From artgodwin@gmail.com Wed Nov 1 11:20:00 2023 From: Adrian Godwin To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Greaseweazle part 2 Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2023 11:19:43 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8780997695341346056==" --===============8780997695341346056== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable An interesting update on greaseweazle. As I understand this it now supports LIF at the file level as well as at the disc format level. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3D8OLdqJqJ490 On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 9:43=E2=80=AFAM Tony Duell via cctalk wrote: > On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 8:31=E2=80=AFAM r.stricklin via cctalk > wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 24, 2023, at 11:10 PM, Tony Duell via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > > > And this is where I get lost.. > > > > > > > I do not understand your overbearing attitude of helplessness toward > this project. I have known you on many occasions to go to far greater > lengths to achieve far deeper understanding of far more complicated > devices. Far less intelligent people than you have managed somehow to > marshal the necessary resources to make useful headway with the damn thing. > The majority of the questions you=E2=80=99re demanding answers to seem to m= e like > the kind of questions that could be easily answered with about four > minutes=E2=80=99 worth of simple experimentation. > > It's a combination of things : > > I regard the Greaseweazle (or any other similar device) as a tool to > help me to do something which I enjoy -- running classic computers. > While I am happy to spend time improving my skills at using tools, I > do not expect to have to guess at what the designer was doing. > > I also want to understand what my tools should be doing. Not what they > seem to have done in the past. Getting some of my classics running is > a big enough ob without having to worry whether or not some missing > option in writing the boot disk image to a real disk has caused that > disk to be mangled. The more I know to be correct, the better. I can > sit down with the Greaseweazle board, the PC, a floppy drive and a > logic analyser and probably find some combination of options that > produces what look to be sensible signals on the Write Data line. But > whether they are sensible signals is a much bigger problem. > > Yes, I like solving puzzles. But this shouldn't be a puzzle. If I want > to solve a puzzle about reading and writing arbitrary disk formats the > I'll design my own device to do it. > > -tony > --===============8780997695341346056==-- From artgodwin@gmail.com Wed Nov 1 11:27:47 2023 From: Adrian Godwin To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Greaseweazle part 2 Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2023 11:27:30 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6089804968644030647==" --===============6089804968644030647== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I should say that that's actually the Fluxengine software in combination with the Greaseweazle hardware. On Wed, Nov 1, 2023 at 11:19 AM Adrian Godwin wrote: > An interesting update on greaseweazle. As I understand this it now > supports LIF at the file level as well as at the disc format level. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OLdqJqJ490 > > > On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 9:43 AM Tony Duell via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > >> On Sun, Jun 25, 2023 at 8:31 AM r.stricklin via cctalk >> wrote: >> > >> > >> > > On Jun 24, 2023, at 11:10 PM, Tony Duell via cctalk < >> cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: >> > > >> > > And this is where I get lost.. >> > > >> > >> > I do not understand your overbearing attitude of helplessness toward >> this project. I have known you on many occasions to go to far greater >> lengths to achieve far deeper understanding of far more complicated >> devices. Far less intelligent people than you have managed somehow to >> marshal the necessary resources to make useful headway with the damn thing. >> The majority of the questions you’re demanding answers to seem to me like >> the kind of questions that could be easily answered with about four >> minutes’ worth of simple experimentation. >> >> It's a combination of things : >> >> I regard the Greaseweazle (or any other similar device) as a tool to >> help me to do something which I enjoy -- running classic computers. >> While I am happy to spend time improving my skills at using tools, I >> do not expect to have to guess at what the designer was doing. >> >> I also want to understand what my tools should be doing. Not what they >> seem to have done in the past. Getting some of my classics running is >> a big enough ob without having to worry whether or not some missing >> option in writing the boot disk image to a real disk has caused that >> disk to be mangled. The more I know to be correct, the better. I can >> sit down with the Greaseweazle board, the PC, a floppy drive and a >> logic analyser and probably find some combination of options that >> produces what look to be sensible signals on the Write Data line. But >> whether they are sensible signals is a much bigger problem. >> >> Yes, I like solving puzzles. But this shouldn't be a puzzle. If I want >> to solve a puzzle about reading and writing arbitrary disk formats the >> I'll design my own device to do it. >> >> -tony >> > --===============6089804968644030647==-- From jeffrey@vcfed.org Fri Nov 3 02:13:20 2023 From: Jeffrey Brace To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] "Linux like Unix" livestream Sat. Nov. 4, 2023 at 6:30PM EDT Date: Thu, 02 Nov 2023 22:12:55 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5206206610678646638==" --===============5206206610678646638== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Jim Hall will be doing a livestream on VCF's YouTube channel: https://youtube.com/live/FpBnRk8oWLc We don=E2=80=99t give much thought these days to what =E2=80=9CUnix=E2=80=9D = means. In 2023, most Unix systems are actually running some version of Linux, which includes modern tools and commands that were unthinkable when Unix hit the scene in the early 1970s. But some 50 years later, =E2=80=9CUnix=E2=80=9D still lives = on. Jim will look back on Unix history and experience first-hand what it was like to use the original Unix. Unix 3rd Edition debuted in 1973, and he chose that version as my target. That=E2=80=99s transporting back in time by = 50 years. He will talk about: * Terminal setup * FORTRAN66 program * nroff document * linenum program * For another example of using Linux like original Unix, read hist article on Sysadmin Signal: https://sysadminsignal.com/2023/06/19/run-linux-like-original-unix/ For more FreeDOS content, visit his website https://www.freedos.org/ Join hist project on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/groups/freedosproject/ Follow his project on Mastodon https://fosstodon.org/@freedosproject Thanks! Jeff Brace VCF National Board Member Chairman & Vice President Vintage Computer Festival East Showrunner VCF Mid-Atlantic Event Manager Vintage Computer Federation is a 501c3 charity https://vcfed.org/ jeffrey(a)vcfed.org --===============5206206610678646638==-- From ccth6600@gmail.com Tue Nov 7 01:34:34 2023 From: Tom Hunter To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] PDP 11/34 or 11/04 front panel question Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2023 09:33:50 +0800 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0183533264257297341==" --===============0183533264257297341== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit The PDP 11/34 and 11/04 front panels (both operator and programmer) use a somewhat stiff plastic sheet of 1.0 mm thickness with DEC logo, model designation, labels for the keys printed on it, cut-outs for the keypad and knob and red transparent sections for LEDs and 6 digit 7-segment display. I don't know what the industry calls this type of plastic sheet? Is it a "decal"??? This plastic sheet is (was) fixed to an anodized aluminium plate (1.6 mm thickness) using some type of glue which has deteriorated so that the plastic sheet has separated from the aluminium plate. The glue looks like it has been sprayed on and has a light yellowish-brown appearance. The glue readily dissolves in ethyl-alcohol and acetone, but is unaffected by water, petrol (gasoline) and dry cleaning fluid (white spirits). I would like to glue the plastic sheet back onto the aluminium plate, but worry about damaging the plastic sheet and/or paint by the solvents in typical glues. Also some glues don't allow any adjustment once you combine the two halves of whatever you glue together. What type of plastic is this plastic sheet likely made of (polycarbonate?) and what paint was used? I am asking to determine what solvent based glues may attack either the plastic sheet or the painted surfaces. The dark grey and transparent red paints are applied to the back side of the plastic sheet, so they are vulnerable to solvent attack when glueing. I tried ethyl-alcohol in one corner which is obscured by the cast metal surround and some of the dark gray colour came off with the alcohol and gentle rubbing. Has anyone successfully glued back the plastic sheet to the aluminium plate? If yes, what type of glue did you use and how exactly did you do the operation? Any suggestions, advice or tips? Thanks and best regards Tom Hunter --===============0183533264257297341==-- From tih@hamartun.priv.no Tue Nov 7 07:32:58 2023 From: Tom Ivar Helbekkmo To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP 11/34 or 11/04 front panel question Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2023 08:26:39 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5023508457410183859==" --===============5023508457410183859== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Tom Hunter via cctalk writes: > Any suggestions, advice or tips? Have you considered simply using double sided tape? -tih -- Most people who graduate with CS degrees don't understand the significance of Lisp. Lisp is the most important idea in computer science. --Alan Kay --===============5023508457410183859==-- From ccth6600@gmail.com Tue Nov 7 08:41:59 2023 From: Tom Hunter To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP 11/34 or 11/04 front panel question Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2023 16:41:40 +0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8782967060955022571==" --===============8782967060955022571== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Thanks for the suggestion Tom. I have thought about it, but it would have to be a very thin type of tape. Also very precise positioning of the plastic sheet onto the aluminium plate is required as once the tape sticks to the other half it won't allow for repositioning. Some form of solvent free glue which does not attack the paint would be better as you can reposition at least for a few seconds. On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 3:33 PM Tom Ivar Helbekkmo via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > Tom Hunter via cctalk writes: > > > Any suggestions, advice or tips? > > Have you considered simply using double sided tape? > > -tih > -- > Most people who graduate with CS degrees don't understand the significance > of Lisp. Lisp is the most important idea in computer science. --Alan Kay > --===============8782967060955022571==-- From doc@vaxen.net Tue Nov 7 09:06:56 2023 From: Doc Shipley To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP 11/34 or 11/04 front panel question Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2023 03:00:39 -0600 Message-ID: <179d38e4-7972-4b73-9eaa-9db9c779d1c5@vaxen.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8498328725588596110==" --===============8498328725588596110== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11/6/23 19:33, Tom Hunter via cctalk wrote: > > Has anyone successfully glued back the plastic sheet to the aluminium > plate? If yes, what type of glue did you use and how exactly did you do the > operation? > > Any suggestions, advice or tips? > > Thanks and best regards > Tom Hunter 3M markets several different types of double-sided adhesive sheets that can be positioned by applying the sheet to one part and then wetting the other part, usually with Windex. Once you've got the position correct you squeegee the liquid and any bubbles out to the edges. I couldn't say whether the adhesives would damage your plastic, but given that there's no curing involved I doubt there'd be any at all. If you're willing to endure some hold time 3M might even help you with that. Doc --===============8498328725588596110==-- From tommyeg@gmail.com Tue Nov 7 14:17:11 2023 From: Thomas G To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Announcement of VCFed warehouse closure & improvements Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2023 08:50:19 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1570868826414888034==" --===============1570868826414888034== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, After 18 years of acquiring artifacts, our warehouse is in need of reorganization, as well as major renovation work - climate control, roof repairs, etc. A total restructuring, inventorying, and refurbishment of the warehouse is planned to commence soon - some steps such as the installation of climate control have already been taken - however, planning this process is made difficult by the fact that a number of our members have their own personal belongings stored within, many without proper tagging or documentation as such. On January 1st, 2024, the VCF warehouse at Infoage will be closed for renovation and organization. During this time, no items will be permitted in or out of the warehouse bar those permitted *directly* by the VCF Warehouse manager - Thomas Gilinsky - during monthly repair workshops. As such, if you have any personal belongings stored within the warehouse, and would like to retrieve it, or have it tagged and set aside for you to collect later, please contact either me at thomas.gilinsky(a)vcfed.org, or Doug at douglas.crawford(a)vcfed.org. Please provide *verifiable* *proof* that the item you are describing is your possession. *ITEMS WHICH ARE NOT CLAIMED BY JANUARY 1ST, 2024 WILL BE ASSUMED TO BE THE POSSESSIONS OF VCF.* Donations to VCF will still be accepted during this time - we have other areas to store them while the warehouse is reorganized. Thanks, Thomas Gilinsky Vintage Computer Federation Warehouse Manager --===============1570868826414888034==-- From wdonzelli@gmail.com Tue Nov 7 14:43:12 2023 From: William Donzelli To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Announcement of VCFed warehouse closure & improvements Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2023 09:42:51 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1931735583249029826==" --===============1931735583249029826== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit How long do people with tagged items have beyond 1 January 2024 to claim their items? (clarifying, otherwise everyone will tag their items and the problem will not be solved!). -- Will On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 9:17 AM Thomas G via cctalk wrote: > > Hello, > > After 18 years of acquiring artifacts, our warehouse is in need of > reorganization, as well as major renovation work - climate control, roof > repairs, etc. A total restructuring, inventorying, and refurbishment of the > warehouse is planned to commence soon - some steps such as the installation > of climate control have already been taken - however, planning this process > is made difficult by the fact that a number of our members have their own > personal belongings stored within, many without proper tagging or > documentation as such. > > On January 1st, 2024, the VCF warehouse at Infoage will be closed for > renovation and organization. During this time, no items will be permitted > in or out of the warehouse bar those permitted *directly* by the VCF > Warehouse manager - Thomas Gilinsky - during monthly repair workshops. > > As such, if you have any personal belongings stored within the warehouse, > and would like to retrieve it, or have it tagged and set aside for you to > collect later, please contact either me at thomas.gilinsky(a)vcfed.org, or > Doug at douglas.crawford(a)vcfed.org. Please provide *verifiable* *proof* > that the item you are describing is your possession. > > *ITEMS WHICH ARE NOT CLAIMED BY JANUARY 1ST, 2024 WILL BE ASSUMED TO BE THE > POSSESSIONS OF VCF.* > Donations to VCF will still be accepted during this time - we have other > areas to store them while the warehouse is reorganized. > > Thanks, > Thomas Gilinsky > Vintage Computer Federation Warehouse Manager --===============1931735583249029826==-- From tommyeg@gmail.com Tue Nov 7 14:55:08 2023 From: Thomas G To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Announcement of VCFed warehouse closure & improvements Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2023 09:54:25 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2681540910374933737==" --===============2681540910374933737== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit If your item is tagged, it will be removed from the warehouse and stored in a secure area on-campus until you are able to collect it. I understand that the 2-3 weeks before the warehouse is closed will be hectic for most people given the holidays, so I do not expect everyone to come to collect, but I do implore everyone with possessions in the building to at least notify Doug or me so that we can tag & isolate it. I have heard of incidents in the past where people's personal property has been misidentified as warehouse surplus and disposed of - I want to avoid this more than anything else. Once the warehouse is closed, if there are still uncollected items, we will of course periodically nag people to come collect them. Another important thing to note to everyone - if you claim to own an item in the warehouse, and we later find that it either did not belong to you or had been *donated* to VCF, there will be trouble - not just for you, but for us. Please don't defraud museums! -Thomas Gilinsky On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 9:43 AM William Donzelli via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > How long do people with tagged items have beyond 1 January 2024 to > claim their items? > > (clarifying, otherwise everyone will tag their items and the problem > will not be solved!). > > -- > Will > > On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 9:17 AM Thomas G via cctalk > wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > After 18 years of acquiring artifacts, our warehouse is in need of > > reorganization, as well as major renovation work - climate control, roof > > repairs, etc. A total restructuring, inventorying, and refurbishment of > the > > warehouse is planned to commence soon - some steps such as the > installation > > of climate control have already been taken - however, planning this > process > > is made difficult by the fact that a number of our members have their own > > personal belongings stored within, many without proper tagging or > > documentation as such. > > > > On January 1st, 2024, the VCF warehouse at Infoage will be closed for > > renovation and organization. During this time, no items will be permitted > > in or out of the warehouse bar those permitted *directly* by the VCF > > Warehouse manager - Thomas Gilinsky - during monthly repair workshops. > > > > As such, if you have any personal belongings stored within the warehouse, > > and would like to retrieve it, or have it tagged and set aside for you to > > collect later, please contact either me at thomas.gilinsky(a)vcfed.org, or > > Doug at douglas.crawford(a)vcfed.org. Please provide *verifiable* *proof* > > that the item you are describing is your possession. > > > > *ITEMS WHICH ARE NOT CLAIMED BY JANUARY 1ST, 2024 WILL BE ASSUMED TO BE > THE > > POSSESSIONS OF VCF.* > > Donations to VCF will still be accepted during this time - we have other > > areas to store them while the warehouse is reorganized. > > > > Thanks, > > Thomas Gilinsky > > Vintage Computer Federation Warehouse Manager > --===============2681540910374933737==-- From pa0pkg@gmail.com Wed Nov 8 07:10:15 2023 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Installing DEC C on RSTS/E Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2023 20:49:03 -0500 Message-ID: <5534CA46-5DEE-4447-805B-3483CEACB30C@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7656217174217161706==" --===============7656217174217161706== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi... I'm seriously rusty on official RSTS installation procedures. I'm try= ing to install DEC C using the C_V1_2.tap file from the bitsavers bits/DEC/pd= p11/rsts directory. It's actually a TPC file, in spite of what the extension= suggests. Once I supply the correct format, SIMH recognizes it and RSTS can= see the tape contents. Then I try @[0,1]install c81. Point to the tape, answer the destination, and= then it asks me for the "library" tape and complains when I give it the C ta= pe again (labels don't match). So what is it looking for? Does anyone have the C installation procedure han= dy? paul --===============7656217174217161706==-- From pa0pkg@gmail.com Wed Nov 8 07:10:21 2023 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Installing DEC C on RSTS/E Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2023 21:05:14 -0500 Message-ID: <9A7FC3C7-3F7D-48FF-B94D-9F903CF81C3B@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5534CA46-5DEE-4447-805B-3483CEACB30C@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3690709461684721074==" --===============3690709461684721074== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On Nov 7, 2023, at 8:49 PM, Paul Koning wrote: >=20 > Hi... I'm seriously rusty on official RSTS installation procedures. I'm t= rying to install DEC C using the C_V1_2.tap file from the bitsavers bits/DEC/= pdp11/rsts directory. It's actually a TPC file, in spite of what the extensi= on suggests. Once I supply the correct format, SIMH recognizes it and RSTS c= an see the tape contents. >=20 > Then I try @[0,1]install c81. Point to the tape, answer the destination, a= nd then it asks me for the "library" tape and complains when I give it the C = tape again (labels don't match). >=20 > So what is it looking for? Does anyone have the C installation procedure h= andy? >=20 > paul Never mind... (a) C81 is COBOL (!!) not C. And I found the C installation ma= nual on STUPI. Off & running now. paul --===============3690709461684721074==-- From leec2124@gmail.com Wed Nov 8 15:51:14 2023 From: Lee Courtney To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Installing DEC C on RSTS/E Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2023 07:50:31 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <9A7FC3C7-3F7D-48FF-B94D-9F903CF81C3B@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2879838089349941986==" --===============2879838089349941986== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Not related to the original question, but what is "STUPI?" TIA! Lee C. On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 11:10 PM Paul Koning via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > On Nov 7, 2023, at 8:49 PM, Paul Koning wrote: > > > > Hi... I'm seriously rusty on official RSTS installation procedures. > I'm trying to install DEC C using the C_V1_2.tap file from the bitsavers > bits/DEC/pdp11/rsts directory. It's actually a TPC file, in spite of what > the extension suggests. Once I supply the correct format, SIMH recognizes > it and RSTS can see the tape contents. > > > > Then I try @[0,1]install c81. Point to the tape, answer the > destination, and then it asks me for the "library" tape and complains when > I give it the C tape again (labels don't match). > > > > So what is it looking for? Does anyone have the C installation > procedure handy? > > > > paul > > Never mind... (a) C81 is COBOL (!!) not C. And I found the C installation > manual on STUPI. Off & running now. > > paul > > -- Lee Courtney +1-650-704-3934 cell --===============2879838089349941986==-- From bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca Wed Nov 8 19:04:17 2023 From: ben To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Installing DEC C on RSTS/E Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2023 11:54:44 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <9A7FC3C7-3F7D-48FF-B94D-9F903CF81C3B@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5123642185788569759==" --===============5123642185788569759== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2023-11-07 7:05 p.m., Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: >=20 >=20 >> On Nov 7, 2023, at 8:49 PM, Paul Koning wrote: >> >> Hi... I'm seriously rusty on official RSTS installation procedures. I'm = trying to install DEC C using the C_V1_2.tap file from the bitsavers bits/DEC= /pdp11/rsts directory. It's actually a TPC file, in spite of what the extens= ion suggests. Once I supply the correct format, SIMH recognizes it and RSTS = can see the tape contents. >> >> Then I try @[0,1]install c81. Point to the tape, answer the destination, = and then it asks me for the "library" tape and complains when I give it the C= tape again (labels don't match). >> >> So what is it looking for? Does anyone have the C installation procedure = handy? >> >> paul >=20 > Never mind... (a) C81 is COBOL (!!) not C. And I found the C installation = manual on STUPI. Off & running now. >=20 > paul >=20 Come one, don't hide you are a CLOSET COBOL PROGRAMMER. Will COBOL (C81) run on a regular 11, or does it need to be upgraded? --===============5123642185788569759==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Wed Nov 8 19:15:41 2023 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Installing DEC C on RSTS/E Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2023 14:07:24 -0500 Message-ID: <5543BFD0-7500-41F6-93C1-02EDE0672E44@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1619485213102434835==" --===============1619485213102434835== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On Nov 8, 2023, at 1:54 PM, ben via cctalk wrote: >=20 > On 2023-11-07 7:05 p.m., Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: >>> On Nov 7, 2023, at 8:49 PM, Paul Koning wrote: >>>=20 >>> Hi... I'm seriously rusty on official RSTS installation procedures. I'm= trying to install DEC C using the C_V1_2.tap file from the bitsavers bits/DE= C/pdp11/rsts directory. It's actually a TPC file, in spite of what the exten= sion suggests. Once I supply the correct format, SIMH recognizes it and RSTS= can see the tape contents. >>>=20 >>> Then I try @[0,1]install c81. Point to the tape, answer the destination,= and then it asks me for the "library" tape and complains when I give it the = C tape again (labels don't match). >>>=20 >>> So what is it looking for? Does anyone have the C installation procedure= handy? >>>=20 >>> paul >> Never mind... (a) C81 is COBOL (!!) not C. And I found the C installation= manual on STUPI. Off & running now. >> paul > Come one, don't hide you are a CLOSET COBOL PROGRAMMER. Not me, but my younger sister is an expert (RPG also). She observed that "CO= BOL is the programming language that gives you writer's cramp". > Will COBOL (C81) run on a regular 11, or does it need to be upgraded? I don't remember. Possibly it can use CIS if present but I don't think it re= quires that. paul --===============1619485213102434835==-- From jeffrey@vcfed.org Thu Nov 9 04:18:00 2023 From: Jeffrey Brace To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Livestream VCF Chat Sat. Nov. 11 at 6:30PM EST Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2023 23:17:37 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0420605772298380216==" --===============0420605772298380216== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Join us live for VCF chat hosted by Jeff Brace with guests: Liza Loop, Cynthia Solomon, Brian Silverman and Margaret Morabito. https://youtube.com/live/WfsWVtey5Vk?feature=3Dshare Streaming live on VCF's YouTube channel. We will talk about educational technology with vintage computers. --===============0420605772298380216==-- From pa0pkg@gmail.com Thu Nov 9 16:02:42 2023 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Installing DEC C on RSTS/E Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2023 15:55:02 +0000 Message-ID: <57DB7DBE-A3C9-4A19-A1C9-785ABCD2CA28@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5795467825193724364==" --===============5795467825193724364== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Short for mim.stupi.net -- Johnny's web server where = I found an assortment of RSX manuals, including a whole bunch of layered prod= uct manuals that carry over to other PDP-11 operating systems as well. A lot= of them don't seem to be on Bitsavers. Among them are installation manuals = for things like DEC C, APL, and Datatrieve. So now I have DEC C installed, and it works. Its generated code is surprisin= gly bad, though. Loading a sequence of structure fields by loading the base = address into a register once for each assignment is a rather obvious bad idea= . So while GCC is not exactly stellar on PDP-11 (or VAX) code generation, it= does better than that. paul > On Nov 8, 2023, at 10:50 AM, Lee Courtney via cctalk wrote: >=20 > Not related to the original question, but what is "STUPI?" >=20 > TIA! >=20 > Lee C. >=20 > On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 11:10=E2=80=AFPM Paul Koning via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: >=20 >>=20 >>=20 >>> On Nov 7, 2023, at 8:49 PM, Paul Koning wrote: >>>=20 >>> Hi... I'm seriously rusty on official RSTS installation procedures. >> I'm trying to install DEC C using the C_V1_2.tap file from the bitsavers >> bits/DEC/pdp11/rsts directory. It's actually a TPC file, in spite of what >> the extension suggests. Once I supply the correct format, SIMH recognizes >> it and RSTS can see the tape contents. >>>=20 >>> Then I try @[0,1]install c81. Point to the tape, answer the >> destination, and then it asks me for the "library" tape and complains when >> I give it the C tape again (labels don't match). >>>=20 >>> So what is it looking for? Does anyone have the C installation >> procedure handy? >>>=20 >>> paul >>=20 >> Never mind... (a) C81 is COBOL (!!) not C. And I found the C installation >> manual on STUPI. Off & running now. >>=20 >> paul >>=20 >>=20 >=20 > --=20 > Lee Courtney > +1-650-704-3934 cell --===============5795467825193724364==-- From adambillyard@googlemail.com Thu Nov 9 17:44:06 2023 From: adambillyard@googlemail.com To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Tektronix 4404 Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2023 17:43:59 +0000 Message-ID: <169955183913.4006402.17810631143917289881@classiccmp.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3458880135117542607==" --===============3458880135117542607== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi everyone, =20 I've been restoring a couple of Tektronix 4404 here in the UK. (68010, 2M RA= M / 8MB virtual, 1024x1024 display, C & Smalltalk-80, runs on Uniflex) Having got past the physical restoration and using David Gesswein MFM board i= n place of the Micropolis HD, I've been diving into writing software. Its been a fun - if sometimes frustrating - project. There are no docs beyo= nd some vanilla CRT + (incorrect) graphics calls. In particular nothing on the network stack.. (Figured out executable file format) and wrote a Uniflex to ELF file format c= onverter so I can load stuff into Ghidra to analyze. =20 Code here: https://github.com/Elektraglide/tek4404=20 I've managed to write a DHCP client and telnetd and port uemacs and have a (k= inda) working window system written from scratch in C.=20 Pic here:=20 https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:1280/format:webp/1*a8PNwQ9g_3S27AxlWSJ= Jlw.png All the networking seems to revolve around calls to ldiddle() and wdiddle() = (no kidding!) These read and write kernel values in the absence of ioctl() Anyone here recall Network Research Consultant's network stack? There appears to be no way of making a broadcast socket. =20 And of course I would love to hear from anyone who also has a Tektronix 4404 --===============3458880135117542607==-- From shumaker@att.net Wed Nov 15 00:12:33 2023 From: steve shumaker To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Need a SCSI 1/2' tape drive Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2023 16:12:13 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5236808656547352071==" --===============5236808656547352071== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Greetings all..  I'm looking for a Qualstar 1260S 1/2" tape system to review/recover data from a stack of early Landsat tapes that I came into a while back.  I'd prefer  the Qualstar SCSI system for familiarity but basically I'm looking for a SCSI unit that can read 6250 GCR tapes.  I'd prefer west coast area to avoid shipping but given their (lack of) availability I'm open to talking with anyone who might be willing deal with it. Steve --===============5236808656547352071==-- From cclist@sydex.com Wed Nov 15 00:42:46 2023 From: Chuck Guzis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Need a SCSI 1/2' tape drive Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2023 16:34:36 -0800 Message-ID: <441b7890-5dcd-44b5-8bc1-df8febbf797a@sydex.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0401639026155006226==" --===============0401639026155006226== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 11/14/23 16:12, steve shumaker via cctalk wrote: > Greetings all..  I'm looking for a Qualstar 1260S 1/2" tape system to > review/recover data from a stack of early Landsat tapes that I came into > a while back.  I'd prefer  the Qualstar SCSI system for familiarity but > basically I'm looking for a SCSI unit that can read 6250 GCR tapes.  I'd > prefer west coast area to avoid shipping but given their (lack of) > availability I'm open to talking with anyone who might be willing deal > with it. Steve, I've got a 1260S and it does a pretty poor job at reading 6250 GCR. It slows the tape down for the higher density and just doesn't make enough signal to be reliable. You probably want to consider other brands. Most of my 6250 work is done on a Fujitsu X2444 drive, but it's Pertec, not SCSI. But there are lots of other drives with 6250 capability. FWIW, Chuck --===============0401639026155006226==-- From van.snyder@sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 15 01:11:22 2023 From: Van Snyder To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Need a SCSI 1/2' tape drive Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2023 17:11:09 -0800 Message-ID: <532515b399ed7fd5fd24218ad145ce9ebad5e9a6.camel@sbcglobal.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8014681013248249407==" --===============8014681013248249407== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 2023-11-14 at 16:12 -0800, steve shumaker via cctalk wrote: > Greetings all.. I'm looking for a Qualstar 1260S 1/2" tape system to > review/recover data from a stack of early Landsat tapes that I came into > a while back. I'd prefer the Qualstar SCSI system for familiarity but > basically I'm looking for a SCSI unit that can read 6250 GCR tapes. I'd > prefer west coast area to avoid shipping but given their (lack of) > availability I'm open to talking with anyone who might be willing deal > with it. > > Steve Paul Pierce in Portland OR read some tapes for me. http://www.piercefuller.com/collect/general.html --===============8014681013248249407==-- From shumaker@att.net Wed Nov 15 02:06:21 2023 From: steve shumaker To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Need a SCSI 1/2' tape drive Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2023 18:06:05 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <441b7890-5dcd-44b5-8bc1-df8febbf797a@sydex.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2317684482511061591==" --===============2317684482511061591== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I've heard that elsewhere.  Basically at this point, I'm open to whatever hardware I can dig up. Even a Pertec based unit would work if it came with an interface card.  (I'm just partial to SCSI as that's where I've mostly worked)  Thanks for the comment though - I'd forgotten about that specific point.  The crazy thing about all this is that the large crate of tapes came with a Qualstar 1054 that they were adamant about being the unit used with them.   As soon as I saw the labels on the gov't tapes, it was obvious that I had an issue  lol.  (The1054 worked without a hitch on the first try with a blank tape so I have a nice little 3200 tape system and a big grate of tapes it can't read...) On 11/14/23 4:34 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: > On 11/14/23 16:12, steve shumaker via cctalk wrote: >> Greetings all..  I'm looking for a Qualstar 1260S 1/2" tape system to >> review/recover data from a stack of early Landsat tapes that I came into >> a while back.  I'd prefer  the Qualstar SCSI system for familiarity but >> basically I'm looking for a SCSI unit that can read 6250 GCR tapes.  I'd >> prefer west coast area to avoid shipping but given their (lack of) >> availability I'm open to talking with anyone who might be willing deal >> with it. > Steve, I've got a 1260S and it does a pretty poor job at reading 6250 > GCR. It slows the tape down for the higher density and just doesn't > make enough signal to be reliable. > > You probably want to consider other brands. > > Most of my 6250 work is done on a Fujitsu X2444 drive, but it's Pertec, > not SCSI. But there are lots of other drives with 6250 capability. > > FWIW, > Chuck > --===============2317684482511061591==-- From shumaker@att.net Wed Nov 15 02:07:34 2023 From: steve shumaker To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Need a SCSI 1/2' tape drive Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2023 18:07:27 -0800 Message-ID: <802dcfe1-6b06-43af-96fe-76df157645f2@att.net> In-Reply-To: <532515b399ed7fd5fd24218ad145ce9ebad5e9a6.camel@sbcglobal.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0290099525776695803==" --===============0290099525776695803== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Thanks for the suggestion!  