Google-Apps
Hauptmenü

Post a Comment On: Ken Shirriff's blog

"Examining a technology sample kit: IBM components from 1948 to 1986"

15 Comments -

1 – 15 of 15
Blogger Sudsy said...

Minor typo:

"a Pentium II system was $7,0000 to $20,000." ->
"a Pentium II system was $7,000 to $20,000."

January 23, 2021 at 4:39 PM

Blogger Jack said...

I served in the USAF from 1967 through 1970 as an electronics technician. During technical training (1967) one of my instructors told a story about his job experience prior to enlisting. He worked for Allied Electronics in Chicago as part of the crew that maintained the company's IBM mainframe. I can't recall the model number but it was a vacuum tube machine. Part of this fellow's job was testing (in place) vacuum tubes to evaluate if they were reaching end of life. If a tube required replacement then he'd pull and replace it, all without removing power. This technique was possible because of built-in error detection and correction. I think this must have only applied to what we'd consider data busses rather than logic circuits, but 54 years later I'm no longer clear on the exact details.

January 24, 2021 at 8:07 AM

Anonymous Ian Farquhar said...

(Bit of a long post, sorry.)

I'm not sure it's fair to say "What I find interesting is that the technology box focuses on mainframes and lacks any artifacts from the IBM PC (1981), which ended up having much more long-term impact."

IBM, like most very large vendors, was more a group of marginally competing smaller businesses. Each had their own marketing departments, and in this case they wanted to sell mainframes. Why would they include any reference to mini's or PC's? They were, even if made by IBM, the competition. The purpose of this box isn't a historical overview generally, but to guide the recipient customer into thinking that mainframes were the pinnacle of computing technology.

This was about a decade before my time, but I did end up working with and for people who had been in this world. One in particular was memorable, as he had worked in IBM and EDS for the majority of his career, and even though by 1991 he was running a computer center contains DEC/VMS and Sun equipment, he literally referred to them as "toys". I'm not sure he knew what a PC was, and I suspect he thought they were simply terminals. Having met with the IBM salespeople at the time, they would use the same dismissive terminology: "toys", "real computers". Only the baby Cray we owned got this manager's attention, because it was mainframe enough to qualify as a real computer.

This individual ended up purchasing a Fujitsu FACOM mainframe, which from memory cost $500K a year for 5 years in maintenance, decimating the ability of the center to purchase anything else. But to him, this purchase was his proudest achievement, and he brought in photographers to take pictures of him standing next to it.

My point in relating this story is to explain that this person was very much the sort of buyer this kit was targeted at. This individual would never have understood or cared about the contents, nor its historical context, but he would have displayed it proudly on his self as an objet d'art. The whole purpose of this is not to display technology, but to reassure the recipient that buying another IBM mainframe was the only sensible approach.

Two funny follow-ons to this:

1. When the Facom was decommissioned (after I left to work at SGI), they dragged the main processor cabinet out behind the building, and people could make a donation to charity to hack into the thing with an axe. I don't know how much was raised, but I was told that the line was quite long.

2. At SGI, I ended up working with the Fujitsu salesman who had sold this manager the mainframe. I must have reacted really strongly when he mentioned it, as he got really nervous and actually apologized. He said that Fujitsu had presented three options to the moron manager: a mini-mainframe which was in a deskside cabinet and pretty much perfect for their needs, a slightly larger variant which was beyond their budget but about the same physical size, and this old mainframe was supposed to be the ridiculous option no sane person would ever choose. It was way outside the budget, almost at end-of-sale, and actually underpowered. The Fujitsu sales team was horrified when this manager took the ridiculous option, and they tried to talk him out of it. They couldn't: the manager wanted a mainframe, a mainframe was big and a "real computer", and some small deskside server might as well be a "Unix toy".

So I forgave him. :)

January 24, 2021 at 5:46 PM

Anonymous Ian Farquhar said...

BTW, yes, I know Fujitsu is not IBM, but they used exactly the same marketing approach in exactly the same way.

January 24, 2021 at 5:51 PM

Blogger Marian Aldenhövel said...

