test-drb June 1999

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

164 participants
610 discussions

Disney Sound Source --> A success! Now: Covox Speech Thing

by roblwill＠usaor.net

I just found drivers for the Sound Source today. It turned out that one of the people on my ICQ list also has a Sound Source. I loaded the Win 3.1 drivers in my P70, fired it up, and it works! Now my next 'project'. I have an old Covox Speech Thing that I've had sitting around for quite some time. Just for the heck of it, I plugged it into the parallel port of the P70, fired up the P70, loaded windows, and.... A garbled mess of undefinable static came out of the speaker... I'm guessing that this means that it works, but has nowhere near the capabilities of the Sound Source. I remember that someone had emailed me, saying that they had the drivers for the Speech Thing (I know that Sputter is supposed to drive it, but have no clue how to set it up because I don't know the port address of the parallel port on my SupersPORT...) I lost the email of the person that said they had the drivers (HD crash - *stupid windoze*). Do you remember who you are? ThAnX, ///--->>> -Jason Willgruber (roblwill(a)usaor.net) ICQ#: 1730318 <http://members.tripod.com/general_1>

25 years, 1 month

HP Sketchpro digitiser

by davhos＠magna.com.au

Can anyone help me with any technical information on HP SketchPro digitiser. Product number 45911B. I have the device but nothing else. Even to know the DIP switch settings would be a big help. Thanks David

25 years, 1 month

**RARE** "Altair-like" HP1000 minicomputer

by Glenatacme＠aol.com

In a message dated 6/7/99 5:25:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jlwest(a)tseinc.com writes: > Geez... I didn't know all machines with switches and > lights had the same architecture <grin>. Who cares about the messy details ... think I'll put a zx81 in a box with a bunch of switches & leds & post it on eBay: *** RARE British prototype computer with 1KB RAM / advanced BASIC built in" *** Should be good for about $200, eh? Regards, Glen Goodwin 0/0

25 years, 1 month

**RARE** "Altair-like" HP1000 minicomputer K00L K00L Vintage! <grin>

by jimw＠agora.rdrop.com

At 07:47 PM 6/7/99 -0700, Charles P. Hobbs wrote: > >Has anyone heard of the HP1000 anyway, at least in a home/hobbyist >context? It looks more like an industrial-type computer to me, something >that would have never seen the inside of most private homes, unlike the >Altair or IMSAI. . . Ok, so call me odd (you would not be the first)... But I have a pair of HP 1000F CPUs (aka HP 2117F). One of the early systems I used in school was a timeshared BASIC system that ran on HP CPUs, so there is a sentimental attachment here. Pictures on my web pages... -jim --- jimw(a)computergarage.org The Computer Garage - http://www.computergarage.org Computer Garage Fax - (503) 646-0174

25 years, 1 month

ID this PC card

by rigdonj＠intellistar.net

Hi, I picked up an old IBM AT the other day and found a strange card in it. It's a full length card with an 8 bit ISA plug. It has two Burr Brown DAC800P-CBI-V ( D to A?) ICs on it along with a large IC marked TSC 7109CPL. (I have no idea what that one is.) There is also a small flat sealed Yuasa NiCad battery in the top corner of the card. It has 37 pin male connector on the back and it's marked "copyright 1983 MBC". Most of the ICs are dated 1986. It looks like it may be some kind of D to A convertor card. Does anyone know what it is for sure? Joe

25 years, 1 month

Disk Drive Documents

by edick＠idcomm.com

Well? . . . now you see why we disagree. This doesn't just extend to you and to me, but rather to lots of other people who use documentation differently. Consequently there are differing needs which I believe need to be addressed. This won't happen if all we do is trash the other guy's solution. We need to find an adequate accomodation which has the potential, at least, of meeting almost everybody's needs with an increase in work as the scarcity of the need increases. Now, that may still not make you happy, but it will at least try to prevent leaving you, or anyone else high and dry, don't you agree? . . . and you'll have to do more than shout to convince me that's (meaning the fact every page is a document apart from the one major unit to which it belongs) not a big part of why the LINUX doc's are so impenetrably muddled. 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: Monday, June 07, 1999 8:07 PM Subject: Re: Disk Drive Documents >> >> Now, I don't want to go off chasing another rabbit, but there is one point >> about published documents that I would like to make. That's that I think a >> complete document should be archived as a complete document. Lack of this > >Archived as a complete document != is only one file once unpacked... > >> unity is the reason or at least a majorly contributing factor in why the >> LINUX documentation is so screwed up, out of sync with itself, and out of >> sync with the software to which it applies. If people can fiddle with >> individual pieces of a document in its "library" then it's not long before > >RUBBISH!!!. > >The reason linux documentation is in small pieces is to make it easier to >keep it in sync with the software. > >Look, I rewrite some bit of linux. I also rewrite the appropriate >documentation file (man page or whatever). You download them and install >them. Your on-line manual is now updated to include the changes I made to >the software. > >Otherwise it would be _impossible_ to keep the documentation up to date. > >> it's corrupted. That's a positive feature for the single-document >> indivisible archive approach I prefer. Once you have possession of a copy, >> you're at liberty to fiddle with it all you want, but not at the source. >> >> I spent the better part of a year trying to get complete documents from >> Sunsite and other loci when I had the urge to learn about LINUX. It seemed >> that EVERY PARAGRAPH was a separate file . . . what a PAIN. There I sat, >> 50 computers, 35 TB of storage available half a dozen available DS3's for >> internet traffic, and I had to type one character for every ten I >> downloaded, or so it seemed. >> >> There's got to be a better way. Please tell me what it is. > >Err... Buy a book on unix (Linux includes almost everything you'd expect >to find on a unix system). Buy some of the better books on linux. >Download the archive files of documentation. Download some of the >complete manuals from the LDP. What more do you need? > >-tony >

25 years, 1 month

Disk Drive Documents

by edick＠idcomm.com

I freely admit that I'm not a UNIX expert, or even knowledgable to be dangerous. I've driven vi and grep a few dozen times and installed drivers, etc, and typed 'make' followed by a bit of other text, but the way I use documents, is that I read everything I can about the subject and remember it, largely verbatim, for LONG periods of time. Few people do that, but I'm one. When you do that, the most obvious thing about the subject and about the documentation is the inconsistency in the documentation. I'm a stickler for precise documents. Maybe this is not part of your reality, but it's how the world works for me. I've avoided UNIX for all the years, since I was in college in the VERY early '60's, not that it was an issue back then, and, clearly, though I have had nearly a dozen dedicated machines running it right here, and I don't any more, I've concluded that that's not what I want to study. I don't remember things as well as I did when I was a student, perhaps due to overflow, and maybe I'll do things differently in the future, but that's the approach to documents that I can best grasp, so I've staked that territory out for myself. It doesn't matter to me that few or many people use the information in question. I've had it for 20-25 years in some cases and never even used some of the items myself, but recently, I've seen numerous posts and received inquiries about one or another of these documents. Clearly, someone wants to use them. If you don't need this data, you won't serve anyone by looking it over. If you do, I suppose you'll have to satisfy your curiosity somewhere. The computer where the data's stored won't care, and I won't even know. When I see data available somewhere, I consider whether I want it, and, if so, I find a way . . . Dick -----Original Message----- From: Max Eskin <max82(a)surfree.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Monday, June 07, 1999 8:10 PM Subject: Re: Disk Drive Documents >On Mon, 7 Jun 1999, Richard Erlacher wrote: >>I did that, and as you say, they're generally just reductions to CD of the >>published e-docs, except that they're permanently mixed together out of >>logical or chronological sequence, so you can't track progress of a given >>feature set. I wasn't after info on UNIX, I was after info on LINUX. >>However that's not what THIS thread is about. > >If you're already familiar with UNIX, then your point is well taken. If >you're not, and wish to use Linux, you should get familiar. They are >almost the same in many instances as far as user interface is concerned. > >>I'm not sure clumsy is what it is, but it's inherently solvable if not >>elegant. If I can break out parts of the document into PCL, then I can do >>that into POSTSCRIPT as well, and so can you. If the guy down the hall >>can't, he can ask for help. > >I won't be using these docs if they ever are made, so I'll shut up now :) > >--Max Eskin (max82(a)surfree.com) > http://scivault.hypermart.net: Ignorance is Impotence - Knowledge is Power >

25 years, 1 month

**RARE** "Altair-like" HP1000 minicomputer K00L K00L Vintage! <grin>

by jlwest＠tseinc.com

You wrote... >Has anyone heard of the HP1000 anyway, at least in a home/hobbyist >context? It looks more like an industrial-type computer to me, something >that would have never seen the inside of most private homes, unlike the >Altair or IMSAI. . . Er... uh.... yeah, I agree with the above poster ;) HP1000's probably aren't of interest to any collectors, so don't tell anyone if you see one ;) Nope, never heard of the HP1000's ;) Probably just industrial things, never used for general data processing ;) If you ever see one, I wouldn't be interested, but let me know anyway, k? <GRIN> Jay

