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

by manney＠hmcltd.net

I have an IBM 5181001 "IBM Compact Printer" available. Includes instruction manual. Seems to take roll thermal paper (possibly FAX; although -- knowing IBM -- probably not.) Parallel interface. Anyone interested? P Manney Is it illegal to yell "Movie!" in a fire station? Thousands of discounted photo items at http://www.hmcltd.net/pgphoto

27 years

1
0
0 0

Sigh. Bringing up a PDP-8/M

by cmcmanis＠mcmanis.com

Dontcha just hate it when this happens? Here I am happily working away on an 8/E chassis with boards scavenged far and wide to get it up and running. In the course of which I'm using boards out of my 8/M that works find to replace questionable boards to reduce the number of variables in the equation. So the 8/E (with an 8/F front panel) is all up and running with my hodge podge of boards and I reassemble the 8/M, turn it on and the 'RUN' LED is stuck on. No response from the front panel halt switch state. Argh! --Chuck

27 years

9
14
0 0

VERY OT: Win'98 splash screen

by roblwill＠usaor.net

Hi! I know that this is WAY off-topic, but I need some help: While "cleaning up" some files on his computer my dad accidentally deleted the "LOGO.SYS" file. Now when he has no splash screen when booting. All that's shown is the startup commands and the BIOS settings of the computer. He wants me to fix it, but the only problem is that he doesn't have the Windows '98 CD (came pre-loaded on the computer). What I want to know is if anyone running Windows '98 could email me the logo.sys file (I think it's only 120k or something close to that). ThAnX! -- -Jason Willgruber (roblwill(a)usaor.net) ICQ#: 1730318 <http://members.tripod.com/general_1> PS>> Please remember to change the email address to mine - this doesn't need to be continued on the List....

27 years

7
6
0 0

FREE: Vic-20

by fpp＠concentric.net

Hi Anthony, I am looking forward to receiving the Vic 20. I was wondering if you have sent it yet? I had to respond to the list as I don't have your personal email. >Wow, I have always wanted a vic20. If you still have it I'd love it. I have >several Apple IIc if youd like one. No thanks. Trying to reduce the amount of stuff. =-) Since you're the first to ask for it, it's yours. If you want it, send a check for $7.50 to Anthony Clifton 407 E. Porter Avenue Des Moines, Iowa 50315 and I'll ship it out to you by the fastest route that costs $7.50 or less. =) Thanks! Also, send me your shipping address for USPS shipping. Anthony Clifton - Wirehead

27 years

1
0
0 0

Hallelujah!

by max82＠surfree.com

I've finally gotten around to reading a LISP book that I had bought months before, and I can see why people refer to LISP as a religious experience (I've seen that said at least twice). It's really a wonderful language. I wonder how it is worse than BASIC or Perl. Also, although I didn't really take the time to really understand smalltalk (Squeak is slow and unstable), I can see the beginnings of smalltalk in LISP. Wow. This thing really is pretty amazing. This should be taught in every computer programming course, along with PAL-8, C, and Perl. I am now certain that if a language is hard to learn (C++ comes to mind), there's something wrong with it :) --Max Eskin (max82(a)surfree.com)

27 years

16
30
0 0

Computer Storage

by Philip.Belben＠pgen.com

I'll reply to Geoff, since he has covered more points than others. >> Do I need to insulate / heat the building? > > Not sure where you are, but I imagine insulation would be a good idea. My > experience with electronics/computers is that ideal storage is at a > relatively constant temperature, so extremes of heat (ie over 35c) or cold > (much below 10c) should be avoided where possible. I don't think it'll get over 35 deg C, even in a hot summer, although the thin roof may act like a solar panel. To look at it another way, domestic air conditioning is almost unknown here in the UK. (Nasos - I'm at Coalville, about 5 mi NW of M1 Jn 22) In winter, temperatures of -2 deg C are common, and -10 is not unheard-of. So that sounds like insulation would be a good idea. I am unlikely to operate computers in this building - no electricity or comms services as yet, so it would be expensive. I shall look into elec costs... > Some stuff is more tolerant, our Vax 6310 kept right on going despite the > a/c failing last summer during a long weekend. It was 44C in the computer > room on the Monday morning. The netware server in the same room died when > it's power supply failed, presumably due to overheating! Ha! I must admit I'd have thought that humidity would be more of a problem than temperature. An argument in favour of electric heating rather than gas, I suppose... >> Should I install a dehumidifier (I think I can get hold of one)? > > If the place is damp you need to either seal up each machine with > dehumidifying agent inside the seal, or dehumidify the environment > it's in. Dust/spiders/roaches/mice etc can be a problem with long term > storage too. I think my parents have a dehumidifier they no longer use. Again, electricity is needed - I'll try and plumb it in to discharge on the ground outside for water disposal. >> Do I need (for example) to wrap each computer up in plastic with a packet >> of silica gel? > > That's one way..... I was afraid of that. Dehumidifier is probably less work, but more money long-term... I think that controlled environment of some sort is probably more necessary for books/manuals etc. than for hardware (if you'll forgive the qualified absolute). >> The rent is very cheap - L2 (about $3.30) per square foot per year, and >> the building is only 10 min walk from my house. With luck, this will mean >> that I shall soon have a house with room for me as well as my junk... > > How big is this building? At that rate you could use quite a bit of it > without breaking the bank... That is cheap. Perhaps I wasn't clear. It's all or nothing. 300 sq ft for L600 ($1000) per annum. (FWIW it was built by a local toyshop to store excess stock, apparently. Most recent tenant was the local council, who stored polling booths there for use in local elections.) On top of the rent there is a property tax ("Uniform Business Rate") - the agent are finding this out for me - and I shall have to buy racking and things. But I think it's a good deal. Bob was paying L42 per month for 25 sq ft - roughly ten times as much on a per-square-foot basis! Philip

27 years

2
1
0 0

digital bites the dust, finally

by djenner＠halcyon.com

Well, the two big signs that said |d|i|g|i|t|a|l| on the DECwest buildings in Bellevue, WA disappeared sometime in the last few days. Just big blanks there now, not even a Compaq, yet. Also, in case anyone's interested, here's a reference to the DECwest Alumni club. http://www.halcyon.com/edge/decwest_alumni Dave

27 years

6
6
0 0

Description: Catalog of 11/45 Cards Installed

by CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.com

>>So, I got a moment to list the 11/45 complement of cards mounted in >>the chassis. They read with the imprinted numberings properly >>oriented to the eye, and R to L they are: >You need a copy of the DEC Field Guide. It's available on metalab, I'm >sure someone else will pop up with the URL. http://metalab.unc.edu/pub/academic/computer-science/history/pdp-11/field-g… -- Tim Shoppa Email: shoppa(a)trailing-edge.com Trailing Edge Technology WWW: http://www.trailing-edge.com/ 7328 Bradley Blvd Voice: 301-767-5917 Bethesda, MD, USA 20817 Fax: 301-767-5927

27 years

2
1
0 0

Restoration of an 11/34a

by mbg＠world.std.com

In the latest trip that Allison and I took to collect some hardware, I got an RL01 and an RL11. I've now installed the RL01 in the rack with the 11/34a and have plugged the RL11 into the machine. I haven't yet located a cable, but that shouldn't be too hard given some time (now where did I put my stockroom?) I've also prettied it up a little by adding another black plastic panel to the front, so it looks pretty good. Next step is to also locate a cable to connect the DL11-W to a terminal, and I can check if it boots with one of the numerous RL01 disks I got this weekend. In the same trip, I also got another 11/34a, which had numerous non-dec boards in it, but also had an FP11, which is now in the machine I've been working on. Since I may sell 11/34a I got the other day, I did some work on it this morning to clean it up and configure it with at least the processor, memory (16kw), boot board and a serial interface. I vacuumed all the old filter out of the backplane, put in the boards and it mostly worked... one strange thing is that when I put in the UNIBUS terminator, I get bus hangs. When I remove it, I don't... Anyway, I'll have to toggle in some short code segments to see if the CPU will execute code (actually, I think it was executing the boot cood...hmmm) Anyway, that's the latest on those machines... I'll have a newer picture of the 11/34a up on my web page later today... Megan Gentry Former RT-11 Developer +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+ | Megan Gentry, EMT/B, PP-ASEL | Internet (work): gentry!zk3.dec.com | | Unix Support Engineering Group | (home): mbg!world.std.com | | Compaq Computer Corporation | addresses need '@' in place of '!' | | 110 Spitbrook Rd. ZK03-2/T43 | URL: http://world.std.com/~mbg/ | | Nashua, NH 03062 | "pdp-11 programmer - some assembler | | (603) 884 1055 | required." - mbg | +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+

27 years

2
1
0 0

Description: Catalog of 11/45 Cards Installed

by hhacker＠home.com

So, I got a moment to list the 11/45 complement of cards mounted in the chassis. They read with the imprinted numberings properly oriented to the eye, and R to L they are: 8114 8115 8112 8113 8100 8101 8102 8103 8104 8105 8106 8108 8107 8109 There are no other cards installed. All but the 8109 fill the entire slot, while the 8109 fills the lower three socket ranks. While I should find these answers amidst some of the email I have archived over my tenure on the list, I know that some of you know the URL backwards. Care to help me out? Also, is it true that all 11/45 systems sported the operators console, LED's, switches, the works? William R. Buckley

27 years

3
3
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4

by pete＠dunnington.u-net.com

On Apr 11, 17:21, Cameron Kaiser wrote: > Allison wrote: > ::the oder of learning for me was PDP-8, PDP-10, CM2100, 8008, 8080 then > ::over a span of 6 years. From the 1975 to 1978 the list is z80, 8048, > :: 1802, sc/mp, 6800, 650x, 9900, pdp-11! > :: > ::I have fewer biases. ;) Well ok, if said 8085 for some, 804x for others, > ::T-11 (pdp-11 on a single chip), and z80. Never had more than the few 6502s > ::until recently but they are fun too. > > Heavily biased to 6502 myself :-) then Z80, 9995 and x86. I'll learm M68K > one of these days. I started on the Z80, then 6502, followed by ARM, 68K, 6809, 8048, PDP11, MIPS in no particular order. I still like the Z80 and 6502, but the ARM is one of my favourites. I've never written any serious code for x86, and what I've seen of the architecture fills me with loathing ;-) -- Pete Peter Turnbull Dept. of Computer Science University of York

27 years

5
6
0 0

Computer Storage

by PB14＠leicester.ac.uk

On 13 Apr 99 at 9:32, Philip.Belben(a)PowerTech.co.uk wrote: > I am thinking of renting a building in which to store my computer collection, > together with that of a friend who has gone to Canada [Bob Manners, for P850UG > people]. The building is very simply constructed - single brick walls and sheet > asbestos roof - and currently has no supply of electricity or gas, but appears > fairly dry (at least at present). A couple of years ago I helped store some some PDP and RL02 stuff in a similar construction building in Nottingham, so I guess the climate is similar to Coalville :-) The precautions were pretty basic -- sealed cabinets etc in clingfilm, some plywood over the concrete floor to make things "warmer". The kit was stored in this condition for a year before being sold and resuming commercial service. I think you should even be able to store manuals/books (not those in ring binders of course) if they are sealed in clingfilm and kept away from damp surfaces. I have a couple of boxes of shrinkwrapped software that were stored in a damp shed but the shrinkwrap protected the packaging. As any old car owner will tell you, the worst thing about lock-up storage tends to metal doors which add to your condensation/damp problem more than anything. Mail me if you need a hand physically moving your kit. Phil ************************************************************** Phil Beesley -- Computer Officer -- Distributed Systems Suppport University of Leicester Tel (0)116 252-2231 E-Mail pb14(a)le.ac.uk

27 years

1
0
0 0

Corvus Concept (was Re: Y2K stuff)

by fmc＠reanimators.org

Derek Peschel <dpeschel(a)u.washington.edu> wrote (after something I wrote a while ago): > > What do you think a Corvus Concept would bring to Blockout? I don't know, > > and it's been years since I played Tetris. > > Mostly the high-resolution graphics and possibly a tall aspect ratio of > the monitor. Radius Pivot monitors are very rectangular (they're either > very tall or very wide) -- does the Concept screen look the same way? Hmm, sort of -- it's a 15" monitor, but the bezel around the screen is such that it encompasses an 8.5"x11" sheet of paper with a little bit of border all the way around. Then again, so does the 17" Dell monitor that I'm using now...well, no, I think it has a bit more border to the left and right than the Concept monitor would (in landscape mode). > I just saw a picutre of a Concept, and it seemed to be running a decent- > looking GUI. Is that realistic? I think it's realistic (the hardware does bit-mapped 720x560 monochrome graphics), but I'm not sure it was typically done. Reading the manuals, I get a picture of a character- and screen-oriented UI that just happens to be done by drawing characters on a bit-mapped display. Navigation through applications seems to be done largely with character commands and function keys (w/on-screen labels). And there's no standard pointing device beyond the keyboard. Though I guess you could add something -- there are serial ports and the bus slots are close enough to Apple ][ slots that you might be able to plug an Apple-compatible interface in and write some code to make it work. Or you could do without, I can certainly work the GUI on my HP Integral PC without a rodent, and when I used to do stuff in HPDRAW using an HP graphics terminal with an HP3000 mini, there were a lot of things for which I preferred the keyboard cursor positioning over what I'd be able to do with a Mac and its mouse.

27 years

1
0
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by edick＠idcomm.com

You know what? I had completely forgotten about the Amiga. (Duhhh!) The Amiga did make a pretty good splash, AND it carved a niche for itself in the video processing area that even Apple couldn't penetrate. There were quite sophisticated gadgets available for the Amiga which you couldn't use with a MAC or a PC/AT. What's more, the "fancier" Mac's and PC's didn't make any headway in that arena either, as demonstrated by the lack of competition with the "gadgets" needed for some of these tasks. There was, of course, a major difference between the earlier Commodore products and the Amiga. A look under the hood would quickly reveal that. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Doug Spence <ds_spenc(a)alcor.concordia.ca> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Tuesday, April 13, 1999 1:56 AM Subject: Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies) > > >On Sun, 11 Apr 1999, Richard Erlacher wrote: > >> In all the time I was involved in the microcomputer industry, I never saw a >> single Commodore ad that wasn't printed in a trade publication of some sort. > >What!? You mean there was a part of the world that WASN'T completely >saturated in Commodores? What part of the world do you live in? > >So I guess you missed "I adore my 64", the "Sweet 16" ads, and William >Shatner shilling for the VIC-20? > >Of course, I can still remember _Amiga_ ads on television. I wish I had >had a VCR back then, because some of those ads were pretty good. > >"Betcha can't do that with your Mac, Jack!" > ><snip> > >> Dick > >-- >Doug Spence >ds_spenc(a)alcor.concordia.ca >http://alcor.concordia.ca/~ds_spenc/ >

27 years

1
0
0 0

Restoring an 8/E

by danburrows＠mindspring.com

>>That said, I would still use it (if available), use gloves and put a fan >>to blow the fumes away from me during assembly. But then, I do this kind >>of stuff every day. My job. > If you expect to get a lot on you use at least 2 layers of the usual lab gloves. They dissolve in methylene chloride. I commonly will use 3 layers and change them often. Then to I also end up using other much nastier solvents at them same time. 1,1,1 trichlor. will dissolve gloves in about 30 sec. and if not used in a good fume hood will give you a bad solvent headache in a short time. I can always tell how good each customers fume hoods are when I use it. Dan

27 years

1
0
0 0

Calling Richard W. Schauer

by guerney＠uq.net.au

Richard, My latest e-mail to you has repeatedly bounced as "Sorry, no mailbox here by that name". If you are out there with a new address and want to continue discussing disks for the CPT 8525 then please contact me privately. Phil

27 years

1
0
0 0

Moving REALLY BIG IRON...

by mbg＠world.std.com

Recently I posted about some KS10s which were becoming available. I mentioned that I needed to mount a team to try to save them. Well, that part has been a success, and the move is currently set for two saturdays from now, pending acceptence from the current owners of the -10s. Per the current plans: This week I hope to be in attendence when the machines are turned off for the last time in their current home. After that I will being the process of staging the hardware for the move. This involves locking the heads on the disks, raising the leveling feet, removing cables and separating the cabinets. I'm not going to attempt to do it all... Carl Friend (of RCS/RI) and I will finish the pre-staging on friday the 23rd. On saturday the 24th, the team will assemble and simply roll all the stuff down to the loading dock and onto the truck were it will be secured for the move. I will be getting one of the machines. RCS/RI will be getting one, and the third is going to another group in Rhode Island. A couple of RP06s will go with each one. I will, of course, take pictures to document this major move. I also hope to do a write-up in a format similar to the one I did for the move of my more recent acquisitions (http://world.std.com/~mbg/move_report.html) I just wanted to assure everyone that they indeed were going to find homes and weren't going to end up at the crusher or in a landfill. Megan Gentry Former RT-11 Developer +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+ | Megan Gentry, EMT/B, PP-ASEL | Internet (work): gentry!zk3.dec.com | | Unix Support Engineering Group | (home): mbg!world.std.com | | Compaq Computer Corporation | addresses need '@' in place of '!' | | 110 Spitbrook Rd. ZK03-2/T43 | URL: http://world.std.com/~mbg/ | | Nashua, NH 03062 | "pdp-11 programmer - some assembler | | (603) 884 1055 | required." - mbg | +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+

