I have an old 286 computer i use for tasks that won't run on a newer maching... My old printer is dead and when trying to connect a new printer it doesn't work...? What can i do to get the newer printers like lexmark to go with the old 286 HP VECTRA???? TNX
Eric Smith <eric at brouhaha.com> wrote:
> Johnny Billquist wrote:
> > But if we call this an 11/74, what shall we call the 11/70 with CIS?
>
> I wrote:
> > Fantasy? There wasn't such a thing, since there wasn't an 11/70 with a
> > KB11-E CPU that was necessary to accomodate the KE74-A CIS.
>
> Johnny wrote:
> > Then you are saying that Don North's work on the CIS microcode
> > for the 11/74 is a figment of his imagination?
>
> Not at all. I'm saying that it wasn't an 11/70, and that no 11/70 had
> CIS. He seems to agree with me.
Excellent. :-)
So let's call that an 11/74 then, as I've been doing the whole time.
Then the question is, what do we call the 11/70 with modifications to be
able to run multiprocessor configurations?
Johnny
Hi guys,
I've got a Laserjet III laser scanner module kicking around in my
junkbox, harvested from an utterly screwed LJ3. It has a fibre-optic
light pipe on one side, which connects to a photosensor on the
motherboard. Does anyone know what the frequency or period of the
photocell signal is?
That is to say, how long does it take for the scanner to make one
complete pass from "horizontal blank" to the right margin -- in other
words, the time from the leading edge of one photocell pulse to the next?
I'm toying with the idea of repurposing the scanner module for another
project (using a BluRay laser diode to print directly onto photographic
paper then process using a 3-bath B&W process), and I'd like to figure
out (in advance!) what the requirements will be placed on the paper
drive system (among other things!)
Thanks,
--
Phil.
philpem at philpem.me.uk
http://www.philpem.me.uk/
Eric Smith <eric at brouhaha.com> wrote:
> Johnny Billquist wrote:
>> Another way to name them would perhaps be:
>>
>> KB11-B - Old 11/70 CPU with synch FPP.
>> KB11-C - New 11/70 CPU with asynch FPP.
>> KB11-CM - MP modified KB11-C
>> KB11-E(?) - The new 11/74 CPU with asynch FPP and CIS.
>>
>> I seem to remember reading somewhere that the 11/74 CPU were to be
>> called KB11-E, but I also have this nagging feeling that KB11-E might
>> have been the 11/44, or possibly the 11/60.
>
> The 11/44 CPU was a KD11-Z. The 11/60 CPU was a KD11-K.
That might be correct.
>> Now, as I myself pointed out, RSX regards the 11/70mP as an 11/74, and
>> that is also what the CPU identification code in RSX calls it.
>
> Since the 11/70mp and 11/74 were never official products, there was a
> lot of conflation of the designations. Without the optional CIS,
> software can't easily distinguish an 11/70mp from an 11/74, so it
> probably simply didn't bother to try. Thus whether software reports the
> CPU as an 11/70mp or an 11/74 doesn't really prove much of anything.
Indeed. Which I think I tried pointing out.
>> But if we call this an 11/74, what shall we call the 11/70 with CIS?
>
> Fantasy? There wasn't such a thing, since there wasn't an 11/70 with a
> KB11-E CPU that was necessary to accomodate the KE74-A CIS.
Then you are saying that Don North's work on the CIS microcode for the
11/74 is a figment of his imagination? And the results they got back
>from running performance tests on this hardware?
I think it's just easier, for this discussion, to call that the 11/74,
and call the multiprocessor PDP-11s that went out to field test, and
which also were kept running inside DEC until not long ago, 11/70mP.
Mind you - just for this discussion.
Otherwise I'm just happy to keep calling CASTOR:: an 11/74, just as my
emulated 11/74 (MIM::), which also don't have CIS...
Johnny
> At 8:49 PM -0400 7/1/10, Bryan Pope wrote:
>> Another great item for sale from my collection:
>>
>> http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=190412195573
I know it says different ROM version in your auction description, but
how exactly does this model differ from the Educator 64 (one of which
is also up on ebay at the moment?)
