Does anyone here have a Power One switching power supply of the
SPF4 series that I might talk them out of? This is a big, 1+kW power
supply that's about the size of a couple of phone books stacked atop
one another.
It'll have a long model number starting with SPF4; the other
numbers indicate what output modules are installed. I don't care
about the output modules; my "base" unit is badly fried.
Thanks,
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
>-----Original Message-----
>From: David Griffith dgriffi at cs.csubak.edu
>Sent 8/21/2008 2:13:41 AM
>To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts cctalk at classiccmp.org
>Cc: General at mail.mobygames.com
>Subject: Re: UI (Was: OT: Microsoft crazy academic deal
>
>It's not amazing to me. I've sold a fair number of still-shrinked CP/M
>packages.
>
>
Even NOT shrinked CP/M fetches...
I sold an extra complete set of original Osborne Executive disks, in binder, for about $90 on fleaBay a while back.
Tony
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Sridhar Ayengar ploopster at gmail.com
>Sent 8/21/2008 11:27:00 AM
>To: General Discussion GeneralDiscussion@
>Subject: Re: OT: Microsoft crazy academic deal
>
>tonym wrote:
> Not to be a jerk about it, but welcome to the Internet. People
> swear, just like they do in real life. If your mom doesn't want you
> to hear those words, set up an email filter or something. Hell, he
> even censored himself, but you still felt the need to complain?
>
> I do agree that this topic is just fine on the list; it's not like
> we have these sort of threads every day, and some people could find
> this information (about the Academic Alliance and other things)
> useful.
>
> Actually, if you read the messages in correct order, you will see
> that *I* was the one that censored it in my response.
>
>I'm not a prude, but that really is unnecessary. I'd like to think
>we're a little more civilized.
>
>*plonk*
>
>Peace... Sridhar
>
Oh, wow - I am SO impressed.
You're only a day late, and a dollar short
Jos Dreesen wrote:
> My "simple" Linux/X11 version is still not running...
My 'simple' MCode interpreter doesn't compile yet (at least I haven't tried to compile it). It's complete apart from the Blitting ops, but it's basically a straight translation from the M2P interpreter. :-)
Nevertheless, I think your emulator is more ambitious than what I'd do, I only want to emulate at the MCode level. I think that's true to the spirit of Lilith, it's an abstract machine so the microarchitecture would have changed with future versions.
> Is your C-code available somewhere ?
I'll send you the file once it compiles, is that OK? You're welcome to host it on your ftp site.
> Some more interesting facts :
> 1 No hierarchical filesystem,
> 2 dodgy & very noisy diskdrive,
> 3 4 big & loud fans,
> 4 apple-II compatible floppy disk with a 9600 bd serial access
> 5 keytronics keyboard with those damned foampads
> 6 problematic 4116's ( 128 of them )
> 7 asynchroneous access to the memory by graphics hardware
> 8 instruction fetch unit and CPU etc. etc
I've been aware of the Filesystem issue - if I were to implement a MCU-baesd PocketLilith I'd redo the filesystem to support directories and a useful disk size - 256Mb? (64K * 4K blocks).
Otherwise, not having used one, I didn't know they were so temperamental.
Going back to the whole Modula-2 / Lilith theme for the moment. For me, it really is all interesting. Let me take you back to my University days in the UK: 1986 - 1989. At the time we were taught Pascal and C as the main languages (with some 68000 assembler) and had the use of 512K Macs, 1Mb Mac Plusses and some brand-new Mac IIs.
We missed out on object-orientation, but in our 3rd year, 1st year Students were being taught Modula-2, a 'big-boys' language, using an early version of MacMeth. But we never knew about Lilith; so we didn't know that Modula-2 wasn't just a conventional language hosted on a graphical computer, but a self-hosted universal systems language integrated with an early graphical computer.
So, despite the weaknesses of the platform, the ambition of Lilith/Modula-2 is a real revelation.
-cheers from Julz @P
> I believe
> that TSS-8 and PS/8 were distributed as source, though OS/8 may
> have had an extra license fee.
A TSS/8 customer received a listing of the monitor which was customized
for their machine. Very few sites received machine-readable sources.
UWM was unusual since we made SO many mods that they were able to get
the sources and the source to TSS/8 BASIC.
> Just to mention, IIRC, SHARE, the IBM user group, which I believe was intended
> both for sharing software amongst members and presenting a coordinated front of
> members to IBM, was started back in the late 50's, or very early 60's
IBM had SHARE and GUIDE, for scientific and commercial users. SHARE was formed in
1955.
