Re: does a reverse-engineering EDA tool exist?

At 10:06 PM 24/10/2018 -0500, you wrote: >On 10/24/2018 04:25 PM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote: >> To draw out the schematics for the Displaywriter I have a bunch of boards to >> trace out, >> and I don't want to do the usual "scribble on yellow pad" >> to do it. Has someone written a graphical tool

Re: does a reverse-engineering EDA tool exist?

On Oct 24, 2018, at 2:25 PM, Al Kossow via cctech wrote: > What I would like to find is a tool that puts up a bunch of footprints with > internal IC functions > shown, then a way to rapidly enter the buzzed out interconnections, > generating a netlist. > > This is exactly backwards workflow f

Re: High res e-readers

Kobo have a quite plain Linux, run on iMX processors, and are very easy to modify/script, and last but not least, to unbrick in case of severe problems. In many models, the internal memory is an SD card, so it can be expanded easily. Then you have also external SD. On the software side, try koread

Re: does a reverse-engineering EDA tool exist?

On 10/24/18 8:06 PM, Jon Elson via cctalk wrote: > Hmmm, you COULD actually use a schematic tool to do this!  Maybe create > the components to look like DIPs.  I know I could do this in Protel 99 > without a great deal of trouble.  Then, just draw in all the wires. > I suspect a few other good sch

Re: VAX Lisp, Macsyma, Maxima

On Oct 24, 2018, at 4:07 PM, David Coolbear via cctech wrote: > Does anyone know if any of these are still available for OpenVMS VAX? I don't know what "available" means in this context. But: VAX Lisp wasn't among the set of hobbyist licenses I got from HP last August. They did send me one wh

Re: VAX Lisp, Macsyma, Maxima

On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 4:07 PM David Coolbear via cctech wrote: > > Does anyone know if any of these are still available for OpenVMS VAX? 917AA VAX LISP/VMS [LISP030] or [LISP031] was on VMS Consolidated Software Distribution CD sets from at least Jan-1990 to May-1993 I have [LISP031] that I mu

Re: VAX Lisp, Macsyma, Maxima

> On Oct 24, 2018, at 4:07 PM, David Coolbear via cctech > wrote: > > Does anyone know if any of these are still available for OpenVMS VAX? Part of the problem will be licensing, I think that I have copies of VAX Lisp, but I don’t think that it’s included with the hobbyist PAKs. Zane Sent

VAX Lisp, Macsyma, Maxima

Does anyone know if any of these are still available for OpenVMS VAX?

Re: does a reverse-engineering EDA tool exist?

On 10/24/2018 04:25 PM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote: To draw out the schematics for the Displaywriter I have a bunch of boards to trace out, and I don't want to do the usual "scribble on yellow pad" to do it. Has someone written a graphical tool for doing this? What I would like to find is a too

Re: 70's computers

On 10/24/2018 01:11 PM, ben via cctalk wrote: On 10/24/2018 10:31 AM, Marc Howard via cctalk wrote: You know that since you mentioned possibly using CMOS 22V10's why not just build a board around AMD 29XX bit slice parts. They actually predate 22V10's by quite a bit and you can pretty much imp

Re: 70's computers

On 10/24/2018 12:01 PM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote: On 10/24/18 8:57 AM, Jon Elson via cctalk wrote: Yeah, basically a PDP-8 with a wider word. Four accumulators, and no memory pages Yes, and the accumulators could hold addresses, which was a big plus. But, still, storing the subroutine ret

Re: Advice needed: Entry point into things PDP-8

Ethan Dicks wrote: On Mon, Oct 22, 2018 at 10:39 PM Carlos E Murillo-Sanchez via cctalk wrote: you. The thing is, I would like to have something pdp8-ish that would allow me to play a little bit with the programming languages that were available for these machines, FORTRAN 4K and FORTRAN IV in

Action Computer Enterprise and ADES

Anyone have any manuals or software for an ACE 1600? Or manuals for an ADES hard drive? I've had this one in storage for a while, but it seems fairly interesting and possibly complete. http://imgur.com/a/KR83Okw Thanks, Kyle

Re: Teletype cheap

I hate being on the [south]east coast. On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 9:56 PM Bill Degnan via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > https://www.ebay.com/itm/Teletype-Machine-Model-3320-3WA-Teletypewriter-AS-IS-FOR-PARTS-local-pick-up/142981290439?hash=item214a5959c7:g:UXoAAOSwmXJbylEN:rk:6:pf:1&frc

Teletype cheap

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Teletype-Machine-Model-3320-3WA-Teletypewriter-AS-IS-FOR-PARTS-local-pick-up/142981290439?hash=item214a5959c7:g:UXoAAOSwmXJbylEN:rk:6:pf:1&frcectupt=true b

Re: does a reverse-engineering EDA tool exist?

