Jim Battle wrote:
>Are you sure about that? Nick Tredennick, the architect (or maybe co
>architect) of the 68000 left Motorola, went to work for IBM, and was the
>architect of the "micro 370". The design and its evolution were
>described in a book Tredennick wrote, Microprocessor Logic Design: The
>Flowchart Method.
The source for my information is the IBM Systems Journal, Vol 23, No 3 from 1984.
>From page 245:
"After studying several types of microprocessors to identify one architecturally suitable as a base for System/370, IBM selected the Motorola MC68000 microprocessor and began working with Motorola engineers to develop a customized microprocessor. At IBM's site in Endicott, New York, a group in the engineering organization wrote the internal microcode which allowed the device to directly execute a large subset of the commercial System/370 instructions."
Later in the article, they just call it the "custom" processor.
It sounds like the same part could be an MC68000 or the S/370 depending on microcode load; when they say 'the device,' I believe they are referring to the aforementioned MC68000.
Thanks,
Mike
I've noticed that 68kmla.net has been down for quite a while now and still
is. Does anyone know what happened? Will it be coming back? I certainly hope
it's not going to disappear... :-(
You (and your family) would be in trouble (if not in
danger) every time it froze or crashed. What about in
a power cut - batteries dont last forever? Would most
retro computers be able to do such a job? ( trying to
get this back on topic) - Andrew B (via mobile phone)
--- cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org <jvdg at sparcpark.net>
wrote:
> woodelf wrote:
>
> > Patrick Finnegan wrote:
> >
> >> As I've learned before from this list, the only
thing which that question
> >> generates is a flamewar about what is a computer,
and what's a "home
> >> computer".
> >
> > I have yet to see a real HOME computer. Most game
boxes I have seen
> > - Coco, C-64 ect. where marketed as home computers
but what do you need
> > a home computer for?
>
> To assist you in managing your household, or Course!
A home computer would
> be, I imagine, a computer installed somewhere in a
closet or the basement,
> and it'd have connections for thin clients all
through the house. It'd
> control your furnace, communications systems,
lighting, heating, water
> supply, you name it. You'd use it to determine at
what level of ambient
> light the room lighting switches on and at what
times the curtains open
> and close, or what temperature your bedroom needs to
be a the time you
> get up on workdays. It'd make sure your bath tub is
filled at the right
> time. and that your toast and coffee are ready in
the kitchen when you
> finish your bath, displaying your email on the
kitchen's display while
> you breakfast.
>
> No, haven't seen many of them, yet. Only in a few
proof-of-concept "home of
> the future" type projects.
>
> ,xtG
> tsooJ
>
>
> I was looking for something else and ran across a two-binder
> set of something called "PC-MOS" by The Software Link, circa
> 1992. I opened the shrinkwrap on the nstallation manual and
> the thing looks like
> it's a multi-user version of MS-DOS, talking to terminals. I
> appear to have a 5 user version.
>
> Anyone familiar with this animal? The version is 4.2.
I remember this!
It was a multi user MS-DOS. It supported a number of 8 port serial cards
of the same generation (Starcomm or something like that). You'd attach
terminals to the serial board and run software that was written to run
under PC-MOS. Medical office software was what I mostly saw on these
systems.
At 11:41 AM 4/12/2007, Ethan Dicks wrote:
>Hmm... sounds like what the Amiga did out of the box with a "newcli
><AUX:" I used to hang a VT220 off of my Amiga and read e-mail and
>NetNews (aquired via UUCP and read off-line) while my flatmate played
>"Silent Service".
I seem to remember doing it in both directions between PC and Amiga,
with Pro-YAM delivering a good command line over the serial port.
On the Amiga side, wasn't there a better alternative than 'newcli'?
I also remember having either the PC or the Amiga answer the modem,
then let me into the command line on either machine when I was
on the road. When I was debugging PC programs, I'd use a debugging
printf() that spit out the serial port, which I'd watch on the
adjacent Amiga screen.
- John
> I have heard of a lot of m68k variants (including XC-series parts),
> but I've never heard of an MC68000R
PGA package. Not commonly used on the 68000.
The version I worked with for a client was circa late 1980's. Basically it was
software that would support multi-tasking on one CPU. It was installed on an
original IBM 6 MHz AT and was fairly slow but did save the expense of another
computer by using a terminal instead. They also sold some hardware that was
basically a four-port serial card/connectors for attaching to the terminals thus
allowing multiple operations. As I said, the whole things was fairly slow then,
but worked well for something like word processing.
> I was looking for something else and ran across a two-binder set of
> something called "PC-MOS" by The Software Link, circa 1992. I opened
> the shrinkwrap on the nstallation manual and the thing looks like
> it's a multi-user version of MS-DOS, talking to terminals. I
> appear to have a 5 user version.
>
> Anyone familiar with this animal? The version is 4.2.
>
> Cheers,
> Chuck
Jim Battle <frustum at pacbell.net> wrote:
> Mike, your web page says:
>
> "The System/370 processor is implemented in three microprocessors --
> two Motorola 68000 processors and a custom 8087."
>
> Are you sure about that? Nick Tredennick, the architect (or maybe co
> architect) of the 68000 left Motorola, went to work for IBM, and was the
> architect of the "micro 370". [...]
>
> I know nothing of the machine you have there, but I suspect it is really
> using redundant copies of the micro 370 described in the book. [...]
This quote from the article "System/370 capability in a desktop Computer"
(IBM System Journal Vol 23, No 2, 1984), may help resolve this issue:
As previously mentioned, three microprocessors are used to implement
System/370 processing functions. A custom-developed System/370
Subset microprocessor performs most of the System/370 commercial
instructions. Floating point, including extended precision, instructions
are executed by a custom developed Floating point microprocessor
which works in close conjuction with the System/370 Subset processor.
The remaining instructions are emulated by an MC68000R microprocessor
which also performs other tasks such as exception handling.
Having said that, I also remember reading somewhere about the 68000
with modified microcode somewhere (maybe Byte magazine?)
**vp
Andrew Burton wrote:
> You (and your family) would be in trouble (if not in
> danger) every time it froze or crashed. What about in
> a power cut - batteries dont last forever?
Manual override. A bit of a nuisance that your tub isn't filled and the tea isn't ready, but we're getting by, now, so why wouldn't we get by then?
> Would most retro computers be able to do such a job?
> (trying to get this back on topic)
I would think so. Thermostats and phone systems are embedded computer systems, have been for ages. So are dedicated routers. No huge amounts of processing power necessary.
,xtG
tsooJ
> Does a TU56 normally have rack-mount rails? I have two TU56 drives and
> neither of them have rails. How are these typically mounted?
>
Like others have said with the normal rail screws. To make it easy
to get in and out I got some angle iron from the hardware store and
bolted it between the front and back rails below the drive so I could
slide the drive in then put a couple of screws in. Most items that
will be below it are narrow enough that they will clear the angle iron.
Not correct but since I was taking it for display that made the disassembly
and reassembly much easier.
