[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
On 4/18/24 14:01, paul.kimpel--- via cctalk wrote: > The tape for the Burroughs 220 drives was not metallic. It was 3/4-inch wide, > and I think a Mylar sandwich. It could be spliced much the same way you would > have spliced quarter-inch reel-to-reel audio tape back in the day. > The Datamatic 1000 tapes were definitely a Mylar sandwich affair. 3" wide and 2700' long. https://www.smecc.org/honeywell_datamatic_1000.htm A few reels of the stuff are still around. --Chuck
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
The main storage area of the ElectroData/Burroughs Datatron 205 was 20 tracks of 200 words each for a total of 4000 words. The drum rotated at 3570 RPM, so the average access time was about 8.4ms. The four quick-access tracks (or "loops" as they were called) were 20 words each and worked as a delay line, much like the Bendix G-15's drum. These tracks had separate read and write heads. When writing was not taking place, the digits from the read head were simply copied to the write head 36 degrees behind on the surface of the drum. So as the last digit of the track was written, the first digit of the track was coming under the read head, yielding an average access time of 0.84ms. When writing, digits from the processor were shunted to the write head in lieu of those coming from the read head. When power was removed from the system, the 4000-word main memory was preserved, but the data in the high-speed bands was lost. The 205 had instructions to transfer 20-word blocks between the main memory and the high-speed tracks. There were even a couple of instructions to move a block to one of the high-speed tracks and branch to a word in that high-speed track. The high-speed tracks were addressed modulo 20 (i.e., word 4005 was the same as 4025, 4045, 4065, ... 4985). You had to get good at dealing with addresses that were congruent modulo 20. The high-speed tracks were so much faster than main storage that most programmers went to a lot of effort to "block" 20-word segments of the program to the high-speed tracks and execute at least the most active code from the faster storage.
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
The tape for the Burroughs 220 drives was not metallic. It was 3/4-inch wide, and I think a Mylar sandwich. It could be spliced much the same way you would have spliced quarter-inch reel-to-reel audio tape back in the day. If the tape controller detected a parity error, it would backspace the block and retry twice. If the error persisted on the second retry, the tape would stop with the head ready to read the bad block (hanging the processor in the middle of its I/O instruction), and the operator would have to take manual action. If the drive punched a hole in the tape, then the drive needed service -- probably a bad capstan pinch-roller solenoid.
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
On Sun, 2024-04-14 at 15:11 -0400, Paul Koning wrote: > > On Apr 14, 2024, at 2:50 PM, Van Snyder via cctalk < > > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > On Sun, 2024-04-14 at 13:15 -0400, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > > > The printer I was describing sounds a lot like the Versatec ones > > > youmentioned, including the funny paper and smelly toner. But it > > > wasactually made by Varian, and the driver tells me it had 1408 > > > pixelsacross the width of the paper, so at 11 inches wide that > > > would makeit 128 PPI. I wonder if I still have a sample page or > > > two from thatprinter. > > > > American Geophysical had a fleet of trucks fitted with > > hydraulic"thumpers." They would go out to a potential oil or gas > > field, lay outa few thousand feet of cables with geophones on them, > > and drive aroundthumping the ground. Within the truck, they had > > Varian V70 computerswith microcode to do Fast Fourier Transforms. > > I remember a Varian computer sitting in a corner of a lab at U of > Illinois (computer science department). It looks similar to the ones > shown in Bitsavers but not quite the same -- it had a front panel > that had mostly brown coloring, and the panel was totally flat. It > used membrane pushbuttons for operation, with the button positions > marked by circles on the flat plastic front panel. > > Does that ring any bells? I remember being told it had user > programmable microcode, but I never used it, in fact I never heard of > anyone using it. Varian bought Data Machines Inc, which had a computer called 620i. It fit in a 9U rack unit. When Varian built the V70 series, they fit in a 4U unit. Varian implemented the 620 instruction set, with a few extensions, in microcode ROM, and called it 620f. Writable Control Store (WCS) was an extra-cost option. WCS came in blocks of 512 64-bit words. I think three blocks of WCS could be added. My senior undergraduate project consisted of writing microcode for a V73 to implement the IBM 1130 instruction set. That fit in about 450 words. I did that because the University had replaced their 1130 with the V73, and then discovered that Varian didn't offer a COBOL compiler, and they wanted to continue to teach COBOL. As one would expect, I/O is quite different, and there wasn't room to do it in micocode in the one block of WCS they had bought, so two faculty members, Frank Kollar and Delmorris Blakely, both expert with IBM 1130 and V73, wrote I/O support that ran in 620f mode. 1130 support was put onto the removable paltter in the Winchester drive. A switch was added to exchange the "drive numbers" so the boot key loaded either VORTEX or the 1130 support, so COBOL students didn't need to learn how to use the VORTEX command shell. In the end, the V73 pretending to be an 1130 was up to thirty times faster. If anybody wants the microcode (and flow charts), I can send it. I never had the I/O support in electronic form, and I gave the listings to the Computer History Museum many years ago. Maybe Al Kossow scanned them, maybe not. Varian Data Machines was sold to Unisys, who pounded it into the ground.
