeks waiting for more parts. I figure 90% of the code will be planning simple IO for this beast and 10% the emulator itself. I like real hardware that you can put a scope too. All I can say modern programming is a about using a GUI and very little about console IO. This is a bit change from using a PDP-8 with TTY, and 4K focal.
[cctalk] Re: typical IC kits on Amazon and elsewhere
On 2024-03-30 9:49 p.m., Tom Hunter via cctalk wrote: Sorry I mistyped. I meant Mouser and Digikey, not Amazon and Digikey. Well the searches suck on both. Digikey is bad for having 0 stock listings. Digikey is turning out to be more the Radio Shack for parts.
[cctalk] Re: typical IC kits on Amazon and elsewhere
On 2024-03-30 8:53 p.m., Glen Slick via cctalk wrote: You can also buy parts direct from TI, for example they currently show around around 3000 SN74LS04N parts in stock. https://www.ti.com/product/SN74LS04/part-details/SN74LS04N The prices for that part match the current Mouser prices of $0.674 each, or $0.519 each if you buy at least 4 tubes of 25 parts. I've bought some tubes of 74LS parts direct from TI in the last year. 185 In Stock 595-SN7404NE4 prices in canadian $'s QTY 1 $3.84 QTY 1000 $1.89
[cctalk] Re: typical IC kits on Amazon and elsewhere
On 2024-03-30 8:23 p.m., Jonathan Chapman via cctalk wrote: Been lurking for a while, but this topic hits true with some recent experiences. I would not hesitate to buy most common digital ICs on Amazon or ebay I mean we had to stop buying 7400 series from Jameco over counterfeits, so it's definitely a problem for jellybean parts too. We had so many reject 74F573 latches go out in XT-IDE kits we just scrapped the remaining Jameco-provided inventory. We also started having issues with 28C64B EEPROMs from them, obvious relabels that wouldn't program with the Atmel SDP algorithm -- that's actually why they started shipping pre-programmed in kits! Real shame, I've bought from Jameco since I was a kid, they'd actually sell to Just Some Kid :P Personally I'm not willing to save the relatively small amount of money on TTL by buying from random sources. It's especially infuriating when you're building something for the first time (prototypes, someone else's project you've never put together, etc.) and it turns out to be a dead 25 cent chip. Thanks, Jonathan Well the pal programmer I have does test TTL, a handy option, for junk box stuff. I tend to have a bad habit of putting in parts upside dowm or the wrong programmed part, for the simple fact DARK plastic hard to read in most homes with dark gray labels.
[cctalk] Re: typical IC kits on Amazon and elsewhere
On 2024-03-30 6:10 p.m., Jonathan Chapman via cctalk wrote: Standard TTL 74XXX is drying up rather quickly. Futurlec still has some TTL but 7404s are all gone. Even LS is hard to find. Ours comes from Mouser, between two part #s they have over 7,000 74LS04s in DIP packaging in stock. Didn't check ACT, HCT, or ALS. I don't think we've had a 7400 series part that we couldn't just order off Mouser in recent history, and we're usually buying QTY 100. Thanks, Jonathan I checked mouser (canada) again. After about 3 pages of garbage matches, I found some 7904's in DIP packages, only a few 100 in stock. TI and Motorola sell 74LS541's but only the Motorola part has Vin Low of .8 volts. TI has .6 Vin low. Are there any more part differences between TI and other digital logic.
[cctalk] Re: typical IC kits on Amazon and elsewhere
On 2024-03-30 4:27 p.m., Will Cooke via cctalk wrote: I'm not clear on whether you mean some specific chips or in general, but here is my experience. For things that are in current production or recently discontinued, I have had extremely good luck with Chinese suppliers either from Amazon or Ebay. For things that are long out of production, such as 1802 (normal, not SOS) and 6502 processors, I've heard way too many horror stories so I look to ebay for new old stock or used from US or sometimes European suppliers. Again, I've had very good luck. In fact, I can't remember every getting any bad ones. YMMV Will Standard TTL 74XXX is drying up rather quickly. Futurlec still has some TTL but 7404s are all gone. Even LS is hard to find. Ben. Still designing that vintage computer Newer is not always better.
[cctalk] Re: Amoeba OS
On 2024-03-28 5:50 p.m., Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: OTOH, spammer mailing lists, and leaked personal and trade secrets seem to last forever. You forgot Mickey Mouse. -- Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
[cctalk] Re: recreating old computers [was: Paper tape in casettes...]
On 2024-02-27 3:09 p.m., Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: On Feb 27, 2024, at 4:49 PM, CAREY SCHUG via cctalk wrote: Religion warning: I was a mainframer. Since at any practical budget, they can only be emulated, Dumpster diving is a 0 dollar budget. People could afford the APPLE II, 8080 S-100 bus, SWTPC 6909. I assume with careful shopping one can rebuild them for about the same price, in small quanities. Power supplies require harder to find parts. Main frame rebuilding is costly, but I suspect the real cost is I/O that can't be duplicated. A hardware emulation using microcode to me is real computer, a windows fly by night emulation is not, as the base platform is too unstable. Depends on your definition of emulated. Is an FPGA version merely an "emulation"? You might say yes if it's a functional model. Arguably no, if it's a gate level model. I have bad luck with FPGA's, too many timing issues with routing. I have better luck with a 2901 4 bit alu and some support logic mounted on a small pcb. Suppose you had schematics of, say, a KA-10. You could turn those gates into VHDL or Verilog, and that should deliver an exact replica of the original machine, bug for bug compatible. That assumes the timing quirks are manageable, which for most machines should be true. (It isn't for a CDC 6600.) paul The IBM 1130 is also a pretty scary machine inside. The blog is here. https://rescue1130.blogspot.com/ Ben.
[cctalk] Re: Paper tape in casettes...
