test-drb

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

101090 discussions

by lbickley＠bickleywest.com

A friend and business associate recently asked me about how I dealt with corrosion issues in vintage computer restorations. After I created this writeup for for him, I realized it may also prove helpful to someone on this list. Here 'tis: Very bad corrosion from alkaline battery spillage: ------------------------------------------------- Pour 30% Hydrochloric Acid directly on the affected area of the board. When the foaming (along with "clouds" of vapor) stop, immediately rinse the board in plenty of cold water. Follow with a rinsing of distilled water (to eliminate any calcium in the tap waster). Dry in the open air or with mild air pressure (I use the later to speed drying). When originally told of this process, I was skeptical (even though sourced >from a professional in the board repair business). When I first tried it, I was amazed at the quantity of foaming (and clouds of vapor) from the acid treatment. But amazingly, just as he said, the acid is not on the board long enough to dissolve traces, components, etc. It works, just as he said it would! You can get 30% Hydrochloric Acid at most hardware stores. Its "common name" is "Muriatic Acid". (Wear latex gloves when handing and protective eye guards - and use outdoors or in a well ventilated area). Medium corrosion (from any source): ---------------------------------- Apply "DeoxIT D100L" sparingly to the affected area. Wait 20 minutes. Repeat if necessary. When the corrosion is completely removed, remove any excess "D100L". Apply "DeoxIT G100L" (formerly known as "ProGold") sparingly for long term protection. Light corrosion (from any source): --------------------------------- Apply "DeoxIT GL100L" sparingly. Notes: ----- "DeoxIT GL100L" - The military (and certain manufacturers) uses this "stuff" on edge connectors in sensitive system connectors to maintain excellent contact and easy removal/insertion w/o stressing boards and connectors. I've used it for years on the edge connectors of vintage computers (PDP-8, PDP-11, etc.) - and it is truly an amazing product. Works like perfection. The "DeoxIT" products seem expensive - but because you use the stuff "sparingly", a very small bottle lasts a long time. Cheers, Lyle -- Lyle Bickley Bickley Consulting West Inc. Mountain View, CA http://bickleywest.com "Black holes are where God is dividing by zero"

19 years, 5 months

Intergraph / Clipper / HLH Orion

by aek＠bitsavers.org

OS install media is likely to be a big problem for any potential restore, and likely documentation too -- One of the folks involved with HLH lives in the Bay Area. I've been bugging him to donate the Orion material he has to CHM.

19 years, 5 months

MIL-MOD8 (8008) simulator and a few other goodies posted

by dave06a＠dunfield.com

Over the break I finally got around to writing a simulator for the Microsystems International Limited MOD-8 (Modular-8). It has been very educational and interesting, and the final result of being able to experience what is like to run a very early microprocessor (8008) based system from Canada has been well worth it. The simulator is available on my site in the MOD8 section (Under "Designed in Canada") - I have also included an 8008 assembler, and my retyped source code to the MOD-8's ROM monitor (Monitor-8). This is the first step in getting my MOD-8 system up and running. I have a complete chassis (MOD8-8), as well as unpopulated ROM (MOD8-4) and RAM (MOD8-5) cards. What I don't currently have is the CPU (MOD8-1), Restart/TTY I/O (MOD8-2) and Control Buffer (MOD8-3) cards. If anyone can help locate these cards, it would be greatly appreciated. I do have several vectorboards which match the MOD-8 card format, and I will eventually construct the boards that I am unable to locate, however I would like to restore the system to as nearly original as possible. I will also need to locate a few more 1702 EPROMs - I have 3-4 of them, but the system needs a minimum of 7 for the ROM monitor. Programming them will also be a challenge (even my trusty DIO 29B doesn't do 1702s and the requirement for -40v as logic-low makes for a more complex construction project than I would like considering I will probably never need it again) - but the MOD8 has a built in 1702 programmer - Currently, I am planning to make a ROM board with a 2716 on it once I have the rest of the system completed, and use it to program 1702s for the original ROM board - an interesting kind of hardware/software bootstrap. The MOD8 was also known as the "GNC8" (Great Northern Computers), and a later version used an 8080 processor (MOD80). Any other MOD8/GNC8/MOD80 owners or interested parties out there? ----- Other things posted to the site over the break: - Updated my paper tape tools with PTE, a Paper Tape (reader) Emulator - allows you to send the content of the paper tape images over a serial or parallel interface as if from a physical reader. - Updated the NST (North Star Transfer) utility in my Horizon package to include a "Clean Head" function - easier than using N*DOS "RD" command to sweep the head back and forth over a cleaning disk. - Added disk images to the archive for: NorthStar Advantage (thanks Joachim!) Coleco Adam Regards, Dave -- dave06a (at) Dave Dunfield dunfield (dot) Firmware development services & tools: www.dunfield.com com Collector of vintage computing equipment: http://www.classiccmp.org/dunfield/index.html

