 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 27/10/2015 07:53 PM, Stephen wrote:
> http://www.righto.com/2015/03/12-minute-mandelbrot-fractals-on-50.html
Qui-binary...?
My mind is blown.
As an aside, Hackaday.io seems to be full of people building computers
"from scratch", using only individual logic gates. One guy claimed to be
building a computer from nothing but 7400s...
...until you realise that he means the members of the 7400 family that
implement entire counters, encoders, decoders, latches, etc.
Another guy claimed to by building a computer from discrete
transistors... until you realise that he's using an Arduino to control
it. Wuh??
It's interesting to me that the IBM 1401 appears to be a *real* computer
made only from discrete transistors. I'd always assumed that such a
thing would fill an entire warehouse. But it doesn't actually look all
that big...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 27/10/2015 07:50 PM, Stephen wrote:
> On 10/27/2015 6:58 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>>> I think there's a lot you can do that's interesting without any video at
>>> all.
>>
>> Oh, really?
>>
>> [That maybe sounded sarcastic. It wasn't meant to.]
>>
>> Clearly you've got different ideas to me... What kinda thing are you
>> thinking?
>>
>> [Genuinely interested here.]
>
> Break codes, calculate ballistic trajectories, solve engineering
> problems. Run the finances for Lyons tea house.
Not sure too many children would be interested in any of those.
> Text processing and games.
Interesting without display capabilities. ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 27/10/2015 07:53 PM, Stephen wrote:
> http://www.righto.com/2015/03/12-minute-mandelbrot-fractals-on-50.html
Only just finished reading this.
Man, that is some special brand of craziness, right there. Mental stuff.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 18:58:19 +0000, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>> Nothing else really plugged in, either. HDMI, external hard drive,
>> power. Wireless keyboard/mouse combo that I generally don't use.
>
> At that point, doesn't it kinda make it look like *the screen* is all
> the smarts? Not the inconspicuous little box in the corner?
Not really, but then again, I connect the HDMI to a receiver that then
sends the output to a projector. So my "screen" is a 10' diagonal image
projected on a white wall.
But it doesn't really matter.
> Oh, I *totally* agree with what you're saying. My question is how you
> keep the kids from just glancing at it and going "this is lame!" and
> going back to playing Angry Birds or something.
By making it interesting, which is done by making it relevant. A lot of
kids are curious about stuff like that.
>> Yes, but that's true on a lot of PCs that run Linux as well. That
>> doesn't mean you can't do system-level programming on it.
>
> Thanks to backwards compatibility, every IBM PC-compatible starts up in
> 8080 emulation mode, and has a BIOS that lets you do stuff without even
> knowing what model of video card you have. Even then, it surely has 100%
> VGA register compatibility, so you can program it that way.
>
> On the Pi, until you poke the GPU, the CPU isn't even *turned on*...
Mine turns on when I plug it in, before the OS is done. That's firmware-
level stuff, generally not the sort of thing I think of with "system-
level" programming.
>> I think there's a lot you can do that's interesting without any video
>> at all.
>
> Oh, really?
>
> [That maybe sounded sarcastic. It wasn't meant to.]
>
> Clearly you've got different ideas to me... What kinda thing are you
> thinking?
>
> [Genuinely interested here.]
Web hosting is the most obvious example. Music streaming, controlling
home automation - lots of IoT-related things, actually.
Jim
--
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and
besides, the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10/27/2015 8:31 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> On 27/10/2015 07:53 PM, Stephen wrote:
>> http://www.righto.com/2015/03/12-minute-mandelbrot-fractals-on-50.html
>
> Qui-binary...?
>
> My mind is blown.
>
I know and I thought BCD was strange.
>
> As an aside, Hackaday.io seems to be full of people building computers
> "from scratch", using only individual logic gates. One guy claimed to be
> building a computer from nothing but 7400s...
>
> ....until you realise that he means the members of the 7400 family that
> implement entire counters, encoders, decoders, latches, etc.
>
I hope he has a big power supply and lots of fans.
In the mid 70's I built a digital clock out of TTL. It needed 25 amps at
5 volts to drive the logic. A couple of years later I built one out of
CMOS and that would run for an hour on a PP3 battery. (It was mains
powered the battery was for backup.)
> Another guy claimed to by building a computer from discrete
> transistors... until you realise that he's using an Arduino to control
> it. Wuh??
>
The first machine I worked on was the Honeywell H516. It used discrete
components not ICs.
> It's interesting to me that the IBM 1401 appears to be a *real* computer
> made only from discrete transistors. I'd always assumed that such a
> thing would fill an entire warehouse. But it doesn't actually look all
> that big...
That is a media exaggeration. They were forever showing images of
computer systems in enormous clean rooms with technicians in white coats.
One company I worked for had an old PDP 8. It fitted inside a 19 inch
cabinet. I only once opened the door to look at the guts. I then prayed
it would never break. ;-)
> Only just finished reading this.
>
> Man, that is some special brand of craziness, right there. Mental stuff.
Funnily enough. His project reminded me of you. Did you not once write
programs in PostScript or Printer Command Language?
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10/27/2015 8:32 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
> On 27/10/2015 07:50 PM, Stephen wrote:
>> On 10/27/2015 6:58 PM, Orchid Win7 v1 wrote:
>>>> I think there's a lot you can do that's interesting without any
>>>> video at
>>>> all.
>>>
>>> Oh, really?
>>>
>>> [That maybe sounded sarcastic. It wasn't meant to.]
