11 Apr
2012
11 Apr
'12
10:55 p.m.
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://yahozna.dyndns.org/
computers/cdcterminal/CIMG1330.JPG&imgrefurl=http://
www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctech/2008-February/
052537.html&usg=__1fV1PKo3sAiJ9Wg7Uo9Hi8yipYU=&h=1728&w=2304&sz=1734&hl=
en&start=28&zoom=1&tbnid=qPJXAYIkwqa-
cM:&tbnh=113&tbnw=150&ei=oEOGT67UIenj0QGehIz6Bw&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dcdc
%2Bterminal%26start%3D21%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26tbm%3Disch%26prmd%
3Divnsfd&itbs=1
it's a VUCOM 1 made by CDC
ok,the post is a few years old but hey...you've posted one of the
rare photo of a VUCOM 1 online !...
if you have found more info on it,let me know,I've got one home.
JF
12 Apr
12 Apr
12:49 p.m.
In article <BLU0-SMTP30799027C900F1EA431AB83B43A0 at phx.gbl>,
jello <benylin at hotmail.com> writes:
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://yahozna.dyndns.org/
computers/cdcterminal/CIMG1330.JPG&imgrefurl=http://
www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctech/2008-February/
052537.html&usg=__1fV1PKo3sAiJ9Wg7Uo9Hi8yipYU=&h=1728&w=2304&sz=1734&hl=
en&start=28&zoom=1&tbnid=qPJXAYIkwqa-
cM:&tbnh=113&tbnw=150&ei=oEOGT67UIenj0QGehIz6Bw&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dcdc
%2Bterminal%26start%3D21%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN%26tbm%3Disch%26prmd%
3Divnsfd&itbs=1
it's a VUCOM 1 made by CDC
Apparently only made by CDC *Canada*.
All I could find in Computerworld about it were articles about
Bell Canada.
Here's one with pictures that confirms the id by jello:
<http://books.google.com/books?id=BfckBPmP-30C&lpg=PT15&dq=%22vucom%22%20terminal&pg=PT15#v=onepage&q=%22vucom%22%20terminal&f=false>
ok,the post is a few years old but hey...you've
posted one of the
rare photo of a VUCOM 1 online !...
if you have found more info on it,let me know,I've got one home.
Ah... can you take pics of the rear of the terminal, particularly
the model plate?
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 version available for download
<http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com/the-direct3d-graphics-pipeline/>
Legalize Adulthood! <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>
11:41 p.m.
On 4/12/2012 9:49 AM, Richard wrote:
In article<BLU0-SMTP30799027C900F1EA431AB83B43A0 at
phx.gbl>,
jello<benylin at hotmail.com> writes:
it's a VUCOM 1 made by CDC
Apparently only made by CDC *Canada*.
All I could find in Computerworld about it were articles about
Bell Canada.
Here's one with pictures that confirms the id by jello:
<http://books.google.com/books?id=BfckBPmP-30C&lpg=PT15&dq=%22vucom%22%20terminal&pg=PT15#v=onepage&q=%22vucom%22%20terminal&f=false>
I still have my pics up at
http://yahozna.dyndns.org/computers/cdcterminal/. CIMG1328.JPG is an OK
shot of the model plate (a bit washed out). I can also take some more
pictures if you need. Mine shows no evidence of being made in Canada,
but who knows?
Josh
ok,the post is a few years old but
hey...you've posted one of the
rare photo of a VUCOM 1 online !...
if you have found more info on it,let me know,I've got one home.
Ah... can you
take pics of the rear of the terminal, particularly
the model plate?
11:47 p.m.
Also, thanks for the additional information about this terminal, Mr.
Jello :).
I received the following from the cray-cyber mailing list back in 2008,
I can't recall if I relayed it back to this list, so here it is just in
case:
Hi Josh,
please find below collected comments from some friends of mine.
This appears to be a CDC 711 terminal, similar to a 713.
It will be VERY difficult to find any more information, I fear.
Good luck, best regards
John
I believe that that is an old 713 terminal. Quite a cadillac in the early
70s.
Google finds:
File: TERMS, Node: CDC713, Previous: Bantam, Up: Top, Next: C100
Control Data Corporation 713
Status: Supported by ":CRTSTY CDC713".
Users: DPR
Price: forgotten in the dawn of time
Screen: 16 x 80
Chars: 7 x 9 with descenders
Keybrd: rotten
Speeds: 110,300
Has: Random, CLEOL, CLEOS, Standout
Lacks: Addr, Tabs, InsChar, DelChar, InsLine, DelLine, Overstrike
Misfeatures: 300 baud maximum speed!
http://www.museumwaalsdorp.nl/computer/en/cybequip.html also has an entry.
Maybe this isn't a 713, exactly, since both entries describe a max speed
ot 300bps. I see termcap entries for a cdc456 (80x24 and some escape
sequences--713 was dumber than that).
Never fear...
