"Larry Blanchard" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 19:05:03 -0700, LDosser wrote:

"Morris Dovey" wrote in message
...


Sorry, but after spending more than a half-century developing software
(link in sig),

I'll see your Spectra 70/45 and raise you an RCA 501 and 301. )

I'll put in a Univac and a Ramac :-).

I'll raise you punchboards ...

On 4/11/2010 5:36 PM, Morris Dovey wrote:
On 4/11/2010 9:32 AM, Swingman wrote:

So, what's behind this obsession with taking snide shots at every
opportunity that presents itself?

You exaggerate - I've passed on most of the opportunities, but now that
I know you're so emotionally involved I'll try to do better.

... thanks for the warning. I hereby gird my loins in anticipation,
but be gentle.


--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

On 4/11/2010 5:36 PM, Morris Dovey wrote:

http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/Projects/LLJ/

On another subject, what are you hearing that is new about "spray on"
solar panels?

This was big news about five years ago in the green building seminars,
and then disappeared into the noise.

Went to another seminar a couple of weeks back and it was brought up by
the organizers again as a "rapidly emerging technology"?

Seems that some manufacturers are coming out with windows coated with a
spray on product?

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 15:44:35 -0700, LDosser wrote:

"Larry Blanchard" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 19:05:03 -0700, LDosser wrote:

"Morris Dovey" wrote in message
...


Sorry, but after spending more than a half-century developing
software (link in sig),

I'll see your Spectra 70/45 and raise you an RCA 501 and 301. )

I'll put in a Univac and a Ramac :-).

I'll raise you punchboards ...

402,403,407,509,552,077?

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

"Larry Blanchard" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 15:44:35 -0700, LDosser wrote:

"Larry Blanchard" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 19:05:03 -0700, LDosser wrote:

"Morris Dovey" wrote in message
...


Sorry, but after spending more than a half-century developing
software (link in sig),

I'll see your Spectra 70/45 and raise you an RCA 501 and 301. )

I'll put in a Univac and a Ramac :-).

I'll raise you punchboards ...

402,403,407,509,552,077?

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

407 - but only when forced to = tab shop manager out sick!

On 4/11/2010 5:58 PM, Swingman wrote:

On another subject, what are you hearing that is new about "spray on"
solar panels?

I'm not much involved with PV panels, but I do try to keep an eye on
news:alt.solar.photovoltaic for developments - and the concensus there
seems to be that coatings aren't yet ready for prime time.

This was big news about five years ago in the green building seminars,
and then disappeared into the noise.

Well, it could be that the folks in a.s.p were right, or it might be
that producers were pricing products higher than the market was willing
to pay for what they got, or even that the expectation of falling prices
for silicon panels made the technology less attractive - or all of the
above.

Went to another seminar a couple of weeks back and it was brought up by
the organizers again as a "rapidly emerging technology"?

Methinks that's a favorite label for "anything that might make me some
green in this lousy economy".

If you come across something that looks/sounds really good, get a sample
and check it out. If that's not possible, get a demonstration. If they
can't even do that, keep your wallet in your pocket and invite 'em to
call you when they're ready.

Seems that some manufacturers are coming out with windows coated with a
spray on product?

Why not? Just remember that only so much energy is delivered to each
square foot. Current silicon panel efficiencies run in the 10% ballpark,
so purchasers are going to need substantial window area to get
worthwhile amounts of electricity.

It wasn't by accident that I chose to build passive solar heating panels
- where efficiencies in the 80% bracket are reasonable.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

On Apr 11, 6:18*pm, Swingman wrote:
On 4/11/2010 5:14 PM, Robatoy wrote:

Some self reflection is in order, however, but I am a bit confused as
to who should be doing the reflecting.

Here ya go, Bubba. Let me help you out:

"For things that are essentially boxes - like kitchen cabinets and,
perhaps, your entertainment center CNC has acquired a substantial
following. "

A ridiculously ignorant, superficial remark, showing a decided lack of
depth of understanding, eh?

Now, live with it ... lol


That is not the original text from Morris' quote.

On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 15:14:05 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
wrote:

On Apr 11, 10:32*am, Swingman wrote:
On 4/11/2010 4:45 AM, Morris Dovey wrote:





On 4/11/2010 2:01 AM, Swingman wrote:
On 4/10/2010 8:49 PM, Morris Dovey wrote:

Tracing an image and skipping definition of contoured surfaces don't
work for me.

