🚀 go-pugleaf

On 22/01/2018 23:56, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> In 1956 McGraw Hill published a book, "Reliability Factors for
> Ground Electronic Equipment".  It may be downloaded from:
> http://www.tubebooks.org/Books/Atwood/Henney%201956%20Reliabilty%20Factors%20in%20Ground%20Electronic%20Equipment.pdf
> 
> It seems to be an excellent book with a lot of good ideas on how
> to design electronic circuits for maximum reliability and
> effectiveness (as of 1956).  Interesting reading.
> 
> I was wondering, although obviously microprocessors have replaced
> vacuum tubes and components today are different than 60 years ago,
> what techies think of this book.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> (public replies, please).

This is my particular area of expertise, my physics degree is geared 
toward material physics and the physics of failure and I started working 
on equipment reliability as a student in the 1980s running a 'shake and 
bake' oven to reveal early-life failures in test equipment with Marconi 
(Marconi CheckMATE system) before moving into design for reliability.

Broadly speaking it is out of date in terms of technology and theory. 
Some of this forms the core of modern Reliability &  Maintainability but 
they have refined and grown considerably with time. Some is totally 
outdated technology and so is not longer applicable.

The sections dealing with redundancy are still valid and the section on 
human factors and interfaces is pretty much similar to today's human 
factors.

A lot has changed and there is a greater emphasis on metallurgy, 
soldering, pre-stressing, automation for consistency and on the physical 
security of connections. There is also more emphasis on system 
reliability and planned maintenance.

Early reliability was about calculating failure as precisely as possible 
using calculation models such as Bell Labs, NPRD, or MIL-HBBK-217, these 
are largely discredited.

There was also emphasis on preventing failures, often by the incredibly 
expensive techniques of pre-stressing or 'hardening' components that 
gave you confidence in terms of reliability but increased the cost by 
orders of magnitude. Now we design systems to work around failures or 
else to identify impending failures and schedule replacement in 
down-time so as not to impact the mission.

It also goes down the wrong path of the 'bath tub curve' which has been 
shown to only be valid in 14% of failures (mostly mechanical) in the 
Nowlan and Heap report that basically kick-started the RCM industry.

In terms of reliability it covers the basics such as thermal stability 
and cooling, vibration reduction, low humidity etc. These are still 
valid today. It also covers common sense techniques such as not running 
components near their limit

On the Maintainability section it is broadly similar but simpler to 
today's techniques and includes a lot of common sense guides such as 
consistency, simplicity etc although things have changed in the 
maintainability fields these core items still remain.

Andy

AndyW wrote:
> On 22/01/2018 23:56, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> In 1956 McGraw Hill published a book, "Reliability Factors for
>> Ground Electronic Equipment".  It may be downloaded from:
>> http://www.tubebooks.org/Books/Atwood/Henney%201956%20Reliabilty%20Factors%
20in%20Ground%20Electronic%20Equipment.pdf
>>
>> It seems to be an excellent book with a lot of good ideas on how
>> to design electronic circuits for maximum reliability and
>> effectiveness (as of 1956).  Interesting reading.
>>
>> I was wondering, although obviously microprocessors have replaced
>> vacuum tubes and components today are different than 60 years ago,
>> what techies think of this book.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> (public replies, please).
>
> This is my particular area of expertise, my physics degree is geared
> toward material physics and the physics of failure and I started working
> on equipment reliability as a student in the 1980s running a 'shake and
> bake' oven to reveal early-life failures in test equipment with Marconi
> (Marconi CheckMATE system) before moving into design for reliability.

Was that kind of work fun?  How much waiting was involved?  (or could
you start something up and then leave to do something else?)

/BAH

>
> Broadly speaking it is out of date in terms of technology and theory.
> Some of this forms the core of modern Reliability &  Maintainability but
> they have refined and grown considerably with time. Some is totally
> outdated technology and so is not longer applicable.
>
> The sections dealing with redundancy are still valid and the section on
> human factors and interfaces is pretty much similar to today's human
> factors.
>
> A lot has changed and there is a greater emphasis on metallurgy,
> soldering, pre-stressing, automation for consistency and on the physical
> security of connections. There is also more emphasis on system
> reliability and planned maintenance.
>
> Early reliability was about calculating failure as precisely as possible
> using calculation models such as Bell Labs, NPRD, or MIL-HBBK-217, these
> are largely discredited.
>
> There was also emphasis on preventing failures, often by the incredibly
> expensive techniques of pre-stressing or 'hardening' components that
> gave you confidence in terms of reliability but increased the cost by
> orders of magnitude. Now we design systems to work around failures or
> else to identify impending failures and schedule replacement in
> down-time so as not to impact the mission.
>
> It also goes down the wrong path of the 'bath tub curve' which has been
> shown to only be valid in 14% of failures (mostly mechanical) in the
> Nowlan and Heap report that basically kick-started the RCM industry.
>
> In terms of reliability it covers the basics such as thermal stability
> and cooling, vibration reduction, low humidity etc. These are still
> valid today. It also covers common sense techniques such as not running
> components near their limit
>
> On the Maintainability section it is broadly similar but simpler to
> today's techniques and includes a lot of common sense guides such as
> consistency, simplicity etc although things have changed in the
> maintainability fields these core items still remain.
>
> Andy

On Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 3:18:36 AM UTC-5, AndyW wrote:

[snip]
> On the Maintainability section it is broadly similar but simpler to 
> today's techniques and includes a lot of common sense guides such as 
> consistency, simplicity etc although things have changed in the 
> maintainability fields these core items still remain.

Thanks for the information.

On 2018-01-23, AndyW <An...@nojunqmail.com> wrote:

> It also goes down the wrong path of the 'bath tub curve' which has been 
> shown to only be valid in 14% of failures (mostly mechanical) in the 
> Nowlan and Heap report that basically kick-started the RCM industry.

What has taken the place of the bathtub curve?  Presumably failure rates
still vary over time, but what do you use now?

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored.  Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!

On 23/01/2018 13:33, jmfbahciv wrote:
> AndyW wrote:
>> On 22/01/2018 23:56, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>> In 1956 McGraw Hill published a book, "Reliability Factors for
>>> Ground Electronic Equipment".  It may be downloaded from:
>>> http://www.tubebooks.org/Books/Atwood/Henney%201956%20Reliabilty%20Factors%
> 20in%20Ground%20Electronic%20Equipment.pdf
>>>
>>> It seems to be an excellent book with a lot of good ideas on how
>>> to design electronic circuits for maximum reliability and
>>> effectiveness (as of 1956).  Interesting reading.
>>>
>>> I was wondering, although obviously microprocessors have replaced
>>> vacuum tubes and components today are different than 60 years ago,
>>> what techies think of this book.
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> (public replies, please).
>>
>> This is my particular area of expertise, my physics degree is geared
>> toward material physics and the physics of failure and I started working
>> on equipment reliability as a student in the 1980s running a 'shake and
>> bake' oven to reveal early-life failures in test equipment with Marconi
>> (Marconi CheckMATE system) before moving into design for reliability.
> 
> Was that kind of work fun?  How much waiting was involved?  (or could
> you start something up and then leave to do something else?)

The student work was basically a human robot, lots of waiting for the 
ovens and shock and vibrations tables to finish then a flurry of 
activity and form filling. But it was honest work and paid for my 
studies and the wait time allowed me to do a lot of reading which 
probably boosted my final scores.

Design for reliability was basically operating as an advisor to the 
chief engineer on refining designs as pert of the design process. Basic 
engineering.

Andy

On 23/01/2018 21:26, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2018-01-23, AndyW <An...@nojunqmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> It also goes down the wrong path of the 'bath tub curve' which has been
>> shown to only be valid in 14% of failures (mostly mechanical) in the
>> Nowlan and Heap report that basically kick-started the RCM industry.
> 
> What has taken the place of the bathtub curve?  Presumably failure rates
> still vary over time, but what do you use now?

There are 6 main curves of which the bathtub is one, the vast majority 
of failure curves are constant (with a rise/fall at the start for 
early-life failures or break-in that can be bench stressed to remove 
from deployed kit).

<http://www.maintenance.org/topic/doing-the-right-mix-of-maintenance-work>

For a population of similar items there is no real sudden rise in 
probability of failures with time, the point at which the failure starts 
is generally random which does go against the common belief.

Andy

On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 08:10:57 +0000, AndyW <An...@nojunqmail.com> wrote:

[snip]

>For a population of similar items there is no real sudden rise in 
>probability of failures with time, the point at which the failure starts 
>is generally random which does go against the common belief.

     Actually, I found that I did have a sudden rise in failures on
socks.  I would buy a lot of one type.  For a long time, none would
wear out, then the odd one, then suddenly in a period of weeks, I
would have socks wearing out sometimes more than one in a week.  About
then, I would buy new socks and toss the old ones.

     I have since switched to socks with a lifetime guarantee.

Sincerely,

Gene wirchenko

On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 11:00:33 -0800
Gene Wirchenko <ge...@telus.net> wrote:

>      I have since switched to socks with a lifetime guarantee.

	Intrigued!

-- 
Steve O'Hara-Smith                          |   Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN                                     | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins.                |    licences available see
You lose and Bill collects.                 |    http://www.sohara.org/

On 24/01/2018 22:23, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 11:00:33 -0800
> Gene Wirchenko <ge...@telus.net> wrote:
> 
>>       I have since switched to socks with a lifetime guarantee.
> 
> 	Intrigued!
> 

I have a wristwatch with a lifetime guarantee, for when
it malfunctions, the main spring jumps out and slashes
your wrist

On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 22:23:24 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
<ste...@eircom.net> wrote:

>On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 11:00:33 -0800
>Gene Wirchenko <ge...@telus.net> wrote:
>
>>      I have since switched to socks with a lifetime guarantee.
>
>	Intrigued!

     Sport Chek -- spelling is correct -- is a Canadian sporting goods
store.  Their Icebreaker line of socks has a lifetime guarantee.  They
are about $25 per pair.  They are great, and I have yet to manage to
wear out a pair though not through lack of trying.  They are all I
wear for socks now.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

On 1/24/2018 6:19 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 22:23:24 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
> <ste...@eircom.net> wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 11:00:33 -0800
>> Gene Wirchenko <ge...@telus.net> wrote:
>>
>>>       I have since switched to socks with a lifetime guarantee.
>>
>> 	Intrigued!
> 
>       Sport Chek -- spelling is correct -- is a Canadian sporting goods
> store.  Their Icebreaker line of socks has a lifetime guarantee.  They
> are about $25 per pair.  They are great, and I have yet to manage to
> wear out a pair though not through lack of trying.  They are all I
> wear for socks now.

Lifetime. Theirs, yours, or that of the socks?

Gene Wirchenko <ge...@telus.net> writes:

> On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 22:23:24 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
> <ste...@eircom.net> wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 11:00:33 -0800
>> Gene Wirchenko <ge...@telus.net> wrote:
>>
>>>      I have since switched to socks with a lifetime guarantee.
>>
>>	Intrigued!
> 
>      Sport Chek -- spelling is correct -- is a Canadian sporting goods
> store.  Their Icebreaker line of socks has a lifetime guarantee.  They
> are about $25 per pair.  They are great, and I have yet to manage to
> wear out a pair though not through lack of trying.  They are all I
> wear for socks now.

Nylon/wool.  My wife inherited a pair of socks knit by her grandmother
for her father from nylon/wool yarn.  At 25 yrs, they were in poor
condition and wore out before 30 yrs.  I had a set of thermal-knit
long-johns from nylon/wool yarn that developed holes in the knees at
25 yrs but were otherwise in fairly good condition.

It should be obvious why this fiber combo has not become popular
with companies who want to sell you useful garments.

I mostly now wear heavy, hand-knit woolen socks.  With hand washing,
boots that fit properly and attention to toe nail maintenance, they
last about a decade.

-- 
Mike Spencer                  Nova Scotia, Canada

On 2018-01-24, Gareth's Downstairs Computer <headstone255.but.n...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On 24/01/2018 22:23, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 11:00:33 -0800
>> Gene Wirchenko <ge...@telus.net> wrote:
>> 
>>>       I have since switched to socks with a lifetime guarantee.
>> 
>> 	Intrigued!
>> 
>
> I have a wristwatch with a lifetime guarantee, for when
> it malfunctions, the main spring jumps out and slashes
> your wrist
>

!


-- 
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man

Gene Wirchenko <ge...@telus.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 22:23:24 +0000, Ahem A Rivet's Shot
> <ste...@eircom.net> wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 11:00:33 -0800
>> Gene Wirchenko <ge...@telus.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> I have since switched to socks with a lifetime guarantee.
>> 
>> Intrigued!
> 
>      Sport Chek -- spelling is correct -- is a Canadian sporting goods
> store.  Their Icebreaker line of socks has a lifetime guarantee.  They
> are about $25 per pair.  They are great, and I have yet to manage to
> wear out a pair though not through lack of trying.  They are all I
> wear for socks now.

For the cost of sox I'm not sure this is a good bargain. I get six pairs
for, what, $8.00 (forget, haven't bought any in a year or so) If this is
the right price I'm paying 75¢/pr, so I'd have to hang around about 30 more
years to get my money's worth.

-- 
Pete

On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 23:21:56 +0000, Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
>
> On 24/01/2018 22:23, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>> On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 11:00:33 -0800
>> Gene Wirchenko <ge...@telus.net> wrote:
>>
>>>       I have since switched to socks with a lifetime guarantee.
>>
>> 	Intrigued!
>>
>
> I have a wristwatch with a lifetime guarantee, for when
> it malfunctions, the main spring jumps out and slashes
> your wrist

When I read some 80s magazines, for example about dot-matrix printers,
the ads say "Has all you'll ever need".

I mean back in 1986 to have a 24 needle printer must have been awesome
and you might have though, how could this can get any better.

Well you didn't know about laser- or ink printers back then, although
technology existed already. ;-)
-- 
Andreas
You know you are a redneck if
your wife has a beer belly and you find it attractive.

Andreas Kohlbach wrote:


> 
> When I read some 80s magazines, for example about dot-matrix printers,
> the ads say "Has all you'll ever need".
> 
> I mean back in 1986 to have a 24 needle printer must have been awesome
> and you might have though, how could this can get any better.
In about 1982 or so, I had a 300 LPM Honeywell drum printer hooked to my 
Z-80 CP/M system.  That was quite a reverse engineering project to figure 
out how to control it.

Jon

On 25/01/2018 23:16, Jon Elson wrote:
> Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
> 
> 
>>
>> When I read some 80s magazines, for example about dot-matrix printers,
>> the ads say "Has all you'll ever need".
>>
>> I mean back in 1986 to have a 24 needle printer must have been awesome
>> and you might have though, how could this can get any better.
> In about 1982 or so, I had a 300 LPM Honeywell drum printer hooked to my
> Z-80 CP/M system.  That was quite a reverse engineering project to figure
> out how to control it.
> 
> Jon
> 

The joys of the ribbon belt stretching on the left side where it got the
most use!

On 2018-01-25, Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:

> On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 23:21:56 +0000, Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
>
>> On 24/01/2018 22:23, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 11:00:33 -0800
>>> Gene Wirchenko <ge...@telus.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>       I have since switched to socks with a lifetime guarantee.
>>>
>>> 	Intrigued!
>>
>> I have a wristwatch with a lifetime guarantee, for when
>> it malfunctions, the main spring jumps out and slashes
>> your wrist
>
> When I read some 80s magazines, for example about dot-matrix printers,
> the ads say "Has all you'll ever need".
>
> I mean back in 1986 to have a 24 needle printer must have been awesome
> and you might have though, how could this can get any better.
>
> Well you didn't know about laser- or ink printers back then, although
> technology existed already. ;-)

Oh, we knew about laser printers - but we didn't want to spend a quarter
of a million dollars on one, nor did we need to be able to print several
thousand pages at 167 pages per minute.

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored.  Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!

On 25/01/2018 21:54, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
> When I read some 80s magazines, for example about dot-matrix printers,
> the ads say "Has all you'll ever need".
> 
> I mean back in 1986 to have a 24 needle printer must have been awesome
> and you might have though, how could this can get any better.
> 
> Well you didn't know about laser- or ink printers back then, although
> technology existed already. ;-)

Nothing quite like the sound of a DM printer. Crackle of a log fire, 
roar of a waterfall, zizz of a DM printer and the hiss of a paraffin 
pressure lamp. Favourite sounds.

I had a DM printer in regular use until about 10 years ago. I was 
contacted by a local church in the early 90s who wondered if they should 
get a desktop publishing system with laser printers for the notices and 
orders of service. Until then they has a typewriter and a Gestetner 
duplicator (I think Mimeograph if you are left side of the pond).
I got hold of a Mac SE and a dot matrix printer being dumped by my work 
and, without a ribbon, the DM printer cut the stencil perfectly giving 
access to 'hi res' graphics.

It was a cracking little set up and was only retired when the duplicator 
ink became hard to obtain.

Now they have a PC and laser printer. Perfect prints but souless and no 
character.

Andy

On 2018-01-26, AndyW <An...@nojunqmail.com> wrote:

> Nothing quite like the sound of a DM printer. Crackle of a log fire, 
> roar of a waterfall, zizz of a DM printer and the hiss of a paraffin 
> pressure lamp. Favourite sounds.

Yes, it was quite distinctive.  Too bad the guys who produced the
original Tron movie didn't realize this; near the end there's a
close-up view of a daisy-wheel printer showing some messages,
while the dubbed-in sound is that of a dot-matrix printer.

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored.  Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!

On 26/01/2018 17:37, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2018-01-26, AndyW <An...@nojunqmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Nothing quite like the sound of a DM printer. Crackle of a log fire,
>> roar of a waterfall, zizz of a DM printer and the hiss of a paraffin
>> pressure lamp. Favourite sounds.
> 
> Yes, it was quite distinctive.  Too bad the guys who produced the
> original Tron movie didn't realize this; near the end there's a
> close-up view of a daisy-wheel printer showing some messages,
> while the dubbed-in sound is that of a dot-matrix printer.
> 

How quiet we thought the DecWriter to be after the
clanking Teletypes!

On 26 Jan 2018 17:37:01 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
> On 2018-01-26, AndyW <An...@nojunqmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Nothing quite like the sound of a DM printer. Crackle of a log fire, 
>> roar of a waterfall, zizz of a DM printer and the hiss of a paraffin 
>> pressure lamp. Favourite sounds.
>
> Yes, it was quite distinctive.  Too bad the guys who produced the
> original Tron movie didn't realize this; near the end there's a
> close-up view of a daisy-wheel printer showing some messages,
> while the dubbed-in sound is that of a dot-matrix printer.

There are a lot of bad dubs for sound. Probably from always until the 00s
you can hear tires screeching - on sand.
-- 
Andreas
You know you are a redneck if
your school fight song was "dueling banjos".

On Friday, January 26, 2018 at 4:02:14 AM UTC-5, AndyW wrote:

> I had a DM printer in regular use until about 10 years ago. I was 
> contacted by a local church in the early 90s who wondered if they should 
> get a desktop publishing system with laser printers for the notices and 
> orders of service. Until then they has a typewriter and a Gestetner 
> duplicator (I think Mimeograph if you are left side of the pond).
> I got hold of a Mac SE and a dot matrix printer being dumped by my work 
> and, without a ribbon, the DM printer cut the stencil perfectly giving 
> access to 'hi res' graphics.

Well, you answered my long standing question if a dotmatrix
could cut a mimeo stencil.

However, my 24 pin unit, while fine on text, was rather poor on
graphics.  I guess if you had a simple line drawing it would come
out on mimeo, the overall, the mimeo process wasn't too good for
graphics.  Sometimes a school would do artwork on a stencil, and
it looked crappy.

> It was a cracking little set up and was only retired when the duplicator 
> ink became hard to obtain.

I'm surprised the mimeo ink would be hard to obtain--I'd figure that
would remain available after parts dried up.  

While I'm nostalgic for mimeo, I must admit it was a crappy process.
It's big advantage was that it was simple and cheap.  Anyone with
a typewriter could cut a stencil, and presumably second-hand
manual simple mimeo machines were cheap.  When low-cost Xerox
machines came out, everyone switched over.

ad for mimeograph machine
https://books.google.com/books?id=lU0EAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA10&dq=life%20mimeo&pg=PA10#v=onepage&q&f=false




> 
> Now they have a PC and laser printer. Perfect prints but souless and no 
> character.
> 
> Andy

Jon Elson wrote:

> Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> When I read some 80s magazines, for example about dot-matrix printers,
>> the ads say "Has all you'll ever need".
>> 
>> I mean back in 1986 to have a 24 needle printer must have been awesome
>> and you might have though, how could this can get any better.
> In about 1982 or so, I had a 300 LPM Honeywell drum printer hooked to my
> Z-80 CP/M system.  That was quite a reverse engineering project to figure
> out how to control it.
> 
> Jon
You would then see the rare condition of the printer waiting on the computer 
to catch up.

Freddy,
( PRINT, pause...pause...pause, PRINT, pause...pause...pause. )

-- 
Replace fuse with another of the same amp rating.

/|>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>\|
/|  I may be demented                          \|
/|                      but I'm not crazy!     \|
/|<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<\|
*    SPAyM trap:  there is no X in my address   *

Freddy <freddy1X@indyX.netX> wrote:
> Jon Elson wrote:
> 
>> Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> When I read some 80s magazines, for example about dot-matrix printers,
>>> the ads say "Has all you'll ever need".
>>> 
>>> I mean back in 1986 to have a 24 needle printer must have been awesome
>>> and you might have though, how could this can get any better.
>> In about 1982 or so, I had a 300 LPM Honeywell drum printer hooked to my
>> Z-80 CP/M system.  That was quite a reverse engineering project to figure
>> out how to control it.
>> 
>> Jon
> You would then see the rare condition of the printer waiting on the computer 
> to catch up.
> 
> Freddy,
> ( PRINT, pause...pause...pause, PRINT, pause...pause...pause. )
> 

I would assume the programming was similar to what the 1130 went thru for
the 1132 printer, where the printer interrupted as each character was
coming around on the print drum and the CPU had to send it a bitmap of
which hammers to  fire.

-- 
Pete

On 2018-01-26, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com <hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> On Friday, January 26, 2018 at 4:02:14 AM UTC-5, AndyW wrote:
>
>
> I'm surprised the mimeo ink would be hard to obtain--I'd figure that
> would remain available after parts dried up.  
>
> While I'm nostalgic for mimeo, I must admit it was a crappy process.
> It's big advantage was that it was simple and cheap.  Anyone with
> a typewriter could cut a stencil, and presumably second-hand
> manual simple mimeo machines were cheap.  When low-cost Xerox
> machines came out, everyone switched over.
>
> ad for mimeograph machine
> https://books.google.com/books?id=lU0EAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA10&dq=life%20mimeo&pg=PA10#v=onepage&q&f=false

Mimeo machines, in my erperience, were extensively used by churches
for weekly newsletters. The wives of Reformed Church clerics were
usually doing it, (probably the girlfriends of Catholic priests too,
but hey ..)


>
>
>
>
>> 
>> Now they have a PC and laser printer. Perfect prints but souless and no 
>> character.
>> 
>> Andy


-- 
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man

hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Friday, January 26, 2018 at 4:02:14 AM UTC-5, AndyW wrote:
>
>> I had a DM printer in regular use until about 10 years ago. I was
>> contacted by a local church in the early 90s who wondered if they should
>> get a desktop publishing system with laser printers for the notices and
>> orders of service. Until then they has a typewriter and a Gestetner
>> duplicator (I think Mimeograph if you are left side of the pond).
>> I got hold of a Mac SE and a dot matrix printer being dumped by my work
>> and, without a ribbon, the DM printer cut the stencil perfectly giving
>> access to 'hi res' graphics.
>
> Well, you answered my long standing question if a dotmatrix
> could cut a mimeo stencil.
>
> However, my 24 pin unit, while fine on text, was rather poor on
> graphics.  I guess if you had a simple line drawing it would come
> out on mimeo, the overall, the mimeo process wasn't too good for
> graphics.  Sometimes a school would do artwork on a stencil, and
> it looked crappy.
>
>> It was a cracking little set up and was only retired when the duplicator
>> ink became hard to obtain.
>
> I'm surprised the mimeo ink would be hard to obtain--I'd figure that
> would remain available after parts dried up.
>
> While I'm nostalgic for mimeo, I must admit it was a crappy process.
> It's big advantage was that it was simple and cheap.  Anyone with
> a typewriter could cut a stencil, and presumably second-hand
> manual simple mimeo machines were cheap.  When low-cost Xerox
> machines came out, everyone switched over.
>
> ad for mimeograph machine
> https://books.google.com/books?id=lU0EAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA10&dq=life%20mimeo&pg=P
A10#v=onepage&q&f=false


Cutting those stencils were a RPITA.  First you had to remember
to put the stencil into the typewriter upside-down.  When an error
was made, you  rolled the stencil up, opened it and scraped the
error of with a switchblade (I don't recall the proper name for
the knife but we called it a switchblade).  Then you tore a piece
of inked paper from a scrap stencil, put it in (properly) the
stencil where the error had been scraped, rolled the stencil
down, typed the correction, rolled the stencil up, removed the
scrap, rolled the stencil down and continued typing.

/BAH

Freddy wrote:
> Jon Elson wrote:
>
>> Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> When I read some 80s magazines, for example about dot-matrix printers,
>>> the ads say "Has all you'll ever need".
>>>
>>> I mean back in 1986 to have a 24 needle printer must have been awesome
>>> and you might have though, how could this can get any better.
>> In about 1982 or so, I had a 300 LPM Honeywell drum printer hooked to my
>> Z-80 CP/M system.  That was quite a reverse engineering project to figure
>> out how to control it.
>>
>> Jon
> You would then see the rare condition of the printer waiting on the computer
> to catch up.
>
> Freddy,
> ( PRINT, pause...pause...pause, PRINT, pause...pause...pause. )
>
Some of the printing jobs I did on the 407 had a beat which I
danced to while waiting for the job to finish.

/BAH

ma...@mail.com wrote:
> On 2018-01-26, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com <hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>> On Friday, January 26, 2018 at 4:02:14 AM UTC-5, AndyW wrote:
>>
>>
>> I'm surprised the mimeo ink would be hard to obtain--I'd figure that
>> would remain available after parts dried up.
>>
>> While I'm nostalgic for mimeo, I must admit it was a crappy process.
>> It's big advantage was that it was simple and cheap.  Anyone with
>> a typewriter could cut a stencil, and presumably second-hand
>> manual simple mimeo machines were cheap.  When low-cost Xerox
>> machines came out, everyone switched over.
>>
>> ad for mimeograph machine
>> https://books.google.com/books?id=lU0EAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA10&dq=life%20mimeo&pg=
PA10#v=onepage&q&f=false
>
> Mimeo machines, in my erperience, were extensively used by churches
> for weekly newsletters. The wives of Reformed Church clerics were
> usually doing it, (probably the girlfriends of Catholic priests too,
> but hey ..)

and schools.

