Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #159869

Re: Delay Line Memory

From	Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca>
Newsgroups	alt.folklore.computers
Subject	Re: Delay Line Memory
Date	2016-02-19 19:21 -0500
Organization	National Capital Freenet, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
Message-ID	<alpine.LNX.2.02.1602191917470.27211@darkstar.example.org> (permalink)
References	<na03mr$ttc$1@dont-email.me> <dii0psFdmfqU6@mid.individual.net> <na325v0o7i@news4.newsguy.com> <alpine.LNX.2.02.1602172309580.24250@darkstar.example.org> <80f18c34-21d5-4936-9312-f4a955b3394c@googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On Thu, 18 Feb 2016, Quadibloc wrote:

> On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 9:08:09 PM UTC-7, Michael Black wrote:
>
>> And for some reason, when solid state memory came along, it wsa in the
>> form of long shift registers, though I'm not sure if that was the only
>> option or in parallel with "random access memory".
>
> For a short time, although there were static random access memory chips also available, they had a limited capacity, and the long shift registers were the only chips that could hold a full 1,024 bits on a single chip.
>
> Or so I thought, but looking it up:
>
> Intel 1402/3/4 shift register - 1970
> Intel 1103 DRAM - 1970
> Intel 2102 SRAM - 1972
>
> So while 1K static RAMs came 2 years later, 1K dynamic RAMs and 1K shift
> registers were at least approximately contemporaneous. But a dynamic RAM would
> require significantly more support circuitry, so if you could get away with a
> shift register - say if you were designing a video terminal or "TV Typewriter"
> (vide Don Lancaster's famous Cookbook) - you would. No doubt they were cheaper
> too.
>
That's the thing.  It was available "surplus" (I have no idea if that 
actually meant "no longer needed" or it was just a distribution channel) 
and thus "cheap".  Right at that point, there wasn't much need for large 
storage in hobbyist circles, but if you needed it, you ended up using 
those long shift registers.  I can't remember if I mentioned amateur radio 
slow scan TV in my previous post, but that was using it up too around 
1974, about the only thing besides that TV typewriter that made use of RAM 
(it was a blink before microprocessors took off).  I remember talk of one 
SSTV scan converter, and a dismissal "because now you can't get the long 
shift registers for it", which I assumed meant "the surplus stock dried 
up".

   Michael

Thread

Delay Line Memory "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-02-16 15:21 -0600
  Re: Delay Line Memory Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-16 15:41 -0600
  Re: Delay Line Memory David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 22:18 +0000
  Re: Delay Line Memory Dan Espen <despen@verizon.net> - 2016-02-16 17:36 -0500
  Re: Delay Line Memory Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-16 16:57 -0600
  Re: Delay Line Memory bert <bert.hutchings@btinternet.com> - 2016-02-16 15:08 -0800
    Re: Delay Line Memory Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-17 01:31 +0000
    Re: Delay Line Memory Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-17 03:42 +0000
  Re: Delay Line Memory Morten Reistad <first@last.name.invalid> - 2016-02-17 00:25 +0100
    Re: Delay Line Memory Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk> - 2016-02-17 14:03 +0000
  Re: Delay Line Memory Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-17 00:14 +0000
    Re: Delay Line Memory Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-17 11:46 -0800
      Re: Delay Line Memory jhhaynes@earthlink.net - 2016-02-17 18:18 -0800
      Re: Delay Line Memory David Wade <dave.g4ugm@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 09:44 +0000
  Re: Delay Line Memory hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com - 2016-02-16 16:43 -0800
    Re: Delay Line Memory Anonymous <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2016-02-17 01:24 +0000
    Re: Delay Line Memory Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-16 18:52 -0700
      Re: Delay Line Memory Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-16 22:19 -0500
      Re: Delay Line Memory JimP <solosam90@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 11:34 -0600
    Re: Delay Line Memory Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> - 2016-02-16 20:06 -0600
    Re: Delay Line Memory Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-16 20:23 -0600
    Re: Delay Line Memory "hgww" <hgww@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 14:35 +1100
    Re: Delay Line Memory Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-17 04:17 +0000
      Re: Delay Line Memory "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-02-18 17:14 -0600
        Re: Delay Line Memory Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-18 19:27 -0600
          Re: Delay Line Memory Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2016-02-19 04:14 +0000
          Re: Delay Line Memory Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-19 19:07 -0500
  Re: Delay Line Memory Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> - 2016-02-17 01:30 +0000
    Re: Delay Line Memory "Joe Morris" <j.c.morris@verizon.net> - 2016-02-17 19:11 -0500
      Re: Delay Line Memory Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-17 23:13 -0500
        Re: Delay Line Memory Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-02-17 22:25 -0600
        Re: Delay Line Memory isw <isw@witzend.com> - 2016-02-17 23:16 -0800
          Re: Delay Line Memory Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-02-18 12:01 -0600
            Re: Delay Line Memory Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2016-02-18 12:10 -0600
            Re: Delay Line Memory Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-18 13:46 -0600
            Re: Delay Line Memory Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-19 19:13 -0500
        Re: Delay Line Memory Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-18 04:49 -0800
          Re: Delay Line Memory Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-19 19:21 -0500
        Re: Delay Line Memory Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-18 04:51 -0800
          Re: Delay Line Memory Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2016-02-19 19:16 -0500
  Re: Delay Line Memory Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> - 2016-02-16 18:52 -0700
    Re: Delay Line Memory "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-02-19 20:50 -0600
      Re: Delay Line Memory Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-02-20 06:31 +0000
  Re: Delay Line Memory G. <gerry77@no.spam.mail.com> - 2016-02-17 04:08 +0100
  Re: Delay Line Memory Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-02-17 08:19 +0000
    Re: Delay Line Memory Jon Elson <jmelson@wustl.edu> - 2016-02-17 14:57 -0600
    Re: Delay Line Memory "Charles Richmond" <numerist@aquaporin4.com> - 2016-02-19 20:43 -0600
      Re: Delay Line Memory isw <isw@witzend.com> - 2016-02-19 22:13 -0800
      Re: Delay Line Memory Stan Barr <plan.b@bluesomatic.org> - 2016-02-20 08:17 +0000
      Re: Delay Line Memory Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-20 09:17 -0600
        Re: Delay Line Memory Lawrence Statton <lawrence@senguio.mx> - 2016-02-20 09:20 -0600
      Re: Delay Line Memory Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2016-02-20 18:49 -0800
        Re: Delay Line Memory isw <isw@witzend.com> - 2016-02-20 21:06 -0800
  Re: Delay Line Memory jhhaynes@earthlink.net - 2016-02-17 18:23 -0800
    Re: Delay Line Memory isw <isw@witzend.com> - 2016-02-17 23:06 -0800

csiph-web