The "tracing" of a component, imported into a project from an outside
source, is routinely done as a matter of convenience and is a common
practice to speed up a project, with any design software, and is one of
the reasons for an "import" feature.

Furthermore, it is inarguable that if the software contains the tools to
effectively "trace" a component, it therefore has the tools/ability to
"draw" it instead, should you chose to do so, as this software indeed
does.

Your argument in that regard falls flatly on its face ...

Yeah fine. Give this easy one a whirl:

Draw parabola with curve length of 96" between intersections with the
latus rectum (a line through the focus perpendicular to another line
passing through both focus and vertex). Points separated by 0.0100"
along the x-axis, and accurate to +/-0.0005". I don't care whether you
draw or trace, only that all requirements be met, so that I can export
it as a DXF (the format needed for my 'Bot) and machine it accurately.

Obfuscation par excellence ... and totally, and ridiculously, irrelevant.

Your arguments thus far do nothing to disprove that.

Eh? Why should I have any interest in proving or disproving anything?

Yep, it's indeed a mystery why you bothered in the first place. You've
made it plain in the past that you have little use for the software;
that you don't use it; have minimum experience with it and are ignorant
of its capabilites for the most part.

So, what's behind this obsession with taking snide shots at every
opportunity that presents itself?

Hell, it wasn't even a good troll, so why bother muddying the water with
ignorance?

A little self reflection might be in order there, Bubba ...

--www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 10/22/08
KarlC@ (the obvious)

I'm a little late to the party, but 'snide shots', 'obsession',
'troll' and 'ignorance' are not words I can associate with the Morris
*I* know.

Some self reflection is in order, however, but I am a bit confused as
to who should be doing the reflecting.


I wondered about this a little myself. Then I remembered his
daughters eye surgery and a few other comments so I'm going to cut him
some slack. He's usually very helpful, and shares his info. ****
happens on usenet where everything is lost in translation. These are
two great people so I think it will work out.

Mike M

On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 21:16:41 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Morris Dovey wrote:
On 4/10/2010 9:05 PM, LDosser wrote:
"Morris Dovey" wrote in message
...

Sorry, but after spending more than a half-century developing software
(link in sig),

I'll see your Spectra 70/45 and raise you an RCA 501 and 301. )

You win - besides, the 70/45 was just a thin film approximation to a
360/30 (same instruction set and I/O devices, but had a sexier front
panel)


By "thin film", do you mean it also had the cros (capacitance read only
memory) instruction set as the 360/30? It was punch card size mylar
with copper traces that were punched out on one of four sides of a
squeare or some such. The first time I saw the 30 power on and the cros
"pump up" to push the cros punch card ros together, I wondered "WTF"?

Then there was the 360/40 with the "tros" micro programmed instruction
set...

Then there was the 360/75 with no microcode.

That's the one I started with in '64.

Must have been a first. The /360 was announced in '64. I didn't use the /75
until '67 (I was a Junior in high school .

On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 00:26:41 -0500, Morris Dovey wrote:

On 4/10/2010 11:16 PM, Doug Winterburn wrote:

By "thin film", do you mean it also had the cros (capacitance read only
memory) instruction set as the 360/30? It was punch card size mylar
with copper traces that were punched out on one of four sides of a
square or some such. The first time I saw the 30 power on and the cros
"pump up" to push the cros punch card ros together, I wondered "WTF"?

You and nearly everyone else - I've always suspected it was designed by
the same madman who designed the 407...

I honestly don't know how RCA implemented the instruction set or the
internals of IPL. I suspect that they may have used ROMs, because IBM
was likely to have the CROS covered every which way with patents.

Thin film refers to (yet another) logic family (like ECL, TTL, MOS,
CMOS, etc). RCA claimed it was cheaper, provided higher yields, and was
more reliable. Of course, when you asked around you discovered that
every company's technology flavor was well above average.

"Thin film" was a manufacturing process rather than a logic family. IIRC,
everything was RTL at that time. IBM's variety was SLT (Solid Logic
Technology). It *was* RTL. ECL didn't come along until the 370s and "MST"
(Monolithic Solid Technology), which was made by TI.

