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

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #94962 > unrolled thread

Is This An Old Folks Home?

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

Contents

  Is This An Old Folks Home? Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-11-02 23:08 +0000
    Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-03 02:51 +0100
      On the on-topicness of tape drives (was: Re: Is This An Old Folks Home?) Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-04 23:47 +0000
        Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-11-05 04:14 +0000
          Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-05 17:29 -0500
            Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-11-05 22:52 +0000
              Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-05 19:11 -0500
                Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-11-06 02:41 +0000
                  Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-05 22:31 -0500
                    Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-06 20:51 +0000
                      Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-11-07 02:41 +0000
            Re: On the on-topicness of tape drives Beej Jorgensen <beej@beej.us> - 2026-11-06 05:59 +0000
              Re: Tape Drives Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-11-06 06:18 +0000
    Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-02 21:08 -0500
    Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-11-03 02:26 +0000
    Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? Woozy Song <suzyw0ng@outlook.com> - 2026-11-04 09:55 +0800
      Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-03 22:14 -0500
        Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2026-11-04 03:54 +0000
          Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-11-04 06:21 +0000
            Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? TJ <TJ@noneofyour.business> - 2026-11-05 20:40 -0500
              Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-05 21:52 -0500
                Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-11-06 14:28 +0100
            My Computer History (Re: Is This An Old Folks Home?) Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-11-06 18:37 -0800
    Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? Beej Jorgensen <beej@beej.us> - 2026-11-04 19:15 +0000
      Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-11-04 20:38 +0000
        Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-04 23:51 +0000
        Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> - 2026-11-05 17:48 +0100
          Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-11-05 16:56 +0000
          Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-11-05 20:55 +0000
    Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2026-11-06 12:23 -0500
      Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? Farley Flud <ff@gnulinux.rocks> - 2026-11-06 19:25 +0000
        Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? "Joel W. Crump" <joelcrump@gmail.com> - 2026-11-06 15:59 -0500
          Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-11-07 02:50 +0000
        Re: Is This An Old Folks Home? c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-11-06 23:00 -0500

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#95221

On 11/5/26 20:40, TJ wrote:
> On 2026-11-04 01:21, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> On 2026-11-04, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/3/26 20:55, Woozy Song wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Usenet has a lot of people who have been using it since the 1990s, so
>>>>> presumably over 50 years old.  I am a bit older, I remember 9-track
>>>>> tapes, punch cards and acoustic coupler modems.
>>
>> <waves hand> Me too!
>>
>>>>    Umm ... they were EIGHT-track tapes :-)
>>>
>>> Idiot.  Woozy's not referring to "8-track audio tapes".
>>
>> Uh, I think he was pulling our legs - note the smiley.
>>
>>> He's referring to 9-track digital computer tapes used on
>>> old IBM mainframes.  They were 9-tracks:
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9-track_tape
>>>
>>> Eight data bits plus one parity bit per byte makes for a "9-track"
>>> tape.
>>
>> If you're really old you'll remember 7-track tapes (6 data bits
>> plus one parity bit, popular before 8-bit bytes came along).
>> I don't think I ever actually used one of them, but I did read
>> about them.  I think some units even had a hardware converter
>> option that let you attach them to a machine that did 8-bit
>> bytes; for every three 8-bit bytes you sent them they'd write
>> four 6-bit bytes to the tape.  Good for converting your old
>> tapes...
>>
> Guess that makes me really old. I was drafted during the Nixon 
> administration, and assigned to run a HP 2116 minicomputer system at a 
> research facility. When I got there, it was using a couple of 7-track 
> tape drives, and was booted up with a strip of paper tape. Soon after, 
> it was upgraded to a then newfangled "moving head disk drive" that had 
> one fixed disk and one bay for cartridges about 15 inches in diameter, 
> and a revised boot program eliminated the paper tape boot procedure.

   Hey, STATE-OF-THE-ART !  :-)

   Kinda miss the drive units with the
   removable platters. Do NOT pull them
   before they stop spinning, saw the
   result of that once !

