- test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org - classiccmp.org

by ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk

In message <02440020302929(a)michianatoday.com> classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu writes: > At 08:59 AM 6/27/97 BST, you wrote: > >> I do use my old machines now and then, but if anyone here has never ran a > >> modern MAC or PC, they have NO idea what is bieng missed. web pages in full > >> photo quality color, realistic games, PPP connections, Realaudio etc. I am > > > >I have used 'modern' PC's (well, at least pentiums with 16 MBytes RAM, > >SVGA card, etc), and I know I'm not missing _anything_ by sticking to > >classic computers. Let's go through your points. > > > What I mean is that we must realize that there is only so much you can do > with classic computers. after all, if they were the best than why we have > faster and better? And there's only so much you can do with PC's :-) Seriously, It's obvious that the _real_ top end today is faster than the top end 10 years ago. It's also obvious that the 'home computer' of today (which is probably a pentium PC) is better than the home computer of 10 eyars ago (say a Commodore 64). But it's not at all obvious that the home computer of today is any better than a 10 year old top-end personal workstation or a minicomputer, or a number of other things. And those are turning up very cheaply if you know where to look. > > >'Web pages in full photo quality colour'. Well, I access the web to get > >information, not look at pretty pictures. Most of the information I want > >is _text_, or at least monochrome graphics (things like IC data sheets). > >So I don't need 'photo quality colour'. And if I did, I could easily find > > well at the moment you dont need it, but its nice to know that you can see > it when you need it. I don't necessarily buy hardware on the grounds that I _might_ need the facilities one day. As what I already have does all I need, then I see no reason to upgrade (downgrade?) And if I did ever need to display a 'photo-quality' image, I can find a few systems around here (all over 10 years old) that could do it trivially. > >a classic system that could display them. Evans and Sutherland, Grinnell, > >Ramtek, I2S, PPL, etc all made high-res colour displays that make most > >PC's look like toys. And you can pick one up second-hand for less than an > >SVGA card + monitor. > > SVGA a toy? I used many an apple ][ + and C=64 with 80 col RGB monitors, and Compared to the machines I've named, SVGA is a toy... > I can take only so much eyestrain. sharp graphics make your eyes feel good... This, alas shows how little you know about the state of graphics 10 years ago Give me a break. I am _NOT_ talking about home micros. I am talking about professional graphics displays with hardware anti-alliasing of displayed objects. I am talking about 512*512*30 bit images. I am talking about broadcast-quality TV images (if you should need to go to such a low scan rate). I am talking about 3D displays with LCD spectacles. Etc, Etc, Etc. I've had more than my fair share of eyestrain from impossible-to-converge SVGA monitors. I've battled with the service manuals for _hours_ on some of them and not been able to get the convergence right. I'm then pleased that Barco, Fimi, Sony (the older ones at least), Philips, Moniterm, KNE, etc, etc, etc did make decent, easy-to-set-up monitors 10 years ago or more. [...] > >we had good quality audio on PDP11's (thanks to a little board from 3RCC) > >in 1976. It's not exactly hard to add a DAC and a DMA engine or even a DSP > >to a lot of classic computers (and classic computer != cheap home micro so > >there's easily enough RAM space for a reasonable length sample). > > to me, a PDP11 is WORLDS apart from classic HOME computers, If I had the > fortune of actually owing a PDP11, I would use it extensively..... :) AFAIK, this is a classic computers list, and not a classic home computers list Anyway the PDP11 is a home computer now. I know dozens of people who run one or more at home. I've payed a lot less for any of my PDP11's that you'd pay for a pentium motherboard + CPU. That's complete PDP11's with disks, realtime I/O, terminals, graphics options, SCSI interfaces, etc, etc, etc. > >for most modern machines > >Repairability. I can fix classic computers with no problem at all. Just > I have never had any hardware failures in ANY of my machines so far (knock > on silicon), with the exception that I accidentally cooked a 6526. > Maybe I've been unlucky, but I have had hardware failures. > >try getting a custom chip for a PC motherboard. And don't tell me to > >replace the motherboard - if the PC is a few years old I'd probably have > >to replace the CPU and memory as well. > > that is just the ticket. A brand new 486 motherboard cost $90. with it you > get real functionality. Wait a second. ISA graphics cards are already getting hard to find. So, presumably, if I have a not-too-old PC with an ISA graphics card and some custom chip dies, I have to buy a PCI graphics card, a new motherboard, a new processor, and either new memory or some SIMM converters. No thanks - I'll stick to my classics where repairing consists of picking up the service manual, finding the dead chip in about 10 minutes, and replacing it with one >from either my junk box of the local electronics shop. > actually, you can get a decent modern PC together just by scrounging > computer shows and bargaining for parts. assembling a system from scratch > with old parts is very fun and rewarding. and the reliablity rate for modern > chips is very high. in fact the monitor or hard disk probably will die I've had modern custom chips fail for 'no good reason'. > before the motherboard will. Monitors can often be repaired for a lot less than the cost of a new one. Yes, the motherboard will probably outlast the hard disk, but that's (IMHO) because modern hard disks are darn unreliable (I've had several die on me, and without a clean room there's not a lot I can do). That doesn't mean the motherboard won't fail, though. -tony

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

USING classic machines

by ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk

> BUT- > viewing a photo on a CRT in 16 million colors is still 100% better than > having only 16 colors...<G> There was a thing that came out in 1979/1980 called an I2S model 70 image processor. It used (in at least one configuration) _30_ bits per pixel, although only at a resolution of 512*512 pixels. If you're only used to home micros I can understand why you think old machines can't display 'photo-quality' images, but there were plenty of larger machines that are now turning up second-hand at prices that collectors can afford that have significant graphics abilities. -tony > >

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Video game machine/Computer With 6800 Processor

by manney＠nwohio.com

> It came out approx at the same time as the Atari 400/800 series > (78-79?) > > I remember seeing an ad on it and the heading of the ad was > "imagination machine". Mattel?

28 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

Domestic Commercial Computing Power

by ccm＠sentex.net

Great idea to include peripherals. Never thought of that. I would rather you see a sample of the book before making a purchase decision. Please reply with your postal address and I send a few pages - don't have scanned copies for faxing or emailing. Kevin Stumpf

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Historical Research

by ccm＠sentex.net

Nope no serial number info. Thanks for the encouragement about the CD version. Kevin Stumpf

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

USING classic machines

by allisonp＠world.std.com

> Here's an interesting idea, now that mini Linux seems to be up and > running, there appears to be a good code base for porting it over to othe > old 8 bit and 16 bit chips. The TI-99/4a, RS COCO, PDP-11, and old S-100 > based z80 (with MMU) boxes appear to be good candidates. Yes... there is UZI unix was on the z80 already so it's doable. > Yes yes yes yes. SVGA is a *TOY* compared to what was available > to those with million dollar budgets 20 years ago. The old hardware ran > slower in clock speed but was most certainly capable of *extream* high By 1986 1280x1024 color was about $25k and small (allowing for the 19" monitor). MicrovaxII/gpx... now you can find them in dumpsters. > PDP-11 hardware is still widely available. You could build > youself a functinal Qbus LSI-11/73 or 83 for less than $500 easy. Most o > this hardware is sitting in old factories and still in production. There > are many hardware outlets out there such as ELI in cambridge MA, which At $500 I'd have a killer PDP11. Most of mine are scrap/salvage or trades. I'm letting a PDP11/23b go for very little as I have one and they are common enough and powerful enough to run multiuser OS or one of the unixes out there. > ;-) You might also want to think of a decent used microVAX.... wonderful > machine based on the same Qbus. I got a working vs2000 from someone elses dumpster trip so they are common and they can do eithernet, PPP, 1280x1024 graphics (color was an option), 6-16mb of ram in a 1cuft box witha 160w powersupply (small PC!). The real trick is getting a disk (rd54 was the largest supported at 150mb) as SCSI is there but not bootable other than DEC tk50 tape. The other problem is an OS though DEC has made VMS6.1 available with a free license, compared to VMS DOS is a toy! There are people doing a netBSD for it as well. Other boxsized vaxen are 3100 and friends most being very high performance (2.5-3VUP, a 780=1VUP). larger MicrovaxII configs are common and generally free to cheap and most of the same thing apply save for bigger. Even the BA123 boxed VAXen are under 500w in practice, since most pcs are in the 230-270 watt range it's not as bad as it would seem. Other small vaxen in the "Sbox" incluude the 3400, 3500. they are faster and still pre-1990.. The older Vax 780/1/2/5 systems are three good sized racks plus and serious power. The later smaller (slower) 730s are one to two short (40") racks and under 1000w for mall configs (save 1 or 2 ra80/81 disks). RA81 is 200mb IMS. The next faster was the 750 and that can also run on household power but, just barely. Allison

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Panasonic Handhelds

by dastar＠crl.com

PANASONIC HANDHELD UPDATE: This is the latest message from Mike who has the hundreds of Panasonic HandHeld computers. In case its not obvious what's going on, I put in an offer of $10 each for 50, $9 each for 100, $8 each for 150, etc. I don't have $2000 lying around with which to buy them all up. I have a plan, but first read what Mike had to say: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 10:39:01 -0400 (EDT) From: Mikeooo1(a)aol.com To: dastar(a)crl.com Subject: Re: EPROM Burners re: Classic Computers Dear Sam, I believe the total number of HHC's available will be about 400.Based on your offer I assume that for 150 of the units you would be willing to pay at the rate of $10 for the first 50,$9 for the next 50, $8 for the next 50 and $7 for the next 50 whcih would come to $1700 for 200 units.Would you be interested in 300 units for $2000 even?To make the offer even sweeter I'll throw in the memory expander trays with each unit.The cost for each tray alone was well over $100 when they were purchased,as well as a quantity of the MCM 68674 8K eprom chips that the programs were written on. As always Best Regards, Mike ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ END FORWARD So here's my plan...anyone and everyone who is interested, reply to ME (do not reply to classiccmp! People will hate you and want to drown your pets!) telling me how many you want. Do this soon. I will save all of your e-mails and then at the end of say, 10 days I will tally up the total and make Mike an offer. So again... Reply to ME only (dastar(a)crl.com) Tell me HOW MANY of the Panasonic HandHeld Computers you want. Do it SOON. You have about 10 days. Price will be NO MORE THAN $10 EACH. I'll get back to everyone in 10 days or so. Sam ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer, Jackass

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

DOS 2.11 software (fwd)

by more＠camlaw.rutgers.edu

OK guys, here is a request I got, maybe someone can help this poor guy! Thanks, Les ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 08:26:19 -0400 (EDT) From: KenpoKidJB(a)aol.com To: more(a)camlaw.Rutgers.EDU Subject: software hey, i went to your web site, but didn't find what i wanted. i'm looking for dos 2.11 programs that will run off of a 3.5" floppy. most specifically, i'm especially looking for games. any kind will do, but even more specifically, i'm looking for text driven adventure games, as my kaypro 2000 LCD screen doesn't do very well with graphics!! so, let me know what you can do for me.. i really appreciate it. Jeremiah

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

which month?

by e.tedeschi＠ndirect.co.uk

I wonder if anybody here has the *exact* months of introduction of the three first *real* home computers introduced in 1977: a) the Apple II b) the Tandy TRS-80 c) the Commodore Pet I need them for a book on collecting home computers I am researching for. Thank you enrico -- ================================================================ Enrico Tedeschi, 54, Easthill Drive, BRIGHTON BN41 2FD, U.K. tel/fax +(0)1273 701650 (24 hours) or 0850 104725 mobile website <http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~e.tedeschi> ================================================================ visit Brighton: <http://www.brighton.co.uk/tourist/welcome.htm>

28 years, 5 months

5
6
0 0

Computer Usage & Commodore internet...

by foxnhare＠goldrush.com

Well some of my collection gets a good workout. The most notable is the Commodore 64 running my BBS, the Silicon Realms, which has been on-line for just over 10 years using 64s (this is the second 64, before it the BBS was running on my then only 64 and my 128 for a while, all the original computers still work.) I would say that this BBS is probably one of the most stable low-end BBSs it can run litterally for weeks (it is networked to other boards, mind you) without nary a crash. Nowadays I can bump my commie BBS to 14.4k and have a 20mghz accelerator to keep up with the big bards, but alot of that stuff isn't considered classic yet... Across the room (more like spin around in the chair) is the 128, which I still use to program stuff on as well as create disks for people and stuff, lately it has seen increased use. A PET and a couple 64s made it out of storage for my last BBS gathering and helped entertain attendees. (Many of the IBM gamers fondly remembered and played on the 64s for a while.) I think I'll bring more classics to future ones, (I hope to have asteroids for the Atari by then, it has a 4-player game option). ------------ Currently most of the Commodore 64/128 users on the internet are using terminals and connecting via provider's shell-accounts. There is a version of SLIP for the Commodore and also a HTML viewer (off-line from what I gather), but more and more word on bigger and better things coming "real soon now". The Wave, a terminal for the GEOS environment is supposed to have text HTML viewing capabilities, graphics is a pretty big hurdle for our little machines, it's not in the size per se (images can be scaled down), but in the volume of processing these huge image files will require, many of which are 2 to 5 times our computer's memory! But that never stopped the determined hacker. 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 -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

weekend additions

by allisonp＠world.std.com

> a digital microvax ][ I assume you man a MicroVAXII, only apple used the ][. > it's big. i thought a ps2 model 80 was big, but this eclipses it. not test > yet, but i need info on what it is, what it did, and is it worth keeping? Ba23, ba123 or ba213 box? There were also the 1cuft vaxen (vs2000). IF you think the vax was big the 21" color monitor dwarfed it! > being used to the pc world i didnt see monitor/keyb connections. should i > an ascii terminal to conenct to it to use it? it has a door on the front w > something behind it (tape?) but it's locked down. if anyone can point me t > faq id be grateful. Around back of the unit. Depending on version it was terminal (vt100/220/320...) or vr290/320 monitor mouse and keyboard. Allison

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

which month?

by allisonp＠world.std.com

> I have a book about marketing, written by a Tandy VP which has a large > chapter on the birh of the TRS-80. He mentioned the day of the first > produced unit, (sept 15th I think) and game totals for the first months > or two (It seemed they only managed 3 computer a day for the first week > or two). The august/september was the dates!. Also the first few months were a learning experience for TANDY ftworth as they didn't know how to properly handle mos devices, inline QC and do testing non destructively. The early yeilds were horrendously low! The dry air and mishandling ment most of the mos and much ttl were no good by time the were in the board or were killed on the board. I vaguly remember saying when I saw the way things were beign done "you have got to be kidding!" and several people stated investigating ESD procedure and manufacturing QC. Allison

