At 11:17 PM 6/28/97 -0500, you wrote:
>I have,
>BASIC
All I saw were BASIC cartridges... I'll let you know if anything else turns up.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- O-
Uncle Roger "There is pleasure pure in being mad
sinasohn(a)crl.com that none but madmen know."
Roger Louis Sinasohn & Associates
San Francisco, California http://www.crl.com/~sinasohn/
I've just arranged for a Tandy 1000HX and it appears to be kind of odd. It
was bought at one of Tandy's infamous 'tent sales' where they dispose of stuff
they've had sitting around the local 'Shack, and the guy who bought it
originally said that it didn't come with any 3-1/2" floppy installed and that
both covers are still over the bays. It boots off of an external 5-1/4"
drive, which if I remember correctly, is selectable easily enough by way of
the SETUPHX program included with it's DOS diskettes. Do any of you
TRS-80/Tandy knowledgable people remember ever seeing a HX set up like this?
Every one of them I've ever seen new has come with a 3-1/2" floppy in the
left-most bay, right next to the expansion connectors. I bought one of these
nifty machines when they first appeared as well, and had an external 5-1/4"
floppy and CM-11 monitor with it, as well as the PLUS memory, RS232 and 1200
bps modem cards.
Jeff jeffh(a)unix.aardvarkol.com
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amiga enthusiast and collector of early, classic microcomputers
http://www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/lakes/6757
i've got an ibm 3178 c, anyone know what it is?
(it's look like some kind of terminal)
seems to be in 3 main parts
i) monitor
ii) base of monitor
iii) bit that seems to go under base of monitor
cheers for any info
--
Pete Robinson
pete(a)madhippy.demon.co.uk
http://www.madhippy.demon.co.uk - 8-bit, faqs, emulators, web utilities.
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 18:16:33 +0000
From: "e.tedeschi" <e.tedeschi(a)ndirect.co.uk>
To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu
Subject: Re: 'Home' computer: Definition
Message-ID: <33B6A681.66DE(a)ndirect.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Daniel A. Seagraves wrote:
>> On Sun, 29 Jun 1997, Bruce Lane wrote:
>>
>> I've seen a couple of posts in here that declare, in very firm terms
>> indeed, that machines like the MicroVAX and PDP's are not "home" computers.
>
> My PDP is a home computer. All it takes up is a table (I don't have a
> rack yet. It's coming...) Besides, my XT is bigger than the PDP at the
> moment (condidering keyboard, monitor, printer, and disks)
>
> Anything I can fit inside is a home computer! If it's in a home, and
> it's a computer, it's a home computer, right?
Absolutely right, Daniel! Thanks... Then Enrico responded with...
>Of course you could go to work on a Ferrari BUT would you? (and is a
>Ferrari a "goto work car"?)
I've seen at least a pair of them used for exactly that about 20 miles
east of me in Bellevue (the local Yuppie haven). If someone's got enough
bucks to own one of those things, you better believe they're going to get
good use out of it. ;-)
The whole definition argument seems pretty pointless, Enrico. That's what
I was trying to say in the first place. If you want to set your own
definitions of what constitutes a 'home computer,' that's fine. The rest of
us will happily(?) continue to use whatever strikes our fancy for computing
hardware in the home (a much better definition, I think).
As has been pointed out, this group is for discussion of 'classic'
computers. Bill Whitson's definition of 'classic,' in this case, refers to
ANY machine that is ten years or more old. Period.
Since MicroVAXen and other DEC machines fall neatly into that category, I
will continue to discuss them with others on this group. Period.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I have work to do on this beautiful 12-year old
HP drafting plotter I just bought (replace a couple of switches, clean it
up, and it'll be good to go, especially once I hook it to the MicroVAX!)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Bruce Lane, Sysop, The Dragon's Cave BBS (Fidonet 1:343/272)
(Hamateur: WD6EOS) (E-mail: kyrrin(a)wizards.net)
http://www.wizards.net/technoid
"Our science can only describe an object, event, or living thing in our own
human terms. It cannot, in any way, define any of them..."
for those of you interested in mainframes and minis, there's an unknown
piece of test equipment going for sale on AuctionWeb, item# yzx34561.
it sounds pretty interesting,if one has a use for such a piece of
equipment.
Jeff jeffh(a)unix.aardvarkol.com
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Collector of Classic Computers: Amiga 1000, Apple II+, Atari 800,
800XL, MegaST-2, Commodore 128D, 16, Plus/4, VIC-20, Kaypro 2X, Mattel
Aquarius, Osbourne Executive, Radofin Aquarius, Timex-Sinclair 1000,
TRS-80 Color Computer 3, and Model IV. Also Odyssey2, Atari SuperPong
and Atari 2600VCS game consoles
In message <33B75A67.2AE4(a)ndirect.co.uk> classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu writes:
> Brett wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 29 Jun 1997, e.tedeschi wrote:
> > > There are computers that you could not possibly USE but they are
> > > important for what they meant (and mean today) in short for their
> > > "heritage". Without them you could not have used (and use) the ones you
> > > are using today.
