First video terminal?
Eric Fischer
the first CRT device to act more or less like a printing terminal
rather than a point- or vector-plotting device. I see the February,
1969 announcement of the Digital VT03 (at $7900 for an 80x12 display)
but this probably wasn't the first (if only because it should have
been preceded by VT01 and VT02).
eric
Edward Green
Not to mention the VT52...
On the theory that any fool with a web connection can become an
instant expert via search engines, and had better at least emulate
this activity if he wants to avoid the dreaded search engine police, I
can now knowingly say...
Have you seen these lovingly crafted web sites devoted to video
terminal memorabilia?
<http://vt100.net/> (Paul Williams)
<http://www.cs.utk.edu/~shuford/terminal_index.html> (Richard Shuford)
By following some links therein I managed to learn that the first
time sharing systems at MIT, in the period 1960-63 at least, used
something called the Flexowriter, which was sort of a hot-wired IBM
Selectric... maybe the typewriter derives from the terminal, not the
other way around. So presumably during that period video terminals
were still a gleam in their engineer's eye.
By further reading in the second site, which not only contains more
information about terminals than you probably want to know, but
more, far more, than you could ever believe _existed_, I managed
to glean that the first DEC video terminal (I presume this means
the first production model) was the VT05, which was essentially a
"glass teletype", while the first terminal incorporating key
features which the average schmoe of today would require in a "video
terminal" was indeed the VT52, released "circa 1974", which would
seem to be five years off, by your reference. Further unverified
reading suggests the VT52 was only officially "retired" by DEC in
May of 1993. That product had legs, whatever its real intro date!
You can find pictures of a VT50, VT50 and VT100 side by side at
<http://www.kuno.de/steinburg/drucker.htm>;
and by piecing together the mosaic, you can deduce that the thing
on top of the VT50 is a "DECWriter IV".
David R Brooks
...
:Have you seen these lovingly crafted web sites devoted to video
:terminal memorabilia?
:
:<http://vt100.net/> (Paul Williams)
:
:<http://www.cs.utk.edu/~shuford/terminal_index.html> (Richard Shuford)
:
:By following some links therein I managed to learn that the first
:time sharing systems at MIT, in the period 1960-63 at least, used
:something called the Flexowriter, which was sort of a hot-wired IBM
:Selectric... maybe the typewriter derives from the terminal, not the
:other way around. So presumably during that period video terminals
:were still a gleam in their engineer's eye.
Flexowriter was not a hot-wired Selectric. Made by Friden (later
Singer-Friden). Unlike the Selectric (or for that matter, the
Teletype), Flexowriter did not use a dancing ball/drum for the type.
It derived from a classical manual typewriter, with a "basket" of
type-levers. Beneath all this, was a "power roll", rather like a
second platen, spun by the motor. Attached to each type-lever was a
pivoting cam, with a serrated face. When tripped by a solenoid, the
cam's serrations caught on the power-roll, which dragged it around, so
firing the type-lever.
It could be hooked up to two paper-tape stations (ie 2 readers & 2
punches), and could do some interesting things. One was to load one
reader with an endless tape containing a letter, with the address,
etc. replaced by special flags. The second reader was loaded with a
tape of names & addresses. Yes indeed, an all-mechanical MailMerge!
Edward Green
> Flexowriter was not a hot-wired Selectric. Made by Friden (later
>Singer-Friden).
Sorry. I've been accused of sloppy reading before, and this time, my
accusers would be right. I knew there was some early
cross-connection between the typewriter and a terminal series, and
late night posting sucked "Flexowriter" into this stew.
I did enjoy the enjoy the period culture of how the coolest of the
cool computer people had early terminals which weighed as much as a
washing machine and cost as much as a Chevy hauled into their homes.
As for "fully-mechanical mail merge", I was onboard a US sub in the
mid-eighties which had been launched in '64, whose torpedo fire control
computer was still fully mechanical, a distant cousin I suppose of
WWII era fully mechanical battleship fire control computers. At the
time I remember thinking the choice represented some kind of technical
conservatism, but except for the fact that they had never been
replaced, its sounds like at the time of launch they may have been
state of the art.
Edward Green
>I did enjoy the enjoy the period culture of how the coolest of the...
Heh... outsmarted the spell checker that time! Forget about repeated
words; it didn't think to check for "phrase stutter", now _did_ it? :)
Henry Churchyard
> Eric Fischer <e...@pobox.com> wrote:
> I managed to glean that the first DEC video terminal (I presume this
> means the first production model) was the VT05, which was
> essentially a "glass teletype", while the first terminal
> incorporating key features which the average schmoe of today would
> require in a "video terminal" was indeed the VT52, released "circa
> 1974", which would seem to be five years off, by your reference.
Have no idea what the model number was, or whether they had cursor
control or not, but I do clearly remember that while the University of
California at Irvine mostly used standing teletypes (with punched tape
readers and writers) in 1972, there were also at least 6 or 8 green
screen terminals located in the computer room itself (hooked up to a
DEC PDP-10; I think you probably couldn't access the Xerox Sigma-7 --
the other main timesharing computer at the University -- from these
video terminals). There was also exactly one very expensive
pixel-addressable light-pen sensitive screen, with a large vertical
rectangular CRT, which they were very protective of, since the pixels
could supposedly be burned out if you illuminated them brightly for a
sustained period of time (for ten years afterwards, I had some paper
tapes that contained the commands for drawing simple line drawings on
the light-pen screen, but those all got crinkled up due to carless
storage, then thrown away as useless, years ago...).
--
Henry Churchyard chu...@usa.net http://www.crossmyt.com/hc/
Eric Fischer
> I see the February, 1969 announcement of the Digital VT03 ... but
> this probably wasn't the first (if only because it should have been
> preceded by VT01 and VT02).
Eric Smith points out (in mail) that DEC's published history (Digital
at Work) and the time line at
http://www.dec.com/timeline/1970-3.htm
both say that the VT05 was the first video terminal manufactured by
the company and asks for more details. So here is the complete text:
KEYBOARD DISPLAY ADDED TO PDP-10 LINE
A keyboard display terminal, providing quicker response in an
interactive computing environment than is possible with tele-
typewriter devices, has been added to the PDP-10 product
line.
The VT03 display console operates similarly to a conventional
teleprinter and incorporates "carriage return" and "line feed"
characters for position control. It is virtual noiseless and
accepts data at the rate of 1200 baud as compared to a tele-
printer rate of 110 baud.
The full-duplex console features a local memory for display
refreshing thus eliminating the demand on processor time usually
required for this function. The VT03 display up to 960 char-
acters arranged in 12 rows of 80 characters each.
Among others, the display unit features an alphanumeric key-
board, editing capability from the keyboard or computer, au-
dible end-of-line and incoming message tones and plug-in
boards for easy maintenance.
The unit is priced at $7900. An interface option, priced at
$300, is available which allows the user to generate hard copy
remotely via standard Teletype devices.
First deliveries of the new unit are scheduled for this summer.
The VT03 keyboard display joins a comprehensive line of
PDP-10 options which include, among other items, mass storage
devices, card handling and line printing equipment, display
and plotter systems and data communications equipment. More
than 1.5 million console hours have been logged on PDP-10
systems in some 50 worldwide installations in such environments
as commercial time-sharing, manufacturing, banking, un-
versities and research.
"News from DEC," DECUSCOPE, vol. 8, no. 2, 1969, p. 20.
Seeing a feature set like this going for $7900 makes it easier to
understand why TV typewriters were considered so exciting a few
years later.
eric
jmfb...@aol.com
"Henry Churchyard" <chu...@usa.net> wrote:
>In article <8t3elm$3u0$1...@news.panix.com>, Edward Green <e...@panix.com>
wrote:
>> Eric Fischer <e...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> means the first production model) was the VT05, which was
>> essentially a "glass teletype", while the first terminal
>> incorporating key features which the average schmoe of today would
>> require in a "video terminal" was indeed the VT52, released "circa
>> 1974", which would seem to be five years off, by your reference.
>
>Have no idea what the model number was, or whether they had cursor
>control or not, but I do clearly remember that while the University of
>California at Irvine mostly used standing teletypes (with punched tape
>readers and writers) in 1972, there were also at least 6 or 8 green
>screen terminals located in the computer room itself (hooked up to a
>DEC PDP-10;
The ones that had a green screen that were hooked up to our
PDP-10 were called VT06s but DEC didn't make them. They were
very expensive but were, IMO, the best terminals that ever
existed.
> ...I think you probably couldn't access the Xerox Sigma-7 --
>the other main timesharing computer at the University -- from these
>video terminals).
They wouldn't be if they were hardwired into the -10. Back in
those days changing hosts involved sneaker power.
> There was also exactly one very expensive
>pixel-addressable light-pen sensitive screen, with a large vertical
>rectangular CRT, which they were very protective of, since the pixels
>could supposedly be burned out if you illuminated them brightly for a
>sustained period of time (for ten years afterwards, I had some paper
>tapes that contained the commands for drawing simple line drawings on
>the light-pen screen, but those all got crinkled up due to carless
>storage, then thrown away as useless, years ago...).
And paper tapes seemed to acquire crinkles just by laying
around.
/BAH
Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.
jmfb...@aol.com
Eric Fischer <e...@pobox.com> wrote:
>I wrote,
>
>> I see the February, 1969 announcement of the Digital VT03 ... but
>> this probably wasn't the first (if only because it should have been
>> preceded by VT01 and VT02).
>
>Eric Smith points out (in mail) that DEC's published history (Digital
>at Work) and the time line at
>
> http://www.dec.com/timeline/1970-3.htm
>
>both say that the VT05 was the first video terminal manufactured by
>the company and asks for more details.
It was. Note the word manufactured. That means that a DEC-owned
plant made them and didn't just hang a logo on another
manufacturer's product.
> ... So here is the complete text:
<snip description>
>"News from DEC," DECUSCOPE, vol. 8, no. 2, 1969, p. 20.
>
>Seeing a feature set like this going for $7900 makes it easier to
>understand why TV typewriters were considered so exciting a few
>years later.
I have no idea what that VT03 was.
jchausler
Eric Fischer wrote:
The first raster video terminal I saw was in 1970 at CMU. It was IIRC
called "Infoton" or something like that. It displayed white characters
on
a black background. I came across them again in 73 or so at my first
"real" job. I last saw one, still in use, in 94. IIRC they used a shift
register memory.
Chris
AN GETTO$;DUMP;RUN,ALGOL,TAPE
$$
Carl R. Friend
>
> The first raster video terminal I saw was in 1970 at CMU. It was IIRC
> called "Infoton" or something like that. It displayed white
> characters on a black background. I came across them again in 73
> or so at my first "real" job. I last saw one, still in use, in 94.
> IIRC they used a shift register memory.
When I acquired my Nova 840 I had an opportunity to grab the original
Infoton console; I still kick myself for not doing so - it's landfill
now.... (The machine was purchased new in 1973, or close thereabouts.)
I don't recall a shift-register memory on it, though, but am
aware of some terminals that used delay-line (acoustic) memory for
refresh purposes.
My how time flies....
--
+------------------------------------------------+---------------------+
| Carl Richard Friend (UNIX Sysadmin) | West Boylston |
| Minicomputer Collector / Enthusiast | Massachusetts, USA |
| mailto:crfr...@ma.ultranet.com +---------------------+
| http://www.ultranet.com/~crfriend/museum | ICBM: 42:22N 71:47W |
+------------------------------------------------+---------------------+
Shez
> the VT52 was only officially "retired" by DEC in
>May of 1993. That product had legs, whatever its real intro date!
That is incorrect, in fact it had small rubber feet.
-Shez.
--
______________________________________________________
Hacker's Law:
The belief that enhanced understanding will necessarily stir
a nation to action is one of mankind's oldest illusions.
______________________________________________________
Take a break at the Last Stop Cafe: http://www.xerez.demon.co.uk/
Use PGP: my key is at http://www.xerez.demon.co.uk/p/Shez.asc
Ric Werme
>e...@panix.com (Edward Green) wrote:
>:By following some links therein I managed to learn that the first
>:time sharing systems at MIT, in the period 1960-63 at least, used
>:something called the Flexowriter, which was sort of a hot-wired IBM
>:Selectric... maybe the typewriter derives from the terminal, not the
>:other way around. So presumably during that period video terminals
>:were still a gleam in their engineer's eye.
Probably not - most television sets of that era were still made with
vacuum tubes, anything transistorized used discreet transistors.
(The typical AM handheld radio was advertised as a "six transistor radio".)
A 80x24 video terminal needs 2 KB of RAM, well, maybe it could have used
SIXBIT, but still, 12 Kb of memory for a terminal! Much better of sticking
with good old Teletypes Flexowriters.
My father had a Packard-Bell 250 at work with a Flexowriter. I think they
came together, but I'm not sure. Also 1962 timeframe.
> Flexowriter was not a hot-wired Selectric.
Worth saying twice! IBM did have some terminals that had Selectric
guts, e.g. the 2741 and 1051? used as the console for various 360s.
--
Ric Werme | we...@nospam.mediaone.net
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/werme | ^^^^^^^ delete
Vote www.harrybrowne.com for President!
