21 Dec
2018
21 Dec
'18
1:10 p.m.
From: Al Kossow
"Straight-8" seems to be a fairly modern
name coming from collectors
My _guess_ is that that probably happened because there is no formal 'model'
for that first one (unlike the first -11, which got re-named the -11/20
BITD), and people recently picked that to disambiguate them from all the
other -8's.
But what I _don't_ know is _why_ that particular name? I was hoping some
-8 collector knew...
Noel
21 Dec
21 Dec
3:06 p.m.
My _guess_ is that that probably happened because there is no formal
'model'
for that first one (unlike the first -11, which got re-named the -11/20
BITD), and people recently picked that to disambiguate them from all the
other -8's.
The original PDP 11 was sold in two model options, although the numbers did
not appear on the faceplace, very clearly the model options were called PDP
11/10 and PDP 11/20. These are just as legitimate and well defined as the
11/05 vs. 11/10 (later version) that followed it except for the one fact of
the front plate. The fact that the name does not appear on the front panel
has caused every DEC historian to miss this factoid. Read the first
brochure, don't take my word for it.
http://vintagecomputer.net/browse_thread.cfm?id=593
Momentum prevents change I get it, but it's clear that the model 11/20 and
11/10 existed from day one. The problem is that DEC re-used the 11/10
model name again a few years later, the other cause for neglecting the
original 11/10 model.
Bill
4:07 p.m.
New subject: Original PDP-11/10 [was: Re: Origin of 'Straight 8' name]
On Dec 21, 2018, at 3:06 PM, Bill Degnan via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
Wow.
Did that V1 11/10 ever ship? Do any still exist?
I'm curious about that 1 kW read-only memory. What technology is that memory? At
that size and that date I suspect core rope, but that would be pretty expensive (due to
the labor involved).
paul
My _guess_ is that that probably happened because there is no formal
'model'
for that first one (unlike the first -11, which got re-named the -11/20
BITD), and people recently picked that to disambiguate them from all the
other -8's.
The original PDP 11 was sold in two model options, although the numbers did
not appear on the faceplace, very clearly the model options were called PDP
11/10 and PDP 11/20. These are just as legitimate and well defined as the
11/05 vs. 11/10 (later version) that followed it except for the one fact of
the front plate. The fact that the name does not appear on the front panel
has caused every DEC historian to miss this factoid. Read the first
brochure, don't take my word for it.
http://vintagecomputer.net/browse_thread.cfm?id=593
Momentum prevents change I get it, but it's clear that the model 11/20 and
11/10 existed from day one. The problem is that DEC re-used the 11/10
model name again a few years later, the other cause for neglecting the
original 11/10 model.
Bill 
4:47 p.m.
New subject: Original PDP-11/10 [was: Re: Origin of 'Straight 8' name]
On 12/21/2018 3:07 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
It shows up in the pdp11 handbook 1969 inside/1970 on the spine, and
pdp11 handbook 2nd edition (also 1969/1970), but has been displaced by
the latter 11/10 variant by 1972.
Perhaps, since the *only* difference was the memory configuration (near
as I can tell), there may have been so few orders (maybe even none?)
that they just dropped it. Or maybe a marketing / design team
communication misstep.
The pdp11 handbook from 1969/1970 identifies the memory attributed to
the 11/10 only as read-only core memory with an access time of 500ns
(same as the RAM core). It describes the tiny RAM for the 11/10 of 256
words has having a 2us cycle time vs. 1.2us for the 11/20.
The handbook also indicates that an 11/20 could do an NPR transfer every
1.2us but an 11/10 could do one ever 1.0us (probably assuming ROM cycle
times).
As a guess, they may never have sold any (or delivered 11/20's to those
who ordered 11/10's).
On Dec 21, 2018, at 3:06 PM, Bill Degnan via
cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
Wow.
Did that V1 11/10 ever ship? Do any still exist?
I'm curious about that 1 kW read-only memory. What technology is that memory? At
that size and that date I suspect core rope, but that would be pretty expensive (due to
the labor involved).
paul
My _guess_ is that that probably happened because there is no formal
'model'
for that first one (unlike the first -11, which got re-named the -11/20
BITD), and people recently picked that to disambiguate them from all the
other -8's.
