Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #236265 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-10-31 21:38 +0000 |
| Last post | 2026-11-02 13:58 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 307 — 28 participants |
Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-10-31 21:38 +0000
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-01 04:30 -0500
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-11-01 10:16 +0000
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-01 19:13 +0000
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-11-02 09:35 -0800
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-11-02 20:27 +0000
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-11-02 13:50 -0800
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-02 20:42 -0500
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-03 02:42 +0000
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-11-03 16:38 +0800
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-03 08:40 +0000
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-03 07:29 -0700
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-11-04 02:02 +0800
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-03 19:45 +0100
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-01 18:17 -0500
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 16:45 -0800
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-01 21:00 -0500
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-02 02:16 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-11-02 04:48 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-11-02 14:13 +0800
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-11-02 06:47 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-11-02 20:02 +0800
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-11-02 19:48 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-05 23:17 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-05 19:37 -0700
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-05 21:54 -0500
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-06 20:51 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-06 04:24 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-05 23:31 -0500
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Richard Kettlewell <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-06 08:46 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-06 07:41 -0700
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-06 14:30 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-06 20:53 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-11-07 06:13 +0800
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-07 01:12 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-02 16:51 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-11-02 20:10 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-02 03:56 -0500
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-11-02 20:03 +0800
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-02 13:51 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-11-02 19:56 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2026-11-04 19:48 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-02 01:28 -0500
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-11-02 09:41 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-02 11:22 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-11-02 20:11 +0800
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-02 13:57 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-11-03 00:20 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-03 12:45 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-11-03 11:49 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-03 13:02 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> - 2026-11-03 13:26 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-03 07:35 -0700
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-03 18:06 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-03 21:52 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-04 07:48 -0700
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-04 21:45 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-03 21:51 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-03 14:29 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-03 14:28 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-11-03 22:15 +0000
Re: [OT] Mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-03 22:47 +0000
Re: [OT] Mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-11-03 23:18 +0000
Re: [OT] Mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-04 03:12 +0000
Re: [OT] Mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-11-04 08:26 +0000
Re: [OT] Mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-05 01:20 +0000
[OT] Fujitsu Horizon (was: Re: [OT] Mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-05 08:19 +0000
Re: [OT] Fujitsu Horizon Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-11-05 09:50 +0000
Re: [OT] Mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-04 09:09 -0700
Re: [OT] Mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-11-04 22:59 +0000
Re: [OT] Mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-04 19:10 -0700
Re: [OT] Mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-03 22:30 -0500
Re: [OT] Mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-04 03:57 +0000
Re: [OT] Mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-11-04 16:57 +0800
Re: [OT] Mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-04 19:51 +0000
Re: [OT] Mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-11-05 04:48 +0800
Re: [OT] Mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-11-06 06:38 +0000
Re: [OT] Mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-05 08:27 +0000
Re: [OT] Mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-04 09:11 -0700
Re: [OT] Mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-11-06 06:40 +0000
Re: [OT] Mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-04 10:43 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-04 07:54 -0700
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-11-04 19:59 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-04 19:04 -0700
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-05 03:34 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-11-05 06:27 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-05 21:01 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-11-06 15:45 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-07 11:32 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-03 20:29 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-04 07:40 -0700
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-04 19:51 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-04 19:02 -0700
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-11-05 15:02 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-05 19:18 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-05 21:00 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-05 21:57 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-05 23:04 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-05 19:15 -0500
