Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.misc > #2879 > unrolled thread
| Started by | RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-05-19 15:44 +0000 |
| Last post | 2014-05-21 13:06 +0000 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 200 — 45 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.misc
Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-19 15:44 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-19 15:47 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-19 21:33 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-21 10:32 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-21 11:01 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-21 11:38 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-21 12:23 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn bill@server3.cs.scranton.edu (Bill Gunshannon) - 2014-05-21 12:40 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-21 15:59 +0300
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-21 13:16 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-21 18:38 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-21 13:18 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn rpw3@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) - 2014-05-21 13:46 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-21 21:22 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-21 15:03 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-21 15:20 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk> - 2014-05-22 21:40 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2014-05-22 08:20 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-05-22 18:14 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2014-05-23 07:21 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn pechter@tucker.pechter.dyndns.org (William Pechter) - 2014-05-21 19:11 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-21 20:18 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-21 21:16 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-21 22:19 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-05-21 23:02 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-05-22 05:42 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-22 19:22 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-22 19:26 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-05-22 17:52 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-05-22 18:02 -0800
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-23 02:02 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-05-23 13:16 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-23 06:51 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-23 09:35 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-05-23 19:55 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2014-05-23 09:49 -0600
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-23 19:24 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2014-05-23 14:23 -0600
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-24 16:19 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-23 07:32 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-23 07:09 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-23 09:36 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-23 19:00 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-23 15:21 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-23 21:58 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-05-24 00:34 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-05-24 10:22 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-05-23 17:35 -0800
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-24 10:20 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-24 21:41 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-05-24 00:33 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Christian Corti <use@reply.to> - 2014-05-24 10:39 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-24 09:28 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-24 13:13 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-05-24 10:51 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-24 18:50 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-24 20:05 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stan Barr <plan.b@dsl.pipex.com> - 2014-05-24 16:22 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-24 19:30 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-05-26 09:36 -0800
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-05-26 15:01 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-26 22:02 +0300
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-26 19:17 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-05-26 15:40 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-26 22:14 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Christian Corti <use@reply.to> - 2014-05-25 22:30 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-26 05:02 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-05-24 20:34 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-24 13:36 +0300
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-24 16:29 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-24 14:47 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Christian Corti <use@reply.to> - 2014-05-25 22:43 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-25 17:56 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-26 11:49 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-26 14:18 +0300
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Christian Corti <use@reply.to> - 2014-05-28 17:46 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-28 20:11 +0300
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-28 13:29 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-28 19:19 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2014-05-29 14:10 -0700
