From caveguy@sbcglobal.net Tue May 15 18:45:39 2007 From: caveguy@sbcglobal.net To: test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org Subject: WAS: Nice PC-museum.. Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 19:45:39 -0400 Message-ID: <200705152345.l4FNjjSB093026@keith.ezwind.net> In-Reply-To: <310f50ab0705151626m12830a25gbadd6615264680b5@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0648400759285447871==" --===============0648400759285447871== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I had not planned to sent that one untill I could edit it a bit :( Here is a link to a ygam chart I generated for that mutterings and it includes a link to the page. http://ygams.com/ygams.lsp?Switchtech Bob On Wed, 16 May 2007 01:26:50 +0200, from at fu3.org wrote: >Bob, >I have no idea who this person is, and unfortunately I've forgotten >what page(s) I followed to get there. >-If you snip out all but the domain name from the URL I posted, it >seems that _that_ might be your very guy. >(Try navigating through the/his "Hobbies" link onto the computer >museum, and decide for yourself.. -It's at the bottom of that >"Hobbies" page..) - - - Front page updated little over a year ago, so, >further inquiries doesn't seem all that impossible, if anyone should >be so inclined. >2007/5/15, Bob Bradlee : >> On 15 May 2007 10:35:15 -0700, Geoff Reed wrote: >> >> >although I don't remember the Z-80 being a clone of the 8085 CPU like the= author >> >of that site claims. (or has my memory gone faulty?) >> >> I have heard before from those who equate the entire Intel 808x family as = a class. >> >From their perspective the Z-80 was designed around and expanded upon the= 8080 instruction set=20 licenced >> from Intel! >> The deal gave 8080 programmers a second source, which raised the credibili= ty of the instruction set >> against the Motorola 6800 family. >> Motorola ended up cutting their own deal providing AMD trading some VMOS m= emory masks for the=20 68xx >> mask set, which they both second sourced for each other to a set of common= customers who=20 demanded a >> second source be available before they would finalize a design. >> >> I agree Clone might not be the correct word choice, but by todays business= standards is not that far=20 off the >> mark. >> >> As to the website in question, a quick look revealed it has not been updat= es in years, I am personally >> thankful that this person was just enough of a geek to have built a nice h= obby page. but how managed=20 to >> keep it unnoticed ? >> >> This raises the question of "how much unnoticed?", I ran the page title an= d meta content into YGAMS=20 and >> came up with some very interesting footprint info. (see YGAMS.COM for the = current beta and=20 examples of >> the internet footprinting tool) >> >> >From page header >> My Virtual PC Museum >> >> >> >> >> "John B Sandlin" came up as a known with a YGAMS of ~253 >> The Title "My Virtual PC Museum" only hit ~ 2 on this side of never seen ! >> and "07/15/2002 PCs I've Owned" ~ 0 proves this has never been indexed. >> >> It looks to me that these pages have been unseen and hiding for many years= behind more than just=20 robots.txt >> files. Believe me a YGAMS of 0 is almost impossible to maintain once somet= hing has been published=20 and >> indexed gets indexed by someone! >> >> There is little question this is fresh meat, none of the search engines ha= ve seen it YET, but that could >> change as soon as this mutterings got indexed, if I had but included a lin= k to the page in question. >> >> BTW: Does anone here know who this is ? >> >> Back to my rat-killen, I have wasted enough time today muttering :) >> >> Bob Bradlee >> >> I am still trying to get my head around the fact that this email may viola= te 6 or more software patents... >> Just in its transmission, not including any possible problems someone migh= t have with it's content ! >> >> >> >> >> >> >> --===============0648400759285447871==--