From: kenney on
In article <4537877d$0$1351$834e42db(a)reader.greatnowhere.com>,
eric_pattison(a)sympaticoREMOVE.ca (Eric P.) wrote:

> Ok, then go straight to the horses mouth.

Thank you.

Ken Young
From: Peter Flass on
Christopher C. Stacy wrote:

> "Derek Simmons" <dereks314(a)gmail.com> writes:
>
>>kenney(a)cix.compulink.co.uk wrote:
>>
>>>I can remember several years when magnetic bubble memory was going
>>>to be the next big thing, replacing most other forms of storage.
>>>It then seemed to disappear without trace. Has development stopped?
>>
>
>>If I remember right it was very slow, very expensive, not completely
>>reliable and I think IBM held most if not all the patents.
>>Being slow might have been related to reliably reading
>>and writing to the device.
>
>
> It was used for secondary storage on a version of the TI Silent 700.
> I think the FTD (Florist) network was based on these.

This rings a bell. You have a darn good memory.

From: Larry__Weiss on
Peter Flass wrote:
> Christopher C. Stacy wrote:
>> "Derek Simmons" <dereks314(a)gmail.com> writes:
>>> kenney(a)cix.compulink.co.uk wrote:
>>>
>>>> I can remember several years when magnetic bubble memory was going
>>>> to be the next big thing, replacing most other forms of storage.
>>>> It then seemed to disappear without trace. Has development stopped?
>>
>>> If I remember right it was very slow, very expensive, not completely
>>> reliable and I think IBM held most if not all the patents. Being slow
>>> might have been related to reliably reading and writing to the device.
>>
>>
>> It was used for secondary storage on a version of the TI Silent 700.
>> I think the FTD (Florist) network was based on these.
>
> This rings a bell. You have a darn good memory.
>

A little web surfing reveals that the bubble memory version was the
model 765.

I don't think I ever used that model, but I sure remember using up a
lot of thermal paper on the older Silent 700!

- Larry
From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Torben_=C6gidius_Mogensen?= on
cstacy(a)news.dtpq.com (Christopher C. Stacy) writes:

> "Derek Simmons" <dereks314(a)gmail.com> writes:
>> If I remember right it was very slow, very expensive, not completely
>> reliable and I think IBM held most if not all the patents.
>> Being slow might have been related to reliably reading
>> and writing to the device.
>
> It was used for secondary storage on a version of the TI Silent 700.
> I think the FTD (Florist) network was based on these.

Wasn't bubble memory used on the onboard computer in the space
shuttle?

Torben

From: Jan Vorbr├╝ggen on
> Wasn't bubble memory used on the onboard computer in the space
> shuttle?

Nope. The original design used core. When the processors were upgraded, the
memory was upgraded to semiconductor memory (and much larger capacity) as
well. As core is inherently radiation-tolerant and transistors are not, the
new memory design has ECC and runs a scrubber task in the background. This
introduces an operational change: With core, some of the GPCs were
"freeze-dried" on orbit, i.e., loaded with software (e.g., for an emergency
descent) and turned off. The new design needs to keep them running, with only
the scrubber task active.

Jan