First, I'd like to say thanks to everyone that has provided help. The
insight provided by this group is invaluable in getting a system like this
going :-)
I did a quick inventory of the cards in the rear of the machine plus a
second 1000 carcass that I have and this is what I found:
* (2) Time base generator
* (3) Microcircuit A-2222 / 12566-60032 cards
* (1) 55613 GMR-1 - I have no idea what this is.
* (1) HS Terminal - 12531-80025
* (1) INTF - 1337
* (3) Natel 2101 R/D Converter
I understand the "Time Generator" card but, really don't know the functions
of the other cards. I know some of this info may be on the spies/~AEK site
but, haven't had time to filter through those docs.
The machine also has:
* (1) 64K HSM 12747H - High speed memory
* (1) MEM CONTR 2102B
* (1) M.E.M 12731
I'm assuming these are just extended memory cards and controllers.
At this point, the HP basic route certainly seems like the most doable. I
did see those images on Jeff's site but, was pretty clueless as to how to
get the data into the machine.
Bob: exactly what is involved in your "Paper Tape Emulator". From the
functional description, it doesn't sound all that complicated. This may be
something, I could hack together.
As a side note: I know where there are two more 1000/E that I could get for
about $200 each. While I haven't inventoried them, each of those systems is
a FULL rack of goodies including disk drives, X/Y data monitors, A/D
converters, etc... One of the systems has a combo tape/hard drive and could
possibly still have the OS installed. The other one has dual 8" floppies.
I'm running out of room for rack sized systems but, those probably deserve a
good home (mine).
Happy holidays to all,
SteveRob
>From: Bob Shannon <bshannon(a)tiac.net>
>Reply-To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org
>To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org
>Subject: Re: HP 1000/E
>Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 09:56:42 -0500
>
>Wow, you got an amazing deal!
>
>I've been looking for a spare 2113 for a while now, as I have a custom
>instrument that is based on a HP 2113 processor. I would have easily paid
>10
>times that price!
>
>As for operating systems and software, you have at least two options...
>
>First, the easy path...
>
>Simply run HP's stand-alone basic. You can download a binary image of the
>media, originally a paper tape, from Jeff's HP2100 Archives. Now you need
>a way
>to get
>that data into the machine, and a console port.
>
>You will also need a 'Buffered TTY Register' board to serve as a console
>serial
>port. Later HP machines (like the 2113) often use the BACI (Buffered Async
>Communications Adapter) board, which is NOT compatible with HP Basic.
>
>Depending on what interface boards you have, we may be able to work out a
>deal.
>
>I usually boot HP Basic from a custom tape reader emulator that holds the
>binary
>image of the paper tape in EPROM. This reader-emulator connects to a HP
>'Microcircuit Interface' board, and the software is loaded using the
>built-in
>boot loader ROMs in the HP 2113. You simply power up, set a few switches
>on the
>front panel, then press IBL, Preset, then IBL once again, and the loader
>code is
>stored in memory. Pressing RUN at this point will load the tape image into
>memory, and away you go.
>
>Now then the hard way...
>
>HP's operating system's for these machines are pretty nasty. The 'top of
>the
>line' OS was RTE-6VM, and the more common OS was RTE-IVB (RTE 4B). These
>operating systems were unlike anything I've ever seen, cryptic, obtuse, and
>fairly painful to use. As an example, to run a compiled program, you had
>to
>link the code into the OS itself.
>
>The hardest part here, is getting a useable disk system. RTE-IVB uses what
>were
>called MAC interface disks, while RTE-6VM also supported ICD drives, using
>a
>specialized version of the IEEE-488 interface.
>
>Supporting the original operating systems is a lot of work, and I strongly
>reccomend you run HP Basic.
>
>Now, what exactly do you have?
>
>The HP 2113 was one of the last machines in a long series going back to
>1968.
>Your 2113 is binary code compatible with the original HP 2116, the first HP
>product to use the then new-fangeled IC chips. HP2113's were still selling
>for
>$13,000+ in 1983, and are exceptionally well-built.
>
>It has no stack, but executes subroutines much like a PDP-8. In addition
>to the
>original HP 2116 instructions, the HP 2113 also adds several new registers
>and
>instructions, as well as a virtual memory scheme that can address 1
>megaword of
>solid-state memory.
>
>Oh yes, many of the original interface boards from a 1968 HP 2116 will plug
>right into your 2113 and work perfectly (but not the cool oscilloscope
>point-plot display board...).
