Really interesting. Frankenserver...
Maybe they can build any kind of MainFrame for high computing proceses!
(Based on Intel's 286, 386, 486, Pentium I, II, III, IV, etc...) je je je

Hey, anyone (other than me) ever see a 186? I still have one, although it hasn't done anything for a couple of years...

There was no such thing as a 186 computer. The original desktop computer was an IBM XT PC. It had an 8088 processor and ran at a whopping blazing fast 4.77 MHz (as compared to the 1.0 MHz Commodore 64).

The first 286 computer was the IBM AT PC. It has an 80286 processor that ran 8.0 MHz.

I beg to differ, Tandy or Radio-Shack used to sell the model 2000. I had one of those and it ran on a 80186 processor under MS-dos.

In the day's of XT-s this was a pritty potent PC.

Greets,
Erland.

---

Sorry for being testy.
I would happily have given you links and so on, but you came across as a wee bit of close to calling me a liar. Sorry for getting going.
Only thing I could do is translating it into english, but I guess that would be on the negative believabillity side. Learn swedish?

Take care!
Carl

I'm sorry for coming off strong. I think it's just a personality quirk that I just start blasting away questions without realizing it might make the other person feel like I'm calling them a liar. Certainly not my intention, I assure you. I just like to ask lots of questions when I see/hear anything that doesn't make sense. I go into "logic" mode mentally and forget that I'm dealing with people that have feelings. I really meant no harm.

Glad we can solve this amicably.

---

Sorry for being testy.
I would happily have given you links and so on, but you came across as a wee bit of close to calling me a liar. Sorry for getting going.
Only thing I could do is translating it into english, but I guess that would be on the negative believabillity side. Learn swedish?

Take care!
Carl

I'm sorry for coming off strong. I think it's just a personality quirk that I just start blasting away questions without realizing it might make the other person feel like I'm calling them a liar. Certainly not my intention, I assure you. I just like to ask lots of questions when I see/hear anything that doesn't make sense. I go into "logic" mode mentally and forget that I'm dealing with people that have feelings. I really meant no harm.

Glad we can solve this amicably.

Me too:-) *Handing over a beer*

---

It is SEXY to DONATE!
Skype = demiurg2

Good morning/afternoon/evening (delete as applicable)

I'm receiving and uploading WU's OK it would appear but I'm not getting any credit - there are many in "pending" credit status. I read through the latest threads but couldn't clearly see if this was one of the current global problems or not.

The funny thing is that I have the same thing hapenning with Enstein also??

On the subject of optimised apps - can anyone point me in the direction of one for my Mac Pro Intel Xeon?

Cheers!

Good morning/afternoon/evening (delete as applicable)

I'm receiving and uploading WU's OK it would appear but I'm not getting any credit - there are many in "pending" credit status. I read through the latest threads but couldn't clearly see if this was one of the current global problems or not.

The funny thing is that I have the same thing hapenning with Enstein also??

On the subject of optimised apps - can anyone point me in the direction of one for my Mac Pro Intel Xeon?

Cheers!

Validators are currently offline.

---

It is SEXY to DONATE!
Skype = demiurg2

With Seti I would expect that with the ongoing problems having been aged quite a bit that we may be looking into some time next week before the storm passes (assuming something else doesn't go bump in the night). I'm inclined to simply keep my SETI stuff on Suspend for the duration. When (if) things get to normal, I will put SETI back on my active projects list -- until then, it is something of a waste of time.

With Einstein, their new work units are typically very large (anywhere from 100 to 500 credits). They take long to process and that means that they have a greater possibility of computational errors and folks simply missing reporting deadlines. As a result, it can take quite a bit longer to get the quorum needed to get credits. Also, the new workunits seem to have been if anything 'de-optimized. for AMD processors. They run something like 25% slower than they should so that pushes out getting credits (and then getting less credits that you'd expect). The net result of this is that with Einstein work, you will get 'lumpy' credits -- nothing for a while on a given workstation, then 200 to 500 credits one day.

It seems the only projects awarding credits smoothly and running 'normal' at the moment are World Grid, Rosetta, and Climate. Right now, those are the projects picking up the slack provided by the troubled SETI and Einstein projects.

