- test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org - classiccmp.org

More thoughts on building a Z-80 (64bit!!!)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

< I have looked at Z180's, Z380's and etc.... They are SLOW!!!!!! The < only availabe packaging for the Z380 is un-useable to me as a hobbist < (without a lot of headache.) Slow clock but they use fewer clocks and 16bit fetch. The effective speed is higher. Also the chip spped in climbing. The socket is a 25$ item to get from flat pack to wire wrapable. < I hate the way that Zilog has taken the nice and simple control bus sche < of the Z-80 and really made it a pain-in-the-butt on the Z-380!. At first I was of that opinion. Then I started with the z280 (Zbus mode) and z8000 and looked back at the z380 and it looks worse than it is. It's advantage is that it puts out advanced timing info making fast systems possible while using less bus bandwidth. < size set of bus control lines), Z-80 instruction set and match a DEC Alp < performance (at a cheap price of-course), I would worship that company. Why not find and Alpha and write z80 PALcode for it? < (Oh yes, I want a 64bit data bus and a 128bit address bus). Is this ask < for too much? Why can't we all just get along? You don't know why that isn't done. There are things about the z80 that do not scale well. < My thoughts are this: If I can find some REALLY SIMPLE mirco-controlle < that do just the basic microprocessor functions, I can parallel them to < make them read-in and intrepret Z-80 code. Like I said it's the sub 1nS memory that will stop you. A z80 at a theorhetical clock of 100mhz would require the memory *system* to have a M1 read cycle of less than 10nS. Try and find logic for decode and memory taht can make that happen in the required time. The Z80 bus provides little in the way of advanced timing to overlap operations so you need really fast memory and IO stuff. For example while z80s at faster than 10mhz are easy to get peripherals for greater than 8mhz are scarce and some never got faster than 4-6mhz! < and DEC Alpha) can reach clock speeds of 600 Mcyc and a really simple (o < accumulator, bare instruction set) microcontroller can't exceed those sp It's a study in piplelined operations. Simple machines have less to pipleine so the individual elements have to be faster. You cannot overlap as many operations as there only a few. Even with current superfast logic sub 1nS gates are rather scarce. So you hit the speed limit IE: how fast can you compare two numbers and branch based on the result. < If I got some of these micro-controllers and had two or three of them < reading in instructions ahead of execution (looking for branches) I coul < do half of the job and speed up the through-put. Except that they arent avalable that fast. Your trying to discretely do what a PII does internally. It's in esscence doing several things in parallel assuming some will be thrown away (branch no taken, add not done and so on) that take complex archecture so that you have more irons in the fire and can be more speculative. < For math, a bunch of stinking fast memory locations acting as look-up ta That works but to get the speeds you talking about where do these sub 3nS rams/roms come from? Can you wire them on a card so that the lead lengths are not a significant part of the timing (remember 1ft=1nS). These become real things when the clock exceeds 100MHz. I know this >from doing a 20mhz z180 design on paper and I was looking at fast cache rams chips to keep the memory inline, but for IO wat states were a must as most periperal chips I could find were limited to 10mhz bus speed range. I know I'm a party pooper but, I'm also one of those wacky engineers that has pushed the z80/z180/z280 to the edge and know what a design must do to work. On the other hand running CPM at 12.5MHz z180 is frighteningly fast but also points out system bottlenecks like disk speed! I've been putting time into overcomming that using disk caches and the like. Allison

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Y2K and immortal executables

by allisonp＠world.std.com

< >Ok, howabout a Brigeport milling machine with the PDP-8E it was purchas < >with in 1975, still running the same code. < < Sure, I can imagine that. But I can't imagine it will stop working < on January 1, 2000, or that the clock couldn't be set back to 1975 < without affecting the milling. Correction, what clock? Most control apps clocks are intervals, time between events, maybe time of day or week for longer periods and its rare that they even consider time of year. Keep in mind that until sometime past 1981ish clocks were not chips that kept time of day/year. Of ten they were a periodic interrupt that was totalized for time and date. So if the clock was broken it was software not hardware. The one example where Y2K has hit a PDP-8 use was a nuke power plant and the PDP-8 doing data logging had to print the right time date on the page. If the time and date were wrong nothing stopped working but the NRC would be upset with the dataing of the logs. FYI: Y2K happens to hit every 7-8 years on PDP-8 OSs as they only use 3bits for relative year. Bits used to be expensive! < If the source code has existed in some form since the late 50s or < early 60s, no programmer since its creation has tinkered with it? < I can imagine a slightly more plausible situation in which the source < was written in 1961, recompiled and tweaked throughout the Sixties, < and somehow the source was lost after recompilation in the Seventies < so only the executable remains, and that it's been running in some This is likely the commonplace event and the machine by the 70s was stable platform say like DG Nova, PDP-11 or other that has a lifespan exceeding 10+ years or still being made. Lost in some cases means it exists and somewhere on a backup that is in a room with 10,000 tapes of other backups that no one has looked at for 7+ years. Heck my vax archive is over 7 years old and is more than 20 TK50s. I don't recycle major backups as I've had tapes fail. So the deeper the archive the less likely the loss and also harder to find a specific item. This is only hobby use. business should do this far more often. < It's not that I'm denying Y2K - it's that I think it's overblown, < especially when it comes to antique computers. Me too. Many system Y2K is a singular event or non event. The only ones I even think about in relation to it are the PCs and maybe the VAXen (I run VMS 5.3 to 5.5). The PDP-11s may not like the date but most of the stuuff I do is not date centric so unless the OS breaks it keeps cranking. The PC makes me worry as DOS/Win and internetorking software may have bombs I don't know nor can fix myself. I've bumped the clock and it seems to behave though. Allison

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Emulation or the real thing?

by franke＠sbs.de

>> field fixings etc. Especialy in the /360.../390 world some >> of these routiens are older than the OSes where they are used >> today. Some are dated back to a thime when source was equal to >> punch cards - at this time only the object code was stored in >> libraries - source was stored as card boxes - and some of these >> little helper work just fine when used in complete new projects, >> 30 years later. > Good grief, you mean to say that these boxes of source code I have on punch > cards are finally going to be worth something :). Yeah - but fast, you have to finde s.o. in need of them :) <g> Gruss H. -- Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut HRK

