From: "G Swaine" Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Origin of "mainframe" Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 21:20:44 +1300 Organization: The Gluepot Lines: 33 Message-ID: <8vqhs0$1t3q$1@news.comnet.co.nz> Reply-To: "G Swaine" NNTP-Posting-Host: dynamic-39.remote.comnet.co.nz Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: news.comnet.co.nz 975227584 62586 131.203.242.39 (26 Nov 2000 08:33:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.comnet.co.nz NNTP-Posting-Date: 26 Nov 2000 08:33:04 GMT X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!fr.clara.net!heighliner.fr.clara.net!news.tele.dk!204.94.211.44!enews.sgi.com!news.xtra.co.nz!news.netgate.net.nz!news.comnet.co.nz!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69558 Where did the tern "mainframe" originate from to describe large computers? From a mid-1980s computing class I took, I was told that "mini computer" originated from the mid 1960s when Digital decided to manufacture smaller/cheaper computers than the typical machine of the time, and target them at small/medium sized businesses. And "micro computers" was an extrapolation of that, to describe the smaller, single user machines of the mid/late 1970s. "Super computers" were the "warehouse sized, cost-is-no-object" machines where performance is paramount. But the origin of the term "mainframe" has never been explained to me. And it just doesn't seem to fit into the "[micro|mini|super]-computer" naming convention. -- Quote for the month: "The 8086 was not used in any mass-market desktop machines of any consequence" ("The PowerPC Revolution" pg367) -- g.swaine@the.gluepot.com is a bogus address. I can be contacted via an intermediary : gem at gem win co nz. I would like to apologise to the genuine respondents that this may inconvenience. ###### X-Posting-Agent: Hamster/1.3.22.0 From: Nick Spalding Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Reply-To: spalding@iol.ie Message-ID: <2tt12tkkaiv3ppg9sk61ascrcqeoa667t5@4ax.com> References: <8vqhs0$1t3q$1@news.comnet.co.nz> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 29 Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 11:47:04 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.203.147.118 X-Complaints-To: abuse@iol.ie X-Trace: news.iol.ie 975239224 193.203.147.118 (Sun, 26 Nov 2000 11:47:04 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 11:47:04 GMT Organization: Ireland On-Line Customer Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!newsfeed1.news.nl.uu.net!sun4nl!iol.ie!news.iol.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69582 G Swaine wrote, in <8vqhs0$1t3q$1@news.comnet.co.nz>: > Where did the tern "mainframe" originate from to describe large > computers? > > From a mid-1980s computing class I took, I was told that "mini computer" > originated from the mid 1960s when Digital decided to manufacture > smaller/cheaper computers than the typical machine of the time, and > target them at small/medium sized businesses. > > And "micro computers" was an extrapolation of that, to describe the > smaller, single user machines of the mid/late 1970s. > > "Super computers" were the "warehouse sized, cost-is-no-object" machines > where performance is paramount. > > > But the origin of the term "mainframe" has never been explained to me. > And it just doesn't seem to fit into the "[micro|mini|super]-computer" > naming convention. I believe mainframe was not originally used in distinction from mini-computer - there weren't any of those. It was to distinguish the computer from the subsidiary units containing I/O controllers. It then became used to distinguish a computer where this division of labour existed, i.e. one with a mainframe, from one where everything was in one (smallish) box. -- Nick Spalding ###### From: linley@megami.org (Bruce Linley) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Date: 26 Nov 2000 07:18:14 -0800 Organization: Megami no Belldandy-sama no deshi Message-ID: <8vr9jm$f3t$1@megami.org> References: <8vqhs0$1t3q$1@news.comnet.co.nz> <2tt12tkkaiv3ppg9sk61ascrcqeoa667t5@4ax.com> X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 23 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!localhost!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69537 In ye olden post spalding@iol.ie spake... >G Swaine wrote, in <8vqhs0$1t3q$1@news.comnet.co.nz>: > >> Where did the tern "mainframe" originate from to describe large >> computers? > >I believe mainframe was not originally used in distinction from >mini-computer - there weren't any of those. It was to distinguish the >computer from the subsidiary units containing I/O controllers. It then >became used to distinguish a computer where this division of labour >existed, i.e. one with a mainframe, from one where everything was in one >(smallish) box. I would think it derived from the rack mount nature of many of the beasts. The machine was the "main" "frame" into which you inserted whatever set of add on boards you needed. -- Bruce James Robert Linley | +---+---+--_ | "Ocha tte nigai demo... hito no chi linley at megami dot org | | |NV | UT | wa atatakakute tottemo amai no" Programmer, Fortunet Inc. | \ CA \ |___ | "Tea is always bitter... but blood Las Vegas, Nevada, USA ---------> \*| AZ | is warm and sweet" - Miyu ###### From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (lwin) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Date: 26 Nov 2000 17:16:59 GMT Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS Lines: 15 Message-ID: <8vrgib$l0@netaxs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: bbs.cpcn.com Originator: root@bbs.cpcn.com Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-xfer.newsread.com!bad-news.newsread.com!netaxs.com!newsread.com!netaxs.newsread.com!bbs.cpcn.com!root Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69586 > I believe mainframe was not originally used in distinction from > mini-computer - there weren't any of those. It was to distinguish the > computer from the subsidiary units containing I/O controllers. It then > became used to distinguish a computer where this division of labour > existed, i.e. one with a mainframe, from one where everything was in one > (smallish) box. Yes. In a 1958 system manual, the CPU was referred to as the "main frame", as opposed to the I/O controllers and I/O devices. The computers of that time allowed some I/O units to run offline together under control of the I/O controller and plugboards in the units. That is, someone could go tape-to-print or card-to-tape independently of the CPU. The printers, readers, and punches, were modified standard EAM machines. ###### X-Posting-Agent: Hamster/1.3.22.0 From: Nick Spalding Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Reply-To: spalding@iol.ie Message-ID: References: <8vqhs0$1t3q$1@news.comnet.co.nz> <2tt12tkkaiv3ppg9sk61ascrcqeoa667t5@4ax.com> <8vr9jm$f3t$1@megami.org> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 11 Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 19:36:34 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 193.203.144.197 X-Complaints-To: abuse@iol.ie X-Trace: news.iol.ie 975267394 193.203.144.197 (Sun, 26 Nov 2000 19:36:34 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 19:36:34 GMT Organization: Ireland On-Line Customer Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!fr.clara.net!heighliner.fr.clara.net!news.tele.dk!213.24.141.54!newsfeed.gamma.ru!Gamma.RU!newsfeed.esat.net!news.iol.ie!