Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #154407 > unrolled thread

IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical)

Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers

Contents

  IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Mike Hore <mike_horeREM@OVE.invalid.aapt.net.au> - 2015-11-12 14:31 +0930
    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) mentificium@gmail.com - 2015-11-12 04:49 -0800
    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-12 18:51 -0800
      Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-12 20:06 -0800
        Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Mike Hore <mike_horeREM@OVE.invalid.aapt.net.au> - 2015-11-13 14:45 +0930
      Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Mike Hore <mike_horeREM@OVE.invalid.aapt.net.au> - 2015-11-13 14:51 +0930
        Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-12 22:44 -0800
          Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Mike Hore <mike_horeREM@OVE.invalid.aapt.net.au> - 2015-11-14 10:28 +0930
            Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-13 17:20 -0800
            Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-14 17:13 -0500
              Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-14 14:43 -0800
                Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-15 07:18 -0500
                  Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-15 09:07 -0800
                    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-15 13:09 -0800
                      Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-15 13:35 -0800
                        Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-15 16:03 -0800
                          Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2015-11-15 18:26 -0600
                  Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-15 16:13 -0800
                    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "John Jackson" <jj@nospam.com> - 2015-11-16 13:27 +1100
                      Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2015-12-02 17:20 -0600
                        Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2015-12-03 20:39 -0500
                    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-16 01:16 -0500
                    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-16 08:22 -0500
                    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2015-12-02 17:16 -0600
                      Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-12-02 19:14 -0800
    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-13 17:45 -0800
      Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-13 21:02 -0500
    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-13 17:54 -0800
      Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-13 18:00 -0800
      Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Mike Hore <mike_horeREM@OVE.invalid.aapt.net.au> - 2015-11-14 12:22 +0930
        Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Mike Hore <mike_horeREM@OVE.invalid.aapt.net.au> - 2015-11-16 08:12 +0930
          Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-16 12:52 -0800
            Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Mike Hore <mike_horeREM@OVE.invalid.aapt.net.au> - 2015-11-17 08:21 +0930
              Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-16 16:39 -0800
                Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Mike Hore <mike_horeREM@OVE.invalid.aapt.net.au> - 2015-11-17 10:22 +0930
                  Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-16 17:52 -0800
                    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Mike Hore <mike_horeREM@OVE.invalid.aapt.net.au> - 2015-11-17 16:14 +0930
                      Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-17 06:22 -0800
                        Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-17 11:30 -0500
                        Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-17 16:43 +0000
                          Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Mike Hore <mike_horeREM@OVE.invalid.aapt.net.au> - 2015-11-18 08:29 +0930
                            Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-11-17 17:38 -0600
                            Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-17 17:36 -0800
                              Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Mike Hore <mike_horeREM@OVE.invalid.aapt.net.au> - 2015-11-18 12:23 +0930
                                Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-18 13:46 +0000
                                  Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-18 15:16 +0000
                                    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-18 07:31 -0800
                                      Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-18 15:52 +0000
                                        Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-18 10:02 -0800
                                          Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-18 18:25 +0000
                                            Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2015-11-18 13:37 -0500
                                            Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-18 11:06 -0800
                                            Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-18 19:21 +0000
                                              Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "hunar" <hunar@nospam.com> - 2015-11-19 16:09 +1100
                                            Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-18 16:09 -0500
                                              Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-11-19 14:56 -0600
                                                Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-20 09:53 +0000
                                          Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-18 19:12 +0000
                                            Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-11-19 16:24 +0000
                                          Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2015-11-18 15:24 -0700
                                          Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-19 14:26 +0000
                                      Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-18 16:09 -0500
                                        Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "hunar" <hunar@nospam.com> - 2015-11-19 16:11 +1100
                                      Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Alfred Falk <falk@arc.ab.ca> - 2015-11-18 21:25 +0000
                                        Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "hunar" <hunar@nospam.com> - 2015-11-19 16:18 +1100
                                          Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Alfred Falk <falk@arc.ab.ca> - 2015-11-20 19:04 +0000
                                            Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "hunar" <hunar@nospam.com> - 2015-11-21 11:29 +1100
                                  Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-11-19 16:01 +1100
                              Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) maus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-18 10:10 +0000
                                Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Mike Hore <mike_horeREM@OVE.invalid.aapt.net.au> - 2015-11-19 10:06 +0930
                                  Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-19 15:32 +0000
                                    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "hunar" <hunar@nospam.com> - 2015-11-20 05:58 +1100
                                      Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-19 19:15 +0000
                                      Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Bob Eager <news0005@eager.cx> - 2015-11-19 20:50 +0000
                                        Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2015-11-20 07:59 +0000
                                          Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-20 07:07 -0500
                                            Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-20 14:24 +0000
                                      Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-20 17:58 +0000
                                    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2015-11-20 13:33 +0000
                                  Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-19 11:23 -0600
                                    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-19 18:36 +0000
                                      Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-20 04:52 -0800
                                        Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-11-20 23:27 +0000
                                          Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-20 16:34 -0800
                                          Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-21 12:47 +0000
                                            Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "hunar" <hunar@nospam.com> - 2015-11-22 06:30 +1100
                                              Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Andrew Swallow <am.swallow@btinternet.com> - 2015-11-22 01:53 +0000
                                                Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2015-11-21 18:33 -0800
                                                Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "hunar" <hunar@nospam.com> - 2015-11-22 15:11 +1100
                                                  Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-11-21 23:59 -0600
                                                    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "hunar" <hunar@nospam.com> - 2015-11-22 20:10 +1100
                                                      Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-22 06:30 -0600
                                                        Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "hunar" <hunar@nospam.com> - 2015-11-23 05:44 +1100
                                        Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2015-11-21 16:45 +0000
                                    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-19 14:34 -0500
                                    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> - 2015-11-19 21:40 -0400
                                      Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "hunar" <hunar@nospam.com> - 2015-11-20 15:14 +1100
                                        Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Joy Beeson <jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> - 2015-11-20 19:27 -0400
                                      Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-11-20 06:09 +0000
                                Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "hunar" <hunar@nospam.com> - 2015-11-19 16:29 +1100
                                  Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-19 07:25 -0600
                                    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-11-19 06:56 -0800
                                    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "hunar" <hunar@nospam.com> - 2015-11-20 05:50 +1100
                              Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) "hunar" <hunar@nospam.com> - 2015-11-19 16:36 +1100
                  Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-16 18:29 -0800
              Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) Mike Hore <mike_horeREM@OVE.invalid.aapt.net.au> - 2016-02-07 13:25 +0930
    Re: IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical) jfehlinger@comcast.net - 2016-02-22 16:21 -0800

Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6  Next page →

#154785

Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> writes:

> John Jackson wrote:

>> <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote in message
>> news:87b081d0-efd3-4fe3-bf5b-fae910dd888b@googlegroups.com...

>>> If memory serves, the Digital VAX line (DEC10 and DEC20?)
>>> were popular mid-range computers.

>> Not clear what you are saying there. The VAXs were
>> a completely separate line to the DEC10s and DEC20s.

> Yes, but the OS command script language was quite similar, the HLL language 
> variants were also quite similar.  So, although the basic instruction set 
> and general machine layout was quite different, it was possible for 
> competent programmers to migrate their programs from DECSystem 10 or 20 to 
> VMS in a very short time.  They would grumble, of course, but it really was 
> not hard.

Hmm.  As a professional TOPS-20 and Tops-10 programmer (and yes, I still make a
living with that as part of my daily job!), I have to disagree about the
similarities among DCL, EXEC, and the command processor in the Tops-10 monitor.
Does VMS have command line completion yet?  Question-mark help mid-command,
with automagic refresh of the command line to that point instead of retyping?

High-level language programmers don't generally have to worry about those kinds
of things, but they do occasionally have to worry about differences in integer
size, bit ordering, character representation, file system organization, etc.
They have reason to grumble if they have to port something to VMS, whether to
VAX, Alpha, or Itanic, from the PDP-10, whatever operating system it's running.

