new desktop/micro exhibit -- pick 32 now
New entry: RCA COSMAC Microtutor with 1801 COSMAC chipset (became 1802 microprocessor). It's small and rare. The museum has one. Dates to 1974 probably. Other reasons: First CMOS microprocessor, which matters because many subsequent microprocessor used CMOS to reduce power. RCA created the CMOS process for digital logic chips and then for the COSMAC. One of the first microprocessor development products from RCA. The COSMAC microprocessor was developed here in New Jersey. Likely the first microprocessor in space. May be the first microprocessor for emissions controls in cars (Chrysler). Direct predecessor of the "COSMAC ELF", a popular you-wire-it COSMAC design by the lead COSMAC developer Joseph Weisbecker; published in Popular Electronics. Many many versions of the ELF have been created and produced every decade since, to the present day. Used in RCA video game and video terminal products (not that popular but known to collectors of early video game computers). Those who argue the 1802 "was a loser so forgetit" might explain why a computing museum should show only "the winners", and set a dollar or production count for "winning". To make space: If space is needed, I suggest choosing between the Commodore 64 and the Commodore VIC-20. I'm sure they are very different but I'm not sure many people would know the difference. The Commodore brand is well-represented among the choices given. The VIC-20 and C-64 could take turns on display. Herb Johnson -- Herbert R. Johnson, New Jersey USA http://www.retrotechnology.com
On 11/08/2015 04:13 PM, Herb Johnson via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
Those who argue the 1802 "was a loser so forgetit" might explain why a computing museum should show only "the winners", and set a dollar or production count for "winning".
I agree 100%. Is anyone really stupid enough to say something like that about any chip, processor or otherwise, in constant production for 39 years (1976-present) with no plans for discontinuance? -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
Those who argue the 1802 "was a loser so forgetit" might explain why a computing museum should show only "the winners", and set a dollar or production count for "winning".
I agree 100%. Is anyone really stupid enough to say something like that about any chip, processor or otherwise, in constant production for 39 years (1976-present) with no plans for discontinuance?
Nobody said anything like that.
On 11/08/2015 07:39 PM, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
Those who argue the 1802 "was a loser so forgetit" might explain why a computing museum should show only "the winners", and set a dollar or production count for "winning".
I agree 100%. Is anyone really stupid enough to say something like that about any chip, processor or otherwise, in constant production for 39 years (1976-present) with no plans for discontinuance?
Nobody said anything like that.
Of course not, and I made no such claim, nor did Herb. If anyone does in the future, though, feel free to refer them to me so I can beat them over the head with the numbers. -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
On Nov 8, 2015 7:41 PM, "Dave McGuire via vcf-midatlantic" < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
On 11/08/2015 07:39 PM, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
Those who argue the 1802 "was a loser so forgetit" might explain why a computing museum should show only "the winners", and set a dollar or production count for "winning".
I agree 100%. Is anyone really stupid enough to say something like
that about any chip, processor or otherwise, in constant production for 39 years (1976-present) with no plans for discontinuance?
Nobody said anything like that.
Of course not, and I made no such claim, nor did Herb. If anyone does in the future, though, feel free to refer them to me so I can beat them over the head with the numbers.
-Dave
-- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
Can't have everything, but even if this is not chosen you make a good case as to whether the 1802 is important historically. I think "looks" has to taken into account for an exhibit selection too, the nod would go to something in the top 40 "qualifying" machines that typical visitors would find interesting. Impossible cover everything. I look forward to seeing it all in the new location. Bill
----- Original Message ----- From: Dave McGuire via vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org>
I agree 100%. Is anyone really stupid enough to say something like that about any chip, processor or otherwise
I don't think anyone is. But like I told Evan. I think there should be a section for important processors. The museum should have a section with important CPUs such as the Cosmac.
New entry:
RCA COSMAC Microtutor with 1801 COSMAC chipset (became 1802 microprocessor). It's small and rare. The museum has one. Dates to 1974 probably. Other reasons:
First CMOS microprocessor, which matters because many subsequent microprocessor used CMOS to reduce power. RCA created the CMOS process for digital logic chips and then for the COSMAC.
One of the first microprocessor development products from RCA. The COSMAC microprocessor was developed here in New Jersey. Likely the first microprocessor in space. May be the first microprocessor for emissions controls in cars (Chrysler).
Direct predecessor of the "COSMAC ELF", a popular you-wire-it COSMAC design by the lead COSMAC developer Joseph Weisbecker; published in Popular Electronics. Many many versions of the ELF have been created and produced every decade since, to the present day.
Used in RCA video game and video terminal products (not that popular but known to collectors of early video game computers).
All good points. I think I'd take out the Compaq Portable. Yes it has some claims-to-fame as an early PC-compatible, but we'll already have an Osborne and a mid-80s compatible desktop in the exhibit.
Another 1802 feature is that a fair number of satellites use it, so while some might not appreciate it and consider it a “loser,” it served in some very unique applications, probably long after many contemporary chips were put onto the shelf as being no longer relevant. Bob
your list was sorted alphabetically I hope the exhibits are laid out chronologically You wouldn't want to get the visitors any more confused Dan
Yes. Things are typically invented in chronological order, except bizarrely fax machines which are invented in reverse - chronological order. Bill Degnan twitter: billdeg vintagecomputer.net On Nov 9, 2015 6:55 AM, "Dan Roganti via vcf-midatlantic" < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
your list was sorted alphabetically I hope the exhibits are laid out chronologically You wouldn't want to get the visitors any more confused Dan
On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 7:21 AM, william degnan via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
Yes. Things are typically invented in chronological order, except bizarrely fax machines which are invented in reverse - chronological order.
now there's an exhibit for ya one that show's everything who said they were "First"
participants (7)
-
Bob Applegate -
Christian Liendo -
Dan Roganti -
Dave McGuire -
Evan Koblentz -
Herb Johnson -
william degnan