You might get a kick out of learning that the floppy disk was originally
developed to load the microcode into the ill-fated object-based FS (for
Future System) machines.

Nah, floppies were used on the 370/158s to load microcode, well before FS.

Then there was the 360/40 with the "tros" micro programmed instruction
set...

That's the one I started with in '64.

I was away from computers from 62-65 working for Uncle Sam, but IIRC I
was introduced to the 40 (but it could have been a 50) and DEBE at the
same time.

On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 15:44:35 -0700, "LDosser" wrote:

"Larry Blanchard" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 19:05:03 -0700, LDosser wrote:

"Morris Dovey" wrote in message
...


Sorry, but after spending more than a half-century developing software
(link in sig),

I'll see your Spectra 70/45 and raise you an RCA 501 and 301. )

I'll put in a Univac and a Ramac :-).

I'll raise you punchboards ...

....on an analog computer.

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 21:16:41 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Morris Dovey wrote:
On 4/10/2010 9:05 PM, LDosser wrote:
"Morris Dovey" wrote in message
...

Sorry, but after spending more than a half-century developing software
(link in sig),
I'll see your Spectra 70/45 and raise you an RCA 501 and 301. )
You win - besides, the 70/45 was just a thin film approximation to a
360/30 (same instruction set and I/O devices, but had a sexier front
panel)

By "thin film", do you mean it also had the cros (capacitance read only
memory) instruction set as the 360/30? It was punch card size mylar
with copper traces that were punched out on one of four sides of a
squeare or some such. The first time I saw the 30 power on and the cros
"pump up" to push the cros punch card ros together, I wondered "WTF"?

Then there was the 360/40 with the "tros" micro programmed instruction
set...

Then there was the 360/75 with no microcode.

That's the one I started with in '64.

Must have been a first. The /360 was announced in '64. I didn't use the /75
until '67 (I was a Junior in high school .

It was an IBM punch card I/O Fortran IBM machine we used in college in
'64 - can't remember the IBM model number.

Akshooly, it was '66 when I went to work for IBM and went to 360 OS
school in Endicott (DOS), and then Poughkeepsie (OS). Classrooms full
of ashtrays and smoke so thick, you could barely see the blackboard and
the instructor with his [bad] hairpiece. Cigs were $0.35 a pack in the
vending machines in the hallways with 2 cents taped to each pack making
them $0.33.

On Apr 12, 1:23*am, Doug Winterburn wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 21:16:41 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Morris Dovey wrote:
On 4/10/2010 9:05 PM, LDosser wrote:
"Morris Dovey" wrote in message
...

Sorry, but after spending more than a half-century developing software
(link in sig),
I'll see your Spectra 70/45 and raise you an RCA 501 and 301. )
You win - besides, the 70/45 was just a thin film approximation to a
360/30 (same instruction set and I/O devices, but had a sexier front
panel)

By "thin film", do you mean it also had the cros (capacitance read only
memory) instruction set as the 360/30? *It was punch card size mylar
with copper traces that were punched out on one of four sides of a
squeare or some such. *The first time I saw the 30 power on and the cros
"pump up" to push the cros punch card ros together, I wondered "WTF"?

Then there was the 360/40 with the "tros" micro programmed instruction
set...

Then there was the 360/75 with no microcode.

That's the one I started with in '64.

Must have been a first. *The /360 was announced in '64. *I didn't use the /75
until '67 (I was a Junior in high school .

It was an IBM *punch card I/O Fortran IBM machine we used in college in
'64 - can't remember the IBM model number.

Akshooly, it was '66 when I went to work for IBM and went to 360 OS
school in Endicott (DOS), and then Poughkeepsie (OS). *Classrooms full
of ashtrays and smoke so thick, you could barely see the blackboard and
the instructor with his [bad] hairpiece. *Cigs were $0.35 a pack in the
vending machines in the hallways with 2 cents taped to each pack making
them $0.33.

Oh..MAN!! Do I remember my days at U of Waterloo (yes, home of the
Blackberry) I had a prof who smoked the best part of a pack of
Gauloises in a single session. Brilliant guy (all about dithering pcm)
but he wore a tweed jacket and stank....and I mean STANK.

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 15:44:35 -0700, "LDosser" wrote:

"Larry Blanchard" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 19:05:03 -0700, LDosser wrote:

"Morris Dovey" wrote in message
...


Sorry, but after spending more than a half-century developing software
(link in sig),

I'll see your Spectra 70/45 and raise you an RCA 501 and 301. )

I'll put in a Univac and a Ramac :-).

I'll raise you punchboards ...

...on an analog computer.


Nah, but I've touched the Enigma ...

On 4/11/2010 11:02 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 00:26:41 -0500, Morris wrote:

You might get a kick out of learning that the floppy disk was originally
developed to load the microcode into the ill-fated object-based FS (for
Future System) machines.

Nah, floppies were used on the 370/158s to load microcode, well before FS.

Are you sure? The 158 was announced in August 2, 1972 about the time
Dept 71J in East Fishkill received a bare (no electronics) /Igar/ drive
from Boulder, and at that time the folks at Boulder were still having
difficulties producing diskettes (something about the jacket lining
abrading the oxide).

In 1972, D/71J was working on the UC0 and UC.5 controllers and firmware
drivers for not only /Igar/, but also for /Gulliver/ (the new sealed
hard drive from Hursley), /Lynx/ (a new band printer to succeed the
print-chain 1403), and an SDLC adapter - and all of these were being
developed (primarily) as building blocks for FS.

It was the guy across the hall from me who came up with the
motor+geneva+leadscrew drive to implement seeks (clack, clack, clack) on
/Igar/, which was later replaced with a (quiet) voice coil seek mechanism.

They all underwent final product test at the same time in Kingston
during, IIRC, 1974. We worked 12 hours on and twelve hours off with a
long commute, through that entire 6-week test process - it was an
exhausting experience (I remember waking up one morning on the way back
from Kingston - driving down the shoulder of US9 doing 65).

The evolved /Igar/ drive graduated as the 33FD. I still have some of the
diskettes.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

On 4/12/2010 12:23 AM, Doug Winterburn wrote:

It was an IBM punch card I/O Fortran IBM machine we used in college in
'64 - can't remember the IBM model number.

Hmm - sounds like my favorite old machine: an IBM-1130. If so, you
probably had a 1442 card reader/punch and an 1132 [POS!] printer to go with.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

"Morris Dovey" wrote in message
...
On 4/11/2010 11:02 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 00:26:41 -0500, Morris
wrote:

You might get a kick out of learning that the floppy disk was originally
developed to load the microcode into the ill-fated object-based FS (for
Future System) machines.

Nah, floppies were used on the 370/158s to load microcode, well before
FS.

Are you sure? The 158 was announced in August 2, 1972 about the time Dept
71J in East Fishkill

Ever run into a guy name of Dick Gomez back there?

On 4/12/2010 2:40 AM, LDosser wrote:

Ever run into a guy name of Dick Gomez back there?

If I did, I've forgotten.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

Morris Dovey wrote:
On 4/12/2010 12:23 AM, Doug Winterburn wrote:

It was an IBM punch card I/O Fortran IBM machine we used in college in
'64 - can't remember the IBM model number.


Hmm - sounds like my favorite old machine: an IBM-1130. If so, you
probably had a 1442 card reader/punch and an 1132 [POS!] printer to go
with.


Wasn't the 1442 a prototype for the office paper shredder?

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA

On Apr 12, 2:03*am, Morris Dovey wrote:
On 4/11/2010 11:02 PM, wrote:

On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 00:26:41 -0500, Morris *wrote:

You might get a kick out of learning that the floppy disk was originally
developed to load the microcode into the ill-fated object-based FS (for
Future System) machines.

Nah, floppies were used on the 370/158s to load microcode, well before FS.

Are you sure? The 158 was announced in August 2, 1972 about the time
Dept 71J in East Fishkill received a bare (no electronics) /Igar/ drive
from Boulder, and at that time the folks at Boulder were still having
difficulties producing diskettes (something about the jacket lining
abrading the oxide).

I'm not sure when they were introduced into the 370s, but yeah, they
were used for /158 microcode. I remember interviewing at CDC in early
'74. They had a /158 with its covers off, with a bunch of people
reverse-engineering the floppy drive. The /158 was their pride and
joy, which I thought odd. The whole place was "odd" and I told them
so before I left (didn't get an offer .

