[cctalk] Re: Back-plane wrap (was Re: Re: Antonio's call for donations (was LCM auction))
No, nobody else inquired about it. I have no idea it will fit a DEC backplane; AFAIK it was used on NCR systems. It might take me a while to find it; when I do I'll try to determine the dimensions of the pins and the wire gauge. On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 10:41 PM Ryan de Laplante (Personal) via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > Hey Mike, > > Did the wire wrap tool sell? Is it any good for DEC backplanes? > > > Thanks, > > Ryan > > > On 2024-08-31 10:29 a.m., Mike Stein via cctalk wrote: > > If I can find it, is anyone interested in a battery-powered wire wrap > tool? > > Not sure of the diameter but it's larger than an IC socket, so I suspect > > that it is in fact for a backplane. > > > > Postage from Toronto. > > > > On Sat, Aug 31, 2024 at 1:55 AM Vincent Slyngstad via cctalk < > > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > >> On 8/30/2024 7:25 PM, cz via cctalk wrote: > >>> To try and turn this thread around: I'm looking to make an extended > >>> memory controller for my pdp8/L. I've got a wire wrap backplane and > >>> enough cards to make it work but I've never done wire-wrap on this sort > >>> of scale. > >>> > >>> I've got an old Radio Shack Wire wrap tool and a lot of wire. Is there > >>> any sites that discuss how to do reasonable wire-wrapping? > >> Some of the older (single-sided especially) DEC back-planes were wrapped > >> with heavier gauge wire, which needs a different tool. The newer > >> back-planes seem to be wrapped with 30 gauge wire. You can tell the old > >> connector blocks, as the pins appear rectangular, rather then square. > >> > >> There are all kinds of opportunity for optimizing routing for distance, > >> cross-talk and and other esoterica. One thing that's worth doing, > >> though, is to wrap for a max height of two, and such that all the > >> connections (except possibly the last end of a given signal) are at the > >> same height. So, if A B C and D are to be connected together, you > >> connect A to B, then C to D (thus all at the lower level), then put the > >> connection of B to C at a higher level. This dramatically cuts down on > >> the amount you have to *unwrap* to fix something. Avoid situations which > >> cross the height boundary, because then you have to keep unwrapping > >> stuff you'd rather not, to expose the buried lower side. > >> > >> If you are wrapping by hand, you can be assured that you *will* make > >> mistakes and have to fix something. > >> > >> I predict you will also find that you are really sick of wire-wrap long > >> before you are done. These days, PCBs are inexpensive, and less error > >> prone (in the sense that you almost always end up with exactly the > >> connections in the netlist). OTOH, connectors are expensive and hard to > >> reuse when soldered to a PCB. So you've got to be really confident of > >> your netlist. > >> > >> You might consider investing in a tool where you pull the trigger to do > >> the wrap. You'll probably get a more consistent result, and > >> significantly fewer repetitive motion issues. > >> > >> Hope that helps! > >> > >> Vince > >> > >
[cctalk] Re: Back-plane wrap (was Re: Re: Antonio's call for donations (was LCM auction))
Hey Mike, Did the wire wrap tool sell? Is it any good for DEC backplanes? Thanks, Ryan On 2024-08-31 10:29 a.m., Mike Stein via cctalk wrote: If I can find it, is anyone interested in a battery-powered wire wrap tool? Not sure of the diameter but it's larger than an IC socket, so I suspect that it is in fact for a backplane. Postage from Toronto. On Sat, Aug 31, 2024 at 1:55 AM Vincent Slyngstad via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: On 8/30/2024 7:25 PM, cz via cctalk wrote: To try and turn this thread around: I'm looking to make an extended memory controller for my pdp8/L. I've got a wire wrap backplane and enough cards to make it work but I've never done wire-wrap on this sort of scale. I've got an old Radio Shack Wire wrap tool and a lot of wire. Is there any sites that discuss how to do reasonable wire-wrapping? Some of the older (single-sided especially) DEC back-planes were wrapped with heavier gauge wire, which needs a different tool. The newer back-planes seem to be wrapped with 30 gauge wire. You can tell the old connector blocks, as the pins appear rectangular, rather then square. There are all kinds of opportunity for optimizing routing for distance, cross-talk and and other esoterica. One thing that's worth doing, though, is to wrap for a max height of two, and such that all the connections (except possibly the last end of a given signal) are at the same height. So, if A B C and D are to be connected together, you connect A to B, then C to D (thus all at the lower level), then put the connection of B to C at a higher level. This dramatically cuts down on the amount you have to *unwrap* to fix something. Avoid situations which cross the height boundary, because then you have to keep unwrapping stuff you'd rather not, to expose the buried lower side. If you are wrapping by hand, you can be assured that you *will* make mistakes and have to fix something. I predict you will also find that you are really sick of wire-wrap long before you are done. These days, PCBs are inexpensive, and less error prone (in the sense that you almost always end up with exactly the connections in the netlist). OTOH, connectors are expensive and hard to reuse when soldered to a PCB. So you've got to be really confident of your netlist. You might consider investing in a tool where you pull the trigger to do the wrap. You'll probably get a more consistent result, and significantly fewer repetitive motion issues. Hope that helps! Vince
[cctalk] Re: Back-plane wrap (was Re: Re: Antonio's call for donations (was LCM auction))
Would you mind me using your tips for wire wrapping for a tutorial at the Computer History Wiki (https://gunkies.org/wiki/Main_Page)? I've learned wire-wrapping right now and thought others should get a little help. Ulli Am Sa., 31. Aug. 2024 um 07:55 Uhr schrieb Vincent Slyngstad via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org>: > On 8/30/2024 7:25 PM, cz via cctalk wrote: > > To try and turn this thread around: I'm looking to make an extended > > memory controller for my pdp8/L. I've got a wire wrap backplane and > > enough cards to make it work but I've never done wire-wrap on this sort > > of scale. > > > > I've got an old Radio Shack Wire wrap tool and a lot of wire. Is there > > any sites that discuss how to do reasonable wire-wrapping? > > Some of the older (single-sided especially) DEC back-planes were wrapped > with heavier gauge wire, which needs a different tool. The newer > back-planes seem to be wrapped with 30 gauge wire. You can tell the old > connector blocks, as the pins appear rectangular, rather then square. > > There are all kinds of opportunity for optimizing routing for distance, > cross-talk and and other esoterica. One thing that's worth doing, > though, is to wrap for a max height of two, and such that all the > connections (except possibly the last end of a given signal) are at the > same height. So, if A B C and D are to be connected together, you > connect A to B, then C to D (thus all at the lower level), then put the > connection of B to C at a higher level. This dramatically cuts down on > the amount you have to *unwrap* to fix something. Avoid situations which > cross the height boundary, because then you have to keep unwrapping > stuff you'd rather not, to expose the buried lower side. > > If you are wrapping by hand, you can be assured that you *will* make > mistakes and have to fix something. > > I predict you will also find that you are really sick of wire-wrap long > before you are done. These days, PCBs are inexpensive, and less error > prone (in the sense that you almost always end up with exactly the > connections in the netlist). OTOH, connectors are expensive and hard to > reuse when soldered to a PCB. So you've got to be really confident of > your netlist. > > You might consider investing in a tool where you pull the trigger to do > the wrap. You'll probably get a more consistent result, and > significantly fewer repetitive motion issues. > > Hope that helps! > > Vince >
[cctalk] Re: Back-plane wrap (was Re: Re: Antonio's call for donations (was LCM auction))
If I can find it, is anyone interested in a battery-powered wire wrap tool? Not sure of the diameter but it's larger than an IC socket, so I suspect that it is in fact for a backplane. Postage from Toronto. On Sat, Aug 31, 2024 at 1:55 AM Vincent Slyngstad via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > On 8/30/2024 7:25 PM, cz via cctalk wrote: > > To try and turn this thread around: I'm looking to make an extended > > memory controller for my pdp8/L. I've got a wire wrap backplane and > > enough cards to make it work but I've never done wire-wrap on this sort > > of scale. > > > > I've got an old Radio Shack Wire wrap tool and a lot of wire. Is there > > any sites that discuss how to do reasonable wire-wrapping? > > Some of the older (single-sided especially) DEC back-planes were wrapped > with heavier gauge wire, which needs a different tool. The newer > back-planes seem to be wrapped with 30 gauge wire. You can tell the old > connector blocks, as the pins appear rectangular, rather then square. > > There are all kinds of opportunity for optimizing routing for distance, > cross-talk and and other esoterica. One thing that's worth doing, > though, is to wrap for a max height of two, and such that all the > connections (except possibly the last end of a given signal) are at the > same height. So, if A B C and D are to be connected together, you > connect A to B, then C to D (thus all at the lower level), then put the > connection of B to C at a higher level. This dramatically cuts down on > the amount you have to *unwrap* to fix something. Avoid situations which > cross the height boundary, because then you have to keep unwrapping > stuff you'd rather not, to expose the buried lower side. > > If you are wrapping by hand, you can be assured that you *will* make > mistakes and have to fix something. > > I predict you will also find that you are really sick of wire-wrap long > before you are done. These days, PCBs are inexpensive, and less error > prone (in the sense that you almost always end up with exactly the > connections in the netlist). OTOH, connectors are expensive and hard to > reuse when soldered to a PCB. So you've got to be really confident of > your netlist. > > You might consider investing in a tool where you pull the trigger to do > the wrap. You'll probably get a more consistent result, and > significantly fewer repetitive motion issues. > > Hope that helps! > > Vince >
[cctalk] Back-plane wrap (was Re: Re: Antonio's call for donations (was LCM auction))
On 8/30/2024 7:25 PM, cz via cctalk wrote: To try and turn this thread around: I'm looking to make an extended memory controller for my pdp8/L. I've got a wire wrap backplane and enough cards to make it work but I've never done wire-wrap on this sort of scale. I've got an old Radio Shack Wire wrap tool and a lot of wire. Is there any sites that discuss how to do reasonable wire-wrapping? Some of the older (single-sided especially) DEC back-planes were wrapped with heavier gauge wire, which needs a different tool. The newer back-planes seem to be wrapped with 30 gauge wire. You can tell the old connector blocks, as the pins appear rectangular, rather then square. There are all kinds of opportunity for optimizing routing for distance, cross-talk and and other esoterica. One thing that's worth doing, though, is to wrap for a max height of two, and such that all the connections (except possibly the last end of a given signal) are at the same height. So, if A B C and D are to be connected together, you connect A to B, then C to D (thus all at the lower level), then put the connection of B to C at a higher level. This dramatically cuts down on the amount you have to *unwrap* to fix something. Avoid situations which cross the height boundary, because then you have to keep unwrapping stuff you'd rather not, to expose the buried lower side. If you are wrapping by hand, you can be assured that you *will* make mistakes and have to fix something. I predict you will also find that you are really sick of wire-wrap long before you are done. These days, PCBs are inexpensive, and less error prone (in the sense that you almost always end up with exactly the connections in the netlist). OTOH, connectors are expensive and hard to reuse when soldered to a PCB. So you've got to be really confident of your netlist. You might consider investing in a tool where you pull the trigger to do the wrap. You'll probably get a more consistent result, and significantly fewer repetitive motion issues. Hope that helps! Vince
[cctalk] Re: Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
On 17/07/2024 20:15, Adrian Godwin via cctalk wrote: The number of UK museums seem to be growing. Perhaps some of the newer ones are not yet full. I think the large Science Museums are pretty well off but the smaller ones may be more flexible. Of course, they are also in greater danger of fading away. The Science Museum Group has space but I believe it struggles money. It has made staff redundant recently and closed the Air and Space hall in Manchester last year and scaled updates to the spaces there. I'm sure you're aware of TNMoC at Bletchley Park (though not the same organisation as the Bletchley Park Trust) . I am a member of the "TNMOC Supporters club" . I'm hoping to get involved there myself soon. They seem to be mainly limited by the rate at which they can restore the many old buildings on the site. There are still a lot left semi-derelict. Very few now, and all the TNMOC buildings are leased from the Bletchley Park Trust so as interest in the park grows the Trust may be inclined to let them to commercial concerns. They will accept some donations. Although both organisations have improved their standing a lot recently, I'm still astonished when I compare it with the museum Curious Marc and his team recently visited. I think we expect Museums in the UK to be free. They have to be free to get government money. I think TNMOC charges £10. Its not really enough, but I am sure folks would gripe at more. I recently visited the OXO Museum in Malaga which is 15€ for two hours. Its much smaller than TNMOC yet because of its location I am sure it takes a lot more money. OXO is well worth a visit even if you are not a gamer... https://oxomuseo.com/ Two other notable but more recently established museums are Cambridge's 'Centre for computing History' which has a variety of HP and DEC systems in addition to many homegrown Cambridge machines, A great place, but I think they would only accept things of real importance. They have recently sold off surplus items.. and Sam Battle's 'This museum is not obsolete', a volunteer-run museum with a very dedicated staff and an astounding ability to take on work and exhibits. I'd recommend both for a visit and perhaps a donation. Not managed to get there yet but on my "Must See" list There is also the "Retro Computer Museum" in Leicester https://retrocomputermuseum.co.uk/ This is a great place to visit, and has an extensive Library. Andy who runs it has taken a few items from me, but also turned down a few .. and the Northwest Computer Museum.. https://www.nwcomputermuseum.org.uk/ which is pretty new, but again a great place for post-mainframe exhibits ... not sure where Joe is with donations... Dave G4UGM On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 6:53 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: On Wed, 17 Jul 2024, Alan Perry wrote: My wife worked at the part of Sun that made many of the machines in my collection when they were being made, so she is fine with my computer collection. Does she have a sister?
