> Of course you could go to work on a Ferrari BUT would you? (and is a
> Ferrari a "goto work car"?)
If work is a race car driver, it might be. ;-) Assuming it's not
outclassed.
Allison
I can help...I have lotsa "old" games (MDA/MGA/CGA) -- mostly shareware.
Please tell him to contact me.
----------
> From: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu
> To: Manney
> Subject: DOS 2.11 software (fwd)
> Date: Saturday, June 28, 1997 1:59 PM
>
>
>
> OK guys, here is a request I got, maybe someone can help this poor guy!
> Thanks,
>
> Les
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 08:26:19 -0400 (EDT)
> From: KenpoKidJB(a)aol.com
> To: more(a)camlaw.Rutgers.EDU
> Subject: software
>
> hey, i went to your web site, but didn't find what i wanted. i'm looking
for
> dos 2.11 programs that will run off of a 3.5" floppy. most specifically,
i'm
> especially looking for games. any kind will do, but even more
specifically,
> i'm looking for text driven adventure games, as my kaypro 2000 LCD screen
> doesn't do very well with graphics!! so, let me know what you can do for
> me.. i really appreciate it.
> Jeremiah
>
RE From: Jeff Hellige <jeffh(a)unix.aardvarkol.com>
Subject: C= 16 & Plus/4 cartridges
> For the first time since I actively started collecting old systems and
> the software and peripherals, I finally came across some program
> cartridges for the C-16 & Plus/4 today. They came from a guy who does a
>flea market each weekend and who keeps an eye out for 8bit stuff, and he
>picked them up with me in mind. They are 'Strange Odyssey' and 'Jack
>Attack'. Anyway, my question is, since these are the only ones I've
>ever run across, other than the cartridge that shipped with the C-16,
>were there many made for these machines?
> Jeff jeffh(a)unix.aardvarkol.com
Sounds like two from a set an electronics secods outlet was selling...
The set had 8 carts, Jack Attack, Strange Oddesy, Plus Calc, Plus Script
(plus/4 verions of easycalc and easyscript), and some others I can't
remember or locate, total of 8 carts. I think that might have been the
bulk of the U.S. release for the Plus/4. Of course in europe the Plus/4
went many years of popularity with many companies supplying games (just
check the net you will find lots if information, though many of the
games are PAL mode, *sigh*)
Larry Anderson
--
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Visit our web page at: http://www.goldrush.com/~foxnhare
Call our BBS (Silicon Realms BBS 300-2400 baud) at: (209) 754-1363
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
> For the sake of discussion in this list, and computer hobbyists in
> general, I would like the world to know that I define 'home computer' as
> any machine that you can:
>
> * Comfortably fit through your door...
> * Doesn't test the load limits of your target floor...
> * Power and run without tripping your main breaker...
> * (most importantly) Have fun restoring and working with... in your
> home
Great loved it!
What I'd pointed out before is many of the PDP-11s were in the same space
and competing for the same percieved market as the PC.
While some -11s were large like the 11/70 with RP06/7 disks and wanting a
cooled computer room. most were at must one rack and a disk systems that
were more modest in size.
The systems I refered to as desktop were:
LSI-11/03 (floppy based in short rack 28" tall)
PDP-11/23+ (in 40" tall rack with RL02 removeable disk and floppy)
PDT-11/130 (slow tape but it was only vt100 sized!)
PDT-11/150 (Late 70s early 80s) not large at all. (also called breadbox)
PRO350 and later 380
Microvax I/II (ba23 pedestal)
VS2000 (box slightly larger than DECMATEIII)
VS3100 (aka pizza box)
These happen to be DEC systems but IBM, HP, DG were all out there too with
desktop sized or desk side minies in disgusise. All very collectable and
also useable!
Allison
Tim Shoppa wrote...
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 06:26:54 -0800 (PDT)
From: Tim Shoppa <shoppa(a)alph02.triumf.ca>
To: classiccmp(a)u.WASHINGTON.EDU
Subject: Re: Archiving & other news
Message-ID: <9706281326.AA21254(a)alph02.triumf.ca>
Content-Type: text
>Does this include 1702A's and 2704's?
Checking my wall chart, it doesn't look like it right away. However, I
will check with Data I/O's web site (they have an online device support
lookup).
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Bruce Lane, Sysop, The Dragon's Cave BBS (Fidonet 1:343/272)
(Hamateur: WD6EOS) (E-mail: kyrrin(a)wizards.net)
http://www.wizards.net/technoid
"Our science can only describe an object, event, or living thing in our own
human terms. It cannot, in any way, define any of them..."
