test-drb April 1999

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

170 participants
1190 discussions

What if,... early PCs (was: stepping machanism

by fpp＠concentric.net

> Yes, that's true, but, the 4MHz+ (4.9152 MHz, actually) Z-80B with 64K of > RAM, a 24x80-charcter display, double-density diskette interface that > actually worked, built-in capability to install a hard disk, AND the ability > to run CP/M right out of the box, in 1978-1979 e.g. at the fall '78 COMDEX, > which was BEFORE there were "Over 10,000 programs written for the Apple" Would be a good argument but; Comdex did not exist 1978. There was The West Coast Computer Faire (San Jose, CA), or NCC show (Anaheim, CA I believe in 79) mostly heavy iron.

25 years, 11 months

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 5 1/4 floppies)

by edick＠idcomm.com

You're right in that it would be silly to bang the head assembly into anything. I didn't say they did that, though it would work for a while, maybe. It's clear to me that Apple drives do things differently from other drives just from listening to them when the machine starts up. I'd never pretend to "know" what they do. In fact I'd be hesitant to admit it if I did know. Your observation that there were alignment problems with Apple disk drives sounds familiar too. Could it be that they actually did bang the head into the stops? My contempt for Apple begins and ends with their total disregard for the value of your data. If you wrote to their floppies, especially if your computer was in the "front room" of a business, exposed to whatever dust was carried in by customers and wind, etc, from the parking lot, (I had a client years ago, whose mail-order business was operated with the "help" of an Apple-II with two controllers and three drives in just such a location.) you'd frequently observe the computer locking up because it had come to a bit it couldn't read. The reason was probably contamination of media or drives, but the only recovery was the reset. Your data, meanwhile, and perhaps your customer calling long distance, were gone by now. They designed the MAC with no memory parity assuming that you'd not mind if your data was corrupted without your knowledge, and though the disk handling was a bit more mature than the Apple-II "I give up . . . and die" it wasn't much better. I've never taken note of the 8" drives' sensor for track 43. I always believed that since they had provided a "low-current" control on the interface cable, it was not necessary. I suppose I'd have taken note if one had failed along the way. Of the many dozens of 8" drives I've owned, I never had one fail. I used several of these for 7 or 8 years, moving them about and just generally abusing them, yet they seemed to keep going. I only occasionally aligned a drive for someone else, or as part of a checkout of an "experienced" set of drives we were buying. The only drives which ever gave a noticeable amount of trouble were the Persci. They were "hangar queens" of the first order. I had a couple of those for a time because I had to verify they worked properly with our controllers. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Tony Duell <ard(a)p850ug1.demon.co.uk> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Thursday, April 08, 1999 8:50 PM Subject: Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 5 1/4 floppies) >> >> Actually there are two points. One is track 000 and the other is the >> innermost (for sa400 35-40 tracks later). Only track 000 was sensored >> save for apple didn't use that either. Apple cut the interface to the > >A very silly nitpick: > >I have an 8" drive here with 2 slotted optoswitches on the head carriage. >One is on track 0. The other is on track43 and all later tracks. The >reason for the latter one? It automatically does the write current switch >at track 43. > >> minimim number of wires and signals possible and made up the difference >> with software, rather clever in my mind. > >And rather silly in my mind. Continually banging the head into the end >stop does cause the alignment to drift. I've had plenty of Disk IIs and >1541s (another drive that seems to bang the head rather too much) in for >repair. Often alignment is the problem. > >> >> Allison >> >> >> > >-tony >

25 years, 11 months

OT: Microsoft, again!