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

USING classic machines

by allisonp＠world.std.com

> A microVAX or any of the VAXEN is NOT a home computer. I know that PC's > were not the first ones to do it and never claimed it, and what I am talki Define home computer? In the early days of PCs(xt class) pro350s, PDP11 with color graphics and hard disk. These were single user multitasking systems in the same price range asna loaded xt. > about is the person who still uses his apple ][, and has never touched > anything else, saying everything else is junk. sure a Mini workstation ca > do it, no question about it, but I *KNOW* that a kaypro, apple ][+ C=64, > coleco ADAM, 8 bit Ataris and other HOME computers of that era CAN'T handl Thein lies my point. These were the low end of the spectrum, low cost and performance at the low end of the spectrum for what the cpu used could do. Though the apple was one of the better ones. Really, an ADAM and interestig machine uses a z80 it was slow compared to many due to how it was implemented. Same for many others. C64s/128 are fast machines... throttled to slow by a slow serial link to the disk. Every one of those machines were interesting but crippled perfomance wise. Granted often it was done for cost reasons. Even the kaypro, while fairly fast has the slowest screen on the planet. I say that lovingly as I have one but while it can transfer files at 9600 if it writes to screen 2400 may be too fast. This is not an inditement of their collectability or other interesting ideas they brought forward. It is a cold assessment of their performance when measured against their respective CPU standards (1980 z80-4mhz, 6502-2mhz, 6800-2mhz, 6809-2mhz, ti9900-3.3mhz, 8086/8-5mhz...) and what they could do when run at that performance level. So when you say the ti99/4a was to slow to do real IP or multiuser(acceptably) it was the TI99/4a not the 9900 cpu or other 9900 designs which could. Allison

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Modern Apps on Old Machines

by allisonp＠world.std.com

> lynx is nice, as I use it for fast FTP, but when I read about a PDP11, it > nice to see a picture of one, rather just text. Most people were running altairs and the like in 78... I was a friend started with one in '76. But in 78 he decided a H-11 bas a better deal. H-11 was a DEC LSI-11 cpu card with heathkit made boards around them that were DEC look alikes and a OS that was RT-11 look alike. All of a sudden minies weren't too big or out of range. > everyone forgets is that having limited memory is a pain, > and TCP/IP alone uses 64K in ONE SOCKET ALONE as a buffer. That was true even of most PDP-11s. What the -11 (most minies) had were more efficient IO even if it was floppies. > You have a good point there, and it would work sorta, but patience runs th > after awhile, as decoding images at 1 MHZ does take 1 min, times that wit > 10 or so inlines you will find at every web page, and waiting 10 mins for This is a problem for me with the 486dx/50 and 33.6 modem. Most fo the images unless compressed really do not require much processing (GIFs). > its not about apps, its about efficincy, and operator comfort. VGA or SVG > is worth it becuse it prevents eyestrain, and you can use your system for > longer amounts of time. I used color TV's before when I got started, and > serious word processing was painful to the eyes. RGB's are better, but no I've been using h-19s, vt100s for years to get past the TV displays that generally are low res. > by much. also its about speed. The ability to cut and paste is underrated > as in serious work, it saves gobs of time. I love command line interfaces I could cut and past using editors for cp/m back in '80. Cut and past is an editing feature not a system capability. PCs running windows make it latent on the screen all of the time, thats the difference. When some one said a home machine in say...'80 it was appleII, trs80, S100 or SS50(6800/6809). At that time people that had PDP-8s, -11s, DG novas were scarce. By '86 most of the minies were old and getting accessable cheap and not all were large either!. Move to 1990, people are collecting vaxes (the 780 was new in '78) as most of the 7xx series systems were going to junk. the 730s/750s though slow were small enough to consider for a home. What's forgotten is by 1990 a lot of stuff was over 5-10 years old. Now in 1997, microvaxes (ca 1986-7) are for dumpster diving and these little gems are not slow nor are they under powered and they had VGA or better capabilities and they are collectable. Now what you said is true of many systems. I'd never try to run a modem program on my TI99 at faster than 1200 as it will not keep up. Then again it was by the standards of the time very very slow! It was neat. My systems for the late '70s were s100 for flexibility and speed. I found myself looking at canned systems like TRS80, apple and felt most fo the time like I was running a fuel dragster compared to that. But I was running networks and the like in '81 because I knew of them and could design my own to save a buck (they existed for home computers but were expensive). I got my first PDP-11 in '83 for FREE because the lsi-11 boards and memory were old! It was my first save! The -11 introduced me to small minies, and big performance. Some required a scope and series debugging to get them going but the cost offset that (free). It would be years (1991) before PCs would eclipse the power of the various PDP-11s (many of the 11/23 design) and the software maturity behind it. Many computer consumers knew they wanted performance. It was minies where more could be found. I'd point out that many of the minies were disguised. Alpha Microsystems(ca 1977) had the same chip set as the LSI-11 with a slightly different instruction set modification and was s100, still the same capability. There was the Western Digital Pascal Microengine, Marinechip (PDP-11 in s100), pdt-11/150, Pro350 to name a few that were either pre-pc or on the PC introduction cusp.While home computing was commodores and apples and trs80 they were the appliance machines for many. There was always a core of those that felt they were nice and had good ideas but, they wanted more. Allison

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Archiving & other news

by kyrrin＠wizards.net

Well, I see some rumblings in the group about archiving (among other things) EPROMs and other such chips. I think it's a great idea! I will assist as much as I can, considering that I certainly have the equipment for it (Data I/O UniSite, current rev). I can read or program just about anything that comes in a DIP package that is programmable to begin with (including PALs if the security fuse isn't blown). In other news... A Scrounging I Will Go! I'm off to the Bay Area as of Saturday next week (the 5th) for a major see-what's-changed trip, to say nothing of hitting two swap meets (Livermore and Foothill) and seeing what other kinds of trouble I can get into. Sam, watch for an E-mail. I'd like to get in touch with you when I hit the area. For those who have visited my web page, I'll be giving the scrounging section a major facelift and update after I get back. Caveat Emperor! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- 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..."

28 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

weekend additions

by SUPRDAVE＠aol.com

i need some help on what i found this weekend. a trs80 model III 48k. came with trsdos disk, but i havent tested it yet. can anyone point to a source of software. now i need a model ][ to fill in the blanks! a digital microvax ][ it's big. i thought a ps2 model 80 was big, but this eclipses it. not tested yet, but i need info on what it is, what it did, and is it worth keeping? being used to the pc world i didnt see monitor/keyb connections. should i get an ascii terminal to conenct to it to use it? it has a door on the front with something behind it (tape?) but it's locked down. if anyone can point me to a faq id be grateful. there was plenty of xt's and the old pc peripheral expansion unit i might get also. total cost <$20. david

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Source for Syquest 44mb cartridges.

by more＠camlaw.rutgers.edu

Recently I got a SyQuest SQ555 Removable drive (44mb/SCSI) for free. I have been looking for cartridges that fir this drive but so far no luck. (Well, I did find one place that still sold them but they wanted $40 a piece for 'em). If anyone knows of a cheap(er) place to get these babies, please let me know! Thanks, les more(a)crazy.rutgers.edu

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

USING classic machines

by allisonp＠world.std.com

> going for a while. I don't know that Dr. Shoppa using all that classic > DEC machinery at his Canadian university qualifies as doing "ordinary hom > applications", although I'm delighted to hear that the old junk is still > providing useful service (heck, at Hughes here, we have PDP-11s running I have six all operational two get regular use. BEsides my CP/M systems >from before the flood. > >modern MAC or PC, they have NO idea what is bieng missed. web pages in fu > >photo quality color, realistic games, PPP connections, Realaudio etc. I a Well, much of this I used to do back around '85 using microvax in color with a 1280x1024 19" screen! Asa to much of the other stuff it's all hardware much of which saw it origins on s100, Q and other busses. Allison

28 years, 5 months

3
2
0 0

USING classic machines

by cerebral＠michianatoday.com

At 12:00 AM 6/28/97 -0400, you wrote: > >> also about enough ram space...NOT! >> I have some software for the C=64 that plays back digital sound files. wit >> the stock 64K of ram, I can hold a 6 second clip. with the 1764 ram >> expansion with 512K of ram, I can hold a 60 second clip, but no longer tha > >Funny my s100 crate can playback easily 8mb and using a modified os 32mb >of sound. In this case a well designed hard disk system (circa 1982) >easily keeps up without eating ram. On a z80 at 4mhz. Oh, the disk size >was limited by budget! Even in 1982 hard disks were plenty fast enough to >support fast DACs or audio. > >Allison That is because the software you run want work well enough at 1 MHZ... and if you want to edit, that is where the heap requirement goes up.

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

USING classic machines

by cerebral＠michianatoday.com

At 06:20 PM 6/27/97 -0400, you wrote: > >Well, much of this I used to do back around '85 using microvax in color with ^^^^^^^ >a 1280x1024 19" screen! Asa to much of the other stuff it's all hardware >much of which saw it origins on s100, Q and other busses. > >Allison A microVAX or any of the VAXEN is NOT a home computer. I know that PC's were not the first ones to do it and never claimed it, and what I am talking about is the person who still uses his apple ][, and has never touched anything else, saying everything else is junk. sure a Mini workstation can do it, no question about it, but I *KNOW* that a kaypro, apple ][+ C=64, coleco ADAM, 8 bit Ataris and other HOME computers of that era CAN'T handle it.

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Modern Apps on Old Machines

by cerebral＠michianatoday.com

At 02:52 PM 6/27/97 -0700, you wrote: >A different thought - I don't really buy the argument for owning a modern >machine for the purposes of "better" games. But the Web browser thing is >slightly different, being a VERY powerful and useful communication method. I agree with you here, and games are fun, but that depends on what you like. I love the internet, and I learned ALOT from it. sure a shell account with lynx is nice, as I use it for fast FTP, but when I read about a PDP11, it is nice to see a picture of one, rather just text. > >I have heard that the C64 and Atari 8-bit machines now have graphical Web >browsers and PPP clients running on them. The TI community is working on >a TCP/IP system, but we were debating the possibility of a Web browser. I have dreamed of writing one, and I don't know if someone else has done it, and if they did, I would grab a copy right away. The main problem that everyone forgets is that having limited memory is a pain, and TCP/IP alone uses 64K in ONE SOCKET ALONE as a buffer. >The argument I and others made in its defense was, granted the stock >hardware is incapable of SVGA-grade graphical displays, with appropriate >decoding, you can get "close" (with sufficient processing time), and if >you have to "scroll" around to see the entire page, so what? You have a good point there, and it would work sorta, but patience runs thin after awhile, as decoding images at 1 MHZ does take 1 min, times that with 10 or so inlines you will find at every web page, and waiting 10 mins for a page to load would make it a fustrating experiance. heck, on days where there is severe net lag (especially on fridays), it takes 10 mins for the data to arrive even for fast machines! <G> It is a cool idea though, and it would be interesting to see if this can be pulled off. >1. Am I correct in what I have heard of the C64 and Atari 8-bitters? > >2. Is this a reasonable argument for "home computers" being fit out for >browsing? Or is it silly when $2000 (maybe even below $1000) can get you >a Web-capable peecee? You dont have to spend this much to have a fast PC (or MAC), all you need is to hunt around... AND NEVER BUY RETAIL SYSTEMS!!! like packard smell..... > >3. What other apps are there that are REALLY useful for home use that >modern machines have and "home computers" don't? And is is really its not about apps, its about efficincy, and operator comfort. VGA or SVGA is worth it becuse it prevents eyestrain, and you can use your system for longer amounts of time. I used color TV's before when I got started, and serious word processing was painful to the eyes. RGB's are better, but not by much. also its about speed. The ability to cut and paste is underrated, as in serious work, it saves gobs of time. I love command line interfaces, as well as GUI's, but typing long commandlines to just load a directory, its nice just to be able to type LS -l and get the same result. and if you think about it, these nice classic machines we love EVOLVED to be the modern ones we got now, and I understand the resentment of microsnot, as I hate them too, but I can't understand the resentment of the modern machines. Yes some say they cost too much, but that can be solved. I see people go gaga over a PCjr, and while that make a nice collectors item, it is the least usefull home computer EVER made. and yes most apps used for home perposes dont need the latest and greatest, however, a modern machine is far more veratle in the power department, and the classics are more versatle in the hardware department. >impossible to do these tasks on "home computers"? Is it worth the time >and effort (even out of love) to write the software, or even create the >new peripherals, to enable the old iron to do the job? > It is worth the time to develop the software when you need it only if the results are the same if you used somthing already out there on a capable machine. I wrote MANY small utilitys for the Commodore, simply because they did not exist in my area. and while it is fun to do it out of love, it does get tiring reinventing the wheel all the time. more time went into the devleopment than in actual use when it was done. I did write a budget/checkbook balancing program in BASIC, used it a few times, the it got bit rot, because i never had any money left to manage :) all in all, if the machine you use now does all what you want, thats great! but the day WILL come where you just need to have a feature that you have not got now. that is just the way the computing cookie crumbles.

