Heh heh, this took some doing, but I got it for ya, phone # coming in
private mail.
Kai
-----Original Message-----
From: Sam Ismail [mailto:dastar@ncal.verio.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 1998 10:45 PM
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
Subject: NEED HELP FINDING CHUCK PEDDLE!!!
I'll give a LIFETIME PASS TO THE VINTAGE COMPUTER FESTIVAL to the first
person who successfully gets me in touch with CHUCK PEDDLE of
6502/Commodore PET fame.
Sam Alternate e-mail:
dastar(a)siconic.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
Ever onward.
September 26 & 27...Vintage Computer Festival 2.0
See http://www.siconic.com/vcf for details!
[Last web site update: 08/25/98]
>> I really don't know what to call a SMP PC, though. Microsupercomputer?
> These days, a mini. Look at one of Suns Ultra Enterprise systems -
> essentially as many UltraSPARC CPUs that you want to shove in one box.
So this PC, I'm curently working on, on my desktop with 4 CPUs
and Win 3.51, is a Mini ? Gosh - I always thought is was just an
ordinary PC for my dayly Tasks with Word & co.
:)
H.
--
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK
Hello all.
If you're not aware of this, Don Tarbell, of the famous Tarbell Cassette
standard, died earlier this year. Someone posted about this on the list
around the time he passed on.
I'd like to display an "obituary" at the Vintage Computer Festival. I'll
give a free pass to this (or a future) Vintage Computer Festival and a VCF
t-shirt to anyone who wants to write up an obituary for Mr. Tarbell.
Ideally, the write-up should include his contributions to the world of
computing, including a good historical account of his cassette standard
and other technical acheivements, as well as what companies he founded,
etc. The requisite obituary information such as date of birth/death,
hometown, etc. should also be included.
I would need to have this by the 20th or so. Please contact me by private
e-mail if you are interested. Thanks!
Sam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ever onward.
September 26 & 27...Vintage Computer Festival 2.0
See http://www.siconic.com/vcf for details!
[Last web site update: 08/25/98]
> I need to test a possibly bad PSU for an Apple II+. Can anyone
> (tony?) tell me what I should use for a dummy load?
I don't know what the Apple ][ or // used in the way of current, but
Commodore PETs of that date used 2 to 4 amps, I think. (Early PETs,
iirc, had 4 1A regulator chips on different bits of 5V rail).
You want something to draw around 1/2 to 1 amp. 6V torch (flashlight)
bulb - one of the nice krypton ones that runs of a big rectangular
battery would be ideal. 12V 10W car lamp bulb would do, though it won't
glow more than dull orange when working. 10 ohm resistor would work,
but it probably needs to be a really big fat one - in a rectangular
ceramic package or with built in alumin(i)um heatsink.
Hope this gives you some ideas.
Philip.
It could be, as in the case of the adapter, a transformer. It could also
be a capacitor. I don't know how they make sound, but when I used to turn
off my old Leading Edge, there was a high-voltage Cap that would make a
loud *Chirp!*, then whistle, and the whistle would die down in a few
seconds. It did the same thing when it was turned on, but backwards. It
would start out as a soft whistle, get louder, then disappear, as the sound
probably went out of the range of human hearing. It sounded sort of like
when a computer would power up in an old Sci-Fi movie.
Is the computer otherwise working fine? if it is, and there's no smoke or
crackling sounds (like heating of coils or other components) after it's
been on for a while, I wouldn't worry.
Is it a constant, high-pitched whistle? Not being familiar with the
Osborne 01, dose it have a built-in CRT? It could be that that's
whistling. Try booting it with the CRT and control board (the thing with
the high voltage transformer with the wire going to the side of the CRT)
TOTALLY disconnected, and see if it still whistles. If it doesn't, then
you've found the problem.
As for fixing a whistling CRT, I haven't figured it out, yet (If anybody
knows how, could they please tell me?). The only problems that I've seen
the whistling do is possibly make your ears hurt. My current solution:
wear ear plugs when using my Tandy 1000.
--
-Jason
(roblwill(a)usaor.net)
ICQ#-1730318
----------
> From: Sam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com>
> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
> Subject: Re: Osborne 01 computer smoked..
> Date: Friday, September 04, 1998 9:53 PM
>
> But what part is making such vibrations that it actually causes sound
> waves to be emitted?
>
> Sam Alternate e-mail:
dastar(a)siconic.com
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
> Ever onward.
>
> September 26 & 27...Vintage Computer Festival 2.0
> See http://www.siconic.com/vcf for details!
> [Last web site update: 08/25/98]
>
----------
> From: David Williams <dlw(a)trailingedge.com>
> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
> Subject: Re: WTB: TRS-80 stuff.
> Date: Monday, September 07, 1998 2:24 AM
>
>
> On Tim's page (I believe) there is also a Linux TRS-80 Model 1/3/4
> emulator (called xtrs) that can use the Linux box's floppy drives as
> the emulator's drives. A couple of days ago, I setup an old 486
> with a 5.25" floppy and installed Linux. Set up the emulator and
> downloaded the LDOS from Tim's page. Used the emulator to
> make a new LDOS boot disk using the floppy drive. Took the disk
> to my Model III and it booted right up. I've used that technique to
> move several pieces of TRS-80 Model III software now and I'm
> working on Model I software using the Model III as a go between.
