Intel rewrites history

In 2006 I helped Intel celebrate the 35th anniversary of their first microprocessor by designing a museum exhibit that spotlights the 4004 and the Busicom calculator. During my collaboration with the Intel Museum, I had the opportunity to experience Intel's modesty on the matter of who was first. They even have an official policy not to claim to have invented the microprocessor, and I know for a fact that they do not call the 4004 the world's first microprocessor.

Ray, I believe you mean Bob Cushman, not Goodman. Cushman spearheaded EDN's early microprocessor coverage starting with Intel's 4004 and 8008 and he initiated the microprocessor directory in 1974 when there were only a handful of microprocessors on the market. (The Z80 didn't appear until 1975, for example.) Unfortunately, I must tell you that Bob passed on more than a decade ago. The only ways to read his articles that I know of at the moment are to go to a library (probably a university library) into the archive/reference stacks (the San Jose State University library's EDNs only go back to 1978, for example) or to pay for access to the University Microfilms assets now at Proquest (www.proquest.com). EDN magazine has not digitized its archives back that far, at least as far as I know.

Hi Steve, I thought I would start with you. In the 70's Mr Robert (Bob) Goodman was an EDN editor that covered the "micro" area and published several articles about my work. Is he still around and do you know how I might be able to reviews those EDN issues? I looked into it several years ago and hit dead ends with EDN. Thanks much, Ray

Ray, thanks for dropping by the www.hp9825.com site. It's been fun to develop and it connected me with people I had not seen for 30 years.

Hi Steve, I finally took some time to visit your HP History site. Great reading and fun to imagine the times. I was in Silicon Valley during those days and I understand the feelings, anticipations, and excitement of it all. Great site. Ray Holt

Hi Steve, Actually, the first definition I could find in print of a microprocessor was made by Hank Smith, the Marketing Manager for Intel. 1973: A CPU "uses P-channel MOS and is contained in 1, 2, 3 or 4 LSI standard dual-in-line packages from 16 - 42 pins per package". Hank Smith, Microprocessor Marketing Manager, Intel Corp. IEEE 1973 WESCON Professional Program Session 11 Proceedings Hank knew at this time that a single-chip definition was not adequate to define what was being built. Intel has changed the definition several times over the years. Of course, hind sight in defining what happened is the best vision to have. I was a consultant to Intel during this time and I was hired, along with Manny Lemas, to travel the USA (for two years) teaching engineers how to microprogram. The reason Intel hired us was because they have a difficult time convincing the engineering world that a programmable device is a better design decision than random logic chips. I was aware and casually participated in many discussions with Intel marketing and engineering people about the 'microprocessor' and I can tell you there was much confusion on what is what. Of course, none of them knew what I had done in '68-'70. Ray

As both EDN Magazine and the Microprocessor Report define microprocessors, the Intel 4004 was the first commercially available, single-chip microprocessor. That's microprocessor as in "processor." The 4004 block diagram shows on-chip fetch, decode, and execute units plus a stack (albeit a tiny, tiny one) and a bus interface. We label all-in-one devices that add in memory and I/O "single-chip microcomputers" or "microcontrollers." Also, I believe I've seen 4004-based systems with somewhat fewer support chips than the 51 TTL devices you cited. However, none of that takes away from the considerable achievement of the MOS LSI F14 flight-computer chip set that you developed. It's unfortunate that you were not able to publicize your work at the time so that you would get more credit for your pioneering efforts. I'm glad you left a note here and I hope you're working with the Computer History Museum in Mountain View to ensure your proper place in history by making sure they have the necessary documentation.

Hi, I was one of the two brother s that worked on the F14 chip set. I was the logic designer and my brother was a mainframe programmer that designed the simulator and logic test program. Without his efforts it would have been impossible to ''guarantee'' a working chip set. I suspect that Intel is trying to redefine the effort because their claims have never been true. The 4004 is a single chip CPU and not a single chip microprocessor or even a microprocessor chip set as it took 51 other TTL chips around it to make it work. Intel''s contribution to marketing their programable logic device is without dispute but the design was not a single chip microprocessor... and neither was the F14 chip set. see my website at: www.microcomputerhistory.com Thanks, Ray

OK - still not accurate. Not a single chip micro, but the basic blocks in discrete chips. The team had dozens of folks and not just the two brothers. And, a few other folks make the same claim. My point is that Intel would most likely diminish the 4004 as the "first" in order to eliminate other perceived competition to this title.

Actually it was the F-14A. The two brothers were Ray & Bill Holt. Ray was finally able to speak about it in 1999. Documentation has shown that they developed a single chip micro more powerful than the 4004 - more than a year before Intel.

My best guess is that Intel is trying to make something more complicated than the 4004 be the "first". I believe that the first true microprocessor on a chip was designed by two brothers who designed the electronics for the F-16. Due to military secrecy, they had to keep their mouths shut until just a few years ago. Intel immediately rejected the claim by the one surviving brother. I'll bet Intel has redefined what a microprocessor is in order to make sure these two brothers do not get the credit.