Hello William:
In a message dated 6/30/99 10:33:04 PM Eastern Daylight Time, aw288(a)osfn.org
writes:
> With big machines, tinkering was generally frowned upon, especially with
> the hardware.
I'll bet it was! I once caused an uproar at BP's MIS Dept. over some code I
wrote to batch transaction records from PCs to VAXen via ATT Mail ... nobody
told me the VAX would puke if it encountered a null in a data record . . .
and that was just _software_ . . . taught me a lesson: never rock the "big
iron" . . .
But nowadays, do those members of the group who have "big" computers out in
their barns experiment with them? Or just try to restore and preserve them?
After all, nothing (probably) really depends on the machine in your basement
. . . so no real chance of a summary execution . . . just curious . . .
Regards,
Glen Goodwin
0/0
Hello Tony:
In a message dated 6/30/99 8:32:36 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
ard(a)p850ug1.demon.co.uk writes:
> Well, the PERQ was a sideline of the main development, it's true. But
> yes, alas....
>
> Of course a PERQ is (IMHO) a lot more pleasant to use and a lot more
> stable than some modern OSes I could name...
I _will_ name them -- I work with Windows 9x every day, and it's a horrible
travesty, a poor excuse for an operating system. It saddens me to see that
people accept this crap. I get better error report codes from my ZX81.
"Illegal operation," indeed!
> But for graphics operations, it's painful. You start in sync. After that
> you have to count every microcycle so that you know exactly when a memory
> address or control word has to be generated. There is no synchronisation
> logic here. ]
Whew! And I thought counting Z80 t-states was bad . . .
> I've long been of the belief
> that software developers should be forced to use a machine at least one
> 'generation' behind that in normal use at the time. If their code is
> useable on that, it should be useable on the public's machines :-)
Right on! Those clowns in Redmond are using 550 MHz P-IIIs with 256 MB RAM,
you can count on it! Ever try loading Win 95 on a 25 MHz 386 with a 17 ms
hard drive and 4 MB RAM?
> I think the PC would have hit the workplace anyway, and
> most of the mainstream applications would be much the same.
Without a doubt.
> I don't want to belittle the cheap home computers and their place in
> computer history. But equally I don't want other machines to be forgotten
> either.
Likewise.
> In other words the local-ish second-hand computer shop tries to sell that
> at that price. Mind you their prices are a little strange - CBM 64 :
> \pounds 25.00. CBM P500 : \pounds 10.00. BBC micro : \pounds 1.00. Go
figure.
Why do the Brits hate the BBC Micro?
> However _now_ you have a lot more choices :
>
> 'Modern PC, running 'standard' applications'. Not that education _about
> computers.
Breaks my heart every day to see a 200+ MHz PC turned into a limping dog by
what is represented to the unsuspecting public as a "multitasking operating
system." I'll never again do any major programming on a PC, unless the OS is
non-Windows or I am completely destitute.
> 'Early 80's home micro'. As educational as ever. Yes, you can still learn
> a lot packing progams into 1K or whatever.
I learn from my ZX81 & 2068 every week.
> '1970s Minicomputer/Workstation'. Again as educational as ever. The point
> is, these machines are now affordable. You can have a real PDP8 on your
desk.
Now, I have no -- none -- experience with anything bigger than a PC, but IIRC
C & Unix were developed on a PDP-8 (or was it an 11???). I _am_ a C fanatic
so these have some historical interest for me. Can you really have one on a
desktop? Is the CPU smaller than a Toyota? Are 8" floppies still available?
Please advise, as this may be my next foray into collecting, if I can find
one and move it without a forklift . . .
A newbie collector thanks you very much for your help,
Glen Goodwin
0/0
P.S.: Isn't it rather sad that a micro-maker (Compaq) wound up buying DEC
_and_ Tandem?
In a message dated 6/30/99 7:34:04 PM Eastern Daylight Time, elvey(a)hal.com
writes:
> I doubt these people are just buying these things
> to spray paint them, green and red, to use as lawn ornaments.
Wow! Sounds to me like the perfect application for a C64 ;>)
Glen Goodwin
0/0
>>an idiot. People pay money for something because they want it. So, you're
>>basically upset that somebody wants it more than you do?
