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


Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #150402 > unrolled thread

very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode

Started byhancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
First post2015-08-25 13:24 -0700
Last post2015-11-30 10:42 -0900
Articles 20 on this page of 112 — 26 participants

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


Contents

  very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-08-25 13:24 -0700
    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) - 2015-08-25 13:35 -0800
    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2015-08-25 23:19 +0100
    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-08-25 17:36 -0500
    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode "Joe Morris" <j.c.morris@verizon.net> - 2015-08-25 19:41 -0400
      Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode tracymnelson@gmail.com - 2015-10-26 09:16 -0700
        Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-26 09:47 -0700
          Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-26 10:00 -0700
            Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-26 21:18 +0000
              Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-10-26 17:37 -0400
                Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-27 19:55 +0000
              Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-10-27 08:31 -0400
              Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-27 14:41 -0500
                Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-27 20:17 +0000
                  Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2015-10-28 15:59 -0500
                    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-28 19:01 -0700
                      Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2015-10-29 13:46 -0500
                        Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-29 19:37 +0000
            Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2015-10-26 21:00 -0500
              Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-26 19:41 -0700
                Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-27 07:28 -0700
                  Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-27 12:47 -0700
                    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-27 20:17 +0000
                Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-27 23:02 +0000
                  Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-28 09:38 +0000
                    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-28 07:47 -0700
                      Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-28 19:24 +0000
                        Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-28 13:42 -0700
                      Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 15:57 +0000
                    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 15:54 +0000
                      Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-30 18:44 +0000
              Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-27 15:19 -0500
                Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2015-10-27 18:58 -0500
                  Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-27 17:57 -0700
                    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-27 17:59 -0700
                    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-27 18:26 -0700
                    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-28 14:57 -0500
                      Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-10-28 14:09 -0600
                        Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2015-10-28 15:52 -0500
                      Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2015-10-28 15:46 -0500
                      Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-28 21:09 +0000
                    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2015-10-28 15:38 -0500
                  Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-28 06:06 -0400
                Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-28 01:22 +0000
                  Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-28 15:22 -0500
                    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-28 13:49 -0700
                      Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-28 15:51 -0700
                        Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-28 19:28 -0700
                    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-28 21:34 +0000
                      Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2015-10-28 22:11 +0000
                        Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 15:59 +0000
                          Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-10-30 16:31 +0000
                            Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-30 20:07 -0700
                            Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-10-31 03:57 -0600
                              Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-31 10:20 +0000
                                Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-10-31 04:51 -0600
                                Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-31 07:08 -0400
                                  Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-31 12:29 +0000
                                Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode David Hume <David.Hume@example.com> - 2015-10-31 12:04 +0000
                                  Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-10-31 06:11 -0600
                                    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode David Hume <David.Hume@example.com> - 2015-10-31 12:37 +0000
                                  Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2015-10-31 13:20 +0000
                                Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2015-11-01 16:18 +0000
                                  Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-01 10:41 -0600
                              Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-10-31 15:21 +0100
                                Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2015-10-31 15:13 +0000
                                  Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-10-31 12:49 -0500
                              Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-31 15:09 -0500
                                Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-01 12:04 +0000
                                  Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-11-01 07:48 -0600
                                    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-11-01 13:56 +0000
                                    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Greymaus <mausg@mail.com> - 2015-11-01 18:33 +0000
                                      Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-11-02 17:17 +0000
                          Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Ibmekon <Ibmekon> - 2015-10-31 11:30 +0000
                      Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-28 19:15 -0700
                        Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-29 02:55 +0000
                          Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-29 07:36 -0700
                            Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-29 17:19 +0000
                              Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2015-10-29 11:33 -0600
                                Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-29 19:37 +0000
                                  Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2015-10-29 18:03 -0500
                          Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2015-10-29 11:44 -0600
                            Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-29 19:37 +0000
                              Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-10-29 16:03 -0400
                                Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2015-10-29 14:15 -0600
                                Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-29 21:51 +0000
                                  Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-29 15:20 -0700
                                    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-30 07:28 -0400
                                      Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-30 14:57 -0500
                              Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-10-29 13:26 -0700
                                Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2015-10-29 15:40 -0500
                              Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-29 15:32 -0700
                                Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-29 23:10 +0000
                                  Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-29 19:09 -0700
                                    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-10-30 16:35 +0000
                                      Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-10-30 18:35 +0000
                                        Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-30 12:05 -0700
                                          Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2015-10-30 12:22 -0700
                                          Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2015-11-02 14:15 +0000
                                      Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-10-30 17:31 -0400
                                        Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-10-30 17:44 -0400
                                        Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2015-10-30 23:38 -0400
                                        Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2015-10-31 15:08 -0500
                                          Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2015-11-02 17:17 +0000
                                            Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Alfred Falk <falk@arc.ab.ca> - 2015-11-03 16:44 +0000
                                            Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2015-11-05 15:28 -0600
                                              Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2015-11-05 17:05 -0500
            Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2015-10-26 22:12 +0100
    Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-16 18:48 -0800
      Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode Chris <xxx.syseng.yyy@gfsys.co.uk> - 2015-11-25 16:00 +0000
        Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2015-11-30 09:43 -0800
          Re: very basic tube questions--twin triode, "mu" rating; heptode floyd@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) - 2015-11-30 10:42 -0900

