1 Dec
2020
1 Dec
'20
1:35 p.m.
I found a box of 45 Atari ST diskettes in my basement, from my 1980's
520 ST (or maybe my brother's 1040 ST).
I don't have a floppy drive, so I can't tell whether they're readable.
Some are originals, for example for 1St Word, the word processor, and
Regent Base, a relational database program.
Others are copies.
If you send a PDF of a USPS media rate shipping label, 4"x5"x6", 3lb,
they're yours. Coordinate with me so you don't send a label after
somebody else has already sent one.
Van Snyder
2 Dec
2 Dec
4:14 a.m.
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 at 22:36, Van Snyder via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
I found a box of 45 Atari ST diskettes in my basement, from my 1980's
520 ST (or maybe my brother's 1040 ST).
I don't have a floppy drive, so I can't tell whether they're readable.
Some are originals, for example for 1St Word, the word processor, and
Regent Base, a relational database program.
Others are copies.
If you send a PDF of a USPS media rate shipping label, 4"x5"x6", 3lb,
they're yours. Coordinate with me so you don't send a label after
somebody else has already sent one.
So I guess you are in the USA?
If you don't get much response here, for many of whom I suspect the ST
is a bit modern, let me know and I can share it on some relevant
groups on FB for you. Anonymised or obscured as you prefer.
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: lproven at gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven ? Skype: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 ? ?R (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053
7 Dec
7 Dec
3:28 a.m.
On Wed, 2 Dec 2020, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
If you don't get much response here, for many of
whom I suspect the ST
is a bit modern, let me know and I can share it on some relevant
groups on FB for you. Anonymised or obscured as you prefer.
Well, I guess for some anything that does not require you to toggle in
the boot loader or doesn't have a teletype console terminal is surely too
modern to even consider.
Maciej
3:42 a.m.
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 12:28, Maciej W. Rozycki <macro at linux-mips.org> wrote:
Well, I guess for some anything that does not require you to toggle in
the boot loader or doesn't have a teletype console terminal is surely too
modern to even consider.
:-D
One of the things I enjoy about this group is that some of the
discussions and the memories make me feel young...
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: lproven at gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven ? Skype: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 ? ?R (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053
10:32 a.m.
On Mon, 2020-12-07 at 12:42 +0100, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 12:28, Maciej W. Rozycki
<macro at linux-mips.org>
wrote:
The first computer I was paid to write software for didn't require me
to toggle in a boot loader: The IBM 1401 in 1966.
All I had to do was push the load key on the card reader, or the tape
load key on the operator console. And it didn't even have a teletype
console.
Well, I guess for some anything that does not
require you to
toggle inthe boot loader or doesn't have a teletype console
terminal is surely toomodern to even consider.
:-D
One of the things I enjoy about this group is that some of
thediscussions and the memories make me feel young... 
10:36 a.m.
On Dec 7, 2020, at 1:32 PM, Van Snyder via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
On Mon, 2020-12-07 at 12:42 +0100, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
Then there was the CDC 6000 series, where the boot loader was simply a matrix of switches,
144 switches in 12 rows of 12. You'd mostly just set it once and leave it alone,
except that the field service boot code was slightly different so one or two rows had to
be changed back after the early morning daily field service run.
paul
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 at 12:28, Maciej W. Rozycki
<macro at linux-mips.org>
wrote:
The first computer I was paid to write software for didn't require me
to toggle in a boot loader: The IBM 1401 in 1966. Well, I guess for some anything that does not
require you to
toggle inthe boot loader or doesn't have a teletype console
terminal is surely toomodern to even consider.
:-D
One of the things I enjoy about this group is that some of
thediscussions and the memories make me feel young... 
11:21 a.m.
On 12/7/20 10:32 AM, Van Snyder via cctalk wrote:
The first computer I was paid to write software for
didn't require me
to toggle in a boot loader: The IBM 1401 in 1966.
All I had to do was push the load key on the card reader, or the tape
load key on the operator console. And it didn't even have a teletype
console.
