Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Last Word on Dennis Ritchie
24 views
Skip to first unread message
Message has been deleted
jmfbahciv
Oct 23, 2011, 10:11:28 AM10/23/11
to
August West wrote:
>
> The entity calling itself hda wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 13:01:47 +0100, Frederick Williams
>> <freddyw...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>>I was alarmed to hear Bill Thompson call himself a computer scientist.
>>>I know journalist aren't too concerned about the truth, but you'd think
>>>they'd know the truth about themselves.
>>
>> And there is just mathematics or computer engineering. What science ?
>> To me DMR was a very fine and brilliant computer engineer.
>
> It's just a label; a branch of applied maths, like physics; not really
> worth getting worked up about. And I'd say dmr was more of mathematician
> that a computer engineer - unlike ken he never built any machines, just
> software, and his doctorate was in complexity theory.
>
He started out in physics.
/BAH
>
> The entity calling itself hda wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 13:01:47 +0100, Frederick Williams
>> <freddyw...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>
>>>I was alarmed to hear Bill Thompson call himself a computer scientist.
>>>I know journalist aren't too concerned about the truth, but you'd think
>>>they'd know the truth about themselves.
>>
>> And there is just mathematics or computer engineering. What science ?
>> To me DMR was a very fine and brilliant computer engineer.
>
> It's just a label; a branch of applied maths, like physics; not really
> worth getting worked up about. And I'd say dmr was more of mathematician
> that a computer engineer - unlike ken he never built any machines, just
> software, and his doctorate was in complexity theory.
>
He started out in physics.
/BAH
Rod Speed
Oct 23, 2011, 1:21:47 PM10/23/11
to
jmfbahciv wrote
> August West wrote
>> hda wrote
> August West wrote
>> hda wrote
>>> Frederick Williams <freddyw...@btinternet.com> wrote
>>>> I was alarmed to hear Bill Thompson call himself a computer
>>>> scientist. I know journalist aren't too concerned about the truth,
>>>> but you'd think they'd know the truth about themselves.
>>> And there is just mathematics or computer engineering. What science ?
>>> To me DMR was a very fine and brilliant computer engineer.
>> It's just a label; a branch of applied maths, like physics; not really
>> worth getting worked up about. And I'd say dmr was more of
>> mathematician that a computer engineer - unlike ken he never built
>> any machines, just software, and his doctorate was in complexity
>> theory.
> He started out in physics.
It wasnt even possible to start out in computing formal education wise.
>>>> I was alarmed to hear Bill Thompson call himself a computer
>>>> scientist. I know journalist aren't too concerned about the truth,
>>>> but you'd think they'd know the truth about themselves.
>>> And there is just mathematics or computer engineering. What science ?
>>> To me DMR was a very fine and brilliant computer engineer.
>> It's just a label; a branch of applied maths, like physics; not really
>> worth getting worked up about. And I'd say dmr was more of
>> mathematician that a computer engineer - unlike ken he never built
>> any machines, just software, and his doctorate was in complexity
>> theory.
> He started out in physics.
rosen...@cix.compulink.co.uk
Oct 23, 2011, 1:53:00 PM10/23/11
to
In article <9gj0pe...@mid.individual.net>, rod.sp...@gmail.com (Rod
Indeed. About as meaningful as saying he started out in nappies. True but
the world moved on somewhat.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
the world moved on somewhat.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
The Natural Philosopher
Oct 23, 2011, 2:07:12 PM10/23/11
to
drunk milk, the limp dims haven't tried to ban it yet,.
Roland Perry
Oct 23, 2011, 2:15:36 PM10/23/11
to
In message <PM0004AFF...@ac8122f2.ipt.aol.com>, at 14:11:28 on
Sun, 23 Oct 2011, jmfbahciv <See....@aol.com> remarked:
distributed example) were built for/by physicists.
Engineers would have got around to it eventually, but the physicists had
the money (NASA, CERN, Lords Bridge etc).
--
Roland Perry
Sun, 23 Oct 2011, jmfbahciv <See....@aol.com> remarked:
>He started out in physics.
Most large computer installations (of which the Internet is just a
distributed example) were built for/by physicists.
Engineers would have got around to it eventually, but the physicists had
the money (NASA, CERN, Lords Bridge etc).
--
Roland Perry
Rod Speed
Oct 23, 2011, 2:36:21 PM10/23/11
to
Roland Perry wrote
> jmfbahciv <See....@aol.com> wrote
>> He started out in physics.
> Most large computer installations (of which the Internet is just a distributed example) were built for/by physicists.
Thats just plain wrong, most obviously with what IBM did.
> Engineers would have got around to it eventually, but the physicists had the money (NASA, CERN, Lords Bridge etc).
Thats just plain wrong, most obviously with what the military did.
> jmfbahciv <See....@aol.com> wrote
>> He started out in physics.
> Most large computer installations (of which the Internet is just a distributed example) were built for/by physicists.
> Engineers would have got around to it eventually, but the physicists had the money (NASA, CERN, Lords Bridge etc).
Roland Perry
Oct 23, 2011, 2:47:40 PM10/23/11
to
In message <9gj557...@mid.individual.net>, at 05:36:21 on Mon, 24 Oct
2011, Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> remarked:
big ones (and the Internet rollout reaching a critical mass) were for
the physicists.
--
Roland Perry
2011, Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> He started out in physics.
>
>> Most large computer installations (of which the Internet is just a distributed example) were built for/by physicists.
>
>Thats just plain wrong, most obviously with what IBM did.
>
>> Engineers would have got around to it eventually, but the physicists had the money (NASA, CERN, Lords Bridge etc).
>
>Thats just plain wrong, most obviously with what the military did.
I'll have to disagree. IBM built lots of commercial computers, but the
>
>> Most large computer installations (of which the Internet is just a distributed example) were built for/by physicists.