Charles Richmond
>
> David R Brooks <da...@iinet.net.au> writes:
>
> >e...@panix.com (Edward Green) wrote:
>
> >:By following some links therein I managed to learn that the first
> >:time sharing systems at MIT, in the period 1960-63 at least, used
> >:something called the Flexowriter, which was sort of a hot-wired IBM
> >:Selectric... maybe the typewriter derives from the terminal, not the
> >:other way around. So presumably during that period video terminals
> >:were still a gleam in their engineer's eye.
>
> Probably not - most television sets of that era were still made with
> vacuum tubes, anything transistorized used discreet transistors.
> (The typical AM handheld radio was advertised as a "six transistor radio".)
>
advertised as "eight transistor radio" or "ten transistor radio". The trick
was...sure, they had eight (or ten) transistors, but only six transistors
were actually wired into the circuit. The others were just soldered in as
dead weight. Sounded good to the unwashed masses to have more transistors,
though...
--
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Charles and Francis Richmond <rich...@plano.net> |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
Charlie Gibbs
we...@nospam.mediaone.net (Ric Werme) writes:
>Probably not - most television sets of that era were still made with
>vacuum tubes, anything transistorized used discreet transistors.
Except for the very cheap and sleazy ones, which used indiscreet
transistors. :-)
>(The typical AM handheld radio was advertised as a "six transistor
>radio".)
I heard of some really cheap TRF sets that went as low as two
transistors (at that level they'd make a big point of any additional
diodes, e.g. in the detector), but you couldn't make a decent
superhet with fewer than six transistors. But you could do a
lot with a fraction of the electronics people take for granted
these days. I remember staying up late at night listening to KSL
in Salt Lake City, Utah come booming in to my little 6-transistor
radio near Vancouver, B.C. My best was a brief break in the static
long enough to identify WOWO in Fort Wayne, Indiana. Not bad for a
little AM radio. (Short wave was a whole 'nother thing.)
--
cgi...@sky.bus.com (Charlie Gibbs)
Remove the first period after the "at" sign to reply.
Philip Nasadowski
<cgi...@sky.bus.com> wrote:
> But you could do a
> lot with a fraction of the electronics people take for granted
> these days.
I've goty a nice collection of tube audio gear, mostly antique radios.
From Long Island, NY, I can easily get Albany/Schenectedy NY, and I've
gotten as far as Chicago, at night. All with a console Magnavox. Though
it does have like 24 tubes in it (most are in the audio amp(s) actually).
Still, it's quite a simple set, you don't really even need the schematic
to fix it.
The Bakers
news:zpLJ5.82$ml4....@typhoon.ne.mediaone.net...
>
> IBM did have some terminals that had Selectric
> guts, e.g. the 2741 and 1051? used as the console for various 360s.
I believe you are referring to the 1050.
And of course, the IBM 1130 built-in console typewriter used a Selectric
mechanism, which the IBM servicemen universally seemed to really enjoy
repairing (NOT!). IIRC it was not the most reliable unit, and I often
learned a few new cusswords from the fellow while he was trying to fix it.
Not to mention some interesting observations on the parentage of the guy who
designed it :-) Don't really remember what it was that made it so nasty
to service....maybe its location in the system or tight clearances around
some parts ?
Tom Van Vleck
> By following some links therein I managed to learn that the first
> time sharing systems at MIT, in the period 1960-63 at least, used
> something called the Flexowriter, which was sort of a hot-wired IBM
> Selectric... maybe the typewriter derives from the terminal, not the
> other way around.
Not exactly. The Selectric came long after the Flexowriter.
Flexowriters had regular electric typewriters with multiple
typebars. They had many more moving parts than a Selectric
and were much heavier and less reliable.
Carl R. Friend
>
> My father had a Packard-Bell 250 at work with a Flexowriter. I think
> they came together, but I'm not sure. Also 1962 timeframe.
Yes, it came with the CPU. The 250s used a modified Flexowriter
as the console. There were a couple of added switches to control the
CPU that weren't on "standard issue" Flexos.
> > Flexowriter was not a hot-wired Selectric.
>
> Worth saying twice!
Too true.
Eric Fischer
> Flexowriter was not a hot-wired Selectric. Made by Friden (later
> Singer-Friden).
As I understand it, the Flexowriter story goes something like this:
The powered typewriter was invented around 1914 by John Smathers,
who originally intended to run a series of typewriters off a single
motor rather than having a separate electric motor in each. But
his invention was developed by the Northeast Electric Co., which
saw it as a good source of business for its electric motors. In
1925, Northeast and Remington made an electric Remington typewriter
as a joint venture, but the deal fell apart because of Remington's
inability to commit to any specific size of order from Northeast.
Northeast then continued the development on its own, resulting in
the Electromatic typewriter, and then around 1931 spun Electromatic
off into a separate company. Electromatic then followed up with
a second typewriter model, this one designed for stencil cutting,
which introduced the "electric" keyboard layout, and an "automatic
typewriter" that read an enormously wide paper tape (one hole per
key, I think) to produce form letters. IBM then (in 1933) bought
Electromatic and made it into its own typewriter division, but the
automatic typewriter instead evidently went to Commercial Controls,
Inc., which refined it into the Flexowriter. Commercial Controls
was then bought out by Friden in the early 1960s, making them the
owners of the Flexowriter.
Eric
Lars Poulsen
> Flexowriter was not a hot-wired Selectric. Made by Friden (later
> Teletype), Flexowriter did not use a dancing ball/drum for the type.
> It derived from a classical manual typewriter, with a "basket" of
> type-levers.
That depends on which model year you are talking about. Certainly,
the FlexoWriters that my undergraduate programming class used in
1969 were golf-ball type.
--
/ Lars Poulsen - http://www.cmc.com/lars - la...@cmc.com
125 South Ontare Road, Santa Barbara, CA 93105 - +1-805-569-5277
George Gonzalez
I took one apart some decades ago and save all the screws from it-- musta
been
200 screws.
Later on I tried using some of them, and they never seemed to fit anything.
Not your typical
4-40, 6-32, threads at all.
Alexandre Pechtchanski
Weren't they just metric, as should be expected in European product?
--
[ When replying, remove *'s from address ]
Alexandre Pechtchanski, Systems Manager, RUH, NY
John Bowen
million and performed Air Defense activities for the Air Force in the Nevada
desert. The large CRTs we used to display tracks of aircraft, radar data and
had a capability of displaying any of 64 characters from a matrix inside the
tube. The data was intended to be placed next to vectors indicating flight
information. However, as a maintenance engineer I wrote the software to
actually make the tube a very interactive device from which we would run our
diagnostics. It also had decent keyboard. I wrote one line at a time and
moved everything up a line each time I wrote. There was room for about 64
lines as I recall. I just simulated a line printer and card reader for
keyboard. My idea allowed us to run our diagnostics in half the time (4
hours instead of 8 hours) because we weren't printing on a the military
version of the IBM 407 printer. My boss invented the Selectric Typewriter at
the same time I was working on the display consoles. I just needed a good
terminal and didn't realize other computers didn't have them. The SAGE was
the only machine I had ever seen due to secrecy. We switched our giant
classified mainframes to the Selectric after that which was a mistake
because they were so unreliable. The 7030 Stretch for NSA and AEC (prior to
DOE) is an example of that foolishness. I didn't see my back room
engineering idea used again in IBM but we did a similar thing in 1966 while
I was at RAND helping on the development of the RAND tablet. Yes, the guys
in my department developed ARPANET. We never knew. John Bowen
"Eric Fischer" <e...@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:8t36kn$2kbh$1...@news.enteract.com...
jchausler
John Bowen wrote:
> I was at RAND helping on the development of the RAND tablet. Yes, the guys
> in my department developed ARPANET. We never knew. John Bowen
Tell me more about the RAND tablet. I believe I used one back in the late 60's,
probably 67 or 68, attached to a Philco display controller for a multi head
stroke writing graphics system.
John Ferrell
soon as the programmers got a console printer they seemed determined to keep it
active 100% of the time!
I acquired a "defective" I/O writer from a 360/155 in 1979 and interfaced it to
a Radio Shack TRS80-II. The hardware was just magnet drivers from the printer
port. The software driver tailored the timings to the needs of each character in
the mechanism. Of course it was slow but I ran it over night to get listings.
The I/O writers would have been a lot easier to maintain if a little tweaking
had been designed into the drivers.
John Bowen wrote:
--
John Ferrell in Julian NC, de W8CCW
Dixie Competition Products
6241 Phillippi Rd
Julian NC 27283
Phone: (336)685-9606 Fax: (336)685-9771
NSRCA 479 AMA 4190
"My Competition is Not My Enemy"
Brian {Hamilton Kelly}
johnf...@sprintmail.com "John Ferrell" writes:
> I never felt the Selectric I/O writers were unreliable. The problem was that as
> soon as the programmers got a console printer they seemed determined to keep it
> active 100% of the time!
>
I first saw a Selectric "terminal" at the Business Efficiency Exhibition
at Olympia (West London, for the benefit of those that have never been to
the Ideal Home Show) in 1964. IBM had one on their stand, which ran
24h/d for the week of the exhib at a rate of 31 ch/s (ordinarily,
Selectrics ran at 15.5 ch/s). It suffered no ill effects at all.
IBM took that display back to their offices (at Chiswick) and continued
to take it to other exhibitions. I visited an IBMer there in 1967 (Bob
Latham, IIRC) and he showed me it still running, and assured me that it
was kept permanently on even when not on display, except whilst being
transported between venues.
I believed him, as well.
--
Brian {Hamilton Kelly} b...@dsl.co.uk
"We have gone from a world of concentrated knowledge and wisdom to one of
distributed ignorance. And we know and understand less while being incr-
easingly capable." Prof. Peter Cochrane, BT Labs
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
> I first saw a Selectric "terminal" at the Business Efficiency Exhibition
> at Olympia (West London, for the benefit of those that have never been to
> the Ideal Home Show) in 1964. IBM had one on their stand, which ran
> 24h/d for the week of the exhib at a rate of 31 ch/s (ordinarily,
> Selectrics ran at 15.5 ch/s). It suffered no ill effects at all.
about a year ago ... I finally got rid of the tabletop and paperfeed
for my 2741. Standard 2741 terminal was something like a frame with a
flat surface with the typerwriter body buried in the middle of the top
with only a couple inches of "table" on each side (not enuf to hold
paper or anything else).
At CSC (4th floor, 545 tech sq, cambridge) had special 1/2"(?)
laminated board with a cut-out the size of the typerwriter ... that
laid on the top of the 2741 frame & wrapped around the typerwriter
body with a couple inches on one side and 18"-24" on the other side
and back ... providing enuf room to support paper feed tray in the
back and papers to one side of the keyboard (the board could be
flipped so the space was either to the left or the right of the
keyboard).
The paper-feed tray was like a wide in/out basket but large enuf to
hold standard printer fan-fold paper ... bottom tray had room for
about 6" stack of paper and return paper then would feed on to the top
tray. I started out using standard green-bar fan-fold paper
... nominally reversed so it printed on the white-side.
I haven't had a real 2741 at home in nearly 25 years ... but some how
the the table top and paper tray made it into the garage and sat
around gathering dust ... managing not to get thrown away even with
3-4 moves over the period (although i still have an "apl" golfball
printing element).
random 2741 refs:
http://www.multicians.org/mga.html#2741
http://www.multicians.org/terminals.html
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#6
http://www.classiccmp.org/mail-archive/classiccmp/1998-05/0875.html
http://www.deadmedia.org/notes/17/170.html
http://www.totse.com/en/hack/understanding_the_internet/excerpt2.html
http://www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/2260/gli_00.html
http://www.enteract.com/~enf/afc/wp
http://www-mice.cs.ucl.ac.uk/multimedia/misc/tcp_ip/8705.mm.www/0110.html
http://www.unb.ca/web/transpo/mynet/mtx20.htm
some photos
http://www.nerdc.ufl.edu/info-services/history/nhp75A.jpg
http://www.keysan.com/ksu0675.htm
http://www.ibmtypewriters.com/reconselectric.htm
following gives description of the CCN computing facility at UCLA in
'71 (360/91kk, i/o configuriaton, 10 dail 2741 interfaces, etc)
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc90.txt
note in the following "history of the internet in new brunswick", 110
baud was teletype speed and 134.? baud was the 2741 speed. the
reference to "local" office connecting to "VM mainframe in Toronto"
was a "HONE" clone.
http://personal.nbnet.nb.ca/laurie/internet.html
random hone refs:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#62
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#75
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#30
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#14
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#27
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | ly...@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
John Bowen
entered "rand tablet". I actually found some pictures and including one that
seems like one of our original prototypes. The original was attached to the
first IBM 360 that ever went to a customer. The customer being the RAND
corporation and the time frame was May 1964. It was serial 10023 as I recall
and we mechanically replaced it about two years later. I think I changed
about 100 SLT cards that were defective in those two years. It also had the
first 2311 disk drives, 2841 control unit, 2701, and probably the first
1442N1 and 1443N1 peripherals. The CRT used with the table came from
Burroughs as I recall.
Daniel Ellsberg kept his books in the vault next to the machine room. He
sent copies of the Pentagon Papers to the New York Times and may have
started the early retirement of Nixon. The 60s were an interesting time to
be at the RAND Corporation.
I spotted the commercial version of the RAND tablet in 1977 at Union Oil
Geophysical in Los Angeles doing seismic map plotting. The pen had changed
to a glass piece with a couple of buttons and a cross hair. I just don't
recall who was manufacturing it.