[cctalk] Re: Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
The number of UK museums seem to be growing. Perhaps some of the newer ones are not yet full. I think the large Science Museums are pretty well off but the smaller ones may be more flexible. Of course, they are also in greater danger of fading away. I'm sure you're aware of TNMoC at Bletchley Park (though not the same organisation as the Bletchley Park Trust) . I'm hoping to get involved there myself soon. They seem to be mainly limited by the rate at which they can restore the many old buildings on the site. There are still a lot left semi-derelict. Although both organisations have improved their standing a lot recently, I'm still astonished when I compare it with the museum Curious Marc and his team recently visited. Two other notable but more recently established museums are Cambridge's 'Centre for computing History' which has a variety of HP and DEC systems in addition to many homegrown Cambridge machines, and Sam Battle's 'This museum is not obsolete', a volunteer-run museum with a very dedicated staff and an astounding ability to take on work and exhibits. I'd recommend both for a visit and perhaps a donation. On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 6:53 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: > On Wed, 17 Jul 2024, Alan Perry wrote: > > My wife worked at the part of Sun that made many of the machines in my > > collection when they were being made, so she is fine with my computer > > collection. > > Does she have a sister? > > >
[cctalk] Re: Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
On Wed, 17 Jul 2024, Alan Perry wrote: My wife worked at the part of Sun that made many of the machines in my collection when they were being made, so she is fine with my computer collection. Does she have a sister?
[cctalk] Re: Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
R&R Auction. They have been doing mostly Apple and some other. https://www.rrauction.com On Tue, Jul 16, 2024 at 4:46 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: > > Which commercial auction houses specialize in collectible computers? > > -- > Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
[cctalk] Re: Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
Storage is one reason I have a Palm Pilot collection ;) I have a dozen different models from many vendors (including one used on Better Call Saul) as well as accessories and all of it fits in a bankers box. I hear storage is a problem for CHM. alan > On Jul 16, 2024, at 13:00, John Foust via cctalk > wrote: > > At 02:10 PM 7/16/2024, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: >> Collectors always assert that their collection has value, and the next of >> kin never believe a word of that. > > It's not just the claimed value, which could be correct at a given > moment in time. It's the cost involved in physically storing the > stuff, the time and skill it would take to assess and describe it > all for sale, and then conducting the sale and shipment. It's > a lot of work. > > At 02:35 PM 7/16/2024, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote: >> We also talked about sticking it to the survivors. I think we concluded >> it's best to sell or give away the collection before you're too old to do so. > > Far easier to acquire something - just one more! - than to dispose of one. > > - John >
[cctalk] Re: Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
> On Jul 16, 2024, at 12:10, Fred Cisin via cctalk > wrote: > > On Tue, 16 Jul 2024, Joshua Rice via cctalk wrote: >> I think the key to preservation is assuring next of kin that the items in >> our possession have value, and are worth seeking out future custodians. > > Collectors always assert that their collection has value, and the next of kin > never believe a word of that. > My own sister actually claims that her very old French Horns are valuable! > Another relative tries to claim that "Blue willow" dishes have some value. > > Although, perhaps you could search out the highest prices ever bid on eBay, > and tape clippings of those to each item. I think most of this stuff is valuable. To the right person. The trick is finding that person, My wife worked at the part of Sun that made many of the machines in my collection when they were being made, so she is fine with my computer collection. alan
[cctalk] Re: Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
On Tue, 16 Jul 2024, brianb1224 via cctalk wrote: Or do what the Ham Radio guys do and have a commercial auction house that specializes in collectable computers. Which commercial auction houses specialize in collectible computers? (The format of your post comes through much like that of the late Ed Sharpe) -- Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
[cctalk] Re: Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
Or do what the Ham Radio guys do and have a commercial auction house that specializes in collectable computers. KF5CNC 73Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: John Foust via cctalk Date: 7/16/24 3:00 PM (GMT-06:00) To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Cc: John Foust Subject: [cctalk] Re: Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice At 02:10 PM 7/16/2024, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:>Collectors always assert that their collection has value, and the next of kin never believe a word of that.It's not just the claimed value, which could be correct at a given moment in time. It's the cost involved in physically storing thestuff, the time and skill it would take to assess and describe itall for sale, and then conducting the sale and shipment. It's a lot of work.At 02:35 PM 7/16/2024, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote:>We also talked about sticking it to the survivors. I think we concluded>it's best to sell or give away the collection before you're too old to do so.Far easier to acquire something - just one more! - than to dispose of one.- John
[cctalk] Re: Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
On Tue, 2024-07-16 at 14:59 -0500, John Foust via cctalk wrote: > Far easier to acquire something - just one more! - than to dispose of > one. The two happiest days in a boat owners life: The day he buys it, and the day he sells it. Boat (n): A hole in the water that you throw money into.
[cctalk] Re: Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
At 02:10 PM 7/16/2024, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: >Collectors always assert that their collection has value, and the next of kin >never believe a word of that. It's not just the claimed value, which could be correct at a given moment in time. It's the cost involved in physically storing the stuff, the time and skill it would take to assess and describe it all for sale, and then conducting the sale and shipment. It's a lot of work. At 02:35 PM 7/16/2024, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote: >We also talked about sticking it to the survivors. I think we concluded >it's best to sell or give away the collection before you're too old to do so. Far easier to acquire something - just one more! - than to dispose of one. - John
[cctalk] Re: Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
Didn't we already kill this horse a few weeks ago? We had a very long thread and branches about the subject and related topics. But, specific to Paul Allen, it obviously was not a priority of his to plan for the LCM after his passing, compared to other things that he did plan. We also talked about sticking it to the survivors. I think we concluded it's best to sell or give away the collection before you're too old to do so. Bill On Tue, Jul 16, 2024, 3:18 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: > On Tue, 16 Jul 2024, Joshua Rice via cctalk wrote: > > I think the key to preservation is assuring next of kin that the items > in our > > possession have value, and are worth seeking out future custodians. > > Collectors always assert that their collection has value, and the next of > kin never believe a word of that. > My own sister actually claims that her very old French Horns are valuable! > Another relative tries to claim that "Blue willow" dishes have some value. > > Although, perhaps you could search out the highest prices ever bid on > eBay, and tape clippings of those to each item. > > -- > Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com >
[cctalk] Re: Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
On Tue, 16 Jul 2024, Joshua Rice via cctalk wrote: I think the key to preservation is assuring next of kin that the items in our possession have value, and are worth seeking out future custodians. Collectors always assert that their collection has value, and the next of kin never believe a word of that. My own sister actually claims that her very old French Horns are valuable! Another relative tries to claim that "Blue willow" dishes have some value. Although, perhaps you could search out the highest prices ever bid on eBay, and tape clippings of those to each item. -- Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
[cctalk] Re: Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
On 16/07/2024 18:49, Joshua Rice via cctalk wrote: I think the key to preservation is assuring next of kin that the items in our possession have value, and are worth seeking out future custodians. There's a lot of stuff in private collections that can bring in great sums of money if only those in charge of selling the estate appreciate what they have to deal with. Making sure spouses and children know that at least some items in the collection are not just "old junk" will help immeasurably in their preservation, as well as pointing them in the direction of those knowledgeable enough to value it. Groups like this, as well as local/national computer museums will, i'm sure, help a lot with valuing pieces of equipment if and when the time comes to auction them off. I think you are living in some alternate universe. I remember when clearing out a significant (for the uk) collection which consisted of IBM 7090 tapes, cards and CE manuals, and a straight 8 PDP8, talking to the children of the widow, about their mums collection of china, some of it valuable which covered every inch of wall space within the house and which severely hampered our moving of the computers, radios and scopes and other electronic items through the house. What were their plans for that I asked? Toffee Hammers they replied, the intended to smash the lot in a sort of revenge for having to live with it. Money did not matter! They just wanted rid ... I am 100% certain my wife and kids feel the same, except perhaps for my ATARI ST on which we played "Buggy Boy", "XENON II" and Tynesoft "Winter Olympics" as a family. ... as for "national museums" all the ones I know of are totally over-whelmed with donations. Space is expensive. They cherry pick the best because thats all they can afford to store. Certainly in the UK they exist because the offer STEM courses for which they get rewards, Since the UK left the EU their funding sources are further reduced as EU funding has gone, and not been replaced, as promised by the pro-brexit lobby. they won´t accept most of what we have, and any they do take must be donated without condition. ... so as I am now 70 years old my collection of junk is being dispersed as fast as I can to younger enthusiasts, who I hope are not out to make a fast buck on a quick cheap buy and re-sell on e-bay. If you want to have any confidence it goes to a good home you need to do it yourself .. Which brings us back to Paul Allen who sadly did not have the time to do this for LCM+L. I hope he passed peacefully. Dave G4UGM Of course, a great tool is a personal inventory. A book, or some such document with rough values and other information could be very useful for those unfortunate enough to have to rehome our collections once we're passed. Contact details of those who can help in assessing and distributing such stuff will also be quite useful. I, personally, am quite young compared to many here (no offense intended!), being 32 years old. However i have reassured my spouse that much of my "junk" (largely consisting of QBUS PDP-11's at this time) is actually quite valuable and well worth getting a good price for. Other, rarer items, i have assured her need to be rehomed to a museum. Of course, i intend to hang onto these pieces for at least another 32 years, as a good portion is somewhat "retirement projects", as well as "retirement funds", and i definitely intend to divest some of my ever-growing collection when the time comes. But then again, we all have those pieces that are actually quite valueless. It is definitely worth divesting those pieces if and when we get round to it. If and when the time is available to divest these pieces (i'm eyeing up the stack of 30+ Core i7 3770 boards in the corner as i type this, definitely not retro at this time, but definitely need to be divested) it is worth getting the money back when we can. It's a difficult one for those that love and cherish these machines, but it always hurts to see them end up in the trash. Ultimately, as custodians of this equipment, it is also our duty to assure their preservation, and sometimes it is us who know best where to rehome them. Don't hesitate to downsize and find younger folk that have the passion. There isn't a lot of them, but they are out there. Cheers Josh rice On 16/07/2024 01:59, Alan Perry via cctalk wrote: Drop the civility discussion or the LCM+L discussion? The LCM+L discussion raises important questions about finding good homes for one’s vintage computer collection after one passes on. I got more passionate about making sure this kind of stuff got saved when in the late 90s I found that little of what I worked on at Burroughs in the late 80s was available most anywhere. I didn’t donate the item that I donated to LCM+L just to see it get scrapped. I know of at least one other person who donated rare items there on the condition they wou
[cctalk] Re: Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