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-11-04 03:23 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-04 10:53 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-04 21:47 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-11-04 22:22 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-05 21:09 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-05 00:14 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-05 01:18 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-05 12:27 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-05 21:12 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-05 22:22 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-05 15:59 -0700
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-11-06 06:35 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-06 23:09 -0500
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-07 11:45 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-07 07:37 -0700
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-11-07 22:49 +0800
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-11-07 14:54 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-07 13:31 -0500
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-11-08 02:56 +0800
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2026-11-08 21:19 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-07 20:03 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-11-07 20:56 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-07 21:53 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-11-08 01:23 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-04 11:25 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-11-04 19:45 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-11-05 03:33 +0800
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-05 21:05 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-11-03 00:08 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-02 21:12 -0500
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-11-03 15:13 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-03 20:27 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-11-03 21:37 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-03 23:01 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-03 22:18 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-04 11:09 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> - 2026-11-03 22:51 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-03 23:02 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-03 22:54 -0500
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-03 23:02 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-03 22:58 -0500
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2026-11-07 16:04 -1000
NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-11-08 05:59 -0800
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2026-11-08 08:11 -1000
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-08 21:31 +0000
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-11-08 13:45 -0800
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2026-11-08 12:21 -1000
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-08 23:51 +0000
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-08 20:33 -0700
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-08 22:59 -0500
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2026-11-09 07:32 -1000
Re: what's a mainframe, NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-09 21:20 +0000
Re: what's a mainframe, NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-09 22:07 -0500
Re: what's a mainframe, NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Alexander Schreiber <als@usenet.thangorodrim.de> - 2026-11-10 10:37 +0100
Re: what's a mainframe, NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Pancho <Pancho.Jones@protonmail.com> - 2026-11-10 12:22 +0000
Re: what's a mainframe, NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-11-10 06:31 -0800
Re: what's a mainframe, NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-11-10 15:14 +0000
Re: what's a mainframe, NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-10 07:35 -0700
Re: what's a mainframe, NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-10 18:36 +0000
Re: what's a mainframe, NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2026-11-10 07:29 -1000
Re: what's a mainframe, NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2026-11-10 07:55 -1000
Re: what's a mainframe, NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-10 12:19 -0700
Re: what's a mainframe, NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-10 12:16 -0700
Re: what's a mainframe, NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-10 18:36 +0000
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-11-10 07:09 +0000
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-10 07:27 +0000
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Alexander Schreiber <als@usenet.thangorodrim.de> - 2026-11-10 10:50 +0100
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-10 07:37 -0700
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-11-10 15:18 +0000
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-10 10:45 +0000
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-11-10 15:16 +0000
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-10 18:36 +0000
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-09 04:42 +0000
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-09 10:01 +0000
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-09 11:08 +0000
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-11-09 15:59 +0000
Re: NYT and Stratus (Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-11-09 09:38 +0800
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2026-11-08 08:32 -1000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-08 21:32 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> - 2026-11-08 11:55 -1000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-08 21:49 -0500
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-11-04 15:34 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-04 11:08 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-04 07:36 -0700
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-11-05 00:13 +0800
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-05 20:58 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-03 02:42 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-03 02:49 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-03 02:53 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-03 04:44 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-03 07:15 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-03 20:27 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-03 23:41 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-04 10:58 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-04 11:19 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-04 19:51 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-05 00:19 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-05 01:24 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-11-05 15:48 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-05 19:17 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-04 21:52 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> - 2026-11-03 09:28 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-03 20:25 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> - 2026-11-03 20:53 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-03 21:57 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> - 2026-11-03 22:44 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-03 23:05 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-04 11:27 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-04 09:20 -0700
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-04 07:52 -0700
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-04 21:50 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-05 08:59 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-11-04 15:36 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-11-04 02:42 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-04 07:43 -0700
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-04 19:51 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-11-03 21:35 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-04 07:32 -0700
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-11-04 11:32 -0500
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-11-04 18:52 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-04 19:51 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-11-05 05:02 +0800
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-11-05 18:43 -0800
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-11-06 06:44 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-11-06 21:29 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-06 04:34 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-06 20:51 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-11-06 21:31 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-07 01:22 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-11-07 05:00 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-07 04:12 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-11-07 05:39 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-07 11:37 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-11-07 06:25 +0800
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-11-04 22:01 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-02 22:53 -0500
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-03 07:15 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-11-03 19:28 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-03 22:01 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-03 23:41 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-11-04 01:13 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-03 12:50 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-03 14:31 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-11-03 19:16 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-03 07:31 -0700
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-11-04 02:13 +0800
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-11-03 05:28 -0800
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-03 22:00 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-11-04 15:42 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-11-04 03:29 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-04 04:00 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-04 04:05 +0000
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-03 23:04 +0000
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-03 23:05 -0500
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-04 04:15 +0000
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-04 00:14 -0500
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-04 18:24 +0000
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-04 06:21 +0000
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-04 07:10 +0000
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-04 07:00 -0500
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-04 18:28 +0000
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2026-11-04 16:50 -0500
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-11-06 03:02 +0100
Re: [OT] what's a byte, was mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-06 02:44 +0000
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-11-05 19:57 +0000
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-05 21:57 +0000
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-05 21:57 +0000
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-05 16:01 -0700
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-05 23:06 +0000
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-06 02:50 +0000
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-11-06 15:25 +0000
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2026-11-04 16:44 -0500
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-11-06 17:30 +0000
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-07 04:33 +0000
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-07 07:30 -0700
Re: [OT] what's a mini, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-07 19:40 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-11-03 15:18 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-11-04 02:59 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-02 22:29 -0500
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-11-04 03:16 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-03 22:23 -0500
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2026-11-04 19:18 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-11-04 03:17 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-11-04 02:07 +0000
Re: [OT] highly reliable upgradable mainframes, Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-04 03:06 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-04 03:54 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-11-04 15:54 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-04 19:51 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-02 16:51 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-02 11:13 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-11-02 19:41 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-02 17:01 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-03 12:36 +0100
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-11-03 07:10 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-11-03 05:44 -0800
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-03 07:38 -0700
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-11-03 22:16 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> - 2026-11-04 07:58 -0700
