November 2007 - test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

by compoobah＠valleyimplants.com

On Nov 13, 2007, at 11:50 PM, Chuck wrote: > Very close--I've got 3M's published specs on all of these, if anyone > cares. And 3.5 DSHD media is fairly close to DS2D; the coercivity is > somewhat higher, requiring increased write currents, but not as > drastic as the difference between 5.25" DSDD and DSHD. > It is different enough that after a couple of years DSHD media written on DSDD drives can very easily start to fade- had it happen on some DSHD floppies I wrote on a 800k Mac SE several years ago (diskettes unreadable after about 3 years).

17 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

Floppy storage boxes

by mdyori＠verizon.net

can you tell me more about these floppy storage boxes thanks! Martin

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Tarbell is making me insane

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: Re: Tarbell is making me insane > From: Grant Stockly <grant at stockly.com> > Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 11:34:53 -0900 > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only" <cctech at classiccmp.org> > >More to add... > >I know that writing to 3.5" HD disks with the hole covered to make >them look like DD is frowned upon, but maybe it could help determine >why I get errors with the real DD disks. > >While trying to back up my DD disks onto HD hole covered disks I got >an error. Its not the disk because I've tried two and they both fail >at the same spot. Bad write or media, or dirty head scaring disk. >Also, are DD disks the same as Single Sided 3.5" 360/400k >disks? Except for the double sided part? I use a stack (about 200) of written once disks, they have sales promo and utility on them and never distributed. Good media and easily erased. >What are good sources for DD disks TODAY, not NOS disks, but new >disks? Is athana the only place out there making DD disks? > >When copying from drive A to drive B it has an error at the end of >the disk. Is this where a data rate issue would be the worst? Inner tracks are always worst. >A>stat *.* | B>stat *.* > | >RECS BYTS EX D:FILENAME.TYP | RECS BYTS EX D:FILENAME.TYP > 0 0K 1 A:.INT | 64 8K 1 B:ASM.COM > 64 8K 1 A:ASM.COM | 96 12K 1 B:BASIC.COM > 96 12K 1 A:BASIC.COM | 8 1K 1 B:COPY.COM > 8 1K 1 A:COPY.COM | 70 9K 1 B:CPM.COM > 70 9K 1 A:CPM.COM | 38 5K 1 B:DDT.COM > 38 5K 1 A:DDT.COM | 12 2K 1 B:DISKTEST.COM > 12 2K 1 A:DISKTEST.COM | 24 3K 1 B:DUMPDSK.COM > 24 3K 1 A:DUMPDSK.COM | 48 6K 1 B:ED.COM > 48 6K 1 A:ED.COM | 4 1K 1 B:FORMAT.COM > 4 1K 1 A:FORMAT.COM | 56 7K 1 B:PIP.COM > 56 7K 1 A:PIP.COM | 0 0K 1 B:RUN.$$$ > 92 12K 1 A:RUN.COM | 24 3K 1 B:STAT.COM > 24 3K 1 A:STAT.COM | 8 1K 1 B:SYSGEN.COM > 8 1K 1 A:SYSGEN.COM | BYTES REMAINING ON B: 11K >BYTES REMAINING ON A: 0K | > | B> >A> | > >And the error: > >A>PIP B:=*.* > >COPYING - >CPM.COM >SYSGEN.COM >DDT.COM >COPY.COM >PIP.COM >ASM.COM >STAT.COM >ED.COM >FORMAT.COM >DISKTEST.COM >DUMPDSK.COM >BASIC.COM >RUN.COM >DISK WRITE ERROR: =*.* > >A: R/O, SPACE: 0K >B: R/W, SPACE: 11K > >A> > >(can't be too save with my only good boot disk, A:. :) Disk write error... likely just not making it. FYI: 3.5" disks were never meant to run at 125khz. The 720k mode is 250khz and the 1.44mh is 500khz. The read amps just may not work well down that low. Allison > >Grant

17 years, 5 months

5
5
0 0

cctalk Digest, Vol 51, Issue 36 - DECtalk

by lee＠geekdot.com

> I picked up one of the ISA DECtalkPC's cheap a couple of weeks ago > but I'd like to get one of the externals. They're supported by just > about every accessibililty program. Perhaps it would be possible to make an external to ISA interface using a modern microcontroller. I've found that using ISA cards in small projects is fairly easy and often only needs the data and read/write select lines driven. The address can be fixed to that of the card. Lee.

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Tarbell is making me insane

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: Re: Tarbell is making me insane > From: Grant Stockly <grant at stockly.com> > Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:16:59 -0900 > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only" <cctech at classiccmp.org> > > >> > One little nasty. The 1771 has a basic ability to do data seperation. >> > I havent' looked at a tarbel board in a very long time but I do hope >> > that they didn't do the TRS80 save a buck trick and try to use that >> > internal seperator, it does NOT work. It has zero jitter tolerence. >> >>Strange. I used an unmodified TRS-80 Model 1 EI for years and never had >>any problems with the disk side of things. And that used the internal >>data separateor of the 1771 IIRC. > >If that is the case, why would the Tarbell have so many extra >chips? Also, at the time the tarbell was manufactured, would they >have even known that there was an issue with the 1771's data separation? Because the internal seperator sucked. If the user never had problems it was just dumb luck. Percom (and others) sold thousands of add on data seperator board to all the E1 users that couldn't make it work. >Just wondering why...I'm not trying to second guess anyone. Just >that if the extra ICs weren't required I can't imagine Tarbell using them??? Because they were needed. Even WD advised that it was not adaquate for many cases. Tarbell wasn't stupid, they built protos and tested them and the board they sold worked. Allison >Grant