On 2024-02-27 1:13 p.m., Doug McIntyre via cctalk wrote: On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 11:10:34AM -0700, ben via cctalk wrote: PS: With low cost Chinese PCB's and vintage parts, why are people not building real hardware replica's of interesting machines. But they are.. I can't tell what you'd find interesting since the list is pretty wide. Anything not APPLE or IBM or DEC or a PI-emulation for a home brew computer. I've got an Apple I replica board that someday I intend to populate and get running. 1) Get a good power supply 2) hack in a 6809. 3) get a good power supply. You've got the ReAmiga project producing new boards for using up old parts on broken boards. https://www.reamiga.info/?page_id=36 One thing that I find interesting (although I'd never do it), is a board to emulate a 68000 CPU at much higher speeds running barebones emulator on a Raspberry Pi. Aimed at Amiga A1200 again. https://wiki.amiga.org/index.php?title=Pistorm32-Lite I've put together my IMSAI 8080 frontpanel kit, with the CPU emulated on an ESP32. https://thehighnibble.com/imsai8080/ I had z80/s100 kit once, but the power supply failed taking every thing out. Or they are about to ship out the PiDP-10 blinkenlights kits https://obsolescence.dev/pidp10.html The CPU again emulated on a RaPi, but all new boards and plastic for the console kit I think the PI is too cheap of computer build wise for emulation of any system. It might blink your lights, but never run 20 users timesharing. > I'm not sure if anybody has ever thought about making flipchip boards themselves though. > Although they might have been.. > https://forum.vcfed.org/index.php?threads/a-general-purpose-flip-chip-adapter-board-worth-doing.1228572/ Small PCB's run at $5 each and PAL 22v10 in each could replace a lot simple cards. I would love to see a PDP-8 with 1/2 size flip chips using today's smaller logic. A good home brew computer is what I am looking for. In hindsight I want 18 bit addressing (bytes optional) and single word memory ref's. Since 2901 alu's are 4 bits wide, 20,24,28 bits are my only option for a COMPUTER not for digital controller faking it. Still working on the pro-type stage here. For test pcb's I have, good source of Chinese toggle switches with a PCB foot print. https://www.ebay.ca/itm/143887059040 Hex displays are here. https://www.ebay.ca/itm/281809099152
[cctalk] Re: Paper tape in casettes...
On 2024-02-27 9:20 a.m., CAREY SCHUG via cctalk wrote: It's not a cassette, but the PB-440 (Pitney-Bowes), renamed Raytheon 440 and its upgrade the raytheon 520 had a large reel paper tape with a bidirectional read and an "operating system" Load the os, say we want to run fortran, spin down to fortran, read the program in on 80 column cards (probably 2 pass, I don'trecall), automatically reload the monitor when done, read and execute the program from cards. Frequently used programs could be on the OS paper tape reel. btw, that computer was user level microcode. multiple "machine" definitions, with typical 24 bit word, one instruction set optimized for fortran execution, one for fortran compilation, etc (don't remember exactly, as I only programmed in the microcode of mostly 2 micro instructions per word). --Carey Where is some document ion on that machine? I finally got around to building the TTL home-brew computer I wanted from the 1970's and now I need all the goodies like paper tape and i/o that is Algol ready. :) Ben. OK I cheated using Cmos 2901's and 22v10's, but that is what I had to make the PCB layouts easy.I don't think 1 74H04 counts for making it a TTL computer. :) PS: With low cost Chinese PCB's and vintage parts, why are people not building real hardware replica's of interesting machines.
[cctalk] Re: HAPPY DEC-20 DAY!
On 2023-12-20 11:16 a.m., Rich Alderson via cctalk wrote: I wish you all a joyous Winter Solstice Festival, however you may choose to celebrate it. I like the day after, the days get longer again. Rich Ben, in the dark.
[cctalk] Re: HAPPY DEC-20 DAY!
On 2023-12-20 11:16 a.m., Rich Alderson via cctalk wrote: Happy DEC-20 Day! My late friend Mark always noted that TOPS-20 (and the DECSYSTEM-20 on which it runs) was a great improvement on its successors. I wish you all a joyous Winter Solstice Festival, however you may choose to celebrate it. Good to see it back. Rich Ben. PS for 18 days ago, the 2 http://lightning.locl.net/homes/pdp2/ PPS some say the PDP 2 was PDP 1 with a different core memory.
[cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?)
On 2023-11-22 6:53 p.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: On 11/22/23 16:47, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: Yup. I have vivid memories of the Intel rep telling us that not only was the 8086 compatible with the 8085, conversion could be automated through their ISIS-II based conversion program--and it would result in a smaller (memory footprint) program. To be fair to Intel,I think they did good job of encoding the instruction set for the most common sequences being shorter. 8 bit bytes only give space for byte or word instructions, not both. Prefix bytes are good compromise with the segmented 64K memory space. Data and code space are optimized for 16 bits. You want 32 bits, buy a 432. Still only 64Kb segments. Ben.
[cctalk] Re: Intel 4004
On 2023-11-20 5:36 p.m., Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: On Nov. 15, 1971 Intel commercially released the 4004 microprocessor which some consider to be the first. Nonetheless, even if not in agreement, it made possible the instrument which drives the classic-computing industry or at the very least our hobby! Happy computing. Murray https://retrocomputingforum.com/t/swiss-physicist-builds-complete-intel-4004-computer-out-of-smd-transistors/3738 THE DIY VERSION
[cctalk] Re: Installing DEC C on RSTS/E
On 2023-11-07 7:05 p.m., Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: On Nov 7, 2023, at 8:49 PM, Paul Koning wrote: Hi... I'm seriously rusty on official RSTS installation procedures. I'm trying to install DEC C using the C_V1_2.tap file from the bitsavers bits/DEC/pdp11/rsts directory. It's actually a TPC file, in spite of what the extension suggests. Once I supply the correct format, SIMH recognizes it and RSTS can see the tape contents. Then I try @[0,1]install c81. Point to the tape, answer the destination, and then it asks me for the "library" tape and complains when I give it the C tape again (labels don't match). So what is it looking for? Does anyone have the C installation procedure handy? paul Never mind... (a) C81 is COBOL (!!) not C. And I found the C installation manual on STUPI. Off & running now. paul Come one, don't hide you are a CLOSET COBOL PROGRAMMER. Will COBOL (C81) run on a regular 11, or does it need to be upgraded?
[cctalk] Re: The World Wide Web
On 2023-10-02 4:36 p.m., Rick Bensene via cctalk wrote: Mike wrote: ... Gawd, I still remember those numbers, some 60 years later; so why can't I remember my thirty-year old cell phone number... Because you rarely, if ever, call it. ;-) I never could figure out how to call myself, so I have no need to remember it. BTW the last time I have seen a phone book was about 25 years ago.