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-30 00:42 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-05-30 05:48 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Christian Corti <use@reply.to> - 2014-05-29 18:00 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-29 13:17 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-05-30 15:57 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-30 11:29 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-05-30 15:55 -0800
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2014-05-30 20:32 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-31 08:50 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-06-01 10:11 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-06-01 16:07 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-29 18:42 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Lawrence Statton <lawrence@perl.mx> - 2014-05-29 14:15 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-29 15:32 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-28 19:13 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-05-28 14:44 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2014-05-28 22:45 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-05-30 11:10 -0800
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2014-05-29 05:48 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-26 13:26 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-26 13:06 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-26 12:35 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Christian Corti <use@reply.to> - 2014-05-28 17:49 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-28 13:06 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 14:16 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-30 04:47 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-30 11:41 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "ratty" <ratty@gmail.com> - 2014-05-30 21:05 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bernd Felsche <berfel@innovative.iinet.net.au> - 2014-05-30 19:16 +0800
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-26 13:02 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-26 18:44 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-26 21:10 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-26 21:14 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-26 21:45 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-26 23:59 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-26 23:44 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2014-05-27 11:35 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-26 20:25 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2014-05-26 13:38 -0700
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-05-27 13:59 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn polygonum <rmoudndgers@vrod.co.uk> - 2014-06-14 18:05 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Oeter Johns" <oj19854@nospam.com> - 2014-06-15 07:32 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-06-15 00:50 +0300
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-06-15 16:44 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-24 16:27 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-24 14:53 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "2ju" <2ju@gmail.com> - 2014-05-25 06:59 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-24 22:44 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-29 13:40 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-29 20:01 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2014-05-24 19:01 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-05-25 00:58 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-25 13:17 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-05-26 17:08 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-25 10:17 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-22 09:54 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-22 15:56 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-05-22 14:07 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2014-05-23 12:44 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-05-21 08:20 -0800
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-05-22 17:58 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-23 00:00 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-05-22 18:12 -0800
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-23 09:50 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-05-23 18:37 +0300
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-24 16:59 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn bill@server3.cs.scranton.edu (Bill Gunshannon) - 2014-05-23 16:22 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-23 12:08 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-05-23 12:03 -0800
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-23 21:58 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-24 03:20 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-24 13:11 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-24 21:47 -0400
What constitutes being a Yankee? [was Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn] Rich Alderson <news@alderson.users.panix.com> - 2014-05-29 14:58 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-24 15:59 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2014-05-23 23:41 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-24 04:09 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-24 21:52 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> - 2014-05-24 21:31 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2014-05-25 14:34 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bernd Felsche <berfel@innovative.iinet.net.au> - 2014-05-23 16:15 +0800
