This is an interesting look back into the 1950s. I
didn't have a chance to spend time with Karl during my February visit
to the Haus zur Geschichte der IBM Datenverarbeitung. His name was
mentioned. I'll have to save that for
another trip to Böblingen.
I came onto the picture as a 1401 programmer in 1960. The bank's 1401
actually came in the summer of 1961. Back then, 6-12 months between
order and installation was standard to "give you a chance to get your
programs in shape so that the computer could be put into production
when it arrived." So, we made many trips from Providence to the IBM
Datacenter in Boston to test programs before the actual arrival. We
did have a 1412 MICR Check Sorter which was demonstrated in the
customer lobby at the bank's headquarters. All the programmers had to
take tours of duty showing how capable it was as a stand-alone sorter.
I too am fascinated and intrigued by Karl's saying:
- Cost objectives:
The costs of electronics
technology
with ferrite core memory and stored program control were still barely
acceptable for the Unit Record market in the mid 1950ies.. Its low cost
end actually could not be reached with the 1401, particularly in
Europe.
But thanks to the booming high end Unit Record market in USA this did
not
matter. Instead, a low cost version 1430 was planned to be developed
but
this submerged in the /360 design processes for several years.
Eventually
the /360 Model 15 and later the /3 took care of this.
I wonder if the 1430 he refers to is the (US?) 1420 system which was a
latecomer to the 1400 family. It was a low-cost implementation that
was sold in the US in the 1960s (post 1440 and 1460's being
available). As I recall it was focused on the banking industry and may
have had a check sorter (1240?) built on to it.
I think his last sentence may refer to the System/3. I remember
running a comparison benchmark of the S/3 vs. a S/370 Model 115 when I
was in the Poughkeepsie Systems Center that created quite a stir. The
jobstream was one Rochester used and was mostly RPG. I converted it to
run under DOS/VS using an MFCM attached to the S/370-115. The Model
115 came out ahead which was not expected. I got my hand slapped
because we did not review the results with Rochester and, instead,
published a Technical Bulletin. Once Rochester saw what had happened,
they demanded and got the withdrawal of the Technical Bulletin. Lots
of copies had made their way out.
I also don't recall a /360 Model 15. The Model 25 was the smallest
S/360 model that we had to sell in the US. It had up to 48K of memory
and we did get an OS/360 system running on it even though the spec for
OS/360 said it required 64K. But this is another story.
Regards, Bill
Robert B Garner wrote:
More fascinating, first-hand,
nascent
1401 history on the WWAM group
from Karl Ganzhorn, one of its
members,
attached and pasted below...
Please send any follow-up questions
to me and I'll forward to Karl.
Emerson ==> Karl suggested
you might know how to find
Francis Underwood's email address or
contact info?
Thanks!
- Robert
IBM Almaden Research Center, San Jose, CA
Office: 408-927-1739
Mobile: 408-679-0976
robgarn@us.ibm.com
----- Forwarded by
Robert
B Garner/Almaden/IBM on 08/13/2007 04:08 PM -----
Dear Robert,
attached please find my comments to your questions
<Garner807.doc>.
Rebards, Karl
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
August 6, 2007.
Subject: 1401 History_3.
Dear Robert,
Thank you for your e-mail of
August
6. Here are some answers to your questions:
- Anecdotes:
You may use them for
publications
except the one on my wife’s illness.
- Origin of the name WWAM
(needs
a lengthy explanation):
In the early 50ies IBM’s Unit
Record product line was different in USA and WTC due to the war
separation.
But the need for faster calculation and printing was recognized in both
areas. During and after World War II the development of Unit Record
punched
card machinery had followed different routes: In France J. Ghertman and
his engineers had designed calculator punches like the 626 and
especially
a new accounting machine Type 421, functionally similar to the 407, all
in relay technology with plugboards for wireable data flow, storage
allocation
in electromechanical counters and control functions. In Germany a
series
of special features for the 421 accounting machine were designed.
