On Mar 22, 23:56, Tony Duell wrote:
> You _honestly_ think that a 22V10 (or whatever) is simpler, cheaper, and
> easier to use than a couple of 74LS20s? You know, a 22V10 has 24 pins,
> and the 2 74LS20s have 28. That's only 4 more pins to solder. And there's
> no requirement to program a chip if you use the '20s.
No, but I can make more choices with the 22V10 -- I want to be able to
switch ROM sets (between the original on the motherboard and possibly two
on the expansion) and RAM sizes and that would need a little more effort
with the TTL, because I want to *replace* the 74154, not add to it.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
On Mar 22, 17:32, Bill Sudbrink wrote:
> > > Could some kind soul post the pin-out
> > > of a 2532 4Kx8 EPROM?
> >
> > Which one TI or moto or ?
>
> Egad! They have different pin-outs by manufacturer?!?!
There's an "industry-standard" arrangement, and a JEDEC arrangement. TI,
almost uniquely, chose the "unusual" one for 2532s.
> Uh... it has an 'S' on it that looks like two 'C's
> hooked together, one upsidedown. Is that Signetics?
Sounds like it... here you go:
Intel, Motorola, Signetics, Hitachi etc 2532/2732:
A7 1 24 Vcc
A6 2 23 A8
A5 3 22 A9
A4 4 21 A11
A3 5 20 ~OE/Vpp
A2 6 19 A10
A1 7 18 ~CE
A0 8 17 D7
D0 9 16 D6
D1 10 15 D5
D0 11 14 D4
GND 12 13 D3
Texas TMS2532, Hitachi HN462532 (JEDEC):
A7 1 24 Vcc
A6 2 23 A8
A5 3 22 A9
A4 4 21 Vpp
A3 5 20 ~CE/~PGM
A2 6 19 A10
A1 7 18 A11
A0 8 17 D7
D0 9 16 D6
D1 10 15 D5
D0 11 14 D4
GND 12 13 D3
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
OOPS
I just realised I listed the Motorola 2532 as the same pinout as the Intel
2732; it's actually the same as the Texas 2532. Sorry!
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
On Mar 22, 19:47, Eric Smith wrote:
> Pete Turnbull <pete(a)dunnington.u-net.com> wrote:
> > I'm not sure these are repeaters, though. So a signal that's sent from
a
> > station on one of the AUI interfaces would go onto the wire, but I'm
not
> > sure that it would get back (directly) to the other AUI interface(s).
>
> It had better, or you don't have a functional ethernet, because two of
> the nodes can't talk to each other. Also, the nodes have to be in the
> same collision domain, so there's not really anything to be saved by
> using some wacky scheme where the nodes can't talk to each other.
I have seen such schemes. The small objects sold as "passive" 2-port or
3-port 10baseT hubs work like that, and two adjacent nodes can't talk
directly to each other. It rarely matters. Well, I guess that depends on
your network setup, actually! If you've not seen them, they look like a
little black (usually) box with two RJ45 sockets on one end (into which you
connect, say, two workstations or PCs) and a short RJ45 cable at the other
end (which you connect to a real hub, switch, or a server). They're
intended to let you connect more clients than you have hub ports.
It's not a question of using some wacky scheme; rather a question of
simplicity: if you want the adjacent nodes to talk to each other, you need
to have the Tx from each connected to the Rx of the other. That's easy to
arrange with just two 10baseT ports (that's all a crossed cable does, after
all), but with three (as in the so-called passive hubs) you would end up
with *everything* connected together -- or you need some electronics to
isolate and filter (as in a proper hub/repeater). The passive units don't
have that, so the two RJ45 sockets can each talk/listen to the RJ45 cable,
but not to each other.
There's a similar problem connecting three or more AUI ports; it's further
complicated by the collision detect, which is normally done in the
transceiver. Now if it were a multiport repeater, I'd have expected all
the AUI connectors to be the same gender (since they'd be functionally
equivalent). But the fanout units have one of a different gender, so I
suspect that either they use a similar scheme to the passive hub I
described, or they actually have more electronics than a normal repeater
(or at least arranged rather differently), in order to get the signals in
the right arrangement to drive a transceiver instead of a drop cable to
another AUI.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
On Mar 22, 14:52, Philip.Belben(a)powertech.co.uk wrote:
> Expansion box.
>
> The old PETs don't AFAIK have the internal expansion connector - they
have an
> edge connector sticking out at one side. Very useful for toggling RESET
with a
> pair of tweezers!
Yes, I know :-) Mine has the edge connector, not the expansion block.
> That aside, on this edge connector are brought out most of the block
select
> lines from the 74154 I mentioned in my previous post. In particular,
brought
> out are lines 1 to 7, 9, A and B.
>
> It takes only three four-input AND gates to re-encode any eight of these
you
> choose into three upper address lines for a 62256.
Seems like the hard way to do it...
> My suggestion is: disable the select to the upper 4K of memory within
your PET,
> and encode lines 1 to 7 and 9. This will give you 32K of main memory,
several
> spare 6550s, and 4K of RAM above the screen. Essentially, you will have
a 4K
> PET fully expanded.