19 years, 5 months

IBM 5100/5110 ROS (ROM) images?

by brian＠quarterbyte.com

Has anyone extracted images of the Read Only Storage for the IBM 5100/5100 desktop computers? I haven't seen any mention of it anywhere, nor any simulators. Has anyone worked on this? Seems like it should be doable and worthwhile. Though, it might be necessary to build hardware to read out the ROS contents -- I don't think the 5100 provides programmatic access to the PALM object code for the 360 and S/3 emulators, just the BASIC and APL code. Does that sound right? Brian

19 years, 5 months

Advice for tape drive repair / maintenance

by cclist＠sydex.com

Generally still OT, but on-topic regarding the maintainability of modern devices, did anyone perchance read the "A New Spin on White Goods" article in the December 15, Electronic Design? My clothes washer and dryer are going on 17 years and work just fine. I see no reason that I won'd get 20-25 years of service out of them. But reading about technology in the pipeline makes me wish they'd last forever. Motors controlled by DSPs with 10 A/D converters on chip, GUI displays, talk about inventorying the stuff in your refrigerator (using RFID tags on the food) really makes me wonder where the heck repair parts are going to come from when the new appliances are 20 years old. BTW, when I looked at replacement ovens over the last few days, I found that just about all of the new ones are loaded with features that I'll never use, such as "Sabbath Mode" (no kidding). It looks like a brave new world, folks. Cheers, Chuck

19 years, 5 months

Kosher stove and fridge

by evan＠snarc.net

I didn't say anything about being 'special' (although the answer is 'plenty'.) I will respond the same to such comments about ANY minority group. I choose fights with caution, but ignorance is the biggest problem facing the human species.

19 years, 5 months

Outbound Laptop; Was: Mac OS vintage

by jvdg＠sparcpark.net

Jeff Walther wrote: >> Last OS *my* 68000 Mac Plus has run is MacOS 7.1. MacTracker >> claims 7.5.5, I can't dispute that as I haven't tried it but I expect >> it might not do much good (no RAM left for applications). Same is >> claimed for the Mac SE and Classic and PowerBook 100. MacTracker >> doesn't report the Outbounds (Jeff?) but since (I think) they used >> motherboards from the above systems, > > The Outbounds used motherboards designed and built by Outbound but > with Apple ROMs installed which were scavenged from Apple Macs. > > I can't speak to the Notebook series but the Laptop (a much cooler > machine, IMHO) will not run past Mac OS 7.0.1. However, this is a > limitation in Outbound support. Mac OS 7.5.5 runs on any Mac except the 128K, the 512K and any Mac released after 7.5.5 was current. I have run it on a 2 MB PowerBook 100, and found it performs surprisingly well. More RAM is recommended, though, I wouldn't have put up with it for daily use on a machine with less than 4 MB RAM. However, I always felt that System 7.1 is a better choice for machines that support it than 7.5. After all, 7.5 is basically 7.1 with a bunch of shareware goodies thrown in. ,xtG tsooJ

19 years, 5 months

Anyone else here do AS/400?

by ISC277＠CLCILLINOIS.EDU

I'm not entirely sure if this is off topic yet(hence why I put it on cctalk), but I know on a hobbyist level it's fairly rare. On Saturday I'll be picking up an AS/400 model 9406-600 originally purchased September 1997 with all the software and docs, licences etc that were ever used with the machine, from the original owner. I've contacted IBM and arranged license transfer (there was thankfully no charge) Does anyone else here deal with AS/400, or have a lingering interest in it? Secondly, I'm thinking of connecting a classic IBM terminal to it such as a 5251 S/34 term instead of the one that comes with it (something fairly modern, not sure of the model yet) I am curious; are any limitations on what I can connect, or are all twinax terminals pretty equal from a connectivity standpoint?

19 years, 5 months

D-shell connector age?

by RodSmallwood＠mail.ediconsulting.co.uk

I expect they use Scart as opposed to D type for the same reason they use phono and not 75 Ohm BNC and XLR. Its cheaper in mass produced consumer electronics. Rod Smallwood -----Original Message----- From: cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Jules Richardson Sent: 03 January 2007 23:08 To: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Subject: Re: D-shell connector age? Adrian Graham wrote: > On 3/1/07 21:33, "Jules Richardson" <julesrichardsonuk at yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >> Anyone know where D-shell connectors first appeared on equipment? >> >> Interesting thread going on in a local group at the moment about why >> SCART [1] sockets are so horrible and nasty (prone to breaking pins, >> difficult to line up, prone to falling out etc.) and why something >> better, like a D-shell connector, wasn't chosen instead. > > SCART was originally known as PERITEL and originated in France. > > Make of that what you will :) To be honest, it's a great idea - and much better than non-European countries where the typical connectivity is via RF only. Going source->modulator->tuner->display never did seem like a good idea when you could just go source->display via separate shielded RGB signals. (The picture quality I've seen on the typical US setup is piss-poor compared to the UK, jokes about NTSC aside) It's just a shame that the connector they picked for the standard is so lousy. Having looked at some old pricelists, SCART connectors weren't much cheaper than D-shells - and given that they were typically used on expensive equipment which only contained a couple of them, the difference couldn't have been significant at all. The only thing I can think of (other than it being some odd political decision) is that you know SCART is SCART; if using D-shells there would have been a few idiots trying to plug any old computer cable into their equipment. That hardly seems justification to enforce a nasty connector choice, though. Assuming that D-shell connectors were around, of course - but if Chuck's right then they should have been readily available in the mid-70's. Pin spacing is wider on SCART, so presumably they suffer less from interference - but we all know that D-shells are perfectly good for video (particularly at TV rates). cheers Jules

