 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsEnglish UsageBritish EnglishESL Teaching Learnglish.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Discussion Groups / English Usage / January 2004to spool up
what does it mean? like in Michael Nitabach's post (b14000268b3b35e803f3cea76902f45d@news.teranews.com): "Same here. Shall we generate an action plan to spool up everyone else and make sure we're all on the same page?" I wonder also what "on the same page" means here. jeremi@anonymous.com spake thus: > what does it mean? > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "Same here. Shall we generate an action plan to spool up everyone else and > make sure we're all on the same page?" It's not common, whatever it means. It indicates something like "get everybody informed and working" > I wonder also what "on the same page" means here. That's more common. It means that everybody is working together, on the same path, having the same understanding of the plan. We also say "singing from the same hymn sheet", which means the same thing.  SignatureDavid ===== > That's more common. It means that everybody is working together, on > the same path, having the same understanding of the plan. We also > say "singing from the same hymn sheet", which means the same thing. I've heard "reading from the same playbook". >what does it mean? I suspect it originates with pilots of jet aircraft - the engines are said to "spool up" as they increase their rotation speed, which can take several seconds, i.e. power increase is rather gradual, as compared to a car engine. SignatureJohn W Hall <wweexxsseessssaa@telus.net> Cochrane, Alberta, Canada. "Helping People Prosper in the Information Age" >>what does it mean? > >I suspect it originates with pilots of jet aircraft - the engines are >said to "spool up" as they increase their rotation speed, which can >take several seconds, i.e. power increase is rather gradual, as >compared to a car engine. My guess was computer related. Data is prepared and sent to the print spool. >>> what does it mean? >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > My guess was computer related. Data is prepared and sent to the print > spool. I think so. And I think it relates to the days when there were physical spools of tape containing information and programmes to run mainframes. See any 60s spy movie - the Mastermind's lair had all these grey boxes with tape reels whirring and reversing. Tape recorders used to be the same. And typewriter ribbons. As George Eliot said "That's a spool to wind a speech on" -- John Dean Oxford De-frag to reply > >>> what does it mean? > >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > reels whirring and reversing. Tape recorders used to be the same. And > typewriter ribbons. I spent 35 years working on air traffic control automation systems--which put me squarely at the intersection of aviation and computers, and I am sure that "spool up" comes from jet engines and is identical in meaning to "come up to speed". SignatureJohn Varela (Trade "OLD" lamps for "NEW" for email.) I apologize for munging the address but the spam is too much. >>>>> what does it mean? >>>> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > computers, and I am sure that "spool up" comes from jet engines and > is identical in meaning to "come up to speed". But how about the usage of 'spool up' by cinema projectionists which antedates the invention of the jet engine? -- John Dean Oxford De-frag to reply > But how about the usage of 'spool up' by cinema projectionists which > antedates the invention of the jet engine? I read the posts about projectors after I posted this, and they have a point. Some googling shows that: A patent was issued for a steam turbine in 1884. The first gas turbine was built in 1903. Steam turbines were in Naval use by the first decade of the 20th century. So it's *possible* that spool-up, as used for aircraft turbines, was a term inherited from steam and gas turbine technology that antedates film spools. SignatureJohn Varela (Trade "OLD" lamps for "NEW" for email.) I apologize for munging the address but the spam is too much. >> But how about the usage of 'spool up' by cinema projectionists which >> antedates the invention of the jet engine? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >So it's *possible* that spool-up, as used for aircraft turbines, was a term >inherited from steam and gas turbine technology that antedates film spools. Spools for fishing and textiles predate either of those possibilities by hundreds of years. From the OED1: 1611 J. Davies (Heref.) Wit's Pilgr. xxvii, The wheeling of the Spheares.. Winde vp thy lifes Threed on the Spowle of yeares. A fitting metaphor- the thread of your life winds faster and faster as you approach the end. Best regards, Spehro Pefhany Signature"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com > > >>> what does it mean? > > >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > "spool up" comes from jet engines and is identical in meaning to "come up to > speed". Yes, remember the Chinese 747 that did a roll over the Pacific Ocean because not all four engines did "spool up", after slowing down for turbulence? It fell out of the sky but the pilot recovered the plane just before it hit the sea. He made it to San Francisco with parts of the airplane torn off. He was heartily applauded by the passengers. Then there was the case of an Airbus in Basel-Mulhouse IIRC, that wanted to do a slow low fly by for the air show. The engines didn't spool up fast enough, so the plane crashed in a forest. Thomas F. Howald Signature------------------------------------------------------------------------ T.F. Howald |It's difficult to soar with eagles,|Ph:+41 32 686 61 86 Otto Howald AG | when you work with turkeys.