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

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Chris [mailto:mythtech@mac.com] > If BMW doesn't suit your fancy as an example, replace it with > any small > market share high priced vehicle. Like maybe the Lotus, or > Lambrogini, or > Ferrari.... or for more mainstream, the Jaguar. People aren't buying > these cars because they need them, they are buying them > because they WANT > them. I think BMW is a good metaphor for a Mac -- it leaves nicer cars for the nicer workstations ;) Though, SGI isn't exactly what it used to be -- maybe they just had some "bad years," the Octane2 shows some promise. > bought out of desire, NOT out of neccessity. Once you have an > audience > that buys from desire, you can safely raise your prices to > the highest > point that audience will bear. They'll like it better, of course, if you don't. In the computer sense, people who know what they're doing will just go buy an old Cobra, or that Lamborghini that's setting out in the dumpster for some reason ;) Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

New Toy - VAX 4000-710

by Antonio.Carlini＠riverstonenet.com

>The futurebus was short lived... as >people say "it was in the future"... I never >saw any REAL options for it... DECnis used FB+, the DEC 4000-600/700 series used the FB+ (although apparently a sufficiently different version that interworking was not possible) and that was about it, at least as far as DEC was concerned. Antonio

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> And for the most part... this is perfectly fine with Jobs... he isn't > interested in ruling the PC world, he is interested in making stuff > people desire. He WANTS to be the BMW or Jaguar of the computer world. > MS, Dell, Gateway, et al can be the Ford or Chevy, let them deal with > having the bulk of the sales churning out the same old tired but reliable > designs at cut throat prices. Althought I'm no Jobs fan (hate Apple, love Mac), I must agree. Well said, Chris.

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

Tape dumping programs for Unix/Linux...

by LFessen106＠aol.com

In a message dated 5/2/02 9:33:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time, erd_6502(a)yahoo.com writes: > You misunderstand the direction I'm going. I have magtape with data > already on it. I want to extract that data into a file or set of > files on the disk that I can then burn to CD-R. I can use dd to move > raw records, but I would like to also know what the block size was > for a particular file so I could reconsitute the tape later if > necessary. I'm not so worried about the VMS BACKUP tapes I need to > spin off - I want one saveset per file. If I want to dup any install > tapes (non-VAX), the blocking becomes more critical. > > Essentially, a physical backup that is primarily for data recovery, > but secondarily for later restoration. > > I do not intend to use magtape as a primary backup media for Linux > or Solaris. Writing tape is not a concern here, only reading. I > do know how to operate dump/restore, tar, etc. They are of _no_ use > Wouldn't dd make an image preserving the original block sizes? -Linc. In The Beginning there was nothing, which exploded - Yeah right... Calculating in binary code is as easy as 01,10,11.

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

New Toy - VAX 4000-710

by erd_6502＠yahoo.com

Just dropped by the Uni Surplus for their grand unveiling... Open one day a week now, with inventory soon to appear on the web. Got a PowerMac 7200/90 for $10, just to get cables and accessories with it (needed a AV adapter for my 6100/60av). Also got a nice Barco monitor, c. 1989. Will go great with an old Amiga. The big win, though, was a fully loaded (SCSI drives, 4 x MS440 and TSZ07) VAX 4000-710. I would have thought it was an Alpha box, but unless the sun was in my eyes, it says "VAX 4000" on one name plate on one end, and "Model 710" on a name plate on the other end. It's still in the back of my station wagon, so I haven't even fired it up. From the stickers on the devices, it's running UNIX (/dev/whatever on all the disks and tape drives). I bought it without powering it on because a) I wanted the TSZ07 and it was cheaper than the shipping alone, and b) they don't have a 20A plug at the surplus barn (the one with the blades like (- |) not the usual (| |) for a 15A plug). I only found a few hits for it while googling. Any good resources for a box that new? I figure I'll get it home, stick a VT220 on it and go from there. Yes, I have MMJ cables to plug into the console port. If I decide to keep it, I'll want to think about OpenVMS on it. There's nothing magical about modern DEC Unix that makes it special to me. If I want Unix, I'll go with *BSD or Solaris on beefy hardware. Ultrix only in special cases. -ethan __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com

24 years, 3 months

4
5
0 0

"Non-Standard PCs"

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> What's always annoyed me with "brand-name" PC's is that the packaging ALWAYS > deviates from the "norm" established by the DIY market. Consquently, your > DELL, Gateway, or Compaq was never upgradable, because the CPU or hard disk > wasn't supported by the BIOS, or some peripheral wouldn't fit in the system > because of address conflicts. Simple things like the on-board video caused > problems when they failed because one couldn't disable them, or, if one did, > the now-broken native video interfered with the replacement. Even printer > ports posed such problems. Many times the packaging itself was the problem. > Have you ever tried to replace or upgrade the CDROM drive in an HP PC? It just depends on the model. We bought several Dell Precision Workstations, 410s and 420s. They use non-standard mobos and non-standard PSUs. Everything else is standard. We also have Dimensions, which have similar attributes w/r/t peripherals. -dq

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

AIM-65 displays

by mhstein＠canada.com

>From: Ethan Dicks <erd_6502(a)yahoo.com> >Would you have 10-12 DL1416s? That would give me enough for two >display boards and a spare or two for the future. --- Hmm.. probably not. I do have about a dozen, but I might need some of them for my AIMs if & when I finally get around to looking at them. Also, I doubt that there are even five matching ones; some are Siemens and some are Litronix/NSL, with different profiles, and they are also various brightness codes. But if you need a replacement or two I could probably help out. But from the other perspective, what were you planning to use? And do you know of a source for a cheap 1x20 parallel VF or LCD display? Lots of 2&4x20s; guess one of those would do... --- >Right now, my "spare" time is all focused on displays anyway - the >LCDProc project (http://lcdproc.omnipotent.net/) is closing in on >a new point release and I'm trying to debug a development environment >to be able to add support for some new display hardware (PD3000 "pole >displays" like you see attached to cash registers/tills). --- Looks like there are a few of these display/monitor projects out there; what's so different about the PD3000? Aren't they all RS-232? I'll be in touch off-list when I know more. mike

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>It's just that the 250% price premium >paid for it because it's mainly a single-vendor system is pretty steep. Now, >I haven't looked at any pricing in over 15 years, But when you compare a similar package Gateway, Dell, or other "name brand" PCs, you will find that there is actually very little difference in price. Certainly not enough to justify the significantly higher TCO of the PC. Where the price difference really shines is in the generic branded PCs, or in the "build your own" PCs. >What I don't understand is, if the >supply is lower and the devices are as reliable as those on the PC market, >where's the demand that drives the prices up coming from? Because people WANT a Mac. How does BMW get away with charging a price premium when they only have a 5% market share. People will pay the price because they want the item. I have long felt that Apple could make much larger sweeps into the market if they would stop being "cool" and just make a $400 bare bones iMac. -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

Mac topics (was Re: APPLEVISION Monitor)

by acme_ent＠bellsouth.net

> From: Richard Erlacher <edick(a)idcomm.com> > I'm also looking for a recommendation for a decent but not too rare or > expensive 56K dialup modem that's also fax-capable. Any external 56K modem should work, right? You should be able to get one for $20 or so. > I'm sure I can find a > reasonable MAC for a few dollars, but the real question with the MAC is the > peripherals. No doubt ;>) I don't know about availability where you are, but I get a couple of calls from PC parts vendors every day, and I have not had one call from a Mac vendor in 10 years. If I could find a reliable wholesaler of Mac parts and peripherals I'd start doing Mac repairs. > I've noticed that there's software out there for doing > long-distance jibberjabber between computers on the internet. If I equip one > of these babies with that and send it to my S.O's sister in Portland, they can > yack without running up the long distance bills. That's easily going to pay > for an older MAC in a week or so. Does anyone on this list know of anyone who has gotten "free long distance telephone calls over the internet" software to work consistently? Glen 0/0

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

Mainframe emulation and serial comms (was Re: "Toy computers)"

by donm＠cts.com

On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Ethan Dicks wrote: > > --- "Douglas H. Quebbeman" <dquebbeman(a)acm.org> wrote: > > > ...will "Hercules" talk BISYNC or SNA down a sync serial pipe? > > > > I'd think you'd either need a PC serial card that uses a > > USART instead of a UART, or a convert of some kind... but > > I don't know how the converter would supply synch... > > Naturally. I wouldn't expect a 16550 to sprout clock lines and > stop being asynchronous. I guess I should have been a little > clearer on my inqury. I do not know of any off-the-shelf sync > serial cards for the PC, so I didn't know the best way to phrase > the question. There are/were apparently a number of Apple LocalTalk cards made for PC usage. One of them is the PC MacBridge by Tangent Technologies - now defunct - which is a short 8-bit card based on the Zilog Z8530APC chip. A google search will disclose multiple others also. - don > > But it wouldn't be too hard to kludge up a design for a > > single-port 8251a-based serial card... > > If I were going to build hardware, I'd probably go with the ZSIO > because a) I have some and b) I programmed one at the register > level for a living 10 years ago, and know how to make it tick. > > More to the point: does Hercules support any off-the-shelf sync > cards? I'd rather this be as light on the customization as possible. > > -ethan > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness > http://health.yahoo.com >

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

MP/M was CP/M-86

by Innfogra＠aol.com

In a message dated 5/1/02 5:51:42 PM Pacific Daylight Time, doc(a)mdrconsult.com writes: > Sounds like an Altos. I'm looking for a BIOS file for my 580 with a > Seagate ST225..... > I will keep an eye out for my Altos SW, I too had a 580 at one time. Nice machine. I just salvaged an Altos 8000-12 out of my house. More about that later. The box I am referring to is a small white minitower that used RJ connectors for terminal connection. I believe it is an 8 bit machine like the Altos 580. I cannot remember the name, I will have to get it out of storage. Ran 8 bit MP/M. Cute. Paxton Astoria, OR

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

MP/M was CP/M-86

by Innfogra＠aol.com

In a message dated 5/1/02 12:55:08 PM Pacific Daylight Time, dquebbeman(a)acm.org writes: > > MP/M-86: multiuser, multi-terminal version of CP/M. Supports > more memory than CP/M-86 though... > I liked MPM. I am still sitting on a MPM box that supports 4 terminals and hope to get it running again some time. Hmm. that reminds me, I am going to need a new (used) 10 meg HD for it. It is nice to see the SW for it on the Internet. I should bring it home from the storage locker. Paxton Astoria, OR

