My memory may be suspect, but I thought it had an eight bit accumulator. I wrote an executive for it in 1974. Biggest problem was to create a multiplier in less than a page of 256 nibbles, so I could calculate Fourier Transforms with it.
I and a buddy built a couple of MOS Technology 6502A's with a cubic architecture in 1974-75. Actually, they were alternating 6502As and 6512As (they accessed memory on opposite clock values). We put 1K of memory shared between each pair of processors, leaving 2K for the OS (executive) in each processor's memory map (8K only). We didn't have enough money for more memory or real keyboards, so we used a bunch of microswitches glued together as a hex keypad, and 8 nixie tubes for output.
David Maister (author of "Managing the Professional Services Firm") has quite a good overview in his book "True Professionalism: The Courage to Care about Your People, Your Clients, and Your Career." Free Press, 1997, ISBN 0-684-83466-9.
The recent court cases (see http://www.aclu.org/news/2000/n062200b.html) very clearly show no tolerance for this sort of thing. Is this just more grandstanding for the voters?
This strikes me as exactly the wrong thing to do. To attack the problem of public (and courthouse) knowledge of technical issues, we ought to be encouraging ways to increase the public's exposure to technical issues. If we segregate them in a special justice system, we segregate technical people into a "special" group, which would be subject to resentment from the public at large. It would create a formalized, legally enforced, "class society".
Slashdot Mirror
My memory may be suspect, but I thought it had an eight bit accumulator. I wrote an executive for it in 1974. Biggest problem was to create a multiplier in less than a page of 256 nibbles, so I could calculate Fourier Transforms with it.
I and a buddy built a couple of MOS Technology 6502A's with a cubic architecture in 1974-75. Actually, they were alternating 6502As and 6512As (they accessed memory on opposite clock values). We put 1K of memory shared between each pair of processors, leaving 2K for the OS (executive) in each processor's memory map (8K only). We didn't have enough money for more memory or real keyboards, so we used a bunch of microswitches glued together as a hex keypad, and 8 nixie tubes for output.
David Maister (author of "Managing the Professional Services Firm") has quite a good overview in his book "True Professionalism: The Courage to Care about Your People, Your Clients, and Your Career." Free Press, 1997, ISBN 0-684-83466-9.
The recent court cases (see http://www.aclu.org/news/2000/n062200b.html) very clearly show no tolerance for this sort of thing. Is this just more grandstanding for the voters?
You might want the Curcio mod on the ST70s.
http://www.curcioaudio.com
This strikes me as exactly the wrong thing to do. To attack the problem of public (and courthouse) knowledge of technical issues, we ought to be encouraging ways to increase the public's exposure to technical issues. If we segregate them in a special justice system, we segregate technical people into a "special" group, which would be subject to resentment from the public at large. It would create a formalized, legally enforced, "class society".
"A History of Modern Computing" by Paul Ceruzzi is also quite good, and places ENIAC in context.