Re: I-4004
I have had an interest in the 4004 for a number of years. I've acquired a SIM4-01 that I've used over the years to read and program 1702A EPROMs. I've recently also located a copy of Tom Pittman's resident 4004 assembler. Quite remarkable when you realize that that it was a complete two pass assembler that ran in just 1K of machine code. I've always been interested in application code that ran on the 4004. The CHM has recovered the ROMs used on the original Busicom calculator and has been disassembled. One can easily find it on the web. In my searches I've found code that was used to calculate time differences from satellites ( now days GPS ). A couple of the more interesting pieces of code that I've come across was a load calculator for helicopters and an electronic maneuver board ( used on shop to determine closest point of approach with time, speed and distance ). These two projects were interesting because they were developed by students of Gary Kildall, before CP/M was even a dream. A number of years ago, I began a project to recreate a working maneuver board calculator. The original used 13 ea 1702As. That was a little bit much so I used a single 2732 instead. Anyway, I had the maneuver board at the VCF west this year, along with the sim4-01 and a 4004 to arduino interface. If one has a 4004 or a 4040 with adapter, one could run the Busicom calculator code on that arduino retro-shield. One of the fellows had the weighing machines running on 4004 as well. All in celebration of the 50th year. Dwight
Re: I-4004
On 2021-11-16 5:08 p.m., jim stephens via cctalk wrote: On 11/16/2021 2:20 PM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote: On 11/16/21 2:08 PM, Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: Did the 4004 chip start our interest in microcomputing? no I got interested in microprogramming before it was hijacked as a a term for such devices. It's generous at best to apply that term to a 4004 anyway. In 1971 firmware and the like still was still very much something that was used in conjunction with system design. A group was very active, SIGMicro to share techniques. Only after most microprogramming vanished into a black hole in the silicon did it taper off. I'm glad some amount of that discipline has emerged in that context, and not applied to small ceramic chips with gold legs. thanks Jim Only looking back now at the price and speed of main memory, I can see micro-programming advantage. Having the word settle on 8 bit bytes; (my vote was for 10 bits : 2 BCD digits + sign flag + end flag) You have a severe lack opcode space as every thing is n+ bytes, compared to when you could design the CPU to what ever word sized you needed and room for micro-coded ops and full alu rather than ADD DCA AND OPERATE. Ben. Back then you touch the hardware.
Re: I-4004
On 2021-11-16 4:41 p.m., Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: Yes, there were prior machines, but the 4004 is ARGUABLY the first successful commercial mass-produced one. There were others, from TI, Fairchild, Four-Phase?, etc. As usual, the label "FIRST" is questionable due to whether we count announcement, prototypes, demos, shipping, etc. I think the first to sell at $5 or some other magic price number was most important. For $75 more you can get a state of the art toaster, with one touch browning and a free remote. Some call the 5150, the start of the END of classic computing, or at least of the hobby dominated field. The lack of good front panel I say was end of classic computing. After that every thing was the same black box computer, and C compiler. Happy computing all. Murray IBM IS EVIL. LIKE BIG BROTHER FROM 1984. Well regards to in my view to open ideas in computing hardware and software up until the internet. -- Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com Ben.
Re: I-4004
On 11/16/2021 2:20 PM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote: On 11/16/21 2:08 PM, Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: Did the 4004 chip start our interest in microcomputing? no I got interested in microprogramming before it was hijacked as a a term for such devices. It's generous at best to apply that term to a 4004 anyway. In 1971 firmware and the like still was still very much something that was used in conjunction with system design. A group was very active, SIGMicro to share techniques. Only after most microprogramming vanished into a black hole in the silicon did it taper off. I'm glad some amount of that discipline has emerged in that context, and not applied to small ceramic chips with gold legs. thanks Jim
Re: I-4004
On 2021-11-16 4:18 p.m., Will Cooke via cctalk wrote: On 11/16/2021 4:35 PM Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: As for microprocessors, there are MANY MANY micros that preceded the PC. Pretty sure "PC" meant "Politically Correct." Will I believe in free speech, not "Politically Correct". The trash man takes out the trash, not some fancy "Politically Correct" name. It feels more guilty using the correct term when dumpster diving. :). Ben.