/BAH

On 27 Jan 2018 15:27:52 GMT, jmfbahciv <See....@aol.com> wrote:

>hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> On Friday, January 26, 2018 at 4:02:14 AM UTC-5, AndyW wrote:
>>
>>> I had a DM printer in regular use until about 10 years ago. I was
>>> contacted by a local church in the early 90s who wondered if they should
>>> get a desktop publishing system with laser printers for the notices and
>>> orders of service. Until then they has a typewriter and a Gestetner
>>> duplicator (I think Mimeograph if you are left side of the pond).
>>> I got hold of a Mac SE and a dot matrix printer being dumped by my work
>>> and, without a ribbon, the DM printer cut the stencil perfectly giving
>>> access to 'hi res' graphics.
>>
>> Well, you answered my long standing question if a dotmatrix
>> could cut a mimeo stencil.
>>
>> However, my 24 pin unit, while fine on text, was rather poor on
>> graphics.  I guess if you had a simple line drawing it would come
>> out on mimeo, the overall, the mimeo process wasn't too good for
>> graphics.  Sometimes a school would do artwork on a stencil, and
>> it looked crappy.
>>
>>> It was a cracking little set up and was only retired when the duplicator
>>> ink became hard to obtain.
>>
>> I'm surprised the mimeo ink would be hard to obtain--I'd figure that
>> would remain available after parts dried up.
>>
>> While I'm nostalgic for mimeo, I must admit it was a crappy process.
>> It's big advantage was that it was simple and cheap.  Anyone with
>> a typewriter could cut a stencil, and presumably second-hand
>> manual simple mimeo machines were cheap.  When low-cost Xerox
>> machines came out, everyone switched over.
>>
>> ad for mimeograph machine
>> https://books.google.com/books?id=lU0EAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA10&dq=life%20mimeo&pg=P
>A10#v=onepage&q&f=false
>
>
>Cutting those stencils were a RPITA.  First you had to remember
>to put the stencil into the typewriter upside-down.  When an error
>was made, you  rolled the stencil up, opened it and scraped the
>error of with a switchblade (I don't recall the proper name for
>the knife but we called it a switchblade).  Then you tore a piece
>of inked paper from a scrap stencil, put it in (properly) the
>stencil where the error had been scraped, rolled the stencil
>down, typed the correction, rolled the stencil up, removed the
>scrap, rolled the stencil down and continued typing.

Or you keyed and edited the job using the APL editor, saved to a
variable, keyed the name of the variable, swapped the element,
unloaded the greenbar, rolled the stencil in, and hit "Enter".

On 1/27/2018 9:27 AM, jmfbahciv wrote:
> hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:

> 
> Cutting those stencils were a RPITA.  First you had to remember
> to put the stencil into the typewriter upside-down.  When an error
> was made, you  rolled the stencil up, opened it and scraped the
> error of with a switchblade (I don't recall the proper name for
> the knife but we called it a switchblade).  Then you tore a piece
> of inked paper from a scrap stencil, put it in (properly) the
> stencil where the error had been scraped, rolled the stencil
> down, typed the correction, rolled the stencil up, removed the
> scrap, rolled the stencil down and continued typing.

You may be remembering spirit duplicators ("ditto machines") rather 
than mimeos. Spirit duplicators transferred the ink from a backing 
sheet to the master, where it would be gradually transferred to the 
printed copies. Maximum print run maybe a couple hundred copies. The 
default ink color seemed to be blue, but other colors were available. 
You could do 2 or 3 color printing, by using different colored backing 
sheets for your typing or drawing. Print consumed alcohol, which 
dampened the paper and then pressed it against the master. The printed 
pages smelled sweetly of alcohol.

Mimeos used very thin actual stencils through which thick ink was 
squeezed. You typed with the typewriter's "stencil" setting, which let 
the typebars hit the stencil directly without being intercepted by the 
ribbon. To do corrections on those, you had to paint over the mistake 
with "correction fluid", which recoated the stencil (and didn't work 
terribly well). But you could get a couple thousand copies out of a 
print run. You usually got ink on yourself in the process. One place I 
worked also had a "stencil cutter", sort of a facsimile machine with 
two drums, one for an original and the other for a stencil. The 
stencil was cut with a spark, accompanied by copious ozone and 
probably other toxic fumes, but it could actually do pictures, though 
the result was sort of xerox-of-a-xerox.

On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 10:28:56 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:

> > ad for mimeograph machine
> > https://books.google.com/books?id=lU0EAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA10&dq=life%20mimeo&pg=P
> A10#v=onepage&q&f=false

> Cutting those stencils were a RPITA.  First you had to remember
> to put the stencil into the typewriter upside-down.  When an error
> was made, you  rolled the stencil up, opened it and scraped the
> error of with a switchblade (I don't recall the proper name for
> the knife but we called it a switchblade).  Then you tore a piece
> of inked paper from a scrap stencil, put it in (properly) the
> stencil where the error had been scraped, rolled the stencil
> down, typed the correction, rolled the stencil up, removed the
> scrap, rolled the stencil down and continued typing.

You might be confusing the stencils of a _mimeograph_ machine
and a _spirit duplicator_.

To recap, a mimeo used a wax sheet, where the ink bled through
where cut by the typewriter.  Mimeo was good for unlimited
copies and was a high-volume method.  It was almost always
typed.

Spirit used a heavy piece of carbon paper, making an impression on
the backside of the stencil.  One could easily use pen on that,
indeed, many people did  Sprit used an alcohol solvent to transfer
a bit of the image to the pencil.  It was only good for short
runs, and the output was usually pale.

A large school would use both--teachers would use the spirit for
individual classes, while the office would use the mimeo for
school-wide notices.

To correct an error on a mimeo stencil, one used a correction fluid
which basically "plugged" up the error.

Very large and more sophisticated organizations used offset printing
which was much higher quality (assuming one had a good original;
if typed, it needed to be on a film ribbon for best results.  Ink
had to be special drawing ink, not ballpoint.)

When we graduated college, we were told to have our resume printed
via offset for best results.  There was a print shop, but the owner
was sleazy and the quality was terrible.  Indeed, I found that the
_smaller_ sized IBM and Xerox copiers could do a very good job.
The big dome Xerox copiers gave poor faint quality.


I was surprised Xerox machines took over for high volume runs
since the cost, even in the 1980s, was still higher.  But
admittedly Xerox was so much easier to use, and a heck of a
lot less messy.

On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 1:45:33 PM UTC-5, Dave Garland wrote:


[snip]
> You usually got ink on yourself in the process.

Oh, yes!

>  One place I 
> worked also had a "stencil cutter", sort of a facsimile machine with 
> two drums, one for an original and the other for a stencil. The 
> stencil was cut with a spark, accompanied by copious ozone and 
> probably other toxic fumes, but it could actually do pictures, though 
> the result was sort of xerox-of-a-xerox.

The Gestetner Company made scanners as you describe, and marketed
them into the 1980s.  But the quality was rather poor.  I think you
had better quality using an electric typewriter on the stencil
setting (ideally pica type).  Gestetner also claimed to produce
a superior quality mimeo copy, but I couldn't see it.
https://books.google.com/books?id=5jMEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA12&dq=rotary%20gestetner&pg=PA12#v=onepage&q&f=false

Some of the older documents on bitsavers were typewritten and 
mimeographed.


I have 50 y/o mimeo documents and they remain quite crisp, no fading.
Sprint documents have faded to nothing.  Indeed, a lot of documents
I have made by Xerox or other copying machines have faded.

Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in news:p4e01401mg5
@news6.newsguy.com:

> On 2018-01-25, Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 23:21:56 +0000, Gareth's Downstairs Computer wrote:
>>
>>> On 24/01/2018 22:23, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 24 Jan 2018 11:00:33 -0800
>>>> Gene Wirchenko <ge...@telus.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>       I have since switched to socks with a lifetime guarantee.
>>>>
>>>>      Intrigued!
>>>
>>> I have a wristwatch with a lifetime guarantee, for when
>>> it malfunctions, the main spring jumps out and slashes your wrist
>>
>> When I read some 80s magazines, for example about dot-matrix printers,
>> the ads say "Has all you'll ever need". 
>>
>> I mean back in 1986 to have a 24 needle printer must have been awesome
>> and you might have though, how could this can get any better.
>>
>> Well you didn't know about laser- or ink printers back then, although
>> technology existed already. ;-) 
> 
> Oh, we knew about laser printers - but we didn't want to spend a quarter
> of a million dollars on one, nor did we need to be able to print several
> thousand pages at 167 pages per minute.

In 1986 you could get something like a QMS Kiss for a mere 7 or 8 thousand.

J. Clarke wrote:
> On 27 Jan 2018 15:27:52 GMT, jmfbahciv <See....@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>> On Friday, January 26, 2018 at 4:02:14 AM UTC-5, AndyW wrote:
>>>
>>>> I had a DM printer in regular use until about 10 years ago. I was
>>>> contacted by a local church in the early 90s who wondered if they should
>>>> get a desktop publishing system with laser printers for the notices and
>>>> orders of service. Until then they has a typewriter and a Gestetner
>>>> duplicator (I think Mimeograph if you are left side of the pond).
>>>> I got hold of a Mac SE and a dot matrix printer being dumped by my work
>>>> and, without a ribbon, the DM printer cut the stencil perfectly giving
>>>> access to 'hi res' graphics.
>>>
>>> Well, you answered my long standing question if a dotmatrix
>>> could cut a mimeo stencil.
>>>
>>> However, my 24 pin unit, while fine on text, was rather poor on
>>> graphics.  I guess if you had a simple line drawing it would come
>>> out on mimeo, the overall, the mimeo process wasn't too good for
>>> graphics.  Sometimes a school would do artwork on a stencil, and
>>> it looked crappy.
>>>
>>>> It was a cracking little set up and was only retired when the duplicator
>>>> ink became hard to obtain.
>>>
>>> I'm surprised the mimeo ink would be hard to obtain--I'd figure that
>>> would remain available after parts dried up.
>>>
>>> While I'm nostalgic for mimeo, I must admit it was a crappy process.
>>> It's big advantage was that it was simple and cheap.  Anyone with
>>> a typewriter could cut a stencil, and presumably second-hand
>>> manual simple mimeo machines were cheap.  When low-cost Xerox
>>> machines came out, everyone switched over.
>>>
>>> ad for mimeograph machine
>>>
https://books.google.com/books?id=lU0EAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA10&dq=life%20mimeo&pg=P
>>A10#v=onepage&q&f=false
>>
>>
>>Cutting those stencils were a RPITA.  First you had to remember
>>to put the stencil into the typewriter upside-down.  When an error
>>was made, you  rolled the stencil up, opened it and scraped the
>>error of with a switchblade (I don't recall the proper name for
>>the knife but we called it a switchblade).  Then you tore a piece
>>of inked paper from a scrap stencil, put it in (properly) the
>>stencil where the error had been scraped, rolled the stencil
>>down, typed the correction, rolled the stencil up, removed the
>>scrap, rolled the stencil down and continued typing.
>
> Or you keyed and edited the job using the APL editor, saved to a
> variable, keyed the name of the variable, swapped the element,
> unloaded the greenbar, rolled the stencil in, and hit "Enter".

<grin>  I never had to type those things again after the PDP-10
came into my life.  Yea, RUNOFF and TECO.

/BAH

hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Saturday, January 27, 2018 at 10:28:56 AM UTC-5, jmfbahciv wrote:
>
>> > ad for mimeograph machine
>> >
https://books.google.com/books?id=lU0EAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA10&dq=life%20mimeo&pg=P
>> A10#v=onepage&q&f=false
>
>> Cutting those stencils were a RPITA.  First you had to remember
>> to put the stencil into the typewriter upside-down.  When an error
>> was made, you  rolled the stencil up, opened it and scraped the
>> error of with a switchblade (I don't recall the proper name for
>> the knife but we called it a switchblade).  Then you tore a piece
>> of inked paper from a scrap stencil, put it in (properly) the
>> stencil where the error had been scraped, rolled the stencil
>> down, typed the correction, rolled the stencil up, removed the
>> scrap, rolled the stencil down and continued typing.
>
> You might be confusing the stencils of a _mimeograph_ machine
> and a _spirit duplicator_.

Yup, I was.   Thanks.

/BAH

>
> To recap, a mimeo used a wax sheet, where the ink bled through
> where cut by the typewriter.  Mimeo was good for unlimited
> copies and was a high-volume method.  It was almost always
> typed.
>
> Spirit used a heavy piece of carbon paper, making an impression on
> the backside of the stencil.  One could easily use pen on that,
> indeed, many people did  Sprit used an alcohol solvent to transfer
> a bit of the image to the pencil.  It was only good for short
> runs, and the output was usually pale.
>
> A large school would use both--teachers would use the spirit for
> individual classes, while the office would use the mimeo for
> school-wide notices.
>
> To correct an error on a mimeo stencil, one used a correction fluid
> which basically "plugged" up the error.
>
> Very large and more sophisticated organizations used offset printing
> which was much higher quality (assuming one had a good original;
> if typed, it needed to be on a film ribbon for best results.  Ink
> had to be special drawing ink, not ballpoint.)
>
> When we graduated college, we were told to have our resume printed
> via offset for best results.  There was a print shop, but the owner
> was sleazy and the quality was terrible.  Indeed, I found that the
> _smaller_ sized IBM and Xerox copiers could do a very good job.
> The big dome Xerox copiers gave poor faint quality.
>
>
> I was surprised Xerox machines took over for high volume runs
> since the cost, even in the 1980s, was still higher.  But
> admittedly Xerox was so much easier to use, and a heck of a
> lot less messy.
>

