test-drb

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

101090 discussions

Info Needed: Motorola EXORcisor 6800 System

by Arlen.Michaels.amichael＠nortelnetworks.com

> Kevin McQuiggin <mcquiggi(a)sfu.ca> wrote: > > Anybody else have one of these? I understand that Bill Yakowenko (sp?) > does, but don't have his email. > > Any and all info appreciated. There's nothing on ther web that I can find. > It dates from 1975. > I remember seeing these used to develop embedded microprocessor systems for applications like industrial control, back in 1979. I was using a Kontron development system then so I didn't use the EXORcisor firsthand. As I recall, it had a backplane that accepted cards from Motorola and a few 3rd-party manufacturers (cpu, memory, serial ports, etc). The cards had dimensions similar to S-100 but were 86-pin or something like that, and of course the bus incorporated more 6800-ish signals, like the E clock signal used to synchronize bus events. The idea was that you could run the EXORcisor itself as a general-purpose computer (monitor, editor, assembler, Basic, and so on--running on top of a proprietary Motorola OS that I can't recall) and you could stuff in any special boards you were developing for your application and so integrate them into your software development. When you had the code debugged, you'd blow an eprom, pull the boards out and stuff them into their own cabinet, insert the eprom, and start up your embedded system independent of the EXORcisor. One interesting thing was that many of Motorola's standalone (KIM-like) single-board computer "development kits" like the "D2" had the same EXORcisor bus connector and you could easily mix-and-match those boards with standard EXORcisor cards. I have a couple of EXORcisor cards somewhere (a Burr-Brown D to A card, some memory boards I think?) but no EXORcisor and no documents. So if you have documentation I'd like to take advantage and get copies of the relevant schematics, etc. I also think I have a couple of ROMs containing Motorola Basic that would probably work if plugged into an EXORcisor memory card. The system you've got probably sold for upwards of $20K back then. This was state-of-the-art professional gear, so admiration and respect are warranted :) Arlen -- Arlen Michaels amichael(a)nortelnetworks.com

27 years, 9 months

OT - power supplies

by jim＠calico.litterbox.com

Thanks to all who replied. I was concerned that if the PSs are really pulling 7 amps each I was going to run out of power really quickly in my computer room, which is fed by a single 20 amp circuit. However, since they're not, my 3 soon to be 4 computers, tv, and laser printer will (hopefully) all peacefully coexist. Again, thanks. :) -- Jim Strickland jim(a)DIESPAMMERSCUMcalico.litterbox.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Vote Meadocrat! Bill and Opus in 2000 - Who ELSE is there? -----------------------------------------------------------------------

27 years, 9 months

OT: Online auctins an institution?

by dastar＠ncal.verio.com

I can't believe what an institution online auctions have now become. Check out this preposterous item up for bid: http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=49600496 Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Always being hassled by the man. Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0 See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details! [Last web site update: 12/07/98]

27 years, 9 months

HP9100 EHT oscillator transistor

by ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk

A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text Size: 735 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19981221/f060917c/at…

27 years, 9 months

HP9100 EHT oscillator transistor

by geoffrob＠stmarks.pp.catholic.edu.au

-----Original Message----- From: Tony Duell <ard(a)p850ug1.demon.co.uk> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Tuesday, 22 December 1998 15:24 Subject: Re: HP9100 EHT oscillator transistor >If it is a 2N1701, then the maximum collector current for that device is >2.5A. The transistor is part of a blocking oscillator using the EHT >transformer, the supply to which is fused at 750mA. But the maximum >collector current for a BF259 is only 100mA. I am suprised it worked at >all, but work it did. It will be a short life I suspect. It's probably drawing around 200ma. >The maximum voltage is not a problem. The oscillator runs off an >unregulated 20V line, and there are no HV spikes flying around. The >2N1701 is only rated at 60-odd volts, which the BF259 (or any of the >other transistors I've tried) can stand trivially. Well, a 2SD350 or 380 are fairly common HOP transistors, they will certainly run at line freq, I don't have a data book handy, but they have Ic ratings of well over an amp. 2N3055 might work too, though I'm not certain it could handle the frequency. They all have TO3 cases though, so mounting it might be a headache. If I can dig up a data book in this mess I'll see what else I can come up with. Cheers Geoff Roberts Computer Systems Manager Saint Marks College Port Pirie South Australia. My ICQ# is 1970476 Ph. 61-411-623-978 (Mobile) 61-8-8633-0619 (Home) 61-8-8633-8834 (Work-Direct) 61-8-8633-0104 (Fax)

