On 11/14/2022 2:51 PM, Peter Flass wrote:
> Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> On 12/11/2022 14:06, Peter Flass wrote:
>>> Back then memories were a lot flakier, although now I think data is stored
>>> with lots of check bits that only the hardware sees.
>>
>> It's been like that for a while. I've used systems that would raise an
>> NMI (non-maskable interrupt) for a parity error. It's a *** to test the
>> handler, you need a system that will give you a reasonable number of
>> errors, but not so many it won't run at all.
>>
>> I've heard some systems even have error correcting memory. And I've also
>> heard that the extra complexity may make them _more_ likely to make a
>> mistkae...
>>
>
> I think most do these days. IBM mainframe memory corrects (IIRC) single-bit
> errors and detects multiple-bit errors.
>

ECC used to be called Hamming code, after Richard Hamming, the inventor
of Hamming code.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamming_code

--

Charles Richmond

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com

On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 02:31:45 -0600, Charles Richmond wrote:

> On 11/14/2022 2:51 PM, Peter Flass wrote:
>> Vir Campestris <vir.campestris@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> On 12/11/2022 14:06, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>> Back then memories were a lot flakier, although now I think data is
>>>> stored with lots of check bits that only the hardware sees.
>>>
>>> It's been like that for a while. I've used systems that would raise an
>>> NMI (non-maskable interrupt) for a parity error. It's a *** to test
>>> the handler, you need a system that will give you a reasonable number
>>> of errors, but not so many it won't run at all.
>>>
>>> I've heard some systems even have error correcting memory. And I've
>>> also heard that the extra complexity may make them _more_ likely to
>>> make a mistkae...
>>>
>>>
>> I think most do these days. IBM mainframe memory corrects (IIRC)
>> single-bit errors and detects multiple-bit errors.
>>
>>
> ECC used to be called Hamming code, after Richard Hamming, the inventor
> of Hamming code.

Well, *some* ECC is Hamming.

--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

On 2022-11-17, Charles Richmond <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:

> On 11/13/2022 8:42 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2022-11-13, greymaus <greymaus@dmaus.org> wrote:
>>
>>> When did stamped cards finish on computers, to be replaced by computer
>>> screens?.
>>
>> I was using cards well into the '80s, although in the end they were
>> used primarily for JCL and small data decks, the large files having
>> moved to disk. Part of this was inertia, e.g. a reluctance to change
>> a system that worked. Another part was cost - computer terminals
>> were available in the '70s, but you could buy a lot of cards for the
>> several thousand (1970s) dollars that one terminal cost at the time.
>
> The ad I remember was in a computer or electronics magazine. It asked
> the question: "Are your programmers online???" The picture showed a
> line (queue) of programmers waiting to get a chance to use a *single*
> keypunch machine.
>
> The ad (of course) was an attempt to convince employers that, though
> VDU terminals were expensive, it was *more* expensive to force your
> programmers to continue using punch cards...

Only in the long term, which managers are notorious for ignoring.
Besides, why should lowly programmers have access to such fancy
toys? That should be the sole domain of the beautiful people,
i.e. management.

When personal computers were first spreading, a PPOE purchased several.
There were three models available: a high-end one with a large screen
and lots of CPU power; an intermediate one; and the cheapo unit with
minimal hardware and a small screen. The managers, who barely used
them or even knew how, naturally got the high-end machines. We techies
got the intermediate model, while our poor data entry clerk, who pounded
away on it all day, got the cheapest model and spent her days squinting
at its small screen. (They really treated her like dirt. Several times
she stormed out of the office in tears. One day she never came back.)

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>On 2022-11-17, Charles Richmond <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>
>> On 11/13/2022 8:42 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> On 2022-11-13, greymaus <greymaus@dmaus.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> When did stamped cards finish on computers, to be replaced by computer
>>>> screens?.
>>>
>>> I was using cards well into the '80s, although in the end they were
>>> used primarily for JCL and small data decks, the large files having
>>> moved to disk. Part of this was inertia, e.g. a reluctance to change
>>> a system that worked. Another part was cost - computer terminals
>>> were available in the '70s, but you could buy a lot of cards for the
>>> several thousand (1970s) dollars that one terminal cost at the time.
>>
>> The ad I remember was in a computer or electronics magazine. It asked
>> the question: "Are your programmers online???" The picture showed a
>> line (queue) of programmers waiting to get a chance to use a *single*
>> keypunch machine.
>>
>> The ad (of course) was an attempt to convince employers that, though
>> VDU terminals were expensive, it was *more* expensive to force your
>> programmers to continue using punch cards...
>
>Only in the long term, which managers are notorious for ignoring.
>Besides, why should lowly programmers have access to such fancy
>toys? That should be the sole domain of the beautiful people,
>i.e. management.
>

I visited the Sperry office in Clear Lake, Iowa around 1980.
At the Uni, we had dozens of ADM33a in the student labs, attached to a
quad of VAX-11/780's.

