25 Sep
2012
25 Sep
'12
10:11 p.m.
PDP 11/10 available, appears to be located in Arizona. Please contact
me off-list if interested.
J
26 Sep
26 Sep
1:55 a.m.
On 09/26/2012 04:11 AM, Jay West wrote:
PDP 11/10 available, appears to be located in Arizona.
Please contact
me off-list if interested.
J
Come on Jay. Sending three mails with available PDP11s and then
following up with this topic line was just mean :-)
Made my heart skip a beat at least.
Cheers,
Pontus.
12:50 p.m.
On 09/26/2012 01:55 AM, Pontus wrote:
On 09/26/2012 04:11 AM, Jay West wrote:
I had the same reaction. ;)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
PDP 11/10 available, appears to be located in
Arizona. Please contact
me off-list if interested.
J
Come on Jay. Sending three mails with available PDP11s and then
following up with this topic line was just mean :-)
Made my heart skip a beat at least. 
1:25 p.m.
From: Jay West
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 7:11 PM
PDP 11/10 available, appears to be located in Arizona.
Please contact
me off-list if interested.
This one was even forwarded to me by another list member, based on the
Subject: header. Imagine *my* distress when I read it. :-(
Rich Alderson
Vintage Computing Sr. Systems Engineer
Vulcan, Inc.
505 5th Avenue S, Suite 900
Seattle, WA 98104
mailto:RichA at vulcan.com
mailto:RichA at LivingComputerMuseum.org
http://www.LivingComputerMuseum.org/
2:04 p.m.
My heart skipped a beat or two when I saw the Subject: line also,
thought the chance of me being able to collect/house such an artifact
is slim to none. I think the OP probably led to accelerated heartbeat
or skipped beats for a lot of people when they read the subject.
There is a huge difference between a PDP-10 and a PDP 11/10, though both
are very cool (though, a PDP-10 in any form is way more cool in my
mind).
Rick Bensene
The Old Calculator (and some old computers) Museum
http://oldcalculatormuseum.com
3:34 p.m.
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 2:04 PM, Rick Bensene <rickb at bensene.com> wrote:
My heart skipped a beat or two when I saw the Subject:
line also,
thought the chance of me being able to collect/house such an artifact
is slim to none. I think the OP probably led to accelerated heartbeat
or skipped beats for a lot of people when they read the subject.
Mine too. Outside of using the CompuServe service, I never got much
direct hands-on (like at the command prompt level) back in the day,
but I've still always been fascinated with 36-bit machines. We had a
CIS node called "CIVIC" as a functional computer room display at COSI,
our science museum, complete with a "DECsystem 20/20" and plastic
covers, IIRC.
I even worked at CompuServe, about 10 years ago, but I missed the
window when they were replacing DEC machines with Systems Concepts
machines, and I also missed a garage cleanout or two from old CIS
employees who saved machines, but eventually reclaimed the space. I
just came along too late to get any goodies. I have set up klh10 and
spend hours noodling around, and I do have an account or two on a
36-bit machine that's still powered up, but it's not quite the same as
running your own.
I would be happy enough with something small like an SC-25 - it's just
going to be a single-user workstation, really. Given the size and the
scarcity, I think if I ever run native 36-bit hardware, it's going to
be an FPGA implementation, and to me, at least, that's one step more
interesting than software emulation. I emulate because I must, but
I'd love to run the real thing.
-ethan
5:04 p.m.
On 09/26/2012 03:34 PM, Ethan Dicks wrote:
I would be happy enough with something small like an
SC-25 - it's just
going to be a single-user workstation, really. Given the size and the
scarcity, I think if I ever run native 36-bit hardware, it's going to
be an FPGA implementation, and to me, at least, that's one step more
interesting than software emulation. I emulate because I must, but
I'd love to run the real thing.
Well, XKL's TOAD-1 is "an FPGA emulation", strictly speaking. It's
much more "grown up", though, than somebody spending a year working on
the VHDL or Verilog, then copping out and squirting it into a friggin'
eval board but never designing any hardware. ;)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
27 Sep
27 Sep
1:39 p.m.
From: Dave McGuire
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 2:05 PM
On 09/26/2012 03:34 PM, Ethan Dicks wrote:
> I would be happy enough with something small like
an SC-25 - it's just
> going to be a single-user workstation, really. Given the size and the
> scarcity, I think if I ever run native 36-bit hardware, it's going to
> be an FPGA implementation, and to me, at least, that's one step more
> interesting than software emulation. I emulate because I must, but
> I'd love to run the real thing.