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
> On Apr 14, 2024, at 2:50 PM, Van Snyder via cctalk > wrote: > > On Sun, 2024-04-14 at 13:15 -0400, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: >> The printer I was describing sounds a lot like the Versatec ones you >> mentioned, including the funny paper and smelly toner. But it was >> actually made by Varian, and the driver tells me it had 1408 pixels >> across the width of the paper, so at 11 inches wide that would make >> it 128 PPI. I wonder if I still have a sample page or two from that >> printer. > > American Geophysical had a fleet of trucks fitted with hydraulic > "thumpers." They would go out to a potential oil or gas field, lay out > a few thousand feet of cables with geophones on them, and drive around > thumping the ground. Within the truck, they had Varian V70 computers > with microcode to do Fast Fourier Transforms. I remember a Varian computer sitting in a corner of a lab at U of Illinois (computer science department). It looks similar to the ones shown in Bitsavers but not quite the same -- it had a front panel that had mostly brown coloring, and the panel was totally flat. It used membrane pushbuttons for operation, with the button positions marked by circles on the flat plastic front panel. Does that ring any bells? I remember being told it had user programmable microcode, but I never used it, in fact I never heard of anyone using it. paul
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
On Sun, 2024-04-14 at 13:15 -0400, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > The printer I was describing sounds a lot like the Versatec ones you > mentioned, including the funny paper and smelly toner. But it was > actually made by Varian, and the driver tells me it had 1408 pixels > across the width of the paper, so at 11 inches wide that would make > it 128 PPI. I wonder if I still have a sample page or two from that > printer. American Geophysical had a fleet of trucks fitted with hydraulic "thumpers." They would go out to a potential oil or gas field, lay out a few thousand feet of cables with geophones on them, and drive around thumping the ground. Within the truck, they had Varian V70 computers with microcode to do Fast Fourier Transforms. They also had Varian electrostatic printers fitted for 36-inch paper on hundred-foot rolls. I never visited one, so I don't know whether they had funny paper and smelly toner.