| http://www.garagehowald.ch Engestrasse 13, 4500 Solothurn, Switzerland | howag@bluewin.ch >>I suspect it originates with pilots of jet aircraft - the engines are >>said to "spool up" as they increase their rotation speed, which can [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >My guess was computer related. Data is prepared and sent to the print >spool. Perhaps. I will refrain from comment on "data is". Spool was originally SPOOL: Simultaneous Peripheral Operations On-Line which was a print queue among other things. This is DocRobin's territory. But I don't see how that suggests "get everyone up to speed", which is how I interpreted the original question. SignatureJohn W Hall <wweexxsseessssaa@telus.net> Cochrane, Alberta, Canada. "Helping People Prosper in the Information Age" >>> I suspect it originates with pilots of jet aircraft - the engines >>> are said to "spool up" as they increase their rotation speed, which [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > But I don't see how that suggests "get everyone up to speed", which is > how I interpreted the original question. You're not forgetting that 'spool' was ur-originally a cylinder onto which thread or cloth was bound? That usage is centuries old. It became the verb used for winding movie film, audio tape and data tape into a form from which they could be used. Cinema projectionists in the days of manual synchronisation had to 'spool up' reels ready to come in at the appropriate moment as the earlier reel came to an end. Turning it into an acronym after the event may well be so, in which case I can only suggest that never the TWAIN shall meet. -- John Dean Oxford De-frag to reply John Hall: >>>> I suspect it originates with pilots of jet aircraft - the engines >>>> are said to "spool up" as they increase their rotation speed, which >>>> can take several seconds, i.e. power increase is rather gradual... Tony Cooper: >>> My guess was computer related. Data is prepared and sent to the >>> print spool. Which has nothing to do with "spooling up" or getting up to speed. The explanation given by John Hall is obviously the correct one. John Hall: >> Spool was originally SPOOL: >> Simultaneous Peripheral Operations On-Line Nonsense; as stated elsewhere in the thread, that's an obvious backronym. John Dean: > You're not forgetting that 'spool' was ur-originally a cylinder onto > which thread or cloth was bound? That usage is centuries old. It became > the verb used for winding movie film, audio tape and data tape into a > form from which they could be used. ... Which is why print jobs are "spooled" to a queue -- you imagine them being written onto a tape (paper or magnetic) which will be carried to the printer. But they are not "spooled up". SignatureMark Brader "Well, it's not in MY interest -- and I represent Toronto the public, so it's not in the public interest!" msb@vex.net -- Jim Hacker, "Yes, Minister" (Lynn & Jay) My text in this article is in the public domain. } John Hall: }>>>> I suspect it originates with pilots of jet aircraft - the engines }>>>> are said to "spool up" as they increase their rotation speed, which }>>>> can take several seconds, i.e. power increase is rather gradual... } } Tony Cooper: }>>> My guess was computer related. Data is prepared and sent to the }>>> print spool. } } Which has nothing to do with "spooling up" or getting up to speed. } The explanation given by John Hall is obviously the correct one. } } John Hall: }>> Spool was originally SPOOL: }>> Simultaneous Peripheral Operations On-Line } } Nonsense; as stated elsewhere in the thread, that's an obvious backronym. } } John Dean: }> You're not forgetting that 'spool' was ur-originally a cylinder onto }> which thread or cloth was bound? That usage is centuries old. It became }> the verb used for winding movie film, audio tape and data tape into a }> form from which they could be used. ... } } Which is why print jobs are "spooled" to a queue -- you imagine them } being written onto a tape (paper or magnetic) which will be carried } to the printer. But they are not "spooled up". It may not be far from the truth, though. (Where is Truly when you need her?) As I recall, when winding thread onto a bobbin for the under-plate second thread, the spool that holds the main thread supply gets to spinning faster and faster as the bobbin turns at a constant rate but increases in diameter at the outside of the inside, if you catch my drift. Toward the end the spool is turning at a fearsome rate. Same thing happens when you are rewinding movie film on a projector. SignatureR. J. Valentine <mailto:rj@smart.net> > John Hall: >>>>> I suspect it originates with pilots of jet aircraft - the engines [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > being written onto a tape (paper or magnetic) which will be carried > to the printer. But they are not "spooled up". http://www.madcornishprojectionist.co.uk/memoriesmichael.php << gone are the days when you had a film on the Sunday, Kids film Saturday morning, a film on the Saturday afternoon, then Sunday a film Mon-Wed then Thurs-Fri, all that spooling up, and spooling off, Plus you had the Feature and Support films, not like today one film thats your lot. >> -- John Dean Oxford De-frag to reply > Which is why print jobs are "spooled" to a queue -- you imagine them > being written onto a tape (paper or magnetic) which will be carried > to the printer. But they are not "spooled up". Different computer manufacturers