| IBM timesharing terminal--offline preparation? [message #390168] |
Thu, 09 January 2020 16:31  |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Most timesharing systems used Teletype model 33's.
They had paper tape and an offline mode that allowed
programs to be prepared offline--without the expensive
meter charges building up.
But on IBM systems with Selectric style terminals,
I don't recall their having paper tape or any
kind of memory. Was it possible on those systems
to prepare programs in advance offline to save on
meter charges?
For instance, on the APL system, we slowly had to
type in the Greek letters. P.I.T.A. and ran up
charges.
|
|
|
|
| Re: IBM timesharing terminal--offline preparation? [message #390176 is a reply to message #390168] |
Thu, 09 January 2020 17:36  |
|
|
Originally posted by: David Wade
On 09/01/2020 21:31, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> Most timesharing systems used Teletype model 33's.
> They had paper tape and an offline mode that allowed
> programs to be prepared offline--without the expensive
> meter charges building up.
>
> But on IBM systems with Selectric style terminals,
> I don't recall their having paper tape or any
> kind of memory. Was it possible on those systems
> to prepare programs in advance offline to save on
> meter charges?
>
> For instance, on the APL system, we slowly had to
> type in the Greek letters. P.I.T.A. and ran up
> charges.
>
Not with a Selectric! IBM was almost all card based, at Newcastle
Polytechnic (now Northumbria University) we had paper tape on our remote
1130 but only used it for output for CNC.
Many places had small RJE systems as well as terminals. Later at NERC we
built small RJE systems from PDP-11s with card readers.
I think a lot of folks still did the main program input from cards
punched from coding forms which could be POSTED in, and then edit the
source.
We also had HP26xx terminals with cassette tape which could be used for
offline prep.
Lastly you could put ASR33s on IBM mainframes but I don't think many did...
Dave
|
|
|
|
| Re: IBM timesharing terminal--offline preparation? [message #390179 is a reply to message #390168] |
Thu, 09 January 2020 18:34 |
Freddy1X
Messages: 61
Registered: August 2012
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> Most timesharing systems used Teletype model 33's.
> They had paper tape and an offline mode that allowed
> programs to be prepared offline--without the expensive
> meter charges building up.
>
> But on IBM systems with Selectric style terminals,
> I don't recall their having paper tape or any
> kind of memory. Was it possible on those systems
> to prepare programs in advance offline to save on
> meter charges?
>
> For instance, on the APL system, we slowly had to
> type in the Greek letters. P.I.T.A. and ran up
> charges.
Not quite what you are asking, but there was a Mowhawk Data Science Systems
device that I have some components from( including the Selectric ) and
blueprints for that was centered around doing keyboard to tape and back
again offline. I don't know if the tape was physically sent in or
transmitted when the tape work was done,
The centerpiece of this system was a Selectric with an I/O plug. Inside the
Selectric is wiring that ran to solenoids and switches that worked off of
the tilt & rotate bars.
Freddy,
banging away at keyboard. ( It bangs back )
--
Use bike rack at your own risk.
/|>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>\|
/| I may be demented \|
/| but I'm not crazy! \|
/|<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<\|
* SPAyM trap: there is no X in my address *
|
|
|
|
| Re: IBM timesharing terminal--offline preparation? [message #390186 is a reply to message #390168] |
Thu, 09 January 2020 21:05 |
Anne & Lynn Wheel
Messages: 3156
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
> Most timesharing systems used Teletype model 33's.
> They had paper tape and an offline mode that allowed
> programs to be prepared offline--without the expensive
> meter charges building up.
>
> But on IBM systems with Selectric style terminals,
> I don't recall their having paper tape or any
> kind of memory. Was it possible on those systems
> to prepare programs in advance offline to save on
> meter charges?
>
> For instance, on the APL system, we slowly had to
> type in the Greek letters. P.I.T.A. and ran up
> charges.
>
not 2741 selectric ... but 1050 selectric had paper tape
reader/punch as well as card reader/punch
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_1050
1052 was more data entry (like later 3278) ... and 2741
adapted for interactive computing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_2741
CTSS/7094 ... this mentions supporting 1052
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatible_Time-Sharing_System
following, 2741 home terminal, CTSS & Multics (I didn't get 2741 at home
until March 1970 for CP67)
https://multicians.org/terminals.html
I got my first home terminal in 1967, when I was working on Multics at
Project MAC. It was an IBM 2741, the standard machine for the
programming staff. Like the 1050, the 2741 had a Selectric mechanism
built into a desk, but one smaller than the 1050's, and with a slimmer
electronics box and fewer switches. The original 2741s were designed as
"inquiry" terminals: the keyboard was normally locked, and the user was
supposed to hit the ATTN button to get the attention of the computer,
which would unlock the keyboard and let the user type one line, and then
lock the keyboard on carriage return. This mode of operation was no good
for time-sharing use, and we had to have two special features installed
on the 2741's for CTSS (and later Multics) use. The 2741 used paper with
perforations on each side, like printer paper, and had a tractor feed
that kept the paper from going crooked and jamming. Annoyingly, the 2741
platen was a little narrower than the 14 7/8 inches wide regular line
printer paper, and so Operations had to stock two sizes of paper, and
more than once I brought home a box of the wrong size.
