Sharp computers from the early 80's were truly amazing. Every computer part they produced was a joy to see and feel because of its accuracy and design. If you've ever held a Sharp CE-152 data tape device, you know what I mean. Fortunately, I have a CE-510F with an internal power supply and floppy disk controller. If you're interested, please drop me a PM. Thomas On 07.09.2024 09:17, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote: up I'm card number are set Japanese-speaking

What OS are you using to format the disk? If you have a DOS system running (or can run DOS from a USB drive) you might try FORMAT /S and whatever other options you need; make sure the system files are in the DOS directory. AFAIK you can also use WIN98 or earlier. On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 1:31 AM Steve Lewis via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org&gt; wrote:

On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 10:31 PM Steve Lewis via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org&gt; wrote: from to this Is it possible to try formatting the disk from the Sharp PC-5000 itself? It's possible there's something special about the boot sector on the bubble carts. You might try reading the raw sectors off of it and examining the boot sector to see if it's doing something special to allow it to boot, then maybe copy that code into the boot sector on the floppy. Sellam

I don't know your level of familiarity with DEBUG, assembly, etc. So, if you need more detail, then when I get a chance, I could write out more detailed instructions First step, is to confirm whether the DOS that is running is actually 2.00 If so, then we can work on making the DOS 2.11 FORMAT run under DOS 2.00 Be aware that 2.11 is an OEM version, and is sometimes heavily customized for specific hardware. Ideally, you will want the MODE.COM that is specific toyour hardware. -- Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com

I follow all that (on the DEBUG.COM notes) and appreciate the notes - that will save some time, I look forward to trying a few things out tomorrow. I forgot to do VER explicitly, but on boot up it is saying MS-DOS 2.00. And just now, I recalled that on github there is MS-DOS source (and bins) - I think Dave's Garage, he recently did a video on building and booting MS-DOS 4.0 from that source. Maybe I should use this as an excuse to try a 2.0 build? Or least, reading through the FORMAT.ASM, I see all the DOSVER checking stuff - helps confirm patch addresses, or maybe try just recompiling that one utility without this check. Reading through the CONFIG.txt in the MS-DOS 2.0 github repo, it's interesting near the end: (the use of forward slash instead of backslash, ha! and just above this, the comments mention /dev/<dev>) "A typical configuration file might look like this: BUFFERS = 10 FILES = 10 DEVICE = /bin/network.sys BREAK = ON SWITCHAR = - SHELL = a:/bin/command.com a:/bin -p"

Some interesting things (on PC-5000): - I copied over QMATH, and old command line "parsing-calculator" I did in Turbo Pascal decades ago (probably about 1992, so post MSDOS5 at least), and it runs on the PC-5000! It's packaged in my "VUC" tools here (along with CDIR) voidstar78/VUC4DOS: voidstar Utility Collection for (MS/DR/PC) DOS (github.com) <https://github.com/voidstar78/VUC4DOS> That just speaks well to the PC-5000 really being MS-DOS compatible (and that it ran an executable from a much later generation of MS-DOS). Note that CDIR itself doesn't run on that MS-DOS 2.00 system (I suspect anything that "touches color" won't run, based on trying to run a few other similar type things) - VER is saying MS-DOS 2.00, same as the startup/bootup note. Though it does say the "Command v2.02" shortly after (I suspect as it is loading the command.com, or in any case just prior to invoking autoexec.bat) - I don't have a "native" DEBUG.COM for 2.X yet (and ended up in a bad time that archive.org is majorly down again). And trying to run DEBUG.COM from 3.30 disks on the PC-5000 just says "Incorrect DOS version" (was we've discussed, which as mentioned I'll have to debug the debug.com on another system first to patch it) I'll dig into the .COM patching later, have some errands this weekend first. Plus, it turns out I "blew up" my parallel port *again*. Modern day, we take it for granted about USB being hot-swappable. Well, parallel-ports apparently aren't that forgiving - and I keep forgetting that. I've zapped two parallel cards now while swapping between parallel devices. (which I'm making good progress figuring out the "retro printer" that will emulator old printers and let us print from old software and go straight to a PDF, but still working on it) The LPT devices themselves are fine, just I really heard the electrical pop and just the parallel port is absolutely dead (everything else seems fine though) More to report later, but was excited that "something from the future" (qmath.exe built almost a decade after the PC-5000 was sold) worked. -SteveL On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 6:35 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org&gt; wrote: tomorrow. just stored