   Odd fact, had a tour of a US submarine in
   the mid 80s ... the sonar niche had a "mini"
   and one removable-platter drive. Probably
   officially specced a decade before. Govt/mil
   stuff is often like that. The Apollo/LEM
   spacecraft were already well behind the
   curve when it came to computer shit ... but
   it'd all been specced, set in stone, in the
   early 60s. "ROPE MEMORY" for the LEM !

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

#95239

On 2026-11-06 03:52, c186282 wrote:
> On 11/5/26 20:40, TJ wrote:
>> On 2026-11-04 01:21, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>> On 2026-11-04, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:


>> Guess that makes me really old. I was drafted during the Nixon 
>> administration, and assigned to run a HP 2116 minicomputer system at a 
>> research facility. When I got there, it was using a couple of 7-track 
>> tape drives, and was booted up with a strip of paper tape. Soon after, 
>> it was upgraded to a then newfangled "moving head disk drive" that had 
>> one fixed disk and one bay for cartridges about 15 inches in diameter, 
>> and a revised boot program eliminated the paper tape boot procedure.
> 
>    Hey, STATE-OF-THE-ART !  :-)
> 
>    Kinda miss the drive units with the
>    removable platters. Do NOT pull them
>    before they stop spinning, saw the
>    result of that once !

Please tell!

> 
>    Odd fact, had a tour of a US submarine in
>    the mid 80s ... the sonar niche had a "mini"
>    and one removable-platter drive. Probably
>    officially specced a decade before. Govt/mil
>    stuff is often like that. The Apollo/LEM
>    spacecraft were already well behind the
>    curve when it came to computer shit ... but
>    it'd all been specced, set in stone, in the
>    early 60s. "ROPE MEMORY" for the LEM !

It is a big problem to maintain those for years, if they are 
industry-obsolete when they start service.

-- 
Cheers,
        Carlos E.R.
        ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺.

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

#95270 — My Computer History (Re: Is This An Old Folks Home?)

On 11/3/2026 22:21, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2026-11-04, Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/3/26 20:55, Woozy Song wrote:
>>>
>>>> Usenet has a lot of people who have been using it since the 1990s, so
>>>> presumably over 50 years old.  I am a bit older, I remember 9-track
>>>> tapes, punch cards and acoustic coupler modems.
> 
> <waves hand> Me too!
> 
>>>    Umm ... they were EIGHT-track tapes :-)
>>
>> Idiot.  Woozy's not referring to "8-track audio tapes".
> 
> Uh, I think he was pulling our legs - note the smiley.
> 
>> He's referring to 9-track digital computer tapes used on
>> old IBM mainframes.  They were 9-tracks:
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9-track_tape
>>
>> Eight data bits plus one parity bit per byte makes for a "9-track"
>> tape.
> 
> If you're really old you'll remember 7-track tapes (6 data bits
> plus one parity bit, popular before 8-bit bytes came along).
> I don't think I ever actually used one of them, but I did read
> about them.  I think some units even had a hardware converter
> option that let you attach them to a machine that did 8-bit
> bytes; for every three 8-bit bytes you sent them they'd write
> four 6-bit bytes to the tape.  Good for converting your old
> tapes...

1964: Junior High School. Getting simple computer architecture books 
(written for a general "Popular Mechanics" audience) and Fortran 
beginning textbooks from the library. Writing FORTRAN IV programs in a 
comp book. No access to any computers, but reading about GE (BASIC) 
time-sharing systems in newspapers.

1969: Enrolling in University Math department with the goal of learning 
computer science (and dropping out after 6 months). While there, played 
with GIER minicomputer, "2st generation comp[uter" (first transistor 
generation), 1024 words of 42 bits each, plus 4KW of "extended storage" 
(buffer memory with fast block transfer in and out). Fixed head drum 
with 960 tracks of 40 words each; programmed in Algol-60, paper tape 
in/out with 2000 char/sec optical paper tape reader, 150 cps punch.