>
I assume the following is one of the computers you claim can't possibly be
used today...
> How about the Science of Cambridge (Sinclair) MK XIV ? It had 256 bytes
You mean an MK-14. I've never seen it printed in roman numerals (I have the
machine, user manual, a couple of 3rd party books, the adverts, etc, etc,etc
It was my first computer).
> (NOT Kb, BYTES) of RAM memory, LED display, not modulator and no way of
> storing programs (you could add these at a later stage as accessories).
Perhaps you could explain _why_ I can't use one today. I've written many,
many embedded control programs (monitor some inputs, update state variables,
toggle outputs, etc) that would _trivially_ fit into 256 bytes of SC/MP code.
If I add the optional INS8154 RAM/IO chip I have another 128 bytes of RAM and
16 bidirectional I/O lines. I can also add another 256 bytes by raiding my
junk box for some 2111's.
I can think of a few dozen applications that I could use that for. A trivial
one is an I2C chip tester - replace the monitor ROMs with ones burnt to contain
the correct code (avoids using the cassette interface option...), and have
said code read I2C addresses/data from the hex keypad and bit-bang the I2C
protocol on a couple of the 8154 lines. Or, how about a Centronics printer
tester (emulate the centronics port on the 8154, make it print the classic
scrolling ASCII text). Or a programmable pulse generator for digital IC
testing. Or a hundred-and-one other applications.
Yes, I can do any of those with a PC or many, many other machines. But the MK14
is small and portable. It doesn't need a monitor. It will start the program
instantly at switch-on. It is still useful today.
>
> enrico
>
>
-tony
>
>From: Ward Griffiths and/or Lisa Rogers <gram(a)cnct.com>
>Subject: Re: 'Home' computer: Definition
>On Sun, 29 Jun 1997, Brett wrote:
>> Which reminds me, my oldest handheld is from Korea. It feels great on my
>> feet! My uncle picked it up for me in the mid-60's tho the design has been
>> around in Asia for centuries.
>Yeah, got three assorted items of that nature myself (abacuses?
>abaci? Never met anybody with more than one to tell me the proper
>plural!)
>--
>Ward Griffiths
Consulting "The Japanese Abacus; Its Use and Theory" by Takashi Kojima
(12th printing, 1960) He uses "abacuses" as the plural form. (very
interesting history that dates way back to Roman days and farther).
Unfortunately I have a somewhat incompatible model from my book, on my
wall is a chinese abacus with 5 and 2 beads per digit, where the
japanese models use 4 and 1 (which sounds more logical to me, easier to
execute a carry to the next digit.)
An interesting chapter in the book covers a contest hosted by Stars &
Stripes between a U.S. Pvt. in Macarthur's Finance Disbursing Section,
(an awarded expert operator of calculators of the tim)e and a Japanese
champion abacus operator from the Postal Ministry. As of 1946 the
Japanese Abacuses were still able to beat the latest in American
calculators.
Larry Anderson
--
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Visit our web page at: http://www.goldrush.com/~foxnhare/
Call our BBS (Silicon Realms BBS 300-2400 baud) at: (209) 754-1363
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Bill:
{...}
> 2. Submission & storage: UUEncoded image file e-mailed to "repository";
> ROM/EPROM chips sent by snail mail and returned. All submissions should have
> as much info about the source computer as possible (board revisions, date of
> mnaufacture, etc.)
>>I think that anything doing with the chips (purchasing, programming,
>>shipping) should be left to the person that needs them. Sure, not very
>>many people on the list have programmers, but there are enough kind souls
>>that would do the programming. Anyway, having a policy concerning
>>shipping and supply may turn into a big headache.
I don't think that this would be a problem. I don't anticipate that many
people would want it this way (we are all hardware hackers {in the nice
sense}, after all). Even so, as long as a person doesn't want Fedex delivery,
how bad can it be??
> 4. Cost: nominal (cost of postage and EPROM).
>>Doing any more may actually be legally shakey.
I don't think so. See one of my earlier messages on this topic. If you're
posting a ROMimage, you have already "paid" your licensing fee because you own
the machine. I'm just replacing a defective copy with a working copy (sort of
like exchanging a defective diskette dor a working one). We're not "creating"
or "copying" for distribution. Also, we can limit it to pre-PC machines.