27 years, 9 months

SunOS -- was: Evans & Sutherland Y2K scrapyard heads-up

by KFergason＠aol.com

In a message dated 12/22/98 9:33:55 AM Pacific Standard Time, dhansen(a)zebra.net writes: > SunOS and Solaris were seperate creatures up until about Solaris 2.4 and > SunOS 5.4 when they began merging the two into one entity. > As for the numbering scheme that is definitely weird. It's advertised as > Solaris 7, yet in the code it comes up as 2.7. Guess their marketing dept. > had an afterthought about it. > I don't know where you are getting this. Solaris is an "environment". Always has been. It includes SunOS, Openwindows, and tools. Real developement ended on SunOS 4 about 7 years ago, 4.1.4 being the last released version about 3-4 years ago. Also called Solaris 1.1.2. Yes, the Solaris moniker was retrofitted to the SunOS 4 stuff. SunOS 5, also called Solaris 2, is running rampant as we speak. the Solaris 7 thing, well, we figured that was just to get a bigger number than NT 5. course, now its windows 2000. Solaris 7, aka 5.7, aka 2.7, still returns 5.7 in the uname commands to ensure compatibility with scripts, etc. This is even on topic, sort of. The Sun announcement of what would become Solaris was in 1987. Kelly

27 years, 9 months

SunOS -- was: Evans & Sutherland Y2K scrapyard heads-up

by dhansen＠zebra.net

SunOS and Solaris were seperate creatures up until about Solaris 2.4 and SunOS 5.4 when they began merging the two into one entity. As for the numbering scheme that is definitely weird. It's advertised as Solaris 7, yet in the code it comes up as 2.7. Guess their marketing dept. had an afterthought about it. david On Tue, 22 Dec 1998, pete(a)dunnington.u-net.com (Pete Turnbull) wrote: >On Dec 21, 23:04, Aaron Christopher Finney wrote: > >> Indeed. SunOS 4.1.x is what I was referring to. I generally assume that >> someone who mentions "SunOS" is referring to versions previous to 5.0 and >> "Solaris" refers to versions 5.0 and later, although I realise that >> Solaris is officially SunOS. > >I wasn't sure what was meant, but what you describe is what I usually >assume as well (though SunOS != Solaris, according to Sun -- they seem to >have changed their marketing position recently, to say nothing of the >numbering scheme). > >-- > >Pete Peter Turnbull > Dept. of Computer Science > University of York

27 years, 9 months

SuperPET vs 8096

by ckaiser＠oa.ptloma.edu

A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text Size: 1514 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19981222/cbed4a65/at…

27 years, 9 months

SunOS -- was: Evans & Sutherland Y2K scrapyard heads-up

by pete＠dunnington.u-net.com

On Dec 21, 23:04, Aaron Christopher Finney wrote: > Indeed. SunOS 4.1.x is what I was referring to. I generally assume that > someone who mentions "SunOS" is referring to versions previous to 5.0 and > "Solaris" refers to versions 5.0 and later, although I realise that > Solaris is officially SunOS. I wasn't sure what was meant, but what you describe is what I usually assume as well (though SunOS != Solaris, according to Sun -- they seem to have changed their marketing position recently, to say nothing of the numbering scheme). -- Pete Peter Turnbull Dept. of Computer Science University of York

27 years, 9 months

Southern California TRW Swap

by jpl15＠netcom.com

To any of us who will be in or near the SoCal area this Northern-Hemisphere Solstice proximate weekend: Greetings. The TRW Amateur Radio Swapfest will be held on 26th December at the TRW facilities in El Segundo, Cal from 7:30 am til 11:30 am.. 405 (San Diego) freeway to Rosecrans exit, Rosecrans west to Aviation, Aviation south (turn under the railway bridge) one block and it will be on your right. The closest intersection is Aviation and Marine. E-mail me if more info is needed. If any interest, those who Show Up will be invited to an after-swap luncheon whereat we can gloat/whine over the day's 'catch'. Marvin and I will be in spaces J-21 and -23. Cheers John PS: WX is clear, crisp and beautiful; not like last time...

27 years, 9 months

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

test-drb