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

[off topic] Bomb Threat.

by DSEAGRAV＠toad.xkl.com

This is kinda off topic, but we've just had a bomb threat! No joke! Someone phoned in, asked for my boss, and said they put a bomb in the building! Why would someone bomb an ISP? Other than my boss is an Afican-American... (Native of Nigeria). -------

27 years, 9 months

11
16
0 0

[off topic] Bomb Threat.

by maxeskin＠hotmail.com

Well, I guess we see this trend of making things less redundant and less faithful to theory, more faithful to shaving off 1/4 of a cent universally. We see bomb threats pretty universally too, and not necessarily for political reasons. Are you sure it wasn't just a kid whose computer crashed again? > >> This is kinda off topic, but we've just had a bomb threat! >> No joke! Someone phoned in, asked for my boss, and said they >> put a bomb in the building! Why would someone bomb an ISP? >> Other than my boss is an Afican-American... (Native of Nigeria). >> ------- > >A sad commentary on a form of 'techno-terrorism' that is likely to become >more prevalent as dependency on the 'net' increases. > >The commercialization of the Internet has inadvertantly weakened one of >its major design points that was considered to be so critical when the >first ARPA designs were worked out. That being redundancy and lack of >centralization. > >Before the major commercial 'backbones' were in place, (set the 'wayback' >machine; Sherman) most systems had multiple shared dial-up connections to >numerous other hosts with which they regularly shared information (email, >news, files, etc.) > >If a network connection went down, (if you even had one) or a given host >was offline, traffic was just routed thru another system that indicated >connectivity to the system (or systems) that the traffic was destined for. >(everyone remember the periodic routing 'maps' that went around?) > >So... unless you lost ALL of your phone lines for an extended period, you >pretty much always had (some level of) connectivity. > >Today, on the other hand (generalization warning!) how many major systems >maintain dial-up inter-system capability even as a backup? > >The major infrastructures have tended to centralize around the commercial >'backbones' and carriers which make them succeptable to interruptions of >service when a single connection fails! (Sure... your web servers are fed >by dual 'T3s', but both from a single carrier thru a single POP?!?) > >So much in money and resources is often committed to create/maintain a >major (high bandwidth) link onto the net, (useful) redundancy is >frequently sacrificed. > >One attack on a major carrier POP (ok, definition time: POP = Point >Of Presence) could easily disrupt Internet traffic for a LOT of people and >corporations. > >Take out a couple of the major authoritative DNS servers, and watch the >world (generalization) start crashing down! > >Or sadly, target one ISP that is suspected of being a major provider? > >It happens... more often than you might ever imagine... > >-jim >(I speak for no one but myself... YMMV) >--- >jimw(a)agora.rdrop.com >The Computer Garage - http://www.rdrop.com/~jimw >Computer Garage Fax - (503) 646-0174 > > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

27 years, 9 months

4
3
0 0

Building a Z-80 (64bit!!!)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

< THe Z180 is already down to 3 cycle/instruction, and the z380 is < down to 2 cycle/instr. But since the maximum clock rate of the < 180 is more than 50% higher than the 280, it's the way to go. No news to me. I'm running a modifed SB180 (z180) and also working with z280/12.5Mhz. I've looked at z380. < > of using. I have z80/10mhz parts however and the 2901s would barely d < > that. < < And if you try, most 10 MHz can run at 12 to 14 MHz. I've taken the 10Mhz part to 12.5Mhz. < < > FYI: z80S180s can be had into the 30+ mhz range. < :) Jep and 1 Meg is still plenty of RAM when running CP/M That it is. < But after all where is the sense of having a Z80 as 64 Bit < processor ? It's a well usable 8/16 Bit processor. Even the < 380 isnt really an advantage - you just don't realy need this < 32 Bit instructions. A set consecutive 16 Bit instructions Larger flat address space. The z380 would make a real good data handler (z382 is a PC bus slave version for comms) or possibly a graphics crunchers. Even in the z80 native mode you can access beyond the 64k basic addressing in a manor that is more convenient than the basic z80 provides. In most cases the extended mode changes the the effect of the arithmetic overflow in 16bit ops so that 0FFFFh+1 is not 0000. but 10000h. There are of course extended operations as addressing modes as well. < can do it in almost the same time. From my point of usage < a 16 Bit uP is anything you need - compact code, compact data < and greater over all performance. Z380 still has those attributes. It saves the memory management overhead for apps that need to get at spaces larger than 64k. I plan to do a bit of serious work with one if I can get my hands on a few and a socket adaptor. Allison

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Emulation or the real thing?

by franke＠sbs.de

> This reminds me of a claim I hear in Y2K discussions, but can hardly > believe: that businesses are running the same *executables* since > the 1950s/60s/70s, and that they don't have the source code to fix it. In fact, this is widely true - Ok, the most cases are not about the source of the whole programm or the main programm its more about subroutines that have been used over the years to solve common things like conversation, key transformations field fixings etc. Especialy in the /360.../390 world some of these routiens are older than the OSes where they are used today. Some are dated back to a thime when source was equal to punch cards - at this time only the object code was stored in libraries - source was stored as card boxes - and some of these little helper work just fine when used in complete new projects, 30 years later. > Sure, they might not have the source to the OS, but their own apps? Remember 30 years - have you ever archived all your work for 30 years ? _EVERY_ Programm you did within these 30 years ? > And that there's been no other reason to change or replace the > programs in all these years, and Y2K is the only reason they need to do it? Jep it is - for example lets take a common old application, for example a salery programm for a big company - the programm still uses the same algorythms since 30 years - the same way of I/O and the same basic data - just some modules for tax calculation have been changed over the years. After all I bet some of these programms will even survive the Y2K hype without change :) Gruss H. -- Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut HRK

