test-drb

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

101090 discussions

by drb＠msu.edu

I'm writing a little program in H316 assembler, running it in simh (3.8-1). The usual idiom for returning from a subroutine seems to be an indirect jump through a pointer. But my indirect jump halts at the location where the pointer is stored. The code looks something like this: ... >from jst subr call the subroutine ... subr dac ** ... do some stuff jmp* subr The jst is supposed to drop the address of from+1 into location subr, and execution continues at subr+1. The indirect jmp (jmp*) should be the return, getting the target address >from location subr. There are even examples in some of the H316 docs showing this kind of thing. Best I can tell, the assembled code has all the correct bits set -- the indirect bit is the high order bit in the word, and is set, opcode looks correct, etc. The correct target address is indeed stored at subr by the jst. Obviously this isn't re-entrant, etc. Don't care about that at this point. What am I doing wrong? Thanks, De

15 years, 6 months

simh & hardware - pdp-11 psw in supervisor mode?

by bqt＠softjar.se

On 10/25/10 00:46, Brad Parker <brad at heeltoe.com> wrote: > I have a low-level pdp-11 question... > > I'm confused about writing to the PSW on cpu's which support user& > supervisor mode. My > read of the docs is that in user mode you should not be able to write > the "mode" bits of the PSW. > > (or, perhaps more accurately, you should not be able to*clear* any mode > bits from user space) > > I have a little diagnostic which doesn't work as I though it should > under simh and I thought I'd > ask what others think... > > Basically, simh allows code running in "user mode" to write the PSW even > when (I claim) it > should not. I have not tried this on a real 11/44 or 11/34 yet, but I > can/will. > > Should simh allow this? In the test blow the "clr @#PSW" is successful > when run > on simh and I think it should basically be a nop... > > (which begs another question - should it be a nop? or a exception?) > > A side question might be "the psw is not protected from writes, except > by using > the mmu" - is this true on all models? or just some? The 11/40 manual > implies > that it*is* protected. But 11/73 docs seem to say the opposite and > imply using the mmu. > > diagnostic follows: > > .TITLE test17 > .ASECT > PSW=177776 ;processor status word > .=34 > .word 200 > .word 0007 > .=200 > mov #200, r5 ;we should be in kernel mode here > rti > .=500 > clr @#PSW ;kernel mode > mov #500,sp ;sp=500 in kernel mode > mov #140000,@#PSW ;user mode > mov #700,sp ;sp=700 in user mode > trap 377 ;should move us to kernel mode > nop > clr @#PSW ;back to kernel mode > nop > halt > > The PSW, when regarded as a memory location, is not protected at all. How could it be? The PSW is protected, when we talk about the MFPS/MTPS instructions, as well as the RETI/RETN. For an operating system, you normally protect the whole I/O page from user access, since not only the PSW is in there, but all kind of stuff that you do not want user programs to get access to. Data in the I/O page follows the same rules as any other memory essentially. If you have write access to it, you can write to those locations. The underlying device responding to those writes have no idea what the PSW is, and cannot enforce any protection. The special case of the PSW itself is perhaps "odd" since it actually do know what the PSW is (obviously) but it still follows the same rules as all other devices. Johnny

15 years, 6 months

Oldest original proper computer (stored program etc)