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


#153377

Fromhancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Date2015-10-27 07:28 -0700
Message-ID<b2c2eaff-f288-4c4c-884c-aebff632ef3e@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#153372
On Monday, October 26, 2015 at 10:41:40 PM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:

> I figure that an 1130 would be, at most, comparable to a 360/40. I couldn't 
> find an installation planning guide for it on Bitsavers, and the FE manual just 
> gave the voltages, not the power consumption.


Power consumption and resultant heat generation would vary by installation depending on the peripherals and their controllers, all of which throw out their own heat.  

(I don't know if on S/360 core size would make a difference on power consumption and heat, such as between the a 64k model 40 and a 256k unit.  But cores did generate heat, indeed, a challenge in those days was cooling high speed heavy-density core memory; they may have had to immerse the core array in oil.)





> 
> I did find such a manual for the 360 - I had to Google for it, though; the 
> directory tree didn't lead me to it. It turns out to be in the FE directory, which makes sense.
> 
> The 360/40, CPU only, smallest memory configuration, required 2.5 kVA of power, and produced heat in the amount of 7,000 BTU/hr.
> 
> John Savard

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


#153393

FromQuadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
Date2015-10-27 12:47 -0700
Message-ID<1e49f2e2-c8e5-4f60-a1af-dd537bad02f7@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#153377
On Tuesday, October 27, 2015 at 8:28:11 AM UTC-6, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> indeed, a challenge in those days was cooling high speed heavy-density core 
> memory; they may have had to immerse the core array in oil.

This is true, but this is partly due to other factors in addition to the amount 
of heat energy old-fashioned core memory dissipates.

Since individual cores were addressed by whether current ran down one wire, or 
two wires, going through a core, it was critical that the magnetic behavior of 
all the cores was nearly identical - and that it was what the circuitry driving 
the memory expected.

Now, as it happens, the response of magnetic materials to applied magnetic 
fields is temperature dependent.

So even though core memories performed better (when driven appropriately) the 
lower the temperature was, since a cooling system couldn't respond fast enough 
to changes of temperature to keep the cores at the exact temperature needed, 
they put heating coils in with the cores (usually in addition to a cooling 
system).

This problem, though, was reduced considerably in severity when they developed 
new ferrite formulations for cores that included lithium. Advertisements for 
the Honeywell 300 computer proudly boasted that its core memory did not have to 
worry about temperature at all - I suspect that was overoptimistic, as later 
machines with such cores still did pay attention to controlling the temperature 
of the cores.

John Savard

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


#153403

FromCharlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date2015-10-27 20:17 +0000
Message-ID<n0om551122s@news6.newsguy.com>
In reply to#153393
On 2015-10-27, Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:

> On Tuesday, October 27, 2015 at 8:28:11 AM UTC-6, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>> indeed, a challenge in those days was cooling high speed heavy-density core 
>> memory; they may have had to immerse the core array in oil.
>
> This is true, but this is partly due to other factors in addition to the
> amount of heat energy old-fashioned core memory dissipates.
>
> Since individual cores were addressed by whether current ran down one
> wire, or two wires, going through a core, it was critical that the magnetic
> behavior of all the cores was nearly identical - and that it was what the
> circuitry driving the memory expected.