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-04 21:44 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2026-11-05 17:13 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-03 20:35 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2026-11-03 21:11 +0000
Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-11-04 03:09 +0000
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-02 10:52 +0000
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-11-02 15:35 +0000
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-02 10:47 +0000
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-11-02 20:16 +0800
Re: [OT] Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-02 13:58 +0000
Page 10 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 … 16 Next page →
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-04 15:34 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <wgIGS.199921$MmU5.36478@fx44.iad> |
| In reply to | #236413 |
John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> writes: >According to Scott Lurndal <slp53@pacbell.net>: >>>So, as usual, the facts are not correctly represented by the resident >>>armchair experts >> >>Dig into a bit and you'll find that those are refreshes for existing >>customers, not new customers. > >IBM has two markets for z mainframes, the legacy S/360/370/390 market >and high performance linux servers which they call LinuxONE. > >I agree they're not likely to have new legacy customers but I'd be surprised >that they put all that effort into LinuxONE without expecting to get new >customers out of it. It's possible they might pick up one or two, but _if_ their linux offering is still running the legacy instruction set, that fundamentally limits the third-party software available on LinuxOne. I have trouble seeing it as a viable alternative to AWS or other cloud offerings (many of which also support similar or better uptime SLAs). [Disclaimer - I do own some stock in IBM]. > >They just announced that the next generation of z will have a >partnership with ARM so the processors can run ARM64 code as well as >the three legacy 360 modes. That tells me they're trying to get >customers who already have the ARM code running in the cloud at AWS or >Azure. Will be interesting to see how it plays out. The Neoverse IP is fairly straightforward to integrate into an existing SoC.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-04 11:08 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <11cf3o0$k0n0$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #236398 |
On 03/11/2026 21:37, Scott Lurndal wrote: >> So, as usual, the facts are not correctly represented by the resident >> armchair experts > Dig into a bit and you'll find that those are refreshes for existing > customers, not new customers. So what? So is every new I-phone/Android model. And just about every ARM chip. THERE ARE NO NEW CUSTOMERS except for AI slop Any more than there are for new cars. -- There is nothing a fleet of dispatchable nuclear power plants cannot do that cannot be done worse and more expensively and with higher carbon emissions and more adverse environmental impact by adding intermittent renewable energy.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <Peter@Iron-Spring.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-04 07:36 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <11cfft4$ooah$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #236388 |
On 11/3/26 13:27, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 03/11/2026 15:13, Scott Lurndal wrote: >> Actually, the numbers decline every year. The vast majority are >> legacy installations (particularly for the Burroughs/Univac/Unisys >> mainframes) and there are very few, if any, new customers adopting >> mainframes of any flavor. > > "Global mainframe market size and IBM Z mainframe revenue trends > highlight a cyclical pattern dominated by multi-year refresh waves (such > as the z16 and z17 cycles): > > Global Mainframe Market Size: > > Valued at approximately $5.33 billion to $5.71 billion in 2025. > Projected to grow to $5.65 billion to $6.11 billion in 2026. > Forecasted to reach $7.54 billion to $10.53 billion by > 2031–2034, driven by a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of roughly > 5.95% to 7.05%. > > IBM Z Mainframe Performance & Fluctuations: > Late 2025 (z17 Launch / Q4): IBM reported its strongest Q4 > mainframe revenue in 20 years, with IBM Z sales surging 67% > year-over-year as enterprises adopted the z17 architecture. > Mid-2026 (Q2): IBM Z mainframe revenue experienced a short-term > 42% year-over-year decline in fiscal Q2 2026 due to delayed large > capital expenditure (capex) deals and client shifts toward > supply-constrained servers, though management noted these were deferred > purchases rather than lost contracts (with roughly one-third closing > shortly after the quarter)." > > So, as usual, the facts are not correctly represented by the resident > armchair experts > My only question is how many mainframe shipments represent NEW customers, as opposed to additional horsepower for current customers. I suppose, given that the trend today is to consolidation of everything, that eventually everything will be owned by BigCorp, who will then be the only mainframe customer.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-05 00:13 +0800 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <YQIGS.32677$3SG5.4982@fx16.ams4> |
| In reply to | #236470 |
On 11/4/2026 10:36 PM, Peter Flass wrote: > On 11/3/26 13:27, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> On 03/11/2026 15:13, Scott Lurndal wrote: >>> Actually, the numbers decline every year. The vast majority are >>> legacy installations (particularly for the Burroughs/Univac/Unisys >>> mainframes) and there are very few, if any, new customers adopting >>> mainframes of any flavor. >> >> "Global mainframe market size and IBM Z mainframe revenue trends >> highlight a cyclical pattern dominated by multi-year refresh waves (such >> as the z16 and z17 cycles): >> >> Global Mainframe Market Size: >> >> Valued at approximately $5.33 billion to $5.71 billion in 2025. >> Projected to grow to $5.65 billion to $6.11 billion in 2026. >> Forecasted to reach $7.54 billion to $10.53 billion by >> 2031–2034, driven by a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of roughly >> 5.95% to 7.05%. >> >> IBM Z Mainframe Performance & Fluctuations: >> Late 2025 (z17 Launch / Q4): IBM reported its strongest Q4 >> mainframe revenue in 20 years, with IBM Z sales surging 67% >> year-over-year as enterprises adopted the z17 architecture. >> Mid-2026 (Q2): IBM Z mainframe revenue experienced a short-term >> 42% year-over-year decline in fiscal Q2 2026 due to delayed large >> capital expenditure (capex) deals and client shifts toward >> supply-constrained servers, though management noted these were deferred >> purchases rather than lost contracts (with roughly one-third closing >> shortly after the quarter)." >> >> So, as usual, the facts are not correctly represented by the resident >> armchair experts >> > > My only question is how many mainframe shipments represent NEW > customers, as opposed to additional horsepower for current customers. > > I suppose, given that the trend today is to consolidation of everything, > that eventually everything will be owned by BigCorp, who will then be > the only mainframe customer. INC Inc, no doubt; welcome to the /Head Office/. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAVXp1oGjHA It will not only be the only mainframe manufacturer, it'll sell its own subdivisions the mainframe at double the price. -- Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/ I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com https://bsky.app/profile/myrkraverk.bsky.social | for ( ;; ) _:; Federated at https://fed.brid.gy/bsky/myrkraverk.bsky.social
