On 9/7/07, Jerome H. Fine <jhfinedp3k at compsys.to> wrote:
> >Ethan Dicks wrote:
>
> >My first -11 hard drive controller was an RLV11 that ran me about
> >$100. I dropped into a BA-11N w/KDF11, DLV11J, MSV11-mumble (M8044),
> >and LPV11 that all ran me $300 in 1986...
> >
> Jerome Fine replies:
>
> I seem to remember that my first... was
> a VT103 with a PDP-11/23 inside and a DSD 880/8 floppy / hard drive combo.
> The latter was an 8 MB RL01 emulation combined with RX02 (actually RX03
> although DEC never released their version) 1/2 MB SSDD 8" floppy emulation.
Nice rig.
> At one even shorter period of time, the VT103 backplane had a
> PDP-11/73 quad CPU, 4 MB of memory, DHV11 and a Sigma RQD11-EC
> controller that supported FOUR * 600 MB ESDI Hitachi hard drives
> although it was essential that all of the hard drives were placed
> OUTSIDE the VT103 since each required its own fan and all of the
> hard drives and their fans also used a separate external power
> supply.
Wow... that's a lotta stuff for a VT103.
I have a VT103 up in the attic. I _might_ be able to squeeze a VT100
case somewhere in my office... these days, though, I'd go with a 3.5"
SCSI drive and a Qbus SCSI controller. The real question is, what to
choose for CPU and memory. I could easily pull a KDF11B from the
shelf, add a meg or two on a quad-height board, and between those
three boards, have a running system. What I think I'd prefer, though,
is something with a KDJ11.
So presuming one is starting from the assumption that you have a VT103
and a Qbus SCSI controller, what are good choices for the remainder of
the system? One can assume that 1MB is minimum, but 4MB wouldn't be
unwarranted. I kinda fell off the PDP-11 cart in the KDJ11 era, so
I'm not as conversant with what's out there, but ISTR that there's the
dual-height KDJ11A, and there must be a quad-height KDJ11 of some
flavor, with a variety of common accessories, but I couldn't quote
chapter and verse.
I have an 11/53-level KDJ11 board from a DEC comms controller, with
-11 ROMs installed, but it still has S-box handles, and only has,
IIRC, 1MB on it. I'm thinking that any sort of 11/83 or 11/93 board
is probably going to be priced out of my range, but I'm willing to
entertain the idea. I really don't _need_ the speed of an 11/83 or
11/93, but 4MB on board is attractive (if I've got my boards right).
Anyone else have any ideas on how to trick out a VT103?
-ethan
>
>Subject: Re: Portable PDP-11 (was Re: Does anyone use RT-11?)
> From: "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh at aracnet.com>
> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 11:54:24 -0700 (PDT)
> To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
>
>> >As for storage, obviously some flavor of FLASH is great for most
>> >things. CF is easy to interface to, and CF cards 1GB and smaller are
>> >quite inexpensive. MMC/SD are also inexpensive and even easier to
>> >interface to, with a bit more work on the driver side to man the SPI
>> >interface.
>>
>> None of the above for cost or availability reasons. I'd opt for IDE
>> using one of the many 40-500mb drives I have.
>
>I believe converters for IDE to CF cards are pretty cheap, so if you have
>IDE, you effectively have CF.
True but then I ahve to buy an adaptor and the CF. And I don't get
to use up that pile of drives.. ;)
>> You envision what sould like a Laptop. I can't easily fabricate that
>> but a toteable like Kaypro, Osborne and a few others is very doable.
>
>You might want to look at some of the "Laptops" that others have built for
>things such as the Amiga. It might not be as difficult as you might think.
If you have to wirewarp the system board first then create a CRT/LCD driver
board yes it gets nasty. If you have RS170 video already then there are
screens available. I've traversed this path a few times already and the
basic thing is if you have excess money to throw at it then it's easier.
>> The basic machine description is a 128kW using 32kx8 static parts (8pcs),
>> Boot roms/ODT, MMU, two serial, parallel (PC conpatable for printer)
>> and IDE disk. Things like OS in Eprom have surfaced to my idea pool
>> to consider especially if it were not RT11 (CUBIX influence). Terminal
>> logic would be VK170 (base VT52 on a dual size card) and a monitor in
>> the 7-9" size.
>>
>> Right now it's a static project from the build it perspective but
>> as new ideas surface and other projects supply different expereinces
>> it morphs some. What I'd have built say 6 years ago and noew would
>> be very different. It will eventually get attention as I have parts
>> stored away for it.
>
>Sounds fun.
One day I'll just decide to do it.. ;)
Allison
>
>Subject: Portable PDP-11 (was Re: Does anyone use RT-11?)
> From: "Ethan Dicks" <ethan.dicks at gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 11:54:54 -0500
> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
>
>On 9/9/07, Allison <ajp166 at bellatlantic.net> wrote:
>> One day I plan to get a T11 up and running wtih RT but with non-DEC
>> drivers for terminal and storage as a small toteable -11.
>
>I'd like to hear more about this, either on-list, if you feel your
>ideas are fleshed out enough to share widely, or off-list, if you are
>not as far along with the creative process.
I have a lot on paper plus the ever important T-11 manual. However
it has stopped at that phase mostly due to other projects having
my interest. I did some prototyping a few years back with the T11
to see in in action without a lot of DEC hardware around it. I
have that but it was never meant to grow and is only 8KW ram, 8KW
Eprom and a DLART for serial IO. Since then I've been doing 8085,
Z80, Z280, 6809 and 1802 stuff when not building HF and VHF tranceivers.
>Ever since I had a PDT-11 (and let it go to another collector, sadly
>for me), I've wanted a portable PDP-11. It might or might not be easy
>(read inexpensive ;-) to implement an 80x24 LCD, some form of 40x25
>isn't expensive at all since it only takes a 320x200 mono LCD panel.
>Of course, one could just have serial out from the basic PDP-11
>design, then worry about a portable display as a secondary project.
The display is really the harder part at least for portability and power
consumption. However for this one I was considering packaging along
the lines of the Kaypro totables and wall power. Part of this recognizes
the T-11 uses a fair amount of power (Z80 NMOS is similar) and most of
the parts around it will not be CMOS so battery operation is not easily
accomplished.
>As for storage, obviously some flavor of FLASH is great for most
>things. CF is easy to interface to, and CF cards 1GB and smaller are
>quite inexpensive. MMC/SD are also inexpensive and even easier to
>interface to, with a bit more work on the driver side to man the SPI
>interface.
None of the above for cost or availability reasons. I'd opt for IDE
using one of the many 40-500mb drives I have.
>While textual LCDs are cheaper and easier to interface to, the largest
>one I've seen is 4x40. A graphical LCD panel with a SED1335 or t6963
>of a size of 640x200 would be perfect for 80x25, and, since the common
>graphical LCD controllers are well documented, not difficult to talk
>to. One could either attach the graphical display right to the T-11
>bus as a peripheral and do all the work in PDP-11 software, or hang a
>microcontroller off of the T-11 via serial, and write some
>microcontroller firmware to turn the LCD into an ANSI terminal.
I planned on text. However it's possible to get LCDs used for laptops
but the logic to drive them is non trivial.
>Back to the T-11, though, if I recall its capabilities correctly, it
>doesn't have an MMU, and it would be difficult, if not impractical, to
>design an external one that resembles, say, the MMU on an 11/23... so
>that means RT-11SJ monitor only, correct? (or would FB be possible?)
>There's lots of software out there that runs in 56K or less, so I
>don't see that as a fatal flaw.
Correct on the OS and software. However the MMU is very buildable
and not near as hardware intensive as would seem. For an example
look at the T-11 interface in the VT240. It takes a few 16x4
bipolar rams and some loose logic to implement the paging (2 74189,
3 74ls257 and a bit of TTL glue) to make a a compatable (mostly) mapper.