Bill Ellis was the RAND engineer who developed the tablet. The original had
a pen with microswitch in it to detect pressure on the tip. Gabe Groner
worked on algorithms to read printed words and Chinese.
John Bowen
"jchausler" <jcha...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3A4E49C9...@earthlink.net...
John Bowen
when you placed the early versions on a computer and really pounded on it
none could last a week without breaking the tilt and rotate tapes or having
mechanical problems. You would have a $20 million dollar 7030 Stretch or a
ANFSQ-32 (SAGE II) sitting idle waiting for the Customer Engineer to make a
repair that often lasted several hours. In the mid 1960s the version of the
selectric used on big mainframes was a pretty poor choice. I was a glorified
Customer Engineer (Senior Specialist) until 1971 and we all hated the
machines compared to electronic equipment. I visited an FAA air traffic
control site in 1986 and was surprised to see Selectrics still in use by
them. They had a room full of broken ones. I purchased a small insurance
company in 1983 and one of the first things I did was replace every
Selectric with a PC and a matrix printer. That change and a little software
quadrupled the productivity of most of the clerical people.
John Bowen
"John Ferrell" <johnf...@sprintmail.com> wrote in message
news:3A4F8C2E...@sprintmail.com...
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
"John Bowen" <jhbowe...@charter.net> writes:
> John, the Selectric was not too unreliable when used as a typewriter. But
> when you placed the early versions on a computer and really pounded on it
> none could last a week without breaking the tilt and rotate tapes or having
> mechanical problems. You would have a $20 million dollar 7030 Stretch or a
> ANFSQ-32 (SAGE II) sitting idle waiting for the Customer Engineer to make a
> repair that often lasted several hours. In the mid 1960s the version of the
> selectric used on big mainframes was a pretty poor choice. I was a glorified
> Customer Engineer (Senior Specialist) until 1971 and we all hated the
> machines compared to electronic equipment. I visited an FAA air traffic
> control site in 1986 and was surprised to see Selectrics still in use by
> them. They had a room full of broken ones. I purchased a small insurance
> company in 1983 and one of the first things I did was replace every
> Selectric with a PC and a matrix printer. That change and a little software
> quadrupled the productivity of most of the clerical people.
while the standard 360 console, 1052-7, may have been somewhat more
rugged than early selectrics ... it still had the golfball
tilt/rotate. I know that CSC kept a spare 1052-7 for the 360/67
... rather than repairing ... swap the hardware and repair the broken
one offline.
It wasn't all because of the tilt/rotate ... there were some people
that would slam their fist into the keyboard for one reason or another
(especially if you had dedicated machine time over the weekend and had
been up for 40+ hrs straight and there was a problem where the
solution was difficult coming).
once cp/67 was up and running enuf for production, it was less of a
problem since CP supported logging on as the operator from the machine
console or any available 2741 (some security was added to limit the
definition of "any").
The 1052-7 had another "nasty" feature that periodically caught
people. There was a small finger that sensed whether there was
incoming paper to the carriage. Frequently there were two boxes behind
the 1052-7, one to feed the 1052-7 carriage and the other was for
output after it had been printed. The input/feed was underneath the
output/printed and frequently couldn't be seen.
More than once, the "finger" would sense that it had reached the end
of paper and signal intervention required to the CPU. However there
were no lights indicating the problem ... and OS/360 when it got an
intervention required from the 1052-7 would ring the bell and stop all
operations. There were numerous times where it took between 30minutes
to 3hrs for somebody to realize that the reason that the system had
apparently died was because the 1052-7 had run out of paper (since the
input feed wasn't easily visable).
In the early '80s, I wanted one of those Field Engineering briefcases
which were actually fancy toolboxs. The first couple times I requested
one, it was rejected because I wasn't in IBM field engineering.
Finally, I found a generic part number for the briefcase where it
could be ordered w/o having to ask IBM. It still came with a number of
specialized tools that I had seen used for repairing 2741s,
selectrics, 1052s, etc.
Nick Spalding
> I surprised myself when I went to my favorite search engine, Google, and
> entered "rand tablet". I actually found some pictures and including one that
> seems like one of our original prototypes. The original was attached to the
> first IBM 360 that ever went to a customer. The customer being the RAND
> corporation and the time frame was May 1964. It was serial 10023 as I recall
> and we mechanically replaced it about two years later. I think I changed
> about 100 SLT cards that were defective in those two years. It also had the
> first 2311 disk drives, 2841 control unit, 2701, and probably the first
> 1442N1 and 1443N1 peripherals. The CRT used with the table came from
> Burroughs as I recall.
I wonder how what was obviously by way of being a flagship system got
lumbered with the thoroughly nasty 1442.
--
Nick Spalding
Nico de Jong
nyhedsmeddelelse:ugg35to606tkupm2u...@4ax.com...
> > 1442N1 and 1443N1 peripherals. The CRT used with the table came from
> > Burroughs as I recall.
>
> I wonder how what was obviously by way of being a flagship system got
> lumbered with the thoroughly nasty 1442.
> --
> Nick Spalding
Hm., maybe I'm getting senile, but what was the 2701? Wasnt the 1442 a
card-read punch?
Should anyone have a more-or-less complete listing of the model numbers used
by IBM?
Nico
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
> Hm., maybe I'm getting senile, but what was the 2701? Wasnt the 1442 a
> card-read punch?
> Should anyone have a more-or-less complete listing of the model numbers used
> by IBM?
2701, 2702, & 2703 were "telecommunication control units".
2702 supported 16 (maybe up to 32?) low-speed lines
2703 was similar to 2702 but supported up to 128 lines.
2701 supported only a few lines ... but had an RPQ that allowed
supporting T1 (1.5mbite/2mbit) lines. It was the only IBM controller
that supproted T1 lines until the 90s.
Federal System Division got a Zirpel T1 RPQ card for the S/1 in the
mid-80s that saw limited deployment ... and you could get a 3rd party
card that directly attached a S/1 to a channel. The internal network
had a number of these. However, in the mid to late 80s it was becoming
difficult to acquire S/1 boxes to house Zirpel cards (although
possibly not as hard as it was to acquire 2701 boxes).
The only other choice was HYPERChannel starting in the early '80s, you
could get an A220 adapter for channel attach and 710/715/720 adapters
for driving T1/T2 links. My wife and I ran a backbone attached to the
internal network with this technology. It was also possible to connect
an HYPERChannel LAN to a S/1 via a A400 adapter and get T1
connectivity that way (with or w/o the S/1 having a channel attach
card).
There were plans in the late '80s for the 8232 (i.e. PC/AT with
channel attach card and LAN cards ... providing mainframe gateway to
T/R and enet LANS) that saw development of a PC/AT T1 card, but I
don't know of any that were actually sold to customers. This was about
the same time as the annual Super Computer conference held in Austin
where T3 HYPERChannel adatpers were being demonstrated.
The 3705/3725 communication controller mainstay (during the 70s & 80s)
didn't support full-speed T1 ... although there La Gaude may have had
one or two test boxes in the late '80s. The 3705/3725 market saw a
number of customers using "fat pipe" support to gang 2, 3, and 4
56kbit links into a single simulated trunk; but saw now evidence of
customers with more than 4 56kbit links in fat pipe configurations.
One of the issues that was possibly overlooked was that T1 tariffs
were typically about the same as 5-6 56kbit links. At the time when
there were no 3705/3725 mainframe customers with more than 4 56kbit
lines in a fat-pipe configuration there were 200 easiliy identified
customers using mainframe HYPERChannel T1 support.
While NSFNET1 in the late '80s called for full-speed T1 trunks, it was
actually done with multiple PC/RTs each with LAN card and a 440kbit
card (although RT had a AT bus and the PC/AT T1 card targeted for
the 8232 could have fit on the RT bus) ... with multiple 440kbit
circuits multiplexed by an IDNX box through T1 trunks provided by MCI.
random refs:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000.html#77
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#15
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#16
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#17
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#23
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#9
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#27
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#30
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#36
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#63
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#66
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#67
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#70
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#38
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#66
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#36
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#37
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#65
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#6
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#31
Jim Saum
<ly...@garlic.com> wrote:
>"Nico de Jong" <ni...@farumdata.dk> writes:
>> Hm., maybe I'm getting senile, but what was the 2701? ...
>
>2701, 2702, & 2703 were "telecommunication control units".
The 2701 also had an optional Parallel Data Adapter feature (RPQ?),
which acted like the digital I/O lines on a PC data acquisition card.
Some other ways for doing parallel I/O from a 360 to custom hardware
were the 360 Direct Control feature (Read/Write Direct instructions
and external interrupt lines), the IBM System/7 minicomputer with the
channel-attach RPQ, non-IBM channel-attach interfaces from several
vendors (Interdata, DEC, Austex?), or building your own channel
interface to the IBM spec.
- Jim Saum
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
js...@world.std.com (Jim Saum) writes:
> channel-attach RPQ, non-IBM channel-attach interfaces from several
> vendors (Interdata, DEC, Austex?), or building your own channel
> interface to the IBM spec.
>
there is some documentation that the board that I worked on as an
undergraduate was the first such non-IBM connection to an IBM channel.
It went into an Interdata/3 that we programmed to be a replacement for
the 2702 and would actually support both dynamic speed and terminal
recognition. It later evolved into Interdata/4 with multiple
Interdata/3s handling the line-scanner functions. Perkin/Elmer bought
out Interdata and the rights to what I worked on as undergraduate.
I ran across later versions of the Perkin/Elmer box still in
production use as late as 1996 (& some conjecture that the wire-wrap
channel attach board had possibly not changed since the original
implementation).
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | ly...@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Lars Poulsen
> Should anyone have a more-or-less complete listing of the model numbers used
> by IBM?
I'm working on it ... capturing items as they are mentioned here.
http://www.cmc.com/lars/engineer/comphist/ibm_nos.htm
I would be delighted if someone could mark this up with year of
introduction and retirement for each item.
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
> I'm working on it ... capturing items as they are mentioned here.
>
> http://www.cmc.com/lars/engineer/comphist/ibm_nos.htm
>
> I would be delighted if someone could mark this up with year of
> introduction and retirement for each item.
> --
> / Lars Poulsen - http://www.cmc.com/lars - la...@cmc.com
> 125 South Ontare Road, Santa Barbara, CA 93105 - +1-805-569-5277
another location
http://www.isham-research.freeserve.co.uk/chrono.txt
Terry Kennedy
> I wonder how what was obviously by way of being a flagship system got
> lumbered with the thoroughly nasty 1442.
The 1442 was the punch, wasn't it? We liked it - we originally had a
2650 (or was it 2560) MFCM (the Mother-F*ing Card Mangler) which had
2 input hoppers, 5 output hoppers, and a non-deterministic path between
them.
We swapped out the MFCM for a 2501 and a 1442 and were very happy.
However, I'd say we had a 98/2 read/punch ratio - most users had moved
to magetape datasets by then.
Terry Kennedy http://www.tmk.com
te...@tmk.com Jersey City, NJ USA
Terry Kennedy
> while the standard 360 console, 1052-7, may have been somewhat more
> rugged than early selectrics ... it still had the golfball
> tilt/rotate. I know that CSC kept a spare 1052-7 for the 360/67
> ... rather than repairing ... swap the hardware and repair the broken
> one offline.
When I was in school, we had Trendata 1000 terminals, which were a 3rd-
party interface to a Selectric mechanism. From the way you describe the
less-than-useful Formica table, the T1000 was apparently an exact clone.
We also had about the same number of 029 keypunches. The T1000's were
more reliable than the 029's - I can't remember when I found an unusable
T1000, while the 029's were always in need of major or minor repairs.
> More than once, the "finger" would sense that it had reached the end
> of paper and signal intervention required to the CPU. However there
> were no lights indicating the problem ... and OS/360 when it got an
> intervention required from the 1052-7 would ring the bell and stop all
> operations. There were numerous times where it took between 30minutes
> to 3hrs for somebody to realize that the reason that the system had
> apparently died was because the 1052-7 had run out of paper (since the
> input feed wasn't easily visable).
The reason our 3125 CPU was upgraded immediately after eligibility for
trade was the console. Under DOS/VS rel 32 (I think it was 32, may have
been 30) POWER, opening the cover on the 1052 would wedge the system in
a state requiring a re-IPL. And of course, clearing the phantom paper
jams required opening the cover 8-(
Nick Spalding
> Nick Spalding <spal...@iol.ie> writes:
> > I wonder how what was obviously by way of being a flagship system got
> > lumbered with the thoroughly nasty 1442.
>
> The 1442 was the punch, wasn't it? We liked it
I guess you didn't have to fix it! It was a reader/punch both in the
same card path. The reader was tolerable, the punch was a bitch.
--
Nick Spalding
John Coelho
Lars Poulsen <la...@cmc.com> wrote in message
news:3A5358F5...@cmc.com...
> Nico de Jong wrote:
> > Should anyone have a more-or-less complete listing of the model numbers
used
> > by IBM?
>
> I'm working on it ... capturing items as they are mentioned here.
>
On this topic - I'd like a "memory check" on a couple of things. I seem to
recall that a "001" keypunch was available until about 1971 which was a
manual, desktop, punch. One card at a time, probably twelve buttons. Does
anyone else remember this?