27 years

3
2
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by edick＠idcomm.com

In all the time I was involved in the microcomputer industry, I never saw a single Commodore ad that wasn't printed in a trade publication of some sort. Most of those that I saw were German, though some I saw were in French or Italian, but I couldn't read them. That by itself indicates there wasn't much doing with them. I once read that they had a digital watch switch patent that made them more dough than all their computer-related activities combined. I didn't find that hard to believe. The way in which the Apple computer "won" the schools over was to donate a significant number to each school system with whom they thought they could do some business. Once they were on the Apple path, they were too short-sighted to see it would ultimately lead to much higher costs. For a number of years I served as a member of various committees at the middle school my sons attended. The impression I got was that there were darned few teachers and school administrators smart enough or experienced enough to realize that the "cheap" deal they were getting on their computers were all based on pricing when the products were newly entered in the market, and at maximal cost. Later on, they'd be paying double or triple what they could on the local economy. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Cameron Kaiser <ckaiser(a)oa.ptloma.edu> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, April 11, 1999 5:59 PM Subject: Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies) >::I don't think Commodore was a factor in this aspect of the process. The >::Commodore machines weren't "accessible" enough, in that there was no really >::convenient way to install the additional hardware people wanted, so nobody >::(well, almost) built it. > >I disagree very strongly with that statement (in a nice way :-). Apples >definitely had a nice selection of hardware add-ons, but there were also >C64 80-column cards (Batteries Included made some), hard drives (first the >Lt. Kernal, then the CMD series), RAM expansions (first the Commodore REUs >and then BBGRAM, RAMLink, geoRAM), modems (first Commodore VICMODEMS and >1600 series, then HesModem, Mighty Mo, etc.), printer interfaces (Cardco, >Xetec; even some Centronics ones) and accelerators (TurboMaster, Flash-8 >and SuperCPU). Many compared quite favourably with the Apple's assortment. >Moreover, the Commodore hardware has always been superbly documented -- >witness the Programmer's Reference Guides on all the major 8-bit Commodores >and even the minor ones like the 264 series (Plus/4, etc.). Granted, this >translated more into better designed software rather than expanded hardware, >but the 64 definitely had its fair share. > >::They couldn't afford a market clash with the Apple. They had a safe market >::in Europe, which didn't seem to suffer as badly from the video-toy-looking >::Apple as their U.S. market did. By the time all the goodies were installed, >::the Apple became a formidable presence to be reckoned with by nearly any >::computer maker. The Apples were unduly costly, but they exhibited an >::unprecedented breadth of applications with more variety of plug-in >::peripherals than even an S-100 box offered. > >But they didn't market-clash with the Apple except possibly in the education >market, which Apple soundly won (depending on whom you talk to, this is >either attributed to Apple's aggressiveness or Commodore's passivity). Apple >may have been trying for the home market at one stage, but they never made >any offerings that could be explicitly marked "home computer". The Apple IIs >were more business computers that happened to play some games, while (PETs >excepted) Commodore made home computers that happened to run some business >applications, IMHO. I've always perceived them operating in just about >separate worlds precisely *because* of the Apple's inclination towards >hardware expansion and the 64's towards software expansion (see the 64 demo >scene for an example of this), which breeds quick market separation because >any emergent applications will be totally differently focused. > >-- >-------------------------- personal page: http://calvin.ptloma.edu/~spectre/ -- >Cameron Kaiser Database Programmer/Administrative Computing >Point Loma Nazarene University Fax: +1 619 849 2581 >ckaiser(a)ptloma.edu Phone: +1 619 849 2539 >-- A dean is to faculty as a hydrant is to a dog. -- Alfred Kahn --------------

27 years

2
1
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by edick＠idcomm.com

I don't think Commodore was a factor in this aspect of the process. The Commodore machines weren't "accessible" enough, in that there was no really convenient way to install the additional hardware people wanted, so nobody (well, almost) built it. They couldn't afford a market clash with the Apple. They had a safe market in Europe, which didn't seem to suffer as badly from the video-toy-looking Apple as their U.S. market did. By the time all the goodies were installed, the Apple became a formidable presence to be reckoned with by nearly any computer maker. The Apples were unduly costly, but they exhibited an unprecedented breadth of applications with more variety of plug-in peripherals than even an S-100 box offered. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Cameron Kaiser <ckaiser(a)oa.ptloma.edu> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, April 11, 1999 3:14 PM Subject: Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies) >::I agree with you there. The Zilog boys had the CP/M crowd to maintain the >::low-end of their development system market, so nobody could complain it was >::too expensive to develop. The MOS-Technology folks had merely to point at >::the Apple to accomplish the same thing. Meanwhile, Motorola was making a > >Commodore, too (well, they did own MOS Technology, after all). > >-- >-------------------------- personal page: http://calvin.ptloma.edu/~spectre/ -- >Cameron Kaiser Database Programmer/Administrative Computing >Point Loma Nazarene University Fax: +1 619 849 2581 >ckaiser(a)ptloma.edu Phone: +1 619 849 2539 >-- Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants. -- Gen. O. N. Bradley

27 years

3
2
0 0

VCF preview

by dastar＠ncal.verio.com

Here's a quick overview on the things currently in the works at VCF central: * Exhibitor guidelines for the VCF exhibit - this year we want YOU to bring the machines to exhibit at the VCF. What's in it for you? We'll be judging each entry on a number of criteria in multiple categories. The best in each category will be honored with 1st, 2nd and 3rd place ribbons, and each Best in Class will be eligible to compete for the coveted Best of Show award. Prizes will be awarded!! * A contest for web site owners to win free passes and other junk by referring the most visitors to the VCF web site. Don't have a web site? Make one! The top winners will have prominent links to their site placed in a prominent location of the VCF web site. Think of all the hits you could get! * Another round of the Nerd Trivia Challenge - the NTC was a big hit last year. This year there will be even more challenging questions. A pre-qualifying quiz will be posted to the VCF web site in the coming weeks. The top pre-qualifying entrants will compete on the first day of VCF, and the top three entrants will appear in the actual Nerd Trivia Challenge on Sunday, October 3rd. Last year, the prize for first place included among other cool things $50 and a Java ring. * Some great speakers are being lined up! The current line up will be posted to the web site shortly (its currently undergoing construction for VCF 3.0). And much more! Stay tuned. P.S. If you'd like to be added to the VCF mailing list to receive updates as they are announced, go over to http://www.vintage.org/vcf/maillist.htm now and fill out the form (the VCF does not share your information with anyone, nor do we spam you!) Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out. Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0 See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details! [Last web site update: 04/03/99]

27 years

1
0
0 0

Commodore vs Apple [WAS: Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive

by edick＠idcomm.com

When I referred to middle schools, I meant the "thing" that's in place here in the Denver Public Schools in place of what was junior high school when I attended it (in the same building, by the way). Your observation supports my notion that schools got into the Apples because they'd been given quite a number of them for free. Apple probably couldn't get a big write-off for donating things to the Canadian schools. There's no reason why the Commodore machines couldn't have evolved into someting useful That keyboard on the early models might have been a deterrent for the schools, though, since the Denver schools really teach little more than typing with these computers at the middle school level.

27 years

1
0
0 0

Commodore vs Apple [WAS: Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive

by gregorym＠cadvision.com

This must have varied significantly with geography. In Ontario, Canada, where I grew up, Commodore was king, both at home and in schools. Most schools' first computers were PETs, either alone or in clusters, followed by C-64s. There were some Apples around, but they were much more expensive (even to schools) than Commodores. Proof of this was the strength of the Commodore (TPUG, Waterloo Basic) and Amiga communities in Ontario.

27 years

1
0
0 0

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by edick＠idcomm.com

Well, Allison, I now see why this discussion has led nowhere. We were addressing the same issue from different perspective. You were looking at the relatively short memory access strobe, while I was talking about the frequency at which they occur, as defined in the spec. I agree completely that the memory read access strobe, something on the order of /mreq + /rd (which should yield a more or less appropriate /memrd) is quite short and that the write strobe is probably a bit shorter. What I was doing by tying these strobes to the processor clock period (ticks, cycles, whatever you like) was finding a way in which the overall rate at which they occur could be discussed without getting into the gate-level strategy of building the strobes themselves. That is, after all, a matter of style, and quite personal. The fact remains, that the memory CYCLE is three clock ticks long, as defined in the spec (though I haven't looked at it in 15 years or so since I haven't yet unearthed my Zilog or Mostek data books) and if you look at the pictures you saw with your logic analyzer, you should have seen two read pulses of whatever lenght they were, spaced at very nearly 750 ns, each time you saw the execution of an absolute jump, or any other instruction which consists of an opcode followed by a 16-bit address. The same is true of writes. They take one memory cycle, which is three clock ticks long, for each byte, although the memory write strobe is a mite shorter than the read strobe, IIRC, which I might not, but . . . What it comes down to is that the non-M1 memory cycles of a typical 2 MHz 6502 take one clock tick, or 500 ns, while the actual memory read strobe can be as short as you like within the window during which valid addresses are available and ending when the Phase-2 clock falls. As you've pointed out, the M1 processor cycle, comprised of the opcode fetch (a shortened memory read) and the refresh cycle, (during which the instruction was decoded and the memory refresh strobe asserted concurrently with the 7-bit refresh counter), was a bit longer, one or two clock ticks, and more if wait states were inserted as they often were for M1 cycles. Nevertheless, commonly used instructions were MUCH faster on the 2 MHz 6502, than on the 4 MHz Z-80. Offsetting this, however, the Z-80 had lots of instructions which operated on internal registers, leaving memory idle. If you executed a direct jump, which on either processor meant "load the program counter with the following two bytes," The Z-80 required at least five, and perhaps six clock ticks to get to the first address fetch, which took, overall three clock ticks, followed by another three for the second byte. This would amount to 12 clock ticks if my reckoning is correct for the AMPRO Little Board, of which I also have a couple, and on that board, running a 4 MHz Z-80A, you will probably measure three microseconds for those twelve clock ticks (T-states) which is EXACTLY how long a 1 MHz 6502 takes to do that. Hence, I conclude it is just about twice as fast for that type of instruction on a 2 MHz 6502. How long the memory strobes are doesn't affect the duration of the cycles at all. After looking a what seems like about a billion lines of code over the years since I saw my first one back in the very early '60's (CDC-6400) I've concluded that most code I've seen underutilizes the internal resources and overutilizes the external ones. Code like that favors processors with more time-efficient use of the external resources. Hence, my assertion that there's reason to believe the 6502 at 2 MHz could outrun the 4 MHz Z-80 in more or less typical code and in a more or less typical hardware environment. Code written to make better than average utilization of the internals of a Z-80 might fare better against equally well-written code on a 6502. I'm comfortable with the reality that I'll probably never know for certain. Since neither processor is particularly important these days, not terribly important to me either. None of this is really worth getting all excited about because, by the way, in spite of its "better" performance, (by my assessment) the 6502 didn't accomplish more useful work on MY behalf, because I used a Z-80 running CP/M every chance I got due to the abundance of really decent tools and office automation software. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Monday, April 12, 1999 8:24 PM Subject: z80 timing... 6502 timing >from my ampro LB using calibrated logic analyser... > > Tc = 1/clock z80A 4mhz or 250ns (clock is symetric) > >address stable before Memreq/ ~80nS (occurs 0.5clocks earlier > than read or wr -delays) > WR/ width 210ns (roughly 1 clock -delays) > RD/ width (M1) 290us (roughly 1.5 clocks -delays > RD/ width (other) 390us (roughly two clocks -delays) > >So the longest memory use cycle is address setup+ RD/ or about 470us. >Even the rom chip select was active for less than 400ns and that includes >propagation delays. the 4mhz z80 wants memories with access times in the >250ns range. > >In terms of memory bandwidth used the z80 runs from a high of 80% on M1 >cycles (due to z80 providing memory refersh) to around less than 50% on >other read or write cycles. Refresh is not a required signal for operation >with static rams so the M1 memeory bandwidh can be less than 50%. This >set of statements is also inaccurate as it is worst case for some >instuctions. In those cases like ADD DE,HL that takes many cycles but the >only bus useage is during M1 so the average bandwidth can be very low. > >To get 750ns I need to slow the clock to about less than 2mhz or add the >time for m1 and refresh at 4mhz. In either case it's apples and oranges. > >The 6502 @2mhz would want 300ns memory. An aside to this is that the >6502 like many cpus use both edges of the clock to trigger functions via >a two phase internal clock so there are roughly 4 phase pulses per cycle >internally. the external timing of the 6502 looks simpler due to it's >use of signals and the synchronous nature of the machine. this is wny >external clock frequency is so meaningless. Instruction execution time >is the only measure. > >the 6502 memory useage is far higher as it is active for half the >processor cycle so it's roughly 50% in all cases. This makes hidden >refresh of Drams easier with the regular cycle timing but allows less >time to achieve it. If the refresh is done during the inactive portion >of the 6502 cycle then memory bandwidth nears 100% use. The exception >is if the memory is fast enough it can be done with post read refresh >(cas after ras). Static rams will run at ~50% of bus bandwidth. > >Allison >

27 years

1
0
0 0

ABS - or is it Pure BS

by chemif＠mbox.queen.it

At 16:02 05/04/99 -0700, many of you wrote: >Boy, we're way off topic here. Yes, I think we are OT, exept if this (anyway interesting) discussion started talking about the CPU that drives the ABS systems (that's BTW older than 10 years). Anyway here my impressions: >Secondly, ABS is for dry or wet roads. It actually increases stopping >distance in snow and gravel, because on those surfaces it is more >advantageous to lock up the wheels and pile up material in front of each >tire. This is very true, and that's why my AUDI 90 was equipped with a switch to disable the ABS on snow. I' ve made many trials with and w./out ABS on snow and found that the switch had a real meaning. >ABS - American Bull Shi... American? Was it a Bosch patent? The only page I found was on Mercedes: http://www.mercedes-benz.com/e/innovation/rd/forschung_nov96.htm > > wheel motion sensors, something like the big GE locomotives. Some > systems used notched brake drums. Yes, in italian "ruota fonica" that in english should be a "sound wheel" or similar: it' the same used inside many needle printer to determine the movement of the carriage. >So? If the car is stopped, the wheels aren't turning. If the brakes have >locked and the car is skidding all over the place, the wheels aren't >turning. What's the difference? >AFAIK, it looks for times when only some of the wheels are stopped (i.e. >it assumes that at least one wheel still has some grip on the road). If >all the wheels are skidding, then essentially ABS won't do a darn thing. I've asking myself the same thing. My thinking is that that the system start its action when it detects the wheel is stopping and it cuts the breaking pressure to this channel so the wheel starts again moving (even on ice an unbreaked wheel rolls), so, in general, it checks that "after cutting the breaking pressure to a stopped wheel, the same keep rolling or not" if yes the system wait for next locking situation, if no the system make some additional attemps on the channels then stops. I think that specially in recent versions the ABS is checking also different speed between wheels. This improvement was necessary to develop the ASR (Acceleration Skid Control) and the amazing ESP (Electronic Stability Program). >Having had decades of extensive driving during the long cold winters in >western Canada, Qebec and Ontario , I would consider myself a quite skilled >slippery road driver. The worst thing you can do when you go into a skid is >lock your brakes. The best is to turn into the skid and use your accellerator >and steering to bring it back under control. I would rather have any brake >action under my control and hope I can steer out of it without using them. I fully agree on the dangerous use of the brakes:I' ve tried to conduct narrow mountain curves with snow, finding wich solution would better work in case I found myself to enter the curve with a higher speed (at last with my front wheel drive car) So I' ve tryed different possibilities E.g. brakes, acceleration, clutch and brakes, a lower gear etc. I found that the best is "clutch and pray" In fact: brakes or clutch and brakes = front wheel skid + worse stability lower gear or acceleration = similarly to breaks you are forcing the wheels to an unnatural speed (different radius)=skid + worse stability clutch and pray = with clutch pressed every wheels automatically adapt to the speed forced by the radius with lateral grip as only job to make, (e.g. with no loose of grip caused by de- or accelerations) and the pray helps...stability :-> > ABS seems just damnright dangerous to me All the above was to be considered with ABS=off >, except perhaps for the complete novice who >would lock his brakes out of fear and >inexperience. No, it's like the usage of safety belts, it works better or worse according to different situations: personally I thank the inventor of ABS because (unfortunately) I had the chance to verify its effectiveness when (in motorway speeding at 160 km/h) I suddenly found a stopped car in the fast lane. The good driving procedures said that one should break down the speed as much as possible (no steering) and then try to avoid the obstacle by steering by its side like this -------------------------------- [=]---->--->-->->->>>\ [X] -------------------------------- -[=] -------------------------------- but at that speed it's very difficult to keep the car in a straight direction to guarantee the necessary speed/stability to make the vital last steering.The working of ABS helped me to decrease the speed with more efficacy and allowed the late steering (while breaking):the car that followed me (no ABS) could'nt do the same and crashed against the stopped car. Really it's not only question of driving skills. Riccardo Romagnoli <chemif(a)mbox.queen.it> I-47100 Forl?

27 years

1
0
0 0

Pink Screen of Death? (was: Re: Hallelujah!)

by roblwill＠usaor.net

It is also the default color (gray on Blue) for the old DOS WordPerfect versions. -- -Jason Willgruber (roblwill(a)usaor.net) ICQ#: 1730318 <http://members.tripod.com/general_1> -----Original Message----- From: George Currie <g(a)kurico.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Monday, April 12, 1999 3:30 PM Subject: Re: Pink Screen of Death? (was: Re: Hallelujah!) > Well, I don't know. However, MS Word/Windows and /Macintosh has a strange > option: to have large white letters on a blue background instead of black > on white. This has nothing to do with any color settings, and no other > colors can be used in a similar way. This may have classic reasons. Anyone > know? Don't know the exact reason but that was the default color combination of the DOS version of MS Word (and every day I use the current version, I long for the old one). George

27 years

3
2
0 0

Pink Screen of Death? (was: Re: Hallelujah!)

by walt＠accessus.org

This is the screen scheme from the early WordPerfect/DOS days of Jerry's young years. -w. -----Original Message----- From: Zane H. Healy <healyzh(a)aracnet.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Monday, April 12, 1999 7:33 PM Subject: Re: Pink Screen of Death? (was: Re: Hallelujah!) >>> Well, I don't know. However, MS Word/Windows and /Macintosh has a strange >>> option: to have large white letters on a blue background instead of black >>> on white. This has nothing to do with any color settings, and no other >>> colors can be used in a similar way. This may have classic reasons. Anyone >>> know? >> >>Don't know the exact reason but that was the default color >>combination of the DOS version of MS Word (and every day I use >>the current version, I long for the old one). >> >>George > >I think this has something to do with a request for an enhancement made by >Jerry Pornelle <sp> believe it or not. I read something recenty where he >wrote about having gotten MS to add some special colour combination for him. > > Zane >| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Adminstrator | >| healyzh(a)aracnet.com (primary) | Linux Enthusiast | >| healyzh(a)holonet.net (alternate) | Classic Computer Collector | >+----------------------------------+----------------------------+ >| Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, | >| and Zane's Computer Museum. | >| http://www.dragonfire.net/~healyzh/ | > >

27 years

1
0
0 0

Restoring an 8/E

by mbg＠world.std.com

> Got to stick my nose in here, if you research it, you will find that >concentrated solutions of methylene chloride are a confirmed >carcinogenic. I'm sure... I didn't get a chance to check the Merck Manual... tonight's lab was just too complex and annoying... the instructor added steps to the already documented procedure, as well as modified others... and since it was a two-part lab (part I having been done the night I missed it for observing seder with my partner), I didn't have anything I needed which was produced during step I... so my lab partner and I had to do it tonight... <sigh> >That said, I would still use it (if available), use gloves and put a fan >to blow the fumes away from me during assembly. But then, I do this kind >of stuff every day. My job. Absolutely... >Just be careful. Your too good to lose. Thanks... Megan Gentry Former RT-11 Developer +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+ | Megan Gentry, EMT/B, PP-ASEL | Internet (work): gentry!zk3.dec.com | | Unix Support Engineering Group | (home): mbg!world.std.com | | Compaq Computer Corporation | addresses need '@' in place of '!' | | 110 Spitbrook Rd. ZK03-2/T43 | URL: http://world.std.com/~mbg/ | | Nashua, NH 03062 | "pdp-11 programmer - some assembler | | (603) 884 1055 | required." - mbg | +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+