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
> On Apr 13, 2024, at 5:48 PM, Jon Elson via cctalk > wrote: > > On 4/12/24 20:21, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: >> >>> On Apr 12, 2024, at 7:48 PM, Van Snyder via cctalk >>> wrote: >>> >>> ... The other was to print on its "whippet" >>> printer, a very fast electrostatic printer that put soot onto a thermal >>> paper that was then heated to "fix" it. There was a huge variac under >>> the printer to adjust the heater. The perfect setting was between two >>> windings. Too cold and the soot fell off. Too hot and it was melted and >>> smeared into an almost illegible mess. But it was very fast -- and only >>> 80 columns wide. It was about the size of a KSR-33. >> Different beast, but it reminds me of an electrostatic plotter we at on the >> U of Illinois PLATO system. That one was by Versatec, either 11 or 17 >> inches wide (I forgot), 300 dpi, pretty sure it used wet toner. It also >> used a chain drive for the paper feed, which had enough backlash that >> starting and stopping would produce visible irregularities in the output. >> So I wrote a driver for it that did overlapped I/O to avoid that problem. >> (File I/O directly from a PPU program, lots of fun!) >> >> With that, it did an awesome job printing musical scores. > > Yes, there were a number of Versatec models for different paper sizes and > pixel density. I worked with a bunch of 1200A units, they could run either > roll or fanfold paper at 11" width. The paper was clay coated and felt like > a dirty chalkboard. The toner was quite smelly, some kind of paraffin oil > with carbon particles suspended in it. There was a blower to evaporate the > toner solvent. The 1200A had 200 pixels/inch, so you got 2112 pixels across > the page, IIRC. it applied 800 V to the writing electrodes, and something > like 400 V to the segmented backplate that was on the opposite side of the > paper. It could print text at about 1200 LPM, which was pretty fantastic for > the time. > > But, I am glad to not have to deal with these things anymore! Indeed. Meanwhile, it turns out my memory was faulty. The printer I was describing sounds a lot like the Versatec ones you mentioned, including the funny paper and smelly toner. But it was actually made by Varian, and the driver tells me it had 1408 pixels across the width of the paper, so at 11 inches wide that would make it 128 PPI. I wonder if I still have a sample page or two from that printer. paul
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems (was: Re: Re: IBM 360)
On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 9:45 AM Christian Kennedy via cctalk wrote: While on the topic of odd IBM mass storage systems, does anyone recall an IBM system that used rotating carousels holding sheets of magnetic material? The carousel would rotate to position the selected sheet into the read/write station, where it would be moved up and down relative to the multiple fixed heads, a weird linear riff on a fixed head disk. Nowhere near as cool, . . . About 30 years ago? (When libraries would DEDICATE a PC for each CDROM that they had) Keith Hensen made a device consisting of a carousel holding 240 CD/CD-ROM/DVDs. It had a name something like "Qubik"? It was in a square box with a smoked plexiglass cover, with a drive at each corner. They were stackable. The drives were SCSI, the carousel controls were RS232. -- Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems (was: Re: Re: IBM 360)
On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 9:45 AM Christian Kennedy via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > While on the topic of odd IBM mass storage systems, does anyone recall > an IBM system that used rotating carousels holding sheets of magnetic > material? The carousel would rotate to position the selected sheet into > the read/write station, where it would be moved up and down relative to > the multiple fixed heads, a weird linear riff on a fixed head disk. > > LBL had one of these systems, installed in the same room as one of the > few examples of the IBM 1360 photo digital storage system. They kept a > broom next to the later in order to sweep up the photo chips when the > thing occasionally spewed them everywhere. > I don't know if you saw it but the video at this link that Len Shustek posted shows a machine very similar to what you describe ==> https://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/102740069 Sellam
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
Plato experience is still active including the games at https://www.cyber1.org/ Regards, Tarek Hoteit AI Consultant, PhD +1 360-838-3675 https://tarek.computer INFOCOM AI LLC - https://infocom.ai > On Apr 13, 2024, at 10:20, Paul Koning via cctalk > wrote: > > > >> On Apr 12, 2024, at 9:49 PM, ben via cctalk wrote: >> >> 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. > > PLATO was the system where a whole lot of early games first appeared, > especially multi-player games. Among them were any number of variations of > "Star Trek" inspired ones. While you couldn't refresh a screen full of space > ships in motion as fast as you can on a dedicated graphics engine, it was > certainly acceptable for the players. And a simpler two-ship game like the > original spacewar would work even better, because you'd only need a couple of > operations per refresh -- on the classic terminal, 12 output words at 60 per > second, so 200 ms per refresh. Not quite "full motion" but close. > >paul >