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69577 Bruce Linley wrote, in <8vr9jm$f3t$1@megami.org>: > I would think it derived from the rack mount nature of many of the > beasts. The machine was the "main" "frame" into which you inserted > whatever set of add on boards you needed. The only problem with that hypothesis is that the mainframe computers were/are in general not rack mounted. The minis however, when they arrived, were. -- Nick Spalding ###### From: David Razler Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Reply-To: david.razler@worldnet.att.net Message-ID: References: <8vrgib$l0@netaxs.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 25 Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 19:46:10 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.79.65.69 X-Complaints-To: abuse@worldnet.att.net X-Trace: bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net 975267970 12.79.65.69 (Sun, 26 Nov 2000 19:46:10 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 19:46:10 GMT Organization: AT&T Worldnet Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!europa.netcrusader.net!204.127.161.3!wn3feed!worldnet.att.net!wnmasters2!bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69585 On 26 Nov 2000 17:16:59 GMT, lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (lwin) wrote: >> I believe mainframe was not originally used in distinction from >> mini-computer - there weren't any of those. It was to distinguish the >> computer from the subsidiary units containing I/O controllers. It then >> became used to distinguish a computer where this division of labour >> existed, i.e. one with a mainframe, from one where everything was in one >> (smallish) box. > >Yes. In a 1958 system manual, the CPU was referred to as the "main frame", >as opposed to the I/O controllers and I/O devices. > >The computers of that time allowed some I/O units to run offline together >under control of the I/O controller and plugboards in the units. That >is, someone could go tape-to-print or card-to-tape independently of the >CPU. The printers, readers, and punches, were modified standard EAM >machines. Hmmm. Question, what was TELCO for "switch" or "mass of relay racks" before computers adopted "mainframe"? I know,individually, the racks were frames ... dmr ###### From: "Daniel P. B. Smith" Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" References: <8vqhs0$1t3q$1@news.comnet.co.nz> <2tt12tkkaiv3ppg9sk61ascrcqeoa667t5@4ax.com> <8vr9jm$f3t$1@megami.org> User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.0 (PPC) Message-ID: Lines: 45 Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 00:38:50 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 151.203.19.105 X-Complaints-To: newsadmin@bellatlantic.net X-Trace: typhoon1.ba-dsg.net 975285530 151.203.19.105 (Sun, 26 Nov 2000 19:38:50 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 26 Nov 2000 19:38:50 EST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!europa.netcrusader.net!199.45.45.8!cyclone1.ba-dsg.net!typhoon1.ba-dsg.net.POSTED!dpbsmith Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69595 In article , spalding@iol.ie wrote: > Bruce Linley wrote, in <8vr9jm$f3t$1@megami.org>: > > > I would think it derived from the rack mount nature of many of the > > beasts. The machine was the "main" "frame" into which you inserted > > whatever set of add on boards you needed. > > The only problem with that hypothesis is that the mainframe computers > were/are in general not rack mounted. The minis however, when they > arrived, were. The first time I heard the word "mainframe" was in the mid-sixties and was, in fact, in connection with the PDP-1. It meant the main cabinet housing the CPU, as distinct from the peripherals (CRT, drum, etc.) I assumed at the time and assume now that the usage came from bigger machines but don't know that for a fact. There was a shift in meaning sometime in the late seventies. This is strictly my imagination, but I think it was one of those drifts in meaning that you get from successive groups of people inferring meanings from context without consulting dictionaries... but I think that when IBM was forced to unbundle, so that for the first time you could have non-IBM peripherals in your system, you started to hear the phrase "mainframe vendor," meaning the vendor that made the CPU, as distinct from the vendors that made the peripherals. Perhaps it was a practice of the peripheral vendors in order to avoid mentioning IBM by name? just as for a while, in some circles, the phrase "industry standard" meant, specifically, "an IBM-specified interface." If this usage was primarily used in connection with IBM, one can easily imagine a further drift in meaning whereby "mainframe" meant "the sort of machine a 'mainframe vendor' makes", i.e. the sort of machine IBM makes, i.e. big iron. -- Daniel P. B. Smith Current email address: dpbsmith@bellatlantic.net "Lifetime forwarding" address: dpbsmith@alum.mit.edu Visit alt.books.jack-london! ###### From: jones@cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Date: 27 Nov 2000 03:25:22 GMT Organization: The University of Iowa Lines: 22 Message-ID: <8vsk72$bv4$1@flood.weeg.uiowa.edu> References: <8vqhs0$1t3q$1@news.comnet.co.nz> NNTP-Posting-Host: pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu X-Trace: flood.weeg.uiowa.edu 975295522 12260 128.255.28.3 (27 Nov 2000 03:25:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.uiowa.edu NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 Nov 2000 03:25:22 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feeder.qis.net!nntp.abs.net!uunet!ffx.uu.net!news.uiowa.edu!