Ca|cdc752|752|cdc:\
:al=\E\114:am:bl=^G:bs:cd=^X:ce=^V:cl=^Y^X:cm=\E1%+ %+
:co#80:cr=^M:\
:dl=\E\112:do=^J:ho=^Y:le=^H:li#24:nd=^L:nl=^J:up=^Z:
C3|713|cdc713|Control Data 713:\
:am:bs:bw:cl=^X:co#80:kd=j:kh=H:kl=h:kr=l:ku=k:\
:li#16:ll=^Y:nd=^U:se=^O:sg=1:so=^N:up=^Z:x7:
C2|722|cdc722|Control Data 722:\
:li#24:pt@:tc=713:
Cc|cdc721|721|plato|viking:\
:al=^^R:am:bl=^G:cd=^^:ce=^K:cl=^L:cm=^B%r%+ %+ :co#80:cr=^M:\
:dc=^^N:dl=^^Q:do=^J:ho=^Y:ic=^^O:le=^H:li#30:nl=^J:se=^U:so=^F:ul:\
:up=^W:x7:
We had a couple of those with max speed of 300 baud at UNEV. But I do not
remember (or most likely was never interested enough to find out) what the
model number was. My manager bought them at 'fire sale' prices back in
the late 1970s. They were horrible, but much better than using an ASR-33
or cards. And as we all know, the 6676 mux only supported a max speed of
300 baud anyway.
The one in the photos has speeds up to 9600 baud, so must be quite a bit
later. (Or possibly a new 'high speed' module plugged into the older
display chassis?)
Could it be the display terminal off a Mode 4 (731 or 734) station? They
ran at higher speeds.
My input suggests it is a 711, based on the position and number of
function keys.
In the Cyber 70 Computer systems application guide (pub 200,464 dated
2/1972) there are photos of 713 (function keys 2+8+2) and 711 (function
keys (2+8+2+2+1).
The photo you supplied matches the 711 in my manual.
On 4/12/2012 8:41 PM, Josh Dersch wrote:
On 4/12/2012 9:49 AM, Richard wrote:
In
article<BLU0-SMTP30799027C900F1EA431AB83B43A0 at phx.gbl>,
jello<benylin at hotmail.com> writes:
it's a VUCOM 1 made by CDC
Apparently only made by CDC *Canada*.
All I could find in Computerworld about it were articles about
Bell Canada.
Here's one with pictures that confirms the id by jello:
<http://books.google.com/books?id=BfckBPmP-30C&lpg=PT15&dq=%22vucom%22%20terminal&pg=PT15#v=onepage&q=%22vucom%22%20terminal&f=false>
I still have my pics up at
http://yahozna.dyndns.org/computers/cdcterminal/. CIMG1328.JPG is an
OK shot of the model plate (a bit washed out). I can also take some
more pictures if you need. Mine shows no evidence of being made in
Canada, but who knows?
Josh
ok,the post is a few years old but
hey...you've posted one of the
rare photo of a VUCOM 1 online !...
if you have found more info on it,let me know,I've got one home.
Ah... can you
take pics of the rear of the terminal, particularly
the model plate? 
13 Apr
13 Apr
1:13 a.m.
On 12 Apr 2012 at 20:47, Josh Dersch wrote:
Also, thanks for the additional information about this
terminal, Mr.
Jello :).
I didn't see the original post for this, so I ignored it.
I spent a fair amount of time in front of one of those, circa 1975-
76. They came in several incarnations. One was a cost reduced
version with every other line blank--that probably was the 16-line
version. An up-version had 24 lines.
We had a room at SVLOPS dedicated to these terminals connected to a
leased 9600 bps line, run through a TDM to the STAR-100 at ADL in
Arden Hills. All ran at 300 bps.
But we had no connection to the MCU, so figuring out what was going
on in case of a CPU fault (DEAD code) was an insane exchange over
conference phone to the operator at ADL. "Okay, now tell me what's
in register C4..." whereupon the operator would phonetically read a
64 bit hex number. On a machine with 48 bit addresses, 64 bit words
and 256 registers, you could easily spend an hour gathering minimal
information.
I was detailed off to a project called the "Remote MCU". Basically,
one of the engineers back at ADL worked up a UART card (from SSI
components) that ran at 1800 bps. A bit of MCU code and an
appropriation of bandwidth of the 9600 bps link and we were in
business. It was a lifesaver.
As terrible as the terminals were, they were still better than the
200 series terminals used on the EI/200 setups still in use. For one
thing, they understood ASCII, not 6-bit display code. And they had
more than 64 characters on a line.
Management refused to put a terminal on one's desk back then. So you
had to get your paperwork and go to the terminal room to work. It
was horrible--some people could simply not avoid gabbing.
I think I have the distinction of writing the first text editor for
the STAR-100 for use on a slow terminal. I called it OGNATE--for "Oh
G*d, not another text editor". The odd thing was that when a bunch
of use got together to contract to ETA for a Fortran compiler circa
1984, OGNATE was still in use, even though the 700 series terminals
were long gone, as were the specialized string instructions that made
the editor interesting (the CYBER 201-203 and the ETA 10 actually had
fewer instructions than the STAR-100). Some enterprising programmer
had simply re-coded them as scalar sequences. I was stunned when I
discovered that.
--Chuck
12:06 p.m.
This doesn't really have anything to do with identifying this terminal, but more of a
general observation I've made about these old CDC terminals...
The keyboards are staggered weird. Look at a normal keyboard, and the keys in the home row
are offset 2/3rds off the keys above it. Look at a CDC keyboard from this era, and the
keys are offset one HALF. So, the E key is *directly* lined up straight with X key, and so
on. Similarly, the 2 key is lined up with the A key.
After spending a few hours typing on one of those CDC keyboards, it feels a bit odd to go
back to a normal one. With practice, you eventually don't notice any more, but still.
It's amazing how much that little shift affects typing until you get used to it. I
don't know why they chose to do the layout like this, and I'm not aware of any
other manufacturer that did this. Most everyone else used the same typewriter styled
staggering.
-Ian
4460
days inactive
4461
days old
5 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
benylin＠hotmail.com -
cclist＠sydex.com -
derschjo＠mail.msu.edu -
ian_primus＠yahoo.com -
legalize＠xmission.com