There was a story in rec.humor.funny years ago...

http://www.netfunny.com/rhf/jokes/87/14917.8.html

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored.  Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!

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


#153415

FromDavid Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-27 23:02 +0000
Message-ID<n0ovq5$5a7$1@news.albasani.net>
In reply to#153372
On 27/10/2015 02:41, Quadibloc wrote:
> On Monday, October 26, 2015 at 8:00:51 PM UTC-6, Jon Elson wrote:
>
>> Must have been one of the larger models.  The /30 and /40 were not massive
>> power consumers, but the /50 and up did start to get there.  System 370s
>> really gulped the power, though.
>
> I figure that an 1130 would be, at most, comparable to a 360/40. I couldn't
> find an installation planning guide for it on Bitsavers, and the FE manual just
> gave the voltages, not the power consumption.
>
> I did find such a manual for the 360 - I had to Google for it, though; the
> directory tree didn't lead me to it. It turns out to be in the FE directory, which makes sense.
>
> The 360/40, CPU only, smallest memory configuration, required 2.5 kVA of power, and produced heat in the amount of 7,000 BTU/hr.
>
> John Savard
>
The 1130 I used had an IBM 1403 (I think, proper line printer any way) 
and "box" which I think was an modified IBM channel controller, was much 
bigger than the rest of the 1130. A bit like a big blue Tardis.

Dave

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


#153431

FromAhem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Date2015-10-28 09:38 +0000
Message-ID<20151028093816.3c19805f52ea8e7e881e56c0@eircom.net>
In reply to#153415
On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 23:02:37 +0000
David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> wrote:

> The 1130 I used had an IBM 1403 (I think, proper line printer any way) 
> and "box" which I think was an modified IBM channel controller, was much 
> bigger than the rest of the 1130. A bit like a big blue Tardis.

	Much the same as the one I used, that channel adaptor was *only*
used for the 1403 printer which must have made it an expensive option, the
1132 printer must have been even worse than it sounds. Ours also had a 1442
card reader, a 1627 plotter, a paper tape reader (which I'm pretty sure
wasn't an IBM one - it was fast), a paper tape punch and a double disc
cabinet (same cartridges as the console). It was a fun machine to learn on.

	The paper tape was mainly used to provide access for the local
schools, each school would send a bunch of programs through a
teletype/modem link while the results of their last batch went back the
same way. Anybody who could get to the machine used cards.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

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


#153444

Fromhancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Date2015-10-28 07:47 -0700
Message-ID<77cbaafd-abca-42bf-8fb1-0519ce4550a3@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#153431
On Wednesday, October 28, 2015 at 6:00:01 AM UTC-4, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:

> > The 1130 I used had an IBM 1403 (I think, proper line printer any way) 
> > and "box" which I think was an modified IBM channel controller, was much 
> > bigger than the rest of the 1130. A bit like a big blue Tardis.
> 
> 	Much the same as the one I used, that channel adaptor was *only*
> used for the 1403 printer which must have made it an expensive option, the
> 1132 printer must have been even worse than it sounds. Ours also had a 1442
> card reader, a 1627 plotter, a paper tape reader (which I'm pretty sure
> wasn't an IBM one - it was fast), a paper tape punch and a double disc
> cabinet (same cartridges as the console). It was a fun machine to learn on.
> 
> 	The paper tape was mainly used to provide access for the local
> schools, each school would send a bunch of programs through a
> teletype/modem link while the results of their last batch went back the
> same way. Anybody who could get to the machine used cards.


The 1132 printer was extremely slow.  Doing a READ and WRITE together was terribly slow.  If I could go back, I'd like to run a program on an 1130 that would build up a table, then print the table. In this way, the read and write actions would be separated; maybe the printer would run a little faster.

Our 1130 was used as a base for timesharing--it supported up to 15 terminals.  It was slow in that service.  If many users were on, it was terribly slow.  While on the terminal, one had to hit both RET and LF, and then wait for a blip to come back before typing in the next line.

