I'm "just about" finished with an emulator for a Control Data
3300 computer (you might ask "why" - I'll explain later.)
But I'm looking for diagnostics tapes (instruction, floating point,
mass storage, memory, etc.) Also, other operating systems would
be interesting (I was dumb back in the 70's and didn't make copies
of all my old stuff...) such as Master with MATS or MSOS or Realtime
Scope. (I have no problem reading 7 track tapes.)
I'm building this primarily to resurrect an obscure language, also
developed at OSU, called "Oscar". It was a numerical person's
dream interactive system for it's time (way before common graphics
terminals, alas) including all sorts of large precision arith and
rational number management (ratios of integral fractions) which made
matrix manipulations a lot easier. Oscar ran under OS-3 and hence the
need for the emulator. Besides, it's fun. (And I have source for damn
near all of the OS-3 system, languages and tools (I was "with it"
enough to make copies of those at least.) The original 3300 at OSU was
"decommissioned" back in the early 80s, so this part is even "on topic!"
It's a bit depressing (and humiliating) to see that my entirely-C-based
emulator (i.e. NO assembler "optimization" on my part) runs at nearly
the speed of the original machine on a lowly 66 mhz 486. (1.6us/cycle
where instructions USUALLY took 2 cycles, for fetch and memory reference.)
It'll probably scream on a reasonable Pentium-class system. (By inference
will we be writing emulators in 15 to 20 years that emulate 400 mhz Pentiums
and Power PCs at the full speed of day? Boggles the mind...)
I'm emulating most CDC periphs (as far as I can without real "iron") so
the emulator should handle virtual 604/607 tape drives, disk controllers,
501/512 printers, card readers, punches, etc.
I realize this may be a bit "off topic" with respect to the other
"mainstream" collectable computers (dec/hp/etc.) but, hey! it's
what I learned on way back when. And the computer was far too large
to ever think of "owning" one.
For reference, the 3300 was a 3rd generation computer (no IC's - all
Germanium transistors) with memory that came in chunks of 8k words
(24 bits) all the way up to 256k words (LOTS of boxes.) Each 8k
took half a 7 foot tall by 6 foot wide rack (IIRC). I think
very late in life they had 32k modules... 24 bit ones-complement
math with a "reasonable" two-state architecture (program/system
mode) that actually worked (OSU's may have been the only one that
really challenged it, though, running timesharing software on it.)
Any and all software for the beast would be welcome. For reference,
anything for the 3150, 3200, 3300 or 3500 would be welcome, as well
as any CDC docs on these machines. I've got quite a few, but some
of the more obscure controllers (3317 terminal control, for example)
eluded me. Information on 3600 or 3800 (a sort of "48 bit word" 3300
and 3500) would also be welcome, as these two lines shared a lot of
peripherals and controllers.
And of course, assuming anyone else is as silly as me and wants to
play with this mess, I'm happy to make the source/executables available
(it's Linux based.) It's not "ready for prime time" yet, but soon...
Thanks for sharing the bandwidth,
Gary
<What's that got to do with it? Diodes are analogue parts - the output
<(current) is a continuous function of the input (voltage), not a
<discrete one (to me the difference between an analogue and a digital
Yes, but they don't (generally) amplify.
<component). In fact, Allison, you were saying only a few days ago that
<you don't need any amplification to make an analogue _computer_ (with
<which I agree - although some of your examples I wouldn't call
<computers).
I still hold that amplification is a factor in the equation that an analog
function may contain but it is not required.
----||----+---------+------>
| |
| |
V ---
input === diode ---
| |
--------------------+------>
This is an analogue function, take a shot at the equation it solves.
<For non-electronic digital computers, where do Facit mechanical
<calculators lie? I have one (which is driven by an electric motor but
Computers, mechanical, fixed program.
<For pneumatic computers, I think some pipe organs of the turn of the
<century came close - you could program some buttons to set various
<combinations of ranks for fast selection during performance. However,
<the more complicated schemes of this nature (popular around 1920) used
<electrical as well as pneumatic logic elements.
pipe organs were an example of repetitive but generally simple logic.
I might point ot that when they went electronic they used lots of
flipflops to generate octave and also diodes and tube to do keying
(gating). They were likely one of the earliest users of large numbers
of bistable and monostable elements in one system other than computers and
electronic measuring instruments.
You've not seen a modern production line that uses air logic. I've worked
on one that was used to produce pharaceuticals that were in flamable bases
(ethanol). There was some fairly complex logic in that system. Working
with it is like designing with relays.
Allison
> <Are you thinking of 'Digital circuits are built from analogue parts' ?
>
> Not a valid concept. both OR and AND gates can be done using totally
> non amplifying devices (diodes).
What's that got to do with it? Diodes are analogue parts - the output
(current) is a continuous function of the input (voltage), not a
discrete one (to me the difference between an analogue and a digital
component). In fact, Allison, you were saying only a few days ago that
you don't need any amplification to make an analogue _computer_ (with
which I agree - although some of your examples I wouldn't call
computers).
> It was Vonda that postulated that digital was analogue with a precision
> of two states, true and false. The realm of analogue is one of infinite
> precision but possibly of limited accuracy. The digital realm is one of
> limited precision and absolute accuracy.
That is an excellent concept. Thank you - I'll remember that.
For non-electronic digital computers, where do Facit mechanical
calculators lie? I have one (which is driven by an electric motor but
could conceivably use any motor) which has algorithms for optimised
decimal multiplication and non-restoring decimal division. It is not
programmable, but it is pretty complex - and all done mechanically.
For pneumatic computers, I think some pipe organs of the turn of the
century came close - you could program some buttons to set various
combinations of ranks for fast selection during performance. However,
the more complicated schemes of this nature (popular around 1920) used
electrical as well as pneumatic logic elements.
Philip.
On May 5, 11:37, Daniel A. Seagraves wrote:
> [Adding RX50 to the Supnik emulator...]
>
> Yeah, it'd be a Lot Of Work(tm).
It certainly would. Even the RT-11 driver (which is about the simplest
I've seen) is fairly complex.
> Those talk MSCP, and there's little/no documentation on how it works.
> (I think...)
It's basically a message-passing protocol, unlike most of the earlier DEC
disk stuff where you can poke the hardware registers to "make things
happen". To oversimplify, with MSCP you make a message containing
instructions, put it in a memory buffer somewhere, tell the controller it's
there, and it does the rest with DMA, returning a response message.
The relevant documentation is "MSCP Basic Disk Functions Manual",
AA-L619A-TK, and "Storage System Diagnostics And Utility Protocol",
AA-L620A-TK, which in turn are parts of the UDA50 Programmer's
Documentation Kit (QP-905-GZ). My copy is version 1.2, April 1982.
It's not good bedtime reading; the plot's a bit too convoluted and the
characterisation is weak :-)
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
[remove indy. from email address to reply] University of York
In a message dated 98-05-05 22:56:32 EDT, you write:
<< Speaking of sealed originals, I found some original still shrink-wrapped
Osborne software today, with the original Byte Shop price stickers on them
no less. They were basically some accounting packages by a company called
Computronic that made software for the gamut of the machines of the era
(TRS-80, Apple, Atari, Commodore, Xeroex, Osborne, Kaypro...that was the
list of machines on the package). I also got a shrink-wrapped copy of
WordStar circa 1981, a shrink-wrapped copy of Microsoft Multi-Tool Budget
and a shrinkwrapped copy of Desktop Plan II by Visicorp. Vintage
shrink-wrapped software is still out there, you just gotta look for it.
Sam >>
i agree, my list is small, but i do have os2 1.1 which came in two seperate
boxes wrapped together and includes sidekick 2.0 which i paid $3 for. i also
got a never opened 1.3 which i did open just to look at but i never used, and
several boxes of the ibm pc 3270 emulation program entry level version 1.22
david
Philip Belben:
>Sam Ismail:
>
>> The party agrees that unauthorized copying or disclosure will cause great
>> damage to MICROSOFT."
>
>Hey! Let's all start copying Basic 80! Or other Microsoft stuff!
>Perhaps we can cause great damage to Microsoft!
>
>Wait a bit... somehow I don't think we'll do any damage unless we
>persuade people to buy our copies in preference to the originals.
Oh? You know somewhere you can buy the originals?
Roger Ivie
ivie(a)cc.usu.edu
<Whether the distributed monitors and drivers are enough to run it
<depends strongly on your application! Under an emulator - where
If your developing with RT-11 for a specific task then sysgening is
needed. If you need to run BASIC, DECUS-C, MicroPower Pascal, write
assembly code files or edit text then the stock monitor are just fine.
Sysgening to simply move to a different varient of PDP-11 cpu or disk
however is not required. The typical example of sysgening RT-11 I've
done was to use a console that wasn't DL (standard PDP-11 serial line
unit) compatable.
RT-11 was designed as both a development enviornment and a realtime
executive for embedded applications. It's pretty flexible and small
so it's good for lots of other stuff. It weakness (there is one) is
that it does not use a scatter-gather map for storage so storage space
can be poorly used due to device fragmentation.
<I interpret "no source code" quite differently, mainly because I have
<the source kits!
Same here, V4, V5.0, V5.1, V5.4 I may even have 3.xx. Heck I've been
running RT11 since '79 on one thing or another Q-bus.
Allison
Wow, anyone desparate for a Horizon should check out recent posts to
comp.sys.northstar. No fewer than six systems from three different
individuals have been offered there in the past couple of days. And
some AFAIR are free for pick up or the cost of shipping.
--
mor(a)crl.com
http://www.crl.com/~mor/
>
>>
>> Well, this kind of comes from a rant of mine... ya see, on my
computer, I
>> origionally had an AMD InterWave chip on my sound card, but found
that it
>> was STB made. It was made in Dec. 1996. I called about it in Dec.