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-05-21 14:15 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn bill@server3.cs.scranton.edu (Bill Gunshannon) - 2014-05-21 14:35 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn bill@server3.cs.scranton.edu (Bill Gunshannon) - 2014-05-21 14:38 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2014-05-21 08:22 -0800
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2014-05-21 15:43 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-22 15:54 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Andy Valencia <vandys@vsta.org> - 2014-05-21 07:07 -0700
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-05-21 15:23 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-19 23:10 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-19 22:54 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-20 19:52 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-20 23:22 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-20 11:10 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Gordon Henderson <gordon+usenet@drogon.net> - 2014-05-20 11:56 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-20 12:32 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2014-05-20 15:24 -0500
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn rpw3@rpw3.org (Rob Warnock) - 2014-05-21 14:08 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2014-05-21 16:06 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-20 13:50 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Rob Brown <brown@greenslade.gmcl.internal> - 2014-05-20 19:49 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-21 10:35 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-20 21:11 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-20 21:20 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2014-05-20 13:45 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2014-05-21 05:31 +1000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Johnny Billquist <bqt@softjar.se> - 2014-05-21 09:35 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2014-05-20 15:14 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Rob Brown <brown@greenslade.gmcl.internal> - 2014-05-20 20:00 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Walter Banks <walter@bytecraft.com> - 2014-05-20 16:45 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2014-05-20 21:14 -0700
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-05-21 09:42 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2014-05-21 10:33 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2014-05-20 13:40 +0000
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-21 09:40 +0200
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-05-21 08:27 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-21 16:10 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2014-05-21 12:11 -0400
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2014-05-21 20:52 +0100
Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2014-05-21 13:06 +0000
Page 3 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 10 Next page →
| From | glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-23 07:09 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <llms6j$g2h$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #3013 |
In alt.sys.pdp11 Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote: (snip, I wrote) >> And for some interesting unit questions, the duty free allowance >> coming into the US is 1 liter, ... > One liter than what? Seems to be after being gone 48 hours or more, you can bring 1 liter of alcoholic beverages or 1 case (24 bottles) of beer. Also, the TSA restriction on liquids in carry on luggage is in bottles of 100ml or less. (Popularly 3 US fluid ounces, but actually it is 100ml.) Into Canada, it is 53 imperial ounces of wine, or 40 ounces of alcoholic beverages of 8.5 liters of beer or ale. So, the last one is metric, but the first two are imperial units. -- glen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-23 09:36 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <llnmdv$t7q$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3011 |
On 22-May-14 21:02, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote: > And for some interesting unit questions, the duty free allowance > coming into the US is 1 liter, and for going into Canada (such as > from the US) it is 40 ounces. Well, the vast majority of imports into both countries will be across their (very long) common border, so it's easier to understand as a limit of 40oz coming from the US and 1L coming from Canada. > It seems that they make special 1l bottles of alcoholic beverages Please write "1L" rather than "1l"; in most fonts, the latter looks like "11". > just for sale in duty free stores. You can find those in US liquor/wine stores too, but 750mL bottles (0.19 US gallons, a "fifth") are far more common. S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-23 19:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <llo5si$t11$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #3024 |
In alt.sys.pdp11 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: (snip, I wrote) >> It seems that they make special 1l bottles of alcoholic beverages > Please write "1L" rather than "1l"; in most fonts, the > latter looks like "11". I have always seen l instead of L, and so decided to look it up. I never knew this before, but it seems that the rule is that units named for people are upper case, and units not named for people are lower case. That is the official SI rule. Seems that the litre is a non-SI unit officially accepted for use with SI. -- glen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-23 15:21 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <lloajs$mop$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3035 |
