25 Nov
2019
25 Nov
'19
7:29 p.m.
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
*Wrote:*
*?More worrisome is that Murray is NOT A "NEWCOMER" who will be "scared
off" *
*by corrections of his facts! This is not the first time that he has *
*needed to be admonished to be VERY specific about what was "FIRST" about *
*something. He wrote about the exact same event three weeks ago, on the *
*correct date, with much more accurate details, other than calling it "the *
*first inter-computer communication". Not sure where he got the November *
*21 date, nor the "SIXTY years ago" (probably a simple misteak)*
*He is quite capable of some fairly good writing. I don't remember any *
*prior time that he had to be reminded to "PICK A TOPIC!" rather than *
*string together eight unrelated concepts into four sentences.*
*On the other hand, if his confusion was recreational, that's OK, too.*
*Let's have a toast with him to the people who got the idea to work, *
*disunirregardless of who was "first".?*
********** *
Things we historians talk about are ?firsts? and ?facts?. If we go to
original source(s) maybe then we will get things right. I guess the best
that can be said is we agree to disagree. A sad commentary in this age of
what my ?facts? and your ?facts? are, are not the same but we historians
should do our best to state ?firsts? and ?facts? are indeed that to the
best of our knowledge. The 60 yrs. as noted was a math error and here I
spent years as a BASIC, C and C++ programmer as isn?t mathematics the basis
for all programming languages? Let's indeed toast to all micro-computing
progenitors for making our hobby possible.
I?ve been a hobbyist and experimenter since the 1970s though I worked on
mini-computers(PDP-8/11) in the 1960s. I got to work on them in high
school; I know we were rather privileged.
For microcomputers it began in April 1978 when I built the Heathkit
H8($2500 Cdn.) a computer based on the PDP-11 with 4K(B) of an 8K(B) card;
now $2500 will buy a truly powerful home computer with 16/32GB of memory.
My second, the Coleco ADAM, computer was Aug. 1984. A bit more powerful and
more useful to be sure. Finally in 1989 I moved into the IBM PC world ? the
Compaq Deskpro 386 which ran DOS, Lotus 1-2-3 and Windows 2 that could run
Word and Excel. Wow! Notebooks followed.
And now(well Aug. 2019 to be precise) I built my own custom Mini-ITX PC
from parts sourced here and there for $750 Cdn. This
makes me nostalgic for
the old days of computing we talk about on cctalk.
Happy computing.
Murray ?
25 Nov
25 Nov
8:33 p.m.
On Mon, 25 Nov 2019, Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote:
Things we historians talk about are ?firsts? and
?facts?. If we go to
original source(s) maybe then we will get things right. I guess the best
that can be said is we agree to disagree. A sad commentary in this age of
what my ?facts? and your ?facts? are, are not the same but we historians
should do our best to state ?firsts? and ?facts? are indeed that to the
best of our knowledge. The 60 yrs. as noted was a math error and here I
spent years as a BASIC, C and C++ programmer as isn?t mathematics the basis
for all programming languages? Let's indeed toast to all micro-computing
progenitors for making our hobby possible.
If we didn't make arithmetic errors, we couldn't prove that we are human
(a variation/enhancement of a Turing test?)
"Facts" need to be checked for prior corruption of the stories, but are
often traceable.
"Firsts" bother me, as they always seem to glorify a famous early guy, and
ignore all those who came before, even if they had already done the
supposed "first" activity. Hence we get the "Jobs invented computers;
Gates invented operating systems" nonsense. So, I prefer "important"
events, rather than "FIRST".
I?ve been a hobbyist and experimenter since the 1970s
though I worked on
mini-computers(PDP-8/11) in the 1960s. I got to work on them in high
school; I know we were rather privileged.
For microcomputers it began in April 1978 when I built the Heathkit
H8($2500 Cdn.) a computer based on the PDP-11 with 4K(B) of an 8K(B) card;
now $2500 will buy a truly powerful home computer with 16/32GB of memory.
My second, the Coleco ADAM, computer was Aug. 1984. A bit more powerful and
more useful to be sure. Finally in 1989 I moved into the IBM PC world ? the
Compaq Deskpro 386 which ran DOS, Lotus 1-2-3 and Windows 2 that could run
Word and Excel. Wow! Notebooks followed.
And now(well Aug. 2019 to be precise) I built my own custom Mini-ITX PC
from parts sourced here and there for $750 Cdn. This makes me nostalgic for
the old days of computing we talk about on cctalk.
Rather similar backgrounds.
My father had taught me adding machines, keypunching, sorting machine,
etc., and always had low-paying work for me to do.
On May 24, 1965, he called me from out of town and told me, "LEARN
FORTRAN." He had just had a bad experience with "professional" data
processing by IBM (CBS "National Drivers Test"), and was going to
IMMEDIATELY switch over to doing his own computer work.
So, we learned some FORTRAN.
I did keypunching and EAM work while in college, and was a data technician
at Goddard Space Flight Center 1970-1972 (APL, FORTRAN, plotting
subroutines)
Aerospace was collapsing, and I got out, but we were hearing about the
coming "micro processor", so I declared that I would get back into
computers "in about five years, when tabletop computers programmable in
FORTRAN come out and get cheap enough for me." (it turned out to be
BASIC instead, and "tabletop" was not the name)
I built and ran an auto repair shop, until TRS80/PET/Apple caame out.
Even wrote a book on Honda car repair.
I got the first TRS80 available, and sold my auto shop to two of my
employees. They're still doing it, almost 40 years later.
I built and ran a small microcomputer business (small peripherals such as
memory and disk drives, commercial software, and my software) and began
community college teaching.
When IBM announced the PC, I said, "Whether it is good or bad, it is going
to DOMINATE the market, and in only a few years, all microcomputers will
be Imitations-of-IBM-PC, and 'all others'." So, I got the first one that
I could (end of 1981). I ran my business, and taught full-time for over
30 years. And put in enough work at UCBerkeley to get an MLIS and
PhD/ABD
Seven years ago, I was completely overwhelmed having to take care of my
mother 24 hours a day, along with serious health problems of my own.
So, no more business; no more teaching, for 4 years.
I started to write a textbook on Information Science.
I don't know what I'll do now. I can't do the amount of stuff that I did
decades ago.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
9:10 p.m.
On Mon, 25 Nov 2019, Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote:
A sad commentary in this age of what my ???facts???
and your ???facts???
are, are not the same but we historians should do our best to state
???firsts??? and ???facts??? are indeed that to the best of our
knowledge.
A typical instance of "The Blind Men And The Elephant".
Even if we go to original sources.
I've heard some interesting arguments between people who were in the
military, industry and academia at the time, about the relative importance
of those players in the creation of the internet.
None (well,FEW) are "wrong", but perceptions vary, because at the time it
is impossible to see all of it at once.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
26 Nov
26 Nov
10:32 a.m.
