From artgodwin@gmail.com Thu May 1 11:27:08 2025 From: Adrian Godwin To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Compute's Gazette returning Date: Thu, 01 May 2025 12:26:52 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2438415493016249015==" --===============2438415493016249015== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks for the pointer. I found https://www.computesgazette.com/generative-ai-and-game-development-a-necessar= y-evil/ particularly interesting. I tend to agree with developer he interacted with : the use of these tools devalues the product. It may be that there are some uses that are valuable, as the writer tried to determine. But many visual images have characteristics that immediately mark them out as AI generated. Perhaps images are particularly prone to pattern-matching and categorisation, as it's something our brains are really good at. For me, in the case of the image he shows, that's the high contrast, strong colours and sharp lines. That is a style that predates 'AI slop' and perhaps is especially common in retro game areas (it echoes early computer graphics, albeit with better resolution) but seems to have been picked up by AI generators .. or perhaps it's just the choice of the person using the tool, or a bias in the training data. On Thu, May 1, 2025 at 12:43=E2=80=AFAM Bill Degnan via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > I have COMPUTE! COMPUTE. and COMPUTE II magazines. And the Gazettes for > Commodore, etc. There were a lot of variations for different groups. > b > > On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 6:58=E2=80=AFPM Cameron Kaiser via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > > > I saw on the BASIC Programming group on FaceBook that a new venture is > > going to start publishing Compute's Gazette again. > > > > > > https://www.computesgazette.com/ > > > > > > Perhaps interesting to some of you. > > > > Their recent articles are hopefully not an indicator of what they're > > likely to > > publish, but because they're trying to cover the entire retro scene, it's > > going > > to be more COMPUTE and less Gazette. Which is fine, but it's not Gazette. > > > > -- > > ------------------------------------ personal: > > http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ -- > > Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * > > ckaiser(a)floodgap.com > > -- The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws. -- Tacitus > > --------- > > > > > --===============2438415493016249015==-- From tubastuff@yahoo.com Thu May 1 14:23:11 2025 From: Chuck Guzis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Compute's Gazette returning Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 19:20:49 -0700 Message-ID: <18e81442-673f-49e6-963f-8110272b1e89@yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <228c0d3f-4762-468b-9bd3-345be6aa667d@jetnet.ab.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0257137738590633424==" --===============0257137738590633424== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I miss Kilobaud, myself. W2NSD really had a great rag for the early micro crowd. I think Wayne passed in 2013. --Chuck --===============0257137738590633424==-- From billdegnan@gmail.com Thu May 1 18:31:16 2025 From: Bill Degnan To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] kennett classic surplus sale open, NeXT cube for sale, more. Date: Thu, 01 May 2025 14:30:58 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============9132583111941278642==" --===============9132583111941278642== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit https://www.kennettclassic.com/surplus/ Lots of items remain. Priced cheap for pick-up only Also have a complete NeXT cube with display, mouse, keyboard. SCSI2SD card harddrive installed. Works $2700. Will consider shipping this. Contact me privately with questions. Bill --===============9132583111941278642==-- From epekstrom@gmail.com Fri May 2 15:06:06 2025 From: Peter Ekstrom To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Fri, 02 May 2025 11:05:50 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8527511811371866128==" --===============8527511811371866128== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello PDP-11 Gurus, I am looking for a better time-keeping alternative than the LTC in my PDP-11/23-PLUS. Is the KWV11-C card the best option for that or are there other options? I have looked around a bit and have seen some other RTC boards but don't know if they would work. -Peter --===============8527511811371866128==-- From lists@glitchwrks.com Fri May 2 15:46:15 2025 From: Jonathan Chapman To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Fri, 02 May 2025 15:46:03 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0670329411961052873==" --===============0670329411961052873== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Is the KWV11-C card the best option for that or are there other options? I > have looked > around a bit and have seen some other RTC boards but don't know if they > would work. There are third-party options that are KW11 compatible and generally have mor= e features. They're also usually nearly free when you find them! Beware of ba= ttery damage, many had a NiCd cell or pack mounted on the PCB. Thanks, Jonathan --===============0670329411961052873==-- From ethan.dicks@gmail.com Fri May 2 19:44:32 2025 From: Ethan Dicks To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Fri, 02 May 2025 15:44:14 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3Ch9XrYbRK4ouRU464oM5So4iAfM2j4xYo8C21xajSGCIHK-Ese8?= =?utf-8?q?Y92XD5SsIU0tlErlrwVk09KW5w=5FW6LyT8iz9m87EnRMtskknyEZ97VmSY=3D=40?= =?utf-8?q?glitchwrks=2Ecom=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5949936451768470227==" --===============5949936451768470227== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, May 2, 2025 at 11:53=E2=80=AFAM Jonathan Chapman via cctalk wrote: > > Is the KWV11-C card the best option for that or are there other options? I > > have looked around a bit and have seen some other RTC boards but don't kn= ow if they > > would work. > > There are third-party options that are KW11 compatible and generally have m= ore features. They're also usually nearly free when you find them! Beware of = battery damage, many had a NiCd cell or pack mounted on the PCB. I have a Grant Technologies 306A/307 I found in a MicroPDP-11/53 I bought a few years back. Yes... NiCd damage under the battery, fortunately very minor. -ethan --===============5949936451768470227==-- From cz@alembic.crystel.com Fri May 2 22:08:42 2025 From: Christopher Zach To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Fri, 02 May 2025 18:08:26 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8601469320201296371==" --===============8601469320201296371== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Interesting. I have one does it emulate a kw11? Can it keep the date and time= between reboots?=20 On May 2, 2025 3:44:14 PM EDT, Ethan Dicks via cctalk wrote: >On Fri, May 2, 2025 at 11:53=E2=80=AFAM Jonathan Chapman via cctalk > wrote: >> > Is the KWV11-C card the best option for that or are there other options?= I >> > have looked around a bit and have seen some other RTC boards but don't k= now if they >> > would work. >> >> There are third-party options that are KW11 compatible and generally have = more features. They're also usually nearly free when you find them! Beware of= battery damage, many had a NiCd cell or pack mounted on the PCB. > >I have a Grant Technologies 306A/307 I found in a MicroPDP-11/53 I >bought a few years back. Yes... NiCd damage under the battery, >fortunately very minor. > >-ethan --===============8601469320201296371==-- From epekstrom@gmail.com Sat May 3 17:25:33 2025 From: Peter Ekstrom To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Sat, 03 May 2025 13:25:14 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3563308489324010618==" --===============3563308489324010618== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Thanks for the info! I'm going to have to widen my search for sure. One of those 306A or 307 cards sounds like they should work. - Peter On Sat, May 3, 2025 at 12:08 PM Christopher Zach via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > Interesting. I have one does it emulate a kw11? Can it keep the date and > time between reboots? > > On May 2, 2025 3:44:14 PM EDT, Ethan Dicks via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > >On Fri, May 2, 2025 at 11:53 AM Jonathan Chapman via cctalk > > wrote: > >> > Is the KWV11-C card the best option for that or are there other > options? I > >> > have looked around a bit and have seen some other RTC boards but > don't know if they > >> > would work. > >> > >> There are third-party options that are KW11 compatible and generally > have more features. They're also usually nearly free when you find them! > Beware of battery damage, many had a NiCd cell or pack mounted on the PCB. > > > >I have a Grant Technologies 306A/307 I found in a MicroPDP-11/53 I > >bought a few years back. Yes... NiCd damage under the battery, > >fortunately very minor. > > > >-ethan > --===============3563308489324010618==-- From epekstrom@gmail.com Sat May 3 18:00:11 2025 From: Peter Ekstrom To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] QRAM-2 SAB-1 manual? Date: Sat, 03 May 2025 13:59:46 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1135193753688702706==" --===============1135193753688702706== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit So I have one of these boards, but I haven't been able to locate a manual for this specific one. Does anyone have the manual for this specific board? - Peter --===============1135193753688702706==-- From brian@quarterbyte.com Sat May 3 20:46:30 2025 From: Brian Knittel To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Mac SE disk cleaning Date: Sat, 03 May 2025 13:46:23 -0700 Message-ID: <39B4C71A-D2BD-4544-86CD-2D0D01E32524@quarterbyte.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7486257936248805945==" --===============7486257936248805945== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Passing on a request: anyone know of a way to erase user data off a Mac SE ha= rd disk that will leave the disk and Mac OS intact? The machine works and cou= ld go to a new home but has privileged medical data on it so just deleting fi= les isn=E2=80=99t sufficient =E2=80=94 the free space has to be overwritten. = Are there any utilities available on floppy disk that could do it? Plan B is = taking a sledgehammer to the drive, but seems a waste to go right to euthanas= ia if there=E2=80=99s another option. --===============7486257936248805945==-- From wayne.sudol@hotmail.com Sat May 3 21:13:35 2025 From: Wayne S To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Mac SE disk cleaning Date: Sat, 03 May 2025 21:13:29 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <39B4C71A-D2BD-4544-86CD-2D0D01E32524@quarterbyte.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3373541439976248921==" --===============3373541439976248921== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There=E2=80=99s lots of article on this just google If you want to make sure, just delete the files in question and write a progr= am that opens a file, writes about a 1 mb string of zeros to it , then closes= it Repeat until disk is full. Then delete the files that were created. Disk was = about 20 mb capacity, so it shouldn=E2=80=99t take long. Sent from my iPhone > On May 3, 2025, at 13:53, Brian Knittel via cctalk wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BFPassing on a request: anyone know of a way to erase user data off = a Mac SE hard disk that will leave the disk and Mac OS intact? The machine wo= rks and could go to a new home but has privileged medical data on it so just = deleting files isn=E2=80=99t sufficient =E2=80=94 the free space has to be ov= erwritten. Are there any utilities available on floppy disk that could do it?= Plan B is taking a sledgehammer to the drive, but seems a waste to go right = to euthanasia if there=E2=80=99s another option. >=20 --===============3373541439976248921==-- From cisin@xenosoft.com Sat May 3 21:13:51 2025 From: Fred Cisin To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Mac SE disk cleaning Date: Sat, 03 May 2025 14:13:45 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <39B4C71A-D2BD-4544-86CD-2D0D01E32524@quarterbyte.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2264142538862014657==" --===============2264142538862014657== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 3 May 2025, Brian Knittel via cctalk wrote: > Passing on a request: anyone know of a way to erase user data off a Mac SE = hard disk that will leave the disk and Mac OS intact? The machine works and c= ould go to a new home but has privileged medical data on it so just deleting = files isn=E2=80=99t sufficient =E2=80=94 the free space has to be overwritten= . Are there any utilities available on floppy disk that could do it? Plan B i= s taking a sledgehammer to the drive, but seems a waste to go right to euthan= asia if there=E2=80=99s another option. Start by erasing everything on the disk that you want to get rid of. THEN, before doing anything else, fill up the disk completely, with large=20 files and small ones. If you don't have files to do that with, open your word processor, and=20 type "404 " a few thousand times; you can cut and paste to get more, with=20 less manual typing. Then, erase those, and fill it up again, with different files. hexadecimal E5 is a good filler. If you want, do that a few more times. THEN "defrag" the disk. Fill it once more, then erase the filler. All of the space previously used by the "sensitive" files will have been=20 overwritten. --===============2264142538862014657==-- From lewissa78@gmail.com Sat May 3 21:18:23 2025 From: Steve Lewis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sat, 03 May 2025 16:18:09 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3497836033107153870==" --===============3497836033107153870== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Is anyone out there familiar with the Wang 2200 BASIC? Of about 1973/1974 C. Corti, I think you still have one of these complete and runnable? My question is, was its basically really "built" using TTL logic/chips? The system didn't really have a microprocessor (neither did the early Alto, right?) I recall that system had many boards, the whole "CPU" box was external to the monitor (and in the earliest versions, the power supply was also a large external box). I can't really fathom creating a BASIC out of raw TTL, or maybe I'm misunderstanding the approach. -Steve --===============3497836033107153870==-- From henry.r.bent@gmail.com Sat May 3 21:40:05 2025 From: Henry Bent To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Mac SE disk cleaning Date: Sat, 03 May 2025 17:39:45 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <39B4C71A-D2BD-4544-86CD-2D0D01E32524@quarterbyte.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6435593270087237742==" --===============6435593270087237742== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 3 May 2025 at 17:03, Brian Knittel via cctalk wrote: > Passing on a request: anyone know of a way to erase user data off a Mac SE > hard disk that will leave the disk and Mac OS intact? The machine works and > could go to a new home but has privileged medical data on it so just > deleting files isn=E2=80=99t sufficient =E2=80=94 the free space has to be = overwritten. Are > there any utilities available on floppy disk that could do it? Plan B is > taking a sledgehammer to the drive, but seems a waste to go right to > euthanasia if there=E2=80=99s another option. Is there a particular reason to leave MacOS intact? After removing all the user data you might as well have a fresh copy of the OS, so I'm not sure why you wouldn't zero the entire disk and then do an OS reinstall. That's certainly the most secure way to do it. -Henry --===============6435593270087237742==-- From cam.k801@gmail.com Sat May 3 21:52:03 2025 From: Cameron Kelly To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Mac SE disk cleaning Date: Sat, 03 May 2025 17:51:47 -0400 Message-ID: <24036d90-d1b1-41a8-a222-77b03717fc70@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <39B4C71A-D2BD-4544-86CD-2D0D01E32524@quarterbyte.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5622216257459519242==" --===============5622216257459519242== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If you're able to attach the disk to any computer running a Unix/Linux=20 OS, a simple dd command should be able to wipe the disk clean: dd if=3D/dev/urandom of=3D/dev/sdb bs=3D1M status=3Dprogress obviously you'd want to make sure that /dev/sdb is the disk you want to=20 erase. On 2025-05-03 4:46 p.m., Brian Knittel via cctalk wrote: > Passing on a request: anyone know of a way to erase user data off a Mac SE = hard disk that will leave the disk and Mac OS intact? The machine works and c= ould go to a new home but has privileged medical data on it so just deleting = files isn=E2=80=99t sufficient =E2=80=94 the free space has to be overwritten= . Are there any utilities available on floppy disk that could do it? Plan B i= s taking a sledgehammer to the drive, but seems a waste to go right to euthan= asia if there=E2=80=99s another option. > --===============5622216257459519242==-- From lewissa78@gmail.com Sat May 3 22:33:00 2025 From: Steve Lewis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Looking for IBM System/3 BASIC book Date: Sat, 03 May 2025 17:32:46 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5289089365194874645==" --===============5289089365194874645== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Per the link below, it mentions a reference manual to IBM's BASIC for the System/3 as part number GC34-0001-1 but that no digital copies are known to exist. https://manx-docs.org/details.php/19,11119 I know at VCF East they've been trying to restore one of these. Not sure if any functional system still exists (especially probably not the Model 6 with CRT and disk drive). Anyway, if anyone happens to have the physical manual described above, I'm just curious if in the first few pages was it publication date? (before or after 1970?) Also - since IBM went out of their way to re-use the BASIC from the System/3, does that imply there was never a variation of BASIC written for the IBM 360/370? (asking because from my understanding, the System/3 was a lot more difficult to program and operate -- and yet someone wrote a BASIC interpreter for it). -Steve --===============5289089365194874645==-- From ethan.dicks@gmail.com Sun May 4 02:07:55 2025 From: Ethan Dicks To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Sat, 03 May 2025 22:07:39 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8537900574803641653==" --===============8537900574803641653== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, May 3, 2025 at 12:08=E2=80=AFPM Christopher Zach via cctalk wrote: > Interesting. I have one does it emulate a kw11? Can it keep the date and ti= me between reboots? I think it's a KWV11 plus an RTC. That MicroPDP-11/53 came with MicroRSX-11 and there was a program for reading the RTC. It complains when I boot it up and the board is missing. It shouldn't be impossible to figure out how it all works and write a program for RT-11 or possibly 2BSD to read the time. Oh... there are product variants for how much of the board is populated. I think mine is "RTC only". -ethan --===============8537900574803641653==-- From classiccmp@fjl.co.uk Sun May 4 04:02:18 2025 From: Frank Leonhardt To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Mac SE disk cleaning Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 13:33:27 +1000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <39B4C71A-D2BD-4544-86CD-2D0D01E32524@quarterbyte.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3320860972337235825==" --===============3320860972337235825== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 4/05/2025 6:46 am, Brian Knittel via cctalk wrote: > Passing on a request: anyone know of a way to erase user data off a Mac SE = hard disk that will leave the disk and Mac OS intact? The machine works and c= ould go to a new home but has privileged medical data on it so just deleting = files isn=E2=80=99t sufficient =E2=80=94 the free space has to be overwritten= . Are there any utilities available on floppy disk that could do it? Plan B i= s taking a sledgehammer to the drive, but seems a waste to go right to euthan= asia if there=E2=80=99s another option. As a few others have pointed out the easiest way to erase files to they=20 can't be undeleted using a simple utility is to delete them and then=20 fill up the disk with a large file containin zeros. Or simply keep=20 copying an existing inocuous file until you run out od disk space (not=20 difficult if you copy it, then copy both copies and then all four, eight=20 and so on. It works on all systems. HOWEVER this does not destroy data to the point where people like me=20 can't possibly recover anything given enough time and incentive. Don't=20 assume this is good enough for security sentiive infomration. I won't go into the details (buy the book!) but one easy example is data=20 on bad sectors that have been mapped out and marked "do not use" by the=20 OS, but are very likely still readable if you try hard. I suggest a balanced view. Is anyone going to spend time and money=20 trying to recover the deleted data, and if so, how much? Unless it's a=20 lot of time and money then deleting the files and zeroing the empty=20 space is probably good enough. Regards, Frank. --===============3320860972337235825==-- From jsw@ieee.org Sun May 4 06:09:18 2025 From: Jerry Weiss To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 01:08:35 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1950005395328496194==" --===============1950005395328496194== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable My note in the DEC VCF forum might give you some more background. https://forum.vcfed.org/index.php?threads/real-time-clock-card-gtsc306a-addin= g-calender.71542/ https://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/gtsc/979-0021-306_GTSC306_Sep88.pdf The DEC KWV-11 is designed to support analog and digital acquisition boards. See EK-ADV11-OP-002 ADV11-A, KWV11-A, AAV11-A, DRV11 User's Manual.pdf. On Sat, May 3, 2025 at 9:18=E2=80=AFPM Ethan Dicks via cctalk wrote: > On Sat, May 3, 2025 at 12:08=E2=80=AFPM Christopher Zach via cctalk > wrote: > > Interesting. I have one does it emulate a kw11? Can it keep the date and > time between reboots? > > I think it's a KWV11 plus an RTC. That MicroPDP-11/53 came with > MicroRSX-11 and there was a program for reading the RTC. It complains > when I boot it up and the board is missing. > > It shouldn't be impossible to figure out how it all works and write a > program for RT-11 or possibly 2BSD to read the time. > > Oh... there are product variants for how much of the board is > populated. I think mine is "RTC only". > > -ethan > --=20 jsw(a)ieee.org --===============1950005395328496194==-- From ethan.dicks@gmail.com Sun May 4 06:15:23 2025 From: Ethan Dicks To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 02:15:06 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5888176249210472850==" --===============5888176249210472850== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, May 3, 2025 at 12:08=E2=80=AFPM Christopher Zach via cctalk wrote: > Interesting. I have one does it emulate a kw11? Can it keep the date and ti= me between reboots? > > > >I have a Grant Technologies 306A/307... OK. I did some digging around for 3 year old conversations and links. The Grant Technology 306A is the fully-stuffed KWV11 + RTC board. If it's 1/4 stuffed with just the RTC portion, it's a 307. Manual at: http://bitsavers.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de/pdf/gtsc/979-0021-306= _GTSC306_Sep88.pdf RT-11 routines at: https://archive.decromancer.ca/pdp-11.classiccmp.org/RT-11/freeware/decus11/1= 10645 One 306A sold last year on fleabay for $27 plus shipping. If I had seen it, I probably would have bought it. I don't think there are any photos easily findable online. The manual on bitsavers has some great technical details but sadly no schematic. Enjoy, -ethan --===============5888176249210472850==-- From ethan.dicks@gmail.com Sun May 4 06:22:29 2025 From: Ethan Dicks To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 02:22:14 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2644293784677947705==" --===============2644293784677947705== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, May 4, 2025 at 2:09=E2=80=AFAM Jerry Weiss wrote: > My note in the DEC VCF forum might give you some more background. > > https://forum.vcfed.org/index.php?threads/real-time-clock-card-gtsc306a-add= ing-calender.71542/ > https://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/gtsc/979-0021-306_GTSC306_Sep88.pdf Thanks for the link to the VCF post. I added to it just now with a photo of my 307. -ethan --===============2644293784677947705==-- From ethan.dicks@gmail.com Sun May 4 06:24:09 2025 From: Ethan Dicks To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 02:23:49 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7950049296644321754==" --===============7950049296644321754== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, May 4, 2025 at 2:15=E2=80=AFAM Ethan Dicks = wrote: > > >I have a Grant Technologies 306A/307... > > The Grant Technology 306A is the fully-stuffed KWV11 + RTC board. If > it's 1/4 stuffed with just the RTC portion, it's a 307. > > Manual at: http://bitsavers.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de/pdf/gtsc/979-0021-3= 06_GTSC306_Sep88.pdf I read deeper. The manual only says that the RTC is "optional". Doesn't make a clear distinction by part number. I'm still pretty sure the 307 designation was RTC-only, no KWV11 parts populated. -ethan > RT-11 routines at: > https://archive.decromancer.ca/pdp-11.classiccmp.org/RT-11/freeware/decus11= /110645 > > One 306A sold last year on fleabay for $27 plus shipping. If I had > seen it, I probably would have bought it. > > I don't think there are any photos easily findable online. The manual > on bitsavers has some great technical details but sadly no schematic. > > Enjoy, > > -ethan --===============7950049296644321754==-- From jos.dreesen@greenmail.ch Sun May 4 08:22:37 2025 From: jos To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 10:11:11 +0200 Message-ID: <3c715554-0256-4cce-96d4-62b61c1bc9b3@greenmail.ch> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8713639648430259283==" --===============8713639648430259283== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > I recall that system had many boards, the whole "CPU" box was external to > the monitor (and in the earliest versions, the power supply was also a > large external box). I can't really fathom creating a BASIC out of raw > TTL, or maybe I'm misunderstanding the approach. You build a processor with some TTL, and then implement a BASIC on that micro= processor. There is always this intermediate step, no machine executes BASIC directly in= TTL. Look here for an example of a processor (Datapoint 2200) in TTL : https://bitsavers.org/pdf/datapoint/2200/jdreesen_shematics/DP2200_mb.pdf Jos --===============8713639648430259283==-- From cz@alembic.crystel.com Sun May 4 14:05:50 2025 From: Christopher Zach To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 10:05:37 -0400 Message-ID: <3FFF27BB-13B3-41C0-AAFA-9A79731D3288@alembic.crystel.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4849390080240120724==" --===============4849390080240120724== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Neat! Is the rsx code or source code for the rtc anywhere? It's less necessar= y now that we have ntp from the tcp stack (thank you bqt) but it would still = be cool On May 4, 2025 2:08:35 AM EDT, Jerry Weiss via cctalk wrote: >My note in the DEC VCF forum might give you some more background. > >https://forum.vcfed.org/index.php?threads/real-time-clock-card-gtsc306a-addi= ng-calender.71542/ >https://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/gtsc/979-0021-306_GTSC306_Sep88.pdf > >The DEC KWV-11 is designed to support analog and digital acquisition >boards. See EK-ADV11-OP-002 ADV11-A, KWV11-A, AAV11-A, DRV11 User's >Manual.pdf. > >On Sat, May 3, 2025 at 9:18=E2=80=AFPM Ethan Dicks via cctalk >wrote: > >> On Sat, May 3, 2025 at 12:08=E2=80=AFPM Christopher Zach via cctalk >> wrote: >> > Interesting. I have one does it emulate a kw11? Can it keep the date and >> time between reboots? >> >> I think it's a KWV11 plus an RTC. That MicroPDP-11/53 came with >> MicroRSX-11 and there was a program for reading the RTC. It complains >> when I boot it up and the board is missing. >> >> It shouldn't be impossible to figure out how it all works and write a >> program for RT-11 or possibly 2BSD to read the time. >> >> Oh... there are product variants for how much of the board is >> populated. I think mine is "RTC only". >> >> -ethan >> > > >--=20 >jsw(a)ieee.org --===============4849390080240120724==-- From julf@julf.com Sun May 4 14:26:32 2025 From: Johan Helsingius To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 16:26:21 +0200 Message-ID: <296be373-deb8-491a-b64c-e1dcd6905a02@Julf.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5836251421524722314==" --===============5836251421524722314== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 03/05/2025 23:18, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote: > Is anyone out there familiar with the Wang 2200 BASIC? Of about 1973/1974 I worked on them for a couple of years back in the day. Still carry the trauma. > My question is, was its basically really "built" using TTL logic/chips? > The system didn't really have a microprocessor (neither did the early > Alto, right?) So your question isn't really about the BASIC, I guess, but about the hardware? > I recall that system had many boards, the whole "CPU" box was external to > the monitor (and in the earliest versions, the power supply was also a > large external box). I can't really fathom creating a BASIC out of raw > TTL, or maybe I'm misunderstanding the approach. You build up a CPU (and the rest) from TTL, just like before that you would have built it from discrete transistors or even tubes. All a microprocessor is is just a bunch of TTL-like MOS logic circuits (made of metal oxide semiconductor elelements) combined on one chip. Julf --===============5836251421524722314==-- From epekstrom@gmail.com Sun May 4 15:35:22 2025 From: Peter Ekstrom To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 11:35:03 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3FFF27BB-13B3-41C0-AAFA-9A79731D3288@alembic.crystel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5693820838956279696==" --===============5693820838956279696== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It is still a 'good to have' for those running real PDP-11 machines without I/D support, like the 11/23 and 11.23+. The TCP/IP stack Johnny has written works great on the machines (emulated or real) that do support I/D space. I would really like to have Johnny's TCP/IP stack on my 11/23+ but I understand it is a big undertaking to modify the stack to work on non-I/D space systems. DECnet works though but lacks NTP-like utilities. -Peter On Sun, May 4, 2025 at 10:23=E2=80=AFAM Christopher Zach via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > Neat! Is the rsx code or source code for the rtc anywhere? It's less > necessary now that we have ntp from the tcp stack (thank you bqt) but it > would still be cool > > On May 4, 2025 2:08:35 AM EDT, Jerry Weiss via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > >My note in the DEC VCF forum might give you some more background. > > > > > https://forum.vcfed.org/index.php?threads/real-time-clock-card-gtsc306a-add= ing-calender.71542/ > > > https://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/gtsc/979-0021-306_GTSC306_Sep88.pdf > > > >The DEC KWV-11 is designed to support analog and digital acquisition > >boards. See EK-ADV11-OP-002 ADV11-A, KWV11-A, AAV11-A, DRV11 User's > >Manual.pdf. > > > >On Sat, May 3, 2025 at 9:18=E2=80=AFPM Ethan Dicks via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> > >wrote: > > > >> On Sat, May 3, 2025 at 12:08=E2=80=AFPM Christopher Zach via cctalk > >> wrote: > >> > Interesting. I have one does it emulate a kw11? Can it keep the date > and > >> time between reboots? > >> > >> I think it's a KWV11 plus an RTC. That MicroPDP-11/53 came with > >> MicroRSX-11 and there was a program for reading the RTC. It complains > >> when I boot it up and the board is missing. > >> > >> It shouldn't be impossible to figure out how it all works and write a > >> program for RT-11 or possibly 2BSD to read the time. > >> > >> Oh... there are product variants for how much of the board is > >> populated. I think mine is "RTC only". > >> > >> -ethan > >> > > > > > >-- > >jsw(a)ieee.org > --===============5693820838956279696==-- From mjd.bishop@emeritus-solutions.com Sun May 4 17:00:23 2025 From: Martin Bishop To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 17:00:15 +0000 Message-ID: <48f4bcc66c544c95880c4c059ed86670@emeritus-solutions.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4941361208636526095==" --===============4941361208636526095== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Source code for the rtc -- the KW11-L and KW11-P diagnostics are available on= BitSavers et al via goo. MAINDEC-11-DDKWA for the KW11-L line frequency clock and MAINDEC-11-DDKWB for the KW11-P real time clock (ie 50/60/10k and 100k Hz). I appreciate this is agricultural, but these are probably the best specificat= ions of the KW11's available. There are also the KW11-W watchdog timers, the Qbus derivatives, counter / ti= mers boards to support data acquisition, and of course the time of day clocks. Usage of the CSRs and vectors seems quite a fankle, but that is an XFU. =20 Specimen CSR/VEC/BR may be - line frequency / programmable clock 777546 / 100 / BR6 - watchdog timer 777544 / 104 / BR7 - ToD RTC float / float / BR4 HtH; Martin -----Original Message----- From: Peter Ekstrom via cctalk [mailto:cctalk(a)classiccmp.org]=20 Sent: 04 May 2025 15:35 To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Cc: Peter Ekstrom Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock It is still a 'good to have' for those running real PDP-11 machines without I= /D support, like the 11/23 and 11.23+. The TCP/IP stack Johnny has written works great on the machines (emulated or = real) that do support I/D space. I would really like to have Johnny's TCP/IP stack on my 11/23+ but I understa= nd it is a big undertaking to modify the stack to work on non-I/D space syste= ms. DECnet works though but lacks NTP-like utilities. -Peter On Sun, May 4, 2025 at 10:23=E2=80=AFAM Christopher Zach via cctalk < cctalk(= a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > Neat! Is the rsx code or source code for the rtc anywhere? It's less=20 > necessary now that we have ntp from the tcp stack (thank you bqt) but=20 > it would still be cool > > On May 4, 2025 2:08:35 AM EDT, Jerry Weiss via cctalk <=20 > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > >My note in the DEC VCF forum might give you some more background. > > > > > https://forum.vcfed.org/index.php?threads/real-time-clock-card-gtsc306 > a-adding-calender.71542/ > > > https://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/gtsc/979-0021-306_GTSC306_Sep8 > 8.pdf > > > >The DEC KWV-11 is designed to support analog and digital acquisition=20 > >boards. See EK-ADV11-OP-002 ADV11-A, KWV11-A, AAV11-A, DRV11 User's=20 > >Manual.pdf. > > > >On Sat, May 3, 2025 at 9:18=E2=80=AFPM Ethan Dicks via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> > >wrote: > > > >> On Sat, May 3, 2025 at 12:08=E2=80=AFPM Christopher Zach via cctalk=20 > >> wrote: > >> > Interesting. I have one does it emulate a kw11? Can it keep the=20 > >> > date > and > >> time between reboots? > >> > >> I think it's a KWV11 plus an RTC. That MicroPDP-11/53 came with > >> MicroRSX-11 and there was a program for reading the RTC. It=20 > >> complains when I boot it up and the board is missing. > >> > >> It shouldn't be impossible to figure out how it all works and write=20 > >> a program for RT-11 or possibly 2BSD to read the time. > >> > >> Oh... there are product variants for how much of the board is=20 > >> populated. I think mine is "RTC only". > >> > >> -ethan > >> > > > > > >-- > >jsw(a)ieee.org > --===============4941361208636526095==-- From glen.slick@gmail.com Sun May 4 17:10:29 2025 From: Glen Slick To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 10:10:13 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7472517570799024191==" --===============7472517570799024191== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit One option for a QBus time of day clock calendar card is the DIGITAL PATHWAYS INC TCU-50, for example: https://www.ebay.com/itm/177058714800 https://bitsavers.org/pdf/digitalPathways/tcu-50.pdf --===============7472517570799024191==-- From epekstrom@gmail.com Sun May 4 17:30:35 2025 From: Peter Ekstrom To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 13:30:16 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8680766052336998538==" --===============8680766052336998538== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Oh! Thank you for that! I didn't know about that one. -Peter On Sun, May 4, 2025 at 1:18=E2=80=AFPM Glen Slick via cctalk wrote: > One option for a QBus time of day clock calendar card is the DIGITAL > PATHWAYS INC TCU-50, for example: > > https://www.ebay.com/itm/177058714800 > > https://bitsavers.org/pdf/digitalPathways/tcu-50.pdf > --===============8680766052336998538==-- From lewissa78@gmail.com Sun May 4 17:36:43 2025 From: Steve Lewis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 12:36:30 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <296be373-deb8-491a-b64c-e1dcd6905a02@Julf.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0000614855127849784==" --===============0000614855127849784== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I get that, that a general purpose processor with a particular instruction set can be made up from TTLs (or vacuum tubes, or water sleuths, or metal gears, etc), and am familiar with the Datapoint (and it always was odd to me that Wang called their model the 2200 like the Datapoint 2200; I know both companies had various models). But aren't modern ASICs essentially that idea of software-implemented-in-hardware, mainly for dedicated performance? If you had "perfected" your software and accepted no code change was necessary, the coding did exactly whatever it is you needed to do, you can then commit that to some combination of hardware-logic-gate-stuff (for the sake of executing it wicked-fast, just as modern specialized crypto-ASICs do) ? I just had the impression Wang was doing some early form of this, as they referred to their BASIC as "hard-wired." Or in other words, you can't point to a single chip and say "there is the Wang BASIC ROM" (but I'm speculating, hence the question to try to clarify on their pre-1974 systems) -Steve On Sun, May 4, 2025 at 9:33 AM Johan Helsingius via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > On 03/05/2025 23:18, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote: > > Is anyone out there familiar with the Wang 2200 BASIC? Of about > 1973/1974 > > I worked on them for a couple of years back in the day. Still carry the > trauma. > > > My question is, was its basically really "built" using TTL logic/chips? > > The system didn't really have a microprocessor (neither did the early > > Alto, right?) > > So your question isn't really about the BASIC, I guess, but about the > hardware? > > > I recall that system had many boards, the whole "CPU" box was external to > > the monitor (and in the earliest versions, the power supply was also a > > large external box). I can't really fathom creating a BASIC out of raw > > TTL, or maybe I'm misunderstanding the approach. > > You build up a CPU (and the rest) from TTL, just like before that you > would have built it from discrete transistors or even tubes. All a > microprocessor is is just a bunch of TTL-like MOS logic circuits > (made of metal oxide semiconductor elelements) combined on one chip. > > Julf > > --===============0000614855127849784==-- From julf@julf.com Sun May 4 17:42:27 2025 From: Johan Helsingius To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 19:42:15 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2640105391706085375==" --===============2640105391706085375== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 04/05/2025 19:36, Steve Lewis wrote: > But aren't modern ASICs essentially that idea of software-implemented- > in-hardware, mainly for dedicated performance? I would think of it more as "hardware assisted software" - figure out what parts are especially critical for performance and implement as much of that in hardware. > If you had "perfected" > your software and accepted no code change was necessary, the coding did > exactly whatever it is you needed to do, you can then commit that to > some combination of hardware-logic-gate-stuff (for the sake of executing > it wicked-fast, just as modern specialized crypto-ASICs do)? Sure. But while that works well for specialized algorithms typical of crypto, it is hard to do for a more general case. > I just > had the impression Wang was doing some early form of this, as they > referred to their BASIC as "hard-wired."   Or in other words, you can't > point to a single chip and say "there is the Wang BASIC ROM" (but I'm > speculating, hence the question to try to clarify on their pre-1974 systems) If seem to remember that they were "hard-wired" in the sense that the keywords were tokenized early, and transmitted to the CPU as tokens. Julf --===============2640105391706085375==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Sun May 4 17:57:53 2025 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 13:57:36 -0400 Message-ID: <8100041C-8FAB-4176-BDA0-D3F028CF628D@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4173917118187568643==" --===============4173917118187568643== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On May 4, 2025, at 1:36=E2=80=AFPM, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote: >=20 > I get that, that a general purpose processor with a particular instruction > set can be made up from TTLs (or vacuum tubes, or water sleuths, or metal > gears, etc), and am familiar with the Datapoint (and it always was odd to > me that Wang called their model the 2200 like the Datapoint 2200; I know > both companies had various models). >=20 > But aren't modern ASICs essentially that idea of > software-implemented-in-hardware, mainly for dedicated performance? If > you had "perfected" your software and accepted no code change was > necessary, the coding did exactly whatever it is you needed to do, you can > then commit that to some combination of hardware-logic-gate-stuff (for the > sake of executing it wicked-fast, just as modern specialized crypto-ASICs > do) ? =20 Somewhat, but mostly not I think. The key point is that software is roughly = sequential at the conceptual level. Even with threading that's true for each= thread. In the hardware various things happen concurrently or even out of o= rder, but the hardware does a large amount of hard work to make that invisibl= e. When it fails to get that right the results can be interesting -- conside= r the Intel security bugs caused by speculative execution. An ASIC tends to do many things in parallel. When you look at a design langu= age like VHDL that's very obvious, and things look quite different from conve= ntional programming languages precisely for that reason. That means an ASIC = implementation of a software algorithm is likely to look quite different also= , at least if it wants to take advantage of all the potential speed-ups from = casting things in silicon. Consider DSP -- "Software defined radios" implement a DSP signal processing p= ath in software. And these have significant limitations because even very fa= st processors struggle to do DSP operations at high frequency. In an FPGA yo= u can go very much faster because you can take each of the processing element= s and implement them as a separate block, and many of those can be futher pip= elined. FPGAs aimed at doing DSP things will often contain hundreds or even = thousands of multipliers exactly for that reason. paul --===============4173917118187568643==-- From bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca Sun May 4 18:24:33 2025 From: ben To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 12:24:22 -0600 Message-ID: <9b2eae80-43a8-4bdf-bcb4-1f4e13c268d2@jetnet.ab.ca> In-Reply-To: <3c715554-0256-4cce-96d4-62b61c1bc9b3@greenmail.ch> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5111052658572710981==" --===============5111052658572710981== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 2025-05-04 2:11 a.m., jos via cctalk wrote: >> I recall that system had many boards, the whole "CPU" box was external to >> the monitor (and in the earliest versions, the power supply was also a >> large external box).   I can't really fathom creating a BASIC out of raw >> TTL, or maybe I'm misunderstanding the approach. > You build a processor with some TTL, and then implement a BASIC on that > microprocessor. > There is always this intermediate step, no machine executes BASIC > directly in TTL. > Well for BASIC that is true. The Fairchild Symbol Computer was test to just how far TTL could go. > Look here for an example of a processor (Datapoint 2200) in TTL : > > https://bitsavers.org/pdf/datapoint/2200/jdreesen_shematics/DP2200_mb.pdf > > Jos Micocoded coded machines, could likely be programed to run basic. Ben. --===============5111052658572710981==-- From jsw@ieee.org Sun May 4 18:28:18 2025 From: Jerry Weiss To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 13:27:36 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7397326819818629718==" --===============7397326819818629718== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The timekeeping chip used in the TCU-50 was leveraged from early digital wrist watches. This can be seen from the rather interesting method used to set the time. --===============7397326819818629718==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Sun May 4 18:40:15 2025 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 14:39:58 -0400 Message-ID: <57120361-5F01-49B7-9397-DA0EA7677356@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: <9b2eae80-43a8-4bdf-bcb4-1f4e13c268d2@jetnet.ab.