In message <m19JhvL-000IzIC_at_p850ug1>
ard_at_p850ug1.demon.co.uk (Tony Duell) wrote:
> Rubbish!. Are you seriously trying to tell me that these skills can't be
> learnt? I would claim that anybody who _truely_ understood a modern
> machine would have no problems on an older one. The fact that very few
> people understand modern computers is the problem, not that the older
> machines are so different.
That's more or less my opinion exactly. As long as I had at least a manual
for the CPU, I could probably sit down in front of a computer and program
it. I'd probably curse the designers or the CPU a few times, but I could
probably do it. I know basic x86 assembler (yuck), some CDP1802 assembler,
6502 assembler, C, PASCAL and (rusty) BASIC. I could sit down in front of
nearly any 1980s home computer and program it. I say "nearly any" because I
don't know FORTH, but I do intend to learn it when the Ace is up and running
again.
So the ICs are datestamped 2002. They're the same chips that were available
in 1984, the electrical characteristics have improved slightly, but the chip
itself hasn't changed that much. Wirewrap wire was available in 1984, so
were turned-pin IC sockets. Sure, mine are dated 2002, but without them it
would be a real pig to fix the machine if any of the ICs were to fail again.
So my Ace doesn't have the original ICs. It's not as if it matters. If I see
some 1984-dated 74LS chips somewhere, I'll probably buy them just for the
heck of it. To me, priority number one is getting the machine running and
keeping its exterior casing in good condition. Priority two is historical
accuracy - IC datecodes and suchlike.
I'm surprised the Ace's electrolytic capacitors are still OK!
Later.
--
Phil.
philpem_at_dsl.pipex.com
http://www.philpem.dsl.pipex.com/
Received on Sun May 25 2003 - 04:25:01 BST