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Tarbell is making me insane

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: Re: Tarbell is making me insane > From: Grant Stockly <grant at stockly.com> > Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 15:25:53 -0900 > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only" <cctech at classiccmp.org> > >Wow, a lot to go over here... Rich, if you have any problems with >your drive I might be able to help you after this exercise! : ) > >>Data is comming from the disk, however it's not readable. Possible >>reasons: >> >> NOISE, ground the drive, insure it has good power that the >> system case and it's grounds are common. Also common >> error is long drive cables (stay short for now) and cables >> (and drives) that get near CRTs. > >I'm hooking the 3.5" drive power cable directly to the output of the >7805 on the tarbell, which is getting its power from an 8v switching >power supply. The power is nice and steady at 4.95v. The only thing >I haven't done is made sure the case is grounded. Some drives had >jumpers for that, but mine doesn't. So it could be either way. BZZT!!!! NEVER! The 7805 DOES NOT have the output to support the logic and the Drive power. It might with a modern 3.5" but not any of the 5" older drives. >> Internal: 1771 requires a data seperator to recover clock and >> nice(cleaned up some) read data. The common circuits >> are oneshots and PLLs. Tarbel used oneshots. Generally >> they work well enough if set right. > >The tarbell card I have doesn't have any one shots for data >separation. The read data line goes into a L74 (Dual D Edge >Triggered Flip Flop), then goes into a LS175 (Quad D Type Flip Flop >with Direct Clear). There are two LS161 (Synchronous 4 Bit Binary >Counter) that are hooked up to parts of the LS175. There are is a >XOR gate and two NAND gates. I'm not sure what is going on at the >moment, does it seem like that pile of parts could be implementing a >PLL? I would think a PLL would be more complex than that. I'll at >least make sure all of the edges match up (Read data vs separated >clock and data) It's a oneshot done with counters rather than monostables. Better, stable and predictable. >I hope I find something obvious. I should at least see a difference >between the two tarbell cards (reliably bad vs somewhat bad). I have >a 4FDC Cromemco? It uses a 1771. I might be able to use the tarbell >driver to boot off of that. Is anything known about that card as far >as being better or worse? Make sure the logic osc is really running at the crystal frequency. >> LOGIC: problem with read/wait hardware not working or possible >> data path corruption. > >The two 3.5" drives and the 5.25" drive I have don't do anything with >the ready/disk change line at all. BUT, I know the Sony 3.5" drive >doesn't generate index pulses until the drive speeds up (I think that >is what its doing). That should affect nothing. SA400s (and others) don't generate index if teh media is not spinning (motor off, door open). >With a TEAC 235HF drive it takes 694.053ms for the drive to generate >sector pulses AFTER the drive was given a "Motor Enable" >signal. Even though the head was NOT at track 00, the drive didn't >signal that status until 491.221ms after given a "Motor Enable". So >the drive seemed to spin the motor up, tell the controller it was not >at 0, and then start issuing index pulses. Most systems that used 5.25" drives had a 1second motor delay for the motor to spin up. You dont read as soon as you see index nor does the FDC chip. >That is probably how the 3.5" disk is getting away without a ready >line. The older drives probably generated index pulses regardless of >if the drive is ready or not. These newer drives with more brains >must not make index pulses unless they are ready. Ready is one line I never used nor is it important. Use a jumper to force it true and forget it. >>your shotgunning. I've seen this for 30+ years. Doesn't work, swap >>out the big hairy chip as they must be flaky or why else put it in a >>socket? Rare if ever is that the case. > >On my second kenbak build I had a problem. First I tested all of the >ICs (digital only) but didn't find any problems so I started swapping >them all. About 3 hours after testing it started working, but then >stopped. I found a cold solder joint. Pushing around and bending >the boad "fixed" it. : ) So I fixed the joint and reinstalled all >of the old chips. : ) Probing for a missing signal might have found it faster. Pulling chips risks fatigueing sockets and also ESD to the chips (even TTL). The worst is the motion makes the problem go away only to return days later. >The main reason I swapped the 1771 was because I think I read >somewhere that its a very static sensitive part and of all of them >the most likely to go out... No more so than 8080, z80 or 765. Once in circuit the surrounding stuff further protects it. However ESD can and does kill chips that come to edge connectors. >>FYI: certain brands of sockets of the side wipe style tend to fatigue >>with insertion/removeal and some do it over time leading to failures >>where the chips are 100% good but nothing works and may be flakey >>if wiggled or moved. > >I will replace the sockets with machine pin sockets. Do so as needed. I've had to strip entire NS* MDS boards for that reason. >>DD or HD with tarbel?????? > >The tarbell is treating the 3.5" disk drive as that TM100 tandon SSSD >drive. The data rate recorded to the drive is 8.07us per bit. I'm >getting 123916 bits a second, which doesn't seem to match anything I >remember... That would be single density 5.25" rate and you at 99.1328% of correct which would be 125,000. Less than 1% slow is tolerable. >>HD media is incompatable in every way with older drives and lower >>data rates. > >My drive is a new from sony. I've made formatted and written to HD >disks with the HD hole covered. This same drive reading the same >disks does not always read. I don't know if its the tarbell's fault or not. Disks as in media or drives? Disks as in media is an issue. Better bet is older 720k stuff. FYI HD in this context is meaningless as your running at 1/2 the lowest data rate for those drives. >>Does the read loop test a status bit or hang/wait on read? > >The silly tarbell issues a "IN" to a "wait" port and the tarbell >keeps it in a wait state until the 1771 is good and ready. Kind of >makes debugging hard if the tarbell doesn't decide to stop waiting. ; ) I call that read/hang. It's the only way to go with slow CPUs. If thats the case then your disks test [program should hang if there is no data. > >>can you supply the sector read code? ( should be fairly short) > >The datasheet for the 1771 says "Upon receipt of the Read command, >the head is loaded, the BUSY status bit set, and when an ID field is >encountered that has the correct track number, correct sector number, >and correct CRC, the data field is presnted to the computer." I know that paragraph. It also means the FDC had to find and read those correctly. >Is that the sector read code you are talking about? One of those >first bytes? The data sheet says that the 1771 is capable of reading >the entire track as one big sector. Maybe I should try to make a >routine to do that. I don't know of any other way to get that code >since it isn't part of a normal read. Ah, no the software that manages the FDC. the program segment that does READ IO. > >> >The drive, tarbell, and boot disks were mailed to me from a fellow >> >enthusiast. He made all of the modifications, made the disks, >> >etc. He has tested the setup in an IMSAI (kind of) with my (kit) >> >CPU, a SSM 8080, and a ZPU at 2MHz. >> >>Kind of and exactly are differnt things. > >At least we both have a ZPU and both have one with the 2MHz >switch. So that eliminates the CPU card one shots from the >reliability question. Right? Same bus? Same ram, same Front pannel? >> > 4. With the Altair CPU and the Imsai front panel the Tarbell >> >will boot after you push reset and then push the run switch. >> >>Says the MITS FP is causing some pain. > >FP? FRONT PANNEL. >>The 8t97s worked fine for me. It has 8224? your mod or 8800B? > >That was part of a quote from him. Its not my board. I do have pictures at: >http://www.stockly.com/forums/showthread.php?t=325 > >Its a regular Rev 0 card with some modifications. The biggest >modification is the lack of one shots. It uses an 8224. I imagine >he got this info from a vintage place somewhere because his work >looks very well planned out. Or maybe he just planned it out good! I just ripped up the osc and oneshots plus the drivers and used on of the pad areas to mount the 8224 and wired it in. One problem the 8224 can have is the crystal osc can sometime run at a harmonic of the marked freq or for the 18.384 mhz rock sometimes at a subharmonic. I found it stable but watch for it. >>The only media that should go in that drive is the brown SD/DD floppies. >>If the media was written on a 96tpi drive the noise and jitter _will_ >>be higher due to track width differences. IF the FDC oneshots are >>not quite on that makes a huge differnence. > >I've read that HD (1.44MB 3.5") disks with tape over the HD hole >aren't exactly a DD disk. Something about the track width being >narrower because of the smaller head in an HD drive? BUT, the DD >(720k 3.5") disks were formatted to 40 tracks 18 sectors, 128 bytes a >sector using an HD drive. So the DD disks wouldn't have a wide track >width to begin with. Are there really physical media differences >between DD and HD that would keep a HD disk from being used as a DD >disk when in a HD drive? The HD drive should be able to read the >narrow track written on what it thinks is a DD disk, right? Is the >magnetic material of an HD disk significantly different? the 3.5" all have the same track width. The 5.25" stuff had that wholde thing going on. What the 3.5" had was the media had a different corcivity and there were at least two differnt media and the 1.44 had a harder to write 700 orsted media vs the 720K at 600. > >Most of the information I've read about mixing media is in reference >to DD disks being written in an HD drive and then becoming unreliable >in a DD drive. I've also heard about people who add holes to disks >to make a DD disk an HD disk, which probably works for them better >than my tarbell works for me... : ) Again thats the 5.25" drives. The 3.5" world is generally less muddled for modern drives. (those that likely appeard in PCs). Allison >Thanks! > >Grant

17 years, 5 months

3
2
0 0

cctalk Digest, Vol 51, Issue 36

by pechter＠gmail.com

> Message: 2 > Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 16:18:45 -0600 > From: "Jason T" <silent700 at gmail.com> > Subject: Who keeps buying DECTalks? > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > Message-ID: > <51ea77730711111418j6a375852xea3fcf22f6864744 at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > So I like early speech synthesis. I like DEC stuff. I've got a > couple forms of the DECTalk boxes (the portable, the ISA card.) I'd > like the DTC-01 unit, the one that sort of looks like a VX2000 > terminal. They come up on ebay every other week or so and end up > selling for well over $100. > > Who's buying these things? Are they popular with collectors? Or are > they still being used in the disability care industry? > Folks like me would love to get some cheap. My wife's blind and from what I've seen the DECtalk is the best sounding of the early Speach synthesis boxes. It's (IIRC) got a pair of 68k chips and some nice software including stuff like an "email mode" which knows how to skip the extraneous header stuff when talking mail messages. I picked up one of the ISA DECtalkPC's cheap a couple of weeks ago but I'd like to get one of the externals. They're supported by just about every accessibililty program. bill -- d|i|g|i|t|a|l had it THEN. Don't you wish you could still buy it now! pechter-at-gmail.com

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Slightly OT: Getting parts form Hong Kong

by cclist＠sydex.com

List, I'm starting work on a small hardware project and note that the best deals on items such as PIC microcontrollers are from Chinese dealers. They seem to be reputable and offer items at half the US supplier price. Has anyone had problems with them? My last order from such an HK supplier was a bucketload of white LEDs. Cheap--and they were exactly what the seller represented them as--shipment took less than a week. I couldn't tough the price I paid through normal US dealders (DigiKey, Mouser, etc.). Cheers, Chuck

