test-drb October 2010

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

175 participants
274 discussions

by classiccmp＠vintage-computer.com

I've got a nice, boxed and working AT&T 6300 that has to go ASAP. I've had it on eBay (item 190454801269) but the shipping is/was prohibative ($110ish for 3 boxes) and it's been languishing on The VCGM for too long. I'm brokering this for someone in the NorCal area and if it's not gone very soon it's going back to the owner and subsequently, eventually, to the recycler. I'll pass any reasonable offers on to the owner for consideration. Local pickup is preferred. And no, "you're gonna throw it away anyway so just give it to me" is not a "reasonable" offer. :) -- Erik Klein www.vintage-computer.com www.vintage-computer.com/vcforum - The Vintage Computer Forums marketplace.vintage-computer.com - The Vintage Computer and Gaming Marketplace

13 years, 8 months

Oldest original proper computer (stored program etc)

by thomas.gardner＠sbcglobal.net

On Fri, 22 Oct 2010 11:03:10 +0200 (CEST) Christian Corti wrote: >Per definition, a magnetic drum is not random access. >A random access storage is defined by the fact that addressing >any arbitrary cell needs the same time. . That may be today's definition but if you check the literature of the 50's and 60's I am sure u will find drums (along with Williams Tubes, etc) categorized as random access devices. Even the first disk drive was the IBM RAMAC 350 - as in Random Access Memory! I think IBM invented the term Direct Access Storage in the 1960s to distinguish devices whose assess time was short but variable; that is, in between core (random) and tape (sequential). So the historical definition may have been . needs essentially the same time. Tom > -----Original Message----- > From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org] > On Behalf Of cctalk-request at classiccmp.org > Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 7:14 AM > To: cctalk at classiccmp.org > Subject: cctalk Digest, Vol 86, Issue 46 > > Send cctalk mailing list submissions to > cctalk at classiccmp.org > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://www.classiccmp.org/mailman/listinfo/cctalk > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > cctalk-request at classiccmp.org > > You can reach the person managing the list at > cctalk-owner at classiccmp.org > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of cctalk digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: 1986 NSA paper on computers (William Donzelli) > 2. RE: the new manx is live (Rob Jarratt) > 3. RE: Cataloguing in a museum setting [was Re: nonsense...] > (Ian King) > 4. Re: cctalk Digest, Vol 86, Issue 45 (MikeS) > 5. Re: Moving House - Need to downsize (Dan Williams) > 6. Re: cctalk Digest, Vol 86, Issue 45 (Al Kossow) > 7. Re: the new manx is live (Dan Roganti) > 8. Re: the new manx is live (Richard) > 9. Re: cctalk Digest, Vol 86, Issue 45 (Chuck Guzis) > 10. RE: Cataloguing in a museum setting [was Re: nonsense...] > (Rich Alderson) > 11. Re: HTL (Charles Dickman) > 12. Re: Cataloguing in a museum setting [was Re: nonsense...] > (Al Kossow) > 13. Viper 2150S scsi tape drive (dwight elvey) > 14. Re: Viper 2150S scsi tape drive (Chuck Guzis) > 15. Re: Moving House - Need to downsize (Pontus Pihlgren) > 16. Re: the new manx is live (Pontus Pihlgren) > 17. Test Diablo Model 31 drive and disk pack on a PC (Operation > Alto Restoration) (Nick Allen) > 18. Re: Oldest original proper computer (stored program etc) > (Charlie Carothers) > 19. Re: Viper 2150S scsi tape drive (r.stricklin) > 20. Re: Oldest original proper computer (stored program etc) > (Jochen Kunz) > 21. Re: Oldest original proper computer (stored program etc) > (Christian Corti) > 22. RE: Oldest original working proper computer (stored program > etc) (Roger Holmes) > 23. Re: lilith computer by wikipedia (Simon Fryer) > 24. Re: Test Diablo Model 31 drive and disk pack on a PC > (Operation Alto Restoration) (Al Kossow) > 25. RE: Viper 2150S scsi tape drive (dwight elvey) > 26. Re: Viper 2150S scsi tape drive (Dave McGuire) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 17:25:52 -0400 > From: William Donzelli <wdonzelli at gmail.com> > Subject: Re: 1986 NSA paper on computers > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: > <AANLkTinUBCts0XvV0RaGH7RcJQab-Vqm5YjBrks8aQP3 at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > > Will, you've got a 1604; do you know anything about this? > > Not me. > > I probably have enough of the modules that I could build one, however. > > -- > Will > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 22:28:17 +0100 > From: "Rob Jarratt" <robert.jarratt at ntlworld.com> > Subject: RE: the new manx is live > To: "'General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts'" > <cctalk at classiccmp.org>, "'General Discussion: On-Topic Posts > Only'" > <cctech at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: <015601cb7166$e49b58a0$add209e0$(a)ntlworld.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk- > > bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Torfinn Ingolfsen > > Sent: 21 October 2010 08:10 > > To: General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only > > Subject: Re: the new manx is live > > > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Richard <legalize at xmission.com> wrote: > > > > > Manx is an online catalog of computer documentation. > > > > > > The new manx is up for beta testing here: <http://manx.classiccmp.org> > > > > > > > I seem to be having problems reaching the site. > > Details: > > root at kg-quiet# traceroute manx.classiccmp.org traceroute to > classiccmp.org > > (209.145.140.17), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets > > 1 kg-omni1 (10.1.10.1) 0.228 ms 0.182 ms 0.158 ms > > 2 kg-ruter (10.0.0.1) 77.819 ms 127.069 ms 86.825 ms > > 3 1.80-203-92.nextgentel.com (80.203.92.1) 15.481 ms 14.011 ms > 14.051 > ms > > 4 80-202-3-30.dd.nextgentel.com (80.202.3.30) 17.763 ms * 59.706 ms > > 5 217-13-0-70.dd.nextgentel.com (217.13.0.70) 18.365 ms 14.260 ms > > 14.759 ms > > 6 oso-b3-link.telia.net (80.239.193.93) 15.088 ms 14.948 ms 14.765 > ms > > 7 kbn-bb2-link.telia.net (80.91.251.49) 34.331 ms 27.930 ms 28.293 > ms > > 8 hbg-bb2-link.telia.net (80.91.252.114) 78.106 ms 34.255 ms 34.479 > ms > > 9 ffm-bb2-link.telia.net (80.91.247.142) 67.265 ms > > ffm-bb2-link.telia.net (80.91.245.123) 44.158 ms > > ffm-bb2-link.telia.net (80.91.247.142) 50.006 ms > > 10 ffm-b2-link.telia.net (80.91.249.103) 42.490 ms > > ffm-b2-link.telia.net (80.91.252.174) 41.347 ms > > ffm-b2-link.telia.net (80.91.249.103) 42.628 ms > > 11 cogent-ic-135155-ffm-b2.c.telia.net (213.248.93.174) 51.872 ms > 42.313 ms > > 40.571 ms > > 12 te0-2-0-6.ccr22.fra03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.36.81) 42.860 ms > > te0-2-0-6.mpd21.