Chances are that these manufacturers are either out of business or no longer
support the machine.
>>Additional thought...
>>How will additional required information be tied to the ROM images (as in
>>manufacturers part numbers, revision levels, serial numbers,
>>corresponding hardware information, etc.)? ROMS (and PALs) often change
>>as the circuits get minor "improvements" (ECOs).
I don't know yet. I'm grappling with this now. There are all sorts of issues
with this: parts are house numbered, or not numbered at all. Maybe we can go
by unit serial number, date-of-manufacture stickers, and pc-board
identifications (such as "Revision A" or the like).
-------------------------------------------------
Rich Cini/WUGNET
- ClubWin Charter Member (6)
- MCPS Windows 95/Netowrking
> Also have these:
>
> the Encryptor, Jones Futura Corporation, Model ENC 100-1
> California Computer Systems, Model 2832 [has this big, black 3"x3" square
> and 3/8" thick block of resin on it, have no idea what it's hiding]
>
> Any idea what this stuff is?
>
>
> Sam
I was reading in the Atari Game Systems FAQ that the 7800 carts are
encrypted with a special encryption and only those encrypted games get
access to the 7800's advanced video resources (otherwise it just gets
2600 resources)... This was a measure by Atari to make sure to get a
share of the profits from 3rd party game developers. There could be a
slight possibility this is an encryption unit for the 7800 game
system...
Currently no one knows (or is saying they know) how to encrypt 7800
carts.
Larry Anderson
--
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Visit our web page at: http://www.goldrush.com/~foxnhare/
Call our BBS (Silicon Realms BBS 300-2400 baud) at: (209) 754-1363
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Hey, that mailing list fudged part of my first line as their command
which reported in error and refused to post it here. :(
Q. Hold on, I would like to express my opinions...
"Home Computer" term is invented by corporations to supposely help
define their markets and totally miss it all the time because users
needs is usually higher than their corporates' computers by factor of
1.5 to 2. At same time tries to pull off a coup on "home" users by
selling stripped down with loads of cut corners and oft-nonstandard
parts machine at horrible prices. Case in point: PCjr. PCjr and
orignal 2 piece PS/1 (sold at 1000 bux cdn but you get no HD in it,
introduced 1990's but users right away dumped them by pallets barely
2 years after. Yuk!) Side note: I traded few things to get this PS/1
2011 and used it for a while but sold it cheaply to a user who have
modest needs than I. (for me, I can't manage well without hard drive
attached even all the down to XT but not for apple II's their floppy
drive is very fast enough to forgo hd, very impressed but at that
time too expensive for my taste but now they are so cheap now.)
So there was a bad taste to this name "home computers" in general.
Similar types of computers did well in many areas but
happened to lack important areas that killed it. Ironically, better
to build DIY similar capablies 386, 80mb, 1mb, desktop/mono vga and
still easily interchangable than that darned PS/1 2011 models. When I
read about many machines and few "home computers" as called toys but
I was mistaken when I saw and heard that "toy", boy, they're mistaken
and I was taken too for a while! Indeed they were used for anything
within their capablies so I accept anything that has CPU in it at
same time useful and expandable should be decent computers, no more
or less. :)
C64, PET's, apples and such has just right stuff to keep users
happy.
In closing, corporations always underestimate "home" users.
But now they are not pushing this word and crippled machines anymore,
now selling them in general to any users execpt for corporations who
needs turnkey system just to do very specific jobs like weak machine
strictly for WP use, alphas for servers and heavy graphics, fast
processor for programming but that is getting blurred that most users
can afford them and can put them in their homes.
Ok, now I could respond to yours... :)
> I've seen a couple of posts in here that declare, in very firm terms
> indeed, that machines like the MicroVAX and PDP's are not "home" computers.
Suppose, Digital did not cared a whit and cut prices on that and we
would be sure many would have one in home if they're small enough and
easy on power requirements. Linux is there now and NT can be run on
alphas but bit late and cost is fast appoaching to affordable levels
where getting a pentium pro machine is not only option.
>
> For the sake of discussion in this list, and computer hobbyists in
> general, I would like the world to know that I define 'home computer' as
> any machine that you can:
>
> * Comfortably fit through your door...
>
> * Doesn't test the load limits of your target floor...
>
> * Power and run without tripping your main breaker...
>
> * (most importantly) Have fun restoring and working with... in your home!
>
> Which just goes to show that such terminology is so relative, there's
> little point in debating it. Why waste the bandwidth over something as
> trivial as a difference in wording?
>
> (No, I'm not trying to start a flamewar; I posted this because I'm
> concerned that the current thread regarding 'home' computers may erupt into
> one!)
>
> Caveat Emperor!
