Re: Another old mainframe comparison
The 10^-15 figure is ridiculous, and a 7090 with 12 tape drives would have had to have at least two channels, so they claim that you could read two tapes at the same time is also ridiculous. Yes, the 7090 was painfully limited and slow by contemporary standards, but there's no need to exaggerate. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Tom Brennan [t...@tombrennansoftware.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 1:26 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Another old mainframe comparison I don't know what's going on with the comparisons lately, but here's a fun one. Paging the fact checkers... https://spectrum.ieee.org/ibm-mainframe -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Another old mainframe comparison
The B5000 was slower, but had a more advanced architecture. That 100,000 figure makes some significan assumptions about the instruction mix. For the faster instructions it could get almost to 500,000/s. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Robin Vowels [robi...@dodo.com.au] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 9:42 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Another old mainframe comparison Burroughs had the B5000 in 1961. At 100,000 instructions per second, the 7090 wasn't all that fast. Pilot ACE, in 1951, could execute 15,000 instructions per second. On 2021-12-22 17:26, Tom Brennan wrote: > I don't know what's going on with the comparisons lately, but here's a > fun one. Paging the fact checkers... > https://spectrum.ieee.org/ibm-mainframe -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Another old mainframe comparison
The various S/360 emulator programs relied on a combination of hardware and microcode. There was a 1401 simulator that used only S/360 ISA, but IBM never referred to it as an emulator. On the System/370, IBM had a program that could simulate a 1401 using only the S/370 ISA, but that would use the instructions added by the compatibility feature when running on a machine that had it installed. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of René Jansen [rene.vincent.jan...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 9:53 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Another old mainframe comparison Thank you for the pointers to those two very interesting articles. I never the introduction of microcode linked to the 1401 compatibility of S/360 - I thought this was an emulator that used the 360 ISA as-is? In the other one, I think what we need to take away from that is how the scarcity of nearly everything led to enormous efficiency, and the plenitude of today leads to the enormous waste we experience. In not having to worry too much about segment registers some fundamental mental imagery of what computing is, got lost. Part of the mainframe still running those important workloads is linked to how very well a small, efficient kernel can cope with layers of abusively inefficient software piled on top of it. So we need a different scale for those comparisons. Otherwise, we need to go investigate into the reality of my phone not being able to run all transactions of a medium size commercial bank. Best regards, René. > On 22 Dec 2021, at 08:15, Mike Schwab wrote: > > https://spectrum.ieee.org/building-the-system360-mainframe-nearly-destroyed-ibm > > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 6:26 AM Tom Brennan > wrote: >> >> I don't know what's going on with the comparisons lately, but here's a >> fun one. Paging the fact checkers... >> https://spectrum.ieee.org/ibm-mainframe >> >> -- >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA > Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Another old mainframe comparison
Is it possible that the author wrote "10^-15" and the caret got lost in the editing process, or that the "-15" was originally a superscript? The other error was bad enough :-( -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Bob Bridges [robhbrid...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 9:59 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Another old mainframe comparison I'm enjoying the article so far, and I'm sure contributors will chime in who are far more knowledgeable than I. But the first thing I notice is that he spends some time estimating how inferior the early 7090 was to a modern laptop in terms of clock speed, RAM, and tape-driven I/O, and concludes "So now the 7090 looks to have run at about a quadrillionth (10-15) the speed of your 2021 laptop." The first thing that leaps out at me is that he appears to be multiplying the three comparative numbers to come up with a quadrillion. But that isn't the proper way to compare speeds, is it? Surely the proper comparison is only the slowest of the three. Not to mention the silly typographical error of writing 10 to the 15th as "10-15". I use "10e15", myself, though I suppose in a magazine with decent capabilities a superscript might look more professional. This article, though, isn't comparing modern PCs to modern mainframes, so no need to wax indignant. --- Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313 /* If you can't say something nice, say it in Yiddish. */ -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Tom Brennan Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 01:26 I don't know what's going on with the comparisons lately, but here's a fun one. Paging the fact checkers... https://spectrum.ieee.org/ibm-mainframe -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Another old mainframe comparison
Pictures (aka icons) are the preferred choice of those who cannot read. On 22/12/2021 22:42, Tomasz Rola wrote: > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 08:04:01AM -0600, Dave Jones wrote: >> "But I wonder, are we using all that computation effectively to >> make as much difference as our forebears did after the leap from >> pencil and paper to the 7090?" >> >> IMHO, no. >> DJ > Of course we do. Try to animate an icon using just pen and paper, like > computer users had to do decades ago. They lacked proper graphics, > they had to draw icons in their notebooks. > > Still not convinced? Okay, so try animating your icon with pen > every 30 seconds. > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Another old mainframe comparison
+1 On 22/12/2021 14:04, Dave Jones wrote: > "But I wonder, are we using all that computation effectively to make as > much difference as our forebears did after the leap from pencil and paper to > the 7090?" > > IMHO, no. > DJ > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > . > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Another old mainframe comparison