If I can't find a solution, I may reach out to him. On 11/14/23 5:11 PM, Van Snyder via cctalk wrote: > On Tue, 2023-11-14 at 16:12 -0800, steve shumaker via cctalk wrote: >> Greetings all.. I'm looking for a Qualstar 1260S 1/2" tape system to >> review/recover data from a stack of early Landsat tapes that I came into >> a while back. I'd prefer the Qualstar SCSI system for familiarity but >> basically I'm looking for a SCSI unit that can read 6250 GCR tapes. I'd >> prefer west coast area to avoid shipping but given their (lack of) >> availability I'm open to talking with anyone who might be willing deal >> with it. >> >> Steve > Paul Pierce in Portland OR read some tapes for me. > http://www.piercefuller.com/collect/general.html > --===============0290099525776695803==-- From elson@pico-systems.com Wed Nov 15 15:11:03 2023 From: Jon Elson To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Need a SCSI 1/2' tape drive Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2023 09:10:56 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <441b7890-5dcd-44b5-8bc1-df8febbf797a@sydex.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0463436398156994350==" --===============0463436398156994350== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 11/14/23 18:34, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: > On 11/14/23 16:12, steve shumaker via cctalk wrote: >> Greetings all..  I'm looking for a Qualstar 1260S 1/2" tape system to >> review/recover data from a stack of early Landsat tapes that I came into >> a while back.  I'd prefer  the Qualstar SCSI system for familiarity but >> basically I'm looking for a SCSI unit that can read 6250 GCR tapes.  I'd >> prefer west coast area to avoid shipping but given their (lack of) >> availability I'm open to talking with anyone who might be willing deal >> with it. > Steve, I've got a 1260S and it does a pretty poor job at reading 6250 > GCR. It slows the tape down for the higher density and just doesn't > make enough signal to be reliable. > > You probably want to consider other brands. > > Most of my 6250 work is done on a Fujitsu X2444 drive, but it's Pertec, > not SCSI. But there are lots of other drives with 6250 capability. > The CDC Keystone 92185 could handle 6250 at full speed, and was very reliable.  There was a SCSI version available, but the ones I had were Pertec formatted. Jon --===============0463436398156994350==-- From dave.g4ugm@gmail.com Thu Nov 16 10:24:28 2023 From: dave.g4ugm@gmail.com To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Free to good home HP 7510a Photo Plotter - UK Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2023 10:24:22 +0000 Message-ID: <0ae201da1877$114c7850$33e568f0$@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7120293210760676878==" --===============7120293210760676878== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Folks, Trying to reduce the weight in my loft and I would like to donate my HP Photoplotter to a good home. . Photos of the plotter and some sample plots are on my OneDrive here:- https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ag4BJfE5B3ongspXY7zySSZsDj-WMg It has both serial and IEEE interfaces and uses HPGL like the GP and Roland pen plotters. The plots on there are the samples built into the plotter taken on a Fuji XE-1 digital camera and are cropped because the Fuji does not have a full frame sensor. The tube is actually a white tube and the colours are generated by rotating colour filters. Its powered by a 68000 and you can see the various boards in the pictures. Dave --===============7120293210760676878==-- From anders.k.nelson@gmail.com Thu Nov 16 16:49:03 2023 From: Anders Nelson To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Free to good home HP 7510a Photo Plotter - UK Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2023 11:48:43 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <0ae201da1877$114c7850$33e568f0$@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6748421652551526869==" --===============6748421652551526869== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit What an interesting device, I've never heard of such a thing. How does it realize full-spectrum color if it uses primary color wheels? Maybe by varying exposure time of each color? -- Anders Nelson www.andersknelson.com On Thu, Nov 16, 2023 at 5:24 AM Dave Wade G4UGM via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > Folks, > > > > Trying to reduce the weight in my loft and I would like to donate my HP > Photoplotter to a good home. > > . Photos of the plotter and some sample plots are on my OneDrive here:- > > > > https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ag4BJfE5B3ongspXY7zySSZsDj-WMg > > > > It has both serial and IEEE interfaces and uses HPGL like the GP and Roland > pen plotters. > > The plots on there are the samples built into the plotter taken on a Fuji > XE-1 digital camera and are cropped because the Fuji does not have a full > frame sensor. > > The tube is actually a white tube and the colours are generated by rotating > colour filters. > > Its powered by a 68000 and you can see the various boards in the pictures. > > > > Dave > > > > > > --===============6748421652551526869==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Thu Nov 16 17:23:58 2023 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Free to good home HP 7510a Photo Plotter - UK Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2023 12:23:51 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8001514975021912986==" --===============8001514975021912986== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On Nov 16, 2023, at 11:48 AM, Anders Nelson via cctalk wrote: >=20 > What an interesting device, I've never heard of such a thing. I haven't either, but when I saw the sample output it rang a bell. At DEC, i= n the 1970s, we would prepare presentation material for customer talks such a= s DECUS sessions by sending manuscripts to a nearby company named "Genigraphi= cs" which would send back images looking much like the samples, on 35 mm slid= es. We'd put those in a projector and use them with the talk. This was long= before Powerpoint or PC projectors. paul --===============8001514975021912986==-- From jrr@flippers.com Thu Nov 16 17:25:18 2023 From: John Robertson To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Free to good home HP 7510a Photo Plotter - UK Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2023 09:17:10 -0800 Message-ID: <6d57e7b5-2302-4d4f-ac56-942b3132dd42@flippers.com> In-Reply-To: <0ae201da1877$114c7850$33e568f0$@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1635993920982156503==" --===============1635993920982156503== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Location? On 2023/11/16 2:24 a.m., Dave Wade G4UGM via cctalk wrote: > Folks, > > > > Trying to reduce the weight in my loft and I would like to donate my HP > Photoplotter to a good home. > > . Photos of the plotter and some sample plots are on my OneDrive here:- > > > > https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ag4BJfE5B3ongspXY7zySSZsDj-WMg > > > > It has both serial and IEEE interfaces and uses HPGL like the GP and Roland > pen plotters. > > The plots on there are the samples built into the plotter taken on a Fuji > XE-1 digital camera and are cropped because the Fuji does not have a full > frame sensor. > > The tube is actually a white tube and the colours are generated by rotating > colour filters. > > Its powered by a 68000 and you can see the various boards in the pictures. > > > > Dave > > > > > -- John's Jukes Ltd. 7 - 3979 Marine Way, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5J 5E3 Call (604)872-5757 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games) flippers.com "Old pinballers never die, they just flip out" --===============1635993920982156503==-- From dave.g4ugm@gmail.com Thu Nov 16 17:34:54 2023 From: dave.g4ugm@gmail.com To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Free to good home HP 7510a Photo Plotter - UK Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2023 17:34:49 +0000 Message-ID: <10a201da18b3$333bca60$99b35f20$@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <6d57e7b5-2302-4d4f-ac56-942b3132dd42@flippers.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0731395016454114939==" --===============0731395016454114939== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > -----Original Message----- > From: John Robertson via cctalk > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2023 5:17 PM > To: Dave Wade G4UGM via cctalk > Cc: John Robertson > Subject: [cctalk] Re: Free to good home HP 7510a Photo Plotter - UK >=20 > Location? Like it says in the subject, "UK", so Altrincham, Greater Manchester... Dave >=20 > On 2023/11/16 2:24 a.m., Dave Wade G4UGM via cctalk wrote: > > Folks, > > > > > > > > Trying to reduce the weight in my loft and I would like to donate my > > HP Photoplotter to a good home. > > > > . Photos of the plotter and some sample plots are on my OneDrive > > here:- > > > > > > > > https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ag4BJfE5B3ongspXY7zySSZsDj-WMg > > > > > > > > It has both serial and IEEE interfaces and uses HPGL like the GP and > > Roland pen plotters. > > > > The plots on there are the samples built into the plotter taken on a > > Fuji > > XE-1 digital camera and are cropped because the Fuji does not have a > > full frame sensor. > > > > The tube is actually a white tube and the colours are generated by > > rotating colour filters. > > > > Its powered by a 68000 and you can see the various boards in the pictures. > > > > > > > > Dave > > > > > > > > > > >=20 > -- > John's Jukes Ltd. > 7 - 3979 Marine Way, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5J 5E3 Call (604)872-5757 (Pinbal= ls, > Jukes, Video Games) > flippers.com > "Old pinballers never die, they just flip out" --===============0731395016454114939==-- From dave.g4ugm@gmail.com Thu Nov 16 18:27:54 2023 From: dave.g4ugm@gmail.com To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Free to good home HP 7510a Photo Plotter - UK Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2023 18:27:48 +0000 Message-ID: <10f801da18ba$99efbc60$cdcf3520$@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3358149129001034317==" --===============3358149129001034317== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >From: Anders Nelson =20 >Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2023 4:49 PM >To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts >Cc: dave.g4ugm(a)gmail.com >Subject: Re: [cctalk] Free to good home HP 7510a Photo Plotter - UK > >What an interesting device, I've never heard of such a thing. > >How does it realize full-spectrum color if it uses primary color wheels? May= be by varying exposure time of each color? Well that=E2=80=99s what it says in the manual, but sure how it achieves this= . The samples were taken by opening the shutter, running the demo and then cl= osing the shutter but as you can see the sample palette comes out fine. I don't know if it varies the brightness or the plot speed....=20 >-- >Anders Nelson >http://www.andersknelson.com/ Dave --===============3358149129001034317==-- From dave.g4ugm@gmail.com Thu Nov 16 22:27:38 2023 From: dave.g4ugm@gmail.com To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Free to good home HP 7510a Photo Plotter - UK Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2023 22:26:45 +0000 Message-ID: <00ef01da18dc$06fe45d0$14fad170$@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <3.0.6.32.20231117085353.011bcf78@mail.optusnet.com.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4396384783142807397==" --===============4396384783142807397== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > -----Original Message----- > From: Guy Dunphy > Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2023 9:54 PM > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > Subject: Re: [cctalk] Free to good home HP 7510a Photo Plotter - UK > > Hi Dave, > > I'm very interested, and happy to pay for packing and airfreight to Australia. Also had one other query. I will now keep things private... > Also something for the unit. Do you happen to have originals of the manuals, or > just the digital ones you've posted? I don't think I have any paper manuals. > > Do you have a 'pack and ship' company nearby, who could do a safe packing > using foam-in-place, or soft foam block padding, then send by airfreight to > Sydney Australia? > I should have said the plotter came to me from France packed in expanded foam. I think I may still have the packing.. I will check and report back... > I'm fully aware of the costs, having recently had a HP 7586B pedestal plotter > sent from San Francisco in a big wooden crate (vial PCL sea freight) and a 20' > shipping container full of thousands of service manuals arriving by sea form the > USA in a few days. OK I have shipped an IBM 3174 screen controller to Europe, and a E-Prom programmer to the USA so I may also be reasonably experienced... > > If you'll pass the photo plotter on to me, please reply via private email. Ok let me talk privately... > > Kind regards, > Guy > Dave > At 10:24 AM 16/11/2023 -0000, you wrote: > >Folks, > > > > > > > >Trying to reduce the weight in my loft and I would like to donate my HP > >Photoplotter to a good home. > > > >. Photos of the plotter and some sample plots are on my OneDrive here:- > > > > > > > >https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ag4BJfE5B3ongspXY7zySSZsDj-WMg > > > > > > > >It has both serial and IEEE interfaces and uses HPGL like the GP and > >Roland pen plotters. > > > >The plots on there are the samples built into the plotter taken on a > >Fuji > >XE-1 digital camera and are cropped because the Fuji does not have a > >full frame sensor. > > > >The tube is actually a white tube and the colours are generated by > >rotating colour filters. > > > >Its powered by a 68000 and you can see the various boards in the pictures. > > > > > > > >Dave > > > > > > > > > > > > --===============4396384783142807397==-- From bobalan@sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 17 06:18:54 2023 From: Bob Rosenbloom To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] PDP-8/E front panels Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2023 12:53:03 -0800 Message-ID: <95a6dc51-3c8c-4c74-951a-33fc3b4448af@sbcglobal.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6056019755982933726==" --===============6056019755982933726== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Do you have any more of the DEC PDP-8 e/m/f front panels? I'm looking for one that matches the layout attached. I don't care what model (e/m/f etc.) it's for, but the rotary switch layout needs to be right and I prefer the matte finish. Color is not important either I have orange, green, and blue switch boards. Thanks, Bob -- Vintage computers and electronics www.dvq.com www.tekmuseum.com www.decmuseum.org --===============6056019755982933726==-- From andrew@carrierdetect.com Fri Nov 17 12:18:37 2023 From: Andrew Back To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Free to good home HP 7510a Photo Plotter - UK Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 12:12:26 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <0ae201da1877$114c7850$33e568f0$@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5344650385789167950==" --===============5344650385789167950== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Dave, Did this go? If not, I'd be interested. I'm located in Hebden Bridge, so could drive over to collect. Best, Andrew On 16/11/2023 10:24, Dave Wade G4UGM via cctalk wrote: > Folks, > > > > Trying to reduce the weight in my loft and I would like to donate my HP > Photoplotter to a good home. > > . Photos of the plotter and some sample plots are on my OneDrive here:- > > > > https://1drv.ms/f/s!Ag4BJfE5B3ongspXY7zySSZsDj-WMg > > > > It has both serial and IEEE interfaces and uses HPGL like the GP and Roland > pen plotters. > > The plots on there are the samples built into the plotter taken on a Fuji > XE-1 digital camera and are cropped because the Fuji does not have a full > frame sensor. > > The tube is actually a white tube and the colours are generated by rotating > colour filters. > > Its powered by a 68000 and you can see the various boards in the pictures. > > > > Dave > > > > > --===============5344650385789167950==-- From ccth6600@gmail.com Fri Nov 17 13:52:17 2023 From: Tom Hunter To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-8/E front panels Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 21:52:01 +0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <95a6dc51-3c8c-4c74-951a-33fc3b4448af@sbcglobal.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7460730862571870191==" --===============7460730862571870191== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Bob, I can't help with your search for 8/e front panels, but you mentioned "green switch boards". I have a nicely restored DEC LAB-8/e with green switch toggles. Do you have spare green switch toggles? I would love to have one dark green and one light green toggle. I don't need the actual switch, but would be happy to take the toggles with switch. Please let me know if you can help. Tanks and best regards Tom Hunter On Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 2:18 PM Bob Rosenbloom via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > Do you have any more of the DEC PDP-8 e/m/f front panels? > > I'm looking for one that matches the layout attached. I don't care what > model (e/m/f etc.) it's for, but the rotary switch layout needs to be > right and I prefer the matte finish. Color is not important either I > have orange, green, and blue switch boards. > > Thanks, > > Bob > > -- > Vintage computers and electronics > www.dvq.com > www.tekmuseum.com > www.decmuseum.org > --===============7460730862571870191==-- From bill.gunshannon@hotmail.com Fri Nov 17 14:14:37 2023 From: Bill Gunshannon To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-8/E front panels Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 09:14:18 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6487362783872047045==" --===============6487362783872047045== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11/17/2023 8:52 AM, Tom Hunter via cctalk wrote: > Hi Bob, > I can't help with your search for 8/e front panels, but you mentioned > "green switch boards". I have a nicely restored DEC LAB-8/e with green > switch toggles. Do you have spare green switch toggles? I would love to > have one dark green and one light green toggle. I don't need the actual > switch, but would be happy to take the toggles with switch. Please let me > know if you can help. > Have you ever considered making your own? https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:360853 bill --===============6487362783872047045==-- From ccth6600@gmail.com Fri Nov 17 16:16:14 2023 From: Tom Hunter To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-8/E front panels Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2023 00:15:58 +0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CDM6PR06MB55809F4A91682547E56FB299EDB7A=40DM6PR06MB?= =?utf-8?q?5580=2Enamprd06=2Eprod=2Eoutlook=2Ecom=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5429090854368489760==" --===============5429090854368489760== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I had some toggles printed for me professionally, but they are inferior to the originals and the colours don't match. If anyone has spare DEC LAB-8/e switches please let me know. Thanks Tom On Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 10:14 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > On 11/17/2023 8:52 AM, Tom Hunter via cctalk wrote: > > Hi Bob, > > I can't help with your search for 8/e front panels, but you mentioned > > "green switch boards". I have a nicely restored DEC LAB-8/e with green > > switch toggles. Do you have spare green switch toggles? I would love to > > have one dark green and one light green toggle. I don't need the actual > > switch, but would be happy to take the toggles with switch. Please let me > > know if you can help. > > > > Have you ever considered making your own? > > https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:360853 > > > bill > --===============5429090854368489760==-- From bobalan@sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 17 17:24:00 2023 From: Bob Rosenbloom To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-8/E front panels Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 09:23:48 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <95a6dc51-3c8c-4c74-951a-33fc3b4448af@sbcglobal.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5158502680410836308==" --===============5158502680410836308== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11/16/2023 12:53 PM, Bob Rosenbloom via cctalk wrote: > Do you have any more of the DEC PDP-8 e/m/f front panels? > > I'm looking for one that matches the layout attached. I don't care > what model (e/m/f etc.) it's for, but the rotary switch layout needs > to be right and I prefer the matte finish. Color is not important > either I have orange, green, and blue switch boards. > > Thanks, > > Bob > Whoops, this should have been a private message to Rod. Too quick with the mouse... What I'm looking for is the plastic panel for the bezel. I have the switch PCB with switches (at least most of them). I have played with 3D printing switches. They work, but colors are way off. Someday I'm going to play with an SLA printer. There are dye sets (such as the Monocure CMYK) set) that should allow pretty close matching to the original colors. The switches will also come out smoother. Bob -- Vintage computers and electronics www.dvq.com www.tekmuseum.com www.decmuseum.org --===============5158502680410836308==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Fri Nov 17 18:15:42 2023 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Address wrapping in PDP-11 MMU Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 13:15:32 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4418893835235665415==" --===============4418893835235665415== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'm working on some code where it would be handy to map the top of the I/O pa= ge along with the bottom of physical memory. An obvious hack is to point the= APR to the I/O page address needed, then set the length so that the address = modulo 2^22 also covers the low memory range. It seems from the architecture manual that this would work, and SIMH seems to= do this (since it adds VA and PAR then masks with a 22 bit mask). Would thi= s work on real hardware? paul --===============4418893835235665415==-- From mjd.bishop@emeritus-solutions.com Fri Nov 17 19:25:00 2023 From: Martin Bishop To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Address wrapping in PDP-11 MMU Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 19:24:46 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5615727506821169970==" --===============5615727506821169970== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable EK-DCJ11-UG-Pre DCJ11 Microprocessor User's Guide says it will abort [the fir= st processor guide on the shelf] $4.5.2.2 (p4-7) Page Length Field ... "The block number of the virtual addres= s is compared against the page length field to detect length errors" ... $4.7.1 MMR0 <14> Abort Page Length Error $4.7.1.1.2 Abort -- Page Length=20 When descriptors exist as they do in the PAR / PDR pair it is usual to police= them. A QL at the manual indicates no exception behaviour for kernel mode o= r an override. The behaviour may be model dependent, but if MMR0<14> is populated I should e= xpect an abort -- you could code the abort ISR for desired behaviour and retu= rn It would be easier to build hardware without the checking, but harder to debu= g the system. Martin -----Original Message----- From: Paul Koning via cctalk [mailto:cctalk(a)classiccmp.org]=20 Sent: 17 November 2023 18:16 To: cctalk(a)classiccmp.org Cc: Paul Koning Subject: [cctalk] Address wrapping in PDP-11 MMU I'm working on some code where it would be handy to map the top of the I/O pa= ge along with the bottom of physical memory. An obvious hack is to point the= APR to the I/O page address needed, then set the length so that the address = modulo 2^22 also covers the low memory range. It seems from the architecture manual that this would work, and SIMH seems to= do this (since it adds VA and PAR then masks with a 22 bit mask). Would thi= s work on real hardware? paul --===============5615727506821169970==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Fri Nov 17 20:52:32 2023 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Address wrapping in PDP-11 MMU Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 15:51:58 -0500 Message-ID: <4C831CEF-6E76-446E-9099-92F71738E48B@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7523871009719475981==" --===============7523871009719475981== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ok, but I think that's not what I meant. Suppose I have APR6 =3D 177777 and length > 1. That means VA 140076 maps to = physical address 17777776, and VA 140100 maps to physical addres 20000000 whi= ch when masked with 22 bits would end up at 0. The offset within the page is= <=3D the page length. Meanwhile, I discovered that RSTS actually rejects attempts to map things thi= s way. :-( paul > On Nov 17, 2023, at 2:24 PM, Martin Bishop wrote: >=20 > EK-DCJ11-UG-Pre DCJ11 Microprocessor User's Guide says it will abort [the f= irst processor guide on the shelf] >=20 > $4.5.2.2 (p4-7) Page Length Field ... "The block number of the virtual addr= ess is compared against the page length field to detect length errors" ... >=20 > $4.7.1 MMR0 <14> Abort Page Length Error >=20 > $4.7.1.1.2 Abort -- Page Length=20 >=20 > When descriptors exist as they do in the PAR / PDR pair it is usual to poli= ce them. A QL at the manual indicates no exception behaviour for kernel mode= or an override. >=20 > The behaviour may be model dependent, but if MMR0<14> is populated I should= expect an abort -- you could code the abort ISR for desired behaviour and re= turn >=20 > It would be easier to build hardware without the checking, but harder to de= bug the system. >=20 > Martin >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Koning via cctalk [mailto:cctalk(a)classiccmp.org]=20 > Sent: 17 November 2023 18:16 > To: cctalk(a)classiccmp.org > Cc: Paul Koning > Subject: [cctalk] Address wrapping in PDP-11 MMU >=20 > I'm working on some code where it would be handy to map the top of the I/O = page along with the bottom of physical memory. An obvious hack is to point t= he APR to the I/O page address needed, then set the length so that the addres= s modulo 2^22 also covers the low memory range. >=20 > It seems from the architecture manual that this would work, and SIMH seems = to do this (since it adds VA and PAR then masks with a 22 bit mask). Would t= his work on real hardware? >=20 > paul >=20 --===============7523871009719475981==-- From mjd.bishop@emeritus-solutions.com Fri Nov 17 21:06:57 2023 From: Martin Bishop To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Address wrapping in PDP-11 MMU Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 21:05:42 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4C831CEF-6E76-446E-9099-92F71738E48B@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0124377687728849119==" --===============0124377687728849119== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable OK, a faux descriptor would work round the documented checks which are on blo= ck number rather than EA - there is a hardware overide I'm delighted to hear that RSTS won't play along and set up for EA overflow Martin -----Original Message----- From: Paul Koning [mailto:paulkoning(a)comcast.net]=20 Sent: 17 November 2023 20:52 To: Martin Bishop Cc: cctalk(a)classiccmp.org Subject: Re: [cctalk] Address wrapping in PDP-11 MMU Ok, but I think that's not what I meant. Suppose I have APR6 =3D 177777 and length > 1. That means VA 140076 maps to = physical address 17777776, and VA 140100 maps to physical addres 20000000 whi= ch when masked with 22 bits would end up at 0. The offset within the page is= <=3D the page length. Meanwhile, I discovered that RSTS actually rejects attempts to map things thi= s way. :-( paul > On Nov 17, 2023, at 2:24 PM, Martin Bishop wrote: >=20 > EK-DCJ11-UG-Pre DCJ11 Microprocessor User's Guide says it will abort [the f= irst processor guide on the shelf] >=20 > $4.5.2.2 (p4-7) Page Length Field ... "The block number of the virtual addr= ess is compared against the page length field to detect length errors" ... >=20 > $4.7.1 MMR0 <14> Abort Page Length Error >=20 > $4.7.1.1.2 Abort -- Page Length=20 >=20 > When descriptors exist as they do in the PAR / PDR pair it is usual to poli= ce them. A QL at the manual indicates no exception behaviour for kernel mode= or an override. >=20 > The behaviour may be model dependent, but if MMR0<14> is populated I should= expect an abort -- you could code the abort ISR for desired behaviour and re= turn >=20 > It would be easier to build hardware without the checking, but harder to de= bug the system. >=20 > Martin >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Koning via cctalk [mailto:cctalk(a)classiccmp.org]=20 > Sent: 17 November 2023 18:16 > To: cctalk(a)classiccmp.org > Cc: Paul Koning > Subject: [cctalk] Address wrapping in PDP-11 MMU >=20 > I'm working on some code where it would be handy to map the top of the I/O = page along with the bottom of physical memory. An obvious hack is to point t= he APR to the I/O page address needed, then set the length so that the addres= s modulo 2^22 also covers the low memory range. >=20 > It seems from the architecture manual that this would work, and SIMH seems = to do this (since it adds VA and PAR then masks with a 22 bit mask). Would t= his work on real hardware? >=20 > paul >=20 --===============0124377687728849119==-- From rodsmallwood52@btinternet.com Fri Nov 17 21:07:18 2023 From: Rod Smallwood To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-8/E front panels Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 11:11:57 +0000 Message-ID: <2085fa98-0587-479b-bb95-ead040b8c70d@btinternet.com> In-Reply-To: <95a6dc51-3c8c-4c74-951a-33fc3b4448af@sbcglobal.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0185188180427249669==" --===============0185188180427249669== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Bob     The attachment seems to be missing. Rod Also I hae some more boards available M7856     X 2 M863     X 2 M837    X 2 M8650 M8320 M880 + H241 (MR8 EC) M849 M3310 On 16/11/2023 20:53, Bob Rosenbloom via cctalk wrote: > Do you have any more of the DEC PDP-8 e/m/f front panels? > > I'm looking for one that matches the layout attached. I don't care > what model (e/m/f etc.) it's for, but the rotary switch layout needs > to be right and I prefer the matte finish. Color is not important > either I have orange, green, and blue switch boards. > > Thanks, > > Bob > --===============0185188180427249669==-- From bitwiz@12bitsbest.com Fri Nov 17 22:12:53 2023 From: Mike Katz To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-8/E front panels Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 10:26:56 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2403248743008132132==" --===============2403248743008132132== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I have tired to print the paddle handles both SLA and FDM and none match the quality and strength of injected molded paddles. Unless you print an entire set (light and dark colors) it is nearly impossible to match the colors also.  Even if you were to find the perfect filament or resin color, the variability between batches makes accurate reproduction nearly impossible. On 11/17/2023 10:15 AM, Tom Hunter via cctalk wrote: > I had some toggles printed for me professionally, but they are inferior to > the originals and the colours don't match. > > If anyone has spare DEC LAB-8/e switches please let me know. > > Thanks > Tom > > On Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 10:14 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > >> >> On 11/17/2023 8:52 AM, Tom Hunter via cctalk wrote: >>> Hi Bob, >>> I can't help with your search for 8/e front panels, but you mentioned >>> "green switch boards". I have a nicely restored DEC LAB-8/e with green >>> switch toggles. Do you have spare green switch toggles? I would love to >>> have one dark green and one light green toggle. I don't need the actual >>> switch, but would be happy to take the toggles with switch. Please let me >>> know if you can help. >>> >> Have you ever considered making your own? >> >> https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:360853 >> >> >> bill >> --===============2403248743008132132==-- From cz@alembic.crystel.com Fri Nov 17 22:34:31 2023 From: Chris Zach To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-8/E front panels Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 17:34:27 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2303518109923798850==" --===============2303518109923798850== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Try printing them in PETG: I've printed several of them for my 8/L and they equal the strength of factory switches. Even the little pins are more than strong enough. PETG does require a higher printing temperature (220c-230c) but is well worth it and a massive improvement over PLA. Chris On 11/17/2023 11:26 AM, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote: > I have tired to print the paddle handles both SLA and FDM and none match > the quality and strength of injected molded paddles. > > Unless you print an entire set (light and dark colors) it is nearly > impossible to match the colors also.  Even if you were to find the > perfect filament or resin color, the variability between batches makes > accurate reproduction nearly impossible. > > > > On 11/17/2023 10:15 AM, Tom Hunter via cctalk wrote: >> I had some toggles printed for me professionally, but they are >> inferior to >> the originals and the colours don't match. >> >> If anyone has spare DEC LAB-8/e switches please let me know. >> >> Thanks >> Tom >> >> On Fri, Nov 17, 2023, 10:14 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk < >> cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 11/17/2023 8:52 AM, Tom Hunter via cctalk wrote: >>>> Hi Bob, >>>> I can't help with your search for 8/e front panels, but you mentioned >>>> "green switch boards". I have a nicely restored DEC LAB-8/e with green >>>> switch toggles. Do you have spare green switch toggles? I would love to >>>> have one dark green and one light green toggle. I don't need the actual >>>> switch, but would be happy to take the toggles with switch. Please >>>> let me >>>> know if you can help. >>>> >>> Have you ever considered making your own? >>> >>> https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:360853 >>> >>> >>> bill >>> > --===============2303518109923798850==-- From bobalan@sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 18 06:48:53 2023 From: Bob Rosenbloom To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: PDP-8/E front panels Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 22:48:41 -0800 Message-ID: <434125e3-be56-4aea-9a61-6cad604ba591@sbcglobal.net> In-Reply-To: <2085fa98-0587-479b-bb95-ead040b8c70d@btinternet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0776154284456934232==" --===============0776154284456934232== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I can't add attachments here. I emailed them to your direct email address. Bob On 11/17/2023 3:11 AM, Rod Smallwood via cctalk wrote: > Hi Bob > >     The attachment seems to be missing. > > Rod > > Also I hae some more boards available > > M7856     X 2 > M863     X 2 > M837    X 2 > M8650 > M8320 > M880 + H241 (MR8 EC) > M849 > M3310 > > > On 16/11/2023 20:53, Bob Rosenbloom via cctalk wrote: >> Do you have any more of the DEC PDP-8 e/m/f front panels? >> >> I'm looking for one that matches the layout attached. I don't care >> what model (e/m/f etc.) it's for, but the rotary switch layout needs >> to be right and I prefer the matte finish. Color is not important >> either I have orange, green, and blue switch boards. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Bob >> -- Vintage computers and electronics www.dvq.com www.tekmuseum.com www.decmuseum.org --===============0776154284456934232==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Mon Nov 20 22:13:15 2023 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Two items for RSTS/E Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2023 17:12:42 -0500 Message-ID: <35305D72-8471-43A2-B962-2AB7BAF2DEA8@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7670595888092769817==" --===============7670595888092769817== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I just pushed two additions to https://github.com/pkoning2/decstuff : In "patches" a new patch for the DEUNA driver. This fixes a problem seen whe= n doing user (as opposed to DECnet) I/O, as well as two errors that show up w= hen using units beyond the first. =20 Directory "ntp" is new. This is a simple NTP protocol client for RSTS, which= will synchronize the system clock with an NTP server on the LAN. It include= s handling of timezone rules, so the right thing will happen at daylight savi= ngs time (summer time) boundaries. The clock is maintained to the full RSTS = resolution -- typically 1/50th or 1/60th second, but can be as low as 10 ms i= f the KW-11/P clock is used. paul --===============7670595888092769817==-- From c.murray.mccullough@gmail.com Tue Nov 21 00:37:03 2023 From: Murray McCullough To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Intel 4004 Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2023 19:36:39 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3053316634509204701==" --===============3053316634509204701== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Nov. 15, 1971 Intel commercially released the 4004 microprocessor which some consider to be the first. Nonetheless, even if not in agreement, it made possible the instrument which drives the classic-computing industry or at the very least our hobby! Happy computing. Murray 🙂 --===============3053316634509204701==-- From bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca Tue Nov 21 01:00:57 2023 From: ben To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2023 18:00:38 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8989210119579949930==" --===============8989210119579949930== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2023-11-20 5:36 p.m., Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: > On Nov. 15, 1971 Intel commercially released the 4004 microprocessor which > some consider to be the first. Nonetheless, even if not in agreement, it > made possible the instrument which drives the classic-computing industry or > at the very least our hobby! >=20 > Happy computing. >=20 > Murray =F0=9F=99=82 https://retrocomputingforum.com/t/swiss-physicist-builds-complete-intel-4004-= computer-out-of-smd-transistors/3738 THE DIY VERSION --===============8989210119579949930==-- From tim@sneddon.id.au Tue Nov 21 03:05:42 2023 From: Tim Sneddon To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Two items for RSTS/E Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 11:05:21 +0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <35305D72-8471-43A2-B962-2AB7BAF2DEA8@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1964199734553322474==" --===============1964199734553322474== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 21 Nov 2023 at 06:13, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote: > I just pushed two additions to https://github.com/pkoning2/decstuff : > > In "patches" a new patch for the DEUNA driver. This fixes a problem seen > when doing user (as opposed to DECnet) I/O, as well as two errors that show > up when using units beyond the first. > > Directory "ntp" is new. This is a simple NTP protocol client for RSTS, > which will synchronize the system clock with an NTP server on the LAN. It > includes handling of timezone rules, so the right thing will happen at > daylight savings time (summer time) boundaries. The clock is maintained to > the full RSTS resolution -- typically 1/50th or 1/60th second, but can be > as low as 10 ms if the KW-11/P clock is used. > This is awesome! Thanks, Paul. Regards, Tim. --===============1964199734553322474==-- From tdk.knight@gmail.com Tue Nov 21 04:06:15 2023 From: Adrian Stoness To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2023 22:05:58 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7055371704663899571==" --===============7055371704663899571== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable someone should build it in minecrsft On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 7:01=E2=80=AFPM ben via cctalk wrote: > On 2023-11-20 5:36 p.m., Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: > > On Nov. 15, 1971 Intel commercially released the 4004 microprocessor > which > > some consider to be the first. Nonetheless, even if not in agreement, it > > made possible the instrument which drives the classic-computing industry > or > > at the very least our hobby! > > > > Happy computing. > > > > Murray =F0=9F=99=82 > > > https://retrocomputingforum.com/t/swiss-physicist-builds-complete-intel-400= 4-computer-out-of-smd-transistors/3738 > THE DIY VERSION > > --===============7055371704663899571==-- From couryhouse@aol.com Tue Nov 21 09:03:51 2023 From: ED SHARPE To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 09:03:41 +0000 Message-ID: <944441853.3391425.1700557421379@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7750828519787015027==" --===============7750828519787015027== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable So what are the other contenders and what do they bring to table Sent from AOL on Android=20 =20 On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 9:06 PM, Adrian Stoness via cctalk wrote: someone should build it in minecrsft On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 7:01=E2=80=AFPM ben via cctalk wrote: > On 2023-11-20 5:36 p.m., Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: > > On Nov. 15, 1971 Intel commercially released the 4004 microprocessor > which > > some consider to be the first. Nonetheless, even if not in agreement, it > > made possible the instrument which drives the classic-computing industry > or > > at the very least our hobby! > > > > Happy computing. > > > > Murray =F0=9F=99=82 > > > https://retrocomputingforum.com/t/swiss-physicist-builds-complete-intel-400= 4-computer-out-of-smd-transistors/3738 > THE DIY VERSION > > =20 --===============7750828519787015027==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Tue Nov 21 14:57:49 2023 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Two items for RSTS/E Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 09:49:10 -0500 Message-ID: <617CCCFE-02A7-4838-BDCA-EEB25F115E8F@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5365978912449202203==" --===============5365978912449202203== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On Nov 20, 2023, at 10:05 PM, Tim Sneddon via cctalk wrote: >=20 > On Tue, 21 Nov 2023 at 06:13, Paul Koning via cctalk > wrote: >=20 >> I just pushed two additions to https://github.com/pkoning2/decstuff : >>=20 >> In "patches" a new patch for the DEUNA driver. This fixes a problem seen >> when doing user (as opposed to DECnet) I/O, as well as two errors that show >> up when using units beyond the first. >>=20 >> Directory "ntp" is new. This is a simple NTP protocol client for RSTS, >> which will synchronize the system clock with an NTP server on the LAN. It >> includes handling of timezone rules, so the right thing will happen at >> daylight savings time (summer time) boundaries. The clock is maintained to >> the full RSTS resolution -- typically 1/50th or 1/60th second, but can be >> as low as 10 ms if the KW-11/P clock is used. >>=20 >=20 > This is awesome! Thanks, Paul. Glad you like it. Comments welcome. When I first posted this I still had trouble with the QNA driver. Those are = now fixed (patch file patches/xhdvr.cmd) so it now works on both UNA and QNA = devices. I've tested this in SIMH. I would expect it to work on real hardware too, bu= t I don't have any to try, so reports on actual machines would be particularl= y interesting. paul --===============5365978912449202203==-- From dkelvey@hotmail.com Tue Nov 21 18:32:00 2023 From: dwight To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 18:31:52 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <944441853.3391425.1700557421379@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2355171706130317234==" --===============2355171706130317234== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There is little surviving software for the 4004. There are a few places with = snippets of code to do things like add or subtract several digits but my sear= ches of the internet have shown little actual code. The NBS has some code to = track satellites and correct for time delays from their clocks ( think GPS ). I'd had a spare 4004 and always wanted to do something with it. I found that = the library for work done at the Navy Post Graduate School in Monterey Califo= rnia had 2 projects that students of Gary Kildall created. One was a load cal= culator for helicopters and the other was for calculating closest point of ap= proach for ships. I'd been unsuccessful at down loading the helicopter code b= ut was able to down load the ships document. I'd let the listing sit for 10's of years while always on the back burner. Ov= er the years I'd acquired the needed parts. I did make a few substitutions, t= hough. The original used 13 each 1702A EPROMs. Since that exceed my budget fo= r a PC board space, I chose the option of using a 4289 and a 2732 EPROM. I di= d use the original designs number of 4002s, as using RAM through the 4289 wou= ld have made significant changes to the software. The problem of the circuit needed to be dealt with. The document had a page l= abelled 'schematic' that turned out to be the keyboard layout and display lay= out( both of which I ignored and used my own layout that I though was better = ). Before getting to the board design, I needed to get working software. The lis= ting was done on a ASR33 with a deeply rutted platen, typical of hand-me-down= things used by a school's command. Letters like R or P would look like F and= 0 would look like C. Other letters were easy to figure out but still often h= ad their right edge missing. After entering the list by hand, I'd feed it into my assembler and the tried = to run it with my simulator. I'd make corrections as I got the code running. I need to create the circuitry for the keyboard decoder, that took 25 buttons= to the 4 bit data bus input of the 4004. There was enough description in the= document to create the LED display but I did missed one thing ( that I'll me= ntion later ). I created the board with my typical incorrect wiring, requiring several extra= cuts and jumpers. ( the concept was right but I got the pins of the 7402 mix= ed up.) The one thing that I'd missed was the order of the digit scan. I assu= med left to right but the code was actually right to left. After so many cuts= and jumpers to get the keyboard right, I dreaded more to fix the scan order = so I made the one change to the original software to do right to left ( I sti= ll feel bad about that change ). I thought I'd talk a little about how a Closest Point of Approach Calculation= is done. Normally it had been done by a graphical method of line drawing on = what is called a plotting maneuver board. One used graphical calculations for= the trig used. It was all done by pencil and parallel. It is so important th= at, I believe, that to this day a ship's pilot still needs to be able to do t= his calculation on a maneuver board, even though such graphical displays are = capable of doing such, today. Large ships require significant knowledge of wh= ere they are relative to other fixed and moving objects in order to determine= the safest path to proceed. A broken display is not time to learn how to do = such a calculation. This 4004 calculator used a newly found way of doing tangent calculations, ca= lled the CORDIC method. One could clearly see the influence of Gary Kildall's= hand in this code. It is noted that he wrote the division routine used and t= he organization of the code clearly shows the influence of a seasoned program= mer. Bring such code back to life was almost as much as making a 4004 process= or from discrete transistors but I felt was for me as part of my bucket list. Things I needed to do, included writing an assembler, writing a simulator, le= arn a PC board CAD, transcribing a poor quality listing, debugging the poorly= transcribed listing, creating the keyboard decoder and instrumenting my simu= lator to be the calculator. Dwight ________________________________ From: ED SHARPE via cctalk Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2023 1:03 AM To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Cc: ED SHARPE Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 So what are the other contenders and what do they bring to table Sent from AOL on Android On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 9:06 PM, Adrian Stoness via cctalk wrote: someone should build it in minecrsft On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 7:01=E2=80=AFPM ben via cctalk wrote: > On 2023-11-20 5:36 p.m., Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: > > On Nov. 15, 1971 Intel commercially released the 4004 microprocessor > which > > some consider to be the first. Nonetheless, even if not in agreement, it > > made possible the instrument which drives the classic-computing industry > or > > at the very least our hobby! > > > > Happy computing. > > > > Murray =F0=9F=99=82 > > > https://retrocomputingforum.com/t/swiss-physicist-builds-complete-intel-400= 4-computer-out-of-smd-transistors/3738 > THE DIY VERSION > > --===============2355171706130317234==-- From cisin@xenosoft.com Tue Nov 21 19:30:12 2023 From: Fred Cisin To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 11:24:09 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CSA1PR11MB6941D5A3E40E2CBA9347FF40A3BBA=40SA1PR11MB?= =?utf-8?q?6941=2Enamprd11=2Eprod=2Eoutlook=2Ecom=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2019203786435117317==" --===============2019203786435117317== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ISTR a 4004 on one of the boards of my DTC300 Hytype I daisy wheel printers. (or has unrefreshed wetware dynamic RAM lost its content?) -- Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com --===============2019203786435117317==-- From pcw@mesanet.com Tue Nov 21 19:56:04 2023 From: Peter Wallace To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 11:49:02 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8637242086641781682==" --===============8637242086641781682== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 21 Nov 2023, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: > Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 11:24:09 -0800 (PST) > From: Fred Cisin via cctalk > To: dwight via cctalk > Cc: Fred Cisin > Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 > > ISTR a 4004 on one of the boards of my DTC300 Hytype I daisy wheel printers. > > (or has unrefreshed wetware dynamic RAM lost its content?) > > > -- > Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com > I think thats a 4040 Peter Wallace --===============8637242086641781682==-- From billdegnan@gmail.com Tue Nov 21 20:04:59 2023 From: Bill Degnan To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 15:04:41 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0977070648198749980==" --===============0977070648198749980== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 > > > > ISTR a 4004 on one of the boards of my DTC300 Hytype I daisy wheel > printers. > > > > (or has unrefreshed wetware dynamic RAM lost its content?) > > > > > > -- > > Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com > > > > I think thats a 4040 > > Peter Wallace > My IMI 1010 eProm burner has a 4040 https://vintagecomputer.net/imi/ Bill --===============0977070648198749980==-- From bhilpert@shaw.ca Tue Nov 21 21:04:08 2023 From: Brent Hilpert To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 12:56:54 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <944441853.3391425.1700557421379@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0357997855096725273==" --===============0357997855096725273== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2023-Nov-21, at 1:03 AM, ED SHARPE via cctalk wrote: > On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 7:01=E2=80=AFPM ben via cctalk wrote: >> On 2023-11-20 5:36 p.m., Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: >>> On Nov. 15, 1971 Intel commercially released the 4004 microprocessor which >>> some consider to be the first. Nonetheless, even if not in agreement, it >>> made possible the instrument which drives the classic-computing industry = or >>> at the very least our hobby! >>>=20 >>> Happy computing. >>>=20 >>> Murray =F0=9F=99=82 >>=20 >> https://retrocomputingforum.com/t/swiss-physicist-builds-complete-intel-40= 04-computer-out-of-smd-transistors/3738 >> THE DIY VERSION >=20 > So what are the other contenders and what do they bring to table A claim is made for the first microproc being the CADC processor of an early = flight-control system for the F-14, made by Garrett AiResearch ~ 1969. I have= n't looked into it in depth - or I don't know of detailed info being availabl= e - but apparently it was a CPU made up of several LSI chips. In my opinion t= hat disqualifies it, but it's all into the mug's game of specifying 'first at= what?' There's also the TMS-1000 series of calculator chips which were single-chip p= rogrammed processors and came in the same time-frame (measured in months) of = the 4004. IIRC, there's some argument there about development vs production v= s release vs availability dates. Also to note, there were multi-chip programmed-processor calculator chip-sets= in that time-frame, not sure of the exact timing relative to the 4004. The microproc was simply a development whose time had come. It was a predicta= ble, 'in-the-air' idea brought to fruition with increasing integration capabi= lities. In reality the 4004 was/would-be awkward to use for a general-purpose system.= The 4004 CPU was tailored for use with mask-programmed ROM chips and RAM chi= ps, all specific to the MCS-4 family. IO was also in those MCS-4 chips. To ma= ke a system with off-the-shelf ROM/RAM/IO chips required going through other = special MCS-4 family chips for that purpose. Or put another way, it was a multi-chip CPU by the time you tried to make a s= ystem with standard RAM/ROM/IO chips. I have two embedded systems using 4004s: - an M900 PROM programmer. This system does have interfacing for use of off-the-shelf ROM (1702s) and= RAM. The manual for this includes the firmware source code listing. - the remnants of the PLL control from an avionics transceiver. An example of a 'proper' MCS-4 system, as it was intended to be used, with 4004 CPU, 4001 ROMs, 4002 RAM & 4201 clock-gen. http://madrona.ca/e/4004Monument/index.html --===============0357997855096725273==-- From rice43@btinternet.com Tue Nov 21 21:41:17 2023 From: Joshua Rice To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 20:26:53 +0000 Message-ID: <27186815-5f4c-4137-b898-2c84c09e9da8@btinternet.com> In-Reply-To: <944441853.3391425.1700557421379@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3776275166651144179==" --===============3776275166651144179== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 21/11/2023 09:03, ED SHARPE via cctalk wrote: > So what are the other contenders and what do they bring to table The 4004 was definitely the first commercially available single-chip CPU on the market, but if you include multi-chip LSI designs, the lines get blurry. --===============3776275166651144179==-- From couryhouse@aol.com Tue Nov 21 22:00:15 2023 From: ED SHARPE To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 22:00:00 +0000 Message-ID: <1642852725.3569678.1700604000349@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <27186815-5f4c-4137-b898-2c84c09e9da8@btinternet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5949608155031656122==" --===============5949608155031656122== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I had heard something about a f14 chip pehS being first but not avail. To gen= eral=C2=A0 public???Ed# Sent from AOL on Android=20 =20 On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 2:41 PM, Joshua Rice via cctalk wrote: =20 On 21/11/2023 09:03, ED SHARPE via cctalk wrote: > So what are the other contenders and what do they bring to table The 4004 was definitely the first commercially available single-chip CPU=20 on the market, but if you include multi-chip LSI designs, the lines get=20 blurry. =20 --===============5949608155031656122==-- From wrcooke@wrcooke.net Tue Nov 21 23:19:25 2023 From: wrcooke@wrcooke.net To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 17:14:18 -0600 Message-ID: <1520236875.302647.1700608458721@email.ionos.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0118756151308281890==" --===============0118756151308281890== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable More information is here: https://firstmicroprocessor.com/?doing_wp_cron=3D1700608229.86660599708557128= 90625 I think that is the designers (Rod Holt?) website. Apparently he won a legal= battle to use the term "first microprocessor" for whatever that is worth. Will > On 11/21/2023 2:56 PM CST Brent Hilpert via cctalk wrote: >=20 >=20 > On 2023-Nov-21, at 1:03 AM, ED SHARPE via cctalk wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 7:01=E2=80=AFPM ben via cctalk wrote: > > > On 2023-11-20 5:36 p.m., Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: > > > > On Nov. 15, 1971 Intel commercially released the 4004 microprocessor = which > > > > some consider to be the first. Nonetheless, even if not in agreement,= it > > > > made possible the instrument which drives the classic-computing indus= try or > > > > at the very least our hobby! > > > >=20 > > > > Happy computing. > > > >=20 > > > > Murray =F0=9F=99=82 > > > https://retrocomputingforum.com/t/swiss-physicist-builds-complete-intel= -4004-computer-out-of-smd-transistors/3738 > > > THE DIY VERSION > > So what are the other contenders and what do they bring to table >=20 > A claim is made for the first microproc being the CADC processor of an earl= y flight-control system for the F-14, made by Garrett AiResearch ~ 1969. I ha= ven't looked into it in depth - or I don't know of detailed info being availa= ble - but apparently it was a CPU made up of several LSI chips. In my opinion= that disqualifies it, but it's all into the mug's game of specifying 'first = at what?' If you want to build a ship, don't drum up people to collect wood and don't a= ssign them tasks and work, but rather teach them to long for the endless imme= nsity of the sea. Antoine de Saint-Exupery --===============0118756151308281890==-- From cisin@xenosoft.com Wed Nov 22 00:09:10 2023 From: Fred Cisin To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 16:08:48 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3079735741917296401==" --===============3079735741917296401== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >> ISTR a 4004 on one of the boards of my DTC300 Hytype I daisy wheel >> printers. >> (or has unrefreshed wetware dynamic RAM lost its content?) On Tue, 21 Nov 2023, Peter Wallace wrote: > I think thats a 4040 > Peter Wallace Sorry about that. Not sure whether to blame that on old-timers memory corruption, or on lysdexia. --===============3079735741917296401==-- From a.carlini@ntlworld.com Wed Nov 22 00:26:12 2023 From: Antonio Carlini To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 00:13:21 +0000 Message-ID: <877b6e12-1901-dee5-17c9-ba001ba42410@ntlworld.com> In-Reply-To: <1520236875.302647.1700608458721@email.ionos.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5614919183318907888==" --===============5614919183318907888== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 21/11/2023 23:14, Will Cooke via cctalk wrote: > More information is here: > https://firstmicroprocessor.com/?doing_wp_cron=3D1700608229.866605997085571= 2890625 > > I think that is the designers (Rod Holt?) website. Apparently he won a leg= al battle to use the term "first microprocessor" for whatever that is worth. Details were published in 1998 and the chip was available approximately=20 never (I presume, unless you were building a Tomcat) so I'm not sure you=20 should count it. Perhaps "first microprocessor, until someone else=20 claims another secret design that was even earlier" would be a more=20 accurate claim? Antonio --=20 Antonio Carlini antonio(a)acarlini.com --===============5614919183318907888==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Wed Nov 22 00:29:36 2023 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 19:29:08 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1520236875.302647.1700608458721@email.ionos.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0559648269000209188==" --===============0559648269000209188== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On Nov 21, 2023, at 6:14 PM, Will Cooke via cctalk wrote: >=20 > More information is here: > https://firstmicroprocessor.com/?doing_wp_cron=3D1700608229.866605997085571= 2890625 >=20 > I think that is the designers (Rod Holt?) website. Apparently he won a leg= al battle to use the term "first microprocessor" for whatever that is worth. The website makes it clear he's talking about a chipset: control chip, multip= lier, divider, and some other stuff. Sounds a bit like a 2901/2910 combinati= on. As for the term, was that a copyright or trademark dispute? That doesn't hav= e any connection to who was first actually to create something. Consider for= example the guy (a failed political candidate, of all things) in MA who clai= ms to have invented Email. His argument for this is that the US Copyright Of= fice accepted the registration of a publication, the source code of that prog= ram, and that the title of the work was "email". That doesn't say anything a= bout whether others did it before; it only says that he created something wit= h that name and recorded that fact at that time. That one, actually, was eve= n feebler than a trademark or a domain name registration, because domain name= s are unique and while trademarks need not be, they are at least supposed to = be unique within a particular commercial category. paul --===============0559648269000209188==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Wed Nov 22 00:34:14 2023 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 19:33:40 -0500 Message-ID: <5664502A-B070-4829-9B42-6A6A62625BD9@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: <877b6e12-1901-dee5-17c9-ba001ba42410@ntlworld.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8693177228279058267==" --===============8693177228279058267== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On Nov 21, 2023, at 7:13 PM, Antonio Carlini via cctalk wrote: >=20 > On 21/11/2023 23:14, Will Cooke via cctalk wrote: >> More information is here: >> https://firstmicroprocessor.com/?doing_wp_cron=3D1700608229.86660599708557= 12890625 >>=20 >> I think that is the designers (Rod Holt?) website. Apparently he won a le= gal battle to use the term "first microprocessor" for whatever that is worth. >=20 > Details were published in 1998 and the chip was available approximately nev= er (I presume, unless you were building a Tomcat) so I'm not sure you should = count it. Perhaps "first microprocessor, until someone else claims another se= cret design that was even earlier" would be a more accurate claim? Remember the guy at the British spook agency (GCHQ?) who said he invented RSA= a long time before Rivest, Shamir, and Adleman did? Perhaps so, but the fac= t that it was all secret means it didn't matter to the real world. This sort of thing happens a lot, in inventions or discoveries. There were t= ypes of telegraphs before S.F.B. Morse came along, but his design took over t= he world. There were Europeans who traveled to America before Columbus, but = nothing came of those explorations and they were pretty much forgotten. And = FM radio was first invented in 1919 by a Dutch engineer (Hanso Idzerda), not = around 1930 by Edwin Armstrong -- but Idzerda's design was a technological de= ad end and disappeared from view by the late 1920s, while Armstrong's design = became universal and remains so. So I tend to qualify "first to invent" (or "discover") as "first to invent an= d make it matter". paul --===============8693177228279058267==-- From cisin@xenosoft.com Wed Nov 22 00:35:19 2023 From: Fred Cisin To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 16:35:10 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1485776642884557452==" --===============1485776642884557452== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 21 Nov 2023, Brent Hilpert via cctalk wrote: > . . . the same time-frame > (measured in months) of the 4004. IIRC, there's some argument there > about development vs production vs release vs availability dates. also, "announcement" (cf. vaporware) Hence, it makes sense to acknowledge a "tie" for multiple entries in any "first", that are close, but differ in which aspect of "first" applies. -- Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com --===============1485776642884557452==-- From rickb@bensene.com Wed Nov 22 02:08:56 2023 From: Rick Bensene To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 02:00:54 +0000 Message-ID: <5c0cd49076d04543a781a3b0ed4d4df8@bensene.com> In-Reply-To: <1642852725.3569678.1700604000349@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1633332863192691517==" --===============1633332863192691517== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The F14 flight control (CADC) computer was a chipset, with different function= al aspects built into each chip. The design was done by Garrett AirResearch.= The requirements of the system were quite arduous, and thus the computer wa= s reasonably powerful for its time, especially considering its size and power= supply requirements. Once the logic was all tried and true via bread boardi= ng the system, The logic was given to American Micro-systems, Inc., (AMI) who laid out and f= abricated the chips. At the time, AMI was one of the few companies that coul= d make large scale MOS ICs. AMI did a lot of secret work for the US Governm= ent which is how it got its start in MOS LSI, and a lot of AMI's early histor= y is somewhat shrouded in mystery because most of the work they did was secre= t. =20 It appears that AMI's first MOS LSI calculator chipset was for Smith Corona M= archant (SCM), with an eight-chip set that was partitioned into two ROMs, a c= ontrol chip that decoded the microcode in the ROMs into control signals, a di= git parallel, serial in/out ALU, an input processing IC for scanning the keyb= oard, de-bouncing, and generating more signals going to the microcode control= chip, an output chip that took in serial data representing a digit, decoded = the BCD into 1-of-10 signals, sent that out to the common Nixie bus, and also= strobed the appropriate digit, as well as keeping track of decimal point inf= ormation, a register chip that contained three 68-bit serial-in/serial out (w= ith perhaps one position 4-bit parallel out) shift registers that represented= the storage for the working registers of the calculator, and lastly, a data = routing chip that took care of gating serial data streams to/from the registe= r chip, ALU chip, and output chip. Technically, this chipset was kind of a 4-bit micro-coded engine that was mic= roprogrammed to operate as a calculator, but with different I/O chips and mic= rocode, it could have been micro-coded to be a small, general-purpose four-bi= t processor. =20 The resulting calculator(s), the SCM Cogito 414 (introduced first on 23-April= -1969), and it's little brother, the SCM Cogito 412 (identical chipset includ= ing ROMs, but has a jumper on the main board that limits the machine to 12 di= gits versus the 414's 14 digits - and introduced a bit later to allow sales o= f the 14-digit version to ramp up before introducing a lower-cost model with = two fewer digits). =20 Was that chipset developed for SCM a microprocessor chipset? That's reall= y tough to say one way or the other. It could have fairly easily been turned= into a small general purpose (probably decimal based rather than binary) com= puter with some different I/O chips and microcode, but does that count as a m= icroprocessor, either as-is, or with modifications? There was also a chipset that was developed by an individual entrepreneur tha= t was intended to function as the compute engine for a small portable compute= r. =20 At the moment, I can't recall the name of the person. He claimed his design = was truly the first "CPU on a chip". It had all of the requisite bits (excus= e pun) in the design to make it a full processor. At some point fairly rec= ently, after arguing his case for many years, it went to court, with his clai= m being that he beat Texas Instruments to implementation. TI had their singl= e-chip microprogrammed "calculator" processor that only needed display drive = electronics, an external clock generator, and a keyboard. The claim was that= the chip that this guy had developed was a complete CPU, whereas the TI chip= , in order to do anything other than serve as a calculator (with different ma= sk-programmed microcode) would require additional support ICs to do anything = really useful as a computer. A major point of the decision was that the engi= neer had some of the core CPU chips and determined that one of them was still= working, and built a small demonstration computer using it. It was slow, b= ut had a full keyboard and a LCD display and could do simple application-like= functions. =20 The court sided on the independent guy, although it was a very contentious de= cision. I'm sorry I don't have the details of this at hand at the moment, bu= t there was quite a splash in the technical media regarding this decision. = At least for now, as far as patent law is concerned, this was the first singl= e chip microprocessor. So, technically, the CADC chipset for the F-14 was very likely the first gene= ral-purpose processor implemented in MOS on a reasonably small number of chip= s. The machine was a 20-bit machine, and had to do a lot of math, very quick= ly, so its math functions were heavily optimized for the types of calculators= necessary for positioning the control surfaces of the F-14 in a "fly-by-wire= " environment. There were dedicated multiplier and divider chips to do these= calculations in hardware as quickly as possible. So, in some ways, the CADC, while it could likely be micro-coded to operate a= s a more conventional computer, a lot of the details of its implementation ar= e still secret as far as I know. The chips were never made available to any= one but the integration developer for the F-14 project, and were all kept und= er tight secrecy for many, many years. So, while it might qualify as a micr= oprocessor distributed over a number of large scale ICs, it was all top secre= t and definitely not an open commercial product.=20 I actually spent some time on the telephone with the primary engineer on the = CADC (Ray Holt) many years ago, and while I learned a lot, there were many of= my questions that he had to politely decline to answer because he was still = bound by duty to the US Government not to disclose information that would be = considered in the interest of the national security of the United States. I = believe that some more information has come out concerning the chipset in the= interest of the historical record. =20 Here's an interesting article about Ray Holt and the CADC. https://www.eejournal.com/article/ray-holt-and-the-cadc-the-worlds-first-mili= tary-digital-flight-computer/ Here is a website maintained by Ray: https://firstmicroprocessor.com/ The opinions expressed on Ray's site are his own. Another interesting, but often overlooked multi-chip microprocessor set was d= esigned by Computer Design Corp., which marketed higher-end calculators under= the Compucorp brand, as well as making OEM versions for Monroe and a few oth= ers (Sumlock, Deitzgen among them). The chipset was called the "HTL" chipse= t, and consisted of bit-serial ROM and RAM with mask-programmed addressing, a= core micro-coded engine that implemented an eight-bit processor, with an ins= truction set that was fairly general-purpose, but had a lot of stuff specific= to calculator operations, such as instructions for operating on half-word (4= -bit) quantities in binary and BCD. =20 The core "CPU" chips used the data in the microcode ROMs as the interpreter f= or the instruction set, with the rest of the microcode ROM containing the spe= cific "macrocode" implementation of the calculator. There were I/O chips th= at were designed to run a multiplexed Nixie tube display, as well as a Shinsu= -Seiki (Seiko/Epson) drum impact printer. =20 A generalized Input chip took care of the keyboard, but its operation was qui= te programmable through control instructions sent to it that would configure = it for various different keyboard designs. =20 There were some optional chips that together combined to be called the "LEMP"= , for Learn Mode Programmer" that had specialized serial RAM for storing prog= ram steps (stored as key codes learned from the keyboard), and a sequencer th= at took care of doing things like programmed looping, branching, comparisons,= etc., as well as taking keyboard input and stuffing the key codes into the p= rogram RAM. =20 The LEMP RAM could hold 256 steps, or optionally with an additional two chips= , 512 steps. =20 Lastly, there was a CLEMP chip, another I/O chip that interfaced an optional = optical card reader that could read punched cards into LEMP RAM, for quick lo= ading of applications, since the RAM technology used was volatile, and regist= er and program step storage was lost when power was removed (and it was initi= alized to null on power-up as part of the RAM sizing microcode). =20 There were un-used key codes that could encode actual instructions of the CPU= instruction set which could be used by those with the appropriate documentat= ion to write code directly for the microcode-implemented instruction set of t= he chipset. =20 The first operable HTL chipsets appear to have been running (the chipsets wer= e laid out and fabricated by AMI) sometime in the mid-to-latter part of 1969= , putting the chipset in the timeframe for consideration. =20 Computer Design Corp. from its inception was involved in designing electronic= calculators under contract to calculator manufacturers. Initially, they used= early DTL bipolar ICs made by Signetics. Computer Design Corp. could design= and build the calculators under contract, or just provide all of the documen= tation for the customer to put together a complete calculator from the design= and sell it as their own. =20 Interestingly enough, Nippon Calculating Machine Co., (NCM) which had markete= d two early transistorized calculators (basically a copy of the design of Ita= ly's IME 24 Calculator, without any royalties or rights paid to IME) called the Busicom 1= 61 and 141. Since their first two calculators were essentially engineered for= them in Italy, NCM, while it had some digital electronics competency, did no= t have much in the way of the skills needed to design a machine as complex as= a calculator. Since the 161 and 141 had caused some ruckus, with Industria = Macchine Elettroniche (IME)complaining publicly that the Busicom machines wer= e unlicensed copies, there never was any legal process involved. NCM decide= d to look outside for calculator design engineering, and right away became on= e of Computer Design Corporation's early customers. =20 Computer Design Corporation developed the Busicom 202, 207 and 2017, with CRT= display and optional printer attachment on the 207 and 2017), which were bui= lt with DTL logic and magnetostrictive delay line memory with punched card pr= ogramming. These machines were targeted at higher-end environments. Comput= er Design Corp. also designed the Busicom 162 and 162C, smaller desktop calcu= lators designed more for bookkeeping/accounting and general math. The 162/16= 2C Nixie-display calculators used DTL bipolar logic, and a small magnetic cor= e array for memory storage. These two machines were essentially replacement= s for the Busicom 161/141 that had limited lifetimes because of their discret= e transistor construction. Along with designing calculators for others, primarily Busicom as is known at= this point, Computer Design Corp. was also working on the design of its own = MOS chipset that could be programmed to make up a sophisticated calculator. = When that chipset was operational and tested to be working in a calculator pr= ototype, the company thought they would just be a supplier of boards stuffed = with the MOS chipset to anyone who wanted them and they could integrate them = into their own calculator. =20 Computer Design Corp. had created its Compucorp division to market a line of = machines using the chipsets, and was working on putting ramping up its produc= tion facilities. There were actually small numbers of Compucorp-branded Nix= ie-display calculators coming off the line that were being sold through a num= ber of independent business machine distributors that they had lined up. Sale= s weren't particularly brisk, though, because the company was a newcomer to a= very well-established calculator marketplace. Even though their calculators = were more capable than most of the competitors on the higher-end of the elect= ronic calculator business, their name was not well known when compared with t= he giants of the industry: Wang Laboratories, Hewlett Packard, and others li= ke Monroe, SCM, and Friden. Monroe happened to learn of these new calculators and that Computer Design Co= rp. was eager to find OEMs to increase sales, and jumped on the bandwagon big= -time, making a deal with Computer Design Corp. to be the exclusive retailer = of calculators made by Computer Design Corporation using the HTL chipset. =20 Computer Design Corp. was forced to stop making Compucorp-branded calculators= , and badge their calculators as Monroe products. Monroe would buy them and= distribute them to all of their business machine retail outlets. =20 This was seemingly wonderful for Computer Design Corp., as it immediately had= a gigantic and very well-established sales network for its calculators. As i= t turned Out, Monroe was making a killing on the machines, and Compucorp wasn't gettin= g much out of their part of the deal. Compucorp still wanted to sell their = own machines through independent retailers, with different features than the = Monroe models. In time, Compucorp asked Monroe for release from the exclusi= vity agreement, but Monroe would have nothing of it. =20 That did not go over well with Computer Design Corp. management. At one poi= nt, Computer Design Corp. announced it was going to buy the Monroe division o= f Litton Industries from Litton, as a way to get out of the contract that so = limited them, but that fell on its face, as Litton wanted way more than Compu= ter Design Corp. could muster. Then, Litton announced that they intended to buy Computer Design Corporation.