Well, XKL's TOAD-1 is "an FPGA
emulation", strictly speaking. It's
much more "grown up", though, than somebody spending a year working on
the VHDL or Verilog, then copping out and squirting it into a friggin'
eval board but never designing any hardware. ;)
Not, strictly speaking, true. The FPGAs + AMD 29xx sequencer in the XKL-1
CPU implement a microcode engine, and the extended PDP-10 architecture is
then implemented in microcode just as in the KL-10 and KS-10 processors.
The later XKL-2 processor, implemented in a single FPGA, is much closer
to what Ethan means, I would think, although still microcoded. The ucode
is part of the overall loadup of the FPGA from ROM at power-up.
Perhaps Ethan has in mind something more like what Neil Franklin attempted
a decade ago, or "dgcx" more recently.
Rich Alderson
Vintage Computing Sr. Systems Engineer
Vulcan, Inc.
505 5th Avenue S, Suite 900
Seattle, WA 98104
mailto:RichA at vulcan.com
mailto:RichA at LivingComputerMuseum.org
http://www.LivingComputerMuseum.org/
2:51 p.m.
On 09/27/2012 01:39 PM, Rich Alderson wrote:
That's a very blurry distinction, and is a path directly into
quicksand on this list. ;) Where DOES one draw the line between
hardware and firmware?
What I'd like to know about the XKL designs is: Who owns the design
files, and how can I get my hands on them? B-)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
Well,
XKL's TOAD-1 is "an FPGA emulation", strictly speaking. It's
much more "grown up", though, than somebody spending a year working on
the VHDL or Verilog, then copping out and squirting it into a friggin'
eval board but never designing any hardware. ;)
Not, strictly speaking, true. The FPGAs + AMD 29xx sequencer in the XKL-1
CPU implement a microcode engine, and the extended PDP-10 architecture is
then implemented in microcode just as in the KL-10 and KS-10 processors.
The later XKL-2 processor, implemented in a single FPGA, is much closer
to what Ethan means, I would think, although still microcoded. The ucode
is part of the overall loadup of the FPGA from ROM at power-up.
Perhaps Ethan has in mind something more like what Neil Franklin attempted
a decade ago, or "dgcx" more recently. 
5:02 p.m.
On 9/27/2012 11:51 AM, Dave McGuire wrote:
That's a very blurry distinction, and is a path directly into
quicksand on this list. ;) Where DOES one draw the line between
hardware and firmware?
I talked with a friend who was a designer for Astrodata in
the mid
60's. There was a fellow there who would design hardware with the
intent of programming the sequencing and so forth later. That was
frowned upon at the time and later banned. He left to work at one of
the early computer system companies here in Orange County, Varian or
such, don't recall.
The distinction I would place is whether the hardware can be made to
behave differently with either mechanical programming at assembly time,
as this fellow did, or with changes to a load of code that is easily
alterable in the factory or field. I would argue that even if there are
sequencers such as Xilinx parts that have to be loaded at power on time,
if they are loaded by parts not easily programmable in the field, then
hardware discipline applies, more than software / firmware.
Such things as the vhdl and such still may be easily alterable, but are
much closer to this sort of firmware than it is to any firmware type
function, where the firmware can be loaded and altered to run
differently to suit a particular need of a machine.
5:45 p.m.
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 2:51 PM, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> wrote:
On 09/27/2012 01:39 PM, Rich Alderson wrote:
>>
>> Well, XKL's TOAD-1 is "an FPGA emulation", strictly speaking...
>
> Not, strictly speaking, true. The FPGAs + AMD 29xx sequencer in the XKL-1
> CPU implement a microcode engine, and the extended PDP-10 architecture is
> then implemented in microcode just as in the KL-10 and KS-10 processors.
Interesting to know. There's a lot I could learn about each and every
implementation.
> The later XKL-2 processor, implemented in a single
FPGA, is much closer
> to what Ethan means, I would think, although still microcoded.
Yes. That would count, but I doubt I'll ever land any XKL hardware.
> Perhaps Ethan has in mind something more like what
Neil Franklin attempted
> a decade ago, or "dgcx" more recently.
That is more what I was thinking of - a slab of silicon that (above
the microcode level) runs the PDP-10 instruction set native, and
allows for some modern or semi-modern disks to be attached (I really
don't care if it's SCSI or PATA or SATA or SAS or FC-AL or whatever -
just so I can mount something at least as large an RP06 or RP07) _and_
Ethernet (that acts at the register level like "real" hardware -
NI-10? NI-20? Is that the right nomenclature?)