Oops. Yeah, what he said. --- Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313 /* Few people can keep up with written law. They shouldn't have to. If the written law is basically the Ten Commandments writ large, and in keeping with customary morality, you can be a good citizen by leading a decent life, without undue study or reflection. That ought to be enough. But when laws become so numerous, detailed, and technical that decent people find themselves running afoul of them just by behaving in customary ways, something is seriously wrong. -Joseph Sobran, 1999-09-09 */ -Original Message- From: robi...@dodo.com.au Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 17:51 um, 10e15 is 10 x 10**15, or 1e16, --- On 2021-12-23 01:59, Bob Bridges wrote: > I'm enjoying the article so far, and I'm sure contributors will chime > in who are far more knowledgeable than I. But the first thing I > notice is that he spends some time estimating how inferior the early > 7090 was to a modern laptop in terms of clock speed, RAM, and > tape-driven I/O, and concludes "So now the 7090 looks to have run at > about a quadrillionth (10-15) the speed of your 2021 laptop." The > first thing that leaps out at me is that he appears to be multiplying > the three comparative numbers to come up with a quadrillion. But that > isn't the proper way to compare speeds, is it? Surely the proper > comparison is only the slowest of the three. > > Not to mention the silly typographical error of writing 10 to the 15th > as "10-15". I use "10e15", myself, though I suppose in a magazine > with decent capabilities a superscript might look more professional. > > This article, though, isn't comparing modern PCs to modern mainframes, > so no need to wax indignant. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Another old mainframe comparison
On 2021-12-23 01:59, Bob Bridges wrote: I'm enjoying the article so far, and I'm sure contributors will chime in who are far more knowledgeable than I. But the first thing I notice is that he spends some time estimating how inferior the early 7090 was to a modern laptop in terms of clock speed, RAM, and tape-driven I/O, and concludes "So now the 7090 looks to have run at about a quadrillionth (10-15) the speed of your 2021 laptop." The first thing that leaps out at me is that he appears to be multiplying the three comparative numbers to come up with a quadrillion. But that isn't the proper way to compare speeds, is it? Surely the proper comparison is only the slowest of the three. Not to mention the silly typographical error of writing 10 to the 15th as "10-15". I use "10e15", myself, um, 10e15 is 10 x 10**15, or 1e16, though I suppose in a magazine with decent capabilities a superscript might look more professional. This article, though, isn't comparing modern PCs to modern mainframes, so no need to wax indignant. --- Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Another old mainframe comparison
On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 08:04:01AM -0600, Dave Jones wrote: > "But I wonder, are we using all that computation effectively to > make as much difference as our forebears did after the leap from > pencil and paper to the 7090?" > > IMHO, no. > DJ Of course we do. Try to animate an icon using just pen and paper, like computer users had to do decades ago. They lacked proper graphics, they had to draw icons in their notebooks. Still not convinced? Okay, so try animating your icon with pen every 30 seconds. -- Regards, Tomasz Rola -- ** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. ** ** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home** ** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... ** ** ** ** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_r...@bigfoot.com ** -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Another old mainframe comparison
I'm enjoying the article so far, and I'm sure contributors will chime in who are far more knowledgeable than I. But the first thing I notice is that he spends some time estimating how inferior the early 7090 was to a modern laptop in terms of clock speed, RAM, and tape-driven I/O, and concludes "So now the 7090 looks to have run at about a quadrillionth (10-15) the speed of your 2021 laptop." The first thing that leaps out at me is that he appears to be multiplying the three comparative numbers to come up with a quadrillion. But that isn't the proper way to compare speeds, is it? Surely the proper comparison is only the slowest of the three. Not to mention the silly typographical error of writing 10 to the 15th as "10-15". I use "10e15", myself, though I suppose in a magazine with decent capabilities a superscript might look more professional. This article, though, isn't comparing modern PCs to modern mainframes, so no need to wax indignant. --- Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382-7313 /* If you can't say something nice, say it in Yiddish. */ -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Tom Brennan Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2021 01:26 I don't know what's going on with the comparisons lately, but here's a fun one. Paging the fact checkers... https://spectrum.ieee.org/ibm-mainframe -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Another old mainframe comparison
Thank you for the pointers to those two very interesting articles. I never the introduction of microcode linked to the 1401 compatibility of S/360 - I thought this was an emulator that used the 360 ISA as-is? In the other one, I think what we need to take away from that is how the scarcity of nearly everything led to enormous efficiency, and the plenitude of today leads to the enormous waste we experience. In not having to worry too much about segment registers some fundamental mental imagery of what computing is, got lost. Part of the mainframe still running those important workloads is linked to how very well a small, efficient kernel can cope with layers of abusively inefficient software piled on top of it. So we need a different scale for those comparisons. Otherwise, we need to go investigate into the reality of my phone not being able to run all transactions of a medium size commercial bank. Best regards, René. > On 22 Dec 2021, at 08:15, Mike Schwab wrote: > > https://spectrum.ieee.org/building-the-system360-mainframe-nearly-destroyed-ibm > > On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 6:26 AM Tom Brennan > wrote: >> >> I don't know what's going on with the comparisons lately, but here's a >> fun one. Paging the fact checkers... >> https://spectrum.ieee.org/ibm-mainframe >> >> -- >> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >> send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > > > > -- > Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA > Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Another old mainframe comparison
Burroughs had the B5000 in 1961. At 100,000 instructions per second, the 7090 wasn't all that fast. Pilot ACE, in 1951, could execute 15,000 instructions per second. On 2021-12-22 17:26, Tom Brennan wrote: I don't know what's going on with the comparisons lately, but here's a fun one. Paging the fact checkers... https://spectrum.ieee.org/ibm-mainframe -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Another old mainframe comparison
"But I wonder, are we using all that computation effectively to make as much difference as our forebears did after the leap from pencil and paper to the 7090?" IMHO, no. DJ -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Another old mainframe comparison
https://spectrum.ieee.org/building-the-system360-mainframe-nearly-destroyed-ibm On Wed, Dec 22, 2021 at 6:26 AM Tom Brennan wrote: > > I don't know what's going on with the comparisons lately, but here's a > fun one. Paging the fact checkers... > https://spectrum.ieee.org/ibm-mainframe > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Another old mainframe comparison
I don't know what's going on with the comparisons lately, but here's a fun one. Paging the fact checkers... https://spectrum.ieee.org/ibm-mainframe -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
