I currently have a dual-channel 30mhz analog scope, the Intronix
34-channel 500mhz 2k samples max logic analyzer, a Saleae Logic
8-channel 24mhz unlimited samples and a (much) older 60mhz DSO on it's
last legs.
The 30 & 60 mhz analog scopes are simply too big and cumbersome to use.
These new scopes are much smaller and more convenient.
For logic analyzers, I have FAST, WIDE, but short buffer. And a slow,
narrow, mega-long buffer(limited by PC RAM more or less). These both
have their good points but to round out my tools, I need something that
ballparks 200mhz, 32-channels, and decent buffer. What's a decent
buffer? I don't know exactly. I know 2k isn't even close. And that a
million+ is really nice.
These are both PC-based logic analyzers and I'm fine with that. The
software is sufficient with both and gets me the measurements I need.
Of course, I'd prefer standalone units but still would like to export
data to a PC (say via USB or serial). This would simplify the process
and the UIs of dedicated devices have usually been thought out a little
more than the PC software.....
I was seriously looking at a Rigol DS1102D which is 100mhz, 16-channel
LA + 2 analog channels. My only real beef is that it's 16-channels and
not 32. Could really use 32 to do a 16-bit data bus and other stuff
(partial address, etc)
I can't easily tell looking at the specs what the depth of the LA would
be. Would I simply divide the 1 million point memory by the 16 channels?
http://www.rigolna.com/products/digital-oscilloscopes/ds1000d/ds1102d/
Rigol's have gotten great reviews.
Or do I get a scope only, and then use something cheap like this
http://dangerousprototypes.com/docs/Open_Bench_Logic_Sniffer
and solder another 16-pin header onto that and go 32-channels, 200mhz,
6k depth. Or buy a kickass eval board and hack SUMP onto it, and get a
deeper solution.....
While I'm a huge fan of HP and Tektronix, and I know there is old
hardware at reasonable prices --- I don't want to mess with trying to
piece parts a large mainframe together from untrusted sources, and spend
time trying to fix something like that. Plus, the specs are normally not
even close to that of modern equipment. I'd rather invest time hacking
verilog onto a new eval board that has plenty of fast memory...............
Any discussion would be helpful.
Thanks,
Keith
http://www.vintage-computer.com/vcforum/showthread.php?31323-New-Book-is-a-…
He mentioned it on the vintage computer forums.
http://macgui.com/newa2guide/ I think is the official link. Apparently
this is the 2nd revision which does correct some errors. From the chapter
previews I'm surprised how much information is in the book. I haven't
bought or read it but it's certainly tempting and definitely seems like
enough to get someone with the equipment up and running these days.
I have a large number of surplus DE9F to 8P8C (RJ45) adapters available if
someone can use some. I counted at least 350, but I'm not sure of the
exact number. When I bought them many years ago, I was expecting to get
adapters that had all 8 wires present (based on the photo the seller
provided) but what he sent me were pre-wired and three of the wires are
clipped away down inside the adapter body. (It might be possible to extend
those three wires, but I didn't want to spend the time on it.) The
adapters are labeled with a "PC" sticker, so I have to assume they were
originally used to connect to a PC serial port of some sort. (Mixed in
with these were a handful of DE9M to 8P8C adapters labeled "UPS" that have
5 wires similarly clipped away).
These are located on the US side of the pond, and whoever might want some
will have to cover the postage. I don't think these adapters are really
worth very much, although I certainly won't complain if someone wants to
pay something for some of them and help offset my original purchase cost.
I didn't pay /too/ much for them, although I doubt I'd have bought them at
all had the seller been up front about what he had.
If these adapters sound useful at all I can see about taking some photos
and a work up the pinout. I just really can't see me ever using ~350 of
these things :)
It has been many years since I wrote any VAX-Pascal and I find myself
needing to write an AST. I have looked around in various documentation
but can't find any examples. The AST I want to write is in response to
the completion of a QIO. The QIO call looks like this:
Stat := $QIO(0, Channel, IO$_WRITEVBLK, , %IMMED SendCompleted, 0, Buf, Len);
And the AST itself looks like this (no body at the moment, just want
to make it work first):
[ASYNCHRONOUS] PROCEDURE SendCompleted( P : UNSIGNED);
BEGIN
END;
When I run the code though I get a runtime error:
%SYSTEM-F-ACCVIO, access violation, reason mask=00, virtual
address=00000000, PC
=000008C1, PSL=03C00000
%TRACE-F-TRACEBACK, symbolic stack dump follows
module name routine name line rel PC abs PC
DMC11SEND SENDCOMPLETED 67 00000009 000008C1
801D58F3 801D58F3
0001E893 0001E893
DMC11SEND SEND 77 00000070 00000938
DMC11SEND DMC11SEND 111 00000179 000006BD
I am not sure what I have done wrong, anyone know?
Thanks
Rob
> Wait... That Ken Rockwell article says *nothing* about film
> grain. I even searched it for the word grain. How on earth
> can you write an article about the relative resolution of film
> without a word regarding grain?!
That's right. If anyone starts believing that "no grain" is the same
as "high resolution" then we end up back in the mushy microdol-X era
where every photo is just... blah.
I far prefer a nice roll/sheet of Tri-X or HP5 developed in
a high-acutance developer that really makes for obvious sharp
snappy grain. Oh it's so beautiful.
For fans of color... the 1600 color slide films available in the late
80's/early 90's, when push processed a few stops, are amazing.
Astoundingly huge and sharp color grain. I love it.
Tim.
With this talk about tintypes, I was wondering if anyone had any pointers
on where to get an inexpensive 4x5 field camera.
--
David Griffith
dgriffi at cs.csubak.edu
A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
From: Chuck Guzis < cclist at sydex.com >
>On 10/28/2012 09:19 PM, Paul Anderson wrote:
>> That would probably wet plate photography. People are definitely
>> still doing it, and getting some incredibly beautiful results.
>
>I'll bet that if you search hard enough, you can still find people who
>make tintypes.
>
>--Chuck
Tintypes are too new. How about daguerreotypes?
http://www.alternativephotography.com/wp/processes
Bob