[cctalk] Re: The World Wide Web
On 2023-10-02 1:15 p.m., Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: On Mon, Oct 2, 2023 at 5:18 AM Stefan Skoglund via cctalk wrote: The main problem with that lorry hurtling down the freeway is latency. I need to move 1 PB . how long will it take filling and packing enough IBM LTO-9 tapes to send 1 PB ? How long does it takes to fill 1 tape with 18 TB ? On Mon, 2 Oct 2023, KenUnix via cctalk wrote: Back it up to floppy diskettes. HaHa. Sorry I could not resist. Far too unstable and prone to damage and data corruption. Use dead-tree technology of cards or paper tape. If you use cards, put diagonal sharpie marks on the decks, to facilitate visual re-ordering after the crash on the freeway. -- Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com Also EAST / WEST , in case of data collision. :)
[cctalk] Re: Good C to FPGA/PLA compiler
On 2023-09-23 12:36 p.m., Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: On Sep 22, 2023, at 9:30 PM, Martin Bishop wrote: Paul I endorse your point regarding Lattice's gouging. Support for anything prior to the XO parts now costs a significant premium. Their XO2 parts are the most useful to this community - free tools and 0.5 mm pitch, e.g. 100p & 144p - not dense but usefully large, 3v3 IO and agricultural assembly. The Xilinx free tools no longer have license files, which was how Lattice cut us all off at the pass. The current Vivado ML Standard Edition (tools to normal people) are free up to the XC7Z030 - which is a fairly serious device. I have a PDP-11 and space to spare running in the markedly smaller XC7Z010; 16b / no MMU, most of the 45 instruction set. FPGA are (organically) memory poor - perhaps because the access time is ~3 ns. I should think you would be in with a chance of fitting the 6600 logic, however on a '30 you have 265 x 4 ki by BRAMs = ~1 Mi By, if more is required either a dedicated external memory device or DMA to/fr DRAM would be required. The 6600 model I'm building is a gate level model, so it is cycle-accurate, but also large. I'm figuring several hundred thousand gates, which makes sense if you consider the module count for a 6600. A large enough FPGA for that seems to have enough on-chip memory for both PP and CP memories, leaving only ECS as off-chip. That's helpful because both PP and CP have tightly constrained cycles; DRAM would be nearly impossible to make work, though SRAM is doable. paul I say get the memory first, who knows what you need will be around later. I wish you good luck, as FPGA software does what it thinks is right, not what you think is right. Ben.
[cctalk] Re: Good C to FPGA/PLA compiler
On 2023-09-22 3:16 p.m., Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: Martin, The debug board will need to have the following functionality: 1. Read and write to/from memory when the CPU is running using one cycle data break (DEC's version of DMA for the PDP-8). Single Cycle DMA requires some interesting signaling, including putting the priority on the data bus during part of the cycle. 2. Read and write to/from memory when the CPU is halted using front panel emulation (something totally different than one cycle data break unfortunately) 3. Handle 4 breakpoints (based on address, data, R/W and count) and signal the cpu to stop. I don't know, yet, if there will be enough time in the CPU's instruction cycle to top the CPU before the fetch of the next instruction. If this cannot be done in hardware than a much more crude break point system can be done in software. 4. There are 96 active signals on the PDP-8/E's Omnibus. I expect to need most or all of them for this project. 5. The Omnibus is an open drain, active low bus where +2.7V to +4.5V is a zero and -0.5 to +0.4V is a one. I don't necessarily need a 5V tolerant gate array but what ever I use to interface to the bus will need to be. A full description of the Omnibus can be found here: https://bitsavers.org/pdf/dec/standards/EL-00157_00_A_DEC_STD_157_OMNIBUS_Specification_Aug76.pdf Coding the break point system in some kind of parallel C like language seems way easier to me than to write this in gates. I don't have a clue how to design the count registers. I need to get #'s 1 and 2 working first and then I can dive into #3. Thanks. Hexadecimal displays til311, (pulled DIS1417's) can be found on ebay for about $5 not counting shipping. This way you have easy to read hex or octal numbers.
[cctalk] Re: Good C to FPGA/PLA compiler
On 2023-09-22 12:34 p.m., emanuel stiebler via cctalk wrote: On 2023-09-22 12:04, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: I'm working on the design for an Omnibus (PDP-8/E) debug board and I am not very good at circuit design. I know there are programs that will compile something that looks like C into Verilog/VHDL/Abel/Etc for use on some kind of large (more than 64 pins) programmable logic device. There are still some 84pin chips out there(Altera & Xilinx). Sometimes they are pulls, or some 5V tolerant xilinx xc95l Can any of you recommend a good C like tool for programmable logic? Stay away from them :) At the end, you will spend as much time learning the differences (as it is not real "C") so invest the time in learning system verilog or VHDL. VHDL is a little more verbose, system verilog lets you shoot in your foot much easier. I hate both. You can't shoot yourself in the foot, because you can never figure where the feet are with all that verbose. If you just like to "debug" the bus, get an FPGA & some level shifters, very easy to do ... I use ADHL. It is vender specific, but I can figure out the logic. FPGA's have too many vender specific features,to go from one brand to the other. Schematic capture, is the other option. One gota with FPGA's, flip flops only have asyncronus clears, not preset.
[cctalk] Re: Good C to FPGA/PLA compiler
FPGA's tend to be ALL 3.3 volts or less today. Cmos 22v10's are nice chips to program that is still working at 5 volts. FPGA's also have high learning curve to catch the bugs and gotya's. I got tl866 ii + programer and it works great under windows, with wincupl.
[cctalk] Re: For Fred, especially: "Everything I know about floppy disks"
On 2023-09-11 10:43 a.m., Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: On Sep 10, 2023, at 6:24 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: On Sun, 10 Sep 2023, Will Cooke via cctalk wrote: I make an official motion that Fred write his own "Everything I Know About Floppy Disks" page / book /encyclopedia. I suspect that what is inside his head is the greatest collection of knowledge about floppies on the planet. Fred, you will be paid with great admiration and appreciation. Sorry, all I can offer. :-) Anyone with me? 1) Chuck Guzis knows FAR more than I do about floppy disks. Tony Duell (ARD) knows FAR more than I do about disk drives. 2) It is now so far out of date that, Who would want it? (besides a few here) Anyone who wants to resuscitate either old drives, or recover data from old disks. There is a lot of such data... Also, history is important. Not always in obvious ways, but if it's lost it tends to be very hard to recover. One of my favorite examples of old history is the Ph.D. thesis of Gauthier van den Hove (U. Amsterdam, a few years ago) analyzing in extreme detail the world's first ALGOL-60 compiler, by Dijkstra and Zonneveld. Why bother? Well, for one, because it wasn't just the first compiler but the place where a whole bunch of later-standard techniques were first invented, and understanding the origin of things and what problems they solve and why they do it that way can be surprisingly important. paul Did Algol in general have memory leaks?,or is just C and Windows.
[cctalk] Re: Vintage Computer Fest Midwest "DECnut" pizza party
On 2023-09-07 3:44 p.m., ste...@malikoff.com steven--- via cctalk wrote: On 09/07/2023 2:36 AM AEST Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: Does VAX have nothing to do with vacuum cleaners? Here in Oz, VAX has been a popular brand of vacuum cleaner for many decades. We had one until recently. https://www.vax.com.au/ Steve I say a good item to have, when the bit bucket overflows. Ben.
[cctalk] Re: Friden (was Silly question about S-100 and video monitors)
On 2023-09-03 9:21 p.m., Wayne S wrote: I was thinking of the parts kits that was offered by sone arrangement between the author of a construction article and some parts house. Was handy if you really wanted to build the device. I was thinking the same thing. Now days any construction article, is just a review of some product. The one good thing about COVID, is all the retro rebuilding stuff going as more people seem had more time at home to do things. Ben.
