At 11:14 AM 4/1/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Almost every computer involved person I know who
>has any control of their work schedule:
>
>1) Gets up after the sun has properly warmed the earth
> where they live
Dysania: (n) an inability to function early in the morning.
I've got it bad. (It's a real word, at least according to Balderdash, a
commercial version of the game Dictionary.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------- O-
Uncle Roger "There is pleasure pure in being mad
roger(a)sinasohn.com that none but madmen know."
Roger Louis Sinasohn & Associates
San Francisco, California http://www.sinasohn.com/
It is exactly that. . . a YMMV thing . . . My experience with terminals was
always a disappointment. I can't even think of a way to fix it. The people
who wrote and sold software made assumptions about what's out there, and, if
you used three different vendors' software, it was unlikely any of the
sophisticated features, including emulations, by the way, would work well
enough to use the same terminal in all cases. Only with the lowest common
denominator (ADM-3A) did one have a reasonable time of it.
Dick
-----Original Message-----
From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Date: Tuesday, April 06, 1999 9:08 PM
Subject: Re: homemade computer for fun and experience...
><This is going to be a YMMV thing, but I've never had problems with normal
><serial terminals, especially not DEC ones.
>
>AS someone actively running s100 and assorted other cpm systems... A soft
>terminal that can emulate ADM1, ADM3, Vt100 and telvideo covers the crowd
>right up until you get some oddball code that used a 64x16 VDM1. The
>reality was no standards and it's really not gotten that much better.
>
>My solution... An H19 thats over 21, A vt100 (all others are broken),
>a few Vt320s and a Vt340. The thing is I also run DEC hardware and while
>they will support any ansi tube a real VT is still easier to use.
>
><> I have never had a desire for DEC hardware, mainly because of my distast
><> (and disdain) for their application of technology, and of course for
thei
>
>Personal preference. I happen to like them and they seem to run a long
>time. At least all of mine still runs and the 11/03 cpu I have has turned
>20!
>
><Don't forget that this started with somebody who wanted to homebrew their
><first computer. In which case it should be as simple as possible.
>
>therein is the essence of the string and why terminals are somewhat nicer
>even if they lack color graphics you can play doom on.
>
><> See . . . there are reasons NOT to use a terminal.
><
><Sure. Not every machine should use a serial terminal, but equally, not
><every machine needs a built-in graphics display. Which you build is up to
><you.
>
>I'll add you still need a serial line for a modem. Then you still need a
>printer. CPM being a nongraphic OS and there is a distinct lack of
>software that uses graphics for it... kind of a moot point if you can
>have a 1280x1024 color tube. I can say this as I have a visual 1050
>that has a rather elaborate display system and there is lttle use for it
>save for it can emulate a terminal at a cost of another micro, ram and
>firmware to run it. Nothing like debuging two systems and blind at that.
>
>Allison
>
<> To put this slightly on topic, we all know that computer systems have
<> become more reliable in the last 20 years but does anyone have any real
Potentially they are. there are fewer chips and connectors to fail and
chips can be highly reliable however...
The average PC is tossed togeher from a motly assortment of parts and
software and usually works, sometimes. With that cases are more a fashon
statment rather than given the thought toward cooling... those 333mhz
celerons do get mightly hot and those cheap bushing fans do fail often.
When new system have the uptime records of my 12 year old uVAXII we can
debate this... the record is 422 days contuinious uptime without reboot, it
was limited by a power failure.
I've built Z80 based systems with uptimes measured in years (still
counting as they are battery backed). They are running very debugged code
and power failure is not seen due to power systems that expect brownouts.
It's not to say they cannot out do that, only that reliability is a
measure of quality and sadly most PCs greatly lack the latter.
Technology does not automagically beget reliability, it affords the
opportunity to create it. Often that boat never docked at the airport.
Allison
<This is going to be a YMMV thing, but I've never had problems with normal
<serial terminals, especially not DEC ones.
AS someone actively running s100 and assorted other cpm systems... A soft
terminal that can emulate ADM1, ADM3, Vt100 and telvideo covers the crowd
right up until you get some oddball code that used a 64x16 VDM1. The
reality was no standards and it's really not gotten that much better.
My solution... An H19 thats over 21, A vt100 (all others are broken),
a few Vt320s and a Vt340. The thing is I also run DEC hardware and while
they will support any ansi tube a real VT is still easier to use.
<> I have never had a desire for DEC hardware, mainly because of my distast
<> (and disdain) for their application of technology, and of course for thei
Personal preference. I happen to like them and they seem to run a long
time. At least all of mine still runs and the 11/03 cpu I have has turned
20!
<Don't forget that this started with somebody who wanted to homebrew their
<first computer. In which case it should be as simple as possible.
therein is the essence of the string and why terminals are somewhat nicer
even if they lack color graphics you can play doom on.
<> See . . . there are reasons NOT to use a terminal.
<
<Sure. Not every machine should use a serial terminal, but equally, not
<every machine needs a built-in graphics display. Which you build is up to
<you.
I'll add you still need a serial line for a modem. Then you still need a
printer. CPM being a nongraphic OS and there is a distinct lack of
software that uses graphics for it... kind of a moot point if you can
have a 1280x1024 color tube. I can say this as I have a visual 1050
that has a rather elaborate display system and there is lttle use for it
save for it can emulate a terminal at a cost of another micro, ram and
firmware to run it. Nothing like debuging two systems and blind at that.
Allison
I wonder is it would be possible to devise something that would use some
sort of disc with a bunch of holes in it and the sensors from an old (8"?)
floppy drive?
A desperate attempt to get this somewhat back on topic :)
--
-Jason Willgruber
(roblwill(a)usaor.net)
ICQ#: 1730318
<http://members.tripod.com/general_1>
===============================
---------------Original Message-----
From: Stan Perkins <stan(a)netcom.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Date: Tuesday, April 06, 1999 3:01 PM
Subject: Re: OT: ABS - or is it Pure BS/wheel sensors
>
>It's probably a similar system to the one used by Etak with their early
>car navigation systems. Basically, they used a special adhesive tape
>that contained a small bar magnet every inch along its length. This was
>applied to the circumference of the inside of each front wheel rim, and
>a Hall effect sensor was attached to a point on the front axle (usually
>to a part of the brake caliper assembly) where it was within an inch of
>this tape as it passed by. Each magnet passage would produce a countable
>pulse, and the Etak computer could determine the wheel speed and
>direction of rotation for each front wheel. *Supposedly* it could also
>detect a turn by the differential speed of the front wheels, but it also
>had a flux gate compass to help determine direction and turns.
>
>A pretty clever system that worked quite well, considering it was all
>done without reference to external navigation data sources like GPS,
>LORAN, etc!
>
>Since your system apparently produces only a single pulse per
>revolution, I would guess there's one magnet somewhere on each wheel
>rim. The speed resolution with only a single pulse per revolution is
>probably not good enough for ABS use.
>
>Hope this helps,
>Stan
>
My vacation/computer-rescue-mission has come to a close and there is now a
big honkin pile of trs-80 6000 and 16b toys on my living room floor. :)
Several of them have broken this or thatsz but the first one I pulled, a
6000hd 15mhd, booted into Xenix 3.0.1 I think (Microsoft '84). the 68k in
it crashed after about 20min of xenix frolicking. She's resting now. I'd
like cc and tcp for this if anyone can help me out? I 'm sure some parts
will be available as soon as I figure out what I have. Software, give me
software or give me death.
;)
- Mike: dogas(a)leading.net
I am looking for an "Industrial" IBM-compat PC... the kind that
is mounted in a 19" rack enclosure with a small monitor integral to
the box, and usually a keyboard underneath on a slide-shelf.
My purpose is to run one of the PDP11 sims and Linux, and to
function as a more modern 'peripheral farm' and a comm node to my
Real PDP collection.
I am looking for a 486 or Pentium I unit with 8-16 meg of RAM, .5 -
1.5 G HD, compatible BIOS and able to run Win95... if it *has* to.
One serial, one parallel, one SCSI, and Ethernet, or capable of
supporting all these at once.
I am looking to trade or buy. Obviously I prefer not to have to
buy new, I would much rather keep it 'local'.
NOTE: ABS braking is neither required nor desired on the above unit.
Cheerz
John
Just wanted to let eveyone know that I have been contacted by someone
who works for a company where they have three (3) KS10s. One of the
machines is *CURRENTLY OPERATIONAL*. One was shut down several months
ago, and the person who wrote to me doesn't know about the third.
There are nine (9) RP06 disk drives distributed between the three
systems, two additional ones are broken. Two tape drives are on
line (with problems) and one is broken (one TM03 and two TU77s).
The computers are in a room without a raised floor, so the cables
are simply laying around.
The terms are that we (whoever) takes the equipment must do so at
their own cost, and must take everything, including cables and
non-working units.
Dismantling can start April 21st, removal has to be by April
27th. No later than this.
The KS10s take up about 6sqft of floor space each, and are about 600 lbs.,
the RP06s apparently take up about 7-9 sqft and I don't know how much they
weight. I don't know about the tape drives.
Someone told me it may be between 6000 and 8000 lbs all together...
Systems are located in Cambridge, Massachussetts.
We need to give an answer by April 13th at the latest.
I suspect that if it isn't saved, it will go to the scrapheap,
landfill, crusher, <fill_in_your_own_worst_nightmare_here>.
So, is anyone game? Please contact me off-list. I'll *try* to
coordinate this.
This is a chance to handle some *REAL IRON*...
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 |
+--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+
G'day,
Yesterday four geeks (including myself) had tried to convince a HP 88780
9-track SCSI drive (cleverly disguised as Tandem 5160) to accept 6250 bpi
tapes. It works OK at 1600 bpi, but refuses to admit it knows about 6250:
"mt setdensity 3" on a Linux box results in "Incompatible media installed"
error (when the tape written at 6250 bpi is loaded.)
The problem is: no docs. By playing with front panel buttons, we
discovered lots of interesting knobs to turn (CONF 40..199), but weren't
inclined to try them all. What CONF will allow 6250 bpi density to be
used? Or is it permanently disabled by Tandem-customized firmware?
--
Sergey Svishchev -- svs{at}ropnet{dot}ru
*Having had decades of extensive driving during the long cold winters in
*western Canada, Qebec and Ontario , I would consider myself a quite skilled
*slippery road driver. The worst thing you can do when you go into a skid is
*lock your brakes. The best is to turn into the skid and use your
accellerator
*and steering to bring it back under control. I would rather have any brake
*action under my control and hope I can steer out of it without using
them.There
*are courses up here which teach this technique. ABS seems just damnright
*dangerous to me,
What happens when that novice (or anyone for that matter) who is used to
ABS,
when the ABS system fails?
* except perhaps for the complete novice who would lock his
*brakes out of fear and inexperience. I have also had experiences of
*power-steering failure one of which resulted in a serious accident for
myself.
*
*ciao larry
*lwalker(a)interlog.com
*
*Collectors info http://members.xoom.com/T3C
*
