From: <(>
Date: Tue Jan 13 05:41:52 1998

> On Mon, 12 Jan 1998, Joe wrote:
>> Phillip said:
>> >
>> >Um. What date was the Casio AL1000? For that matter, what date was the
>> >AL2000? OK, the AL1000 had nixie tubes in the display, so was not all
>> >solid state, but it comes close, I'm sure. (Other people have commented
>> >on the HP 9100 and the earlier Busicoms)
>> Ahhh, a Casio expert! When was the Casio AS-8D made? I just picked one
>> up. I had never seen one before and I thought it looked interesting.

Alas, I am not a Casio expert. I merely happen to have an AL1000, an FX-502P
and an FX-601P, FWIW. What is the AS-8D? Can you describe it to us?

>> I was just reading an old (ca 1977) Byte magazine this morning and it
>> had a article about the Tek 4051. I think they said it had just been
>> discontinued. E-mail me if you're interested.
>> Joe
> More likely superceded by the 4052, which used a bit-slice processor
> rather than the MC6800 that the 4051 used. There were some other minor
> improvements also, as I recall.

I cannot remember the exact date the 4051 was discontinued, although I
have it somewhere at home, but it was a couple of years after the
introduction of the 4052. 1982? 1977 does sound more like the
announcement of the 4052 and 4054, I must admit.

Yes please, Joe, I am indeed interested in the Byte article.

> The 4051 might also qualify for the race of an early personal computer if
> its $10,000 cost doesn't put it out. It was programmed in the nicest BASIC
> that I have ever run across! Marvellous vector graphics. But SLOOOOOW!
> The real queen, though, was the 4053 with its 19" (17"?) screen!

I think I'd disagree with you here, Don. The 4051 was announced with a
price tag of (I think) $6999 for the base spec. (Might have been
$7999). It went down in price very rapidly - the top spec machine was
only $5250 or something when it was eventually discontinued. But I
meant "personal" not in the sense of "personally owned" but in the sense
of "intended to go on/at someone's desk for their personal use" - and I
was commenting on the "all in one box" definition someone had proposed

The 4051 BASIC is AWFUL. Example: the syntax of the IF statement is IF
condition THEN line number. Similarly the 4052 and 4054. The really
nice version came with the 4052A and 4054A in (?) 1982. This was
achieved AFAICT by freeing up ROM space from GPIB handling routines -
the upgrade was new ROMS plus a new I/O board that had a proper GPIB
controller chip on it.

I've never heard of the 4053. Are you sure you don't mean the 4054?
This did have a 19 inch screen.

Yes, I too would love a 4054A. But I have to be content with my 4052,
which is also a nice machine. But as you say, the graphics are SLOW.
(Faster on the 4054 which had constant rate vector drawing rather than
constant time. But that's another story). I shall look up some of the
above details when I get home - I did a talk on the 4050 series recently
and the notes are still on my Microscribe - and post corrections if I
made any glaring errors...

Received on Tue Jan 13 1998 - 05:41:52 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:30:56 BST