by roger.holmes＠microspot.co.uk

> From: "Chuck Guzis" <cclist at sydex.com> > On 23 Oct 2010 at 21:03, Roger Holmes wrote: > >> That is a great find. It even includes the first machine I ever wrote >> a program for, the IBM 7094 (in Fortran IV using the Purdue University >> Fast Fortran Translator). > > I don't know if I'd confess to using PUFFT :). ISTR that you could > just about dump a deck of cards scavenged from the trash into it and > get a program that ran. > > Was that before they got the CDC 6500? I know at one point they had > a pair of 7094s working as I/O processors and PUFFT > compilers/interpreters. And what, a 1401? This was in England in 1969. I was at Dartford Grammar school and for a general studies course we took a bus to Erith Tech one afternoon a week where there were two keypunches and a lecturer who taught us programming in Fortran IV. We punched our cards and a courier took them to Imperial College (of Mines) which is part of the University of London. They were run through the 7094 which ran PUFFT through IBJOB. The following week we would get our cards back with a listing of the program and the results. My first program (calculating Pi) worked first time and I was hooked. Most times the listings would have errors and we'd have to wait another week for our next try. I remember once the compiler printing out "FORMAT misspelled" and continuing the compilation but otherwise I don't think it was particularly user friendly. I was told at the time the 7094 had two separate offline peripheral processors, one which copied cards to tape which was then switched to the 7094 as input and another which took the 7094's output tape and printed it to listing paper. I guess the operators had the job of putting the input cards and output listings together. I happened to live about a mile from the lecturer (Tony Newey) and walking to his house one foggy night, collecting the listings for all the chap from Dartford (which was a single sex school, there being a separate Dartford Grammar school for girls which my elder sister went to). Anyway I remember dividing up the thick listing into ones for all the separate pupils and handing them out the next day so we could all consider what we wanted to change for a while before going back to Erith. One of my friends had a Reliant three wheeler (which you could drive at 16) and we drove over at lunch time once or twice to amend our card decks mid week and resubmit them. Later another friend had a mini and after he overtook going over the crest of a hill I asked what would have happened if someone else was doing the same thing coming the other way. No reply. He was a great mathematician and later worked for Lloyds of London as an insurance risk assessor. He once scored 101% in a maths exam which rather made a mockery of the math's teachers marking scheme. Anyway I don't suppose he was ever so stupid again. The 7094 was taken offline for several months so engineers could replace every single electrolytic capacitor and we were allowed to use the University's main CDC6600 which later got replaced with a 7600. After leaving school I was turned down by Imperial College because I could not pass English Language 'O' level but was accepted by Queen Mary College and again used the 7600 but this time via the college's ICL1905E and later 1904S. Most work was done on the ICL mainframes but it did not support a couple of languages the 7600 did. We also had a CDC 1700 which was used to teach us assembly language. My Fortran experience was not directly helpful at QMC because they taught us Algol 60 in our first six months and most of the rest was maths (cheaper to teach) though I did show one of our lecturers my Fortran knowledge was better than his and earned me a summer holiday job in the college's own programming department doing things like testing the NAG (Nottingham Algorithms Group) library on the 1900s. One evening system time was due to start and I was still running things on the multi access system. As I was staff they did not throw me off but asked if I could finish earlier if they threw all the other users off and stopped the batch stream. I said I didn't know. They said it couldn't hurt and did so. WOW I never knew computers so could be so fast! I was again hooked after doing half an hours work in a minute or two, some of which time was the computer waiting for me to type something. First time I'd ever had a computer waiting for me, of course now its what computers do 99% of the time but back then it was unusual. A few years back in history, before multi access systems, it had been common but that was not my experience.

15 years, 6 months

S-100 PIC/RTC boards available

by lynchaj＠yahoo.com

Hi! I have some S-100 PIC/RTC boards left over from an S-100 project. They are $20 each plus $3 shipping in the US and $6 elsewhere for the PCB only. The boards are priority interrupt controller (i8259) and a MM58167 real time clock. There are diagnostics LEDs, configuration jumpers and switches, and battery backup. http://s100computers.com/My%20System%20Pages/PIC <http://s100computers.com/My%20System%20Pages/PIC&RTC%20Board/My%20PIC%20Boa rd.htm> &RTC%20Board/My%20PIC%20Board.htm These boards will support CP/M-80 but primarily intended for the S-100 x86 boards (CP/M-86 and FreeDOS) slated for next year. Please contact me if interested. Thanks and have a nice day! Andrew Lynch PS there are 11 types of S-100 boards completed (done or available) and another four more in development.