1970: Leaving studies at Uni, taking job at physics dept of uni, with 
another GIER, plus IBM 1130 with 1MB disk cartridge drive (2311) and 2 
tape drives, 1 7-track 800 bpi, one 9-track 1600 bpi, 600 cpm card 
reader / 200 (?) cpm punch (1442), 150 (?) lpm printer. The 1130 
eventually became a HASP RJE terminal. Access to NEUCC data center with 
IBM 7494 (36 bit tape oriented IBSYS/IBJOB OS) and IBM 360/65 
(OS-360/MVT/HASP/WITS) with tapes, disks and 2260 CRJE terminal on-site.

1972: Job transitions to startup of RECKU data center with UNIVAC-1106 
(EXEC-8) with mix of Fastrand huge drum, 7-track tape, 9-track tape, 
UNIVAC 9300 for card/printer I/O spool. Gradually building out a row of 
80 MB removable disk storage units.

The UNIVAC was 36 bits, mostly using 6-bit FIELDATA for text, but 
gradually growing into 9-bit bytes and printing 7-bit ASCII text.
The 7-track tapes were a natural fit for 36-bit words, but the 9-track 
was faster and at 1600 bpi held more data. When moounting the 9-track 
tape, one could select whether to use "packed binary" mode (5 8-bit 
bytes in 2 36-bit words) or "byte mode" (4 8-bit bytes in the 4 9-bit 
quarter words of a 36-bit word).

Just before I left the university in 1972, someone had brought in a 
bare-bones PDP-11/20 mini with a TTY which they also used for papertape 
I/O. But that did not catch my interest.

In 1974, we got a couple PDP-11/10, which we used to develop a terminal 
concentrator that allowed "glass TTYs" to emulate a multi-dropped 
cluster of Univac's expensive keyboard/printer terminals or Uniscope
display terminals over a synchronous comms line. I hung around enough to 
understand the building blocks and the instruction set.

In 1975, I moved to a small private engineering company which used PDP-8 
and PDP-11 barebones systems to build various industrial systems. The 
larger PDP-11 systems ran RSX-11M, and used the 2MB cartridge disk 
drives. I also wrote a customer data acquisition device driver for a 
Nord-10 minicomputer running SINTRAN.

Around 1977, my coworker talked me into a side project to write terminal 
emulator code to run on a Z80 multi-microprocessor system that plugged 
into a UNIBUS on a PDP-11 or a VAX too emulate UNIVAC or IBM display 
terminals.

Around 1978, our little company became the Danish distributor for Wang 
Labs word processing systems. As part of the deal, we got a Wang VS-10 
which was sort of like a 370/125 with a stupid terminal system, that 
could be programmed in RPG or COBOL, but the terminals were Z80 
processors attached with twinax cables like IBM3270, and could run the 
word processing system, using the VS-10 as a boot device and central 
disk storage.

In 1980, I moved to California to work for ACC and got introduced to a 
PDP-11/70 running Univ v6, later BSD, VMS, 4.2BSD and Ultrix. My group 
mostly developed "smart communication boards" for Unibus, some Z80 
based, some MC68000 based. Later with did rack-sized communication 
systems on a VersaBus chassis. All of this connected first to ARPAnet, 
then we landed on the MILnet side in the ARPAnet split (26.x.y.z). Most 
of our customers were in 21.a.b.c (some of you know what that was, the 
rest of you are not supposed to ask). Our first network connection was
a VDH link as 1200 bps; later we got an IMP in our computer room. Our 
East coast office was connected via a 2400 bps X.25 trunk.

Beginning in 1989, I worked on "remote telnet clusters" with 10 async 
TTY ports on one side, an ethernet port on the other side and an MC68000 
in the middle.

