Re: Happy DEC-10 Day
Charles Richmond
> Isn't today DEC-10 day? Where's the party? I thought there was going
> to be a party? Oh well.
>
> Happy 10-DEC-2009 to all you 36-bitters wherever you are out there.
Yes!!! Happy DEC-10 Day!!!
I was trying hard to remember to celebrate DEC-10 Day,
and I came *close* to forgetting!!!
--
+----------------------------------------+
| Charles and Francis Richmond |
| |
| plano dot net at aquaporin4 dot com |
+----------------------------------------+
John Francis
Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>johnhre...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> Isn't today DEC-10 day? Where's the party? I thought there was going
>> to be a party? Oh well.
>>
>> Happy 10-DEC-2009 to all you 36-bitters wherever you are out there.
>
>Yes!!! Happy DEC-10 Day!!!
>
>I was trying hard to remember to celebrate DEC-10 Day,
>and I came *close* to forgetting!!!
I'm waiting for DEC-20.
I'd like to make DEC 20 2050, but I'll probably have to settle for 2020.
jmfbahciv
> johnhre...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> Isn't today DEC-10 day? Where's the party? I thought there was going
>> to be a party? Oh well.
>>
>> Happy 10-DEC-2009 to all you 36-bitters wherever you are out there.
>
> Yes!!! Happy DEC-10 Day!!!
>
> I was trying hard to remember to celebrate DEC-10 Day,
> and I came *close* to forgetting!!!
>
/BAH
jmfbahciv
/BAH
Joey Goggles
> John Francis wrote:
> > Charles Richmond <friz...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
> >> johnhreinha...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >>> Isn't today DEC-10 day? Where's the party? I thought there was going
> >>> to be a party? Oh well.
>
> >>> Happy 10-DEC-2009 to all you 36-bitters wherever you are out there.
> >> Yes!!! Happy DEC-10 Day!!!
>
> >> I was trying hard to remember to celebrate DEC-10 Day,
> >> and I came *close* to forgetting!!!
>
> > I'm waiting for DEC-20.
>
> > I'd like to make DEC 20 2050, but I'll probably have to settle for 2020.
>
> You made 1080.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Happy belated 11/30 day!
jmfbahciv
<grin> You get to celebrate twice in November.
/BAH
Joey Goggles
actually.... 11/05, 11/10, 11/20.... hmmm ....
John Francis
11/03, 11/04, 11/15, 11/23, 11/24 ...
Mensanator
> In article <7d62fe2a-1d1e-4a56-8d39-af4157052...@x15g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>,
Where does the 11/34 fit in?
Joe Pfeiffer
On December 4.
--
As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should
be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours;
and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin)
jmfbahciv
You would get an overflow that isn't trapped.
/BAH
jmfbahciv
and I tried to remember all the options ...:-)
/BAH
Joey Goggles
>
> - Show quoted text -
Between 11/30 and 11/35
Charles Richmond
Errrr... I'm *no* great authority on PDP-11's, but was there *not*
an 11/04 ???
jmfbahciv
/BAH
Mike Ross
Meantime us poor pdp-15 guys are totally stuffed...
Mike
--
http://www.corestore.org
'As I walk along these shores
I am the history within'
John Francis
Serves you right. You should have stuck with 1/4/7/9; that already gives
you four months for celebrations. Nobody else gets more than three.
jmfbahciv
<grin> Nah. Just hang it off a -10. Then you can
celebrate on 10/15.
/BAH
Quadibloc
> Serves you right. You should have stuck with 1/4/7/9; that already gives
> you four months for celebrations. Nobody else gets more than three.
Ah... December 5, December 8... and December 12 for one group... and
December 6, December 10, and December 20 for the other.
John Savard
Gene Wirchenko
<joeam...@optonline.net> wrote:
>On Dec 12, 9:34�am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
>> Joey Goggles wrote:
[snip]
>> > Happy belated 11/30 day!
>>
>> <grin> �You get to celebrate twice in November.
[snip]
>actually.... 11/05, 11/10, 11/20.... hmmm ....
^^^^^
My birthday. Celebrate twice.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Eric Chomko
Yeah, DEC was like Porshe, they had a good thing and then went crazy
and sold out making too many different types and for too many
different markets.
Mike Roach
<jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
The 12-bitters get 5 and 8, but we should also get 12, yet there's those
happy DEC-10 and happy DEC-20 folks hanging around.
--
New members urgently required for SUICIDE CLUB, Watford area.
-- Monty Python's Big Red Book
Rich Alderson
Well, if you write it like you would back in the isles, you get a day in
October (15/10). But yeah, all the featureful systems are right out.
--
Rich Alderson "You get what anybody gets. You get a lifetime."
ne...@alderson.users.panix.com --Death, of the Endless
jmfbahciv
You don't know what you're talking about. The problem is that the
appellation assignments stopped increasing so hierarchies could no
longer be determined by the name of the system. There wasn't any
point in remembering the number.
/BAH
Eric Chomko
If I had a $ for everytime you said that I'd have as much money as
Bill Gates!
You're problem with DEC is one of subjective vs. objective viewpoint.
I see the same thing in parents when viewing their children. DEC is
your child. :)
> The problem is that the
> appellation assignments stopped increasing so hierarchies could no
> longer be determined by the name of the system. There wasn't any
> point in remembering the number.
>
Because they made too many damn products of which the market segment
got lost in all the different product lines that were slightly
different. Just like Porshe!
Eric
Patrick Scheible
> On Dec 17, 7:34=A0am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
> > Eric Chomko wrote:
> > > On Dec 15, 7:48 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
> > >> Charles Richmond wrote:
> > >>> jmfbahciv wrote:
> > >>>> Joey Goggles wrote:
> > >>>>> On Dec 12, 9:34 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
> > >>>>>> Joey Goggles wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On Dec 11, 8:53 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>> John Francis wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>> In article <hfsi03$ve...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> > >>>>>>>>> Charles Richmond =A0<friz...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>> johnhreinha...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Isn't today DEC-10 day? =A0Where's the party? =A0I thought th=
> ere
> > >>>>>>>>>>> was going
> > >>>>>>>>>>> to be a party? =A0Oh well.
> > >>>>>>>>>>> Happy 10-DEC-2009 to all you 36-bitters wherever you are out
> > >>>>>>>>>>> there.
> > >>>>>>>>>> Yes!!! Happy DEC-10 Day!!!
> > >>>>>>>>>> I was trying hard to remember to celebrate DEC-10 Day,
> > >>>>>>>>>> and I came *close* to forgetting!!!
> > >>>>>>>>> I'm waiting for DEC-20.
> > >>>>>>>>> I'd like to make DEC 20 2050, but I'll probably have to settle
> > >>>>>>>>> for 2020.
> > >>>>>>>> You made 1080.
> > >>>>>>>> /BAH- Hide quoted text -
> > >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> > >>>>>>> Happy belated 11/30 day!
> > >>>>>> <grin> =A0You get to celebrate twice in November.
> > >>>>>> /BAH- Hide quoted text -
> > >>>>>> - Show quoted text -
> > >>>>> actually.... 11/05, 11/10, 11/20.... hmmm ....
> > >>>> and I tried to remember all the options ...:-)
> > >>> Errrr... I'm *no* great authority on PDP-11's, but was there *not* an
> > >>> 11/04 ???
> > >> There were so many towards the end I stopped memorizing them.
> >
> > > Yeah, DEC was like Porshe, they had a good thing and then went crazy
> > > and sold out making too many different types and for too many
> > > different markets.
> >
> > You don't know what you're talking about. =A0
>
> If I had a $ for everytime you said that I'd have as much money as
> Bill Gates!
Oh, come on. Bill Gates is worth $58 billion. Even if it only took
five seconds for Barb to say "You don't know what you're talking
about" and she did nothing else, without taking breaks, eating or
sleeping, she still would have had to start in 7198 BC for you to be
as rich as Bill.
> Because they made too many damn products of which the market segment
> got lost in all the different product lines that were slightly
> different. Just like Porshe!
If that was really the problem, DEC would have become more profitable
when they stopped selling any architecture but the VAX. As it turned
out, that was DEC's peak after which they started declining.
And Porsche has been doing pretty well, long term. Sure, the past
couple of years have been hard, but they've been hard on all
automakers.
-- Patrick
jmfbahciv
<grin> It's a good thing that making Chomko rich is one of my
non-goals.
/BAH
Quadibloc
> On December 4.
In that case, 18-bit and 16-bit fans can party on the same day.