Also, I remember seeing a demo of a robot in 1972 that was called
(appropriately) the "1972". Am I dreaming?
And finally, there was a modified 3275 video terminal called - I think - the
5275. It was mounted on a wheeled cart and used to program NC machine tools.
It had some local capability and probably output to a punched tape. Does
anyone have any info on that?
Thanks.
(For folks compiling lists, treat the above as unconfirmed....)
John Coelho
Paul Repacholi
> On this topic - I'd like a "memory check" on a couple of things. I seem to
> recall that a "001" keypunch was available until about 1971 which was a
> manual, desktop, punch. One card at a time, probably twelve buttons. Does
> anyone else remember this?
Don't know if it's an 001, but they exist. Used one.
We have one in the collection, _somewhere_ I'm sure...
--
Paul Repacholi 1 Crescent Rd.,
+61 (08) 9257-1001 Kalamunda.
West Australia 6076
Raw, Cooked or Well-done, it's all half baked.
John Varela
> On this topic - I'd like a "memory check" on a couple of things. I seem to
> recall that a "001" keypunch was available until about 1971 which was a
> manual, desktop, punch. One card at a time, probably twelve buttons. Does
> anyone else remember this?
I remember playing with one. Can't recall anyone ever using it in anger.
--
John Varela
McLean, VA USA
Lars Poulsen
> > > I wonder how what was obviously by way of being a flagship system
> > > got lumbered with the thoroughly nasty 1442.
Terry Kennedy wrote, in <G6MHA...@spcuna.spc.edu>:
> > The 1442 was the punch, wasn't it? We liked it
Nick Spalding wrote:
> I guess you didn't have to fix it!
> It was a reader/punch both in the same card path. The reader was
> tolerable, the punch was a bitch.
Nick, you're right; one would have expected such a system to have
a better card subsystem. A 1402 would have been ideal, but it may
not have been easily adaptable to the S/360 channel; when it did
become available, it was called the 2540.
I am getting a sense that there was a progression of 14xx peri-
pherals that paralleled the progression of CPUs:
1401 -> 1410 -> 1440 -> 1460
I don't know the compatibility issues along the path.
The 1442, I am told was not available for the 1401, but only for the
1440 and possibly the 1460. Personally, I met the 1442 on the 1130
with which I shared a room for a year. And on that system, it was
eventually replaced by a 2501.
I don't recall any particular problems with the 1442, except
- lace cards tended to get stuck
- the dual-function nature of the beast could destroy a good deck
loaded with the wrong program. The design allowed read-before-punch
operation to verify that columns due to be punched were previously
blank, but standard software was not written to take advantage
of that.
Nick Spalding
> On this topic - I'd like a "memory check" on a couple of things. I seem to
> recall that a "001" keypunch was available until about 1971 which was a
> manual, desktop, punch. One card at a time, probably twelve buttons. Does
> anyone else remember this?
Indeed so, though I think it may have been 011 not 001. I have punched
many cards on one of those.
--
Nick Spalding
Nick Spalding
> Nick Spalding wrote:
> > I guess you didn't have to fix it!
> > It was a reader/punch both in the same card path. The reader was
> > tolerable, the punch was a bitch.
>
> Nick, you're right; one would have expected such a system to have
> a better card subsystem. A 1402 would have been ideal, but it may
> not have been easily adaptable to the S/360 channel; when it did
> become available, it was called the 2540.
Wasn't the 2540 available as soon as the 360 was?
> I am getting a sense that there was a progression of 14xx peri-
> pherals that paralleled the progression of CPUs:
> 1401 -> 1410 -> 1440 -> 1460
> I don't know the compatibility issues along the path.
>
> The 1442, I am told was not available for the 1401, but only for the
> 1440 and possibly the 1460. Personally, I met the 1442 on the 1130
> with which I shared a room for a year. And on that system, it was
> eventually replaced by a 2501.
The difference between the 1401 and 1440 was in the handling of reader,
punch and printer. 1401 used single character instructions and
hardware defined i/o areas, 1440 used 8 character instructions (same
format as 1401 tape instructions) containing addresses for the i/o
areas. The 1460 was certainly available with the 1401 style
instructions and 1402 reader/punch; since it was physically a speeded up
1440 (6musec clock against 10.5) it may have had the 1440 instructions
as well and possibly could attach a 1442.
The 1410 (and its descendant the 7010) was a much bigger beast which had
the addressable i/o and definitely the 1402.
--
Nick Spalding
Howard S Shubs
>The 1442, I am told was not available for the 1401, but only for the
>1440 and possibly the 1460. Personally, I met the 1442 on the 1130
>with which I shared a room for a year. And on that system, it was
>eventually replaced by a 2501.
Details about these two card readers are available at
http://www.mindspring.com/%7Ehshubs/1130/functional/Cards.html
--
Howard S Shubs
"Run in circles, scream and shout!" "I hope you have good backups!"
Joe Morris
>On this topic - I'd like a "memory check" on a couple of things. I seem to
>recall that a "001" keypunch was available until about 1971 which was a
>manual, desktop, punch. One card at a time, probably twelve buttons. Does
>anyone else remember this?
Yup. The "machine" looked like a slightly overgrown credit card
imprinter. You placed a card in the bed, then moved the carriage
to the first column you wanted to punch and pressed the appropriate
keys. None of this wimpy automatic coding in later machines; Real
programmers instinctively know the punch combinations such as 12-8-3
for a period.
And 1972 sounds about right for when I got a notice from IBM that
maintenance services for the 001 were to be withdrawn.
>Also, I remember seeing a demo of a robot in 1972 that was called
>(appropriately) the "1972". Am I dreaming?
Never heard of that unit, but the "9" in the second digit place
strongly suggests that it was an RPQ (custom) product. Having
said that, I should also note that there were "standard RPQ"
devices that were "custom" only in their history.
>And finally, there was a modified 3275 video terminal called - I think - the
>5275. It was mounted on a wheeled cart and used to program NC machine tools.
>It had some local capability and probably output to a punched tape. Does
>anyone have any info on that?
Can't help you there; when the first digit goes above '3' you've
usually gone beyond the DPD product line and into areas where I'm
not familiar with the nomenclature.
Joe Morris
Joe Morris
>Nick, you're right; one would have expected such a system to have
>a better card subsystem. A 1402 would have been ideal, but it may
>not have been easily adaptable to the S/360 channel; when it did
>become available, it was called the 2540.
At the risk of being called a nitpicker (who, *me*?) the 2540 didn't
know anything about an S/360 channel either. That task was given
to the 2821 Control Unit, which also was the interface between the
venerable 1403-N1 printer and the S/360 channels. The 1402 and 2540
had many similar design elements; I've never seen any explanation
for why the 2821 couldn't have been designed to handle the 1402
directly.
Joe Morris
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
> Wasn't the 2540 available as soon as the 360 was?
the university had a 1401 with 2540 & 1403n1 that was used as unit
record front end for 709 (card->tape & tape->printer/punch). it got a
360/30 and for awhile it would move the 2540/1403n1 back & forth
between the 360/30 controller and the 1401.
the university then started running the 360/30 in 1401 emulator mode
... booting from "MPIO" card deck. My first programming job (summer
'66) was to duplicate the 1401 "MPIO" function in 360 assembler. I got
to design my own memory manager, task manager, device drivers,
interrupt processes, etc.
I don't know how long they had the 2540/1403n1 prior to getting the
360/30 ... my first exposure was about the time the 360/30 came in and
the 1401 was still there and they would periodically move the unit
record back and forth between the 1401 & 360/30.
I would get a dedicated machine time on the 360/30 ... typically
weekends when I could get the machine for 48hrs straight. One of the
first things I learned was to not start until i had cleaned the tape
drives and took the 2540 apart and cleaned everything. If I was
diligent about cleaning every 8hrs or so (of use), things ran a lot
smoother.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | ly...@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
John Coelho
Joe Morris <jcmo...@jmorris-pc.MITRE.ORG> wrote in message
news:934ktk$ebf$1...@top.mitre.org...
> "John Coelho" <j...@nfrpartners.com> writes:
<snipped here and there>
> keys. None of this wimpy automatic coding in later machines; Real
> programmers instinctively know the punch combinations such as 12-8-3
> for a period.
>
Agreed - but why do I remember 12-2-9 as significant? "REP" cards in object
decks?
>
> >Also, I remember seeing a demo of a robot in 1972 that was called
> >(appropriately) the "1972". Am I dreaming?
>
> Never heard of that unit, but the "9" in the second digit place
> strongly suggests that it was an RPQ (custom) product. Having
> said that, I should also note that there were "standard RPQ"
> devices that were "custom" only in their history.
>
I think you're right. I'm pretty sure it was being pushed by an instrument
or manufacturing group. The demo I saw was at an employee function and I
never heard of it afterwards.
> >And finally, there was a modified 3275 video terminal called - I think -
the
> >5275. It was mounted on a wheeled cart and used to program NC machine
tools.
> >It had some local capability and probably output to a punched tape. Does
> >anyone have any info on that?
>
> Can't help you there; when the first digit goes above '3' you've
> usually gone beyond the DPD product line and into areas where I'm
> not familiar with the nomenclature.
I know. It sounds awfully "GSD"ish, doesn't it. I'm probably wrong re the
number but it was some variation of 3275. I think.
> Joe Morris
Thanks Joe, and everyone else for your responses.
John Coelho
Terry Kennedy
> I guess you didn't have to fix it! It was a reader/punch both in the
> same card path. The reader was tolerable, the punch was a bitch.
Was it available without the reader option? IIRC, we used it for punch
only, with a 2501 for reading.
Jim Saum
<j...@nfrpartners.com> wrote:
>Agreed - but why do I remember 12-2-9 as significant? "REP" cards in object
>decks?
The object decks produced by assemblers and compilers in all the
standard 360 OSes had (and still have) X'02' (hex 02) in column 1,
followed by a 3-character EBCDIC type descriptor (TXT, ESD, RLD, SYM,
END) in columns 2-4. The EBCDIC card code for X'02' is 12-2-9.
- Jim Saum
Jim Saum
>The difference between the 1401 and 1440 was in the handling of reader,
>punch and printer. 1401 used single character instructions and
>hardware defined i/o areas, 1440 used 8 character instructions (same
>format as 1401 tape instructions) containing addresses for the i/o
>areas. The 1460 was certainly available with the 1401 style
>instructions and 1402 reader/punch; since it was physically a speeded up
>1440 (6musec clock against 10.5) it may have had the 1440 instructions
>as well and possibly could attach a 1442.
1401 cycle time was 11.5 (not 10.5) usec. The 1460 was a 1963 upgrade
of the 1401 with a faster cycle time and some of the 1401's optional
features made standard. The instruction sets were the same for the
1401 and 1460, and the same manuals document the two systems.
I never used a 1460, but the 1401/1460 manuals say the card and print
operations were programmed the same way for 1401s and 1460s, i.e.,
with one-character opcodes (plus optional modifiers and the ability to
issue more than one such op at a time by OR-ing the opcodes). The 1460
had the ability to drive more than one 1403 printer, but used a
special Printer Pre-Select instruction to select a printer before the
usual Write instruction.
>The 1410 (and its descendant the 7010) was a much bigger beast which had
>the addressable i/o and definitely the 1402.
The 1410 and 7010 had 5-character addresses (like the 1620) instead of
the 3-character addresses of the 1401, 1460, and 1440.
- Jim Saum
Nick Spalding
> In article <bpeb5tc8ad93ef4tn...@4ax.com>, spal...@iol.ie wrote:
>
> >The difference between the 1401 and 1440 was in the handling of reader,
> >punch and printer. 1401 used single character instructions and
> >hardware defined i/o areas, 1440 used 8 character instructions (same
> >format as 1401 tape instructions) containing addresses for the i/o
> >areas. The 1460 was certainly available with the 1401 style
> >instructions and 1402 reader/punch; since it was physically a speeded up
> >1440 (6musec clock against 10.5) it may have had the 1440 instructions
> >as well and possibly could attach a 1442.
>
> 1401 cycle time was 11.5 (not 10.5) usec. The 1460 was a 1963 upgrade
> of the 1401 with a faster cycle time and some of the 1401's optional
> features made standard. The instruction sets were the same for the
> 1401 and 1460, and the same manuals document the two systems.
The 1440 had a 10.5 musec clock and the 1460 was as you say logically a
1401 but physically it was a 1440. The parts were largely
interchangeable. I got hold of a 1460 clock which I used to plug into
the 1440 to run diagnostics - it picked off dodgy cards which were
beginning to lose their edge. The only part of the 1440 system which
didn't work properly with the faster clock was the 1443 printer which
depended on the system clock working in synchronism with the bar
movement.
> I never used a 1460, but the 1401/1460 manuals say the card and print
> operations were programmed the same way for 1401s and 1460s, i.e.,
> with one-character opcodes (plus optional modifiers and the ability to
> issue more than one such op at a time by OR-ing the opcodes). The 1460
> had the ability to drive more than one 1403 printer, but used a
> special Printer Pre-Select instruction to select a printer before the
> usual Write instruction.
>
> >The 1410 (and its descendant the 7010) was a much bigger beast which had
> >the addressable i/o and definitely the 1402.
