> Zane H. Healy wrote:
>
> > There was at least one video card made for the SE/30, I've got one in mine,
> > and I've got a SCSI-to-Ethernet adapter for network access.
>
> I remember the first Mac I used back in '89 was an SE/30 with a
> grey-scale (8 bit) card made by RasterOps. It had a grey-scale monitor
> to go with it too. That was when the Apple LaserWriter had more RAM than
> the machine that was printing! Aaah, the smell of ozone.
>
> Simon
I'm pretty sure the video card I have is colour, however, I've only actually
hooked it up once, and that was years ago. What can I say, I got the SE/30
for it's small footprint and fast[1] processor, I didn't care that it had a
video card in it, I needed the ethernet more.
Zane
[1] Of course fast being relative to the app, and at the time my primary
system was a PowerMac 8500/180. Still the SE/30 with MS Word 5.1 makes a
great word processor!
Hello,
I'm owner of Mac SE/30 (asked regarding broken CRT tube a while ago).
Can aynone supply me with a list of accessories that can be inserted
into the slot? www.apple.com didn't help me very much, and the only card
I saw is 10base2/10baseT ethernet. are there any videocards for se/30?
or some other equip?
Cheers,
--
freddy
...for more info 'finger freddy(a)kotol.kotelna.sk'
On Jan 17, 17:26, Philip Pemberton wrote:
> pete(a)dunnington.u-net.com wrote:
> > I finally remembered to check mine. It's 23-ANC13-1000034. All Acorn
> > retail product serial numbers of the era are of that form. The 25
> > tells where it was made, ANC13 is the product code, the rest is a
> > serial number, which always starts at 1000000 for production systems
> > or factory prototypes. So my Archimedes 310 is 27-AKB10-1000002, my
> > 440 is 27-AKB20-1000614, and my A3000 is 27-AKB01-1000028.
> Now that's interesting. My Master 128 carries the serial number
> 01-AMB15-0053025. Which means I've either got the -946975th machine to be
> made by Acorn, their labelling kit malfunctioned, or my M128 is the
53025th
> Master 128 to leave Acorn's factory. Ah, well. At least it hasn't got the
> serial number 13...
I wrote "of the era". Your Master predates ARM systems by a few years. My
oldest Beeb is 0000672. And will the ***** who borrowed it please return
it, if you're reading this?
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
On Jan 17, 8:01, Philip Pemberton wrote:
> BTW, does anyone know what the small raised bar on
> the EPROM sockets is for?
The early cartridges were made with a form of low exteaction force sockets
-- a kind of poor man's ZIF, designed to make it easier to extract the
ROMs. You've probably got those. You put a small screwdriver blade in,
against the bar, and twist (only when there's a chip in the socket!!)
> BTW, has anyone got a spare BBC Master Series User's Manual? The one that
> covers the Master 128?
It's called the Master Series Welcome Guide. No, I'm not parting with mine
just yet :-)
> I'd also like to find out what ROMs the
> ROM cartridges will accept - I've used 27128s and 27256s, anyone know if
> anything else will work?
AFAIR, 2732s should work, 2764s certainly work, and then up to 27128 is
officially supported. You can use 27256s and *possibly* 27512s if you
program them appropriately.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
Jochen Kunz <jkunz(a)unixag-kl.fh-kl.de> wrote:
> Sorry, no. The m76 has a Rigel.
Yes.
> Looks so. It seams to support only NMOS-VAX (VS2k), CVAX (VS3100
> m30/38/40/48) and maybe SOC. I think SOC is the CPU in the VXT2k.
Yes, VXT2000 has SOC. Last night I finally downloaded the whole VXT software
and ran strings(1) on the VXTEX image, and I see mention of three machines:
VS2000, VT1300, and VXT2000. VT1300 is the CVAX-based KA42-A, the same system
board as in VS3100 M30.
Fred N. van Kempen <Fred.van.Kempen(a)microwalt.nl> wrote:
> It might run on the 3100-M38, although I believe
> that's a "non" 3100, too.
VS3100 M38 differs from VS3100 M30 (which is the same hardware as VT1300 except
for the latter lacking the mass storage controller board) only in speed (M30
has 90 ns cycle time giving you 2.8 VUPs and M38 has 60 ns cycle time giving
you 3.8 VUPs). VS3100 M30 is KA42-A and VS3100 M38 is KA42-B. The difference
between the two boards are a different crystal oscillator, KA42-B has chips
rated for higher speed, and a byte or two in the ROM is twiddled.
> I would assume that they kept the CPU
> support library as small as possible, meaning only the generic series
> of machines they "sortof" intended the VXT software set for, i.e. the
> 2000, 3100 and alike systems and their hardware features (as needed.)
This is all true, but I'm still wondering about VS3100 M76. Although it has a
different CPU chip (Rigel), other than knowing about its SID code, supporting a
different CPU chip entails nothing more than slightly different cache control
and machine check handling. In every other way VS3100 M76 (KA43) was designed
to be a direct successor to earlier models (KA42). In particular all hardware
other than the CPU chip, i.e., what the bulk of system code is concerned with,
is absolutely unchanged.
But the million dollar question remains: what will the existing VXT boot image
do upon detecting SID top byte equal to 0B? Will it scream and give up, or will
it treat it as a VS3100/VT1300?
> Yup, it's basically some "NanoVMS" kernel, with minimal runtime and a
> VMS DECwindows subset.
Are you sure it's based on VMS and not Ultrix? Doing strings(1) on the VXTEX
image showed a few bits that bring Ultrix to mind.
