our new museum -- micro exhibit -- pick 28!
Everyone, This is going to be a fun thread. PLEASE DON'T FORK IT. :) Tentatively, we'll have space for 28 microcomputers in that section of our new museum exhibit. This begs the question: which ones? I made a preliminary list. Some ground rules: - Do we have the system and does it work or can realistically be made to work? - What is *** MOST *** historically important? (Thus some of our personal favorites may be initially excluded... examples: Atari 800, Commodore VIC-20, DEC Rainbow, Epson QX-10, and many others) - Exhibits aren't permanent, so some could be rotated in/out. ---------------------- That being said, here's my list of 28. We will probably display them chronologically. Pardon anything obvious that I forgot. Very important: Don't just reply with lists of other notable microcomputers, or make a huge fuss that the CyberBlahBlah-25 was the first with the XYTTTGH 8081 chip, etc. .... I want to hear solid arguments for/against the historical importance of whatever systems you think we should include/exclude. 1. Our homebrewed "Dudley" PDP-8 clone 2. Apple 1 (Mimeo) 3. Apple 2 4. Apple Lisa (2/10) 5. Apple Mac 128K 6. Apple Mac Portable 7. AT&T (but which one? 6300, 7300, or 3B2?) 8. Commodore PET 2001 9. Commodore 64 10. Commodore Amiga (500?) 11. Compaq Portable 12. HP-85B 13. IBM 5100 14. IBM 5150 15. IBM PC Jr. 16. IBM (or generic) Windows 3.1 17. IMSAI 8080 18. Mark-8 19. MITS Altair 8800 20. MOS Tech KIM-1 21. Osborne 1 22. Processor Tech SOL-20 23. Scelbi-8H (repro) 24. Sinclair ZX-80 25. SWTPC 6800 26. TRS-80 Model 1 27. TRS-80 Model 100 28. Xerox 860 And ..... go!
On Nov 5, 2015, at 10:54 PM, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote: Everyone, This is going to be a fun thread. PLEASE DON'T FORK IT. :) Tentatively, we'll have space for 28 microcomputers in that section of our new museum exhibit. This begs the question: which ones? I made a preliminary list. Some ground rules: - Do we have the system and does it work or can realistically be made to work? - What is *** MOST *** historically important? (Thus some of our personal favorites may be initially excluded... examples: Atari 800, Commodore VIC-20, DEC Rainbow, Epson QX-10, and many others) - Exhibits aren't permanent, so some could be rotated in/out. ---------------------- That being said, here's my list of 28. We will probably display them chronologically. Pardon anything obvious that I forgot. Very important: Don't just reply with lists of other notable microcomputers, or make a huge fuss that the CyberBlahBlah-25 was the first with the XYTTTGH 8081 chip, etc. .... I want to hear solid arguments for/against the historical importance of whatever systems you think we should include/exclude. 1. Our homebrewed "Dudley" PDP-8 clone 2. Apple 1 (Mimeo) 3. Apple 2 4. Apple Lisa (2/10) 5. Apple Mac 128K 6. Apple Mac Portable 7. AT&T (but which one? 6300, 7300, or 3B2?) 8. Commodore PET 2001 9. Commodore 64 10. Commodore Amiga (500?) 11. Compaq Portable 12. HP-85B 13. IBM 5100 14. IBM 5150 15. IBM PC Jr. 16. IBM (or generic) Windows 3.1 17. IMSAI 8080 18. Mark-8 19. MITS Altair 8800 20. MOS Tech KIM-1 21. Osborne 1 22. Processor Tech SOL-20 23. Scelbi-8H (repro) 24. Sinclair ZX-80 25. SWTPC 6800 26. TRS-80 Model 1 27. TRS-80 Model 100 28. Xerox 860 And ..... go! The VIC-20 was the first computer to sell a million units, wasn't it? Not significant enough to make the list?
Tentatively, we'll have space for 28 microcomputers in that section of our new museum exhibit. This begs the question: which ones?
Correction: There would tentatively be space for 24 micros, not 28. However, there would be additional space for one "Computer of the month" that we could keep changing.
1. Our homebrewed "Dudley" PDP-8 clone 2. Apple 1 (Mimeo) 3. Apple 2 4. Apple Lisa (2/10) 5. Apple Mac 128K 6. Apple Mac Portable 7. AT&T (but which one? 6300, 7300, or 3B2?) 8. Commodore PET 2001 9. Commodore 64 10. Commodore Amiga (500?) 11. Compaq Portable 12. HP-85B 13. IBM 5100 14. IBM 5150 15. IBM PC Jr. 16. IBM (or generic) Windows 3.1 17. IMSAI 8080 18. Mark-8 19. MITS Altair 8800 20. MOS Tech KIM-1 21. Osborne 1 22. Processor Tech SOL-20 23. Scelbi-8H (repro) 24. Sinclair ZX-80 25. SWTPC 6800 26. TRS-80 Model 1 27. TRS-80 Model 100 28. Xerox 860
From the above list, to reach 24 I would consider removing: - HP-85B - Compaq Portable - IBM PC Jr. - SWTPC 6800
I agree with the cuts, except fir the Compaq Portable. But I can think of what I'd cut to include it. I would say include the AT&T 3B2. The Windows 3.1 machine should be a 5170. The Amiga should be a 1000 if possible. On Friday, November 6, 2015, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
Tentatively, we'll have space for 28 microcomputers in that section of
our new museum exhibit. This begs the question: which ones?
