Identify this mystery DEC control panel

In alt.sys.pdp8 David Evans <dfevans@bcr10.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:[color=blue]
> In article <LLKdnRgN5J5Jco7bnZ2dnUVZ_h7inZ2d@magma.ca>,
> Robert Krten <info2007@parse.com> wrote:[color=green]
> >
> >By CCI do you mean "Consolidated Computer Inc" ? They made terminals,
> >where based in Ottawa, and had a PDP-8 clone in the (mid?) 70's with
> >a cute little front panel...
> >[/color][/color]
[color=blue]
> Like this?[/color]
[color=blue]
> [url]http://plg.uwaterloo.ca/~bfkorvem/digital/2005-04-16/dscf0031.jpg[/url][/color]

Bingo!

Cheers,
-RK
--
Robert Krten, Antique computer collector looking for PDP-8 and PDP-8/S
minicomputers; check out their "good home" at [url]www.parse.com/~museum[/url]

In article <B7udnT77aNLPt4jbnZ2dnUVZ_qjinZ2d@magma.ca>,
Robert Krten <info2007@parse.com> wrote:[color=blue]
>In alt.sys.pdp8 David Evans <dfevans@bcr10.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:[color=green]
>> In article <LLKdnRgN5J5Jco7bnZ2dnUVZ_h7inZ2d@magma.ca>,
>> Robert Krten <info2007@parse.com> wrote:[color=darkred]
>> >
>> >By CCI do you mean "Consolidated Computer Inc" ? They made terminals,
>> >where based in Ottawa, and had a PDP-8 clone in the (mid?) 70's with
>> >a cute little front panel...
>> >[/color][/color]
>[color=green]
>> Like this?[/color]
>[color=green]
>> [url]http://plg.uwaterloo.ca/~bfkorvem/digital/2005-04-16/dscf0031.jpg[/url][/color]
>
>Bingo!
>[/color]

Nifty. I've never seen the things in person; I'm sure that Ben will
now be happy to know what he hauled out of the field.

--
David Evans [email]dfevans@bbcr.uwaterloo.ca[/email]
Research Associate [url]http://bbcr.uwaterloo.ca/~dfevans/[/url]
Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge

On Apr 5, 9:47 am, "Tom Linden" <t...@kednos-remove.com> wrote:[color=blue]
> On Wed, 04 Apr 2007 11:47:12 -0700, <sho...@trailing-edge.com> wrote:[color=green]
> > On Apr 4, 2:35 pm, info2...@parse.com (Robert Krten) wrote:[color=darkred]
> >> In alt.sys.pdp11 sho...@trailing-edge.com wrote:
> >> > On Apr 4, 12:35 pm, klu...@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
> >> > > In article <w9z4pnwumi7....@zipcon.net>, kkt <k...@zipcon.net>
> >> wrote:
> >> > > >The original poster might try posting to alt.folklore.computers.
> >> > > >There's a lot more people reading it and if it's a non-DEC part
> >> > > >there's a decent chance one of them might have seen it.[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> >> > > Here is a good guess: how about a prototype Sigma clone, made by a
> >> > > company that was already in the DEC clone business, like CCI or the
> >> > > like?
> >> > Was CCI associated with/morphed into Belobox (who I know sold Sigma
> >> > clones and was also in Irvine) maybe? I recall some connection from
> >> > the 80's but unlike many other things I have a vague memory of, I
> >> > cannot say what the connection was.[/color][/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> >> By CCI do you mean "Consolidated Computer Inc" ? They made terminals,
> >> where based in Ottawa, and had a PDP-8 clone in the (mid?) 70's with
> >> a cute little front panel...[/color][/color]
>[color=green]
> > I think I meant "Computer Consoles Incorporated" or maybe "Computer
> > Consoles Irvine", but you can correct my failing memory if I'm wrong![/color]
>
> The former, they were located in Irvine, they acquired the old Varian
> buildings from Univax(I think) and there may have been a connection to
> SDS[/color]

Was SDS ever in Irvine? All I know is that the LA-area Sigma diehards
always pointed at the Xerox building near LAX and said "that used to
be the SDS building before Xerox bought the company.".