17 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

How not to fix a classic mac (or: fried logic boards)

by trag＠io.com

> Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 22:45:09 -0800 > From: Josh Dersch <derschjo at msu.edu> > Subject: How not to fix a classic mac (or: fried logic boards) > The other day I picked up a Macintosh 512k with a broken monitor for $5 > thinking that it'd be a fun project to hack on (yes, another thing to > add to my pile of things to hack on, just what I need :)). > > First point of business, I discharged the CRT. > To the main chassis. This, as I have now discovered, is not what you > are supposed to do to discharge the CRT unless you want to destroy the > logic board. > > Anyone out there experienced this failure mode? Any > obvious things to check? That particular failure is documented in Larry Pina's "Macintosh Repair and Upgrade Secrets" and probably in "The Dead Mac Scrolls" as well. I'd look it up for you, but I don't have my books with me here. It's definitely an IC, but I don't remember which one, nor how rare/common it is. If someone else doesn't jump in with the answer, email me (to remind me when I'm at home) and I'll look it up. Jeff Walther

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Do you have oldest-running HP-UX system in the U.S?

by darin.lory＠gmail.com

I thought I would pass this on....I'm sure someone on this list could win this!!! -Darin Do you have the oldest running HP-UX server? If you do, you'll receive a new HP Integrity server as our celebration gift. Register to claim your complimentary limited edition 20thanniversary sweater. If you have the oldest-running HP-UX system in the U.S., you'll receive a new HP Integrity rx2660 server.(2) Your HP-UX server could be more valuable than you think. If it's the oldest HP-UX server still in production, you'll receive a HP Integrity server.(2) Register to enter and receive your complimentary special edition 20th anniversary sweater.(1) https://h30046.www3.hp.com/campaigns/2007/promo/1-43HP8/index.php?key=HPUX&… Register today to see if it's yours and receive: * A limited edition 20th anniversary sweater(1) * A chance to receive(2) an HP Integrity rx2660 server with HP-UX 11i v3 license and HP Care Pack Service * Outstanding trade-in discounts Celebrating 20 Years of HP-UX customer loyalty. Find out if you have the oldest running system https://h30046.www3.hp.com/campaigns/2007/promo/1-43HP8/index.php?key=HPUX&… Technology for better business outcomes. _____________________________________________________________________ 1. Complimentary HP-UX anniversary offer subject to HP terms and conditions. Offer available to all U.S. customers with a valid HP-UX server serial number while supplies last. You must meet HP qualifications. HP may discontinue this offer at anytime. 2. Rules: No purchase necessary. Open only to U.S. entries. Entries must be received by January 15, 2008. HP will determine and select the oldest running system from all valid entries received, based on the oldest running instance of a HP-UX server currently in production. HP reserves the right to disqualify entries for any reason. The oldest running system will be announced in February 2008. (C) 2007 Hewlett-Packard Company. All rights reserved. All product and company names referenced herein are trademarks of their respective owners. THIS DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED AS IS WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED. This document may be copied provided all text is included and copies contain HP's copyright notice and any other notices provided herein.

17 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

"Barn" finds - Victor 9000, Rex Microcomputer and Intersil Development System

by jplist2007＠kiwigeek.com

Hey all; My wife's grandfather started a company that made the first digital meter for propane (and other gaseous) distribution and they're clearing out their old facility (which the family calls the Car Barn, for his collection of vintage Packards now stored there). Couple of goodies, but I'm afraid I'm having trouble finding much on some of them, thought perhaps those out there might be able to help. The first is a Victor 9000 which I found some descriptions of and, thanks to Al, a manual on BitSavers. I'll dig into that one later. The next is a 'Rex Microcomputer System', model REX-1032, "Manufactured by Realistic Controls Corporation of Davenport, Iowa". I'm guessing this is a kit computer that's been put together by this local company, but "Rex Micrcomputer" gets me nothing via google and breaking it down gives me screeds of irrelevancies. The machine has a Z80 microprocessor, although it might have another (ala Rainbow) and I just haven't dug far enough. The last is quite a beasty, weighing plenty thanks to its significantly hefty linear power supply. Intersil Development System, ISB 80DS 3020-120. Got six apparently serial ports on the back with what I think is a console cable hanging out one side. What I like best is the socket mounted in the front plate for reading/writing 24 pin DIP chips. Two 8" drives with diskettes in them, God only knows if they're still good after sitting out for this long. I'll give all of the above a good part of the day to warm back up (20F last night in Iowa and they sat out in my car, the boards are now sufficiently slick with condensation in my office) and see what I get. I have a monitor for the Victor and the Rex (a rather adorable 8" Sanyo TV), we'll see what happens on the Intersil. I'd love to hear from anyone who is famaliar with these, on or off-list, your choice. JP Hindin Iowa

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

S100 Floppy Controller Question

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: Re: S100 Floppy Controller Question > From: M H Stein <dm561 at torfree.net> > Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2007 01:13:48 -0500 > To: "'cctalk at classiccmp.org'" <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > >---------------Original Message: > >Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 17:51:09 -0500 >From: Allison <ajp166 at bellatlantic.net> >Subject: Re: S100 Floppy Controller Question >To: cctech at classiccmp.org >Message-ID: <0JRD004G7656LL73 at vms044.mailsrvcs.net> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > >> >>Subject: Re: S100 Floppy Controller Question >> From: M H Stein <dm561 at torfree.net> >> Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 17:33:20 -0500 >> To: "'cctalk at classiccmp.org'" <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > ><snip> >>I think Tim's point was that if your controller's smart enough to deal with a >>relatively modern 8" drive like a TM848 it could probably deal equally >>well with a 5.25" HD drive and you could transparently restore an 8" image >>(if you have one) to the 5.25" disk. The controller (and CP/M) would not >>even know that it's a 5.25 instead of an 8"; my Cromemcos certainly don't, >>although a different FDC might well require some mods to the BIOS. > >Different FDC WILL require a different bios. Same for SERIAL IO. > >Allison > >-----------Reply: > >I think you might have misunderstood, Allison; sounds like you thought I was >talking about replacing an FDC with one other than what the BIOS is configured >for; obviously that will require mods to the BIOS. Ok, then same fdc but sufficiently differnt drive requires new (modified) bios. Changes that affect a bios: Motor on/motor runs continiously. Step rate, head load delay, motor on delay Different on disk format (likely with 8 to 5") >What I was responding to was a previous post that suggested replacing an 8" >drive with a 5 1/4" HD drive might require mods to the BIOS, and I just wanted >to mention that this is not the case with a Cromemco 16/64FDC, to which a >TM848 and a JU475 appear identical as long as the jumpers on the 5 1/4 drive >are set correctly and it supplies /READY, and that this may also apply to some >other controllers. Also, if the controller has both 8" and 5 1/4 connectors and >they are effectively in parallel as they are on the Cromemco, you may not >even need a 50<>34 pin adapter cable. if the drive supplies ready _MAYBE_. If the Drive has the same step rate. >Nevertheless, controllers meant for some of the older, non-'standard' 8" drives >probably will require changes to the BIOS, and likely also hardware mods. BTDT, drive changes ultimately a BIOS and in few cases the mods are small and most not interchangeable. Allison > >mike

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Who keeps buying DECTalks?

by dm561＠torfree.net

-------------Original Message(s): Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:25:13 -0800 From: "Chuck Guzis" <cclist at sydex.com> Subject: On 11 Nov 2007 at 20:49, Jim Leonard wrote: > The digitized examples (Kennedy, etc.) weren't that much better > either... I wonder, with modern computers making the FFT analysis, could > the computalker produce intelligible output? I can only assume that the > original analysis was limited by the speed of its day. I don't know--the CT was a strange board. I do recall at one point having a Votrax Type'n'Talk RS-232 text-to-speech box installed on a terminal. To this day, I still say "ok" (rhymes with "sock")... ;) Cheers, Chuck -----------------Reply; Same here; one of the Cromemcos had a Votrax on a dedicated port that announced the user's name and port no. when he/she logged in, and for many years I've had a PC set up with an RS-232 speech card that announces the caller's name and number when my phone rings, as well as logging the call. mike

