On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 5:08 PM Fritz Mueller via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 2:36 AM Fritz Mueller via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> > So you could set up on t4 or t5 of that microinstruction with the KM11...
>
> > On Feb 16, 2021, at 11:08 AM,
This was getting long - so I decided to "top post". Sorry ;)
Here's Peter Samson's comments after I sent him a copy of the proposal:
"Well how about that! (It was never built and the hardware was never
designed.) So many ideas and proposals never saw the light of day. I utterly
forgot about the S
On 02/17/2021 02:45 AM, Josh Dersch via cctalk wrote:
"0" here selects DR (Destination Register) input to the
mux and is incorrect; it should be 1 (PCB). During a
single-instruction-step run, this value reads out OK on
the analyzer. I noted a few other discrepancies in the
capture (all of whic
On Thu, 1 Oct 2020, Glen Slick via cctalk wrote:
> > Sadly neither seems to be among the files I have copied. I could yet
> > check Intel Dec 1995 Data on Demand discs I happen to have, and do have
> > here, but they are cumbersome to handle as they use a proprietary format
> > requiring a DOS a
> I heard back from Fred Wright:
>
> "Although I wasn't at SC in 1972, I'm pretty sure I would have heard of
> the SC-4 if it had ever existed. The document you linked was just a
> proposal, and I imagine that that's as far as it ever got. AFAIK, SC
> didn't create any full-fledged compute