Tim.

On Apr 3, 8:24 am, John DeRosa <stug...@qwest.net> wrote:[color=blue]
> On Mon, 02 Apr 2007 11:44:25 -0700, Al Kossow <a...@spies.com> wrote:[color=green]
> >[url]http://bitsavers.org/mysteryPanel_Nov74.jpg[/url][/color]
>[color=green]
> >This is part of the Computer History Museum collection that no one, including
> >Gordon Bell, has been able to identify. It appears to be for a 32 bit computer
> >with a 360-like architecture, but with Unibus control signals. It would appear
> >to be for a PDP-15 style front panel bezel (two rows of switches) but is using
> >the PDP-11 color scheme.[/color]
>
> What's printed on the back of this panel?[/color]

Could this be a front panel for an early version of the AT&T 4ESS
switch (DEC based before the 3B20) or one of the associated other
DEC based Bell Labs systems:
No 1 AMARC was an 11/40 and the 1A was a 11/70.
I installed an early version of the 4ESS at Bellsouth and
believe there was an X Bus...could be wrong

In article <87wt0r81mv.fsf@k9.prep.synonet.com>,
Paul Repacholi <prep@prep.synonet.com> wrote:[color=blue]
>Al Kossow <aek@spies.com> writes:
>[color=green]
>> kkt wrote:[/color]
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>> The original poster might try posting to alt.folklore.computers.
>>> There's a lot more people reading it and if it's a non-DEC part
>>> there's a decent chance one of them might have seen it.[/color][/color]
>[color=green]
>> I am absolutely certain this was made by DEC. It matches the
>> materials and paints the DEC panel shop used, and will fit into the
>> cast frame that were used by the PDP-9L, and 15.[/color]
>
>But the tiny details like the corner radii does not seem quite right.
>[color=green]
>> Why it was made is the mystery.[/color]
>
>Say that again!
>[color=green]
>> Bob Supnik pointed out that PSW2 doesn't match any known Sigma
>> implementation. The instruction word and PSW1 do match.[/color]
>[color=green]
>> I got mail back from someone familiar with Sigma clones, and he's
>> never seen a panel like this either.[/color]
>
>I was interested to see the PDP and EMUL status lights. EMULate what??[/color]

Extended MULtiply, perhaps? Emulate wasn't a common word back then.

/BAH

> The Smithsonian had a blue PDP-15 on display in the Museum of[color=blue]
> American History, but that's closed for massive renovation now so
> we can't just drop in and compare. Maybe someone has another shot
> of a PDP-15?[/color]

Here's a couple shots of the Smithsonian / FBI PDP-15 from my trip to DC a
couple years ago. Sorry the first one is a bit dark.

[url]http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/photos/computers/pdp-15-smithsonian.jpg[/url]

[url]http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/photos/computers/pdp-15-smithsonian-panel.jpg[/url]

--
Bob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<<
Kaplow Klips & Baffle: [url]http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf[/url]
[url]www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/[/url] [url]www.nira-rocketry.org[/url] [url]www.nar.org[/url]

Sir, if I was building a weapon of mass destruction,
you wouldn't be able to find it.

On Apr 4, 12:49 pm, Al Kossow <a...@spies.com> wrote:[color=blue]
> kkt wrote:[color=green]
> > The original poster might try posting to alt.folklore.computers.
> > There's a lot more people reading it and if it's a non-DEC part
> > there's a decent chance one of them might have seen it.[/color]
>
> I am absolutely certain this was made by DEC. It matches the materials
> and paints the DEC panel shop used, and will fit into the cast frame that
> were used by the PDP-9L, and 15.
>
> Why it was made is the mystery.
>
> Bob Supnik pointed out that PSW2 doesn't match any known Sigma
> implementation. The instruction word and PSW1 do match.
>
> I got mail back from someone familiar with Sigma clones, and he's
> never seen a panel like this either.
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com[/color]


If it was made by DEC as a one-off, it could have been a PDP-16.
It used to be an exercise at CMU to build a PDP-11 out of PDP-16
modules
since the control path could be wired up (literally) to create any
desired
instruction set.