24 years, 3 months

3
2
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

> *sigh* Chris, the evangelist... > >Someone gimme a rock, to knock him off his soapbox... :-) -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>Are you certain? If the Mac was running the same network services as >that Unix box, I'd bet your chances of a problem are even -- if not >worse on the Mac, due to their popularity among "home users," which >unix isn't... The wonderful bonus you have here with the Mac is... AppleTalk isn't passed by home internet routers or modems. So you can safely have the default settings of a home file/print sharing turned on on your Macs, and no one outside of your home network will know it is there. This changes if you turn on AppleTalk over IP, but since that is off by default, you must explicitly set it when you turn on your filesharing. At that point, if you don't know what you are activating, you deserve what you get. Also, even if I run servers/services that DO interact with the internet... I am far less likely to be hacked simply by virtue of there is almost no one trying to hack the Mac servers. That isn't true with Windows and Unix where any 13yr old script kiddie can get tools to make attempts. I don't pretend that Mac internet servers are unhackable... just that people aren't making easy tools to try, so the script kiddies ignore them. Much like Mac users being "immune" to viruses. We are FAR from immune... we just don't really see them because no one is interested in trying. There are advantages to being a 5% market... small targets don't get hit often. (so how long now until someone hacks my web page to prove a point :-) ) -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

3
2
0 0

Googling and "egg-sucking" (was Re: "Toy" computers...)

by cdl＠proxima.ucsd.edu

> Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 14:49:00 -0700 (PDT) > From: Ethan Dicks <erd_6502(a)yahoo.com> > Subject: Googling and "egg-sucking" (was Re: "Toy" computers...) > To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org > In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0204281433220.29291-100000(a)george.home.org> > > --- Doc <doc(a)mdrconsult.com> wrote: > > On Sun, 28 Apr 2002, Peter C. Wallace wrote: > > > > > On Sun, 28 Apr 2002, Doc wrote: > > > > > > Dude. > > > > Fire up your favorite Open Source browser. Go to > > > > http://www.google.com > > > > Do a search for this (quotation marks included): > > > > > > > > "Teach Grandpa to suck eggs" > > > > > > BTW Google doesn't find the quoted string... > > I got one hit with this... > "teaching grandpa to suck eggs" > > And a bunch more by using the exact phraseology I heard growing up... > > "teach your grandma to suck eggs" > > With Google, spelling (and precise word selection) counts. > > > Argh. > > Once again, what I thought was a universal expression turns out to be > > a Texasism. > > I would count it as an American Colloquialism, but I don't think of the > phrase as uniquely Texan. Hey, guys. Simplify. A Google search on the phrase "suck eggs" leads to a clear explanation of the historical use of the phrase, dating back to the 16th century in English, and older in other languages. < http://www.quinion.com/words/qa/qa-tea1.htm > carl

24 years, 3 months

3
2
0 0

Info for IMS hardware needed

by Fritz_Chwolka＠t-online.de

There is someone searching for infos about IMS - hardware. Can you help ? Answer only to: arlen.michaels(a)sympatico.ca ==================BEGIN FORWARDED MESSAGE================== >Return-Path: <arlen.michaels(a)sympatico.ca> Just want to thank you for making the old manuals and image files available on http://oldcomputers.dyndns.org/public/ I found things here (like the IMS information) I have been hunting for years. I am still looking for documents etc for some other IMS S-100 boards dating from around 1980-84: - A862 Z80 CPU - A930 Floppy Controller - A821 Winchester Controller - A1100 Winchester Controller - A1021 64K RAM You don't by any chance have files for these, do you? :) Best wishes, Arlen Michaels arlen.michaels(a)sympatico.ca ===================END FORWARDED MESSAGE=================== -- Greetinggs from Fritz Chwolka < collecting old computers yust for fun > > at www.alterechner.de <

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

The toys just keep coming... Tek 4105 terminals

by erd_6502＠yahoo.com

I finally hooked up with an old college buddy of mine who works at OCLC. We had previously arranged to meet today before I filled up my car with wads o' DEC stuff. Fortunately there was still room for the three complete Tektronix 4105 terminals. He caught them on the way to the dumpster a few years ago, but hasn't done much with them. They all powered up and worked 4 months ago. Is anyone interested in one? I do not need three. Make offers off-list, please, to ethan_dicks(a)yahoo.com (if you reply to this message it will take longer for me to see your message). Offers exceeding S&H will receive first consideration. Given their size, I'd prefer pickup or even delivery at Dayton (if you are going). Packing will be a hassle. If you act now, you can have a Tek 4695 color printer... I got it at Dayton because there were Amiga drivers for it. Turns out I wanted a 4696. The 4695 is a messy beast that set back inkjet evolution several eons. I only mention it because it is specifically mentioned in the docs as supported as the standard color "Copier" device. I have offered the printer to the list once. I got no responses. This time, I will tear it down for interesting tidbits and junk the rest. It is too cantankerous and the ink is essentially not available, so as a printer, it's worthless. Its only value is as a decorative accessory to the terminal in a historical exhibit to show how it would have been used in period. Anybody have any interesting data files/software to throw at a Tek terminal to do cool stuff? -ethan __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

New Toy - VAX 4000-710

by Antonio.Carlini＠riverstonenet.com

> I would have thought it was an Alpha > box, but unless the sun was in my eyes, it says "VAX 4000" on one > name plate on one end, and "Model 710" on a name plate on the other > end. I think the sun was in your eyes (or someone has been playing with labels). It might be a VAX 4000-700A or a VAX 4000-705A or it might indeed be an Alpha: a DEC 4000-710 (this was the Fang, a follow on to the DEC 4000-610, the Cobra). You can add a second CPU to obtain a 4000-720 (similarly you can get a 4000-620). > It's still in the back of my station wagon, so I haven't even > fired it up. From the stickers on the devices, it's running UNIX > (/dev/whatever on all the disks and tape drives). It's almost certainly a DEC 4000-710 (which is probably a win: they are rarer than VAX 4000-70x machines IMHO). I don't think Ultrix ever ran on the VAX 4000 machines. > I bought it without powering it on because a) I wanted the TSZ07 and > it was cheaper than the shipping alone, and b) they don't have > a 20A plug at the surplus barn (the one with the blades like (- |) > not the usual (| |) for a 15A plug). Sounds to me like you won big time here :-) Antonio

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

No subject

by Fritz_Chwolka＠t-online.de

There is someone searching for infos about IMS - hardware. Can you help ? Answer only to: arlen.michaels(a)sympatico.ca ==================BEGIN FORWARDED MESSAGE================== >Return-Path: <arlen.michaels(a)sympatico.ca> Just want to thank you for making the old manuals and image files available on http://oldcomputers.dyndns.org/public/ I found things here (like the IMS information) I have been hunting for years. I am still looking for documents etc for some other IMS S-100 boards dating from around 1980-84: - A862 Z80 CPU - A930 Floppy Controller - A821 Winchester Controller - A1100 Winchester Controller - A1021 64K RAM You don't by any chance have files for these, do you? :) Best wishes, Arlen Michaels arlen.michaels(a)sympatico.ca ===================END FORWARDED MESSAGE=================== Greetings from Fritz Chwolka - Duisburg / collecting old computers just for fun at www.alterechner.de \

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

ARK files

by caprio＠dcms.com

Eric, Thank you. pkxarc did the job! >> I picked up a bunch of CPM archives from CPMUG. The files end with the >> ARK file extension. I've tried the unark16.exe I picked up from the >> oak.oakland.edu site but I can't seem to get them to unpack. > >ARK should be the same as ARC. You could probably use pkxarc if you can >still find it. I think pkunpack will work as well. Does anyone know if >WINZIP handles "ARC" type archives? > >> What MS-DOS command works on these archives or do I need to fetch a CP/M >> version and run under a CP/M emulator? > >Eric

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

MP/M was CP/M-86

by f.heite＠hccnet.nl

Oaxton wrote: >I liked MPM. I am still sitting on a MPM box that supports 4 terminals and >hope to get it running again some time. Hmm. that reminds me, I am going to >need a new (used) 10 meg HD for it. It is nice to see the SW for it on the >Internet. On what kind of hardware is this MPM (86?) running? Newbies that want to experiment with MPM, would most likely want an implementation of MPM for the IBM PC hardware - but is that available somewhere? The downloads that were mentioned a week ago (mpm8621i.zip etc.) are for some compupro hardware. Freek.

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

New Toy - VAX 4000-710

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Antonio Carlini [mailto:Antonio.Carlini@riverstonenet.com] > > a 20A plug at the surplus barn (the one with the blades like (- |) > > not the usual (| |) for a 15A plug). > Sounds to me like you won big time here :-) Sounds to me like a 16A plug. ;) Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

FW: Dig UNIX Alpha V3 CD-ROM Kit

by healyzh＠aracnet.com

> OpenVMS? Maybe eventually. When I started really getting into > computer work, it was as an operator, on an OpenVMS system... But since I > do have the CDs and docs here for D/UX, I'll give it a whirl, and see if it > fits my needs. > Does it allow only one user at a time, without the OSF-BASE PAK? > This afternoon I'll be firing up my 3000/400 to see what's > installed, before I try throwing D/UX on it... Without the PAK you'll be pretty restricted on what you can do, and can probably only log in on the console. I suspect you can't even bring up X-Windows. OpenVMS has the advantage of being cheaper to run for a Hobbyist, but the Hobbyist PAKs have to be renewed every year (for free). Tru64 costs about $100 for the hobbyist, but that includes a set of CD's and permanent PAK's. Personally I prefer OpenVMS on my Alpha's as I can run UNIX faster on x86. Zane

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

New Toy - VAX 4000-710

by healyzh＠aracnet.com

> The big win, though, was a fully loaded (SCSI drives, 4 x MS440 > and TSZ07) VAX 4000-710. I would have thought it was an Alpha > box, but unless the sun was in my eyes, it says "VAX 4000" on one > name plate on one end, and "Model 710" on a name plate on the other Lucky Bum!!!! That's one of the most powerful VAXen around! OpenVMS/VAX should rock on that sucker! It's interesting that there is a VAX 4000-710 and a DEC 4000-710 with the DEC being an Alpha. Zane

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by DAW＠yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu

> From: Christopher Smith > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: David Woyciesjes [mailto:DAW@yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu] > > > > From: Christopher Smith > > > > I certainly hope that changes. I could stand to see many people > > > replace their peesees with Macs. > > > Instead of a Mac, how about a DEC 3000/400, or Sun > > Ulltra1 Creator > > or an SGI, or... > > Even better, but there's less of a chance that will happen. > > Chris > Unless, of course, you hang around here... -- --- David A Woyciesjes --- C & IS Support Specialist --- Yale University Press --- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu --- (203) 432-0953 --- ICQ # - 905818 Mac OS X 10.1 - Darwin Kernel Version 5 Running since 01/22/2002 without a crash

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

what precautions are called for when moving an RM03 ?

by GOOI＠oce.nl

Hi all. Well, the weekend of the big move is getting closer. I intend to take 2 RM03's and not only for the good looks! I actually want to hook them to the 11/70 and operate them. Changing electricity cabling is planned ;-) The big question is: how do I move these "washing machines" so that afterward they still are in working order? I have experience with head locking RL01/RL02, RK05, RA81 and RA60. I suspect that the RM03 also have some head lock mechanism. Perhaps also some trick for the spindle like the tension of the drive belt in the RA81? Thanks for all the good advice received on the RM03's so far. I am looking forward to read more on topic info from this fine list. For those who like my StarShip website: I got the stars on the main screen correctly plotted with the rotation matrix algorithms, so an update will hit the site in a month or so. kind regards, - Henk.

