Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> wrote:
> On 8/11/10 11:21 PM, William Donzelli wrote:
>>> >> Of course, shipping for, say a hundred VT520s is significantly higher than for those modern replacements - even when you add in the (now LCD) screen. Oh that's right, you can just go down to Best Buy (which rarely is) to buy the screens....
>> >
>> > I doubt shipping costs would be so much of an issue - VT520s, if they
>> > are anything like VT420s, are not very heavy. If company X needs
>> > several hundred dumb terminals spread around in their system, I bet
>> > they would have enough of their own shipping going on, and the VTs
>> > could hang on the sides of the trucks for free.
>> >
>>> >> That's not to say I don't have a personal preference for the originals - I have mostly VT420s at home, and we're refurbishing a bunch of VT100s and VT52s here at work. -- Ian
>> >
>> > OK, I will say it - VT420s suck.
>
> What don't you like about VT420s? They're my favorite of the line,
> followed closely by VT320 then VT220. I don't like VT520s at all.
I like the VT5xx series, just as I like all other VT-terminals. However,
I've had problems with power supplies of VT320, and VT340 terminals, and
have had problems with the displays going weak on VT420 terminals.
In a way, I think the VT525 is pretty optimal. External screen with VGA
connection, so I can use any PC screen, including flat screens. The fact
that the VT5xx terminals use a PC keyboard connection sucks some, but I
can live with that, since I atleast have proper DEC layout keyboards
anyway. And color, in addition to that. The only thing missing is ReGIS
and SIXBIT graphics.
But, to make a comment on the original topic here - I don't really think
that new VT terminals are more expensive than buying a PC. Yes, the
initial cost is larger, but I definitely expect a VT520 to last way
longer than a PC, and buying two or three PCs, and additionally to have
to service, update, install, and work on the machines will make them
cost way more than a new VT520 within just a year or two.
Johnny
--
Johnny Billquist || "I'm on a bus
|| on a psychedelic trip
email: bqt at softjar.se || Reading murder books
pdp is alive! || tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol
So I picked up both a MicroVAX 2000 with 120mb MFM drive and MMJ terminal
adapter and a VAXstation 2000 with 40mb ST-251, keyboard, mouse, and some
little breakout box for the latter two.
Both systems power up and the drives don't make any nasty noises (though
both are blank so they won't be booting anything until I get VMS on them)
but in both cases I have no way to communicate with them. The MicroVAX I
can't talk to simply because I lack an MMJ cable but the more interesting
VAXstation with it's 4-bit framebuffer simply because I don't see how on
earth you connect up a monitor to it. The keyboard and mouse break out box
connect to the monitor port but the box itself has no connections for a
monitor to be plugged in.
How did this work and what types of monitor were compatible? I might have
access to a VR201 if I want to pay shipping from MA to western canada.
--------------Original Message:
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2010 12:21:49 -0700
From: John Robertson <pinball at telus.net>
Subject: Re: 1970s TTL specs and prices
MikeS wrote:
<snippage>
> ----------------
> FWIW, approx. Canadian 100-1000 prices in 1977:
> Gates: .28
> F-F's etc: .48
> SRs, adders, etc: 1.50
>
> 16Kx1 SRAM: $113.74
>
> mike
>
I do have an Electrosonic catalog (Canada) from the mid 1960s. It is
very handy as it covers things like CDS cells, Germanium items (ratings,
etc) and other odds and ends of industrial electronics where there are
no other sources of information.
John :-#)#
-----------------------------------
Umm, that's where I got the prices; as a matter of fact I used to work
for Electrosonic in the 60s in industrial sales, still around after all
these years...
mike
Kind folks,
I was just wondering if anyone else is able to view the 3 movies near
the bottom of http://pdp-1.computerhistory.org/pdp-1/index.php?f=theme&s=2
For me, each one runs for a bit and then just stops. Windows task
manager shows no internet activity at that point. If I bring up some
other page and then go back there, the video gets a bit further each
time before seizing up again. Perhaps if I had infinite patience I
could eventually see them all the way through. Any idea what might
cause this?
Thanks,
Charlie C.
Hi,
Does anyone have an image of an Digital Equipment Corporation van? A
friend and DEC fan wants his new white van to look as much as possible
as original DEC vans. There seems to be an image of a large number of
vans parked for a corporate building in some DEC brochure.
Fred Jan
Hi,
I have an Intel SDK-85 System Design Kit here (single board computer)
which doesn't want to turn on. After some debugging, I'm fairly
confident it's the ROM that's dead, but I can't find an image for it on
the Internet.
If someone has a copy of the ROM image, or is willing to dump it, I
would greatly appreciate it.
Thanks,
Alexis.
Message: 13
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 12:49:19 -0700 (PDT)
From: Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com>
Subject: Re: Origin of the term minicomputer (was Re: PDP-1 as
minicomputer
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Message-ID: <20100821124828.V87695 at shell.lmi.net>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Sat, 21 Aug 2010, William Donzelli wrote:
>> Pretty much, yes. I suppose the "youngest" mini architecture is the
>> RS/6000, since it originally was made of multiple gate arrays (seven
>> maybe?).
>ISTR the RS/6000 (68000?) being called a microcomputer. But it was out of
>my price range.
-----------
Gee, I just offered a nice classic RS/6000-520 that you coulda had for free
;-)
Lots o' 40-bit memory, 32 ports, SCSI HD & tape; really hated to see it go
to the dump.
m
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 2010 11:24:47 -0700
From: Brent Hilpert <hilpert at cs.ubc.ca>
Subject: Re: 1970s TTL specs and prices
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Message-ID: <17dbd76df89836d82320a900dd3576a1 at cs.ubc.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
On 2010 Aug 20, at 11:23 AM, Tom Gardner wrote:
> For some Computer History Museum work I need information on 7400
> series Flip
> Flops (S and Normal, DIPs) circa 1973 (anything 1970-75). Anyone have
> any
> maximum clock speed and OEM volume pricing information on parts such
> as 7473
> thru 79 or 74106-116?
>
> I must be getting old because I remember the 7474 well but I thru out
> my
> Yellow books years ago :-)
Well, just to add to the list, I have the 1969, 1973 and 1981 TTL
databooks from TI, as well as a 1965 TI component catalog listing some
TTL devices (also various from Fairchild, National and Moto).
As with others though, I haven't managed to dig up any prices.
...
----------------
FWIW, approx. Canadian 100-1000 prices in 1977:
Gates: .28
F-F's etc: .48
SRs, adders, etc: 1.50
16Kx1 SRAM: $113.74
mike
---------------Original Message:
Date: Sun, 22 Aug 2010 12:51:32 -0400
From: Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com>
Subject: Re: Terminals...
On 8/22/10 9:52 AM, dwight elvey wrote:
> There was a RACAL that I liked a lot as well ( can't recall the name
> but I do recall almost being killed by one that I was tuning the
> IF strip ).
Mmm, just mentioning RACAL reminds me of (what was) my RA6790/GM.
Sadly I had to sell it to pay the mortgage a couple of years ago, plus I
felt kinda guilty having such a great receiver but not having much time
to use it.
Its CPU is a Mostek F8 as I recall, at least on the earlier ones (and
mine).
-Dave
---------------
Speaking of Racal, I still have a Technical Manual for a model 9521
'Computing Counter'; is there a group/forum/site out there somewhere that
would be interested (if it isn't already out there)?
mike