I was actually thinking of replacing the 74154 with a socket, to get access
to all the signals I'd want -- I could enable (or not) all the RAM that
way, and use the internal ROMs. It would only require one 22V10; and I
would prefer to use several ROMs (probably 27256s) for the alternate
BASICs. I'd take the data lines from the edge connector, probably. If you
look at the PET circuit, you'll see the data lines to the edge connector
are buffered, and the control to that buffer is hardwired (via AND gates
and an inverter) to several of the SEL block selects from the 74154;
similarly, the RAM buffers are hardwired to SEL0 and (via an OR, a NAND,
and a link) SEL1. So you can't put replacement RAM on the expansion
connector without doing something about that 74154... Plus, the SEL lines
relevant to the ROMs aren't present on the edge connector, but they are on
the 74154.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
--- healyzh(a)aracnet.com wrote:
> > Ow... that's scary. I am in the process of _finally_ building up this
> > AXP133 "no-name" board...
> Since you're running Sparc's with 64MB, to give you an idea of what I
> consider acceptable performance, I don't consider Solaris 2.6 acceptable in
> 64MB, but it's quite nice in 96MB on my Sparc 2.
I don't consider 64Mb acceptable if I'm running CDE. It's horrible. Things
are sluggish but not painful under OpenWindows. I'd run 96Mb if I could,
but I don't have the Sbus expansion card. I used to use a Sparc 5/110 as
my primary desktop machine at Lucent, and with 256Mb of memory the only
ongoing problem I had was with starting up Netscrape - it took much more
than a minute. Once I was in, things were ducky. I could even run ViCE
at 200% 6502-emulation speed with no problems.
> In the case of OpenBSD I was able to get a Tulip-based 10/100 NIC working
> with no problem in the AS200. I *can not* get one working under OpenVMS, it
> looks like I need a real DE500 to work under OpenVMS.
I bought a real DE500 once, just for this box (not that it runs OpenVMS
due to other driver issues). It never left the show with me; I think I
set down the bag and walked off. Not the first time, but usually I remember
while I'm still in the same aisle.
> On the RAM, I *always* check for used True Parity 72-pin SIMMS when I'm
> anywhere that has used RAM.
Me too. I'm up to five pair of 16Mb and one pair of 4Mb. :-(
> You're lucky. The AS500 requires custom RAM, the only way I'm going to get
> it more memory is by spending about $500 :^(
Ow!
Speaking of custom RAM, I notice that on diagnostics, the IPX detects 33bit
vs 36bit parity SIMMs. Are there any performance differences? I only have
three or four 33bit 16Mb SIMMs. I was just wondering if there were any
benefit to take these to 36bit. I plan to use the IPX as our primary DNS
server at work, so enhanced reliability is a benefit.
-ethan
=====
Even though my old e-mail address is no longer going to
vanish, please note my new public address: erd(a)iname.com
The original webpage address is still going away. The
permanent home is: http://penguincentral.com/
See http://ohio.voyager.net/ for details.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
Wow. Hi everyone.
A hot tip, a long drive, lots of digging, and a pocket full of kryptonite
turned up an OSI C3C12 yesterday! It's a 4 component system including the
CD2 8" floppys, a big CD23 Shugart SA4000 harddrive, and a Hazeltine
terminal
that's OSI branded (neat.) It sports a 17 slot backplane with a 525, 590,
CSS cpu+ (that is cracked), and 3 522's now in it. I found another box of
boards that had 2 510's (my favorite), a 555, 2 550's, 2 470's, and 3 520's,
and a CA-18E ((on a 550 board)?) that hints at level III networking) Also
got a bunch of software like os-65u v1.43 timeshare, ( w/mputil...) Looks
like it can handle 3 users maybe. And there are boxes of disks I haven't
even gone through yet.
The documentation was a wonderful find too. Most of it is preliminary docs
of things like the:
Ohio Scientific Multiple User Computer System Manual
C2-8p Users Manual
C3 Setup and Operations Manual (with the C3 Utilities and Demo disks
(!!!))
OS-DMS
Shugart SA4000 servicing info
OS-65u Ref Manual
a *huge* binder of tech and sales newsletters
and a real cool OSI Servicing Data book for *many* of the osi boards
>from 470-594 and cii and cIII systems
Then the ghost of classiccmp-past infused and led me back to a dark dusty
workbench where I scored 3 boxes of molex connectors that I needed
desperately.
Oh, I found a Motorola EXORmacs system in the same pile too. yipee!
My home is smaller. One happy ccmper signing off...
;)
- Mike: dogas(a)leading.net
--- jmd <jmd(a)infinet.com> wrote:
> Ethan
> I have 1 DEC 205 NIC if you are interested. ISA slot.
How much?
-ethan
=====
Even though my old e-mail address is no longer going to
vanish, please note my new public address: erd(a)iname.com
The original webpage address is still going away. The
permanent home is: http://penguincentral.com/
See http://ohio.voyager.net/ for details.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
On Mar 22, 0:51, Eric Smith wrote:
> Chuck McManis asked:
> > I'm confused, aren't these "fan out" units just hubs?
>
> Aaron Christopher Finney replied:
> > These simply provide multiple ports on a single tap. I indicated my
> > interest in them for the thick ethernet segment in my garage, as I only
> > have 3 transceivers tapped into it at the moment. Physically, they just
> > connect to the tapped transciever.
>
> Which, as Chuck suggests, is a effectively a description of a hub, albeit
one
> that has AUI interfaces rather than 10-base-T. Ethernet hubs are
technically
> multiport repeaters, and are subject to all of the topology and distance
> limits of repeaters.
I'm not sure these are repeaters, though. So a signal that's sent from a
station on one of the AUI interfaces would go onto the wire, but I'm not
sure that it would get back (directly) to the other AUI interface(s).
Anyone know?
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York