test-drb

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

101090 discussions

by CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.com

>Since we've not seen any code for the 6502 yet, this may not be a problem, >but since Apple didn't exactly make it easy to exchange diskettes with other >systems, how would you propose to transfer a file, binary or otherwise >between systems? Though I haven't gotten into it, I figured on >cross-assembling from a PC to a PROM. That makes it easy for me, but how >will others do it? Easy: Run Kermit on both ends of the link. Kermit is available for everything from IBM mainframes to HP calculators, and has been the standard solution for decades for those of us who have to deal with diverse systems. See http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ for details. >It's enough of a problem transferring files from, say, a CP/M box running a >Z-80, since PC's don't read 8" disks. Huh? I've been doing this with 22Disk and/or Teledisk on PC-clones for over a decade. See http://www.sydex.com/ for details. See the comp.os.cpm FAQ for details about the cabling, and see my recent posts here or the discussions in comp.os.cpm about single-density FDC chips in PC clones if you need to read single-density formats on your PC-clone. -- 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

26 years, 1 month

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by edick＠idcomm.com

That is really interesting! I was pretty disappointed when I got my first "kit" and found that, while it had provisions for a front-panel in its design, none was ever offered. I'm glad to know that there actually were such things. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Hans Franke <Hans.Franke(a)mch20.sbs.de> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Thursday, April 22, 1999 4:52 AM Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing > >> My name is Wouter, I'm new here, and I never throw anything away. >> <everyone>Hi Wouter!</everyone> :-) > >Hi <howeverthisispronounced>, > >> >I saw one ad for an >> >SC/MP, in '77, but that one was a homebrewed model. Other than that, it was >> >not of much interest here. Was that not the case in Germany? The processor >> >was still in National's data book, but I really wasn't then and am not now >> >of any operating system or application software for it. I don't believe I >> >ever saw a real SC/MP based computer. > >> http://ccii.dockside.co.za/~wrm/ccc.html > >CUTE! >H. > >-- >Stimm gegen SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/de/ >Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/en/ >Votez contre le SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/fr/ >Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut >HRK

26 years, 1 month

How scarce (valuable) is core for the PDP-8?

by CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.com

>> take about 90VDC to light up, but after they light up they'll stay on >> until the voltage drops below 60VDC or so. Only problems are: >> >> 1. The thresholds can vary greatly from unit to unit. >> >> 2. The thresholds will vary depending on ambient light, as well. >Use pulse coupleing so each runs at it's range. Also I do have a basic >design for a TTT machine using neons and 2d21 thyratrons. >I feel personally that would be good for demonstrating some for the other >forms of logic used. Absolutely - a lot about logic, especially pulse-coupled logic, is there to be learned. >Then again someone would want that interfaced to PCI too. Hmm - there's enough loopholes in the PCI spec already, maybe we can sneak 90V logic levels in? :-). Tim.

26 years, 1 month

Now OT: Re: Roman numerals

by CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.COM

>> > And no doubt some poor slave just finished chisling in all the closing >> > stock prices for the Roman Stock Exchange and some spelling weenie piped up >> > and said only, "You misspelled 18 on line 30 there." >> and said only, "You misspelled XVIII on line XXX there." >Now we know where his family went after there was no longer >a roman stock exchange :) OTOH, if we all used Roman Numerals for data storage still, there would be no Y2K problem due to "extra" digits! -- 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

