Haven't caught up on the whole 4004 discussion here, but my understanding was that the 4004 and 8008 were effectively developed at the same time? And were announced or available about within one month of each other?
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 2:51 AM ED SHARPE via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > Was there ever a COMPUTER using a 4004 that you cud really do > something or did tat finally arrive with the 8008 as in the skelby > shelby sp? 8008 i now there was an Intel INTELIC 4 (?sp) could n > that use 4004 or one of the later 4000 numbered proc. We have an > intelec 8 and 8 inch floppy drives here at smecc musem .... always > wanted a 4!Ed# > In a message dated 11/21/2023 11:31:55 AM US Mountain Standard Time, > dkel...@hotmail.com writes: > There is little surviving software for the 4004. There are a few places > with snippets of code to do things like add or subtract several digits but > my searches of the internet have shown little actual code. The NBS has some > code to track satellites and correct for time delays from their clocks ( > think GPS ).I'd had a spare 4004 and always wanted to do something with it. > I found that the library for work done at the Navy Post Graduate School in > Monterey California had 2 projects that students of Gary Kildall created. > One was a load calculator for helicopters and the other was for calculating > closest point of approach for ships. I'd been unsuccessful at down loading > the helicopter code but was able to down load the ships document.I'd let > the listing sit for 10's of years while always on the back burner. Over the > years I'd acquired the needed parts. I did make a few substitutions, > though. The original used 13 each 1702A EPROMs. Since that exceed my budget > for a PC board space, I chose the option of using a 4289 and a 2732 EPROM. > I did use the original designs number of 4002s, as using RAM through the > 4289 would have made significant changes to the software.The problem of the > circuit needed to be dealt with. The document had a page labelled > 'schematic' that turned out to be the keyboard layout and display layout( > both of which I ignored and used my own layout that I though was better > ).Before getting to the board design, I needed to get working software. The > listing was done on a ASR33 with a deeply rutted platen, typical of > hand-me-down things used by a school's command. Letters like R or P would > look like F and 0 would look like C. Other letters were easy to figure out > but still often had their right edge missing.After entering the list by > hand, I'd feed it into my assembler and the tried to run it with my > simulator.I'd make corrections as I got the code running.I need to create > the circuitry for the keyboard decoder, that took 25 buttons to the 4 bit > data bus input of the 4004. There was enough description in the document to > create the LED display but I did missed one thing ( that I'll mention later > ).I created the board with my typical incorrect wiring, requiring several > extra cuts and jumpers. ( the concept was right but I got the pins of the > 7402 mixed up.) The one thing that I'd missed was the order of the digit > scan. I assumed left to right but the code was actually right to left. > After so many cuts and jumpers to get the keyboard right, I dreaded more to > fix the scan order so I made the one change to the original software to do > right to left ( I still feel bad about that change ).I thought I'd talk a > little about how a Closest Point of Approach Calculation is done. Normally > it had been done by a graphical method of line drawing on what is called a > plotting maneuver board. One used graphical calculations for the trig used. > It was all done by pencil and parallel. It is so important that, I believe, > that to this day a ship's pilot still needs to be able to do this > calculation on a maneuver board, even though such graphical displays are > capable of doing such, today. Large ships require significant knowledge of > where they are relative to other fixed and moving objects in order to > determine the safest path to proceed. A broken display is not time to learn > how to do such a calculation.This 4004 calculator used a newly found way of > doing tangent calculations, called the CORDIC method. One could clearly see > the influence of Gary Kildall's hand in this code. It is noted that he > wrote the division routine used and the organization of the code clearly > shows the influence of a seasoned programmer. Bring such code back to life > was almost as much as making a 4004 processor from discrete transistors but > I felt was for me as part of my bucket list.Things I needed to do, included > writing an assembler, writing a simulator, learn a PC board CAD, > transcribing a poor quality listing, debugging the poorly transcribed > listing, creating the keyboard decoder and instrumenting my simulator to be > the calculator.Dwight From: ED SHARPE via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> > Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2023 1:03 AM > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> > Cc: ED SHARPE <couryho...@aol.com> > Subject: [cctalk] Re: Intel 4004 So what are the other contenders and what > do they bring to table > > > Sent from AOL on Android > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 9:06 PM, Adrian Stoness via cctalk< > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: someone should build it in minecrsft > > On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 7:01 PM ben via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> > wrote: > > > On 2023-11-20 5:36 p.m., Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote: > > > On Nov. 15, 1971 Intel commercially released the 4004 microprocessor > > which > > > some consider to be the first. Nonetheless, even if not in agreement, > it > > > made possible the instrument which drives the classic-computing > industry > > or > > > at the very least our hobby! > > > > > > Happy computing. > > > > > > Murray 🙂 > > > > > > > https://retrocomputingforum.com/t/swiss-physicist-builds-complete-intel-4004-computer-out-of-smd-transistors/3738 > > THE DIY VERSION > > > > > >
