At 12:53 AM 8/12/2007, Ethan Dicks wrote:
>On 8/6/07, Rick Murphy <rick at rickmurphy.net> wrote:
> > XT2190s (RD54s) aren't cheap, they're noisy as hell, and
> > aren't very big.
>
>How "not cheap" are they these days? They are large enough for VMS
>6.0 - I've done it. OTOH, there wasn't any room left for anything
>else, and I did have to trim off a few things to make it all fit, but
>it does come up and boot on my rather-stock uVAX-II.
They fetch $300 or more per drive on eBay.
>By even semi-modern standards, though, I'd agree with you that 154MB
>just isn't that much room for later versions of VMS or Ultrix, but VMS
>5.x and on down fit just fine, if that's what you want to run.
Yup. When I had a uVAX here I used three RD54s with VMS 5.4 on the
first drive. As long as you're careful it works OK. Putting the swap
onto another drive helps remove some of the space crunch. One advantage
of these drives is that they're pretty reliable, unlike RD53s.
> > As several people have pointed out, you're far better off with non-DEC
> > storage controllers and devices.
>
>Agreed. I managed to locate a Qbus SCSI controller a while back, but
>I've had other DEC machines in the queue head of any MicroVAX work, so
>I haven't been able to put a system together yet.
I tried for a SCSI controller for a long time but wasn't willing to pay
the price. I eventually gave away the VAXen and just moved to SIMH.
-Rick
> From: Patrick Finnegan <pat at computer-refuge.org>
> On Saturday 11 August 2007 17:55, Roger Holmes wrote:
>> Anyway, do things like QuickTime, OpenGL and Quesa exist on Linux?
>
> QT: xine, mplayer. Both are way more compatible with more formats
> than
> Quicktime is. QT and Window Media Player don't come close to
> supporting all the variants of just MPEG-4, that xine/mplayer do.
I see. Thanks.
>
> OpenGL: It's called the same thing on MacOS, Windows, Linux, and every
> other UNIX. There's lots of high-performance graphics work that gets
> done on Linux boxes with nVidia cards.
I understand that 'Open' in this context does not mean open source,
just an open specification. Apple, Microsoft and presumably the Linux
volunteers had to spend a lot of time writing their own versions. I
also understand that Microsoft's version is getting left behind and
may be axed at any time. Maybe I am out of date on this though as we
don't currently have a windows versions of our 3D products, only the
2D ones.
>
> According to Quesa's website, "Quesa currently supports Mac OS 8/9,
> Mac
> OS X, Linux, and Windows."
Yes I should have known that, sorry.
>
>> It would take me time I do not have (and human memory) to keep up
>> with what is and is not in yet another operating system. Apple
>> spends a lot of money keeping developers like me up to date with
>> their developments, I presume nothing similar is done with Linux.
>> What spare time I have is more enjoyably spent of classic cars and
>> classic computers.
>
> I don't understand what to make of this. Basic OS API features
> tend to
> change slowly... and if you want to keep track of GUI or other random
> library/toolkit updates, just pay general attention to the mailing
> lists they have, download new versions as the come out, and see if
> your
> code still compiles against them.
Speed is relative. If you have a million lines of code to keep up to
date and sales revenues only allow you to employ yourself and one
other programmer, then the speed of development is not sufficient to
keep up with API, OS and processor changes AND add the features,
which you need to stay competitive, to your programs. One of our
programs, which was first issued soon after the first Macintosh
shipped, has been rewritten from Pascal and assembler into C/C++, its
basic drawing engine has been changed from using QuickDraw to using
Quartz, the user interface has been partially rewritten to use Quartz/
Carbon and look like Aqua, but a lot more needs to be done. The
printing side has been updated to use use the OS-X printing model
rather than the OS1 to OS9 model. The clipboard handling has been
changed many times and needs to be changed again to support PDF input
rather than PICT vector format. Its been moved from 68K to PowerPC
and now to Intel. Its been moved from development on Lisa to MPW on
Mac, to CodeWarrior and now onto X-Code. Debugging has moved from 2
machine debugger to MacsBug to CodeWarrior's debugger to GDB under X-
Code, and not always for the better. GDB under X-Code is still not as
good as CodeWarrior, it fails to show some variables, cannot display
dynamic arrays except as a hex memory dump and cannot single shot
over some C++ constructors.
Another program has been updated from using QuickDraw3D to using
Quesa, from using PowerPC to Intel (with lots of endian problems),
>from using PowerPlant under CodeWarrior to using Cocoa under X-Code.
Its been partially re-coded from C++ to Objective C. We've only re-
issued two thirds of the program, dropping the less useful features
until (if ever) we get the time to do the more exotic parts. Its been
changed from the classic event handling system to Carbon events. Its
been changed from using a single processor to using multiple
processors in critical parts. From using resources and Resourcerer to
using NIB files with Interface Builder (despite that, in my opinion,
Interface Builder is still incomplete and that MacOS is still not as
well documented as OS9).
I could go on, and that's just two programs of all the ones we ship.
> There's been some issues with newer versions of GCC breaking older
> code,
> but in general, if that happens, its because your code was written
> poorly and not to the language specifications.
It been moving TO GCC that is one of the problems. It does not allow
temporary variables which need to be constructed, to then be passed
as procedure parameters. Debugging of anything using templates is
very confusing (presumably because the compiler does not output the
correct source code references), displaying source code which has
nothing at all to what its actually executing so that you have to
look at the object code, which is Intel code which is another
learning curve I need to master to add to my repertoire of a dozen or
so machine codes. Any recommendations of a good book on the latest
Intel processor instruction set? GCC does not even generate very
efficient object code when optimisations are all turned on.