--
jht
allison <ajp166 at verizon.net> wrote:
> On 06/30/2010 11:27 AM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
>> > I'll reply to this one last time, and then I'll give up.
(I can't seem to keep out, can I? :-) )
> I can't add too much to this regarding what parts and what DEC
> designators applied
> but here are memories of the time frame.
>
> The first multiprocessor 11/70 was built with existing hardware and a few
> wire wrap and jumper mods. Memory said there were 4 total, three inside DEC
> and one at CMU that they hacked together possibly with DEC help.
CMU did multiprocessor PDP-11s before DEC did, I think. However, they
went about it differently than the 11/74 (or whatever you want to call
it). Search for C.MMP and similar stuff on the net for more information
about CMUs multiprocessor PDP-11 projects.
The 11/74 systems were designed and built inhouse, although they might
have talked with CMU to get help, experience and whatnot. Reportedly
more than three systems were built. Rumors have it that they even had
some systems out to external customers for test, but all systems were
returned at the end of the tests (even though there is a persistent
rumor about Ontario Hydro keeping their).
I think I know of/heard of three systems that were in use inside DEC
long after the system was officially cancelled. We had, of course,
CASTOR:: which was the RSX engineering system, and which was up and
running as late as 2002 (2005?) or so. This was a 4-CPU system.
Then we had POLLUX::, which I think was a 2-CPU system. Not sure, but I
think it might have been DECnet engineering who had it. The third I've
heard about is PHEANX:: which might have been POLLUX:: after a move to
field service, and possibly also using bits and pieces from other
places inside DEC.
As far as I know, all of these systems, as well as the ones gone out on
field test, were KB11-CM cpus. So, no CIS option ever made it out of
prototypes, nor any KB11-E.
The boards from the 11/74 systems that were returned were allegedly used
in plain 11/70 machines inside DEC afterwards. They were, after all,
plug compatible with the normal 11/70 systems. The KB11-E boards would
not have been that, though.
> It
> would evolve
> to a design project to make that buildable as marketing felt they could
> sell it.
> However at the same time VAX/11/780 was real and also the various product
> groups were feeling the effects of FCCs new class A and B limits for
> RFI/EMI.
> That and the high end market had been moving to more addressable memory
> for bigger datasets and computationally wider data words as the tasks were
> getting bigger. At that time the big calculations that were important were
> atomic physics and weather models and both were associated with massive
> [by that eras measure] datasets. In many respects the same pressures
> repeated
> themselves in the 32bit to 64bit evolution [Alpha].
Indeed. But looking at the papers on the 11/74, their aim was more
towards high availability. Thus the total redundancy in the system, as
well as the ability to bring CPUs and memory on- and offline while the
system is running, and even run diagnostics on one CPU while the others
were serving. Even going as far as being able to physically remove
hardware from a running system.
So, high performance and large memory applications were not the target
of the 11/74. In fact, a 4 CPU 11/74 had about three times the
performance of an 11/70, but that was only aggregated performance. A
single task ran no faster on an 11/74 than on an 11/70. Possibly slower.
The question I think DEC asked itself wether there would be more point
in just selling four 11/70 machines to the customer, or one 11/74. And
four 11/70 won.
I know that RFI/EMI became a problem around this time. I think that
originally DEC planned to stop the 11/70 because of this, but since it
was such a popular machine, and no real replacement existed for quite a
while (the VAX was not a good enough replacement for an 11/70 in some
applications, mostly realtime), they were eventually forced to redesign
the 11/70, and that is where the DEC Datasystem 570 came from.
So the 11/70 in the corporate cabinet was ok with regards to RFI/EMI
radiation, while the older style full height (H960?) cabinets are not.
Or at least that is my understanding.
> It was my understanding that the 11/70 continued as a grandfathered
> EMI and the new multiple cpu died due to EMI issues (plethora of cables
> and multiple racks) and it was a faster number cruncher than VAX-11/780.
> The VAX had higher potential as the new reigning super minicomputer. It
> wasn't long after that I'd seen a VAX-11/782, 785 and VAXclusters.
The long cables from multiple CPUs to the memory boxes might have been
an problem with RFI/EMI in an 11/74, I don't know. But the 11/74
machines I have seen in pictures have been in the newer corporate
cabinets, which would imply that they were designed to pass the RFI/EMI
requirements.