25 years, 1 month

Disk Drive Documents

by edick＠idcomm.com

please see (non-combative) comments embedded below. 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: Monday, June 07, 1999 6:45 PM Subject: Re: Disk Drive Documents >> All of this suggests that Word documents are a complete non-starter, and >> however convenient PDF is in some ways, it shouldn't be the *only* format >> provided. I think we're all agreed on that? I'd also submit that >> PostScript is less useful than either. There are few systems that can >> handle PostScript but not PDF; all can handle ASCII+GIF; it can be a real > >Hmm... Well, if it's level 1 postscript you can print it on an old Apple >LW2NT printer, and those are pretty cheap and common now. They're also >dead easy to fix :-). > >Maybe I was being a little biased, as that's the printer(s) I have here, >so I have few problems with postscript. On the other hand, postscript is >hardly suitable as a medium for distributing documents (IMHO). > >Are there really more machines with modern PDF views than ones that can >run ghostscript? I thought that was available for virtually all >modern-ish OSes, and anyway, source is available so porting it should be >possible. The problem with PS is that it's not trivial (or achievable with freeware) to display, scale, search, or selectively print portions of it, is it? PDF allows all these. True, that's no help if you can't run Acroread. >> pain extracting individual pages from PostScript, especially the > >True. I think I was suggesting (but not seriously suggesting) a separate >postscript file for each page. > >> >> PDF is nice because it can preserve the original layout, with diagrams in > >This is great if you're the sort of person who believes layout is more >important than content. It can be a right pain if the user wishes to >alter the layout for whatever reason. Perhaps not the art of the layout, but the order in which things are presented certainly can make the different between a very informative and easy-to-use document and one which is impenetrable. That doesn't mean it is MORE important than the content, but it's important enough. >> the right places etc, but for many purposes having the diagrams separate >> (and viewed in a separate window) is actually a nicer way of working -- > >Agreed... > >Actually, I've just thought of something. > >I have the shop manauls for some old (1960s) Citroen cars. Like all Citroen >products, these manuals are unconventional. > >You open them in landscape format. The top part is then a 'book' of >diagrams (only). The bottom part is the text, which refers to the >diagrams by number. > >Actually, this is _extremely_ convenient when you're working. You can >keep a particular diagram open while you read the text that goes with it. >Or turn up a different, but related, diagram. > >The same thing could apply to computer manuals. How many times have you >found yourself flipping between a circuit description and the schematic. >I suspect that's one reason why DEC used to publish the printset >(schematics) and maintenance manual (description) as separate books. >Many times I've wanted to keep both open at once. > >One other thing to consider. Given separate text and diagrams, it's easy >to (automatically) combine them into one document. It's much harder to >separate them again. > >[...] > >> There are plenty of document formats that don't keep everything in one >> file. Why should that be a requirement? There are probably more systems > >In fact whenever I've written a large document, I've always split it up >into separate files. Makes it a lot easier to manage (like splitting up >source code into separate files, I guess). > >[PDF] > >> [1] unless I discover that the "text" within it isn't OCRed or typed, but >> scanned bitmaps, in which case I'll likely throw it away again. > >YES!. A PDF file shouldn't be used as a way of grouping a number of >single-page bitmaps together. > >-tony > I don't like those minimal-effort-PDF's which look like faxed documents, badly aligned with the page boundaries, and looking like poorly rendered dot-matrix images either, but I think it's highly important, for the confidence of the user if not out of respect for the originator, to put forth a creditable presentation of the original document. Making it barley readable means nearly illegible which is nearly worthless. OCR'ing, however, invites editing, reformatting, and other sins, which , out of respect for the document's originator, and probably still owner, should be avoided. Besides, having what is, for all intent and purpose a complete de-facto facsimile (not fax) of the document in question as opposed to an edited and possibly corrupted copy is a great confidence builder the third day you're trying to effect a repair in which you NEED the document. That's another reason to make the file monolithic in my view.

25 years, 1 month

Disk Drive Documents

by edick＠idcomm.com

That, in fact, is the case here. I have two laser printers and three ink-spitters, and a pen plotter, none of which speak PS. They even require different dialects of PCL. There's even an impact printer from the DOT-Matrix (for multi-part forms) which doesn't speak either. The only language common to all my printers is ASCII. All but the TOSHIBA Dot-Matrix printer speak HPGL if they're prodded. How can the needs of the many be met without disabling resolution of the needs of the few, and vice-versa? Who will do the work? From which of several source formats? Dick -----Original Message----- From: Pete Turnbull <pete(a)dunnington.u-net.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Monday, June 07, 1999 6:08 PM Subject: Re: Disk Drive Documents >On Jun 7, 18:30, Max Eskin wrote: >> I recommend PostScript at least as an option, since it's inside every >> laser printer and many inkjets. > >obNitPick: My laserprinter doesn't have PostScript, only PCL. Lots of >lasers don't, and not many inkjets, at least in my experience. I drive my >laserjet from a PostScript raster engine (not Ghostscript) running on one >of my unix machines. > > >-- > >Pete Peter Turnbull > Dept. of Computer Science > University of York

25 years, 1 month

← Newer
1
...
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
...
61
Older →

Jump to page:

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 June 1999