Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 1/26/2017 8:37 PM, Fred Cisin wrote: Even the phrase "shipped" need not be when the customer starts printing out the nine billion names of god. That was a printout ... not card I/O. (1953, so it predates the 7074) Great Story! -- Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

In the story, Chuck (no last name, so not confirmed to be OUR Chuck), had the last word: "Look" http://downlode.org/Etext/nine_billion_names_of_god.html On Thu, 26 Jan 2017, Chuck Guzis wrote: I remember reading that one many years ago. The bit about the stars quietly winking out at the end

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/26/2017 07:50 PM, Fred Cisin wrote: >> Even the phrase "shipped" need not be when the customer starts >> printing out the nine billion names of god. (1953, so it >> predates the 7074) > > OK, that was a "Mark V, Automatic Sequence Computer". > > In the story, Chuck (no last name, so not

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

Even the phrase "shipped" need not be when the customer starts printing out the nine billion names of god. (1953, so it predates the 7074) OK, that was a "Mark V, Automatic Sequence Computer". In the story, Chuck (no last name, so not confirmed to be OUR Chuck), had the last word: "Look"

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On Thu, 26 Jan 2017, Eric Smith wrote: On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: "Transactions of Society of Actuaries" 1959, Volume 11, Number 31 On a system like that, how much time could elapse between, "We (customer) are switching to..."? decision planning

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/26/2017 06:49 PM, Eric Smith wrote: > IBM generally didn't consider a data processing system to have > "shipped" until it passed the field acceptance criteria, e.g., > assembled on-site and passed diagnostics. Perhaps the 7070 didn't > pass acceptance testing until April 1960? Does IBM

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 8:07 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: > "Transactions of Society of Actuaries" > 1959, Volume 11, Number 31 > That's certainly more convincing, but it still seems to be a bit of a mystery. The four authors of IBM's Early Computers were all engineers and

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/25/2017 05:47 PM, Eric Smith wrote: > Based on the bios of the authors, I'm actually more inclined to > believe the book than annotation of a photo on the IBM web site. Computerhistory.org mentions that the 1959 date was part of other information written on the back of the photo.

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: > So who you gonna believe--a photo taken in 1959 or some guy writing 27 > years later saying it didn't exist? Based on the bios of the authors, I'm actually more inclined to believe the book than annotation of a photo on

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 1/25/2017 9:54 AM, Ray Arachelian wrote: On 01/23/2017 02:00 PM, Steven Maresca wrote: Just wanted to share an excerpted story just sent to me by a colleague, regarding an IBM 7074 supplying data to Java middleware, ultimately feeding a modern webapp stack:

RE: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

I dunno – there’s something about the sheep welcoming the 7070 that struck me funny. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Chuck Guzis Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:01 PM To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Subject: Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love"

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/25/2017 01:37 PM, ben wrote: > What ever happened to computrons? Were computrons ever deployed in a real product? I was under the impression that they were stillborn. --Chuck

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/25/2017 02:07 PM, Eric Smith wrote: > The 7070 was announced in Sept. 1958, but did not ship until April > 1960. According to IBM's DPD Chronology for 1959: "On August 3, DPD introduces the IBM Datacenter -- facilities in which customers rent the use of IBM 7070 systems by the hour and

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On Jan 24, 2017 7:57 PM, "Chuck Guzis" wrote: > The 7070 was very early (1958) and is probably the first (or close to > the first) IBM transistorized computer. The 7070 was announced in Sept. 1958, but did not ship until April 1960. The first IBM computing device to use

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 1/25/2017 11:55 AM, Chuck Guzis wrote: On 01/25/2017 09:39 AM, Jon Elson wrote: Well, of course. If you look at the design of some of the last gasps of the tube generation like the Bendix G15, you will see what incredible hoops they had to jump through to make a viable product. Or, look at

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/25/2017 09:39 AM, Jon Elson wrote: > Well, of course. If you look at the design of some of the last gasps > of the tube generation like the Bendix G15, you will see what > incredible hoops they had to jump through to make a viable product. > Or, look at SAGE, which filled an enormous

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/23/2017 02:00 PM, Steven Maresca wrote: > Just wanted to share an excerpted story just sent to me by a colleague, > regarding an IBM 7074 supplying data to Java middleware, ultimately feeding > a modern webapp stack: > http://thenewstack.io/happens-use-java-1960-ibm-mainframe/ > > This comes

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/25/2017 12:19 AM, Chuck Guzis wrote: On 01/24/2017 10:01 PM, Jon Elson wrote: And, the 7074 was a serious computer, given the vintage. Either 4 or 6 us core cycle time was QUITE good in 1961 or so. 10 us instruction execution time was pretty decent. I find the whole period amazing.

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/24/2017 10:01 PM, Jon Elson wrote: > And, the 7074 was a serious computer, given the vintage. Either 4 or > 6 us core cycle time was QUITE good in 1961 or so. 10 us > instruction execution time was pretty decent. I find the whole period amazing. Consider that the 709 was introduced in

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/24/2017 11:14 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: Given that the whole SMS thing was the common denominator among the 7000 and 1400 and 1620 lines, it's hard to say who was first. But the 7070 was first delivered. --Chuck Which is damned amazing, as the 7070 was a VERY ambitious machine. 30,000

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/24/2017 07:55 PM, Jon Elson wrote: > Well, they were all built using SMS card technology, and a few > pictures seem to show very similar backplane setup. I didn't know the > 7070 was the first of that generation. While the first 7030 was > delivered after the 7070, development of the