I think the key to preservation is assuring next of kin that the items in our possession have value, and are worth seeking out future custodians. There's a lot of stuff in private collections that can bring in great sums of money if only those in charge of selling the estate appreciate what they have to deal with. Making sure spouses and children know that at least some items in the collection are not just "old junk" will help immeasurably in their preservation, as well as pointing them in the direction of those knowledgeable enough to value it. Groups like this, as well as local/national computer museums will, i'm sure, help a lot with valuing pieces of equipment if and when the time comes to auction them off. Of course, a great tool is a personal inventory. A book, or some such document with rough values and other information could be very useful for those unfortunate enough to have to rehome our collections once we're passed. Contact details of those who can help in assessing and distributing such stuff will also be quite useful. I, personally, am quite young compared to many here (no offense intended!), being 32 years old. However i have reassured my spouse that much of my "junk" (largely consisting of QBUS PDP-11's at this time) is actually quite valuable and well worth getting a good price for. Other, rarer items, i have assured her need to be rehomed to a museum. Of course, i intend to hang onto these pieces for at least another 32 years, as a good portion is somewhat "retirement projects", as well as "retirement funds", and i definitely intend to divest some of my ever-growing collection when the time comes. But then again, we all have those pieces that are actually quite valueless. It is definitely worth divesting those pieces if and when we get round to it. If and when the time is available to divest these pieces (i'm eyeing up the stack of 30+ Core i7 3770 boards in the corner as i type this, definitely not retro at this time, but definitely need to be divested) it is worth getting the money back when we can. It's a difficult one for those that love and cherish these machines, but it always hurts to see them end up in the trash. Ultimately, as custodians of this equipment, it is also our duty to assure their preservation, and sometimes it is us who know best where to rehome them. Don't hesitate to downsize and find younger folk that have the passion. There isn't a lot of them, but they are out there. Cheers Josh rice On 16/07/2024 01:59, Alan Perry via cctalk wrote: Drop the civility discussion or the LCM+L discussion? The LCM+L discussion raises important questions about finding good homes for one’s vintage computer collection after one passes on. I got more passionate about making sure this kind of stuff got saved when in the late 90s I found that little of what I worked on at Burroughs in the late 80s was available most anywhere. I didn’t donate the item that I donated to LCM+L just to see it get scrapped. I know of at least one other person who donated rare items there on the condition they would be preserved. alan On Jul 15, 2024, at 17:38, Rick Bensene via cctalk wrote: Dennis Boone wrote: Folks, Once again, it seems I need to ask everyone to drop this discussion. I _still_ don't > want to have the moderation flags and banhammers. Seconded. Though, I'll get in my last words about it before the thread hopefully dies off. The situation with LCM+L is what it is. Unless someone has the wherewithal to challenge the whole mess within the legal system (and probably lose anyway), there's nothing that anyone can do about it.I, as is clear many others who inhabit this list, have a great deal of frustration built up about the demise of LCM+L. With me, it's most specifically felt in the way that the whole thing was executed. At some point, though, I just have to let it go, which is right now. I agree with Dennis that the time has come for this discussion to expire. LCM+L R.I.P. You will be missed. Thanks to all (which includes some members of this list) who contributed to the amazing place that LCM+L was. Mr. Allen's heart was in the right place, or he wouldn't have devoted his resources to creating it in the first place. Unfortunately, his life didn't last long enough for him to assure that after he was gone it would have some means by which it could continue on in his memory. Rick Bensene The Old Calculator Museum https://oldcalculatormuseum.com Beavercreek, Oregon USA
[cctalk] Re: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
> On Jul 15, 2024, at 8:38 PM, Rick Bensene via cctalk > wrote: > > > Dennis Boone wrote: > >> Folks, > >> Once again, it seems I need to ask everyone to drop this discussion. I >> _still_ don't > >> want to have the moderation flags and banhammers. > > Seconded. > > Though, I'll get in my last words about it before the thread hopefully dies > off. > > The situation with LCM+L is what it is. Unless someone has the wherewithal > to challenge the whole mess within the legal system (and probably lose > anyway), there's nothing that anyone can do about it.I, as is clear many > others who inhabit this list, have a great deal of frustration built up > about the demise of LCM+L. With me, it's most specifically felt in the way > that the whole thing was executed. At some point, though, I just have to let > it go, which is right now. I agree with Dennis that the time has come for > this discussion to expire. A problem with the whole discussion is that there are two rather different questions: the fate of Paul Allen's collection (things he owned, so that the estate now owns) vs. the fate of LCM (a non-profit organization which also owns things, and those are not part of Paul Allen's estate). Some things we tend to think of as belonging to the museum in fact appear to be Paul Allen's property, like a PDP-10. I don't know if the Purdue 6500 is in that category; probably yes since Christie attempted to mention it. On the other hand, various things donated to LCM presumably are not being auctioned since they are not property of the Paul Allen estate, though it's certainly a good question what will happen to them given that the museum is permanently closed. For the more interesting Paul Allen items, I wonder if there are people here who would try to bid on them, either as individuals or as members of a team of rescuers. I'm seriously tempted to try that for the 6500, even though the notion of winning and having to pay for transportation is a big scary. paul
[cctalk] Re: Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
Drop the civility discussion or the LCM+L discussion? The LCM+L discussion raises important questions about finding good homes for one’s vintage computer collection after one passes on. I got more passionate about making sure this kind of stuff got saved when in the late 90s I found that little of what I worked on at Burroughs in the late 80s was available most anywhere. I didn’t donate the item that I donated to LCM+L just to see it get scrapped. I know of at least one other person who donated rare items there on the condition they would be preserved. alan > On Jul 15, 2024, at 17:38, Rick Bensene via cctalk > wrote: > > > Dennis Boone wrote: > >> Folks, > >> Once again, it seems I need to ask everyone to drop this discussion. I >> _still_ don't > >> want to have the moderation flags and banhammers. > > Seconded. > > Though, I'll get in my last words about it before the thread hopefully dies > off. > > The situation with LCM+L is what it is. Unless someone has the wherewithal > to challenge the whole mess within the legal system (and probably lose > anyway), there's nothing that anyone can do about it.I, as is clear many > others who inhabit this list, have a great deal of frustration built up > about the demise of LCM+L. With me, it's most specifically felt in the way > that the whole thing was executed. At some point, though, I just have to let > it go, which is right now. I agree with Dennis that the time has come for > this discussion to expire. > > LCM+L R.I.P. You will be missed. Thanks to all (which includes some > members of this list) who contributed to the amazing place that LCM+L was. > Mr. Allen's heart was in the right place, or he wouldn't have devoted his > resources to creating it in the first place. Unfortunately, his life didn't > last long enough for him to assure that after he was gone it would have some > means by which it could continue on in his memory. > > Rick Bensene > The Old Calculator Museum > https://oldcalculatormuseum.com > Beavercreek, Oregon USA > > >
[cctalk] Re: Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
Dennis Boone wrote: > Folks, > Once again, it seems I need to ask everyone to drop this discussion. I > _still_ don't > > want to have the moderation flags and banhammers. Seconded. Though, I'll get in my last words about it before the thread hopefully dies off. The situation with LCM+L is what it is. Unless someone has the wherewithal to challenge the whole mess within the legal system (and probably lose anyway), there's nothing that anyone can do about it.I, as is clear many others who inhabit this list, have a great deal of frustration built up about the demise of LCM+L. With me, it's most specifically felt in the way that the whole thing was executed. At some point, though, I just have to let it go, which is right now. I agree with Dennis that the time has come for this discussion to expire. LCM+L R.I.P. You will be missed. Thanks to all (which includes some members of this list) who contributed to the amazing place that LCM+L was. Mr. Allen's heart was in the right place, or he wouldn't have devoted his resources to creating it in the first place. Unfortunately, his life didn't last long enough for him to assure that after he was gone it would have some means by which it could continue on in his memory. Rick Bensene The Old Calculator Museum https://oldcalculatormuseum.com Beavercreek, Oregon USA
[cctalk] Re: Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 11:57 AM Doc Shipley via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > Sellam, > >Stay the FUCK off my private email. That crosses the line and you > know it. > lol I tried to keep this off-list but you dragged it back out into the open, like an absolute twat. Keep my name out of your stupid messages and I won't have to reply to you at all. Sellam
[cctalk] Re: Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
Folks, Once again, it seems I need to ask everyone to drop this discussion. I _still_ don't want to have the moderation flags and banhammers. De
[cctalk] Fwd: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
Sellam, Stay the FUCK off my private email. That crosses the line and you know it. Forwarded Message Subject:Re: [cctalk] Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 11:46:54 -0700 From: Sellam Abraham To: Doc Shipley On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 10:19 AM Doc Shipley via cctalk mailto:cctalk@classiccmp.org>> wrote: On 7/15/24 12:12, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote: > The only thing criminal here is Paul Allen's handling of LCM. > With all due respect, man, your noise:signal ratio is getting really awful. Do you ever look at what you've typed and ask yourself if it's *useful*? The last I looked this mailing list was meant to be an exchange of information and a source of support, not a Reddit clone. Useful or not, it needs to be stated. I stand by the comment. Thanks for your feedback. Sellam
[cctalk] Re: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 11:01 AM Joseph S. Barrera III via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > This whole thread is full of judgements and opinions and condemnations. > Sellam makes one flippant comment, in line with the prevailing opinion, not > attacking anyone on this list, and he is singled out for being uncivil? I > don't understand. No reply needed. Just stating my confusion. > It's a strange phenomenon. I don't get it myself. Especially since my comment is perhaps literally true. Sellam
[cctalk] Re: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
This whole thread is full of judgements and opinions and condemnations. Sellam makes one flippant comment, in line with the prevailing opinion, not attacking anyone on this list, and he is singled out for being uncivil? I don't understand. No reply needed. Just stating my confusion. > On 7/15/24 12:12, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote: > > The only thing criminal here is Paul Allen's handling of LCM. > > > > With all due respect, man, your noise:signal ratio is getting really > awful. Do you ever look at what you've typed and ask yourself if it's > *useful*? > > The last I looked this mailing list was meant to be an exchange of > information and a source of support, not a Reddit clone. > > > Doc >
[cctalk] Re: Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
Seconded. Thanks, Jonathan On Monday, July 15th, 2024 at 13:19, Doc Shipley via cctalk wrote: > > > On 7/15/24 12:12, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote: > > > The only thing criminal here is Paul Allen's handling of LCM. > > > With all due respect, man, your noise:signal ratio is getting really > awful. Do you ever look at what you've typed and ask yourself if it's > useful? > > The last I looked this mailing list was meant to be an exchange of > information and a source of support, not a Reddit clone. > > > Doc
[cctalk] Civility; Was Re: Re: LCM auction pre-notice
On 7/15/24 12:12, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote: The only thing criminal here is Paul Allen's handling of LCM. With all due respect, man, your noise:signal ratio is getting really awful. Do you ever look at what you've typed and ask yourself if it's *useful*? The last I looked this mailing list was meant to be an exchange of information and a source of support, not a Reddit clone. Doc
[cctalk] Re: Delay slots, was: Re: Re: early microprocessor limited pipelining [was: Intel 8086 - 46 yrs. ago]