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3831312845406552099==" --===============3831312845406552099== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On May 4, 2025, at 2:24=E2=80=AFPM, ben via cctalk wrote: >=20 > On 2025-05-04 2:11 a.m., jos via cctalk wrote: >>> I recall that system had many boards, the whole "CPU" box was external to >>> the monitor (and in the earliest versions, the power supply was also a >>> large external box). I can't really fathom creating a BASIC out of raw >>> TTL, or maybe I'm misunderstanding the approach. >> You build a processor with some TTL, and then implement a BASIC on that mi= croprocessor. >> There is always this intermediate step, no machine executes BASIC directly= in TTL. > Well for BASIC that is true. > The Fairchild Symbol Computer was test to just how far TTL could go. >=20 >> Look here for an example of a processor (Datapoint 2200) in TTL : >> https://bitsavers.org/pdf/datapoint/2200/jdreesen_shematics/DP2200_mb.pdf >> Jos > Micocoded coded machines, could likely be programed to run basic. >=20 > Ben. Well, of course any general purpose computer can be made to run BASIC. If yo= u mean that a microcoded machine could directly implement a pseudo-code repre= sentation of BASIC, sure, I suppose so. There isn't much point in that, thou= gh. Better just to compile it. A language for which specific machines have been built a number of times is F= ORTH, which makes sense because it is a rather low level language that explic= itly manipulates data on stacks. And the execution model has two stacks, so = it is tempting to build a machine that directly deals with that. There are s= ome nice FPGA blocks for this, in VHDL or Verilog; one example I remember was= built to enable a robotics or machine vision application. paul --===============3831312845406552099==-- From brian@quarterbyte.com Sun May 4 18:47:59 2025 From: brian@quarterbyte.com To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Mac SE disk cleaning Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 11:47:43 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5678456580390554879==" --===============5678456580390554879== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Is there a particular reason to leave MacOS intact? After removing all > the user data you might as well have a fresh copy of the OS, so I'm not > sure why you wouldn't zero the entire disk and then do an OS reinstall. > Owner of the thing does not have a set of installation disks. so, if erased, it would be sold or given away unbootable. I suppose someone interested enough in vintage Macs to acquire it would already be equipped with installation disks, but, it would be nice to send it on demonstrably working. They said they tried Googling a solution and didn't come up with anything, I took their word on that. Saving a bunch of very large files seems a reasonable way to do it, I'll suggest that. thanks brian --===============5678456580390554879==-- From gavin@learn.bio Sun May 4 18:59:54 2025 From: Gavin Scott To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 13:59:39 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7412788518475609445==" --===============7412788518475609445== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Sun, May 4, 2025 at 12:43 PM Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote: > I just had the impression Wang was doing some early form of this, > as they referred to their BASIC as "hard-wired." Or in other words, you > can't point to a single chip and say "there is the Wang BASIC ROM" (but I'm > speculating, hence the question to try to clarify on their pre-1974 systems) It seems to just be 16K BASIC in ROM as far as I can see. They describe it as MICROCODE and the Wikipedia article talks about how the microcode implemented the instructions for BASIC thus providing an abstraction layer that later allowed replacing the native hardware underneath while retaining compatibility. But then that's what any BASIC interpreter does really isn't it? From their 1974 ad (image in the Wikipedia article) they say "...you get a CPU with 16K bytes of BASIC language instructions hardwired into the electronics" then in the next paragraph "The hardwired MOS ROM language..." so honestly, I don't see how any of this is any different than a conventional microcomputer with BASIC in ROM. I think the rest is just awkward market-speak because what they are describing hadn't really been done before so the terminology was still up in the air as to what to call it. If they released it five years later, they would probably just have said "computer with 16K BASIC in ROM" because that's what it is. --===============7412788518475609445==-- From julf@julf.com Sun May 4 19:06:18 2025 From: Johan Helsingius To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 21:06:06 +0200 Message-ID: <64375500-63c7-4048-82a7-64dd00dd012d@Julf.com> In-Reply-To: <57120361-5F01-49B7-9397-DA0EA7677356@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6681912894234516565==" --===============6681912894234516565== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 04/05/2025 20:39, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > A language for which specific machines have been built a number of times is= FORTH Another is Lisp. Julf --===============6681912894234516565==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Sun May 4 19:18:15 2025 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 15:17:57 -0400 Message-ID: <3BA045C4-19FC-4A11-AEED-E8FCE586238E@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: <64375500-63c7-4048-82a7-64dd00dd012d@Julf.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3402545718120372984==" --===============3402545718120372984== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On May 4, 2025, at 3:06=E2=80=AFPM, Johan Helsingius via cctalk wrote: >=20 > On 04/05/2025 20:39, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: >=20 >> A language for which specific machines have been built a number of times i= s FORTH >=20 > Another is Lisp. Good point. And yet another is ALGOL 60 -- the Burroughs mainframes are stac= k machines nicely matched to what ALGOL needs, and Burroughs created several = special-purpose languages based on ALGOL for that machine. The OS uses one (= ESPOL); there is one for the communications machinery (DC-ALGOL) and it has a= compiled ALGOL variant called WFL (work flow language) for the batch job con= trol. (As an analogy, imagine if "bash" were a compiler rather than an inter= preter.) paul --===============3402545718120372984==-- From gavin@learn.bio Sun May 4 19:21:16 2025 From: Gavin Scott To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 14:21:01 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7110112653112821019==" --===============7110112653112821019== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Sun, May 4, 2025 at 1:59 PM I wrote: > They describe it as MICROCODE... I mean, it probably IS microcode in the sense that without it the CPU may not actually do anything because it's just a bunch of resources which the bits in the microcode call into action to implement an ISA. So that 16K of MOS ROM is probably implementing an instruction set, implementing the BASIC runtime using that instruction set, and implementing the BASIC interpreter application with all the associated user-interface, parsing, etc. --===============7110112653112821019==-- From ethan.dicks@gmail.com Sun May 4 19:29:08 2025 From: Ethan Dicks To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 15:28:52 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3FFF27BB-13B3-41C0-AAFA-9A79731D3288@alembic.crystel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3067828952773757645==" --===============3067828952773757645== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, May 4, 2025 at 10:23=E2=80=AFAM Christopher Zach via cctalk wrote: > Neat! Is the rsx code or source code for the rtc anywhere? It's less necess= ary now that we have ntp from the tcp stack (thank you bqt) but it would stil= l be cool I have imaged that disk (it since went totally south, so I'm glad I did) but the image file is on a specific machine that isn't right at hand. I suspect it's only the binary. The DECUS archive mentioned in this thread and on the VCF post does have source for both reading and setting for RT-11 so it shouldn't be impossible to port that over to RSX-11. All the fiddly hardware register magic is there, but obviously the system interface to time is different. -ethan --===============3067828952773757645==-- From julf@julf.com Sun May 4 19:44:21 2025 From: Johan Helsingius To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 21:44:13 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3BA045C4-19FC-4A11-AEED-E8FCE586238E@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3944422787368989387==" --===============3944422787368989387== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 04/05/2025 21:17, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > Good point. And yet another is ALGOL 60 A more obscure one - The Nokia MPS-10, a 32-bit supermini from 1983, with a microprogrammed architecture optimized for Ada. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/989798.989799 Julf --===============3944422787368989387==-- From lewissa78@gmail.com Sun May 4 20:05:58 2025 From: Steve Lewis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 15:05:45 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <9b2eae80-43a8-4bdf-bcb4-1f4e13c268d2@jetnet.ab.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3725335136539129381==" --===============3725335136539129381== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The IBM5100 also uses the term "microcode" - but I'm not sure if that term pre-1975 means the same as what, say, Intel used it for around the x86? I've seen a glimpse into the syntax of the x86 microcode. In the IBM 5100's case, its CPU is distributed across 14 or so SLT chips - so I never fully understood how it implements its PALM instruction set. I know the two large IC on that process are two 64-byte memory things (dunno if categorized as SRAM or DRAM, or neither), mapped to the first 128 bytes of system RAM (so a high speed pass through, where that 128 bytes correspond to the registers used by each of the 4 interrupt levels). That PALM processor was developed right around the time of the Intel 4004 (late '71 / mid '72), and stout enough to run a version of APL about a year later (I see Intel made a version of FORTRAN for the 8008, or at least a claim for it in the Intertec brochures). Anyway, all I mean is, in early 70s did "microcode" just mean instruction-set, and that changed a few years later? Or did microcode always mean some kind of "more primitive sequence" used to construct into an instruction set? -Steve On Sun, May 4, 2025 at 1:33=E2=80=AFPM ben via cctalk wrote: > On 2025-05-04 2:11 a.m., jos via cctalk wrote: > >> I recall that system had many boards, the whole "CPU" box was external > to > >> the monitor (and in the earliest versions, the power supply was also a > >> large external box). I can't really fathom creating a BASIC out of raw > >> TTL, or maybe I'm misunderstanding the approach. > > You build a processor with some TTL, and then implement a BASIC on that > > microprocessor. > > There is always this intermediate step, no machine executes BASIC > > directly in TTL. > > > Well for BASIC that is true. > The Fairchild Symbol Computer was test to just how far TTL could go. > > > Look here for an example of a processor (Datapoint 2200) in TTL : > > > > > https://bitsavers.org/pdf/datapoint/2200/jdreesen_shematics/DP2200_mb.pdf > > > > Jos > Micocoded coded machines, could likely be programed to run basic. > > Ben. > > --===============3725335136539129381==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Sun May 4 20:21:20 2025 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 16:21:03 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3998144875056793702==" --===============3998144875056793702== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On May 4, 2025, at 4:05=E2=80=AFPM, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote: >=20 > The IBM5100 also uses the term "microcode" - but I'm not sure if that term > pre-1975 means the same as what, say, Intel used it for around the x86? > I've seen a glimpse into the syntax of the x86 microcode. In the IBM > 5100's case, its CPU is distributed across 14 or so SLT chips - so I never > fully understood how it implements its PALM instruction set. I know the > two large IC on that process are two 64-byte memory things (dunno if > categorized as SRAM or DRAM, or neither), mapped to the first 128 bytes of > system RAM (so a high speed pass through, where that 128 bytes correspond > to the registers used by each of the 4 interrupt levels). That PALM > processor was developed right around the time of the Intel 4004 (late '71 / > mid '72), and stout enough to run a version of APL about a year later (I > see Intel made a version of FORTRAN for the 8008, or at least a claim for > it in the Intertec brochures). >=20 > Anyway, all I mean is, in early 70s did "microcode" just mean > instruction-set, and that changed a few years later? Or did microcode > always mean some kind of "more primitive sequence" used to construct into > an instruction set? The latter, as far as I know. And in "horizontal microcode" you have a rathe= r wide microcode instruction word with a bunch of fields, each of which encod= es a portion of what the machine is doing for a particular cycle. The microc= ode and the microengine may well be specialized for a particular instruction = set, as opposed to the "general purpose" microcode that lets you pick the "ma= cro" instruction set fairly broadly. For example, with the possible exceptio= n of the PDP-11/60 I suspect that PDP-11 microengines do PDP-11 instruction s= et execution nicely, but wouldn't be all that effective with other ISPs. The= 11/60 is a bit different, at least I know it was used to implement PDP-8 exe= cution at speeds higher than that of "real" PDP-8 machines. paul --===============3998144875056793702==-- From mjd.bishop@emeritus-solutions.com Sun May 4 21:13:26 2025 From: Martin Bishop To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 21:13:16 +0000 Message-ID: <1c9f94deff0c4068b08b91f30d7bd7ca@emeritus-solutions.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4673389992443012874==" --===============4673389992443012874== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There can also be nanocode where code drives microcode drives nanocode. http://www.easy68k.com/paulrsm/doc/dpbm68k1.htm gives an exposition of nanoco= de used below microcode in the 68000 and also examples of vertical and horizo= ntal microcode. Paul Konig has just posted on the V H distinction - I shall = not duplicate beyond emphasising that microcode is an overloaded term, compar= e : i64 usage, horizontal, vertical, "normal" people's usage It is arguable that code, state machines and microcode are "the same thing"; = that is they are all logical sequential engines. To differentiate, I shall o= fer the view that you change code 4 times an hour, microcode 4 times a day an= d state machines once a year. Another differentiator of microcode from state= machines is that it is usually held in RAM, although the old men often used = PROMs for production and speed. These days microcode works well in FPGAs, RAM access times of 3 ns without pi= pelining, and as Xilinx BRAM comes in 1k Wd x 36b quanta eg 108 bits. BRAM a= nd DSP resource permits implementation of pretty much any (array of) mills. = And the architecture can provide a plurality of parallel memories and address= generators. The sort of things which were conveiveable but probably not imp= lementable in the bit slice days. Dropping down the stack to the original sequential software / parallel hardwa= re question Superscalar architectures represent a hybrid aproach, multiple mi= lls potentially tailored to the task, scope for dynamic resource resolution a= nd the heavy lifting of scheduling micro-operations handled by the compiler b= ack end / code generator; see eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superscalar_pr= ocessor#:~:text=3DSuperscalar%20CPU%20design%20emphasizes%20improving,from%20= a%20single%20instruction%20thread. Interestingly, Synopsis have a toolset, asip-designer, which implements supe= rscalar architectures; see eg https://www.synopsys.com/designware-ip/processo= r-solutions/asips-tools.html Unless I am mistaken, the AI engines provided i= n Xilinx's ACAP range use this technology. In any case, you can get FPGAs wi= th an array of superscalar processors; see eg https://adaptivesupport.amd.com= /s/article/1132493?language=3Den_US A final point is that most of the old mens techniques remain current, Wilkes = used microcode ~1950. What changes, is the price point at which you can redu= ce to practice. Martin -----Original Message----- From: Steve Lewis via cctalk [mailto:cctalk(a)classiccmp.org]=20 Sent: 04 May 2025 20:06 To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Cc: Steve Lewis Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC The IBM5100 also uses the term "microcode" - but I'm not sure if that term pre-1975 means the same as what, say, Intel used it for around the x86? I've seen a glimpse into the syntax of the x86 microcode. In the IBM 5100's case, its CPU is distributed across 14 or so SLT chips - so I never fully understood how it implements its PALM instruction set. I know the two large IC on that process are two 64-byte memory things (dunno if categori= zed as SRAM or DRAM, or neither), mapped to the first 128 bytes of system RAM= (so a high speed pass through, where that 128 bytes correspond to the regist= ers used by each of the 4 interrupt levels). That PALM processor was develop= ed right around the time of the Intel 4004 (late '71 / mid '72), and stout en= ough to run a version of APL about a year later (I see Intel made a version = of FORTRAN for the 8008, or at least a claim for it in the Intertec brochures= ). Anyway, all I mean is, in early 70s did "microcode" just mean instruction-set= , and that changed a few years later? Or did microcode always mean some kind= of "more primitive sequence" used to construct into an instruction set? -Steve On Sun, May 4, 2025 at 1:33=E2=80=AFPM ben via cctalk wrote: > On 2025-05-04 2:11 a.m., jos via cctalk wrote: > >> I recall that system had many boards, the whole "CPU" box was=20 > >> external > to > >> the monitor (and in the earliest versions, the power supply was also a > >> large external box). I can't really fathom creating a BASIC out of raw > >> TTL, or maybe I'm misunderstanding the approach. > > You build a processor with some TTL, and then implement a BASIC on=20 > > that microprocessor. > > There is always this intermediate step, no machine executes BASIC=20 > > directly in TTL. > > > Well for BASIC that is true. > The Fairchild Symbol Computer was test to just how far TTL could go. > > > Look here for an example of a processor (Datapoint 2200) in TTL : > > > > > https://bitsavers.org/pdf/datapoint/2200/jdreesen_shematics/DP2200_mb. > pdf > > > > Jos > Micocoded coded machines, could likely be programed to run basic. > > Ben. > > --===============4673389992443012874==-- From wrcooke@wrcooke.net Sun May 4 21:51:46 2025 From: wrcooke@wrcooke.net To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 17:51:42 -0400 Message-ID: <1814818281.13958.1746395502685@email.ionos.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0586282687107808253==" --===============0586282687107808253== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From all I have seen, Maurice Wilkes is considered the inventor of "microcode= " as we know it. In the linked paper from 1951 he uses the term "micro-progr= amme", so I think it is safe to say microcode was used in the same way in the= 70s as it is today, although surely some people used it for normal machine c= ode. I have seen examples of that, although none come immediately to mind. https://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/fall09/cos375/BestWay.pdf Will > On 05/04/2025 4:05 PM EDT Steve Lewis via cctalk = wrote: >=20 > =20 > The IBM5100 also uses the term "microcode" - but I'm not sure if that term > pre-1975 means the same as what, say, Intel used it for around the x86? > I've seen a glimpse into the syntax of the x86 microcode. In the IBM > 5100's case, its CPU is distributed across 14 or so SLT chips - so I never > fully understood how it implements its PALM instruction set. I know the > two large IC on that process are two 64-byte memory things (dunno if > categorized as SRAM or DRAM, or neither), mapped to the first 128 bytes of > system RAM (so a high speed pass through, where that 128 bytes correspond > to the registers used by each of the 4 interrupt levels). That PALM > processor was developed right around the time of the Intel 4004 (late '71 / > mid '72), and stout enough to run a version of APL about a year later (I > see Intel made a version of FORTRAN for the 8008, or at least a claim for > it in the Intertec brochures). >=20 > Anyway, all I mean is, in early 70s did "microcode" just mean > instruction-set, and that changed a few years later? Or did microcode > always mean some kind of "more primitive sequence" used to construct into > an instruction set? >=20 > -Steve >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Sun, May 4, 2025 at 1:33=E2=80=AFPM ben via cctalk wrote: >=20 > > On 2025-05-04 2:11 a.m., jos via cctalk wrote: > > >> I recall that system had many boards, the whole "CPU" box was external > > to > > >> the monitor (and in the earliest versions, the power supply was also a > > >> large external box). I can't really fathom creating a BASIC out of r= aw > > >> TTL, or maybe I'm misunderstanding the approach. > > > You build a processor with some TTL, and then implement a BASIC on that > > > microprocessor. > > > There is always this intermediate step, no machine executes BASIC > > > directly in TTL. > > > > > Well for BASIC that is true. > > The Fairchild Symbol Computer was test to just how far TTL could go. > > > > > Look here for an example of a processor (Datapoint 2200) in TTL : > > > > > > > > https://bitsavers.org/pdf/datapoint/2200/jdreesen_shematics/DP2200_mb.pdf > > > > > > Jos > > Micocoded coded machines, could likely be programed to run basic. > > > > Ben. > > > > You just can't beat the person who never gives up. Babe Ruth --===============0586282687107808253==-- From mjd.bishop@emeritus-solutions.com Sun May 4 22:05:06 2025 From: Martin Bishop To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 22:04:58 +0000 Message-ID: <3b28f96ef1f74608845a966e1429c23c@emeritus-solutions.com> In-Reply-To: <1814818281.13958.1746395502685@email.ionos.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1872021120590938941==" --===============1872021120590938941== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Will Cooke wrote " although surely some people used it for normal machine cod= e " Anyone without knowledge of microcode, in the sense it is being discussed her= e, since at least the mid 70's would assume you were talking about code for a= 6800, PIC or whatever uP/uC. Saying "I have just upissued the microcode" is quite a good differentiator of= folks computing knowledge. Martin -----Original Message----- From: Will Cooke via cctalk [mailto:cctalk(a)classiccmp.org]=20 Sent: 04 May 2025 21:52 To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Cc: wrcooke(a)wrcooke.net Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC From all I have seen, Maurice Wilkes is considered the inventor of "microcode= " as we know it. In the linked paper from 1951 he uses the term "micro-progr= amme", so I think it is safe to say microcode was used in the same way in the= 70s as it is today, although surely some people used it for normal machine c= ode. I have seen examples of that, although none come immediately to mind. https://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/fall09/cos375/BestWay.pdf Will > On 05/04/2025 4:05 PM EDT Steve Lewis via cctalk = wrote: >=20 > =20 > The IBM5100 also uses the term "microcode" - but I'm not sure if that=20 > term > pre-1975 means the same as what, say, Intel used it for around the x86? > I've seen a glimpse into the syntax of the x86 microcode. In the IBM > 5100's case, its CPU is distributed across 14 or so SLT chips - so I never > fully understood how it implements its PALM instruction set. I know the > two large IC on that process are two 64-byte memory things (dunno if=20 > categorized as SRAM or DRAM, or neither), mapped to the first 128=20 > bytes of system RAM (so a high speed pass through, where that 128=20 > bytes correspond to the registers used by each of the 4 interrupt=20 > levels). That PALM processor was developed right around the time of=20 > the Intel 4004 (late '71 / mid '72), and stout enough to run a version=20 > of APL about a year later (I see Intel made a version of FORTRAN for=20 > the 8008, or at least a claim for it in the Intertec brochures). >=20 > Anyway, all I mean is, in early 70s did "microcode" just mean=20 > instruction-set, and that changed a few years later? Or did microcode=20 > always mean some kind of "more primitive sequence" used to construct=20 > into an instruction set? >=20 > -Steve >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Sun, May 4, 2025 at 1:33=E2=80=AFPM ben via cctalk wrote: >=20 > > On 2025-05-04 2:11 a.m., jos via cctalk wrote: > > >> I recall that system had many boards, the whole "CPU" box was=20 > > >> external > > to > > >> the monitor (and in the earliest versions, the power supply was also a > > >> large external box). I can't really fathom creating a BASIC out of r= aw > > >> TTL, or maybe I'm misunderstanding the approach. > > > You build a processor with some TTL, and then implement a BASIC on=20 > > > that microprocessor. > > > There is always this intermediate step, no machine executes BASIC=20 > > > directly in TTL. > > > > > Well for BASIC that is true. > > The Fairchild Symbol Computer was test to just how far TTL could go. > > > > > Look here for an example of a processor (Datapoint 2200) in TTL : > > > > > > > > https://bitsavers.org/pdf/datapoint/2200/jdreesen_shematics/DP2200_m > > b.pdf > > > > > > Jos > > Micocoded coded machines, could likely be programed to run basic. > > > > Ben. > > > > You just can't beat the person who never gives up. Babe Ruth --===============1872021120590938941==-- From bill.gunshannon@hotmail.com Sun May 4 23:15:13 2025 From: Bill Gunshannon To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 19:15:04 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4827689133069387468==" --===============4827689133069387468== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 5/4/2025 1:10 PM, Glen Slick via cctalk wrote: > One option for a QBus time of day clock calendar card is the DIGITAL > PATHWAYS INC TCU-50, for example: > > https://www.ebay.com/itm/177058714800 > > https://bitsavers.org/pdf/digitalPathways/tcu-50.pdf If you have a free serial port there is always an old GPS receiver like A Delorme Tripmate. They show up on eBay all the time. And, now I have an even more interesting idea. I have built a couple of different clocks based on things like the Arduino and The Blue Pill. I expect it would not take much to add serial port output on one of these and use it to feed time to an old system. bill --===============4827689133069387468==-- From cclist@sydex.com Sun May 4 23:52:52 2025 From: cclist@sydex.com To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 23:44:52 +0000 Message-ID: <9ad6eece63c5786752306fcfc8e19078@sydex.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2722281795660263597==" --===============2722281795660263597== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The Packard-Bell PB440 (1963) was microprogrammable: https://bitsavers.org/pdf/packardBell/PB-440/SP-149A_PB-440_microprogramming_= May63.pdf Various earlier systems used microprogram-like techniques, but I don't know how many were earlier than PB in their use of the word. Was the PB-250's floating point microprogrammed? --Chuck --===============2722281795660263597==-- From bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca Mon May 5 01:28:23 2025 From: ben To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 19:28:16 -0600 Message-ID: <5b970161-db93-4a34-a71d-309ed8519d63@jetnet.ab.ca> In-Reply-To: <1c9f94deff0c4068b08b91f30d7bd7ca@emeritus-solutions.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3163325602541882373==" --===============3163325602541882373== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2025-05-04 3:13 p.m., Martin Bishop via cctalk wrote: > These days microcode works well in FPGAs, RAM access times of 3 ns without = pipelining, and as Xilinx BRAM comes in 1k Wd x 36b quanta eg 108 bits. BRAM= and DSP resource permits implementation of pretty much any (array of) mills.= And the architecture can provide a plurality of parallel memories and addre= ss generators. The sort of things which were conveiveable but probably not i= mplementable in the bit slice days. FPGA logic is too vendor specific to have portable code. who needs 3 ns=20 when 5 volt logic levels and simple packaging are more important in my=20 mind when it comes to vintage equipment. http://fpgaretrocomputing.org/pdp4x/ Can we still get the chips? I was thinking of the western digital chip set, that had the PDP 11 or=20 Pascal in microcode. A version of BASIC could have been developed, had=20 not Microsoft cornered the basic market. > A final point is that most of the old mens techniques remain current, Wilke= s used microcode ~1950. What changes, is the price point at which you can re= duce to practice. >=20 > Martin Here is $10.00 bribe to support RISC. Ben. --===============3163325602541882373==-- From lewissa78@gmail.com Mon May 5 01:35:42 2025 From: Steve Lewis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 20:35:26 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1814818281.13958.1746395502685@email.ionos.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1916073231850283588==" --===============1916073231850283588== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Maurice Wilkes - by chance any relation to Mary Allen Wikes (of LINC-8 fame) ? On Sun, May 4, 2025 at 5:08=E2=80=AFPM Will Cooke via cctalk wrote: > From all I have seen, Maurice Wilkes is considered the inventor of > "microcode" as we know it. In the linked paper from 1951 he uses the term > "micro-programme", so I think it is safe to say microcode was used in the > same way in the 70s as it is today, although surely some people used it for > normal machine code. I have seen examples of that, although none come > immediately to mind. > https://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/fall09/cos375/BestWay.pdf > > Will > > > > On 05/04/2025 4:05 PM EDT Steve Lewis via cctalk > wrote: > > > > > > The IBM5100 also uses the term "microcode" - but I'm not sure if that > term > > pre-1975 means the same as what, say, Intel used it for around the x86? > > I've seen a glimpse into the syntax of the x86 microcode. In the IBM > > 5100's case, its CPU is distributed across 14 or so SLT chips - so I > never > > fully understood how it implements its PALM instruction set. I know > the > > two large IC on that process are two 64-byte memory things (dunno if > > categorized as SRAM or DRAM, or neither), mapped to the first 128 bytes > of > > system RAM (so a high speed pass through, where that 128 bytes correspond > > to the registers used by each of the 4 interrupt levels). That PALM > > processor was developed right around the time of the Intel 4004 (late > '71 / > > mid '72), and stout enough to run a version of APL about a year later (I > > see Intel made a version of FORTRAN for the 8008, or at least a claim for > > it in the Intertec brochures). > > > > Anyway, all I mean is, in early 70s did "microcode" just mean > > instruction-set, and that changed a few years later? Or did microcode > > always mean some kind of "more primitive sequence" used to construct into > > an instruction set? > > > > -Steve > > > > > > > > On Sun, May 4, 2025 at 1:33=E2=80=AFPM ben via cctalk > wrote: > > > > > On 2025-05-04 2:11 a.m., jos via cctalk wrote: > > > >> I recall that system had many boards, the whole "CPU" box was > external > > > to > > > >> the monitor (and in the earliest versions, the power supply was > also a > > > >> large external box). I can't really fathom creating a BASIC out > of raw > > > >> TTL, or maybe I'm misunderstanding the approach. > > > > You build a processor with some TTL, and then implement a BASIC on > that > > > > microprocessor. > > > > There is always this intermediate step, no machine executes BASIC > > > > directly in TTL. > > > > > > > Well for BASIC that is true. > > > The Fairchild Symbol Computer was test to just how far TTL could go. > > > > > > > Look here for an example of a processor (Datapoint 2200) in TTL : > > > > > > > > > > > > https://bitsavers.org/pdf/datapoint/2200/jdreesen_shematics/DP2200_mb.pdf > > > > > > > > Jos > > > Micocoded coded machines, could likely be programed to run basic. > > > > > > Ben. > > > > > > > > You just can't beat the person who never gives up. > Babe Ruth > --===============1916073231850283588==-- From ethan.dicks@gmail.com Mon May 5 01:44:09 2025 From: Ethan Dicks To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 21:43:51 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CLV8P221MB14694B1BFABDA81632999C03ED8F2=40LV8P221MB?= =?utf-8?q?1469=2ENAMP221=2EPROD=2EOUTLOOK=2ECOM=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6257750062965805715==" --===============6257750062965805715== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Sun, May 4, 2025 at 8:03 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote: > If you have a free serial port there is always an old GPS receiver > like A Delorme Tripmate. They show up on eBay all the time. Sure. We used to use rackmount GPS as time standards all the time for scientific experiments in the 90s and 00s. For those, though, we had to run antennas to the outside of the building. If you have a spare serial port (easy with a DLV11-J) a Hayes Chronograph can work, but those are hard to find and expensive now. Easier to emulate that with a modern MCU and a DS1307 where the MCU implements some parsable serial command scheme like the Chronograph does. -ethan --===============6257750062965805715==-- From elson@pico-systems.com Mon May 5 02:00:10 2025 From: Jon Elson To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 20:59:57 -0500 Message-ID: <89786a49-1827-f981-7790-449b50f3d1fe@pico-systems.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3710319401130839623==" --===============3710319401130839623== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 5/4/25 20:35, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote: > Maurice Wilkes - by chance any relation to Mary Allen Wikes (of LINC-8 > fame) ? > No, that would be a really big coincidence!  No relation at all! Mary Allen Wilkes was born in the US, Maurice V Wilkes was born in the UK. Jon --===============3710319401130839623==-- From tubastuff@yahoo.com Mon May 5 04:58:38 2025 From: Chuck Guzis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Sun, 04 May 2025 16:27:05 -0700 Message-ID: <8b331432-d892-4cc7-bcac-c36b61b4832d@yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0688527236074672523==" --===============0688527236074672523== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The Packard-Bell PB440 (1963) was microprogrammable: https://bitsavers.org/pdf/packardBell/PB-440/SP-149A_PB-440_microprogramming_= May63.pdf Various earlier systems used microprogram-like techniques, but I don't know how many were earlier than PB in their use of the word. Was the PB-250's floating point microprogrammed? --Chuck --===============0688527236074672523==-- From mjd.bishop@emeritus-solutions.com Mon May 5 07:45:59 2025 From: Martin Bishop To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Mon, 05 May 2025 07:45:52 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <8b331432-d892-4cc7-bcac-c36b61b4832d@yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8887903441680847565==" --===============8887903441680847565== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable ACM's precis of who what when : https://amturing.acm.org/info/wilkes_1001395.= cfm To paraphrase: - 1951 concept - 1958 reduced to practice in ESDAC2 in the chilly fens; Cambridge UK - 1964 IBM 360 Model $ Martin -----Original Message----- From: Chuck Guzis via cctalk [mailto:cctalk(a)classiccmp.org]=20 Sent: 04 May 2025 23:27 To: Paul Koning via cctalk Cc: Chuck Guzis Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC The Packard-Bell PB440 (1963) was microprogrammable: https://bitsavers.org/pdf/packardBell/PB-440/SP-149A_PB-440_microprogramming_= May63.pdf Various earlier systems used microprogram-like techniques, but I don't know h= ow many were earlier than PB in their use of the word. Was the PB-250's floating point microprogrammed? --Chuck --===============8887903441680847565==-- From mjd.bishop@emeritus-solutions.com Mon May 5 08:06:07 2025 From: Martin Bishop To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Mon, 05 May 2025 08:06:00 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <5b970161-db93-4a34-a71d-309ed8519d63@jetnet.ab.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4089070385683448959==" --===============4089070385683448959== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ocht ... Ben >> "FPGA logic is too vendor specific to have portable code. who needs 3 = ns when 5 volt logic levels and simple packaging are more important in my min= d when it comes to vintage equipment." Not if you write in VHDL / Verilog, the instantiated lumps (eg memory) will b= e different but no more than the API between M$ and Borland C. And if your interest is in vintage architecture rather than vintage hardware,= 5V logic has little relevance. Ben >> " Can we still get the chips?" The narrow answer is given the source VHDL/Verilog you don't need legacy sili= con. Taking DG Conway's PDP/4 as an example the XC4010 is probably no more o= btanium than a DS8641, and the Spartan family is only now going out of produc= tion. Ben >> " I was thinking of the western digital chip set, that had the PDP 11 = or Pascal in microcode." Acording to goo's AI the Intersil 6100 and Harris HD6120 both implemented a P= DP-8 on a chip; IIRC microcoded. And IIRC the DEC T-11 chip was also microcoded with an 8 bit data path. Martin -----Original Message----- From: ben via cctalk [mailto:cctalk(a)classiccmp.org]=20 Sent: 05 May 2025 01:28 To: cctalk(a)classiccmp.org Cc: ben Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC On 2025-05-04 3:13 p.m., Martin Bishop via cctalk wrote: > These days microcode works well in FPGAs, RAM access times of 3 ns without = pipelining, and as Xilinx BRAM comes in 1k Wd x 36b quanta eg 108 bits. BRAM= and DSP resource permits implementation of pretty much any (array of) mills.= And the architecture can provide a plurality of parallel memories and addre= ss generators. The sort of things which were conveiveable but probably not i= mplementable in the bit slice days. FPGA logic is too vendor specific to have portable code. who needs 3 ns when = 5 volt logic levels and simple packaging are more important in my mind when i= t comes to vintage equipment. http://fpgaretrocomputing.org/pdp4x/ Can we still get the chips? I was thinking of the western digital chip set, that had the PDP 11 or Pascal= in microcode. A version of BASIC could have been developed, had not Microsof= t cornered the basic market. > A final point is that most of the old mens techniques remain current, Wilke= s used microcode ~1950. What changes, is the price point at which you can re= duce to practice. >=20 > Martin Here is $10.00 bribe to support RISC. Ben. --===============4089070385683448959==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Mon May 5 12:33:23 2025 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-11 hardware clock Date: Mon, 05 May 2025 08:33:04 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4920309726329162232==" --===============4920309726329162232== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On May 4, 2025, at 9:43=E2=80=AFPM, Ethan Dicks via cctalk wrote: >=20 > On Sun, May 4, 2025 at 8:03=E2=80=AFPM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk > wrote: >> If you have a free serial port there is always an old GPS receiver >> like A Delorme Tripmate. They show up on eBay all the time. >=20 > Sure. We used to use rackmount GPS as time standards all the time for > scientific experiments in the 90s and 00s. For those, though, we had > to run antennas to the outside of the building. >=20 > If you have a spare serial port (easy with a DLV11-J) a Hayes > Chronograph can work, but those are hard to find and expensive now. > Easier to emulate that with a modern MCU and a DS1307 where the MCU > implements some parsable serial command scheme like the Chronograph > does. GPS modules can now be had from various outlets for $20 or so, perhaps less d= epending on specs. I got one from Adafruit recently that will track 15 or mo= re satellites, and deliver time to a modest number of nanoseconds. Some have= embedded antennas that work quite well even indoors (though I would assume n= ot if you have solid metal layers in the ceiling). The common standard is NMEA, which is well enough described in product data s= heets (the ones from u-blox are particularly good, and they also make good GP= S modules at prices somewhat higher than Chinese competitors) even though the= standard itself is annoyingly secret. It's a simple serial protocol on a 96= 00 baud link, so a PDP-11 can easily process it. If you want time to the ne= arest second, just parsing the incoming NMEA message is sufficient. If you w= ant to do better, hook up the GPS module's PPS (pulse per second) line to a c= onvenient logic level input, perhaps a modem control signal of a serial port = or an input line of a GPIO digital controller. That will get you second sign= als to far better than the interrupt latency of a PDP-11. paul --===============4920309726329162232==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Mon May 5 12:41:58 2025 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Mon, 05 May 2025 08:41:41 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1814818281.13958.1746395502685@email.ionos.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5428170119760383164==" --===============5428170119760383164== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On May 4, 2025, at 5:51=E2=80=AFPM, Will Cooke via cctalk wrote: >=20 > From all I have seen, Maurice Wilkes is considered the inventor of "microco= de" as we know it. In the linked paper from 1951 he uses the term "micro-pro= gramme", so I think it is safe to say microcode was used in the same way in t= he 70s as it is today, although surely some people used it for normal machine= code. I have seen examples of that, although none come immediately to mind. > https://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/fall09/cos375/BestWay.pdf From what I understand, the Dutch computer ZEBRA (a Dutch acronym for "very s= imple binary computer") by van der Poel is, in a way, a machine in which hori= zontal microprogramming is the way that regular programs are written. I have= n't looked at it in detail but the impression I got is that it uses the horiz= ontal microprogram approach of controlling individual elements of the machine= concurrently by the various fields of the instruction word, rather than defi= ning "normal" instructions that perform a single conceptual action at a time.= That machine actually predates the Wilkes paper. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ZEBRA_(computer) has more. paul --===============5428170119760383164==-- From cc@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de Mon May 5 13:43:07 2025 From: Christian Corti To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Mon, 05 May 2025 15:42:56 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8770155557475685197==" --===============8770155557475685197== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sun, 4 May 2025, Steve Lewis wrote: >> Anyway, all I mean is, in early 70s did "microcode" just mean >> instruction-set, and that changed a few years later? Or did microcode >> always mean some kind of "more primitive sequence" used to construct into >> an instruction set? > The latter, as far as I know. And in "horizontal microcode" you have a No, Steve is right. IBM used the term "microcode" for the normal CPU instruction set (at least for the PALM processor). Christian --===============8770155557475685197==-- From cc@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de Mon May 5 13:47:10 2025 From: Christian Corti To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Mon, 05 May 2025 15:47:04 +0200 Message-ID: <67861489-88c1-97c3-04c6-53624027dc7f@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de> In-Reply-To: <8b331432-d892-4cc7-bcac-c36b61b4832d@yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2643026127152816384==" --===============2643026127152816384== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sun, 4 May 2025, Chuck Guzis wrote: > Various earlier systems used microprogram-like techniques, but I don't > know how many were earlier than PB in their use of the word. The Zuse Z1 from 1936(!) was microcoded, too. It implemented for example floating-point arithmetic and conversion instructions (binary<-->decimal). Christian --===============2643026127152816384==-- From dave.g4ugm@gmail.com Mon May 5 15:09:36 2025 From: David Wade To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Mon, 05 May 2025 16:09:29 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <67861489-88c1-97c3-04c6-53624027dc7f@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0496595587241624691==" --===============0496595587241624691== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 05/05/2025 14:47, Christian Corti via cctalk wrote: > On Sun, 4 May 2025, Chuck Guzis wrote: >> Various earlier systems used microprogram-like techniques, but I don't >> know how many were earlier than PB in their use of the word. > I think "Microprogramming" as a technique has been around as long as we have had computers. Couldn't the setting up ENIAC to behave like a stored program computer in 1948 be described as "Microprogramming"? > The Zuse Z1 from 1936(!) was microcoded, too. It implemented for example > floating-point arithmetic and conversion instructions > (binary<-->decimal). > > Christian Dave --===============0496595587241624691==-- From bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca Mon May 5 16:55:39 2025 From: ben To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Mon, 05 May 2025 10:55:22 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7730942106437506069==" --===============7730942106437506069== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Not if you write in VHDL / Verilog, the instantiated lumps (eg memory) will= be different but no more than the API between M$ and Borland C. I refuse to those poorly designed languages, for the the reason I can't=20 figure out what is compiled, or where it is defined. I have used ADHL and WINCUPL, both easy to figure out. They also came=20 free, like schematic capture rather than 10K year license for the name=20 brand stuff. Even PAL's could be designed by hand. You can't even get a get a netlist with modern software. Why no one ever=20 used the one of the many RTL langues I will will never know. > And if your interest is in vintage architecture rather than vintage hardwar= e, 5V logic has little relevance. > Both,but 5 volt IO is still important since I like to use classic chips=20 like the 6850 or TIL311's or have slow BUS. > Ben >> " Can we still get the chips?" > The narrow answer is given the source VHDL/Verilog you don't need legacy si= licon. Taking DG Conway's PDP/4 as an example the XC4010 is probably no more= obtanium than a DS8641, and the Spartan family is only now going out of prod= uction. >=20 More the case, only high tech PCB designs are permitted now days- 4+=20 layer, surface mount,BGA packages. I still am the kitchen table guy for=20 hardware. The only reason I can do any kind of hobby stuff is because of=20 the low cost chinese PCB's, and Kicad has PLCC socket footprints. Ben. "It is more fun to talk with someone who doesn't use long, difficult=20 words but rather short, easy words like, 'What about lunch?'" =E2=80=94Winnie the Pooh --===============7730942106437506069==-- From mjd.bishop@emeritus-solutions.com Mon May 5 18:28:50 2025 From: Martin Bishop To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Mon, 05 May 2025 18:28:34 +0000 Message-ID: <2dfbde2adfcd4b92a8d505fa6c894f2a@emeritus-solutions.com> In-Reply-To: <3BA045C4-19FC-4A11-AEED-E8FCE586238E@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3973550212110963887==" --===============3973550212110963887== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Folks There was another Basic Language Machine, UK 1960's, nothing to do with the e= ponymous language and goo's AI seems able to halucinate it and microcode in r= esponses. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Iliffe_(computer_designer)#The_Basic_Langu= age_Machine The BLM was a precursor to the ICL 2900 and subsequent series of machines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICL_2900_Series Most interestingly the BLM/ICL 2900 was architected to work with Algol68 / S3= , just as the Boroughs 6500/7500 was designed for Algol 60. And, most intere= stingly they are architecturally very similar : objective, techniques, etc. See eg Siewiorek, Bell, Newell; "Computer Structures : Principles and Example= s; McGraw Hill; 1982; ISBN 0-07-057302-6; Part 2 Section 2 pp227ff Perhaps a demonstration of the perils of overloaded words, especially in the = age of AI Martin -----Original Message----- From: Paul Koning via cctalk [mailto:cctalk(a)classiccmp.org]=20 Sent: 04 May 2025 19:18 Good point. And yet another is ALGOL 60 -- the Burroughs mainframes are stac= k machines nicely matched to what ALGOL needs, and Burroughs created several = special-purpose languages based on ALGOL for that machine. The OS uses one (= ESPOL); there is one for the communications machinery (DC-ALGOL) and it has a= compiled ALGOL variant called WFL (work flow language) for the batch job con= trol. (As an analogy, imagine if "bash" were a compiler rather than an inter= preter.) paul --===============3973550212110963887==-- From blstuart@bellsouth.net Mon May 5 21:12:14 2025 From: "Brian L. Stuart" To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Mon, 05 May 2025 21:02:35 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2901290050648023399==" --===============2901290050648023399== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, May 05, 2025 at 04:09:29PM +0100, David Wade via cctalk wrote: > I think "Microprogramming" as a technique has been around as long as we have > had computers. Couldn't the setting up ENIAC to behave like a stored program > computer in 1948 be described as "Microprogramming"? That's an interesting question, but I'd say yes. I base that on the idea that microprogramming is essentially programming one universal machine to emulate another universal machine with the purpose of using the programming model of the second machine as one that is more convenient than that of the first. Of course, it doesn't look at all like the microprogramming we're used to, but I'd say it still applies. > > The Zuse Z1 from 1936(!) was microcoded, too. It implemented for example > > floating-point arithmetic and conversion instructions > > (binary<-->decimal). > > > > Christian I'd add that we can go back even farther. Babbage included a mechanism on the analytical engine for the more complex operations that was effectively microcode. I was implemented with a cylinder (referred to as a barrel) that you could screw blocks into. A set of levers were pressed against a line of block positions along the length of the cylinder and the presence or absence of a block would determine whether the connected mechanism is engaged. Then the cylinder is turned one step and the process repeated. The whole thing ends up being a lot like typical horizontal microcode. BLS --===============2901290050648023399==-- From bob099@centurytel.net Tue May 6 04:20:23 2025 From: Bob Yates To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Wang TTL BASIC Date: Mon, 05 May 2025 23:08:16 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1749858941539921881==" --===============1749858941539921881== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Schematics for your viewing pleasure.  More detailed information can be found in other parts of the website. https://www.wang2200.org/schematics.html --===============1749858941539921881==-- From stefaan@ponnet.com Tue May 6 04:53:50 2025 From: Stefaan Ponnet To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for an IF-20 interface for an Brother AX-45 typewriter Date: Mon, 05 May 2025 08:22:42 +0000 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7597104118662751523==" --===============7597104118662751523== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'm attempting to interface with the 15-pin connector on the AX-45. I'm assuming it uses a similar protocol as the IF-50 / IF-30 interface which has been described in other forums https://forum.classic-computing.de/forum/index.php?thread/29023-panasonic-r19= 1-mit-centronics-interface/ and has a working interface emulation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D1UJ5cyvNC_M I opened up the typewriter and traced the pins of the 15-pin centronics connector. So far I came up with this pin 1 : GND pin 2 : connected to the IC + has a pulldown resistor pin 3 : GND pin 4 : connected to the IC + has a pulldown resistor pin 5 : GND pin 6 : connected to the IC + has a pulldown resistor pin 7 : GND pin 8 : N/C pin 9 : N/C pin 10 : connected, but haven't been able to trace yet pin 11 : connected, but haven't been able to trace yet pin 12 : connected, but haven't been able to trace yet pin 13: N/C pin 14: N/C pin 15: N/C Probably these pins map to DATA CS CLK and ACK But this is still a work in progress - If we can figure out how to get the typewriter to listen to our commands we're one step closer to getting it to print. --===============7597104118662751523==-- From h.j.stegeman@hccnet.nl Wed May 7 05:36:16 2025 From: Henk Stegeman To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for IBM System/3 BASIC book Date: Tue, 06 May 2025 22:59:13 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1139054309151645395==" --===============1139054309151645395== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Steve, ...does that imply there was never a variation of BASIC written for the IBM 360/370? There is a VS BASIC, pgm-nr 5748-XX1, avail round 1976 OS/360 TSO BASIC, pgm-nr 5734-RC2 round 1971 A general BASIC language reference manual GC28-6837 pub date June 1970. What are your plans/project with this IBM BASIC ? Have you seen https://bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/system3/basic/5703-XM1_BASIC_V1.5/ ? Regards Henk --===============1139054309151645395==-- From lewissa78@gmail.com Wed May 7 05:50:33 2025 From: Steve Lewis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Wed, 07 May 2025 00:50:14 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5378313414187002963==" --===============5378313414187002963== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit For reference, Shirriff describes aspects of the 8086 microcode here How the 8086 processor's microcode engine works https://www.righto.com/2022/11/how-8086-processors-microcode-engine.html Including a reference to 1951 Wilkes concept. As the S/360 used microcode, I'm suspect if PALM used some form of microcode (which was developed at or near Boca Raton c.1971, but not much is known about it -- we have its instruction set documented as early at 1972, and the "M" is PALM is said to be Microcode). Just unclear what they really had going on in those SLT modules. But back on the original Wang question: I still can't find high resolution images of it's CPU board. According to 1991 discussion here on the 2200B, there is also mention of the system not really having an instruction set, BASIC was all it could do since it was "hard wired." https://groups.google.com/g/alt.folklore.computers/c/lb0DzzDja-Y I would think by 1991 they knew what a ROM was and would have called it as such, so I'm still curious if we have right on how that system worked. People may have had that impression about the IBM 5100, but we've showed it has a DSP (kind of diagnostic mode) where you code in PALM machine code (or even load "binary blobs" of previously stored PALM code onto tape [ video on it here, towards the end I load an IBM 5100 ported version of Corti's original one he did for the 5110 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2GYWyZyfpE ]), and the earliest PALM instruction docs we have is from 1972. That doc doesn't describe how many cycles each instruction takes, but I think in the IBM 5100 SLM docs it does imply they have a variable number of cycles. On Mon, May 5, 2025 at 4:18 PM Brian L. Stuart via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > On Mon, May 05, 2025 at 04:09:29PM +0100, David Wade via cctalk wrote: > > I think "Microprogramming" as a technique has been around as long as we > have > > had computers. Couldn't the setting up ENIAC to behave like a stored > program > > computer in 1948 be described as "Microprogramming"? > > That's an interesting question, but I'd say yes. I base that > on the idea that microprogramming is essentially programming > one universal machine to emulate another universal machine > with the purpose of using the programming model of the second > machine as one that is more convenient than that of the > first. Of course, it doesn't look at all like the microprogramming > we're used to, but I'd say it still applies. > > > > The Zuse Z1 from 1936(!) was microcoded, too. It implemented for > example > > > floating-point arithmetic and conversion instructions > > > (binary<-->decimal). > > > > > > Christian > > I'd add that we can go back even farther. Babbage included > a mechanism on the analytical engine for the more complex > operations that was effectively microcode. I was implemented > with a cylinder (referred to as a barrel) that you could > screw blocks into. A set of levers were pressed against > a line of block positions along the length of the cylinder > and the presence or absence of a block would determine > whether the connected mechanism is engaged. Then the cylinder > is turned one step and the process repeated. The whole > thing ends up being a lot like typical horizontal microcode. > > BLS > > --===============5378313414187002963==-- From lewissa78@gmail.com Wed May 7 06:20:30 2025 From: Steve Lewis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for IBM System/3 BASIC book Date: Wed, 07 May 2025 01:20:13 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1956000018537656124==" --===============1956000018537656124== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Thank you Henk, no I hadn't come across that system3/basic folder at bitsavers. But it is exactly what I was looking for! One intent was to try to verify that indeed the IBM 5100 is running the same "version" of BASIC as was on the native System/3 itself, and approximately when that version of BASIC was available (which seems to be 1971). Although we confirmed the 5100 is (when in "BASIC mode") running the S/3 emulation (we found the instruction jump table in the ROM), I was never really sure where that BASIC code had come from (the one implemented using S/3 instructions). [ now it might be interesting to do a hex comparison of the actual S/3 native BASIC -- what that S/3 emulator is running, and what we've extracted out of the IBM 5100; note the 5100 arranges things in 6KB segments, not every segment is fully used but code generally does straddle across two segments -- but the size is approximately 54KB, which any early microcomputer would struggle to handle that ] Cory is doing a talk about BASIC at June VCF - mostly from the microcomputer perspective, but I wasn't sure if he'd be interested in touching on any pre-1975 aspects (aside from its Dartmouth origin). The S/3 isn't quite a "boot to BASIC" system -- I was curious on the process of how it BASIC was started on this system, and page 12-14 of that Guide to BASIC PDF in the link you provided describes exactly that sequence (which I see followed in your example1/2.txt outputs-- any chance that S/3 emulator runs on a PC? Imagine a MAME front end with a Model 6 CRT depicted). Anyway, it leads to a question of what was the first boot-to-BASIC system? And tentatively I'm thinking that might have been the Wang 2200 (but I've no idea what the "lineage" of the Wang 2200 BASIC was). Yes, yes, there was the HP9830 (if the BASIC ROM cartridge was inserted) - sales of both systems seemed to have started really in '74. Thanks! Steve On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 12:43 AM Henk Stegeman via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > Hi Steve, > > ...does that imply there was never a variation of BASIC written for the > IBM 360/370? > > There is a VS BASIC, pgm-nr 5748-XX1, avail round 1976 > > OS/360 TSO BASIC, pgm-nr 5734-RC2 round 1971 > > A general BASIC language reference manual GC28-6837 pub date June 1970. > > What are your plans/project with this IBM BASIC ? > > Have you seen > https://bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/system3/basic/5703-XM1_BASIC_V1.5/ ? > > Regards > Henk > > --===============1956000018537656124==-- From lewissa78@gmail.com Wed May 7 06:32:52 2025 From: Steve Lewis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for IBM System/3 BASIC book Date: Wed, 07 May 2025 01:32:35 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1928141736386754377==" --===============1928141736386754377== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit >>> OS/360 TSO BASIC, pgm-nr 5734-RC2 round 1971 Interesting - then I wonder why in 1974 they bothered to build a S/3 emulator into the IBM 5100. They had already done the S/360 emulator and gotten APL working, so why not use this OS/360 version of BASIC? (well, OS/360 is the OS -- maybe there were more hooks and baggage in getting that working; i.e. they didn't want to pull over the entire OS/360 environment) Or maybe there were more features they liked about the S/3 version? Did the TSO BASIC have floating point, MAT, PRINT USING, etc? On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 12:43 AM Henk Stegeman via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > Hi Steve, > > ...does that imply there was never a variation of BASIC written for the > IBM 360/370? > > There is a VS BASIC, pgm-nr 5748-XX1, avail round 1976 > > OS/360 TSO BASIC, pgm-nr 5734-RC2 round 1971 > > A general BASIC language reference manual GC28-6837 pub date June 1970. > > What are your plans/project with this IBM BASIC ? > > Have you seen > https://bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/system3/basic/5703-XM1_BASIC_V1.5/ ? > > Regards > Henk > > --===============1928141736386754377==-- From cc@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de Wed May 7 06:53:06 2025 From: Christian Corti To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Wed, 07 May 2025 08:52:55 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3016259217483690653==" --===============3016259217483690653== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 7 May 2025, Steve Lewis wrote: > As the S/360 used microcode, I'm suspect if PALM used some form of > microcode (which was developed at or near Boca Raton c.1971, but not much > is known about it -- we have its instruction set documented as early at > 1972, and the "M" is PALM is said to be Microcode). Just unclear what they > really had going on in those SLT modules. Yes, the PALM is a (by modern terms) microcoded CPU. The block diagram and the processor data flow chart in the MIM show amongst the signals the microcode ROS (control ROS). > People may have had that impression about the IBM 5100, but we've showed it I wonder why, because the instruction set was documented in the 5100 MIM that was distributed with every machine. The omitted that part in the 5110 MIM, though. Christian --===============3016259217483690653==-- From bear@typewritten.org Wed May 7 09:01:12 2025 From: "r.stricklin" To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for IBM System/3 BASIC book Date: Wed, 07 May 2025 01:23:25 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3898467247643828205==" --===============3898467247643828205== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On May 6, 2025, at 11:32 PM, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote: >=20 >>>> OS/360 TSO BASIC, pgm-nr 5734-RC2 round 1971 >=20 > Interesting - then I wonder why in 1974 they bothered to build a S/3 > emulator into the IBM 5100. They had already done the S/360 emulator and > gotten APL working, so why not use this OS/360 version of BASIC? I wonder if you might be making unwarranted assumptions about the extent of w= hat is encompassed by the emulation. It=E2=80=99s at least plausible that the= state of the emulation required for implementing the APL interpreter was mis= sing some non-trivial set of features required by the BASIC interpreter. It=E2=80=99s also worth considering, as you point out, that perhaps the BASIC= inerpreter depended on some OS services. APL\360 had originally been its own= standalone timesharing environment. I=E2=80=99m unsure of whether that situa= tion was fully at an end by the time of APL\360 on DOS and MVT (1969ish) but = I don=E2=80=99t doubt the standalone code was likely still reasonably fresh b= y the time work was underway on the 5100. The S/3 BASIC may have been in a mo= re reasonable state for adapting to standalone operation on the 5100. I haven= =E2=80=99t kept up with all the scholarship around the history of the 5100 bu= t it=E2=80=99s also not exactly implausible that there was some phase of the = project where the thing had been two separate products. ok bear. --===============3898467247643828205==-- From mjd.bishop@emeritus-solutions.com Wed May 7 09:54:36 2025 From: Martin Bishop To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Wed, 07 May 2025 09:54:30 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2598335797356734524==" --===============2598335797356734524== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Steve Thank you for the link to Shrriff (below) - interesting and with valuable ref= erences, including from the commentariat Folks Two microprogramming URLs worth following up - both pdfs https://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/MicroprogrammingABriefHistoryOf.pdf 2012 comm= entary on microprogramming https://baltazarstudios.com/webshare/A-Z80/Library/Demystifying%2520Microproc= essor%2520Design%2520-%2520M.%2520Shima.pdf Z8000 design retrospective Enjoy Martin -----Original Message----- From: Steve Lewis via cctalk [mailto:cctalk(a)classiccmp.org]=20 Sent: 07 May 2025 05:50 To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Cc: Steve Lewis Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC For reference, Shirriff describes aspects of the 8086 microcode here How the = 8086 processor's microcode engine works https://www.righto.com/2022/11/how-8086-processors-microcode-engine.html Including a reference to 1951 Wilkes concept. As the S/360 used microcode, I'm suspect if PALM used some form of microcode = (which was developed at or near Boca Raton c.1971, but not much is known abou= t it -- we have its instruction set documented as early at 1972, and the "M" = is PALM is said to be Microcode). Just unclear what they really had going on= in those SLT modules. But back on the original Wang question: I still can't find high resolution im= ages of it's CPU board. According to 1991 discussion here on the 2200B, ther= e is also mention of the system not really having an instruction set, BASIC w= as all it could do since it was "hard wired." https://groups.google.com/g/alt.folklore.computers/c/lb0DzzDja-Y I would think by 1991 they knew what a ROM was and would have called it as su= ch, so I'm still curious if we have right on how that system worked. People may have had that impression about the IBM 5100, but we've showed it h= as a DSP (kind of diagnostic mode) where you code in PALM machine code (or ev= en load "binary blobs" of previously stored PALM code onto tape [ video on it= here, towards the end I load an IBM 5100 ported version of Corti's original = one he did for the 5110 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3De2GYWyZyfpE ]), and the earliest PALM instruction docs we have is from 1972. That doc do= esn't describe how many cycles each instruction takes, but I think in the IBM= 5100 SLM docs it does imply they have a variable number of cycles. On Mon, May 5, 2025 at 4:18=E2=80=AFPM Brian L. Stuart via cctalk < cctalk(a)= classiccmp.org> wrote: > On Mon, May 05, 2025 at 04:09:29PM +0100, David Wade via cctalk wrote: > > I think "Microprogramming" as a technique has been around as long as=20 > > we > have > > had computers. Couldn't the setting up ENIAC to behave like a stored > program > > computer in 1948 be described as "Microprogramming"? > > That's an interesting question, but I'd say yes. I base that on the=20 > idea that microprogramming is essentially programming one universal=20 > machine to emulate another universal machine with the purpose of using=20 > the programming model of the second machine as one that is more=20 > convenient than that of the first. Of course, it doesn't look at all=20 > like the microprogramming we're used to, but I'd say it still applies. > > > > The Zuse Z1 from 1936(!) was microcoded, too. It implemented for > example > > > floating-point arithmetic and conversion instructions=20 > > > (binary<-->decimal). > > > > > > Christian > > I'd add that we can go back even farther. Babbage included a=20 > mechanism on the analytical engine for the more complex operations=20 > that was effectively microcode. I was implemented with a cylinder=20 > (referred to as a barrel) that you could screw blocks into. A set of=20 > levers were pressed against a line of block positions along the length=20 > of the cylinder and the presence or absence of a block would determine=20 > whether the connected mechanism is engaged. Then the cylinder is=20 > turned one step and the process repeated. The whole thing ends up=20 > being a lot like typical horizontal microcode. > > BLS > > --===============2598335797356734524==-- From lewissa78@gmail.com Wed May 7 11:50:37 2025 From: Steve Lewis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for IBM System/3 BASIC book Date: Wed, 07 May 2025 06:50:19 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1604465257423570436==" --===============1604465257423570436== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > I wonder if you might be making unwarranted assumptions about the extent of what is encompassed by the emulation. It=E2=80=99s at least plausible that= the > state of the emulation required for implementing the APL interpreter was missing some non-trivial set of features required by the BASIC interpreter. Certainly possible - we've found the jump tables in both emulators that gives an inventory of what opcodes they supported, and to fit in the capacity and cost (of what amount of software could be fitted into a slotted card at the time) that they were targeting, some compromises had to be made [ so neither were a "general 100% cycle accurate" kind of emulation, rather the focus was on supporting the essentials necessary for those respective applications of APL and BASIC, adapted from line-printer over to kbd/CRT fashion ] I recall in the SCAMP Joe George engineering docs, there was an entry where they had trouble funding or obtaining a "spare" System/3 for their development (that being IBMs own internal developers). I'm on travel and will have to lookup the exact reference later. Perhaps similarly, whatever S/360 they borrowed or used previously was no longer available. So (maybe) just being pragmatic on what was available to them at the time, they went the S/3 route. Another reason might possibly be: iirc, 1975 the trial portion of IBMs long antitrust suite was starting (the decade long one ending right at the release of the IBM PC in 1981). That being the issue of coupling software to their hardware. A thought was that by at least showing the concept that "some other language" could essentially be plugged into the system, it at least gives the impression that a third-party could technically do the same. Of course no one ever did (I'm not sure if they'd have access to enough info then to do so), but there was mention of a FORTRAN card concept for the system. Aspects along these lines are also implied in the dev journal mentioned above (if not for third party, but even in internal debate and justification by Friedl to get the project funded, a la "you want to build WHAT?" kind of discussions to a mainframe oriented business unit). Dennis Robinson might still be available to chime in on this aspect. -Steve On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 5:18=E2=80=AFAM r.stricklin via cctalk wrote: > > > > On May 6, 2025, at 11:32 PM, Steve Lewis via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > >>>> OS/360 TSO BASIC, pgm-nr 5734-RC2 round 1971 > > > > Interesting - then I wonder why in 1974 they bothered to build a S/3 > > emulator into the IBM 5100. They had already done the S/360 emulator > and > > gotten APL working, so why not use this OS/360 version of BASIC? > > I wonder if you might be making unwarranted assumptions about the extent > of what is encompassed by the emulation. It=E2=80=99s at least plausible th= at the > state of the emulation required for implementing the APL interpreter was > missing some non-trivial set of features required by the BASIC interpreter. > > It=E2=80=99s also worth considering, as you point out, that perhaps the BAS= IC > inerpreter depended on some OS services. APL\360 had originally been its > own standalone timesharing environment. I=E2=80=99m unsure of whether that > situation was fully at an end by the time of APL\360 on DOS and MVT > (1969ish) but I don=E2=80=99t doubt the standalone code was likely still re= asonably > fresh by the time work was underway on the 5100. The S/3 BASIC may have > been in a more reasonable state for adapting to standalone operation on the > 5100. I haven=E2=80=99t kept up with all the scholarship around the history= of the > 5100 but it=E2=80=99s also not exactly implausible that there was some phas= e of the > project where the thing had been two separate products. > > ok > bear. > > --===============1604465257423570436==-- From billdegnan@gmail.com Wed May 7 14:24:40 2025 From: Bill Degnan To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for IBM System/3 BASIC book Date: Wed, 07 May 2025 10:24:22 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============9196335454267993778==" --===============9196335454267993778== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable BASIC was not supported on a SYSTEM/3 machine I don't believe, but there was a BASIC reference manual 65-2211-7 1974, that would have been for the 370, same time period at least. On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 8:13=E2=80=AFAM Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote: > > I wonder if you might be making unwarranted assumptions about the extent > of what is encompassed by the emulation. It=E2=80=99s at least plausible th= at the > > state of the emulation required for implementing the APL interpreter was > missing some non-trivial set of features required by the BASIC interpreter. > > Certainly possible - we've found the jump tables in both emulators that > gives an inventory of what opcodes they supported, and to fit in the > capacity and cost (of what amount of software could be fitted into a > slotted card at the time) that they were targeting, some compromises had to > be made [ so neither were a "general 100% cycle accurate" kind of > emulation, rather the focus was on supporting the essentials necessary for > those respective applications of APL and BASIC, adapted from line-printer > over to kbd/CRT fashion ] > > I recall in the SCAMP Joe George engineering docs, there was an entry where > they had trouble funding or obtaining a "spare" System/3 for their > development (that being IBMs own internal developers). I'm on travel and > will have to lookup the exact reference later. Perhaps similarly, whatever > S/360 they borrowed or used previously was no longer available. So > (maybe) just being pragmatic on what was available to them at the time, > they went the S/3 route. > > Another reason might possibly be: iirc, 1975 the trial portion of IBMs long > antitrust suite was starting (the decade long one ending right at the > release of the IBM PC in 1981). That being the issue of coupling software > to their hardware. A thought was that by at least showing the concept that > "some other language" could essentially be plugged into the system, it at > least gives the impression that a third-party could technically do the > same. Of course no one ever did (I'm not sure if they'd have access to > enough info then to do so), but there was mention of a FORTRAN card concept > for the system. Aspects along these lines are also implied in the dev > journal mentioned above (if not for third party, but even in internal > debate and justification by Friedl to get the project funded, a la "you > want to build WHAT?" kind of discussions to a mainframe oriented business > unit). Dennis Robinson might still be available to chime in on this > aspect. > > -Steve > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 5:18=E2=80=AFAM r.stricklin via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> > wrote: > > > > > > > > On May 6, 2025, at 11:32 PM, Steve Lewis via cctalk < > > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > > >>>> OS/360 TSO BASIC, pgm-nr 5734-RC2 round 1971 > > > > > > Interesting - then I wonder why in 1974 they bothered to build a S/3 > > > emulator into the IBM 5100. They had already done the S/360 emulator > > and > > > gotten APL working, so why not use this OS/360 version of BASIC? > > > > I wonder if you might be making unwarranted assumptions about the extent > > of what is encompassed by the emulation. It=E2=80=99s at least plausible = that the > > state of the emulation required for implementing the APL interpreter was > > missing some non-trivial set of features required by the BASIC > interpreter. > > > > It=E2=80=99s also worth considering, as you point out, that perhaps the B= ASIC > > inerpreter depended on some OS services. APL\360 had originally been its > > own standalone timesharing environment. I=E2=80=99m unsure of whether that > > situation was fully at an end by the time of APL\360 on DOS and MVT > > (1969ish) but I don=E2=80=99t doubt the standalone code was likely still > reasonably > > fresh by the time work was underway on the 5100. The S/3 BASIC may have > > been in a more reasonable state for adapting to standalone operation on > the > > 5100. I haven=E2=80=99t kept up with all the scholarship around the histo= ry of > the > > 5100 but it=E2=80=99s also not exactly implausible that there was some ph= ase of > the > > project where the thing had been two separate products. > > > > ok > > bear. > > > > > --===============9196335454267993778==-- From wrcooke@wrcooke.net Wed May 7 17:45:40 2025 From: wrcooke@wrcooke.net To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Wed, 07 May 2025 13:45:31 -0400 Message-ID: <1085085161.527611.1746639931777@email.ionos.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4126376290416277293==" --===============4126376290416277293== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Coincidentally, this link to photos of a Wang 2200 came through a facebook gr= oup today. Apparently he recently acquired one. Will https://www.icloud.com/sharedalbum/?fbclid=3DIwY2xjawKIevhleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBicm= lkETFtb3YxUHpBRnZ5QnlJUGFuAR5jcMRIH9jACdejVSeRcDn7rOINwo8s0v0_MaGzHOkKvOh_408= 2rb7ZwqgRnw_aem_kRxA2kc8dT0rptH0GpU6_Q#B2SGrhkPxGqMPcS > On 05/07/2025 5:54 AM EDT Martin Bishop via cctalk wrote: >=20 > =20 > Steve >=20 > Thank you for the link to Shrriff (below) - interesting and with valuable r= eferences, including from the commentariat >=20 > Folks >=20 > Two microprogramming URLs worth following up - both pdfs > https://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/MicroprogrammingABriefHistoryOf.pdf 2012 co= mmentary on microprogramming > https://baltazarstudios.com/webshare/A-Z80/Library/Demystifying%2520Micropr= ocessor%2520Design%2520-%2520M.%2520Shima.pdf Z8000 design retrospective >=20 > Enjoy >=20 > Martin >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Lewis via cctalk [mailto:cctalk(a)classiccmp.org]=20 > Sent: 07 May 2025 05:50 > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > Cc: Steve Lewis > Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC >=20 > For reference, Shirriff describes aspects of the 8086 microcode here How th= e 8086 processor's microcode engine works > https://www.righto.com/2022/11/how-8086-processors-microcode-engine.html >=20 > Including a reference to 1951 Wilkes concept. >=20 > As the S/360 used microcode, I'm suspect if PALM used some form of microcod= e (which was developed at or near Boca Raton c.1971, but not much is known ab= out it -- we have its instruction set documented as early at 1972, and the "M= " is PALM is said to be Microcode). Just unclear what they really had going = on in those SLT modules. >=20 > But back on the original Wang question: I still can't find high resolution = images of it's CPU board. According to 1991 discussion here on the 2200B, th= ere is also mention of the system not really having an instruction set, BASIC= was all it could do since it was "hard wired." > https://groups.google.com/g/alt.folklore.computers/c/lb0DzzDja-Y > I would think by 1991 they knew what a ROM was and would have called it as = such, so I'm still curious if we have right on how that system worked. >=20 > People may have had that impression about the IBM 5100, but we've showed it= has a DSP (kind of diagnostic mode) where you code in PALM machine code (or = even load "binary blobs" of previously stored PALM code onto tape [ video on = it here, towards the end I load an IBM 5100 ported version of Corti's origina= l one he did for the 5110 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3De2GYWyZyfpE > ]), and the earliest PALM instruction docs we have is from 1972. That doc = doesn't describe how many cycles each instruction takes, but I think in the I= BM 5100 SLM docs it does imply they have a variable number of cycles. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > On Mon, May 5, 2025 at 4:18=E2=80=AFPM Brian L. Stuart via cctalk < cctalk(= a)classiccmp.org> wrote: >=20 > > On Mon, May 05, 2025 at 04:09:29PM +0100, David Wade via cctalk wrote: > > > I think "Microprogramming" as a technique has been around as long as=20 > > > we > > have > > > had computers. Couldn't the setting up ENIAC to behave like a stored > > program > > > computer in 1948 be described as "Microprogramming"? > > > > That's an interesting question, but I'd say yes. I base that on the=20 > > idea that microprogramming is essentially programming one universal=20 > > machine to emulate another universal machine with the purpose of using=20 > > the programming model of the second machine as one that is more=20 > > convenient than that of the first. Of course, it doesn't look at all=20 > > like the microprogramming we're used to, but I'd say it still applies. > > > > > > The Zuse Z1 from 1936(!) was microcoded, too. It implemented for > > example > > > > floating-point arithmetic and conversion instructions=20 > > > > (binary<-->decimal). > > > > > > > > Christian > > > > I'd add that we can go back even farther. Babbage included a=20 > > mechanism on the analytical engine for the more complex operations=20 > > that was effectively microcode. I was implemented with a cylinder=20 > > (referred to as a barrel) that you could screw blocks into. A set of=20 > > levers were pressed against a line of block positions along the length=20 > > of the cylinder and the presence or absence of a block would determine=20 > > whether the connected mechanism is engaged. Then the cylinder is=20 > > turned one step and the process repeated. The whole thing ends up=20 > > being a lot like typical horizontal microcode. > > > > BLS > > > > You just can't beat the person who never gives up. Babe Ruth --===============4126376290416277293==-- From jdbryan@acm.org Wed May 7 18:23:25 2025 From: "J. David Bryan" To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Wed, 07 May 2025 14:23:16 -0400 Message-ID: <4Zt3Y06Hz3zlvhyM@003.mia.mailroute.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6083787611257606576==" --===============6083787611257606576== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wednesday, May 7, 2025 at 0:50, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote: > But back on the original Wang question: I still can't find high > resolution images of it's CPU board. According to 1991 discussion here > on the 2200B, there is also mention of the system not really having an > instruction set, BASIC was all it could do since it was "hard wired." Section 4 of the "2200 Systems Maintenance Manual" here: http://www.wang2200.org/docs.html ...contains the theory of operation of the CPU. Subsection 4.2 is the "General Instruction Set Description." The BASIC interpreter is contained in ROM providing 20-bit instructions that are executed by the hardware. The "Wang 2200 CPU schematics" here: http://www.wang2200.org/schematics.html ...show that the ALU is a single 74181, implying essentially a 4-bit processor. -- Dave --===============6083787611257606576==-- From holm@freibergnet.de Wed May 7 18:47:38 2025 From: Holm Tiffe To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Wed, 07 May 2025 20:37:24 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4Zt3Y06Hz3zlvhyM@003.mia.mailroute.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2613651068180772493==" --===============2613651068180772493== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit J. David Bryan via cctalk wrote: > > ...contains the theory of operation of the CPU. Subsection 4.2 is the > "General Instruction Set Description." The BASIC interpreter is contained > in ROM providing 20-bit instructions that are executed by the hardware. > > The "Wang 2200 CPU schematics" here: > > http://www.wang2200.org/schematics.html > > ...show that the ALU is a single 74181, implying essentially a 4-bit > processor. > > -- Dave Dave a Z80 has an 4 Bit ALU, but isn't essentially a 4-bit processor. Regards, Holm BTW: I have two Wang 2200 waiting in my garage until I have time to look at them... -- Technik Service u. Handel Tiffe, www.tsht.de, Holm Tiffe, Goethestrasse 15, 09569 Oederan, USt-Id: DE253710583 info(a)tsht.de Tel +49 37292 709778 Mobil: 0172 8790 741 --===============2613651068180772493==-- From jdbryan@acm.org Wed May 7 21:59:20 2025 From: "J. David Bryan" To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Wed, 07 May 2025 17:59:24 -0400 Message-ID: <4Zt8LB1KSwzlnfZT@003.mia.mailroute.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5207910364403847997==" --===============5207910364403847997== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wednesday, May 7, 2025 at 20:37, Holm Tiffe via cctalk wrote: > Dave a Z80 has an 4 Bit ALU, but isn't essentially a 4-bit processor. I'm not familiar with the Z80 internals. However, the 2200 theory of operation manual states, "The eight 4-bit File Registers are used as general purpose registers during arithmetic computations and related calculator processing." Also, "When data is written into memory, only four bits from the data bus can be written at a time." Also, the immediate machine instructions supply only 4-bit operand values. These plus the presence of decimal instructions seem suggestive to me that the machine is designed to process digit-serial BCD numbers. -- Dave --===============5207910364403847997==-- From lewissa78@gmail.com Thu May 8 00:06:52 2025 From: Steve Lewis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wang TTL BASIC Date: Wed, 07 May 2025 19:06:33 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4Zt3Y06Hz3zlvhyM@003.mia.mailroute.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5130651450209628453==" --===============5130651450209628453== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit ? Section 4 of the "2200 Systems Maintenance Manual" here: ... > ...contains the theory of operation of the CPU. Subsection 4.2 is the > "General Instruction Set Description." The BASIC interpreter is contained Thanks! Exploring more through this reference.. Page 88 in the larger (filesize) version of that Systems of Operations (last sentence): "In a similar manner, the complete microprogram is written to produce the desired results and then is stored in a 'hardwired' Instruction Memory." Not sure why they put 'hardwired' in quotes, instead of just saying memory address (unless, as someone earlier suggested, they just hadn't evolved up to that terminology yet). The instructions (from the table) seem to be 20-bit: most of the opcodes are 5-bit, except branch instructions being 4-bit. The operand registers are 4-bit. Page 93, 4.3 first sentence: "As mentioned in 4.1, the BASIC Interpreter contained in Instruction ROM is the important link between the user's BASIC program and the machine instructions." This followed by a memory map of RAM (for symbol tables). Later, the BASIC tokens are referred to as "text atom" (apparently 96 tokens each with a 16-bit address pointer for handling). Like the IBM 5100 (and S/3 before it), the line of BASIC must be syntactically valid before it is accepted/stored. Like the 5100 manuals, they use the term microprogram and microcode (which I think in their usage, are equivalent to what we today call machine code and instruction set). Then Section 4.4.1 goes cycle by cycle on the startup sequence. The PDF (for me) isn't searchable, so I'm not seeing reference to any "hot key" to enable any kind of built in monitor/machine code entry like the 5100 had. Neat stuff! On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 2:13 PM J. David Bryan via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > On Wednesday, May 7, 2025 at 0:50, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote: > > > But back on the original Wang question: I still can't find high > > resolution images of it's CPU board. According to 1991 discussion here > > on the 2200B, there is also mention of the system not really having an > > instruction set, BASIC was all it could do since it was "hard wired." > > Section 4 of the "2200 Systems Maintenance Manual" here: > > http://www.wang2200.org/docs.html > > ...contains the theory of operation of the CPU. Subsection 4.2 is the > "General Instruction Set Description." The BASIC interpreter is contained > in ROM providing 20-bit instructions that are executed by the hardware. > > The "Wang 2200 CPU schematics" here: > > http://www.wang2200.org/schematics.html > > ...show that the ALU is a single 74181, implying essentially a 4-bit > processor. > > -- Dave > > --===============5130651450209628453==-- From bitwiz@12bitsbest.com Thu May 8 01:50:00 2025 From: Mike Katz To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] May Repair and Social Meeting Date: Wed, 07 May 2025 20:10:12 -0500 Message-ID: <8ed75a1d-cc69-438d-8cdc-37eb75ef7c2f@12bitsbest.com> In-Reply-To: <60acc78fe5ec437cbbdbbb7665e9ff76@emeritus-solutions.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6542989547212821476==" --===============6542989547212821476== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit The next CCC repiar/social meeting will be at my house in Glen Ellyn on May 17th starting at 2pm and ending with everyone gets tired and leaves.  As usual pop, water and beer will be provided and everyone will chip in for pizza. I have a friend who has several Macintosh's that are in need of repair.  I have his SE here now. If you are a MAC persion, please come and give us a hand. I will see you all then. Mike Katz 385 Saint Charles Rd Glen Ellyn, Il  60137-3794 +1 (773) 414-1044 See you all on the 17th.      Mike On 4/13/2025 5:49 AM, Martin Bishop via cctalk wrote: > The Sanyo Denki readers I have known use sprocket wheel feed, an > additional means of damaging tapes. > > The Fanuc readers use a friction pinch, "rubber on steel", so they > can't "saw" the tapes. > > Perhaps a consideration - if one has a choice > > Martin > > -----Original Message----- > From: Chuck Guzis via cctalk [mailto:cctalk(a)classiccmp.org] > Sent: 13 April 2025 02:18 > To: Ethan Dicks via cctalk > Cc: Chuck Guzis > Subject: [cctalk] Re: Paper Tape Reader Needed > > My PT reader is a Sanyo Denki, from a piece of CNC gear. (Bitsavers > has some docs on those), Added a +5/+24 power suppy and a STM32 "Blue > Pill" > MCU interfacing as a USB communications device. > > Easy peasy and woks a treat. > > --Chuck --===============6542989547212821476==-- From epekstrom@gmail.com Thu May 8 16:42:31 2025 From: Peter Ekstrom To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] VMR question for RSX11M and DECnet CEX Date: Thu, 08 May 2025 12:42:10 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4408966644695138022==" --===============4408966644695138022== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I am putting together a PDP-11/23 and have a working RSX-11M 4.4 OS running in simh while I wait for a few parts. I want DECnet as well. I have the 4.7 kit and have done a netgen, but I can't install it because I don't have the CEXPAR partition in my system image. I have gone over the VMR command in the manual a few times and tried various things to try and create the partition in my image, but have not been successful. I assume (from looking in the manuals) that I either need to create that partition in my image, or make room for it? The netgen process has the defaults of 113500 as the base and 4300 as the size. VMR complains about 'non-existing memory' for the base and if I try the wild card I get 'alignment error'. I have 512KW of memory that I plan to use in the real machine, so simh is configured with that as well. Any pointers would be greatly appreciated. -Peter --===============4408966644695138022==-- From h.j.stegeman@hccnet.nl Thu May 8 19:15:21 2025 From: Henk Stegeman To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for IBM System/3 BASIC book Date: Thu, 08 May 2025 18:11:56 +0200 Message-ID: <370dfbef-ffa5-437e-b8e2-2d62f974d5d8@hccnet.nl> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1497784372370398431==" --===============1497784372370398431== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit A few corrections: The BASIC on the S/3 model 6 was a "boot to BASIC" system. You could IPL BASIC from R1 or business SCP from F1. This BASIC system had virtual memory implemented. Real storage was 8 or 16k but in the BASIC environment approximately 54KB was available during execution. Only thing IBM did was reuse of the Psuedo machine code definition in the 5100. Another nice feature of this BASIC was the online helpfiles. Regards Henk --===============1497784372370398431==-- From lewissa78@gmail.com Thu May 8 22:16:09 2025 From: Steve Lewis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for IBM System/3 BASIC book Date: Thu, 08 May 2025 17:15:52 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <370dfbef-ffa5-437e-b8e2-2d62f974d5d8@hccnet.nl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0176532408770523620==" --===============0176532408770523620== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Makes sense, IPL (instruction program load?) - how were the disk packs initialized to indicate it was an IPL media? I assume the content to be loaded had to be on a specific sector or of a file-type indicating it is to be loaded on startup? And it is "boot to BASIC" (in quotes) mainly because the operator has to do the effort of at least inserting the proper disk (but it was a "pack", not just a single disk?) I assume SCP is a serial line of some fashion, to support that idea of remote-loading of an OS or startup software? Kind-of sort of an early form of PXE to "boot from a network"? While we're here, another note: on the SCAMP, they emulated the IBM 1130's version of APL (so I may have misspoken earlier - it wasn't an IBM S/3 they had trouble sourcing, but rather during the SCAMP dev it was an IBM 1130 they had trouble finding to borrow/lease). This SCAMP was the prototype leading to the IBM 5100 (where in the IBM 5100, they switched to using an S/360 based APL). On an off-chance of any IBMers out there, I'm still looking for Kitty Price or Patrick Smith (two known experts of the PALM processor, they wrote a paper referring to it in 1974). In the appendix of that paper, they refer to a "1130 PALM Simulator" (i.e. before the PALM was available to them, someone had developed a simulator of it on the 1130). Then in the next section, they refer to a "1130 Simulator which runs under VM/370". Finding any of that software would be incredible. > On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 2:38=E2=80=AFPM Henk Stegeman via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > A few corrections: > The BASIC on the S/3 model 6 was a "boot to BASIC" system. You could IPL > BASIC from R1 > or business SCP from F1. > > This BASIC system had virtual memory implemented. Real storage was 8 or > 16k but in the > BASIC environment approximately 54KB was available during execution. > > Only thing IBM did was reuse of the Psuedo machine code definition in > the 5100. > > Another nice feature of this BASIC was the online helpfiles. > > Regards Henk > > > --===============0176532408770523620==-- From wayne.sudol@hotmail.com Thu May 8 23:26:53 2025 From: Wayne S To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for IBM System/3 BASIC book Date: Thu, 08 May 2025 23:26:46 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5230211112386363661==" --===============5230211112386363661== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Just for clarity IPL =3D Initial Program Load IMPL =3D Initial Machine Program Load=20 Sent from my iPhone > On May 8, 2025, at 15:23, Steve Lewis via cctalk = wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BFMakes sense, IPL (instruction program load?) - how were the disk p= acks > initialized to indicate it was an IPL media? I assume the content to be > loaded had to be on a specific sector or of a file-type indicating it is to > be loaded on startup? And it is "boot to BASIC" (in quotes) mainly because > the operator has to do the effort of at least inserting the proper disk > (but it was a "pack", not just a single disk?) >=20 > I assume SCP is a serial line of some fashion, to support that idea of > remote-loading of an OS or startup software? Kind-of sort of an early form > of PXE to "boot from a network"? >=20 >=20 > While we're here, another note: on the SCAMP, they emulated the IBM 1130's > version of APL (so I may have misspoken earlier - it wasn't an IBM S/3 they > had trouble sourcing, but rather during the SCAMP dev it was an IBM 1130 > they had trouble finding to borrow/lease). This SCAMP was the prototype > leading to the IBM 5100 (where in the IBM 5100, they switched to using an > S/360 based APL). >=20 >=20 > On an off-chance of any IBMers out there, I'm still looking for Kitty Price > or Patrick Smith (two known experts of the PALM processor, they wrote a > paper referring to it in 1974). In the appendix of that paper, they refer > to a "1130 PALM Simulator" (i.e. before the PALM was available to them, > someone had developed a simulator of it on the 1130). Then in the next > section, they refer to a "1130 Simulator which runs under VM/370". Finding > any of that software would be incredible. > at main =C2=B7 voidstar78/SCAMP > >>=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >> On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 2:38=E2=80=AFPM Henk Stegeman via cctalk < >> cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: >>=20 >> A few corrections: >> The BASIC on the S/3 model 6 was a "boot to BASIC" system. You could IPL >> BASIC from R1 >> or business SCP from F1. >>=20 >> This BASIC system had virtual memory implemented. Real storage was 8 or >> 16k but in the >> BASIC environment approximately 54KB was available during execution. >>=20 >> Only thing IBM did was reuse of the Psuedo machine code definition in >> the 5100. >>=20 >> Another nice feature of this BASIC was the online helpfiles. >>=20 >> Regards Henk >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 --===============5230211112386363661==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Fri May 9 00:46:47 2025 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for IBM System/3 BASIC book Date: Thu, 08 May 2025 20:46:28 -0400 Message-ID: <19113408-8D96-4E67-9FA9-ACC99E7F4FFB@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2402192823103651874==" --===============2402192823103651874== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On May 8, 2025, at 6:15=E2=80=AFPM, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote: >=20 > Makes sense, IPL (instruction program load?) "Initial Program Load" > - how were the disk packs > initialized to indicate it was an IPL media? I assume the content to be > loaded had to be on a specific sector or of a file-type indicating it is to > be loaded on startup?=20 I don't know any system other than the 360 and that one only very vaguely. I= think it would load one record (a card, if IPL from the card reader; a secto= r, probably the first one, if disk; don't know about tape) and execute that. = And I think that the loaded data is a channel program, so it's handled to th= e IPL channel to execute. A special case is "Emulator IPL" on the 360 model 44, which loads the special= memory (inaccessible from normal execution) that contains the code to emulat= e SS class instrutions. The emulator is provided as a card deck, in standard= assembler object file output format, one object data record per card. And t= he loader is a self-modifying channel program that reads in the entire emulat= or deck by an impressive mix of data and command chaining, picking up the dat= a load address and length fields of each object card to modify the CCW that t= hen reads the data bytes into the correct memory location. paul --===============2402192823103651874==-- From bitwiz@12bitsbest.com Fri May 9 00:48:08 2025 From: Mike Katz To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Looking for ASR-33 Roll Paper and Paper Tape Date: Thu, 08 May 2025 19:48:02 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7984211450486567635==" --===============7984211450486567635== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I will soon receive an ASR-33 and I will need roll paper, 1" rolled (preferably oiled) paper tape and a ribbon or two. Please DM me if you have any to spare. Thank you, . Mike --===============7984211450486567635==-- From epekstrom@gmail.com Fri May 9 01:24:56 2025 From: Peter Ekstrom To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: VMR question for RSX11M and DECnet CEX Date: Thu, 08 May 2025 21:24:36 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7048539336459233341==" --===============7048539336459233341== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I figured it out. Wohoo! On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 12:42 PM Peter Ekstrom wrote: > I am putting together a PDP-11/23 and have a working RSX-11M 4.4 OS > running in simh while I wait for a few parts. I want DECnet as well. I have > the 4.7 kit and have done a netgen, but I can't install it because I don't > have the CEXPAR partition in my system image. I have gone over the VMR > command in the manual a few times and tried various things to try and > create the partition in my image, but have not been successful. I assume > (from looking in the manuals) that I either need to create that partition > in my image, or make room for it? > > The netgen process has the defaults of 113500 as the base and 4300 as the > size. VMR complains about 'non-existing memory' for the base and if I try > the wild card I get 'alignment error'. > > I have 512KW of memory that I plan to use in the real machine, so simh is > configured with that as well. > > Any pointers would be greatly appreciated. > > -Peter > > --===============7048539336459233341==-- From classiccmp@fjl.co.uk Fri May 9 01:47:17 2025 From: Frank Leonhardt To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for ASR-33 Roll Paper and Paper Tape Date: Fri, 09 May 2025 11:47:03 +1000 Message-ID: <7c67dcc5-4c79-4d11-8577-0338318d115d@fjl.co.uk> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3993274549962323514==" --===============3993274549962323514== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 9/05/2025 10:48 am, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: > I will soon receive an ASR-33 and I will need roll paper, 1" rolled > (preferably oiled) paper tape and a ribbon or two. > > Please DM me if you have any to spare. > Paper is easy enough - its a standard telex roll and they're still made and sold. We used to have it in two grades in England - high quality white for special occasions (use a new ribbon and clean the head first and it almost looks good), and bog roll. If you know, you know ;-)  Just make sure you don't order the thermal version by mistake. Telex ribbons are still made and sold in the usual places too. You can fit a standard typewrite ribbon but of course they're normally black/red. Pretty effect but probably not what you're after. Paper tape is more of a problem but GNT still makes 1" (or did last time I bought some). You don't say where you are (no one ever does on this list) but they're in England. It's still used for CNC machines, amongst other things. Getting the five-hole is more of a problem IME. Regards, Frank. --===============3993274549962323514==-- From dave.g4ugm@gmail.com Fri May 9 07:08:00 2025 From: David Wade To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for ASR-33 Roll Paper and Paper Tape Date: Fri, 09 May 2025 08:07:53 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <7c67dcc5-4c79-4d11-8577-0338318d115d@fjl.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1951707170270667712==" --===============1951707170270667712== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 09/05/2025 02:47, Frank Leonhardt via cctalk wrote: > On 9/05/2025 10:48 am, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: >> I will soon receive an ASR-33 and I will need roll paper, 1" rolled >> (preferably oiled) paper tape and a ribbon or two. >> >> Please DM me if you have any to spare. >> > Paper is easy enough - its a standard telex roll and they're still > made and sold. We used to have it in two grades in England - high > quality white for special occasions (use a new ribbon and clean the > head first and it almost looks good), and bog roll. If you know, you > know ;-)  Just make sure you don't order the thermal version by mistake. > > Telex ribbons are still made and sold in the usual places too. You can > fit a standard typewrite ribbon but of course they're normally > black/red. Pretty effect but probably not what you're after. > > Paper tape is more of a problem but GNT still makes 1" (or did last > time I bought some). You don't say where you are (no one ever does on > this list) but they're in England. It's still used for CNC machines, > amongst other things. Getting the five-hole is more of a problem IME. > Sadly GNT is no more:- https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/01895522 I do have some paper tape and telex rolls in the UK. Also wide 11" music ruled line printer paper. > Regards, Frank. > > Dave --===============1951707170270667712==-- From artgodwin@gmail.com Fri May 9 08:03:11 2025 From: Adrian Godwin To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for ASR-33 Roll Paper and Paper Tape Date: Fri, 09 May 2025 09:02:54 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3949862262967893334==" --===============3949862262967893334== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Not relevant for you but relatedly, I just bought silent 700 thermal paper. Won't be available forever. https://www.mrpaper.co.uk/catalogsearch/result/?q=3DTH216-15 This is the same as fax paper but apparently the fax paper rolls hold more paper and won't fit the roll holder on the silent 700. On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 8:18=E2=80=AFAM David Wade via cctalk wrote: > > > On 09/05/2025 02:47, Frank Leonhardt via cctalk wrote: > > On 9/05/2025 10:48 am, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: > >> I will soon receive an ASR-33 and I will need roll paper, 1" rolled > >> (preferably oiled) paper tape and a ribbon or two. > >> > >> Please DM me if you have any to spare. > >> > > Paper is easy enough - its a standard telex roll and they're still > > made and sold. We used to have it in two grades in England - high > > quality white for special occasions (use a new ribbon and clean the > > head first and it almost looks good), and bog roll. If you know, you > > know ;-) Just make sure you don't order the thermal version by mistake. > > > > Telex ribbons are still made and sold in the usual places too. You can > > fit a standard typewrite ribbon but of course they're normally > > black/red. Pretty effect but probably not what you're after. > > > > Paper tape is more of a problem but GNT still makes 1" (or did last > > time I bought some). You don't say where you are (no one ever does on > > this list) but they're in England. It's still used for CNC machines, > > amongst other things. Getting the five-hole is more of a problem IME. > > > Sadly GNT is no more:- > > https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/01895522 > > I do have some paper tape and telex rolls in the UK. Also wide 11" music > ruled line printer paper. > > Regards, Frank. > > > > > Dave > > --===============3949862262967893334==-- From billdegnan@gmail.com Fri May 9 12:46:27 2025 From: Bill Degnan To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for ASR-33 Roll Paper and Paper Tape Date: Fri, 09 May 2025 08:46:10 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3101590160019298338==" --===============3101590160019298338== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Oiled paper is preferred if you can get it, but at this point it would be expensive surplus. If you get non-oiled paper I don’t know if there would be additional occasional mechanism maintenance needed. I guess take what you can get. Bill On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 4:28 AM Adrian Godwin via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > Not relevant for you but relatedly, I just bought silent 700 thermal paper. > Won't be available forever. > https://www.mrpaper.co.uk/catalogsearch/result/?q=TH216-15 > > This is the same as fax paper but apparently the fax paper rolls hold more > paper and won't fit the roll holder on the silent 700. > > > > > On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 8:18 AM David Wade via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> > wrote: > > > > > > > On 09/05/2025 02:47, Frank Leonhardt via cctalk wrote: > > > On 9/05/2025 10:48 am, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: > > >> I will soon receive an ASR-33 and I will need roll paper, 1" rolled > > >> (preferably oiled) paper tape and a ribbon or two. > > >> > > >> Please DM me if you have any to spare. > > >> > > > Paper is easy enough - its a standard telex roll and they're still > > > made and sold. We used to have it in two grades in England - high > > > quality white for special occasions (use a new ribbon and clean the > > > head first and it almost looks good), and bog roll. If you know, you > > > know ;-) Just make sure you don't order the thermal version by > mistake. > > > > > > Telex ribbons are still made and sold in the usual places too. You can > > > fit a standard typewrite ribbon but of course they're normally > > > black/red. Pretty effect but probably not what you're after. > > > > > > Paper tape is more of a problem but GNT still makes 1" (or did last > > > time I bought some). You don't say where you are (no one ever does on > > > this list) but they're in England. It's still used for CNC machines, > > > amongst other things. Getting the five-hole is more of a problem IME. > > > > > Sadly GNT is no more:- > > > > > https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/01895522 > > > > I do have some paper tape and telex rolls in the UK. Also wide 11" music > > ruled line printer paper. > > > Regards, Frank. > > > > > > > > Dave > > > > > --===============3101590160019298338==-- From mark.s.waterbury@gmail.com Fri May 9 14:26:52 2025 From: mark.s.waterbury@gmail.com To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for IBM System/3 BASIC book Date: Fri, 09 May 2025 14:26:48 +0000 Message-ID: <174680080862.1228.17044953383860559270@classiccmp.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5464150654550789799==" --===============5464150654550789799== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable APL on the 5100/5110/5120 was based on the IBM mainframe APL/SV, (follow-on t= o APL\360), with several added features. The "360 emulator" was not a full e= mulator of 360/370, but only emulated exactly those instructions needed by th= e APL interpreter (that was written in 360/370 assembler language). Similarly, the System/3 emulator that was developed for the 5100/5110/5120 BA= SIC implemented only those instructions that were needed by the S/3 BASIC sof= tware. System/3 was a machine with limited amounts of real CORE memory, so d= evelopers recognized early on that they needed to implement a kind of a "virt= ual machine" for BASIC, and that was coded in S/3 assembler language. This la= yer also provided the "virtual" memory for BASIC use, done via "software pagi= ng" on a machine (S/3) that had no hardware for virtual memory, relocation, e= tc. See also: https://www.glennsmuseum.com/items/s3m6/=20 Glenn Henry was instrumental in the development of the S/3 Model 6 BASIC, and= later led the effort to create the IBM System/38. He was eventually promote= d to become an IBM Fellow. The design of the virtual instruction set used fo= r S/3 BASIC was used to create the "scientific instructions" for the S/32, S/= 34 and S/36 that was used by BASIC and FORTRAN on those systems. Mark S Waterbury --===============5464150654550789799==-- From lists@glitchwrks.com Fri May 9 14:36:43 2025 From: Jonathan Chapman To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for ASR-33 Roll Paper and Paper Tape Date: Fri, 09 May 2025 14:36:17 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7795774129175213499==" --===============7795774129175213499== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > If you get non-oiled paper I don=E2=80=99t know if there would > be additional occasional mechanism maintenance needed. I guess take what > you can get. Not only will there be more stoppages, you'll wear out the punch pins faster.= Oiled paper is pretty well a hard requirement. You can of course *read* non-oiled tape without damage. Thanks, Jonathan --===============7795774129175213499==-- From anders.k.nelson@gmail.com Fri May 9 14:49:11 2025 From: Anders Nelson To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for ASR-33 Roll Paper and Paper Tape Date: Fri, 09 May 2025 10:48:52 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3ClbqxFcbh=5FarYYEujFqa2pFbHkfI1dPcI0XSRqcliO23fesVI?= =?utf-8?q?m56E3stIHnxXaBtI4IoefXut-V14qBcbV6J8k9m5khx0Ec3VU2yGFeTWDxQ=3D=40?= =?utf-8?q?glitchwrks=2Ecom=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2624567679673390871==" --===============2624567679673390871== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit "This is the same as fax paper but apparently the fax paper rolls hold more paper and won't fit the roll holder on the silent 700." If you need a roll adaptor, or a core for re-rolling the paper on, I can CAD that up, post to printables.com and/or 3D print that for you. =] -- Anders Nelson On Fri, May 9, 2025, 10:43 AM Jonathan Chapman via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > If you get non-oiled paper I don’t know if there would > > be additional occasional mechanism maintenance needed. I guess take what > > you can get. > > Not only will there be more stoppages, you'll wear out the punch pins > faster. Oiled paper is pretty well a hard requirement. > > You can of course *read* non-oiled tape without damage. > > Thanks, > Jonathan > --===============2624567679673390871==-- From henk.gooijen@hotmail.com Fri May 9 14:51:41 2025 From: Henk Gooijen To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for ASR-33 Roll Paper and Paper Tape Date: Fri, 09 May 2025 14:51:32 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3ClbqxFcbh=5FarYYEujFqa2pFbHkfI1dPcI0XSRqcliO23fesVI?= =?utf-8?q?m56E3stIHnxXaBtI4IoefXut-V14qBcbV6J8k9m5khx0Ec3VU2yGFeTWDxQ=3D=40?= =?utf-8?q?glitchwrks=2Ecom=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3442823911439262500==" --===============3442823911439262500== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I seem to remember that you can use dry paper after soaking it in oil. Put a very thin layer of light oil on a plate and let the paper roll soak in = it. Henk, PA8PDP -----Oorspronkelijk bericht----- Van: Jonathan Chapman via cctalk =20 Verzonden: vrijdag 9 mei 2025 16:36 Aan: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts CC: Jonathan Chapman Onderwerp: [cctalk] Re: Looking for ASR-33 Roll Paper and Paper Tape > If you get non-oiled paper I don=E2=80=99t know if there would be additiona= l=20 > occasional mechanism maintenance needed. I guess take what you can=20 > get. Not only will there be more stoppages, you'll wear out the punch pins faster.= Oiled paper is pretty well a hard requirement. You can of course *read* non-oiled tape without damage. Thanks, Jonathan --===============3442823911439262500==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Fri May 9 14:54:10 2025 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for ASR-33 Roll Paper and Paper Tape Date: Fri, 09 May 2025 10:53:53 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3ClbqxFcbh=5FarYYEujFqa2pFbHkfI1dPcI0XSRqcliO23fesVI?= =?utf-8?q?m56E3stIHnxXaBtI4IoefXut-V14qBcbV6J8k9m5khx0Ec3VU2yGFeTWDxQ=3D=40?= =?utf-8?q?glitchwrks=2Ecom=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1888898335550150981==" --===============1888898335550150981== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On May 9, 2025, at 10:36=E2=80=AFAM, Jonathan Chapman via cctalk wrote: >=20 >> If you get non-oiled paper I don=E2=80=99t know if there would >> be additional occasional mechanism maintenance needed. I guess take what >> you can get. >=20 > Not only will there be more stoppages, you'll wear out the punch pins faste= r. Oiled paper is pretty well a hard requirement. >=20 > You can of course *read* non-oiled tape without damage. >=20 > Thanks, > Jonathan What about mylar tape? That's commonly chosen when a tape has to be read man= y times. paul --===============1888898335550150981==-- From billdegnan@gmail.com Fri May 9 17:03:42 2025 From: Bill Degnan To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] SCAMP Date: Fri, 09 May 2025 13:03:23 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0854836547658825286==" --===============0854836547658825286== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > While we're here, another note: on the SCAMP, they emulated the IBM 1130's > version of APL (so I may have misspoken earlier - it wasn't an IBM S/3 they > had trouble sourcing, but rather during the SCAMP dev it was an IBM 1130 > they had trouble finding to borrow/lease). This SCAMP was the prototype > leading to the IBM 5100 (where in the IBM 5100, they switched to using an > S/360 based APL). > > > On an off-chance of any IBMers out there, I'm still looking for Kitty Price > or Patrick Smith (two known experts of the PALM processor, they wrote a > paper referring to it in 1974). In the appendix of that paper, they refer > to a "1130 PALM Simulator" (i.e. before the PALM was available to them, > someone had developed a simulator of it on the 1130). Then in the next > section, they refer to a "1130 Simulator which runs under VM/370". Finding > any of that software would be incredible. > > at main =C2=B7 voidstar78/SCAMP > < > https://github.com/voidstar78/SCAMP/blob/main/IBM_SCAMP_1of3_May1974_AnArch= itecturalAndDesignOverviewOfScamp_PatrickSmith_KittyPrice_Part1.pdf > > > > > > A whole other topic that gets little attention is the SC/MP processor, but I digress. Where would the SCAMP / PALM paper have been published? I can check. Bill --===============0854836547658825286==-- From cliendo@gmail.com Fri May 9 17:32:18 2025 From: Christian Liendo To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Uploading PDFs to Bitsavers Date: Fri, 09 May 2025 13:32:01 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1701679317593271030==" --===============1701679317593271030== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I'm sorry if this has been asked before. How can I send PDFs to Bitsavers? I know I cannot just FTP and create a directory. I am looking on the website but I am probably not reading what is right in front of me. Any help would be appreciated. --===============1701679317593271030==-- From pat@vax11.net Fri May 9 19:51:57 2025 From: Patrick Finnegan To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Uploading PDFs to Bitsavers Date: Fri, 09 May 2025 15:51:36 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0771709617473837672==" --===============0771709617473837672== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Send email to Al, and ask if he wants it. If he does, he'll let you know how to send it to him. He doesn't take everything sent his way, since he tries to curate the content. Pat On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 1:38 PM Christian Liendo via cctalk wrote: > > I'm sorry if this has been asked before. > > How can I send PDFs to Bitsavers? > > I know I cannot just FTP and create a directory. > > I am looking on the website but I am probably not reading what is > right in front of me. > > Any help would be appreciated. --===============0771709617473837672==-- From g-wright@att.net Fri May 9 20:24:50 2025 From: Jerry Wright To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Summer house keeping. Date: Fri, 09 May 2025 20:22:33 +0000 Message-ID: <14819287.1794035.1746822153968@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <14819287.1794035.1746822153968.ref@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6305946422322812909==" --===============6305946422322812909== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I have some more thing to move out of my shop. These are in Kent Washington. most are too big to ship. Hp 1000f=C2=A0 2117f computer. Lots of boards. Unknown condition. looks good.= =C2=A0 400.00Hp 2753a Paper Tape=C2=A0 100.00Hp 7906 drive=C2=A0 200.00=20 HP 7970e Tape HPIB interface in cabinet=C2=A0 100.00HP 7970B=C2=A0 tape=C2=A0= 50.00 HP 9000/380=C2=A0 in Desk side Cabinet with drives and Hi-Res graphics 250.00 Intel 310 development system=C2=A0=C2=A0 200.00 General Automation=C2=A0 computer=C2=A0 100.00 HP K-210 server works with drives in a Rack=C2=A0 Free=20 Sun 4-260=C2=A0 desk side computer. No drives. missing top cover. did boot 20= 0.00 Dec 11/44=C2=A0 loaded with boards in Rack, comes with 2) RA-80's, 1) TU80=C2= =A0 in 42" rackHas 2 RA81=C2=A0 and 2 RA 91 drives.( loose), + a second 42" c= abinet, with a 11/44 chassis, (no Boards) with a Power supply. (mint)=C2=A0= =C2=A0 Computer has booted=C2=A0 in the past, but now has 12v power supply is= sues=C2=A0 600.00 Dec 11/34 Chassis and Boards=C2=A0 300.00 Nova 3=C2=A0 Chassis, Front panel and Boards=C2=A0 450.00 Nova 4 Chassis and boards=C2=A0 200.00 3 DG Desk Top computers.=C2=A0 made out of modular units connected together= =C2=A0 like model 10/20=C2=A0 Style=C2=A0 50.00 each Altos=C2=A0 486, 586, 5-15AD desk tops=C2=A0 computers=C2=A0 50.00 each Private Mail please with questions and or requests.=C2=A0 most have not been = turned on. Some have but years ago.=C2=A0 All stored in a heated shop. - Jerryg-wright(a)att.net=C2=A0 --===============6305946422322812909==-- From jonesthechip@logicmagic.co.uk Sat May 10 06:33:01 2025 From: Sid Jones To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for ASR-33 Roll Paper and Paper Tape Date: Fri, 09 May 2025 07:49:36 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2862005968724506232==" --===============2862005968724506232== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mr Katz - if you care to mention your locality... (I have access to a local stash!) Regards Sid GB LL13 0UJ -----Original Message----- From: Mike Katz via cctalk Sent: Friday, May 09, 2025 1:48 AM To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Cc: Mike Katz Subject: [cctalk] Looking for ASR-33 Roll Paper and Paper Tape I will soon receive an ASR-33 and I will need roll paper, 1" rolled (preferably oiled) paper tape and a ribbon or two. Please DM me if you have any to spare. Thank you, . Mike --===============2862005968724506232==-- From useddec@gmail.com Sat May 10 08:10:45 2025 From: Paul Anderson To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Summer house keeping. Date: Sat, 10 May 2025 03:10:29 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <14819287.1794035.1746822153968@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1351620293172273597==" --===============1351620293172273597== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I have 11/44 sets (and others) and the FP11-F. If anyone needs any, please contact me off list. Located in Illinois Thanks, Paul On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 3:33 PM Jerry Wright via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > I have some more thing to move out of my shop. > These are in Kent Washington. most are too big to ship. > Hp 1000f 2117f computer. Lots of boards. Unknown condition. looks good. > 400.00Hp 2753a Paper Tape 100.00Hp 7906 drive 200.00 > HP 7970e Tape HPIB interface in cabinet 100.00HP 7970B tape 50.00 > HP 9000/380 in Desk side Cabinet with drives and Hi-Res graphics 250.00 > Intel 310 development system 200.00 > General Automation computer 100.00 > HP K-210 server works with drives in a Rack Free > > Sun 4-260 desk side computer. No drives. missing top cover. did boot > 200.00 > Dec 11/44 loaded with boards in Rack, comes with 2) RA-80's, 1) TU80 in > 42" rackHas 2 RA81 and 2 RA 91 drives.( loose), + a second 42" cabinet, > with a 11/44 chassis, (no Boards) with a Power supply. (mint) Computer > has booted in the past, but now has 12v power supply issues 600.00 > Dec 11/34 Chassis and Boards 300.00 > Nova 3 Chassis, Front panel and Boards 450.00 > Nova 4 Chassis and boards 200.00 > 3 DG Desk Top computers. made out of modular units connected together > like model 10/20 Style 50.00 each > > Altos 486, 586, 5-15AD desk tops computers 50.00 each > Private Mail please with questions and or requests. most have not been > turned on. Some have but years ago. All stored in a heated shop. > - Jerryg-wright(a)att.net > > > > > --===============1351620293172273597==-- From dwilliams@port8080.net Sat May 10 15:33:37 2025 From: Daniel Williams To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Summer house keeping. Date: Sat, 10 May 2025 10:33:19 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4341596832525859326==" --===============4341596832525859326== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I'm in Denver and would love a bunch of the stuff on offer. Since most of it is too big to ship, I would be happy to figure out when to drive up with a trailer and see about loading some of it up. How quick are you wanting to move it out? Is anyone else in the Denver area interested in some of the equipment? ~Daniel On Sat, May 10, 2025, 03:18 Paul Anderson via cctalk wrote: > I have 11/44 sets (and others) and the FP11-F. If anyone needs any, please > contact me off list. > > Located in Illinois > > Thanks, Paul > > On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 3:33 PM Jerry Wright via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > I have some more thing to move out of my shop. > > These are in Kent Washington. most are too big to ship. > > Hp 1000f 2117f computer. Lots of boards. Unknown condition. looks good. > > 400.00Hp 2753a Paper Tape 100.00Hp 7906 drive 200.00 > > HP 7970e Tape HPIB interface in cabinet 100.00HP 7970B tape 50.00 > > HP 9000/380 in Desk side Cabinet with drives and Hi-Res graphics 250.00 > > Intel 310 development system 200.00 > > General Automation computer 100.00 > > HP K-210 server works with drives in a Rack Free > > > > Sun 4-260 desk side computer. No drives. missing top cover. did boot > > 200.00 > > Dec 11/44 loaded with boards in Rack, comes with 2) RA-80's, 1) TU80 in > > 42" rackHas 2 RA81 and 2 RA 91 drives.( loose), + a second 42" cabinet, > > with a 11/44 chassis, (no Boards) with a Power supply. (mint) Computer > > has booted in the past, but now has 12v power supply issues 600.00 > > Dec 11/34 Chassis and Boards 300.00 > > Nova 3 Chassis, Front panel and Boards 450.00 > > Nova 4 Chassis and boards 200.00 > > 3 DG Desk Top computers. made out of modular units connected together > > like model 10/20 Style 50.00 each > > > > Altos 486, 586, 5-15AD desk tops computers 50.00 each > > Private Mail please with questions and or requests. most have not been > > turned on. Some have but years ago. All stored in a heated shop. > > - Jerryg-wright(a)att.net > > > > > > > > > > > --===============4341596832525859326==-- From aperry@snowmoose.com Sat May 10 22:27:12 2025 From: Alan Perry To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Summer house keeping. Date: Sat, 10 May 2025 15:19:26 -0700 Message-ID: <2E2DA7D0-00AC-4877-A7AF-EDE5CC83EA3D@snowmoose.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3919380257354929369==" --===============3919380257354929369== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On May 10, 2025, at 01:18, Paul Anderson via cctalk wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BFI have 11/44 sets (and others) and the FP11-F. If anyone needs any= , please > contact me off list. >=20 > Located in Illinois >=20 > Thanks, Paul >=20 >> On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 3:33=E2=80=AFPM Jerry Wright via cctalk < >> cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: >>=20 >> I have some more thing to move out of my shop. >> These are in Kent Washington. most are too big to ship. >> Hp 1000f 2117f computer. Lots of boards. Unknown condition. looks good. >> 400.00Hp 2753a Paper Tape 100.00Hp 7906 drive 200.00 >> HP 7970e Tape HPIB interface in cabinet 100.00HP 7970B tape 50.00 >> HP 9000/380 in Desk side Cabinet with drives and Hi-Res graphics 250.00 >> Intel 310 development system 200.00 >> General Automation computer 100.00 >> HP K-210 server works with drives in a Rack Free >>=20 >> Sun 4-260 desk side computer. No drives. missing top cover. did boot >> 200.00 >> Dec 11/44 loaded with boards in Rack, comes with 2) RA-80's, 1) TU80 in >> 42" rackHas 2 RA81 and 2 RA 91 drives.( loose), + a second 42" cabinet, >> with a 11/44 chassis, (no Boards) with a Power supply. (mint) Computer >> has booted in the past, but now has 12v power supply issues 600.00 >> Dec 11/34 Chassis and Boards 300.00 >> Nova 3 Chassis, Front panel and Boards 450.00 >> Nova 4 Chassis and boards 200.00 >> 3 DG Desk Top computers. made out of modular units connected together >> like model 10/20 Style 50.00 each >>=20 >> Altos 486, 586, 5-15AD desk tops computers 50.00 each >> Private Mail please with questions and or requests. most have not been >> turned on. Some have but years ago. All stored in a heated shop. >> - Jerryg-wright(a)att.net >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 --===============3919380257354929369==-- From aperry@snowmoose.com Sat May 10 22:29:44 2025 From: Alan Perry To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Summer house keeping. Date: Sat, 10 May 2025 15:29:23 -0700 Message-ID: <4F49E347-F264-4913-8941-ED2BA711FA08@snowmoose.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2673355045765017179==" --===============2673355045765017179== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am interested in the Sun 4/260 and am local to Kent. I have tried responding directly but my email sent to the att.net address bou= nces. alan > On May 10, 2025, at 01:18, Paul Anderson via cctalk wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BFI have 11/44 sets (and others) and the FP11-F. If anyone needs any= , please > contact me off list. >=20 > Located in Illinois >=20 > Thanks, Paul >=20 >> On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 3:33=E2=80=AFPM Jerry Wright via cctalk < >> cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: >>=20 >> I have some more thing to move out of my shop. >> These are in Kent Washington. most are too big to ship. >> Hp 1000f 2117f computer. Lots of boards. Unknown condition. looks good. >> 400.00Hp 2753a Paper Tape 100.00Hp 7906 drive 200.00 >> HP 7970e Tape HPIB interface in cabinet 100.00HP 7970B tape 50.00 >> HP 9000/380 in Desk side Cabinet with drives and Hi-Res graphics 250.00 >> Intel 310 development system 200.00 >> General Automation computer 100.00 >> HP K-210 server works with drives in a Rack Free >>=20 >> Sun 4-260 desk side computer. No drives. missing top cover. did boot >> 200.00 >> Dec 11/44 loaded with boards in Rack, comes with 2) RA-80's, 1) TU80 in >> 42" rackHas 2 RA81 and 2 RA 91 drives.( loose), + a second 42" cabinet, >> with a 11/44 chassis, (no Boards) with a Power supply. (mint) Computer >> has booted in the past, but now has 12v power supply issues 600.00 >> Dec 11/34 Chassis and Boards 300.00 >> Nova 3 Chassis, Front panel and Boards 450.00 >> Nova 4 Chassis and boards 200.00 >> 3 DG Desk Top computers. made out of modular units connected together >> like model 10/20 Style 50.00 each >>=20 >> Altos 486, 586, 5-15AD desk tops computers 50.00 each >> Private Mail please with questions and or requests. most have not been >> turned on. Some have but years ago. All stored in a heated shop. >> - Jerryg-wright(a)att.net >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 --===============2673355045765017179==-- From van.snyder@sbcglobal.net Sat May 10 22:38:22 2025 From: Van Snyder To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Summer house keeping. Date: Sat, 10 May 2025 15:38:10 -0700 Message-ID: <575d89e54916e287f3947cb688557b786475262c.camel@sbcglobal.net> In-Reply-To: <2E2DA7D0-00AC-4877-A7AF-EDE5CC83EA3D@snowmoose.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3290723583975887608==" --===============3290723583975887608== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Does the Computer History Museum want any of this? On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 15:19 -0700, Alan Perry via cctalk wrote: > > > > On May 10, 2025, at 01:18, Paul Anderson via cctalk > > wrote: > > > > I have 11/44 sets (and others) and the FP11-F. If anyone needs > > any, please > > contact me off list. > > > > Located in Illinois > > > > Thanks, Paul > > > > > On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 3:33 PM Jerry Wright via cctalk < > > > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > > > I have some more thing to move out of my shop. > > > These are in Kent Washington. most are too big to ship. > > > Hp 1000f  2117f computer. Lots of boards. Unknown condition. > > > looks good. > > > 400.00Hp 2753a Paper Tape  100.00Hp 7906 drive  200.00 > > > HP 7970e Tape HPIB interface in cabinet  100.00HP 7970B  tape  > > > 50.00 > > > HP 9000/380  in Desk side Cabinet with drives and Hi-Res graphics > > > 250.00 > > > Intel 310 development system   200.00 > > > General Automation  computer  100.00 > > > HP K-210 server works with drives in a Rack  Free > > > > > > Sun 4-260  desk side computer. No drives. missing top cover. did > > > boot > > > 200.00 > > > Dec 11/44  loaded with boards in Rack, comes with 2) RA-80's, 1) > > > TU80  in > > > 42" rackHas 2 RA81  and 2 RA 91 drives.( loose), + a second 42" > > > cabinet, > > > with a 11/44 chassis, (no Boards) with a Power supply. (mint)   > > > Computer > > > has booted  in the past, but now has 12v power supply issues  > > > 600.00 > > > Dec 11/34 Chassis and Boards  300.00 > > > Nova 3  Chassis, Front panel and Boards  450.00 > > > Nova 4 Chassis and boards  200.00 > > > 3 DG Desk Top computers.  made out of modular units connected > > > together > > > like model 10/20  Style  50.00 each > > > > > > Altos  486, 586, 5-15AD desk tops  computers  50.00 each > > > Private Mail please with questions and or requests.  most have > > > not been > > > turned on. Some have but years ago.  All stored in a heated shop. > > > - Jerryg-wright(a)att.net > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --===============3290723583975887608==-- From cmhanson@eschatologist.net Sun May 11 00:52:43 2025 From: Chris Hanson To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Summer house keeping. Date: Sat, 10 May 2025 17:15:26 -0700 Message-ID: <9D2CDB4A-2855-459E-879E-19E7FB5410B8@eschatologist.net> In-Reply-To: <575d89e54916e287f3947cb688557b786475262c.camel@sbcglobal.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7680143264787325865==" --===============7680143264787325865== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On May 10, 2025, at 3:38=E2=80=AFPM, Van Snyder via cctalk wrote: > Does the Computer History Museum want any of this? Why would you ask this? Do you want it to wind up in a warehouse or behind a velvet rope to never be = used again? -- Chris --===============7680143264787325865==-- From tosteve@yahoo.com Sun May 11 01:00:26 2025 From: steven stengel To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for ASR-33 Roll Paper and Paper Tape Date: Sun, 11 May 2025 01:00:16 +0000 Message-ID: <1733702934.3843633.1746925216843@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0224421039650790377==" --===============0224421039650790377== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =C2=A0MARCH (the NJ Vintage Computer Museum) used to have paper.. On Thursday, May 8, 2025 at 05:58:20 PM PDT, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: =20 =20 I will soon receive an ASR-33 and I will need roll paper, 1" rolled=20 (preferably oiled) paper tape and a ribbon or two. Please DM me if you have any to spare. Thank you, . Mike =20 --===============0224421039650790377==-- From aperry@snowmoose.com Sun May 11 01:15:19 2025 From: Alan Perry To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Summer house keeping. Date: Sat, 10 May 2025 18:14:58 -0700 Message-ID: <8D1822FD-5320-44A3-8838-73837D5A19FD@snowmoose.com> In-Reply-To: <9D2CDB4A-2855-459E-879E-19E7FB5410B8@eschatologist.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5872119670627680158==" --===============5872119670627680158== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On May 10, 2025, at 17:58, Chris Hanson via cctalk wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BFOn May 10, 2025, at 3:38=E2=80=AFPM, Van Snyder via cctalk wrote: >=20 >> Does the Computer History Museum want any of this? >=20 > Why would you ask this? >=20 > Do you want it to wind up in a warehouse or behind a velvet rope to never b= e used again? The CHM already has a 4/260 ;) The CHM has a formal artifact donation application and review process and som= eone would need to transport the stuff to Mtn View if it is accepted. Then again there are a couple odd things going on there. An item (the last Mt= . Xinu calendar) that I donated before the pandemic still hasn=E2=80=99t appe= ared in their catalog. The Burroughs B1000 in their collection is now gone. (= I was talking to them about getting access to it to take photos of it but lif= e got in the way and I never got down there.) alan --===============5872119670627680158==-- From van.snyder@sbcglobal.net Sun May 11 02:48:21 2025 From: Van Snyder To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Summer house keeping. Date: Sat, 10 May 2025 19:48:11 -0700 Message-ID: <02ab55793aed91d6e7022e4f775cdbc3b3a3fb7b.camel@sbcglobal.net> In-Reply-To: <8D1822FD-5320-44A3-8838-73837D5A19FD@snowmoose.