On 1/27/2018 9:27 AM, jmfbahciv wrote:
> hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> On Friday, January 26, 2018 at 4:02:14 AM UTC-5, AndyW wrote:
>>
>>> I had a DM printer in regular use until about 10 years ago. I was
>>> contacted by a local church in the early 90s who wondered if they should
>>> get a desktop publishing system with laser printers for the notices and
>>> orders of service. Until then they has a typewriter and a Gestetner
>>> duplicator (I think Mimeograph if you are left side of the pond).
>>> I got hold of a Mac SE and a dot matrix printer being dumped by my work
>>> and, without a ribbon, the DM printer cut the stencil perfectly giving
>>> access to 'hi res' graphics.
>>
>> Well, you answered my long standing question if a dotmatrix
>> could cut a mimeo stencil.
>>
>> However, my 24 pin unit, while fine on text, was rather poor on
>> graphics.  I guess if you had a simple line drawing it would come
>> out on mimeo, the overall, the mimeo process wasn't too good for
>> graphics.  Sometimes a school would do artwork on a stencil, and
>> it looked crappy.
>>
>>> It was a cracking little set up and was only retired when the duplicator
>>> ink became hard to obtain.
>>
>> I'm surprised the mimeo ink would be hard to obtain--I'd figure that
>> would remain available after parts dried up.
>>
>> While I'm nostalgic for mimeo, I must admit it was a crappy process.
>> It's big advantage was that it was simple and cheap.  Anyone with
>> a typewriter could cut a stencil, and presumably second-hand
>> manual simple mimeo machines were cheap.  When low-cost Xerox
>> machines came out, everyone switched over.
>>
>> ad for mimeograph machine
>> https://books.google.com/books?id=lU0EAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA10&dq=life%20mimeo&pg=P
> A10#v=onepage&q&f=false
> 
> 
> Cutting those stencils were a RPITA.  First you had to remember
> to put the stencil into the typewriter upside-down.  When an error
> was made, you  rolled the stencil up, opened it and scraped the
> error of with a switchblade (I don't recall the proper name for
> the knife but we called it a switchblade).  Then you tore a piece
> of inked paper from a scrap stencil, put it in (properly) the
> stencil where the error had been scraped, rolled the stencil
> down, typed the correction, rolled the stencil up, removed the
> scrap, rolled the stencil down and continued typing.
> 

If you are talking about the duplicators that used a special carbon 
paper (usually purple), those were *not* mimeograph machines, they were 
"spirit duplicators".  This was pointed out by Dennis Ritchie on this 
group many years ago.

A mimeograph machine would force liquid ink through the holes in a 
stencil, which was usually "cut" with a typewriter.  The stencil was cut 
on a special "paper", *not* an ordinary paper sheet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mimeograph

A spirit duplicator  used two-ply "spirit masters", also called "master 
sheets". The first sheet could be typed, drawn, or written upon. The 
second sheet was coated with a layer of wax that had been impregnated 
with one of a variety of colorants. The pressure of writing or typing on 
the first sheet transferred the colored wax from the second sheet to the 
shiny/coated back side of the first sheet, producing a mirror image. 
This produced the same result of a sheet of carbon paper put in 
backwards. The two sheets were then separated, and the first sheet was 
fastened onto the drum of the machine, with the back side facing out, 
acting as a printing plate.

There is no separate ink used in spirit duplication, as the wax 
transferred to the back side of the first sheet contained the ink. As 
the paper to be printed moved through the printer, the solvent was 
spread across each sheet by an absorbent wick. When the 
solvent-impregnated paper came into contact with the back side of the 
first sheet, it dissolved just enough of the pigmented wax to print the 
image onto the paper as it went under the printing drum.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit_duplicator


-- 
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com

On Sun, 28 Jan 2018 12:58:49 -0600, Charles Richmond
<nume...@aquaporin4.com> wrote:

> There is no separate ink used in spirit duplication, as the wax 
> transferred to the back side of the first sheet contained the ink. As 
> the paper to be printed moved through the printer, the solvent was 
> spread across each sheet by an absorbent wick. When the 
> solvent-impregnated paper came into contact with the back side of the 
> first sheet, it dissolved just enough of the pigmented wax to print the 
> image onto the paper as it went under the printing drum.

Sometimes the machine would malfunction and a flood of spirit would
wash all the ink off your master and you'd have to start over.

I've forgotten whether the mess was hard to clean up.

Spirit masters also worked with hectograph, but hecto reverses twice,
so you had to type on the carbon side and it was hard to see what you
were doing.

-- 
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/

Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in 
news:p4...@news1.newsguy.com:

> On 2018-01-26, AndyW <An...@nojunqmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Nothing quite like the sound of a DM printer. Crackle of a log fire, 
>> roar of a waterfall, zizz of a DM printer and the hiss of a paraffin 
>> pressure lamp. Favourite sounds. 
> 
> Yes, it was quite distinctive.  Too bad the guys who produced the
> original Tron movie didn't realize this; near the end there's a
> close-up view of a daisy-wheel printer showing some messages,
> while the dubbed-in sound is that of a dot-matrix printer.

When I was at UBC in the early 80's, the terminal room in Electrical 
Engineering had a Printronix P300 printer. I'm sure if I heard the 
distinctive cadence of the P300 printing the first banner page of a 
printout from the MTS system, it would trigger a nostalgic memory.

At my first job, there was a P300 attached to the VAX we used. Very solid 
printer. I don't recall it ever needing repair.

-- 
Clark G
* take away the em's to reply  

On 26/01/2018 17:37, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2018-01-26, AndyW <An...@nojunqmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Nothing quite like the sound of a DM printer. Crackle of a log fire,
>> roar of a waterfall, zizz of a DM printer and the hiss of a paraffin
>> pressure lamp. Favourite sounds.
> 
> Yes, it was quite distinctive.  Too bad the guys who produced the
> original Tron movie didn't realize this; near the end there's a
> close-up view of a daisy-wheel printer showing some messages,
> while the dubbed-in sound is that of a dot-matrix printer.

Or it could be like the joke in Airplane where throughout the entire 
film there is the sound of a prop plane but it's a jet....or maybe they 
just made a mistake.

Andy

In the case of Airplane, it was definitely a joke and not a mistake.

In the case of TRON, they wouldn't joke about things like that.

But that doesn't mean it couldn't have been deliberate instead of a mistake.

They could have felt that the sound of a daisywheel wasn't computer-y 
enough, and chose the sound effect of the sound of a dot-matrix printer as 
more suited to the intended atmosphere of the film.

On 29/01/2018 10:29, Quadibloc wrote:
> In the case of Airplane, it was definitely a joke and not a mistake.
> 
> In the case of TRON, they wouldn't joke about things like that.
> 
> But that doesn't mean it couldn't have been deliberate instead of a mistake.
> 
> They could have felt that the sound of a daisywheel wasn't computer-y
> enough, and chose the sound effect of the sound of a dot-matrix printer as
> more suited to the intended atmosphere of the film.

In a lot of cases they use what people will recognise and not the reality.
When someone is using a defibrillator it is invariably the 70s paddles, 
the thump and leap of the body. These days it is a case of stick on 
pads, a beep and a wobble but it is not Hollywood-enough an image to show.

Andy

On 2018-01-29, Clark G <clarkm....@ieeemmm.org> wrote:

> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote in 
> news:p4...@news1.newsguy.com:
>
>> On 2018-01-26, AndyW <An...@nojunqmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Nothing quite like the sound of a DM printer. Crackle of a log fire, 
>>> roar of a waterfall, zizz of a DM printer and the hiss of a paraffin 
>>> pressure lamp. Favourite sounds. 
>> 
>> Yes, it was quite distinctive.  Too bad the guys who produced the
>> original Tron movie didn't realize this; near the end there's a
>> close-up view of a daisy-wheel printer showing some messages,
>> while the dubbed-in sound is that of a dot-matrix printer.
>
> When I was at UBC in the early 80's, the terminal room in Electrical 
> Engineering had a Printronix P300 printer. I'm sure if I heard the 
> distinctive cadence of the P300 printing the first banner page of a 
> printout from the MTS system, it would trigger a nostalgic memory.