It would have to be emulating 32-bits using double precision, since
the
PDP-16 data paths were 16-bit. Also, no floating point hardware.

--S

In article <1176834944.770165.137880@p77g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
smallpond <smallpond@juno.com> wrote:[color=blue]
>On Apr 4, 12:49 pm, Al Kossow <a...@spies.com> wrote:[color=green]
>> kkt wrote:[color=darkred]
>> > The original poster might try posting to alt.folklore.computers.
>> > There's a lot more people reading it and if it's a non-DEC part
>> > there's a decent chance one of them might have seen it.[/color]
>>
>> I am absolutely certain this was made by DEC. It matches the materials
>> and paints the DEC panel shop used, and will fit into the cast frame that
>> were used by the PDP-9L, and 15.
>>
>> Why it was made is the mystery.
>>
>> Bob Supnik pointed out that PSW2 doesn't match any known Sigma
>> implementation. The instruction word and PSW1 do match.
>>
>> I got mail back from someone familiar with Sigma clones, and he's
>> never seen a panel like this either.[/color][/color]
[color=blue]
>If it was made by DEC as a one-off, it could have been a PDP-16.
>It used to be an exercise at CMU to build a PDP-11 out of PDP-16
>modules
>since the control path could be wired up (literally) to create any
>desired
>instruction set.
>
>It would have to be emulating 32-bits using double precision, since
>the
>PDP-16 data paths were 16-bit. Also, no floating point hardware.[/color]

With the date etched on the panel, I would guess that it
was made for a special project for one customer. There would
be no other panels like it. The software would have been
especially modified for the use. There were quite a few
projects like this going on back then.

/BAH

smallpond wrote:[color=blue]
> On Apr 4, 12:49 pm, Al Kossow <a...@spies.com> wrote:[color=green]
>> kkt wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> The original poster might try posting to alt.folklore.computers.
>>> There's a lot more people reading it and if it's a non-DEC part
>>> there's a decent chance one of them might have seen it.[/color]
>> I am absolutely certain this was made by DEC. It matches the materials
>> and paints the DEC panel shop used, and will fit into the cast frame that
>> were used by the PDP-9L, and 15.
>>
>> Why it was made is the mystery.
>>
>> Bob Supnik pointed out that PSW2 doesn't match any known Sigma
>> implementation. The instruction word and PSW1 do match.
>>
>> I got mail back from someone familiar with Sigma clones, and he's
>> never seen a panel like this either.
>>
>> --
>> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com[/color]
>
>
> If it was made by DEC as a one-off, it could have been a PDP-16.
> It used to be an exercise at CMU to build a PDP-11 out of PDP-16
> modules
> since the control path could be wired up (literally) to create any
> desired
> instruction set.
>
> It would have to be emulating 32-bits using double precision, since
> the
> PDP-16 data paths were 16-bit. Also, no floating point hardware.
>
> --S
>[/color]
but the PDP-16 was the CADET - Can't Add, Doesn't Even Try.

On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, bob wrote:[color=blue]
> but the PDP-16 was the CADET - Can't Add, Doesn't Even Try.[/color]

Huh? The CADET was the IBM 1620, which had an addition table instead of
adder hardware.

-- Mark --

[url]http://staff.washington.edu/mrc[/url]
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
Si vis pacem, para bellum.

bob <sfmc68@verizon.net> writes:[color=blue]
> but the PDP-16 was the CADET - Can't Add, Doesn't Even Try.[/color]

Nope. The PDP-16 adds just fine.

The IBM 1620 was the CADET.