In 1972, D/71J was working on the UC0 and UC.5 controllers and firmware
drivers for not only /Igar/, but also for /Gulliver/ (the new sealed
hard drive from Hursley), /Lynx/ (a new band printer to succeed the
print-chain 1403), and an SDLC adapter - and all of these were being
developed (primarily) as building blocks for FS.

I worked on FS for a few months, before it was killed. I started in
P'ok in June of '74. IIRC it was killed that fall and the 308x
started using the hardware. FS was a *bad* idea and would have killed
any other company.

It was the guy across the hall from me who came up with the
motor+geneva+leadscrew drive to implement seeks (clack, clack, clack) on
/Igar/, which was later replaced with a (quiet) voice coil seek mechanism..

They all underwent final product test at the same time in Kingston
during, IIRC, 1974. We worked 12 hours on and twelve hours off with a
long commute, through that entire 6-week test process - it was an
exhausting experience (I remember waking up one morning on the way back
from Kingston - driving down the shoulder of US9 doing 65).

I did a lot of 12/12 projects in my time at IBM. In a department
meeting my boss announced that he had good news and bad news. The
good news was that starting immediately, we would be working half
days. The bad news was that there were 24 hours in a day. I'd
already been working 70-hour weeks, for months, so no change.

The evolved /Igar/ drive graduated as the 33FD. I still have some of the
diskettes.

On Apr 12, 2:20*am, Morris Dovey wrote:
On 4/12/2010 12:23 AM, Doug Winterburn wrote:

It was an IBM *punch card I/O Fortran IBM machine we used in college in
'64 - can't remember the IBM model number.

Hmm - sounds like my favorite old machine: an IBM-1130. If so, you
probably had a 1442 card reader/punch and an 1132 [POS!] printer to go with.

The original personal computer. ;-)

On Apr 12, 12:23*am, Doug Winterburn wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 21:16:41 -0700, Doug Winterburn
wrote:

Morris Dovey wrote:
On 4/10/2010 9:05 PM, LDosser wrote:
"Morris Dovey" wrote in message
...

Sorry, but after spending more than a half-century developing software
(link in sig),
I'll see your Spectra 70/45 and raise you an RCA 501 and 301. )
You win - besides, the 70/45 was just a thin film approximation to a
360/30 (same instruction set and I/O devices, but had a sexier front
panel)

By "thin film", do you mean it also had the cros (capacitance read only
memory) instruction set as the 360/30? *It was punch card size mylar
with copper traces that were punched out on one of four sides of a
squeare or some such. *The first time I saw the 30 power on and the cros
"pump up" to push the cros punch card ros together, I wondered "WTF"?

Then there was the 360/40 with the "tros" micro programmed instruction
set...

Then there was the 360/75 with no microcode.

That's the one I started with in '64.

Must have been a first. *The /360 was announced in '64. *I didn't use the /75
until '67 (I was a Junior in high school .

It was an IBM *punch card I/O Fortran IBM machine we used in college in
'64 - can't remember the IBM model number.

Akshooly, it was '66 when I went to work for IBM and went to 360 OS
school in Endicott (DOS), and then Poughkeepsie (OS). *Classrooms full
of ashtrays and smoke so thick, you could barely see the blackboard and
the instructor with his [bad] hairpiece. *Cigs were $0.35 a pack in the
vending machines in the hallways with 2 cents taped to each pack making
them $0.33.

Lots of Beamers around these parts. I feel like the kid listening to
the old war stories (started in P'ok in '74, moved to BTV in '93, and
retired in '06). ;-)

On 4/12/2010 8:26 AM, wrote:
On Apr 12, 2:20 am, Morris wrote:
On 4/12/2010 12:23 AM, Doug Winterburn wrote:

It was an IBM punch card I/O Fortran IBM machine we used in college in
'64 - can't remember the IBM model number.

Hmm - sounds like my favorite old machine: an IBM-1130. If so, you
probably had a 1442 card reader/punch and an 1132 [POS!] printer to go with.

The original personal computer. ;-)

Y'know, there may be more truth to that than anyone suspects.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

On 4/12/2010 8:24 AM, wrote:

I'm not sure when they were introduced into the 370s, but yeah, they
were used for /158 microcode. I remember interviewing at CDC in early
'74. They had a /158 with its covers off, with a bunch of people
reverse-engineering the floppy drive. The /158 was their pride and
joy, which I thought odd. The whole place was "odd" and I told them
so before I left (didn't get an offer .