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5072277975944563846==" --===============5072277975944563846== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Sat, 2025-05-10 at 18:14 -0700, Alan Perry via cctalk wrote: > > > > On May 10, 2025, at 17:58, Chris Hanson via cctalk > > wrote: > > > > On May 10, 2025, at 3:38 PM, Van Snyder via cctalk > > wrote: > > > > > Does the Computer History Museum want any of this? > > > > Why would you ask this? > > > > Do you want it to wind up in a warehouse or behind a velvet rope to > > never be used again? > > The CHM already has a 4/260 ;) > > The CHM has a formal artifact donation application and review process > and someone would need to transport the stuff to Mtn View if it is > accepted. > > Then again there are a couple odd things going on there. An item (the > last Mt. Xinu calendar) that I donated before the pandemic still > hasn’t appeared in their catalog. The Burroughs B1000 in their > collection is now gone. (I was talking to them about getting access > to it to take photos of it but life got in the way and I never got > down there.) I tried to get them to take the Unisys 2200 at JPL that had been in use supporting Voyager, when Angus McRonald, its last user, retired.  I had worked on Voyager, directly and indirectly. I tried unsuccessfully to convince various teams to write portable software instead of exploiting all the cool Univac features they could find. That's why some Voyager software was still trapped in the Univac 1100/2200 world thirty years after launch. Unfortunately, transportation couldn't be arranged, so the 2200 was sold for scrap. > > alan > > > --===============5072277975944563846==-- From henry.r.bent@gmail.com Sun May 11 03:25:18 2025 From: Henry Bent To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Summer house keeping. Date: Sat, 10 May 2025 23:24:59 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <02ab55793aed91d6e7022e4f775cdbc3b3a3fb7b.camel@sbcglobal.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3273750619814764167==" --===============3273750619814764167== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sat, 10 May 2025 at 23:13, Van Snyder via cctalk wrote: > > I tried to get them to take the Unisys 2200 at JPL that had been in use > supporting Voyager, when Angus McRonald, its last user, retired. I had > worked on Voyager, directly and indirectly. I tried unsuccessfully to > convince various teams to write portable software instead of exploiting > all the cool Univac features they could find. That's why some Voyager > software was still trapped in the Univac 1100/2200 world thirty years > after launch. Unfortunately, transportation couldn't be arranged, so > the 2200 was sold for scrap. > > Did you attempt to contact anyone else about preserving that machine? -Henry --===============3273750619814764167==-- From billdegnan@gmail.com Sun May 11 14:02:10 2025 From: Bill Degnan To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for ASR-33 Roll Paper and Paper Tape Date: Sun, 11 May 2025 10:01:50 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1733702934.3843633.1746925216843@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6748893722406007179==" --===============6748893722406007179== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Mike…does the reader work? Does the tty print? You might have time… B On Sat, May 10, 2025 at 9:08 PM steven stengel via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > MARCH (the NJ Vintage Computer Museum) used to have paper.. > > On Thursday, May 8, 2025 at 05:58:20 PM PDT, Mike Katz via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > I will soon receive an ASR-33 and I will need roll paper, 1" rolled > (preferably oiled) paper tape and a ribbon or two. > > Please DM me if you have any to spare. > > Thank you, > > . Mike > --===============6748893722406007179==-- From bill.gunshannon@hotmail.com Sun May 11 15:12:59 2025 From: Bill Gunshannon To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Summer house keeping. Date: Sun, 11 May 2025 11:12:46 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <9D2CDB4A-2855-459E-879E-19E7FB5410B8@eschatologist.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7733939196002223940==" --===============7733939196002223940== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 5/10/2025 8:15 PM, Chris Hanson via cctalk wrote: > On May 10, 2025, at 3:38=E2=80=AFPM, Van Snyder via cctalk wrote: >=20 >> Does the Computer History Museum want any of this? >=20 > Why would you ask this? >=20 > Do you want it to wind up in a warehouse or behind a velvet rope to never b= e used again? Or in a dumpster. Or auctioned off so someone else can make money on it. bill --===============7733939196002223940==-- From tdk.knight@gmail.com Mon May 12 22:42:36 2025 From: Adrian Stoness To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Finding a Honeywell 316? Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 17:42:20 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0863052079490689173==" --===============0863052079490689173== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit digging through emails and just found this again strangely i have the h316 manuals from lynn lake found them in my house i bought in 2017 did some digging around to find the system but it got tossed out in 2016 apparently argg On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 10:39 PM Paul Anderson wrote: > My father worked in a mine in the '70s that was using a Honeywell 316 for > process control. I was thinking it might be neat to see if I could track > one down. What are they worth the days? How common are they? > > Sent from my iPad > --===============0863052079490689173==-- From cczoic@proton.me Mon May 12 22:44:48 2025 From: Mark To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Uploading PDFs to Bitsavers Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 22:36:54 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0038301192588539222==" --===============0038301192588539222== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Last several emails to Al (in last 8 months) have been unanswered. Just me? = I'm using the (previously successfully used) email he lists at bitsavers.org. Sent with Proton Mail secure email. On Friday, May 9th, 2025 at 2:58 PM, Patrick Finnegan via cctalk wrote: > Send email to Al, and ask if he wants it. If he does, he'll let you > know how to send it to him. >=20 > He doesn't take everything sent his way, since he tries to curate the conte= nt. >=20 > Pat >=20 > On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 1:38=E2=80=AFPM Christian Liendo via cctalk > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org wrote: >=20 > > I'm sorry if this has been asked before. > >=20 > > How can I send PDFs to Bitsavers? > >=20 > > I know I cannot just FTP and create a directory. > >=20 > > I am looking on the website but I am probably not reading what is > > right in front of me. > >=20 > > Any help would be appreciated. --===============0038301192588539222==-- From c.murray.mccullough@gmail.com Mon May 12 23:42:08 2025 From: Murray McCullough To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Skype Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 19:41:49 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2071587707542753760==" --===============2071587707542753760== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit It is with some sadness to here of Skype's demise even though MS owned it. It's not necessarily on topic of 'ancient' personal computing but then again maybe it is! Happy computing, Murray 🙂 --===============2071587707542753760==-- From bitwiz@12bitsbest.com Mon May 12 23:58:32 2025 From: Mike Katz To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Skype Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 18:58:24 -0500 Message-ID: <5e8539c1-477b-4356-99b2-12f848ee279b@12bitsbest.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0353874127053809968==" --===============0353874127053809968== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit It's just another case of how long should a company maintain older infrastructure in the face of new technologies and systems. The conversion to Teams was relatively painless so it's not much of a big deal for many. There are also many alternatives to Skype if Teams doesn't work for you. I am not a fan of Microsoft at all but how long can we expect them to pay to keep old servers up and running? Try to find 10 year old DDR2 RAM or a DVD Blou-Ray writer (or reader).  Even the automotive industry isn't required to maintain a parts inventory for more than 10 years. On 5/12/2025 6:41 PM, Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: > It is with some sadness to here of Skype's demise even though MS owned it. > It's not necessarily on topic of 'ancient' personal computing but then > again maybe it is! > > Happy computing, > > Murray 🙂 --===============0353874127053809968==-- From aperry@snowmoose.com Mon May 12 23:59:04 2025 From: Alan Perry To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Uploading PDFs to Bitsavers Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 16:58:45 -0700 Message-ID: <81398DD9-8AB7-4E3D-9286-14B76BA17D9C@snowmoose.com> In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3Ceq3LleVW6g7388wBoRdDHOBqIMico0AWZO57y6OrDHbHDMG2xD?= =?utf-8?q?-V2T-iilmIUlgSjh-zQAUTqqiGLNMHe4CyV9Yj5g6vjSZ8OHi=5Fs0s5Zzk=3D=40?= =?utf-8?q?proton=2Eme=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8259512981593668464==" --===============8259512981593668464== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Last December Al responded to my request for the bitsavers upload credentials. alan > On May 12, 2025, at 15:53, Mark via cctalk wrote: > =EF=BB=BFLast several emails to Al (in last 8 months) have been unanswered.= Just me? I'm using the (previously successfully used) email he lists at bi= tsavers.org. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > Sent with Proton Mail secure email. >=20 > On Friday, May 9th, 2025 at 2:58 PM, Patrick Finnegan via cctalk wrote: >=20 >> Send email to Al, and ask if he wants it. If he does, he'll let you >> know how to send it to him. >>=20 >> He doesn't take everything sent his way, since he tries to curate the cont= ent. >>=20 >> Pat >>=20 >> On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 1:38=E2=80=AFPM Christian Liendo via cctalk >> cctalk(a)classiccmp.org wrote: >>=20 >>> I'm sorry if this has been asked before. >>> How can I send PDFs to Bitsavers? >>> I know I cannot just FTP and create a directory. >>> I am looking on the website but I am probably not reading what is >>> right in front of me. >>> Any help would be appreciated. --===============8259512981593668464==-- From cam.k801@gmail.com Tue May 13 00:02:20 2025 From: Cameron Kelly To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Skype Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 20:02:02 -0400 Message-ID: <3f42c18e-939b-452f-924b-b3e67d32f715@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6053231346923449373==" --===============6053231346923449373== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I remember finding it odd during the start of the pandemic that Zoom was the default video conferencing app, instead of Skype. Oh how things change so quickly! On 2025-05-12 7:41 p.m., Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: > It is with some sadness to here of Skype's demise even though MS owned it. > It's not necessarily on topic of 'ancient' personal computing but then > again maybe it is! > > Happy computing, > > Murray 🙂 --===============6053231346923449373==-- From hpyle@cabezal.com Tue May 13 01:25:07 2025 From: Hugh Pyle To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for ASR-33 Roll Paper and Paper Tape Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 21:17:38 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3166154645052040462==" --===============3166154645052040462== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Mike! Happy to send you a couple rolls of tape (oiled paper). Let me know your address! Don't try punching mylar, the 33 punch isn't really strong enough for the job. Hugh 617-308-8810 On Thu, May 8, 2025 at 8:58=E2=80=AFPM Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: > I will soon receive an ASR-33 and I will need roll paper, 1" rolled > (preferably oiled) paper tape and a ribbon or two. > > Please DM me if you have any to spare. > > Thank you, > > . Mike > --===============3166154645052040462==-- From billdegnan@gmail.com Tue May 13 01:30:31 2025 From: Bill Degnan To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Finding a Honeywell 316? Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 21:30:13 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4990467871761708572==" --===============4990467871761708572== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It=E2=80=99s hard enough to find a mine, but to find a mine with a Honeywell 316=E2=80=A6that might be unrealistic. But seriously folks=E2=80=A6 I know there is a 316 at the md technology museu= m in hunt valley. There may be one in Europe. Very rare Bill On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 7:38=E2=80=AFPM Adrian Stoness via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > digging through emails and just found this again strangely i have the h316 > manuals from lynn lake found them in my house i bought in 2017 did some > digging around to find the system but it got tossed out in 2016 > apparently argg > > On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 10:39=E2=80=AFPM Paul Anderson wrote: > > > My father worked in a mine in the '70s that was using a Honeywell 316 for > > process control. I was thinking it might be neat to see if I could track > > one down. What are they worth the days? How common are they? > > > > Sent from my iPad > > > --===============4990467871761708572==-- From tdk.knight@gmail.com Tue May 13 01:51:09 2025 From: Adrian Stoness To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Finding a Honeywell 316? Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 20:50:50 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7115672464614239429==" --===============7115672464614239429== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit what id love to find my self is the philips rebadge ones On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 8:38 PM Bill Degnan via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > It’s hard enough to find a mine, but to find a mine with a Honeywell > 316…that might be unrealistic. > > But seriously folks… I know there is a 316 at the md technology museum in > hunt valley. There may be one in Europe. > > Very rare > > Bill > > On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 7:38 PM Adrian Stoness via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > digging through emails and just found this again strangely i have the > h316 > > manuals from lynn lake found them in my house i bought in 2017 did some > > digging around to find the system but it got tossed out in 2016 > > apparently argg > > > > On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 10:39 PM Paul Anderson > wrote: > > > > > My father worked in a mine in the '70s that was using a Honeywell 316 > for > > > process control. I was thinking it might be neat to see if I could > track > > > one down. What are they worth the days? How common are they? > > > > > > Sent from my iPad > > > > > > --===============7115672464614239429==-- From dave.g4ugm@gmail.com Tue May 13 07:33:22 2025 From: David Wade To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Skype Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 08:33:14 +0100 Message-ID: <048c34e6-8ad1-45dc-8447-986d60e8cd52@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5e8539c1-477b-4356-99b2-12f848ee279b@12bitsbest.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6608373180889784106==" --===============6608373180889784106== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 13/05/2025 00:58, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: > It's just another case of how long should a company maintain older > infrastructure in the face of new technologies and systems. > > The conversion to Teams was relatively painless so it's not much of a > big deal for many. > > There are also many alternatives to Skype if Teams doesn't work for you. > For those of us who had free minutes to a real landline in many countries via "Skype Out"  its a big loss that isn't replaced by Teams. Skype once was a real help when I had a card blocked in the USA and was sent a number to dial that was only accessible from the UK. Nearly spoilt a VCF but I used Skype to call the UK presenting my UK landline number. Another great feature was that it if like me you had two phone numbers in different countries it would present the one appropriate to that country. So many won't miss it, but for those of us who used it to call real numbers, there is nothing comparable to replace it. > I am not a fan of Microsoft at all but how long can we expect them to > pay to keep old servers up and running? > > Try to find 10 year old DDR2 RAM or a DVD Blou-Ray writer (or > reader).  Even the automotive industry isn't required to maintain a > parts inventory for more than 10 years. > > On 5/12/2025 6:41 PM, Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: >> It is with some sadness to here of Skype's demise even though MS >> owned it. >> It's not necessarily on topic of 'ancient' personal computing but then >> again maybe it is! >> >> Happy computing, >> >> Murray 🙂 > Dave --===============6608373180889784106==-- From mazzini_alessandro@hotmail.com Tue May 13 08:48:10 2025 From: Alessandro Mazzini To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Skype Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 08:48:03 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <5e8539c1-477b-4356-99b2-12f848ee279b@12bitsbest.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6602875715891783770==" --===============6602875715891783770== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Actually the move had way more hidden interests , I think. I'm one of the mig= rated people and now I painfully realized that to add new people into chatroo= ms that I had ongoing, is a very complicate and painful process easily prone = to failure UNLESS you move to a paid tier. Even the invite link you give around to join a room, is effectively not worki= ng. So you need to add the contact you want in, because searching for registered = users not in your contacts is crippled in free mode, but you cannot add to go= ogle since they discontinued the syncing ... and once you add to Hotmail it m= ay take up to 24h to sync=20 "Wonderful" experience, that's motivating my group to migrate fully to telegr= am -----Original Message----- From: Mike Katz via cctalk =20 Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2025 1:58 AM To: Murray McCullough via cctalk Cc: Mike Katz Subject: [cctalk] Re: Skype It's just another case of how long should a company maintain older infrastruc= ture in the face of new technologies and systems. The conversion to Teams was relatively painless so it's not much of a big dea= l for many. There are also many alternatives to Skype if Teams doesn't work for you. I am not a fan of Microsoft at all but how long can we expect them to pay to = keep old servers up and running? Try to find 10 year old DDR2 RAM or a DVD Blou-Ray writer (or reader). Even t= he automotive industry isn't required to maintain a parts inventory for more = than 10 years. On 5/12/2025 6:41 PM, Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: > It is with some sadness to here of Skype's demise even though MS owned it. > It's not necessarily on topic of 'ancient' personal computing but then=20 > again maybe it is! > > Happy computing, > > Murray =F0=9F=99=82 --===============6602875715891783770==-- From cliendo@gmail.com Tue May 13 13:52:53 2025 From: Christian Liendo To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Comstar Computer Systems System 4 Intel 4004 based Industrial Computer Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 09:52:37 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4355145262871942321==" --===============4355145262871942321== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Back in Nov of 2023 Ed Sharpe asked the following: =E2=80=9CWas there ever a COMPUTER using a 4004 that you could really do something or did that finally arrive with the 8008=E2=80=9D https://classiccmp.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/cctalk(a)classiccmp.org/messa= ge/LYKGFANNPN6S75X3IUEZVFDRVPD5MQKF/ I hope to answer that question, or at least spark a discussion. For a number of years now I have been researching this computer called a Comstar System 4 which is based on the Intel 4004. The Comstar Corporation of Minneapolis was a developer of microcomputer control and automation systems and in 1972 released the System 4 microcomputer. Comstar built a general purpose capable computer that could be programmed to do a multitude of tasks but their market focus was industrial automation. Comstar was eventually bought by Warner & Swasey in 1974 to integrate their computers into the Warner & Swasey product line. Warner & Swasey was a huge manufacturer of industrial machines. So they bought Comstar to be their Computer division. In fact it was called " Warner & Swasey Comstar Microcomputer Electronic Products" Warner and Swasey also licensed the Micral N to do the same and we call the Micral N a computer. The Micral N was designed for process control, but we know of it as a computer. Now before anyone argues about if this is a computer or not, I will state the following. It was called a Microcomputer in the ACM titled "Development of a portable compiler for industrial microcomputer systems " It was called a Microcomputer in Electronics Magazine July 11th 1974 It was listed as a Microcomputer in "Auerbach Guide to Minicomputers" April 1976 & Winter 1976 - 1977 It was listed as a Microcomputer in Datamation Magazine Dec 1974 It was called a Microcomputer in "A MICROCOMPUTER BASED SUBSTATION CONTROL SYSTEM" The University of Oklahoma, Ph.D., 1975 Engineering, electronics and electrical Page 90 It was listed as a Microcomputer in the Intel MCS 4 User Manual Feb 1973 page 171 It was listed as a Microcomputer in Electronics Magazine Jan 1973, they promote the 4004 and 8008 and use the System 4 as an example. The reality is this existed, was 4004 based and there were discussions about it in the media at the time. Anyway I wanted to see if there was more interest in researching this compute= r. I listed a number of articles and references below that either discuss Comstar, The Warner Swasey Computer Division, the =E2=80=9CSystem 4=E2=80=9D = or =E2=80=9CStar 4=E2=80=9D Computer. All the Manuals and schematics I was able to upload to archive.org https://archive.org/search?query=3Dsubject%3A%22Comstar+Computer+Systems%22 Computer History Museum's Archive of the Manual https://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/102686568 Pictures of the items I have collected so far https://imgur.com/a/Oyts3A9 The website "Internet Scripophily Museum of Computing" has a page on the history of The Warner & Swasey Company. It's a decent timeline of the company http://ismoc.blogspot.com/2017/06/the-warner-swasey-company.html "Development of a portable compiler for industrial microcomputer systems" by LEROY H. ANDERSON The Warner & Swasey Company, it discusses the system and has images on the unit. https://www.computer.org/csdl/pds/api/csdl/proceedings/download-article/12OmN= zRqdD4/pdf In the ACM's archives "Development of a portable compiler for industrial microcomputer systems" by LEROY H. ANDERSON The Warner & Swasey Company, it discusses the system and has images on the unit. https://www.computer.org/csdl/pds/api/csdl/proceedings/download-article/12OmN= zRqdD4/pdf Electronics Magazine July 11th 1974 Article: Industrial Automatic control proliferates, they are mentioned on page 84 & 85 https://www.worldradiohistory.com/Archive-Electronics/70s/74/Electronics-1974= -07-11.pdf There is a mention about the compiler in the IEEE on Page 25 under Compiler Programmer https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=3D6368812 Computer Design Magazine Nov 1975 Page 129 they talk about the compiler. https://archive.org/details/bitsavers_ComputerDe_90611286/page/128/mode/2up The Intel MCS 4 User Manual Feb 1973 page 171 and in Electronics Magazine Jan 1973, they promote the 4004 and 8008 and use the System 4 as an example. http://www.bitsavers.org/components/intel/MCS4/MCS-4_UsersManual_Feb73.pdf https://www.worldradiohistory.com/Archive-Electronics/70s/73/Electronics-1973= -01-04.pdf There are a number of sources that list the computer as a "microcomputer" and provide specs showing it being 4004 based. Datamation Magazine Page 97 & 101 http://www.bitsavers.org/magazines/Datamation/197412.pdf In "Auerbach Guide to Minicomputers" April 1976, the computer is mentioned on page 54 and page 70. http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/auerbach/Auerbach_Guide_to_Minicomputers_Apr76.p= df In "Auerbach Guide to Minicomputers" Winter 1976 - 1977, the computer is mentioned on page 32 http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/auerbach/Auerbach_Guide_to_Minicomputers_1976-19= 77_Winter.pdf --===============4355145262871942321==-- From elson@pico-systems.com Tue May 13 15:01:43 2025 From: Jon Elson To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Skype Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 10:01:35 -0500 Message-ID: <4cb884b6-bd0f-b642-77fe-4655d3fb63a9@pico-systems.com> In-Reply-To: <5e8539c1-477b-4356-99b2-12f848ee279b@12bitsbest.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6598332989330525100==" --===============6598332989330525100== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 5/12/25 18:58, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: > It's just another case of how long should a company > maintain older infrastructure in the face of new > technologies and systems. > > The conversion to Teams was relatively painless so it's > not much of a big deal for many. > > There are also many alternatives to Skype if Teams doesn't > work for you. Well, if you run Linux, Skype WAS one of the conference platforms that was available. I doubt there is a way to join a Teams conference from a Linux system. Jon --===============6598332989330525100==-- From mazzini_alessandro@hotmail.com Tue May 13 15:09:57 2025 From: Alessandro Mazzini To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Skype Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 15:09:47 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4cb884b6-bd0f-b642-77fe-4655d3fb63a9@pico-systems.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4065547221822315002==" --===============4065547221822315002== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If I'm not mistaken, teams runs also from a browser and the OS should not mat= ter in that case -----Original Message----- From: Jon Elson via cctalk =20 Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2025 5:02 PM To: Mike Katz via cctalk Cc: Jon Elson Subject: [cctalk] Re: Skype On 5/12/25 18:58, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: > It's just another case of how long should a company maintain older=20 > infrastructure in the face of new technologies and systems. > > The conversion to Teams was relatively painless so it's not much of a=20 > big deal for many. > > There are also many alternatives to Skype if Teams doesn't work for=20 > you. Well, if you run Linux, Skype WAS one of the conference platforms that was av= ailable. I doubt there is a way to join a Teams conference from a Linux system. Jon --===============4065547221822315002==-- From billdegnan@gmail.com Tue May 13 15:31:06 2025 From: Bill Degnan To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Finding a Honeywell 316? Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 11:30:49 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============9086708231470361464==" --===============9086708231470361464== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I have the manuals and related materials including the manual with the "Kitchen Computer" on the cover. b On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 12:18=E2=80=AFAM Adrian Stoness via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > what id love to find my self is the philips rebadge ones > > On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 8:38=E2=80=AFPM Bill Degnan via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > It=E2=80=99s hard enough to find a mine, but to find a mine with a Honeyw= ell > > 316=E2=80=A6that might be unrealistic. > > > > But seriously folks=E2=80=A6 I know there is a 316 at the md technology m= useum in > > hunt valley. There may be one in Europe. > > > > Very rare > > > > Bill > > > > On Mon, May 12, 2025 at 7:38=E2=80=AFPM Adrian Stoness via cctalk < > > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > > digging through emails and just found this again strangely i have the > > h316 > > > manuals from lynn lake found them in my house i bought in 2017 did some > > > digging around to find the system but it got tossed out in 2016 > > > apparently argg > > > > > > On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 10:39=E2=80=AFPM Paul Anderson > > wrote: > > > > > > > My father worked in a mine in the '70s that was using a Honeywell 316 > > for > > > > process control. I was thinking it might be neat to see if I could > > track > > > > one down. What are they worth the days? How common are they? > > > > > > > > Sent from my iPad > > > > > > > > > > --===============9086708231470361464==-- From macro@orcam.me.uk Tue May 13 15:43:33 2025 From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Skype Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 16:38:13 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3COS6P279MB089195E4C2F8A1B9A3902C45EC96A=40OS6P279MB?= =?utf-8?q?0891=2ENORP279=2EPROD=2EOUTLOOK=2ECOM=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8013897986586437221==" --===============8013897986586437221== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 13 May 2025, Alessandro Mazzini via cctalk wrote: > If I'm not mistaken, teams runs also from a browser and the OS should > not matter in that case It's a resource hog compared to other platforms, but yes it does work via a browser under Linux. Maciej --===============8013897986586437221==-- From macro@orcam.me.uk Tue May 13 15:44:51 2025 From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Skype Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 16:44:45 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <048c34e6-8ad1-45dc-8447-986d60e8cd52@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0222610884446821606==" --===============0222610884446821606== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 13 May 2025, David Wade via cctalk wrote: > So many won't miss it, but for those of us who used it to call real numbers, > there is nothing comparable to replace it. With the gradual demise of the POTS and mobile/cell handsets switching to VoIP that won't be an issue soon (or rather the issue will be elsewhere). Maciej --===============0222610884446821606==-- From elson@pico-systems.com Tue May 13 15:59:10 2025 From: Jon Elson To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Skype Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 10:59:02 -0500 Message-ID: <5ebb8c9b-f35e-53ce-d913-88668105d155@pico-systems.com> In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3COS6P279MB089195E4C2F8A1B9A3902C45EC96A=40OS6P279MB?= =?utf-8?q?0891=2ENORP279=2EPROD=2EOUTLOOK=2ECOM=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0869626256151422776==" --===============0869626256151422776== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 5/13/25 10:09, Alessandro Mazzini via cctalk wrote: > If I'm not mistaken, teams runs also from a browser and the OS should not m= atter in that case > OK, never used it, I try to avoid MS software when I can.=C2=A0=20 Thanks for the info. Jon --===============0869626256151422776==-- From spectre@floodgap.com Tue May 13 16:01:24 2025 From: Cameron Kaiser To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Skype Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 09:01:14 -0700 Message-ID: <297f4e55-e0dc-4e53-858a-80089615faa4@floodgap.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6529905587084714689==" --===============6529905587084714689== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >> So many won't miss it, but for those of us who used it to call real number= s, >> there is nothing comparable to replace it. > With the gradual demise of the POTS and mobile/cell handsets switching to = > VoIP that won't be an issue soon (or rather the issue will be elsewhere). Currently my Australian wife and I solve the problem of having numbers in both countries using dual SIMs and Wi-Fi calling (my American Pixel 7 Pro has both AT&T and Telstra, one via eSIM). As long as we have Wi-Fi on either shore, we can make and place phone calls to either country from either country, and the numbers are local. She was also a big user of Skype calling, but having this now part of her handset is simpler. --=20 ------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ = -- Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser(a)floodgap.c= om -- You're only as good as the last problem someone had. -- Ballmer on security --===============6529905587084714689==-- From dave.g4ugm@gmail.com Tue May 13 16:54:09 2025 From: David Wade To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Skype Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 17:54:02 +0100 Message-ID: <2d3db9a9-f81b-422b-abef-26f715e79242@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <297f4e55-e0dc-4e53-858a-80089615faa4@floodgap.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1759859385041663781==" --===============1759859385041663781== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 13/05/2025 17:01, Cameron Kaiser via cctalk wrote: >>> So many won't miss it, but for those of us who used it to call real numbe= rs, >>> there is nothing comparable to replace it. >> With the gradual demise of the POTS and mobile/cell handsets switching to >> VoIP that won't be an issue soon (or rather the issue will be elsewhere). > Currently my Australian wife and I solve the problem of having numbers in b= oth > countries using dual SIMs and Wi-Fi calling (my American Pixel 7 Pro has bo= th > AT&T and Telstra, one via eSIM). As long as we have Wi-Fi on either shore, = we > can make and place phone calls to either country from either country, and t= he > numbers are local. She was also a big user of Skype calling, but having this > now part of her handset is simpler. > It is an issue as with Skype we got 60 minutes to 60 countries..... Dave --===============1759859385041663781==-- From mhs.stein@gmail.com Tue May 13 18:09:22 2025 From: Mike Stein To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Skype Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 14:09:00 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <297f4e55-e0dc-4e53-858a-80089615faa4@floodgap.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4870254910064981280==" --===============4870254910064981280== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Dumb question: how do you make a phone call over WiFi? On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 12:08 PM Cameron Kaiser via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > >> So many won't miss it, but for those of us who used it to call real > numbers, > >> there is nothing comparable to replace it. > > With the gradual demise of the POTS and mobile/cell handsets switching > to > > VoIP that won't be an issue soon (or rather the issue will be elsewhere). > > Currently my Australian wife and I solve the problem of having numbers in > both > countries using dual SIMs and Wi-Fi calling (my American Pixel 7 Pro has > both > AT&T and Telstra, one via eSIM). As long as we have Wi-Fi on either shore, > we > can make and place phone calls to either country from either country, and > the > numbers are local. She was also a big user of Skype calling, but having > this > now part of her handset is simpler. > > -- > ------------------------------------ personal: > http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ -- > Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * > ckaiser(a)floodgap.com > -- You're only as good as the last problem someone had. -- Ballmer on > security > > --===============4870254910064981280==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Tue May 13 18:21:50 2025 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Comstar Computer Systems System 4 Intel 4004 based Industrial Computer Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 14:21:33 -0400 Message-ID: <0943A967-38AB-4902-9962-60CD526026C8@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7958792667006494339==" --===============7958792667006494339== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On May 13, 2025, at 9:52=E2=80=AFAM, Christian Liendo via cctalk wrote: >=20 > Back in Nov of 2023 Ed Sharpe asked the following: =E2=80=9CWas there ever a > COMPUTER using a 4004 that you could really do something or did that > finally arrive with the 8008=E2=80=9D > https://classiccmp.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/cctalk(a)classiccmp.org/mes= sage/LYKGFANNPN6S75X3IUEZVFDRVPD5MQKF/ >=20 > I hope to answer that question, or at least spark a discussion. >=20 > For a number of years now I have been researching this computer called > a Comstar System 4 which is based on the Intel 4004. The Comstar > Corporation of Minneapolis was a developer of microcomputer control > and automation systems and in 1972 released the System 4 > microcomputer. Comstar built a general purpose capable computer that > could be programmed to do a multitude of tasks but their market focus > was industrial automation. ... Interesting. Another data point, but not a commercial one: a university classmate of mine = created a 4004 based computer system of his own design, a large wire wrap boa= rd with about 100 chips on it. It became his Honors project. I think it was= summer of 1974 that he spent at one of the US National Labs, and they were s= ufficiently impressed with what he had built that they wanted copies of it. Originally the machine didn't have a UART, so it needed a bit-banging serial = port driver to load code. Later on a friendly DEC field service tech gave hi= m a General Automation UART chip, I think that was the first single chip UART= , which made the job a whole lot simpler. paul --===============7958792667006494339==-- From d44617665@hotmail.com Tue May 13 18:38:53 2025 From: David Wise To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Comstar Computer Systems System 4 Intel 4004 based Industrial Computer Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 18:38:46 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <0943A967-38AB-4902-9962-60CD526026C8@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7966546862362188432==" --===============7966546862362188432== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Paul, are you thinking of the General Instruments AY5-1013, or did that come = later? That chip was in an 8008-based option board for the Tektronix 4014 gr= aphics terminal. (Internally called the figpi, first gen peripheral interfac= e. The sigpi was a 6800.) I had a look at the firmware when I started at Tek = in 1980. Dave Wise > On May 13, 2025, at 11:28 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BFGeneral Automation UART chip, I think that was the first single ch= ip UART, which made the job a whole lot simpler. >=20 > paul --===============7966546862362188432==-- From henry.r.bent@gmail.com Tue May 13 19:02:09 2025 From: Henry Bent To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Skype Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 15:01:50 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2093675031460381927==" --===============2093675031460381927== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 13 May 2025 at 14:58, Mike Stein via cctalk wrote: > Dumb question: how do you make a phone call over WiFi? > > Many modern phones/carriers have support for this, and if it's supported by both it's usually just a matter of turning it on in your phone's options. On my Android 12 phone it's in Settings -> Network & Internet -> Calls & SMS. -Henry --===============2093675031460381927==-- From artgodwin@gmail.com Tue May 13 19:29:03 2025 From: Adrian Godwin To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Skype Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 20:28:42 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1056006450942356640==" --===============1056006450942356640== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'm not interested in downloading a bunch of closed-source applications so I always use a browser. Zoom always gets the wrong input source but apart from that I've been able to use any platform that I've been invited to. Teams used to be a bit weird about expecting a microsoft account but tey seem to have fixed it. I can't necessarily create a session for all of them. I tend to prefer google meet for simplicity. On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 8:08=E2=80=AFPM Henry Bent via cctalk wrote: > On Tue, 13 May 2025 at 14:58, Mike Stein via cctalk > > wrote: > > > Dumb question: how do you make a phone call over WiFi? > > > > > Many modern phones/carriers have support for this, and if it's supported by > both it's usually just a matter of turning it on in your phone's options. > On my Android 12 phone it's in Settings -> Network & Internet -> Calls & > SMS. > > -Henry > --===============1056006450942356640==-- From macro@orcam.me.uk Tue May 13 21:10:07 2025 From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Skype Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 22:09:57 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6709918076151284777==" --===============6709918076151284777== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 13 May 2025, Adrian Godwin via cctalk wrote: > I'm not interested in downloading a bunch of closed-source applications so > I always use a browser. [...] Well, this ship has sailed already. Unless you disable Javascript, which in turn makes hardly anything work nowadays, you've already lost control over what your browser (and consequently computer) downloads and runs. Maciej --===============6709918076151284777==-- From chrise@pobox.com Wed May 14 03:36:14 2025 From: Chris Elmquist To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Comstar Computer Systems System 4 Intel 4004 based Industrial Computer Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 22:27:50 -0500 Message-ID: <0D869D7E-97A3-4F2A-8A51-408EA1FB306F@pobox.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5745757454705342245==" --===============5745757454705342245== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I know that LeRoy Anderson and worked with him in the early 90s. I do not kn= ow if he is still on the planet however. He was quite a name in the Twin Cit= ies electronics industry in the 70s, 80s and early 90s. I worked with him at= Multi-Tech Systems, a fairly prominent modem manufacturer during that timefr= ame. He was a consultant there and had a big role in helping Multi-Tech=E2= =80=99s founder, Raghu Sharma, become a citizen, get his PhD at UofMN and sta= rt the company. LeRoy was also an EE professor at UofMN and dabbled in vario= us RF heating technologies I believe. I have two C4040 (prerelease silicon) chips that I found in a box in the atti= c at Multi-Tech one day over the lunch hour sometime in 1979. Nobody knew wha= t they were or why they were there but I kept them, still have them, and they= run. LOL. Chris -- Chris Elmquist > On May 13, 2025, at 9:00=E2=80=AFAM, Christian Liendo via cctalk wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BFBack in Nov of 2023 Ed Sharpe asked the following: =E2=80=9CWas th= ere ever a > COMPUTER using a 4004 that you could really do something or did that > finally arrive with the 8008=E2=80=9D > https://classiccmp.