27 years, 9 months

2
1
0 0

Fwd: secrets of a microvax II

by Mzthompson＠aol.com

Following is a usenet posting from a guy needing some help with a uVAX II. It sounds like what I would call a basket case, he hauled it home in several baskets in this case. I have emailed him answers to the more basic questions. Since there are a few of you with far more knowledge on this, I thought maybe some of you could help him out. My knowledge of the uVAX II is limited to having gutted out 6 machines being disposed of by former employer. Sorry, that was before I knew of Classiccmp, snif, snif. Mike Please email directly to him. Subject: secrets of a microvax II From: siebert(a)berlin.gmd-net.de Date: Thu, Oct 22, 1998 07:39 EDT Message-id: <70n5h7$koq$1(a)nnrp1.dejanews.com> Hi there, I need help... I got a DEC Microvax II System which is partly disassembled and has the following coponents: ------------------- | | ------------------- | <OO> | < > | 1) looks like a kind of harddisk ------------------- | < ..I>| 2) MICROVAX II | < ..I>| ------------------- | < . >| 3) ? with a TK50 tape unit | < . >| ------------------- | | 4) RA81 harddisk | | | | | | ------------------- | | 5) power supply ------------------- 1) The harddisk (?) is perhaps from FUJITSU and there is place for a second one. It has to be connected to a EMULEX QD 331040100 controler. I saw some pictures of the same units on the web! 2) The muVAX II processor has no harddisks or any drives and has one switch, four buttons and two LEDs on the front panel. It has the following boards: (back view, top) ------------------------------------------ | M 7606 KA630 CPU | ------------------------------|||||||||--- | M 7608 4MB Memory | ------------------------------|||||||||--- | M 7608 4MB Memory | ------------------------------------------ | |M 7504 DEQNA Ethern.|--cable ------------------------------------------ | | ------------------------------------------ | | ------------------------------------------ | | ------------------------------------------ | | ------------------------------------------ 3) The other housing looks like the muVAX processor but has only two buttons and the built in TK50 tape unit. It has the following boards: (back view, top) ------------------------------------------ | M 9404 connector | |-- cable to muVAX II ------------------------------------------ | M 3104 8 line serial controler |-- cables ------------------------------------------ | M 7546 TK 50 ctrl.| |-- cable to TK 50 ------------------------------------------ | M 7164 QDA processor for KDA 50 |-- cables ----||||||-----------------||||||--------- | M 7165 QDA SDI controller KDA 50 | ------------------------------------------ | | ------------------------------------------ | | ------------------------------------------ | | ------------------------------------------ 4) RA 81 456 MB SDI HDD 5) power supply digital 874-F On the backside are the following connectors: > 8 serial 25 pin SUBD connectors > 4 connectors for SDI drives > 1 DEQNA Ethernet 15 pin SUBD connector with a fuse > bulkhead with 9 pin SUBD console connector I have no documentation except from the manual for the serial controller... Hmm.. now I have some problems/questions...: - Which was perhaps the use of this system ? - which was probably the OS (Unix version...) ? - Was it a single user system ? - where can I get a "user handbook" for the muVAX (booting, meaning of the front buttons of all components...) ? - Which type are the housings for this muVAX (BA23, BA123...) ? - Why is this muVAX II SO BIG ??? (in comparision to the "under table systems" which don't have TWO boxes for the cards...) - What is the difference between a Microvax II and a Vaxstation II ? I have no Terminal to use as console - what kind of connector is the 9 pin SUBD connector on the backside (bulkehead) ? - What kind of terminals can I connect ? (I have some SS97 Siemens Terminals or a IBM colour Terminal...) - Can I use a PC with a TTY or a VT100 emulation and a serial connector cable ? - Do I have to use always a console to start the system (with a switch on it or something like that) ? Some of the cards are disassembled in the machine - Where in the muVAX processor housing 2) must I plug in the M 9404 card coming from the "controller housing" 3) and which side must be on the top ? - Where in the "controller housing" 3) must I plug in the EMULEX controller (it needs only half of the place) ? I am not firm with RA81 HDD - Where in the RA81 must I plug in the flat connector ? - Is only one of the four flat connectors for ONE RAxx drive ? - what are the two round mini 4 pin din connectors for in the RA81 ? - in which of the four flat connectors on the back of the system do I have to plug in the RA81 ? - Is there any information about the SDI "standard" ? In both the processor and the controller housing are slots for connecting HDDs. - Do I need controllers for connecting drives there? - Is it MFM standard ? - When there are no drives in it, do the buttons on the front panel have any function ? General... - How can I use the Ethernet connector (compatibility, wiring...) ? - What is the power supply for ? (one big INPUT, three OUTPUTS - all 220 V and 4 smaller outs !) - from which of the two harddisks (RA81, FUJITSU) does the system boot from ? - What are the 8 serial connectors for (Terminals...) ? - For which use was the TK 50 tape for (booting, streamer...) ? I also got a DEC VR262 screen together with the whole stuff, but I can't imagine that there is any use with the muVAX. - how can I use the VR262 ? I know this are manymanymany questions, but even few ansers would be a great help, thanks - Rainer

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Units of measure (Was: discrete transistors

by roblwill＠usaor.net

Well, comparing myself to _most_ of the keds in my school, I'd say 'odd' is the word. In my school, they have a "freak day", where everyon dresses up in screwy clothes, and purple hair and everything. Even the teachers do it. -- -Jason (roblwill(a)usaor.net) ICQ#-1730318 ---------- > From: Brett <danjo(a)xnet.com> > To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> > Subject: Re: Units of measure (Was: discrete transistors > Date: Tuesday, October 20, 1998 11:38 PM > > > On Tue, 20 Oct 1998, Jason Willgruber wrote: > > I think the only reason that I know this is that I collect antique radios. > > maybe I'm just odd... > > Whoa - change that view - You are not odd - just exceptional 8-) > > BC >

27 years, 9 months

3
2
0 0

Emulation or the real thing?

by franke＠sbs.de

> >So, believe it or not my naive young man, people are dumb enough to lose > >the source code. > What I don't believe are these claims that the heart of the Y2K > problem are thousands of businesses running apps as old as I am, > that haven't had to change, or that can't be changed. How many > serious businesses are still running the same unchanged sourceless > app since 1978, much less 1968 or 1958? Most of them are not completely unchanged, but the changes are only in some parts that have been changed every year once or twice - and large parts haven't changed at all for the last 20 or 30 years. Also don't forget - for some programm parts there might be a source, but the object code has been patched (not uncomon) and the source doesn't reflect the programm. Or source tools (assemblers etc) where used, wich are not availabe today ! Or the source is stored in a library where no LMS needed is available - or they are stored on tapes no longer readable (to bee correct no longer readable means in most cases only they can't be just inserted and read - you know, some of the Y2K heros don't spend more than 20 minutes before they decide 'Source gone'). Gruss H. -- Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut HRK

