Talk:Altair 8800

message: Anyone know what speed the processor ran at? There's absolutely nothing about it anywhere on the page. A bit strange when that's normally a pretty fundamental part of any computer specification, especially the earlier models. The IMSAI 8080 page suggests that machine ran at 2MHz (or in some cases up to 3MHz with a 8085 installed), but there's no particular reason why the Altair would necessarily have used the same clock. Maybe it was a bit variable because of the machine's somewhat homebrew nature, but there must surely have been some quasi-standard operating speed imposed simply by whatever crystal they were able to most cheaply get hold of in bulk quantities (e.g. the NTSC colourburst as used by a lot of 8-bits and even some 16-bits for 1.02, 1.79, 2.38, 3.58, 4.77, 5.34, 7.16... MHz speeds) and include as a default in the kits...? In which case it should be a reasonably well known quantity? 51.7.49.27 (talk) 17:04, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  CPU clock speed? 

message: --141.149.132.54 14:36, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''Altair 8800''' 

message: The Altair basic section is kind of confusing.--Gbleem 20:24, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Altair basic  

message: Who is Solomon? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.25.255.246 (talk) 16:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Solomon 

message: The spoiler template appears to be of little use: the warning is placed before it is clear which movie is spoiled. But then again, maybe the fact that the Altair 8800 appears in Malcolm in the middle is the whole spoiler? ElMorador 11:30, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spoiler 

message: I don't see any.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.81.227.133 (talk) 21:22, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources 

message: How much memory was there in that thing? The article doesn't say. --207.176.159.90 (talk) 03:15, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The original Altair 8800 came with 256 bytes of RAM. To get a useful system you would need to purchase additional memory boards. The early boards would hold 4K bytes and soon there were 8K and 16K boards. The Intel 8080 CPU would address 64 K bytes. A system that used audio cassettes for data storage was usable with 8K of memory. A floppy disk system would need a least 12K or 16K. In December 1976 a 4K RAM board cost around $160. -- SWTPC6800 (talk) 05:21, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

text: As it says the supplied board was a "1024-word" one, does that mean it was mostly unpopulated and could be upgraded to 1kb if you bought the appropriate chips separately? Which would at least have made the machine somewhat more useful, especially in combination with some cheap terminal (possibly a modified electric typewriter), than a mere 256 bytes would (which is only really suitable for toggle-switch and lamp-readout use). I can't imagine MITS would have considered a word to consist of just 2 bits... 51.7.49.27 (talk) 16:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Memory size? 

message: The introduction date for the Altair computer has been reported as December 19, 1974. I have never found a source for that date. The June 1975 issue has this:
* "The break through in low-cost microprocessors occurred just before Christmas 1974, when the January issue of Popular Electronics reached readers … "
I made a visit to the Copyright office in the Library of Congress to find the correct date.  The reading room is LM-404 in the James Madison building; 101 Independence Avenue, S.E., Washington, D.C. The pre 1978 records are hand written on 3 by 5 cards and stored in card catalogs drawers, just like an old library. The published date is when it went to the printer, not when it was mailed to the reader.
The January 1975 issue of Popular Electronics was published on November 29, 1974; registration number B99920. The January 1975 issue of Radio-Electronics was published on December 19, 1974; registration number B992753. -- SWTPC6800 (talk) 01:09, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Publication date 

