HP3000-L Archives

April 2014, Week 2

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Penney, John" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Penney, John
Date:
Wed, 9 Apr 2014 10:05:08 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (78 lines)
Hey, Jeff and List:

Amazing the backgrounds of the last few posts- started on a 360/20 BPS (i.e. card compiler, etc.), graduated to a 360/50 128k with 4 x 20mb drives, 3 tapes, etc. at university- started in Operations, went back to school, into programming, CDC6400, HP2000, NCR8200, HP3000 and a partridge in a pear tree. Memories indeed. Thanks for sharing, list...

John M Penney

--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 4/8/14, Jeff Kell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] IBM 360 - 50 Years Ago
 To: [log in to unmask]
 Date: Tuesday, April 8, 2014, 5:17 PM
 
 On 4/8/2014 4:47 PM, Jack Connor
 wrote:
 > I remember having a 1401 simulator emulator (or was it
 the other way) for the 360 that executed autocoder programs
 emulating a 7090 series...
 >
 > It was SOOOOoooo slow :-)
 
 The 360/30 had some optional firmware that did 1401
 emulation.  Not sure
 if it was available on the whole 360 line however...
 
 Don't recall if ours at UTC had it or not... I never played
 with a
 1401.  UTC had one prior to the 360, but AFAIK all the
 360 code was
 running natively by the time I got there.
 
 By default the 360/30 only had 32K of RAM, and the
 supervisor would run
 4-12K of that, depending on how it was configured.  We
 had a third-party
 memory extension that ran that up to 64K (when I worked at a
 service
 bureau downtown, they were similarly configured; there was a
 third-party
 solid state 32K extension).  Both were setup with a
 "spooler" you could
 run in a foreground partition to help with printing.
 
 However, the stock IBM COBOL compiler on the beast required
 54K to run. 
 If you wanted to compile COBOL, you had to reboot without
 the spooler /
 foreground partition active so you had 54K to work with :) 
 
 So the infamous MS-DOS / Bill Gates claims of "640K ought to
 be enough"
 rang especially true back in those days, when you were
 clamoring to
 squeeze things into 64K.  Geez, PC's had 10x the memory
 you had on the
 mainframe :)
 
 I did systems programming for the service bureau eventually
 (after
 starting as an operator), and their Nashville office had a
 360/40 with
 128K of memory.  Big time fun (at the time) :)
 
 UT-Knoxville had a 360/65 with 512K (I think it was...) but
 it was
 running OS/MFT... never played with that, only DOS / EDOS on
 lower 360s.
 
 Jeff
 
 * To join/leave the list, search archives, change list
 settings, *
 * etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
 

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

ATOM RSS1 RSS2