Correction: There would tentatively be space for 24 micros, not 28. However, there would be additional space for one "Computer of the month" that we could keep changing.
1. Our homebrewed "Dudley" PDP-8 clone
2. Apple 1 (Mimeo) 3. Apple 2 4. Apple Lisa (2/10) 5. Apple Mac 128K 6. Apple Mac Portable 7. AT&T (but which one? 6300, 7300, or 3B2?) 8. Commodore PET 2001 9. Commodore 64 10. Commodore Amiga (500?) 11. Compaq Portable 12. HP-85B 13. IBM 5100 14. IBM 5150 15. IBM PC Jr. 16. IBM (or generic) Windows 3.1 17. IMSAI 8080 18. Mark-8 19. MITS Altair 8800 20. MOS Tech KIM-1 21. Osborne 1 22. Processor Tech SOL-20 23. Scelbi-8H (repro) 24. Sinclair ZX-80 25. SWTPC 6800 26. TRS-80 Model 1 27. TRS-80 Model 100 28. Xerox 860
From the above list, to reach 24 I would consider removing: - HP-85B - Compaq Portable - IBM PC Jr. - SWTPC 6800
On Nov 6, 2015, at 1:17 AM, Dean Notarnicola via vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
I agree with the cuts, except fir the Compaq Portable. But I can think of what I'd cut to include it. I would say include the AT&T 3B2. The Windows 3.1 machine should be a 5170. The Amiga should be a 1000 if possible.
On Friday, November 6, 2015, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic <
Correction: There would tentatively be space for 24 micros, not 28. However, there would be additional space for one "Computer of the month" that we could keep changing.
1. Our homebrewed "Dudley" PDP-8 clone
2. Apple 1 (Mimeo) 3. Apple 2 4. Apple Lisa (2/10) 5. Apple Mac 128K 6. Apple Mac Portable 7. AT&T (but which one? 6300, 7300, or 3B2?) 8. Commodore PET 2001 9. Commodore 64 10. Commodore Amiga (500?) 11. Compaq Portable 12. HP-85B 13. IBM 5100 14. IBM 5150 15. IBM PC Jr. 16. IBM (or generic) Windows 3.1 17. IMSAI 8080 18. Mark-8 19. MITS Altair 8800 20. MOS Tech KIM-1 21. Osborne 1 22. Processor Tech SOL-20 23. Scelbi-8H (repro) 24. Sinclair ZX-80 25. SWTPC 6800 26. TRS-80 Model 1 27. TRS-80 Model 100 28. Xerox 860
From the above list, to reach 24 I would consider removing: - HP-85B - Compaq Portable - IBM PC Jr. - SWTPC 6800
For the most part, I agree with Dean's choices, except that I would INCLUDE the SWTPC 6800 and EXCLUDE the home brew PDP-8 clone. Back in the mid seventies, if you were shopping for a computer system there were 2 primary bus choices in play, the S-100 bus and the SS-50 bus. SWTPC was a major player in the day, offering a real alternative to the Intel/Zilog world for Motorola enthusiasts. SWTPC was big in the kit business dealing directly with hobbyists. Even though I built an IMSAI, I feel the SWTPC was very important for the time. Your PDP-8 clone while very unique, isn't historically significant for me. Well that's my $.02. Regards, Jeff Galinat
For the most part, I agree with Dean's choices, except that I would INCLUDE the SWTPC 6800 and EXCLUDE the home brew PDP-8 clone. Back in the mid seventies, if you were shopping for a computer system there were 2 primary bus choices in play, the S-100 bus and the SS-50 bus. SWTPC was a major player in the day, offering a real alternative to the Intel/Zilog world for Motorola enthusiasts. SWTPC was big in the kit business dealing directly with hobbyists. Even though I built an IMSAI, I feel the SWTPC was very important for the time. Your PDP-8 clone while very unique, isn't historically significant for me. Well that's my $.02. Regards, Jeff Galinat
I agree with Jeff, SWTPC was a very successful kit company that went into the micro business using their well-honed manufacturing know-how to produce inexpensive but high quality kits. They probably dragged people into the microcomputer revolution because someone would have interest in their other products but then see something about a COMPUTER in their nice brochures. “A computer? Say what? I can build my own computer as well as one of these nice audio amps?" Atari could easily be included because the SIO bus, which people thought was a joke back then, formed the basis for USB. Ie, a “game” computer introduced a technology that everyone uses today. It also had a formally defined operating system interface and expansion methods. From an engineering perspective those were a big step forward from other “gaming” computers of the era, but the average person doesn’t appreciate that. Sometimes the technology is significant, not necessarily the machine itself. One of the big concepts that the display should show is that there was no overly dominate ANYTHING back in the early days. Find me a home computer today that isn’t Intel or AMD based… pretty much none. Between Windoze, OS X and Linux, that’s 99.99% of the market. Many people don’t realize you could go to a computer club meeting in the 70s and the room was arguing over whether the 8080/6502/6800,2650/etc was the best processor, the assortment of disk operating systems, busses, octal versus hex, etc. Having too many peecee based designs implies that IBM designs ruled from day one, which they did not. The original IBM PC is significant, the rest are just modifications. Bob
PDP-8 clone while very unique, isn't historically significant for me. We have a few examples of systems that are truly homemade. That's a very important era which we need to represent. Of these systems, I chose the "Dudley 8" because it's physically small (the other two are in racks). Granted, it clones a minicomputer. The important representation here is to show visitors, "People built the earliest [desktop*] by themselves." * Not looking for a debate about desktop v. micro v. personal, etc. :)
On 11/05/2015 10:54 PM, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
Everyone,
This is going to be a fun thread. PLEASE DON'T FORK IT. :)
Tentatively, we'll have space for 28 microcomputers in that section of our new museum exhibit. This begs the question: which ones?
