test-drb April 1999

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

170 participants
1190 discussions

Fw: Old HP 9000/300 for free - you want it?

by jlwest＠tseinc.com

Thought someone here might be interested... As usual, please contact the original poster... Jay West -----Original Message----- From: William Blair Wagner <blairw(a)triadnewton.com> Newsgroups: comp.sys.hp.hardware,comp.sys.hp.hpux,comp.sys.hp.misc To: hpux-admin mailing-list <hpux-admin(a)dutchworks.nl> Date: Thursday, April 22, 1999 6:07 PM Subject: Old HP 9000/300 for free - you want it? >Hi Gang, > >Listen, this is not a joke. I have a very old (1985) HP 9000/300 model 350 >workstation. Its a relick! Its likely useless for anyone other than ant antique >collector, but I thought I'd see if anyone wanted it or parts of it before I >throw it all in the trash. It has the following parts / features: > >Workstation Cabinet: HP 9000/300 model 330 (1985) >1) Mainboard has BNC Ethernet connection, 9-pin rs232 connection, RCA sound mono >connection, HP-HIL connection, and an HP-IB connection >2) HP98547A HiRes Color Bitmapped video board with 64 colors ,6 planes of >display memory, and the 3 R-G-B connectors >3) HP98628A Datacomm board (I think for an external modem or something) > >External Cabinet: HP 9153B >1) 20MB hard disc drive >2) 3.5" removable diskette >3) HP-IB interface > >Monitor: >HP 98785A 17" (made by Sony in 1989) R-G-B monitor (very nice!) > >Keyboard and Mouse included too. > >It has HP Basic loaded (that's the OS), not HP-UX. > >I'll give this to anyone who wants to come get it, or pay for shipping. Like I >said, I dont expect anyone to want this, but you never know! > >Please email me if your interested, I wont be checking the news groups for >replies. > > >-- >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >: William Blair Wagner :"Education is not always knowing the answer, : >: CCI/Triad Company : ..but rather knowing where to look for it!" : >: blairw(a)triadnewton.com : >: UltimatePlus Software Engineer : >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

25 years, 2 months

The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the 80s

by edick＠idcomm.com

I'm sure everyone recongnizes that fact. What's important is getting past that point, i.e. settling what the definition is going to be. In the case of the early video cards, for the S-100, they weren't generally used as the console interface. In fact I don't know of a graphics card that was, though on toward '82-83 there were a few with some of the more "capable" graphics support chips like the NEC 7220 or that "BIG" Hitachi graphics chip, though I never saw one except at a trade show. Some of these were pretty demanding applications which quickly pointed up the weakness in using 8-bit computers for multi-plane graphics. They also pointed up the fact that decent high resolution color monitors cost about as much as a house . . . well, not quite, but you get the idea. If you bought one, you'd better keep the box, because you'd need a place to live when your wife found out . . . In any case, the dual-console (text/graphics) model was the default. The personal computer definition, IMHO, doesn't require that there be a dedicated video circuit, but does require one be tolerant of it, at least at the low end, because a lot of fairly potent "video-toy" types were pretty weak-kneed computers, and thus were touted as being for home use. You might say these were definitely personal, but you might also call their characterization as computers into question. I think it's a little shallow to quibble over whether the video was built in or removable when the system wouldn't really do much without some sort of video interface to effect the console function. As I recall, there was a board by VIDEX (?) for the Apple-][ which allowed you to present an 80x24 console, but didn't support graphics. The normal Apple graphics could be shown, though, by means of a separate monitor attached to the normal video output. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Tony Duell <ard(a)p850ug1.demon.co.uk> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Friday, April 23, 1999 6:37 PM Subject: Re: The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the 80s >> The issue of "integral part" is different. I didn't mean that the S-100 >> machines had no video capability, I mean that it wasn't an integral part of >> the system because you had to install it. A manufacturer (like SOL? I >> think) might install the video for you and sell the result as a package -- >> that's an interesting borderline case. But S-100 is clearly different from >> a single board (like the Apple ][ motherboard) in which the video circuitry >> can't be easily changed or removed. > >You do realise that this definition implies that the IBM PC is not a >'personal computer' :-). On all the 'classic' IBM PC-family machines, and >on a lot of clones, the video system was an _optional_ plug-in card. I >think there's even a way to configure machines without a video card if >you're clever... > >-tony >

25 years, 2 months

The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the80s

by edick＠idcomm.com

That's actually quite true. The technology didn't yet exist in 1950-55 for the hobbyist to expand on the initial concept and extend it into something potentially useful or even marginally so. It probably wasn't even terribly educational. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Hans Franke <Hans.Franke(a)mch20.sbs.de> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Friday, April 23, 1999 3:08 PM Subject: Re: The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the80s > >> Just a couple of stray thoughts. While a person could possibly have >> purchased a $300 computer in the 50's, why would they? What could they >> have done with it? The answer is almost nothing. The only people who >> might have been interested would have been ham radio or electronics >> hobbysists, and they would very likely have built there own. I don't >> even believe there was a viable used market for low cost computers in >> the 50's, they would all have been enormous mainframes. > >Where is the difference to the 70s and 80s ? > > >Gruss >H. > >-- >Der Kopf ist auch nur ein Auswuchs wie der kleine Zeh. >H.Achternbusch