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.31.245) 132.058 ms > > te0-4-0-0.mpd21.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.26.101) 147.305 ms > > 13 te0-4-0-0.ccr22.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.42.113) 140.836 ms > > te0-2-0-4.mpd21.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.40.226) 152.265 ms > > te0-2-0-6.ccr22.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.31.241) 135.140 ms > > 14 te0-1-0-4.ccr22.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.40.206) 143.202 ms > > te0-2-0-4.ccr22.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.40.210) 157.894 ms > > 147.097 ms > > 15 te3-2.ccr01.stl03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.27.30) 150.725 ms > 150.014 > > ms 150.329 ms > > 16 vl3808.na41.b003211-0.stl03.atlas.cogentco.com (38.20.47.170) > 167.084 > > ms 156.374 ms > > vl3508.na41.b003211-0.stl03.atlas.cogentco.com (38.20.47.166) > 158.136 > ms > > 17 38.104.146.10 (38.104.146.10) 155.110 ms 155.902 ms 152.225 ms > > 18 host42.datotel.com (208.82.151.42) 161.893 ms 179.548 ms 167.528 > ms > > 19 stl-d1-g5-1.datotel.com (208.82.151.22) 157.149 ms 151.804 ms > 151.915 > > ms > > 20 * * * > > 21 * * * > > 22 * * * > > 23 * * * > > 24 * * * > > 25 * * * > > 26 * * * > > 27 * * * > > 28 * * * > > 29 * * * > > 30 * * * > > 31 * host50.datotel.com (208.75.82.50) 156.517 ms !X * > > 32 * * * > > 33 * * * > > 34 * * * > > 35 * * * > > 36 * * * > > 37 * * * > > 38 * * * > > 39 * * * > > 40 * * * > > 41 * * * > > 42 * * * > > 43 * * * > > 44 * * * > > 45 * * * > > 46 * * * > > 47 * * * > > 48 * * * > > 49 * * * > > 50 * * * > > 51 * * * > > 52 * * * > > 53 * * * > > 54 * * * > > 55 * * * > > 56 * * * > > 57 * * * > > 58 * * * > > 59 * * * > > 60 * * * > > 61 * * * > > 62 * * * > > 63 * * * > > 64 * * * > > root at kg-quiet# > > > > Is it working ok for everyone else? > > -- > > Regards, > > Torfinn Ingolfsen > > Oslo, Norway > > Works OK for me, here is my tracert: > > 1 8 ms 3 ms <1 ms JUPITER [192.168.0.1] > 2 42 ms 22 ms 26 ms 10.236.80.1 > 3 29 ms 66 ms 9 ms oldh-cam-1a-v100.network.virginmedia.net > [80.5.1 > 65.13] > 4 11 ms 24 ms 12 ms manc-core-1a-ae2-0.network.virginmedia.net > [195. > 182.180.37] > 5 25 ms 23 ms 18 ms manc-bb-1a-as0-0.network.virginmedia.net > [213.10 > 5.175.1] > 6 22 ms 31 ms 49 ms manc-bb-1b-ae0-0.network.virginmedia.net > [62.253 > .187.178] > 7 34 ms 45 ms 35 ms nrth-bb-1a-as3-0.network.virginmedia.net > [213.10 > 5.64.21] > 8 30 ms 29 ms 15 ms nrth-tmr-1-ae1-0.network.virginmedia.net > [213.10 > 5.159.30] > 9 64 ms 54 ms 43 ms fran-ic-1-as0-0.network.virginmedia.net > [62.253. > 185.81] > 10 76 ms 51 ms 54 ms te0-7-0-7.mpd22.fra03.atlas.cogentco.com > [130.11 > 7.14.133] > 11 144 ms 138 ms 120 ms te0-2-0-6.mpd22.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com > [130.11 > 7.51.230] > 12 138 ms 186 ms 155 ms te0-0-0-4.mpd22.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com > [154.54 > .40.234] > 13 137 ms 145 ms 155 ms te0-1-0-0.ccr22.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com > [154.54 > .6.178] > 14 184 ms 142 ms 141 ms te3-2.ccr01.stl03.atlas.cogentco.com > [154.54.27. > 30] > 15 173 ms 146 ms 158 ms > vl3808.na41.b003211-0.stl03.atlas.cogentco.com [ > 38.20.47.170] > 16 165 ms 165 ms 180 ms 38.104.146.10 > 17 163 ms 151 ms 146 ms host42.datotel.com [208.82.151.42] > 18 147 ms 151 ms 161 ms stl-d1-g5-1.datotel.com [208.82.151.22] > 19 151 ms 140 ms 155 ms host50.datotel.com [208.75.82.50] > 20 146 ms 163 ms 158 ms 209-145-130-66.accessus.net > [209.145.130.66] > 21 147 ms 160 ms 163 ms louie.classiccmp.org [209.145.140.17] > > Regards > > Rob > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 14:30:07 -0700 > From: Ian King <IanK at vulcan.com> > Subject: RE: Cataloguing in a museum setting [was Re: nonsense...] > To: "'General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts'" > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: <FF6AB92D97A23A409701CDBF66F03FCD03DC3E70BE at 505fuji> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk- > > bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Tony Duell > > Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 12:18 PM > > To: cctalk at classiccmp.org > > Subject: Re: Cataloguing in a museum setting [was Re: nonsense...] > > > > > > I'd like to hear more about what constitutes "cataloging", as I'm a > > > > n00b in this respect. > > > > > > Just what it sounds like. :-) > > > > > > When an item comes into the collection, it is assigned an accession > > > number; the standard is yyyy.nnn.mmm, where nnn represents order in > > > which the item came in in year yyyy, and mmm is the individual number > > > of each piece that makes up the item. If a piece is made up of > > > parts (say a tea set, for example) a letter can be suffixed to the > > > piece number for each part to make it possible to keep them > > associated > > > even if physically apart. Leading zeroes should be used in the item > > > and piece numbers. > > > > What do you mean by 'item','piece' and 'part' here? I can understand an > > item being made of several pieces, but why do you need a third level > > here? > > > > In the case of a classic computer, what would you label? The casing? > > The > > individual PCBs/modules? How would you handle the case of taking 2 > > effectively identical machines acquired at differnet times and using > > parts from bvth to make one working example, or would a museum never do > > that? (If the latter, then I consider the policy to be broken!). > > > > Yes. :-) > > Seriously: we do encounter this situation. When a machine comes in, it is > catalogued as an entity. If we find it necessary to remove a component > from machine A to install in machine B, the component is separately > catalogued with a note in the record stating that it was originally part > of machine A. > > I did this recently with a machine that came as a system containing an > RK05 drive identified as non-functional. We used the RK8-E from that > machine with another PDP-8/e that also had RK05 drives but no RK8-E. > > That would not be appropriate