[cctalk] Re: Friden (was Silly question about S-100 and video monitors)
> What kinda kits we talking about? > Heathkit kind or the kind you could get in popular electronics? http://www.sworld.com.au/steven/educ-8/ Give the other magazines a chance. :) I always looked a the 1/2 page ads. Get a keyboard $99. 1 cent sale on 7400's. Get a second one for just a penny. 4096 x 36 bit core , untested $89. Printing terminal $399+ $75 shipping in the Continental USA. NOW I have the time and money, the surplus is GONE. Ben.
[cctalk] Re: Friden (was Silly question about S-100 and video monitors)
On 2023-09-03 5:08 p.m., Adrian Godwin via cctalk wrote: Yes, that's what I mean. Of course, it's no good for income-generating things but if all you want to do is make the design available, it's much less hassle than buying stocks of pcbs and mailing them out for minimal profit. It pushes the hassle of doing that onto the recipient but without the added errors of them downloading your design and sending gerbers off. I guess the era of kit building is long gone. On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 12:03 AM Paul Koning wrote: On Sep 3, 2023, at 5:34 PM, Adrian Godwin via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: OSHPArk and PCBWay will hold your design and let other people buy them (if you wish). This is an excellent way to do cheap on-demand distribution. I don't believe Jlcpcb offer this. OSHpark lets you post your design as an open design, and then others can just order their own for the standard OSH price. Is that what you meant by "buy"? It doesn't mean buy in the sense of money going to the designer. For my purposes this is just what I want, and I have posted my 3 boards there. paul I wonder if there is a need for generic flip chip replacements? I am thinking here with the low cost of pcb's and easy PAL programing one could duplicate most of PDP-# flip chips used. Ben.
[cctalk] Re: Friden (was Silly question about S-100 and video monitors)
On 2023-09-02 8:01 a.m., Will Cooke via cctalk wrote: On 09/02/2023 8:50 AM CDT Peter Corlett via cctalk wrote: On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 04:32:57PM -0600, ben via cctalk wrote: [...] I think that way has been for a while. Having a hard time finding a 68B50 Unicorn Electronics has the 68B50 for $7.99 https://www.unicornelectronics.com/IC/6800.html $ 30 mininum order and 4 weeks shipping to canada stopped me. $12.06 US from china. (ebay). I am having my PCB's made from PCBWAY in china. Shipping takes longer than them being made. ~ $100 US for the PCB's and ~ $50 for shipping and tax.
[cctalk] Re: Friden (was Silly question about S-100 and video monitors)
On 2023-09-02 7:50 a.m., Peter Corlett via cctalk wrote: On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 04:32:57PM -0600, ben via cctalk wrote: [...] I think that way has been for a while. Having a hard time finding a 68B50 on ebay. All the modern serial devices (I can buy) seem to be serial interfaced. Sigh. I see the 68B50 on AliExpress, and they're probably even genuine. The vendor I'm tempted to order some other retro chips from offers them in five packs for about a euro each. For new parts available from a reputable supplier, there's the W65C51. The bumph notes it is "compatible with 65xx and 68xx microprocessors". Available in a variety of packages including DIP, and also in -S and -N variants depending on whether you want CMOS or TTL levels, it runs at a nominal 5V and has speed grades up to 14MHz. It's not a direct replacement for the 6850 but will look quite familiar and present no surprises. For new designs, it's simpler to use as it doesn't need external baud rate generators. A single W65C51N6TPG-14 (DIP, TTL, 14MHz) is €7.10 from my local Mouser. If you can handle SMD, there's even the venerable 16550 and clones which could be handy if you're trying to do high-speed serial, although that's got a more 8080-style bus interface so you'll need a few extra gates to get that going. I need it simple, as I am bringing up a new cpu design. 36 bits lives again*. Program testing is to be done I expect from the front panel, until I get boot strap loader into eeprom. The 6850 is just right and coding examples are easy to find. This last PCB is memory and IO.** Ben. * I am building one, if it works is is another story. I use a lot of cmos pals in the design, it makes things so easy build stuff with. ** Once working in need find N x 9 non volitile memory.
[cctalk] Re: Friden (was Silly question about S-100 and video monitors)
On 2023-09-01 12:18 p.m., Adrian Godwin via cctalk wrote: Interesting that processors are getting wider and wider, whilst (perhaps not in the same timeframe) we have moved away from parallel interfaces towards serial ones. I know there are reasons for that in operations-per-cycle and the difficulty of synchronising wide busses off-chip but I wonder if those sweetspots will change again. I think that way has been for a while. Having a hard time finding a 68B50 on ebay. All the modern serial devices (I can buy) seem to be serial interfaced. Sigh. Ben. PS: Is it me or was the 6850 ACIA the only simple and bug free uart around at the time with interupts.
[cctalk] Re: PDP-8/L $15,000
On 2023-08-29 6:46 a.m., Chris Zach via cctalk wrote: -BUT- That does not mean it *can't* be restored, only that $15,000 is ridiculous for a machine that clearly needs an expert with time and money. b True, it is a silly price. I was thinking about this on the forum: If someone offers to buy one of my fully running 8/L's for 6k I'll put in an offer on this one for 3k and restore it. The extra 3k will be used to buy beer to help me forget about all of the little mouse ghosts I'm going to find. :-) I'd offer 3k for it outright, but to be honest I can't have 3 pdp8/L's AND an 8/e. At some point I'd have to wire them into some sort of nightmare SMP pdp8 Hm. C How about a 36 bit PDP-8L? :)
[cctalk] Re: Apple 1
On 2023-08-17 2:30 p.m., Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote: On Thu, Aug 17, 2023, 4:07 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: On Thu, 17 Aug 2023, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote: I should add that part of the fun is to locate parts for free or cheap from dead or unimportant period electronics, cards, etc. In that way slowly building up what is needed to complete parts of the Apple I replica one piece at a time. I am not in a rush. "unimportant period electronics, cards, etc." such as that blue box, an Imsai, etc.? :-) Exactly. Who needs an IMSAI anyway? Ha ha... In truth I have a lot of old military chips and stuff like that, generic s100 cards with burnt traces and so on. Obviously not to harm or cannibalize anything that should be preserved B Like the magic smoke you find in transistors. :) In retrospect only did the S100 bus takeoff with the Z80 and Drams. Did any body ever buy the PACE 16 cpu? Godbout ad, DEC 1975, BYTE page 9.
[cctalk] Re: Apple 1
On 2023-08-17 12:28 p.m., Ethan Dicks via cctalk wrote: On Sat, Aug 5, 2023 at 4:08 PM Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote: But...because the apple I is so valuable people have been motivated to produce really nice replica motherboards. The replicas give many the chance to experience the Apple I at a reasonable price I have a bare replica PCB. It's proving difficult to stuff without spending a wad. It's fun to find original parts and sockets to try to get a replica as close as possible to an original. You can do that for less than buying an original but it's still $$$ in part because of the rarity of the oddball shift registers, etc., and in part because of the demand for specific package types and date codes to achieve the closest match to an original. Just the ICs alone are hundreds of dollars, the large caps are tens of dollars and even that exact heat sink isn't exactly cheap. Unicorn electronics, sells replica parts. NOW you know why the sell for on ebay. :) Ben. https://unicornelectronics.com/ PS: The apple I kit is the same price as in 1976. 10% discount for vintage money?
[cctalk] Re: Apple 1
On 2023-08-05 11:16 a.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: On 8/3/23 00:45, Joshua Rice via cctalk wrote: Value is a very much reliant on both desirability and historical significance. I guarantee most people who own an Apple 1 never use it, and it sits in a cabinet/shelf somewhere. Transversely, I’m sure there’s very few Amiga 1200’s purely on display, with the vast majority in collectors hands either tucked in a cupboard or actively used. The Apple 1 is collectible purely because it was the first product Apple made. There’s dozens of similar machines from the same time period, vcreated by startups looking to be the next big thing, that just didn’t make it. Look at SWTPC, look at IMSAI, the COSMAC ELF. Apple made it to the big time, and they didn’t, so many more people with too much money would consider the Apple 1 to be a wise investment. I’d still prefer the IMSAI 8080 or SWTPC 6800 though. Collection values are so subjective that to me, that they make little sense. For example, is a Mac that belonged to Steve Jobs more valuable than the same model Mac that belonged to Harvey Schmidlap? Same machine--I doubt that any scientific test could affirm that Jobs was still alive in the former. But the difference to collectors may be a couple orders of magnitude. But then, I see little difference in value between an original painting and an expert copy. Yes, I know, I have no soul! --Chuck If it was so great a Investment, why did not more sell at $666.66 in 1976? Ben.
[cctalk] Re: SCAMP at 61 (IBM Scientific Computer And Modular Processor) was Re: SCAMP at 50 (IBM 5100)
On 2023-08-01 12:59 p.m., Tom Stepleton via cctalk wrote: I have to assume that the SCAMP used in the IBM 5100 Portable Computer and relatives must have been a great deal smaller than the earlier machine. As such, a logical and unambiguous way to refer to it is "SCAMP Shrimpy." I hope this is helpful, --Tom Sadly you can't google it. IBM used the name(Scientific Computer And Modular Processor) again. Got a link for the 1961 computer. Ben.
[cctalk] Re: Did Bill Gates Really Say That?
On 2023-06-22 10:04 p.m., Ken Seefried via cctalk wrote: Didn't see anyone mention it, but one should recall that the whole memory space on the 8088/8086 was 1M, so a 'limit' (whatever kind) of 640K wasn't the dumbest computer design decision ever made. In addition to that, Intel was telling people to get ready to jump to iAXP432 because 8086/80286 was nothing but a stopgap, and anyway the 80286 was for high-end minicomputer replacements, so why assume that more than 1M on an 8086-type CPU for PCs for an OS that was going to be obsoleted anyway was the future. KJ The 640K is a minor point.Look at the PDP 11 you had hoards virtual memory but code and data only 64kb each. Same as the Intel's small model. How long were OS's crippled by this fact? Did the iAXP432 just have 64kb segments as well? Ben.
[cctalk] Re: How much memory?
On 2023-06-16 4:56 p.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: On 6/16/23 12:48, ben via cctalk wrote: What cpu? Minix was 16 bit code only. I suspect 16 bit code here as well. Remember 32 bit code is 2x the size of 16 bit stuff. 32-bit, I'm afraid. To quote: WHAT IS LINUX? Linux is a Unix clone for 386/486-based PCs written from scratch by Linus Torvalds with assistance from a loosely-knit team of hackers across the Net. It aims towards POSIX compliance. It has all the features you would expect in a modern fully-fledged Unix, including true multitasking, virtual memory, shared libraries, demand loading, shared copy-on-write executables, proper memory management and TCP/IP networking. It is distributed under the GNU General Public License - see the accompanying COPYING file for more details. --Chuck Was that quote written for version #1. At risk of being a troll, when did Unix (PDP 11) not have all the the above. Other than TCP/IP networking, I don't see any of above features desirable, as I feel a need for more real time operating systems. How many OS's are complete in design that you don't need to bypass the OS like MS DOS. Ben.
[cctalk] Re: How much memory?
On 2023-06-16 2:31 p.m., r.stricklin via cctalk wrote: On Jun 16, 2023, at 12:48 PM, ben via cctalk wrote: Remember 32 bit code is 2x the size of 16 bit stuff. Are you, like, trying to play the list for laughs, with this kind of comment? It is not? 3x's better. All I know after x86 programs keep growing faster than MORE's law. ok bear. Ben.
[cctalk] Re: How much memory?
On 2023-06-16 2:12 p.m., Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote: On 6/16/2023 3:51 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: On Jun 16, 2023, at 3:40 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: On 6/16/23 12:02, ben via cctalk wrote: Ken , Jobs and Wozniak need their fair share. Graphics and file system buffers take up more space than you expect. I just transferred a DC150 tar tape. Total (uncompressed) file size was 11MB. What was on it? The complete source to Linux 1.0. Somewhat earlier, the complete source for the RSTS-11 timesharing system fit on 5 DECtapes, 1.5 MB. And that was assembly language, exhaustively commented. Wish I had a copy of that!! bill I think the hint is to send 5 BLANK DEC tapes. Ben.
[cctalk] Re: How much memory?
On 2023-06-16 1:40 p.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: On 6/16/23 12:02, ben via cctalk wrote: Ken , Jobs and Wozniak need their fair share. Graphics and file system buffers take up more space than you expect. I just transferred a DC150 tar tape. Total (uncompressed) file size was 11MB. What was on it? The complete source to Linux 1.0. --Chuck What cpu? Minix was 16 bit code only. I suspect 16 bit code here as well. Remember 32 bit code is 2x the size of 16 bit stuff. Ben.
[cctalk] Re: How much memory?
On 2023-06-16 12:24 p.m., Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: I was at a Comdex once in Chicago where the featured speaker was Bill Gates and he said that Microsoft would never write a program that needed more than 256K of memory. A few years later, Microsoft Exchange Server required a minimum of 256MB of memory to run. Just for comparison my new laptop has 128GB of memory. Let's not write better code, lets just add more memory and faster processors <- Microsoft Programmers Mantra Lets not blame Bill for everything, Ken , Jobs and Wozniak need their fair share. Graphics and file system buffers take up more space than you expect. Ben.
[cctalk] Re: Greaseweazle part 2
On 2023-06-11 8:44 a.m., Tony Duell via cctalk wrote: Fundamentally, it seems to me that they're all the same basic hardware, timing intervals between flux transitions. So other than the soaftware, what's the difference? I could make a stupid comment and ask 'what's the difference between a PDP8, PDP11, PERQ or HP9830?'. Apart from having finite memory, all are (I believe) equivalent to a Turing machine. A: the blinking lights. But more seriously when I started asking about writing images to floppy disks, I asked what options were available and what I'd need. Apart from the (IMHO) stupid suggestion of a 1990's PC compatible, the only thing that was mentioned to me was the Greaseweazle. Nobody pointed me at web sites giving comparisons between the various methods and devices. -tony I would of thought the AMIGA would have a say here, as it reads a disk track as just a bunch of flux transitions. Ben.
[cctalk] Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.
On 2023-06-04 3:39 a.m., Harald Arnesen via cctalk wrote: Fred Cisin via cctalk [04/06/2023 02.50]: On Sun, 4 Jun 2023, Alexander Schreiber wrote: So the Mercedes T model was (at least in Germany, the manufacturers country) never called a "station wagon" because that category name doesn't exist there. The closest analogue to it in German parlance would be the "Kombi" class of vehicles. Based upon the more numerous sedan models, but shaped like a station wagon with a large rear door, a level trunk (usually) and with the option of considerably expanding cargo space by folding down the rear seats to provide a flat surface. yes. a Kombi full of tapes hurtling down the highway. ...down the Autobahn. Down the Autobahn... https://www.computerhistory.org/revolution/artifact/331/1893
[cctalk] Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.
On 2023-06-03 11:46 a.m., Alexander Schreiber via cctalk wrote: On Thu, Jun 01, 2023 at 02:33:07PM -0700, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: But, there is another problem. None of the auto makers still make "Station Wagon"s! Not quite true. VW makes the "Variant" version of the VW Golf and Mercedes still makes the "t model" of the C and E class, all of which are basically station wagons. And I can confirm from experience that a Mercedes C204 T model fits a complete (fully assembled) IKEA sofa, so it does have _quite_ a bit of cargo volume (and, once you fold down the rear seats, a nice long _flat_ loading surface). Getting older now, packing a sofa, next a love seat.:) Kind regards, Alex. But can it handle any kind of rack mount computer? Ben.
[cctalk] Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.
On 2023-06-01 2:40 p.m., Alexander Schreiber via cctalk wrote: On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 05:01:34PM -0700, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: What is the bandwidth of a station wagon full of 1TB Mcro-SD cards hurtling down the highway? $BIGNUM. But the latency is going to be orders of magnitude worse than the station wagon full of tapes, so there is that. Also, SD card reliability being what it is, expect some of that data to "evaporate" along to way, so you might need to look into applying erasure coding and some redundant copies ... SCNR, Alex. I can see them them all flying out the open windows, once you hit the free way.
[cctalk] Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.
On 2023-05-31 4:31 p.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: On 5/31/23 13:33, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: I think I will just convert file sizes to lengths of paper tape for comparison: 1K 102.4" 10K 85' 100K 853' 1M 1.6 Miles 10M 16.5 Miles 100M 165 Miles 1G 1,695 Miles 10G 16,947 Miles 100G 6.8 Earth Circumferences 1T 69.8 Earth Circumferences How about converting that to tons of 80 column punched cards? --Chuck No. I don't want to sink into a Black Hole, thank you.
[cctalk] Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.
On 2023-05-31 1:52 p.m., Alexander Schreiber via cctalk wrote: On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 12:22:53PM -0500, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: In 1981 when i got my first 5MB hard disk drive at work (I had to write the drivers for the OS myself) I was able to put all or my source code, binaries, executable, applications and the operating system and not fill half of that disk. A the first computer science class in school (very early 90s) our teacher held up a 3.5" 1.44M floppy and told us that "this can hold all you'll ever write" ... well, that aged worse than fresh milk ;-) Looking at a BYTE from 1983, there was a Japanese 3 inch floppy, 500K raw. That must of lasted as long as the ad. Kind regards, Alex. Ben.
[cctalk] Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.
On 2023-05-30 11:19 p.m., Ali via cctalk wrote: I heard that Duracell now has a "bitterant" coating on its 2032 batteries; so that you will spit it out. Fred, That's been there for a while. It is aimed at babies swallowing coin batteries of all sorts. Mine was pure stupidity. I had spent the whole weekend working on and rebuilding the image on an RPi that I use for a DNS server. I took out the Micro-SD card with the plans to image it for backup. I was munching on a bowl of nuts, tossing them back as it were, while I checked a few last minute things and suddenly I hear a non-nutty crunch. Spit it out and there is a tooth mark right through the Micro-SD. Apparently what I thought was a pistachio was my Micro-SD card. Suffice to say it was no longer working and I had no backup. Choice expletives were spewed throughout that day LOL -Ali AH! NUTS! :) Runs and ducks...
[cctalk] Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.
On 2023-05-30 12:43 p.m., emanuel stiebler via cctalk wrote: On 2023-05-30 13:08, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: "Sneakernet" or whatever, I'm still impressed that I can spend USD$3 for a 64GB microSD card and store the entire code output of my life I was looking for some files on my backup tapes, wondering if I have enough space on my drives to simply copy the tape to the disk, and then search. Finally hit me, that my DOS disk from back than was only 300MB :) and still have lots of room left over for photos of my dogs. Look at it from the other side: you need two RL02s for a decent resolution picture of your dog this days :) And from this side, playing my Japanese game, every so often in town a dog blocks your path until you pet it. 18GB of game. Ben. PS. You have to feed the cat a fish. :)
[cctalk] Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.
On 2023-05-30 11:08 a.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: "Sneakernet" or whatever, I'm still impressed that I can spend USD$3 for a 64GB microSD card and store the entire code output of my life and still have lots of room left over for photos of my dogs. --Chuck ... until it gets swallowed by the gold fish. Ben.
[cctalk] Re: MCAS
On 2023-05-27 2:48 p.m., Alexander Schreiber via cctalk wrote: On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 07:34:19PM -0400, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: On May 25, 2023, at 6:29 PM, Christian Kennedy via cctalk wrote: On 5/25/23 12:30, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: ...and we still get gems like the Boeing 737MAX... I get your point, but it's a bad example. MCAS worked precisely as specified, and while one could have a discussion regarding if those specifications were wrong, the logic was that a MCAS failure was indistinguishable from any other 737 trim runaway and was to be handled in the same fashion. Perhaps this is an example of Brooks' observation that most bugs in software are in fact bugs in specification. I'm not sure that observation is true anymore, with the "hack it until it stops crashing" approach to software development that seems to have been brought to us by the PC and gaming culture. In my work (storage servers) I would from time to time see bug reports closed by the engineer as "works as designed". I would remind them that they are only permitted to say that if (a) the program matches the spec, AND (b) the spec is right. I would say "if you're not able to stand on a conference center stage and explain to an audience of 1000 customers why the spec is right, you can't use 'works as designed'. The bug may be in the spec rather than in the code, but it's still a bug. Fix it." Which is why among the more cynic^Wexperienced SREs (my line of work) we sometimes use the term "Working As Implemented" when the code behaves exactly as written (and ofteni as specified), but still does the wrong thing because it (usually) was written with wrong assumptions. Kind regards, Alex. How do prove it with typo-graphical errors in the docs? Ben.