One of the things I've given consideration to in recent years is a nonDEC
and non *nix OS such as CUBIX as that would translate reasonably from
6908 to PDP-11. This arises from the fact that RT-11 has a very
primitive filesystem compared to CP/M and an OS that is not encumbered
would be easier to work with.
>So, Allison, does any of this sound like what you had in mind, or am I
>going off in an entirely different direction?
You envision what sould like a Laptop. I can't easily fabricate that
but a toteable like Kaypro, Osborne and a few others is very doable.
The basic machine description is a 128kW using 32kx8 static parts (8pcs),
Boot roms/ODT, MMU, two serial, parallel (PC conpatable for printer)
and IDE disk. Things like OS in Eprom have surfaced to my idea pool
to consider especially if it were not RT11 (CUBIX influence). Terminal
logic would be VK170 (base VT52 on a dual size card) and a monitor in
the 7-9" size.
Right now it's a static project from the build it perspective but
as new ideas surface and other projects supply different expereinces
it morphs some. What I'd have built say 6 years ago and noew would
be very different. It will eventually get attention as I have parts
stored away for it.
Allison
>
>-ethan
>
>Subject: Re: Portable PDP-11 (was Re: Does anyone use RT-11?)
> From: "e.stiebler" <emu at e-bbes.com>
> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:18:26 -0600
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
>
>Ethan Dicks wrote:
> > If course, if a project were to erupt that was some form of portable
>> J-11 design w/1MB or more of SRAM and some local mass storage, I would
>> certainly strongly consider building one, even if I had to borrow a
>> J-11 chip from one of my two sources.
>
>But the j-11 are alos very easy to get, as a lot 11/73 boards are
>showing even on ebay for dirt cheap. And a SBC-11-+++ would be also a
>nice project, getting SCSI or IDE, 4 MBytes of ram, 100 mbit ethernet, ...
IF you have the part on Qbus already then a small backplance with other
scaled sized parts and it's left to being a programming project.
Seriously I already have a BA11VA with 11/23, 235kb ram, IO and RQDX3
in only four dual slots, why bother smaller?
For that fact why wreck a J11 CPU board to make a J11 system?
Allison
On 9/9/07, Allison <ajp166 at bellatlantic.net> wrote:
> One day I plan to get a T11 up and running wtih RT but with non-DEC
> drivers for terminal and storage as a small toteable -11.
I'd like to hear more about this, either on-list, if you feel your
ideas are fleshed out enough to share widely, or off-list, if you are
not as far along with the creative process.
Ever since I had a PDT-11 (and let it go to another collector, sadly
for me), I've wanted a portable PDP-11. It might or might not be easy
(read inexpensive ;-) to implement an 80x24 LCD, some form of 40x25
isn't expensive at all since it only takes a 320x200 mono LCD panel.
Of course, one could just have serial out from the basic PDP-11
design, then worry about a portable display as a secondary project.
As for storage, obviously some flavor of FLASH is great for most
things. CF is easy to interface to, and CF cards 1GB and smaller are
quite inexpensive. MMC/SD are also inexpensive and even easier to
interface to, with a bit more work on the driver side to man the SPI
interface.
While textual LCDs are cheaper and easier to interface to, the largest
one I've seen is 4x40. A graphical LCD panel with a SED1335 or t6963
of a size of 640x200 would be perfect for 80x25, and, since the common
graphical LCD controllers are well documented, not difficult to talk
to. One could either attach the graphical display right to the T-11
bus as a peripheral and do all the work in PDP-11 software, or hang a
microcontroller off of the T-11 via serial, and write some
microcontroller firmware to turn the LCD into an ANSI terminal.
Back to the T-11, though, if I recall its capabilities correctly, it
doesn't have an MMU, and it would be difficult, if not impractical, to
design an external one that resembles, say, the MMU on an 11/23... so
that means RT-11SJ monitor only, correct? (or would FB be possible?)