After one year of that mess they bought an HP 2000 which was built for timesharing service and ran a heck of a lot faster, plus had a much more sophisticated BASIC.  I have no idea of the respective hardware costs, and wonder what they were.  The 1130 was supposed to be relatively cheap compared to other machines, which is why it was so popular, despite being so slow.

I will note that one kid write a BASIC program with some heavy number crunching in it for a class assignment; more calculations than a student's program typically had.  He said his program ran faster on the 1130 than on the HP.  I don't know, but maybe once you got nuermic data past the lousy I/O and into the CPU, it could actually do something with it, which the 1130 was designed to do.

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


#153464

FromAhem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Date2015-10-28 19:24 +0000
Message-ID<20151028192448.34d4cc0a3f44337b96c94efe@eircom.net>
In reply to#153444
On Wed, 28 Oct 2015 07:47:13 -0700 (PDT)
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> Our 1130 was used as a base for timesharing--it supported up to 15
> terminals.

	Ye gods! Ours was strictly single user with decent peripherals and
I still thought it was slow (especially the day I had to recreate the
system disc).

>  It was slow in that service.  If many users were on, it was
> terribly slow.  While on the terminal, one had to hit both RET and LF,
> and then wait for a blip to come back before typing in the next line.

	imagination fails as to what an 1130 must be like with 15 users.

> After one year of that mess they bought an HP 2000 which was built for
> timesharing service and ran a heck of a lot faster, plus had a much more
> sophisticated BASIC.

	Ours got replaced by an Eclipse with terminals and time sharing,
better, faster and yet less fun.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

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


#153477

Fromhancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Date2015-10-28 13:42 -0700
Message-ID<1c15de00-7013-4286-8eb0-6f6d880198de@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#153464
On Wednesday, October 28, 2015 at 3:30:04 PM UTC-4, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:

> 	imagination fails as to what an 1130 must be like with 15 users.

Whole solar systems could emerge.

But I suspect the 1130 was cheaper to buy than the HP-2000.  I think they intended to run batch jobs during offpeak with the 1130, but they did on the HP.  The HP had a card reader and supported Fortran.

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


#153614

FromDavid Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-30 15:57 +0000
Message-ID<n1040v$irr$2@news.albasani.net>
In reply to#153444
On 28/10/2015 14:47, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 28, 2015 at 6:00:01 AM UTC-4, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>
>>> The 1130 I used had an IBM 1403 (I think, proper line printer any way)
>>> and "box" which I think was an modified IBM channel controller, was much
>>> bigger than the rest of the 1130. A bit like a big blue Tardis.
>>
>> 	Much the same as the one I used, that channel adaptor was *only*
>> used for the 1403 printer which must have made it an expensive option, the
>> 1132 printer must have been even worse than it sounds. Ours also had a 1442
>> card reader, a 1627 plotter, a paper tape reader (which I'm pretty sure
>> wasn't an IBM one - it was fast), a paper tape punch and a double disc
>> cabinet (same cartridges as the console). It was a fun machine to learn on.
>>
>> 	The paper tape was mainly used to provide access for the local
>> schools, each school would send a bunch of programs through a
>> teletype/modem link while the results of their last batch went back the
>> same way. Anybody who could get to the machine used cards.
>
>
> The 1132 printer was extremely slow.  Doing a READ and WRITE together was terribly slow.  If I could go back, I'd like to run a program on an 1130 that would build up a table, then print the table. In this way, the read and write actions would be separated; maybe the printer would run a little faster.
>
> Our 1130 was used as a base for timesharing--it supported up to 15 terminals.  It was slow in that service.  If many users were on, it was terribly slow.  While on the terminal, one had to hit both RET and LF, and then wait for a blip to come back before typing in the next line.
>
> After one year of that mess they bought an HP 2000 which was built for timesharing service and ran a heck of a lot faster, plus had a much more sophisticated BASIC.  I have no idea of the respective hardware costs, and wonder what they were.  The 1130 was supposed to be relatively cheap compared to other machines, which is why it was so popular, despite being so slow.
>
> I will note that one kid write a BASIC program with some heavy number crunching in it for a class assignment; more calculations than a student's program typically had.  He said his program ran faster on the 1130 than on the HP.  I don't know, but maybe once you got nuermic data past the lousy I/O and into the CPU, it could actually do something with it, which the 1130 was designed to do.
>
>
there are some costs for an 1130 in the IBM archives.