>
>I have a MS-DOS based version of the HP assembler, so you can assemble
>small
>programs on your PC. I am also working on a program for the PC that will
>send
>the paper tape image from the assembler into the HP via my tape reader
>emulator. Once this is working, it should be possible to boot the HP
>directly
>from a file on the PC's disk.
>
>Take a careful inventory of the interface boards you have, and we can see
>if
>there is something in there you can use to get your machine running HP
>Basic.
>(many generic HP interface boards can be made to serve as psudo-tape reader
>interfaces).
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
Well, most of one anyway. I have a 7011-250 upgraded from a 7011-220,
which means that I replaced literally everything but the case. So I have
the 220 entire, if you want to mount it on something. This includes PSU,
system board, MCA riser, 8-bit color adapter & riser, floppy drive &
cable, and the lock barrel & key. A standard >2G scsi disk & cable will
work. I've heard that the graphics adapter is not supported past AIX
v3.25, but I promise you don't want to run X on this dog anyway. Or you
could use a standard MCA graphics adapter.
I need an internal SCSI cable for my VS3100 m38, a memory expansion
board for the PS/2 8570, and a GXT130P graphics adapter. I'd consider
Q-Bus drive controllers for the VS-II I may or may not be rebuilding,
depending on whether the trade for CPU & RAM goes through. If you have
something that's worth more than the RS/6000 pieces/parts, let me know
what else you need. I'm suffering no delusions concerning the value of
an orphaned 7011-220.
Doc
From: Ben Franchuk <bfranchuk(a)jetnet.ab.ca>
>Since I have no way of having a chip of 80's technology made I have to
>limit the design to what looks realistic for that era.
I dont get that? You want a 4mhz z80 or 5mhz 8085? Those are relatively
common. Now, if your doing PDP-8 era then 1.2uS instruction cycle was
the number, slow by todays standards.
>This is what this is -- a hobby/ learning tool --
In the early 80s, I really was trying to do what zilog eventually did,
make a Z280 more or less. That and figure out what this ucode
thing was all about.
>If it was $$$ making I would have to move to Seattle. :)
Now that's depressing. ;)
Z80 uses it's time differently... Then again how many instuctions
would it take to do a 16bit add (result in register or convenient place).
The fact that both are still viable suggests they have adaquate
speed and a rich enough instruction set to do many tasks.
Last item, z80, Z180 and Z280 do not have the same timing.
For example the Z280 can be run at a bus speed slower than
the CPU speed and with the MMU and cache running in burst
mode you get a very different bus utilization model.
Generally the only things that count is:
Can the cpu do the task?
What cpu are you familiar with?
What is the total cost to implement the task (firmware/software counts)?
Politcial impacts (company prefers, owns, has, used before).
Do I think z80 is better than 6502? Yes, I'm biased. Is 6502 a good cpu?
I think so, it certainly beat the 6800 and a lot of others in the 8bit
space.
Would I design with it? No, lack of experience, no on hand software base
for it, limited tools to work with it. Would I consider it, likely.
I have 6502, 6800, 1802, SC/MP, SC/MPII, ti9900, 8048/9/874x, 8080,
8085, z80, Z180 Z280, 6809 and T-11 to pick from. For a new design
(personal) of some size say to run an OS then Z280 or T-11 for single chip
I have 8748, 8749 and 8751s around. For simple controllers 8085 is easy
to use if it grows out of the 8749. Then again I also have upd78pg11s too.
Allison
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Erlacher <edick(a)idcomm.com>
To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Date: Thursday, December 20, 2001 4:17 AM
Subject: 6502/Z80 speed comparison (was MITS 2SIO serial chip?)
>I've been on both sides of this question on a number of occasions and I've
found
>that the real challenge is to figure out what defines a level playing field
for
>such a comparison. I once concluded that running each processor at a rate
>amenable with the same memory bandwidth was appropriate, but there are a
number
>of quesitons, still that have to be resolved.
>
>(1) the 6502 is designed in a way that lends itself very well to shared use
of
>its memory, i.e. using the memory for the CPU during phase-2 and letting a
>memory-mapped video refresh circuit have it during phase-1. That's quite
>reasonable and impacts the 6502 very little, but, if you try to do the same
>thing with a Z80, you get tangled up with its variable cycle lengths pretty
>quickly.