had different jargon. In an IBM shop in the early 60s we called that DLO, for DeLayed Output. Starting a program was done using a single punched card, called "the one-card loader". Later, to start an IBM operating system was to IPL, for Initial Program Load. I believe "boot" and "boot loader" were Univac terms. Perhaps "spool" also came from Univac. I don't recall "spool" as a computer term until the 1980s when I first dealt with non-IBM systems. SignatureJohn Varela (Trade "OLD" lamps for "NEW" for email.) I apologize for munging the address but the spam is too much. I just came across this message from "John Varela" <OLDlamps@earthlink.net>, which has been sitting on alt.usage.english since Sun, 04 Jan 2004 18:30:28 GMT. >> Which is why print jobs are "spooled" to a queue -- you imagine them >> being written onto a tape (paper or magnetic) which will be carried [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >I don't recall "spool" as a computer term until the 1980s when I first dealt >with non-IBM systems. I first learned "spool" as a computer term in January of 1972, when I started work in an IBM shop. It was explained to me that "SPOOL" was an acronym for Simulaneous Peripheral Operations Off-Line. It has the flavor, for me, of one of those acronyms contrived to fit an already-existing word. At any rate, "spool" must by that time have existed long enough to be incorporated in the name of the spool manager program we used, HASP ("Houston Automatic Spool Program", according to the mythology; it was said that an earlier name was "Waco Automatic Spool Program", but that that name was changed for political correctness.). Regards, John SignatureJohn Estill Millersburg, Ohio USA >I just came across this message from "John Varela" ><OLDlamps@earthlink.net>, which has been sitting on alt.usage.english [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >flavor, for me, of one of those acronyms contrived to fit an >already-existing word. I first heard it in January 1968, and it was not presented to us as an acronym. >At any rate, "spool" must by that time have existed long enough to be >incorporated in the name of the spool manager program we used, HASP >("Houston Automatic Spool Program", according to the mythology; it was >said that an earlier name was "Waco Automatic Spool Program", but that >that name was changed for political correctness.). I heard that, too. (That was presumably running under MVT, or had it become MVS by 72?) We had a set of teleprocessing macros called "British Additional Teleprocessing Support". The 'British' was changed to 'Basic before it was released into the big, wide world. And political correctness had yet to be invented! Signaturewrmst rgrds Robin Bignall Quiet part of Hertfordshire England >>and "boot loader" were Univac terms. Perhaps "spool" also came from Univac. >>I don't recall "spool" as a computer term until the 1980s when I first dealt [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >said that an earlier name was "Waco Automatic Spool Program", but that >that name was changed for political correctness.). We were spooling stuff to tape for a printer in the late Sixties (on a non-IBM system). I think it was a fairly standard word for the process from the time the process first existed. Katy > I first learned "spool" as a computer term in January of 1972, when I > started work in an IBM shop. It was explained to me that "SPOOL" was [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > said that an earlier name was "Waco Automatic Spool Program", but that > that name was changed for political correctness.). CEGB in London was one of the first multi-360 accounts in the UK in the mid-60s and I was a software CE there. The 360/30 and 360/75 were connected by channel-to-channel adapter - the software supporting this was ASP (Attached Support Processor) which was written by a small group of IBM SEs in Los Angeles. One of them, Mike Carlitz, spent more than two years on assignment at CEGB. Whereas previously the 7094 and 1401 had been "connected" by hand-carried tapes, on the ASP setup all the card read/punch and print operations were done on the model 30 which maintained a job-queue. The model 75 had virtual card reader, card punch and printers which were mapped to addresses on the CTC (36C, 36D and 36E). Bob Martin > At any rate, "spool" must by that time have existed long enough to be > incorporated in the name of the spool manager program we used, HASP > ("Houston Automatic Spool Program", according to the mythology; it was > said that an earlier name was "Waco Automatic Spool Program", but that > that name was changed for political correctness.). Oh yeah! I remember HASP. I should acknowledge that I led a sheltered life in the embedded real-time systems domain, where we didn't use commercial operating systems, and the IBM we dealt with was Federal Systems Division (now part of what? Lockheed Martin?). SignatureJohn Varela (Trade "OLD" lamps for "NEW" for email.) I apologize for munging the address but the spam is too much. >> At any rate, "spool" must by that time have existed long enough to be >> incorporated in the name of the spool manager program we used, HASP [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >operating systems, and the IBM we dealt with was Federal Systems Division (now >part of what? Lockheed Martin?). I have a friend in the States who transferred to the new company when FSD was sold off. He's still with them, so I'll check. Signaturewrmst rgrds Robin Bignall Quiet part of Hertfordshire England >>> At any rate, "spool" must by that time have existed long enough to be >>> incorporated