Re: I-4004
On 2021-11-16 3:33 p.m., William Donzelli via cctalk wrote: Best, most concise answer of the week. -- Will On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 5:20 PM Al Kossow via cctalk wrote: On 11/16/21 2:08 PM, Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: Did the 4004 chip start our interest in microcomputing? no For me it was STAR TREK. Not everybody in the 70's had a 4004. The 4004 had the most press, but how many 4 other bit micro controller chips went in to things like washing machines or microwave ovens. Ben.
Re: I-4004
On Tue, 16 Nov 2021, Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: Did the 4004 chip start our interest in microcomputing? For ME, hearing about the 4004 was the first solid assurance that tabletop computers would become available. I heard some mentions of it from cow- orkers at Goddard Space Flight Center, and then somebody referred me to the Electronic News article. Very shortly after that, I got out of aerospace, which was going through some turmoil, but promised that I would get back into computers as soon as they got into MY price range. THAT ended up being the Z80 based TRS80 for $399. A LOT of people HERE were in it LONG before I was. It is 50 today. Classic computing begins earlier but for the masses, if they could be called that in the early seventies, this was it. Yes, there were prior machines, but the 4004 is ARGUABLY the first successful commercial mass-produced one. There were others, from TI, Fairchild, Four-Phase?, etc. As usual, the label "FIRST" is questionable due to whether we count announcement, prototypes, demos, shipping, etc. I hesitate in calling it the first microprocessor as pc'ers will object. It is good to hesitate! Virtually EVERY "FIRST" has some prior art. If, by "pc'ers", you mean Politically Correct, then it is arguably correct. If, however, by "pc'ers", you mean the IBM 5150, then NO! The IBM 5150 was a late entry in order to "take over" and "dominate" an already "bustling" market. Some call the 5150, the start of the END of classic computing, or at least of the hobby dominated field. Happy computing all. Murray -- Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
Re: I-4004
> On 11/16/2021 4:35 PM Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: > > > As for microprocessors, there are MANY MANY micros that preceded the PC. > Pretty sure "PC" meant "Politically Correct." Will
Re: I-4004
As for microprocessors, there are MANY MANY micros that preceded the PC. You can find a list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microprocessor_chronology The 8088 is a late comer to the microprocessor world. On 11/16/2021 4:08 PM, Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: Did the 4004 chip start our interest in microcomputing? It is 50 today. Classic computing begins earlier but for the masses, if they could be called that in the early seventies, this was it. I hesitate in calling it the first microprocessor as pc'ers will object. Happy computing all. Murray
Re: I-4004
Best, most concise answer of the week. -- Will On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 5:20 PM Al Kossow via cctalk wrote: > > On 11/16/21 2:08 PM, Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: > > Did the 4004 chip start our interest in microcomputing? > > no > >
Re: I-4004
On Nov 16, 2021, at 2:08 PM, Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: > > Did the 4004 chip start our interest in microcomputing? It is 50 today. > Classic computing begins earlier but for the masses, if they could be > called that in the early seventies, this was it. I hesitate in calling it > the first microprocessor as pc'ers will object. > > Happy computing all. > > Murray For me, it was the Honeywell DPS-8 that started my interest in “Classic Computers”. Mind you, the ones I used were production systems, running a current version of GCOS-8. Zane
Re: I-4004
On 11/16/21 2:08 PM, Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: Did the 4004 chip start our interest in microcomputing? no
I-4004
Did the 4004 chip start our interest in microcomputing? It is 50 today. Classic computing begins earlier but for the masses, if they could be called that in the early seventies, this was it. I hesitate in calling it the first microprocessor as pc'ers will object. Happy computing all. Murray
