Hi all, Just was going through this video from Howstuff works and I got amazed by the invention of the Intel4004 in the companies earlier days way back in 1969.Quite a remarkable work I believe.Share your thoughts.... http://videos.howstuffworks.com/intel-corporation/865-4004-intels-first-microprocessor-video.htm Just wondered how much technology has changed from those days till date.... Regards, s.subbarayan
Intels chips in early days...Quire interesting...
Started by ●May 28, 2009
Reply by ●May 29, 20092009-05-29
On Thu, 28 May 2009 02:14:12 -0700 (PDT), ssubbarayan <ssubba@gmail.com> wrote:>Hi all, >Just was going through this video from Howstuff works and I got amazed >by the invention of the Intel4004 in the companies earlier days way >back in 1969.Quite a remarkable work I believe.Share your thoughts.... > >http://videos.howstuffworks.com/intel-corporation/865-4004-intels-first-microprocessor-video.htm > >Just wondered how much technology has changed from those days till >date.... >Not much. The x86 architecture is still pretty much the same kluge. John
Reply by ●May 29, 20092009-05-29
ssubbarayan wrote:> Just was going through this video from Howstuff works and I got amazed > by the invention of the Intel4004 in the companies earlier days way > back in 1969.Quite a remarkable work I believe.Share your thoughts....John Larkin wrote:> Not much. The x86 architecture is still pretty much the same kluge.Actually not. The 4004 and 4040 had a relatively clean and simple architecture that was almost entirely unlike those of the 8008, 8080, 8086/8088, etc. Eric
Reply by ●May 29, 20092009-05-29
On May 29, 1:21=A0pm, Eric Smith <e...@brouhaha.com> wrote:> ssubbarayan wrote: > > Just was going through this video from Howstuff works and I got amazed > > by the invention of the Intel4004 in the companies earlier days way > > back in 1969.Quite a remarkable work I believe.Share your thoughts.... > John Larkin wrote: > > Not much. The x86 architecture is still pretty much the same kluge. > > Actually not. =A0The 4004 and 4040 had a relatively clean and simple > architecture that was almost entirely unlike those of the 8008, > 8080, 8086/8088, etc. > > EricDidn't know Intel had ever produced a clean architecture - never looked into the 40xx things. Yet the x86 mess turned out to be a neat way to feed the public what it believes are computers while the real thing remained reserved for elsewhere (elsewhere being an unknown to me). The plan has worked for well > 20 years now, not bad at all... Dimiter ------------------------------------------------------ Dimiter Popoff Transgalactic Instruments http://www.tgi-sci.com ------------------------------------------------------ http://www.flickr.com/photos/didi_tgi/sets/72157600228621276/
Reply by ●May 29, 20092009-05-29
didi wrote:> On May 29, 1:21 pm, Eric Smith <e...@brouhaha.com> wrote: >> ssubbarayan wrote: >>> Just was going through this video from Howstuff works and I got amazed >>> by the invention of the Intel4004 in the companies earlier days way >>> back in 1969.Quite a remarkable work I believe.Share your thoughts.... >> John Larkin wrote: >>> Not much. The x86 architecture is still pretty much the same kluge. >> Actually not. The 4004 and 4040 had a relatively clean and simple >> architecture that was almost entirely unlike those of the 8008, >> 8080, 8086/8088, etc. >> >> Eric > > Didn't know Intel had ever produced a clean architecture - never > looked into the 40xx things.I never had a chance to work with one hands-one, but reading the datasheet and programming guide, I thought the i860 was quite nice.