> The 1410 and 7010 had 5-character addresses (like the 1620) instead of
> the 3-character addresses of the 1401, 1460, and 1440.
Beautiful machines, particularly the 7010 which was barely in production
when 360 was announced so it died the death.
--
Nick Spalding
Nick Spalding
Very true. The only difference I can recall was that the 2540 read
cards a bit faster - wasn't it 1000cpm against 800 for the 1402? The
punch stayed the same at 250. That punch unit was identical to one
which was shipped with the venerable 650 where I think it only ran at
150 or 200. In an emergency I stripped one out of an old 650 system and
it worked grand at 250 in a 2540 attached to a 360/40. It was still
working well 2 years later when I left IBM.
--
Nick Spalding
Nick Spalding
> Nick Spalding <spal...@iol.ie> writes:
> > I guess you didn't have to fix it! It was a reader/punch both in the
> > same card path. The reader was tolerable, the punch was a bitch.
>
> Was it available without the reader option? IIRC, we used it for punch
> only, with a 2501 for reading.
Could well have been; I never saw it in such a configuration.
--
Nick Spalding
David C. Barber
"John Varela" <jav...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:vd2NzVOTNb7v-p...@dialup-63.208.165.181.Washington2.Level3.
net...
The real question is: Did you ever use it to vote in Florida?
*David Barber*
David C. Barber
Wasn't there also an 080 even older card sorter?
*David Barber*
Joe Morris
>Joe Morris <jcmo...@jmorris-pc.MITRE.ORG> wrote:
>> keys. None of this wimpy automatic coding in later machines; Real
>> programmers instinctively know the punch combinations such as 12-8-3
>> for a period.
>Agreed - but why do I remember 12-2-9 as significant? "REP" cards in object
>decks?
Yup...hex deck cards (including REP cards, at least if you were using a
loader that supported them) started with X'02' in the first column, and
the 12-9-p punch produced X'0p' for 1 <= p <= 8. (The punch code was
12-8-9-p for X'09' through X'0F', for 1 <= p <= 7.)
Joe Morris
Joe Morris
>I would get a dedicated machine time on the 360/30 ... typically
>weekends when I could get the machine for 48hrs straight. One of the
>first things I learned was to not start until i had cleaned the tape
>drives and took the 2540 apart and cleaned everything. If I was
>diligent about cleaning every 8hrs or so (of use), things ran a lot
>smoother.
<grin>
By any chance when cleaning the punch die block in the 2540 did you
ever develop a reliable way to seat it when putting it back into the
machine? For readers who never had the experience, the punch
die was located on the underside of the card bed; the actual dies
were above it and were propelled through the card into the die block,
with the card chips forced through the die block until they fell
into the chip bucket.
The problem was that the die block was located where it was quite
difficult to see it, meaning that when you removed the block to clean
it or to remove a jammed card, replacing it would often require
numerous attempts to position it *just* right in its channel.
(Needless to say, its position had to be correct within quite
small tolerances, so the mounting channel had essentially zero
slack.)
I don't know about you, but I never got it right the first time
whenever I had to remove it.
Joe Morris
Joe Morris
>The 1440 had a 10.5 musec clock and the 1460 was as you say logically a
>1401 but physically it was a 1440. The parts were largely
>interchangeable. I got hold of a 1460 clock which I used to plug into
>the 1440 to run diagnostics - it picked off dodgy cards which were
>beginning to lose their edge. The only part of the 1440 system which
>didn't work properly with the faster clock was the 1443 printer which
>depended on the system clock working in synchronism with the bar
>movement.
The 1443 needed no help whatever in screwing up its bar movement; it was
quite capable of doing so on its own. Adding a timing problem in the
CPU to which it was attached would be only icing on the cake. <g>
The shop where I used a 1443-N1 typically lost one comb every week or
so and an entire bar every 6-8 weeks. Reliability was lousy, but I'll
admit that when the printer worked it delivered excellent print quality.
Joe Morris
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
attach recent response i posted in bit.listserv.ibm-main asking about
object deck formats (specifically about ESD and entries) ... other
12-2-9 object deck cards:
SLC
ICS
TXT
REP
RLD
END
LDT
from Control Program-67/Cambridge Monitor System User's Guide,
GH20-0859-0,pgs 521-523
SLC definition
col meaning
1 12-2-9 punch ... ldentifies card as acceptable to the loader
2-4 SLC
5-6 blank
7-12 hexadecimal address to be added to the value of the sumbol, if
any, in columns 17-22. must be right-justified in these columns
with unused leading columns filled with zeros
13-16 blank
17-22 symbolic name whose assigned location is used by the loader
must be left-justified in these columns. if blank, the address
in the abolsute field is used
23 blank
24-72 may be used for comments or left blank
73-80 not used by the loader, the user may leave these blank or insert
program identification for his own conveniences
ICS
col meaning
1 load card identification, 12-2-9 punch
2-4 ICS
5-16 blank
17-22 control sectionname, left justified
23 blank
24 , (comma)
25-28 hexadecimal length in bytes of the control section
29 blank
30-72 may be used for comments
73-80 not used by the loader
REP
col meaning
1 load card identification, 12-2-9 punch
2-4 REP
5-6 blank
7-12 hexadecimal starting address of the area to be replaces as assigned
by the assembler. must be right-justified with leading zeros
13-14 blank
15-16 ESID -- external symbol identification, the hexadeecimal number assigned
to the control section in which replacement is to be made. the
LISTING file produced by the compiler indicates this number
17-70 a maximumm of 11 four-digit hexadecimal fields, seperated by commas
each replacing one previously loaded halfword
71-72 blank
73-80 not used by the loader
--------- bit.listserv.ibm-main response ---------------
From CMS Program Logic Manual (360D-05-2-005, Oct. 1970), pg. 292
Name - ESD Card Formant
Col Meaning
1 12-2-9 punch
2-4 ESD
8-10 blank
11-13 Variable field count
13-14 Blank
ESDID ESDID for first SD, XD, CM, PC, or ER
17-84 variable field, repeated 1 to 3 times
17-24 name
24 ESD type code
26-28 Address
29 Alighment for XD, otherwise blank
30-32 Length, LDID, or blank
... pg. 275 ESD Type 0 processing
This routine makes Reference Talbe and ESID Table entries for the
card-specified control section
This routine first determines whether a Reference Table (REFTBL) entry
has already been established for the csect=specified control
sectionn. To do this, the routine links to the REFTBL search
routine. The ESD Type 0 Card Routine's subsegment operation depends on
whether there already is a REFTBL entry for the control section. If
there is such an entry, processing continues with operation 4,
below. If there is not, the REFTBL search routine places the name of
this control section in REFTBL, and processing continues with
operation 2, bleow.
.... pg. 276 ESD type 1
This routine establish a Reference Table entry for the entry point
specified on the ESD card, unless such an entry already exists.
... ESD Type 2
This routine makes the proper ESID table entry for the card-specified
external name and places that name's assigned address (ORG2) in the
reference table relocation factor for that name.
.. pg. 277 ESD Type 4
This routine makes Reference Table and ESIDTAB entries for private code
CSECT
... pg. 278 ESD Type 5 & 6
Thie routine makes Reference Table and ESIDTAB entries for common and
psuedo-register ESD's
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | ly...@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Peter Smith
news:935c74$1ats$1...@thoth.cts.com...
sorter. Sorters actually extended into the 70's for numbering,
so that the type 80 was an advanced-type. Relatively speaking.
Peter Smith
Julian Thomas
>Nick, you're right; one would have expected such a system to have a
>better card subsystem. A 1402 would have been ideal, but it may not have
>been easily adaptable to the S/360 channel; when it did become available,
>it was called the 2540.
On the contrary, the 1402 was attached to the 360 channels from day 1 via
the 2841 control unit, which also attached the 1403 (N1) printer. The
2540 came later and was IIRC faster.
--
Julian Thomas: jt . epix @ net http://home.epix.net/~jt
remove letter a for email (or switch . and @)
In the beautiful Finger Lakes Wine Country of New York State!
Boardmember of POSSI.org - Phoenix OS/2 Society, Inc
http://www.possi.org
-- --
... File not found. Should I fake it? (Y/N)
Julian Thomas
>At the risk of being called a nitpicker (who, *me*?) the 2540 didn't know
>anything about an S/360 channel either. That task was given to the 2821
>Control Unit, which also was the interface between the venerable 1403-N1
>printer and the S/360 channels.
I stand corrected - I had the attachment right in a post a minute ago, but
said it was the 2841 CU. Joe is correct - 2821 was the right unit.
Now what DID attach via 2841? Tape?
--
Julian Thomas: jt . epix @ net http://home.epix.net/~jt
remove letter a for email (or switch . and @)
In the beautiful Finger Lakes Wine Country of New York State!
Boardmember of POSSI.org - Phoenix OS/2 Society, Inc
http://www.possi.org
-- --
A computer with COBOL and FORTRAN is
like a piece of chocolate cake with ketchup and mustard.
Julian Thomas
>On this topic - I'd like a "memory check" on a couple of things. I seem
>to recall that a "001" keypunch was available until about 1971 which was
>a manual, desktop, punch. One card at a time, probably twelve buttons.
>Does anyone else remember this?
I remember the punch, having been forced to use it for some alpha work
once (a PITA), but my fading memory tells me it was a '010'.
--
Julian Thomas: jt . epix @ net http://home.epix.net/~jt
remove letter a for email (or switch . and @)
In the beautiful Finger Lakes Wine Country of New York State!
Boardmember of POSSI.org - Phoenix OS/2 Society, Inc
http://www.possi.org
-- --
Uncle Ed's Rule of Thumb: Never use your thumb for a rule.
You'll either hit it with a hammer or get a splinter in it.
Charlie Gibbs
(Nick Spalding) writes:
I've seen them, but we had one that was even more rudimentary. It had
a single die which you slid up and down to get to the row(s) you wanted
to punch. It wasn't an IBM product, although the light blue colour
suggests that it might have been made by someone like Wright Line.
Given how difficult it often was to get time on a keypunch, I made
up a little sign for the beast that read: "Programmers have priority
on this punch!"
--
cgi...@sky.bus.com (Charlie Gibbs)
Remove the first period after the "at" sign to reply.
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
> from Control Program-67/Cambridge Monitor System User's Guide,
> GH20-0859-0,pgs 521-523
Since I have it out (control program-67/cambridge monitor system
user's guide, gh20-0859-0, pgs 17-26). I haven't reproduced the
associated keyboard layout figures ... however, a modern PC keyboard
looks pretty similar to a standard Selectric 2741 configuration (as
opposed to a PTTC/EBCD 2741 configuration). Biggest difference is the
< & > above the comma/period and the bracket/brace keys to the right
of the P key.
from terminal characteristics
2741 Characteristics
The IBM 2741 Communication Terminal consists of an IBM Selectric
typewriter mounted on a typerwriter stand. The stand includes the
electronic controles needed for communications, a cabinet for mounting
a data-phone, a rack for mounting a roll of paper, and a working
surface. For use with the CP/CMS system, the 2741 should be equipped
with the Transmit Interrupt and the Receive Interrupt features.
The 2741 has two modes of operation: communicate mode and local
mode. The mode of the terminals is contrlled by the terminal mode
switch, ahich is located on the left side of the typerwriter
stand. When inlocal mode, the terminal is disconnected from the
computer. It then functions as a typerwriter only, and no information
is transmitted or received. When in communicate mode, the terminal may
be connected to the communication line to the computer. The power
switch on the right side of the keyboard must be set to ON before the
terminal can operate in either communicate or local mode. The
procedure for establishing connections with the computer and the
terminal switch settings which should be used are discussed below
under "2741 Initiation Producedures".
Either of two 2741 keyboard configurations may be used in accessing
the CP/CMS system. These are the PTTC/EBCD configurations (shown in
Figure 1) and the standard Selectric configuration (shown in Figure
2). On either keyboard, the alphameric and special character keys, the
space bar, power switch, the SHIFT, LOCK, TAB, tab CLR SET, and MAR
REL keys all operate in the same way as standard Selectric typewriter
keys.
On most 2741 terminals, the space bar, backspace, and hyphen/underline
keys have the typamatic feature. If one of these keys is operated
normally, the corresponding function occurs only once. If the key is
pressed nad held, the function is repeated until the key is
released. The RETURN and AATN keys have special significance on the
2741 keyboard.
The RETURN key is hit to signal the termination of each input
line. When RETURN is hit, control is transferred to the system, and
the keyboard is locked until the system is ready to accept another
input line.
The ATTN key is used to generate an attention interrupt. It may be hit
at any time (since it is never locked out) and causes the keyboard to
be unlocked to accept an input line. Refer to "Attention Interupt" for
a discussion of the transfer between enviornments that occurs when the
attention interupt is generate.
The 2741 paper controls (such as the paper release lever, line-space
lever, impression control lever, etc.) are identical to the
corresponding controls on an IBM Selectric typerwriter and operate
accordingly.
An invalid output character (one which cannot be typed by the terminal
and for which no keyboard function, such as tab or carriage return,
exists) appears in terminal output as a space. For a further
discussion of 2741 characteristics refer to the 2741 component
description manual (GA24-3415).
