> Now THIS is a classic:
> http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2003117896
>
> Starts making me long my old Sphere I, and Outpost II.
I personally liked seeing the original BSR-X10 setup at the bottom of the
ad picture... I am still using some of my lamp modules from that era, and
am still using my base controller as well. Although I have the clock
model with timer, not the one that is pictured, that looks like it might
have been the original alarm base controller, which would fit with the
dialer, door sensor, and smoke detector also pictured.
What software is shown on the screen? Looks like some early X10 software
judging by the graphics of the lamps and TV. The first time I got to play
with a software interface was only a few years ago on the Mac (and since
I still lack a computer interface, all I got to do was look at what I
COULD be doing). Some day I will get an old interface and hook my X10
system up to a Mac Plus or SE or so that I have kicking around.
-chris
<http://www.mythtech.net>
>I've seen some extremely nice looking, rust-free, apparently
>well-maintained, older cars (e.g., late 1960's to late 1970's), with
>good interiors, new tires, etc. sitting in a junkyard with stickers
>from such charities on their windshields.
Always donate scrappable cars to your local fire department or heavy
rescue department so they can drill on them by cutting them up. Any self
respecting department will have gotten themselves listed as a charitable
organization so you will still get a tax write off.
And if you have a running car... give it to me! :-)
>It's my
>understanding that the titles to such cars are kept by the
>lame-brained cretins at those charities so that the classic cars can't
>be put back on the road.
Doesn't matter... once they hit the scrap yard, the existing title makes
no difference. The car can be recovered via a "scrap" title, and then
sold back out... it is just a messy, not easy ordeal... and 99% of junk
yards aren't going to go thru the heartache when they can just sell the
car in parts for more than the whole (and avoid ALL the paperwork)... or
they will just crush it and sell it as scrap metal... also probably for
more than selling the running car, and avoiding all the paper work.
At least that is the understanding I have from the guy that takes the
cars from my FD once we are done cutting them up. Maybe someone that
works as a scrapper can confirm or deny my understanding (of course, this
may very well also be a state by state kind of regulation).
-chris
<http://www.mythtech.net>
Today I picked up two 8" Shugart 851 floppy drives and two 8" hard
drives. I checked the hard drives (Quantum 2030s) and they use the SA 1000
interface. How similar is that to the interface for floppy drives? The
control cable for each hard drive also connected to one of the floppy
drives so they must share a good bit of the interface. Does anyone have a
pointer to a good on-line description of the SA 1000 interface?
Joe
On February 14, Robert Schaefer wrote:
> Hi! I'm looking for info on the SUN-3 floating point accelerators like the
> FPA, and FPA+. Programming info, header files, maybe even the libraries if
> they're avaliable.
Under SunOS4, and perhaps previous versions, there are FPA libraries
in /usr/lib. There are three separate math libraries if memory
serves...one for soft floating point, one for 6888[12] fp, and one for
use with the FPA. I don't remember what they're called, but if you
look at the files in /usr/lib it should be obvious.
Since those libraries are part of the standard SunOS distribution,
studying the SunOS source code should allow one to glean all the
programming info.
FPAs are neat. If I recall correctly they use Weitek WTL1164 and
WTL1165 chips. Very nice. :-)
> Also, before I pop in to motorols.com, does anyone have a quick little
> snippet of code to excersize a 68882? I just upgraded my SUN-3/280 to a
> '882, and I want to verify that everything's working right before I solder
> in some sockets and start playing with the clock.
Also under SunOS4, there's a program called "mc68881version" or
something very similar. That'll tell you what rev your 68881/68882
is, and I seem to remember it saying something about performance also,
but it's been a very long time since I last messed with this and I may
not be remembering that part correctly.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
St. Petersburg, FL "Less talk. More synthohol." --Lt. Worf
I just got done installing HP/UX 11i on my C110. I was using
1024x768 @60Hz for the monitor settings, but after I was done
installing I moved the box to my KVM switch and changed the
settings to 1280x1024 @75Hz. With that setting the display
blanks for a half second every few seconds. Is there a
reason for that?
Also, how can I tell which video card I have installed without
pulling the card?
--
Eric Dittman
dittman(a)dittman.net
Check out the DEC Enthusiasts Club at http://www.dittman.net/
tony writes:
>One nasty that I've come across is that many 9 track QIC24 tape drives
>can do QIC11 as well. And they can do the 4 track QIC11. But you have a
>similar sort of problem to using 40 cylinder disks in 80 cylinder drives.
>Reading is fine, but don't try writing to an already-written tape.
Actually, it's even a bit funkier than that. I spent a lot of time
messing around with the tape drives that same with Sun-2's (QIC-11) and
Sun-3's (QIC-24). SunOS on a Sun-3 had two devices for each tape drive,
which determined whether it used QIC-11 or QIC-24, and for reading it was
smart enough to autodetect and use the correct format regardless of which
device you used.
So far so good.
I started out with Sun-3's, and for a while I didn't think there was
actually any difference between the two devices, since I could get
approximately the same capacity (~60M) on the tape using either one, whereas
QIC-11 is supposed to only be 20M. When I got into Sun-2's, I discovered
that there was a difference, and I had to use the correct device on a -3
when prepping a tape for use on a -2. In addition, I had to be very careful
not to overrun the 20M limit, because the drives in the -2's would only
read 20M, per the spec. As long as I wrote less than 20M, in QIC-11 format,
the tapes would work fine, but I had to enforce the 20M limit manually.