Hi,

I visited the Stuttgart factory as part of a school trip in 1985 or 1986.

They explained the construction of those ceramic multichip carrier modules. I remember that the process explained to us was quite involved.

The base material was a film made from the ceramic powder with some plastic material to hold it together as a flexible strip. Very much like todays ceramic filaments for FDM 3D-printing.

Many layers of this material were prepared and stacked on top of each other.

Each layer had holes punched in a pattern as vias to the layer below. They then printed the tracks of the circuitry on it in a conductive paint/paste that also filled the holes to create the through-connects.

The stack of these layers would then be fired in a kiln to form the final ceramic part.

I remember them talking about the way the material shrank during the firing process. This was hard to control and had some variability in it. So much that they took precise digital pictures of the final modules and used image-processing to measure the final dimensions. Those were stored in a database on an individual part bases. When it came to populating the modules with chips the data would be recalled and the placing process would take the variance into account.

I remember that I was very impressed.

January 25, 2021 at 1:08 AM

Anonymous Microgadgethacker said...

I wonder how rare those IBM boxes are? Thanks for sharing this - I absolutely love your detailed description of IBM's technology evolution. I used to use a 3090 at college - nice machine.

Do you have any data on the relative speeds of the different memories shown here? I'd love to hear how much faster the silicon memory was over core.

January 25, 2021 at 8:01 AM

Blogger J. Peterson said...

IBM's electronics is very distinct from the look of the rest of the industry at the time - e.g., packaging IC's in the "SLT" modules instead of standard DIP packaging. I'm sure in some cases it gave them a performance edge (e.g., the TCM modules) but in other case, it just seems like added expense.

January 25, 2021 at 11:39 AM

Anonymous GR said...

Fun little tidbit: that 5" wafer was exposed with a GCA stepper, probably an 8500 given the date and wafer size. You can tell from the distinctive alignment marks (the + and x superimposed crosses in the upper left of the die). A lot of these are still kicking in university cleanrooms...

It's always fun to see die with the streets intact, as you can tell a lot about the process and what tools were used.

I don't know what was used to expose the 4" wafer, but it might be a contact aligner of some type.

January 25, 2021 at 8:36 PM

Anonymous Chris said...

Not only IBM is known to have found use for their faulty DRAMs. I have SIMMs that use Siemens 256k x 3(!) DRAM chips. These are actually 256kx4bit ICs with (at least) a faulty bit. Solder bridges on the SIMMs allow selection of which bit not to use.

Must still have been cheaper to put three faulty ICs (+ custom solder bridges) on a SIMM than two good ones.

January 25, 2021 at 11:51 PM

Blogger ForOldHack said...

This is very thorough, and well researched.
I have the display board from a IBM 604. Since doing a BCD multiply was obscenely slow before the 604 ( repeated addition...), the 604 was designed to do the multiplications in parallel. A single tube could contain 4 digit x 1 digit multiply logic. There were 4 multiply tubes per rack, and 40 to 65 racks. It could do a matrix inversion that would take a week on a prior machine, and perform the calculations in less than an hour. It was so fast, that many of the machines saw 20+ years of use. ( 1948 to 1968 )

January 26, 2021 at 12:07 AM

Anonymous CheezBoy said...

wow--thanks much for this fascinating "show and tell"!

February 13, 2021 at 10:13 AM

Anonymous Larry McElhiney said...

--> Jack:

I was a MW Technician in the USAF during the same period. However, I was assigned to NATO and spent 36 months in The Netherlands. Much of our equipment was left over from late 1940s so I feel very close to this IBM Demo Kit!

Larry
AC9OX

April 12, 2021 at 1:37 PM

Blogger Zayden Wood said...

Good post.

October 17, 2021 at 11:13 PM

Blogger Unknown said...

comprehensive

July 29, 2022 at 10:29 AM

Blogger Unknown said...

Great historical overview.I sold/installed two 360/91 systems(UCLA) and managed the team that covered a third 91 at SLAC.

July 31, 2022 at 10:44 AM

You can use some HTML tags, such as <b>, <i>, <a>

Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author.

You will be asked to sign in after submitting your comment.
Please prove you're not a robot