|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Data from Columbia 2/1/03 massacre survived... Sounds like ?another govmint covup to me!
On Mon, 26 May 2008 19:10:14 -0400, Kevin Willoughby
wrote: There is something ironic about the fact that the two most notable RISC machines were both the smallest, slowest, cheapest computer (PDP-5/8) of its era, and the biggest, baddest, fastest computer of its era (CDC). Even better: these two machines were the first two computers I ever programmed. ....I personally never worked on any of the PDP series, but I had at least one Texas U "Cyber" account on the 6600 from the fall of 1976 to the summer of 1987 - almost 11 years! And most of that was programming in MNF4, although one semester I got suckered into testing out a version they called "Fortran 5" that tried to turn Foutran into a Pascal knockoff, with some elements of top-down design shoehorned in to frack things up. It was essentially a "hack/cludge" attempt to port Data General's "Fortran 5" from a Nova to the 6600 that some bright kid in the Comp Center administration thought would be "easier" to use while at the same time cutting usage costs for student accounts due to the compiler being somewhat more optimized than Fortran IV was. ....And that should have been the tip-off that we were fracked. The first two programs assigned couldn't be completed because we'd uncovered bugs in the compiler that were so fatal that they actually defeated some of the safeguards that Texas U added to the 6600 to prevent massive runtime infinite loops that would eat up an account's allocated funds in seconds. The first five weeks of the class consisted in the end of nothing but talking about the language while we waited for the bugs to be fixed. In the end of the 13 programs we expected to be assigned - one a week - only 8 were actually assigned, and the compiler bugs at the end of the semester were so bad that the prof decided to not include the last two programs in the grading - only three of the 45 people in the class managed to get theirs to compile and produce results before the compiler would go tits up! ....At the end of the semester we were asked to evaluate the language's ease of use, as well as how well the 6600 handled the compiling and run ops. In both cases the entire class was unanimous - take the master tapes containing the language and after they'd bulk erased them, throw them on a pyre as a sacrifice to the gods of programming in hopes they'd forgive humanity for having created such an atrocity. OM -- ]=====================================[ ] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [ ] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [ ] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [ ]=====================================[ |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Data from Columbia 2/1/03 massacre survived... Sounds like ?another govmint covup to me!
In sci.space.history Fred J. McCall wrote:
Rick Jones wrote: :It was in the IBM "PC-RT" which those enough "fortunate" to be at :CMU ca 1984-1988 could use as an "Andrew" workstation. No, that was a different processor. I think that one was the RS/6000. My dimm memory isn't what it used to be. Perhaps we were both wrong/right? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_6150_RT rick jones -- firebug n, the idiot who tosses a lit cigarette out his car window these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com but NOT BOTH... |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Data from Columbia 2/1/03 massacre survived... Sounds like ?another govmint covup to me!
On Tue, 27 May 2008 17:57:12 +0000 (UTC), Rick Jones
wrote: My dimm memory isn't what it used to be. Perhaps we were both wrong/right? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_6150_RT "The IBM RT had a varied life even from its initial announcement. Most industry watchers considered the RT as "not enough power, too high a price, and too late". Many thought that the RT was part of IBM's Personal Computer line of computers. This confusion started with its initial name, "IBM RT PC"." ....Of course, it didn't help that quite a few of their corporate sales geeks were pushing the RT as if it were a PC, albeit one intended for the higher-end academics, science labs, and even as a server-client base pair for CAT labs. They tried to pawn those off on Texas U back when the Micro Channel Architecture scam first got off the ground, with some 32-station testing lab involving the 6152s and one 6150. The Comp Center eval'd the network, found that a PC XT "server" and 32 "B" models as "clients" ran rings around it, and that wound up being one of the major decisions in the beancounters issuing memos to the various schools of whatever to go with (cr)Apple and the Macs. Want another example of how down-upon the RT was looked? The Aerospace Engineering school sent out an intercampus memo offering to trade *three* RTs for just -one- Trash-80 Model 12... OM -- ]=====================================[ ] OMBlog - http://www.io.com/~o_m/omworld [ ] Let's face it: Sometimes you *need* [ ] an obnoxious opinion in your day! [ ]=====================================[ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Data from Columbia 2/1/03 massacre survived... Sounds like anothergovmint covup to me! | [email protected] | Space Shuttle | 48 | May 27th 08 06:57 PM |
Data from Columbia 2/1/03 massacre survived... Sounds like anothergovmint covup to me! | [email protected] | Policy | 43 | May 27th 08 06:57 PM |
Drudge's Headline: COLUMBIA CREW SURVIVED MINUTE LONGER THAN PREVIOUSLY INDICATED, SAY INVESTIGATORS... | cndc | Space Shuttle | 57 | August 6th 03 06:18 AM |
Data Disparities (Columbia/Challenger Crew Survival) | John Maxson | Space Shuttle | 1 | July 18th 03 11:19 PM |
Crew of Columbia Survived a Minute After Last Signal - NYT | Bruce Palmer | Space Shuttle | 2 | July 16th 03 01:47 PM |