15 years, 6 months

IBM S/390 on ebay (Dave McGuire)

by ceby2＠csc.com

Speaking of S/390s I wondered if anyone could help me to donate my to the NMOC at Bletchley Park. The model number escapes me, but it's an early air-cooled s/390 from around 1990-1992. NMOC don't currently have this architecture in the collection, so are receptive to the donation. However there's the small matter of getting it there from Hampshire. My MG isn't up to lugging to cabinets worth of disk and IO chassis. The other issue is that I have almost no cabling. I have the cabling for the system controller workstation, but all of the bus and tag cabling used for this model is missing. So for the moment, it sits in both the spare bedroom and the garage. Anyone clearing out the under floor of their data centers in southern England? And anyone with a strong back and and white van? Thanks, Colin Eby |------------> | From: | |------------> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |cctalk-request at classiccmp.org | >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | To: | |------------> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |cctalk at classiccmp.org | >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | Date: | |------------> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |24/10/2010 23:56 | >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | Subject: | |------------> >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |cctalk Digest, Vol 86, Issue 52 | >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| 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: IBM S/390 on ebay (Dave McGuire) 2. Re: IBM S/390 on ebay (Dave McGuire) 3. Re: IBM S/390 on ebay (Patrick Finnegan) 4. Re: Cataloguing in a museum setting [was Re: nonsense...] (Tony Duell) 5. simh & hardware - pdp-11 psw in supervisor mode? (Brad Parker) 6. Re: IBM S/390 on ebay (St?phane Tsacas) 7. Re: IBM S/390 on ebay (Sridhar Ayengar) 8. Re: IBM S/390 on ebay (Dave McGuire) 9. Re: Test Diablo Model 31 drive and disk pack on a PC (Operation Alto Restoration) (Nick Allen) 10. FS: 70's Vintage Computer Magazines (Byte, Kilobaud, Dr Dobb's) & Sun-2, Sun 100U Docs (Nick Allen) 11. Re: the new manx is live (Torfinn Ingolfsen) 12. Re: IBM S/390 on ebay (jim s) 13. RE: Re: Oldest original proper computer (stored program etc) (Tom Gardner) 14. Re: Apple IIa (Martin Goldberg) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 13:18:49 -0400 From: Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> Subject: Re: IBM S/390 on ebay To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org> Message-ID: <4CC46A79.3090101 at neurotica.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed On 10/24/10 12:20 PM, Bob Bradlee wrote: > It will be interesting to see if it sells ... They always do. Have you guys really not seen recent IBM mainframes sell on eBay before? They come up (and sell) maybe half a dozen times per year. I personally have two sitting here, and I'm not even a hardcore mainframer. > It may have just become collectible and be tracked as the first of its kind outside IBM's control to be sold as > running hardware on eBay. One never knows what will make an IBMcollectable :) Certainly not the first, no. -Dave -- Dave McGuire Port Charlotte, FL ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 13:18:53 -0400 From: Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> Subject: Re: IBM S/390 on ebay To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org> Message-ID: <4CC46A7D.2060903 at neurotica.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed On 10/24/10 12:14 PM, Eric Smith wrote: > Presumably they haven't "gone after people" for running Linux on > Hercules, so it seems unlikely that they would go after someone for > running Linux on a z900. We can't presume to know what an eBay buyer > would run on it. You still need the LIC to run Linux, and the LIC is what's tightly controlled. One can get operating systems pretty easily, but not LIC images. >> they will definitely go after someone with real hardware. Especially a >> current machine. This is not some ancient retiree we are discussing, >> this is a z900 that you can still buy brand new. > > I'll admit that I'm not very expert on such things, so I could be > mistaken, but this looks to be an 8 year old model to me, not one that > "you can still buy new". The z900 was withdrawn from marketing three or four years ago, which makes them pretty much "last years' model" in the mainframe world. They're