The Sperry programmers had to fight for a handful of mobile video
terminals on carts.

On So 13 Nov 2022 at 17:02, greymaus <greymaus@dmaus.org> wrote:
> When did stamped cards finish on computers, to be replaced by computer
> screens?.

When I started university in autumn of 1981 O had toe work with puncg
cards.
Next year I could use a glass tty.

'Andreas

On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 18:37:50 GMT, Charlie Gibbs
<cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
>On 2022-11-17, Charles Richmond <codescott@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>
>> On 11/13/2022 8:42 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> On 2022-11-13, greymaus <greymaus@dmaus.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> When did stamped cards finish on computers, to be replaced by computer
>>>> screens?.
>>>
>>> I was using cards well into the '80s, although in the end they were
>>> used primarily for JCL and small data decks, the large files having
>>> moved to disk. Part of this was inertia, e.g. a reluctance to change
>>> a system that worked. Another part was cost - computer terminals
>>> were available in the '70s, but you could buy a lot of cards for the
>>> several thousand (1970s) dollars that one terminal cost at the time.
>>
>> The ad I remember was in a computer or electronics magazine. It asked
>> the question: "Are your programmers online???" The picture showed a
>> line (queue) of programmers waiting to get a chance to use a *single*
>> keypunch machine.
>>
>> The ad (of course) was an attempt to convince employers that, though
>> VDU terminals were expensive, it was *more* expensive to force your
>> programmers to continue using punch cards...
>
>Only in the long term, which managers are notorious for ignoring.
>Besides, why should lowly programmers have access to such fancy
>toys? That should be the sole domain of the beautiful people,
>i.e. management.

The university I was at, got some brand new 386 computers in 1988/89.
They were for the graphics lab.

One professor told me to take one to his office. I told him to take a
flying leap to the moon.

He asked me if I knew who he was ? I replied, yes, someone tryng to
dstreal a computer from the computer lab.

My boss walked in just then, and asked me what was going on. I pointed
to the professor and said that thief wants me to take one of our brand
new computers to his office and I told him no.

The campus dean walke in and told the professor that if he moved one
of those computers to his office he would find himself out the door
and not come back.

I smiled at the professor. He left the computer lab.

And no, I didn't get fired. My boss bought me lunch that day.

>When personal computers were first spreading, a PPOE purchased several.
>There were three models available: a high-end one with a large screen
>and lots of CPU power; an intermediate one; and the cheapo unit with
>minimal hardware and a small screen. The managers, who barely used
>them or even knew how, naturally got the high-end machines. We techies
>got the intermediate model, while our poor data entry clerk, who pounded
>away on it all day, got the cheapest model and spent her days squinting
>at its small screen. (They really treated her like dirt. Several times
>she stormed out of the office in tears. One day she never came back.)

Same at most places I ever worked, except one. Any computer had to be
justified to the big boss at one job. He wanted finance and purchasing
to be happy. So most of them had 2 monitors and nice computers.

--
Jim

Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:33377678.690071219.935255.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-septemb
er.org:

> Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On 13 Nov 2022 17:02:05 GMT
>> greymaus <greymaus@dmaus.org> wrote:
>>
>>> When did stamped cards finish on computers, to be replaced by
>>> computer screens?.
>>
>> I was using punched cards regularly in the mid 1970s, by the
>> late
>> 1970s they were almost but not quite gone - systems still supported
>> them but hardly anyone used them for anything other than notes.
>>
>
> They kind of slipped away without anyone noticing. I don’t recall
> exactly when, but a professor asked me to convert his research results
> on cards into something usable and I had to look all over the city for
> someone with a card reader to get them copied to tape, and I was a bit
> surprised by how hard I had to search.
>
> PPOE had an IBM 3505/3525 reader punch for a long time, perhaps into
> the 80s. They may still have it, but I don’t think it was ever used.
>

In my first year of engineering at the University of British Columbia in
1980, I was in the last class of 'Introduction to Programming' to use
punch cards, programming in WATFIV (Waterloo's FORTRAN dialect).
I used terminals for the rest of my courses, but they still had a card
punch attached to the MTS mainframe for me to produce my resume on punch
cards when I graduated in 1983. I still have a box of cards in the crawl
space with that resume and other nostalgic bits.