24 years, 3 months

3
2
0 0

Seeking Interest in Group Purchase, Avery Magtape Labels

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> > Tape Reel High Speed Computer Labels > > 3-7/8" x 1-13/16", White, Dot Matrix, > > Removable, 5000 labels per box > > 04052 5000 Labels per Box $139.15 > > > > If there are just ten people on the list who'd have use > > for 500 labels, it's close to fifteen bucks per person. > > > > OTOH, is anyone sitting on a stash of them? I found a > > sheet with precisely three labels, and I've quite a > > few more tapes than that... > > Check to see if the adhesive still sticks to anything. My long-term > experience with tape-reel labels is that the "permanent' adhesive > lets go after 10 years or so, leaving me with a rack of unlabeled > tapes and a bunch of labels on the floor. Dunno what kind of labels my old ones are, but labels applied in the 1978 through 1983 period remain firmly fastened to the reels. I took one of the three unused label, peeled it from the backing paper, and applied it to a new reel of tape. It stuck, but threatened to not do so very well. Some hand pressure seems to have done the trick. It looks ok now... write me back in 10 years for an update. ;)

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: David Woyciesjes [mailto:DAW@yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu] > > From: Christopher Smith > > I certainly hope that changes. I could stand to see many people > > replace their peesees with Macs. > Instead of a Mac, how about a DEC 3000/400, or Sun > Ulltra1 Creator > or an SGI, or... Even better, but there's less of a chance that will happen. Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

CP/M-86

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> On Wed, 1 May 2002, Douglas H. Quebbeman wrote: > > > OK, so who knows the sequence and differences between: > > > MP/M-86 > > > Concurrent CP/M-86 > > > Concurrent PC-DOS (announced by DRI at Comdex, because IBM did NOT > > > trademark "PC-DOS" ("It's a description, not a name"), but > > > then DRI backed down and changed the name) > > > Concurrent DOS > > > DR DOS > > Very good, Fred! The answer to your question is "Fred Cisin"! > > Well, you confirmed my guess as to the sequence, but it wasn't a > rhetorical question. I really DON'T know what the differences are. Oops! My bad... MP/M-86: multiuser, multi-terminal version of CP/M. Supports more memory than CP/M-86 though... Concurrent CP/M-86: MP/M-86 with multi-terminal support removed. User can run multiple programs simultaneously. Concurrent PC-DOS: Concurrent CP/M-86 with support for Microsoft loader conventions, Microsoft disk formats, etc. while pre- serving existing CP/M-86 program & media support Concurrent DOS: Don't know the differences but whatever it is it's Concurrent PC-DOS modified to do <xyz> DR DOS: Lots of support added for stuff like running mouse and network drivers in upper memory blocks, etc. Generally a catch-up revision of the previous product, but was already surpoassed by the latest Microsoft DOS. hth,-dq

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by DAW＠yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu

> From: Christopher Smith > > > There are advantages to being a 5% market... small targets > > don't get hit > > often. > > I certainly hope that changes. I could stand to see many people > replace their peesees with Macs. > > Chris > Instead of a Mac, how about a DEC 3000/400, or Sun Ulltra1 Creator or an SGI, or... -- --- David A Woyciesjes --- C & IS Support Specialist --- Yale University Press --- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu --- (203) 432-0953 --- ICQ # - 905818 Mac OS X 10.1 - Darwin Kernel Version 5 Running since 01/22/2002 without a crash

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

New Toy - VAX 4000-710

by dittman＠dittman.net

BTW, if you decide not to keep it, I'll buy it from you. -- Eric Dittman dittman(a)dittman.net Check out the DEC Enthusiasts Club at http://www.dittman.net/

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

CP/M-86

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> OK, so who knows the sequence and differences between: > > MP/M-86 > > Concurrent CP/M-86 > > Concurrent PC-DOS (announced by DRI at Comdex, because IBM did NOT > trademark "PC-DOS" ("It's a description, not a name"), but > then DRI backed > down and changed the name) > > Concurrent DOS > > DR DOS Very good, Fred! The answer to your question is "Fred Cisin"! ;)

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Chris [mailto:mythtech@mac.com] > The wonderful bonus you have here with the Mac is... AppleTalk isn't > passed by home internet routers or modems. So you can safely have the > default settings of a home file/print sharing turned on on > your Macs, and > no one outside of your home network will know it is there. Won't argue with that. In fact, that sounds like just what I was saying. ;) > This changes if you turn on AppleTalk over IP, but since that > is off by > default, you must explicitly set it when you turn on your > filesharing. At > that point, if you don't know what you are activating, you > deserve what > you get. If you make changes to the configuration, as I said, it's likely to get worse. > Also, even if I run servers/services that DO interact with the > internet... I am far less likely to be hacked simply by > virtue of there > is almost no one trying to hack the Mac servers. That isn't true with > Windows and Unix where any 13yr old script kiddie can get > tools to make > attempts. It's a trivial, but not obvious to an idiot, exercise to make those "tools" work under Unix, too, and they become outdated very quickly. If you're running a newer or older Unix than the "tool" is designed to break, you'll likely have no problem there, either. This whole part of the discussion might be irrelevant, though, since nobody does anything interesting in that area any more. It's generally "denial of service" crap, and mostly depends on saturating peoples' network pipe, but what can you expect? > I don't pretend that Mac internet servers are unhackable... just that > people aren't making easy tools to try, so the script kiddies > ignore them. Possible. Just imagine how "safe" Amiga users are in that respect :) > Much like Mac users being "immune" to viruses. We are FAR > from immune... > we just don't really see them because no one is interested in trying. Wait 'till I get my Prime. ;) > There are advantages to being a 5% market... small targets > don't get hit > often. I certainly hope that changes. I could stand to see many people replace their peesees with Macs. Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

> And I should clarify, the only reason this machine has been rebooted >since I loaded OS X back on 1/22/2002 is because Apple hasn't figured out >how to update the system without a reboot... So that's only 3 reboots, all >by choice, not crashes. Now if they can just fix Classic so when a freaking installer forces you to reboot after installing a classic app, it doesn't take down the whole machine! 4 different installers did that to me. After installing in classic, it forced me to reboot, and rather than just rebooting classic, it froze the entire computer. Of course, that brings up another pet peeve of mine... installers that FORCE you to reboot after installing. Thanks, but I'll decide when it is a good time to reboot, give me the option of rebooting then, or quitting and doing it myself later. -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

FW: Dig UNIX Alpha V3 CD-ROM Kit

by DAW＠yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu

> From: Zane H. Healy > > > I've got here the Digital UNIX (a.k.a. D/UX, right?) v3.2F CD box > >here. The way the docs read, without an OSF-BASE license PAK, I can have > >only 1 user logged in at a time, not counting root. the OSF-BASE PAK will > >let me have 2 simultaneous users, and anything higher needs an > appropriate > >OSF-USER PAK, right? > > Either way, I'm hoping to get my hands on a OSF-BASE PAK, at least. > > You might just want to buy the Tru64 V5.1 Hobbyist Kit. It's about $100, > and it includes PAK's. Or better yet, put OpenVMS on the system :^) > > Zane > -- > OpenVMS? Maybe eventually. When I started really getting into computer work, it was as an operator, on an OpenVMS system... But since I do have the CDs and docs here for D/UX, I'll give it a whirl, and see if it fits my needs. Does it allow only one user at a time, without the OSF-BASE PAK? This afternoon I'll be firing up my 3000/400 to see what's installed, before I try throwing D/UX on it... -- --- David A Woyciesjes --- C & IS Support Specialist --- Yale University Press --- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu --- (203) 432-0953 --- ICQ # - 905818 Mac OS X 10.1 - Darwin Kernel Version 5 Running since 01/22/2002 without a crash

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

IRIX

by knightstalkerbob＠netscape.net

Dan Wright <dtwright(a)uiuc.edu> wrote: >Tarsi said: > >Though, I think any machines that are truly on-topic wouldn't be able to run >IRIX 6.5 anyway ;) > >- Dan Wright >(dtwright(a)uiuc.edu) >(http://www.uiuc.edu/~dtwright) > I've successfully installed 6.5 on an Indy with a 2 Gig drive. Barebones with only 2 Gig, but it runs:) -- Bob Mason 2x Amiga 500's, GVP A530 (40mhz 68030/68882, 8meg Fast, SCSI), 1.3/3.1, 2meg Chip, full ECS chipset, EZ135, 1084S, big harddrives, 2.2xCD Gateway Performance 500 Piece 'o Crap, 'ME, 128meg, 20Gig & 40Gig, flatbed. Heathkit H-89A, 64K RAM, hard and soft-sectored floppies, SigmaSoft and Systems 256K RAM Drive/Print Spooler/Graphics board HDOS 2 & CP/M 2.2.03/2.2.04 __________________________________________________________________ Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/ Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/

24 years, 3 months

10
15
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by DAW＠yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu

> From: Chris > > > And Chris, couldn't you tell I' was breaking your stones? C'mon, > >you've seen my basement... :) > > Yes... but your statement was still correct. I implied that Apple was far > better than it really is when compared to things outside the wintel > world. I was simply wrong in that respect. > > Besides, how could you be anything but pro-Mac... you proudly display > your OS X uptime in your sig > > -chris > Well, I'm not sure if it's really pro-Mac, but more of pro-OS X, or is it pro-*BSD, and a bit of 'about time someone took it to the masses'. And I should fix my sig, it's now 10.1.4... [~] dwoycies% uname -a Darwin dwoyciesjes-g4.unipress.yale.edu 5.4 Darwin Kernel Version 5.4: Wed Apr 10 09:27:47 PDT 2002; root:xnu/xnu-201.19.3.obj~1/RELEASE_PPC Power Macintosh powerpc And I should clarify, the only reason this machine has been rebooted since I loaded OS X back on 1/22/2002 is because Apple hasn't figured out how to update the system without a reboot... So that's only 3 reboots, all by choice, not crashes. So, technically the "Running without a crash" isn't really wrong. -- --- David A Woyciesjes --- C & IS Support Specialist --- Yale University Press --- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu --- (203) 432-0953 --- ICQ # - 905818 Mac OS X 10.1.2 - Darwin Kernel Version 5.2: Fri Dec 7 21:39:35 PST 2001 Running since 01/22/2002 without a crash

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>You mean it'll work with the older mac's? It has a "normal" (for MAC's) >video >cable, and its model number is 1710AV. I just checked the tech manual for the 1710AV, it indeed has the standard RGB plug, so you should be good to go with just about any mac that has an RGB port. Some of the older ones will only be able to display in 640x480 resolution, but the Q650 you are looking into will do higher. If you want the PDF of the manual, let me know, I'll send it to you offlist. It's about 3.6MB, has some interesting notes about repair problems with that model (Apple even has/had a repair extension program in place for some of it) >It has what appears to be >pass-through's for the mouse and for a mike, that funny thing that looks like >the USB symbol but isn't That's the ADB port. Predates USB by some time. The idea was you could run one cable bundle from the screen to the Mac, and then be able to plug the keyboard and mic into the screen (mouse would be connected to the keyboard's ADB port). >but it's only a 16" >diagonal visible (not viewable) screen so I don't think it's supposed to be a >17", though you never know these days. It is listed as a 17" with 16.1" viewable image size. Although, it was made back in the day when apple was a little less than honest with their screen sizes (before they were sued over it), so who knows what it really has. >I saw a >Quadra 650 or something on that order for $5 earlier today. It had a part of >the front face missing, else I'd have probably looked inside. Probably missing the CD bezel. Most likely it was stripped of the CD before being junked. If the CD is missing, verify that the rest of the system is there, who knows what else was pulled. -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

3
2
0 0

FW: Dig UNIX Alpha V3 CD-ROM Kit

by DAW＠yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu

Yep, this is about 4 years shy of being on topic, but I know I can find help here... I've got here the Digital UNIX (a.k.a. D/UX, right?) v3.2F CD box here. The way the docs read, without an OSF-BASE license PAK, I can have only 1 user logged in at a time, not counting root. the OSF-BASE PAK will let me have 2 simultaneous users, and anything higher needs an appropriate OSF-USER PAK, right? Either way, I'm hoping to get my hands on a OSF-BASE PAK, at least. The DEC 3000/400 that this will be installed on, I have never seen what OS is on there now. Maybe I'll get lucky and there will be a valid OSF-BASE PAK there already? Nah, doubt it. Not my luck. I think the previous owner said something about NetBSD on it... -- --- David A Woyciesjes --- C & IS Support Specialist --- Yale University Press --- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu --- (203) 432-0953 --- ICQ # - 905818 Mac OS X 10.1.2 - Darwin Kernel Version 5.2: Fri Dec 7 21:39:35 PST 2001 Running since 01/22/2002 without a crash

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>Now there's one of the problems with Apple's approach ... My old (1993-94) >'486 setups support PCI, (some of 'em ... the ones I use) while these old >MAC's don't because Apple was slow to adopt PCI. Not slow to adopt... too arrogant to get with the program and stop using their own standards. The first PCI based macs showed up in 1995 -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

> And Chris, couldn't you tell I' was breaking your stones? C'mon, >you've seen my basement... :) Yes... but your statement was still correct. I implied that Apple was far better than it really is when compared to things outside the wintel world. I was simply wrong in that respect. Besides, how could you be anything but pro-Mac... you proudly display your OS X uptime in your sig -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> >Now there's one of the problems with Apple's approach ... My old (1993-94) > >'486 setups support PCI, (some of 'em ... the ones I use) while these old > >MAC's don't because Apple was slow to adopt PCI. > > Not slow to adopt... too arrogant to get with the program and stop using > their own standards. I've always thought of apple as the Sony of Computing... there may be fans of the memory stick here, but Sony was slow to come out with high-density versions... hell, in the CompactFlash format, I can eschew solid state for a tiny 1-inch IBM 1GB hard drive... now *that's* density! -dq

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Chris [mailto:mythtech@mac.com] > specifying that on this list, I opened the comment to compare > them to a > slew of machines that would blow Apple out of the water. I imagined you would be comparing them directly to peesees, but I couldn't pass that up. > Sorry it was my > Mac Evangelist side popping out too quickly. That's ok. I like to evangelize VMS once in a while. > Ok... I was thinking security as in how often we loose or > destroy your > files. Not how often we let someone steal your files. No That's different. I've seen it happen, of course, but I'd rather handle the MacOS "corrupt preferences" problem that is so common than the windows "I just stomped on the wrong DLL" counterpart. :) > Apple doesn't > excel at keeping the files intact, but they are no worse than > many others. I often think that windows machines should come with a VAX/PDP-like "Write protect fixed disk 0" button. :) > In terms of allowing someone to steal or alter your files, I > agree, short > of encrypting the files, there is nothing acceptable on the > Mac pre-OS X Of course, PGP is fine for that, but I wasn't counting it since it's third-party. > I have seen few even half way decent security systems to keep > people off > your Mac. And even the half way decent ones tend to be easy > to bypass if > you have sufficient access to the machine (ie: steal it and take your > time) Even if not, I've seen far too many that can be disabled by hitting "shift" during boot-up. > Although, in the Mac's defense, in terms of "hacker" access > from over the > internet, I will trust my Mac running any pre-OS X version of the OS > before I will trust ANY other OS (even well configured Unix). In that Are you certain? If the Mac was running the same network services as that Unix box, I'd bet your chances of a problem are even -- if not worse on the Mac, due to their popularity among "home users," which unix isn't... > line, then I stand by my overly stated statement saying that > the Mac has > far better security. I think that the closer-to-default Mac configuration is better by virtue of it's not running unnecessary network services. The Unix one needs a lot of help in that respect. Now, if a given system must run these services, or if you want to compare a Unix set up to be "Mac like" in this respect to a Mac, it's a whole different thing. Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by DAW＠yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu

> From: Chris > > >> WOAH?!? That's just a shot from the dark... Apple is known for how good > > >> their quality IS... sure they had a few flops, but most of their > hardware > >> is built well, and built to last. And security? Um... compared to what? > > >> Windows? BWAA HAA HAA HAA HAA!!! > >> > >> -chris > >> > > Really Chris? Then why was I very busy making good money doing > >Apple/Mac support at Electric Boat up here? ;) > > Sorry, that was a poorly worded direct comparison to the PC WinTel world. > Having done Mac and PC hardware repair for the last don't know how long, > I can tell you that PCs break down 10x more often than a Mac. Hardware > wise that is. Software wise, well, that isn't fair... Windows just isn't > up to the task of being compared to anything. > > Alas, I forgot what list I was on, and many (if not most) of the > computers applicable to this list would blow Apple stuff out of the water > in terms of reliability in hardware AND software. > - Hmmm, actually, compared to x86/Win stuff, Apple is generally better, so your comment isn't that far off. And Chris, couldn't you tell I' was breaking your stones? C'mon, you've seen my basement... :) -- --- David A Woyciesjes --- C & IS Support Specialist --- Yale University Press --- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu --- (203) 432-0953 --- ICQ # - 905818 Mac OS X 10.1.2 - Darwin Kernel Version 5.2: Fri Dec 7 21:39:35 PST 2001 Running since 01/22/2002 without a crash

24 years, 3 months

3
2
0 0

CP/M-86

by f.heite＠hccnet.nl

Pat Finnegan wrote: >Cool. Next question: is there any software for MSDOS or Linux (preferably >that I don't need to pay for) that will read/write CP/M-86 (1) hard disk >partitions or (2) 1.44M floppies. I've noticed 22DSK doesn't support much >more than 5-1/4" floppies. Out-of-the-box "CP/M-86 for the IBM PC" does not support 1.44 MB diskettes. But if you still need it: some time ago I wrote a software package called "The 1.44 MB Feature for CP/M-86" that provides this support as an add-on to standard CP/M-86 for IBM. See the CP/M-86 software repository at www. seanet.com/~klaw There's also a definition for 22disk in the package. Freek Heite.

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

MacEthernet (Was: RE: APPLEVISION Monitor)

by mythtech＠mac.com

>> networks, but they've since been renamed by Apple to 'PhoneNet' because of >> the satin phone cable you typically use to connect the adaptors together. > >Actually, I think 'LocalTalk' is what they now call the serial-connected >network. Not quite sure where I got 'phonenet' from... LocalTalk was always technically the cabling system that Apple developed. It uses a 4 wire round cable and connects to a box that connects to the serial port of the Mac (traditionally the printer port) PhoneNet/TeleNet/TeleTalk was always technically the cabling system that used 2 wires in a phone cable to connect. I believe this was first developed by TOPS, but I'm probably wrong. Also connected to an adaptor that connected to the serial port. Serial was always technically the cabling system where you take a mac printer cable and connect two macs together with it (AppleTalk over Serial... wonder why it was never refered to as SerialTalk) Localtalk has been perverted into meaning any of the above topologies, and any others that use the serial port on the Mac. And Farallon perverted the PhoneNet name by using it in one of their ethernet cards (PhoneNet EN) -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>> their hardware >> is built well, and built to last. And security? Um... > >I've seen better. I have better. (I also have a couple of >Macintosh's, a IIGS, etc... which still work fine, to be >fair) I was making the comparison to the WinTel world, forgetting that without specifying that on this list, I opened the comment to compare them to a slew of machines that would blow Apple out of the water. Sorry it was my Mac Evangelist side popping out too quickly. >> compared to what? > >VMS? :) Even a poorly configured Unix -- until OS X. >MacOS had no built-in security at that point. (I hope you >won't seriously suggest that "At Ease" counts... :) Ok... I was thinking security as in how often we loose or destroy your files. Not how often we let someone steal your files. No Apple doesn't excel at keeping the files intact, but they are no worse than many others. In terms of allowing someone to steal or alter your files, I agree, short of encrypting the files, there is nothing acceptable on the Mac pre-OS X (at least OS 9 finally added built in encryption if you wanted to use it). I have seen few even half way decent security systems to keep people off your Mac. And even the half way decent ones tend to be easy to bypass if you have sufficient access to the machine (ie: steal it and take your time) Although, in the Mac's defense, in terms of "hacker" access from over the internet, I will trust my Mac running any pre-OS X version of the OS before I will trust ANY other OS (even well configured Unix). In that line, then I stand by my overly stated statement saying that the Mac has far better security. -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>> WOAH?!? That's just a shot from the dark... Apple is known for how good >> their quality IS... sure they had a few flops, but most of their hardware >> is built well, and built to last. And security? Um... compared to what? >> Windows? BWAA HAA HAA HAA HAA!!! >> >> -chris >> > Really Chris? Then why was I very busy making good money doing >Apple/Mac support at Electric Boat up here? ;) Sorry, that was a poorly worded direct comparison to the PC WinTel world. Having done Mac and PC hardware repair for the last don't know how long, I can tell you that PCs break down 10x more often than a Mac. Hardware wise that is. Software wise, well, that isn't fair... Windows just isn't up to the task of being compared to anything. Alas, I forgot what list I was on, and many (if not most) of the computers applicable to this list would blow Apple stuff out of the water in terms of reliability in hardware AND software. -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Chris [mailto:mythtech@mac.com] > >Apple Computer Co. always impressed me as being > >entirely too willing to compromise the quality of MY > hardware/software, and > >the security of my data, in favor of their profits. > WOAH?!? That's just a shot from the dark... Apple is known > for how good > their quality IS... sure they had a few flops, but most of I wouldn't say that. Apple hardware is passable for "consumer" stuff, sure, but it's not good. Better than most peesee clone manufacturers? Sure, but again, that doesn't make it good. You're welcome to buy an all-in-one box with a plastic bubble for a case if you like, but I'm not going to. :) I will also grant that Apple's hardware used to be better when compared to peesee stuff than it is now (possibly due to Apple's cutting costs)... > their hardware > is built well, and built to last. And security? Um... I've seen better. I have better. (I also have a couple of Macintosh's, a IIGS, etc... which still work fine, to be fair) > compared to what? VMS? :) Even a poorly configured Unix -- until OS X. MacOS had no built-in security at that point. (I hope you won't seriously suggest that "At Ease" counts... :) > Windows? BWAA HAA HAA HAA HAA!!! Heh. Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 3 months

3
3
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Erlacher [mailto:edick@idcomm.com] > Does the MAC support USB? How about USB-2? 5-port boards Yes, and "possibly" -- if a USB-2 interface is available on a PCI board, there's a good chance of finding one supported by Apple. Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

IBM AT power supply case/cooling question

by fernande＠internet1.net

I'm using the case from an IBM AT to build a socket 7 Linux machine. The AT wasn't complete, and the case is a little rusty on it's hood, so it wasn't a good example to restore to original. My question is this..... can I safely leave the PS cover off? If I add a few of the factory screws the PS case/chassis is still quite solid, it just does have the cover on the top, or by the drives. Basically, it removes two out of six sides. I'd want to do this for a bit more cooling, since the fan would have less obstruction. Plus, I think it looks lind of cool too :-) Would I have problems with EMF emmisions effecting the computer's operations? The main case cover would be installed.... would I have other EMF troubles, if I leave the top of the PS off? Chad Fernandez Michigan, USA

24 years, 3 months

6
11
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>Does the MAC support USB? You can thank the Mac for the USB saturation in the PC world. It wasn't moving until Apple added USB to the iMac. >How about USB-2? Not yet >5-port boards for the PC cost >about $20. Most of those boards, if you read the packaging, also support PCI based Macs, but since every current shipping Mac has USB built in, there is little need to buy the board except to add it to older systems. -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>> >We'd best just agree to disagree about Apple Computer Co product quality. >> >> I'm sure not aiming to start another flame war :-) >> >Thank you both! ;) When you are a die hard Mac user in a Windows based industry, you learn to "agree to disagree" and just let things go. -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>Standard? The 8*24*GC kicks keister -- it's accelerated and has great colour >output. My IIsi is visibly faster since I got one. I didn't mean standard as in piss poor... what I meant was, the 8*24 was a commonly found card in the day of the IIx. Yes, it is a very good card. -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by DAW＠yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu

> From: Chris > > >Apple Computer Co. always impressed me as being > >entirely too willing to compromise the quality of MY hardware/software, > and > >the security of my data, in favor of their profits. > > WOAH?!? That's just a shot from the dark... Apple is known for how good > their quality IS... sure they had a few flops, but most of their hardware > is built well, and built to last. And security? Um... compared to what? > Windows? BWAA HAA HAA HAA HAA!!! > > -chris > Really Chris? Then why was I very busy making good money doing Apple/Mac support at Electric Boat up here? ;) -- --- David A Woyciesjes --- C & IS Support Specialist --- Yale University Press --- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu --- (203) 432-0953 --- ICQ # - 905818 Mac OS X 10.1.2 - Darwin Kernel Version 5.2: Fri Dec 7 21:39:35 PST 2001 Running since 01/22/2002 without a crash

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

Apple networking (was: APPLEVISION Monitor)

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: tim lindner [mailto:tlindner@ix.netcom.com] > PhontNet is also a cabling system. It's worth mentioning that the difference between phonenet and localtalk is all in the cable ends. There's really no difference at all. Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Erlacher [mailto:edick@idcomm.com] > One thing that I've wondered is how one gets an old MAC to talk on the > Ethernet when it's a mixed environment with Netware and > Windows NT servers. I > know Netware has a provision for MAC namespace, but I've only seen one > ethernet-capable MAC, which leaves me wondering how folks who > use MACs install > an ethernet interface. If you can't get an ethernet board for the machine, you can get a Kayman Gatorbox. It's an Appletalk <-> Ethernet router kind of setup. It will also do protocol translation to an extent, and most Mac IP stacks will use it. (I think. :) Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by edick＠idcomm.com

See below, plz. Dick ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pat Finnegan" <pat(a)purdueriots.com> To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org> Sent: Wednesday, May 01, 2002 12:24 AM Subject: Re: APPLEVISION Monitor > On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Richard Erlacher wrote: > > > The baseband frequency, BTW doesn't impact the CPU, at least not on the > > systems I'm familiar with, since the NIC recognizes traffic for the local > > address and only that has to be dealt with. That's done at the CPU's > > pleasure. > > Yeah, but 1) there's no way you'd come close to saturating a 1Gbit pipe > with your Performa and 2) it makes more sense to use a network switch that > can deal with different speeds than a single backbone of 'excessive' > speed. In fact, to use junky old Ethernet's CSMA/CD collision detection > on a 'bus' version that fast would require a VERY short bus length, > negating any advantages I could see for using such a fast networking > topology. > First of all, it's not necessary that the MAC be capable of the highest bandwidth. I was just curious what's out there. Secondly, for a 5-6 staton LAN, including servers, it makes little sense to have lots of switching/routing hardware and a complex topology. Right now, what's active is one of two servers and a single station (this one). I get inquiries about the 10Gb and faster hardware from time to time, and, having not even ventured, in any sense, into the 1 Gb stuff, I'm just looking around. > > Still, I guess it would be a very interesting sight. > > > So, if I want to put standard ethernet on this Performa, how does that work? > > 1) Insert NIC into LC PDS slot > 2) Turn on mac, connect ethernet cable, and configure the 'AppleTalk' > control panel to use Ethernet instead of the modem or printer port. > ... and what's an LC PDS slot? What's a suitable NIC that's common enough I might see one? > > > What do I have to beg, borrow, steal? If the NT server, as I'm told it can, > > talks AppleTalk, does it do that over ethernet? > > Yes. It's possible to get a Localtalk card (for connection over the slow > 230Kbit apple networking), but they're few and far between (besides, I'm > not sure what OS's they actually work with). However, AppleTalk will run > 'out of the box' over ethernet on NT. My high school used a couple NT > servers for all of their Mac systems, so it's definitely doable. > > OK, now I really need to try and get some work done. > > -- Pat > >

24 years, 3 months

2
2
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Chris [mailto:mythtech@mac.com] > >I'm still trying to figure out what to do with a MAC once > it's running. > replace your normal everyday use computer... and finally be > able to relax? Well, that got a laugh from me. Some of us who don't use Macs every day can already relax. :) Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Erlacher [mailto:edick@idcomm.com] > I'm still trying to figure out what to do with a MAC once > it's running. I > have a walkman, and several CD players, so I don't need it > for that ... Do you like programming in Pascal? :) Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

MacEthernet (Was: RE: APPLEVISION Monitor)

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Erlacher [mailto:edick@idcomm.com] > What's Appletalk, ... I mean REALLY ... What's Appletalk? Funny networking protocol, I think over top of RS-422 or the like. Sometimes they tunnel it over ethernet too. The serial port that the Macs have built in is generally called the "localtalk" port, and also used for printers, which speak some subset of this strange protocol, AFAIR. Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by DAW＠yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu

> From: Chris > > >I'm still trying to figure out what to do with a MAC once it's running. > > replace your normal everyday use computer... and finally be able to relax? > > -chris > *sigh* Chris, the evangelist... Someone gimme a rock, to knock him off his soapbox... -- --- David A Woyciesjes --- C & IS Support Specialist --- Yale University Press --- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu --- (203) 432-0953 --- ICQ # - 905818 Mac OS X 10.1.2 - Darwin Kernel Version 5.2: Fri Dec 7 21:39:35 PST 2001 Running since 01/22/2002 without a crash

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>I don't remember seeing any slots for "cards" of any sort when I had the box >open. It has a Comm Slot 1 and an LC PDS slot, both right on the slide out motherboard. The Comm Slot looks a bit like a PCI slot, and the LC slot looks more like that NuBus slot (long retange with rows of pin holes). There is also a video in/out slot, that will look like a tiny card edge connector slot. >I just discarded a MAC (Nubus) >ethernet card. I figured I'd come to regret it, though I'm not sure it would >have made any difference. Nope, couldn't have used that on the 630 anyway. >the video card, which, I think, is a pretty typical MAC >video board. >From a IIx, if it was color, probably the 8*24GC, fairly standard card for the day. >It's a serious security problem to use TCP/IP on a lan if one has an internet >connection. My LAN uses Netbeui and IPX/SPX. There's got to be a way ... If you are doing file/print sharing, I would use AppleTalk if possible. The key is can any of the servers you are running speak appletalk. (NT4, Win2k, Netware...). AppleTalk isn't the most secure protocol as far as packet sniffing is concerned... but very few internet routers will route it, so it is a fairly safe bet that the traffic will not go beyond your lan (as your internet router box will most likely ignore the packets and not pass them along). Appletalk has the added advantage of just working. It finds its own node address, and sniffs out the network by itself. Pretty much turn it on, and it works. It doesn't get much easier than AppleTalk. Downside is, it tends to be a bit chatty, and it isn't real fast (usually about 4Mb/s on a 10Mb network is the best you will get. AppleTalk of TCP/IP is much faster, but then you run the same risks you do for any TCP/IP traffic) >Is there a "slick" way to exploit hardware that's already in the Performa >630CD? Eh... not really. There are software things you can run to route Localtalk (built in to all macs since the 512kE IIRC, definitly since the Plus) to Ethernet... but somewhere you will still need the hardware connection to go to Ethernet. But you should be able to lay your hands on an LC Ethernet card for the 630 with ease, and fairly cheap. Worst case, if you don't find one local, let me know, I can probably turn up a spare and let you have it for a song (read: probably free + shipping depending on how fast you need it, my time schedule, and how many I have kicking around) -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