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-05 20:58 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <11ciqmg$1votj$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #236470 |
On 04/11/2026 14:36, Peter Flass wrote: > On 11/3/26 13:27, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> On 03/11/2026 15:13, Scott Lurndal wrote: >>> Actually, the numbers decline every year. The vast majority are >>> legacy installations (particularly for the Burroughs/Univac/Unisys >>> mainframes) and there are very few, if any, new customers adopting >>> mainframes of any flavor. >> >> "Global mainframe market size and IBM Z mainframe revenue trends >> highlight a cyclical pattern dominated by multi-year refresh waves (such >> as the z16 and z17 cycles): >> >> Global Mainframe Market Size: >> >> Valued at approximately $5.33 billion to $5.71 billion in 2025. >> Projected to grow to $5.65 billion to $6.11 billion in 2026. >> Forecasted to reach $7.54 billion to $10.53 billion by >> 2031–2034, driven by a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of roughly >> 5.95% to 7.05%. >> >> IBM Z Mainframe Performance & Fluctuations: >> Late 2025 (z17 Launch / Q4): IBM reported its strongest Q4 >> mainframe revenue in 20 years, with IBM Z sales surging 67% >> year-over-year as enterprises adopted the z17 architecture. >> Mid-2026 (Q2): IBM Z mainframe revenue experienced a short-term >> 42% year-over-year decline in fiscal Q2 2026 due to delayed large >> capital expenditure (capex) deals and client shifts toward >> supply-constrained servers, though management noted these were deferred >> purchases rather than lost contracts (with roughly one-third closing >> shortly after the quarter)." >> >> So, as usual, the facts are not correctly represented by the resident >> armchair experts >> > > My only question is how many mainframe shipments represent NEW > customers, as opposed to additional horsepower for current customers. > My only question is how many computer sales are to new users, rather than upgrades My only question is how many car sales are to new users, rather than upgrades My only question is how many smartphone sales are to new users, rather than upgrades Completely specious weasel > I suppose, given that the trend today is to consolidation of everything, > that eventually everything will be owned by BigCorp, who will then be > the only mainframe customer. > Oh dear. -- If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State. Joseph Goebbels
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-03 02:42 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <ESbGS.128744$Gau3.32637@fx14.iad> |
| In reply to | #236340 |
On 2026-11-02, Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> wrote: > I'm also a bit astonished about your mention of using mainframes for > efficient I/O. Networking clusters appear to me to be much better able > than a single mainframe instance. The older mainframe architectures we > used also had a lot of peripheral processors to specifically handle > the I/O. True, but back in 1970 there wasn't a lot of networking happening, largely because people hadn't really figured it out yet. Mainframe I/O capacity was prodigious at the time - early minis could hardly manage the megabyte-per-second speeds that mainframes dealt with routinely. Consider that while the mini people were making a big thing of DMA, the term was unheard of in the mainframe world - mainframers just took it for granted. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | In this world there are \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | two kinds of people: X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | 1. Those who can extrapolate / \ if you read it the right way. | from incomplete data.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-03 02:49 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <11cbi32$3djvr$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #236345 |
On Tue, 03 Nov 2026 02:42:44 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > Consider that while the mini people were making a big thing of DMA, > the term was unheard of in the mainframe world - mainframers just > took it for granted. The mainframe world had “channels”, which were practically autonomous controllers with their own ability to obey complex sequences of program instructions while the CPU was busy doing application stuff. The mini people were spending a lot of time building systems which could efficiently respond to a CPU interrupt on every user keystroke. Even the thought of that would have filled mainframers with horror.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-03 02:53 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <Z0cGS.111361$cLL5.87949@fx42.iad> |
| In reply to | #236347 |
On 2026-11-03, Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: > On Tue, 03 Nov 2026 02:42:44 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > >> Consider that while the mini people were making a big thing of DMA, >> the term was unheard of in the mainframe world - mainframers just >> took it for granted. > > The mainframe world had “channels”, which were practically autonomous > controllers with their own ability to obey complex sequences of > program instructions while the CPU was busy doing application stuff. > > The mini people were spending a lot of time building systems which > could efficiently respond to a CPU interrupt on every user keystroke. > Even the thought of that would have filled mainframers with horror. Yes, there is a dichotomy there. Mainframe protocols were designed for sending files across a continent, while mini protocols were designed for sending characters across the room. Compromises were made on both sides. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | In this world there are \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | two kinds of people: X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | 1. Those who can extrapolate / \ if you read it the right way. | from incomplete data.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-03 04:44 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <11cbora$3fh28$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #236348 |
