<Yes, you type 'go 64' in the 128 screen or you have a key down when you tur
<it on. If you don't have a manual, I could look it up for you but there ar
<two ways of getting into 64 mode, as I recall. There were few games writte
I do have the manual or two and aat least two games.
Allison
Actually, I'm not that excitable about making old hardware work. I am
interested when someone does some of the things I did with parts with which
I didn't. I didn't get interested in microprocessors until the 8008,
which, by the way, though still functional when I unplugged it from the
circuit board, became a "high-tech tie-tack" which I wore from time to time
along with others of about the same ilk and vintage.
With all the fascination over the internet and GUI OS's, etc, it's easy to
forget that the old 8080 can still process the words and generate the
payroll as well as it did 20 years ago. Printers are faster too, I guess,
but since the essential demise of multi-part paper, it takes about as long
to generate the 4-part documents as ever.
Some things will just always be painful . . . <sigh>
I find it interesting to note, however, that you've taken the pain to do
this work yourself. Rest assured, it can't be any worse than the tools
everyone who worked with this primitive beastie had to use.
Dick
----------
> From: Dwight Elvey <elvey(a)hal.com>
> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
> Subject: Re[2]: Intel 4004
> Date: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 2:28 PM
>
> "Richard Erlacher" <edick(a)idcomm.com> wrote:
> > Good Work!
> >
> > Now, do these tools run on the machine itself, or do they require
> > cross-development? Either one's fine, of course. What do you have
your
> > machine doing?
> >
> > Dick
>
> Hi Dick
> I use a PC to develop on. I don't have enough ROM space
> on the 4004 system to do very much. The developement
> system is currently running the code that came with
> it. It was intended to program 1702A's. It does this
> well.
> I am writing code to make a 4 function calculator
> that runs through the serial line used for the programmer.
> I've desided to use BCD math since it has instructions
> built in that deal with doing BCD corrections. The RAM
> orginization is well suited for 16 digits of BCD for
> each data value.
> To get copies of my tool set, down load:
> ftp://ftp.hal.com/pub/elvey/I4004.ZIP
> You'll also need a Forth interpreter because everything
> is in source and not precompiled. I used the Freeware
> Forth called FPC. You can download a copy from the
> site:
> http://www.forth.org/compilers.html
> I also included tools to convert Intel hex to binary
> and back for those that need this format for their
> particular programmer. There are some assembly example
> files called *.AS4 that will get you started.
> Let me know if you have any questions. You don't need
> to know Forth to use the tools but you can do more
> advanced things if you do. For the most part, the READ.ME
> file should be enough to get you started.
> What is your interest in working with the 4004?
> Dwight
I think I might have accidentally nuked some responses to my latest manual
offering. So far, I've received one offer from Hans Franke.
Was anyone else interested in a Motorola 68000 'ExorMacs' System Manual?
Three inches thick and 9+ pounds, vintage about 1980.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Bruce Lane, Owner and head honcho, Blue Feather Technologies
http://www.bluefeathertech.com
Amateur Radio:(WD6EOS) E-mail: kyrrin(a)bluefeathertech.com
SysOp: The Dragon's Cave (Fido 1:343/272, 253-639-9905)
"Our science can only describe an object, event, or living thing in our own
human terms. It cannot, in any way, define any of them..."
>Especially given how much money I had to pay for them; as HPs go, second
only
>to my HP-01 watch. I'm keeping them in a safe place!
What, you don't wear your HP-01? What's the point in having one, then?
- Joe
P.S. My HP-01 didn't come with the little key-presser stylus thingie. What's
the best hack replacement anyone has come up with?
>On Sun, 7 Feb 1999, Mark Gregory wrote:
>> Hi. I recently acquired a 1950's vintage Gibson GA-30 guitar amp. Never
>> having owned a tube-based amp before, I'm clueless about the proper way to
>> use this amp without abusing it (and it sounds great, so I want it to last
>> a long time! :v) .
Sam said:
>Wow, this is decidely off-topic. Way off topic. Don't you think this
>question would be better served on a more suitable newsgroup?
(This reply is Digest delayed)
This is not off topic! We don't talk enough about vacuum tubes!(..imho..)
First, amplifiers are the most basic element of any electronic analog
computer.
Second, where can anyone draw the OT line between vacuum tubes and LSI chips?
RTL,DTL,TTL, or transistors in general?
:)
Mark,
Check out Vacuum Tube Valley http://www.vacuumtube.com/
--Doug
=========================================
Doug Coward
Press Start Inc.
Sunnyvale,CA
=========================================
Questions on Intel 4004 chip:
-Am I correct in assuming that 4004 is no longer manufactured by Intel?
-How many were made?
-Is it true that this chip is used the Voyager spacecraft?
David
davidfreibrun(a)home.com
http://altaircomputers.org
-----Original Message-----
From: Sam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Date: Wednesday, February 10, 1999 7:23 AM
Subject: Re: Intel 4004
>On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, David Freibrun wrote:
>
>> You have an Intel 4004? Where did you obtain this?
>
>The answer is right inside the message to which you are replying. Look...
>
>> >I would *love* some 4004 tools. I have a 4004 that I plan to build
>> >into a project someday. It came out of a non-UPC grocery store barcode
>> >scanner I bought at the Dayton Hamfest in 1983.
>
>Sellam Alternate e-mail:
dastar(a)siconic.com
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
>Always hasslin' the man.
>
> Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0
> See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details!
> [Last web site update: 01/15/99]
>
You'll need to find someone local with a pickup truck, since you probably
won't find anyone willing to pay what it costs to ship it. I paid $385 to
ship mine from Pennsylvania to Denver. The "Draftmaster" 7596, I believe,
that we had at work weighed considerably more than mine, though it didn't
plot faster, or, in any detectable way, differently. It cost and weighed
more, and was more massive in its appearance. It was, however, an
excellent device.
one more thing . . . imbedded below.
Dick
----------
> From: Athanasios Kotsenos <a.kotsenos(a)rca.ac.uk>
> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
> Subject: Re: HP plotters
> Date: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 11:56 AM
>
<snip>
>
> >I do have the manuals for the 758x series, by the way.
>
> I should have the manuals for both, but I've only definitely found one of
them.
> I actually found the info for printing the test page on their web site.
>
Well, I've had several people inquire about reproducing the two massive
manuals, nearly 1k pages each. I sent the manuals (user guide not
included) a Programming Manual and a Technical manual, the latter of which
has numerous 11"x33" foldout drawings, and they have sat at the printer's
for a couple of months waiting for an estimate on reproducing them to be
finalized. It won't be cheap because of those foldouts, which are
half-tones.
>
> So, if anybody wants them...
>
> Nasos.
>
Yes . . . that's how I remember it, too. Those irritating core dumps were
always recongnizable as they went through the line printer, since they
sounded like a chef chopping celery.
I never did get to where I could actually gain anything from a core dump.
I guess it hasn't changed much, though the dumps Windows95 gives you when a
process goes askew aren't as long.
Dick
----------
> From: Lawrence LeMay <lemay(a)cs.umn.edu>
> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
> Subject: Re: Piece of classic FORTRAN code
> Date: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 9:47 AM
>
> > ::Those were the days . . . FORTRAN-II, SCOPE OS, COMPASS assembler . .
Golly! That does bring back the memories . . . but wasn't the CDC6xxx
family 64 bits? I cut my teeth on that one, back in the mid 1960's and it
seems that it (the 6600) was a dual-processor version of the 64-bit 6400.
Those were the days . . . FORTRAN-II, SCOPE OS, COMPASS assembler . . .
batch processing . . . (that meant you wrote your code on a 24-line
80-column "coding sheet" and, when finished, gave them to a woman behind a
door with a small window in it . . . and got your error listing a few days
later) . . . I'd have given a week's pay for an hour in that room behind
the door . . . mini-skirts . . . (you do remember keypunch operators and
Hollerith cards, don't you?)
Dick
----------
> From: Sergey Svishchev <svs(a)ropnet.ru>
> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
> Subject: Piece of classic FORTRAN code
> Date: Tuesday, February 09, 1999 2:34 AM
>
> G'day,
>
> IF (COMPLF(-1).LE.2) IF (RSHIFT(COMPLF(0),32)-15) 360,1108,6600
> C IF (NOT(-1).LE.2) IF (ISHFT(NOT(0),-32)-15) 360,1108,6600
> 7094 PRINT *,'IBM 7094'
> STOP
> 360 PRINT *,'IBM 360 (32 BITS)'
> STOP
> 1108 PRINT *,'UNIVAC 1108 (48 BITS)'
> STOP
> 6600 PRINT *,'CDC 6600 (60 BITS)'
> STOP
>
> --
> Sergey Svishchev -- svs{at}ropnet{dot}ru