Computers and other hardware containing the 8008 microprocessor

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Thu Nov 11 11:05:07 1999

Well . . . one version of the story, according to Adam Osborne, in his book
(3-volume set) on microcomputers, was that Datapoint paid for the
development of the 8008 for use in this jewel, then concluded that it wasn't
fast enough, so now Intel had a paid-for 8-bit version of their 4004, which
Osborned didn't say was what this was, but one might see a connection,
nonetheless.

Dick

-----Original Message-----
From: John Lewczyk <jlewczyk_at_his.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp_at_u.washington.edu>
Date: Thursday, November 11, 1999 8:34 AM
Subject: Re: Computers and other hardware containing the 8008 microprocessor


>< <! Datapoint 2200 (architecture was the model for the 8008, was built
>< < using LSI, not an 8008)
>
>< This sounds bogus. the 8008 model was the 4004 (stretched data paths).
>< The 8008 model was clearly unlike most minis of the time with the
internal
>< (to the CPU) return address stack or limited depth.
><
>< Allison
>
>My information concerning the Datapoint 2200 is from a posting in
>CPSR-HISTORY (the link I have to the archive is now dead, anybody have a
>good link to that archive?) by the Chief Tech Officer at Datapoint from
1969
>to 1984, Vic Poor, who was directly involved in the Intel 8008 project. I
>also have a copy of the excellent book "The Microprocessor: A Biography" by
>Michael S. Malone, which describes the development of the 4004 and 8008
>Intel.
>
>There is lots of misinformation on the web, where you possibly got the
>impression that that 8008 was a 4004 with a streched data path. The 8008
>was a very different design, actually an implementation of a Datapoint
>architecture designed by Vic and Harry Pyle of Datapoint (then CTC, or
>Computer Terminal Corporation), which was a bit-serial computer design.
>Both Intel and TI were contracted to design the chip, but Intel couldn't
>deliver on time (also maybe too slow?) and TI's product was doa ("its noise
>margin was so poor it could not be used commercially"), so Datapoint used
>the design it had already implemented using MSI chips and put out their
>"Datapoint 2200". Anybody got one of those? All the Intel micoprocessors
>up through the Pentium III have their roots in this design. That is were
>the real data path stretching has occurred! :-)
>
>Interestingly, the notion that "Intel only got into the microprocessor
>business to sell its memory chips" was at least in part based on the 8008
>project. According the Vic Poor, they only took on the cpu chip project in
>order to keep the memory business with Datapoint! Some in Intel thought
>that the market for microprocessors was too small and that the real money
>was in volume production of memory chips!
>
>John
>
>jlewczyk_at_his.com
>
Received on Thu Nov 11 1999 - 11:05:07 GMT