ShadeOfBlue wrote:
The Model M was supposedly a "cost-reduced" version of the Selectric keyboard and the Cherry key switches are a "cost-reduced" version of the buckling-spring ones in the Model M
That's interesting ! thanks ... I'm still looking for a keyboard that has the F keys in a double row down the left side. HP built them that way but HPIL she don't work with an SGI
PymbleSoftware wrote:
ShadeOfBlue wrote:
Wow, that code is really ancient
For comparison, here's how a modern Fortran program can look like:
http://www.liv.ac.uk/HPC/HTMLF90Course/HTMLF90CourseNotesnode62.html
Bah, that looks more like Ada. Real FORTRAN looks like:
Code:
IF IF = 0 THEN THEN = 0;
STOP
END
You forgot your FINIS, Pymble
It's actually RS-274D, aka "g-code", kind of like Assembler for machine tools. Then they got "conversational" controls, which would be like writing your term paper in Postscript
And it's not old, I just threw that together off the top of my head ... you can still control machine tools that way but I doubt that very many people do.
Writing programs that way sucks because it is so labor-intensive but you have total control over everything the machine does. Total. When you use a CAM system the machine cuts a lot of air, does a bunch of junk you don't really want but oh well. It was fast and easy and all I had to do was click on the various surfaces in the order I wanted them cut.
All the machine tool stuff predates personal computers and even large computers by decades. The first numerically controlled machine was running in 1952. They didn't start small and build up, either - it's more like trickle-down. This was when men built SR-71's and XB-70's with slide rules instead of taking twenty-five years and six billion dollars to buy a bridge from China - then bolt it together with bad fasteners. It will be funny when the Bay Bridge falls down ... I read what they did and go, "WHAT ! Nobody with an IQ over thirty would do that !"
But they did.
Automatically Programmed Tools, the One True APT :
Code:
PARTNO SAMPLE
PRINT/ON
SETPT=POINT/-13.3312,8
PT1=PT/6,3
PT2=PT/3,7
L1-LINE/PT1,PT2
L2=LINE/PARLEL L1, XSMAL, 3
CIR1=CIRCLE/CENTER,PT1,RADIUS,6
FROM/SETPT
RAPID/ TO, L1
FEDRAT/.015
GOLFT / L1, TO, CIR1
Looks simple and it is but it will do geometry up the wazoo. APT
predates
FORTRAN
It was the first ANSI standard. Somewhere around 1964 they rewrote it in FORTRAN ... and it will still do some things that graphical point-n-click CAM programs cannot. I have APT/360 code (public domain) if someone wants to help get it running in Irix .... it's fun to play with (if you don't have to make the rent with it.)
ShadeOfBlue wrote:
These early computers were interesting, everyone made their own CPU architecture back then
And the more architectures you have, the more ideas and the more choices ... as long as everyone can run on the same roads, a lot of different cars is a good idea. That was the Loonies' rallying cry back when they were the underdogs
Quote:
The patent applications were much more substantial that the crap that gets accepted today. For example, for the HP 9830A computer, HP put _everything_ you needed to know how to build the machine in the patent application.
You could build your own PDP-8 from the prints that came with a K&T. Honest, the machine came with full prints to the boards and K&T built three boards of their own that went into the PDP-8 for real-time control and they wrote their own operating system. Not "sort-of" real-time, realtime. Sundstrand likewise. And when you called tech support, you got someone who knew their shit. No one from India ! Some of those guys could think in binary. Seriously. It was nice to talk to people who knew their job. Knew it inside-out, frontwards and backwards, and never once said "Oh we can't tell you that, it's a seeecret !" Gag.
But hey now, it really
is
more important that Mark Zuckerberg has eighty billion dollars in the Caymans than the US has an industrial base, right ?
I would not be surprised if the US collapses within the next ten years. You simply can't run a country on hot air.
Here's a photo of the Teletype keys, better than my description. You can see why they would have a terrible action :
Attachment:
teletypekeys.jpg [ 81.03 KiB | Viewed 319 times ]
And the site I stole it from has a great description of how they work - it's "innovative"
http://www.oldcomputers.arcula.co.uk/perf1.htm