by rigdonj＠intellistar.net

>Subject: Microsoft, again! >Date: Fri, 9 Apr 1999 15:23:12 -0400 > >Bucks For Bugs >By Randy Whitted, TechWeb contributor > >Microsoft is setting a dangerous precedent by announcing the next Windows 98 >"service pack" -- read: bug fix release -- will cost users $89. > >What we're seeing here is the first instance in the software industry of a >company charging a significant sum to, hopefully, improve a product that >didn't work right in the first place. > >As much as I'd like to deny it, what Apple, and even Linux developers, do to >innovate in the software industry pales in comparison to the big Kahuna. >Microsoft sets the status quo, which is why watching its moves, even if >we're not customers, is wise. > >While I'm not privy to Microsoft's motives, I can guess the company's >thinking goes something like this: "We spent a good deal of time and money >fixing these problems, and we want to be compensated for our efforts." PC >users should then say, "We spent a good deal of money on your product, which >didn't work as you said it would, and we'd like the thing to work right at >your expense." > >But here's the catch: Did Microsoft promise to deliver a version of Win 98 >that would be bug-free? Do any software developers say they release bug-free >software? Of course not. They know, as do consumers, that software will >always have problems, glitches, performance issues, and some bugs. No one is >immune from releasing buggy software. It's a fact of life. > >However, how a company deals with its bugs is the true test of a winner or >loser. And quite simply, charging users for a bug fix is a dumb move. > >Imagine if Apple tried to pull this off. There would be a mass defection, >public scrutiny, a stock price plunge, and enough ridicule to ruin >everything the iMac accomplished. > >That is why Apple, shortly after confirming bugs in Mac OS 8.5.1, released a >bug-fix patch that could be download for free. Those fixes were subsequently >incorporated into later shipments of 8.5 -- it's called slip-streaming. > >It should be noted, however, that Apple's forthcoming Veronica -- Mac OS 8.6 >-- is not a bug fix. Sure, it includes several bug fixes, some new drivers, >and enhancements, but it is an updated version of the operating system that >also offers new features and functions. Because it is an upgrade, Apple is >not charging full price. Mac OS 8.6 is expected to be free for recent 8.5 >buyers, cost about $20 for a CD, and free when downloaded from the Internet. > >So, perhaps Microsoft, in its clumsy way, is just putting the wrong spin on >this whole service-pack issue. My advice is the company should call it >"Windows April 98," ship it in August, and tout the release as having >several performance enhancements instead of just bug fixes. At least the >consumer could imagine for their $89, Windows was working better than >before, instead of simply working the way it should have been in the first >place. > >The implications of letting Microsoft get away with this could be >significant for the sectors of the software industry in which there is still >competition. To me, Microsoft is saying it still doesn't believe there is >any alternative to Windows, and as the dominant OS provider, whatever its >says goes. Consumers, the ball is in your court. Linux is free. The Mac OS >is polished and ready. Make your move. > >Randy Whitted is a copy writer/technical adviser at Studeo, a marketing and >communications agency in Provo, Utah. The opinions expressed here are >strictly his own. > >http://www.techweb.com/ <http://www.techweb.com/> > > http://img.cmpnet.com/tw/newsletters/blank.gif ><http://img.cmpnet.com/tw/newsletters/blank.gif> >http://img.cmpnet.com/tw/newsletters/blank.gif ><http://img.cmpnet.com/tw/newsletters/blank.gif> >http://img.cmpnet.com/tw/newsletters/blank.gif ><http://img.cmpnet.com/tw/newsletters/blank.gif> > http://img.cmpnet.com/tw/newsletters/scoop-bottom.gif ><http://img.cmpnet.com/tw/newsletters/scoop-bottom.gif> > http://img.cmpnet.com/tw/newsletters/arrowright-gray.gif ><http://img.cmpnet.com/tw/newsletters/arrowright-gray.gif> ><http://www.techweb.com?ls=twb_ibd> http://www.techweb.com >