On Tue, 03 Nov 2026 02:53:45 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > Yes, there is a dichotomy there. Mainframe protocols were designed > for sending files across a continent, while mini protocols were > designed for sending characters across the room. Compromises were > made on both sides. That’s not the dichotomy. The dichotomy was that mainframes were optimized for throughput at the expense of latency, while minicomputers concentrated on minimizing latency to maximize interactive responsiveness at the expense of throughput.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-03 07:15 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <YRfGS.60036$Zy1.6984@fx05.iad> |
| In reply to | #236351 |
On 2026-11-03, Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: > On Tue, 03 Nov 2026 02:53:45 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > >> Yes, there is a dichotomy there. Mainframe protocols were designed >> for sending files across a continent, while mini protocols were >> designed for sending characters across the room. Compromises were >> made on both sides. > > That’s not the dichotomy. The dichotomy was that mainframes were > optimized for throughput at the expense of latency, while > minicomputers concentrated on minimizing latency to maximize > interactive responsiveness at the expense of throughput. Pick your metaphor. In the end the trade-offs are the same. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | In this world there are \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | two kinds of people: X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | 1. Those who can extrapolate / \ if you read it the right way. | from incomplete data.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-03 20:27 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <11cdg4e$46jl$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #236355 |
On Tue, 03 Nov 2026 07:15:04 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2026-11-03, Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: > >> On Tue, 03 Nov 2026 02:53:45 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >> >>> Yes, there is a dichotomy there. Mainframe protocols were designed >>> for sending files across a continent, while mini protocols were >>> designed for sending characters across the room. Compromises were >>> made on both sides. >> >> That’s not the dichotomy. The dichotomy was that mainframes were >> optimized for throughput at the expense of latency, while >> minicomputers concentrated on minimizing latency to maximize >> interactive responsiveness at the expense of throughput. > > Pick your metaphor. In the end the trade-offs are the same. Nothing “metaphorical” about it. Sending data across a continent in real-time became commonplace with the coming of ARPAnet. But those mainframes couldn’t actually connect directly, could they? They had to go through one of those “IMP” boxes from BBN. And those were built around ... minicomputers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-03 23:41 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <4juGS.78284$y_V1.5930@fx12.iad> |
| In reply to | #236389 |
On 2026-11-03, Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: > On Tue, 03 Nov 2026 07:15:04 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > >> On 2026-11-03, Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote: >> >>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2026 02:53:45 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >>> >>>> Yes, there is a dichotomy there. Mainframe protocols were designed >>>> for sending files across a continent, while mini protocols were >>>> designed for sending characters across the room. Compromises were >>>> made on both sides. >>> >>> That’s not the dichotomy. The dichotomy was that mainframes were >>> optimized for throughput at the expense of latency, while >>> minicomputers concentrated on minimizing latency to maximize >>> interactive responsiveness at the expense of throughput. >> >> Pick your metaphor. In the end the trade-offs are the same. > > Nothing “metaphorical” about it. Sending data across a continent in > real-time became commonplace with the coming of ARPAnet. But those > mainframes couldn’t actually connect directly, could they? They had to > go through one of those “IMP” boxes from BBN. And those were built > around ... minicomputers. That's not the only way to get data across the continent. In the late '70s our mainframe in Vancouver was driving block-mode multidropped terminals in Toronto through a leased line at a blazing 2400 bps. From a software standpoint they looked just like our local terminals, except that the wires were much longer and the speed slower. (Our local terminals ran at 9600 bps.) In those days modems cost about a dollar per bps - that's right, $2500 for a Bell 202-style modem running synchronously at 2400 bps. You could get 9600-bps modems, but they were ten grand a pop. And the leased line wasn't cheap either. As ever, we balanced price against performance. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | In this world there are \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | two kinds of people: X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | 1. Those who can extrapolate / \ if you read it the right way. | from incomplete data.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-04 10:58 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <nl0duhFn18lU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #236418 |
On 2026-11-04 00:41, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2026-11-03, Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2026 07:15:04 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> On 2026-11-03, Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 03 Nov 2026 02:53:45 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Yes, there is a dichotomy there. Mainframe protocols were designed
>>>>> for sending files across a continent, while mini protocols were
>>>>> designed for sending characters across the room. Compromises were
>>>>> made on both sides.
>>>>
>>>> That’s not the dichotomy. The dichotomy was that mainframes were
>>>> optimized for throughput at the expense of latency, while
>>>> minicomputers concentrated on minimizing latency to maximize
>>>> interactive responsiveness at the expense of throughput.
>>>
>>> Pick your metaphor. In the end the trade-offs are the same.
>>
>> Nothing “metaphorical” about it. Sending data across a continent in
>> real-time became commonplace with the coming of ARPAnet. But those
>> mainframes couldn’t actually connect directly, could they? They had to
>> go through one of those “IMP” boxes from BBN. And those were built
>> around ... minicomputers.
>
> That's not the only way to get data across the continent. In
> the late '70s our mainframe in Vancouver was driving block-mode
> multidropped terminals in Toronto through a leased line at a
> blazing 2400 bps. From a software standpoint they looked just
> like our local terminals, except that the wires were much longer
> and the speed slower. (Our local terminals ran at 9600 bps.)
> In those days modems cost about a dollar per bps - that's right,
> $2500 for a Bell 202-style modem running synchronously at 2400 bps.
> You could get 9600-bps modems, but they were ten grand a pop.
> And the leased line wasn't cheap either. As ever, we balanced
> price against performance.
>
And we were told that 9600 was the limit, the theory said so. I think it
was 9600.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-04 11:19 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <11cf4c6$k0n0$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #236453 |
On 04/11/2026 09:58, Carlos E. R. wrote: >> You could get 9600-bps modems, but they were ten grand a pop. >> And the leased line wasn't cheap either. As ever, we balanced >> price against performance. >> > > And we were told that 9600 was the limit, the theory said so. I think it > was 9600. for one type of technology, it was... -- "I guess a rattlesnake ain't risponsible fer bein' a rattlesnake, but ah puts mah heel on um jess the same if'n I catches him around mah chillun".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-04 19:51 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <81MGS.199929$MmU5.25273@fx44.iad> |
| In reply to | #236464 |
On 2026-11-04, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > On 04/11/2026 09:58, Carlos E. R. wrote: > >>> You could get 9600-bps modems, but they were ten grand a pop. >>> And the leased line wasn't cheap either. As ever, we balanced >>> price against performance. >> >> And we were told that 9600 was the limit, the theory said so. I think it >> was 9600. > > for one type of technology, it was... The mainframe I worked on could do async (although nobody ever did) - but since Everybody Knows that async is a low-speed protocol the ports weren't designed to run async any faster than 2400 bps, even for direct connections. Didn't part of the RS-232 spec say that wiring had to handle 50-foot runs at 9600 bps? Given cable capacitance it could be a crap shoot, but we managed to get async terminals (or emulators on PCs) to talk to a Sun workstation at the other end of the building at 38400 bps. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | In this world there are \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | two kinds of people: X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | 1. Those who can extrapolate / \ if you read it the right way. | from incomplete data.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-05 00:19 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <nl1srfF670U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #236500 |
On 2026-11-04 20:51, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2026-11-04, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 04/11/2026 09:58, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>
>>>> You could get 9600-bps modems, but they were ten grand a pop.
>>>> And the leased line wasn't cheap either. As ever, we balanced
>>>> price against performance.
>>>
>>> And we were told that 9600 was the limit, the theory said so. I think it
>>> was 9600.
>>
>> for one type of technology, it was...
>
> The mainframe I worked on could do async (although nobody
> ever did) - but since Everybody Knows that async is a
> low-speed protocol the ports weren't designed to run async
> any faster than 2400 bps, even for direct connections.
>
> Didn't part of the RS-232 spec say that wiring had to handle
> 50-foot runs at 9600 bps? Given cable capacitance it could
> be a crap shoot, but we managed to get async terminals
> (or emulators on PCs) to talk to a Sun workstation at the
> other end of the building at 38400 bps.
>
I got my PC to talk to another PC at 118K with a serial port across
perhaps 20 metres, in the 90's.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-05 01:24 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <11cglsm$16hl5$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #236521 |
On Thu, 5 Nov 2026 00:19:11 +0100, Carlos E. R. wrote: > I got my PC to talk to another PC at 118K with a serial port across > perhaps 20 metres, in the 90's. Apple Mac serial ports using the Zilog Z8530 SCC could run at 230.4kbps, or 1Mbps with external clocking. That was from 1984.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-05 15:48 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <11ci8gq$2jan1$1@paganini.bofh.team> |
| In reply to | #236500 |
In alt.folklore.computers Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> On 2026-11-04, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 04/11/2026 09:58, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>>
>>>> You could get 9600-bps modems, but they were ten grand a pop.
>>>> And the leased line wasn't cheap either. As ever, we balanced
>>>> price against performance.
>>>
>>> And we were told that 9600 was the limit, the theory said so. I think it
>>> was 9600.
>>
>> for one type of technology, it was...
>
> The mainframe I worked on could do async (although nobody
> ever did) - but since Everybody Knows that async is a
> low-speed protocol the ports weren't designed to run async
> any faster than 2400 bps, even for direct connections.
>
> Didn't part of the RS-232 spec say that wiring had to handle
> 50-foot runs at 9600 bps? Given cable capacitance it could
> be a crap shoot, but we managed to get async terminals
> (or emulators on PCs) to talk to a Sun workstation at the
> other end of the building at 38400 bps.