19 years, 5 months

back to the AGC, was Re: TTL 7400's Available

by ajp166＠bellatlantic.net

> >Subject: back to the AGC, was Re: TTL 7400's Available > From: Brent Hilpert <hilpert at cs.ubc.ca> > Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2007 20:24:39 -0800 > To: General at priv-edtnaa05.telusplanet.net, > "Discussion at priv-edtnaa05.telusplanet.net":On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > <cctalk at classiccmp.org> > >Chuck Guzis wrote: >> >> I stumbled on this document: >> >> http://klabs.org/mapld04/papers/g/g233_alonso_p.doc >> >> while wondering about AC transformer-coupled logic and discovered >> that the original idea for the Apollo guidance computer was to use AC- >> coupled (core-transistor) logic. >> >> How's that for tying two threads together? :) > >Now that was a fun read. I'm still trying to understand his description of >the core rope ROM though. I'm familiar with core-rope ROM (or at least one >version of it) from attempting to make a reader to dump the contents of a Wang >calc microcode ROM, but the AGC version sounds like the >address-decoding/word-selection is done differently (..need a diagram). cant help on core rope. >And whats up with this mention of LCD displays? I didn't think there was >anything practical available that early, or that was going to stand up to the >rigours of space-flight - I have a calc with one of the first commercial LCDs >(1972) and it's still kind of rudimentary - slow, poor contrast, temperature sensitive... My memory of LCDs is they were way too late for the AGC and the basic AGC design used either LEDs or Lamps in a 7 segment format. >(And it confirmed that the AGC was constructed from a single gate/IC type.) That statement I believe is in error. While the logic used was RTL and a single family type the logic elements for that family by the mid 60s were more diverse than just a two input NOR. My junkbox contains parts from the era and includes JK-FF, three input nor, inverter buffers, and three wide NOR parts. It is true that the 2input NOR is the fundamental RTL logic building block there was nothing to limit it to 2,3 or 4 inputs for the die size of the time other than the hermetic flat packs of the day were typically 8/10/12 pins. Examples of mid 60s RTL. ul900 buffer inverter uL914 dual two input nor uL923 jk-ff uL925 dual 2 input nor gate expander (914 withput collector resistor). These were widely available and purchaseable by hobbists in 1967 at reasonable prices, typically under $2.00US. Most ham/electronics magazines had DMM and frequency counter projects using these parts by or during 1968. History of transistor computers by that time frame had already proven that a minimal set of logic blocks made general computer design easier. The TX1 and TX2 could stand as foundation machines on that basis alone. Those bocks were an inverter(buffer), NOR or NAND, and a register (FF). Any more specialized parts were likely used for core or other very limited use parts of a computer. RTL is old, some of the peices I have are now reaching 40! Allison

19 years, 5 months

Missing Bit Redux

by Billy.Pettit＠wdc.com

Zane H. Healy wrote: Have you googled? That name sounds really familiar, are you sure they aren't still doing Ada stuff? Zane ------------------ Yes, there still do softwware. But in the late 80's, they made complete systems, designing all their own hardware. That's what I'm trying to find. Billy

19 years, 5 months

Missing Bit Redux

by Billy.Pettit＠wdc.com

Billy wrote: And one that is driving me crazy, a company that supplied Ada systems to the military. Was first based in Mt. View, then moved to San Jose into one of the old Amdahl buildings. I can visualize the people and systems but can't remember the name. Getting old sucks. Of course as soon as I clicked send, the name came to me - Rational Systems. Anybody remember them or have any of their systems? Billy

19 years, 5 months

Altair Basic Discussion and Calculator Forensics

by grant＠stockly.com

At 04:38 PM 1/3/2007, you wrote: >At this point, I would just use the cassette version, unless I needed the >extra memory. I would be tempted to patch the ID text. I might change >"VERSION" to "VER PT " and "VER CT ". It's not original, but could avoid >confusion. Is it not possible that the only difference between the paper tape and cassette is the CSAVE and CLOAD commands? (as well as --KCACR-- in the opening text) I think we need a memory image of unloaded paper tape and unloaded cassette basic to compare. Hopefully it is "patched" in a way that makes few differences. Or maybe the commands were just activated... >Next, I would build a BASIC version timeline based on reading all issues of >Computer Notes in chronological order. That would be a good time to make >hardware timelines and copy info about software and hardware changes. > >Now you see why I collect the newest Altairs. I can assume I have the most >powerful debugged MITS products. I wasn't in a hurry for the 680 because I >always needed drives for development and business software. As a collector, >I appreciate the weight and size and the opportunity to learn the M6800 at >the bit and ASM level. > > >The KCACR doesn't seem very popular. > >I need a better timeline on the 680 and Pertec acquisition. After looking at >some issues of Computer Notes, I see that the 680 was around for awhile. >Pertec purchased a lot of problems when the bought MITS. They may have >killed the 680 just as the KCACR was finished. The documentation was not >updated and few people got new KCACR. Some 680 owners may be industrial and >not interested in cassettes. Much of my stuff and a lot from eBay auctions >came from Albuquerque after MITS closed. The component or product may not >have reached many MITS customers. > >The KCACR is popular with me. I have two and a new reason to use the 680. >I've avoided cassettes on the 8800. Now I have a smaller platform to use for >learning. The 680 may lack software, but BASIC makes it easier write more. >There are good books on the 6800 with small code examples. A 33K 680 with >BASIC and switches with lights could keep someone busy for awhile. > > >What could we do to determine if the basics are the same? This would tell >us the math function similarity... > >I think that is too much detail for now. I'd just use the newest version >that would fit in memory with my application. So far I only have two software applications for the 680. Even if they are the same except for two commands. ; ) > >I could run the forensics on the Altair32 emulator and on both versions of > >the 680 basic. If it matches up with any of the 8080 basics then we've > >found the "version" of 8080 basic used as a starting point. > >Interesting idea. I'd start with Reading Computer Notes. It would only prove anything if all the 8800 basics have different finger prints. The disk basics could have the same fingerprint and we wouldn't care about that, I think. This doesn't rule out bug fixes in all non math areas... >I hope you find someone with additional software. Did you find a KCACR >manual? I don't have one and haven't checked Steve's list. I will look at >pricelists and see what is listed for the 680. I'm sure I will. Steve has the manuals. I'm making a big list for him. : ) Grant

