In dropping off some loaned manuals to someone earlier, I came away with a
System 96 box by mistake :-)
It's a nice STE bus crate (approx 16-way, without going back downstairs to
count) using 3U Eurocards - the nice thing about this one being that it runs
OS-9 rather than some proprietary OS/application (as is often the case with
Eurocard boxes that are generally aimed at the industrial control market)
As well as a 5.25" floppy drive, the machine has a small ST506 hard disk in it
running via a SASI bridge (I can only see the underside at the moment, but
judging by the connector pin locations it's probably an Emulex)
I've got the following boards:
6809 CPU + control ROM
SASI HBA + parallel + 2 x serial (for internal disk via bridge)
SASI HBA + parallel + 2 x serial (for external SASI devices)
FDC
Memory (128KB)
Memory (128KB)
Memory (128KB)
Memory (128KB)
It was working when last used (which wasn't that long ago; it belonged to
someone who still got occasional support jobs for STE bus equipment, and was
their backup OS-9 box).
I've got various floppies for it, but at present no documentation - that's
currently packed up many miles away at the chap's other premises.
Which begs the question - anyone have one of these systems with the docs, and
can tell me:
a) DIP switch settings for the serial lines, so I know which is the console
and what line settings to use.
b) DIP switch settings for the memory boards. One switch on one of the boards
is jammed halfway between open and closed, so needs putting right before I try
and get some life out of the machine.
cheers
Jules
--
If you've ever wondered how you get triangles from a cow
You need buttermilk and cheese, and an equilateral chainsaw
Hi,
Can anyone point me to a copy of "/IBM AS400 Programming: Backup and
Recovery Guide/", IBM Form # SC21-8079-0 from June 1988 ?
Have tried all the obvious; told that "things don't go back that far".
Not exactly a personal machine, but it quals under the 10 year rule.
Thanks,
Steve
Gordon wrote:
>will any version of A/UX run on a Powerbook 180?
Nope, no Powerbooks, no LCs (including Classics), no 68LC040 machines,
no IIs without PMMUs, no AV Macs.
Will run on SE/30, II+68851, II(c,f)x, IIci, IIsi, Quadra {700, 800, 900, 950, 650, 610+FPU}
Not sure about IIvx, IIvi, Performa 600.
Later models needed later versions, 1.x was only II+851, IIx, IIcx, 2.x ran on almost all the IIs (you need the
latest 2.x for the fx), 3.x runs on the IIs and Quadras.
<snip>
> So, my question is - for the c128 people... if I really just want a
> > C64,
> will the C128's C64 emulation be 100% and make me happy? If so
I'd like a
> 128 as long as I'm going for a C64 so I have some extra functionality
to
> play with. But if the C128 won't run 100% of the C64 software,
then I'd best
> just stick with getting a C64.
>
> Advice?
>
> Jay
For all intents and purposes the 128 will work as a 64 without incident.
What you get with the 128 is faster file processing when used in
conjuntion with a RAM expansion and 1571/1581 drives. THe OS is
newer so you get BASIC 4 in 128 mode which I find useful. I switch
to 64 mode only to play games. The C 128 is the most-used computer
in my old computer work. For example, I can use it as a bridge
between the B-128 world and the PC world.
B128-->IEEE-->sfd-1001-->IEEE/serial adapter-->C128-->1571-->1581-
->720K drive PC-->Internet
Bill D
I was an avid C64 user, ran a C64 bbs for years, etc. etc. But when I got
rid of it years ago, one never made it back in to my collection as I focus
more on mini's than micros'.
I find myself wanting to acquire a C64 for my collection and gaming fun, as
that was the system I had. However, as I understand it, the C128 has a C64
emulation mode which allows it to run C64 software. I never had a C128 and
don't know anything about it.
So, my question is - for the c128 people... if I really just want a C64,
will the C128's C64 emulation be 100% and make me happy? If so I'd like a
128 as long as I'm going for a C64 so I have some extra functionality to
play with. But if the C128 won't run 100% of the C64 software, then I'd best
just stick with getting a C64.
Advice?
Jay
--- aliensrcooluk at yahoo.co.uk wrote:
>
>> snip <<
>
> Missing item from XU1 - there is an outline (in
> white) clearly visible, with small circular metal
> marks above and below where the component
> should be. The outline looks a bit like this:
> ______________________
> |_ |
> _) |
> |______________________|
>
>
> Anyone have any idea whether this should be
> missing or not? Is it possible to get my hands
> on the plans (schematics?) for the PCB?