3
2
0 0

"Toy" computers (was Re: Micro$oft Biz'droid Lusers)

by spectre＠stockholm.ptloma.edu

> > > > (For those not in the know, the Commodore Indus GT drive has a > > > > drive 1 [LOAD"$1",8] with DOS Wedge, a fast loader and some other > > > > utilities permanently in drive ROM that can > > > > just be loaded out of the drive instantaneously.) > > That's interesting. I did not know that. Are there any details > published anywhere about how they did it? How large is the "ROM > Disk"? Does it work by having an emulated filesystem, or does > it "cheat"? I wonder how hard it would be to slap some ROM on the > side of a 1541 and add "unit 1 support" (and I wonder if that would > fix or aggravate the save-and-replace bug). I strongly think it cheats. It does have what looks like a real filesystem, but I doubt the illusion goes further than skin-deep :-) It is one of the GT's most interesting features, but since it works just fine with Epyx FastLoad, I don't use it often. More to the point, the GT's in-ROM fast loader doesn't work with any other drive but a GT, and most utility cartridges have some kind of DOS wedge, so the files aren't called for much now. Still a neat idea. -- ----------------------------- personal page: http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ -- Cameron Kaiser, Point Loma Nazarene University * ckaiser(a)stockholm.ptloma.edu -- ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI! ----------------------------------

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

"Toy" computers http://www.conmicro.cx/hercules

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> Raymond > > Your Mother Runs TSO ! Your Daddy runs BTAM! ;)

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

"Toy" computers http://www.conmicro.cx/hercules

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> > I didn't mean to say it wasn't. Just that you made it sound like > > one could completely replace a 390 with a peesee. > > A 360 you could. a 370 soon, and thats doing emulation > on the bare metal a PC is faster than the total run of > 360's ever built combined many times over, and that > includes the I/O. What, even a 360/91 (I guess there weren't too many, in fact, did anyone besides Columbia get one)? -dq

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

PDP11 M8190 console + DIP switches / FPA

by jkunz＠unixag-kl.fh-kl.de

Hi. I am looking for the console bulkhead pinout and the DIP switch description of the M8190 / KDJ11-B PDP11 QBus CPU module. I had a look at the micronotes and googled around, but found nothing. Also: The board seams to be revision C1 (stamped on the handle). Does this mean I can not add a FPA? I am a bit confused because there is only "KDJ11-B" written on the board and micronote 39 lists the "KDJ11-BC" as FPA incompatible. field-guide.txt contains no "KDJ11-BC" and lists only the "KDJ11-B 11/84 CPU" UniBus CPU as FPA incompatible. -- tsch??, Jochen Homepage: http://www.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de/~jkunz/

24 years, 3 months

2
2
0 0

PDP11 M8190 console + DIP switches / FPA

by Antonio.Carlini＠riverstonenet.com

>I am looking for the console bulkhead pinout and the DIP switch > description of the M8190 / KDJ11-B PDP11 QBus CPU module. I had a look > at the micronotes and googled around, but found nothing. You can find a manual over at http://scandocs.trailing-edge.com/micropdp11/volume1_system_cpus/EK-247AA-M… and you can find the related KDJ11-A info at: http://www.spies.com/~aek/pdf/dec/pdp11/ (I believe that the KDJ11-A and KDJ11-B are similar but not identical). Antonio

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

"Toy" computers http://www.conmicro.cx/hercules

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Raymond Moyers [mailto:rmoyers@nop.org] > Well the newer ones are getting better, the new fridge sized > boxes require a fraction of the cooling the old ones did I know, but power is somewhat expensive for me anyway ;) > getting small, a IBM 3864 modem was a hefty 30 pounds or so. Seen the "I put the nut on a rock, and I hit it with the modem" text file? > So what i said was correct, the herc emu is emulating the majority I didn't mean to say it wasn't. Just that you made it sound like one could completely replace a 390 with a peesee. If that's the case, you (rather, the people who own the 390 in question) should have never used a 390 in the first place. > of all that stuff, dasd,, tapes,, card deck with an emulated > "reader" the 3174's and the terminals, that campus full of stuff > running virtualized on your PC. One day I'll actually get around to trying it. > at the time when the press would talk about NT everywhere when > it was knowwhere, i guess doing their part to create the illusion > of "everyone else, why not you?" You mean NT finally got somewhere? :) > > I don't know exact numbers, but honestly, the CPU in a modern peesee > > isn't the weak spot at all. Generally there's some kind of > bottleneck > > (or five) that needs repaired in the design. > Well a decent modern board is no slouch there either really The boards aren't, but the disk I/O on most "consumer" systems is pretty bad, for instance. It should be possible to get better I/O out of them, especially if there are (as I hear) AMD boards with 64-bit PCI. > You cant really trash PC I/O anymore, its right up there > with everything else and surpasses all the old workstations, Might be a dangerous statement. There have been some pretty impressive workstations. Add that to the fact that some people consider a one-year-old machine "old." I won't argue that peesee hardware hasn't advanced. it's literally mind-blowing what they've done with it, given the origins of the thing. I just wish they'd started with a nicer architecture to begin with. > current PC I/O dont compete with a current mainframe, > but what ever did ? Well, other current mainframes, of course, possibly -- as you mentioned -- supercomputers, too. > There has been really large R&D sums spent on pushing PC > performance. and its starting to show bigtime. I'm sure. Just imagine what they could have done by pouring all of that cash into Alpha. > In a way, comparing a mainframe to a PC is like a coal train to a > dodge viper, sure the viper is faster, but lets see how well it > does hooked to 80 hopper cars full of coal eh ? I'll go along with that. > > a supercomputer at all. When is "yesterday" in this context? :) > Well litteraly yesterday, dreamworks, pixar etc is going all linux > for their stuff and the supercomputers people talk about these > days on the www.top500.org list are linux clusters. All? I haven't checked top500 recently, but there were certainly a few non-clusters in the top 20 last time I looked. My trouble with clusters is that they're not "tightly coupled" enough to make them very interesting to me, generally. Sure, they'll solve problems, but again, I/O is the bottleneck. > Another example, look at www.ltsp.org, they are netbooting old > retired PC's used a diskless xterminals and hanging up to 200 > of them off a modern machine that the apps run on. I've considered doing something like that just for fun, and it's interesting, but as far as being a "cluster," I'm not sure it would qualify in my book. :) Or did you mean it as an example of something else? > It saves them bucks, and a machine not bloated down > to a 486 with winblows can hump a good load these days. Windows is up to 486 performance now? You wouldn't know it to use windows 2k on the pentium 5xx at work. > > Your comment about mainframes having "stayed small" is > oddly amusing, > Stay small they did, sure the linux kernel tree has grown with the They've certainly "gotten small," in hardware. I can't argue that the software isn't efficient, either. > in-tree driver count and branches for all the different hardware, > the same tree builds for a sun alpha or s390. It's not so much the size of the tree that bothers me in general with Linux, but the size of the finished kernel. I do still use it occasionally on <on topic> hardware, and it really annoyed me when I had to start using the bzImage target for make ;) I don't think it's in the drivers, either, but in the kernel somewhere, that it's gotten larger. There could be a good reason for it, but I'd like to see some of the stuff optionally removed so that my kernels can go back to being a few hundred kbytes uncompressed. Admittedly, loadable modules help. > but the resultant built kernel has not grown much over the years, > same for the mainframe, sure it has lots of services hanging around > it but its core also has stayed very trim. In relation to the memory capacity of the hardware on which it runs, you're absolutely right. I'd still like to see it trimmed some. > One important object of kernel development is for the code to > get smaller and faster consistent with the other goals. > Linux, the BSD's and IBM's top line operating systems have > done well here. I can't name any non-microsoft product that hasn't done ok. > My firewall DNS mail www and other sundres is still running on an > old 486 EISA machine, and its just as happy running the same > kernel and userspace as the 1000mhz linux box with the > nvidia 3D card, runs fast on slow machines, runs all the faster > on fast machines. I hope you re-compiled specifically for the CPUs. There are some optimizations that the compiler could make differently for 486 vs. Pentium (I assume it's 100Mhz Pentium) that could make a difference in performance. > The agenda for mickysoft dumbf**kware n co, however, seems > to be ""cover up any hardware performance gains ( and existing > hardware) with bloat, forcing the market to buy new boxes > and end up with no gain at all."" Agenda? I don't know about that. I honestly don't care what microshaft is thinking. The result, though, is as you say. > My main beaf with x86 is register starvation, at least AMD is doing > something about it. Ok, this is floating off-topic again, but do you mean in their 64-bit core, or in some 32 bit chip? > c++ for example, eats a register for "this" and on a register > starved cpu it hurts far more than others that have more > registers, this type of thing is perhaps why some fare well > by compare despite slower clock speeds. There's always "virtual registers." > Its hard to ignore raw speed however, what the x86 lacks > archtectually its seems to be making it up with brute force. That's true. I won't argue that it's not effective, but it's the wrong way to do it ;) Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 3 months

2
2
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>What's the "right" way to add networking to the MAC? Just add the card >I'm not inclined to buy >into standard Ethernet, since I've got 100Mbps and am looking to move to the >bleeding edge for educational purposes. Is there any >10Gbps stuff one can >add? How about just the 100 Mbps? There are 10, 100, and 1000 cards available, but the 1000s are only for the newer PCI based Macs. That isn't to say you can't lay your hands on the Mac cheap (a 7200 can be had for nearly free)... but the giga card is likely to cost you far more than the Mac did. You can get 100 cards for NuBus... Farallon made one... but they are a little tough to come by. If you are looking to get a Mac and not use the 630, then get a PCI based Mac... 10/100 cards can be bought for those easy (and some of your off the shelf brands support the Mac... like SMC sells one of their cards and offers Mac drivers on their web site). I don't know of anything faster than a 10Mb for the LC slot in your 630... at that point, you are better off getting a cheap 10/100 switch and just use the 10Mb card. >I'm also looking for a recommendation for a decent but not too rare or >expensive 56K dialup modem that's also fax-capable. Just about any external modem will work with a Mac. Take your pick... all the major brands work fine. >I've noticed that there's software out there for doing >long-distance jibberjabber between computers on the internet. If I equip one >of these babies with that and send it to my S.O's sister in Portland, they >can >yack without running up the long distance bills. That's easily going to pay >for an older MAC in a week or so. Find a cheap Power PC mac (these can be had almost for free these days for low end ones). Make sure it is a PCI one (check apple.com's hardware specs to see which ones) -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

MacEthernet (Was: RE: APPLEVISION Monitor)

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

Dick said: > One thing that I've wondered is how one gets an old MAC to talk on the > Ethernet when it's a mixed environment with Netware and Windows NT servers. I > know Netware has a provision for MAC namespace, but I've only seen one > ethernet-capable MAC, which leaves me wondering how folks who use MACs install > an ethernet interface. Nuvolink made a box, SCSI interfaced Ethernet, 10-base-2 and AUI. The Quadra 700 was a slight modification to the Mac IIci. The IIci didn't have Ethernet; the Q700 did. The IIci was a 1990 machine. Q700 was probably late '91 or early '92. Not sure therefore what you mean by "old". May have been e-net boards that clamped down on the 68k chip like the hard drive upgrades and the 1st Radius FP display, but once SCSI was in place, you had that. But shortly thereafter you have e-nat on (almost) every Mac. -dq