On 6/15/24 12:39, Paul Koning wrote: > > > I learned it from OS code reading and adopted some of it for my own work, but > not much because I actually only worked on the 6500 -- which doesn't have > multiple functional units. > > Writing good code for those machines was further complicated by the fact that > instructions were either 1/4 or 1/2 word long, could not split across word > boundaries, and branches would only go to the start of the word. So there > tended to be NOPs to pad out the word, which the assembler would supply. > Avoiding them would make the code go faster and of course make it smaller. > > The other complication was a fairly limited set of registers, and the fact > that loads would go only to X1..X5 while stores could only come from X6 or > X7. So a memcpy would involve a register to register transfer. That takes 3 > cycles on a 6600, so a skillful memcpy implementation would use two load > registers, both store registers, and two separate functional units for the > R-R move (one via the "boolean" unit and one via the "shift" unit). I > remember my bafflement the first time I saw a shift (by zero) used to do just > a register to register move; on a 6500 you wouldn't have any reason to write > that. > > I once crashed the PLATO system in mid-day, when the load hit peak (600 users > logged on) because I had slowed down a critical terminal output processing > step and the machinery didn't have flow control there. My bosses were NOT > happy. I solved the issue by cleaning up that block of code to avoid all > NOPs; the result was that it was both shorter and faster than the previous > version while still delivering the new feature. :-) At CDC SSD SVLOPS, it was all big gummint stuff stuff, so we had clusters of Cyber 74s and 73s (6600/6400) linked with a few million words of ECS (we had a QSE that expanded it to 4M words). 6600/Cyber 74 programming was the rule. A short loop was considered to be optimal, if it kept the instruction issue to 1/cycle and kept the whole thing "in stack" (basically an 8-word buffer, not really a cache) to avoid accessing CM for instructions. Lots of bit-twiddling fun! The 6600 had an interesting feature we called "shortstop" where the result of an operation was available for use by a subsequent instruction 1 cycle before it materialized in a register On early 6600s, there was a so-called "store out of order" problem where two closely-timed stores to the same location would result in the earlier result overwriting the later ones. An ECO fixed that--it was pretty fundamental. STAR initially mapped the user's low-memory to the 256-word register file, such that one could have vectors occupying several registers addressed by memory location, while referring to the registers by register number. That apparently resulted in some serious issues, solved eventually by simply locking out access to the first 16Kbits (recall that the STAR is bit-addressed) of memory. The so-called "Rev R" ECO, if my mind isn't playing tricks on me. CDC had a pretty close relationship with Fairchild during this time; initially for the silicon transistors in the 6600 and later the register file for the STAR. Fun times! --Chuck
[cctalk] Re: Delay slots, was: Re: Re: early microprocessor limited pipelining [was: Intel 8086 - 46 yrs. ago]
> On Jun 15, 2024, at 1:41 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk > wrote: > > I'm certain that Paul has done his share of this, but an art on the CDC > 6600 was hand-scheduling instruction execution. There was at least one > class for this--and probably more. The CPU could issue one instruction > every cycle, assuming that there were no conflicts. The 6600 had > several functional units whose operation could overlap. I learned it from OS code reading and adopted some of it for my own work, but not much because I actually only worked on the 6500 -- which doesn't have multiple functional units. Writing good code for those machines was further complicated by the fact that instructions were either 1/4 or 1/2 word long, could not split across word boundaries, and branches would only go to the start of the word. So there tended to be NOPs to pad out the word, which the assembler would supply. Avoiding them would make the code go faster and of course make it smaller. The other complication was a fairly limited set of registers, and the fact that loads would go only to X1..X5 while stores could only come from X6 or X7. So a memcpy would involve a register to register transfer. That takes 3 cycles on a 6600, so a skillful memcpy implementation would use two load registers, both store registers, and two separate functional units for the R-R move (one via the "boolean" unit and one via the "shift" unit). I remember my bafflement the first time I saw a shift (by zero) used to do just a register to register move; on a 6500 you wouldn't have any reason to write that. I once crashed the PLATO system in mid-day, when the load hit peak (600 users logged on) because I had slowed down a critical terminal output processing step and the machinery didn't have flow control there. My bosses were NOT happy. I solved the issue by cleaning up that block of code to avoid all NOPs; the result was that it was both shorter and faster than the previous version while still delivering the new feature. :-) paul
[cctalk] Re: Delay slots, was: Re: Re: early microprocessor limited pipelining [was: Intel 8086 - 46 yrs. ago]
I'm certain that Paul has done his share of this, but an art on the CDC 6600 was hand-scheduling instruction execution. There was at least one class for this--and probably more. The CPU could issue one instruction every cycle, assuming that there were no conflicts. The 6600 had several functional units whose operation could overlap. But we've discussed this before... On the large vector STAR-100, operands were fetched via a 512-bit wide (not counting error checking bits) memory bus and pipelined vector units. The trick there was not so much scheduling of scalar instructions, but avoiding "bubbles" in the vector pipes. --Chuck
[cctalk] Re: Delay slots, was: Re: Re: early microprocessor limited pipelining [was: Intel 8086 - 46 yrs. ago]
On 6/13/24 09:33, Adrian Godwin via cctalk wrote: > I may be wrong, but wasn't that a feature of early RISC, possibly the Sparc > ? You were compiling to microcode rather than CISC assembler, so you got to > think about pipelining in the instruction stream. Just about feasible in > assembler but perfectly sensible if the compiler was doing the work. PS-RISC has a "delay slot" after a branch and the instruction there will be executed before the branch target is reached for a taken branch. You can do fun things like put a branch in the delay slot of another branch and when both are taken, you end up executing a single instruction at the target of the delay slot branch before resuming at the target of the original branch. PA-RISC implements PC as PCQ, a two entry queue containing the current instruction address and the "following instruction address" which get manipulated by the branches to create this behavior.
[cctalk] Re: Delay slots, was: Re: Re: early microprocessor limited pipelining [was: Intel 8086 - 46 yrs. ago]
On Thu, 13 Jun 2024, Henry Bent via cctalk wrote: > > I always assumed that was because the latency of multiply, let alone > > divide, was far too many cycles for anyone to plausibly schedule "useful" > > instructions into. Wasn't r4000 divide latency over 60 cycles? Wasn't r4000 > > divide latency more than 60 cycles? > > > > The MIPS R4000 manual > https://groups.csail.mit.edu/cag/raw/documents/R4400_Uman_book_Ed2.pdf > says that double precision divide is 36 cycles, and double precision square > root is 112 (!). Note that these figures are for floating-point arithmetic. > What's interesting about that is that GCC's model of the R4000 says that > divide is 69 cycles; I'm not sure of the reason for the discrepancy. > https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=blob_plain;f=gcc/config/mips/4000.md;hb=HEAD And this is for integer arithmetic, that's the reason. Maciej
[cctalk] Re: Delay slots, was: Re: Re: early microprocessor limited pipelining [was: Intel 8086 - 46 yrs. ago]
> But the required are often dependent on variables that are not> known at > compile time, for example load/store delays, or branches> taken/not taken. > Run time interlocks deal with the actual conflicts> as they occur, while > compiler or programmer conflict avoidance> has to use the worst case > scenarios. The observation that interlocks are not needed when the delay isknown and predictable, but are needed when the delay is varialbehas been around since the beginning. The ENIAC didn't haveinterlocks for the multiplier or function tables, but did for the divider/square rooter and the card reader. (The card punch had whatamounted to a completion signal that enforced the timing.) BLS
[cctalk] Re: Delay slots, was: Re: Re: early microprocessor limited pipelining [was: Intel 8086 - 46 yrs. ago]
> On Jun 13, 2024, at 6:22 PM, Jonathan Stone via cctalk > wrote: > > > On Thursday, June 13, 2024 at 03:00:22 PM PDT, Maciej W. Rozycki via cctalk > wrote: > >> The architecture designers cheated however even in the original ISA in >> that moves from the MD accumulator did interlock. I guess they figured >> people (either doing it by hand or by writing a compiler) wouldn't get >> that right anyway. ;) > > I always assumed that was because the latency of multiply, let alone divide, > was far too many cycles for anyone to plausibly schedule "useful" > instructions into. Wasn't r4000 divide latency over 60 cycles? Wasn't r4000 > divide latency more than 60 cycles? Probably, because divide is inherently an interative operation, and usually is implemented to produce one bit of result per cycle. A notable exception is the CDC 6600, which throws a whole lot of logic at the problem to produce two bits of result per cycle. The usual divide amounts to a trial subtraction and shift; the 6600 implementation does THREE trial subtractions concurrently. Not cheap when you're using discrete transistor logic. Multiply is an entirely different matter, that can be done in few cycles if you throw enough logic at the problem. Signal processors are an extreme example of this because multiply/add sequences are the essence of what they need to do. This is also why Alpha omitted divide entirely and made programs do multiply by the reciprocal instead. The best argument for doing interlocking in the hardware isn't that it's hard for software to get right. Code generators can do it and that's a one time effort. But the required are often dependent on variables that are not known at compile time, for example load/store delays, or branches taken/not taken. Run time interlocks deal with the actual conflicts as they occur, while compiler or programmer conflict avoidance has to use the worst case scenarios. paul
[cctalk] Re: Delay slots, was: Re: Re: early microprocessor limited pipelining [was: Intel 8086 - 46 yrs. ago]
On Thu, 13 Jun 2024, Jonathan Stone wrote: > > The architecture designers cheated however even in the original ISA in > > that moves from the MD accumulator did interlock. I guess they figured > > people (either doing it by hand or by writing a compiler) wouldn't get > >that right anyway. ;) > > I always assumed that was because the latency of multiply, let alone > divide, was far too many cycles for anyone to plausibly schedule > "useful" instructions into. Wasn't r4000 divide latency over 60 cycles? Well, overflow and divide by zero checks will often take many cycles in parallel with MDU executing the operation, but you're of course correct in that the designers have made a reasonable decision there. I just put it differently. The net result however is the architecture has never been fully without pipeline interlocks, although indeed it used to be close. Performance figures for the R3000 would be more appropriate for the MIPS I initial ISA revision and reportedly said CPU executed a 32-bit division in 35 cycles. I can imagine the R4000 could need over 60 cycles to run a 64-bit division. Figures vary among more modern implementations, but MDU operations continue having significant latencies. Maciej
[cctalk] Re: Delay slots, was: Re: Re: early microprocessor limited pipelining [was: Intel 8086 - 46 yrs. ago]
On Thu, 13 Jun 2024 at 18:22, Jonathan Stone via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > On Thursday, June 13, 2024 at 03:00:22 PM PDT, Maciej W. Rozycki via > cctalk wrote: > > > The architecture designers cheated however even in the original ISA in > > that moves from the MD accumulator did interlock. I guess they figured > > people (either doing it by hand or by writing a compiler) wouldn't get > >that right anyway. ;) > > I always assumed that was because the latency of multiply, let alone > divide, was far too many cycles for anyone to plausibly schedule "useful" > instructions into. Wasn't r4000 divide latency over 60 cycles? Wasn't r4000 > divide latency more than 60 cycles? > The MIPS R4000 manual https://groups.csail.mit.edu/cag/raw/documents/R4400_Uman_book_Ed2.pdf says that double precision divide is 36 cycles, and double precision square root is 112 (!). What's interesting about that is that GCC's model of the R4000 says that divide is 69 cycles; I'm not sure of the reason for the discrepancy. https://gcc.gnu.org/git/?p=gcc.git;a=blob_plain;f=gcc/config/mips/4000.md;hb=HEAD -Henry
[cctalk] Re: Delay slots, was: Re: Re: early microprocessor limited pipelining [was: Intel 8086 - 46 yrs. ago]
On Thursday, June 13, 2024 at 03:00:22 PM PDT, Maciej W. Rozycki via cctalk wrote: > The architecture designers cheated however even in the original ISA in > that moves from the MD accumulator did interlock. I guess they figured > people (either doing it by hand or by writing a compiler) wouldn't get >that right anyway. ;) I always assumed that was because the latency of multiply, let alone divide, was far too many cycles for anyone to plausibly schedule "useful" instructions into. Wasn't r4000 divide latency over 60 cycles? Wasn't r4000 divide latency more than 60 cycles?