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

another ebay laugh

by franke＠sbs.de

> mac128k in box for $260? hmmm > I have the same,except my mac has a rare documented upgrade board that > basically turns it into a mac+ complete with scsi. oooh, and i have IW2 in box > also. mine's worth $1000! lol I was in, but the price sored to a laughter ... To many rich jerks out there. Gruss H. -- Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut HRK

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Emulation or the real thing?

by allisonp＠world.std.com

< John Foust <jfoust(a)threedee.com> wrote: < > This reminds me of a claim I hear in Y2K discussions, but can hardly < > believe: that businesses are running the same *executables* since < > the 1950s/60s/70s, and that they don't have the source code to fix it. < > Sure, they might not have the source to the OS, but their own apps? Actually this is more common that you'd think. Many cases the company didn't write the code, they contracted for it or it's a canned application. In most of those cases they never had the source! Then the people that had the source go out of business and the code is effectively lost. I worked for a company that had to sue to get the source for an app they used for some 5 years so they could fix a bug! The bug was that RSTS-11 upgrade cased the app to crash. They needed the upgrade to keep the hardware and OS service contract alive on an 11/34 that ran the place. Allison

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Emulation or the real thing?

by dburrows＠netpath.net

>< I'm still skeptical. I'd love to hear more first-hand reports of >< the oldest code still running as-is. Come on, code from the 50s >< that's never been replaced? Running on what? Under an emulator? > >Ok, howabout a Brigeport milling machine with the PDP-8E it was purchased >with in 1975, still running the same code. How about a major circuit board mfg that has 20+ PDP11/04 and 11/24's that could not even tell me what operating system they were running. I was and still am suppling them with parts to keep the systems running. It took me a while when I went on a service call there to figure it out. DOS11 beleive it or not. With RL01 and RL02's some of the systems only have paper tape. They are using the systems to control routers, drills and test sets. They also wanted to know about possibility of Y2K compliance - no sources, DOS11 had no RL drivers so the must have written their own. Dan

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

OT: Modern college educations

by dburrows＠netpath.net

> >More people should insist on proper documentation. On a couple of >occasions I've returned a device to the shop that sold it under the UK >sale of goods act. The reason? It was not fit for the purpose that I >bought it for because important documentation (register maps, connector >pinouts, etc) was not available. Alas I doubt if the company ever >realised or cared.. I sure wish they had those laws here in the US. The only to get documentation is to make it a line item on the purchase order and hold back payment until the PO is complete. Dan

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Units of measure (Was: discrete transistors

by dburrows＠netpath.net

> >When I was a lad, we used to use a fine jet of helium and spray that >round any possible leaks. It shows up very clearly on a mass spectromter. >Some of them even had a setting on one of the controls to look for the >appropriate peak (4, I guess). > Virtually all the instruments I am involved with have a GC for sample introduction so there is helium present all the time. Do they ever think of using the tank of argon sitting off to the side? Much less know the mass of argon? (40) Do they ever think of using any of the gallons of methanol present in all the labs? or even know offhand what mass to look for. (31 there is to much 32 from the leak - O2) The heliun/argon works on the source region but on the analyzer region you have to resort to numerous other methods - there is nothing to ionize the gas. Instead you have to use solvents and look for the pressure burst when the liquid volitizes in the vac. I have had to even pressurize the system with heliun and use a gas leak detector to find some. - A bad weld on a diffusion pump is the worst to find. At hi vac. it is extremly hot when it is cold the pump oil seals the leak. What makes it even more fun is I have no diploma other than high school. I have taught numerous classes in mass spec to masters and phd's on operation, maintenance and troubleshooting. It gets really funny when they find out I have had only 1 university course - sociology. Dan

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

HP85 - need info

by fauradon＠pclink.com

Ok it should be there now. Under tech info Let me know if it is useable or if I'd be better off with the original scans at 120K a piece. Francois ------------------------------------------------------------- Visit the desperately in need of update Sanctuary at: http://www.pclink.com/fauradon -----Original Message----- From: Megan <mbg(a)world.std.com> To: fauradon(a)pclink.com <fauradon(a)pclink.com> Date: Wednesday, October 21, 1998 4:59 PM Subject: Re: HP85 - need info > >>Oh and by the way I have the manual sitting on my desk right now >>(actually on top of my scanner). If you're still interested I could scan >>the 7 pages of the glossary and BASIC syntax guidelines and place it on >>my wed site tonight (I wanted to do that for several machines anyway). >>There is also 5 pages of error codes right after that (If I have time >>I'll set it up too) > >That would be great... thanks. > > Megan >

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

WTB: NEEDED: Tandy/Bondwell parts!

by roblwill＠usaor.net

Wanted: LCD for a Bondwell B310 laptop. Half of the LCD in mine quit working. it is a non-backlit LCD, but I'd like to know if there is a backlit version available for this computer (this is the CGA, not the VGA version). There's the specs: SHARP LM64032 NEEDED: HD controller for a Tandy 1400HD laptop. ANY help is appreciated, as I need to rescue data from the 1400, and I'd like to get the Bondwell working. As always, ThAnX in advance, -Jason PS>> The Tandy is within the 10-yr limit. the Bondwell has about 6 months to go...

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Building a Z-80 (64bit!!!)

by CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.com

> I am trying to basically build a 64Bit Z-80 on a board. What I am >looking for is: Anyone know of any chips that are EXTREMELY simple >micro-controllers but, work at EXTREMELY high clock rates??? I wanna put >a few on a board with some memory and made a 64-bit Z-80. I'd like the >processor to operate at 300Mcyc (or faster) clock speeds so, I figure I >need micro-controllers that operate at about 900 Mcyc to do the work. You're pretty much looking at ECL here, I think. Some of the new gate arrays will clock at 100 MHz, but that's still nowhere need 900 MHz. Tim.