On 10/24/18 5:41 PM, Guy Dunphy wrote: > A: Yes. But god knows what it costs. > > http://scancad.net/products/pcb-design-fabrication/pcb-reverse-engineering > ScanFAB is a fully integrated, stand-alone, scanner- based re-engineering > system that permits the creation of CAD data (DXF/Gerber/D

Re: does a reverse-engineering EDA tool exist?

At 02:25 PM 24/10/2018 -0700, you wrote: >To draw out the schematics for the Displaywriter I have a bunch of boards to >trace out, >and I don't want to do the usual "scribble on yellow pad" >to do it. Has someone written a graphical tool for doing this? > >What I would like to find is a tool that

Re: modern stuff

On Wed, Oct 24, 2018, 17:58 Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > > What about Intel's forgotten object oriented kitchen sink processor. > > IAPX-432 better or worse? > > Ben. > > Was that the one designed around Ada? > No, but it's the one that Intel's marketing department said was designed for Ada.

Re: modern stuff

On Wed, Oct 24, 2018, 17:45 ben via cctalk wrote: > On 10/24/2018 3:58 PM, Eric Smith wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 2:18 PM ben via cctalk > > wrote: > > > > Well I can still run DOS BOX and get my nice 8086 instruction set. > > > > > > I've heard many diff

Re: modern stuff

> On Oct 24, 2018, at 7:45 PM, ben via cctalk wrote: > > On 10/24/2018 3:58 PM, Eric Smith wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 2:18 PM ben via cctalk > > wrote: >>Well I can still run DOS BOX and get my nice 8086 instruction set. >> I've heard many different adj

Re: Not really vintage computing, but just in case it's of interest to anyone..

Message: 103 Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2018 09:46:35 -0700 From: Al Kossow To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: Re: Not really vintage computing, but just in case it's of interest to anyone.. Message-ID: <8e90dfc4-8cc2-9d33-9031-52ad4690e...@bitsavers.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 On

Re: modern stuff

On 10/24/2018 3:58 PM, Eric Smith wrote: On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 2:18 PM ben via cctalk > wrote: Well I can still run DOS BOX and get my nice 8086 instruction set. I've heard many different adjectives used with regard to the 8086 instruction set, but this is

Re: modern stuff

It was thus said that the Great ben via cctalk once stated: > On 10/24/2018 12:31 PM, Paul Koning wrote: > > >It's true that the original 8086 instruction set lives on with all its > >warts, and many more added over the years. And yes, I guess that you > >*can* run them in 32 bit segmented mode

Re: does a reverse-engineering EDA tool exist?

I've gone through this a few times myself. There are a few approaches. One is to use a schematic tool like Kicad to place all the ICs first, then add the wires and rearrange things as you buzz out the connections. Another approach uses an intermediate step where you enter all the buzzed out conne

UNIX - An Open Solution

I recently came across an eight-volume set of comb-bound, A4-sized booklets titled "UNIX - An Open Solution", by Mick Farmer and Richard Murphy. In trying to uncover more info about them, I found Mick Farmer's old home page: http://www.plan7.co.uk/mick.html. The books are mentioned there with th

Re: modern stuff

On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 2:18 PM ben via cctalk wrote: > Well I can still run DOS BOX and get my nice 8086 instruction set. > I've heard many different adjectives used with regard to the 8086 instruction set, but this is the first time I've heard it described as "nice". Admittedly there are wors

RE: Astounding Asking Price

On Wed, 24 Oct 2018, Rob Jarratt via cctalk wrote: > > Instant alarm bells to me are a seller posting a London address but the > > item is > > 'for pickup only in Budapest, Hungary' > > Yes I noticed that too. Very odd, and £750 to ship to the UK!! They just chose to pay taxes in the UK and/or

Re: modern stuff

> On Oct 24, 2018, at 4:17 PM, ben via cctalk wrote: > >> ... > > 70's computers are more interesting. That is why do we have PI computers > running PDP 8 emulators? It's all in what you want to do. If your interest is mostly the software, as it is for many of us, then running emulators m

does a reverse-engineering EDA tool exist?

