Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #159559
| From | "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | alt.folklore.computers |
| Subject | Re: Delay Line Memory |
| Date | 2016-02-17 14:35 +1100 |
| Message-ID | <dii84fF68qpU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | <na03mr$ttc$1@dont-email.me> <a96bdf8d-4419-477d-a3d5-6eefc4772139@googlegroups.com> |
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote in message news:a96bdf8d-4419-477d-a3d5-6eefc4772139@googlegroups.com... > On Tuesday, February 16, 2016 at 4:21:16 PM UTC-5, Charles Richmond wrote: >> Yesterday I saw a video on YouTube about a delay line memory device. It >> did >> *not* use mercury or any liquid to hold and circulate the memory >> contents. >> Instead it had a *wire*!!! The wire was physically twisted at one end ot >> input the bit. The other end "decoded" the bit and also re-circulated >> the >> bit. > > As someone else mentioned, there was probably some sort of electrical > component to receive and then pass on each bit. The delay in doing so > allowed for the memory. > > Old issues of C&A had ads for "pulse transformers", which may have been > used for delay line memory. > > Today, it's hard to believe that core memory was once so expensive that > cheaper alternatives were sought. > > When IBM introduced the 650, which used a magnetic drum for memory, > I think core was available, but the drum was cheaper. Later variants > of the 650 had a tiny bit of core for buffers. As just discussed, > the low end 1401 had only 1,400 characters of memory in it. > > Question: when IBM introduced its PC, it had up to 640k of memory. > I think smaller amounts were available, with a cheaper price. Did > customers actually want to save a few bucks and go for the cheaper > and smaller PC? Yes, some did. > (To me, it seemed people couldn't wait for expanded > and extended memory to come out so the PC could get up to 1 meg and > even beyond, But not everyone did that. > so it's hard to believe people would accept less than 640k.) Plenty did.
Back to alt.folklore.computers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Delay Line Memory "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-02-16 15:21 -0600
Re: Delay Line Memory Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-16 15:41 -0600
Re: Delay Line Memory David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 22:18 +0000
Re: Delay Line Memory Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-16 17:36 -0500
Re: Delay Line Memory Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-16 16:57 -0600
Re: Delay Line Memory bert <bert.hutchings@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-16 15:08 -0800
Re: Delay Line Memory Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-17 01:31 +0000
Re: Delay Line Memory Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-17 03:42 +0000
Re: Delay Line Memory Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-17 00:25 +0100
Re: Delay Line Memory Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk> - 2016-02-17 14:03 +0000
Re: Delay Line Memory Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-17 00:14 +0000
Re: Delay Line Memory Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-17 11:46 -0800
Re: Delay Line Memory jhhaynes@earthlink.net - 2016-02-17 18:18 -0800
Re: Delay Line Memory David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 09:44 +0000
Re: Delay Line Memory hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-16 16:43 -0800
Re: Delay Line Memory Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-17 01:24 +0000
Re: Delay Line Memory Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-16 18:52 -0700
Re: Delay Line Memory Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-16 22:19 -0500
Re: Delay Line Memory JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 11:34 -0600
Re: Delay Line Memory Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-16 20:06 -0600
Re: Delay Line Memory Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-16 20:23 -0600
Re: Delay Line Memory "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 14:35 +1100
Re: Delay Line Memory Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-17 04:17 +0000
Re: Delay Line Memory "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-02-18 17:14 -0600
Re: Delay Line Memory Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-18 19:27 -0600
Re: Delay Line Memory Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-19 04:14 +0000
Re: Delay Line Memory Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-19 19:07 -0500
Re: Delay Line Memory Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-17 01:30 +0000
Re: Delay Line Memory "Joe Morris" <j.c.morris@verizon.net> - 2016-02-17 19:11 -0500
Re: Delay Line Memory Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-17 23:13 -0500
Re: Delay Line Memory Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-02-17 22:25 -0600
Re: Delay Line Memory isw <isw@witzend.com> - 2016-02-17 23:16 -0800
Re: Delay Line Memory Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-02-18 12:01 -0600
Re: Delay Line Memory Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-02-18 12:10 -0600
Re: Delay Line Memory Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-18 13:46 -0600
Re: Delay Line Memory Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-19 19:13 -0500
Re: Delay Line Memory Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-18 04:49 -0800
Re: Delay Line Memory Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-19 19:21 -0500
Re: Delay Line Memory Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-18 04:51 -0800
Re: Delay Line Memory Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-19 19:16 -0500
Re: Delay Line Memory Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-16 18:52 -0700
Re: Delay Line Memory "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-02-19 20:50 -0600
Re: Delay Line Memory Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-20 06:31 +0000
Re: Delay Line Memory G. <gerry77@no.spam.mail.com> - 2016-02-17 04:08 +0100
Re: Delay Line Memory Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-02-17 08:19 +0000
Re: Delay Line Memory Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-02-17 14:57 -0600
Re: Delay Line Memory "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-02-19 20:43 -0600
Re: Delay Line Memory isw <isw@witzend.com> - 2016-02-19 22:13 -0800
Re: Delay Line Memory Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-02-20 08:17 +0000
Re: Delay Line Memory Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-20 09:17 -0600
Re: Delay Line Memory Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-20 09:20 -0600
Re: Delay Line Memory Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-20 18:49 -0800
Re: Delay Line Memory isw <isw@witzend.com> - 2016-02-20 21:06 -0800
Re: Delay Line Memory jhhaynes@earthlink.net - 2016-02-17 18:23 -0800
Re: Delay Line Memory isw <isw@witzend.com> - 2016-02-17 23:06 -0800
csiph-web