test-drb

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

101090 discussions

by maxeskin＠hotmail.com

Wait...all matter resists current, and all matter can be forced to emit light, so any item is a 'Light-emmitting resistor'. > >> I used to know the speed of light in Furlongs per Fortnight. > >The attoparsec/microfortnight is remarkably close to the inch/second. >Quite useful for quoting tape speeds :-) > >> >> If you wish to piss off the counter help at your local parts >> shop... ask for a 'Light-Emitting Resistor'. Hardware stores and >> markets have them too. > >You mean a light-emitting non-linear load? > >-tony > > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

27 years, 10 months

Kenback 1

by rax＠warbaby.com

No, I didn't find one for 10 bucks, but I was wondering if anyone knows about how many were made? R. -- Warbaby The WebSite. The Domain. The Empire. http://www.warbaby.com The MonkeyPool WebSite Content Development http://www.monkeypool.com Once you get the nose on, the rest is just makeup.

27 years, 10 months

discrete transistors

by allisonp＠world.std.com

< What amazes me is that no one has ever marketed a mainframe-like < machine out of modern processors. Someone mentioned they had made What like the VAX 4000 or 6000 series, HP3000, PDP-11/23 or later. The list could be very long. < one out of a 286 and some z80s, but why did no single company ever < sell any? I would think such machines could be very useful. OTOH, it < makes more money to sell 1000 machines than 3 machines and 1000 dumb Lessee, I have a Compupro 8/16 (8085/8088) s100 crate that also has a MPX1 an 8085 board used to do IO independent of the main cpu. A later version of the machine was made with 186, 286 and even 386 cpus. Some of the VME and multibus crates were cpu intensive as well. NCR in '91 had a killer four 486 cpu box. The DEC VAX6250 and 6400 were two and four cpus systems. The point being companies DID. They made money. They were too specialized(some cases) and difficult(some cases) to program compared to simpler single cpus. PCs have at least several CPUs, the 486 I'm running has an 8042 (keyboard interface), one in the tape backup, one in the SCSI CDrom, several 8051s(each scsi drive) and even one in the keyboard. no doubt I may have missed one or two. < terminals...sometimes I wish capitalism was never invented... Oh dear, here we go again. You are unaware on Connection machines, DEC LAVCs, Transputers and lots of other multiple processor configurations. The reason this is not usually done is it's expensive when it can be reduced to one primary cpu. Allison

27 years, 10 months

Webpage up; input needed

by roblwill＠usaor.net

Hello everyone! I got my new website going, and I'd like a bit of input. I'm starting a little "computer museum", and need some info. Just click go to <http://members.tripod.com/general_1/>, and go to the "Command Central" link. I'm currently working on the Compaq Portable and WANG WLTC page. If anyone has any pics and descriptions of old 'pooters (or putters, depending on how old), just email them to me, and I'll try to get them on the page. ThAnX, -- -Jason (roblwill(a)usaor.net) ICQ#-1730318 PS>> Don't forget to sign my guestbook :^)

27 years, 10 months

Mainframes vs PCs (was Re: discrete transistors)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

< Chuck McManis <cmcmanis(a)freegate.com> wrote: < > Back to classic computers, it has been said, perhaps apocryphylly(sp?) < > that "My laptop has more computer power than NASA used to put men on t < > moon." While it may be true, I've never actually seen a description of < > computer resources available to NASA between 1962 and 1969. Does anyon < > the list have that information? "My laptop has more computer power than NASA used to put men on the moon." I find that a loaded quote because it's unbounded. Does this refer to ground support, design and simulation systems or what? Granted the computers that flew were not Crays, they didn't have to be. They were sized for the mission as it was conceived and then had every ounce of weight pared out. They however are unique as they ( I believe from from Gemini on) were IC based, had to work at extremes of temperature, be compact, not use too much power or generate a lot of heat that was difficult to remove. those are imposing requirements for the time (pre 1968 technology!!). In the case of Gemini, Apollo and the Shuttle they also were flown as stable designs when better technology was available. That's a result of the need to freeze the design and program it before it could be flown. Considering the capsule(Apollo) was complete in 1967 (I may be off a year) for Apollo, that means a lot of fancy design work and programming. If we look we may see the predecessor to the CADC in the space program. Now considering the laptop has had some 15 plus years of development history beyond the space program it should be better! Allison

