>From: ard(a)p850ug1.demon.co.uk
>
>> A friend has an IMSAI 8080 that he still uses to burn PROMs ... that's the
>> oldest one I know of.
>
>It's nowhwere near the oldest computer still in use (since it's based on
>a microprocessor), but when I need to program 1702s, I have to use my
>Intellec MCS8i, since that's the only machine I have with a suitable
>programmer. And that machine is older than an Imsai.
>
>
>-tony
>
Hi
I use my 4004 system for 1702A's. I suspect that is at least
one or two years older than your MCS8i.
Dwight
Some sad news...
http://www.businessweek.com/technology/cnet/stories/1000732.htm
and
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=9415
Quote:
"Morrow, who was 69, was a member of the Homebrew Computer Club, many
of the members of which became instrumental in pushing the concept
of the personal computer.
He formed a firm called Microstuf and was responsible for the design
of the S100 bus."
-------------------
Thomas Dzubin
Calgary, Saskatoon, or Vancouver CANADA
>From: "Kapteyn, Rob" <kapteynr(a)cboe.com>
>
>I think RTG stands for "Radioactive Thermal Generation" or something like that.
>
>It is a hunk of plutonium that, on its own, glows at a high temperature.
>Since the temperature of space is near absolute zero, there is a large
temperature difference.
>A relatively simple, dependable thermocouple generates electrical power from
this temperature difference,
>making a really long-lasting, dependable battery -- but not of the sort you
want in your kid's toys :-)
Hi
At least I know for sure that the Cassini uses a linear Stirling
engine and not thermocouples. These are much more efficient at producing
electricity with a thermal source. The linear ones can use magnetic
bearings and don't have wear factors to worry about. They can
also be controlled to give a more constant power output by changing
the efficiency as the radioactive source runs down.
Dwight
I am in need of the HP-UX System Security manual from 1989. I don't know
if that is the exact title but it's what I was given.
If someone's got it then please come forward. There is a bounty for this.
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
>From what I remember, those probes (and most (all?) other deep space probes, I
>think), use a radioisotope decay generator for power. This is a
>sub-critical-mass nuclear power plant; it uses the heat produced by a
>near-critical lump of plutonium to generate electricity, rather then using
>fission to produce heat to produce electricity.
So is this the power supply all those whiney people were bitching about
NASA trying to put into a Mars probe? They were all afraid the probe
would explode during launch and be ground zero of a nuclear blast (or
some other most likely vagely based on reality doomsday outcome activists
are notorious for).
-chris
<http://www.mythtech.net>
> What most where worried about was just the accidental
>spread of radioactive material in the atmosphere. I don't know
>about you but I don't like breathing that stuff if I don't
>have to.
Knowing NOTHING about radioactive material (other than its amazing what
simple items will set off my fire department's old geiger counter)...
would an explosion really pose a health hazard? Are we talking about
enough of a quantity to cause an issue (I don't know how deadly it is, so
I don't know what kind of an airborn PPM is needed to be a problem).
-chris
<http://www.mythtech.net>
Hi
One should note that most switching supplies are happier
with an additional 20% voltage. Linears get hotter with
excess voltage.
Dwight
>From: "Gary Dean Hildebrand" <ghldbrd(a)ccp.com>
>>
>Cameron Kaiser writes:
>
>
>> Anyone out there have experience with how Japanese computers of that era
>> (early 1980s) tolerate United States mains voltage, since Japanese voltage
>> is lower (100V)? Any recommendations, cautions, or concerns?
>
>A variac (ISTR is three syllables) will work, but why can't you get a
>18-20vac transformer and wire it to buck the 120v down to 100v? I'd think
>that would be simpler, and a whole lot smaller.
>
>Cameron, you said you were in the market for a variac. I have a couple for
>sale, but they are 10A, complete with STEEL rack panel. These would be
>great for any workbench, and good for some current as well. Drop me a line
>offlist.
>
>Gary Hildebrand
>St. Joseph, MO
>In the
>case of a Voyager-class probe, with RTG-sourced power,
For the few of us on the list that are idiots (ok, fine, just for me
then), what is RTG sourced power?
