Dear sir`s.
I want to move a harddisk from a PCXT to a PCAT and add it to the
existing harddisk in my PCAT. Do you know how that can be done?
With kind regards.
Joaki Kjellander.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
The first speaker has been confirmed for VCF2 this September.
David Rutland was an engineer on a lesser known but very significant
computer dedicated in 1950 called the SWAC (National Bureau of Standards
Western Automatic Computer).
You can check out his bio on the Vintage Computer Festival web page:
http://www.siconic.com/vcf
Sam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't blame me...I voted for Satan.
Coming in September...Vintage Computer Festival 2.0
See http://www.siconic.com/vcf for details!
[Last web page update: 04/25/98]
On Apr 25, 1:39, Tony Duell wrote:
> Allison wrote:
> > I have: 1802, SC/MP, 6800, 6809, NEC D78PG11, 8748/9, 8751, 8080/8085,
> > z80, z180, z280, z8002, z8001, 808x, 8018x, 80286, 80386, 80486 and the
> > micro version of minis 6100(pdp-8), 6120(PDP-8+EMA) TI9900, PDP11(T-11,
> > F11, J-11).
> Let's see how I do :
>
> Ones I have : (possibly embedded, but I've designed machines round a
> number of these...)
>
> SC/MP, 8008, 8080, 1802, 8085, Z80, 64180, 8086, 8088, 80286, 80386,
80486,
> 68000, 68010, 68020, 68040, T212 (or maybe T225), T425, T801, T805,
> PIC16C84, PIC17C42, F11, J11, 6502, 6809, 6800, 6803, 4040, 8048 (and
> 8035), 8051 (and 8031, 8032), ARM2, ARM3, R2000, 6120, Z8001, 32016, 2901
> etc (does that count), 3001 etc (ditto), and doubtless more that I've
> forgotten...
I can't beat that...
8008, 8085, 8088, 8086, 80186, 80286, 80386, 80486, V20, Z80, Z8, Z8001
(but in foam, not a system), 6502, 65C12, 6800, 6809 (in foam), 68HC11,
8032, 8035, 8048, 68000, 68010, 68020, assorted PICs, ARM2, ARM3, R4600,
Sparc, 2901, D11, F11, T11, J11, 6100, and probably a few embedded "things"
and others I've forgotten, but I wouldn't claim to have programmed all of
them.
However, what's surprising about these lists is not what's there, but
what's missing.
What's a 3001, BTW?
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
At 09:50 PM 4/24/98 -0500, you wrote:
>On Fri, 24 Apr 1998, Zane H. Healy wrote:
>
[snippies]
>
>What makes you think the Evil Empire is behind this? Did Microsoft buy
>Wang recently? If not, they'll get hit with the same suit.
>
[s]
>-- Doug
Have a look at http://www.mozilla.org/.
<> Allison wrote:
<> > I have: 1802, SC/MP, 6800, 6809, NEC D78PG11, 8748/9, 8751, 8080/8085
<> > z80, z180, z280, z8002, z8001, 808x, 8018x, 80286, 80386, 80486 and t
<> > micro version of minis 6100(pdp-8), 6120(PDP-8+EMA) TI9900, PDP11(T-1
<> > F11, J-11).
By and large including the 8008 and VAX I've programmed and designed with
all. The key thing is I have working examples of all but the 8008.
Drat, I forgot the NEC unique 4 bitters the uCOM4 and ucom75 series
designed them into and programmed them as well.
<What's a 3001, BTW?
3001 is an intel bit slice (2 bits per).
Allison
<I have an Intel Component Data Catalogue from about 1978 that still lists
<as being available then. A 4 bit microprocessor wouldn't have been very
<useful in a computer so might we find them as controllers in washing
<machines, microwaves and the like?
They were used for calculator like and control systems. The word width
does not determine it's usefulness as a computer though it greately
affects speed.
Allison
The highly sought after Commodore 1581 (3 1/2") drive is worth anywhere from
$50. - $80. depending upon condition (power supply included). Post a
message as to it's availability in comp.sys.cbm, and you'll have all kinds
of offers.