Hi Mike!! Oh I was so nervous taking it apart - I was thinking of you, and worrying about how I'm probably going to end up having to sadly explain why this system doesn't work anymore. But 'lo and behold, I did manage to get it back together! (notes are in my PC-5000 page linked earlier, which is now a bit long winded for a single page - I'll spit it out eventually). I was trying to go after the CMOS battery, or its equivalent - but wow, Sharp made that very difficult. As you'll see in the photos, the component side of the mainboard is actually pointed down. Since this is still very much a working system, I didn't feel comfortable completely disassembling it - you have to get the entire mainboard out. But I got to the vicinity of the area at least. On the positive, my thinking is that since the battery is "inverted" from normal and pointing towards the ground - if it does leak, it'll just leak into the plastic base of the system. With the disk drives, I can now get new software onto the system more easily. But, looks like I'll have to give up on making a boot disk floppy for the system. I've added a ton of notes to my PC-5000 page about it. @Fred Cisin - I did manage to digest and follow your DEBUG.COM advise, and it all did work (in getting past "incorrect DOS version"). But when it came to the business of actually executing a format, they still did not work. As others have suspect, we're just going to need to find that original Sharp MS-DOS 2.00 boot disk someday. In poking around the MS-DOS 2.00 source code on github, it actually doesn't have a pre-built FORMAT.COM - instead it has a FORMAT.DOC file that describes notes on what is expected for an OEM vendor to implement to support doing a format. While we did finally find a format that allows SYS.COM to work, it's still mysterious on why the (bootable) bubble memory report 6 hidden files, but a SYS'd disk is only reporting 2 hidden files (I think someone else here did cover that, in suggesting some vendors did need extra files to fully implementation their DOS?) So it's been a valiant effort, but I'm content enough just being able to move files on/off the system via disks - meanwhile we'll just hunt for that original Sharp MS-DOS 2.00 image, it surely is somewhere "out there" eventually. (again, notes on this are on my PC-5000 page - but the short of it is: - MS-DOS 1.25 FORMAT.COM didn't care about version but didn't even try to actually format (locked up) - (Sharp) MS-DOS 2.11 FORMAT.COM was patched, and would show help on command line arguments, but wouldn't actually run when given /2 /8 or /S, etc. - MS-DOS 3.30 FORMAT.COM was patched, but declared the target drive as ASSIGNed or SUBSTed and refused to proceed The disk controller interface on this system just isn't "PC Compatible" enough. -SL On Sat, Oct 19, 2024 at 12:43 PM Mike Stein &lt;mhs.stein(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > Great to see my old PC5000 receiving so much loving attention; thanks > Steve! > > FWIW, related to the discussion elsewhere about BBSs, that PC5000 was > originally owned by Canada Remote Systems, a smaller Canadian version of > Compuserve based here in Toronto, It was a fairly large (by Canadian > standards) commercial BBS system of the 80s and 90s, noted primarily for > its extensive file collection; I think I still have some of their > collection disks on 8" media somewhere. > > On Sat, Oct 19, 2024 at 10:05 AM Steve Lewis via cctalk < > cctalk(a)classiccmp.org&gt; wrote: > >> Some interesting things (on PC-5000): >> >> - I copied over QMATH, and old command line "parsing-calculator" I did in >> Turbo Pascal decades ago (probably about 1992, so post MSDOS5 at least), >> and it runs on the PC-5000! It's packaged in my "VUC" tools here (along >> with CDIR) voidstar78/VUC4DOS: voidstar Utility Collection for (MS/DR/PC) >> DOS (github.com) <https://github.com/voidstar78/VUC4DOS> >> That just speaks well to the PC-5000 really being MS-DOS