Hi Jeff,
>....that the DG AViiON would be a great addition to any
>collection.
>....1. The ultimate Orphan. One of a small handfull of machines
> to use Moto's 88000 CPU chipset.
VERY interesting, I've never managed to find a machine which uses that chipset.
What other machines came out using the 88000?
>3. Runs DG/UX (subspecies of UNIX). Can't get much cooler
> than that.
Good point.
>....1. Make sure you get the software with it, as replacements
> are hard to come by, and ludicrously expensive.
Sounds rather like my AS/400.... :-(
>3. No free operating system available for it (no LINUX or *BSD).
Is this because the technical info required for such a project isn't available,
or hasn't anyone gotten around to it yet?
It seems the former is true in the case of the AS/400. :-(
TTFN - Pete.
--
Hardware & Software Engineer. Sound Engineer.
Collector of Arcade Machines, Games Consoles & Obsolete Computers (esp DEC)
peter.pachla(a)virgin.net |
peter.pachla(a)vectrex.freeserve.co.uk |
peter.pachla(a)wintermute.free-online.co.uk | www.wintermute.free-online.co.uk
--
Hi James,
>....There is a GPL'd utility for Linux that will download from many
>of the popular cameras, with more being added rapidly.....
Do you know if this utility supports the Mustek VDC-100? What's the name of the
software?
TTFN - Pete.
--
Hardware & Software Engineer. Sound Engineer.
Collector of Arcade Machines, Games Consoles & Obsolete Computers (esp DEC)
peter.pachla(a)virgin.net |
peter.pachla(a)vectrex.freeserve.co.uk |
peter.pachla(a)wintermute.free-online.co.uk | www.wintermute.free-online.co.uk
--
>Just yesterday I handled a copy of the doc's for the CP/M version. This
>implies that it was a CP/M program. I doubt that MuMath/MuSimp was
>generated as an apple version as well, though stranger things have
>happened.
muMATH on the Apple II is not CP/M, nor is it DOS 3.3 or ProDOS. It uses
its own disk operating system which is a bit of a pain if one wanted to
extract files from the system disks. However, the disks are still
16-sector and can be made into images for emulators or backed up easily.
This was done so that the system would run on an Apple II+. DOS 3.3
used too much memory so something simpler had to be found and it predates
ProDOS. I still find it amazing that muSIMP could run at all on such a
small system.
Was muSIMP ever ported to anything "larger"?
Ron Kneusel
rkneusel(a)mcw.edu
Auction is still on, some good systems still not spoken for:
http://net-24-42.dhcp.mcw.edu/auction/auction.html
Hello everyone....
I was just going through some old boxes in my basement, and found some stuff
that I was supposed to pay shipping on. I know that there was someone from
this list that sent me 3 IBM 4869 floppy drives...
I think that was all from the list (I hope)
Could you please contact me with your address and the amount of shipping (I
think it was somewhere around $10?)?
ThAnX (I've gotta keep better track of this stuff...)
///--->>>
-Jason Willgruber
(roblwill(a)usaor.net)
ICQ#: 1730318
<http://members.tripod.com/general_1>
Guys:
I'm working on a job here in the Dallas-Ft worth area; anybody know
of any good surplus places, or scrapyards around here? There
ain't nuthin' where I live, there's gotta be some gold in these thar
hills! :^)
Jeff
___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.
<What is the approximate resolution of a 35mm frame?
Good enough that you can project it to greater than 8 foot by 8 foot image
and still not see the grain with reasonable film.
For printing you get smooth images at greater than 1000 dots per inch and
photo typsetters are around 2500 DPI.
digital cameras at 1024x768 are better video camaras (400 V by ~250H
<~500 with interlace>).
When you take 1024x768 and stretch it to 10.24"x7.68" the image is only
resolved to 100 DPI and image smoothing may help but only to a point.
Allison
Max Eskin <max82(a)surfree.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Jul 1999, Chuck McManis wrote:
> >That question will fry your brain. It depends on what film you use, what
> >speed you shoot it at, and what process you use to develop it.
>
> But, isn't there a maximum resolution?
>
> --Max Eskin (max82(a)surfree.com)
> http://scivault.hypermart.net: Ignorance is Impotence - Knowledge is Power
Hi
It is determined by the f/ratio
and the color that you are trying to focus. It is a wave property
of light. A point sourse of light can only be focused to certain
disk size. The Airy disk is defined as 1.22 * wave_length * f_ratio.
The smallest distance that one can call two disk as being
separate is call Dawes criteria and is when the two spots
are 1 Airy disk apart. Other shapes of objects will have
sightly worse problems of separation but this is a good rule
of thumb for light.
It is interesting that stopping a lens down, makes a higher
f/ratio and makes the spot size smaller. Stopping the lens down
also improves depth of field. Exposure time also goes up.
You just can win.
Dwight
>What is the approximate resolution of a 35mm frame?
A typical film has a resolution of 50 to 200 lines per millimeter
(films intended specifically for high resolution technical use may get
twice this, at significant loss in tonality). A 35mm full frame is
36 mm wide by 24 mm long, or 3600 x 2400 pixels assuming a "pixel"
is a "line" and 100 lpmm resolution. But as pointed out, it could
be twice that resolution or half that resolution depending on the
film.
The better lenses, when properly focused and used on a tripod, can
resolve better than 100 lines per millimeter. Your typical point
and shoot lens will be lucky if it can resolve 50.
Now compare this to what a 4 in x 5 in "large format" camera can get:
assuming only 50 lines/mm (something easily done with an 60 year
old lens), you get 6250 x 5000 resolution. Not bad for technology
that was mature over a half century ago.
--
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
<What pin does the 8080A (raise/lower?) to indicate
<that it is doing an I/O read/write instead of a memory
<read/write? Also, does anyone have a copy of the IMSAI
<MPU-A Rev-4 schematics that they could scan and send me?
Your thinking 8085... 8080 is very different.
There are two pins on the CPU:
WR/ (pin 18) indicates precessor write (memory or IO).
PDBIN (pin 17) indicates a IOREAD, MEMORY READ, INSTRUCTION FETCH
The latched 8bits from the data bus at Sync(pin 19) time tell if the
operation is
D0 SINTA Status interrupt acknowledge
D1 SWO Status write out
D2 SSTACK Status Stack operation
D3 Shlta Status Halt acknowledge
D4 Sout Statue output (IO output operation commences)
D5 SM1 Status M1 state (instuction fetch)
D6 SINP Status input (IO input operation commences)
D7 Smemr Status memory read
Those status signals only indicate the next bus cycle activity and must be
cates with Sync (psync on the bus), PDBIN, WR/ before the whole mess makes
sense. Intel later created the 8228/38 chips to do this. Otherwise it
takes a good handful of gates to sort it out.
I have the Bursky book, no scanning ability. if you can altair docs the
8080 and 8212 status latch portion of the altair CPU are the same.
Allison
What pin does the 8080A (raise/lower?) to indicate
that it is doing an I/O read/write instead of a memory
read/write? Also, does anyone have a copy of the IMSAI
MPU-A Rev-4 schematics that they could scan and send me?
Thanks,
Bill
