test-drb August 2001

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

295 participants
726 discussions

by dhquebbeman＠theestopinalgroup.com

> > I've always thought that one of the more simple assembly languages would > > be a great 'first language' for someone wanting to learn how to program. > > Who's with me? > > I think S/360-S/370 assembler would work quite well. It starts out > exceedingly simple, then moves to variable length opcodes, variable word > length, four-level indirection, etc. Doesn't require it to do useful > stuff though. But I am a bit biased towards mainframes. Yeah, that was my first... in fact, at quitting time, I sometimes think "time to BALR *,HOME" or something like that... -dq

23 years, 4 months

Who reads their email the most Classically?

by jeff.kaneko＠juno.com

On Tue, 14 Aug 2001 23:56:50 -0500 (CDT) "Jeffrey S. Sharp" <jss(a)subatomix.com> writes: > Funny... I haven't seen very many people announcing their use of > Micro$oft Virus Transfer Utility Express > > I guess the magic eight-ball was right when it told me > "Outlook not so good" Hm, that's funny . . . mine says . . . LookOut!! ________________________________________________________________ GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

23 years, 4 months

What's your coolest ISA card?( was Re: IBM 5150 PC)

by dhquebbeman＠theestopinalgroup.com

> > I used to feel the same way when I was running a TRS-80 Model > > 2000 and I'd see caching SCSI controllers that used the same 80186 as > > a coprocessor on the board. There's something humbling about seeing > > your main CPU relegated to coprocessor status! > > Remember when the Apple Laserwriter was more powerful than any of the > computers that they sold to connect it to? Yes, I found that highly amusing at the time... -dq

23 years, 4 months

Who reads their email the most Classically?

by dhquebbeman＠theestopinalgroup.com

> Funny... I haven't seen very many people announcing their use of > Micro$oft Virus Transfer Utility Express > > I guess the magic eight-ball was right when it told me > "Outlook not so good" > > Sorry for the recycled jokes. Ok, Jeff... that one made me split my sides, and I *hurt*.. -dq

23 years, 4 months

SemiOT: Mourning for Classic Computing

by dhquebbeman＠theestopinalgroup.com

> On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Douglas Quebbeman wrote: > > > > And I would not consider people writing in assembly language to be at > > the bottom rungs > > Right! I've always wondered why so many of the other programmers I have > met have held assembly language in such low esteem. Depending on the > particular make/model of processor you're dealing with, it can be > downright elegant. Was it for assembly language programmers that the phrase "high priests of a low cult" was coined? or was that for mainframe guys in general? > I've always thought that one of the more simple assembly languages would > be a great 'first language' for someone wanting to learn how to program. > Who's with me? Many schools (I.U. included) had courses that used assembly language for a hypothetical machine as the first language taught. Regards, -dq

23 years, 4 months

PDP 11/84's - any interest?

by hofmanwb＠worldonline.nl

Sergio Well, I had a BA23 box in which I put the CPU and the memory of the 11/84. And I had an RQDX3 disk interface and a Seagate ST-251 disk. The hard part is the cabinet kit. It should be possible to use parts of the 11/84 cabinet kit and make it fit with some soldering, but happily I could avoid that. The cabinet kit is for setting the serial line speed and to connect the serial line. Someone (Thanks again Wanderer!!) offered me an original 11/83 cabinet kit so that finished it. Wim ---------- > From: SP <SPEDRAJA(a)mail.ono.es> > To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org > Subject: RE: PDP 11/84's - any interest? > Date: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 12:38 AM > > Hello. Could you be more explicit ? It's possible > I could obtain one (with CPU and Memory of the 84, > of course) but I'd like to knoe the form to convert > one 84 in one 83, of course. > > Regards > > Sergio > > > > > Jerome, > > > > I converted an 11/84 to an 11/83 myself. The memory works fine on a Q-bus. > > It is connected to the CPU board via overhead flatcable. I converted an > > 11/84 to an 11/83 myself. > > > > Wim > > >

23 years, 4 months

Fw: SIMH VAX

by dhquebbeman＠theestopinalgroup.com

Can anyone help our good friend Bob Supnik out? "Bob Supnik" <bsupnik(a)us.inter.net> wrote in message news:<et3dnt44ib8ves29sklh73733afl5o6714(a)4ax.com>... > SIMH for VAX has been hung up for more than two years now due to lack > of documentation on I/O. (It ran the HCORE diagnostic in the spring > of '99.) I would like to emulate a CVAX based Qbus system (eg, a > MicroVAX 3000) so I need, in particular, > > - VMB code > - specs for the system support chip (CSSC) > - specs for the Qbus adapter chip (CQBIC) > - specs for the disk controller (RQDX3 or generic MSCP controller) > - specs for the Ethernet controller (DEQNA or first chip based > controllers) > > The rest of the peripherals will be standard - LP(V)11 for line > printer, DZ(V)11 for multiple terminals. > > Thanks, > > /Bob Supnik

