17 Aug
2006
17 Aug
'06
6:14 p.m.
The DN discussion left me thinking about how classic computer collecting was presented to
the outside world.
One of the things that stood out rapidly was that I would not recommend an Apollo as a
first foray into the classic
world (I know that in this circumstance it isn't a first foray, just thinking in
general).
So, I started thinking about what would be a good starter system. So far, I've come up
with
Sun-3 or Sun-4 (good availability of information, easy software accesablilty (NetBSD works
well, Solaris/SunOS isn't bad if you
can find it, although Sun licensing is the strictest of all the options here, with no
transfers allowed). Open hardware, easy-availability
of parts and upgrades. Headers come with, SunOS 4 comes with cc.
Silicon Graphics IRISes of the ARCS era. Goodly amount of information
(sgistuff.g-lenerz.de and futuretech are put out/aided/etc by
listmembers yay!!) Software is harder to come by, NetBSD isn't very well supported on
these beasts and IRIX is pricy (but the license
transfers with the machine). Compilers available for 5.3, headers for 6.2 and 6.5. Parts
are available readily for many classic IRISes, less
so for the biggish-iron (ultramicros? what would you call those...) machines or newer
machines. High cool factor.
I ruled out IBM (non-PCs) because of software and some unusual hardware choices, DEC due
to hard-to-find hardware parts on VAX and
the highly confusing mess with Alpha (play the "will my machine run VMS or
Tru64" game - step right up, watch the pea...) Apollo because of
hard-to-find S/W and limited information on the net.
HP 9000 could be a contender, too. - good NetBSD support, (currently) free HP-UX, good
online documentation, well-built machines.
You'll note this is pretty much limited to UNIX workstations, because of my space
limitations and my assumption that UNIX will make for a
easier transition.
Any other ideas?
17 Aug
17 Aug
7:07 p.m.
I ruled out IBM (non-PCs) because of software and some
unusual
hardware choices, DEC due to hard-to-find hardware parts on VAX
and the highly confusing mess with Alpha
How are IBM machines any more unusual than Sun - POWER vs. SPARC? Or
POWER vs. MIPS for that matter?
And how are DEC parts hard to find? Ebay, as well as more than a few
reasonable resellers (some on this list)...
And why be stuck in the UNIX world? Hell, once a machine is running a
Unix variant, they all start to look like every kidz Linux machine...
--
Will
7:36 p.m.
On 8/18/06, William Donzelli <wdonzelli at gmail.com> wrote:
And why be stuck in the UNIX world? Hell, once a
machine is running a
Unix variant, they all start to look like every kidz Linux machine...
Exactly. I'm a Unix professional by day, and if on my free time
playing with classic computers I'm still doing *nix, I'd be bored to
death. I'll be further frustrated because a lot of the modern commands
that I'm used to doesn't exist in 20+ year old *nix variants (nah, I'm
not talking about Gnome/X11/KDE, more to stuff like lvm, ssh, etc.).
This is all moot unless you're talking about the original Unix kernel
from Ken Thompsom written in PDP7 assembler (circa
August 1969)! :-)
Perhaps the only interesting (more feasible) Unix variant that I'd
ever run on a classic computer is probably the original V6 or V7 on a
11/40 (if I ever lay my grubby little fingers on one of those babies,
espcially the disks!).
18 Aug
18 Aug
5:32 a.m.
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Scott Quinn wrote:
The DN discussion left me thinking about how classic computer
collecting was presented to the outside world. One of the things that
stood out rapidly was that I would not recommend an Apollo as a first
foray into the classic world (I know that in this circumstance it isn't
a first foray, just thinking in general). So, I started thinking about
what would be a good starter system. So far, I've come up with
(unices snipped)
You'll note this is pretty much limited to UNIX workstations, because of
my space limitations and my assumption that UNIX will make for a easier
transition.
Any other ideas?
I have to reluctantly agree that Unix may not be the best entry into
classic collecting. My choice would be the Apple 2 series and/or
Commodore VIC-20 and 64. These are cheap and plentiful with lots of
information and software available on the net.
Steve
--
6:07 a.m.
Rumor has it that Steven N. Hirsch may have mentioned these words:
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Scott Quinn wrote:
> You'll note this is pretty much limited to UNIX workstations, because of
> my space limitations and my assumption that UNIX will make for a easier
> transition.
One must ask oneself - transition *from what*? If one is "transitioning"
from OS/400, I doubt there's any micro available
that will be easier than
any other... ;-)
I have to reluctantly agree that Unix may not be the
best entry into
classic collecting. My choice would be the Apple 2 series and/or
Commodore VIC-20 and 64. These are cheap and plentiful with lots of
information and software available on the net.
Depends. If you are coming from a Unix/Linux world, *or* started out with
the GWBASIC crowd, a Tandy (CoCo|Model3/4|etc.) might be easier to get
accustomed to as there will be less of a learning curve with the Basic (or
in the *nix case, OS-9 on a CoCo). Parts are still cheap, plentiful, and
some are even swappable with the IBM scene; not to mention utilities to
write to cross-platform floppies & whatnot; which is a bit tougher in the
GCR world.
However, I agree that if it is your first foray into the world of classics,
a small cheap 8-bitter is definitely the way to go.
[[ Oh and Will: When the other poster mentioned IBM, he might've been
referencing AS/400 or System/36-type machines. I certainly wouldn't
recommend anything of that vintage from IBM for a beginner! ;-) However,
PowerPC vs. Sparc vs. Alpha vs. Mips vs. Geode vs. every other durned CPU
*nix has been ported to really isn't an issue. ;-) ]]
Laterz,
Roger "Merch" Merchberger
--
Roger "Merch" Merchberger -- SysAdmin, Iceberg Computers
zmerch at 30below.com
What do you do when Life gives you lemons,
and you don't *like* lemonade?????????????
2:17 p.m.
Depends. If you are coming from a Unix/Linux world,
*or* started out with
the GWBASIC crowd, a Tandy (CoCo|Model3/4|etc.) might be easier to get
accustomed to as there will be less of a learning curve with the Basic (or
in the *nix case, OS-9 on a CoCo). Parts are still cheap, plentiful, and
some are even swappable with the IBM scene; not to mention utilities to
write to cross-platform floppies & whatnot; which is a bit tougher in the
GCR world.
However, I agree that if it is your first foray into the world of classics,
a small cheap 8-bitter is definitely the way to go.
If you're interested in going that route, the 2 machines I'd recomend
would be the CoCo series for much the reason you gave (OS-9 is an
interesting operating system) and the BBC micor (excellent BASIC and
assembler built-in, lots of standard interfaces built-in, plenty of
software and docs on the web).
-tony
10:47 a.m.
Scott Quinn wrote:
The DN discussion left me thinking about how classic computer collecting was presented
to the outside world.
One of the things that stood out rapidly was that I would not recommend an Apollo as a
first foray into the classic
world (I know that in this circumstance it isn't a first foray, just thinking in
general).
So, I started thinking about what would be a good starter system. So far, I've come
up with
...
Depends on the collector to be honest and what they like in a system. I'd have
quite liked an SGI of some flavour for the graphics ability (and indeed got my
Tek XD88 fairly early on which was comparable in graphics performance to a
typical SGI of the time).
But equally I'd be at home with a CP/M crate of some description for the fun
of mixing and matching bits and pieces to build a more interesting system.
That's something that until recent times has been harder in the world of SGI
and Sun because the parts still went for Real Money.
Then of course there's the interesting expandable 8-bitters; I got into old
Acorn systems for that reason, but I suppose for the USians it's equivalent to
collecting Apple ][ systems and related hardware.
I suppose the upshot of all that is that I suspect most collectors want a
machine that they can expand, even if they're not necessarily a hardware hacker.
2:29 p.m.
I suppose the upshot of all that is that I suspect
most collectors want a
machine that they can expand, even if they're not necessarily a
hardware hacker.
Some years ago I was involved with the Bristol University student
computer society (it was called 'BITS' [1] which was supposed to stand for
'Bristol IT Society' but never did :-)). Anyway, said society had a
number of SIGs.
And one such SIG was called 'Hardware and old systems SIG'. Those were
grouped together not just because the chap running said SIG was yours
truely and was interested in both aspects, but also because in the
opinion of most people in said society if you want to run an old computer
system (as opposed to running the software under emulation or whatever)
you pretty much have to be somewhat interested in the hardware because
you're going to have to do repairs and you can't generally find modules
to swap out (even if that was the right thing to do ;-)). And if you're
interested in messing about with hardware you'll often find an older
machine to be better documented and easier to work on (slower bus speed,
so you can use a cheaper 'scope and analyser).
I guess what I am saying is that even if you're not a hardware hacker
_now_, getting seriously into old computers will turn you partially into one.
[1] Another proposed name was FOCC, officially standing for 'Friends Of
the C Compiler'. Of course the double meaning was 'F*** Off Computer
Centre' :-).
-tony
1:07 p.m.
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Scott Quinn wrote:
The DN discussion left me thinking about how classic
computer
collecting was presented to the outside world.
FWIW, when people find out about my hobby and ask me why, they're almost
always satisfied when I describe the hobby as being like classic cars.
--
David Griffith
dgriffi at cs.csubak.edu
A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
1:15 p.m.
On Fri, 18 Aug 2006, David Griffith wrote:
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Scott Quinn wrote:
Wow, I thought I was the only guy that came up with that line.
When people ask me I explain that while computers are currently still
utilitarian, so was the Model T Ford back in the '20s. Nevertheless today
they have significant value, so while the computers we collect may only be
20 years old now (give or take ;) - should any of us manage to live
another 80 years... we might have some real winners on our hands.
Works for my inlaws, at least.
- JP
The DN discussion left me thinking about how
classic computer
collecting was presented to the outside world.
FWIW, when people find out about my hobby and ask me why, they're almost
always satisfied when I describe the hobby as being like classic cars.
2:02 p.m.
The DN discussion left me thinking about how classic computer
collecting was presented to the outside world.
One of the things that stood out rapidly was that I would not
recommend an Apollo as a first foray into the classic
world (I know that in this circumstance it isn't a first foray, just
thinking in general).
So, I started thinking about what would be a good starter system. So
far, I've come up with
My first thought its that the 'ideal first classic' depends very much on
what you're interested in. OK, I am the exception, being primarily a
hardware person, so my interest is in CPUs built from simple-ish logic
chips (the 74x181 being about the most complicated device I like to see
in a CPU :-)).
My second thought is that the 'ideal first classic' is the one you're
offered. Most of us don't have the luxury of being able to pick any
classic computer, we restore the machine we can get our grubby little
hands on :-)
This can lead to some interesting 'problems'. The first minicomputer I
got -- in fact the first machine I had without a single-chip CPU was a
Philips P850. A machine that few people have ever heard of, let alone
know anything about. I was very much on my own with the machine and the
technical manual....
And the first PDP11 I got was not one I'd necessarily recomend for a
beginner. It was a PDP11/45. A great machine, but very complicated (over
1000 chips in the CPU IIRC). Anf this time I didn't even have a complete
machine. I had to wire-wrap an MUD backplane before I even knew what MUD
was.
I think that machine I'd go for as a 'first classic' would be one of the
following :
PDP11/10 -- a simple PDP11, CPU built from TTL, but not that much of it,
with a real front panel
PERQ (any classic PERQ) -- again a CPU built from TTL, but this time a
workstation. Plenty of doucmetnation out there, so you should get it working
HP9830 -- Very much the forerunner of the home micro, this machine has
BASIC in ROM, so it's not going to be hard to get used to. But the CPU is
a bit-serial one built from 80 simple chips, there are schematics, etc
out there.
-tony
3:38 p.m.
Tony Duell wrote:
My first thought its that the 'ideal first classic' depends very much on
what you're interested in. OK, I am the exception, being primarily a
hardware person, so my interest is in CPUs built from simple-ish logic
chips (the 74x181 being about the most complicated device I like to see
in a CPU :-)).
Well my first computer other than useing a PDP-8 was
FPGA design that was tied to the prototype board and
PC to download the internal logic. The next design was going to be
a CPLD design, and I got the chips for that. Now I am
working on a 2901 design. All at the moment only on paper
but something different than a 8 or 16 bit cpu from Intel
or Motorola.
My second thought is that the 'ideal first
classic' is the one you're
offered. Most of us don't have the luxury of being able to pick any
classic computer, we restore the machine we can get our grubby little
hands on :-)
I bought a SBC1620, what else is the most Classic -- a PDP 8.
This can lead to some interesting 'problems'.
The first minicomputer I
got -- in fact the first machine I had without a single-chip CPU was a
Philips P850. A machine that few people have ever heard of, let alone
know anything about. I was very much on my own with the machine and the
technical manual....
What I like about about this list is there is other computers than
DEC's products out there and I would like to know more about the
others.
6701
days inactive
6701
days old
11 comments
10 participants
participants (10)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
compoobah＠valleyimplants.com -
dgriffi＠cs.csubak.edu -
jplist＠kiwigeek.com -
julesrichardsonuk＠yahoo.co.uk -
shirsch＠adelphia.net -
waisun.chia＠gmail.com -
wdonzelli＠gmail.com -
zmerch-cctalk＠30below.com