On 23-May-14 14:00, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote: > In alt.sys.pdp11 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >> (snip, I wrote) >>> It seems that they make special 1l bottles of alcoholic beverages >> >> Please write "1L" rather than "1l"; in most fonts, the >> latter looks like "11". > > I have always seen l instead of L, and so decided to look it up. > > I never knew this before, but it seems that the rule is that > units named for people are upper case, and units not named for > people are lower case. That is the official SI rule. Yep. But slavishly following the rules leads to locally suboptimal results. In handwriting, one will often see a cursive "l" even if the rest of the text is printed, but that's not so easy with computers; you'd need to use a different font to get that result. Sometimes folks put all units in italics, which also solves the problem, but doing that only for "l" looks strange and is easy to forget. "L" is a decent (and common) compromise, and I think (hope) the standards folks are smart enough to avoid ever using that for another unit. Likewise, you often see "ug" or "um" because some apparently find it too difficult to write "μg" or "μm". The medical field uses "mcg", which is even worse than "ug". > Seems that the litre is a non-SI unit officially accepted > for use with SI. Yep; the SI unit of volume is cubic meters, but in most cases that doesn't result in convenient sizes, so we use liters instead; 1L = 1dm^3. Also very useful is 1mL = 1cm^3 (aka 1cc). There are other oddities, like the kilogram being the official unit of mass rather than the gram; the former is simply more useful than the latter in most contexts. Or the tonne, which avoids the oddity of a kkg or Mg, which could easily be confused with the (fairly common) mg. And nobody seems to use Mm, Gm, etc.; they just use large numbers of km. In fact, outside of the computing world, the large prefixes are rarely used at all--and while there are some binary prefix purists, most of us stubbornly keep using decimal prefixes even when we _know_ they're wrong, which is rather odd considering how pedantic we tend to be in other matters. Worse, sometimes the decimal prefixes _are_ correct yet the purists change them to incorrect binary prefixes! S -- Stephen Sprunk "God does not play dice." --Albert Einstein CCIE #3723 "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the K5SSS dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-23 21:58 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <llog9b$mr5$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #3037 |
In alt.sys.pdp11 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: (snip, I wrote) >> I have always seen l instead of L, and so decided to look it up. >> I never knew this before, but it seems that the rule is that >> units named for people are upper case, and units not named for >> people are lower case. That is the official SI rule. > Yep. But slavishly following the rules leads to locally > suboptimal results. It seems that one is supposed to put either a hyphen or space between the numeric value and the unit. > In handwriting, one will often see a cursive "l" even if the rest of the > text is printed, but that's not so easy with computers; you'd need to > use a different font to get that result. Sometimes folks put all units > in italics, which also solves the problem, but doing that only for "l" > looks strange and is easy to forget. "L" is a decent (and common) > compromise, and I think (hope) the standards folks are smart enough to > avoid ever using that for another unit. Apparently, and farther down the page from the one indicating l, in 1979 there was a special rule allowing both l and L for litre. In addition, NIST prefers L. > Likewise, you often see "ug" or "um" because some apparently find > it too difficult to write "??g" or "??m". The medical field > uses "mcg", which is even worse than "ug". I think the first time I saw it, I thought it was milli-centi-gram, but it seems that SI specifically disallows compound prefixes. >> Seems that the litre is a non-SI unit officially accepted >> for use with SI. > Yep; the SI unit of volume is cubic meters, but in most cases that > doesn't result in convenient sizes, so we use liters instead; 1L = > 1dm^3. Also very useful is 1mL = 1cm^3 (aka 1cc). > There are other oddities, like the kilogram being the official unit of > mass rather than the gram; the former is simply more useful than the > latter in most contexts. Or the tonne, which avoids the oddity of a kkg > or Mg, which could easily be confused with the (fairly common) mg. And > nobody seems to use Mm, Gm, etc.; they just use large numbers of km. Astronomers might use some of those, when they aren't using au or pc. > In fact, outside of the computing world, the large prefixes are rarely > used at all--and while there are some binary prefix purists, most of us > stubbornly keep using decimal prefixes even when we _know_ they're > wrong, which is rather odd considering how pedantic we tend to be in > other matters. Worse, sometimes the decimal prefixes _are_ correct yet > the purists change them to incorrect binary prefixes! I never got used to the binary prefixes. In most cases, you know which one is intended. Since they stopped building computers with decimal addressing decades ago, computer memory is specified in units of 1024 or powers of 1024 units. That has always been less obvious for disks. For one, the disks built by IBM for many years didn't have power of two sizes. The IBM 2314 has a track length of 7294 bytes. The IBM 3330 has 404 cylinders with 19 tracks each (plus a servo track) and 13030 bytes/track, which multiplies to 100018280 bytes, so just barely over 100 million. Though I don't ever remember hearing it described as 100 megabytes, it seems too close for an accident. In any case, marketing departments long ago started using decimal prefixes for disk size. I do remember in the IBM mainframe days wondering about pricing in $K. (That is, $1000 or $1024?) -- glen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-24 00:34 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <0.0b66e90130de49765327.20140524003439BST.87d2f4m5m8.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #3047 |
glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> writes: <snip> > Apparently, and farther down the page from the one indicating l, > in 1979 there was a special rule allowing both l and L for litre. I should have finished the thread before posting. Sorry for the duplication. <snip> -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-24 10:22 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <bua72hFmjl2U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3047 |
"glen herrmannsfeldt" <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote in message news:llog9b$mr5$1@speranza.aioe.org... > In alt.sys.pdp11 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: > > (snip, I wrote) >>> I have always seen l instead of L, and so decided to look it up. > >>> I never knew this before, but it seems that the rule is that >>> units named for people are upper case, and units not named for >>> people are lower case. That is the official SI rule. > >> Yep. But slavishly following the rules leads to locally >> suboptimal results. > > It seems that one is supposed to put either a hyphen or space > between the numeric value and the unit. > >> In handwriting, one will often see a cursive "l" even if the rest of the >> text is printed, but that's not so easy with computers; you'd need to >> use a different font to get that result. Sometimes folks put all units >> in italics, which also solves the problem, but doing that only for "l" >> looks strange and is easy to forget. "L" is a decent (and common) >> compromise, and I think (hope) the standards folks are smart enough to >> avoid ever using that for another unit. > > Apparently, and farther down the page from the one indicating l, > in 1979 there was a special rule allowing both l and L for litre. > In addition, NIST prefers L. > >> Likewise, you often see "ug" or "um" because some apparently find >> it too difficult to write "??g" or "??m". The medical field >> uses "mcg", which is even worse than "ug". > > I think the first time I saw it, I thought it was milli-centi-gram, > but it seems that SI specifically disallows compound prefixes. > >>> Seems that the litre is a non-SI unit officially accepted >>> for use with SI. > >> Yep; the SI unit of volume is cubic meters, but in most cases that >> doesn't result in convenient sizes, so we use liters instead; 1L = >> 1dm^3. Also very useful is 1mL = 1cm^3 (aka 1cc). > >> There are other oddities, like the kilogram being the official unit of >> mass rather than the gram; the former is simply more useful than the >> latter in most contexts. Or the tonne, which avoids the oddity of a kkg >> or Mg, which could easily be confused with the (fairly common) mg. And >> nobody seems to use Mm, Gm, etc.; they just use large numbers of km. > > Astronomers might use some of those, when they aren't using au or pc. > >> In fact, outside of the computing world, the large prefixes are rarely >> used at all--and while there are some binary prefix purists, most of us >> stubbornly keep using decimal prefixes even when we _know_ they're >> wrong, which is rather odd considering how pedantic we tend to be in >> other matters. Worse, sometimes the decimal prefixes _are_ correct yet >> the purists change them to incorrect binary prefixes! > > I never got used to the binary prefixes. In most cases, you know which > one is intended. Since they stopped building computers with decimal > addressing decades ago, computer memory is specified in units > of 1024 or powers of 1024 units. > > That has always been less obvious for disks. For one, the disks built > by IBM for many years didn't have power of two sizes. The IBM 2314 > has a track length of 7294 bytes. The IBM 3330 has 404 cylinders > with 19 tracks each (plus a servo track) and 13030 bytes/track, > which multiplies to 100018280 bytes, so just barely over 100 million. > Though I don't ever remember hearing it described as 100 megabytes, > it seems too close for an accident. In any case, marketing departments > long ago started using decimal prefixes for disk size. And the 3.5" floppy is in fact a weird binary decimal hybrid. > I do remember in the IBM mainframe days wondering about pricing in $K. > (That is, $1000 or $1024?) > > -- glen >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-23 17:35 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2375.291T1556T10554653@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
| In reply to | #3047 |
In article <llog9b$mr5$1@speranza.aioe.org>, gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) writes: > In alt.sys.pdp11 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: > > (snip, I wrote) > >>> I have always seen l instead of L, and so decided to look it up. > >>> I never knew this before, but it seems that the rule is that >>> units named for people are upper case, and units not named for >>> people are lower case. That is the official SI rule. > >> Yep. But slavishly following the rules leads to locally >> suboptimal results. > > It seems that one is supposed to put either a hyphen or space > between the numeric value and the unit. I'd lean toward a space myself, reserving the hyphen for adjective phrases (e.g. if you run 10 km, it's a 10-km run). >> Likewise, you often see "ug" or "um" because some apparently find >> it too difficult to write "??g" or "??m". The medical field >> uses "mcg", which is even worse than "ug". > > I think the first time I saw it, I thought it was milli-centi-gram, > but it seems that SI specifically disallows compound prefixes. It still feels wrong to me too. > That has always been less obvious for disks. For one, the disks built > by IBM for many years didn't have power of two sizes. The IBM 2314 > has a track length of 7294 bytes. The IBM 3330 has 404 cylinders > with 19 tracks each (plus a servo track) and 13030 bytes/track, > which multiplies to 100018280 bytes, so just barely over 100 million. > Though I don't ever remember hearing it described as 100 megabytes, > it seems too close for an accident. And since the 3330 and 2314 (and the 2311 before it) were all CKD devices, that 100 megabytes was a theoretical maximum which was never reached in practice. I always thought of a 2314 spindle (advertised capacity 29.17 megabytes) as holding 20 to 25 megabytes depending on block sizes used. > In any case, marketing departments long ago started using decimal > prefixes for disk size. And memory, too. I used the terms "programer's K" and "salesmen's K" - where else but in the magical world of marketing could you add 32K to an existing 32K and come up with 65K? -- /~\ 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]