compatible (and >> that it ran an executable from a much later generation of MS-DOS). Note >> that CDIR itself doesn't run on that MS-DOS 2.00 system (I suspect >> anything >> that "touches color" won't run, based on trying to run a few other similar >> type things) >> >> - VER is saying MS-DOS 2.00, same as the startup/bootup note. Though it >> does say the "Command v2.02" shortly after (I suspect as it is loading the >> command.com, or in any case just prior to invoking autoexec.bat) >> >> - I don't have a "native" DEBUG.COM for 2.X yet (and ended up in a bad >> time >> that archive.org is majorly down again). And trying to run DEBUG.COM >> from >> 3.30 disks on the PC-5000 just says "Incorrect DOS version" (was we've >> discussed, which as mentioned I'll have to debug the debug.com on another >> system first to patch it) >> >> I'll dig into the .COM patching later, have some errands this weekend >> first. Plus, it turns out I "blew up" my parallel port *again*. Modern >> day, we take it for granted about USB being hot-swappable. Well, >> parallel-ports apparently aren't that forgiving - and I keep forgetting >> that. I've zapped two parallel cards now while swapping between parallel >> devices. (which I'm making good progress figuring out the "retro >> printer" >> that will emulator old printers and let us print from old software and go >> straight to a PDF, but still working on it) The LPT devices themselves >> are fine, just I really heard the electrical pop and just the parallel >> port >> is absolutely dead (everything else seems fine though) >> >> More to report later, but was excited that "something from the future" >> (qmath.exe built almost a decade after the PC-5000 was sold) worked. >> >> >> -SteveL >> >> >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 6:35 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk < >> cctalk(a)classiccmp.org&gt; >> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 17 Oct 2024, Steve Lewis wrote: >>> >>>> I follow all that (on the DEBUG.COM notes) and appreciate the notes - >>> that >>>> will save some time, I look forward to trying a few things out >> tomorrow. >>>> I forgot to do VER explicitly, but on boot up it is saying MS-DOS >> 2.00. >>>> And just now, I recalled that on github there is MS-DOS source (and >>> bins) - >>>> I think Dave's Garage, he recently did a video on building and booting >>>> MS-DOS 4.0 from that source. Maybe I should use this as an excuse to >>> try >>>> a 2.0 build? Or least, reading through the FORMAT.ASM, I see all >> the >>>> DOSVER checking stuff - helps confirm patch addresses, or maybe try >> just >>>> recompiling that one utility without this check. >>>> >>>> >>>> Reading through the CONFIG.txt in the MS-DOS 2.0 github repo, it's >>>> interesting near the end: (the use of forward slash instead of >>> backslash, >>>> ha! and just above this, the comments mention /dev/<dev>) >>>> >>>> "A typical configuration file might look like this: >>>> >>>> BUFFERS = 10 >>>> FILES = 10 >>>> DEVICE = /bin/network.sys >>>> BREAK = ON >>>> SWITCHAR = - >>>> SHELL = a:/bin/command.com a:/bin -p" >>> GOOD >>> So, you should be able to patch FORMAT 2.11 ti work on the DOS version >>> that is running. >>> >>> BUT, whether Format /S or SYS will work remains to be seen. >>> >>> >>> I have seen cases where the opening banner does not quite match the >> stored >>> version number, such as 4.01 V 4.00 >>> and a conditional jmp needs an exact match. >>> >>> >>> So, definitely run VER >>> >>> and/or >>> in debug A(Assemble) >>> >>> MOV AH,30 >>> INT 21 >>> INT 3 ; ends program and displays registers >>> >>> and see what it shows in AX >>> (running that in CMD of my Windows 7 gives 0005 (5.00)!) >>> >>> >>> One of the early homework assignments when I taught PC Assembly was to >> go >>> into DEBUG and patch LINK.EXE and EXE2BIN.EXE to eliminate DOD version >>> checking. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com >>>