25 years, 2 months

The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the80s

by edick＠idcomm.com

No, what's relevant isn't the technology and its state of maturity, but the comparison of the relative value of the numbers. Today, it's just assumed that if you buy an item for $300 and it subsequently breaks, you shrug your shoulders and throw it away. Back in the '50's, not many people were silly enough to do that. My comment about DEC is based on my observation that the only thing one could count on from DEC was that it would cost a lot. You seldom got technology less than an generation old, and they didn't provide systems integration services gratis as did nearly every other manufacturer, even Big Blue. As a consequence, these services were provided by the bloated aerospace and defense contracting industry. They (DEC) wouldn't sell directly to the government because that required they let government auditors look at their books. There was too much risk that the word would leak out that their profit margins on their mini's were pretty generous. That would have led to competition, which they really never enjoyed. There's nothing wrong with their products, but they were not tuned for nor were they suited for the personal computer market . . . not even the ones they claimed were. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Sellam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Thursday, April 22, 1999 7:17 PM Subject: Re: The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the80s >On Thu, 22 Apr 1999, Richard Erlacher wrote: > >> One aspect of this matter I'm already seeing ignored is the COST. That >> so-called FIRST personal computer which cost $300 in the early '50's, for >> example, cost quite a lot of money. In the '50's, it was unusual for anyone >> to earn $100 a week. A mid-priced Chevrolet cost less than $2000 and $10 a >> week was plenty for a week's groceries for a family of 4. > >That cost was estimated. The computer was only sold as a plan. The buyer >had to find the pieces to make it go and assemble it themselves. So its >conceivable this machine could have been built for free, providing one >could find all the pieces salvaged from old equipment. > >Regardless, it was still a computer that one could very easily have owned >in the 50s, which is more than you can say about a Univac or IBM 70x >series machine. > >> Not even DEC's so-called personal computers were competitive enough to >> interest an industry professional. The DEC mini's weren't even a good buy >> as they became obsolete. I doubt DEC equipment was EVER used where there >> wasn't a third party present who profited from its use. That doesn't mean >> they weren't appropriate and suitable for a wide range of uses, but it >> certainly doesn't characterize a personal computer. > >Huh? > >> Just to put things into perspective, a week's groceries, these days, for a >> family of four, cost about $150, a decent mid-priced car costs $15000, and a >> farily well equipped and appropriately designated personal computer with a >> 400MHz pentium, 8GB HDD, 64MB of RAM, OS installed, all the multimedia >> features, plus a current-generation modem (V.90) costs $400 less the monitor >> with monitors costing $139 for a 15" and $300 for a 20" type. These prices >> are from Best-Buy's ad in last Sunday's paper. You can probably do better >> if you shop. > >These prices are also based on technology that has had 50 years to mature, >and therefore the comparison is entirely invalid. > >Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- >Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out. > > Coming this October 2-3: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0! > See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details! > [Last web site update: 04/03/99] >

25 years, 2 months

The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the 80s

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<The issue of "integral part" is different. I didn't mean that the S-100 <machines had no video capability, I mean that it wasn't an integral part o <the system because you had to install it. A manufacturer (like SOL? I <think) might install the video for you and sell the result as a package -- <that's an interesting borderline case. But S-100 is clearly different fro Except that the SOL was sold with a VDM1 as part of the system unless you bought it bare deliberatly (like you could a PC). As to definition... the longest standing one most would agree on is PC was at one time not a brand or machine but, PERSONALLY OWNED and not owned by a business (or part of one). To that end I really dont care if it had video or not. The idea of personal ownership of a PC was something rooted in the late 50s or eraly 60s and gave rise to the LINC and otehr machines that could be built for believable prices(or at high cost of labor). it wasn't until IBM called their specific product "The Personal Computer" that things changed some. However Apple, TANDY, Northstar* and company had all done their bit to raise the rail and better define what the consumer wanted out of the box. The revolution was in it's evolution. Allison

25 years, 2 months

First "threshold" apps? (Was: "First PC" and other nonsense

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<Without question, to me, my first PC was the IBM 1130. The whole system fi <in one room with plenty of space for storage, card reader, and line printe <and all associated supplies. I could sit at the system console and do <stuff, or just punch in my data on one of the keypunches, slip a program but was it remotely possible to either make your own or even purchase one? This is a loaded comment due to the way IBM marketed their machines. I may add that without the peripherals (all expensive in their own right) the machine was not as useable as some. Personal... not quite. It did add weight the idea that computers didn't need buildings built around them. It would be an afector. Allison

25 years, 2 months

The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the80s

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<That's actually quite true. The technology didn't yet exist in 1950-55 fo <the hobbyist to expand on the initial concept and extend it into something <potentially useful or even marginally so. It probably wasn't even terribl <educational. < <Dick Therein lies a critical point. At some point the _idea_ of having your own computer emerged as became as least acheievable. I'd say the catalyst was transistors and early ICs were the impactors in that transistion. Allison

25 years, 2 months

Wang Stuff is avail.

by jpl15＠netcom.com

Right. This morning I got an e-mail release from the company giving me title free and clear to the Wang VS 7110 system and urging me to get it the hell out of there, pronto. SO: is there any interest in this system, as previously described (yesterday) on the List? I will be happy to e-mail the details to you if you wish. I am probably not capable, emotionally, of actually scrapping the damn thing, as my motive in rescuing it is preservation... anybody out there want the system? There is no room whatsoever at my place to store it, save for outside in the elements, and it would deteriorate rather quickly, even if it is coming up on summer.. I can help with delivery within a reasonable radius of Southern California.... Anybody....? Cheerz John

25 years, 2 months

The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the80s

by edick＠idcomm.com

I suspect that few of the readers of this list remember the early '50's as I do. I wasn't trying to compare or contrast the prices of the antique computers which were under discussion, but rather point out that few people would put out a month's pay (gross) for a personal computer, even today. In the early '50's there were more people, including some professionals, with less than $300 after taxes (and they were MUCH lower then) than there were people earning more. There wasn't yet a minimum wage of $1.00 per hour, and, in fact, when I had a minimum wage job in '60, I earned <$5.00 per 8-hour day. Naturally a $300 computer wasn't on my list of things to buy. Dick -----Original Message----- From: CLASSICCMP(a)trailing-edge.com <CLASSICCMP(a)trailing-edge.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Thursday, April 22, 1999 7:20 PM Subject: Re: The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the80s >>> Just to put things into perspective, a week's groceries, these days, for a >>> family of four, cost about $150, a decent mid-priced car costs $15000, and a >>> farily well equipped and appropriately designated personal computer with a >>> 400MHz pentium, 8GB HDD, 64MB of RAM, OS installed, all the multimedia >>> features, plus a current-generation modem (V.90) costs $400 less the monitor >>> with monitors costing $139 for a 15" and $300 for a 20" type. These prices >>> are from Best-Buy's ad in last Sunday's paper. You can probably do better >>> if you shop. > >>These prices are also based on technology that has had 50 years to mature, >>and therefore the comparison is entirely invalid. > >"If the automobile had followed the same price-performance changes as >the computer industry in the past 50 years, a Rolls Royce would today cost >$4.95, get two million miles to the gallon, go 50000 MPH, and explode >once a day, killing everyone inside." -- Robert X. Cringley > >-- > Tim Shoppa Email: shoppa(a)trailing-edge.com > Trailing Edge Technology WWW: http://www.trailing-edge.com/ > 7328 Bradley Blvd Voice: 301-767-5917 > Bethesda, MD, USA 20817 Fax: 301-767-5927

25 years, 2 months

The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the80s

by gregorym＠cadvision.com

At 10:19 PM 4/22/99 -0700, Sellam Ismail wrote: >On Thu, 22 Apr 1999, Richard Erlacher wrote: > >> The previous comment should have made it obvious it was NOT within the reach >> of the "average" American. >Don't you mean YOUR attitudes, Richard? Get this through your thick >skull: YOU do NOT represent the mass thought process of humans. >> $300 was not an expenditure an "average" American would consider lightly in >> 1952. > >Sure, but the point is that it could CONCEIVABLY have been afforded by >anyone who wished to save their money for 6 months so they could collect >the parts together to build one. >I know if I were alive back then, and I had the same excitement for >computers that I do today, and an opportunity to build my own computer >came up for 1/10th of my yearly salary, I sure as hell would have saved >the money to build one. > >Whatever. > >Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com >----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Both Sellam and Richard have valid points, but neither of them are right, because they're arguing apples and oranges. Richard is arguing consumer acceptance as a criterion - what average Americans _did_ do - and the fact is that very few average Americans in the 50s spent $300 on personal computers. Sellam is arguing affordability and availability as a criterion - what an average American _could_ have done - and Doug's site shows that it was possible to buy a PC for an affordable price in the 50s. Reduce this argument to its extremes: in the extension of Richard's view, _no_ PC can be considered a personal computer until every average American buys one, which hasn't happened yet and probably never will; in the extension of Sellam's view, if I can show that Leonardo da Vinci scrawled down plans for a recognizable computer that cost less than 3 month's pay in commonly available materials in 1500, even if one was never built, that will be the first personal computer, because someone could have bought or built one. This argument can never be resolved, because to do so, you have to agree on whether actual purchasing (as opposed to the possibility of purchasing) is required, and if so, what degree of consumer acceptance is enough (do you have to sell 1 machine? 50? 5000? 250,000?). I don't think anyone can agree on this. And let's keep the personal gibes to a minimum, please (i.e. "Get it through your thick skull"). My 2 cents, Mark.

25 years, 2 months

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

test-drb April 1999