That's a very blurry distinction, and is a path
directly into quicksand on
this list. ;) Where DOES one draw the line between hardware and firmware?
Several PDP-11s were microcoded. VAXen were routinely microcoded. I
don't plan to implement a KA-10 in ECL, so as long as I turn it on and
it doesn't have to boot another OS on some Intel-compatible processor
then fire off an app written in C to implement the PDP-10 instruction
set (something I'm already doing just fine with klh10), it's gotta be
closer than what I have now.
-ethan
9:09 p.m.
On 09/27/2012 06:12 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
Oh I'm quite aware that they're still around...but they don't seem to
be doing anything more interesting than big network switches with their
CPU design. Kinda seems like certain models of HP calculators...it'd
cost them little to have made a few more, and there's still demand...at
least for a handful.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
What I'd
like to know about the XKL designs is: Who owns the design
files,
Is there any reason to believe that they don't belong to XKL?
and how can I get my hands on them? B-)
Get a job working at XKL? 
28 Sep
28 Sep
3:35 p.m.
That's a very blurry distinction, and is a path
directly into
quicksand on this list. ;) Where DOES one draw the line between
hardware and firmware?
Hmmm... One 'thought experiemnt' goes like this :
Take your favourite microprocessor and write a stand-alone program for
it. Burn that program into an EPROM and wire it up to the microprosseor
with whatever RAM and peripherla chips are needed. Most people agree that
EPROM cotnains 'firmware'.
But an EPROM is just a combinatorial logic circuit. So for each of the 8
data bits of the EPROM, write down the logic equation giving it as a
functionof the address inputs. Now implement that logic equation using
TTL gates. Repeat for the other EPROM data pins. Wire the mess up, add
tri-state buffers to the oputput, and connect it in place of the EPROM.
The microrpccor runs as before. It must do. It gets the same logic levels
on its data pins in the 2 cases for each address it outputs. The
microprocessor cann't know whether it's an EPROM or a mass of 74xx chips.
But the result sure doesn;t _look_ like firmware :-)
For that matter, It's difficult to distinguish between 'microcode' and a
'state machine'.
-tony
30 Sep
30 Sep
6:16 p.m.
Hmmm... One 'thought experiemnt' goes like
this :
Take your favourite microprocessor and write a
stand-alone program
for it. Burn that program into an EPROM and wire it up [...]. Most
people agree that EPROM cotnains 'firmware'.
But an EPROM is just a combinatorial logic circuit.
So for each of
the 8 data bits of the EPROM, write down the logic equation giving it
as a functionof the address inputs. Now implement that logic
equation using TTL gates. Repeat for the other EPROM data pins.
Wire the mess up, add tri-state buffers to the oputput, and connect
it in place of the EPROM. The microrpccor runs as before.
Well, to be picky, I'm inclined to doubt it. The pile of TTL (quite
aside from drawing enough power to heat your house) is very likely to
have substantially higher propagation delay than the original PROM.
It must do. It gets the same logic levels on its data
pins in the 2
cases for each address it outputs. The microprocessor cann't know
whether it's an EPROM or a mass of 74xx chips.
But the result sure doesn;t _look_ like firmware :-)
I'd say it looks as much like firmware as a PROM implemented as a board
full of diodes, some of which have been cut. :-)
For that matter, It's difficult to distinguish
between 'microcode'
and a 'state machine'.
In theory. In practice, there is usually little doubt - while the two
formalisms may be formally identical, there are, as reflected in the
terminological difference, differences of attitude and style between
the two.
/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse at rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
6:27 p.m.
On Sep 30, 2012, at 18:16, Mouse <mouse at rodents-montreal.org> wrote:
Sure. If you want to be pedantic, a processor isn't more than
a large state machine. The primary significance of the name
is in how you intend to use it.
- Dave
For that
matter, It's difficult to distinguish between 'microcode'
and a 'state machine'.
In theory. In practice, there is usually little doubt - while the two
formalisms may be formally identical, there are, as reflected in the
terminological difference, differences of attitude and style between
the two.
1 Oct
1 Oct
12:24 a.m.
Mouse wrote:
I'd say it looks as much like firmware as a PROM
implemented as a
board full
of diodes, some of which have been cut. :-)
So, Wang Laboratories made a series of machines it called the
100-series. There were display (Nixie tube) and printing versions of
the calculator.
The logic of the machine was small-scale DTL/TTL IC's.
It was a microcoded architecture.