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69604 From article <8vqhs0$1t3q$1@news.comnet.co.nz>, by "G Swaine" : > From a mid-1980s computing class I took, I was told that "mini computer" > originated from the mid 1960s when Digital decided to manufacture > smaller/cheaper computers than the typical machine of the time, and > target them at small/medium sized businesses. The term was coined as something of a joke "from the land of the [Austin] Mini and the Miniskirt" (quote from British DEC Rep who coined term). > Where did the tern "mainframe" originate from to describe large > computers? I think the term came after or at about the same time as minicomputer. Minicomputers were components you could mount in a relay rack. Mainframes were rackfuls of hardware, so the rack (or frame) itself was a component of the CPU and not something you bought (from a third party, if you wanted) to house the CPU. Doug Jones jones@cs.uiowa.edu ###### Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers References: <8vqhs0$1t3q$1@news.comnet.co.nz> <8vsk72$bv4$1@flood.weeg.uiowa.edu> From: jata@aepiax.net (Julian Thomas) Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Message-ID: <3a22a189$1$wg$mr2ice@news.epix.net> X-Newsreader: MR/2 Internet Cruiser Edition for OS/2 v2.21/21 Lines: 23 Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 18:01:48 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 199.224.125.51 X-Complaints-To: abuse@epix.net X-Trace: news1.epix.net 975348108 199.224.125.51 (Mon, 27 Nov 2000 13:01:48 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 13:01:48 EST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!news-stu1.dfn.de!news-mue1.dfn.de!news-was.dfn.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news-hog.berkeley.edu!ucberkeley!news2.epix.net!news1.epix.net!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69636 In <8vsk72$bv4$1@flood.weeg.uiowa.edu>, on 11/27/00 at 03:25 AM, jones@cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) said: >I think the term came after or at about the same time as minicomputer. Telephone central offices had 'mainframes' long before there were any computers. These were humongous racks where wires were connected; probably the term migrated to the new technology. -- Julian Thomas: jt . epix @ net http://home.epix.net/~jt remove letter a for email (or switch . and @) In the beautiful Finger Lakes Wine Country of New York State! Boardmember of POSSI.org - Phoenix OS/2 Society, Inc http://www.possi.org -- -- Klein bottle for sale ... inquire within. |# Dogs have owners. Cats have staff. ###### From: jones@cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Date: 27 Nov 2000 20:24:53 GMT Organization: The University of Iowa Lines: 22 Message-ID: <8vuful$2o2$1@flood.weeg.uiowa.edu> References: <3a22a189$1$wg$mr2ice@news.epix.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu X-Trace: flood.weeg.uiowa.edu 975356693 2818 128.255.28.3 (27 Nov 2000 20:24:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.uiowa.edu NNTP-Posting-Date: 27 Nov 2000 20:24:53 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!hermes.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!uunet!ffx.uu.net!news.uiowa.edu!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69701 From article <3a22a189$1$wg$mr2ice@news.epix.net>, by jata@aepiax.net (Julian Thomas): >>I think the term came after or at about the same time as minicomputer. > > Telephone central offices had 'mainframes' long before there were any > computers. These were humongous racks where wires were connected; > probably the term migrated to the new technology. Good point -- I knew that, even. Of course, they were switching frames and not computers, but the term mainframe existed before computers, to refer to the main framework of relay racks that made up the core of the system, as opposed to other peripherals such as battery banks, charging systems, and terminal distribution frames (entirely passive frames where customer wires were patched to the wires coming from the switching system). The term frame in this context is standard telco jargon for system of relay racks. Doug Jones jones@cs.uiowa.edu ###### From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (lwin) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Date: 27 Nov 2000 21:04:43 GMT Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS Message-ID: <8vui9b$dc0@netaxs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: bbs.cpcn.com Originator: root@bbs.cpcn.com Lines: 36 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news-fra1.dfn.de!news0.de.colt.net!colt.net!dispose.news.demon.net!demon!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.skycache.com!Cidera!portc03.blue.aol.com!europa.netcrusader.net!209.150.97.11!feeder.qis.net!news-xfer.newsread.com!bad-news.newsread.com!netaxs.com!newsread.com!netaxs.newsread.com!bbs.cpcn.com!root Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69746 > Good point -- I knew that, even. Of course, they were switching frames > and not computers, but the term mainframe existed before computers, to > refer to the main framework of relay racks that made up the core of the > system, as opposed to other peripherals such as battery banks, charging > systems, and terminal distribution frames (entirely passive frames > where customer wires were patched to the wires coming from the switching > system). But what in an old telephone exchange would constitute the "main" frame? I presume they're referring to a step-by-step system, the most common mechanical system of the era. In that, there are three sets of switching equipment: the line finder, which provides dial tone when a subscriber goes off hook, the selectors, which route the call along, and the final connectors, which connect to the desired subscriber. In a larger office, all three of these subsystems could be represented by many racks (frames) of equipment. What would be considered the "main" frame in such an office? Also, step-by-step, in contrast to later systems, did NOT have central control. SxS was controlled directly by the subscriber, each pull of the dial activated the equipment directly. So there was no "brain" of the system. This made SxS limited for large cities since it required too many intermediate units and could not necessarily be used efficiency. Now in panel, crossbar, and of course ESS, there is a central control (where the subscriber's request is translated and instructions given to the switching equipment), and there could be a "main" frame there. Obviously ESS has a CPU. But in crossbar--are the markers/registers the "main frame", or are the actual crossbars themselves the "main frame"? ###### From: linley@megami.org (Bruce Linley) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Date: 27 Nov 2000 19:15:11 -0800 Organization: Megami no Belldandy-sama no deshi Message-ID: <8vv7vv$m25$1@megami.org> References: <8vui9b$dc0@netaxs.com> X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Lines: 19 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!news-stu1.dfn.de!news-mue1.dfn.de!news-was.dfn.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!sn-xit-03!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!localhost!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69649 In ye olden post lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (lwin) spake... >> Good point -- I knew that, even. Of course, they were switching frames >> and not computers, but the term mainframe existed before computers, to >> refer to the main framework of relay racks that made up the core of the >> system, as opposed to other peripherals such as battery banks, charging >> systems, and terminal distribution frames (entirely passive frames >> where customer wires were patched to the wires coming from the switching >> system). > >But what in an old telephone exchange would constitute the "main" frame? The backplane that all the boards plug into? -- Bruce James Robert Linley | +---+---+--_ | "Ocha tte nigai demo... hito no chi linley at megami dot org | | |NV | UT | wa atatakakute tottemo amai no" Programmer, Fortunet Inc. | \ CA \ |___ | "Tea is always bitter... but blood Las Vegas, Nevada, USA ---------> \*| AZ | is warm and sweet" - Miyu ###### From: jones@cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Date: 28 Nov 2000 03:43:50 GMT Organization: The University of Iowa Lines: 17 Message-ID: <8vv9lm$guk$1@flood.weeg.uiowa.edu> References: <8vv7vv$m25$1@megami.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu X-Trace: flood.weeg.uiowa.edu 975383030 17364 128.255.28.3 (28 Nov 2000 03:43:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.uiowa.edu NNTP-Posting-Date: 28 Nov 2000 03:43:50 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!news-stu1.dfn.de!news-mue1.dfn.de!news.augsburg.net!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.kjsl.com!HSNX.atgi.net!avalon.net!news1.icaen!news.uiowa.edu!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69704 lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (lwin) asked: > But what in an old telephone exchange would constitute the "main" frame? A framework of relay racks close to half a block long, with each bay in the rack filled with relays. On one side of the racks, all the relay contacts were easily accessible for maintenance (spring tension adjustment, burnishing, etc). On the other side of the racks, great masses of clearly documented point-to-point wiring, neatly soldered to the relay sockets, finished the system. Some (sub) frames of the system held crossbar switches (multicoil relays with horizontal and vertical bars, able to make or break a connection at any intersection). Some (sub) frames held line selectors, some held dial pulse decoders, etc. It's been years since I read through the documents for the things. Doug Jones jones@cs.uiowa.edu ###### From: Dennis Ritchie Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 04:50:41 +0000 Organization: Bell Labs/Lucent Technologies Lines: 31 Message-ID: <3A2339A1.279CA7E@bell-labs.com> References: <8vv7vv$m25$1@megami.org> <8vv9lm$guk$1@flood.weeg.uiowa.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: trux.cs.bell-labs.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.61 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!news-stu1.dfn.de!news-koe1.dfn.de!news-was.dfn.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!wn4feed!worldnet.att.net!198.6.0.213!uunet!ffx.uu.net!nntphub.cb.lucent.com!news Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69660 "Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879" wrote: > > But what in an old telephone exchange would constitute the "main" frame? > > A framework of relay racks close to half a block long, with each bay in > the rack filled with relays. On one side of the racks, all the relay > contacts were easily accessible for maintenance (spring tension adjustment, > burnishing, etc). .... Although the relay racks were there (sometimes still are), and there are many types of frames, the Main Distributing Frame (MDF) in telco plant terminology was, and I suspect still is, the wired cross-connect between incoming cables and the switch or switches. See, e.g. Engineering and Science in the Bell System: Switching Technology 1925-1975, p 388ff. "The main distributing frame (MDF) principle, patented in 1893 [US patent 507,424] had hardly changed in 75 years.... However, it was early recognized by A. E. Joel Jr [US patent 3562435] that in the long term the MDF functions of cross-connect and test access should be automated...." The second of these patents can be found at the IBM (now evidently Dephion) site; the USPTO recognizes the first but doesn't return an image my browsers understand. Varela and Thompson are probably more accurate as to telco terminology in their earlier remarks. Dennis ###### From: benc@krustbustr.hawaga.org.uk (Ben Clifford) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2000 16:46:09 +0000 Organization: benZone Lines: 31 Message-ID: References: <8vui9b$dc0@netaxs.com> Reply-To: benc@benzone.freeserve.co.uk NNTP-Posting-Host: modem-159.oregon.dialup.pol.co.uk X-Trace: news7.svr.pol.co.uk 975434869 14462 62.137.88.159 (28 Nov 2000 18:07:49 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: 28 Nov 2000 18:07:49 GMT X-Complaints-To: abuse@theplanet.net X-Newsreader: slrn (0.9.4.3 UNIX) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!informatik.tu-muenchen.de!news.csl-gmbh.net!blackbush.xlink.net!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!diablo.theplanet.net!news.theplanet.net!newspost.theplanet.net!benc Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69656 On 27 Nov 2000 21:04:43 GMT, lwin wrote: >I presume they're referring to a step-by-step system, the most common >mechanical system of the era. By that, do you mean Strowger exchanges? >In that, there are three sets of switching equipment: the line >finder, which provides dial tone when a subscriber goes off hook, >the selectors, which route the call along, and the final connectors, >which connect to the desired subscriber. I was only aware of two distinct stages: the first, one-dimensional, selector which would pick one of (eg. ten) "first-digit" selectors, and then a load of "first-digit", "second-digit" etc. selectors. What was the purpose of the final connectors above? >Also, step-by-step, in contrast to later systems, did NOT have >central control. SxS was controlled directly by the subscriber, >each pull of the dial activated the equipment directly. So there >was no "brain" of the system. This made SxS limited for large >cities Strange that, one would expect something with no central control to scale better. -- http://www.hawaga.org.uk/c0deZ/globeApplet/ for my rotating world map applet http://www.hawaga.org.uk/benc_key.txt PGP / GPG key 0x30F06950 - please use it! ###### From: lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (lwin) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Date: 28 Nov 2000 22:50:34 GMT Organization: The PACSIBM SIG BBS Lines: 42 Message-ID: <901crq$29s@netaxs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: bbs.cpcn.com Originator: root@bbs.cpcn.com Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.onemain.com!feed1.onemain.com!xfer13.netnews.com!netnews.com!news-xfer.newsread.com!bad-news.newsread.com!netaxs.com!newsread.com!netaxs.newsread.com!bbs.cpcn.com!root Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69795 x-no-archive: yes > > >In that, there are three sets of switching equipment: the line > >finder, which provides dial tone when a subscriber goes off