>
>Thats just plain wrong, most obviously with what IBM did.
>
>> Engineers would have got around to it eventually, but the physicists had the money (NASA, CERN, Lords Bridge etc).
>
>Thats just plain wrong, most obviously with what the military did.
big ones (and the Internet rollout reaching a critical mass) were for
the physicists.
--
Roland Perry
Patrick Scheible
Oct 23, 2011, 3:44:47 PM10/23/11
to
Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> writes:
> In message <PM0004AFF...@ac8122f2.ipt.aol.com>, at 14:11:28 on
> Sun, 23 Oct 2011, jmfbahciv <See....@aol.com> remarked:
>>He started out in physics.
>
> Most large computer installations (of which the Internet is just a
> distributed example) were built for/by physicists.
Code breakers and makers.
> In message <PM0004AFF...@ac8122f2.ipt.aol.com>, at 14:11:28 on
> Sun, 23 Oct 2011, jmfbahciv <See....@aol.com> remarked:
>>He started out in physics.
>
> Most large computer installations (of which the Internet is just a
> distributed example) were built for/by physicists.
Weapons designers (some of whom started out as physicists).
Meteorologists.
-- Patrick
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
Oct 23, 2011, 4:11:24 PM10/23/11
to
Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> writes:
> Most large computer installations (of which the Internet is just a
> distributed example) were built for/by physicists.
>
> Engineers would have got around to it eventually, but the physicists
> had the money (NASA, CERN, Lords Bridge etc).
original arpanet was mostly univ ... various different kinds of
> Most large computer installations (of which the Internet is just a
> distributed example) were built for/by physicists.
>
> Engineers would have got around to it eventually, but the physicists
> had the money (NASA, CERN, Lords Bridge etc).
mainframe datacenters ... arpanet interconnected by IMP network
processors with one or more mainframe hosts hung off each IMP (except
for the dedicated terminal IMPs). At the time of the great cutover from
arpanet to internetworking protcol (1Jan83), there were on the order of
100 IMPs and possibly 250 hosts. misc. past posts mentioning
arpanet/internet
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internet
the internal corporate network was larger than the arpanet/internet
from just about the beginning until possibly late 85 or early 86 ...
the internal network quickly approaching 1000 nodes at the time
of the arpanet switchover (1Jan83). misc. past posts mentioning
internal corporate network
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#internalnet
misc. old email referencing vnet
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/lhwemail.html#vnet
tcp/ip is the technical/protocol basis for the modern internet,
NSFNET backbone was the operational basis for the modern internet
and CIX was the business basis for the modern internet. Misc.
past email related to NSFNET backbone
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/lhwemail.html#nsfnet
internal politics prevented us from bidding on the NSFNET backbone
RFP. the director of NSF wrote the corporation a letter trying to help
... (misc. statements that what we already had running was at least five
years ahead of all NSFNET backbone RFP responses) ... but that just made
the internal politics worse. misc. past posts mentioning NSFNET backbone
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#nsfnet
some of the internal network technology was also used for BITNET & EARN
(in europe) ... misc. past posts mentioning BITNET/EARN
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#bitnet
BITNET wiki:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BITNET
old email from person setting up EARN in europe:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#email840320
recent posts mentioning internal network technology and
primary person responsible (was at the science center):
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011m.html#10 Selectric Typewriter--50th Anniversary
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011m.html#15 Any candidates for best acronyms?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011m.html#17 What is IBM culture?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011m.html#29 It's Cool To Be Clever
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011m.html#35 How old is the oldest email in your current email inbox?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011m.html#60 How old is the oldest email in your current email inbox?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#2 Soups
part of internal politics going on in the time of the NSFNET backbone
RFP ... was that the communication group was spreading an enormous
amount of mis-information as part of justifying the internal network
conversion to SNA (as well as claims that the NSFNET backbone could be
implementated on SNA) ... some recent posts with old email references:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011m.html#17 What is IBM culture?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011m.html#29 It's Cool To Be Clever
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011m.html#44 CMS load module format
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011m.html#60 How old is the oldest email in your current email inbox?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#2 Soups
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#13 Has anyone successfully migrated off mainframes?
past posts mentioning GML (originally chosen because first letter of
last names of the inventors) was invented at the science center in 1969
(a decade later GML morphs into ISO standard SGML):
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#sgml
posts posts mentioning science center
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#545tech
reference to SGML morphing into HTML (at CERN) two decades after GML was
invented at science center:
http://infomesh.net/html/history/early
first webserver in US was at SLAC (sister institution to CERN) on SLAC's
VM/CMS system (virtual machines original done at science center in the
mid-60s, first cp40/cms that morphs into cp67/cms and later morphs into
vm370/cms):
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/history/earlyweb/history.shtml
I the late 80s, we had started ha/6000 and then added cluster scaleup to
the effort ... I coined "ha/cmp" as marketing term trying to capture
sense of both commercial high availability as well as both commercial
and numerical intensive cluster scaleup. some old posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#hacmp
past post with reference to jan92 meeting in ellison's conference
room on cluster scaleup for (commercial) RDBMS
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/95.html#13
old email mentioning cluster scaleup
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/lhwemail.html#medusa
including this email about meeting with LLNL about use for
numerical intensive:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006x.html#email920129
within hours of the above email, the cluster scaleup part was
transferred and we were told we couldn't work on anything with more than
four processors. Then within a couple weeks, it was announced as
supercomputer product for scientific/numerical intensive *ONLY*
past press item
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001n.html#6000clusters1 920217
and then item about how it caught them by *surprise*
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001n.html#6000clusters2 920511
for some topic drift ... reference to LLNL late 70s about wanting
seventy 4341s:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006y.html#email790220
in this post with several other old 4341 emails
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006y.html#21
joke reference about "Release No Software Before Its Time" (some cluster
scaleup eventually for commercial):
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009p.html#43 From The Annals of Release No Software Before Its Time
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009p.html#46 From The Annals of Release No Software Before Its Time
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011m.html#46 From The Annals of Release No Software Before Its Time
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011m.html#47 From The Annals of Release No Software Before Its Time
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011m.html#59 From The Annals of Release No Software Before Its Time
for a little x-over between cluster scaleup and electronic commerce
... being told we couldn't work on anything with more than processors is
part of motivation to leave a few months later. Also, two of the other
people (in the ellison conference room meeting) leave and show up at a
small client/server startup responsible for something called "commerce
server". We are brought in as consultants because they want to do
payment transactions on the server; the startup had also invented this
technology called "SSL" they want to use; the result is now frequently
called *electronic commerce*.