>
>(2) the Z80 demands a pretty short cycle for its instruction fetch (M1)
cycle,
>and, if that's to be the rate-determining step for the cmparison, i.e. if
the
>memory bandwidth requirement is determined on that basis, (no wait-states
>allowed) then the 6502 will eat it alive. That, of course, is because 50%
of
>its memory bandwidth will be frittered away due to the fact that the M1
cycle is
>short and has a wasted tail end (refresh cycle) while the 6502 doesn't have
that
>burden. Further, if that determines the memory bandwidth, then the M1
cycle
>(~400 ns with 200ns memory of the era) means that a 4 MHz CPU wouldn't be
able
>to run with it.
>
>Fairness might demand a wait state, but that would then raise the question
of
>what's the bus bandwidth at which the 6502 will be run (assume a 20 MHz
6502 and
>a 20 MHz Z80, but use memory of their own era.) Also, the refresh cycle
itself
>is a mite short for what the CPU does at 4 MHz. How would one stretch it
to
>where it wouldn't impinge on the next memory cycle? If you have to share
the
>memory bus of the 6502, why not the Z80 as well? If you can use timing
tricks,
>why not on the 6502? I'd say use whatever timing tricks the two CPU's can
live
>with, but run them to their best advantage. Run phase-1 on the 65-2 for
only 25
>ns, then switch to phase-2 for whatever time the Z80 uses the memory. Let
the
>Z80 use a wait or two in the M1, and stretch the refresh so the cycle can
be
>complete when the next cycle is in progress. Since non-M1 memory cycles
are 3
>clock ticks, the clock could be pretty fast, couldn't it?
>
>(Can you see how this gets tangled up in technical problems of fair
comparison?
>That's BEFORE the question of what sort of benchmark software is to be used
>comes up.)
>
>The shortest 6502 instructions take two clock ticks, but some overlap the
next
>instruction fetch. The shortest Z80 instructions take an M1 cycle,
followed by
>refresh, to fetch, and I'm not sure whether they execute during the refresh
>(they're internal, so that's conceivable) or whether they produce an idle
bus
>cycle. I also don't know what happens during that idle bus cycle. Simply
>sitting down and calculating the relative instruction timing might not be
so
>easy. It certainly won't be easy to get right.
>
>My own experience has been that in controller applications, manipulation of
>16-bit values doesn't come up as often as I once believed. Mostly it seems
the
>values that are dealt with are 8 bits or fewer. Others may see this
>differently, however.
>
>Dick
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Greg Ewing" <greg(a)cosc.canterbury.ac.nz>
>To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 3:30 PM
>Subject: Re: MITS 2SIO serial chip?
>
>
>> Ben Franchuk <bfranchuk(a)jetnet.ab.ca>:
>>
>> > what is the faster CPU -- A 6502 or Z80 style processor like
>> > the rabbit.
>>
>> Back when I used to spend long blissful evenings hand-assembling Z80
>> programs [1] I got the impression that Z80 code was more compact than
>> 6502 code, being able to manipulate 16-bit values with single
>> instructions in many cases. Whether it was actually faster I don't
>> know, but I suspect it was, as long as you stuck to the 8080-like core
>> instructions which didn't take ridiculous numbers of cycles to
>> execute.
>>
>> [1] I didn't do it in a storage locker, although I did often
>> had the heater on in winter.
>>
>> Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept,
+--------------------------------------+
>> University of Canterbury, | A citizen of NewZealandCorp, a |
>> Christchurch, New Zealand | wholly-owned subsidiary of USA Inc. |
>> greg(a)cosc.canterbury.ac.nz +--------------------------------------+
>>
>>
>
I'm not sure how old this is, or if it meets the 10-year rule.. but I've
got a DEC TZ85 (first-generation DLT; also reads TK50 and TK70 media)
SCSI DLT drive for sale or trade. Ended up not being enough capacity
(does 2.6G on a DLT-III tape) for what I needed at home.
I've got the TZ85-A in original DEC big loud and noisy desktop 5.25"
enclosure (has Centronics-style SCSI-I connectors, and I'll throw in
the DEC scsi terminator). If it helps, I'll also throw in 10 or 20
DLT-III tapes, if you want to pay shipping (these tapes also work with
all current DLT drives, at 10/20G capacity if I remember correctly).
Looking to sell, or trade for ham radio or scanner (radio) gear. I'm
in Austin, TX, and this beast is heavy (as are the tapes), so a local
or nearby deal preferred, but if you're not local, buyer pays shipping.
Email me if interested.