| From | "Stanley Daniel de Liver" <admin@127.0.0.1> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-24 10:20 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <op.xgcxkyrio4et73@dell3100> |
| In reply to | #3056 |
On Sat, 24 May 2014 02:35:31 +0100, Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote: > In article <llog9b$mr5$1@speranza.aioe.org>, gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen > herrmannsfeldt) writes: > >> In alt.sys.pdp11 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >> >> (snip, I wrote) >> >>>> I have always seen l instead of L, and so decided to look it up. >> >>>> I never knew this before, but it seems that the rule is that >>>> units named for people are upper case, and units not named for >>>> people are lower case. That is the official SI rule. >> >>> Yep. But slavishly following the rules leads to locally >>> suboptimal results. >> >> It seems that one is supposed to put either a hyphen or space >> between the numeric value and the unit. > > I'd lean toward a space myself, reserving the hyphen for > adjective phrases (e.g. if you run 10 km, it's a 10-km run). > >>> Likewise, you often see "ug" or "um" because some apparently find >>> it too difficult to write "??g" or "??m". The medical field >>> uses "mcg", which is even worse than "ug". >> >> I think the first time I saw it, I thought it was milli-centi-gram, >> but it seems that SI specifically disallows compound prefixes. > > It still feels wrong to me too. > >> That has always been less obvious for disks. For one, the disks built >> by IBM for many years didn't have power of two sizes. The IBM 2314 >> has a track length of 7294 bytes. The IBM 3330 has 404 cylinders >> with 19 tracks each (plus a servo track) and 13030 bytes/track, >> which multiplies to 100018280 bytes, so just barely over 100 million. >> Though I don't ever remember hearing it described as 100 megabytes, >> it seems too close for an accident. > > And since the 3330 and 2314 (and the 2311 before it) were all CKD > devices, that 100 megabytes was a theoretical maximum which was > never reached in practice. I always thought of a 2314 spindle > (advertised capacity 29.17 megabytes) as holding 20 to 25 megabytes > depending on block sizes used. Aye, we spent some time carefully deciding on blocksizes back then. > >> In any case, marketing departments long ago started using decimal >> prefixes for disk size. > > And memory, too. I used the terms "programer's K" and "salesmen's K" - > where else but in the magical world of marketing could you add 32K to > an existing 32K and come up with 65K? > -- It's a money /life balance.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz <spamtrap@library.lspace.org.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-24 21:41 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <53814a3e$20$fuzhry+tra$mr2ice@news.patriot.net> |
| In reply to | #3047 |
In <llog9b$mr5$1@speranza.aioe.org>, on 05/23/2014 at 09:58 PM, glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> said: >In any case, marketing departments >long ago started using decimal prefixes for disk size. Except for a brief perid when they were using 1.024,000 octets as a unit of capacity. Either 2^20 or 10^6 would have been preferable. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel> Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-24 00:33 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <0.1d5875330c5713859d44.20140524003351BST.87ioowm5nk.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
| In reply to | #3037 |
Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> writes: > On 23-May-14 14:00, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote: >> In alt.sys.pdp11 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: >>> (snip, I wrote) >>>> It seems that they make special 1l bottles of alcoholic beverages >>> >>> Please write "1L" rather than "1l"; in most fonts, the >>> latter looks like "11". >> >> I have always seen l instead of L, and so decided to look it up. >> >> I never knew this before, but it seems that the rule is that >> units named for people are upper case, and units not named for >> people are lower case. That is the official SI rule. It's one of them, but there are others. In particular, that either l or L can be used for litre (adopted by the 16th CGPM in 1979 -- resolution 6, apparently). > Yep. But slavishly following the rules leads to locally suboptimal results. > > In handwriting, one will often see a cursive "l" even if the rest of the > text is printed, but that's not so easy with computers; you'd need to > use a different font to get that result. I know what you mean (it will certainly look different) but many fonts have this sort of glyph in them, so a change of font in the computer sense is not always needed. > Sometimes folks put all units > in italics, which also solves the problem, but doing that only for "l" > looks strange and is easy to forget. "L" is a decent (and common) > compromise, and I think (hope) the standards folks are smart enough to > avoid ever using that for another unit. As I said, the SI "powers that be" endorse both l and L. They don't endorse ℓ (U+2113) which Unicode describes are the "traditional" symbol for liter. (I've tried to keep the original spelling used in the various documents, hence the inconsistency). <snip> -- Ben.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Christian Corti <use@reply.to> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-24 10:39 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <tf265b-h1t.ln1@news.online.de> |
