What I meant was, if discrete transistors could be used, a small cube
of which would equal a Pentium II in transistor number, it would be
possible to make a Pentium II box to plug into an XT in 1982. Of
course, I hadn't considered at the time I said it that it would be
very slow, and speed is the main difference between an earlier
machine and a Pentium.
>There were boards to put 386s in XT machines. I have one, an Intel
>inboard386pc. It replaces the 8088 (the 8088 has to be removed). There
>were others made.
>
>Allison
>
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
On Thu, 01 Oct 1998 Max Eskin wrote:
>Is there a device that would allow _any_ disk, independently of
>format, including Apple ][ disks, to be read? I know Teledisk can do
>this for all conventional formats, but not Apple disks. It would be
>nice to connect one of these and read the disk image into a file.
>The main reason why I ask is for rescuing messed up floppies...
There is a product called Catweasel which is available for the Amiga and PC
(ISA card). This is a floppy disk controller which is capable of reading and/or
writing many disk formats.
According to a magazine article that I have in front of me, the ISA version
currently supports (amongst others) Amiga DD & HD, Apple II, Mac 400K & 800K,
Commodore 1541 & 1571. I don't know whether reading Mac 400K & 800K disks
requires a non-standard type of 3.5" drive or not.
PC software support is apparently not too good at the moment, meaning that you
will have to write your own code for more exotic disk formats. The supplied
MS-DOS programs require a 486 for no good reason. A Linux driver is supplied,
but this is object code only, not source. (IMO trying to keep the software that
accesses the card private like this is a really silly thing to do.)
Anyway, the URL given was http://www.jshoenfeld.com/eindex.html
On Thu, 1 Oct 1998 Kai Kaltenbach wrote:
>Atari ST uses DOS format in the first place. Amiga can be read on the PC by
>Amiga emulators. C64, I have no idea, but I know at least you could use a
>C128 to copy files to CP/M format.
Amiga disks cannot be read by normal PC disk controllers.
You can make a cable to hook up a 1541 disk drive to a PC or Amiga and read
files or disk images using this.
-- Mark
Hello everybody...
I hope you are all having a lovely weekend. I have decided to compile a
comprehensive registry of all the existing Nutting Associates Computer
Space machines that are still alive in North America -- and I need your
help. I feel that it is important to the legacy of this revolutionary
arcade game, and the history of videogames, to establish the wherabouts and
condition of the remaining systems.
If either you, or someone you know and love, is in possession of a Computer
Space (working or not) please contact me with the following information:
..............................
model: (one or two player)
color: (red, green, blue, gold, or custom)
controls: (buttons, joystick, pistol-grip, etc.)
serial#: (stamped on back-plate)
owner: (name)
location: (city and state)
condition: (working or not)
comments: -
contact info: (optional)
If you have an image of your game, please send it as an attachment
..............................
This list will be published as a reference for all Computer Space
collectors and updated annually.
Please feel free to forward this message to ANYONE and EVERYONE you feel
may have insight as to the location of a Computer Space machine. Any
assistance in locating these machines will be greatly appreciated you will
no doubt be relentlessly thanked by me for your help.
Best regards,
van burnham
........................................................................
@
/
/ Shift Lever
(D)/
\===================================== @ ================ Floor Plan ===
>
BNL |- - -Phase Shifter- - - -|--/ Get Wired!
- ------------]=[]@----------------------@ 415.276.4979
Trans- ] ]](A) Toll Free 1.888.208.6655 (B) ? (C) Rear Connection
mission ]]]]]]]]]]]]Driveshaft]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]]
] ]]
71 ------------] web superstation of the stars...
van burnham http://www.futuraworld.com
production manager
wired 520 third street fourth floor san francisco ca 94107 united states
........................................................................
for immediate emergency wireless access send email to van-page(a)wired.com
van(a)wired.com van(a)futuraworld.com pingpong(a)spy.net vanburnham(a)aol.com
I've never seen any other pc that used these 128k (64k dip dram
piggy-backed) chips. Regarding the numbers of the chips, they were
standard 64k dip drams, the IBM part number is long lost on me.
Marty
______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
Subject: IBM AT Piggyback Memory
Author: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu at internet
Date: 10/19/98 4:22 PM
In rummage through the dark recesses of my garage (too densly packed to let
in light) I again ran across an IBM AT motherboard that used the piggyback
memory chips. Were there any other computers that used these things? Also,
does anyone know the numbers of the two chips that were soldered together?
