[cctalk] Heurikon HK68/M10 (Multibus) information?
Does anyone have any manuals or other information on the Heurikon HK68/M10? Or the Hbug ROMs for it? The HK68/M10 is a Multibus 68010 board with serial, SCSI, parallel, timers, 1MB onboard RAM, 2- or 4-channel DMA, and an optional 68451 MMU. It's similar but not identical to the HK68/V10 (the VMEbus version) and so far I haven't been able to find much that would make one usable. I'm particularly interested in: An Hbug ROM. Pinouts for the top edge connectors, which provide the serial ports, the SCSI port, and the parallel port. Jumpering/strapping and other configuration information. And of course it'd be incredible to find the UniPlus+ distribution for it, but I'm not holding out much hope for that. I already know what's on Bitsavers—such as the brochure—and I've already looked at the MAME HK68/V10 emulation, so no need to point those out. -- Chris
[cctalk] Re: Experience using an Altair 8800 ("Personal computer" from 70s)
On Thu, Jun 6, 2024, 6:19 AM Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote: > > > Ok, now you're back to cost. Your criteria keep changing. You cannot > > give something meaning when the "something" keeps changing. This is why > > you are refuted. > > > > I refute you, sir! > > > > Sellam There's "personal computing" as a verb and "personal computer" as an object > classification. These are distinct terms. Using a UNIVAC 1 for personal > computing purposes does not make the UNIVAC 1 a personal computer in so far > as the UNIVAC 1 was not originally classified (such as with the patent > office) as a device intended for the express purpose of personal computing, > as defined as blah blah blah. > There were no classifications of computers when the UNIVAC was built. They were just "computers" (spoken in the old-timey news voice). Personal use did not and could not have even been considered until there was 30 more years of development to bring costs and size down to make them ubiquitous, for comparisons to begin to be made so categories could be invented by marketers, and computers categorized into various classifications. But none of that matters because it comes down to how they're used. One could argue that the manufacturer as the right to declare what is and > is not the intended personal use of the thing they're manufacturing, as > represented by the manuals, promotions and marketing, training, etc. > And it is the right of the buyer to use that product in any way they want, including personally. So, I think really it's possible to declare anything a personal computer or > not a personal computer if you have some sort of base definitions for these > things. I think that's the problem we're having, the terms "personal > computer" and personal computing are not really dictionary words. > > Bill > Go back to what I said about the context in which the term was used: at the time, "computers" were primarily a multi-user, time-sharing affair. To have a computer for one's own exclusive use is what made it personal, and that's what Ed Roberts had in mind when he implemented the term. So you are also refuted. I refute you! Anyone else, before I clear the board of all the pieces, declare myself winner, and go home? Sellam >
[cctalk] Re: Experience using an Altair 8800 ("Personal computer" from 70s)
> > > > > Ok, now you're back to cost. Your criteria keep changing. You cannot > give something meaning when the "something" keeps changing. This is why > you are refuted. > > I refute you, sir! > > > Sellam, There's "personal computing" as a verb and "personal computer" as an object classification. These are distinct terms. Using a UNIVAC 1 for personal computing purposes does not make the UNIVAC 1 a personal computer in so far as the UNIVAC 1 was not originally classified (such as with the patent office) as a device intended for the express purpose of personal computing, as defined as blah blah blah. One could argue that the manufacturer as the right to declare what is and is not the intended personal use of the thing they're manufacturing, as represented by the manuals, promotions and marketing, training, etc. So, I think really it's possible to declare anything a personal computer or not a personal computer if you have some sort of base definitions for these things. I think that's the problem we're having, the terms "personal computer" and personal computing are not really dictionary words. Bill
[cctalk] Re: Experience using an Altair 8800 ("Personal computer" from 70s)