still supported. -Dave -- Dave McGuire Port Charlotte, FL ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 14:25:29 -0400 From: Patrick Finnegan <pat at computer-refuge.org> Subject: Re: IBM S/390 on ebay To: cctalk at classiccmp.org Message-ID: <201010241425.30204.pat at computer-refuge.org> Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" On Sunday, October 24, 2010, Daniel Seagraves wrote: > On Oct 24, 2010, at 7:53 AM, St?phane Tsacas <stephane.tsacas at gmail.com> wrote: > > http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220685200658 > > <http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220685200658> > > http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/mainframe/mainframe_PP39 > > 0G1.html > > Do be advised that if you should obtain one of these, it is illegal > for you to operate it in any way. The microcode, which IBM calls the > LIC or Licensed Internal Code, is licensed only for the use of the > original purchaser and only on the specific machine and > configuration as IBM delivered it. Any other usage by any other > party is unlicensed and illegal. This isn't true at all. The last time I read the license agreement that popped up booting my S/390's service element, it required you to transfer the LIC with the machine. It certainly didn't allow you to keep the LIC if you got rid of the machine, nor did it require you to destroy the copy of the LIC if you transferred the machine to someone else. Pat -- Purdue University Research Computing --- http://www.rcac.purdue.edu/ The Computer Refuge --- http://computer-refuge.org ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 19:22:50 +0100 (BST) From: ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk (Tony Duell) Subject: Re: Cataloguing in a museum setting [was Re: nonsense...] To: cctalk at classiccmp.org Message-ID: <m1PA5Df-000J3xC at p850ug1> Content-Type: text/plain > > On Sat, 23 Oct 2010, Tony Duell wrote: > > Sure, but that's then 4 levels. I ahve no problem extending the > > heirarchical system to as many levels as are necessary, my query is why > > it's noramlly limitied to 3. Why not just have as many levels as are needed. > > A properly designed system should be extensible to as many levels as are > needed. That's _exactly_ my point. Having atbitrary limits may cause problems later on. > > > And why recorsd the year of acquisition? What importance is that? Why not > > just a number for each artefact starting at 1? > > It is unlikely that you nor I would care much about the year of > acquisition. But the bean-counters care. Ah no, you misnderstood me... Presumanbly there is a database of the artefacts in the museum, indexed by the indentification numbers. That database includes more details about the particular object, things like (I would hope), options, serial number (s), version, etc. All we've been discussing. I see no reason why the date of acquisition (full date, not just the year), source (maybe 'anonymous donor' :-)), and the like should not be stored there as well. It's far better to store too much information than too little. But what I am wondering is why the year of acquisition should be a field in the indentifier. > Not "exclusive", but a different attitude about what is/isn't important. > > If you end up with a common/stock item that was once owned by a celebrity, > you could sell it on eBay to one of those provenance collectors, and buy > several that were not celebrity owned. As an aside, maybe in principle, but not always in practice... Suppose I did have an HP9820 (say) that had been used for some famous bit of work. Yes, I could sell it for more than the normal 'going rate' for such a machine. But could I be sure ot be able to buy another one? There's not an infinite supply of old computers, and some people may well not sell _at any price_. You could offer me a million pounds/dollars for a machine in my collection and I would turn you down. And I'll bet there are others like me. > > > > > The depth of cataloging would depend on the subjective issue of just how > > > interesting/important that item is. > > How can you possibly know how interesting/importantsomethign will later > > turn out to be? > > It is a subjective evaluation. One more reason that proper cataloging > requires expertise. Agreed... I feel you should err on the side of recording too much information. It's easy to ignroe it later ;-) > > I'm not sure that I would want to live in a world where DELLs became the > most interesting/important