>>>
>>> Clearly you've got different ideas to me... What kinda thing are you
>>> thinking?
>>>
>>> [Genuinely interested here.]
>>
>> Break codes, calculate ballistic trajectories, solve engineering
>> problems. Run the finances for Lyons tea house.
>
> Not sure too many children would be interested in any of those.
Calculating ballistic trajectories and blowing up your target sounds
like fun.
>
>> Text processing and games.
>
> Interesting without display capabilities. ;-)
Did not say that. You said without video.
The output was on a Teletype or a printer.
I played a graphical golf game that used a printer to show the hole and
where the ball had landed.
Thinking about it and looking up Google. I think that many of these
games were inhouse programs and not available to the public.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10/27/2015 11:48 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> Web hosting is the most obvious example. Music streaming, controlling
> home automation - lots of IoT-related things, actually.
Disturbing. You are looking to the future and I looked to the past.
I must watch out for that.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 28.10.2015 um 08:56 schrieb Stephen:
>> As an aside, Hackaday.io seems to be full of people building computers
>> "from scratch", using only individual logic gates. One guy claimed to be
>> building a computer from nothing but 7400s...
>>
>> ....until you realise that he means the members of the 7400 family that
>> implement entire counters, encoders, decoders, latches, etc.
Fair enough, as far as I'm concerned.
> I hope he has a big power supply and lots of fans.
> In the mid 70's I built a digital clock out of TTL. It needed 25 amps at
> 5 volts to drive the logic. A couple of years later I built one out of
> CMOS and that would run for an hour on a PP3 battery. (It was mains
> powered the battery was for backup.)
I suspect the guy in question wouldn't be using classic TTL (where on
Earth would you get those nowadays, anyway), but rather LS-TTL, cutting
power consumption to 20%.
I for one wouldn't use 7400-family chips anyway, and instead go for a
CPLD (or, more likely, a collection thereof). Makes it much easier to
make minor design changes even after the circuitry has been wired.
> Funnily enough. His project reminded me of you. Did you not once write
> programs in PostScript or Printer Command Language?
PostScript is fun! Especially since it comes with high-resolution
graphics output fully integrated ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 10/28/2015 10:45 AM, clipka wrote:
> Am 28.10.2015 um 08:56 schrieb Stephen:
>
>>> As an aside, Hackaday.io seems to be full of people building computers
>>> "from scratch", using only individual logic gates. One guy claimed to be
>>> building a computer from nothing but 7400s...
>>>
>>> ....until you realise that he means the members of the 7400 family that
>>> implement entire counters, encoders, decoders, latches, etc.
>
> Fair enough, as far as I'm concerned.
>
Not worth mentioning unless it was built only using NAND gates. Now that
would be something. ;-)
>> I hope he has a big power supply and lots of fans.
>> In the mid 70's I built a digital clock out of TTL. It needed 25 amps at
>> 5 volts to drive the logic. A couple of years later I built one out of
>> CMOS and that would run for an hour on a PP3 battery. (It was mains
>> powered the battery was for backup.)
>
> I suspect the guy in question wouldn't be using classic TTL (where on
> Earth would you get those nowadays, anyway), but rather LS-TTL, cutting
> power consumption to 20%.
>
This was about 40 years ago* and I was limited to what I could borrow
from the production line. :-)
From what I can remember of the circuit. It was mostly shift registers
and divide-by counters built from D type flip Flops. Ending up driving
Nixie Tubes for the display. (I worked for Boroughs at the time and
there were a few lying around.)
*
I did not invent my Tardis until a few years later. ;-)
> I for one wouldn't use 7400-family chips anyway, and instead go for a
> CPLD (or, more likely, a collection thereof). Makes it much easier to
> make minor design changes even after the circuitry has been wired.
>
>
How about a LM8560? Or if you want to push the boat out and spend USD 4
http://www.ecyberspaces.com/productsview.asp?id=3179
>> Funnily enough. His project reminded me of you. Did you not once write
>> programs in PostScript or Printer Command Language?
>
> PostScript is fun! Especially since it comes with high-resolution
> graphics output fully integrated ;)
>
That raises the question. If Pov will not contemplate using a GPU. How
about using a printer to do some calculations? :-P
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 28.10.2015 um 13:07 schrieb Stephen:
>> I for one wouldn't use 7400-family chips anyway, and instead go for a
>> CPLD (or, more likely, a collection thereof). Makes it much easier to
>> make minor design changes even after the circuitry has been wired.
>
> How about a LM8560? Or if you want to push the boat out and spend USD 4
> http://www.ecyberspaces.com/productsview.asp?id=3179
Nah, I'm talking about re-inventing the computer here, not throwing
together a device intended to be mistaken for a suitcase bomb.
>>> Funnily enough. His project reminded me of you. Did you not once write
>>> programs in PostScript or Printer Command Language?
>>
>> PostScript is fun! Especially since it comes with high-resolution
>> graphics output fully integrated ;)
>
> That raises the question. If Pov will not contemplate using a GPU. How
> about using a printer to do some calculations? :-P
Using the printer as a coprocessor is a rather moot idea, unless you
also include a scanner in the system design; there's no other way to get
data from the printer back into the computer.
You /could/ of course make a PostScript printer do some raytracing
entirely on its own. But I was a bit disappointed by the computing
performance of the printer I once used for generating a printout of the
Mandelbrot set, so I'll probably not pursue this project any further...
Also, I guess we won't get real-time raytracing capabilities out of a
printer anytime soon ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