IN 1951 the Corporation had
encouraged
several European IBM companies (France, Germany and United Kingdom) to
establish engineering competencies in electronics. In France J.
Ghertman,
in Germany Walter P. Scharr and in UK J. Elliot (an outside hire) were
implementing this directive.
By 1954 it was recognized in
USA, in France and in Germany independently of each other that
electronics
had to be investigated also for use in Unit Record machines, replacing
the clumsy relay technology. In USA several engineers around Jim Ingram
became active, in France John Ghertman and his excellent engineers were
searching ways and in Germany I had been given the task to seek ways
for
introducing electronics and physics into IBM’s product line
technologies.
In early 1955 the Corporation
set
an objective for a common future product line for the Unit Record
markets
in the world. In the following early deliberations the name of “World
Wide Accounting Machine” emanated.
For the first time a
multinational
engineering task force was conceived, the WWAM task force, with
participants
from USA, France and Germany. Walter Scharr, head of the German
engineering
department, was asked to host the first workshop of the WWAM task Force
(about 6 weeks) in Boeblingen, Germany. Both Watson brothers, Tom and
Arthur,
took an active interest.
The strongest market pressure
emanated
in France from the national competitor Bull who had an electronic
machine
out in the European market.
- Two Address Concept:
In the early days of computers
1-, 2- and 3-Address schemes were investigated all over the world. The
most frequent calculation in Unit Record applications consisted of
a card stack with various information on each card. The stack was
sorted
in subgroups. Each type of information had to be added to an individual
counter (accumulator). I.e. a varying number of accumulators was
required
to which the respective numeric information could be added/subtracted.
This represents a multiple two-address operation. The French idea was
to
establish any storage cell to act as an accumulator to which the
contents
of an input word could be added. This way multiple accumulator
registers
could be avoided. Calculation went directly from the card input to
memory.
(Today every pocket calculator has this function, namely “memory +”).
Estrems and Papo just combined this calculator function with a variable
word length in memory allocation. (By the way, 8 years later in /360
one
of the machine instruction formats represents exactly the 2-address
format
required for the “Add to memory” operation.)
- Plugboard Control:
The plugboard used to be the
generally
accepted means of control in all Unit Record machines (405, 407, 421,
the
earlier German D11, etc.). By plugging wires the information flow, the
memory allocation and all functional control signals were determined.
In
the early design deliberations for WWAM this concept was never even
questioned.
It was Underwoods independent mind touching this holy cow in 1956/57.
- Stored Program control:
The WWAM concept also had in
mind
that for the world-wide customer community the established way of
handling
control by plugging wires on a plugboard should be maintained. The 1401
finally took away with this, based on Underwood’s design proposal,
which
meant a breakthrough in the Unit Record world.
- Controversial issues in WWAM
conception?:
Decimal arithmetic was never
questioned
for the wide spread accounting business.
Fixed versus variable word
length
was a long debate. Primary reason for variable word length: Saving
expensive
magnetic core memory capacity. (Even three years later the 1401 came
out
with a lowest cost memory version of 1400 characters!).
- Cost objectives:
The costs of electronics
technology
with ferrite core memory and stored program control were still barely
acceptable for the Unit Record market in the mid 1950ies.. Its low cost
end actually could not be reached with the 1401, particularly in
Europe.
But thanks to the booming high end Unit Record market in USA this did
not
matter. Instead, a low cost version 1430 was planned to be developed
but
this submerged in the /360 design processes for several years.
Eventually
the /360 Model 15 and later the /3 took care of this.
- Other WWAM members?:
Here are two e-mail addresses:
m.papo@ieee.org
rgmork@ibm.net
(this is an old address. Ralph Mork recently did no longer maintain our
former connection via e-mail for unknown reasons. If he responds he may
also know about Underwood).
Re address of Underwood: he
might
be a primary source of 1401 info. Maybe E.W. Pugh might know).
I hope this helps you with some
of your questions.
Best regards,
Karl
|