> There were several of the PDP11 flavors that would die or morph as a
> result of manufacturing and serviceability issues.
I bet. :-)
Johnny
Don't know if this has been posted here yet, but Don Maslin's widow,
Winnie, died on 12/15/09. Here is the obit:
"Bristol Maslin "Winnie" (1928-2009)
Bristol "Winnie" Maslin died peacefully at her home in La Jolla on
Christmas night, Dec. 25, 2009. Winnie was a long time resident of San
Diego and La Jolla. She was an active member of The La Jolla Villagers
and the Social Service League of La Jolla, Darlington House.
Winnie was born on April 7, 1928, to Mary and Bristol Moore in
Bardwell, Kentucky. Her family moved to Toledo, Ohio, where she grew
up. She graduated from Scott High School in Toledo. Winnie came to San
Diego as a young woman where she had a long career at Fireman's Fund
Insurance as an Underwriter. She is preceded in death by her husband
of 45 years, Donald Maslin, the love of her life. Her life with Don
was full and exciting as they traveled the world and enjoyed many
wonderful experiences together. They had many close friends as well,
with whom they shared their life. With no children of their own, they
were especially close to her sister's family in San Diego.
Winnie is survived by her sister and brother-in-law, Ann and Hal Heist
of San Diego; nieces, Deborah Sharpe and Dawn Thompson of San Diego;
nephew, David Heist of Livermore, Ca.; and many grandnieces and
nephews. She had an especially close friendship with her only sibling,
Ann. The family will greatly miss our sweet aunt who enjoyed life,
parties, laughter, family and friends.
Winnie's ashes will be scattered at sea where her husband Don's were
scattered five years ago. They are together again. A celebration of
Winnie's life will be held on Sunday, Jan. 10, at her beloved home in
La Jolla, overlooking the beauty of the La Jolla Shores."
Here is the link:
http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/signonsandiego/obituary.aspx?n=bristo
l-maslin-winnie&pid=138344556
Checked the real property database for San Diego county and it doesn't
appear that the house has sold yet.
I can share addresses and some phone numbers of the family offline if
anyone wants to try and initiate contact. Best bet might be nephew
David Heist of Livermore, CA, former owner of Hoptown Brewery. Who
lives in Livermor - Sellam?
-W
Forwarded from the rescue list...these are a favorite of mine but
unfortunately I am unable to retrieve them. Hope someone does!
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Bill Green <bill at supposedly.org>
Date: Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 4:06 PM
Subject: [rescue] Fwd: Sun3 machines in Scranton PA
To: rescue at sunhelp.org
Hello,
I just saw the below on comp.sys.sun.hardware. It doesn't look like
it's been posted here.
----------------------
From: billg999 at cs.uofs.edu (Bill Gunshannon)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun.hardware
Subject: Sun 3's for rescue
Date: 22 Jun 2010 19:08:40 GMT
Anybody here close enough to travel to Scranton, PA interested in saving
a couple of Sun3 Ddeskside pedestels from the landfill?
Might have some stuff shortly and trying to line up a way to keep them
alive for at least a little while longer.
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon ? ? ? ? ?| ?de-moc-ra-cy (di mok' ra see) n. ?Three wolves
billg999 at cs.scranton.edu | ?and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
University of Scranton ? |
Scranton, Pennsylvania ? | ? ? ? ? #include <std.disclaimer.h>
_______________________________________________
rescue list - http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue
> The same with MO drives probably holds. I may still have a Pinnacle
> Apex 4.3GB drive here somewhere. In addition to being somewhat
> delicate, it was very expensive when compared to a standard IDE
> drive.
> I don't consider the later cheap removable-media drives like Zip,
> Jaz, Sparq... to be in the same reliability category as the
> Bernoullis. It's a shame that the technology was abandoned.
MO drives still have a few holdouts, in the worlds radiology and graphic arts. But CD-R and DVD-R have come to dominate even in those holdout areas.
In the radiology world variants on the RT-11 filesystem are still found today on MO drives, although the data hasn't passed through a real PDP-11 in decades.
Tim.
