>Don't worry too much about ripple on an S100 supply. The S100 supply is
>not regulated -- the regulators are on each of the boards (the 8V input
>is designed to be regulated down to 5V, etc). The regulators should take
>care of small amounts of ripple on the backplane supply lines.
Agreed: Rich, what I ment when I told you to check for ripple, would be
"big" ripple, which would be an indication of the filter caps having
dried out - not all that likely, but worth checking. The input to the
regulators should not drop below 7v under load.
I always scope supplies under initial load tests - You never know what
odd things you might see...
Regards,
Dave
--
dave04a (at) Dave Dunfield
dunfield (dot) Firmware development services & tools: www.dunfield.com
com Collector of vintage computing equipment:
http://www.parse.com/~ddunfield/museum/index.html
>
>Subject: Re: Nascom 2 keyboard connector
> From: "Jim Beacon" <jim at g1jbg.co.uk>
> Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2005 22:43:08 +0100
> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
>
>
>> Presumably the punch tool has a limit as to how far from the edges of a
>> piece it can reach?
>>
>There was a "Q-Max" D type punch, don't know if it is still available, but
>that could be used to pace a hole anywhere in a sheet of metal (it is pulled
>through with a bolt, so doesn't need a press of any kind).
>
>Jim.
The famed and well used Greenlee punches are like that. Various sizes
and shapes and you drill a through hole and assemble the punch on
opposing sides, insert bolt and tighten. Nice clean holes.
I also have a nibbling tool, takes a .1"x.25" bite in any direction
and perfect for odd chassis holes.
My wish list includes a 2-3FT wide sheetmetal shear and a small
(18"-24") bending brake.
Allison
>> >OK, I pulled the front panel appart tonight and I found out that whoever
>> >owned this model colored the silkscreen with magic marker. Bogus!
>> >
>> >Anyway, I can get a new photomask from Todd Fischer for $20. Well worth
>> >it.
>>
>> I was afraid of that ... Although it's good that you can get a replacement,
>> keeping it all original has merit as well - depending on the marker used,
>> you might be able to carefully remove it. Try a Q-tip with some whiteboard
>> cleaner and move up to stronger solutions as required.
>
>Oh for ****'s sake.
>
>How is cleaning off the ink any different from replacing the strip? You
>just said, "keeping it all original has merit as well". I guess attacking
>it with whiteboard cleaner is not considered a modification to the
>original?
I don't recall using the verb "attack" ... if he's lucky, the marker used was
a soluable one, and it will clean up nicely with no damage to the original
strip - if you can do that, then why not clean it up and keep it all original.
As Rich noted in a later message, the replacement he can get is not identical
to the original...
Have you never cleaned up a computer that you really wanted to restore to
original condition?
>Like sane people do, note down the modification and keep the note with the
>system (use a tagged string so you can tie the tag internally to keep Dave
>happy). Put the original in a safe place (which is I'm sure what Rich
>planned to do).
Obviously any cleanup should be attempted with great care, and if it's not
going to work, then by all means get the replacement, and keep the original
in a safe place.... but that doesn't mean you shouldn't at least investigate
restoring the original first.
>Sheesh.
Here we agree (although from different viewpoints :-)
--
dave04a (at) Dave Dunfield
dunfield (dot) Firmware development services & tools: www.dunfield.com
com Collector of vintage computing equipment:
http://www.parse.com/~ddunfield/museum/index.html
All items have been spoken for.
I've clued my scrapper into the want list on Vintage, so perhaps he
will get a little more proactive in posting to the list/Vintage.
CRC
RE:
> OK, I pulled the front panel appart tonight and I found out that whoever
> owned this model colored the silkscreen with magic marker. Bogus!
Todd Fischer sells new film masks. www.imsai.net, I believe.
>
>Subject: Metric buttload of OS rants... again...
> From: Roger Merchberger <zmerch at 30below.com>
> Date: Sat, 04 Jun 2005 09:26:15 -0400
> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
>
>Rumor has it that Vintage Computer Festival may have mentioned these words:
>>On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Randy McLaughlin wrote:
>>
>> > Yes windows today is completely equivalent to the different OS's I've used
>> > on a variety of systems since I started in the mid 70's. The fact that
>> > Micro$loth has created a bloated giant that self destructs with time is a
>> > side issue. The open source equivalent Linux is also a bloated giant.