-chris
<http://www.mythtech.net>
>The science being addressed is something we have no other way of observing
>in situ (remote observing missions are being planned) so it's still in
>practical use if you regard basic scientific research as "practical" (I do,
>but then, I would).
After seeing the mission status report on Vyger, I'd have to revise my
previous notion that I didn't accept it as an answer. Since it is still
sending data, and we are still receiving it, and it is still carrying out
its original mission (ie: it isn't doing it simply because it can't be
turned off, but rather is doing it because we WANT it to do it regardless
of our ability to shut it off).
I'd have to say that I now DO accept Vyger as an answer. So the question
is, when was it launched (1977) and is there something older in regular
use (I would think so).
But this also brought to my attention something I had previously not
know. That Voyager 1 and 2 were both launched at the same time. I had
always thought 2 was years after 1 (I thought 2 was late 70's, and 1 was
early 70's). I'm not sure why I thought that, maybe it was because it
took a different course and was more recently in the news sending back
data about the outer planets.
-chris
<http://www.mythtech.net>
I think RTG stands for "Radioactive Thermal Generation" or something like that.
It is a hunk of plutonium that, on its own, glows at a high temperature.
Since the temperature of space is near absolute zero, there is a large temperature difference.
A relatively simple, dependable thermocouple generates electrical power from this temperature difference,
making a really long-lasting, dependable battery -- but not of the sort you want in your kid's toys :-)
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk-admin(a)classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-admin@classiccmp.org]On
Behalf Of chris
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2003 10:25 AM
To: Classic Computer
Subject: Re: OT: Voyager watts
>In the
>case of a Voyager-class probe, with RTG-sourced power,
For the few of us on the list that are idiots (ok, fine, just for me
then), what is RTG sourced power?
-chris
<http://www.mythtech.net>
>From: "Hills, Paul" <Paul.HILLS(a)landisgyr.com>
>
>That's a lot - it's not really a vintage machine, nor a particularly rare
>one. I still use mine as a MC56000 Digital Signal Processing (DSP) testbed.
>At the time, the ?500 I paid for it was a quarter of what I would have had
>to pay to get a DSP experimentation card for a PC, and since I didn't have a
>PC at the time it was a bargain.
>
>In addition to that, I wrote a series of articles about DSP for the ST
>Format magazine in the UK, for which they paid me ?500, recompensing the
>computer's cost! Ha!
>
>paul
>
Hi
For my DSP experiments, I got one of those "SoftModems".
It had a A/D-D/A, ADSP2100 Analog Devices DSP and RAM to load
the programs into. It only cost me $75 when new.
Dwight
>From: TeoZ <teoz(a)neo.rr.com>
>
>The oldest computer still in use has to be a government non military server
>somewhere. The military gets too much cash not to swap their equipment out
>every decade at the latest so I rule them out. Other branches only upgrade
Hi
You must know something about the military that I don't know. When
I was in the military ( middle 70's ) we were still using some pieces
of gear that were made during ww2. The military often doesn't replace
something until you can't get replacement parts any more. In some
cases, even then, ways are found to keep them running.
They do get a lot of new gear but that is usually to add function
and not to replace.
Dwight
>after every user who knows how to run the system is dead/retired. Probably
>some computer setup for the social security database, or liscense plate
>server or other mundane task.
>
>Besides im shure there are tons of Sinclair's running chemical plant
>controllers in the Ukraine somewhere that are at least older then the C64.
>
>What about the computer sent out in the Voyager spacecraft in the 70's? Or
>is this just personal computers?
>
>
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "R. D. Davis" <rdd(a)rddavis.org>
>To: <cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>
>Sent: Saturday, May 10, 2003 9:59 PM
>Subject: Re: Oldest computer still in current use
>
>
>> Quothe UnRooster, from writings of Sat, May 10, 2003 at 01:14:38PM -0600:
>> > What about Commodore 64?
>>
>> Hardly. That's one of those newfangled little computers of relatively
>> recent vintage. It doesn't seem all that long since my C-64 was
>> brand spanking new. Does that mean that I'm getting old? ;-)
>>
>> --
>> Copyright (C) 2003 R. D. Davis The difference between humans & other
>animals:
>> All Rights Reserved an unnatural belief that we're above Nature
>&
>> rdd(a)rddavis.org 410-744-4900 her other creatures, using dogma to justify
>such
>> http://www.rddavis.org beliefs and to justify much human cruelty.