in the name of the spool manager program we used, HASP [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >I have a friend in the States who transferred to the new company when FSD >was sold off. He's still with them, so I'll check. I have, and it is part of Lockheed Martin. On their website, LM describe IBM FSD as a 'heritage' company as far back as the 1970s, so they're trying to rewrite history. It was acquired somewhere around the early 1990s, I think, so is a heritage company now. Of course, LM and IBM may have cooperated on US Government projects back then. Signaturewrmst rgrds Robin Bignall Quiet part of Hertfordshire England > I have, and it is part of Lockheed Martin. On their website, LM describe > IBM FSD as a 'heritage' company as far back as the 1970s, so they're trying > to rewrite history. It was acquired somewhere around the early 1990s, I > think, so is a heritage company now. Of course, LM and IBM may have > cooperated on US Government projects back then. IBM sold FSD to Loral in 1993 or 94. Around the time of the sale I was at a meeting at the FSD offices at Rockville, and at lunch with a friend who worked there he complained that they were being sold to Loral as slaves. I pointed out to him that they weren't slaves, they were serfs, because slaves are sold as individuals but serfs convey with the land. I retired in 1995 and not too long after that Loral sold FSD to Lockheed Martin. The reason for the question in my post to which you responded was that I didn't know that they hadn't been sold yet again. SignatureJohn Varela (Trade "OLD" lamps for "NEW" for email.) I apologize for munging the address but the spam is too much. >> I have, and it is part of Lockheed Martin. On their website, LM describe >> IBM FSD as a 'heritage' company as far back as the 1970s, so they're trying [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >out to him that they weren't slaves, they were serfs, because slaves are sold >as individuals but serfs convey with the land. I seem to recall that it was probably soon after I took early retirement from IBM May 5, 1993. I had started appending to IBM's internal forums (very like Usenet in their operation, for people who don't know) back in 1975. A couple of people, a male (with FSD) and female, who worked at that time in different American locations, got chatting with me. I was good even then at reading between lines, saw their online friendship develop, and, rotter that I am, pre-announced their engagement (which was either an informed guess, or catalytic) in 1977 or thereabouts, and they got married in 78. The lady, with whom I correspond to this day, and her husband via her, sent me an e-mail last Autumn telling me that they had just celebrated their 25th anniversary. She was the one who told me that FSD was being sold (but I can't remember if she said to whom, for Loral rings no bells), and her husband along with it, way back then, and who confirmed yesterday that it's now part of Lockheed Martin. >I retired in 1995 and not too long after that Loral sold FSD to Lockheed >Martin. The reason for the question in my post to which you responded was >that I didn't know that they hadn't been sold yet again. OK. She didn't mention dates, and no, they haven't. Signaturewrmst rgrds Robin Bignall Quiet part of Hertfordshire England >>and the IBM we dealt with was Federal Systems Division (now >>part of what? Lockheed Martin?). > >I have a friend in the States who transferred to the new company when FSD >was sold off. He's still with them, so I'll check. Originally, part of the Federal Systems Division was sold to Loral, which was later acquired by Lockheed Martin. SignatureTruly Donovan Lexy Connor mysteries: Chandler's Daughter, Winslow's Wife http://www.trulydonovan.com truly@trulydonovan.com > Originally, part of the Federal Systems Division was sold to Loral, > which was later acquired by Lockheed Martin. Only part? I thought it was all. At any rate it was all of the part that I had dealings with. SignatureJohn Varela (Trade "OLD" lamps for "NEW" for email.) I apologize for munging the address but the spam is too much. >> Originally, part of the Federal Systems Division was sold to Loral, >> which was later acquired by Lockheed Martin. > >Only part? I thought it was all. At any rate it was all of the part that I >had dealings with. I don't remember the specifics, but I know there were parts of FSD that stayed in IBM. SignatureTruly Donovan Lexy Connor mysteries: Chandler's Daughter, Winslow's Wife http://www.trulydonovan.com truly@trulydonovan.com >>>and the IBM we dealt with was Federal Systems Division (now >>>part of what? Lockheed Martin?). [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >Originally, part of the Federal Systems Division was sold to Loral, >which was later acquired by Lockheed Martin. Only part? After I left I still had some contact with UK IBMers, some in the Development Divisions, and they seemed to think that it was the whole shebang. After my ex-FSD friend was sold off, I've only had news of him via his wife, who had long since left IBM (and paid employment) by 1993. I guess that he doesn't do e-mails at home! Signaturewrmst rgrds Robin Bignall Quiet part of Hertfordshire England >I just came across this message from "John Varela" ><OLDlamps@earthlink.net>, which has been sitting on alt.usage.english [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >said that an earlier name was "Waco Automatic Spool Program", but that >that name was changed for political correctness.). In some circles, HASP was known as "Half-ASP," ASP being either "Asynchronous Support Processor" or "Attached Support Processor," depending on who you asked. An ASP system involved two CPUs; a HASP system, one. To the best of my recollection, they evolved into JES3 and JES2, respectively, but I wouldn't put any money on that. SignatureTruly Donovan Lexy Connor mysteries: Chandler's Daughter, Winslow's Wife http://www.trulydonovan.com truly@trulydonovan.com >> Which is why print jobs are "spooled" to a queue -- you imagine them >> being written onto a tape (paper or magnetic) which will be carried [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >I don't recall "spool" as a computer term until the 1980s when I first dealt >with non-IBM systems. "Bootstrap loader" was in use in IBM software development in the early 60s, as was "spool." I don't recall having heard the terms "DLO" or "delayed output" before today. SignatureTruly Donovan Lexy Connor mysteries: Chandler's Daughter, Winslow's Wife http://www.trulydonovan.com truly@trulydonovan.com > >Different computer manufacturers had different jargon. In an IBM shop in the > >early 60s we called that DLO, for DeLayed Output. Starting a program was done [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > early 60s, as was "spool." I don't recall having heard the terms "DLO" > or "delayed output" before today. How early in the 60s? We got our Stretch in the spring of 1963--that was my first encounter with an operating system--but I transferred to a site before getting to play with it. Our terminology came out of the SAGE project and AN/FSQ-7 so it was doubtless parochial; however, "DLO" was definitely used to describe transferring tapes from the 7090 to the 1401 for printing. And bursting. In a burster. SignatureJohn Varela (Trade "OLD" lamps for "NEW" for email.) I apologize for munging the address but the spam is too much. >> >Different computer manufacturers had different jargon. In an IBM shop in the >> >early 60s we called that DLO, for DeLayed Output. Starting a program was done [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >describe transferring tapes from the 7090 to the 1401 for printing. And >bursting. In a burster. DLO had vanished as a term in IBM or their customers in the UK branch office I worked out of, by late 1967. Like Truly, this is the first time I've heard it. Signaturewrmst rgrds Robin Bignall Quiet part of Hertfordshire England >> "Bootstrap loader" was in use in IBM software development in the >> early 60s, as was "spool." I don't recall having heard the terms "DLO" [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >describe transferring tapes from the 7090 to the 1401 for printing. And >bursting. In a burster. The earliest in the 60s you could get -- 1960. But this was not SAGE, which I'm sure had its own lore and vocabulary. SignatureTruly Donovan Lexy Connor mysteries: Chandler's Daughter, Winslow's Wife http://www.trulydonovan.com truly@trulydonovan.com wweexxsseessssaa@telus.net spake thus: > >>I suspect it originates with pilots of jet aircraft - the engines are > >>said to "spool up" as they increase their rotation speed, which can [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Simultaneous Peripheral Operations On-Line > which was a print queue among other things. I don't believe this. I reckon this is a backronym. There's nothing strange about the word "spool" being used for the print queue - early printers were off line from the main computer; print jobs were run onto tapes and carried elsewhere to be printed. There's no need for the acronym. Having worked on mainframe computers from 1974, I first heard this explanation in about 1985, and I didn't believe it then. > This is DocRobin's territory. He's even older than me, but he spent less time at the coal face, I think. > But I don't see how that suggests "get everyone up to speed", which is > how I interpreted the original question. SignatureDavid ===== >> Spool was originally SPOOL: >> Simultaneous Peripheral Operations On-Line [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >Having worked on mainframe computers from 1974, I first heard this >explanation in about 1985, and I didn't believe it then. Ah, but you should... Having worked on mainframes since before they were called mainframes (the first computer - as opposed to programmed calcualtor - that I got to work on was called Totiac. It didn't even have tapes or central memory as we know it today - computation was done in 8 registers, and memory was implemented on a drum buffered by Williams tubes) When tapes became commonly available, the I/O handling program on the slower machine (that could play the clever trick of interleaving the driving of multiple tapes, card-readers and printers) enjoyed this sobriquet. Then sometime later it was decided that an ANSI (formerly ASA) standard dictionary of DP terms was required and I was on the committee that drafted that gem. Then it got submitted to ISO to become an international standard - which required that it be translated into French and Russian before final promulgation. The draft of the French translation was prepared by the French equivalent of our committee (sponsord by AFNOR) and they had the term "le spooling" in their first draft with the tortuous explanantion of its origin in English. Never one who could resist tweaking the tail of the Academie Francaise, a "public comment" was officially submitted by one of the American delegates - complaining about this bastardization of the French Language. (Hah! Take that!) This comment then went on to suggest a more appropriate term for the French equivalent - namely "embobiner" - playing back on the original jeu de mot and the concept of a spool being wound. As