------ Message Header Follows ------
Received: from lists3.u.washington.edu by smtp.itgonline.com
(PostalUnion/SMTP(tm) v2.1.9i(b5) for Windows NT(tm))
id AA-1998Oct19.162239.1767.70774; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:22:39 -0400
Received: from host (lists.u.washington.edu [140.142.56.13])
by lists3.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW98.06) with SMTP
id NAA09647; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:20:38 -0700
Received: from mxu2.u.washington.edu (mxu2.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.9])
by lists.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW98.06) with ESMTP
id NAA50650 for <classiccmp(a)lists.u.washington.edu>; Mon, 19 Oct 1998
13:20:26 -0700
Received: from coyote.rain.org (root(a)coyote.rain.org [198.68.144.2])
by mxu2.u.washington.edu (8.9.1+UW98.09/8.9.1+UW98.09) with ESMTP id NAA31
532
for <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:20:24 -0700
Received: from rain.org (s14.max2.sb.rain.org [198.68.144.197])
by coyote.rain.org (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA11746
for <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:20:22 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <362B9EBA.D74807C3(a)rain.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 13:19:06 -0700
Reply-To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu
Sender: CLASSICCMP-owner(a)u.washington.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: Marvin <marvin(a)rain.org>
To: "Discussion re-collecting of classic computers"
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Subject: IBM AT Piggyback Memory
References: <199810202000.QAA01233(a)armigeron.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=x-user-defined
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 beta -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN
In fact, it seems there are mainframes faster than even a 486-33.
So, I guess Intel outran the mainframe systems only recently.
>
>If one looks at the Linpack benchmark, the CDC 6600 was almost twice as
>fast as a Sun 386i/250 (info lifted from
><http://lithos.gat.com/docview/linpack.bb>).
>
>> BTW, what did the Cray I use?
>
>The Cray-1s used simple ECL chips - I think there were only four types
in
>the whole machine.
>
>William Donzelli
>william(a)ans.net
>
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>< But you can't build a *system* with that overall density.
>
>Long standing problem but, the military did have machine approacing
that
>density. Consider that once you got over a certain size it was less
>imporant to be small.
>
What about 386s? Did Intel outrun the mainframes with the 386, or were
there discrete transistor machines with better performance than that?
BTW, what did the Cray I use?
>Yep.
>
>I disagree that a 286 had more raw cpu performance than some of the big
>transistor machines. I still remember the BOCES/LIRICS KA10 running
some
>300 users. I've never seen a 286 run more than 4. Same applies to IBM
>2060s.
>
>Allison
>
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>>[Has anyone USED TOPS-20?]
>
>I'm using it, right now. To send this message.
I've used TOPS-20 in the past, and recently got a guest account
on a -20 based system. I have to admit I prefer TOPS-10 over
TOPS-20 any day, but reasons why could inflame a 'religious'
war...
Megan Gentry
Former RT-11 Developer
+--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+
| Megan Gentry, EMT/B, PP-ASEL | Internet (work): gentry!zk3.dec.com |
| Unix Support Engineering Group | (home): mbg!world.std.com |
| Compaq Computer Corporation | addresses need '@' in place of '!' |
| 110 Spitbrook Rd. ZK03-2/T43 | URL: http://world.std.com/~mbg/ |
| Nashua, NH 03062 | "pdp-11 programmer - some assembler |
| (603) 884 1055 | required." - mbg |
+--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+
That wasn't the first p of s IBM delivered.
Marty
______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
Subject: Belly laugh on eBay
Author: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu at internet
Date: 10/19/98 3:40 PM
This item description on eBay says it all:
36111353 Collectible IBM PS/1 Type 2011
BWAHAHAHAHA!
Kai
------ Message Header Follows ------
Received: from lists4.u.washington.edu by smtp.itgonline.com
(PostalUnion/SMTP(tm) v2.1.9i(b5) for Windows NT(tm))
id AA-1998Oct19.154052.1767.70755; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 15:40:52 -0400
Received: from host (lists.u.washington.edu [140.142.56.13])
by lists4.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW98.06) with SMTP
id MAA25925; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:38:34 -0700
Received: from mxu4.u.washington.edu (mxu4.u.washington.edu [140.142.33.8])
by lists.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW98.06) with ESMTP
id MAA19986 for <classiccmp(a)lists.u.washington.edu>; Mon, 19 Oct 1998
12:38:26 -0700
Received: from mail5.microsoft.com (mail5.microsoft.com [131.107.3.121])
by mxu4.u.washington.edu (8.9.1+UW98.09/8.9.1+UW98.09) with ESMTP id MAA17
074
for <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:38:26 -0700
Received: by INET-IMC-05 with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2232.9)
id <VBTZ1YQJ>; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:38:22 -0700
Message-Id: <FFD1BA74C6A7D111A09500805F9F88F50720B045@RED-MSG-43>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 12:38:21 -0700
Reply-To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu
Sender: CLASSICCMP-owner(a)u.washington.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: Kai Kaltenbach <kaikal(a)MICROSOFT.com>
To: "Discussion re-collecting of classic computers"
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Subject: Belly laugh on eBay
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="ISO-8859-1"
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 beta -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN
< Every so often, people here mention how they wish they had TOPS-20
< on their modern computers, how much superior it was to UNIX, etc.
< COuld someone please explain the specific features (apparent to a
< user) that are missing in UNIX? If I understand correctly, TOPS takes
It's been 27 years since I ran TOPS10 but the differences can be summed
up as a better human interface at the command line level. I've always
considered the unix command line userhostile.
Allison