hook, > >the selectors, which route the call along, and the final connectors, > >which connect to the desired subscriber. > > I was only aware of two distinct stages: the first, one-dimensional, > selector which would pick one of (eg. ten) "first-digit" selectors, > > and then a load of "first-digit", "second-digit" etc. selectors. > > What was the purpose of the final connectors above? IIRC, the intermediate selectors would step in one direction in response to the dial pull (such as vertically), but then in another direction (such as horizontally) to find the first open link to the next selector bank. Obviously there has to be multiple paths to the next selector. The final selector goes directly to the subscriber's line. Unless the subscriber has line hunting, if the subscriber is busy no connection is made. > >Also, step-by-step, in contrast to later systems, did NOT have > >central control. SxS was controlled directly by the subscriber, > >each pull of the dial activated the equipment directly. So there > >was no "brain" of the system. This made SxS limited for large > >cities > > Strange that, one would expect something with no central control to > scale better. I'm not sure of the method, but in busy/large offices the need for so many multiple paths requires a very large intermediate bank of selectors. A compounding problem is that each selector used is tied for the length of the call, so where many call paths have to be required you need that many multiples of selectors. It was found, in large cities, to go to common control such as panel and later crossbar. I understand L.A. managed with SxS, though. ###### From: Bruce Bergman Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Organization: A clean desk is a sure sign of a sick mind. Reply-To: blCHURRObergman@earthlink.net Message-ID: References: <901crq$29s@netaxs.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 129 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 16:51:01 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.179.128.223 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net 975516661 209.179.128.223 (Wed, 29 Nov 2000 08:51:01 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 08:51:01 PST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!news.tele.dk!4.1.16.34!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!feeder.qis.net!feed2.onemain.com!feed1.onemain.com!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!newsmaster1.prod.itd.earthlink.net!newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69797 On 28 Nov 2000 22:50:34 GMT, lwinson@bbs.cpcn.com (lwin) wrote: >> >In that, there are three sets of switching equipment: the line >> >finder, which provides dial tone when a subscriber goes off hook, >> >the selectors, which route the call along, and the final connectors, >> >which connect to the desired subscriber. When you picked up the phone, the line relays would trip, and call up the linefinder to your pair (10x10 matrix step switch), and give you your dialtone. >> I was only aware of two distinct stages: the first, one-dimensional, >> selector which would pick one of (eg. ten) "first-digit" selectors, >> and then a load of "first-digit", "second-digit" etc. selectors. If you were making a non-toll local call in your office, you would hit firsts, seconds and thirds to route the call. But a lot of times there were 'digit absorbing' gadgets involved when you dialed digits to make a call that stays in your own exchange, or a neighboring local one (Say for example 818-36X), that would take your '364' and throw out the 36, and cut through on the third digit to the corresponding fourth selectors in your office, or a trunk to the nearby office. Dial 1, and you go to a director for routing. If you were dialing toll, or dialed digits that needed routing, you got sent to a Director unit. Originally they were all relay based and had literally hundreds of relays, strowger step switches, and rotary step relays to route each call - and a hardwired patch panel with all permutations of the routing information - but that was a space and maintenance hog. In the later days, they set up IBM Mini's with each one routing IIRC 24 or 48 calls at a time through interface cards. >> What was the purpose of the final connectors above? The line relays to cut through the call, send back busy-tone or ring your line and send ringback tone to the caller, detect an answer - cut off ring voltage and cut through the talk path, and send back answer supervision with a polarity reversal, and drop the switch-train when either party hangs up. Nothing too complicated, just a whole bunch of relays, resistors, diodes and capacitors... ;-) (Complicated? Rube Goldberg would have been pleased.) >IIRC, the intermediate selectors would step in one direction in response >to the dial pull (such as vertically), but then in another direction >(such as horizontally) to find the first open link to the next selector >bank. Obviously there has to be multiple paths to the next selector. Yup. And if you overflowed the ten choices on the route, you'd hit a busy signal mid-dialing-string. Which is why the first few choices on each level could have individual trunks to the next level, and the last few choices fed through rotary step switches that could multiply that choice by (20? It's been a while...). Traffic balancing was tricky. >The final selector goes directly to the subscriber's line. Unless >the subscriber has line hunting, if the subscriber is busy no >connection is made. >> >Also, step-by-step, in contrast to later systems, did NOT have >> >central control. SxS was controlled directly by the subscriber, >> >each pull of the dial activated the equipment directly. So there >> >was no "brain" of the system. This made SxS limited for large >> >cities >> >> Strange that, one would expect something with no central control to >> scale better. It could be MADE to scale very well, but it took some careful planning and design implementation. Any changes made had a 'ripple effect' back through the entire switching path that could require major changes in seemingly unrelated areas. Like a major customer that paid for 60 incoming lines for their '800' number - but nobody did their homework, they only had 20 level-hunting connectors in that group of 100 lines, and corresponding levels of fourth and fifth directors. Ergo, they could only get 17 or 18 calls at a time, and the other people in that level-hunting group had to fight to get their incoming calls through all the busy signals of people hammering to get through to the major customer. After the customer figured it out and "the fit hit the shan" ;-) , they called around to other offices in the region to get every available CO Installer (and spare switch banks and bays), we all got a few days of overtime attacking en-masse, bumping that hunt group up to 80 connectors, and beefing up the rest of the switching and trunking bottlenecks to feed