27 years, 10 months

discrete transistors

by allisonp＠world.std.com

< And none of those tricks scale up very well for implementing high-perfor < versions of standard microprocessor architectures. The point was that The point is why copy the x86! there are better ways. I don't think I want to try and do the cache and pipeline registers as they eat transistors like mad being mostly memory structures. Copying a PII is also copying how much ram? It would not be a practical venture. Allison

27 years, 10 months

Week End Finds

by dogas＠leading.net

>Does any one have docs on the pc-1500? Any info would be appreciated. A web >search didn't bring anything more than the specs, I would like to find >programming info if that is possible. >Thanks >Francois Hi Francois, I just ordered one of these machines ( inbound mail ) send me some mail to dogas(a)leading.net I should have it by week end... - Mike

27 years, 10 months

Treasure chest!

by Marion.Bates＠Dartmouth.EDU

I just went through a pile of stuff in the storage room I use for an office, and found the following (which the boss is letting me keep): - complete set of manuals for Lisa OS and 7/7 apps!!! - complete set of original 7/7 disks - Smalltalk pre-beta release version 0.3 for the Mac (is this a port of the Smalltalk that ran on the Xerox PARC? I'm pretty ignorant about that.) - Manuals for Lisa Pascal Workshop - MacWorks manuals - assorted diskettes of old Mac/Lisa stuff Today was a happy day. -- MB

27 years, 10 months

Week End Finds

by fauradon＠pclink.com

Hi, This week end I found a TI 99/4a Beige brand new in the box never used accompanied with the epansion box (my arms still hurt from carrying this stuff) and a box of software for it (Microsoft multiplan among other word processors and databases) Apparently it came from a dealer since it also had a bunch of deal training material, price lists and flyers with Bill Cosby. Also got a couple of color pong machines: a Radio shack and a Ricochet. A National Semiconductor ADVERSARY (pong style?) And a Sharp PC-1500A with the printer and cassette interface, it was used as an embedded system for a Pulmonary Analysis Computer (pretty good example of interfacing a pocket computer to the external world) the extra hardware has a D/A and A/D converter pretty cool. Does any one have docs on the pc-1500? Any info would be appreciated. A web search didn't bring anything more than the specs, I would like to find programming info if that is possible. Thanks Francois ------------------------------------------------------------- Visit the desperately in need of update Sanctuary at: http://www.pclink.com/fauradon

27 years, 10 months

Mainframes vs PCs (was Re: discrete transistors)

by maxeskin＠hotmail.com

According to the November '95 Popular Science, p88: The Apollo 11 guidance computer had 2K of RAM and 36K of ROM, and barreled along at 1 MHz. The circuits consisted of 24 modules contained in two trays, weighed 70 pounds, and required 70 W of power. To issue commands, the astronauts used a unique interface that consisted of a number pad and an LED readout. Commands were issued in "noun-verb" format; the astronauts would key in numbers that were codes for commands like "display velocity" or "change program". Nasa computers on the ground were somewhat more powerful, but not much, according to Merritt Jones, a space physicist for the Gemini and Apollo programs who now works for IBM. " The machine used in the mission control center, which was the most powerful commercial machine at the time, could execute 1 million instructions per second," he recalls. "It cost $4 million and took up most of the room. It had one megabyte of memory." next comes a description of modern computers and how laptops can do '90 Million Instructions per second and is small enough...' >things into and out of memory rather than bothering the CPU with all that. >To facilitate this the mainframes typically have fairly complex snooping >caches for effective management of paging activity. > >The Crays and ConnectionMachines have, in the past, had the advantage of >being vector processors where typical mainframes were often SIMD machines >at best and simple pipelines at worst. Microprocessors caught up with the >SIMD wave with multi-ALU pipelining, and with the Katmai and AMD-K7 they >will get many of the vector features that made so-called "super computers" >so fast. > >If you build a "PC" (Pentium II class) with 256MB of SDRAM and dual PCI >based fast/wide SCSI controllers running to a striped RAID array of "good" >SCSI disks you can "beat" a lot of mainframes. Of course you best them with >a $10,000 PC. > >Back to classic computers, it has been said, perhaps apocryphylly(sp?), >that "My laptop has more computer power than NASA used to put men on the >moon." While it may be true, I've never actually seen a description of the >computer resources available to NASA between 1962 and 1969. Does anyone on >the list have that information? > >--Chuck > > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

27 years, 10 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