[cctalk] Re: Delay slots, was: Re: Re: early microprocessor limited pipelining [was: Intel 8086 - 46 yrs. ago]
On Thu, 13 Jun 2024, Jonathan Stone via cctalk wrote: > MIPS is of course (allegedly) an acronym for "Microprocessor without > Interlocked Pipeline Stages". > > No interlocking between pipeline stages mean no hardware avoidance > (delays, pipeline bubbles) of hazards. So hardly surprising that authors > of MIPS assembly-level code are/were responsible for scheduling that > code to avoid what would otherwise be pipeline hazards. The architecture designers cheated however even in the original ISA in that moves from the MD accumulator did interlock. I guess they figured people (either doing it by hand or by writing a compiler) wouldn't get that right anyway. ;) Maciej
[cctalk] Re: Delay slots, was: Re: Re: early microprocessor limited pipelining [was: Intel 8086 - 46 yrs. ago]
On Thursday, June 13, 2024 at 12:56:09 PM PDT, Christian Kennedy via cctalk wrote: [[ ...compiler, or human writing assembler, responsible for avoiding hazards in MIPS delay slots ]] MIPS is of course (allegedly) an acronym for "Microprocessor without Interlocked Pipeline Stages". No interlocking between pipeline stages mean no hardware avoidance (delays, pipeline bubbles) of hazards. So hardly surprising that authors of MIPS assembly-level code are/were responsible for scheduling that code to avoid what would otherwise be pipeline hazards.
[cctalk] Delay slots, was: Re: Re: early microprocessor limited pipelining [was: Intel 8086 - 46 yrs. ago]
On 6/13/24 09:33, Adrian Godwin via cctalk wrote: I may be wrong, but wasn't that a feature of early RISC, possibly the Sparc ? You were compiling to microcode rather than CISC assembler, so you got to think about pipelining in the instruction stream. Just about feasible in assembler but perfectly sensible if the compiler was doing the work. That sounds a lot like early MIPS processors, where you (or the compiler) had to schedule load and store delay slots as necessary. It made sense, given that the whole premise was to make the silicon simple by having the compiler do all of the bookkeeping. -- Christian Kennedy, Ph.D. ch...@mainecoon.com AF6AP | DB0692 | PG00029419 http://www.mainecoon.comPGP KeyID 108DAB97 PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97 "Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration…"
[cctalk] Artonix PC (was Re: Re: Experience using an Altair 8800 ("Personal computer" from 70s))
On 6/8/2024 1:17 PM, jim stephens via cctalk wrote: On 6/8/24 12:33, Jon Elson via cctalk wrote: On 6/8/24 11:56, Vincent Slyngstad via cctalk wrote: Even maintenance drawings would be great. Does any software survive? Diagnostics would be cool, but so would MUMPS. Not sure the radiology software would be useful, but it would still be of historic interest. Well, I believe that LINC LAP-6 will "boot" on an Artronix PC. I am fairly sure I did try that a long time ago. And, the guys who resurrected the LINC for the VCF demo did have LAP-6 running. One big feature of the Artronix PC was a TEK storage scope that allowed you to see a whole page of text at a time, instead of the tiny window that was available on the LINC. I think the LINC could only support about 8 or 12 short lines due to the slow refresh. Jon I'll ask Al Weber if he has anything. I know unless it's PC sized he doesn't have it. He has a lot of RS6000 stuff I need to pick up and Victor. I think he did a give away of a lot of his documentation about 5 years ago, so he may have given it away if he had it. thanks Jim Thanks! Vince
[cctalk] Re: Sports cars (was: Re: Re: Experience using an Altair 8800 ("Personal computer" from 70s))
On Fri, Jun 7, 2024 at 9:10 AM Christian Kennedy via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > Not sure about that. We stuck a Nova 840, a couple of Diablo 30's, and > assorted other bits and bobs in a 1960's Mustang, and I once dragged an > Eclipse S/130, Diablo model 30, and a Hazeltine 2000 home in a early > 1970's Toyota Corolla. All sans racks, of course... > > -- > Christian Kennedy, Ph.D. > I once hauled home about 20 Apple //e's and peripherals in a 2-door Honda Civic Coupe. Trust me, it was impressive. Sellam
[cctalk] Sports cars (was: Re: Re: Experience using an Altair 8800 ("Personal computer" from 70s))
On 6/7/24 07:18, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: Before we do any more automotive analogies of the "personal computer" definitions, . . . Could somebody explain to me What is a "muscle car"? A semi-archaic term used in reference to cars defined primarily by power output relative to the average at the time the vehicle was marketed. What is a "sports car" A semi-archaic term used to describe a car which is designed to handle well at the expense of ride comfort and size. A muscle car was typically relatively good at the quarter mile, but frequently miserable on the track. A sports car frequently was not particularly powerful. The series one Lotus 7 shipped with a Ford Sidevalve engine rocking in at 36HP, the Series two upgraded to a Ford Kent, initially making...39HP. I have heard the Ford Mustang, which seems like a Foulcon with cosmetically redesigned body panels, referred to as each of those. In the special case of the Mustang, it depends on when you ask the question. The Mustang was literally originally marketed, I kid you not, as a car for secretaries. As you suggest, it started life as a generation-two Falcon with a body kit (this isn't strictly true, the original 1962 T-5 Mustang was a two seat, mid-engine thing of which I believe two were built). As initially designed, it was never intended to be a high performance vehicle, although the Falcon chassis actually handled remarkably well for the time. It was for all intents essentially a parts bin car, using interior, chassis, suspension, and drivetrain components from the Falcon and the Fairlane -- enough so that people trained to build or maintain either of those vehicles could find their way around a Mustang without any real additional training. I think that the Mustang came stock with one of the wimpiest six cylinder engines that Ford had. If you special ordered the optional four cylinder engine, would it still be a "muscle car"? The original six rocked in at 2.8L making a whopping 101 HP, this was almost immediately replaced by a 3.3L pumping out 120HP; the other option was a 4.3L V8 making a miserable 164HP, followed in the same 1964 1/2 upgrade by a 4.7L grinding out 210HP. Pretty awful numbers for today, but by the standards of the time, not terribly bad given the use of dizzies and one (for the six) and two barrel carbs; for comparison, the 3.7L I6 in the first generation Camaro made 140HP. Ford wasn't uniquely bad at extracting power from gasoline, but it wasn't until the Mustang-spawned horsepower wars of the later 1960's and very early 1970's that they started to make semi-respectable power. Handling seemed to be pretty much unchanged from the Foulcon. Did you need the dealer-option racing stripe to be a "sports car"? The Series I Mustang is very much a Falcon with a body kit, but despite being sedans, Falcons handled quite well, and with the lighter body of the Mustang was quite respectable. By the commonly used terms, the series one Mustang was a reasonable sports car, but decidedly not a muscle car. Move to 1969, the Mustang gets larger and heavier, but the 4.9L V8 is making a more respectable 290HP while the insane 7.0L is cranking out 375 while not materially affecting weight or weight distribution. The Mustang in now both a muscle car and a sports car. Of course it was all downhill after that, until emissions regulations required manufacturers to make things run properly and computing power evolved to make it possible. We can at least all agree that the Ford Mustang was not a "personal computer", nor "Personal Computer", although almost any Personal Computer could fit in the back seat or the trunk, but probably not in the glove compartment. A mini-computer, disunirregardless of whether it was "Personal", would require the convertible model, with the top down. Not sure about that. We stuck a Nova 840, a couple of Diablo 30's, and assorted other bits and bobs in a 1960's Mustang, and I once dragged an Eclipse S/130, Diablo model 30, and a Hazeltine 2000 home in a early 1970's Toyota Corolla. All sans racks, of course... -- Christian Kennedy, Ph.D. ch...@mainecoon.com AF6AP | DB0692 | PG00029419 http://www.mainecoon.comPGP KeyID 108DAB97 PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97 "Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration…"
[cctalk] Re: Windows, Was Re: Re: First Personal Computer
On May 31, 2024, at 9:29 AM, Doc Shipley via cctalk wrote: > > Can we do the "Which version of Windows is 'Classic' now?" flame war next? > > Pleeeze? > > > Doc I’m rather partial to “Bow Windows”, I feel they have a rather classic look. Zane
[cctalk] Windows, Was Re: Re: First Personal Computer
On 5/30/24 07:29, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote: On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 2:06 AM John Herron via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: Only because I thought it would be funny to hear ChatGPT's wrong answer. Here is ChatGPT's answer on the first personal computer. This would be a fun topic for a series of online debates. There seem to be a few angles 1) First microcomputer of the modern style (desktop computer running home/small business applications) 2) First computer that was primarily used as a personal computer but not necessarily practically or large-scale 3) First inadvertent use of a computer as a personal computer (i.e. first application developed for personal use on a machine not originally designed for such a purpose) more? Can we do the "Which version of Windows is 'Classic' now?" flame war next? Pleeeze? Doc
[cctalk] Audiofools, (was :Re: Re: FWIW CD & DVD demagnitizitation [was: Double Density 3.5" Floppy Disks])
On 5/8/24 13:52, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: If I knew that this stuff wasn't real, I'd figure that it was an April Fool's prank. When people have waxed poetic about their oxygen-free mains cords, forged on the inner thighs of virgins [1], and how it affects the quality of their sound system, I have always asked them why their rarefied equipment incorporates power supplies that are so crappy that they can hear the effects of things on the line side of the switch. [1] I'm just bitter because I don't have the balls to ask $30K for a line cord... -- Christian Kennedy, Ph.D. ch...@mainecoon.com AF6AP | DB0692 | PG00029419 http://www.mainecoon.comPGP KeyID 108DAB97 PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97 "Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration…"
[cctalk] Re: Versatec Electrostatic Printers (was :Re: Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems)
The US Letter size of folded Versatec paper came in a cardboard box that was really good for compartmentalizing small stuff and stacking for storage! I used to scrounge around the waste containers for empty, used boxes. Still have many in use. Dave On 4/13/24 11:40 PM, Tony Duell via cctalk wrote: On Sat, Apr 13, 2024 at 10:48 PM Jon Elson via cctalk wrote: Yes, there were a number of Versatec models for different paper sizes and pixel density. Does anyone else have one in their collection? I have an ICL-badged V80 which has a GPIB interface to link it to a PERQ. I also have the schematics, etc for the plain V80 but nothing on the GPIB interface (ether user or service data). IIRC the V80 is based round a Texas 16-bit microprocessor with some AM2900-series sequencers and ROMs to control the electrode timing. As Jon said in the bit I deleted, there's a 'nib electrode' under the paper and a segmented backing electrode above it. The charge image is built up on the paper, then the toner is flowed over it and the carbon (I assume) particles adhere to the charged bits. No drying heater in mine. -tony
[cctalk] Re: Versatec Electrostatic Printers (was :Re: Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems)
It wasn't just Versatec plotters that used this mixture - standard office photocopiers also had clay-coated paper and liquid toner. I don't know what allowed the change to plain-paper copiers (which use an intermediate photosensitive drum, like a laser printer) but it was probably the expiry of a patent, maybe Xerox's. On Sun, Apr 14, 2024 at 8:02 AM Paul Anderson via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > I have a Versatec interface here somewhere, but I don't remember if it is > for an 8 or 11. > > Paul > > On Sun, Apr 14, 2024 at 1:40 AM Tony Duell via cctalk < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> > wrote: > > > On Sat, Apr 13, 2024 at 10:48 PM Jon Elson via cctalk > > wrote: > > > > > Yes, there were a number of Versatec models for different > > > paper sizes and pixel density. > > > > Does anyone else have one in their collection? > > > > I have an ICL-badged V80 which has a GPIB interface to link it to a > > PERQ. I also have the schematics, etc for the plain V80 but nothing on > > the GPIB interface (ether user or service data). IIRC the V80 is based > > round a Texas 16-bit microprocessor with some AM2900-series sequencers > > and ROMs to control the electrode timing. > > > > As Jon said in the bit I deleted, there's a 'nib electrode' under the > > paper and a segmented backing electrode above it. The charge image is > > built up on the paper, then the toner is flowed over it and the carbon > > (I assume) particles adhere to the charged bits. No drying heater in > > mine. > > > > -tony > > >
