Re: MULTIPROCESSING FOR THE IMPOVERISHED Part 1: a 6809 Uniprocessor
On 08/03/2019 02:06 PM, ben via cctalk wrote: Many were not published. A friend built a TTL computer based on the PDP-8 but no details were published. A field service tech at a company I once worked for built a 16-bit computer that was a whole generation better than the 12-bit machines that company made. I know a few of them were built by others that worked there. Most programs were entered through the front panel switches. This was probably about 1976 or so. Display was via an oscilloscope. It was called the Mike Smith 1. I've never found any reference to it online. Jon
Re: MULTIPROCESSING FOR THE IMPOVERISHED Part 1: a 6809 Uniprocessor
Many were not published. A friend built a TTL computer based on the PDP-8 but no details were published. There was a design in the UK called the "weeny-bitter" in the Amateur Computer Club newsletters. Not sure how many got built... Information is scattered through the magazines. I think start at volume 2... http://www.smrcc.org.uk/members/g4ugm/acc.htm Dave Thank you. That is better reading than BYTE. 250 pages of full page ADS before you hit the text content. My only question is how much a Pound was in Canadian Dollars in 1976? Ben.
Re: IBM Series/1
I'm pretty sure it was intended as a PLC or more precisely a PDP11 competitor as others stated. I am reading an excellent book "The Small Computer Concept" which kind of awe inspiring lays out the need for the Series/1, the ISA, and monitor functions in 400 pages. On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 10:29 AM Jon Elson via cctalk wrote: > > On 08/02/2019 10:04 PM, ED SHARPE via cctalk wrote: > > Was IBM Series/1 for process control?Ed# > > > I don't think it was necessarily DESIGNED for process > control, it was a decent 16-bit mini. > But, it did get USED a lot for that application. They were > also used as interfaces from the IBM channel architecture to > serial ports, where the 360/370's were hurt very badly by > interrupt load. > > Jon
Re: IBM Series/1
On 08/02/2019 10:04 PM, ED SHARPE via cctalk wrote: Was IBM Series/1 for process control?Ed# I don't think it was necessarily DESIGNED for process control, it was a decent 16-bit mini. But, it did get USED a lot for that application. They were also used as interfaces from the IBM channel architecture to serial ports, where the 360/370's were hurt very badly by interrupt load. Jon
Re: IBM Series/1
On 08/02/2019 09:32 PM, William Donzelli via cctalk wrote: I have a pair, plus parts. The hardware is excellent. They have fairly fast processors, and the I/O capacity is great. Reliability is typical IBM. The OS sucks balls. All the balls. Commercially, they were not a success, despite being IBM's first "open" system, in that they invited third party developers. It seems like every S/1 I have ever seen has some CDC DNA in it, for some reason. They ended up successful within IBM, once they found out they were better comms boxes than the real mainframe boxes (3725, for example). Some S/1s were built specifically for comms use on mainframes (7171). Yes, we used some Series/1 machines at Washington University for async dialup and local terminal use. They had a channel interface, and this worked WAY better than even the Memorex 1270, which still hit the system with a huge amount of interrupts. We also got a disk development lab donated from IBM that was all run by S/1 systems. They scrapped those and a bunch of the SLT/MST interface gear, and replaced it with modern stuff. Jon
Avoid shipping with pre-sale deals on stuff from Sellam's collection--today only!
Howdy Folks. I wish I had thought of this a few days ago, but I wasn't sure if I was going to be making it to the VCF event this weekend. Being that I am, I'd like to offer to bring any item that you want to purchase to the VCF if you're going to be there yourself. That way you can save on the shipping. Also note that I have "show prices", which are higher than my normal prices to offset the consignment commission. However, if you confirm a purchase beforehand, you will pay the regular asking price. The listings on my Virtual Warehouse of Computing Wonders are presently up to date: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1I53wxarLHlNmlPVf_HJ5oMKuab4zrApI_hiX0pNmy48/edit?pli=1&fbclid=IwAR29aeaPInesPowqSLeq_ElmtOwSThjfRAJyW9T_oN6mnjPPt4wO1CchMGQ#gid=0&range=A1 Please be reminded that this is not my complete inventory, but merely what I have presently processed and listed from my warehouse mine. If there's something you are looking for that I don't have listed, please send a request by e-mail. Thanks! Sellam
RE: MULTIPROCESSING FOR THE IMPOVERISHED Part 1: a 6809 Uniprocessor
> -Original Message- > From: cctalk On Behalf Of ben via cctalk > Sent: 02 August 2019 23:50 > To: cctalk@classiccmp.org > Subject: Re: MULTIPROCESSING FOR THE IMPOVERISHED Part 1: a 6809 > Uniprocessor > > On 8/2/2019 11:15 AM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote: > > 1993 article on building a multiprocessor 6809 box. > > > > http://www.bradrodriguez.com/papers/6809cpu.htm > > Read that page years ago.I have always like the 6800 CPU model.I have used > that model for a 18 and 20 bit cpu design currently being bread boarded in > DE1 FPGA development kit, > ~900 logic blocks and a few small ROM blocks. > > Where are all the articles about a TTL designed computer? > Yes I know about (Homebuilt CPUs ring) but that is mostly today. What about > the Late 70's and Early 80's? > Many were not published. A friend built a TTL computer based on the PDP-8 but no details were published. There was a design in the UK called the "weeny-bitter" in the Amateur Computer Club newsletters. Not sure how many got built... Information is scattered through the magazines. I think start at volume 2... http://www.smrcc.org.uk/members/g4ugm/acc.htm Dave > > I need a the web site "C compiler for the IMPOVERISHED", I have Ron Cain's > 1.0 Small C compiler modified to generate code for my architecture but the > code is really inefficient. > It is the only C compiler with source that fits in 64KB. (8080) Ben. > > >