19 years, 5 months

Rational

by aek＠bitsavers.org

Yes, there still do softwware. But in the late 80's, they made complete systems, designing all their own hardware. That's what I'm trying to find. -- CHM just got a system w/o docs a month or so ago Did you mean Arete? We have one, and it ran a version of Unix called Arix.

19 years, 5 months

My first Mac

by aek＠bitsavers.org

> This is a university town and, > so G3's aren't hard to come by cheap if the urge should ever hit me > again. Beige G3's are OK, and still have SCSI and serial ports. I have a gaggle of G3 powerbooks that I use at CHM for various recovery projects. Blue and White machines switched to USB and dumped SCSI and serial, which make them less interesting. If you want that sort of machine, get 2nd generation or later Grey G4. Avoid the last couple of generations of G4's, they had cooling problems... Putting a 1+GHz CPU upgrade into the earlier G4s makes a pretty decent system. I'm using one as my main machine at CHM. > I'd probably have to BUY an AAUI-to-RJ45 ethernet adapter Probably not worth messing with. You aren't going to be happy with the performance of a first generation PowerMac. If you really want a shell in the OS 9 environment, there's MPW. I remember someone playing with getting a bare-metal OS going on PPC Macs at one point with a CLI. Don't know how far they got. This is sort of interesting if you wanted to do some low level turn the interrupts off kind of programming on the machine, since you can't actually turn interrupts off completely in the OS 9 environment.

19 years, 5 months

ALERT: Boeing Surplus, Cheap Workstations

by kyrrin＠bluefeathertech.com

This is directed mainly to ClassicCmp folk in or near the Puget Sound region. While at Boeing Surplus this afternoon, I noticed that there were having what amounts to a 'Blowout Sale' on SGI Indigo and Octane workstations. These systems are, as far as I know from talking to their computer guy, complete except for the hard drive (although the Sun Ultra 10 I bought still had the drive in it, admittedly blanked). Here's the best part: The price -- $1.00 Each. No, that's not a typo. One measley dollar for an SGI Octane, Indigo, or a Sun Ultra 10. Now the bad news -- Their computer guy tells me that they need to clear shelf space for a bunch of incoming Dell systems. If said Dells happen to come in tomorrow (Thursday, Jan. 4th), all the Octanes, Indigos, and other non-PC's will ALL be THROWN OUT. So -- If you want to take a crack at getting an ultra-cheap system, I would strongly recommend stopping at Boeing Surplus on Thursday. They're at 20651 84th Ave. S, Kent, WA 98032, open from 11:00 - 17:00 PST. I landed an Ultra-10 myself. Happy scrounging. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Bruce Lane, Owner & Head Hardware Heavy, Blue Feather Technologies -- http://www.bluefeathertech.com kyrrin (at) bluefeathertech do/t c=o=m "If Salvador Dali had owned a computer, would it have been equipped with surreal ports?"

