>
>Subject: Re: BA23 setup and DZQ11 configuration
> From: "Ethan Dicks" <ethan.dicks at gmail.com>
> Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 11:33:10 -0400
> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
>
>On 3/21/07, Mr Ian Primus <ian_primus at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Either that or a trade of a KDJ11-BB or maybe -BF
>> > for my KDJ11-AA and some other stuff?
>>
>> Can't you just burn a boot ROM and put it on the CPU
>> board? I was under the impression you could. If so, I
>> have an EPROM burner and can burn an EPROM if you
>> want.
>
>Dave has nowhere to stuff a ROM. The KDJ11-A board is dual-height and
>is a CPU only, no peripherals (yes, in the mini-computer world, boot
>ROMs aren't always integral - if you have a front panel, you don't
>"need" ROMs, even if they are handy for fast startup).
I'm using a KDJ11A and it boots RX02/RL02/MSCP devices with the right
jumper setup. If memory serves the dual width J11 baord has rom on baord
for standard device boot. My Docs for that board are burried.
Allison
On Wednesday 21 March 2007 12:23:14 am Francesca Smith wrote:
Hiya,
Not to interject myself into this conversation. But I will :-)
But I went to bitsavers and looked high and low and did not see anything
that indicated they were perhaps looking for funding for their efforts. Now
while what they do is Noble and all. One can not eat a Noble since I heard
they are kinda tough and chewy.
In any case perhaps people just need to be able to have a way to contribute
towards these fine endeavors. ??
--
Kindest Regards,
Francesca Smith
"No Problems Only Solutions"
Lady Linux Internet Services
Baltimore, Maryland 21217
I dug deep into the catacombs this past weekend and discovered some
interesting ancient relics.
Among them I found sound remnants of two Microcomputer Systems
Corp/Xebec hard disk controllers that were recently mentioned and took
some close-up shots of them.
One is a single-board ST506 disk controller with GPIB interface, PCB
assy# 104506 Rev 02, without the 8048 and EPROM. Front and back shots,
JPEGs of 380 to 309Kb each. Much better resolution than the manuals
show: Can see part numbers on most IC's, see where jumpers go and read
color bands on resistors and chokes. Shot in daytime shade, no flash to
reduce reflections and glare. Contrast is a bit low.
The other is a 3 board assembly that might be a SASI controller with
GPIB interface, sans 8048, EPROM and 9914. There are shots of front and
back of each of the three boards and a shot of the three assembled.
JPEGs of 360 to 380Kb each. Shot in daytime shade, no flash to reduce
reflections and glare.
I suspect that someone might find them useful or at least interesting to
look at but I have no place to put them at the moment.
If someone is interested in them, please do let me know. It would
probably be best to ftp them to you, as I doubt they are small enough
for mail.
--
jd
If you keep anything long enough, you can throw it away.
Hi Guys,
I've just posted to my site TESTFDC 1.0, which is a small utility that
will test your floppy controller for single/double density operation at
all data rates available to your drives - including the special case of
MFM with 128 byte sectors (Of all the machines I've got here, only ONE
passes that test!).
This should make it a bit easier to find PC/drive combinations that will
work with ImageDisk.
I've also started a "registry" of mainboards and add-in controllers with
the TESTFDC results - this is posted to the site as well, currently it's
very small and not overly useful (just the hardware I've tested), however
I hope that with your help it may grow to be at least somewhat useful.
If anyone can provide information for hardware not currently listed, that
would be very much appreciated.
Regards.
Dave
--
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
On 3/8/07, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> wrote:
> On Mar 8, 2007, at 1:55 PM, Richard wrote:
> > If you do and don't want the VT52, I'll buy it :)
>
> You're just a terminal-obsessed freak, and you know it! ;)
For stuff of the era, the VT-52 is a very handy terminal. I don't
recall my results with a VT100 or CiTOH-101 (clone), but I was *not*
able to use the VTEDIT macro under OS/8 with a VT220 in VT52 emulation
mode. The emulation just wasn't good enough. I suppose one could
find an open-source terminal program and ensure the VT-52 emulation
was up to snuff, but for a plug-it-in-and-get-to-work solution, for
pre-VT52 software, I recommend a real VT52.
-ethan
I have two questions that have interested me a little, and as Johnson
would put it I know neither the answer nor where to go to find the
answer.
(1) What is the history of the crossbar in computer architectures as a
mainbus replacement? All I know of it is when it hit the desktop, and
there it looks like it arrived first in the DEC 3000 AXP (not sure if
this includes the 300 series or not), and then spread around the middle
of the '90s with Sun picking it up as UPA and SGI going whole-hog for
it. I assume it came down from mainframes or supercomputers, possibly a
Control Data design?
(2) What was the UI like on Sun's pre-OpenLook implementation of NeWS
(or was there one?) Did it leverage SunView, or were parts of it
similar to SGIs 4Sight?
------------Original Message:
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 19:26:54 -0700
From: woodelf <bfranchuk at jetnet.ab.ca>
Subject: Re: Why blinkenlights ?
>Jos Dreesen wrote:
>> So why is it then that almost all early micros had them ?
>I had Z80 kit around 1983 with keyboard and 7 segment display.
---------------
I don't think that's the kind of micro he meant; my AIM65s had a
full keyboard and alphanumeric display in '79 (AND an onboard
PRINTER!)
;-)
mike
To all,
Seems my last post started something. I listed the Imsai, PolyMorphic and Sol 20 only as
examples of what's in my collection. Sorry for any problems that may have started. One should
never rush into a post (in real life as well). When I post additional items for free, I'll make sure not to include
any references to my collection.
Sorry,
Dan Snyder
>
>Subject: Why blinkenlights ?
> From: Jos Dreesen <jos.dreesen at bluewin.ch>
> Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 21:18:40 +0100
> To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
>
>I am currenly contemplating what kind of IO to put on my coming i8008
>system : what is it that makes blinkenlights (i.e. leds and switches )
>seem so attractive ?
>
>It must be about the worst possible way to interact with a computer...
>
>
>So why is it then that almost all early micros had them ?
>
>a 7segment display with keyboard ( as in a H8) is clearly more usable,
>and would have cost nothing more. Or were early eproms (for the monitor
>program) that expensive ?
>
> Jos
For it's era it was low cost (compared to 1702 Eproms) and it provided the
ability to debug the hardware. Also t was flexible as it was both IO and
allowed program entry and crude debug (single step). Early systems also
lacked software to interact with and often what was available had the
have the IO altered for to match the available IO. This was very true
for the 8008 generation and remained true for the early 8080 generation.
Later systems such as the H8 were better but also really represented a new
subspecies of systems leading to the turnkey based systems.
Personally I felt it was the first 6800 (and 6502) based systems that
made switches and lights outmoded by using a standard console IO and
a rom based monitor program to do the functions that a hardware front
pannel provides. By then ROMs/Eproms had dropped in price and the hardware
saved was enough made it far less expensive.
Allison