Cliff Gregory
cgregory(a)lrbcg.com
-----Original Message-----
From: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
To: Cgregory <Cgregory>
Date: Friday, April 24, 1998 10:15 PM
Subject: C64 3 1/2" drive
>
>Just turned up a Commodore 3 1/2" drive -- didn't know they existed! Anyone
>interested?
>
>Also, some strange thing with 4 hand held units with 4 buttons each, which
>plugs into the joystick port. No software.
>
>manney(a)lrbcg.com
>
>
>
>Showoff :-) No 8008? I always wanted a 4004 (anyone listening out there,
I have an Intel Component Data Catalogue from about 1978 that still lists it
as being available then. A 4 bit microprocessor wouldn't have been very
useful in a computer so might we find them as controllers in washing
machines, microwaves and the like?
At 09:50 PM 24-04-98 -0500, Doug Yowza wrote:
>It sounds like the Wang patent basically covers rendering formatted
>information on a terminal that was acquired via a remote connection. So,
>what was the closest thing to a Web browser before 1993? GRiD fan that I
>am, I vote for the 1982 GRiD/OS and remote GRiDCentral. GRiD/OS had a
>form and menu based OS interface and actions were based on the file type
>and extension. GRiDCentral (and the LAN-based GRiDServer) basically
>distributed this menu-based filesystem over a remote connection.
How about the CAI system that CDC had (I can't remember the name off hand
at the moment - I think my brain is broken - I couldn't even remember the
brand name of some wine I wanted to buy yesterday... Will chewing on a
floppy disk or two improve things :-). From my limited exposure it's likely
that the CDC thingy :-) had a browser style interface.
Huw Davies | e-mail: Huw.Davies(a)latrobe.edu.au
Information Technology Services | Phone: +61 3 9479 1550 Fax: +61 3 9479
1999
La Trobe University | "My Alfa keeps me poor in a monetary
Melbourne Australia 3083 | sense, but rich in so many other ways"
On Apr 24, 21:50, Doug Yowza wrote:
> Subject: About the Wang '669 patent
> On Fri, 24 Apr 1998, Zane H. Healy wrote:
>
> > If you haven't seen the news yet, I found out thanks to
http://slashdot.org
> > , Microsoft is pulling one of their dirtiest stunts ever in their
attempt
> > to destroy Netscape. If anyone doesn't think Microsoft is evil this
should
> > convince them, unless they are niave enough to think Microsoft isn't
behind
> > this!
>
> What makes you think the Evil Empire is behind this? Did Microsoft buy
> Wang recently? If not, they'll get hit with the same suit.
They "formed a partnership" which, amongst other things, involved the
exchange of some $90,000,000.
> It sounds like the Wang patent basically covers rendering formatted
> information on a terminal that was acquired via a remote connection. So,
> what was the closest thing to a Web browser before 1993? GRiD fan that I
> am, I vote for the 1982 GRiD/OS and remote GRiDCentral. GRiD/OS had a
> form and menu based OS interface and actions were based on the file type
> and extension. GRiDCentral (and the LAN-based GRiDServer) basically
> distributed this menu-based filesystem over a remote connection.
The Wang patent relates to videotex terminals, exactly the stuff that
British Telecom developed in the 1970s and pushed hard (as PRESTEL) in the
early 80s. Prestel was organised a little like an ISP, with various "IP"s
(information providers) renting space in which they creating "frames" of
text and (chunky) graphics which were accessible by modem. IPs could
sublet space, too, so individuals could rent just a single frame if they
wanted.
In 1982 PRESTEL launched a service called Micronet800, which used thousands
of pages on PRESTEL servers to store microcomputer related news, software,
etc, and started selling software to enable home micros to dial up and
display/load/save these pages. Actually, stuff for micros had been around
on PRESTEL before that, but spring 1982 was when it took off. I got my
software and modem that summer. Most of the modems were simple devices
built in to an acoustic coupler, fondly known as agnostic complicators.
PRESTEL itself didn't make use of file extensions, but obviously some of
the micro systesm that accessed it did. CP/M has always based certain
actions on file types and extensions, for example. It did use menus of
links, and the links between frames, could be quite arbitrary (and
tangled!) just like the web. There was even a command to go back one or
more frames, and there were "response" frames and a mail system and ...
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
