That this 8008 computer from 1972 should have 16KB of RAM sounds unlikely. I haven't been able to find any real info stating this - still, the headline on tomshardware says "16KB". That's very hard to believe. Static RAM of that size would have been extremely expensive at the time, the much much later Altair 8800 didn't get past 4KB without a dynamic RAM board (which was also very unreliable).
The Q1/Lite, a Z80-based computer from 1974 (correction - 1977!) - well, that I can kind of believe.
I wonder if the article author is confusing the theoretical max memory address space of the 8008 (which is 16KB) with actual RAM size of the 1972 model Q1?
> They use the Intel 8008 CPU, an 8-bit CPU capable of processing a whopping sixteen kilobytes of memory
Which is correct. As you say, highly unlikely that the computers had that much, though.
I'm not sure how Tom's Hardware does things, but it's well-known in the _newspaper_ industry that the headlines aren't written by the person who writes the article, and misinterpretation happens from time to time. I suspect whoever wrote the headline just got confused, here.
Of course, because of the plague of LLMs which now lies over the land, anyone trying to find out how much RAM such a machine had in 2050 will be confidently, incorrectly told 16kB by GPT47, even though it's obviously wrong, due to this headline...
The headline is probably wrong, the article text just says "capable of" 16 kilobyte. I also think it's unlikely it had 16 installed. On the other hand, doesn't the screen look like a flatscreen, not a CRT? So the screen itself was probably very expensive in itself. (Probably plasma screen?)
Edit:
Look at the image and the bank of 3 * 8 socketed chips:
The 2200 type 2 (1972) was indeed expandable to 16k. Yes it cost $14,000, but you could buy it. Remember: this was an expensive piece of business equipment, the Altair was a cheap (for the time) kit for hobbyists. Companies buying these machines were choosing between them and a minicomputer like the PDP/11 which cost $20,000.
14 year old me in 1978 had a whopping 4K of RAM in my S-100 system (a whole card full of 2102s) and I couldn't have had that much without my parents helping me out.
A full 16K six years before seems unlikely, especially given the size of programs back then.
I worked for Daniel Alroy the founder of Q1. https://www.peel.dk/Q1/
I have never seen one in real life yet. He told me lot of stories, especially how he got into a fight with Intel. He had set out to prove a point that a cheaper simpler machine can be made.
omg hey vachi it's Danielle, your former post-Q1 coworker :)
I've also been trying to track down a Q1 FOR YEARS and a friend sent me this article.
Daniel Alroy would be so thrilled about this coverage. To this day, I still haven't visited the Computer History Museum in San Jose, out of respect for his grudge with Intel. (They don't include Q1 in its history.)
You could also go back to the 1965 Olivetti Programma 101 (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programma_101). It had labels and memory cells, and could be programmed in a kind of assembly.
So many articles have terrible / gibberish writing. I can't help thinking, is this AI?
Eg. In this article, right out of the gate there are two...
..
"They are now on display at Kingston University in Surrey, England, but only for the rest of February 17th."
Are they saying that the machines are available on one day only? February 17th, The day the article was published? If so, that's a very strange way to say that.
..
"As far as what to expect, don't expect too much— these are the first desktop PCs created with a fully integrated single-chip microprocessor, including the CPU."
I am just guessing what they mean here. Do they mean... "the first desktop PCs created with a fully integrated single-chip microprocessor, which includes the CPU" ??
..
ps. I was using Miro recently and a popup appeared asking should the AI rewrite the text I wrote "for clarity" .. I just laughed, clarity is certainly not an LLM's strong suit.
But I reckon these tools are everywhere and they are being used everywhere.
[+] [-] Tor3|2 years ago|reply
I wonder if the article author is confusing the theoretical max memory address space of the 8008 (which is 16KB) with actual RAM size of the 1972 model Q1?
[+] [-] rsynnott|2 years ago|reply
> They use the Intel 8008 CPU, an 8-bit CPU capable of processing a whopping sixteen kilobytes of memory
Which is correct. As you say, highly unlikely that the computers had that much, though.
I'm not sure how Tom's Hardware does things, but it's well-known in the _newspaper_ industry that the headlines aren't written by the person who writes the article, and misinterpretation happens from time to time. I suspect whoever wrote the headline just got confused, here.
Of course, because of the plague of LLMs which now lies over the land, anyone trying to find out how much RAM such a machine had in 2050 will be confidently, incorrectly told 16kB by GPT47, even though it's obviously wrong, due to this headline...
[+] [-] actionfromafar|2 years ago|reply
Edit:
Look at the image and the bank of 3 * 8 socketed chips:
https://www.peel.dk/Q1/img/SN615-03.jpg
If these are the Intel 2102 [1] or something similar, then it would have 3 kilobytes of SRAM.
1: https://w140.com/tekwiki/wiki/Intel_2102
Edit 2: the computer in the picture is another model, ignore me.
[+] [-] tdeck|2 years ago|reply
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datapoint_2200
The 2200 type 2 (1972) was indeed expandable to 16k. Yes it cost $14,000, but you could buy it. Remember: this was an expensive piece of business equipment, the Altair was a cheap (for the time) kit for hobbyists. Companies buying these machines were choosing between them and a minicomputer like the PDP/11 which cost $20,000.
[+] [-] gumby|2 years ago|reply
A full 16K six years before seems unlikely, especially given the size of programs back then.
[+] [-] reacweb|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vachi|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vachi|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] djbaskin|2 years ago|reply
I've also been trying to track down a Q1 FOR YEARS and a friend sent me this article.
Daniel Alroy would be so thrilled about this coverage. To this day, I still haven't visited the Computer History Museum in San Jose, out of respect for his grudge with Intel. (They don't include Q1 in its history.)
[+] [-] ChrisArchitect|2 years ago|reply
https://twitter.com/KingstonUni/status/1757444509577662951
https://twitter.com/KingstonUni/status/1757404905176695186
[+] [-] ChrisArchitect|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rbanffy|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 15457345234|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tetris11|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jaredhallen|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dtagames|2 years ago|reply
I agree more pictures would have been nice. It looks like a cool piece of hardware!
[+] [-] bonzini|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] temporallobe|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] everyone|2 years ago|reply
..
"They are now on display at Kingston University in Surrey, England, but only for the rest of February 17th."
Are they saying that the machines are available on one day only? February 17th, The day the article was published? If so, that's a very strange way to say that.
..
"As far as what to expect, don't expect too much— these are the first desktop PCs created with a fully integrated single-chip microprocessor, including the CPU."
I am just guessing what they mean here. Do they mean... "the first desktop PCs created with a fully integrated single-chip microprocessor, which includes the CPU" ??
..
ps. I was using Miro recently and a popup appeared asking should the AI rewrite the text I wrote "for clarity" .. I just laughed, clarity is certainly not an LLM's strong suit.
But I reckon these tools are everywhere and they are being used everywhere.
[+] [-] unknown|2 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] sema4hacker|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] beautifulfreak|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] macrolime|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] fatkam|2 years ago|reply
[+] [-] stavros|2 years ago|reply