for a machine that is historically > significant in its particular configuration (for example, our PDP-12), but > that's a hard argument to make for the vast majority of PDP-8/e's. And > given the records we keep, we could restore the accession to its original > configuration if needed. > > It's always a judgement call when one must balance preservation and > restoration. -- Ian > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 17:52:03 -0400 > From: "MikeS" <dm561 at torfree.net> > Subject: Re: cctalk Digest, Vol 86, Issue 45 > To: <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: <C254F6585ED7493FB620AF800A7CA4F5 at vl420mt> > Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; > reply-type=original > > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 11:03:54 -0700 > From: Al Kossow <aek at bitsavers.org> > Subject: Re: Oldest original proper computer (stored program etc) > To: cctalk at classiccmp.org > Message-ID: <4CC0808A.8010108 at bitsavers.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > On 10/21/10 10:03 AM, Chuck Guzis wrote: > >> For example, the GI GIMINI (CP1600) > > > That would be fun to find. There was a version that I used in the late > > 70's that had a DSD floppy disk interfaced to it. I think I still have > > all of the software for it. > ---- > And I've got some brochures and datasheets for the GIC8000 and GIMINI and > the various cards and chips in them, so all we need is the computer ;-) > > mike > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 22:53:10 +0100 > From: Dan Williams <williams.dan at gmail.com> > Subject: Re: Moving House - Need to downsize > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: > <AANLkTinSeMiB8LqMnhemRO9Gkq56Ov5wGO6oZfeYtG0P at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On 21 October 2010 20:12, Pontus Pihlgren <pontus at update.uu.se> wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 07:12:03PM +0100, Dan Williams wrote: > >> I'm sure these will be popular: ?I have 8x big heavy drive DSSI drive > >> units. They have not been powered up for a few years. They have > >> scsi-->dssi convertor cards in them. They currently have 1GB and 2GB > >> full height drive units in them. But they can take up to 9GB. > >> I also have cabling which I have to sort out mainly for SUN and DEC. I > >> have all the cabling for the dssi drives and a lot of monitor and > >> other cables for Vaxstation 3100's. > > > > I'm curious about that SCSI->DSSI converter. Is it used to run dssi > > disks on a scsi controller or scsi disks on a dssi controller ? > > > > The latter would be interesting. > > > > Regards, > > Pontus. > > > > It takes scsi disks on a dssi controller. It has a front panel and you > can connect to the controller like a normal dssi disk. It is a > liberator 220. I have the user manual for it if anyone is interested. > > Dan > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 15:08:48 -0700 > From: Al Kossow <aek at bitsavers.org> > Subject: Re: cctalk Digest, Vol 86, Issue 45 > To: cctalk at classiccmp.org > Message-ID: <4CC0B9F0.5000705 at bitsavers.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > On 10/21/10 2:52 PM, MikeS wrote: > > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 11:03:54 -0700 > > From: Al Kossow <aek at bitsavers.org> > > Subject: Re: Oldest original proper computer (stored program etc) > > To: cctalk at classiccmp.org > > Message-ID: <4CC0808A.8010108 at bitsavers.org> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > > > On 10/21/10 10:03 AM, Chuck Guzis wrote: > >>> For example, the GI GIMINI (CP1600) > > > >> That would be fun to find. There was a version that I used in the late > >> 70's that had a DSD floppy disk interfaced to it. I think I still have > >> all of the software for it. > > ---- > > And I've got some brochures and datasheets for the GIC8000 and GIMINI > and the various cards and chips in them, so all we need is the computer ;- > ) > > > > I uploaded the GIMINI manuals under generalInstruments on bitsavers a > couple of weeks ago. > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 18:14:26 -0400 > From: Dan Roganti <ragooman at gmail.com> > Subject: Re: the new manx is live > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: > <AANLkTinTe5iYUGDnrsygRs+4XuFwxrGweoN+rEDL6fMg at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Richard <legalize at xmission.com> wrote: > > > > > In article <AANLkTikFFFKKo=6Ba=6DjtK1hUkDUSciHp+WO- > gfLNyM at mail.gmail.com<6DjtK1hUkDUSciHp%2BWO-gfLNyM at mail.gmail.com> > > >, > > Torfinn Ingolfsen <tingox at gmail.com> writes: > > > > > Is it working ok for everyone else? > > > > Noone else has reported problems; manx is hosted on the same group of > > machines that serves this mailing list and several other classic > > computing sites graciously hosted by Jay. > > > > > > very nice ! > > Can we always request to add addt'l companies ? > SEL is on Bitsavers already but not listed on yours. > > > =Dan > --http://www.vintagecomputer.net/ragooman/ > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 16:51:54 -0600 > From: Richard <legalize at xmission.com> > Subject: Re: the new manx is live > To: cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: <E1P93zG-0005Jz-CS at shell.xmission.com> > > > In article <AANLkTinTe5iYUGDnrsygRs+4XuFwxrGweoN+rEDL6fMg at mail.gmail.com>, > Dan Roganti <ragooman at gmail.com> writes: > > > Can we always request to add addt'l companies ? > > SEL is on Bitsavers already but not listed on yours. > > This first round was just to reproduce the existing manx. > > Next up is to add users and roles to provide for community additions. > > Contributions of code are welcome. The whole code base has been > developed test-driven and is covered by unit tests. > -- > "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download > <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com/the-direct3d-graphics-pipeline/> > > Legalize Adulthood! <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com> > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 16:04:02 -0700 > From: "Chuck Guzis" <cclist at sydex.com> > Subject: Re: cctalk Digest, Vol 86, Issue 45 > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: <4CC06472.12811.1626E31 at cclist.sydex.