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
On 4/12/24 20:21, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: On Apr 12, 2024, at 7:48 PM, Van Snyder via cctalk wrote: ... The other was to print on its "whippet" printer, a very fast electrostatic printer that put soot onto a thermal paper that was then heated to "fix" it. There was a huge variac under the printer to adjust the heater. The perfect setting was between two windings. Too cold and the soot fell off. Too hot and it was melted and smeared into an almost illegible mess. But it was very fast -- and only 80 columns wide. It was about the size of a KSR-33. Different beast, but it reminds me of an electrostatic plotter we at on the U of Illinois PLATO system. That one was by Versatec, either 11 or 17 inches wide (I forgot), 300 dpi, pretty sure it used wet toner. It also used a chain drive for the paper feed, which had enough backlash that starting and stopping would produce visible irregularities in the output. So I wrote a driver for it that did overlapped I/O to avoid that problem. (File I/O directly from a PPU program, lots of fun!) With that, it did an awesome job printing musical scores. Yes, there were a number of Versatec models for different paper sizes and pixel density. I worked with a bunch of 1200A units, they could run either roll or fanfold paper at 11" width. The paper was clay coated and felt like a dirty chalkboard. The toner was quite smelly, some kind of paraffin oil with carbon particles suspended in it. There was a blower to evaporate the toner solvent. The 1200A had 200 pixels/inch, so you got 2112 pixels across the page, IIRC. it applied 800 V to the writing electrodes, and something like 400 V to the segmented backplate that was on the opposite side of the paper. It could print text at about 1200 LPM, which was pretty fantastic for the time. But, I am glad to not have to deal with these things anymore! Jon
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
At 10:00 AM 4/13/2024, Paul Berger wrote: The problem with a lot of these old machines was they relied on a lot of electro-mechanical devices that would today be replaced by electronics and a few simple actuators. These mechanical devices need to be adjusted and maintained and have lots of parts to wear out. For a great example of 1950s electro-mechanical devices, check out this: https://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/102740072 https://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/102740069 "The First Magnetic Random Access Mass Memory with Interchangeable Media"
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
On 4/13/24 10:20, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > > > PLATO was the system where a whole lot of early games first appeared, > especially multi-player games. Among them were any number of variations of > "Star Trek" inspired ones. While you couldn't refresh a screen full of space > ships in motion as fast as you can on a dedicated graphics engine, it was > certainly acceptable for the players. And a simpler two-ship game like the > original spacewar would work even better, because you'd only need a couple of > operations per refresh -- on the classic terminal, 12 output words at 60 per > second, so 200 ms per refresh. Not quite "full motion" but close. > The guys down the hall at CDC SVLOPS were the PLATO people for a couple of years in the 70s. CDC had internal training classes that used the orange monster. I recall I took one for Project Manager training. "The Mythical Man Month" was a required text for the course. --Chuck
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
On 4/13/24 12:20, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: On Apr 12, 2024, at 9:49 PM, ben via cctalk wrote: 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. PLATO was the system where a whole lot of early games first appeared, especially multi-player games. Among them were any number of variations of "Star Trek" inspired ones. While you couldn't refresh a screen full of space ships in motion as fast as you can on a dedicated graphics engine, it was certainly acceptable for the players. And a simpler two-ship game like the original spacewar would work even better, because you'd only need a couple of operations per refresh -- on the classic terminal, 12 output words at 60 per second, so 200 ms per refresh. Not quite "full motion" but close. paul I cannot count how many hours I spend on the Plato IV terminal at our local university playing Empire and Dogfight - I was in high school at the time... --tom
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