> Worst case, you can just install whatever version of the libraries
> your
> app uses along with the app in some out of the way place, and ignore
> changes to the system libraries, GUI, etc, pretty trivially.
Rather difficult when the libraries are in PowerPC code and you're
running on Intel, and when the libraries make OS calls which are no
longer available.
> While Mac OS X has a UNIX layer under the hood, the GUI is where it
> is less than compatible. While X-Windows is available, and so can
> run UNIX GUI applications, most Mac users don't even have it
> installed. Most Mac applications are written for the native Mac OS X
> GUI.
While most UNIXes have X, X isn't necessary for UNIX. I have (and I
know most people on the list probably also have) several Unices where X
isn't included, one UNIX where X is optional (standard display is
NeWS), and two Unices with something completely different.
I will confess to happily running Linux and OS X, and Linux makes a
darn good can opener for assorted disks &cet. The number of different
UI toolkits (and desktop environment support libraries/etc) that you
wind up installing is somewhat outrageous, especially when you consider
that many of them seem to be pretty much copying the UI of Windows.
Just dug a couple of these out of my hellbox. Old full-height 720K
floppy drives. I can find a product description on bitsavers, but no
jumper information. I can probably guess what most are, but I'd like
to have some hardcopy info on file if possible.
Cheers,
Chuck
> From: Patrick Finnegan <pat at computer-refuge.org>
> On Saturday 11 August 2007 17:26, Marvin Johnston wrote:
> > They are not only wrong, but rather vague! But for their list of the
> > top 5 collectible computers, take a look at:
>
> I don't see how you can say that they're wrong. It's *CNET*s top 5.
> Just like Bill or Joe's Top 5. Ie, the 5 machines that the people at
> CNET who wrote the story thought were most collectable.
Actually, when I first wrote it, I had a smiley at the end. They are welcome to
their ideas, but with nothing to indicate how they came up with these five and
what *their* qualifications for making the list, the list is rather worthless.
Much like the person who put an Apple IIe up for sale on Ebay at $5K or so.
Well, I've been playing with some machines I haven't
had time for before (not that I really have time now,
but that's beside the point), and I was able to fire
up the MicroVax II's. I have two of them, one in an
official DEC enclosure, and one in a third party
cabinet. They both "work" after a little cajoling, but
neither boots from disk. The third party cabinet Vax
has a screeching ESDI disk (sounds like a head crash)
on an Emulex controller, and the DEC cabinet Vax has
an RD53 on an RQDX3, and it sounds as if the rubber
bumper has glued the heads to the stops.
I have other ESDI disks, and one other Micropolis
drive (non DEC)- I want to attempt to format and test
some of them on the Vaxen. I plan on attempting to
repair the RD53, but I'd like to be able to format and
test disks, since I need to scare up a replacement for
the other Vax.
I have heard tales of a magical diagnostic tape that
exists for these machines. Both Vaxen have TK50's, and
I have one TK50 cartridge (jammed in one of the
TK50's... Gotta free that tonight). I also have, IIRC,
a SCSI TK50 (gotta dig that out tonight as well). So,
is there any way of creating a diagnostic tape for
these MicroVax II's? Is there an archive somewhere out
on the 'net of tape dumps?
Thanks!
-Ian
I've got myself a Cisco AGS+ router (1986-1995) and I'm looking for OLD
code versions for it. I got it running Cisco GS/IOS 9.x, but want to
see some early revisions. I believe this particular model can go up to
IOS11.x, but that isn't my goal. I'd like to have examples of "what was."
Anyone have suggestions on how I could obtain very obsolete code
revisions for Cisco Routers/IOS most likely only historically
significant and not of much technical or monetary value today?
Also, looking for any more info/leads on vintage infrastructure
equipment, and historically significant early models.
They are not only wrong, but rather vague! But for their list of the top 5
collectible computers, take a look at:
http://www.cnettv.com/9710-1_53-28760.html?tag=nl.e415
For those of you using real browsers that can't view the video, they are:
1 - Apple I
2 - Altair
3 - Apple Lisa
4 - Xerox Alto
5 - Commodore 64
> Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2007 16:23:24 -0400 (EDT)
> From: der Mouse <mouse at Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
>> If OS X is really Unix under the hood, then why do vendors of several
>> of my high-end applications that are offered in Windoze and OS X
>> versions all say "We have no plans for a Linux version"? It would
>> seem to be a pretty easy thing to do.
>
> I don't *know*, of course, since I have no inside information about
> any
> such vendors. But some plausible answers come to mind:
>
> (1) Because "high-end" applications usually depend on a lot more than
> just the "Unix" in OS X. They typically depend on Aqua as well
> (that's
> the fancy - and closed, and proprietary - GUI layer). Porting them
> (too often, this really means rewriting them) for Linux is likely
> to be
> difficult, especially since "Linux" is not a single thing when it
> comes
> to higher-end graphics - there's far more variability in graphics
> hardware under Linux than across the entire OSX-supporting Mac line.
>
> (2) Because a substantial part of the cost, to the vendor, of a Linux
> version is in not the creating of it, but the customer support for it.
>
> (3) Because they have limited resources and have chosen to invest them
> in the Windows and Mac versions, expecting higher ROI there.
I am technical director of one of those vendors, and you are spot on.
Except that Aqua is merely a set of guidelines, not actual code. The
code is called either Carbon or Cocoa, though you could write your
own and still conform to the Aqua user interface guidelines.
Anyway, do things like QuickTime, OpenGL and Quesa exist on Linux?
It would take me time I do not have (and human memory) to keep up
with what is and is not in yet another operating system. Apple
spends a lot of money keeping developers like me up to date with
their developments, I presume nothing similar is done with Linux.
What spare time I have is more enjoyably spent of classic cars and
classic computers.
