Below is what it has looked like for at least 50 years. Some time in the 1950s he dismantled it and put it back together, adding over 130 items in the same case. I also have a booklet he typed which identifies each item.
Saturday, December 25, 2010
The Cartdidge Collection
This is my Grandpa (Steve) Tucker with his cartridge collection (about 100 items). The picture is dated Feb. 1940.
Below is what it has looked like for at least 50 years. Some time in the 1950s he dismantled it and put it back together, adding over 130 items in the same case. I also have a booklet he typed which identifies each item.
Below is what it has looked like for at least 50 years. Some time in the 1950s he dismantled it and put it back together, adding over 130 items in the same case. I also have a booklet he typed which identifies each item.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
The GEEK is in!
Computer Storage Comparison
NOTE: Tricia told me that this starts out a bit too technical, but gets better toward the end (so hang in there).
I've had in mind to do a technical post on computer memory for quite some time. Last week John gave me the push I needed to get it done. He sent me and Francois a link (http://www.toxicjunction.com/pictures/pic/5/P1485-1.jpg ) which shows a comparison of an old disk to a recent SD card and says they were both about 1GB of storage. The disk they show was actually just the head-drive-assembly (HDA) from an IBM 3380 rather than the whole storage unit (which was the size of a large freezer and actually contained two HDA's, the motors to drive them and lots of electronics to receive and send the data, see http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/storage/storage_3380.html ).
Okay, back to my story.
Their comparison cries out for a response, so here it is. Comparing 25 -year-old brown spinning media to recent solid state "flash" memory is like comparing a warehouse to a pickup truck. This isn't a realistic pairing. The SD card (and half-sister "thumb" drives, etc.) is more a replacement for floppy disks rather than mainframe DASD (direct access storage device).
A point to compare: the speed difference. Disk I/O service time is measured in milliseconds (1/1000 or 0.001 .aka. thousandths of seconds ms). Internal random access memory (RAM) reference time is measured in nanoseconds (1/1000000000 or 0.000000001 .aka. billionths). To soften that blow (the million to one performance difference), I will point out that memory references are in bytes (typically 8 or 16 at a time), disk I/O is done in blocks of at least 128 bytes and more typically 2K or 4K and sometimes much more than that. These devices are not designed for single byte access. And that's where buffering and/or caching come in - to mitigate the drastic speed differences between disk and memory. SD memory access time is around 25µs (micro seconds or 0.000001) for first access and cycles of 50 ns for subsequent cycles.
Okay, now for my memory comparison:
This picture is of 2 memory modules. The large one is a 4MB memory board from a VAX-8600 circa 1986-1990. Next to it is a micro SD card. This one is only 2GB but it could just as easily be 16GB (I don't think 32GB micro SD cards are out yet). In case you don't know this, you can click on the picture for a close-up view.
Okay, now for some statistics:
The 4MB board is 12" x 15.5" x 0.25" and weighs 2 lb 8.5 oz.
The micro SD is 0.43" x 0.6" x 0.032" (11mm x 15mm x 0.82mm). My postal scale measures in 0.1 ounce increments and the micro SD doesn't register on it (nor does a standard SD card).
16GB / 4MG = 4096
So,
4096 x .25" = 1024" = 85.333'
4096 x 40.5 oz. = 165,888 oz = 10, 368 lb. = 5.184 tons
In other words, it would require 4096 of the 4MB boards to hold the same amount of information as a 16GB micro SD.
If you were to get 4096 of these boards and stack them up, it would be 85' 4" tall and weigh over 5 tons.
Now, for the rest of the story: pricing
As for cost, the 16GB micro SD cards are selling on eBay for $50-60 including shipping, although 8GB micro SD's are going for under $20 (get 2 8's for about $35).
My 1990 price list does not have the 4MB VAX 8600 memory board (the one in my photo). It was already obsolete by 1990; it was new in 1986. The book does have a 64MB board listed for $50,400 and a 256MB board was $434,000. So, based on ever decreasing memory prices (on a per-megabyte basis in those days), I'm going to estimate that the 1986 list price of this 4MB board was probably around $10,000.
So, based on that estimate, in 1986, 16GB of silicon based computer memory would have cost:
4096 x $10,000 = $40,960,000.00
Disclaimer: The more techno savvy of you may point out that comparing RAM and a micro SD card is not quite valid either. You're probably right. This is more like comparing a Porsche 911 Turbo Carrera and a VW Beatle.
NOTE: Tricia told me that this starts out a bit too technical, but gets better toward the end (so hang in there).
I've had in mind to do a technical post on computer memory for quite some time. Last week John gave me the push I needed to get it done. He sent me and Francois a link (http://www.toxicjunction.com/
Okay, back to my story.
Their comparison cries out for a response, so here it is. Comparing 25 -year-old brown spinning media to recent solid state "flash" memory is like comparing a warehouse to a pickup truck. This isn't a realistic pairing. The SD card (and half-sister "thumb" drives, etc.) is more a replacement for floppy disks rather than mainframe DASD (direct access storage device).
