About The Chip Letter
Welcome!
Hello, welcome and thanks for subscribing.
With quite a few new subscribers, I wanted to take the opportunity to set out what this newsletter is about and to answer one big question.
I’m planning to write a couple of times a week. The posts will generally be short but with a few longer posts with more detailed material. Some will be more technical and some less so.
The initial focus will be on early microprocessors, with occasional ventures into older or newer computers. The material will touch on the designs, the stories behind them, and the commercial and technical background.
The big question? Why write about this topic at all?
I’ve always enjoyed reading about historical computers and the events around them.
With some notable exceptions though, the material generally omits most technical content. The focus is often on just the life story of some key individuals.
I’d like to see more detail. Why did some designs succeed and others didn’t. What about designs that were innovative but failed? I’d like to see how the design worked, the instruction set, to understand its performance and its limitations.
So why is any of this relevant? I admit it’s a little niche. Here are a few reasons why we can learn from this history:
Long-Term Trends: Understanding ‘Moore’s Law’ has long been a key factor in determining success or failure for technology companies. Looking at history can help up see trends that we might otherwise miss.
Universal Truths: We can see the same pattern repeated over and over. Projects that failed because they were too ambitious, or maybe not ambitious enough.
No Unique Way: Sometimes a reminder that things can be done differently is useful in inspiring creativity.
A Simpler Place: We’ve added layers of complexity over the years. Sometimes it’s useful to be reminded that a simpler approach is possible.
On a more fun level, I see much of this as a detective story. Why was this designed in this way? Why did this design succeed when others didn’t? There are lots of clues in the material. With luck and perseverance, we can find out.
Finally, I’d like this to be as interactive as possible. So please share your thoughts, ideas and especially areas where you think I’ve got it wrong.
Next up is a look at the architecture and instruction set of the Intel 4004. It’s a little strange!
So thanks again. Have a great weekend. And please share with anyone who you think might find this interesting.
PS The photo at the top of this post isn’t me! It is, of course, Charles Babbage, in a colorised version of a photo taken in 1850! It’s a striking portrait of a remarkable man. I hope that a tiny fraction of Babbage’s curiosity and spirit enters our collective exploration of this subject.