--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
Roland Perry
Oct 23, 2011, 4:16:09 PM10/23/11
to
In message <8639ejw...@zipcon.net>, at 12:44:47 on Sun, 23 Oct 2011,
Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> remarked:
>Meteorologists.
Are physicists. (But different ones from the astronomical and nuclear
physicists who were also using a lot of mainframe power).
--
Roland Perry
Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> remarked:
>Meteorologists.
Are physicists. (But different ones from the astronomical and nuclear
physicists who were also using a lot of mainframe power).
--
Roland Perry
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
Oct 23, 2011, 4:45:40 PM10/23/11
to
Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> writes:
> Code breakers and makers.
> Weapons designers (some of whom started out as physicists).
> Meteorologists.
re:
> Code breakers and makers.
> Weapons designers (some of whom started out as physicists).
> Meteorologists.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#33 Last Word on Dennis Ritchie
as part of HA/CMP ... we were also working with various labs on putting
out distributed filesystems. congress had passed some legislation
relaxing some anti-trust provisions and encouraging national labs to
commercialize any technology they had.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#hacmp
LANL had done filesystem managed by ibm mainframe for network of
supercomputers interconnected via hyperchannel. They had deal with
General Atomics and San Diego Supercomputer Center productizing it as
"DataTree". LANL reference
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Alamos_National_Laboratory
NASA/AMES had ibm (clone) mainframe based system interconnected with
hyperchannel ... old email mentioning nasa/ames
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007.html#email911004
NASA/AMES wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ames_Research_Center
LLNL had a cray-based filesystem (LINCS) and we were working with them ... and
funding quite a bit of turning it out as Unitree (unix based)
... including port of rs/6000. unitree reference here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NLTSS
LLNL ref
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Livermore_National_Laboratory
NCAR (boulder) had ibm mainframe based system ... similar, but different
to LANL system. They had created at startup called "Mesa Archival" to
productize it. The IBM disk division was funding some amount of
"Mesa Archival" ... with port to unix and rs/6000 ... and we
were acting as their technical interface. NCAR ref:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Center_for_Atmospheric_Research
"Mesa Archival" had their offices in business strip mall at the
bottom of the hill from NCAR lab.
I had started doing hyperchannel stuff with ibm mainframe in 1980 and
boulder branch office had contacted me in the mid-80s about talking to
NCAR about some of the details of supporting hyperchannel from ibm
mainframe. NSC/hyperchannel wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_Systems_Corporation
some past mentioning of doing stuff with hyperchannel (& other things)
... I called HSDT
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subnetwork.html#hsdt
misc. past posts mentioning datatree, unitree, mesa archival:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#21 Disk caching and file systems. Disk history...people forget
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#22 Disk caching and file systems. Disk history...people forget
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#66 commodity storage servers
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002e.html#46 What goes into a 3090?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002g.html#61 GE 625/635 Reference + Smart Hardware
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002k.html#31 general networking is: DEC eNet: was Vnet : Unbelievable
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#29 360/370 disk drives
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#31 360/370 disk drives
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003h.html#6 IBM says AMD dead in 5yrs ... -- Microsoft Monopoly vs. IBM
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003i.html#53 A Dark Day
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004d.html#75 DASD Architecture of the future
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004p.html#29 FW: Is FICON good enough, or is it the only choice we get?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005e.html#12 Device and channel
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005e.html#15 Device and channel
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005e.html#16 Device and channel
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005e.html#19 Device and channel
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006n.html#29 CRAM, DataCell, and 3850
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006u.html#19 Why so little parallelism?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006u.html#20 Why so little parallelism?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006u.html#27 Why so little parallelism?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006v.html#10 What's a mainframe?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006w.html#20 cluster-in-a-rack
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006x.html#3 Why so little parallelism?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007.html#30 V2X2 vs. Shark (SnapShot v. FlashCopy)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007.html#31 V2X2 vs. Shark (SnapShot v. FlashCopy)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007.html#32 V2X2 vs. Shark (SnapShot v. FlashCopy)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007.html#35 V2X2 vs. Shark (SnapShot v. FlashCopy)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007b.html#16 V2X2 vs. Shark (SnapShot v. FlashCopy)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007j.html#47 IBM Unionization
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008l.html#20 IBM-MAIN longevity
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008p.html#51 Barbless
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009k.html#58 Disksize history question
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009p.html#38 big iron mainframe vs. x86 servers
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009s.html#42 Larrabee delayed: anyone know what's happening?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010d.html#69 LPARs: More or Less?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010d.html#71 LPARs: More or Less?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010m.html#85 3270 Emulator Software
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011b.html#58 Other early NSFNET backbone
Al Grant
Oct 23, 2011, 4:49:28 PM10/23/11
to
On Oct 23, 9:16 pm, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <8639ejwl00....@zipcon.net>, at 12:44:47 on Sun, 23 Oct 2011,
Some of them are, but ITYF the bulk of the computer power
goes on applied maths - fluid flow, Navier-Stokes and all that.