John Savard
Eric Chomko
You underestimate how quickly and often Barb says "You don't know what
you're talking
about". And you don't know when she started.
>
> > Because they made too many damn products of which the market segment
> > got lost in all the different product lines that were slightly
> > different. Just like Porshe!
>
> If that was really the problem, DEC would have become more profitable
> when they stopped selling any architecture but the VAX. As it turned
> out, that was DEC's peak after which they started declining.
What about the 4,200 different models of the MicroVax?
>
> And Porsche has been doing pretty well, long term. Sure, the past
> couple of years have been hard, but they've been hard on all
> automakers.
>
Well, when the Alpha-Porshe comes out you'll see!
Eric Chomko
> Patrick Scheible wrote:
Well my goal of making you non-rich makes us even. :)))
jmfbahciv
<grin> Not exactly.
/BAH
jmfbahciv
Have you ever considered that you don't know much about the DEC
mainframe biz?
> And you don't know when she started.
I only make the statement when people don't know what they are
talking about.
>
>>> Because they made too many damn products of which the market segment
>>> got lost in all the different product lines that were slightly
>>> different. Just like Porshe!
>> If that was really the problem, DEC would have become more profitable
>> when they stopped selling any architecture but the VAX. As it turned
>> out, that was DEC's peak after which they started declining.
>
> What about the 4,200 different models of the MicroVax?
You are exaggerating and I was talking about PDP-11s, not VAXes.
/BAH
jmfbahciv
/BAH
Mike Ross
The upstarts can use them for parity.
Charles Richmond
> Eric Chomko wrote:
>> On Dec 18, 7:19 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> <grin> It's a good thing that making Chomko rich is one of my
>>> non-goals.
>>>
>>
>> Well my goal of making you non-rich makes us even. :)))
>
> <grin> Not exactly.
>
How about a "steel cage death match" between Eric Chomko and
Barb??? That could solve a *lot* of problems!!! ;-)
Charles Richmond
And everybody knows: you can *not* buy much with two-bits these
days!!! ;-)
none Morten Reistad
-- mrr
Charles Richmond
> Happy DEC20-day everyone.
>
And a Hap-Hap-Happy DEC-20 Day to you!!!
(Since Oct. 24 == Dec. 20, we should be celebrating DEC-20 Day on
October 24th too!!! So I guess that would make Columbus Day also
be DEC-10 day.)
jmfbahciv
That all depends on how you use those two bits. If you use them
to do something clever, you can sell the product and make millions.
/BAH
jmfbahciv
> Happy DEC20-day everyone.
>
I don't remember the name of their bar.
/BAH
jmfbahciv
> jmfbahciv wrote:
>> Eric Chomko wrote:
>>> On Dec 18, 7:19 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
>>>
>>> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...]
> >>
>>>> <grin> It's a good thing that making Chomko rich is one of my
>>>> non-goals.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well my goal of making you non-rich makes us even. :)))
>>
>> <grin> Not exactly.
>>
>
> How about a "steel cage death match" between Eric Chomko and Barb???
> That could solve a *lot* of problems!!! ;-)
>
of speaking through him (to readers who don't know), not at him.
He pulls this once/18 months.
/BAH
Patrick Scheible
-- Patrick
Walter Bushell
Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
2 bits, 4 bits, 6 bits, a buck!
--
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
jmfbahciv
> In article <hgj70p$rs4$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>
>> jmfbahciv wrote:
>>> Quadibloc wrote:
>>>> On Dec 13, 8:34 pm, Joe Pfeiffer <pfeif...@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On December 4.
>>>> In that case, 18-bit and 16-bit fans can party on the same day.
>>>>
>>> I can imagine the bar fights about the missing two bits.
>>>
>>> /BAH
>> And everybody knows: you can *not* buy much with two-bits these
>> days!!! ;-)
>
> 2 bits, 4 bits, 6 bits, a buck!
>
/BAH
Charlie Gibbs
writes:
Larry (reading): See the deer. Does the deer have any doe?
Curly: Yeah, two bucks!
(Moe smacks Curly.)
Q: What's the difference between beer nuts and deer nuts?
A: Beer nuts are $1.25, deer nuts are under a buck.
--
/~\ cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
jmfbahciv
> In article <hgnnj...@news2.newsguy.com>, jmfbahciv@aol (jmfbahciv)
> writes:
>
>> Walter Bushell wrote:
>>
>>> In article <hgj70p$rs4$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>>> Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> And everybody knows: you can *not* buy much with two-bits these
>>>> days!!! ;-)
>>> 2 bits, 4 bits, 6 bits, a buck!
>> You mean doe.
>
> Larry (reading): See the deer. Does the deer have any doe?
> Curly: Yeah, two bucks!
> (Moe smacks Curly.)
>
> Q: What's the difference between beer nuts and deer nuts?
> A: Beer nuts are $1.25, deer nuts are under a buck.
>
/BAH
Eric Chomko
Not really. You just like disagreeing with people. You think that it
makes you appear to be smarter than they are.
Eric Chomko
I know more than most! Here is a question for you. How much of DEC's
business income (i.e. profit or ROI) came from the mini market and
from the mainframe market? Simple percentage over time period will do.
I sure as hell know more about DEC's micro business than you do! Olsen
made a blunder with micros that DEC NEVER recovered from. Period!
>
> > And you don't know when she started.
>
> I only make the statement when people don't know what they are
> talking about.
>
As is your opinion. You speak your opinions as if they are facts. THAT
is a fallacy.
>
> >>> Because they made too many damn products of which the market segment
> >>> got lost in all the different product lines that were slightly
> >>> different. Just like Porshe!
> >> If that was really the problem, DEC would have become more profitable
> >> when they stopped selling any architecture but the VAX. As it turned
> >> out, that was DEC's peak after which they started declining.
>
> > What about the 4,200 different models of the MicroVax?
>
> You are exaggerating and I was talking about PDP-11s, not VAXes.
>
Yes, yes a tad...
Peter Flass
>
> Not really. You just like disagreeing with people. You think that it
> makes you appear to be smarter than they are.
If we agreed, these discussions would be a lot less fun.
Charles Richmond
> On Dec 20, 9:50 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
>> Charles Richmond wrote:
>>> jmfbahciv wrote:
>>>> Eric Chomko wrote:
>>>>> On Dec 18, 7:19 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
>>>>> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...]
>>>>>> <grin> It's a good thing that making Chomko rich is one of my
>>>>>> non-goals.
>>>>> Well my goal of making you non-rich makes us even. :)))
>>>> <grin> Not exactly.
>>> How about a "steel cage death match" between Eric Chomko and Barb???
>>> That could solve a *lot* of problems!!! ;-)
>> he's not worth my time. My corrections are for the purpose
>> of speaking through him (to readers who don't know), not at him.
>> He pulls this once/18 months.
>>
>
> Not really. You just like disagreeing with people. You think that it
> makes you appear to be smarter than they are.
Look up the word "captious"... I do *not* think that BAH is
captious, but I *do* know people who *are*...
Charles Richmond
"Stupid people surround themselves with smart people. Smart
people surround themselves with smart people who disagree with
them." -- Isaac Jaffe
jmfbahciv
> On Dec 20, 9:50 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
>> Charles Richmond wrote:
>>> jmfbahciv wrote:
>>>> Eric Chomko wrote:
>>>>> On Dec 18, 7:19 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
>>>>> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...]
>>>>>> <grin> It's a good thing that making Chomko rich is one of my
>>>>>> non-goals.
>>>>> Well my goal of making you non-rich makes us even. :)))
>>>> <grin> Not exactly.
>>> How about a "steel cage death match" between Eric Chomko and Barb???
>>> That could solve a *lot* of problems!!! ;-)
>> he's not worth my time. My corrections are for the purpose
>> of speaking through him (to readers who don't know), not at him.
>> He pulls this once/18 months.
>>
>
> Not really. You just like disagreeing with people. You think that it
> makes you appear to be smarter than they are.
<grin> You don't know what you're talking about.
/BAH
jmfbahciv
Nobody knows. A study was made and it looked like the mainframe
market brought in 70% of the mini market.
>
> I sure as hell know more about DEC's micro business than you do!
You only saw the business as a user.
>Olsen
> made a blunder with micros that DEC NEVER recovered from. Period!
>
Which proves my point.
>>> And you don't know when she started.
>> I only make the statement when people don't know what they are
>> talking about.
>>
>
> As is your opinion. You speak your opinions as if they are facts. THAT
> is a fallacy.