At 08:59 AM 6/27/97 BST, you wrote:
>> I do use my old machines now and then, but if anyone here has never ran a
>> modern MAC or PC, they have NO idea what is bieng missed. web pages in full
>> photo quality color, realistic games, PPP connections, Realaudio etc. I am
>
>I have used 'modern' PC's (well, at least pentiums with 16 MBytes RAM,
>SVGA card, etc), and I know I'm not missing _anything_ by sticking to
>classic computers. Let's go through your points.
>
What I mean is that we must realize that there is only so much you can do
with classic computers. after all, if they were the best than why we have
faster and better?
>'Web pages in full photo quality colour'. Well, I access the web to get
>information, not look at pretty pictures. Most of the information I want
>is _text_, or at least monochrome graphics (things like IC data sheets).
>So I don't need 'photo quality colour'. And if I did, I could easily find
well at the moment you dont need it, but its nice to know that you can see
it when you need it.
>a classic system that could display them. Evans and Sutherland, Grinnell,
>Ramtek, I2S, PPL, etc all made high-res colour displays that make most
>PC's look like toys. And you can pick one up second-hand for less than an
>SVGA card + monitor.
SVGA a toy? I used many an apple ][ + and C=64 with 80 col RGB monitors, and
I can take only so much eyestrain. sharp graphics make your eyes feel good...
also I would like to clarify somthing. I am not a billy gates follower. I
despise his efforts and his software. and winsucks 95 is a laugh!!<G> but
the issue is machines, and if you run Linux, as I do, that pentium will
spring to life! so the PC is not the greatest machine, but if you run
software that was properly written, (i.e. not from microsuck) you get
fantastic results, that is why I like my commodore 64, it can do alot on 1 MHZ.
>'Realistic games'. I don't play many games, but I'll agree that modern
>games running on modern hardware do _look_ a lot more realistic than the
>text+block graphics we had on home computers 15 years ago. The problem is
>that IMHO (and YMMV) the old games are just more fun to play. That's a
>personal judgement, though.
I have an Atari 2600, and the best racing game is from Acivision called Enduro.
>'PPP connections' Oh come on. I've run a PPP client on an _XT_. No problem
>at all. I'll happily believe they're available for other old machines as
>well.
well we all believe, but sadly, this does not always work that way. I have
an XT too, and yes you can load a packet driver, but then 640K is not big
enough except to run telnet or ftp from. I use my XT as a file server...
>'Realaudio' I assume that's some audio standard for modern machines. But
Realaudio is a standard, but it is an INTERNET standard for sending LIVE
SOUND from any web server. it has many uses, and the fun part of it is that
I live in Indiana, and when I lived in St Petersburg FL, there was a good
radio station there that I loved, and through Realaudio I can now listen to
it here. and this is not just for PC's, it runs on MACs, UNIX Linux, and
most Sun machines.
>we had good quality audio on PDP11's (thanks to a little board from 3RCC)
>in 1976. It's not exactly hard to add a DAC and a DMA engine or even a DSP
>to a lot of classic computers (and classic computer != cheap home micro so
>there's easily enough RAM space for a reasonable length sample).
to me, a PDP11 is WORLDS apart from classic HOME computers, If I had the
fortune of actually owing a PDP11, I would use it extensively..... :)
also about enough ram space...NOT!
I have some software for the C=64 that plays back digital sound files. with
the stock 64K of ram, I can hold a 6 second clip. with the 1764 ram
expansion with 512K of ram, I can hold a 60 second clip, but no longer than
that.
>What I'd be missing by going to a modern machine would be :
>Documentation. Since I don't just run prepackaged software and plug in
>prebuilt hardware, I need good technical manuals. They just don't exist
I programmed in BASIC, and that is fun, and I tried 6502 assembler, and
almost had a working interrupt handler going, but my brain fried, the
opcodes are easy, but remembering memory addresses when deprived of caffeine
is hard! the interrupt handler was for a terminal program that I was writing
that utilized a 6551 UART in a commodore 64. I love hacking old hardware!
and it also had interupt driven multitasking, as in this terminal, you can
use the modem and play .sid music files at the same time!
that was fun!! now I program in C, and if you do it right, you can make any
machine dance to your beat.
>for most modern machines
>Repairability. I can fix classic computers with no problem at all. Just
I have never had any hardware failures in ANY of my machines so far (knock
on silicon), with the exception that I accidentally cooked a 6526.