= =20 All of this craziness was going on just as the production lines at Computer D= esign Corporation were churning out Monroe-badged machines at a frenzied rate= . =20 Computer Design Corporation was able to somehow (I don=E2=80=99t know how) th= wart the threat of buyout by Litton (who easily could have bought up all of C= omputer Design. Corp.'s stock at an extremely attractive price), and as part = of it, they were able somehow able to get rid of the exclusivity arrangement = with Monroe/Litton, and they immediately began selling Compucorp-branded calc= ulators that were identical to the Monroe machines other than cabinet styling= and color scheme, as well as some subtle functional differences to different= iate Compucorp machines from Monroe's versions. =20 At some point it was announced that the contract with Monroe had been severed= , giving free-reign to Compucorp to sell its own calculators, as well as to O= EM to other makers, and surprisingly, Monroe signed up as an OEM customer. T= his arrangement suited Computer Design Corp. much more favorably. I'll close by mentioning that the relationship between Nippon Calculating Mac= hine Co. and Computer Design Corp. might have seemed to end with the design o= f the 162/162C, but there was continued business between the two companies. = Nippon Calculating Machine engineers had designed the logic for their own com= plex MOS LSI calculator chipset that could allow the chips to be combined in = different ways to make varying types of calculators. =20 At that time, Japan did not have anything but university and corporate labs d= oing very early work on LSI MOS, and there was nowhere near any kind of produ= ction capability in the country. =20 Nippon Calculating Machine turned to the US to try to find someone to make th= eir chips for them. Initially, all of the chipmakers they went to rejected = them. They also visited Computer Design Corp. since they were long-time customers, = and there was discussion about seeing if Computer Design Corp. might be able = to serve as an intermediary to US chipmakers to get their chips made. =20 This wasn't really something that Computer Design Corp. was interested in doi= ng, but given the long history of working with Nippon Calculating Machine Co.= , they agreed that they would take a crack at taking the design that NCM had = developed and work on partitioning it in a way that would work with chip comp= lexity constraints and packaging, and see if they could come up with a chipse= t that they could get AMI to fabricate. Computer Design Corp. already had th= e knowledge to do this from their own internal project to develop their own c= hipset. =20 It isn't known exactly what kind of agreement was forged, and if up-front mon= ey was put up by NCM, but it is known that NCM put a firm deadline in place s= tating that a calculator using the chipset would have to be delivered in pers= on to NCM headquarters and a presentation and demo of the machine made to NCM= executives and engineers. =20 Work began immediately on taking the NCM logic design and turning it into a b= atch of chips, which, by initial estimate was going to require 19 chips, and = that was assuming higher levels of integration that were only being perfected= by AMI at the time. As the NCM delegation was preparing to return to Japan with their hopes dashe= d of making an agreement directly with a chipmaker, a call was received from = a fledgling chip manufacturing company that they had briefly visited when the= y were in the Santa Clara, CA. area. =20 The company specialized in making memory chips, though, and it was initially = thought that the huge amount of random logic that was involved in the NCM cal= culator chipset design was beyond the capabilities of this company. =20 Memory devices are just repetitions of the same memory cell pattern over and = over on the chip to make a memory array, with additional logic to do the addr= ess decoding and read/write (for RAM) or read(for ROM) circuitry and I/O buff= ers. This type of chip design has some aspects that allow a degree of automa= tion to be used in laying out the chips, and also had very little in the way = of random logic to complicate the chip design. =20 The NCM calculator design was a whole bunch of random logic...gate upon gate,= flip-flop upon flip-flop wired together in a rats nest of logic for each chi= p. =20 After NCM left this fledgling company named Intel, higher-ups at Intel had le= arned of the visit by NCM, and told their underlings to get back in touch wit= h NCM and let them know they would see what they could do for NCM.=20 Intel was cash-hungry at the time, and it was thought that perhaps this proje= ct could serve double-duty...to bring in some needed cash for Intel's product= ion capacity expansion, as well as to perhaps push Intel's IC fabrication tec= hnology into areas other than RAM and ROM. Intel was doing well with their m= emory ICs, but they were limited by the number of chips they could produce. = Chip manufacturing technology is very expensive, so Intel was investing every= thing they made in enhancing their production capabilities. So, maybe worki= ng with NCM might help bring in some funds to help that effort. A deal was forged between Intel and NCM. A firm deadline was part of the co= ntractual language where Intel would have to build a prototype calculator bas= ed on the chips, and bring it to NCM's headquarters on a specific date and pr= esent/demonstrate it to NCM executives and engineers. In the end, the NCM chip design was set aside as it was simply beyond the cap= ability to be fabricated by Intel. Had Intel not had an idea of how to effe= ctively do what the massively complex chipset did in a much simpler fashion, = who knows what the future would have held. =20 The solution to Intel's problem of abandoning NCM's chipset is what became th= e Intel 4004. Intel developed and fabricated the 4004 and some support chip= s to make it into a useful controller for a calculator, including some shift = register ICs for I/O, some combination RAM and I/O chips, as well as ROM and = I/O chips. They built a very simple prototype calculator that could do integ= er-only math as their demo, and presented it to NCM. The Busicom 141-PF was = the resulting production calculator, arguably the first consumer device to us= e a microprocessor to create its functionality. The rest is history. There's a piece of the story left hanging, though. That's a very, very interesting story that will have to wait until I get all = of my ducks in a row to tell, which I will do on the Old Calculator Museum we= bsite at some point in the not too distant future. I'll certainly announce i= t here when it's finalized on up on the website. Rick Bensene The Old Calculator Museum https://oldcalculatormuseum.com =20 =20 -----Original Message----- From: ED SHARPE via cctalk [mailto:cctalk(a)classiccmp.org]=20 Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2023 2:00 PM To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Cc: ED SHARPE Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 I had heard something about a f14 chip pehS being first but not avail. To gen= eral=C2=A0 public???Ed# Sent from AOL on Android=20 =20 On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 2:41 PM, Joshua Rice via cctalk wrote: =20 On 21/11/2023 09:03, ED SHARPE via cctalk wrote: > So what are the other contenders and what do they bring to table The 4004 was definitely the first commercially available single-chip CPU on t= he market, but if you include multi-chip LSI designs, the lines get blurry. =20 --===============1633332863192691517==-- From bobalan@sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 22 02:18:59 2023 From: Bob Rosenbloom To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 18:18:48 -0800 Message-ID: <63f649bb-2298-4353-aefd-e59465a365df@sbcglobal.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6529424063272947035==" --===============6529424063272947035== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11/21/2023 4:08 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: >>> ISTR a 4004 on one of the boards of my DTC300 Hytype I daisy wheel >>> printers. >>> (or has unrefreshed wetware dynamic RAM lost its content?) > > On Tue, 21 Nov 2023, Peter Wallace wrote: >> I think thats a 4040 >> Peter Wallace > > Sorry about that. Not sure whether to blame that on old-timers memory > corruption, or on lysdexia. > > Actually, the DTC 300-S did use the 4004. I used to have one of these. I have the schematics for it. I can post them up on dvq.com if anyone's interested. Bob -- Vintage computers and electronics www.dvq.com www.tekmuseum.com www.decmuseum.org --===============6529424063272947035==-- From cclist@sydex.com Wed Nov 22 04:48:07 2023 From: Chuck Guzis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2023 20:39:19 -0800 Message-ID: <8d2e919e-ef9d-45a4-91ca-3b53b028bb34@sydex.com> In-Reply-To: <63f649bb-2298-4353-aefd-e59465a365df@sbcglobal.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5884552930657200229==" --===============5884552930657200229== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11/21/23 18:18, Bob Rosenbloom via cctalk wrote: > On 11/21/2023 4:08 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: >>>> ISTR a 4004 on one of the boards of my DTC300 Hytype I daisy wheel >>>> printers. >>>> (or has unrefreshed wetware dynamic RAM lost its content?) > The Diablo high-speed screaming-loud dot matrix printer used three PPS8 (Rockwell QIL package) CPUs. We had one; I don't know if it was ever a commercial product. --Chuck --===============5884552930657200229==-- From couryhouse@aol.com Wed Nov 22 06:39:47 2023 From: ED SHARPE To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 02:20:55 +0000 Message-ID: <1671374125.3618316.1700619655865@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============9171888818116150370==" --===============9171888818116150370== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =C2=A0what=C2=A0 about that intel 3000 bit slice=C2=A0 thing is=C2=A0 it almo= st=C2=A0 a microprocessor=C2=A0 =C2=A0yes=C2=A0 no=C2=A0 and=C2=A0 =C2=A0why?= =C2=A0=C2=A0Ed# In a message dated 11/21/2023 3:34:03 PM US Mountain Standard Time, c.murray.= mccullough(a)gmail.com writes:=C2=A0 There are 5 other possibilities for the honour:e=C2=A0 or=C2=A0 noe=C2=A0 and= why? No. 2: =C2=A0 Texas Instruments applied for a =E2=80=9Ccomputing systems CPU=E2=80= =9D in 1971 and awarded a patent in 1973. The question though is: did TI have= a functioning processor based on the TMS1000. Not sure if they did! No. 3: =E2=80=9CIn 1969 Four-Phase Systems built the 24-bit AL1, which used multiple= chips segmented into 8-bit hunks, not unlike a bit-slice processor. In a pat= ent dispute a quarter century later proof was presented that one could implem= ent a complete 8-bit microprocessor using just one of these chips. The battle= was settled out of court, which did not settle the issue of the first micro.= =E2=80=9D No. 4: =C2=A0Is this the first microprocessor? =C2=A0 Here is a source:=20 https://historydraft.com/story/microprocessor/pico-electronics-and-general-in= strument-gi-introduced-their-first-collaboration-in-ics/425/6329 No. 5: =C2=A0 "In 1969 Four-Phase Systems built the 24-bit AL1, which used multiple chips s= egmented into 8-bit hunks, not unlike a bit-slice processor. In a patent disp= ute a quarter century later proof was presented that one could implement a co= mplete 8-bit microprocessor using just one of these chips. The battle was set= tled out of court, which did not settle the issue of the first micro."=20 It seems the answer depends on what is a microprocessor...I suppose when it c= omes down to capitalism patents count more than anything else! Happy computing, Murray=C2=A0=F0=9F=99=82 =C2=A0=20 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 5:00=E2=80=AFPM ED SHARPE via cctalk wrote: I had heard something about a f14 chip pehS being first but not avail. To gen= eral=C2=A0 public???Ed# Sent from AOL on Android=20 =C2=A0 On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 2:41 PM, Joshua Rice via cctalk wrote:=C2=A0 =C2=A0 On 21/11/2023 09:03, ED SHARPE via cctalk wrote: > So what are the other contenders and what do they bring to table The 4004 was definitely the first commercially available single-chip CPU=20 on the market, but if you include multi-chip LSI designs, the lines get=20 blurry. --===============9171888818116150370==-- From couryhouse@aol.com Wed Nov 22 08:51:24 2023 From: ED SHARPE To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 08:51:14 +0000 Message-ID: <1355727505.3650641.1700643074049@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CSA1PR11MB6941D5A3E40E2CBA9347FF40A3BBA=40SA1PR11MB?= =?utf-8?q?6941=2Enamprd11=2Eprod=2Eoutlook=2Ecom=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6528964210664295080==" --===============6528964210664295080== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Was there ever a COMPUTER using a 4004=C2=A0 =C2=A0that=C2=A0 you=C2=A0 cud= =C2=A0 really=C2=A0 do=C2=A0 something or=C2=A0 did=C2=A0 tat finally arrive = with the 8008=C2=A0 as=C2=A0 in the skelby shelby=C2=A0 sp? 8008=C2=A0i now t= here=C2=A0 was an Intel=C2=A0 =C2=A0INTELIC 4 (?sp)=C2=A0 =C2=A0 could n that= =C2=A0 use 4004=C2=A0 or one of=C2=A0 the=C2=A0 later 4000 numbered proc.=C2= =A0We have an intelec 8 and 8 inch floppy=C2=A0 drives here at smecc musem ..= .. always=C2=A0 wanted=C2=A0 a 4!Ed# In a message dated 11/21/2023 11:31:55 AM US Mountain Standard Time, dkelvey(= a)hotmail.com writes:=C2=A0 There is little surviving software for the 4004. There are a few places with = snippets of code to do things like add or subtract several digits but my sear= ches of the internet have shown little actual code. The NBS has some code to = track satellites and correct for time delays from their clocks ( think GPS ).= I'd had a spare 4004 and always wanted to do something with it. I found that = the library for work done at the Navy Post Graduate School in Monterey Califo= rnia had 2 projects that students of Gary Kildall created. One was a load cal= culator for helicopters and the other was for calculating closest point of ap= proach for ships. I'd been unsuccessful at down loading the helicopter code b= ut was able to down load the ships document.I'd let the listing sit for 10's = of years while always on the back burner. Over the years I'd acquired the nee= ded parts. I did make a few substitutions, though. The original used 13 each = 1702A EPROMs. Since that exceed my budget for a PC board space, I chose the o= ption of using a 4289 and a 2732 EPROM. I did use the original designs number= of 4002s, as using RAM through the 4289 would have made significant changes = to the software.The problem of the circuit needed to be dealt with. The docum= ent had a page labelled 'schematic' that turned out to be the keyboard layout= and display layout( both of which I ignored and used my own layout that I th= ough was better ).Before getting to the board design, I needed to get working= software. The listing was done on a ASR33 with a deeply rutted platen, typic= al of hand-me-down things used by a school's command. Letters like R or P wou= ld look like F and 0 would look like C. Other letters were easy to figure out= but still often had their right edge missing.After entering the list by hand= , I'd feed it into my assembler and the tried to run it with my simulator.I'd= make corrections as I got the code running.I need to create the circuitry fo= r the keyboard decoder, that took 25 buttons to the 4 bit data bus input of t= he 4004. There was enough description in the document to create the LED displ= ay but I did missed one thing ( that I'll mention later ).I created the board= with my typical incorrect wiring, requiring several extra cuts and jumpers. = ( the concept was right but I got the pins of the 7402 mixed up.) The one thi= ng that I'd missed was the order of the digit scan. I assumed left to right b= ut the code was actually right to left. After so many cuts and jumpers to get= the keyboard right, I dreaded more to fix the scan order so I made the one c= hange to the original software to do right to left ( I still feel bad about t= hat change ).I thought I'd talk a little about how a Closest Point of Approac= h Calculation is done. Normally it had been done by a graphical method of lin= e drawing on what is called a plotting maneuver board. One used graphical cal= culations for the trig used. It was all done by pencil and parallel. It is so= important that, I believe, that to this day a ship's pilot still needs to be= able to do this calculation on a maneuver board, even though such graphical = displays are capable of doing such, today. Large ships require significant kn= owledge of where they are relative to other fixed and moving objects in order= to determine the safest path to proceed. A broken display is not time to lea= rn how to do such a calculation.This 4004 calculator used a newly found way o= f doing tangent calculations, called the CORDIC method. One could clearly see= the influence of Gary Kildall's hand in this code. It is noted that he wrote= the division routine used and the organization of the code clearly shows the= influence of a seasoned programmer. Bring such code back to life was almost = as much as making a 4004 processor from discrete transistors but I felt was f= or me as part of my bucket list.Things I needed to do, included writing an as= sembler, writing a simulator, learn a PC board CAD, transcribing a poor quali= ty listing, debugging the poorly transcribed listing, creating the keyboard d= ecoder and instrumenting my simulator to be the calculator.Dwight=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0From:=C2=A0ED SHARPE via cctalk Sent:=C2=A0Tuesday, November 21, 2023 1:03 AM To:=C2=A0General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Cc:=C2=A0ED SHARPE Subject:=C2=A0[cctalk] Re: Intel 4004=C2=A0So what are the other contenders a= nd what do they bring to table Sent from AOL on Android =C2=A0 =C2=A0 On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 9:06 PM, Adrian Stoness via cctalk wrote:=C2=A0=C2=A0 someone should build it in minecrsft On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 7:01=E2=80=AFPM ben via cctalk wrote: > On 2023-11-20 5:36 p.m., Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: > > On Nov. 15, 1971 Intel commercially released the 4004 microprocessor > which > > some consider to be the first. Nonetheless, even if not in agreement, it > > made possible the instrument which drives the classic-computing industry > or > > at the very least our hobby! > > > > Happy computing. > > > > Murray =F0=9F=99=82 > > > https://retrocomputingforum.com/t/swiss-physicist-builds-complete-intel-40= 04-computer-out-of-smd-transistors/3738 > THE DIY VERSION > > =C2=A0 --===============6528964210664295080==-- From couryhouse@aol.com Wed Nov 22 09:09:36 2023 From: ED SHARPE To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 09:09:21 +0000 Message-ID: <82892349.3652347.1700644161405@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1355727505.3650641.1700643074049@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0722089071486734557==" --===============0722089071486734557== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Damn typos=C2=A0 sorry Sent from AOL on Android=20 =20 On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 1:51 AM, ED SHARPE via cctalk wrote: Was there ever a COMPUTER using a 4004=C2=A0 =C2=A0that=C2=A0 yo= u=C2=A0 cud=C2=A0 really=C2=A0 do=C2=A0 something or=C2=A0 did=C2=A0 tat fina= lly arrive with the 8008=C2=A0 as=C2=A0 in the skelby shelby=C2=A0 sp? 8008= =C2=A0i now there=C2=A0 was an Intel=C2=A0 =C2=A0INTELIC 4 (?sp)=C2=A0 =C2=A0= could n that=C2=A0 use 4004=C2=A0 or one of=C2=A0 the=C2=A0 later 4000 numbe= red proc.=C2=A0We have an intelec 8 and 8 inch floppy=C2=A0 drives here at sm= ecc musem .... always=C2=A0 wanted=C2=A0 a 4!Ed# In a message dated 11/21/2023 11:31:55 AM US Mountain Standard Time, dkelvey(= a)hotmail.com writes:=C2=A0 There is little surviving software for the 4004. There are a few places with = snippets of code to do things like add or subtract several digits but my sear= ches of the internet have shown little actual code. The NBS has some code to = track satellites and correct for time delays from their clocks ( think GPS ).= I'd had a spare 4004 and always wanted to do something with it. I found that = the library for work done at the Navy Post Graduate School in Monterey Califo= rnia had 2 projects that students of Gary Kildall created. One was a load cal= culator for helicopters and the other was for calculating closest point of ap= proach for ships. I'd been unsuccessful at down loading the helicopter code b= ut was able to down load the ships document.I'd let the listing sit for 10's = of years while always on the back burner. Over the years I'd acquired the nee= ded parts. I did make a few substitutions, though. The original used 13 each = 1702A EPROMs. Since that exceed my budget for a PC board space, I chose the o= ption of using a 4289 and a 2732 EPROM. I did use the original designs number= of 4002s, as using RAM through the 4289 would have made significant changes = to the software.The problem of the circuit needed to be dealt with. The docum= ent had a page labelled 'schematic' that turned out to be the keyboard layout= and display layout( both of which I ignored and used my own layout that I th= ough was better ).Before getting to the board design, I needed to get working= software. The listing was done on a ASR33 with a deeply rutted platen, typic= al of hand-me-down things used by a school's command. Letters like R or P wou= ld look like F and 0 would look like C. Other letters were easy to figure out= but still often had their right edge missing.After entering the list by hand= , I'd feed it into my assembler and the tried to run it with my simulator.I'd= make corrections as I got the code running.I need to create the circuitry fo= r the keyboard decoder, that took 25 buttons to the 4 bit data bus input of t= he 4004. There was enough description in the document to create the LED displ= ay but I did missed one thing ( that I'll mention later ).I created the board= with my typical incorrect wiring, requiring several extra cuts and jumpers. = ( the concept was right but I got the pins of the 7402 mixed up.) The one thi= ng that I'd missed was the order of the digit scan. I assumed left to right b= ut the code was actually right to left. After so many cuts and jumpers to get= the keyboard right, I dreaded more to fix the scan order so I made the one c= hange to the original software to do right to left ( I still feel bad about t= hat change ).I thought I'd talk a little about how a Closest Point of Approac= h Calculation is done. Normally it had been done by a graphical method of lin= e drawing on what is called a plotting maneuver board. One used graphical cal= culations for the trig used. It was all done by pencil and parallel. It is so= important that, I believe, that to this day a ship's pilot still needs to be= able to do this calculation on a maneuver board, even though such graphical = displays are capable of doing such, today. Large ships require significant kn= owledge of where they are relative to other fixed and moving objects in order= to determine the safest path to proceed. A broken display is not time to lea= rn how to do such a calculation.This 4004 calculator used a newly found way o= f doing tangent calculations, called the CORDIC method. One could clearly see= the influence of Gary Kildall's hand in this code. It is noted that he wrote= the division routine used and the organization of the code clearly shows the= influence of a seasoned programmer. Bring such code back to life was almost = as much as making a 4004 processor from discrete transistors but I felt was f= or me as part of my bucket list.Things I needed to do, included writing an as= sembler, writing a simulator, learn a PC board CAD, transcribing a poor quali= ty listing, debugging the poorly transcribed listing, creating the keyboard d= ecoder and instrumenting my simulator to be the calculator.Dwight=C2=A0=C2=A0= =C2=A0From:=C2=A0ED SHARPE via cctalk Sent:=C2=A0Tuesday, November 21, 2023 1:03 AM To:=C2=A0General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Cc:=C2=A0ED SHARPE Subject:=C2=A0[cctalk] Re: Intel 4004=C2=A0So what are the other contenders a= nd what do they bring to table Sent from AOL on Android =C2=A0 =C2=A0 On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 9:06 PM, Adrian Stoness via cctalk wrote:=C2=A0=C2=A0 someone should build it in minecrsft On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 7:01=E2=80=AFPM ben via cctalk wrote: > On 2023-11-20 5:36 p.m., Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: > > On Nov. 15, 1971 Intel commercially released the 4004 microprocessor > which > > some consider to be the first. Nonetheless, even if not in agreement, it > > made possible the instrument which drives the classic-computing industry > or > > at the very least our hobby! > > > > Happy computing. > > > > Murray =F0=9F=99=82 > > >=C2=A0 https://retrocomputingforum.com/t/swiss-physicist-builds-complete-int= el-4004-computer-out-of-smd-transistors/3738 > THE DIY VERSION > > =C2=A0 =20 --===============0722089071486734557==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Wed Nov 22 14:36:27 2023 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 09:36:19 -0500 Message-ID: <7ECB8A1C-DB41-45E7-9416-F71AD3289C94@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: <1355727505.3650641.1700643074049@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0362307545521542886==" --===============0362307545521542886== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On Nov 22, 2023, at 3:51 AM, ED SHARPE via cctalk = wrote: >=20 > Was there ever a COMPUTER using a 4004 that you cud really do someth= ing or did tat finally arrive with the 8008 as in the skelby shelby sp? = 8008 i now there was an Intel INTELIC 4 (?sp) could n that use 4004 o= r one of the later 4000 numbered proc. We have an intelec 8 and 8 inch flop= py drives here at smecc musem .... always wanted a 4!Ed Don't know about commercial products. But a classmate of mine got Honors in = Independent Study for a project where he built a useable general purpose comp= uter out of a 4004, plus a boatload of other stuff. It filled a wire-wrap pa= nel board about 8 x 10 inches. He wrote some software for it as well, and to= ok it to a summer internship at one of the National Labs (in the Midwest -- A= rgonne?) where as I understand it they liked it enough to ask him for a copy = of the system. He graduated in 1975, so the work was done in the year or so = leading up to that. One complication was the terminal I/O (Teletype 33); originally he had a bit-= banging interface for that, which isn't easy on a 4004. At some point he fin= agled a UART chip out of one of the DEC field service engineers, I think that= was one of the first single chip UARTs, used in the earlier DEC PDP-11 termi= nal adapters. paul --===============0362307545521542886==-- From hummer51417@gmail.com Wed Nov 22 17:09:59 2023 From: Carl Yoder To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 10:09:55 -0700 Message-ID: <4df2fbe4-d1ab-4c8a-acf6-8db3e093ab68@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4109931184434835073==" --===============4109931184434835073== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Please find someone who can take me off the mailing list. Carl Yoder hummer51417(a)gmail.com On 11/21/2023 12:24 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: > ISTR a 4004 on one of the boards of my DTC300 Hytype I daisy wheel > printers. > > (or has unrefreshed wetware dynamic RAM lost its content?) > > > -- > Grumpy Ol' Fred             cisin(a)xenosoft.com -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com --===============4109931184434835073==-- From lewissa78@gmail.com Wed Nov 22 19:40:32 2023 From: Steve Lewis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 13:40:12 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1355727505.3650641.1700643074049@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1085557809118051998==" --===============1085557809118051998== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Haven't caught up on the whole 4004 discussion here, but my understanding was that the 4004 and 8008 were effectively developed at the same time? And were announced or available about within one month of each other? On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 2:51=E2=80=AFAM ED SHARPE via cctalk wrote: > Was there ever a COMPUTER using a 4004 that you cud really do > something or did tat finally arrive with the 8008 as in the skelby > shelby sp? 8008 i now there was an Intel INTELIC 4 (?sp) could n > that use 4004 or one of the later 4000 numbered proc. We have an > intelec 8 and 8 inch floppy drives here at smecc musem .... always > wanted a 4!Ed# > In a message dated 11/21/2023 11:31:55 AM US Mountain Standard Time, > dkelvey(a)hotmail.com writes: > There is little surviving software for the 4004. There are a few places > with snippets of code to do things like add or subtract several digits but > my searches of the internet have shown little actual code. The NBS has some > code to track satellites and correct for time delays from their clocks ( > think GPS ).I'd had a spare 4004 and always wanted to do something with it. > I found that the library for work done at the Navy Post Graduate School in > Monterey California had 2 projects that students of Gary Kildall created. > One was a load calculator for helicopters and the other was for calculating > closest point of approach for ships. I'd been unsuccessful at down loading > the helicopter code but was able to down load the ships document.I'd let > the listing sit for 10's of years while always on the back burner. Over the > years I'd acquired the needed parts. I did make a few substitutions, > though. The original used 13 each 1702A EPROMs. Since that exceed my budget > for a PC board space, I chose the option of using a 4289 and a 2732 EPROM. > I did use the original designs number of 4002s, as using RAM through the > 4289 would have made significant changes to the software.The problem of the > circuit needed to be dealt with. The document had a page labelled > 'schematic' that turned out to be the keyboard layout and display layout( > both of which I ignored and used my own layout that I though was better > ).Before getting to the board design, I needed to get working software. The > listing was done on a ASR33 with a deeply rutted platen, typical of > hand-me-down things used by a school's command. Letters like R or P would > look like F and 0 would look like C. Other letters were easy to figure out > but still often had their right edge missing.After entering the list by > hand, I'd feed it into my assembler and the tried to run it with my > simulator.I'd make corrections as I got the code running.I need to create > the circuitry for the keyboard decoder, that took 25 buttons to the 4 bit > data bus input of the 4004. There was enough description in the document to > create the LED display but I did missed one thing ( that I'll mention later > ).I created the board with my typical incorrect wiring, requiring several > extra cuts and jumpers. ( the concept was right but I got the pins of the > 7402 mixed up.) The one thing that I'd missed was the order of the digit > scan. I assumed left to right but the code was actually right to left. > After so many cuts and jumpers to get the keyboard right, I dreaded more to > fix the scan order so I made the one change to the original software to do > right to left ( I still feel bad about that change ).I thought I'd talk a > little about how a Closest Point of Approach Calculation is done. Normally > it had been done by a graphical method of line drawing on what is called a > plotting maneuver board. One used graphical calculations for the trig used. > It was all done by pencil and parallel. It is so important that, I believe, > that to this day a ship's pilot still needs to be able to do this > calculation on a maneuver board, even though such graphical displays are > capable of doing such, today. Large ships require significant knowledge of > where they are relative to other fixed and moving objects in order to > determine the safest path to proceed. A broken display is not time to learn > how to do such a calculation.This 4004 calculator used a newly found way of > doing tangent calculations, called the CORDIC method. One could clearly see > the influence of Gary Kildall's hand in this code. It is noted that he > wrote the division routine used and the organization of the code clearly > shows the influence of a seasoned programmer. Bring such code back to life > was almost as much as making a 4004 processor from discrete transistors but > I felt was for me as part of my bucket list.Things I needed to do, included > writing an assembler, writing a simulator, learn a PC board CAD, > transcribing a poor quality listing, debugging the poorly transcribed > listing, creating the keyboard decoder and instrumenting my simulator to be > the calculator.Dwight From: ED SHARPE via cctalk > Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2023 1:03 AM > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> > Cc: ED SHARPE > Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 So what are the other contenders and what > do they bring to table > > > Sent from AOL on Android > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 9:06 PM, Adrian Stoness via cctalk< > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: someone should build it in minecrsft > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 7:01=E2=80=AFPM ben via cctalk > wrote: > > > On 2023-11-20 5:36 p.m., Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: > > > On Nov. 15, 1971 Intel commercially released the 4004 microprocessor > > which > > > some consider to be the first. Nonetheless, even if not in agreement, > it > > > made possible the instrument which drives the classic-computing > industry > > or > > > at the very least our hobby! > > > > > > Happy computing. > > > > > > Murray =F0=9F=99=82 > > > > > > > https://retrocomputingforum.com/t/swiss-physicist-builds-complete-intel-400= 4-computer-out-of-smd-transistors/3738 > > THE DIY VERSION > > > > > > --===============1085557809118051998==-- From cisin@xenosoft.com Wed Nov 22 21:46:38 2023 From: Fred Cisin To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 13:46:32 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4df2fbe4-d1ab-4c8a-acf6-8db3e093ab68@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1659852755446476594==" --===============1659852755446476594== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In the headers of the mail that you sent is a line: List-Unsubscribe: If you already tried THAT and it did not work, then that would be important to know. On Wed, 22 Nov 2023, Carl Yoder via cctalk wrote: > Please find someone who can take me off the mailing list. > > Carl Yoder > > hummer51417(a)gmail.com > > On 11/21/2023 12:24 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: > > ISTR a 4004 on one of the boards of my DTC300 Hytype I daisy wheel > > printers. > > > > (or has unrefreshed wetware dynamic RAM lost its content?) > > > > > > -- > > Grumpy Ol' Fred             cisin(a)xenosoft.com > > -- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > www.avast.com --===============1659852755446476594==-- From couryhouse@aol.com Wed Nov 22 22:17:45 2023 From: ED SHARPE To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Nice 32 dollar goodie to display your 4004 in! Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 22:17:32 +0000 Message-ID: <1196734488.3817226.1700691452551@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1196734488.3817226.1700691452551.ref@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8719395227772800730==" --===============8719395227772800730== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable https://www.ebay.com/itm/276167634394?mkcid=3D16&mkevt=3D1&mkrid=3D711-127632= -2357-0&ssspo=3DJ2IlG_4zQZS&sssrc=3D4429486&ssuid=3D8osaXa5ZQwi&var=3D&widget= _ver=3Dartemis&media=3DMORE Sent from AOL on Android --===============8719395227772800730==-- From cisin@xenosoft.com Wed Nov 22 23:06:58 2023 From: Fred Cisin To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 15:06:51 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1355727505.3650641.1700643074049@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5624953973791187325==" --===============5624953973791187325== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 22 Nov 2023, ED SHARPE via cctalk wrote: > Was there ever a COMPUTER using a 4004=C2=A0 =C2=A0that=C2=A0 you=C2=A0 cud= =C2=A0 really=C2=A0 do=C2=A0 something or=C2=A0 did=C2=A0 tat finally arrive = with the 8008=C2=A0 as=C2=A0 in the skelby shelby=C2=A0 sp? 8008=C2=A0i now t= here=C2=A0 was an Intel=C2=A0 =C2=A0INTELIC 4 (?sp)=C2=A0 =C2=A0 could n that= =C2=A0 use 4004=C2=A0 or one of=C2=A0 the=C2=A0 later 4000 numbered proc.=C2= =A0We have an intelec 8 and 8 inch floppy=C2=A0 drives here at smecc musem ..= .. always=C2=A0 wanted=C2=A0 a 4!Ed# An absurd argument: It could be argued that the 8085, rather than being designed from scratch=20 was simply a modification of the 8080. Perhaps significant=20 modifications, but nevertheless modifications, not redesign from scratch. If we accept arguments such as that, then we could argue that Pentium is=20 a modified 80486, which is a modified 80386, which is a modified 80286, which is a modified 80186, which is a modified 8086, ... all the way down to the 4004 :-) Most of those modifications were necessary for subsequent software, . . . For example, Win3.00 could run on 8088/8086, but Win3.10 demanded A20,=20 etc. Therefore, it could be argued that Win11 can be run on a "heavily modified mo= dified 4004" Motorola tended to redesign from scratch, whereas Intel would modify their=20 previous design. [I warned you that it was absurd] --===============5624953973791187325==-- From paulkoning@comcast.net Thu Nov 23 00:33:53 2023 From: Paul Koning To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 19:33:46 -0500 Message-ID: <40D45135-23E8-4738-A619-53E1A9C82751@comcast.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0354400440477682287==" --===============0354400440477682287== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On Nov 22, 2023, at 6:06 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: >=20 > ... > Motorola tended to redesign from scratch, whereas Intel would modify their = previous design. Which might explain why the x86 ISA is such a convoluted tangle. Moto did those things too in various places, though: consider the 68k family.= The 68040 is clearly a derivative design but with a pile of things added. Come to think of it, creating an ISA once and extending it N times is standar= d industry practice, from PDP11 to VAX to Alpha to MIPS to Power, not to ment= ion earlier examples like CDC 6000/170/180 series, various IBM families, Elec= trologica... I'd say it is probably harder to come up with singleton designs= , especially several of them from a single company, than families. The value of N tends to depend on how well conceived the original architectur= e is (which is why N is smaller for PDP11 and VAX and MIPS than it is for x86= ) and also on the longevity of the family. So while Intel made a very large = family starting with the 4004, they made very small families out of the i960,= iAPX432, and various others. paul --===============0354400440477682287==-- From cisin@xenosoft.com Thu Nov 23 00:47:39 2023 From: Fred Cisin To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 16:47:34 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <40D45135-23E8-4738-A619-53E1A9C82751@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3758204849786050622==" --===============3758204849786050622== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >> Motorola tended to redesign from scratch, whereas Intel would modify their= previous design. On Wed, 22 Nov 2023, Paul Koning wrote: > Which might explain why the x86 ISA is such a convoluted tangle. Although redesign from scratch will tend to produce a better product,=20 modifying previous design, with kludge on top of kludge, can provide=20 upwards compatability. Segment/Offset is a hassle, but it meant that 8=20 bit (16 address bits) software can work with it. When the 5150 came out, the CP/M software companies, such as MicroPro=20 (Wordstar) and Sourcim (Supercalc), were able to port their products to it=20 much faster than anybody could port stuff to Macintosh. Though, Apple was=20 smart enough to include a "usable" word processor, so that nobody had to=20 wait for Word, etc., before using the machine. -- Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com --===============3758204849786050622==-- From cclist@sydex.com Thu Nov 23 00:58:14 2023 From: Chuck Guzis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 16:39:59 -0800 Message-ID: <4eebff77-1fa5-46d3-ae87-6ddc24eceee1@sydex.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7794137691049200046==" --===============7794137691049200046== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11/22/23 15:06, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: > Therefore, it could be argued that Win11 can be run on a "heavily > modified modified 4004" Certainly possible, if not incredibly silly. --Chuck --===============7794137691049200046==-- From cclist@sydex.com Thu Nov 23 01:53:19 2023 From: Chuck Guzis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 17:53:06 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8673071843118286043==" --===============8673071843118286043== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 11/22/23 16:47, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: > When the 5150 came out, the CP/M software companies, such as MicroPro > (Wordstar) and Sourcim (Supercalc), were able to port their products to > it much faster than anybody could port stuff to Macintosh.  Yup. I have vivid memories of the Intel rep telling us that not only was the 8086 compatible with the 8085, conversion could be automated through their ISIS-II based conversion program--and it would result in a smaller (memory footprint) program. I decided to take them up on those claims. I brought, as a sample, a floating-point math package with a small program to compute the value of pi to 12 or so places. No macros, nothing funny--plain old ASM80 code. We met at the (San Jose?--I don't recall) sales office, together with "Fast Eddie", Intel's outside sales rep. Confidently, he took my disk, stuck it in the MDS and confirmed that it assembled and ran. The he said "watch this", and started up the conversion program. After about a half-hour, he suggested that we might want to go to lunch, Intel's treat. That took another hour. We came back, fairly well lubricated, and found the thing was still cranking. Ed suggested that maybe we should take the rest of the afternoon off and that he'd get back to us the next day. Well, the next day passed, then the next... About 2 weeks later, he said the that the development team had gotten on the problem and finally had a working binary. It ran with the correct result, naturally. However it was nearly half-again as large. The guys at Sorcim wrote not only their own converter, but their own x86 assembler. Building the PC versions of SuperCalc was a very involved procedure, involving a VAX 11/730, a Compupro box with an 8085/88 CPU card and an IBM 5150. Martin Herbach was apparently the one who could confidently master the process, so he was kept on when Sorcim was puchased by CA. Ah, the old days... Chuck --===============8673071843118286043==-- From bfranchuk@jetnet.ab.ca Thu Nov 23 03:08:15 2023 From: ben To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 20:08:03 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7490373282784383714==" --===============7490373282784383714== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 2023-11-22 6:53 p.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: > On 11/22/23 16:47, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: > Yup. I have vivid memories of the Intel rep telling us that not only > was the 8086 compatible with the 8085, conversion could be automated > through their ISIS-II based conversion program--and it would result in a > smaller (memory footprint) program. > To be fair to Intel,I think they did good job of encoding the instruction set for the most common sequences being shorter. 8 bit bytes only give space for byte or word instructions, not both. Prefix bytes are good compromise with the segmented 64K memory space. Data and code space are optimized for 16 bits. You want 32 bits, buy a 432. Still only 64Kb segments. Ben. --===============7490373282784383714==-- From dkelvey@hotmail.com Thu Nov 23 03:34:39 2023 From: dwight To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2023 03:34:32 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0432490718746446156==" --===============0432490718746446156== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The Intlec 4 was no more or less a computer than the Altiar or IMSAI was. It = didn't typically have as much RAM but one could write and run code on it. As for the F14 processor. For the purpose used, it was likely a DSP. More int= ended to do matrix multiplication using adds and shifts. This would be simila= r to Intel's early try at a DSP. The F14 processor was said to control the flight surfaces. Like the Intel 292= 0 ( not to be confused with the AMD bit slice part) it likely ran tight loops= of signal processing operations using tables of lookup coefficients. Dwight --===============0432490718746446156==-- From couryhouse@aol.com Thu Nov 23 03:43:49 2023 From: ED SHARPE To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2023 03:43:38 +0000 Message-ID: <1904688685.3861017.1700711018178@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CSA1PR11MB6941C7CC86588E89E3D551F5A3B9A=40SA1PR11MB?= =?utf-8?q?6941=2Enamprd11=2Eprod=2Eoutlook=2Ecom=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3543425163212761998==" --===============3543425163212761998== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ibad an intellectual 4 offered to me one time that had a 4040 in it. Is t a 4= 040 like a 5 but more of the aux chips integrated? Is instruction set the sam= e? Sent from AOL on Android=20 =20 On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 8:34 PM, dwight via cctalk= wrote: The Intlec 4 was no more or less a computer than the Altiar or IMSA= I was. It didn't typically have as much RAM but one could write and run code = on it. As for the F14 processor. For the purpose used, it was likely a DSP. More int= ended to do matrix multiplication using adds and shifts. This would be simila= r to Intel's early try at a DSP. The F14 processor was said to control the flight surfaces. Like the Intel 292= 0 ( not to be confused with the AMD bit slice part) it likely ran tight loops= of signal processing operations using tables of lookup coefficients. Dwight =20 --===============3543425163212761998==-- From cclist@sydex.com Thu Nov 23 04:49:57 2023 From: Chuck Guzis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 20:49:47 -0800 Message-ID: <465dc667-e146-4d49-8925-65d69c3d048a@sydex.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1083446398065471658==" --===============1083446398065471658== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 11/22/23 19:08, ben via cctalk wrote: > for the most common sequences being shorter. 8 bit bytes only give space > for byte or word instructions, not both. Prefix bytes are good > compromise with the segmented 64K memory space. Data and code space are > optimized for 16 bits. You want 32 bits, buy a 432. Still only 64Kb > segments. If we're talking technical merits among contemporary designs, I'd say that the Zilog Z8000 was the better choice compared to the 8086 (both were introduced within months of one another). But Zilog was operating under the Exxon mis-management at the time, and nobody was sure about the company's survival. There were translation programs from Z80 to Z8000. -Chuck --===============1083446398065471658==-- From couryhouse@aol.com Thu Nov 23 06:37:33 2023 From: ED SHARPE To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2023 06:37:20 +0000 Message-ID: <885670331.3873114.1700721440695@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: =?utf-8?q?=3CSA1PR11MB6941C7CC86588E89E3D551F5A3B9A=40SA1PR11MB?= =?utf-8?q?6941=2Enamprd11=2Eprod=2Eoutlook=2Ecom=3E?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6498541363170507397==" --===============6498541363170507397== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable - What were the key differences between the Intelec 4 and=C2=A0 our Intelec 8? - What are the possible=C2=A0 accessories=C2=A0 for Intelec 8? We have a dual= floppy cabinet is all. =C2=A0Years I saw=C2=A0 an Intel blue colored standalone paper tape punch and= reader(we would like one!) Is there a good site that addresses=C2=A0 all and lots about=C2=A0 intelec sy= stems anyone can recommend? Thanks in advance! Ed Sharpe archivist for SMECC MUSEUM PROJECT Glendale AZ=C2=A0 Sent from AOL on Android=20 =20 On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 8:34 PM, dwight via cctalk= wrote: The Intlec 4 was no more or less a computer than the Altiar or IMSA= I was. It didn't typically have as much RAM but one could write and run code = on it. As for the F14 processor. For the purpose used, it was likely a DSP. More int= ended to do matrix multiplication using adds and shifts. This would be simila= r to Intel's early try at a DSP. The F14 processor was said to control the flight surfaces. Like the Intel 292= 0 ( not to be confused with the AMD bit slice part) it likely ran tight loops= of signal processing operations using tables of lookup coefficients. Dwight =20 --===============6498541363170507397==-- From sellam.ismail@gmail.com Thu Nov 23 07:45:52 2023 From: Sellam Abraham To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 13:34:34 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <5c0cd49076d04543a781a3b0ed4d4df8@bensene.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1375217252355505798==" --===============1375217252355505798== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable As the one who helped Ray introduce the F14A CADC microprocessor to the public back in 1998, I'm intimately familiar with the story of its creation as well as its capabilities. Ray officially announced the CADC at VCF 2.0 in 1998. He was the keynote speaker. He brought along prototypes of the chips that he kept from his time working at Garrett Air Research. Ray first attempted to publish the design in Computer Design magazine in 1971 but the military stepped in and classified the project and prohibited him from disclosing anything. As a result the article was pulled. In the mid-1990s he began an effort to have the design de-classified so that he could finally talk about it, something he'd been wanting to do since the early 1970s when they completed the project successfully, under budget and with time to spare. With the help of his local assemblywoman, Zoe Lofgren (Santa Clara) he was able to get the project de-classified (probably because the F14A is no longer produced, and the CADC was only used in the F14A, so maybe Iran still has an interest in CADC technology). Ray actually approached me, contacting me by phone, I think. He found me by way of the Vintage Computer Festival and asked if I would be interested in helping to bring disclosure to the CADC. I wasn't sure what to make of him at first as I already had some experience with hucksters promoting themselves as having done the first this or that, but upon meeting Ray for lunch he brought the goods (the prototype chips) and had the story and the facts to back up what he said. So we made an agreement to debut the CADC officially at VCF 2.0. Before we shopped the story around to the press, I decided that we should first meet with Ted Hoff to show him the CADC design and let him know we were going to make this public announcement that it beat out the 4004 by a couple years (and by quite a bit in terms of capability). The reasoning being I didn't want him to feel slighted or to create animosity if we were going to upend the history of microprocessors/microcomputing, which I felt this story would do. I was able to arrange a meeting with Hoff at his office in Menlo Park or something (it's been many long and sometimes hard years since 1998 so forgive me if I forget some minor details). Ted was cordial and then got right down to business, asking Ray a bunch of questions about the design of the CADC. And it came down to this: the CADC was designed to be a multi-processing system. While it was polling the pilot's joystick (first fly-by-wire aircraft I believe), it was also computing air speed/pressure, and using that to control the sweep (sorry that I don't know the proper technical term) of the wings, while also monitoring the weapons systems, etc. It was processing something like 8 different tasks simultaneously, in a round-robin fashion. Each sub-process was contained on its own ROM chip. The CADC central processor would execute so many cycles of code on each ROM and then move onto the next. The CADC had no program counter: since it was designed from its inception to be a multi-processing (multi-threading?) system, it made sense to build a program counter onto each ROM. Therefore, when the CADC switched back to that ROM to continue executing instructions, the program counter on that ROM told the CADC where it was supposed to fetch the next instruction. Once it became clear to Ted that the CADC did not have an integrated program counter (though it easily could have) he pooh-poohed the entire thing as not qualifying as a single-chip microprocessor and we spent the rest of our time with him discussing other topics until it was time to wrap up. Ray and I both came out of the meeting somewhat bewildered at his reaction and response, but in hindsight it was obvious that a gigantic part of Ted Hoff's legacy is as "inventor of the 'first' microprocessor" and so it made sense that he would be quick to protect that legacy rather than so easily give it up to this nobody from out of nowhere with this fantastical claim of a microprocessor before the 4004 that made the 4004 look like the silly little calculator chip that it was. I guess we were expecting him to be more interested in the historical significance of Ray's disclosure and welcome it but that was obviously naive. Once that was out of the way, I began shopping the story around to the press. I first approached the San Jose Mercury News tech editor (Dan whats-his-name), which would have been a natural fit all around, but he just could not be bothered to return my messages. I also pitched it to Katie Hafner and/or (can't remember for sure) John Markoff at the New York Times, and to Dan Kawasaki at the Wall Street Journal. It was Dan Kawasaki who actually got back to me and expressed a definite interest in the CADC and Ray's story. After an initial conversation with me and Ray, Dan asked for an exclusive on the story and we granted it to him. We had also (I guess tentatively) agreed it would be a front page story. So he set about doing his research and due diligence, which included talking with Ted Hoff and Frederico Faggin and also some proponents of the design, which included the designer of the 6800 (I think, or it might've been with Fairchild F8 microprocessor...like I said, it's been a while) who called the CADC a "tour de force of engineering". In the end, the article gave a somewhat antagonistic (I felt) review of the CADC and relied too heavily on the opinions of Hoff and Faggin to frame it. So whereas I was expecting a huge and glorious response, it ended up just fizzling out into nothing as far as the general public. It would take several more years of Ray Holt speading the word, establishing the record, and lobbying for recognition before the CADC would be de facto formally recognized for what it is, which depends on your definition of "single chip microprocessor", and how loyal you are to Ted Hoff :) Ray, by the way, is also responsible for the JOLT (first 6502 SBC) as well as the Synertek SYM-1. I will add that he is one of the nicest and calmest of people I have ever met and known in my life. A fantastic human being he is. He is someone who I believe still hasn't really gotten the recognition he deserves. The Computer History Museum has but a single result when searching their collection for "Ray Holt": https://computerhistory.org/blog/who-invented-the-microprocessor/ I don't think they've even done an oral history with him yet (fie). If they have, I apologize, but there's no indication of such in searching their site. At any rate, that article is a good overview of the controversy of all the people claiming "first" on the microprocessor. I learned of the Lee Boysel/AL-1 claim after digging more into the research once VCF 2.0 had passed as determining the "first microprocessor" became a sub-passion of mine for a while. I actually acquired a Four Phase Systems IV-90 from a dilapidated barn in Florida back in the 2000 timeframe. I still have it (one of the things that I was able to get out of my warehouse before I was permanently locked out) and I believe it may have an (or many) AL-1 in it. I put that research project on hold for 23 years. I'll eventually get back to it. Special thanks for Rick Bensene for that chapter of a book about the history of computers that he conjured up on the fly. The output of that man is beyond prolific. The information he provided about the CADC compliments the history I've provided here, but to really learn about it, and understand just what an amazing engineering feat it was, I recommend one go to his website and read up on it: https://firstmicroprocessor.com Sellam On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 6:08=E2=80=AFPM Rick Bensene via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > The F14 flight control (CADC) computer was a chipset, with different > functional aspects built into each chip. The design was done by Garrett > AirResearch. The requirements of the system were quite arduous, and thus > the computer was reasonably powerful for its time, especially considering > its size and power supply requirements. Once the logic was all tried and > true via bread boarding the system, > The logic was given to American Micro-systems, Inc., (AMI) who laid out > and fabricated the chips. At the time, AMI was one of the few companies > that could make large scale MOS ICs. AMI did a lot of secret work for the > US Government which is how it got its start in MOS LSI, and a lot of AMI's > early history is somewhat shrouded in mystery because most of the work they > did was secret. > > It appears that AMI's first MOS LSI calculator chipset was for Smith > Corona Marchant (SCM), with an eight-chip set that was partitioned into two > ROMs, a control chip that decoded the microcode in the ROMs into control > signals, a digit parallel, serial in/out ALU, an input processing IC for > scanning the keyboard, de-bouncing, and generating more signals going to > the microcode control chip, an output chip that took in serial data > representing a digit, decoded the BCD into 1-of-10 signals, sent that out > to the common Nixie bus, and also strobed the appropriate digit, as well as > keeping track of decimal point information, a register chip that contained > three 68-bit serial-in/serial out (with perhaps one position 4-bit parallel > out) shift registers that represented the storage for the working registers > of the calculator, and lastly, a data routing chip that took care of gating > serial data streams to/from the register chip, ALU chip, and output chip. > > Technically, this chipset was kind of a 4-bit micro-coded engine that was > microprogrammed to operate as a calculator, but with different I/O chips > and microcode, it could have been micro-coded to be a small, > general-purpose four-bit processor. > > The resulting calculator(s), the SCM Cogito 414 (introduced first on > 23-April-1969), and it's little brother, the SCM Cogito 412 (identical > chipset including ROMs, but has a jumper on the main board that limits the > machine to 12 digits versus the 414's 14 digits - and introduced a bit > later to allow sales of the 14-digit version to ramp up before introducing > a lower-cost model with two fewer digits). > > Was that chipset developed for SCM a microprocessor chipset? That's > really tough to say one way or the other. It could have fairly easily been > turned into a small general purpose (probably decimal based rather than > binary) computer with some different I/O chips and microcode, but does that > count as a microprocessor, either as-is, or with modifications? > > There was also a chipset that was developed by an individual entrepreneur > that was intended to function as the compute engine for a small portable > computer. > > At the moment, I can't recall the name of the person. He claimed his > design was truly the first "CPU on a chip". It had all of the requisite > bits (excuse pun) in the design to make it a full processor. At some > point fairly recently, after arguing his case for many years, it went to > court, with his claim being that he beat Texas Instruments to > implementation. TI had their single-chip microprogrammed "calculator" > processor that only needed display drive electronics, an external clock > generator, and a keyboard. The claim was that the chip that this guy had > developed was a complete CPU, whereas the TI chip, in order to do anything > other than serve as a calculator (with different mask-programmed microcode) > would require additional support ICs to do anything really useful as a > computer. A major point of the decision was that the engineer had some of > the core CPU chips and determined that one of them was still working, and > built a small demonstration computer using it. It was slow, but had a > full keyboard and a LCD display and could do simple application-like > functions. > > The court sided on the independent guy, although it was a very contentious > decision. I'm sorry I don't have the details of this at hand at the > moment, but there was quite a splash in the technical media regarding this > decision. At least for now, as far as patent law is concerned, this was > the first single chip microprocessor. > > So, technically, the CADC chipset for the F-14 was very likely the first > general-purpose processor implemented in MOS on a reasonably small number > of chips. The machine was a 20-bit machine, and had to do a lot of math, > very quickly, so its math functions were heavily optimized for the types of > calculators necessary for positioning the control surfaces of the F-14 in a > "fly-by-wire" environment. There were dedicated multiplier and divider > chips to do these calculations in hardware as quickly as possible. > > So, in some ways, the CADC, while it could likely be micro-coded to > operate as a more conventional computer, a lot of the details of its > implementation are still secret as far as I know. The chips were never > made available to anyone but the integration developer for the F-14 > project, and were all kept under tight secrecy for many, many years. So, > while it might qualify as a microprocessor distributed over a number of > large scale ICs, it was all top secret and definitely not an open > commercial product. > > I actually spent some time on the telephone with the primary engineer on > the CADC (Ray Holt) many years ago, and while I learned a lot, there were > many of my questions that he had to politely decline to answer because he > was still bound by duty to the US Government not to disclose information > that would be considered in the interest of the national security of the > United States. I believe that some more information has come out > concerning the chipset in the interest of the historical record. > > Here's an interesting article about Ray Holt and the CADC. > > https://www.eejournal.com/article/ray-holt-and-the-cadc-the-worlds-first-mi= litary-digital-flight-computer/ > > Here is a website maintained by Ray: > https://firstmicroprocessor.com/ > > The opinions expressed on Ray's site are his own. > > Another interesting, but often overlooked multi-chip microprocessor set > was designed by Computer Design Corp., which marketed higher-end > calculators under the Compucorp brand, as well as making OEM versions for > Monroe and a few others (Sumlock, Deitzgen among them). The chipset was > called the "HTL" chipset, and consisted of bit-serial ROM and RAM with > mask-programmed addressing, a core micro-coded engine that implemented an > eight-bit processor, with an instruction set that was fairly > general-purpose, but had a lot of stuff specific to calculator operations, > such as instructions for operating on half-word (4-bit) quantities in > binary and BCD. > > The core "CPU" chips used the data in the microcode ROMs as the > interpreter for the instruction set, with the rest of the microcode ROM > containing the specific "macrocode" implementation of the calculator. > There were I/O chips that were designed to run a multiplexed Nixie tube > display, as well as a Shinsu-Seiki (Seiko/Epson) drum impact printer. > > A generalized Input chip took care of the keyboard, but its operation was > quite programmable through control instructions sent to it that would > configure it for various different keyboard designs. > > There were some optional chips that together combined to be called the > "LEMP", for Learn Mode Programmer" that had specialized serial RAM for > storing program steps (stored as key codes learned from the keyboard), and > a sequencer that took care of doing things like programmed looping, > branching, comparisons, etc., as well as taking keyboard input and stuffing > the key codes into the program RAM. > > The LEMP RAM could hold 256 steps, or optionally with an additional two > chips, 512 steps. > > Lastly, there was a CLEMP chip, another I/O chip that interfaced an > optional optical card reader that could read punched cards into LEMP RAM, > for quick loading of applications, since the RAM technology used was > volatile, and register and program step storage was lost when power was > removed (and it was initialized to null on power-up as part of the RAM > sizing microcode). > > There were un-used key codes that could encode actual instructions of the > CPU instruction set which could be used by those with the appropriate > documentation to write code directly for the microcode-implemented > instruction set of the chipset. > > The first operable HTL chipsets appear to have been running (the chipsets > were laid out and fabricated by AMI) sometime in the mid-to-latter part of > 1969, putting the chipset in the timeframe for consideration. > > Computer Design Corp. from its inception was involved in designing > electronic calculators under contract to calculator manufacturers. > Initially, they used early DTL bipolar ICs made by Signetics. Computer > Design Corp. could design and build the calculators under contract, or just > provide all of the documentation for the customer to put together a > complete calculator from the design and sell it as their own. > > Interestingly enough, Nippon Calculating Machine Co., (NCM) which had > marketed two early transistorized calculators (basically a copy of the > design of Italy's IME 24 > Calculator, without any royalties or rights paid to IME) called the > Busicom 161 and 141. Since their first two calculators were essentially > engineered for them in Italy, NCM, while it had some digital electronics > competency, did not have much in the way of the skills needed to design a > machine as complex as a calculator. Since the 161 and 141 had caused some > ruckus, with Industria Macchine Elettroniche (IME)complaining publicly that > the Busicom machines were unlicensed copies, there never was any legal > process involved. NCM decided to look outside for calculator design > engineering, and right away became one of Computer Design Corporation's > early customers. > > Computer Design Corporation developed the Busicom 202, 207 and 2017, with > CRT display and optional printer attachment on the 207 and 2017), which > were built with DTL logic and magnetostrictive delay line memory with > punched card programming. These machines were targeted at higher-end > environments. Computer Design Corp. also designed the Busicom 162 and > 162C, smaller desktop calculators designed more for bookkeeping/accounting > and general math. The 162/162C Nixie-display calculators used DTL bipolar > logic, and a small magnetic core array for memory storage. These two > machines were essentially replacements for the Busicom 161/141 that had > limited lifetimes because of their discrete transistor construction. > > Along with designing calculators for others, primarily Busicom as is known > at this point, Computer Design Corp. was also working on the design of its > own MOS chipset that could be programmed to make up a sophisticated > calculator. > > When that chipset was operational and tested to be working in a calculator > prototype, the company thought they would just be a supplier of boards > stuffed with the MOS chipset to anyone who wanted them and they could > integrate them into their own calculator. > > Computer Design Corp. had created its Compucorp division to market a line > of machines using the chipsets, and was working on putting ramping up its > production facilities. There were actually small numbers of > Compucorp-branded Nixie-display calculators coming off the line that were > being sold through a number of independent business machine distributors > that they had lined up. Sales weren't particularly brisk, though, because > the company was a newcomer to a very well-established calculator > marketplace. Even though their calculators were more capable than most of > the competitors on the higher-end of the electronic calculator business, > their name was not well known when compared with the giants of the > industry: Wang Laboratories, Hewlett Packard, and others like Monroe, SCM, > and > Friden. > > Monroe happened to learn of these new calculators and that Computer Design > Corp. was eager to find OEMs to increase sales, and jumped on the bandwagon > big-time, making a deal with Computer Design Corp. to be the exclusive > retailer of calculators made by Computer Design Corporation using the HTL > chipset. > > Computer Design Corp. was forced to stop making Compucorp-branded > calculators, and badge their calculators as Monroe products. Monroe would > buy them and distribute them to all of their business machine retail > outlets. > > This was seemingly wonderful for Computer Design Corp., as it immediately > had a gigantic and very well-established sales network for its calculators. > As it turned > Out, Monroe was making a killing on the machines, and Compucorp wasn't > getting much out of their part of the deal. Compucorp still wanted to > sell their own machines through independent retailers, with different > features than the Monroe models. In time, Compucorp asked Monroe for > release from the exclusivity agreement, but Monroe would have nothing of > it. > > That did not go over well with Computer Design Corp. management. At one > point, Computer Design Corp. announced it was going to buy the Monroe > division of Litton Industries from Litton, as a way to get out of the > contract that so limited them, but that fell on its face, as Litton wanted > way more than Computer Design Corp. could muster. > > Then, Litton announced that they intended to buy Computer Design > Corporation. > > All of this craziness was going on just as the production lines at > Computer Design Corporation were churning out Monroe-badged machines at a > frenzied rate. > > Computer Design Corporation was able to somehow (I don=E2=80=99t know how) = thwart > the threat of buyout by Litton (who easily could have bought up all of > Computer Design. Corp.'s stock at an extremely attractive price), and as > part of it, they were able somehow able to get rid of the exclusivity > arrangement with Monroe/Litton, and they immediately began selling > Compucorp-branded calculators that were identical to the Monroe machines > other than cabinet styling and color scheme, as well as some subtle > functional differences to differentiate Compucorp machines from Monroe's > versions. > > At some point it was announced that the contract with Monroe had been > severed, giving free-reign to Compucorp to sell its own calculators, as > well as to OEM to other makers, and surprisingly, Monroe signed up as an > OEM customer. This arrangement suited Computer Design Corp. much more > favorably. > > I'll close by mentioning that the relationship between Nippon Calculating > Machine Co. and Computer Design Corp. might have seemed to end with the > design of the 162/162C, but there was continued business between the two > companies. > > Nippon Calculating Machine engineers had designed the logic for their own > complex MOS LSI calculator chipset that could allow the chips to be > combined in different ways to make varying types of calculators. > > At that time, Japan did not have anything but university and corporate > labs doing very early work on LSI MOS, and there was nowhere near any kind > of production capability in the country. > > Nippon Calculating Machine turned to the US to try to find someone to make > their chips for them. Initially, all of the chipmakers they went to > rejected them. > > They also visited Computer Design Corp. since they were long-time > customers, and there was discussion about seeing if Computer Design Corp. > might be able to serve as an intermediary to US chipmakers to get their > chips made. > > This wasn't really something that Computer Design Corp. was interested in > doing, but given the long history of working with Nippon Calculating > Machine Co., they agreed that they would take a crack at taking the design > that NCM had developed and work on partitioning it in a way that would work > with chip complexity constraints and packaging, and see if they could come > up with a chipset that they could get AMI to fabricate. Computer Design > Corp. already had the knowledge to do this from their own internal project > to develop their own chipset. > > It isn't known exactly what kind of agreement was forged, and if up-front > money was put up by NCM, but it is known that NCM put a firm deadline in > place stating that a calculator using the chipset would have to be > delivered in person to NCM headquarters and a presentation and demo of the > machine made to NCM executives and engineers. > > Work began immediately on taking the NCM logic design and turning it into > a batch of chips, which, by initial estimate was going to require 19 chips, > and that was assuming higher levels of integration that were only being > perfected by AMI at the time. > > As the NCM delegation was preparing to return to Japan with their hopes > dashed of making an agreement directly with a chipmaker, a call was > received from a fledgling chip manufacturing company that they had briefly > visited when they were in the Santa Clara, CA. area. > > The company specialized in making memory chips, though, and it was > initially thought that the huge amount of random logic that was involved in > the NCM calculator chipset design was beyond the capabilities of this > company. > > Memory devices are just repetitions of the same memory cell pattern over > and over on the chip to make a memory array, with additional logic to do > the address decoding and read/write (for RAM) or read(for ROM) circuitry > and I/O buffers. This type of chip design has some aspects that allow a > degree of automation to be used in laying out the chips, and also had very > little in the way of random logic to complicate the chip design. > > The NCM calculator design was a whole bunch of random logic...gate upon > gate, flip-flop upon flip-flop wired together in a rats nest of logic for > each chip. > > After NCM left this fledgling company named Intel, higher-ups at Intel had > learned of the visit by NCM, and told their underlings to get back in touch > with NCM and let them know they would see what they could do for NCM. > > Intel was cash-hungry at the time, and it was thought that perhaps this > project could serve double-duty...to bring in some needed cash for Intel's > production capacity expansion, as well as to perhaps push Intel's IC > fabrication technology into areas other than RAM and ROM. Intel was doing > well with their memory ICs, but they were limited by the number of chips > they could produce. Chip manufacturing technology is very expensive, so > Intel was investing everything they made in enhancing their production > capabilities. So, maybe working with NCM might help bring in some funds > to help that effort. > > A deal was forged between Intel and NCM. A firm deadline was part of the > contractual language where Intel would have to build a prototype calculator > based on the chips, and bring it to NCM's headquarters on a specific date > and present/demonstrate it to NCM executives and engineers. > > In the end, the NCM chip design was set aside as it was simply beyond the > capability to be fabricated by Intel. Had Intel not had an idea of how to > effectively do what the massively complex chipset did in a much simpler > fashion, who knows what the future would have held. > > The solution to Intel's problem of abandoning NCM's chipset is what became > the Intel 4004. Intel developed and fabricated the 4004 and some support > chips to make it into a useful controller for a calculator, including some > shift register ICs for I/O, some combination RAM and I/O chips, as well as > ROM and I/O chips. They built a very simple prototype calculator that > could do integer-only math as their demo, and presented it to NCM. The > Busicom 141-PF was the resulting production calculator, arguably the first > consumer device to use a microprocessor to create its functionality. The > rest is history. > > There's a piece of the story left hanging, though. > > That's a very, very interesting story that will have to wait until I get > all of my ducks in a row to tell, which I will do on the Old Calculator > Museum website at some point in the not too distant future. I'll certainly > announce it here when it's finalized on up on the website. > > Rick Bensene > The Old Calculator Museum > https://oldcalculatormuseum.com > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ED SHARPE via cctalk [mailto:cctalk(a)classiccmp.org] > Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2023 2:00 PM > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> > Cc: ED SHARPE > Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 > > I had heard something about a f14 chip pehS being first but not avail. To > general public???Ed# > > > Sent from AOL on Android > > On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 2:41 PM, Joshua Rice via cctalk< > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > On 21/11/2023 09:03, ED SHARPE via cctalk wrote: > > So what are the other contenders and what do they bring to table > > The 4004 was definitely the first commercially available single-chip CPU > on the market, but if you include multi-chip LSI designs, the lines get > blurry. > > --===============1375217252355505798==-- From wayne.smith@wbd.com Thu Nov 23 07:45:59 2023 From: "Smith, Wayne" To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 19:03:23 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <170067600996.2847341.2055655909207252582@classiccmp.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7871069369446687980==" --===============7871069369446687980== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Not a COMPUTER but I have a Pro-log M900 EPROM burner that has a second sourc= e INS4004 on the board. This isn't my M900 (my INS4004 is white/gold), but h= ere is a view of the board/chip: http://www.wolfgangrobel.de/programmer/img_= m900/m900_06.jpg=20 -W Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 09:36:19 -0500 From: Paul Koning Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) To: ED SHARPE , "cctalk(a)classiccmp.org" Message-ID: <7ECB8A1C-DB41-45E7-9416-F71AD3289C94(a)comcast.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=3Dus-ascii > On Nov 22, 2023, at 3:51 AM, ED SHARPE via cctalk = wrote: >=20 > Was there ever a COMPUTER using a 4004 that you cud really do someth= ing or did tat finally arrive with the 8008 as in the skelby shelby sp? = 8008 i now there was an Intel INTELIC 4 (?sp) could n that use 4004 o= r one of the later 4000 numbered proc. We have an intelec 8 and 8 inch flop= py drives here at smecc musem .... always wanted a 4!Ed Don't know about commercial products. But a classmate of mine got Honors in = Independent Study for a project where he built a useable general purpose comp= uter out of a 4004, plus a boatload of other stuff. It filled a wire-wrap pa= nel board about 8 x 10 inches. He wrote some software for it as well, and to= ok it to a summer internship at one of the National Labs (in the Midwest -- A= rgonne?) where as I understand it they liked it enough to ask him for a copy = of the system. He graduated in 1975, so the work was done in the year or so = leading up to that. One complication was the terminal I/O (Teletype 33); originally he had a bit-= banging interface for that, which isn't easy on a 4004. At some point he fin= agled a UART chip out of one of the DEC field service engineers, I think that= was one of the first single chip UARTs, used in the earlier DEC PDP-11 termi= nal adapters. paul --===============7871069369446687980==-- From cc@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de Thu Nov 23 10:31:45 2023 From: Christian Corti To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2023 11:31:34 +0100 Message-ID: <9119e35-7eac-9ba8-9566-5a6e155a655d@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8697942316036987461==" --===============8697942316036987461== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 22 Nov 2023, Fred Cisin wrote: > An absurd argument: > It could be argued that the 8085, rather than being designed from scratch w= as=20 > simply a modification of the 8080. Perhaps significant modifications, but = > nevertheless modifications, not redesign from scratch. 8080 and 8085 are essentially the same (from the programmer's view). > If we accept arguments such as that, then we could argue that Pentium is a = > modified 80486, > which is a modified 80386, > which is a modified 80286, > which is a modified 80186, > which is a modified 8086, > ... > all the way down to the 4004 :-) Right, this is what I always say. BUT the cut is with the 8008. The 4004 is a completely different beast=20 and has absolutely no ressemblence to the 8008, e.g. Harvard vs.=20 Von-Neumann architecture etc. The "modifications" (or better: heritage) can be seen if you look at the=20 registers. Initially A, B, C, D, E, H and L, they were the same in the=20 8080. When going 16 bits, they were "extended", i.e. called A extended, B=20 extended and so on, with names AX, BX, CX, DX, and the addition of=20 segmenmt registers. Later, when going to 32 bits, Intel already "forgot"=20 what AX stood for, and so they called the registers "extended A extended"=20 (EAX) and so on. > Therefore, it could be argued that Win11 can be run on a "heavily modified = > modified 4004" 8008, not 4004. > Motorola tended to redesign from scratch, whereas Intel would modify their = > previous design. Yes, but that is a widely known fact. > [I warned you that it was absurd] It isn't absurd at all, or not more absurd as my post ;-) Christian --===============8697942316036987461==-- From couryhouse@aol.com Thu Nov 23 14:28:28 2023 From: ED SHARPE To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2023 13:00:04 +0000 Message-ID: <1833016003.3912246.1700744404207@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4438209047362489935==" --===============4438209047362489935== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Great history info!!!!Ed# Sent from AOL on Android=20 =20 On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 12:45 AM, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote: As the one who helped Ray introduce the F14A CADC micropro= cessor to the public back in 1998, I'm intimately familiar with the story of its creation as well as its capabilities. Ray officially announced the CADC at VCF 2.0 in 1998.=C2=A0 He was the keynote speaker.=C2=A0 He brought along prototypes of the chips that he kept from his time working at Garrett Air Research.=C2=A0 Ray first attempted to publish the design in Computer Design magazine in 1971 but the military stepped in and classified the project and prohibited him from disclosing anything.=C2=A0 As a result the article was pulled.=C2=A0 In the mid-1990s he began an effort to h= ave the design de-classified so that he could finally talk about it, something he'd been wanting to do since the early 1970s when they completed the project successfully, under budget and with time to spare.=C2=A0 With the help of his local assemblywoman, Zoe Lofgren (Santa Clara) he was able to get the project de-classified (probably because the F14A is no longer produced, and the CADC was only used in the F14A, so maybe Iran still has an interest in CADC technology). Ray actually approached me, contacting me by phone, I think.=C2=A0 He found me by way of the Vintage Computer Festival and asked if I would be interested in helping to bring disclosure to the CADC.=C2=A0 I wasn't sure what to make = of him at first as I already had some experience with hucksters promoting themselves as having done the first this or that, but upon meeting Ray for lunch he brought the goods (the prototype chips) and had the story and the facts to back up what he said.=C2=A0 So we made an agreement to debut the CADC officially at VCF 2.0. Before we shopped the story around to the press, I decided that we should first meet with Ted Hoff to show him the CADC design and let him know we were going to make this public announcement that it beat out the 4004 by a couple years (and by quite a bit in terms of capability).=C2=A0 The reasoning being I didn't want him to feel slighted or to create animosity if we were going to upend the history of microprocessors/microcomputing, which I felt this story would do.=C2=A0 I was able to arrange a meeting with Hoff at his office in Menlo Park or something (it's been many long and sometimes hard years since 1998 so forgive me if I forget some minor details).=C2=A0 Ted was cordial and then got right down to business, asking Ray a bunch of questions about the design of the CADC.=C2=A0 And it came down to this: the C= ADC was designed to be a multi-processing system.=C2=A0 While it was polling the pilot's joystick (first fly-by-wire aircraft I believe), it was also computing air speed/pressure, and using that to control the sweep (sorry that I don't know the proper technical term) of the wings, while also monitoring the weapons systems, etc.=C2=A0 It was processing something like 8 different tasks simultaneously, in a round-robin fashion.=C2=A0 Each sub-proc= ess was contained on its own ROM chip.=C2=A0 The CADC central processor would execute so many cycles of code on each ROM and then move onto the next. The CADC had no program counter: since it was designed from its inception to be a multi-processing (multi-threading?) system, it made sense to build a program counter onto each ROM.=C2=A0 Therefore, when the CADC switched back= to that ROM to continue executing instructions, the program counter on that ROM told the CADC where it was supposed to fetch the next instruction. Once it became clear to Ted that the CADC did not have an integrated program counter (though it easily could have) he pooh-poohed the entire thing as not qualifying as a single-chip microprocessor and we spent the rest of our time with him discussing other topics until it was time to wrap up.=C2=A0 Ray and I both came out of the meeting somewhat bewildered at his reaction and response, but in hindsight it was obvious that a gigantic part of Ted Hoff's legacy is as "inventor of the 'first' microprocessor" and so it made sense that he would be quick to protect that legacy rather than so easily give it up to this nobody from out of nowhere with this fantastical claim of a microprocessor before the 4004 that made the 4004 look like the silly little calculator chip that it was.=C2=A0 I guess we were expecting him= to be more interested in the historical significance of Ray's disclosure and welcome it but that was obviously naive. Once that was out of the way, I began shopping the story around to the press.=C2=A0 I first approached the San Jose Mercury News tech editor (Dan whats-his-name), which would have been a natural fit all around, but he just could not be bothered to return my messages.=C2=A0 I also pitched it to Katie Hafner and/or (can't remember for sure) John Markoff at the New York Times, and to Dan Kawasaki at the Wall Street Journal.=C2=A0 It was Dan Kawas= aki who actually got back to me and expressed a definite interest in the CADC and Ray's story.=C2=A0 After an initial conversation with me and Ray, Dan ask= ed for an exclusive on the story and we granted it to him.=C2=A0 We had also (I guess tentatively) agreed it would be a front page story.=C2=A0 So he set abo= ut doing his research and due diligence, which included talking with Ted Hoff and Frederico Faggin and also some proponents of the design, which included the designer of the 6800 (I think, or it might've been with Fairchild F8 microprocessor...like I said, it's been a while) who called the CADC a "tour de force of engineering".=C2=A0 In the end, the article gave a somewhat antagonistic (I felt) review of the CADC and relied too heavily on the opinions of Hoff and Faggin to frame it.=C2=A0 So whereas I was expecting a h= uge and glorious response, it ended up just fizzling out into nothing as far as the general public.=C2=A0 It would take several more years of Ray Holt speadi= ng the word, establishing the record, and lobbying for recognition before the CADC would be de facto formally recognized for what it is, which depends on your definition of "single chip microprocessor", and how loyal you are to Ted Hoff :) Ray, by the way, is also responsible for the JOLT (first 6502 SBC) as well as the Synertek SYM-1.=C2=A0 I will add that he is one of the nicest and calm= est of people I have ever met and known in my life.=C2=A0 A fantastic human being= he is.=C2=A0 He is someone who I believe still hasn't really gotten the recognit= ion he deserves. The Computer History Museum has but a single result when searching their collection for "Ray Holt": https://computerhistory.org/blog/who-invented-the-microprocessor/ I don't think they've even done an oral history with him yet (fie).=C2=A0 If they have, I apologize, but there's no indication of such in searching their site.=C2=A0 At any rate, that article is a good overview of the controversy of all the people claiming "first" on the microprocessor. I learned of the Lee Boysel/AL-1 claim after digging more into the research once VCF 2.0 had passed as determining the "first microprocessor" became a sub-passion of mine for a while.=C2=A0 I actually acquired a Four Phase Syste= ms IV-90 from a dilapidated barn in Florida back in the 2000 timeframe.=C2=A0 I still have it (one of the things that I was able to get out of my warehouse before I was permanently locked out) and I believe it may have an (or many) AL-1 in it.=C2=A0 I put that research project on hold for 23 years.=C2=A0 I'll eventually get back to it. Special thanks for Rick Bensene for that chapter of a book about the history of computers that he conjured up on the fly.=C2=A0 The output of that man is beyond prolific.=C2=A0 The information he provided about the CADC compliments the history I've provided here, but to really learn about it, and understand just what an amazing engineering feat it was, I recommend one go to his website and read up on it: https://firstmicroprocessor.com Sellam On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 6:08=E2=80=AFPM Rick Bensene via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > The F14 flight control (CADC) computer was a chipset, with different > functional aspects built into each chip.=C2=A0 The design was done by Garre= tt > AirResearch.=C2=A0 The requirements of the system were quite arduous, and t= hus > the computer was reasonably powerful for its time, especially considering > its size and power supply requirements.=C2=A0 Once the logic was all tried = and > true via bread boarding the system, > The logic was given to American Micro-systems, Inc., (AMI) who laid out > and fabricated the chips.=C2=A0 At the time, AMI was one of the few compani= es > that could make large scale MOS ICs.=C2=A0 AMI did a lot of secret work for= the > US Government which is how it got its start in MOS LSI, and a lot of AMI's > early history is somewhat shrouded in mystery because most of the work they > did was secret. > > It appears that AMI's first MOS LSI calculator chipset was for Smith > Corona Marchant (SCM), with an eight-chip set that was partitioned into two > ROMs, a control chip that decoded the microcode in the ROMs into control > signals, a digit parallel, serial in/out ALU, an input processing IC for > scanning the keyboard, de-bouncing, and generating more signals going to > the microcode control chip, an output chip that took in serial data > representing a digit, decoded the BCD into 1-of-10 signals, sent that out > to the common Nixie bus, and also strobed the appropriate digit, as well as > keeping track of decimal point information, a register chip that contained > three 68-bit serial-in/serial out (with perhaps one position 4-bit parallel > out) shift registers that represented the storage for the working registers > of the calculator, and lastly, a data routing chip that took care of gating > serial data streams to/from the register chip, ALU chip, and output chip. > > Technically, this chipset was kind of a 4-bit micro-coded engine that was > microprogrammed to operate as a calculator, but with different I/O chips > and microcode, it could have been micro-coded to be a small, > general-purpose four-bit processor. > > The resulting calculator(s), the SCM Cogito 414 (introduced first on > 23-April-1969), and it's little brother, the SCM Cogito 412 (identical > chipset including ROMs, but has a jumper on the main board that limits the > machine to 12 digits versus the 414's 14 digits - and introduced a bit > later to allow sales of the 14-digit version to ramp up before introducing > a lower-cost model with two fewer digits). > > Was that chipset developed for SCM a microprocessor chipset?=C2=A0 =C2=A0 T= hat's > really tough to say one way or the other.=C2=A0 It could have fairly easily= been > turned into a small general purpose (probably decimal based rather than > binary) computer with some different I/O chips and microcode, but does that > count as a microprocessor, either as-is, or with modifications? > > There was also a chipset that was developed by an individual entrepreneur > that was intended to function as the compute engine for a small portable > computer. > > At the moment, I can't recall the name of the person.=C2=A0 He claimed his > design was truly the first "CPU on a chip".=C2=A0 It had all of the requisi= te > bits (excuse pun) in the design to make it a full processor.=C2=A0 =C2=A0 A= t some > point fairly recently, after arguing his case for many years, it went to > court, with his claim being that he beat Texas Instruments to > implementation.=C2=A0 TI had their single-chip microprogrammed "calculator" > processor that only needed display drive electronics, an external clock > generator, and a keyboard.=C2=A0 The claim was that the chip that this guy = had > developed was a complete CPU, whereas the TI chip, in order to do anything > other than serve as a calculator (with different mask-programmed microcode) > would require additional support ICs to do anything really useful as a > computer.=C2=A0 A major point of the decision was that the engineer had som= e of > the core CPU chips and determined that one of them was still working, and > built a small demonstration computer using it.=C2=A0 It was slow, but had a > full keyboard and a LCD display and could do simple application-like > functions. > > The court sided on the independent guy, although it was a very contentious > decision.=C2=A0 I'm sorry I don't have the details of this at hand at the > moment, but there was quite a splash in the technical media regarding this > decision.=C2=A0 At least for now, as far as patent law is concerned, this w= as > the first single chip microprocessor. > > So, technically, the CADC chipset for the F-14 was very likely the first > general-purpose processor implemented in MOS on a reasonably small number > of chips.=C2=A0 The machine was a 20-bit machine, and had to do a lot of ma= th, > very quickly, so its math functions were heavily optimized for the types of > calculators necessary for positioning the control surfaces of the F-14 in a > "fly-by-wire" environment.=C2=A0 There were dedicated multiplier and divider > chips to do these calculations in hardware as quickly as possible. > > So, in some ways, the CADC, while it could likely be micro-coded to > operate as a more conventional computer, a lot of the details of its > implementation are still secret as far as I know.=C2=A0 The chips were never > made available to anyone but the integration developer for the F-14 > project, and were all kept under tight secrecy for many, many years.=C2=A0 = So, > while it might qualify as a microprocessor distributed over a number of > large scale ICs, it was all top secret and definitely not an open > commercial product. > > I actually spent some time on the telephone with the primary engineer on > the CADC (Ray Holt) many years ago, and while I learned a lot, there were > many of my questions that he had to politely decline to answer because he > was still bound by duty to the US Government not to disclose information > that would be considered in the interest of the national security of the > United States.=C2=A0 I believe that some more information has come out > concerning the chipset in the interest of the historical record. > > Here's an interesting article about Ray Holt and the CADC. > > https://www.eejournal.com/article/ray-holt-and-the-cadc-the-worlds-first-mi= litary-digital-flight-computer/ > > Here is a website maintained by Ray: > https://firstmicroprocessor.com/ > > The opinions expressed on Ray's site are his own. > > Another interesting, but often overlooked multi-chip microprocessor set > was designed by Computer Design Corp., which marketed higher-end > calculators under the Compucorp brand, as well as making OEM versions for > Monroe and a few others (Sumlock, Deitzgen among them).=C2=A0 The chipset w= as > called the "HTL" chipset, and consisted of bit-serial ROM and RAM with > mask-programmed addressing, a core micro-coded engine that implemented an > eight-bit processor, with an instruction set that was fairly > general-purpose, but had a lot of stuff specific to calculator operations, > such as instructions for operating on half-word (4-bit) quantities in > binary and BCD. > > The core "CPU" chips used the data in the microcode ROMs as the > interpreter for the instruction set, with the rest of the microcode ROM > containing the specific "macrocode" implementation of the calculator. >=C2=A0 There were I/O chips that were designed to run a multiplexed Nixie tu= be > display, as well as a Shinsu-Seiki (Seiko/Epson) drum impact printer. > > A generalized Input chip took care of the keyboard, but its operation was > quite programmable through control instructions sent to it that would > configure it for various different keyboard designs. > > There were some optional chips that together combined to be called the > "LEMP", for Learn Mode Programmer" that had specialized serial RAM for > storing program steps (stored as key codes learned from the keyboard), and > a sequencer that took care of doing things like programmed looping, > branching, comparisons, etc., as well as taking keyboard input and stuffing > the key codes into the program RAM. > > The LEMP RAM could hold 256 steps, or optionally with an additional two > chips, 512 steps. > > Lastly, there was a CLEMP chip, another I/O chip that interfaced an > optional optical card reader that could read punched cards into LEMP RAM, > for quick loading of applications, since the RAM technology used was > volatile, and register and program step storage was lost when power was > removed (and it was initialized to null on power-up as part of the RAM > sizing microcode). > > There were un-used key codes that could encode actual instructions of the > CPU instruction set which could be used by those with the appropriate > documentation to write code directly for the microcode-implemented > instruction set of the chipset. > > The first operable HTL chipsets appear to have been running (the chipsets > were laid out and fabricated=C2=A0 by AMI) sometime in the mid-to-latter pa= rt of > 1969, putting the chipset in the timeframe for consideration. > > Computer Design Corp. from its inception was involved in designing > electronic calculators under contract to calculator manufacturers. > Initially, they used early DTL bipolar ICs made by Signetics.=C2=A0 Computer > Design Corp. could design and build the calculators under contract, or just > provide all of the documentation for the customer to put together a > complete calculator from the design and sell it as their own. > > Interestingly enough, Nippon Calculating Machine Co., (NCM) which had > marketed two early transistorized calculators (basically a copy of the > design of Italy's IME 24 > Calculator, without any royalties or rights paid to IME) called the > Busicom 161 and 141. Since their first two calculators were essentially > engineered for them in Italy, NCM, while it had some digital electronics > competency, did not have much in the way of the skills needed to design a > machine as complex as a calculator.=C2=A0 Since the 161 and 141 had caused = some > ruckus, with Industria Macchine Elettroniche (IME)complaining publicly that > the Busicom machines were unlicensed copies, there never was any legal > process involved.=C2=A0 NCM decided to look outside for calculator design > engineering, and right away became one of Computer Design Corporation's > early customers. > > Computer Design Corporation developed the Busicom 202, 207 and 2017, with > CRT display and optional printer attachment on the 207 and 2017), which > were built with DTL logic and magnetostrictive delay line memory with > punched card programming.=C2=A0 These machines were targeted at higher-end > environments.=C2=A0 Computer Design Corp. also designed the Busicom 162 and > 162C, smaller desktop calculators designed more for bookkeeping/accounting > and general math.=C2=A0 The 162/162C Nixie-display calculators used DTL bip= olar > logic, and a small magnetic core array for memory storage.=C2=A0 These two > machines were essentially replacements for the Busicom 161/141 that had > limited lifetimes because of their discrete transistor construction. > > Along with designing calculators for others, primarily Busicom as is known > at this point, Computer Design Corp. was also working on the design of its > own MOS chipset that could be programmed to make up a sophisticated > calculator. > > When that chipset was operational and tested to be working in a calculator > prototype, the company thought they would just be a supplier of boards > stuffed with the MOS chipset to anyone who wanted them and they could > integrate them into their own calculator. > > Computer Design Corp. had created its Compucorp division to market a line > of machines using the chipsets, and was working on putting ramping up its > production facilities.=C2=A0 There were actually small numbers of > Compucorp-branded Nixie-display calculators coming off the line that were > being sold through a number of independent business machine distributors > that they had lined up. Sales weren't particularly brisk, though, because > the company was a newcomer to a very well-established calculator > marketplace. Even though their calculators were more capable than most of > the competitors on the higher-end of the electronic calculator business, > their name was not well known when compared with the giants of the > industry:=C2=A0 Wang Laboratories, Hewlett Packard, and others like Monroe,= SCM, > and > Friden. > > Monroe happened to learn of these new calculators and that Computer Design > Corp. was eager to find OEMs to increase sales, and jumped on the bandwagon > big-time, making a deal with Computer Design Corp. to be the exclusive > retailer of calculators made by Computer Design Corporation using the HTL > chipset. > > Computer Design Corp. was forced to stop making Compucorp-branded > calculators, and badge their calculators as Monroe products.=C2=A0 Monroe w= ould > buy them and distribute them to all of their business machine retail > outlets. > > This was seemingly wonderful for Computer Design Corp., as it immediately > had a gigantic and very well-established sales network for its calculators. > As it turned > Out, Monroe was making a killing on the machines, and Compucorp wasn't > getting much out of their part of the deal.=C2=A0 Compucorp still wanted to > sell their own machines through independent retailers, with different > features than the Monroe models.=C2=A0 In time, Compucorp asked=C2=A0 Monro= e for > release from the exclusivity agreement, but Monroe would have nothing of > it. > > That did not go over well with Computer Design Corp. management.=C2=A0 At o= ne > point, Computer Design Corp. announced it was going to buy the Monroe > division of Litton Industries from Litton, as a way to get out of the > contract that so limited them, but that fell on its face, as Litton wanted > way more than Computer Design Corp. could muster. > > Then, Litton announced that they intended to buy Computer Design > Corporation. > > All of this craziness was going on just as the production lines at > Computer Design Corporation were churning out Monroe-badged machines at a > frenzied rate. > > Computer Design Corporation was able to somehow (I don=E2=80=99t know how) = thwart > the threat of buyout by Litton (who easily could have bought up all of > Computer Design. Corp.'s stock at an extremely attractive price), and as > part of it, they were able somehow able to get rid of the exclusivity > arrangement with Monroe/Litton, and they immediately began selling > Compucorp-branded calculators that were identical to the Monroe machines > other than cabinet styling and color scheme, as well as some subtle > functional differences to differentiate Compucorp machines from Monroe's > versions. > > At some point it was announced that the contract with Monroe had been > severed, giving free-reign to Compucorp to sell its own calculators, as > well as to OEM to other makers, and surprisingly, Monroe signed up as an > OEM customer.=C2=A0 This arrangement suited Computer Design Corp. much more > favorably. > > I'll close by mentioning that the relationship between Nippon Calculating > Machine Co. and Computer Design Corp. might have seemed to end with the > design of the 162/162C, but there was continued business between the two > companies. > > Nippon Calculating Machine engineers had designed the logic for their own > complex MOS LSI calculator chipset that could allow the chips to be > combined in different ways to make varying types of calculators. > > At that time, Japan did not have anything but university and corporate > labs doing very early work on LSI MOS, and there was nowhere near any kind > of production capability in the country. > > Nippon Calculating Machine turned to the US to try to find someone to make > their chips for them.=C2=A0 Initially, all of the chipmakers they went to > rejected them. > > They also visited Computer Design Corp. since they were long-time > customers, and there was discussion about seeing if Computer Design Corp. > might be able to serve as an intermediary to US chipmakers to get their > chips made. > > This wasn't really something that Computer Design Corp. was interested in > doing, but given the long history of working with Nippon Calculating > Machine Co., they agreed that they would take a crack at taking the design > that NCM had developed and work on partitioning it in a way that would work > with chip complexity constraints and packaging, and see if they could come > up with a chipset that they could get AMI to fabricate.=C2=A0 Computer Desi= gn > Corp. already had the knowledge to do this from their own internal project > to develop their own chipset. > > It isn't known exactly what kind of agreement was forged, and if up-front > money was put up by NCM, but it is known that NCM put a firm deadline in > place stating that a calculator using the chipset would have to be > delivered in person to NCM headquarters and a presentation and demo of the > machine made to NCM executives and engineers. > > Work began immediately on taking the NCM logic design and turning it into > a batch of chips, which, by initial estimate was going to require 19 chips, > and that was assuming higher levels of integration that were only being > perfected by AMI at the time. > > As the NCM delegation was preparing to return to Japan with their hopes > dashed of making an agreement directly with a chipmaker, a call was > received from a fledgling chip manufacturing company that they had briefly > visited when they were in the Santa Clara, CA. area. > > The company specialized in making memory chips, though, and it was > initially thought that the huge amount of random logic that was involved in > the NCM calculator chipset design was beyond the capabilities of this > company. > > Memory devices are just repetitions of the same memory cell pattern over > and over on the chip to make a memory array, with additional logic to do > the address decoding and read/write (for RAM) or read(for ROM) circuitry > and I/O buffers.=C2=A0 This type of chip design has some aspects that allow= a > degree of automation to be used in laying out the chips, and also had very > little in the way of random logic to complicate the chip design. > > The NCM calculator design was a whole bunch of random logic...gate upon > gate, flip-flop upon flip-flop wired together in a rats nest of logic for > each chip. > > After NCM left this fledgling company named Intel, higher-ups at Intel had > learned of the visit by NCM, and told their underlings to get back in touch > with NCM and let them know they would see what they could do for NCM. > > Intel was cash-hungry at the time, and it was thought that perhaps this > project could serve double-duty...to bring in some needed cash for Intel's > production capacity expansion, as well as to perhaps push Intel's IC > fabrication technology into areas other than RAM and ROM.=C2=A0 Intel was d= oing > well with their memory ICs, but they were limited by the number of chips > they could produce.=C2=A0 Chip manufacturing technology is very expensive, = so > Intel was investing everything they made in enhancing their production > capabilities.=C2=A0 So, maybe working with NCM might help bring in some fun= ds > to help that effort. > > A deal was forged between Intel and NCM.=C2=A0 A firm deadline was part of = the > contractual language where Intel would have to build a prototype calculator > based on the chips, and bring it to NCM's headquarters on a specific date > and present/demonstrate it to NCM executives and engineers. > > In the end, the NCM chip design was set aside as it was simply beyond the > capability to be fabricated by Intel.=C2=A0 Had Intel not had an idea of ho= w to > effectively do what the massively complex chipset did in a much simpler > fashion, who knows what the future would have held. > > The solution to Intel's problem of abandoning NCM's chipset is what became > the Intel 4004.=C2=A0 Intel developed and fabricated the 4004 and some supp= ort > chips to make it into a useful controller for a calculator, including some > shift register ICs for I/O, some combination RAM and I/O chips, as well as > ROM and I/O chips.=C2=A0 They built a very simple prototype calculator that > could do integer-only math as their demo, and presented it to NCM.=C2=A0 The > Busicom 141-PF was the resulting production calculator, arguably the first > consumer device to use a microprocessor to create its functionality.=C2=A0 = =C2=A0 The > rest is history. > > There's a piece of the story left hanging, though. > > That's a very, very interesting story that will have to wait until I get > all of my ducks in a row to tell, which I will do on the Old Calculator > Museum website at some point in the not too distant future.