24 years, 3 months

7
9
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by nemesis-lists＠icequake.net

Dick, > One thing that I've wondered is how one gets an old MAC to talk on the > Ethernet when it's a mixed environment with Netware and Windows NT servers. I > know Netware has a provision for MAC namespace, but I've only seen one > ethernet-capable MAC, which leaves me wondering how folks who use MACs install > an ethernet interface. > > What do you know about that? For Localtalk Macs, you have a few choices. 1) Some models, like the SE/30, had internal slots in which an Ethernet interface could be installed. These are, however, rare and somewhat pricey. 2) There are ethernet adapters available that hang off the SCSI port. These are quite proprietary, and can be hard to find software for. 3) You can use a Mac running Localtalk Gateway software for a router. However, that Mac must have a localtalk and ethernet interface. 4) You can buy standalone boxes like the Shiva Fastpath that handle routing Localtalk to Ethertalk. These generally work rather well, and can be found cheaply on Ebay. I use a Fastpath 5 for my Mac network, and it's not failed me. Locating and configuring the software is the biggest hurdle; I've compiled an archive of information at http://dbz.icequake.net/oldskool/fastpath/ . -- Ryan Underwood, <nemesis at icequake.net>, icq=10317253

24 years, 3 months

4
3
0 0

MacEthernet (Was: RE: APPLEVISION Monitor)

by mythtech＠mac.com

>What's Appletalk, ... I mean REALLY ... What's Appletalk? Apple's own networking protocol. -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>Nickel Metal Hydride. yeah that... (I know Hydroxide didn't sound right... I was just drawing a blank on the right term) -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

Apple networking (was: APPLEVISION Monitor)

by tlindner＠ix.netcom.com

> Now we've got Localtalk and Appletalk ... What are they and which is which? AppleTalk is a networking protocol. TCP/IP is also a networking protocol. LocalTalk is a cabling system. Just like Ethernet (10baseT, etc) is a cabling system. AppleTalk runs on top of LocalTalk. Other terms that might crop up: PhontNet is also a cabling system. EtherTalk is AppleTalk running on top of Ethernet. -- tim lindner tlindner(a)ix.netcom.com "Life. Don't talk to me about life." - Marvin, the android

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>We'd best just agree to disagree about Apple Computer Co product quality. I'm sure not aiming to start another flame war :-) >My position is based on what I saw in '81-'82 with then ][ and ][+, where 10 >complete data losses per hour were the rule rather than the exception. Ironically, you might have missed the best Apple days when it comes to hardware reliability. (I can't say for sure, but I have been hearing the rumors growing that QC on the new flat panel iMac isn't all that great, and I know QC on the iceBook isn't less than wonderful) >One thing that I've wondered is how one gets an old MAC to talk on the >Ethernet when it's a mixed environment with Netware and Windows NT >servers. I >know Netware has a provision for MAC namespace, but I've only seen one >ethernet-capable MAC, which leaves me wondering how folks who use MACs >install >an ethernet interface. > >What do you know about that? Most Macs, since sometime in the early 90's have come with ethernet on board. The exceptions were the home targeted models (like the Performa series), where ethernet was an optional add on. Every mac since the G3 comes with ethernet standard (basically, with the death of the performa line came the death of optional ethernet... it was just included with everything from then on out) Every mac with an expansion slot can have ethernet added. Every mac with at least SCSI can have ethernet added. If you have a pre-scsi mac (128-512), then it gets a touch harder, but then, if you have one of those, and don't know what you can and can't do with it... I'll take it >from you for cost of shipping. That pretty much means, every mac from the Plus on can support ethernet. For your Performa 630, you can add either an LC PDS ethernet card, or a Comm Slot 1 ethernet card. The LC card will probably be the easier to find. Beyond that, you just have protocol issues. The Mac doesn't natively use anything other than AppleTalk for file and print sharing (up thru OS 9... OS X is a whole different ballgame). If you are in a network that supports AppleTalk, great, everything will work fine (NT 4 and 2k support it, as well as I believe later versions of Netware, and there are some *nix packages out there as well). If you can't get AppleTalk supported, then you will have to add things to the Mac to access the servers. There are 3rd party apps out there to enable the Mac to speak to a number of different systems. If this is something you want to do, I will be happy to discuss it with you, but it is going to get off topic really fast, so we are better off taking it off list. -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

3
2
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>Apple Computer Co. always impressed me as being >entirely too willing to compromise the quality of MY hardware/software, and >the security of my data, in favor of their profits. WOAH?!? That's just a shot from the dark... Apple is known for how good their quality IS... sure they had a few flops, but most of their hardware is built well, and built to last. And security? Um... compared to what? Windows? BWAA HAA HAA HAA HAA!!! -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

4
5
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>Repaired PB 5300ce in my possession, serviced in '96, no problems >other than tiny built-in speaker has died. Runs longer on its >lithium cell than any laptop I've seen. Nickel Metal Hydroxide.... no Lithium Ion batteried PB 5300's are in public circulation to the best of my knowledge (and I don't think any made it past internal testing and early seeding... they exploded during charging). If you really have a LiON batteried 5300 lets talk... what do you want for it? But I agree on the battery life... it just seemed like it never died, and never lost its life-span. I could go a whole evening on a charge easily. Way better life span then my 1400 (which even with a new battery was lucky to get 1.5hrs, now I get 30-45 minutes on a charge) >No harm to LCD screen. rock-solid. don't make 'em like this >anymore. The only recurring problem with the 5300 AFTER it has been put thru the repair extension program, is the screen cable tends to fray and break. Other than that, a repaired 5300 is a very good reliable unit. I actually miss the size (why do all computer makers assume everyone wants a huge screen? I want a portable computer... give me a 10.4" 800x600 screen, thin and light.... I don't want these 15" wide screen designs) -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> >...it had terrible QC problems. It's a tossup which was the less reliable > >product: the 1710AV, or the PowerBook 5300. Check out some of the > >you-had-to-be-there rants about this monitor in Google Groups > >(comp.sys.macintosh.*) > > As of last summer though Apple was still keeping it's promise > of repairing defective 5300's. Mine hadn't yet had the case repaired > and they replaced the whole outer casing under warranty, including > shipping both ways. Not bad service for a near 7 year old laptop. Repaired PB 5300ce in my possession, serviced in '96, no problems other than tiny built-in speaker has died. Runs longer on its lithium cell than any laptop I've seen. I use it for a system console on the Prime; it's on 24x7x365. Most batteries get screwed by that. Not this one. Got a 500w halogen worklight too close for a while... plastic was too hot to touch and started warping where the LCD shell comes together on the top edge (top as in when the lid is up). No harm to LCD screen. rock-solid. don't make 'em like this anymore. -dq

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

> As of last summer though Apple was still keeping it's promise >of repairing defective 5300's. Mine hadn't yet had the case repaired >and they replaced the whole outer casing under warranty, including >shipping both ways. Not bad service for a near 7 year old laptop. IIRC, the extension program on the 5300 is good for 8 years from the date the 5300 was discontinued. Unfortunatly, if the tech manual for the 1710AV is to be believed, the repair program only lasted 5 months for it (August of 98 to Dec 31 98). -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> >It's a tossup which was the less reliable > >product: the 1710AV, or the PowerBook 5300. Check out some of the > >you-had-to-be-there rants about this monitor in Google Groups > >(comp.sys.macintosh.*) > > UGH... well, I had the PB 5300, and if the 1710AV was > anywhere near that bad... YIKES! Sorry fer yer bad luck, son... flawless PB5300ce here, too bad I slightly melted the case, would be a museum piece some day. Well, will anyway... Current use: Prime 2455 system console, plus plays Arashi (Finnish clone of TEMPEST) quite nicely... ...also took it on cruise to use as blackjack practice machine. -dq

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>Since it was cheap, I snagged an AppleVision monitor/speaker combo today. >What systems will support it? I figure I'll find one eventually. > >It's only a small risk at $3.95. If it is one with the AppleVision plug (HDI-45, this kind of rectangular plug with lots of pins in it), then only the 6100, 7100 and 8100 support it directly IIRC. However, there is an adaptor out there to break out the cable to its RGB plug, mic, speaker, and ADB, so you can plug it into any of the other Macs. Also, the last series of AV monitors weren't true AppleVision monitors, and only had the standard RGB plug, if you have one of those, than any color mac EXCEPT the 6100, 7100, or 8100 should support it (those 3 will support it IF they have the optional RGB card installed, or if you have the HDI-45 to RGB pigtail). -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

4
6
0 0

MacEthernet (Was: RE: APPLEVISION Monitor)

by mythtech＠mac.com

> Focus made a combo video/ethernet card for certain >Powerbook's as well. I've got one of them in my 5300 and it works >great. It's nice having built-in ethernet vice using the PCMCIA >slot. Plus, how many laptops actually have upgradable/replacable >video cards? I've always wondered... how do you connect to that? My 5300 (and my 1400 which also has a video/ethernet card available for it) the video took up the entire opening. Do you use a dongle? That is the only way I could figure to fit it. Does the dongle break out to that thin powerbook video connector, or to an RGB or VGA? Just one of those things I have been curious about. -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

FREE MUSIC FOR VIDEO/FILM PRODUCTIONS Time:9:40:32 PM

by classiciron320＠aol.com

ATTENTION VIDEO/ FILM PRODUCERS AND EDITORS!! You can now DOWNLOAD fresh, new music for your next production at NO CHARGE!! This is original music written and produced especially for video and film productions by a group of composers that want you to try their music. (This is not a NAPSTER-style artist ripoff - we have actually been paid for our work!) We will grant you synchronization rights to use our music in your next production ABSOLUTELY FREE!! Why would we do that? Because we believe once you actually listen to and use our compositions - you'll want to buy our music in the future. OVER 500 THEMES! Choose from driving rock, soft underscores, classical, country, Latin, new age, World music and more. This is incredible music, recorded at some of the top recording studios in the world, using LIVE MUSICIANS - not just the result of a stack of synthesizers. Simply pick the themes you want and download online. Why keep using the same old music beds over and over when you can use NEW and ORIGINAL music themes? To learn more about this incredible offer, just click: info(a)ispmirror.com?subject=PLEASE_SEND_MORE_INFO and send it to us. Or send an email to info(a)ispmirror.com and put MORE INFO in the subject line. If you have received this mailing in error, or do not wish to receive any further mailings pertaining to this topic, please click: remove(a)ispmirror.com?subject=PLEASE_REMOVE or send an email to remove(a)ispmirror.com and put PLEASE REMOVE in the subject line. DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL OR YOU MAY NOT BE REMOVED. Not intended for or available to residents of WA, CA or VA.