>try getting a custom chip for a PC motherboard. And don't tell me to
>replace the motherboard - if the PC is a few years old I'd probably have
>to replace the CPU and memory as well.
that is just the ticket. A brand new 486 motherboard cost $90. with it you
get real functionality.
I know some who will pay twice that for a doorstop...
actually, you can get a decent modern PC together just by scrounging
computer shows and bargaining for parts. assembling a system from scratch
with old parts is very fun and rewarding. and the reliablity rate for modern
chips is very high. in fact the monitor or hard disk probably will die
before the motherboard will.
also I am speaking of those who NEVER touched anything new, and passing
judgment. if you tried the
new stuff, and hate it, that is fine, but I can't stand those who never
tried it then saying it sux.
At 23:55 28/06/97 -0500, you wrote:
>
>WAHOO! I am in as Root! And I ain't gonna tell you what it was!
>
>Now, anyone know what the Streaming Tape Drive device is called?
>I can boot with this (an old Adaptec SCSI board) installed.
I have the TI 1300, and the device was called /dev/rct0
you should have the "help" command available, try also with ? and
the topic.
>I also have 2 CB811 cards but only one seems to come up with a light,
>the other one just flashes?
> *** CB811 -- (C) Copyright 1986 Computone Systems, Inc.
> (C) Copyright 1987, 1988 Texas Instruments Inc.
>
>I can not boot with either or both of these installed. I haven't tried
>real hard, maybe the console port changes with these in. But I also don't
>hear all the beeps if these are in.
I guess you are using built-in vga card and keyboard connected directly
in the machine, instead of using "tty0a" port of the CB811 with a vt 100 as
console. This, usually, make the difference.
>Here's my last bootup record
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Sat Jun 28 23:11:07
> *** CB811 -- (C) Copyright 1986 Computone Systems, Inc.
> (C) Copyright 1987, 1988 Texas Instruments Inc.
>
>Can't find any CB811 boards
>Texas Instruments print screen v1.01
>SPA initialization complete
>Streaming cartridge tape v2.00[A] (int=3,dma=3,base=00000220)
>Irootdev 1/40, pipedev 1/40, swapdev 1/41
>JKL0L1L2L3disk[W] drive 0: cyls = 918, heads = 15, secs = 17
>nswap = 5610, swplo = 0, Hz = 50
>L4maximum user process size = 8655k
>L5MNOPmem: total = 8064k, reserved = 4k, kernel = 1088k, user = 6
>Sat Jun 28 23:11:08
>972k
>kernel: drivers = 4k, 0 screens = 0k, 600 i/o bufs = 600k, msg bufs = 8k
>QRSTUVWXYZdisk[W] drive 1: cyls = 918, heads = 15, secs = 17
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>I have looked and can not find any docs on the CB811's or the Tape Drive
>8-( 8-( 8-(
>
>Anybody know anything about either of these?????
I will try to ask my old TEXAS suppliers and let you know
Riccardo
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Riccardo Romagnoli,collector of:CLASSIC COMPUTERS,TELETYPE UNITS,PHONE
AND PHONECARDS I-47100 Forli'/Emilia-Romagna/Food Valley/ITALY
Pager:DTMF PHONES=+39/16888(hear msg.and BEEP then 5130274*YOUR TEL.No.*
where*=asterisk key | help visit http://www.tim.it/tldrin_eg/tlde03.html
Subject: Home computer: Definition
My opinions and to disgress;
"Home Computer" term is invented by corporations to supposely help
define their markets and totally miss it all the time because users
needs is usually higher than their corporates' computers by factor of
1.5 to 2. At same time tries to pull off a coup on "home" users by
selling stripped down with loads of cut corners and oft-nonstandard
parts machine at horrible prices. Case in point: PCjr. PCjr and
orignal 2 piece PS/1 (sold at 1000 bux cdn but you get no HD in it,
introduced 1990's but users right away dumped them by pallets barely
2 years after. Yuk!) Side note: I traded few things to get this PS/1
2011 and used it for a while but sold it cheaply to a user who have
modest needs than I. (for me, I can't manage well without hard drive
attached even all the down to XT but not for apple II's their floppy
drive is very fast enough to forgo hd, very impressed but at that
time too expensive for my taste but now they are so cheap now.)
So there was a bad taste to this name "home computers" in general.
Similar types of computers did well in many areas but
happened to lack important areas that killed it. Ironically, better
to build DIY similar capablies 386, 80mb, 1mb, desktop/mono vga and
still easily interchangable than that darned PS/1 2011 models. When I
read about many machines and few "home computers" as called toys but
I was mistaken when I saw and heard that "toy", boy, they're mistaken
and I was taken too for a while! Indeed they were used for anything
within their capablies so I accept anything that has CPU in it at
same time useful and expandable should be decent computers, no more
or less. :)
C64, PET's, apples and such has just right stuff to keep users
happy.
In closing, corporations always underestimate "home" users.
But now they are not pushing this word and crippled machines anymore,
now selling them in general to any users execpt for corporations who
needs turnkey system just to do very specific jobs like weak machine
strictly for WP use, alphas for servers and heavy graphics, fast
processor for programming but that is getting blurred that most users
can afford them and can put them in their homes.
Ok, now I could respond to yours... :)
> I've seen a couple of posts in here that declare, in very firm terms
> indeed, that machines like the MicroVAX and PDP's are not "home" computers.
Suppose, Digital did not cared a whit and cut prices on that and we
would be sure many would have one in home if they're small enough and
easy on power requirements. Linux is there now and NT can be run on
alphas but bit late and cost is fast appoaching to affordable levels
where getting a pentium pro machine is not only option.
>
> For the sake of discussion in this list, and computer hobbyists in
> general, I would like the world to know that I define 'home computer' as
> any machine that you can:
>
> * Comfortably fit through your door...
>
> * Doesn't test the load limits of your target floor...
>
> * Power and run without tripping your main breaker...
>
> * (most importantly) Have fun restoring and working with... in your home!
>
> Which just goes to show that such terminology is so relative, there's
> little point in debating it. Why waste the bandwidth over something as
> trivial as a difference in wording?
>
> (No, I'm not trying to start a flamewar; I posted this because I'm
> concerned that the current thread regarding 'home' computers may erupt into
> one!)
>
> Caveat Emperor!
I just discovered some *VERY* interesting S100 boards that I didn't
realize I had in my box 'o S-100 boards. They seem to be some kind of
Atari development/prototyping system. The boards are:
65xx Emulator, part no. 100-015-2, (c) 1983 Atari [this is the PCB only]
Trace Memory Interface, part no, 100-003-2, (c) 1983 Atari
6502 Processor, part no. 100-003-2, has a 6502 and some other stuff, such
as a clock speed DIP switch (1, 2, 4 MHZ settings), some RAM, a couple
ribbon cable connectors. I have 2 of these boards but one is incomplete
(does not have all the chips the other one does).
All have the Atari name and logo and a copyright date of 1983.
Also have these:
the Encryptor, Jones Futura Corporation, Model ENC 100-1
California Computer Systems, Model 2832 [has this big, black 3"x3" square
and 3/8" thick block of resin on it, have no idea what it's hiding]
Any idea what this stuff is?
Sam
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer, Jackass
I have,
BASIC
Lotus 1-2-3, {but can't get to work}
Mouser
MineShaft
I'd like to have anything you can find.
----------
> From: thedm <thedm(a)sunflower.com>
> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
> Subject: Re: PCjr Cartridges?
> Date: Thursday, June 26, 1997 9:08 PM
>
> Im interested in the PCjr carts. I have the basic one, but I can post a
> list of what I have.
>
> ----------
> > From: Uncle Roger <sinasohn(a)crl.com>
> > To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
> <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
> > Subject: PCjr Cartridges?
> > Date: Thursday, June 26, 1997 8:27 PM
> >
> > Saw today a few cartridges which I'm guessing are PCjr carts. They
said
> > (among other things) "Cartridge BASIC". Anyone interested in them?
They
> > were (I think) a buck.
> >
> > They also had some misc Apple II cards (about $5 each, I think), some
> Atari
> > 800 ROM's (or RAM? I didn't look that closely). Lemme know if there's
> any
> > interest.
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
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/
----------
> ???o?l : Ward Griffiths and/or Lisa Rogers <gram(a)cnct.com>
> ???? : Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
> ???? : RE: which month?
> ???M???? : 1997?N6??28?? 23:57
>
> On Sat, 28 Jun 1997, Cord Coslor wrote:
>
> > What was the name of that book? Wasn't it something about a mouse?
Like,
> > To Catch a Mouse, Make a Noise Like A Cheese?
> >
> > On Sat, 28 Jun 1997, Matt Pritchard wrote:
> >
> > > I have a book about marketing, written by a Tandy VP which has a
large
> > > chapter on the birh of the TRS-80. He mentioned the day of the first
> > > produced unit, (sept 15th I think) and game totals for the first
months
> > > or two (It seemed they only managed 3 computer a day for the first
week
> > > or two).