RS-232 is crappy from signaling point of view: too large
voltage and too large resistance which leads to mismatch
with typical tarsmition lines (like in building telephone
wires). IIUC maiframes had special adapters for better
signaling. This was mainly used with synchronous transmission,
but AFAICS the main thing to get better speed was better
electrical part. Synchronous may gain some fraction of
speed because there is no need to transmit start and stop
bits required by async. If clock is transmited by separarte
line, then synchronous hardware may be much simpler. OTOH
at high speed and with long lines separate lines tend to
have different delay, which means that separate clock no
longer is in sync with the signal. I am not sure how this
was resolved around 1970 (maybe distances and speed were low
enough that it did not matter), but now separate clock
is limited to short distances. Once distance and speed
are large enough, then it is async or its variations
(which send less data but still allow clock recovery
in the receiver). It seems that people also used
term "synchronous" for case when there was no separate
clock line. Schemes like MFM are simple, but less
efficient than async, and once one moves to more advanced
schemes it is more like async and unlike simple
synchronous schemes.
--
Waldek Hebisch
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-05 19:17 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <GD4HS.121187$QbKc.111486@fx16.iad> |
| In reply to | #236549 |
On 2026-11-05, Waldek Hebisch <antispam@fricas.org> wrote: > In alt.folklore.computers Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: > >> On 2026-11-04, The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: >> >>> On 04/11/2026 09:58, Carlos E. R. wrote: >>> >>>>> You could get 9600-bps modems, but they were ten grand a pop. >>>>> And the leased line wasn't cheap either. As ever, we balanced >>>>> price against performance. >>>> >>>> And we were told that 9600 was the limit, the theory said so. I think it >>>> was 9600. >>> >>> for one type of technology, it was... >> >> The mainframe I worked on could do async (although nobody >> ever did) - but since Everybody Knows that async is a >> low-speed protocol the ports weren't designed to run async >> any faster than 2400 bps, even for direct connections. >> >> Didn't part of the RS-232 spec say that wiring had to handle >> 50-foot runs at 9600 bps? Given cable capacitance it could >> be a crap shoot, but we managed to get async terminals >> (or emulators on PCs) to talk to a Sun workstation at the >> other end of the building at 38400 bps. > > RS-232 is crappy from signaling point of view: too large > voltage and too large resistance which leads to mismatch > with typical tarsmition lines (like in building telephone > wires). IIUC maiframes had special adapters for better > signaling. This was mainly used with synchronous transmission, > but AFAICS the main thing to get better speed was better > electrical part. Synchronous may gain some fraction of > speed because there is no need to transmit start and stop > bits required by async. If clock is transmited by separarte > line, then synchronous hardware may be much simpler. OTOH > at high speed and with long lines separate lines tend to > have different delay, which means that separate clock no > longer is in sync with the signal. I am not sure how this > was resolved around 1970 (maybe distances and speed were low > enough that it did not matter), but now separate clock > is limited to short distances. Once distance and speed > are large enough, then it is async or its variations > (which send less data but still allow clock recovery > in the receiver). It seems that people also used > term "synchronous" for case when there was no separate > clock line. Schemes like MFM are simple, but less > efficient than async, and once one moves to more advanced > schemes it is more like async and unlike simple > synchronous schemes. You've nicely put it into a nutshell. We had synchronous line drivers which could push a signal down a mile or so of wire at 9600 bps. They were cheaper than modems. -- /~\ Charlie Gibbs | In this world there are \ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | two kinds of people: X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | 1. Those who can extrapolate / \ if you read it the right way. | from incomplete data.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-11-04 21:52 +0000 |
| Subject | Re: [OT] Dead DEC Punch card times (was Re: Taking Speedy too seriously) |
| Message-ID | <11cg9fk$12d33$6@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #236453 |
On Wed, 4 Nov 2026 10:58:41 +0100, Carlos E. R. wrote: > And we were told that 9600 was the limit, the theory said so. I > think it was 9600. The theoretical information capacity of an analog telephone line was always known to be close to 64kbps. Remember, it was Bell Labs, part of AT&T the US phone company, that invented most of the basis of information theory in the first place.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 10 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 … 16 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | alt.folklore.computers
csiph-web