[cctalk] Re: Versatec Electrostatic Printers (was :Re: Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems)
I have a Versatec interface here somewhere, but I don't remember if it is for an 8 or 11. Paul On Sun, Apr 14, 2024 at 1:40 AM Tony Duell via cctalk wrote: > On Sat, Apr 13, 2024 at 10:48 PM Jon Elson via cctalk > wrote: > > > Yes, there were a number of Versatec models for different > > paper sizes and pixel density. > > Does anyone else have one in their collection? > > I have an ICL-badged V80 which has a GPIB interface to link it to a > PERQ. I also have the schematics, etc for the plain V80 but nothing on > the GPIB interface (ether user or service data). IIRC the V80 is based > round a Texas 16-bit microprocessor with some AM2900-series sequencers > and ROMs to control the electrode timing. > > As Jon said in the bit I deleted, there's a 'nib electrode' under the > paper and a segmented backing electrode above it. The charge image is > built up on the paper, then the toner is flowed over it and the carbon > (I assume) particles adhere to the charged bits. No drying heater in > mine. > > -tony >
[cctalk] Versatec Electrostatic Printers (was :Re: Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems)
On Sat, Apr 13, 2024 at 10:48 PM Jon Elson via cctalk wrote: > Yes, there were a number of Versatec models for different > paper sizes and pixel density. Does anyone else have one in their collection? I have an ICL-badged V80 which has a GPIB interface to link it to a PERQ. I also have the schematics, etc for the plain V80 but nothing on the GPIB interface (ether user or service data). IIRC the V80 is based round a Texas 16-bit microprocessor with some AM2900-series sequencers and ROMs to control the electrode timing. As Jon said in the bit I deleted, there's a 'nib electrode' under the paper and a segmented backing electrode above it. The charge image is built up on the paper, then the toner is flowed over it and the carbon (I assume) particles adhere to the charged bits. No drying heater in mine. -tony
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems (was: Re: Re: IBM 360)
On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 9:45 AM Christian Kennedy via cctalk wrote: While on the topic of odd IBM mass storage systems, does anyone recall an IBM system that used rotating carousels holding sheets of magnetic material? The carousel would rotate to position the selected sheet into the read/write station, where it would be moved up and down relative to the multiple fixed heads, a weird linear riff on a fixed head disk. Nowhere near as cool, . . . About 30 years ago? (When libraries would DEDICATE a PC for each CDROM that they had) Keith Hensen made a device consisting of a carousel holding 240 CD/CD-ROM/DVDs. It had a name something like "Qubik"? It was in a square box with a smoked plexiglass cover, with a drive at each corner. They were stackable. The drives were SCSI, the carousel controls were RS232. -- Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
[cctalk] Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems (was: Re: Re: IBM 360)
On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 9:45 AM Christian Kennedy via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > While on the topic of odd IBM mass storage systems, does anyone recall > an IBM system that used rotating carousels holding sheets of magnetic > material? The carousel would rotate to position the selected sheet into > the read/write station, where it would be moved up and down relative to > the multiple fixed heads, a weird linear riff on a fixed head disk. > > LBL had one of these systems, installed in the same room as one of the > few examples of the IBM 1360 photo digital storage system. They kept a > broom next to the later in order to sweep up the photo chips when the > thing occasionally spewed them everywhere. > I don't know if you saw it but the video at this link that Len Shustek posted shows a machine very similar to what you describe ==> https://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/102740069 Sellam
[cctalk] Re: The Atomic Energy Commission [was Re: Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems]
On 2024-04-12 7:09 p.m., Rich Alderson via cctalk wrote: Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 15:28:34 -0300 From: Paul Berger via cctalk The 1360 was apparently developed at the request to Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), I would guess a forerunner of the DOE. There where apparently only 5 built 3 for the AEC and 2 for the NSA. The United States Atomic Energy Commission was superseded by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the 1970s. The Department of Energy is not the same thing at all. Rich The Wikipedia article on Department of Energy (DOE) suggests that in 1974 the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) was split into two organizations the Nuclear Regulatory Commision (NRC) and the other for energy research and development and I believe this is what is now known as the DOE. I book I found information on the IBM 1360 indicates 3 where sold to the AEC and one was installed at Livermore and another at Los Alamos both of which I am pretty sure are DOE facilities now. So it would seem that the AEC was the ancestor for both the DOE and the NRC. Paul.
[cctalk] Re: The Atomic Energy Commission [was Re: Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems]
On Fri, 2024-04-12 at 18:09 -0400, Rich Alderson via cctalk wrote: > > Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 15:28:34 -0300From: Paul Berger via cctalk < > > cctalk@classiccmp.org> > > The 1360 was apparently developed at the request to Atomic Energy > > Commission(AEC), I would guess a forerunner of the DOE. There > > where apparently only5 built 3 for the AEC and 2 for the NSA. > > The United States Atomic Energy Commission was superseded by the > NuclearRegulatory Commission in the 1970s. The Department of Energy > is not the samething at all. > Rich AEC was split up into NRC, mostly now composed of attorneys, gynecologists, architects, and theologians, who see it as their duty to suppress nuclear power, and (initially) ERDA, or Energy Research and Development Agency. ERDA became DoE. So DoE is, along with NRC, a descendant of AEC.
[cctalk] The Atomic Energy Commission [was Re: Re: Odd IBM mass storage systems]
> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 15:28:34 -0300 > From: Paul Berger via cctalk > The 1360 was apparently developed at the request to Atomic Energy Commission > (AEC), I would guess a forerunner of the DOE. There where apparently only > 5 built 3 for the AEC and 2 for the NSA. The United States Atomic Energy Commission was superseded by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the 1970s. The Department of Energy is not the same thing at all. Rich
[cctalk] Odd IBM mass storage systems (was: Re: Re: IBM 360)
On 4/12/24 05:31, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote [snip] Yes. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_2321_Data_Cell . By the standards of the time it was an unusually high capacity storage device, way faster than a room full of tapes and much larger than the 2311 disk drive. While on the topic of odd IBM mass storage systems, does anyone recall an IBM system that used rotating carousels holding sheets of magnetic material? The carousel would rotate to position the selected sheet into the read/write station, where it would be moved up and down relative to the multiple fixed heads, a weird linear riff on a fixed head disk. LBL had one of these systems, installed in the same room as one of the few examples of the IBM 1360 photo digital storage system. They kept a broom next to the later in order to sweep up the photo chips when the thing occasionally spewed them everywhere. -- Christian Kennedy, Ph.D. ch...@mainecoon.com AF6AP | DB0692 | PG00029419 http://www.mainecoon.comPGP KeyID 108DAB97 PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97 "Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration…"
[cctalk] Re: Ball Brothers (was: Re: Re: Silly question about S-100 and video monitors)
On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 1:09 PM Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > > > On Sep 1, 2023, at 3:23 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > On 9/1/23 11:58, Christian Kennedy via cctalk wrote: > > > >> At one point in the late 1970's, some division of Ball ended up buying > >> the firm that did contract maintenance on our Novas and 16 bit > >> Eclipses. After the purchase the quality of the work took a nosedive, > >> which led to one of my coworkers observing "Well, it kinda makes sense > >> when you consider that they also make the garbage cans in the parking > lot". > > > > A friend employed by Ball Aerospace used to receive every year, at > > Christmastime, a box of holiday-themed mason jars. Of course, Ball has > > long-since spun off its glass jar operation, although the Ball brand > > continues. > > That's a bit like Coors, which makes beer and high quality ceramics. > > paul > Panasonic enters the conversation... Sellam
[cctalk] Re: Ball Brothers (was: Re: Re: Silly question about S-100 and video monitors)
> On Sep 1, 2023, at 3:23 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk > wrote: > > On 9/1/23 11:58, Christian Kennedy via cctalk wrote: > >> At one point in the late 1970's, some division of Ball ended up buying >> the firm that did contract maintenance on our Novas and 16 bit >> Eclipses. After the purchase the quality of the work took a nosedive, >> which led to one of my coworkers observing "Well, it kinda makes sense >> when you consider that they also make the garbage cans in the parking lot". > > A friend employed by Ball Aerospace used to receive every year, at > Christmastime, a box of holiday-themed mason jars. Of course, Ball has > long-since spun off its glass jar operation, although the Ball brand > continues. That's a bit like Coors, which makes beer and high quality ceramics. paul
[cctalk] Re: Ball Brothers (was: Re: Re: Silly question about S-100 and video monitors)
On 9/1/23 11:58, Christian Kennedy via cctalk wrote: > At one point in the late 1970's, some division of Ball ended up buying > the firm that did contract maintenance on our Novas and 16 bit > Eclipses. After the purchase the quality of the work took a nosedive, > which led to one of my coworkers observing "Well, it kinda makes sense > when you consider that they also make the garbage cans in the parking lot". A friend employed by Ball Aerospace used to receive every year, at Christmastime, a box of holiday-themed mason jars. Of course, Ball has long-since spun off its glass jar operation, although the Ball brand continues. An icon in Muncie, IN for many years, Ball State University was the result of the Ball brothers' commitment to the community. Used to be Ball State Teachers College, known by many as "Testicle Tech". --Chuck
[cctalk] Ball Brothers (was: Re: Re: Silly question about S-100 and video monitors)
On 9/1/23 10:42, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: But then we also have Ball Brothers, they of the canning (Mason) jars, going into aerospace and making OEM "kit" monitors... At one point in the late 1970's, some division of Ball ended up buying the firm that did contract maintenance on our Novas and 16 bit Eclipses. After the purchase the quality of the work took a nosedive, which led to one of my coworkers observing "Well, it kinda makes sense when you consider that they also make the garbage cans in the parking lot". -- Christian Kennedy, Ph.D. ch...@mainecoon.com AF6AP | DB0692 | PG00029419 http://www.mainecoon.comPGP KeyID 108DAB97 PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97 "Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration…"
[cctalk] Re: Draper, wsa: Re: Re: Death of Mitnick
On Thu, Jul 20, 2023, 10:42 AM Christian Kennedy via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > On 7/20/23 04:49, John Foust via cctalk wrote: > > [snip] > > Chuck's only saying that because he wasn't invited to "work out." > > Those of us who received such invites should form a club or somethin'. > Wow. I guess I never researched him lately and hadn't heard any of those allegations. I'm still curious about the potential new documentary about him and the phreaking scene though. I think it's a Kickstarter or something. I guess one would need to check if the money is going to a production company vs internet bills.