--
Clark G
* take away the em's to reply

On 2022-11-10 12:04 p.m., Tak To wrote:
> On 11/10/2022 8:40 AM, Peter Flass wrote:
>
>> think systems with 36-bit words that stored characters in 9 bits may have
>> called them bytes. “Characters” was the term of art earlier.
>
> The only system I know of that fits that description is Multics,
> and I don't remember how those 9-bit entities were called.

It was not just the Multics boxes. It was the whole line of
machines descended from the GE-600, (Honeywell 6000, DPS-8,
DPS-8000, DPS-9000 ...) Most ran Gcos-III, later Gcos-8, although
Dartmouth created DTSS for this architecture (from which came BASIC).

GE also had the MarkIII timesharing system, which is what
the GEnie service ran under.

There are still Gcos8 systems in production today although
they are emulating the instruction set using Itanium or Xeon
processors.

On 2023-01-26, Alan Bowler <atbowler@thinkage.ca> wrote:

> On 2022-11-10 12:04 p.m., Tak To wrote:
>
>> On 11/10/2022 8:40 AM, Peter Flass wrote:
>>
>>> think systems with 36-bit words that stored characters in 9 bits may have
>>> called them bytes. “Characters” was the term of art earlier.
>>
>> The only system I know of that fits that description is Multics,
>> and I don't remember how those 9-bit entities were called.
>
> It was not just the Multics boxes. It was the whole line of
> machines descended from the GE-600, (Honeywell 6000, DPS-8,
> DPS-8000, DPS-9000 ...) Most ran Gcos-III, later Gcos-8, although
> Dartmouth created DTSS for this architecture (from which came BASIC).
>
> GE also had the MarkIII timesharing system, which is what
> the GEnie service ran under.
>
> There are still Gcos8 systems in production today although
> they are emulating the instruction set using Itanium or Xeon
> processors.

The 36-bit Univac 1100 series originally stored six 6-bit Fieldata
characters in a word, but later models offered quarter-word (9-bit)
operations and supported ASCII that way.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.

Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2023-01-26, Alan Bowler <atbowler@thinkage.ca> wrote:
....
>> It was not just the Multics boxes. It was the whole line of
>> machines descended from the GE-600, (Honeywell 6000, DPS-8,
>> DPS-8000, DPS-9000 ...) Most ran Gcos-III, later Gcos-8, although
>> Dartmouth created DTSS for this architecture (from which came BASIC).
>>
>> GE also had the MarkIII timesharing system, which is what
>> the GEnie service ran under.
>>
>> There are still Gcos8 systems in production today although
>> they are emulating the instruction set using Itanium or Xeon
>> processors.
>
> The 36-bit Univac 1100 series originally stored six 6-bit Fieldata
> characters in a word, but later models offered quarter-word (9-bit)
> operations and supported ASCII that way.

yes, i enjoyed writing assembler on those machines.
it spoiled me for many others.

songbird

On 2022-11-12 9:07 a.m., lar3ryca wrote:
>
> I never did like the 8080 or any of its successors, and the RCA COSMAC,
> Z80, and PIC were in the same category. Actually the PIC was in a class
> of its own, the worst microprocessor I ever used.

The 16 bit z8000 (z80001) was actually a quite nice little system
once you decoded the manual and found the actual instruction set.
E.g. the manuals talked about various formats of the move instruction.
When you reclassified things by op code value and what they did
you found a more or classic load register, store register, and
memory to memory move.

It was not quite as elegant as the PDP-11, but it was an easily
programmed machine. The manuals were terrible, trying to make it
look like a z80.

Alan Bowler <atbowler@thinkage.ca> wrote:
> On 2022-11-12 9:07 a.m., lar3ryca wrote:
>>
>> I never did like the 8080 or any of its successors, and the RCA COSMAC,
>> Z80, and PIC were in the same category. Actually the PIC was in a class
>> of its own, the worst microprocessor I ever used.
>
> The 16 bit z8000 (z80001) was actually a quite nice little system
> once you decoded the manual and found the actual instruction set.
> E.g. the manuals talked about various formats of the move instruction.
> When you reclassified things by op code value and what they did
> you found a more or classic load register, store register, and
> memory to memory move.
>
> It was not quite as elegant as the PDP-11, but it was an easily
> programmed machine. The manuals were terrible, trying to make it
> look like a z80.
>
>

IMO, at the time Motorola 6809 was the best of the bunch, and the Mot 16-
and 32-bit chips improved on it, while the later Intel chips just got more
bizarre.

