From: Ray Arachelian <ray at arachelian.com>
An excellent, almost definitive summary of the subject.
I would just like to add a little of my own experiences.
I happen to be in both camps - yes, such a thing is
possible.
Luckily I
do have enough physical space to be able to own a few dozen old
machines, though nothing very large, but certainly, I can experience
far
many more machines than I can house by emulating them.
I have the real thing too (1962 mainframe) but also have an emulator
for it. I initially wrote it so I could write software for it in the
comfort of my house in the cold winter months without having to (a)
risk damaging Germanium transistors which have a minimum official
temperature rating of 50F, 10C. (b) having to warm up a whole barn to
be comfortable to work in (c) having to hand start an old 3 phase 3.5
litre diesel generator with cold thick oil in it (d) having to pay for
lots of diesel fuel or after I had 3 phase installed, to pay for 13
kWh electricity per hour.
I now plan to publish my emulator on the web, along with original
software which non programmers can run on it. I am very unsure of how
many people will be interested in such a thing. I need to get the
physical machine running to retrieve said software from unique ten
track mag tapes and from standard 80 column cards, though I could
probably get the latter read elsewhere, I don't want to have to
transport about 150,000 card somewhere to have them read, probably at
great cost.
I am also into classic cars and hold an annual car show at my home
attended by about 4000 people. The opportunity to try opening the door
and show visitors the mainframe was too hard to resist, so we did and
were very surprised by the results. No negative comments, even by
children who were amazed that computers were ever so much bigger than
their familiar home machines. It was surprising how many adults people
had experienced mainframes and who loved being reminded of just what
it had been like, and having the opportunity for their children to
experience what words alone cannot really describe. The smell of hot
electronics by the ton, the heat, the noise, and of course the sights
of the whole thing and the main console with its flashing lights, the
scale of a machine big enough that you can stand INSIDE it and being
told it weighs five tons.
In the early years I had to simulate some of what the machine should
have done, by using diagnostic facilities and one or three
instructions entered directly into the control registers when the
machine had failed. If the machine ever completely failed and had to
be shut down I certainly would be very disappointed and I feel the
visitors would be too, I'm sure a static museum exhibit just does not
have the same impact. I once visited Manchester museum and they had a
couple of old mainframe. No explanation, nobody to ask, I could have
been very interested and spent hours there but without any information
I passed on to the next room in about two minutes. I have to say the
temptation to try the on switch was hard to resist, there wasn't even
anything saying not to do so.
By and large, the people I've dealt with in
regards to emulation have
been civil and friendly and appreciative. Some of these have never
seen
the systems they want emulators or, some of them have and wish to
relive
the nostalgia, some couldn't afford the real thing, or couldn't repair
it and so forth. In other words, they're hobbyists, just like the
type
of folks you'll find here on this list. And in fact, some were from
this list.
The same thing in the classic car scene. There are people who spend
years building replicas of E Type Jaguars (called XKE in the US), D
Type Jaguars, AC Cobras, 1930s roadsters etc, often with better
performance/handling than the originals. Very nice people, and I'd
rather they did that than modify a working original.
Like many others, I take an original car which should really be
scrapped and spend much time and money to bring it back to how it left
the factory, often to a better build quality. A few people then sell
them at a huge loss because it is the restoration process itself that
they enjoy. I keep mine (I have never ever sold a car - scrapped a few
though) and enjoy driving it. I have seven cars - six are roadworthy,
one under restoration, postponed due to the amount of work on my
classic computer.
I will say this, a computer is nothing more than a
bunch of parts that
don't do interesting things without software. Whether that
software is
a specific set of applications, an operating system, or a ROM with
some
sort of interpreter or debugger in it, or some code you yourself
have to
type in, there's not much a computer can do without code. All it will
do is sit there and take up space and, if turned on, consume
electricity
and produce heat.
For micro computers I agree, not quite sure this applies to
mainframes. I guess it depends on how you define software. If a single
instruction is software then I suppose so. At the lowest level
debugging I can set an instruction into control register one, set the
machine to single cycle and watch the lights on the console as I send
single clock pulses through the hardware every time I press a button.
I'll assume that we're not in this hobby for
the sole purpose of using
classic computers as space heaters.
Not solely no. Just a useful side effect.
Now, of course, there is a lot of fun in the physical
aspects of it,
repairing and reconfiguring systems, for example is a very good thing,
that's what allows us to keep our machines in running order, and
there's
certainly a huge sense of accomplishment in fixing a machine, and
therefore saving it from the scrap heap.
Yes.
Ultimately, I believe that's the key here (at
least it is for
myself -
and I don't presume to speak for others, except in the sense that they
might feel the same way) if you can't actually run the machine, it's
not very useful. It might be something nice to look at in a museum,
but
you won't be able to interact with it, you won't be able to *run
programs on it*. So, to me, a non working machine isn't very much
more
interesting than a statue, in fact, quite a lot less due to the lost
potential of what it could be.
Couldn't agree more.
Walking by a cordoned off exhibit that shows a
non-functioning
machine,
without the ability to see it run or interact with it, well that's
just
not very interesting to me. Watching the blinking lights of a powered
on machine might be fun for only about 3 seconds (unless perhaps
you're
one of those that tends to partake in mind-shrinking substances).
The experience of actually running code, and even better, coding for
an
old machine is probably the largest part of the fun of this hobby.