It took some investigation to discover that the QIC-11 standard was at
some point extended from four tracks to nine tracks, and obviously the
QIC-24 drives used in the -3's supported the extended standard. I wish
SunOS had included a third device to allow distinguishing between
four-track and nine-track QIC-11, but perhaps the drive or the drive/SCSI
bridge didn't provide the necessary pseudo-EOT notification.
--James B.
Hi! I'm looking for info on the SUN-3 floating point accelerators like the
FPA, and FPA+. Programming info, header files, maybe even the libraries if
they're avaliable.
Also, before I pop in to motorols.com, does anyone have a quick little
snippet of code to excersize a 68882? I just upgraded my SUN-3/280 to a
'882, and I want to verify that everything's working right before I solder
in some sockets and start playing with the clock.
Thanks!
Bob
Ok, I scored quite a few drives for my data conversion machine project
yesterday:
Iomega Ditto Easy3200 (floppy interface)
Colorado T4000 (SCSI)
Exabyte EXB-8200 (SCSI)
Bernoulli Box 20+20 (DC-37 proprietary?)
WORM Drive of some type (SCSI)
QIC-150 tape drive (SCSI)
Iomega 150 MultiDisk (SCSI)
Iomega 90 Pro (SCSI)
DAT of some type (SCSI)
Iomega Jaz (SCSI)
Iomega ZIP (IDE)
Conner 420 (floppy interface)
Colorado 250 (floppy interface)
Archive 4320NT DAT (SCSI)
Conner 700 (floppy interface)
Colorado T1000 (floppy)
SyQuest EZ135 (SCSI)
The trick now is to figure out what is downward compatible with what and
eliminate those drives. The Conner 700 is obviously compatible with the
420, the Colorado T4000 is probably downward compatible with the T1000,
the Iomega 150 is downward compatible with the 90, I think the Ditto drive
is basically the same as the Colorado Jumbo drives and the Conners, so I
would want to choose the one that is most downward compatible in terms of
maximum storage.
I have no idea what various DAT formats there are so I'll have to research
that. Ditto for the WORM drives (I have one more somewhere in my
collection).
Did the Bernoulli Box have a proprietary interface? If so, does anyone
have one they want to get rid of?
I would imagine I can hook as many of the floppy interface drives as I
need to a single cable, providing I can crimp on the proper connectors.
Will there be any issues with conflicts or power? I imagine as long as
I'm not using two drives on the same cable at a time then I should be
fine.
I think I have QIC-40/80 covered. My Tecmar QT-125e does QIC-2 up to
125MB, but from what I can tell from research that standard goes up to at
least 500MB. I'm still trying to figure out what QIC-1000 is.
Tecmar is still around (www.tecmar.com) but they only do Travan and DAT.
Their older products (QIC and 8MM) are obsolete and they don't have
drivers available.
I guess what I really want to know is if the various tape drives from
different manufacturers for a certain specification, say QIC-40/80, read
and write the same low- or high-level format. So for instance, if I
create a tape on a Colorado drive and stick it into a Conner drive, will
the Conner be able to read it?
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com *
That, and they _never_ significantly lower the price of their media.
A Zip disk still costs $15.00 in quantity 1 in this era of 19 cent
CDRs; Jaz 1GB are still $100.00 per, and may heaven help you if you
need a Bernoulli 90MB cartridge! In 1991, they were about $90.00--
today, they're about $90.00.
>It's just another IOMEGA boondoggle, though. I avoid any contact with
IOMEGA anymore, as
>not one of their products, and I have dozens, has ever lived up to
their widely publicized
>claims. They clearly lie about their device characteristics, and
freely admit it if
>pressed.
The 11/93 is hardly "classic", but to my DIGITAL collection
it is still a nice addition and I would like to get it running.
I agree with Jerome that the M9047 grant continuity card could
be removed and move all other boards one position 'up', but the
system had the M8047 when I got it, so I left it there.
Perhaps the cooling of the cpu board is better ...
> What do the DL interface connections consist of? I have a set
> from an 11/94 system, but they really don't seem to fit from a
> hardware point of view into a Qbus system, in particular, in a
> BA23 box.
That is exactly what I have. It is an 11/93 in a BA23 box.
I read somewhere that the 11/94 uses a KTJ11 (?) board to bridge
to UNIBUS, and that the 11/94 system comsumes more power.
The rear panel that connects to the M8981 in my BA23 box has the
following parts on it:
+ 8 9-pin D-shape (DE-9) connectors for 8 extra terminals
+ 1 25-pin D-shape (DB25) connector with "CONSOLE" text next to it
+ 2 7-segment displays
+ 1 DIP switch block with 8 switches
The M8981 board has on the front side a 40-pin male header, next
to it are the 8 LEDs followed by a 50-pin male header. Behind the
LEDs is an other DIP switch module.
The 40- and 50-pin headers are connected to the rear panel with 2
flatcables.
I am still looking for the DIP switch positions.
I will gather all info on the 11/93 and put it on my website. Of
course with several pictures of the system.
Several Google searches did not produce much technical detail info.
TIA,
- Henk.