You're right - I went digging and found that there had been a /Minnow/
R/O floppy drive with diminished capacity released in 1972. I'm guessing
it was an early /Igar/ prototype.

Yuppers on the oddness - my impression was that the CDC management team
had never quite been able to decide what they wanted to do when they
grew up. At one point they were even in the windmill business.

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

ExtremelyAvg wrote:

There is another free option, but I should mention that there is a
bit of a learning curve to get started. The virtual world of Second
Life allows one to build. You may enter exact dimensions, create
multiple pieces, and it is free. There are tons of in world
tutorials. I made my living for 3 years building spaces in SL for
corporate clients, so that is where I design most of my stuff. The
nice thing about SL is that you could build in groups, if your
woodworking friends also joined. As for curves and such, no problem.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suGykJIBLZU This is a video showing
things that either I personally built or my workers built. There are
lots of bits of furniture.

I also love Google Sketchup and 3Ds Max.

Good luck,

Brian
http://extremelyaverage.com


Brian, Look like interesting stuff! What is the best way to learn a
little more about how to use it?

Bill

On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 17:29:27 -0700, LDosser wrote:

I'll put in a Univac and a Ramac :-).

I'll raise you punchboards ...

402,403,407,509,552,077?

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

407 - but only when forced to = tab shop manager out sick!

Another operator and I once wired a 407 plugboard to list missing checks
for payroll reconciliation. The checks were punched cards so we were
running them through and listing the ones that weren't there! IBM said
it couldn't be done. There were so many wires (including quite a few one
way wires) we had to pull some and put in the "permanent" wires so we
could get a cover on the board.

It worked fine for several months and suddenly stopped working. We
accosted the IBM CE and he confessed he'd done a "tuneup" and found the
timing was a little off so he fixed it. We convinced him to put it back
the way it was. Thereafter, for at least as long as I worked there,
there was a sign on the 407 that threatened immediate beheading for
anyone who touched it!

BTW, the first payroll system written for the Univac took 8-9 days to
run. For a weekly payroll! Seems table lookups on mag tape were just a
mite too slow :-).

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

On Apr 12, 11:18*am, Morris Dovey wrote:
On 4/12/2010 8:24 AM, wrote:

I'm not sure when they were introduced into the 370s, but yeah, they
were used for /158 microcode. *I remember interviewing at CDC in early
'74. *They had a /158 with its covers off, with a bunch of people
reverse-engineering the floppy drive. *The /158 was their pride and
joy, which I thought odd. *The whole place was "odd" and I told them
so before I left (didn't get an offer .

You're right - I went digging and found that there had been a /Minnow/
R/O floppy drive with diminished capacity released in 1972. I'm guessing
it was an early /Igar/ prototype.

It was R/O (forgotten that detail). The floppy writers were a desk-
sized contraption that connected to an internal use only computer
(RSTS?) from Rochester, IIRC. It was IUO because it would put shame
to the S/7 and there were a *lot* of S/7s, unsold, in the warehouse.

Yuppers on the oddness - my impression was that the CDC management team
had never quite been able to decide what they wanted to do when they
grew up. At one point they were even in the windmill business.

It was obviously run by a bunch of MBA kids, still wet behind the
ears. The treated candidates like grade school kids. Just amazing.

On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 22:23:31 -0700, Doug Winterburn wrote:

Then there was the 360/75 with no microcode.

That's the one I started with in '64.

Must have been a first. The /360 was announced in '64. I didn't use
the /75 until '67 (I was a Junior in high school .

It was an IBM punch card I/O Fortran IBM machine we used in college in
'64 - can't remember the IBM model number.

Might have been an 1130 or maybe a 360/20 which came out about the same
time. But '64 does seem a little early - IIRC, both came out in '65 or
'66.

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 11:18:42 -0500, Morris Dovey wrote:

You're right - I went digging and found that there had been a /Minnow/
R/O floppy drive with diminished capacity released in 1972. I'm guessing
it was an early /Igar/ prototype.

I'm beginning to wonder how many old computer jocks and card pushers
there are in this group :-). Is there some mystical connection between
computers and woodworking?