19 years, 5 months

Mac OS vintage (was: Re: Sun E450 server officially vintage)

by mtapley＠swri.edu

At 15:24 -0600 1/3/07, Zane wrote: >Consider this, it's been nearly 10 years since a Mac containing a 68000 CPU >was even able to run the current version of the operating system. I forget >if support was dropped with System 7.6, or Mac OS 8.0. > > Zane To elaborate on what Cameron said: Last OS *my* 68000 Mac Plus has run is MacOS 7.1. MacTracker claims 7.5.5, I can't dispute that as I haven't tried it but I expect it might not do much good (no RAM left for applications). Same is claimed for the Mac SE and Classic and PowerBook 100. MacTracker doesn't report the Outbounds (Jeff?) but since (I think) they used motherboards from the above systems, I would be surprised if they ran later versions. I'm not aware of any later 68000 Macs (or indeed, any others excepting the 128k/512k/fat Mac series, none of which went to OS 7.x). If the question was whether 680x0 processors support OS 8, the answer to that should be yes. Quadra 950 is claimed to run MacOS 8.1, as is PowerBook 540/c and others, again per MacTracker (which is a reasonably useful resource for these machines). The Mac OS category in the same program says the same thing, giving requirements as follows: 7.1 68000 or later, 2 MB RAM, 4 MB hard drive 7.5 68000 or later, 4 MB RAM, 21 MB hard drive 7.6 32-bit clean 68030 or later, 8 MB RAM, 40-120 MB hard drive 8.0/1 68040 or later, 12 MB RAM, 195 MB hard drive 8.5 PPC, 16 MB RAM, 150-250 MB hard drive 8.6 PPC, 24 MB RAM, 190-250 MB hard drive Wow. Looking back, it's amazing how fast requirements shot up. I'm really glad I sort of sat out that period as far as buying computers. Our main home system was a Mac Plus until we leapfrogged to a Powerbook 3400 (which is still our current system). Nice to go >from on-topic to brand-new machines - gives us a while to save up our computer-buying budget. FWIW, hit http://www.mactracker.ca/ if you want to grab the (freeware) program I'm looking at. Gotta love these guys, there's a version which runs on MacOS 8.5 still available, as well as one for (spit) Windows and (grin) *iPod*. Not affiliated. -- Mark Tapley, Dwarf Engineer (I haven't cleared my neighborhood) 210-379-4635 Dwarf Phone, 210-522-6025 Office Phone

19 years, 5 months

Missing Bits

by Billy.Pettit＠wdc.com

In the mid-80's when I first moved to Silicon Valley, I worked for Fujitsu Computer Products. I (and my support engineers) went around the Valley to various companies installing Hard Drives. Recently, I've been trying to write up some of those experiences and found that I have almost nothing on a lot of the companies. And I see that bitsavers doesn't have much either. Does anybody remember or know anything about: Daisy Systems - Design Automation stuff Arix or later, Arete - Unix systems for government sites Pixel - Unix systems California Computer Corporation - Training systems General Computer - 16 and 32 bit CPUs System Industries - Controller PCBs DEC compatible Intertest - Design Automation And one that is driving me crazy, a company that supplied Ada systems to the military. Was first based in Mt. View, then moved to San Jose into one of the old Amdahl buildings. I can visualize the people and systems but can't remember the name. Getting old sucks. I'd love to hear about anyone's experience with any of these companies and especially if any documents or hardware survived. And I'm especially interested in ARIX. It was a very unusual company, and obliquely mentioned in the 6 part TV series on Silicon Valley. Billy