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

S100 Floppy Controller Question

by dm561＠torfree.net

---------------Original Message: Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 17:51:09 -0500 From: Allison <ajp166 at bellatlantic.net> Subject: Re: S100 Floppy Controller Question To: cctech at classiccmp.org Message-ID: <0JRD004G7656LL73 at vms044.mailsrvcs.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > >Subject: Re: S100 Floppy Controller Question > From: M H Stein <dm561 at torfree.net> > Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 17:33:20 -0500 > To: "'cctalk at classiccmp.org'" <cctalk at classiccmp.org> <snip> >I think Tim's point was that if your controller's smart enough to deal with a >relatively modern 8" drive like a TM848 it could probably deal equally >well with a 5.25" HD drive and you could transparently restore an 8" image >(if you have one) to the 5.25" disk. The controller (and CP/M) would not >even know that it's a 5.25 instead of an 8"; my Cromemcos certainly don't, >although a different FDC might well require some mods to the BIOS. Different FDC WILL require a different bios. Same for SERIAL IO. Allison -----------Reply: I think you might have misunderstood, Allison; sounds like you thought I was talking about replacing an FDC with one other than what the BIOS is configured for; obviously that will require mods to the BIOS. What I was responding to was a previous post that suggested replacing an 8" drive with a 5 1/4" HD drive might require mods to the BIOS, and I just wanted to mention that this is not the case with a Cromemco 16/64FDC, to which a TM848 and a JU475 appear identical as long as the jumpers on the 5 1/4 drive are set correctly and it supplies /READY, and that this may also apply to some other controllers. Also, if the controller has both 8" and 5 1/4 connectors and they are effectively in parallel as they are on the Cromemco, you may not even need a 50<>34 pin adapter cable. Nevertheless, controllers meant for some of the older, non-'standard' 8" drives probably will require changes to the BIOS, and likely also hardware mods. mike

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

MIT provides MULTICS source and documentation

by ggs＠shiresoft.com

Hi, I don't know if anyone else noticed but MIT has released the source (and documentation) to MULTICS. The link is: http://web.mit.edu/multics-history/ I haven't gone through it (yet) but thought I should bring this great news to everyone's attention. -- TTFN - Guy

17 years, 5 months

11
20
0 0

Docs for Chipcom ONline System Concentrator and Online NCS

by steve＠radiorobots.com

Hi, Trying to re-create, at least on paper, a system I used in the early '90s. Looking for docs for Chipcom ONline concentrator and NCS. Thanks, Steve

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

More pollution- Onyx (1) in California, also free

by compoobah＠valleyimplants.com

http://forums.nekochan.net/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=16005 Don't know if he'll ship, but move fast if you're interested.

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

beckmen industrial circuitmate 9020 osilloscope operaters manual

by thenicnics＠tiscali.co.uk

Hi Dan Please would you contact me if you still have a Beckman industrial circuitmate 9020 oscilloscope operators manual MANY THANKS Gary Nicholson

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

DEC sun3 gear available in Ottawa

by dave06a＠dunfield.com

Hi Guys, A friend of mine is cleaning his basement, and offers up some equipment, located near Ottawa, Ontario Canada. Please see: http://www.ba23.org/blog/2007/11/12/index.html#free > Free gear available for pick-up in Ottawa. Will consider shipping > if you are willing to pay packaging and shipping costs. > > I need to get this stuff out of my basement. > > - Sun 3/50 and Sun 3/160 > - MicroVAX-II in a BA123 enclosure > - DEC RL02 drives > - AlphaServer 2100 > - DECstation 3100 > - SPARCstation IPC > - VT100 Tempest > > > There will be more gear available. I will update this webpage as > I sort out the gear -- http://www.ba23.org/page0290.html -- dave06a (at) Dave Dunfield dunfield (dot) Firmware development services & tools: www.dunfield.com com Collector of vintage computing equipment: http://www.classiccmp.org/dunfield/index.html

17 years, 5 months

3
2
0 0

MIT provides MULTICS source and documentation

by blstuart＠bellsouth.net

From: Sridhar Ayengar <ploopster at gmail.com> > > Brian L. Stuart wrote: > > segmentation structure. Unfortunately, it's only got 32-bit > > addresses. Even in the 60s, the Multics machines had 36. > > Pardon my ignorance, but were there any places where the top four bits > were actually used? I mean, I don't believe there was a machine back > then capable of running MULTICS and also having more than 8Gb primary > storage. Wouldn't it be possible to fake it by just chopping off the > four most-significant bits and using the remaining 32? It's the virtual addresses you really care about. So the limit of physical memory is really a diffent issue. The address was used in 2 18-bit parts. The upper part was the segment number and the lower the offset into the segment. That meant segments could be no more the 256K and you could have no more than 256K of them. Because there was a one-to-one correspondence between files and segments, that would have limited files to 256K. They did some "stuff" to get around that, but I don't think it's what you'd do if you were starting from scratch, or maybe even doing a fresh port. If you divided the 32-bit address into a 14-bit segment number and 18-bit offset, then you could keep the same segment size and the only limit would be that a process could use no more than 16K segments. All in all, it'd be a whole lot more fun to use a 64-bit machine and divide it into 32 and 32. BLS

17 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

MIT provides MULTICS source and documentation

by blstuart＠bellsouth.net

> > >> But what machines could run the that today? > > > > > > Anything you port it to. The segmentation architecture would be hard to fake. And the idea of segments is so deeply ingrained, I doubt you'd want to try. However, the x86 does seem to have the necessary segmentation structure. Unfortunately, it's only got 32-bit addresses. Even in the 60s, the Multics machines had 36. > > That's an interesting question. I can't think of that many machines > > with a hardware ring architecture, and it's not something that can be > > easily faked with more traditional architectures. It would be a fairly > > invasive "port". > > It pains me to say it, but you could just throw CPU horsepower and > memory at the problem. Yes and no. In principle, the only thing you'd have to ensure is that you gave control to the supervisor on a ring crossing. So you could make all pages not in the current ring inaccessible. On a page fault, apply the ring brackets in software and change the page tables as a result. At the very least, you'd take a performance hit. Having said that, somewhere in the back of my head, I want to say that the x86 has at least part of the mechanism already. So a port to it would be less painful than to a lot of others, except of course, for the smaller address space. Of course, I could be totally off. I'm certainly no Multics expert, and my memory of the details of the x86 segmentation are rusty at best. BLS

17 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

MIT provides MULTICS source and documentation

by blstuart＠bellsouth.net

From: Chris Kennedy <chris at mainecoon.com> > > Brian L. Stuart wrote: > > >>From multicians.org: > > Although there were 64 rings (an illusion created by software) on > > GE 645 Multics, there are 8 rings, supported in hardware, on the > > Honeywell 6180 in its various models. > > As opposed to what? Four on the X86? > > The original question remains, how many rings does Multics need? Just > because eight were provided by hardware doesn't mean they were all used. For the most part, they used 0-4. I don't think you'd actually need 5-7. BLS

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

MIT provides MULTICS source and documentation

by blstuart＠bellsouth.net

From: Chris Kennedy <chris at mainecoon.com> > > Sean Conner wrote: > > > I can think of several thousand that have been made over the past decade, > > all made with the Intel x86 architecture. It even has the segments that > > Multics used. Seems like a perfect match to me. > > Hence my question regarding the number of rings used by Multics. Just > because there's multiple contexts doesn't mean that there's _enough_ of > them. >From multicians.org: Although there were 64 rings (an illusion created by software) on GE 645 Multics, there are 8 rings, supported in hardware, on the Honeywell 6180 in its various models. BLS

17 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

Found a NCR system 3400 BoatAnchor

by laura＠gbsncr.com

I am looking for information on how to find some part numbers to my NCR 3400 machine. I need one master slave (3) cables that go to the NCR3400 and the controller box (possible pn: 5300008319) for the tape drive (initialization tape 5 ?? tape). Please let me know if you can help. Laura Ellingson Sales & Marketing Manager Guarantee Business Systems, Inc. 800-650-1457, X429 651-286-8429-Direct 651-688-6160-Fax <mailto:laura at gbsncr.com> laura at gbsncr.com <http://www.gbsncr.com/> www.gbsncr.com GBS is a Woman Owned Small Business & Service Disabled Veteran Owned. We are a POS, Storage, networking hardware solution provider - in the IT industry since 1986.

