Chapter notes and references for The Pegasus Story
Paper tape input/output equipment and the Pegasus operator's console. Photo courtesy Ferranti Archive and ICL.
Chapter 1.
| Page 1, para. 2: the four computers working by the end of 1949 were: | |
| In the UK: | the EDSAC at Cambridge University – (see ref. B6); |
| the Mark I at Manchester University – (see ref. B7); | |
| In Australia: | the CSIRAC – (see ref. B10); |
| In the USA: | the Eckert-Mauchley BINAC – (see ref. B11. BINAC first ran a program in August 1949. The project experienced some technical difficulties and it is believed that the computer was no longer operational by mid-1951). |
Chapter 2.
Page 4, para. 2: the quote from Nathaniel Rochester is taken from ref. C1.
Page 4 and following: for background on the NRDC, see refs. D1, D2 and D3. Many of the NRDC source documents are held at the NAHC.
Page 6: for ENIAC and EDVAC, see refs. A1, A4, B1 and B2.
Page 6: material on early British computers is in ref. A3 and also as follows: ACE: B3 & B5; EDSAC: B6; Manchester Mark I: B7 & B8; MOSAIC: B12; LEO: B9.
Page 8, section 2.2: for Bill Elliott's awareness of other UK computer projects, see ref. B4.
Page 10, section 2.2.1 The full history of the Borehamwood Laboratories is yet to be written. Useful material has been provided informally by some of the individuals involved – (see refs. D1, D4, D5, D6,). C2 is the earliest reference to nickel delay lines to have been quoted by the Borehamwood group.
Page 11. For NICHOLAS, see refs. D7 – D10; for the Elliott/NRDC 401 computer, see refs. D11 & D12. For events at Borehamwood after the 401, see refs. D6 and D13.
Page 14. For Mercury, Atlas, and the connection between Manchester University and Ferranti Ltd., see ref. B8.
Page 15, section 2.3. A biography of Christopher Strachey is given in ref. D14. Strachey's views on instruction sets and optimum programming are reflected in comments contained in refs. E1, E2 and G1.
Page 17: information on Pegasus dates, and on project costs, is contained in refs. D15, G1 and G3.
Chapter 3.
Section 3.1: the comments on Pegasus design philosophy and reliability come from ref. E3.
Section 3.2: See especially refs. E1, E2 and E4 for background to this section.
Section 3.3: see also refs. E5 and E6 for Pegasus hardware details. See ref. F1 for an estimation of computing speeds.
Section 3.4: for general Pegasus programming, see refs. F2, F3, F4 & F5.
Section 3.5: for more information on the matrix interpretive scheme, see refs. F4 &F6. For Pegasus Autocode, see refs. F7, F8, F11, F12.
Chapter 4.
Section 4.1: For general information on Ferranti's computer developments, see refs. G1, B8, G4, G12, G13 & G17. For activity at Portland Place, see refs. F9 & F10.
Section 4.3: The data for Table 4.1 come from ref. G5. The story of the HEC and BTM1200 computers is given in refs. G6 & G11. The comparison between Pegasus and the IBM 650 comes from ref. G1. More information on the IBM 650 may be found in refs. G15 and G16.
Chapter 5.
Section 5.1: In addition to the computer references already quoted for Chapters 3 and 4, information on DEUCE comes from ref. G7.
Section 5.2: See ref. G16.
Section 5.3: Information on Ferranti's computer activity in the 1960s comes from refs. G10, G11, G12, G13, G14 & G17. Statistics on the UK installed computer market come from refs. G5 & G11. Brian Pollard's comments are taken from ref. G8. The Atlas computer is described in ref. G9; pointers to other Atlas papers are given in ref. B8.
Section 5.4: Lord Halsbury's comment about "pushing mules uphill" comes from ref. D3. Martin Campbell-Kelly's assessment of Pegasus programming is given in ref. F13.