Can anyone identify the equipment this board came from, or the
company going from the style of part number? It's a baud rate
generator, or presumably is, given the "TTY" on the solder side. ~
10.7 MHz clock, 12-14 stage divider, late 1970's.
http://www3.telus.net/~bhilpert/tmp/brg/
Seemingly odd choice of clock frequency for a baud rate generator,
results in some error at the higher standard rates.
New scans have been posted at our document archive of the Interactive
Computer Systems OmniFORTH manuals, as well as those for its
predecessor, fig-FORTH:
http://chiclassiccomp.org/docs/index.php?dir=%2Fcomputing/InteractiveComput…http://chiclassiccomp.org/docs/index.php?dir=%2Fcomputing/ForthInterestGroup
Each time I do a scan, the original document is either stored, if I
find it to be of value, given away, if someone else does, or recycled,
if no one appears to mind. This one rides the edge of the first two
categories, so if anyone would like the original, FFS, let me know.
There is no content to be gained by having the original vs. the scan,
yet someone may still want the tactile (and nasal!) experience of 33
year old paper. Shipping will be from the 60070 ZIP.
-jht
--
silent700.blogspot.com
Retrocomputing and collecting in the Chicago area:
http://chiclassiccomp.org
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:24 PM, Zane H. Healy <healyzh at aracnet.com> wrote:
> It looks like I've found a home for it and some other stuff.
>
> Zane
>
> Great! Hate to see vintage gear wind up at the shredders.
Thanks,
- Earl
I meant to post this last night before the auctions went live, but I was
going to add some stuff and waited, forgetting I already had stuff going
live at 7pm. Only the Vax4000/300 is gone, but the rest here:
http://www.ebay.com/sch/tcp1022/m.html?item=251286765330&ssPageName=STRK%3A…
which include an Aviion m88k, Unibus expansion cabinets and other goodies.
at 7pm today 6/8 the 11/23+ and some other stuff goes up. All at buy it now
or best offer, for your instant gratification
If your a list member and making an offer, tell me just as you would when
you buy anything. I always throw in some good free stuff
Cheers
-tom P.
Hi Zane,
I'd hate to see this go in the dumpster. If nothing else, there are parts
inside (e.g., the Z80 and support chips, the Shugart 8" drive) that could
be useful.
If you don't get any takers, please let me know...
- Earl
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Zane H. Healy <healyzh at aracnet.com> wrote:
> Local Pickup Only
>
> It's missing the keyboard, and is untested. There are a bunch of 8"
> floppies, but no manuals.
>
> It needs a home ASAP, I don't want to see it dumped, but I also do not
> have room to bring it home.
>
> Zane
>
>
> --
> | Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Administrator |
> | healyzh at aracnet.com | OpenVMS Enthusiast |
> | | Photographer |
> +-----------------------------**-----+------------------------**----+
> | My flickr Photostream |
> | http://www.flickr.com/photos/**33848088 at N03/<http://www.flickr.com/photos/33848088 at N03/> |
> | My Photography Website |
> | http://www.zanesphotography.**com<http://www.zanesphotography.com> |
>
>
I have some boards with gold fingers that match S100, but are obviously
not. For one, they're dated to 1973 and from Intel. Also, they're two
inches narrower and 1.5 inches taller than an S100 board. What are they?
--
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?
We're doing NetBSD and 80386 again? Evil cabal responsible for crimes
against computing again?
Jason Thorpe and others were talking about fundamental problems continuing
80386 support, what, almost a decade ago (no...the 80386 is not simply an
older 80486)? They announced the intention to drop support in 2007, and
dropped it in 2009. It was not a secret and it wasn't a smug "buy
bigger/faster/stronger" dictate; they still support VAX and a pack of
ridiculously obscure mc68k boxes, after all.
80386 support died because no one stepped up to support it, even though
proposals were made as to how to do that. Based on that, the core
developers made a decision about how to allocate scarce resources, and in 4
years the world has somehow failed to end. If a single person had stepped
forward to take on 80386 as a distinct port, it could still be in there.
It not like ns32k or mc88k, where getting things going means recreating
GCC support, figuring how to jump to ELF, etc. And yet, since 2009, no one
has picked up 80386, which pretty much tells you how really important it is
in the grand scheme of things.
KJ
Does anyone else who is reading this still use the DEC
SD: (Symbolic Debugger) under RT-11?
I have been spending some time, of late, becoming
more familiar with this software and I have noticed a
few areas which could use some improvements. This
post is in respect of version Y01.16 which runs under
the most recent versions of RT-11, and in particular
the SDHX.SYS variant which runs under a Mapped
RT-11 Monitor.
The two major aspects that could use some improvement
are to reduce the Low Memory required from 1124 words
to perhaps half that requirement. The second is a lack of
a history capability. Doing so will certainly require the use
of additional Extended Memory beyond the 8192 bytes
already in use and that is probably the major obstacle to
overcome. One other aspect that might possibly be changed
is the fact that the SDHX.SYS variant freezes RT-11 when
the user is at the DBG> prompt. While that is a major
problem, I don't know if there is a solution which would
allow the user to unfreeze the system and allow other jobs
to execute.
As for the Symbolic Debugger capabilities that are available
under RSX-11, in particular with respect to programs
with overlays which the DEC Symbolic Debugger under
RSX-11 is reported to posses - even before the overlay
is loaded, that may also be possible if there is sufficient
need under RT-11.
I would appreciate a response from anyone who still uses
SD: under RT-11, especially under a Mapped RT-11
Monitor and most definitely from anyone who uses the
version Y01.16 which DEC limits to certain versions of
RT-11, but which is capable of supporting debugging under
versions of RT-11 at least as far back as V05.03 of RT-11.
Jerome Fine