26 years, 1 month

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by edick＠idcomm.com

I just never considered a computer a useful tool if you couldn't use it until you rebuilt it (hardware or software). That was the case with the early TI home computer boxes. They had totally unexploited potential for a long time. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Sellam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 2:36 PM Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing >On Wed, 21 Apr 1999, Richard Erlacher wrote: > >> For the longest time, the TMS 9900 didn't appear in anything one could >> consider a reasonable computer. There was one model I saw at a colleagues >> home which had expansion capability, but he often complained that cards for >> interesting applications, like mass storage, etc, were not available. I >> didn't pursue it and so I believe(d) it to be true. I saw one ad for an >> SC/MP, in '77, but that one was a homebrewed model. Other than that, it was >> not of much interest here. Was that not the case in Germany? The processor >> was still in National's data book, but I really wasn't then and am not now >> of any operating system or application software for it. I don't believe I >> ever saw a real SC/MP based computer. > >Richard, the rest of the world does not peer through the same blinders you have on. > >Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- >Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out. > > Coming this October 2-3: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0! > See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details! > [Last web site update: 04/03/99] >

26 years, 1 month

The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the 80s

by cfandt＠netsync.net

Upon the date 04:28 PM 4/21/99 -0700, Sellam Ismail said something like: -- snip -- >Ok, you asked for it. > >http://www.blinkenlights.com/pc.shtml Thanls for the URL! > >This should answer the question "What was the first personal computer?" >once and for all. Well, that's certainly an understatement Sellam! This seems to be a well researched trail leading up to the Simon, IMO. However, any good guess as to how many Simons were actually made and successfully run from the over 400 plan sets sold? Any known to exist now? To try to solve that First Microcomputer question, a set of attributes must first be set just like the set was to determine the 1st PC as shown in the above URL. Methinks that will be a bit troublesome as nobody seemed to agree on that during the last go-around of discussing the 1st Microcomputer here awhile back. Regards, Chris -- -- Christian Fandt, Electronic/Electrical Historian Jamestown, NY USA cfandt(a)netsync.net Member of Antique Wireless Association URL: http://www.ggw.org/awa

26 years, 1 month

How scarce (valuable) is core for the PDP-8?

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<How long does core stay magnetized without power? Years. <How many bytes of battery-backed RAM are there in a typical PC? Not a lot usually something in the 32-128byte range, maybe more. <Haven't there been contemporary memory devices that use nano-scale <cores, to eliminate the battery needs and radiation sensitivity of RAM? Not that I'm aware of. Allison

26 years, 1 month

Saving *BIG* Old Iron...

by mbg＠world.std.com

>This seems very melancholy to me. Delightful that you're there to >preserve the machines for posterity, but sad that prodcutive machines are >being shut down after long service. > >"Farewell, o' good and faithful servant". I know what you mean... I've read the story about the shutdown of a -10 system back in october of 82(?) which is on Tim Shoppa's ftp area... I wish I could have something as touching... What is sad about it is the fact that part of the reason the machines are being decomissioned is the person who cared for them apparently died recently of cancer... today's shutdown was part of the ongoing grieving process for the people who had been using them. It was difficult for them... They are, however, very glad that the machines won't simply be relegated to a trash heap somewhere... they're really glad that they will have new owners who will care for them and keep them running... So we don't have to say farewell to them, they wll find service. Part of that service will be to provide a base system against which some KS10 emulators which I know are being developed can be compared against. I also hope that someday we will be able to get them on the net and let others use them. 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 | +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+

26 years, 1 month

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by edick＠idcomm.com

Since we all see to have so much time on our hands . . . perhaps it would be amusing to attempt to write the SAME logic in the SAME way on each processor, then compare to see which is faster. THEN turn around and try to improve the implementation of this logic to see which is easier to speed up, and perhaps see which has the greatest cost in terms of memory usage, etc. It's truly a retrocomputing exercise, as neither processor is "still around" in the sense of mainstream applications, or even as an "active" product. I guess that qualifies it as an extended topic in this forum. 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: Friday, April 16, 1999 2:00 PM Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing >> I realy love your mails - Just reading all of this I felt almost >> 20 years younger - I was involved _very_ heavyly into the Z80/8080 >> vs. 6502 discusion back then - weh had a circle of engeneers where >> one part wher 8085/Z80 advocates, whie some (like me) where 6502 >> boreheads. > >Actually I'm not done with it. just have the time. The fundemental >problem is not really which is faster, I think for the real world >applications they are likely close but the arguement is flawed. It >misstates the z80 and 6502 timing vs real useage. > >What's funny is I have a kim one I can run and a z80 SBC for comparison. > > >Allison > > >