At my first job, the rhythm of the printer would tell me from across
the room not only that an RPG compile was running, but whether it
had any errors.

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored.  Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!

On Monday, January 29, 2018 at 5:29:10 AM UTC-5, Quadibloc wrote:

> They could have felt that the sound of a daisywheel wasn't computer-y 
> enough, and chose the sound effect of the sound of a dot-matrix printer as 
> more suited to the intended atmosphere of the film.

Actually, the sound of my dot matrix printer was kind of annoying,
especially in graphics mode.  

Dasiy wheels were quiet.  I had a nice one, but the daisy itself
kept breaking, and I couldn't get ink cartridges for it.

On Monday, January 29, 2018 at 10:33:02 AM UTC-5, AndyW wrote:

> In a lot of cases they use what people will recognise and not the reality.
> When someone is using a defibrillator it is invariably the 70s paddles, 
> the thump and leap of the body. These days it is a case of stick on 
> pads, a beep and a wobble but it is not Hollywood-enough an image to show.

For the longest time, when Hollywood showed someone using a
pay phone, they had the sound effect of the ding-ding-dong of
the coins dropping (as late as 2009).  But payphones got rid 
of that sound far earlier with single-slot phones.

ding = 5c
ding ding 10c
dong  25c

On Monday, January 29, 2018 at 11:54:30 AM UTC-5, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> At my first job, the rhythm of the printer would tell me from across
> the room not only that an RPG compile was running, but whether it
> had any errors.

+1.  Like with the 1403 printing a dump--I could tell by the
sound my job had abended.

On 29/01/2018 21:01, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Monday, January 29, 2018 at 11:54:30 AM UTC-5, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> 
>> At my first job, the rhythm of the printer would tell me from across
>> the room not only that an RPG compile was running, but whether it
>> had any errors.
> 
> +1.  Like with the 1403 printing a dump--I could tell by the
> sound my job had abended.
> 
My IT department wrote a routine to print a block of text onto the end 
of each print so that they could hear when each batch print had ended 
and so they could separate the prints as they came out instead of 
searching through a whole stack of fan fold to separate the different 
prints. It sounded like descending tones.

Simple everyday genius.

Andy

On Tue, 30 Jan 2018 07:05:01 +0000, AndyW wrote:

> On 29/01/2018 21:01, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>> On Monday, January 29, 2018 at 11:54:30 AM UTC-5, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> 
>>> At my first job, the rhythm of the printer would tell me from across
>>> the room not only that an RPG compile was running, but whether it had
>>> any errors.
>> 
>> +1.  Like with the 1403 printing a dump--I could tell by the sound my
>> job had abended.
>> 
> My IT department wrote a routine to print a block of text onto the end
> of each print so that they could hear when each batch print had ended
> and so they could separate the prints as they came out instead of
> searching through a whole stack of fan fold to separate the different
> prints. It sounded like descending tones.
> 
> Simple everyday genius.

Never heard of that, but I did the same when I wrote a VMS print symbiont.


-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

AndyW <An...@nojunqmail.com> writes:
> My IT department wrote a routine to print a block of text onto the end
> of each print so that they could hear when each batch print had ended
> and so they could separate the prints as they came out instead of
> searching through a whole stack of fan fold to separate the different
> prints. It sounded like descending tones.

re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2018.html#90 1956 -- circuit reliability book

standard IBM 1403 was separator header ... mostly blank page with
printing across the perferation (so from side of stack of paper, could
see "darker" marking separating printout ... also easy to see fanning
paper) followed by header page identifying owner of the printout. full
box of printer output could have printout for several dozen different
people when go to separate (N1 had lots of sound deadening, made the
cover so heavy that it had mechanical lift)

later for 6670 (computer driver for effectively copier 3) printers out
in departmental areas. put colored paper in the 6670 alternate paper
drawer. normal printout was on standard (white) paper ... "header" page
(with user identification) was on colored paper from alternate paper
drawer.

we added some extra special for the 6670 header page ... had lots of
extra room ... so selected random entry from some quotation/saying
files. One file had all the IBMJARGON definitions ... another file had
collection of random quotations.

During one corporate audit ... which included checking offices and
departmental areas offshift for classified information left unsecured
...  including 6670 printout in department areas ... they found output
that had the following on a separator/header page

[Business Maxims:] Signs, real and imagined, which belong on the walls of the nation's offices:
1) Never Try to Teach a Pig to Sing; It Wastes Your Time and It Annoys the Pig.
2) Sometimes the Crowd IS Right.
3) Auditors Are the People Who Go in After the War Is Lost and Bayonet the Wounded.
4) To Err Is Human -- To Forgive Is Not Company Policy.

... snip ...

The auditors then were complaining that we were ridiculing them.
Contributing factor was that we had a lot of demo programs (frequently
games by any other name) on the systems ... and the auditors were
demanding that all games had to be removed. 3270 logon screens at the
time had some statement about "for business purposes only" ... we
managed to get executive authorization that said "for management
approved use only" (with the demo program use as management approved).

some past "management approved use" posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011.html#89 Make the mainframe work environment fun and intuitive
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011e.html#85 The first personal computer (PC)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2011f.html#62 Mixing Auth and Non-Auth Modules
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012e.html#95 Burroughs B5000, B5500, B6500 videos
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2012l.html#6 Some fun with IBM acronyms and jargon (was Re: Auditors Don't Know Squat!)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2015h.html#67 IMPI (System/38 / AS/400 historical)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2016g.html#66 Is the IBM Official Alumni Group becoming a ghost town? Why?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2017g.html#67 What is the most epic computer glitch you have ever seen?

-- 
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970

Bob Eager <news...@eager.cx> wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2018 07:05:01 +0000, AndyW wrote:
> 
>> On 29/01/2018 21:01, hanc...@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>> On Monday, January 29, 2018 at 11:54:30 AM UTC-5, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>> 
>>>> At my first job, the rhythm of the printer would tell me from across
>>>> the room not only that an RPG compile was running, but whether it had
>>>> any errors.
>>> 
>>> +1.  Like with the 1403 printing a dump--I could tell by the sound my
>>> job had abended.
>>> 
>> My IT department wrote a routine to print a block of text onto the end
>> of each print so that they could hear when each batch print had ended
>> and so they could separate the prints as they came out instead of
>> searching through a whole stack of fan fold to separate the different
>> prints. It sounded like descending tones.
>> 
>> Simple everyday genius.
> 
> Never heard of that, but I did the same when I wrote a VMS print symbiont.
> 
> 

Pretty standard. JES2 printed headers and trailers like that, and I think
the older OS/360 "output writer" must have, since the block letter routine,
IEFSD095, was a standard part of the OS. TSS/360 did the same, I used a TSS
header for the Wikipedia article on, I think, "Header page".  JES would
print two header and two trailer pages, and overwrite the bottom fold of
the page with a few lines of "stuff", so the separations would show up when
you looked at a stack of paper edge-on.

-- 
Pete