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > On 21 Oct 2010 at 15:08, Al Kossow wrote: > > > I uploaded the GIMINI manuals under generalInstruments on bitsavers a > > couple of weeks ago. > > Well, I've got the CP1600 CPU sitting unused in my hellbox and the > blue manual that gives the schematics for the system. But no > firmware listing for the monitor... > > BTW, did anyone notice that there's a fellow on eBay offering the > INS8900 (PACE in NMOS) NOS CPUs for about $16 the each? > > --Chuck > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 16:04:06 -0700 > From: Rich Alderson <RichA at vulcan.com> > Subject: RE: Cataloguing in a museum setting [was Re: nonsense...] > To: "'General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts'" > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: > <CC28F43ED4708D489ABCF68D06D7F556040A5CCB91 at 505DENALI.corp.vnw.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > From: Tony Duell > Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 12:18 PM > > >> When an item comes into the collection, it is assigned an accession > >> number; the standard is yyyy.nnn.mmm, where nnn represents order in > >> which the item came in in year yyyy, and mmm is the individual number > >> of each piece that makes up the item. If a piece is made up of > >> parts (say a tea set, for example) a letter can be suffixed to the > >> piece number for each part to make it possible to keep them associated > >> even if physically apart. Leading zeroes should be used in the item > >> and piece numbers. > > > What do you mean by 'item','piece' and 'part' here? I can understand an > > item being made of several pieces, but why do you need a third level > here? > > I was trying not to re-use the same word for different levels. > > You donate items to a museum, let's say for simplicity's sake a horse shoe > and a tea service with 4 individually decorated cups and matching saucers, > pot, sugar and creamer. > > You do this in 2010. That's the first field of the accession numbers. > > The two items are the 75th and 76th donated to the museum this year. > These numbers will be the second fields of the respective accession > numbers. > > The horse shoe will receive accession number 2010.075.001, and be marked > as 2010.75.1 > > The tea pot will be 2010.076.001; the sugar, 2010.076.002; the creamer, > 2010.076.003; the first cup-and-saucer pair, 2010.076.004A and > 2010.076.004B; > and so on. The reason for pairing the cup and saucer will be the matching > decoration on each pair. > > You could also simply number each piece individually, but then you lose > information. > > > In the case of a classic computer, what would you label? The casing? The > > individual PCBs/modules? How would you handle the case of taking 2 > > effectively identical machines acquired at differnet times and using > > parts from bvth to make one working example, or would a museum never do > > that? (If the latter, then I consider the policy to be broken!). > > I'll start with the last comment. The policy will depend on the purpose > of the museum; no two museums have identical missions, though they may be > very close. A computer museum with a mission of making systems run will > have a very different answer to your question than a museum dealing with > the history of engineering laboratories, where the identical computers > may have been used for very different purposes and be important to the > understanding of how each lab achieved its goals. (Not every museum tries > to please everyone in the know about a topic--there are art museums which > I find deadly dull, and art museums I love to visit over and over, for > example.) Neither policy is "broken", they simply differ. > > Computers are more difficult to catalog than tea services. My personal > preference would be to replicate the manufacturer's bill of materials, > assigning accession numbers at each level down to the circuit boards (or > equivalent, in the case of large valve-based modules, but those don't > crop up in the time frame in which we have specialized). Since the > catalog here was set up by someone else several years before I joined > the team, I have to accommodate myself to what is in place--we're not in > a position to re-catalog several thousand pieces my way. > > We catalog the top-level items (CPU, disk drives, tape drives, printers, > etc.) when they come in. The low-level items (disk packs and cartridges, > tapes, boards, etc.) are fuzzier: Loose items, like spare boards, are > catalogued when they come in, but boards installed in larger items only > get catalogued when they are pulled for repair or replacement. > > It takes discipline to catalog pieces when you would really rather be > restoring a system to working condition, but without a catalog, you will > very quickly lose all semblance of provenance, and your reason for being > a museum. > > > Rich Alderson > Vintage Computing Sr. Server Engineer > Vulcan, Inc. > 505 5th Avenue S, Suite 900 > Seattle, WA 98104 > > mailto:RichA at vulcan.com > mailto:RichA at LivingComputerMuseum.org > > http://www.PDPplanet.org/ > http://www.LivingComputerMuseum.org/ > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 11 > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 21:09:31 -0400 > From: Charles Dickman <chd at chdickman.com> > Subject: Re: HTL > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: > <AANLkTimgJ80NcGDTXXwhRHZFDfbzy_reGtCe65juy5Ax at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 11:27 PM, William Donzelli > <wdonzelli at gmail.com>wrote: > > > Maybe a retarded question, but how static sensitive are HTL chips? > > > > Why do you ask? > > I have quite a few HTL chips that I have no use for. > > -chuck > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 12 > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 18:23:11 -0700 > From: Al Kossow <aek at bitsavers.org> > Subject: Re: Cataloguing in a museum setting [was Re: nonsense...] > To: cctalk at classiccmp.org > Message-ID: <4CC0E77F.3000005 at bitsavers.