27 years

1
0
0 0

digital bites the dust, finally

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<> Well, the two big signs that said <> <> |d|i|g|i|t|a|l| <> <> on the DECwest buildings in Bellevue, WA <> disappeared sometime in the last few days. <> <> Just big blanks there now, not even a Compaq, yet. Happend in Maynard two months ago at PK3 and LKG. I pass both every day. Allison

27 years

1
0
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<I started on the Z80, then 6502, followed by ARM, 68K, 6809, 8048, PDP11, <MIPS in no particular order. I still like the Z80 and 6502, but the ARM i <one of my favourites. I've never written any serious code for x86, and <what I've seen of the architecture fills me with loathing ;-) ARM, MIPS are both unknown to me from design or programming. I've looked at the ARM though and it's very appealing. I've written code for 8088/186 and they didn't make me happy. They weren't that fast and awkward with the segments. I'd have rather used z180. I've been playing recently with z8001 and Z8002 and they arent too bad and much easier to like than the 808x. The 6809 was ok, it felt like PDP-11 but the speed wasn't as good. Never got excited over the 68k even though I've had two s100 cards pass through my hands with them. It looked sorta like 32bit PDP-11 with registers that were asymetric in addressing and use. My all time fun machine is still the 6100 (or pdp-8). It has an instruction set that's hard to forget and effectve enough. Allison

27 years

1
0
0 0

Restoring an 8/E

by mbg＠world.std.com

>Megan: since you are taking chemistry get a small bottle of methylene >chloride. It works wonders as a plastic glue. At the EPA we made >aquariums out of Plexiglas and used it for gluing the panels together. >You will want a 50 or a 100 microliter syringe to dispense it also. Just so happens I have lab tonight... I'll check the Merck Manual and see if they have any... :-) Megan Gentry Former RT-11 Developer +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+ | Megan Gentry, EMT/B, PP-ASEL | Internet (work): gentry!zk3.dec.com | | Unix Support Engineering Group | (home): mbg!world.std.com | | Compaq Computer Corporation | addresses need '@' in place of '!' | | 110 Spitbrook Rd. ZK03-2/T43 | URL: http://world.std.com/~mbg/ | | Nashua, NH 03062 | "pdp-11 programmer - some assembler | | (603) 884 1055 | required." - mbg | +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+

27 years

2
1
0 0

6502 vs Z80, round 97

by edick＠idcomm.com

It's true, what you say about the value of discussing performance without discussing the task. Keep in mind, though, that Motorola's favorite trick was to boast how fast its processors could execute no-op's. The 6502 core is in as many libraries as it is because it is small and thrifty, not because it's fast. It's fast because it's small and thrifty. It was included in a wide range of cell libraries, particularly the Rockwell incarnation. I'm not sure why this was the case. Perhaps it's because they (Rockwell) had stopped producing the CPU and were using it as a core themselves. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Mike Ford <mikeford(a)netwiz.net> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Monday, April 12, 1999 3:21 PM Subject: 6502 vs Z80, round 97 >>I was pointing out that is the processor was running fast enough even a >>dog can look good. ;) Obviously using a 8mhz z80 as the standard your >>comparison CPU had better be of similar generational speed or it may fail >>the test. the inverse is with a 33mhz z185 I know I can blow the 65c02 >>out of the water unless someone has at least a 25-30mhz 6502! > >I think I remember reading that the 6502 was eventually included in gate >array logic libraries, so that GaaS parts with Ghz clocks likely exist >(perhaps only embedded in other designs though). > >One of the things I have noticed is that great similarity exists between a >couple of instruction sets, the 6502 and the Sparc, and the IBM 360 and >68000. Kind of the classics of RISC and CISC, and I love them both. > >Arguing about the 6502 vs Z80 makes about as much sense as arguing about >which cart is faster without discussing the horse or load. As I remember it >speed was a big "talking" point, but the real issue for most power users >was capacity, not speed. > >

27 years

2
1
0 0

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by allisonp＠world.std.com

>from my ampro LB using calibrated logic analyser... Tc = 1/clock z80A 4mhz or 250ns (clock is symetric) address stable before Memreq/ ~80nS (occurs 0.5clocks earlier than read or wr -delays) WR/ width 210ns (roughly 1 clock -delays) RD/ width (M1) 290us (roughly 1.5 clocks -delays RD/ width (other) 390us (roughly two clocks -delays) So the longest memory use cycle is address setup+ RD/ or about 470us. Even the rom chip select was active for less than 400ns and that includes propagation delays. the 4mhz z80 wants memories with access times in the 250ns range. In terms of memory bandwidth used the z80 runs from a high of 80% on M1 cycles (due to z80 providing memory refersh) to around less than 50% on other read or write cycles. Refresh is not a required signal for operation with static rams so the M1 memeory bandwidh can be less than 50%. This set of statements is also inaccurate as it is worst case for some instuctions. In those cases like ADD DE,HL that takes many cycles but the only bus useage is during M1 so the average bandwidth can be very low. To get 750ns I need to slow the clock to about less than 2mhz or add the time for m1 and refresh at 4mhz. In either case it's apples and oranges. The 6502 @2mhz would want 300ns memory. An aside to this is that the 6502 like many cpus use both edges of the clock to trigger functions via a two phase internal clock so there are roughly 4 phase pulses per cycle internally. the external timing of the 6502 looks simpler due to it's use of signals and the synchronous nature of the machine. this is wny external clock frequency is so meaningless. Instruction execution time is the only measure. the 6502 memory useage is far higher as it is active for half the processor cycle so it's roughly 50% in all cases. This makes hidden refresh of Drams easier with the regular cycle timing but allows less time to achieve it. If the refresh is done during the inactive portion of the 6502 cycle then memory bandwidth nears 100% use. The exception is if the memory is fast enough it can be done with post read refresh (cas after ras). Static rams will run at ~50% of bus bandwidth. Allison

27 years

1
0
0 0

IBM Programmed Symbols Adapter

by rigdonj＠intellistar.net

I just picked up an IBM 3270 Personal Computer Programmed Symbols Adapter card in the box. The box says that it's "an option that provides the storage and controls for displaying an APL font and six additional programmable fonts." It's a full length 8 bit card with two sockets on the to edge. There is also two jumpers in the box that I assume are used to jumper this card to another card. I didn't get any instructions or software with it. Does anyone know how to use it or have instructions etc for it? Joe

27 years

6
6
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by pete＠dunnington.u-net.com

On Apr 11, 21:47, Richard Erlacher wrote: > From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com> > ><Have YOU seen a 'C' compiler for any of the 6502 types? > > > >Never. There could have been one but I'd wonder about code efficientcy. > >Then again I've never seen one for 9900 bit that as CISC a machine if > >there ever was one. > > Someone posted a small-c compiler for the 6502 as implemented in popular > machines of the early '80's. That might be worth a look. There were at least two C compilers for the BBC micro in the mid-80s. -- Pete Peter Turnbull Dept. of Computer Science University of York

27 years

1
0
0 0

Fwd: Metric conversions..??

by pete＠dunnington.u-net.com

On Apr 11, 20:56, Christian Fandt wrote: > Sorry to a few of the list members who are not native English speakers. > There are a few strange colloquial or American expressions. Ask in private > email. However, even I am not sure what a "demijohn" really is except for > perhaps a 1/2 bath in a house. A large squat glass bottle, typically 2-3 gallons. Over here, 2 gallon sizes are commonly used by homebrew winemakers. -- Pete Peter Turnbull Dept. of Computer Science University of York

27 years

1
0
0 0

IBM diagnostic cassette <.?>

by SUPRDAVE＠aol.com

In a message dated 99-04-12 20:29:05 EDT, you write: > >picked up two neat items at the hamfest today. the first was two clean > amiga > >500s and a IBM diagnostic cassette ver 1.02 with a part number 6081562. > looks > >like it only has 5 minutes of tape on it. i presume its only for the 5150. > >how would one run this tape? > > > > Do you have an extra power supply for those 500 that I could some how > aquire? The flea market special I have didn't come with one. > unfortunately i only got one power supply. the ps seems fairly simple though. 5v 4.5a 12v 1a -12v 100ma perhaps one could be adapted to work.

27 years

1
0
0 0

Fw: Getting rid of old stuff...

by fauradon＠pclink.com

Reply to the guy directly. If shipping is a problem I may be able to help... But first contact should be to Peter Seebach >----- Original Message ----- >From: Peter Seebach <seebs(a)plethora.net> >Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers >Sent: Saturday, April 10, 1999 2:18 PM >Subject: Getting rid of old stuff... > > >> First off, if I owe you a copy of the 3b1 system software, let me know - I >> have a list of people to send this to, but I've been swamped and I may >have >> lost entries. >> >> Secondly, anyone (especially in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area) want a >bunch >> of old hardware? I have a passel of sun 3/80's, a 3/60, a 3/50, a couple >> of 4/110's, and two 3/160's, in varying states of disrepair. The 3/80's >> mostly need new NVRAM. I have memory for most of them, but not >necessarily >> all. I have a couple of monitors, and a handful of high- and low- >resolution >> graphics cards for the 3/80's. I think I even have a couple of early >color >> frame buffers. Also, about six of the old shoebox drive/tape bays. (The >> gray metal ones.) >> >> Cost: Free for the taking, or you pay shipping. My goal here is to get >> this stuff to people who will use it, or who can at least use it as spare >> parts, instead of having it recycled. I no longer have the time to play >> with as many old computers as I'd like. :( >> >> -s >> -- >> Copyright 1999, All rights reserved. Peter Seebach / seebs(a)plethora.net >> C/Unix wizard, Pro-commerce radical, Spam fighter. Boycott Spamazon! >> Will work for interesting hardware. http://www.plethora.net/~seebs/ >> Visit my new ISP <URL:http://www.plethora.net/> --- More Net, Less Spam! > >

27 years

1
0
0 0

IBM diagnostic cassette <?>

by SUPRDAVE＠aol.com

picked up two neat items at the hamfest today. the first was two clean amiga 500s and a IBM diagnostic cassette ver 1.02 with a part number 6081562. looks like it only has 5 minutes of tape on it. i presume its only for the 5150. how would one run this tape?

27 years

3
2
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<You're certain right . . . it is a dead horse . . . killed by the insistenc <that 750 ns < 250 ns. < <Dick Meaningless incorrect drivel, now give it up. Allison

27 years

1
0
0 0

WTTA (Want To Throw Away): DEC PMAG-AA

by paulk＠microsoft.com

Does anyone have any use for a TURBOchannel monochrome framebuffer -- a PMAG-AA?? I feel guilty just pitching it, but I'm tired of packing it up every time I move. Free for the asking. Paul Kearns paulk(a)microsoft.com

27 years

1
0
0 0

[RANTISH] Programming Stupidity

by DSEAGRAV＠toad.xkl.com

Wonderful quote from my boss, who's (supposed to be a professional programmer for Caterpillar): "You should use strings instead of integers. You can put bigger numbers in a string." [Large progressive rant here, nevermind me...] This came up while I was being forced to write a Visual Basic program. You see, he saw me playing with BASIC on one of the UNIXen, and he thinks "BASIC = Visual Basic!". It doesn't. Visual basic is almost entirely worse. You guys think BASIC is bad? How about BASIC that automagically writes bad Windows code for you! This thing couldn't make optimized code if Billy-boy's monopoly depended on it. On top of that, the bad code that it DOES generate doesn't even work. We build the .EXE on a Win98 machine - Now it refusues to run on 95. Microsoft's wizard for making install programs for your software sucks worse. It replaced some DLLs it wasn't supposed to have on our (one and only, thank Goddess!) NT server, and NT crashed like you wouldn't believe. I'm gonna have a hell of a time putting THAT back together... On top of this, the installer doesn't run under 95, either. It starts just fine, makes a pathetic attempt at copying files, then blows up horrbibly with Error 0x16E. Wasn't Billy saying they were supposed to make our error messages make SENSE? With an error message like that, a dialog box reading "YOU LOSE!" would be better. Not to mention a damn sight funnier. We're going to reformat one of our 95 boxen and start from a clean machine - My bet is the installer will find some way to do nasty things to the partition table. The sad part is, this has become the status quo. And I hate it. I can't stand it. This is progress? If progress is like evolution, I'd sure like to jump back in time and see what we came from, it's probably a lot better than the here-and-now... Another quote from my boss: "In programming, it doesn't matter how well it runs or does it's job. The bottom line is, 'can we sell it to someone?'" Is it just me, or is that just plain wrong? Please say it's not only me... I hate being alone, 'cause that means I'm right and everyone else is wrong. Sorry for that, I just needed to vent. Do with it what you will... -------

27 years

9
8
0 0

Don Lancaster was Re: Ebay Mark-8 Plans

by rigdonj＠intellistar.net

At 01:15 PM 4/12/99 -0700, Sellam wrote: >> VCF has a generous travel fund, fueled by Intel, Paul Allen, and >> auctions of antique computer wiring harnesses on eBay. In fact, >> any member of this mailing list is eligible for grants of up to >> $1,500 for travel and lodging purposes, if you wish to attend. > >Well, this is certainly news to me, and I'd love if you would explain this >in private e-mail :) > >(for the record, no I don't know what he's talking about so please don't >e-mail me asking where to sign up). Shucks! and I was all set to go! Joe

27 years

2
1
0 0

Therac-25 (was: microcode, compilers, and supercomputer architecture)

by yakowenk＠cs.unc.edu

That's the same URL that I have bookmarked. I very strongly recommend that every programmer read through it, at least once. It is long, but enlightening. Correctness is a lot more than "seems to work". Bill. On Tue, 6 Apr 1999, clintw(a)colorado.cirrus.com (Clint Wolff) wrote: ] > ::Actually, the THERAC-25 radiation therapy machine is a good example of ] > ::poor hardware AND software design which killed a number of people by ] > ::giving them too high a dose of radiation, either for too long or ] > ::without the proper screen in place. ] > ] > !?! ] > ] > Has this been documented anywhere? Where did you find this out from? ... ] Take a look at http://ei.cs.vt.edu/~cs3604/lib/Therac_25/Therac_1.html ] This is a reprint from IEEE Computer (might even be the original article ] I saw :) ] ] clint

27 years

3
2
0 0

What if,... early PCs (was: stepping machanism

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<You've got two tracks mixed up, I think. True, the Apple II was quite <plentiful in 80, but not in businesses the way it was in 82-83. I even ha <several of them with people to man them as well. I hated the Apple but <loved the 6502. In the meantime, I noted that the RS Model 1 was a piece o <junk, and, in fact, so much of one that I never bought one, even for <experimentation, and I had nearly every other sort of box around the shop. OK, maybe where you were that was true. However despite the TRS80s shortfalls (most corrected with mods or outside hardware) I knew of businesses using them, and I may add same for the apple II. <The model 1 was quite common, but the model 1 was in too many pieces to be <of much interest to most folks. What's more, it was pretty weak-kneed. Th <model 3 held out hope, though that was later dashed when the model 3 turne <out to be not much better. My slant was the M1 was close but people wanted something more "one box". The M3 was never more than a blip on the screen because when it hit the streets there were plenty more choices and all of them deemed (if only subjectively) better. In the business worlds in NY and eastern PA S100 crates were the rule as most were seen as the business strength machines and the apple/trs80 as toys. This was by people that didn't care what cpu only that it ran! <The initial impact of the PC was to get people to stop buying non-PC's for <their businesses. They were extremely costly at first, and didn't have a <few serious problems worked out. People had to mortgage their houses to bu <one (a basic PC on the gray-market cost nearly $2k). Not really. If you were invested in apple then PC was a non-player as nothing was compatable and you lost your investement going over. For the z80 crowd (TRS and S100 crates) that was slightly less a concern but PCs needed to get up to speed with applications first. Keep in mind when the PC was introduced the only 8086 stuff out there was ISIS based and mostly as development tools. It was the spread sheets and graphic programs that caused the great sucking sound of people going PC but, that would take more time than your indicating. Yes, I remember getting a bonus check becuase of the PC in 82. IT wasn't for implementing as a useful system it was for FIXing the design. Seems one of the design bugs was it would only run intel chipsets. As to the cost of a PC... equipped as a useful machine that could run production it was far from $2k! Allison

27 years

3
2
0 0

Restoring an 8/E

by danburrows＠mindspring.com

>> I agree but for front panel switches and things that you want to look good >> without and drips I use the syringe. Then to I have them down to 2 >> microliter. The 50 microliter one is huge for my usual work. > >2 mm^3? That's small... Yes and the sample never makes it into the barrel of the syringe. The plunger is a long wire that is stepped is size. The large part is in the body and the small part goes the length of the needle. > The normal injection volume for GC/Mass spec is 1 or 2 microliters. The usual syringe used is 10 microliter. The plunger is the approx size of 26 or 28 gauge wire. They are stainless and they do bend and kink easily. I long ago lost count of the # I have messed up. Dan

27 years

1
0
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<You can build your own in an FPGA for something on the order of 2500 gates Gates or CPLDs? Big difference there. I do ahve a few 3030s here and can get 4000 seris. But why would I do it. then again I have an early 80s project that was a z80 built in 2901s... at a time where a 10mhz z80 was an extreme machine. Allison

27 years

3
4
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<Think about it! It's really simple and you could easily build it as part o <a gate array. Try that with a Z-80 and see what you get. Did it with 2901s, contemporary to the mid 70s also. If course the 3201 intel two bit slice was in some ways more interesting. Allison

27 years

2
3
0 0

Restoring an 8/E

by danburrows＠mindspring.com

> >The new name for that is dichloromethane IIRC.... Both names are currently used by the solvent vendors. > >And that's basically what 'plastic weld' is (or at least it smells like >it). But in the UK it's almost impossible to get chemicals for home use. >Dunno why, but I suspect sodium chloride would be unavailable if you >asked for it under that name ;-). You just need to know the right people in labs.:) You also don't want to know all the different things I have in my solvent cabinet or the explosion proof refrig. that is in one of my sheds.:) It is amazing what you can get (cheap or free) a lab bankruptcy sales. Especially when you know the people. > >> a 50 or a 100 microliter syringe to dispense it also. > >The easiest way that I've found to use it is to clamp the plastic >together and then to dip a small brush in the solvent and run it along >the crack. It'll be drawn into the crack by capillary action and will >weld the plastic together. I agree but for front panel switches and things that you want to look good without and drips I use the syringe. Then to I have them down to 2 microliter. The 50 microliter one is huge for my usual work. Dan

27 years

2
1
0 0

Restoring an 8/E

by CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.COM

>>The new name for that is dichloromethane IIRC.... >Both names are currently used by the solvent vendors. >>And that's basically what 'plastic weld' is (or at least it smells like >>it). But in the UK it's almost impossible to get chemicals for home use. >>Dunno why, but I suspect sodium chloride would be unavailable if you >>asked for it under that name ;-). >You just need to know the right people in labs.:) Or head to your local plastics supplier - all of the ones I've ever dealt with are more than happy to sell you all the useful solvents. Incidentally, for those doing "front panel" restorations, talk to a good sign-making shop. It's rather straightforward these days to get custom plastic panels made and printed. I've had this done several times and have been very satisfied with the results. -- Tim Shoppa Email: shoppa(a)trailing-edge.com Trailing Edge Technology WWW: http://www.trailing-edge.com/ 7328 Bradley Blvd Voice: 301-767-5917 Bethesda, MD, USA 20817 Fax: 301-767-5927

27 years

1
0
0 0

Don Lancaster was Re: Ebay Mark-8 Plans

by jon＠techniche.com

Hi Sam, Possible suggestion for a speaker............Steve Ciarcia (SP?) You know the hardware guy who used to have a column in Byte and then started several of his own magazines. He also wrote "how to build a z80 home computer" (or something very close to that, I don't have it in front of me). He came to mind because I've been working in Conn for the last several months and I keep bumping into folks who know him. I also hear that there is a monthly dinner meeting of the ex-members of a now defunct computer club not far >from where I am working and that he often shows up. I know that he cammme on the scene later than some of the other people who have been mentioned as past or future VCF speakers, but he certainly meets the >10 rule. By the way does the VCF pay the speakers? Or their travel? Jon >On Fri, 9 Apr 1999, Joe wrote: > >> At 04:27 PM 4/9/99, Dave wrote: >> > >> >The seller also has the RE TVT plans by Don Lancaster. >> >> Speaking of Don Lancaster, has anyone asked him to speak at VCF or told >> him about this list? He's been involved with the home PCs since the >> beginning and is probably a wealth of infomation. > >I invited him to speak for VCF 1.0 but he wasy busy and told me to try >again some other time. Maybe I'll try again this year. > >On that topic, if anyone would like to suggest a speaker for VCF 3.0 (or >even be a speaker themself!) then please drop me a line with your >suggestion. Thanks! > >Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out. > > Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0 > See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details! > [Last web site update: 04/03/99] > >

27 years

5
4
0 0

Restoring an 8/E

by danburrows＠mindspring.com

> >>Try to get some 'plastic weld'. It's a solvent for the sort of plastic >>used on these panels, and you can weld the broken bit back in place. It's >>normally a very strong repair. > >Thanks... I'll keep that in mind... Megan: since you are taking chemistry get a small bottle of methylene chloride. It works wonders as a plastic glue. At the EPA we made aquariums out of Plexiglas and used it for gluing the panels together. You will want a 50 or a 100 microliter syringe to dispense it also. Dan

27 years

2
1
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by edick＠idcomm.com

It's not about and indirect table jump, it's about an indirect INDEXED table jump. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Dwight Elvey <elvey(a)hal.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Monday, April 12, 1999 11:12 AM Subject: Re[2]: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies) >allisonp(a)world.std.com (Allison J Parent) wrote: >> <I knew somebody woudl come up with a good example. That 6809 code is <snip> >> the kinds of things a PC (or other general purpose computer) would. > >Hi > Even the 4004 had an indirect table jump, so what is all the >noise about. >Dwight >

27 years

1
0
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<I knew somebody woudl come up with a good example. That 6809 code is <probably the closest thing I've seen in a micro. The 8051 uses a similar <approach, pointing to the table with the datapointer and uses the The 8051 is very ugly in other places. Then there are the NEC uPD 78xx series that are similar in register layout to z80 but code wise, not close. They have a table lookup instructions for that exact task. They are targetted as rom based controllers and code efficientcy is a requirement but often controller don't need to preocess the kinds of things a PC (or other general purpose computer) would. The z280 has a load address inscrtuction that makes the setup for an indexed jump easier. The PDP-11 did it on one instuction but it has some very powerful addressing modes. Indirection and indexing are natural to that part. However in CPUs righer in register than the 6502, the task would be done far differently. It's a different programming style and it does impact code structure. For example a set of operations that can be done requiring multiple (say a dozen) 16bit parameters to be passed are easily done on even 8080 but the 6502 has to do that as indexed list in ram and pass the pointer to the list if you want to be efficient. It's possible to structure a problem such that any cpu looks good or bad. Generally an application is far more than a trivial few instructions. Look at the PDP-8 which is both register poor and has an instruction set that small is far from adaquate to describe. Yet it performs tasks efficiently in small amounts of core that some cpus can't. The 6809 example would be in PDP-8... / enter here with uart data DCA pindex / store index value at pindex JMP I,INDEX / indirect jump via index (could have been a JMS, jump / subroutine!) Execution time for an 8E (1973) would have been under 8uS if both instuction used indirect addressing. As written it would be 7.6uS. Now the 6502 at 2mhz would have done it in what? < They (DEC) did make the uVax-II as a chipset for interfacing to their <BI-bus, I believe, so that might qualify as well. The DEC chipset probabl <didn't sell for what a 6809 costs, even the faster part, and certainly not <the $0.86 I last saw on the 4MHz Rockwell 65C02. ?????? UvaxII was not for interfacing the BI, that was a dedicated chipset. The uVAXII was a single chip (extended FPU and DMA were companions). UvaxII was only remotely related to BI bus. The statment doesn't parse. <I'm not surprised that it was in the 6809 that this instruction came up. <The 6809 showed lots of promise at first, but once it was in hand, one <clearly could see that it would be MUCH easier going with the MC68008 if on <had to use an 8-bit bus. I never had the opportunity to write in a the 6809 was a bridge part while waiting for the 68K. Still it was a good part. <high-level language for the 6809, but I was told it should have been quite <easy to write a high-quality efficient compiler for it because of its <repertioire of instructions and addressing modes. I turned out literally Nearly as good as the PDP-11. FYI both the 6809 and the 68k had heavy PDP-11 and vax influences. Allison

27 years

2
1
0 0

C for 6502

by jfoust＠threedee.com

At 08:55 PM 4/11/99 -0700, Sellam Ismail wrote: >On Sun, 11 Apr 1999, Richard Erlacher wrote: > >> Have YOU seen a 'C' compiler for any of the 6502 types? > >Aztec C for the Apple ][, for one. I'm sure there were others. I remember buying a C compiler for my Commodore 64 in '83 or so, made by a student at a university in Waterloo, Ontario. My brain is strained to remember the name, though. Aztec C was a popular compiler for the Amiga, too. Wondering what happened to the primary programmer there, who I knew quite well in the Amiga heyday, I found his web page at <http://www.oro.net/~jimg/>. Presto, he's still selling a C compiler for the 65816. He was once involved with the post-Amiga VISCorp set-top effort, and previously unknown to me, was at Bell Labs Murray Hill in '77-79, and wrote a Unix disk driver for the port to the PDP-11/34, and a tiny C for the KIM-1 and Apple II. - John

27 years

4
7
0 0

Don Lancaster was Re: Ebay Mark-8 Plans

by SUPRDAVE＠aol.com

In a message dated 12/04/99 10:29:53 Eastern Daylight Time, jfoust(a)threedee.com writes: << VCF has a generous travel fund, fueled by Intel, Paul Allen, and auctions of antique computer wiring harnesses on eBay. In fact, any member of this mailing list is eligible for grants of up to $1,500 for travel and lodging purposes, if you wish to attend. >> hmmm,. i'd love to go. how does one take advantage of this?

27 years

1
0
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by edick＠idcomm.com

You're certain right . . . it is a dead horse . . . killed by the insistence that 750 ns < 250 ns. Dick -----Original Message----- From: allisonp(a)world.std.com <allisonp(a)world.std.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Monday, April 12, 1999 7:59 AM Subject: Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies) >> I didn't want to descend into the gate-level details of the CPU, but merely >> to count clocks for comparison's sake. > >Since the clocks are applied in such a different fashion the comparison is >meaningless. > >> clock ticks to access memory while a 6502 took only one. As I've said in >> previous posts, the comparison at the memory bandwidth level came out in > >Meaningless unless that is a particular requirement of an application >HARDWARE. > >> the fastest commercially available Z-80 with the fastest commercially >> available 6502, the 6502 will win by a wide margin EVERY time. Compare the >> Z80H (1983 or so) with the Synertek SYC6502C (1979) and you'll see that >> 8 MHz Z-80 can't be counted on to win the race. If you like, you can > >Your dreaming again. Seriously weve beat the dead horse and it's time to >quit. The 6502 is a good cpu but the comparisons are getting silly. > >If you really want to compare archectecture I'll take the T-11 (PDP-11 on >a 40 pin dip) @7.5mHZ and blow the both out of the water. here a part >from The same era that has all the addressing modes of the 68k and then >some and can use memory like the 6502 or z80 with its registers. Things >like position independent code, relative addressing and two address >structure are all there. the problem is the arguement is specious as I >can also use the CMOS PDP-8 part to put up as good a battle of who wins. >And getting a PDP-8 into a FPGA has been done as well. > >> compare the 8 MHz Z-80H with the Rockwell 65C102, which takes a 4x clock. >> Now it takes 4 clock ticks at 16 MHz to execute a bus cycle of any type. >> Feed it an 8 MHz clock, it will still outdistance the Z-80H. > >YEs and the z180S part takes a 33mhz clock, whats the point? CLOCKS and >counting them is meaningless unless they mean something comparable. > >> I remember what it was like trying to get delivery on 2147's back in >'81. I > >There were peole sellign 4kx1 22pinparts at near firesale prices compared >to 2147 and were near 65ns. They were of the pseudo static three voltage >generation but the y were cheap. > >> machines of the early '80's. That might be worth a look. What I want is a > >Smallc had limited optimization. I've used it for other cpus and it's fat. >I would ahve guessed that was ported to near everything but it's not a >production compiler though I guess it could be used as one. > >> I recently bought a couple of single board dedicated boards, and found that >> they had the 4 MHz Rockwell CMOS parts on them. I didn't think I'd ever see >> something like that in the scrap box. Oh well, once I've figured out the >> memory map, they'll be useful for 1-of's. > >I have 4 or 5 board from telvideo 905/955 terminals and they have 65C02s >from rockwell on them. I also have a trackstar 128 (APPLE II for PC) that >has two 65C02s. > > >Allison > > > >> >> >Allison >> > >> >

27 years

1
0
0 0

Old Nicolet boxes...

by jfoust＠threedee.com

In penance to Sam for opening the floodgates to the previously secret VCF travel fund, I reveal a link to someone at Nicolet who seems willing to talk about their line of computers. - John >From: Mike Lennon <lennon(a)nicolet.com> >To: "'John Foust'" <jfoust(a)threedee.com> >Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 08:34:19 -0500 >Subject: RE: Old Nicolet boxes... > >I did a fair amount of engineering on the 1280 and it's operating >system. Feel free to contact me with any questions you may have. > >Mike Lennon

27 years

1
0
0 0

More Pick info (was Prime 2250)

by jlwest＠tseinc.com

Prime Infomation was certainly a pick variant - I spent a lot of time (about 7 years) on Prime's and Prime Information at AB. When pick first came out, is was what we called "vanilla" which meant that the machine booted pick - there was no other operating system. Later other manufacturers (licensees of pick systems) decided to strip out the monitor and missionary/native code architecture, and gut everything that was OSlike rather than RDBMSlike. They then put the remnants on top of some other operating system (layered rather than vanilla). Unix was common, as was DOS, Windows, PRIMOS, etc. To answer someone elses question, BASIC was the programming language (you had no choice). There was also PROC which was not that much more than batch files in DOS. Then there was the assembler. The assembler verb definition was removed from many later versions but you could define a pointer into the ABS area to call it up. BASIC was compiled into DCD or Pcode, and the result was run interpretively. The DCD/Pcode was rather elegant - it implemented a stack architecture to speed code generation and execution in RPN. At the end of each BASIC statements resulting code the state machine was completely back to its initial value. In a certain sense, each basic statement resulted in a separate DCD/Pcode subroutine that was reentrant as the symbol table and variable allocations were made out of the users workspace. All the Pick variations handle file I/O the same - I've never seen any programming language even close to pick basic in the elegance of the file/record interface. The assembler was virtual, in that the instruction set really didn't exist on any machine. So - assembly was a 3 pass process. First, the Pick assembler turned your assembler file into "virtual machine code". Then a BASIC program turned the virtual machine code into an assembler program in the native assembly language of the cpu it was running on. Finally the native assembler was run to generate executable object code. Somewhere I still have some listings where you can see the same program turn into 68000 assembler and then compile on a different machine and see each instruction turn into 8080 assembler. Nifty AND educational :) I forget if prime information was created by ex Vmark engineers, or if Universe was created by ex Prime engineers - one way or the other ;) I have to admit, next to freeBSD, Primos is a really nice OS IMHO. ISTR that the baud rates for the AMLC lines (serial cards) were controlled via the AMLC.COMI file, located on the system volume ( <SYSTEM>AMLC.COMI or <MFD 0>AMLC.COMI). This was a command input file which set the line characteristics. Can't recall if the console speed was set there, but the other serial lines were. I have a complete Primos and Prime Information manual set at the office. I'll check how to set the console speed for you. If you have no docs and are playing with the primos machine, just remember, it's "A " rather than "cd ", and "ED" rather than "vi" <grin> oh - emacs was VERY common on primos, so that might be there as well for you to use. One final note - I do NOT want to represent that I wrote the Pick operating system, or that I was on the original development team. Dick Pick and Chandru Murthi would just scream if I said I was. Pick was developed in the late 60's by those two under a government project for maintaining the data on a helicopter project. The original name (according to the US Government) for the Pick OS was G.I.R.L.S. (Generalized Information Retrieval Language). No Kidding. So - I didn't invent it, I was merely a freelance consultant who worked on modifications and enhancements to the virtual code and monitor code in the Pick OS for some of the pick licensees. Cheers! Jay West -----Original Message----- From: John Lawson <jpl15(a)netcom.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, April 11, 1999 7:43 PM Subject: PR1ME 2550 Up and Running > > > Well... it didn't hurt as much as I thought it was going to.. > >I have just run "SHUTDN ALL" after two hours of playing with PRIMOS >(on a DEC LA120 running at 300 baud... s-l-o-w...). > > I rescued this system about two months ago, and finally got tired >of it taking up space. It took about an hour to figure out where all >the cables used to go, and the Control Data SMD drive [used as a >paging and swapping drive] needed a little prodding to wake it up, >but the system boots and remembers what it was doing last time it was >on... about six years ago. > > Now to try and make the console port run at a decent speed. > > And, apropos of the Pick discussions, this machine has INFORMATION >loaded and running... haven't messed with it yet, tho.. > > > Cheers > >John > >

27 years

3
2
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by edick＠idcomm.com

please have a look at my emmbedded comments below. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, April 11, 1999 9:22 PM Subject: Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies) ><Well, Allison, you're going to force me to venture into the archives and ><fetch the data sheet. > >Since I use z80s and kin often the data sheets for the z80 (all dozen or so) >starting with the 1977 ones are at hand. It helps that in my history is >applications engineering time at NEC microcomputers (they sold the uPD780 >a z80). > ><4mhz (shorter for M1 cycle)" is ABSOLUTELY correct. However, it took thre ><clock ticks in order to generate that cycle. IIRC, the entire M1 (opcode ><fetch + refresh) cycle took 4 or 5 (?) clock ticks, which made it the ><longest cycle. Memory cycles other than opcode fetches took 3 ticks and I ><believe I/O cycles took 4. So I remembered these correctly? After all those years? Amazing . . . >Don't ignore the fact that there are such thing as propagation delays >internal to the chip in the 50-80nS range or that some edges chaged on >the rising edge and some on the falling ones. I didn't want to descend into the gate-level details of the CPU, but merely to count clocks for comparison's sake. ><The theory was that one execute a bunch of memory cycles to load up the ><internal registers of the Z-80, of which there are plenty, and then execut ><scads of register-register instructions which are faster, in order to ><accomplish a given computational task. It didn't easily work out that way ><a notion which wasn't lost on the designers of the 6502. > >There are many schools of thought. the PDP-8 is and the 6502 have the >sparse hardware idea in common. the z80 is really a CISC machine and >reflects the more complex instruction set and the 8080 history. > >< ><The MOS-Technology people who first implemented the 6502 architecture, ><recognized that although the Z-80 had plenty of registers, it still wasn't ><enough, so they shortened the memory access cycles. In fact, they used a > >I don't feel that is a right way to say it. I'd go with... The mos >technology people with a limited silicone real estate (silicon costs alot >then) fewer register and a instruction set biased to use memory more. >That heritage comes from the 6800 which is a more similar part. > ><done, and they opted for an 8-bit stack pointer, which gave them the ability ><to execute stack-oriented operations faster than the Z-80 and its kin could > >they werent! Not significantly. in most cases the time to actually execute >isn't that much different. Well . . . I'd say it is significant, in view of the fact a Z-80 took three clock ticks to access memory while a 6502 took only one. As I've said in previous posts, the comparison at the memory bandwidth level came out in favor of the Z-80 because it had a BETTER BASIC interpreter. If you compare the fastest commercially available Z-80 with the fastest commercially available 6502, the 6502 will win by a wide margin EVERY time. Compare the Z80H (1983 or so) with the Synertek SYC6502C (1979) and you'll see that the 8 MHz Z-80 can't be counted on to win the race. If you like, you can compare the 8 MHz Z-80H with the Rockwell 65C102, which takes a 4x clock. Now it takes 4 clock ticks at 16 MHz to execute a bus cycle of any type. Feed it an 8 MHz clock, it will still outdistance the Z-80H. ><do so. It could look at its zero-page as extra-fast memory, or slow ><register space. In any case, a stack operation took one clock tick + one ><clock tick per byte. A zero page operation, depending on the operation in ><question, took one clock tick less time than that same instruction operatin ><on any of the rest of memory. A load or store took two cycles, and an ><indexed load or store took three. > >The idea of zero page was straight from PDP-8 too. The zero page was a way >to solve the problem of too few registers. The TI9900 took an entirely >different path to solve that problem. > >Which problem? Silicon real estate. registers are memory and that memory >eats silicon. back in that time frame you had some hard choices a with >regard to that. The Z80 was somewhat remarkable as there were 208 bits of >storage inside the processor for just user programable registers and bits. > ><Today, we're equipped with cheap VERY fast large, SRAMs which would make i ><much easire to make a solid and objective test of the two processors. ><Unfortunately, there's little reason to do so, since neither is of any ><commercial interest. > >In 1979 I had several tubes of 85nS 4kx1 rams that made a dandy memory. >They were static. I still have some of them. then in 1980 I got some slow >static 16kx1s that were only 70nS (2167) and built a z80 system that pushed >a 6mhz part to 7mhz. fast rams were available. I remember what it was like trying to get delivery on 2147's back in '81. I did manage to get the 55 ns parts for my 6502 based system. The bottom 16K allowed the processor to run a 4 MHz, while the rest caused it to slow to 1 MHz. Since the assembler lived in the bottom 8K, and the editor we used right above it, the combination was pretty fast. I eventually filled the whole lower 48K with the fast SRAMS, as we had a card designed for the TMS4044, which was a slow 2147. >My NSbox had 2116s that were 300ns and only 32 filled the memory space >on one board. that was 1981. > ><Have YOU seen a 'C' compiler for any of the 6502 types? > >Never. There could have been one but I'd wonder about code efficientcy. >Then again I've never seen one for 9900 bit that as CISC a machine if >there ever was one. Someone posted a small-c compiler for the 6502 as implemented in popular machines of the early '80's. That might be worth a look. What I want is a cross-compiler with a version for the PC as the target and one for the 6502. That way I can debug on the PC and transfer my code to the 6502. (Mitsubishi microcontrollers, actually) I recently bought a couple of single board dedicated boards, and found that they had the 4 MHz Rockwell CMOS parts on them. I didn't think I'd ever see something like that in the scrap box. Oh well, once I've figured out the memory map, they'll be useful for 1-of's. >Allison >

27 years

2
1
0 0

Several things

by Philip.Belben＠pgen.com

It has taken me a whole week to catch up with Classiccmp. So this is on oldish threads, I'm afraid... Tim Shoppa wrote (starting with a quotation from I don't know whom): >>C= PET VisiCalc EPROM >>--------------------- >>The Commodore PET version of the VisiCalc spreadsheet came with a chip that >>plugged into a socket on the main board. This was probably an EPROM, used for >>copy-protection. I have an original VisiCalc package, minus this EPROM. Does >>anyone know where I can download an image of the EPROM from? > > I'd be interested to know exactly what this chip did. It was never > perfectly clear to me that it was used for copy-protection. I was always under the impression that the ROM that came with Visicalc contained most of the code. I never used VZCalc on a PET (I had an old ROM PET, not compatible and no expansion sockets, and in those days no knowledge to change matters), but could the ROM have contained the code common to all modules? The argument on microcode and that which it spawned on ABS are a bit old, but since the subject line says "Several things" I may as well put in my bit. MICROCODE, Compilers, Assemblers. ================================= Microcode compilation is a good example of differences between humans and computers. Humans have (one hopes, if they are working at it at all) a BETTER UNDERSTANDING of the job (in one sense, computers have no understanding at all). Computers are FASTER and LESS PRONE TO MISTAKES [1]. In something like microcode compilation/optimisation, it is often a requirement to get the best possible result. If your processor knocks one clock cycle off an addition, because you spotted a shortcut in the microcode that your competitors' compiler/assembler didn't, you will have a faster processor. Probably significantly faster. But you can't claim that humans will always exhibit better PRODUCTIVITY (sorry William B, otherwise I agree with you) because doing it by hand is usually _far_ slower. The distinction between a compiler and an assembler is irrelevant here. As usual, there is a continuous spectrum of techniques and things like Hex monitors, assemblers, macro assemblers, compilers are names given to parts of the spectrum. No matter how you define them there will always be examples that are hard to place in one category or another. I think the point is: the more the computer does for you, the easier and faster it is to get a good result, but the more hassle it is to get the best result... Spc said "There's no such thing as compiled code - everything is interpreted" Definitely everything is interpreted. But unless the code fed to the interpreter, be it software, microcode or hardware, is what was written, it's compiled as well. Tony said, on processor design, you can either have one flip-flop to each machine state (like a P850) or microcode. Again there are intermediate points. I claim you can do quite well by numbering the machine states in a suitably chosen binary code and having one flip-flop to each bit. Logic for changing flip-flops is often _easier_ than when you have one flip-flop per state. (I have done both designs for the same circuit BTW). If you put this logic into a ROM, this becomes in a sense a microcode ROM, but you can do it combinatorially as well... [1] In principle anyway, computers will do what they've been told, rather than forget things. Microsoft have managed to write a suite of programs that do make random silly mistakes just like humans, but even Microsoft software is more predictable in its mistakes than humans are. ABS. ==== To try and keep this on topic, how did Ferguson do ABS in the early 1970s? I don't believe they would have used a microprocessor. I'd guess at an analogue computer, probably not even electronic. Would this be less frightening to Tony? Theory of ABS. -------------- The consensus (and I agree) seems to be that a sliding tyre has less good grip than a rolling one. If when braking, you start to skid, take the foot off and re-apply. This will shorten your stoping distance. I once saw (via television) a demo carried out at a skid pan. Car 1 jammed on brakes and skidded a long way. Car 2, same speed, pumped the brakes quite slowly (less than 1 Hz) and stopped in 1/2 the distance. ABS, by pumping brakes, will stop you in a shorter distance than straight skidding. Now ABS pumps the brakes very fast. A further improvement can be achieved by slow pumping. Why? The car will bounce up and down like anything. If you pump at the resonant frequency of the suspension, you can arrange always to brake when it is down. This gives you extra pressure and extra grip, so you can stop sooner. This is what I understand by the phrase "cadence braking". But as several people have pointed out, the BIG advantage of ABS is extra control. Practice of ABS. ---------------- I will admit that I used to think as Tony does - ABS is undesirable because it fails in a nasty way. However, having driven cars with and without ABS, my opinion has changed. Please note that this is only an opinion. You are welcome to think differently. If you have skid training (I don't, but would like to one day), you perhaps ought to think differently. I don't know. 1. Emergency stop doesn't require pumping as a matter of course. In my 1972 Marcos it is very seldom that I skid and have to reapply brakes. 2. Therefore the technique in most situations is the same whether you have ABS or not: If you start skidding, pump. But not until. 3. As I said in the argument on earth leakage protection, a safety device is to get you out of trouble not into it. ABS is no excuse for driving too fast or too close. 4. There are situations in which ABS if it works can save you when no amount of braking technique from the driver without it can. Emergency stop on a corner springs to mind (see below). It is amazing how far a car goes between applications of the brake pedal. At 60mph, in one second you travel 88 feet. Pumping brakes quite fast, your skids will be 20 feet long. Pumping at a more humanly achievable rate, probably nearer 40 feet. This is quite far enough to leave the road and hit a tree. (Last month emergency stop on a corner sprang rather forcibly to more than just my mind. Car: dead. Diver: minor whiplash and bruising to joints of right leg. Without ABS I am still confident that, had I been able to go in a straight line, I would have stopped safely. With it, I wouldn't have hit the tree. With failed ABS I would be no worse off than I am now.) 5. I now believe that on balance, ABS does more good than harm. To me, that is. 6. But I refuse to have an airbag in my car! I don't like to carry explosives at the best of times, and an accident is hardly the best of times. (Seriously, airbags are generally inflated by an explosive that generates a lot of gas. Sometimes it goes off when you are not crashing. If the airbag has a pinhole leak, escaping gas can cause serious injuries (fortunately I wear glasses when driving)). Seat belts and crumple zones are quite sufficient when used properly. Well, I've got it off my chest too. But boy, has the traffic on the list been high this last week! Philip.

27 years

4
3
0 0

PICK OS - I know it well...

by steverob＠hotoffice.com

> I had no idea there was pick interest here. If someone wants a small writeup > of the OS architecture and progression through history, I'd be happy to > resurrect those brain cells :) > This is a lot more on topic than many recent posts. Please enlighten us! Steve Robertson - <steverob(a)hotoffice.com>

27 years

1
0
0 0

PR1ME 2550 Up and Running

by steverob＠hotoffice.com

> > Well... it didn't hurt as much as I thought it was going to.. > > I have just run "SHUTDN ALL" after two hours of playing with PRIMOS > (on a DEC LA120 running at 300 baud... s-l-o-w...). > > I rescued this system about two months ago, and finally got tired > of it taking up space. It took about an hour to figure out where all > the cables used to go, and the Control Data SMD drive [used as a > paging and swapping drive] needed a little prodding to wake it up, > but the system boots and remembers what it was doing last time it was > on... about six years ago. > > Now to try and make the console port run at a decent speed. > > And, apropos of the Pick discussions, this machine has INFORMATION > loaded and running... haven't messed with it yet, tho.. > > > Cheers > > John John, The 2550 is a neat little minicomputer. I have one but, it has a bad processor card so, I've never actually got it to boot. Sooner or later, I'll find a replacement card for it. IIRC, I was able to connect a dumb terminal to the console port at 2400 baud. I was able to talk to the diagnostics processor and run the startup sequence at this speed. There's probably a configuration setting for this but, I don't know what it is. I have a fairly complete set of DOCs for the machine (as a matter of fact, most of them are still in the shrink wrap). I'll be happy to share them if you are missing any volumes. If you have any specific questions, I'll try to look them up for you. The "2550 Operators Manual" will probably be the most useful at this point. It has the basic system operation and getting started guide. Do you have this DOC? Steve Robertson - <steverob(a)hotoffice.com>

27 years

1
0
0 0

PCMCIA

by edick＠idcomm.com

There are a couple of newsgroups dedicated to PCMCIA which might be of some help. Take a look! Ask! Dick -----Original Message----- From: John Ruschmeyer <jruschme(a)exit109.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Saturday, April 10, 1999 6:52 PM Subject: PCMCIA >Hi! > >This is possibly too new for this list, so please excuse me if I offend >anyone... > >I was wondering if any of you might have a copy of PCMICA drivers, such as >might have been shipped with a modem or other card? > >I'm in the process of resurrecting my NCR Safari, but the only drivers >that came with it are a simple memory card driver/formatter. > >Thanks... ><<<John>>>

27 years

3
2
0 0

Victor 80286 (Lap-Top)

by vischer＠access.ch

I saw that one; anyone knows anything about it? Victor 80286 (Lap-Top) please mail me privately Thanks! Simon

27 years

1
0
0 0

Fwd: H8 Enthusiasts

by cfandt＠netsync.net

Okay folks, I know a few of you have been looking for these items (Hans F.! Are you reading this now?) so have at it! :-) Seems to be just an H-10 manual, not the unit itself though :( Write Jeff directly of course, don't reply to me. -- Chris >Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 12:06:32 -0400 >Reply-To: Jeff Headlee <jeffhdle(a)HOME.COM> >Sender: Heathkit Owners and Collectors List <HEATH(a)LISTSERV.TEMPE.GOV> >From: Jeff Headlee <jeffhdle(a)HOME.COM> >Organization: @Home Network >Subject: H8 Enthusiasts >To: HEATH(a)LISTSERV.TEMPE.GOV > >Greetings, > >I have an H8 computer and a bunch of manuals I must clear out >to tidy up the basement. The H8 has an 8k memeory card in it >but the computer doesn't work. The power supply appears OK, >but the speaker screams a lot and the post is not successful. >Otherwise the unit is in good shape. The manuals are for the many >peripherals available for the H8: > > (2) H8 complete > H9 video terminal (assembly and operation) > H8-2 parallel I/O interface (assembly) > H8-5 serial I/O cassette card (assembly) > H10 paper tape reader/punch (assembly and operation) > 8k static memory card schematics > >Free to loving home if you pay postage or you can pick it up if you >live in the Baltimore MD area. > >Jeff > >--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- >To subscribe: listserv(a)listserv.tempe.gov >and in body: subscribe HEATH yourfirstname yourlastname >To unsubscribe: listserv(a)listserv.tempe.gov >and in body: signoff HEATH >Archives for HEATH: http://www.tempe.gov/archives >--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- Christian Fandt, Electronic/Electrical Historian Jamestown, NY USA cfandt(a)netsync.net Member of Antique Wireless Association URL: http://www.ggw.org/awa

27 years

2
1
0 0

IBM diagnostic cassette <?>

by roblwill＠usaor.net

There's probably a BASIC program on it that would be loaded from ROM BASIC. What the name of it would be, I have no idea. Try "DIGS.BAS", or maybe "TEST.BAS". -- -Jason Willgruber (roblwill(a)usaor.net) ICQ#: 1730318 <http://members.tripod.com/general_1> -----Original Message----- From: SUPRDAVE(a)aol.com <SUPRDAVE(a)aol.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, April 11, 1999 7:01 PM Subject: IBM diagnostic cassette <?> >picked up two neat items at the hamfest today. the first was two clean amiga >500s and a IBM diagnostic cassette ver 1.02 with a part number 6081562. looks >like it only has 5 minutes of tape on it. i presume its only for the 5150. >how would one run this tape? >

27 years

1
0
0 0

PICK OS - I know it well...

by jlwest＠tseinc.com

My company has specialized in the Pick OS for about 17 years. Matter of fact, I spent a lot of time writing some portions of the operating system for several of the implementing manufacturers as an independent consultant. The "virtual" assembler on Pick is truely unique - the entire instruction set is geared for byte oriented string searches on delimiters, etc. Very bizzare, but I loved the assembler on it. In addition, due to the way the virtual assembler was implemented, porting the Pick OS to a different hardware platform was childsplay, and typically took about a week at most. Yes, I have the PC version, as well as full source code to Reality 2.5D (a Microdata -> McDonnel Douglas implementation on the M1600 systems). I'm sure I have OS load tapes for many of the other platforms too (LSI11, Honeywell DPS6 [those two weren't really called pick, they were called Ultimate OS, but it WAS pick], General Automation, Prime [called INFORMATION on that platform], ADDS [mentor OS], Universe [a variant of pick that runs on top of Unix], Revelation [a variant running on DOS], there are MANY others). Contrary to what others have mentioned, it virtually NEVER had built in networking. Picks strong suit was database management and multiuser handling, it's weak point was communications and networking - it REALLY stunk at those last two. Ah - but it's database manager was the greatest thing around for business data management. Also, it was VERY extensible - the only problem was that any extensions had to be written in assembler. The virtual assembler on pick was largely undocumented and something of a black art. The PC version was not a toy - I had a small hand in it as well. The virtual code was 100% identical to the pick OS code used on many of the mainframe versions - the only difference was the machine dependent monitor code which implemented the missionary instructions. Other than that difference (which isn't visible to the user or programmer) it was identical to the other "r83" type implementations. I had no idea there was pick interest here. If someone wants a small writeup of the OS architecture and progression through history, I'd be happy to resurrect those brain cells :) Jay West -----Original Message----- From: Max Eskin <max82(a)surfree.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Saturday, April 10, 1999 5:07 PM Subject: PICK OS >I saw an interesting book at the library today about something called PICK >OS. I didn't get to look through the entire book, but I read enough to see >that it refers to directories as dictionaries. It seems to take a novel >approach, but I know nothing about it. Haven't even heard of it. Does >anyone here know more? Does anyone here have the PC version (mentioned in >the book)? > >--Max Eskin (max82(a)surfree.com) > >

27 years

5
4
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by edick＠idcomm.com

This is gates, not macrocells. I imagine it could be done with just a CPLD, like one of the mid-sized ~384 macrocells including the steering logic and instruction sequencer. It only needs eight 8-bit registers including the impending operand register. -----Original Message----- From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, April 11, 1999 9:46 PM Subject: Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies) ><You can build your own in an FPGA for something on the order of 2500 gates > >Gates or CPLDs? Big difference there. I do ahve a few 3030s here and can >get 4000 seris. But why would I do it. This would depend on the available resources. The Xylinx parts tend to come up short on routing resources. Last time (hopefully) I worked with the old 3000-series parts we were always having to cut and jumper our boards because the routing resources weren't there to preserve our pinout. I also found the 3000 series doesn't integrate well. It's best if you can partition a function to fit the FPGA. Sharing logic cells uses too many pins. It's easier and perhaps more efficient to replicate some functions versus sharing them from either the internals of one LCA or from a common external source. >then again I have an early 80s project that was a z80 built in 2901s... >at a time where a 10mhz z80 was an extreme machine. > >Allison >

27 years

1
0
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by edick＠idcomm.com

Well, Allison, you're going to force me to venture into the archives and fetch the data sheet. I'll get back to you on the precise numbers after I've looked them up, but for now, I recall that the normal memory cycle was three clock ticks long. That's the cycle, not the stroke into memory. Your assertion "The memory active portion of the instruction cycle was far shorter, typically 300ns at 4mhz (shorter for M1 cycle)" is ABSOLUTELY correct. However, it took three clock ticks in order to generate that cycle. IIRC, the entire M1 (opcode fetch + refresh) cycle took 4 or 5 (?) clock ticks, which made it the longest cycle. Memory cycles other than opcode fetches took 3 ticks and I believe I/O cycles took 4. The theory was that one execute a bunch of memory cycles to load up the internal registers of the Z-80, of which there are plenty, and then execute scads of register-register instructions which are faster, in order to accomplish a given computational task. It didn't easily work out that way, a notion which wasn't lost on the designers of the 6502. The MOS-Technology people who first implemented the 6502 architecture, recognized that although the Z-80 had plenty of registers, it still wasn't enough, so they shortened the memory access cycles. In fact, they used a whole addressing mode focused on the lowest page in memory, as, MOTOROLA had done, and they opted for an 8-bit stack pointer, which gave them the ability to execute stack-oriented operations faster than the Z-80 and its kin could do so. It could look at its zero-page as extra-fast memory, or slow register space. In any case, a stack operation took one clock tick + one clock tick per byte. A zero page operation, depending on the operation in question, took one clock tick less time than that same instruction operating on any of the rest of memory. A load or store took two cycles, and an indexed load or store took three. Today, we're equipped with cheap VERY fast large, SRAMs which would make it much easire to make a solid and objective test of the two processors. Unfortunately, there's little reason to do so, since neither is of any commercial interest. The testing I did was many years ago, and my emphasis was on which one worked faster in raw speed in a DRAM environment in which the affordable DRAMs were of the 200 ns flavor. I've never been comfortable with my final conclusion that the Z-80 was faster, except for the observation I made along the way, that most tasks simply couldn't be done realistically on the 6502 because the tools weren't available. Have YOU seen a 'C' compiler for any of the 6502 types? Dick -----Original Message----- From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, April 11, 1999 4:35 PM Subject: Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies) ><I have to disagree with your comparison of the 2 MHz 6502 with a 4 MHz ><Z-80A. My thought here is that the 4MHz Z-80 used in the conventional way ><had a memory cycle of 750 nanoseconds (3 clock ticks), while the 6502, at > >No it did not. The memory active portion of the instruction cycle was >far shorter, typically 300ns at 4mhz (shorter for M1 cycle). the rest of >the time the cpu cares not if memory is there. Now if your depending on the >CPU for refresh it's longer but then again if you used something else it >still has to be done and takes some about of time/logic. > ><had to go in order to utilize the memory bandwidth most effectively. The ><The 6502 could be interfaced quite easily by using an asymmetrical clock, ><with a short Phase-1 (the period during which addresses and control signal > >The same can be done with the Z80 (the cmos parts it can be very effective). >I've used that trick to get a M1 read/ that has the same length as Mread/. > ><In any case, what I determined was that the Z-80, in spite of its ><complicated hardware requirement, was potentially the faster processor. > >I always get upset with this term as it's hard to quantitize unless standard >programs (sieve, fp-ops...) > >Allison >