The fact that a PDP-10 was a mainframe is not an opinion.
<snip>
/BAH
jmfbahciv
suggestion.
/BAH
jmfbahciv
> On Dec 20, 9:50 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
>> Charles Richmond wrote:
>>> jmfbahciv wrote:
>>>> Eric Chomko wrote:
>>>>> On Dec 18, 7:19 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
>>>>> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...]
>>>>>> <grin> It's a good thing that making Chomko rich is one of my
>>>>>> non-goals.
>>>>> Well my goal of making you non-rich makes us even. :)))
>>>> <grin> Not exactly.
>>> How about a "steel cage death match" between Eric Chomko and Barb???
>>> That could solve a *lot* of problems!!! ;-)
>> he's not worth my time. My corrections are for the purpose
>> of speaking through him (to readers who don't know), not at him.
>> He pulls this once/18 months.
>>
>
> Not really. You just like disagreeing with people. You think that it
> makes you appear to be smarter than they are.
That's the problem you have. I am smarter than you are and you can't
handle the truth.
Now, PDP-10s were mainframes.
/BAH
Eric Chomko
I agree and disagree with what you typed. I agree in principle but
disagree to keep the subject at hand in proper context. :)
Eric Chomko
Wait, what are we designing?
Eric Chomko
> Eric Chomko wrote:
> > On Dec 20, 9:50 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
> >> Charles Richmond wrote:
> >>> jmfbahciv wrote:
> >>>> Eric Chomko wrote:
> >>>>> On Dec 18, 7:19 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
> >>>>> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...]
> >>>>>> <grin> It's a good thing that making Chomko rich is one of my
> >>>>>> non-goals.
> >>>>> Well my goal of making you non-rich makes us even. :)))
> >>>> <grin> Not exactly.
> >>> How about a "steel cage death match" between Eric Chomko and Barb???
> >>> That could solve a *lot* of problems!!! ;-)
> >> he's not worth my time. My corrections are for the purpose
> >> of speaking through him (to readers who don't know), not at him.
> >> He pulls this once/18 months.
>
> > Not really. You just like disagreeing with people. You think that it
> > makes you appear to be smarter than they are.
>
> That's the problem you have. I am smarter than you are and you can't
> handle the truth.
You keep believing both those things and I'll keep you at the
disadvantage.
>
> Now, PDP-10s were mainframes.
>
Yeah, I admitted that. So?
Eric Chomko
Alright that turns out to be 59% mini and 41% mainframe. Seems
reasonable.
>
> > I sure as hell know more about DEC's micro business than you do!
>
> You only saw the business as a user.
And a student and computer professional. I worked on several different
DEC systems over the years. I took several DEC training classes as
well. I never worked for DEC, but I was around from the very beginning
in the Micro business and remember Bill Gates and Steve Jobs and
Wozniak at the DC Computer Show in 1978 when nobody was rich and
famous, yet. gates looked like a little kid. But I digress.
> >Olsen
> > made a blunder with micros that DEC NEVER recovered from. Period!
>
> Which proves my point.
We have been around on this one. Yet you have never presented a
counter-argument that was valid.
> >>> And you don't know when she started.
> >> I only make the statement when people don't know what they are
> >> talking about.
>
> > As is your opinion. You speak your opinions as if they are facts. THAT
> > is a fallacy.
>
> The fact that a PDP-10 was a mainframe is not an opinion.
So was the PDP-6. Again, so what?
Why don't don't we talk about DECNET and how it helped or hindered DEC
over the years?
Was DEC slow to pick up TCP/IP and the Internet while pushing DECNET
or do you think they could coexist just fine?
Eric
jmfbahciv
In this thread, your retraining. :-)
/BAH
jmfbahciv
Sigh! No. 70% of our customers who bought minis, also had a
PDP-10. What most people didn't want to find out was which
came first. If the PDP-10 cost center actually brought in
all that mini business, then cancelling the -10 was going to be
a really stupid idea. So the higher level management, a.k.a.
Gordon Bell, ignored the datum.
>
>>> I sure as hell know more about DEC's micro business than you do!
>> You only saw the business as a user.
>
> And a student and computer professional. I worked on several different
> DEC systems over the years. I took several DEC training classes as
> well. I never worked for DEC,
Thus, you don't know the DEC business from the inside, but only
what you saw from the outside. And not very many humans, who
were customers, saw the inner workings.
>but I was around from the very beginning
> in the Micro business and remember Bill Gates and Steve Jobs and
> Wozniak at the DC Computer Show in 1978 when nobody was rich and
> famous, yet. gates looked like a little kid. But I digress.
>
>>> Olsen
>>> made a blunder with micros that DEC NEVER recovered from. Period!
>> Which proves my point.
>
> We have been around on this one. Yet you have never presented a
> counter-argument that was valid.
>
that's because you read everything I write with a big not in the
front. It's a very bad habit of yours.
>>>>> And you don't know when she started.
>>>> I only make the statement when people don't know what they are
>>>> talking about.
>>> As is your opinion. You speak your opinions as if they are facts. THAT
>>> is a fallacy.
>> The fact that a PDP-10 was a mainframe is not an opinion.
>
> So was the PDP-6. Again, so what?
>
> Why don't don't we talk about DECNET and how it helped or hindered DEC
> over the years?
> Was DEC slow to pick up TCP/IP and the Internet while pushing DECNET
> or do you think they could coexist just fine?
Do your homework first, and look up ANF-10.
/BAH
Morten Reistad
snip .. DEC20 market seems to bring in lots of mini business
>>> market brought in 70% of the mini market.
>>>
>>
>> Alright that turns out to be 59% mini and 41% mainframe. Seems
>> reasonable.
>
>Sigh! No. 70% of our customers who bought minis, also had a
>PDP-10. What most people didn't want to find out was which
>came first. If the PDP-10 cost center actually brought in
>all that mini business, then cancelling the -10 was going to be
>a really stupid idea. So the higher level management, a.k.a.
>Gordon Bell, ignored the datum.
[snip]
>>>> I sure as hell know more about DEC's micro business than you do!
>>> You only saw the business as a user.
>>
>> And a student and computer professional. I worked on several different
>> DEC systems over the years. I took several DEC training classes as
>> well. I never worked for DEC,
>
>Thus, you don't know the DEC business from the inside, but only
>what you saw from the outside. And not very many humans, who
>were customers, saw the inner workings.
>
>>but I was around from the very beginning
>> in the Micro business and remember Bill Gates and Steve Jobs and
>> Wozniak at the DC Computer Show in 1978 when nobody was rich and
>> famous, yet. gates looked like a little kid. But I digress.
>>
>>>> Olsen
>>>> made a blunder with micros that DEC NEVER recovered from. Period!
>>> Which proves my point.
You have to make mistakes in new businesses. Many mistakes. The
important point is to make them, and learn from them, and not put
prestige into them. In the micro business DEC failed on 3 of 3.
>> We have been around on this one. Yet you have never presented a
>> counter-argument that was valid.
IBM made many mistakes too. Even they should have made lots
more mistakes.
>
>that's because you read everything I write with a big not in the
>front. It's a very bad habit of yours.
>
>>> The fact that a PDP-10 was a mainframe is not an opinion.
>>
>> So was the PDP-6. Again, so what?
>>
>> Why don't don't we talk about DECNET and how it helped or hindered DEC
>> over the years?
>> Was DEC slow to pick up TCP/IP and the Internet while pushing DECNET
>> or do you think they could coexist just fine?
>
>Do your homework first, and look up ANF-10.
The 20 had all its users behind the pdp11, except for a handful
of die-hards using card decks.
-- mrr
jmfbahciv
> In article <hh2gf...@news1.newsguy.com>, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
>
> snip .. DEC20 market seems to bring in lots of mini business
And, before the -20 went out, the -10 helped penetrate the
geographical areas which were die-hard IBM areas.
<snip>
>>>>> Olsen
>>>>> made a blunder with micros that DEC NEVER recovered from. Period!
>>>> Which proves my point.
>
> You have to make mistakes in new businesses. Many mistakes.
Of course.
> The
> important point is to make them, and learn from them, and not put
> prestige into them. In the micro business DEC failed on 3 of 3.
That was the VAX mentality which started out not doing anything
the PDP-10 product line did. We've been through this one before.
<snip>
>>
>>>> The fact that a PDP-10 was a mainframe is not an opinion.
>>> So was the PDP-6. Again, so what?
>>>
>>> Why don't don't we talk about DECNET and how it helped or hindered DEC
>>> over the years?