-- 
Rich Alderson                                   news@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...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154540

hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:

> On Sunday, November 15, 2015 at 7:18:33 AM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote:
>
>> We ran our administrative stuff on a remote IBM mainframe using CICS.  We
>> wanted email, conferencing, and the ability to run some stuff for profs and
>> students.
>
> Would you recall what kind of stuff you ran on the VAX?
>
> If memory serves, the Digital VAX line (DEC10 and DEC20?) were
> popular mid-range computers.  Would anyone know how their sales
> volume compared to the IBM S/3x AS/400 line?
>
> Also, would anyone know if the orignal System/3 supported 
> on-line inquiry terminals, or did that come later?  I think 
> that may have been a big advantage of the PDP line, since
> they supported Teletypes early on.  The Bell Telephone
> installations made wide use of the Teletype CRT unit.

Terminals were introduced with the S/34.
Not a Teletype though, a 5250.
Sort of an IBM 3270 with improvements.


-- 
Dan Espen

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154548

<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Sunday, November 15, 2015 at 7:18:33 AM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote:
> 
>> We ran our administrative stuff on a remote IBM mainframe using CICS.  We
>> wanted email, conferencing, and the ability to run some stuff for profs and
>> students.
> 
> Would you recall what kind of stuff you ran on the VAX?
> 
> If memory serves, the Digital VAX line (DEC10 and DEC20?) were
> popular mid-range computers.  Would anyone know how their sales
> volume compared to the IBM S/3x AS/400 line?
> 
> Also, would anyone know if the orignal System/3 supported 
> on-line inquiry terminals, or did that come later?  I think 
> that may have been a big advantage of the PDP line, since
> they supported Teletypes early on.  The Bell Telephone
> installations made wide use of the Teletype CRT unit.
> 

We ran email (with a bitnet gateway whose name escapes me at the momement),
conferencing software (ditto),
RJE and 3270 emulation, plus compilers and various other stuff.  As I said,
all our admin. work was done on a 370.

-- 
Pete

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154777

hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> On Sunday, November 15, 2015 at 7:18:33 AM UTC-5, Peter Flass wrote:
> 
>> We ran our administrative stuff on a remote IBM mainframe using CICS.  We
>> wanted email, conferencing, and the ability to run some stuff for profs
>> and students.
> 
> Would you recall what kind of stuff you ran on the VAX?
> 
> If memory serves, the Digital VAX line (DEC10 and DEC20?) were
> popular mid-range computers.  Would anyone know how their sales
> volume compared to the IBM S/3x AS/400 line?
> 
Wikipedia says 400,000 VAXes were sold.  Not sure how accurate that is, or 
what period that covers.

Jon

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154780

Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> writes:
> Wikipedia says 400,000 VAXes were sold.  Not sure how accurate that is, or 
> what period that covers.

old post with 88 IDC report, VAX sliced&diced by model, year, US/non-US
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2002f.html#0 

it has 139,195 total from 1978-1987 ... but that includes 64,900 MVII

-- 
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154474

I've looked into this, and I now understand that the System/32 and System/34 are 
not relevant to your query.

Since compilers on the System/38 and AS/400 generated TIMI code, and then IMPI 
code was internally associated with the binaries by something at a lower level of 
the system - so that when they changed to the PowerPC, all that was needed was to 
generate PowerPC code from TIMI instead - IMPI was very much something nobody was 
intended to use directly.

So any documentation of IMPI would have been internal to IBM for use by system 
designers. (TIMI, on the other hand, should have been somewhat more widely 
documented.) Thus, it's unlikely any copies were floating around outside IBM. 
This doesn't preclude Bitsavers getting its hands on them, but it certainly is 
an explanation if they couldn't.

John Savard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154477

Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> writes:

> I've looked into this, and I now understand that the System/32 and System/34 are 
> not relevant to your query.
>
> Since compilers on the System/38 and AS/400 generated TIMI code, and then IMPI 
> code was internally associated with the binaries by something at a lower level of 
> the system - so that when they changed to the PowerPC, all that was needed was to 
> generate PowerPC code from TIMI instead - IMPI was very much something nobody was 
> intended to use directly.
>
> So any documentation of IMPI would have been internal to IBM for use by system 
> designers. (TIMI, on the other hand, should have been somewhat more widely 
> documented.) Thus, it's unlikely any copies were floating around outside IBM. 
> This doesn't preclude Bitsavers getting its hands on them, but it certainly is 
> an explanation if they couldn't.