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Architecture vs Implementation

by aek＠bitsavers.org

> If a processor has 16 bit registers, 16 bit math and address > calculation, and a 16 bit address bus, but it's ALU is only 8 bit and > its internal data bus is 8 bits, it's an 8 bit processor. Right? wrong -- The 360/30 /40 and /50 are all considered members of the same 32 bit architecture, and have 8, 16 and 32 bit data paths, respectively. An 80386/SX is not considered a 16 bit processor because it has a 16 bit data bus. People are confusing architecture with implementation. Is a PDP-8/S a one bit processor because it implements arithmetic serially?

17 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

Older Apple Macintosh books, manuals, Apple 2e card.

by trag＠io.com

> Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 09:30:42 -0700 > From: Richard <legalize at xmission.com> > Subject: Re: Older Apple Macintosh books, manuals, Apple 2e card. > In article <38603.209.163.133.242.1194883321.squirrel at webmail.io.com>, > "Jeff Walther" <trag at io.com> writes: > >> The IIe card has an actual IIe-in-a-chip on board. It plugs into an LC >> slot. The "LC-slot" originated on the Mac LC, but was instantiated on >> many Mac models after that. > > Is the "LC-slot" referring to the form factor or the bus interface? Primarily the bus interface. There may have been other Apple connectors which used the same physical connector but were wired differently. I am not aware of any, but Apple did this with other connectors. For example, the PDS connector in the IIci, IIsi and SE/30 are the same physically, but the IIci's is wired quite a bit differently, and even the IIsi and SE/30 have minor differences, though the latter doesn't stop cards from being cross-compatible. > Is this a NuBus slot? No. Apple was very fond of the Euro Mini-DIN connector in various pin numbers, but it is not the same as a NuBus slot. >> A IIe expansion card enthusiast has a very informative website up on the >> topic. > Is this the one you're thinking about? > > <http://www.vintagemacworld.com/> > Apple IIe Card for the Macintosh LC Frequently Asked Questions That's it. Anywhere that FAQ and I differ, I'm probably wrong. Same for me and Cameron's post which I saw after I wrote mine. Jeff Walther

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

At risk of polluting the list with micros- IRIS Indigo adv. for free.

by compoobah＠valleyimplants.com

See http://forums.nekochan.net/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=16095 Looks like a R3000 model with XS-24Z, XZ, or Elan graphics Not mine, in Oregon.

17 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

CRC question

by dkelvey＠hotmail.com

> From: cclist at sydex.com > > On 11 Nov 2007 at 10:37, dwight elvey wrote: > >> To my knowledge, I don't know if any of the assemblers had >> a CRC calculator built in. The final check number was most >> likely calculated after the assembly and just added to the code. >> If in the listing, this may have been a second pass through >> the assembler. > > MAC certainly didn't have one. I assume that the last 2 bytes of the > ROM were the zero-CRC-makers. The "quick and dirty way" to get a > zero sum is to compuate the CRC for the first n-2 bytes of the size n > ROM, then iterate through the 65536 possible 16-bit combinations of > the "corrector" stopping when a zero CRC is hit. It shouldn't take > long, particularly if you're using an emulator on a modern PC. > > You could also work out the reverse polynomial, but that sounds like > too much work for what probably will amount to a one-off deal. > > Cheers, > Chuck Hi Chuck As I recall, you just play the CRC forward with 0's in the two bytes. The value in the CRC is then just put into the place of the two bytes. It the will cancel to zero. I'd have to check that but that is what I recall. I recall it wasn't all that complicated. Remember, CRC circuits in controller chip do this for floppy disk without complicated circuits. It has been some time since I played with CRC's. I once had to write test to check CRC chips that used the Chinese Remainder Theorem to make data correction. I had to make sure that it corrected correctly by checking each part of the error correction. That was many years ago. Dwight _________________________________________________________________ Boo!?Scare away worms, viruses and so much more! Try Windows Live OneCare! http://onecare.live.com/standard/en-us/purchase/trial.aspx?s_cid=wl_hotmail…

17 years, 5 months

3
4
0 0

cctalk Digest, Vol 51, Issue 37

by compoobah＠valleyimplants.com

On Nov 11, 2007, at 11:21 PM, cctalk-request at classiccmp.org wrote: > What I meant to say is that the investor who get in turn the hobby > into a > business. Get in buy low, trade items around between other investors to > drive up the costs, sell out and find another pump and dump hobby. It > leaves > people thinking their stuff is worth money when the people with the > money > are long gone. Granted people will dig up those rarities and trade them > around so they do not get trashed, so there is a plus side to it > (things get > preserved). > There's another factor here - people like Will and Paul and Sellam (probably) don't cater to deep-pocket collectors as their primary customers. They cater to businesses who still use the machines in day-to-day operations and are happy to pay what's needed for a part so they can get it next-business-day. The other market is lawyers looking for prior art evidence. In both cases the bankroll is substantially bigger than almost any collector, so collectors get locked out through no nefarious intent of the dealers. Remember there's quite a lot of overhead in locating, buying, storing, organizing, and dealing that one part that one person will need every 5 years (or longer for the lawyers - maybe only once in 50 years, but they're willing to pay). Off of this there is a certain amount of hype-induced market pumping (lookit how much that old thing sold for! I'm gonna dump my beanie babies and invest in cawm-pew-tuhs (yes, more sophisticated certainly, but it's a fun image), but that is vapor wealth because those people don't have the support to deal to businesses and probably have no interest in doing professional lawyer supply so the investment is probably as good as shares in "Gobi Rainforest Woods Limited" > The only thing stopping me from fighting over the big boys for my > collectables is that nothing I collect would interest the big deep > pocket > collectors in the first place. Everything I like was made in the > thousands > or millions, outbid me today and I just wait for the next one, or find > it at > a garage sale for $1. I guess if I was older and used computers pre > 1980, I > might want some of the rarer systems that command money, but they just > don't > mean anything to me so I don't bother. I certainly wouldn't mind trying out a HP2100 or 3000, or an IBM mini/mainframe, but definitely same boat here - wussy micros only (unless you count the TAAC board which might be a mini). I'm a bit gunshy too, after the trouble it took to outfit my $25 VAX 4200 I'm hesitant to get into something that I don't know especially if it's pricy.

17 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

Older Apple Macintosh books, manuals, Apple 2e card.

by trag＠io.com

> Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:41:34 -0800 > From: Scott Quinn <compoobah at valleyimplants.com> > Subject: Re: Older Apple Macintosh books, manuals, Apple 2e card. > To: cctalk at classiccmp.org > The Apple // cards (I think it was a //e) fit in the LC PDS (LC, LCII, > LCIII, not sure about the '040 LCs) and are a genuine Apple product > that was pretty much 100%. While most of the (usually schools) using > them would move their Apple // software to either 3.5" or hard disk, I > think that Apple made a Macintosh-compatible 5.25" floppy that would > read Apple // disks (I know they made an IBM 5.25"-compatible floppy > drive for Macintosh back in the late 1980s), but not many were sold. The IIe card has an actual IIe-in-a-chip on board. It plugs into an LC slot. The "LC-slot" originated on the Mac LC, but was instantiated on many Mac models after that. The rule to distinguish 68040 based machines with an LC slot is that 68040 machines which can boot into 24 bit addressing mode will support the IIe card and 68040 machines which cannot boot into 24 bit addressing mode (IOW, 32 bit only) cannot support the IIe card, even though it will plug into the LC slot. IIRC, the Quadra 605/LC605/P605 supports the IIe card and the Quadra 630 family (Q630, 631, 635, 636, 640, and LC and Performas with same numbers) does not. Most machines with an LC style expansion slot have no other expansion slots, so installation of a IIe card precludes adding an ethernet card and other expansions. The Q63x family has a comm slot and an LC slot, so one could have an ethernet card in the comm slot and a IIe board in the LC slot, if they supported the IIe, which they don't. Grrrrr. The IIe card has a connector on the back plane for a custom cable. The custom cable splits into a joystick connector and a floppy drive connector. So one can connect a IIe joystick to the IIe card and one can also connect a 5.25" floppy drive to the connector on the special cable. IIRC, there is a model(s) of 5.25" drive which will work and another (others?) which will not, but I don't rememember which is which. Still, one does not need a special 5.25" drive. The connector is for one of the external 5.25" drives which was supported on the original Mac IIe. The IIe card uses the host machine's keyboard, mouse, display, hard drive and built-in 3.5" floppy drive. A IIe expansion card enthusiast has a very informative website up on the topic. And I will be useless here and fail to have the URL. But the resource exists and covers the information above to a useful level of detail. Jeff Walther

17 years, 5 months

3
2
0 0

cctalk Digest, Vol 51, Issue 37

by compoobah＠valleyimplants.com

On Nov 11, 2007, at 11:21 PM, cctalk-request at classiccmp.org wrote: > I would love to be proven wrong on this, since it would potentially > make > my II disk archiving a lot easier, but I have never heard of such a > device > for the Mac. > > In the case of the IIe card, this was accomplished by connecting a > regular > Apple II 5.25" drive to the *card*, not the computer. AFAIK same for the DOS compatible drive (though a different card, not the //e). I think somebody (must not have been Apple) did make some sort of drive that did the necessary interface juggling to do 5.25" //-series on the Mac. I was a bit too young to remember specifics, though. Perhaps AE. Pretty sure I've seen reference to it somewhere.

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Old Sun diags questions (4/300 and 3/200)

by compoobah＠valleyimplants.com

> Dave McGuire writes: > On Nov 10, 2007, at 1:19 PM, Scott Quinn wrote: > > Couple of questions on old Sun machines (well, parts). > > > > On a Sun 4300 CPU board, I'm getting the > > "EEPROM Write-Write-Read-Read test > > error PA=0xF2000000 VA=0X00FF8000 Exp=0x0000005a Obs=0x00000000 > > (looping)" > > error. Looking on the Web and Usenet seems to show that this has > > happened a couple of times, with some reference to possibly being > > the NVRAM (although the most comprehensive posing set was in > > German :(). This seems a bit odd, though - on my other Suns it > > calls the NVRAM the NVRAM, so I'm wondering if this is something > else. > > It's just a terminological difference. Most of those machines (if > I recall correctly) used 2816 NVRAM chips, which are also correctly > referred to as EEPROMs. Oh, so the Mostek unit isn't what this is talking about. Hmm- have to go over the board again. I saw the Mostek and assumed that it was the same as the 4c/m/u NVRAM setup .

17 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

Video clips (was Re: modern serial terminal)

by jeffj＠panix.com

replying to ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk (Tony Duell) Subject: Re: Video clips (was Re: modern serial terminal) Message-ID: <m1IrKbM-000J3RC at p850ug1> > I am not a 'normal' computer collector, if such a thing even exists. > For one thing I am primarily interested in the hardware design > (if I can get a machine running properly so that it boots the normal OS, > or runs the ROM software, or..., then I tend to lose interest in it). > I am interested in the electronics/engineering aspects, > the fact that the devices happen to be programmable computers is secondary to this. I think I'm in that camp too. I adored pulling apart old electronics to see the immense worksmanchip and craftsmanship required just for the assembly. Old military stuff was designed for reliability, maintenance, repairability, upgrade/replacement, etc. Even just verifying in-spec operation ment test points, built-in meters, test lamps, status indicators, etc. Things that are TOALLY MISSING from today's equipment. Will I ever build anything that magnificent by myself? Unlikely, but I can still aim high. [a quick rant: I've been having problems with my cable internet. I knew it was the modem by watching the status leds as it kept rebooting. How's anyone to diagnose things with only a power LED? Yea, it's sure great to buy 500+ gig hard drives for $100 but without a REAL activity LED, how am I to assure what drive is active? Some drives used to even blink diagnostics on their LED. New PCs are sure fast but without activity LEDs, how is one to isolate faults? That's a far cry from the mainframes with diagnostic LEDs on each card or part for fault isolation Yea, remote diagnostics and SMART give more details but after all that, someone still has to touch the hardware!] > This has several implications. The first, which I think is on-topic, > is that I am equally interested in peripherals as CPUs. > I want to run my PDP11 with RK05s and RK07s and RL02s, and... > Not an IDE drive pretending to be the above. > The design of the servo system in an RK07 > is every bit as interesting to me as the processor. I both agree and disagree. Yes, it's amazing seeing things in motion (particulalry linear motors) and motion control systems where you can SEE the feedback sensors and signals (not just a black-blob of a DSP doing all the work). BUT - when those drives were in common use, there was a support infrastructure. You could buy new disks and the cleaning kits and hire people to clean and check the disks and drives for "preventive maintenance". The drudgery of doing all that maintenance myself made me give up many such projects of running old equipment :-( -- Jeff Jonas

17 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

VCFX Photos

by wayne.smith＠charter.net

I have posted some VCFX photos at: http://picasaweb.google.com/Joy.Wayne/VintageComputerFestivalX Labels to follow.

17 years, 5 months

16
19
0 0

Tarbell is making me insane

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: Re: Tarbell is making me insane > From: Grant Stockly <grant at stockly.com> > Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 13:21:32 -0900 > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only" <cctech at classiccmp.org> > >Tarbell Update > >> >> > Also sounds like oneshot problems. Check cpu timing. Even small timing >> >> > errors tend to magnify bus noise issues and incompability problems. >> >>(Snip) >> >> > Also HEAT. That thing despite a very heafty noisy fan and cover mods >> >> > didn't like heat. FYI: the timing of the oneshots drifts with heating! > >I can't speak for the exact combination of the Tarbell, but the >system has been running all day long with: >-16k static card >-8k static card >-4k static card Ok you have 28k ram. Is the image sized and booting in that? If the image is sized for say 32 or 48K it will crash, likely as a bounce back to rom monitor. >-2SIO Is the boot image set up for MITS 2SIO and does it set it up? >-1k ROM >-8k Byte saver I assume thse are in high memory and not below the address the image will try to boot to. CP/M wants from 0000h to system size as configured. When working on FDCs I load the system with a single known good RAM16, Ram17 or similar 64k static card that can kill the last 4 or 8k. I use a CPU with resident monitor and local ram (compupro CPU Z) and an CPro Interfacer for IO. At that point I know I have a known IO, known CPU and a monitor at F000h with POJ to F000h and ram at F800h. Any time there is doubt about these they get a quick retest in a known backplane (NS*Horizon). This means the system will be 4 boards max with the 4th being the FDC in question. I keep a CCS terminator card handy as it seemed to work the best of all of them. Things I've found in old backplanes. Staples under the S100 connectors. Metal under the backplane shorting to chassis. Terminators with burned off tracks. Metal bits in the connectors Bits of nonconductor in the connectors. Green cruft in the connectors (corrosion) Black card edge connectors (gold over copper without nickle flash, a bad thing) Power supplies with excessive ripple. (tired caps) Power traces fried on the backplane (altair 4slots) Signal traces missing... from a former short? That doesn't even touch on cards that just didn't play well in some machines or with certain other cards. Heres an example of a machine. I have two explorer 8085s. One I built back when and another aquired. They are identical as best as I can see or test. Mine runs perfect, always did with any card I've tried. the second is flaky, won't run any S100 card without a bus terminator and even then it's fussy. I've gone as far as to completely swap every chip (they are fully socketed) between the one that is cranky and my old one is still happy and the newer one not. I've even swapped PSs ( uses s100 style unregulated) and no dice. All on board (there are a few) regulators replaced on the bad one. No help. After a LONG time of testing and all the problem was a high resistance trace on the faulty board. I can see the signal at the source IC solder side but between there and it's terminus it's a 1000ohm resistor! One of the S100 status signals was not quite there and floating. I bridged the trace with blue wire between the two solder pads and it's solid now. I cannot even with a 10x scope see where the apparent crack is. That's chasing a phantom. But I do find the oddest of the odd. >-Tarbell FD > >It has been running solid a 4K ROM monitor from Dave >Dunfield. Floppy interface still doesn't work on either card, and >these cards were tested by someone else on an IMSAI with an Altair CPU card. If it's the monitor I think, it doesnt stress ram just sitting there. You need a memory exerciser running at a minimum to be sure. >>Some Z80 cards complicate the issue. They have different timing and at 4mhz >>some ram MAY NOT be fast enough. Either slow the z80 to 2mhz or more wait >>states from ram. > >The card I have has a switch for 2MHz. The tarbell with the reduced >clock speed will not work at anything higher like you suggested. I >have confirmed (from the person who shipped me the tarbell cards) >that the tarbell card with a reduced clock speed works normally with >a Z80 at 2MHz. Doesnt assure the FDC is set right for the drive and media. Also doesnt assure the media is SD or even bootable. Further is the media is not using a 2sio as the IO the system could boot and crash or appear to. > >I attached a logic analyzer to the drive and watched all of the >signals. Every thing looks normal to me. I hooked it to a 5.25" >drive and then to a 3.5" drive. The drives are sending everything >that they should. Then the FDC is potentialy not decoding the data. > >>Shows how rough the bus timing and noise can be. Is that a one piece >>backplane of the two sided variety or the one of the earlier Altair >>4 slot chains or single sided backplane? The reason is the earlier > >2x4 slot motherboards, but all of the wires are the same length >(there was a tip on that to reduce noise) ICKPOO. Those were the worst for ringing and bus power sag. Poke a scope at it, it's nasty. >I'm going to let the thing heat soak and then check the bus with an >oscilloscope and the CPU clock. if the oneshots are good ones once set they should say put. Then again there was lore and fact about what was and wasn't good. >You know, I'm worried that the reliability issues aren't related to >the Altair, but to a heavily modified tarbell card trying to write a >Tandon SSSD 5.25" onto a 3.5" disk??? Likely if the data rates are not set right for the FDC and it's data seperator (usually also oneshots) is not set right it will fail. Could even be a simple bad IDC crimp on the cable. > >Would any of you like to see the data coming out of the disk >drive? I can upload the logic analyzer data to my web site... Not I. If I did at the very least I'd also need to see the schematic and jumper info for the tarbel. Other wise it's just a pretty picture. >I will never be happy until I find the problem. I'd like to think >that with all of the information we have that I can make the Altair >as reliable as any other S-100 system. I have collected a lot of >errata and have applied it all to my system... That's why I won't >give up with this setup. : ) Most of the erata is lore not hard tried fixes. Most fall in the "it worked for me" realm. The problem is you have a lot of still possibles lurking. Oh, SA400 drives... had a problem with them and all that used that frame (sa400, 400l and 450). Seems if the spindle bearings go bad the amount of jitter on the data can exceed that of simple data seperators used with 1771 (especially RS early TRS80 with early EI). I'm sure it's possible to have the same problem with other drives. Showed up best with the SA alignment disk and a dual trace scope set up for data read EYE pattern. Allison >Thanks, >Grant

17 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

S100 Floppy Controller Question

by dm561＠torfree.net

-------------Original Message: Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 19:32:38 -0500 From: "Richard A. Cini" <rcini at optonline.net> Subject: Re: S100 Floppy Controller Question Yes, I understand the 5-for-8 substitution. One of the challenges I'm having is finding a suitable disk image to try. If I get an 8" image I plan on jamming it onto a 5.25" HD disk and giving that a whirl. I made the "8"-only" distinction because one of the boards I have (the Versafloppy) has both connectors. It just saves a little time in not having to make a cable. ------------Reply: This is quite possibly not relevant to _your_ controller, but FWIW my Cromemcos have both the DD and the HD drives on the same cable, and the 50 pin connector is only used for the 'real' 8" drive. Although some of the signals have separate drivers/receivers, the 5 1/4 and 8" drives are effectively on the same bus; the only difference is that the 8" drives supply (and the FDC expects) a /READY signal on pin 22 (?) whereas the TM-100s did not supply that signal and the FDC does not look for it on the 5 1/4" cable; I suspect that's how the system distinguishes between the drives in order to select the correct speed. Modern HD drives _do_ supply a /READY signal on pin 34, although you'll probably have to change a jumper since PCs use it for Disk Change; the jumpers are in fact often labelled DC and RDY. Therefore all that is required is a jumper on the FDC from pin 34 of the 5" connector to pin 22 of the 8" (and of course any DD 5 1/4 drives must have their /READY signal disabled if it's active). The only other FDC I have any experience with is a Micropolis, and it _does_ use the /READY signal from its DD drives (although it looks for it on pin 6, which is normally DS3 or 4), so this wouldn't work. m

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

VXT2000+

by Rinaldo.Eversdijk＠stork.com

Hi Henk, I'm in the Netherlands and I would like to have the unit as well. We are still using it in a sort of test environment and we have a defect power supply in one of them. We are willing to pay the shipping and additional costs. Regards Rinaldo -----Original Message----- From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Henk Gooijen Sent: zondag 11 november 2007 13:02 To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Subject: RE: VXT2000+ Hi ?ngel, I checked the TPG website. Pity that the unit is just over 5 kilos, that would have saved 5 euro. Shipping inside Europe will be 24 euros. I have to find a good box to ship it safely ...If you are interested, send me an off-list e-mail. BTW, I have been in Granada and seen the beautiful Alhambra! thanks, Henk > Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 12:47:38 +0100> From: ama at ugr.es> To: cctalk at classiccmp.org> Subject: Re: VXT2000+> > Hi Henk,> > On Sun, Nov 11, 2007 at 11:45:56AM +0100, Henk Gooijen wrote:> > I am about to throw out a complete VXT2000+> > Shipping overseas is probably not worth it> > (I am in The Neterlands), but if somebody> > needs a specific part, I am willing to disassemble> > the VXT before it becomes landfill. The VXT is> > in good shape AFAIK, but can not test it ... > > I might be interested on the terminal if shipping price permits :-)> > How much could it be to ship to Granada, Spain?> > Thanks and greetings,> ?ngel> > -- > Angel Martin Alganza Tel +34 958 248 926> Departamento de Genetica Fax +34 958 244 073> Universidad de Granada mailto:ama at ugr.es> C/ Fuentenueva s/n http://www.ugr.es/~ama/> E-18071 Granada, Spain JabberID alganza at jabber.org> PGP Public key: http://www.ugr.es/~ama/ama-pgp-key> 3EB2 967A 9404 6585 7086 8811 2CEC 2F81 9341 E591> ------------------------------------------------------> () ASCII Ribbon Campaign - http://www.asciiribbon.org/> /\ Against all HTML e-mail and proprietary attachments> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments> http://linux.sgms-centre.com/advocacy/no-ms-office.php -------------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCLAIMER: This e-mail and any attachment(s) sent with it are intended exclusively for the addressee(s), and may not be used by, opened by, passed on to, or made available for use to, any person other than the addressee(s). Stork rules out any and all liabilities resulting from any electronic transmission.

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

MUSIC 4B

by aek＠bitsavers.org

> Does MUSIC 4B still exist? Barry Vercoe at the Media Lab might know. I don't think CHM has a copy. From memory, MIT's MUSIC 11 has roots in the Bell program.

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Cameron- you're server's still down

by compoobah＠valleyimplants.com

Been trying to re-send, but it looks like your server still isn't quite right.

17 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

HP2116 inventory

by aek＠bitsavers.org

> if someone has service > manuals for the C it would be nice if scans could eventually find their way to bitsavers. I have a lot of material for the C as well as B from a large collection I obtained a few years ago. The only thing I don't appear to have are the schematics for the 2116A. All this needs to get sorted out to be included with material available through the HP/CHM agreement.

17 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

MUSIC 4B

by wdonzelli＠gmail.com

One of my fun finds at the Record Fair while you folks were all out at VCF X is Paul Zukofsky's Lyric Variations for Violin and Computer, >from 1967. Several of the pieces were made by an IBM 7094 running the MUSIC 4B program - non-real-time digital synthesis software. The pieces are interesting, and really sound like anything a good sized Moog modular could have made, but these pieces were done completely by the 7094 to seven track tape in batch mode, where they were later fed into a D/A converter in the studio. Listening to these, and knowing what went into making them, make them a bit more special than just music. Does MUSIC 4B still exist? Maybe this is an Al question. It certainly would be neat to play around with on a 7094 simulator. -- Will

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Older Apple Macintosh books, manuals, Apple 2e card.

by compoobah＠valleyimplants.com

On Nov 11, 2007, at 2:08 PM, cctalk-request at classiccmp.org wrote: > Those Apple // cards, are they the actual 100% emulation of the //e or > //c under old PDS Macs? Was there a SCSI 5.25" drive for Macs that > would read the Apple // disks? > The Apple // cards (I think it was a //e) fit in the LC PDS (LC, LCII, LCIII, not sure about the '040 LCs) and are a genuine Apple product that was pretty much 100%. While most of the (usually schools) using them would move their Apple // software to either 3.5" or hard disk, I think that Apple made a Macintosh-compatible 5.25" floppy that would read Apple // disks (I know they made an IBM 5.25"-compatible floppy drive for Macintosh back in the late 1980s), but not many were sold. Pretty well engineered device if you have a LC-series Mac.

17 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

LIST ADMIN Re: Laserdiscs

by dkelvey＠hotmail.com

> From: trixter at oldskool.org> > Jay West wrote:> > Jim wrote...> >> Public Service Announcement: The entire world of classic computer > >> collectors/restorers/enthusiasts is *not* made up of DEC-heads. Other > >> companies existed; other niches exist. It's a big hobby out there.> > > > Someone take a picture. Jim and I are in complete agreement on something ;)> > Holy mackerel :-) Hi I wish there was more talk about the Canon Cat but I also realize that it is quite rare( although, Jack Rubin just found one ). R. Cini's thread is of interest to me because I've built up a CP/M BIOS from scratch. Still, it is Jay's job to keep this list from just diverging into what ever. I've seen one of the news groups that's original charter was great that fell to a wasteland without the vigilance of a moderator. I'd not like to see that happen to this list. I think most ( including me ) have the occasional OT post but some seem to think that that is what the list is for. I try to police myself because I know how annoying it is to post that I could care less about. It is still a great list. Many on the list are great contributors. It is not a place to stand on a soap box and tell the world about everything that they can think of. Dwight _________________________________________________________________ Windows Live Hotmail and Microsoft Office Outlook ? together at last. ?Get it now. http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook/HA102225181033.aspx?pid=CL1006269…

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Systems Industries Model 9400 Disc Controller

by technobug＠comcast.net

A friend's 11/70 has gone through the last of his SI 9400 disk controller spares and he has tasked me with the repair task. Does anyone have documentation for this beast? CRC

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Who keeps buying DECTalks?

by wdonzelli＠gmail.com

> I suspect they're being purchased by dealers. I'd like one, but > haven't been willing to shell out the $$$'s. Dealers do not buy many things on Ebay - a general rule of thumb. It does not make much sense for dealer to pay top dollar for stuff. Lets see - 1) its DEC 1) its old 1) its cool. Collector demand? Nahhhh.... -- Will

17 years, 5 months

3
2
0 0

S100 Floppy Controller Question

by dm561＠torfree.net

-------------Original Messages: Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 11:23:30 -0500 From: "Richard A. Cini" <rcini at optonline.net> Subject: Re: S100 Floppy Controller Question Good. The Morrow controller then falls into the same category in my mind as the ComprPro Disk 1 with the added bonus of not requiring mods to my IMSAI. Now the thousand-dollar question -- does anyone have a suitable disk image I could use? On 11/11/07 10:55 AM, "Tim Shoppa" <shoppa_classiccmp at trailing-edge.com> wrote: > "Richard A. Cini" <rcini at optonline.net> wrote: >> Oh, I also just found a Morrow DiskJockey 2D/B in one of my boxes. This >> model has only a 50-pin connector and the manual talks about the SA800, so >> I'm assuming it's an 8"-only controller. > > Well, originally intended for 8" drives, but with a suitable adapter > cable glue and a slightly modified BIOS it'll do 5.25" and 3.5" drives. > > Tim. Rich ----------Reply: I think Tim's point was that if your controller's smart enough to deal with a relatively modern 8" drive like a TM848 it could probably deal equally well with a 5.25" HD drive and you could transparently restore an 8" image (if you have one) to the 5.25" disk. The controller (and CP/M) would not even know that it's a 5.25 instead of an 8"; my Cromemcos certainly don't, although a different FDC might well require some mods to the BIOS. Worth a try in any case. m

17 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

Furguson Big Board II (was CRC question)

by aek＠bitsavers.org

> My Bigboard II has a bit of interesting code in the EPROM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bigboard The EPROM source was available with the board, there should be no need to disassemble it.

17 years, 5 months

3
3
0 0

S100 Floppy Controller Question

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: Re: S100 Floppy Controller Question > From: M H Stein <dm561 at torfree.net> > Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 17:33:20 -0500 > To: "'cctalk at classiccmp.org'" <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > >-------------Original Messages: >Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2007 11:23:30 -0500 >From: "Richard A. Cini" <rcini at optonline.net> >Subject: Re: S100 Floppy Controller Question > >Good. The Morrow controller then falls into the same category in my mind as >the ComprPro Disk 1 with the added bonus of not requiring mods to my IMSAI. The Compupro only uses pines 20 and 70 for ground, you can cut if needed. HOWEVER and VERY BIG DEAL the CPRO 1 can boot... 8" or 5.25". The Cpro 1A is more adept at that and more flexible. Both have the problem of if you boot any of the sandard CPRO images the assumed serial port is one of the standards used by CPRO. The manual will help with this. >Now the thousand-dollar question -- does anyone have a suitable disk image I >could use? > CPRO images are out there. If you go with 5.25" a PC can write a DD boot disk (uses same 765!). Also if you can boot a 5.25" image you can boot a 3.5" image of the track/sector layout is same and same density. > >On 11/11/07 10:55 AM, "Tim Shoppa" <shoppa_classiccmp at trailing-edge.com> >wrote: > >> "Richard A. Cini" <rcini at optonline.net> wrote: >>> Oh, I also just found a Morrow DiskJockey 2D/B in one of my boxes. This >>> model has only a 50-pin connector and the manual talks about the SA800, so >>> I'm assuming it's an 8"-only controller. >> >> Well, originally intended for 8" drives, but with a suitable adapter >> cable glue and a slightly modified BIOS it'll do 5.25" and 3.5" drives. >> >> Tim. > >Rich > >----------Reply: > >I think Tim's point was that if your controller's smart enough to deal with a >relatively modern 8" drive like a TM848 it could probably deal equally >well with a 5.25" HD drive and you could transparently restore an 8" image >(if you have one) to the 5.25" disk. The controller (and CP/M) would not >even know that it's a 5.25 instead of an 8"; my Cromemcos certainly don't, >although a different FDC might well require some mods to the BIOS. Different FDC WILL require a different bios. Same for SERIAL IO. Allison >Worth a try in any case. > >m

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Who keeps buying DECTalks?

by silent700＠gmail.com

On 11/11/07, Zane H. Healy <healyzh at aracnet.com> wrote: > I suspect they're being purchased by dealers. I'd like one, but > haven't been willing to shell out the $$$'s. Grrr, dealers. Yep there are quite a few in the for-sale section of ebay for $500 and up. Uh, no thanks.

17 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

modern serial terminal

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: Re: modern serial terminal > From: Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> > Date: Wed, 07 Nov 2007 16:48:04 -0800 (PST) > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > >On Wed, 7 Nov 2007, ajones wrote: >> There was never a version of Linux, or UNIX in general, less bloated >> than Windows 95. > >Xenix ran on an 8088 XT with 640K. The IBM XT hard disk controller could >be jumpered (undocumented) to handle other sizes of drives other than the >412 (10MB). One of those sizes was 26MB, which was just right for a 10MB >DOS partition and a 16MB Xenix partition (that was how I found out about >the XT hard disk controller's undocumented jumper solder pads) > > >> [1] Yes, Windows 95 had memory protection and preemptive multitasking. > >Are there multiple definitions of "preemptive"? >Or, is "preemptive" a quantitative, rather than qualitative attribute? >I would not consider Win95, nor early Mac, to be "preemptive". Even NT4, >which is purportedly preemptive has a few two many situations where/when >it can not be preempted. For example, when opening a telnet session, it >often can NOT be preempted until it gets to the point of success or failure. Time for a topic change. Is that an OS failure or an application failure? As I see it and run it NT is preemtive but applications can block or alter lower priority tasks making it possile to do nasty thing like block keyboard task. I suspect it's legacy plus the tendancy to make forground tasks the higher priortity may have something to do with it. Linux and VMS seem to be clearly preemptive as are a number of other OSs. Allison

17 years, 5 months

26
66
0 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

test-drb November 2007