>http://helmies.org.uk/images/cap_comp.jpg
>
>
>Then come up with an amusing/apposite caption :)
>
>Bonus points for anyone who can identify the make/model of machine she's
>actually using. HINT: this photo was published circa. 1983, and is almost
>certainly British.
No witty caption, but it looks like a Tandata TD1600 viatel/prestel
terminal. Used to have a stack of them here, couldn't think of any use for
them so they were stripped for parts over time.
On Jan 16, 19:08, Hans Franke wrote:
> Hmm. To me the screen layout looks quite like a Teletext page.
> I have no idea how this service was called in the UK (The name
> Viewtext pops up, but I'm not shure). These are data pages,
> transmitted via 'invisible' lines, 'between' or 'below' the
> picture (As a bunch of other information also is).
That's Videotext (generic term) or Teletext (name used by the BBC and ITV).
> Now, back to the picture, what realy puzzles me is the keyboard.
> The service is strict one way, you could only select a page, and
> a regular remote is all you need.
> Of course it could be the British equivalent of our (CEPT based
> BTx system, a early online service to be used on a 1200/75
> connection with pages, made in a way to be displayed on you
> telly. But then the picture layout would be quite different.
> That service hat a quite more apropriate set of graphic
> elements.
Latterly, BTX did use different graphics, using a sort of "shift out" mode
for "high" resolution but the original Bildschirmtext was the same as the
UK's PRESTEL and French MiniTel services (generic term Viewdata), which use
the Teletext character set and graphics. Those were truly interactive
dialup services. Prestel (which predates BTX) offered information pages,
news, electronic mail, downloadable software, etc.
It became quite popular in the UK in the early 1980's and the price of
adapters fell rapidly, especially with the advent of the BBC Micro and
similar machines which could use cheap modems, and the promotion of the
MicroNet 800 service (microcomputer news, bulletin board, and telesoftware,
starting at page 800) and services like Viewfax258 (guess which start page)
and the popular MicroGnome (anyone remember Bob Clark?). Page numbers
could be up to 9 digits, and each could have 25 sub-pages so there was room
for a lot of information (I probably still have statistics somewhere, as I
had an Information Provider account then). There were even several
bulletin boards which used Viewdata protocols, and commercial services too.
The main travel agents' service was a private Viewdata system, several
stockbrokers and financial institutions used one, and the Open University
had one.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
On Jan 16, 13:21, Dwight K. Elvey wrote:
> >From: pete(a)dunnington.u-net.com
> >
> >On Jan 15, at various times, Jeffrey Sharp wrote:
> >
> >> 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 have to add my vote to the many others who've said "NO!!!"
> >
> >> - 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.
> >
> >I would hate that.
> >
> >> - You would have an account with a username and password.
> >
> >Right, I need another username/password (likely with different rules to
all
> >the rest) like I need another hole in my head :-)
> >
>
> ---snip---
>
> I see no particular advantage to using a browser for the
> use of this group. If one looks at the attempts with something
> as global as news groups, we would be quickly trashed with
> hundreds of "Please fix my PCee" stuff from those that have
> little interest in classic machines.
For those who weren't there, that was exactly what happened to
alt.computer.hardware.homebuilt. Skipping over the long tale of woe, the
upshot was that a new, moderated, group was created (comp.arch.hobbyist).
Sadly, that sees little traffic as the interested parties seem to have
moved to greener and more diverse pastures altogether (some of them, to
this list).
I hope we don't try to be an elitist mailing list, but lets not invite
trouble.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
On Jan 16, 21:14, John Honniball wrote:
> Adrian Vickers wrote:
> > See:
> >
> > http://helmies.org.uk/images/cap_comp.jpg
[...]
> > Bonus points for anyone who can identify the make/model of machine
she's
> > actually using. HINT: this photo was published circa. 1983, and is
> > almost certainly British.
>
> I think it's a Prestel adaptor made by Tandata. I had one, somewhere,
> in the original polystyrene packaging.
Yes, I was about to say Tandata or Tantel when I read this.
There are still services that use Prestel/Viewdata protocols -- I spent
ages writing a Viewdata terminal emulator for X-windows a few years ago, so
I could use online banking from my Unix box. Still in use today :-)
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
> I expect that more people/companies will resort to smashing the
> hard drives of computers they get rid of :(
the local computer recycling place here won't actually take in any machines
with hard drives intact (from companies or individuals) unless said persons can
prove that the drive(s) have been 'professionally wiped' - whatever that means.
The recyclers are worried about being sued by the very companies / individuals
that they got the machines from in the event that any data falls into somebody
elses' hands.
PC clones form 99% of the stuff coming in, but it's a shame that when the odd
bit of exotica does come in it is without any disks and essentially useless
without a copy of the OS and a suitable drive (and the knowledge to install
said OS). I understand the RAM usually gets pulled if it's anything remotely
useful and the rest goes straight to the metal recyclers (I talked to them
seperately and they crush everything immediately)
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
>If anyone wants to send me info, I'll volunteer to collect and put it
>up on my website (I won't put email addresses or other incriminating
>evidence unless you want me to :-)).
OK, reports from the UK:
I have one:
http://www.corestore.org/pdp-12.htm
She had two sisters, at the Burden Neurological Institute. I collected
another one along with it, which I immediately passed on to... a person
involved with a certain UK 'used DEC' trader, for his personal collection.
No names, no pack drill...
The third machine there was retained for a number of years, it was still
required to be fired up occasionally to read old LINCtapes. It was promised
to me, I called religously every few months... 'no we're still using it'...
until the fateful day last year I called 'oh we got rid of that a few months
ago, we gave it away to someone else who was interested since you hadn't
called in a while...'. Bugger.