> In message <8639ejwl00....@zipcon.net>, at 12:44:47 on Sun, 23 Oct 2011,
Some of them are, but ITYF the bulk of the computer power
goes on applied maths - fluid flow, Navier-Stokes and all that.
The Natural Philosopher
Oct 23, 2011, 5:04:35 PM10/23/11
to
Charlie Gibbs
Oct 23, 2011, 5:56:40 PM10/23/11
to
In article <5HxHTJgM...@perry.co.uk>, rol...@perry.co.uk
>>> Engineers would have got around to it eventually, but the physicists
>>> had the money (NASA, CERN, Lords Bridge etc).
>>
>> Thats just plain wrong, most obviously with what the military did.
^^^^^^^^^^^^
> I'll have to disagree. IBM built lots of commercial computers, but
> the big ones (and the Internet rollout reaching a critical mass)
> were for the physicists.
Wow, Rod has advanced from simple fixed text insertion to macros
with arguments.
--
/~\ 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!
(Roland Perry) writes:
> In message <9gj557...@mid.individual.net>, at 05:36:21 on Mon,
> 24 Oct 2011, Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>>>> He started out in physics.
>>
>>> Most large computer installations (of which the Internet is just a
>>> distributed example) were built for/by physicists.
>>
>> Thats just plain wrong, most obviously with what IBM did.
^^^
> In message <9gj557...@mid.individual.net>, at 05:36:21 on Mon,
> 24 Oct 2011, Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>>>> He started out in physics.
>>
>>> Most large computer installations (of which the Internet is just a
>>> distributed example) were built for/by physicists.
>>
>> Thats just plain wrong, most obviously with what IBM did.
>>> Engineers would have got around to it eventually, but the physicists
>>> had the money (NASA, CERN, Lords Bridge etc).
>>
>> Thats just plain wrong, most obviously with what the military did.
> I'll have to disagree. IBM built lots of commercial computers, but
> the big ones (and the Internet rollout reaching a critical mass)
> were for the physicists.
with arguments.
--
/~\ 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!
Roland Perry
Oct 23, 2011, 5:06:30 PM10/23/11
to
In message
<6b83e127-ef7f-4442...@m19g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>, at
13:49:28 on Sun, 23 Oct 2011, Al Grant <alg...@myrealbox.com> remarked:
--
Roland Perry
<6b83e127-ef7f-4442...@m19g2000vbm.googlegroups.com>, at
13:49:28 on Sun, 23 Oct 2011, Al Grant <alg...@myrealbox.com> remarked:
>> >Meteorologists.
>>
>> Are physicists.
>
>Some of them are, but ITYF the bulk of the computer power
>goes on applied maths - fluid flow, Navier-Stokes and all that.
It's getting a boring trying to redefine what a physicist is.
>>
>> Are physicists.
>
>Some of them are, but ITYF the bulk of the computer power
>goes on applied maths - fluid flow, Navier-Stokes and all that.
--
Roland Perry
Al Grant
Oct 23, 2011, 5:06:37 PM10/23/11
to
On Oct 23, 7:47 pm, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> I'll have to disagree. IBM built lots of commercial computers, but the
> big ones (and the Internet rollout reaching a critical mass) were for
> the physicists.
You said "most large computer installations". That's not the
> I'll have to disagree. IBM built lots of commercial computers, but the
> big ones (and the Internet rollout reaching a critical mass) were for
> the physicists.
same as "the largest computer installations".
There's an alternative lineage of "large computer installations"
which goes from SAGE, through SABRE, to Google, Amazon etc.
where size is measured by message handling and transactions
and the ability to support vast networks of remote computers.
I'll leave you to work out whether this is more relevant to the
Internet than the ability to run LINPACK very fast.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Oct 23, 2011, 5:19:32 PM10/23/11
to
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Rod Speed
Oct 23, 2011, 5:32:05 PM10/23/11
to
Roland Perry wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>> Roland Perry wrote
>>>> He started out in physics.
>>> Most large computer installations (of which the Internet is just a distributed example) were built for/by
>>> physicists.
>> Thats just plain wrong, most obviously with what IBM did.
>>> Engineers would have got around to it eventually, but the
>>> physicists had the money (NASA, CERN, Lords Bridge etc).
>> Thats just plain wrong, most obviously with what the military did.
> I'll have to disagree. IBM built lots of commercial computers, but the big ones (and the Internet rollout reaching a
> critical mass) were for the physicists.
That was a comment on your 'had the money', not on the size of what got built.
> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>> Roland Perry wrote
>>>> He started out in physics.
>>> Most large computer installations (of which the Internet is just a distributed example) were built for/by
>>> physicists.
>> Thats just plain wrong, most obviously with what IBM did.
>>> Engineers would have got around to it eventually, but the
>>> physicists had the money (NASA, CERN, Lords Bridge etc).
>> Thats just plain wrong, most obviously with what the military did.
> I'll have to disagree. IBM built lots of commercial computers, but the big ones (and the Internet rollout reaching a
> critical mass) were for the physicists.
Rod Speed
Oct 23, 2011, 5:34:39 PM10/23/11
to
Roland Perry wrote
> Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> wrote
>> Meteorologists.
> Are physicists.
Nope, we have different words for a reason.
And the field is applied maths at most, not physics.
> (But different ones from the astronomical and nuclear physicists
And they arent called meteorolgical physicists for a reason.
> who were also using a lot of mainframe power).
What was being discussed was your 'had the money' not mainframe power.
> Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> wrote
>> Meteorologists.
> Are physicists.
Nope, we have different words for a reason.
And the field is applied maths at most, not physics.
> (But different ones from the astronomical and nuclear physicists
> who were also using a lot of mainframe power).
Message has been deleted
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
Oct 23, 2011, 5:47:41 PM10/23/11
to
Al Grant <alg...@myrealbox.com> writes:
> You said "most large computer installations". That's not the
> same as "the largest computer installations".
