DIGIAL network.
> My favorites were MILRAT, and the other two cluster members MILROT and
> MILDEW. They were apt names for vaxen located where straight down
through
> the floor meant you were in the pond.
Reminds me of the spinoffs of SNOBOL -- FASBOL, SPITBOL...
Speaking of names, the best (most descriptive) program name I ever ran
across was the CP/M debugger, DDT.
In message <33B8B786.6F47(a)ndirect.co.uk> classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu writes:
> Tony Duell wrote:
>
> > Yes, I can do any of those with a PC or many, many other machines. But the MK14
> > is small and portable. It doesn't need a monitor. It will start the program
> > instantly at switch-on. It is still useful today.
>
> O, come on......of course you can go to work everyday with a penny
> farthing (early bicycles with the very different sized wheels) but would
> you?
If I rode a bicycle, and had a penny-farthing, I might well use it, yes. Please
give me one _good_ reason not to.
While I can think of other things that would be a good as the MK-14 for (say)
I2C chip testing (a microcontroller board springs to mind), I can't think of
anything that would be _better_.
The origianl statement stands. I can't think of a single computer system (owned
by me or not) that can't be used for useful work in 1997. The fact that it's
old has nothing to do with it.
I can think of many applications that need fast machines with plenty of memory.
I'd not use (most) classic computers for those. But as I rarely need to do
such work, I see no reason _not_ to use a classic.
>
> enrico
-tony
Here is a reply I got from alt.atari.2600 on my Atari S-100 boards.
Sam
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer, Jackass
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: jjessop1(a)home.com (Jerry Jessop)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.8bit,alt.atari.2600
Subject: Re: Help identify these Atari S-100 Boards
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 1997 20:08:30 GMT
Sam,
Looks like you found some boards used in the old 2600 in-house
development systems. These units were Cromemco S-100 based computers
with the appropriate Atari S-100 cards installed. This system in turn
was connected to a PDP-11.
Of course they could also be coin-op development tools, hard to tell
without looking at them.
jj
On 30 Jun 1997 00:37:22 GMT, dastar(a)crl.com (Sam Ismail) wrote:
>
>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, Rev. 2, (c) 1983 Atari
> [this is the PCB only]
>
>Trace Memory Interface, part no. 100-002-2 (two of these)
> has (3) Intersil 6402 chips and (3) 26-pin connectors (for interface to a
> terminal), DIP switches to select the baud rate for the 6402 chips (up to
> 38400 bps). Also has a 40-pin (2-rows of 20) ribbon cable connector
> labelled J100. One has a test sticker on it with "OK 10/25/82" written
> on it.
>
>6502 Processor, part no. 100-003-2, Rev. 4
> has a 6502 and some other stuff, such as a clock speed DIP switch
> (1, 2, 4 MHZ settings), some RAM, a 40-pin ribbon cable connector
> which presumably connects to the Trace Memory Interface card (labelled
> COMP BUS J100).
> I have 2 of these boards but one is incomplete (does not have all the
> chips the other one does, for instance the 6502).
>
>All have the Atari name and logo in yellow lettering.
>
>Any idea what this stuff is and what it was used for?
>
>If you can shed any light, please reply to dastar(a)crl.com. Thanks!
--
Sam
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer, Jackass
.
> seems to be the fact that they were electronic and the idea
> of electronic counters (which is most of what ENIAC was) had
This is fairly complete history of electronic computings origins however
there were several electric (relay logic) designs not mentioned here.
While slow they capitialized on the then fairly mature telephone realys
of varying design. They were generally of two types the contactor or
n-pole double throw or the stepping(counting) with typically 11
positions. The later could be used to make counters or registers.
In the early years (pre about '44) these were used to make calculator
type machines of the programmed or fixed type.
Allison
> On 01-Jul-97, jpero(a)mail.cgo.wave.ca wrote:
>
> >Ok, put in generic 1.44 mb floppy drive and Pow! Why? that oddball
>
> I don't see much point in this though since the HX's controller won't
> handle the 1.44 meg drive anyway. Plus, it'd be easy enough to add a floppy
> drive to it, but supposedly neither knock-out plate has been punched out
> behind either of the drive bays! This is what prompted my original post.
>
I've been using my HX for some ten years now. Since it won't die
it's been upgraded quite a bit. Anyhind, I didn't even know the HX's
shipped without a 3.5" floppy. That was standard.
Maybe a Shack guy removed it to sell it to someone way back when.
>
> Actually, it's an 8088 running at like 7.16mhz I believe. One needs the
> PLUS Memory board to add the memory above 256k, the DMA functions, and the two
> additional PLUS connectors for the additional cards. That's a neat idea about
> the SCSI though...heck, it'd be a cinch fitting one of the newer drives into
> one of the 1" x 3-1/2" drive bays. The only problem would be power to the
> drive, since as you've already mentioned, Tandy likes to send the power
> through the ribbon cable.