Not sure I agree.
My experience with the line stopped with the S/34.
But I've read the S/38 and AS/400 documentation
and at least from a software perspective, you can
see the ongoing refinement of the S/34 OS.

-- 
Dan Espen

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154475

I've found a reply to an old post by Eric Smith of Retrocomputing that gives some helpful leads:

(begin quote)
IBM published a manual describing the S/38 instruction set in detail.
The CISC AS/400 instruction set is nearly identical.  The manual was
called "S/38 Internal Microprogramming Instructions, Formats and
Functions Reference Manual", pub number SC21-9037.  It's still listed
on IBMlink at:

http://www1.ibmlink.ibm.com/cgi-bin/master?request=pubscatalog&parms=SN&xh=xyJpCDuXYIy1Ek0USenGnF9332&xhi=usa.main%7Cpubscatalog%5E&orderno=SC21-9037

They say it's obsolete (pub date is 10/81!), but they list a price of
$32.50.  Don't know if they'll send you one.

There's a summary of AS/400 CISC architecture at:

http://users.snip.net/~gbooker/AS400/arch.htm

--Dave

On 21 Jun 2000 11:09:22 -0700, Eric Smith
<eric-no-s...@brouhaha.com> wrote:

>Now that I actually own an old AS/400 (9406-B45), I'm more
>curious than ever about the IMPI CISC processor.  Did IBM ever
>publish any description of the architecture, even in general
>terms?  How different is it from the System/38 processor
>architecture (and was anything published on that)?
>
>I've never worked on a machine with a single-level store, so I'm
>eager to learn about it.
>
>Cheers,
>Eric
(end quote)

As well, I've seen a reference to a document entitled AS/400 IMPI Specification 
in a document concerning a Department of Defense evaluation of the AS/400.

John Savard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154476

On Friday, November 13, 2015 at 6:54:03 PM UTC-7, Quadibloc quoted, in part:

> http://users.snip.net/~gbooker/AS400/arch.htm

This link is no longer valid, but one can go back to 2001 with the Wayback machine. It only has general information, though.

I've found

http://www.verycomputer.com/153_4d985c1df03dd296_1.htm

which contains a discussion that may be helpful.

John Savard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154478

On 14/11/2015 11:24 AM, Quadibloc wrote:
> I've found a reply to an old post by Eric Smith of Retrocomputing that gives some helpful leads:
> 
> (begin quote)
> IBM published a manual describing the S/38 instruction set in detail.
> The CISC AS/400 instruction set is nearly identical.  The manual was
> called "S/38 Internal Microprogramming Instructions, Formats and
> Functions Reference Manual", pub number SC21-9037.  It's still listed
> on IBMlink at:
> 
> http://www1.ibmlink.ibm.com/cgi-bin/master?request=pubscatalog&parms=SN&xh=xyJpCDuXYIy1Ek0USenGnF9332&xhi=usa.main%7Cpubscatalog%5E&orderno=SC21-9037
> 
> They say it's obsolete (pub date is 10/81!), but they list a price of
> $32.50.  Don't know if they'll send you one.

Now that's one that I'd love to get my hands on, but it doesn't appear
to be available any more.  And Googling for "SC21-9037" doesn't give any
useful hits.

However the Machine Interface (MI) manual went up on bitsavers last year:

http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/www.bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/system38/GA21-9331-1_System_38_Functional_Reference_Manual_Feb81.pdf

That's the target for the compilers.  It's great to have that manual
available at least.

Cheers,  Mike.


---------------------------------------------------------------
     Mike Hore     mike_horeREM@OVE.invalid.aapt.net.au
---------------------------------------------------------------

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154527

On 14/11/2015 12:22 PM, Mike Hore wrote:
> On 14/11/2015 11:24 AM, Quadibloc wrote:
>> I've found a reply to an old post by Eric Smith of Retrocomputing that gives some helpful leads:
>>
>> (begin quote)
>> IBM published a manual describing the S/38 instruction set in detail.
>> The CISC AS/400 instruction set is nearly identical.  The manual was
>> called "S/38 Internal Microprogramming Instructions, Formats and
>> Functions Reference Manual", pub number SC21-9037.  It's still listed
>> on IBMlink at:
>>
>> http://www1.ibmlink.ibm.com/cgi-bin/master?request=pubscatalog&parms=SN&xh=xyJpCDuXYIy1Ek0USenGnF9332&xhi=usa.main%7Cpubscatalog%5E&orderno=SC21-9037
>>
>> They say it's obsolete (pub date is 10/81!), but they list a price of
>> $32.50.  Don't know if they'll send you one.
> 
> Now that's one that I'd love to get my hands on, but it doesn't appear
> to be available any more.  And Googling for "SC21-9037" doesn't give any
> useful hits.