>
> _To Catch a Mouse, Make a Noise Like a Cheese_ was indeed the title, by
> Lou Kornfeld, president of Radio Shack and originator of the "Flyer-Side
> Chat" column that was a regular feature in Radio Shack retail flyers for
> so many years. He was managing one of the (8 or 9) original Radio Shack
> stores in Boston when Charles Tandy bought the company in about 1964 (and
> proceeded to expand the chain by three orders of magnitude). I forget if
> the book was released before or after he retired.
> --
> Ward Griffiths
> "America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within
> the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." --Claire Wolfe
I have a book about marketing, written by a Tandy VP which has a large
chapter on the birh of the TRS-80. He mentioned the day of the first
produced unit, (sept 15th I think) and game totals for the first months
or two (It seemed they only managed 3 computer a day for the first week
or two).
-Mp
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bwit(a)pobox.com [SMTP:bwit@pobox.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 27, 1997 11:51 AM
> To: 'classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu'
> Subject: RE: which month?
>
>
> IIRC the TRS-80 was introduced in September 1977.
>
> ----------
> From: e.tedeschi
> Sent: Friday, June 27, 1997 7:39 AM
> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
> Subject: which month?
>
> I wonder if anybody here has the *exact* months of introduction
> of the
> three first *real* home computers introduced in 1977:
>
> a) the Apple II
> b) the Tandy TRS-80
> c) the Commodore Pet
>
> I need them for a book on collecting home computers I am
> researching
> for.
>
> Thank you
>
> enrico
> --
> ================================================================
> Enrico Tedeschi, 54, Easthill Drive, BRIGHTON BN41 2FD, U.K.
> tel/fax +(0)1273 701650 (24 hours) or 0850 104725 mobile
> website <http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~e.tedeschi>
> ================================================================
> visit Brighton: <http://www.brighton.co.uk/tourist/welcome.htm>
>
>
In message <Pine.SUN.3.91.970628111459.3115L-100000(a)crl4.crl.com> classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu writes:
> Also have these:
>
> the Encryptor, Jones Futura Corporation, Model ENC 100-1
> California Computer Systems, Model 2832 [has this big, black 3"x3" square
> and 3/8" thick block of resin on it, have no idea what it's hiding]
I think this is what it says it is - a data encyption/decryption system.
I have a thing called a 'modem maximiser' (a serial port data buffer box with
a real time clock, parallel printer port, etc) that has an optional
encryption unit. It too was a potted module. As I had a few spare modules I cut
one apart and found it contained an 8032 (I think) microcontroller, RAM, a ROM
(I must desolder that and examine it) and a TTL latch. Pretty much what you'd
expect - a little microcontroller that reads in data, encrypts it, and sends
it out again.
>
> Any idea what this stuff is?
>
>
> Sam
-tony
Sam:
> 1. Record format: open (depending on software for EPROM programmer);
S-records, Intel Hex, binary.
>> I'm no expert at this so I'll defer.
The various hex records are ASCII representations, so I figured that they can
be transferred with no problem by e-mail. If we're doing ftp, it doesn't
matter
> 2. Submission & storage: UUEncoded image file e-mailed to "repository";
ROM/EPROM chips sent by snail mail and returned. All
submissions should have as much info about the source computer as
possible (board revisions, date of manufacture, etc.)
>>Sounds good. The repository then is a "soft" repository of ROM images?
Yes. This way, we can transfer it, or burn it.
> 3. Requests & withdrawls: by e-mail to those with programmers; by mail for
those supplying their own chips; e-mail request with no chip
sent.
>> I assumed since the images are merely files they could be downloaded by
anyone requesting them. Is the repository also going to have physical EPROMS
that someone can request? If so, why?
THe only reason to have EPROMs available is for those who are incapable of
burning EPROMs them selves.
> 4. Cost: nominal (cost of postage and EPROM).
>> Is the repository also going to be in the business of supplying people
with pre-burnt EPROMS? If so then 3 makes more sense now.
Sure, why not. I don't think that there will be a huge demand, so the
repository will not keep pre-burned ROMs on hand.
------------------------
Rich Cini/WUGNET
- ClubWin Charter Member (6)
- MCPS Windows 95/Networking
At 01:07 PM 6/27/97 -0400, you wrote:
>> Anyone remember a trivial-pursuit-like Computer Trivia game? It was
>I have computer-based trivia game (shareware, I think) on a CD-ROM. I could
>dig it up, if anyone want it...it had pretty hard questions, which went
>'way back to the dawn of time (you know, like the 1950's :> ))
Actually, that does sound neat -- if you com across it, I'd love a copy.