23 years, 4 months

SemiOT: Mourning for Classic Computing (Was: RE: PeeCee turns 20) [longish]

by dhquebbeman＠theestopinalgroup.com

> I think all of us have our own personal view on "when computing had it's > golden age". For me, 1984 and the Sinclair QL was the peak of the > microcomputer (as opposed to the IBM PC & clones). For you, it must have > been around 197<mumble>. Hard to say... Actually, 1979-1983, my Pr1me Days... > >The beginning of the end. I knew it then, and I was > >proved right. > > I dispute that: Computers and computing go from strength to strength. > There's more than just PCs out there; the mighty mainframe still rules the > roost in many places, there's Apple Macs, VAX minis, Crays, and probably > many others I can't even think of. And, for the soldering-iron fans, > embedded computing is probably stronger than it ever was - *everything's* > got a computer or three in it... Computing today is nothing if not diverse. > >Again, it's nice to have fast, cheap > >computers, but I for one would have been just as > >happy for the next 20 years having fast, cheap TERMINALS > >to hook to the mainframes. And the continued high cost of > >entry would have kept from coming into existence an entire > >generation of self-taught (and poorly so) programmers who > >have and continue to crank out some of the worst software > >imaginable. In the halcyon days, most of the bad code was > >writtwn by the lusers themselves... > > That's a bit elitist, isn't it? Besides, most of the self-taught > programmers of whom you speak are not really programmers; they're merely > users with enough knowledge to be dangerous. Besides, if it wasn't for the > microprocessor and all that it begat, this list wouldn't even be here.. No; I have worked with these people. Most of them learned how to program before they had a chance to take a college course with rigor; I know this is anecdotal, but take one young man I worked with. He'd learned to program in high school, a combination of some fragmentary knowledge on the part of the math teacher and self-taught the rest of the way. Then got to college, where they tried to teach him structured programming. He dismissed structured programming completely because "it slows down both the program and the programmer". While this is potentially true, it ignores the truth (at the time, less so now) that more labor is spent on maintaining code than initially writing it. And as to lusers with a little too much knowledge... yeah, they can be a problem, and a LART's not always at hand... But as this list is dedicated to hardware that ranges from a Imlac-1 (I think that was the oldest reported here recently) to something like a Mac IIci (1991), it might have a smaller readership sans micros, but I'd bet there'd be sufficient interest to have the list. And if you meant we'd not have the Internet if the micro hadn't come about, I'd have to dispute that. It would simply be a slower, and less saturated Internet... > >Easy access to fast, cheap computers drove the genesis of > >an entire generation of self-taught programmers who didn't > >give a whit for structured programming or anything else that > >resembles a methodology, and who single-handedly changed the > >expectations that managers have about how quickly things > >get done. Sure RAD helped speed programming along, but not > >nearly as much just cutting corners... which the PC made > >easier... damn, I feel a song coming on again: > > It wasn't the PC that made cutting corners easy; it was the near-universal > use of BASIC - a fundamentally unstructured language - that is responsible > for the bulk of the "bad programmers"; and I say that as a professional > programmer who uses BASIC....! Well, you won't get much disagreement from me here... but I've seen COBOL code that was more spaghetti'd out than the worst BASIC I've seen... > Maybe if PASCAL had been the language de jour, today's self-taught > programmers would be better at it... Overall, yes, but to paraphrase my Data Structures, Pascal sucks when you limit yourself to the FORTRAN subset... > >No, not only will I not celebrate it, but I need to > >find a black armband to wear the rest of the month. > > IMHO, no. The PC had to happen; it was just a case of who got lucky (or had > the best marketing). At the end of the day, the PC offered unrivalled > expansion possibilities, a comparatively friendly OS (Gates did well to > poach DOS), and good flexibility thanks to the lack of built > in anything. Actually, at that moment I saw the Apple II, my thought was: "ten years too soon. we need ten years to figure out what we can really do with these damn things..." Ten years to develop real operating systems, job control languages, interfaces, etc. > Personally, I'd have liked to have seen a MC68000 based machine become > today's PC (mainly because I'd already learned assembler on the QL). No > doubt Commodore fans would have preferred the C128 or Amiga to "grow up" > into the PC. Might have been a marginal improvement... it's a nicely orthogonal processor... > Well, I'm off to dabble with my CBM PET, or maybe the MZ-80K. They're fun, > but I wouldn't like to have to use them every day, day in day out... Cool, don't let my rant effect your fun! -dq

23 years, 4 months

HS-1

by Glenatacme＠aol.com

On page 81 of the March/April 1981 issue of Sync Magazine there is a ad for a board which connects two ZX81, TS1000 or TS1500 computers, using one as the display processor and one for all other computations. The company name is Interface Design, in Rexford NY. Any info out there? Thanks, Glen 0/0

23 years, 4 months

Fujitsu drives (was Re: Service does still exist....)

by Glenatacme＠aol.com

In a message dated 8/13/01 5:03:03 PM Eastern Daylight Time, vance(a)ikickass.org writes: << Yeah. Two hard disk manufacturers I've never had trouble with are IBM and Fujitsu. The reason I mention Fujitsu is that their highest-end drives, and most of their oldest drives all come/came with a lifetime warranty. There has been many a time when I have found an old SCSI Fujitsu drive lying around broken somewhere, I rescue it, and they fix it up for me. I find that very impressive. >> More information about this, please? If I find a Fujitsu drive how can I tell if the lifetime warranty applies to that drive? Thanks, Glen 0/0

23 years, 4 months

← Newer
1
...
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
...
73
Older →

Jump to page:

2025

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 August 2001