There's lots of software out there that runs in 56K or less, so I
don't see that as a fatal flaw.
So, Allison, does any of this sound like what you had in mind, or am I
going off in an entirely different direction?
-ethan
>
>Subject: Re: VT103 (was Re: Reviving DEC RX01 power supply)
> From: Roger Ivie <rivie at ridgenet.net>
> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 07:42:28 -0700 (PDT)
> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only" <cctech at classiccmp.org>
>
>On Mon, 10 Sep 2007, Dave McGuire wrote:
>> On Sep 9, 2007, at 5:54 PM, Roger Ivie wrote:
>>>
>>> I knew a fellow who claimed to have build a MicroVAX II in a VT103. I
>>> never saw it and don't know the details, but I believed him. He was
>>> some sort of meta-service guy at DEC (i.e., he got called when the
>>> normal service guys couldn't figure it out) and I think the machine
>>> was on the DEC internal network. IIRC (and I might not), his name was
>>> Ozzie Perez and the node name was OZZIE::
>>
>> Are you sure that wasn't "Ernie"? That sounds like something my old friend
>> and mentor Ernie Perez might have tried.
>
>Pretty sure it was Ozzie.
The big problem with putting a MicroVAX in the VT103 is enough slots for
memory and a disk interface. It's certainly doable and when you consider
some of the plans floated for 11/73s, why not uVAX.
Allison
>--
>roger ivie
>rivie at ridgenet.net
>
>Subject: Re: Portable PDP-11 (was Re: Does anyone use RT-11?)
> From: "Ethan Dicks" <ethan.dicks at gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 12:43:52 -0500
> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
>
>On 9/10/07, e.stiebler <emu at e-bbes.com> wrote:
>> Ethan Dicks wrote:
>> > Back to the T-11, though, if I recall its capabilities correctly, it
>> > doesn't have an MMU, and it would be difficult, if not impractical, to
>> > design an external one that resembles, say, the MMU on an 11/23... so
>> > that means RT-11SJ monitor only, correct? (or would FB be possible?)
>> > There's lots of software out there that runs in 56K or less, so I
>> > don't see that as a fatal flaw.
>>
>> Why not just use the J-11, and have it all ?
>
>I would think that for one thing, T-11 chips are much easier to find
>than J-11 chips - DEC used the T-11 in a variety of peripheral cards
>and terminals, and such. I personally probably have half-a-dozen T-11
>chips, and two J-11 chips (one Pro380 and one KDJ11 board).
T-11 is designed along the lines of 8085 or Z280 and far easier to
interface than J-11. That and I have a handful of T-11s out of
defunct RQDX1s and VT240s. If all else the T11 is 40pin DIP and
far easier to remove and socket for wire wrap than the huge J-11.
T-11s appeared as loose parts, RQDXn controller, VT240/241, HSC50
KXT-11 and KXT-21 to name a few. For raw volume it outnumbers the J11.
Doesn't hurt that all software design work can be done on any PDP11
but does not rely on features not available on most all -11s.
>
>If course, if a project were to erupt that was some form of portable
>J-11 design w/1MB or more of SRAM and some local mass storage, I would
>certainly strongly consider building one, even if I had to borrow a
>J-11 chip from one of my two sources.
>-ethan
J11 and 1MB of sram is not battery friendly unless one is willing to
invest in a lot of 74HCxx parts and a big battery.
Allison
Just as there were inquiries about using PDP-11 hardware, I thought
that it might be helpful to know if anyone uses RT-11 and for what
purpose.
For myself, I have the addiction of fixing RT-11 bugs
in the operating system as well as making enhancements.
Ten years ago, I even produced most of the Y2K changes
that were required for V05.04G of RT-11 for a customer
who could not wait for Mentec. Eventually, I want to
produce a set of Y9K changes to allow years up to 9999
to be used.
