What we can learn from vintage computing
This is from a programmer's point of view but still interesting reading https://github.com/readme/featured/vintage-computing
This is from a programmer's point of view but still interesting reading
Decent article! There's absolutely value in learning this old stuff. I still maintain that hacking on old computers at the architecture/machine code/asm level gave me a distinct advantage over "academically stronger" (better at memorizing, mostly) folks in college. I don't know if they're still doing it, but at some point in talking with folks at the MIT Flea, someone had related that MIT was still offering either a comp arch or comp org type of course using the PDP-11. This was some time between 2010 and 2015. Like the article says, before a point it's possible to understand all parts of a whole system. Thanks, Jonathan
On 12/14/22 08:51, Jonathan Chapman via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
This is from a programmer's point of view but still interesting reading
Decent article! There's absolutely value in learning this old stuff. I still maintain that hacking on old computers at the architecture/machine code/asm level gave me a distinct advantage over "academically stronger" (better at memorizing, mostly) folks in college.
I don't know if they're still doing it, but at some point in talking with folks at the MIT Flea, someone had related that MIT was still offering either a comp arch or comp org type of course using the PDP-11. This was some time between 2010 and 2015. Like the article says, before a point it's possible to understand all parts of a whole system.
Thanks, Jonathan
I really can't imagine how hard it would be to pick up something like Software defined networks and try to understand it without knowing the basics of networking and the OSI stack. Same here, learned a lot from Don Lancaster's articles on the Apple II (amazingly simple, complex machine). That and my electronics and I'm now reverse engineering the Liebert controller for a CDL project. Got Motorola Lilbug assembled last night. Need to make a few tweeks to the code. Learning a simple architecture made it possible to understand what the asm code was doing and how it worked with the electronics. And while I can pretty much identify what todays chips are and what a board can do so much of it is hidden inside the system on a chip or worse FPGA. Everything is built on the basics. -- Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry kd2zrq@linuxha.com http://www.linuxha.com/ Main site http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog Author of: Linux Smart Homes For Dummies KD2ZRQ
This exactly. The best programmers I've known are the ones that had a good understanding of the underlying architecture, regardless of whether they are doing end-user applications or system software. On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 9:44 AM Neil Cherry via vcf-midatlantic < vcf-midatlantic@lists.vcfed.org> wrote:
On 12/14/22 08:51, Jonathan Chapman via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
This is from a programmer's point of view but still interesting reading
Decent article! There's absolutely value in learning this old stuff. I still maintain that hacking on old computers at the architecture/machine code/asm level gave me a distinct advantage over "academically stronger" (better at memorizing, mostly) folks in college.
I don't know if they're still doing it, but at some point in talking with folks at the MIT Flea, someone had related that MIT was still offering either a comp arch or comp org type of course using the PDP-11. This was some time between 2010 and 2015. Like the article says, before a point it's possible to understand all parts of a whole system.
Thanks, Jonathan
I really can't imagine how hard it would be to pick up something like Software defined networks and try to understand it without knowing the basics of networking and the OSI stack.
Same here, learned a lot from Don Lancaster's articles on the Apple II (amazingly simple, complex machine). That and my electronics and I'm now reverse engineering the Liebert controller for a CDL project. Got Motorola Lilbug assembled last night. Need to make a few tweeks to the code.
Learning a simple architecture made it possible to understand what the asm code was doing and how it worked with the electronics. And while I can pretty much identify what todays chips are and what a board can do so much of it is hidden inside the system on a chip or worse FPGA.
Everything is built on the basics.
-- Linux Home Automation Neil Cherry kd2zrq@linuxha.com http://www.linuxha.com/ Main site http://linuxha.blogspot.com/ My HA Blog Author of: Linux Smart Homes For Dummies KD2ZRQ
On 12/14/22 09:44, Neil Cherry via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
I really can't imagine how hard it would be to pick up something like Software defined networks and try to understand it without knowing the basics of networking and the OSI stack.
Same here, learned a lot from Don Lancaster's articles on the Apple II (amazingly simple, complex machine). That and my electronics and I'm now reverse engineering the Liebert controller for a CDL project. Got Motorola Lilbug assembled last night. Need to make a few tweeks to the code.
Learning a simple architecture made it possible to understand what the asm code was doing and how it worked with the electronics. And while I can pretty much identify what todays chips are and what a board can do so much of it is hidden inside the system on a chip or worse FPGA.
Everything is built on the basics.
This is inescapably true. It's one reason why I love PDP-8s so much, in particular the 8/e. The processor is simple enough that one person (even a kid, as in my case) can understand the operation of the *entire thing*, without dedicating a lifetime to it. I think it took me about a week of after-school afternoons. All the way down to the gate level. If someone truly wants to understand how computers actually work, it's one great design to study. -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA
All of this folds in to how the museum can be configured to point in this direction- give kids and parents a taste of the reason to dig deeper into an old computer- -like Dave said and experienced- as an ideal vehicle for learning foundations applicable moving forward. You'll see soon how this will find expression in exhibits with exposure to architecture- around our fine examples of machines restored from over the decades The microprocessor exhibit is expanding into discussing logic gates and building blocks of computers - in tube and diode form, transistor form, LSI form, and microprocessor form. And hands on activities: probably for gates, machine language and BASIC. A tour would elaborate on these items as appropriate, if the visitors are interested and motivated and have the time, otherwise it would just be history tour glossing over the technicals. And I have found this is dynamic, I have often seen a visitor interest grow and want deeper information than they initially thought they did! We can only do so much as a tour, but it can be significant. We can give a taste that really inspires. Hopefully they carry the exposure on for their own study or also maybe we expand into extra curricular activity on site with clubs playing with the machines and exploring software. AND - more to this articles point - we can provide an opportunity for young engineers to use this old equipment and back-fill with the old tech exposure to fortify their knowledge. We can invite such into the fold to come in and work with the museum machines. Yes they can do it all on their own with emulation, but I think the real machines would have an appeal and interaction with knowledgeable folks (who lived this old tech) in person would have to be very inspiring. Maybe it spills over into an interest in restoration too. We will need a lot of help refurbishing items in the warehouse in prep for the big museum - inexperienced young people- with supervision- can disassemble and clean! On 12/14/2022 10:43 AM, Dave McGuire via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
On 12/14/22 09:44, Neil Cherry via vcf-midatlantic wrote:
I really can't imagine how hard it would be to pick up something like Software defined networks and try to understand it without knowing the basics of networking and the OSI stack.
Same here, learned a lot from Don Lancaster's articles on the Apple II (amazingly simple, complex machine). That and my electronics and I'm now reverse engineering the Liebert controller for a CDL project. Got Motorola Lilbug assembled last night. Need to make a few tweeks to the code.
Learning a simple architecture made it possible to understand what the asm code was doing and how it worked with the electronics. And while I can pretty much identify what todays chips are and what a board can do so much of it is hidden inside the system on a chip or worse FPGA.
Everything is built on the basics.
This is inescapably true. It's one reason why I love PDP-8s so much, in particular the 8/e. The processor is simple enough that one person (even a kid, as in my case) can understand the operation of the *entire thing*, without dedicating a lifetime to it. I think it took me about a week of after-school afternoons. All the way down to the gate level. If someone truly wants to understand how computers actually work, it's one great design to study.
-Dave
participants (7)
-
bob jeffway.com -
Christian Liendo -
Dave McGuire -
Dean Notarnicola -
Douglas Crawford -
Jonathan Chapman -
Neil Cherry