IBM Archive

Recently I came across a minor mystery—the model numbers of the original IBM PC. For such a pivotal product, there is remarkably little detailed original information from the early days. ↫ Michal Necasek Count me surprised. When I think IBM, I think meticulously documented and detailed bureaucracy, where every screw, nut, and bolt is numbered, documented, and tracked, so much so in fact this all-American company even managed to impress the Germans. You’d expect IBM, of all companies, to have overly detailed lists of every IBM PC it ever designed, manufactured, and sold, but as it turns out, it’s actually quite hard to assemble a complete list of the early IBM PCs the company sold. The biggest problem are the models from before 1983, since before that year, the IBM PC does not appear in IBM’s detailed archive of announcements. As such, Michal Necasek had to dig into random bits of IBM documentation to assemble references to those earlier models, and while he certainly didn’t find every single one of them, it’s a great start, and others can surely pick up the search from here.

In this article, I look inside a chip in the IBM 3274 Control Unit.1 But before I discuss the chip, I need to give some background on mainframes. ↫ Ken Shirriff Whenever we talk about mainframes, I am obligated to link to the story of an 18 year old buying a mainframe, while still living at his parents. One of the greatest presentations of all time.

Each S1012 node has a single Power10 processor, which can have 1, 4, or 8 cores activated, which suggests that it is the same single chip module (SCM) implementation of the Power10 processor that was used in the Power S1022s entry machine. The Power S1012 node has four ISDIMM memory slots (using the differential signaling created by Big Blue for its Power10 memory) with a maximum capacity of 256 GB. The node has four half-height, half-length PCI-Express 5.0 slots and room for four NVM-Express U.2 drive bays that come in a maximum 1.6 TB capacity each for a total of 6.4 TB of storage. The eight-core version of the Power10 SCM is only available in the rack configuration, while the one-core and four-core versions are available in rack or tower configurations. The four-core and eight-core versions can run IBM i, AIX, or Linux, but the one-core version can only run IBM i and it has its main memory capped at the same 64 GB that other single-core Power Systems machines have been subjected to. We have suggested that 128 GB or even 256 GB is more appropriate given modern workloads, but Big Blue is standing its ground here. If you need more memory than 64 GB, then this machine is not for you. ↫ Timothy Prickett Morgan at IT Jungle I understand full well that these machines are by no means meant for people like you and I, sitting at home playing with our toys. That being said, I still wish there was some way for IBM to offer unique hardware like this – perhaps in a more standard, paired-down configuration – so more people than just enterprises could explore and use them. It wouldn’t make any economic sense for IBM to do so, and even in a more standard, paired-down configuration they’d probably still be ungodly expensive, but when I look at this unique tower, with its POWER10 hardware and the ability to run AIX, desires are stirred within me that are banned in at least 46 countries. Such a machine would surely be wasted on someone like me, who would just be shoehorning whatever desktop tasks he could into it, but what a grand ol’ time we would have. There is absolutely, positively, unequivocally zero percent chance IBM would ever send one of these over for review to someone like me, but I wonder if I should try anyway. I’ve got nothing to lose. Does anyone here work at IBM? Perhaps IBM wants to sponsor OSNews? How about like 12 weeks of free sponsorships in exchange for a tower model of the Power S1012? I also have two POWER9 machines to compare it to! It’s the only way you’ll ever get a Power S1012 screenfetch screenshot go viral on nerd social media, and we all know that deep down, that’s all you IBM folks really want.

The first “Power11” patches were queued today into the PowerPC’s “next” Git branch ahead of the upcoming Linux 6.9 kernel cycle. The first of many IBM Power11 processor/platform enablement patches are beginning to flow out for the Linux kernel for enabling the next-generation Power processors. This shouldn’t be too surprising given that a few months ago IBM began posting “PowerPC Future” patches for the GCC compiler with speculating at the time it was for Power11 just as IBM previously called their “future” CPU target in GCC for Power10 prior to those processors officially debuting. ↫ Michael Larabel I really hope IBM learned from the POWER10 fiasco and will make sure POWER11 is properly and fully open again, because POWER9’s openness made it unique among the other options out there. Without it, there’s really no reason for an enthusiast community to developer around POWER11 as it did around POWER9, and that would be a shame. Again.

