Mark,
Rare - probably depends on where you can look! :-)
RT-11 will run on any of the PDP-11's. The RSX-11 family of OS's has
specific requirements about memory amounts and memory management thus
the SPD should be reviewed. RSTS/E (and M+) require memory management
hardware. If you can find one, the best is probably the 11/73, 11/83 or
11/93 in a BA23 (QBUS) enclosure. These come in either 4, or 8-slot
backplanes. If you really want to experience pain in your electric bill
then the BA123 (also QBUS) with it's 645 watt dual power supplies can
double as a winter heater/loud white-noise generator. These come in a
12 slot backplane configuration.
The Pro-Series of systems could also be looked at for RT-11 and RSX
(P/OS). In this space the Pro-380 is probably preferred. The problem
here is finding a network card (DECNA) that does not cost as much (or
more) than the rest of the system.
Disks on real hardware will be small and slow (an possibly expensive).
On emulated systems they can be much bigger and many many times faster.
The books you have detail the degree of expandability for each of these
HW platforms (except maybe the Pro). You will be surprised at just how
much can be done with these systems. The speed will be another story.
All of these machines have some weight to them. An emulator will be
much faster and in the end easier to deal with. When the PLUTO::
machine is running as an emulated machine it is running with NetBSD and
SimH on a 700MHz Pentium-III, otherwise it is a real PDP-11/23+ (22-bit
backplane). The emulated machine is faster than the real thing, but not
my much. I was going for similar performance so that when I switch
between the two it wasn't that noticeable/painful to return to the
actual hardware.
PLUTO:: configuration (from memory)
BA23 backplane (8-slot version)
PDP-11/23+
4MB memory
FPU chip set (somewhat rare these days)
CIS chip set (extremely rare these days)
2 * RQDX3 controllers - 1 for RD54 and dual RX50 drives (internal) and
1 for RD5x drive (external)
KLESI controller (TK50 tape drive (external)
DELQA NIC
2 serial ports (on main CPU board)
4 serial ports (on DHQ11 board)
RT-11 Languages (from memory):
MACRO-11
APL-11
BASIC-11
MU/BASIC-11
BASIC-PLUS/RT-11
FORTRAN-IV (FORTRAN 66 STD)
PDP-11/C
DECUS-C
RSX-11 Languages (also from memory):
MACRO-11
APL-11
BASIC-PLUS-2
FORTRAN-IV (FORTRAN 66 STD)
FORTRAN-77
PDP-11/C
DECUS-C
COBOL-81, COBOL-11
RSTS/E Languages (also from memory):
The same as RSX-11 for the most part.
If you want to have a look around RSTS/E, I can create an account on
PLUTO:: for you to poke around. Just let me know off-list.
-Steve
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] On
Behalf Of Mark Wickens
Sent: Thursday, July 14, 2011 15:50
To: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Subject: Re: [HECnet] PDP Ignorance
Are the MicroPDPs (desktop, deskside, rackmount) rare beasts? They seem
to be of a fairly hobbyist-friendly size, although presumably they are
less expandable (much like a VAXstation versus VAXserver I would
imagine)
Mark.
Although I hate to mention it... I have about 30 micro PDP 11/83's sitting in a lab right beside me; unfortunately they do not (yet... nor might they ever) belong to me... are they, in fact, "rare"?
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Mark Wickens <mark at wickensonline.co.uk> wrote:
Are the MicroPDPs (desktop, deskside, rackmount) rare beasts? They seem to be of a fairly hobbyist-friendly size, although presumably they are less expandable (much like a VAXstation versus VAXserver I would imagine)
Mark.
At 8:49 PM +0100 7/14/11, Mark Wickens wrote:
Are the MicroPDPs (desktop, deskside, rackmount) rare beasts? They seem to be of a fairly hobbyist-friendly size, although presumably they are less expandable (much like a VAXstation versus VAXserver I would imagine)
Depends in whose garage you look. ;-) Having said that, I've not come across any locally for well over a decade, but then I've not been looking.
Zane
--
| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Administrator |
| healyzh at aracnet.com | OpenVMS Enthusiast |
| | Photographer |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------+
| My flickr Photostream |
| http://www.flickr.com/photos/33848088 at N03/ |
Are the MicroPDPs (desktop, deskside, rackmount) rare beasts? They seem to be of a fairly hobbyist-friendly size, although presumably they are less expandable (much like a VAXstation versus VAXserver I would imagine)
Mark.
On 2011-07-14 21.22, Mark Wickens wrote:
OK Johnny,
So to not appear too one tracked, and maybe draw the subject a little
more towards your heart ;)
Since my recent acquisition of various PDP handbooks I've decided to
delve the world of PDPs a little now I've been able to read up on the
(somewhat confusing) model numbers.
Could I have recommendations of where to go in terms of an emulator
(assume linux based), which model and operating system?
What I'd like to do is play with some of the languages, especially but
not exclusively APL, I don't know what software there is out there,
whether licenses are required, etc.
I'm guessing this is all very much before the SPL started...
Thanks for the help, Mark.
Those are not neccesarily easy questions to answer.
As for emulator, simh is free, but I'd say e11 is better. So it depends on your preferences. :-)
They both probably work well enough for your needs, though.
What you want to emulate, though, is something with all the "features" that you might want to use, which means lots of memory, split I/D-space and supervisor mode. This means:
11/44, 11/53, 11/7x, 11/8x or 11/9x machines.
As for operating system, that depends on your preferences. I can't really say what you should go with. An additional complication is that there aren't free licenses for some of the stuff, and it's still commercial products.
Johnny
OK Johnny,
So to not appear too one tracked, and maybe draw the subject a little more towards your heart ;)
Since my recent acquisition of various PDP handbooks I've decided to delve the world of PDPs a little now I've been able to read up on the (somewhat confusing) model numbers.