To draw out the schematics for the Displaywriter I have a bunch of boards to trace out, and I don't want to do the usual "scribble on yellow pad" to do it. Has someone written a graphical tool for doing this? What I would like to find is a tool that puts up a bunch of footprints with internal IC

RE: Astounding Asking Price

Sadly this is on the wrong side of the pond. I would like to repair the one I have in any case. In fact, while I think I know the pinout of the F11 chips from a KDF11-A printset, can anyone confirm that pin 23 of the DIL package is the RESET signal? If that is correct then it is oscillating

Re: Burroughs TD keyboard - was Selling keyboards without the terminal

- Original Message - From: "Toby Thain via cctalk" To: Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 4:31 PM Subject: Re: Burroughs TD keyboard - was Selling keyboards without the terminal > On 2018-10-24 5:28 p.m., Mike Stein via cctalk wrote: >> It's pretty unlikely that I'll ever get my TD700

Re: NOVApalooza in 2 weeks - DG Nova - was Re: 70's computers

It just ended. I made a crap video (no people in it) that Bruce needs to screen before I post to Youtube, however, there was a video team that shot an enormous amount of 4K footage. Bruce does not quite know what to do with it, but figured it needed recording. -- Will On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 1:00

Re: Burroughs TD keyboard - was Selling keyboards without the terminal

On 2018-10-24 5:28 p.m., Mike Stein via cctalk wrote: > It's pretty unlikely that I'll ever get my TD700 working so, with all this > talk about terminals missing keyboards, does anyone need/want a keyboard for > a Burroughs TD700/TD800 type terminal? > > http://terminals.classiccmp.org/wiki/imag

Re: Desktop Metaphor

> Liam Proven wrote: > On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 at 18:59, Paul Berger via cctalk > wrote: >> >> This is my issue with a lot of Linux distros they seem to try to hard to >> look and work like mac or like windows while I would rather have them >> look and work like the xwindows I knew and loved. One of

Burroughs TD keyboard - was Selling keyboards without the terminal

It's pretty unlikely that I'll ever get my TD700 working so, with all this talk about terminals missing keyboards, does anyone need/want a keyboard for a Burroughs TD700/TD800 type terminal? http://terminals.classiccmp.org/wiki/images/0/0f/Burroughs_TD_700-3.jpg http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/bur

Re: Astounding Asking Price

On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 2:20 PM Warner Losh wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 9:53 AM Rob Jarratt via cctalk < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > >> My jaw dropped when I saw this: >> https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/223201002247?ul_noapp=true >> >> >> >> It looks nice externally, and it has the pede

Re: Astounding Asking Price

On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 9:53 AM Rob Jarratt via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > My jaw dropped when I saw this: > https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/223201002247?ul_noapp=true > > > > It looks nice externally, and it has the pedestal, which is nice, but the > seller has not even give the spec or

Re: modern stuff

On 10/24/2018 12:31 PM, Paul Koning wrote: On Oct 24, 2018, at 2:22 PM, ben via cctalk wrote: On 10/24/2018 11:57 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote: On 10/24/18 10:53 AM, ben via cctalk wrote: I have no idea what is in a modern home computer, but I suspect it still follows the same design of

Re: 70's computers

On Wed, 24 Oct 2018, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote: On 10/24/18 10:53 AM, ben via cctalk wrote: I have no idea what is in a modern home computer, but I suspect it still follows the same design of the IBM PC. Single CPU with segmented memory and bit of DMA here and there. Wow... You are out o

Re: 70's computers

On 10/24/18 11:22 AM, ben via cctalk wrote: > Am I really, every thing is so backwards compatable with the classic > PC's I don't see much new other than what was hacked on. > I am dealing with archiecture model here, the real hardware don't matter > anyway. If it takes X cycles to read memory, it

Re: 70's computers

> On Oct 24, 2018, at 11:22 AM, ben via cctalk wrote: > > On 10/24/2018 11:57 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote: >> On 10/24/18 10:53 AM, ben via cctalk wrote: >>> I have no idea what is in a modern home computer, but I suspect >>> it still follows the same design of the IBM PC. Single CPU >>> wi

