johnl@marque.mu.edu (John Ledan) (06/17/88)
A friend and I have access to an ENIAC computer, and although it's in pretty sad state, we think we can get it going provided we can get some help and information about it. Where is the best place to discuss these computers, grepping through the spool directories here showed some technical talk in news.stargate, which seems to have gone *poof* (why?) recently, and a bunch of noise in news.*, which given the content of late could be renamed noise.* :-) Any suggestions ? And thanks in advance. --John
webber@porthos.rutgers.edu (Bob Webber) (06/18/88)
In article <198@marque.mu.edu>, johnl@marque.mu.edu (John Ledan) writes: > A friend and I have access to an ENIAC computer, and although > it's in pretty sad state, we think we can get it going provided > we can get some help and information about it. Yes, it can be quite difficult to get good documentation on the ENIAC. The more I read of the literature, the more convinced I am that most of the people who set out to describe it have never programmed it. It is amusing to trace the cribbing of author upon author back to the original 1946 10 page note in Mathematical Tables and Aids To Computation by the Goldstine's. While that note was useful for introducing numerical analysts to the power of the new machine, it is quite inadequate for the anyone directly working with the ENIAC (comparable to trying to use UNIX after reading Ritchie and Thompson's 1974 CACM paper -- a nice overview but no replacement for a systems manual). I expect to soon post a more definitive description of the ENIAC architecture, but for now, you might want to get a copy of Burks' From ENIAC to the Stored- Program Computer: Two Revolutions in Computers which appeared in A History of Computing in the Twentieth Century -- A Collection of Essays edited by N. Metropolis, J. Howlett, and Gian-Carlo Rota (Academic Press, 1980). > Where is the best place to discuss these computers,... > Any suggestions ? And thanks in advance. Currently comp.protocols.tcp-ip.eniac is the best place to discuss them as it is the only eniac-related group that the net has voted to create. Connectivity has been awkward for this group as Spafford is currently opposed to the addition of any computer-related groups to comp.*. The easiest way to establish connectivity between your site and whichever nearby sites carry comp.protocols.tcp-ip.eniac is to issue a newgroup command for it. Since it is an unmoderated group, this should cause no problems. -------- BOB (webber@athos.rutgers.edu ; rutgers!athos.rutgers.edu!webber)
jbn@glacier.STANFORD.EDU (John B. Nagle) (06/19/88)
I'd like to encourage people to write simulators for one or two of the
early machines, as a way of keeping the history alive. The ENIAC was
plugboard-programmed, so it is not an enormously interesting machine to
simulate. But simulating IAS, or Binac, or Whirlwind, would be a useful
exercise. Especially if some original software could be found and brought
back to life.
Is there a vacuum-tube computer still running anywhere, even in a
museum?
John Nagleweemba@garnet.berkeley.edu (Obnoxious Math Grad Student) (06/19/88)
In article <17496@glacier.STANFORD.EDU>, jbn@glacier (John B. Nagle) writes: > I'd like to encourage people to write simulators for one or two of the >early machines, as a way of keeping the history alive. The ENIAC was >plugboard-programmed, so it is not an enormously interesting machine to >simulate. An uncle of mine had been an IBM salesmen. When he learned I was first getting into computers, he dumped a pile of old IBM 650 manuals on me. At the time I was just a BASIC programmer, and didn't even know what machine/assembly language was. So my first major BASIC project ended up being an IBM 650 simulator. How old is the 650 you ask? It used a drum for main memory. This was before "core". It stored numbers in *decimal* form. Optimization tricks consisted of laying out your drum references very carefully. I've actually talked about the 650 to some geezers who used the real thing. They were so happy.... And when you get the chance, go to a good technical library and track down the original Fortran manual. The one that announces that bugs will now be a thing of the past. ucbvax!garnet!weemba Matthew P Wiener/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
cosell@bbn.com (Bernie Cosell) (06/19/88)
In article <11111@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> weemba@garnet.berkeley.edu (Obnoxious Math Grad Student) writes: }How old is the 650 you ask? It used a drum for main memory. This was }before "core". It stored numbers in *decimal* form. Optimization tricks }consisted of laying out your drum references very carefully. } }I've actually talked about the 650 to some geezers who used the real }thing. They were so happy.... Ah yes, the 650 -- reminiscences from the geezer end of the spectrum. One cute thing you left out (did your simulator get this right???) was the drum rotation optimization. Each instruction had a "next address" field to give the explict location of the next instruction to execute. Getting things laid out on the drum just right was a VERY big deal. The original assembler, SAP, was quickly supplanted by an improved assembler for the beast: SAP was the "Symbolic assembly program", but SOAP was the "symbolic *optimizing* assembly program". The trick of the "O" part was to put the next instruction at _just_ the right place on the drum so that when you finished the current instruction the next was _just_ coming up on the heads. What a neat/ugly optimization problem. By the time the 650 died, there was a multi-pass (to say the least) fortran for the thing. I haven't seen my 650 manuals in decades now... I wonder what I did with them... Probably right next to my 407 board-wiring manuals.... __ / ) Bernie Cosell /--< _ __ __ o _ BBN Labs, Cambridge, MA 02238 /___/_(<_/ (_/) )_(_(<_ cosell@bbn.com
webber@porthos.rutgers.edu (Bob Webber) (06/20/88)
In article <17496@glacier.STANFORD.EDU>, jbn@glacier.STANFORD.EDU (John B. Nagle) writes: > > I'd like to encourage people to write simulators for one or two of the > early machines, as a way of keeping the history alive. The ENIAC was > plugboard-programmed, so it is not an enormously interesting machine to > simulate. But simulating IAS, or Binac, or Whirlwind, would be a useful > exercise. Especially if some original software could be found and brought > back to life. Actually the ENIAC is quite fascinating to simulate. It has the most important feature a computer can have -- a neon bulb for each flip flop (connection machine -- eat your heart out). Also, it was only plugboard-programmed until 1948 at which time it became the first stored-program computer (although the store was read-only). Prior to 1948, it was a parallel computer so there are doubtless many who wouldn't want to simulate it due to the difficulty of matching it's speed. The biggest problem in simulating it is getting suitable documentation. All the ``good stuff'' never made it to the journals, but lies buried in various technical reports (mostly from the Moore School at U Penn and BRL at Aberdeen). Of course, with a little imagination one can get fairly close. The earliest electronic stored-program computers that are well-documented in the public literature seem to be the EDVAC (proposal in Von Neumann's collected papers as well as significant discussion in the Moore School Lectures reprinted by MIT Press) and the ACE (Turing's proposal reprinted by MIT Press -- which differs from the machines actually built under that name). A number of ISP descriptions of slightly more recent machines are available in Siewiorek, Bell, and Newell's (1982 successor to 1971 Bell and Newell) Computer Structures - Principles and Examples. I have also heard that some other author did a book of ISP descriptions, but I haven't seen that book. ----- BOB (webber@athos.rutgers.edu ; rutgers!athos.rutgers.edu!webber)
lisper-bjorn@CS.YALE.EDU (Bjorn Lisper) (06/21/88)
In article <Jun.20.04.49.43.1988.3576@porthos.rutgers.edu> webber@porthos.rutgers.edu (Bob Webber) writes: >In article <17496@glacier.STANFORD.EDU>, jbn@glacier.STANFORD.EDU (John B. Nagle) writes: >> I'd like to encourage people to write simulators for one or two of the >> early machines, as a way of keeping the history alive.... >The earliest electronic stored-program computers that are >well-documented in the public literature seem to be the EDVAC >(proposal in Von Neumann's collected papers as well as significant >discussion in the Moore School Lectures reprinted by MIT Press) and >the ACE (Turing's proposal reprinted by MIT Press -- which differs >from the machines actually built under that name). What about the early German computers? The Z-1 was built in 1941 or so and the Germans claim that this is the first electronic computer. The man who constructed it (I think his name was Zuse) wrote an autobiography where his creations apparently have a big role. I haven't read it, though, so I can't tell how technical it gets. Bjorn Lisper
bct@its63b.ed.ac.uk (B Tompsett) (06/23/88)
In article <Jun.20.04.49.43.1988.3576@porthos.rutgers.edu> webber@porthos.rutgers.edu (Bob Webber) writes: >[....] Also, it was only plugboard-programmed until >1948 at which time it became the first stored-program computer (although >the store was read-only). Prior to 1948, it was a parallel computer [....] >----- BOB (webber@athos.rutgers.edu ; rutgers!athos.rutgers.edu!webber) Correction: the Manchester Mark I was the first stored-program computer. It first ran on 21st June 1948. This week marks the 40th aniversary of that event which is being celebrated at Manchester. Princess Anne, The Princess Royal, unveiled a plaque to mark the anniversary at the place the original event took place at the precise time of the anniversary. This is not a situation (like the World Series, for example) where No. 1 in the USA is the same as No. 1 in the World. Edinburgh has recently celebrated 25 years of computing which does not quite match Manchesters 40! Brian. -- > Brian Tompsett. Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh, > JCMB, The King's Buildings, Mayfield Road, EDINBURGH, EH9 3JZ, Scotland, U.K. > Telephone: +44 31 667 1081 x2711. > JANET: bct@uk.ac.ed.ecsvax ARPA: bct%ed.ecsvax@nss.cs.ucl.ac.uk > USENET: bct@ecsvax.ed.ac.uk UUCP: ...!mcvax!ukc!ed.ecsvax!bct > BITNET: ukacrl.earn!ed.ecsvax!bct or bct%ed.ecsvax@uk.ac
adb@alice.UUCP (06/24/88)
If you *really* want info on the ENIAC, go to the library of the Moore School of Electrical Engineering, which still has all the original design documents for the ENIAC on the shelf. However, I suspect they won't be that useful, since there was only one ENIAC and it has long since been dismantled and scattered. Alan Berenbaum AT&T Bell Labs ihnp4!research!adb
farren@gethen.UUCP (Michael J. Farren) (06/24/88)
webber@porthos.rutgers.edu (Bob Webber) writes: >Actually the ENIAC is quite fascinating to simulate. It has the most important >feature a computer can have -- a neon bulb for each flip flop. Nope, the most important feature is that found in the Sperry NAVDAC, used on Polaris submarines once upon a time. That machine used gas-discharge triodes for its accumulator, so the lights you saw WERE the register. Not only did you have less propagation delay, since the lights didn't have to be connected to the flip-flops with wires, the lights were also a very pretty color of blue. -- Michael J. Farren | "INVESTIGATE your point of view, don't just {ucbvax, uunet, hoptoad}! | dogmatize it! Reflect on it and re-evaluate unisoft!gethen!farren | it. You may want to change your mind someday." gethen!farren@lll-winken.llnl.gov ----- Tom Reingold, from alt.flame
webber@porthos.rutgers.edu (Bob Webber) (06/25/88)
In article <8012@alice.UUCP>, adb@alice.UUCP writes: > If you *really* want info on the ENIAC, go to the library of the Moore > School of Electrical Engineering, which still has all the original design Well it looks like eventually I will have to visit the U Penn (I presume the Moore School is in Philadelphia with the rest of it). [I hate travel and big cities, but c'est la vie.] The 1945-1955 period in the history of computing is chock full of fascinating documents as some very major thinkers came to grips with the notion of computing. The ENIAC seems to have been the only major attempt at a parallel computer during this time period [at least one author has noted that the ILLIAC is more closely the successor of the ENIAC than either the EDVAC or the BINIAC (the latter two being more reactions against the percieved problems with the ENIAC by the designers of it rather than attempts to ``upgrade'' it)]. > documents for the ENIAC on the shelf. However, I suspect they won't be that > useful, since there was only one ENIAC and it has long since been dismantled > and scattered. The BRL machine was dismantled and scattered to various museums on 2nd day of October in the year 1955. Whether or not any other machines were ever made from that design is something that would be difficult to prove (except, of course, in the positive by an example). So far no published references have come to my attention. However, the documents would still prove useful. A software simulation of the machine requires rather detailed knowledge of its hardware. A hardware simulation is, at the moment, just a dream -- but the resources are available if I can just find the time to master them (a direct VLSI implementation is my current ``ultimate'' goal). A design for microcode that is functionally equivalent to ``wiring up'' the ENIAC is still in progress. ---- BOB (webber@athos.rutgers.edu ; rutgers!athos.rutgers.edu!webber)
scc@cl.cam.ac.uk (Stephen Crawley) (06/25/88)
In article <1496@its63b.ed.ac.uk> bct@ecsvax.ed.ac.uk (B Tompsett) writes: > > Edinburgh has recently celebrated 25 years of computing which does not quite >match Manchesters 40! > Mere stripplings! The Cambridge University Computer Laboratory (ne the Mathematical Laboratory), celebrated its 50'th aniversary last year. BTW: the CUCL Library has an extensive archive of material from the early days. -- Steve