Velocity Reviews

Velocity Reviews (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/index.php)
-   Digital Photography (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/f37-digital-photography.html)
-   -   someone posted this elsewhere (http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/t953897-someone-posted-this-elsewhere.html)

philo 10-25-2012 01:33 PM

someone posted this elsewhere
 
http://www.retronaut.com/2012/06/kod...l-camera-1975/
--
https://www.createspace.com/3707686

Usenet Account 10-25-2012 06:44 PM

Re: someone posted this elsewhere
 
On 25/10/2012 9:33 AM, philo wrote:
> http://www.retronaut.com/2012/06/kod...l-camera-1975/


And RichA complained then!

--

philo 10-26-2012 12:03 AM

Re: someone posted this elsewhere
 
On 10/25/2012 04:28 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2012.10.25 09:33 , philo wrote:
>> http://www.retronaut.com/2012/06/kod...l-camera-1975/

>
> Love the cassette tape, not to mention the Motorola Exorcisor that I
> spent so many days (and nights) working on in the lab in college.
>
> (What they label as "Microcomputer" in the 2nd photo is a bit of a
> misnomer. The Exorcisor was a development breakout system for the
> Motorola 8600 processor (a precursor to ICE). You could extend boards,
> make your own boards (PC or DIP project cards). We had two teams racing
> cars (on a slot car track) each team building their own h/w and s/w. (I
> was too new at the time to code on that - my project was a floppy drive
> controller. Code was, ironically, saved on tape cassettes with an
> ordinary audio tape deck).
>



Yep , I remember those cassette tapes.

The first computer I owned was a TI99/4A

I thought it rather amazing

--
https://www.createspace.com/3707686

Martin Brown 10-26-2012 07:08 AM

Re: someone posted this elsewhere
 
On 26/10/2012 01:17, Alan Browne wrote:
> On 2012.10.25 20:03 , philo wrote:
>> On 10/25/2012 04:28 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
>>> On 2012.10.25 09:33 , philo wrote:
>>>> http://www.retronaut.com/2012/06/kod...l-camera-1975/
>>>
>>> Love the cassette tape, not to mention the Motorola Exorcisor that I
>>> spent so many days (and nights) working on in the lab in college.
>>>
>>> (What they label as "Microcomputer" in the 2nd photo is a bit of a
>>> misnomer. The Exorcisor was a development breakout system for the
>>> Motorola 8600 processor (a precursor to ICE). You could extend boards,
>>> make your own boards (PC or DIP project cards). We had two teams racing
>>> cars (on a slot car track) each team building their own h/w and s/w. (I
>>> was too new at the time to code on that - my project was a floppy drive
>>> controller. Code was, ironically, saved on tape cassettes with an
>>> ordinary audio tape deck).
>>>

>>
>>
>> Yep , I remember those cassette tapes.
>>
>> The first computer I owned was a TI99/4A
>>
>> I thought it rather amazing

>
> Owned one for about 72 hours and turned it back in for a VIC-20 and
> eventually a C-64.
>
> the TI-99 microprocessor had an annoying architecture (and slow) as the
> first so many locations of memory were also the CPU op registers. I
> don't recall how many.


The TI-99 was severely compromised to bring it down to a price. The 9900
series CPUs had 16 registers in ram including the programme counter.
This could be amusing if it ever found itself pointing at ROM!

Back then registers in ram could be faster than on chip if you used the
right sort of ram and the right width! TI-99 did neither.

I can't remember if the TI-99 used it but the 9900 series graphics chip
whose number escapes me now was capable of hardware sprites for gaming.

9900's were unbelievably good at the time for realtime work since a
context switch was a single register move. You could also execute a
single instruction after placing it in a register for debugging.

It was a cute architecture but they were out gunned and outwitted in the
domestic market by the humble 6502.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

philo 10-26-2012 12:13 PM

Re: someone posted this elsewhere
 
On 10/26/2012 02:08 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 26/10/2012 01:17, Alan Browne wrote:
>> On 2012.10.25 20:03 , philo wrote:
>>> On 10/25/2012 04:28 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>> On 2012.10.25


<snipped for brevity>

>>>
>>> The first computer I owned was a TI99/4A
>>>
>>> I thought it rather amazing

>>
>> Owned one for about 72 hours and turned it back in for a VIC-20 and
>> eventually a C-64.
>>
>> the TI-99 microprocessor had an annoying architecture (and slow) as the
>> first so many locations of memory were also the CPU op registers. I
>> don't recall how many.

>
> The TI-99 was severely compromised to bring it down to a price. The 9900
> series CPUs had 16 registers in ram including the programme counter.
> This could be amusing if it ever found itself pointing at ROM!
>
> Back then registers in ram could be faster than on chip if you used the
> right sort of ram and the right width! TI-99 did neither.
>
> I can't remember if the TI-99 used it but the 9900 series graphics chip
> whose number escapes me now was capable of hardware sprites for gaming.
>
> 9900's were unbelievably good at the time for realtime work since a
> context switch was a single register move. You could also execute a
> single instruction after placing it in a register for debugging.
>
> It was a cute architecture but they were out gunned and outwitted in the
> domestic market by the humble 6502.
>


I'm an old timer who as a student started out with FORTRAN-IV and punch
cards back in 1968...so by comparison the TI-99 was amazing.

Using punch cards was so time consuming (and having to wait in line to
submit them) was infinitely frustrating. It typically took me a full
week to get a program working, while with the TI-99 and it's "instant"
feedback. I could write and debug a program in an hour or so.

Of course today, very few people even associate the words "computer" and
"programming" !
--
https://www.createspace.com/3707686


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:28 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.