--
Pete

On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 11:55:45 -0700
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:

Trimming alt.usage.english.

> IMO, at the time Motorola 6809 was the best of the bunch, and the Mot 16-
> and 32-bit chips improved on it, while the later Intel chips just got more
> bizarre.

I'm very much inclined to agree, at least from the perspective of
an assembler programmer. I gather things look different from the
perspective of the compiler writer which is why modern architectures are so
complex and strange (ARM v8 I'm looking your way).

--
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/
Host: Beautiful Theory meet Inconvenient Fact
Obit: Beautiful Theory died today of factual inconsistency

On 2023-11-03 12:55, Peter Flass wrote:
> Alan Bowler <atbowler@thinkage.ca> wrote:
>> On 2022-11-12 9:07 a.m., lar3ryca wrote:
>>>
>>> I never did like the 8080 or any of its successors, and the RCA COSMAC,
>>> Z80, and PIC were in the same category. Actually the PIC was in a class
>>> of its own, the worst microprocessor I ever used.
>>
>> The 16 bit z8000 (z80001) was actually a quite nice little system
>> once you decoded the manual and found the actual instruction set.
>> E.g. the manuals talked about various formats of the move instruction.
>> When you reclassified things by op code value and what they did
>> you found a more or classic load register, store register, and
>> memory to memory move.
>>
>> It was not quite as elegant as the PDP-11, but it was an easily
>> programmed machine. The manuals were terrible, trying to make it
>> look like a z80.
>>
>>
>
> IMO, at the time Motorola 6809 was the best of the bunch, and the Mot 16-
> and 32-bit chips improved on it, while the later Intel chips just got more
> bizarre.

Do you remember the Pentium with the floating point bug?

"I am Pentium of Borg. Prepare to be approximated."

--
I was looking for the stationery department,
but they moved it.

On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 11:55:45 -0700
Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Alan Bowler <atbowler@thinkage.ca> wrote:
> > On 2022-11-12 9:07 a.m., lar3ryca wrote:

It was a year ago, but never mind!
> >>
> >> I never did like the 8080 or any of its successors, and the RCA COSMAC,
> >> Z80, and PIC were in the same category. Actually the PIC was in a class
> >> of its own, the worst microprocessor I ever used.
> >
> > The 16 bit z8000 (z80001) was actually a quite nice little system
> > once you decoded the manual and found the actual instruction set.
> > E.g. the manuals talked about various formats of the move instruction.
> > When you reclassified things by op code value and what they did
> > you found a more or classic load register, store register, and
> > memory to memory move.
> >
> > It was not quite as elegant as the PDP-11, but it was an easily
> > programmed machine. The manuals were terrible, trying to make it
> > look like a z80.
> >
> >
>
> IMO, at the time Motorola 6809 was the best of the bunch, and the Mot 16-
> and 32-bit chips improved on it, while the later Intel chips just got more
> bizarre.
>

Tried doing any ARM asm? [I haven't]

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> writes:
>On Fri, 3 Nov 2023 11:55:45 -0700
>Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Alan Bowler <atbowler@thinkage.ca> wrote:
>> > On 2022-11-12 9:07 a.m., lar3ryca wrote:
>
>It was a year ago, but never mind!
>> >>
>> >> I never did like the 8080 or any of its successors, and the RCA COSMAC,
>> >> Z80, and PIC were in the same category. Actually the PIC was in a class
>> >> of its own, the worst microprocessor I ever used.
>> >
>> > The 16 bit z8000 (z80001) was actually a quite nice little system
>> > once you decoded the manual and found the actual instruction set.
>> > E.g. the manuals talked about various formats of the move instruction.
>> > When you reclassified things by op code value and what they did
>> > you found a more or classic load register, store register, and
>> > memory to memory move.
>> >
>> > It was not quite as elegant as the PDP-11, but it was an easily
>> > programmed machine. The manuals were terrible, trying to make it
>> > look like a z80.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> IMO, at the time Motorola 6809 was the best of the bunch, and the Mot 16-
>> and 32-bit chips improved on it, while the later Intel chips just got more
>> bizarre.
>>
>
>Tried doing any ARM asm? [I haven't]
>

It's like any other instruction set. ARMv7 has some
idiosyncrancies, as does most any useful instruction set;
although ARMv8 did get rid of predication in the normal
instruction set (where each instruction can be optionally
executed based on the CPU flags). ARMv8 reduced that
to a few conditional moves with the rest of the instruction
set unpredicated.