26 years, 1 month

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by edick＠idcomm.com

The TI computers in general were a bit off center in a number of ways. They certainly had potential which was under utilized, I suspect, because of a strange way of interfacing to their video subsystem. Lacking an OS and the usual assortment of non-game (carefully not using words like "serious" or "real-world" or . . .) software applications was a bit of a hindrance, though. I ws never interested in the TI stuff for my own use, as it didn't offer anything I didn't already have with other systems. I looked into their 9980 (single chipper) for a while. It turned out not to be much of an improvement over the 8748 for which I'd already done all the requisite suffering, so that's what I used. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Mark Gregory <gregorym(a)cadvision.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 8:52 PM Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing >Now I know that many people didn't consider it a reasonable computer, but >the TMS-9900 did make a memorable appearance in the TI-99/4/4A of blessed >memory - 16K if I recall correctly. Once you added a PEB, RS-232 card, 32 K >memory card, 2 HH DS/SD floppies and an Extended Basic cartidge, it was a >fine computer. > >So bite your tongue. > >Cheers, >Mark "They'll pry my TI out of my cold, dead hands" Gregory > >At 02:16 PM 4/21/99 -0600, you wrote: >>For the longest time, the TMS 9900 didn't appear in anything one could >>consider a reasonable computer. There was one model I saw at a colleagues >>home which had expansion capability, but he often complained that cards for >>interesting applications, like mass storage, etc, were not available. I >>didn't pursue it and so I believe(d) it to be true. I saw one ad for an >>SC/MP, in '77, but that one was a homebrewed model. Other than that, it was >>not of much interest here. Was that not the case in Germany? The processor >>was still in National's data book, but I really wasn't then and am not now >>of any operating system or application software for it. I don't believe I >>ever saw a real SC/MP based computer. >> >>Dick >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Hans Franke <Hans.Franke(a)mch20.sbs.de> >>To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers >><classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> >>Date: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 2:10 PM >>Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing >> >> >>>> I suppose that's true, Hans, BUT, in1982, there were few other >>processors >>>> than the 6502 and Z-80 in popular use, with the exception of the 8080A >>and >>>> the 8085, of course. The majority of home computers, though, used one of >>>> these two, at that time. Several years later, we found the 6510 and 6809 >>in >>>> commercially interesting applications, but not for as long a period as >>the >>>> Z-80 and 6502. These two had a life of nearly ten years before the >>IBM-PC >>>> and its clones wrenched the home computer market from their grasp. >>> >>>in 1982, the 9900 was also big and beasts like SC/MP where still on >>>the run (and 680xx, 808x and 160xx comming up), but you're right if >>>you want to pich the two mayor player in the SOHO market. >>> >>>But still, a general measurement includes them. >>> >>>Gruss >>>H. >>> >>>-- >>>Stimm gegen SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/de/ >>>Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/en/ >>>Votez contre le SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/fr/ >>>Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut >>>HRK >> >> >>

26 years, 1 month

SUN tape drive was RE: Sun 1 question

by rigdonj＠intellistar.net

Aaron, OK now how the hell do I get it out to find out what's in there? Joe At 01:27 PM 4/21/99 -0700, you wrote: >The 411 is just the box. Mine has an Archive Viper QIC-150 in it that I >use with an Emulex MT-02 controller. You'll have to take a look inside to >see what you've got in there. Under SunOS, you should be able to access >this as device st[devnum]. Check the man page for "st" for some more info. > >Aaron > >On Wed, 21 Apr 1999, Joe wrote: > >> I just picked up a SUN model 411 tape drive PN 595-1711-03. I can't find it >> in the SUN FAQ , does anyone have any info on it? >> >> Joe >> > >