The microcode sequencer consisted of a TI TMS 2600 ROM, which took
inputs from various state flip flops, and generated control signals that
ran the microcode through the sequences. The microcode itself
was...wait for it...
Two large circuit boards populated with diodes! The microcode itself
was "hard wired' in diodes.
The machine was developed at a time that MOS ROM wasn't quite there in
terms of size and cost to hold the microcode, so the diode ROM was used.
Question is: Is the diode ROM "firmware"?
1:43 a.m.
In article <B9639BAE3F34504E83FEEDD71D4AFB463D4630 at mail.bensene.com>,
"Rick Bensene" <rickb at bensene.com> writes:
Question is: Is the diode ROM "firmware"?
Yes.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book
<http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline>
The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org>
The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals.classiccmp.org>
Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>
2:46 a.m.
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 7:43 AM, Richard <legalize at xmission.com> wrote:
In article <B9639BAE3F34504E83FEEDD71D4AFB463D4630 at mail.bensene.com>,
"Rick Bensene" <rickb at bensene.com> writes:
No, IMHO the particular _pattern_ of cut/missing diodes is the
"firmware". The diodes are the ROM, yes. But like a book is a bunch
of pressed tree-pulp, a "novel" is a particular arrangement of
letters.
Information is a thing, too!
--
Joachim Thiemann :: http://jthiem.bitbucket.org ::
http://signalsprocessed.blogspot.com
Question is: Is the diode ROM
"firmware"?
Yes.
4:06 a.m.
In article <CAJ0dHHxfubVB-8KtGYBTMBCVJOaoH0AgK6QmQm+nW4_5TKKOhg at mail.gmail.com>,
Joachim Thiemann <joachim.thiemann at gmail.com> writes:
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 7:43 AM, Richard <legalize
at xmission.com> wrote:
This is a non-distinguishing distinction. The firmware is realized as
a bunch of cut/missing diodes. So what? Who cares how the firmware
is realized, it's still firmware. It could be realized in Minecraft,
that wouldn't make it any less firmware.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book
<http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline>
The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org>
The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals.classiccmp.org>
Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com>
In article <B9639BAE3F34504E83FEEDD71D4AFB463D4630 at mail.bensene.com>,
"Rick Bensene" <rickb at bensene.com> writes:
No, IMHO the particular _pattern_ of cut/missing diodes is the
"firmware". The diodes are the ROM, yes. But like a book is a bunch
of pressed tree-pulp, a "novel" is a particular arrangement of
letters. Question is: Is the diode ROM
"firmware"?
Yes.
4:26 a.m.
Question is:
Is the diode ROM "firmware"?
Yes. Who cares how the firmware is realized, it's still
firmware. It
could be realized in Minecraft, that wouldn't make it any less
firmware.
Exactly! The firmware is the data; the diode matrix embodies the data
but is not the same thing as it - consider that, if they were the same
thing, it wouldn't make sense to speak of saving a copy of the firmware
in a file on a modern disk drive, because that's something you can't do
with a bunch of diodes and PCBs and such.
For most purposes, this distinction doesn't make much difference, but
it's why it makes sense to speak of (for example) replacing those two
boards with a modern PROM containing the same firmware. Same data,
different instantiation.
/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse at rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
2:17 p.m.
Joachim Thiemann <joachim.thiemann at gmail.com> writes:
No, IMHO the particular _pattern_ of cut/missing
diodes is the
"firmware". The diodes are the ROM, yes. But like a book is a bunch of
pressed tree-pulp, a "novel" is a particular arrangement of letters.
Richard wrote:
This is a non-distinguishing distinction. The firmware
is realized as
a bunch of cut/missing diodes. So what? Who cares how the firmware is
realized, it's still firmware. It could be realized in Minecraft, that
wouldn't make it any less firmware.
No, it's a completely sensible and useful distinction.
The fact that firmware can be realized in Minecraft doesn't make
Minecraft firmware, any more than the fact that firmware can be stored
as a pattern of electrical charges on floating gates makes an EPROM be
firmware. I have plenty of EPROMs that are not firmware, but perhaps
could store firmware at some future date.
3:57 a.m.
> I'd say it looks as much like firmware as a
PROM implemented as a
> board full of diodes, some of which have been cut. :-)
So, Wang Laboratories made [...microcoded SSI...]
The microcode itself was...wait for it...
Two large circuit boards populated with diodes! The microcode itself
was "hard wired' in diodes.
Question is: Is the diode ROM "firmware"?
I would say yes - well, if I unleash my full pickiness, I would say the
diode ROM is not firmware but the data it holds is.
