• Please review our updated Terms and Rules here

about the future (missing ICs)

and the 6530 in the Kim-1, although there's some substitution you can do but I'd still rather have a bloody replacement chip. I do agree with Chuck though. I would think (and personally and pretty amazed at the stuff I've seen already) FPGA or other virtual logic is pretty amazing and could potentially be wired in place IF enough is known about the existing chipsets. That was one of the first hugely identifiable differences I saw with vintage technology vs new. It was almost like in early computers every manual came with the circuitry layout of the chips, boards, and all the ways you could hack and improve it. These days it's they'd likely just void your warranty and sue the end user for prying with their intellectual property.

I don't quite recall if there is a working Amiga core for the Commodore One. I'm not involved enough with the current Amiga hardware to know what they're using but they're also using an emulator in Amiga OS4 to run 68k code. Somehow I imagine it's probably not perfect either.
 
FPGA - Emulation, Simulation or RE-Implemented

FPGA - Emulation, Simulation or RE-Implemented

Chuck(G) said:
In a sense, that's an excellent application of FPGAs. At least you're forced to write out a detailed description of the hardware.
Click to expand...

Well of course that depends on what you are doing with the FPGA. I guess there are at least three levels you can work at, functional, logic unit, gate level.

So for example Richard Stofer's re-implementation of the IBM1130 is only a functional re-creation. It does not re-create any timings and it could (just about) have been created from the programmers manual. But it does run original IBM1130 code, including a plotter, but its a lot faster. This is more akin to Emulation rather than re-implementation.

http://ibm1130.org/party/v06

is the best page I can find, but I do have a copy of this code and run it from time to time on my Spartan Nexys-2 board.

Then there is Laurence Wilkinson's re-implementation of the IBM 360/30..

http://www.ljw.me.uk/ibm360/

That re-creates the function of each package in the 360/30 but only as packages, not at the gate level.

Lastly there is Carl Claunch's IBM1130. This is intended to be a gate level re-creation.

http://ibm1130.blogspot.co.uk/

Really wonderful.


Probably more appropriate to this group is the re-creation of the ZX Spectrum ULA which although its only a single chip is a complex problem as it needs to accurately replicate the timings.

There is a site here:_

http://www.zxdesign.info/thebeginning.shtml

about re-engineering the Spectrum ULA so I am sure, with a lot of work, it can be done for the commodore chips....

(By the way the book about the Spectrum ULA is IMHO well worth the price)

Dave
 
..... It is interesting to see all the anxiety that is amongst forum members regarding the future of these lovely pioneering computers.

I think keeping them in an operational condition is only the concern of the current - our - generation who grew up with these machines and whose lives were affected in some way or another by the revolution created by these machines.

For future generations (including our kids) these machines would (or do) have only academic interest as "museum pieces". I could "see" such machines in a future museum, with their specs written next to them, on a stand, next to an emulator of some sort, showing the abilities of the particular unit under display.

So, to summarize, keeping these machines operational is of interest (by a huge margin) only to our generation, mostly for sentimental reasons. I would therefore not worry about the availabilty of parts to keep them alive. I think these machines, in an operational condition, would outlive all their fans, and then when we "will not be here" future generations would treat them as museum pieces in a manner described already.

So cheer up everybody. Parts for as long as we live and emulators for future generations...

Hope I have not depressed too many of you...
 
With that logic we should be doing what Tez is doing and documenting the actual operation of the computers; screen shots, videos of systems screens in use, loading media, etc.

I disagree however - They're still saving and preserving all kinds of old tech - cars, guns, watches, trebuchets, printing presses, locomotives, viking ships, etc. Why not computers? Sure some will sit there on display, but some few will always be running - it will be a matter of pride and accomplishment to do this.
 
Simple mechanical devices are easy to keep running or make new parts for. Old cars are much easier to keep running 50+ years later then a new car with all the sensors and computers needed to run it. In 100 years I don't think too many people will care about the machines we try to keep running now, but they might care about the information we recorded onto their obsolete spinning disks, tapes, and floppies which means they will have to deal with emulation of the hardware and a physical interface to read the media.
 
Here is what I think.... Someday your ancestor will be sitting on 200 years of digital photography from this period. People are going to have to start taking old tech seriously if they want to keep their family photos (for example). I can see a whole industry in this kind of stuff. As an extension keeping old systems going or at least the means to span the gaps would be profitable for a niche business.