.... snip ...
note that 2741 used tilt-rotate codes ... and standard golfball
characters were what defined for EBCDIC ... with translate between
EBCDIC and the golfball tilt-rotate codes ... however it was possible
to get other golfballs ... like APL. In theory it should have been
possible to have ASCII character set golfball ... and translate
between ASCII and golfball tilt-rotate codes.
The bottom above webpage references
https://history.computer.org/pioneers/bemer.html
Bemer's web page that 360 originally was suppose to be ASCII (gone 404)
https://web.archive.org/web/20180513184025/http://www.bobbem er.com/P-BIT.HTM
I was myself in charge of such "Logical Systems Standards" for IBM at
e he time, and have written 20 papers about ASCII. One doesn't get the
sobriquet "Father of ASCII" for nothing.
The culprit was T. Vincent Learson. The only thing for his defense is
that he had no idea of what he had done. It was when he was an IBM Vice
President, prior to tenure as Chairman of the Board, those lofty
positions where you believe that, if you order it done, it actually will
be done. I've mentioned this fiasco elsewhere.
.... snip ...
more of his history
https://web.archive.org/web/20180513184025/http://www.bobbem er.com/HISTORY.HTM
wiki age
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Bemer
--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
|
|
|
|
| Re: IBM timesharing terminal--offline preparation? [message #390187 is a reply to message #390176] |
Thu, 09 January 2020 21:32 |
Anne & Lynn Wheel
Messages: 3156
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
David Wade <g4ugm@dave.invalid> writes:
> Not with a Selectric! IBM was almost all card based, at Newcastle
> Polytechnic (now Northumbria University) we had paper tape on our
> remote 1130 but only used it for output for CNC.
>
> Many places had small RJE systems as well as terminals. Later at NERC
> we built small RJE systems from PDP-11s with card readers.
>
> I think a lot of folks still did the main program input from cards
> punched from coding forms which could be POSTED in, and then edit the
> source.
>
> We also had HP26xx terminals with cassette tape which could be used
> for offline prep.
>
> Lastly you could put ASR33s on IBM mainframes but I don't think many did...
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2020.html#7 IBM timesharing terminal--offline preparation
within a year after taking intro to computers/fortran, univ. hired me
fulltime to be responsible for ibm mainframe system (academic &
administration) ... had gotten 360/67 (to replaced 709/1401)
.... originally for tss/360 ... which never came to production fruition
.... and ran as 360/65 with OS/360 production ... initially MFT and then
MVT.
Three people from the science center came out last week of Jan1968 to
install CP/67 ... I got to mostly play with it on weekends (datacenter
was shutdown from 8am sat to 8am monday ... and I could have the whole
place to myself for 48hrs) and rewrote lots of CP/67 during 1968.
Part of presentation on performance related rewrites at fall 1968
(mainframe user group) SHARE:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#18 CP/67 & OS MFT14
Original CP/67 had 1052 & 2741 terminal support ... including dynamical
terminal type identification ... switching terminal controller port
scanner type with CCW SAD command (to match terminal type). The
univ. had a bunch of TTY/ASCII terminals ... so I added support for TTY
terminals ... incorporating it into dynamic terminal logic. I then
wanted to have a single dial-in number ... single "HUNT GROUP"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_hunting
which didn't quite work ... while could switch port scanner type for
each line ... IBM took shortcut and hardwired port-line speed (1052/2741
134.5, TTY 110). This was part of motivation for univ. to start clone
controller project ... initially built 360 channel interface board for
Interdata/3 programmed to emulate mainframe terminal controller ... with
the added feature that it would (also) do dynamic line speed. Later
upgraded to Interdata/4 for mainframe channel interface and cluster of
Interdata/3s for line/port scanner. This box was sold by Interdata (and
later Perkin/Elmer) as mainframe clone communication controller (and
four of us are written as responsible for some part of the clone
controller business).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interdata
Start of the century, I ran across one of the (later) boxes in financial
datacenter handling majority of the card-swipe point-of-sale terminals in
US east of Mississippi.