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/cctalk(a)classiccmp.org/mes= sage/LYKGFANNPN6S75X3IUEZVFDRVPD5MQKF/ >=20 > I hope to answer that question, or at least spark a discussion. >=20 > For a number of years now I have been researching this computer called > a Comstar System 4 which is based on the Intel 4004. The Comstar > Corporation of Minneapolis was a developer of microcomputer control > and automation systems and in 1972 released the System 4 > microcomputer. Comstar built a general purpose capable computer that > could be programmed to do a multitude of tasks but their market focus > was industrial automation. Comstar was eventually bought by Warner & > Swasey in 1974 to integrate their computers into the Warner & Swasey > product line. Warner & Swasey was a huge manufacturer of industrial > machines. So they bought Comstar to be their Computer division. In > fact it was called " Warner & Swasey Comstar Microcomputer Electronic > Products" Warner and Swasey also licensed the Micral N to do the same > and we call the Micral N a computer. The Micral N was designed for > process control, but we know of it as a computer. >=20 > Now before anyone argues about if this is a computer or not, I will > state the following. >=20 > It was called a Microcomputer in the ACM titled "Development of a > portable compiler for industrial microcomputer systems " > It was called a Microcomputer in Electronics Magazine July 11th 1974 > It was listed as a Microcomputer in "Auerbach Guide to Minicomputers" > April 1976 & Winter 1976 - 1977 > It was listed as a Microcomputer in Datamation Magazine Dec 1974 > It was called a Microcomputer in "A MICROCOMPUTER BASED SUBSTATION > CONTROL SYSTEM" The University of Oklahoma, Ph.D., 1975 Engineering, > electronics and electrical Page 90 > It was listed as a Microcomputer in the Intel MCS 4 User Manual Feb > 1973 page 171 > It was listed as a Microcomputer in Electronics Magazine Jan 1973, > they promote the 4004 and 8008 and use the System 4 as an example. > The reality is this existed, was 4004 based and there were discussions > about it in the media at the time. >=20 > Anyway I wanted to see if there was more interest in researching this compu= ter. >=20 > I listed a number of articles and references below that either discuss > Comstar, The Warner Swasey Computer Division, the =E2=80=9CSystem 4=E2=80= =9D or =E2=80=9CStar > 4=E2=80=9D Computer. >=20 > All the Manuals and schematics I was able to upload to archive.org > https://archive.org/search?query=3Dsubject%3A%22Comstar+Computer+Systems%22 >=20 > Computer History Museum's Archive of the Manual > https://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/102686568 >=20 > Pictures of the items I have collected so far > https://imgur.com/a/Oyts3A9 >=20 > The website "Internet Scripophily Museum of Computing" has a page on > the history of The Warner & Swasey Company. It's a decent timeline of > the company > http://ismoc.blogspot.com/2017/06/the-warner-swasey-company.html >=20 > "Development of a portable compiler for industrial microcomputer > systems" by LEROY H. ANDERSON The Warner & Swasey Company, it > discusses the system and has images on the unit. > https://www.computer.org/csdl/pds/api/csdl/proceedings/download-article/12O= mNzRqdD4/pdf >=20 > In the ACM's archives "Development of a portable compiler for > industrial microcomputer systems" by LEROY H. ANDERSON The Warner & > Swasey Company, it discusses the system and has images on the unit. > https://www.computer.org/csdl/pds/api/csdl/proceedings/download-article/12O= mNzRqdD4/pdf >=20 > Electronics Magazine July 11th 1974 Article: Industrial Automatic > control proliferates, they are mentioned on page 84 & 85 > https://www.worldradiohistory.com/Archive-Electronics/70s/74/Electronics-19= 74-07-11.pdf >=20 > There is a mention about the compiler in the IEEE on Page 25 under > Compiler Programmer > https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=3D6368812 >=20 > Computer Design Magazine Nov 1975 Page 129 they talk about the compiler. > https://archive.org/details/bitsavers_ComputerDe_90611286/page/128/mode/2up >=20 > The Intel MCS 4 User Manual Feb 1973 page 171 and in Electronics > Magazine Jan 1973, they promote the 4004 and 8008 and use the System 4 > as an example. >=20 > http://www.bitsavers.org/components/intel/MCS4/MCS-4_UsersManual_Feb73.pdf > https://www.worldradiohistory.com/Archive-Electronics/70s/73/Electronics-19= 73-01-04.pdf >=20 > There are a number of sources that list the computer as a > "microcomputer" and provide specs showing it being 4004 based. >=20 > Datamation Magazine Page 97 & 101 > http://www.bitsavers.org/magazines/Datamation/197412.pdf >=20 > In "Auerbach Guide to Minicomputers" April 1976, the computer is > mentioned on page 54 and page 70. > http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/auerbach/Auerbach_Guide_to_Minicomputers_Apr76= .pdf >=20 > In "Auerbach Guide to Minicomputers" Winter 1976 - 1977, the computer > is mentioned on page 32 > http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/auerbach/Auerbach_Guide_to_Minicomputers_1976-= 1977_Winter.pdf --===============5745757454705342245==-- From leec2124@gmail.com Wed May 14 04:37:52 2025 From: Lee Courtney To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Summer house keeping. Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 21:37:10 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <8D1822FD-5320-44A3-8838-73837D5A19FD@snowmoose.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============9219691200503819211==" --===============9219691200503819211== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Looks like the B1000 is still in the collection at CHM. https://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/102688154 I'd be very surprised if CHM "lost" an artifact of that importance and size. Lee C. On Sat, May 10, 2025 at 6:23=E2=80=AFPM Alan Perry via cctalk wrote: > > > > On May 10, 2025, at 17:58, Chris Hanson via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > =EF=BB=BFOn May 10, 2025, at 3:38=E2=80=AFPM, Van Snyder via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > >> Does the Computer History Museum want any of this? > > > > Why would you ask this? > > > > Do you want it to wind up in a warehouse or behind a velvet rope to > never be used again? > > The CHM already has a 4/260 ;) > > The CHM has a formal artifact donation application and review process and > someone would need to transport the stuff to Mtn View if it is accepted. > > Then again there are a couple odd things going on there. An item (the last > Mt. Xinu calendar) that I donated before the pandemic still hasn=E2=80=99t = appeared > in their catalog. The Burroughs B1000 in their collection is now gone. (I > was talking to them about getting access to it to take photos of it but > life got in the way and I never got down there.) > > alan > > > > --=20 Lee Courtney +1-650-704-3934 cell --===============9219691200503819211==-- From aperry@snowmoose.com Wed May 14 05:13:30 2025 From: Alan Perry To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Summer house keeping. Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 22:13:20 -0700 Message-ID: <7cc556e0-fb1e-42e6-b01a-59cabc64a01c@snowmoose.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============9199419998730630257==" --===============9199419998730630257== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yeah, but the Mt. Xinu calendar that I donated through their application=20 process is still missing from their collection. Other items that I=20 donated are there. alan On 5/13/25 9:37 PM, Lee Courtney via cctalk wrote: > Looks like the B1000 is still in the collection at CHM. > https://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/102688154 > > I'd be very surprised if CHM "lost" an artifact of that importance and size. > > Lee C. > > On Sat, May 10, 2025 at 6:23=E2=80=AFPM Alan Perry via cctalk > wrote: > >> >>> On May 10, 2025, at 17:58, Chris Hanson via cctalk < >> cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: >>> =EF=BB=BFOn May 10, 2025, at 3:38=E2=80=AFPM, Van Snyder via cctalk < >> cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: >>>> Does the Computer History Museum want any of this? >>> Why would you ask this? >>> >>> Do you want it to wind up in a warehouse or behind a velvet rope to >> never be used again? >> >> The CHM already has a 4/260 ;) >> >> The CHM has a formal artifact donation application and review process and >> someone would need to transport the stuff to Mtn View if it is accepted. >> >> Then again there are a couple odd things going on there. An item (the last >> Mt. Xinu calendar) that I donated before the pandemic still hasn=E2=80=99t= appeared >> in their catalog. The Burroughs B1000 in their collection is now gone. (I >> was talking to them about getting access to it to take photos of it but >> life got in the way and I never got down there.) >> >> alan >> >> >> >> --===============9199419998730630257==-- From lewissa78@gmail.com Wed May 14 06:21:23 2025 From: Steve Lewis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for IBM System/3 BASIC book Date: Wed, 14 May 2025 01:21:05 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <174680080862.1228.17044953383860559270@classiccmp.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4773123630131585944==" --===============4773123630131585944== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Mark, for both the S/370 and S/3 "emulation" we found the opcode jump tables for the 5100/5110 (I don't think I posted those anywhere, but mentioned in the VCF 5100 talk). While each opcode 00-FF has an entry, as you say many of them jump to effectively a halt or invalid instruction placeholder (or in other words, only about 80% of the opcodes actually being supported). In the 5110, both the BASIC and APL "ROMs" increase in size, and so it also has a larger subset of instruction jump table entries that are implemented. On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 10:13 AM mark.s.waterbury--- via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > APL on the 5100/5110/5120 was based on the IBM mainframe APL/SV, > (follow-on to APL\360), with several added features. The "360 emulator" > was not a full emulator of 360/370, but only emulated exactly those > instructions needed by the APL interpreter (that was written in 360/370 > assembler language). > > Similarly, the System/3 emulator that was developed for the 5100/5110/5120 > BASIC implemented only those instructions that were needed by the S/3 BASIC > software. System/3 was a machine with limited amounts of real CORE memory, > so developers recognized early on that they needed to implement a kind of a > "virtual machine" for BASIC, and that was coded in S/3 assembler language. > This layer also provided the "virtual" memory for BASIC use, done via > "software paging" on a machine (S/3) that had no hardware for virtual > memory, relocation, etc. > > See also: > https://www.glennsmuseum.com/items/s3m6/ > > Glenn Henry was instrumental in the development of the S/3 Model 6 BASIC, > and later led the effort to create the IBM System/38. He was eventually > promoted to become an IBM Fellow. The design of the virtual instruction > set used for S/3 BASIC was used to create the "scientific instructions" for > the S/32, S/34 and S/36 that was used by BASIC and FORTRAN on those systems. > > Mark S Waterbury > --===============4773123630131585944==-- From lewissa78@gmail.com Wed May 14 06:39:44 2025 From: Steve Lewis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: SCAMP Date: Wed, 14 May 2025 01:39:27 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0905920444306892002==" --===============0905920444306892002== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable That paper is what led me to asking the Smithsonian if I could see the Joe George collection (since in their inventory of documents, they listed said 1974 "Overview of SCAMP" paper, so theirs is the only place I've seen a copy of it - marked as ZZ20-6426 of the Palo Alto Scientific Center (largely an IBM internal document at the time, other than that - I'm not sure what the intended publication audience was). Kitty Price was apparently an IBM 1130 expert, helping Patrick Smith host that system using PALM (so they were figuratively "tied at the hip" figuring out that integration). Kitty was hand writing advise about this (aspects of shadow memory and improving floating point precision), right as she was departing for maternity leave in Winter of '73 (per the journal notes). Curious Marc once mentioned the SC/MP largely contributing to his early interest in computing - it was a later 1970s kit, right? But altogether unrelated to the 1973 IBM SCAMP. On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 12:13=E2=80=AFPM Bill Degnan via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > While we're here, another note: on the SCAMP, they emulated the IBM > 1130's > > version of APL (so I may have misspoken earlier - it wasn't an IBM S/3 > they > > had trouble sourcing, but rather during the SCAMP dev it was an IBM 1130 > > they had trouble finding to borrow/lease). This SCAMP was the prototype > > leading to the IBM 5100 (where in the IBM 5100, they switched to using an > > S/360 based APL). > > > > > > On an off-chance of any IBMers out there, I'm still looking for Kitty > Price > > or Patrick Smith (two known experts of the PALM processor, they wrote a > > paper referring to it in 1974). In the appendix of that paper, they > refer > > to a "1130 PALM Simulator" (i.e. before the PALM was available to them, > > someone had developed a simulator of it on the 1130). Then in the next > > section, they refer to a "1130 Simulator which runs under VM/370". > Finding > > any of that software would be incredible. > > > > > > at main =C2=B7 voidstar78/SCAMP > > < > > > https://github.com/voidstar78/SCAMP/blob/main/IBM_SCAMP_1of3_May1974_AnArch= itecturalAndDesignOverviewOfScamp_PatrickSmith_KittyPrice_Part1.pdf > > > > > > > > > > > A whole other topic that gets little attention is the SC/MP processor, but > I digress. > > Where would the SCAMP / PALM paper have been published? I can check. > > Bill > --===============0905920444306892002==-- From ggs@shiresoft.com Wed May 14 07:28:45 2025 From: Guy Sotomayor To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Skype Date: Tue, 13 May 2025 22:12:47 -0700 Message-ID: <92deb12f-0923-4b06-ba4d-355cda41f3b9@shiresoft.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0314492651565886263==" --===============0314492651565886263== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit There is a native Teams application for Linux.  I used it all the time at NVIDIA (before I retired) as that was the messaging/call platform that was used within the company.  Most folks used the Windows version but there were quite a few of us who ran everything on Linux since all of our development was on Linux and why have 2 (or more) systems to keep running.  ;-) On 5/13/25 08:38, Maciej W. Rozycki via cctalk wrote: > On Tue, 13 May 2025, Alessandro Mazzini via cctalk wrote: > >> If I'm not mistaken, teams runs also from a browser and the OS should >> not matter in that case > It's a resource hog compared to other platforms, but yes it does work via > a browser under Linux. > > Maciej -- TTFN - Guy --===============0314492651565886263==-- From spectre@floodgap.com Thu May 15 00:52:06 2025 From: Cameron Kaiser To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Skype Date: Wed, 14 May 2025 17:51:52 -0700 Message-ID: <0110ff12-7145-40e8-8558-590a6516cfd3@floodgap.com> In-Reply-To: <92deb12f-0923-4b06-ba4d-355cda41f3b9@shiresoft.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7396257083416768215==" --===============7396257083416768215== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > There is a native Teams application for Linux. Well, to the extent Electron can be considered native ... --=20 ------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ = -- Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser(a)floodgap.c= om -- I have but two things to say to you: Celery and Sidewalk. -- Michel Rivard= - --===============7396257083416768215==-- From cc@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de Thu May 15 11:01:11 2025 From: Christian Corti To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Looking for IBM System/3 BASIC book Date: Thu, 15 May 2025 13:00:57 +0200 Message-ID: <8a124f54-5d3c-a636-a453-046a735c4448@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3843109799755335030==" --===============3843109799755335030== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 14 May 2025, mark.s.waterbury(a)gmail.com wrote: > Mark, for both the S/370 and S/3 "emulation" we found the opcode jump > tables for the 5100/5110 (I don't think I posted those anywhere, but > mentioned in the VCF 5100 talk). While each opcode 00-FF has an entry, as > you say many of them jump to effectively a halt or invalid instruction > placeholder (or in other words, only about 80% of the opcodes actually > being supported). I had disassembled and partially documented the 5110 S/3 (basicros.asm) and S/360 (aplros.asm) emulators many years ago. The listings are publicly available on our servers since 2008. Christian --===============3843109799755335030==-- From lewissa78@gmail.com Thu May 15 15:01:29 2025 From: Steve Lewis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Comstar Computer Systems System 4 Intel 4004 based Industrial Computer Date: Thu, 15 May 2025 10:01:10 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1905127671302938342==" --===============1905127671302938342== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable At VCF West (Mountain View) in 2021, there was a demonstration of using a 4004 in a weighing machine and cash register. I'm not sure if there was modern make or referenced prior equipment. On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 8:58=E2=80=AFAM Christian Liendo via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > Back in Nov of 2023 Ed Sharpe asked the following: =E2=80=9CWas there ever a > COMPUTER using a 4004 that you could really do something or did that > finally arrive with the 8008=E2=80=9D > > https://classiccmp.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/cctalk(a)classiccmp.org/mes= sage/LYKGFANNPN6S75X3IUEZVFDRVPD5MQKF/ > > I hope to answer that question, or at least spark a discussion. > > For a number of years now I have been researching this computer called > a Comstar System 4 which is based on the Intel 4004. The Comstar > Corporation of Minneapolis was a developer of microcomputer control > and automation systems and in 1972 released the System 4 > microcomputer. Comstar built a general purpose capable computer that > could be programmed to do a multitude of tasks but their market focus > was industrial automation. Comstar was eventually bought by Warner & > Swasey in 1974 to integrate their computers into the Warner & Swasey > product line. Warner & Swasey was a huge manufacturer of industrial > machines. So they bought Comstar to be their Computer division. In > fact it was called " Warner & Swasey Comstar Microcomputer Electronic > Products" Warner and Swasey also licensed the Micral N to do the same > and we call the Micral N a computer. The Micral N was designed for > process control, but we know of it as a computer. > > Now before anyone argues about if this is a computer or not, I will > state the following. > > It was called a Microcomputer in the ACM titled "Development of a > portable compiler for industrial microcomputer systems " > It was called a Microcomputer in Electronics Magazine July 11th 1974 > It was listed as a Microcomputer in "Auerbach Guide to Minicomputers" > April 1976 & Winter 1976 - 1977 > It was listed as a Microcomputer in Datamation Magazine Dec 1974 > It was called a Microcomputer in "A MICROCOMPUTER BASED SUBSTATION > CONTROL SYSTEM" The University of Oklahoma, Ph.D., 1975 Engineering, > electronics and electrical Page 90 > It was listed as a Microcomputer in the Intel MCS 4 User Manual Feb > 1973 page 171 > It was listed as a Microcomputer in Electronics Magazine Jan 1973, > they promote the 4004 and 8008 and use the System 4 as an example. > The reality is this existed, was 4004 based and there were discussions > about it in the media at the time. > > Anyway I wanted to see if there was more interest in researching this > computer. > > I listed a number of articles and references below that either discuss > Comstar, The Warner Swasey Computer Division, the =E2=80=9CSystem 4=E2=80= =9D or =E2=80=9CStar > 4=E2=80=9D Computer. > > All the Manuals and schematics I was able to upload to archive.org > https://archive.org/search?query=3Dsubject%3A%22Comstar+Computer+Systems%22 > > Computer History Museum's Archive of the Manual > https://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/102686568 > > Pictures of the items I have collected so far > https://imgur.com/a/Oyts3A9 > > The website "Internet Scripophily Museum of Computing" has a page on > the history of The Warner & Swasey Company. It's a decent timeline of > the company > http://ismoc.blogspot.com/2017/06/the-warner-swasey-company.html > > "Development of a portable compiler for industrial microcomputer > systems" by LEROY H. ANDERSON The Warner & Swasey Company, it > discusses the system and has images on the unit. > > https://www.computer.org/csdl/pds/api/csdl/proceedings/download-article/12O= mNzRqdD4/pdf > > In the ACM's archives "Development of a portable compiler for > industrial microcomputer systems" by LEROY H. ANDERSON The Warner & > Swasey Company, it discusses the system and has images on the unit. > > https://www.computer.org/csdl/pds/api/csdl/proceedings/download-article/12O= mNzRqdD4/pdf > > Electronics Magazine July 11th 1974 Article: Industrial Automatic > control proliferates, they are mentioned on page 84 & 85 > > https://www.worldradiohistory.com/Archive-Electronics/70s/74/Electronics-19= 74-07-11.pdf > > There is a mention about the compiler in the IEEE on Page 25 under > Compiler Programmer > https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=3D6368812 > > Computer Design Magazine Nov 1975 Page 129 they talk about the compiler. > https://archive.org/details/bitsavers_ComputerDe_90611286/page/128/mode/2up > > The Intel MCS 4 User Manual Feb 1973 page 171 and in Electronics > Magazine Jan 1973, they promote the 4004 and 8008 and use the System 4 > as an example. > > http://www.bitsavers.org/components/intel/MCS4/MCS-4_UsersManual_Feb73.pdf > > https://www.worldradiohistory.com/Archive-Electronics/70s/73/Electronics-19= 73-01-04.pdf > > There are a number of sources that list the computer as a > "microcomputer" and provide specs showing it being 4004 based. > > Datamation Magazine Page 97 & 101 > http://www.bitsavers.org/magazines/Datamation/197412.pdf > > In "Auerbach Guide to Minicomputers" April 1976, the computer is > mentioned on page 54 and page 70. > > http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/auerbach/Auerbach_Guide_to_Minicomputers_Apr76= .pdf > > In "Auerbach Guide to Minicomputers" Winter 1976 - 1977, the computer > is mentioned on page 32 > > http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/auerbach/Auerbach_Guide_to_Minicomputers_1976-= 1977_Winter.pdf > --===============1905127671302938342==-- From Anders.Gustafsson@pedago.fi Fri May 16 07:42:54 2025 From: Anders Gustafsson To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Wanted: 64Mb 72-pin, single sided, non-ecc, non-parity SIMMs. 3.3V and 5V tolerant or 5V Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 10:36:34 +0300 Message-ID: <6826EB020200002800138E8E@pamir.pedago.fi> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6775469776385205497==" --===============6775469776385205497== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Asking for a friend =EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD=EF=BF=BD Reason is this... I built an expansion board for the HP1000 A-series. I found= some modules on eBay that work fine for me, but a friend that built the board have had probems finding and y= es, most of the vendors on eBay do not know what they are selling and the picture might not match what you ge= t. So I am asking here if anyone has a module they might want to part with. The board design is here: https://www.dalton.ax/hp1000/memory/ --=20 Med v=C3=A4nlig h=C3=A4lsning Anders Gustafsson, ingenj=C3=B6r anders.gustafsson(a)pedago.fi | Support +358 18 12060 | Direkt +358 9 315= 45 121 | Mobil +358 40506 7099 Pedago interaktiv ab, Nygatan 7 B , AX-22100 MARIEHAMN, =C3=85LAND, FINLAND --===============6775469776385205497==-- From lbmgmusic@gmail.com Fri May 16 16:16:29 2025 From: lbmgmusic@gmail.com To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Wanted: DEC ba23 or ba123 chassis Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 16:16:20 +0000 Message-ID: <174741218046.1228.9273861373966093119@classiccmp.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8803692441942276072==" --===============8803692441942276072== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am building up a micro vax and need an empty chassis. Given the number of dec boards on ebay, I assume (hopefully) that there are s= ome empty chassis=20 out there. Please PM if you know of an option. tnx jc --===============8803692441942276072==-- From lbmgmusic@gmail.com Fri May 16 16:16:36 2025 From: lbmgmusic@gmail.com To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Wanted: DEC ba23 or ba123 chassis Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 16:16:28 +0000 Message-ID: <174741218861.1228.10505137670352733325@classiccmp.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0573644744918041377==" --===============0573644744918041377== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I am building up a micro vax and need an empty chassis. Given the number of dec boards on ebay, I assume (hopefully) that there are s= ome empty chassis=20 out there. Please PM if you know of an option. tnx jc --===============0573644744918041377==-- From lbmgmusic@gmail.com Fri May 16 16:21:31 2025 From: lbmgmusic@gmail.com To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Finding a Honeywell 316? Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 16:21:28 +0000 Message-ID: <174741248836.1228.15336268756762453817@classiccmp.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0709376956459289969==" --===============0709376956459289969== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'd like to find a 516. I used one in the military and really liked the mach= ine. I think I still remember the assembly language. jc --===============0709376956459289969==-- From rice43@btinternet.com Fri May 16 17:38:15 2025 From: Joshua Rice To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wanted: DEC ba23 or ba123 chassis Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 18:32:22 +0100 Message-ID: <5e6b8bc8-a257-425e-983d-315d73d3208b@btinternet.com> In-Reply-To: <174741218861.1228.10505137670352733325@classiccmp.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6339218173886705665==" --===============6339218173886705665== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Location would be helpful, shipping is the biggest concern. Those=20 chassis are heavy. The issue you'll have is that BA23 chassis are just too convenient for=20 those with PDP11 boards, and BA123 chassis are large and hard to ship=20 (and rarer than their BA23 counterparts) Good luck, Josh Rice On 16/05/2025 17:16, lbmgmusic--- via cctalk wrote: > I am building up a micro vax and need an empty chassis. > > Given the number of dec boards on ebay, I assume (hopefully) that there are= some empty chassis > out there. > > Please PM if you know of an option. > > tnx > jc --===============6339218173886705665==-- From js@cimmeri.com Fri May 16 18:18:00 2025 From: js@cimmeri.com To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wanted: DEC ba23 or ba123 chassis Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 13:12:48 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <174741218861.1228.10505137670352733325@classiccmp.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1741478189900480511==" --===============1741478189900480511== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Location? On 5/16/2025 11:16 AM, lbmgmusic--- via cctalk wrote: > I am building up a micro vax and need an empty chassis. > > Given the number of dec boards on ebay, I assume (hopefully) that there are= some empty chassis > out there. > > Please PM if you know of an option. > > tnx > jc --===============1741478189900480511==-- From johnhreinhardt@thereinhardts.org Fri May 16 18:27:51 2025 From: "John H. Reinhardt" To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wanted: DEC ba23 or ba123 chassis Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 13:27:43 -0500 Message-ID: <763b73d0-8e1e-4458-9daa-be611ad0341a@thereinhardts.org> In-Reply-To: <5e6b8bc8-a257-425e-983d-315d73d3208b@btinternet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6042290328471845581==" --===============6042290328471845581== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There are some PDP-11/23 (PLUS) BA-11 boxes on Ebay, but the prices are high = (IMHO), some are beat up and I don't think the straight 11/23 BA11 can suppor= t a MV. I'm pretty sure they are 18-bit.=C2=A0 The 11/23 PLUS are 22-bit and = might work, but I think are Q22/Q22 rather than Q22/CD slots. I just got a BA123 about 4 months ago after a 2-yr search. John H. Reinhardt On 5/16/2025 12:32 PM, Joshua Rice via cctalk wrote: > Location would be helpful, shipping is the biggest concern. Those chassis a= re heavy. > > The issue you'll have is that BA23 chassis are just too convenient for thos= e with PDP11 boards, and BA123 chassis are large and hard to ship (and rarer = than their BA23 counterparts) > > Good luck, > > Josh Rice > > On 16/05/2025 17:16, lbmgmusic--- via cctalk wrote: >> I am building up a micro vax and need an empty chassis. >> >> Given the number of dec boards on ebay, I assume (hopefully) that there ar= e some empty chassis >> out there. >> >> Please PM if you know of an option. >> >> tnx >> jc=20 --===============6042290328471845581==-- From lbmgmusic@gmail.com Fri May 16 18:42:12 2025 From: lbmgmusic@gmail.com To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wanted: DEC ba23 or ba123 chassis Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 18:42:07 +0000 Message-ID: <174742092776.1228.11160858252616326394@classiccmp.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6035566557166087183==" --===============6035566557166087183== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I am in Roseburg OR. I will be up in Seattle next month for a few days. --===============6035566557166087183==-- From lbmgmusic@gmail.com Fri May 16 18:44:27 2025 From: lbmgmusic@gmail.com To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wanted: DEC ba23 or ba123 chassis Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 18:44:22 +0000 Message-ID: <174742106297.1228.11332399538065833269@classiccmp.org> In-Reply-To: <174741218046.1228.9273861373966093119@classiccmp.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1637032496681619213==" --===============1637032496681619213== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit SORRY FOR DOUBLE POST. I GUESS I PRESSED SEND TO FAST. --===============1637032496681619213==-- From lbmgmusic@gmail.com Fri May 16 18:46:25 2025 From: lbmgmusic@gmail.com To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wanted: DEC ba23 or ba123 chassis Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 18:46:20 +0000 Message-ID: <174742118046.1228.2879220287238745435@classiccmp.org> In-Reply-To: <174742092776.1228.11160858252616326394@classiccmp.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0179235212365413660==" --===============0179235212365413660== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The micro vax iii documents say that a BA23 chassis or BA123 chassis will wor= k. I think (might be wrong) the BA23 is Q22/CD=20 jc --===============0179235212365413660==-- From tdk.knight@gmail.com Fri May 16 18:58:40 2025 From: Adrian Stoness To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Finding a Honeywell 316? Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 13:58:19 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <174741248836.1228.15336268756762453817@classiccmp.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2144654176450966852==" --===============2144654176450966852== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit was also rebaged as a phillips p9205 so ur aware On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 11:28 AM lbmgmusic--- via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > I'd like to find a 516. I used one in the military and really liked the > machine. > I think I still remember the assembly language. > > jc > --===============2144654176450966852==-- From johnhreinhardt@thereinhardts.org Fri May 16 19:04:56 2025 From: "John H. Reinhardt" To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wanted: DEC ba23 or ba123 chassis Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 14:04:51 -0500 Message-ID: <3d5bbb95-8a0a-41d5-951f-31c4ed56d694@thereinhardts.org> In-Reply-To: <174742118046.1228.2879220287238745435@classiccmp.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1096504912802784585==" --===============1096504912802784585== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 5/16/2025 1:46 PM, lbmgmusic--- via cctalk wrote: > The micro vax iii documents say that a BA23 chassis or BA123 chassis will w= ork. > > I think (might be wrong) the BA23 is Q22/CD > > jc They are hybrid -=C2=A0 BA23 has slots 1-3 as Q22/CD and then 4-8 are Q22/Q22 I believe the BA123 is Slots 1-4 Q22/CD and 4-12 are Q22/Q22 --=20 John H. Reinhardt --===============1096504912802784585==-- From lbmgmusic@gmail.com Fri May 16 19:56:27 2025 From: lbmgmusic@gmail.com To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Finding a Honeywell 316? Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 19:56:20 +0000 Message-ID: <174742538041.1228.4962500248329959474@classiccmp.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3834863439106416600==" --===============3834863439106416600== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit here is a link to a simulator https://www.theoengel.nl/ --===============3834863439106416600==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Fri May 16 20:07:50 2025 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Finding a Honeywell 316? Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 16:07:32 -0400 Message-ID: <62465EFF-FAB2-409C-AFEE-E0C7B8DDDF7A@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: <174742538041.1228.4962500248329959474@classiccmp.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7630118073915380835==" --===============7630118073915380835== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable That's the machine that ran the Senster "cybernetic sculpture" at the Evoluon= in Eindhoven, right? That has been restored but apparently not with the ori= ginal software. I have been wondering if that code could be run on a simulat= or and get it to work right. The listings still exist, as do at least some o= f the schematics for the sensor and motion control electronics. paul > On May 16, 2025, at 3:56=E2=80=AFPM, lbmgmusic--- via cctalk wrote: >=20 > here is a link to a simulator >=20 > https://www.theoengel.nl/ --===============7630118073915380835==-- From kiwi_jonathan@yahoo.com Fri May 16 20:57:51 2025 From: Jonathan Stone To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wanted: DEC ba23 or ba123 chassis Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 20:57:43 +0000 Message-ID: <1375215720.1470418.1747429063638@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <3d5bbb95-8a0a-41d5-951f-31c4ed56d694@thereinhardts.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1743011957753778802==" --===============1743011957753778802== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =20 On Friday, May 16, 2025 at 12:13:30 PM PDT, John H. Reinhardt via cctalk wrote: >They are hybrid -=C2=A0 BA23 has slots 1-3 as Q22/CD and then 4-8 are Q22/Q22 >I believe the BA123 is Slots 1-4 Q22/CD and 4-12 are Q22/Q22 BA123 has 4 Q22/CD slots and the rest are Q22/Q22. There is another slot behi= nd, slightly raised, which is 'reserved'. I believe the dual height RQDX3-Ext= ender cards are permitted in the "raised" slot, but I'd have to check which h= alf.=20 BA213 and 215 are Q22/CD entirely.=20 Several of the Q18 backplanes can be converted to Q22 by modifying or wire-wr= apping the four pins. The path is serpentine -- alternating left-to-right/rig= ht-to-left by row. frainresearch.org had instructions and pictures, and usefu= l information on Qbus termination. That site is gone, but the content is stil= l on the Internet Archive's WayBack machine: https://web.archive.org/web/2015= 0506140342/http://web.frainresearch.org:8080/projects/pdp-11/conv22.php.=20 However a pure Q22/Q22 backplane will not support any Microvax II or III memo= ry cards, as they use CD slots as part of the Private Memory Interconnect (PM= I) to the CPU. You could run a KA630 with just the 1MB on the CPU board; but = it'd be even more constrained than a microvax 2000/vaxstation 2000 with just = the 2MB onboard memory. =20 --===============1743011957753778802==-- From bitwiz@12bitsbest.com Sat May 17 00:40:11 2025 From: Mike Katz To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] May Repair and Social Meeting Reminder Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 19:30:25 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <60acc78fe5ec437cbbdbbb7665e9ff76@emeritus-solutions.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1113706906148309609==" --===============1113706906148309609== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit This is a reminder that the next CCC repiar/social meeting will be at my house in Glen Ellyn on May 17th starting at 2pm and ending with everyone gets tired and leaves.  As usual pop, water and beer will be provided and everyone will chip in for pizza. Mike Katz 385 Saint Charles Rd Glen Ellyn, Il  60137-3794 +1 (773) 414-1044 I have a MAC SE that is in need of repair and I have a very old E & L Instruments TYCHON Mini-Micro Designer 8080 that needs the power supply repaired. The friend whose MAC SE that is also has several more MACs that need repair. Please feel free to come any time after 2PM until we all get too tired. See you all on the 17th.      Mike --===============1113706906148309609==-- From henry.r.bent@gmail.com Sat May 17 01:26:45 2025 From: Henry Bent To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wanted: DEC ba23 or ba123 chassis Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 21:26:28 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1375215720.1470418.1747429063638@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4640768374275360216==" --===============4640768374275360216== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 16 May 2025 at 20:33, Jonathan Stone via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > However a pure Q22/Q22 backplane will not support any Microvax II or III > memory cards, as they use CD slots as part of the Private Memory > Interconnect (PMI) to the CPU. You could run a KA630 with just the 1MB on > the CPU board; but it'd be even more constrained than a microvax > 2000/vaxstation 2000 with just the 2MB onboard memory. Does anyone know what the reasoning behind the 1MB on the KA630 board was? Just enough for a realtime application, maybe, or a single tinkerer? I can't see running much of anything serious in 1MB on a uVAX II in 1985 if you were really trying to take advantage of the hardware, so I wonder if the idea was that the board would have other applications. -Henry --===============4640768374275360216==-- From imp@bsdimp.com Sat May 17 01:49:06 2025 From: Warner Losh To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wanted: DEC ba23 or ba123 chassis Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 19:48:48 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8446348362515578343==" --===============8446348362515578343== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, May 16, 2025, 7:33=E2=80=AFPM Henry Bent via cctalk wrote: > On Fri, 16 May 2025 at 20:33, Jonathan Stone via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > > However a pure Q22/Q22 backplane will not support any Microvax II or III > > memory cards, as they use CD slots as part of the Private Memory > > Interconnect (PMI) to the CPU. You could run a KA630 with just the 1MB on > > the CPU board; but it'd be even more constrained than a microvax > > 2000/vaxstation 2000 with just the 2MB onboard memory. > > > Does anyone know what the reasoning behind the 1MB on the KA630 board was? > Just enough for a realtime application, maybe, or a single tinkerer? I > can't see running much of anything serious in 1MB on a uVAX II in 1985 if > you were really trying to take advantage of the hardware, so I wonder if > the idea was that the board would have other applications. > VAX eln realtime applications? Warner > --===============8446348362515578343==-- From henry.r.bent@gmail.com Sat May 17 02:14:03 2025 From: Henry Bent To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Finding a Honeywell 316? Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 22:13:45 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <62465EFF-FAB2-409C-AFEE-E0C7B8DDDF7A@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5194583823206935505==" --===============5194583823206935505== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 16 May 2025 at 22:03, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > That's the machine that ran the Senster "cybernetic sculpture" at the > Evoluon in Eindhoven, right? That has been restored but apparently not > with the original software. I have been wondering if that code could be > run on a simulator and get it to work right. The listings still exist, as > do at least some of the schematics for the sensor and motion control > electronics. You're talking about simulating a realtime application, and that would require exceptionally precise timing from the host to match the original hardware. I'm not saying that it can't be done but I wouldn't expect to be able to just put the code into SIMH, build an interface board out of a Raspberry Pi or whatever, and plug it into the mechanical controls. Also FWIW Wikipedia says that it was an H416, but I'm not familiar with that model line at all so I have no idea what the difference between that and an H316 would be. -Henry --===============5194583823206935505==-- From henry.r.bent@gmail.com Sat May 17 02:38:23 2025 From: Henry Bent To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wanted: DEC ba23 or ba123 chassis Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 22:38:04 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8432432585339356607==" --===============8432432585339356607== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, May 16, 2025, 21:49 Warner Losh wrote: > > > On Fri, May 16, 2025, 7:33=E2=80=AFPM Henry Bent via cctalk > wrote: > >> On Fri, 16 May 2025 at 20:33, Jonathan Stone via cctalk < >> cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: >> >> > >> > However a pure Q22/Q22 backplane will not support any Microvax II or III >> > memory cards, as they use CD slots as part of the Private Memory >> > Interconnect (PMI) to the CPU. You could run a KA630 with just the 1MB >> on >> > the CPU board; but it'd be even more constrained than a microvax >> > 2000/vaxstation 2000 with just the 2MB onboard memory. >> >> >> Does anyone know what the reasoning behind the 1MB on the KA630 board was? >> Just enough for a realtime application, maybe, or a single tinkerer? I >> can't see running much of anything serious in 1MB on a uVAX II in 1985 if >> you were really trying to take advantage of the hardware, so I wonder if >> the idea was that the board would have other applications. >> > > VAX eln realtime applications? > > Warner > Yeah, I always forget that that existed. I kind of get the sense that everyone else did too. Did it get any real market penetration? -Henry > --===============8432432585339356607==-- From holm@freibergnet.de Sat May 17 06:18:11 2025 From: Holm Tiffe To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wanted: DEC ba23 or ba123 chassis Date: Sat, 17 May 2025 08:18:00 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6215368652637596466==" --===============6215368652637596466== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Henry Bent via cctalk wrote: > On Fri, May 16, 2025, 21:49 Warner Losh wrote: >=20 > > > > > > On Fri, May 16, 2025, 7:33=E2=80=AFPM Henry Bent via cctalk > > wrote: > > > >> On Fri, 16 May 2025 at 20:33, Jonathan Stone via cctalk < > >> cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > >> > >> > > >> > However a pure Q22/Q22 backplane will not support any Microvax II or I= II > >> > memory cards, as they use CD slots as part of the Private Memory > >> > Interconnect (PMI) to the CPU. You could run a KA630 with just the 1MB > >> on > >> > the CPU board; but it'd be even more constrained than a microvax > >> > 2000/vaxstation 2000 with just the 2MB onboard memory. > >> > >> > >> Does anyone know what the reasoning behind the 1MB on the KA630 board wa= s? > >> Just enough for a realtime application, maybe, or a single tinkerer? I > >> can't see running much of anything serious in 1MB on a uVAX II in 1985 if > >> you were really trying to take advantage of the hardware, so I wonder if > >> the idea was that the board would have other applications. > >> > > > > VAX eln realtime applications? > > > > Warner > > >=20 > Yeah, I always forget that that existed. I kind of get the sense that > everyone else did too. Did it get any real market penetration? >=20 > -Henry >=20 > > Oh yes, it got..but probaply not with that KA630. Take a look at this: https://www.tiffe.de/Robotron/PDP-VAX/rtVAX300/ That rTVAX 300 contains an CVAX with SGEC and serial devices, meant as a building block for embedded Applications with VAXeln. I've tried to port NetBSD to the ISA board, but failed. There was no Interest from the NetBSD VAX People to help. I've run in a problem with the Memory management afte the positve results at the beginning. Regards, Holm --=20 Technik Service u. Handel Tiffe, www.tsht.de, Holm Tiffe,=20 Goethestrasse 15, 09569 Oederan, USt-Id: DE253710583 info(a)tsht.de Tel +49 37292 709778 Mobil: 0172 8790 741 --===============6215368652637596466==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Sat May 17 14:01:50 2025 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wanted: DEC ba23 or ba123 chassis Date: Sat, 17 May 2025 10:01:31 -0400 Message-ID: <37EB9115-253F-4A92-92B8-1DDA6008B211@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8509748533739324062==" --===============8509748533739324062== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On May 16, 2025, at 10:38=E2=80=AFPM, Henry Bent via cctalk wrote: >=20 >> ...VAX eln realtime applications? >>=20 >> Warner >=20 > Yeah, I always forget that that existed. I kind of get the sense that > everyone else did too. Did it get any real market penetration? >=20 > -Henry One VAXeln application is the LPS40 PostScript print server, the first high s= peed PostScript printer produced by DEC. paul --===============8509748533739324062==-- From dkelvey@hotmail.com Sat May 17 15:56:56 2025 From: dwight To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Comstar Computer Systems System 4 Intel 4004 based Industrial Computer Date: Sat, 17 May 2025 15:56:49 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7820356017104666410==" --===============7820356017104666410== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It all depends on what one means by a computer that one could do useful thing= s on. A fellow named Tom Pittman wrote a 4004 assembler that ran on the SIM4-= 01 board, using a teletype's tape reader as the source code and the intermedi= ate output for the 2 pass assembler. This assembler was released, through Int= el, in the 4004 manual listed below. I understand the assembler was used to write the code for a mailing list prog= ram. While the ASR33 is not the best editing machine, some scissors, a splici= ng block and tape could do the needed editing of paper tape. The assembler also had the ability to stop and edit the tape being punched wh= ile assembling. I'd say that having an assembler would be sufficient to call it a general pur= pose computer. Although, one didn't normally connect the 4004 up to program R= AM, it could be done as was done on the MOD4 development system. The 4004 was= generally intended to run code from ROMs and use RAM for temporary data. Tha= t doesn't mean it never had RAM for program space. I don't know what the Comstar systems had but Tom Pittman didn't let not havi= ng a computer to work on stop him from using the 4004 as a computer. Dwight ________________________________ From: Steve Lewis via cctalk Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2025 8:01 AM To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Cc: Steve Lewis Subject: [cctalk] Re: Comstar Computer Systems System 4 Intel 4004 based Indu= strial Computer At VCF West (Mountain View) in 2021, there was a demonstration of using a 4004 in a weighing machine and cash register. I'm not sure if there was modern make or referenced prior equipment. On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 8:58=E2=80=AFAM Christian Liendo via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > Back in Nov of 2023 Ed Sharpe asked the following: =E2=80=9CWas there ever a > COMPUTER using a 4004 that you could really do something or did that > finally arrive with the 8008=E2=80=9D > > https://classiccmp.org/mailman3/hyperkitty/list/cctalk(a)classiccmp.org/mes= sage/LYKGFANNPN6S75X3IUEZVFDRVPD5MQKF/ > > I hope to answer that question, or at least spark a discussion. > > For a number of years now I have been researching this computer called > a Comstar System 4 which is based on the Intel 4004. The Comstar > Corporation of Minneapolis was a developer of microcomputer control > and automation systems and in 1972 released the System 4 > microcomputer. Comstar built a general purpose capable computer that > could be programmed to do a multitude of tasks but their market focus > was industrial automation. Comstar was eventually bought by Warner & > Swasey in 1974 to integrate their computers into the Warner & Swasey > product line. Warner & Swasey was a huge manufacturer of industrial > machines. So they bought Comstar to be their Computer division. In > fact it was called " Warner & Swasey Comstar Microcomputer Electronic > Products" Warner and Swasey also licensed the Micral N to do the same > and we call the Micral N a computer. The Micral N was designed for > process control, but we know of it as a computer. > > Now before anyone argues about if this is a computer or not, I will > state the following. > > It was called a Microcomputer in the ACM titled "Development of a > portable compiler for industrial microcomputer systems " > It was called a Microcomputer in Electronics Magazine July 11th 1974 > It was listed as a Microcomputer in "Auerbach Guide to Minicomputers" > April 1976 & Winter 1976 - 1977 > It was listed as a Microcomputer in Datamation Magazine Dec 1974 > It was called a Microcomputer in "A MICROCOMPUTER BASED SUBSTATION > CONTROL SYSTEM" The University of Oklahoma, Ph.D., 1975 Engineering, > electronics and electrical Page 90 > It was listed as a Microcomputer in the Intel MCS 4 User Manual Feb > 1973 page 171 > It was listed as a Microcomputer in Electronics Magazine Jan 1973, > they promote the 4004 and 8008 and use the System 4 as an example. > The reality is this existed, was 4004 based and there were discussions > about it in the media at the time. > > Anyway I wanted to see if there was more interest in researching this > computer. > > I listed a number of articles and references below that either discuss > Comstar, The Warner Swasey Computer Division, the =E2=80=9CSystem 4=E2=80= =9D or =E2=80=9CStar > 4=E2=80=9D Computer. > > All the Manuals and schematics I was able to upload to archive.org > https://archive.org/search?query=3Dsubject%3A%22Comstar+Computer+Systems%22 > > Computer History Museum's Archive of the Manual > https://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/102686568 > > Pictures of the items I have collected so far > https://imgur.com/a/Oyts3A9 > > The website "Internet Scripophily Museum of Computing" has a page on > the history of The Warner & Swasey Company. It's a decent timeline of > the company > http://ismoc.blogspot.com/2017/06/the-warner-swasey-company.html > > "Development of a portable compiler for industrial microcomputer > systems" by LEROY H. ANDERSON The Warner & Swasey Company, it > discusses the system and has images on the unit. > > https://www.computer.org/csdl/pds/api/csdl/proceedings/download-article/12O= mNzRqdD4/pdf > > In the ACM's archives "Development of a portable compiler for > industrial microcomputer systems" by LEROY H. ANDERSON The Warner & > Swasey Company, it discusses the system and has images on the unit. > > https://www.computer.org/csdl/pds/api/csdl/proceedings/download-article/12O= mNzRqdD4/pdf > > Electronics Magazine July 11th 1974 Article: Industrial Automatic > control proliferates, they are mentioned on page 84 & 85 > > https://www.worldradiohistory.com/Archive-Electronics/70s/74/Electronics-19= 74-07-11.pdf > > There is a mention about the compiler in the IEEE on Page 25 under > Compiler Programmer > https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=3D6368812 > > Computer Design Magazine Nov 1975 Page 129 they talk about the compiler. > https://archive.org/details/bitsavers_ComputerDe_90611286/page/128/mode/2up > > The Intel MCS 4 User Manual Feb 1973 page 171 and in Electronics > Magazine Jan 1973, they promote the 4004 and 8008 and use the System 4 > as an example. > > http://www.bitsavers.org/components/intel/MCS4/MCS-4_UsersManual_Feb73.pdf > > https://www.worldradiohistory.com/Archive-Electronics/70s/73/Electronics-19= 73-01-04.pdf > > There are a number of sources that list the computer as a > "microcomputer" and provide specs showing it being 4004 based. > > Datamation Magazine Page 97 & 101 > http://www.bitsavers.org/magazines/Datamation/197412.pdf > > In "Auerbach Guide to Minicomputers" April 1976, the computer is > mentioned on page 54 and page 70. > > http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/auerbach/Auerbach_Guide_to_Minicomputers_Apr76= .pdf > > In "Auerbach Guide to Minicomputers" Winter 1976 - 1977, the computer > is mentioned on page 32 > > http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/auerbach/Auerbach_Guide_to_Minicomputers_1976-= 1977_Winter.pdf > --===============7820356017104666410==-- From elson@pico-systems.com Sat May 17 17:41:47 2025 From: Jon Elson To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Wanted: DEC ba23 or ba123 chassis Date: Sat, 17 May 2025 12:41:38 -0500 Message-ID: <5ec3b7ee-b8ae-3eab-abbd-07f5a701b4dc@pico-systems.