>>> Was DEC slow to pick up TCP/IP and the Internet while pushing DECNET
>>> or do you think they could coexist just fine?
>> Do your homework first, and look up ANF-10.
>
> The 20 had all its users behind the pdp11,
Running sucky software. The full DECnet did not belong on an
PDP-11; as designed, it needed the computer power of a VAXeln.
RSX20-F was very limited w.r.t. all the jobs it had to do.
>except for a handful
> of die-hards using card decks.
Card decks on a -20?
/BAH
Morten Reistad
>Morten Reistad wrote:
>> In article <hh2gf...@news1.newsguy.com>, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
>>
>> snip .. DEC20 market seems to bring in lots of mini business
>> The 20 had all its users behind the pdp11,
>
>Running sucky software. The full DECnet did not belong on an
>PDP-11; as designed, it needed the computer power of a VAXeln.
>RSX20-F was very limited w.r.t. all the jobs it had to do.
>
>
>>except for a handful
>> of die-hards using card decks.
>
>Card decks on a -20?
This particular 20 got it's card reader busy with converting the
statistics Ragnar Frish got the Nobel for; originally assembled
on punched cards from ca 1932 until the 1960s, reconstructing full
time series from the late 1400's until modern statistics was available.
This was a mountain of punched cards. They didn't fit in one
standard container. The 20 wore out a few card readers reading these.
But DEC card readers were reasonably cheap, and the 20 handled card
input surprisingly well. There was a "card job" running at 1% cpu
when it was busy during card input.
So, the economies of Norway, Holland and England are charted in
detail for half a millennium or more. It is extremely useful to run
new models on these data. So it was worth wearing out a card reader.
-- mrr
Charles Richmond
> Morten Reistad wrote:
>
> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...]
>
>> except for a handful
>> of die-hards using card decks.
>
> Card decks on a -20?
>
;-)
At the university I attended, we had a DEC-20/50 with a card
reader *and* a line printer. Of course, *both* of these were at
the computer center, which was far removed from where most
students frequented. Most ran computer jobs from terminals or card
readers in *remotes*, and got their line printer output at those
remotes. Those line printers only connected to the IBM 370/155.
The line printer for the DEC-20/50 was a *drum" printer and only
printed 150 lines per minute (it *may* have been 300, I'm *not*
entirely sure after 30 years). Anyway it was slower than the band
printers used on the IBM.
I do *not* think that I ever read a deck of cards into the -20...
Charles Richmond
Do you have a rough estimate of *how* many cards it took to
contain all these data??? Is this data available on the internet
today???
Morten Reistad
Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>Morten Reistad wrote:
>> In article <hh7km...@news7.newsguy.com>, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
>
>Do you have a rough estimate of *how* many cards it took to
>contain all these data??? Is this data available on the internet
>today???
No, I haven't got a count. The time series contain around 20
variables monthly for 450 years, and lots of others on lower
frequencies.
Multiply by three countries, and you have several hundred thouasand
cards, They were full of annotations to the sources, written up
on the cards. These were carefully transcribed.
What should we have done without grad students?
The data is not completely freely available; they are sold
commercially, but are free for the media cost to all accredited
researchers. ssb.no has the time series, as does imf and oecd.
-- mrr
jmfbahciv
using PA1050? hmmm..and you'ld need a device driver.
/BAH
Eric Chomko
That seems an odd statistic. Somehow I'd think that the PDP-10 buyers
wouldn't have bought THAT many DEC minis.
> What most people didn't want to find out was which
> came first. If the PDP-10 cost center actually brought in
> all that mini business, then cancelling the -10 was going to be
> a really stupid idea. So the higher level management, a.k.a.
> Gordon Bell, ignored the datum.
>
Yes, you don't want your mini business killing your mainframe
business.
>
> >>> I sure as hell know more about DEC's micro business than you do!
> >> You only saw the business as a user.
>
> > And a student and computer professional. I worked on several different
> > DEC systems over the years. I took several DEC training classes as
> > well. I never worked for DEC,
>
> Thus, you don't know the DEC business from the inside, but only
> what you saw from the outside. And not very many humans, who
> were customers, saw the inner workings.
Yes, but I saw the whole industry from up close and personal from
about 1976 on. Back in those days when the micros were first coming
out you could keep track of every single new product in that market.
The computer store I worked for in McLean, VA near Tyson Corners used
to sell the LSI-11 chip set.
>
> >but I was around from the very beginning
> > in the Micro business and remember Bill Gates and Steve Jobs and
> > Wozniak at the DC Computer Show in 1978 when nobody was rich and
> > famous, yet. gates looked like a little kid. But I digress.
>
> >>> Olsen
> >>> made a blunder with micros that DEC NEVER recovered from. Period!
> >> Which proves my point.
>
> > We have been around on this one. Yet you have never presented a
> > counter-argument that was valid.
>
> that's because you read everything I write with a big not in the
> front. It's a very bad habit of yours.
You still have never answered why DEC made the LSI-11 in the 70s and
then a full decade later made the Alpha (early 90s) and that whole
time in between is what cost them the farm!
>
> >>>>> And you don't know when she started.
> >>>> I only make the statement when people don't know what they are
> >>>> talking about.
> >>> As is your opinion. You speak your opinions as if they are facts. THAT
> >>> is a fallacy.
> >> The fact that a PDP-10 was a mainframe is not an opinion.
>
> > So was the PDP-6. Again, so what?
>
> > Why don't don't we talk about DECNET and how it helped or hindered DEC
> > over the years?
> > Was DEC slow to pick up TCP/IP and the Internet while pushing DECNET
> > or do you think they could coexist just fine?
>
> Do your homework first, and look up ANF-10.
>
DEC was in the speaker business?! Who knew?
Don't tell you know nothing about DECNET?
Mark Crispin
> Kewl. What did you use for a spooler? TOPS-10's GALAXY's SPRINT
> using PA1050? hmmm..and you'ld need a device driver.
Punched cards were supported natively on the -20.
-- Mark --
http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.
Peter Flass
> On Dec 25, 9:12 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
>> Sigh! No. 70% of our customers who bought minis, also had a
>> PDP-10.
>
> That seems an odd statistic. Somehow I'd think that the PDP-10 buyers
> wouldn't have bought THAT many DEC minis.
Probably not. Who were the -10 customers? My WA guess would be
universities and companies that did lots of research. These customers
probably bought all kinds of DEC and non-DEC equipment.
>
>> What most people didn't want to find out was which
>> came first. If the PDP-10 cost center actually brought in
>> all that mini business, then cancelling the -10 was going to be
>> a really stupid idea. So the higher level management, a.k.a.
>> Gordon Bell, ignored the datum.
>>
>
> Yes, you don't want your mini business killing your mainframe
> business.
Obviously it has been shown that I don't understand the computer biz
very well, but ISTM that the two product lines should have been
complementary and re-enforced each other, except in limited situations.
I think the fact that they were made to seem competitive with each other
caused a lot of problems for DEC and others.
Eric Chomko
> Eric Chomko wrote:
> > On Dec 25, 9:12 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
> [snip]
> >> Sigh! No. 70% of our customers who bought minis, also had a
> >> PDP-10.
>
> > That seems an odd statistic. Somehow I'd think that the PDP-10 buyers
> > wouldn't have bought THAT many DEC minis.
>
> Probably not. Who were the -10 customers? My WA guess would be
> universities and companies that did lots of research. These customers
> probably bought all kinds of DEC and non-DEC equipment.
>
>
>
> >> What most people didn't want to find out was which
> >> came first. If the PDP-10 cost center actually brought in
> >> all that mini business, then cancelling the -10 was going to be
> >> a really stupid idea. So the higher level management, a.k.a.
> >> Gordon Bell, ignored the datum.
>
> > Yes, you don't want your mini business killing your mainframe
> > business.
>
> Obviously it has been shown that I don't understand the computer biz
> very well, but ISTM that the two product lines should have been
> complementary and re-enforced each other, except in limited situations.
Ask BAH if the mini and mainframe segments competed. I bet they did.
Like car dealerships. In fact DEC salesman sort of reminded me of car
salesman. :)
> I think the fact that they were made to seem competitive with each other
> caused a lot of problems for DEC and others.
Well think about it. From one point of view they want you to buy a
DEC-10 and pay lots for it. But rather than lose you to Data General
they'll sell you a PDP-11 instead.
Customer: Why didn't you tell me that in the first place when you were
trying to sell me a DEC-10?
