someone smarter than Dave Cutler
in [Device Drivers]
|
From: glen herrmannsfeldt on 5 Apr 2010 00:31 In alt.sys.pdp10 Gene Wirchenko <genew(a)ocis.net> wrote: (snip, I wrote) >>in MS-DOS, if you want a routine to be run at certain times then >>substitute a PSW pointing to it for one of the interrupt new PSW >>locations. Then after your routine does what it needs to do >>then LPSW for the original, which you should have stored somewhere >>else. > LPSW was a privileged operation, so how was it done? So is writing over the low memory locations where the new PSWs are stored. Such routines would run in supervisor mode. -- glen
From: jmfbahciv on 5 Apr 2010 07:57 Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote: > jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> writes: >> Then we got the PDP-10 because DEC gave a lower bid than IBM. > > ibm use to give very large educational discounts ... i think possibly > like 60% ... but that all changed after the litigation started and the > gov. jumped in (starting around 69 when unbundling was also announced > 23jun69) ... then there were much fewer educational ibm installs after > that. > > misc. past posts mentioning unbundling announced > http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#unbundle > The university got the PDP-10 in 1970, IIRC. The bidding must have happened in 1969 or 1968 (I never knew how all that stuff worked nor how long it took). /BAH
From: Peter Flass on 6 Apr 2010 21:02 jmfbahciv wrote: > Joe Pfeiffer wrote: >> Peter Flass <Peter_Flass(a)Yahoo.com> writes: >> >>> jmfbahciv wrote: >>>> Jim Stewart wrote: >>>>> Mark Crispin wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, 30 Mar 2010, Jim Stewart posted: >>>>>>> Anyone that takes the time to leaf through some >>>>>>> Datamation magazines of that era would be lucky >>>>>>> to find any reference to PDP-10's. >>>>>> Using Datamation as an historical reference is like using the >>>>>> National Enquirier. >>>>> A circular religious argument not unexpected from >>>>> someone that believed that PDP-10's dominated the >>>>> era. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> You, obviously, have had no experience in non-IBM niches. >>>> >>>> /BAH >>> Bill Clinton would love this. I guess it depends on what your >>> definition of "dominated" is. Certainly -10's were popular in >>> universities and research organizations. On the other hand, in 40 >>> years I encountered exactly *one* -10, at a timesharing outfit. >>> Naturally I loved it, but there weren't many out in the real world. >> >> I'm a little bit reminded of the days when just about everybody used >> ASCII except IBM -- which meant something like 90% of the computers in >> the world used EBCDIC. >> >> To the best of my recollection, I never saw an IBM computer when I was >> an undergrad. DEC-10, VAX, PDP-11, DG Nova, CDC, Harris... yes. IBM, >> no. It would be easy to forget how big IBM was, if I were to go from my >> own university recollections. I seem to have lost track of who posted what on this thread, and I'm a little behind in my newsgroup reading, but what timeframe was this? I was at the University of Rochester from 1964-1968 and all I saw was IBM. We started with a 7094 (IIRC) and a 1620 for Engineering students, and moved to a 360 (/50?) with an 1130 for hands-on. At some point Xerox gave them a bunch of Altos, but that was after my time. Later I worked at SUNY, and most of the university centers had IBM. Buffalo (I believe) had moved from CDC to IBM, Stony Brook and Binghamton had IBM. Only Albany was the holdout with Univac, but moved to IBM later. Of course by this time (mid 70's maybe) there were probably lots of other computers on campus, but no DEC (AFAIK). Later there was a system-wide RFP that resulted in Vaxen - maybe 8600 by this time - for all the colleges. [there seem to be a lot of unrelated cross-posts for this thread.] > > Schools, who couldn't afford to buy^Wrent an IBM system had to buy > time on another university's IBM system. That was real money instead > of funny money; so computer time was parceled out with great care. > Only a few "users" would have access to that mainframe. > > /BAH
From: Joe Pfeiffer on 7 Apr 2010 02:16 Peter Flass <Peter_Flass(a)Yahoo.com> writes: >> Joe Pfeiffer wrote: >>> >>> To the best of my recollection, I never saw an IBM computer when I was >>> an undergrad. DEC-10, VAX, PDP-11, DG Nova, CDC, Harris... yes. IBM, >>> no. It would be easy to forget how big IBM was, if I were to go from my >>> own university recollections. > > I seem to have lost track of who posted what on this thread, and I'm a > little behind in my newsgroup reading, but what timeframe was this? 1975-1975 as undergrad, 1979-1984 as grad. -- As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours; and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin)
From: Joe Pfeiffer on 7 Apr 2010 03:06
Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer(a)cs.nmsu.edu> writes: > Peter Flass <Peter_Flass(a)Yahoo.com> writes: > >>> Joe Pfeiffer wrote: >>>> >>>> To the best of my recollection, I never saw an IBM computer when I was >>>> an undergrad. DEC-10, VAX, PDP-11, DG Nova, CDC, Harris... yes. IBM, >>>> no. It would be easy to forget how big IBM was, if I were to go from my >>>> own university recollections. >> >> I seem to have lost track of who posted what on this thread, and I'm a >> little behind in my newsgroup reading, but what timeframe was this? > > 1975-1975 as undergrad, 1979-1984 as grad. Sigh. 1975-1979 as ugrad, of course. -- As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours; and this we should do freely and generously. (Benjamin Franklin) |