1997,
>> and NO ONE at their technical support knew ANYTHING about it. And
that's a
>> year after it was made!!!
>
>Don't get me started on Tech Support, or the lack of it.
>
>When I call Tech Support I will have made some attempts to check the
>obvious, gather evidence, and solve the problem. In particular :
>
>I'll have checked the 'bleeding obvious' - that it's plugged in, that I
>
>I'll have read all available documentation, including, but not limited
to
>the user manual, tech/service manual (if available), schematics, data
>sheets on the chips, command reference, processor instruction set,
>language standards, etc as appropriate.
>
>I'll be sitting in front of my machine with a 'scope, logic analyser,
>software debugger, etc at the ready
>
>Alas this seems to mean that I know more about the product than the
>company that sold it to me. Tech support seems to consist of either
>telling me to check I've inserted the disk correctly or reading the
user
>manual to me very, very slowly (I am not kidding...). I am fed up with
You've got to be gentle w/tech support. For one thing, they're
nothing more than figureheads for the company, also, they are
treated fairly poorly, according to PC World. Most have no desire
to spend 8 hours reading assembly listings. There's just no
encouragement, like with teachers. In the end, they just get tired.
>> Anyway, lets call, e-mail, fax, walk up and talk to, etc. people
at
>> various companies and talk about tech support, etc. for old OLD
products.
>> (Like calling up IBM... "Hello, I've got this 8" disk here, it was
new in
>> package, and it was not free of mechanical errors. I want my money
back!")
>
>IBM are better than most, at least for providing parts/manuals. They
may
>claim that a machine never existed (IBM UK told be there was 'no such
>thing as a PC-jr'), but they can often find all sorts of things given a
>part number or forms number.
>
>> Or saying that we found a bug in the 4K MS tape basic, etc. ;-)
>
>Sending in bug reports (and even better, fixes) for ancient products is
>great fun :-).
Have you ever gotten a response?
>
>Agreed.
C'mon d00dZ, 1've got \/\/1nd0ze 98 beta on ftp.aol.com/max/42342/!!!
Let's get some c00l \/\/aReZ, Man!
>-tony
>
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
I have just returned after a long weekend to find my mail had got set to
Postpone again. This has probably all been said but I thought I'd put
my bit in anyway.
Tony:
< A question occurred to me today : Can you have an embedded analogue
< computer, and if so, how many op-amps are needed to have one?
Allison
> Yes, and that's very common. None, a low pass filter(RC) performs a
> function and can be considered analogue.
A filter made of passive components or otherwise I wouldn't consider a
computer, although I agree it is definitely analogue (Americans may omit
the ue where appropriate).
I would say that an analogue computer:
(a) combines two or more signals
(b) does so in a more complex way than by simple addition or
subtraction. (But this could be A+dB/dt, for example)
An analogue computer need not be electrical at all - quite complex
analogue functions can be implemented in cams, for example. A good
example of a simple embedded analogue computer is the ignition
distributor on a petrol engine. This:
Takes two inputs - camshaft angle and manifold vacuum;
Differentiates camshaft angle to get engine speed (centrifugal
weights on springs);
Applies some non linear function to engine speed (cams attached to
the centrifugal weights);
Adds together camshaft angle, function(engine speed) and constant *
vacuum level;
Compares the result with a reference angle to generate pulses of a
given width for the ignition.
I claim that is a simple (but actually quite sophisticated) analogue
computer.
< I was looking at the service manual for my Micropolis 1203 hard disk, and
< I read the circuit description of the servo electronics. It's a fairly
< complicated array of op-amps, which combine integral and differential
< forms of the position error, positioner current, etc. I would claim that
< is an embedded analogue computer.
> Valid claim, also a good example of a fairly complex function.
Agreed 100% (As Tony would say). An excellent example of an embedded
analogue computer.
Another example is the convergence circuit in a colo(u)r television.
This takes the two timebases as inputs, multiplies them and their
squares/ first derivatives etc. by user settable constants, and feeds
this back onto the deflection systems of the tube.
< On the other hand, I think it would be stretching the definition to call
< a simple op-amp wired as a voltage follower an analogue computer.
> Correct. However often the buffer is between some function or follows one
> so it's part of the analog system.
Agreed it could be part of an analogue computer. But I think Tony's
point was that it does not by itself make one. Otherwise practically
any analogue circuit becomes a computer (One of Vonada's axioms, I
think: All circuits are amplifiers)
> Other analog systems common to computers:
>
> cassette IO (low pass filter on output) and complex filter/differentiator
> edge/peak detectors for input. Some of the acients used PLLs for clock
> recovery (KANSAS City is one).
>
> Analog to digital conversion (quantification).
> Digtial to analog conversion (filtering)
>
> Disk/tape systems have several layers of analog function for data and
> control.
Definitely analogue systems. But some are merely filters, not
computers. (I think a PLL almost qualifies as a computer, though...)
But in general, I agree with you both - analogue computers are often
small, simple and embedded, and they're a heck of a lot more common than
most people think.
Philip.