computers for collecting. Nor would I, and for the record I don't consider DELLs or other PC clones to be the machines I want to collect. That doesn't mean I think that nobody should collect them. Or that the PC clone has not had a very significant impact on computing (not necessarily for the better :-)). -tony ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 14:33:42 -0400 From: Brad Parker <brad at heeltoe.com> Subject: simh & hardware - pdp-11 psw in supervisor mode? To: General at heeltoe.com, "Discussion at heeltoe.com":On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org>, "simh at trailing-edge.com" <simh at trailing-edge.com> Message-ID: <4CC47C06.5020000 at heeltoe.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed I have a low-level pdp-11 question... I'm confused about writing to the PSW on cpu's which support user & supervisor mode. My read of the docs is that in user mode you should not be able to write the "mode" bits of the PSW. (or, perhaps more accurately, you should not be able to *clear* any mode bits from user space) I have a little diagnostic which doesn't work as I though it should under simh and I thought I'd ask what others think... Basically, simh allows code running in "user mode" to write the PSW even when (I claim) it should not. I have not tried this on a real 11/44 or 11/34 yet, but I can/will. Should simh allow this? In the test blow the "clr @#PSW" is successful when run on simh and I think it should basically be a nop... (which begs another question - should it be a nop? or a exception?) A side question might be "the psw is not protected from writes, except by using the mmu" - is this true on all models? or just some? The 11/40 manual implies that it *is* protected. But 11/73 docs seem to say the opposite and imply using the mmu. diagnostic follows: .TITLE test17 .ASECT PSW=177776 ;processor status word .=34 .word 200 .word 0007 .=200 mov #200, r5 ;we should be in kernel mode here rti .=500 clr @#PSW ;kernel mode mov #500,sp ;sp=500 in kernel mode mov #140000,@#PSW ;user mode mov #700,sp ;sp=700 in user mode trap 377 ;should move us to kernel mode nop clr @#PSW ;back to kernel mode nop halt ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 20:47:49 +0200 From: St?phane Tsacas <stephane.tsacas at gmail.com> Subject: Re: IBM S/390 on ebay To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org> Message-ID: <AANLkTinCtUkbC4gfnNad6jJ4g6-++65wXvvXoHQ7PYO3 at mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 15:06, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> wrote: > On 10/24/10 8:53 AM, St?phane Tsacas wrote: > >> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220685200658 >> <http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220685200658> >> > > That's a (badly abused) z900, a 64-bit z/Series machine, nowhere near > classiccmp material, but...I'm drooling all over my lap here. > > See also http://cgi.ebay.com/HP-DEC-AlphaServer-GS320-Scalable-Server-Complete-/3304… ;-) -- Stephane http://updatedoften.blogspot.com ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 15:45:39 -0400 From: Sridhar Ayengar <ploopster at gmail.com> Subject: Re: IBM S/390 on ebay To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org> Message-ID: <4CC48CE3.7050508 at gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed St?phane Tsacas wrote: > See also > http://cgi.ebay.com/HP-DEC-AlphaServer-GS320-Scalable-Server-Complete-/3304… > ;-) *boioioioioioioing!!* Peace... Sridhar ------------------------------ Message: 8 Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 15:49:27 -0400 From: Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> Subject: Re: IBM S/390 on ebay To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org> Message-ID: <4CC48DC7.9070705 at neurotica.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed On 10/24/10 3:45 PM, Sridhar Ayengar wrote: > St?phane Tsacas wrote: >> See also >> http://cgi.ebay.com/HP-DEC-AlphaServer-GS320-Scalable-Server-Complete-/3304… >> >> ;-) > > *boioioioioioioing!!* Right there with you on that. -Dave -- Dave McGuire Port Charlotte, FL ------------------------------ Message: 9 Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 14:11:02 -0500 From: Nick Allen <nick.allen at comcast.net> Subject: Re: Test Diablo Model 31 drive and disk pack on a PC (Operation Alto Restoration) To: cctech at classiccmp.org Message-ID: <4CC1E1C6.9050709 at comcast.