12 Jul
2016
12 Jul
'16
9:08 a.m.
...and the /20 was developed at Sindelfingen, which was one reason it was
the redheaded stepchild (but very popular nonetheless, due to its lower
cost).
On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 6:01 AM, Camiel Vanderhoeven <iamcamiel at gmail.com>
wrote:
On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 1:24 PM, <steven at
malikoff.com> wrote:
designing
--
Ian S. King, MSIS, MSCS, Ph.D. Candidate
The Information School <http://ischool.uw.edu>
Dissertation: "Why the Conversation Mattered: Constructing a Sociotechnical
Narrative Through a Design Lens
Archivist, Voices From the Rwanda Tribunal <http://tribunalvoices.org>
Value Sensitive Design Research Lab <http://vsdesign.org>
University of Washington
There is an old Vulcan saying: "Only Nixon could go to China."
Camiel said:
> IBM UK Laboratories in Hursley was a software facility, the model 40 was
> developed in Poughkeepsie, like the others. Secondary production sites
were
in Mainz,
Germany, and Japan.
Yes, the wiki does say that, but I am sure Hursley was involved in hardware as well, for instance TROS. This PDF by
Pugh states that a team
at Hursley
were designing the Model 40:
http://ed-thelen.org/Pugh-Technology_Transfer.pdf
As a CE, my dad was there to study the hardware
only.
You're quite right, I was wrong. Both hardware and software
development took place at Hursley. According to Pugh, Johnson, and
Palmer's "IBM's 360 and early 370 systems", the /30 (then called NPL
101) was developed at Endicott, the /40 (NPL 250) at Hursley, and the
larger models at Poughkeepsie.