I made a preliminary list. Some ground rules:
- Do we have the system and does it work or can realistically be made to work?
Historical importance is hard. After the initial IBM PC clones I don't see any clones that stands out. But before (during) we have a lot going on. While the Amiga's and later Macs were mostly post IBM 5150 they have some significance. Then the OS starts to become the more significant part. Though the later x86 (>= 386) are significant and are starting to fall into the area of Vintage. While the ARM doesn't fall into Vintage it is significant. Yes, I know this is the tough part of the argument. Exclude list (just opinion):
1. Our homebrewed "Dudley" PDP-8 clone When was this built?
7. AT&T (but which one? 6300, 7300, or 3B2?) Not the 6300 it's an insignificant clone, Not sure about the other 2's significance. Sun vs AT&T, BSD vs SYSV was this on the 3B2?
12. HP-85B 13. IBM 5100 Lab computers, not insignificant but seems a bit out of place with the rest.
15. IBM PC Jr. It's a clone, made by IBM. Not one of my favorites.
16. IBM (or generic) Windows 3.1 Not insignificant, but which clone? The OS is more important than the clone but a generic clone might be the perfect choice.
24. Sinclair ZX-80 Not significant (IMO), the Acorn seems more important.
25. SWTPC 6800 SS20 and SS50 bus, not significant but seems a bit out of place. I think the OS Flex and OS9 are significant.
-- Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@linuxha.com http://www.linuxha.com/ Main site http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog Author of: Linux Smart Homes For Dummies
On Nov 6, 2015, at 12:37 AM, Neil Cherry via vcf-midatlantic <vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
On 11/05/2015 10:54 PM, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic wrote: Everyone,
This is going to be a fun thread. PLEASE DON'T FORK IT. :)
Tentatively, we'll have space for 28 microcomputers in that section of our new museum exhibit. This begs the question: which ones?
I made a preliminary list. Some ground rules:
- Do we have the system and does it work or can realistically be made to work?
Historical importance is hard. After the initial IBM PC clones I don't see any clones that stands out. But before (during) we have a lot going on. While the Amiga's and later Macs were mostly post IBM 5150 they have some significance. Then the OS starts to become the more significant part. Though the later x86 (>= 386) are significant and are starting to fall into the area of Vintage. While the ARM doesn't fall into Vintage it is significant. Yes, I know this is the tough part of the argument.
Exclude list (just opinion):
1. Our homebrewed "Dudley" PDP-8 clone When was this built?
7. AT&T (but which one? 6300, 7300, or 3B2?) Not the 6300 it's an insignificant clone, Not sure about the other 2's significance. Sun vs AT&T, BSD vs SYSV was this on the 3B2?
12. HP-85B 13. IBM 5100 Lab computers, not insignificant but seems a bit out of place with the rest.
15. IBM PC Jr. It's a clone, made by IBM. Not one of my favorites.
16. IBM (or generic) Windows 3.1 Not insignificant, but which clone? The OS is more important than the clone but a generic clone might be the perfect choice.
24. Sinclair ZX-80 Not significant (IMO), the Acorn seems more important.
25. SWTPC 6800 SS20 and SS50 bus, not significant but seems a bit out of place. I think the OS Flex and OS9 are significant.
What about an IBM PS/2 model 50 as an early example of a 386 machine? That is historically significant since it was the beginning of ia32 32-bit pc line, and it will run Linux or minix or 386BSD as a historical OS?
All I can say is what no Atari AT ALL On Nov 6, 2015 9:54 AM, "Jonathan Gevaryahu via vcf-midatlantic" < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
On Nov 6, 2015, at 12:37 AM, Neil Cherry via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
On 11/05/2015 10:54 PM, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic wrote: Everyone,
This is going to be a fun thread. PLEASE DON'T FORK IT. :)
Tentatively, we'll have space for 28 microcomputers in that section of our new museum exhibit. This begs the question: which ones?
I made a preliminary list. Some ground rules:
- Do we have the system and does it work or can realistically be made to work?
Historical importance is hard. After the initial IBM PC clones I don't see any clones that stands out. But before (during) we have a lot going on. While the Amiga's and later Macs were mostly post IBM 5150 they have some significance. Then the OS starts to become the more significant part. Though the later x86 (>= 386) are significant and are starting to fall into the area of Vintage. While the ARM doesn't fall into Vintage it is significant. Yes, I know this is the tough part of the argument.
Exclude list (just opinion):
1. Our homebrewed "Dudley" PDP-8 clone When was this built?
7. AT&T (but which one? 6300, 7300, or 3B2?) Not the 6300 it's an insignificant clone, Not sure about the other 2's significance. Sun vs AT&T, BSD vs SYSV was this on the 3B2?