DEC Salesman: Because I didn't know you were so poor in the
beginning.
Customer: Well if I were rich I would have gone to IBM in the first
place!
Peter Flass
> On Dec 28, 2:56 pm, Peter Flass <Peter_Fl...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Well think about it. From one point of view they want you to buy a
> DEC-10 and pay lots for it. But rather than lose you to Data General
> they'll sell you a PDP-11 instead.
Maybe if you were a fairly dumb customer. The amount and type of work
the two machines could do was completely different. If you didn't
understand your workload well enough to know what you needed, I'd try to
sell you anything.
Christopher C. Stacy
> The computer store I worked for in McLean, VA near Tyson Corners used
> to sell the LSI-11 chip set.
I worked there.
jmfbahciv
Think about a university. The computer center buys a PDP-10
which was attended with PDP-8s and PDP-11s for the comm. Other
departments gain on-line experience and want one for themselves.
Since they don't have the budget for dozens of PDP-10s, they
buy hundreds of PDP-8s and PDP-11s and whatever else strikes
their fancy for their research.
Now, there are thousands of kiddies whose first exposure to computing
is the PDP-10 and the minis. When they get out into the real world,
they recommend and buy PDPs. Since it takes a decade+ for most
to get into a position where they can sign a purchase order for
a million dollar machine, they buy the minis earlier or talk
their managers into buying minis.
Now multiply those thousands of kiddies/university by the number
of universities who bought a PDP-10.
>
>> What most people didn't want to find out was which
>> came first. If the PDP-10 cost center actually brought in
>> all that mini business, then cancelling the -10 was going to be
>> a really stupid idea. So the higher level management, a.k.a.
>> Gordon Bell, ignored the datum.
>>
>
> Yes, you don't want your mini business killing your mainframe
> business.
You don't learn, do you?
>
>>>>> I sure as hell know more about DEC's micro business than you do!
>>>> You only saw the business as a user.
>>> And a student and computer professional. I worked on several different
>>> DEC systems over the years. I took several DEC training classes as
>>> well. I never worked for DEC,
>> Thus, you don't know the DEC business from the inside, but only
>> what you saw from the outside. And not very many humans, who
>> were customers, saw the inner workings.
>
> Yes, but I saw the whole industry from up close and personal from
> about 1976 on.
You did not see DEC up close. It looks like you saw most of
that time through a salesman's eyes. I won't comment on _that_!
>Back in those days when the micros were first coming
> out you could keep track of every single new product in that market.
So?
> The computer store I worked for in McLean, VA near Tyson Corners used
> to sell the LSI-11 chip set.
And?
>
>>> but I was around from the very beginning
>>> in the Micro business and remember Bill Gates and Steve Jobs and
>>> Wozniak at the DC Computer Show in 1978 when nobody was rich and
>>> famous, yet. gates looked like a little kid. But I digress.
>>>>> Olsen
>>>>> made a blunder with micros that DEC NEVER recovered from. Period!
>>>> Which proves my point.
>>> We have been around on this one. Yet you have never presented a
>>> counter-argument that was valid.
>> that's because you read everything I write with a big not in the
>> front. It's a very bad habit of yours.
>
> You still have never answered why DEC made the LSI-11 in the 70s and
> then a full decade later made the Alpha (early 90s) and that whole
> time in between is what cost them the farm!
Huh? I've discussed that era. You really should learn to listen.
>
<snip snotty nose>
/BAH
jmfbahciv
> On Mon, 28 Dec 2009, jmfbahciv posted:
>> Kewl. What did you use for a spooler? TOPS-10's GALAXY's SPRINT
>> using PA1050? hmmm..and you'ld need a device driver.
>
> Punched cards were supported natively on the -20.
>
remember a SPRINT on the tapes. Was there a SPROUT?
/BAH
jmfbahciv
> Eric Chomko wrote:
>> On Dec 25, 9:12 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
> [snip]
>>> Sigh! No. 70% of our customers who bought minis, also had a
>>> PDP-10.
>>
>> That seems an odd statistic. Somehow I'd think that the PDP-10 buyers
>> wouldn't have bought THAT many DEC minis.
>
> Probably not. Who were the -10 customers? My WA guess would be
> universities and companies that did lots of research.
And governments.
> These customers
> probably bought all kinds of DEC and non-DEC equipment.
Yep.
>
>>
>>> What most people didn't want to find out was which
>>> came first. If the PDP-10 cost center actually brought in
>>> all that mini business, then cancelling the -10 was going to be
>>> a really stupid idea. So the higher level management, a.k.a.
>>> Gordon Bell, ignored the datum.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, you don't want your mini business killing your mainframe
>> business.
>
> Obviously it has been shown that I don't understand the computer biz
> very well, but ISTM that the two product lines should have been
> complementary and re-enforced each other, except in limited situations.
And they did. However, the sales structure within DEC sucked.
> I think the fact that they were made to seem competitive with each other
> caused a lot of problems for DEC and others.
Note that the LCG product line did not get credit for the minis they
sold. I never understood how one could get a clear picture of the
biz.
/BAH
jmfbahciv
via bids, not by your idea of sales.
/BAH
Mark Crispin
>> Punched cards were supported natively on the -20.
> OK. thanks. I didn't do packaging on the -20. I didn't
> remember a SPRINT on the tapes. Was there a SPROUT?
Yes, there was both SPRINT and SPROUT.
IIRC, the card reader was an FE device, but the card punch required an I/O
bus (as did paper tape, plotter, and ARPAnet). Most -10s had an I/O bus,
but it was an option on the -20.
Eric Chomko
You'd have made a fine DEC salesman.
Eric Chomko
And how were the PDP-11s sold? Like cars? DEC salesmen were
notoriously pushy.
Eric Chomko
> Peter Flass wrote:
> > Eric Chomko wrote:
> >> On Dec 25, 9:12 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
> > [snip]
> >>> Sigh! No. 70% of our customers who bought minis, also had a
> >>> PDP-10.
>
> >> That seems an odd statistic. Somehow I'd think that the PDP-10 buyers
> >> wouldn't have bought THAT many DEC minis.
>
> > Probably not. Who were the -10 customers? My WA guess would be
> > universities and companies that did lots of research.
>
> And governments.
Government agencies. UNIVAC sold more to foreign governments.
>
> > These customers
> > probably bought all kinds of DEC and non-DEC equipment.
>
> Yep.
>
>
>
> >>> What most people didn't want to find out was which
> >>> came first. If the PDP-10 cost center actually brought in
> >>> all that mini business, then cancelling the -10 was going to be
> >>> a really stupid idea. So the higher level management, a.k.a.
> >>> Gordon Bell, ignored the datum.
>
> >> Yes, you don't want your mini business killing your mainframe
> >> business.
>
> > Obviously it has been shown that I don't understand the computer biz
> > very well, but ISTM that the two product lines should have been
> > complementary and re-enforced each other, except in limited situations.
>
> And they did. However, the sales structure within DEC sucked.
No argument there!
>
> > I think the fact that they were made to seem competitive with each other
> > caused a lot of problems for DEC and others.
>
> Note that the LCG product line did not get credit for the minis they
> sold. I never understood how one could get a clear picture of the
> biz.
>
> /BAH
DEC salesmen were true salesmen and not real computer people. DEC
looked for those types to sell
their products.
Eric Chomko
> Eric Chomko <pne.cho...@comcast.net> writes:
> > The computer store I worked for in McLean, VA near Tyson Corners used
> > to sell the LSI-11 chip set.
>
> I worked there.
Computer Systems Store? Chuck Suit was one of the owners. I was there
from 1977 to 1979 when they sold the company to the Georgetown
Computer Emporium.
We sold Commodore PETS and SOL-20s primarily. I also sold the one
Apple II we had to a guy from MD. CompterLand came in around the
corner and really but a hurt on our business.
Eric Chomko
Not how it was at U of MD. We had two UNIVAC 1100s (1106 turned
1100/40, and 1108) as mainframes and two PDP-11s (40 and 45) for our
OS class. No PDP-10 at all. Physics/Engineering had an IBM 360 (don't
recall the model).
>
> Now, there are thousands of kiddies whose first exposure to computing
> is the PDP-10 and the minis.
Err no. A Honeywell 600 and an Interdata 7/16, then I got my SWTPC
6800.
> When they get out into the real world, they recommend and buy PDPs.
Not really. At GSFC where I work, there were a few PDP-11s. They even
had a couple in the excess warehouse until recently, but I'd say that
DEC was averagely represented, Vaxes, sorry Vaxen, here and there,
MicroVaxen as well, but not like all over the place, if you know what
I mean.