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sure, I will upload the photos shortly. Did you have to build a custom cable/adapter from Diablo to the Parallel port on the PC? Did you use any a custom drive, utility, os on the PC side? Just looking to validate somehow that my Diablo Drive is fully functioning, and this direction seems to be the best bet until I get the Alto working. ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 20:35:54 -0500 From: Nick Allen <nick.allen at comcast.net> Subject: FS: 70's Vintage Computer Magazines (Byte, Kilobaud, Dr Dobb's) & Sun-2, Sun 100U Docs To: cctech at classiccmp.org Message-ID: <4CC23BFA.3050409 at comcast.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Byte magazines pretty much the complete 1975-1977 years! Kilobaud magazines: Year 1977 Dr Dobb's: Years 1977-79 Sun-2 technical overview documentation Sun 100u Optical Mouse Docs Mark 8 Minicomputer build plans from Radio Electronics magazine: Here is the link to my seller profile (will display all current auctions): http://shop.ebay.com/sdinet/m.html?_dmd=1&_ipg=50&_sop=12&_rdc=1 Trying to clear room in the condo, and raise funds to repair the Alto/IMSAIs/Altairs! ------------------------------ Message: 11 Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2010 04:09:42 +0200 From: Torfinn Ingolfsen <tingox at gmail.com> Subject: Re: the new manx is live To: "General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only" <cctech at classiccmp.org> Message-ID: <AANLkTimoQDE2XM84piiJ1QB9Lyi8LyM=3qCcKC-02NL8 at mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 12:14 AM, Dan Roganti <ragooman at gmail.com> wrote: > 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> > <6DjtK1hUkDUSciHp%2BWO-gfLNyM at mail.gmail.com<6DjtK1hUkDUSciHp%252BWO-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. > Seems there are some network problems somewhere between me and manx. I can't rerach bitsavers.org either: tingo at kg-u35jc:~$ ping bitsavers.org PING bitsavers.org (209.145.140.17) 56(84) bytes of data. >From host50.datotel.com (208.75.82.50) icmp_seq=50 Packet filtered >From host50.datotel.com (208.75.82.50) icmp_seq=53 Packet filtered >From host50.datotel.com (208.75.82.50) icmp_seq=54 Packet filtered >From host50.datotel.com (208.75.82.50) icmp_seq=55 Packet filtered >From host50.datotel.com (208.75.82.50) icmp_seq=56 Packet filtered ^C --- bitsavers.org ping statistics --- 91 packets transmitted, 0 received, +5 errors, 100% packet loss, time 90127ms tingo at kg-u35jc:~$ traceroute bitsavers.org traceroute to bitsavers.org (209.145.140.17), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 * * * 2 * * * 3 * * * 4 * * * 5 * * * 6 * * * 7 * * * 8 * * * 9 * * * 10 * * * 11 * * * 12 * * * 13 * * * 14 * * * 15 * * * 16 * * * 17 * * * 18 * * * 19 * * * 20 * * * 21 * * * 22 * * * 23 * * * 24 * * * 25 * * * 26 * * * 27 * * * 28 * * * 29 * * * 30 * * * tingo at kg-u35jc:~$ >from my gateway / firewall: tingo at kg-omni1$ traceroute bitsavers.org traceroute to bitsavers.org (209.145.140.17), 64 hops max, 40 byte packets 1 kg-ruter (10.0.0.1) 46.484 ms 98.823 ms 99.785 ms 2 1.80-203-92.nextgentel.com (80.203.92.1) 14.068 ms 14.298 ms 13.788 ms 3 80-202-3-30.dd.nextgentel.com (80.202.3.30) 14.536 ms 15.015 ms 14.369 ms 4 217-13-0-70.dd.nextgentel.com (217.13.0.70) 14.258 ms 18.107 ms 14.183 ms 5 oso-b3-link.telia.net (80.239.193.93) 14.555 ms 14.674 ms 14.876 ms 6 kbn-bb2-link.telia.net (80.91.251.49) 27.834 ms 28.522 ms 27.609 ms 7 hbg-bb2-link.telia.net (80.91.252.114) 33.525 ms 33.542 ms 33.596 ms 8 213.248.65.121 (213.248.65.121) 43.259 ms 43.400 ms ffm-bb2-link.telia.net (80.91.245.117) 42.396 ms 9 ffm-b12-link.telia.net (80.91.246.121) 40.698 ms ffm-b12-link.telia.net (80.91.246.105) 43.963 ms ffm-b12-link.telia.net (80.91.246.121) 40.340 ms 10 cogent-ic-140549-ffm-b12.c.telia.net (213.248.92.142) 43.399 ms 43.176 ms 42.901 ms 11 te0-1-0-7.ccr22.fra03.atlas.cogentco.com (130.117.49.162) 39.443 ms te0-2-0-6.ccr21.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.31.237) 134.206 ms te0-1-0-7.ccr22.fra03.atlas.cogentco.com (130.117.49.162) 40.854 ms 12 te0-4-0-0.ccr22.dca01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.42.113) 133.907 ms te0-1-0-4.ccr21.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.40.190) 146.549 ms 146.957 ms 13 te0-0-0-0.ccr22.ord01.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.31.154) 144.096 ms 146.334 ms 145.755 ms 14 te3-2.ccr01.stl03.