[cctalk] Re: MS-DOS
I found Tim Peterson's old blog a while back which contained some interesting tidbits about the history of DOS from the original author. http://dosmandrivel.blogspot.com/ - Rod > On Jul 29, 2024, at 8:21 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk > wrote: > > On Mon, 29 Jul 2024, Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: >> I had not realized that 43 yrs. ago Microsoft purchased 86-DOS for $50,000 >> – US not Cdn. money. With this purchase the PC industry, IBM’s version >> thereof, began. I remember using it to do amazing things, moreso than what >> 8-bit machines could do! > > Ah, but there is so much more to the story, which deserves an entire chapter > in the history. > > More than you wanted to know? : (but even more details available if you > really want them) > > Tim Paterson, of Seattle Computer Products was developing 8086 hardware, but > CP/M-86 was delayed. So, he wrote a temporary place-holder to use instead of > CP/M-86 until CP/M-86 became available. That was called "QDOS", "Quick and > Dirty Operating System". Later it became known as "SCP-DOS" and/or "86-DOS" > > Then came the "culture clash" between IBM and Digital Research (previously > known as "Intergalctic digital Research"). That has been documented > elsewhere; some claim that there was not a culture clash, nor an error. > > So, Microsoft (possibly Bill Gates personally) went down the street to > Seattle Computer Products, and bought an unlimited license for 86-DOS "that > we can sell to our [un-named] client" > > Tim Paterson, who later opened "Falcon Technologies" and Seattle Computer > Products both also retained licenes to be able to sell "the operating > system". Note that the version was not specified, as to whether such license > would include rights to sell updated versions; that error (failure to specify > whether future/derivative products were included) has been repeated elsewhere > (cf. Apple/Microsoft) > > Microsoft also hired Tim Paterson to maintain and update "MS-DOS". > > Microsoft sold a license to IBM, where it became PC-DOS. > And, it was available through Lifeboat as "86-DOS" > > In August 1981, when the PC (5150) was released, IBM started selling PC-DOS. > But digital Research was not happy with IBM selling a copy of their operating > system. In those days, selling a copy was legal, if the internal code was not > copied. (hence the development of "clean-room reverse engineering") > It wasn't until the Lotus/Paperback Software (Adam Osborne) lawsuit that > "look and feel" became copyrightable. > > So, IBM agreed to also sell CP/M-86 IN ADDITION to selling PC-DOS. > . . . and sold UCSD P-System. > > But CP/M-86 was STILL not ready, so everybody bought PC-DOS, many of whom > planned to switch to CP/M-86 when it became available. > But, when CP/M-86 was finally ready, the price was $240 vs $40 for PC-DOS. > There are arguments about whether IBM or Digital Research set that price. > Although, if that price was IBM's idea, then why did Digital Research charge > $240 for copies sold through other sources (such as Lifeboat)? > > > Initially MS-DOS and PC-DOS differed only in name and trivial items, such as > "IO.SYS" and "MSDOS.SYS" being renamed "IBMBIO.COM" and "IBMDOS.COM" > When changes were made, Microsoft's and IBM's version numbers were separated. > Thus 1.00 was the same for both > IBM released PC-DOS 1.10, and Microsoft released MS-DOS 1.25 > 2.00 was the same for both > 2.10 VS 2.11 (IBM needed trivial changes to 2.00 to deal with the excessively > slow Qumetrak 142 disk drives in the PC-Junior and "portable" > 3.00 was the same > 3.10, adding network support and the "network redirector for CD-ROMs > 3.20 VS 3.21, adding "720K" 3.5" drive support > 3.30 VS 3.31, BUT 3.31 was the first to support larger than 32Mebibyte > drives! > 4.00 and 4.01 IBM/Microsoft did not provide third party vendors enough > advanced warning, so Norton Utilities, etc. did not work on 4.00 (NOT 4.00 > did not work with Norton Utilities!) > 5.00 > In 6.00 each company bundled a whole bunch of third party stuff (such as disk > compression) and each got them from different sources. When Microsoft's disk > compression was blamed for serious problems