>
>I agree that this is not a legitimate thing over which to become angry,
>but there is an issue that this is driving the prices up, out of reach of
>people who can handle these machines, and into the reach of people who
>want to encase them in plastic and put them into their 500 sq.ft. living
>room. This is causing some hostility.
I'm a little uncertain why it's causing any hostility. As Kai pointed
out, there's thousands of historic and interesting computers and
peripherals hitting the dumpster every day, and if increased public
awareness causes some of these machines to be saved, so much the better.
Admittedly, most of the machines getting tossed aren't necessarily
in anyone's "top 100 collectible" list, but that doesn't make them any less
interesting IMHO.
--
Tim Shoppa Email: shoppa(a)trailing-edge.com
Trailing Edge Technology WWW: http://www.trailing-edge.com/
7328 Bradley Blvd Voice: 301-767-5917
Bethesda, MD, USA 20817 Fax: 301-767-5927
Classic computer collecting is rewarding on so many levels. And in so many
senses, we have a collector community relationship that rivals those of much
more established hobbies. That's why it's so important, as the hobby begins
to reach maturity, that we not lose sight of our fundamentals.
Lately, there has been a disturbing trend towards isolationism and elitism
among our flock, up to and including outright hostility. This has got to
stop.
Now, as Dennis Miller says, I don't want to get off on a rant here. As much
as anyone else, I'd like a world full of retired aerospace engineers with
garages full of free Altairs. I'd also like the IRS to abolish my income
taxes and give me a free Ferrari. It's just not going to work that way,
folks.
Lashing out at people who want to publicize our hobby is like sitting in the
nosebleed section of your hometown baseball stadium and hoping to god that
your team loses big so you can afford better tickets next year. Get OVER
it. Nobody understands our hobby, it's next to impossible to properly
insure, there's far too little real museum space devoted to classic
computers, hundreds of historic pieces are being tossed in the dumpster
every day, and you want to keep the whole thing a big in-clique secret.
Does this make any freaking sense to you?
Every time I hear somebody say something like, "Are you going to sell that
to a REAL collector at a decent price or are you going to WHORE it on EBAY?"
I just want to gag. Amazing as this may seem, the people on eBay deserve
this stuff as much as you do, mr. nose-in-the-air elitist. Oh sure, who
wouldn't want to buy the thing at a token "collector price" and save a bunch
of money, but don't make the seller feel like an ass because he wants to
participate in a free-market economy.
And quit calling the people on eBay "morons". OK, sure, the guy who bid
$510 for the "signature Macintosh" was a few cans short of a six-pack, but
if you bothered to follow up on the auction, you'd notice that most of the
bidders pulled out once they caught a clue. And everybody who pays what YOU
consider a high price for a genuinely interesting piece of hardware is not
an idiot. People pay money for something because they want it. So, you're
basically upset that somebody wants it more than you do?
And while we're at it, what's with all this "some rich bastard overbid me"
crap. If I went through all the classiccmp posts about rich executives,
rich internet IPO participants, rich employees of big computer companies,
and replaced all the occurrences of "rich" with "black" or "hispanic", the
vintage computer festival would look like a Klan rally. America has always
stood for a place where anybody can get rich if they work hard enough. Are
you upset that somebody else got there first? There is a lot of assumption
that, when someone pays a high price for a classic computer, that they A)
don't know as much about it as you do, and B) don't care as much about it as
you do, when the reverse is probably the case. Look, just because you
refused that job opportunity at Apple in 1983 because you thought the Lisa
was a bomb and your business selling print drivers for daisywheels was doing
so well, DOESN'T mean you're an idealist.
Because somebody outbid you doesn't mean they deserve it less than you do.
Maybe they have more cash, maybe they were just willing to bid a higher
perecentage of their income than you were. Heck, somebody with cash
probably is going to care for the item better. A good percentage of the
purported idealists complaining about high classic computer prices have an
Altair on their kitchen table with coffee mug rings on the top. Look, I'm
impressed that you're reading this post through a custom TCP/IP stack that
you wrote for a Kaypro II. If you did that for the fun of it, more power to
you. If you think that doing your daily correspondence on a dot matrix
printer makes you a better classic computer collector than the rest of us,
that's something else. It's like that guy who coated the entire exterior of
his 1952 Oldsmobile with tiny rhinestones over a grueling 5-year period --
impressive, but the man obviously had too much time on his hands. It is NOT
necessary to have a Wozniak beard, live in a geodesic dome house, and drive
a Volkswagen Thing to appreciate classic computers.