Re: 70's computers

> On Oct 24, 2018, at 2:22 PM, ben via cctalk wrote: > > On 10/24/2018 11:57 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote: >> On 10/24/18 10:53 AM, ben via cctalk wrote: >>> I have no idea what is in a modern home computer, but I suspect >>> it still follows the same design of the IBM PC. Single CPU >>> wit

Re: 70's computers

On 10/24/2018 11:57 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote: On 10/24/18 10:53 AM, ben via cctalk wrote: I have no idea what is in a modern home computer, but I suspect it still follows the same design of the IBM PC. Single CPU with segmented memory and bit of DMA here and there. Wow... You are out

Re: 70's computers

On 10/24/2018 10:31 AM, Marc Howard via cctalk wrote: You know that since you mentioned possibly using CMOS 22V10's why not just build a board around AMD 29XX bit slice parts. They actually predate 22V10's by quite a bit and you can pretty much implement what every you want to without rewiring.

Re: NOVApalooza in 2 weeks - DG Nova - was Re: 70's computers

On 2018-10-24 2:00 p.m., Al Kossow via cctalk wrote: > > > >> So you won't be at NOVApalooza then? It's not too late to sign up: >> http://www.novapalooza.org/ > > > When: October 22-24, 2018 > > How was it? > > > Oops! I read the subject line and not the dates...

Re: 70's computers

On 10/24/18 10:53 AM, ben via cctalk wrote: > I have no idea what is in a modern home computer, but I suspect > it still follows the same design of the IBM PC. Single CPU > with segmented memory and bit of DMA here and there. Wow... You are out of touch, aren't you.

Re: 70's computers

On 10/24/2018 9:47 AM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote: On 10/24/2018 07:01 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote: An observation about RISC: I've opined before that the CISC->RISC transition was driven, in part, by the changing balance of CPU speed versus memory speed: with slow memory and fast CPUs

Re: 70's computers

You know that since you mentioned possibly using CMOS 22V10's why not just build a board around AMD 29XX bit slice parts. They actually predate 22V10's by quite a bit and you can pretty much implement what every you want to without rewiring. Marc On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 8:57 AM Jon Elson via cct

Re: 70's computers

On 10/24/18 8:57 AM, Jon Elson via cctalk wrote: > Yeah, basically a PDP-8 with a wider word. Four accumulators, and no memory pages

Re: 70's computers

> On Oct 24, 2018, at 12:38 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: > > On 10/24/18 5:36 AM, Paul Koning wrote: >> >> Very different. PPUs are real computers, vaguely like a PDP-8 in >> fact but quite fast. The PPUs have major roles in the OS throughout >> the 6000 series, not just in early versions. > >

Re: NOVApalooza in 2 weeks - DG Nova - was Re: 70's computers

> So you won't be at NOVApalooza then? It's not too late to sign up: > http://www.novapalooza.org/ When: October 22-24, 2018 How was it?

NOVApalooza in 2 weeks - DG Nova - was Re: 70's computers

On 2018-10-24 12:57 p.m., Jon Elson via cctalk wrote: > On 10/24/2018 08:13 AM, allison via cctalk wrote: >> On 10/23/2018 05:32 PM, Gordon Henderson via cctalk wrote: >>> On Tue, 23 Oct 2018, ben via cctalk wrote: >>> The PDP 11 is nice machine, but I am looking  for simpler designs wher

Re: Not really vintage computing, but just in case it's of interest to anyone..

On 10/24/18 1:08 AM, Evan Linwood via cctalk wrote: > taken from the listing : > > "It was used ( I Believe ) to process Geophysical Seismic Data during the > exploration of Oil in Bass Straight. The circuitry is all NASA standard." > > https://www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/gosford/other-electron

Re: 70's computers

On 10/24/18 5:36 AM, Paul Koning wrote: > > Very different. PPUs are real computers, vaguely like a PDP-8 in > fact but quite fast. The PPUs have major roles in the OS throughout > the 6000 series, not just in early versions. You obviously haven't spent much time in SSD (Special Systems). I r

Re: Astounding Asking Price

> On Oct 24, 2018, at 11:53 AM, Rob Jarratt via cctalk > wrote: > > My jaw dropped when I saw this: > https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/223201002247?ul_noapp=true > > It looks nice externally, and it has the pedestal, which is nice, but the > seller has not even give the spec or posted pics of the

