At 02:46 PM 12/15/98 -0600, Doug Yowza wrote:
>That's an idea. Do you think there's a greed gene we could test for?
>The point was that there's more than one motivation for selling something,
>and money alone isn't always it.
If someone paid $6,000 for something, and someone else paid $100,
which person is more likely to preserve the something?
>I have no problem with high prices being paid, but I have problems with
>high prices being *publicized* because it directly affects me and the
>hobby in a negative way.
>We can no longer assume that everybody on this list is
>interested in the preservation of old computers, so it doesn't make sense
>to offer "special" deals here with the expectation that the machines will
>get "special" treatment.
You know the joke about the guy who goes to the doctor and says
"It hurts when I do this" and the doctor says "Don't do that"?
Well, you're right. You can't expect to make a public announcement
and somehow control the outcome after the sale.
If someone really wants to preserve a system, would it be so hard
as to hand-pick someone to get it? Let's say you had an old Terak.
You do a simple web search and see this nice guy in Wisconsin with
a Terak museum web page, and you decide to give it to him instead
of selling it on eBay for $10,000. Problem solved.
Oh, but wait you say - we aren't talking about people who want
to preserve systems, we're talking about people who want to sell
them and get as much money as possible for the transaction.
>But this isn't a rant about prices, it's about expectations of behavior in
>this "community."
There is no community. You've been believing too many techno-pagans
in the pages of Wired. :-)
At 12:43 PM 12/15/98 -0800, Kai Kaltenbach wrote:
>I feel compelled to point out that I know all of the classic computer
>collectors here, and I am only aware of one millionaire in the world ever
>paying stupid prices for old junk, and he's the founder of some independent
>web design company, he does not work for MS.
I wasn't thinking of anyone in particular. Sorry about that.
I recalled someone else complaining that some xxxx(a)microsoft.com
bidder was walking away with systems on eBay, and assumed it
was true.
> I am not aware of anyone who is _buying and
>selling_ classic computers for a profit.
There's the Bob guy, the antique reseller, right? Good for him.
At 04:19 PM 12/15/98 -0500, Max Eskin wrote:
>That right there is a very important statement, on par with "Carthago
>delenda est". I agree with you completely.
What do you think you can wipe out, and how?
>I guess the old days of
>innocence are gone. It's not just an Enrico Tedeschi every few months,
>there are actually people trying to make money off this hobby.
Hobby? Who said it was a hobby? There are obviously some people
on this list who have made it their life's work.
- John
Well, I guess we lost an RSX document resource for some reason.
http://rsxbbs.delconet.com/ has a shouting message and graphic:
"Due to negative comments by posters to vmsnet.pdp-11,
the RSX BBS was decommissioned on 13 December 1998.
There are no plans to restore the service. Some
material will be moved to a commercial site.
Previous donors should contact the Webmaster
to arrange return of their equipment or documents. "
I cannot keep up with Usenet groups for lack of time. Anybody know what the
'negative comments' were about that I (we) missed?
There were some Emulex docs posted there I wanted to check again (at URL:
http://rsxbbs.delconet.com/docs/emulex/index.html). Any other location??
Thanks, Chris
-- --
Christian Fandt, Electronic/Electrical Historian
Jamestown, NY USA cfandt(a)netsync.net
Member of Antique Wireless Association
URL: http://www.ggw.org/freenet/a/awa/
Sorry about the ebay intrusion. I queried them to find out how to do a search
on the description and forgot I was doing it from within the list. I seem to
be able to search only by title, number, buyer, seller and completed titles.
Paxton
I have done this on a 64C case here. It requires a little surgery (minor),
but nothing serious.
The 64 MB is preferred since it has sockets and uses a 6581 SID, not the cost
reduced 8580 SID that has broken filters.
Jim
In article <c=USa=IBMX400p=HFCl=EXCHANGE01-980915164143Z-198853(a)exchange01.hersheys.com>,
"Salzman, Jeff" <jsalzman(a)hersheys.com> wrote:
>Mostly, there are some motherboard design difference between the two.
>However, it is known that you can actually swap the boards between the
>two if you preferred one case over another and have a bad unit. There
>were at least 4 different board revisions, so some boards may not move
>to another case. Another thing you might notice is the power supply
>connector is different. There was a connector redesign between the newer
>(aka 'flat C64') and older (aka 'Breadbox') C64's. The flat 64 has a
>square connector where the breadbox 64 has a round one. The flat 64 also
>has a different component layout due to IC consolidation. Maybe those
>newer chip designs are what's overheating your system. Or it could be
>the fact that the parts are closer to the outside of the case.
>
>I'm toying with the idea of swapping boards in my systems. I only heard
>that it can be done. I want a functional version of each and I have 2
>working flat units and 7 dead breadboxes (of which I salvaged parts from
>to get an SX-64 working). For my display units, I would like one of each
>design in working order.
>
>Hope this helps,
>Jeff Salzman
>
>>I was wondering, what is the difference between a regular Commodore 64 and a
>>64C? I've got one of each, and everything seems identical other than that the
>>64C looks like a 128. (Well, one other difference is that the 64C overheats
>>after about an hour or so...)
