[cctalk] It's been a while - retirement project
>>[anyone know if there's a usable web interface to CCTALK? I browse it >>through the ARCHIVE on CCTALK.COM >KenUnix - 27 Nov 7:13 p.m. >When I try and connect to it I see in the tab chinese verbiage >CCtalk ???-?? and it tries to send me to public.hujia.104.cdn20.com Sorry, my mistake - I meant the CCTALK archives at: classiccmp.org Dave -- -- Search "Dave's Old Computers" see "my personal" at bottom!
[cctalk] Re: Intel 4004
On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 5:32 PM Rick Bensene via cctalk wrote: > Steve Lewis wrote: > > then like the 4004, we're struggling to find evidence of actual products > > that > > made use of them. Wasn't the 4004 used in some cash registers, street > > lights, or > > some weighing machines? (I don't have any specific references, just > > recollections > from past reading) Over the years, I've found a 4004 in two commercial products - a 1970s non-UPC barcode scanner, and a commercial kitchen scale. I still have the PCBs for the scale (with the accessory chips). The barcode scanner was utterly dismantled 35 years ago. -ethan
[cctalk] Re: Intel 4004
Steve Lewis wrote: > then like the 4004, we're struggling to find evidence of actual products that > made use of them. Wasn't the 4004 used in some cash registers, street > lights, or > some weighing machines? (I don't have any specific references, > just recollections > from past reading) The major (and primary reason for the 4004 and the MCS-4 family existing in the first place) was Nippon Calculating Machine Co and their Busicom 141-PF electronic printing desktop calculator. NCM went to the US looking for a chipmaker (the capability for the level of integration required to make such a chipset did not exist in production form anywhere else in the world at the time), and two companies were engaged to develop a chipset for NCM, one being Intel, and the other being Computer Design Corporation. As history clearly points out, Intel won the competition, developing a chipset based on the 4004 CPU, and some peripheral chips (RAM, ROM, I/O) that ended up being the operating element of the NCM/Busicom 141-PF Calculator. The 141-PF is a very famous calculator for this reason, but is otherwise (by appearance and function) a very ordinary calculator for the time. The fact that it had "Intel Inside" (though the term didn't exist at the time), using the world's first commercially available microprocessor chipset made with MOS Large Scale Integration technology, makes the 141-PF (and the OEM copies; the NCR 18-36 and the Unicom 141). Two versions of the machine were made, one that was a four-function machine, and another that added an extra ROM that added a square root function. Other devices were subsequently developed that used the 4004 as their computing core, such as digital scales, electronic cash registers, and various other electronic devices. This was only possible because initially, Nippon Calculating Machine Co. had exclusive rights to the use of the chipset. Due to some financial difficulties, NCM renegotiated the contract with Intel, removing the exclusivity clause in return for Intel forgiving some money owed on the development of the chips. This allowed Intel to sell the chipset to the open market. Once this occurred, Intel aggressively marketed the chipset as the MCS-4 microprocessor system, providing extensive documentation, development tools, both hardware and software, and lots of support for anyone wishing to develop an electronic system based on the 4004. The Busicom 141-PF calculator and its OEM versions were the first commercially-available electronic devices that had a general-purpose microprocessor with firmware implementing the machine’s logic, and thus represent the historical benchmark. These were actual products that were sold under the Busicom brand as well as NCR and Unicom. It isn’t known how many of these machines were actually made, but enough were made that they can still (rarely, though) be found today. Nippon Calculating Machine Co. in Japan manufactured and distributed them under their Busicom brand name, as well as providing the machines with subtly changed color schemes for cabinet/keyboard to OEM customers, which would market, sell, and service them under their own brand names. Rick -- The Old Calculator Museum https://oldcalculatormuseum.com P.S. If anyone out there has one of these calculators lying around gathering dust, working or not, and would like to have it see new life as part of a museum exhibit, please get in touch with me.
[cctalk] Re: It's been a while - retirement project
When I try and connect to it I see in the tab chinese verbiage CCtalk 丰富多元的综合内容平台-专业的知识分享与在线教育平台 and it tries to send me to public.hujia.104.cdn20.com -Ken On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 1:44 AM Dave Dunfield via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > >26 Nov 8:14 p.m. > > >I was trying to format an HP LIF disk from IMD (77 tracks, 30 sectors, > >5 interleave, 512 MFM encoding, 256 bytes per sector). Which I can > configure > >IMD for using the interactive user interface. EXCEPT it won't > >accept entering sector numbering starting from 0 to 29. It always wants to > >start at 1. > > >So it looks like it's just a trivial bug in the interactive user > interface. > > Hi Marc, > > I'll look into it - it will take me a while as I have to dig out and set up > a real DOS IMD system... > > [anyone know it there's a usable web interface to CCTALK? I browse it > through > the ARCHIVE on CCTALK.COM - it's a web interface which presents "reply" > button > - but it doesn't work - so I have to cut/paste/edit the existing post and > send > it back by email - and HOPE that it finds its way to the proper thread!] > > Dave > > -- > > -- > Search "Dave's Old Computers" see "my personal" at bottom! > -- End of line JOB TERMINATED
[cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?)