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > On 10/21/10 4:04 PM, Rich Alderson wrote: > > The low-level items (disk packs and cartridges, > > tapes, boards, etc.) are fuzzier > > But necessary. > > We're discovering that systems were accepted in Boston with no boards in > them, > for example, and there is nothing in the accession record that mentions > that > fact. > > It's absolutely necessary to know if anything that should be in an > accessioned > artifact is missing, and the condition. > > It is a huge amount of work to catalog a collection. > > One of the requirements for museum accreditation is having a significant > portion of your collection cataloged. > > CHM has come a LONG way since I've been here. We have just under 75,000 > items > visible in the on-line data base > > http://www.computerhistory.org/collections/search/ > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 13 > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 21:37:58 -0700 > From: dwight elvey <dkelvey at hotmail.com> > Subject: Viper 2150S scsi tape drive > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: <SNT129-W286E3F0A65E7EDCFA0F5C3A35E0 at phx.gbl> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > Hi > I just got this use drive and I was wondering if it > is working as expected. > When I plug in the tape, the head moves up and down > but the tape drive motor doesn't move. > Is this normal? > Dwight > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 14 > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 21:50:44 -0700 > From: "Chuck Guzis" <cclist at sydex.com> > Subject: Re: Viper 2150S scsi tape drive > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: <4CC0B5B4.16151.2A10F67 at cclist.sydex.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > On 21 Oct 2010 at 21:37, dwight elvey wrote: > > > I just got this use drive and I was wondering if it > > is working as expected. > > When I plug in the tape, the head moves up and down > > but the tape drive motor doesn't move. > > Is this normal? > > My recollection of this drive is that the tape should be > automatically positioned to BOT when inserted. (i.e., the drive > should spin the tape a bit). > > --Chuck > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 15 > Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 07:13:36 +0200 > From: Pontus Pihlgren <pontus at Update.UU.SE> > Subject: Re: Moving House - Need to downsize > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: <20101022051336.GA15674 at Update.UU.SE> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 10:53:10PM +0100, Dan Williams wrote: > > > > It takes scsi disks on a dssi controller. It has a front panel and you > > can connect to the controller like a normal dssi disk. It is a > > liberator 220. I have the user manual for it if anyone is interested. > > It would be a lovely thing to have. I live in sweden and unless you find > someone local and wouldn't mind shipping I wouldn't mind paying for it. > Well, it depends on the size of course, how big is this thing? > > /P > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 16 > Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 07:16:37 +0200 > From: Pontus Pihlgren <pontus at Update.UU.SE> > Subject: Re: the new manx is live > Cc: "General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only" <cctech at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: <20101022051637.GB15674 at Update.UU.SE> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > This is a semiuseful tool: > > http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/http://manx.classiccmp.org/ > > Good work everyone! Manx is an awesome tool! Many thanks. > > /Pontus > > > On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 09:10:28AM +0200, Torfinn Ingolfsen wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Richard <legalize at xmission.com> wrote: > > > > > Manx is an online catalog of computer documentation. > > > > > > The new manx is up for beta testing here: <http://manx.classiccmp.org> > > > > > > > I seem to be having problems reaching the site. > > Details: > > root at kg-quiet# traceroute manx.classiccmp.org > > traceroute to classiccmp.org (209.145.140.17), 64 hops max, 52 byte > packets > > 1 kg-omni1 (10.1.10.1) 0.228 ms 0.182 ms 0.158 ms > > 2 kg-ruter (10.0.0.1) 77.819 ms 127.069 ms 86.825 ms > > 3 1.80-203-92.nextgentel.com (80.203.92.1) 15.481 ms 14.011 ms > 14.051 > > ms > > 4 80-202-3-30.dd.nextgentel.com (80.202.3.30) 17.763 ms * 59.706 ms > > 5 217-13-0-70.dd.nextgentel.com (217.13.0.70) 18.365 ms 14.260 ms > > 14.759 ms > > 6 oso-b3-link.telia.net (80.239.193.93) 15.088 ms 14.948 ms 14.765 > ms > > 7 kbn-bb2-link.telia.net (80.91.251.49) 34.331 ms 27.930 ms 28.293 > ms > > 8 hbg-bb2-link.telia.net (80.91.252.114) 78.106 ms 34.255 ms 34.479 > ms > > 9 ffm-bb2-link.telia.net (80.91.247.142) 67.265 ms > > ffm-bb2-link.telia.net (80.91.245.123) 44.158 ms > > ffm-bb2-link.telia.net (80.91.247.142) 50.006 ms > > 10 ffm-b2-link.telia.net (80.91.249.103) 42.490 ms > > ffm-b2-link.telia.net (80.91.252.174) 41.347 ms > > ffm-b2-link.telia.net (80.91.249.103) 42.628 ms > > 11 cogent-ic-135155-ffm-b2.c.telia.net (213.248.93.174) 51.872 ms > 42.313 > > ms 40.571 ms > > 12 te0-2-0-6.ccr22.fra03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.36.81) 42.860 ms > > te0-2-0-6.mpd21.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.31.245) 132.058 ms > > te0-4-0-0.mpd21.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.26.101) 147.305 ms > > 13 te0-4-0-0.ccr22.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.42.113) 140.836 ms > > te0-2-0-4.mpd21.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.40.226) 152.265 ms > > te0-2-0-6.ccr22.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.31.241) 135.140 ms > > 14 te0-1-0-4.ccr22.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.40.206) 143.202 ms > > te0-2-0-4.ccr22.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.40.210) 157.894 ms > > 147.097 ms > > 15 te3-2.ccr01.stl03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.27.30) 150.725 ms > 150.014 > > ms 150.329 ms > > 16 vl3808.na41.b003211-0.stl03.atlas.cogentco.com (38.20.47.170) > 167.084 > > ms 156.374 ms > > vl3508.na41.b003211-0.stl03.atlas.cogentco.com (38.20.47.166) > 158.136 > > ms > > 17 38.104.146.10 (38.104.146.10) 155.110 ms 155.902 ms 152.225 ms > > 18 host42.datotel.com (208.82.151.42) 161.893 ms 179.548 ms 167.528 > ms > > 19 stl-d1-g5-1.datotel.com (208.82.151.22) 157.149 ms 151.804 ms > 151.915 > > ms > > 20 * * * > > 21 * * * > > 22 * * * > > 23 * * * > > 24 * * * > > 25 * * * > > 26 * * * > > 27 * * * > > 28 * * * > > 29 * * * > > 30 * * * > > 31 * host50.datotel.com (208.75.82.50) 156.517 ms !X * > > 32 * * * > > 33 * * * > > 34 * * * > > 35 * * * > > 36 * * * > > 37 * * * > > 38 * * * > > 39 * * * > > 40 * * * > > 41 * * * > > 42 * * * > > 43 * * * > > 44 * * * > > 45 * * * > > 46 * * * > > 47 * * * > > 48 * * * > > 49 * * * > > 50 * * * > > 51 * * * > > 52 * * * > > 53 * * * > > 54 * * * > > 55 * * * > > 56 * * * > > 57 * * * > > 58 * * * > > 59 * * * > > 60 * * * > > 61 * * * > > 62 * * * > > 63 * * * > > 64 * * * > > root at kg-quiet# > > > > Is it working ok for everyone else? > > -- > > Regards, > > Torfinn Ingolfsen > > Oslo, Norway > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 17 > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 19:57:55 -0500 > From: Nick Allen <nick.allen at comcast.net> > Subject: Test Diablo Model 31 drive and disk pack on a PC (Operation > Alto Restoration) > To: cctech at classiccmp.org > Message-ID: <4CC0E193.9070101 at comcast.