[cctalk] Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.
On 2023-05-25 5:52 a.m., Tony Duell via cctalk wrote: On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 1:54 AM Mike Stein via cctalk wrote: I realize he's a bit eccentric, (even more so than many of us ;-) ), but I I am not 'a bit eccentric'. There is absolutely nothing mild about my eccentricities! But it sounds like he'll explore one of the flux-transition gizmos; good luck, Tony, and I hope you enjoy the experience! I've got a Greaseweazle V4 now. I haven't got the software working yet and I am treading carefully as an early attempt managed to mangle the drivers for my USB-RS232 cable which I depend on for a lot of work but I suspect I will get it working in the end and it will do what I need. At least it's open-source so I can read the software source code (maybe I'll have to learn Python). And I have schematics. What is odd is how many things were _not_ suggested. For example : A RPi can read files off a USB stick. Hang a floppy controller chip, possibly with buffer RAM, off the user port connector of one of those. Come up with a parallel interface between an RPi user port and ISAbus. Use that to transfer the disk images to a classic PC and go from there. It is not unheard-of for classic PCs -- even ISAbus ones -- to have 10Mbps ethernet. Most, if not all, 100Mbps ethernet ports will fall back to that. So use that to transfer the disk image. A disk image is almost certainly less than a megabyte for a classic machine, so it won't take long. USB interfacing is hard, but SD cards are a lot simpler. So use a card reader thing to transfer the files to an SD card and design an interface for that to ISA bus. CF cards are essentially the same interface as PATA (IDE) disk drives. Go from there. Just about any of those would have been easier and more likely to use bits from my junk box/computer collection than trying to get an old, but not too old, PC -tony Would it be possible to build a small computer, 8088/8086 just for this?
[cctalk] Re: ST-251 Data Recovery for Glenside Color Computer Club (GCCC)
On 2023-05-18 8:15 a.m., Antonio Carlini via cctalk wrote: There are other flux readers out there but they either don't seem to have much momentum behind them (so you might be stuck if you need a new format added) or they're closed like KyroFlux. At ~£25 you're unlikely to lose much with either of the two front runners :-) But what if I want RS232 serial interface instead of USB? Antonio Ben.
[cctalk] Re: The World Wide Web
On 2023-05-05 8:39 p.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: I do remember the bad old days, when even a leased line was insufficiently fast or reliable to send a quantity of data. I recall many times taking the "noon balloon" out of San Jose with my Samsonite carry-on case and not so much as a toothbrush. On arrival, turn the contents of the case over to someone waiting at the gate, and catch the next flight home with an empty case. My case, which I still have, comfortably accommodates six 10.5" reels of tape. I remember flying on an USAF general's plane with several 844 disk packs. One time, I forgot my B-area badge, so the general gave me his. Nobody saluted, however. --Chuck And us POOR people get the Station Wagon. I remember them as a kid, but they have been replaced by king cabs. Ben.
[cctalk] Re: The World Wide Web
On 2023-05-05 2:57 p.m., Mike Katz wrote: And for some more nostalgia: 4.5MB of punch cards (approx. 334 lbs): That is old, a full sized skirt.:)
[cctalk] Re: The World Wide Web
On 2023-05-05 2:48 p.m., Tony Jones via cctalk wrote: On Fri, May 5, 2023 at 1:31 PM ben via cctalk wrote: True, until the last few years, I was on dial up speeds. I think you may be an outlier ;-) You know a MOOSE could just walk and read this. You don't want a angry MOOSE. ⢀⣤⡤⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⢠⢊⡾⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⢀⡏⠸⠦⠤⣤⠀⠀⢀⡦⡄⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⣼⢡⠀⠀⣰⠁⠀⠀⠀⢰⢦⡀⢸⡇⣷⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⡏⢸⠀⠀⠈⢹⡇⠀⣀⡀⠀⣤⣤⠀⠀⢸⠳⠼⠀⠙⠛⢁⡿⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⣷⢸⣄⣀⠀⠈⠉⢉⣩⠿⠃⡟⠀⠙⠒⠛⢀⡼⠁⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠸⣞⠿⣿⠂⠀⠀⣸⡅⠀⠀⠀⣀⣾⠟⠃⠀⠀⢀⣠⠟⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠘⣆⠘⢲⣄⠘⢳⣄⠀⠀⡞⣟⠀⢀⣼⠟⠛⠀⠀⠀⠛⣻⡏⠀⠀ ⢠⣄⣀⣀⠼⠋⠉⠈⠉⢉⡷⠶⣛⣀⣈⣉⠉⠁⠀⢀⣀⣤⠶⠚⠉⠀⠀⠀ ⠸⡤⠚⠁⠀⠘⣷⣿⣅⠀⠀⠀⠉⠉⠓⠒⠒⠚⠛⠋⠉⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⣠⠞⠁⠀⠀⢀⣶⡦⠄⠀⠀⠉⢿⠻⢭⣶⣶⢤⡤⠀⠀ ⠀⢀⡼⠁⠀⠀⠀⠈⠳⢤⣠⣴⠾⠃⠀⠀ ⢰⡞⠀⢀⣦⠀⠘⠢⢤⣀⠀⠀ ⠸⣧⠀⣀⣴⢀⣤⣠⠤⠴⠖⠛⠁⠈⠉⠉⠉⠙⠢⢄⣀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠙⢶⣿⣟⡽⠋⢸⢰⡆⠀⠀⠉⠉⠉⠙⠒⢤⣤⣄⣀⣀⡀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠈⠁⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⠀⠀⠀⠈⠙⢦⡀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⢸⡇⣿⢠⠀⠙⠢⡀⠀ ⠙⢿⣿⠀⠀⡀⠘⡆ ⠀⠀⡽⠀⠀⢹⠀⣹ ⠀⠀⣧⣿⢢⣸⡾⠋ ⠀⠀⠹⢿⣸⣇⠀⠀⡀⠀⠈⣆⢀⡿⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠈⠻⣟⠦⣷⣷⠀⠀⢘⡆⠀⠀⠀⣾⠁⠀⠀ ⠀⠈⠁⠀⢹⠀⣠⠞⢥⠤⠶⠶⢦⣀⣀⣀⡤⠶⣀⡀⠹⣆⠀⠀ ⢸⠀⠀⠀⢀⡾⠁⠀⣼⠀⠈⢻⡓⠲⣄⡀⠀⠈⣇⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⢰⡏⠀⠀⢀⡜⣇⠀⠀⣧⠀⠀⢸⠀⢠⡏⢻⠀⠀⡏⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⢀⡇⠀⣴⠋⠀⠈⢧⠀⡇⠀⠀⡼⠀⣼⠀⠸⡆⠀⡇⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⢸⠃⢰⠃⠀⠀⠀⠸⡆⢻⠀⠀⡇⢠⡇⠀⠀⣧⠀⡇⠀ ⠀⠀⢀⠏⢀⡎⠀⣧⠸⡆⣼⠁⣼⠀⠀⠀⣿⠀⡇⠀ ⠀⠀⡞⠀⡞⠀⠀⢹⠀⣇⠀⠀⠀⢠⡏⢠⡇⠀⠀⠀⣿⠀⢷⠀ ⠀⡼⠁⣼⠁⠀⠀⢸⠀⢸⡀⠀⢀⡟⠀⢼⣿⠀⠸⡆ ⡴⠁⢰⠃⠀⠀⠀⣸⠀⠈⣧⢀⣾⣀⣲⡟⠂⠀⠀⠀⣿⠀⣀⣷ ⠀⠀⢀⠜⠁⠀⡏⠀⠀⠀⣰⣯⣤⣽⠃⠀⠀⠀⢠⣯⣮⣼⠏⠀⠀⠀⢀⣽⣥⠼⡇⠀ ⢀⡴⣏⣀⡴⠟⠃⠀⠀⠀⠛⠚⠒⠉⠘⠛⠓⠚⠁⠀ ⠈⣛⣗⢚⠃⠀ The real catch with the internet was getting a local provider that did not charge a arm and a leg for any service. When BBS's where around, long distance was still $1.00 a minute. Ben. ⠀⠀
[cctalk] Re: The World Wide Web