--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
|
|
|
|
| Re: IBM timesharing terminal--offline preparation? [message #390188 is a reply to message #390187] |
Thu, 09 January 2020 21:44 |
Anne & Lynn Wheel
Messages: 3156
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> writes:
> Original CP/67 had 1052 & 2741 terminal support ... including dynamical
> terminal type identification ... switching terminal controller port
> scanner type with CCW SAD command (to match terminal type). The
> univ. had a bunch of TTY/ASCII terminals ... so I added support for TTY
> terminals ... incorporating it into dynamic terminal logic. I then
> wanted to have a single dial-in number ... single "HUNT GROUP"
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_hunting
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2020.html#7 IBM timesharing terminal--offline preparation
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2020.html#8 IBM timesharing terminal--offline preparation
science center pickedd up my tty support (as well as a bunch of my other
stuff) and included it in official distribution. This is post about MIT
USL which was datacenter in another tech sq. bldg (across courtyard from
545tech sq that had Multics and IBM science center)
https://www.multicians.org/thvv/360-67.html
My tty support used one byte length value, 255, since tty lines weren't
longer than 80. Above description has somebody hacking CP67 to change
TTY max line length to 1200 (but didn't change the one byte games) ...
for some sort of plotter(?) device down at Harvard ... resulting in 27
CP/67 crashes in a short period of time.
--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
|
|
|
|
| Re: IBM timesharing terminal--offline preparation? [message #390200 is a reply to message #390186] |
Fri, 10 January 2020 13:45 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Thursday, January 9, 2020 at 9:05:53 PM UTC-5, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote:
> The culprit was T. Vincent Learson. The only thing for his defense is
> that he had no idea of what he had done. It was when he was an IBM Vice
> President, prior to tenure as Chairman of the Board, those lofty
> positions where you believe that, if you order it done, it actually will
> be done. I've mentioned this fiasco elsewhere.
Someone should do an objective biography of Learson. I've
read good and bad accounts. On the one hand, he was a
brilliant leader who saved IBM on multiple occasions
(like the S/360 trainwreck). On the other hand, he
was supposedly a total SOB.
> ... snip ...
>
> more of his history
> https://web.archive.org/web/20180513184025/http://www.bobbem er.com/HISTORY.HTM
> wiki age
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Bemer
>
> --
> virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: IBM timesharing terminal--offline preparation? [message #390202 is a reply to message #390186] |
Fri, 10 January 2020 13:51 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2020-01-10, Anne & Lynn Wheeler <lynn@garlic.com> wrote:
> Bemer's web page that 360 originally was suppose to be ASCII (gone 404)
> https://web.archive.org/web/20180513184025/http://www.bobbem er.com/P-BIT.HTM
>
> I was myself in charge of such "Logical Systems Standards" for IBM at
> e he time, and have written 20 papers about ASCII. One doesn't get the
> sobriquet "Father of ASCII" for nothing.
>
> The culprit was T. Vincent Learson. The only thing for his defense is
> that he had no idea of what he had done. It was when he was an IBM Vice
> President, prior to tenure as Chairman of the Board, those lofty
> positions where you believe that, if you order it done, it actually will
> be done. I've mentioned this fiasco elsewhere.
"ASCII and ye shall receive." -- the industry
"ASCII not, what your machine can do for you." -- IBM
-- Ted Nelson: Computer Lib
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
|
|
|
|
| Re: IBM timesharing terminal--offline preparation? [message #390216 is a reply to message #390200] |
Fri, 10 January 2020 16:08 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
<hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, January 9, 2020 at 9:05:53 PM UTC-5, Anne & Lynn Wheeler wrote:
>
>> The culprit was T. Vincent Learson. The only thing for his defense is
>> that he had no idea of what he had done. It was when he was an IBM Vice
>> President, prior to tenure as Chairman of the Board, those lofty
>> positions where you believe that, if you order it done, it actually will
>> be done. I've mentioned this fiasco elsewhere.
>
> Someone should do an objective biography of Learson. I've
> read good and bad accounts. On the one hand, he was a
> brilliant leader who saved IBM on multiple occasions
> (like the S/360 trainwreck). On the other hand, he
> was supposedly a total SOB.
>
Those two aren’t necessarily contradictory.
>
>
>
>
>> ... snip ...
>>
>> more of his history
>> https://web.archive.org/web/20180513184025/http://www.bobbem er.com/HISTORY.HTM
>> wiki age
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Bemer
>>
>> --
>> virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
>
>
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