>>
>
--
--
*********** A NOTE FROM JIM BRAIN ********************************************
I would like to apologize for the lateness in replying to your letter or note.
Please do not take offense at the lack of a reply from myself. The Brain
family has had some very extenuating circumstances throughout the 1998 year.
At the close of 1997, my wife became gravely ill while in her first trimester
of pregnancy with our son. To support my wife's needs, I switched the
www.jbrain.com web site, ftp.jbrain.com FTP site and mail.jbrain.com
listserver to autopilot and discontinued all online activities, including FAQ
maintenance, responses to email requests, and other demands for my time. I
also shut down Brain Innovations, Inc., our side business.
My wife's health improved by March of 1998, and in June 19, 1998, Brent
Harrison Brain came into the world at 7:50 AM. However, at 5 pounds, 3
ounces, Brent was 5 weeks early and a bit of a preemie. We were very ecstatic
at the arrival.
A few weeks later, Brent, who had not learned how to nurse very well, weighed
in at 4 pounds and was sent to the neonatal ICU to stabilize his weight and
regain lost fluids. The cause was his underdeveloped "sucking" instinct,
which is common in preemies. Brent quickly stabilized and he was sent home
within 3 days. I am happy to report that Brent has now learned all he needed
to get food and now tips the scale at 15 pounds.
Abaout this time, my commercial Internet Service Provider upgraded some
application libraries on my server (which I share with many others) and broke
the entire www.jbrain.com. It took from June 1 to July 1 to fix the problem,
which eventually led to the migration of the jbrain.com domain to a new server
with upgraded scripting tools, rendering the old www.jbrain.com unusable. I
then started working on a replacement.
I was able to get email and mailing lists back in operation before my wife and
I (Brent was at home with my parents) were involved in a broadside collision
while on our first "date" after the birth. I was left unhurt, but my wife
sustained bruises and broken bones. Due to the breastfeeding, she was unable
to take adequate medication, and her immobility made taking care of our son a
impossible task. With some regret, I packed her and my son off with my
parents to drive 10 hours to IL, where my wife's mother would care for both of
them. I stayed at our house to direct the replacement of our totaled Saturn
automobile
In early August, my wife and son returned to Nebraska, but it took a few
months for my wife injuries to heal to the point where she could care for our
son during the day alone and withut discomfort.
The events of the past 7 months caused us both to "withdraw" from the world in
some respects. I have let email and web maintenance go without intervention,
while we've both been slow to start back into any projects or start up our
side business again.
However, we are finally feeling better able to tackle the many demands on our
time and the many hobbies we enjoy. My hope is that we can start out 1999
with a clean slate and forget about our many trials in 1998. We will, though,
always remember 1998 as the year our son came to us (but I hope that is all we
remember from it). I am happy to report that as of December 7, 1998, Brent is
doing great, my wife is hoping to make a full recovery (though her back and
feet still hurt occasionally). I am finally finishing some projects around
the house and finding time and the energy to restart enjoying my hobbies and
my online presence.
As I write this, I am preparing to work my wife through 9 months of
accumulated email from mail.jbrain.com. If you have sent me more than one
message, please excuse the redundancy of the note when you receive it
additional times. For simplicity sake, this is my .signature file for the
next few weeks.
We appreciate the responses we have received from folks during our trials.
However, please do not feel it necesary to respond to this message, at least
not for a few weeks. Doing so now will simply put more email in my inbox, of
which I have plenty at present.
Merry Christmas to everyone, and look for the Brain Christmas Letter on our
web site.
Jim Brain (and family)
--
Jim Brain, Embedded System Designer, Brain Innovations, Inc. (BII)(offline sig)
bii(a)mail.jbrain.com "Above views DO reflect my employer, since I'm my employer"
Dabbling in WWW, Embedded Systems, Old CBM computers, and Good Times! -Me-
BII Home: http://www.jbrain.com CBM Info: http://www.jbrain.com/vicug/
At 08:09 PM 12/15/98 -0600, you wrote:
>
>BTW, have you seen my Sol museum?
> http://www.yowza.com/classiccmp/sol/
>
>-- Doug
AARGH!!! a guilt trip! (and well done I might add)
-jim
---
jimw(a)agora.rdrop.com
The Computer Garage - http://www.rdrop.com/~jimw
Computer Garage Fax - (503) 646-0174
ive got two i want to sell. one has the standard brown keys, but the other has
white keys instead and a white power supply. the insert/del key is broken off,
but included. the C64 with the normal colours is complete. either one will
come with a power supply. both presumed working, but i have not a video cable
to verify video. make a whimsical offer including shipping from NC.
david
In a message dated 12/15/98 10:03:07 PM US Eastern Standard Time,
pctech(a)davidbowie.com writes:
>
> Someone i know came across this machine and asked if i could restore it.It
> is a Laser 128 I know it is an Apple II clone but what else can anyone tell
> me about it.I have cleaned this thing out(it was filthy)But cant start it up
> because i have no power cord to do so any info will be of great help
>
> Brian
if it's just the laser 128 and not an ex model, then it's pretty much a //c
wannabe. ive heard it said that a //c power supply will get it working but
i've never verified it. the slot on the left side can take an option card like
a disk ][ controller. IIRC, control-open apple-P or control-reset-P gets you
into control panel.
david
>>S1= ON Boot to ODT 165xxx
>>S1=off Boot selected device 173xxx
>>s2=off for 11/24 use
>>s3 through s10 are starting add.