26 years, 1 month

The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the 80s

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<Ah, but what was the first Microcomputer (including at least a monitor with <bitmap display, some sort of disk or floppy drive, as standard features, <and 'personal' in nature)? That could be a pdp-12 or a POLY-88 depending on your point of view. Clearly a northstar horizon with a compucolor would fit that requirement though at that time useres didn't feel the need for more than a good terminal. That would be 1978. Why bit mapped monitor? Allison

26 years, 1 month

more chording keyboards

by gregorym＠cadvision.com

At 09:42 PM 4/21/99 +0100, you wrote: >> >> Hi, >> I still haven't built a chording keyboard, but I'd like to know, what are >> its advantages/disadvantages over a regular one? I realize the general >> differences, what I'm looking for is 'it would be great for typing >> because.., it would be awful for data entry because....' > >Well, what it's useful for often depends on how the chords are assigned. >I have a Microwriter Agenda, and it's quite difficult to type some of the >characters like '{' that are rarely used in English (but which are common >in programming). The one I built for my PERQ (hopefully) makes it easier >to type some of the common programming symbols (at the expense of making >some letters a little harder to type). > >The main advantage is that (a) they're very fast to use (once you learn >to use them, which I haven't) and (b) they can be used 1-handed. The >original idea (from Xerox IIRC) was that you used the chording pad with >one hand and the mouse with the other. I want to try a mouse with a >chording keypad built in, but I've not got round to making it. > >-tony > I thought that the chording keyboard was one of Doug Engelbart's innovations. I believe he envisioned them as a way to move through Cyberspace more efficently than with a mouse. So that would pre-date PARC, being at Arpa or at Tymshare. Mark.

26 years, 1 month

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by gregorym＠cadvision.com

Now I know that many people didn't consider it a reasonable computer, but the TMS-9900 did make a memorable appearance in the TI-99/4/4A of blessed memory - 16K if I recall correctly. Once you added a PEB, RS-232 card, 32 K memory card, 2 HH DS/SD floppies and an Extended Basic cartidge, it was a fine computer. So bite your tongue. Cheers, Mark "They'll pry my TI out of my cold, dead hands" Gregory At 02:16 PM 4/21/99 -0600, you wrote: >For the longest time, the TMS 9900 didn't appear in anything one could >consider a reasonable computer. There was one model I saw at a colleagues >home which had expansion capability, but he often complained that cards for >interesting applications, like mass storage, etc, were not available. I >didn't pursue it and so I believe(d) it to be true. I saw one ad for an >SC/MP, in '77, but that one was a homebrewed model. Other than that, it was >not of much interest here. Was that not the case in Germany? The processor >was still in National's data book, but I really wasn't then and am not now >of any operating system or application software for it. I don't believe I >ever saw a real SC/MP based computer. > >Dick >-----Original Message----- >From: Hans Franke <Hans.Franke(a)mch20.sbs.de> >To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers ><classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> >Date: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 2:10 PM >Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing > > >>> I suppose that's true, Hans, BUT, in1982, there were few other >processors >>> than the 6502 and Z-80 in popular use, with the exception of the 8080A >and >>> the 8085, of course. The majority of home computers, though, used one of >>> these two, at that time. Several years later, we found the 6510 and 6809 >in >>> commercially interesting applications, but not for as long a period as >the >>> Z-80 and 6502. These two had a life of nearly ten years before the >IBM-PC >>> and its clones wrenched the home computer market from their grasp. >> >>in 1982, the 9900 was also big and beasts like SC/MP where still on >>the run (and 680xx, 808x and 160xx comming up), but you're right if >>you want to pich the two mayor player in the SOHO market. >> >>But still, a general measurement includes them. >> >>Gruss >>H. >> >>-- >>Stimm gegen SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/de/ >>Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/en/ >>Votez contre le SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/fr/ >>Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut >>HRK > > >

26 years, 1 month

Saving *BIG* Old Iron...

by gregorym＠cadvision.com

This seems very melancholy to me. Delightful that you're there to preserve the machines for posterity, but sad that prodcutive machines are being shut down after long service. "Farewell, o' good and faithful servant". Cheers, Mark. At 01:37 PM 4/21/99 -0400, you wrote: > >It looks like everything is coming together... We have a team >assembled (compiled?) to decommission and move a set of KS10 >decsystem-10 36-bit machines and the move happens this weekend! > >I was in attendance earlier today as the machines were shut >down for the final time where they have been for quite a few >years. I got a picture of the final systat screen, and they >stopped timesharing... > >We then got busy unloading and shutting down all the disk drives. >I then shut down the individual boxes and power controllers for >the system cabinets and isolated the cabling (they had LOTS of >terminal cables). I then raised all the stabilizing feet and >used a tie-wrap to attach the panel keys inside the cabinet. I >then closed and latched the front doors. I also did the same >for the tape drive cabinets. They're all rolling free and ready >to go. > >On friday, we'll be pre-staging all the disk drives, and on >saturday we load-out to trucks. > >I'll be taking more pictures as we go along... > > Megan Gentry > Former RT-11 Developer > >+--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+ >| Megan Gentry, EMT/B, PP-ASEL | Internet (work): gentry(a)zk3.dec.com | >| Unix Support Engineering Group | (home): mbg(a)world.std.com | >| Compaq Computer Corporation | | >| 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 | >+--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+ > >

26 years, 1 month

And what were the 80s like for you? (Was: z80 timing...

by ddameron＠earthlink.net

At 03:05 PM 4/21/99 -0700, Sam wrote: >Check this excellent timeline out for updating your microcomputer history >knowledge: > >http://www1.islandnet.com/~kpolsson/comphist.htm Here's another one describing many (micro)computers: Including 2901's, 6502, Moto's 1 bit, etc. http://wwwcsif.cs.ucdavis.edu/~csclub/museum/cpu.html > >Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- >Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out. > -Dave

26 years, 1 month

The Paxton auction: any interest in rescues

by rigdonj＠intellistar.net

At 11:52 AM 4/21/99 -0700, you wrote: >On Wed, 21 Apr 1999, Joe wrote: > >> I'd go with a pickup load of $$$ and come back with several loads of junk, >> er, umm, stuff. Good thing I'm on the wrong side of the country. > >Hans Franke came all the way from Germany last year and bought a truck >load of stuff, so what's stopping you (besides sanity)? > >(Unfortunately, that truckload of stuff ended up taking up valuable space >in my closet...some people just don't know their limits :) LOL! At least he can say he owns it even if it's in a different country! Joe

26 years, 1 month

PDP-11/44 CPU Configuration

by CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.COM

>> Speaking from decades of experience, you *do not* put a Unibus machine >> together in a big configuration, especially from mix-and-match used >> parts, and get it to work. You go down to the most basic configuration >> possible, and then add parts one at a time, testing as you go. >Well, with the exception of the DELUA, and RAM everything is configured the >way it was when I got the machine, but that's a good point. I hope nobody takes it as an insult when I try to encourage them to take a system down to its bare-bones and build it back up step-by-step, but this really is the best way to debug a system that one knows little about the history of. Just because something is written on the sticker on the cover of a system about its configuration doesn't mean that it was working in that last configuration! In particular, with Unibus machines you have to check the presence of the NPG jumpers on the backplane if you have the slightest reason to believe that the configuration has been meddled with in the slightest since it last worked. A single mis-placed jumper anywhere in the system can cause the entire system to lock up when the first DMA attempt is made... Tim.