Of course any Ultrixisms would not be in M76's favor, as DEC had the stupidity
to make Ultrix not run on M76, almost artificially I have to say. Having a copy
of the Ultrix V4.20 sources has given me the pleasure (and disgust) of seeing
just why. Its CPU type determination logic simply assumes that everything with
a Rigel CPU must be a VAX 6400! So when you try to boot it on a VS3100 M76, it
goes looking for XMI... If that logic were tweaked to treat KA43 as KA42, it
would have probably worked. (And if someone added a couple dozen lines to the
KA42 code to handle Rigel/KA43 machine checks and cache ops, it would have
worked solid.)
> Which means (methinks..) that it most likely
> wasnt stripped from its GPX and SPX(+) drivers.
Not most likely, but absolutely certain. VXT2000 video *is* SPX, so it has to
have the SPX driver. VT1300 was color, so it had to have some add-on video
board, and I think it was GPX, not SPX. Oh, and it works on VS2000, which would
certainly have GPX and not SPX. So both GPX and SPX drivers are most certainly
there. The only concern is that if the real DEC VT1300 indeed had GPX and not
SPX, would it accept a VS3100 with SPX. It should unless some asshole
artificially blocked the SPX driver in the VT1300 configuration. (But the
latter possibility seems unlikely given how they even supported VS2000.)
> Dang! Now you got me curious. I have all three (2000,M38 and M76) so
> will set them up tonight or tomorrow and see what they do.
I would greatly appreciate a test on VS3100 M76. I want to put together my own
VXT X terminal and I'm inclined to do it on a VS3100 rather than VXT2000
hardware. If I could use an M76 instead of M30 or M38, it would be great.
MS
>>I just checked - mine's S/N 0184 according to the label where the cable comes
>>out. If that started at 0 I guess they made a few...
>
>Hmm. That sounds like the PSU serial number. Mine is 0119. I have another
>white
>sticker on the underside o the box itself, full number
>25-anc13-1000038. (Which matches the format of the computer serial numbers.)
sorry - my mistake. I saw the s/n label and figured that was the main number
for the whole unit.
just checked mine again and it's 25-ANC13-1000049
have lost the original post from the person who had the last unit to see where
that fits into the scheme of things. :-(
cheers
Jules
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Everything you'll ever need on one web page
>from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
http://uk.my.yahoo.com
In my quest to cover every aspect, to think about every permutation of what
ClassicCmp *could* be in the future, I have yet another question to ask
ClassicCmp subscribers: What if ClassicCmp were a weblog, in the style of
Slashdot or Kuro5hin?
I know many of you hold /. in disdain for whatever reason. I am not talking
about emulating the /. culture; I'm speaking only of its infrastructure,
purely in terms of being a web app for thread-based discussion.
The basics, as they apply to ClassicCmp, are:
- Posting and reading of messages would be doable from a web browser. An
email interface could be developed, but it wouldn't be the primary
method of participation.
- You would have an account with a username and password.
- Your account would be used for other features on the site, such as
access to a data archives, using to a buy-and-sell arena, or
moderating others' posts.
Right away, I see several benefits:
- Members can participate from any computer with a web browser. Even lynx.
- Anonymity and privacy can be more well-respected. The 'sender' of a
post is your username, not your email address. A system can be
implemented where another member can discover your email address only
after you give them permission to do so.
- Moderation could be less the subjective task that it is now, and more of
a distributed, many-eyes process. Imagine if you could vote on a post's
on-topicness on a scale of 1 to 5 (1=off-topic, 5=on-topic). Imagine if
you could set a minimum viewing level to screen out posts that were too
far into the OT side of the spectrum.
- There's no worry about HTML, attachments, wierd character sets, spam,
virii, or cctech moderation delay.
- Your inbox receives less clutter. You spend less bandwidth on mail.
- With thread titles on the front page, casual web visitors will be more
tempted to subscribe.
- It scales well as more members join and start posting.
- The forum *is* the archive.
- Features you want can be added in code, quickly. The current setup is
great for turn-key mailing lists and such, but it is tough to extend.
The bad points I see are:
- It's a huge change from the status quo. We may lose some members.
- Some people may find mailing lists more comfortable. Of course, an email
interface to the weblog could be developed.
My opinion: It's a good idea that I can implement in just a few months.
What is your opinion? Let's answer this one in-list, please.
--
Jeffrey Sharp
See below.
Reply-to: gwilson188(a)earthlink.net
--
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 *
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2002 16:54:06 -0800
From: glwilson <gwilson188(a)earthlink.net>
To: donate(a)vintage.org
Subject: FW: Potential Donation
I had to change my account due to a trashing. Please resond to
glwilson00(a)earthlink.net.
Thanks!
Gloria
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gloria Wilson [mailto:gloriawlsn@earthlink.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 11, 2002 6:12 PM
> To: donate(a)vintage.org
> Subject: Potential Donation
>
> I have a Mac Color Classic, with all the originial manuals and software,
> one owner, in mint condition. It has the original 80MB HD, and 12MB ram,
> of which 10MB is recognized by the OS. It has an external 45MB GCC
> 40Ultra Drive, SCSI I interface, also in working order. I also have a
> Bernoulli Transportable 150MB RCD (removable cartridge disk) unit, with
> several functional RCD's. That was the precursor to IOMEGA Zip drives, but
> reliable enough for Military use. It interfaces with either Mac or Dos
> SCSI I. If there is any interest, please let me know how to proceed.
> Gloria Wilson
From: Jeffrey Sharp <jss(a)subatomix.com>
Date: 01/15/2003 11:56 PM
> Surely anything that can run a mail client can run lynx...
False. The two systems I use for email do not support VT-100 emulation (AFAIK)
hence no Lynx on my email machines (the Kaypro 10 which I'm using to compose
and send this message, and a Zenith Z-100).
Glen
0/0
