Glen,
I might have something somewhere, but I couldn't put
my fingers on it right now..
I remember taking the source for the manuals and
backing them up to Floppy in the late 80's.
I don't remember if I wrote the manuals on the PC I
was using, or the Imsai 8080 (8" Z-80 CPM), OR the
MS-DOS Clone we used for awhile..
If it's on the PC or the Clone, I might have the files
still. But, I think that Stewart kept the source to
that manual on the IMSAI.
Stewart is still in business, and he might still have
the information.
Have you tried going to www.zebrasystems.com ?
I remember that the software consisted of a Binary
Driver that did text to speech conversions. It was
contained in REM statements at the beginning of the
program, and I would pass the text to it for parsing
by poking values into a memory area, which would then
be sent to the Synthesiser for output after CALLing
the routine. It's been a LONG time.. LOL!
I didn't write the text to speech algorithim. Stewart
did that. I just did the UI, and wrote the manual for
it.
I'm not sure I have the source for that seperate from
a TS1000/ZX-81 Cassette. And I never kept one for
myself.
I still have a Speech Pak for the Coco (which we made
for Spectrum Projects), with the software... But, I
never kept one of the Timex Boards.
Regards,
Al
> Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2005 17:06:39 -0500
> From: "Glen Goodwin" <acme at gbronline.com>
> Subject: SC-01 Votrax
>
> Al -- do you have any documentation for the
ZX81/TS1000
> version? I have both boards but no docs for the
ZX81
> version.
>
> Regards --
>
> Glen
> 0/0
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
---------------Original Message:
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 17:21:05 -0800 (PST)
From: steven stengel <tosteve at yahoo.com>
Subject: Burroughs L7000 Magnetic System - What is it?
Sheesh,
I've been offered a Burroughs L7000, but I don't even
know what it is. Any hints?
http://members.cox.net/stengel/temp/L7000.jpg
Steve.
-----
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2005 23:47:30 -0500
From: "James Fogg" <James at jdfogg.com>
Subject: RE: Burroughs L7000 Magnetic System - What is it?
Well, it looks like an A/C unit in a hotel ;-)
---------------Reply:
It does indeed, but it is a somewhat misleading close-up
picture of the nameplate.
It's a relatively rare model of the L series accounting computer,
desk size with a keyboard, dual tractor Selectric-type printer,
fixed hard disk and integrated paper tape reader, capable
of reading mag stripe ledger cards (hence the "magnetic").
Suggest you ask for a picture of the whole machine; see:
http://www.sieler.com/L9000/original.html
for excellent pictures of an L9000, identical but with solid state
memory and dot-matrix printer (and a single tape drive on this
particular one).
Possible peripherals include PPT/EPC reader & punch, up to 4
digital cassette tape drives, external card reader, modem, etc.
I believe it was the last model to use a fixed hard disk for program
& working storage before they went solid state (L8000/9000).
Programming was normally done in assembler on a mainframe,
using punched card input and PPT output. With peripherals and
the relevant software it was possible to program on the L itself;
otherwise one could still program in machine language (again,
with the necessary software/firmware).
A real challenge if you don't have the firmware and utility tapes;
threw out most of my manuals & tapes long ago, but might
still have a golf & lunar lander game on cassette tape somewhere.
BTW, looks like Bletchley has a restored L5000 in its collection,
a very similar previous model; also, there used to be someone
on this list with 2 L9000s.
mike
Hi,
I'm trying to figure out what the difference between a PDP-11/55 and a
PDP-11/t55 is (other than the obvious "t").
Anyone out there know?
Thanks.
--
TTFN - Guy
>> The Monitor you're using was Sysgen'd to load those drivers
>> automatically. You could probably free up a little memory by doing a
>> Sysgen that just includes the drivers you need.
>Ok, makes sense. I suppose I have to find an original system master to
>make my own sysgen. Though the boot disk I'm using now suits me fine for
>my current purposes.
Problem is that it is wrong. The monitor, at boot time, will fill
in its tables for devices it finds (up to 40 devices). Except for
the system device, which is loaded so that it can't be unloaded,
these handlers are considered 'installed' if the I/O page addresses
indicated as required in the handler exist. This does not mean
that the handlers have been loaded. Handlers are not automatically
loaded by RT-11. They can, however, be loaded using the startup
command file. They can also be .FETCHed by properly written
programs.
Megan Gentry
Former RT-11 Developer
+--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+
| Megan Gentry, EMT/B, PP-ASEL,ST| email: mbg at world.std.com |
| Member of Technical Staff | megan at savaje.com |
| SavaJe Technologies, Inc. | (s/ at /@/) |
| 100 Apollo Drive | URL: http://world.std.com/~mbg/ |
| Chelmsford, MA 01824 | "pdp-11 programmer - some assembler |
| (978) 256 6521 (DEC '77-'98) | required." - mbg KB1FCA |
+--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+
> The 4051,4052 and 4053 were very static sensitive. But it
> is try that most were relatively insensitive. Still, if you
> are hitting a part with a spark large enough to make
> a sound, you are most likely doing some damage, even if
> it doesn't show right away.