However, the game I was thinking of was one that had cards and (I think) a
board, like trivpursuit. (I know my brother actually won a copy at the West
Coast Computer Faire, but he's an a$$h@le and we aren't in contact.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/
At 09:38 PM 6/25/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Unfortunately, it was a classic design at the time - a lot of people
>thought it looked like a dumb terminal (VT100).
An awful lot of people have painted pictures of pretty women... Still,
there's only one Mona Lisa.
Sometimes it just takes a slight modification to turn the ordinary into the
extraordinary. I still say the Lisa gets an out-of-the-park home run on
aesthetics.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/
[...]
> I love the internet, and I learned ALOT from it. sure a shell account with
> lynx is nice, as I use it for fast FTP, but when I read about a PDP11, it is
> nice to see a picture of one, rather just text.
Alternatively I could just pick up one of about 30 PDP11 manuals I have lying
about and not only see a picture of the outsides, but also see board layouts,
schematics, timing charts, microcode flowcharts, and other useful info
I've never found pictures of the outside of computers to be particularly
interesting. The useful diagrams (see above) are just as useful on a 1-bit-
per-pixel display.
> >3. What other apps are there that are REALLY useful for home use that
> >modern machines have and "home computers" don't? And is is really
>
> its not about apps, its about efficincy, and operator comfort. VGA or SVGA
OK, I'm using my (much hacked) PC/AT (true-blue IBM, and just about on-topic
here) at this moment. The display is a clone Hercules card driving that
Zenith monitor with the 'interesting' PSU. After I fixed the PSU and tweaked
the internal controls, I have an image _for text_ that's as sharp as any
cheap SVGA monitor I've ever seen. No eyestrain at all.
If you want colour, look at an old Barco (or Fimi, Philips, etc) monitor. Some
of those are very well focused and converged.
> is worth it becuse it prevents eyestrain, and you can use your system for
> longer amounts of time. I used color TV's before when I got started, and
> serious word processing was painful to the eyes. RGB's are better, but not
RGB simply means that the video signal is sent along 3 separate cables for
the 3 primary colours. Technically a VGA or SVGA monitor is an RGB monitor.
> all in all, if the machine you use now does all what you want, thats great!
> but the day WILL come where you just need to have a feature that you have
In which case I'll do what I've always done in the past when this happens. I'll
either find a classic machine that already has this feature or I'll build a
bit of hardware to add it to whatever machine I feel like.
> not got now. that is just the way the computing cookie crumbles.
>
-tony
>
Does anyone remember this machine :
it's a video game console (like the atari VCS) but which could sit on
a box which then converts it to a home computer.
The machine ran on a 6800 and had built-in basic.
It came out approx at the same time as the Atari 400/800 series
(78-79?)
I remember seeing an ad on it and the heading of the ad was
"imagination machine".
Ben
In message <02440020302929(a)michianatoday.com> classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu writes:
> At 08:59 AM 6/27/97 BST, you wrote:
> >> I do use my old machines now and then, but if anyone here has never ran a
> >> modern MAC or PC, they have NO idea what is bieng missed. web pages in full
> >> photo quality color, realistic games, PPP connections, Realaudio etc. I am
> >
> >I have used 'modern' PC's (well, at least pentiums with 16 MBytes RAM,
> >SVGA card, etc), and I know I'm not missing _anything_ by sticking to
> >classic computers. Let's go through your points.
> >
> What I mean is that we must realize that there is only so much you can do
> with classic computers. after all, if they were the best than why we have
> faster and better?
And there's only so much you can do with PC's :-)
Seriously, It's obvious that the _real_ top end today is faster than the top
end 10 years ago. It's also obvious that the 'home computer' of today (which
is probably a pentium PC) is better than the home computer of 10 eyars ago
(say a Commodore 64). But it's not at all obvious that the home computer of
today is any better than a 10 year old top-end personal workstation or a
minicomputer, or a number of other things. And those are turning up very
cheaply if you know where to look.
>
> >'Web pages in full photo quality colour'. Well, I access the web to get
> >information, not look at pretty pictures. Most of the information I want
> >is _text_, or at least monochrome graphics (things like IC data sheets).
> >So I don't need 'photo quality colour'. And if I did, I could easily find
>
> well at the moment you dont need it, but its nice to know that you can see
> it when you need it.