 From 1995 to 1997, I tried to build a small-business modular edge 
router on a PCI (ATX) x86 motherboard with "smart peripherals". When 
that collapsed, I finally found the people I still work with. We do 
industrial radio modems at low speed and high reliability.

-- 
Lars Poulsen - an old geek in Santa Barbara, California

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

#95122

In article <18e45d18dce2f904$1893$2999836$802601b3@news.usenetexpress.com>,
Farley Flud  <ff@gnulinux.rocks> wrote:
>Ha, ha, [snip] ha, ha!

I do wish more people, young and old, would comply with RFC 1855.
Everyone should give it a (re)read. :)

-- 
Brian "Beej Jorgensen" Hall | beej@beej.us

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

#95131

On Wed, 4 Nov 2026 19:15:19 -0000 (UTC), Beej Jorgensen wrote:

> 
> I do wish more people, young and old, would comply with RFC 1855.
> Everyone should give it a (re)read. :)
>

Usenet is beyond doubt superior to all of the fashionable web forums
that are controlled by single entities and heavily moderated (i.e censored)
and also data mined.

But it seems that Usenet, or at least a lot of formerly popular groups,
is no longer used for free discussion but only only to alleviate the
loneliness of decrepit old-timers that can't find anything better to
do with their empty time.

Please keep all posts on topic and refrain from assuming that Usenet
is your personal taproom.


-- 
Gentoo/LFS: Is there any-fucking-thing else?

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

#95144

On 2026-11-04, Farley Flud wrote:

> On Wed, 4 Nov 2026 19:15:19 -0000 (UTC), Beej Jorgensen wrote:
>
>> 
>> I do wish more people, young and old, would comply with RFC 1855.
>> Everyone should give it a (re)read. :)
>>
>
> Usenet is beyond doubt superior to all of the fashionable web forums
> that are controlled by single entities and heavily moderated (i.e censored)
> and also data mined.
>
> But it seems that Usenet, or at least a lot of formerly popular groups,
> is no longer used for free discussion but only only to alleviate the
> loneliness of decrepit old-timers that can't find anything better to
> do with their empty time.
>
> Please keep all posts on topic and refrain from assuming that Usenet
> is your personal taproom.

(No, this is the *tape*-room.)

... why didn't you set Followup-To: to a group discussing hypocrisy?

-- 
Nuno Silva

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

#95164

On Wed, 04 Nov 2026 20:38:16 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:

> Please keep all posts on topic and refrain from assuming that Usenet
> is your personal taproom.

'netcop' and 'self-proclaimed moderator' come to mind.

-- 
Horum omnium fortissimi sunt Belgae.
		- Julius Caesar

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

#95165

On 2026-11-05, s|b <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Nov 2026 20:38:16 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:
>
>> Please keep all posts on topic and refrain from assuming that Usenet
>> is your personal taproom.
>
> 'netcop' and 'self-proclaimed moderator' come to mind.

Please don't feed the trolls.

-- 
Robert Riches
spamtrap42@jacob21819.net
(Yes, that is one of my email addresses.)

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

#95174

On 05/11/2026 16:48, s|b wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Nov 2026 20:38:16 +0000, Farley Flud wrote:
> 
>> Please keep all posts on topic and refrain from assuming that Usenet
>> is your personal taproom.
> 
> 'netcop' and 'self-proclaimed moderator' come to mind.
> 
I thought Farley was plonked. Seems to have nym shifted
Re plonked


-- 
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, 
that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."

Jonathan Swift.

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

#95243

On 11/2/2026 6:08 PM, Farley Flud wrote:

> Is this group an actual GNU/Linux discussion forum or a sordid
> home for decrepit old folks and faltering has-beens?
> 
> I don't want no useless info on pre-historic tape readers.


So why no SSD?