ARMv7 does also support a second 16-bit instruction set for
use in embedded and small CPUs. That's been eliminated
from ARMv9 on and was deprecated in ARMv8.

On 2023-11-03, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

> On 2023-11-03 12:55, Peter Flass wrote:
>
>> IMO, at the time Motorola 6809 was the best of the bunch, and the Mot 16-
>> and 32-bit chips improved on it, while the later Intel chips just got more
>> bizarre.
>
> Do you remember the Pentium with the floating point bug?
>
> "I am Pentium of Borg. Prepare to be approximated."

"Division is futile. You will be approximated."

Windows: a 64-bit enhancement to a 32-bit upgrade of software
that runs on a 16-bit kludge of an 8-bit version of a 4-bit
processor from a two-bit company that can't stand one bit of
competition.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | The Internet is like a big city:
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | it has plenty of bright lights and
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | excitement, but also dark alleys
/ \ if you read it the right way. | down which the unwary get mugged.

On 2023-11-03 16:30, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2023-11-03, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>
>> On 2023-11-03 12:55, Peter Flass wrote:
>>
>>> IMO, at the time Motorola 6809 was the best of the bunch, and the Mot 16-
>>> and 32-bit chips improved on it, while the later Intel chips just got more
>>> bizarre.
>>
>> Do you remember the Pentium with the floating point bug?
>>
>> "I am Pentium of Borg. Prepare to be approximated."
>
> "Division is futile. You will be approximated."
>
> Windows: a 64-bit enhancement to a 32-bit upgrade of software
> that runs on a 16-bit kludge of an 8-bit version of a 4-bit
> processor from a two-bit company that can't stand one bit of
> competition.

<applause>

--
Asking if a computer can think is like asking if a submarine can swim.

Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>On 2023-11-03, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>
>> On 2023-11-03 12:55, Peter Flass wrote:
>>
>>> IMO, at the time Motorola 6809 was the best of the bunch, and the Mot 16-
>>> and 32-bit chips improved on it, while the later Intel chips just got more
>>> bizarre.
>>
>> Do you remember the Pentium with the floating point bug?
>>
>> "I am Pentium of Borg. Prepare to be approximated."
>
>"Division is futile. You will be approximated."
>
>Windows: a 64-bit enhancement to a 32-bit upgrade of software
>that runs on a 16-bit kludge of an 8-bit version of a 4-bit
>processor from a two-bit company that can't stand one bit of
>competition.

Although that is factually incorrect. NT was a completely
new operating system (with a stark resemblence to VMS).

Personally, I've managed to avoid windows entirely.

On 2023-11-04 09:41, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>> On 2023-11-03, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2023-11-03 12:55, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>
>>>> IMO, at the time Motorola 6809 was the best of the bunch, and the Mot 16-
>>>> and 32-bit chips improved on it, while the later Intel chips just got more
>>>> bizarre.
>>>
>>> Do you remember the Pentium with the floating point bug?
>>>
>>> "I am Pentium of Borg. Prepare to be approximated."
>>
>> "Division is futile. You will be approximated."
>>
>> Windows: a 64-bit enhancement to a 32-bit upgrade of software
>> that runs on a 16-bit kludge of an 8-bit version of a 4-bit
>> processor from a two-bit company that can't stand one bit of
>> competition.
>
> Although that is factually incorrect. NT was a completely
> new operating system (with a stark resemblence to VMS).
>
> Personally, I've managed to avoid windows entirely.

I was pretty much forced into it by wanting to be employed.

--
Of course I know which side my bread is buttered on, but I don't care.
I eat both sides.

On 2023-11-04, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

> On 2023-11-03 16:30, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2023-11-03, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2023-11-03 12:55, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>
>>>> IMO, at the time Motorola 6809 was the best of the bunch, and the Mot 16-
>>>> and 32-bit chips improved on it, while the later Intel chips just got more
>>>> bizarre.
>>>
>>> Do you remember the Pentium with the floating point bug?
>>>
>>> "I am Pentium of Borg. Prepare to be approximated."
>>
>> "Division is futile. You will be approximated."
>>
>> Windows: a 64-bit enhancement to a 32-bit upgrade of software
>> that runs on a 16-bit kludge of an 8-bit version of a 4-bit
>> processor from a two-bit company that can't stand one bit of
>> competition.
>
> <applause>

Thanks. And no, I haven't forgotten you; those Amigas are
sitting on my desk, waiting for me to find time to go over
them and get them ready to ship.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | The Internet is like a big city:
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | it has plenty of bright lights and
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | excitement, but also dark alleys
/ \ if you read it the right way. | down which the unwary get mugged.