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

BASF Extra 120 tape carthridges

by dastar＠crl.com

Can anyone use a mess of BASF Extra 120 (ultra stabilized) tape carthridges? I don't know much more about them beyond what is written on them. We get these at work every week and my accountant just tosses them because she has no use for them (we get records on them from PacBell for accounting stuff). I could collect these and send them off to someone every month if they want to pay for shipping in advance. Sam ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer, Jackass

28 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

which month?

by jimw＠agora.rdrop.com

At 01:25 PM 6/27/97 -0600, you wrote: >On Fri, 27 Jun 1997, e.tedeschi wrote: > >>I wonder if anybody here has the *exact* months of introduction of the >>three first *real* home computers introduced in 1977: > >>a) the Apple II > >Okay, all sources for the Apple II seem to agree that it was introduced in >April, but what date? From memory I would've said April 17th. I decided >to confirm this with a quick web search and came up with two dates! > >http://www.research.apple.com/extras/history/ > >puts the date at April 20, 1977 while > >http://www.kelleyad.com/histry.htm > >puts the date at April 17, 1977. Both of these sources have the >credentials to be accurate. Which date was it? Surely someone here >knows. Well... will have to find the program to check the dates, but the Apple II was *introduced* at the opening day of the First West Coast Computer Faire in San Francisco. (I was there - Jim Warren had some *great* stories around that event!) It created the biggest buzz at the show as I recall... And then there was that joke that Woz played on Jobs and all of the Altair fans... (but I'll get to that later) -jim --- jimw(a)agora.rdrop.com The Computer Garage - http://www.rdrop.com/~jimw Computer Garage Fax - (503) 646-0174

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

USING classic machines

by allisonp＠world.std.com

> also about enough ram space...NOT! > I have some software for the C=64 that plays back digital sound files. wit > the stock 64K of ram, I can hold a 6 second clip. with the 1764 ram > expansion with 512K of ram, I can hold a 60 second clip, but no longer tha Funny my s100 crate can playback easily 8mb and using a modified os 32mb of sound. In this case a well designed hard disk system (circa 1982) easily keeps up without eating ram. On a z80 at 4mhz. Oh, the disk size was limited by budget! Even in 1982 hard disks were plenty fast enough to support fast DACs or audio. Allison

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

USING classic machines

by cerebral＠michianatoday.com

At 07:22 AM 6/27/97 -0800, you wrote: >> > modern MAC or PC, they have NO idea what is bieng missed. web pages in full > ^^^^ >> > photo quality color, realistic games, PPP connections, Realaudio etc. I am > ^^^^^ > > >Really? Full photo quality? My early 1940's Speed Graphic makes >4" x 5" (100mm x 125mm) negatives with roughly 160 dpmm resolution. >(Admittedly, with a lens that's stopped down considerably...) >That's roughly 16000 x 20000 pixels, using technology that's over >50 years old. SuperVGA and CRT's have a long, long, way to go before >they catch up. > >Tim. (shoppa(a)triumf.ca) > you are technically correct, BUT- viewing a photo on a CRT in 16 million colors is still 100% better than having only 16 colors...<G>

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Xerox (RE: Lisa's scores)

by kaikal＠MICROSOFT.com

The first GUI system was the Xerox Alto. It was desk-sized. The commercial model was the Xerox Star, which was somewhat smaller (c.1977) The Xerox Alto appears to have introduced: - Bitmapped displays - BitBLT raster operations - Cursor changes to show system mode - GUI menus and Popup menus - Overlapped windows - Tiled windows - Scroll bars - Push buttons, radio buttons, check boxes - Dialog boxes - Multiple fonts and styles visible in text - Cut/Copy/Paste with a mouse The Lisa UI appears to have introduced: - Pull-down menus - Menu bars - Disabling (graying) of menu items - Command-key shortcust for menu items - Check marks on menu items The book "Fumbling the Future: How Xerox Invented, Then Ignored, the First Personal Computer" by Douglas Smith and Robert Alexander, states that Xerox voluntarily offered the UI elements to Steve Jobs. Apple does not appear to have "stolen" the ideas. Kai > ---------- > From: Daniel A. Seagraves > Reply To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 1997 2:11 PM > To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers > Subject: Re: Lisa's scores > > On Thu, 26 Jun 1997 starling(a)umr.edu wrote: > > > > Actually, Xerox had a working GUI-based system (the name eludes me > at the > > > moment) well before the LISA, which is where Jobs got his > inspiration > > Was it Smalltalk? > I got a picture of that, somewhere... >

28 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

Modern Apps on Old Machines

by manney＠nwohio.com

Let's not forget that old machines were, in their day, designed to be used by *mainstream* users. So, let's look at the people who would -- nowadays -- use old machines. 1) Newbies/inexperienced users. Are these people willing to put up inadequate documentation, unbelievably klunky software with *no* tech support? No -- no more than they were willing to when the machines were new. 2) Power users? most would laugh at the idea of using a "relic". They would be no more caught dead with one than a photographic toy-boy would with a point-and-shoot camera (altho' many pros, with nothing to prove, use P&S's as cheap backup cameras. Don't tell anyone <g>) 3) People who love it? few and far between. Sure, you can do e-mail, use lynx to check out the web on an XT (I cheat...I use a 386SX lap top with a 2400 baud modem). Using an old machine to perform routine tasks -- tasks for which the machines were originally designed and sold -- in no way ennobles the person who does so...it's just a hobby, rife with the same inconveniences that plague any undertaking. Most people have some sort of hobby, (altho' usually not as technical) and go through the same inconveniences we do, working with their love. I do a fair amount of photographic retouching on my P-133. I need large amounts of disk space (up to 30 MB per), memory, processing speed -- otherwise, I just can't do it. (I can't just go have a cup of coffee.) I do publication and page layout, and WSYWIG is an enormous convenience. (sure, LaTeX on the VAX gives me nice output. Give me Microsoft Publisher to get work done a lot faster...I have to feed my family.) As an engineer, I used to do finite element analysis on rubber products. Running on a 486-50 (the fastest available at the time) a single job would run overnight. Try *that* on a PDP-11! The point? (He finally gets to one!)Many tasks can be accomplished easily on an XT running 1-2-3 or QEDIT -- sure. But, many jobs are now possible to do on a garden-variety PC (mac) which were impossible to perform on older machines.

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Modern Apps on Old Machines

by allisonp＠world.std.com

Many of the midrange minies like the PDP-11, perq, and a host of others can and did do much of the web thing. much of the old machines don't do that was not a matter of speed or memory but software conceived to do that. is it practical not finance wise the user population is too small and would not pay much but the hardware can make a good account of itself. Keep in mind most of the PCs have only gotten to or exceeded the minicomputer performance level say in the last 7 years maybe less. Before then people used all manner of things to accomplish was PCs are commonly used for. Allison

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Modern Apps on Old Machines

by dlormand＠aztec.asu.edu

>I do use my old machines now and then, but if anyone here has never ran a >modern MAC or PC, they have NO idea what is bieng missed. web pages in full >photo quality color, realistic games, PPP connections, Realaudio etc. I am >not a member of the dark force, I just have a multitude of machines, and I >have EXPERIANCED running them, from an apple ][ +, C=64, IBM XT, and a 586-133. >we must have an open mind about this, as there are some who still never ran >anything NEW, and pass judgment about how bad a machine is when they have >never used one. A different thought - I don't really buy the argument for owning a modern machine for the purposes of "better" games. But the Web browser thing is slightly different, being a VERY powerful and useful communication method. I have heard that the C64 and Atari 8-bit machines now have graphical Web browsers and PPP clients running on them. The TI community is working on a TCP/IP system, but we were debating the possibility of a Web browser. The argument I and others made in its defense was, granted the stock hardware is incapable of SVGA-grade graphical displays, with appropriate decoding, you can get "close" (with sufficient processing time), and if you have to "scroll" around to see the entire page, so what? 1. Am I correct in what I have heard of the C64 and Atari 8-bitters? 2. Is this a reasonable argument for "home computers" being fit out for browsing? Or is it silly when $2000 (maybe even below $1000) can get you a Web-capable peecee? 3. What other apps are there that are REALLY useful for home use that modern machines have and "home computers" don't? And is is really impossible to do these tasks on "home computers"? Is it worth the time and effort (even out of love) to write the software, or even create the new peripherals, to enable the old iron to do the job? -- ********************************************** * David Ormand *** Southwest 99ers * * dlormand(a)aztec.asu.edu *** Tucson, Arizona * **************************** TMS9900 Lives! *

28 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

USING classic machines

by dlormand＠aztec.asu.edu

I am glad to hear that others, like myself, commonly use a "non-mainstream" machine for ordinary home applications. I would like to keep this discussion going for a while. I don't know that Dr. Shoppa using all that classic DEC machinery at his Canadian university qualifies as doing "ordinary home applications", although I'm delighted to hear that the old junk is still providing useful service (heck, at Hughes here, we have PDP-11s running AMRAAM test equipment, and HP-1000s running Tomahawk test equipment). >But it depends upon what you are doing. While in theory you could >calculate e to 100,000 digits using an Apple ][, it might take upwards of a >week for the results, and you couldn't use the computer in the meantime, >whereas on modern machines, 100,000 digits could be generated in under an >hour, and with the right OS, you could still work on other things [1]. I would also hesitate to say that calculating e to 100,000th digits is an ordinary household task. As is graphics arts, desktop publishing, audio mixing, and a lot of other things that some people do in their homes for fun or profit. Obviously you need the tools for the job. But nearly EVERYTHING you do for common home jobs can be done on the "home computers" that were sold for the purpose nearly 20 years ago. >I do use my old machines now and then, but if anyone here has never ran a >modern MAC or PC, they have NO idea what is bieng missed. web pages in full >photo quality color, realistic games, PPP connections, Realaudio etc. I am >not a member of the dark force, I just have a multitude of machines, and I >have EXPERIANCED running them, from an apple ][ +, C=64, IBM XT, and a 586-133. >we must have an open mind about this, as there are some who still never ran >anything NEW, and pass judgment about how bad a machine is when they have >never used one. I really have no dispute with people with modern machines. [Especially Macs or BeOS machines, for instance; peecees to me are primarily means for the Microsoft empire to attain world domination.] My beef is: (a) When these people look down on you for sticking with your "toy" computer when theirs is obviously so much more superior to yours, (b) People mislead by the above people into thinking that they MUST have a Pentium-class peecee to balance their checkbooks on, (c) User/owners of "non-mainstream" machines dumping them when they swallow the propaganda that they MUST have a peecee or they will be hopelessly left behind. The obvious reason the collectors in this List can acquire the classic machines for pennies from thrift stores is that people who donate to or shop at these thrift stores believe this is worthless junk that isn't capable of doing anything useful. I (and others on this List) KNOW that is false, but what can you do? How do you raise a voice of opposition in the face of the Wintel juggernaut? -- ********************************************** * David Ormand *** Southwest 99ers * * dlormand(a)aztec.asu.edu *** Tucson, Arizona * **************************** TMS9900 Lives! *

28 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

which month?

by kaikal＠MICROSOFT.com

Here's the list I keep. Sorry about the formatting. Kai November, 1971 Intel 4004 CPU 1971 Nutting & Associates Computer Space arcade 1972 Atari Pong arcade 1972 Magnavox Odyssey home video game system November, 1972 Intel 8008 CPU March, 1974 Scelbi 8H kit appears in QST magazine April, 1974 Intel 8080 CPU July, 1974 Mark 8 plans appear in Radio Electronics magazine August, 1974 Motorola 6800 1974 RCA 1802 CPU 1974 Atari Pong home game January, 1975 MITS Altair 8800 September, 1975 IBM 5100 1975 IMSAI 8080 1975 Processor Technology Sol 1975 MOS Technology/Commodore KIM-1 July, 1976 Apple I kit July, 1976 Zilog Z80 CPU 1976 Fairchild/Zircon Channel F home game April, 1977 Apple II April, 1977 Commodore PET August, 1977 Tandy TRS-80 1977 Atari 2600 VCS home game 1977 RCA Studio II home game 1977 Bally Astrocade home game 1978 Intel 8085 CPU June, 1978 Intel 8086 CPU December, 1978 Atari 400/800 s 1978 Taito/Bally/Midway Space Invaders arcade 1978 Magnavox Odyssey2 home game February, 1979 Intel 8088 CPU May, 1979 Seattle Products 8086 S-100 CPU board May, 1979 Tandy TRS-80 Model II June, 1979 Texas Instruments 99/4 June, 1979 Apple II+ September, 1979 Motorola 68000 CPU 1979 Atari Asteroids arcade 1979 Atari Lunar Lander arcade 1979 Mattel Intellivision home game February, 1980 Sinclair ZX80 June, 1980 Commodore VIC-20 July, 1980 Tandy TRS-80 Model III July, 1980 Tandy TRS-80 Color I September, 1980 Apple III 1980 Atari Battlezone arcade 1980 Atari Missile Command arcade 1980 Bally/Midway Pac-Man arcade 1980 APF M1000 home game April, 1981 Osborne 1 May, 1981 Xerox Star August, 1981 IBM PC 1981 Atari Centipede arcade 1981 Nintendo Donkey Kong arcade November, 1982 Compaq Portable PC 1982 Commodore 64 1982 Colecovision home game 1982 GCE/Milton Bradley Vectrex home game 1982 Milton Bradley Microvision hand held game 1982 Atari 5200 home game 1982 Emerson Arcadia 2001 home game January, 1983 Apple Lisa January, 1983 Apple Iie March, 1983 Tandy TRS-80 Model 100 April, 1983 Tandy TRS-80 Model 4 June, 1983 Coleco Adam October, 1983 IBM PC-XT October, 1983 Compaq Portable Plus December, 1983 Apple III+ 1983 Mattel Intellivision II home game 1983 Mattel Aquarius January, 1984 Apple Macintosh February, 1984 IBM Portable PC March, 1984 IBM PCjr April, 1984 Apple IIc June, 1984 Compaq DeskPro August, 1984 IBM PC-AT September, 1984 Tandy 1000 1984 Motorola 68010 CPU 1984 Intel 80186 CPU 1984 Intel 80286 CPU January, 1985 Commodore 128 January, 1985 Atari 520ST January, 1985 Atari XE January, 1985 Apple Macintosh XL April, 1985 Compaq DeskPro 286 April, 1985 Compaq Portable 286 July, 1985 Commodore Amiga 1000 1985 Nintendo Entertainment System January, 1986 Apple Macintosh Plus February, 1986 Compaq Portable II April, 1986 IBM PC Convertible August, 1986 Intel 80386 CPU September, 1986 Compaq DeskPro 386 September, 1986 IBM PC-XT 286 1986 Sega Master System home game 1986 Atari 7800 March, 1987 Apple Macintosh II April, 1987 IBM PS/2 October, 1987 Compaq Portable 386 1987 Motorola 68030 CPU > ---------- > From: e.tedeschi > Reply To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu > Sent: Friday, June 27, 1997 4:39 AM > To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers > Subject: which month? > > I wonder if anybody here has the *exact* months of introduction of the > > three first *real* home computers introduced in 1977: > > a) the Apple II > b) the Tandy TRS-80 > c) the Commodore Pet > > I need them for a book on collecting home computers I am researching > for. > > Thank you > > enrico > -- > ================================================================ > Enrico Tedeschi, 54, Easthill Drive, BRIGHTON BN41 2FD, U.K. > tel/fax +(0)1273 701650 (24 hours) or 0850 104725 mobile > website <http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~e.tedeschi> > ================================================================ > visit Brighton: <http://www.brighton.co.uk/tourist/welcome.htm> >

28 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

PETs ( was Who was in Australia?)

by jolminkh＠c2.telstra-mm.net.au

---------- > From: Ward Griffiths and/or Lisa Rogers <gram(a)terra.cnct.com> > To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> > Subject: Re: PETs ( was Who was in Australia?) > Date: Sunday, June 22, 1997 4:30 PM > > On Sat, 21 Jun 1997, Olminkhof wrote: > > keyboard 4k version, a CBM 3032 and a CBM 8032 hulk. I suspect they will > > always be around because they are so hard to destroy. The case is very > > solid. I found the "hulk" in a paddock, like some people find ancient cars! > > I've never attempted to power this one up though. > > I take "paddock" is Strine for "junkyard", and open to the elements? "paddock" is an english word for a place where animals graze. > -- > Ward Griffiths > "America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within > the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." --Claire Wolfe

