On 06/02/2018 03:33 PM, Antonio Carlini via cctech wrote:
On 02/06/18 15:17, allison via cctech wrote:
It was my understanding from using the 730 that there was
limited
(really limited) microcode
enough to load the WCS as the tu58 was a serial device
(standard tu58)
and the 730 had to
unpac
> On Jun 2, 2018, at 2:08 PM, Robert Armstrong via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>> Tony Duell wrote:
>> Incidentally, did DEC ever release any details (flowcharts, source listings,
>> etc) of the 11/730 microcode? And what about the control PROMs for the
>> memory system. The technical manual implies th
On 02/06/18 19:08, Robert Armstrong via cctalk wrote:
Tony Duell wrote:
Incidentally, did DEC ever release any details (flowcharts, source listings,
etc) of the 11/730 microcode? And what about the control PROMs for the
memory system. The technical manual implies there was a listing of those,
bu
The 729 CE manual quotes 555 BPI. I’m not sure when it became 556.
http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/ibm/magtape/729/223-6845_729_CEman_1959.pdf
The IBM 728 was 248 BPI. Before that it was the nice round number 200 BPI.
I tried permutations of standard IPS and round number data rates and do
On 02/06/18 15:17, allison via cctech wrote:
>
> It was my understanding from using the 730 that there was limited
> (really limited) microcode
> enough to load the WCS as the tu58 was a serial device (standard tu58)
> and the 730 had to
> unpack and stuff the WCS.� You need little to do that but f
On 6/3/18 11:17 AM, Antonio Carlini via cctalk wrote:
> From reading the DTJ article it seems as though there was no set of neatly
> pre-packaged ucode development tools for the
> 730.
and the 730 started out in life as a PDP-10 (Minnow)
> On Jun 2, 2018, at 2:08 PM, Robert Armstrong via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>> Tony Duell wrote:
>> Incidentally, did DEC ever release any details (flowcharts, source listings,
>> etc) of the 11/730 microcode? And what about the control PROMs for the
>> memory system. The technical manual implies t
On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 1:08 PM, Robert Armstrong via cctalk
wrote:
> You forgot the 11/730 and 725. The KA730 used 2901 bit slicers and the
> control store was entirely in RAM. After power on it was a paperweight until
> the 8085 CFE loaded the microcode.
And one of the big optimizations wa
On Fri, Jun 1, 2018 at 2:46 PM, Antonio Carlini via cctalk
wrote:
> the 78032 chip. The VAX-11/730 was chosen because it was "an entirely 'soft'
> machine".
>
> (The VAX-11/725 is essentially the same hardware but in different
> packaging).
We used to purchase 11/725s for parts to keep our 11/730
> On Jun 3, 2018, at 7:37 PM, Ethan Dicks via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> We used to purchase 11/725s for parts to keep our 11/730 running.
> Much cheaper because "nobody" wanted an 11/725 in the early 90s (I
> still have one. I wish I could afford a Unibus controller to replace
> the KLESI/U and RC2
On 5/30/2018 7:34 AM, Camiel Vanderhoeven via cctalk wrote:
The microcode for the MicroVAX 2 (for which the MICRO2 assembler was
used) and the CVAX (which is the CPU in your 3800) is implemented as
a mask ROM on the CPU chip itself. No way to change it, and no way
you can use MICRO2 to assemble t
11 matches
Mail list logo