I do, however, consider it close enough to the line that I'd listen
rather than just laughing if someone were to argue the other way.
/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse at rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
12 Oct
12 Oct
5:47 p.m.
Mouse wrote:
Please don't murder me. I was young and foolish... I have the remains of
one of those somewhere :-(
I got it yeras ago, and used the keyboard, case, and PSU as part of my
first homebrew machine. I think i have the main PCBs mostly intact still.
I did desolder some of the connectors and maybe tghe odd IC, though.
IIRC there wewre 3 boards in the pile. The bottome 2 were the didoe
matrix firmware ROMs, the top one was full of mostly TTL. Ther was
anoitehr 24 pin IC (the ROM you mention) and some RAMs (1101a?). I seem
to rememebr a coupele of smalelr PCBs tht fitted on top, display drivers?
I'd say it looks as much like firmware as a
PROM implemented as a
board full
of diodes, some of which have been cut. :-)
So, Wang Laboratories made a series of machines it called the
100-series. There were display (Nixie tube) and printing versions of
the calculator.
The logic of the machine was small-scale DTL/TTL IC's.
It was a microcoded architecture.
The microcode sequencer consisted of a TI TMS 2600 ROM, which took
inputs from various state flip flops, and generated control signals that
ran the microcode through the sequences. The microcode itself
was...wait for it...
Two large circuit boards populated with diodes! The microcode itself
was "hard wired' in diodes.
The machine was developed at a time that MOS ROM wasn't quite there in
terms of size and cost to hold the microcode, so the diode ROM was used.
Question is: Is the diode ROM "firmware"?
I would say the diodes and PCB are hardware, in the same way that an EPOM
chip is hardware. The (electrical)_ layout of the diodes is firmware.
-tony
8:47 p.m.
[...]... Two
large circuit boards populated with diodes! The
microcode itself was "hard wired' in diodes.
Please don't murder me.
I was young and foolish... I have the
remains of one of those somewhere :-( 
9:18 p.m.
The BPA (Bonneville power administration) dumped a bunch of Wang
transistor / Core memory calculators in 1977 and a local surplus/scrapper
picked them up for sale. The calculator "brain box" was priced out
of my budget, Something like $30.00. I did pick up a $5.00 display head with
Nixie display and Microswitch keyboard and proceeded to disassemble it
for parts. The other regret was a missle control system by I believe,
Singer.
a small cast metal box with flex backplane and stuffed with gold plated
stacked flatpack MCM modules. I fould some amazing components, A zener
reference Mil-spec was listed in the mot catalog for $180.00.
-jim
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org
[mailto:cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org]On Behalf Of Mouse
Sent: Friday, October 12, 2012 5:48 PM
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: PDP-10
I think if I were to do unpleasant things to people who ruined working
hardware out of ignorance as a kid I'd have to start with myself and
follow up with just about everyone who was lucky enough to have
hardware to play with at that age.
There once existed a rather nice desk calculator, with Nixie - or
something indistinguishable from them from what I can recall - display
tubes, and some rather interesting guts that I suspect was SSI at most,
probably bit-serial or digit-serial or some such. I poked around
inside it. By the last I recall of it, it probably wasn't good for
anything but harvesting parts, like the Nixies and the keyboard, from.
I'm not sure whether I regret meddling with it. I have little doubt I
broke it, but I'm not sure what I learned in the process wasn't worth
it, though it's been long enough I'm not sure what that covers. I do
regret losing the remaining pieces; if nothing else, I'd like to have
those display tubes. But, last time I went looking for the remnants, I
couldn't find any of them, and that was at least a decade ago, so it's
likely in a landfill somewhere. I do have some faint hope it's in the
hands of someone who appreciates it....
/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse at rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
[...]... Two
large circuit boards populated with diodes! The
microcode itself was "hard wired' in diodes.
Please don't murder me.
I was young and foolish... I have the
remains of one of those somewhere :-(
13 Oct
13 Oct
6:45 p.m.