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2467378458954137386==" --===============2467378458954137386== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 5/16/25 20:26, Henry Bent via cctalk wrote: > On Fri, 16 May 2025 at 20:33, Jonathan Stone via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > >> However a pure Q22/Q22 backplane will not support any Microvax II or III >> memory cards, as they use CD slots as part of the Private Memory >> Interconnect (PMI) to the CPU. You could run a KA630 with just the 1MB on >> the CPU board; but it'd be even more constrained than a microvax >> 2000/vaxstation 2000 with just the 2MB onboard memory. > > Does anyone know what the reasoning behind the 1MB on the KA630 board was? > Just enough for a realtime application, maybe, or a single tinkerer? I > can't see running much of anything serious in 1MB on a uVAX II in 1985 if > you were really trying to take advantage of the hardware, so I wonder if > the idea was that the board would have other applications. MicroVMS on the uVAX II was a demand-paged virtual memory system, and ran QUITE a lot of stuff in the basic 1 MB.  The original aim of the uVAX II was to support a single user desktop environment, and it did so VERY well.  If you wanted to surf the web with streaming videos, then it was overwhelmed, but nobody was doing that in 1986 when it came out. I ran a home system starting in 1986 on a uVAX II with just the on-board memory, and it ran FINE like that.  I did a lot of tape duplicating as a DECUS librarian, and also ran a home environment monitor as a permanent batch job.  I started with just the console terminal, then added a DHV-11 serial multiplexer, then a VCB01 monochrome graphics board and DECWindows, then upgraded to a VCB02 and added a few more MB of memory.  I also did driver developement on that system. Jon --===============2467378458954137386==-- From wrcooke@wrcooke.net Sat May 17 18:14:11 2025 From: wrcooke@wrcooke.net To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Comstar Computer Systems System 4 Intel 4004 based Industrial Computer Date: Sat, 17 May 2025 14:14:06 -0400 Message-ID: <2115731783.12368.1747505646491@email.ionos.com> In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CSA1PR11MB69418C98BE0FF1359D2FBB5BA392A=40SA1PR11MB?= =?utf-8?q?6941=2Enamprd11=2Eprod=2Eoutlook=2Ecom=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2215544883070705997==" --===============2215544883070705997== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On 05/17/2025 11:56 AM EDT dwight via cctalk wrot= e: >=20 > =20 > It all depends on what one means by a computer that one could do useful thi= ngs on. A fellow named Tom Pittman wrote a 4004 assembler that ran on the SIM= 4-01 board, using a teletype's tape reader as the source code and the interme= diate output for the 2 pass assembler. This assembler was released, through I= ntel, in the 4004 manual listed below. > I don't know what the Comstar systems had but Tom Pittman didn't let not ha= ving a computer to work on stop him from using the 4004 as a computer. > Dwight >=20 As a related side note, Tom Pittman was rather prolific and well-known in the= early days of home computing. He also wrote several popular versions of Tin= y BASIC. He is still active. http://www.ittybittycomputers.com/ Will --===============2215544883070705997==-- From bitwiz@12bitsbest.com Sun May 18 02:12:38 2025 From: Mike Katz To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] May Repair and Social Meeting Reminder Date: Sat, 17 May 2025 21:12:28 -0500 Message-ID: <098a9791-9b57-412d-a9fc-03bf8393eaa8@12bitsbest.com> In-Reply-To: <60acc78fe5ec437cbbdbbb7665e9ff76@emeritus-solutions.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6770721006136680677==" --===============6770721006136680677== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit No one showed up today.  Have we all lost interest.  Should I schedule another one for June? This is a reminder that the next CCC repiar/social meeting will be at my house in Glen Ellyn on May 17th starting at 2pm and ending with everyone gets tired and leaves.  As usual pop, water and beer will be provided and everyone will chip in for pizza. Mike Katz 385 Saint Charles Rd Glen Ellyn, Il  60137-3794 +1 (773) 414-1044 I have a MAC SE that is in need of repair and I have a very old E & L Instruments TYCHON Mini-Micro Designer 8080 that needs the power supply repaired. The friend whose MAC SE that is also has several more MACs that need repair. Please feel free to come any time after 2PM until we all get too tired. See you all on the 17th.      Mike --===============6770721006136680677==-- From julf@julf.com Sun May 18 13:36:05 2025 From: Johan Helsingius To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: May Repair and Social Meeting Reminder Date: Sun, 18 May 2025 15:35:55 +0200 Message-ID: <11ff0a56-92b8-452d-8b2c-ef5f598394dd@Julf.com> In-Reply-To: <098a9791-9b57-412d-a9fc-03bf8393eaa8@12bitsbest.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1448015592332284349==" --===============1448015592332284349== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 18/05/2025 04:12, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: > No one showed up today.  Have we all lost interest.  Should I schedule > another one for June? Well, it was a bit too far to just pop in from here (Amsterdam). Julf --===============1448015592332284349==-- From imp@bsdimp.com Sun May 18 13:55:23 2025 From: Warner Losh To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: May Repair and Social Meeting Reminder Date: Sun, 18 May 2025 07:55:05 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <11ff0a56-92b8-452d-8b2c-ef5f598394dd@Julf.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4877270531711990602==" --===============4877270531711990602== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Sun, May 18, 2025, 7:43 AM Johan Helsingius via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > On 18/05/2025 04:12, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: > > No one showed up today. Have we all lost interest. Should I schedule > > another one for June? > > Well, it was a bit too far to just pop in from here (Amsterdam). > I'm closer in Denver, but still too far to drive home after. Warner > --===============4877270531711990602==-- From henry.r.bent@gmail.com Sun May 18 14:31:39 2025 From: Henry Bent To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: May Repair and Social Meeting Reminder Date: Sun, 18 May 2025 10:31:22 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5281976728859702509==" --===============5281976728859702509== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, May 16, 2025, 20:48 Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: > This is a reminder that the next CCC repiar/social meeting will be at my > house in Glen Ellyn on May 17th starting at 2pm and ending with everyone > gets tired and leaves. As usual pop, water and beer will be provided > and everyone will chip in for pizza. > > Mike Katz > 385 Saint Charles Rd > Glen Ellyn, Il 60137-3794 > +1 (773) 414-1044 > > I have a MAC SE that is in need of repair and I have a very old E & L > Instruments TYCHON Mini-Micro Designer 8080 that needs the power supply > repaired. > > The friend whose MAC SE that is also has several more MACs that need > repair. > > Please feel free to come any time after 2PM until we all get too tired. > > See you all on the 17th. > > Mike > I'll be honest, your email sounds like you're saying "come fix my computers, and my friend's computers, and I'll give you some pop and beer." Not necessarily a very enticing proposition for a lot of folks. -Henry > --===============5281976728859702509==-- From cz@alembic.crystel.com Sun May 18 14:53:06 2025 From: Christopher Zach To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: May Repair and Social Meeting Reminder Date: Sun, 18 May 2025 10:52:58 -0400 Message-ID: <497F1110-9C64-4467-9563-853C4F48B252@alembic.crystel.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8449187433965536080==" --===============8449187433965536080== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hm. If I were local I'd love to come and fix stuff for beer and recognition=20 On May 18, 2025 10:31:22 AM EDT, Henry Bent via cctalk wrote: >On Fri, May 16, 2025, 20:48 Mike Katz via cctalk >wrote: > >> This is a reminder that the next CCC repiar/social meeting will be at my >> house in Glen Ellyn on May 17th starting at 2pm and ending with everyone >> gets tired and leaves. As usual pop, water and beer will be provided >> and everyone will chip in for pizza. >> >> Mike Katz >> 385 Saint Charles Rd >> Glen Ellyn, Il 60137-3794 >> +1 (773) 414-1044 >> >> I have a MAC SE that is in need of repair and I have a very old E & L >> Instruments TYCHON Mini-Micro Designer 8080 that needs the power supply >> repaired. >> >> The friend whose MAC SE that is also has several more MACs that need >> repair. >> >> Please feel free to come any time after 2PM until we all get too tired. >> >> See you all on the 17th. >> >> Mike >> > >I'll be honest, your email sounds like you're saying "come fix my >computers, and my friend's computers, and I'll give you some pop and beer." >Not necessarily a very enticing proposition for a lot of folks. > >-Henry > >> --===============8449187433965536080==-- From ard.p850ug1@gmail.com Sun May 18 15:39:42 2025 From: Tony Duell To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: May Repair and Social Meeting Reminder Date: Sun, 18 May 2025 16:39:26 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3938951011947564294==" --===============3938951011947564294== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Sun, May 18, 2025 at 3:38 PM Henry Bent via cctalk wrote: > > I'll be honest, your email sounds like you're saying "come fix my > computers, and my friend's computers, and I'll give you some pop and beer." > Not necessarily a very enticing proposition for a lot of folks. I was fixing 'old' computers all day anyway [1]. But starting at 14:00 and going on until I'm tired would probably give 5-6 hours of repair time. Which is not a lot when faced with a non-working machine that I've never seen before, however well I know that type of machine. Actually, I probably would have gone, had I been nearer. But having an ocean in the way does make things difficult... [1] Still doing battle with the Philips P3800 that we discussed the lock from some time back (still need to do more on that part!). I am hoping an ATX power supply, chosen because they are cheap and have logic-level on/off switching, can be used to replace the missing Philips board. So my bench is covered in bits of ATX power supply in various states of dismantled-ness. -tony --===============3938951011947564294==-- From artgodwin@gmail.com Sun May 18 17:55:39 2025 From: Adrian Godwin To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: May Repair and Social Meeting Reminder Date: Sun, 18 May 2025 18:55:22 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <497F1110-9C64-4467-9563-853C4F48B252@alembic.crystel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4422342786613009847==" --===============4422342786613009847== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Yeah, social fixing is fun. But I'm an ocean away too. On Sun, May 18, 2025 at 4:18 PM Christopher Zach via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > Hm. If I were local I'd love to come and fix stuff for beer and > recognition > > On May 18, 2025 10:31:22 AM EDT, Henry Bent via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > >On Fri, May 16, 2025, 20:48 Mike Katz via cctalk > >wrote: > > > >> This is a reminder that the next CCC repiar/social meeting will be at my > >> house in Glen Ellyn on May 17th starting at 2pm and ending with everyone > >> gets tired and leaves. As usual pop, water and beer will be provided > >> and everyone will chip in for pizza. > >> > >> Mike Katz > >> 385 Saint Charles Rd > >> Glen Ellyn, Il 60137-3794 > >> +1 (773) 414-1044 > >> > >> I have a MAC SE that is in need of repair and I have a very old E & L > >> Instruments TYCHON Mini-Micro Designer 8080 that needs the power supply > >> repaired. > >> > >> The friend whose MAC SE that is also has several more MACs that need > >> repair. > >> > >> Please feel free to come any time after 2PM until we all get too tired. > >> > >> See you all on the 17th. > >> > >> Mike > >> > > > >I'll be honest, your email sounds like you're saying "come fix my > >computers, and my friend's computers, and I'll give you some pop and > beer." > >Not necessarily a very enticing proposition for a lot of folks. > > > >-Henry > > > >> > --===============4422342786613009847==-- From jonesthechip@logicmagic.co.uk Sun May 18 19:01:40 2025 From: Sid Jones To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: May Repair and Social Meeting Reminder Date: Sun, 18 May 2025 20:01:31 +0100 Message-ID: <8F9F359D9B3C48D599C4D724976364AD@LM010> In-Reply-To: <098a9791-9b57-412d-a9fc-03bf8393eaa8@12bitsbest.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============9091236292873531351==" --===============9091236292873531351== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Do you have remote access during your meetups? Is it possible to video call and say hello? Regards Sid (If it's E&L from the UK, I did some consultancy work with them a few years ago...) -----Original Message----- From: Mike Katz via cctalk Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2025 3:12 AM To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts ; Jason T ; Spyro Svolos ; Bob Kaplow ; Jeff Hellyer Cc: Mike Katz Subject: [cctalk] May Repair and Social Meeting Reminder No one showed up today. Have we all lost interest. Should I schedule another one for June? This is a reminder that the next CCC repiar/social meeting will be at my house in Glen Ellyn on May 17th starting at 2pm and ending with everyone gets tired and leaves. As usual pop, water and beer will be provided and everyone will chip in for pizza. Mike Katz 385 Saint Charles Rd Glen Ellyn, Il 60137-3794 +1 (773) 414-1044 I have a MAC SE that is in need of repair and I have a very old E & L Instruments TYCHON Mini-Micro Designer 8080 that needs the power supply repaired. The friend whose MAC SE that is also has several more MACs that need repair. Please feel free to come any time after 2PM until we all get too tired. See you all on the 17th. Mike --===============9091236292873531351==-- From bitwiz@12bitsbest.com Sun May 18 19:45:40 2025 From: Mike Katz To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: May Repair and Social Meeting Reminder Date: Sun, 18 May 2025 14:45:31 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <8F9F359D9B3C48D599C4D724976364AD@LM010> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4180416597556148040==" --===============4180416597556148040== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I've never set that up before that that shouldn't be that difficult with one of my older laptops. Good idea. On 5/18/2025 2:01 PM, Sid Jones via cctalk wrote: > Do you have remote access during your meetups? > > Is it possible to video call and say hello? > > Regards > > Sid > > (If it's E&L from the UK, I did some consultancy work with them a few > years ago...) > > -----Original Message----- From: Mike Katz via cctalk > Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2025 3:12 AM > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts ; Jason T ; Spyro > Svolos ; Bob Kaplow ; Jeff Hellyer > Cc: Mike Katz > Subject: [cctalk] May Repair and Social Meeting Reminder > > No one showed up today.  Have we all lost interest.  Should I schedule > another one for June? > > This is a reminder that the next CCC repiar/social meeting will be at my > house in Glen Ellyn on May 17th starting at 2pm and ending with everyone > gets tired and leaves.  As usual pop, water and beer will be provided > and everyone will chip in for pizza. > > Mike Katz > 385 Saint Charles Rd > Glen Ellyn, Il  60137-3794 > +1 (773) 414-1044 > > I have a MAC SE that is in need of repair and I have a very old E & L > Instruments TYCHON Mini-Micro Designer 8080 that needs the power supply > repaired. > > The friend whose MAC SE that is also has several more MACs that need > repair. > > Please feel free to come any time after 2PM until we all get too tired. > > See you all on the 17th. > >      Mike > > --===============4180416597556148040==-- From artgodwin@gmail.com Sun May 18 20:19:34 2025 From: Adrian Godwin To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: May Repair and Social Meeting Reminder Date: Sun, 18 May 2025 21:19:19 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <8F9F359D9B3C48D599C4D724976364AD@LM010> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8711995082003834313==" --===============8711995082003834313== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Tech Tangents does a twitch stream with text comments. Could work. On Sun, May 18, 2025 at 8:38=E2=80=AFPM Sid Jones via cctalk wrote: > Do you have remote access during your meetups? > > Is it possible to video call and say hello? > > Regards > > Sid > > (If it's E&L from the UK, I did some consultancy work with them a few > years > ago...) > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Katz via cctalk > Sent: Sunday, May 18, 2025 3:12 AM > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts ; Jason T ; Spyro > Svolos ; Bob Kaplow ; Jeff Hellyer > Cc: Mike Katz > Subject: [cctalk] May Repair and Social Meeting Reminder > > No one showed up today. Have we all lost interest. Should I schedule > another one for June? > > This is a reminder that the next CCC repiar/social meeting will be at my > house in Glen Ellyn on May 17th starting at 2pm and ending with everyone > gets tired and leaves. As usual pop, water and beer will be provided > and everyone will chip in for pizza. > > Mike Katz > 385 Saint Charles Rd > Glen Ellyn, Il 60137-3794 > +1 (773) 414-1044 > > I have a MAC SE that is in need of repair and I have a very old E & L > Instruments TYCHON Mini-Micro Designer 8080 that needs the power supply > repaired. > > The friend whose MAC SE that is also has several more MACs that need > repair. > > Please feel free to come any time after 2PM until we all get too tired. > > See you all on the 17th. > > Mike > > > --===============8711995082003834313==-- From hupfadekroua@gmail.com Mon May 19 19:42:49 2025 From: hupfadekroua To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] DEC MAD-11 Date: Mon, 19 May 2025 21:42:32 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0057157453823335018==" --===============0057157453823335018== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi All, In my collection I do have a blinkenlight front panel with a label MAD-11. Based on the adress and data switches the system should be of 18 Bits wide. I don=E2=80=98t see any kind of references or links to docs while querying th= e internet. Does some of you have any information or hints available? A. --===============0057157453823335018==-- From vaxorcist@googlemail.com Mon May 19 20:31:19 2025 From: Hans-Ulrich =?utf-8?q?H=C3=B6lscher?= To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: DEC MAD-11 Date: Mon, 19 May 2025 22:31:02 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1540646323058289477==" --===============1540646323058289477== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Could you please post a picture? Am Mo., 19. Mai 2025 um 21:48 Uhr schrieb hupfadekroua via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>: > Hi All, > > In my collection I do have a blinkenlight front panel with a label MAD-11. > > Based on the adress and data switches the system should be of 18 Bits wide. > > I don‘t see any kind of references or links to docs while querying the > internet. > > Does some of you have any information or hints available? > > A. --===============1540646323058289477==-- From mjd.bishop@emeritus-solutions.com Mon May 19 21:00:50 2025 From: Martin Bishop To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: DEC MAD-11 Date: Mon, 19 May 2025 21:00:44 +0000 Message-ID: <20df972acd4242adb66577c6dd9d6d21@emeritus-solutions.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6797970373790700763==" --===============6797970373790700763== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable https://www.pdp-11.nl/pdp11-45/pdp11-45startpage.html ? see system console 1= 8 addr lites for an 18b Unibus cf https://www.pdp-11.nl/pdp11-70startpage.html with a 22b Unibus, but still = 16b data bus So 11/45 11/40 are certainly possibilities, documentation at bitsavers or onl= ine pix may generate other candidates (11/20 etc) And, although there are 18 switches, only the bottom 16 are used to load data= =20 Unless the -11 is noise it=E2=80=99s a PDP-11 Martin -----Original Message----- From: Hans-Ulrich H=C3=B6lscher via cctalk [mailto:cctalk(a)classiccmp.org]=20 Sent: 19 May 2025 20:31 To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Cc: Hans-Ulrich H=C3=B6lscher Subject: [cctalk] Re: DEC MAD-11 Could you please post a picture? Am Mo., 19. Mai 2025 um 21:48 Uhr schrieb hupfadekroua via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>: > Hi All, > > In my collection I do have a blinkenlight front panel with a label MAD-11. > > Based on the adress and data switches the system should be of 18 Bits wide. > > I don=E2=80=98t see any kind of references or links to docs while querying = the=20 > internet. > > Does some of you have any information or hints available? > > A. --===============6797970373790700763==-- From bill.gunshannon@hotmail.com Tue May 20 13:15:26 2025 From: Bill Gunshannon To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] IBM 5155 Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 09:15:13 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7411685980380433832==" --===============7411685980380433832== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I just managed to score a 5155. Well, soon, it is waiting for me to pick it up at the University where I used to work. It looks to be in really good shape and has been in storage for probably two decades or more. A couple quick question for anyone familiar with this system. Is it likely there is one of those little batteries on it that would now be dead and need replacing before I try to use it? And, also, would this have a floppy controller on it that was capable of reading and writing disks from systems like the TRS-80 with an SD boot track? Inquiring minds want to know. :-) bill --===============7411685980380433832==-- From cctalk@ibm51xx.net Tue May 20 13:29:40 2025 From: Ali To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: IBM 5155 Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 06:29:31 -0700 Message-ID: <0Ma0N7-1uWZbF0Zqh-00P3qd@mrelay.perfora.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3281018364519350081==" --===============3281018364519350081== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >Is it likely there is one of those=C2=A0 little batteries on it that would>n= ow be dead and need replacing before I try to use it?>Congrats and no. This i= s your std XT (5160) MB just shoved in a case with a handle and monitor.>And,= also, would this have a floppy controller on it that was capable>of reading = and writing disks from systems like the TRS-80 with an SD boot track?>If it w= orks on an XT it will work on a 5155. If not then no. --===============3281018364519350081==-- From lists@glitchwrks.com Tue May 20 13:40:50 2025 From: Jonathan Chapman To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: IBM 5155 Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 13:32:13 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CLV8P221MB14699C32F339A1A6E4CCED02ED9FA=40LV8P221MB?= =?utf-8?q?1469=2ENAMP221=2EPROD=2EOUTLOOK=2ECOM=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1748281630088124431==" --===============1748281630088124431== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Is it likely there is one of those little batteries on it that would > now be dead and need replacing before I try to use it? If it has a battery, it'd be on an add-on board, so check to make sure there = aren't leakers, but otherwise no. Your more likely issue will be shorted tantalums. It's a 256K XT motherboard = in there. =20 > And, also, would this have a floppy controller on it that was capable > of reading and writing disks from systems like the TRS-80 with an SD > boot track? Almost certainly no, if it has the external floppy connector (37-pin D-SUB). = There were third party controllers that will. Thanks, Jonathan --===============1748281630088124431==-- From billdegnan@gmail.com Tue May 20 13:45:34 2025 From: Bill Degnan To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: IBM 5155 Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 09:45:17 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CLV8P221MB14699C32F339A1A6E4CCED02ED9FA=40LV8P221MB?= =?utf-8?q?1469=2ENAMP221=2EPROD=2EOUTLOOK=2ECOM=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0915583428548100812==" --===============0915583428548100812== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit It’s an IBM XT with a built-in monochrome display. No battery on the motherboard unless someone added an expansion card that required a battery. On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 9:38 AM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > I just managed to score a 5155. Well, soon, it is waiting for me to > pick it up at the University where I used to work. It looks to be in > really good shape and has been in storage for probably two decades or > more. > > A couple quick question for anyone familiar with this system. > > Is it likely there is one of those little batteries on it that would > now be dead and need replacing before I try to use it? > > And, also, would this have a floppy controller on it that was capable > of reading and writing disks from systems like the TRS-80 with an SD > boot track? > > Inquiring minds want to know. :-) > > bill > --===============0915583428548100812==-- From ard.p850ug1@gmail.com Tue May 20 13:52:02 2025 From: Tony Duell To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: IBM 5155 Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 14:51:47 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CLV8P221MB14699C32F339A1A6E4CCED02ED9FA=40LV8P221MB?= =?utf-8?q?1469=2ENAMP221=2EPROD=2EOUTLOOK=2ECOM=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1652488306236171072==" --===============1652488306236171072== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 2:38 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote: > > > I just managed to score a 5155. Well, soon, it is waiting for me to > pick it up at the University where I used to work. It looks to be in > really good shape and has been in storage for probably two decades or > more. I restored one last year. Mine is still 100% orginal IBM too. It's a normal PC/XT motherboard with CGA and floppy controller boards at least. Technical references for everything apart from the power supply are on bitsavers. Theres another site with some detailed information on the power supply and I think I found the sources for the keyboard microcontroller as a Github project. > > A couple quick question for anyone familiar with this system. > > Is it likely there is one of those little batteries on it that would > now be dead and need replacing before I try to use it? No, it's a XT, so no internal real time clock or CMOS configuration RAM as standard. What you do need to replace before they do their antisocial acts and emit clouds of magic smoke are the metalised paper capacitors in the power supply. This is painful to do, you have to dismantle the power supply which involves Bristol Spline and tamperproof Torx screws, then drill out rivets holding the little filter PCB in place. Rivets that are hard to get a drill to. The only other part I had to replace in mine was a tantalum bead capactor on the motherboard. > > And, also, would this have a floppy controller on it that was capable > of reading and writing disks from systems like the TRS-80 with an SD > boot track? Alas not. The oriignal IBM controller is strictly double density (MFM) only. -tony --===============1652488306236171072==-- From billdegnan@gmail.com Tue May 20 13:53:43 2025 From: Bill Degnan To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: IBM 5155 Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 09:53:27 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3Cz5ViRLo0dU6HAWN8iisBtpT5Gbisvyj3lirz0=5Fq8G6hiQTIa?= =?utf-8?q?PycthLimH-ksU4YRPOobmkkcscw1m8wWJeZN9lbp9f4MjpWEaPiSwAU08Wc=3D=40?= =?utf-8?q?glitchwrks=2Ecom=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7740775684536187863==" --===============7740775684536187863== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > > And, also, would this have a floppy controller on it that was capable > > of reading and writing disks from systems like the TRS-80 with an SD > > boot track? > > Almost certainly no, if it has the external floppy connector (37-pin > D-SUB). There were third party controllers that will. This is true for the trs 80 model 1, but for the model III and 4, there was software then to allow a person to make disks and transfer files to and from the IBM XT with IBM disk drive controller and a std TRS 80 3/4 controller. PC Cross Zap for example. Bill > --===============7740775684536187863==-- From cisin@xenosoft.com Tue May 20 15:16:53 2025 From: Fred Cisin To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: IBM 5155 Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 08:16:47 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CLV8P221MB14699C32F339A1A6E4CCED02ED9FA=40LV8P221MB?= =?utf-8?q?1469=2ENAMP221=2EPROD=2EOUTLOOK=2ECOM=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1881857536261827002==" --===============1881857536261827002== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 20 May 2025, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote: > I just managed to score a 5155. Well, soon, it is waiting for me to > pick it up at the University where I used to work. It looks to be in > really good shape and has been in storage for probably two decades or > more. > A couple quick question for anyone familiar with this system. > Is it likely there is one of those little batteries on it that would > now be dead and need replacing before I try to use it? It is a 5160 (IBM PC/XT) is a different case. Luggable, like an original Compaq, although most people feel that Compaq did a better job of converting to a aluggable, specifically including how much of how many slots remain fully accessible. It was most likely created BECAUSE of the success of the original Compaq. Colby? created an after-market case for 5150, that was smaller than Compaq. The 5150/5160/5155 had no real time clock. IBM didn't include that until the 5170 (PC/AT). But there were MANY third party multi-function boards the included addition of a real-time clock, so those need to be examined for leakage, etc. > And, also, would this have a floppy controller on it that was capable > of reading and writing disks from systems like the TRS-80 with an SD > boot track? Short answer: NO. It could, with appropriate added software, read and write MANY DD/MFM disks from other machines, including: http://www.xenosoft.com/fmts.html but NOT SD/MFM. And even boards that could, and the TRS80 model 3/4 had difficulty with the "non-standard" DAMs (Data Address Marks) used on TRS80 model 1. There used to be an unconfirmed explanation saying that the choice(s) of DAMs for the model 1 was due to a misprinted 765 spec sheet, with 2 columns transposed. The 5150/5160/[5155] FDC board used an NEC 765 (or equivalent) that was hard wired for DD/MFM. In stock configuration, it did not permit SD/FM, although it certainly could have been modified (non-trivially) for such. Similarly, Flagstaff Engineering modified those FDC boards (quite a few added wires), with added software, for 8" SSSD CP/M; but not 5/25" SD/FM. Marty Goodman studied one, and copied those changes, to modify a few imitations; but he no longer has any of them, nor his notes from the project, and likely doesn't even remember doing it. OB_Tangent: Sorrento Valley Associates made a floppy controller card for the Apple2 that used an FDC chip, in order to be able to do 8" SSSD CP/M. There were numerous third party FDC boards thet could do SD/FM, some of which used the WD37C65 chip. David Dunfield provided a small program that could test 5150/5160/[5155] and other PC FDC's for whether they could handle SD/FM. > Inquiring minds want to know. :-) The National Enquirer (who made popular the phrase: "Inquiring minds want to know") had little or no coverage of microcomputers. THOSE inquiring minds did not want to know. -- Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com http://www.xenosoft.com --===============1881857536261827002==-- From hupfadekroua@gmail.com Tue May 20 15:25:57 2025 From: hupfadekroua To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: DEC MAD-11 Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 08:17:59 +0200 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20df972acd4242adb66577c6dd9d6d21@emeritus-solutions.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2683557758846373868==" --===============2683557758846373868== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Attached to this email there are two photographs of this front-panel l > Am 19.05.2025 um 23:00 schrieb Martin Bishop : >=20 > =EF=BB=BFhttps://www.pdp-11.nl/pdp11-45/pdp11-45startpage.html ? see syste= m console 18 addr lites for an 18b Unibus >=20 > cf https://www.pdp-11.nl/pdp11-70startpage.html with a 22b Unibus, but stil= l 16b data bus >=20 > So 11/45 11/40 are certainly possibilities, documentation at bitsavers or o= nline pix may generate other candidates (11/20 etc) >=20 > And, although there are 18 switches, only the bottom 16 are used to load da= ta >=20 > Unless the -11 is noise it=E2=80=99s a PDP-11 >=20 > Martin >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Hans-Ulrich H=C3=B6lscher via cctalk [mailto:cctalk(a)classiccmp.org] > Sent: 19 May 2025 20:31 > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > Cc: Hans-Ulrich H=C3=B6lscher > Subject: [cctalk] Re: DEC MAD-11 >=20 > Could you please post a picture? >=20 >> Am Mo., 19. Mai 2025 um 21:48 Uhr schrieb hupfadekroua via cctalk < >> cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>: >>=20 >> Hi All, >>=20 >> In my collection I do have a blinkenlight front panel with a label MAD-11. >>=20 >> Based on the adress and data switches the system should be of 18 Bits wide. >>=20 >> I don=E2=80=98t see any kind of references or links to docs while querying= the >> internet. >>=20 >> Does some of you have any information or hints available? >>=20 >> A. --===============2683557758846373868==-- From cisin@xenosoft.com Tue May 20 15:29:36 2025 From: Fred Cisin To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: IBM 5155 Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 08:29:30 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6768822420317452115==" --===============6768822420317452115== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 20 May 2025, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: > Colby created an after-market case for 5150, that was smaller than Compaq. https://vintage-computer.fr/tag/colby/ --===============6768822420317452115==-- From cliendo@gmail.com Tue May 20 15:51:37 2025 From: Christian Liendo To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Comstar Computer Systems System 4 Intel 4004 based Industrial Computer Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 11:51:19 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CSA1PR11MB69418C98BE0FF1359D2FBB5BA392A=40SA1PR11MB?= =?utf-8?q?6941=2Enamprd11=2Eprod=2Eoutlook=2Ecom=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5458863168899763079==" --===============5458863168899763079== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From what I was able to learn the 4004 based System 4 was implemented in multiple systems It ran systems at a Michigan-California Lumber Company sawmill, the Comstar system was used in the grading and sorting operation, keeping track of the number of boards that had gone into each bin and activating a relay when a palette load was completed. Another was a "tape editing system for Deluxe Check Printers. At that time the check information was stored on a short strip of paper tape included with each check order. When checks were re-ordered, the paper tape drove the linotype machine that set the type for the check order. When a bank was bought by another bank, it was necessary to change the routing number on new check orders to the new bank's number. The Comstar system would read each tape, look up the routing number in an EPROM table and substitute the new routing number (and add an account number prefix) if it found a match for the old routing number in the table. Another was in a Frozen food warehouse in Chicago (Beatrice Foods'). There were four four-story high stacker cranes running on tracks in the floor that moved pallets from entrance turntables to the many pallet slots in the four-story high pallet racks. There was a Comstar machine in each crane cab to implement three-axis closed loop control of the crane motors. There were also several other Comstar machines to control the turntables, as well as a system of conveyer belts used to move manually picked boxes from the pallets in the pallet slots to the loading dock area for transfer to outbound trucks. Comstar also worked with TRW on the street Lights in Baltimore. I remember there was a brief mention of a water system that was run on these computers So the computers actually did stuff. On Sat, May 17, 2025 at 12:03=E2=80=AFPM dwight via cctalk wrote: > > > It all depends on what one means by a computer that one could do useful thi= ngs on. A fellow named Tom Pittman wrote a 4004 assembler that ran on the SIM= 4-01 board, using a teletype's tape reader as the source code and the interme= diate output for the 2 pass assembler. This assembler was released, through I= ntel, in the 4004 manual listed below. > I understand the assembler was used to write the code for a mailing list pr= ogram. While the ASR33 is not the best editing machine, some scissors, a spli= cing block and tape could do the needed editing of paper tape. > The assembler also had the ability to stop and edit the tape being punched = while assembling. > I'd say that having an assembler would be sufficient to call it a general p= urpose computer. Although, one didn't normally connect the 4004 up to program= RAM, it could be done as was done on the MOD4 development system. The 4004 w= as generally intended to run code from ROMs and use RAM for temporary data. T= hat doesn't mean it never had RAM for program space. > I don't know what the Comstar systems had but Tom Pittman didn't let not ha= ving a computer to work on stop him from using the 4004 as a computer. > Dwight > > --===============5458863168899763079==-- From cctalk@ibm51xx.net Wed May 21 00:33:36 2025 From: Ali To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: IBM 5155 Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 17:33:54 -0700 Message-ID: <045501dbc9e8$09623bb0$1c26b310$@net> In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CLV8P221MB14699C32F339A1A6E4CCED02ED9FA=40LV8P221MB?