Bill
--
Bill Bradford
mrbill(a)mrbill.net
Austin, TX
The Fairchild FST-2 computer was used to control a family of
Semiconductor ( chip ) testers I guess from sometime in the mid 1970s to
around the mid 1980s. The family of testers were branded as "Sentry",
"Sentinel" and "Series10" ( maybe some others ).
The FST-2 was a 24-bit machine with its memory interleaved between odd
and even addreses. When the CPU was reading/writing to an odd address, a
peripheral could address an even address and vice-versa using DMA. Early
machines were booted from tape, but newer machines had a PROM boot board
which allowed booting from 8" floppy, hard-disk, tape ( and possibly a
network. ) Early machines had 25 bit wide memory with a parity bit,
while the later machines had 30 bit wide memory which provided error
detection and correction. Control of the tester was via two busses known
as the long-register bus and the short-register bus.
If you come across an FST-2 which can be powered up, set the console
switches ( piano keys ) to 06760000 in octal and press STOP, RESET, LDP,
LDC and START. The machine should waken up. There are a few stand-alone
FST-2s kicking around without any tester hardware. These were used as a
FACTOR compiler co-processor for a development system which was based on
the HP1000. Most FST-2s will be part of a chip tester. If the chip
tester is still working, the whole system is still quite valuable. Even
as a source of spares.
Although the tester has a lot of different power supplies the FST-2
probably ony needs 5.0V and the RS-232 voltages to get running.
The FST-2 ran an OS named M3 ( "M Cubed" ) and was programmed using a
FORTRAN-like language named FACTOR, ( Fairchild Algorithmic Compiler
Tester ORiented. ) Most Sentry testers could test digital chips with 60
pins up to 10 MHz. Some later Sentrys could test up to 120 pins at 20
MHz. I remember FST-2s being very slow to compile FACTOR programs. Most
users ended up compiling their program and test patterns (
Vectors/Truth-Tables ) on a VAX.
Fairchild ( and later Schlumberger ) provided really good in-depth
training and documentation for the CPU and the testers for hardware
maintenance and programming. The manuals which were up for grabs were
either manuals/schematics which were shipped with a tester, or training
manuals which some engineer picked up in San Jose or Munich.
On December 24, Bill Pechter wrote:
> The cable that goes between the DEC VT1200 (looks like an N connector)
> and their monochrome video monitors like a vt262 and a DEC VSXXX-AA
> mouse.
>
> I've got a working VT1200 minus mouse and video cable.
> I was going to cobble one up with some RG6 and a BNC connector and
> an N connector (if that's really an N connector) but I'd really rather
> find the right cable and spend more time enjoying the toy rather than
> fixing it.
FYI, if that connector is about the size of a BNC but threaded, it's a
TNC connector.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
St. Petersburg, FL "Less talk. More synthohol." --Lt. Worf
It's funny how once you find out about a certain machine they then
seem to show up everywhere. Found a Fluke 900* yesterday they are
asking $25 (Cdn) for it, looked like it was missing attachments.
Picked up a GRID 1500 laptop it came with 6 batteries, external 3.5,
5.25 and tape as well as a vga adapter. It's missing a battery
charger, and when it boots mentions a config error.
The Daisy was sitting in the back, they had it put with office
furniture. It looks like a desk but with a closer look, there is a
8" floppy drive on the side and at the base all of the usual
connectors.
In a message dated 12/24/01 6:51:52 PM Eastern Standard Time,
doc(a)mdrconsult.com writes:
> The "disconnect your terminal" part was the thing. I find it odd that
> the box won't even finish power-up diags if the terminal is connected
> and turned off.
>
> Doc
>
That's not so odd.. The exact same thing happens with my 3 vs3100m35's, my
vs3500, all my Decstations and my Alphastation as well.. I just leave them
completely headless for the most part, and the ones I need a head on always
have a terminal connected and running.
on 19-Dec-01 18:53:47, Ethan Dicks wrote:
>I still have mine that I bought new. I use it to play CD+G discs and
>not much else. Wish I had the MPEG cart - got some VCDs that would
>be fun to play on it. I have an SX-1 adapter that turns a CD32 into
>sort of an A1200, but I haven't had the time to check it out and put
>it together. Does anyone have any docs for that? The jumpers are
>labelled, so there's not much guesswork, but any docs are more than
>I have now.
http://www.amiga-hardware.com/sx-1.html, there is a PDF version of
the docs there.
Regards Jacob Dahl Pind
--
CBM, Amiga,Vintage hardware collector
Email: Rachael_(a)gmx.net
url: http://rachael.dyndns.org
