test-drb

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

101090 discussions

by allisonp＠world.std.com

< I seem to recall that one (or more) of the Godbout/CompuPro ram boards u < a 2kx8 static RAM part that had the same pinout as a 2716 EPROM, and cou < support 2716s in place of some/all of the RAM chips. True or false? Ram16 and RAM17 both used 6116 2kx8 but neither were configurable for 2716 Eproms. It can be done but it would be a hack. Allison

27 years, 11 months

AES computer with 8-inch disks?

by jfoust＠threedee.com

Below is a description of a system with some data to be rescued. I've already responded to the people mentioned, so there's no need to respond again. I asked for more details, if they had any: when was it used, what software did it run, whether the disk is soft- or hard-sectored. I have no idea, though, what kind of system this was. Does "AES" ring a bell with any Canadian readers? - John >>Sent from: Gilles Poitras <cowpunk(a)sirius.com> >> >>This is from a mailing list for theological librarians that I am on. >> >>Can anyone help out? >> >>>"Accelerating obsolescence" strikes again. >>> >>>Professor Dr Hans Rollmann, who supervises one of the more elegant and >>>elaborate sites on the WorldWideWeb for the Department of Religious Studies >>>at Memorial University in Newfoundland, has found some important primary >>>data that he hopes to mount with other texts on the site. These data are >>>imprisoned on 8-inch computer disks that were made on an AES computer, >>>apparently in the 1980s. No printed record of the material survives; only >>>the 8-inch disks remain. No AES computer or 8-inch drive exists at Memorial >>>University; the technical services people from the Computing Sciences >>>Department tried to build an 8-inch drive from spare parts, but came up >>>short. The intellectual content frozen in this "obsolete" technology >>>remains unreadable. >>> >>>Does anyone know the whereabouts of an intact AES computer? Failing that, >>>is there any available information about these machines? What did the >>>acronym AES stand for? Where was it built? Most important, what operating >>>system did it use? What word processing software might have been loaded? >>> >>>Has anyone preserved any computer with an 8-inch disk drive? As I recall, >>>both Commodore and Atari used 8-inch drives. >>> >>>Anyone who has useful information on this problem can communicate with >>>Professor Rollmann at >>> >>> hrollman(a)morgan.ucs.mun.ca >>> >>>Those who may be interested in his religious studies web site can begin >>>sifting through its many layers at >>> >>> http://www.ucs.mun.ca/~hrollman >>> >>>Professor Rollmann will be grateful for any assistance anyone can offer. >>>The rest of us need to be sure that any intellectual material we >>>"catalogue" can also be "read."

27 years, 11 months

North Star Horizon Help

by bobstek＠ix5.ix.netcom.com

I have a manual for the N* HRAM series which I'd be happy to copy and send you - email me. There are some differences between revision B and E boards and there are lots of jumper options. In summary, S1 and S2 select the active memory areas, JP1 selects the bank status on reset and selects I/O control bits for bank switching and parity, JP2 selects areas to be bank switched, JP3 selects the parity error response, JP4 implements the First Quadrant option (only revision E 48K version), and JP6 is reserved (no jumper). Bob Stek bobstek(a)ix.netcom.com Saver of Lost SOLs (and the occasional Horizon)

27 years, 11 months

Question: Godbout/CompuPro ram boards

by ddameron＠earthlink.net

Hi Jim and all, At 10:50 PM 10/7/98 -0700, you wrote: >Can anyone confirm this vague memory, or set me straight? > >I seem to recall that one (or more) of the Godbout/CompuPro ram boards used >a 2kx8 static RAM part that had the same pinout as a 2716 EPROM, and could >support 2716s in place of some/all of the RAM chips. True or false? > >And if true, was there any special configuration that needed to be done for >the 2716s? > A 6116 is a 2kx8 static ram. The only difference in its pinout from a 2716 is pin 21. For the 6116 it is /write enable (active low). For the 2716 it is V(program). For read it is tied to 5V, it needs a higher voltage and current, up to 5mA, so just a TTL "1" isn't enough. Can you jumper this pin to +5 volts? -Dave

27 years, 11 months

kits, definitions, prices...

by yakowenk＠cs.unc.edu

Hey, several threads just coalesced in my head. (Ouch!) There are a handful of questions that keep getting re-hashed. Build my SwTPC kit and play with it, or treasure it in pristine form? Is my LSI-11 a micro, or not? Are my XT's really classic? Should I hack my Apple-1 to sub in a 99 GHz Pentium for the 6502? Wanna buy a 1200 baud modem? The problem is that we have so many different backgrounds and goals, everybody has different answers to those. So, when these questions come up, maybe instead of arguing about the right answers, we could gain more by digging backwards to the *reasons* for the different answers. Here are my two cents: Most of my stupid sample questions revolve around differing valuations. Sources of value. 1. Nostalgia I had/wanted one of these once. 2. Education This is really different from stuff I already know. 3. Preservationism There are only three left on the entire planet. If I don't protect it, soon there won't be any. 4. Usability I make practical use of it. 5. Money There are only three left on the entire planet. Somebody must be willing to pay a lot for it. .. any more? So building a Heathkit is good for reasons 1, 2, and 4; and bad on 3 and 5. In my own collection, different items hit different buttons. I play games on my Radio Shack Color Computers, so they hit button 4. I also hack around in machine code on them, so they hit button 2. And I've done quite a bit of work with 6809's, so they hit button 1 as well. (No wonder I have such a pile of CoCos!) My SwTPC kit is still unbuilt for reason 3. It doesn't hit buttons 1 or 2 so hard because I also have an assembled one which covers those nicely. (Man, I'm a lucky guy!) And it seems my own button 5 isn't connected to anything. But other peoples' seem to work just fine. The one sample question still unanswered is a definition thing. So maybe the root question should be, why is one definition better than another? I learned the definition of microprocessor to be a single-chip CPU, and a microcomputer to be a computer based on a microprocessor. But I never questioned it. Why is that a useful definition? Maybe it is a measure of how hard it would be to build a system around it. Which in turn could be correlated with cost, and so with popularity. By that reasoning, if you get the same functionality out of a smallish chip-set as a single chip, and the price is the same, both should be considered as micros. Or maybe it has more to do with physical size of the end result; if you have a single chip instead of four, it leaves you with more room to put the rest of the computer on that same PC board. Maybe that could be really important for hobbyists. (I know my own attempts at homebrewing were all SBC's.) But there is a red herring in all this. External VLSI support chips are a convenience. You could have built an 8080 system without the 8228. You would just use a boatload of TTL instead. So again, the issue is probably just cost of doing so (money, time, space). Was the 8080 more expensive in any way because of the 8228's existance? No. Was it any less of a microcomputer? Either the 8228 was enough of an improvement over the boatload of TTL that it made 8080 systems doable (ie, made it a micro), or maybe the lack of the 8228 circuitry in the 8080 chip itself still made it impractical for some (ie, made it a non-micro). It depends on where your thresholds are. You can still argue about whether or not the 8080 without an 8228 is a complete CPU, but my point is that this may not be worth arguing. What is the practical impact of having the entire CPU on one chip vs. two? How does it change anyone's behaviour? *That* could be worth some discussion. I have my own ideas about which things are micros and which are not, but in retrospect, the definition that I was taught is not a useful one; it does not classify things into categories that I can use to any benefit. Cheers, Bill.

27 years, 11 months

Question: Godbout/CompuPro ram boards

by CLASSICCMP＠timaxp.trailing-edge.com

>I seem to recall that one (or more) of the Godbout/CompuPro ram boards used >a 2kx8 static RAM part that had the same pinout as a 2716 EPROM, and could >support 2716s in place of some/all of the RAM chips. True or false? True! The part is the Hitachi (or compatible) 6116P-2. >And if true, was there any special configuration that needed to be done for >the 2716s? It depends on the exact board; most boards that would take either had a jumper per socket to set RAM vs EPROM. Which board are you specifically interested in? When I bought out the stock of the last remaining Compupro dealer I ended up with most of the manuals in addition to hundreds of boards... This feature certainly wasn't confined to Compupro; there were several dozen other manufacturers of memory boards that did this, too. Most of the time the jumpers are pretty obvious, though some weren't below requiring the user to do PC board surgery. -- Tim Shoppa Email: shoppa(a)trailing-edge.com Trailing Edge Technology Voice: 301-767-5917 7328 Bradley Blvd Fax: 301-767-5927 Bethesda, MD, USA 20817

27 years, 11 months

RT-11 on 8" media

by CLASSICCMP＠timaxp.trailing-edge.com

> Is there available on the Web this info? Probably, but the authoratitive source for this sort of thing is the manual that matches the version of RT you're interested in. > Also, I have an 11/73 with RT-11SJ V5.0.... it has an 8" drive. >What would I have to do to make a bootable minimal floppy on this >machine? In other words how few files can one get away with to wake >up a PDP11 with only an RX02 clone as it's mass storage? That's easy: SWAP.SYS, TT.SYS, DY.SYS (or DX.SYS or whatever driver your hardware uses for the 8" drive), and a monitor (RT11SJ.SYS). This gives you a bootable minimal floppy which is capable of doing very little :-). Almost certainly you want to put PIP, DIR, DUP, FORMAT, and other useful "recovery utilities" on as well (BUP if you use it, your favorite editor, etc.). And certainly the drivers for any other devices you may be interested in. And, of course, after putting the files on the floppy, you want to make it hardware bootable too! COPY/BOOT DY:RT11SJ DY:, for example. -- Tim Shoppa Email: shoppa(a)trailing-edge.com Trailing Edge Technology Voice: 301-767-5917 7328 Bradley Blvd Fax: 301-767-5927 Bethesda, MD, USA 20817

27 years, 11 months

Latets finds

by franke＠sbs.de

>>> It looks like the vt62 could be equipped with an additional printer >>> unit. Is this correct? > I believe the VT62 is somewhat related to the VT52. The VT62 is a VT52 with inverse video. thats all. Gruss H. -- Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut HRK

27 years, 11 months

Latest finds

by franke＠sbs.de

> I got the kit for 50 guilders ($25), which is not a bad price if > you ask me for such a near complete kit. As for the moment, I don't > ha

27 years, 11 months

New Finds

by jrkeys＠concentric.net

Today I walked into a thrift store and found a stack of Popular Science, Popular Mechanics, and others going back to 1974. I got real excited thinking I would find that had Altair on the cover (does anyone remember which issue that was ?), but no luck. I did get a October 1977 issue that covers home computers for $595. In it were pictures and write-ups on the following: Commodore PET Heath H-8 (article says new H-11 uses DEC LSI-1) Radio Shack model 1 Altair 8800 Single-board 8084 from IMSAI Southwest Technical's 6800 Sol Terminal Computer Technical Design Labs Z-80 Xitan Compucolor The Digital Group Cromeco Z-2 Poly 88 from PolyMorphic Vector Graphic Vector 1+ Challenger System from OSI EPA 6800 with hexidecimal keyboard There were many more mentioned in the article, all together I purchased 12 different issues at 7 cents each. Got a few manuals for cpu's, software, and printers all for 7 cents each. Got three apple IIc power supplies for $1 each along with various commodore power supplies for the same price. As soon as someone can tell me the right issue I will go back looking for it. John

27 years, 11 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