>>
>>Except that it rarely (if ever) self destructs with time.
>
>And it doesn't *have* to be a bloated giant; only the prepackaged versions
>are. If you want your own, whip out LFS and recompile it *any way you
>like.* Yes, there are still versions that can fit on a pair of floppies --
>no HD required!
>
>>BIG difference.
>
>Yup.
>
>=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>
>Speaking of whiny people whining about Closed-Source OSs and whining those
>whiny computers/OSs won't open whiny PDFs...
>
>Who has a version of MicroWare's OS-9 68K that'll run on an Atari ST?
>
>;-)
>
>Laterz,
>"Merch"
>
>--
>Roger "Merch" Merchberger -- SysAdmin, Iceberg Computers
>zmerch at 30below.com
The only thing I like about the linux/unix tree is that we can
hang Billy G from it. I'm not a unix sort myself but, having
used linux (also Ultrix, Freebsd and Openbsd) I can say it's
solid, compact and latest distributions are fairly complete.
It's biggest feature is it's totally configurable. It's clearly
one of the few OSs out there for PCs that if you don't like a
feature or it's size changing it is not only possible, there's
a good chance someones done it for you. The down side is the
world is so totally PC/wintel centric that you end up running
msWord and Excel virii and all no matter what.
You know it's a curse when you apply to a linix shop and they
want a MSword Resume.. ;-p
Allison
>From: "Jules Richardson" <julesrichardsonuk at yahoo.co.uk>
>
>On Thu, 2005-06-02 at 23:15 -0700, Eric Smith wrote:
>> Does any TIFF file of the nature you describe actually exist? PDFs
>> with both bitmaps and text are not uncommon.
>
>I'm not sure I've seen one, and I've dealt with a *lot* of TIFF files
>over the years.
>
>Other metadata such as the app that created the image etc. is quite
>common though, and I have a feeling that Photoshop puts in all sorts of
>extra tags (I haven't got a copy here with which to check)
>
>Whether any such tags are useful to preserve is another matter.
>Personally I like the accountability; I'd like to know who scanned a
>document, when they scanned it, what software they used to do the scan.
>Mainly because it may help at some future OCR stage in identifying ways
>of improving the process or runs of documents that are likely to cause
>trouble during the OCR phase. Plus of course it's nice to know who was
>responsible for the hard work!
>
>cheers
>
>Jules
Hi
The biggest problem I think TIFF has is that it is really just
a container and not truly a image format. From what I know,
one can put just about any data stream into a TIFF. It
need not be an image.
When I said that I thought that a TIFF format was better for
archiving I intended it to mean an non-compress scanned image
thet is in a form that has little encoding.
The TIFF allows all kinds of other things. I'm not saying
they should be used.
I astro imaging, one often uses TIFF's to contain several
different color images to be processed later.
Dwight
On Jun 3 2005, 19:49, Jim Leonard wrote:
> Pete Turnbull wrote:
> > What about a PDF that I need to use some distance from
> > my computer, but is not printable?
>
> In what situation would a PDF not be printable? I don't get your
point.
When the creator locked it so that the standard Adobe reader can't
print it. I've come across two or three that are protected in this
way.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
or at least the firmware. Vesta e-mailed me the Forth
interpreter rom image, but thats all I have. I have
the article and the artwork otherwise.
__________________________________
Discover Yahoo!
Use Yahoo! to plan a weekend, have fun online and more. Check it out!
http://discover.yahoo.com/
On Jun 3 2005, 14:28, der Mouse wrote:
> >> Which of those "several open source packages" includes a
scriptable
> >> (ie, command-line) tool to extract the embedded images from a PDF?
> > If you have a "need" for extracting images from PDF than you are
> > missing the point of PDF. If you can view it and print it you have
> > no need to extract images from it.
>
> That's a nice-sounding theory, but it is wrong.
And incomplete. What about a PDF that I need to use some distance from
my computer, but is not printable? What about the case where a PDF
contains more than one document that you want to store and index
separately? What about a badly-scanned document that needs some
fixing?
> You do not know better than I what I have need to do with PDFs.
Agreed :-)
It's all very easy to say it should have been created properly in the
first place. Life's not like that; things are not perfect.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