I don't necessarily buy hardware on the grounds that I _might_ need the
facilities one day. As what I already have does all I need, then I see no
reason to upgrade (downgrade?)
And if I did ever need to display a 'photo-quality' image, I can find a few
systems around here (all over 10 years old) that could do it trivially.
> >a classic system that could display them. Evans and Sutherland, Grinnell,
> >Ramtek, I2S, PPL, etc all made high-res colour displays that make most
> >PC's look like toys. And you can pick one up second-hand for less than an
> >SVGA card + monitor.
>
> SVGA a toy? I used many an apple ][ + and C=64 with 80 col RGB monitors, and
Compared to the machines I've named, SVGA is a toy...
> I can take only so much eyestrain. sharp graphics make your eyes feel good...
This, alas shows how little you know about the state of graphics 10 years ago
Give me a break. I am _NOT_ talking about home micros. I am talking about
professional graphics displays with hardware anti-alliasing of displayed
objects. I am talking about 512*512*30 bit images. I am talking about
broadcast-quality TV images (if you should need to go to such a low scan
rate). I am talking about 3D displays with LCD spectacles. Etc, Etc, Etc.
I've had more than my fair share of eyestrain from impossible-to-converge
SVGA monitors. I've battled with the service manuals for _hours_ on some of
them and not been able to get the convergence right. I'm then pleased that
Barco, Fimi, Sony (the older ones at least), Philips, Moniterm, KNE, etc, etc,
etc did make decent, easy-to-set-up monitors 10 years ago or more.
[...]
> >we had good quality audio on PDP11's (thanks to a little board from 3RCC)
> >in 1976. It's not exactly hard to add a DAC and a DMA engine or even a DSP
> >to a lot of classic computers (and classic computer != cheap home micro so
> >there's easily enough RAM space for a reasonable length sample).
>
> to me, a PDP11 is WORLDS apart from classic HOME computers, If I had the
> fortune of actually owing a PDP11, I would use it extensively..... :)
AFAIK, this is a classic computers list, and not a classic home computers list
Anyway the PDP11 is a home computer now. I know dozens of people who run
one or more at home.
I've payed a lot less for any of my PDP11's that you'd pay for a pentium
motherboard + CPU. That's complete PDP11's with disks, realtime I/O,
terminals, graphics options, SCSI interfaces, etc, etc, etc.
> >for most modern machines
> >Repairability. I can fix classic computers with no problem at all. Just
> I have never had any hardware failures in ANY of my machines so far (knock
> on silicon), with the exception that I accidentally cooked a 6526.
>
Maybe I've been unlucky, but I have had hardware failures.
> >try getting a custom chip for a PC motherboard. And don't tell me to
> >replace the motherboard - if the PC is a few years old I'd probably have
> >to replace the CPU and memory as well.
>
> that is just the ticket. A brand new 486 motherboard cost $90. with it you
> get real functionality.
Wait a second. ISA graphics cards are already getting hard to find. So,
presumably, if I have a not-too-old PC with an ISA graphics card and some
custom chip dies, I have to buy a PCI graphics card, a new motherboard,
a new processor, and either new memory or some SIMM converters. No thanks -
I'll stick to my classics where repairing consists of picking up the service
manual, finding the dead chip in about 10 minutes, and replacing it with one
>from either my junk box of the local electronics shop.
> actually, you can get a decent modern PC together just by scrounging
> computer shows and bargaining for parts. assembling a system from scratch
> with old parts is very fun and rewarding. and the reliablity rate for modern
> chips is very high. in fact the monitor or hard disk probably will die
I've had modern custom chips fail for 'no good reason'.
> before the motherboard will.
Monitors can often be repaired for a lot less than the cost of a new one.
Yes, the motherboard will probably outlast the hard disk, but that's
(IMHO) because modern hard disks are darn unreliable (I've had several
die on me, and without a clean room there's not a lot I can do). That doesn't
mean the motherboard won't fail, though.
-tony
> BUT-
> viewing a photo on a CRT in 16 million colors is still 100% better than
> having only 16 colors...<G>
There was a thing that came out in 1979/1980 called an I2S model 70 image
processor. It used (in at least one configuration) _30_ bits per pixel,
although only at a resolution of 512*512 pixels.
If you're only used to home micros I can understand why you think old machines
can't display 'photo-quality' images, but there were plenty of larger machines
that are now turning up second-hand at prices that collectors can afford that
have significant graphics abilities.
-tony
>
>
> It came out approx at the same time as the Atari 400/800 series
> (78-79?)