The contemporaneous 1620 had it both ways--one could type in the loader
on the console typewriter (hit the Release key when done) or by pressing
the console LOAD key, could read a record from either card or paper tape
into 00000-00079. On the CADET, one of the first things that most
loaders did was to have a small routine to read in the addition and
multiplication tables. If you're going to do any arithmetic at all,
you'd better have those!
--Chuck
11:50 a.m.
On Mon, 2020-12-07 at 11:21 -0800, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
On 12/7/20 10:32 AM, Van Snyder via cctalk wrote:
The first computer I was paid to write software
for didn't require me
to toggle in a boot loader: The IBM 1401 in 1966.
All I had to do was push the load key on the card reader, or the tape
load key on the operator console. And it didn't even have a teletype
console.
The contemporaneous 1620 had it both ways--one could type in the loader
on the console typewriter (hit the Release key when done) or by pressing
the console LOAD key, could read a record from either card or paper tape
into 00000-00079. On the CADET, one of the first things that most
loaders did was to have a small routine to read in the addition and
multiplication tables. If you're going to do any arithmetic at all,
you'd better have those!
--Chuck
One of my friends changed the tables in a 1620 to do octal arithmetic,
for telemetry processing.
Speaking of those tables, do you remember why the 1620 was called
CADET? Not because it was a "beginner's" or "novice" computer. It
was
an acronym for "Can't Add; Doesn't Even Try."
The Computer History Museum in Mountain View, California has a 1620
that worked for a time. They had a problem with cooling the core
memory, which they could probably repair. They didn't get a 1622 card
reader/punch, so they connected it to a PC -- which makes the
appropriate noises. When Professor Maniotis retired from Purdue
University, he gave two 20-drawer card cabinets of 1620 software to
CHM.
CHM also has two working IBM 1401's. Their cool address is 1401
Shoreline Blvd.
12:15 p.m.
On Dec 7, 2020, at 2:50 PM, Van Snyder via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
The Model II added hardware add/multiply.
...
One of my friends changed the tables in a 1620 to do octal arithmetic,
for telemetry processing.
Speaking of those tables, do you remember why the 1620 was called
CADET? Not because it was a "beginner's" or "novice" computer. It
was
an acronym for "Can't Add; Doesn't Even Try." The Computer History Museum in Mountain View,
California has a 1620
that worked for a time. They had a problem with cooling the core
memory, which they could probably repair.
Or perhaps heating. I remember that our college 1620 Model II needed a couple of minutes
after power-on before it would be willing to operate; supposedly that time was spent
waiting for the heaters in the core memory to bring it up to operating temperature.
Apparently timing and/or signal levels in core memory are fairly sensitive to temperature,
so keeping them consistent is helpful. It isn't common to select a temperature well
above ambient and use heaters to do that, but it isn't totally strange.
paul
12:17 p.m.
On 12/7/20 11:50 AM, Van Snyder via cctalk wrote:
One of my friends changed the tables in a 1620 to do
octal arithmetic,
for telemetry processing.
Speaking of those tables, do you remember why the 1620 was called
CADET? Not because it was a "beginner's" or "novice" computer. It
was
an acronym for "Can't Add; Doesn't Even Try."
That was the Model I; the Model II had the math tables hardwired.
Several options were available (and required for some software), such as
indirect addressing and hardware floating point. A close relative was
the 1710; basically a 1620 with interrupts, real-time clock and various
options for ADC/DAC interfaces for process control. I believe that
binary arithmetic was also an option, but I'd have to check.
Dijkstra developed a dislike for the thing pretty early on. One of his
big gripes was that you can't write (to peripherals) everything that you
read. The other gripe was that there were certain "untouchable"
characters that you could neither test for nor use in arithmetic nor
create, except by reading them (e.g. numeric blank, 8-4 punch).
The standard disk drive was the 1311.