Yes but how can you give this experience to several hundred visitors
in a day. With a multi-programmed machine this might be possible but
with an older machine, specially ones without terminals (my one does
not even have an operators terminal) you cannot do much without
affecting the experience of the bulk of less technical visitors. I
suppose it would be possible to provide an emulated machine to the
minority but would they be interested in that?
......
But there is one area where we are actually able to create and provide
immortality: software.
So that's why I'm a programmer? I don't really expect my programs to
be around in 20 years time let alone a hundred. One member here did
express approval for a program I wrote in the 1980s but that is
exceptional. The program drove a particular colour dot matrix printer,
very few of which survive, and is of no use whatever without that
hardware, which in time will become extinct. Applications I've worked
on could fare better but why would anyone want to run a 2D drafting
program or a 3D modelling program on an emulated Mac in a hundred
years time? For me I think its pleasing people NOW which matters, and
of course the money to spend on cars, old computers, food etc
.....
I think the major complaint (or rather phobia) is that emulation can
allow one to run the same software WITHOUT the original hardware. Oh,
the excuses will come up from the back of the mind, dripping in terror
"But! But! But! If they can run it in software, they might throw out
the
hardware!" Well, yes, they might, and when /they/ discard that old
hardware, it will likely make its way to our hands. Sure, some will
wind up being scrapped by those who don't know any better, but a lot
of
folks realize our hobby exists. Some have various misunderstandings
about our ability to pay insane amounts for nostalgia (i.e. the rabid
ebay complaints that surface every few months), but others aren't
looking for a quick score, so they'll ask around or post on Craig's
List
or Goodwill and do the right thing.
As I am not going to live for ever I want my old computer to go to a
museum. I've already tried with one which eventually went to a
privately run museum as I could not GIVE it to a publicly run one. I
would like this to happen to my remaining one whilst I am young enough
to tell them how to move it, reassemble it and help get it running, I
don't want to be doing it in my eighties, but I MIGHT still be
interested in running an emulator which does not develop faults and
need a resident engineer to fix them.
(Some write emulators for the
challenge, for being the first to do so, etc. I admit all of those
sentiments in my own experiences, but preservation was the main one.)
One aspect of emulators I have not yet explored is, well hold on a
second and I'll explain. When looking through the 1301's
documentation, circuit diagrams and instruction set, I am very tempted
to add improvement which could have been done by the designer, but for
some reason, either budgetary or lack of knowledge (some software
techniques had not been invented yet). In an emulator I could add
indexing or indirect addressing, or immediate mode data, or relative
mode, or branch on NOT some condition without having to modify the
actual hardware. I could then try programming the machine in that
configuration and see how it affected the program size and ease of
programming.
It would be even more fun if the emulator was done at logic gate level
and even more so if mated to an interactive 3D model of the hardware
where you could open the cover, insert emulated scope probes and look
at the signals. You could even emulate random logic failures for
educational reasons, though to do so as a game would probably be a
step too far for me, though programming the emulator to do it WOULD be
fun.
So the goals of those who repair, those who create
replicas, and those
who write emulators are very much the same.
The goals of those who buy and collect older machines, and of those
who
run emulators are also similar.
Yes.
There are also many reasons why emulation is a good
thing. The
ability
to liberate the soul of the machine from the hardware (whether broken
beyond repair, fixable, or working) is a good thing. It provides us
with the chance to collect unwanted hardware, it provides anyone who
is
interested the ability to experience older software, and to some
degree
get an idea of what the older hardware could do. Sure, it's not the
same, but it can be if the guys who write emulators care to make it a
close experience. If we ask for them to be as close to the real thing
as possible, the guys that write emulators will make it so.
Yes.
...
While there may have been only a few Colossus machines, all of which
had
been destroyed after WWII, if someone can get their hands on the
emulator for it, they can run one whenever the mood strikes. Not as
many can build their own replica, however, and none will have an
original.
(Speaking of which anyone know where you could get a Colossus emulator
from? - there was mention of one here:
http://designresearchgroup.wordpress.com/2007/11/23/a-post-modern-colossus/
) :-)
The emulation page of the CCS web site seems to have disappeared so I
can't check. As Colossus, like early US machines was not a stored
program computer, I'm not sure at what level you want the emulation to
run. I think there was an emulator for Baby, the first stored program
computer on the web site.
Maybe emulators aren't for everyone, then again,
neither is
collecting a
lot of classic machines, or building replicas of such. To each their
own. Each have advantages the others can't meet.
And of course there is a huge spectrum between pristine sealed in
box to
damaged beyond repair. (Of course, ideally, every classic machine
should be in pristine condition, with unyellowed cases, and completely
working. But that's a pipe dream.)
Never had a sealed in box machine which was beyond economic repair? :-)
That spectrum also includes modern peripherals or
upgrades. Some
would
scream bloody murder at the thought of replacing a non-working hard
drive for a classic system with a modern hard drive (or CF card) and
interface, others would gladly welcome it as it means the difference
between an unusable machine and one that works.
This can go all the way to replacing the actual internals of a machine
with a modern one running an emulator (I recall someone installed a
Mac
Mini inside a Mac Plus case and then ran mini vMac on it as an
example),
or of course, just a plain emulator running on a normal consumer
machine.
I don't think we should be bickering and fighting over where our
preferences lie on the spectrum. To each their own, and no matter
where
your preferences lie, the end result is that more classic machines are
saved from scrap.
Absolutely.