Wake up, open up, embrace the world's coming to know our hobby. Because
otherwise, one day you're going to wake up and find that not a single
schoolchildren remembers any of this history, because somebody started
making 6800 assembler coding an entrance requirement to the museums.
Kai
I KNOW that this would have been dealt with somewhere but can't find it so
standard apologizes are applicable.
On the little battery pack on the T1200 laptop, there is a little
switch (breaker?) that in one position is read and on the other is closed.
What the heck does it mean and what position does it go to for recharging.
I've hooked it up to a 12v adapter and the little red light on the upper
left hand corner of the laptop blinks which is what my old Sanyo would do
on a recharge. Is it the same for the Toshiba?
TIA
colan
Hello Lawrence!
In a message dated 6/30/99 11:50:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
lemay(a)cs.umn.edu writes:
> Real rare seems an understatement. You're the first person I've heard of
> that even knows what I'm babbling about when I mention my Microace ;)
Okay, so I read a lot ... actually fleeting references to this machine pop up
>from time to time in ZX81 literature. Let me pore over some old
Timex/Sinclair user group mags and contact a few friends . . . give me a
couple of days on this one. IIRC this thing is 100% ZX81 compatible --
please share your experience with me.
> Sure, I have the whole thing. Original packaging. Board is dated 1980.
> I never got around to putting the Microace sticker on the case, or
> even putting the case together.
Holy cow! You've never spoken with anyone who knew about the MicroACE, and
I've never met anyone who ever owned one!! Let alone, still owns one!!!
> Know of any web sites or other sources of information about this computer?
> Of course I keep thinking I should make a small web page with a few photos
> of this thing...
That would be cool -- I just took a look at the ZX-TEAM web site, and they
mention the MicroACE but have no details -- and these guys are the
_world's_biggest_fanatics_ re ZX81 clones . . .
Give me a couple of days -- I'll be back in touch.
Regards,
Glen Goodwin
0/0
In a message dated 6/30/99 10:35:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
museum(a)techniche.com writes:
> I bought my first computer (a TI 99/4A) in 1981.
>
> I am almost certain that the price for the console package at that time
was $
> 99.
>
> The Ed/asm was an available option for an extra charge.
You may have gotten a _really_good_deal_. IIRC, the list price for the TI
was $299. They were heavily discounted in late '82-'83, to about $149. If
you'd like to take a trip back through time, I believe I can refer you to
some web sites which have old ads for the TI machines.
Regards,
Glen Goodwin
0/0
Hi Lawrence:
In a message dated 6/30/99 7:13:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, lemay(a)cs.umn.edu
writes:
> > Other than the Timex/Sinclairs, what's the cheapest machine which was
> > available in 1982 that I could have used to learn BASIC and assembler
and
> > machine code -- at home?
>
> The MicroACE. Available in kit form for about $170, that included the
> extra 1K of ram ;) for a total of 2K ram. Basic in rom, video modulator
> on board, cassette interface. Basically looked like a timex/sinclair
> though. I bought mine definitely before 1981, so probably in 79 or maybe
80.
Once again, almost twice the price of a ZX81.
Historical note -- the MicroACE used Sinclair code without permission (along
with a number of Asian and South American knock-offs). Sinclair sued,
successfully, and MicroACE production was halted. If you still have it, be
advised it's really rare now, and highly sought-after by "real" ZX81ers
(non-speculators).
Regards,
Glen Goodwin
0/0
SNIP....
>Other than the Timex/Sinclairs, what's the cheapest machine which was
>available in 1982 that I could have used to learn BASIC and assembler and
>machine code -- at home?
>
I bought my first computer (a TI 99/4A) in 1981.
I am almost certain that the price for the console package at that time was $99.
The Ed/asm was an available option for an extra charge.