RE: Astounding Asking Price

> -Original Message- > From: Adrian Graham [mailto:binarydinosa...@gmail.com] > Sent: 24 October 2018 17:00 > To: r...@jarratt.me.uk; Jarratt RMA ; General > Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > Subject: Re: Astounding Asking Price > > >It looks nice externally, and it has the pe

Re: Desktop Metaphor

On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 at 17:35, Rick Bensene wrote: > > Earlier, I wrote: > >> The whole desktop metaphor UI existed long before Windows 95 in non-Unix > >> implementations by Xerox PARC (Palo Alto Research >>Center) with the > >> pioneering Xerox Alto, introduced in 1973, which implemented Alan

Re: Astounding Asking Price

On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 10:53 AM Rob Jarratt via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > My jaw dropped when I saw this: > https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/223201002247?ul_noapp=true > > > > It looks nice externally, and it has the pedestal, which is nice, but the > seller has not even give the spec or

Re: Astounding Asking Price

>It looks nice externally, and it has the pedestal, which is nice, but the >seller has not even give the spec or posted pics of the innards and it is >"untested". At that price I would expect a bit more information.. Instant alarm bells to me are a seller posting a London address but the item is

Re: 70's computers

On 10/24/2018 08:13 AM, allison via cctalk wrote: On 10/23/2018 05:32 PM, Gordon Henderson via cctalk wrote: On Tue, 23 Oct 2018, ben via cctalk wrote: The PDP 11 is nice machine, but I am looking for simpler designs where 16K words is a valid memory size for a OS and small single user softwa

Re: 70's computers

On 10/24/2018 07:36 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: IBM channels are (from the programmer point of view at least) merely hardwired controllers Well, no. They actually can do a lot more. They can do branching and simple arithmetic. We had a program to deal with damaged/deteriorating tapes

Astounding Asking Price

My jaw dropped when I saw this: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/223201002247?ul_noapp=true It looks nice externally, and it has the pedestal, which is nice, but the seller has not even give the spec or posted pics of the innards and it is "untested". At that price I would expect a bit more informati

Re: 70's computers

On 10/24/2018 07:01 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote: An observation about RISC: I've opined before that the CISC->RISC transition was driven, in part, by the changing balance of CPU speed versus memory speed: with slow memory and fast CPUs, it makes sense to get as much execution bang out of

RE: Desktop Metaphor

Earlier, I wrote: >> The whole desktop metaphor UI existed long before Windows 95 in non-Unix >> implementations by Xerox PARC (Palo Alto Research >>Center) with the >> pioneering Xerox Alto, introduced in 1973, which implemented Alan Kay's >> concepts for the desktop metaphor that >>were post

Re: 70's computers

On 10/24/2018 09:19 AM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > >> On Oct 23, 2018, at 7:08 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk >> wrote: >> >> ... >> There was a recent discussion about code density (I forget whether here, or >> on TUHS), and someone mentioned this paper: >> >> http://web.eece.maine.edu/~vweav

Re: Microsoft-Paul Allen

On 10/24/18 9:45 AM, Nemo via cctalk wrote: > On 24/10/2018, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote (in part): > [...] >> Come to think of it, most Linux users I know are Windows converts. >> Very few are Mac converts -- once you go Mac, you can't go back, >> apparently. > Why would you? (Mac is certified

Re: Microsoft-Paul Allen

On 24/10/2018, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote (in part): [...] > Come to think of it, most Linux users I know are Windows converts. > Very few are Mac converts -- once you go Mac, you can't go back, > apparently. Why would you? (Mac is certified POSIX and works very nicely with Sun mice and UNIX k

Re: Microsoft-Paul Allen

On 10/24/18 5:47 AM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote: > On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 at 20:01, Alan Perry via cctalk > wrote: > >> Excuse me, but I work for Oracle on Solaris (primarily on USB code) and >> it is not EOL. Oracle just released Solaris 11.4 and the next release is >> being worked on. > Oh! Well

Re: 70's computers

> On Oct 23, 2018, at 7:08 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk > wrote: > > ... > There was a recent discussion about code density (I forget whether here, or > on TUHS), and someone mentioned this paper: > > http://web.eece.maine.edu/~vweaver/papers/iccd09/iccd09_density.pdf > > which shows that f