[cctalk] Re: Draper, wsa: Re: Re: Death of Mitnick
So, I was an acquaintance of John Draper, rather than a survivor, because I never work out. Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com On Thu, 20 Jul 2023, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote: Very well then: Survivors of John Draper and Grumpy Ol' Fred That implies that there are survivors of Grumpy Ol' Fred! Have you been talking to my former students? On Thu, 20 Jul 2023, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote: Survivors of John Draper, and Grumpy Ol' Fred Not sure if that is a bona fide example of the Oxford Comma at work, but nonetheless I hope it clarifies the matter. It's not exactly "the Oxford comma",but it is a little clearer. I am reasonably sure that there are no survivors of Grumpy Ol' Fred Since there are a few people here with computer programming backgrounds, . . . (Survivors of John Draper) and Grumpy Ol' Fred works less ambiguously
[cctalk] Re: Draper, wsa: Re: Re: Death of Mitnick
On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 3:34 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: > > So, I was an acquaintance of John Draper, rather than a survivor, because > >> I never work out. > >> -- > >> Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com > > On Thu, 20 Jul 2023, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote: > > Very well then: > > > > Survivors of John Draper and Grumpy Ol' Fred > > That implies that there are survivors of Grumpy Ol' Fred! > Have you been talking to my former students? > Survivors of John Draper, and Grumpy Ol' Fred Not sure if that is a bona fide example of the Oxford Comma at work, but nonetheless I hope it clarifies the matter. > > To be fair to him, he seems to have mellowed out in his later years. > And I > > hate to imagine the abuse he suffered as a child that made him who he > > became. He's definitely a special individual, very talented and > > intellectually gifted, but most likely misunderstood as a boy, and > probably > > didn't come from a very loving home environment. > > Well, I'm not cute enough for him not to accept a simple "no, thank you". > > He has always had some issues with social interactions. I'm guessing > Aspergers. But, other than the tantrum at my office about thinking he > smelled a cigarette, he's always treated me OK. Sorry for those who > weren't. > I should make a shirt: I GOT INVITED TO "SHARE MASSAGES" WITH JOHN DRAPER BUT FORTUNATELY ALL I GOT WAS THIS T-SHIRT. Sellam
[cctalk] Re: Draper, wsa: Re: Re: Death of Mitnick
So, I was an acquaintance of John Draper, rather than a survivor, because I never work out. -- Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com On Thu, 20 Jul 2023, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote: Very well then: Survivors of John Draper and Grumpy Ol' Fred That implies that there are survivors of Grumpy Ol' Fred! Have you been talking to my former students? To be fair to him, he seems to have mellowed out in his later years. And I hate to imagine the abuse he suffered as a child that made him who he became. He's definitely a special individual, very talented and intellectually gifted, but most likely misunderstood as a boy, and probably didn't come from a very loving home environment. Well, I'm not cute enough for him not to accept a simple "no, thank you". He has always had some issues with social interactions. I'm guessing Aspergers. But, other than the tantrum at my office about thinking he smelled a cigarette, he's always treated me OK. Sorry for those who weren't. -- Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
[cctalk] Re: Draper, wsa: Re: Re: Death of Mitnick
On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 3:09 PM Chuck Guzis via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > John has a twitter account and he's apparently hit on hard times, asking > for contributions so he can keep his Internet service... > > --Chuck > That's pretty much par for the course with him. Sellam
[cctalk] Re: Draper, wsa: Re: Re: Death of Mitnick
On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 2:15 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: > >> [snip] > >>> Chuck's only saying that because he wasn't invited to "work out." > >> > >> Those of us who received such invites should form a club or somethin'. > > On Thu, 20 Jul 2023, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote: > > Survivors of John Draper > > So, I was an acquaintance of John Draper, rather than a survivor, because > I never work out. > -- > Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com Very well then: Survivors of John Draper and Grumpy Ol' Fred To be fair to him, he seems to have mellowed out in his later years. And I hate to imagine the abuse he suffered as a child that made him who he became. He's definitely a special individual, very talented and intellectually gifted, but most likely misunderstood as a boy, and probably didn't come from a very loving home environment. Sellam Sellam
[cctalk] Re: Draper, wsa: Re: Re: Death of Mitnick
On 7/20/23 14:14, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: > So, I was an acquaintance of John Draper, rather than a survivor, > because I never work out. > John has a twitter account and he's apparently hit on hard times, asking for contributions so he can keep his Internet service... --Chuck
[cctalk] Re: Draper, wsa: Re: Re: Death of Mitnick
[snip] Chuck's only saying that because he wasn't invited to "work out." Those of us who received such invites should form a club or somethin'. On Thu, 20 Jul 2023, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote: Survivors of John Draper I ran into John Draper often. When I got my PC Technical Reference Manual, but had not yet received a PC, I visited him in the gated community (to keep people out, not a prison) near the Caldicott Tunnel. We spent a couple of hours with the manual, and wrote trivial programs, such as putting characters on the screen with Int10h. He gave me a copy of the SCP assembler. We did not work out. At NCC in 1983, (when it was too hot for the tents), booth idiots at both Intertec/Superbrain and Telvideo told me that they would sue me if I included their disk formats in XenoCopy, because they could not understand any reason to transfer files between disk formats other than to steal their proprietary software. I added both format that night. I bought John lunch, and over air conditioned diner food, he told me the basics and directory structure for p-system disks. Very worthwhile for me. We did not work out. One time, he visited me at my office. At one point, he had a temper tantrum, yelling at people in the lobby of the building, because he thought that he smelled a cigarette. I did not invite him back. We did not work out. So, I was an acquaintance of John Draper, rather than a survivor, because I never work out. -- Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
[cctalk] Re: Draper, wsa: Re: Re: Death of Mitnick
On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 8:42 AM Christian Kennedy via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > On 7/20/23 04:49, John Foust via cctalk wrote: > > [snip] > > Chuck's only saying that because he wasn't invited to "work out." > > Those of us who received such invites should form a club or somethin'. > > -- > Christian Kennedy, Ph.D. > Survivors of John Draper Sellam
[cctalk] Re: Draper, wsa: Re: Re: Death of Mitnick
I have a funny video of a bunch us including John at the DigiBarn about 20 years ago. Dan Kotke (sp?), Steve Russell, a few others. On Thu, Jul 20, 2023, 11:42 AM Christian Kennedy via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > On 7/20/23 04:49, John Foust via cctalk wrote: > > [snip] > > Chuck's only saying that because he wasn't invited to "work out." > > Those of us who received such invites should form a club or somethin'. > > > -- > Christian Kennedy, Ph.D. > ch...@mainecoon.com AF6AP | DB0692 | PG00029419 > http://www.mainecoon.comPGP KeyID 108DAB97 > PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97 > "Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration…" > >
[cctalk] Draper, wsa: Re: Re: Death of Mitnick
On 7/20/23 04:49, John Foust via cctalk wrote: [snip] Chuck's only saying that because he wasn't invited to "work out." Those of us who received such invites should form a club or somethin'. -- Christian Kennedy, Ph.D. ch...@mainecoon.com AF6AP | DB0692 | PG00029419 http://www.mainecoon.comPGP KeyID 108DAB97 PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97 "Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration…"
[cctalk] Re: Station wagons (was: Re: Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.)
On 6/2/23 09:25, Hans-Ulrich Hölscher via cctalk wrote: > We're running two VOLVO 940 station wagons on LPG. Best cars we ever had! Yup. Owned a 940. The problems I had wee mostly with (a) too many plastic parts and (b) lead-free solder. I reworked the relay box using good old leaded solder, but never did get around to fixing the sound system. --Chuck
[cctalk] Re: Station wagons (was: Re: Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.)
We're running two VOLVO 940 station wagons on LPG. Best cars we ever had! Ulli Adrian Stoness via cctalk schrieb am Fr., 2. Juni 2023, 17:15: > volvo 245 and mercedes w123 wagons were the best tanks for wgons > > On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 6:51 PM Chuck Guzis via cctalk < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> > wrote: > > > On 6/1/23 16:43, Christian Kennedy via cctalk wrote: > > > > > > On 6/1/23 16:37, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: > > >> I'm sorry but Audi does not make a lowly station wagon😲 > > > > > > I don't know about that. My wife's Q7 sure looks like a station wagon > > > to me. > > > > > Mike did say " lowly" station wagon. For that matter, there's the > > Porsche Taycan Cross. > > The Volvo V90 Cross Country certainly does look like a wagon. > > As does the Mercedes E450 All-Terrain. > > > > Granted, none of them look like a Ford Country Squire, but progress... > > > > --Chuck > > > > >
[cctalk] Re: Station wagons (was: Re: Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.)
volvo 245 and mercedes w123 wagons were the best tanks for wgons On Thu, Jun 1, 2023 at 6:51 PM Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: > On 6/1/23 16:43, Christian Kennedy via cctalk wrote: > > > > On 6/1/23 16:37, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: > >> I'm sorry but Audi does not make a lowly station wagon😲 > > > > I don't know about that. My wife's Q7 sure looks like a station wagon > > to me. > > > Mike did say " lowly" station wagon. For that matter, there's the > Porsche Taycan Cross. > The Volvo V90 Cross Country certainly does look like a wagon. > As does the Mercedes E450 All-Terrain. > > Granted, none of them look like a Ford Country Squire, but progress... > > --Chuck > >
[cctalk] Re: Station wagons (was: Re: Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.)
On 6/1/23 16:43, Christian Kennedy via cctalk wrote: > > On 6/1/23 16:37, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: >> I'm sorry but Audi does not make a lowly station wagon😲 > > I don't know about that. My wife's Q7 sure looks like a station wagon > to me. > Mike did say " lowly" station wagon. For that matter, there's the Porsche Taycan Cross. The Volvo V90 Cross Country certainly does look like a wagon. As does the Mercedes E450 All-Terrain. Granted, none of them look like a Ford Country Squire, but progress... --Chuck
[cctalk] Station wagons (was: Re: Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.)
On 6/1/23 16:37, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: I'm sorry but Audi does not make a lowly station wagon😲 I don't know about that. My wife's Q7 sure looks like a station wagon to me. -- Christian Kennedy, Ph.D. ch...@mainecoon.com AF6AP | DB0692 | PG00029419 http://www.mainecoon.comPGP KeyID 108DAB97 PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97 "Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration…"
[cctalk] MCAS (was: Re: Re: ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.)
On 5/25/23 12:30, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: ...and we still get gems like the Boeing 737MAX... I get your point, but it's a bad example. MCAS worked precisely as specified, and while one could have a discussion regarding if those specifications were wrong, the logic was that a MCAS failure was indistinguishable from any other 737 trim runaway and was to be handled in the same fashion. Perhaps this is an example of Brooks' observation that most bugs in software are in fact bugs in specification. I can even sorta understand the thought processes behind the specs. While there were two hull losses, there have been many, many, many more MCAS failures; the only time they resulted in holes in the ground is when the trim runaway procedures weren't followed -- that being a sort of sobering thought given that there are all sorts of other things that can lead to that happening beyond MCAS. -- Christian Kennedy, Ph.D. ch...@mainecoon.com AF6AP | DB0692 | PG00029419 http://www.mainecoon.comPGP KeyID 108DAB97 PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97 "Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration…"
[cctalk] Re: Atari PLATO was Re: Re: Age of Tape Formats?
On 3/13/23 14:00, Cameron Kaiser via cctalk wrote:
>> Was there any PLATO/NovaNet arrangements with Atari like
>> there was for Texas Instruments computers?
>
> Yes, though not exactly. The TI implementation was a true, full Micro-TUTOR
> runtime that ran Off-Line System lessons directly. Atari had a PLATO cartridge
> that could connect to a server via modem ("PLATO Homelink") and was arguably
> more functional than the contemporary PC Homelink, but the Micro-PLATO (*not*
> Micro-TUTOR) lessons on floppy disk for Apple II and Atari were ported to the
> 6502 and had no runtime or interpreter per se.
I've got a Plato disk for an IBM PC, but it's kind of useless nowadays.
--Chuck
[cctalk] Atari PLATO was Re: Re: Age of Tape Formats?
> Was there any PLATO/NovaNet arrangements with Atari like
> there was for Texas Instruments computers?
Yes, though not exactly. The TI implementation was a true, full Micro-TUTOR
runtime that ran Off-Line System lessons directly. Atari had a PLATO cartridge
that could connect to a server via modem ("PLATO Homelink") and was arguably
more functional than the contemporary PC Homelink, but the Micro-PLATO (*not*
Micro-TUTOR) lessons on floppy disk for Apple II and Atari were ported to the
6502 and had no runtime or interpreter per se.