Just as IBM was posting “future” processor compiler patches in 2019 for what ended up being early POWER10 enablement, they are once again repeating their same compiler enablement technique with sending out “PowerPC future” patches for what is likely to be POWER11. The “PowerPC future” patches sent out today are just like before — complete with mentions like “This feature may or may not be present in any specific future PowerPC processor…Again, these are preliminary patches for a potential future machine. Things will likely change in terms of implementation and usage over time.“ If this is indeed a sign that POWER11 is on its way, I really hope IBM learned from its mistake with POWER10. POWER9 was completely open, top to bottom, which made it possible for Raptor Computing Systems to build completely open source, auditable workstation where every bit of code was open source. POWER10, however, contained closed firmware for the off-chip OMI DRAM bridge and on-chip PPE I/O processor, which meant that the principled team at Raptor resolutely said no to building POWER10 workstations, even though they wanted to. I firmly believe that if IBM tried even the littlest bit, there could be a niche, but fairly stable market for POWER-based workstations, by virtue of being pretty much the only fully open ISA (at least, as far as POWER9 goes). Of course, we’re not talking serious competition to x86 or ARM here, but I’ve seen more than enough interest to enable a select few OEMs to build and sell POWER workstations. Let’s hope POWER11 fixes the firmware mess that is POWER10, so that we can look forward to another line of fully open source workstations.

Writing a cycle-accurate emulator for a computer system is more than just understanding all the CPU instruction timings. A computer is a complete system with peripherals, interrupts, IO bus signals, and DMA. All this comes with an array of different timings and quirks. When software like Area 5150 is written that requires perfect cycle timing, it can be a challenge to provide the level of accuracy needed for the software to function. Area 5150 in particular requires precise coordination with the CGA’s CRTC chip and timer interrupts to begin the end credits demo effect at precisely the right time. It would be very handy then if we could somehow peek into the operation of the system while it was running and understand how all these parts interact.  As it turns out, we can! This process is typically referred to as ‘bus sniffing’, and there’s a lot of a technical information out there on the topic in general. Sniffing can be done on everything from ethernet networks to vending machines, and you can even bus sniff your car. This article will specifically discuss sniffing the IBM PC 5150. A very in-depth and technical article, and one that can easily lead to another weekend project.

Ars Technica writes: There are hundreds of billions of lines of COBOL code running on production systems worldwide. That’s not ideal for a language over 60 years old and whose primary architects are mostly retired or dead. IBM, eager to keep those legacy functions on its Z mainframe systems, wants that code rewritten in Java. It tried getting humans to do it a few years back, but now it has another idea. Yes, you guessed it: It’s putting AI on the job. The IBM watsonx Code Assistant, slated to be available in Q4 this year, intends to keep humans in the mix, but with a push from generative AI in analyzing, refactoring, and testing the new object-oriented code. It’s not an all-or-nothing process, either, as IBM claims that watsonx-generated code should be interoperable with COBOL and certain Z mainframe functions. This might be one of those cases where using “AI” actually makes sense and can be a meaningful tool for the relatively few COBOL programmers left trying to modernise COBOL codebases. I’m obviously not well-versed enough in any of this to make any objective statements, but it seems to make sense.

The Blue Lightning CPU is an interesting beast. There is not a whole lot of information about what the processor really is, but it can be pieced together from various scraps of information. Around 1990, IBM needed low-power 32-bit processors with good performance for its portable systems, but no one offered such CPUs yet. IBM licensed the 386SX core from Intel and turned it into the IBM 386SLC processor (SLC reportedly stood for “Super Little Chip”). Later on, IBM updated the processor to support 486 instructions. It is worth noting that there were still the SLC variants available—nominally a 486, but with a 16-bit bus. The licensing conditions reportedly prevented IBM from selling the SLC processors on the free market. They were only available in IBM-built systems and always(?) as QFP soldered on a board. A very unique processor from the days Intel licensed others to make x86 chips, even allowing them to improve upon them. Those days are long gone, with only AMD and VIA remaining as companies with an x86 license.