>
SCSI is what I have on this one also. A 2.5" drive works fine but the
other stuff doesn't.
When I had the RLL and later an IDE (for a few days), they all got
power from the controller card. Some RLL's have power leads on the
controller. DCS (Tandy 3rd party stuff) had the IDE stuff. Didn't pay
attention where the connectors were on the 8-bit card.
> Yes, true, but XT class machines were still pretty much the norm for the
> low-end in '87 when the HX appeared. I'm glad to be getting another one
> though and remember 'PCM' making a big deal about the machine, asking if it
> might not be the best 1000-series machine up to that time. Too bad Tandy
> didn't at least make it a 286 like the TX which came out about the same time.
>
> Jeff
Hmm, a 286 design in this shell would've been nice.
I didn't realize how compact this case was 'til a neighbor came by
with a Toshiba 286 laptop recently. The thing was huge.
Ten years and my Tandy 1000 HX keeps running.
Marc
--
>> ANIME SENSHI <<
Marc D. Williams
marcw(a)lightside.com Lightside, Inc.
marc.williams(a)mb.fidonet.org The MailBox BBS
marc.williams(a)652.sasbbs.com Paradigm Shift BBS
IRC Nick: Senshi Channel: #dos #IrcHelp
http://www.agate.net/~tvdog/internet.html -- DOS Internet Tools
At 11:17 PM 6/28/97 -0500, you wrote:
>I have,
>BASIC
All I saw were BASIC cartridges... I'll let you know if anything else turns up.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- 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've just arranged for a Tandy 1000HX and it appears to be kind of odd. It
was bought at one of Tandy's infamous 'tent sales' where they dispose of stuff
they've had sitting around the local 'Shack, and the guy who bought it
originally said that it didn't come with any 3-1/2" floppy installed and that
both covers are still over the bays. It boots off of an external 5-1/4"
drive, which if I remember correctly, is selectable easily enough by way of
the SETUPHX program included with it's DOS diskettes. Do any of you
TRS-80/Tandy knowledgable people remember ever seeing a HX set up like this?
Every one of them I've ever seen new has come with a 3-1/2" floppy in the
left-most bay, right next to the expansion connectors. I bought one of these
nifty machines when they first appeared as well, and had an external 5-1/4"
floppy and CM-11 monitor with it, as well as the PLUS memory, RS232 and 1200
bps modem cards.
Jeff jeffh(a)unix.aardvarkol.com
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amiga enthusiast and collector of early, classic microcomputers
http://www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/lakes/6757
i've got an ibm 3178 c, anyone know what it is?
(it's look like some kind of terminal)
seems to be in 3 main parts
i) monitor
ii) base of monitor
iii) bit that seems to go under base of monitor
cheers for any info
--
Pete Robinson
pete(a)madhippy.demon.co.uk
http://www.madhippy.demon.co.uk - 8-bit, faqs, emulators, web utilities.
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 18:16:33 +0000
From: "e.tedeschi" <e.tedeschi(a)ndirect.co.uk>
To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu
Subject: Re: 'Home' computer: Definition
Message-ID: <33B6A681.66DE(a)ndirect.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Daniel A. Seagraves wrote:
>> On Sun, 29 Jun 1997, Bruce Lane wrote:
>>
>> 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.
>
> My PDP is a home computer. All it takes up is a table (I don't have a
> rack yet. It's coming...) Besides, my XT is bigger than the PDP at the
> moment (condidering keyboard, monitor, printer, and disks)
>
> Anything I can fit inside is a home computer! If it's in a home, and
> it's a computer, it's a home computer, right?
Absolutely right, Daniel! Thanks... Then Enrico responded with...
>Of course you could go to work on a Ferrari BUT would you? (and is a
>Ferrari a "goto work car"?)
I've seen at least a pair of them used for exactly that about 20 miles
east of me in Bellevue (the local Yuppie haven). If someone's got enough
bucks to own one of those things, you better believe they're going to get
good use out of it. ;-)
The whole definition argument seems pretty pointless, Enrico. That's what
I was trying to say in the first place. If you want to set your own
definitions of what constitutes a 'home computer,' that's fine. The rest of
us will happily(?) continue to use whatever strikes our fancy for computing
hardware in the home (a much better definition, I think).
As has been pointed out, this group is for discussion of 'classic'
computers. Bill Whitson's definition of 'classic,' in this case, refers to
ANY machine that is ten years or more old. Period.
Since MicroVAXen and other DEC machines fall neatly into that category, I
will continue to discuss them with others on this group. Period.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have work to do on this beautiful 12-year old
HP drafting plotter I just bought (replace a couple of switches, clean it
up, and it'll be good to go, especially once I hook it to the MicroVAX!)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
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..."