I figure the record will finally be set straight after all of the people
involved at time cited are dead.
Such is history.
--Chuck
5:18 p.m.
On 11/26/19 12:48 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
On 11/26/19 1:32 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
And Edison invented the incandescent lamp.
--Chuck
I figure the record will finally be set straight
after all of the people
involved at time cited are dead.
Such is history.
You mean like how history says Columbus discovered America... 
5:28 p.m.
Will,
And IBM invented the Personal Computer.
GOD Bless and Thanks,
rich!
On 11/26/2019 7:25 PM, William Donzelli via cctalk wrote:
And Digital invented
the minicomputer.
...we are just as guilty...
--
Will
You mean like how history says Columbus discovered
America...
And Edison invented the incandescent lamp.
5:45 p.m.
Fred,
I'm not stating that IBM invented the PC. I am stating that IBM
says it invented the PC. Yeah right. I actually believe that it was
Commodore that invented the Personal Computer for they were the first
company to come out with an affordable home computer system that was
very flexible. Of course this is my opinion.
GOD Bless and Thanks,
rich!
On 11/26/2019 7:39 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
Where do you suppose he picked up such heretical revisionist ideas?
And IBM invented the Personal Computer.
No.
We already established that Steve Jobs did that. Please pay attention.
6:37 p.m.
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, Richard Pope wrote:
Fred,
I'm not stating that IBM invented the PC. I am stating that IBM says it
invented the PC. Yeah right. I actually believe that it was Commodore that
invented the Personal Computer for they were the first company to come out
with an affordable home computer system that was very flexible. Of course
this is my opinion.
GOD Bless and Thanks,
rich!
Well, it has all the makings of a great holy war, although not as
fascinating as vi V emacs.
After most of the Cat people were killed in the holy war over RED V BLUE
hats, Cloister The Stupid (Lister) revealed that he had intended the hats
to be GREEN.
I consider Commodore PET, TRS80, and Apple to be an exact TIE! (along with
a whole bunch of tiny guys who nobody remembers).
Did it really matter whether Alexander Graham Bell or Elisha Gray filed
the patent earliest in that day? (There were a few other issues, such as
Bell's people manipulating patent examiner)
When we look at which computer was first, are we looking at
First successful prototype
First instance of a finished machine
First announced
First advertised
First demo'd
First shown at a significant trade show
First manufactured
First one sold or available for sale
First one that did not require pre-order
First one shipped
First one that could be bought off the shelf
None of the three were first on ALL of those, so it becomes which are most
important, or chosen to be the DEFINITION of "FIRST"
For me, TRS80 was the first one that I was able to purchase and carry
home, but the other two were not significantly behind, if I were to have
been less impatient and research my choice. Both of the other two were
"on the market", but I couldn't get my hands on either for at least
another month.
I preferred the Apple hardware expandability, but I couldn't get one until
later, and for more money.
At the time, I could have purchased an S100 computer, or a few others,
(PET/TRS80/Apple were far from being the first!) but I could buy the
TRS80 for $400 plus tax ($600 with monitor and casette, but I used my own).
I had a few B&W composite input monitors from Sony CV and AV videotape,
and just had to make a cable from 5 pin DIN to UHF connector.
Nothing else was available that had a high level language for less
than $1000. BASIC was close enough to FORTRAN to satisfy my original
"requirement".
So, those three were the first in MY price range.
Even when the IBM PC (5150 - "a danger to itself and others") was
released (August 12, 1981), there was a waiting list of months to be able
to get one.
(about $1230? plus Floppy controller, Video board, and RS232, plus my own
RAM, drives and monitor. The oft-quoted $1565 included an over-priced
monitor - "well, you certainly can't USE one without a monitor!")
Fortunately, I was able to get the "Technical Reference Manual" (with
schematics and source for the BIOS!) well before the machine itself.
6:49 p.m.
Fred,
You are correct in your assessment. Which was first? The Altair and
IMSAI had been available for years but you almost had to be an engineer
to build them and use them. So were they first? I don't believe so
because the average idiot couldn't get them to work. They were too much
trouble, work, and they cost too much.
I consider the VIC-20 to be the first Home Computer or Personal
Computer. It was inexpensive, had good color graphics, good sound, was
easy to program, use, and was easy to expand. So I consider Commodore to
be the inventor of the PC. Just my opinion. Again which was truly first?
What about the Amiga. The first multitasking multiprocessing computer
with outstanding graphics, sound, and expandability for a reasonable
price. It was also truly plug and play.
GOD Bless and Thanks,
rich!
On 11/26/2019 8:37 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, Richard Pope wrote:
Fred,
I'm not stating that IBM invented the PC. I am stating that IBM
says it invented the PC. Yeah right. I actually believe that it was
Commodore that invented the Personal Computer for they were the first
company to come out with an affordable home computer system that was
very flexible. Of course this is my opinion.
GOD Bless and Thanks,
rich!
Well, it has all the makings of a great holy war, although not as
fascinating as vi V emacs.
After most of the Cat people were killed in the holy war over RED V
BLUE hats, Cloister The Stupid (Lister) revealed that he had intended
the hats to be GREEN.
I consider Commodore PET, TRS80, and Apple to be an exact TIE! (along
with a whole bunch of tiny guys who nobody remembers).
Did it really matter whether Alexander Graham Bell or Elisha Gray
filed the patent earliest in that day? (There were a few other
issues, such as Bell's people manipulating patent examiner)
When we look at which computer was first, are we looking at
First successful prototype
First instance of a finished machine
First announced
First advertised
First demo'd
First shown at a significant trade show
First manufactured
First one sold or available for sale
First one that did not require pre-order
First one shipped
First one that could be bought off the shelf
None of the three were first on ALL of those, so it becomes which are
most important, or chosen to be the DEFINITION of "FIRST"
For me, TRS80 was the first one that I was able to purchase and carry
home, but the other two were not significantly behind, if I were to
have been less impatient and research my choice. Both of the other
two were "on the market", but I couldn't get my hands on either for at
least another month.
I preferred the Apple hardware expandability, but I couldn't get one
until later, and for more money.
At the time, I could have purchased an S100 computer, or a few others,
(PET/TRS80/Apple were far from being the first!) but I could buy the
TRS80 for $400 plus tax ($600 with monitor and casette, but I used my
own).
I had a few B&W composite input monitors from Sony CV and AV
videotape, and just had to make a cable from 5 pin DIN to UHF connector.
Nothing else was available that had a high level language for less
than $1000. BASIC was close enough to FORTRAN to satisfy my original
"requirement".
So, those three were the first in MY price range.
Even when the IBM PC (5150 - "a danger to itself and others") was
released (August 12, 1981), there was a waiting list of months to be
able to get one.
(about $1230? plus Floppy controller, Video board, and RS232, plus my
own RAM, drives and monitor. The oft-quoted $1565 included an
over-priced monitor - "well, you certainly can't USE one without a
monitor!")
Fortunately, I was able to get the "Technical Reference Manual" (with
schematics and source for the BIOS!) well before the machine itself.
7:03 p.m.
On 11/26/19 6:49 PM, Richard Pope via cctalk wrote:
Fred,
??? You are correct in your assessment. Which was first? The Altair and
IMSAI had been available for years but you almost had to be an engineer
to build them and use them. So were they first?
So how do you class the 1973 MCM/70? No assembly needed.
--Chuck
7:17 p.m.
Chuck,
I don't know anything about this system. I don't consider Minis and
MainFrames to be Personal Computers. It must fit in a small room, run on
a 120VAC 5Amp service, and not require 3 tons of AC to keep it cool to
fit in to the Personal Computer definition.
GOD Bless and Thanks,
rich!
On 11/26/2019 9:03 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
On 11/26/19 6:49 PM, Richard Pope via cctalk wrote:
Fred,
You are correct in your assessment. Which was first? The Altair and
IMSAI had been available for years but you almost had to be an engineer
to build them and use them. So were they first?
So how do you class the 1973
MCM/70? No assembly needed.
--Chuck
8:07 p.m.
On 11/26/19 7:17 PM, Richard Pope wrote:
Chuck,
??? I don't know anything about this system. I don't consider Minis and
MainFrames to be Personal Computers. It must fit in a small room, run on
a 120VAC 5Amp service, and not require 3 tons of AC to keep it cool to
fit in to the Personal Computer definition.
It's better than that; it fits nicely on a desktop, has its own tape
storage, display and printer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MCM/70
Of course, it's usually ignored because it's Canadian.
--Chuck
8:40 p.m.
Chuck,
I wouldn't consider this a Personal Computer. It has some severe
limitations. There are no graphics, only one line of display, no sound,
no expandability. It is more of a front end to talk to another system.
This computer is just too limited.
GOD Bless and Thanks,
rich!
On 11/26/2019 10:07 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
On 11/26/19 7:17 PM, Richard Pope wrote:
Chuck,
I don't know anything about this system. I don't consider Minis and
MainFrames to be Personal Computers. It must fit in a small room, run on
a 120VAC 5Amp service, and not require 3 tons of AC to keep it cool to
fit in to the Personal Computer definition.
It's better than that; it fits
nicely on a desktop, has its own tape
storage, display and printer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MCM/70
Of course, it's usually ignored because it's Canadian.
--Chuck
27 Nov
27 Nov
4:47 a.m.
Rich wrote:
Chuck,
I don't know anything about this system. I don't consider Minis and
MainFrames to be Personal Computers. It must fit in a small room, run on
a 120VAC 5Amp service, and not require 3 tons of AC to keep it cool to
fit in to the Personal Computer definition.
GOD Bless and Thanks,
rich!
Well, I don't regard it as a Personal Computer if I have to lug around
a 2:1ish voltage stepdown transformer along with it in order to power it.
Regards,
Peter Coghlan.
7:54 a.m.
On 11/26/19 10:17 PM, Richard Pope via cctalk wrote:
Chuck,
??? I don't know anything about this system. I don't consider Minis and
MainFrames to be Personal Computers. It must fit in a small room, run on
a 120VAC 5Amp service, and not require 3 tons of AC to keep it cool to
fit in to the Personal Computer definition.
Well, let's see, what have I had that fit that description?
Several VAX
Several PDP-11's
A couple of Prime 50-series
bill
10 a.m.
On Nov 27, 2019, at 10:54 AM, Bill Gunshannon via
cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
On 11/26/19 10:17 PM, Richard Pope via cctalk wrote:
I think you can go back a bit further.
Electrologica X-1 (from 1958). And how about the LGP-30?
paul
Chuck,
I don't know anything about this system. I don't consider Minis and
MainFrames to be Personal Computers. It must fit in a small room, run on
a 120VAC 5Amp service, and not require 3 tons of AC to keep it cool to
fit in to the Personal Computer definition.
Well, let's see, what have I had that fit that description?
Several VAX
Several PDP-11's
A couple of Prime 50-series
bill
10:21 a.m.
On 11/27/19 1:00 PM, Paul Koning wrote:
I was only talking about ones I have personally had that met the
description.
bill
On Nov 27, 2019, at 10:54 AM, Bill Gunshannon via
cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
On 11/26/19 10:17 PM, Richard Pope via cctalk wrote:
I think you can go back a bit further.
Electrologica X-1 (from 1958). And how about the LGP-30?
Chuck,
I don't know anything about this system. I don't consider Minis and
MainFrames to be Personal Computers. It must fit in a small room, run on
a 120VAC 5Amp service, and not require 3 tons of AC to keep it cool to
fit in to the Personal Computer definition.
Well, let's see, what have I had that fit that description?
Several VAX
Several PDP-11's
A couple of Prime 50-series
bill 
8:19 a.m.
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, Richard Pope wrote:
I don't know anything about this system. I
don't consider Minis and
MainFrames to be Personal Computers. It must fit in a small room, run on a
120VAC 5Amp service, and not require 3 tons of AC to keep it cool to fit in
to the Personal Computer definition.
Therefore I (and others BTW) consider the LGP-30 to be the first Personal
Computer. You know, the definition of a PC is that you can directly access
and operate the computer and it is only doing what you want.
Christian
26 Nov
26 Nov
7:05 p.m.
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, Richard Pope wrote:
You are correct in your assessment. Which was
first? The Altair and IMSAI
had been available for years but you almost had to be an engineer to build
them and use them. So were they first? I don't believe so because the average
idiot couldn't get them to work. They were too much trouble, work, and they
cost too much.
"FIRST", but rejected for various reasons. in this case too hard for us
beginners?
I consider the VIC-20 to be the first Home Computer
or Personal Computer.
It was inexpensive, had good color graphics, good sound, was easy to program,
use, and was easy to expand. So I consider Commodore to be the inventor of
the PC. Just my opinion. Again which was truly first?
Again, an exact tie between three manufacturers.
What about the Amiga.
The first multitasking multiprocessing computer with outstanding graphics,
sound, and expandability for a reasonable price. It was also truly plug and
play.
I LOVED the Amiga! Traded 10 copies of XenoCopy for one of the early
model 1000.
But, it wasn't until about 1986?, when even early Windoze was out.
Although far from as PRACTICAL for multitasking multiprocessing, I would
place the Radio Shack Color Computer running the OPTIONAL OS-9 as earlier.
Yes, I would use the Amiga, NOT the Coco.
And, when the Amiga PC emulation came out, most of XenoCopy would run on
it! ("the acid test of compatability" - PCWorld)
But, people griped that it "isn't FAST enough". They got an elephant to
FLY, and people complain about airspeed and payload??!?
Video Toaster, while a niche product, really showed the advantages of
Amiga. Up until a few years ago, when the Cable TV system crashed, it
would display a "Guru Meditation Number"!
"But there HAS to be a Macintosh version!"
"OK, OK." It's a bigger box, and if you look inside there's an Amiga
motherboard. (or so I'm told)
Atari 520/1040 were pretty good, but they didn't appeal to me like the
Amiga.
7:14 p.m.
Fred,
I started with the VIC. I then got a C-64. From there I bought a
C-128 and then the A-1000. I migrated to a A-2000 that I then upgraded
many times. I finally got an A-4000T 040/25MHz system which I upgraded
to 50MHz and 128MB of ram. It also had 4MB of chip ram and 8MB of Fast
ram. It took over 20 years to finally get an Intel machine that is as
fast as my 4000 was and it is running dual 6 core Xeons running at
1.6GHz and with 32GB of ram. It still won't handle more than one floppy
at a time where the Amiga could handle four floppies at one time.
GOD Bless and Thanks,
rich!
On 11/26/2019 9:05 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, Richard Pope wrote:
You are correct in your assessment. Which was
first? The Altair
and IMSAI had been available for years but you almost had to be an
engineer to build them and use them. So were they first? I don't
believe so because the average idiot couldn't get them to work. They
were too much trouble, work, and they cost too much.
"FIRST", but rejected for various reasons. in this case too hard for
us beginners?
I consider the VIC-20 to be the first Home
Computer or Personal
Computer. It was inexpensive, had good color graphics, good sound,
was easy to program, use, and was easy to expand. So I consider
Commodore to be the inventor of the PC. Just my opinion. Again which
was truly first?
Again, an exact tie between three manufacturers.
What about the Amiga. The first multitasking
multiprocessing computer
with outstanding graphics, sound, and expandability for a reasonable
price. It was also truly plug and play.
I LOVED the Amiga! Traded 10 copies of XenoCopy for one of the early
model 1000.
But, it wasn't until about 1986?, when even early Windoze was out.
Although far from as PRACTICAL for multitasking multiprocessing, I
would place the Radio Shack Color Computer running the OPTIONAL OS-9
as earlier.
Yes, I would use the Amiga, NOT the Coco.
And, when the Amiga PC emulation came out, most of XenoCopy would run
on it! ("the acid test of compatability" - PCWorld)
But, people griped that it "isn't FAST enough". They got an elephant
to FLY, and people complain about airspeed and payload??!?
Video Toaster, while a niche product, really showed the advantages of
Amiga. Up until a few years ago, when the Cable TV system crashed, it
would display a "Guru Meditation Number"!
"But there HAS to be a Macintosh version!"
"OK, OK." It's a bigger box, and if you look inside there's an Amiga
motherboard. (or so I'm told)
Atari 520/1040 were pretty good, but they didn't appeal to me like the
Amiga.
27 Nov
27 Nov
4:28 a.m.
At 09:05 PM 11/26/2019, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
Video Toaster, while a niche product, really showed the
advantages of Amiga. Up until a few years ago, when the Cable TV system crashed, it would
display a "Guru Meditation Number"!
"But there HAS to be a Macintosh version!"
"OK, OK." It's a bigger box, and if you look inside there's an Amiga
motherboard. (or so I'm told)
At some COMDEX, NewTek won a "Best in Show" crystal trophy for the PS/2
version of the Toaster, which was a GUI I wrote in Visual BASIC
that sent ARexx commands over the serial port to a real (Amiga) Toaster
hidden under the table, but who's counting.
- John
26 Nov
26 Nov
6:59 p.m.
I would make a strong argument that DEC invented the PC: Twice actually.
The PDT11/150 is a pretty amazing system: 64k of memory, serial port,
printer port, RT11 operating system and if I recall correctly someone
wrote a version of Visicalc and a nice word processor on it as a
demonstration.
Unfortunately Dec saw that such a system would cannibalize their sales
of pdp11 computers and sold the damn thing as a communication
controller. Sad beyond belief.
They did it again with the Pro/350: A system that had integrated
graphics, 512k of memory, dual floppies and a hard disk, easy to install
card options (Ethernet, TMS, etc) and of course a real time
multi-program operating system and (with Synergy) a fairly neat GUI.
Unfortunately Dec saw that such a system would cannibalize their sales
of pdp and vax computers and crippled the living daylights out of it.
Ultimately selling it as a front-end processor. Sad beyond belief.
It wasn't just having the technology, it was having it and knowing how
to market it. You need both to make a good product and DEC really was
all about protecting their current market share (which is insane as they
came to be by exploiting a niche in the computer industry).
Oh well.
CZ
On 11/26/2019 8:45 PM, Richard Pope via cctalk wrote:
Fred,
??? I'm not stating that IBM invented the PC. I am stating that IBM
says it invented the PC. Yeah right. I actually believe that it was
Commodore that invented the Personal Computer for they were the first
company to come out with an affordable home computer system that was
very flexible. Of course this is my opinion.
GOD Bless and Thanks,
rich!
On 11/26/2019 7:39 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
Where do you suppose he picked up such heretical revisionist ideas?
???? And IBM invented the Personal Computer.
No.
We already established that Steve Jobs did that. Please pay attention.
7:16 p.m.
Good point.
Some companies that COULD HAVE been the leaders made great inventions
and/or engineering, and then fumbled the marketing.
I'm thinking that Xerox Parc could be said to have "invented" the next
generation of personal computers, but did they ever cash in on that?
I can visualize a Apple/Microsoft argument, "But we stole it FIRST!"
(like English/French/Spanish in America)
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, Chris Zach via cctalk wrote:
I would make a strong argument that DEC invented the
PC: Twice actually. The
PDT11/150 is a pretty amazing system: 64k of memory, serial port, printer
port, RT11 operating system and if I recall correctly someone wrote a version
of Visicalc and a nice word processor on it as a demonstration.
Unfortunately Dec saw that such a system would cannibalize their sales of
pdp11 computers and sold the damn thing as a communication controller. Sad
beyond belief.
They did it again with the Pro/350: A system that had integrated graphics,
512k of memory, dual floppies and a hard disk, easy to install card options
(Ethernet, TMS, etc) and of course a real time multi-program operating system
and (with Synergy) a fairly neat GUI.
Unfortunately Dec saw that such a system would cannibalize their sales of pdp
and vax computers and crippled the living daylights out of it. Ultimately
selling it as a front-end processor. Sad beyond belief.
It wasn't just having the technology, it was having it and knowing how to
market it. You need both to make a good product and DEC really was all about
protecting their current market share (which is insane as they came to be by
exploiting a niche in the computer industry).
Oh well.
CZ
7:18 p.m.
Fred,
Agreed!
GOD Bless and Thanks,
rich!
On 11/26/2019 9:16 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
Good point.
Some companies that COULD HAVE been the leaders made great inventions
and/or engineering, and then fumbled the marketing.
I'm thinking that Xerox Parc could be said to have "invented" the next
generation of personal computers, but did they ever cash in on that?
I can visualize a Apple/Microsoft argument, "But we stole it FIRST!"
(like English/French/Spanish in America)
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, Chris Zach via cctalk wrote:
I would make a strong argument that DEC invented
the PC: Twice
actually. The PDT11/150 is a pretty amazing system: 64k of memory,
serial port, printer port, RT11 operating system and if I recall
correctly someone wrote a version of Visicalc and a nice word
processor on it as a demonstration.
Unfortunately Dec saw that such a system would cannibalize their
sales of pdp11 computers and sold the damn thing as a communication
controller. Sad beyond belief.
They did it again with the Pro/350: A system that had integrated
graphics, 512k of memory, dual floppies and a hard disk, easy to
install card options (Ethernet, TMS, etc) and of course a real time
multi-program operating system and (with Synergy) a fairly neat GUI.
Unfortunately Dec saw that such a system would cannibalize their
sales of pdp and vax computers and crippled the living daylights out
of it. Ultimately selling it as a front-end processor. Sad beyond
belief.
It wasn't just having the technology, it was having it and knowing
how to market it. You need both to make a good product and DEC really
was all about protecting their current market share (which is insane
as they came to be by exploiting a niche in the computer industry).
Oh well.
CZ
27 Nov
27 Nov
8:51 a.m.
On 11/26/2019 09:16 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
Good point.
Some companies that COULD HAVE been the leaders made great
inventions and/or engineering, and then fumbled the
marketing.
Konrad Zuse was another one, for sure. Bendix created the
first personal computer, the G-15.
Packard-Bell? Univac supposedly sold the FIRST commercial
computers, as opposed to one-of-a-kind
machines at research institutes. Honeywell and GE?
Jon
23 Dec
23 Dec
7:27 a.m.
tis 2019-11-26 klockan 19:16 -0800 skrev Fred Cisin via cctalk:
Good point.
Some companies that COULD HAVE been the leaders made great
inventions
and/or engineering, and then fumbled the marketing.
I'm thinking that Xerox Parc could be said to have "invented" the
next
generation of personal computers, but did they ever cash in on that?
I can visualize a Apple/Microsoft argument, "But we stole it FIRST!"
(like English/French/Spanish in America)
Regarding XEROX, i think that the project was to large for them to do
while having a proprietary mindset (we want to design the whole stack,
except some applications but we want to design the main one TOO.)
This included seeing Ethernet as a proprietary technology which could
be used to lock out the competition, Which turned out to be a tall
order.
27 Nov
27 Nov
8:39 a.m.
On 11/26/2019 08:59 PM, Chris Zach via cctalk wrote:
It wasn't just having the technology, it was having it and
knowing how to market it. You need both to make a good
product and DEC really was all about protecting their
current market share (which is insane as they came to be
by exploiting a niche in the computer industry).
Yup. We were a big VAX user, and were accustomed to our
salesman and a technical guy coming out for a sales call to
iron out exactly what features and options we wanted on a
machine. When the MicroVAX came out, for a purchase price
less than EITHER the software or hardware maintenance
contract on a VAX 11/780, I know this couldn't go on. When
they went to the 3100/3500 Pizza box machines, I know it
REALLY was unsustainable.
Jon
10:30 a.m.
Hello all,
Commodore had the marketing part down pact. That is one of the
reasons that at the time Commodore sold more C-64s than all of the other
computers combined.
GOD Bless and Thanks,
rich!
On 11/27/2019 10:39 AM, Jon Elson via cctalk wrote:
On 11/26/2019 08:59 PM, Chris Zach via cctalk wrote:
It wasn't just having the technology, it was having it and knowing
how to market it. You need both to make a good product and DEC really
was all about protecting their current market share (which is insane
as they came to be by exploiting a niche in the computer industry).
Yup. We were a big VAX user, and were accustomed to our salesman and
a technical guy coming out for a sales call to iron out exactly what
features and options we wanted on a machine. When the MicroVAX came
out, for a purchase price less than EITHER the software or hardware
maintenance contract on a VAX 11/780, I know this couldn't go on.
When they went to the 3100/3500 Pizza box machines, I know it REALLY
was unsustainable.
Jon
6:19 p.m.
On 11/27/2019 11:30 AM, Richard Pope via cctalk wrote:
Hello all,
??? Commodore had the marketing part down pact. That is one of the
reasons that at the time Commodore sold more C-64s than all of the other
computers combined.
I think it was more the case of who had the better games C/64 or COCO II.
I always liked the look of the Commodore PET, better than TV game box.
As for surplus computers from the 1970's they were more type of " 'Mom
and Pop DATA CENTER' still uses a Brain-o-vac 36000 vacum tube computer"
or School of computing and fish farming now has second relay computer
with a film punch/reader found say Kilobaud Microcomputing Magazine.
Ben.
As a side note a few relay computers are still running in places other
than America like the Japanese FACOM128B, far more interesting to me
than who sent the first internet message. I favor the Morse Code version
Indians seen SEN <lost carrier> :)
26 Nov
26 Nov
5:31 p.m.
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
> I figure the record will finally be set straight
after all of the
> people involved at time cited are dead.
And Edison invented the incandescent lamp.
Light bulbs, automobiles, personal computers were all ideas that were
OBVIOUS and inevitable. Often present in science fiction. So, people
see an "important" person (that THEY have heard of) who was good at
marketing, or engineering to make it marketable, and declare that one to
have "invented" it. And schoolteachers pass on their misconceptions.
Sometimes the record is finally "set straight" to an authoritaative form
that is nowhere near correct.
6:09 p.m.
Patents are generally used to document who invented what first. Commercial
success building on old research and patents tends to be what is remembered.
So what if some guy in 1761 heated up a wire until it glowed releasing
light, it took many people over a long time to come up with a usable cheap
light bulb design and the inventions that brought electricity into cities
and peoples houses to power those bulbs that people will remember.
The only reason Apple sold so many Apple II's was because some software
designer came out with Visicalc. So many machines were sold that they ended
up cheap enough and useful enough to end up in schools and homes where
before they were only sold to corporations. IBM's release of the PC with
open architecture and all the people who cloned it and made software and
hardware for it that IBM never envisioned is the reason X86/X64 is so
dominant not that is was the first or the best.
The people who invented something epic tend to not have commercial success
because pretty much most ground breaking patents tend to expire before they
truly become useful and because of the need for other inventions to make
them commercially usable.
-----Original Message-----
From: Chuck Guzis via cctalk
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2019 8:18 PM
To: Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
Subject: Re: First Internet message and ...
On 11/26/19 12:48 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
On 11/26/19 1:32 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
And Edison invented the incandescent lamp.
--Chuck
I figure the record will finally be set straight
after all of the people
involved at time cited are dead.
Such is history.
You mean like how history says Columbus discovered America...
6:43 p.m.
On 11/26/2019 7:09 PM, TeoZ via cctalk wrote:
The only reason Apple sold so many Apple II's was because some software
designer came out with Visicalc. So many machines were sold that they
ended up cheap enough and useful enough to end up in schools and homes
where before they were only sold to corporations. IBM's release of the
PC with open architecture and all the people who cloned it and made
software and hardware for it that IBM never envisioned is the reason
X86/X64 is so dominant not that is was the first or the best.
But the stange thing now, all the 8 bitters are making a come back
like the z80 with CP/M (USA) and the 6502 with BBC Micro (UK).
What ever happened to all the wierd early transitor computers that were
like 48+ bits and 4K of core memory hit the surplus market in the mid
1970's?
7:02 p.m.
On 11/26/19 6:43 PM, ben via cctalk wrote:
But the stange thing now, all the 8 bitters are making
a come back
like the z80 with CP/M (USA) and the 6502 with BBC Micro (UK).
What ever happened to all the wierd early transitor computers that were
like 48+ bits and 4K of core memory hit the surplus market in the mid
1970's?
Other than in very low-level MCUs, I don't see 8 bit micros making a
comeback. And 32/64 bits seems to be the rule for MCUs today.
But surplus 2nd generation machines were common in the 1970s?
CDC had a scorched-earth policy when it came to leased mainframes. I
suspect that IBM did also. I witnessed CEs taking sledgehammers and
bolt cutters to several interesting mainframes. The official directive
was that nothing was to leave the facility that could be re-sold.
--Chuck
27 Nov
27 Nov
3:52 a.m.
On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 at 04:02, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
Other than in very low-level MCUs, I don't see 8 bit micros making a
comeback. And 32/64 bits seems to be the rule for MCUs today.
You might be surprised.
E.g.
https://rc2014.co.uk/ (selling strongly, I believe)
https://www.specnext.com/ (selling umpteen thousands, 2nd kickstarter
round sold out long ago)
https://www.worldofsam.org/products/zx-uno (less well marketed, but
also doing very well)
I'm not really into the American machines (Commodore, MSX, etc.) but
they too have modern clones that are selling well. I do have one of
these:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C64_Direct-to-TV
This isn't _really_ an 8-bit but it acts like one. I have a PCB and
hope to build one up.
https://basicengine.org/
Comparable machines:
http://geoffg.net/maximite.html
http://cb2.qrp.gr/
So, actually, considering how obsolete the tech is, the 8-bit world is
in pretty good shape!
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: lproven at gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 - ?R (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053
6:46 a.m.
On 11/27/19 3:52 AM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 at 04:02, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
No, I meant "commercially viable" computers. Hobbyist stuff is
interesting, but to be honest, one could sell a steam-powered 1-bit
computer to the hard-bitten hobbyists.
I have zero interest in computer games.
--Chuck
Other than in very low-level MCUs, I don't see 8 bit micros making a
comeback. And 32/64 bits seems to be the rule for MCUs today.
You might be surprised.
7:13 a.m.
On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 at 15:47, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
No, I meant "commercially viable" computers.
[1] You didn't say that, though.
[2] If it sells enough units for someone to make a living off it, that
is the _definition_ of "commercially viable".
As such, my first link qualifies. See:
https://rc2014.co.uk/history/
?
By May 2016 things were getting busy enough that I had to quit my full
time network infrastructure engineer job to dedicate my time to
RC2014?
?
Hobbyist stuff is
interesting
My last link, the CB2, it based on an ATmega644. The AVR series had
sold 500 million units by 2003, and vendor Atmel was sold to Microchip
Technology for US$3.6 billion, 3 years ago. Microchip make the PIC32
used in the MaxiMite which I also linked to.
These devices sell, today, in the *billions* of units. Many have 8-bit
architectures.
Is that "commercially viable" enough for you? E.g. is outselling all
Intel x86 products annually significant enough?
Zilog still sells derivatives of the Z80 such as the Z180 and eZ80,
today. Modern Z80s run at up to 50MHz.
This is *not* a hobbyist business. It is a very large, profitable,
commercial, mainstream market.
The fact that hobbyists built little educational standalone computers
around them is really neither here nor there. It's a rounding error.
To think that because people build such stuff with them, or because
the Z80 once powered the Micro-Professor MPF-I, is to say that DEC was
a vendor of home and hobbyist toy computers because most of the
machines running today are maintained by hobbyists.
I have zero interest in computer games.
Well, I have _slightly_ more than that -- in fact I actually bought a
new video game this year, for the first time in about 18 years -- but
really very little.
But you don't get kids interested in programming by telling them that
they can implement VisiCalc.
Most of us got interested in this stuff as kids, I suspect. I
certainly did. If we don't get more kids interested, then the field
will die.
So I suggest that you are trying (and, incidentally, failing) to be
too selective and judgemental and are failing to notice the forest
we're all standing in because you've found a beetle on the bark of the
nearest tree.
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: lproven at gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 - ?R (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053
9:29 a.m.
On 11/27/19 7:13 AM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
Okay, you're right and I'm wrong. Everyone should play games on their
8 bit computers because they'll grow up to be real computer scientists.
--Chuck
10:28 a.m.
On Wed, 27 Nov 2019 at 18:29, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
On 11/27/19 7:13 AM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
Okay, you're right and I'm wrong. Everyone should play games on their
8 bit computers because they'll grow up to be real computer scientists.
Play, no.
Write, yes. Or at least be offered the chance to learn to do it, if they want.
And I reckon quite a few of them will go on to do it for a living. As
I did, indirectly. As Terry Pratchett said: "It?s indoor work with no
heavy lifting."
--
Liam Proven - Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk - Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: lproven at gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven - Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 - ?R (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053
8:47 a.m.
On 11/26/2019 09:02 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
CDC had a scorched-earth policy when it came to leased
mainframes. I suspect that IBM did also. I witnessed CEs
taking sledgehammers and bolt cutters to several
interesting mainframes. The official directive was that
nothing was to leave the facility that could be re-sold.
Were these leased machines
or customer-owned machines?
I don't know about CDC, but IBM would very gently
disassemble and prepare for shipping any mainframe so the
customer could sell it on to another outfit. They would
often do this EVEN IF it had been made clear the machine was
going to the scrapyard.
There was a HUGE second market in IBM mainframe gear at one
time (late 60's to mid 70's at least.)
CDC may have had many more custom/one-of-a-kind machines,
while IBM had tons of identical units in the field.
Maybe that makes a difference.
And, IBM moved leased machines around like they were
dominoes. But, yes, if they had a leased machine that they
KNEW would never be used again, they would not dump it at
the customer's back dock, it would be trucked off to SOMEWHERE.
As for the 360's, they HAD to keep them for spare parts, as
they were maintaining (generally owned, not leased) 360
machines WAY after the SLT factory was shut down. This came
to a head when they were directed to keep the National
Airspace System running WELL PAST its "sell by" date, and
they reclaimed all machines extant, including owned
machines, to scavenge them for parts.