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Building a Z-80 (64bit!!!)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

< Okay, here's another hair-brained project that I am working on..... < < I am trying to basically build a 64Bit Z-80 on a board. What I am < looking for is: Anyone know of any chips that are EXTREMELY simple < micro-controllers but, work at EXTREMELY high clock rates??? I wanna p < a few on a board with some memory and made a 64-bit Z-80. I'd like th < processor to operate at 300Mcyc (or faster) clock speeds so, I figure I < need micro-controllers that operate at about 900 Mcyc to do the work. < < Any ideas???? Wait till April first for this. I don't think you were listening when we were discussing propagation delays. To deal with 300-900Mhz clock your talking 4-6layer etch and some really fast logic. The .33nS memory will be tough to buy. Be prepared to dump a few DecaKilobucks into the attempt after all you'll need a really fast logic analyser and O'scope to see what you missed. If you want a 32 bit z80 get a z380, it runs native z80 code, until you switch modes then compatability works but it has a lot of gotchas. If your doing a z80 stretch, you better think about how to access memory or really alter the z80 fetch timing. Basic Z80 timing for say 20ns memory would limit you to some 40-50Mhz... it would be a 5-10 MIPS machine though. If you superpipline it and get it down to 1-2 clocks per cycle you can double that. In any case there is no way to logically stretch a z80 without running the risk of making it software incompatable at some point. I've seriously looked at it, still have the 2901s I was thinking of using. I have z80/10mhz parts however and the 2901s would barely do that. FYI: z80S180s can be had into the 30+ mhz range. Allison

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

net disruptions through terrorist machinations

by jim＠calico.litterbox.com

Gang, the tcp-ip protocol was designed to survive a nuclear war. Assuming there is ANY connectivity going around a hypothetically disrupted/destroyed major network hub, the packets should find it. Of course that link won't handle the bandwidth, but in theory the net would still *work*. -- Jim Strickland jim(a)DIESPAMMERSCUMcalico.litterbox.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Vote Meadocrat! Bill and Opus in 2000 - Who ELSE is there? -----------------------------------------------------------------------

27 years, 9 months

2
1
0 0

Emulation or the real thing?

by maxeskin＠hotmail.com

Another important factor is newer software that uses code from ancient programs. Examples of this are various algorithms (that could be y2K sensitive). Also, I'm pretty sure that there are at least a couple of dozen lines that are exactly the same in MS-DOS 7 and in Q-DOS. Same goes for other operating systems and software. >> that haven't had to change, or that can't be changed. How many >> serious businesses are still running the same unchanged sourceless >> app since 1978, much less 1968 or 1958? > >Amazing, isn't it? I'm sure those same sentiments were expressed back in >1978, 1968 and 1958 by the same incredulous programmers who supposed that >perhaps their programs would still be crunching away in 1998. > >I don't think the software I've written thats been in the field since 1993 >will still be there in 2003, but there's no reason it can't be, and I >would be thrilled (and amazed) to find out that it was. > >I'm sure the guys who wrote Sage Professional Editor back in the late 80s >would be amazed that I still use it for all my code writing (in DOS >windows under Win95) and swear by it (best damn text editor ever >developed...yeah, you heard me!) > >SO anyway, believe it. Code from the 50s and 60s still churns away, >calculating the taxes you owe, the fines you are assessed and the bank >statements you received. > >Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com >------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Ever onward. > > Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0 > See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details! > [Last web site update: 09/21/98] > > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

net disruptions through terrorist machinations

by maxeskin＠hotmail.com

That's the idea behind any distributed network. If you drove a pole into your head, you will cause damage, but you would still be able to live, unless you hit one of a number of critical 'network hubs' >Gang, the tcp-ip protocol was designed to survive a nuclear war. Assuming >there is ANY connectivity going around a hypothetically disrupted/destroyed >major network hub, the packets should find it. Of course that link won't >handle the bandwidth, but in theory the net would still *work*. >-- >Jim Strickland >jim(a)DIESPAMMERSCUMcalico.litterbox.com >----------------------------------------------------------------------- >Vote Meadocrat! Bill and Opus in 2000 - Who ELSE is there? >----------------------------------------------------------------------- > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

FS: DEC Documentation (RM80 Disk Drives)

by cmcmanis＠freegate.com

I've got a spare, nearly complete set, of docs for the DEC RM80 disk drive available. Three books: 1) RM80 Disk Drive User's Guide P/N EK-ORM80-UG-003 2) RM80 Illustrated Parse Breakdown P/N EK-ORM80-IP-001 3) RM80 Disk Drive Service Manual P/N EK-ORM80-SV-001 What I don't have is a copy of the RM80 engineering print set. I'm asking $30/obo for all three of them. I'll pay shipping in the US. For those who don't have one the RM80 is a 120MB MASSBUSS based disk for PDP-10s or PDP-11s. One of these and an 11/45 and you've got the "original" classic UNIX system. (Well classic from the sense that there were a lot of them configured that way) --Chuck McManis (cmcmanis-at-mcmanis.com)

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Emulation or the real thing?

by jfoust＠threedee.com

At 12:48 PM 10/21/98 -0700, Sam Ismail wrote: > >I'm sure the guys who wrote Sage Professional Editor back in the late 80s >would be amazed that I still use it for all my code writing (in DOS I'm still using Brief now and then, but it's the 1989 build. The oldest DOS tool I found on my system today was from 1984. >So anyway, believe it. Code from the 50s and 60s still churns away, >calculating the taxes you owe, the fines you are assessed and the bank >statements you received. I'm still skeptical. I'd love to hear more first-hand reports of the oldest code still running as-is. Come on, code from the 50s that's never been replaced? Running on what? Under an emulator? - John

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Emulation or the real thing?