Other enhancements include SL: and a new pseudo device
driver, SB: (SymBolic device list device driver) which
is similar to the VMS SNL (Symbolic Name List), but
operates only on a device which supports a directory
as does PATH for DOS. At one point it was named PH:
for Path Handler, but SB: seems a better choice. Even
more reasonable would be Symbolic device List or SL:, but
SL: is already used by the Single Line editor (or the DOSKEY
interface). Symbolic Debugger is also taken for SD:
Lately, I mostly use Ersatz-11 and I have been making
changes and enhancements to the HD: (Hypothetical Disk)
device driver that John Wilson originally wrote in 1995.
The challenge I set myself was to produce a VM(X).SYS
equivalent that is:
(a) Faster - about 3 times as fast
(b) Higher capacity - a full 65536 blocks vs 8192 blocks
(c) Smaller number of LOADed words in low memory
(d) Support the command SET VM: [NO]WRITE
plus a number of other useful features.
Well, one idea led to another and other versions are also
being tested which support 8 units and eventually 64 units
(with monitors that have that support as well). If there is
any interest, eventually a translation table similar to the
one used by DU(X).SYS is possible. In addition, full 32 bit
block number support will be done eventually which will
allow 2 TeraByte disk drives.
The other HD: related code that is also interesting is the
ability to interface the HD: device directly from user code
WITHOUT a device driver. So while the HD: is about twice
as fast as DU(X).SYS when a device driver HD(X).SYS is used,
the direct user interface (which avoids all the overhead of
a system EMT call) is about twice as fast again. For this
user interface, 32 bit blocks numbers are already possible.
Under a Windows (YEK !! Double YEK) operating system or even
just DOS, all disk access is completed before the HD: returns
control to the RT-11 operating system. Consequently, no
interrupts are required. I am not sure about Linux operation,
but if anyone does know, please advise.
Sincerely yours,
Jerome Fine
Announcing, Vintage Computer Festival 10.0
_ _ ______ ______ __ __
| | | | | __ | | ____| \ \ / /
| | | | | | |_| | | \ \/ /
| | | | | | | |___ \ /
| | | | | | | ___| / \
\ \/ / | | _ | | / /\ \
\ / | |__| | | | / / \ \
\/ |______| |_| /_/ \_\
November 3-4, 2007
Computer History Museum
Mountain View, California
http://www.vintage.org/2007/main/
Ten years! From a quirky little event at the county fairgrounds, the
Vintage Computer Festival has grown into the preeminent celebration of
computers and their history. We want you to come help us celebrate
the tenth anniversary of the VCF in proper style!
WHAT:
The tenth annual Vintage Computer Festival: VCFX!
WHEN:
Saturday and Sunday, November 3rd & 4th, 2007
WHERE:
The Computer History Museum in Mountain View, California.
WHY:
Vintage computers, baby!
WHO:
Why YOU, silly!
This announcement is simply a harbinger. The next long-awaited
edition of the VCF Gazette is on its way soon with complete VCFX
details.
In the meantime, you can also check the VCFX web pages for the latest
information:
http://www.vintage.org/2007/main/
VOLUNTEERS NEEDED
We can use some volunteers this year to help make this the smoothest
event yet. Contact VCF Producer Sellam Ismail at <sellam at vintage.org>
for details.
EXHIBITORS
If you've been waiting for that one year to finally do an exhibit at
the VCF, THIS IS THAT YEAR. Sign up now!
http://www.vintage.org/2007/main/exhibit.php
VENDORS
We currently have plenty of vendor booths available. But don't wait,
sign up now because booths sell out quickly:
http://www.vintage.org/2007/main/vendor.php
Stay tuned for further announcements of VCFX coming your way soon!
Best regards,
Sellam Ismail
Producer
Vintage Computer Festival
http://www.vintage.org/
To remove yourself from the VCF mailing list, please visit:
http://www.vintage.org/maillist.php?reset=1&state=find
Hello all,
last weekend I got a MINC 11 including docs (book 6 is missing), but no
software.
I'm interested in the system and demonstration disk, even as disk
images, mentioned in the MINC's manuals.
Andreas (from Germany)