https://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/1130/1130_intro.html

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


#153613

FromDavid Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com>
Date2015-10-30 15:54 +0000
Message-ID<n103rp$irr$1@news.albasani.net>
In reply to#153431
On 28/10/2015 09:38, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 23:02:37 +0000
> David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The 1130 I used had an IBM 1403 (I think, proper line printer any way)
>> and "box" which I think was an modified IBM channel controller, was much
>> bigger than the rest of the 1130. A bit like a big blue Tardis.
>
> 	Much the same as the one I used, that channel adaptor was *only*
> used for the 1403 printer which must have made it an expensive option, the
> 1132 printer must have been even worse than it sounds. Ours also had a 1442
> card reader, a 1627 plotter, a paper tape reader (which I'm pretty sure
> wasn't an IBM one - it was fast), a paper tape punch and a double disc
> cabinet (same cartridges as the console). It was a fun machine to learn on.
>
> 	The paper tape was mainly used to provide access for the local
> schools, each school would send a bunch of programs through a
> teletype/modem link while the results of their last batch went back the
> same way. Anybody who could get to the machine used cards.
>
Yes almost identical to the one at Newcastle upon Type Polytechnic, 
except we mostly used ours as a remote HASP workstation to access the 
360/67 and MTS at Newcastle upon Tyne University. I believe that our 
paper tape punch was used mainly for CNC tapes. Apparently we did some 
early modelling of CNC operation...

Dave Wade

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


#153645

FromAhem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net>
Date2015-10-30 18:44 +0000
Message-ID<20151030184406.73058931ef2ba7debcca27c1@eircom.net>
In reply to#153613
On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 15:54:42 +0000
David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 28/10/2015 09:38, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> > On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 23:02:37 +0000
> > David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> The 1130 I used had an IBM 1403 (I think, proper line printer any way)
> >> and "box" which I think was an modified IBM channel controller, was
> >> much bigger than the rest of the 1130. A bit like a big blue Tardis.
> >
> > 	Much the same as the one I used, that channel adaptor was *only*
> > used for the 1403 printer which must have made it an expensive option,
> > the 1132 printer must have been even worse than it sounds. Ours also
> > had a 1442 card reader, a 1627 plotter, a paper tape reader (which I'm
> > pretty sure wasn't an IBM one - it was fast), a paper tape punch and a
> > double disc cabinet (same cartridges as the console). It was a fun
> > machine to learn on.
> >
> > 	The paper tape was mainly used to provide access for the local
> > schools, each school would send a bunch of programs through a
> > teletype/modem link while the results of their last batch went back the
> > same way. Anybody who could get to the machine used cards.
> >
> Yes almost identical to the one at Newcastle upon Type Polytechnic, 

	The one I used was a Cambridgeshire College of Arts and Technology,
which is now part of Anglia Ruskin University.

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:>WIN                                      | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

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


#153404

From"Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com>
Date2015-10-27 15:19 -0500
Message-ID<n0om3t$oot$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#153371
"Jon Elson" <elson@pico-systems.com> wrote in message 
news:wtydnRda35tPR7PLnZ2dnUU7-SGdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
>
>>
>> One weekend I went in to work on our S/360 and forgot to turn on the a/c.
>> It didn't take long for the computer room to get very warm.
>>
> Must have been one of the larger models.  The /30 and /40 were not massive
> power consumers, but the /50 and up did start to get there.  System 370s
> really gulped the power, though.
>> Indeed, I wonder what a modern office consumes in a/c to cool down the PC
>> that sits on everyone's desk, plus all the support network gear.
> Modern PCs are quite a bit lower power.  The gamers babble to each other
> about 1000 W power supplies, but the typical REAL desktop machines rarely
> use much over 100 W.  Some muilt-chip servers do use more, of course.
>
> The two higher-end desktops in my computer room at home together draw less
> power than my old MicroVAX-II.
>

At a PPoE, the financial department had a large IBM mainframe.  This 
department also had a "tape picker".  If a disk file "aged out", then it was 
transferred to a small piece of mag tape and place in some kind of pigeon 
hole.  If later this file was accessed, the "tape picker" would have to 
restore the file to actual disk before you could use it.  That could take 
between 2 and 5 minutes.