> Since it takes a decade+ for most
> to get into a position where they can sign a purchase order for
> a million dollar machine, they buy the minis earlier or talk
> their managers into buying minis.
>
> Now multiply those thousands of kiddies/university by the number
> of universities who bought a PDP-10.
>
And? Was that supposed to be a success story?
Seems to me that VAX outsold DEC-10s/20s. I could be wrong.
>
> >> What most people didn't want to find out was which
> >> came first. If the PDP-10 cost center actually brought in
> >> all that mini business, then cancelling the -10 was going to be
> >> a really stupid idea. So the higher level management, a.k.a.
> >> Gordon Bell, ignored the datum.
>
> > Yes, you don't want your mini business killing your mainframe
> > business.
>
> You don't learn, do you?
>
Sure I do. I watched micros kill them both for DEC!
DEC should have owned the workstation market, but instead it went to
HP, SGI, Sun, and IBM.
DEC got into it way to late with Alpha and went under as a result.
Hardware company, software company, computer company? Which one was
it?
>
> >>>>> I sure as hell know more about DEC's micro business than you do!
> >>>> You only saw the business as a user.
> >>> And a student and computer professional. I worked on several different
> >>> DEC systems over the years. I took several DEC training classes as
> >>> well. I never worked for DEC,
> >> Thus, you don't know the DEC business from the inside, but only
> >> what you saw from the outside. And not very many humans, who
> >> were customers, saw the inner workings.
>
> > Yes, but I saw the whole industry from up close and personal from
> > about 1976 on.
>
> You did not see DEC up close.
Yes I did! I was there when DEC made the deal with Microsoft to run
VMS on Windows NT, and the DEC training facility in Landover MD and
the DEC (now HP) facility In Greenbelt, MD were regular visiting spots
for me. I recall the whole OSF thing and still have the Alpha chip
manual, etc. No I wasn't an employee that knows all the bitches about
time cards and stupid holiday schedule (that would be CSC for me), but
I sure as hell learned from DEC what I needed to know and I probably
know DCL better than you do!
> It looks like you saw most of
> that time through a salesman's eyes. I won't comment on _that_!
Uh, no. Programmer with an interest in hardware. But I DID know the
sales end of the biz, as you put it. I used to work in sales while in
college, in several different microcomputer stores, all before the IBM
PC.
>
> >Back in those days when the micros were first coming
> > out you could keep track of every single new product in that market.
>
> So?
That was when Kenneth Olsen scoffed at micros with his famous comment
about them being toys. That was about as dumb as Gates claiming that
640K of RAM was all one needed. Or IBM's Watson Sr. saying that the
world needed only 5 computers!
>
> > The computer store I worked for in McLean, VA near Tyson Corners used
> > to sell the LSI-11 chip set.
>
> And?
>
I recall the DEC guy coming by and teaching us all about the LS-11
chipset. That was actually fun and the guy DID know his stuff. But you
could tell that DEC was committed to it because they didn't make an
affordable DEC computer around it like TI did with their 9900 CPU.
>
>
>
> >>> but I was around from the very beginning
> >>> in the Micro business and remember Bill Gates and Steve Jobs and
> >>> Wozniak at the DC Computer Show in 1978 when nobody was rich and
> >>> famous, yet. gates looked like a little kid. But I digress.
> >>>>> Olsen
> >>>>> made a blunder with micros that DEC NEVER recovered from. Period!
> >>>> Which proves my point.
> >>> We have been around on this one. Yet you have never presented a
> >>> counter-argument that was valid.
> >> that's because you read everything I write with a big not in the
> >> front. It's a very bad habit of yours.
>
> > You still have never answered why DEC made the LSI-11 in the 70s and
> > then a full decade later made the Alpha (early 90s) and that whole
> > time in between is what cost them the farm!
>
> Huh? I've discussed that era. You really should learn to listen.
>
The point is that DEC went dormant with chips for over a decade and it
cost them right now!
What is the connection between the LSI-11 and the Alpha? None other
than they came from DEC.
Now, look at x86 and the latest Pentium. THAT is why Intel is still
here and DEC is gone.
Eric
Eric Chomko
>
>
>
> <snip snotty nose>
>
gesundheit!
> /BAH
Christopher C. Stacy
> On Dec 29, 6:48�am, cst...@news.dtpq.com (Christopher C. Stacy) wrote:
>> Eric Chomko <pne.cho...@comcast.net> writes:
>> > The computer store I worked for in McLean, VA near Tyson Corners used
>> > to sell the LSI-11 chip set.
>>
>> I worked there.
>
> Computer Systems Store? Chuck Suit was one of the owners. I was there
> from 1977 to 1979 when they sold the company to the Georgetown
> Computer Emporium.
Yup!
jmfbahciv
> On Tue, 29 Dec 2009, jmfbahciv posted:
>>> Punched cards were supported natively on the -20.
>> OK. thanks. I didn't do packaging on the -20. I didn't
>> remember a SPRINT on the tapes. Was there a SPROUT?
>
> Yes, there was both SPRINT and SPROUT.
>
> IIRC, the card reader was an FE device,
I remember that but not any on the -10 itself.
>but the card punch required an
> I/O bus (as did paper tape, plotter, and ARPAnet). Most -10s had an I/O
> bus, but it was an option on the -20.
>
I was surprised at the card support on a TOPS-20 PDP-10 because
we didn't have any hooked up in-house. It was our policy
to keep at least one of anything we supported hooked up. There
were no card devices on the -20. I don't remember when
the plotter hooked up on the TOPS-10 system went away.
/BAH
jmfbahciv
> On Dec 29, 7:36 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
>> Peter Flass wrote:
>>> Eric Chomko wrote:
>>>> On Dec 25, 9:12 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>>>> Sigh! No. 70% of our customers who bought minis, also had a
>>>>> PDP-10.
>>>> That seems an odd statistic. Somehow I'd think that the PDP-10 buyers
>>>> wouldn't have bought THAT many DEC minis.
>>> Probably not. Who were the -10 customers? My WA guess would be
>>> universities and companies that did lots of research.
>> And governments.
>
> Government agencies. UNIVAC sold more to foreign governments.
Wrong. Governments, including the US government.
/BAH
jmfbahciv
Which proves that you had no DEC exposure.
>
>> When they get out into the real world, they recommend and buy PDPs.
>
> Not really. At GSFC where I work, there were a few PDP-11s. They even
> had a couple in the excess warehouse until recently, but I'd say that
> DEC was averagely represented, Vaxes, sorry Vaxen, here and there,
> MicroVaxen as well, but not like all over the place, if you know what
> I mean.
Which shows that your view of Digital was from way outside its
business.
>
>> Since it takes a decade+ for most
>> to get into a position where they can sign a purchase order for
>> a million dollar machine, they buy the minis earlier or talk
>> their managers into buying minis.
>>
>> Now multiply those thousands of kiddies/university by the number
>> of universities who bought a PDP-10.
>>
>
> And? Was that supposed to be a success story?
> Seems to me that VAX outsold DEC-10s/20s. I could be wrong.
>
Since when does a count of CPUs measure the number of users
exposed to PDP-10s during the 70s?
>>>> What most people didn't want to find out was which
>>>> came first. If the PDP-10 cost center actually brought in
>>>> all that mini business, then cancelling the -10 was going to be
>>>> a really stupid idea. So the higher level management, a.k.a.
>>>> Gordon Bell, ignored the datum.
>>> Yes, you don't want your mini business killing your mainframe
>>> business.
>> You don't learn, do you?
>>
>
> Sure I do. I watched micros kill them both for DEC!
>
> DEC should have owned the workstation market, but instead it went to
> HP, SGI, Sun, and IBM.
> DEC got into it way to late with Alpha and went under as a result.
that is merely your opinion. Wang owned the workstation market.
Do you know what a workstation was in the 80s? It was not
a PC.
>
> Hardware company, software company, computer company? Which one was
> it?
DEC's business was a hardware business. All trade-offs were based
on that.
>
>>>>>>> I sure as hell know more about DEC's micro business than you do!
>>>>>> You only saw the business as a user.
>>>>> And a student and computer professional. I worked on several different
>>>>> DEC systems over the years. I took several DEC training classes as
>>>>> well. I never worked for DEC,
>>>> Thus, you don't know the DEC business from the inside, but only
>>>> what you saw from the outside. And not very many humans, who
>>>> were customers, saw the inner workings.
>>> Yes, but I saw the whole industry from up close and personal from
>>> about 1976 on.
>> You did not see DEC up close.
>
> Yes I did! I was there when DEC made the deal with Microsoft to run
> VMS on Windows NT,
Which was in the 90s. Jim was part of that. This deal was designed
for failure.
>and the DEC training facility in Landover MD and
> the DEC (now HP) facility In Greenbelt, MD were regular visiting spots
> for me. I recall the whole OSF thing and still have the Alpha chip
> manual, etc. No I wasn't an employee that knows all the bitches about
> time cards and stupid holiday schedule (that would be CSC for me), but
> I sure as hell learned from DEC what I needed to know and I probably
> know DCL better than you do!
>
And you had absolutely no exposure to the DEC business before the
VAXes. So you don't know what went on nor do you have any idea
why certain decisions were made nor when they were made. Yet
you refuse to learn from people who were there and made
the designs, decisions, and distributions.
>> It looks like you saw most of
>> that time through a salesman's eyes. I won't comment on _that_!
>
> Uh, no. Programmer with an interest in hardware. But I DID know the
> sales end of the biz, as you put it.
But not DEC's.
> I used to work in sales while in
> college, in several different microcomputer stores, all before the IBM
> PC.
Right. All PC stuff. You don't have any idea what goes on in
the mainframe biz. You don't even know about the comm biz.
/BAH
Eric Chomko
> Eric Chomko <pne.cho...@comcast.net> writes:
> > On Dec 29, 6:48 am, cst...@news.dtpq.com (Christopher C. Stacy) wrote:
> >> Eric Chomko <pne.cho...@comcast.net> writes:
> >> > The computer store I worked for in McLean, VA near Tyson Corners used
> >> > to sell the LSI-11 chip set.
>
> >> I worked there.
>
> > Computer Systems Store? Chuck Suit was one of the owners. I was there
> > from 1977 to 1979 when they sold the company to the Georgetown
> > Computer Emporium.
>
> Yup!
When were you there? Do you remember Lee Mull and Becky Cullen? I
don't recall you, though.
Also, there was the IBM tech that moonlighted for the CSS. I worked
mostly afternoons like Tuesdays, Thursdays and Fridays and all day
Saturday. Also, the Georgetown Computer Emporium manager was a guy
named Lee Bristol and the CSS manager was a guy named Eric Dorn. Damn,
I can't believe I remember all that from 30 years ago!
Eric Chomko
Because I didn't own one?!? haha
I have several DEC PCs. One is a laptop. All x86 clones. Hey, I still
have my PDP-11 book!
I took two OS classes on PDP-11s and wrote my own OS for that machine!
Stripped down but still several 1000 lines of code and it worked!
Device drivers, spooler, exec, scheduler, process manager, file
manager. Hell, BAH, I bet I could have done your job, from back in the
day!
>
> >> When they get out into the real world, they recommend and buy PDPs.
>
> > Not really. At GSFC where I work, there were a few PDP-11s. They even
> > had a couple in the excess warehouse until recently, but I'd say that
> > DEC was averagely represented, Vaxes, sorry Vaxen, here and there,
> > MicroVaxen as well, but not like all over the place, if you know what
> > I mean.
>
> Which shows that your view of Digital was from way outside its
> business.
>
The point is that as good as DEC was, there was good competition as
well.
>
> >> Since it takes a decade+ for most
> >> to get into a position where they can sign a purchase order for
> >> a million dollar machine, they buy the minis earlier or talk
> >> their managers into buying minis.
>
> >> Now multiply those thousands of kiddies/university by the number
> >> of universities who bought a PDP-10.
>
> > And? Was that supposed to be a success story?
> > Seems to me that VAX outsold DEC-10s/20s. I could be wrong.
>
> Since when does a count of CPUs measure the number of users
> exposed to PDP-10s during the 70s?
A lot! The more machines sold the more people used them. Works sort of
like cars as well.
> >>>> What most people didn't want to find out was which
> >>>> came first. If the PDP-10 cost center actually brought in
> >>>> all that mini business, then cancelling the -10 was going to be
> >>>> a really stupid idea. So the higher level management, a.k.a.
> >>>> Gordon Bell, ignored the datum.
> >>> Yes, you don't want your mini business killing your mainframe
> >>> business.
> >> You don't learn, do you?
>
> > Sure I do. I watched micros kill them both for DEC!
>
> > DEC should have owned the workstation market, but instead it went to
> > HP, SGI, Sun, and IBM.
> > DEC got into it way to late with Alpha and went under as a result.
>
> that is merely your opinion. Wang owned the workstation market.
Maybe early on but not by the time it went belly up!
What version of Unix did Wang run?
> Do you know what a workstation was in the 80s? It was not
> a PC.
No shit! Workstations tended to run some flavor of Unix. They all
tended to have built-in
networking using ethernet. WSs had more RAM and disk space than PCs.
PCs ran DOS or a lousy version of Windows and used modems.
It wasn't until about 10 years ago that the the PC became as advanced
as a workstation, thus killing that market. I can install Linux or
Solaris on an x86 box with built-in ethernet now and have done so.
>
> > Hardware company, software company, computer company? Which one was
> > it?
>
> DEC's business was a hardware business. All trade-offs were based
> on that.
Tell that to all the folks working on VMS.
Surely you have seen the pie charts related to the cost of computers
where in the beginning the cost of computers was 90% HW and 10% SW and
then to evolve to 10% HW and 90% SW.
>
> >>>>>>> I sure as hell know more about DEC's micro business than you do!
> >>>>>> You only saw the business as a user.
> >>>>> And a student and computer professional. I worked on several different
> >>>>> DEC systems over the years. I took several DEC training classes as
> >>>>> well. I never worked for DEC,
> >>>> Thus, you don't know the DEC business from the inside, but only
> >>>> what you saw from the outside. And not very many humans, who
> >>>> were customers, saw the inner workings.
> >>> Yes, but I saw the whole industry from up close and personal from
> >>> about 1976 on.
> >> You did not see DEC up close.
>
> > Yes I did! I was there when DEC made the deal with Microsoft to run
> > VMS on Windows NT,
>
> Which was in the 90s. Jim was part of that. This deal was designed
> for failure.
Designed to fail? Why? DEC was not in a position to design to fail,
look at the result!
>
> >and the DEC training facility in Landover MD and
> > the DEC (now HP) facility In Greenbelt, MD were regular visiting spots
> > for me. I recall the whole OSF thing and still have the Alpha chip
> > manual, etc. No I wasn't an employee that knows all the bitches about
> > time cards and stupid holiday schedule (that would be CSC for me), but
> > I sure as hell learned from DEC what I needed to know and I probably
> > know DCL better than you do!
>
> And you had absolutely no exposure to the DEC business before the
> VAXes.
PDP-11s in college. My own OS. 1000s of lines of assembly language
code.
> So you don't know what went on nor do you have any idea
> why certain decisions were made nor when they were made. Yet
> you refuse to learn from people who were there and made
> the designs, decisions, and distributions.
How long were you at DEC? From when to when?
First time I used a DEC system was 1975. I fired up the DEC laptop a
few weeks ago.
>
> >> It looks like you saw most of
> >> that time through a salesman's eyes. I won't comment on _that_!
>
> > Uh, no. Programmer with an interest in hardware. But I DID know the
> > sales end of the biz, as you put it.
>
> But not DEC's.
I have DEC experience on my resume and have had it there for 30 years!
BAH, I am not really sure what you did for DEC, but if it was related
to programming, then I am certain I could have done your job!
> > I used to work in sales while in
> > college, in several different microcomputer stores, all before the IBM
> > PC.
>
> Right. All PC stuff. You don't have any idea what goes on in
> the mainframe biz. You don't even know about the comm biz.
>
Actually no. I recently worked on an IBM p500 series machine running
AIX.
It is a mainframe.
I wrote a comm program that linked a SEL/Gould/Encore 32 to MicroVaxes
using a third party tool called QNET. I had to call QNET subroutines
in FORTRAN to make it work. Not really easy. Not a lot of help from
the systems if you know what I mean. Lots of guess work.
I'll never forget the day that the system kept hanging. We spent days
trying to figure it out. The prick tester was enjoying me and the
others squirming to the point where he said I guess you're not going
on vacation and have to come in over the weekend to fix this thing
since it is still not working. At exactly 5pm on Friday I said change
the batch login params from user to system (the equivalent to 'root')
and it worked. We had a damn permissions problem and with nothing from
the system telling us that we had that problem, it simply hung.