> Works great and is just one more example of some useful software
> for Linux. At least for collectors of old TRS-80s. :-) The xtrs
> emulator is pretty good although it isn't really easy to swap
> emulated disks. Next I'm going to try it out with my Model 4.
>
O.K. I saw that. Now-- Where do I get a copy of Linux??
--
-Jason
(roblwill(a)usaor.net)
ICQ#-1730318
>>> Ahhh. I guess it shows that I've done very very little with mainframes and
>>> learned everything I know on Micros and Mini's. I stand corrected. :)
>> I hope my message did not come across as a flame, but there are a lot of
>> misconceptions about mainframes (the biggest is that they are dead!). They
>> are different beasts, certainly. Almost everything about them is in some
>> way different than the rest of the computing world (micros, minis) - from
>> benchmarks and architecture to fabrication and networking (compare SNA to
>> TCP/IP and you will see black and white).
> Well, as an old DEC guy who later worked for IBM... I agree, although
So, there are at least tree of us holding the
banner for the real (big) guys :)
> with Posix Compliant mainframe software that meets the Unix spec
> and runs the Apache webserver... mainframes aren't mainframes anymore.
Oh-Oh, did you ever took a look at the resulting ASSM code ?
Did yo uever trace the extreamly inperformant I/O calls for
unix like file systems ?
A mainframe can only produce it's marvelous throughput if
the data is well prepared - handling every byte of a string
inside a loop and check for zero is like using a using a
truck for moving a pice of paper.
Gruss
H.
--
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK
> The rule I use is simple :
> If the CPU is one chip (like a Z80, or a pentium) or a chipset that's
> always used together to make that CPU (like a F11, or the early IBM 6000
> CPU) -> It's a micro
> If the CPU is a lot of standard chips (gates, flip-flops, ALUs, bit-slice
> stuff), and it fits into at most a couple of 6' racks -> it's a mini
> If the CPU takes up most of the room -> it's a mainfame.
> If it meets the 3M critera (Megabyte, Megapixel, Mips) -> it's a workstation.
> Now, this leads to some interesting ones. By that definition, a PDP11/23
> is a micro. But a PDP11/34 is a mini. The 370-on-a-card is probably also
> a micro.
> Note that 'workstation' says nothing about the CPU. I'd claim a Sun3 is a
> worktation _and_ a micro. A PERQ 2 is a workstation and a mini.
> Those definitions aren't perfect, but they seem to work for me.
I think ruling the CPU isn't exatly the way to describe this
classes, since even a mainframe type computer can have singe
chip processors, and a micro can consist of a whole chip graveyard.
But your Note leads a trace: try the design goal as class.
So, a mainframe is a general purpose computer specaly designed
to transport, merge and modify data like a big steel plant
modifies iron. Using only a small number of programms but serving
the same task a _huge_ mass of users. Usualy these are just /370ish
designs.
A Mini is some kind of 'big' computer designed to serve
a lot of people in an individual sense, giving every
user (and sometimes even every single programm) the
feeling of a complete independant computer. The OS is
wasing a lot of resouces (not needed on mainframes) to
ensure coexistence, fast programm change etc. The OS is
mostly unix-like.
A Workstation is 4M (you just missed the Megabucks :).
A workstaton serves the needs of only one user.
The OS is in most cases very graphic-able orientated.
An average PC is just a workstation on a lower level, running
several different application (maybe even at the same time)
to serve every person as his own computer like a mini, but
without sharing anything. The OS is almost complete graphic
orientated.
I think this sceme is sufficient for all GPC. If you miss
the micro, its just because it represents no class of its
own. The micro can be just a very small mini, or he is a
PC(Workstation). Didn't the Wozniak once state that every
micro before the A2 was just a small singe user mini ?
Gruss
H.
--
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK
At 10:07 AM 9/9/98 -0400, you wrote:
>
>A previous employer of mine bought a cool mini/PC several years ago: An
>NCR 3000 series. Could handle something like 8 CPU cards with multiple
>pentiums, had a UPS in the cabinet, 50 some hot-swappable SCSI bays, 512MB
>of ram, multiple micro-channel buses and SCSI adapters, SVr4, etc.
>
>On the back of the small-refrigerator sized box were a PC-style VGA and
>keyboard connector! It would boot and run MS-DOS ;) hahaha.
>
> -Wayne
>
Geez, I'll bet that that one smoked! Sounds like just what you need to
run Windozes '95 effectively.
Joe
>On Wed, 9 Sep 1998, Tony Duell wrote:
>
>> > Workstation: a computer designed to run Unix with a bitmapped display.
>The problem with this definition is that it would include a PC running
>Windows. Very few seem to be willing to call that a workstation.
>
>A workstation has to be *designed* to be networked, graphical, and
>multitasking. The Amiga would have been a workstation if it has
>networking built-in. If somebody built a PC that had networking built-in
>and ran Windows NT, but could not run MS-DOS, I might be willing to call
>that a workstation.
>
How about the iMac it has networking built in and AFAIK doen't run MS stuff.
I think that todays machines are so versatile that it is pretty hard to
differenciate them out of the box, The way they are used makes them a
workstation, a server, a personal computer or what not, not the hardware
itself.
