On 1998-01-02 classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu said to scottk5(a)ibm.net
>I have one sitting in my dining room! It's one of the HP 9000 200
>series computers (9826 aka 9000 216, 9836 aka 9000 236, 9000/220,
(Much really helpful information snipped here...)
Video: Yeap, typical HP, it uses a
>non-standard video output. I doubt you'll find a monitor that will
>work on it except the proper HP one. If you send me the part
>number from the video card I'll tell you which monitors will work
There are two video output cards; a 98204A, marked composite video; and
a 98627A, marked color output. The only monitor I have with RGB and sync
BNC ports is a 19" Taxan 980, wonder if that will work?
More about HP-IB: There sould be a connector for an
>external HP-IB bus on the back. It will probably be on the same
>card as the keyboard connection. It will look like a Centronics
>connector (the same type as a parallel printer uses) except it will
>only use 24 pins.
Yes, it's there, but is the keyboard connector the RG-45 looking one? There
is also another BNC connector on the same card.
>If you decide to get rid of it, I'd like to have it.
Thanks a lot for the info, and if I start to think I'm in way over my
head with this thing I'll give you first dibs on it. Now I'm wondering
what my friend Rick did with the rest of it?!?!?!?
Net-Tamer V 1.09.2 - Test Drive
I have two PC Jr. that I no longer use, but refuse to just throw away. Also, I
have 15+ orig software probrams for the jr. Can you put me in contact with
others who might want some for the stuff. I collect Macintohs Classic's and
would like to trade. If you want I can sent a list of the software and
equipment I have.
<> I haven't personally tried it, but a Japanese company had some XT clo
<> laptops (OK, luggables) which ran Windows 3.x (Maybe it was 3.0, or
<> 3.1, there's not to awful much of a difference in my mind).
3.0 still had support for 808x(xt class) machines. I know as it have
3.1 besides enhancements and structureal improvements dropped support
for 8086 though it runs on 286 and above.
<Any Windows 3.x is going to be *very* slow on an XT. There is (IMHO)
<tremendous difference between 3.0 and 3.1 not just the maintenance
3.1 would be slow as it will not start. ;-) 3.0 however is a bit slow
anything like a fast disk or turboXT does help greatly. I'm have 3.0
running on a turboXT with a V20 and a IDE(with adaptor) disk and it's
quite useable and the speed difference from a st251 to a 40meg 3.5" IDE
drive is substantial especially when windows has to swap.
<CGA, Hercules or MDA, I can't recall off the top of my head if it even
<supported EGA but I think it did.
3.0 supports all, so does 3.1.
I happen to run 3.1 on the 486dx/50 and 3.0 on the V20(8088) 10mhz
turboXT clone. They are similar in look and feel and within memory
limitations runs the same set of apps. Some however, cannot run on the
V20 as there isn't enough memory or the code requires 286/386 minimum.
Read http://www.netaction.org/articles/freesoft.html for a discussion of
the importance of free software such as Linux to the infrastructure of the
Free software and open standards drive creativity and foster a
collaborative approach that benefits all.
The fastest way to fix bugs in new software is to release the source code
to the community. Hmmm, funny MS hasn't done this with Win 95 or NT...
Lots of folks got their first computing experience in the PC era, and being
victims of media and advertising hype decry free software as substandard.
The opposite is true. When substandard software has all the hype and the
gigabucks behind it, it unfortunately develops a market force that is all
but impossible to stop. Where's Beta rather than VHS these days anyway?
Kevin McQuiggin VE7ZD
A friend of mine dumped a small, meant-to-be-rack-mounted box that is
marked as a Hewlett Packard 9000 220, (model 9920-A). It has several cards
inside including a composite video car, a color output card, and one
meant for the keyboard. I tried to find out something about it but haven't
gotten very far, there were a few references to the auxiliary cards in
articles posted on comp.sys.hp.hardware. It appears to be a 286 workstation
maybe, and will boot, but I can't make out the prompts, since it won't sync
on the only composite monitor I have with BNC input.
Can anyone shed some light on this thing and what cann be done with it?
Net-Tamer V 1.09.2 - Test Drive
>Uh, PC's can do _anything_? Kewl. Set up an IBM PC with 64K RAM, 1 35-track
>SSDD Floppy drive, run a multi-user, multi-tasking operating system on it,
>and still have enough RAM/Floppy room left over to actually do something
>*useful*. Lemme know when it's done. My CoCo in the next room is set up to
>do just that.