Voyager Mission Operations Status Report # 2003-03-14, March 8 Through
March 14, 2003
Command Transmission & Verification Operations
Voyager 1 command operations consisted of a command loss timer reset on
03/11 [DOY 070/1555z]. The spacecraft received the command.
There were no Voyager 2 command operations during the period.
Sequence Generation Operations
Continue sequence development of CCSL A047 and B119 mini-sequence.
Data Return Operations
Voyager 1 Data Processing and Operations:
There were 79.1 hours of DSN scheduled support for Voyager 1 of which
2.5 hours were large aperture coverage. There was one real-time change
made on 03/11 [DOY 070] when 1.3 hours of DSS-25 support was released to
Ulysses. The total actual support was 77.8 hours of which 2.5 hours
were large aperture coverage. There were no significant outages during
the period.
Science instrument performance was nominal for all activities during
this period. One frame of GS-4 data was recorded this week. The AHELI1
cyclic for recording additional GS-4 data was enabled on November 17,
2001. A frame from this cyclic was recorded on March 8. The EDR
backlog is 23 days.
Voyager 2 Data Processing and Operations:
There were 73.9 hours of DSN scheduled support for Voyager 2 of which
18.0 hours were large aperture coverage. There were no real-time or
schedule support changes made or significant outages during the period.
Science instrument performance was nominal for all activities during
this period. One frame of GS-4 data was recorded on March 12. The
PRA receiver recovered from it's 84th POR event on March 11. It has
been 393 days since the last POR event. Twenty-six frames of GS-4 data
were played back on March 12. Approximately 96.95% of the data were
recovered. The EDR backlog is 23 days.
Flight System Performance
Voyager 1 performance was nominal during this report period. Activity
included an ASCAL on 3/12 (DOY 071).
Voyager 2 performance was nominal during this report period.
Activities included a PMPCAL on 3/11 (DOY 070), X-Band high power and
DTR playback on 3/12 (DOY 071), and turning ON Gyros B/C on 3/13 (DOY
072).
PROPELLANT/POWER CONSUMABLES STATUS AS OF 3-13-03/3-14-03
Spacecraft
Consumption
One Week (Gm)
Propellant
Remaining (Kg)
Output
(Watts)
Margin
(Watts)
1
9.12
30.23
305.0
28
2
9.82
32.11
306.4
37
RANGE, VELOCITY AND ROUND TRIP LIGHT TIME AS OF 3/14/03
Voyager 1
Voyager 2
Distance from the Sun (Km)
13,119,000,000
10,424,000,000
Distance from the Sun (Mi)
8,152,000,000
6,477,000,000
Distance from the Earth (Km)
13,096,000,000
10,479,000,000
Distance from the Earth (Mi)
8,137,000,000
6,511,000,000
Total Distance Traveled Since Launch (Km)
14,941,000,000
14,007,000,000
Total Distance Traveled Since Launch (Mi)
9,284,000,000
8,704,000,000
Velocity Relative to Sun (Km/sec)
17.212
15.690
Velocity Relative to Sun (Mi/hr)
38,501
35,096
Velocity Relative to Earth (Km/sec)
18.770
24.570
Velocity Relative to Earth (Mi/hr)
41,986
54,961
Round Trip Light Time (hh:mm:ss)
24:15:58
19:25:04
>What about the computer sent out in the Voyager spacecraft in the 70's? Or
>is this just personal computers?
Well, for my question, it doesn't matter if it is personal computer or a
mainframe or whatever.
Although I would rule out the Voyager computer for two reasons. 1: You
can't say for sure that it is still running (is it still sending back
data?) and 2: Its only still running because no one shut it off.
However, I WOULD consider any original ground based systems that are
still in use listening for data from Voyager to be valid. At least they
are still serving a purpose even if they aren't getting any data.
-chris
<http://www.mythtech.net>
FYI
(From the Poqet mailing list)
Bob
-----Original Message-----
From: Sven Utcke [mailto:utcke@informatik.uni-hamburg.de]
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2003 5:33 AM
To: Poqet PC mailing list
Subject: PoqetPad Plus User Guide
Hi everybody,
several of you were interested in the User Guide for the
PoqetPadPlus. Bill Moy was so good to photocopy his version (several
times) and to send it to all interested --- big cheers to Bill for
that! John O'Neal than scanned in his copy, and after a lot of
problems with ftp this is now available as a 16MB File at
ftp://kogs.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/pub/utcke/poqetpc/PoqetPadPlus.pdf
Happy downloading
Sven
--
_ __ The Cognitive Systems Group
| |/ /___ __ _ ___ University of Hamburg
| ' </ _ \/ _` (_-< phone: +49 (0)40 42883-2576 Vogt-Koelln-Strasse 30
|_|\_\___/\__, /__/ fax : +49 (0)40 42883-2572 D-22527 Hamburg
|___/ http://kogs-www.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/~utcke/home.html
I don't know if this was mentioned earlier, but I see that Megan has gotten a new job.
Congratulations!
-----Original Message-----
From: Megan [mailto:mbg@theworld.com]
Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2003 12:46 PM
To: cctalk(a)classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: RE: Oldest computer still in current use
<snip>
Megan Gentry
Former RT-11 Developer
+--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+
| Megan Gentry, EMT/B, PP-ASEL | email: mbg at world dot std dot com |
| Member of Technical Staff | megan at savaje dot com |
| SavaJe Technologies, Inc | |
| 100 Apollo Dr. | URL: http://world.std.com/~mbg/ |
| Chelmsford, MA | "pdp-11 programmer - some assembler |
| (DEC '77-'98) | required." - mbg KB1FCA |
+--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+
>> Rebuilding? Without the existing infrastructure (in the wilderness), how
>> many people would be capable of building/making ANYTHING? Other than
>> Tony, could you make a battery? a bulb? Do you really know how to extract
>> the materials needed from the ground?
>
>I can think of two people off the top of my head - Captain Kirk when
>fighting the Zorn Captain, and McGuyver in just about any episode.
Don't forget the Professor from Giligan's Island.
:-)
-chris
<http://www.mythtech.net>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vintage Computer Festival [mailto:vcf@siconic.com]
> Sent: Sunday, May 11, 2003 1:22 AM
> To: Classic Computers
> Subject: Re: Oldest computer still in current use
>
<SNIP>
>
> I am inclined to believe there may still be some ground
> systems for the
> Space Shuttle program that are run on 8080 based machines.2
>
I can confirm as a fact that there was at least 1 8086 flying on Columbia
before Feb 1.
************************************
If this email is not intended for you, or you are not responsible for the
delivery of this message to the addressee, please note that this message may
contain ITT Privileged/Proprietary Information. In such a case, you may not
copy or deliver this message to anyone. You should destroy this message and
kindly notify the sender by reply email. Information contained in this
message that does not relate to the business of ITT is neither endorsed by
nor attributable to ITT.
************************************
>I dont understand your logic.
Logic plays no role... this was nothing more than a question I posed
(almost a week ago non the less). Therefore in looking for answers, I can
allow or disallow anything I please for any reason I please. That doesn't
make it valid or invalid for anyone other than me. If others want to tag
onto my 2 questions, then they can use whatever criterea they desire to
see if something is a valid answer for them.
>The Voyager is ruled out because it might be
>too far away to have its valid data (stuff it was made to send back on
>purpose) get back to us, but the recieving equipment that will never get any
>data back since the signal isnt getting back is still a valid system?
The big strike Voyager has against it in my book is that no one can tell
if it is still running. Its not valid to me, because it might be mythical
(not the craft, but rather the fact that it is still functioning).
The ground computers on the other hand are valid, because they can be
verified and someone each budgeting cycle has to make the decision if
they want to continue to spend money having them operate. So they are
still doing their original job... listening for data from Voyager.
Of course, its all pretty irrelivant as I'm sure the original ground
computers for Voyager have long since been shut off and removed. NASA may
still be listening, but if they are, I'm sure the task has been lumped in
with other newer monitoring systems.
>Would an old obsolete college computer that runs a 300 baud bbs still be
>valid if nobody knows about it, or even called it and the college forgot to
>shut it down in the last 40 years?