28 years, 5 months

7
10
0 0

IBM 32174

by manney＠nwohio.com

Anyone want IBM 3174, software and a modem? Save it from the dump! Located in Ohio (near Cleveland)

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

USING classic machines

by dlormand＠aztec.asu.edu

>What worries me is that in a lot of cases, the older machines are more >useable than the modern Wintel equivalents. This applies both to a new >user (somebody who just wants to write 2 page letters does _NOT_ (or >should not) need a 166MHz Pentium with 16Mbytes of RAM), and to 'hackers' >who want to understand their machines. It's possible for one person to >complete understand both the hardware and software of most classic >computers - something that (IMHO) is not possible with a Wintel box. >Same here. In reality I use my s100 crate, ampro, and sb180 to produce >8048/9 and 8051 code as they really are faster and easier to use. Also >being as I have them interconnected it's easier to blast proms in the >s100 crate. Efficient, very! I've had nearly 20 years to refine the code >and tools! I have the advantage of having source code for those tools so >and long latent bugs are easily squashed. This is not doable on PCs. >I still do my banking/checkbook on the kaypro! Faster than the PC >overall. For a while there, I was thinking maybe I'm in the wrong group. I see a LOT of traffic about restoring and collecting old computers, and the typical member here is one who has a large collection of different machines, but except for a rare question about boot disks, there isn't much said about using these machines. When I turn on my 99/4A or Geneve, it isn't primarily to bask in a nostalgic glow, but to write something or balance my budget or do some programming. Certainly the nostalgic glow is there, and it adds a dimension to the computing experience that peecee devotees cannot understand. But it IS my primary workhorse, not just a desk queen. Don't get me wrong; I love to hear about these old machines, so keep those messages coming. But I would like to hear from others out there who use their obsolete machines (I prefer "non-mainstream machines") for practical, everyday, household computing uses. In fact, I'm wondering how widespread my idea is (shared by a few, apparently) that the smaller, simpler machines really are well suited for home use, and you don't need a high-end peecee for nearly everything you want to do. -- ********************************************** * David Ormand *** Southwest 99ers * * dlormand(a)aztec.asu.edu *** Tucson, Arizona * **************************** TMS9900 Lives! *

28 years, 5 months

6
7
0 0

pieces of metal and plastic

by manney＠nwohio.com

> Of course if you were a real hacker you had an M-code box that let you > write the native 10 bit (?) instructions for the 41's CPU (I forget what > it's called). I got more into the guts of the HP-71, which was a 20-bit, nybble-oriented. It had a Saturn chip (I think), on which I programmed in FORTH. A FORTH chip was talked about for the HP-41 (never heard it called a coco, though) but I don't know if it jelled.

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Computer Trivia Game

by manney＠nwohio.com

> Anyone remember a trivial-pursuit-like Computer Trivia game? It was being > touted at one of the last West Coast Computer Faires here in San Francisco. > Anyone have a copy? I have computer-based trivia game (shareware, I think) on a CD-ROM. I could dig it up, if anyone want it...it had pretty hard questions, which went 'way back to the dawn of time (you know, like the 1950's :> ))

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

which month?

by bwit＠pobox.com

IIRC the TRS-80 was introduced in September 1977. ---------- From: e.tedeschi Sent: Friday, June 27, 1997 7:39 AM To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers Subject: which month? I wonder if anybody here has the *exact* months of introduction of the three first *real* home computers introduced in 1977: a) the Apple II b) the Tandy TRS-80 c) the Commodore Pet I need them for a book on collecting home computers I am researching for. Thank you enrico -- ================================================================ Enrico Tedeschi, 54, Easthill Drive, BRIGHTON BN41 2FD, U.K. tel/fax +(0)1273 701650 (24 hours) or 0850 104725 mobile website <http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~e.tedeschi> ================================================================ visit Brighton: <http://www.brighton.co.uk/tourist/welcome.htm>

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Northstar Software

by kaikal＠MICROSOFT.com

As much as I would love to get this stuff directly myself, I would much prefer that you send them to Don Maslin, the CP/M boot disk archivist, >from whom I (and many others) can obtain copies. Kai > ---------- > From: Doug Rich > Reply To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 1997 9:27 PM > To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers > Subject: Northstar Software > > I was a northstar dealer for many years and have a box (about the size > of a > case of paper) full of northstar software on original disks. I am not > sure > what to do with them. I would like them to be of some use to someone. > Any suggestions? > > Doug > > Remember... No mater where you go... there you are! >

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

USING classic machines

by cerebral＠michianatoday.com

At 04:07 PM 6/26/97 -0700, you wrote: > > >>What worries me is that in a lot of cases, the older machines are more >>useable than the modern Wintel equivalents. This applies both to a new >>user (somebody who just wants to write 2 page letters does _NOT_ (or >>should not) need a 166MHz Pentium with 16Mbytes of RAM), and to 'hackers' >>who want to understand their machines. It's possible for one person to >>complete understand both the hardware and software of most classic >>computers - something that (IMHO) is not possible with a Wintel box. > >>Same here. In reality I use my s100 crate, ampro, and sb180 to produce >>8048/9 and 8051 code as they really are faster and easier to use. Also >>being as I have them interconnected it's easier to blast proms in the >>s100 crate. Efficient, very! I've had nearly 20 years to refine the code >>and tools! I have the advantage of having source code for those tools so >>and long latent bugs are easily squashed. This is not doable on PCs. > >>I still do my banking/checkbook on the kaypro! Faster than the PC >>overall. > >For a while there, I was thinking maybe I'm in the wrong group. > >I see a LOT of traffic about restoring and collecting old computers, >and the typical member here is one who has a large collection of >different machines, but except for a rare question about boot disks, >there isn't much said about using these machines. When I turn on my >99/4A or Geneve, it isn't primarily to bask in a nostalgic glow, but >to write something or balance my budget or do some programming. >Certainly the nostalgic glow is there, and it adds a dimension to >the computing experience that peecee devotees cannot understand. But >it IS my primary workhorse, not just a desk queen. > >Don't get me wrong; I love to hear about these old machines, so keep >those messages coming. But I would like to hear from others out there >who use their obsolete machines (I prefer "non-mainstream machines") >for practical, everyday, household computing uses. > >In fact, I'm wondering how widespread my idea is (shared by a >few, apparently) that the smaller, simpler machines really are well >suited for home use, and you don't need a high-end peecee for nearly >everything you want to do. > >-- >********************************************** >* David Ormand *** Southwest 99ers * >* dlormand(a)aztec.asu.edu *** Tucson, Arizona * >**************************** TMS9900 Lives! * > I do use my old machines now and then, but if anyone here has never ran a modern MAC or PC, they have NO idea what is bieng missed. web pages in full photo quality color, realistic games, PPP connections, Realaudio etc. I am not a member of the dark force, I just have a multitude of machines, and I have EXPERIANCED running them, from an apple ][ +, C=64, IBM XT, and a 586-133. we must have an open mind about this, as there are some who still never ran anything NEW, and pass judgment about how bad a machine is when they have never used one.

28 years, 5 months

4
3
0 0

(fwd) Apple III computer & Monitor FS (fwd)

by dastar＠crl.com

Thought someone may be interested. Sam ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer, Jackass ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "News User" <tbinet(a)ic.net> Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2.marketplace Subject: Apple III computer & Monitor FS Date: 25 Jun 1997 12:57:25 GMT I have an Apple III computer & Monitor III for sale with Manuals and software for sale, or Trade. Please let me know if you are interested. Robert Please respond to: rdoerr(a)bizserve.com -- Sam ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer, Jackass

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Lisa's scores

by IVIE＠cc.usu.edu

> From hacking Commodore 1541 disks, I have seen that it used a system as you > mentioned above, and in block 0 of each file the first 2 bytes was the load > address if it was a program file, or data in a sequnetial file, and each > block had pointers to the next block. too bad that ms-dos is not as simple.. But MS-DOS _is_ that simple. It just stores the linked list in a different part of the disk than it stores the data... Roger Ivie ivie(a)cc.usu.edu

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Lisa's scores

by allisonp＠world.std.com

> Does anyone have information / know where I could find information on > building a computer using 2901's? I know they were fairly common and > I have (I'm almost positive) a few of the bare chips laying around > home. Find an old (early 80s) copy of the amd or motorola data books. These are bipolar 4 bit slices and can be used to make a fairly fast cpu (10mhz) of variying designs from 4 bit to over 64 bits. Warning microcoding can be habit forming. You will also want 2909/10/11 microcode sequencer chips. Those are less common. It's rather fun designing a cpu to your specs, hten of course you'll write all the other code too as it's one up design. Allison

28 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

Z100 saved from the landfill

by groberts＠mitre.org

thanks to a pointer originally posted on this list i met up with someone yesterday who bequeathed me his old Z-100 (Heath/Zenith pre-pc era dual CPU system). it took me a while to replace a bunch of the keyboard switches (they were gunked up with glue) and some bad video RAM, but now the system hums along nicely. he had souped it up in a number of ways (except no hard disk, darn) and had tons of software. i'll undoubtedly have extra and will post a listing of duplicates at some point in case anyone's interested. he included lots of cp/m stuff including cp/m85 and cp/m86 and, interestingly, mp/m. so thanks for the pointer guys! (P.S. i've noticed a markedly improved signal to noise ratio on this list lately so people are thinking twice before hitting the "send" button with meaningless chatter or flaming comments - let's keep it up!) tx. - glenn +=========================================================+ | Glenn F. Roberts, Falls Church, VA | Comments are my own and not the opinion of my employer | groberts(a)mitre.org

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

C64 CP/M carts

by clark_geisler＠nortel-nsm.com

chemif(a)mbox.queen.it wrote: >At 13:54 23/06/97 -0800, you wrote: >>> On another note, has anyone ever seen (or have) a Basis-xxx? I know it >>> has a number in the name, but I can't remember it. It was an Apple ][ >>> clone that also ran CP/M I believe? Something like that. I'm sure >>> someone knows about it. I only knew one guy who ever had one, but I never >>> saw it. It was a friend in high school back in 1989. >> >>I believe these were designed/built in Europe, probably Germany. > >In Italy there was Lemon computer building Apple-clones. >Has anyone heard about them? Were they actually called 'Lemon's'? That certainly doesn't have a positive connotation in North America! In Canada, a company built Apple II clones called 'Pineapples'. There were probably other fruit-named clones as well! -- Clark Geisler

28 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

USING classic machines

by David_A._Vandenbroucke＠hud.gov

I monitor this mailing list (some might call it lurking) because of all the now-classic machines that I used to own. If I had the room, time, and skill, I might be a collector like most of you, but for now I must be content to watch. I'm glad to see that so many people are still getting use out of these machines. There are certainly times when I wish I understood what was going on inside a Windows 95 box as well as I understood the various Kaypros, the Geneva, the Timex-Sinclair, the Model 100, or the other machines I once used on a daily basis. I suppose that even my Mac SE would qualify as a "classic machine" by now. On the other hand, let's not go overboard and say that you can do as much with those lean, mean computers of yesteryear as you can with today's bloated and overpowered desktop Cadillacs. Despite the processing power and overhead devoted to being more user friendly, today's machines are better at doing most kinds of real work. Okay, if you're just writing business letters or balancing your checkbook, a Kaypro is going to work just as well as a Dell Pentium. But that's only one extreme. When I was working on my dissertation, I wrote a cluster analysis program for my Kaypro II because it was the only machine I had. It took months to write and debug the program (written in S-BASIC), and every time I ran the analysis it took two days--literally, 48+ hours of grinding away. I could do the same thing in seconds using SAS and the P133 machine on which I'm typing this. In fact, I do this sort of thing for a living, and there are so many things that would be a major project on a classic machine which I do now just as a matter of preliminary exploration. And it's not just statistics. Writing reports is much easier with a mouse and multitasking. Getting data from dBASE II to Perfect Calc and then moving the summary table to Wordstar or Perfect Writer was a considerable chore. Yesterday I zapped a bunch of Quattro Pro tables (based on SAS output) over to a Word document, and everything showed up with no trouble, formatting and all. Those are programs written by rival companies, but they can talk to each other just fine. Others have mentioned that it takes more skill and intelligence to use classic software than to point and click. I don't disagree with that, and I'm proud of what I was able to get those machines to do. Learning to use those kinds of computers has given me a better outlook about later ones, and I still tweak my current set up much more than most people (and certainly more than our IT department would like me to). But then, I remember a lot of people in my Kaypro User's Group who never figured out how to use the modems in their 2Xs. Friendlier interfaces have opened up the benefits of computing to a lot of people who would never have put up with CP/M. After all computers are _supposed_ to make your life easier. If that means they require less intelligence and skill to use, that means they're doing their job. --Dav david_a._vandenbroucke(a)hud.gov

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Commodore P-500

by foxnhare＠goldrush.com

>From: steve <steve(a)kennard.keme.co.uk> >Subject: Re: PET > Hi you lot, glad the group is in a positive mood!!! > Ok can you help ? a few months ago I found a Commodore P500 seriel NO. WG00837 ????? Well if you collect Commodres, you are a very fortunate person! > What the heck is it???? > Its made in W.Germany > Any Idea?? > Steve All I can do is give you the U.S. perspective on this machine, since I haven't heard any stories on the European distribution of P-500s. A few years back I picked up one (P-500) as well, with people telling me it was a B-128, I didn't look at the back and was surely perplexed when I needed to hook it to my 1702 and it came up in 40 column color when I turned it on, so I did some research and asked around a few places (on Q-Link, and a query to the Chicago B-128 users group). I received two or three stories that were pretty much the same. Back in 1982 Commodore re-vamped it's entire product line in order to replace the aging PETs and to eventually phase out the then looking more limited VIC-20. The line consisted of the Commodore 64 and Ulitmax, for games/home/education use and the B-128 and P-500 for education/business and as an upgrade option for people who purchased alot of PET (IEEE-488) equipment. In its rush (given the home computer wars), Commodore sent a bunch of demo units of the B-128 and P-500 to dealers (yeah, I know that sounds strange, it was a different Commodore back then) these units were not to be sold as they still needed to get their FCC certification (for low radio interference). Well some of these dealers were offered quick cash for the demo units (even though they had no manuals or anything) and of course, they jumped at the chance. The FCC heard about these sales of uncertified equipment and told Commodore to immediately cease any sales of them and face stiff penalties. Commodore promptly recalled them (at least the ones they could get). Well they finally certified the B-128 but I guess being that the Commodore 64 was so popular they abandoned the P-500 entirely and it is said they destroyed all reamining P-500s. At the time I talked to the CB128UG (1990?) they said I was the third person in the world ever to report having one, and their estimation was that there are ten in existence. (they would have known since they were lent ALL documantation on the B-128 series from Commodore when they gave up that B-series computers). Ok the P-500 has a 6502 type processor (you know, like the 64) and 128k of RAM, it has a SID sound chip (also on the 64 and B-128), a true RS-232 port, cartridge port (I know of no carts avalable for the B series) and IEEE-488 port. But unlike the B-128 it sports a 40 column VIC-II chip, two joystick ports and ROM coding that supports the datasette drive (the B-128 also has a connector but no programming to use it). Both computers could accept an optional 8088 co-processor board and make it capapble of running CP/M 86. The RS-232 port has one pin designated (on both B-128 &P-500) for a high-speed networking system that never went into development (but was put in hardware, just in case) the guy from CB128UG was pretty impressed with the stats on it which I forgot. So to sum it up, the P-500 is essentially the Color PET or P-128 that Commodore had talked about. Kinda a cross between the SuperPET/B-128 (128k, IEEE-488, true RS-232, Co-Processor), and a 64 (SID, VIC-II, Joysticks, color). Jim Butterfield made a memory map for the B-128 and has some programming examples for the B-128 in Transactor issues which might get you some information, but there are differences. My unit has a RAM problem and I haven't been able to explore it too much, also the ROMs are pretty much porototype and it runs like molassas, so I dunno how much good that would do me when I eventually fix it... If you do find out ANYTHING more (or even have a manual on it) I would surely be interested in what you find out! 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 -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-

28 years, 5 months

3
2
0 0

Lisa's scores

by sinasohn＠crl.com

At 09:45 PM 6/24/97 -0400, you wrote: >> us, rather than simply because a machine is physically attractive, >> technically impressive, or financially successful. >Actually, some of the real dogs are just as fun and important. The Lisa, >for example, strikes out on all three (OK, two strikes and one foul) of the >above mentioned catagories, but is still a fascinating machine. Hey, waitaminnit.... The lisa is one of the best looking computers around! I think it's design is a classic! (Also, I think it was technically impressive -- I remember being very impressed upon seeing a demo in a little back room of the St. Francis hotel just before it was announced.) --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/

28 years, 5 months

13
18
0 0

Northstar Software

by bwit＠pobox.com

>> I was a northstar dealer for many years and have a box (about the size >>of a case of paper) full of northstar software on original disks. I am not >>sure what to do with them. I would like them to be of some use to >>someone. >Don Maslin (a frequent contributor to comp.os.cpm) has proven to be >a remarkably able archivist of this sort of stuff. Among other >things, he has a huge archive of CP/M boot disks that he makes >available to those with orphaned machines. His e-mail >address is donm(a)cts.com. I would second this suggestion. Don has saved me on a number of occasions and I think he would be happy to archive and distribute the software to those who need it. Good call Tim. bw

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Northstar Software

by doug＠the-one.com

I was a northstar dealer for many years and have a box (about the size of a case of paper) full of northstar software on original disks. I am not sure what to do with them. I would like them to be of some use to someone. Any suggestions? Doug Remember... No mater where you go... there you are!

28 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

CBM 900

by walgen＠do.isst.fhg.de

---------- From: Alexios Chouchoulas[SMTP:alexios@vennea.demon.co.uk] Reply To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu Sent: Friday, June 27, 1997 3:20 AM To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers Subject: CBM 900 > What information is there on the CBM 900? I was mailed by someone who has > a working one and is looking for more information on the machine. What do you need? I have the Coherent-Disk the Manual and some technical diagramms for the C900. > Any info > would be lovely. Btw, his machine is apparently a prototype (it says so > somewhere -- probably a sticker or something). Yes ist is a prototype. According to Jim Brains "cbmmodel": C900 Series: Prototype UNIX System, dropped after Amiga acquisition Zilog Z8000 CPU, Runs Coherent 0.7.3, UNIX 7 clone, Built-In Floppy, HD, IEEE-488. MFM Disk Controller, 1MB 9600 bps, 500 units made. Came in two versions.

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Dead Cromemco - Help!

by kaikal＠MICROSOFT.com

My Cromemco System 3 won't power up. Help! Normally I would just pull it open and check the power supply voltages, but this is a problem because A) the case is incredibly difficult to get into, and B) I don't have the schematics. I'd like folks' assessment of probable problem causes before I tear into it (heck, it takes two people just to move the sucker!) Symptoms: The rear power switch glows when I turn it on. So far, so good. All fuses are OK. When I turn the front key (or hit the rear switch with the front key already ON) all I get is a faint internal click, and the power supply fan moves VERY slightly (maybe 1/8"). Somebody told me this is an AC fan, is this true? If so, either the fan is dead or the problem isn't the power supply. If the problem is the power supply, what's the likely culprit for this symptom? I peered into the back of the case with a flashlight (this is a BIG case) and the cap didn't appear to be leaking. Thoughts? thanks Kai

28 years, 5 months

3
2
0 0

PCjr Cartridges?

by thedm＠sunflower.com

Im interested in the PCjr carts. I have the basic one, but I can post a list of what I have. ---------- > From: Uncle Roger <sinasohn(a)crl.com> > To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> > Subject: PCjr Cartridges? > Date: Thursday, June 26, 1997 8:27 PM > > Saw today a few cartridges which I'm guessing are PCjr carts. They said > (among other things) "Cartridge BASIC". Anyone interested in them? They > were (I think) a buck. > > They also had some misc Apple II cards (about $5 each, I think), some Atari > 800 ROM's (or RAM? I didn't look that closely). Lemme know if there's any > interest. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

old printers

by SUPRDAVE＠aol.com

if anyone does actually collect old printers i've one available for the asking. its an hp2671a, a big and ugly thermal printer made in feb of 1993. prints the self test, but i cannot establish communication with mac, a //e or an xt through it's serial port no matter what the dip switches are set to. im in raleigh, nc and the printer weighs about 20lbs, so it's probably not worth shipping. if anyone wants it, give me a shout before i round file it. david.

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

PCjr Cartridges?

by sinasohn＠crl.com

Saw today a few cartridges which I'm guessing are PCjr carts. They said (among other things) "Cartridge BASIC". Anyone interested in them? They were (I think) a buck. They also had some misc Apple II cards (about $5 each, I think), some Atari 800 ROM's (or RAM? I didn't look that closely). Lemme know if there's any interest. --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Floppy drive type for North Star controller?

by allisonp＠world.std.com

> Anybody know what type of drive I can connect to the popular North Star > MDS-AD3 S-100 disk controller board? Sugart sa400l or similar. The MDS-AD3 was a dual density controller that aslo did two sided. Any of the 360 PC half height drives will work as will many of the older full height. Your limited to 5.25 as the media must be for ten sector hard sectoring. I have one here but it was given to me dead. I still run a MDS-A2 single density controller. FYI the are hard sector 10 sectors per track 256 or 512 bytes a sector. > dual density (FM vs. MFM) is determined by the controller, and soft vs. FM single density, MFM double density. > What bothers me is single vs. double sided and all of those jumpers on 5 > 1/4" drives. Will dual sided drives work on single sided controllers, Yes. > with only one side operating? Do those jumpers need to be set > differently for different controllers, and how would I find > documentation for the various brands (I'm sure I wouldn't!) Yes. The controller you identified is two sided capable and double density capable but the OS can be configured for various combinations. Allison

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Lisa's scores

by allisonp＠world.std.com

> BTW, Allison, the Lisa wasn't actually a PROTOTYPE for the Mac. Rather i > was the sister machine to the Mac. The Lisa and Mac projects stemmed fro > the same research, with the Mac project splitting off from the Lisa It was my understanding at the time if you wanted to develop apps for the mac you needed a design kit and a lisa. Something to the effect that the lisa has the resources that were a bit short in the mac. Allison

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

(fwd) 65816 computer (fwd)

by dastar＠crl.com

This is a message by John Harris I pulled off of the Atari 8bit newsgroup. John Harris, if you've ever read _Hackers_ by Steven Levy, wrote pretty awesome games for ther Atari 800. He later when on to start his own company which used Atari 8-bit computers as displays in airports and in the hotel industry for the guests services menu on the TV (read about it in a soft-book called _Halcyon Days_). Anyway, the system he describes here sounds pretty neat. Sam ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer, Jackass ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: jharris(a)poboxes.com (John Harris) Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.8bit Subject: 65816 computer Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 18:01:39 GMT Some of you may remember an anouncement I tried to make a few years back, but later had to keep quiet. It concerned a new atari-compatible computer made with a 65816 processor and some other cool stuff. It was being manufactured for a dedicated application that I actually never found out what it really was. I found out about it at a time when I was selling character generator software on the Atari8, and having immense difficulty obtaining Atari hardware. It was a great connection to make, and we are still selling these new systems with my CG software installed. The big project never materialized, since the company making the systems and Atari could never reach an agreement for large supply of Atari custom chips. It seemed like a no-brainer--Atari had chips, these guys had money, it should have been a simple exchange. It's no wonder Atari doesn't have any feet left. They keep shooting themselves there. Anyway, the bottom line is that Atari negotiations were the reason behind my silence at the time, and now that the project is completely dead I can make public the details of the machine for all those that are curious. It is based on a 5.37MHz 65816 processor, although it still runs 1.79MHz when accessing the base 64K of address space for compatibilty with the custom chips. It is in a nice case with internal 3.5 high density floppy and hard drive, parallel and serial, expansion slots, fully static memory (turn the power off and on, and everything is still there!), mouse support, and separate IBM-style keyboard. It has its own Sparta-like DOS, and with 65816 optimizations the memlo gets down to $FA3. I've found the compatibility to be extremely good, with two main problems. Some european programs, especially demos, use the undocumented 6502 extra instructions, and these don't work on the 65816 CPU. The other issue, is that there is no cartridge slot. Technically, it is feasible to add a slot using a plug in board, and run a connector out the back. It would probably depend on the number of interested parties for whether it was financially affordable to get the thing made. One nice thing about the slots though, they are physically the same as IBM 16-bit ISA cards. (but not electronically compatible of course). You can get experimenter boards for IBMs that just run power and have all other connections open. The do-it-yourself'er can do pretty much anything from here. Because of being a very low-production item, it is really expensive by 8-bit standards. Retail is $1800 with all options and the CG software. Obviously, it's only being sold to commercial applications like hotels and cable TV at that price. It is possible to make some deals if anyone is interested, especially for systems without the CG software. Obviously, I need to be fair to the people who are still buying the system for commercial use. I don't have any prices for you, but if anyone is interested at all, please let me know and I'll see what we can work out. If you're just curious for info, let me know that too. John Harris Japanese translation of Microsoft slogan: jharris(a)poboxes.com "If you don't know where you want to go, we'll make sure you get taken."

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Floppy drive type for North Star controller?

by kaikal＠MICROSOFT.com

Hi all, Anybody know what type of drive I can connect to the popular North Star MDS-AD3 S-100 disk controller board? I'm confused with all of this old floppy terminology. I know single vs. dual density (FM vs. MFM) is determined by the controller, and soft vs. hard sectoring is determined by the controller, so neither of these should matter as far as the drive is concerned. What bothers me is single vs. double sided and all of those jumpers on 5 1/4" drives. Will dual sided drives work on single sided controllers, with only one side operating? Do those jumpers need to be set differently for different controllers, and how would I find documentation for the various brands (I'm sure I wouldn't!) Any advice appreciated, thanks Kai

28 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

USING classic machines

by BROBSTONA＠wartburg.edu

>I see a LOT of traffic about restoring and collecting old computers, >and the typical member here is one who has a large collection of >different machines, but except for a rare question about boot disks, >there isn't much said about using these machines. When I turn on my >99/4A or Geneve, it isn't primarily to bask in a nostalgic glow, but >to write something or balance my budget or do some programming. >Certainly the nostalgic glow is there, and it adds a dimension to >the computing experience that peecee devotees cannot understand. But >it IS my primary workhorse, not just a desk queen. That's part of what I love about my Apple IIGS. I'm the original owner. I know what this machine has done for me and continues to do for me. I love its simplicity. In the rare event of a crash, I pretty much know what the problem is, because I know the machine much better than anything Wintel came up with or any of the Macincrash line. >Don't get me wrong; I love to hear about these old machines, so keep >those messages coming. But I would like to hear from others out there >who use their obsolete machines (I prefer "non-mainstream machines") >for practical, everyday, household computing uses. Well, I'm a college student, so I use my IIGS for writing papers (though I transfer them to a Mac to print because my Imagewriter II isn't in good shape - I'll get around to fixing it one of these days). Mainly, I use it to connect to the campus computer system. I've also used it to run a BBS, play games, program - more than most people do with their PeeCees. >In fact, I'm wondering how widespread my idea is (shared by a >few, apparently) that the smaller, simpler machines really are well >suited for home use, and you don't need a high-end peecee for nearly >everything you want to do. You bet it is! This machine does everything I want or need it to do (or at least is capable of it, if I'm too cheap to buy things like a laser printer). -- Andy Brobston brobstona(a)wartburg.edu ***NEW URL BELOW*** http://www.wartburg.edu/people/docs/personalPages/BrobstonA/home.html My opinions do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Wartburg College as a whole.

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

IBM System/36

by rcini＠msn.com

Dan: Although I have never seen one up-close, a company that I formerly worked for had a System 36. I think that it is one of IBM's older mainframes/minis that was the predecessor to the AS/400 (our S36 software ran unmodified on the AS/400). It's based on a TwinAx-based network and has terminals connected to it with snappy names such as the "3270" and the "5250". Line printers are also Twin-Ax based. I hope that this is the same one that I was thinking about (otherwise, ignore the above <g>). ------------------------ Rich Cini/WUGNET - ClubWin Charter Member (6) - MCPS Windows 95/Networking

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

pieces of metal and plastic

by dlormand＠aztec.asu.edu

>And it was more than just the machine itself, but the culture that >spawned around it. The culture I am referring to mainly is the BBS >culture with all its lingo, the pirate groups who banded together and >cracked software, the holy wars with other computers. >The history behind the machine is what I am most interested in. What >company built it, what year it came out, what technology it used (its >processor, RAM, etc), what its predecessor and successor were, etc. I >like to know each machines historical perspective. Part of the thrill I have of being a TI junkie is BEING part of that history! The interesting part of the 99/4A is not so much the level of technology involved (although it IS there, relative to other home computers of the period) as the legend of how TI could make a market run with it, strain every nerve in true TI tradition, and then dramatically dump it when the effort finally proves to be too much. And now, I am part of the history of the TI-99/4A too, by perversely supporting it in preference to other (e.g. modern, more capable) platforms. -- ********************************************** * David Ormand *** Southwest 99ers * * dlormand(a)aztec.asu.edu *** Tucson, Arizona * **************************** TMS9900 Lives! *

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Lisa's scores

by cerebral＠michianatoday.com

>Files are linked lists of blocks. The sector header of each sector on the >hard disk contains pointers to the previous and next blocks in the file, >along with some other info that I've forgotten >Files may be sparse - the fact that block n exists does not mean that >block n-1 does >Block 0 of each file (I think, maybe block -1) contains the 'file >descriptor' - bascially an i-node. >Negative block numbers are the file allocation map. You can use this to >quickly find any block in the file without following the links.

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Help identifying ...

by walgen＠do.isst.fhg.de

Hi, today I got a special german (?) computer. It is a "SIEMENS PC100". But inside there is a board labled "R6500 ADVANCED INTERACTIVE MICROCOMPUTER" it is made by "ROCKLWELL" with a small (thermo?) printer a one-line display. Is this one of the legendary AIM65-Machines?

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Archive file formats (RE: Archiving Stuff)

by sinasohn＠crl.com

At 06:47 PM 6/25/97 -0700, you wrote: >I'm not so sure that "everything" supports TIFF. After a little looking, >I couldn't even find a TIFF file to test with xv. And my experience has been that TIFF is not always the same, especially Mac vs. PC. >Is there a reason that postscript cannot be used? Most of the schematics >out there that I have seen have been postscript files. [...] >Why not use postscript for publishing the formatted documents? Postscript is fine for Macs, not so great for PC's, and probably unusable for most older (pre-pc) machines. I'm not so worried about the images, but the formatted text should be kept readable. I'm not super-familiar with RTF, but isn't it just tags (like HTML)? If so, than a "reader"(?) could be written, even for CP/M or TRS-DOS or whatever... --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

atari800xl FOUND it!

by thedm＠sunflower.com

Monitor Jack (all but 400, North American 600XL, XE Game System): 3 1 5 4 2 1. Composite Luminance (not on North American 600XL's) 2. Ground 3. Audio Output 4. Composite Video 5. Composite Chroma (not on 800XL,1200XL; grounded on 600XL) ---------- > From: Bill Girnius <thedm(a)sunflower.com> > To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> > Subject: atari800xl > Date: Thursday, June 26, 1997 10:39 AM > > anyone know the video pinouts so I can build a cable for this? i just > learned it has a video output.

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

atari800xl

by thedm＠sunflower.com

anyone know the video pinouts so I can build a cable for this? i just learned it has a video output.

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

TRS-80 Model I info (RE: MSX, TRS-80, Colour Genie, etc.)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

> >The Basic was an 4k microsoft basic with floating point and simple = > >arrays but no alphanumeric operators or transcendental functions. > =20 > >Tiny basic was an integer language of less than 4k. =20 > > IIRC Level I Basic was floating point but it was not a Microsoft = > product. Only Level II Basic came from Microsoft. In fact the source = > for Level I Basic was later released and I think I have a copy of it in = > storage somewhere. I pulled my notebooks from 76/77/78 and yes RS called it Tiny but, is was not. Tiny basic was the generic name given to ALL integer basics. At the time the only source available basic that was floating point was LLLbasic (lawence livermore labs) which as 8080 code fit in 5k of rom. I suspected at the time it could be a z80 recode for space, no match. Of the tiny basics palo alto TB (1976) was well known and fit in 2k of rom without IO drivers. It didn't match L1. My files indicate that the basic was most closely that of MITS altair basic 4k (pre- MS) by gates/allen. Techically is was not MS. It was at least looking at my notebook significantly identical. That particular basic was an early lost one and after about 79-80 its not seen in MSbasic docs. I suspect it was due to it being pre MS and having allens hand in it. FYI mits 4k basic was small enough to fit in 4k of ram and still hold the video and keyboard drivers. Allison

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

TRS-80 Model I info (RE: MSX, TRS-80, Colour Genie, etc.)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

> Level I BASIC was _NOT_ a Microsoft BASIC. It was a fairly straight > rendition of Tiny BASIC. Unless I've been lied to for many years. The > Tiny BASIC published in Interface Age did have floating point, though not > much precision. You were lied to. ;-) I have the IA articles for TB and TBX along with DDJ and BYTE. tiny basic was integer. There were several small basics that fit in 4k that were not like L1 (different mix of capability) or were MS 4k clones. Technically it was MS4k. I'd used the altair version and the TRS80 and they were Identical! > The keybounce was a bug in the hardware. Mine always came back when I > turned the keyboard upside down and dumped out a few months worth of > cigarette ashes. A week later the problem would go away. (Proof that I > didn't grow up in a clean-room computer environment -- I was 23 and out > of the USAF when I got that Mod I in '78). Wrong. I was doing systems design for a terminal company while at RS(i was not in sales). That terminal company used the exact same keyboard. Switches bounce, debounce is simple you detect closure wait a few MS and verify closure if the verify fails the switc is open. The 4k basic didn't wait long enough but, beniding the contacts to change their dynamics was often enough. The verification if this is I clocked off a pulse gen and at 1.15mhz the bounce would go away! The delay rountine was in software so slowing the cpu was enough to make the dely longer and it would behave. some of the speed mods made it worsse unless LII was in there. I still have my trs80 hackboard (much modified and mangled) that I used to test various and sundry ideas. Of course when Tandy has launched the trs80 I'd had my altair up and running for some time with a TTY, ct1024 (64x16 upper only) and PR40 printer for a while. Allison

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

TRS-80 Model I info (RE: MSX, TRS-80, Colour Genie, etc.)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

> > modifications), and power supply brick. Level I BASIC is similar to > > Tiny BASIC. I still have my Level I BASIC reference manual. > > Level I BASIC _was_ Tiny BASIC. NO IT WAS NOT. LEVEL-I basic was the same basic sold by gates for the altair just a later revision level. IT was little, it ws limited but to did have floating point math and a few otehr things not found in tiny basics of the time. Tiny BASIC was one of several basics that were integer math only and far more limited and generally smaller too. Once upon a time there were three basics from MS, 4k, 8k, 12k extended, disk (~23k), and compiled(bascom). L1 was 4k and LII was the 12k extended with mods. > Dennis Kitsz did once publish an upgrade to 48k that could be done in a > keyboard without the EI. I have no idea how many others built it, but I > never had a problem with the alleged memory speed problems from the EI > cable. Jerry Pournelle's gripes are another story. It was never memory speed it was ras/mux/cas timing that was marginal. after about late 79 the design was substantually changed to derive the signals loacally in the EI. stacking 32k more in the keyboard was a trivial task. IF you didn't mind staking the chips three high and skywiring the cas/ lines for the added chips to a decoder. It did work well. > > - RS-232 interface board > For expansion interface. > > Worked better than an Apple serial card from the era. The RS card worked excellent if the connector did! > I _still_ don't understand that trade-off between cost and utility. The > decision makers were gone before I joined the company in '80. INthe trs 80 case some of it was the lack of decision making by other than marketing/sales types. I was there from 74-79 and helped launch and fix the trs80 > > It was more reliable than the cassette interfaces for the Apple or the Pe > ot the Atari. _All_ cassette interfaces are unreliable. How many people Generally speaking all audio cassette interfaces were poor. Some were poorer than others. I'd tried digital (saturation recording) using a modified trs80(all the analog gone) and it was absolutely reliable. The recorder electronics were no more complicated than athe audio just different. > more than a few eval and review units when Tandy announced the TRS-80 > Microcomputer System on 3 Aug 77 with 5,000 units already in the > warehouses -- idea was, since they didn't know if it would work, they had > 5,000 stores -- if the silly things didn't move they'd figure out a way The first year of sales exceeded 250,000! > The one Percom used came out after the design was final. The percom design existed at least a year before the design was started. It was straight out of the wd1771 data sheet!

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

MSX, TRS-80, Colour Genie, etc.

by walgen＠do.isst.fhg.de

---------- From: Cord Coslor[SMTP:coslor@pscosf.peru.edu] Reply To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu Sent: Thursday, June 26, 1997 2:50 PM To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers Subject: MSX, TRS-80, Colour Genie, etc. > I am located in central Nebraska, USA, and am looking for the following to > add to my collection. If you have these systems or might be able to get > them for me at a reasonable price, PLEASE e-mail me. > > MSX computer > Colour Genie > TI 99/4a I have a Colour Genie and a Sony HitBit HB75 and also a Ti99/4A as I live in germany sending the TI99/4A makes no sense but if you are interested in the other items drop me a note. I would like to swap them on a "I send them to you and pay on my own and you send me some other stuff and pay for the shipping". What do you think? Here my URL for some other stuff I have to trade: http://192.102.161.122/~walgen/

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

pieces of metal and plastic

by manney＠nwohio.nwohio.com

> > > Remember it? If it's what I am thinking of, I was doing it a couple of > > > weeks ago. You are talking about a 'Coconut', right (explanation of that > > > codename also on request - it has _nothing_ to do with the Tandy CoCo). > > > Nowadays I do something similar. I create a GROB with the right bit > > > patterns, use the SystemRPL 'Get' routine to remove the header, and thus > > > create new objects. No, not quite. The HP-41C used 2, 3 or 4 bytes to create the program steps. By forcing apart the bytes and substituting new ones, new ("synthetic") opcodes could be created. These ranged from creating new characters to being able to access areas of memory. Ah, the heady days of discovery! Mother HP wouldn't officially help, but there was plenty of behind-the-scenes help.

28 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

CBM 900

by alexios＠vennea.demon.co.uk

Hello folks! What information is there on the CBM 900? I was mailed by someone who has a working one and is looking for more information on the machine. Any info would be lovely. Btw, his machine is apparently a prototype (it says so somewhere -- probably a sticker or something). Thanks, Alexios --------------------------- ,o88,o888o,,o888o. ------------------------------- Alexios Chouchoulas '88 ,88' ,88' alexios(a)vennea.demon.co.uk The Unpronounceable One ,o88oooo88ooooo88oo, axc(a)dcs.ed.ac.uk

28 years, 5 months

2
2
0 0

TRS-80 Model I info (RE: MSX, TRS-80, Colour Genie, etc.)

by bwit＠pobox.com

>>modifications), and power supply brick. Level I BASIC is similar to >> Tiny BASIC. I still have my Level I BASIC reference manual. >The Basic was an 4k microsoft basic with floating point and simple >arrays but no alphanumeric operators or transcendental functions. >Tiny basic was an integer language of less than 4k. IIRC Level I Basic was floating point but it was not a Microsoft product. Only Level II Basic came from Microsoft. In fact the source for Level I Basic was later released and I think I have a copy of it in storage somewhere. Regards, Bob

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

TRS-80 Model I info (RE: MSX, TRS-80, Colour Genie, etc.)

by fmc＠reanimators.org

Kai Kaltenbach <kaikal(a)MICROSOFT.com> writes: > Other Upgrades: You left out the TRS-80 Screen Printer, a widget that plugs into the connector otherwise used for the Expansion Interface. Hit the switch on the front of the printer, and it ejects a few inches of silvery electrostatic paper with the image on your screen zapped dark on it. My understanding is that it grabs the image right out of the screen memory. Somewhere I have some pages printed by one of these. As I recall they didn't last long as a product. I think I have two Radio Shack microcomputer catalogs from 1978 (one white/black/silver, one later one in full color) and the screen printer is only shown in the earlier catalog, but both are loaned out to someone who wanted to scan some pictures from them. (Hey Javier, are you reading this?) -Frank McConnell

28 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

FS: More cheap C= stuff, GEOS, Games

by gmast＠oboe.aix.calpoly.edu

Sorry, I for got to aadd these to my last message. Also found some software. I've never used this stuff so it's an as-is deal. Geos Lot: Looks like a set of GEOS 2.0 and 1.2 Manuals for 1.2 and 2.0 Deskpak Plus (six applications for GEOS) Deskpak Manual 25 Blank 5-1/4 disks Price $5, Shipping $2.75 C-64 Game/Software Lot: Zork I or C64 with Manual Flight Simulator II in box w/manual AwardWare Graphics Starcross game w/manual Business Indoor Sports w/manual Into the Eagles Nest (WWII) Box of 12 misc disks w/some s/w Price $5, Shipping $2.75

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

FS: Books, Books, Books!

by gmast＠oboe.aix.calpoly.edu

I'm sorting through the boxes of "stuff" I have accumulated and I've saved a pile of books you folks might be interested in. I am selling them in lots because I don't have time to pack up and mail them out individually. Besides they're going cheap! Shipping via USPS Book Rate. Commodore Lot: The Manager - Commodore 64 C64 User's Manual Kids and the Commodore 64 Commodore 64 Favorite Programs Explained Re Run - Reprinted Articles from Jan to June 1984 - Run Magazine VIC 1541 User's Maanual More than 32 Basic Programs for the C64 Commodore 64 User's Handbook Commodore 64 Programmer's Reference Guide Turte Graphics II Instruction Manual Price $5, Shipping $4.25 Apple Lot: Critic's Guide to Software for Apple and Compatible Computers Apple II Super Serial Card Manual Apple II 80-Column Text Card Manual Extended 80-Column Text Card Supplement Apple II The DOS Manual Applesoft II Basic Programming Reference Manual Price $5, Shipping $4.25 Other Lot: 10 Starter Programs from Family Computing (Apple, Atari, etc, 1983) 1986 Radio Shack Software Reference and Tandy Computer Guide A Bit of Basic (Apple II, TRS-80) Price $2.75, Shipping $2.25

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

TRS-80 Model I info (RE: MSX, TRS-80, Colour Genie, etc.)

