Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-4.nntp.ord.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 09:20:05 +0000
Subject: Re: Remember "Bit-Slice" Chips ?
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
References: <o4ucnYo2YLqmZ876nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@earthlink.com>
 <vj1m3f$33eu5$16@dont-email.me> <947j2lx3qf.ln2@Telcontar.valinor>
 <lrolhlFkmd2U1@mid.individual.net> <vj77pi$f8rj$9@dont-email.me>
 <24ffec92-9486-251d-7a42-d376b88b2c9b@example.net>
 <20241209135847.00004fb7@gmail.com> <lrpjjpFpep6U1@mid.individual.net>
 <G5mdnXqNwMsTeMr6nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
 <lrqaq4FstdvU1@mid.individual.net>
 <2I6dnRAQE4x-u8T6nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@earthlink.com>
 <lrsoe6Fac80U1@mid.individual.net>
 <yRWdnUoeG4z9z8T6nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@earthlink.com>
 <lruuasFl4n6U1@mid.individual.net>
 <QSKdnZ8NtLd7ysf6nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
 <lrvm17FohqnU3@mid.individual.net>
From: "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net>
Organization: wokiesux
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 04:20:04 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <lrvm17FohqnU3@mid.individual.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <142dnZ34m8FYN8f6nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
Lines: 85
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 99.101.150.97
X-Trace: sv3-Fo6XpmXlrg2Bd4fN5QCHi7vLi/K9tB8N24Et667WUmEI0QKee0OV7wvNv5jZVsMM46EiLvwY+j+Gkjz!dBiEzXHPjrIVkc4zRnkInYybB56cp6MxA6Df2d9lZxM5qsWTEQ82QDgDaxVbRtv0jO0HShHGJtvD!6MMGq58/r0l5rJwCUmEJ
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 5418

On 12/12/24 3:43 AM, rbowman wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Dec 2024 22:26:29 -0500, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
> 
>> Didn't the 5120s have like a REALLY dinky monitor ?
> 
> The 5100 and 5110 did. They were meant to be 'portable'. The 5120 bumped
> it up to a magnificent 9".  It was bigger than the Osborne 1 monitor. Like
> a laptop if I was at home I plugged it into an external monitor. I sent it
> back to the factory for the 100 column upgrade and the massive storage of
> double sided, double density floppies. It paid for itself many times over.
> I even build a EPROM programmer using the parallel port. It had just
> enough lines to put out the data and toggle the necessary lines.

   Try the IBM "portable" PC ... if you don't throw out
   yer back lifting it :-) DID use one - but did most of
   the software on a 286 box.

>>     I've used an Osbourne and the competing Kaypro. For the era, they
>>     really weren't bad. The 8088 more smoothly accessed larger RAM space
>>     however, so it became the worthy successor. 64/128k became obsolete
>>     REAL quick.
> 
> You could already get more memory for a Z80 using bank switching. iirc the
> bottom 2K was reserved to do the switch. The 8088 just formalized it on
> the chip. The best part was the five different libraries for the tiny,
> small, medium, large, and huge memory schemes or whatever they were
> called.


   I think the "formalized" bit - plus the IBM name - kinda
   sealed it for the Z80s. Bank-switching on Z80's was kinda
   too clunky - and all the banks were 64k.

   Anyway, won't really diss the 8088 ... had it's good
   time and place and uses and paved the way to Better.

   EVER see an actual 8086 system ? I never did. Kinda
   had to wait for the 286/386 era to see the promised
   perks. I think Compaq had an 8086.


>>     I've got a ZX81 around somewhere, but those were 'toys'.
> 
> I had a ZX80 that I bought in the kit form. I was already using the Z80
> for embedded stuff and was curious what $100, iirc, would buy.

   They made a ZX-80 *kit* ??? Never ever saw one
   in the USA. Besides, the 80 keys were TOO tiny,
   the '81 really was better and had more peripherials.

>>     Still, always wanted my own S-100 box, but could never afford one
>>     while they were still in use. I think they were still made even for
>>     the 68000, maybe 68020, but the buss wasn't meant for the higher
>>     clocks that soon became prevalent and it became so easy to put the
>>     periphs into ONE CHIP that there really wasn't the need for 8/10/12
>>     slot computers anymore.
> 
> I never had a S-100 but I designed a set of cards and a proprietary
> backplane for a client with a real case of NIH. There were a bunch of them
> in the industrial field including the STD Bus, which was anything but
> standard. Everybody rolled their own.

   Yep, the 'proprietary' era ... still, a lot of good ideas ....

> The rumor was the S-100 came about when someone got a hell of a deal on
> milsurp edge connectors.

   MIGHT be true !!!

   Anyway, it WORKED, well, for a long time. Alas it really
   was a product of its time-slot ... lower clocks and the
   need for really large complex peripherial cards.

   Anyway, now, having 95% of all that on ONE chip is
   kinda nice - and FAST. However there's still a
   certain 'nostalgia' for S-100 ... wouldn't mind
   owning a '33 Packard either even though a Subaru
   is technologically superior ......

   Ah :

   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cromemco

   I was right about the 68020's !