> On Apr 12, 2024, at 9:49 PM, ben via cctalk wrote: > > 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. PLATO was the system where a whole lot of early games first appeared, especially multi-player games. Among them were any number of variations of "Star Trek" inspired ones. While you couldn't refresh a screen full of space ships in motion as fast as you can on a dedicated graphics engine, it was certainly acceptable for the players. And a simpler two-ship game like the original spacewar would work even better, because you'd only need a couple of operations per refresh -- on the classic terminal, 12 output words at 60 per second, so 200 ms per refresh. Not quite "full motion" but close. paul
[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: Odd IBM mass storage systems
> 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
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
> On Apr 12, 2024, at 7:48 PM, Van Snyder via cctalk > wrote: > > ... The other was to print on its "whippet" > printer, a very fast electrostatic printer that put soot onto a thermal > paper that was then heated to "fix" it. There was a huge variac under > the printer to adjust the heater. The perfect setting was between two > windings. Too cold and the soot fell off. Too hot and it was melted and > smeared into an almost illegible mess. But it was very fast -- and only > 80 columns wide. It was about the size of a KSR-33. Different beast, but it reminds me of an electrostatic plotter we at on the U of Illinois PLATO system. That one was by Versatec, either 11 or 17 inches wide (I forgot), 300 dpi, pretty sure it used wet toner. It also used a chain drive for the paper feed, which had enough backlash that starting and stopping would produce visible irregularities in the output. So I wrote a driver for it that did overlapped I/O to avoid that problem. (File I/O directly from a PPU program, lots of fun!) With that, it did an awesome job printing musical scores. paul
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
On Fri, 2024-04-12 at 15:05 -0700, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: > > > One that comes to mind is the Datatron/Burroughs B-205, used as a prop > in several Hollywood productions (or at least pieces of one).. > In the computer center, beside the 7094/7044 Direct Couple, Caltech had a Datatron/Burroughs 220. It had a tape drive for metallic tape. If it detected an error, it backspaced and punched a hole in the tape. By 1964, the 220 had only two jobs: One was to read paper tape from the synchrotron into the 7044. The other was to print on its "whippet" printer, a very fast electrostatic printer that put soot onto a thermal paper that was then heated to "fix" it. There was a huge variac under the printer to adjust the heater. The perfect setting was between two windings. Too cold and the soot fell off. Too hot and it was melted and smeared into an almost illegible mess. But it was very fast -- and only 80 columns wide. It was about the size of a KSR-33.
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
On 4/12/24 14:27, Van Snyder via cctalk wrote: > On Fri, 2024-04-12 at 16:13 -0400, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: >> Not all that fast, well, it depends on what you're comparing with. >> Given tube logic with cycle times measures in microseconds, quite >> possibly serial rather than parallel organization, those acoustic or >> drum memory systems weren't all that terrible. > > Speaking of drum machines One that comes to mind is the Datatron/Burroughs B-205, used as a prop in several Hollywood productions (or at least pieces of one).. The drum there was divided into two areas; the "main storage" area where each track stored 100 words of 11 digit BCD and the "quick access" tracks that stored only a tenth as much, 20 words. The deal was that writing a word to the quick access tracks would write it 10 times, so that access time to a word was cut by 90%. Clever. --Chuck
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
On 4/12/24 14:54, CAREY SCHUG via cctalk wrote: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IBM_products for genuine ibm devices. > > Calcomp (and others?) had automated tape libraries for reel to reel taps. > The cartridge tape library that staged onto 3350s (and later 3380s?) The beer-can-in-a-beehive 3850 MSS, perhaps? At a trade show where the thing was being demonstrated (NCC perhaps?), I remember the presenter saying that the advantage of two "picker" assemblies was that one could push the other out of the way should it stop working. MPI/CDC did offer a competing product, but I don't recall the number. --Chuck