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/24/2017 08:57 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: On 01/24/2017 06:37 PM, Jon Elson wrote: On 01/24/2017 12:38 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: Was the 7070 IBM's first machine with a wire-wrapped backplane? --Chuck No, all SMS machines used similar wire wrapping. So, I think that goes back to the 7030

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/24/2017 06:37 PM, Jon Elson wrote: > On 01/24/2017 12:38 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: >> Was the 7070 IBM's first machine with a wire-wrapped backplane? >> --Chuck > No, all SMS machines used similar wire wrapping. So, I think that > goes back to the 7030 (Stretch) and probably 1620, 1401 and

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/24/2017 12:38 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: Was the 7070 IBM's first machine with a wire-wrapped backplane? --Chuck No, all SMS machines used similar wire wrapping. So, I think that goes back to the 7030 (Stretch) and probably 1620, 1401 and others of that time. I'm pretty sure those

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/24/2017 09:25 AM, Jon Elson wrote: > I wonder how late IBM still supported the 7074 microcode emulation? > And, of course, anybody could write a software-level emulation for > the 7074, in IBM or other hardware. One reason maybe to not run simh > on a PC is if the data comes in on old mag

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/24/2017 12:00 AM, Chuck Guzis wrote: On 01/23/2017 09:42 PM, Jon Elson wrote: On 01/23/2017 07:45 PM, Jon Elson wrote: This blog seems to indicate that there is NO 7074, but an emulator running on 370 hardware. http://nikhilism.com/post/2016/systems-we-love/ This makes a lot more

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/23/2017 11:46 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: Bob Bener has written a short squib about how the 7070 came into being: http://www.bobbemer.com/BIRTH.HTM Funny, in a tragic way. WOW! But, at the end, he says the 707x is a 6-bit machine. It seems, in fact, that the 707x was a WORD machine, not

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/23/2017 09:42 PM, Jon Elson wrote: > On 01/23/2017 07:45 PM, Jon Elson wrote: > > This blog seems to indicate that there is NO 7074, but an emulator > running on 370 hardware. >> http://nikhilism.com/post/2016/systems-we-love/ > > This makes a lot more sense, some of these microcode

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

Bob Bener has written a short squib about how the 7070 came into being: http://www.bobbemer.com/BIRTH.HTM Funny, in a tragic way. --Chuck

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/23/2017 07:45 PM, Jon Elson wrote: This blog seems to indicate that there is NO 7074, but an emulator running on 370 hardware. http://nikhilism.com/post/2016/systems-we-love/ This makes a lot more sense, some of these microcode emulations were still available of fairly late machines.

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/23/2017 09:21 PM, Jon Elson wrote: > Oh, and the picture in the article is CLEARLY a posed IBM sales > brochure photo, and not from the recent operation at the unnamed > government agency. The photo's from Wikipedia, and is a photo of the system at the Deutsches Museum in Munich, which is

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/23/2017 09:04 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: On 01/23/2017 05:45 PM, Jon Elson wrote: WOW That is QUITE amazing! And, I can't possibly imagine why anyone in their right mind would do this! Seems an emulator on a PC would be faster, and way more reliable, not to mention taking up MUCH less

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/23/2017 05:45 PM, Jon Elson wrote: > WOW That is QUITE amazing! And, I can't possibly imagine why > anyone in their right mind would do this! Seems an emulator on a PC > would be faster, and way more reliable, not to mention taking up MUCH > less space, power and cooling. How

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/23/2017 01:00 PM, Steven Maresca wrote: Just wanted to share an excerpted story just sent to me by a colleague, regarding an IBM 7074 supplying data to Java middleware, ultimately feeding a modern webapp stack: http://thenewstack.io/happens-use-java-1960-ibm-mainframe/ This comes from a

David Gelernter - was Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 2017-01-23 6:52 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: On 01/23/2017 12:25 PM, Paul Koning wrote: On Jan 23, 2017, at 2:16 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: On 01/23/2017 11:00 AM, Steven Maresca wrote: Just wanted to share an excerpted story just sent to me by a colleague, regarding an IBM 7074

RE: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

Oh, no. Of course not. Perish the thought. Sent from my Windows 10 phone From: Toby Thain Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 12:45 PM To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference On 2017-01-23 5:16 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: > On 01/23/

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 12:33 PM, Mouse wrote: > >> The 7074 was referred to as a "supercomputer". Can any decimal > >> machine really bear that title? > > I suppose it could. I would apply the term to a computer that's the > fastest$ > > Consider Babbage's

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

>> The 7074 was referred to as a "supercomputer". Can any decimal >> machine really bear that title? > I suppose it could. I would apply the term to a computer that's the fastest$ Consider Babbage's Analytical Engine. It was decimal and it was, not so much by intrinsic merit as by lack of

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

> On Jan 23, 2017, at 2:16 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: > > On 01/23/2017 11:00 AM, Steven Maresca wrote: >> Just wanted to share an excerpted story just sent to me by a >> colleague, regarding an IBM 7074 supplying data to Java middleware, >> ultimately feeding a modern webapp

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 2017-01-23 5:16 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: On 01/23/2017 11:00 AM, Steven Maresca wrote: Just wanted to share an excerpted story just sent to me by a colleague, regarding an IBM 7074 supplying data to Java middleware, ultimately feeding a modern webapp stack:

Re: IBM 7074 and then some: "Systems we love" conference

On 01/23/2017 11:00 AM, Steven Maresca wrote: > Just wanted to share an excerpted story just sent to me by a > colleague, regarding an IBM 7074 supplying data to Java middleware, > ultimately feeding a modern webapp stack: > http://thenewstack.io/happens-use-java-1960-ibm-mainframe/ The 7074 was