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.27.30) 148.954 ms 149.120 ms 149.191 ms 15 vl3508.na41.b003211-0.stl03.atlas.cogentco.com (38.20.47.166) 159.651 ms 159.613 ms 157.883 ms 16 38.104.146.10 (38.104.146.10) 151.954 ms 153.009 ms 177.673 ms 17 host42.datotel.com (208.82.151.42) 152.974 ms 153.659 ms 153.212 ms 18 stl-d1-g5-1.datotel.com (208.82.151.22) 152.006 ms 151.510 ms 150.509 ms 19 * * * 20 * * * 21 * * * 22 * * * 23 * * * 24 * * * 25 * * * 26 * * * 27 * * * 28 * * * 29 * * * 30 * * * 31 * * * 32 * * * 33 * * * 34 * * * 35 * * * 36 * * * 37 * host50.datotel.com (208.75.82.50) 667.077 ms !X * 38 * * * 39 * * * 40 * * * 41 * * * 42 * * * 43 * * * 44 * * * 45 * * * 46 * * * 47 * * * 48 * * * 49 * * * 50 * * * 51 * * * 52 * * * 53 * * * 54 * * * 55 * * * 56 * * * 57 * * * 58 * host50.datotel.com (208.75.82.50) 152.356 ms !X * 59 * * * 60 * * * 61 * * * 62 * * * 63 * * * 64 * * * tingo at kg-omni1$ -- Regards, Torfinn Ingolfsen ------------------------------ Message: 12 Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 12:32:24 -0700 From: jim s <jws at jwsss.com> Subject: Re: IBM S/390 on ebay To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org> Message-ID: <4CC489C8.3020702 at jwsss.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed The LIC for the r/390's and the pc/390's was at one time freely downloadable. It is the OS Licensed material that is not transferable to another entity. The firmware is not a problem. Most of the peripherals have LIC code and you only need to call IBM to get copies if you supply the model number. I have two 3174's that have "LIC" and IBM's support number supplied the code at IBM's cost to fix me up. I have to say that I was impressed with that. I also ordered 3290 support as well as the latest rev of the Token Ring support on 2mb floppies. I also believe that the firmware for the 9370's is not a problem to transfer, just the OS. Linux is not a problem. I will ask a friend who has two of these running what if any issues he has, as he may have transferred a license I don't know about for one of the smaller 390's he has. Based on his use, I would almost (but for that detail) say there is no problem as long as you have the hardware. On 10/24/2010 11:25 AM, Patrick Finnegan wrote: > On Sunday, October 24, 2010, Daniel Seagraves wrote: >> On Oct 24, 2010, at 7:53 AM, St?phane Tsacas > <stephane.tsacas at gmail.com> wrote: >>> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220685200658 >>> <http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220685200658> >>> http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/mainframe/mainframe_PP39 >>> 0G1.html >> Do be advised that if you should obtain one of these, it is illegal >> for you to operate it in any way. The microcode, which IBM calls the >> LIC or Licensed Internal Code, is licensed only for the use of the >> original purchaser and only on the specific machine and >> configuration as IBM delivered it. Any other usage by any other >> party is unlicensed and illegal. > This isn't true at all. The last time I read the license agreement that > popped up booting my S/390's service element, it required you to > transfer the LIC with the machine. It certainly didn't allow you to > keep the LIC if you got rid of the machine, nor did it require you to > destroy the copy of the LIC if you transferred the machine to someone > else. > > Pat ------------------------------ Message: 13 Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 10:10:21 -0700 From: "Tom Gardner" <thomas.gardner at sbcglobal.net> Subject: RE: Re: Oldest original proper computer (stored program etc) To: <cctalk at classiccmp.org> Message-ID: <EE3A6EC5DBF7493E9E39C8CFA9759060 at tegp4> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 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 > ************************************** ------------------------------ Message: 14 Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2010 12:40:43 -0500 From: Martin Goldberg <wgungfu at gmail.com> Subject: Re: Apple IIa To: "General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only" <cctech at classiccmp.org> Message-ID: <AANLkTi=XtN6XYQQN-euZX8VmWrQUEA-6OULyovcjqYRX at mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > At 9:00 AM -0700 10/23/10, Mr Ian Primus wrote: >The IIe comes in two flavors - beige and "platinum". It comes in more than that. There's also the IIe enhanced model (pre-platinum), and you'll also find IIGS upgrade versions out there. Marty End of cctalk Digest, Vol 86, Issue 52 **************************************

