The Arduino ecosystem is expanding with a new USB-connected accessory designed to help simplify edge AI and computer vision: meet our first official, standalone Arduino USB Camera! And if you are thinking “Well, it’s just a camera” – think again. When paired with single-board computers like the Arduino® UNO™ Q and Arduino® VENTUNO™ Q, it […] The post Bring USB-connected AI vision to your projects with the new Arduino® USB Camera appeared first on Arduino Blog.

The enormous advance in AI capabilities over the last several years has in large part been driven by the availability of vast amounts of training data.

We launched an AirTag silencing tool recently. We have always made products we want for ourselves, and this was no different - we wanted it for AirTags on our bikes. (Some of us here have bikes more valuable than our cars.) In retrospect though, this also has the side effect of aiding someone with bad intentions to track someone that wouldn’t get phone notifications. We have removed the product and will use our patent on it to prevent anyone else from making one in the future. Sincerely, Elevation Lab

This Refurb Weekend is a sequel in two ways. Six years ago I fixed the power supply and case fan in my 68EC030-based Alpha Microsystems Eagle 300, a more modernized and substantially faster Alpha Micro running AMOS, their unique DEC-inspired multiuser operating system. These blue-collar boxes were very common in many vertical markets due to their tightly integrated business-specific software packages, and are especially unusual for running their big-endian 68000-series processors little-endian (for data file backwards compatibility with their WD-16 ancestors). The 1990s-era Alpha Micro Eagle family improves on the originals with later 68K and even ColdFire CPUs, plus Ethernet and faster SCSI. The second way it's a sequel is to our previous Alpha Micro refurb weekend, a double header restoring an Alpha Micro AM-1000 and AM-1200, two members of Alpha Micro's most popular series of computers and some of the closest things they made in the early '80s to desktop workstations. From the outside, the Eagle comes in a PC-style case, but it's not a PC: ampm.floodgap.com using the webserver provided with AlphaTCP — yes, Alpha Micros can be networked — and its own on-board Ethernet. At the time the cooling fan failure was putting a lot of strain on the hard disk because it was overheating, and since this was my first Alpha Micro and I wanted to keep it in good nick, I decided I would put a SCSI2SD in it after the repair and get rid of the spinning disk entirely. Fast-forward to last fall, a little over a year ago, when I tried to do exactly that with a ZuluSCSI. And then it wouldn't start. thought was a replacement unit I could raid for parts, but it turned out to be something rather more special — and then I was even more fortunate when I got the Eagle 300 back out of storage to make one last attempt at reviving it. To cap it off we'll go stick ZuluSCSIs in everybody else, including my Motorola ColdFire-based Eagle 450, the first ColdFire server ever produced and what used to be the fastest Eagle in the house until the new hotness came. I even converted the external BlueSCSI the AM-1200 was using to an internal ZuluSCSI too. Now nearly everybody's got a solid-state boot disk and they're all a good bit more zippy, so we'll gawk at the internals, compare 68K CPU and storage benchmarks and most importantly learn from my mistakes, because as my late father always said, "I'd rather be lucky than good." On a more solemn note, we'll also observe a moment of silence for one of the line's creators who passed away last year. It's time for a Refurb Multi-Weekend Sequel. Alpha Microsystems, founded in Orange County, California in 1977, produced what were considered some of the earliest "poor man's minicomputers," smaller and more affordable multi-user systems that run a bespoke, Digital Equipment Corporation-influenced operating system named AMOS. In our previous entry we discussed their history in detail. First-generation Alpha Micros like the AM-100, designed by Dick Wilcox who also wrote most of the operating system, used large S-100 cases and a CPU chipset called the WD-16, derived from the Western Digital MCP-1600 chipset — the same one used in DEC's LSI-11 CPU — but with higher performance microcode developed by Rich Notari. These machines thoroughly outclassed low-end PDP-11s yet were substantially cheaper, and Alpha Micro found a ready audience initially with hobbyists and then later corporate turnkey environments, where its integrated AlphaBASIC and database functionality gave it a competitive advantage. As the WD-16 had little elbow room to evolve, in 1982 Alpha Micro introduced new systems based on the Motorola 68000, porting AlphaBASIC and AMOS to run natively, but swapping address lines to make it appear little-endian for compatibility with WD-16 data files and AlphaBASIC P-code. These new machines included the AM-1000, Alpha Micro's most popular single model, and by 1984 it constituted the majority of the over 20,000 Alpha Micro machines then in active use. An idealized Alpha Micro office from the 1980s might look like this photo, from their actual advertising of the period. The main system is an AM-1042E, the S-100 box sitting on the pedestal next to the printer, using an AM-100/L CPU with an 8MHz 68000 (the same as the AM-1000, which was integrated into a desktop case), and in the factory-standard configuration shipped with 512K of RAM and a 60MB Winchester ST-506 hard disk. The system served some number of local users connected directly via serial ports, in this case the two administrative assistants with AM-60 terminals (a modified and rebadged Wyse WY-100). The fact everyone here was in the same room with the machine was helpful, because AMOS is a strictly real-memory operating system and executable code ran from where it was loaded in the user's fixed memory allocation — there was no memory protection. Although the admin assistants' explicit permissions were limited by which account they were logged into, using the same style of project-programmer numbers as DEC (e.g., [1,2] being the operator account), an errant job of theirs could readily stomp on another and it was not rare for busy systems with buggy software to regularly crash. On the other hand, this also made it fast and efficient with little separation between you and the hardware, and even Alpha Micros with fairly modest specifications could support hundreds of simultaneous users. Alpha Microsystems tried multiple times to broaden the line technologically, though these efforts were largely for naught. Early attempts to put equivalent hardware onto a PC ISA co-processor card, with software to interchange between MS-DOS and AMOS, yielded only an expensive and poorly-selling PC that wasn't good at either OS (eventually the company gave up producing turnkey systems and just sold the card). In 1984 Alpha Micro introduced UNIMOS, a licensed version of AT&T System V UNIX which ran on modified AM-1000 hardware with an MMU, but it was likewise too expensive and garnered little interest from new users nor demand from existing ones. The cost of its development, the Unix license and its associated royalties, and a simultaneous lawsuit from DEC over AMOS's similarities subsequently caused lasting damage to the company, and by the end of the decade Alpha Micro found itself almost entirely dependent on legacy AMOS users. In the wake of Wilcox's 1990 retirement and original investor Bob Hitchcock's own departure in 1991, new management tried once more with Unix systems based on the Motorola 88000 — which Motorola abandoned shortly afterwards for the PowerPC AIM alliance, and so no hardware ever shipped. anybody — yes, really, just two months after the '030's October introduction — initially offering a 20MHz CPU, 32K of L2 cache and supporting up to 360 simultaneous terminals, but even the lowliest 30-user configuration started north of $40,000 [about $117,600 in 2026 dollars]. By contrast, Alpha Micro was uncharacteristically tardy in adopting the 68040 and didn't release the 33MHz AM-4000 until 1993. It was nevertheless nearly as expensive, and for most small offices, which were now increasingly Alpha Micro's financial anchor, that kind of money was simply beyond consideration. In 1993 the company settled on a two-board approach to solve both problems at once. The CPU board, dubbed the Roadrunner and designed by engineer Joshua Stumpf, contained the new processor, standard RAM SIMM slots, L2 cache (if present), and SCSI controller. This board was specifically designed to also fit in legacy machines, specifically the desktop AM-1000, AM-1200 and AM-1600 and server AM-2000 and AM-3000 systems, and initially came in a 68030 and two 68040 versions. A second board served as the CPU board's system interface, linked together using a custom "X-BUS" interconnect over twin 34-pin cables. For legacy installs, this second board was an active interposer physically replacing the original processor, which in elderly units sometimes needed to be desoldered (though that was also true for the few third-party CPU upgrades then extant, like InterLink's Dimension-030, so the Roadrunner was at least no worse). But this second board could be a whole new system architecture of its own, and that was what the I/O board was, designed by Rod Hewitt. It carried the power supply connectors, controlled the system front panel, contained the System Security Device for licensing (more on this later), presented built-in external ports for parallel, SCSI and (for certain loadouts) Ethernet, had an internal port for an optional floppy drive, and provided SIMM-format "paddle card" slots for option cards. Best of all, these boards were smaller and — by using off-the-shelf commodity hardware — cheaper to manufacture, and could be paired into multiple configurations, together becoming the company's long-promised updated low-end and mid-range systems. reasons I've related elsewhere, and I managed to land it for just a couple hundred bucks in fully working order. (Boy, are those days gone.) Based on the software still on the hard disk, this machine was previously used at a chain of three party stores in Washington state as a centralised rental and point-of-sale system, a common turnkey application. On arrival it sported the same loadout as in this article's first picture except for its original smaller-capacity Tandberg QIC tape drive, which in Alpha Micro parlance is called a tape streamer. Since these systems don't boot from CD, QIC tape is your only way to cold start and restore most 68K Alpha Micro computers if the hard disk fails. These systems also don't support the old Alpha Micro VHS backup system, hopefully to be the subject of a future article, which was ubiquitous in their early hardware. There is a single hard disk in the second 5.25" bay, though these first-generation systems also supported 5.25" and 3.5" floppy drives using an AM-219 controller board. original Refurb Weekend. our previous Alpha Micro foray we discussed the SSD's role, a chip installed in every 68K (and later x86) Alpha Micro, even the earliest S-100 boards, used by the operating system and any installed VAR software packages to enforce copy protection and license caps. The SSD number on the rear is just a serial number, printed on the rear plate for convenience and engraved on the SSD chip inside, which I'll show you in a moment. This number is not the key stored inside the chip, up to 256 bytes in length, which only Alpha Micro recorded. When a VAR wanted to lock an install to a particular system, they would provide their private code to Alpha Micro plus the user's SSD serial number, and Alpha Micro would look up the key and generate an alphanumeric PIC (Product Installation Code) that the VAR either used for direct installation or to provide to the user. During the installation process the PIC (usually irreversibly) encoded a binary overlay for the protected executable(s), making it impossible to run them on a system where the SSD didn't match. To facilitate logic board swaps and upgrades, the SSD is socketed and easily transplanted into a new board, but PICs were expensive then and unobtanium now, another reason hard disk backups were so critical. % curl -I http://ampm.floodgap.com/ HTTP/1.0 200 OK Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2026 23:43:03 GMT Server: AMOS-HTTPD/1.3C(111) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/html Last-modified: Sun, 11 Oct 2026 23:42:00 GMT Content-length: 30242 Content-encoding: 7bit in our most recent article. In this picture it's also attached to an AM-401 CD-ROM, which is the trusty Toshiba XM-5401B in an external case, though only specific ROM versions are supported. It can't boot from this drive, but it can read AMOS-formatted partitions, and with external software can also access ISO 9660 filesystems. Onscreen is a performance estimate using the built-in SI.LIT tool, which we'll be using to benchmark our new solid-state disks when we get them in there. Here's that output. .si dsk0: SI--AMOS System Information, (C) Copyright 1990, Alpha Microsystems Inc. Version 3.0(114) Computer Type: Eagle Main Processor: 68030 Co-Processor: None MMU present: Yes Operating System: AMOS 2.3A(484) Boot PROM revision: M00 Number of SSDs: 1 Total Memory: 16384 K-bytes Resident Monitor Memory: 6218 K-bytes Computing Index (CX), relative to AM-100: 36.9 48 bit FP Index (4X), relative to AM-100: 36.3 Floating Point Index (FX), relative to AM-100/L: 5.6 Disk Index (DX), relative to ST-506: 15.3 I don't know why it identified the 68EC030 as having an MMU, because it doesn't, but we're mostly interested in the "computing index" figure (SI's equivalent of an integer score) which is 36.9 times faster than Alpha Micro's original AM-100, and the "disk index" hard disk throughput test, which rates the spinning disk it came with as 15.3 times faster than their early ST-506 drives. Remember these figures as a baseline; we'll be referring to them again. On the front panel in both pictures you can see the number "0" in the LEDs. That's where the system status is displayed, initially by the firmware, then the OS monitor during boot and then in operation. We'll come back to this as well. original Refurb Weekend involved replacing the old AT supply with an ATX one and a converter. Since that post I found a NOS AT supply for cheap and I needed the ATX supply for something else, so I removed the converter and installed the new AT supply. This is that unit. The CPU and the 53C710 are both clocked by an 80MHz crystal divided down to 40MHz; there are also 16MHz and 50MHz oscillators on the board which appear to be used for the PLD and bus logic. Likely for cost reasons there is no L2 cache, though another thing to keep in mind is — so I'm told — that for compatibility reasons with 68000 and 68010-era AMOS software it is not possible to enable the data cache (or at least not without substantial difficulty). In fact, we observed exactly this phenomenon when looking at the driver for the InterLink Dimension-030 CPU upgrade, which puts a 68030 in an AM-1000: it never set the data cache bit in the '030's CACR at all. Although some machines can accept an external L2 cache, including one we'll look at in detail, anything it would provide is strictly I-cache. but is functionally equivalent in AMOS. not). I have such an example later on. Other serial paddlecards can also be installed. The AM-314 provides only four serial ports, but is not merely a cut-down AM-318 — the AM-314 can also be configured for RS-422 (the AM-318 is strictly RS-232) and supports all RS-232 handshake lines (the AM-318 only RTS/CTS), and in certain configurations can trigger a remote reboot from a connected distant console by grounding pin 1 with pin 7. By contrast, the more exotic AM-338 provides an IBM Binary Synchronous Communication "Bisync" link, typically used for Remote Job Entry (RJE) or CICS connections with IBM mainframes, but could theoretically have also worked with some early point-to-point networks like BITNET. It connects to an AM-339 which provides the physical port. a future article. Notice how many of these PCBs say "Made in USA"! A different era. from my SGI Indigo^2 retrofit to see if it could sit on them. It did, so I sheathed them in electrical tape as a "bed," put the ZuluSCSI into initiator mode, connected the old hard disk and the ZuluSCSI to my copy rig, and left it to image the drive to the SD card. didn't change: the boot sequence wasn't starting. I freaked out, immediately powered it off, and checked everything inside that I'd touched to find I had not properly reconnected the CPU board's power connector. original. I dug up Rod's old E-mail to see if there were any clues in it and recalled what he'd said about the PLDs being dynamically reprogrammed on every startup — from the CPU board. I also knew from the service manual that the X-BUS cables, the only connection between the I/O board and the CPU board, had to be correctly connected or the service manual warned damage could result. A horrible theory stirred in my head: perhaps I had managed to accidentally corrupt the PLDs by effectively bringing up the I/O board without the CPU board, where the boot PROMs used to reprogram them are located. However, that also suggested a solution — there are many undocumented jumpers on the AM-319 and I wondered if one of them could be used to trigger a clean reset of the programmable logic. in a future article). He also had an interest in digital television, developing TSReader, a way to analyse the MPEG-2 transport streams commonly used for satellite, cable and IPTV transmissions. ZTERM and in particular TSReader became far and away his most popular software packages. However, a few years prior and unbeknownst to many, he had quietly entrusted a copy of the TSReader source code to a friend officially "just in case," and sold ZTERM to MicroSabio, a long-time Alpha Micro support company that maintains A-Shell, a way of running AlphaBASIC applications on modern operating systems. The reason became clear later — he was dying, and it was not treatable. The source code for TSReader was duly posted after his passing and remains today as his most popular legacy. Rest in peace, Rod, and thank you. Without Rod's guidance, though, there wasn't much more I could think of to do at that point. I unplugged it, pulled the clock battery and let it sit for a couple days to see if that was enough to reset the PLDs, assuming that was the actual problem, and it didn't. It still seemed like it should be repairable if I could only figure out how, but as there was little point in having it sit fruitlessly on the workbench I removed all the remaining cables from the system board and moved the machine to cold storage until I could come up with something else. In the meantime I turned to my alternative system to get ampm.floodgap.com back up and running, though to discuss it we need to bring the history forward some more. only in the E500: a junior-varsity 68040, which is what the E400 was, didn't have much appeal. Both the E200 and E400 were quietly dropped. For large installs that required substantial numbers of serial ports, the existing AM-319 board had to be expanded. The revised AM-319-20 board, providing four built-in serial and parallel ports with a UPS monitor port and a higher-performance DP83902 Ethernet NIC, still had two paddlecard slots, but these slots were widened to 60 pins and could now be part of a bus connected to an external chassis. Alpha Micro had long sold the AM-990, a large capacity case (in this image as used for the AM-4000, though I apologise I don't have a better image of it) and the AM-990 Jumbo, which was even larger. A new higher-performance serial card was developed to take advantage of the widened paddlecard slots, an optically-isolated eight-port card called the AM-359. Twelve AM-359s could be installed in the AM-990, yielding 96 ports when connected to a fan-out in one of the AM-319-20's paddlecard slots (the four on-board ones made an even hundred); the Jumbo could take another twelve AM-359s for another 96 ports connected to the second, a whopping total of 196 serial ports when combined with the base four. If you needed even more, the AM-3501 sidecar chassis could take you well beyond. There was no point in supporting the 68EC030 with such a monster: this new Eagle, officially the Eagle 550 Super Eagle, was 68040 or bust. that large, a Super Eagle in the standard case could support up to 60 ports, four on the AM-319-20 and then seven AM-359 cards in the usual position. The E550 Super Eagle additionally came as a separate upgrade kit for the E500 and the few E400s that sold, essentially a system board swap, though when sold as a turnkey system it was always with the 40/80MHz CPU. The E550 introduced a new Seiko timekeeper chip as well which not only maintained the time but also the "CMOS settings," the first Alpha Micro with an on-screen setup utility in ROM allowing boot configuration. Subsequently the company was tardy once again in adopting Motorola's newest 68K CPU, this time the superscalar 68060, which had come out in 1994 aimed squarely at the Intel Pentium but didn't reach Alpha Micro customers until mid-1997. This took two forms, a new 66MHz '060 Roadrunner upgrade option for the E550 Super Eagle and the AM-4000 (lesser Eagles need not apply), and a new AM-6000 large system. Interestingly, the AM-6000 is strongly based on the E550, reflected in its internal designation as the AM-3500-6000 making it a "stealth" Eagle. The '060 Roadrunner not only included the new CPU but also 64K of L2 cache, support for up to 256MB of RAM in four SIMM slots, and 68-pin Fast and Wide SCSI-2 using the NCR 53C770. along with E100s and a smattering of E500s and Super Eagles. However, it was not lost on company management that Motorola believed the 68000 family was fast approaching a performance wall. This was made most clear by their then-enthusiastic participation in the PowerPC AIM alliance, but also the rise of ColdFire, which Motorola had first announced in 1994 as well. ColdFire was in its own way Motorola's oblique admission that 68K was losing desktop competitiveness to x86, an attempt to scale the ISA down to embedded markets where its familiarity could be an asset. Approximately 20% of the instruction set such as BCD and certain addressing modes were eliminated, meaning the canonical ColdFire could not be fully binary-compatible with any extant 68K. On the other hand, such cuts enabled the core to execute nearly every remaining instruction in a single clock cycle, and the initial die was a miniscule 4.4mm² at 0.5μm, a third the size of Motorola's own 68300-series CPU32+. Some amount of this work was done by altering the microcode of the 68040V, a fully static 68LC040. Mindful that ColdFire's incompatibility might impair adoption, Motorola chose to create a bridge first-generation chip from this altered 68040V where omitted user mode instructions were left in, demonstrated on die photos. While the new chip had smaller 2K instruction and 1K data caches than the 68040V, and the MMU was also eliminated, this deviation from spec was still sufficient to run regular 68EC040 code at the user level. Motorola called this first-generation ColdFire chip the MCF5102, produced on a 0.6μm process, and introduced it in 1995 drawing 0.8W at 20MHz and reaching 33MHz. Clock-for-clock there was no way this chip could eclipse an '060, and the emerging "true" ColdFire 520x series couldn't run existing Alpha Micro software, but the MCF5102 was still faster than an '030 and nearly as fast as an '040 — in fact, we'll prove it. On top of that it was cheaper and AMOS didn't need the MMU anyway, making for a plausible mid-range machine that wouldn't imperil (much) sales of the E500 or E550. alt.sys.alpha-micro, though credit must be given to John F. G. Leighton, then Alpha Micro's VAR marketing manager, who chose to print the review unedited in marketing materials, even Rod's gentle complaints. Since this is the only E450 I have personally laid my hands on, we will be referring to his comments liberally as a point of comparison, and consequently the E450's history is probably the best documented of any 68K Eagle. It rolled out to users in October at the annual meeting in nearby Riverside, California. This particular system was a gift from someone who inherited it from an 9-1-1 emergency dispatch centre and wanted to find it a good home, another way that running an Alpha Micro-powered web server has paid off. I was able to quickly get into the system (if it's not clear by now, I love hacking into Alpha Micros) and reconfigure it, and it had lurked as the E300's work spare and a test unit since then. Like the E300 it has a bootable tape drive, but this time it's a more modern DDS/DAT. E450, and it claims not to have an SSD at all (untrue). As such, I'm not sure I can believe the stated manufacturing date of September 2002, and at least one date inside directly contradicts it. It's possible this was a case with a transplanted board. 1999 as prerequisites for the AM-370, an unidentified off-the-shelf 100Mbit PCI NIC that goes into the "slot" at J5. To access these PCI slots, that rear panel I pointed out needs to be removed. The AM-370's availability implies all shipping E450s should have had them by then — there was even an alleged board-swap program to do so. I've yet to find another one, so I don't know if that's true, but it would be interesting to find out because with this card or the OEM equivalent you would have two fully operational NICs and multihoming was reportedly supported. I also don't know what's going on with the unpopulated "option connector" at P5 to the right/east of the AT power connectors. other slots. The E450 is one of only a few Alpha Micro systems that can accept an optional external L2 cache, though as mentioned this cache is only enabled for instructions, and the form factor does not match any PC cache stick — in fact, it's the same as a 72-pin SIMM, so don't put the wrong one in the wrong place (Rod also objected to this). The only size supported is 64K, the same cache stick used for the AM-6000 and the '060 Roadrunner, part #PDB-00701-00. I've never seen this cache stick and comparison of his numbers with my cacheless E450 suggests it only yields around a fourteen percent boost, not nothing but not much, likely because it can't do anything for the data cache (though stand by for a very important observation on actual clock speed). The E450 also has two 72-pin SIMM slots, which need not be paired and support up to 256MB, though as with the earlier systems the machine needs to be jumpered to tell it how much is there. The tag on the one in J11 (service order 13009, apparently) is dated January 18, 2002: that makes this machine at least eight months older than its alleged manufacturing date, and to have received an upgrade suggests it's even older than that. Between the two sticks this system has 72MB of RAM. Below/south of the RAM SIMMs are the three paddlecard slots. Also in this image is another obvious non-populated area: a pin-grid array marked "PGA040" at U89 in the northeast/upper right hand corner. That sounds like somewhere the CPU would go, and the footprint looks like an '040. So where's the actual processor? fast is it doing it, though? While Rod's review stated his prerelease system was apparently running at 33MHz, the oscillator closest to the CPU can be seen clearly in this photograph, and it's ... 25MHz. There are no other crystals on the board except for the serial port one you saw earlier, the official marketing announcement has a board layout that also clearly labels this crystal as 25MHz, and nothing in the MCF5102 user's manual says the chip does anything tricky with the clock. As it happens, the only place in Alpha Micro documentation where the E450's CPU speed is given is Rod's review: everywhere else, even the data sheet, simply says it's a ColdFire and nothing more. Since mine is only 14% slower than his, and his had the cache, his can't possibly have been running at 33MHz either. The E450 is a 25MHz ColdFire, full stop. In a backwards way, however, this is nothing less than validation of how performant early ColdFires could be. Recall that our E300, a 40MHz 68EC030, had a "CX" computing index score on the SI.LIT benchmark of 36.9. The same benchmark on this E450 with a 25MHz MCF5102 gets a score of 59.9, and Rod's with 64K L2 came in at a whopping 68 (Alpha Micro said 68.5; either one is around 14% higher). By contrast, the E550 Super Eagle, with a full 40MHz ("80MHz") 68040 Roadrunner clocked 60% faster and 32K of L2 cache, officially gets ... 79.9 (note from the future: my figure is 83.6) — the full cached-up faster-clocked 68040's performance on the same code is only around 33-40% better, and just 16-22% or so if the E450 has its cache too. Put another way, the CX/MHz ratio of the faster 68040 was right around 2.0, while the CX/MHz ratio of the MCF5102 is 2.4 without the cache, and almost 2.75 with it. Likely because the lower clock speed would have looked bad in marketing materials, similar to why General Magic never mentioned the clock speed of the DataRover 840, Alpha Micro simply chose not to mention it either. Still, this machine's surprising efficiency proves ColdFire, at least early on, definitely had legs. I'm not sure how Rod got it wrong except that an earlier version may indeed have run that part, though with these numbers, if there had ever been a production 33MHz E450 it might have seriously endangered sales of Alpha Micro's remaining '040s — perhaps that's why they didn't use it even though the faster part existed. Best guess is that the AM-138 was originally designed for the 68040 and then quickly retrofitted for ColdFire, leaving the PGA region as an "R&D test point" (as documented). our prior entry, and he referred me to a longtime Alpha Micro vendor that they still partner with for existing installations. It took a few months, but this vendor was able to locate what appeared to be another E300 with working boards and we negotiated a price and getting it shipped. "everything console" connected to the top left port (G1) via the dongle at the typical speed of 19200bps. Good, it booted fine, we got a dot prompt, we can get into it, networking is already configured, and (as is typical for most Alpha Micro installations of the era) there is no password on the operator account. I powered it off and now that we know where the system thinks the console is, we'll get a proper self-test readout. I powered it back on with the reset button held in and the self-test came right up. The self-test can autosense the baud rate by mashing the spacebar when the front LED flashes "5b," and then the test runs, with the LED showing the current state and additional details sent to the serial port. ---------------- SYSTEM SELF-TEST ---------------- Version 2.1(120) Prom Rev. N00 for the AM-174 board. polling complete. Boot configuration: Processor - 68040 Memory detected - 32M bytes Primary serial ports - 4 SCSI Controller press [space] to bypass memory test MEMORY TEST passed - 32M bytes TIMER TEST passed SERIAL PORT TEST Primary serial ports - 4 Port # 0 passed Port # 1 passed Port # 2 passed Port # 3 passed SCSI Controller Controller Self-test passed SCSI drive Self-test passed Find diagnostic cylinder passed Write/read test passed 40?! This is not a Eagle 300! We need to open this thing up. didn't expect was the CPU board on the bottom: it's a full 68040, just like the test said. Bclk for the bus clock, and then a second exactly twice as fast labeled Pclk as the so-called processor clock. In the 68020 and 68030, which accept a single clock signal, their internal ALU runs at only half the bus speed such that the 40MHz 68EC030 in the Eagle 300 actually has an ALU running at just 20MHz. For the 68040 Motorola removed this limitation to run its ALU at full bus speed, but the chip designers also studied trace data to optimize for the most common instructions, implementing a 7-stage pipeline where most effective address calculations and fetches occur with no penalty. The upshot of this was to cut most instructions' cycle count in half or more. The 2x processor clock is truly used, but not to speed up the ALU, so it's wrong to say the 68040 is "double-clocked." In a two-part 1990 article in IEEE Micro, Motorola explains that "Pclk provides timing reference points within each Bclk period," employing it for synchronous sub-cycle timing, and furthermore explicitly states that "all internal operations cycle at the Bclk rate." Still, the fact this clock signal was present at all gave Apple an excuse to tout both timings for '040 Macintoshes, and Alpha Micro cheerfully reported just the faster one, even though the chip only appears to run at that comparative speed from its larger 4K L1 cache, unhindered ALU and reduced cycles per instruction. On this board, Pclk is provided by the same 80MHz crystal we saw on the AM-172, divided down by two to yield Bclk in the same way the 68EC030 board does for its single 40MHz clock. (For the E400's AM-174-00, this crystal would have been 66MHz divided down to 33MHz.) The single parity FPM SIMM slot and 16MHz and 50MHz oscillators are also present, as well as the same 53C710 SCSI controller, here a genuine NCR part. However, new for this board is 32K of L2 cache at the upper right/northeast corner, implemented with two IDT 71B74 8K cache-tag RAMs together providing 29 bits (512MB) of address comparison, and then four Cypress CY78C185 8K SRAMs for the cache itself. Remember, however, that in AMOS all cache is I-cache. Effectively this 40/80MHz AM-174 makes our new system a full Eagle 500, so why is it labeled as "only" an E300? I don't how how these systems originally shipped from the factory nor whether the E500 designation actually appeared on the back, but Alpha Micro did run a promotion in late 1997 where you could upgrade any Roadrunner '030 to a Roadrunner '040 by swapping the CPU board. My guess is this is one of those systems, and because that upgrade kit wouldn't have changed the plate on the back itself, the reseller simply noted it to be a working E300 and sold it to me as such. While that wasn't exactly what I was hoping for, it's a really nice bonus, as evidenced by the system benchmark (taken on the SCSI hard disk it shipped with): That score officially makes it the new fastest Alpha Micro in the shop by far (this is where that prior 83.6 number came from, compared to the E450's 59.9 and E300's 36.9). It seemed a shame to carve it up as spare parts, so let's have a little look around. A surprising thing about the system configuration file (SYS:AMOS32.INI, a/k/a AMOS32.INI[1,4]) is that only one terminal is actually defined, which makes you wonder what those two RJ-21s are doing. Best guess is that this machine passed through a couple hands and ended its prior service as a single user's toy, much as my own machines are now. In a related phenomenon an annoyingly small number of terminal types are defined, all inconvenient, likely to save memory. On the other hand, the full AlphaTCP suite (based on SpiderTCP and SpiderStreams, best known as the Windows NT TCP/IP stack before 3.5) is defined and present, and we saw it running before, so we ought to be able to make use of that. That's its IP address, and we saw Telnet was running (TCP:TELNED.LIT), but there's a snag: The TCP:CONFIG. file sets up TCPEMU, AlphaTCP's master daemon, acting as its service description file (really a sort of up-script). This line for the Telnet daemon causes an automatic log-on from a Telnet session and inconveniently forces the FWYCOL terminal type, intended for a real Wyse WY-370. That's also the terminal setting for the single serial port which our "everything console" doesn't speak, meaning I can't visually edit anything without making a big mess. Ironically, that AM-75 colour head my E300 uses is itself a modified WY-370, but no longer speaks that terminal emulation either. But we have another option! Now knowing its IP address, I set up a small wired network to my MacBook Air. Although some terminal programs like Kermit 95 can speak WY-370 over Telnet, using MacWise — now freeware and runs on Tiger and Power Macs all the way to Tahoe on Apple silicon — I managed to discover that its TeleVideo 925 emulation will partially match FWYCOL. This was just enough to, with some care, edit TCP:CONFIG. and remove all the defaults so that I could manually select the terminal type on Telnet login. I then reset the FTP user credentials in TCP:FTPUSR., uploaded a copy of ANSI.TDV from the Eagle 450, and changed the TDVDEF line in a test copy of SYS:AMOS32.INI to allow it as a terminal type, which at last got me a proper session. I'm not sure of this system's most recent owner and the seller didn't know either, but there were two interesting domains in its TCP:HOSTS. file (identical to /etc/hosts) for that IP address. One domain name belongs to someone who appears to have been a recording engineer (!). This domain still exists, but is only partially functional, so I've chosen not to link it here. The other domain name was for a personal genealogy site, now parked, and that site appeared to be what it was currently offering via the Web server on HTM:, mapped to PPN [7,77]. However, because the HTML files were not on an extended directory device, I can't tell when the site was created because the old AM file system doesn't preserve modification times: Looking up this domain in the Wayback Machine, it seems to have been active in the early 2000s. Still, not bad assuming it was still serving it then. differently on the AM-172 and AM-174s, so it seemed safer just to never separate them in the first place. I wasn't even going to move the SSD and hard disk — since TCP/IP networking was already set up on the E500, I could just upload the site to the E500's hard disk instead. Only the E300's power supply, serial port cards and Tandberg QIC streamer would stay. Once the new transplanted system was working, then I'd see about doing the ZuluSCSI upgrade again. It tried to boot. Startled, I powered it off, connected the everything console, and turned it back on with the reset button held in to force a self-test. Except for the missing hard disk, it passed the self-test — even the SCSI controller tested good. I decided to push my luck and connect the ZuluSCSI, and this time it did throw a 2d. I freaked out again, powered it off, let it sit and then gingerly turned it back on. It still did it. However, when I disconnected the ZuluSCSI, it went back to trying to boot, and a repeated self-test was still clean. This was clearly new behaviour — beforehand, it wouldn't do anything, not even enter the self-test, let alone attempt booting. Recall that error 2d had two mentions in the manual, the second one referencing the primary and secondary boot devices. Since the self-test said the SCSI controller was fine, this made me suspicious that there was something about the ZuluSCSI's configuration the machine didn't like. Knowing some systems can get finicky about sluggish devices immediately after power-up, I reconnected the ZuluSCSI and powered the E300 back on. Code 2d duly appeared, but this time instead of turning it off, I hit the reset button just to see what it would do. SI.LIT had actually dropped to around 10, which was 33% slower than its original hard disk. .scsi Dispatched SCSI port: SCSI id 7: (reserved) SCSI bus host adaptor SCSI id 6: No device or unable to report SCSI id 5: No device or unable to report SCSI id 4: No device or unable to report SCSI id 3: SCSI-2 (tape) TANDBERG TDC 4200 =08:01CREATED12119 SCSI id 2: No device or unable to report SCSI id 1: No device or unable to report SCSI id 0: SCSI-2 (disk) ZULUSCSIHARDDRIVE 2.3BZuluSCSI .si dsk0: SI--AMOS System Information, (C) Copyright 1990, Alpha Microsystems Inc. Version 3.0(114) Computer Type: Eagle Main Processor: 68030 Co-Processor: None MMU present: Yes Operating System: AMOS 2.3A(484) Boot PROM revision: M00 Number of SSDs: 1 Total Memory: 16384 K-bytes Resident Monitor Memory: 6218 K-bytes Computing Index (CX), relative to AM-100: 36.8 48 bit FP Index (4X), relative to AM-100: 36.3 Floating Point Index (FX), relative to AM-100/L: 5.6 Disk Index (DX), relative to ST-506: 41.2 .si dsk0: SI--AMOS System Information, (C) Copyright 1990, Alpha Microsystems Inc. Version 3.0(114) Computer Type: Eagle Main Processor: 68030 Co-Processor: None MMU present: Yes Operating System: AMOS 2.3A(484) Boot PROM revision: M00 Number of SSDs: 1 Total Memory: 16384 K-bytes Resident Monitor Memory: 6218 K-bytes Computing Index (CX), relative to AM-100: 36.9 48 bit FP Index (4X), relative to AM-100: 36.3 Floating Point Index (FX), relative to AM-100/L: 5.6 Disk Index (DX), relative to ST-506: 100.4 six times faster than the original hard disk). There's no obvious caching in the Blaster's firmware that I could see, and although the AMOS system-wide disk cache was on, the test is supposed to be unaffected by OS-level caching. On the other hand, when I rebooted AMOS from software, its score went back to 41 and 100 thereafter. More on this phenomenon later. Termination power was sufficient to power the Blaster. But what the Blaster didn't fix, even with its later firmware, was the 2d code the E300 kept throwing from a cold start. Although booting after a manual reset was still fine, it refused to start after a power cycle without assistance, which I need it to be able to do if there's a power outage when I'm not around. .ini file, but since the issue appeared to be what the E300 thought was the secondary device and I knew the streamer was connected and working, I had a look at the back boot DIP switches first. The previous setting was #1 and #3 on, which would attempt a boot from the (non-existent) floppy drive first, and then try the SCSI hard disk. This had always worked before, but we have no floppy drive and I'm not likely to find an AM-219 anytime soon, so I tried the other boot position where it attempts a boot from the streamer first — again, known good electronics — by switching #4 on. And that worked: now it boots reliably. The conversion is complete. So, with the E300 resurrected and finally successfully converted to solid state, let's really push our luck here ... by doing the same with the others! (I should note I excluded the E100s this time around; I haven't found a special task or physical location for them yet.) SI.LIT disk score of 30.9. For this system I bought a ZuluSCSI Wide, which tops out at 34 MB/s read and 15 MB/s write, and which I already use in my Apple Network Servers with a similar NCR 53C825A. .scsi Dispatched SCSI port: SCSI id 15: No device or unable to report SCSI id 14: No device or unable to report SCSI id 13: No device or unable to report SCSI id 12: No device or unable to report SCSI id 11: No device or unable to report SCSI id 10: No device or unable to report SCSI id 9: No device or unable to report SCSI id 8: No device or unable to report SCSI id 7: (reserved) SCSI bus host adaptor SCSI id 6: No device or unable to report SCSI id 5: No device or unable to report SCSI id 4: No device or unable to report SCSI id 3: No device or unable to report SCSI id 2: SCSI-2 (tape) HP C1533A A907 9 SCSI id 1: No device or unable to report SCSI id 0: SCSI-2 (disk) ZULUSCSIHARDDRIVE 2.3WZuluSCSI .si dsk0: SI--AMOS System Information, (C) Copyright 1990, Alpha Microsystems Inc. Version 3.0(114) Computer Type: Eagle Main Processor: 68040 Co-Processor: None MMU present: Yes Operating System: AMOS 2.3A(484)-15 Boot PROM revision: D00 Number of SSDs: 1 Total Memory: 73728 K-bytes Resident Monitor Memory: 4366 K-bytes Computing Index (CX), relative to AM-100: 59.9 48 bit FP Index (4X), relative to AM-100: 58.2 Floating Point Index (FX), relative to AM-100/L: 7.9 Disk Index (DX), relative to ST-506: 51.0 .si dsk0: [...] Disk Index (DX), relative to ST-506: 52.2 . the last Alpha Micro article we booted our AM-1200 desktop system using a BlueSCSI attached to its external 50-pin Centronics-style SASI port, which with some tweaks to the settings file can be made compatible enough for its very old bus. But I'd like to use that device for other things, so we'll put the old ZuluSCSI card — more than fast enough for this thing — inside. To avoid me having to dismantle it every time I want to switch the disk image, I disconnected one of its unused serial ports and threaded a USB cable there. SUB0:. It's as fast as the BlueSCSI was, probably because both devices can easily saturate its slow SASI bus: AMOS 1.4 misdetects its 68010 as a 68000 (AMOS 2.3A detects the CPU correctly), but like the E450, there was no second test bump either. "everything console." I should point out that the E500 has a slightly later version of AMOS than the E300 and E450 and we get a little more explanation with the bus readout: While all three systems support synchronous SCSI, this version of AMOS actually reports it, along with the width (8-bit, because it's only Fast SCSI, not Wide). Now, what about performance? The ST32272N we replaced is a 7200rpm drive while the ST310151N in the E300 was only 5400rpm, thus accounting for the E500's better baseline disk score, and the E500's faster CPU probably explains its slightly higher first-run result of 46.3. But the second run is even more lopsided than what we saw with the E300, a massive 180.7. Since two of the systems were doing it, it was time to dig in a little more. The ZuluSCSI Blaster has a debug mode switch which echoes status and current operation to a connected machine over USB serial at 115200bps, so I hooked up both the E500's serial console and the USB port of the Blaster simultaneously to the MacBook Air to watch what SCSI operations occurred during the benchmark test. very unusual: there wasn't any. In fact, even though the baseline score had sunk down to a dismal 10 or so because of all the debugging data it was emitting, the second run was still a blistering 180.7. This really sounded like operating system caching, but except for the AM-1200 where I wasn't running it to save memory, the other three systems were running the standard disk cache as virtually any performance Alpha Micro would — and allegedly SI.LIT should be unswayed by it. For some reason the E450's cache configuration wasn't locking UFDs (user file directories, i.e., PPNs), but turning that off on the E500 and E300 didn't make a difference, and all three were caching everything else including the MFD (master file directory). However, when I turned off caching altogether at runtime (using the CACHE.LIT tool and disabling with OFF), though the scores got really low, they were now consistent from run to run. Do note our observation isn't enough to fully explain the E450, which also runs the OS disk cache, but didn't have a second run bump. If you disable the cache on the E450, although its overall score declines, it still remains consistent from run to run. One possibility is that the driver for its later SCSI controller just isn't as aggressive. Although the overall issue certainly calls into question how useful SI.LIT is as a disk benchmark, despite being likely the only Alpha Micro benchmark tool you can expect most recent systems to come with, the question then becomes how comparative disk performance on an Alpha Micro should be measured. Was it still fine for me to continue with my usual practice of leaving the cache on and testing immediately after boot? It's probable that there'd be little in the cache by that point, whatever would be there would likely be similar from system to system (assuming the same version of the operating system), and likelier still that whatever was present in the cache wouldn't be very germane to SI.LIT. Under my current knowledge of AMOS I think these numbers are still broadly comparable; I just have to keep in mind that the score on subsequent runs is likely to be bogus. precisely even with our E450 here). The E100 was discontinued shortly afterwards in 2001. SI.LIT CX score of 816 (!) on dual Athlon 2800+ CPUs. Later AM-113 SuperFalcons were just serial ports and a socket for the SSD; the main system was now more than suitable to service them, and Motorola wasn't making any more 5102 CPUs either. The Eagle 800 that same year ran the same technology in miniature, bringing the great experiment to a close with the discontinuation of the last E250 and E450 systems, and today's systems sold by the reformulated Alpha Microsystems LLC use the same x86-based architecture. Over their production lifetime, analysis of known serial numbers suggests around ten thousand 68K Eagles were ultimately sold, and now I've got five of them. Rest in peace, Rod. They're still great machines.

Up until the 1960s, telephone calls were carried as analog signals. There was a great deal of frequency division multiplexing onto open wire, and sometimes coaxial cables, but in the post-war period buried multipair telephone cables began to dominate. While the network was surprisingly functional—long distance calls from coast to coast were still quite intelligible—there were fundamental limitations to analog carriers. The quality of the call would degrade with each step, a problem that was much more acute for the sensitive digital connections that were already the apparent future of the telephone system. These were digital signals modulated over the top of telephone lines: the telephone system itself still handled them as analog calls, just ones that required special care for quality. During the Second World War, it became apparent that many of the long distance network's challenges could be greatly simplified by using digital signaling as the basis of the entire long distance system. In 1943, Bell Labs contributed to the design of an early encrypted voice communications system called SIGSALY. Unlike the "voice scramblers" and other analog techniques of the early phase of the war, SIGSALY was recognizably similar to modern encryption. The voice data was quantized into numerical values, so that digital arithmetic could be used to encode it. In the quest to build a cryptosystem for voice, Bell Labs incidentally built the first applied system for PCM digital voice transmission. After the war, it was an obvious next step to refine this technology and apply it to regular service. This didn't necessarily mean direct digital service, at least not at first: most subscriber loops remain analog to the present day. For the first years of the digital network, even the exchanges themselves switched purely analog signals. Between offices, though, encoding the analog channels into digital ones solved problems from audio quality, to microwave path overloading, to flexibility in traffic routing. Digitization became a core part of AT&T's concept of a carrier, just like frequency division multiplexing had in the 1920s. That's the background to the 1962 introduction of T-carrier, the first digital carrier in the commercial telephone system. The Digital Hierarchy Back in the article on T-carrier (which you should read if you are at all interested in this topic!), I explained that T1, T2, T3, etc. are hierarchically larger-bandwidth connections that carry the DS1, DS2, DS3, etc. digital signals respectively. Let's quickly review this hierarchical concept and, just to keep things interesting, add the further confusion of the D1 channel bank. A D1 channel bank is the physical piece of equipment that digitizes 24 voice channels and multiplexes them into a DS1 signal, which will be carried over T1 carrier. Similarly, four DS1 signals can be combined into a DS2 signal and carried over T2. Seven DS2 signals can be combined into a single DS3 signal and carried over T3. And so on, at least as far as they were able to get with the technology of the time. The DS2 level maps generally to the D2 channel bank, but that relationship can be confusing as the subsequently developed channel banks added features as well as capacity. The D2 channel bank could multiplex 96 channels onto a DS2 signal, but it also increased the overall quality of the audio channel to meet the technical requirements for general mixed toll service (the D1 had originally only been approved for conventional voice channels, not other applications like data-grade leased lines). In order to make that improvement, the D2 had to reduce the amount of quantization noise introduced into the signal. The D1 channel bank had used PCM audio with seven bits per sample, and calculations showed that eight bits per sample would be required for a toll-grade connection 1. In a way, that looked easy: DS1 already used 8-bit units. But the eighth bit, not used as part of the PCM sample, was reserved for signaling purposes. No bother: the D1 channel bank hadn't really used the full signaling bandwidth anyway, so it could comfortably be reduced to meet a compromise position. The D2 channel bank used 8 bits for most PCM samples, but every six frames the last bit of each sample was reserved for signaling use rather than audio. This created a slight increase in quantization noise, and a significant decrease in signaling rate, but the resulting numbers for both fell within acceptable margins. A perfect compromise, but one that feels technically inelegant: in a sense, the D2 channel bank used 7.833 bits per sample. Ouch. This must have given the Bell System's engineers similar discomfort, but the aesthetic offense was worth it for backwards-compatibility. By the time the D2 channel bank was fielded in 1970, there were a huge number of D1 channel banks and T1 connections in service. Backwards-compatibility to existing T1 lines was a firm requirement. The D2 multiplexed 96 channels, four times a D1, and could carry those channels over four T1 links—in fact, initially, this was only the option. T2 and subsequent carriers were not fielded until after the D2. This backwards compatibility provided an upgrade path, as well as a way to subdivide the 96-channel capacity. You might realize that it is also a completely alternate explanation of the "hierarchy." You might wonder why the multipliers at the levels of the hierarchy are so inconsistent—24, 4, 7, 6. Reading the thing about signaling bits in every six samples above might have stirred deep memories of a concept called "robbed-bit signaling," a general concept of stealing occasional bits for other purposes that was widely used with T1. These are all smells, indications that a system was not architected, but grown. The "digital hierarchy" of T1, T2, T3, etc. is not some elegantly-designed system, at least not nearly as much as T4-era Bell Laboratories Record articles like to make it sound. It's mostly a result of happenstance, as the history of the Dn channel banks shows: each new channel bank, the D3, the D4, was designed to carry many more channels than those before. They were also required to be backwards-compatible with the use of the older channel banks and carriers. This process of exponential improvement with backwards compatibility led to the digital hierarchy as a natural consequence, not as a designed outcome. Plesiochronicity This emergent concept of layers of successively larger muxes explains the digital hierarchy, but we now need to consider the problem of timing and synchronization. In any system based on digital sampling, you have to be aware at the point at which those samples are taken in order to combine multiple signals. Consider the scenario where several simultaneous phone calls are being combined into a single digital mux for transmission. When the phone calls reach a D1 (or D2, D3, etc) channel bank, it samples all of the inputs at an appropriate time to build its DS1 (or higher) output stream. Nothing about this case is particularly complicated, except that it does require that all of the calls involved in the digital stream are sampled under the control of the same clock. But what about cases where lines need to be digitized in different locations? Say you have two smaller offices in a city, that need to deliver inter-office traffic to a tandem in the next city over. An obvious approach would be to digitize the calls in each of their local offices, send them as digital signals to one of the offices (perhaps the city's main downtown exchange), and then combine all of those digital signals together to be sent to the tandem switch. Doing this with channel banks wasn't very desirable: you would actually need to convert the calls back to analog, and then back to digital, in order to relay them from the first digital leg to the second. The first digital telephone leads were like this: completely point-to-point, without the possibility of switching or routing in the digital realm. That wasn't so big of a limitation early on when all of the switches were analog and digital leads just made the lines between them denser, but it prevented the construction of the fully digital network that Bell Labs envisioned. What was clearly needed was some sort of mux that could take four DS1s, already in that form, and combine them into a DS2. Repeat this for the higher levels as well, and you have the basis of a system that can combine and separate traffic as needed to meet the level of demand between various offices. But what about the sample timing? If you have four DS1 streams from four different places, at least back in the 1970s, they are not going to be synchronized. The four D1 channel banks would each be operating on their own sample clocks, and because of the imperfection of the physical world some of these clocks would run slightly faster or slower than others. When our four DS1 streams arrived at our notional multiplexer, the four streams would be not only out of phase, they would actually run at slightly different speeds. We can imagine a lot of modern solutions to this problem, probably by buffering relatively large blocks of samples in memory and then transmitting out of that buffer. In the '70s, things weren't so simple: first, memory was expensive and slow compared to the bitrates involved, and second, the latency involved in such extensive buffering was not considered acceptable in a network that had previously been all-analog and thus had no more latency than that implied by the speed of light. The solution to this problem, the Plesiochronous Digital Hierarchy or PDH, is not easy to understand from our contemporary perspective. Many textbooks on networking and communications make some nod to PDH, but it's often short and cursory, and leaves you with a nagging feeling that the whole thing doesn't make much sense. PDH is hard to relate to for two reasons: first, it was developed to solve a set of problems that (due to broader technical advancements) we no longer have. Second, even within those constraints, it is a solution that has been obsoleted by newer approaches. PDH is not something that anyone would design today, and in retrospect, it's probably best to think of it as a hack. PDH was an interim measure, if you will, that bridged a gap between the development of digital channel banks and the later development of a good approach to synchronizing a digital network. It would have been more convenient if those two systems had been designed at the same time, but in practice, they weren't: digital long distance lines were in common use a solid decade before AT&T had a reasonable architecture for a digital network. You can already see that they were thinking through these requirements in the late 1960s, leading to the concept of the PDH as a hierarchical network architecture, but most of the actual technology to provide that network was built later, in the '70s and '80s. For a while, there was just, you know, something that worked. A duct tape fix. Conceptual bailing wire. So what even was the PDH? It is helpful to start by defining the word "plesiochronous," which every textbook has to do since the term was invented by Bell Labs to describe their design. I will spare the roots, but plesiochronous means "almost synchronized" or "approximately synchronized." And that's what the PDH was: it was a synchronous digital system with some slop. There was a little wiggle room. A DS1 signal is 1.544 Mbps, so if you multiplex four of them, you might expect 6.176 Mbps. You would be wrong: a DS2 is actually 6.312 Mbps. The overhead here comes from the plesio part of plesiochronous. To understand how that works, we should look at the design of the multiplexer from the beginning. AT&T practice would call a multiplexer from the DS1 level to the DS2 level an M12, for, well, multiplexer from 1 to 2. In practice M13s seem to have been more common equipment, which were often implemented internally as seven M12s feeding one M23. In any case, the M12 takes in four different DS1 streams and then bit-interleaves them, such that every 4th bit of the output is the next bit from one of the inputs. This is simple to reason about and has the advantage that virtually no buffering ever happens. But what if one of the inputs is running slightly fast, and another slightly slow? The first thing to know is that the output stream is intentionally slightly faster than all of the inputs. A typical PDH system allowed a 50 PPM plus or minus variation in the rate of the inputs, which means that the output had to be at least 50 PPM fast relative to the sum of the inputs. That way, the multiplexer will never "fall behind" because an input is providing bits faster than the output can interleave them. The other thing to know is that the multiplexer must perform a function known as either stuffing or justification. It is said that the term justification was introduced within AT&T because it sounded more technical, while stuffing was more popular with the actual engineers. Certain parts of each outgoing frame are defined (by standard) as stuffable, and they're sometimes called gaps. These are sections where the multiplexer is allowed to either include real data, or to include some nonsense data called stuffing bits (or, if you want to sound more technical, justification bits). By choosing to either include real data or stuffing in the gaps, the multiplexer can actually adjust the "real" output data rate up or down. That way, it converges onto the correct average (the sum of the inputs) despite the "timing noise" of the inputs varying slightly up and down in real speed. If that didn't make sense to you, here's a different way to think about the same thing: we can imagine the DS2 output frame as consisting of four "slots" into which the four DS1 input frames are inserted (this isn't quite intuitive because they are interleaved bit-by-bit, but the math works out the same). Under the PDH design, these slots are all slightly wider than the input frames, so that there is "free space" for the input frames to be shifted a bit in either direction or stretched out. That allows the multiplexer to "catch up" on a fast input or to "draw out" the frames from a slow input. Thinking about it in terms of a wide slot that you can place the input into as desired also gives more value to the term "justification:" you can shift bits around, or add extra space in between them, just like you would to justify text. The actual implementation of this idea is pretty complicated, because the demultiplexer on the other end needs to know which bits were stuffed so that they can be discarded. That's why PDH specified gaps at fixed positions: the control signaling included a set of flags that indicated whether the fixed gaps were used for data or stuffing. When the multiplexer decided whether or not to use a stuffable bit (based on whether or not the input was getting ahead of the output mux), it also had to store that decision for the end of the frame so that the flag could be set correctly. PDH wasn't an elegant solution, but it was a solution, and multiplexers were designed up to the DS4 level based on the PDH approach. We all owe PDH a huge thanks for providing the clunky stopgap that allowed the construction of a nationwide digital telephone network. That said, well, it had quite a few downsides. First, PDH was never all that well standardized. Researching PDH is tricky because there aren't a lot of documents that provide conclusive detail about the actual implementation in the US, mostly just summaries, conceptual sketches, and examples from Europe. As far as I can tell 2, Western Electric never really offered a standalone PDH multiplexer. Larger integrated systems from Western Electric (like, say, a microwave carrier equipment bay) might include a PDH multiplexer, but it's not clear to me if WE even made them—the advertisements and pricing information I can find for PDH multiplexers are from other vendors like Farinon and NEC. In North American practice, it doesn't seem like PDH was ever robustly standardized, and there were implementation differences between equipment from different manufacturers. That's probably one of the reasons for the scarcity of information on PDH equipment: you wouldn't usually buy a single PDH multiplexer, but instead would specify a specific model as part of a larger system. That meant that the PDH network was far less flexible than AT&T had hoped. The problem was even bigger when you looked overseas: AT&T tended to field the best thing that Bell Labs and Western Electric could come up with, and then promulgate that as a standard later on. The European telcos tended not to adopt new American developments until they were mature, giving them the opportunity to make standards before any equipment was in place. Thus the European versions of US telephone carriers are often a bit better, and PDH is no exception. In fact, the US, Europe, and Japan used three different hierarchies for PDH signaling. The European standard put more channels into a stream (the "E1" at about 2 Mbps), and used a consistent multiplier of 4 for each level. European PDH practices even got a complete published standard from CCITT. The Japanese system used the same DS1 standard as the US but with different multipliers (4, 5, 3, 4 instead of 4, 7, 6). PDH could thus not be used for international calling without completely remuxing everything. Another shortcoming of PDH had to do with that remuxing. The decision to bit-interleave the input frames together, stuff some bits, and then put flags on the bit stuffing into the interleaved stream, meant that a PDH multiplexer effectively "scrambled" the input streams. If you had, say, a DS3 stream and wanted to extract a single voice channel from it, you had a lot of work in front of you. It simply wasn't feasible with the electronics of the era to analyze the stream to determine the interleaving and stuffing bits at each level. Instead, you would have to put the DS3 through demuxers all the way back down to the bottom of the hierarchy, pull out the channel you wanted, and then remux it all the way back up. Pulling a single channel out of a DS3 could require two 11.5 foot tall equipment bays, and even further quantization noise due to the nature of the robbed bit scheme. Two things happened that pushed PDH to its limit: first, fiber optics. AT&T was famously a late adopter of fiber, and 1970s documents on the digital hierarchy talked about conveying it over T-carrier, microwave, and coaxial. We have talked about coaxial before, but L-carrier was an analog system. Digital coaxial did emerge as the T3, T4, and T5 carriers, but these were relatively short range and mostly only saw use on shorter inter-office links. Things were changing, though: by the time DS3 equipment was appearing in telephone exchanges, competitors were already evaluating fiber optics. AT&T dipped their toe in the water in 1976, with an experimental DS3 fiber optic link in Atlanta. The next year, both AT&T and competitor GTE had DS3 fiber lines in service (in Chicago and the LA area, respectively). Outside manufacturers started offering T1-over-fiber equipment around 1980, and in 1983 AT&T had a multimode fiber system stretching from New York to Washington. Sparing the (fascinating) story of the business and competitive factors, the writing was on the wall: fiber was the future of long lines. AT&T engineers realized that the PDH design did not scale well to the enormous capacities that fiber could reach, and even worse, that complex fiber networks would require exactly the capability that PDH lacked: extracting single channels from the mux. Besides, despite the systems in use, there really wasn't any standard for conveying PDH signals over fiber, which only meant more compatibility issues. Something else was coming over the horizon in 1983: divestiture. The complete reorganization of AT&T in the mid-1980s, breaking the Baby Bells up into independent companies, made the interoperability problems with PDH much more severe. Bell operating companies (BOCs) would need to easily exchange traffic with both AT&T Long Lines and, eventually, with other BOCs and competitive phone companies and long distance carriers. That was very difficult when that traffic was mostly conveyed in loosely-standardized black-box muxes. Many aspects of US telephony were loosely standardized prior to the Bell System breakup because AT&T ran the entire network and didn't really need to cooperate with others. After 1984, the US became a lot more like Europe: for technology to be widely adopted, it would need to have a well-defined, published standard. That meant a standards body—the part of AT&T that had formerly published the practices used by all of the BOCs, after divestiture, became an independent company called Bellcore. Bellcore had an immediate goal of developing a fully standardized set of digital interfaces to be used between telephone companies. At the same time, a group of carriers and equipment manufacturers organized an association to start an ANSI standards process for fiber-optic equipment. They had a goal of an industry standard for high-speed digital fiber optics, so that terminal equipment from different manufacturers could be used together. That effort formed the ANSI T1X1 working group, titled Digital Hierarchy and Synchronization. In 1985, Bellcore proposed their draft standard to the T1X1 committee: they called it SONET. Synchronicity First, I will briefly explain some context for my global readers. One of the shortcomings of PDH was its lack of international standardization, and SONET would not make the same mistake. Shortly after SONET was proposed to ANSI, it was also proposed to CCITT. For historic reasons, and despite the fact that they are largely identical, SONET (Synchronous Optical Network) is a North American standard while the European standard is called SDH, for Synchronous Digital Hierarchy. I will stick to the term SONET because it is catchier, but the name SDH better conveys that SONET is essentially the same idea as PDH but it's actually synchronous. Beyond that, it is also more feature-rich and much better standardized. SONET starts out higher up in the digital hierarchy. The "lowest" SONET level is Synchronous Transport Signal 1, or STS-1, which is typically transported by Optical Carrier 1, or OC-1. OC-1 operates at 51.84 Mbps, sufficient to carry a PDH DS3 channel with signaling overhead. By this point in telecommunications history, channel banks had improved and 50 Mbps wasn't what it once was, so DS3 was a good choice for the basic unit of a high-capacity transport system. This also provided critical backwards compatibility: DS3 was the most widely deployed PDH signal, so by accommodating a DS3 within an STS-1, SONET provided an easy route to tunneling legacy PDH links through a SONET replacement. I put a lot of time into writing this, and I hope that you enjoy reading it. If you can spare a few dollars, consider supporting me on ko-fi. You'll receive an occasional extra, subscribers-only post, and defray the costs of providing artisanal, hand-built world wide web directly from Albuquerque, New Mexico. By this time, the Digital Hierarchy principle from PDH was well established, so SONET follows the exact same pattern—but, fortunately, the naming convention improved. OC-3 is three times the bandwidth of OC-1, OC-12 is twelve times the bandwidth of OC-1, and so on, with OC-24, OC-48, OC-192, and even OC-768 in common use, the latter achieving over 38 Gbps of payload. SONET is complex compared to what you might expect, or at least different. A SONET frame does not consist of a header and a body. Instead, like with PDH, all of the data is interleaved together in a way that feels messy. In an STS-1 signal, for example, a frame consists of three bytes of protocol overhead and 87 bytes of payload, making up a 90 byte pattern that is repeated nine times to make up an 810 byte frame. Higher levels use larger frames but keep the same structure, effectively mixing the header into each frame. Like PDH's bitwise interleaving, this is done to manage latency: interleaving the header with the payload avoids the need to buffer an entire frame of data at any point. Because of this design decision, SONET can provide a latency that is less than the frame time. This description also oversimplifies by discussing only one part of SONET's protocol overhead. There are actually several layers of overhead, all interleaved together, that serve different purposes. The "lowest layer" overhead is recreated at each regenerator along the route (devices that decode and then reencode the optical signaling to compensate for path loss), while higher layers are only processed by terminal equipment and are used for purposes like connection quality monitoring. These types of overhead are important because, unlike PDH, SONET provides a specification for the entire physical infrastructure. SONET is virtually always used with one of a few standard architectures, each of which are designed to provide