I've found that I could make a formal request to IBM Archives for SC21-9037:

http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/request2/terms.html

However the process looks very bureaucratic, even having to send a
request by snail mail.  It would be very easy for them to decide it's
still confidential, especially as I'm just a private individual, not a
university.  And then from the terms and conditions I wouldn't have the
right to send it to Bitsavers.  It looks to me like it would be much
better for somebody within IBM to do it.

Cheers,  Mike.


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
     Mike Hore     mike_horeREM@OVE.invalid.aapt.net.au
---------------------------------------------------------------

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154561

On Sunday, November 15, 2015 at 5:42:54 PM UTC-5, Mike Hore wrote:

> However the process looks very bureaucratic, even having to send a
> request by snail mail.  It would be very easy for them to decide it's
> still confidential, especially as I'm just a private individual, not a
> university.  And then from the terms and conditions I wouldn't have the
> right to send it to Bitsavers.  It looks to me like it would be much
> better for somebody within IBM to do it.

In fairness to IBM, it would not be easy for them decide if something
like this is still confidential.  First, a lot of factors go into
whether something can be released or not.  Secondly, the archives
can't decide that, it must inquire to technical people.

Some years ago IBM was burned by malicious individuals utilizing 
stuff in their archives.  So, it would be understandable that
they'd be gun shy.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154568

On 17/11/2015 6:22 AM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Sunday, November 15, 2015 at 5:42:54 PM UTC-5, Mike Hore wrote:
> 
>> However the process looks very bureaucratic, even having to send a
>> request by snail mail.  It would be very easy for them to decide it's
>> still confidential, especially as I'm just a private individual, not a
>> university.  And then from the terms and conditions I wouldn't have the
>> right to send it to Bitsavers.  It looks to me like it would be much
>> better for somebody within IBM to do it.
> 
> In fairness to IBM, it would not be easy for them decide if something
> like this is still confidential.  First, a lot of factors go into
> whether something can be released or not.  Secondly, the archives
> can't decide that, it must inquire to technical people.
> 
> Some years ago IBM was burned by malicious individuals utilizing 
> stuff in their archives.  So, it would be understandable that
> they'd be gun shy.

OK thanks for that.  Yes, that makes sense.  Legal advice would probably
be needed as well as technical, given that the document WAS confidential
in the '80s when the technology under the Machine Interface was secret
to preserve the integrity of the system and its technology independence.
 There was all sorts of antitrust stuff going on in the `80s which as
you know is why everything under the MI was labelled "microcode".  I'm
sure that's all ancient history now, but somebody would need to decide that.

I might try sending my request anyway, but I'm not too hopeful.

Cheers,  Mike.


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
     Mike Hore     mike_horeREM@OVE.invalid.aapt.net.au
---------------------------------------------------------------

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154574

On Monday, November 16, 2015 at 5:51:12 PM UTC-5, Mike Hore wrote:

> I might try sending my request anyway, but I'm not too hopeful.

Good luck!

I don't know if they still allow visitors, but if practical, 
it is a fascinating place.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154577

On 17/11/2015 10:09 AM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Monday, November 16, 2015 at 5:51:12 PM UTC-5, Mike Hore wrote:
> 
>> I might try sending my request anyway, but I'm not too hopeful.
> 
> Good luck!
> 
> I don't know if they still allow visitors, but if practical, 
> it is a fascinating place.
> 

I'd love to, but it's a long swim from here (Darwin, Australia)
:-)

Cheers,  Mike.

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------
     Mike Hore     mike_horeREM@OVE.invalid.aapt.net.au
---------------------------------------------------------------

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154580

On Monday, November 16, 2015 at 5:52:20 PM UTC-7, Mike Hore wrote:

> I'd love to, but it's a long swim from here (Darwin, Australia)
> :-)

Well, you may be in a poor position to visit IBM, but you're in a good position to prove the world is round.

Beteween yourself and someone in Sydney, by determining geographic North or 
South, comparing the time sundials show, to prove that the right number of time 
zones exist between your location and theirs... and then showing that the drive 
from Sydney to Perth is of the correct distance, you can show that the Earth 
can't be either a projection centered on the North Pole, or an adjusted version 
with the southern continents shrunk to their correct size.

Which is the last surviving 'flat earth' layout that is sometimes defended.

John Savard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154586

On 17/11/2015 11:22 AM, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Monday, November 16, 2015 at 5:52:20 PM UTC-7, Mike Hore wrote:
> 
>> I'd love to, but it's a long swim from here (Darwin, Australia)
>> :-)
> 
> Well, you may be in a poor position to visit IBM, but you're in a good position to prove the world is round.
> 
> Beteween yourself and someone in Sydney, by determining geographic North or 
> South, comparing the time sundials show, to prove that the right number of time 
> zones exist between your location and theirs... and then showing that the drive 
> from Sydney to Perth is of the correct distance, you can show that the Earth 
> can't be either a projection centered on the North Pole, or an adjusted version 
> with the southern continents shrunk to their correct size.
> 
> Which is the last surviving 'flat earth' layout that is sometimes defended.

Good suggestion.  Actually right now I'm watching a Cricket match in
Perth on TV (if you don't know much about Cricket, that's fine, you have
to be born into it :-)  It will still be broad daylight there after the
sun has set here.  Actually right on sunset I could look at the shadows
on the field and do some trig.  But actually I'd be a bit more
interested in the score ;-)

Cheers,  Mike.

---------------------------------------------------------------
     Mike Hore     mike_horeREM@OVE.invalid.aapt.net.au
---------------------------------------------------------------

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154591

On Monday, November 16, 2015 at 11:44:25 PM UTC-7, Mike Hore wrote:

> It will still be broad daylight there after the
> sun has set here.

I see my knowledge of Australian geography is somewhat lacking. I had thought 
that Darwin was located about where Perth actually is. In the case of Darwin, 
travel to Sydney would likely be by ship rather than by road, and of course the 
sea captains would be sworn members of the round-earth conspiracy - or so the 
flat-earth people would say.

Unless the Northern Territory is slightly less inaccessible and impassable than 
the textbooks of my youth had said.

John Savard

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154593

Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> On Monday, November 16, 2015 at 11:44:25 PM UTC-7, Mike Hore wrote:
> 
>> It will still be broad daylight there after the
>> sun has set here.
> 
> I see my knowledge of Australian geography is somewhat lacking. I had thought 
> that Darwin was located about where Perth actually is. 

I remember Darwin from WW II.  Well, not actually remember...

In the case of Darwin, 
> travel to Sydney would likely be by ship rather than by road, and of course the 
> sea captains would be sworn members of the round-earth conspiracy - or so the 
> flat-earth people would say.
> 
> Unless the Northern Territory is slightly less inaccessible and impassable than 
> the textbooks of my youth had said.
> 
> John Savard
> 



-- 
Pete

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#154595

On 2015-11-17, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> On Monday, November 16, 2015 at 11:44:25 PM UTC-7, Mike Hore wrote:
>
>> It will still be broad daylight there after the
>> sun has set here.
>
> I see my knowledge of Australian geography is somewhat lacking. I had thought 
> that Darwin was located about where Perth actually is. In the case of Darwin, 
> travel to Sydney would likely be by ship rather than by road, and of course the 
> sea captains would be sworn members of the round-earth conspiracy - or so the 
> flat-earth people would say.
>
> Unless the Northern Territory is slightly less inaccessible and impassable than 
> the textbooks of my youth had said.
>
> John Savard

AFAIK, the original town site was abandoned some time ago, and
a new site somehat inland was built.


-- 
greymaus
 .
  .
...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers

csiph-web