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IBM_products for genuine ibm devices. Calcomp (and others?) had automated tape libraries for reel to reel taps. STC (and others?) had automated tape libraries for the 3480 carts plotters? 1404 printer (I've mentioned before) that could print on two tab cards at a time forget who, but an archiving system using 14 inch (?) video disk platters. 7(?) years of all customer statements were stored on these. 3rd party extensions for main memory (took a 360/30 to 96 KB or more, beyond IBM's 64 KB limit) The cartridge tape library that staged onto 3350s (and later 3380s?) Of course there were 7 track tape drives for compatibility with prior systems. When we were down to only one job a week using the 7 track tape, we discovered the client we got tapes from had only one 7 track tape, just to send us tapes. --going beyond mass storage the 2956 check sorter (rpq) that was two complete 1419 sorters connected head to tail to give twice as many pockets (it had a second read unit, don't think it actually read a second time). the 3890 replacement for the 2956 that was built in modules of 6(?) pockets you choose how many up to 36 (?) 3270 terminals that were only 12 lines of 40 characters 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... --Carey
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
On Fri, 2024-04-12 at 16:13 -0400, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > Not all that fast, well, it depends on what you're comparing with. > Given tube logic with cycle times measures in microseconds, quite > possibly serial rather than parallel organization, those acoustic or > drum memory systems weren't all that terrible. Speaking of drum machines On the Bendix G-15, memory was logically 20 "long" delay lines, each of 108 words of 29 bits, and four "short" lines of four words each, 27 times faster, used for registers. The "delay line" was not an acoustic mercury delay line. Rather, it was implemented on a drum as a digital delay line, with data read and them immediately written a short distance away on the same track. Data were not retained on the drum when the machine was turned off. It was a serial machine. Even the instructions were designed to minimize how much had to be held in flop flops. The machine was remarkably cost effective for its time. Being five feet tall with a one square yard footprint, it could have been a home computer, but as far as I know, the only "home" version was one that the designer, Harry Huskey, got. It was based on the Automatic Computing Engine, or ACE, designed by Alan Turing. Huskey had worked with Turing for about a year. Huskey also worked on SWAC. He did most of the G-15 design work while he was a professor at UC Berkeley. Nicklaus Wirth was one of his grad students. David Evans, cofounder of Evans and Sutherland, worked for him on the G-15 project.
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
On Fri, 2024-04-12 at 15:04 -0400, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
> Some of the earliest magnetic storage was mechanically simple:
> magnetic drums. Nothing moving apart from the spinning media, and
> quite fast. Fixed head ("head per track") disk drives are a
> variation on that theme, DEC had some that were successful for a
> while.
From 1968 until almost 2000, Caltech Jet Propulsion Laboratory had
Univac mainframes, first 1108 (three of them), then 1110, then 1100/40,
then 1100/80, then 2200.
We would run 50 time-shariing jobs and ten batch jobs on a 262k
machine. Swap was on eleven 4 millisecond FH432 (FH="Flying Head")
drums, able to hold one core load each, plus several 7 millisecond
FH1782 drums with four core loads each. Users' files were on FASTRAND
II™ -- an 5,000 pound drum machine the size of two upright pianos,
holding about 22 megawords. With 92 millisecond access time, calling it
FASTRAND was obviously a marketing fiction. A bunch of Calcomp disk
drives eventually replaced the Fastrand.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNIVAC_FASTRAND
The 1100 series began with the ERA 1101, built for the Navy's "project
13," or 1101 in binary.
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
> On Apr 12, 2024, at 3:25 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk > wrote: > > On 4/12/24 12:04, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > >> I remember a concept for a very fast magnetic storage system that didn't >> become a product, as far as I know. The scheme was to build a large array >> of heads, using IC-manufacturing type techniques, and mount that array in >> contact or near-contact with a flat rectangular magnetic plate. The plate >> (or the heads) could move a small amount in one direction. The idea was >> "head per sector", with the mechanical motion scanning the sector across the >> head. Given something like piezo-electric actuators it would have been >> quite fast. >> >> There's a neat document in the CWI archives, a course on computer design >> from early 1948. It has a section about memories, well before core memory >> was invented. The schemes it describes are quite curious, including >> photographic memories, selectrons, and various other schemes. Also drum >> memories, including the rather mythical notion of a drum spinning at 60,000 >> rpm. > > That UNIVAC nickel-plated sewer pipe in a box, the Fastrand II used a > series of solenoids and lever arms for head positioning. I vaguely > remember a FJCC article describing it. > > But fast? Not so much, at least for drum storage of that era. I > believe there were also microphones incorporated into it, called "ping > detectors" Yes, the Univac Model I acoustic delay line memories. The document I mentioned is MC report CR-3, by A. van Wijngaarden, 1948, which is online in their archive but only as a not particularly clear scanned document in Dutch. It describes six memory technologies: photographic film, fluorescence, electric resistance (including the notion of a neon cross-bar, which is another way of describing Bitzer's inherent-memory plasma display panel but more than a decade earlier), acoustic waves (such as the Univac memory), magnetic tape, wire, or drum storage, and electrostatic charges (the Selectron is described in detail). Not all that fast, well, it depends on what you're comparing with. Given tube logic with cycle times measures in microseconds, quite possibly serial rather than parallel organization, those acoustic or drum memory systems weren't all that terrible. paul
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
On 4/12/24 12:04, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > I remember a concept for a very fast magnetic storage system that didn't > become a product, as far as I know. The scheme was to build a large array of > heads, using IC-manufacturing type techniques, and mount that array in > contact or near-contact with a flat rectangular magnetic plate. The plate > (or the heads) could move a small amount in one direction. The idea was > "head per sector", with the mechanical motion scanning the sector across the > head. Given something like piezo-electric actuators it would have been quite > fast. > > There's a neat document in the CWI archives, a course on computer design from > early 1948. It has a section about memories, well before core memory was > invented. The schemes it describes are quite curious, including photographic > memories, selectrons, and various other schemes. Also drum memories, > including the rather mythical notion of a drum spinning at 60,000 rpm. That UNIVAC nickel-plated sewer pipe in a box, the Fastrand II used a series of solenoids and lever arms for head positioning. I vaguely remember a FJCC article describing it. But fast? Not so much, at least for drum storage of that era. I believe there were also microphones incorporated into it, called "ping detectors" --Chuck
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
> On Apr 12, 2024, at 2:28 PM, Paul Berger via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>
> On 2024-04-12 2:45 p.m., Christian Kennedy via cctalk wrote:
>>
>> On 4/12/24 10:28, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
>>> Isn't that the IBM 2321 Data Cell drive?
>>
>> Same idea, but I recall the cabinets being lower to the floor and the media
>> being more rigid than the 2321 noodles. Then again, it's been the better
>> part of 50 years, and it could well have been a 2321.
>>
>> Memory rot sucks.
>>
>>> Having one's files "photostored" at LLL was a chancy proposition. There
>>> were bootleg programs to access every file for a user, just to keep them
>>> from being consigned to the photostore.
>>
>> It was chancy at LBL as well. The mechanical handling of the 1360
>> photostore cells was something that would have defied the imagination of
>> Rube Goldberg, and chips routinely ended up in places where they didn't
>> belong (although they did make pretty cool bookmarks for my teenage self).
>>
> The problem with a lot of these old machines was they relied on a lot of
> electro-mechanical devices that would today be replaced by electronics and a
> few simple actuators. These mechanical devices need to be adjusted and
> maintained and have lots of parts to wear out. While I only started with
> IBM in 1979 I still got to work on machines that would now be considered
> electro-mechanical nightmares.
Some of the earliest magnetic storage was mechanically simple: magnetic drums.
Nothing moving apart from the spinning media, and quite fast. Fixed head
("head per track") disk drives are a variation on that theme, DEC had some that
were successful for a while.
I remember a concept for a very fast magnetic storage system that didn't become
a product, as far as I know. The scheme was to build a large array of heads,
using IC-manufacturing type techniques, and mount that array in contact or
near-contact with a flat rectangular magnetic plate. The plate (or the heads)
could move a small amount in one direction. The idea was "head per sector",
with the mechanical motion scanning the sector across the head. Given
something like piezo-electric actuators it would have been quite fast.
There's a neat document in the CWI archives, a course on computer design from
early 1948. It has a section about memories, well before core memory was
invented. The schemes it describes are quite curious, including photographic
memories, selectrons, and various other schemes. Also drum memories, including
the rather mythical notion of a drum spinning at 60,000 rpm.