12. HP-85B 13. IBM 5100 Lab computers, not insignificant but seems a bit out of place with the rest.
15. IBM PC Jr. It's a clone, made by IBM. Not one of my favorites.
16. IBM (or generic) Windows 3.1 Not insignificant, but which clone? The OS is more important than the clone but a generic clone might be the perfect choice.
24. Sinclair ZX-80 Not significant (IMO), the Acorn seems more important.
25. SWTPC 6800 SS20 and SS50 bus, not significant but seems a bit out of place. I think the OS Flex and OS9 are significant.
What about an IBM PS/2 model 50 as an early example of a 386 machine? That is historically significant since it was the beginning of ia32 32-bit pc line, and it will run Linux or minix or 386BSD as a historical OS?
All I can say is what no Atari AT ALL
First, keep in mind this is just a tentative list, nothing is decided. Deep breath. :) This kind of thing is a hard decision. I asked myself, in the grand scheme of microcomputer evolution, how historically important is (for example) the Atari 800 vs all the other 8-bit consumer micros? One could ask the same question about (for example) the TI-99/4A. If either of these didn't exist, would anything be different today? What did either of these bring to the table that others didn't? Not picking on them. There are plenty of Atari fans among us. Just thinking aloud: what would we remove from the list? As previously stated, there are good arguments to have all of these 24-28 and many others. Continuing to think aloud: I should have included a sentence about which each one is important. Please show rational arguments for any particular system that you think should be included and what (and why it) should be omitted to accommodate it. Merely saying "But you left out my favorite" doesn't help. :)
This kind of thing is a hard decision. I asked myself, in the grand scheme of microcomputer evolution, how historically important is (for example) the Atari 800 vs all the other 8-bit consumer micros? One could ask the same question about (for example) the TI-99/4A. If either of these didn't exist, would anything be different today? What did either of these bring to the table that others didn't?
By the way, the reason I thought to include the TI system is because of its unique-ish expansion interface.
On Friday, November 6, 2015, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
This kind of thing is a hard decision. I asked myself, in the grand scheme of microcomputer evolution, how historically important is (for example) the Atari 800 vs all the other 8-bit consumer micros? One could ask the same question about (for example) the TI-99/4A. If either of these didn't exist, would anything be different today? What did either of these bring to the table that others didn't?
By the way, the reason I thought to include the TI system is because of its unique-ish expansion interface.
My thoughts: I agree with the inclusion of the PS/2, but the model 50 is an 80286. I'd suggest a model 80, and to have it run OS/2 1.x. Though they didn't win, in the end, both were important developments. As far as the Amiga goes, there are good arguments for both the 500 (sales volume) and the 1000 (first), but I would pick the 1000, personally. I would also agree that the PC Jr. can be dispensed with, for the first group. As far as a Windows 3.1 system, how about the Compaq Deskpro 386? Quite a significant machine, if we have one. Last, I'd switch out the Mac Portable for a PowerBook 100/140/170. The Portable is neat, but they are the true first Mac laptops that sold any numbers. - Alex
As far as the Amiga goes, there are good arguments for both the 500 (sales volume) and the 1000 (first), but I would pick the 1000, personally.
Good point. Probably the 1000.
I would also agree that the PC Jr. can be dispensed with, for the first group. As far as a Windows 3.1 system, how about the Compaq Deskpro 386? Quite a significant machine, if we have one.
Another good point. I don't think we have one. Also, I think a generic clone better represents the overall Win3.1 era.
Last, I'd switch out the Mac Portable for a PowerBook 100/140/170. The Portable is neat, but they are the true first Mac laptops that sold any numbers.
Yet another good point! I think I agree.
On 11/6/15 3:24 AM, J. Alexander Jacocks via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
On Friday, November 6, 2015, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
This kind of thing is a hard decision. I asked myself, in the grand scheme of microcomputer evolution, how historically important is (for example) the Atari 800 vs all the other 8-bit consumer micros? One could ask the same question about (for example) the TI-99/4A. If either of these didn't exist, would anything be different today? What did either of these bring to the table that others didn't?
By the way, the reason I thought to include the TI system is because of its unique-ish expansion interface.
My thoughts:
I agree with the inclusion of the PS/2, but the model 50 is an 80286. I'd suggest a model 80, and to have it run OS/2 1.x. Though they didn't win, in the end, both were important developments.
I'd have to agree with using OS/2, but you already knew that Evan. ;-) And while a PS/2 is probably more historically important, it is just another beige box. The IBM Thinkpad 701c with the butterfly keyboard would be a nicer OS/2 display item if you are allowing laptops. But the model 50Z will run OS/2 1.0 EE. But most people would just think that is just a weird looking version of PCDOS. I know almost no one else here probably cares but I have an IBM Personal Computer Power Series 830 with OS/2 Power PC installed on it, which is probably of no interest to anyone except as a complete technological failure at least for the OS/2 part. But if you are looking for an oddity I don't think too many other people have one of these, but again it is just another IBM beige box. Hopefully it still boots. Mark
As far as the Amiga goes, there are good arguments for both the 500 (sales volume) and the 1000 (first), but I would pick the 1000, personally.
I would also agree that the PC Jr. can be dispensed with, for the first group. As far as a Windows 3.1 system, how about the Compaq Deskpro 386? Quite a significant machine, if we have one.