If it is running ONLY because no one knows its running AND no one knows
it exists... then its a mute point. If a tree falls in the woods...
Although, I would still, for my original question, consider it not valid.
Because it isn't in normal use. The simple fact that no one knows about
it removes it from use (no one dials in to the BBS anymore, and the sysop
forgot it is there so isn't leaving it up just in case someone stumbles
on it).
If on the other hand, a sysop knows about it and IS leaving it running
just to see if someone hits it, then I might consider it valid. At least
it is still serving a function. But I would have to hunt for a better
answer, something that is a bit more in use. (I would also probably hunt
for a better answer than Voyager ground monitoring computers for the same
reason, they may be valid, but they are a poor example).
>If somebody fires up an old 50's analog computer in a museum just to see if
>it still kicks is it really "in use"?
No, because my ORIGINAL question was, what is the oldest computer still
in normal use. So for MY question, that is, the answer I am looking
for.... I will only consider a computer that was put into service when it
was reasonably new, and is still functioning today. I will also accept an
old computer that was put back into service either as a replacement for
one the died, or because it was needed to do a job, and it was the best
option for the job.
So I wouldn't consider a collector or museum that has put an old machine
into service just because they can (although that would still be
interesting to know, but for my question, I would consider that a
different catagory). This of course is 100% acceptable as an answer for
my 2nd question that was: Whats the oldest computer connected online and
preferably hosting a site that can be visited. Its very acceptable to me
that the best answer for this is one that is doing it for no other reason
than because someone wanted to see if it could be done with one of their
old collected computers.
But for my first question, 'm looking for the type of answer along the
lines of "Company XXX still uses YYY for their ZZZ process".
-chris
<http://www.mythtech.net>
Following a successful trans-Pacific trade, (for a DRQ3B) I have the following that will (theoretically) upgrade my Vax 6000-430 to
a 6000-620.
2 T2054-AA 6000-600 CPUs
1 T2019 3.3V regulator, 25A
Can Antonio or one of the other DEC experts confirm that there are no other hardware mods required to the Vax 6000-200/300/400
series cabinets (this particular machine was originally a 6000-310 IIRC) to support the 500 & 600 series cpu boards other than the
insertion of the T2019 3.3v regulator board? ie no re-cabling etc?
AFAIK this is a plug it in and go field upgrade but would like to confirm it before committing irreplaceable hardware to possible
destruction.
Can't seem to find much on the web about the process itself.
Thanks.
Geoff in Oz
Does anyone have a source for Old Cisco hardware, IOS, documentation info.
Preferably pre 1990.
Brian Roth
Network Administrator
A+ N+ CNA CCNA
Network Services
First Niagara Bank
(716) 625-7500 X2186
Brian.Roth(a)FirstNiagaraBank.com
*****************************************************************************
*********************
The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential.
It is intended for the named recipient(s) only.
If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager or
the
sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any one or make
copies.
** eSafe scanned this email for viruses, vandals and malicious content **
*****************************************************************************
*********************
BEGIN:VCARD
VERSION:2.1
X-GWTYPE:USER
FN:roth, brian
TEL;WORK:2186
ORG:;Network Services
TEL;PREF;FAX:716-625-0012
EMAIL;WORK;PREF;NGW:brian.roth@fnfg.com
N:roth;brian
X-GWUSERID:1372
END:VCARD
That's a lot - it's not really a vintage machine, nor a particularly rare
one. I still use mine as a MC56000 Digital Signal Processing (DSP) testbed.
At the time, the £500 I paid for it was a quarter of what I would have had
to pay to get a DSP experimentation card for a PC, and since I didn't have a
PC at the time it was a bargain.
In addition to that, I wrote a series of articles about DSP for the ST
Format magazine in the UK, for which they paid me £500, recompensing the
computer's cost! Ha!
paul
-----Original Message-----
From: Keys [mailto:jrkeys@concentric.net]
Sent: 05 May 2003 05:42
To: cctalk@classiccmp
Subject: ST Falcon Goes high on eBay
This ST Falcon goes for over $300.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?viewitem&item=2725518828
I salvaged this laptop, looks ok, but does'nt have a power supply. Any
members of this b-board in the san francisco bay area interested in it??
robert-e(a)pacbell.net