by jfoust＠threedee.com

At 12:14 PM 10/21/98 -0700, Sam Ismail wrote: > >So, believe it or not my naive young man, people are dumb enough to lose >the source code. Who you calling "young man"? :-) I'm 35 and learned BASIC on an ASR-33 when I was twelve, and have been supporting myself on my programmer earnings since the summer I turned 18. I certainly know the source code gets lost. I'm appalled at how much code gets written, and then is lost, which might explain the tubs of floppies and 8mm tapes that I use for decoration in my office. What I don't believe are these claims that the heart of the Y2K problem are thousands of businesses running apps as old as I am, that haven't had to change, or that can't be changed. How many serious businesses are still running the same unchanged sourceless app since 1978, much less 1968 or 1958? - John

27 years, 9 months

2
1
0 0

Emulation or the real thing?

by CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.com

>This reminds me of a claim I hear in Y2K discussions, but can hardly >believe: that businesses are running the same *executables* since >the 1950s/60s/70s, and that they don't have the source code to fix it. All the time. In many cases, the customer never saw the source code. (Did you get the source code to the microcontroller in your microwave when you bought it?) >Sure, they might not have the source to the OS, but their own apps? I'm intimately familiar with an example where the company selling the OS no longer has all the source code to it. (And, in one specific case, they can't recompile a tool distributed with the OS because they've even lost the binaries of the compiler.) -- Tim Shoppa Email: shoppa(a)trailing-edge.com Trailing Edge Technology Voice: 301-767-5917 7328 Bradley Blvd Fax: 301-767-5927 Bethesda, MD, USA 20817

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

another ebay laugh

by SUPRDAVE＠aol.com

cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=36124539 mac128k in box for $260? hmmm I have the same,except my mac has a rare documented upgrade board that basically turns it into a mac+ complete with scsi. oooh, and i have IW2 in box also. mine's worth $1000! lol

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

whistling mac plus

by Marion.Bates＠Dartmouth.EDU

--- SUPRDAVE(a)aol.com wrote: i fear it's probably that infamous cold solder joint issue. i'm looking at a spare mac power supply board; does anyone know any exact locations of common solder joint failures? finally, if i do touch up some contacts with a soldering iron, MUST the high voltage lead be discharged? i'm hoping i can just remove the protective cardboard cover, reheat the solder joints and not even go near the HT lead or tube at all. --- end of quote --- In my experience, the C-shaped ring of joints corresponding to the flyback transformer go bad pretty often. Also, I've re-soldered them before without discharging the high voltage lead, and everything's been okay afterward, but maybe that's just lucky. If you DO discharge it, do NOT ground to the chassis -- I read once that the logic board components are too delicate to share ground with a jolt like that. Use the screw on a wallplate or something instead. Good luck! -- MB

27 years, 9 months

3
2
0 0

MS-DOS type-ahead buffer limit?

by CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.com

>apple ][ users know that there is no type-ahead during disk access. Actually, there is a one character keyboard rollover, and that's there whether or not disk access is going on. Tim.

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

whistling mac plus

by SUPRDAVE＠aol.com

i'm putting together a mac+ for someone and while testing it, i noticed it started clicking inside. then later, the machine started making a high pitched whistling noise, almost kinda like what you hear when you're close to the back of a tv while it's on. the video worked fine however. i presume it's a power supply problem, but can anyone say what component is failing here? smacking the left side of the case would make the whistling quit, although the clicking continued. i fear it's probably that infamous cold solder joint issue. i'm looking at a spare mac power supply board; does anyone know any exact locations of common solder joint failures? finally, if i do touch up some contacts with a soldering iron, MUST the high voltage lead be discharged? i'm hoping i can just remove the protective cardboard cover, reheat the solder joints and not even go near the HT lead or tube at all. david

27 years, 9 months

2
1
0 0

Units of measure (Was: discrete transistors

by SUPRDAVE＠aol.com

maybe? the answer here is obvious! i'm always taken aback by the wealth of knowledge his brain/storage devices hold! In a message dated 10/20/98 2:06:01 PM US Eastern Standard Time, dastar(a)ncal.verio.com writes: > Q. Is Tony Duell really a supercomputer with an incomprehensively large > database of factual knowledge and highly advanced artificial intelligence > algorithms? > A. Maybe

27 years, 9 months

3
2
0 0

UK VCF (Was: Re: Any *really* homebrewing going on?)

by franke＠sbs.de

>> I'll summarise the results when the replies dry up. > Well the replies never really got started. I only got five replies, all > said they were interested. I can only conclude that there are not that > many UK collectors on this list. So did you take the non-UK replies out ? Even if the english like to ignore it, Europe is just a short hop away :) I think I know at least 3 or 4 Germans who would like to join and I guess there are a lot more. Gruss H. -- Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut HRK

27 years, 9 months

8
8
0 0

Units of measure (Was: discrete transistors

by dburrows＠netpath.net

> silliness of the phrase "partial vacuum" repeatedly... I'll completely > leave out the concept of "vacuum leak"!) Oh, I've been known to say 'That valve (tube) is white round the top. Somebody has let the vacuum out' Seems like quite a reasonable way of putting it :-) Try explaining how important a tight vacuum system on a mass spectrometer is to some PHD chemists. Not to mention how to find the leaks. It is amazing how little they teach in "leading" colleges today. Definately NO common sense. So often all the problem consists of is the last thing they worked on but did that enter their mind? Dan

27 years, 9 months

2
1
0 0

TRS80-4,i/o

by foxvideo＠wincom.net

>Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 10:15:22 -0400 >To: ard(a)p850ugl.demon.co.uk >From: "Charles E. Fox" <foxvideo(a)wincom.net> >Subject: TRS80-4,i/o > > > Hi, Tony: > > In the Model 4 reference manual there are four pages that seem to be relevant: > >#26-Model 4 I/O Bus, #27-I/O Bus Timing Diagram, #28 &29- Model 4 Port Bits. > >I can try scanning these and email them to you if you haven't dug up the information elsewhere. > > Charlie Fox Sorry to post this to the list, but when I tried your email address it bounced. Charles E. Fox Chas E. Fox Video Productions email foxvideo(a)wincom.net Homepage http://www.wincom.net/foxvideo

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

MS-DOS type-ahead buffer limit?

by dastar＠ncal.verio.com

Does anyone know why MS decided to limit the type-ahead buffer in MS-DOS to 16 characters? Also, why they never increased this over time? Basically on-topic. I really want to know because I've always cursed it. Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ever onward. Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0 See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details! [Last web site update: 09/21/98]