them. In a hurry. (This was around 1984 or 1985. God, I hope we're past the statute of limitations by now... ;-) >I'm not sure of the method, but in busy/large offices the need for >so many multiple paths requires a very large intermediate bank of >selectors. A compounding problem is that each selector used is >tied for the length of the call, so where many call paths have to >be required you need that many multiples of selectors. It was >found, in large cities, to go to common control such as panel and >later crossbar. I understand L.A. managed with SxS, though. We did because we had to - they didn't want to spend capital on new equipment twice, to upgrade to the EAX-1 architecture - common control with reed relay matrix switching, and then again to a Digital-matrix common control GTD-5 or ESS-5 before they got done depreciating the EAX switches. They put in a few analog switches to handle the Centrex and special customers, and kept the steppers running until the Digitals were ready for prime time. The conversions from Type 57 SATT (Strowger Automatic Toll Ticketing) to Electronic Directors they installed to route the calls helped a lot - except in Lancaster, which had an incompatible Type 62 "rural" SATT that was supposed to only serve 20,000 lines max. Short version: They were all mechanical routing 'till the end - 80,000 plus lines homing on 128 directors, with All-Relay line-detection, dialed-number-storage and routing. You dialed '1' to get a director and a second dialtone, and every time a radio station ran a contest it was up to a 3-minute wait for second dialtone Don't mis-dial, or you'll have to "Please hang up and try your call again..." To those of you that had to suffer through all that crap, I hereby humbly apologize. Us worker-bees didn't get to decide when to change it out, we just kept the old equipment running as well as we could. --<< Bruce >>-- -- Bruce L. Bergman blCHURRObergman@ NOearthSPAMlink.netEVER Remove the caps. Troubleshooter - Electrician, Phones, HVAC, Plumbing,... 'Current'ly with Westend Electric (#726700) Agoura, CA 818/889-9545 WARNING: No Unsolicited Commercial E-mail is EVER accepted. ###### From: jmfbahciv@aol.com Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Date: Thu, 30 Nov 00 13:56:00 GMT Organization: UltraNet Communications, Inc. Lines: 36 Message-ID: <905q2d$910$5@bob.news.rcn.net> References: <901crq$29s@netaxs.com> <90423i$a05$1@top.mitre.org> X-Trace: ICjCz5r4pcy94ndLE1bzFHClcvunRvfZXIxBLXKgR5g= X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 30 Nov 2000 15:00:29 GMT X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!207-172-245-169 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69814 In article <90423i$a05$1@top.mitre.org>, jcmorris@jmorris-pc.MITRE.ORG (Joe Morris) wrote: >Bruce Bergman writes: > >> The line relays to cut through the call, send back busy-tone or ring >>your line and send ringback tone to the caller, detect an answer - cut >>off ring voltage and cut through the talk path, and send back answer >>supervision with a polarity reversal, and drop the switch-train when >>either party hangs up. Nothing too complicated, just a whole bunch of >>relays, resistors, diodes and capacitors... ;-) > >> (Complicated? Rube Goldberg would have been pleased.) > >....which some observers claim to be the justification for the famous >(MIT) Tech Model Railroad Club's decision to build a complete dial >telephone exchange into the system. No computers at the time I >was familiar with it in the early 1960s, although they inevitably >arrived not too much later...but lots and lots of relays. > >In the _TMRC Dictionary_ an "operating session" was defined as "10 >members versus 10,000 relays." > >The exchange was a 2-digit system, with plunger linefinders (yuck) >and a few standard SxS units. The telephone system was even used >to tell the automated track-power control system (which was based >on a couple of crossbar switches) to assign a train to a particular >control board: to pick up the train in block 19 and assign it to board >3, you picked up the phone, waited for dial tone, and dialed 70193. >You could even throw switches on the layout through the phone system. Heh, heh. And Kotok did it at DEC, proving that it was possible to AT&T. He later did one in Marlboro, too. /BAH Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail. ###### Message-ID: <3A25479A.B6A85333@sprintmail.com> From: John Ferrell Reply-To: johnferrell@sprintmail.com Organization: Dixie Competition Products X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en,pdf MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" References: <8vqhs0$1t3q$1@news.comnet.co.nz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 49 Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 19:15:03 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 206.133.65.80 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net 975525303 206.133.65.80 (Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:15:03 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 11:15:03 PST Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!fu-berlin.de!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.mindspring.net.MISMATCH!news.mindspring.net!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!newsmaster1.prod.itd.earthlink.net!newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69819 Mainframe has not always been one word. In IBM documentation it was generally two words. There were also Power Frames. G Swaine wrote: > Where did the tern "mainframe" originate from to describe large > computers? > > From a mid-1980s computing class I took, I was told that "mini computer" > originated from the mid 1960s when Digital decided to manufacture > smaller/cheaper computers than the typical machine of the time, and > target them at small/medium sized businesses. > > And "micro computers" was an extrapolation of that, to describe the > smaller, single user machines of the mid/late 1970s. > > "Super computers" were the "warehouse sized, cost-is-no-object" machines > where performance is paramount. > > But the origin of the term "mainframe" has never been explained to me. > And it just doesn't seem to fit into the "[micro|mini|super]-computer" > naming convention. > > -- > > Quote for the month: > > "The 8086 was not used in any mass-market desktop machines of any > consequence" > ("The PowerPC Revolution" pg367) > > -- > > g.swaine@the.gluepot.com is a bogus address. I can be contacted via an > intermediary : gem at gem win co nz. I would like to apologise to the > genuine respondents that this may inconvenience. -- John Ferrell in Julian NC, de W8CCW Dixie Competition Products 6241 Phillippi Rd Julian NC 27283 Phone: (336)685-9606 Fax: (336)685-9771 NSRCA 479 AMA 4190 "My Competition is Not My Enemy" ###### From: jcmorris@jmorris-pc.MITRE.ORG (Joe Morris) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Date: 29 Nov 2000 23:05:22 GMT Organization: The MITRE Corporation Lines: 29 Message-ID: <90423i$a05$1@top.mitre.org> References: <901crq$29s@netaxs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: jmorris-pc.mitre.org X-Trace: top.mitre.org 975539122 10245 128.29.251.13 (29 Nov 2000 23:05:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.mitre.org NNTP-Posting-Date: 29 Nov 2000 23:05:22 GMT X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 (NOV) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.tele.dk!171.64.14.106!newsfeed.stanford.