We can keep old cars going better now that we could when they were newer because we can manufacture parts and we have new techniques. There are shops that specialize in old parts because it's profitable to do so. We make new and better parts for them. This will also happen with new tech used for solving old tech problems. Someday computers will be able to figure out what an old computer was supposed to do and fix it. We can't fix our own surface mount boards today, but it may actually be child's play in the future. See where I am going with this? Only if technology declines like it did in the dark ages might we truly loose our connection to be able to support old tech. Maybe I am just an optimist
 
Well the IBM1620 is I think about as complex as the 1130 so IMHO it would not be a big problem in an FPGA. The trouble is no one has sorted out the software with the existing Java emulator and I think that needs doing next. Not so sure about the IBM 7090. Again I would have thought possible but you might need multiple FPGA's, on the plus side there is a 7090 software emulator and working software.

THe CDC7600 would be an amazing project, but almost certainly multiple FPGA's. Again no software that I am aware of...
 
Since the 7600 was used at LLL and Sandia, I suspect there might be something archived for it. Except for the OS, most 6600 code will run on it--and I can remember enough about the unusual architecture (nested FLs) of SCOPE 2 to engineer a recreation of the important bits.

I've run some of my old code on the SIMH 1620 (Model 1) and the code ran as expected.
 
I may have a source for 6532 chips: 1526/802 printers. I'm pretty sure the 1526 had a pair of them in it. Commodore printers may be a good source for some of the odd chips that are hard to find.
 
I used some of my old code and even wrote some new code (see the 1620 program on the "99 bottles of beer" website.). There is at least one 1620 cross-assembler available.

CHM has had a 1620 restoration project going for some time. They've managed to pick up a bunch of punched cards and paper tapes from various sources. Here's a link on bitsavers

Enjoy--and remember to keep those character strings on even-digit boundaries!
 
I only ever wrote Fortran II and I always forgot to put the decimal point in to make integers floats.

I got the software but I am still clueless (I know you have that from previous posts) on how to feed anything into SIMH...

Is there a guide a simple 59 year old idiot could follow....
 
g4ugm said:
I only ever wrote Fortran II and I always forgot to put the decimal point in to make integers floats.

I got the software but I am still clueless (I know you have that from previous posts) on how to feed anything into SIMH...

Is there a guide a simple 59 year old idiot could follow....
Click to expand...

Bitsavers has a good collection of 1620 documents, including the Leeson and Dimitry 1962 book. The Caffey book is another good one, but I can't locate an online copy for you.

One obstacle is getting past the brutal simplicity of the machine, particularly the Model I--you had to load the addition and multiplication tables into low memory in order to do arithmetic, for example.
 
Nicolas said:
..... It is interesting to see all the anxiety that is amongst forum members regarding the future of these lovely pioneering computers.

I think keeping them in an operational condition is only the concern of the current - our - generation who grew up with these machines and whose lives were affected in some way or another by the revolution created by these machines.

For future generations (including our kids) these machines would (or do) have only academic interest as "museum pieces". I could "see" such machines in a future museum, with their specs written next to them, on a stand, next to an emulator of some sort, showing the abilities of the particular unit under display.

So, to summarize, keeping these machines operational is of interest (by a huge margin) only to our generation, mostly for sentimental reasons. I would therefore not worry about the availabilty of parts to keep them alive. I think these machines, in an operational condition, would outlive all their fans, and then when we "will not be here" future generations would treat them as museum pieces in a manner described already.

So cheer up everybody. Parts for as long as we live and emulators for future generations...

Hope I have not depressed too many of you...
Click to expand...


Of course you depressed me, so I have to disagree with you in some way ;-)

IMO the interest about retrocomputing won't be just academic. A lot of people has interest in old things, even when they're older than them. In example I love ancient EM machines like calculators or pinballs. And I'm "just" 44, so this interest isn't nostalgia but a real interest.
Our old machines like PETs are different from modern computers and they will be even when our P4 will be old, because they are the first milestone in the personal computer era. I believe there always will be people interested.

Reverse engineering of simple chip like VIC, etc. should be "quite easy" since they're simple, compared with modern electronic; and I believe they could have a good niche market: imagine in example how many VIC and VIC II chips you could sell, if you have any. Since were produced 2 millions VIC-20 and 22 millions C=64, there's space for a good business, IMO; even because collector would buy more than real need: I wish to find at least 10 VIC and 10 VIC II for a rasoable price, just to be sure :D

BTW: funny that older machines like PETs can be fixed easier than the modern ones like C=64, Amiga, etc. :)

--- emulators are like silicone dolls, somebody like to play with them but my choice is (and always will be) the original model, even if old and with some scratches :)
 
Well, to get to the nub of the matter, it's less the CPU than the peripherals. But who has the resources to host a 1960s mainframe other than a select very wealthy few?
 
As most of you probably know, already exists some work (in progress?) about making replacements for Commodore ICs, like the C=64 PLA reverse engineering and replacement:

http://www.sx64.net/downloads/C64%20PLA%20Logic%20Equations.txt

I just found it so I didn't search about it yet; but it sounds promising. Maybe not all the ICs can be replaced, but if at least some of them can be, expecially those harder to find, it would be fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top