| In reply to | #3037 |
In alt.sys.pdp11 Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> wrote: > Likewise, you often see "ug" or "um" because some apparently find it too > difficult to write "µg" or "µm". The medical field uses "mcg", which is That's a (US-)americanism. Nobody write "ug" or "um" in papers or other documents. And apparently many (US-)americans don't know what a picofarad (pF) is, they say (or write) micro-microfarad instead (µµF). Now that's sick! > Yep; the SI unit of volume is cubic meters, but in most cases that > doesn't result in convenient sizes, so we use liters instead; 1L = > 1dm^3. Also very useful is 1mL = 1cm^3 (aka 1cc). It's "ccm", not "cc". And liters are usually only used for liquids. And to be mathematically correct, it should be (dm)³ or (cm)³ or c³m³ ;-) > or Mg, which could easily be confused with the (fairly common) mg. And > nobody seems to use Mm, Gm, etc.; they just use large numbers of km. No, we use tons, kilotons, megatons etc. Christian
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-24 09:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <llpooq$7uv$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #3062 |
In alt.sys.pdp11 Christian Corti <use@reply.to> wrote: (snip) > That's a (US-)americanism. Nobody write "ug" or "um" in papers or other > documents. And apparently many (US-)americans don't know what a > picofarad (pF) is, they say (or write) micro-microfarad instead (µµF). > Now that's sick! In old electronics, it was micro-micro-farad, I presume before the pico prefix was invented. I have seen it actually printed on capacitors. Well, they might have been condensers, before the word capacitor was invented. (But just after the Leyden Jar.) -- glen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-24 13:13 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <240520141313190476%timstreater@greenbee.net> |
| In reply to | #3066 |
In article <llpooq$7uv$1@speranza.aioe.org>, glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: > In alt.sys.pdp11 Christian Corti <use@reply.to> wrote: > > (snip) > > > That's a (US-)americanism. Nobody write "ug" or "um" in papers or other > > documents. And apparently many (US-)americans don't know what a > > picofarad (pF) is, they say (or write) micro-microfarad instead (µµF). > > Now that's sick! > > In old electronics, it was micro-micro-farad, I presume before the > pico prefix was invented. I have seen it actually printed on > capacitors. Well, they might have been condensers, before the > word capacitor was invented. (But just after the Leyden Jar.) Have to be pretty old then. It was pF when I was mucking about with the things back in the 60s. -- "People don't buy Microsoft for quality, they buy it for compatibility with what Bob in accounting bought last year. Trace it back - they buy Microsoft because the IBM Selectric didn't suck much" - P Seebach, afc
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-24 10:51 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <alpine.LNX.2.02.1405241048001.12413@darkstar.example.org> |
| In reply to | #3072 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
On Sat, 24 May 2014, Tim Streater wrote: > In article <llpooq$7uv$1@speranza.aioe.org>, glen herrmannsfeldt > <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: > >> In alt.sys.pdp11 Christian Corti <use@reply.to> wrote: >> >> (snip) >> >> > That's a (US-)americanism. Nobody write "ug" or "um" in papers or other >> > documents. And apparently many (US-)americans don't know what a >> > picofarad (pF) is, they say (or write) micro-microfarad instead (µµF). >> > Now that's sick! >> >> In old electronics, it was micro-micro-farad, I presume before the >> pico prefix was invented. I have seen it actually printed on >> capacitors. Well, they might have been condensers, before the >> word capacitor was invented. (But just after the Leyden Jar.) > > Have to be pretty old then. It was pF when I was mucking about with the > things back in the 60s. > That was part of the "great migration". The standards changed, but didn't have to be fully implemented until some time later. It was the same move that brought "Hertz" instead of "cycles per second". So there was a period when either goes. It was before my time, but I remember reading an old magazine from the early sixties talking about the change, and then you'd see the gradual adoption of the new terms. I didn't start reading hobby electronic magazines until 1971, but I was certainly aware of uuF, the older magazines did use the term, and once I started taking things apart for parts, there were the capacitors with the older term. MIchael
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "gareth" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-24 18:50 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <llqm5n$vjv$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3079 |
"Michael Black" <et472@ncf.ca> wrote in message news:alpine.LNX.2.02.1405241048001.12413@darkstar.example.org... I didn't start reading hobby electronic magazines until 1971, but I was certainly aware of uuF, the older magazines did use the term, and once I started taking things apart for parts, there were the capacitors with the older term. -----ooooo----- The Admiralty Handbook of Wireless Telegraphy talks about matching networks for antennae with the capacitance measured in Jars