Duiring the '70s and '80s I worked at a company that made
many military and space grade components. A percentage
were de-lidded at the end of each lot and sent to a SEM
(Scanning Electron Microscope) to look for static damage,
that had NOT effected functionallity. If any (above a very
small threshold) was found, the ENTIRE lot was scrapped
[although they really became samples, lab grade, etc...]
It was AMAZING, the various craters and cracks that were
caused by static that you could not see, feel, or hear....
Wish I still had some of the prints....
>From: "William Maddox" <wmaddox at pacbell.net>
>
>--- "Dwight K. Elvey" <dwight.elvey at amd.com> wrote:
>
>> Also, have you removed the chip and put some
>> contact
>> enhancer on it?? ( You know, some silicon grease )
>> Dwight
>
>I imagine that some DeOxit or similar would be
>good, but silicon grease? I thought that was
>for *thermal* conductivity only.
>
>--Bill
Hi Bill
Don't use heat sink grease. That has fillers to
make it thermally conductive. Use the clear gel stuff.
Dow Corning #4 works wonders and doesn't harm any of
the electrical stuff. I actually use SilGlyde that I
got at the automotive shop. It works quite well.
Dwight
On Mar 14 2005, 9:54, Paul Koning wrote:
> >>>>> "Joe" == Joe R <rigdonj at cfl.rr.com> writes:
>
> Joe> At 11:14 PM 3/12/05 -0500, James Fogg wrote:
> >> Over the years I've learned to never trust tape of any kind.
>
> Joe> That's been my experience. I've never been able to get a tape
> Joe> backup that worked. That includes brand new ones, DATs and
> Joe> everything else. I know tapes have been a mainstay in the
> Joe> computer field but I've had nothing but trouble with them.
>
> My view is that there are PC class tapes and real tapes. Real tapes
> include classic half inch reel, DLT, and presumably IBM' cartridges
(I
> haven't used those).
I'll go along with that. I've had a few problems recovering data from
8mm and 4mm tapes -- in the latter case it's been the drives that were
troublesome, rather than the media -- but not with DLTs or 1/2" magtape
(except for very very old ones). I've never used QIC tapes, though
some of my friends seem to think the bigger ones are OK.
> It doesn't help when trade press reviewers don't take data integrity
> seriously. Some years ago there was a review article about backup
> software. The reviewers did some restore testing. Good of them to
do
> that. Some of the programs tested didn't reliably restore data, so
> they were docked 30 points or so.
>
> That's amazing. The only correct answer would be to unconditionally
> flunk such programs, because the value of a backup program that can't
> restore reliably is obviously zero, not any higher value...
I agree. If it won't restore, you'd be better off not bothering at
all, and saving the money (and time).
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
On Mar 10 2005, 20:10, Adrian Graham wrote:
> the uVAX II has a Q22/Q22 backplane so the positioning of the TQK50
is
> important, as is the RQDX(2/3) disk controller which should be last
on the
> bus.
No. It's only the RQDX1 that has the "must be last on the bus"
problem, and only then if what's below it uses DMA and interrupts.
RQDX2 and RQDX3 have no such limitation. You won't find an RQDX1 in a
MicroVAX II because it is not compatible with the MicroVAX II
processor.
> The first 3 slots are CD types and are reserved for CPU/Memory, the
> rest (I can't remember which size cab you've got) are serpentine so
if
> you've only got the CPU, 2 mem boards and the disk/tape controllers
then the
> TQK50 should be on top of the RQDX3.
Well, as you mention the cabinet size, perhaps you realise this, but
I'll spell it out:
The backplane in a BA23 is three Q22-CD slots followed by serpentine
slots; the BA123 is 4 slots of Q22-CD then serpentine. MicroVAX IIs
came in both types. In either case, you must, of course, put the CPU
and memory at the top, but there is nothing to prevent use of any
remaining Q22-CD slot for anything else. Just remember only the
left-hand side of a Q22-CD slot actually has Qbus signals on it (there
are some quad boards that won't work in a Q22-Q22 slot; I can't think
of any offhand that won't work in a Q22-CD slot but that doesn't mean
there aren't any). The MicroVAX II Micronotes actually show such a
configuration, with a processor, single memory card, a DEQNA, an RQDX2,
and a DHV11 (with the DHV11 last, as usual).
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
willisjo at zianet.com wrote:
> [ASCII art drawing of a BA23]
> Is that a BA23?
Yes.
> (Apologies for the ASCII drawing)
Why apologize? ASCII art is great!
MS