1050 Characteristics
The IBM 1050 terminal is composed of the 1051 Control Unit and a 1052
Printer-Keyboard. The 1051 Control Unit includes the power supplies,
printer code translator, data channel, and control circuitry needed
for 1050 operation. To be used with the CP/CMS system, the 1051 should
be equipped with the Time-Out Suppression and the Transmit Interrupt
and Receive Interrupt special features. The 1052 keyboard is similar
in appearance to the standard IBM typewriter keyboard. Figure 3 and 4
illustrate the 1050 switch panel and keyboard. The alphameric and
special character kyes, the space bar, LOCK, SHIFT, and TAB keys, and
the paper controls operate in the same way as those on a standard IBM
typewriter. The following keys are of special significance on the 1052
keyboard:
RETURN. If the Automatic EOB special feature is included on the
terminal being used, and if the EOB switch on the switch panel is set
to AUTO, the RETURN key may be used to terminate an inpute
line. Otherwise, (if the Automatic EOB special feature is not availabe
on the terminal being used, or if EOB on the switch panel is set to
MANUAL) the character transmitted when RETURN is hit is considered
part of the input line.
ALTN CODING. This key, when pressed and held while one of the other
keys is hit, Originates a single character code such as restore,
bypass, reader stop, end of block (EOB), end of address (EOA), prefix,
end of transaction (EOT), or cancel. Note that input lines from 1050
terminals not equipped with the automatic EOB special feature must be
terminated by pressing the ALTN CODING key and holding it down while
hitting the 5 key. This procedure causes a carriage return at the
tmerinal.
RESET LINE. Hitting this key (at the left side of the keyboard) causes
an attention interupt (provided the terminal is equipped with the
Transmit Interrupt special feature). The RESET LINE key may be hit at
any time, since it is never locked out, and causes the keyboard to
accept on input line. Refer to "Attention Interupt" for a discussion
of the transfer between environments which occurs when an attention
interrupt is generated.
RESEND. This key and its associated light (both located on the right
of the keyboard) are used during block checking. The light comes on
when an end-of-block character is sent by the terminal; it is turned
of when receipt is acknowledged by the system. If the light remains
on, indicating an error, RESENT may be hit to turn off the light, and
the previous input line may then be reentered. While the light is on,
no input is accepted from the keyboard.
LINE FEED. This key causes the paper to move up one or two lines,
according to the setting of the line space lever, wihtout moving the
typing element.
DATA CHECK. This key should be hit to turn off the associated light
(to its left), which comes on whenever a longitudinal or vertical
redundancy checking error occurs, or when power is turned on at the
terminal.
1050 Initiation Procuedures
The procedure for preparing the 1050 for use are descriped below. When
these steps have been performed, log in.
1. After making sure that the terminal is plugged in, set the panel
switches (shown in Figure 3) as follows:
Switch Setting
SYSTEM ATTEND
MASTER OFF
PRINTER1 SEND REC
PRINTER2 REC
KEYBOARD SEND
READER1 OFF
READER2 OFF
PUNCH1 OFF
PUNCH2 OFF
STOP CODE OFF
AUTO FILL OFF
PUNCH NORMAL
SYSTEM PROGRAM
EOB see below
SYSTEM (up)
TEST OFF
SINGLE CY OFF
RDR STOP OFF
If an EOB switch appears on the terminal, it may be set to either AUTO
or MANUL. If it is set to AUTO, the RETURN key may be used to
terminate an input line. If the EOB switch is set to MANUAL, or if it
does not appear on the terminal, all input lines must be terminated by
hitting the 5 key while the ALTN CODING key is pressed and held down.
TYPE 33 TELETYPE Characteristics
The KSR (Keyboard Send/Receive) model of the Teletype Type 33 terminal
is supported by CP-67. The Type 33 KSR includes a typewriter keybarod,
a control panel, a data-phone, control circuitry for the teletype, and
roll paper. The Type 33 KSR keyboard contains all standard characters
in the conventional arrangement, as well as a number of special
symbols. All alphabetic characters are capitals. The SHIFT key is used
only for typing the "uppershift" special characters. The CTRL key
(Control key) is used in conjunction with other keys to perform
special functions. Neither the SHIFT nor CTRL key is self-locking;
each must be depressed when used.
In addition to the standard keys, the keyboard contains several
non-printing keys with special functions. These function keys are as
follows:
LINE FEED generates a line-feed character and moves the paper up one
line without moving the printing mechanism. When the terminal is used
offline, the LINE FEED key should be depressed after each line of
typing to avoid overprinting of the next line.
RETURN is the carriage return key and signifies the physical end of
the input line.
REPT repeats the action of any key depressed.
BREAK generates an attention interupt and interrupts program
execution. After breaking program execution, the BRK-RLS button must
be depressed to unlock the keyboard.
CNTRL is used in conjunction with other keys to perform special
functions. The tab character (Control-I) acts like the tab key on the
2741. COntrol-H acts like the backspace key on the 2741. Control-Q and
Control-E produce an attention interrupt like BREAK if the teletype is
in input mode. Control-S (X-OFF) and Control-M act as RETURN. Control-D
(EOT) should not be used as it may disconnect the terminal. Control-G
(bell), COntrol-R (tape), Control-T (tape), and all other Control
characters are legitimate characters even though they have no
equivalent by the 2741.
HERE IS and RUBOUT are ignored by CP-67.
ESC (ALT MODE on some units) is not used by CP-67, but generates a
legal character.
The control panel to the right of the keyboard contains six buttons
below the telephone dial, and two lights, a button, and the
NORMAL-RESTORE knob above the dial. THe buttons and lights are as
bollows:
ORIG (ORIGINATE). This button obtains a dial tone before dialing. The
volume control on the loadspeaker (under the keybarod shelf to the
right) should be turned up such that the dial tone is audible. After
connection with the computer has been made, the volume can be lowered.
CRL (CLEAR). This button, when depressed, turns off the typerwriter.
ANS (ANSWER). This button is not used by CP-67.
TST (TEST). This button is used for testing purposes only.
LCL (Local). This button turns on the typerwriter for local or offline
use.
BUZ-RLS (Buzzer-Release). This button turns off the buzzer that warns
of low paper supply. The light in the BUZ-RLS button remains on until
the paper has been replenished.
BRK-RLS (Break-Release). This button unlocks the keyboard after
program execution has been interrupted by the BREAK key.
REST. This light is not used by CP-67.
NORMAL-RESTORE. This knob is set to NORMAL, except to change the
ribbon, in which case the knob is twisted to the OUT-OF-SERV
light. The knob is then set to RESTORE and returned to NORMAL when the
operation has been completed.
OUT-OF-SERV (Out of Service). This light goes on when the
NORMAL-RESTORE knob is pointed to it for ribbon changing.
Most teletype units have a loadspeaker and a volume control knob (VOL)
located under the keyboard shelf. The knob is turned clockwise to
increase the volume.
TYPE 35 TELETYPE Characteristics
THe KSR (Keyboard Send/Receive) model of the Teletype Type 35 terminal
is supported by CP-67. The Type 35 KSR, like the Type 33 KSR, includes
a typewriter keybarod, a control panel, a data-phone, control
circuitry, as well as roll paper. The Type 35 has basically the same
features as the Type 33. The additional features of a Type 35 are the
following:
LOC-LF (Local/Line Feed). This button operates as the LINE FEED button
without generating a line-feed character. It is used along with the
LOC-CR.
LOC-CR (Local/Carriage Return). This button returns the carrier as
RETURN does without generating an end-of-line character. LOC-CR is
normally used only to continue a line of input to the next line.
LOC-BSP (Logical/Backspace). This button generates a character but it
has no meaning with the KSR model.
BREAK. This button generates an attention interrupt and interrupts
program execution. After execution has been interrupted, BRK-RLS, and
then the K buttons must be depressed to unlock the keyboard.
K (Keyboard). This button unlocks the keybarod and sets the terminal
for page copy only.
John Coelho
> Now what DID attach via 2841? Tape?
>
> --
Wasn't it 2311 disk drives? (Sorry, I mean DASD's).
John C
Steve Myers
-- Steve Myers
Bruce B. Reynolds
numbers and model numbers in some cases (all errors due to taking this off my
most
volatile storage medium, by head):
1801: CPU for 1800 Data Acquisition and Control System; model numbers based on
amount and speed of memory installed; would hold logic for I/O
interfaces to 1053/1816 typers, 1442 card reader/punch, 1443
printer, 1810 disk drive (via feature codes), paper tape reader
and/or punch (10xx), and limited amount of A/D, D/A, DI/DO, and PI
interfaces (via feature codes). Memory speed was
either 4 microseconds or 2 microseconds; if an 1803 was added, the
memory speed was set at 2.25 microseconds. Lots and lots of
winkin-blinkin
lights and rows of toggle switches; if that not enuf, another panel
of lights
a switches for the CE was right behind the main panel. Extra memory
for
diagnostic programs, which could be run without disturbing the user
environment. All logic SLT, except cards were "hardened" by a dip
into
a vat of "impervium"; only weak point, discovered after twenty years
of use,
was standard flat signal cables were not impervious to corrosive
atmosphere,
and copper had become an oxide; many 1800's were "recabled" at the
time
of maintenance cut-off (c. 1985); some are still in use.
1802: CPU for 1800 Data Acquisition and Control System---with control logic for
2401(?) tape drive; otherwise akin to 1801.
1803: Core expansion unit for 1801/1802, when installed, one core box (each of
4Kwords (of 18-bits) would be moved from 1801/1802 to the 1803 to
allow space for the expansion core interface logic in the
1801/1802.
1810: Disk drive unit; models -001, -002, -003, had one, two, or three drives
identical
to the 2310 drive (for you DEC readers, the RK05 disk).
1816: I/O heavy-duty Selectric typewriter, similar to the 1052 console on
S/360's;
logically, the keyboard was the "1816" and the output printer was
the
same as a 1053 attached to the 1801/1802; code used was PTTC/BCD.
1826: I/O expansion chassis: by feature codes, gates could be populated with
data channels (for attachment of standard S/360 I/O units, e.g.
2841/2311
or 2848/2260; several locations with which I was familar had
3274-01L/3279
color CRTs) or with communications controllers (start/stop for
2740/2741
or bisynchronous as either primary or secondary and interface for
the
2791 communications system) or for additional termination points
for analog and digital signals to be multiplexed onto the
1801/1802. One model of the 1826 was for direct
attachment to the S/360, which would allow the entire 1800
system to be channel device to the S/360.
1828: process expansion chassis: by feature codes could hold additional A/D or
D/A convertors, and hold 1851 and/or 1854 multiplexor boxes; an
RPQ allowed for the remote installation of an 1828 box.
1851: reed relay analog multiplexor (I'm thinking 32 lines in/out)
1854: solid state analog multiplexor
1894: machine number for multiple 1800 RPQ's: some that I worked with were:
---interface for 1092 programmable keyboards (q.v.)
---interface for mass spectrascope
---interface for Hewlett-Packard gas chromatograph
An 1894 was usually mounted in an 1828 chassis to get power and
interface
to the 1801/1802. (Anecdote: the 1894 for the gas chromatograph was
built by a third party for IBM, it was a black steel frame gated to
the
1828, with no standard IBM parts in the RPQ unit; when a company for
which I was working informed IBM that we were decommissioning an 1800
with the RPQ, they sent the chief 1800 maintenance engineer from San
Jose to get the parts---he took out every single piece from the frame,
but
was not allowed to take the frame itself with the IBM serial number
on it (which would have made shipping the unit a lot
easier) due to some post-consent-degree rule preventing IBM
from buying back purchased
machines).
Some items mentioned, attached (not necessarily exclusively) to 1800's:
1092: programmable keyboard, model numbers varied by number of columns on the
unit, seem to recall that really "wide" units had a 1094 expansion
keyboard;
programmable in sense that overlays would indicate the data to be
entered
in each 0-9 column, with one rotary switch to indicate which
overlay was
being used at the time; user would enter data in columns, set
switch to
match overlay, and press start key; the "host" unit would enable
the
keyboard read function, which was done by a mechanical swipe brush
on
the keyboard column interlocks; data sent to "host" as bit
parallel BCD.
1442: believe model used on 1800's was -006; firmware in 1801/1802 was used
for the "load" (IPL) function; in light of discussions in a.f.c.,
I consider it pretty reliable, only recall one or two "call
the CE" jams at the site I worked at longest: (chad output to the
"chip box") .
1443: 300-lpm printer, sliding comb print-bar mechanism: only printer I know of
that could put characters out of alignment in both vertical and
horizontal, and wasn't too good at paper transport, either.
CHI made a very good 1443
replacement, 600-lpm drum printer OEM'd by ????.
2841: channel-attached disk controller for 2311 drives (and never let it break
when
it (a DPD product) is attached to an 1800 (a GSD product)),
especially
if you have OEM 2311's.
2311: disk drives using 1316 disk packs of 7.5MB maximum storage; on the 1800,
"virtual" 1810 disk images would be stored as a single OS dataset,
two 1810's per 2311, with the remaining space available for
"native" OS
datasets, if you were willing to do RYO CCW programming. The PID
distribution of the MPX source code needed for a sysgen was done
on
a 1316 pack to users without 1810's or a tape drive; punchout was
about
17,000 cards, which would then be customized, and read back into
the
assembler.