far as I know, to this very day that is the official French word for the concept, even though it passed into the dustbin of history very soon after it was invented. Spooling on a separate machine died out with the advent of the 360 series in America and the 1900 series in the UK - late 1960's - but the concept remained where a spooling subsystem would cohabit on the same sytem as the program doing the reading (of punched card data) or printing - thanks to wider availability of multi -programming and multi-tasking capabilities and the ability to "overlap" I/O to slower peripherals. So - that's your history lesson for today. Tomorow we may wax eloquent on the use of the sorting needle to check the accuracy of the punched-card sorter, and the arcane craft of "programming" the collator. Jitze couperus@znet.eschew-spam.com spake thus: > >> Spool was originally SPOOL: > >> Simultaneous Peripheral Operations On-Line [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > done in 8 registers, and memory was implemented on a drum buffered > by Williams tubes). Impressive. Tom Kilburn was my Professor at Manchester, and taught me all I know about Williams tubes. Which, these days, is not much. And I've programmed the rebuilt 1948 Baby Machine. I enjoyed the rest of your post, but I don't see any comment on why I should believe that spool was originally formed from Simultaneous Peripheral Operation On Line (which is what I didn't believe). Actually, I'm second generation. Dad's job as an estimator disappeared and GKN transferred him to be a programmer - in 1967. I was taken to see the ICL 1901 when I was 11. SignatureDavid ===== >Impressive. Tom Kilburn was my Professor at Manchester, and taught >me all I know about Williams tubes. Which, these days, is not much. >And I've programmed the rebuilt 1948 Baby Machine. Ah - but did you work with Dai Edwards at Manchester? In my estimation he was the unsung hero doomed to live forever in the shadow of folks like Kilburn and Wilkes. Brilliant guy who should have gotten the OBE or MBE or something, but never did as far as I know. >I enjoyed the rest of your post, but I don't see any comment on why I >should believe that spool was originally formed from Simultaneous >Peripheral Operation On Line (which is what I didn't believe). Oh I'm sure the gang who were tasked to dream up a name considered the acronymic potential at the point it was dreamed up, and this name was probably chosen from thousands precisely because of its acronymic cuteness. I was just trying to point out that a facility with such a name did actually exist. This is when mere mortals could still understand the guts of such things, then it got "simplified" into HASP and JES and all manner of crudiferous accretions. >Actually, I'm second generation. Dad's job as an estimator >disappeared and GKN transferred him to be a programmer - in 1967. I >was taken to see the ICL 1901 when I was 11. The 1901 was the tiddler. The original 1904 (as begat from the Canadian Ferranti-Packard 6000) was a machine with balls and that still looked like a computer. Stonking great "mainframe" that stretched the length of the machine room. But no blinkenlights... this was one of the earliest commercial machines with a teletype for its operator console instead of an organ-like keyboard as was used on the ICT 1500 and the knobs-mit-neon-bulbs of the ICT 1301. I seem to remember that GKN had such a 1301 at one point. Jitze couperus@znet.eschew-spam.com spake thus: > >Impressive. Tom Kilburn was my Professor at Manchester, and taught > >me all I know about Williams tubes. Which, these days, is not much. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > like Kilburn and Wilkes. Brilliant guy who should have gotten the OBE > or MBE or something, but never did as far as I know. I wouldn't go as far as "worked with" - he taught me and I must have had conversations with him. We weren't aware of how much genius surrounded us at Manchester in the 70s. Derrick Morris, of the Brooker-Morris Compiler Compiler (the most wonderfully named piece of software); Frank Sumner, who I occasionally run into even now; Roland Ibbett, now at Edinburgh. SignatureDavid ===== [fascinating detail snipped for brevity] > Spooling on a separate >machine died out with the advent of the 360 series in America >and the 1900 series in the UK - late 1960's - Minor correction. I think System/360 was announced in the States in 1964, shipped in '65. I seem to recall that both /360 and ICT 1900 were available when I joined Big Blue in '67, so I suspect 1900 was mid-60s, too. Signaturewrmst rgrds Robin Bignall Quiet part of Hertfordshire England > Minor correction. I think System/360 was announced in the States in 1964, > shipped in '65. I seem to recall that both /360 and ICT 1900 were available > when I joined Big Blue in '67, so I suspect 1900 was mid-60s, too. Yes, I attended the 360 announce in spring 1964 in London. I had finished my basic CE course at Rayners Lane a few months before. I was based at CEGB (just off Victoria Street) from early 65 to 68 and they had a 7094, 1401 and a big ICL machine that I'm sure was a 1900 when I first got there. A 360/30 arrived later that year, closely followed by a 360/75. Bob Martin >> Minor correction. I think System/360 was announced in the States in 1964, >> shipped in '65. I seem to recall that both /360 and ICT 1900 were available >> when I joined Big Blue in '67, so I suspect 1900 was mid-60s, too. > >Yes, I attended the 360 announce in spring 1964 in London. I had >finished my basic CE course at Rayners Lane a few months before. Fancy new location in 64, huh? I did basic SE