caused by SMARTDRV, Microsoft > released 6.20 (repaired and reliability improved from 6.00). > Then 6.21 and 6.22 as a result of Microsoft's legal case with Stac > Electronics. > > > Please note that MS-DOS/PC-DOS ALWAYS had a version number, a period, and > then a TWO DIGIT DECIMAL sub-version number. THAT is what is stored > internally. Thus, 1.10 is stored as ONE.TEN (01h.0Ah), 3.31 is actually > THREE.Thirty-ONE (03h.1Fh), etc. > If there had ever actually been a "1.1" or "3.2", those would have been > 01h.01h (1.01) and 03h.02h (3.02), etc. > "1.1" was NOT the same as "1.10", nor "3.2" the same as "3.20", otherwise > VERY minor changes would be confused with serious changes, as happened when > some people called 4.01 "four point one". > >
[cctalk] Re: Turbo Prolog
35 years ago I got tasked to write a simple expert system in Turbo Prolog because I was familiar with Turbo Pascal. The goal was an application to assist new members of the help desk. I have vague recollections of having to define rules to evaluate answers to simple questions. What I remember seems far removed from what I know of modern AI implementations. - Rod > On Feb 24, 2024, at 3:36 PM, Just Kant via cctalk > wrote: > > Has anyone used it or something contemporaneous? > Is it at all applicable to any degree to today's approach to AI/machine > learning tasks? I would like to perhaps eventually create a game, probably > not chess, lilely something simpler. The old expert system modeling paradigm > seems to have largely if not entirely fallen out of favor. From what I'm > reading though TP seems to be geared for that.
[cctalk] Re: Disk-pack-based drives at LCM
I can't say I blame them. It was a lot of work to get a drive running after a head crash. If it was a bad crash, there could be extensive cleaning to be done followed by replacing one or more heads. Then the new heads had to be aligned. If you hadn't cleaned thoroughly enough, you risked damaging the expensive alignment disk. Once I came back from lunch to see the operators had 3 drives open. They kept swapping a disk pack which was giving I/O errors to new drives and were crashing heads along the way due to the damaged disk pack. I stopped them before they spun up the pack on a 4th drive. That wasn't as bad as the time one of them dropped a disk pack and bent platters. That ripped heads completely out of the mounting mechanism. Ah, the good old days! Rod > On Jun 2, 2023, at 2:51 AM, P Gebhardt via cctalk > wrote: > > Hi all, > > I just came across pictures on the LCM website about their SDS Sigma > installation there. > On the pictures, one can see 10-platter disk packs in the corner and stored > on the disk drives. > Did the LCM ever had these in operation, either for data retrieval or even > demo purposes? > I know of the Jim Austin Computer museum where they fixed a CDC 9766 drive > but it suffered > a head crash after a few hours according to their description which led to > giving up the operation > of these drives. > > Greetings, > Pierre > > - > http://www.digitalheritage.de
[cctalk] Re: flipchip cleaning and pin corrosion inhibition
Ken, Core places being hand wired amazed me as well. The maintenance panels on the Honeywell mainframes were hand wired as well. They were works of art with lots of toggle switches and lights (the later models switched to LEDs). I could see most of the internal registers using a fancy scroll wheel to select what register the lights should show. I could also enter small diagnostic programs and single step through them using the panel. Most of our core memories were 256K of 36 bit words (with a few spares for each location). They took up lots of floor space. I suspect the fact that the power supplies had to drive that much equipment was what made them sing. - Rod > On Apr 25, 2023, at 9:25 AM, KenUnix via cctalk wrote: > > Rod, > > Never heard the singing. Switch room's were too noisy. > > It always amazed me that those core planes were hand wired. I guess by > little people. Or, big people with little hands. > > On the PDP 8/I they were 4K plug in affairs. > > Ken > > > On Tue, Apr 25, 2023, 9:14 AM Rod Bartlett via cctalk > wrote: > >> Ken, >> >> This discussion does my geezer's heart good. >> >> I used