25 years, 11 months

Thoughts on Taking Inventory

by kees.stravers＠iae.nl

On Sun, 28 Feb 1999 21:56:42 -0500, mbg(a)world.std.com (Megan) said: >>I'd also have a "shadow" page that showed the outlines of the "standard" >>bus types so that boards could be identified by their outline. > >Kind of line the charts 'plane-spotters' used... > >I'll go that one better... I've been thinking of taking pictures (now >that I have a digital camera) of one each of all the qbus boards I >have in my stock, so that people can see what they look like. [This reaction is a bit late, I'm slowly catching up on my classiccmp reading] I think this is an excellent idea! It can even be done without a digital camera for the dual- and quad wide boards, just lay them face-down on a flatbed scanner! This is a lot quicker and the resulting images look just fine. I did this for the images of the RQDX boards on my RQDX page at <http://www.vaxarchive.org/hw/rqdx/> You can see that the boards look great in the images. (Click on the small images to see larger ones.) If you have the time to scan the boards, but not the room on your web page to post them, I can store them on VAXarchive. In fact, if everyone that has a few DEC boards lying about, would scan them and email me the resulting JPG's, I would have a 'visual field guide' online in no time :) Kees. -- Kees Stravers - Geldrop, The Netherlands - kees.stravers(a)iae.nl http://www.iae.nl/users/pb0aia/ I'm Sysadmin and DEC PDP/VAX preservationist - Visit VAXarchive! http://www.vaxarchive.org/ (primary) http://www.sevensages.org/vax/ (mirror) http://www.coyote.org/mirrors/vaxarchive/ (mirror)

25 years, 11 months

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4floppies)

by edick＠idcomm.com

In the late '70's, I think the microcomputer market was highly simplistic with respect to what it is today. Take a look at the comments I've imbedded in your text below. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Sellam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Friday, April 09, 1999 12:58 PM Subject: Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4floppies) >On Fri, 9 Apr 1999, Richard Erlacher wrote: > >> The TRS-80 could have been put out with (1) an 80x24 display rather than the <snip> >> If Tandy had gone with the better design, which was on the >> table, there probably would be no IBM PC today. > >This is a highly simplistic view of the early home computer market. He >with the biggest dick didn't always go home with the babe. There was much >more to the computer to entice someone to buy it than just the speed of >the microprocessor. Available software and overall marketing effort >played the bigger role, and Apple exploited this by advertising the figure >of "Over 10,000 programs written for the Apple". Yes, that's true, but, the 4MHz+ (4.9152 MHz, actually) Z-80B with 64K of RAM, a 24x80-charcter display, double-density diskette interface that actually worked, built-in capability to install a hard disk, AND the ability to run CP/M right out of the box, in 1978-1979 e.g. at the fall '78 COMDEX, which was BEFORE there were "Over 10,000 programs written for the Apple" would have been hard to beat . . . particularly under the aegis of a nation-wide company with these facilities under one management already in place. Remember APPLE had to rely on small-time stores like Computerland for distribution, and their service, mostly indirect, was slow and costly. The things which seemed to make the Apple fit the business model the best (before Visicalc) was the 24x80-character display and the 8" diskette drives sitting next to it. With the aid of the Videx video display adapter and the Sorrento Valley Associates' 8" disk drive interface, the machine suddenly began to look like what people had come to expect when they learned about computers and how to use them. It's true that "He with the biggest dick didn't always go home with the babe" but you mustn't forget that in this case, the dick was overtly measured and advertised. Whereas the above described TRS80-III wouldn't have been the fastest on the market, it had the packaging and the ability to turn into much more computer for much less money than the Apple, though with the gradually and later not so gradual increase in Apple's market share, they were able to become somewhat more competitive in spite of the high cost of distribution and service. The way it turned out, Tandy Corp ended up with precisely the smallest, didn't it? A barely-over 2MHz processor which stroked memory more at about 1.5 microsecond per memory cycle??? It was obvious to everyone who used the Radio Shack model III that their computer was SLOW. The Z-80-card in the Apple was significantly (and noticeably) faster. The two machines otherwise occupied about the same desk space, and, aside from the stupid, Stupid, STUPID choice to leave the Tandy machine's display at 16 lines of 64 characters (about half of what was on a 24x80, and about what was on an Apple with the standard display), they were quite similar. Of course the Radio Shack machine was SLOW . . . >As far as a comparison between the 6502 and Z80, its been argued over time >and again, but the consensus is generally that each processor could >perform some task faster than the other, and overall, applications running >on both seemed to perform equally. Of course, when you involved >subsystems like disk access, the Apple tended to have an advantage over >some Z-80 systems (and even other 6502 systems). I don't know that the assertions you make here are correct, but I don't believe they're completely off-base. It's important to remember that if one computer is not at least ~2x the speed of another, most tasks will seemingly execute in more or less the same time as observed by a user at the console. If two are set side-by-side and compared, the difference in performance seldom amounts to the ratio of the clock speed or the ratio of the memory access time. Often the result is totally counterintuitive. (Meaning something's been overlooked!) Most of the time, it makes little difference. Whether it takes four hours or six to handle the weekly payroll doesn't matter very much if it's run at night. >Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- >Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out. > > Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0 > See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details! > [Last web site update: 04/03/99] >

25 years, 11 months

microcode, compilers, and supercomputer architecture

by CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.com

>DEC's customer runnable MicroVax stuff was fairly lame though. Generally, if you can boot the diagnostics on a Microvax, you know that the Microvax is OK. Yep, pretty useless, considering that if you can't boot VMS, you can't boot the diagnostics. The PDP-11 based diagnostics were much more flexible. You could load from paper tape if your disk or tape drive system was sick. You didn't need interrupts or even DMA operational to load them, so you could do some basic tests on a box that didn't even have full backplane continuity! Tim.

25 years, 11 months

Classic (computer literacy textbook)

by max82＠surfree.com

I have the teacher's edition of 'Computer Fundamentals with BASIC programming', copyright 1986. It's in the form of pages to be inserted into a binder. Does anyone want this? --Max Eskin (max82(a)surfree.com)

25 years, 11 months

Fooling with floppy drives

by rigdonj＠intellistar.net

At 03:37 AM 4/8/99 -0700, Sellam wrote: >On Thu, 8 Apr 1999, Mike Ford wrote: > >> Coincident with all this chatter on floppy drives I have run into a streak >> of uncooperative drives. I happen to be using macs with 3.5" Sony >> mechanisms, but my question is somewhat general. What do you do with floppy >> drives that need repairs? ><...> >> Do any of you fix your floppies? > >Yes. As much as I can at least. The drive electronics are beyond me but >mechanically I can mend most problems. The issue with the Mac drives >usually tends to be the lubricant that gets gooey over time. You must use >an electronic cleaner like Blue Shower or similar to wash away the gooey >lube, then re-lube it with a suitable lubricating element (I don't >know...sewing machine oil?) This usually unsticks the eject mechanism. HP (sony made) floppy drives have the same problem. They stick part way open and don't eject the disk. If you pull the disk out, you WILL rip the top head off of a double sided drive. Never take a disk out or put a disk into a partially open HP floppy drive. Take the drive out and clean the old lube off so that it opens properly. Joe

25 years, 11 months

Stan Veits book

by steverob＠hotoffice.com

Received Stan Veits book (from the Ebay auction) last night. Highly recommended. Steve Robertson - <steverob(a)hotoffice.com>

25 years, 11 months

Rotting away

by ethan_dicks＠yahoo.com

> On Thu, 25 Mar 1999, KNIGHT G.A wrote: > > > http://www.nwfl.net/haynesdl/requests/games-a-rottin.JPG > > if ever you're wondering if saving computers from the scrap > > heap is the right thing, check out this link. It's rather a > > sorry sight. > Ow! I'm also a bit of a video-game restorer (presently my best example is a fully restored Gorf), but I've done more to help a friend of mine than I have for myself. At one point, my friend needed some AMD 2901's which are used in the 16-bit math co-pro for Battlezone. We had a pile of dead VAX-11/730 boards at work (self-maintained), so I desoldered some 2901's for him and he was so happy to have VAX parts in his video game. (I still have that 11/730; it was the first machine I ever installed UNIX on, Ultrix 1.1; we used it at work for Usenet before the Great Renaming) Every once in a while, I still go to video-game auctions. It is possible to pick up full-sized games for under $100 if you don't want the hottest games. PacMac, Galaga and other classics are still available, but for big bucks. -ethan _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

25 years, 11 months

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

test-drb April 1999