message: Is it appropriate based upon other TALK that details be added to the article?  
Let me just type off the top of my head a possible addition to the article, though it would read more like a BLOG than an encyclopedic entry - but I think Wikipedia is -- or I think Wikipedia should be -- more "friendly" -- as long as it is 100% factual.
The Altair's appeal, was not in what it could do, but in what it was - it was -- at $395 -- an affordable computer.  Some people purchased it with no purpose in mind except to "own a computer", and "play with it".  
With your $395 purchase for the kit, you got the chassis with front panel, power supply, CPU board, and I believe (need to check sources) 2K static RAM memory board, but populated only with 256 bytes.  need confirmation - I recall 2K, previous said 256 bytes the chip was a 2102,  which was 1024 x 1, so ... I can't remember that initial 256 bytes, i.e. where it was etc.  Sorry.  
: It's possible the expansion boards used 2102s or similar, with a bank of 32 of them on the 4k and a full 64 (maybe 4 rows of 16) on the 8k board, but the base-level processor board (especially in the kit), in order to be as cheap as possible, may have used Intel's slightly older 1101 (the company's first ever product, in fact) which probably saw something of a price drop on introduction of the higher density parts. That was only a 256 x 1, so one 8-chip bank of those = 256 bytes. With space on the board for another 24 to bring it up to 1kb. If we assume the 8k boards were absolutely rammed solid with ICs, and they would have been about the same size or slightly larger than the 1101s, that leaves half of a similar-sized processor board free for the actual CPU and all the support chips it required. As memory densities increased and prices of low density parts decreased, it's possible that the basic systems might have gone over to including two banks of 2102s instead (1k x 1, x16, = 2kbyte), or even just a discrete memory card packed out with 1101s; if a similar 2102-using board offered 8k, then that cheaper pack-in option would have provided just 2k instead. And of course, there were a lot of partial failures in the early semiconductor memory fabbing processes - an awwwwful lot of early computers had somewhat odd memory sizes and unexpectedly high chip counts from using half-faulty chips relabeled with concealing code numbers, wired up so that "bad" half was permanently excluded from being accessed... a "2k" board could be a 4k one loaded with half-bad 2102s given a slightly different code indicating that they actually only had 512 x 1 available.
: Still, as demonstrated by the microcontroller ecosystem, and even things like the Atari 2600, there's a lot you can do with that (or with 1k, or even 256 bytes), if you load in machine code and then use the computer (and it's general IO ports/functions) for e.g. process control or the like, or install a ROM board that holds the code you want to run and only use the RAM for live data and working space. And a lot of those uses don't require a proper keyboard or VDU either; you can just get by with the front panel switches and lights to control what the program does once it's running and display status, maybe with overlays that replaced the original labels (I believe there were bitwise instructions both for sensing how the switches were set, and for changing what the lights showed), or expand to a fairly simple numeric keypad plus a 7-segment, nixie, light-board or one-or-two-line alphanumeric readout or a printer. Think of all the clearly microcontroller driven things in your home that lack an alphanumeric keyboard and high resolution character or bitmap display yet do just fine - at the time the Altair came along, there simply weren't any existing options for that kind of control, so a relatively compact, shoebox sized all-in-one computer would have seemed like a perfectly good option instead, particularly if its functionality could be shared amongst several devices so you didn't need to add a shoebox-worth of volume to every single machine but could wire them in to a central control hub. After all, the i8048 which offered remarkably similar specifications ended up being the workhorse of a whole load of single-board controller solutions, from dishwashers, microwaves and VCRs through to car engine management and all kinds of industrial machinery in the late 70s/early 80s. 51.7.49.27 (talk) 16:43, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Continuing the article with some details?  

message: What was the popular way of interacting with the Altair 8800? Considering that the machine could be instructed by BASIC, I find it hard to believe that switches and lights where the common way of interaction. --Abdull (talk) 17:32, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: A fairly common accessory would have been a serial port board connected to either a Teletype or some kind of terminal. --Wtshymanski (talk) 04:21, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  User interface and usability 

message: This article could do with further details on:
- total sales for 8800, 8800a and 8800b. 
- When was last one made.
- Notable musueums with Altair exhibits.
- Current interest / collectable status.
John a s (talk) 14:58, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further sections needed 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Altair 8800. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add  after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://startup.nmnaturalhistory.org/gallery/notesViewer.php?ii=76_4&p=7
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://startup.nmnaturalhistory.org/gallery/notesViewer.php?ii=75_8&p=2
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://startup.nmnaturalhistory.org/gallery/notesViewer.php?ii=75_10&p=3
*Attempted to fix sourcing for http://startup.nmnaturalhistory.org/gallery/item.php?ii=26
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:35, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified