test-drb

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

101090 discussions

Evans & Sutherland Y2K scrapyard heads-up

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

-----Original Message----- From: Zane H. Healy <healyzh(a)aracnet.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Tuesday, 22 December 1998 16:40 Subject: Re: Evans & Sutherland Y2K scrapyard heads-up >>Hopefully, there will be a bunch of Sun 3's too...according to their web >>site, there's no Y2K support for them at all... Good. >My guess would be any Sun that only runs SunOS isn't, and won't be Y2k. To >the best of my knowledge they've no intention of making SunOS Y2k as they >want you running Solaris. Probably. I think NetBSD runs on Sun 3's now. So it should be possible to keep them going with that, (or just lie about the date!) 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

Evans & Sutherland Y2K scrapyard heads-up

by ware＠xtal.pharm.nwu.edu

Here is another small addition to the list of interesting machines that may be scrapyard-bound as January 1, 2000 approaches. Evans & Sutherland have recently sent a letter to the owners of ESV workstations indicating that these systems will suffer catastrophic failure (i.e, will refuse to boot) after January 1, 2000 due to a Y2K problem with the system's NVRAM. The ESV is a quite nice UNIX-based 3D graphics workstation, and many of these systems are still in use running specialized software (such as the 'O' molecular modeling package). E&S indicate that the Y2K problems with the older VAX-tethered graphics terminals are all in the "nuisance" category, but the warning message is certain to send many of these machines that remain to the scrapyard, as well. SGI also does not certify any of their systems with 68K, R2000, or R3000 processors to be Y2K compliant, presumably because they cannot run IRIX 6.5. Watch your local scrap dealer for IRIS 2000/3000, 4D series, and Indigo R3000 systems. -- Scott Ware ware(a)xtal.pharm.nwu.edu

27 years, 9 months

Bernoulli Box

by SUPRDAVE＠aol.com

In a message dated 12/21/98 11:25:01 PM US Eastern Standard Time, rws(a)eagle.ais.net writes: > A while back I got an Iomega Bernoulli Box at a hamfest, along with a big > stack of cartridges. It's almost the exact same size, shape, and style as > an XT, with dual 10MB 8" drives ive got two of these drives, one dual and one single with ~40 carts and no controller card. i havent been able to find much info either. shirley they were popular in their day?

27 years, 9 months

Evans & Sutherland Y2K scrapyard heads-up

by dburrows＠netpath.net

>Well, on the unixpc (att 7300/3b1), it is not possible to set a date > >12/31/99 thru either the setup screen or the 'date' utility. it is >possible to 'walk' the date into 2000 by setting 12/31/99 23:59. Once >over the hump it is then possible to advance to 23:59 12/31/00, etc. But >two digit dates in 2000 display mm/yy/100 (sic). Does that count as >broke? :). > >Date arithmetic seems to work OK beyond 01/01/00 tho. Don't forget to check Feb 29 2000. There are some systems that break there. Dan

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 10:32 Subject: HP9100 EHT oscillator transistor >I've got an HP9100 to repair, and the first fault is that the transistor >on the EHT power supply board is short-circut all ways round. > >Alas the only number I have for it is the HP custom number, 1854-0322. >Tests on the transistor in my (working) 9100 show it's an NPN transistor, >but I don't want to do too many tests on it in case I damage the working >transistor. > >I've tried a few modern replacements. Most of them oscillate OK, but the >EHT won't regulate and sits at far too high a voltage (small, bright >image on the CRT). Certainly indicative of high eht.> >A BF259 does seem to work, but it's hardly got sufficient ratings for >this circuit. I don't know how long it will last. What voltages are on the transistor in the working unit? What sort of package is the transistor in? 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

OT question for electronics wizards

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<Hi. Just a quick question which is kind of off topic - with switched powe <supplies like those in modern PCs, when it says the input current is 7 amps <115 volts, is that the constant no matter how much the computer itself draw 7A@115V... an 800w PS??? <or the maximum, no matter what? If it's the latter my computer room is <going to need more circuits in a big hurry... The input current is load dependant above a minimum current. If that 7A PS is real I'd expect a minimum of .5A-1.5A at near minimum load. Plain english, input current is proportional to load current plus some internal losses. If it helps I have 6 vaxen on the same 15A line. Three 3100/M10E, one 3100/M76, two VS2000, BA123 MicrovaxII and one BA23 MicrovaxII. Worse case numbers would have me using a 25-30A line. Real numbers are far lower. Also the 3100 PS is only some 160W but if the aux outlet is present for say a monitor then there is +3-5A added to the input current for that outlet. So it's easy to have a spec for 7A but it's likly allowing 3A for a monitor or somesuch. Allison

27 years, 9 months

HP9100 EHT oscillator transistor

by rigdonj＠intellistar.net

More info: > >> >>Alas the only number I have for it is the HP custom number, 1854-0322. > > HP says "Q1 -- 1854-0322 -- Quantity 1 --- TSTR: NPN, Si --- (Mfr) 86658 --- obd" > > The notes say that "obd" means "order by description". There's a list of manufacturer's code in the manual but 86658 isn't listed. ??? I think that manufacturer's code may be wrong in the manual. I can't find any other parts with that code but I did find that a lot of the 1854-xxxx transistors are made by 86684. I looked that up, it's RCA, Electronics Components and Devices Division in Harrison, NJ. Joe

27 years, 9 months

OT question for electronics wizards

by ddameron＠earthlink.net

At 07:17 PM 12/21/98 -0700, you wrote: >gaa. remind me again that English is my native language... > >Okay. Let's try again. When it says it wants 7 amps at 115, does it ALWAYS >want 7 amps at 115volts? or only when the computer it's driving really wants >all 300 watts it can put out? > > It probably has a 7Amp fuse inside, so the 7 Amps is just the max surge current. Even then most PC power supplies have less turn on surge current than a color TV because they have a negative temp coeff. surge resistor in series with the power input. Many TV's I've seen do not. Because of lower power disk drives, most PC's draw much less power than one may expect. Feel the air flow exiting from the PSU to get an indication of the heat load. Take out all the computer stuff from the case and put a light bulb inside as a comparison. One can also measure the currents on each of the DC leads (with an adapter because there are, for example, multiple 5 Volt leads). -Dave

27 years, 9 months

HELP

by pctech＠davidbowie.com

I have a Laser 128 i am trying to restore i have it working only thing is it is not doing anything. I have a screen that says: LASER 128 ROM Version 2.9 (C) Copyright 1985, 1986 Central Point Software, Inc. BASIC (C) 1982 Microsoft All rights reserved That is in the left hand corner.But it goes no further,Does anyone have any idea what is going on???? i have never messed with one of these and i dont know what its going on here.PLEASE help me!!! Do i need disks????

27 years, 9 months

Evans & Sutherland Y2K scrapyard heads-up

by pete＠dunnington.u-net.com

On Dec 21, 21:51, Sean 'Captain Napalm' Conner wrote: > Um, IRIX is a Unix derivative, right? What about IRIX ISN'T Y2K > compliant? 2038 compliant, I can see, but 2000? Do these companies go out > fo their way to make stuff non-Y2k compilant? Lots of things in many Unix versions are potentially non-Y2K compliant -- anything that handles date input/output in ASCII could be, or anything that depends on a RTC chip that only stores the year as two digits. Common culprits are at(1) and date(1) but SGI have a list of issues on one of their support pages, as do Sun and some other vendors. -- Pete Peter Turnbull Dept. of Computer Science University of York

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