Jon
9:19 a.m.
On 11/27/19 8:47 AM, Jon Elson wrote:
CDC may have had many more custom/one-of-a-kind
machines, while IBM had
tons of identical units in the field.
The "scorched earth" policy came right from the top- After it was
discovered that some "customer' had assembled a working system from
scavenged parts and then signed up for CE service, Bill Norris
reportedly hit the ceiling.
I saw one-of-a-kind systems utterly demolished. If a functional
subassembly was removed, the order was to damage it with prejudice.
I have a heatsink from a STAR-1B computer--that was the only bit in the
dumpster that remained recognizable. The stations and SBUs were
repurposed as spares for the STAR-100. CDC Sunnyvale had the only two
1Bs at the time. The STAR-65 was shipped down from Canada and
similarly demolished. The same fate befell countless peripherals and
older systems like the 160A that managed to find their way into the
facility. I've got a few oddball cordwood modules and a head from an 808
disk drive. That's about it. I used to have a platter from one, but it
was left behind in a move.
--Chuck
26 Nov
26 Nov
6:51 p.m.
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, TeoZ via cctalk wrote:
The only reason Apple sold so many Apple II's was
because some software
designer came out with Visicalc.
Dan Bricklin and Bob Frankston ("Software Arts")
They sold it through "Personal Software", who became "VisiCorp"
http://www.bricklin.com/history/sai.htm
Frankly, I think that word processing was more responsible than
spreadsheet for microcomputer sales.
But, Apple had a headstart by having both.
A far from complete and only partially chronological list:
Electric Pencil (Michael Shrayer)
Electric Pencil for CP/M (with a program to transfer files from Electric
Pencil disks to and from CP/M disks)
Wordstar for CP/M (MicroPro (later WordStar, Inc))
Easy Writer (Apple II, by John Draper)
Scripsit (TRS80)
Electric Pencil for TRS80
Easy Writer for IBm PC
Wordstar for PC
Electric Pencil for PC (Harv Pennington)
Microsoft Word (PC and Apple)
WordPervert
PC-Write (Bob Wallace)
7:15 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Cisin via cctalk" <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at
classiccmp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2019 9:51 PM
Subject: Re: First Internet message and ...
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, TeoZ via cctalk wrote:
------------------------
WordPro, Paper Clip (written by local boys) and PaperMate for the Commodore PET (and later
for the C64)
The only reason Apple sold so many Apple II's
was because some software
designer came out with Visicalc.
Dan Bricklin and Bob Frankston ("Software Arts")
They sold it through "Personal Software", who became "VisiCorp"
http://www.bricklin.com/history/sai.htm
Frankly, I think that word processing was more responsible than
spreadsheet for microcomputer sales.
But, Apple had a headstart by having both.
A far from complete and only partially chronological list:
Electric Pencil (Michael Shrayer)
Electric Pencil for CP/M (with a program to transfer files from Electric
Pencil disks to and from CP/M disks)
Wordstar for CP/M (MicroPro (later WordStar, Inc))
Easy Writer (Apple II, by John Draper)
Scripsit (TRS80)
Electric Pencil for TRS80
Easy Writer for IBm PC
Wordstar for PC
Electric Pencil for PC (Harv Pennington)
Microsoft Word (PC and Apple)
WordPervert
PC-Write (Bob Wallace)
7:19 p.m.
Mike,
Word Perfect and the Vista series was also available for the Amiga!
GOD Bless and Thanks,
rich!
On 11/26/2019 9:15 PM, Mike Stein via cctalk wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Cisin via cctalk" <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at
classiccmp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2019 9:51 PM
Subject: Re: First Internet message and ...
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, TeoZ via cctalk wrote:
------------------------
WordPro, Paper Clip (written by local boys) and PaperMate for the Commodore PET (and
later for the C64)
The only reason Apple sold so many Apple II's
was because some software
designer came out with Visicalc.
Dan Bricklin and Bob Frankston ("Software
Arts")
They sold it through "Personal Software", who became "VisiCorp"
http://www.bricklin.com/history/sai.htm
Frankly, I think that word processing was more responsible than
spreadsheet for microcomputer sales.
But, Apple had a headstart by having both.
A far from complete and only partially chronological list:
Electric Pencil (Michael Shrayer)
Electric Pencil for CP/M (with a program to transfer files from Electric
Pencil disks to and from CP/M disks)
Wordstar for CP/M (MicroPro (later WordStar, Inc))
Easy Writer (Apple II, by John Draper)
Scripsit (TRS80)
Electric Pencil for TRS80
Easy Writer for IBm PC
Wordstar for PC
Electric Pencil for PC (Harv Pennington)
Microsoft Word (PC and Apple)
WordPervert
PC-Write (Bob Wallace)
7:32 p.m.
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, Richard Pope via cctalk wrote:
Word Perfect and the Vista series was also
available for the Amiga!
GOD Bless and Thanks,
Manx ("Aztec C Compiler") and WordPervert made efforts to expand
into ALL platorms.
A couple of times, MY booth at Comdex was next to WordPervert.
They were not good neighbors, and didn't comply with noise/sound-volume
limits. But, their booth was more than a dozen times the size of ours, so
enforcement was minimal.
7:26 p.m.
No, this was the first personal computer...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tektronix_4050#/media/File:Tektronix_4051_ad_…
________________________________
From: cctalk <cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org> on behalf of Mike Stein via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2019 7:15 PM
To: Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com>; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic
Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: First Internet message and ...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Cisin via cctalk" <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at
classiccmp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2019 9:51 PM
Subject: Re: First Internet message and ...
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, TeoZ via cctalk wrote:
------------------------
WordPro, Paper Clip (written by local boys) and PaperMate for the Commodore PET (and later
for the C64)
The only reason Apple sold so many Apple II's
was because some software
designer came out with Visicalc.
Dan Bricklin and Bob Frankston ("Software Arts")
They sold it through "Personal Software", who became "VisiCorp"
http://www.bricklin.com/history/sai.htm
Frankly, I think that word processing was more responsible than
spreadsheet for microcomputer sales.
But, Apple had a headstart by having both.
A far from complete and only partially chronological list:
Electric Pencil (Michael Shrayer)
Electric Pencil for CP/M (with a program to transfer files from Electric
Pencil disks to and from CP/M disks)
Wordstar for CP/M (MicroPro (later WordStar, Inc))
Easy Writer (Apple II, by John Draper)
Scripsit (TRS80)
Electric Pencil for TRS80
Easy Writer for IBm PC
Wordstar for PC
Electric Pencil for PC (Harv Pennington)
Microsoft Word (PC and Apple)
WordPervert
PC-Write (Bob Wallace)
7:33 p.m.
Randy,
I will argue that that is an engineering computer and not a
personal computer. No color and probably no sound except for beeps.