>
>S1 is set so that 1 thru 8 is 'OFF' and 9 + 10 are 'ON' as I found it.
9+10 means boot 173006 diagnose on (sizes memory etc.)
> -- snip --
>>I am surprised you have the M9312 in that machine since you have 1 meg of
>>memory. Normally you would put the boot rom on the KT24 (M7134) and use
>>just a M9302 terminator.
correction 01000000 = 256k bytes /128k words sorry old age I guess
>Then Tim Shoppa replied:
>
>>I am surprised you have the M9312 in that machine since you have 1 meg of
>>memory. Normally you would put the boot rom on the KT24 (M7134) and use
>>just a M9302 terminator.
>
>Normally, yes, that's what you'd do. But it is possible to use
>more than 256 K without the KT24 memory map/bootstrap module, assuming
>your OS never tries to do I/O to memory past 256 K. For example,
>RT-11 SJ, where the extra memory is used as a virtual (VM:) disk
>drive.
>
>
>Well, this machine has just a single M7891-DH with 128 KW of MOS RAM. Tim,
>I assume you meant 256K *bytes*? :)
>
>There is no KT24 in this machine. It's kinda scrawny featurewise for such a
>machine. Not even a DD11-DK expansion backplane is installed. Has two
>RL02's in the cabinet. Came out of Case Western Reserve university so it
>could have been hacked to make a 'smaller' system for instructional use or
>just for lab use. Still has the UDA50 boardset for SDI disks but no SDI
>"DU" boot ROM (767A9). Who knows <shrug> . . .
>
>Anyway, the lack of a KT24 explains why a 9312 was used instead of the
9302.
>
>BTW: after flicking the boot switch, about how many minutes should it take
>to do the prelim. tests before any evident booting action takes place? I
>just see the # of bytes of memory displayed ("@01000000") and a few
>flickers of the "Ready" light on the RL02.
Should start booting shortly (less than 30 sec.after mem size displayed)
I waited at least five minutes
>or more several times. After thinking I've waited long enough to grow old
>waiting, I Halt the processor and "@1013" is written to the display. Could
>there be a hang? (Got simple info out of my RT-11 5.1 manuals on how to
>boot an 11/24 just this AM. Stumbled upon it, actually.)
I don't know about RT - all my experience is with RSX11M+ but I would guess
that it is not seeing the boot sectors. IE: try another platter. Before
inserting another disk check / clean the heads, check the old platter for
those nasty rings.
Dan
>
Ok... being somewhat bemused by the thoughts of a 'feeding frenzy', and
sadly short on $$ (as is all too common this time of year), and not
wanting to be accused of 'selling out' on eBay without offering to the
more civilized set first, and... (etc., etc., etc...)
Let's chuck another (yule) log into the flames and see how badly I get
scorched with this one... (quite the build up, eh?)
---
Deemed (reluctantly) surplus to the collection:
SOL-20, electronically restored and keyboard rebuilt
w/ P.T. 16kra memory card
- AND -
(so the eBay set does not feel left out)
*RARE* original Panasonic B/W TV/Monitor conversion from P.T. with
touch-plate power switch!
---
Not that I want to start a bidding war (or then again, why not?) so lets
say that it could be had for $600 plus shipping, with a possibility of
part/all trade for something similarly really cool! (tho I could really
use the $$$)
Then, if the feeding frenzy really starts, folks can start openly bidding
up the "ham sandwich"! B^}
"Call now! This offer only good thru noon PST Friday, 18-December-1998
or while supplies last! This offer may not be repeated! Operators are
standing by!"
(quickly donning the flameproof 'Santa' suit)
-jim
---
jimw(a)agora.rdrop.com
The Computer Garage - http://www.rdrop.com/~jimw
Computer Garage Fax - (503) 646-0174
Interestingly, one of these sold on ebay yesterday.
The photo is still there right now, but will probalby
go away shortly.
Jon
see:
http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=48594741
=======================================================
>cswiger wrote:
>
>> Anyone heard of a product called the "Video Brain" circa 77-78?
>>
>> Regards
>> Chuck
>> cswiger(a)widomaker.com
>
>I have one of these computers/Game machines. I have looked everywhere
>and have never found any information about them anywhere.
>
>Do you have one?
>
>Do You know anything about them ?
>
>My Video Brain is black, about the size of a commodore 64, has a full
>keyboard,
>cheap keyboard almost chicklet type. It has two nice joysticks, several
>application
>cartridges, I also have several manuals for it. Its very clean, but does
>not work..
>Like I said I know nothing about this machine and have found out nothing
>anywhere about it..
>
>Phil...
>