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > Al and everyone else, > > I believe Al has had success interfacing a Diablo Model 31 with a > PC computer (I assume so, since he uploaded the Alto diskpacks up to > bitsavers.org). Al, Can you (or anyone else) please provide the steps > on how to do so? > > If I can verify the disk drive is working, and the disk packs have valid > data on them, this would be yet another step completed in getting the > alto up and running =) > > Thanks! > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 18 > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 22:26:49 -0500 > From: Charlie Carothers <csquared3 at tx.rr.com> > Subject: Re: Oldest original proper computer (stored program etc) > To: General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only <cctech at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: <4CC10479.2020902 at tx.rr.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > On 10/18/2010 6:58 AM, Roger Holmes wrote: > >> From: Christian Corti<cc at informatik.uni-stuttgart.de> > >> > >> On Sat, 16 Oct 2010, Roger Holmes wrote: > >>> don't believe its true, I was told my machine is currently the oldest > >>> original working computer. Not counting replicas or machines which > don't > >>> have stored programs. My machine was installed in 1962 (and designed > in > >>> the late 1950s). > >> > >> Then you've been told wrong. > >> Several examples: > >> - Our LGP-30 ser.no. 4, built 1958, still working with peripherals. > Just > >> yesterday I've had a group of visitors. It's been designed around > 1954. > >> - The IBM 650 of the IBM Museum in Sindelfingen (working) > >> - The Zuse Z22 ser.no. 13 in Karlsruhe, also built around 1958 > (apparently > >> still working, although the ZKM is not the right place for it IMHO) > >> All are original first generation machines, and all of them are in > >> southern Germany. > >> > >>> restored was first installed in 1964. Are there other? I'm not > counting > >>> the Zuse in Germany as its not a stored program machine, and anyway > I'm > >>> not sure if it is a replica or the original. It is surprising if it > >>> survived the extensive bombing by the USAF and RAF during WW2 unless > it > >>> was stored in a bunker/cave/mine. > >> > >> What Zuse are you talking about? The Z3 has been destroyed, yes, and > >> rebuilt by Zuse in 1962. > > > > Thank you, this is just the information I wanted. > > > > Is the Z3 stored program? Turing complete? > > > > If it is, then it would be useful to know when the rebuilt version > became operational, though I'm not actually sure the actual month my > machine went live either. > > > > Assuming for now that Z3 is not stored program, than my list so far is: > > > > 1958, LGP-30 > > 1958, Zuse Z22 > > Somewhere between 1954 and 1962, IBM 650 > > 1962 ICT 1301 serial no 6 (SO FAR the earliest surviving machine with > random access program and data storage. i.e. Core and called Immediate > Access Store by ICT). > > > > Thanks again. > > > > I expect the chaps in the states will tell me of several more when I > catch up with my e-mails. > > > > > > > According to this: > http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/650/650_ch1.html the first > 650 was installed at a customer site in December, 1954. > > I thought this was pretty interesting as well: > http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/mainframe/mainframe_FT1.html > It indicates the 701 was around in 1952. I'm not sure if you want to > limit your list to core memory or not. It appears that the 701's > internal memory consisted of a drum and a CRT. In any case, I need to > waste a lot more time exploring these pages. :-) > Later, > Charlie C. > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 19 > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 23:23:44 -0700 > From: "r.stricklin" <bear at typewritten.org> > Subject: Re: Viper 2150S scsi tape drive > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only" <cctech at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: <D428CDED-9195-48F5-B183-3CE5930788D1 at typewritten.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > > On Oct 21, 2010, at 9:37 PM, dwight elvey wrote: > > > When I plug in the tape, the head moves up and down > > but the tape drive motor doesn't move. > > Is this normal? > > It could be, depending on firmware. > > ok > bear > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 20 > Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 08:53:46 +0200 > From: Jochen Kunz <jkunz at unixag-kl.fh-kl.de> > Subject: Re: Oldest original proper computer (stored program etc) > To: cctalk at classiccmp.org > Message-ID: <20101022085346.5c1f9ec0.jkunz at unixag-kl.fh-kl.de> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > > On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 12:58:00 +0100 > Roger Holmes <roger.holmes at microspot.co.uk> wrote: > > > 1962 ICT 1301 serial no 6 (SO FAR the earliest surviving machine > > with random access program and data storage. > Well. The drum of the Z22 is random access program and data storage, > just with a bit lattency... > > I don't know how and when the Z22 at the ZKM is operated now. When it > moved to the ZKM there where weekly operating hours with demonstrations > done by the former maintainers of the machine. > -- > > > \end{Jochen} > > \ref{http://www.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de/~jkunz/} > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 21 > Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 11:03:10 +0200 (CEST) > From: Christian Corti <cc at informatik.uni-stuttgart.de> > Subject: Re: Oldest original proper computer (stored program etc) > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1010221057001.21272 at linuxserv.home> > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed > > On Fri, 22 Oct 2010, Jochen Kunz wrote: > > Well. The drum of the Z22 is random access program and data storage, > > just with a bit lattency... > > Per definition, a magnetic drum is not random access. A random access > storage is defined by the fact that addressing any arbitrary cell needs > the same time. > But the Z22 has a small amount of core memory, too, called > "Schnellspeicher", i.e. "fast memory". > > Christian > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 22 > Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 10:11:53 +0100 > From: Roger Holmes <roger.holmes at microspot.co.uk> > Subject: RE: Oldest original working proper computer (stored program > etc) > To: cctalk at classiccmp.org > Message-ID: <C1C3379B-1DCB-412A-B3C3-43252EF6DC0E at microspot.co.uk> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > > From: "Rod Smallwood" <rodsmallwood at btconnect.com> > > > > > > And we have a winner!! > > > > > > The Manchester computer of 1948 (Built 1946-1948) > > It could store 1024 bits on a cathode-ray-tube, enough to demonstrate > the > > stored-program principle in working electronics, the first in the world > to > > do so > > > > Built under the direction of Alan Turing and A von Neumann > > ? > > > No, sorry the ORIGINAL Manchester Baby no longer exists. Fellow members of > the Computer Conservation Society have built a replica, correct in almost > every respect but it is only a few years old so does not qualify as oldest > original working stored program computer. I still would like to make a > list of the top ten not just the top one. > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 23 > Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 21:11:20 +1100 > From: Simon Fryer <fryers at gmail.com> > Subject: Re: lilith computer by wikipedia > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: > <AANLkTinYKzyw+HKKc3FS9EAFdkrLis0n1NX-KnAO=rcx at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On 22/10/2010, Tony Duell <ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >> Yes, and made the mistake of buying one. Couldn't believe it when it > >> actually arrived. I left an interesting review on Amazon. > > > > Do you happen to remember the title (or have a URL) for this? I wonder > > how the authors of that/those wikipedia articles feel about this? I know > > I'd be pretty annoyed if somedy did that with something I'd written. > > ISBN 10: 1155452186 > ISBN 13: 978-1155452180 > Title: ICL Mainframe Computers: Leo, English Electric Kdf8, Elliott > 803, Ict 1900, ICL 2900 Series, English Electric Kdf9, Ict 1301 > By: Books LLC > > http://www.amazon.co.uk/ICL-Mainframe-Computers-English- > Electric/dp/1155452186/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top > > >> Only upside, it is in a more convenient format for reading while on the > >> toilet. > > > > And for other uses in that location? > > The paper isn't really too soft. It might be okay in an emergency. > > Simon > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > "Well, an engineer is not concerned with the truth; that is left to > philosophers and theologians: the prime concern of an engineer is > the utility of the final product." > Lectures on the Electrical Properties of Materials, L.Solymar, D.Walsh > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 24 > Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 06:27:37 -0700 > From: Al Kossow <aek at bitsavers.org> > Subject: Re: Test Diablo Model 31 drive and disk pack on a PC > (Operation Alto Restoration) > To: cctalk at classiccmp.org > Message-ID: <4CC19149.5030409 at bitsavers.org> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > On 10/21/10 5:57 PM, Nick Allen wrote: > > Al and everyone else, > > > > I believe Al has had success interfacing a Diablo Model 31 with a PC > computer > > I used a program that runs on the Alto and copies sectors across through a > PC parallel port. > > Could you take pictures of the labels on the packs? I normally supplied a > couple of them > with the machines that came from me, and could tell pretty quickly if they > need to be copied. > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 25 > Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 07:07:24 -0700 > From: dwight elvey <dkelvey at hotmail.com> > Subject: RE: Viper 2150S scsi tape drive > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: <SNT129-W644821C0BBBE562CFC5863A35E0 at phx.gbl> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > > > > > > From: cclist at sydex.com > > To: cctalk at classiccmp.org > > Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 21:50:44 -0700 > > Subject: Re: Viper 2150S scsi tape drive > > > > On 21 Oct 2010 at 21:37, dwight elvey wrote: > > > > > I just got this use drive and I was wondering if it > > > is working as expected. > > > When I plug in the tape, the head moves up and down > > > but the tape drive motor doesn't move. > > > Is this normal? > > > > My recollection of this drive is that the tape should be > > automatically positioned to BOT when inserted. (i.e., the drive > > should spin the tape a bit). > > > > --Chuck > > > > > Thanks Chuck > I was afraid of that. That was my recollection > of similar drives. Now I have to find out why the motor > doesn't spin. > As I recalled, if the tape was accidentally loaded > with the end of tape marker off the spool, it would > unspool the hole thing and it would then be a 30 > minute job to spool it back on. > I'll have to look at the motor drive and see what is up. > The fact that I see the head moving gives me confidence > that it is most likely the motor drive circuit. > This is suppose to back up my Sparcbook. As you recall > my 8mm drive didn't seem to work with it so I thought > I'd try a drive that was inteneded. > Dwight > > Dwight > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 26 > Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 10:13:34 -0400 > From: Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> > Subject: Re: Viper 2150S scsi tape drive > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: <4CC19C0E.3060509 at neurotica.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed > > On 10/22/10 10:07 AM, dwight elvey wrote: > > This is suppose to back up my Sparcbook. As you recall > > my 8mm drive didn't seem to work with it so I thought > > I'd try a drive that was inteneded. > > 8mm drives were sold with early SPARCstations and SPARCservers as > well, FYI. An 8mm drive will work fine if it's properly set up. > > -Dave > > -- > Dave McGuire > Port Charlotte, FL > > > End of cctalk Digest, Vol 86, Issue 46 > **************************************

