Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Awesome! -- here are some process detalis (Score 1) 124

The 4004 family was fabbed using a 10um pMOS process. Single metal, single poly, self-aligned gate. No depletion. Buried contacts were only used in the 4004 due to density requirements. Pretty sure the rest (4001, 4002, and 4003) used the same process as Intel's SRAMs of the day (e.g. the 1101). Not sure how the diff layer was made. I can ask. Bootstrap loads were used for high-side of push-pull inverters needed to drive big loads. Much to my surprise, diff was used instead of poly for interconnect that couldn't be done in metal.
Intel

Submission + - Intel allows release of full 4004 chip-set details (4004.com)

mcpublic writes: When a small team of reverse engineers receives the blessing of a big corporate legal department, it is cause for celebration. For the 38th anniversary of Intel's groundbreaking 4004 microprocessor, the company is allowing us to release new details of their historic MCS-4 chip family announced on November 15, 1971. For the first time, the complete set of schematics and artwork for the 4001 ROM, 4002 RAM, 4003 I/O Expander, and 4004 Microprocessor is available to teachers, students, historians, and other non-commercial users. To their credit, the Intel Corporate Archives gave us access to the original 4004 schematics, along with the 4002, 4003, and 4004 mask proofs, but the rest of the schematics and the elusive 4001 masks were lost until just weeks ago when Lajos Kintli finished reverse-engineering the 4001 ROM from photomicrographs and improving the circuit-extraction software that helped him draw and verify the missing schematics. His interactive software can simulate an ensemble of 400x chips, and even lets you trace a wire or click on a transistor in the chip artwork window and see exactly where it is on the circuit diagram (and vice-versa).

Comment SI: Stop harassing SparkFun, it makes you look bad (Score 1) 219

Dear SPARC International, Inc,

If you want lots of current and future tech professionals to hate you, keep hassling small businesses like SparkFun. Your trademark case against them borders on frivolous. It is a battle that you are unlikely to win in court, and that you will certainly lose in the court of public opinion. Stick with your bread and butter mission: championing the SPARC architecture. Leave popular "Davids" alone, unless the goal is to smear your own brand name.

Comment For ages 7-11, keep things VERY simple (Score 1) 136

In grad school I studied and developed methods to make programming accessible to young children. At the time, the general consensus in the field was that before the ages of 11-14, children don't typically have the cognitive ability to write programs, even simple ones. Even though I am a professional programmer now, when I was introduced to BASIC at age 9, I definitely didn't "get it." When I got to 7th grade I did.

Radia Perlman did some groundbreaking work in the 1970's to develop technology in the hope that 6-years-old could learn programming skills. Years later, Ken Kahn developed a game/programming environment called ToonTalk. From my personal experience and research, I don't think you can expect kids younger than 9 to build and program robots, but they can start playing with the physical and conceptual "building blocks."

I see from LEGO's literature that WeDo is aimed at children 7-11 years old. Their approach is very sensible: Keep things very, very simple: One motor, one motion sensor, and one tilt sensor. RoboSoccer can wait until they are older.

For further information

Comment Re: He should be incarcerated or worse (NOT) (Score 1) 63

Back in the late-60's and early-70's, when the Busicom 141-PF calculator software was written, United States copyright law was very different, you needed to explicitly mark a work with a copyright symbol, and register it with the U.S. Copyright Office. Nowadays everything is automatically protected by copyright law. Back then it was not. There was no copyright on the Busicom binaries, so this code is free-and-clear. The re-created "source code" was written without access to the original Busicom source code. In this sense it was done using techniques similar to a traditional "clean room".
Intel

Submission + - Historians Recreate Source Code of First 4004 App

mcpublic writes: "The team of 'digital archeologists' who developed the technology behind the Intel Museum's 4004 microprocessor exhibit have done it again. 36 years after Intel introduced their first microprocessor on November 15, 1971, these computer historians have turned the spotlight on the first application software ever written for a general-purpose microprocessor: the Busicom 141-PF calculator. At the team's web site you can download and play with an authentic calculator simulator that sports a cool animated flowchart. Want to find out how Busicom's Masatoshi Shima compressed an entire four-function, printing calculator into only 1,024 bytes of ROM? Check out the newly recreated assembly language "source code," extensively analyzed, documented, and commented by the team's newest member: Hungary's Lajos Kintli. 'He is an amazing reverse-engineer,' recounts team leader Tim McNerney, 'We understood the disassembled calculator code well enough to simulate it, but Lajos really turned it into "source code" of the highest standards.'"

Slashdot Top Deals

* UNIX is a Trademark of Bell Laboratories.

Working...