>
I have since discovered that the component
at XU1 was apparently used to correct a
timing bug with earlier Gayle revisions, ergo
there is no need for it on my PCB.
Regards,
Andrew B
aliensrcooluk at yahoo.co.uk
Zane,
wcopy+ by CMD is very easy to use. The package containing the program
wcopy+ is called "CMD Utilities"
WCOPY+ alows me to copy files from the 1571 (as drive 9) to a 720K
PC-formatted diskette on a 1581 (as drive 10). I load wcopy+ on drive 8
first, write to a 720K PC formatted diskette in drive 10 (1581 drive).
From the 720K disk you can move files to modern computer.
WCOPY+ can take advantage of the extra memory of the c128 to do the copy
operations faster than a c64. If you have a RAM expansion all the better.
Bill D
>Message: 1
>Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2006 11:03:37 -0700
>From: "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh at aracnet.com>
>Subject: Another C64 Question
>To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
> <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
>Message-ID: <a06200727c11f6f6c247a(a)[192.168.1.199]>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
>
>What solutions are people using to get data on and off of their C64's?
>
>In the past I was able to use my old 486 with a X1541 cable and a
>dedicated 1541 drive. I also had a Catweasel in my Amiga (still have
>both, but the A3000 is back in its original case with no room for a 5
>1/4" drive, and up in storage), but found it to be less than a
>perfect solution, at least at that time.
>
>I really like the look of a MMC64 (MMC adapter for the 64), but they
>seem to be sold out.
>
> Zane
--- Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Sep 2006 aliensrcooluk at yahoo.co.uk wrote
:
> > Hehe, I was gonna try and answer the first
> > question, but I admit I had no clue about q's
> > 2 or 3. I don't no what the IEEE format is,
> > but I'd guess it would be Integer, Exponent,
> > Exponent, Exponent?
>
> I think that you would enjoy:
> Schaum's Outline Series : Essential Computer
> Mathematics by Seymour
> Lipschutz ISBN:0-07-037990-4
> It's a much more comfortable casual read than Rose
n,
> etc.
>
Thanks. I'll see if I can find that.
>
> Do you understand 2's complement notation?
>
> IEEE floating point has
> 1 bit for sign (an actual sign bit!, rather than 2
's
> complement),
> 8 bits for exponent (power of TWO to be multiplied
> to the mantissa,
> stored as a "biased" number, NOT sign bit, nor 2's
> complement)
> 23 bits for 24 bit mantissa (when normalized, the
> high order bit is known,
> and doesn't need to be stored) (Lipschutz has a
> minor error on that!)
>
Well, I already new about signed and unsigned
bytes/numbers. But the rest I don't follow
100% (not sure what mantissa is).
I have learnt alot in recent years, some from
groups/email lists like this and other stuff
>from my recently acquired collection of
80 Microcomputing (aka 80 Micro) - I now have
issues 1 to 60 (just got the last 40 to get) ;)
> > Besides, without a computer (or appropriate
> > calculator) it would have taken ages to
> > work out the binary for question 1 (the initial
> > few bits would have been easy but the rest...
> > urgh!).
>
> with practice, it gets easier, like any other bina
ry
> conversion
>
Like lot's of things in life, the more you do it
the better/quicker you are a it.
> >
> > Also.... in binary with binary points what would
> > the bits be known as that were below the
> > binary point?
> > If we have a value of say 11.111 which would
> 3.875 3 7/8
> If you have CARPENTRY experience, then making .875
> out of one half, plus
> one quarter, plus one eighth becomes more obvious
> > be the first bit (bit 0)? The 2nd one (reading
> > left to right) or the 5th one (far right)?
>
> There isn't a fixed standard for naming them.
> Some people use 0 through 7 (or whatever) for the
> bits to the left of the
> binary point, and use NEGATIVE numbers for the bit
s
> to the right, which
> keeps the bit "name" matching the power of two.
> But, not everybody likes to do it that way.
>
That sounds like a sensible way to me.
Regards,
Andrew B
aliensrcooluk at yahoo.co.uk
My idea of the best calculator on the desktop is an HP 9100A/B or 9810,
9820, or 9830, Wang 720C, IME-86S, or a Tektronix 31. No native octal,
but they can be programmed to do octal math.
It's on-topic, these things are over 30 years old.
Rick Bensene
The Old Calculator Web Museum
http://oldcalculatormuseum.com