GOD Bless and Thanks,
rich!
On 11/26/2019 9:26 PM, Randy Dawson via cctalk wrote:
No, this was the first personal computer...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tektronix_4050#/media/File:Tektronix_4051_ad_…
________________________________
From: cctalk <cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org> on behalf of Mike Stein via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2019 7:15 PM
To: Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com>; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic
Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: First Internet message and ...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Fred Cisin via cctalk" <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at
classiccmp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2019 9:51 PM
Subject: Re: First Internet message and ...
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019, TeoZ via cctalk wrote:
------------------------
WordPro, Paper Clip (written by local boys) and PaperMate for the Commodore PET (and
later for the C64)
The only reason Apple sold so many Apple II's
was because some software
designer came out with Visicalc.
Dan Bricklin and Bob Frankston ("Software
Arts")
They sold it through "Personal Software", who became "VisiCorp"
http://www.bricklin.com/history/sai.htm
Frankly, I think that word processing was more responsible than
spreadsheet for microcomputer sales.
But, Apple had a headstart by having both.
A far from complete and only partially chronological list:
Electric Pencil (Michael Shrayer)
Electric Pencil for CP/M (with a program to transfer files from Electric
Pencil disks to and from CP/M disks)
Wordstar for CP/M (MicroPro (later WordStar, Inc))
Easy Writer (Apple II, by John Draper)
Scripsit (TRS80)
Electric Pencil for TRS80
Easy Writer for IBm PC
Wordstar for PC
Electric Pencil for PC (Harv Pennington)
Microsoft Word (PC and Apple)
WordPervert
PC-Write (Bob Wallace)
7:40 p.m.
On Wed, 27 Nov 2019, Randy Dawson via cctalk wrote:
No, this was the first personal computer...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tektronix_4050#/media/File:Tektronix_4051_ad_…
No, the first personal computer was any machine, including IBM 360, if you
could get access to it after midnight!
No one else around? Then it's now my personal machine!
That night school course run by United States Department Of Agriculture!
in 1970 on "IBM 360 operator training" got me a little extra access in a
few facilities. (along with bringing a snack for the operator and showing
off a few trivial tricks, like changing the box of paper without stopping
the printer) I was not a competent operator, but it meant that the
operator wouldn't shoo me out when he took a break.
27 Nov
27 Nov
8:54 a.m.
On 11/26/2019 09:26 PM, Randy Dawson via cctalk wrote:
No, this was the first personal computer...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tektronix_4050#/media/File:Tektronix_4051_ad_…
Yes, and they were pretty cool, but try the Bendix G-15,
more than a decade earlier.
Jon
8:55 a.m.
On 11/26/2019 09:26 PM, Randy Dawson via cctalk wrote:
No, this was the first personal computer...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tektronix_4050#/media/File:Tektronix_4051_ad_…
Oh, another one is the LINC, designed from the ground up for
personal interaction with one user.
Circa 1964.
Jon
2:07 a.m.
I believe that Edison invented the filament bulb with a Tungsten Filament, but Joseph
Swan's carbon filament bulb pre-dated this.
However Edison was doing so well in his court case, than rather than wait for the result,
he simply bought out Swan thus ending the debate....
Dave
G4UGM
ps. what didn't they use to light the fire on the first public railway (Stockton and
Darlington Railway, 1825)
pps. For a bonus point where did the above railway start and end...
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk <cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org> On Behalf Of TeoZ via cctalk
Sent: 27 November 2019 02:10
To: Chuck Guzis <cclist at sydex.com>; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-
Topic Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: First Internet message and ...
Patents are generally used to document who invented what first. Commercial
success building on old research and patents tends to be what is remembered.
So what if some guy in 1761 heated up a wire until it glowed releasing light, it
took many people over a long time to come up with a usable cheap light bulb
design and the inventions that brought electricity into cities and peoples houses
to power those bulbs that people will remember.
The only reason Apple sold so many Apple II's was because some software
designer came out with Visicalc. So many machines were sold that they ended
up cheap enough and useful enough to end up in schools and homes where
before they were only sold to corporations. IBM's release of the PC with open
architecture and all the people who cloned it and made software and hardware
for it that IBM never envisioned is the reason X86/X64 is so dominant not that is
was the first or the best.
The people who invented something epic tend to not have commercial success
because pretty much most ground breaking patents tend to expire before they
truly become useful and because of the need for other inventions to make them
commercially usable.
-----Original Message-----
From: Chuck Guzis via cctalk
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2019 8:18 PM
To: Bill Gunshannon via cctalk
Subject: Re: First Internet message and ...
On 11/26/19 12:48 PM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
On 11/26/19 1:32 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
wrote:
And Edison invented the incandescent lamp.
--Chuck I figure the record will finally be set straight
after all of the
people involved at time cited are dead.
Such is history.
You mean like how history says Columbus discovered America...
6:55 a.m.
On Nov 26, 2019, at 9:09 PM, TeoZ via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
Patents are generally used to document who invented what first. Commercial success
building on old research and patents tends to be what is remembered.
"who invented what first" -- sort of. More precisely, who filed a patent
application first, and then depending on whether the patent office noticed the prior art.
One of my favorite examples is the patent issued to Abraham Lincoln for an invention that
actually has prior art going back about two centuries.
So what if some guy in 1761 heated up a wire until it
glowed releasing light, it took many people over a long time to come up with a usable
cheap light bulb design and the inventions that brought electricity into cities and
peoples houses to power those bulbs that people will remember.
...
The people who invented something epic tend to not have commercial success because pretty
much most ground breaking patents tend to expire before they truly become useful and
because of the need for other inventions to make them commercially usable.
There are lots of examples like this. Columbus is a good one: not the first European to
set foot in America, but the first whose visit led to a large and lasting historic impact.
Or the one I have been investigating recently: FM radio wasn't first done by Edwin
Armstrong, but his work led to the current use of FM while the earlier work of Idzerda did
not.
Incidentally, that demonstrates the limitations of patents as a source of historical
evidence: Idzerda has a US Patent, but Armstrong's patents, filed some years later, do
not cite that prior art or make any mention of it.
paul
1580
days inactive
1607
days old
56 comments
20 participants
participants (20)
-
aek＠bitsavers.org -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
bill.gunshannon＠hotmail.com -
c.murray.mccullough＠gmail.com -
cc＠informatik.uni-stuttgart.de -
cclist＠sydex.com -
cctalk＠beyondthepale.ie -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
cz＠alembic.crystel.com -
dave.g4ugm＠gmail.com -
elson＠pico-systems.com -
jfoust＠threedee.com -
lproven＠gmail.com -
mechanic_2＠charter.net -
mhs.stein＠gmail.com -
paulkoning＠comcast.net -
rdawson16＠hotmail.com -
stefan.skoglund＠agj.net -
teoz＠neo.rr.com -
wdonzelli＠gmail.com