26 years, 1 month

Programming fixtures for Panasonic HHC

by rcini＠email.msn.com

Hello, all: A friend of mine has a small quantity (~30) of adapters to enable one to program the EPROMs used in the Panasonic HHC with a standard EPROM programmer. The adaptor houses the 8K eprom, most commonly used is the MCM68764 by Motorola, but a special crimping device is used on the chips before they can seat in the HHC proper. If this was not the case, you wouldn't need the special insertion socket to burn chips, you would be able to seat the eproms directly into the ZIF sockets on the programmer being used. These adapters were supposedly hand-crafted for the purpose. Asking price is $15@ plus shipping from New Jersey. If anyone needs more details, e-mail me privately and I can hook you up with the guy selling them. [ Rich Cini/WUGNET [ ClubWin!/CW7 [ MCP Windows 95/Windows Networking [ Collector of "classic" computers [ http://highgate.comm.sfu.ca/~rcini/classiccmp/ [ http://highgate.comm.sfu.ca/~rcini/pdp11/ <---------------------------- reply separator

26 years, 1 month

And what were the 80s like for you? (Was: z80 timing...

by edick＠idcomm.com

In '76 a couple of my friends and I were ogling at ads for Alpha Micro and some self-contained Z-80-based unit from CompuTrol or some such manufacturer. The latter had a built in display and printer, though I don't recall what kind of display and printer. It might have been an EPN9120-based printer, but it appeared it was a small CRT from the ads. It might have been a small, e.g. 20-character alpha-numeric LED display, though. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Jim Strickland <jim(a)calico.litterbox.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 4:09 PM Subject: Re: And what were the 80s like for you? (Was: z80 timing... >> >> No, I was referring to your comment of the TRS-80 M1 being the "first >> personal computer". We won't argue about the definition of "personal >> computer", but for the sake of this discussion, the Apple ][ and Commodore >> PET were both introduced in April 1977 at the first West Coast Computer >> Faire. The TRS-80 M1 was introduced in August of 1977. > >Really? I stand corrected then. I always assumed the TRS-80 came out before >the A2 and the PET. And I should have specified first commercially sold >ready-to-use personal computer. And I might have been wrong even with that. >Would you believe first computer I ever saw for sale? :) > > >-- >Jim Strickland >jim(a)DIESPAMMERSCUMcalico.litterbox.com >----------------------------------------------------------------------- >Vote Meadocrat! Bill and Opus in 2000 - Who ELSE is there? >-----------------------------------------------------------------------

26 years, 1 month

And what were the 80s like for you? (Was: z80 timing...

by edick＠idcomm.com

>10 years? >Does this imply that the PC was not the dominant force until the end of the 80s? > No, I'd say it was a force to be reckoned with from the first day it appeared, but it was several years before a reasonably useful suite of software was available at a reasonable price. The Z-80 and Apple-II continued to be a force in the marketplace until the late '80's. By 1988, the PC was completely dominant in the general purpose microcomputer market, with the exception of the desktop publishing market, which the Apple MacIntosh, in case you've forgotten about it, had pretty well dominated up to the release of Windows 3.0. The appearance of WIndows 3.0 got the MAC people to look at the pricetag for the first time. Up to then there had been few WYSIWYG graphics tools for the PC. Once the PC started showing up with WYSIWYG graphics applications, the MAC's days were numbered. This could have been fixed with a timely price cut, but that wasn't forthcoming. I even had pretty decent cross-development tools for the PC, yet continued using my CP/M tools until about 1987. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Fred Cisin (XenoSoft) <cisin(a)xenosoft.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 2:38 PM Subject: And what were the 80s like for you? (Was: z80 timing... >On Wed, 21 Apr 1999, Richard Erlacher wrote: >> I suppose that's true, Hans, BUT, in1982, there were few other processors >> than the 6502 and Z-80 in popular use, with the exception of the 8080A and >> the 8085, of course. > >In it's first couple of years, the IBM PC (introduced 8/11/1981) sold >enough machines that surely the 8088 could have been said to be in popular >use! >[this is a comment about market, NOT an endorsement] > >> The majority of home computers, though, used one of >> these two, at that time. Several years later, we found the 6510 and 6809 in >> commercially interesting applications, but not for as long a period as the >> Z-80 and 6502. These two had a life of nearly ten years before the IBM-PC >> and its clones wrenched the home computer market from their grasp. > >10 years? >Does this imply that the PC was not the dominant force until the end of >the 80s? >[this is a comment about market, NOT an endorsement] > >