Hi Steve, I think I can help you. I have a PC-5000 disk image of a double-sided 5.25 disk (360kb format) called CE-101FA on my Google Drive. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1qo6A3ZzkOHzxh5M5XEjqcKPP2F63Zi9P?us… The images were created with a Greazweasel. For test read twice, but identical in both cases. The disk files can be found in the Disk_Image directory. Including Format and Basic and Macro Assembler and so on. Also various image formats for creating disks. Enjoy Thomas On 20.10.2024 08:03, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote: you, explain to which eventually). to ground floppy and MS-DOS FORMAT.COM expected mysterious on is in their hunt to in least), (along (MS/DR/PC) (and Note similar it the another Modern parallel go themselves - booting to

That is because you are writing "320K" disk in a 1.2M drive. double step is to get 40 tracks instead of 80

That is because you are writing "320K" disk in a 1.2M drive. double step is to get 40 tracks instead of 80

I'll have to answer some other questions later, . . .

Track width 360K drives (40 track) have tracks 48 tpi. (Early on, Shugart SA400, and

Apple SA390, only used 35 of those tracks) That's about 1/2 mm from center of one track to center of the next. The track itself is about 1/3 mm wide, leaving a little blank space between tracks. 80 track (both 1.2M, and 5/25" 720K/800K) have tracks 96 tpi. that's about 1/4 mm from center of one track to center of the next. The track width is about 1/6 mm.

(BTW, 8" disks are 48tpi) It is possible to use a 1.2M drive to make a usable 360K disk, Use the right ("360K"/300 Oersted) diskette. DO NOT USE A 1.2M DISKETTE! Start with a thoroughly bulk eraased or virgin disk that is NOT "preformatted" The 1.2M drive will have to "double step" to get 40 tracks at 48tpi The drive must not be using the HD write current (I've no idea of amperage) The drive must switch to 300 RPM at 250K bps, or switch to 300 bps at 360 RPM The resulting diskette will have narrower tracks than normal, which is usually not a problem, but the tracks will be at the right spacing.

On Tue, 29 Oct 2024, Tony Duell via cctalk wrote: point taken. I should have said "Tracks per side"

Yes, but this was in response to 360K/1.2M issues.

I have had some 100TPI, both Micropolis and Tandon TM100-4M One of the 100tpi Tandon drives is mislabeled as being TM100-4, without the criticaally important 'M'

Not in s PC, but Epson Geneva PX-8 used one.

Shouldn't ever have problms with it. But, if the disk is damaged, would the wider track be able to survive a little more damage?

The location of track 0 is radically different in the 96 tpi and 100 tpi conventions--there's about a 6 track offset. 100 tpi drives were also spec-ed as being 77 track (like their 8" relatives).

Fascinating notes! I did run into oddities when using a 360KB disks in between a 1.2M 5.25 drive on the '386 and the 5.25 drive on the Sharp PC-5000. I forget my exact sequence of events, but in short the MS-DOS 2.00 FORMAT.COM on the Sharp PC-5000 would start marking a few bad sectors (sometimes just a few KB, sometimes as much as 20KB of bad sectors). And yet those same disks were formatted as just fine and no bad sectors over the '386. Or, if I used IMD and wrote full MS-DOS 2.00 image to the disk, then the disk would work (and boot) fine in the Sharp PC-5000. Without nit-picking the specifics here (of whatever I did) - my lesson was there is definitely a difference between a completely uninitialized disks, versus something that has been previously formatted. Which, yeah, duh - but my real lesson was: you can't always FORMAT.COM your way back into a bootable disk. If something else has "touched" the boot sectors, then another system might start flagging those as bad sectors. I'm not sure if IMD (ImageDisk) trumps all that? Meaning, whatever crap is on the disk, does IMD not care? In otherwords, is using IMD kinda-sorta like degaussing (and then applying whatever the image is)? It just seemed to me that however I mangled the format on a disk, IMD was always able to get me back into a usable (and bootable) disk. I do remember (vaguely for me) in the 80s we'd get boxes of uninitialized disks, and there were generally warnings along the lines of once it was formatted to whatever system you intended to use the disk for, it was thereafter basically committed to being used for that system. (but it seems only because, back in those days we didn't typically have the benefit of something like IMD software or a Greazeweasal - and I imagine the documentation from disk vendors didn't want to get into the weeds of waving magnets around your disk, especially when they already had bold warnings of keeping your disk the heck away from any magnets :) ) Regarding the article on SF rail replacing disk drives, to avoid "catastrophic failure".... recall a while back, ActionRetro made a RAID out of floppy disk drives (3.5"'s). With all the firmware going into modern SSD's and M.2's, I ponder the irony of "old dumb mechanical drives" actually being (in a way) more secure. -Steve On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 8:35 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk &lt;cctalk(a)classiccmp.org&gt; wrote: > On Tue, 29 Oct 2024, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: >> The location of track 0 is radically different in the 96 tpi and 100 tpi >> conventions--there's about a 6 track offset. 100 tpi drives were also >> spec-ed as being 77 track (like their 8" relatives). > Are the tracks offset from one side of a disk to the other? > >

Non-descript 5.25 DS/DD (they don't format as 1.2M disk using a 1.2 5.25" drive, so I'm pretty sure they are actual 360KB disks). That said, I haven't really fully confirmed if it's a 1.2M drive. TEAC FD-55GFR 142-U, because I haven't actually come across any 1.2M formatted media. I've wondered if maybe one of the heads on the D: drive the Sharp PC-5000's dual disk drive might have some kind of issue (either the REad or Write head, not sure which) - just since it seemed more likely to end up with some bad sectors marked when using FORMAT.COM (whereas on other systems, the same disk would format fine with no bad sectors).

On Sun, 3 Nov 2024, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote: Teac FD-55GFR is a 1.2M drive that can also be used as a 720K 5.25" drive. (FD-55G is 1.2M; FD-55F is 720K)

On 11/3/24 18:44, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: systems, drive. Just be sure to set the drive jumpers so that the spindle speed is 300 RPM, not 360, which is the usual default for PC drives. --Chuck

I use a strobe disk glued to a fridge magnet that I stick on the spindle motor of 5 1/4" drives to confirm the speed; the trouble is that it's becoming difficult these days to find lamps that emit light at 60 Hz. ;-)

I use a strobe disk glued to a fridge magnet that I stick on the spindle motor of 5 1/4" drives to confirm the speed; the trouble is that it's becoming difficult these days to find lamps that emit light at 60 Hz. ;-)

On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 5:21 PM dwight &lt;dkelvey(a)hotmail.com&gt; wrote: strobe. Quite likely. Actually the traditional mains lamp stroboscope flashes twice per cycle, so you might want 2 white LEDs in inverse parallel. I wanted something that I could run off a DC supply and which could handle '60Hz' markings in the UK. I have at least one device with a set of black and white bars for 60Hz mains but not for 50Hz. Another advantage is the fact that the LEDs are only on for 1/16th of the time gives a very clear pattern. The bars look sharp and you can easily see if they are jitterng about due to bad bearings, drive belt issues, etc. -tony

I'd think a diode, white LED and a resistor would make a good enough strobe. Maybe 2 resistors to isolate the AC lines enough a little better.

The old common standard for a mains stroboscope was a neon bulb (+resistor). They are still widely available, simple and inexpensive. No, they are not very bright and need some shading or otherwise reduced ambient light, but for a tool of infrequent use...

On 2024-11-06 12:28 p.m., Brent Hilpert via cctalk wrote: If it works why change it? Don't modern leds use a still glow after being turned off? Ben.

On 2024-11-06 12:28 p.m., Brent Hilpert via cctalk wrote: If it works why change it? Don't modern leds use a still glow after being turned off?

> Non-descript 5.25 DS/DD (they don't format as 1.2M disk using a 1.2 5.25" > drive, so I'm pretty sure they are actual 360KB disks). That said, I

from my experience, these "Non-descript" are often the cause for format errors. Look for high quality disk media like Dysan 100 5.25 MD2D 2D/2D "BASF" MD2-DD "Maxell" or DS,DD from "3M"

In addition, these "Non-descript" disk are most likely pre-formatted by factory, so Degaussing is recommended or at least formatting on a 360k drive.

I used Elephant. Still have piles of them and they are all still readable (and probably writable but I don't want to lose the data they hold.)

The biggest laugh I ever had was when we complained about a problem writing floppies under UCSD Pascal on a Terak and their answer was to buy Terak Brand Floppies.

This is interesting. I had no recollection at all of Elephant branded media, and I wondered if it might have been a US-only thing... so I Googled them, and as soon as I saw the detailed full-colour logo, I immediately remembered. There is some deeper point about recollection here that is probably doctrine taught in marketing schools... if there are such places.

On Tue, 29 Oct 2024, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: Are the tracks offset from one side of a disk to the other?