=C2=A0 I'll cert= ainly > announce it here when it's finalized on up on the website. > > Rick Bensene > The Old Calculator Museum > https://oldcalculatormuseum.com > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ED SHARPE via cctalk [mailto:cctalk(a)classiccmp.org] > Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2023 2:00 PM > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> > Cc: ED SHARPE > Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 > > I had heard something about a f14 chip pehS being first but not avail. To > general=C2=A0 public???Ed# > > > Sent from AOL on Android > >=C2=A0 On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 2:41 PM, Joshua Rice via cctalk< > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > On 21/11/2023 09:03, ED SHARPE via cctalk wrote: > > So what are the other contenders and what do they bring to table > > The 4004 was definitely the first commercially available single-chip CPU > on the market, but if you include multi-chip LSI designs, the lines get > blurry. > > =20 --===============4438209047362489935==-- From dkelvey@hotmail.com Fri Nov 24 03:18:52 2023 From: dwight To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2023 03:18:44 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <1904688685.3861017.1700711018178@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5155448069281358789==" --===============5155448069281358789== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable The 4040 was more of an enhanced 4004. It had a deeper stack ( 4004 was only = 3 levels ), It had interrupt capabilities and a second register bank. The mulplexed bus was almost identical except the 4040 had one additional bus= operation. I forget the exact difference. Still, people seem to think that the 4004 wasn't a capable microprocessor. Be= nchmarks showed that much code was faster on the 4004 than the 8008, if worki= ng in BCD math. The main reason the 4004 was thought of as just a calculator chip was that th= e chipset that it originally came with, the ROM and RAM, was to use a minimal= additional amount of custom bus circuity for the Busicom project. I guess it= wouldn't be a real uP if one didn't have to create bus buffers and address d= ecoders. As an example, Tom Pittman wrote a two pass assembler that ran on the SIM4-01= ( 4ea1702.s or 1k of code! ). That seems to be a uP type of process, to me. I= should note that Tom's code won't run on a 4040 without modification. This w= as because he took advantage of the fact that the stack would overflow on the= fourth subroutine push. The 4040 had a deeper stack. Still, the 4004 could h= andle text as well as do calculations. Probably, the main thing that tended to put it in the calculator bucket was t= he restricted instruction memory range, without using some form of bank swapp= ing. Its natural memory range was limited to 4096 addresses. But then, the 80= 80 was considered a real uP with similar restrictions to 64K. Both the 4004 and the 8008 used a multiplexed bus, for the 8008, one had to d= esign their own bus interface. The 8080 was what made the type of uP we tend = to think of. It had separate data and address busses ( note the 8085 and 8086= both multiplexed the address and data buses. A step back I'd say. ) I'd say things really started to happen when they created the 6502. That brou= ght the pricing into a range that people could start small and expand to bigg= er things. Dwight ________________________________ From: ED SHARPE Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 7:43 PM To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Cc: dwight Subject: Re: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Ibad an intellectual 4 offered to me one time that had a 4040 in it. Is t a 4= 040 like a 5 but more of the aux chips integrated? Is instruction set the sam= e? Sent from AOL on Android On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 8:34 PM, dwight via cctalk wrote: The Intlec 4 was no more or less a computer than the Altiar or IMSAI was. It = didn't typically have as much RAM but one could write and run code on it. As for the F14 processor. For the purpose used, it was likely a DSP. More int= ended to do matrix multiplication using adds and shifts. This would be simila= r to Intel's early try at a DSP. The F14 processor was said to control the flight surfaces. Like the Intel 292= 0 ( not to be confused with the AMD bit slice part) it likely ran tight loops= of signal processing operations using tables of lookup coefficients. Dwight --===============5155448069281358789==-- From 1297.dunfield@gmail.com Fri Nov 24 06:54:54 2023 From: Dave Dunfield <1297.dunfield@gmail.com> To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] It's been a while - retirement project Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2023 14:25:00 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1973070831221344085==" --===============1973070831221344085== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, this is "Dave Dunfield" - best known here for being the site owner of "Daves Old Computers" and the author of "ImageDisk" No longer have the email I used to use to access cctalk... (hence the change) Just in case anyone is interested: I've been working on a "retirement" project: I am publishing some 40+ years worth of source code to "stuff I've written". This includes my DDS products, lots of "internal tools and utilities" and other misc. "stuff". Of special interest to cctalk members, this include my Altair, Horizon, H8, D6809, MOD8, ImageDisk and some other related material. Most of it is C (mainly for my own compiler - one of the items), some in assembly, and a few "custom languages". Available from my personal site: https://dunfield.themindfactory.com or go to: "Daves Old Computers" -> "Personal" Please note that I no longer monitor these forums on a regular basis. Anyone wishing to reach me, please see the "contact" link on my site. Dave --=20 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Search "Dave's Old Computers" see "my personal" at bottom! --===============1973070831221344085==-- From go4retro@go4retro.com Fri Nov 24 06:55:09 2023 From: RETRO Innovations To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Hayes numeric codes Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2023 22:36:26 -0600 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0172826093889430922==" --===============0172826093889430922== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I received a bug report today concerning tcpser (the=20 Linux/Unix/Windows/MacOS modem emulator) and numeric response codes. https://github.com/go4retro/tcpser/issues/31 I knew long ago that not all codes and commands were common/consistent=20 among modem manufacturers, but I guess I didn't realize even response=20 codes differed quite a bit.=C2=A0 After receiving the bug report, I did a bit= =20 of research, and found, for instance, CONNECT 19200 differs: Hayes - 14: http://www.bitsavers.org/.../Hayes_44-012_Technical...=20 Conexant - 16:=20 https://web.archive.org/.../documenta.../dial_up/100498D.pdf=20 USRobotics - 85:=20 https://support.usr.com/.../5610a/5610a-files/5610a-user.pdf=20 Phoenix Contact (industrial modem) - 16:=20 https://files.realpars.com/.../um_en_psi_data_basic_modem...=20 Supra - 16: https://www.manualslib.com/.../Diamond-Supraexpress-56e.html=20 Multi_Tech -19:=20 https://www.multitech.com/.../public.../manuals/s000316a.pdf=20 I have two questions for the group, if folks can assist: * Since I purport to be Hayes compatible, I should use the Hayes code=20 when available, but the reference above does not go above 38400 bps.=C2=A0=20 Did Hayes make a modem that went faster (DTE speed?) and if so, can I=20 get a scan of the manual to ensure the codes I am using are the best ones? * Any other modem manufacturers anyone is aware of, with manuals I can=20 check. Jim --=20 RETRO Innovations, Contemporary Gear for Classic Systems www.go4retro.com store.go4retro.com --===============0172826093889430922==-- From p.gebhardt@ymail.com Sat Nov 25 08:20:23 2023 From: P Gebhardt To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Available in Germany: PDP 11/23 Plus with two RL02 drives in a H9642 cabinet Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 08:18:11 +0000 Message-ID: <1447402833.12566229.1700900291106@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <1447402833.12566229.1700900291106.ref@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3743869641886598500==" --===============3743869641886598500== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello list,=20 there is a PDP 11/23 Plus with two RL02 drives available near Stuttgart, Germ= any.=20 The configuration corresponds to the one shown here:=20 http://www.cosam.org/computers/dec/pdp11-23/cabinet.html Contact me off-list if you are interested.=20 Cheers,=20 Pierre ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.digitalheritage.de --===============3743869641886598500==-- From silvercreekvalley@yahoo.com Sat Nov 25 10:36:40 2023 From: silcreval To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] It's been a while - retirement project Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 10:36:31 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0736217433582416582==" --===============0736217433582416582== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dave, Many thanks for making this source available, I'm going to spend some time lo= oking through it all.=20 --===============0736217433582416582==-- From ccth6600@gmail.com Sat Nov 25 10:38:45 2023 From: Tom Hunter To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: It's been a while - retirement project Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 18:38:30 +0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8158952788855683465==" --===============8158952788855683465== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Thank you Dave! On Sat, Nov 25, 2023, 6:36 PM silcreval via cctalk wrote: > Dave, > > Many thanks for making this source available, I'm going to spend some time > looking through it all. > > > --===============8158952788855683465==-- From robert.jarratt@ntlworld.com Sat Nov 25 12:07:38 2023 From: Rob Jarratt To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] VT100 Monitor Board Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 11:47:17 +0000 Message-ID: <015501da1f95$24465c30$6cd31490$@ntlworld.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7256353901046638660==" --===============7256353901046638660== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, As some may recall I have been working on getting a VT100 going again. I have made good progress and I think the main board is probably OK now (see here if you are interested: https://robs-old-computers.com/2023/11/19/vt100-keyboard-constant-clicking-f ault/). Possibly I still need to replace the NVRAM, but I am leaving that until I fix the problem I want to describe next. The problem is that there is no image on the screen. This is because the monitor board is not doing anything, there is no glow from the neck of the tube etc. I have found that this is because the fuse on the 12V input to the monitor board is open circuit. Of course the worry is, why? There could be a fault on the board. I have tested the transistors in circuit with a multimeter and they appear to be OK. I used a bench PSU to give the board 12V and it drew no current (with all connectors disconnected). I tried again with the round connector attached to the end of the tube and it drew about 100mA and there was a faint glow from the neck of the tube. I am hesitant just to replace the fuse and try it. I am hoping for some suggestions on how to test this safely (in particular without involving the flyback transformer) to find if there is a fault. For information, the monitor is an Elston and I pre-emptively replaced all the electrolytics on the monitor board apart from the non-polar one. Some details of what I did are here https://robs-old-computers.com/2023/10/01/vt100-ram-fault/. Although I have since realised that I didn't replace two of them because they looked like diodes. I don't think the board I have is the one in the available printsets. Thanks Rob --===============7256353901046638660==-- From ard.p850ug1@gmail.com Sat Nov 25 14:18:16 2023 From: Tony Duell To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: VT100 Monitor Board Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 14:17:00 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <015501da1f95$24465c30$6cd31490$@ntlworld.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0729951114127717825==" --===============0729951114127717825== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 12:07 PM Rob Jarratt via cctalk wrote: > > Hello, > > > > As some may recall I have been working on getting a VT100 going again. I > have made good progress and I think the main board is probably OK now (see > here if you are interested: > https://robs-old-computers.com/2023/11/19/vt100-keyboard-constant-clicking-f > ault/). Possibly I still need to replace the NVRAM, but I am leaving that > until I fix the problem I want to describe next. > > > > The problem is that there is no image on the screen. This is because the > monitor board is not doing anything, there is no glow from the neck of the > tube etc. I have found that this is because the fuse on the 12V input to the > monitor board is open circuit. OK. My first suspicion would be problem round the horizontal output stage/flyback transformer. But that is just a guess > > > > Of course the worry is, why? There could be a fault on the board. I have > tested the transistors in circuit with a multimeter and they appear to be > OK. I used a bench PSU to give the board 12V and it drew no current (with > all connectors disconnected). I tried again with the round connector > attached to the end of the tube and it drew about 100mA and there was a > faint glow from the neck of the tube. The CRT has a heater fillament rated at about 11V or so. Most, if not all, such monitors run it from the12V input via a suitable resistor. So you know the CRT filament is good but you don't know much else so far. > > > > I am hesitant just to replace the fuse and try it. I am hoping for some > suggestions on how to test this safely (in particular without involving the > flyback transformer) to find if there is a fault. I don't think you can do much without the flyback connector plugged in. You need the flyback transformer to do any sane tests on the horizontal side, and you need the iron-cored inductor, normally wired on the same connector, to get the vertical output stage to work. Also you may need the deflection yoke connected for some tests, the inductance of the horizontal deflection windings can make quite a difference (factor of 2) to the voltages produce by the flyback. The flyback transformer started as a 'something for nothing' idea. To deflect the electron beam horizontally, you store considerable energy in the horizontal yok windings. Rather than waste that at the end of the line, you use it to power other bits of the monitor, like the EHT for the CRT final anode. Have you checked the diodes and capacitors associated with the flyback transformer? If something is shorted there. it's the equivaent of running a power supply into a short circuit. The input current will go up. Does this unit have a horizontal oscllator? Quite a lot do not, they simply use the horizontal pulses from the logic,suitably amplified, to drive the horizontal output transistor. This could never have worked for television as interference pulses could send the thing crazy with voltages going all over the place, but it's not uncommon in small monitors. The IBM5151 was like that. If there is no horizontal oscillator then you need to provide a drive signal of the correct frequency and duty cycle. Rather than use the logic (which might be faulty and thus mis-driving the monitor), I've been known to cobble something up using a 555 timer chip, Here's roughtly what I would do : Trace out a schematic of the board so I know what I am dealing with. Check all diodes and capactiors hung off the flyback transformer. Ring-test the flyback transformer. Make a test oscillator to drive it if necessary Connect it up, run it from a current limited supply. If it tries to draw too much current, then I've mssed something. Might try lifting the diodes to disconnect voltage outputs to see if one of those is loading it. I do wonder what the problem is with testing it with the flyback connected, though... > > > > For information, the monitor is an Elston and I pre-emptively replaced all > the electrolytics on the monitor board apart from the non-polar one. Why? I have never understood replacing capacitors at random in the hope it cures the fault. It is much easier to start from a board that once worked and trace the fault. -tony --===============0729951114127717825==-- From 1297.dunfield@gmail.com Sat Nov 25 14:34:17 2023 From: Dave Dunfield <1297.dunfield@gmail.com> To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 07:25:19 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1955837738307594869==" --===============1955837738307594869== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sorry if not linked correctly - looking through the list via the archives.. "reply" option doesn't seem to work (at least for me - older Chrome) >but my understanding was that the 4004 and 8008 were effectively developed >at the same time? And were announced or available about within one month >of each other? I believe they were, although I never had much experience with the 4004... I did play a bit with the 8008 - and wrote a simulator/emulator for the 8008 system I had, a Canadian: MIL (Microsystems International Limited) MOD8 (Modular-8) it was also available as: GNC8 (Great Northern Computers) 8008 You can get MOD8 simulator from "Daves Old Computers" and actually experience using an 8008 based system including the built in "MONITOR-8" ROM software as well as "Scelbi 8008 BASIC" (one of the earliest) - source to both provided. If you care to, I included ASM88 (my 8008 cross assembler) so you can try writing and running 8008 code! -Be aware that MOD8.COM itself is pretty old and is 16-bit DOS software. This means it WON'T run under modern Windows, but it does work well in DosBox (I recommend the one I have on my site) Dave Dunfield - https://dunfield.themindfactory.com --=20 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Search "Dave's Old Computers" see "my personal" at bottom! --===============1955837738307594869==-- From 1297.dunfield@gmail.com Sat Nov 25 14:34:23 2023 From: Dave Dunfield <1297.dunfield@gmail.com> To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: VT100 Monitor Board Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 09:05:47 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4015094124613286920==" --===============4015094124613286920== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Rob Jarratt 25 Nov 2023 8:47 a.m. > Of course the worry is, why? There could be a fault on the board. > I am hesitant just to replace the fuse and try it... An older CRT terminal is probably a bit too much current draw for this, but you can prob use it in a setup to test parts... A very handy gadget you can make very easily, which I use all the time when testing small devices in "unknown operational state" is a simple current limiter. (following discussion based on North America power, numbers may be different if you are in a different part of the world). The "smallest" typical line circuit is 15A which is more than enough to cause damage to small devices experiencing excessive power draw through a fault (often indicated by a blown fuse). The "limiter" relies on the fact that an incandescent light bulb will draw/pass a fair bit of current when it is cold, and much less when it's warm. (this is because they are designed to "turn on" fast) In my case, I have three light sockets wired in parallel, all in series with the hot side of a receptacle. This lets me change from a single 25w bulb (very little current possible) up to 3 100w bulbs (a good part of amp before it seriously limits). For example, 100w bulbs draw .833ish (100/120) when operating fully lit - x3 =3D 2.5A max current - this would only happen if the device under test was "shorted", presenting 0 series resistance and would therefore effectively have 0 volts across it. In practice, you could prob. draw 1/2 amp (160ish ma per bulb) without warming them "too much" to seriously drop a lot of voltage. Much more than that and the bulbs will light up rather than hearing "popping" sounds from the device under test :-) -- Btw, I've given most of my CRT terminals away - For VT100's I use my "PC100" program - It provides very good VT100 emulation using an old DOS (or DosBox) PC - it remains "text" mode, so it turns "smooth scroll" into "slow scroll" and large fonts into "double spaced" fonts - but in all other respects nothing I've used it on has been able to tell it's not an actual VT100! (I'm sure there are better/graphical VT100 emulations "out there") Dave --=20 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Search "Dave's Old Computers" see "my personal" at bottom! --===============4015094124613286920==-- From cz@alembic.crystel.com Sat Nov 25 16:51:56 2023 From: Chris Zach To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Available in Germany: PDP 11/23 Plus with two RL02 drives in a H9642 cabinet Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 11:51:46 -0500 Message-ID: <43572b5e-17dd-456d-918d-cb2d280af7ad@alembic.crystel.com> In-Reply-To: <1447402833.12566229.1700900291106@mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2711291777345027688==" --===============2711291777345027688== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Neat! And oddly enough I'm going to be in Brussels later this week, I=20 wonder if I could take this home as my "checked baggage".... Had one like this 30 years ago, it's a very nice design for a 23+ with=20 RSX11M 4.0/Decnet 3.2 On 11/25/2023 3:18 AM, P Gebhardt via cctalk wrote: > Hello list, >=20 > there is a PDP 11/23 Plus with two RL02 drives available near Stuttgart, Ge= rmany. > The configuration corresponds to the one shown here: >=20 > http://www.cosam.org/computers/dec/pdp11-23/cabinet.html >=20 > Contact me off-list if you are interested. >=20 > Cheers, > Pierre >=20 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= -- > http://www.digitalheritage.de --===============2711291777345027688==-- From robert.jarratt@ntlworld.com Sat Nov 25 21:22:55 2023 From: Rob Jarratt To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: VT100 Monitor Board Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 21:22:48 +0000 Message-ID: <017d01da1fe5$8a19f620$9e4de260$@ntlworld.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2420460793592262569==" --===============2420460793592262569== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > -----Original Message----- > From: Dave Dunfield via cctalk > Sent: 25 November 2023 14:06 > To: cctalk(a)classiccmp.org > Cc: Dave Dunfield <1297.dunfield(a)gmail.com> > Subject: [cctalk] Re: VT100 Monitor Board >=20 > > Rob Jarratt 25 Nov 2023 8:47 a.m. > > Of course the worry is, why? There could be a fault on the board. > > I am hesitant just to replace the fuse and try it... >=20 > An older CRT terminal is probably a bit too much current draw for this, but > you can prob use it in a setup to test parts... >=20 > A very handy gadget you can make very easily, which I use all the time when > testing small devices in "unknown operational state" is a simple current > limiter. (following discussion based on North America power, numbers may > be different if you are in a different part of the world). >=20 > The "smallest" typical line circuit is 15A which is more than enough to cau= se > damage to small devices experiencing excessive power draw through a fault > (often indicated by a blown fuse). >=20 > The "limiter" relies on the fact that an incandescent light bulb will draw/= pass a > fair bit of current when it is cold, and much less when it's warm. (this is > because they are designed to "turn on" fast) Thanks. I am familiar with the light bulb current limiter, although I must sa= y I hadn't thought of using it in this case. I have used it when testing PSUs= , but as this is downstream of the PSU I wonder if it would help? My bench PS= U has current limiting abilities though, so I can provide current limited vol= tages within the range of the PSU. It is actually a twin PSU each with a 0-30= V range, so I probably could drive the board that way. Thanks Rob >=20 > In my case, I have three light sockets wired in parallel, all in series wit= h the hot > side of a receptacle. This lets me change from a single 25w bulb (very litt= le > current possible) up to 3 100w bulbs (a good part of amp before it seriously > limits). For example, 100w bulbs draw .833ish (100/120) when operating fully > lit - x3 =3D 2.5A max current - this would only happen if the device under = test > was "shorted", presenting 0 series resistance and would therefore effective= ly > have 0 volts across it. >=20 > In practice, you could prob. draw 1/2 amp (160ish ma per bulb) without > warming them "too much" to seriously drop a lot of voltage. Much more than > that and the bulbs will light up rather than hearing "popping" sounds from > the device under test :-) >=20 >=20 > -- Btw, I've given most of my CRT terminals away - For VT100's I use my > "PC100" > program - It provides very good VT100 emulation using an old DOS (or > DosBox) PC - it remains "text" mode, so it turns "smooth scroll" into "slow > scroll" > and > large fonts into "double spaced" fonts - but in all other respects nothing = I've > used it on has been able to tell it's not an actual VT100! > (I'm sure there are better/graphical VT100 emulations "out there") >=20 > Dave >=20 > -- > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- > Search "Dave's Old Computers" see "my personal" at bottom! --===============2420460793592262569==-- From robert.jarratt@ntlworld.com Sat Nov 25 23:12:59 2023 From: Rob Jarratt To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: VT100 Monitor Board Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2023 23:12:48 +0000 Message-ID: <019101da1ff4$e8a01ee0$b9e05ca0$@ntlworld.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6974642702243558622==" --===============6974642702243558622== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > -----Original Message----- > From: Tony Duell > Sent: 25 November 2023 14:17 > To: rob(a)jarratt.me.uk; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > > Cc: Rob Jarratt > Subject: Re: [cctalk] VT100 Monitor Board >=20 > On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 12:07=E2=80=AFPM Rob Jarratt via cctalk > wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > As some may recall I have been working on getting a VT100 going again. > > I have made good progress and I think the main board is probably OK > > now (see here if you are interested: > > https://robs-old-computers.com/2023/11/19/vt100-keyboard-constant-clic > > king-f ault/). Possibly I still need to replace the NVRAM, but I am > > leaving that until I fix the problem I want to describe next. > > > > > > > > The problem is that there is no image on the screen. This is because > > the monitor board is not doing anything, there is no glow from the > > neck of the tube etc. I have found that this is because the fuse on > > the 12V input to the monitor board is open circuit. >=20 >=20 > OK. My first suspicion would be problem round the horizontal output > stage/flyback transformer. But that is just a guess > > > > > > > > Of course the worry is, why? There could be a fault on the board. I > > have tested the transistors in circuit with a multimeter and they > > appear to be OK. I used a bench PSU to give the board 12V and it drew > > no current (with all connectors disconnected). I tried again with the > > round connector attached to the end of the tube and it drew about > > 100mA and there was a faint glow from the neck of the tube. >=20 > The CRT has a heater fillament rated at about 11V or so. Most, if not all,= such > monitors run it from the12V input via a suitable resistor. > So you know the CRT filament is good but you don't know much else so far. >=20 >=20 > > > > > > > > I am hesitant just to replace the fuse and try it. I am hoping for > > some suggestions on how to test this safely (in particular without > > involving the flyback transformer) to find if there is a fault. >=20 > I don't think you can do much without the flyback connector plugged in. You > need the flyback transformer to do any sane tests on the horizontal side, a= nd > you need the iron-cored inductor, normally wired on the same connector, to > get the vertical output stage to work. Also you may need the deflection yoke > connected for some tests, the inductance of the horizontal deflection > windings can make quite a difference (factor of 2) to the voltages produce = by > the flyback. >=20 > The flyback transformer started as a 'something for nothing' idea. To defle= ct > the electron beam horizontally, you store considerable energy in the > horizontal yok windings. Rather than waste that at the end of the line, you= use > it to power other bits of the monitor, like the EHT for the CRT final anode. >=20 > Have you checked the diodes and capacitors associated with the flyback > transformer? If something is shorted there. it's the equivaent of running a > power supply into a short circuit. The input current will go up. I have checked all the diodes (in circuit) and they appear to be OK. One capa= citor may be suspect but without the full schematic I am not sure. I may have= to lift it to check. >=20 > Does this unit have a horizontal oscllator? Quite a lot do not, they simply= use > the horizontal pulses from the logic,suitably amplified, to drive the horiz= ontal > output transistor. This could never have worked for television as interfere= nce > pulses could send the thing crazy with voltages going all over the place, b= ut > it's not uncommon in small monitors. The IBM5151 was like that. If there is > no horizontal oscillator then you need to provide a drive signal of the cor= rect > frequency and duty cycle. Rather than use the logic (which might be faulty > and thus mis-driving the monitor), I've been known to cobble something up > using a 555 timer chip, >=20 > Here's roughtly what I would do : >=20 > Trace out a schematic of the board so I know what I am dealing with. Yes, I may have to do that. Historically I have done a poor job of this becau= se of my insufficient understanding of electronics. >=20 > Check all diodes and capactiors hung off the flyback transformer. Agreed, will check carefully. >=20 > Ring-test the flyback transformer. You sent me a circuit for this years ago and I built the device, so this is d= efinitely something else I can do. >=20 > Make a test oscillator to drive it if necessary >=20 > Connect it up, run it from a current limited supply. If it tries to draw to= o much > current, then I've mssed something. Might try lifting the diodes to disconn= ect > voltage outputs to see if one of those is loading it. >=20 >=20 > I do wonder what the problem is with testing it with the flyback connected, > though... Only that I know it can produce lethal voltages and I would rather avoid that= if I can. >=20 >=20 > > > > > > > > For information, the monitor is an Elston and I pre-emptively replaced > > all the electrolytics on the monitor board apart from the non-polar one. >=20 > Why? >=20 > I have never understood replacing capacitors at random in the hope it cures > the fault. It is much easier to start from a board that once worked and tra= ce > the fault. >=20 > -tony Thanks for all the advice Tony. Regards Rob --===============6974642702243558622==-- From lewissa78@gmail.com Sun Nov 26 06:22:58 2023 From: Steve Lewis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 00:22:36 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <9119e35-7eac-9ba8-9566-5a6e155a655d@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5854300539994416066==" --===============5854300539994416066== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Well, just to throw this into the conversation: Over this past summer, I was studying the SCAMP ( https://voidstar.blog/scamp-a-review-50-years-later/ ) In that collection I came across a very early printing of the PALM instruction set, with the cover page dated March 21, 1972 of the printing, and on the next page a date of March 16, 1972 of the document number. My photos of that document is here: https://github.com/voidstar78/SCAMP/blob/main/IBM_SCAMP_PALM_InstructionSet_M= arch1972.pdf We can't infer from this on when the actual PALM processor was developed (which took place in or around Boca Raton, FL). We can only say this description of the instruction set was published in early 1972, and we know it was "fielded" (used in the SCAMP prototype) by September 1973 in a fully functional "desktop computer" (though despite the sleek case, it was still a "rough around the edges" prototype). Isn't the March 1972 date is at least earlier than the Intel 8008 ? Also, digging through the Joe George tech journal, I believe I recall a reference in those pages that IBM's internal parts cost of the PALM processor itself was around $200-$300 (that being in 1973/1974 dollars) [at least a couple pages, Joe itemized component parts, since they had specific cost goals to stay under] As others have suggested, the idea of a microprocessor was very much in the air, as an idea whose time had come. Recall the story that Datapoint was "begging" Intel to make a processor, but Intel essentially cost Datapoint a year since Intel was plenty happy selling the very profitable memory chips (but also that TI's alternative didn't work out). Now, of course an argument is then is PALM a microprocessor? Perhaps not by todays standards and expectations, as it is a series of about 14 "Dutchess" chips, which is claimed to consist of MOSFET. I'm not enough of a hardware person to really argue on the nuance of the specific technology involved inside there. But as I understand, neither of the 4004 or 8008 did much on their own and still needed quite a few chips to make a viable system. Anyhow - I'm not suggesting the PALM was special or particularly innovative, but it did have multiple sets of 16x 16-bit registers (which were referenced using memory addresses 0-128, but they were physically "on the CPU board" itself) - which is interesting since the "many registers" is the path Intel went (in contrast to processors like 6502, 6809). The System/3 before all this also had "memory mapped registers" (which I don't know enough about that system to know if they were "memory mapped" like PALM were, in that they were physically on the processor; or were they "memory mapped" in like how 6502-based systems reserve R0-R16 in their zeropage?). -Steve On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 4:31=E2=80=AFAM Christian Corti via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > On Wed, 22 Nov 2023, Fred Cisin wrote: > > An absurd argument: > > It could be argued that the 8085, rather than being designed from > scratch was > > simply a modification of the 8080. Perhaps significant modifications, > but > > nevertheless modifications, not redesign from scratch. > > 8080 and 8085 are essentially the same (from the programmer's view). > > > If we accept arguments such as that, then we could argue that Pentium is > a > > modified 80486, > > which is a modified 80386, > > which is a modified 80286, > > which is a modified 80186, > > which is a modified 8086, > > ... > > all the way down to the 4004 :-) > > Right, this is what I always say. > BUT the cut is with the 8008. The 4004 is a completely different beast > and has absolutely no ressemblence to the 8008, e.g. Harvard vs. > Von-Neumann architecture etc. > > The "modifications" (or better: heritage) can be seen if you look at the > registers. Initially A, B, C, D, E, H and L, they were the same in the > 8080. When going 16 bits, they were "extended", i.e. called A extended, B > extended and so on, with names AX, BX, CX, DX, and the addition of > segmenmt registers. Later, when going to 32 bits, Intel already "forgot" > what AX stood for, and so they called the registers "extended A extended" > (EAX) and so on. > > > Therefore, it could be argued that Win11 can be run on a "heavily > modified > > modified 4004" > > 8008, not 4004. > > > Motorola tended to redesign from scratch, whereas Intel would modify > their > > previous design. > > Yes, but that is a widely known fact. > > > [I warned you that it was absurd] > > It isn't absurd at all, or not more absurd as my post ;-) > > Christian > --===============5854300539994416066==-- From ard.p850ug1@gmail.com Sun Nov 26 06:34:49 2023 From: Tony Duell To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: VT100 Monitor Board Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 06:34:32 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <019101da1ff4$e8a01ee0$b9e05ca0$@ntlworld.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8911256845498543999==" --===============8911256845498543999== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 11:12=E2=80=AFPM Rob Jarratt wrote: > > Have you checked the diodes and capacitors associated with the flyback > > transformer? If something is shorted there. it's the equivaent of running= a > > power supply into a short circuit. The input current will go up. > > I have checked all the diodes (in circuit) and they appear to be OK. One ca= pacitor may be suspect but without the full schematic I am not sure. I may ha= ve to lift it to check. Without the schematic you are going to have problems. With a schematic you can see (a) Can you isolate certain areas -- for example the vertical deflection syste > > Trace out a schematic of the board so I know what I am dealing with. > > Yes, I may have to do that. Historically I have done a poor job of this bec= ause of my insufficient understanding of electronics. It gets easier with experience. Looking at every small monochrome monitor schematic you can find will give you an idea of the sort of things to look for. > > I do wonder what the problem is with testing it with the flyback connecte= d, > > though... > > Only that I know it can produce lethal voltages and I would rather avoid th= at if I can. The high voltage outputs can't supply that much current and are unlikely to be lethal. Mains, and even worse the rectified mains in an SMPSU, is a lot more liely to kill you. That said, work with one hand in your pocket (current flow arm-to-arm is the most dangerous) and take care. I don't see how you can debug a monitor without having the flyback in place. It's part of the highest power circuit on the board. And it provides voltages for many other areas. -tony --===============8911256845498543999==-- From dave.g4ugm@gmail.com Sun Nov 26 20:12:08 2023 From: dave.g4ugm@gmail.com To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] iPaqs free to good home (UK) Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 20:12:00 +0000 Message-ID: <01a101da20a4$d0c815b0$72584110$@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8271993423637724365==" --===============8271993423637724365== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Folks, While looking for something else I found few iPaqs. There are two later models, mud coloured with plastic screen covers both work fine. Sadly the silver one with the battery has a broken clip, so you need to secure it some how works if you do this. The one with the missing door does nothing. There are two power bricks, one USB lead, one docking station. No stylus. Can't remember when I last looked at these. Free collection from Manchester. Dave --===============8271993423637724365==-- From couryhouse@aol.com Sun Nov 26 22:58:13 2023 From: ED SHARPE To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 22:58:03 +0000 Message-ID: <953180151.4373603.1701039483088@mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3949274871658364437==" --===============3949274871658364437== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable great old "Scelbi 8008 "=C2=A0 article in killobaud or=C2=A0 Byte=C2=A0 in on= e=C2=A0 if the=C2=A0 EARLY Issues! Ed# In a message dated 11/25/2023 7:34:21 AM US Mountain Standard Time, cctalk(a)= classiccmp.org writes:=C2=A0 Sorry if not linked correctly - looking through the list via the archives.."r= eply" option doesn't seem to work (at least for me - older Chrome)=C2=A0>but = my understanding was that the 4004 and 8008 were effectively developed>at the= same time?