school at Lodge Road in 67, and most other subsequent stuff at Rayners Lane except for Sales School, which was in a hotel somewhere. >I was based at CEGB (just off Victoria Street) from early 65 to 68 and >they had a 7094, 1401 and a big ICL machine that I'm sure was a 1900 >when I first got there. A 360/30 arrived later that year, closely >followed by a 360/75. The first customer at which I was based was Gulf Oil, just off Oxford Street. They had a 360/40. The largest machine I actually worked with in a customer's office was a 360/65, but got to play with all sorts of bigger stuff in Poughkeepsie on our annual (and hopeless) jaunt to benchmark our linear-program code (MPS) with customer data, against the same data when run on a Univac 1108 with LP code written and optimised for the hardware and the particular sparseness of their matrices by the customer (British Petroleum). We lost every time quite spectacularly! 1108s were fast number crunchers, and code written specifically for them whizzed through. A 360/65 with an Array Processor didn't even come close, and a 360/85 + AP, which did but was still slower, was so much more expensive than an 1108 it was laughable. IBM systems (and those of ICT as I recall) were always designed to be general purpose, mainly for commercial work where CPU power was less important than lots of fast I/O channels. Machines by CDC and Univac were optimised for number crunching. Reminiscences of the old days might appeal to David56 and other DP professionals (remember when we called it Data Processing?) but we are at risk of sending the others to sleep... Signaturewrmst rgrds Robin Bignall Quiet part of Hertfordshire England >IBM systems ... were always designed >to be general purpose, .... [ellipses show snippage] Except when they weren't. I can't prove it, but I believe I may be the only IBM employee who was assigned to work on BOTH of the maverick 360s, the 44 and the 67. We were all set to fire up programs for the 47 and the 64 when someone pointed out (wisely, I believe, but it left me with a lot of useless knowledge) that the whole point of the 360 revolution had been to minimize the cost of maintaining diverse large system families. SignatureTruly Donovan Lexy Connor mysteries: Chandler's Daughter, Winslow's Wife http://www.trulydonovan.com truly@trulydonovan.com >>IBM systems ... were always designed >>to be general purpose, .... [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >revolution had been to minimize the cost of maintaining diverse large >system families. I purposely didn't want to get into detail, Truly, but my territory in 1970/2 as SE then salesman included the seismic exploration companies operating in the UK, all of which had their HQs in Houston. The standard system was a 360/44 with a (3838?) Array Processor. I understood at the time that the 44 was a 360/65 with most of the I/O gear removed. One very small (two-person) outfit operating on the fringes of seismic used an 1130, mainly for post-processing data from other companies. They somehow hooked up to it the very first laser colour printer I ever saw. They didn't care much about operating systems or upward compatibility, for they wrote all of their own software, and were only interested in cheap MIPS (Millions of Instructions Per Second). Signaturewrmst rgrds Robin Bignall Quiet part of Hertfordshire England >>IBM systems ... were always designed >>to be general purpose, .... [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >only IBM employee who was assigned to work on BOTH of the maverick >360s, the 44 and the 67... While I was briefly at Hursley, waiting for the Havant plant to be built, I heard tales of a couple of guys (of unspecified sex) who wrote new microcode for one of the /360 range, making APL its native machine code. Apparently it blew the socks off anything else, and scared the sales planning folks, who promptly squashed it. SignatureJohn W Hall <wweexxsseessssaa@telus.net> Cochrane, Alberta, Canada. "Helping People Prosper in the Information Age" >>>IBM systems ... were always designed >>>to be general purpose, .... [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >machine code. Apparently it blew the socks off anything else, and >scared the sales planning folks, who promptly squashed it. They must have found out that you read it backwards. SignatureTruly Donovan Lexy Connor mysteries: Chandler's Daughter, Winslow's Wife http://www.trulydonovan.com truly@trulydonovan.com > The first customer at which I was based was Gulf Oil, just off Oxford > Street. They had a 360/40. The largest machine I actually worked with in a [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > important than lots of fast I/O channels. Machines by CDC and Univac were > optimised for number crunching. In fact, the BP LP/MP stuff was written by Scientific Control Systems - a BP subsidiary, later called Scicon. The then technical director, Martin Beale, specialised in solving large systems of sparse equations. BP chose the 1108 over the 360/67 (partly on because the Scicon advice was that the 360/67 OS didn't work...) In my opinion, Univac's advantage was in the simplicity of EXEC 8 (the OS), and the excellent Fortran compiler - provided by CSC?? As far as I know you can still get the ex-Scicon UMPIRE from EDS... regards from a grumpy old Univac fan... A >> The first customer at which I was based was Gulf Oil, just off Oxford >> Street. They had a 360/40. The largest machine I actually worked with in a [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > >regards from a grumpy old Univac fan... Your regards are very welcome. I remember Scicon, but