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-24 20:05 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <llqu1h$4bj$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #3079 |
In alt.sys.pdp11 Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> wrote: (snip on micro-micro-Farad) >> Have to be pretty old then. It was pF when I was mucking about with the >> things back in the 60s. > That was part of the "great migration". The standards changed, but didn't > have to be fully implemented until some time later. It was the same move > that brought "Hertz" instead of "cycles per second". > So there was a period when either goes. It was before my time, but I > remember reading an old magazine from the early sixties talking about the > change, and then you'd see the gradual adoption of the new terms. > I didn't start reading hobby electronic magazines until 1971, but I was > certainly aware of uuF, the older magazines did use the term, and once I > started taking things apart for parts, there were the capacitors with the > older term. About 1969, I had a subscription to Popular Electronics, and also checked them out from the library earlier than that. But then I found that I could get back issues, back to about 1954, from the library asking for them at the circulation desk. So, back to vacuum tube days. I also remember reading the Carl and Jerry stories. -- glen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stan Barr <plan.b@dsl.pipex.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-24 16:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnlo1hr3.2cn8.plan.b@ID-309335.user.uni-berlin.de> |
| In reply to | #3072 |
On Sat, 24 May 2014 13:13:19 +0100, Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote: > In article <llpooq$7uv$1@speranza.aioe.org>, glen herrmannsfeldt ><gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: > >> In alt.sys.pdp11 Christian Corti <use@reply.to> wrote: >> >> (snip) >> >> > That's a (US-)americanism. Nobody write "ug" or "um" in papers or other >> > documents. And apparently many (US-)americans don't know what a >> > picofarad (pF) is, they say (or write) micro-microfarad instead (µµF). >> > Now that's sick! >> >> In old electronics, it was micro-micro-farad, I presume before the >> pico prefix was invented. I have seen it actually printed on >> capacitors. Well, they might have been condensers, before the >> word capacitor was invented. (But just after the Leyden Jar.) > > Have to be pretty old then. It was pF when I was mucking about with the > things back in the 60s. > I can remember mica caps marked uuF - in fact I've probably got a few somewhere! Some of my old radio books give capacitance in Jars...1 Jar = 1.11 nano-Farads. I *must* be getting old :-( -- Stan Barr plan.b@dsl.pipex.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-24 19:30 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <llqs0s$v27$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #3072 |
In alt.sys.pdp11 Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote: (snip, I wrote) >> In old electronics, it was micro-micro-farad, I presume before the >> pico prefix was invented. I have seen it actually printed on >> capacitors. Well, they might have been condensers, before the >> word capacitor was invented. (But just after the Leyden Jar.) > Have to be pretty old then. It was pF when I was mucking about > with the things back in the 60s. I recently bought one of these from a Goodwill store: http://elektrotanya.com/heathkit_ig-102_signal-generator_assembly-manual.pdf/download.html Seems that the manual, Copyright 1962 and updated 1965, uses uuF (with mu instead of u). Mostly I was learning in the 1960's, but many of the books and actual electronics I had were old. -- glen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-05-26 09:36 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2067.294T784T5763673@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
| In reply to | #3072 |
In article <240520141313190476%timstreater@greenbee.net>, timstreater@greenbee.net (Tim Streater) writes: > In article <llpooq$7uv$1@speranza.aioe.org>, glen herrmannsfeldt > <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote: > >> In alt.sys.pdp11 Christian Corti <use@reply.to> wrote: >> >> (snip) >> >>> That's a (US-)americanism. Nobody write "ug" or "um" in papers or >>> other documents. And apparently many (US-)americans don't know what >>> a picofarad (pF) is, they say (or write) micro-microfarad instead >>> (µµF). Now that's sick! >> >> In old electronics, it was micro-micro-farad, I presume before >> the pico prefix was invented. I have seen it actually printed on >> capacitors. Well, they might have been condensers, before the >> word capacitor was invented. (But just after the Leyden Jar.) > > Have to be pretty old then. It was pF when I was mucking about with > the things back in the 60s. When I was mucking about with the things back in the '60s, it was still micro-microfarads. I think the prefix "pico" was just coming into use at the time. Actually, in most cases "nanofarads" would have been more appropriate to the values involved, but again it probably was just coming into use; I remember seeing the occasional European capacitor marked in nF, but nothing from North America. You'd usually see something like ".001 uF". Speaking of odd notation, I seem to recall that electrolytic capacitors often had an extra "d" appended, as in "20 uFd". I never saw this on any other type of capacitor, though. > -- > "People don't buy Microsoft for quality, they buy it for compatibility > with what Bob in accounting bought last year. Trace it back - they buy > Microsoft because the IBM Selectric didn't suck much" - P Seebach, afc "The only reason everyone uses COBOL is that everyone uses COBOL." -- me -- /~\ 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]
Page 3 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5 … 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.misc
csiph-web