13 years, 8 months

Almost free: various DEC, Wyse items, for pickup Rockville, MD, USA

by js＠cimmeri.com

Last call for items located in Rockville, MD, 20850. Already taken: CCS S-100 chassis; HP 712; Fluke 8520. Almost free: $2 (two) dollars per item, local pickup only at this time, no photos. Offer expires 11/7/10. 1. Digital BA23 floor pedestal enclosure, complete with front + rear covers. Very decent shape. No yellowing (painted). 2. Digital LA100 Letterprinter w/ ribbons. Tested working. Has age yellowing (barely perceptible) but no heavy yellowing (eg. from UV light). 3. Digital LA75 Plus Companion Printer (LA75S-A2) w/ parallel + MMJ. Professionally refurbished and assumed working (but untested). Clean and nice cosmetic shape. No yellowing. 4. Wyse 60 RS232C terminal with keyboard and spare analog board. Terminal unit is in excellent shape all around, as is spare analog board. Keyboard was taken apart and thoroughly cleaned -- it works but 3 of the keycaps broke when it slid off my desk. No yellowing on any of the components. My handle on ebay is MdntTrain if anyone wishes to verify my reputation. Email me if interested in any or all. I will select who the items go to. Thank you, John Singleton js at cimmeri.com

13 years, 8 months

Oldest original working proper computer (stored program etc)

by roger.holmes＠microspot.co.uk

> From: "Rod Smallwood" <rodsmallwood at btconnect.com> > > > And we have a winner!! > > > The Manchester computer of 1948 (Built 1946-1948) > It could store 1024 bits on a cathode-ray-tube, enough to demonstrate the > stored-program principle in working electronics, the first in the world to > do so > > Built under the direction of Alan Turing and A von Neumann > ? No, sorry the ORIGINAL Manchester Baby no longer exists. Fellow members of the Computer Conservation Society have built a replica, correct in almost every respect but it is only a few years old so does not qualify as oldest original working stored program computer. I still would like to make a list of the top ten not just the top one.

13 years, 8 months

Oldest original proper computer (stored program etc)

by roger.holmes＠microspot.co.uk

> From: Christian Corti <cc at informatik.uni-stuttgart.de> > > On Sat, 16 Oct 2010, Roger Holmes wrote: >> don't believe its true, I was told my machine is currently the oldest >> original working computer. Not counting replicas or machines which don't >> have stored programs. My machine was installed in 1962 (and designed in >> the late 1950s). > > Then you've been told wrong. > Several examples: > - Our LGP-30 ser.no. 4, built 1958, still working with peripherals. Just > yesterday I've had a group of visitors. It's been designed around 1954. > - The IBM 650 of the IBM Museum in Sindelfingen (working) > - The Zuse Z22 ser.no. 13 in Karlsruhe, also built around 1958 (apparently > still working, although the ZKM is not the right place for it IMHO) > All are original first generation machines, and all of them are in > southern Germany. > >> restored was first installed in 1964. Are there other? I'm not counting >> the Zuse in Germany as its not a stored program machine, and anyway I'm >> not sure if it is a replica or the original. It is surprising if it >> survived the extensive bombing by the USAF and RAF during WW2 unless it >> was stored in a bunker/cave/mine. > > What Zuse are you talking about? The Z3 has been destroyed, yes, and > rebuilt by Zuse in 1962. Thank you, this is just the information I wanted. Is the Z3 stored program? Turing complete? If it is, then it would be useful to know when the rebuilt version became operational, though I'm not actually sure the actual month my machine went live either. Assuming for now that Z3 is not stored program, than my list so far is: 1958, LGP-30 1958, Zuse Z22 Somewhere between 1954 and 1962, IBM 650 1962 ICT 1301 serial no 6 (SO FAR the earliest surviving machine with random access program and data storage. i.e. Core and called Immediate Access Store by ICT). Thanks again. I expect the chaps in the states will tell me of several more when I catch up with my e-mails.

13 years, 8 months

HTL

by wdonzelli＠gmail.com

Maybe a retarded question, but how static sensitive are HTL chips? -- Will

13 years, 8 months

cctalk Digest, Vol 86, Issue 45

by dm561＠torfree.net

Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2010 11:03:54 -0700 From: Al Kossow <aek at bitsavers.org> Subject: Re: Oldest original proper computer (stored program etc) To: cctalk at classiccmp.org Message-ID: <4CC0808A.8010108 at bitsavers.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed On 10/21/10 10:03 AM, Chuck Guzis wrote: >> For example, the GI GIMINI (CP1600) > That would be fun to find. There was a version that I used in the late > 70's that had a DSD floppy disk interfaced to it. I think I still have > all of the software for it. ---- And I've got some brochures and datasheets for the GIC8000 and GIMINI and the various cards and chips in them, so all we need is the computer ;-) mike

13 years, 8 months

1986 NSA paper on computers

by cclist＠sydex.com

Something that's fun reading, in spite of the redactions is the 1986 National Security report on "General and Special-Purpose Computers: a Historical Look and Some Lessons Learned": http://tinyurl.com/2dt5egq (PDF) --Chuck

13 years, 8 months

Xerox Alto aution

by jws＠jwsss.com

Mr 1519 approval rating bid $30,100 as a snipe. At least it wasn't a 0 feedback ID that did it. Things really took of in the last 5 minutes with the winning bidder having a true snipe. Anyone on the list the winner? The other Alto thread is useless, nothing about Alto's so starting a new thread here about this sale, also on topic to discuss what happened to the short lived auction for the alto from DC. Was that one fraud, or stupidity? In advance change the thread title if you hijack it, please. Jim

13 years, 8 months

Updates on repairing Xerox Alto

by nick.allen＠comcast.net

Couple updates and requests for help. Got the CRT repaired and WORKING! The culprit was the 100k sliding pot control on the underside of the CRT. Now that I have a working CRT, it is on to the next step of diagnosing in which I need advice. I noticed the cursor is a hardware cursor, does this mean if I get the display board working (and if only the display card is working) will it output the cursor to the CRT? If so, this is great news as I can focus on repairing a single board. If not, do you know which boards I need to get working at a MINIMUM to get ANY display on the CRT (either the hardware cursor, or some sort of diagnostic boot code to output to the CRT)? Thanks! Nick

13 years, 8 months

← Newer
1
...
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
...
28
Older →

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 October 2010