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.tufts.edu!blanket.mitre.org!news.mitre.org!jmorris-pc.MITRE.ORG!jcmorris Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69800 Bruce Bergman writes: > The line relays to cut through the call, send back busy-tone or ring >your line and send ringback tone to the caller, detect an answer - cut >off ring voltage and cut through the talk path, and send back answer >supervision with a polarity reversal, and drop the switch-train when >either party hangs up. Nothing too complicated, just a whole bunch of >relays, resistors, diodes and capacitors... ;-) > (Complicated? Rube Goldberg would have been pleased.) ...which some observers claim to be the justification for the famous (MIT) Tech Model Railroad Club's decision to build a complete dial telephone exchange into the system. No computers at the time I was familiar with it in the early 1960s, although they inevitably arrived not too much later...but lots and lots of relays. In the _TMRC Dictionary_ an "operating session" was defined as "10 members versus 10,000 relays." The exchange was a 2-digit system, with plunger linefinders (yuck) and a few standard SxS units. The telephone system was even used to tell the automated track-power control system (which was based on a couple of crossbar switches) to assign a train to a particular control board: to pick up the train in block 19 and assign it to board 3, you picked up the phone, waited for dial tone, and dialed 70193. You could even throw switches on the layout through the phone system. Joe Morris ###### From: jcmorris@jmorris-pc.MITRE.ORG (Joe Morris) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Date: 1 Dec 2000 19:35:15 GMT Organization: The MITRE Corporation Lines: 19 Message-ID: <908uhj$r41$1@top.mitre.org> References: <901crq$29s@netaxs.com> <90423i$a05$1@top.mitre.org> <905q2d$910$5@bob.news.rcn.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: jmorris-pc.mitre.org X-Trace: top.mitre.org 975699315 27777 128.29.251.13 (1 Dec 2000 19:35:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.mitre.org NNTP-Posting-Date: 1 Dec 2000 19:35:15 GMT X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 (NOV) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!news-stu1.dfn.de!news-koe1.dfn.de!RRZ.Uni-Koeln.DE!news.netcologne.de!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.tufts.edu!blanket.mitre.org!news.mitre.org!jmorris-pc.MITRE.ORG!jcmorris Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69864 jmfbahciv@aol.com writes: > jcmorris@jmorris-pc.MITRE.ORG (Joe Morris) wrote: >>The exchange was a 2-digit system, with plunger linefinders (yuck) >>and a few standard SxS units. The telephone system was even used >>to tell the automated track-power control system (which was based >>on a couple of crossbar switches) to assign a train to a particular >>control board: to pick up the train in block 19 and assign it to board >>3, you picked up the phone, waited for dial tone, and dialed 70193. >>You could even throw switches on the layout through the phone system. >Heh, heh. And Kotok did it at DEC, proving that it was possible >to AT&T. He later did one in Marlboro, too. I'll bite: where *is* Alan these days? (I knew him when he was the TMRC treasurer.) Joe Morris ###### From: jmfbahciv@aol.com Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Date: Sat, 02 Dec 00 13:30:48 GMT Organization: UltraNet Communications, Inc. Lines: 36 Message-ID: <90b1bp$q55$2@bob.news.rcn.net> References: <901crq$29s@netaxs.com> <90423i$a05$1@top.mitre.org> <905q2d$910$5@bob.news.rcn.net> <908uhj$r41$1@top.mitre.org> X-Trace: 92Gwr3XLdzWXHGPSCS22fK7snQV4xHoIlVFQRV0aeow= X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 2 Dec 2000 14:35:37 GMT X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.tele.dk!128.230.129.106!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!207-172-245-119 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69929 In article <908uhj$r41$1@top.mitre.org>, jcmorris@jmorris-pc.MITRE.ORG (Joe Morris) wrote: >jmfbahciv@aol.com writes: > >> jcmorris@jmorris-pc.MITRE.ORG (Joe Morris) wrote: > >>>The exchange was a 2-digit system, with plunger linefinders (yuck) >>>and a few standard SxS units. The telephone system was even used >>>to tell the automated track-power control system (which was based >>>on a couple of crossbar switches) to assign a train to a particular >>>control board: to pick up the train in block 19 and assign it to board >>>3, you picked up the phone, waited for dial tone, and dialed 70193. >>>You could even throw switches on the layout through the phone system. > >>Heh, heh. And Kotok did it at DEC, proving that it was possible >>to AT&T. He later did one in Marlboro, too. > >I'll bite: where *is* Alan these days? (I knew him >when he was the TMRC treasurer.) I don't remember the name of the biz he was going to; it was a _small_ company. I went to his "retirement party" when he left DEC. That's when he told his telephone stories and his PDP-10 story. One thing that I'll regret not doing at that party is to stand up and formally thank him for the PDP-10. But I'll never forget the look of delight on his face when he started to correct the term DEC^WDigital and realized out loud that he could say DEC as much as he wanted to now. /BAH Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail. ###### From: Eric Fischer Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Date: 1 Dec 2000 21:45:27 GMT Lines: 15 Message-ID: <90965n$l3j$1@bob.news.rcn.net> References: <901crq$29s@netaxs.com> <90423i$a05$1@top.mitre.org> <905q2d$910$5@bob.news.rcn.net> <908uhj$r41$1@top.mitre.org> X-Trace: 6WZAdhYZsItDWqLyktyzb010Q6RCJsJMB3uQCEtZirY= X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 1 Dec 2000 21:45:27 GMT X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test72 (19 April 1999) Originator: enf@enteract.com (Eric Fischer) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!news.uni-stuttgart.de!uni-erlangen.de!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.skycache.com!Cidera!