Converting drive:

Do note that Fred last line can be important. If you take a disk that is a 96 tpi and write something on a clean disk, you should be able to take it to a 360k drive and read it. If the disk was use ona 360k machine and you over write anything that was previously on it, it will unlikely read on a 360K drive. This is because the 96 tpi drive does not erase the wider track written by the earlier 360k drive 🙁 It is like a oneway ticket. It only gets you there but not back. Dwight ________________________________ From: Fred Cisin via cctalk &lt;cctalk(a)classiccmp.org&gt; Sent: Monday, October 28, 2024 1:50 PM To: Fred Cisin via cctalk &lt;cctalk(a)classiccmp.org&gt; Cc: Fred Cisin &lt;cisin(a)xenosoft.com&gt; Subject: [cctalk] Re: Running DOS executables on other versions of DOSRe: Looking for Sharp PC-5000 disk drive (CE-510F or possibly MZ-80B) SOME 96tpi drives had a jumper to make them always double step SOME 2 speed drives had a jumper to force one speed. SO, it couldbe jumpered into a 360K, other than the heads being too narrow

2) motor speed is not as easy as increasing/decreasing voltage. On a belt driven drive, you might be able to change pulleys. Althoug, I think that a "50Hz" pulley on a "60Hz" drive might give you the change from 300 RPM to 360RPM?, . . . Some/many?/all? 8 inch drives use synchronous motors (8 inch drive power connections were NOT standardized!) with one of their voltages being a lowered voltage AC

3) 360K and 1.2M require different current level for writing. 1.2M drives will generally have a signal (pin6?) for choosing current

So, that will require a work-around. (also, READY/DISK CHANGED signal was not completely standardized.) AFTER coming out with the 1.2M drives, it bagan to be important to tell them apart. So, getting it backwards?, they started embossing an asterisk on 360K drives. So, any drive with an asterisk is 360K, a drive WITHOUT an asterisk might be a 1.2M, OR might be a 360K from before they added asterisks.

Nor I. I don't recall ever seeing a 5.25", 3", 3.25", nor 3.5" that used anything other than 5VDC and/or 12VDC

Almost all of the 5.25" (and, I think 3") used the same "molex" connector.

I have a 3.25" drive that uses the same connector as 3.5", BUT different postions for the voltages!

How much 115VAC power do they produce?

Because one couldn't supply drives with an asterisk?

or because they didn't want to use the crappy Qume 142 drives on anything else? The Qume 142 was so slow stepping, that that was one of the reasons for introducing PC-DOS 2.10, to have a slower step time.

On Oct 29, 2024, at 12:26 PM, Tony Duell via cctalk &lt;cctalk(a)classiccmp.org&gt; wrote: On the other hand there are Archive tape drives that used +5 and +24V with the same power connector as a 5.25" floppy drive. Thankfully they kept the 5V and grounds in the same place. I am told some Sun machines had power cables for both disk drives and said tape drive, the only difference was the colour of the wire (yellow for 12V, orange for 24V) Sounds like a source of magic smoke emission.