The original PDP 11 was sold in two model options, although the numbers did
not appear on the faceplace, very clearly the model options were called PDP
11/10 and PDP 11/20. These are just as legitimate and well defined as the
11/05 vs. 11/10 (later version) that followed it except for the one fact of
the front plate. The fact that the name does not appear on the front panel
has caused every DEC historian to miss this factoid. Read the first
brochure, don't take my word for it.
http://vintagecomputer.net/browse_thread.cfm?id=593
Momentum prevents change I get it, but it's clear that the model 11/20 and
11/10 existed from day one. The problem is that DEC re-used the 11/10
model name again a few years later, the other cause for neglecting the
original 11/10 model.
Bill
5 p.m.
New subject: Original PDP-11/10 [was: Re: Origin of 'Straight 8' name]
On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 4:47 PM Jay Jaeger via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
wrote:
On 12/21/2018 3:07 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
memory?
At that size and that date I suspect core rope, but that would be
pretty expensive (due to the labor involved).
When you consider the differences between the 11/35 and 11/40 were simply
option choices and the later 11/10 11/05, I can see no reason why the
"original 11/10 11/20 is any different other than the front plate being
"PDP-11" for the later pairing. I am unaware of any 11/10's still around
but I am also unaware of any Rolm 1601's that still exist, does not mean it
was not a real Ruggednova model. etc.
Basically it's being inconsistent to not acknowledge the original 11/10.
We could say that the PDP 11 models were
11/20
11/45
11/40
11/10
... and ignore the original 11/10, plus the 11/35 and 11/05.
I will still sleep well at night regardless what officialdom decides. :-)
Bill
> On Dec 21, 2018, at 3:06 PM, Bill Degnan via cctalk <
cctalk at
classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> My _guess_ is that that probably happened because there is no formal
>> 'model'
>> for that first one (unlike the first -11, which got re-named the -11/20
>> BITD), and people recently picked that to disambiguate them from all
the
>> other -8's.
>>
>>
>>
> The original PDP 11 was sold in two model options, although the numbers
did
> not appear on the faceplace, very clearly the
model options were called
PDP
> 11/10 and PDP 11/20. These are just as
legitimate and well defined as
the
> 11/05 vs. 11/10 (later version) that followed
it except for the one
fact of
> the front plate. The fact that the name does
not appear on the front
panel
> has caused every DEC historian to miss this
factoid. Read the first
> brochure, don't take my word for it.
> http://vintagecomputer.net/browse_thread.cfm?id=593
>
> Momentum prevents change I get it, but it's clear that the model 11/20
and
11/10
existed from day one. The problem is that DEC re-used the 11/10
model name again a few years later, the other cause for neglecting the
original 11/10 model.
Bill
Wow.
Did that V1 11/10 ever ship? Do any still exist?
I'm curious about that 1 kW read-only memory. What technology is that
paul
It shows up in the pdp11 handbook 1969 inside/1970 on the spine, and
pdp11 handbook 2nd edition (also 1969/1970), but has been displaced by
the latter 11/10 variant by 1972.
Perhaps, since the *only* difference was the memory configuration (near
as I can tell), there may have been so few orders (maybe even none?)
that they just dropped it. Or maybe a marketing / design team
communication misstep.
The pdp11 handbook from 1969/1970 identifies the memory attributed to
the 11/10 only as read-only core memory with an access time of 500ns
(same as the RAM core). It describes the tiny RAM for the 11/10 of 256
words has having a 2us cycle time vs. 1.2us for the 11/20.
The handbook also indicates that an 11/20 could do an NPR transfer every
1.2us but an 11/10 could do one ever 1.0us (probably assuming ROM cycle
times).
As a guess, they may never have sold any (or delivered 11/20's to those
who ordered 11/10's).
5:37 p.m.
New subject: Original PDP-11/10 [was: Re: Origin of 'Straight 8' name]
On 12/21/2018 4:00 PM, Bill Degnan wrote:
On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 4:47 PM Jay Jaeger via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org <mailto:cctalk at classiccmp.org>> wrote:
On 12/21/2018 3:07 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
that
memory?? At that size and that date I suspect core rope, but
that would be pretty expensive (due to the labor involved).
Unless, of course, none of them found their way into customers' hands.
> On Dec 21, 2018, at 3:06 PM, Bill Degnan via cctalk
<cctalk at
classiccmp.org <mailto:cctalk at classiccmp.org>> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> My _guess_ is that that probably happened because there is no formal
>> 'model'
>> for that first one (unlike the first -11, which got re-named the
-11/20
>> BITD), and people recently picked that to
disambiguate them from
all the
>> other -8's.
>>
>>
>>
> The original PDP 11 was sold in two model options, although the
numbers
did
> not appear on the faceplace, very clearly the
model options were
called PDP
> 11/10 and PDP 11/20.? These are just as
legitimate and well
defined as the
> 11/05 vs. 11/10 (later version) that followed
it except for the
one fact of
> the front plate.? The fact that the name does
not appear on the
front panel
> has caused every DEC historian to miss this
factoid.? Read the first
> brochure, don't take my word for it.
> http://vintagecomputer.net/browse_thread.cfm?id=593
>
> Momentum prevents change I get it, but it's clear that the model
11/20
and
> 11/10 existed from day one.? The problem is
that DEC re-used the
11/10
> model name again a few years later, the other
cause for
neglecting the
original
11/10 model.
Bill
Wow.
Did that V1 11/10 ever ship?? Do any still exist?
I'm curious about that 1 kW read-only memory.? What technology is
? ? ? ?paul
It shows up in the pdp11 handbook 1969 inside/1970 on the spine, and
pdp11 handbook 2nd edition (also 1969/1970), but has been displaced by
the latter 11/10 variant by 1972.
Perhaps, since the *only* difference was the memory configuration (near
as I can tell), there may have been so few orders (maybe even none?)
that they just dropped it.? Or maybe a marketing / design team
communication misstep.
The pdp11 handbook from 1969/1970 identifies the memory attributed to
the 11/10 only as read-only core memory with an access time of 500ns
(same as the RAM core).? It describes the tiny RAM for the 11/10 of 256
words has having a 2us cycle time vs. 1.2us for the 11/20.
The handbook also indicates that an 11/20 could do an NPR transfer every
1.2us but an 11/10 could do one ever 1.0us (probably assuming ROM cycle
times).
As a guess, they may never have sold any (or delivered 11/20's to those
who ordered 11/10's).
When you consider the differences between the 11/35 and 11/40 were
simply option choices and the later 11/10 11/05, I can see no reason why
the "original 11/10 11/20 is any different other than the front plate
being "PDP-11" for the later pairing.? I am unaware of any 11/10's still
around but I am also unaware of any Rolm 1601's that still exist, does
not mean it was not a real Ruggednova model.? etc.
Basically it's being inconsistent to not acknowledge the original 11/10.
We could say that the PDP 11 models were
11/20
11/45
11/40
11/10
... and ignore the original 11/10, plus the 11/35 and 11/05.?
I will still sleep well at night regardless what officialdom decides. :-)
Bill 
11:30 p.m.
New subject: Original PDP-11/10 [was: Re: Origin of 'Straight 8' name]
Are you sure the referenced early PDP-11/10 wasn't really the PDP-11/15?
We got an 11/15 because it was cheaper and DEC had one sitting around
that we could get with end of year left over budget funds.
On 12/21/18 2:00 PM, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote:
On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 4:47 PM Jay Jaeger via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
wrote:
On 12/21/2018 3:07 PM, Paul Koning via cctalk
wrote:
memory?
At that size and that date I suspect core rope, but that would be
pretty expensive (due to the labor involved).
When you consider the differences between the 11/35 and 11/40 were simply
option choices and the later 11/10 11/05, I can see no reason why the
"original 11/10 11/20 is any different other than the front plate being
"PDP-11" for the later pairing. I am unaware of any 11/10's still around
but I am also unaware of any Rolm 1601's that still exist, does not mean it
was not a real Ruggednova model. etc.
Basically it's being inconsistent to not acknowledge the original 11/10.
We could say that the PDP 11 models were
11/20
11/45
11/40
11/10
... and ignore the original 11/10, plus the 11/35 and 11/05.
I will still sleep well at night regardless what officialdom decides. :-)
Bill
> On Dec 21, 2018, at 3:06 PM, Bill Degnan via cctalk <
cctalk at
classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> My _guess_ is that that probably happened because there is no formal
>> 'model'
>> for that first one (unlike the first -11, which got re-named the -11/20
>> BITD), and people recently picked that to disambiguate them from all
the
>> other -8's.
>>
>>
>>
> The original PDP 11 was sold in two model options, although the numbers
did
> not appear on the faceplace, very clearly the
model options were called
PDP
> 11/10 and PDP 11/20. These are just as
legitimate and well defined as
the
> 11/05 vs. 11/10 (later version) that followed
it except for the one
fact of
> the front plate. The fact that the name does
not appear on the front
panel
> has caused every DEC historian to miss this
factoid. Read the first
> brochure, don't take my word for it.
> http://vintagecomputer.net/browse_thread.cfm?id=593
>
> Momentum prevents change I get it, but it's clear that the model 11/20
and
11/10
existed from day one. The problem is that DEC re-used the 11/10
model name again a few years later, the other cause for neglecting the
original 11/10 model.
Bill
Wow.
Did that V1 11/10 ever ship? Do any still exist?
I'm curious about that 1 kW read-only memory. What technology is that
paul
It shows up in the pdp11 handbook 1969 inside/1970 on the spine, and
pdp11 handbook 2nd edition (also 1969/1970), but has been displaced by
the latter 11/10 variant by 1972.
Perhaps, since the *only* difference was the memory configuration (near
as I can tell), there may have been so few orders (maybe even none?)
that they just dropped it. Or maybe a marketing / design team
communication misstep.
The pdp11 handbook from 1969/1970 identifies the memory attributed to
the 11/10 only as read-only core memory with an access time of 500ns
(same as the RAM core). It describes the tiny RAM for the 11/10 of 256
words has having a 2us cycle time vs. 1.2us for the 11/20.
The handbook also indicates that an 11/20 could do an NPR transfer every
1.2us but an 11/10 could do one ever 1.0us (probably assuming ROM cycle
times).
As a guess, they may never have sold any (or delivered 11/20's to those
who ordered 11/10's).
22 Dec
22 Dec
7:04 a.m.
New subject: Original PDP-11/10 [was: Re: Origin of 'Straight 8' name]
On Sat, Dec 22, 2018, 3:50 AM David C. Jenner via cctalk <
cctalk at classiccmp.org wrote:
Are you sure the referenced early PDP-11/10 wasn't
really the PDP-11/15?
We got an 11/15 because it was cheaper and DEC had one sitting around
that we could get with end of year left over budget funds.
Yes. The "11/15" did not exist in 1969 early 1970 documents from DEC and
articles, including the original product brochure and pricelist:
https://www.vintagecomputer.net/browse_thread.cfm?id=593
Bill
12:19 p.m.
New subject: Original PDP-11/10 [was: Re: Origin of 'Straight 8' name]
when the multi rack PDP11/20 (on the switch panel) was being assembled
for delivery to Aeroflote, circa 1971 or 2 iirc, the unit did not have
a working power fail recovery capability. The machine was then
referred to as an 11/15. At that time, the PDP11 was considered a
controlled technolgy item, and there were some guys present for the
testing in the mill on 1-2. Anyone familiar with 1=2 at that time,
knows the floors did shift with heavy loads. This caused said computer
to suffer power failures as the racks shifted, bus cables shifted and
the machine would crash. after about the 15th crash, no pun intended,
the delivery to Aeroflot was approved. A couple of years later, the
Ryad version of the 11 was delivered to a shop, and found to be an
exact duplicate of the delivered 11. it dd not have power fail
capability.
bob
On Sat, Dec 22, 2018 at 7:05 AM Bill Degnan via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
On Sat, Dec 22, 2018, 3:50 AM David C. Jenner via cctalk <
cctalk at classiccmp.org wrote:
Are you sure the referenced early PDP-11/10
wasn't really the PDP-11/15?
We got an 11/15 because it was cheaper and DEC had one sitting around
that we could get with end of year left over budget funds.
Yes. The "11/15" did not exist in 1969 early 1970 documents from DEC and
articles, including the original product brochure and pricelist:
https://www.vintagecomputer.net/browse_thread.cfm?id=593
Bill
2039
days inactive
2040
days old
8 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
billdegnan＠gmail.com -
bobsmithofd＠gmail.com -
classiccmp＠earthlink.net -
cube1＠charter.net -
jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu -
paulkoning＠comcast.net