15 years, 6 months

IBM S/390 on ebay

by stephane.tsacas＠gmail.com

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220685200658 <http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=220685200658> http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/mainframe/mainframe_PP390G1.html -- Stephane http://updatedoften.blogspot.com

15 years, 6 months

FS: 70's Vintage Computer Magazines (Byte, Kilobaud, Dr Dobb's) & Sun-2, Sun 100U Docs

by nick.allen＠comcast.net

Byte magazines pretty much the complete 1975-1977 years! Kilobaud magazines: Year 1977 Dr Dobb's: Years 1977-79 Sun-2 technical overview documentation Sun 100u Optical Mouse Docs Mark 8 Minicomputer build plans from Radio Electronics magazine: Here is the link to my seller profile (will display all current auctions): http://shop.ebay.com/sdinet/m.html?_dmd=1&_ipg=50&_sop=12&_rdc=1 Trying to clear room in the condo, and raise funds to repair the Alto/IMSAIs/Altairs!

15 years, 6 months

Working IMSAI 8080 system on the VCGM

by classiccmp＠vintage-computer.com

I just posted a nice, working IMSAI 8080 on the VCGM (Item 108335) There is, as always, lots of other stuff to look at there. Cheers! -- ----- 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

15 years, 6 months

Apple IIa

by wgungfu＠gmail.com

> At 9:00 AM -0700 10/23/10, Mr Ian Primus wrote: >The IIe comes in two flavors - beige and "platinum". It comes in more than that. There's also the IIe enhanced model (pre-platinum), and you'll also find IIGS upgrade versions out there. Marty

15 years, 6 months

Xerox Alto on ebay (not mine!)

by nick.allen＠comcast.net

Well, I thought I was the only one to have a Xerox Alto, appears there is another one in Chicago and it was just put on ebay: http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=320602942545&ssPageName=… Looks identical to mine (File Server, Xlto II XM), and having the same boot issues I am having (CRT warming up, but no image). Will be interesting to see what it goes for (as there is no reserve), I just wish I could get the gentlemen selling it to assist me in getting mine repaired and working (as he mentions he has experience working on these).

15 years, 6 months

Jump to page:

2026

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