26 years, 1 month

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by edick＠idcomm.com

History ran a different course from where I sit. In 1985, the R65C02 was in almost every new communications product I saw, e.g. FAX machines, though many had a custom device. Those custom devices in many cases had a 65C02 core. Rockwell pushed it into those applications by making many of their other parts "friendly" to the 650x core. The 805x was a mite slow out of the blocks, and in '85, it was real but not appealing and certainly not taking much business from the Z-80 or 650x because its price was still WAY too high. It was, however, a single-chip device . . . There's this old military saying, that "where you sit determines what you see." 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: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 5:17 PM Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing ><For the longest time, the TMS 9900 didn't appear in anything one could ><consider a reasonable computer. There was one model I saw at a colleagues > >One of the first commercial lorans had it! it was big in embedded circles >that needed some oomph or were replacing ti990 minis. > ><didn't pursue it and so I believe(d) it to be true. I saw one ad for an ><SC/MP, in '77, but that one was a homebrewed model. Other than that, it wa > >You didn't look hard. It was popular in embedded apps at the low end as it >was cheap and easy to code for. > ><of any operating system or application software for it. I don't believe ><ever saw a real SC/MP based computer. > >For the consumer market? Well, that's what we're discussing, isn't it? >In the 1981 to 1982 timeframe: > > 808x was getting into embeeded apps and there were few general computer apps for it. > > Z8000 series were getting in to military boxes. >

26 years, 1 month

Program Challenge (was Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing)

by mbg＠world.std.com

I have found a reference which has some rules for constructing roman numerals. Firstly, four of a given numeral is okay, but five or more is not. This allows VIIII to be valid. You must use the largest numeral at a given stage, so for 15, you don't write VVV, you write XV. Numerals of a lower value, when written in front of a higher valued numeral subtract their value from the higher valued numeral. Further rules for the subtraction: o Only I X and C can be used in this way. V, L and D cannot (nor can M) o Only one smaller numeral can be written first. So XIIX is not valid for 18. o The lower numeral must be no less than a tenth of the value of the higher numeral. o It specifically states that each power of ten is handled separately, and uses the example that 49 is NOT IL, it is correctly XLIX. These are the rules I have used in my routine... 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 | +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+

26 years, 1 month

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<Name a non-homebrew SC/MP based computer. <(note, I believe one existed, but memory is fuzzy till i get home to <the old magazines) Not including the three sold by National Semi or the ones that used the 8073 SC/MP with a internal rom tiny basic(also sold be national)??? Allison

26 years, 1 month

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<For the longest time, the TMS 9900 didn't appear in anything one could <consider a reasonable computer. There was one model I saw at a colleagues One of the first commercial lorans had it! it was big in embedded circles that needed some oomph or were replacing ti990 minis. <didn't pursue it and so I believe(d) it to be true. I saw one ad for an <SC/MP, in '77, but that one was a homebrewed model. Other than that, it wa You didn't look hard. It was popular in embedded apps at the low end as it was cheap and easy to code for. <of any operating system or application software for it. I don't believe <ever saw a real SC/MP based computer. For the consumer market? In the 1981 to 1982 timeframe: 808x was getting into embeeded apps and there were few general computer apps for it. Z8000 series were getting in to military boxes. 8051 was well on the way and pushing out 6502s. In the embedded market is where most started. Allison

26 years, 1 month

Jump to page:

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