BTW, to see the 1st computer I programmed (and helped assemble) go to:

http://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/BRL61.html#TOC

and click on Readix. I worked on one at Science Research Associates in
the late '50s.

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

On 4/12/2010 12:18 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:

I'm beginning to wonder how many old computer jocks and card pushers
there are in this group :-). Is there some mystical connection between
computers and woodworking?

Good call! I've been convinced for a very long time that systems design
and woodworking use the same circuits. People who're good at one seem to
have a shot at being good at the other.

BTW, to see the 1st computer I programmed (and helped assemble) go to:

http://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/BRL61.html#TOC

and click on Readix. I worked on one at Science Research Associates in
the late '50s.

I like that you don't even have to open the covers to see which board is
on fire.

I started programming in '59 on a Bendix G-15, but it was definitely
_not_ as impressive looking as the one in the BRL Report - and it did
require opening the covers to see what was roasting...

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

On Apr 12, 12:18*pm, Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 11:18:42 -0500, Morris Dovey wrote:
You're right - I went digging and found that there had been a /Minnow/
R/O floppy drive with diminished capacity released in 1972. I'm guessing
it was an early /Igar/ prototype.

I'm beginning to wonder how many old computer jocks and card pushers
there are in this group :-). *Is there some mystical connection between
computers and woodworking?

Not so much computers and woodworking, I think, rather electronics and
woodworking. I noticed a correlation some time back (maybe it's just
that design is design - doesn't matter much what). Computers, to me,
were just a way to get paid to design circuits. ;-)

BTW, to see the 1st computer I programmed (and helped assemble) go to:

http://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/BRL61.html#TOC

and click on Readix. *I worked on one at Science Research Associates in
the late '50s.

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

wrote:
On Apr 12, 12:18 pm, Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 11:18:42 -0500, Morris Dovey wrote:
You're right - I went digging and found that there had been a /Minnow/
R/O floppy drive with diminished capacity released in 1972. I'm guessing
it was an early /Igar/ prototype.
I'm beginning to wonder how many old computer jocks and card pushers
there are in this group :-). Is there some mystical connection between
computers and woodworking?

Not so much computers and woodworking, I think, rather electronics and
woodworking. I noticed a correlation some time back (maybe it's just
that design is design - doesn't matter much what). Computers, to me,
were just a way to get paid to design circuits. ;-)

I was in the computer software development/support side, but I did
design & build most of my ham radio gear - vacuum tubes no less.


BTW, to see the 1st computer I programmed (and helped assemble) go to:

http://ed-thelen.org/comp-hist/BRL61.html#TOC

and click on Readix. I worked on one at Science Research Associates in
the late '50s.

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

Morris Dovey wrote:
On 4/12/2010 12:18 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:

I'm beginning to wonder how many old computer jocks and card pushers
there are in this group :-). Is there some mystical connection between
computers and woodworking?


I guess I qualify except I don't consider myself "old"!!!

I actually used paper-tape (over a dumb-terminal) before I "graduated"
to punch cards.

I fully expect that my post-HS woodworking projects will be better my HS
projects of about 30 years ago, but it's hard to explain "why" in words.
I'm the same person, but somehow I'm a more learned person--that's one
of great things about staying young is you get to keep on learning!

Bill

Bill wrote:

I'm the same person, but somehow I'm a more learned person--that's one
of great things about staying young is you get to keep on learning!

Bill


I've been reading James Krenov's book, "A Cabinet Makers Notebook".
I just finished the first chapter on "Wood". He gives the reader
plenty of opportunity to "learn something"! : )

During my own reflection I observed that the beauty of using tools
is in using them well. They sing their own song (but please don't
tell anyone I said that)!

I can solder a good joint too (ya gotta make it flow, baby flow!--my
shop teacher sang that alot).

Lew always says to "have fun"...I think I'm right on track!

Bill

In article ,
Morris Dovey wrote:
On 4/12/2010 8:24 AM, wrote:

I'm not sure when they were introduced into the 370s, but yeah, they
were used for /158 microcode. I remember interviewing at CDC in early
'74. They had a /158 with its covers off, with a bunch of people
reverse-engineering the floppy drive. The /158 was their pride and
joy, which I thought odd. The whole place was "odd" and I told them
so before I left (didn't get an offer .

You're right - I went digging and found that there had been a /Minnow/
R/O floppy drive with diminished capacity released in 1972. I'm guessing
it was an early /Igar/ prototype.

Yuppers on the oddness - my impression was that the CDC management team
had never quite been able to decide what they wanted to do when they
grew up. At one point they were even in the windmill business.

And they built computers that couldn't add!

They faked addition by 'complement and subtract'. (true!!)


That said, they were some of my favorite hardware to work on.

The high-level architecture was positively elegant in it's simplicity and
regularity.

the closer to the hardware they got, the *stranger* things got.

In article ,
Doug Winterburn wrote:
wrote:

Must have been a first. The /360 was announced in '64. I didn't use the /75
until '67 (I was a Junior in high school .

It was an IBM punch card I/O Fortran IBM machine we used in college in
'64 - can't remember the IBM model number.

a 7090? mebbie it's predecessor, a 709?

On 4/12/2010 8:07 PM, Robert Bonomi wrote:
In ,
Morris wrote:

Yuppers on the oddness - my impression was that the CDC management team
had never quite been able to decide what they wanted to do when they
grew up. At one point they were even in the windmill business.

And they built computers that couldn't add!

They faked addition by 'complement and subtract'. (true!!)

That said, they were some of my favorite hardware to work on.

Was it the IBM-650 that was nicknamed the "CADET" for Can't Add, Doesn't
Even Try?

The only CDC machine I ever used was the 6500 at Purdue and it seemed to
do crank right along fair reliably.

The high-level architecture was positively elegant in it's simplicity and
regularity.

the closer to the hardware they got, the *stranger* things got.

Speaking of Burroughs... )

--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/

On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 20:07:05 -0500, Robert Bonomi wrote:

Yuppers on the oddness - my impression was that the CDC management team
had never quite been able to decide what they wanted to do when they
grew up. At one point they were even in the windmill business.

And they built computers that couldn't add!

They faked addition by 'complement and subtract'. (true!!)


That said, they were some of my favorite hardware to work on.

The high-level architecture was positively elegant in it's simplicity
and regularity.

There was a saying back in those days that the perfect computer would
have CPU by CDC, peripherals by IBM, and software by GE.

--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw

On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 20:07:05 -0500, (Robert
Bonomi) wrote:

In article ,
Morris Dovey wrote:
On 4/12/2010 8:24 AM, wrote:

I'm not sure when they were introduced into the 370s, but yeah, they
were used for /158 microcode. I remember interviewing at CDC in early
'74. They had a /158 with its covers off, with a bunch of people
reverse-engineering the floppy drive. The /158 was their pride and
joy, which I thought odd. The whole place was "odd" and I told them
so before I left (didn't get an offer .

You're right - I went digging and found that there had been a /Minnow/
R/O floppy drive with diminished capacity released in 1972. I'm guessing
it was an early /Igar/ prototype.

Yuppers on the oddness - my impression was that the CDC management team
had never quite been able to decide what they wanted to do when they
grew up. At one point they were even in the windmill business.

And they built computers that couldn't add!

They faked addition by 'complement and subtract'. (true!!)

That's not unusual at all. Subtraction *is* adding the negative (complement).

OTOH, the IBM 1620 was known as the CADET (Can't Add, Didn't Even Try). It
had no ADD (or subtract) instruction at all, rather used an index into a
lookup table in memory to add. Want a different operator? Overwrite the
"ADD" lookup table, sometimes on purpose, even.

That said, they were some of my favorite hardware to work on.

The high-level architecture was positively elegant in it's simplicity and
regularity.

the closer to the hardware they got, the *stranger* things got.

" wrote in
:


That's not unusual at all. Subtraction *is* adding the negative
(complement).

OTOH, the IBM 1620 was known as the CADET (Can't Add, Didn't Even
Try). It had no ADD (or subtract) instruction at all, rather used an
index into a lookup table in memory to add. Want a different
operator? Overwrite the "ADD" lookup table, sometimes on purpose,
even.


In one of my CS classes, it was pointed out that ADD circuits are usually
smaller and easier than SUBtract circuits, so they're used more often.
That's what was so weird about the subtractor being used to emulate
addition.

Puckdropper
--
Never teach your apprentice everything you know.