iPhone
in [UK Mac]
|
From: Graeme on 19 Feb 2010 03:04 In message <1je58ly.1njbd4m1eot1wN%real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid (Rowland McDonnell) wrote: [snip] > > There's a lot of stuff like that - odd bits of `kit from unexpected > sources' that turns up in hairy labs. Always good for a giggle, I find > - and always a lesson in appropriate technology that the wise pay > careful attention to. > One bit of odd kit that turned up in a lab was a ZX81 at Sperry's when they were doing calibration work on missiles. They needed to do a lot of coversions from decimal to binary and vice versa. They didn't want to chew up main-frame time and doing it by hand was a pain so I wrote them a program to run on the ZX81. Was apparently still in use when the labs folded. -- Graeme Wall My genealogy website <www.greywall.demon.co.uk/genealogy/>
From: Rowland McDonnell on 19 Feb 2010 03:43 Graeme <Graeme(a)greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote: > real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid (Rowland McDonnell) wrote: > > [snip] > > > > There's a lot of stuff like that - odd bits of `kit from unexpected > > sources' that turns up in hairy labs. Always good for a giggle, I find > > - and always a lesson in appropriate technology that the wise pay > > careful attention to. > > > > One bit of odd kit that turned up in a lab was a ZX81 at Sperry's when they > were doing calibration work on missiles. They needed to do a lot of > coversions from decimal to binary and vice versa. They didn't want to chew > up main-frame time and doing it by hand was a pain so I wrote them a program > to run on the ZX81. Was apparently still in use when the labs folded. Once upon a time, that would have been done using a programmable calculator - quicker, at least, unless the ZX81 were wired in to accept non-typed input. Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking
From: Woody on 19 Feb 2010 04:16 David Kennedy <davidkennedy(a)nospamherethankyou.invalid> wrote: > Ben Shimmin wrote: > > David Kennedy<davidkennedy(a)nospamherethankyou.invalid>: > >> Woody wrote: > >>> David Kennedy<davidkennedy(a)nospamherethankyou.invalid> wrote: > >>>> Richard Tobin wrote: > >>>>> Sinclair was British industry at its very worst. > >>>> > >>>> Sorry to disagree. Yes their product line was shoddy but no one has come > >>>> close* to BLMH yet for that particular prize. > >>> > >>> Briarcliffe Lakes Manor Homes in chicago? > >> > >> I wouldn't disagree but hadn't realised they were British... > > > > The closest I could get to that abbreviation was... > > > > <URL:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Leyland> > > > > Am I right? > > > > Correct. I got the abbreviation wrongish. It was a merger of BMC [BMH] > and Leyland. Commonly [?] refereed to as British Leyland Motor Holdings. Ahh - thought it may be leyland as, well, if you are talking about classic UK management it is the best example. But I couldn't find anything on google with that name! -- Woody www.alienrat.com
From: Woody on 19 Feb 2010 04:16 Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > > > Richard Tobin <richard(a)cogsci.ed.ac.uk> wrote: > > > > > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > >That's what Sinclair did. One reason Sinclair and the other British > > > >micro makers died is that they did spend the money on half-decent > > > >customer service > > > > > > What??? Did you live in some alternate 70s and 80s? > > > > > > This is the Sinclair who never made a product that didn't fall to bits > > > within a month of purchase, assuming that the bits could be forced > > > together in the first place - it's not for nothing that many of them > > > were sold as kits. > > > > I found it fascinating as a kid, My uncle worked for cambridge research > > and then sinclair in the 70s when they made the calculators and the > > black watches. He had a drawer full of the black watches that he would > > go and check occasionally to see if they were still working or told > > anything like the right time. They always said something different. > > Those watches were reliable if you'd made them carefully enough. What I > recall reading, the dodgy ones were dodgy due to dodgy construction, not > dodgy design. These were the ones already built, and they were anything but reliable. -- Woody www.alienrat.com
From: Rowland McDonnell on 19 Feb 2010 04:26
Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > > > Woody <usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > > > > > Chris Ridd <chrisridd(a)mac.com> wrote: > > [snip] > > > > > > Even modern digital clocks drift quite a lot, so it isn't surprising > > > > that all of his reported different times. > > > > > > Hmm.. this is many minutes a day. That is not really a drift! > > > > My original 1970s Commodore digital watch had an adjuster screw inside > > it to correct its time-keeping. > > > > When new, it was an okay time keeper. > > > > Come the mid 1980s (by the time I started uni and dragged it out of the > > drawer for the hell of it), even using that adjuster, it was impossible > > to get the thing to keep time even to the extent of a minute a day > > accuracy. > > > > If there was a problem with the Sinclair black watches, I suspect it was > > down to dodgy construction techniques. > > It was. ie, how they were made by sinclair. If you read that article > posted here about the watches history it makes for interesting reading. I did read it - and it's not exactly reliable sounding or particularly illuminating. Rowland. -- Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell(a)dog.physics.org Sorry - the spam got to me http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking |