- VCF South West - June 14 - 16, Davidson-Gundy Alumni Center at University of Texas at Dallas
- VCF West - Aug 2 - 3, Computer History Museum, Mountain View, CA
- VCF Midwest - Sept 7 - 8 2024, Schaumburg, IL
- VCF SoCal - Mid February 2025, Location TBD, Southern CA
- VCF East - April 2025, Infoage Museum, Wall NJ
-
Please review our updated Terms and Rules here
Wang 2200 Influence
- Thread starter ClausB
- Start date
durgadas311
Veteran Member
I'm not sure I'd classify the Wang 2200 as a minicomputer. It was more of an evolution of their discrete-logic calculators, as was the Wang 1200 word processor. I believe the actual hardware ran BASIC, so it was not a language interpreter running on some generic CPU - like Microsoft BASIC was on the early micros. I'd have to study the schematics, but I suspect it was along the same lines as the 500/600/700 programmable calculators and 1200 word processor. It ran a microcode on a simple CPU. The microcode realized the "language" seen by users. If my suspicions are correct, the Wang 2200 was more of an "end of an era" rather than influence for future designs. Once the microprocessor arrived, the Wang designs quickly became obsolete. As history, though, the Wang designs are fascinating, and marvelous in their elegant simplicity.
krebizfan
Veteran Member
The microcode BASIC was fairly CPU independent since Wang changed the underlying CPU multiple times. The 2200VP from 1976 fits in the mini-computer ranks and an upgrade was planned to run COBOL in 1981. Alas, by then, the 2200 was too expensive for the limited performance gain over a business micro. I only programmed a 2200 briefly so my impression of its ability may be incorrect.
The major 2200 impact was on IBM when it was used as proof that what became the 5100 could be produced. Enough 2200s were shipped to school and operated in a form with shared disk drives while individual users used a local cassette which seemed to inspire a number of systems that used the same set up for the educational market.
The major 2200 impact was on IBM when it was used as proof that what became the 5100 could be produced. Enough 2200s were shipped to school and operated in a form with shared disk drives while individual users used a local cassette which seemed to inspire a number of systems that used the same set up for the educational market.
durgadas311
Veteran Member
I'm sure the Wang BASIC *pcode* was backward compatible, such that a user's BASIC program from an older model would run on a newer model. However, the *microcode* used to implement the BASIC interpreter would have to change if the CPU changed, so the same microcode image would not run on all models - *if* the CPU changed.
An Wang's machines certainly motivated a lot of companies to develop products, so in that respect the Wang designs had influence. From an architecture perspective, though, the designs were out-of-date when the first microprocessors appeared, which was early 70s. The hardware designs were at end-of-life.
Wang was a fascinating company back in the day. They produced a multi-user *calculator* in the 1960s (https://www.oldcalculatormuseum.com/wang360.html). Their programmable calculators were famous, and their word-processor was quite interesting (http://www.wang1200.org/). The big problem, in my opinion, that Wang had was they did not move fast enough into large-scale integration and microprocessors. The Wang programmable calculators were initially one-of-a-kind, but then HP (and others) came out with more powerful and more compact designs. Then, mid-70s, Texas Instruments and HP came out with *hand-held* (pocket) programmable calculators. It's hard to compete when your only product is the size of an IBM Selectric typewriter - and twice as hard to move. The (early models, at least) Wang 2200 was not compact. If you look at the pictures available (http://www.wang2200.org/), there was significant hardware in the stand itself, and it was heavy. An ASR 33 Teletype was more portable. The user module on top of the stand only housed terminal electronics for the CRT, keyboard, and cassette.
Wang had an impressive offering of peripherals, most of which were available on their 500/600/700 calculator line as well as the 2200. But most of these peripherals used the same technology as their "computers", and so they were big, heavy, expensive, and hot. Later peripherals were adapted to modern technology.
So, from my perspective, by the time Wang started modernizing their architectures they had fallen so far behind that they had little chance of catching up. Still, no one but An Wang (et al.) could build so many varied "computers" out of 7400-series logic.
An Wang's machines certainly motivated a lot of companies to develop products, so in that respect the Wang designs had influence. From an architecture perspective, though, the designs were out-of-date when the first microprocessors appeared, which was early 70s. The hardware designs were at end-of-life.
Wang was a fascinating company back in the day. They produced a multi-user *calculator* in the 1960s (https://www.oldcalculatormuseum.com/wang360.html). Their programmable calculators were famous, and their word-processor was quite interesting (http://www.wang1200.org/). The big problem, in my opinion, that Wang had was they did not move fast enough into large-scale integration and microprocessors. The Wang programmable calculators were initially one-of-a-kind, but then HP (and others) came out with more powerful and more compact designs. Then, mid-70s, Texas Instruments and HP came out with *hand-held* (pocket) programmable calculators. It's hard to compete when your only product is the size of an IBM Selectric typewriter - and twice as hard to move. The (early models, at least) Wang 2200 was not compact. If you look at the pictures available (http://www.wang2200.org/), there was significant hardware in the stand itself, and it was heavy. An ASR 33 Teletype was more portable. The user module on top of the stand only housed terminal electronics for the CRT, keyboard, and cassette.
Wang had an impressive offering of peripherals, most of which were available on their 500/600/700 calculator line as well as the 2200. But most of these peripherals used the same technology as their "computers", and so they were big, heavy, expensive, and hot. Later peripherals were adapted to modern technology.
So, from my perspective, by the time Wang started modernizing their architectures they had fallen so far behind that they had little chance of catching up. Still, no one but An Wang (et al.) could build so many varied "computers" out of 7400-series logic.
durgadas311
Veteran Member
Reading up on the Wang 2200VP/VS, which appears to be a *late* 70s offering, that was more of a minicomputer. But in the early 70s there was only the original design 2200s, using discrete logic. I would maintain, though, that the 2200VP was more reactive than innovative. These later "minis" had practically nothing (architecturally) in common with the original 2200. I suspect Wang was unable to influence the computer industry by the late 1970s. Early 70s or late 60s, yes - but not from an architectural standpoint.
Not architecturally but from a product standpoint. Was Wang first to put BASIC in ROM? That was a standard consumer microcomputer feature by 1979.
Edit: Well not the first. HP 9830 in '72. Just asking whether the 2200 had any influence on consumer micros.
Edit: Well not the first. HP 9830 in '72. Just asking whether the 2200 had any influence on consumer micros.
Last edited:
Chuck(G)
25k Member
durgadas311
Veteran Member
Fred Wang inherited a ship already on the rocks. It's speculation whether anybody could have saved it. The beginning of the end was when Wang stopped producing innovative products, 10-15 years prior. The (original) Wang 2200 may have been the last. As an outsider, it appeared as though they were stuck with a 60s mind-set. They also may have mistook sales to mean they don't need new technology.
So, back to Claus' question, was the Wang 2200 the first "personal" BASIC computer? I've never heard of any others. The later 2200VP/VS seems to me to be too little too late, as there were already minicomputers that ran timeshare BASIC in the early 70s.
So, back to Claus' question, was the Wang 2200 the first "personal" BASIC computer? I've never heard of any others. The later 2200VP/VS seems to me to be too little too late, as there were already minicomputers that ran timeshare BASIC in the early 70s.
Chuck(G)
25k Member
Was the 2200 any more "personal" than the HP 9830A/9831 with its BASIC in ROM?
I doubt that either was "personal" in a budgetary sense and I doubt that either had a significant effect on PC development.
It's more likely that the PDP-8 had a significant effect.
I doubt that either was "personal" in a budgetary sense and I doubt that either had a significant effect on PC development.
It's more likely that the PDP-8 had a significant effect.
krebizfan
Veteran Member
Fred Wang had a lot of good ideas for future products, certainly better than the average futurist. The problem was the Fred was not a good manager. Many of the concepts needed 5 to 10 years to turn into something viable but instead were announced to ship in one year and arrived after 2 or 3 years in a very poor implementation draining Wang's cash reserves even faster.
Consider two other small systems available in 1973. The SCELBI had a BASIC while the MCM-70 had its APL in ROM. The idea of placing a language in ROM since large ROMs were a lot cheaper than RAM was fairly obvious. I can't think of many clear language constructs from the Wang BASIC used in other BASICs. The IBM 5100 seems a much more direct influence on the 1977 line up of mass produced micros; certainly the Commodore PET with its integrated display and internal plus external tape drives offered a check list of direct comparisons to the 5100.
Consider two other small systems available in 1973. The SCELBI had a BASIC while the MCM-70 had its APL in ROM. The idea of placing a language in ROM since large ROMs were a lot cheaper than RAM was fairly obvious. I can't think of many clear language constructs from the Wang BASIC used in other BASICs. The IBM 5100 seems a much more direct influence on the 1977 line up of mass produced micros; certainly the Commodore PET with its integrated display and internal plus external tape drives offered a check list of direct comparisons to the 5100.
Chuck(G)
25k Member
For me, pre-1975, the only bit of Wang gear was the LOCI-2 that the psychology department owned. After that, nothing. So I was oblivious to the 2200.
I remember fondly using a 2200T to do BASIC programming while I was in high school. It wasn't really an affordable home computer though. The Wang2200.org web site is really a great resource, and he recently updated his emulator to version 3.0 if you want to get a feel for what they were like.
byates
Experienced Member
5 1/4 inch drives and SIM memory module. At least according to my reading.
krebizfan
Veteran Member
Wang was important to both but not the 2200. The 2200 didn't get any SIMM update until maybe the final 2200 line up made using the 80386. It was the APC and VS lines that had SIMMs. The 5.25" drives were designed for the OIS word processors but cheap and small made it easy to migrate to other Wang products.
Chuck(G)
25k Member
Yeah, 5.25" drives in 1973 didn't exist. Most of my Wang WP samples are 8" hard-sectored floppies.
Chuck(G)
25k Member
But if it was a 1973 2200, it didn't use 5.25" floppies, did it?
krebizfan
Veteran Member
I doubt anyone intended the PCS II top-hat as the basis for the 5.25" floppy drive design. Floating drives on top of the display makes it a challenge to change disks. It did preclude the interference that often happened when trying to put the floppy in the same case as the CRT.
One version of the 5.25" development story has the drive being sized to match the word processors tape drive bay.
One version of the 5.25" development story has the drive being sized to match the word processors tape drive bay.
voidstar78
Veteran Member
I realize this is an old thread, but I came across an article from 2013 at the bottom of this page (involving a letter from IBM's Alvin Ginsburg):
The Wang systems do predate me, so it's not like I have first-hand knowledge of them. And curious if anyone disputes the above article?
But some observations:
- Scott Miller (who later founded Apogee shareware software and wrote several interesting titles for the IBM PC) was once interviewed, he first programmed on a Wang (w/ BASIC) in high school, and in his opinion considered it a "first" personal computer. [ can't find the link of that article at the moment ] My point is this is just a reference opinion of someone from that era. And as these expensive systems trickled down into schools, that alone had influence to the next generation of up and coming software developers.
- The original Wang 2200 had both an external CPU/processor and power supply. I'd still consider it a "personal computer", but expensive and bulky (I'd agree on the "last of a kind" sentiment more than the "first of a kind"). Keep in mind, the original SCAMP prototype also depended on an external power supply (as mentioned in the article above) -- in photos, it's always hidden under a desk. We take power supplies for granted these days, but I think getting those smaller and reliable was some pioneering work in of itself (by 1975, by then the newer Wang models and the 5100 had "solved" the external big power supply issue). I'm not sure how the small MCM-70 was powered - but (AFAIK) a single line LED screen I think is far less complicated than a multi-line CRT (text scrolling and all that).
- The Wang 2200 did have floating point support. I'm not sure to what extent (e.g. decimal places, SQRT, trig functions, etc?). The emulator I think only goes as far back as the 2200B model (which I think is more '75). In any case, the Wang's seemed to be mostly for word processing (re: Stephen King) -- which there were lots of word processing systems even by 1972 (i.e. a typewriter like thing with a multi-line screen). I think the original 2200's were mostly 4K systems? And somewhere in there, could only expand to 32K due to some limitations maybe in the BASIC? I'm not sure how memory the MCM-70 could be expanded to - 4K is great for its time, but still fairly limited to calculator-like functionality, not accounting or database entry type applications. The 5100's were 8K to 64KB.
But consider this: if a (non-technical/non-engineer) person today was teleported back to 1972, they'd probably be able to use a Wang 2200 with very little training. Maybe just read a little bit about the BASIC syntax, but essentially power it up and be comfortable as a system to sit down and use, and do some programming. The same might be said for the HP9830A or MCM/70 - except the MCM/70, wasn't it APL-only? I'm not sure if a BASIC was available for it to be loaded by tape. In any case, they were single line screens, so it'd be a frustration experience for a non-technical person (and I don't think any options to attach any multi-line screen). Traveling back to 1971 or 1970 - a non-technical personal would definately struggle with the switches and dials of just loading and running a program.
So aside from the technical details of how the Wang operated inside - I think the above is why it deserves some credit: it would have familiarity to any modern person who had used on what became the "standard" desktop computer. (not that I think anyone is ever spontaneously teleporting thru time - or think of it the otherway: if they weren't so rare, if you brought a Wang 2200 out to the public, they could probably make it do useful stuff in just a few minutes of powering it up -- that's the experience I get on the IBM 5100, in just a few minutes you have a complete RNG "guess my number" game with intuitive input and output, or a program that could tell you the distance needed to make a scale model of the solar system to demonstrate floating point capabilities).
The Wang systems do predate me, so it's not like I have first-hand knowledge of them. And curious if anyone disputes the above article?
But some observations:
- Scott Miller (who later founded Apogee shareware software and wrote several interesting titles for the IBM PC) was once interviewed, he first programmed on a Wang (w/ BASIC) in high school, and in his opinion considered it a "first" personal computer. [ can't find the link of that article at the moment ] My point is this is just a reference opinion of someone from that era. And as these expensive systems trickled down into schools, that alone had influence to the next generation of up and coming software developers.
- The original Wang 2200 had both an external CPU/processor and power supply. I'd still consider it a "personal computer", but expensive and bulky (I'd agree on the "last of a kind" sentiment more than the "first of a kind"). Keep in mind, the original SCAMP prototype also depended on an external power supply (as mentioned in the article above) -- in photos, it's always hidden under a desk. We take power supplies for granted these days, but I think getting those smaller and reliable was some pioneering work in of itself (by 1975, by then the newer Wang models and the 5100 had "solved" the external big power supply issue). I'm not sure how the small MCM-70 was powered - but (AFAIK) a single line LED screen I think is far less complicated than a multi-line CRT (text scrolling and all that).
- The Wang 2200 did have floating point support. I'm not sure to what extent (e.g. decimal places, SQRT, trig functions, etc?). The emulator I think only goes as far back as the 2200B model (which I think is more '75). In any case, the Wang's seemed to be mostly for word processing (re: Stephen King) -- which there were lots of word processing systems even by 1972 (i.e. a typewriter like thing with a multi-line screen). I think the original 2200's were mostly 4K systems? And somewhere in there, could only expand to 32K due to some limitations maybe in the BASIC? I'm not sure how memory the MCM-70 could be expanded to - 4K is great for its time, but still fairly limited to calculator-like functionality, not accounting or database entry type applications. The 5100's were 8K to 64KB.
But consider this: if a (non-technical/non-engineer) person today was teleported back to 1972, they'd probably be able to use a Wang 2200 with very little training. Maybe just read a little bit about the BASIC syntax, but essentially power it up and be comfortable as a system to sit down and use, and do some programming. The same might be said for the HP9830A or MCM/70 - except the MCM/70, wasn't it APL-only? I'm not sure if a BASIC was available for it to be loaded by tape. In any case, they were single line screens, so it'd be a frustration experience for a non-technical person (and I don't think any options to attach any multi-line screen). Traveling back to 1971 or 1970 - a non-technical personal would definately struggle with the switches and dials of just loading and running a program.
So aside from the technical details of how the Wang operated inside - I think the above is why it deserves some credit: it would have familiarity to any modern person who had used on what became the "standard" desktop computer. (not that I think anyone is ever spontaneously teleporting thru time - or think of it the otherway: if they weren't so rare, if you brought a Wang 2200 out to the public, they could probably make it do useful stuff in just a few minutes of powering it up -- that's the experience I get on the IBM 5100, in just a few minutes you have a complete RNG "guess my number" game with intuitive input and output, or a program that could tell you the distance needed to make a scale model of the solar system to demonstrate floating point capabilities).