> The receivers are a bit more interesting. The spec says that their
> threshold must be between 1.3 and 1.7 volts and that their high-level
> input current must be no greater than 80?A;
> Are there any bus receiver chips that have a reference-voltage pin,
> which could be connected to (say) 1.5V?
You can use open drain CMOS buffers/inverters in this way by setting
the supply volts to give the desired ViH point (check the data sheet
but ViH * 2 is about right). The outputs are at least TTL volts
tolerant used like this.
Lee.
________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk
________________________________________________________________________
> I also can't be the only Outlook 2000 user here, can I?
You're not, I'm stuck with it here at work.
Anyone want to check my message to see if the redundant
"Reply-To:" is there
> I wonder how.....
I don't, because fixing software here has become a summary
dismissal offence. 8^(=
Cheers,
Lee.
________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk
________________________________________________________________________
On Jan 20, 0:54, Witchy wrote:
> Bearing in mind a lot of mailing software ignores the 'from' field
and
> instead uses the 'reply-to' field instead. Well, OK, for USENET
anyway :)
Well, anything that replies is *supposed* to ignore the "From:" field
*if* (and only if) there is a "Reply-To:". The "From:" is mandatory,
the "Reply-To:" is optional. There are some other headers that may be
involved but only for errors and control messages.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
On Jan 20, 0:34, Jules Richardson wrote:
> Well hang on.. surely it's legal protocol-wise for witchy to put the
> reply-to field in the header for email that he sends, even though the
> from: field is also present and valid?
The "Reply-To:" field is supposed to override the "From:" field, and
although the standard doesn't expressly forbid setting both the same,
it makes it clear that there is no point unless they're different.
> Isn't it a little quirky for the list software to append to any
existing
> reply-to field rather than overwriting it? (which for a mailing list
> might seem more sensible).
Not really, the standard implies that appending is correct behaviour,
in case replies direct to the originator should not go to the
originator's address as given in the "From:" field (eg suppose Witchy
sent a message from somewhere other than his normal address, or a
machine that didn't have a valid address; the "From:" would show the
not-normal point of origin, the "Reply-to: would show his normal
address).
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
On Jan 19, 16:24, Brad Parker wrote:
>
> der Mouse wrote:
> ...
> >Once, years ago, I was involved in building a designed-on-the-spot
Qbus
> >board.
>
> Which raises a question I've been meaning to ask.
[...]
> Seems like a 4 layer board with gold fingers would work - the few
boards
> I've handled seemed pretty thick, however. I'm guessing the
thickness
> needs to be correct.
Small variations shouldn't matter. I've not noticed any Unibus boards
being abnormally thick.
> I have not (yet) looked at a unibus card schematic - would be it hard
to
> create a bus master IDE interface?
>
> Is a unibus controller a relatively straight forward TTL design ?
Dunno about the DMA -- probably not hard -- but the rest is
straightforward.
> And, if I did manage to create a realiable IDE interface, would
anyone
> else want one?
For low enough cost, yes, me!
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
On Jan 19, 23:03, Witchy wrote:
> > It *is* your mailer. It appears to be putting an unneccessary
> > "Reply-to:" header in, and when the list software sets its
"Reply-To:",
> > it gets concatenated to yours instead of replacing it:
>
> I know microsloth stuff has a mind of its own, but if I've not
changed
> anything since well before pre-upgrade days and both my 'from' and
> 'reply-to' addresses are the same what more can I do?
But you don't need a "Reply-to:" if it's the same as the "From:" and it
shouldn't really be there unless it's diifferent.
> I'll have a nose through the options, but I doubt 'include from AND
reply-to
> address when replying to mails' is in there. It's microsloth, what
more can
> I say :)
:-)
I'm fairly sure there's a way to tell it not to include the
"Reply-to:". I'll ask the M$ people at work.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
I've listed (3) DEC VT520 terminals on the Vintage Computer Marketplace.
Search for items #372-374.
I'm asking $25 each. These are fantastic multi-purpose terminals. Check
out the listing descriptions for more information.
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
[ Old computing resources for business || Buy/Sell/Trade Vintage Computers ]
[ and academia at www.VintageTech.com || at http://marketplace.vintage.org ]
Looking for peoples estimate of the value of an ASR-33 with working paper
tape reader/punch (and of course keyboard/print), modem is quite optional.
I am starting to search for one to add to my collection and am not sure what
price range is reasonable these days....
Also if anyone has one that they want to sell (especially if located in
North East US), please contact me directly.
David Corbin
dvcorbin(a)optonline.net
If you need one for your collection, I thought someone might find this
listing of interest.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2781740056
If anyone has any other Berkeley Enterprise items for sale, please let me
know. I would also like to purchase a number of other early computer
artifacts. Any suggestions besides ebay? Can I submit a "want list" to this
group? Thank you for your time.
I was searching around the net for information on Datapoint the other day
and came across information on ARCNET. I never realized ARCNET was still
in wide use today. There is even a 100Mbit version of ARCNET over RG58(!)
Check out the links below for more interesting reading and history of
ARCNET:
http://www.tcpmag.com/archives/article.asp?EditorialsID=58http://www.arcnet.com/abtarc.htm
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
[ Old computing resources for business || Buy/Sell/Trade Vintage Computers ]
[ and academia at www.VintageTech.com || at http://marketplace.vintage.org ]
