I think your second post, answers your first post's question, just fine. So what help were you asking for? The question and answer I mean are, quoting you:
some concern that what I had was not in fact a computer, but a controller.
your answered yourself with
[if these sources] called it a Microcomputer > then I think I have enough to go with.
So why ask a question you already answered? and - why did I respond to someone, when I already knew we would not agree? That part, was my fault, I took the bait. So, my apologies to my list colleagues for a private fight conducted in public, which ends now. Herb Johnson still not a bot On 12/27/2024 8:41 PM, Christian Liendo wrote:
I'm just going to address some things listed
Comstar was a company that automated other people's products.
They worked with companies like Warner & Swasey to build custom automation solutions and then went on to pretty much make a 4004 system with various cards to do the same automation.
I would argue they are pretty much like the Micral N. Which was also designed for process control.
As of 1972 they had one product. The Star 4 which was 4004 based and then came the Star 8 which was 8008 and then the Star 4A which was 4040.
They were eventually purchased by Warner and Swasey and became their computer division.
But if you Christian insist that if Comstar or Intel calls something "a computer", that makes it a computer in some other ways? or is official in some fashion? that goes from reportage to judgement. Judgement is fine when backed by evidence.
Intel called it a Microcomputer in their advertising It was called a Microcomputer in the ACM titled "Development of a portable compiler for industrial microcomputer systems " It was called a Microcomputer in Electronic’s Magazine July 11th 1974 It was listed as a Microcomputer in "Auerbach Guide to Minicomputers" April 1976 & Winter 1976 - 1977 It was listed as a Microcomputer in Datamation Magazine Dec 1974 It was called a Microcomputer in "A MICROCOMPUTER BASED SUBSTATION CONTROL SYSTEM" The University of Oklahoma, Ph.D., 1975 Engineering, electronics and electrical Page 90
I am defining it in the same manner they are defining it, in the time they are defining it.
I did get in touch with Jim Hollenhorst from Agilent who actually worked there and worked on the units.
To quote him
"Regarding the question of whether the system was a general-purpose computer, the answer in principle is "yes".
So if all those publications called it a Microcomputer and the people who worked on also did, then I think I have enough to go with.
I hope to have some more photos in 2025 when the Western Reserve Historical Society reopens after a flood. They have a number of Warner & Swasey photos and so I hope to find something useful.
-- Herbert R. Johnson, New Jersey USA https://www.retrotechnology.com OR .net preserve, recover, restore 1970's computing email: hjohnson AT retrotechnology DOT com or try later herbjohnson AT comcast DOT net