the LP code was written before my time with BP. The linear equations for both refinery scheduling and seismic cross-sectioning resulted in large matrices which were very sparse, as you state. One of the programmers at Western Geophysical once spent a day describing the basics of deconvolution to me (which he described as the inversion of large, sparse matrices) and showed how impossible it was in reasonable amounts of computer time to do it by formal maths. The secret was in the short cuts in their software, and an intimate knowledge of the IBM 360/44 hardware. I gathered at the time that the same was true for BP with their programmers and the 1108 hardware. I enjoyed my meetings at BP. They and I knew that I had no chance of selling them anything at that time (1972), so after meeting with the DP Manager, I'd spend a day talking technical with their programmers. I had, after all, just transferred from being an SE to sales a few months before. It was relaxing to talk to technicians! Signaturewrmst rgrds Robin Bignall Quiet part of Hertfordshire England > wweexxsseessssaa@telus.net spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >>But I don't see how that suggests "get everyone up to speed", which is >>how I interpreted the original question. I had 40 years in the mainframe computer world and never heard "spool up" in that context, but I am familiar with it in connection with jet engines (4 years on V-bombers). Bob Martin >david56 wrote: >> wweexxsseessssaa@telus.net spake thus: [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] >up" in that context, but I am familiar with it in connection with jet >engines (4 years on V-bombers). Well, I haven't done my 40 years yet (but I'm still working at it (one of the mainframes I work on at present is a laptop!)), but nor have I, and so am I. NODE has that meaning of "spool up" without comment or qualification. On the other hand, NODE also has the acronym as the origin of "spool", despite the fact that it the hallmark of a back-formation which was invented for a piece of software which was replacing a piece of hardware. Signature-ler >wweexxsseessssaa@telus.net spake thus: > [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >He's even older than me, but he spent less time at the coal face, I >think. You're right and you're right. I was a true techie from 67 to 71, then let the side half down by moving to sales, and then fully down by becoming a manger... Manager. But there was spooling on mainframes as far back as I can remember, and we didn't see it as an acronym. The word 'spool' probably has a very old origin. COD 10 gives: spool · n. a cylindrical device on which thread, film, magnetic tape, fishing line, etc. can be wound. · v. 1 wind or be wound on to a spool. 2 Computing send (data for printing or peripheral processing) to an intermediate store. 3 (spool up) increase the speed of rotation of a device to the working speed. ORIGIN ME: shortening of OFr. espole or from Mid. Low Ger. spZle, of W. Gmc origin; sense 2 of the verb is an acronym from simultaneous peripheral operation online. I suspect that 'acronym' is a backronym, too. I seem to remember that in one of the fairy stories someone was using a spinning machine with a spool. It must have been a princess or a wicked witch, and how long ago were fairy stories written? Anyway, I bet that the word 'spool' used in spinning wool or cotton has been with us for more centuries than the one for increasing rotation speed (which, incidentally, is new to me). Signaturewrmst rgrds Robin Bignall Quiet part of Hertfordshire England > >what does it mean? > > I suspect it originates with pilots of jet aircraft - the engines are > said to "spool up" as they increase their rotation speed, which can > take several seconds, i.e. power increase is rather gradual, as > compared to a car engine. Gee, sir, I guess it just flamed-out. Mike. >>what does it mean? > >I suspect it originates with pilots of jet aircraft - the engines are >said to "spool up" as they increase their rotation speed, which can >take several seconds, i.e. power increase is rather gradual, as >compared to a car engine. That's my guess, too. The term "spool up" is commonly applied to all sorts of rotating machinery, including automotive turbochargers. "Spooling" in computer terms is quite different- you spool the data "out" (to a buffer) not "up". Best regards, Spehro Pefhany Signature"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward" speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com > what does it mean? > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > I wonder also what "on the same page" means here. Your sentence tells you the answer: spooling up brings everybody up to the same page---it makes them current. You can see the metaphor involved most clearly by thinking of two microfilm readers. You are looking at page 201 of a book on one, but the other is at page 156. You need to spool (spool = roll) the second one up to page 201 so that you are looking at the same page on both readers. The person who wrote the sentence was probably thinking of print spooling on computers. That is another application of the same metaphor. Gary >> like in Michael Nitabach's post >> (b14000268b3b35e803f3cea76902f45d@news.teranews.com): [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > spooling on computers. That is another application of the same > metaphor. No, I wasn't. I was mimicking a usage that has become common in the United States, particularly among quick-talking, cell-phone- and Blackberry-wielding digerati. -- Mike Nitabach |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.