27 years

3
2
0 0

8080 - 4004 - 8051 Historical Software Source Site! (fwd)

by donm＠cts.com

Forwarded for any that may be interested. - don ========================== Path: nusku.cts.com!mercury.cts.com!socal.verio.net!nntp.ni.net!peerfeed.ncal.verio.net!feeder.qis.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newspeer1.nac.net!newsfeed.concentric.net!global-news-master From: "Steve J. Quest" <Squest(a)mariner.cris.com> Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.arch.embedded,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,comp.emulators.misc,comp.lang.basic.misc,comp.os.cpm,comp.software-eng,comp.sources.wanted,comp.sys.intel,comp.sys.misc,sci.electronics.components Subject: 8080 - 4004 - 8051 Historical Software Source Site! Followup-To: alt.folklore.computers Date: 10 Apr 1999 15:30:38 PDT Organization: AVR Technologies - Des Moines, Iowa, USA Lines: 75 Sender: Steve J. Quest <Squest(a)mariner.cris.com> Message-ID: <7eojee$ru(a)chronicle.concentric.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: mariner.concentric.net Summary: Archive for MCS-51(tm) software including BASIC-52 and BASIC-51 Keywords: MCS-51,80C52,8052,8051,Tiny BASIC,SOL,SOLOS,SOL BASIC,Altair 8800,MOS Kim-1,Kim-1 SBC,VIC-20,Sinclair ZX-80,Sinclair ZX81,MONITOR,MCS-51 MONITOR,MONITOR-DEBUGGER,BASIC CODE,8051 MONITOR X-Newsreader: TIN [UNIX 1.3 unoff BETA 970930; sun4m SunOS 4.1.3_U1] Xref: nusku.cts.com alt.folklore.computers:5704 comp.arch.embedded:5952 alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt:7730 comp.emulators.misc:2024 comp.lang.basic.misc:1906 comp.os.cpm:749 comp.software-eng:2694 comp.sources.wanted:166 comp.sys.intel:3530 comp.sys.misc:133 sci.electronics.components:3996 ______________________________________________________________________ Steve J. Quest Presents: The Code Archive! Now software for 8080 - 4004 - 8051 Tiny BASIC! http://www.code.archive.aisnota.com/ ______________________________________________________________________ XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXXXXXX XXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXX 4 000 000 4 44 0 0 0 0 44 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 4444444 0 0 0 0 0 0 4444444 4 0 0 0 0 4 4 000 000 4 4004 MICROPROCESSOR http://www.code.archive.aisnota.com/index.shtml#i4004.zip -------------------------------------------------------------- 88888 000 88888 000 8 8 0 0 8 8 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 88888 0 0 0 88888 0 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 8 8 0 0 0 8 8 0 0 8 8 0 0 88888 000 88888 000 8080 MICROPROCESSOR http://www.code.archive.aisnota.com/index.shtml#Poly88_TinyBASIC.zip -------------------------------------------------------------- 88888 000 5555555 1 8 8 0 0 5 11 8 8 0 0 0 5 1 88888 0 0 0 555555 1 8 8 0 0 0 5 1 8 8 0 0 5 1 88888 000 555555 111 8051/8751 Single-Chip MICROCOMPUTER http://www.code.archive.aisnota.com/index.shtml#tb51-32.bin.gz http://www.code.archive.aisnota.com/index.shtml#tb51-32.hex.gz -------------------------------------------------------------- -- -<Squest(a)concentric.net>------\ ( ( | ) ) Amendment1 Congress shall make ===============================> /_\ no law abridging the freedom Pirate Shortwave Broadcasting-/ /\_/\ of speech, or of the press.

27 years

1
0
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<Well, Allison, you're going to force me to venture into the archives and <fetch the data sheet. Since I use z80s and kin often the data sheets for the z80 (all dozen or so) starting with the 1977 ones are at hand. It helps that in my history is applications engineering time at NEC microcomputers (they sold the uPD780 a z80). <4mhz (shorter for M1 cycle)" is ABSOLUTELY correct. However, it took thre <clock ticks in order to generate that cycle. IIRC, the entire M1 (opcode <fetch + refresh) cycle took 4 or 5 (?) clock ticks, which made it the <longest cycle. Memory cycles other than opcode fetches took 3 ticks and I <believe I/O cycles took 4. Don't ignore the fact that there are such thing as propagation delays internal to the chip in the 50-80nS range or that some edges chaged on the rising edge and some on the falling ones. <The theory was that one execute a bunch of memory cycles to load up the <internal registers of the Z-80, of which there are plenty, and then execut <scads of register-register instructions which are faster, in order to <accomplish a given computational task. It didn't easily work out that way <a notion which wasn't lost on the designers of the 6502. There are many schools of thought. the PDP-8 is and the 6502 have the sparse hardware idea in common. the z80 is really a CISC machine and reflects the more complex instruction set and the 8080 history. < <The MOS-Technology people who first implemented the 6502 architecture, <recognized that although the Z-80 had plenty of registers, it still wasn't <enough, so they shortened the memory access cycles. In fact, they used a I don't feel that is a right way to say it. I'd go with... The mos technology people with a limited silicone real estate (silicon costs alot then) fewer register and a instruction set biased to use memory more. That heritage comes from the 6800 which is a more similar part. <done, and they opted for an 8-bit stack pointer, which gave them the abilit <to execute stack-oriented operations faster than the Z-80 and its kin coul they werent! Not significantly. in most cases the time to actually execute isn't that much different. <do so. It could look at its zero-page as extra-fast memory, or slow <register space. In any case, a stack operation took one clock tick + one <clock tick per byte. A zero page operation, depending on the operation in <question, took one clock tick less time than that same instruction operatin <on any of the rest of memory. A load or store took two cycles, and an <indexed load or store took three. The idea of zero page was straight from PDP-8 too. The zero page was a way to solve the problem of too few registers. The TI9900 too an entirely different path to solve that problem. Which problem? Silicon real estate. registers are memory and that memory eats silicon. back in that time frame you had some hard choices a with regard to that. The Z80 was somewhat remarkable as there were 208 bits of storage inside the processor for just user programable registers and bits. <Today, we're equipped with cheap VERY fast large, SRAMs which would make i <much easire to make a solid and objective test of the two processors. <Unfortunately, there's little reason to do so, since neither is of any <commercial interest. In 1979 I had several tubes of 85nS 4kx1 rams that made a dandy memory. They were static. I still have some of them. then in 1980 I got some slow static 16kx1s that were only 70nS (2167) and built a z80 system that pushed a 6mhz part to 7mhz. fast rams were available. My NSbox had 2116s that wer 300ns and only 32 filled the memory space on one board. that was 1981. <Have YOU seen a 'C' compiler for any of the 6502 types? Never. There could have been one but I'd wonder about code efficientcy. Then again I've never seen one for 9900 bit that as CISC a machine if there ever was one. Allison

27 years

1
0
0 0

What if,... early PCs (was: stepping machanism

by edick＠idcomm.com

Well, the policy here in the U.S. seems to be to skip the outgoing inspection and replace it with a warranty. The terms of the warranty make it void if you open the box, so the buyer returns it for a replacement or refund, and the maker then gets to do the outgoing inspection on the incoming trip back. -----Original Message----- From: Tony Duell <ard(a)p850ug1.demon.co.uk> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, April 11, 1999 2:47 PM Subject: Re: What if,... early PCs (was: stepping machanism >> >> On Sun, 11 Apr 1999, Richard Erlacher wrote to Allison: >> > The principal complaint I heard about the M1 was the principal complaint >> > about the M3. It was a paper tiger until you opened the box and added a >> > bunch of stuff/mods. >> >> While I agree, I kinda doubt that Allison has EVER plugged in ANYTHING >> before she "opened the box and added a bunch of stuff/mods". So, she >> might not see that as quite the negative that you do :-) > >You mean there _are_ people who plug things in without pulling the case >and checking that it's built correctly? They must be mad... > >Of course once you've got the lid off, you might as well fix whatever the >original designers got wrong ;-) > >> >> > The same, to lesser extent, perhaps, could be said for >> > the Apple. The Apple was made easy-to-open. The RS boxes were not. >> >> While velcro is certainly extraordinarily convenient, particularly to >> those bothered by screwdrivers. But, as an occasional professional auto >> mechanic, I hardly felt that half a dozen screws made something hard to > >I've also never seen the point of 'screwless' cases. If I'm going to be >fixing/modifying something I'm going to need a logic probe (or better an >logic analyser), multimeter, soldering iron, pliers, cutters, etc. Having >to use a screwdriver as well is no big problem.. > >> open. But it is true that RS had a very bad attitude about it. They >> actually had anti-tamper paint on one of the screws! One of the local RS > >Some machines had a label over one of the screws. What Tandy didn't >realise was that it was possible to get the label off in one piece >without tearing it, and then stick it back after you'd done the mod... > >> technicians had an interesting slant on that: Since RS's policies >> apparently didn't explicitly mention modifications, only that the tamper >> seal must be intact, he would happily do the various warranty mods (there >> were SEVERAL for the early EI), IFF you provided him circuit sketches for > >I never put Tandy UK to the test (I always fixed my Model 1 myself). >Although the local shop did get me some of the parts either free or for a >nominal charge for me to do a couple of official mods myself. > >> all mods, and put a dab of the anti-tamper paint (he would provide it) on >> the screw after you made the mods. He said that if the store manager >> balked at seeing additional stuff through the slots of the "unopened" > >:-) :-) > >> case, just start talking about "building boats in bottles". Apple's >> attitude of "go on in!" was much more refreshing. > >Although, IIRC the Apple ][ Techref did mention that doing the Eurapple >mod (50 Hz video) would void the warranty. It appeared that you could >open the case and stick in expansion cards with no problems, but if you >took a soldering iron to the motherboard you were on your own. Again it >didn't bother me. Both the Apple ][ and TRS-80 had excellent tech manuals >available, so fixing them yourself was the easiest thing to do. > >-tony >

27 years

3
2
0 0

Fwd: Metric conversions..??

by cfandt＠netsync.net

Well folks, here's a break from the looong-running threads which have been rolling along the past couple of days. Saw this on one of the many other reflectors I subscribe to and I thought this group would appreciate the humor break too. The same 'Sorry about the bandwidth' apology stands from me too. :-) >Date: Sun, 11 Apr 1999 17:17:03 -0400 >Reply-To: MODSTEPH(a)ACS.EKU.EDU >Sender: Boat Anchor Owners and Collectors List > <BOATANCHORS(a)LISTSERV.TEMPE.GOV> >From: N5AIT Allan Stephens <MODSTEPH(a)ACS.EKU.EDU> >Subject: Metric conversions..?? >To: BOATANCHORS(a)LISTSERV.TEMPE.GOV > > Well, it DOES include megacycles... Sorry about the bandwidth, but >figured if anyone would appreciate these, y'all would. > > 73, Al N5AIT > > >Here are some of the rarer metric conversions not carried in standard >reference works: > >1 million microphones = 1 megaphone >1 million bicycles = 2 megacycles >500 millinaries = 1 seminary >10 cards = 1 decacards >1/2 lavatory = 1 demijohn >1 millionth of a fish = 1 microfiche >453.6 graham crackers = 1 pound cake >1 trillion pins = 1 terrapin >1 million billion piccolos = 1 gigolo >10 rations = 1 decoration >100 rations = 1 C-ration >10 millipedes = 1 centipede >3 1/3 tridents = 1 decadent >10 monologues = 5 dialogues >5 dialogues = 1 decalogue >2 monograms = 1 diagram >8 nickels = 2 paradigms >2 wharves = 1 paradox > >--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- >To subscribe: listserv(a)listserv.tempe.gov >and in body: subscribe BOATANCHORS yourfirstname yourlastname >To unsubscribe: listserv(a)listserv.tempe.gov >and in body: signoff BOATANCHORS >Archives for BOATANCHORS: http://www.tempe.gov/archives >--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- -- Sorry to a few of the list members who are not native English speakers. There are a few strange colloquial or American expressions. Ask in private email. However, even I am not sure what a "demijohn" really is except for perhaps a 1/2 bath in a house. Have fun! Regards, Chris PS: A "boatanchor", for the ones who are not amateurs or radio collectors or otherwise in-the-know, is an affectionate label attached by us to any large, heavy vacuum tube (valve) operated radio receiver or transmitter or sometimes test equipment. I have about a dozen boatanchors (50-100+ lbs) in my collection and, by golly, I was really sore after hauling them over here to the new house ;)

27 years

2
2
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by edick＠idcomm.com

Well, that was a surprise! I doubt it was around in time to do any good for the processor when it was used in home computers. It still lives in those video games, though. Thanks for the pointer! Now, if we could just find an adequate ANSI-C compiler which isn't wedded, through libraries or other objects, to one specific environment . . . Dick -----Original Message----- From: Cameron Kaiser <ckaiser(a)oa.ptloma.edu> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, April 11, 1999 6:39 PM Subject: Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies) >::Have YOU seen a 'C' compiler for any of the 6502 types? > >As a matter of fact, yes. :-) > > http://www.von-bassewitz.de/uz/cc65/ > >-- >-------------------------- personal page: http://calvin.ptloma.edu/~spectre/ -- >Cameron Kaiser Database Programmer/Administrative Computing >Point Loma Nazarene University Fax: +1 619 849 2581 >ckaiser(a)ptloma.edu Phone: +1 619 849 2539 >-- "I'd love to go out with you, but I'm rethreading my toothbrush bristles." -

27 years

1
0
0 0

Conversions etc.

by jpl15＠netcom.com

I may have posted this one before... 1 millihelen = the amount of beauty required to launch just one ship. 1 New York Second = the elapsed time between the light turning green and the guy behind you laying on his horn and screaming at you. The difference between Theory and Practice is much closer in theory than in preactice. "'Yields Falsehood' when appended to it's quotation" yields falsehood when appended to it's quotation. Okay, sorry. I'm just all happy 'cause my Pr1me booted.. Cheers John

27 years

1
0
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by edick＠idcomm.com

Well, if you look at the 6502 architecture very carefully, you'll see what a thing of beauty it really is. What the 8080 and Z-80 designers did with brute force, the 650x designers did with resourceful elegance. Instead of big counters and the like, for, say, the stack pointer or the program counter, the 650x needs only to use registers. The same ALU that is used in the execution of instructions is useable to increment the program counter, manipulate the stack pointer, etc. The part can be built with extremely little in the way of resources. I once sat down with a pencil and figured out that you could build the content of the 6502 with a pair of 74181's, a pair of 74189's four '373's a couple of decoders, a small PAL and a 256x12 rom (3 82S129's) That was all available in '75 or so, with the possible exception of the PALand the 373's. That is not very much logic. That was possibly what they used to prototype their part. Think about it! It's really simple and you could easily build it as part of a gate array. Try that with a Z-80 and see what you get. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, April 11, 1999 6:08 PM Subject: Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies) ><I'm not sure I'd agree, when it comes to indexing. I think the 6502 ><indexing is more useful in typical cases, and the instruction set is much ><"cleaner" in some ways. However... > >it has to be as there are so few register to store intermediate results or >addresses. The end result is operands are out in memory more and return to >memory more. Different optimization of resources. > ><Exactly. I was brought up on the Z80, or at least that's what my earliest ><assembly language experience was on, but I learned how to use a 6502 prett ><well. Just a different design philosophy. > >the oder of learning for me was PDP-8, PDP-10, CM2100, 8008, 8080 then >over a span of 6 years. From the 1975 to 1978 the list is z80, 8048, > 1802, sc/mp, 6800, 650x, 9900, pdp-11! > >I have fewer biases. ;) Well ok, if said 8085 for some, 804x for others, >T-11 (pdp-11 on a single chip), and z80. Never had more than the few 6502s >until recently but they are fun too. > >Allison >

27 years

1
0
0 0

PR1ME 2550 Up and Running

by jpl15＠netcom.com

Well... it didn't hurt as much as I thought it was going to.. I have just run "SHUTDN ALL" after two hours of playing with PRIMOS (on a DEC LA120 running at 300 baud... s-l-o-w...). I rescued this system about two months ago, and finally got tired of it taking up space. It took about an hour to figure out where all the cables used to go, and the Control Data SMD drive [used as a paging and swapping drive] needed a little prodding to wake it up, but the system boots and remembers what it was doing last time it was on... about six years ago. Now to try and make the console port run at a decent speed. And, apropos of the Pick discussions, this machine has INFORMATION loaded and running... haven't messed with it yet, tho.. Cheers John

27 years

1
0
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by edick＠idcomm.com

You can build your own in an FPGA for something on the order of 2500 gates. That will ostensibly operate at 80 MHz or so. Some vendors make claims about their silicon that sport higher speed claims, e.g. 150-200 MHz. I'll believe the 80 is realistic. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, April 11, 1999 4:36 PM Subject: Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies) ><Well, that's not very far from what I wrote, is it? I was just pointing ><out that although Allison seemed to imply that a 6 or 8MHz Z80 was much ><faster than a 4MHz(? I haven't got the original message any more) 6502, I ><believe that to be far from the case. > >I was pointing out that is the processor was running fast enough even a >dog can look good. ;) Obviously using a 8mhz z80 as the standard your >comparison CPU had better be of similar generational speed or it may fail >the test. the inverse is with a 33mhz z185 I know I can blow the 65c02 >out of the water unless someone has at least a 25-30mhz 6502! > >Allison >

27 years

1
0
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<I'm not sure I'd agree, when it comes to indexing. I think the 6502 <indexing is more useful in typical cases, and the instruction set is much <"cleaner" in some ways. However... it has to be as there are so few register to store intermediate results or addresses. The end result is operands are out in memory more and return to memory more. Different optimization of resources. <Exactly. I was brought up on the Z80, or at least that's what my earliest <assembly language experience was on, but I learned how to use a 6502 prett <well. Just a different design philosophy. the oder of learning for me was PDP-8, PDP-10, CM2100, 8008, 8080 then over a span of 6 years. From the 1975 to 1978 the list is z80, 8048, 1802, sc/mp, 6800, 650x, 9900, pdp-11! I have fewer biases. ;) Well ok, if said 8085 for some, 804x for others, T-11 (pdp-11 on a single chip), and z80. Never had more than the few 6502s until recently but they are fun too. Allison

27 years

2
1
0 0

Restoring an 8/E

by mbg＠world.std.com

>The data lights were ok the address lights I remember a high order >one bad. Actually, I was back over at my museum earlier this evening, to put the cleaned and repaired front panel on the 8/e... I took the time to power it up myself, and did a little playing with loadadrs and dep... I verified that I can address both fields (0 and 1)... it has 8k. I checked the EMA lights, and they all light. I tested the address lights and they all light... I checked out the data lights, they all light, at least in MD position... I've yet to check the other positions... Megan Gentry Former RT-11 Developer +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+ | Megan Gentry, EMT/B, PP-ASEL | Internet (work): gentry!zk3.dec.com | | Unix Support Engineering Group | (home): mbg!world.std.com | | Compaq Computer Corporation | addresses need '@' in place of '!' | | 110 Spitbrook Rd. ZK03-2/T43 | URL: http://world.std.com/~mbg/ | | Nashua, NH 03062 | "pdp-11 programmer - some assembler | | (603) 884 1055 | required." - mbg | +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+

27 years

1
0
0 0

8/E cable handling?

by cmcmanis＠mcmanis.com

Ok, I was wondering how the 8/E manages its cables. In the 8/f/m chassis there is a sliding door with a plate on it to act as a strain relief and exit point for cables exiting the CPU chassis. I don't think I want to put something in the cover I'm building but I really think the strain relief is necessary (I've seen M8650 boards with one connector broken off because of a pull on the cable and there wasn't anything to take the strain) Anyway, thoughts appreciated, --Chuck

27 years

2
3
0 0

Restoring an 8/E

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<You mean you _don't_ have a pile of PDP11 power control cables to raid <suitable plugs from ? She does, they were in another box...under a box... <Nice!. It's worth testing all the panel lamps (just load an address of <all 1's, store data of all 1's to location 0, etc). A blown bulb can make <debugging a program rather hard... The data lights were ok the address lights I remember a high order one bad. Allison

27 years

1
0
0 0

Don Lancaster was Re: Ebay Mark-8 Plans

by jlewczyk＠his.com

Actually, He was on the scene very early, accoridng to me sources. I have copies of the very first Mark-8 computer newsletters and he was a contributor, providing some detailed information on building quality power supplies. His name was on the list of newsletter receipients from the beginning. And this was 1974, so yeah, he meets the >10 rule! :-) > I know that he cammme on the scene later than some of > the other people who have been mentioned as past or future > VCF speakers, but he certainly meets the >10 rule.

27 years

1
0
0 0

What if,... early PCs (was: stepping machanism

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<While I agree, I kinda doubt that Allison has EVER plugged in ANYTHING <before she "opened the box and added a bunch of stuff/mods". So, she <might not see that as quite the negative that you do :-) Not quite true. I'd make sure it works then mod it if needed. :) the first mod I ever did to a trs80 was the add a ram and wire to get lower case. <open. But it is true that RS had a very bad attitude about it. They <actually had anti-tamper paint on one of the screws! One of the local RS <technicians had an interesting slant on that: Since RS's policies <apparently didn't explicitly mention modifications, only that the tamper <seal must be intact, he would happily do the various warranty mods (there <were SEVERAL for the early EI), IFF you provided him circuit sketches for <all mods, and put a dab of the anti-tamper paint (he would provide it) on <the screw after you made the mods. He said that if the store manager <balked at seeing additional stuff through the slots of the "unopened" <case, just start talking about "building boats in bottles". Apple's <attitude of "go on in!" was much more refreshing. Most of the techs (me too, back then) held that the worst part of fixing TRS80s was first correcting the messes customers made. Often with soldering tools better suited for fixing pipe. We didn't care the mods existed and later Tandy would even sell a few as options. <> IBM really performed only one major service to the microcomputer world: <> They lent it its own trade name, which was its legitimacy. <"PC" was in moderately common usage around here before IBM's entry. <IBM always considered "PC" to be a shortened description, NOT a trade <name! They did NOT trademark "PC". They never even trademarked <"PC-DOS"!! OTOH, "MS-DOS" IS a registered trademark. The upside is a lot of other systems got in where before computers were not taken seriously beacuse if they were IBM would be doing it. <One fellow referred to Compaq's "challenge" of IBM as "a mouse running up <the elephant's leg with intent to rape". Looking back... I bet the elephane didn't even scream. ;) Allison

27 years

2
1
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by pete＠dunnington.u-net.com

On Apr 11, 18:27, Allison J Parent wrote: > I was pointing out that is the processor was running fast enough even a > dog can look good. ;) cf any recent pentium :-) -- Pete Peter Turnbull Dept. of Computer Science University of York

27 years

1
0
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<register assets, and simply look at what it takes to "do something" e.g. <load a value, do some arithmetic, store a value, etc. the two instruction <sets have considerable overlap. However, the longest instructions for the <6502 take six (?) clock ticks, while the shortest ones for the Z-80 take <four. (feel free to correct me, as I haven't even though about this, let this is correct. Consider the timing as the z80 was using cycles in groups of four (at 4mhz 1979). So a register moe or register to register add was typically 1uS. Likely the 6502 at the time was 1uS as well. Don't count clocks themselves the sysles were too different. Count the total time to execute. <know how long the longest instruction for the Z-80 takes nor do I even kno 21, LDIR (block move) and 23 (large group) of instructions that use indexing through the IX and IY registers most of which have no analog in 6502. for example SET b,(IX+D) (sets a bit at memory location.). The last one takes 5.75uS at 4mhz. What counts now is what would it take to do that using 6502. <what its longest instruction is. I'd imagine it's one in which you load <16-bit register from memory, indexed, or some such. That would have to tak <a fair number of clock ticks. load indexed is about 5uS. Lotas of clocks but they are used differently. <In my comparisons, I've always fudged in favor of the Z-80, because it <didn't make sense to me that a processor so cheap and simple would be as <much faster than a Z-80 as the 6502 appeared. The hardware problems aside the 6502 trades hardware complexity for some amount of speed and coves very close but at about half the number of longer clocks. <processor's instructions unless they are pushed. If you look at a simple <load-the-accumulator then store-the-result, which occurs often in almost an <application, the Z-80 takes about 6 ticks in the opcode fetch/decode (the <instruction is decoded during the refresh cycle), three for each byte of th <source address, then three to fetch the value. It then takes as long to <store the result to memory. That's 6+3+3+3=15, twice is 30 ticks, or 7.5 <microseconds at 4MHz. LDAX D ; load using DE as index STAX B ; stor using BC as index That is 7 clocks each or 14 total. @4mhz (1979) tht would be 3.5uS the 6502 at 2mhz may do that in about the same time. < The 6502 takes one to fetch the load opcode, one to <fetch each byte of the source address, one to execute the load, one to fetc <the store opcode, one for each byte of the destination address, and one to <accomplish the store. That's 5 to load, 5 to store, which is 10, right? I <would appear that the 6502 would get through this pretty quickly at the sam <clock rate, i.e. 2.5 microseconds, but the problem is that external <peripheral devices wouldn't run this fast. What's more, the 4 MHz parts, <though priced a little higher than a 4 MHz Z-80, in 1980, the Z-80 had <peripherals which would work very well together with the CPU at 4 MHz. <Nevertheless, that's a 3:1 performance ratio which, based on the fact that <there were many more register-to-register (quick) operations available to <the Z-80 programmer, it's hard to imagine these would close the gap that <much. They would have a significant impact, though. It does depending on the application. If a lot of 16bit adds and subtracts were part of the "core" then were is the 6502? How about languages that use really deep stacks? what about really deep recusive code? The z80 has a far larger stack limit! Granted 128 calls is a lot but none of that stack can pass parameters either, so you need to use one of the index register for that. Also there is interrupt structure for multiple complex devices. Z80 allows a 7 bit vector (pointer to table, anywhere in ram) for mode 2. Even mode0 (8080) it has 8 vectors in low memory (one is reset). using the Mode 1 you still have two (NMI and INT/). Hardware wise can the 6502 support DMA, the z80 has busreq/ and busack/ to request the bus from the cpu and get acknowledgement that it has. How much ram space does the 6502 have to give up for a typical spread of devices verses seperate IO space (z80). Keep in mind if memory mapped IO is desired the z80 does that too. <I think you can easily build a circuit with a 2 MHz 6502 and one with a 4 <MHz Z-80 and make a comparison yourself. If you honestly try to take <advantage of the instruction set to accomplish a task on both processors, <you'll play HELL getting the Z-80 to keep up. It can be done, though, if Depending on the mix it would favor one or another but when averaged out the z80 wins or at best matched. There are other factors that may be system implementation dependent that may favor one over the other. <the task is chosen properly. A pair of simulators would be really handy, <wouldn't it? there are tons for the z80 but few if any do cycle counts or other timing. They could be done for the 6502 but... their performance would have to be validated against the real parts to insure the simulations arent biased. Allison

27 years

1
0
0 0

What if,... early PCs (was: stepping machanism

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<$399 without the monitor and cassette. I struggled long and hard with <that decision, until one of the RS store managers agreed to be willing to <special order a "replacement" monitor for me for $200 if I were to be <unsuccessful in interfacing one of my CCTV monitors. Fortunately (since I <didn't/don't) have Allison's technical expertise, it turned out to need <nothing more than cabling. Wise move! My system test stand at work had a common monitor incase the problem was the RCA box. <BTW, MOST of us thought that CP/M-86 would push PC-DOS out ("as soon as it <comes out")! CP/M-86 was significantly delayed. By the time that it <showed up, and the higher price for it than PC-DOS, PC-DOS was barely <affected by its presence. Shows how much to believe "experts"! It was available at introduction. What was delayed was the marketing. It didn't ship with the machine it was a $200 option. Allison

27 years

1
0
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<I have to disagree with your comparison of the 2 MHz 6502 with a 4 MHz <Z-80A. My thought here is that the 4MHz Z-80 used in the conventional way <had a memory cycle of 750 nanoseconds (3 clock ticks), while the 6502, at No it did not. The memory active portion of the instruction cycle was far shorter, typically 300ns at 4mhz (shorter for M1 cycle). the rest of the time the cpu cares not if memory is there. Now if your depending on the CPU for refresh it's longer but then again if you used something else it still has to be done and takes some about of time/logic. <had to go in order to utilize the memory bandwidth most effectively. The <The 6502 could be interfaced quite easily by using an asymmetrical clock, <with a short Phase-1 (the period during which addresses and control signal The same can be done with the Z80 (the cmos parts it can be very effective). I've used that trick to get a M1 read/ that has the same length as Mread/. <In any case, what I determined was that the Z-80, in spite of its <complicated hardware requirement, was potentially the faster processor. I always get upset with this term as it's hard to quantitize unless standard programs (sieve, fp-ops...) Allison

27 years

1
0
0 0

GeoWorks -- Commodore/Apple/PC?

by roblwill＠usaor.net

GEOS wasn't multitasking? I have it on my Tandy Zoomer (with AOL), and can switch back and forth between two programs, and they seem to be where they were left before (They can't be minimized, like Windows, but they don't seem to close). -- -Jason Willgruber (roblwill(a)usaor.net) ICQ#: 1730318 <http://members.tripod.com/general_1> -----Original Message----- From: Cameron Kaiser <ckaiser(a)oa.ptloma.edu> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Saturday, April 10, 1999 7:58 PM Subject: Re: GeoWorks -- Commodore/Apple/PC? >::I Used to have a Commodore 128 that had GeoWorks on it (I think it was >::actually GEOS, or something like that). I also have a box and font/graphics >::set for the PC version or GeoWorks. I've also heard that there was a >::version of it for the Apple // series. > >PC GeoWorks != Commodore/Apple GEOS. Totally different architectures. The >8-bit GEOS was a single-tasking GUI API; the PC version is actually an entire >true preemptively multitasking OS. AOL, before the Windows client emerged, >in fact was based on a PC-GEOS runtime. > >Apple GEOS was an unmitigated flop, especially because Apple was heavily >pushing Quark Catalyst. A shame, because Berkeley Softworks (now GeoWorks) >was trying to add application cross-compatibility between Commodore and Apple >GEOS where possible. > >Commodore GEOS, on the other hand, was and is a big hit. It's still sold >and manufactured, and now people have issued homegrown patches for it that >allow it to take advantage of RAM expansion up to 16MB, hard drive real >estate and the SuperCPU accelerators, and even do context-switching. Avoid >versions before 1.5, however, and even then C= GEOS didn't come into its own >until v2.0. > >-- >-------------------------- personal page: http://calvin.ptloma.edu/~spectre/ -- >Cameron Kaiser Database Programmer/Administrative Computing >Point Loma Nazarene University Fax: +1 619 849 2581 >ckaiser(a)ptloma.edu Phone: +1 619 849 2539 >-- A straw vote only shows which way the hot air blows. -- O. Henry ----------- >

27 years

2
1
0 0

Restoring an 8/E

by mbg＠world.std.com

Allison and I were over at my place today, unloading some of the haul from the weekend - now I've got an RL01 to put on the 11/34a so that I can have a booting system. We took some time to take a look at the pdp-8/e that I now have (which, conincidentally enough was hers about 8 years ago when she gave it to someone else -- the person from whom I obtained my recent haul). We replaced the missing fuse, then used a piece of wire to jumper the plug in the back so it would power up (we got it from the lab-8/e -- the same connector was apparently missing from that machine, so they kludged it). Anyway, we plugged it in, and turned it on.... fans whirred just fine. Allison toggled in a quick program and demonstrated that it had 8k in it, that the CPU seems to execute some instructions, and some of the lights work... so we're off and running. The front panel had a piece broken out of it below the keyswitch, and the panel was kind of dirty... so we removed it and I've cleaned it up. For the time-being the piece is tacked back in with glue from a hot glue gun, but I'll use something else later on... I've also taken some pictures of the case from various angles and have them up in my jpg area, but I haven't set up links to them... If anyone wants to see them by typing in the path to them, they're at http://world.std.com/~mbg/pdp8e_view_001.jpg (002, 003, 004) Megan Gentry Former RT-11 Developer +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+ | Megan Gentry, EMT/B, PP-ASEL | Internet (work): gentry!zk3.dec.com | | Unix Support Engineering Group | (home): mbg!world.std.com | | Compaq Computer Corporation | addresses need '@' in place of '!' | | 110 Spitbrook Rd. ZK03-2/T43 | URL: http://world.std.com/~mbg/ | | Nashua, NH 03062 | "pdp-11 programmer - some assembler | | (603) 884 1055 | required." - mbg | +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+

27 years

3
4
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by pete＠dunnington.u-net.com

On Apr 11, 14:37, Allison J Parent wrote: > Yes, the 6502 overlaps the instuction fetch and execute (mini pipeline). > The z80 is more classic multi-state machine. In the end the two parts are > roughly the same speed for their generation. IE: a 4mhz z80 does basic > operations in 1uS and 6502 at 2mhz is about the same. That's about my estimation, Richard's example not withstanding. > the difference is > any is when complex indexing or other tassks are discussed where the z80 > has a better instuction set (though slower...more states) the 6502 uses > more small instructions(fast but many). I'm not sure I'd agree, when it comes to indexing. I think the 6502 indexing is more useful in typical cases, and the instruction set is much "cleaner" in some ways. However... > In the end they do the same task just different. Exactly. I was brought up on the Z80, or at least that's what my earliest assembly language experience was on, but I learned how to use a 6502 pretty well. Just a different design philosophy. > That supports the only logical conclusion... clock speeds dont count. -- Pete Peter Turnbull Dept. of Computer Science University of York

27 years

1
0
0 0

Restoring an 8/E

by mbg＠world.std.com

>You mean you _don't_ have a pile of PDP11 power control cables to raid >suitable plugs from ? I do have cables, but I didn't want to canabalize any in order to just make a loop. The looped wire did the trick anyway... >Nice!. It's worth testing all the panel lamps (just load an address of >all 1's, store data of all 1's to location 0, etc). A blown bulb can make >debugging a program rather hard... I plan on doing that at some point... Yes, a blown bulb can make debugging VERY annoying... >Try to get some 'plastic weld'. It's a solvent for the sort of plastic >used on these panels, and you can weld the broken bit back in place. It's >normally a very strong repair. Thanks... I'll keep that in mind... Megan Gentry Former RT-11 Developer +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+ | Megan Gentry, EMT/B, PP-ASEL | Internet (work): gentry!zk3.dec.com | | Unix Support Engineering Group | (home): mbg!world.std.com | | Compaq Computer Corporation | addresses need '@' in place of '!' | | 110 Spitbrook Rd. ZK03-2/T43 | URL: http://world.std.com/~mbg/ | | Nashua, NH 03062 | "pdp-11 programmer - some assembler | | (603) 884 1055 | required." - mbg | +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+