= =?utf-8?q?1469=2ENAMP221=2EPROD=2EOUTLOOK=2ECOM=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5046597530803286479==" --===============5046597530803286479== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I still can't figure out why replies sent through my android phone to the lis= t lose formatting... >Is it likely there is one of those little batteries on it that would >now be dead and need replacing before I try to use it? > Congrats and no. This is your std XT (5160) MB just shoved in a case with a h= andle and monitor. >And, also, would this have a floppy controller on it that was capable >of reading and writing disks from systems like the TRS-80 with an SD boot tr= ack? > If it works on an XT it will work on a 5155. If not then no. -Ali --===============5046597530803286479==-- From cisin@xenosoft.com Wed May 21 01:35:19 2025 From: Fred Cisin To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: formatting (Was: IBM 5155 Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 18:35:12 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <045501dbc9e8$09623bb0$1c26b310$@net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1479848322593236793==" --===============1479848322593236793== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 20 May 2025, Ali via cctalk wrote: > I still can't figure out why replies sent through my android phone to the l= ist lose formatting... At first glance, it looks as though your "newline"s are not being=20 recognized as such. Were you using any other formatting, in addition to newline? "Newline", on various systems, can be CR (Carriage Return), LF (Line Feed), CRLF, or LFCR. In printers, many did an automagic LF whenever they=20 got a CR, etc. For a while, each system insisted that theirs was the only true way, and=20 that everybody else shoulc change to match them. The copy of your first 5155 post that I get from the list has no newlines. So, whatever software you are using on your phone seems to be sending=20 sonething for newline, that the list server isn't recognizing. I'm sorry that I can't be any real help, but that is what the nature of=20 the problem seems to be. -- Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com --===============1479848322593236793==-- From cctalk@ibm51xx.net Wed May 21 02:42:59 2025 From: Ali To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: formatting (Was: IBM 5155 Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 19:43:22 -0700 Message-ID: <049501dbc9fa$1f344d90$5d9ce8b0$@net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6803860491441004796==" --===============6803860491441004796== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > At first glance, it looks as though your "newline"s are not being > recognized as such. > That would be accurate. I went so far as putting in two blank lines to see if only one was being discarded for some reason. > Were you using any other formatting, in addition to newline? No. It is a simple text reply. > The copy of your first 5155 post that I get from the list has no > newlines. > So, whatever software you are using on your phone seems to be sending > sonething for newline, that the list server isn't recognizing. Yes. I am using the stock Samsung email program that comes preinstalled on their phones. It seems to be only the list server that fails. i.e. sending email to other people on different system/servers/providers using a variety of email readers on multiple OSes works fine. Only when I reply to the list does this issue occur. > I'm sorry that I can't be any real help, but that is what the nature of > the problem seems to be. NP. Thanks for chiming in! -Ali --===============6803860491441004796==-- From cctalk@beyondthepale.ie Wed May 21 09:42:11 2025 From: Peter Coghlan To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: formatting (Was: IBM 5155 Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 10:08:51 +0100 Message-ID: <01TJZKT2XT1Y8X0GYX@beyondthepale.ie> In-Reply-To: <049501dbc9fa$1f344d90$5d9ce8b0$@net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1564603502554976686==" --===============1564603502554976686== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >> At first glance, it looks as though your "newline"s are not being >> recognized as such. >> > > That would be accurate. I went so far as putting in two blank lines to see > if only one was being discarded for some reason. > >> Were you using any other formatting, in addition to newline? > > No. It is a simple text reply. > >> The copy of your first 5155 post that I get from the list has no >> newlines. >> So, whatever software you are using on your phone seems to be sending >> sonething for newline, that the list server isn't recognizing. > > Yes. I am using the stock Samsung email program that comes preinstalled on > their phones. It seems to be only the list server that fails. i.e. sending > email to other people on different system/servers/providers using a variety > of email readers on multiple OSes works fine. Only when I reply to the list > does this issue occur. > As far as I know, it goes something like this: When sending, most email clients, likely including this Samsung thing, create emails in two sections. One section is formatted using HTML (to accomodate the dancing kangaroos and yodelling jellyfish which Fred occasionally refers to) and the other is formatted in plain text. This is supposed to be the same content presented in two different ways in order that the maximum number of diverse receipient email clients can cope with it. When a typical email client receives an email containing content in two or more different formats, the client is supposed to pick one of them and display it to the user. It is supposed to pick the most "fully featured" format it is capable of displaying and this is typically the HTML formatted section. The Samsung email client thing produces broken plain text formatted sections in its outgoing emails. Most recipients don't notice the problem because their email client picks the HTML section and presents this to them instead and this looks ok. The mailing list server strips out the HTML sections of emails posted to the list (because we don't want no dancing kangaroos nor yodelling jellyfish here) and sends only the malformatted by Samsung text sections to the mailing list recipients. The receiving email client has to display the malformatted text because there is no alternative. So, the problem is that the sending email client is faulty and likely hasn't been tested sending emails to text only capable email clients. Complain to the provider! Regards, Peter Coghlan. --===============1564603502554976686==-- From phillatthewillows@gmail.com Wed May 21 17:44:33 2025 From: Phill Kennedy To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: IBM 5155 Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 09:59:37 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6279270705391406034==" --===============6279270705391406034== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bill, Please update your email on QRZ.com to a working email address. Thanks Phill, a fellow ham. --===============6279270705391406034==-- From cctalk@ibm51xx.net Wed May 21 19:04:33 2025 From: Ali To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: formatting (Was: IBM 5155 Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 12:04:56 -0700 Message-ID: <050001dbca83$3f91d510$beb57f30$@net> In-Reply-To: <01TJZKT2XT1Y8X0GYX@beyondthepale.ie> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5585212683155601594==" --===============5585212683155601594== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > When sending, most email clients, likely including this Samsung thing, > create emails in two sections. One section is formatted using HTML > (to accomodate the dancing kangaroos and yodelling jellyfish which Fred > occasionally refers to) and the other is formatted in plain text. ... > The Samsung email client thing produces broken plain text formatted > sections > in its outgoing emails. Most recipients don't notice the problem > because > their email client picks the HTML section and presents this to them > instead > and this looks ok. Peter, Thanks for the detailed explanation. That would make sense and sounds very likely. I will send a report to Samsung but I really doubt they will care or fix it. It will probably be easier for me to just get a separate client, that handles text only messages properly, on android and use that for the list. -Ali --===============5585212683155601594==-- From bill.gunshannon@hotmail.com Thu May 22 00:09:40 2025 From: Bill Gunshannon To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: IBM 5155 Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 20:09:26 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1912271922966290128==" --===============1912271922966290128== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 5/21/2025 11:59 AM, Phill Kennedy via cctalk wrote: > Bill, > > Please update your email on QRZ.com to a working email address. > > Thanks > > Phill, a fellow ham. Huh? I am not aware of having anything at all to do with QRZ.com so I have no idea what address they might have for me or where it came from. bill --===============1912271922966290128==-- From bill.gunshannon@hotmail.com Thu May 22 00:19:00 2025 From: Bill Gunshannon To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: IBM 5155 Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 20:18:42 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1167563128701210241==" --===============1167563128701210241== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Well, I did it. I obviously haven't been there in at least 10 years and in all likelihood won;t be there again for another 10 years (if I even live that long). Why did it make a difference? bill On 5/21/2025 11:59 AM, Phill Kennedy via cctalk wrote: > Bill, > > Please update your email on QRZ.com to a working email address. > > Thanks > > Phill, a fellow ham. --===============1167563128701210241==-- From epekstrom@gmail.com Fri May 23 22:39:21 2025 From: Peter Ekstrom To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Problems with an RQDX3 in an 11/23. Date: Fri, 23 May 2025 18:39:04 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8913548579090911060==" --===============8913548579090911060== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello to the group, I have been banging my head against a PDP-11/23 where I have an RQDX3 I'm trying to get to work. Actually, I have two RQDX3's but only one at a time. It is configured to the factory CSR, 172150, and it has the latest microcode on it. When I run the XXDP ZRQCH0 formatter I get the following: RQDX3 Disk Formatter Utility UNIT IS Formattable Winchester (RDnn) or Floppy (RX33) Drives RSTRT ADR 145702 DR>STA CHANGE HW (L) ? Y # UNITS (D) ? 1 UNIT 0 Enter controller IP Address (O) 172150 ? What unit do you want to format [0-255] (D) 0 ? Would you like to revector a single LBN only [Y/N] (L) N ? Do you want to use the "AUTOFORMAT" Mode [Y/N] (L) Y ? N ZRQC SYS FTL ERR 00006 ON UNIT 00 TST 001 SUB 000 PC: 105742 Fatal Controller Error During Initialization. ZRQC SYS FTL ERR 00006 ON UNIT 00 TST 001 SUB 002 PC: 105742 Fatal Controller Error During Initialization. ZRQC EOP 1 2 TOTAL ERRS DR> I have been booting XXDP and also RT11 over an emulator TU58. And I have a BDV11 so it has an LTC. I did try downgrading the microcode on the RQDX3 to the previous version, 3. It was 4. But no luck. Am I missing something? This should work with an M8186 CPU board, right? Anyone have any ideas? I haven't yet, but I plan to pop one of these RQDX3s in my 11/23+ and see if it works there. -Peter --===============8913548579090911060==-- From billdegnan@gmail.com Fri May 23 23:51:48 2025 From: Bill Degnan To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Problems with an RQDX3 in an 11/23. Date: Fri, 23 May 2025 19:51:32 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8045835126678728308==" --===============8045835126678728308== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cable and termination? On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 6:48 PM Peter Ekstrom via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > Hello to the group, > > I have been banging my head against a PDP-11/23 where I have an RQDX3 I'm > trying to get to work. Actually, I have two RQDX3's but only one at a time. > It is configured to the factory CSR, 172150, and it has the latest > microcode on it. When I run the XXDP ZRQCH0 formatter I get the following: > > RQDX3 Disk Formatter Utility > UNIT IS Formattable Winchester (RDnn) or Floppy (RX33) Drives > RSTRT ADR 145702 > DR>STA > > > CHANGE HW (L) ? Y > > > > > # UNITS (D) ? 1 > > > UNIT 0 > Enter controller IP Address (O) 172150 ? > What unit do you want to format [0-255] (D) 0 ? > Would you like to revector a single LBN only [Y/N] (L) N ? > Do you want to use the "AUTOFORMAT" Mode [Y/N] (L) Y ? N > > > ZRQC SYS FTL ERR 00006 ON UNIT 00 TST 001 SUB 000 PC: 105742 > Fatal Controller Error During Initialization. > > > ZRQC SYS FTL ERR 00006 ON UNIT 00 TST 001 SUB 002 PC: 105742 > Fatal Controller Error During Initialization. > > > ZRQC EOP 1 > 2 TOTAL ERRS > > > DR> > > > I have been booting XXDP and also RT11 over an emulator TU58. And I have a > BDV11 so it has an LTC. > > I did try downgrading the microcode on the RQDX3 to the previous version, > 3. It was 4. But no luck. > Am I missing something? This should work with an M8186 CPU board, right? > > Anyone have any ideas? I haven't yet, but I plan to pop one of these RQDX3s > in my 11/23+ and see if it works there. > > -Peter > --===============8045835126678728308==-- From wayne.sudol@hotmail.com Sat May 24 01:44:46 2025 From: Wayne S To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Problems with an RQDX3 in an 11/23. Date: Sat, 24 May 2025 01:44:35 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4498348777856812249==" --===============4498348777856812249== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Csr correct? Sent from my iPhone > On May 23, 2025, at 16:58, Bill Degnan via cctalk = wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BFCable and termination? >=20 >> On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 6:48=E2=80=AFPM Peter Ekstrom via cctalk < >> cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: >>=20 >> Hello to the group, >>=20 >> I have been banging my head against a PDP-11/23 where I have an RQDX3 I'm >> trying to get to work. Actually, I have two RQDX3's but only one at a time. >> It is configured to the factory CSR, 172150, and it has the latest >> microcode on it. When I run the XXDP ZRQCH0 formatter I get the following: >>=20 >> RQDX3 Disk Formatter Utility >> UNIT IS Formattable Winchester (RDnn) or Floppy (RX33) Drives >> RSTRT ADR 145702 >> DR>STA >>=20 >>=20 >> CHANGE HW (L) ? Y >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>=20 >> # UNITS (D) ? 1 >>=20 >>=20 >> UNIT 0 >> Enter controller IP Address (O) 172150 ? >> What unit do you want to format [0-255] (D) 0 ? >> Would you like to revector a single LBN only [Y/N] (L) N ? >> Do you want to use the "AUTOFORMAT" Mode [Y/N] (L) Y ? N >>=20 >>=20 >> ZRQC SYS FTL ERR 00006 ON UNIT 00 TST 001 SUB 000 PC: 105742 >> Fatal Controller Error During Initialization. >>=20 >>=20 >> ZRQC SYS FTL ERR 00006 ON UNIT 00 TST 001 SUB 002 PC: 105742 >> Fatal Controller Error During Initialization. >>=20 >>=20 >> ZRQC EOP 1 >> 2 TOTAL ERRS >>=20 >>=20 >> DR> >>=20 >>=20 >> I have been booting XXDP and also RT11 over an emulator TU58. And I have a >> BDV11 so it has an LTC. >>=20 >> I did try downgrading the microcode on the RQDX3 to the previous version, >> 3. It was 4. But no luck. >> Am I missing something? This should work with an M8186 CPU board, right? >>=20 >> Anyone have any ideas? I haven't yet, but I plan to pop one of these RQDX3s >> in my 11/23+ and see if it works there. >>=20 >> -Peter >>=20 --===============4498348777856812249==-- From epekstrom@gmail.com Sat May 24 13:27:30 2025 From: Peter Ekstrom To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Problems with an RQDX3 in an 11/23. Date: Sat, 24 May 2025 09:27:11 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CCO1PR08MB72085DF6D179CBB4F375D483E49BA=40CO1PR08MB?= =?utf-8?q?7208=2Enamprd08=2Eprod=2Eoutlook=2Ecom=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0770281219564770464==" --===============0770281219564770464== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I had one of the ends of the 50-wire flat cable get damaged and replaced it. But it is possible either I did something wrong, or the cable itself also got damaged. I don't have anymore of those but I have a new one on the way. So I'll see when I get it. Yeah, the CSR is the factory 172150, and both XXDP and RT-11 see a controller on that address. It gets a vector of 154 which also seems reasonable compared to my 11/23+. - Peter On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 10:03=E2=80=AFPM Wayne S via cctalk wrote: > Csr correct? > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On May 23, 2025, at 16:58, Bill Degnan via cctalk > wrote: > > > > =EF=BB=BFCable and termination? > > > >> On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 6:48=E2=80=AFPM Peter Ekstrom via cctalk < > >> cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > >> > >> Hello to the group, > >> > >> I have been banging my head against a PDP-11/23 where I have an RQDX3 > I'm > >> trying to get to work. Actually, I have two RQDX3's but only one at a > time. > >> It is configured to the factory CSR, 172150, and it has the latest > >> microcode on it. When I run the XXDP ZRQCH0 formatter I get the > following: > >> > >> RQDX3 Disk Formatter Utility > >> UNIT IS Formattable Winchester (RDnn) or Floppy (RX33) Drives > >> RSTRT ADR 145702 > >> DR>STA > >> > >> > >> CHANGE HW (L) ? Y > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> # UNITS (D) ? 1 > >> > >> > >> UNIT 0 > >> Enter controller IP Address (O) 172150 ? > >> What unit do you want to format [0-255] (D) 0 ? > >> Would you like to revector a single LBN only [Y/N] (L) N ? > >> Do you want to use the "AUTOFORMAT" Mode [Y/N] (L) Y ? N > >> > >> > >> ZRQC SYS FTL ERR 00006 ON UNIT 00 TST 001 SUB 000 PC: 105742 > >> Fatal Controller Error During Initialization. > >> > >> > >> ZRQC SYS FTL ERR 00006 ON UNIT 00 TST 001 SUB 002 PC: 105742 > >> Fatal Controller Error During Initialization. > >> > >> > >> ZRQC EOP 1 > >> 2 TOTAL ERRS > >> > >> > >> DR> > >> > >> > >> I have been booting XXDP and also RT11 over an emulator TU58. And I > have a > >> BDV11 so it has an LTC. > >> > >> I did try downgrading the microcode on the RQDX3 to the previous > version, > >> 3. It was 4. But no luck. > >> Am I missing something? This should work with an M8186 CPU board, right? > >> > >> Anyone have any ideas? I haven't yet, but I plan to pop one of these > RQDX3s > >> in my 11/23+ and see if it works there. > >> > >> -Peter > >> > --===============0770281219564770464==-- From epekstrom@gmail.com Sat May 24 22:45:48 2025 From: Peter Ekstrom To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Problems with an RQDX3 in an 11/23. Date: Sat, 24 May 2025 18:45:30 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5742474281922966625==" --===============5742474281922966625== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Nope, turns out my H9278 backplane is killing the controllers.... Who'd a thunk it. And please don't ask how I know that now..... - Peter On Sat, May 24, 2025 at 9:27=E2=80=AFAM Peter Ekstrom = wrote: > I had one of the ends of the 50-wire flat cable get damaged and replaced > it. But it is possible either I did something wrong, or the cable itself > also got damaged. > I don't have anymore of those but I have a new one on the way. So I'll see > when I get it. > > Yeah, the CSR is the factory 172150, and both XXDP and RT-11 see a > controller on that address. It gets a vector of 154 which also seems > reasonable compared to my 11/23+. > > - Peter > > On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 10:03=E2=80=AFPM Wayne S via cctalk > wrote: > >> Csr correct? >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> > On May 23, 2025, at 16:58, Bill Degnan via cctalk < >> cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: >> > >> > =EF=BB=BFCable and termination? >> > >> >> On Fri, May 23, 2025 at 6:48=E2=80=AFPM Peter Ekstrom via cctalk < >> >> cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hello to the group, >> >> >> >> I have been banging my head against a PDP-11/23 where I have an RQDX3 >> I'm >> >> trying to get to work. Actually, I have two RQDX3's but only one at a >> time. >> >> It is configured to the factory CSR, 172150, and it has the latest >> >> microcode on it. When I run the XXDP ZRQCH0 formatter I get the >> following: >> >> >> >> RQDX3 Disk Formatter Utility >> >> UNIT IS Formattable Winchester (RDnn) or Floppy (RX33) Drives >> >> RSTRT ADR 145702 >> >> DR>STA >> >> >> >> >> >> CHANGE HW (L) ? Y >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> # UNITS (D) ? 1 >> >> >> >> >> >> UNIT 0 >> >> Enter controller IP Address (O) 172150 ? >> >> What unit do you want to format [0-255] (D) 0 ? >> >> Would you like to revector a single LBN only [Y/N] (L) N ? >> >> Do you want to use the "AUTOFORMAT" Mode [Y/N] (L) Y ? N >> >> >> >> >> >> ZRQC SYS FTL ERR 00006 ON UNIT 00 TST 001 SUB 000 PC: 105742 >> >> Fatal Controller Error During Initialization. >> >> >> >> >> >> ZRQC SYS FTL ERR 00006 ON UNIT 00 TST 001 SUB 002 PC: 105742 >> >> Fatal Controller Error During Initialization. >> >> >> >> >> >> ZRQC EOP 1 >> >> 2 TOTAL ERRS >> >> >> >> >> >> DR> >> >> >> >> >> >> I have been booting XXDP and also RT11 over an emulator TU58. And I >> have a >> >> BDV11 so it has an LTC. >> >> >> >> I did try downgrading the microcode on the RQDX3 to the previous >> version, >> >> 3. It was 4. But no luck. >> >> Am I missing something? This should work with an M8186 CPU board, >> right? >> >> >> >> Anyone have any ideas? I haven't yet, but I plan to pop one of these >> RQDX3s >> >> in my 11/23+ and see if it works there. >> >> >> >> -Peter >> >> >> > --===============5742474281922966625==-- From lewissa78@gmail.com Sun May 25 07:27:12 2025 From: Steve Lewis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] IBM 5100 side scroller (PALM processor) Date: Sun, 25 May 2025 02:26:57 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0035856346231628466==" --===============0035856346231628466== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I've written a "side scroller" program using the IBM 5100's native PALM instruction set. I talked about the 5100 in 2023, and for 2025 I wanted to present something special for its 50th anniversary. I kept getting sidetracked with other projects over the year. But thanks to the IBM 5100 emulator now in MAME, that helped a lot in debugging the program more efficiently. There is much I still don't fully understand about PALM, so I probably do this in the most efficient way, but it does work well. I'm also still working towards restoring a POLY-88 (8080 based system, similar to SOL-20 as far as being S-100 based). Someday I'd like to attempt a similar side-scroller on that platform, to see how the performance compares and if a micro that early could handle it (at 1.8MHz and will need to find 16KB of working RAM- one thing about the IBM 5100, it feels fairly rock solid after 50 years). Unless anyone already has a working 8080-based system and wants to take a stab at this? I'll talk more about the design approach (and use of PALM instruction set) after VCF next month. Here is the YouTube video preview of this scroller in action on real hardware: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DsRAxKGkXC1I And the Rumble version in case anyone has issues with YT: https://rumble.com/v6tu80h-ibm-5100-vertical-side-scroller-hardware-demonstra= tion-homage-to-palm-and-i.html If anyone has a 5100 with the "expansion feature" and async card, we're always interested in trying to get old system "online" (through WiModem type devices), or a non-working 5100 is always good for spare parts on the ones that do still work. But one "fabled accessory" of the 5100 is it's carrying case -- which surprisingly was the cheapest item on its price sheet (at $150 new). I've only seen one of these once (in Florida), so they do exist. Or tapes (even later 3M QIC DC6120 are compatible). Cheers, Steve --===============0035856346231628466==-- From epekstrom@gmail.com Sun May 25 19:55:52 2025 From: Peter Ekstrom To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Board repairs? Date: Sun, 25 May 2025 15:55:33 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============9036252944347860109==" --===============9036252944347860109== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Was there someone on this list who can help repair boards, like the RQDX3s I broke in my H9278? I don't know if it would be too costly, but if not I'd like to restore them to working condition. -Peter --===============9036252944347860109==-- From mjd.bishop@emeritus-solutions.com Sun May 25 22:27:37 2025 From: Martin Bishop To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Board repairs? Date: Sun, 25 May 2025 22:27:29 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4768732596772372827==" --===============4768732596772372827== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 0) location 1) nature of fault : dead transceiver, broken track, damaged connector, ex-VL= SI device, etc 2) what materiel do you have to hand; eg donor boards 3) diagnostic resources (DVM, digital CRO, etc) & electronics hand tools (10 = rembi hot stick -> IR stage for BGA) Martin -----Original Message----- From: Peter Ekstrom via cctalk [mailto:cctalk(a)classiccmp.org]=20 Sent: 25 May 2025 19:56 To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Cc: Peter Ekstrom Subject: [cctalk] Board repairs? Was there someone on this list who can help repair boards, like the RQDX3s I = broke in my H9278? I don't know if it would be too costly, but if not I'd lik= e to restore them to working condition. -Peter --===============4768732596772372827==-- From cc@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de Mon May 26 09:49:51 2025 From: Christian Corti To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: IBM 5100 side scroller (PALM processor) Date: Mon, 26 May 2025 11:49:40 +0200 Message-ID: <5e6eb98f-a043-3fb3-9fa1-6832f66eab52@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0889321943261615339==" --===============0889321943261615339== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sun, 25 May 2025, Steve Lewis wrote: > But one "fabled accessory" of the 5100 is it's carrying case -- which > surprisingly was the cheapest item on its price sheet (at $150 new). I've > only seen one of these once (in Florida), so they do exist. Or tapes > (even later 3M QIC DC6120 are compatible). We also have one or two of these cases. They remind me somehow to the cases for the 5155. Christian --===============0889321943261615339==-- From bill.gunshannon@hotmail.com Wed May 28 00:00:24 2025 From: Bill Gunshannon To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] TRS-80 BASIC oddity Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 20:00:06 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5014097179245020658==" --===============5014097179245020658== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I am going to assume there are other TRS-80 people hanging out here and go ahead and ask this: Has anyone here used the DEFUSRx command? I tried to use it for something I am working on and it didn't work. So, I copied the example program from page 115 of the Model III Disk System Owner's Manual and, guess what, it didn't work either. 150 DEFUSR1 = &H7D00 returns a Syntax Error 150 DEFUSR1 = 32000 works fine. Anybody else ever run into this? I can't believe something as blatant as that could have gone on for all those years. bill --===============5014097179245020658==-- From billdegnan@gmail.com Wed May 28 00:32:18 2025 From: Bill Degnan To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: TRS-80 BASIC oddity Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 20:32:00 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CLV8P221MB1469830C762F67D6C120FBF0ED67A=40LV8P221MB?= =?utf-8?q?1469=2ENAMP221=2EPROD=2EOUTLOOK=2ECOM=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4235024042536759516==" --===============4235024042536759516== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit $9C or 9Ch. Try these? Bill On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 8:23 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > I am going to assume there are other TRS-80 people hanging out > here and go ahead and ask this: > > Has anyone here used the DEFUSRx command? > > I tried to use it for something I am working on and it > didn't work. > > So, I copied the example program from page 115 of the > Model III Disk System Owner's Manual and, guess what, > it didn't work either. > > 150 DEFUSR1 = &H7D00 > returns a Syntax Error > > 150 DEFUSR1 = 32000 > works fine. > > Anybody else ever run into this? > > I can't believe something as blatant as that could have > gone on for all those years. > > bill > --===============4235024042536759516==-- From classiccmp@fjl.co.uk Wed May 28 03:17:30 2025 From: Frank Leonhardt To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: TRS-80 BASIC oddity Date: Wed, 28 May 2025 13:17:20 +1000 Message-ID: <9dd74b56-4711-4526-a16a-c0219966cc49@fjl.co.uk> In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CLV8P221MB1469830C762F67D6C120FBF0ED67A=40LV8P221MB?= =?utf-8?q?1469=2ENAMP221=2EPROD=2EOUTLOOK=2ECOM=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============9124495815839431566==" --===============9124495815839431566== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 28/05/2025 10:00, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote: > > I am going to assume there are other TRS-80 people hanging out > here and go ahead and ask this: > > Has anyone here used the DEFUSRx command? > > I tried to use it for something I am working on and it > didn't work. > > So, I copied the example program from page 115 of the > Model III Disk System Owner's Manual and, guess what, > it didn't work either. > > 150 DEFUSR1 = &H7D00 > returns a Syntax Error > > 150 DEFUSR1 = 32000 > works fine. > > Anybody else ever run into this? > > I can't believe something as blatant as that could have > gone on for all those years. A misprint in a manual never corrected? Surly not! I can't speak for the TRS-80 (you don't say which one) but Microsoft BASIC of the time didn't allow for non-decimal numbers in its syntax. I'm more familiar with the 6502 variants, but I'd expect the parser would be expecting an integer expression at that point. I've written few Microsoft compatible BASICs for embedded processors in my time, and hex constants are one of the additional features I add. If you think it does support hex manifest constants, try PRINT &H7D00 and see how far you get. I'd expect the normal Microsoft expression parser to be called for DEF USRx  - there's no reason to call anything else. It's just not how it works. Regards, Frank. --===============9124495815839431566==-- From bobh@tds.net Wed May 28 05:11:30 2025 From: bobh@tds.net To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: TRS-80 BASIC oddity Date: Tue, 27 May 2025 20:19:00 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CLV8P221MB1469830C762F67D6C120FBF0ED67A=40LV8P221MB?= =?utf-8?q?1469=2ENAMP221=2EPROD=2EOUTLOOK=2ECOM=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5290486013553175293==" --===============5290486013553175293== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I used that command once and I seem to remember having the same issue. That w= ould have been in about 1984. Sent from my iPhone Robert Harrison bobh(a)tds.net > On May 27, 2025, at 8:08=E2=80=AFPM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BF > I am going to assume there are other TRS-80 people hanging out > here and go ahead and ask this: >=20 > Has anyone here used the DEFUSRx command? >=20 > I tried to use it for something I am working on and it > didn't work. >=20 > So, I copied the example program from page 115 of the > Model III Disk System Owner's Manual and, guess what, > it didn't work either. >=20 > 150 DEFUSR1 =3D &H7D00 > returns a Syntax Error >=20 > 150 DEFUSR1 =3D 32000 > works fine. >=20 > Anybody else ever run into this? >=20 > I can't believe something as blatant as that could have > gone on for all those years. >=20 > bill --===============5290486013553175293==-- From spc@conman.org Wed May 28 08:51:17 2025 From: Sean Conner To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: TRS-80 BASIC oddity Date: Wed, 28 May 2025 04:32:37 -0400 Message-ID: <20250528083237.GA21410@brevard.conman.org> In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CLV8P221MB1469830C762F67D6C120FBF0ED67A=40LV8P221MB?= =?utf-8?q?1469=2ENAMP221=2EPROD=2EOUTLOOK=2ECOM=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1191565571073742494==" --===============1191565571073742494== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It was thus said that the Great Bill Gunshannon via cctalk once stated: > > I am going to assume there are other TRS-80 people hanging out > here and go ahead and ask this: > > Has anyone here used the DEFUSRx command? Yes, on the TRS-80 Color Computer. It's defined for Extended Color BASIC. > I tried to use it for something I am working on and it > didn't work. > > So, I copied the example program from page 115 of the > Model III Disk System Owner's Manual and, guess what, > it didn't work either. > > 150 DEFUSR1 = &H7D00 > returns a Syntax Error > > 150 DEFUSR1 = 32000 > works fine. > > Anybody else ever run into this? Nope. ECB supports hexadecimal constants. It sounds like the BASIC you have doesn't. I know Microsoft's 8-bit BASICs were all compiled from a common code base, so it may be that the Model III BASIC didn't opt for hexadecimal support, but no one told the documentation department. -spc --===============1191565571073742494==-- From gavin@learn.bio Wed May 28 15:09:57 2025 From: Gavin Scott To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: TRS-80 BASIC oddity Date: Wed, 28 May 2025 10:09:40 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CLV8P221MB1469830C762F67D6C120FBF0ED67A=40LV8P221MB?= =?utf-8?q?1469=2ENAMP221=2EPROD=2EOUTLOOK=2ECOM=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0370934757730992166==" --===============0370934757730992166== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 7:08 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote: > So, I copied the example program from page 115 of the > Model III Disk System Owner's Manual and, guess what, > it didn't work either. > > 150 DEFUSR1 = &H7D00 > returns a Syntax Error &H is a Disc BASIC extension. You have to be actually booted under TRSDOS and run "BASIC" from the disk before that will work I believe. --===============0370934757730992166==-- From bill.gunshannon@hotmail.com Thu May 29 01:21:05 2025 From: Bill Gunshannon To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: TRS-80 BASIC oddity Date: Wed, 28 May 2025 21:20:42 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7345415323704297529==" --===============7345415323704297529== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 5/27/2025 8:32 PM, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote: > $9C > or > 9Ch. > > Try these? > What are the supposed to mean? bill --===============7345415323704297529==-- From cisin@xenosoft.com Thu May 29 01:37:07 2025 From: Fred Cisin To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: TRS-80 BASIC oddity Date: Wed, 28 May 2025 18:36:55 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CLV8P221MB1469D46EEAFBC15CEEDA9889ED66A=40LV8P221MB?= =?utf-8?q?1469=2ENAMP221=2EPROD=2EOUTLOOK=2ECOM=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3742062562279156607==" --===============3742062562279156607== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > On 5/27/2025 8:32 PM, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote: >> $9C >> or >> 9Ch. >> >> Try these? On Wed, 28 May 2025, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote: > What are the supposed to mean? They are simply some of the alternatives to writing &H9C not everybody used the same notations. DISK BASIC added the &H notation; prior to that, "Level 2" BASIC did not have a notation that the numerals were HEX, so you had to write all numbers in base 10. -- Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com --===============3742062562279156607==-- From doug@doughq.com Thu May 29 01:45:20 2025 From: Doug Jackson To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: TRS-80 BASIC oddity Date: Thu, 29 May 2025 11:37:10 +1000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CLV8P221MB1469D46EEAFBC15CEEDA9889ED66A=40LV8P221MB?= =?utf-8?q?1469=2ENAMP221=2EPROD=2EOUTLOOK=2ECOM=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4070023567667692475==" --===============4070023567667692475== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit They are different representations of 9C Hexadecimal (10011100). Kindest regards, Doug Jackson em: doug(a)doughq.com ph: 0414 986878 Follow my amateur radio adventures at vk1zdj.net On Thu, 29 May 2025 at 11:28, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > On 5/27/2025 8:32 PM, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote: > > $9C > > or > > 9Ch. > > > > Try these? > > > > What are the supposed to mean? > > bill > > --===============4070023567667692475==-- From bill.gunshannon@hotmail.com Thu May 29 12:50:58 2025 From: Bill Gunshannon To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: TRS-80 BASIC oddity Date: Thu, 29 May 2025 08:50:40 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1079737837772704375==" --===============1079737837772704375== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 5/28/2025 9:37 PM, Doug Jackson wrote: > They are different representations of 9C Hexadecimal  (10011100). > But they are not the form used by TRS-80 BASIC. It uses the format "&H7D00" (and &O1777 for OCTAL) as depicted not only in the example I tried to use from Page 115 of the manual but also clearly explained on pages 93-94 under the title "Hex and Octal constants. Printing them works fine but trying to use them as arguments to DEFUSR does not. bill --===============1079737837772704375==-- From bill.gunshannon@hotmail.com Thu May 29 12:54:19 2025 From: Bill Gunshannon To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: TRS-80 BASIC oddity Date: Thu, 29 May 2025 08:53:59 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20250528083237.GA21410@brevard.conman.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6923417133993841110==" --===============6923417133993841110== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 5/28/2025 4:32 AM, Sean Conner via cctalk wrote: > > Nope. ECB supports hexadecimal constants. It sounds like the BASIC you > have doesn't. I know Microsoft's 8-bit BASICs were all compiled from a > common code base, so it may be that the Model III BASIC didn't opt for > hexadecimal support, but no one told the documentation department. Nope, not just the documentation. PRINT &H7D00 works fine DEFUSR1 = &H7D00 returns syntax error. Go figure. bill --===============6923417133993841110==-- From bill.gunshannon@hotmail.com Thu May 29 12:56:19 2025 From: Bill Gunshannon To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: TRS-80 BASIC oddity Date: Thu, 29 May 2025 08:56:03 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5870209965220013264==" --===============5870209965220013264== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 5/28/2025 11:09 AM, Gavin Scott via cctalk wrote: > On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 7:08 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk > wrote: > >> So, I copied the example program from page 115 of the >> Model III Disk System Owner's Manual and, guess what, >> it didn't work either. >> >> 150 DEFUSR1 = &H7D00 >> returns a Syntax Error > > &H is a Disc BASIC extension. You have to be actually booted under > TRSDOS and run "BASIC" from the disk before that will work I believe. It is. As formerly stated PRINT &H7D00 works DEFUSR1 = &H7D00 does not. bill --===============5870209965220013264==-- From ard.p850ug1@gmail.com Thu May 29 13:20:52 2025 From: Tony Duell To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: TRS-80 BASIC oddity Date: Thu, 29 May 2025 14:20:34 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CLV8P221MB1469B44399162FC12463B15CED66A=40LV8P221MB?= =?utf-8?q?1469=2ENAMP221=2EPROD=2EOUTLOOK=2ECOM=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8933901204379943363==" --===============8933901204379943363== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 2:04=E2=80=AFPM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote: > > > > On 5/28/2025 4:32 AM, Sean Conner via cctalk wrote: > > > > Nope. ECB supports hexadecimal constants. It sounds like the BASIC y= ou > > have doesn't. I know Microsoft's 8-bit BASICs were all compiled from a > > common code base, so it may be that the Model III BASIC didn't opt for > > hexadecimal support, but no one told the documentation department. > > Nope, not just the documentation. PRINT &H7D00 works fine > DEFUSR1 =3D &H7D00 returns syntax error. Go figure. Have you tried : DEFUSR1=3D(&H7D00) DEFUSR1=3D&H7D00+0 I assume you're running TRS-DOS. What happens if you use LBASIC under LDOS? -tony --===============8933901204379943363==-- From billdegnan@gmail.com Thu May 29 15:03:19 2025 From: Bill Degnan To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: TRS-80 BASIC oddity Date: Thu, 29 May 2025 11:03:01 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CLV8P221MB1469B73B119D74A6D9280844ED66A=40LV8P221MB?= =?utf-8?q?1469=2ENAMP221=2EPROD=2EOUTLOOK=2ECOM=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8913962687639909286==" --===============8913962687639909286== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Now you're tempting me to get out a Model III to try this! On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 9:43 AM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > On 5/28/2025 11:09 AM, Gavin Scott via cctalk wrote: > > On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 7:08 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk > > wrote: > > > >> So, I copied the example program from page 115 of the > >> Model III Disk System Owner's Manual and, guess what, > >> it didn't work either. > >> > >> 150 DEFUSR1 = &H7D00 > >> returns a Syntax Error > > > > &H is a Disc BASIC extension. You have to be actually booted under > > TRSDOS and run "BASIC" from the disk before that will work I believe. > > It is. As formerly stated PRINT &H7D00 works DEFUSR1 = &H7D00 does not. > > bill > --===============8913962687639909286==-- From bill.gunshannon@hotmail.com Fri May 30 00:15:44 2025 From: Bill Gunshannon To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: TRS-80 BASIC oddity Date: Thu, 29 May 2025 20:15:20 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4677953089748716057==" --===============4677953089748716057== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 5/29/2025 9:20 AM, Tony Duell wrote: > On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 2:04=E2=80=AFPM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk > wrote: >> >> >> >> On 5/28/2025 4:32 AM, Sean Conner via cctalk wrote: >>> >>> Nope. ECB supports hexadecimal constants. It sounds like the BASIC = you >>> have doesn't. I know Microsoft's 8-bit BASICs were all compiled from a >>> common code base, so it may be that the Model III BASIC didn't opt for >>> hexadecimal support, but no one told the documentation department. >> >> Nope, not just the documentation. PRINT &H7D00 works fine >> DEFUSR1 =3D &H7D00 returns syntax error. Go figure. >=20 > Have you tried : >=20 > DEFUSR1=3D(&H7D00) Interesting. This works. >=20 > DEFUSR1=3D&H7D00+0 >=20 > I assume you're running TRS-DOS. What happens if you use LBASIC under LDOS? >=20 I was not looking for a work around. I could do that by not using HEX notation. (or OCTAL for that matter) I was just surprised that, apparently, no one ever ran into this or at no one ever said anything about it. I got 80-Micro, Kilobaud and even Creative Computing until each of them went under. I have never seen any mention of something that must have been a bug that was run into thousands of times. And, in all likelihood, could have been easily fixed by many of the ace system programmers that were using these systems in their heyday. bill --===============4677953089748716057==-- From bill.gunshannon@hotmail.com Fri May 30 00:17:12 2025 From: Bill Gunshannon To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: TRS-80 BASIC oddity Date: Thu, 29 May 2025 20:16:55 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0178767527405858813==" --===============0178767527405858813== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 5/29/2025 11:03 AM, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote: > Now you're tempting me to get out a Model III to try this! Just grab an emulator. The problem is in the software, not the hardware. bill --===============0178767527405858813==-- From emu@e-bbes.com Fri May 30 17:16:08 2025 From: emanuel stiebler To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] USDC Unibus SCSI Controller Date: Fri, 30 May 2025 13:06:42 -0400 Message-ID: <0e11a423-4ecc-40e9-8557-81192a61e388@e-bbes.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4316707999388791490==" --===============4316707999388791490== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit It is few years that anybody asks, so here it is again: ANYBODY has any manuals for it? On Discord, we have some discussions, I found some of them in my boxes, but nobody has documentation, and no success to get them working. Any chance? --===============4316707999388791490==-- From bobh@tds.net Sat May 31 13:05:19 2025 From: bobh@tds.net To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: TRS-80 BASIC oddity Date: Sat, 31 May 2025 04:01:52 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CLV8P221MB14694A35E39FA2BE7A740F7BED61A=40LV8P221MB?= =?utf-8?q?1469=2ENAMP221=2EPROD=2EOUTLOOK=2ECOM=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3250562432508304454==" --===============3250562432508304454== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Unfortunately, many bugs go unfixed. Especially back when you couldn=E2=80=99= t just download the update from the internet. You had to get a new diskette. Their word processing program, ScripSit had a bug that as far as I know was n= ever acknowledged publicly. Scripsit was replaced with Super Scripsit, a tot= ally different program. Sent from my iPhone Robert Harrison bobh(a)tds.net > On May 29, 2025, at 8:23=E2=80=AFPM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BF >=20 >> On 5/29/2025 9:20 AM, Tony Duell wrote: >>> On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 2:04=E2=80=AFPM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk >>> wrote: >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>> On 5/28/2025 4:32 AM, Sean Conner via cctalk wrote: >>>>=20 >>>> Nope. ECB supports hexadecimal constants. It sounds like the BASIC = you >>>> have doesn't. I know Microsoft's 8-bit BASICs were all compiled from a >>>> common code base, so it may be that the Model III BASIC didn't opt for >>>> hexadecimal support, but no one told the documentation department. >>>=20 >>> Nope, not just the documentation. PRINT &H7D00 works fine >>> DEFUSR1 =3D &H7D00 returns syntax error. Go figure. >> Have you tried : >> DEFUSR1=3D(&H7D00) >=20 > Interesting. This works. >=20 >> DEFUSR1=3D&H7D00+0 >> I assume you're running TRS-DOS. What happens if you use LBASIC under LDOS? >=20 > I was not looking for a work around. I could do that by not > using HEX notation. (or OCTAL for that matter) I was just > surprised that, apparently, no one ever ran into this or at > no one ever said anything about it. I got 80-Micro, Kilobaud > and even Creative Computing until each of them went under. > I have never seen any mention of something that must have been > a bug that was run into thousands of times. And, in all > likelihood, could have been easily fixed by many of the ace > system programmers that were using these systems in their > heyday. >=20 > bill >=20 --===============3250562432508304454==--