Reply by ●May 29, 20092009-05-29
On May 29, 8:30=A0pm, Jim Stewart <grumpyoldg...@gmail.com> wrote:> didi wrote: > > On May 29, 1:21 pm, Eric Smith <e...@brouhaha.com> wrote: > >> ssubbarayan wrote: > >>> Just was going through this video from Howstuff works and I got amaze=d> >>> by the invention of the Intel4004 in the companies earlier days way > >>> back in 1969.Quite a remarkable work I believe.Share your thoughts...=.> >> John Larkin wrote: > >>> Not much. The x86 architecture is still pretty much the same kluge. > >> Actually not. =A0The 4004 and 4040 had a relatively clean and simple > >> architecture that was almost entirely unlike those of the 8008, > >> 8080, 8086/8088, etc. > > >> Eric > > > Didn't know Intel had ever produced a clean architecture - never > > looked into the 40xx things. > > I never had a chance to work with one hands-one, > but reading the datasheet and programming guide, > I thought the i860 was quite nice.My memories on that one are probably a lot vaguer than yours - I never read anything about it in depth but I did have a look at something back then. However vague though, they tell me you are right (although, again, I do can't even recall the register model the thing had, I just seem to remember the feeling I have had about it all these years back). I had forgotten that completely, though. Dimiter ------------------------------------------------------ Dimiter Popoff Transgalactic Instruments http://www.tgi-sci.com ------------------------------------------------------ http://www.flickr.com/photos/didi_tgi/sets/72157600228621276/
Reply by ●May 30, 20092009-05-30
In article <gvp62p$fv6$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Jim Stewart <grumpyoldgeek@gmail.com> wrote:>didi wrote: >> On May 29, 1:21 pm, Eric Smith <e...@brouhaha.com> wrote: >>> ssubbarayan wrote: >>>> Just was going through this video from Howstuff works and I got amazed >>>> by the invention of the Intel4004 in the companies earlier days way >>>> back in 1969.Quite a remarkable work I believe.Share your thoughts.... >>> John Larkin wrote: >>>> Not much. The x86 architecture is still pretty much the same kluge. >>> Actually not. The 4004 and 4040 had a relatively clean and simple >>> architecture that was almost entirely unlike those of the 8008, >>> 8080, 8086/8088, etc. >>> >>> Eric >> >> Didn't know Intel had ever produced a clean architecture - never >> looked into the 40xx things. > >I never had a chance to work with one hands-one, >but reading the datasheet and programming guide, >I thought the i860 was quite nice.I have the original description of the 8086 by its designer Stephen Morse. It really isn't too bad, and the trade off with segments has some merit for that age. Most of the design decisions (set of arithmetic&logic operators, set of flags, long and short jumps) were already traditional at the time, so no merit there, but at least it was a consistent whole. The problem came when generating upwards compatible processors with more bits and the so called "protection". Compare with DEC. They had the PDP, then the VAX, then the Alpha. The VAX may suffer from the second-implementation syndrome of the Mythical Man Month, but few doubt hat PDP and Alpha were brilliant designs. Compatibility was achieved but differently than Intel did. Groetjes Albert -- -- Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS Economic growth -- like all pyramid schemes -- ultimately falters. albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst
Reply by ●May 30, 20092009-05-30
On 30 May 2009 10:14:03 GMT, Albert van der Horst <albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl> wrote:>In article <gvp62p$fv6$1@news.eternal-september.org>, >Jim Stewart <grumpyoldgeek@gmail.com> wrote: >>didi wrote: >>> On May 29, 1:21 pm, Eric Smith <e...@brouhaha.com> wrote: >>>> ssubbarayan wrote: >>>>> Just was going through this video from Howstuff works and I got amazed >>>>> by the invention of the Intel4004 in the companies earlier days way >>>>> back in 1969.Quite a remarkable work I believe.Share your thoughts.... >>>> John Larkin wrote: >>>>> Not much. The x86 architecture is still pretty much the same kluge. >>>> Actually not. The 4004 and 4040 had a relatively clean and simple >>>> architecture that was almost entirely unlike those of the 8008, >>>> 8080, 8086/8088, etc. >>>> >>>> Eric >>> >>> Didn't know Intel had ever produced a clean architecture - never >>> looked into the 40xx things. >> >>I never had a chance to work with one hands-one, >>but reading the datasheet and programming guide, >>I thought the i860 was quite nice. > >I have the original description of the 8086 by its designer >Stephen Morse. It really isn't too bad, and the trade off >with segments has some merit for that age. >Most of the design decisions (set of arithmetic&logic operators, >set of flags, long and short jumps) were already traditional at >the time, so no merit there, but at least it was a consistent whole. > >The problem came when generating upwards compatible processors >with more bits and the so called "protection".Prior to the release of any usable 8086 documentation, there was a lot of marketing hype of 8080 compatibility. This hype died off quite quickly, when it appeared that this compatibility was only at assembler source level.> >Compare with DEC. They had the PDP, then the VAX, then the Alpha. >The VAX may suffer from the second-implementation syndrome of the >Mythical Man Month, but few doubt hat PDP and Alpha were brilliant >designs. Compatibility was achieved but differently than Intel did.The VAX-11/7xx series processors had PDP-11 compatibility mode (enabling efficient bit mapping in native mode), which executed user mode programs quite well. Unfortunately Intel did not use the compatibility mode bit approach. Paul
Reply by ●May 30, 20092009-05-30
>> Didn't know Intel had ever produced a clean architecture - never >> looked into the 40xx things.>I thought the i860 was quite nice.Intel has produced a number of arhitectures. Unfortunately for their architects, the market demands x86 extensions instead. -- mac the na�f
Reply by ●May 30, 20092009-05-30
On May 28, 5:14=A0am, ssubbarayan <ssu...@gmail.com> wrote:> Hi all, > Just was going through this video from Howstuff works and I got amazed > by the invention of the Intel4004 in the companies earlier days way > back in 1969.Quite a remarkable work I believe.Share your thoughts.... > > http://videos.howstuffworks.com/intel-corporation/865-4004-intels-fir... > > Just wondered how much technology has changed from those days till > date....I got my first 8080 for $39 from Jameco after first getting the 8080 manual from Intel. Wired it and the support chips and a few 16x4 bit TTL memories on a proto board and programmed it using octal thumbwheel switches. Life was good, and never was a blinking LED more glorious!