Thomas, Those images for the SHARP PC-5000 boot disk of MS-DOS 2.00 have worked splendidly (at least the .IMD files, DiskImage is all I tried). I did have to change the IMD Settings to Sides Two, Double-step On, and the 250kps to 300kps. I don't fully understand that last setting, but absolutely it was necessary - the IMD image file wouldn't write to disk otherwise. That did contain the FORMAT.COM (as you mentioned), which I then used to format a few other disks. There is no /? help on that early build of FORMAT. But /s would transfer system files, and /8 would format to a 320KB disk (that was a 320KB bootable disk, but a regular 360KB was bootable as well). Not that I'll need 320KB formatted disks, but just interesting that it can boot from either format. In the disk image share is CE-101FA.jpg that appears to be the front cover of the MS-DOS manual. In a parts listing for this system, I see a line item "CE-100F MS-DOS diskette and manual $25.00" The User Manual that I have only covers some DOS commands (DIR, MKDIR, DEL, and batch commands like IF, FOR, REM), but on the MS-DOS 2.00 disks are some extra things like CREF.COM, KEYBFR.COM. Any chance anyone has this CE-100F manual digitized? It might cover the MS-DOS programs and their arguments. Thanks again Thomas, the drives and boot images are working great! -Steve On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 1:50 PM osi.superboard via cctalk < cctalk(a)classiccmp.org&gt; wrote: > Hi Steve, > > I think I can help you. > I have a PC-5000 disk image of a double-sided 5.25 disk (360kb format) > called CE-101FA on my Google Drive. > > > https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1qo6A3ZzkOHzxh5M5XEjqcKPP2F63Zi9P?us… > > The images were created with a Greazweasel. For test read twice, but > identical in both cases. > The disk files can be found in the Disk_Image directory. Including > Format and Basic and Macro Assembler and so on. Also various image > formats for creating disks. > > Enjoy > > Thomas > > On 20.10.2024 08:03, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote: >> Hi Mike!! Oh I was so nervous taking it apart - I was thinking of > you, >> and worrying about how I'm probably going to end up having to sadly > explain >> why this system doesn't work anymore. But 'lo and behold, I did manage > to >> get it back together! (notes are in my PC-5000 page linked earlier, > which >> is now a bit long winded for a single page - I'll spit it out > eventually). >> >> I was trying to go after the CMOS battery, or its equivalent - but wow, >> Sharp made that very difficult. As you'll see in the photos, the >> component side of the mainboard is actually pointed down. Since this is >> still very much a working system, I didn't feel comfortable completely >> disassembling it - you have to get the entire mainboard out. But I got > to >> the vicinity of the area at least. On the positive, my thinking is that >> since the battery is "inverted" from normal and pointing towards the > ground >> - if it does leak, it'll just leak into the plastic base of the system. >> >> With the disk drives, I can now get new software onto the system more >> easily. But, looks like I'll have to give up on making a boot disk > floppy >> for the system. I've added a ton of notes to my PC-5000 page about it. >> >> >> @Fred Cisin - I did manage to digest and follow your DEBUG.COM advise, > and >> it all did work (in getting past "incorrect DOS version"). But when it >> came to the business of actually executing a format, they still did not >> work. As others have suspect, we're just going to need to find that >> original Sharp MS-DOS 2.00 boot disk someday. In poking around the > MS-DOS >> 2.00 source code on github, it actually doesn't have a pre-built > FORMAT.COM >> - instead it has a FORMAT.DOC file that describes notes on what is > expected >> for an OEM vendor to implement to support doing a format. While we did >> finally find a format that allows SYS.COM to work, it's still > mysterious on >> why the (bootable) bubble memory report 6 hidden files, but a SYS'd disk > is >> only reporting 2 hidden files (I think someone else here did cover that, > in >> suggesting some vendors did need extra files to fully implementation > their >> DOS?) So it's been a valiant effort, but I'm content enough just being >> able to move files on/off the system via disks - meanwhile we'll just > hunt >> for that original Sharp MS-DOS 2.00 image, it surely is somewhere "out >> there" eventually. >> (again, notes on this are on my PC-5000 page - but the short of it is: >> - MS-DOS 1.25 FORMAT.COM didn't care about version but didn't even try > to >> actually format (locked up) >> - (Sharp) MS-DOS 2.11 FORMAT.COM was patched, and would show help on >> command line arguments, but wouldn't actually run when given /2 /8 or /S, >> etc. >> - MS-DOS 3.30 FORMAT.COM was patched, but declared the target drive as >> ASSIGNed or SUBSTed and refused to proceed >> >> >> The disk controller interface on this system just isn't "PC Compatible" >> enough. >> >> -SL >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Sat, Oct 19, 2024 at 12:43 PM Mike Stein &lt;mhs.stein(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >> >>> Great to see my old PC5000 receiving so much loving attention; thanks >>> Steve! >>> >>> FWIW, related to the