Tony D. wrote, in response to a message about the Wang 100-series
calculators that I wrote a while back
Please don't murder me. I was young and foolish... I have the remains
of one
of those somewhere :-(
I understand. We all make mistakes, especially when we are younger. I
made my share of mistakes back in the day too...though it's not like the
days of mistakes are gone despite my age and supposed wisdom :-)
These are extremely rare machines today. They were kind of a lost
machine from the get-go -- the 100-series was Wang's attempt at making a
calculator that was cheaper than the 700-series calculators that were
Wang's top-end machines, with amazing capabilities and speed. The
100-series was a huge compromise, using a serial bit-by-bit ALU, the
"cheap" diode (slow) ROM versus the (fast) wire-rope ROM of the
700-series, and keycode-encoded programs for advanced math operations
(trig & statistics) versus microcoded routines on the 700-series. By
the time the 100-series machines made it to market, the technology used
in them had been eclipsed by solid-state ROM, and higher-levels of TTL
integration, pretty much making them dead-ends. They never sold well,
and planned improvements, like an external learn-mode programmer and
other peripherals were canceled.
I got it years ago, and used the keyboard, case, and PSU as part of my
first
homebrew machine. I think i have the main PCBs mostly
intact still.
I did desolder some of the connectors and maybe the odd IC, though.
A worthy use for the parts at the time. No faulting you for building a
homebrew machine from it.
IIRC there were 3 boards in the pile. The bottom 2 were the diode
matrix
firmware ROMs, the top one was full of mostly TTL.
That's the one. The top board had almost all the logic, and the two
bottom boards had the diode ROM matrices.
The top board had a mix of TTL and DTL ICs on it, mostly small-scale.
There was another 24 pin
IC (the ROM you mention) and some RAMs (1101a?).
The 24-pin IC was part of the microcode sequencer, a mask-programmed TMS
2600 device. The RAMs were indeed 1101A's, either genuine Intel, or
second-sourced parts from various IC houses. There are four sockets, of
which two are populated for the "base" models with 4 memory registers.
The other two sockets were populated for the "extended" models, which
had 12 memory registers.
I seem to remember a
couple of smaller PCBs tht fitted on top, display drivers?
Yes. The display or printer driver board plugged into a socket on the
main board. In the models with Nixie displays, the BCD- to 1-of-10
chip, and display drive transistors were on this board. On the models
equipped with the built-in printer, the circuitry to drive the printer
(a Seiko drum printer) were on the board. There was a socket on either
of these boards that another board could plug into which was the
Trig/Statistics ROM board. This board contained some sequencing and
addressing logic, along with another mask-programmed TMS 2600 ROM that
contained keycode sequences to carry out (rather slowly) trig and some
statistics functions. This board was an extra-cost option.
See http://oldcalculatormuseum.com/wang144t.html for more information.
Rick Bensene
The Old Calculator Museum
14 Oct
14 Oct
6:21 p.m.
Tony D. wrote, in response to a message about the Wang 100-series
calculators that I wrote a while back
Yes, sorry for the delay. I have jsut about caught up with my e-mail now.
BAsically, my ISP accidently stopped accepting PPP conenctions (dial in,
get throug hthe login/pass word promps, then nothing). I told them about
this, they told me to check a lot of irrlevant things (which I did, just
ot be safe). I pointed out I could describe exactly what was goign on
,i'd got a datacoms analyser between the PC and the modem and could see
what each side was doign. I'd changed nothign, my hardware wa behaving as
I expected it to, etc... Afte 2 weeks of such comments, they finally told
the networking group, who fixed the problem in < 1 day. Ho-hum....
Please don't murder me. I was young and foolish... I have the remains
of one
of those somewhere :-(
I understand. We all make mistakes, especially when we are younger. I
made my share of mistakes back in the day too...though it's not like the
days of mistakes are gone despite my age and supposed wisdom :-)
These are extremely rare machines today. They were kind of a lost machine from the get-go -- the 100-series was
Wang's attempt at making a
calculator that was cheaper than the 700-series calculators that were
Wang's top-end machines, with amazing capabilities and speed. The
100-series was a huge compromise, using a serial bit-by-bit ALU, the
"cheap" diode (slow) ROM versus the (fast) wire-rope ROM of the
700-series, and keycode-encoded programs for advanced math operations
(trig & statistics) versus microcoded routines on the 700-series. By
the time the 100-series machines made it to market, the technology used
in them had been eclipsed by solid-state ROM, and higher-levels of TTL
integration, pretty much making them dead-ends. They never sold well,
and planned improvements, like an external learn-mode programmer and
other peripherals were canceled.
Right,...
I got it years ago, and used the keyboard, case, and PSU as part of my
first
homebrew machine. I think i have the main PCBs
mostly intact still.
I did desolder some of the connectors and maybe the odd IC, though.
A worthy use for the parts at the time. No faulting you for building a
homebrew machine from it.
IIRC there were 3 boards in the pile. The bottom 2 were the diode
matrix
firmware ROMs, the top one was full of mostly
TTL.
That's the one. The top board had almost all the logic, and the two
bottom boards had the diode ROM matrices. The top board had a mix of TTL and DTL ICs on it,
mostly small-scale.
That's it.
There was another 24 pin
IC (the ROM you mention) and some RAMs (1101a?).
The 24-pin IC was part of the microcode sequencer, a mask-programmed TMS
2600 device. The RAMs were indeed 1101A's, either genuine Intel, or second-sourced parts from various IC houses. There
are four sockets, of
which two are populated for the "base" models with 4 memory registers.
The other two sockets were populated for the "extended" models, which
had 12 memory registers.
I am pretty sure mine had all 4 RAMs in it. Probbably still does.
I seem to remember a
couple of smaller PCBs tht fitted on top, display drivers?
Yes. The display or printer driver board plugged into a socket on the
main board. In the models with Nixie displays, the BCD- to 1-of-10 chip, and display drive transistors were on this
board. On the models
equipped with the built-in printer, the circuitry to drive the printer
(a Seiko drum printer) were on the board. There was a socket on either
of these boards that another board could plug into which was the
Trig/Statistics ROM board. This board contained some sequencing and
I do rememebr a secodn board on top opf the disply driver, but I don;t
think it backhes the one you show. I don't remmerb ra second ROM, for
example.
addressing logic, along with another mask-programmed
TMS 2600 ROM that
contained keycode sequences to carry out (rather slowly) trig and some
statistics functions. This board was an extra-cost option.
See http://oldcalculatormuseum.com/wang144t.html for more information.
Maybe I should try to get it going again...
-tony
13 Oct
13 Oct
7:19 p.m.
On 10/12/2012 4:47 PM, Tony Duell wrote:
Please don't murder me. I was young and foolish... I have the remains of
one of those somewhere :-(
We all have our stories. For my part, I:
1) Disassembled and gutted an antique tube radio.
2) Didn't recognize an original LINC computer, with LINC tape, keyboard
and all, when I saw one and could have bought it for next to nothing.
Really stupid - I even recognized the LINC tape as being just that - but
figured it had been stuck on some weird set of home-brew flip chip
stuff. (I have no idea what happened to it / where it ended up).
3) Disassembled an RS08/RF08 disk/head assembly (on the other hand, it
had been tossed into a dumpster, and probably didn't survive it anyway.
I did manage to rescue the RS08 and RF08 electronics, backplanes,
cards, power supply and all, and I still have the (now presumably
useless) platter and a couple of the head assemblies.
12 Oct
12 Oct
5:25 p.m.
Hmmm... One 'thought experiemnt' goes
like this :
Take your favourite microprocessor and write a
stand-alone program
for it. Burn that program into an EPROM and wire it up [...]. Most
people agree that EPROM cotnains 'firmware'.
But an EPROM is just a combinatorial logic
circuit. So for each of
the 8 data bits of the EPROM, write down the logic equation giving it
as a functionof the address inputs. Now implement that logic
equation using TTL gates. Repeat for the other EPROM data pins.
Wire the mess up, add tri-state buffers to the oputput, and connect
it in place of the EPROM. The microrpccor runs as before.
Well, to be picky, I'm inclined to doubt it. The pile of TTL (quite
aside from drawing enough power to heat your house) is very likely to
have substantially higher propagation delay than the original PROM. It must do. It gets the same logic levels on its
data pins in the 2
cases for each address it outputs. The microprocessor cann't know
whether it's an EPROM or a mass of 74xx chips.
But the result sure doesn;t _look_ like firmware
:-)
I'd say it looks as much like firmware as a PROM implemented as a board
full of diodes, some of which have been cut. :-) For that matter, It's difficult to
distinguish between 'microcode'
and a 'state machine'.
In theory. In practice, there is usually little doubt - while the two
formalisms may be formally identical, there are, as reflected in the
terminological difference, differences of attitude and style between
the two.
26 Sep
26 Sep
5:19 p.m.
On Sep 26, 2012, at 3:34 PM, Ethan Dicks wrote:
I would be happy enough with something small like an
SC-25 - it's just
going to be a single-user workstation, really. Given the size and the
scarcity, I think if I ever run native 36-bit hardware, it's going to
be an FPGA implementation, and to me, at least, that's one step more
interesting than software emulation. I emulate because I must, but
I'd love to run the real thing.
I've been wanting to make an FPGA emulation of a PDP-10 for a
while now, but I think my stock of tuits (round and otherwise)
has dipped into the negative. One of these days...
- Dave
6:30 p.m.