Could I have recommendations of where to go in terms of an emulator (assume linux based), which model and operating system?
What I'd like to do is play with some of the languages, especially but not exclusively APL, I don't know what software there is out there, whether licenses are required, etc.
I'm guessing this is all very much before the SPL started...
Thanks for the help, Mark.
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE [mailto:owner-hecnet at Update.UU.SE] Namens
Johnny Billquist
Verzonden: donderdag, juli 2011 20:51
Aan: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] Towards the Mouth of Madness....
On 2011-07-14 19.56, MG wrote:
On 13-7-2011 11:32, Johnny Billquist wrote:
Just that the discussions lately seems to have started assuming that
everyone is running VMS. :-)
If so, wouldn't there be a solid rationale behind that thought? VMS is,
by default,
offering DECnet and out-of-the-box. So, for the sake of DECnet and
genuine usage
thereof, it could hence be seen as a big and important player in that
regard, correct?
VMS does not by default offer DECnet. It's a separate license you need
to install.
But yes, VMS is very much associated with DECnet, and DECnet is very
well integrated in VMS.
So it's an important player when we say DECnet.
But it's by no means the only one, or one you have to have, to run DECnet.
But I know that most people know that this is not true. I just felt
like pointing it out. Not trying
to offend anyone.
I don't know what most people know, but I *did* get the impression that
discussion on
VMS would have been allowed or not considered off-topic. So, you'll have
to excuse me
for having participated in that discussion about VMS and related things
and I'll refrain
from doing so in the future in my messages addressed to this mailing list.
Please don't read too much in to it. Talk about VMS is definitely not
banned. I just thought it was becoming perhaps a little too much last
week, considering the normal volume of mail on this list, and reflecting
on the fact that not everyone might be interested.
There were smileys in my mail...
Johnny
-----
DEC asked a pretty hefty fee for the privilege to run DECnet.
If only that license would have been free, and available to 3rd parties,
well then DECnet would have been somewhat more important.
And yes, I realize its design limitations in phase IV.
There were indeed smileys in your mail Johnny! I guess most of us have a
favorite DEC OS. Mine happen to be VMS and RT-11.
RSX-11 just didn't sit well on a PDP-11/40 with one RK05 and a DECtape I
unit.
Hans
On 2011-07-14 19.56, MG wrote:
On 13-7-2011 11:32, Johnny Billquist wrote:
Just that the discussions lately seems to have started assuming that
everyone is running VMS. :-)
If so, wouldn't there be a solid rationale behind that thought? VMS is,
by default,
offering DECnet and out-of-the-box. So, for the sake of DECnet and
genuine usage
thereof, it could hence be seen as a big and important player in that
regard, correct?
VMS does not by default offer DECnet. It's a separate license you need to install.
But yes, VMS is very much associated with DECnet, and DECnet is very well integrated in VMS.
So it's an important player when we say DECnet.
But it's by no means the only one, or one you have to have, to run DECnet.
But I know that most people know that this is not true. I just felt
like pointing it out. Not trying
to offend anyone.
I don't know what most people know, but I *did* get the impression that
discussion on
VMS would have been allowed or not considered off-topic. So, you'll have
to excuse me
for having participated in that discussion about VMS and related things
and I'll refrain
from doing so in the future in my messages addressed to this mailing list.
Please don't read too much in to it. Talk about VMS is definitely not banned. I just thought it was becoming perhaps a little too much last week, considering the normal volume of mail on this list, and reflecting on the fact that not everyone might be interested.
There were smileys in my mail...
Johnny
On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 1:51 PM, MG <marcogb at xs4all.nl> wrote:
On 13-7-2011 13:05, Sampsa Laine wrote:
The RS/6000 is just a AIX / random Unix box, whereas the AS/400 is WEIRD.
Personally speaking, I never cared much for AIX myself. IBM also entered
the UNIX
market relatively late (compared to SGI, HP, DEC and so on).
As for the AS/400 platform, now that's an interesting operating system (I
usually
log onto RZKh.de for that) and the type of system that IBM traditionally
peddled.
(A bit like what VMS, RT-11, RSX, etc. were to DEC, later Compaq and HP
now.)
I wouldn't mind having an AS/400 either, it'd make a nice DB2 test
environment.
Especially those physically smaller systems, like the 9401-P03 with the
original
CISC processor (before "System i" and what-not, or whatever IBM calls it
today).
- http://www.flickr.com/photos/31231773 at N02/4468965124/
- http://www.flickr.com/photos/31231773 at N02/4468966604/
- http://www.flickr.com/photos/31231773 at N02/4468967646/
(The above pictures are of/by the proprietor of IPv7.net, who's also a
'partaker'
in HECnet.)
- MG
Hello!
I agree! I've met my share of these IBM boxes, and that one and two
others seemed interesting.
-----
Gregg C Levine gregg.drwho8 at gmail.com
"This signature fought the Time Wars, time and again."
On 13-7-2011 11:32, Johnny Billquist wrote:
Just that the discussions lately seems to have started assuming that everyone is running VMS. :-)
If so, wouldn't there be a solid rationale behind that thought? VMS is, by default,
offering DECnet and out-of-the-box. So, for the sake of DECnet and genuine usage
thereof, it could hence be seen as a big and important player in that regard, correct?
But I know that most people know that this is not true. I just felt like pointing it out. Not trying
to offend anyone.
I don't know what most people know, but I *did* get the impression that discussion on
VMS would have been allowed or not considered off-topic. So, you'll have to excuse me
for having participated in that discussion about VMS and related things and I'll refrain
from doing so in the future in my messages addressed to this mailing list.
- MG