> I, and many others, want cutting edge philosophy on GNU/Linux/FOSS.
> 
> Otherwise, go bury yourselves, grandpas.
> 
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!


Any OS benefits from an SSD.

-- 
Joel W. Crump

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

#95246

On Fri, 6 Nov 2026 12:23:08 -0500, Joel W. Crump wrote:

> On 11/2/2026 6:08 PM, Farley Flud wrote:
> 
>> Is this group an actual GNU/Linux discussion forum or a sordid
>> home for decrepit old folks and faltering has-beens?
>> 
>> I don't want no useless info on pre-historic tape readers.
> 
> 
> So why no SSD?
> 

The reasons were explicitly stated many times already.

Perhaps the surge of endorphins that you experience with each
dildo that slides up your ass has caused you to forget.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

Degenerate sodomite.


> 
> Any OS benefits from an SSD.
>

None whatsoever.

Unless, for you, SSD = Self-Satisfying Dildo.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!

Degenerate sodomite.


-- 
Gentoo/LFS: Is there any-fucking-thing else?

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

#95254

On 11/6/2026 2:25 PM, Farley Flud wrote:

>>> Is this group an actual GNU/Linux discussion forum or a sordid
>>> home for decrepit old folks and faltering has-beens?
>>>
>>> I don't want no useless info on pre-historic tape readers.
>>
>> So why no SSD?
> 
> The reasons were explicitly stated many times already.
> 
> Perhaps the surge of endorphins that you experience with each
> dildo that slides up your ass has caused you to forget.
> 
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
> 
> Degenerate sodomite.
> 
>> Any OS benefits from an SSD.
> 
> None whatsoever.
> 
> Unless, for you, SSD = Self-Satisfying Dildo.
> 
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
> 
> Degenerate sodomite.


I saw Linux on a four-core machine with a SATA SSD, and on a 
six-core/12-thread and a four-core/four-thread both with NVMe storage, 
it matters plenty if one wants more than your unserviceable rig.

-- 
Joel W. Crump

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

#95272

On Fri, 6 Nov 2026 15:59:30 -0500, Joel W. Crump wrote:

> I saw Linux on a four-core machine with a SATA SSD, and on a
> six-core/12-thread and a four-core/four-thread both with NVMe storage,
> it matters plenty if one wants more than your unserviceable rig.

I replaced the HDDs on a couple of older machines with SATA SSDs. The most 
noticeable improvement was on reboot since I don't do any disk intensive 
stuff. Starting individual programs wasn't appreciably faster. SSDs 
allowed SATA to achieve its maximum performance, something I don't think 
even the best HDDs could.

It's still slower than NVMe but not a show stopper. 

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

#95276

On 11/6/26 14:25, Farley Flud wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2026 12:23:08 -0500, Joel W. Crump wrote:
> 
>> On 11/2/2026 6:08 PM, Farley Flud wrote:
>>
>>> Is this group an actual GNU/Linux discussion forum or a sordid
>>> home for decrepit old folks and faltering has-beens?
>>>
>>> I don't want no useless info on pre-historic tape readers.
>>
>>
>> So why no SSD?
>>
> 
> The reasons were explicitly stated many times already.
> 
> Perhaps the surge of endorphins that you experience with each
> dildo that slides up your ass has caused you to forget.
> 
> Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha!
> 
> Degenerate sodomite.
   Well THIS conversation has gone down
   the toilet ........

   SSDs are good, but the price-per-TB is still
   not so good - even worse now that AI has been
   sucking up all the memory chips in the world.

   Have some SSDs, and like 'em, but the last drive
   I bought was a magnetic ... more cap for the $$$
   by a good margin and fast enough for MY need.

   Tape, as said, still has a place. USB disk units
   with magnetics are better though these days. Tape
   will fade away, but it's not gone yet.

   Linux "gets" tape - good thing.

   Hmm ... ".tar' ... means "TAPE Archive"  :-)

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc

csiph-web