Re: 70's computers

> On Oct 24, 2018, at 9:01 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk > wrote: > >> From: Paul Koning > >> A lot more comes from the CPU architecture. The instruction set, of >> course (arguably the first RISC). > > An observation about RISC: I've opined before that the CISC->RISC transition > was driven,

Re: 70's computers

On 10/23/2018 05:32 PM, Gordon Henderson via cctalk wrote: > On Tue, 23 Oct 2018, ben via cctalk wrote: > >> The PDP 11 is nice machine, but I am looking  for simpler designs >> where 16K words is a valid memory size for a OS and small single user >> software. > > Try the Modular One with an OS wri

Re: 70's computers

> From: Paul Koning > A lot more comes from the CPU architecture. The instruction set, of > course (arguably the first RISC). An observation about RISC: I've opined before that the CISC->RISC transition was driven, in part, by the changing balance of CPU speed versus memory speed: wit

Re: 70's computers

> On Oct 24, 2018, at 6:50 AM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk > wrote: > >> From: Paul Koning > > >> Some years ago I learned the architecture of the Dutch Electrologica X1 >> and X8 machines. ... they gain a lot of efficiency by allowing almost >> all instructions to optionally set a condition fl

Re: 70's computers

> On Oct 23, 2018, at 9:47 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk > wrote: > > On 10/23/18 6:10 PM, ben via cctalk wrote: > >> The 10 or so PPU units. >> Ben. > > Early SCOPE and COS also put the operating system in those, leaving the > CPU for real work. But for I/O, not that much different from IBM

Re: Microsoft-Paul Allen

On Wed, 24 Oct 2018 at 00:31, Jim Manley via cctalk wrote: > It's the sort of stuff marked > with "COMPANY PROPRIETARY" watermarks that, if you try to scan or run it > through a photocopier, produces black output due to opto-molecular chemical > overlays. Oh dear. Let me guess -- do you also wor

Re: 70's computers

> From: Paul Koning > Some years ago I learned the architecture of the Dutch Electrologica X1 > and X8 machines. ... they gain a lot of efficiency by allowing almost > all instructions to optionally set a condition flag, and almost all > instructions to be executed conditional

Re: Microsoft-Paul Allen

On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 at 20:12, Jim Manley via cctalk wrote: > > Wrong. Apple has been using self-customized, optimized-for their-hardware > supersets of the VNC protocol (which is X based) Not true. VNC isn't X-based. And Apple supports it, sure, but as an accessory thing. VNC also works fine on

Re: Microsoft-Paul Allen

On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 at 20:09, John Ames wrote: > There's also the Afterstep/Window Maker crowd, open-source > reimplementations of the NEXTSTEP desktop environment, which predates > even Windows 3.x. That sort of echoes my point, really, I think. As I said, it's ludicrous to counter my claim th

Re: Microsoft-Paul Allen

> On Oct 24, 2018, at 2:47 AM, Liam Proven wrote: > > On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 at 20:01, Alan Perry via cctalk > wrote: > >> Excuse me, but I work for Oracle on Solaris (primarily on USB code) and >> it is not EOL. Oracle just released Solaris 11.4 and the next release is >> being worked on. > >

Re: Microsoft-Paul Allen

On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 at 20:01, Alan Perry via cctalk wrote: > Excuse me, but I work for Oracle on Solaris (primarily on USB code) and > it is not EOL. Oracle just released Solaris 11.4 and the next release is > being worked on. Oh! Well, I'm very glad to hear it. But the news has not spread -- c

Re: Microsoft-Paul Allen

On Tue, 23 Oct 2018 at 19:48, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: > > "The simplistic style is partly explained by the fact that its editors, > having to meet a publishing deadline, copied the information off the back > of a packet of breakfast cereal, hastily embroidering it with a few foot > notes in o

Re: 70's computers

On Tue, 23 Oct 2018, ben via cctalk wrote: On 10/23/2018 3:32 PM, Gordon Henderson via cctalk wrote: On Tue, 23 Oct 2018, ben via cctalk wrote: The PDP 11 is nice machine, but I am looking  for simpler designs where 16K words is a valid memory size for a OS and small single user software.

Not really vintage computing, but just in case it's of interest to anyone..

taken from the listing : "It was used ( I Believe ) to process Geophysical Seismic Data during the exploration of Oil in Bass Straight. The circuitry is all NASA standard." https://www.gumtree.com.au/s-ad/gosford/other-electronics-computers/vintage-computer-tape-drive/1194865314