Last, I'd switch out the Mac Portable for a PowerBook 100/140/170. The Portable is neat, but they are the true first Mac laptops that sold any numbers.
- Alex
-- From the eComStation Desktop of: Mark Dodel "The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That in it's essence, is Fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Message proposing the Monopoly Investigation, 1938
On 11/06/2015 12:49 PM, madodel via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
I know almost no one else here probably cares but I have an IBM Personal Computer Power Series 830 with OS/2 Power PC installed on it, which is probably of no interest to anyone except as a complete technological failure at least for the OS/2 part.
I dunno about that...I think that's fantastic and I'm quite jealous!
but again it is just another IBM beige box. Hopefully it still boots.
I disagree wholeheartedly that it's just another IBM beige box...it's not an x86 PC clone. In fact there's little to nothing PCish about it. And I personally find it very interesting. -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
1 Apple 1 It's an Apple 1, nuff said 2 Apple 2 It's an Apple 2, nuff said 3 Apple Lisa (2/10) First Apple GUI Comptuer from Apple 4 Apple Mac 128K First Macintosh 5 AT&T 3B2 Early Desktop Unix System 6 CBM PET 2001 First Pet 7 Commodore 64 The VW of the computer world 8 CBM Amiga 1000 Ahead of it's time, Multimedia, Video, etc 9 Compaq Portable Major clone and PC portable 10 IBM 5100 The PC before the PC 11 IBM 5150 First IBM PC 12 IBM Windows 3.1 It's an IBM running Windows, run V1 13 IMSAI 8080 War Games 14 Mark-8 Early Do it yourself computer from a book 15 MITS Altair 8800 Starting the S100 generation 16 Osborne 1 Early Portable 17 SOL-20 Lee Felsenstein 18 Scelbi-8H (repro) 19 Sinclair ZX-80 Early low cost computer 20 TRS-80 Model 1 Radio Shack's First computer, can argue first computer targeted for the home. 21 TRS-80 Model 100 Rather have an EPSON HX-20 22 Xerox 860 WYSIWYG Whats missing: Atari 400/800.. Why? I can argue that this computer is the one that pushed home users from game machines to computers. Atari designed these machines for non-hobbyist home users by putting in cartridge ports and having composite output. They sold these through SEARS. I think these are engineering marvels for the time and are very under appreciated. I know that the PET/Apple II came out earlier, but they were not targeted to home users. Yes some people purchased them for the home. They were not designed that way. The Apple II was a $1200 just for the machine and over $2000 complete. I would argue that is not targeting the Home Computer Market. The Ti99/4 came out before the Atari but at $1,150 it was not targeted at the home market.. The TI99/4a in 1981 was at $525. VIC-20 First million sold, ushered in a lot of adoption Next Workstation Ahead of it's time, HTTPd developed, Web Developed @ CERN So I think these can be removed KIM-1, Should be part of a CPU collection, which I think the museum should have. IBM PC Jr., I don't see the significanceHP-85B, I don't see the significance Our homebrewed "Dudley" PDP-8 clone. N Apple Mac Portable, there were earlier laptops SWTPC 6800
On 11/06/2015 02:03 AM, Dave Wade via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
All I can say is what no Atari AT ALL
Yes, I see the silent hand of a Commode Door conspiracy ! ;-) Sorry Jeff B. just kidding. -- Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@linuxha.com http://www.linuxha.com/ Main site http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog Author of: Linux Smart Homes For Dummies
What about an IBM PS/2 model 50 as an early example of a 386 machine? That is historically significant since it was the beginning of ia32 32-bit pc line, and it will run Linux or minix or 386BSD as a historical OS?
Probably top of the list for why not would be that it's a 286. Comment about list: The Atari (anything) is more historic than the PDP 8 clone, as this is a microcomputer exhibit. To that end, I'd also avoid any AT&T machines except the 6300. The UNIX PCs are workstations not micros. Xerox 860 is not really a historic micro. It was more of a business machine used often for terminal emulation, etc in an office environment. If you narrow the scope to home/small business micros that will help narrow the list. -- Bill
On 11/06/2015 07:53 AM, william degnan via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
Comment about list: The Atari (anything) is more historic than the PDP 8 clone, as this is a microcomputer exhibit. To that end, I'd also avoid any AT&T machines except the 6300. The UNIX PCs are workstations not micros. Xerox 860 is not really a historic micro. It was more of a business machine used often for terminal emulation, etc in an office environment. If you narrow the scope to home/small business micros that will help narrow the list.
Good point on the Xerox, Not sure I understand the AT&T comment, did you mean the 7300? I think the PDP-8 is a good example of the DIY mentality though taken to the extreme. The Apple, Atari, Commodore were the big 3 in the home market in the late 70, early 80's. And while I never saw an Apple in K-Mart during that time, I did see the Atari, Commodore and Timex Sinclair 1000. -- Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@linuxha.com http://www.linuxha.com/ Main site http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog Author of: Linux Smart Homes For Dummies
Agreed with Jeff and Neil. This museum is for enthusiasts such as ourselves, but to a somewhat larger extent also for the general public, to whom the consumer micros had a larger impact on their lives. With that in mind, perhaps the exhibits should be weighted a bit more heavily in that direction, which would then include unique examples of the major players at the time ( Atari, Commodore, TI, Tandy/RS, Sinclair, IBM, etc.) That being said, I think it would be vitally important to showcase earlier (DEC, Xerox, Altair, various single-boards, etc.) to show a clear history of what influenced the creation of those "newer" systems. After all, the overall mission is to educate, n'es pas? Dean On Friday, November 6, 2015, Neil Cherry via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
On 11/06/2015 07:53 AM, william degnan via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
Comment about list:
The Atari (anything) is more historic than the PDP 8 clone, as this is a microcomputer exhibit. To that end, I'd also avoid any AT&T machines except the 6300. The UNIX PCs are workstations not micros. Xerox 860 is not really a historic micro. It was more of a business machine used often for terminal emulation, etc in an office environment. If you narrow the scope to home/small business micros that will help narrow the list.
Good point on the Xerox, Not sure I understand the AT&T comment, did you mean the 7300?
I think the PDP-8 is a good example of the DIY mentality though taken to the extreme.
The Apple, Atari, Commodore were the big 3 in the home market in the late 70, early 80's. And while I never saw an Apple in K-Mart during that time, I did see the Atari, Commodore and Timex Sinclair 1000.
-- Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@linuxha.com http://www.linuxha.com/ Main site http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog Author of: Linux Smart Homes For Dummies
On 11/06/2015 10:18 AM, Dean Notarnicola via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
Agreed with Jeff and Neil. This museum is for enthusiasts such as ourselves, but to a somewhat larger extent also for the general public, to whom the consumer micros had a larger impact on their lives. With that in mind, perhaps the exhibits should be weighted a bit more heavily in that direction, which would then include unique examples of the major players at the time ( Atari, Commodore, TI, Tandy/RS, Sinclair, IBM, etc.)
That being said, I think it would be vitally important to showcase earlier (DEC, Xerox, Altair, various single-boards, etc.) to show a clear history of what influenced the creation of those "newer" systems. After all, the overall mission is to educate, n'es pas?
Yes but for now, Evan is asking us to trim the list. I'm pretty sure he intends to have rotating displays but it's hard to display everything. Its hard to show the history of computing when it's still going on. can be viewed from the VCF collective's tainted memories and must fit into 24 displays. Some much of the history overlaps and what seems insignificant (Acorn, ARM) is hugely important today. Somehow we get to write history, very cool but hard to do. -- Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@linuxha.com http://www.linuxha.com/ Main site http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog Author of: Linux Smart Homes For Dummies
Xerox 860 is not really a historic micro. It was more of a business machine used often for terminal emulation, etc in an office environment.
Including it because of the software. This is the closet thing we have to an Alto/Star, and it works!
If you narrow the scope to home/small business micros that will help narrow the list.
No. :) All kinds of micros are important to show in a museum.
On 11/06/2015 01:54 AM, Jonathan Gevaryahu via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
What about an IBM PS/2 model 50 as an early example of a 386 machine? That is historically significant since it was the beginning of ia32 32-bit pc line, and it will run Linux or minix or 386BSD as a historical OS?
IMO: The PS/2 was an insignificant machine. The 386 clones were ISA and AT slot and not microchannel. Other buses were the EISA bus, the VLB and the newer buses but the Linux *BSD boxes are not quite vintage (though I fear soon, God I'm getting old ;-) ). Yes, all 3 OSs are significant. For a series of 24 machines I'd kick these out (for now). I might donate my AT&T 386sx with Linux 1.2 on it. Not sure it will start and I'm not really looking forward to reloading it (hundreds of floppies). Maybe that could be a later exhibit. -- Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@linuxha.com http://www.linuxha.com/ Main site http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog Author of: Linux Smart Homes For Dummies
What about an IBM PS/2 model 50 as an early example of a 386 machine? That is historically significant since it was the beginning of ia32 32-bit pc line, and it will run Linux or minix or 386BSD as a historical OS?
Interesting idea, but given limited space, I think it would lose to a generic clone running Windows 3.1 (the first version of Windows that was a world-changer ... honestly, who from the general public used 3.0 or earlier? Virtually no one.)
On 11/06/2015 01:37 AM, Neil Cherry via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
7. AT&T (but which one? 6300, 7300, or 3B2?) Not the 6300 it's an insignificant clone, Not sure about the other 2's significance. Sun vs AT&T, BSD vs SYSV was this on the 3B2?
No BSD stuff ever happened on the 7300 or the 3B2. That was all SysV. The latter two were most definitely not aimed at individuals, and very few individuals bought them. And I'd probably not consider a 3B2 to be a "microcomputer" anyway...I've seen 3B2s with thirty terminals hanging off of them. -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
And I'd probably not consider a 3B2 to be a "microcomputer" anyway...I've seen 3B2s with thirty terminals hanging off of them.
Great point! We may be able to put it in the minis exhibit, with a sign explaining that not all "minis" (oh the irony" are big beasts. That much, then, is settled: 3B2 (and its ilk) are primarily intended to be multiuser systems, aren't they? In which case we just opened a spot in the micro (maybe I should call it "personal") computing exhibit.
On 11/06/2015 01:18 PM, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
And I'd probably not consider a 3B2 to be a "microcomputer" anyway...I've seen 3B2s with thirty terminals hanging off of them.
Great point! We may be able to put it in the minis exhibit, with a sign explaining that not all "minis" (oh the irony" are big beasts.
It's only ironic until you explain to visitors where the terminology came from.