>
> There's an alternative lineage of "large computer installations"
> which goes from SAGE, through SABRE, to Google, Amazon etc.
> where size is measured by message handling and transactions
> and the ability to support vast networks of remote computers.
> I'll leave you to work out whether this is more relevant to the
> Internet than the ability to run LINPACK very fast.
precursor to LINPACK was LLNL "RAIN" which I did on 4341 when
LLNL was looking at possibly getting 70 4341. old 4341 email
... including some references to doing RAIN benchmarks on 4341
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/lhwemail.html#4341
I've claimed that possibly that largest single-system-image cluster in
the late 70s was the internal US HONE datacenter ... multiple
multiprocessor mainframes all running vm370/cms providing online
sales&marketing support for US ... misc. past posts mentioning HONE
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#hone
commercial online vm370/cms service bureaus were the early "cloud
computing" ... past references
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#timeshare
SABRE (and other airline reservation systems) ran with IBM mainframe ACP
(airline control program) ... later renamed TPF (transaction processing
facility) operating system:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transaction_Processing_Facility
IBM mainframe supported "loosely-coupled" (cluster) with shared disk
... disk controllers supporting up to eight processor complexes. Up
until sometime mid-80s, ACP/TPF had loose-coupled support but not
tightly-coupled (mulitprocessors) support ... so was limited to eight
single processor mainframes. HONE VM370/CMS single-system image had both
tightly-coupled and loosely-coupled support ... so in that period, could
have at least twice as many processors in a single complex.
In the first half of the 80s, IBM came out with 308x which was
(originally) going to come in 2-way and 4-way processor versions ... but
no single processor option. I've posted lots about how this caused lots
of problems for the ACP/TPF market (since it didn't have multiprocessor
support in that time-frame). As mentioned in the TPF wiki article, it
since acquired "tightly-coupled" multiprocessor support. Also, current
hardware configurations support up to 32 processor complexes.
recent references to mega datacenters ... some of which may have
(individually) more aggregate computing power than all the currently
installed IBM mainframes:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011d.html#46 The first personal computer (PC)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011e.html#16 At least two decades back, some gurus predicted that mainframes would disappear in future and it still has not happened
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011e.html#17 At least two decades back, some gurus predicted that mainframes would disappear in future and it still has not happened
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011e.html#19 At least two decades back, some gurus predicted that mainframes would disappear in future and it still has not happened
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011f.html#32 At least two decades back, some gurus predicted that mainframes would disappear
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011h.html#8 At least two decades back, some gurus predicted that mainframes would disappear in future and it still has not happened
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011h.html#32 At least two decades back, some gurus predicted that mainframes would disappear in future and it still has not happened
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011i.html#9 At least two decades back, some gurus predicted that mainframes would disappear in future and it still has not happened
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011i.html#75 Check out June 2011 | TOP500 Supercomputing Sites
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011j.html#23 Cloud computing - is it a financial con trick?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011k.html#70 New IBM Redbooks residency experience in Poughkeepsie, NY
Patrick Scheible
Oct 23, 2011, 6:34:41 PM10/23/11
to
-- Patrick
Fevric J. Glandules
Oct 23, 2011, 7:15:25 PM10/23/11
to
Roland Perry wrote:
> It's getting a boring trying to redefine what a physicist is.
Not-a-stamp-collector?
> It's getting a boring trying to redefine what a physicist is.
Chris Lamb
Oct 23, 2011, 8:06:05 PM10/23/11
to
Physicist-y I feel Mathematician-y - even though N-S equations are
fundamentally F=m*a when all is said and done. Just thought I'd add
confusion.
C
Charlie Gibbs
Oct 24, 2011, 12:59:20 AM10/24/11
to
In article <j8276d$c5t$1...@dont-email.me>, f...@invalid.invalid
Handy Guide to Science:
If it's green or wriggles, it's biology.
If it stinks, it's chemistry.
If it doesn't work, it's physics.
If it's green or wriggles, it's biology.
If it stinks, it's chemistry.
If it doesn't work, it's physics.
Charles Richmond
Oct 24, 2011, 12:12:12 AM10/24/11
to
"Fevric J. Glandules" <f...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:j8276d$c5t$1...@dont-email.me...
"All children are born curious and ask a lot of impossible questions.
By the second or third grade, the education system is able to beat this
out of them. But those who remain curious and continue questioning
things... become physicists."
news:j8276d$c5t$1...@dont-email.me...
> Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> It's getting a boring trying to redefine what a physicist is.
>
> Not-a-stamp-collector?
Some physicist (I can *not* remember who) said:
>
>> It's getting a boring trying to redefine what a physicist is.
>
> Not-a-stamp-collector?
"All children are born curious and ask a lot of impossible questions.
By the second or third grade, the education system is able to beat this
out of them. But those who remain curious and continue questioning
things... become physicists."
Charles Richmond
Oct 24, 2011, 12:09:04 AM10/24/11
to
"Al Grant" <alg...@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
news:6b83e127-ef7f-4442...@m19g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...
At the university I attended, *by* *far* the largest user of computer time
was the chemistry department. What the heck they were working on, I
have *no* idea.
--
+<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>+
| Charles Richmond nume...@aquaporin4.com |
+<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>+
news:6b83e127-ef7f-4442...@m19g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...
was the chemistry department. What the heck they were working on, I
have *no* idea.
--
+<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>+
| Charles Richmond nume...@aquaporin4.com |
+<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>+
Message has been deleted
Roland Perry
Oct 24, 2011, 2:16:09 AM10/24/11
to
In message <20111023221932....@eircom.net>, at 22:19:32 on
Sun, 23 Oct 2011, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <ste...@eircom.net> remarked:
--
Roland Perry
Sun, 23 Oct 2011, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <ste...@eircom.net> remarked:
>> Code breakers and makers.