I'm calling anything that's smaller than a mini a PC.
>Oh, and BTW: I can do *everything* you listed above on my Atari 1040STf...
>albeit not as quickly as my Cyrix box (but there *is* a reason why I
>overclocked it!! ;-) but anything possible on today's Pentium machines can
>be done right now by machines at least 10 years old... sometimes better!
Yep. By the way, what's the best way to overclock a Cyrix?
>>No, it won't. But that doesn't mean that it can't get easy. (Or just not
>>hard) Linux will be here for awhile, and so we've got to live withit.
>Linux isn't hard. My first install with _no_ Linux experience took just
>over an hour to install... and when I was done, (with only the initial
>kernal boot) it was useful. My latest Win95 install took me almost 6 hours
>to get it working somewhat -- ButtPlug-n-play chose the wrong Ethernet
>cards -- but after 3 reboots the wrong drivers (I tried putting in the
>right drivers -- NT doesn't even mind being helped along, but 95 whacked
>the right ones and reinstalled the wrong ones) started working marginally.
>Two more reboots to get the SCSI card working with the scanner, A reboot to
>get the screen at the correct resolution / color depth, and 2 more reboots
>after software installs that required it.
You made a couple mistakes... there arn't MS salesmen here, so don't say
PLUG AND PLAY, it's Plug & Pray. What version of Linux is that?
>Granted, Linux isn't an ooey-gooey with pretty pictures, and as such one
>might require 1/2 a brain to use it -- my personal opinion -- good. Keep
>all the idio-er-users with a brainless box...
Yes, but ease of use is important to some.
>"Uh, my daughter just downloaded our entire computer onto a disk. How do I
>get it back and boot it?"
>Not to sound like a shit-fer-brains, but my holiday is better spent talking
>to you guys & gals than spending 6 hours on the phone talking to a lady who
>specifically told me "I don't want to learn anything about my new computer
>-- I just want to get on the Internet." -- My boss specifically forbade me
>to answer those types of calls anyway ('cause I usually like to be helpful
>to newbies) and I don't get my regular work done.
Tell 'em what I do: (The other day, I e-mailed a friend who was new to the
'Net, then they replied via e-mail and asked what my e-mail address was.)
Then refer them to the convinetly located Online Help, made by someone who
had a little to much of whatever they had an overstock of at the bar and now
have a shortage of, then designed the manual, found on all MS-OSes.
>Yep, Win95 is the NOS for her! (NOS stands for Non-Operating System). But I
Well, it would help if she actually thought. I mean, don't you guies
include a manual, like my ISP, that specifically tells you WHERE TO CLICK
AND WHEN? ;-)
>Sorry for the rambling, Have yourselves a joyous and prosperous '98, and
>keep those geezers computing!!!! :-)
We will.... and don't foget, that means that there are less than 365 days
for Windows 98 to be late again. ;-) BTW, does anyone have a spare 14.4
modem? (For x86, preferably NOT a Winmodem)
Tim D. Hotze
I have acquired a system marked "MAI Basic Four Information System", Model 4105, Tustin California. It's not working.
CPU is a Z80 and it has 2 5 1/4" floppy drives. It's sort of sleek looking and the keyboard clips to the front, but there's no way it could be described a luggable. There are no handles and its much heavier than an Osborne 1 or Compaq.
Does anyone have any background on this?
<FWIW, I've got a DEC PDT-11 (Haven't touched it in years, due to space
PDT11/110 or 130 or 150?
My PDT-11/130 has 32kw ram and runs basic just fine. the 16kw one will
as well if I run rt-11SJ monitor.
<The way I remember it is this way:
I didn't have to remember I just reach over and pushed the mouse around
on both boxen.
FYI the diskset(1.44mb media) I have for 3.1 was had in early 1992 and
later sets had different mixes of drivers. the number of drivers
depended on time and diskset(type of media).
Same was true for 3.0 disks as mine were 720k 3.5" (more room that the
360k floppy set.)
<that, or I had some screwed up install disks). I figure they were thin
<"Who'd want to install 3.1/3.11 on something so slow???"
Someone that needs compatability to some level. Slow is a relitive
thing. When I first ran winders it was on a 386/16 with 4mb of ram
it seemed fast enough to do a lot of useful work.