New subject: PDP-11/10
My apologies, just got confirmation from the offerer that the 11/10 is
no longer available. My fault for taking 25 days to check my email :\
On Sep 25, 2012, at 9:11 PM, Jay West wrote:
PDP 11/10 available, appears to be located in Arizona.
Please
contact me off-list if interested.
J
8:52 p.m.
New subject: PDP-11/10
On 10/1/2012 6:52 PM, Jules Richardson wrote:
On 09/26/2012 05:30 PM, Jay West wrote:
But DEC never used hex. Anyhow the time old computers
could be picked for a song is now gone.
My apologies, just got confirmation from the
offerer that the 11/10 is no
longer available. My fault for taking 25 days to check my email :\
It's only 19 in hex, which doesn't look quite as bad.
9:08 p.m.
New subject: PDP-11/10
On 10/01/2012 08:52 PM, ben wrote:
But DEC never used hex.
WTF? The entire worlds of VAX and Alpha are hex.
And if you dismiss that for being "too new", I might go along with it
for Alpha (1992) but certainly not VAX (1978).
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
My apologies, just got confirmation from the offerer
that the 11/10
is no
longer available. My fault for taking 25 days to check my email :\
It's only 19 in hex, which doesn't look quite as bad.
9:24 p.m.
New subject: PDP-11/10
On 10/1/2012 7:08 PM, Dave McGuire wrote:
On 10/01/2012 08:52 PM, ben wrote:
>>> My apologies, just got confirmation from the offerer that the 11/10
>>> is no
>>> longer available. My fault for taking 25 days to check my email :\
>>
>> It's only 19 in hex, which doesn't look quite as bad.
>>
> But DEC never used hex.
The time frame was for the 11.
WTF? The entire worlds of VAX and Alpha are hex.
I forgot about the big DEC stuff, there.
And if you dismiss that for being "too
new", I might go along with it
for Alpha (1992) but certainly not VAX (1978).
I tend to think system size. Small
is something you can touch.
Big I just think perhaps if the gods are willing I can have few seconds
of access time.
-Dave
9:34 p.m.
New subject: PDP-11/10
On 10/01/2012 09:24 PM, ben wrote:
The word was "never".
But there are common models of both the VAX and Alpha families that
are a whole lot smaller than the average PeeCee.
Sorry, Mouse has got me in a nit-pickin' (not nose-pickin') mood.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
>>> My
apologies, just got confirmation from the offerer that the 11/10
>>> is no
>>> longer available. My fault for taking 25 days to check my email :\
>>
>> It's only 19 in hex, which doesn't look quite as bad.
>>
> But DEC never used hex.
The time frame was for the 11. And if you
dismiss that for being "too new", I might go along with it
for Alpha (1992) but certainly not VAX (1978).
I tend to think system size. Small is something you can touch.
Big I just think perhaps if the gods are willing I can have few seconds
of access time. 
11:44 p.m.
New subject: PDP-11/10
But there are common models of both the VAX and
Alpha families that
are a whole lot smaller than the average PeeCee.
I got my desktop VAX just last week. :)
Need to interface it to the Solbourne S3000, which will act as its groovy
orange console.
--
------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser at floodgap.com
-- "Logan! You renewed!" ------------------------------------------------------
9:25 p.m.
New subject: PDP-11/10
On 10/01/2012 08:52 PM, ben wrote:
On 10/1/2012 6:52 PM, Jules Richardson wrote:
Huh?? DEC used hex cards in the unibus 11s I even have core
and a few random boards for one all hex!
Allison
On 09/26/2012 05:30 PM, Jay West wrote:
But DEC never used hex. Anyhow the time old computers
could be picked for a song is now gone.
My apologies, just got confirmation from the
offerer that the 11/10
is no
longer available. My fault for taking 25 days to check my email :\
It's only 19 in hex, which doesn't look quite as bad.
4299
days inactive
4317
days old
39 comments
19 participants
participants (19)
-
ajp166＠verizon.net -
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
cube1＠charter.net -
eric＠brouhaha.com -
ethan.dicks＠gmail.com -
fraveydank＠gmail.com -
jimpdavis＠gorge.net -
joachim.thiemann＠gmail.com -
jules.richardson99＠gmail.com -
jwest＠classiccmp.org -
jws＠jwsss.com -
legalize＠xmission.com -
mcguire＠neurotica.com -
mouse＠Rodents-Montreal.ORG -
pontus＠update.uu.se -
RichA＠vulcan.com -
rickb＠bensene.com -
spectre＠floodgap.com