>> Weapons designers (some of whom started out as physicists).
>> Meteorologists.
>
>Radio Astronomers.
They are physicists too.
>> Weapons designers (some of whom started out as physicists).
>> Meteorologists.
>
>Radio Astronomers.
--
Roland Perry
The Natural Philosopher
Oct 24, 2011, 3:42:53 AM10/24/11
to
Rod Speed
Oct 24, 2011, 4:27:09 AM10/24/11
to
Charles Richmond wrote
> But those who remain curious and continue questioning things... become physicists."
It would be more accurate to say scientists.
> Fevric J. Glandules <f...@invalid.invalid> wrote
>> Roland Perry wrote
>>> It's getting a boring trying to redefine what a physicist is.
>> Not-a-stamp-collector?
> Some physicist (I can *not* remember who) said:
> "All children are born curious and ask a lot of impossible questions.
> By the second or third grade, the education system is able to beat this out of them.
Thats a silly claim. It happens with the home schooled and those who dont get formal education too.
>>> It's getting a boring trying to redefine what a physicist is.
>> Not-a-stamp-collector?
> Some physicist (I can *not* remember who) said:
> "All children are born curious and ask a lot of impossible questions.
> By the second or third grade, the education system is able to beat this out of them.
> But those who remain curious and continue questioning things... become physicists."
Bill Thompson
Oct 24, 2011, 7:55:27 AM10/24/11
to
On Oct 23, 1:53 pm, rosenst...@cix.compulink.co.uk wrote:
> In article <9gj0peFh6...@mid.individual.net>, rod.speed....@gmail.com (Rod
>
>
>
> Speed) wrote:
> > jmfbahciv wrote
> > > August West wrote
> > >> hda wrote
> > >>> Frederick Williams <freddywilli...@btinternet.com> wrote
>
> > >>>> I was alarmed to hear Bill Thompson call himself a computer
> > >>>> scientist. I know journalist aren't too concerned about the truth,
> > >>>> but you'd think they'd know the truth about themselves.
>
> > >>> And there is just mathematics or computer engineering. What science ?
> > >>> To me DMR was a very fine and brilliant computer engineer.
>
> > >> It's just a label; a branch of applied maths, like physics; not really
> > >> worth getting worked up about. And I'd say dmr was more of
> > >> mathematician that a computer engineer - unlike ken he never built
> > >> any machines, just software, and his doctorate was in complexity
> > >> theory.
> > wise.
>
> Indeed. About as meaningful as saying he started out in nappies. True but
> the world moved on somewhat.
>
> --
> Colin Rosenstiel
Since I hold the Diploma in Computer Science I think I'm entitled to
call myself a computer scientist - though it seems you question the
existence of the discipline rather than my self-attribution - or was
the real goal to make another snide comment about journalism?
Bill
> In article <9gj0peFh6...@mid.individual.net>, rod.speed....@gmail.com (Rod
>
>
>
> Speed) wrote:
> > jmfbahciv wrote
> > > August West wrote
> > >> hda wrote
> > >>> Frederick Williams <freddywilli...@btinternet.com> wrote
>
> > >>>> I was alarmed to hear Bill Thompson call himself a computer
> > >>>> scientist. I know journalist aren't too concerned about the truth,
> > >>>> but you'd think they'd know the truth about themselves.
>
> > >>> And there is just mathematics or computer engineering. What science ?
> > >>> To me DMR was a very fine and brilliant computer engineer.
>
> > >> It's just a label; a branch of applied maths, like physics; not really
> > >> worth getting worked up about. And I'd say dmr was more of
> > >> mathematician that a computer engineer - unlike ken he never built
> > >> any machines, just software, and his doctorate was in complexity
> > >> theory.
>
> > > He started out in physics.
>
> > It wasnt even possible to start out in computing formal education
> > > He started out in physics.
>
> > wise.
>
> Indeed. About as meaningful as saying he started out in nappies. True but
> the world moved on somewhat.
>
> --
> Colin Rosenstiel
Since I hold the Diploma in Computer Science I think I'm entitled to
call myself a computer scientist - though it seems you question the
existence of the discipline rather than my self-attribution - or was
the real goal to make another snide comment about journalism?
Bill
Jules Richardson
Oct 24, 2011, 9:00:28 AM10/24/11
to
done on (IIRC) a GE-something-or-other.
But I don't know how relevant it is to large installations anyway; I
think a significant proportion of such installs were mainframe OSes, or
simply used Unix as a more user-friendly front end and tool host to the
*real* hardware.
cheers
Jules
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
Oct 24, 2011, 9:25:25 AM10/24/11
to
"Charles Richmond" <net...@aquaporin4.com> writes:
> At the university I attended, *by* *far* the largest user of computer time
> was the chemistry department. What the heck they were working on, I
> have *no* idea.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#33 Last Word on Dennis Ritchie
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#34 Last Word on Dennis Ritchie
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#35 Last Word on Dennis Ritchie
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#33 Last Word on Dennis Ritchie
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011n.html#34 Last Word on Dennis Ritchie
two big uses of 370/195 at SJR were the chemistry department and
simulating air bearing for design of (new) thin-film floating disk
heads.
few past posts mentioning chemistry/molecular modeling
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002j.html#30 Weird
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009k.html#49 A Complete History Of Mainframe Computing
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009k.html#51 A Complete History Of Mainframe Computing
when pre-release, engineering 3033 was delivered to the disk product
test lab. ... disk testing didn't use much more than precent or two of
processor. we were then able to co-op the rest of the processor for all
sorts of stuff. 3033 was only about half the MIP rate of peak 370/195,
but the turn-around on the 370/195 could be as long as 1-3 months ...
old email about somebody in sjr doing molecular simulation getting
setup to make runs on product test lab 3033
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009k.html#email800208
kingston engineering and science center with lots of FPS boxes was also
doing predominatly chemistry/molecular modeling. a few past posts
mentioning FPS boxes
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#5 TF-1
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000c.html#61 TF-1
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#56 Why SMP at all anymore?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001d.html#32 Imitation...
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001m.html#25 ESCON Data Transfer Rate
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002e.html#31 Hardest Mistake in Comp Arch to Fix
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002i.html#12 CDC6600 - just how powerful a machine was it?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002j.html#30 Weird
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#29 360/370 disk drives
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003g.html#68 IBM zSeries in HPC
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003m.html#20 360 Microde Floating Point Fix
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006m.html#4 The Power of the NORC
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006o.html#1 harris
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009j.html#54 A Complete History Of Mainframe Computing
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010b.html#72 Happy DEC-10 Day
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2010f.html#61 Handling multicore CPUs; what the competition is thinking
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011h.html#74 Vector processors on the 3090
misc. past posts mentiong sjr/195 and air bearing simulation:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001n.html#39 195 was: Computer Typesetting Was: Movies with source code
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002.html#17 index searching
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002j.html#30 Weird
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002n.html#63 Help me find pics of a UNIVAC please
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002o.html#74 They Got Mail: Not-So-Fond Farewells
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#51 Disk drives as commodities. Was Re: Yamhill
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003b.html#52 Disk drives as commodities. Was Re: Yamhill
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003j.html#69 Multics Concepts For the Contemporary Computing World
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2003n.html#45 hung/zombie users ... long boring, wandering story
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004.html#21 40th anniversary of IBM System/360 on 7 Apr 2004
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2004b.html#15 harddisk in space
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#4 System/360; Hardwired vs. Microcoded
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005f.html#5 System/360; Hardwired vs. Microcoded
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2005o.html#44 Intel engineer discusses their dual-core design
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006.html#29 IBM microwave application--early data communications
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006c.html#6 IBM 610 workstation computer
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#0 IBM 610 workstation computer
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#13 IBM 610 workstation computer
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006d.html#14 IBM 610 workstation computer
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006l.html#6 Google Architecture
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006s.html#42 Ranking of non-IBM mainframe builders?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006t.html#41 The Future of CPUs: What's After Multi-Core?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006x.html#27 The Future of CPUs: What's After Multi-Core?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006x.html#31 The Future of CPUs: What's After Multi-Core?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007e.html#43 FBA rant
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007i.html#83 Disc Drives
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007j.html#13 Interrupts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007j.html#64 Disc Drives
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007l.html#52 Drums: Memory or Peripheral?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008k.html#77 Disk drive improvements
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008l.html#60 recent mentions of 40+ yr old technology
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2008r.html#32 What if the computers went back to the '70s too?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009c.html#9 Assembler Question
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009k.html#49 A Complete History Of Mainframe Computing
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009k.html#75 Disksize history question
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2009r.html#51 "Portable" data centers
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011.html#16 Looking for a real Fortran-66 compatible PC compiler (CP/M or DOS or Windows, doesn't matter)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011.html#36 CKD DASD
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011c.html#26 If IBM Hadn't Bet the Company
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011f.html#87 Gee... I wonder if I qualify for "old geek"?
Walter Bushell
Oct 24, 2011, 10:26:09 AM10/24/11
to
In article <j82od2$vnb$1...@dont-email.me>,
--
It is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant
and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting. -- H. L. Mencken
"Charles Richmond" <net...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
> "Al Grant" <alg...@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
> news:6b83e127-ef7f-4442...@m19g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 23, 9:16 pm, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> >> In message <8639ejwl00....@zipcon.net>, at 12:44:47 on Sun, 23 Oct 2011,
> >> Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> remarked:
> >> >Meteorologists.
> >>
> >> Are physicists.
> >
> >Some of them are, but ITYF the bulk of the computer power
> >goes on applied maths - fluid flow, Navier-Stokes and all that.
>
> At the university I attended, *by* *far* the largest user of computer time
> was the chemistry department. What the heck they were working on, I
> have *no* idea.
Computational chemistry.
> "Al Grant" <alg...@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
> news:6b83e127-ef7f-4442...@m19g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 23, 9:16 pm, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> >> In message <8639ejwl00....@zipcon.net>, at 12:44:47 on Sun, 23 Oct 2011,
> >> Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> remarked:
> >> >Meteorologists.
> >>
> >> Are physicists.
> >
> >Some of them are, but ITYF the bulk of the computer power
> >goes on applied maths - fluid flow, Navier-Stokes and all that.
>
> At the university I attended, *by* *far* the largest user of computer time
> was the chemistry department. What the heck they were working on, I
> have *no* idea.
--
It is the nature of the human species to reject what is true but unpleasant
and to embrace what is obviously false but comforting. -- H. L. Mencken
Bernard Peek
Oct 24, 2011, 10:51:18 AM10/24/11
to
On 24/10/11 15:26, Walter Bushell wrote:
> In article <j82od2$vnb$1...@dont-email.me>,
> "Charles Richmond" <net...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>
>> "Al Grant" <alg...@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
>> news:6b83e127-ef7f-4442...@m19g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...
>> On Oct 23, 9:16 pm, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <8639ejwl00....@zipcon.net>, at 12:44:47 on Sun, 23 Oct 2011,
>>>> Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> remarked:
>>>>> Meteorologists.
>>>>
>>>> Are physicists.
>>>
>>> Some of them are, but ITYF the bulk of the computer power
>>> goes on applied maths - fluid flow, Navier-Stokes and all that.
>>
>> At the university I attended, *by* *far* the largest user of computer time
>> was the chemistry department. What the heck they were working on, I
>> have *no* idea.
>
> Computational chemistry.
>
As in protein folding, amongst many other applications.