19 years, 5 months

Sun E450 server officially vintage

by compoobah＠valleyimplants.com

> Eric J Korpela wrote: >> Even though it may be a collectible, it's not quite vintage. Yet. >> Things branded "Sun 4," I think would count, as would various >> SPARCstations and Solbournes. Has any 64-bit microprocessor been >> declared officially vintage yet? > > I already mentioned the Alpha 21064, but I believe the MIPS R4000 was > even earlier. > > Peace... Sridhar Well, we're talking three things: processor architectures, processors, and systems. The 21064 is definitely on-topic, as are the early AXP systems (DEC 3000/4000/7000) The basic Alpha architecture is probably irrelevant, because I have never heard a discussion about architectures as being on or off topic, generally discussions of that nature are sufficiently technical to pass. The R4000 is an interesting case, because the chip predates the 21064, but (a) early versions could not run 64-bit since they had a bug in the MIPS-III instructions and (b) no R4000/R4400 systems were 64-bit capable until the Onyx in 1993 unless I've missed something. In short, therefore, the 64-bit potential of the R4000 arrived first, but 21064 realized a 64-bit system first. Take that how you will.

19 years, 5 months

yet another Cat *purr* on ePay *meow*

by chrism3667＠yahoo.com

http://cgi.ebay.com/Canon-CAT-computer-Jef-Raskin-PRE-Macintosh-MAC-HISTORY… listed under Apple/Macintosh category. Don't know if that'll make a difference, I don't search by categories myself. Not as nice as the last one (or mine woohoo). __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

19 years, 5 months

Sun E450 server officially vintage

by compoobah＠valleyimplants.com

Well- Sun4u is still in production, and it doesn't have any "first" cachets like the Ultra1, E10k, etc. so I sort of see where Jay's going. Older Sun4 machines (4m 4d 4c -4) would probably be ontopic, though. SGI 4Ds (loosest definition, all MIPS based machines rather than the strict definition of from the 4D/60 to the introduction of ARCS PROMs) are probably fair game now, given that the line has been discontinued effective Dec 31. Newish Alphas and HP-9000s are probably a bit shady, though, since they're still in (semi) production, but not pushed, so they could be on.

19 years, 5 months

Altair Basic Discussion and Calculator Forensics

by grant＠stockly.com

This is a discussion started off list. >Startrek might port to 680 BASIC. It runs the 8080 Tic Tac Toe program. I haven't tried loading star trek yet. It might just work out of the box. I'll find out tonight. More responses below... >There are a couple of issues that I am not too sure about. > >The 680 BASIC VERSION 1.1 REV 3.2 lable uses VERSION and REVISION. I used >mostly 300-5-C. The C and F revisions of Version 5 BASIC are the only 300 >series that work. There is a Version 5.0 that I don't remember much about. I >started with BASIC 4.1 and always thought it was the first "good" version. I >assumed all earlier versions were buggy and missing features. > >At first, I thought 680 BASIC VERSION 1.1 REV 3.2 was similar to 8080 BASIC >3.2. Now I don't know because I'm not used to working with Revision numbers. >The 300 series uses Revision letters. At this point, I don't know how the >680 and 8080 BASIC versions compare. The 680 BASIC VERSION 1.1 REV 3.2 >language and interpreter have at least one feature introduced in 8080 BASIC >4.0. > >The term "regular BASIC" is ambigous. There are several versions of BASIC. >Which ones are "regular"? The term BASIC can refer to the language or the >interpreter. When someone refers to 8K BASIC, the size is obvious and a set >of language features is assumed. Disk Extended BASIC adds language features, >bug fixes, and major internal changes. Do all 8K BASICS support the same >languages and syntax. > >The term "patches" could be accurate, but I'm more comfortable with version >and revision. The label MITS ALTAIR 680 BASIC VERSION 1.1 REV 3.2 may be a >port of 8K BASIC. What version and revision of 8K BASIC? The examples below >show the same lable on two two sizes of interpreter. MITS should have >changed the lables. > >I don't know which 680 BASIC VERSION 1.1 REV 3.2 came first. Do they both >translate the same exact language? The obvious guess would be that the paper >tape interpreter has the CSAVE command removed or disabled. It could also be >that the smaller BASIC supports the older CSAVE syntax. It could also be >that the bigger version has changes and someone forgot to bump the revision >number. I think non KCACR came first. The KCACR doesn't seem very popular. Its not even in a lot of the -system- documentation. What could we do to determine if the basics are the same? This would tell us the math function similarity... http://www.rskey.org/~mwsebastian/miscprj/forensics.htm I could run the forensics on the Altair32 emulator and on both versions of the 680 basic. If it matches up with any of the 8080 basics then we've found the "version" of 8080 basic used as a starting point. >Does CSAVE work if you load the paper tape version into a machine with a >cassette interface? Nope. Not with any of the syntax changes either. Grant