On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 1:13 PM Steve Lewis via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > Yes, it seems PALM did have a few evolutions, which just makes me curious > if there were even earlier editions than this one from 1972.But even if > so - then like the 4004, we're struggling to find evidence of actual > products that made use of them. Wasn't the 4004 used in some cash > registers, street lights, or some weighing machines? (I don't have any > specific references, just recollections from past reading) > > Use of the 4004 would be found first within Intel products themselves, not 3rd party cash register or pioneering gas pump manufacturers. That's why you can't find much. Intel made the first hardware powered by 4004. They started with chip sets, manuals, starter kit hardware, trainers, etc. to get the customer started. I checked bitsavers.org I did not see the first 4004 product guide and sales literature. I have some of this in paper form, but not much. I assume someone has a scanned copy online of the various products intel initially sold with "intel 4004 inside". The microprocessor was a new concept so it would not have been instantly absorbed by the market without a little salesmanship by Intel to inspire customers how to use this new technology. After a while customers started making and then producing things that used the 4004 chipset, but only after Intel got them started. right? Bill
[cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?)
Yes, it seems PALM did have a few evolutions, which just makes me curious if there were even earlier editions than this one from 1972.But even if so - then like the 4004, we're struggling to find evidence of actual products that made use of them. Wasn't the 4004 used in some cash registers, street lights, or some weighing machines? (I don't have any specific references, just recollections from past reading) My suspicion is that something like the PALM was used in the large (later model) IBM 9-track tape systems (forget the model numbers offhand, but in their manuals they describe a full instruction set) or "industrial systems" like that. I think at that time (1972) PALM was also lacking a SHIFT or ROTATE code - since in part of the Joe George tech manual, they mention having to implement this in the SCAMP prototype themselves (a hardware solution workaround to a missing processor capability) until that instruction got added later (before the IBM 5100 release). [ specifically it is mentioned by Pat Smith in an entry from February 1973, who had come up with the workaround; this SHIFT I think was essential to some keyboard integration work ] Note that there is also evidence that as many as 400 early IBM 5100's were actually made in 1974 (based on an early bulk order of keyboards of that quantity, and a sales projection graph that includes a column for 1974) -- those early ones most likely were all APL only (since that was all that was yet available as it carried over from the SCAMP). Very nice images of the Philips tape. Yes, in the last few pages of that System/7 document, it has the 1972 article from Eletronic News about it - IBM was pretty proud of that, and it's the earliest example I've come across of using audio cassette tapes for digital data storage. So right around '71/'72 was the origin of that, as far as I know (at least as far as used in commercial products). Steve On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 2:56 AM Christian Corti via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > Well, just to throw this into the conversation: > > > > Over this past summer, I was studying the SCAMP ( > > https://voidstar.blog/scamp-a-review-50-years-later/ ) > > > > In that collection I came across a very early printing of the PALM > > instruction set, with the cover page dated March 21, 1972 of the > printing, > > and on the next page a date of March 16, 1972 of the document number. My > > photos of that document is here: > > > https://github.com/voidstar78/SCAMP/blob/main/IBM_SCAMP_PALM_InstructionSet_March1972.pdf > > This seems to be an older revision than the photocopied document that > I have. The instruction set described in the '72 document is not the final > one. Some opcodes are missing or are not complete (like the JUMP > instruction). > A transcription of my photocopy is here: > > http://computermuseum.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de/dev/ibm_5110/technik/instr_set.html > > BTW voidstar also has a document called System/7 tape cassette attachment. > I do have the original IBM cassette recorder (a Philips EL 3302) with > cable and System/7 diagnostics cassettes ;-) This was the tape recorder > used with the SCAMP. > Pictures can be found here: > http://computermuseum.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de/pics/ibm/s7 > > > Now, of course an argument is then is PALM a microprocessor? Perhaps not > > by todays standards and expectations, as it is a series of about 14 > > "Dutchess" chips, which is claimed to consist of MOSFET. I'm not enough > of > > I'd say yes. It's not a single-chip processor, but the i8008 wasn't either > (it couldn't work without support chips. > > > Christian >
[cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?)
Well, just to throw this into the conversation: Over this past summer, I was studying the SCAMP ( https://voidstar.blog/scamp-a-review-50-years-later/ ) In that collection I came across a very early printing of the PALM instruction set, with the cover page dated March 21, 1972 of the printing, and on the next page a date of March 16, 1972 of the document number. My photos of that document is here: https://github.com/voidstar78/SCAMP/blob/main/IBM_SCAMP_PALM_InstructionSet_March1972.pdf This seems to be an older revision than the photocopied document that I have. The instruction set described in the '72 document is not the final one. Some opcodes are missing or are not complete (like the JUMP instruction). A transcription of my photocopy is here: http://computermuseum.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de/dev/ibm_5110/technik/instr_set.html BTW voidstar also has a document called System/7 tape cassette attachment. I do have the original IBM cassette recorder (a Philips EL 3302) with cable and System/7 diagnostics cassettes ;-) This was the tape recorder used with the SCAMP. Pictures can be found here: http://computermuseum.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de/pics/ibm/s7 Now, of course an argument is then is PALM a microprocessor? Perhaps not by todays standards and expectations, as it is a series of about 14 "Dutchess" chips, which is claimed to consist of MOSFET. I'm not enough of I'd say yes. It's not a single-chip processor, but the i8008 wasn't either (it couldn't work without support chips. Christian