>
> I remember seeing an ad on it and the heading of the ad was
> "imagination machine".
Mattel?
Great idea to include peripherals. Never thought of that.
I would rather you see a sample of the book before making a purchase
decision. Please reply with your postal address and I send a few pages -
don't have scanned copies for faxing or emailing.
Kevin Stumpf
> Here's an interesting idea, now that mini Linux seems to be up and
> running, there appears to be a good code base for porting it over to othe
> old 8 bit and 16 bit chips. The TI-99/4a, RS COCO, PDP-11, and old S-100
> based z80 (with MMU) boxes appear to be good candidates. Yes... there is
UZI unix was on the z80 already so it's doable.
> Yes yes yes yes. SVGA is a *TOY* compared to what was available
> to those with million dollar budgets 20 years ago. The old hardware ran
> slower in clock speed but was most certainly capable of *extream* high
By 1986 1280x1024 color was about $25k and small (allowing for the 19"
monitor). MicrovaxII/gpx... now you can find them in dumpsters.
> PDP-11 hardware is still widely available. You could build
> youself a functinal Qbus LSI-11/73 or 83 for less than $500 easy. Most o
> this hardware is sitting in old factories and still in production. There
> are many hardware outlets out there such as ELI in cambridge MA, which
At $500 I'd have a killer PDP11. Most of mine are scrap/salvage or trades.
I'm letting a PDP11/23b go for very little as I have one and they are common
enough and powerful enough to run multiuser OS or one of the unixes out
there.
> ;-) You might also want to think of a decent used microVAX.... wonderful
> machine based on the same Qbus.
I got a working vs2000 from someone elses dumpster trip so they are common
and they can do eithernet, PPP, 1280x1024 graphics (color was an option),
6-16mb of ram in a 1cuft box witha 160w powersupply (small PC!). The real
trick is getting a disk (rd54 was the largest supported at 150mb) as SCSI
is there but not bootable other than DEC tk50 tape. The other problem is an
OS though DEC has made VMS6.1 available with a free license, compared to VMS
DOS is a toy! There are people doing a netBSD for it as well.
Other boxsized vaxen are 3100 and friends most being very high performance
(2.5-3VUP, a 780=1VUP).
larger MicrovaxII configs are common and generally free to cheap and most of
the same thing apply save for bigger. Even the BA123 boxed VAXen are under
500w in practice, since most pcs are in the 230-270 watt range it's not as
bad as it would seem. Other small vaxen in the "Sbox" incluude the 3400,
3500. they are faster and still pre-1990..
The older Vax 780/1/2/5 systems are three good sized racks plus and serious
power. The later smaller (slower) 730s are one to two short (40") racks
and under 1000w for mall configs (save 1 or 2 ra80/81 disks). RA81 is 200mb
IMS. The next faster was the 750 and that can also run on household power
but, just barely.
Allison
PANASONIC HANDHELD UPDATE:
This is the latest message from Mike who has the hundreds of Panasonic
HandHeld computers. In case its not obvious what's going on, I put in an
offer of $10 each for 50, $9 each for 100, $8 each for 150, etc. I don't
have $2000 lying around with which to buy them all up. I have a plan,
but first read what Mike had to say:
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 10:39:01 -0400 (EDT)
From: Mikeooo1(a)aol.com
To: dastar(a)crl.com
Subject: Re: EPROM Burners re: Classic Computers
Dear Sam,
I believe the total number of HHC's available will be about 400.Based on
your offer I assume that for 150 of the units you would be willing to pay at
the rate of $10 for the first 50,$9 for the next 50, $8 for the next 50 and
$7 for the next 50 whcih would come to $1700 for 200 units.Would you be
interested in 300 units for $2000 even?To make the offer even sweeter I'll
throw in the memory expander trays with each unit.The cost for each tray
alone was well over $100 when they were purchased,as well as a quantity of
the MCM 68674 8K eprom chips that the programs were written on.
As always Best Regards,
Mike
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
END FORWARD
So here's my plan...anyone and everyone who is interested, reply to ME
(do not reply to classiccmp! People will hate you and want to drown your
pets!) telling me how many you want. Do this soon. I will save all of
your e-mails and then at the end of say, 10 days I will tally up the
total and make Mike an offer. So again...
Reply to ME only (dastar(a)crl.com)
Tell me HOW MANY of the Panasonic HandHeld Computers you want.
Do it SOON.
You have about 10 days.
Price will be NO MORE THAN $10 EACH.
I'll get back to everyone in 10 days or so.
Sam
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer, Jackass