27 years

1
0
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by edick＠idcomm.com

Please see embedded comments below. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, April 11, 1999 7:24 AM Subject: Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies) ><I believe (guessing because I've learned memory doesn't serve as it once ><did) The load is two clock ticks and the indirect, indexed jump is five, s ><that's 3.5 microseconds, give or take a tick. it's less at 4 MHz, which i ><what the 65C02C is rated, though it readily will run at 4.9152 (24.576 ><MHz/5) over a wide temperature and voltage range provided the clock is ><phased correctly. the divice-by five yields a 40/60 h/l which must be ><inverted to give a little longer phase-2 than phase-1. > >The point was apparently missed. Of course I can take a cmos z80 and blow >that out of the water using a 6 or 8 mhz clock. Heck using a 1989 version >of the z80, the Z280 at 12.5mhz I can get the execution time way down. In >the time frame before 1982 (as a marker) there werent any 4mhz 650c02s and >there were 4mhz z80s and pdp-8s were still produced. In that context the >the example represent programming style rather that absolute speed as they >didn't vary that much over all to represent a great diffferece unless you >needed a characteristic that was specific to a given CPU. No, the point wasn't missed. I remember what was going on back then (1979-1984) because it was at a critical juncture in the course of my life. In 1979, my "favorite" CPU was the 6502, the fastest MOS-Technology-comptible version of which was the 4 MHz NMOS part from SYNERTEK. I was VERY involved in making things run faster than most folks thought they could/should at that time and also had occasion to attempt comparison and contrast on the basis of a number of parameters, including performance. In '79, ZILOG and MOSTEK put out the 6-MHz "B"-series of their Z-80, which was enjoying almost universal acceptance as the most widely applicable and easiest-to-use microprocessor available. Most of the popular statements about it were pretty much on the money. Of course, the evolution of the 64K DRAM made its refresh counter more or less useless, but the impact of that wasn't to be felt for a couple of years yet, as commercial production of the 3-voltage 16K DRAMS was just getting into full swing. >I'm not slamming the 6502 or it heirs as it's also a very popular embedded >CPU still. For that fact so are the Z8 and Z80 heirs. Just from that it's >possible to conclude they all had desirable enough characteristics to keep >them in the running. I agree with you there. The Zilog boys had the CP/M crowd to maintain the low-end of their development system market, so nobody could complain it was too expensive to develop. The MOS-Technology folks had merely to point at the Apple to accomplish the same thing. Meanwhile, Motorola was making a BIG mistake, abandoning the amateur and "small" users. >As a CPU the 8051 is ok, I use it. As a controller it's without question >a popular part still. But as a general purpose cpu, it's a really bad >C or Pascal compiler host/target. Since the evolution of the now-popular 'C' and PASCAL compilers for the 8051-core micro's, I believe the popularity of this 25-year-old model has actually increased. The HLL's and the development of high-speed versions of this processor family by DALLAS and Philips, among others have definitely extended the life of this family. The simple migration path to "bigger" parts of more or less the same architecture, e.g. '251, has also made many a '51-core user. I believe that it's as a consequence of that, that there are now compilers for several truly "ugly" architectures, e.g. the PIC/SCENIX class of processors. There are also VHDL and VERILOG cores for several of the older architectures, e.g. 650x, available for those who prefer to "roll-their-own" which are also, though less well, supported with compilers and other tools. Again, Motorola seems to have been left behind at least with their smaller MCU's. I guess that's because of their reputation for spurning applications which consume fewer than 100K parts per week. > >Allison >

27 years

2
1
0 0

stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies)

by edick＠idcomm.com

If you look at the instructions as opposed to getting too hung up on the register assets, and simply look at what it takes to "do something" e.g. load a value, do some arithmetic, store a value, etc. the two instruction sets have considerable overlap. However, the longest instructions for the 6502 take six (?) clock ticks, while the shortest ones for the Z-80 take four. (feel free to correct me, as I haven't even though about this, let alone looked at precise instruction details for over ten years.) I don't know how long the longest instruction for the Z-80 takes nor do I even know what its longest instruction is. I'd imagine it's one in which you load a 16-bit register from memory, indexed, or some such. That would have to take a fair number of clock ticks. In my comparisons, I've always fudged in favor of the Z-80, because it didn't make sense to me that a processor so cheap and simple would be as much faster than a Z-80 as the 6502 appeared. The hardware problems aside, the Z-80 instruction set is full of pretty complex instructions which take a number of clock ticks. The 6502 is full of fairly complex instructions too, but not as many. Fortunately, most programmers don't use ALL of either processor's instructions unless they are pushed. If you look at a simple load-the-accumulator then store-the-result, which occurs often in almost any application, the Z-80 takes about 6 ticks in the opcode fetch/decode (the instruction is decoded during the refresh cycle), three for each byte of the source address, then three to fetch the value. It then takes as long to store the result to memory. That's 6+3+3+3=15, twice is 30 ticks, or 7.5 microseconds at 4MHz. The 6502 takes one to fetch the load opcode, one to fetch each byte of the source address, one to execute the load, one to fetch the store opcode, one for each byte of the destination address, and one to accomplish the store. That's 5 to load, 5 to store, which is 10, right? It would appear that the 6502 would get through this pretty quickly at the same clock rate, i.e. 2.5 microseconds, but the problem is that external peripheral devices wouldn't run this fast. What's more, the 4 MHz parts, though priced a little higher than a 4 MHz Z-80, in 1980, the Z-80 had peripherals which would work very well together with the CPU at 4 MHz. Nevertheless, that's a 3:1 performance ratio which, based on the fact that there were many more register-to-register (quick) operations available to the Z-80 programmer, it's hard to imagine these would close the gap that much. They would have a significant impact, though. I think you can easily build a circuit with a 2 MHz 6502 and one with a 4 MHz Z-80 and make a comparison yourself. If you honestly try to take advantage of the instruction set to accomplish a task on both processors, you'll play HELL getting the Z-80 to keep up. It can be done, though, if the task is chosen properly. A pair of simulators would be really handy, wouldn't it? Dick -----Original Message----- From: Pete Turnbull <pete(a)dunnington.u-net.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, April 11, 1999 10:55 AM Subject: Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit 51/4 floppies) >On Apr 11, 10:20, Richard Erlacher wrote: >> Subject: Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive (was Re: Heatkit >51 >> I have to disagree with your comparison of the 2 MHz 6502 with a 4 MHz >> Z-80A. My thought here is that the 4MHz Z-80 used in the conventional >way, >> had a memory cycle of 750 nanoseconds (3 clock ticks), while the 6502, at >> whatever rate, again, used in the conventional way, had a memory cycle of >> one clock tick. Now, some instructions involve several memory cycles, >but >> that was true of both processor families. What I often cursed, was that >the >> textbook application of the 650x core left memory available (idle) half >the >> time. That was a blessing up to a point (2.5 MHz to be exact) because it >> allowed for DRAM "RAS-precharge." The Apple and others like it proved >that >> at around 1 MHz, the 6502's memory could be used for an entirely separate >> purpose, e.g. video refresh. > >I wasn't talking about precisely 2MHz vs 4MHz, just a ballpark figure (as >opposed to "about the same" or "about ten times" clock speeds). So, given >the rest of your message, I think we're in broad agreement. BTW, BBC >Micros have a 2MHz clock on the 6502, and interleaved video and processor >access quite happily in 1980. The video took care of the refresh >requirement. > >> I believe there are entirely too many subjective, architecture-related, >> factors to allow an absolute comparison/contrast of the two processors. > >Agreed :-) That's why lies, damned lies, and benchmarks are so much fun >:-) > >> In my "gut" I still believe the 4 MHz Z-80 is about >> comparable to a 1.5 MHz 6502. > >Well, that's not very far from what I wrote, is it? I was just pointing >out that although Allison seemed to imply that a 6 or 8MHz Z80 was much >faster than a 4MHz(? I haven't got the original message any more) 6502, I >believe that to be far from the case. > >-- > >Pete Peter Turnbull > Dept. of Computer Science > University of York

27 years

2
1
0 0

What if,... early PCs (was: stepping machanism

by edick＠idcomm.com

I didn't hate the glyptol on the screws nearly so much as I hated the bayonet interlocks, which often broke when you opened a RS box Dick -----Original Message----- From: Fred Cisin (XenoSoft) <cisin(a)xenosoft.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, April 11, 1999 12:16 PM Subject: Re: What if,... early PCs (was: stepping machanism >On Sun, 11 Apr 1999, Richard Erlacher wrote to Allison: >> The principal complaint I heard about the M1 was the principal complaint >> about the M3. It was a paper tiger until you opened the box and added a >> bunch of stuff/mods. > >While I agree, I kinda doubt that Allison has EVER plugged in ANYTHING >before she "opened the box and added a bunch of stuff/mods". So, she >might not see that as quite the negative that you do :-) > >> The same, to lesser extent, perhaps, could be said for >> the Apple. The Apple was made easy-to-open. The RS boxes were not. > >While velcro is certainly extraordinarily convenient, particularly to >those bothered by screwdrivers. But, as an occasional professional auto >mechanic, I hardly felt that half a dozen screws made something hard to >open. But it is true that RS had a very bad attitude about it. They >actually had anti-tamper paint on one of the screws! One of the local RS >technicians had an interesting slant on that: Since RS's policies >apparently didn't explicitly mention modifications, only that the tamper >seal must be intact, he would happily do the various warranty mods (there >were SEVERAL for the early EI), IFF you provided him circuit sketches for >all mods, and put a dab of the anti-tamper paint (he would provide it) on >the screw after you made the mods. He said that if the store manager >balked at seeing additional stuff through the slots of the "unopened" >case, just start talking about "building boats in bottles". Apple's >attitude of "go on in!" was much more refreshing. > > >> When I saw my first PC in a commercial environment, it was running CP/M-86 >> because that had the software the business owner was using previously on his >> Z-80. I often wondered what motivated him to switch. I also saw a couple >> of people's Apple-II running CP/M-86, and was awed by the fact they'd run an >> OS that was slower than the previous and better-endowed (with software) >> CP/M-80 in the same basic environment. > >Interesting. What after-market system were they running to do CP/M-86 on >the Apple? > >> IBM really performed only one major service to the microcomputer world: >> They lent it its own trade name, which was its legitimacy. >"PC" was in moderately common usage around here before IBM's entry. >IBM always considered "PC" to be a shortened description, NOT a trade >name! They did NOT trademark "PC". They never even trademarked >"PC-DOS"!! OTOH, "MS-DOS" IS a registered trademark. > >> Having done >> that, the behemoth was overrun by smaller, more adept innovators. > >Like a handful of fleas on an elephant. > >One fellow referred to Compaq's "challenge" of IBM as "a mouse running up >the elephant's leg with intent to rape". > >

27 years

2
1
0 0

What if,... early PCs (was: stepping machanism

by edick＠idcomm.com

Once again, I've concluded it's more efficient to embed my comments in your quoted message. Have a look below, please. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, April 11, 1999 7:25 AM Subject: Re: What if,... early PCs (was: stepping machanism ><You've got two tracks mixed up, I think. True, the Apple II was quite ><plentiful in 80, but not in businesses the way it was in 82-83. I even ha ><several of them with people to man them as well. I hated the Apple but ><loved the 6502. In the meantime, I noted that the RS Model 1 was a piece o ><junk, and, in fact, so much of one that I never bought one, even for ><experimentation, and I had nearly every other sort of box around the shop. > >OK, maybe where you were that was true. However despite the TRS80s >shortfalls (most corrected with mods or outside hardware) I knew of >businesses using them, and I may add same for the apple II. > ><The model 1 was quite common, but the model 1 was in too many pieces to be ><of much interest to most folks. What's more, it was pretty weak-kneed. Th ><model 3 held out hope, though that was later dashed when the model 3 turne ><out to be not much better. > >My slant was the M1 was close but people wanted something more "one box". >The M3 was never more than a blip on the screen because when it hit the >streets there were plenty more choices and all of them deemed (if only >subjectively) better. The principal complaint I heard about the M1 was the principal complaint about the M3. It was a paper tiger until you opened the box and added a bunch of stuff/mods. The same, to lesser extent, perhaps, could be said for the Apple. The Apple was made easy-to-open. The RS boxes were not. >In the business worlds in NY and eastern PA S100 crates were the rule as >most were seen as the business strength machines and the apple/trs80 >as toys. This was by people that didn't care what cpu only that it ran! > ><The initial impact of the PC was to get people to stop buying non-PC's for ><their businesses. They were extremely costly at first, and didn't have a ><few serious problems worked out. People had to mortgage their houses to bu ><one (a basic PC on the gray-market cost nearly $2k). > >Not really. If you were invested in apple then PC was a non-player as >nothing was compatable and you lost your investement going over. For the >z80 crowd (TRS and S100 crates) that was slightly less a concern but >PCs needed to get up to speed with applications first. Keep in mind when >the PC was introduced the only 8086 stuff out there was ISIS based >and mostly as development tools. It was the spread sheets and graphic >programs that caused the great sucking sound of people going PC but, that >would take more time than your indicating. When I saw my first PC in a commercial environment, it was running CP/M-86 because that had the software the business owner was using previously on his Z-80. I often wondered what motivated him to switch. I also saw a couple of people's Apple-II running CP/M-86, and was awed by the fact they'd run an OS that was slower than the previous and better-endowed (with software) CP/M-80 in the same basic environment. >Yes, I remember getting a bonus check becuase of the PC in 82. IT wasn't >for implementing as a useful system it was for FIXing the design. Seems >one of the design bugs was it would only run intel chipsets. IBM really performed only one major service to the microcomputer world: They lent it its own trade name, which was its legitimacy. Having done that, the behemoth was overrun by smaller, more adept innovators. >As to the cost of a PC... equipped as a useful machine that could run >production it was far from $2k! > >Allison >

27 years

3
2
0 0

Restoring an 8/E

by mbg＠world.std.com

>Thanks Megan! The are great pictures. Thanks... >Can I confirm a couple of things? >That the vents in the cover are offset from the fans in the PSU? so it >goes: ><begin fixed width font> > ----------------- > | + > | + <- cover vents > | + | > + | | > + <- PSU fans | | > + | | > | + | > | + <--+ > | + > ----------------- ><end fixed width font> I can't really tell... I'm not near the machine right now... and the picture is not good enough to figure that out. >And does the cover have a lip over the PSU with holes in the side to >screw into the PSU? I had a hard time seeing the plastic catches that >were discussed here on the list. The cover does have a lip on the PSU side of the case. There are no screw holes, just the latches. On mine, the latches (which are plastic) seem to have been broken off, so that's probably why you don't see them. They're black on black in a lossy photo, so easy to miss... Megan Gentry Former RT-11 Developer +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+ | Megan Gentry, EMT/B, PP-ASEL | Internet (work): gentry!zk3.dec.com | | Unix Support Engineering Group | (home): mbg!world.std.com | | Compaq Computer Corporation | addresses need '@' in place of '!' | | 110 Spitbrook Rd. ZK03-2/T43 | URL: http://world.std.com/~mbg/ | | Nashua, NH 03062 | "pdp-11 programmer - some assembler | | (603) 884 1055 | required." - mbg | +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+

27 years

1
0
0 0

Micropolis 1518/1538 (24MHz) drive problems

by jpero＠cgocable.net

Wait everybody! I have the same old thing that is on that website and these drives that info is based on assumes it's "stock" setup for standard 512byte in peecees applications or like that is compatiable with this settings. I suspected that both drives I have here might be set for specific applications used in nonstandard machines for example RT. I knew of this facts some drives get special mods or special jumper settings. Those are what I need to confirm that my drives are set up properly. This info I'm searching for are not found on the 'net with basic search engines like looksmart.com, go2net.com etc. Wizard

27 years

1
0
0 0

What if,... early PCs (was: stepping machanism

by edick＠idcomm.com

I agree with your comment about the IBM's. The first PC-clone I bought was an XT based on an 80186. By comparison with other available XT-class machines, it was EXTREMELY fast. It was, in fact, quicker than the initial AT-class IBM's, as it ran at 12 MHz. The '186 and '286 had the same execution unit, hence the same code would run in the same time, if the clocks were at the same speed. The '286 got the fancy MMU, however, while the '186 got the built-in peripherals, which the boot firmware had to relocated out of the way first off. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, April 11, 1999 12:45 PM Subject: Re: What if,... early PCs (was: stepping machanism ><The principal complaint I heard about the M1 was the principal complaint ><about the M3. It was a paper tiger until you opened the box and added a ><bunch of stuff/mods. The same, to lesser extent, perhaps, could be said fo ><the Apple. The Apple was made easy-to-open. The RS boxes were not. > >RS didn't want people opening the box. Since there really wasn't a bus on >it internally to hook up to there was little reason besides the internal >hacks (lowercase, speed ups, control ^key, and tape fixes.). The real >problem is the V1 EI was a total dissaster. Obviously the designer new >nothing about the timing and skew constraints for Dram. the later V2 EI >was far better. > >The other thing was apple sorta supported adding boards to increase >functionality or performance. They were amoung the first to have the >essence of plug and play. That was a very good thing. > ><When I saw my first PC in a commercial environment, it was running CP/M-86 ><because that had the software the business owner was using previously on hi ><Z-80. I often wondered what motivated him to switch. I also saw a couple ><of people's Apple-II running CP/M-86, and was awed by the fact they'd run a ><OS that was slower than the previous and better-endowed (with software) ><CP/M-80 in the same basic environment. > >it wasn't an operating system thing it was programs like databases (DBASE) >and spreadsheets (multiplan and VISICALC) what were the killer apps for >business and they ate RAM big time. The z80 could have banked ram, some >did but there never got to be a concenses on how to do it and support it at >the OS level and then the 16bit cpus wer hyped to solve that "64k barrier". > ><IBM really performed only one major service to the microcomputer world: ><They lent it its own trade name, which was its legitimacy. Having done ><that, the behemoth was overrun by smaller, more adept innovators. > >Absolutly. The Compupro and other 8086 S100 systems were far faster and >could run many more OSs and apps. One outfit held off from PCs until >1993 when it was a leap to 386s. The leap also was from older DBASE to >the then hotter Paradox. Sometimes software drives hardware. > > >Allison >

27 years

1
0
0 0

What if,... early PCs (was: stepping machanism

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<The principal complaint I heard about the M1 was the principal complaint <about the M3. It was a paper tiger until you opened the box and added a <bunch of stuff/mods. The same, to lesser extent, perhaps, could be said fo <the Apple. The Apple was made easy-to-open. The RS boxes were not. RS didn't want people opening the box. Since there really wasn't a bus on it internally to hook up to there was little reason besides the internal hacks (lowercase, speed ups, control ^key, and tape fixes.). The real problem is the V1 EI was a total dissaster. Obviously the designer new nothing about the timing and skew constraints for Dram. the later V2 EI was far better. The other thing was apple sorta supported adding boards to increase functionality or performance. They were amoung the first to have the essence of plug and play. That was a very good thing. <When I saw my first PC in a commercial environment, it was running CP/M-86 <because that had the software the business owner was using previously on hi <Z-80. I often wondered what motivated him to switch. I also saw a couple <of people's Apple-II running CP/M-86, and was awed by the fact they'd run a <OS that was slower than the previous and better-endowed (with software) <CP/M-80 in the same basic environment. it wasn't an operating system thing it was programs like databases (DBASE) and spreadsheets (multiplan and VISICALC) what were the killer apps for business and they ate RAM big time. The z80 could have banked ram, some did but there never got to be a concenses on how to do it and support it at the OS level and then the 16bit cpus wer hyped to solve that "64k barrier". <IBM really performed only one major service to the microcomputer world: <They lent it its own trade name, which was its legitimacy. Having done <that, the behemoth was overrun by smaller, more adept innovators. Absolutly. The Compupro and other 8086 S100 systems were far faster and could run many more OSs and apps. One outfit held off from PCs until 1993 when it was a leap to 386s. The leap also was from older DBASE to the then hotter Paradox. Sometimes software drives hardware. Allison

27 years

1
0
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