I refute your refutations thusly: On Thu, Jun 6, 2024, 5:38 AM Liam Proven via cctalk wrote: > On Thu, 6 Jun 2024 at 05:10, Sellam Abraham via cctalk > wrote: > > > If you ride a bus, where multiple random people get > > on and off at various stops, it's not a "personal" conveyance. > > I refute your argument thus: > > If you buy a bus and start driving it yourself everywhere, for your > own exclusive use, it doesn't somehow magically stop being a bus. It's > still a bus, just a bus being used for personal transport. > Ah! You said it: "personal". So, agreed. Stephen Fry, the actor and writer, is quite tall. 6'5". He drives a > London black cab as his personal car. > There it is again: "personal". It's his car, but it's not _a_ car. It's still a taxi cab: a purpose-built > 6-seat vehicle. Agreed, and still used...personally. (I am 6'2" but I get why. I can't see out of the windscreen of a > Citroen 2CV: its top is lower than my chin. I have ridden NYC yellow > cabs, huge saloon cars with a partition shoved in behind the front > seats. I don't fit in the back. It's really painful. This is why > purpose-built vehicles for lots of people and a driver in their own > compartment exist, and it's very American to ignore them and try to > crowbar some other, unsuitable tool into the role because the better > device was Not Invented Here.) > Your height advantage does not an argument make. A personal computer is not any random computer used by a single > person. It's a product category, like "car" as opposed to "train" or > "bus". > Now you're back in the marketing camp, where booze, coke, and sales are the controlling factors. Marketers make good slogans but bad engineers. Some rich people can buy their own helicopter and use them to go where > they want. (Flown by a professional because flying a helicopter is > like rubbing your stomach and patting your head while walking a > tightrope.) That does not make that helicopter into a car. > Who is trying to argue a helicopter is a car? You are. If I own a computer that I use personally and invite my friend over to play a game on it, does that cease to make it personal? If I buy it for my secretary to use on my behalf, does that cease to make it personal (since it is still just one person--her--using it)? If I let you drive or fly me around in my personal car or helicopter (respectively), I'm just letting you use it when I'm not. If I occasionally use my personal bus that I drive myself around in for roving parties involving a group of my friends (or even random strangers I invite on, why not) then it doesn't cease to become personal, same as Stephen Fry can occasionally take on a passenger in his taxi cab if he feels like it, just like I can occasionally use my personal computer to perform tasks for others. In all cases, the primary use is still personal: one person is driving/flying at one time. Two people trying to simultaneously drive a car or fly a helicopter would be awkward, to say the least, especially when one person wants to go left and the other wants to fly higher. A workstation was, essentially, a minicomputer built to be a > single-user device, but cost as much as a room full of terminals or > micros. It's not the same thing. > Ok, now you're back to cost. Your criteria keep changing. You cannot give something meaning when the "something" keeps changing. This is why you are refuted. I refute you, sir! Sellam
[cctalk] Re: Experience using an Altair 8800 ("Personal computer" from 70s)
On Thu, 6 Jun 2024 at 05:10, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote: > If you ride a bus, where multiple random people get > on and off at various stops, it's not a "personal" conveyance. I refute your argument thus: If you buy a bus and start driving it yourself everywhere, for your own exclusive use, it doesn't somehow magically stop being a bus. It's still a bus, just a bus being used for personal transport. Stephen Fry, the actor and writer, is quite tall. 6'5". He drives a London black cab as his personal car. It's his car, but it's not _a_ car. It's still a taxi cab: a purpose-built 6-seat vehicle. (I am 6'2" but I get why. I can't see out of the windscreen of a Citroen 2CV: its top is lower than my chin. I have ridden NYC yellow cabs, huge saloon cars with a partition shoved in behind the front seats. I don't fit in the back. It's really painful. This is why purpose-built vehicles for lots of people and a driver in their own compartment exist, and it's very American to ignore them and try to crowbar some other, unsuitable tool into the role because the better device was Not Invented Here.) A personal computer is not any random computer used by a single person. It's a product category, like "car" as opposed to "train" or "bus". Some rich people can buy their own helicopter and use them to go where they want. (Flown by a professional because flying a helicopter is like rubbing your stomach and patting your head while walking a tightrope.) That does not make that helicopter into a car. A workstation was, essentially, a minicomputer built to be a single-user device, but cost as much as a room full of terminals or micros. It's not the same thing. -- Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lpro...@gmail.com Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven IoM: (+44) 7624 277612: UK: (+44) 7939-087884 Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053