2848: CRT controller for 2260s and 2250s; the CRTs were directly attached by
RF coax to the controller, with the keyboards being read in a
parallel
arrangement (big cables); 2848 maintained the video image on the
2260
by feeding the output signal through a delay line which was tuned
to
match the refresh rate of the CRT; characters were generated by a
single-plane of core ROM which was mounted on one of the fixed
sides
of the cabinet; 2260s were 12 by 80 columns. At one location at
which
I worked, the 2848 was replaced by a solid state unit from Trivex,
which
supported sixteen CRTs (compared to the 2848's eight) and appeared
on the channel as two 2848s, so that no host program changes were
required. Never worked with the 2250, which is the light pen
graphics
terminal attached via the 2260.
One other one, which was at a location at which I worked, but which I did not
have
to figure out:
0357: a precursor to the 1092 programmable keyboard, the 357 series used
sliding
bars, rather than the interlocked keys of the 1092 for each
column's input;
additional data was input from push-in card reader(s): in this
location,
a hospital, plastic cards were punched with the patient i.d., and
cards
were retained with the standard tests at the floor clerk's
location;
clerk would insert patient card, test card, and slide in ordering
physician
code and time; pressing start on the remote 357 would cause it to
transmit to a 358(?) multiplexor (REALLY big cables), which would
then
drive a 026 keypunch; when the output side of the keypunch was
full,
an alarm would sound, and the host operator would remove the cards
and submit them as job to the mainframe, to be accumulated for
that
night's patient billing run. At this location, one output of the
1800 was
billing cards done in the 357's format.
Enuf for now; I'll move forward into the 1970's in another posting.
--
Bruce B. Reynolds, Independent/Legacy Systems Consultant: Trailing Edge
Technologies, Glenside PA---Sweeping Up Behind Data Processing Dinosaurs
Lars Poulsen
>>> And finally, there was a modified 3275 video terminal called -
>>> I think - the 5275. It was mounted on a wheeled cart and used
>>> to program NC machine tools.
>>> It had some local capability and probably output to a punched
>>> tape. Does anyone have any info on that?
The long list of oddball model numbers that I got from an anonymous
source includes this set of numbers in roughly the right range:
5271 -IBM System Unit 3270 PC
5272 -IBM Color Display For 5271 Or 5273
5273 -IBM System Unit For 3270 PC/AT
5275 -IBM Direct Num Control Station
5277 -IBM 3270-PC/G And 3270-PC/GX Mouse
5278 -IBM Display Attach Unit
5279 -IBM 14 Inch Color Display
It looks to me like someone wrote some software for the 3270 PC/AT
that would extract robotics commands from a 3270 display data
stream and output them to a CNC machine through some other PC
plugin card.
(I must admit that when I first saw display terminal and 52xx
numbers together, I was thinking of this other suite, which
are related to S/34:
5250 -IBM Information Display System
Or ROLMBridge Link Protocol Converter (ROLM)
5251 -IBM Display Station
5252 -IBM Dual Display Station
5253 -IBM Display Station
5254 -IBM Dual Display Station
5255 -IBM Display Station
5256 -IBM Printer
5257 -IBM Printer
5258 -IBM Printer
5259 -IBM Migration Data Link
Apparently 5250 was used for two separate products, the lesser
known one being the Rolm thingy before Rolm was sold off again.)
Lars Poulsen
> > I seem to recall that a "001" keypunch was available ....
> I remember the punch, ... but my ... memory tells me it was a '010'.
You are both right; my anonymous cheat sheet says:
0001 -IBM Mechanical Punch
0002 -IBM PortaPunch
0010 -IBM Mechanical Punch
0011 -IBM Electric Punch
0012 -IBM Duplicating Punch
0013 -IBM Badge Punch
0015 -IBM Motor Drive Punch
0016 -IBM Motor Drive Duplicating Punch
0020 -IBM Card Punch
0024 -IBM Card Punch
0026 -IBM Printing Card Punch
0027 -IBM Card Proof Punch
0028 -IBM Printing Card Proof Punch
0029 -IBM Card Punch
0031 -IBM Alphabetic Duplicating Punch
0032 -IBM Card Punch
0036 -IBM Alphabetic Printing Punch
0037 -IBM Alphabetic Stencil Punch
Nico de Jong
> a better card subsystem. A 1402 would have been ideal, but it may
> not have been easily adaptable to the S/360 channel; when it did
> become available, it was called the 2540.
The drawers 1-2-3 could be used for the punched chards, 3.-4-5 for the read cards.
Yes, I _DID_ see once that two jobs trried to use drawer 3 at the same time. One for punched cards, and one for read cards. Jee what a mess it was!
After that, all punching was banned when _any_ other job was run
Nico
(PS: it was a 360/40, 128K RAM, 4x 2311, 7x tapes (cant remember the number), 2501, 2540, 1403N1, 1286
Nico
jmfb...@aol.com
Wait a minute...are you guys talking about a duplicator?
In order to punch a copy, you have to read.
/BAH
Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.
John Coelho
> The long list of oddball model numbers that I got from an anonymous
> source includes this set of numbers in roughly the right range:
>
> 5271 -IBM System Unit 3270 PC
> 5272 -IBM Color Display For 5271 Or 5273
> 5273 -IBM System Unit For 3270 PC/AT
> 5275 -IBM Direct Num Control Station
> 5277 -IBM 3270-PC/G And 3270-PC/GX Mouse
> 5278 -IBM Display Attach Unit
> 5279 -IBM 14 Inch Color Display
>
> It looks to me like someone wrote some software for the 3270 PC/AT
> that would extract robotics commands from a 3270 display data
> stream and output them to a CNC machine through some other PC
> plugin card.
>
Lars - I think this confirms the number, anyway. Hooking a computer to a
machine tool controller in lieu of punched tape is often called "DNC" for
Direct Numerical Control". I think that the 5275 was in fact an oddball in
this list in that it was not related to PC's at all. The DNC machines were
used from roughly 1971 to 1981, I think and were based on a 3270 device.
Your list of numbers brings back memories though, since I had a 3270PC for a
while and even one of the (optical) mice listed here (not mine personally -
company provided).
Thank you for checking on it.
John C
Joe Morris
>>At the risk of being called a nitpicker (who, *me*?) the 2540 didn't know
>>anything about an S/360 channel either. That task was given to the 2821
>>Control Unit, which also was the interface between the venerable 1403-N1
>>printer and the S/360 channels.
>I stand corrected - I had the attachment right in a post a minute ago, but
>said it was the 2841 CU. Joe is correct - 2821 was the right unit.
>Now what DID attach via 2841? Tape?
The 2821 supported the 2540 and up to three 140x printers.
(Side question: the standard addresses for the first two printers were
00E and 00F. What - if anything - was the standard address for the
third printer on a 2821? I don't think I ever saw a 3-printer box.)
The 2841 was the original DASD control unit: 2303 drum, 2311 removable
disk (all 7 MB of it!), and everybody's favorite source of war stories,
the 2321 Data Cell. (I started to put the 2301 drum in this list, but now
I'm thinking that it was attached through a 2820 control unit. Can anyone
confirm or deny that?)
The original S/360 tape drives were the 2415 (successor to the deservedly-
detested 7330, with an integrated control unit) and the 2401 (successor
to the 729, designed to connect to the channel via a 2803 control unit).
Joe Morris
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
> In my memory, the 2540 was a multifunction cardmachine, with 5 output drawers. About 1000 cpm reading, 200 punchung.
> The drawers 1-2-3 could be used for the punched chards, 3.-4-5 for the read cards.
> Yes, I _DID_ see once that two jobs trried to use drawer 3 at the same time. One for punched cards, and one for read cards. Jee what a mess it was!
> After that, all punching was banned when _any_ other job was run
i had to do a job for student registration where all
input/registration cards were standard manila stock and cards in the
punch tray were red-band on the top edge. all input cards were read
into the middle hopper and would go thru some validation, cards with
problems got flagged with a blank red-stripped card punched behind
them.
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | ly...@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
Jim Saum
(Joe Morris) wrote:
>The 2841 was the original DASD control unit: 2303 drum, 2311 removable
>disk (all 7 MB of it!), and everybody's favorite source of war stories,
>the 2321 Data Cell. (I started to put the 2301 drum in this list, but now
>I'm thinking that it was attached through a 2820 control unit. Can anyone
>confirm or deny that?)
Yes, the 2820 was the CU for the 2301 drum.
- Jim Saum
Jim Saum
<ni...@farumdata.dk> wrote:
>In my memory, the 2540 was a multifunction cardmachine, with 5 output =
>drawers. About 1000 cpm reading, 200 punchung.=20
>The drawers 1-2-3 could be used for the punched chards, 3.-4-5 for the =
>read cards.
>Yes, I _DID_ see once that two jobs trried to use drawer 3 at the same =
>time. One for punched cards, and one for read cards. Jee what a mess it =
>was!
>After that, all punching was banned when _any_ other job was run
The same 5 stacker pocket arrangement was on the 1402 reader-punch
used on 1401s, with the middle pocket usable by both the reader and
punch. There were occasional programs that exploited this by reading a
stream of cards, then punching cards to be merged into the stream in
the center pocket. In the single-program, non-spooled world of the
1401, this worked well enough, but operator recovery from reader or
punch jams could be a little tricky. At least the reader and punch
were separate devices not sharing a card path, unlike the 1442.
- Jim Saum
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
> The 2841 was the original DASD control unit: 2303 drum, 2311 removable
> disk (all 7 MB of it!), and everybody's favorite source of war stories,
> the 2321 Data Cell. (I started to put the 2301 drum in this list, but now
> I'm thinking that it was attached through a 2820 control unit. Can anyone
> confirm or deny that?)
the controller was a 2820 for the 2301 the 2301 was effectively a 2303
that read/wrote 4 tracks in parallel with data transfer rate 4* 2303
(1.2mbytes/sec and probably four times what the 2841 could handle). It
needed special dedicated high speed controller and I believe cable
length restriction of more like '80 rather than 200' (more typical of
standard bus&tag configurations).
from Control Program-67/Cambridg Monitor System Installation guide,
GH20-0857-0 (Oct. 1970), pg. 23, sample real I/O source deck
RIOS RIALIO TITLE="SAMPLE SYSPLEX"
SYSRES SYSRES=230,SYSTYPE=2314,SYSVOL=CPDISK1,SYSERR=004, x
SYSDNC=198,SYSWRM=202
SYSGEN SYSOPER=OPERATOR,SYSDUMP=CPSYS,SYSERMG=020, x
SYSCNSL=009,SYSPRT=030,SYSPUN=032,SYSCORE=768K
OPCONSOL DMXDV RDEVPNT=PRINTER1,RDEVADD=009,TYPE=1052
PRINTER1 DMXDV RDEVPNT=CARDRD11,RDEVADD=030,TYPE=1403
CARDRDR1 DMXDV RDEVPNT=PUNCH1,RDEVADD=031,TYPE=2540RDR
PUNCH1 DMXDV RDEVPNT=TERM01,RDEVADD=032,TYPE=2540PCH
TERM01 DMXDV RDEVPNT=TERM02,RDEVADD=020,TYPE=2702T,SAD=1
TERM02 DMXDV RDEVPNT=TERM03,RDEVADD=021,TYPE=2702T,SAD=2
TERM03 DMXDV RDEVOBT=TERM04,RDEVADD=022,TYPE=2702T,SAD=2
,,,,
TERM4E DMXDV RDEVADD=04E,TYPE=2703T,SAD=4
DRUM2 DRDEV RDEVCU-R2820A,RDEVADD=100,TYPE=2301,DECUPTH=80
R2820A DRCU DEVLIST=DRUM2,RCUADD=0,CUTAIL1=CHAIN1,RCUPATH=80
CHAN1 DRCH RCULIST=R2820A,CHANADD=1,CHANPNT=CHAN2
....
as an aside, SAD command on the 2702/2703 bound the line-scanner to a
particular line. Standard installation had 2741 line-scanner at SAD1,
TTY line-scanner at SAD2, and 1052 line-scanner at SAD3.
As an undergraduate, I added the TTY support to CP/67 and after
looking thru all the manuals believed that I could do dynamic terminal
type recognition and not require a preconfigured SAD command for
specific lines. Didn't make a lot of difference for directly wired
terminals but in dial-up ... it allowed a single phone number rotery
pool for all terminals (i.e. all terminals could call the same number)
I tested it all out and it actually worked with TTY terminals working
on 2741 dial-up "lines". Then the IBM CE got around to telling me that
for the 2702 there was a hardware short-cut, while the type of
line-scanner could be dynamically set with the SAD command, specific
line frequency oscillators was hardwared to specific lines (i.e. 110
baud terminals weren't spec'ed for running on 134.5 baud lines).
That led to the university project where four of us built a 360
channel connection board & the first 360 plugged compatible 360
controller (initially out of an Interdata/3) to replace the 2702. The
Interdata/3 directly implemented the line-scanner function in software
... including initially strobbing the signal raise/lower at a very
high rate to determine the edges and dynamically calculate the baud
rate.
random refs:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#30
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#12
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#36
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#37
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#42
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#3
Nico de Jong
Joe Morris <jcmo...@jmorris-pc.MITRE.ORG> skrev i en nyhedsmeddelelse:937jq3$9vj$1...@top.mitre.org...
> (Side question: the standard addresses for the first two printers were
> 00E and 00F. What - if anything - was the standard address for the
> third printer on a 2821? I don't think I ever saw a 3-printer box.)