A point to compare: the speed difference. Disk I/O service time is measured in milliseconds (1/1000 or 0.001 .aka. thousandths of seconds ms). Internal random access memory (RAM) reference time is measured in nanoseconds (1/1000000000 or 0.000000001 .aka. billionths). To soften that blow (the million to one performance difference), I will point out that memory references are in bytes (typically 8 or 16 at a time), disk I/O is done in blocks of at least 128 bytes and more typically 2K or 4K and sometimes much more than that. These devices are not designed for single byte access. And that's where buffering and/or caching come in - to mitigate the drastic speed differences between disk and memory. SD memory access time is around 25µs (micro seconds or 0.000001) for first access and cycles of 50 ns for subsequent cycles.
Okay, now for my memory comparison:
This picture is of 2 memory modules. The large one is a 4MB memory board from a VAX-8600 circa 1986-1990. Next to it is a micro SD card. This one is only 2GB but it could just as easily be 16GB (I don't think 32GB micro SD cards are out yet). In case you don't know this, you can click on the picture for a close-up view.
Okay, now for some statistics:
The 4MB board is 12" x 15.5" x 0.25" and weighs 2 lb 8.5 oz.
The micro SD is 0.43" x 0.6" x 0.032" (11mm x 15mm x 0.82mm). My postal scale measures in 0.1 ounce increments and the micro SD doesn't register on it (nor does a standard SD card).
16GB / 4MG = 4096
So,
4096 x .25" = 1024" = 85.333'
4096 x 40.5 oz. = 165,888 oz = 10, 368 lb. = 5.184 tons
In other words, it would require 4096 of the 4MB boards to hold the same amount of information as a 16GB micro SD.
If you were to get 4096 of these boards and stack them up, it would be 85' 4" tall and weigh over 5 tons.
Now, for the rest of the story: pricing
As for cost, the 16GB micro SD cards are selling on eBay for $50-60 including shipping, although 8GB micro SD's are going for under $20 (get 2 8's for about $35).
My 1990 price list does not have the 4MB VAX 8600 memory board (the one in my photo). It was already obsolete by 1990; it was new in 1986. The book does have a 64MB board listed for $50,400 and a 256MB board was $434,000. So, based on ever decreasing memory prices (on a per-megabyte basis in those days), I'm going to estimate that the 1986 list price of this 4MB board was probably around $10,000.
So, based on that estimate, in 1986, 16GB of silicon based computer memory would have cost:
4096 x $10,000 = $40,960,000.00
Disclaimer: The more techno savvy of you may point out that comparing RAM and a micro SD card is not quite valid either. You're probably right. This is more like comparing a Porsche 911 Turbo Carrera and a VW Beatle.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Deer Hunt
If you want to read this in chronological order, see Jay's post on the same subject first then come back to mine.
I took my walking stick and went with Jay because otherwise, he would have been out there alone. Oh, ya, and I really enjoy his company, too.
So, there he is Saturday afternoon, looking for deer on a hill side that's 500 yards away and I told him if he shoots one down there I'm sending him in with a skillet and a fork. Yes, it is that steep! The shadows were down in there before 4:00 in the afternoon.
And as I left work Monday afternoon - right there in front of the Rocket Garden...
That's right, a 4 point buck right in the middle of 9 does and fawns.
I stopped across the road and took a few pictures. A few of them raised their heads and looked at me, but then just went back to grazing.
I took my walking stick and went with Jay because otherwise, he would have been out there alone. Oh, ya, and I really enjoy his company, too.
So, there he is Saturday afternoon, looking for deer on a hill side that's 500 yards away and I told him if he shoots one down there I'm sending him in with a skillet and a fork. Yes, it is that steep! The shadows were down in there before 4:00 in the afternoon.
And as I left work Monday afternoon - right there in front of the Rocket Garden...
That's right, a 4 point buck right in the middle of 9 does and fawns.
I stopped across the road and took a few pictures. A few of them raised their heads and looked at me, but then just went back to grazing.
Sunday, October 12, 2008
Winter? No, we'll still get a short reprieve.
Yes, it's the first snow fall for down in the valley!
We've seen a little high on the mountains but this
is the first that has fallen down here.
We got 4 or 5 inches but the driveways, sidewalks
and streets are still warm enough to melt it on contact.
Some areas within 10 or 15 miles reported 12 - 14 inches.
Ladder Ball, anyone?
Guess I will be covering the swamp cooler this week.
We've seen a little high on the mountains but this
is the first that has fallen down here.
We got 4 or 5 inches but the driveways, sidewalks
and streets are still warm enough to melt it on contact.
Some areas within 10 or 15 miles reported 12 - 14 inches.
Ladder Ball, anyone?
Guess I will be covering the swamp cooler this week.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
The truth is, I'm mostly a spectator here. In other words, don't expect new posts on a regular basis. I did this blog so I could more easily see what's going on with the kids and grandkids.
Here's a story you should read to your kids: One of my favorite stories from Old Mother West Wind by Thornton W. Burgess.
Johnny Chuck Finds the Best Thing in the World.
Just click on the title to read it.
Here's a story you should read to your kids: One of my favorite stories from Old Mother West Wind by Thornton W. Burgess.
Johnny Chuck Finds the Best Thing in the World.
Just click on the title to read it.
Thursday, May 8, 2008
Most of my kids are here so why not me?
It's late at night and I'm on the computer (as usual), but I'm going to bed now that I got this far.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)