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69928 Joe Morris wrote: > >Heh, heh. And Kotok did it at DEC, proving that it was possible > >to AT&T. He later did one in Marlboro, too. > > I'll bite: where *is* Alan these days? (I knew him when he was the TMRC > treasurer.) According to http://www.w3.org/People/domain?domain=Management#kotok%40w3.org he's the Associate Chairman of the World Wide Web Consortium. eric ###### From: "Phillip Hallam-Baker" Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers References: <901crq$29s@netaxs.com> <90423i$a05$1@top.mitre.org> <905q2d$910$5@bob.news.rcn.net> <908uhj$r41$1@top.mitre.org> <90b1bp$q55$2@bob.news.rcn.net> Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Lines: 15 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 15:43:16 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.128.120.97 X-Complaints-To: abuse@mediaone.net X-Trace: typhoon.ne.mediaone.net 975771796 24.128.120.97 (Sat, 02 Dec 2000 10:43:16 EST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2000 10:43:16 EST Organization: Road Runner Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!news.tesion.net!news.belwue.de!news-stu1.dfn.de!news-koe1.dfn.de!news-fra1.dfn.de!news.tele.dk!209.50.235.254!europa.netcrusader.net!207.172.3.44!feed2.news.rcn.net!rcn!chnws02.mediaone.net!chnws05.ne.mediaone.net!24.91.0.34!typhoon.ne.mediaone.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69952 wrote in message news:90b1bp$q55$2@bob.news.rcn.net... > But I'll never forget the look of delight on his face > when he started to correct the term DEC^WDigital and realized > out loud that he could say DEC as much as he wanted to now. Alan has been at the World Wide Web Consortium for a number of years. He was involved in a payments company, GlobeSET before that. Phill ###### From: jcmorris@jmorris-pc.MITRE.ORG (Joe Morris) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Date: 2 Dec 2000 16:36:59 GMT Organization: The MITRE Corporation Lines: 15 Message-ID: <90b8fb$hlp$1@top.mitre.org> References: <901crq$29s@netaxs.com> <90423i$a05$1@top.mitre.org> <905q2d$910$5@bob.news.rcn.net> <908uhj$r41$1@top.mitre.org> <90b1bp$q55$2@bob.news.rcn.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: jmorris-pc.mitre.org X-Trace: top.mitre.org 975775019 18105 128.29.251.13 (2 Dec 2000 16:36:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.mitre.org NNTP-Posting-Date: 2 Dec 2000 16:36:59 GMT X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 (NOV) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!news1.sunrise.ch!news.imp.ch!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.tufts.edu!blanket.mitre.org!news.mitre.org!jmorris-pc.MITRE.ORG!jcmorris Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:69925 jmfbahciv@aol.com writes: > jcmorris@jmorris-pc.MITRE.ORG (Joe Morris) wrote: >>I'll bite: where *is* Alan these days? (I knew him >>when he was the TMRC treasurer.) >But I'll never forget the look of delight on his face >when he started to correct the term DEC^WDigital and realized >out loud that he could say DEC as much as he wanted to now. It's been thirty-odd years since we were in the same room but that sounds like him... Joe Morris ###### From: jmfbahciv@aol.com Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" Date: Sun, 03 Dec 00 11:06:16 GMT Organization: UltraNet Communications, Inc. Lines: 25 Message-ID: <90dd92$6a$1@bob.news.rcn.net> References: <901crq$29s@netaxs.com> <90423i$a05$1@top.mitre.org> <905q2d$910$5@bob.news.rcn.net> <908uhj$r41$1@top.mitre.org> <90b1bp$q55$2@bob.news.rcn.net> <90b8fb$hlp$1@top.mitre.org> X-Trace: 2XUj4aTVtiw1IgMzp7LLdU/f7mnefsd7tdPi+Th4gQU= X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com NNTP-Posting-Date: 3 Dec 2000 12:11:14 GMT X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #4 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed2.news.rcn.net!feed1.news.rcn.net!rcn!207-172-245-170 Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:70009 In article <90b8fb$hlp$1@top.mitre.org>, jcmorris@jmorris-pc.MITRE.ORG (Joe Morris) wrote: >jmfbahciv@aol.com writes: > >> jcmorris@jmorris-pc.MITRE.ORG (Joe Morris) wrote: > >>>I'll bite: where *is* Alan these days? (I knew him >>>when he was the TMRC treasurer.) > >>But I'll never forget the look of delight on his face >>when he started to correct the term DEC^WDigital and realized >>out loud that he could say DEC as much as he wanted to now. > > It's been thirty-odd years since we were in the same room >but that sounds like him... I never really did any work for/with him. But he was legend in our group even though his office was just down the hall. Now that I'm thinking about it, we had quite a number of people with that flavor of status. /BAH Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail. ###### Message-ID: <3A31C169.FA69B625@acm.org> From: "Joel C. Ewing" X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Origin of "mainframe" References: <8vqhs0$1t3q$1@news.comnet.co.nz> <8vsk72$bv4$1@flood.weeg.uiowa.edu> <3a22a189$1$wg$mr2ice@news.epix.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 29 Date: Sat, 09 Dec 2000 05:24:52 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 158.252.167.113 X-Complaints-To: abuse@earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net 976339492 158.252.167.113 (Fri, 08 Dec 2000 21:24:52 PST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2000 21:24:52 PST Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news.nextra.ch!newsfeed1.online.no!nextra.com!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!xfer13.netnews.com!netnews.com!newsfeed2.earthlink.net!newsfeed.earthlink.net!newsmaster1.prod.itd.earthlink.net!newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net.POSTED!not-for-mail Xref: chonsp.franklin.ch alt.folklore.computers:70380 John Varela wrote: > On Mon, 27 Nov 2000 18:01:48, jata@aepiax.net (Julian Thomas) wrote: > > Telephone central offices had 'mainframes' long before there were any > > computers. These were humongous racks where wires were connected; > > probably the term migrated to the new technology. > > I'd be willing to put money on that being the correct origin of the > term, or else that both the computer and telephone terminology derive > from a common source. With the possible exception of custom built machines, computers and peripheral equipment of the 50's and 60's were not built in racks but typically in custom designed enclosures with heavy steel framing and outer covers, which were by IBM at least called "frames". To call the frame(s) comprising the central processor the "main frame" seems like such a natural extension, I really doubt that any association with telephone terminology would have been necessary to initiate this practice. Based on my own experience I would also doubt there were that many people working with electronic computers in those days that would have had a reason to be familiar with physical terminology in a telephone central office. I had some interest in the logical structure of telephone exchanges as examples of use of digital logic and switching networks, but until this discussion was completely unfamiliar with a use of "main frame" to describe a physical rack in that context. -- Joel C. Ewing, Fort Smith, AR jcewing@acm.org