As much as the haters bashed it, it was a pretty reliable workhorse for
the time and a great system for learning fundamentals. (absolutely
uniform instruction layout; no user-addressable registers--all
memory-to-memory), decimal and no fixed word length.
I remember the 1620 SPS coding forms--on one side, cards marked out in
columns for SPS; on the other, the so-called "Absolute Coding System",
which was nothing more than plain machine code.
The 1622 even during its salad days was prone to overheating and
punch-check errors. One of the hazards running the card-based (no disk)
FORTRAN compiler.
Was there ever a magnetic tape drive for the 1620? I don't recall ever
hearing about any. That alone would make it unique among IBM
offerings--card and disk, but no tape.
--Chuck
1:23 p.m.
On Dec 7, 2020, at 3:17 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
<cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
On 12/7/20 11:50 AM, Van Snyder via cctalk wrote:
I remember him writing (dismissively) about the 1620, don't remember him discussing
the 1710. The 1620's obvious issue, apart from the ones you mentioned, is the
blocking I/O. Can't write a multiprogramming system on such a machine. Dijkstra
worked on the first commercial machine that had interrupts standard (the Electrologica
X-1). So he knew how to use and benefit from interrupts; his Ph.D. thesis is an example.
One of my friends changed the tables in a 1620 to
do octal arithmetic,
for telemetry processing.
Speaking of those tables, do you remember why the 1620 was called
CADET? Not because it was a "beginner's" or "novice" computer. It
was
an acronym for "Can't Add; Doesn't Even Try."
That was the Model I; the Model II had the math tables hardwired.
Several options were available (and required for some software), such as
indirect addressing and hardware floating point. A close relative was
the 1710; basically a 1620 with interrupts, real-time clock and various
options for ADC/DAC interfaces for process control. I believe that
binary arithmetic was also an option, but I'd have to check.
Dijkstra developed a dislike for the thing pretty early on. One of his
big gripes was that you can't write (to peripherals) everything that you
read. The other gripe was that there were certain "untouchable"
characters that you could neither test for nor use in arithmetic nor
create, except by reading them (e.g. numeric blank, 8-4 punch). The standard disk drive was the 1311.
I remember those. Ours had two, and a disk O/S that used them. ("Monitor II"?)
One day the system drive developed a leak, spraying hydraulic oil all over the system
pack. IBM repaired the leak, bled the hydraulics, and cleaned the pack and heads (with
high purity isopropyl alcohol I scrounged from the chemistry department stock room).
Booted up fine afterwards. Don't try that with modern disk drives. :-)
As much as the haters bashed it, it was a pretty
reliable workhorse for
the time and a great system for learning fundamentals. (absolutely
uniform instruction layout; no user-addressable registers--all
memory-to-memory), decimal and no fixed word length.
...
Was there ever a magnetic tape drive for the 1620? I don't recall ever
hearing about any. That alone would make it unique among IBM
offerings--card and disk, but no tape.
Not that I know of. They did offer paper tape, though that wasn't on ours.
paul
12:53 p.m.
> The first computer I was paid to write software
for didn't require me
> to toggle in a boot loader: The IBM 1401 in 1966.
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
The contemporaneous 1620 had it both ways--one could
type in the loader
on the console typewriter (hit the Release key when done) or by pressing
the console LOAD key, could read a record from either card or paper tape
into 00000-00079. On the CADET, one of the first things that most
loaders did was to have a small routine to read in the addition and
multiplication tables. If you're going to do any arithmetic at all,
you'd better have those!
The 1620 that I had access to had PDQ ("pretty Damn Quick"?) FORTRAN,
and a 1401 emulator!
Being students, not administrators, we had VERY limited access to the
1401, but unlimited access to the 1620, and learned 1401 machine language
on the 1620. VERY limited memory, but you could use the input and output
buffers as RAM when you weren't reading nor writing.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
1243
days inactive
1249
days old
11 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
cclist＠sydex.com -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
lproven＠gmail.com -
macro＠linux-mips.org -
paulkoning＠comcast.net -
van.snyder＠sbcglobal.net