Customer told me to have a nice vacation and I did! It was one of my
best days at work.
What did you do? Operations? Compile stuff? Seems you really never
told us what you did for DEC.
des...@verizon.net
> On Dec 30, 9:05�am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv@aol> wrote:
>> Eric Chomko wrote:
>> > Sure I do. I watched micros kill them both for DEC!
>>
>> > DEC should have owned the workstation market, but instead it went to
>> > HP, SGI, Sun, and IBM.
>> > DEC got into it way to late with Alpha and went under as a result.
>>
>> that is merely your opinion. �Wang owned the workstation market.
>
> Maybe early on but not by the time it went belly up!
> What version of Unix did Wang run?
Retorical?
Wang systems ran Wang/VS. Not a UNIX.
One of the more impressive OSs I've had the pleasure of using.
Internally, the machines seemed to be modeled on Sys/360 but
the OS did everything right where MVS and DOS/VS did everything
wrong.
First principle of Wang/VS is that every operating system service
had to be callable from every supported language. Want to see the print
jobs on the queue? Theres a call for it.
The most eye opening experience I had was running my first test of some
ported code. The was submitted and the next thing on my screen was a
message saying a S0C7 had occurred. MVS users will be familiar with
that but that message is usually accompanied with a large dump on MVS.
On Wang/VS I saw S0C7 - data exeception. On the same screen were the
input and output fields of the instruction, the instruction and line
number in the COBOL source code.
The options on the screen were, type in new data for either field and
continue or launch the editor to fix the line shown.
All these years later and IBM has not caught up.
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
des...@verizon.net writes:
> One of the more impressive OSs I've had the pleasure of using.
> Internally, the machines seemed to be modeled on Sys/360 but
> the OS did everything right where MVS and DOS/VS did everything
> wrong.
>
> First principle of Wang/VS is that every operating system service
> had to be callable from every supported language. Want to see the print
> jobs on the queue? Theres a call for it.
>
> The most eye opening experience I had was running my first test of some
> ported code. The was submitted and the next thing on my screen was a
> message saying a S0C7 had occurred. MVS users will be familiar with
> that but that message is usually accompanied with a large dump on MVS.
> On Wang/VS I saw S0C7 - data exeception. On the same screen were the
> input and output fields of the instruction, the instruction and line
> number in the COBOL source code.
>
> The options on the screen were, type in new data for either field and
> continue or launch the editor to fix the line shown.
all cms kernel calls use to be "svc202" with a tokenized parameter list
... it looked the same regardless of language that made the call or if
it was entered from the command line (and then tokenized by the commnad
line interface).
kernel processing for svc202 then was identical regardless of where the
svc202 originated from. kernel would then run svc202 command processing
thru standard search ... first was it in abbreviation/synonym table,
then was it EXEC file (batch commands) somewhere in search order, then
was it MODULE file (binary executable) somewhere in search order, and
finally was it an internal kernel system service.
it made everything callable from everywhere ... but it also made it
possible to do customized processing of anything ... aka making a
personal EXEC file customized front-end for some kernel system service
(by giving it the same name).
in the morph from cp67 cms (cambridge monitor system) to vm370 cms
(conversational monitor system) .. svc203 was added that was
specifically for invoking internal kernel services ... and bypassed all
the search lookup gorp. svc203 had more binary parameter list as opposed
to the svc202 symbolic tokenized parameter list (which required quite a
bit more decoding overhead).
following shows an assembler program making svc202 call (generated by
the HNDINT assembler macro) to kernel service to wait on interrupt from
card reader. It also shows making same kernel call implemented directly
from EXEC file.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004b.html#56 Oldest running code.
... much later Wang/VS apparently was looking to get out of the hardware
business and were convinced to relogo RS/6000 (801 rios risc
processors), porting Wang/VS to RS/6000 (hardware, not on top of aix).
Some from austin workstation group left and joined wang.
--
40+yrs virtualization experience (since Jan68), online at home since Mar1970
des...@verizon.net
> des...@verizon.net writes:
>> One of the more impressive OSs I've had the pleasure of using.
>> Internally, the machines seemed to be modeled on Sys/360 but
>> the OS did everything right where MVS and DOS/VS did everything
>> wrong.
>>
>> First principle of Wang/VS is that every operating system service
>> had to be callable from every supported language. Want to see the print
>> jobs on the queue? Theres a call for it.
>>
>> The most eye opening experience I had was running my first test of some
>> ported code. The was submitted and the next thing on my screen was a
>> message saying a S0C7 had occurred. MVS users will be familiar with
>> that but that message is usually accompanied with a large dump on MVS.
>> On Wang/VS I saw S0C7 - data exeception. On the same screen were the
>> input and output fields of the instruction, the instruction and line
>> number in the COBOL source code.
>>
>> The options on the screen were, type in new data for either field and
>> continue or launch the editor to fix the line shown.
>
> following shows an assembler program making svc202 call (generated by
> the HNDINT assembler macro) to kernel service to wait on interrupt from
> card reader. It also shows making same kernel call implemented directly
> from EXEC file.
> http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004b.html#56 Oldest running code.
That example passes a subroutine address as a parameter and then has
the svc call the subroutine.
The Wang/VS calls were designed to be used from any language.
As I remember, the docs showed how to use each call from COBOL, RPG, and
BASIC.
> ... much later Wang/VS apparently was looking to get out of the hardware
> business and were convinced to relogo RS/6000 (801 rios risc
> processors), porting Wang/VS to RS/6000 (hardware, not on top of aix).
> Some from austin workstation group left and joined wang.
I'm not sure what killed them off but they started talking about
replacing their terminals with PCs and then soon after died.
I'd guess the PCs did them in.
Quadibloc
> 2 bits, 4 bits, 6 bits, a buck!
But what with the price of silver these days, dollars aren't really
comparable to pieces of eight.
John Savard
Walter Bushell
<e338020c-f5b8-435e...@upsg2000gro.googlegroups.com>,
Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
What's reality got to do with doggeletic license when you need a rhyme?
It's been a long time since "Shave and a haircut 2 bits", but the memory
and phrase lingers on.
--
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
jmfbahciv
<snip>
>
>> ... much later Wang/VS apparently was looking to get out of the hardware
>> business and were convinced to relogo RS/6000 (801 rios risc
>> processors), porting Wang/VS to RS/6000 (hardware, not on top of aix).
>> Some from austin workstation group left and joined wang.
>
> I'm not sure what killed them off but they started talking about
> replacing their terminals with PCs and then soon after died.
> I'd guess the PCs did them in.
They were overwhelmed with their support policy. They never got "rid"
of old version support. If a customer was running [now-10 versions]
their system would be supported as is. To support 1000 customers
who are running 1000 different flavors of any level of software
ever shipped would have made any software maintainer completely,
utterly nuts. Just trying to reproduce the problem in-house
would have been impossible.
/BAH
Pat Farrell
> Wang systems ran Wang/VS. Not a UNIX.
All of the production systems for sure.
Wang did announce that it was part of the Open88 group using Motorola
88000 systems and standard backplanes. Used some flavors of BSD. Not
sure if they ever actually shipped any.
Folklore has it that An Wang invented the magnetic core memory, and thus
Wang had a right cross patent liscening deal with IBM. They had a ton of
engineers and were doing a lot of good stuff.
But they completely missed the PC revolution, just like DEC
--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/
Charles Richmond
> des...@verizon.net wrote:
>> Wang systems ran Wang/VS. Not a UNIX.
>
> All of the production systems for sure.
> Wang did announce that it was part of the Open88 group using Motorola
> 88000 systems and standard backplanes. Used some flavors of BSD. Not
> sure if they ever actually shipped any.
>
> Folklore has it that An Wang invented the magnetic core memory, and thus
> Wang had a right cross patent liscening deal with IBM. They had a ton of
> engineers and were doing a lot of good stuff.
>
It used to confuse me, but now I think I understand. An Wang
invented the "magnetic core memory", but J.W. Forrester invented
the "core plane". Well, it must be more complicated that that:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_core_memory
> But they completely missed the PC revolution, just like DEC
>
...and just like Computer Automation, who used to sell a computer
on a single board OEM to companies who wanted to incorporate that
computer into their machines.
--
+----------------------------------------+
| Charles and Francis Richmond |
| |
| plano dot net at aquaporin4 dot com |
+----------------------------------------+
jmfbahciv
people understand that PC business was not the only business
in the world?
/BAH