27 years, 9 months

4
3
0 0

MS-DOS type-ahead buffer limit?

by SUPRDAVE＠aol.com

apple ][ users know that there is no type-ahead during disk access. I have a ][+ with an enhanced keyboard encoder board that gave it 255 character type- ahead at all times. it was cool to keep typing in program code while saving the file. only problem was playing games where you didnt want the game to keep reading repeated keypresses. thankfully, the type-ahead can be disabled by pressing the space bar when powering up. In a message dated 98-10-21 13:15:23 EDT, you write: << Re: > > Does anyone know why MS decided to limit the type-ahead buffer in MS-DOS > > to 16 characters? Also, why they never increased this over time? Lack of foresight? Lack of vision? > Basicly it's BIOS not DOS, And as the machines got faster, > the need for the type ahead decreased. Boy, is *that* wrong! :) I *still* run into the typeahead limits today, on the fastest machines around. 16 characters is probably fine when you're doing ordinary text entry, with no special machine tasks being requested. It *isn't* fine when you do something like: deltree foo <typeahead 17 or more characters while the computer is working> > Just add one of the many vintage type ahead buffer enhancer. > They have been yery popular, once upon a time... I'd still be running the one I used to use ... but it stopped working as of Windows 3.1 :) >>

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

MS-DOS type-ahead buffer limit?

by franke＠sbs.de

> Does anyone know why MS decided to limit the type-ahead buffer in MS-DOS > to 16 characters? Also, why they never increased this over time? Basicly it's BIOS not DOS, And as the machines got faster, the need for the type ahead decreased. So blame IBM, but in fact, when tey designed BIOS they had mainly ASSM Apps in Mind - not this typ of slowish other things. And for an inteligent reprogrammable terminal/workstation 16 Bytes are quite enugh. > Basically on-topic. I really want to know because I've always cursed it. Just add one of the many vintage type ahead buffer enhancer. They have been yery popular, once upon a time... Gruss H. -- Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut HRK

27 years, 9 months

2
1
0 0

GRID question

by rigdonj＠intellistar.net

I have a GRID laptop that has a hard drive was wiped. (It's good but empty). This machine uses an external disk drive. Does anyone have one they'll sell or loan me so that I can get the OS installed on the hard drive again? The laptop uses a DB-25 connector for the disk drive. Will any other external disk drive that has this connector work on the GRID? Joe

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Units of measure (Was: discrete transistors

by franke＠sbs.de

>>> But Allison does NOT make those kinds of errors. That's part of what >>> makes it so notable and what makes it so irresistable to chide her when >>> she does make a typo. >> She ? > I think this is almost qualifying as a FAQ entry: > Section X.Y.Z: List Participants > Q. Is Allison Parent a woman? > A. Yes. > Q. Is Tony Duell really a supercomputer with an incomprehensively large > database of factual knowledge and highly advanced artificial intelligence > algorithms? > A. Maybe Hey, I AM SOOOO SORRY. THis wasn't intendet for the list. I didn't know this is a girls name .. geeeeeee. sigh H. Oh, and add: Q: Is ist true, that the multi trillionaire Salam Ismail startet his fortune at the List, eBay and with his enormous VCF intake ? A: Well, sort of. -- Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut HRK

27 years, 9 months

2
1
0 0

Emulation or the real thing?

by jfoust＠threedee.com

At 05:59 PM 10/20/98 -0700, Sam Ismail wrote: > >SO how long is it before some really enthusiastic hacker creates a 3D >emulator using a graphics engine like that in DOOM, that allows you to pop >open the cover and go INSIDE the machine, home in on specific ICs, >resistors, capacitors, etc. and stick a probe or voltmeter up to the >leads? Basically, it would incorporate a CAD system with a SPICE system. Actually, a flavor of this exists, or will exist soon, in the form of network management software that lets you take a virtual reality tour of the (perhaps tens of thousands) of computers on the network you administer, and zoom in on a particular machine and peek inside to see which cards and storage units are installed. - John

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

How is a microprocessor made?

by franke＠sbs.de

> I've always wanted to ask this question. How is a microprocessor made? > Can someone here on the list answer this question? Take a hand full of sand, compress it, supply voltage and try to boot - if it doesn't work qout, change the sand - try until a result is reached. Gruss H. -- Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut HRK

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

Emulation or the real thing?

by franke＠sbs.de

>> The original machine, no contest!. An emulator can't possibly include the >> wonderful hot-component smells, hardware problems, being able to stick a >> logic probe anywhere you like, the joys of fixing the darn thing, etc. > SO how long is it before some really enthusiastic hacker creates a 3D > emulator using a graphics engine like that in DOOM, that allows you to pop > open the cover and go INSIDE the machine, home in on specific ICs, > resistors, capacitors, etc. and stick a probe or voltmeter up to the > leads? [...] Later on, when they invent the Scent > Printer (a device which emits the smells of the computer you are working > on) you'll be able to know when you've shorted something because all of a > sudden a foul, toxic cloud will be emitted. > I don't think this is so much of a fantasy. Its a lot of work, but it > could be done (ok, save for the Scent Printer part). Salam, just forget it - i will never klick on an Open-The-Cover button (or point on wit a clumbsy glove) when I can feel the snap of an Apple ][+ case by my own. Gruss H. -- Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut HRK

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

How is a microprocessor made?

by allisonp＠world.std.com

< I've always wanted to ask this question. How is a microprocessor made? < Can someone here on the list answer this question? Very carefully. Actually that is not a joke as it is a very precise process. The process is generally the same as making any integrated circuit save for microprocessors are more complex. The basic idea is that a piece of polished pure crystaline silicon has areas photographically marked and either etched away or doped (infused) with other chemicals (like boron, arsenic, others) to alter the local properties of the silicon to form transistors where and as needed. Other steps put metalization like printed circuit board traces to interconnect active areas on the chip. Once complete they are tested seperated and mounted in holders. All of this is done on a scale of size that is in the range of 1/100000th of an inch and smaller. So the "very carefully" comment is valid and speaks to the level of accuracy and cleanliness needed. That is a pretty trivial description but a detailed one could fill volumes quickly. Allison

27 years, 9 months

5
4
0 0

discrete transistors

by franke＠sbs.de

>>Irrelevant to the discussion for two reasons: >>1) No one has made mainframes out of discrete transistors since the late 60s. >>2) Almost all modern mainframes are based on monolithic microprocessors. > My point was that only recently has it become so that there is nothing > more than an Alpha or an PII. There are many parallel implementations, > but nothing like the difference between an Altair and an S/360. Yes, I > know there are many computers way more powerful than CompUSA desktops, > but the point is that they're just parallel implementations and there > isn't so much of a class distinction. Do you want to tell us that the mainframe world didn't evolve ? Boy, they also have new and quite speedy new processors - for example, the new SIEMENS S150 delivers around 93 RPF on a single CPU and a sustained rate of 760 RPF on a 12 CPU configuration. RPF (Relative Performance Factor) is a SIEMENS unit to classify the relative speed of their processors. The baseunit is a processor from the beginnign of the 80's. Even in the main frame (/390 compatible) world it's hard to compare processors just by speed, since the manufacturers use different architectures below. So every one has his own measurement. IBM uses their MIPS (misleading informations on processor speed) as a guideline - but even these are just a definde rate: they just fixed the 9672-R15 as base with 63 MIPS. A rough conversation between IBM MIPS and SIEMENS RPF is 1.3 to 1.5 - so die S150 deliveres between 140 and 1000 IBM MIPS sustained load at average mix. With the small SR2000 systems which are based on MIPS (now thats the processor manufacturer :) R10000 CPUs there is a guideline for transformation: one R10000 deliveres around 12 RPF or 15 MIPS at user level. (if you know take the MIPS R10000 MIPS rating you'll get also a fairly nice RISC to (IBM)CISC ratio, since the firmware interpreter used in the SR2000 is very performant) Now if you take the SpecInt value of the R10000 and of the Alpha or Pentium chips (sorry, I just not have them ready), one could base a comparisation on these values. If a Pentium deliveres about 10 times the performance of a R10000, they might reach te region of an actual mainframe (not any 60's transistor claim). But in fact these numbers are again way beside the actual usability - Mainframe performance is measured by thruput and things like transactions per second within a defind response time rather than raw CPU. Just take a look at http://www9.s390.ibm.com/lspr/ to get an idea how specific measurment in the mainframe world is don - not just instructions or megabytes per second. Gruss H. -- Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut HRK

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

TOPS-20

by maxeskin＠hotmail.com

Every so often, people here mention how they wish they had TOPS-20 on their modern computers, how much superior it was to UNIX, etc. COuld someone please explain the specific features (apparent to a user) that are missing in UNIX? If I understand correctly, TOPS takes a less minimalist attitude than UNIX, but since I've never even seen it run, I wouldn't know. If it's not too much trouble, could someone give some examples of interaction that demonstrates the difference? ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

27 years, 9 months

10
15
0 0

discrete transistors

by John.Dykstra.jdykstra＠nt.com

>The whole reason Cray's are wired up as circles rather than linearly like a >mainframe is to reduce wire lengths (and with them speed of light delays). Although I never looked at the prints for one, all of the Cray 1's that I had a chance to examine were not completely circular--there was always a wedge missing. I expect this was almost essential; all of the wiring between circuit cards was on the inside of the circle, and the customer engineers had to be able to get to that wiring. I suspect that the reason Seymour Cray built the machine in the shape he did was that the circuit cards, plus the machined columns that supported and cooled them, were wider than the card connectors. By arranging the card columns in a semi-circle with the connectors on the inside, he could minimize wiring length. ---- John Dykstra jdykstra(a)nortel.com Principal Software Architect voice: +1 651 415-1604 Nortel (Northern Telecom) fax: +1 612 932-8549

27 years, 9 months

2
1
0 0

discrete transistors

by maxeskin＠hotmail.com

What amazes me is that no one has ever marketed a mainframe-like machine out of modern processors. Someone mentioned they had made 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 terminals...sometimes I wish capitalism was never invented... >The raw CPU performance of thet 386 exceeds that of many (but not all) of the >discrete-transistor mainframes (and even IBM's SLT-based mainframes). > >However, system-level performance is another matter. How many 386 machines >had intelligent I/O channels, *AND* took full advantage of them? > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

27 years, 9 months

4
4
0 0

discrete transistors

by allisonp＠world.std.com

< From: William Donzelli <william(a)ans.net> < < Sure, a Dell Pentium machine might be plenty fast by the book, but simpl < put, it could not even come close to sustaining that speed (140 Mflops f < the Cray-1). A superfast CPU will always loose to slow I/O. < < Its all in the architecture... yes, steaming along at 140MFLOPS only to slam into the IO bus that if ISA *may* be able to sustain 16mb/s. PCI may be faster, I'd suspect in the 30+mb/s range (unknown to me). Anyhow being able to gind lots of numbers is limited by memory bandwidth and maybe disk IO bandwidth and PCs are not notably fast in that depatment. Cray and those other machines were possibly a bit slower but they didn't have that I/O bottlenecks. Allison

27 years, 9 months

4
3
0 0

Need Info on DEC 11/84 Board, M8190

by maxeskin＠hotmail.com

Not to mention power problems! But I have the feeling that's a bit small! Nothing on the scale of the Pentium II has ever been achieved with transistors, never mind relays, and I'm sure they tried. For example, it would be possible to place transistors at 1 per cubic inch, and have the cool adequately, but it's clearly never been attempted, because if it were, there would be boxes to plug into a PC XT to get Pentium II speeds. >Assuming each relay occupied a cubic inch, one million relays would >occupy a cube 100 inches on each side, or just a bit over 8 feet on each side. >Not ridiculously large. > >Of course, real relays much smaller than a cubic inch are readily available, >and a real computer of that density would have incredible cooling >problems. > >Tim. > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

27 years, 9 months

4
6
0 0

Emulation or the real thing?

by allisonp＠world.std.com

< just dont forget to make the program windont9x compatible. lol. never work. They'd get confused and try to fix winders. ;) Allison

27 years, 9 months

1
0
0 0

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