On Sat, 04 Nov 2023 19:46:58 GMT, Charlie Gibbs
<cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:

>On 2023-11-04, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>
>> On 2023-11-03 16:30, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> On 2023-11-03, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2023-11-03 12:55, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> IMO, at the time Motorola 6809 was the best of the bunch, and the Mot 16-
>>>>> and 32-bit chips improved on it, while the later Intel chips just got more
>>>>> bizarre.
>>>>
>>>> Do you remember the Pentium with the floating point bug?
>>>>
>>>> "I am Pentium of Borg. Prepare to be approximated."
>>>
>>> "Division is futile. You will be approximated."
>>>
>>> Windows: a 64-bit enhancement to a 32-bit upgrade of software
>>> that runs on a 16-bit kludge of an 8-bit version of a 4-bit
>>> processor from a two-bit company that can't stand one bit of
>>> competition.
>>
>> <applause>
>
>Thanks. And no, I haven't forgotten you; those Amigas are
>sitting on my desk, waiting for me to find time to go over
>them and get them ready to ship.

Earlier today I took my 7 year-old grandson to a Maker Faire event.
One of the exhibits was an array of old computers and computer games.
I'm not what game he's playing in this photo, but he thought it was
"cool".

https://photos.smugmug.com/2023-MAKER-FAIRE/i-5RN8Mpc/0/18ad473a/O/2023-11-04-17.jpg
--

Tony Cooper - Orlando,Florida

On 2023-11-04 13:46, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2023-11-04, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>
>> On 2023-11-03 16:30, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>> On 2023-11-03, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2023-11-03 12:55, Peter Flass wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> IMO, at the time Motorola 6809 was the best of the bunch, and the Mot 16-
>>>>> and 32-bit chips improved on it, while the later Intel chips just got more
>>>>> bizarre.
>>>>
>>>> Do you remember the Pentium with the floating point bug?
>>>>
>>>> "I am Pentium of Borg. Prepare to be approximated."
>>>
>>> "Division is futile. You will be approximated."
>>>
>>> Windows: a 64-bit enhancement to a 32-bit upgrade of software
>>> that runs on a 16-bit kludge of an 8-bit version of a 4-bit
>>> processor from a two-bit company that can't stand one bit of
>>> competition.
>>
>> <applause>
>
> Thanks. And no, I haven't forgotten you; those Amigas are
> sitting on my desk, waiting for me to find time to go over
> them and get them ready to ship.

Thanks Charlie.

And just for you...

Janus And IBM compatible hardware addon for the Amiga.

I have always felt that the name came from

J (the Amiga check-mark logo) and 'anus', describing the addon itself.

--
I'm a hydrophobic. I have a fear of utility bills.

TonyCooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:

> Earlier today I took my 7 year-old grandson to a Maker Faire event.
> One of the exhibits was an array of old computers and computer games.
> I'm not what game he's playing in this photo, but he thought it was
> "cool".
>
> <https://photos.smugmug.com/2023-MAKER-FAIRE/i-5RN8Mpc/0/18ad473a/O/2023-11-04-17.jpg>

That looks like the old classic 'Pacman'

--
^Ï^. Sn!pe, PA, FIBS - Professional Crastinator.
My pet rock Gordon just is.

Google Groups articles not seen unless poster is whitelisted.

On Sun, 5 Nov 2023 03:34:56 +0000
snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) wrote:

> TonyCooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Earlier today I took my 7 year-old grandson to a Maker Faire event.
> > One of the exhibits was an array of old computers and computer games.
> > I'm not what game he's playing in this photo, but he thought it was
> > "cool".
> >
> > <https://photos.smugmug.com/2023-MAKER-FAIRE/i-5RN8Mpc/0/18ad473a/O/2023-11-04-17.jpg>
>
> That looks like the old classic 'Pacman'
>
It looks a bit like Pacman; I see no "cheese" or enemies though; and the
'dead ends' at the corners are wrong.
lets try Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pac-man.png

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.