Now I'm thinking that a little box of 5 or 6 multi-terrabyte disks could 
handle the whole thing with a minimum of fuss. Of course my time at the PPoE 
was 30 years ago.  :-)

My theory is:  Things get easier and easier... until eventually those things 
are *not* worth doing anymore.

-- 

numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

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


#153416

FromJon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com>
Date2015-10-27 18:58 -0500
Message-ID<upqdnfIKbIcnkq3LnZ2dnUU7-ROdnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#153404
Charles Richmond wrote:


> At a PPoE, the financial department had a large IBM mainframe.  This
> department also had a "tape picker".  If a disk file "aged out", then it
> was transferred to a small piece of mag tape and place in some kind of
> pigeon
> hole.  If later this file was accessed, the "tape picker" would have to
> restore the file to actual disk before you could use it.  That could take
> between 2 and 5 minutes.
> 
That was an IBM 2321 data cell drive.  Completely ingenious, and also 
completely Rube Goldberg!  While they did hold a log of data that rarely 
needed access, they were NOT foolproof.  You RARELY ever needed to touch it, 
so foolproof is not really the correct term.  But, they would occasionally 
mispick a card and tear it up, and then you had a real mess.  I think a LOT 
of people were VERY glad when the darn things were withdrawn from service.
And, my understanding is that NO user installations begged IBM to continue 
support for them.

Jon

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


#153419

FromQuadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
Date2015-10-27 17:57 -0700
Message-ID<7f2abd0e-3b74-45fa-ae99-c8479baa8276@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#153416
On Tuesday, October 27, 2015 at 5:58:52 PM UTC-6, Jon Elson wrote:
> But, they would occasionally 
> mispick a card and tear it up, and then you had a real mess.

And, of course, loss of data is the one intolerable thing in the mainframe world.

IBM probably made the device because NCR had something similar in its CRAM 
device, and so they could not stand to see some other company offering a 
capability they didn't have.

I didn't realize that this was what they meant by "tape picker" - I was 
envisaging a system for automated loading of 9-track tapes. Or that honeycomb 
device IBM made later on.

John Savard

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


#153420

FromQuadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca>
Date2015-10-27 17:59 -0700
Message-ID<8c6c8285-fab3-42e1-991c-7042da5209b4@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#153419
On Tuesday, October 27, 2015 at 6:57:22 PM UTC-6, Quadibloc wrote:
> Or that honeycomb 
> device IBM made later on.

I was thinking of the 3850.

John Savard

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


#153425

Fromhancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Date2015-10-27 18:26 -0700
Message-ID<223685da-ded9-4452-ae9f-de0297106684@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#153419
On Tuesday, October 27, 2015 at 8:57:22 PM UTC-4, Quadibloc wrote:

> IBM probably made the device because NCR had something similar in its CRAM 
> device, and so they could not stand to see some other company offering a 
> capability they didn't have.

If memory of the S/360 history book is accurate, some very large IBM customers were drowning in tape mount traffic.  (A large company using 1600 bpi probably had many multi-reel files, adding to the mounting mess.)  So, IBM developed a variety of automated tape/disk products over the years for both S/360 and 370.  Later, people developed silos to automatically mount tape cartrdiges.

FWIW, in 1979 a 370-158 shop had an operator full time just to mount and demount tapes as well as a tape library staff.  Imagine the traffic in a large 168 installation.

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


#153471

From"Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com>
Date2015-10-28 14:57 -0500
Message-ID<n0r986$sbs$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#153419
"Quadibloc" <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message 
news:7f2abd0e-3b74-45fa-ae99-c8479baa8276@googlegroups.com...
>
>               [snip...]                   [snip...] 
> [snip...]
>
> I didn't realize that this was what they meant by "tape picker" - I was
> envisaging a system for automated loading of 9-track tapes. Or that 
> honeycomb
> device IBM made later on.
>

The word "honeycomb" seems to touch something in my memory.  I thin the 
honeycomb device is what I was refering to.  I had thought that a cell in 
the honeycomb would hold a small length of tape.  Help me out here...