Good morning/afternoon/evening (delete as applicable)

I'm receiving and uploading WU's OK it would appear but I'm not getting any credit - there are many in "pending" credit status. I read through the latest threads but couldn't clearly see if this was one of the current global problems or not.

The funny thing is that I have the same thing hapenning with Enstein also??

On the subject of optimised apps - can anyone point me in the direction of one for my Mac Pro Intel Xeon?

Cheers!

---

I think the reason why there were very few 80186 computers is because the original IBM-PC was introduced in 1981. And the 80286 was launched by Intel the following year.
One assumes the manufactures knew in 1981 that the 80286 was coming soon and had all the specs etc. So why bother developing an 80186 when all your competitors would probably jump straight to the 80286.

And regarding the 80186, there was a co-processor 80186 module developed for the BBC Master in the UK, connected via the Tube. Which could run same code as the Nimbus.

Andy

One assumes the manufactures knew in 1981 that the 80286 was coming soon and had all the specs etc. So why bother developing an 80186 when all your competitors would probably jump straight to the 80286.

I vaguely remember something about memory mapping in the 80186 that required ROM to be low in memory, while the 8086 and 80286 didn't have that restriction.

... and since IBM put ROM at the top of the 1mb address space, it was impossible to do a true PC clone with the '186 chip.

---

One assumes the manufactures knew in 1981 that the 80286 was coming soon and had all the specs etc. So why bother developing an 80186 when all your competitors would probably jump straight to the 80286.

I vaguely remember something about memory mapping in the 80186 that required ROM to be low in memory, while the 8086 and 80286 didn't have that restriction.

... and since IBM put ROM at the top of the 1mb address space, it was impossible to do a true PC clone with the '186 chip.

The ROM thingy is a residue from SLT/Telenova addendums. There where 186es that handled memory the same way as 86es. These where used in the Bull, Mistral, Tandy 186es. I just don't remember the lettering of the different versions.
But here is a bus-schematic of the 186


"One major function of the 80186/80188 series was to reduce the number of chips required by including features such as a DMA controller, interrupt controller, timers, and chip select logic." These are the addendums of the SLT/Telenova.

If I remember correctly the ROM-low was named R80186.

Carl

---

It is SEXY to DONATE!
Skype = demiurg2

There was no such thing as a 186 computer.

Funny,that. My first PC compatible had an 8MHz 80186. It was a BBC Master 512 running Digital Research's DOSPlus and GEM.

---

Be lucky

Neil

My way back machine can't go back any further than 286 without fear of getting stuck

---

Really interesting. Frankenserver...
Maybe they can build any kind of MainFrame for high computing proceses!
(Based on Intel's 286, 386, 486, Pentium I, II, III, IV, etc...) je je je

Hey, anyone (other than me) ever see a 186? I still have one, although it hasn't done anything for a couple of years...

There was no such thing as a 186 computer. The original desktop computer was an IBM XT PC. It had an 8088 processor and ran at a whopping blazing fast 4.77 MHz (as compared to the 1.0 MHz Commodore 64).

The first 286 computer was the IBM AT PC. It has an 80286 processor that ran 8.0 MHz.

Since I sent this blank reply by accident I decided to add something to it.
The IBM 610 was the first personal computer, in the sense that it was the first computer intended for use by one person (e.g. in an office) and controlled from a keyboard. It came out about 1957. You can by a reasonable desktop today for the 610's monthly rental of $1150.

--- Dennis

Really interesting. Frankenserver...
Maybe they can build any kind of MainFrame for high computing proceses!
(Based on Intel's 286, 386, 486, Pentium I, II, III, IV, etc...) je je je

Hey, anyone (other than me) ever see a 186? I still have one, although it hasn't done anything for a couple of years...

There was no such thing as a 186 computer. The original desktop computer was an IBM XT PC. It had an 8088 processor and ran at a whopping blazing fast 4.77 MHz (as compared to the 1.0 MHz Commodore 64).

The first 286 computer was the IBM AT PC. It has an 80286 processor that ran 8.0 MHz.

Just thought I'd throw this in for grins. I go back a little farther than most of you. Wrote my first program in the late '50s on an IBM 650 in the BLISS language. Anyway, the first "desktop" computer I remember was the IBM 1620 - http://www.columbia.edu/acis/history/1620.html for a picture - I used the Model 2 in 1962 or 63 with Fortran (just plain Fortran...it didn't have a version number back then.) It even came with it's own desk! --- Those were the really FUN days.

Keep up the good work guys. I spent may days/nights trying to get these dang gadgets to do what I wanted them to do. --- Dennis

On the status side, most is again green. Why don't I still get any contact? Slowly, the patience gets lost.

---

Wiki German Language, Wiki in deutscher Sprache
View

The original desktop computer was an IBM XT PC. It had an 8088 processor and ran at a whopping blazing fast 4.77 MHz (as compared to the 1.0 MHz Commodore 64).

The first 286 computer was the IBM AT PC. It has an 80286 processor that ran 8.0 MHz.

Since so many folks are quoting this post, I'd just like to point out another couple of errors. The XT was not the original IBM PC, but an upgraded variant which appeared in 1983. I think most folks thought the hard disk it included was the key upgrade at the time. Suddenly not _everything_ had to run from floppy.

Also the AT was introduced at 6 MHz, though 8 MHz did become available. Wikipedia is wildly optimistic in calling 6 MHz for the original AT conservative--for the condition of the 80286 at the time of introduction, it was not conservative at all.

---

The original desktop computer was an IBM XT PC. It had an 8088 processor and ran at a whopping blazing fast 4.77 MHz (as compared to the 1.0 MHz Commodore 64).

The first 286 computer was the IBM AT PC. It has an 80286 processor that ran 8.0 MHz.

Since so many folks are quoting this post, I'd just like to point out another couple of errors. The XT was not the original IBM PC, but an upgraded variant which appeared in 1983. I think most folks thought the hard disk it included was the key upgrade at the time. Suddenly not _everything_ had to run from floppy.

Also the AT was introduced at 6 MHz, though 8 MHz did become available. Wikipedia is wildly optimistic in calling 6 MHz for the original AT conservative--for the condition of the 80286 at the time of introduction, it was not conservative at all.

I was about to comment also on that. I have one of the original IBM PC. I thought I was in Heaven with a mono (green) screen, two floppy drives and 64k of ram, and a 300 baud modem! I then upgraded to a 1200 baud modem (wife had a fit at that) then a 10 meg HD. Some time later added max memory. Then a 2 meg JRam board from Tall Trees, then another, then a 386 upgrade board that fit in a regular slot and tied into the 8088 processor slot.I had every slot filled and all the interrupts were being used. Ran a BBS from it for awhile. Still have it and should fire it up just for grins.......

David

---

Since Sunday I have received no new work, keeps saying contact failed or no work from project.

I suspended communication for one hour, reinstalled boinc using the repair option and rebooted, after one hour I allowed network communications always. Nothing has changed, still no work from project, or failed communication.

Very interesting fact, when I check the your computers tab on the projects page it shows that 50 work units have been sent to me on 16 May and 17 May. So! are they just hanging somewhere in cyber space, because they are not on any of my computers.

Not complaining! just wondering!

---

(blush)
1st PC I ever used was a DEC Rainbow.
It used a 8088 cpu from which the 80186 was descended....

It's too bad that DEC never figured out where to fit into the PC marketplace. They really knew the mini-computer world though.

---

I wonder if the mega equipment replacement, swapping, recycling, decycling, tweaking, stressing, etc. has resulted in a fair degree of server database confusion and thus has dinged the database in ways wondrous and strange.

In any event, I'm hoping this outage (now at 3 weeks and folks it is still an outage -- in that I'm using 'disfunctional' as a definition of an outage) resolves in the next week or so.

Since Sunday I have received no new work, keeps saying contact failed or no work from project.

I suspended communication for one hour, reinstalled boinc using the repair option and rebooted, after one hour I allowed network communications always. Nothing has changed, still no work from project, or failed communication.

Very interesting fact, when I check the your computers tab on the projects page it shows that 50 work units have been sent to me on 16 May and 17 May. So! are they just hanging somewhere in cyber space, because they are not on any of my computers.

Not complaining! just wondering!

---

On the status side, most is again green. Why don't I still get any contact? Slowly, the patience gets lost.

SSSShhhhh! All is running like clockwork. ...and the graph is pointing upwards again.

Well done to all concerned. At least one customer is happy.

---