Re: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds

2019-08-18 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 20:43:52 +, Seymour J Metz wrote: > > 5. No memory pricing for any of the 7 dwarves (BUNCH, RCA and General > Electric), >Bendix, Data General, DEC, PB, Philco, SDS, Sylvania, TRW or the major > European manufacturers. > The DEC PDP-6 was relentlessly asynchronous

Re: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds

2019-08-18 Thread Seymour J Metz
Sent: Friday, August 16, 2019 7:28 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds I'd note this fun page: https://secure-web.cisco.com

Re: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds

2019-08-16 Thread Phil Smith III
I'd note this fun page: https://web.archive.org/web/20170108175446/http://www.jcmit.com/memoryprice.htm -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff /

Re: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds

2019-08-15 Thread Paul Gilmartin
On Thu, 15 Aug 2019 00:46:00 -0500, Support, DUNNIT SYSTEMS LTD. wrote: >2 digit years I recall a shop who throughout the 70's implemented 1 digit >year dates across their files because of the precious cost and availability of >DASD space. In 1979, someone there took are hard look at what

Re: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds

2019-08-15 Thread Jesse 1 Robinson
@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Re: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds > foremoms and foredads Some of us were there at the time. I've lost track of the number of times that I've criticized something only to be accused, decades later, of only having "20-20 hindsight&quo

Re: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds

2019-08-15 Thread Seymour J Metz
List on behalf of Clark Morris Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2019 6:29 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds [Default] On 14 Aug 2019 10:21:17 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main sme...@gmu.edu (Seymour J Metz) wrote: >There were other opti

Re: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds

2019-08-15 Thread Seymour J Metz
u.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Jesse 1 Robinson Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2019 6:50 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds It's a modern day cottage industry--or hobby maybe-

Re: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds

2019-08-15 Thread Seymour J Metz
bytes. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Nightwatch RenBand Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2019 11:33 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction

Re: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds

2019-08-15 Thread Matthew Stitt
I worked at such company that had 1 digit years. The routine(s) to keep them straight across the decades I never did fully understand. OTOH, I also worked at a small Insurance company. The best (non) joke was when a client called regarding a new build discount she was getting on her house.

Re: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds

2019-08-15 Thread Mike Schwab
I interned in a catalog sales company in the marketing department in 1984. Used 1 digit year and purged sales data over 6 years old. On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 12:46 AM Support, DUNNIT SYSTEMS LTD. wrote: > > 2 digit years I recall a shop who throughout the 70's implemented 1 digit > year

Re: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds

2019-08-14 Thread Support, DUNNIT SYSTEMS LTD.
2 digit years I recall a shop who throughout the 70's implemented 1 digit year dates across their files because of the precious cost and availability of DASD space. In 1979, someone there took are hard look at what the future held in store. So they did a full conversion project and changed

Re: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds

2019-08-14 Thread Clark Morris
List On Behalf Of >Clark Morris >Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2019 3:29 PM >To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU >Subject: (External):Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds > >[Default] On 14 Aug 2019 10:21:17 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main >sme...@gmu.edu (Seymour J Metz)

Re: Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds

2019-08-14 Thread Jesse 1 Robinson
-Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Clark Morris Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2019 3:29 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: (External):Reason for 2 digit years was Re: Instruction speeds [Default] On 14 Aug 2019 10:21:17 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main