--
personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckai...@floodgap.com
-- You are not ready! -
[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus (was: Re: Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man)
On Wed, 1 Feb 2023, skogkatt...@yahoo.com wrote: You stop being rude you big burly baby. Get a life. I'm not your hobby, as hard as you're trying to make me so. *PLONK*
[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus (was: Re: Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man)
Plonk! -- Will On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 8:47 AM Chris via cctalk wrote: > > You stop being rude you big burly baby. Get a life. I'm not your hobby, as > hard as you're trying to make me so. > > > On Wednesday, February 1, 2023, 03:37:20 AM EST, Christian Corti via > cctalk wrote: > > On Tue, 31 Jan 2023, skogkatt...@yahoo.com wrote: > > separating the 2. So please stop complaining. Learn to adapt and > > overcome. > > Stop being rude and adapt to the standard! > Quotation is done with a ">" (one for each level) at the beginning of a > line, the indention block is superseded with the author, like this: > > > On Tuesday, January 31, 2023, 06:30:18 AM EST, Liam Proven > > via cctalk wrote: > >> On Wed, 25 Jan 2023 at 08:09, Christian Corti via cctalk > >> wrote: > [...] > > You see? All good mail clients will do this automatically. > > Christian >
[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus (was: Re: Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man)
You stop being rude you big burly baby. Get a life. I'm not your hobby, as hard as you're trying to make me so. On Wednesday, February 1, 2023, 03:37:20 AM EST, Christian Corti via cctalk wrote: On Tue, 31 Jan 2023, skogkatt...@yahoo.com wrote: > separating the 2. So please stop complaining. Learn to adapt and > overcome. Stop being rude and adapt to the standard! Quotation is done with a ">" (one for each level) at the beginning of a line, the indention block is superseded with the author, like this: > On Tuesday, January 31, 2023, 06:30:18 AM EST, Liam Proven > via cctalk wrote: >> On Wed, 25 Jan 2023 at 08:09, Christian Corti via cctalk >> wrote: [...] You see? All good mail clients will do this automatically. Christian
[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus (was: Re: Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man)
On Tue, 31 Jan 2023, skogkatt...@yahoo.com wrote: separating the 2. So please stop complaining. Learn to adapt and overcome. Stop being rude and adapt to the standard! Quotation is done with a ">" (one for each level) at the beginning of a line, the indention block is superseded with the author, like this: On Tuesday, January 31, 2023, 06:30:18 AM EST, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote: On Wed, 25 Jan 2023 at 08:09, Christian Corti via cctalk wrote: [...] You see? All good mail clients will do this automatically. Christian
[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus (was: Re: Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man)
On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 at 13:14, Chris via cctalk wrote: > > I take pains to clearly differentiate what I'm saying from what I'm quoting > (and usually on a phone). All the while I have to struggle readimg others > mish mosh, often there not even being a single line separating the 2. So > please stop complaining. Learn to adapt and overcome. Well, frankly: no. Get better tools, such as K9 Mail which bottom-posts fine on Android devices. Or do what I do: occasionally read mailing lists on my phone, but I don't respond from my phone unless it's an emergency. I mark-unread stuff I want to read later. -- Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lpro...@gmail.com Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven UK: (+44) 7939-087884 ~ Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053
[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus (was: Re: Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man)
I take pains to clearly differentiate what I'm saying from what I'm quoting (and usually on a phone). All the while I have to struggle readimg others mish mosh, often there not even being a single line separating the 2. So please stop complaining. Learn to adapt and overcome. On Tuesday, January 31, 2023, 06:30:18 AM EST, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote: On Wed, 25 Jan 2023 at 08:09, Christian Corti via cctalk wrote: > > Chris, can you *please* correctly indent and cite messages you are > referring to? I am getting annoyed by guessing what part is from whom. Agreed. It's dead easy if you're using Gmail. I am doing it right now in the standard web client. If you use Yahoo or other Oath services, or any MS client, then point Thunderbird at it. -- Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lpro...@gmail.com Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven UK: (+44) 7939-087884 ~ Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053
[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus (was: Re: Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man)
On Wed, 25 Jan 2023 at 08:09, Christian Corti via cctalk wrote: > > Chris, can you *please* correctly indent and cite messages you are > referring to? I am getting annoyed by guessing what part is from whom. Agreed. It's dead easy if you're using Gmail. I am doing it right now in the standard web client. If you use Yahoo or other Oath services, or any MS client, then point Thunderbird at it. -- Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lpro...@gmail.com Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven UK: (+44) 7939-087884 ~ Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053
[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus (was: Re: Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man)
Chris, can you *please* correctly indent and cite messages you are referring to? I am getting annoyed by guessing what part is from whom. Christian On Tue, 24 Jan 2023, skogkatt...@yahoo.com wrote: On Monday, January 23, 2023, 09:58:07 PM EST, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: sorry, never had one. Chuck might know the cookie coercivity specs! 8" and 5.25" were 300 Oersted 5.25" HD was 600 Oersted I think that 720K 3.5" was about 600 Oersted and 1.4M was about 720-750, being close enough that that was why you could sometimes get away with using a 720K disk as a 1.4M https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disk_density has a chart, but not sure if all of the sources are reliable and does not include 2.5" C: Remember though they are 2" disks. And shootimg from the hip, if coercivity wasn't on spec, would a) would that pose a threat to the disk dribe's circuitry. And b) could the circuit be tweaked to work with what's there. I'm not sure how this could be worked out, but it seems to me there could be a way to modify a drive so that it could measure a disk's coercivity. There was that scene in the Jackal where a hacker woman claimed she could read a card's magnetic strip with a disk drive. I guess it's possible the more I think about it.
[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus (was: Re: Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man)
The 2" LT-1 disk was apparently also made by Panasonic. Wondering if other devices used it.
[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus (was: Re: Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man)
On 1/24/2023 4:25 AM, Christian Corti via cctalk wrote: On Mon, 23 Jan 2023, Don R wrote: From NYT website: You?ve reached your limit of free articles. Purchase a subscription yadda-yadda Delete your cookies and web site caches ;-) (hint: install "Cookie Autodelete" browser add on) An easier solution is to stop reading the NYT. bill
[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus (was: Re: Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man)
On Tue, 24 Jan 2023, Chris via cctalk wrote:
C: Remember though they are 2" disks. And shootimg from the hip, if
coercivity wasn't on spec, would a) would that pose a threat to the disk
dribe's circuitry.
no, wrong coercivity won't hurt the drive.
When the college purchasing agent was sleeping with the Roytype salesman,
they gave us HD (1.2M/600Oe) disks for the TRS80s. Disk would format and
write, seemingly OK. A few minutes later, it was blank again.
("Good morning Mister Phelps; if you or the Mission Impossible team are
captured, we will disavow all knowledge. This message will
self-destruct.")
And b) could the circuit be tweaked to work with what's there.
possibly. different level of write current, etc.
I'm not sure how this could be worked out, but it seems to me there
could be a way to modify a drive so that it could measure a disk's
coercivity.
Try different write currents, and see what the thresholds are?
Knowing what it already has for a write current might give a clue.
There was that scene in the Jackal where a hacker woman claimed she
could read a card's magnetic strip with a disk drive. I guess it's
possible the more I think about it.
I think that a tape recorder head might work for a BART card, . . .
[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus (was: Re: Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man)
On Monday, January 23, 2023, 09:58:07 PM EST, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: sorry, never had one. Chuck might know the cookie coercivity specs! 8" and 5.25" were 300 Oersted 5.25" HD was 600 Oersted I think that 720K 3.5" was about 600 Oersted and 1.4M was about 720-750, being close enough that that was why you could sometimes get away with using a 720K disk as a 1.4M https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disk_density has a chart, but not sure if all of the sources are reliable and does not include 2.5" C: Remember though they are 2" disks. And shootimg from the hip, if coercivity wasn't on spec, would a) would that pose a threat to the disk dribe's circuitry. And b) could the circuit be tweaked to work with what's there. I'm not sure how this could be worked out, but it seems to me there could be a way to modify a drive so that it could measure a disk's coercivity. There was that scene in the Jackal where a hacker woman claimed she could read a card's magnetic strip with a disk drive. I guess it's possible the more I think about it.
[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus (was: Re: Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man)
Ah come on Jim fess up. You bought too many bags of gonja that way. Like the rest of us. This schnitzel is too funny. And cheap floppys are still like crack to this day. To some of us anyway.
[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus (was: Re: Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man)
On Mon, 23 Jan 2023, Don R wrote: From NYT website: You?ve reached your limit of free articles. Purchase a subscription yadda-yadda Delete your cookies and web site caches ;-) (hint: install "Cookie Autodelete" browser add on) Christian
[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus (was: Re: Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man)
On Mon, 23 Jan 2023, Mike Stein wrote: I think the issue of finding media tends to be a little overstated. I offered some 8" diskettes a while back and didn't have a single inquiry, and there doesn't seem to be a real shortage of other sizes either if you don't mind sorting through used ones; even paper and mylar tape seem to still be available. I agree. My stock of floppy disks has become so large that I am not even looking after such media any more. And I don't even accept 3.5" HD disks any more, if offered. As to the reliability of mechanical devices, again, to each his/her own; what is a frustrating experience for someone trying to get something done is an opportunity for someone else to repair it and get that satisfaction. At least, unlike some mysterious custom IC you can see what the problem is and repair it. The point of classic computing (and other fields of course), for me, is this feeling of satisfaction after a repair or after finding out how to operate and run a system. Christian
[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus (was: Re: Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man)
> > From NYT website: > > You’ve reached your limit of free articles. > > Purchase a subscription yadda-yadda > > THET! :) > > Don Resor https://sf.funcheap.com/city-guide/ny-times-free/ Problem solved and completely legal... -Ali
[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus (was: Re: Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man)
On Mon, 23 Jan 2023, Jim Brain via cctalk wrote: For some reason, the whole buy in bulk and cut down to smaller sizes and sell just seemed so underworldly to me. You drove over to a friend's home, flashed a bit of cash, and someone would snag it and lay a plastic baggie of disks (literally. To save money, I remember they skipped boxes for plastic bags of 10) into your hand. You quickly went back to the car and drove away. Sometimes, the exchange happened at an event or in front of a frequented store. It felt dishonest in some way. I must have watched too many drug films/TV shows at the time. Well, if you were really worried about what it looked like to the neighbors, you could have hidden the disks inside a bag of pot.
[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus (was: Re: Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man)
On 1/23/2023 9:04 PM, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote: On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 6:17 PM Jim Brain via cctalk wrote: On 1/23/2023 7:58 PM, Chris via cctalk wrote: That brings back memories (pun maybe intended). In the late 1980s, you could buy 5.25 DSDD in bulk for $USD0.29/disk, but you had to buy in bulk. So, clubs would buy, or someone would snag 100 or 200 and then dole them out for a bit of profit. I did that a couple times: bought 50 at a time for maybe 35 cents each? Something like that. They worked (and continue to work) great. Sellam For some reason, the whole buy in bulk and cut down to smaller sizes and sell just seemed so underworldly to me. You drove over to a friend's home, flashed a bit of cash, and someone would snag it and lay a plastic baggie of disks (literally. To save money, I remember they skipped boxes for plastic bags of 10) into your hand. You quickly went back to the car and drove away. Sometimes, the exchange happened at an event or in front of a frequented store. It felt dishonest in some way. I must have watched too many drug films/TV shows at the time. Jim -- Jim Brain br...@jbrain.com www.jbrain.com
[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus (was: Re: Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man)
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 6:17 PM Jim Brain via cctalk wrote: > On 1/23/2023 7:58 PM, Chris via cctalk wrote: > That brings back memories (pun maybe intended). In the late 1980s, you > could buy 5.25 DSDD in bulk for $USD0.29/disk, but you had to buy in > bulk. So, clubs would buy, or someone would snag 100 or 200 and then > dole them out for a bit of profit. > I did that a couple times: bought 50 at a time for maybe 35 cents each? Something like that. They worked (and continue to work) great. Sellam