paul
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
On 4/12/24 11:28, Paul Berger via cctalk wrote: The 1360 was apparently developed at the request to Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), I would guess a forerunner of the DOE. There where apparently only 5 built 3 for the AEC and 2 for the NSA. IIRC, the 1360 was developed from Walnut, which was developed for the CIA. The 1360 was a commercial offering, for which they sold one each to LBL and LLL, then two to the NSA and one to LANL. I had heard that some instances remained in service until 1980, being retired only when IBM refused to maintain them. -- Christian Kennedy, Ph.D. ch...@mainecoon.com AF6AP | DB0692 | PG00029419 http://www.mainecoon.comPGP KeyID 108DAB97 PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97 "Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration…"
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
On 2024-04-12 2:45 p.m., Christian Kennedy via cctalk wrote: On 4/12/24 10:28, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: Isn't that the IBM 2321 Data Cell drive? Same idea, but I recall the cabinets being lower to the floor and the media being more rigid than the 2321 noodles. Then again, it's been the better part of 50 years, and it could well have been a 2321. Memory rot sucks. Having one's files "photostored" at LLL was a chancy proposition. There were bootleg programs to access every file for a user, just to keep them from being consigned to the photostore. It was chancy at LBL as well. The mechanical handling of the 1360 photostore cells was something that would have defied the imagination of Rube Goldberg, and chips routinely ended up in places where they didn't belong (although they did make pretty cool bookmarks for my teenage self). The problem with a lot of these old machines was they relied on a lot of electro-mechanical devices that would today be replaced by electronics and a few simple actuators. These mechanical devices need to be adjusted and maintained and have lots of parts to wear out. While I only started with IBM in 1979 I still got to work on machines that would now be considered electro-mechanical nightmares. The development of the 2321 (announced 1967?) was long and apparently had to overcome a lot of problems, but they apparently soldiered on with it as it was considered a strategic product all for 400,000,000 characters of storage. The later 3850 (announce 1974) MSS had much simpler cartridge retrieval system and had storage capacity up to 472 GB. The capacity of these seems tiny these days but given disk storage at the time, it would take a lot of DASD devices to equal that and the expense would be enormous if you could even fit that many within the reach of channel cables from the system. Late in the days of copper channels one data center I knew of was spread over three floors, with the CPU on the middle floor and channel attached devices surrounding it and as far a channel cables could reach on the floors above and below. The 1360 was apparently developed at the request to Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), I would guess a forerunner of the DOE. There where apparently only 5 built 3 for the AEC and 2 for the NSA. Paul.
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
On 4/12/24 10:28, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: Isn't that the IBM 2321 Data Cell drive? Same idea, but I recall the cabinets being lower to the floor and the media being more rigid than the 2321 noodles. Then again, it's been the better part of 50 years, and it could well have been a 2321. Memory rot sucks. Having one's files "photostored" at LLL was a chancy proposition. There were bootleg programs to access every file for a user, just to keep them from being consigned to the photostore. It was chancy at LBL as well. The mechanical handling of the 1360 photostore cells was something that would have defied the imagination of Rube Goldberg, and chips routinely ended up in places where they didn't belong (although they did make pretty cool bookmarks for my teenage self). -- Christian Kennedy, Ph.D. ch...@mainecoon.com AF6AP | DB0692 | PG00029419 http://www.mainecoon.comPGP KeyID 108DAB97 PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97 "Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration…"
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems
On 4/12/24 09:45, Christian Kennedy via cctalk wrote: > > On 4/12/24 05:31, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote > > [snip] >> Yes. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_2321_Data_Cell . By >> the standards of the time it was an unusually high capacity storage >> device, way faster than a room full of tapes and much larger than the >> 2311 disk drive. > While on the topic of odd IBM mass storage systems, does anyone recall > an IBM system that used rotating carousels holding sheets of magnetic > material? The carousel would rotate to position the selected sheet into > the read/write station, where it would be moved up and down relative to > the multiple fixed heads, a weird linear riff on a fixed head disk. > > LBL had one of these systems, installed in the same room as one of the > few examples of the IBM 1360 photo digital storage system. They kept a > broom next to the later in order to sweep up the photo chips when the > thing occasionally spewed them everywhere. Isn't that the IBM 2321 Data Cell drive? Having one's files "photostored" at LLL was a chancy proposition. There were bootleg programs to access every file for a user, just to keep them from being consigned to the photostore. --Chuck