by kaikal＠MICROSOFT.com

The Model I originally shipped without a numeric keypad. To the right of the main keyboard was a rectangular keypad-size plaque reading "Radio Shack TRS-80 Micro Computer System". The numeric keypad was added to later models, and was available as a retrofit kit for around $50. With the numeric keypad installed, the nameplate was moved to a horizontal plaque above the keyboard. The TRS-80 Model I lineage includes: Model I, 4K, Level I BASIC - This is a 3-piece system with the computer in the keyboard. It includes the system keyboard/cpu, monitor, tape drive (actually a rebadged regular Radio Shack portable cassette deck with no modifications), and power supply brick. Level I BASIC is similar to Tiny BASIC. I still have my Level I BASIC reference manual. Model I, 16K, Level II BASIC - The 16K and Level II upgrades went together. 16K is the maximum Model I memory in the system unit (8x 4116 DRAMs). Level II BASIC is similar to Microsoft BASIC/80 with functions added for things like the TRS-80's 128x48 memory-mapped monochrome graphics. Level II also added a keyboard debounce routine--Level I machines were very difficult for typists. Other Upgrades: - Expansion Interface Matching silver color, acts as a monitor stand, connects to system unit via ribbon cable. Contains dual floppy controller (WD chip), sockets for an additional 32K (2 banks of 4116 DRAMs) for a system maximum of 48K, and a parallel connection. 16K ROM BASIC occupied the remainder of the address space. The expansion interface also contains a card bay for an RS-232 interface. - RS-232 interface board For expansion interface. - Floppy drives Single-sided single-density, approx. 90KB free space. - Lower case upgrade Provides lower case capability. - Numeric keypad retrofit As discussed above Known TRS-80 Model I problems: - Unreliable cassette interface. Radio Shack later released a modification that improved this somewhat. The best option is a third-party unit called the Data Dubber by Microperipheral Corporation (I worked there!) that went in between the system unit and cassette and squared the wave. - Wonky, unbuffered connection to Expansion Interface. This went through various modifications, and some cables you'll see have big buffer boxes in the middle. Later Expansion Interfaces had built-in buffering. Some bought third-party expansion interface clones from Lobo and others. Be very careful if you get an Expansion Interface without a cable. It might need the buffered cable, and it would be a pain to manufacture. - Bad data separator chip. The stock data separator was unreliable. Most people replaced theirs with a third-party improvement such as Percom's. - Unreliable connection for the Expansion Interface-mounted RS-232 board. This board slipped over vertical post connections and never made good contact. Most folks used third-party alternatives that worked off the cassette port. Kai > ---------- > From: Mr. Self Destruct > Reply To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu > Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 1997 4:14 PM > To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers > Subject: Re: MSX, TRS-80, Colour Genie, etc. > > > On Wed, 25 Jun 1997, Scott Walde wrote: > > > No. They were originally known (and labelled) as the TRS-80 > Microcomputer > > System. They later became known as the model 1 (Although I don't > think > > they were ever labelled as such.) > > > > Were there two different Model 1's? I have seen pictures of Model 1's > that don't look like my Model 1. (i.e. no numeric keypad) > > Les > more(a)crazy.rutgers.edu > > >

28 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

Archive file formats (RE: Archiving Stuff)

by BROBSTONA＠wartburg.edu

>> Compressed 1-bit, 300 dpi TIFF for schematics >> - Almost everything supports TIFF, including tons of shareware and [technical stuff snipped] >I'm not so sure that "everything" supports TIFF. After a little looking, >I couldn't even find a TIFF file to test with xv. Is there anything for either OpenVMS/Alpha (No DEC/X-windows) or the Apple IIGS that can read TIFF? >> RTF (Rich Text Format) for text documents that use formatting >> - WordPerfect, Word, WordPad, etc. will save in this format How about HTML? That would likely be more readable for my shell account (though not all formatting would be displayed in Lynx). I suppose I could walk over to the computer lab and use a Mac or a PC if I *had* to. :) -- Andy Brobston brobstona(a)wartburg.edu ***NEW URL BELOW*** http://www.wartburg.edu/people/docs/personalPages/BrobstonA/home.html My opinions do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Wartburg College as a whole.

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Archive file formats (RE: Archiving Stuff)

by kaikal＠MICROSOFT.com

Hey, figuring out standards like this is what I do. I recommend: JPEG for photo scans (brochures, ads, etc.) - It's the Internet photo file format standard Compressed 1-bit, 300 dpi TIFF for schematics - Almost everything supports TIFF, including tons of shareware and Wang's free image processing add-on for Win95 (http://www.microsoft.com/windows95/info/wang.htm) - 1-bit means monochrome (not grayscale). Use JPEG for images. - Images should be 300 dpi, 8 1/2" x 11", i.e. 2550 x 3300 (don't worry about scanning white space, it takes no space at all when compressed) TXT for text documents that don't use formatting - 80-column with carriage returns please RTF (Rich Text Format) for text documents that use formatting - WordPerfect, Word, WordPad, etc. will save in this format Kai > ---------- > From: Bill Whitson > Reply To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu > Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 1997 1:05 PM > To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers > Subject: Archiving Stuff > > Hi all. > > Consider Classiccmp Web/FTP open for your archiving pleasure ;). > > The process has been more or less tested out and is ready to go. > Submissions of Software, Documentation, ROM code, whatever are all > OK. > > What really remains to be done is to work out standards for file > formats. I'll let those of you who are experts on specific platforms > argue that out. I'll follow whatever ensues and firm up some > guidelines. > > To submit something you need to download the form DS-form.txt from > the FTP site (140.142.225.27) and fill it out to the best of your > ability. Follow the instructions at the bottom of the form for > uploading. > > All the form does is provide evidence (if anyone ever complains) that > I'm not just uploading copyrighted material without a care. > > Anyway - if you're itching to archive stuff feel free. Your comments > are welcome and also unavoidable ;) > > Bill > > ---------------------------------------------------- > Bill Whitson - Classic Computers ListOp > bill(a)booster.u.washinton.edu or bcw(a)u.washington.edu > http://weber.u.washington.edu/~bcw > >

28 years, 5 months

4
3
0 0

TRS-80 Model I info (RE: MSX, TRS-80, Colour Genie, etc.)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

> The Model I originally shipped without a numeric keypad. To the right Correct. > of the main keyboard was a rectangular keypad-size plaque reading "Radio > Shack TRS-80 Micro Computer System". The numeric keypad was added to > later models, and was available as a retrofit kit for around $50. With > the numeric keypad installed, the nameplate was moved to a horizontal > plaque above the keyboard. Also correct. > > The TRS-80 Model I lineage includes: > > Model I, 4K, Level I BASIC > - This is a 3-piece system with the computer in the keyboard. It > includes the system keyboard/cpu, monitor, tape drive (actually a > rebadged regular Radio Shack portable cassette deck with no > modifications), and power supply brick. Level I BASIC is similar to > Tiny BASIC. I still have my Level I BASIC reference manual. The Basic was an 4k microsoft basic with floating point and simple arrays but no alphanumeric operators or transcendental functions. Tiny basic was an integer language of less than 4k. > Model I, 16K, Level II BASIC > - The 16K and Level II upgrades went together. 16K is the maximum Model > I memory in the system unit (8x 4116 DRAMs). Level II BASIC is similar wrong. Either could be installed alone. Generally LII with 4k was pretty cramped. FYI: the LII romset was only 12k. > to Microsoft BASIC/80 with functions added for things like the TRS-80's > 128x48 memory-mapped monochrome graphics. It was MS12k basic with TRS extensions (graphics). >Level II also added a > keyboard debounce routine--Level I machines were very difficult for > typists. The key bounce was a bug in the original 4k software, it didn't wait long enough. There was a cassette that when loaded fixed it. Me I'd clean the key contacts with a swab and some contact cleaner and get the same result. > - Expansion Interface > Matching silver color, acts as a monitor stand, connects to system unit > via ribbon cable. Contains dual floppy controller (WD chip), sockets > for an additional 32K (2 banks of 4116 DRAMs) for a system maximum of > 48K, and a parallel connection. 16K ROM BASIC occupied the remainder of > the address space. The expansion interface also contains a card bay for > an RS-232 interface. The bottom 16k was 12k of rom (LII basic) 1k of ram for video and keyboard mapped in to memory space. Some of the 4k space for the video and keyboard was wasted due to partial decode. The upside was since the keyboard was scanned by the cpu so alternate shift and character sets were easy to do. The down side is no matter how you tried, keyboard type ahead was impossible, the keyboard could not interrupt the CPU. > - RS-232 interface board > For expansion interface. The surface connector used was very cranky. > - Floppy drives > Single-sided single-density, approx. 90KB free space. The design used the 1771 internal data seperator which was not very tolerent of drive spped errors or data jitter. > - Lower case upgrade > Provides lower case capability. Way late in the game the "field mod" had been around over a year before tandy did it. > - Numeric keypad retrofit > As discussed above Popular item! > Known TRS-80 Model I problems: > > - Unreliable cassette interface. Radio Shack later released a > modification that improved this somewhat. The best option is a > third-party unit called the Data Dubber by Microperipheral Corporation > (I worked there!) that went in between the system unit and cassette and > squared the wave. There were two mods one largely marginal, the later one was very effective. I had a mod I did that worked very well and was far simpler. > - Wonky, unbuffered connection to Expansion Interface. This went > through various modifications, and some cables you'll see have big > buffer boxes in the middle. Later Expansion Interfaces had built-in > buffering. Some bought third-party expansion interface clones from Lobo > and others. Be very careful if you get an Expansion Interface without a > cable. It might need the buffered cable, and it would be a pain to > manufacture. The first version with the unbuffered or buffered cable was a junk design. the later one with local ras/cas timing was far better. > - Bad data separator chip. The stock data separator was unreliable. > Most people replaced theirs with a third-party improvement such as > Percom's. The stock circuit depended on the 1771 chips internal seperator, Even WD the chipmaker said don't do it! > - Unreliable connection for the Expansion Interface-mounted RS-232 > board. This board slipped over vertical post connections and never made > good contact. Most folks used third-party alternatives that worked off > the cassette port. Being there at the begining was half the fun. Allison

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Lisa's scores

by allisonp＠world.std.com

> > really think the engineers blew it. The original OS is too innovative, > > so much that the computer is nearly unuseable. > > I wouldn't think that "too innovative" would result in a lesser rating fo > "technical" aspects (at least in the realm of computer history/collecting > the "real" world is a different matter (see "success"...)) Lest we forget the LISA was the Prototype system for the mac! Allison

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

MSX, TRS-80, Colour Genie, etc.

by manney＠nwohio.nwohio.com

> I am looking for > > IBM PC Junior > Apple II > TRS-80 (model I) I think I have a couple of trash-80's in the back room. One with disks, one without. Do they say "model 1"? (I don't know these at all) Does have a Lisa he/she wants to unload? I also have several, nice-condition Commodore boxes that I'd hate to pitch. As long as we're in the subject of trading, I have several years of PPC (HP programmable calculator user group) that I'd *love* to find a home for of...absolutely fascinating stuff, including the origin of Ulam's conjecture.

28 years, 5 months

5
5
0 0

Archive file formats (RE: Archiving Stuff)

by thedm＠sunflower.com

Whats wrong with plain old ascii text. ---------- > From: Paul E Coad <pcoad(a)crl.com> > To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> > Subject: Re: Archive file formats (RE: Archiving Stuff) > Date: Wednesday, June 25, 1997 8:47 PM > > > Kai, > > Nice initial stab at some standards. I am a little concerned that this > is a bit PC-centric. I would like to make sure that those of us on the > fringe (not using Windows machines or Macs) don't get left out. This > may mean lowering the standards to be a little more inclusive. > > Maybe these are all cross-platform standards, I don't know. Can any of > the VMS/AmigaOS/TOS/whatnotOS people read and write all of these formats? > > I'm not trying to start a religious war. I want to be able to make use > of and possibly contribute to the archive. > > On Wed, 25 Jun 1997, Kai Kaltenbach wrote: > > > Hey, figuring out standards like this is what I do. I recommend: > > > > JPEG for photo scans (brochures, ads, etc.) > > - It's the Internet photo file format standard > > xv can be used to view these so Unix/X is covered. > > > > > Compressed 1-bit, 300 dpi TIFF for schematics > > - Almost everything supports TIFF, including tons of shareware and > > Wang's free image processing add-on for Win95 > > (http://www.microsoft.com/windows95/info/wang.htm) > > - 1-bit means monochrome (not grayscale). Use JPEG for images. > > - Images should be 300 dpi, 8 1/2" x 11", i.e. 2550 x 3300 (don't worry > > about scanning white space, it takes no space at all when compressed) > > > > I'm not so sure that "everything" supports TIFF. After a little looking, > I couldn't even find a TIFF file to test with xv. > > Is there a reason that postscript cannot be used? Most of the schematics > out there that I have seen have been postscript files. > > > TXT for text documents that don't use formatting > > - 80-column with carriage returns please > > Text is good. > > > > > RTF (Rich Text Format) for text documents that use formatting > > - WordPerfect, Word, WordPad, etc. will save in this format > > > > Is there anything under Unix which can read and/or write RTF? > > Why not use postscript for publishing the formatted documents? > > --pec > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Saved From The Dumpster Collection: http://www.crl.com/~pcoad/machines.html >

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Computer Trivia Game

by sinasohn＠crl.com

At 11:03 PM 6/24/97 -0400, you wrote: >I'm a trivia freak, and computer trivia's fun. Old computers are great Anyone remember a trivial-pursuit-like Computer Trivia game? It was being touted at one of the last West Coast Computer Faires here in San Francisco. Anyone have a copy? --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Lisa's scores

by sinasohn＠crl.com

At 08:38 AM 6/25/97 -0400, you wrote: >technical - foul - It seems that the Lisa should do better here, but I > really think the engineers blew it. The original OS is too innovative, > so much that the computer is nearly unuseable. I wouldn't think that "too innovative" would result in a lesser rating for "technical" aspects (at least in the realm of computer history/collecting; the "real" world is a different matter (see "success"...)) --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Convergent Technology Computers

by sinasohn＠crl.com

At 11:33 PM 6/24/97 -0400, you wrote: >And don't forget the Workslate from Convergent. It was the slickest laptop Anyone know where to find one of these? I'd sure like to add one to my collection! --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Apple II (wasDumpster Diving)

by BigLouS＠aol.com

In a message dated 97-06-22 05:13:35 EDT,maynard(a)jmg.com (J. Maynard Gelinas) wrote: > I have an opportunity for an original Apple II. Keyboard > works, the system prom boots, but unfortunately he lost the disk > controller. He still has the old full height 5 1/4" drive, however. This > thing is quite dirty, and a few keys will have to be cleaned carefully > with alchol, but it looks good. I'm curious to know if I need to find > anything other than the floppy controller. Didn't Microsoft Basic come on > a prom card? Or was that on the floppy controller card? Or was there at > one point a mixed controller/BASIC card? Any Apple disk II controller will work. Apple originally offered an Integer basic card (which contained integer basic in rom) for the Apple II+ series. This solution was replaced by the 16K language card in slot 0. As part of the boot up sequence DOS 3.3 would determine which basic was resident in rom and load the other basic into the 16K on the language card. There was no mixed controller/basic card. Language cards are plentiful and cheap so you should have no trouble finding one. Hope this helps. Lou

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

pieces of metal and plastic

by IVIE＠cc.usu.edu

> Remember it? If it's what I am thinking of, I was doing it a couple of > weeks ago. You are talking about a 'Coconut', right (explanation of that > codename also on request - it has _nothing_ to do with the Tandy CoCo). > Nowadays I do something similar. I create a GROB with the right bit > patterns, use the SystemRPL 'Get' routine to remove the header, and thus > create new objects. Wouldn't it be easier to create the object on something else (like that PDP-11 sitting in the corner) and then just download it using Kermit? I built a set of macros for M80 to create Chip-8 code I could download >from my DECmate, but I never cobbled together a real assembler for the beast... Roger Ivie ivie(a)cc.usu.edu

28 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

pieces of metal and plastic

by manney＠nwohio.nwohio.com

Why do I play with old computers? I love collecting oddball stuff, just to consider what people could do...in what directions the industry could have gone. I play with old software (Visicalc, Concurrent DOS, and others) and trace their influences on today's WINtel products...and you know? as clunky as those old programs are, today's software is a direct descendant of many classic programs. I'm a trivia freak, and computer trivia's fun. Old computers are great trivia. (here's a good one for everyone...does anyone remember "synthetic programming"? Explanation on request.) I recondition old PC's, because -- then -- it puts an *affordable* PC into someone's hands. Unused machinery distresses me. Good machinery trashed makes me really ill. Why do we (USA) throw so much away? I loved computers from my first programmable calculator (1978...a TI-58). I lusted after many higher-priced units of the day. I can satisfy my ex-lusts now for -- sometimes -- a few bucks. I see the earlier stuff I have on the shelf increasing in value. Hey I'm not in business for my health! And...so you watch TV in the evening. Well, I hate TV and don't watch it. Does that make it bad? I read old issues of Punch Magazine, sci-fi and play with old machines. We all should have *something* different to do, or else we'd be alike, and who would I talk to, to keep me interested?

28 years, 5 months

2
2
0 0

CLASSICCMP digest 90

by ghjorth＠sn.no

Would someone please remove me from this list. Thank you.

28 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

CLASSICCMP digest 94

by ghjorth＠sn.no

Will someone take me off this list.

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Archiving Stuff

by bill＠booster.bothell.washington.edu

Hi all. Consider Classiccmp Web/FTP open for your archiving pleasure ;). The process has been more or less tested out and is ready to go. Submissions of Software, Documentation, ROM code, whatever are all OK. What really remains to be done is to work out standards for file formats. I'll let those of you who are experts on specific platforms argue that out. I'll follow whatever ensues and firm up some guidelines. To submit something you need to download the form DS-form.txt from the FTP site (140.142.225.27) and fill it out to the best of your ability. Follow the instructions at the bottom of the form for uploading. All the form does is provide evidence (if anyone ever complains) that I'm not just uploading copyrighted material without a care. Anyway - if you're itching to archive stuff feel free. Your comments are welcome and also unavoidable ;) Bill ---------------------------------------------------- Bill Whitson - Classic Computers ListOp bill(a)booster.u.washinton.edu or bcw(a)u.washington.edu http://weber.u.washington.edu/~bcw

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Computer Documentation

by rcini＠msn.com

Marvin: I, too, like to have documentation for my various holdings. I have copies of the service manuals for the Radio Shack Model I, the Commodore PET 4032, the VIC-20 and (I think) the VIC 1541 floppy drive. I'd like to get copies of the schematics for the Altair, the IMSAI, and anything related to the System 23/Datamaster. If you need these, I can have copies made. As far as ROMs are concerned, maybe we can start a "ROM Archive" database/repository. Members with EPROM programmers could make copies of known-good ROMS from various machines at the request of other members. However, there is a major pitfall: version control. Unless someone has an idea as to which ROM versions go with each hardware revision, there is a risk of incompatibility. Although, what's the worst that can happen -- it doesn't work. As far as Copyright concerns, I don't think that there are any. First, many of our target companies are out of business. Second, we are not selling these chips (and the software contained therein) in a commercial sense. Third, they're being used as a one-for-one replacement for defective firmware. I view it like a diskette: I own Norton Utilities with a bad disk 1. My friend also owns Norton Utilities, and he makes me a copy of his disk 1. Both of us have valid software licenses because we both bought the program. It's like preservation of matter. Rich Cini/WUGNET - MCPS Windows 95/Networking - ClubWin Charter Member Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 13:56:15 -0700 From: Marvin <marvin(a)rain.org> To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu Subject: Computer Documentation Message-ID: <33B0346F.3FFC(a)rain.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit One of the things *I* like to have available is the documentation, particularly schematics, on the things that I have. As such, there are docs and schematics on quite a bit of stuff here but there are also a lot of holes. I'm not sure how the copyright laws apply to machines where the company has ceased to exist, but it would be great to be able to exchange documentation as needed. Things I have machine schematics on include:

28 years, 5 months

4
3
0 0

pieces of metal and plastic

by allisonp＠world.std.com

> What worries me is that in a lot of cases, the older machines are more > useable than the modern Wintel equivalents. This applies both to a new > user (somebody who just wants to write 2 page letters does _NOT_ (or > should not) need a 166MHz Pentium with 16Mbytes of RAM), and to 'hackers' > who want to understand their machines. It's possible for one person to > complete understand both the hardware and software of most classic > computers - something that (IMHO) is not possible with a Wintel box. Same here. In reality I use my s100 crate, ampro, and sb180 to produce 8048/9 and 8051 code as they really are faster and easier to use. Also being as I have them interconnected it's easier to blast proms in the s100 crate. Efficient, very! I've had nearly 20 years to refine the code and tools! I have the advantage of having source code for those tools so and long latent bugs are easily squashed. This is not doable on PCs. I still do my banking/checkbook on the kaypro! Faster than the PC overall. Allison

28 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

Help identifying ...

by kaikal＠MICROSOFT.com

Yes, it is. Kai > ---------- > From: Stefan Walgenbach > Reply To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 1997 10:13 AM > To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers > Subject: Help identifying ... > > Hi, > > today I got a special german (?) computer. It is a "SIEMENS PC100". > But inside > there is a board labled "R6500 ADVANCED INTERACTIVE MICROCOMPUTER" > it is made by "ROCKLWELL" with a small (thermo?) printer a one-line > display. Is this one of the legendary AIM65-Machines? >

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

MSX, TRS-80, Colour Genie, etc.

by thedm＠sunflower.com

Im in kansas and have a spare TI994a with powersupply but no RF box. ---------- > From: Stefan Walgenbach <walgen(a)do.isst.fhg.de> > To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> > Subject: RE: MSX, TRS-80, Colour Genie, etc. > Date: Thursday, June 26, 1997 8:46 AM > > > > ---------- > From: Cord Coslor[SMTP:coslor@pscosf.peru.edu] > Reply To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu > Sent: Thursday, June 26, 1997 2:50 PM > To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers > Subject: MSX, TRS-80, Colour Genie, etc. > > > > I am located in central Nebraska, USA, and am looking for the following to > > add to my collection. If you have these systems or might be able to get > > them for me at a reasonable price, PLEASE e-mail me. > > > > MSX computer > > Colour Genie > > TI 99/4a > > I have a Colour Genie and a Sony HitBit HB75 and also a Ti99/4A > as I live in germany sending the TI99/4A makes no sense but if you > are interested in the other items drop me a note. I would like to > swap them on a "I send them to you and pay on my own and you send > me some other stuff and pay for the shipping". What do you think? > > Here my URL for some other stuff I have to trade: > > http://192.102.161.122/~walgen/ >

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Convergent Technology Computers

by thedm＠sunflower.com

Are those DOS machines, or are those the BTOS/CTOS type I used to run in the military? ---------- > From: Sam Ismail <dastar(a)crl.com> > To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> > Subject: Re: Convergent Technology Computers > Date: Wednesday, June 25, 1997 1:31 AM > > On Tue, 24 Jun 1997, Commercial Computing Museum wrote: > > > And don't forget the Workslate from Convergent. It was the slickest laptop > > around in 1984. Small LCD screen but built in voice digitization and voice > > mail system! No disk, only min-cassette. > > I see one all the time at my local swap meet but always pass it up. I > found a program micro-cassette at a thrift shop and decided I'm going to > pick this thing up next swap meet. Sounds real neat. > > Sam > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- > Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer, Jackass

28 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Historical Research

by ccm＠sentex.net

This is just information. I completed a reference tool that accomplishes most of this for computers built between 1950 and 1979. It's called Domestic Commercial Computing Power Between 1950 & 1979 (DCCP). It doesn't include statistical data, but it does list every make and model of computers built or sold by North American computer companies. It was self-published, but you'll find reviews in upcoming issues of the Annals, Analytical Engine, and the CBI newsletter. It's not available on the web and I have no plans for that, but I am trying to make a CD version that would include photographs, commercials/promotional video clips, sales literature, etc. We could use a similar tool for the years 1980 onwards for commercially available computers, but also for military computers, industrial control computers, programmable communication controllers, etc. Yours in good faith. Kevin Stumpf ------------------------------------- I'm working on my signature file.

28 years, 5 months

3
2
0 0

This weekend's haul

by ds_spenc＠alcor.concordia.ca

I just started paying attention to garage sales this month, because of this list and because my traditional computer supply (Salvation Army) has dried up. I'm very glad I have! Last weekend was my first trip out, but I only managed to find two sales (one of which was in the paper) but this weekend the garage sale season seems to have begun in earnest. There were only two sales listed in the paper for my little town, and one of these was just up the street and around the bend, so I went there first. I ended up buying an Apple /// for $2 and carrying it home on my bicycle! (Not an easy task). I then went back for the cheap green Amdek monitor for another $2, because I have far more computers than monitors. I had to ask if there were any disks to go with the machine, and I was handed a box that I went through until I found one with a label that read "Apple ///", so I knew the disks matched the computer. There were no manuals. After plugging the thing in at home and finding that the beast worked, I went out again. I must've visited five more places (by following signs on telephone poles) before I came across the next thing that was mildly interesting: a Commodore filing cabinet with the chicken-lips logo. Not exactly related to this group, I suppose, and not the kind of thing I collect, but interesting nonetheless. Several stops later I hit the jackpot. Not for me, so much, but for a friend of mine who is out of school, out of work, bored, and constantly coming over to my place to play video games on my computers. :) This was obviously the home of a computer nerd like myself, as there was a complete Apple ][+ clone system and a complete Commodore 64 system for sale, as well as a large box full of books. I picked up four books: "The Explorers Guide to the ZX81", "Timex/Sinclair Interfacing", Jim Butterfield's "Machine Language for the Commodore 64, 128, and Other Commodore Computers", and the "Commodore 64 Troubleshooting & Repair Guide". I also picked up a complete(?) boxed GEOS 2.0 set (which probably should've stayed with the 64 system, come to think of it) and the owner parted out the joystick for his Apple ][+ (mine fell apart years ago). Total cost was $10. I rode straight home from this place, called my friend, and had lunch. He showed up with his car, and we went back to that place together to pick up the C64 system. He got a boxed C64 (old brown one), boxed 1541, 1802 colour monitor, dot matrix printer with Commodore serial ports on it, 1351 mouse in box with docs, 300bps modem in box with docs, a couple of books, a hand-killing Atari joystick, a boxed copy of Atarisoft's "Track and Field" with 3-button arcade controller, and datasette, for $35. Then we went over to the next town, because there was supposed to be some huge 40-family sale at some apartment complex, but there wasn't anything interesting there (perhaps everything was gone by then). I spotted a sign for another garage sale on the next street, so we walked over there. There I picked up an Intellivision with 6 boxed cartridges (Sea Battle, Vectron, Sub Hunt, Utopia, Chess, Armor Battle) and a BIZARRE piece of IBM equipment: an external 5-1/4" floppy drive, model 4869. I figure someone important must have an opinion on the Commodore 64, because there was an earthquake (4.5 on the Richter scale) while we were setting it up to test it. :) Anyway, not everything was perfect. The Intellivision doesn't work 100%... background graphics are OK, but most of the games have totally munged sprites. It looks like the sprites are being read out of the wrong area of memory. Oh, and background graphics ARE screwed up in Sub Hunt as well... not that it really matters, as all of the docs for that game are in German for whatever weird reason. :) There was NO useful software for the Apple ///, only something called "Apple /// Utilities" that let me make a backup of itself. There was also an incomplete copy of Pascal 1.0. Going by the info I gleaned from checking out the system config saved on the Utilities disk, the system was set up to have two floppy drives and a hard drive, but I saw no signs of any extra stuff at the garage sale. There are TWO Apple /// Profile I/O boards in the machine, though, as well as a parallel printer card. The power supply of this machine makes a LOT of noise. Is it supposed to? I found out that there is a monitor built into the machine, too (press Control-OpenApple-Reset) but apart from dumping memory eight bytes at a time and the ability to change the values stored in bytes, I can't figure out if the monitor can do anything. Some of the hardware is very Apple ][ish, though... when romping through memory with the monitor, I of course stumbled into $C000 and beyond, and the speaker sounded in the correct place, and the screen switched to high-res mode. Is this thing just a glorified Apple ][ with an incompatible OS? I took the machine apart, too, and I found a place for a battery on the motherboard, with no battery or battery cover in it. Does the /// have a system clock? Oh, and it has 256K, and the chips are neat little brown chips with gold plates on their backs. 4164s. They look just like the ones in my weird PET expansion board, except that the pins aren't gold. I heeded the warning sticker and didn't open the power supply. :) There was a loose screw, and another spall flat piece of metal, roaming about inside the keyboard. :/ Does anyone know if the Apple ][+ or //e can be made to read/write Apple /// disks in any manner that would be useful for getting files to it? Or do I have to get software for it in actual disk form at first, before I can get the thing to do anything useful? Can the /// emulate a ][? Now, on the subject of that weirdo IBM 4869 disk drive... what does this plug into? The guy I bought it from said it was for an old PC. It has a 37-pin connector on the end of its cable. It's LARGER in two dimensions than even a Commodore 1541 drive. Its power switch is very high quality. :) Would this be a 160K drive? I haven't ripped it apart (yet) to see how many heads the thing has. Pretty cool day, though. It looks like I'll be doing this quite often in future. :) Doug Spence ds_spenc(a)alcor.concordia.ca

28 years, 5 months

12
23
0 0

pieces of metal and plastic

by sinasohn＠crl.com

At 04:09 PM 6/24/97 +0000, you wrote: >Your lovely machines (whichever they are) live *only* because there >someone (you or another human person) to make it work and appreciate the >results. They *only* live in your (or somebody else's) mind. And that is >why their history is important because it's not their history that we >appreciate but the sentiments, feelings, joy and sadness of the people >who used them! What yer saying then, is, that we should collect to remember the impact each computer had on our individual lives and on the lives of the people around us, rather than simply because a machine is physically attractive, technically impressive, or financially successful. --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/

28 years, 5 months

4
4
0 0

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