=C2=A0 And were announced or available about within one month>of e= ach other?=C2=A0I believe they were, although I never had much experience wit= h the 4004...I did play a bit with the 8008 - and wrote a simulator/emulator = for the8008 system I had, a Canadian:=C2=A0MIL (Microsystems International Li= mited) MOD8 (Modular-8)=C2=A0it was also available as:=C2=A0GNC8 (Great North= ern Computers) 8008=C2=A0You can get MOD8 simulator from "Daves Old Computers= " and actuallyexperienceusing an 8008 based system including the built in "MO= NITOR-8" ROM softwareaswell as "Scelbi 8008 BASIC" (one of the earliest) - so= urce to bothprovided.=C2=A0If you care to, I included ASM88 (my 8008 cross as= sembler) so you can trywriting and running 8008 code!=C2=A0-Be aware that MOD= 8.COM itself is pretty old and is 16-bit DOS software.This means it WON'T run= under modern Windows, but it does work well inDosBox (I recommend the one I = have on my site)=C2=A0Dave Dunfield=C2=A0 -=C2=A0 https://dunfield.themindfac= tory.com=C2=A0-- ------------------------------------------------------------= ----------------------Search "Dave's Old Computers" see "my personal" at bott= om! --===============3949274871658364437==-- From curiousmarc3@gmail.com Sun Nov 26 23:14:14 2023 From: curiousmarc3@gmail.com To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: It's been a while - retirement project Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 15:14:07 -0800 Message-ID: <10cf01da20be$424e3e30$c6eaba90$@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1301705219976684618==" --===============1301705219976684618== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dave, Thanks so much for the wonderful IMD utility. While I have you on the horn, c= an I have you look into a small bug in IMD, related to using it to make HP LI= F disks.=20 I was trying to format an HP LIF disk from IMD (77 tracks, 30 sectors, 5 inte= rleave, 512 MFM encoding, 256 bytes per sector).=20 Which I can configure IMD for using the interactive user interface. EXCEPT it= won't accept entering sector numbering starting from 0 to 29. It always want= s to start at 1.=20 However, if I use the command line utility to make an image using BIN2IMD BIN2IMD input.bin out.imd N=3D77 DM=3D3 SS=3D256 SM=3D0-29 /2 And then reconstitute a disc from that image, it works, sectors are correctly= numbered 0 to 29.=20 So it looks like it's just a trivial bug in the interactive user interface. Sorry to annoy and thanks again for all your contributions. Marc -----Original Message----- From: Dave Dunfield via cctalk =20 Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2023 11:25 AM To: cctalk(a)classiccmp.org Cc: Dave Dunfield <1297.dunfield(a)gmail.com> Subject: [cctalk] It's been a while - retirement project Hi, this is "Dave Dunfield" - best known here for being the site owner of "Da= ves Old Computers" and the author of "ImageDisk" No longer have the email I used to use to access cctalk... (hence the change) Just in case anyone is interested: I've been working on a "retirement" project: I am publishing some 40+ years worth of source code to "stuff I've written". This includes my DDS products, lots of "internal tools and utilities" and oth= er misc. "stuff". Of special interest to cctalk members, this include my Altair, Horizon, H8, D6809, MOD8, ImageDisk and some other related material. Most of it is C (mainly for my own compiler - one of the items), some in asse= mbly, and a few "custom languages". Available from my personal site: https://dunfield.themindfactory.com or go to: "Daves Old Computers" -> "Personal" Please note that I no longer monitor these forums on a regular basis. Anyone wishing to reach me, please see the "contact" link on my site. Dave -- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Search "Dave's Old Computers" see "my personal" at bottom! --===============1301705219976684618==-- From jeffrey@vcfed.org Mon Nov 27 03:39:04 2023 From: Jeffrey Brace To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Pre-event survey: VCF East 2024 Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 22:38:37 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2150571069988479376==" --===============2150571069988479376== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Please fill out this pre-event survey for VCF East 2024: https://bit.ly/vcfe2024pre Thanks! Jeff Brace VCF National Board Member Chairman & Vice President Vintage Computer Festival East Showrunner VCF Mid-Atlantic Event Manager Vintage Computer Federation is a 501c3 charity --===============2150571069988479376==-- From 1297.dunfield@gmail.com Mon Nov 27 06:44:31 2023 From: Dave Dunfield <1297.dunfield@gmail.com> To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] It's been a while - retirement project Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 22:41:55 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3811546090205702217==" --===============3811546090205702217== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >26 Nov 8:14 p.m. >I was trying to format an HP LIF disk from IMD (77 tracks, 30 sectors, >5 interleave, 512 MFM encoding, 256 bytes per sector). Which I can configure >IMD for using the interactive user interface. EXCEPT it won't >accept entering sector numbering starting from 0 to 29. It always wants to >start at 1. >So it looks like it's just a trivial bug in the interactive user interface. Hi Marc, I'll look into it - it will take me a while as I have to dig out and set up a real DOS IMD system... [anyone know it there's a usable web interface to CCTALK? I browse it through the ARCHIVE on CCTALK.COM - it's a web interface which presents "reply" button - but it doesn't work - so I have to cut/paste/edit the existing post and send it back by email - and HOPE that it finds its way to the proper thread!] Dave --=20 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Search "Dave's Old Computers" see "my personal" at bottom! --===============3811546090205702217==-- From cc@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de Mon Nov 27 08:56:06 2023 From: Christian Corti To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 09:55:34 +0100 Message-ID: <51b9974-6b3-7bbf-c54f-6e92c0a5f775@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1504584396760495207==" --===============1504584396760495207== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Well, just to throw this into the conversation: > > Over this past summer, I was studying the SCAMP ( > https://voidstar.blog/scamp-a-review-50-years-later/ ) > > In that collection I came across a very early printing of the PALM > instruction set, with the cover page dated March 21, 1972 of the printing, > and on the next page a date of March 16, 1972 of the document number. My > photos of that document is here: > https://github.com/voidstar78/SCAMP/blob/main/IBM_SCAMP_PALM_InstructionSet= _March1972.pdf This seems to be an older revision than the photocopied document that=20 I have. The instruction set described in the '72 document is not the final=20 one. Some opcodes are missing or are not complete (like the JUMP=20 instruction). A transcription of my photocopy is here: http://computermuseum.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de/dev/ibm_5110/technik/instr_= set.html BTW voidstar also has a document called System/7 tape cassette attachment. I do have the original IBM cassette recorder (a Philips EL 3302) with=20 cable and System/7 diagnostics cassettes ;-) This was the tape recorder=20 used with the SCAMP. Pictures can be found here: http://computermuseum.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de/pics/ibm/s7 > Now, of course an argument is then is PALM a microprocessor? Perhaps not > by todays standards and expectations, as it is a series of about 14 > "Dutchess" chips, which is claimed to consist of MOSFET. I'm not enough of I'd say yes. It's not a single-chip processor, but the i8008 wasn't either=20 (it couldn't work without support chips. Christian --===============1504584396760495207==-- From lewissa78@gmail.com Mon Nov 27 18:13:37 2023 From: Steve Lewis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 12:13:16 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <51b9974-6b3-7bbf-c54f-6e92c0a5f775@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5012119953855229561==" --===============5012119953855229561== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Yes, it seems PALM did have a few evolutions, which just makes me curious if there were even earlier editions than this one from 1972. But even if so - then like the 4004, we're struggling to find evidence of actual products that made use of them. Wasn't the 4004 used in some cash registers, street lights, or some weighing machines? (I don't have any specific references, just recollections from past reading) My suspicion is that something like the PALM was used in the large (later model) IBM 9-track tape systems (forget the model numbers offhand, but in their manuals they describe a full instruction set) or "industrial systems" like that. I think at that time (1972) PALM was also lacking a SHIFT or ROTATE code - since in part of the Joe George tech manual, they mention having to implement this in the SCAMP prototype themselves (a hardware solution workaround to a missing processor capability) until that instruction got added later (before the IBM 5100 release). [ specifically it is mentioned by Pat Smith in an entry from February 1973, who had come up with the workaround; this SHIFT I think was essential to some keyboard integration work ] Note that there is also evidence that as many as 400 early IBM 5100's were actually made in 1974 (based on an early bulk order of keyboards of that quantity, and a sales projection graph that includes a column for 1974) -- those early ones most likely were all APL only (since that was all that was yet available as it carried over from the SCAMP). Very nice images of the Philips tape. Yes, in the last few pages of that System/7 document, it has the 1972 article from Eletronic News about it - IBM was pretty proud of that, and it's the earliest example I've come across of using audio cassette tapes for digital data storage. So right around '71/'72 was the origin of that, as far as I know (at least as far as used in commercial products). Steve On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 2:56=E2=80=AFAM Christian Corti via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > Well, just to throw this into the conversation: > > > > Over this past summer, I was studying the SCAMP ( > > https://voidstar.blog/scamp-a-review-50-years-later/ ) > > > > In that collection I came across a very early printing of the PALM > > instruction set, with the cover page dated March 21, 1972 of the > printing, > > and on the next page a date of March 16, 1972 of the document number. My > > photos of that document is here: > > > https://github.com/voidstar78/SCAMP/blob/main/IBM_SCAMP_PALM_InstructionSet= _March1972.pdf > > This seems to be an older revision than the photocopied document that > I have. The instruction set described in the '72 document is not the final > one. Some opcodes are missing or are not complete (like the JUMP > instruction). > A transcription of my photocopy is here: > > http://computermuseum.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de/dev/ibm_5110/technik/inst= r_set.html > > BTW voidstar also has a document called System/7 tape cassette attachment. > I do have the original IBM cassette recorder (a Philips EL 3302) with > cable and System/7 diagnostics cassettes ;-) This was the tape recorder > used with the SCAMP. > Pictures can be found here: > http://computermuseum.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de/pics/ibm/s7 > > > Now, of course an argument is then is PALM a microprocessor? Perhaps not > > by todays standards and expectations, as it is a series of about 14 > > "Dutchess" chips, which is claimed to consist of MOSFET. I'm not enough > of > > I'd say yes. It's not a single-chip processor, but the i8008 wasn't either > (it couldn't work without support chips. > > > Christian > --===============5012119953855229561==-- From billdegnan@gmail.com Mon Nov 27 18:55:58 2023 From: Bill Degnan To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?) Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 13:55:40 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============8969193167155890935==" --===============8969193167155890935== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 1:13 PM Steve Lewis via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > Yes, it seems PALM did have a few evolutions, which just makes me curious > if there were even earlier editions than this one from 1972. But even if > so - then like the 4004, we're struggling to find evidence of actual > products that made use of them. Wasn't the 4004 used in some cash > registers, street lights, or some weighing machines? (I don't have any > specific references, just recollections from past reading) > > Use of the 4004 would be found first within Intel products themselves, not 3rd party cash register or pioneering gas pump manufacturers. That's why you can't find much. Intel made the first hardware powered by 4004. They started with chip sets, manuals, starter kit hardware, trainers, etc. to get the customer started. I checked bitsavers.org I did not see the first 4004 product guide and sales literature. I have some of this in paper form, but not much. I assume someone has a scanned copy online of the various products intel initially sold with "intel 4004 inside". The microprocessor was a new concept so it would not have been instantly absorbed by the market without a little salesmanship by Intel to inspire customers how to use this new technology. After a while customers started making and then producing things that used the 4004 chipset, but only after Intel got them started. right? Bill --===============8969193167155890935==-- From ken.unix.guy@gmail.com Mon Nov 27 22:13:49 2023 From: KenUnix To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: It's been a while - retirement project Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 17:13:25 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============2082858396936106578==" --===============2082858396936106578== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 V2hlbiBJIHRyeSBhbmQgY29ubmVjdCB0byBpdCBJIHNlZSBpbiB0aGUgdGFiIGNoaW5lc2UgdmVy YmlhZ2UKQ0N0YWxrIOS4sOWvjOWkmuWFg+eahOe7vOWQiOWGheWuueW5s+WPsC3kuJPkuJrnmoTn n6Xor4bliIbkuqvkuI7lnKjnur/mlZnogrLlubPlj7AKYW5kIGl0IHRyaWVzIHRvIHNlbmQgbWUg dG8gICBwdWJsaWMuaHVqaWEuMTA0LmNkbjIwLmNvbQoKLUtlbgoKT24gTW9uLCBOb3YgMjcsIDIw MjMgYXQgMTo0NOKAr0FNIERhdmUgRHVuZmllbGQgdmlhIGNjdGFsayA8CmNjdGFsayhhKWNsYXNz aWNjbXAub3JnPiB3cm90ZToKCj4gPjI2IE5vdiA4OjE0IHAubS4KPgo+ID5JIHdhcyB0cnlpbmcg dG8gZm9ybWF0IGFuIEhQIExJRiBkaXNrIGZyb20gSU1EICg3NyB0cmFja3MsIDMwIHNlY3RvcnMs Cj4gPjUgaW50ZXJsZWF2ZSwgNTEyIE1GTSBlbmNvZGluZywgMjU2IGJ5dGVzIHBlciBzZWN0b3Ip LiBXaGljaCBJIGNhbgo+IGNvbmZpZ3VyZQo+ID5JTUQgZm9yIHVzaW5nIHRoZSBpbnRlcmFjdGl2 ZSB1c2VyIGludGVyZmFjZS4gRVhDRVBUIGl0IHdvbid0Cj4gPmFjY2VwdCBlbnRlcmluZyBzZWN0 b3IgbnVtYmVyaW5nIHN0YXJ0aW5nIGZyb20gMCB0byAyOS4gSXQgYWx3YXlzIHdhbnRzIHRvCj4g PnN0YXJ0IGF0IDEuCj4KPiA+U28gaXQgbG9va3MgbGlrZSBpdCdzIGp1c3QgYSB0cml2aWFsIGJ1 ZyBpbiB0aGUgaW50ZXJhY3RpdmUgdXNlcgo+IGludGVyZmFjZS4KPgo+IEhpIE1hcmMsCj4KPiBJ J2xsIGxvb2sgaW50byBpdCAtIGl0IHdpbGwgdGFrZSBtZSBhIHdoaWxlIGFzIEkgaGF2ZSB0byBk aWcgb3V0IGFuZCBzZXQgdXAKPiBhIHJlYWwgRE9TIElNRCBzeXN0ZW0uLi4KPgo+IFthbnlvbmUg a25vdyBpdCB0aGVyZSdzIGEgdXNhYmxlIHdlYiBpbnRlcmZhY2UgdG8gQ0NUQUxLPyBJIGJyb3dz ZSBpdAo+IHRocm91Z2gKPiB0aGUgQVJDSElWRSBvbiBDQ1RBTEsuQ09NIC0gaXQncyBhIHdlYiBp bnRlcmZhY2Ugd2hpY2ggcHJlc2VudHMgInJlcGx5Igo+IGJ1dHRvbgo+IC0gYnV0IGl0IGRvZXNu J3Qgd29yayAtIHNvIEkgaGF2ZSB0byBjdXQvcGFzdGUvZWRpdCB0aGUgZXhpc3RpbmcgcG9zdCBh bmQKPiBzZW5kCj4gaXQgYmFjayBieSBlbWFpbCAtIGFuZCBIT1BFIHRoYXQgaXQgZmluZHMgaXRz IHdheSB0byB0aGUgcHJvcGVyIHRocmVhZCFdCj4KPiBEYXZlCj4KPiAtLQo+Cj4gLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0t LS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQo+IFNlYXJjaCAiRGF2ZSdzIE9sZCBDb21wdXRlcnMiIHNlZSAibXkg cGVyc29uYWwiIGF0IGJvdHRvbSEKPgoKCi0tIApFbmQgb2YgbGluZQpKT0IgVEVSTUlOQVRFRAo= --===============2082858396936106578==-- From rickb@bensene.com Mon Nov 27 22:32:11 2023 From: Rick Bensene To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 22:31:22 +0000 Message-ID: <9dbab1df3fa24014918276020252f282@bensene.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4016059556822675491==" --===============4016059556822675491== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Steve Lewis wrote: > then like the 4004, we're struggling to find evidence of actual products th= at > made use of them. Wasn't the 4004 used in some cash registers, street ligh= ts, or > some weighing machines? (I don't have any specific references, just = recollections > from past reading) The major (and primary reason for the 4004 and the MCS-4 family existing in t= he first place) was Nippon Calculating Machine Co and their Busicom 141-PF el= ectronic printing desktop calculator. NCM went to the US looking for a chip= maker (the capability for the level of integration required to make such a ch= ipset did not exist in production form anywhere else in the world at the time= ), and two companies were engaged to develop a chipset for NCM, one being Int= el, and the other being Computer Design Corporation. As history clearly points out, Intel won the competition, developing a chipse= t based on the 4004 CPU, and some peripheral chips (RAM, ROM, I/O) that ended= up being the operating element of the NCM/Busicom 141-PF Calculator. The 141-PF is a very famous calculator for this reason, but is otherwise (by = appearance and function) a very ordinary calculator for the time. The fact t= hat it had "Intel Inside" (though the term didn't exist at the time), using t= he world's first commercially available microprocessor chipset made with MOS = Large Scale Integration technology, makes the 141-PF (and the OEM copies; the= NCR 18-36 and the Unicom 141). Two versions of the machine were made, one t= hat was a four-function machine, and another that added an extra ROM that add= ed a square root function. Other devices were subsequently developed that used the 4004 as their computi= ng core, such as digital scales, electronic cash registers, and various other= electronic devices. This was only possible because initially, Nippon Calculating Machine Co. had = exclusive rights to the use of the chipset. Due to some financial difficult= ies, NCM renegotiated the contract with Intel, removing the exclusivity claus= e in return for Intel forgiving some money owed on the development of the chi= ps. This allowed Intel to sell the chipset to the open market. Once this oc= curred, Intel aggressively marketed the chipset as the MCS-4 microprocessor s= ystem, providing extensive documentation, development tools, both hardware an= d software, and lots of support for anyone wishing to develop an electronic s= ystem based on the 4004. The Busicom 141-PF calculator and its OEM versions were the first commerciall= y-available electronic devices that had a general-purpose microprocessor with= firmware implementing the machine=E2=80=99s logic, and thus represent the hi= storical benchmark. These were actual products that were sold under the Busicom brand as well as = NCR and Unicom. It isn=E2=80=99t known how many of these machines were actual= ly made, but enough were made that they can still (rarely, though) be found t= oday. Nippon Calculating Machine Co. in Japan manufactured and distributed t= hem under their Busicom brand name, as well as providing the machines with su= btly changed color schemes for cabinet/keyboard to OEM customers, which would= market, sell, and service them under their own brand names. Rick -- The Old Calculator Museum https://oldcalculatormuseum.com P.S. If anyone out there has one of these calculators lying around gathering = dust, working or not, and would like to have it see new life as part of a mus= eum exhibit, please get in touch with me. --===============4016059556822675491==-- From ethan.dicks@gmail.com Tue Nov 28 01:33:15 2023 From: Ethan Dicks To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 20:32:57 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <9dbab1df3fa24014918276020252f282@bensene.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1768143554619393792==" --===============1768143554619393792== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 5:32=E2=80=AFPM Rick Bensene via cctalk wrote: > Steve Lewis wrote: > > then like the 4004, we're struggling to find evidence of actual products = that > > made use of them. Wasn't the 4004 used in some cash registers, street li= ghts, or > > some weighing machines? (I don't have any specific references, just recol= lections > from past reading) Over the years, I've found a 4004 in two commercial products - a 1970s non-UPC barcode scanner, and a commercial kitchen scale. I still have the PCBs for the scale (with the accessory chips). The barcode scanner was utterly dismantled 35 years ago. -ethan --===============1768143554619393792==-- From 1297.dunfield@gmail.com Tue Nov 28 07:21:29 2023 From: Dave Dunfield <1297.dunfield@gmail.com> To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] It's been a while - retirement project Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 18:58:52 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0206960236342129639==" --===============0206960236342129639== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >>[anyone know if there's a usable web interface to CCTALK? I browse it >>through the ARCHIVE on CCTALK.COM >KenUnix - 27 Nov 7:13 p.m. >When I try and connect to it I see in the tab chinese verbiage >CCtalk ???????????-?????????????? and it tries to send me to public.hujia.104.cdn20.com Sorry, my mistake - I meant the CCTALK archives at: classiccmp.org Dave --=20 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- Search "Dave's Old Computers" see "my personal" at bottom! --===============0206960236342129639==-- From cliendo@gmail.com Tue Nov 28 13:46:19 2023 From: Christian Liendo To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 08:46:03 -0500 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4747691189710607580==" --===============4747691189710607580== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit I have a box from Comstar that I was told was a "programmer" that allowed you to burn ROMs for a much larger computer. I did some research and found that COMSTAR made a Microcomputer based on the Intel 4004 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=6368812 Page 26 "Compiler programmer I noted with interest the article in the December 1974 issue /pp. 53-55) enti­tled "Self-contained microcomputers ease system implementation." Comstar Microcomputers, a part of the Warner & Swasey Company, also provides micro­computer development systems. As a part of these systems, Comstar developed a Process Control Language (PCL), which allows the engineer to create mi­crocomputer programs using English lan­guage commands. This language allows the engineer to express on/off control functions in ladder-diagram terms and also provides a simple method for ex­pressing most other control modes. " "Comstar offers a process control com­piler that is used to compile the English language program into programmable read-only memory" (PROM) chips. This system can also erase chips, and edit and program chips in machine language. These chips are then plugged into a PROM memory module to provide pro­gram memory for a microcomputer. The Compiler is built around a Com-star-4 Microcomputer which uses the INTEL 4004 chip • LeRoy H. Anderson The Warner & Swasey Co. Solon, Ohio " --===============4747691189710607580==-- From spacewar@gmail.com Wed Nov 29 01:48:06 2023 From: Eric Smith To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 18:47:45 -0700 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6553087410984333564==" --===============6553087410984333564== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 12:46 AM Sellam Abraham via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > The CADC had no program counter: since it was designed from its inception > to be a multi-processing (multi-threading?) system, it made sense to build > a program counter onto each ROM. Therefore, when the CADC switched back to > that ROM to continue executing instructions, the program counter on that > ROM told the CADC where it was supposed to fetch the next instruction. > Once it became clear to Ted that the CADC did not have an integrated > program counter (though it easily could have) he pooh-poohed the entire > thing as not qualifying as a single-chip microprocessor > The 4004, 4040, 8008, and 8080 have program counters, but if one is picking nits, they have so much missing that has to be supplied by additional logic that IMO it's hard to consider them single-chip microprocessors. And if lack of a program counter is sufficient to disqualify a chip from being a single-chip microprocessor, then the Fairchild F8 isn't one either. The F8 CPU (3850) has no program counter or any other address source on-chip. That's all provided by the ROM chip (3851 or 3856 PSU), or by the SMI or DMI (static or dymanic memory interface chips). When the F8 CPU wants to know the value of one of the program counter or data counter registers, it has to ask the other chips for it! Unlike the CADC, though, all of the ROMs and memory interfaces in an F8 system kept track of the same program counter value, so it couldn't do the ultra-fast task switching of the CADC. On the other hand, if you don't consider an on-chip program counter as necessary to be a single-chip microprocessor, then the Motorola MC14500 would qualify as a single-chip microprocessor, and probably the simplest one ever made. Eric --===============6553087410984333564==-- From lewissa78@gmail.com Wed Nov 29 07:05:12 2023 From: Steve Lewis To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2023 01:04:54 -0600 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <5664502A-B070-4829-9B42-6A6A62625BD9@comcast.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0340390128112502159==" --===============0340390128112502159== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I heard the Aztecs went to the moon eons before that other Armstrong guy :) On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 6:34=E2=80=AFPM Paul Koning via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > On Nov 21, 2023, at 7:13 PM, Antonio Carlini via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > On 21/11/2023 23:14, Will Cooke via cctalk wrote: > >> More information is here: > >> > https://firstmicroprocessor.com/?doing_wp_cron=3D1700608229.866605997085571= 2890625 > >> > >> I think that is the designers (Rod Holt?) website. Apparently he won a > legal battle to use the term "first microprocessor" for whatever that is > worth. > > > > Details were published in 1998 and the chip was available approximately > never (I presume, unless you were building a Tomcat) so I'm not sure you > should count it. Perhaps "first microprocessor, until someone else claims > another secret design that was even earlier" would be a more accurate claim? > > Remember the guy at the British spook agency (GCHQ?) who said he invented > RSA a long time before Rivest, Shamir, and Adleman did? Perhaps so, but > the fact that it was all secret means it didn't matter to the real world. > > This sort of thing happens a lot, in inventions or discoveries. There > were types of telegraphs before S.F.B. Morse came along, but his design > took over the world. There were Europeans who traveled to America before > Columbus, but nothing came of those explorations and they were pretty much > forgotten. And FM radio was first invented in 1919 by a Dutch engineer > (Hanso Idzerda), not around 1930 by Edwin Armstrong -- but Idzerda's design > was a technological dead end and disappeared from view by the late 1920s, > while Armstrong's design became universal and remains so. > > So I tend to qualify "first to invent" (or "discover") as "first to invent > and make it matter". > > paul > > > --===============0340390128112502159==-- From robert.jarratt@ntlworld.com Wed Nov 29 18:16:54 2023 From: Rob Jarratt To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: VT100 Monitor Board Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2023 18:16:46 +0000 Message-ID: <027401da22f0$370aefd0$a520cf70$@ntlworld.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============5631964952860795053==" --===============5631964952860795053== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > -----Original Message----- > From: Tony Duell > Sent: 26 November 2023 06:35 > To: rob(a)jarratt.me.uk > Cc: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > Subject: Re: [cctalk] VT100 Monitor Board >=20 > On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 11:12=E2=80=AFPM Rob Jarratt > wrote: >=20 > > > Have you checked the diodes and capacitors associated with the > > > flyback transformer? If something is shorted there. it's the > > > equivaent of running a power supply into a short circuit. The input cur= rent > will go up. > > > > I have checked all the diodes (in circuit) and they appear to be OK. One > capacitor may be suspect but without the full schematic I am not sure. I may > have to lift it to check. >=20 > Without the schematic you are going to have problems. Hello Tony, I am working on the schematic and when it is done I will post it for informat= ion. However, I was wondering what you suggest for testing the board once I h= ave done this. Simply replacing the blown fuse and plugging it in doesn't sou= nd like a good idea. Equally, not sure if using the light bulb method for lim= iting current into the PSU is going to help is it? Thanks Rob >=20 > With a schematic you can see > (a) Can you isolate certain areas -- for example the vertical deflection sy= ste >=20 > > > Trace out a schematic of the board so I know what I am dealing with. > > > > Yes, I may have to do that. Historically I have done a poor job of this > because of my insufficient understanding of electronics. >=20 > It gets easier with experience. Looking at every small monochrome monitor > schematic you can find will give you an idea of the sort of things to look = for. >=20 > > > I do wonder what the problem is with testing it with the flyback > > > connected, though... > > > > Only that I know it can produce lethal voltages and I would rather avoid = that > if I can. >=20 > The high voltage outputs can't supply that much current and are unlikely to > be lethal. Mains, and even worse the rectified mains in an SMPSU, is a lot > more liely to kill you. >=20 > That said, work with one hand in your pocket (current flow arm-to-arm is the > most dangerous) and take care. >=20 > I don't see how you can debug a monitor without having the flyback in place. > It's part of the highest power circuit on the board. And it provides voltag= es for > many other areas. >=20 > -tony --===============5631964952860795053==-- From ard.p850ug1@gmail.com Wed Nov 29 18:24:07 2023 From: Tony Duell To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: VT100 Monitor Board Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2023 18:23:47 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <027401da22f0$370aefd0$a520cf70$@ntlworld.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============7159565875273203282==" --===============7159565875273203282== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 6:16=E2=80=AFPM Rob Jarratt wrote: > I am working on the schematic and when it is done I will post it for inform= ation. However, I was wondering what you suggest for testing the board once I= have done this. Simply replacing the blown fuse and plugging it in doesn't s= ound like a good idea. Equally, not sure if using the light bulb method for l= imiting current into the PSU is going to help is it? You could try a lamp limiter between the 12V power supply and the monitor board (or across the (empty) fuseholder). Something like a car headlamp bulb with both filaments in parallel. -tony --===============7159565875273203282==-- From cc@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de Thu Nov 30 08:43:13 2023 From: Christian Corti To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: VT100 Monitor Board Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 09:43:04 +0100 Message-ID: <677c91e0-6e72-54fa-b634-7451446a0d9@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de> In-Reply-To: <027401da22f0$370aefd0$a520cf70$@ntlworld.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1494268116652886249==" --===============1494268116652886249== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 29 Nov 2023, 'General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts' wrote: > I am working on the schematic and when it is done I will post it for > information. However, I was wondering what you suggest for testing the What am I missing? Why don't you use the official schematics of the VT100 that also include the schematic of the monitor board? It is on bitsavers PDF page 43. /pdf/dec/terminal/vt100/MP00633_VT100_Schematic_Feb82.pdf Christian --===============1494268116652886249==-- From robert.jarratt@ntlworld.com Thu Nov 30 10:34:32 2023 From: Rob Jarratt To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: VT100 Monitor Board Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 10:34:24 +0000 Message-ID: <029801da2378$ca047b70$5e0d7250$@ntlworld.com> In-Reply-To: <677c91e0-6e72-54fa-b634-7451446a0d9@informatik.uni-stuttgart.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1902203320287160350==" --===============1902203320287160350== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > -----Original Message----- > From: Christian Corti via cctalk > Sent: 30 November 2023 08:43 > To: Rob Jarratt via cctalk > Cc: Christian Corti > Subject: [cctalk] Re: VT100 Monitor Board > > On Wed, 29 Nov 2023, 'General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts' > wrote: > > I am working on the schematic and when it is done I will post it for > > information. However, I was wondering what you suggest for testing the > > What am I missing? Why don't you use the official schematics of the VT100 > that also include the schematic of the monitor board? > It is on bitsavers PDF page 43. > /pdf/dec/terminal/vt100/MP00633_VT100_Schematic_Feb82.pdf My board does not match the one in the schematic. > > Christian --===============1902203320287160350==-- From mattislind@gmail.com Thu Nov 30 11:15:46 2023 From: Mattis Lind To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Re: VT100 Monitor Board Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 12:15:29 +0100 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <029801da2378$ca047b70$5e0d7250$@ntlworld.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3251649848458943697==" --===============3251649848458943697== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Den tors 30 nov. 2023 kl 11:34 skrev Rob Jarratt via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org>: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Christian Corti via cctalk > > Sent: 30 November 2023 08:43 > > To: Rob Jarratt via cctalk > > Cc: Christian Corti > > Subject: [cctalk] Re: VT100 Monitor Board > > > > On Wed, 29 Nov 2023, 'General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts' > > wrote: > > > I am working on the schematic and when it is done I will post it for > > > information. However, I was wondering what you suggest for testing the > > > > What am I missing? Why don't you use the official schematics of the VT100 > > that also include the schematic of the monitor board? > > It is on bitsavers PDF page 43. > > /pdf/dec/terminal/vt100/MP00633_VT100_Schematic_Feb82.pdf > > My board does not match the one in the schematic. > You know that there is another variant of the monitor board described in a schematic at page 58, right? /Mattis > > > > > Christian > > --===============3251649848458943697==-- From van.snyder@sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 30 23:46:31 2023 From: Van Snyder To: cctalk@classiccmp.org Subject: [cctalk] Unknown Viewsonic monitor flashes Red-Blue-Green-White Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2023 15:46:20 -0800 Message-ID: <41f47c5d496111806742478656cbbf30f87a9a54.camel@sbcglobal.net> In-Reply-To: <41f47c5d496111806742478656cbbf30f87a9a54.camel.ref@sbcglobal.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3907706422640585201==" --===============3907706422640585201== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I was given a 22-inch Viewsonic monitor. The label had been scratched off. It has four switchesd below the screen, labeled 1, 2, an up arrow, and a down arrow. When I plug it in, it flashes Red, Blue, Green, White at about one- second intervals. Pushing the buttons doesn't affect it. I haven't attached a VGA or DMI to it. Is it irreparably broken? Van Snyder --===============3907706422640585201==--