discussion elsewhere about BBSs, that PC5000 was >>> originally owned by Canada Remote Systems, a smaller Canadian version of >>> Compuserve based here in Toronto, It was a fairly large (by Canadian >>> standards) commercial BBS system of the 80s and 90s, noted primarily for >>> its extensive file collection; I think I still have some of their >>> collection disks on 8" media somewhere. >>> >>> On Sat, Oct 19, 2024 at 10:05 AM Steve Lewis via cctalk < >>> cctalk(a)classiccmp.org&gt; wrote: >>> >>>> Some interesting things (on PC-5000): >>>> >>>> - I copied over QMATH, and old command line "parsing-calculator" I did > in >>>> Turbo Pascal decades ago (probably about 1992, so post MSDOS5 at > least), >>>> and it runs on the PC-5000! It's packaged in my "VUC" tools here > (along >>>> with CDIR) voidstar78/VUC4DOS: voidstar Utility Collection for > (MS/DR/PC) >>>> DOS (github.com) <https://github.com/voidstar78/VUC4DOS> >>>> That just speaks well to the PC-5000 really being MS-DOS compatible > (and >>>> that it ran an executable from a much later generation of MS-DOS). > Note >>>> that CDIR itself doesn't run on that MS-DOS 2.00 system (I suspect >>>> anything >>>> that "touches color" won't run, based on trying to run a few other > similar >>>> type things) >>>> >>>> - VER is saying MS-DOS 2.00, same as the startup/bootup note. Though > it >>>> does say the "Command v2.02" shortly after (I suspect as it is loading > the >>>> command.com, or in any case just prior to invoking autoexec.bat) >>>> >>>> - I don't have a "native" DEBUG.COM for 2.X yet (and ended up in a bad >>>> time >>>> that archive.org is majorly down again). And trying to run DEBUG.COM >>>> from >>>> 3.30 disks on the PC-5000 just says "Incorrect DOS version" (was we've >>>> discussed, which as mentioned I'll have to debug the debug.com on > another >>>> system first to patch it) >>>> >>>> I'll dig into the .COM patching later, have some errands this weekend >>>> first. Plus, it turns out I "blew up" my parallel port *again*. > Modern >>>> day, we take it for granted about USB being hot-swappable. Well, >>>> parallel-ports apparently aren't that forgiving - and I keep forgetting >>>> that. I've zapped two parallel cards now while swapping between > parallel >>>> devices. (which I'm making good progress figuring out the "retro >>>> printer" >>>> that will emulator old printers and let us print from old software and > go >>>> straight to a PDF, but still working on it) The LPT devices > themselves >>>> are fine, just I really heard the electrical pop and just the parallel >>>> port >>>> is absolutely dead (everything else seems fine though) >>>> >>>> More to report later, but was excited that "something from the future" >>>> (qmath.exe built almost a decade after the PC-5000 was sold) worked. >>>> >>>> >>>> -SteveL >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 6:35 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk < >>>> cctalk(a)classiccmp.org&gt; >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Thu, 17 Oct 2024, Steve Lewis wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I follow all that (on the DEBUG.COM notes) and appreciate the notes > - >>>>> that >>>>>> will save some time, I look forward to trying a few things out >>>> tomorrow. >>>>>> I forgot to do VER explicitly, but on boot up it is saying MS-DOS >>>> 2.00. >>>>>> And just now, I recalled that on github there is MS-DOS source (and >>>>> bins) - >>>>>> I think Dave's Garage, he recently did a video on building and > booting >>>>>> MS-DOS 4.0 from that source. Maybe I should use this as an excuse > to >>>>> try >>>>>> a 2.0 build? Or least, reading through the FORMAT.ASM, I see all >>>> the >>>>>> DOSVER checking stuff - helps confirm patch addresses, or maybe try >>>> just >>>>>> recompiling that one utility without this check. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Reading through the CONFIG.txt in the MS-DOS 2.0 github repo, it's >>>>>> interesting near the end: (the use of forward slash instead of >>>>> backslash, >>>>>> ha! and just above this, the comments mention /dev/<dev>) >>>>>> >>>>>> "A typical configuration file might look like this: >>>>>> >>>>>> BUFFERS = 10 >>>>>> FILES = 10 >>>>>> DEVICE = /bin/network.sys >>>>>> BREAK = ON >>>>>> SWITCHAR = - >>>>>> SHELL = a:/bin/command.com a:/bin -p" >>>>> GOOD >>>>> So, you should be able to patch FORMAT 2.11 ti work on the DOS version >>>>> that is running. >>>>> >>>>> BUT, whether Format /S or SYS will work remains to be seen. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I have seen cases where the opening banner does not quite match the >>>> stored >>>>> version number, such as 4.01 V 4.00 >>>>> and a conditional jmp needs an exact match. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> So, definitely run VER >>>>> >>>>> and/or >>>>> in debug A(Assemble) >>>>> >>>>> MOV AH,30 >>>>> INT 21 >>>>> INT 3 ; ends program and displays registers >>>>> >>>>> and see what it shows in AX >>>>> (running that in CMD of my Windows 7 gives 0005 (5.00)!) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> One of the early homework assignments when I taught PC Assembly was to >>>> go >>>>> into DEBUG and patch LINK.EXE and EXE2BIN.EXE to eliminate DOD version >>>>> checking. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin(a)xenosoft.com >>>>>