Asked if they would put me in touch with this chap, as he had got a large
quantity of spares with it, including a complete CPU/memory 'gate' - enough
to build a fourth machine if he had had a rack etc. - thought it would make
sense to pool resources. Said they would ask him for permission to put me in
touch, he adamantly refused... secretive collectors, bah humbug.
So that's three in the UK. Four, with the addition of the Science Museum /
CCS example. Most are probably working or near-working, mine has some things
to fix, been in storage for years.
Now, I would be interested in a list of pdp-15's...
Mike
http://www.corestore.org
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
>From: pete(a)dunnington.u-net.com
>
>On Jan 15, at various times, Jeffrey Sharp wrote:
>
>> 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 have to add my vote to the many others who've said "NO!!!"
>
>> - 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.
>
>I would hate that.
>
>> - You would have an account with a username and password.
>
>Right, I need another username/password (likely with different rules to all
>the rest) like I need another hole in my head :-)
>
---snip---
I see no particular advantage to using a browser for the
use of this group. If one looks at the attempts with something
as global as news groups, we would be quickly trashed with
hundreds of "Please fix my PCee" stuff from those that have
little interest in classic machines.
If we made it a closed group, like it is now, we'd still have
the problem that even with current technology, many of us are
bandwidth limited on how we use the web ( minor problem for me ).
I can't think of any real advantage of going to some web
based system and it would surely remove many from our group.
DON'T TRY TO FIX WHAT ISN'T BROKEN!!!!
Dwight
On Jan 15, at various times, Jeffrey Sharp wrote:
> 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 have to add my vote to the many others who've said "NO!!!"
> - 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.
I would hate that.
> - You would have an account with a username and password.
Right, I need another username/password (likely with different rules to all
the rest) like I need another hole in my head :-)
> - Members can participate from any computer with a web browser. Even
lynx.
> Surely anything that can run a mail client can run lynx...
Browsers are much more cumbersome and slow than any sensible email client.
And run on fewer systems. I sometimes use older systems for which there
is no web browser, not even a text-based one, but there is a mail client.
And using a browser require you to be online to read, which is not so good
for those of us who use dialup. It also makes it harder to save individual
messages. I often do that with mail; it's much harder to keep copies of
web pages sensibly.
> - 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.
You could also do that with mail. I'd prefer that wasn't implemented,
though see below. Sometimes it's more appropriate to respond directly to
someone, off-list.
> - There's no worry about HTML, attachments, wierd character sets, spam,
> virii, or cctech moderation delay.
You could do most of that with email filtering too. In fact, it would be
nice, in my opinion, if we did filter out the HTML (and the HTML portions
of multipart/alternate messages, which we seem to have had more of
recently).
> - Your inbox receives less clutter. You spend less bandwidth on mail.
Actually, most people would spend *more* bandwidth on a website, because
going back to a previously-viewed message would typically reload the page.
More importantly, there are a lot of dialup users here. With a website you
need to be online all the time you're reading, rather than slurping down a
chunk of mail (as my system does a few times a day) to read offline. Less
importantly, my system can do an early-morning mail fetch just before the
end of the cheaper-rate nighttime period, and the mail is then there for me
to read when I'm sufficiently awake (ie after two mugs of coffee) a little
later (daytime call rate).
> - It's a huge change from the status quo. We may lose some members.
Including me :-)
Returning to the idea of having both email and a website, isn't the website
essentially an extension of the existing archive (possibly more
sophisticated)? I agree it's good to have both, but let's keep the mailing
list as the primary and the archive as, well, an archive.
> The trouble with MUAs is getting some way of either (a) serving
> mail folders to remote locations or (b) serving the login session to
remote
> locations. Both of those are doable (IMAP, SSH) but can be a pain to set
up
> for some users. Then there's the problem of ensuring you have the right
> software at the remote location (IMAP-capable email client, SSH client).
In
> some cases (e.g. student lab, internet cafe on vacation), you can't count
on
> that. In nearly every case, you *can* count on some form of web browser.
I disagree. Most ISPs run either IMAP or POP3 (or both). I have yet to
see an Internet cafe, or attend a conference with 'net facilites, where I
couldn't read my email. *Replying* to the list might be a problem in a few
cases, but most ISPs (at least, most I'm familiar with here) operate some
kind of authentication system so that users away from their normal location
can still send mail (eg replies) from Internet cafes and the like.
> On Wednesday, January 15, 2003, JP Hindin wrote:
> > It surely can't be hard to have the mailing list archival software
munge
> > eMail addresses...
>
> Not at all. But messages delivered to subscribers aren't address munged.
You
> can look at the headers of this message and get my email address. I don't
> think it's a big deal, but someone else might.
Fair point. I don't mind my address being in the headers either, and in
fact I prefer them to be there so people can email me directly, but if some
do and some don't prefer that, perhaps we could set some preference
per-user so that their submissions are/not munged. Some list manager
software has that facility built-in.
Summing that lot up, if the list were changed to become primarily
web-based, I'd vote with my feet -- albeit with great regret -- but I have
no objection at all to enhancing some of the mail facilities and providing
additional methods of access and/or additional services.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
Hi Tony(Duell),
Yes indeed the term 'hacker' was used in the original form as it was
created back by MIT
students in the 60s. It was an honorable title.
Murray--
I would be interested in buying XENIX, or trading for something. I would
have replied to your email, but I read these forums on the web interface,
so your email didn't appear there, and I don't have it delivered.
If anyone has copies still availible, please email me:
justin(a)raspberrytea.com
BTW, whats true about the number of manuals/disks, etc, etc.
Anyone have good resources on capabilities? does X compile on it?
support for video. I assume it doesn't work, but then I've seen stranger
things.
Thanks!,
Justin