19 years, 5 months

Shipping company moveit.com

by wacarder＠earthlink.net

I do all of my large shipping with them too, and have been totally satisfied with their service. I agree with everything that Guy has said. I have used them many times during the past 3 years to ship *LOTS* of large equipment, PDP-11 blinkinglight systems in racks, fragile 35 year old terminals on pedestals, etc. They have always delivered oir picked up on time and it was a painless process just as Guy described. I was a little nervous with my first shipment, but they have proven time and time again that they will get my stuff moved in a safe and timely manner. Last week I they delivered two large racks of 35 year old PDP-11 systems and drives, a DecWriter, and a card reader to my place. They gave me a delivery date with a 3 hour window of delivery, and the delivery truck came right in the middle of the delivery window. Smooth and painless. Ashley -----Original Message----- >From: Guy Sotomayor <ggs at shiresoft.com> >Sent: Jan 2, 2007 4:51 PM >To: General at shiresoft.com, Discussion at shiresoft.com@null, On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk at classiccmp.org>, null at null >Subject: Re: Shipping company moveit.com > >I do *all* of my large shipping through them (unless I do it myself). I >have been *extremely* happy with them and I've been using them for a >number of years now. One of the things I like about them is that they >are pretty much "fire and forget". I don't have to hand hold them to >get stuff done and they do a good job of getting stuff moved with no >breakage. I do however give them *all* of the information at the start >of the transaction. > >Of course, I've done enough business with them that they call me up >occasionally to see if I have anything that needs to be shipped. > >Richard wrote: >> I'm using them for a dovebid sale and while things are scheduled to be >> delivered tomorrow (knock on wood), so far I've been pretty >> unimpressed with moveit.com. They haven't been very good at >> communicating important details like MY SHIPPING ADDRESS, when the >> shipment would be made, how payment was to take place, etc. >> >> They say they do a love of business through dovebid, and while that >> may be so, I don't think I would use them again in the future compared >> to my experiences with cratersandfreighters.com. >> >> Has anyone else used these guys? >> >> What was your experience? >> > >-- > >TTFN - Guy > >

19 years, 5 months

Recovering Cassette Tape Records

by aliensrcooluk＠yahoo.co.uk

--- Grant Stockly <grant at stockly.com> wrote: > > I think the reason that the demodulated output is > not 300bps is the KCACR > is locking onto the tape speed? I don't know anything about the KCACR, but the way the Spectrum and C64 saved data the computer would go by the speed of the tape. Typically, any data would be preceeded by 4 (perhaps less?) seconds of pulses which would allow the computer to work out the speed of the tape. I can only assume other computers used this method too?? Regards, Andrew D. Burton aliensrcooluk at yahoo.co.uk

19 years, 5 months

IBM 5100/5110 ROS (ROM) images?

by aek＠bitsavers.org

> Has anyone extracted images of the Read Only Storage > for the IBM 5100/5100 desktop computers? Eric has talked about doing it. Apparently it is scanned during initial self-test, so it could be captured with a deep logic analyzer Considering how many have failed, it's something that needs doing.

19 years, 5 months

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

test-drb