From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole)
Subject: [COFF] [TUHS] Will pdp 11/04 run unix?
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 16:05:45 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAC20D2PA+ezcXusOa_JqOoPdsM2z4AJQFoHnj3_-nE+btEq1_Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E0EE78FF-015A-4FDC-86D7-6ACFB174BC1B@mac.com>
[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2093 bytes --]
OK, that makes sense. As I said, I thought MAXC was a Nova. So,
Stanford used a direct interface to the 10 and the CMU, DEC and MIT ones
used an 11/20
I don't know how many others were stood up or how.
On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 4:00 PM Bruce Baumgart <bgbaumgart at mac.com> wrote:
> Lars et al
> -
> Lynn Quam is credited with building the XGP hardware interface to the SAIL
> PDP-6.
>
>
> A few lines from
> Version #1 of Quam’s file RESUME[DOC,PDQ] say
>
> < quote >
>
> Nov. 1972 to
> Feb. 1973\jFull-time research associate in computer science.
> Received a grant from the NASA Viking Mission thru
> Cornell University for the analysis of candidate landing
> sites for the Viking mission.\.
>
> \jDesign and debugging of an interface between a PDP-10 (PDP-6)
> and and a Xerox Graphics Printer (XGP).\.
>
> < Unquote />
>
> Prior to the Stanford interface,
> Quam built a Nova to XGP interface at Xerox Parc
> As a part time employee while also working at SAIL.
> -
> Bruce
>
>
>
> p.s. Lynn Quam’s log in code is PDQ
>
>
> On 31 Jul 2020, at 12:38 PM, Lars Brinkhoff <lars at nocrew.org> wrote:
>
> Clem Cole wrote:
>
> Anyway, I'm pretty sure the [XGP] copies at Stanford (Jan '73), and
> MIT (was the 3rd in the series and a little later) also used 11/20s or
> maybe 11/15's which was the OEM version of the 20 as it was March '72
> when the CMU XGP was first stood up.
>
>
> Thank you. That's one more "vote" in favour of 11/20. In which case
> the TV-11 ought to be an 11/10 which was our original guess. I don't
> think it matters to the software; it should run just as well on either
> model.
>
> I have seen MIT files which describe the Stanford hardware, so it seems
> their inspiration came from there. The earliest timestamp is from
> February 1973.
>
> I got the impression the Stanford XGP had a PDP-6/10 IO bus interface
> rather than going through a PDP-11. I'm CC'ing Bruce Baumgart.
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/coff/attachments/20200731/00f3e11f/attachment-0001.htm>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-31 20:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-31 13:56 jnc
2020-07-31 15:32 ` lars
2020-07-31 18:53 ` clemc
2020-07-31 19:38 ` lars
2020-07-31 19:40 ` clemc
2020-07-31 20:00 ` bgbaumgart
2020-07-31 20:05 ` clemc [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2020-07-31 21:26 jnc
[not found] <20200730213720.109C018C0A5@mercury.lcs.mit.edu>
[not found] ` <20200731071008.GA33933@indra.papnet.eu>
2020-07-31 7:57 ` lars
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAC20D2PA+ezcXusOa_JqOoPdsM2z4AJQFoHnj3_-nE+btEq1_Q@mail.gmail.com \
--to=coff@minnie.tuhs.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).