>
Nico
Nico de Jong
> used on 1401s, with the middle pocket usable by both the reader and
> punch. There were occasional programs that exploited this by reading a
> stream of cards, then punching cards to be merged into the stream in
> the center pocket. In the single-program, non-spooled world of the
> 1401, this worked well enough, but operator recovery from reader or
> punch jams could be a little tricky. At least the reader and punch
> were separate devices not sharing a card path, unlike the 1442.
Quite true, but the thing I saw, was that 2 separate / independent programs used stacker 3!
Nico
Lars Poulsen
> >> Was it available without the reader option? IIRC, we used it for
> >> punch only, with a 2501 for reading.
jmfb...@aol.com wrote:
> > Wait a minute...are you guys talking about a duplicator?
> In order to punch a copy, you have to read.
No, it could NOT be used for duplicating, because the read station
was ahead of the card station in the same card path. Only one
input hopper, used for reading, and then emptied and loaded with
blank cards to punch.
1442 model 5 was a punch-only version. Model 6 and 7 were the
300 cpm and 400 cpm read/punch combos. (They punched at about
50 cpm unless you told it halfway through the card that you
were done punching, at which point it could speed up while ejecting
the card. One of the truly crazy features was that it could not
read at the slower feed rate used for punching, so if you wanted
to read the cards before punching (blank check, to protect against
operator error) you had to pick a card only on every other cycle,
so that there would not be a card in the read station while a
card was being punched.
See the online programming manual for the 1130 at Howard Shubs'
website: http://www.mindspring.com/~hshubs/1130/functional/Cards.html
Arargh!
Lars, two more for your list:
403,407 accounting machine
arargh
--
Arargh (at enteract dot com) http://www.arargh.com
Julian Thomas
>Lars, two more for your list:
>403,407 accounting machine
and the 408 was a followon to the 407 - it included the ability to feed
(and read a few columns) from punch chards in the printer path.
--
Julian Thomas: jt . epix @ net http://home.epix.net/~jt
remove letter a for email (or switch . and @)
In the beautiful Finger Lakes Wine Country of New York State!
Boardmember of POSSI.org - Phoenix OS/2 Society, Inc
http://www.possi.org
-- --
Air conditioned environment - Do not open Windows.
Arargh!
wrote:
>In <6cdg5tg81t8qfect2...@4ax.com>, on 01/07/01
> at 03:24 AM, Arargh! <Ara...@Enteract.com> said:
>
>>Lars, two more for your list:
>>403,407 accounting machine
>
>and the 408 was a followon to the 407 - it included the ability to feed
>(and read a few columns) from punch chards in the printer path.
Never saw that one. I remember the 407, because I had to wire up a
board for it to use it to list Autocoder source decks.
I also seem to remember some board controlled card merge/punch that
would also read MARK SENSE cards. I know it was used at my college,
because I re-wrote the test scoring program that read it's cards.
Lars Poulsen
at 03:24 AM, Arargh! <Ara...@Enteract.com> said:
> >>Lars, two more for your list:
> >>403,407 accounting machine
With the long list, it's not even fun anymore; it seems I will need
some description to justify putting them on the main list:
0402 -IBM Alphabetic Accounting Machine
0403 -IBM Alphabetical Accounting Machine
0404 -IBM Alphabetic Accounting Machine
0405 -IBM Alphabetic Accounting Machine
0407 -IBM Accounting Machine
0408 -IBM Accounting Machine
0409 -IBM Accounting Machine
0412 -IBM Alphabetic Accounting Machine
0416 -IBM Numerical Accounting Machine
0417 -IBM Numerical Accounting Machine
0418 -IBM Numerical Accounting Machine
0419 -IBM Numerical Accounting Machine
0420 -IBM Alphabetical Accounting
0421 -IBM Accounting Machine
0424 -IBM Alphabetical Accounting
0426 -IBM Accounting Machine
0444 -IBM Accounting Machine
0447 -IBM Accounting Machine
0450 -IBM Accounting Machine
Jeff Jonas
>> > Wait a minute...are you guys talking about a duplicator?
>> In order to punch a copy, you have to read.
>No, it could NOT be used for duplicating, because the read station
>was ahead of the card station in the same card path. Only one
>input hopper, used for reading, and then emptied and loaded with
>blank cards to punch.
>See the online programming manual for the 1130 at Howard Shubs'
>website: http://www.mindspring.com/~hshubs/1130/functional/Cards.html
A most excellent web site of technical information!
I used the 1442 on the IBM system 1130 and system 3.
re: duplicating decks: it was possible under program control.
The 1130 had a lovely program that read a deck to a disk file
as column-binary so it would reproduce *anything*.
I think it worked like this:
- set the number of copies desired on the console switches
- read the input deck (I forgot how EOF was signalled)
- put in blank cards, press "start" again
The decks alternated between the 2 stackers,
each ending with a card with the word "E N D" in block letters.
Sigh - I miss the program that punched cards with block letters of
whatever I typed at the console.
The console switches set options such as
- underline and/or overline
- center, left or right justify
- number of columns between letters
I used the 1130 for about 2 years, light duty, so I jammed the punch
only 1-2 times despite punching lace cards for amusement.
For some reason it was serviced by a real FE and I learned
how to override the safety switch so the big red flag popped up,
allowing the card reader to operate with the cover open.
It looked like the atomic bomb from "Goldfinger" :-)
--
Jeffrey Jonas
jeffj@panix(dot)com
The original Dr. JCL and Mr .hide
Joe Morris
>In <6cdg5tg81t8qfect2...@4ax.com>, on 01/07/01
> at 03:24 AM, Arargh! <Ara...@Enteract.com> said:
>>Lars, two more for your list:
>>403,407 accounting machine
Was the 402 Accounting Machine already on the list?
>and the 408 was a followon to the 407 - it included the ability to feed
>(and read a few columns) from punch chards in the printer path.
^^^^^^
was this caused by hanging chad? <g>
Now that's a feature I've not heard of...for that matter, I don't recall
ever hearing of the 408, either. Can I assume that the machine came out
too late (when?) to ever become common, especially with the ability
of the 1404 printer to print on card stock as well as normal fanfold?
Joe Morris (who still has some wiring charts he designed for the 407)
John Coelho
Joe Morris <jcmo...@jmorris-pc.MITRE.ORG> wrote in message
news:93cjae$ko5$1...@top.mitre.org...
>
> Now that's a feature I've not heard of...for that matter, I don't recall
> ever hearing of the 408, either. Can I assume that the machine came out
> too late (when?) to ever become common, especially with the ability
> of the 1404 printer to print on card stock as well as normal fanfold?
Was the 407 the machine that the CAM unit worked with? Iirc the CAM
(Computing Accounting Machine) attached to a 407 or something like it and
contained a few registers that you loaded. It then crunched the registers
the same way each time (something like A + B / C = the result). Maybe the
CAM unit itself was called a 408??
Never worked with a CAM but saw one once.
John C
John Winters
>> recall that a "001" keypunch was available until about 1971 which was a
>> manual, desktop, punch. One card at a time, probably twelve buttons. Does
>> anyone else remember this?
>
>Indeed so, though I think it may have been 011 not 001.
Presumably depends on whether the second mark is a hole or a dimple?
John
--
John Winters. Wallingford, Oxon, England.
The Linux Emporium - the source for Linux CDs in the UK
See http://www.linuxemporium.co.uk/
Julian Thomas
>I also seem to remember some board controlled card merge/punch that would
>also read MARK SENSE cards. I know it was used at my college, because I
>re-wrote the test scoring program that read it's cards.
Probably a 514 or more likely 519 with a mark sense feature, altho there
was no merge capability in either of those; the only machine that merged
was the collator, and that didn't punch.
--
Julian Thomas: jt . epix @ net http://home.epix.net/~jt
remove letter a for email (or switch . and @)
In the beautiful Finger Lakes Wine Country of New York State!
Boardmember of POSSI.org - Phoenix OS/2 Society, Inc
http://www.possi.org
-- --
Never insult an alligator until you've crossed the river.
Julian Thomas
>Now that's a feature I've not heard of...for that matter, I don't recall
>ever hearing of the 408, either. Can I assume that the machine came out
>too late (when?) to ever become common, especially with the ability of
>the 1404 printer to print on card stock as well as normal fanfold?
Almost certainly too little too late. ISTR seeing the manual (I never saw
the beast in the flesh^H^H^H^H^Hiron) in the very late '50s - before 4
digit machine numbers!
--
Julian Thomas: jt . epix @ net http://home.epix.net/~jt
remove letter a for email (or switch . and @)
In the beautiful Finger Lakes Wine Country of New York State!
Boardmember of POSSI.org - Phoenix OS/2 Society, Inc
http://www.possi.org
-- --
You said Windows was a Power Tool???
Julian Thomas
>Was the 407 the machine that the CAM unit worked with? Iirc the CAM
>(Computing Accounting Machine) attached to a 407 or something like it and
>contained a few registers that you loaded. It then crunched the registers
>the same way each time (something like A + B / C = the result). Maybe the
>CAM unit itself was called a 408??
>Never worked with a CAM but saw one once.
This sounds much like the CPC which consisted of:
- a modified 402 type accounting machine (type bars, not wheels like the
407)
- a modified 607 electronic calculator
- a fairly standard summary punch for card output (521 ??)
- one or more storage units ('iceboxes') - each held 10 words - word
length
escapes me by now, but it was fairly long - like 16 digits??
I saw a room full of these at United Aircraft in Hartford in 1954.
--
Julian Thomas: jt . epix @ net http://home.epix.net/~jt
remove letter a for email (or switch . and @)
In the beautiful Finger Lakes Wine Country of New York State!
Boardmember of POSSI.org - Phoenix OS/2 Society, Inc
http://www.possi.org
-- --
Is fire supposed to shoot out of that thing?
David Horvath, CCP
>
>>> >> > It was a reader/punch both in the same card path.
>
>>> > Wait a minute...are you guys talking about a duplicator?
>>> In order to punch a copy, you have to read.
>
>>No, it could NOT be used for duplicating, because the read station
>>was ahead of the card station in the same card path. Only one
>>input hopper, used for reading, and then emptied and loaded with
>>blank cards to punch.
>
>>See the online programming manual for the 1130 at Howard Shubs'
>>website: http://www.mindspring.com/~hshubs/1130/functional/Cards.html
lap. It shows a diagram of the 1442.
The card path is (in flow order):
1) Input hopper
2) Read Station
3) Punch Station
4) Card Cornering
5) Stacker 1
6) Stacker 2
Clearly, it is possible to read and then punch on the same card.
I *remembered* doing something similar (updating a card) but had to grab to
book to verify the memory.
At my highschool (I took my first programming class during summer school
after 8th grade ca 1976), we had an 082 Card Sort, a couple of 029 Keypunches
(and interpreter for cards punched in the 1442), and (I think) a 408. Any time
we needed to duplicate ("80-80 punch") a deck of cards we'd use the 408
although we did have a utility that ran on the 1130. They hired me (part-time)
after graduation because their "real" programmer quit. He was also the
math/programming teacher in the high school, taught in adult school, tutored at
the library, *and* had a farm 2 hours away.
Ahhh, the memories. I still have a few cases of punched (and unpunched) cards
in the attic as well as 2315 cartridges and a couple wire boards.
- David
--
David B. Horvath, CCP dhor...@nosuch.cobs.com
Consultant, International Lecturer, Adjunct Professor
Author of "UNIX for the Mainframer" and other books.
*** remove "nosuch." when replying ***
Lars Poulsen
> The card path is (in flow order):
> 1) Input hopper
> 2) Read Station
> 3) Punch Station
> 4) Card Cornering
> 5) Stacker 1
> 6) Stacker 2
> Clearly, it is possible to read and then punch on the same card.
> I *remembered* doing something similar (updating a card) but had to grab to
> book to verify the memory.
Absolutely, and the two-pass card assembler depended on it to punch
the generated absolute code into the "binary" columns of the source
deck. But you had to play a few tricks.
You could read cards at full speed, and send them to stackers
depending on the card content, but you had to keep track of which
station the card was at: If card 1 was at the corner while card 2
was at the punch station and card 3 was at the read station, you
had to remember from reading two cycles ago which stacker it was
that you wanted to send card 1 to.
You could punch cards at 50 cpm by picking a card on each cycle
and then punching it after it made it through the reader to the
punch station.
But if you had a card in the reader and a card in the punch, you
could not read the card in the reader and also punch the card in
the punch at the same time. To do read-before-punch you had to
pick a card only on every other cycle, so that thee would not
be a card in the reader while you were punching, because the
reader and the punch required the card feed mechanism to run at
different speeds.
So: Pick card, read, punch (no pick), pick card, read, ...
Heinz W. Wiggeshoff
>
...
> the generated absolute code into the "binary" columns of the source
> deck. But you had to play a few tricks.
>
> You could read cards at full speed, and send them to stackers
> depending on the card content, but you had to keep track of which
> station the card was at: If card 1 was at the corner while card 2
> was at the punch station and card 3 was at the read station, you
> had to remember from reading two cycles ago which stacker it was
> that you wanted to send card 1 to.
So one who mastered this technique could add "Real time programming"
to the resume.
Didja ever wonder about what makes RTP distinct? To me, it's just
another aspect of resource management.