In case you thought IBM AIX had a future, IBM’s legacy proprietary Unix, IBM apparently doesn’t. The Register reported Friday that IBM has moved the entire AIX development group to IBM India, apparently their Bangalore office, and placing 80 US-based developers into “redeployment.” That’s a fairly craven way of replacing layoffs with musical chairs, requiring the displaced developers to either find a new position within the company (possibly relocating as well) within some unspecified period, or retire. About a third of IBM’s global staff is on the Indian subcontinent. IBM didn’t publicly announce this move and while it’s undoubtedly good news for IBM India it seems bad news for AIX’s prospects: the technologies IBM thinks are up and coming IBM tends to spend money on, and so an obvious cost-cutting move suggests IBM doesn’t think AIX is one of those things. The writing’s on the wall for all the remaining commercial UNIX variants. By this point I think most of the work being done on AIX and HP-UX is maintaining the install base and fulfilling support contracts, after which there’s no real reason to keep these platforms going.

Project Monterey was an attempt to unify the fragmented Unix market of the 90s in to a single cross vendor Unix that would run on Intel Itanium (and others). The main collaborators were: IBM who brought its AIX, HP was supposed to bring some bits from HP-UX, Sequent from DYNIX/ptx and SCO from UnixWare. The project shared fate of Itanium – it totally failed. In the end Linux took its spot as a single Unix. The main legacy of Project Monterey was the famous SCO vs IBM lawsuit. IBM did however produce AIX version for IA64 architecture! According to Wikipedia, 32 copies were sold in 2001. Except of course no one has kept a copy and the famous OS was lost forever. Until now! This rare release has been recovered, imaged, and uploaded for posterity. It’s going to be difficult to actually run it, though, as there’s no emulator capable of running it – you’re going to need a very specific type of Itanium machine, an Intel Engineering Sample Itanium workstation, which were available from several vendors.

Can’t get enough of porting old software? How about getting Doom ported to and running on an old version of AIX for PowerPC? You know what ever computer needs? DOOM. Do you know what I couldn’t find? DOOM for the IBM RS/6000, but that’s not surprising. These machines were never meant for gaming, but that’s doesn’t mean you can’t do it. If you like pain anyway. In this extra long NCommander special, we’re going to explore AIX, discuss the RS/6000 Model 150 43p I’m running it on. Throughout this process, I’d explore the trouble in getting bash to build, getting neofetch to work, then the battle for high colors, SDL, and more. This video is over an hour long, but incredibly detailed and lovingly obscure.

IBM has announced it has cleared a major hurdle in its effort to make quantum computing useful: it now has a quantum processor, called Eagle, with 127 functional qubits. This makes it the first company to clear the 100-qubit mark, a milestone that’s interesting because the interactions of that many qubits can’t be simulated using today’s classical computing hardware and algorithms. But what may be more significant is that IBM now has a roadmap that would see it producing the first 1,000-qubit processor in two years. And, according to IBM Director of Research Darío Gil, that’s the point where calculations done with quantum hardware will start being useful. I feel like quantum computing is one of those things that will eventually have a big impact on various aspects of our world, but at this point, it’s far too complicated and early days to really make any predictions.

This is an introduction to getting IBM’s OS/360 operating system loaded and running on the Hercules emulator for the System/370, ESA/390, and z/Architecture systems. It assumes you have some familiarity with the 370, and with OS; in particular, you need to have some understanding of JCL, and of OS/360 (or later versions, like MVS or OS/390) usage and operation. It does not purport to be an introduction to the world of the 370. This is a bit more complicated to set up than just about any other emulator or VM out there. A great weekend project for people with the right skill set and inclination.

While POWER9 was big for open-source fans with the formation of the OpenPOWER Foundation and Raptor Computing Systems designing POWER9-based systems that are fully open-source down to schematics and the motherboard firmware, the same can’t be currently said about POWER10. While IBM has published a lot of the POWER10 firmware as open-source, remaining closed for at least the time being is their off-chip OMI DRAM bridge and their on-chip PPE I/O processor. This sucks. I am a huge fan of Raptor’s fully open POWER9 workstation and boards, and despite Raptor hinting for months now there were issues with POWER10’s openness, I was hoping things would be figured out before the release of IBM’s new POWER10 processors this month. Sadly, this seems to have been wishful thinking. Raptor’s POWER9 workstations are the only fully open performance-oriented computers you can get, and until IBM decides otherwise, it’s going to stay that way. That just sucks.