Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!shelby!csli!jkl
From: jkl@csli.Stanford.EDU (John Kallen)
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: USSR Microcomputers: How far behind US?
Message-ID: <8902@csli.Stanford.EDU>
Date: 10 May 89 02:25:41 GMT
References: <1805@orion.cf.uci.edu> <8013@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> <528@laic.UUCP> <1905@etive.ed.ac.uk> <4366@ttidca.TTI.COM> <1203@isieng.UUCP>
Sender: jkl@csli.Stanford.EDU (John Kallen)
Reply-To: jkl@csli.stanford.edu (John Kallen)
Organization: Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford U.
Lines: 29

In article <1203@isieng.UUCP> roy@isieng.UUCP (Roy Wells) writes:
#Also remember that our shuttle has really antique computers onboard.  
#If memory serves (small pun here) the Shuttle's main computer has 
#all of 64KB DRAM.  The reason?  The Shuttle was designed in the 
#1970s, using the technology of that time.  
#
#Putting an AT aboard the Shuttle would measureably increase it's 
#computing power.
#
#What boggles the brain is that we won't retrofit the thing with 
#something more modern.

I thought the computers on the shuttles used ferrite core RAMs.
Supposedly more radiation-resistant or something. You're right about
having an AT on board increasing the computing power, but I'd rather
see a tested computer run the Shuttle than a fancy, new, fast and
*untested* (read bugged). It's finally up again and we don't want
the space program set back by a catastrophe due to the AT going:
	Fatal error: stack overflow, system halted
or
	PARITY CHECK 2
during ascent...

(shudder)
_______________________________________________________________________________
 | |   |   |    |\ | |   /|\ | John Kallen            
 | |\ \|/ \|  * |/ | |/|  |  | PoBox 11215             "Life. Don't talk to me 
 | |\ /|\  |\ * |\ |   |  |  | Stanford CA 94309        about life."         
_|_|___|___|____|_\|___|__|__|_jkl@csli.stanford.edu___________________________