Also, 88 (8088), 87 (487, 8087, etc.) and many other numbers. With macs,
there's a whole slew of numbers that I don't want to get into.
Tim D. Hotze
----------
From: Riccardo Romagnoli <chemif(a)mbox.queen.it>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: Computer collecting humor.
Date: Tuesday, November 04, 1997 4:49 PM
At 10.36 04/11/97 +0000, you wrote:
>Which reminds me. Which word lengths have been used by (binary) computers?
>Off the top of my head :
>
>4 (Intel 4004, etc)
>8 (Far too many to list)
>12 (PDP8, PDP12, etc)
..omissis...
>What others?
9 (Texas 99/4, 990/10, TMS 9900)
86 (Intel Docet again)
Riccardo
I disagree with both of you. 300ns is more like the 70's to me. Even the
1982 IBM PC XT had 200ns RAM. A year later adding a third to that figure
makes no since. But 300ns might be right; as I would KILL for 30ns RAM in
a Pentium 233!!!! Even the fastest EDO RAM (Slightly outdated, but still
recent) is at 50ns; so 30ns makes ZERO sense.
----------
From: Tim Shoppa <shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: Help Identifying RAM Chips
Date: Monday, November 03, 1997 5:35 AM
> Your chip #1 is a 64k chip speed of 30ns, chips 2&3 are 256k at 150ns
speed.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I disagree with the 30ns figure; why the heck would a Compaq
Portable from 1983 have 30ns RAM in it? 300ns seems
far more likely, and is perfectly consistent with the numbering
>from manufacturers of that era.
> The last set of tell the the size and speed (64-3 and 256-15). John
> >I have two original Compaq Portables, both of which are giving POST
> >errors when they boot which indicate bad RAM. I have gone through a few
> >...
> >Chip #1:
> >Hitachi
> >1818-3006
> >Japan 8332U
> >HM4864P-3
Tim. (shoppa(a)triumf.ca)
the following are for trade or sale by a guy here in St. Paul MN. PLEASE
e-mail him directly at sloan003(a)maroon.tc.umn.edu
Apples - IIc with case, monitor, power supply
Platinum IIe with Duo drive, platinum monitor
IIplus with amber monitor, 2 drives
IIe with monitor, one drive
KB's - 2 MAC Plus type, 2 MAC II type, 1 MAC 128 type
Mice - 2 old type early MAC's
MAC Plus computer
Apple Imagewriter II printer
2 Conner 40meg HD
10 MAC SE manuals new in package
Tons of new manuals for MAC's Apple II's and other Apple
products(ask for list)
Appletalk card new
Mac II network card
>Date: Mon, 03 Nov 1997 19:34:29 -0600
>To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu
>From: "John R. Keys Jr." <jrkeys(a)concentric.net>
>Subject: Re: Beginners Need Help
>
>Pickup a copy of A Collector's Guide to Personal Computers and Pocket
Calculators by Dr. Thomas F. Haddock. It's a great book. John
>At 05:55 PM 11/3/97 +0300, you wrote:
>>Hello. I'm not so much a classic specialist as a computer specialist, as I
>>love both old and new computers. I'm not a proffesional, but do know
>>BASIC, DOS and all other kinds of stuff which the fast-moving stream of
>>technology has left behind, unfortunately. But anyway, I didn't know jack
>>about computers in the early 80's, other than what the average Joe knew:
>>Keyboard, commands, annoying. But since '92, I've been learning more and
>>more. But I need a basic list of systems that are 1. Easy To Find 2.
>>Important enough to draw attention.
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Tim D. Hotze
>>
>>
>
Sorry it took so long. I tried mailing you, but there was an error.
----------
From: PG Manney <manney(a)nwohio.com>
To: photze(a)batelco.com.bh
Subject: Re: The link you sent
Date: Thursday, October 30, 1997 6:01 PM
>It's really comforting to know that some people have consionace.
>Thanks. I'm trying to raise my children with consciences, too. We're
>Christians, and we feel that treating people *right* is very important
Those people will be the future leaders of our world.
>I hope
>that you're not in a hurry: A friend's giving me a new board, and they say
>that it could take some time to get it, but as soon as I get it, they new
>board will get shipped to you. Don't worry, I won't give it to anyone
>else.
I always need motherboards and drives (got any old IDE drives around?),
because I buy and sell computers. We're out here in the wilds of Ohio
(USA),
where many people have older systems...I even sold a Commodore the other
day!
I have an old IDE drive, it's a Segate 41 MB. It says ST-251, then on a
seperate sticker it says -1 right next to the first one. Serial number is
25534738. It's the large kind, like they had back in the early 80's.
If you repair computers, I have a additional 486/SX 33 that I could throw
in.
>remember the XT being the first IBM, but I might be wrong.
The IBM PC (model 5150, IIRC was the first PC...you can tell that one from
the TX sinc the PC had a small funny keyboard (very small, oddly placed
"Enter" key), 5 slots (the XT had 8) and a Cassette plug next to the
keyboard one. Also, the case said "IBM Personal Computer" instead of "IBM
Personal Computer XT". The motherboard was redesigned in the XT (the PC,
for
example, had 2 banks of DIP switches on the motherboard, instead of one).
The XT counted out memory when it booted up, the PC just gave you a
flashing
cursor to stare at.
Actually, the IBM 5100 was the first desktop computer. It had 8" drives, a
dedicated printer and all that...it bombed, and IBM didn't try again until
the PC.
>Lessee...I have several Commodores, a couple of VIC-20's (one in original
>box with original packaging, used once.), a couple of Apples... two or
three
>PC's and an XT (I think). It would be better to send *anything* but the
>IBM's, because everything else is plastic-cased, and therefore lighter.
>Still, you're the customer!
I'm new at collecting classics. What is a VIC-20? And what model of
Comodore, and Apple? I have a TV screen, I even have one in the guest
bedroom that's used once in a blue moon. Didn't the older Apples up to the
IIGS have attached monitors? (I remember a few Macs that had one later
than that...)
>The Post Office tells me that 44 lbs will cost $89 US to send to you. If
you
>have a TV screen, you can save on the cost of shipping a monitor for an
>Apple/Commodore/anything else. (The IBM will work a TV screen with the
right
>card, but colors are funny).
Thanks,
Tim D. Hotze
You are right it was a typo on my part.
At 06:35 PM 11/2/97 -0800, you wrote:
>> Your chip #1 is a 64k chip speed of 30ns, chips 2&3 are 256k at 150ns speed.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>I disagree with the 30ns figure; why the heck would a Compaq
>Portable from 1983 have 30ns RAM in it? 300ns seems
>far more likely, and is perfectly consistent with the numbering
>from manufacturers of that era.
>
>> The last set of tell the the size and speed (64-3 and 256-15). John
>> >I have two original Compaq Portables, both of which are giving POST
>> >errors when they boot which indicate bad RAM. I have gone through a few
>> >...
>> >Chip #1:
>> >Hitachi
>> >1818-3006
>> >Japan 8332U
>> >HM4864P-3
>
>Tim. (shoppa(a)triumf.ca)
>
>
Would anyone be interested in C-64 stuff and a bunch of tapes?
I have a 1541 drive, and okidata printer, a bunch of famous programs (space
rogue, LOGO, bank street writer, GEOS, F-14 Tomcat,etc.), a few joysticks, a
Koala pad with software. 300 bps modem. No actual C-64.I don't want to ship
this stuff, but I'll give it for free to anyone who picks it up in Boston,
MA, USA.
Also, I have some reel to reel tapes, some labelled ADES, NOVA controller,
and other things. Most are dated 1980's, 1990's. I'll give them away too.
At 05:44 AM 10/26/97 +0300, you wrote:
>I have a similiar problem: Due to the large size of the XT style
>motherboards, my desk devoted to classic computers isn't big enough. I can
>fit the computer on, the monitor on the computer, and the keyboard on the
>floor. When you try to type, it's not fun. (Type a command. Stop. Before
Look into the monitor arms that let attach to your desk and support your
monitor above the desk/computer. Many of them have a simple wire rack that
pulls out in front to hold a keyboard. (Basically, it's just a square U of
metal that slides in and out.)
There are other advantages to this as well. If you're working on several
computers that use the same type of monitor, you don't need to move the
monitor to swap CPU's. Also, it lets you use the monitor-over-CPU set up
for machines that aren't flat boxes (like a C64, atari 800 or SOL-20.) You
can also swing it out of the way if you want to work on the computer.
>PS- How do you post an origional message? Do you just send one to9
>classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu , or somewhere else?
Yep.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- O-
Uncle Roger "There is pleasure pure in being mad
sinasohn(a)crl.com that none but madmen know."
Roger Louis Sinasohn & Associates
San Francisco, California http://www.crl.com/~sinasohn/
Okay, thanks, but I need to know jumper settings. There is a set of four
jumpers accessable in the back when the graphics board is installed.
Thanks,
Tim D. Hotze
----------
From: jpero(a)cgo.wave.ca
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: Need Jumper Settings...
Date: Monday, November 03, 1997 2:27 PM
"CHIPS" is Chip & Technologies.
Well, Sounds like you gotten a great chipset type: it can emulate EGA
driving any monitor TTL, CGA while in EGA. Very good.
I think C&T first chipset was this kind that allowed low cost
computers to happen. Then C&T did in 286 and 386 chipsets including
cached types as well. Not too bad chipset for 286 but tends to be
bit slower in 386 especially at higher mhz.
Now C&T is focusing only on video chipsets for portable applications
only mainly driving flat panels.
Troll
<company like Microsoft or maybe IBM had someone design something
<faster..... we'll be at 15ns soon enough anyway. We've gone from 70ns in
<late 94 to only 45ns today, and SRAM has become so darn fast.... by the
I've been in the technology for 20 years and 15 NS up until the 90s was
bipolar or ECL territory and those technologies were not dense enough to
yeild large memories or cheap. There were static mos/cmos parts that
were fast but in the mid 80s 70ns was still very quick and 45ns was at
the corner of the technology.
<way, does anyone know about overclocking an 8088 (the 8mhz variety), by
<NEC, not Intel?
By how much? 10% is generally doable and depending on the mask and age of
the part it may have been faster than marked. The problem is everything
around the 8088 has to run faster and the eproms/rams are likely unable to
keep up as 10mhz was state of the art for the time and even then wait states
had to be inserted to keep things in sync. I'd recommend not
trying as the amount to could get is not significant enough and you may
cause other problems in the process. If sped is a must find an AT or 386.
Even a 386sx/16 is at least 3-5x faster!
Allison