Allison wrote:
> < The 5100 was IBM's first "Personal Computer" (their words). It had
> <BASIC or APL or both!
>
> The HP system predated it but, I may have the number wrong. It was
> programmed in industrial BASIC.
Allison, I'm really having trouble figuring out what you're thinking of.
Even as far forward as 1975, the only HP systems I can think of that
ran BASIC were minis. The 2100 and 2114 would have been the smallest
of these, and both are boxes that really want to be in 19" racks but
can be made to sit on tabletops and can be carried (I am certain that
the 2100 has handles and think the 2114 does too). If carrying one
doesn't convince you that it wants to be in a 19" rack or at least
left sit I don't know what will.
The closest thing I can think of is the HP 85, which is a fairly small
and lightweight complete system, with keyboard, display, printer, and
cartridge tape in the box. It was also "portable" in that you could
get matching luggage for it. Next closest might be some of the 98xx
calculator/workstations, but I think those were either programmed like
calculators or in HPL, not BASIC. But all of this is late 1970s-1980
stuff.
Maybe I'm just having a brain lapse?
-Frank McConnell
Tony, Allison, Roger:
Thanks for the quick tutorial on microcode. I knew that it was an
involved topic worthy of many hundreds of pages of text, but you did a great
job of giving me a thumbnail of the topic.
Tony, thanks for the book refs. I'll try to track some of them down.
Rich Cini/WUGNET
<nospam_rcini(a)msn.com> (remove nospam_ to use)
ClubWin! Charter Member (6)
MCP Windows 95/Windows Networking
============================================
< I believe the Japanese Busicom calculator is even older and dates from
<about 1966.
busicom had some calcs before the one based on the 4004 but the 4004
design was 1971. By the there were other multichip designs but none
as low a chip count as the 4004 nor were the as general in application.
Up to that point calculator chip implementations were totally custom
singular designs.
Actually there were some chips before the intel part like the 3101 and
6700 bit slices. It took a lot of parts and design effort to make a
computer as general as the 4004 though those parts were far faster.
The 4004 and later parts were along the lines of reducing custom silicon
solutions or hard wired designs to programatic solutions. As
microprocessors became faster and self contained they were able to solve
more problems that were either silicon intensive, real estate intensive or
flat out too fast for digital solutions at the time. At the other end of
the spectrum they created markets and applications that would not have
been anticipated. After all who'ed ever though you'd need a custom
programmed micro for a microwave or washing machine?
Allison
> I was wondering if anyone knew how to install a Hayes 9600 modem into
> an XT (Ogivar Tech.).
This is slightly off-topic, so e-mail me privately and I'll tell you.
manney(a)nwohio.com
I deal a _lot_ with new users, so my answers are a bit different. I use
precise, non-standard (but descriptive) terminology. My goal is to employ
labels such that non-users can understand instantly what I mean.
> For computers like the C-64, the TI-99/4a, Atari 800, etc. I call the CPU
> a "console".
I call 'em a "keyboard", as that is what they look like.
> The all-in-one dealies like the TRS-80 Model II/III and their ilk would
> be "computers"
Me too. More precisely, "old-style computer"
>
> Piece-part systems like the IBM, I'd call "systems" because you have a
> system consisting of a CPU and peripherals, such as the keyboard,
monitor,
> disk drives, perhaps a mouse...
I call the --
Monitor => Screen
Case => System box
I always stress that the 3 1/2" is called a "floppy ", because a surprising
number of people think that they are "hard drives". I also see them
commonly called "tapes" (and installing a program is commonly called
"programming")
>
> Also, things like a PDP or DG Nova would be "systems", but I think people
> prefer to refer to them as "mini's".
I just call them computers -- newbies generally don't know the difference.
(Besides, if you gave up your old stuff and all got PC's with Win95, you
would have _real_ computers and get _real_ work done....snicker snicker.)
(Quick! Now, I gotta change my e-mail address, lest I be buried under tons
of irate e-mail...)
manney(a)nwohio.com
"Zane H. Healy" <healyzh(a)ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> There is also a terminal with it, a "Ann Arbor XL Series" that connects via
> a Serial line. Does anyone have any idea what kind of terminal this is?
> It's very wierd, it's the only ASCII terminal that I've seen which is a
> portrait-mode terminal! Is this some kind of VT-100 compatible or
> something? The only thing I've ever seen that even comes close is some of
> the old Macintosh monitors.
It's probably a flavor of the Ann Arbor Ambassador terminal. I
remember them as being in somewhat widespread use by Unix folks in the
early-to-mid 1980s, their major feature being the number of lines of
source you could fit on the screen. They pretty much fell out of
favor across the mid-1980s with the proliferation of bit-mapped
displays.
-Frank McConnell
>You missed calculators and there are rough catagories:
>
>First eletronic calc
>
>first pocket calc
>
>HP35 $700, the lowcost market breaker being the Bomar Brain.
>
>First programable calc
Good point here thank you. By the way the list was not exhaustive pleas feel
free to add anything and everything you want.
>
>
><first personal computer (I think I know that one)
>
>If you mean PC (as in the IBM PC) then the answer is IBM. However if you
>man pc as in personally owned computer, then you go back by maybe 10-20
What I meant by personal computer was computers mass produced for the home
market. But the rest is still good. What was the first computer to enter the
home (coming from the industry)?
><first portable computer
>
>Define portable as I'd seen totables in the late 70s. One very nice one
>was an expanded EVK68 board in a classy wood case with a small crt and
>keyboard.
My interpretation of portable is a computer that is meant to be moved from
place to place fairly easilly: that means integrated monitor, disk drive (or
tape player), a carrying handle (or two).
>
>One that comes to mind was the HP(5100?) complete packaged system with
>tape for storage and basic and GPIB for external interface.
>
><first laptop
>
>Not sure but it wasnt a dos based for sure. Tandy trs100 or the similar
>NEC, Epson, and others.
>
><first GUI
>
>Xerox PARC smalltalk
>
><first OS
>
>This is real old likely in the late 40s early 50s and was likely a
>machine monitor system to load/save programs. Even the PDP-1 had an OS
>to timeshare multiple users. You may have to be more specific as to tthe
>type or style of OS as there are several and the appearance of each
>corosponds to emerging concepts in computing.
>
>Allison
>
>> > first video game
>>
>> "Computer Space" which was Atari's first video game. I think someone may
>> correct me and tell me it wasn't "Atari" yet, but it was created by Nolan
>> Bushnell.
>
>Spacewar for the PDP-1 is the granddaddy. Still runs, once a year
>(hopefully, if the West Coast computer museum keeps up the tradition).
Wouldn't that be the first computer game? I am not familliar with the PDP-1
but it sounds like a computer name.
>