Every large computer maker had a user's group, with differing restrictions on program
redistribution. Many of the groups were run by the computer companies themselves, and
had restrictions on who could join. Individual programs were published in a catalog with
a modest charge to cover copying costs (though it would add up very quickly if you wanted
ALL the programs).
Groups like ACM maintained a collection of algorithms. For a few years in the 70's, ACM
actually published a book of all available non-commercial software.
I can't think of any organization that was a large-scale clearinghouse/repository for different
vendor's unencumbered software until archives began to spring up in the late 70's.
The result of this is very little early software has survived, because as computer companies
disappeared, no one saved the bits.
As someone else has mentioned, the actual distribution restrictions varied. The use of copyright
as a mechanism to force source code to remain available is a relatively modern invention (early
80's) by FSF/RMS. Before that, it either was placed in the Public Domain, or was copyrighted with
varying restrictions. The rules for copyright have changed over the past 50 years, so there are
programs which have gone into the Public Domain even though they were published with a copyright
notice.
"Closed" sources are generally considered proprietary, unpublished works. The earliest versions of
UNIX, for example, carry no copyrights or other notices, but were considered proprietary, unpublished
works.
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 10:52 PM, tonym <tonym at compusource.net> wrote:
>
> Funniest, is that "feature" makes it unusable at, oh, 9 out of 10 universities in this country, and countless
> numbers of businesses. I know I couldn't use it at work - it wouldn't open hardly anything.
>
I guess I'm also at one of the 1 in 10 where you can use OpenOffice.
And it's not my problem if the place you work has a brain-dead
gotta-have-the-latest-version-of-office IT policy. Every time you
send a document in Office 2007 format you are forcing the person you
send it to consider upgrading as well. Ever wonder if that's why
Microsoft offers these cheap copies?
But then again when I use Bessel functions in a spreadsheet, people
who are still using Office 2000 can't read it because they don't have
Bessel functions. I suppose I should bend over backwards to maintain
compatibility and write my own Bessel function macros.
But if I can save things in Office 2000 format with OpenOffice,
couldn't the idiots using Office 2007 do the same thing?
In other words, when someone sends you something in Office 2007
format, do the same fscking thing you would if you were running Office
2003, tell them you don't have Office 2007 and don't intend to buy it.
Tell them to send you an earlier format or a PDF for FSM sake. I
typically don't do business with companies that insist on sending me
things in incompatible formats.
When it comes to incompatible formats you can be part of the problem
or part of the solution.
Are people still having a shitfit when someone uses a "curse" word?
Fucking-A, grow up already.
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger http://www.vintage.org
[ Old computing resources for business || Buy/Sell/Trade Vintage Computers ]
[ and academia at www.VintageTech.com || at http://marketplace.vintage.org ]
> I'm not very familiar with vacuum tube circuit design, but I
> have a PDF copy of the 1952 USAF technical order TO16-1-255
> "Basic Theory and Application of Electron Tubes" which looks
> like it might be sufficient.
>
> Is that on line, or could you post it?
I found it on an excellent vacuum tube resource page intended for audio amp builders, but I can't find that specific page right now nor will a google search for that title and with filetype:pdf result in proper hits, so I've uploaded the 16.6MB pdf here:
http://tinyurl.com/5dh946
You can review the entire document on-line. Just click on the tiny "download" icon above the preview to download it. You've got to register to download from this site, but it's free, doesn't result in any spam and is well worth it. I've found lots of interesting tech stuff there over time.
> Logic circuits are DC coupled, though, unlike audio
> amplifiers. So the shift in operating point from the plate
> voltage change (or, for that matter, from a change in vacuum tube
> type, if you're doing that) probably means you'd have to change all
> the coupling resistors.
Man, do I know that now. I posted my comment before I'd fully digested the ABC web page. A multi-stage direct coupled vacuum tube circuit. Fun.
>Not to be a jerk about it, but welcome to the Internet. People swear,
>just like they do in real life. If your mom doesn't want you to hear
>those words, set up an email filter or something. Hell, he even
>censored himself, but you still felt the need to complain?
>
>I do agree that this topic is just fine on the list; it's not like we
>have these sort of threads every day, and some people could find this
>information (about the Academic Alliance and other things) useful.
>
>John "Potty Mouth" Floren
>--
>Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn
>
>
Actually, if you read the messages in correct order, you will see that *I* was the one that censored it in my response.
I'm not a prude, but that really is unnecessary. I'd like to think we're a little more civilized.
Speaking vocally, it may have an effect, but spelling it out in words really looks rather ignorant and uneducated.
I'm not going to keep with this thread, just like I didn't respond to his immature response, but I wanted to make sure you were
aware that it was I that censored it with *'s.
'nuff said
Tony