redundancy. SONET uses unidirectional signaling on the fiber, so any SONET link will have two fibers normally active, one for each direction. Where things vary are the approach to redundancy: in a linear route with automatic protection, there are two "spare" fibers. When terminal equipment detects (via monitoring protocol overhead signaling) that the connection quality is no longer good on the primary pair of fibers, it will switch automatically to the secondary pair. Particularly common with SONET though, and particularly distinctive, are rings. A unidirectional ring uses two fibers, one for each direction, but each of those fibers goes in a circle and returns to the origin point. At the origin point, each frame is transmitted both directions into the ring. The terminals elsewhere on the ring compare the two copies that they received, one from each direction, and use the better of the two. This provides protection against damage to one of the fibers: terminals that are "downstream" from a broken fiber should still be able to receive the frames that went the other way around. A downside to this protection method is that it is inefficient: sending every frame twice means that two fibers are still providing a theoretical maximum bandwidth equal to the capacity of a single fiber. Bidirectional rings use a more complicated monitoring scheme to detect when frames are lost, so that they do not need to preemptively send them twice. A broken fiber will be detected and, depending on the ring, either sent the other way around or sent on a second redundant fiber allocated to the same direction. SONET's ring architecture is one of its most interesting properties. Unidirectional rings are often used as the "last mile" component of a SONET network. Consider, for example, a large business in the early days of the internet. If you wanted 100 Mbps internet connectivity, one of your best options was to purchase SONET service from the telephone company. They would take an existing ring, starting and ending with a telephone exchange, and figure out how to add your premises somewhere along it. The ring shape allowed redundancy with a relatively efficient use of fiber length. Bidirectional rings, with their greater complexity but greater efficiency, were usually used between telephone exchanges where there was adequate room for more complex terminal equipment. The ring topology also illustrates the biggest advantage of SONET over PDH. Unlike PDH, SONET hierarchy levels keep overhead and frame data in the same position, with consistent offsets to the framing data necessary to find an individual channel. That means that it is practical to inspect a high-rate SONET link, find a specific channel, and pull out those bits. You can even find where a channel is located and then overwrite just those bits, inserting data into the stream. This pattern is called "add-drop multiplexing," because the multiplexer usually adds some channels and drops others. Let's work a concrete example. Many years ago, I was an intern at a General Electric plant in Virginia. Although the facility's main internet connectivity had since been upgraded, SONET service was still active for redundancy and for a legacy TDM PABX. In an equipment room, the telco-owned add-drop multiplexer sat in a rack with the fiber enclosures where the building was actually spliced into the ring. The multiplexer was the customer premises equipment, and our Cisco router was connected by OC fiber to the multiplexer's "low speed" side while its "high speed" side had two connections, one each way, to our "neighbors" on the ring. The telco had left a diagram taped to the rack that made this material: one pair of fibers went to the National Radio Astronomy Observatory, the other went to the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency. There must have been some interesting traffic on that ring! The multiplexer found the time slots in the SONET ring that were assigned to us, "dropped" them and sent those bits out on the low-speed side, and then received bits on the low-speed side that were "added" back into the same time slots. Each of the organizations along the ring did the same thing with their own channels. The fact that the SONET ring had to "pass through" each of its users was a material downside, since a failure of an add-drop multiplexer at one customer could cause service disruptions for others. That's why the multiplexer was telco property, and further why SONET rings were always deployed with some type of automatic protection and redundancy. Ultimately, though, a telephone company technician still showed up at the security desk from time to time, needing to perform maintenance or repairs on the SONET equipment. The ability to perform add-drop multiplexing at any point on a SONET link also enabled digital cross-connects. This, finally, was the original dream of the nationwide digital network: by pairing two add-drop multiplexers together, you can switch channels from one SONET line onto another, completely digitally and with almost no latency. Paired with a management protocol called Transaction language 1 (TL1) for remote reconfiguration, digital cross connects make the long distance network vastly more flexible. Big chunks of long distance traffic could be instantly rerouted, and consolidated onto major routes or spread across more minor ones. Now, you might wonder, what happened to the whole synchronization problem? The most obvious difference between PDH and SONET is that PDH is plesiochronous while SONET is synchronous. SONET requires that all of the terminals, at least within a given interconnected network, operate in synchronization. That's exactly the requirement that PDH rejected. What changed is the state of the art in timing and synchronization. A few things came together to obsolete the need for plesiochronous technology. One was the introduction of the Bell System Reference Frequency: to coordinate both analog and digital systems that were timing-sensitive, AT&T introduced a nationwide time synchronization system. By the 1980s, the 2048 kHz Bell System Reference Frequency was distributed to nearly all telephone facilities over the long distance infrastructure. Various time code systems followed. During the same period, GPS was coming online, and GPS receivers became a relatively inexpensive source of precise time. Most terminals on a SONET ring got their timing from the ring: they just followed the signal and added or dropped channels at the appropriate time. A "master" terminal, typically at the telephone exchange, had to maintain that beat. In the early days, it would likely derive its clock either from an atomic clock in the office or via a reference signal coming from another office. In the later days of SONET, the time source was more likely to be a "BITS" or Building Integrated Timing Supply. BITS are basically time servers for telephone offices, typically using a GPS receiver as their discipline source and transmitting a few different types of TDM time codes to whatever devices needed them. Despite all of these measures, it's interesting that SONET still cheats. There is a bit of wiggle room. Part of the SONET protocol overhead is a pointer that indicates the offset within the frame that the payload frame actually starts. SONET devices can thus start the payload a little bit late in a SONET frame, providing an opportunity to fix timing errors. This capability means that SONET is still an option even in plesiochronous environments, which eased the fairly rapid transition from PDH to SONET. SONET in Use SONET is fast enough to survive into the modern era, although it is now decidedly legacy. 38 Gbps is nothing to sneeze at, and still compares favorably with a lot of common long distance connections. Where SONET shows its age is in the actual network payload. What do you actually put on a SONET ring? Well, of course, you can fit a whole lot of 64 Kbps telephone channels onto any of the SONET tiers. You can do that using a "raw" T1 signal or via ISDN, which uses the same basic fiber signals but better standardizes telephone signaling (e.g. off hook status) and interoperability. But even an OC-1 has 672 channels, more phone calls than just about anyone needs to make. In the 1980s, the driver for commercial SONET service was data. SONET itself is incredibly protocol neutral—one of the reasons for its unusual framing structure is that it is agnostic to the size, rate, and timing of the frames of the next layer protocol. SONET basically treats all connections as opaque serial streams, so conceptually, you can put just about anything over it. Because SONET evolved during the same period as ISDN, the two are closely related. During the late '80s, as SONET was being deployed, the "Broadband ISDN" initiative created Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM). ATM is a virtual circuit switching protocol that multiplexes a large number of small, fixed-size packets (called cells) over high-speed connections like SONET. ATM was, at one time, a serious contender for the dominant protocol in wide area networks. That didn't come to be, though, and IP took over—but not before ATM was well-enough established to be a tempting way to carry IP. IP over ATM was fairly common, and in fact, remained the norm for DSL until fairly recently. There were other options as well: Packet over SONET was a standard for SONET-based PPP connections, which could carry just about anything but were often used for IP. A newer offering is Ethernet over SONET, which does exactly what it sounds like. The internet provided a compelling use-case for SONET, but it also became a challenge. SONET was designed within the telephone industry, which emphasized handling fixed-speed channels with very high reliability and very low latency. The IP-based internet embraced the opposite: opportunistically moving variable speed connections over relatively high-latency and low-reliability channels. That meant that internet service over SONET became awkward. For one, it tended to be slow. The reason was bandwidth allocation: getting time on a SONET ring means getting channels assigned, and you will pay for those channels 24/7 regardless of whether or not you use them. A technology called virtual concatenation was developed to allow SONET's lower-level building blocks (like STS-1) to be combined in arbitrary ways to produce just about any amount of bandwidth you could want, but every Mbps over SONET was an Mbps that couldn't be used by any other customer. You paid for it. Later on, variable-bandwidth allocation systems were developed, but they were complex and missed the opportunity to make much of a difference. SONET's fixed-bandwidth design made it excellent for real-time media, the wheelhouse of the telephone industry, but ironically real-time media was missing from the information revolution. Internet connections were generally too slow and unreliable to carry it. By the time real-time media returned, IP connections had gotten so fast that they could make up for the lack of traffic engineering with raw speed. Slow and reliable lost out to fast and unreliable almost every time. SONET also had all the typical warts of a telephone industry network architecture. By the '90s, IP-based network equipment was both cheaper and easier to use than ATM and SONET devices. Upstart internet service providers were much more competitively motivated, driving down prices on non-SONET services. SONET has been superseded as a standard by OTN, Optical Transport Network. OTN is an ITU standard for a digital hierarchy that starts at 2.5 Gbps and goes up, well, as high as you want. 800 Gbps "OTUC8" is now in service. Besides being faster, OTN is also designed to accommodate variable packet connections like Ethernet much more efficiently. And, of course, even OTN is losing the fight against schemes that carry Ethernet frames directly over fiber. Is this the reason that 8-bit bytes became so universal in computing? I genuinely do not know, this would be a good topic for future research. A long time ago, on a different blog, I spent some time trying to establish the lineage of the 8-bit word length that is now so universal. Without devoting a career of research to the topic, I think the best I can say is that there seem to have been several parallel paths that converged on 7 and 8 bits as good choices for communications purposes. Digital telephony equipment was certainly one of them.↩ And I would very much appreciate information from anyone who knows otherwise.↩