That much, then, is settled: 3B2 (and its ilk) are primarily intended to be multiuser systems, aren't they? In which case we just opened a spot in the micro (maybe I should call it "personal") computing exhibit.
They were intended to be multiuser systems, yes. But as with nearly all others (PDP-11s, VAXen, etc), they were offered in scaled-down "personal" configurations. Those setups were frequently used in workgroups, as we're still talking about machines costing tens of thousands of (1980s) dollars. -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
I may have found a way to fit 36 small computers. This would greatly simplify the debate! Stay tuned... it depends on how wide the aisles need to be.
On Fri, 6 Nov 2015, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
I may have found a way to fit 36 small computers. This would greatly simplify the debate! Stay tuned... it depends on how wide the aisles need to be.
Wide enough to wheel a keypunch through. :-) Mike Loewen mloewen@cpumagic.scol.pa.us Old Technology http://q7.neurotica.com/Oldtech/
Not big beasts, have you seen a 3b2/600 or 1000? Only the 300/310 are "small" On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 1:18 PM, Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
And I'd probably not consider a 3B2 to be a "microcomputer" anyway...I've
seen 3B2s with thirty terminals hanging off of them.
Great point! We may be able to put it in the minis exhibit, with a sign explaining that not all "minis" (oh the irony" are big beasts.
That much, then, is settled: 3B2 (and its ilk) are primarily intended to be multiuser systems, aren't they? In which case we just opened a spot in the micro (maybe I should call it "personal") computing exhibit.
-- Matt Patoray Owner, MSP Productions (330)542-3698 mspproductions@gmail.com KD8AMG Amateur Radio Call Sign
On 11/06/2015 05:46 PM, Matt Patoray via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
Not big beasts, have you seen a 3b2/600 or 1000? Only the 300/310 are "small"
3b2-300 & 310 are small 3b2-400 and 600 (?) medium (twice the height) 3b2-1000 big (4 times a 300) 3B2-4000 big (racks) -- Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@linuxha.com http://www.linuxha.com/ Main site http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog Author of: Linux Smart Homes For Dummies
latest draft of the exhibit plan has room for 32 stations. (Yes we'll share the draft, but not just yet.) Someone mentioned the Atari Portfolio. Chances are we'll have one station devoted to pocket-sized computers and early PDAs. After all they are tiny. Having said that, here's my latest list based on all input received: - Homebrew PDP-8 (As we discussed, it's technically a 'mini' but it is our best representation of a small homemade system.) - Apple 1 - Apple 2 - Apple Lisa - Apple Mac 128K - Apple Mac Powerbook - Atari 800 - Commodore PET 2001 - Commodore 64 - Commodore VIC-20 - Commodore Amiga (Which one is still up for debate) - Compaq Portable - HP-85b - IBM 5100 - Generic PC clone for Windows 3.1 - IMSAI 8080 - Lear Seigler ADM-3A - Mark-8 - MITS Altair 8800 - MOS Tech. KIM-1 - NeXTstation - Osborne 1 - Processor Tech. SOL-20 ** or ** SWTPc 6800 (or maybe our OSI Challenger) -- that's tough decision! - Scelbi 8H - Sinclair ZX-80 - Teletype ASR-33 - TI-99/4A - TRS-80 Model 1 - TRS-80 Model 100 - Xerox 860 - (An undetermined typical late-1980s laptop) - Various handheld/pocket computers Also we'll have a 33rd station for "Computer of the Month" -- we have enough systems to put something different there every month for two or three years without repeating any of them. Everyone's favorite will get a turn. I think this a very good list. It represents all the major subdivisions of microcomputing. DIY vs. preassembled, famous and less-known, game-changers and commercial workhorses, desktops and portables, blinkenlights and command lines and GUIs. It's not limited to what was most popular or sexiest.
Wow, five computers from Apple and four from Commodore. Two companies represent about 28% of the display… seems like too much emphasis on those two.
Also we'll have a 33rd station for "Computer of the Month" -- we have enough systems to put something different there every month for two or three years without repeating any of them. Everyone's favorite will get a turn.
Please don’t put another Apple or Commodore system in while all the other ones from the same two manufacturer’s are still there. Just my two cents. Bob
On Nov 7, 2015 7:51 AM, "Bob Applegate via vcf-midatlantic" < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vintagecomputerfederation.org> wrote:
Wow, five computers from Apple and four from Commodore. Two companies
represent about 28% of the display… seems like too much emphasis on those two.
Also we'll have a 33rd station for "Computer of the Month" -- we have
enough systems to put something different there every month for two or three years without repeating any of them. Everyone's favorite will get a turn.
Please don’t put another Apple or Commodore system in while all the other
ones from the same two manufacturer’s are still there.
Just my two cents.
Bob
Dump the IBM 5100 put in the IBM 5150 IYAM.
On 11/06/2015 01:05 PM, Dave McGuire via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
On 11/06/2015 01:37 AM, Neil Cherry via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
7. AT&T (but which one? 6300, 7300, or 3B2?) Not the 6300 it's an insignificant clone, Not sure about the other 2's significance. Sun vs AT&T, BSD vs SYSV was this on the 3B2?
No BSD stuff ever happened on the 7300 or the 3B2. That was all SysV. The latter two were most definitely not aimed at individuals, and very few individuals bought them. And I'd probably not consider a 3B2 to be a "microcomputer" anyway...I've seen 3B2s with thirty terminals hanging off of them.
Sorry didn't mean to infer that the 7300 or the 3B2 were anything other than AT&T (SYSV 3.x to 4.x, the 7300 had 4.0 but only internal to AT&T and it was buggy). I meant the 'wars' between AT&T vs BSD Unix. I actually don't recall AT&T Unix on much more than the AT&T machines, Sun machines and a few dual universe machines. Interesting times. None of the Unix machines were really what I would call microcomputers until we reach the start of Linux and PC BSD (was that what it was called initially ?). Now that I think about it, Sun had AT&T Unix also so it was AT&T vs Sun vs BSD. The GNU software eased that bit since you could pop onto Archie/Veronica/Jughead/Comp.sources.* and grab to software to compile away. -- Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry ncherry@linuxha.com http://www.linuxha.com/ Main site http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog Author of: Linux Smart Homes For Dummies
I meant the 'wars' between AT&T vs BSD Unix. I actually don't recall AT&T Unix on much more than the AT&T machines, Sun machines and a few dual universe machines. Interesting times. None of the Unix machines were really what I would call microcomputers until we reach the start of Linux and PC BSD (was that what it was called initially ?).
Now that I think about it, Sun had AT&T Unix also so it was AT&T vs Sun vs BSD. The GNU software eased that bit since you could pop onto Archie/Veronica/Jughead/Comp.sources.* and grab to software to compile away.
A perfectly acceptable list discussion, but CHANGE THE SUBJECT LINE if you're going to fork the debate. The debate about which computers will be very important for us to refer back to, so let's not clog it with threadjacking.
On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 01:05:23PM -0500, Dave McGuire via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
On 11/06/2015 01:37 AM, Neil Cherry via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
7. AT&T (but which one? 6300, 7300, or 3B2?) Not the 6300 it's an insignificant clone, Not sure about the other 2's significance. Sun vs AT&T, BSD vs SYSV was this on the 3B2?
No BSD stuff ever happened on the 7300 or the 3B2. That was all SysV. The latter two were most definitely not aimed at individuals, and very few individuals bought them.
When they were in production. They had a firesale on the 7300/3b1 at the end which made them a good price for a home unix machine. My wife bought one for her use then.
Just throwing a couple of names out for consideration... I've no idea what would need to come out. 1) HP95LX2) Atari Portfolio3) Sinclair ZX Spectrum4) TS 1000 Christopher.
Evan I think that the first exhibit should be a ASR-33 running Dartmouth BASIC on a not visible computer. Turn on TTY, login and play. This sets the scene for the dawn of the micro computer. Oh, I am OT, now that I read your post again you said "in that section" What sections will there be? While I know that the mission is computer history, but I would have several of the more popular models like C-64 and color computers for Pop/Gramps to show the kids what his first computer was. Everyone is not a historian. Duane -----Original Message----- From: Evan Koblentz via vcf-midatlantic Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2015 10:54 PM To: vcf-midatlantic Cc: Evan Koblentz Subject: [vcf-midatlantic] our new museum -- micro exhibit -- pick 28! Everyone, This is going to be a fun thread. PLEASE DON'T FORK IT. :) Tentatively, we'll have space for 28 microcomputers in that section of our new museum exhibit. This begs the question: which ones? I made a preliminary list. Some ground rules: - Do we have the system and does it work or can realistically be made to work? - What is *** MOST *** historically important? (Thus some of our personal favorites may be initially excluded... examples: Atari 800, Commodore VIC-20, DEC Rainbow, Epson QX-10, and many others) - Exhibits aren't permanent, so some could be rotated in/out. ---------------------- That being said, here's my list of 28. We will probably display them chronologically. Pardon anything obvious that I forgot. Very important: Don't just reply with lists of other notable microcomputers, or make a huge fuss that the CyberBlahBlah-25 was the first with the XYTTTGH 8081 chip, etc. .... I want to hear solid arguments for/against the historical importance of whatever systems you think we should include/exclude. 1. Our homebrewed "Dudley" PDP-8 clone 2. Apple 1 (Mimeo) 3. Apple 2 4. Apple Lisa (2/10) 5. Apple Mac 128K 6. Apple Mac Portable 7. AT&T (but which one? 6300, 7300, or 3B2?) 8. Commodore PET 2001 9. Commodore 64 10. Commodore Amiga (500?) 11. Compaq Portable 12. HP-85B 13. IBM 5100 14. IBM 5150 15. IBM PC Jr. 16. IBM (or generic) Windows 3.1 17. IMSAI 8080 18. Mark-8 19. MITS Altair 8800 20. MOS Tech KIM-1 21. Osborne 1 22. Processor Tech SOL-20 23. Scelbi-8H (repro) 24. Sinclair ZX-80 25. SWTPC 6800 26. TRS-80 Model 1 27. TRS-80 Model 100 28. Xerox 860 And ..... go!
participants (18)
-
Bob Applegate -
chrisjpf33＠gmail.com -
Christian Liendo -
Christopher Blackmon -
Dave McGuire -
Dave Wade -
David Gesswein -
Dean Notarnicola -
Duane -
Evan Koblentz -
J. Alexander Jacocks -
Jeff Galinat -
Jonathan Gevaryahu -
madodel -
Matt Patoray -
Mike Loewen -
Neil Cherry -
william degnan