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

ARK files

by caprio＠dcms.com

I picked up a bunch of CPM archives from CPMUG. The files end with the ARK file extension. I've tried the unark16.exe I picked up from the oak.oakland.edu site but I can't seem to get them to unpack. What MS-DOS command works on these archives or do I need to fetch a CP/M version and run under a CP/M emulator?

24 years, 3 months

3
2
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>I'm still trying to figure out what to do with a MAC once it's running. replace your normal everyday use computer... and finally be able to relax? -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>It's a tossup which was the less reliable >product: the 1710AV, or the PowerBook 5300. Check out some of the >you-had-to-be-there rants about this monitor in Google Groups >(comp.sys.macintosh.*) UGH... well, I had the PB 5300, and if the 1710AV was anywhere near that bad... YIKES! -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

Semi OT: Traveling from London to Bath

by Antonio.Carlini＠riverstonenet.com

>It the weather really bad in London at this time??? No. It's really wet in the whole of the UK. As usual, there's nothing at all special about London :-) Antonio

24 years, 3 months

3
2
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>When I adjust the brightness upward, it goes up for a moment, then >suddenly there's considerable pincushioning and the vertical dimension goes >down a mite, say 10%. When I adjust the pincushion, the pincushion goes away >immediately, though I've not adjusted anything, and the image size goes back >to what it was, but it's dim again. Doesn't really match any of the repair notes in the tech manual. Although there is a comment about CRT Arcing, and to turn off the unit, unplug the power cord and ADB cable from the monitor, wait 10 seconds, hook it all back up, and power it up. Problem should be gone.... but like I said, it isn't exactly the same thing as you are describing, so that might not do squat for you. Rather it sounds more like the brightness control might be dying. Maybe a bad cap or something (I'm not an EE, so I defer to someone with more knowledge in these things than me). -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

Starting point

by acme_ent＠bellsouth.net

> From: Tony Duell <ard(a)p850ug1.demon.co.uk> > Do I have to be consistent all the time? :-) Only if you want to maintain your reputation ;>) > More seriously, for testing an interface, particularly if you're just > starting out, it does make sense to start from a simple working computer > (ZX81, CoCo, Apple ][, PC-with-ISA-slots-running MS-DOS, etc). It > eliminates a lot of variables. Thanks for the confirmation. At this point in my life I realize I will never have the time to learn enough about electronics to design and build a computer from scratch. > But if you want to make a complete new computer system (which is really what > these ZX81 projects sound like), you are possibly better off starting > with just the CPU chip. The ZX81 projects which I am aware of all have one thing in common: they maintain the "flavor" of the original machine. This includes Sinclair BASIC, the screen font, and the rest of the ROM. Beyond that, it's wide open. If you come to our meeting next March (Germany), you'll see what I mean. How about it? The entire weekend, with meals and room, is only US$50. Glen 0/0

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

Semi OT: Traveling from London to Bath

by RMeenaks＠olf.com

An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/20020430/e22eac1d/at…

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

Micro$oft Biz'droid Lusers (was: OT email response format)

by mcguire＠neurotica.com

On April 21, R. D. Davis wrote: > > Hmm...I sense some Microsoftism on the list... > > Yes, all of the danger signs are there, as well as the problem of > otherwise intelligent hackers who've become subservient to the greedy > and nonsensical biz'droid lusers in large corporations --- who are far > worse, and far more dangerous to society, than they're portrayed in > the Dilbert comic strip. We must liberate these hackers who've been > brainwashed into subservience by the biz'droids, so that they can get > back to useful hacking on useful systems. I just try not to associate with them. :) (The guy sitting across the room from me is writing some firmware for the project we're working on. A $2000 commercial 8051 C compiler (for Windows of course, the land of commercial software) just crashed because a function in the code it was compiling wasn't prototyped. If this weren't commercial bullshit, I'd have the source code, and I'd have fixed the bug in ten or fifteen minutes. But noooooo, that bug will be there for at least the next year. Some people just like commercial crap...I will never figure out why.) But there's a pattern with the Windows folks...they're often people who tend to do what they're "supposed" to do, and you're "supposed" to use a PC and run Windows on it, so that's what they do. The decision was made for them and they won't question it. The whole "blind rule-following without thought" is a lifestyle that people assume by choice or upbringing...there's nothing wrong with it per se; we can't really fault 'em for it. -Dave -- Dave McGuire "Mmmm. Big." St. Petersburg, FL -Den

24 years, 3 months

30
115
0 0

AIM-65 monitor sources now available

by pete＠dunnington.u-net.com

On Apr 30, 6:35, Richard Erlacher wrote: > I got a 'couldn't find it" sort of error trying to visit that site. I tried > both spellings of AIM-65, BTW, so something must be broken/bottlenecked. Any > suggestions? Try http://www.aconit.org/hbp/AIM65/ (transpose AMI to AIM, remove the hyphen, and add a trailing '/' because it's a directory) -- Pete Peter Turnbull Network Manager University of York

24 years, 3 months

3
4
0 0

Mainframe emulation and serial comms (was Re: "Toy computers)"

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> I have visited the site, but my question is apparently not > frequent enough... from those who know, will "Hercules" > talk BISYNC or SNA down a sync serial pipe? I have some > toys here that emulate PU Type 2s (i.e., include a 3274 > cluster controller emulator) and older HASP and 3780 workstations, > but they all expect a sync serial feed. I have the modem > eliminators, etc., so that's not a problem. The problem is > what to stick in a PeeCee that can be the Host end of the > conversation (i.e., the 37x5 end, from the viewpoint of my > peripherals). The Zilog 8530 SIO is smart enough to handle > the link-level protocol (we used it and the COM5025), but > outside of the classic Mac/Sun product line, you don't see > a ZSIO in every box. I'd think you'd either need a PC serial card that uses a USART instead of a UART, or a convert of some kind... but I don't know how the converter would supply synch... The Data General One notebook used the Intel 8251a USART for serial I/O; it through me for a loop because writing an interrupt handler for it is quite different from its 8250-based stablemates. But it wouldn't be too hard to kludge up a design for a single-port 8251a-based serial card... -Douglas Hurst Quebbeman (DougQ at ixnayamspayIgLou.com) [Call me "Doug"] Surgically excise the pig-latin from my e-mail address in order to reply "The large print giveth, and the small print taketh away." -Tom Waits

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

AIM-65 displays

by dwightk.elvey＠amd.com

>From: "Ethan Dicks" <erd_6502(a)yahoo.com> > >--- M H Stein <mhstein(a)canada.com> wrote: >> BTW, I've used 6821s & 6520s interchangeably as well without problems. > >I only mentioned it because someone either here or on the CBM Hackers >list said they had problems substituting a 6821 for a 6520. Since I >have tubes of 6821s and a small pad of 6520s, I was happy to verify >the substitution (I have, in the meantime, traded a tube of one for >a tube of the other across the pond, so I'm all set with both). > Hi It may be that he confused 6521's with 6821,6820 and 6520's. The last three are essentially the same but the 6521 is different. ( or maybe I got it confused? I know one is different ). Dwight

24 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

HP 9000/300 wanted

by vp＠mcs.drexel.edu

Hi, I'd like to experiment with OpenBSD on the HP 300 platform (mainly because these machines have both HP-IB interfaces and Ethernet interfaces). My intention is to make either an HP-IB to Ethernet gateway or at the very least write software enabling the HP 300 to emulate a CS-80 disk drive. If anybody has hardware that they are willing to sell, advice or links, I'd very grateful. Thanks **vp

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

"Toy" computers (was Re: Micro$oft Biz'droid Lusers)

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Ethan Dicks [mailto:erd_6502@yahoo.com] > If he means "no internal mass storage interface", he might ...but what is "internal?" If the storage interface is in a separate rack, does that make the machine a toy? After that, what is a "storage interface?" A common 'IDE' disk will plug nearly directly into an ISA bus. Does that mean that any system with an ISA bus could not be a "toy?" We could further assume that most busses could be adapted in similar ways to drive mass storage devices, and claim that no computer with any bus which could do this can be a toy. > have something > of a point. Ignoring audio cassette, I can think of few > computers more > complicated than a traditional "single-board" computer that > lack an in- > cabinet mass storage interface. The PET, VIC-20 and C-64 all Well, again, which cabinet? > interfaces. Non- > Zorro-equipped Amigas (A1000, A500, A500+) have floppy but > not hard disk > interfaces in-box, but the A600 and A1200 have 44-pin > internal IDE ports. > Does that make the A500 a toy, but not the A600? What about the Mac plus which had a SCSI interface, but Apple discouraged its use (preferring, rather, that you plug your hard drive into the floppy interface, IIRC)... > I would propose that the label "toy" might be suitable for > machines that > have external disk controllers _and_ an external network interface (if > any; I'll bend and accept a serial port as a network > interface if it runs > some network protocol - SLIP, PPP, LocalTalk, DDCMP...) I'm not sure > how to classify single-boards, though. By the nature of them being Transputers might also be tricky. > Mind you, I love toy computers. They have been fun and profitable for > me. Others, though, need that "bittybox" label to glorify whatever > they like at the expense of others. Let's at least agree on what > constitutes a "toy", even in the most general of terms. I'd say anything that runs windows primarily. *duck* Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 3 months

9
10
0 0

Semi OT: Traveling from London to Bath

by RMeenaks＠olf.com

An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/20020430/4aa67d0a/at…

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

Futuredata 2300

by flori_m＠gmx.net

Hi, I've got such a FutureData System with 8085 CPU. It's modell type is 2300-9402. It's with an 8 ich double floppy drive and some cards. The cases (especially >from the floppy) are strongly scratched. The CPU seem to work, it shows the FutureData logo and a Prompt ( > ) on the screen but nothing else. I have no idea what it is or what I can do with it. Where can I find an operating system for it? Please help me. Greetings from Germany, Flori

24 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

.I.P. for D.I.Y.

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

From: Andy Holt <andyh(a)andyh-rayleigh.freeserve.co.uk> >I'll agree - but perhaps the main reason is that modern components are >almost impossible for the home builder ... and only the odd few (Tony? :-) Impossible? How? >want to spend lots of time and a fair bit of money to build something that >is usually less capable than a less expensive commercial product. There are two good reasons to DIY. One is for personal understanding and in that case practical is often not the point. Two is something specialized that a commercial peice that may be expensive or a poor compromize. I happen to build, RF, AF and digital and the economicas is that I have a very deep junkbox and parts supply to exhaust doing it. I the realm of radios (transceivers) I have several I've designed that far exceed commercial gear as I could specialize them. Generalizing on DIY/homebrewing is not good as exceptions do abound. Allison

24 years, 3 months

9
13
0 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

test-drb