-- 

numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

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


#153474

From"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net>
Date2015-10-28 14:09 -0600
Message-ID<d9cobuFs6m2U1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#153471
"Charles Richmond" wrote:

> "Quadibloc" <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message 
> news:7f2abd0e-3b74-45fa-ae99-c8479baa8276@googlegroups.com...
>>
>>               [snip...]                   [snip...] [snip...]
>>
>> I didn't realize that this was what they meant by "tape picker" - I was
>> envisaging a system for automated loading of 9-track tapes. Or that 
>> honeycomb
>> device IBM made later on.
>>
>
> The word "honeycomb" seems to touch something in my memory.  I thin the 
> honeycomb device is what I was refering to.  I had thought that a cell in 
> the honeycomb would hold a small length of tape.  Help me out here...

IIRC, pictures of the datacell made me think of a honeycomb.  The "piece of 
tape" thing rings no bells for me. 

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


#153480

FromJon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu>
Date2015-10-28 15:52 -0500
Message-ID<zrqdnVw__p6rqKzLnZ2dnUU7-RednZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#153474
Osmium wrote:

> "Charles Richmond" wrote:
> 
>> "Quadibloc" <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message
>> news:7f2abd0e-3b74-45fa-ae99-c8479baa8276@googlegroups.com...
>>>
>>>               [snip...]                   [snip...] [snip...]
>>>
>>> I didn't realize that this was what they meant by "tape picker" - I was
>>> envisaging a system for automated loading of 9-track tapes. Or that
>>> honeycomb
>>> device IBM made later on.
>>>
>>
>> The word "honeycomb" seems to touch something in my memory.  I thin the
>> honeycomb device is what I was refering to.  I had thought that a cell in
>> the honeycomb would hold a small length of tape.  Help me out here...
> 
> IIRC, pictures of the datacell made me think of a honeycomb.  The "piece
> of tape" thing rings no bells for me.
The datacell drive had strips of magnetic media about the size of an IBM 
punch card.  They were kept in a bunch of metal bins attached to a spindle.  
The spindle would rotate to the right position, the bin would be opened and 
a mechanism would reach inside and pick one strip via coded tabs on the 
strips.  That strip would be pulled out and wrapped around a drum that would 
spin it.  A tape head would select a track on the strip and read/write data
to/from it.  When down, the strip would be put back in the bin.

The IBM 2321 data cell drive was made from 1964 to 1975.  I REALLY doubt 
they sold many after about 1971 or so, when everybody knew they were just a 
lot of trouble.  But, they DID have the ability to make off-line data 
available within about 5 seconds.  In 1965, that was REALLY revolutionary.  
Each strip held 200K of data.  One whole drive could store 400 MB.

Jon

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


#153478

FromJon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu>
Date2015-10-28 15:46 -0500
Message-ID<adGdnbbt3JsorqzLnZ2dnUU7-I2dnZ2d@giganews.com>
In reply to#153471
Charles Richmond wrote:

> "Quadibloc" <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in message
> news:7f2abd0e-3b74-45fa-ae99-c8479baa8276@googlegroups.com...
>>
>>               [snip...]                   [snip...]
>> [snip...]
>>
>> I didn't realize that this was what they meant by "tape picker" - I was
>> envisaging a system for automated loading of 9-track tapes. Or that
>> honeycomb
>> device IBM made later on.
>>
> 
> The word "honeycomb" seems to touch something in my memory.  I thin the
> honeycomb device is what I was refering to.  I had thought that a cell in
> the honeycomb would hold a small length of tape.  Help me out here...
> 
The 3850 held a bunch of spools of wide magnetic tape.  Each tape was on a 
spool a couple inches in diameter.  The amount of tape on each spool was 64 
feet.  Each tape held 50 MB of data.

Jon

[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