to maintain Honeywell mainframes in the late 1970s, some of which >> had core memories. Tapping them on the floor wasn't an option since they >> were such huge beasties but they did have space for spare bits. I've >> swapped to the spare bits or replaced sense amps to fix many a core >> problem. Something I'll never forget is the way the power supplies "sang" >> when running memory diagnostics on the core units. I could always tell the >> diagnostic was done when the singing stopped. >> >> - Rod >> >>> On Apr 24, 2023, at 2:11 PM, KenUnix via cctalk >> wrote: >>> >>> David, >>> >>> I could tell you I had an experience where I had a stuck bit in core >> memory. >>> >>> It was in a trunk frame in a #2ESS AIS. >>> >>> I removed the core package and tapped it on the floor, reinserted it and >>> the trouble cleared. >>> >>> Sticky bit! Ha >>> >>> I only knew that because it happened to me on my old PDP-8/I.. >>> >>> Ken >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 1:50 PM David Gesswein via cctalk < >>> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 11:11:35AM +0100, Pete Turnbull wrote: >>>>> On 23/04/2023 22:52, KenUnix via cctalk wrote: >>>>>> Pete, >>>>>> >>>>>> Did the 8E have core or solid state memory? >>>>> >>>>> It had both, but I didn't put the core boards in the dishwasher. I >>>> figured >>>>> they might be too delicate for that, so I rinsed them by hand in the >>>> kitchen >>>>> sink. >>>>> >>>>> I should have said that in my original post. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I assume your referring to the core electronics boards and didn't wash >> the >>>> core plane. >>>> >>>> I've never used the dishwasher. I've hand washed R, W, G and M type >> boards >>>> in >>>> sink with dish soap and soft bristle brush, rinsed, then blew off with >>>> air compressor, then finish dry with fan. For pots and other >>>> components that I wasn't sure how well they were sealed I used damp >> brush >>>> or >>>> cloth around them. Rest got dunked. No obvious issues from washing. >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> End of line >>> JOB TERMINATED Okey Dokey >> >>
[cctalk] Re: flipchip cleaning and pin corrosion inhibition
Ken, This discussion does my geezer's heart good. I used to maintain Honeywell mainframes in the late 1970s, some of which had core memories. Tapping them on the floor wasn't an option since they were such huge beasties but they did have space for spare bits. I've swapped to the spare bits or replaced sense amps to fix many a core problem. Something I'll never forget is the way the power supplies "sang" when running memory diagnostics on the core units. I could always tell the diagnostic was done when the singing stopped. - Rod > On Apr 24, 2023, at 2:11 PM, KenUnix via cctalk wrote: > > David, > > I could tell you I had an experience where I had a stuck bit in core memory. > > It was in a trunk frame in a #2ESS AIS. > > I removed the core package and tapped it on the floor, reinserted it and > the trouble cleared. > > Sticky bit! Ha > > I only knew that because it happened to me on my old PDP-8/I.. > > Ken > > > On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 1:50 PM David Gesswein via cctalk < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > >> On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 11:11:35AM +0100, Pete Turnbull wrote: >>> On 23/04/2023 22:52, KenUnix via cctalk wrote: Pete, Did the 8E have core or solid state memory? >>> >>> It had both, but I didn't put the core boards in the dishwasher. I >> figured >>> they might be too delicate for that, so I rinsed them by hand in the >> kitchen >>> sink. >>> >>> I should have said that in my original post. >>> >> >> I assume your referring to the core electronics boards and didn't wash the >> core plane. >> >> I've never used the dishwasher. I've hand washed R, W, G and M type boards >> in >> sink with dish soap and soft bristle brush, rinsed, then blew off with >> air compressor, then finish dry with fan. For pots and other >> components that I wasn't sure how well they were sealed I used damp brush >> or >> cloth around them. Rest got dunked. No obvious issues from washing. >> > > > -- > End of line > JOB TERMINATED Okey Dokey