> In article <j82od2$vnb$1...@dont-email.me>,
> "Charles Richmond" <net...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>
>> "Al Grant" <alg...@myrealbox.com> wrote in message
>> news:6b83e127-ef7f-4442...@m19g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...
>> On Oct 23, 9:16 pm, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <8639ejwl00....@zipcon.net>, at 12:44:47 on Sun, 23 Oct 2011,
>>>> Patrick Scheible <k...@zipcon.net> remarked:
>>>>> Meteorologists.
>>>>
>>>> Are physicists.
>>>
>>> Some of them are, but ITYF the bulk of the computer power
>>> goes on applied maths - fluid flow, Navier-Stokes and all that.
>>
>> At the university I attended, *by* *far* the largest user of computer time
>> was the chemistry department. What the heck they were working on, I
>> have *no* idea.
>
> Computational chemistry.
>
http://fold.it/portal/
--
Bernard Peek
b...@shrdlu.com
Charles Richmond
Oct 25, 2011, 1:08:28 AM10/25/11
to
"Jules Richardson" <jules.richa...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:j83nhb$53a$1...@dont-email.me...
something-or-other. A lot of mainframe manufacturors sold out to
Honeywell eventually, like RCA and SDS. Now Honeywell is *no*
longer in the mainframe business... I think.
news:j83nhb$53a$1...@dont-email.me...
> On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 15:34:41 -0700, Patrick Scheible wrote:
>
>> The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> Patrick Scheible wrote:
>>>> Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <PM0004AFF...@ac8122f2.ipt.aol.com>, at 14:11:28 on
>>>>> Sun, 23 Oct 2011, jmfbahciv <See....@aol.com> remarked:
>>>>>> He started out in physics.
>>>>> Most large computer installations (of which the Internet is just a
>>>>> distributed example) were built for/by physicists.
>>>>
>>>> Code breakers and makers.
>>>> Weapons designers (some of whom started out as physicists).
>>>> Meteorologists.
>>>>
>>>> -- Patrick
>>> But of course Unix was written for a very small computer. A PDP 16
>>> IIRC.
>>
>> A PDP-7, I think. Unix was migrated to a PDP-11 after a few years.
>
> Indeed - and it, at least in part, grew out of work on Multics, which was
> done on (IIRC) a GE-something-or-other.
>
ISTM that "GE something-or-other" eventually became a Honeywell
>
>> The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> Patrick Scheible wrote:
>>>> Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <PM0004AFF...@ac8122f2.ipt.aol.com>, at 14:11:28 on
>>>>> Sun, 23 Oct 2011, jmfbahciv <See....@aol.com> remarked:
>>>>>> He started out in physics.
>>>>> Most large computer installations (of which the Internet is just a
>>>>> distributed example) were built for/by physicists.
>>>>
>>>> Code breakers and makers.
>>>> Weapons designers (some of whom started out as physicists).
>>>> Meteorologists.
>>>>
>>>> -- Patrick
>>> But of course Unix was written for a very small computer. A PDP 16
>>> IIRC.
>>
>> A PDP-7, I think. Unix was migrated to a PDP-11 after a few years.
>
> Indeed - and it, at least in part, grew out of work on Multics, which was
> done on (IIRC) a GE-something-or-other.
>
something-or-other. A lot of mainframe manufacturors sold out to
Honeywell eventually, like RCA and SDS. Now Honeywell is *no*
longer in the mainframe business... I think.
Frederick Williams
Oct 25, 2011, 2:27:53 PM10/25/11
to
August West wrote:
>
> [...]
John McCarthy has died.
--
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by
this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him.
Jonathan Swift: Thoughts on Various Subjects, Moral and Diverting
>
> [...]
John McCarthy has died.
--
When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by
this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him.
Jonathan Swift: Thoughts on Various Subjects, Moral and Diverting
Rich Alderson
Nov 2, 2011, 7:53:43 PM11/2/11
to
"Charles Richmond" <net...@aquaporin4.com> writes:
> "Jules Richardson" <jules.richa...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:j83nhb$53a$1...@dont-email.me...
>> On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 15:34:41 -0700, Patrick Scheible wrote:
>>> The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>>> But of course Unix was written for a very small computer. A PDP 16
>>>> IIRC.
A PDP-16 is a Register-Transfer Module (in the Bell & Newell/CMU sense),
> "Jules Richardson" <jules.richa...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:j83nhb$53a$1...@dont-email.me...
>> On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 15:34:41 -0700, Patrick Scheible wrote:
>>> The Natural Philosopher <t...@invalid.invalid> writes:
>>>> But of course Unix was written for a very small computer. A PDP 16
>>>> IIRC.
rather than a computer per se. A computer can be built out of PDP-16s.
>>> A PDP-7, I think. Unix was migrated to a PDP-11 after a few years.
Bell Labs management wouldn't spend the money. The retired PDP-7 had no
software, so tools were written and cross-compiled on a GE-635.
>> Indeed - and it, at least in part, grew out of work on Multics, which was
>> done on (IIRC) a GE-something-or-other.
> ISTM that "GE something-or-other" eventually became a Honeywell
> something-or-other. A lot of mainframe manufacturors sold out to
> Honeywell eventually, like RCA and SDS. Now Honeywell is *no*
> longer in the mainframe business... I think.
as the Honeywell 6000 Series. Multics ran on the 6180 (and on follow-on
systems, up to the DPS-8M).
Honeywell did not acquire SDS directly. There was a little company that wanted
to compete against IBM and bought itself a computer division in 1969, proceeded
to squander it, and then sold it in 1975 to Honeywell: XEROX.
--
Rich Alderson ne...@alderson.users.panix.com
the russet leaves of an autumn oak/inspire once again the failed poet/
to take up his pen/and essay to place his meagre words upon the page...
0 new messages