On 2023-05-05 2:06 p.m., Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote: On 5/5/2023 1:44 PM, ben via cctalk wrote: On 2023-05-04 2:31 p.m., Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: True but I don't miss 53K bps analog POTS modem speeds. My Internet varies between 700Mbps and 950Mbps. I don't miss analog modem days in the least. There is no nostalgia there. How ever the people still use them. Fast internet is only good about 1? km from the router. Other than Netflix or Multiplayer games, what is really high speed internet needed for? Ben. Downloading the latest FreeBSD ISO in less than a week? :-) bill REAL BDS'S COME ON MAGNETIC TAPE. BEN @ 110 BAUD.
[cctalk] Re: The World Wide Web
On 2023-05-05 1:02 p.m., Tony Jones via cctalk wrote:
On Fri, May 5, 2023 at 10:59 AM ben via cctalk
wrote:
On 2023-05-04 2:31 p.m., Mike Katz via cctalk wrote:
the router. Other than Netflix or Multiplayer games, what is really high
speed internet needed for?
Ben.
I do development that involves pulling large SCS trees, lots of fetching of
rpms and isos. It's nice to have the bandwidth.
Also bandwidth != latency ("multiplayer games").
True, until the last few years, I was on dial up speeds.
Nice to have bandwidth for all UPDATES OS's think you need.
The only really big download I have done for all the old DR WHO
episodes. Now if I could find that link again.
Ben.
tagline "Don't you love FTL download speeds"
[cctalk] Re: The World Wide Web
On 2023-05-04 2:31 p.m., Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: True but I don't miss 53K bps analog POTS modem speeds. My Internet varies between 700Mbps and 950Mbps. I don't miss analog modem days in the least. There is no nostalgia there. How ever the people still use them. Fast internet is only good about 1? km from the router. Other than Netflix or Multiplayer games, what is really high speed internet needed for? Ben.
[cctalk] Re: Wireless phone
On 2023-04-08 8:27 a.m., Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote: On Mon, Apr 3, 2023, 9:40 AM ben via cctalk wrote: I disagree, I decided to buy new computer game after about 20 years. The last game I played was Tomb Raider I. I like the explore type rather than the RPG games. Being muilt-platform the game has over 20 keys that map to game pad rather than keyboard. The game pad is more important the cell phone. If you can't play games (or in my case save the game) what use is the phone or a computer. I miss games like ADVERTURE. Ben. In that case the cable coming out of the gamepad is more important than the gamepad itself because without the cable the signals from your fingers will never get to the computer. No, I'm not serious, and neither so do I take the assertion above. My claim is meant to be as dumb as Ben's. Sellam Well for stupid stuff, I claim the Smart phone is not needed at all. Just all marketing by APPLE and JAPAN. I think more game pads have sold than smart phones. You are half right, you can by a new game pad but will it plug in to the old machine, like a C64. Ben. PS: Mobile phones have long been around,as analog devices,for those that really need them. PPS. I have two phones and they have bell and number pad and a long cord. PPPS. The same goes for wifi, not really needed since the USB no computer had real I/O devices to connect mice,printers,networks.
[cctalk] Re: Wireless phone
On 2023-04-03 7:15 a.m., Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: On April 3, 1973 the first wireless phone call was made and Moore’s Law has now led to the smart-phone being ubiquitous to our lives: Computer technology and cell phone technology marching hand-in-hand. Happy computing and talking about it! Murray I disagree, I decided to buy new computer game after about 20 years. The last game I played was Tomb Raider I. I like the explore type rather than the RPG games. Being muilt-platform the game has over 20 keys that map to game pad rather than keyboard. The game pad is more important the cell phone. If you can't play games (or in my case save the game) what use is the phone or a computer. I miss games like ADVERTURE. Ben.
[cctalk] Re: mainframe vs mini
On 2023-03-16 8:38 p.m., Ethan Dicks via cctalk wrote: On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 5:05 PM Cameron Kaiser via cctalk wrote: This has been around the block: You can lose a screw in a micro. You can lose a screwdriver in a mini. You can get lost in a mainframe. We had an Amdahl in the middle of a multi-thousand-square-foot computer room (one of several) at work 25 years ago. I do not know/remember the model number but it was made of up several cabinets not in a line. It had such a convoluted layout that you could literally stand in the "middle" of it and not see outside. If you stood in exactly the right spot, the blank panels lined up and made the visual appearance of a box with no exits. You _could_ get lost in that one, as long as you didn't take half a step away. -ethan How did they upgrade the main frame after that? Ben.
[cctalk] Re: on the origin of home computers
On 2023-03-09 10:31 a.m., Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote: No doubt it was capable of being operated by a single user, but that to me does not make it a personal computer. The LGP-30 was used in schools and offices not targeted for industrial use. There is really no reason why any computer could not be a personal computer, if you know everything about it and use independently and operate for personal use. It's really impossible to claim any computer was the "first personal computer", but I like the LGP-30 as one of the first. I bet someone used the BENDIX for fun once in a while, too. BIll Quit changing the rules, BIG COMPUTERS make a great home computer. The cpu has been repainted and makes a lovely walk in kitchen. The power supplies make both a up stairs and down stairs bathroom. Three 4K single core bed rooms and master 8K bed room with extra big Cache. ... and FREE air conditioning, Coming soon to a DUMPSTER near you. I think the IBM-1130 would be the only vintage computer that be a the first personal computer, as It came with BASIC,FORTRAN IV and APL. Ben.
