test-drb

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

101090 discussions

Amiga 2000HD Hard disk

by ethan_dicks＠yahoo.com

--- LordTyran <a2k(a)one.net> wrote: > Beats me. I just said screw it and reformatted the old drive. Boot from an install floppy and check the device numbers with showconfig. > I know that it autoboots, as I've done it many many times with this card OK... that's a good start. There are ways to check the driver name, but not with the supplied tools. > .. And just checking up on my emails with my hand VT100 > terminal and 14.4 modem :) Ugh. It's been a long time since I've had to do that. > P.S. Do you have CIAs that you would like to sell? I'd be interested in > getting my dead 500 working again.. Not really. I have some A500 boards here, but I'd have to pull chips from them to get chips. Are the usual sources dried up? I haven't had to buy any Amiga chips in a while. -ethan _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

26 years, 8 months

NAB Vegas (on topic)

by jpl15＠netcom.com

Any classiccmpers attending the NAB show in Vegas next week? I will be there Tuesday all day... about as much as I can stand of trade shows... even ones specific to my career. :) If so, drop me private e-mail if you would like to get together, or just meet somewhere and say 'hi' on Tues the 20th. [Okay so it's more on-topic than Evolutionary Civic Nomenclature..] Cheers John PS: SoCal TRW Swap, Brunch, and 1st Quarterly Compucrawl coming up on Saturday, the 27th... watch the List or e-mail me for details.

26 years, 8 months

Amiga 2000HD Hard disk

by ethan_dicks＠yahoo.com

--- LordTyran <a2k(a)one.net> wrote: > Hmm... I'll take the 68k if you can get me an even and odd CIA :) > > Well, I know about HDToolbox, but there's one problem. > > When I try to run HDToolbox, it always says "Driver not installed" in the > box that is supposed to contain drive information. What kind of SCSI card do you have? HDToolbox can be invoked with a parameter (Tooltype from Workbench, CLI parameter from CLI) specifying the SCSI-driver's name. If your controller is not autobooting, you may need to build a special boot floppy with the driver in the Expansion drawer and a BindDrivers to load it into RAM. The default driver name for HDToolbox is scsi.device. If your card does not use that as a driver name, the software won't go looking for it. -ethan _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

26 years, 8 months

All this OT stuff...

by kyrrin＠bluefeathertech.com

NOTE: This will be my ONLY message to the list on this subject. I will not reply except via private E-mail. Ya know, when I first joined CLASSICCMP, I joined because I felt it would be a good resource to aid in my work with DEC systems (notably VAXen and PDP), and a meeting place for those who still knew which end of a soldering pencil to use. So far, it has proven to be both, and I've been pretty happy with it. I couldn't care less about the occasional flame war. Such things are inevitable. I'll simply filter it and get on with life. HOWEVER -- Am I the only one getting -really- fed up with all the 'OT:' and 'Re: OT' subject lines and off-topic messages? If a subject is off-topic for the list, then it is off-topic for the list and should, IMO, be taken to private E-mail. Just because you mark it OT does not, in my view, make it OK to clutter the list with it. I've installed a filter at my end that should dump most, if not all, messages with OT: in the subject line. However, the point remains that I should not have had to do so in the first place. Please take OT's elsewhere. Ok? Thanks! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Bruce Lane, Owner and head honcho, Blue Feather Technologies http://www.bluefeathertech.com Amateur Radio:(WD6EOS) E-mail: kyrrin(a)bluefeathertech.com SysOp: The Dragon's Cave (Fido 1:343/272, 253-639-9905) "Our science can only describe an object, event, or living thing in our own human terms. It cannot, in any way, define any of them..."

26 years, 8 months

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by edick＠idcomm.com

Let's not start throwing up our respective hands in disgust! Nothing's been attempted yet. In fact, nothing's been suggested yet except a couple of things which at first inspection didn't seem like they'd work. Now, Hans Franke suggested something like a KIM-1. There's no reason one couldn't code for something LIKE a KIM-1, even the guys working the Z-80 side, but it's not convenient programming a 6532 or whatever those ROM-I/O-Timer things were, or even a 6522 for simple I/O if that's what's needed. I suggested a published algorithm which solves a published problem or something close to that. There haven't been many suggestions made yet, so it's inappropriate to choose. If one wants the hardware, it should be the SAME hardware throughout the exercise, though. That's why I was suggesting a simulator. All that's really needed is a run to see if it actually will execute and end up with the desired result when code is submitted to the hardware. A simulator would be adequate so long as it was trusted to give honest timing results. That way, nobody would have to risk burning his fingers. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Sellam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Saturday, April 17, 1999 3:01 PM Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing >On Sat, 17 Apr 1999, Richard Erlacher wrote: > >> Do we really want to build hardware for the sake of this comparison? >> Writing a bare-bones simulator would be straightforward enough. It's really >> just a big switch statement. The beauty is that you can include/exclude >> undocumented features as you see fit. The gotcha is that it's easy to go >> down a road which has no relevance to reality, i.e. if the processor doesn't >> work like that, even though it should, then simulating it like that is not >> valid. > >Ok, let's first assemble a committee to decide all these issues. We'll >have to start with a Statement of Work. Perhaps we should put out an RFP >first to select the person or group who should develop the SoW. Of course >we'll have to pull together a comittee to draft the RFP. Once that's all >done, then we must put together an administrative committee. We'll have >to vote in a President, Vice President and Secretary. Perhaps we should >incorporate as well. Let's choose the state of Delaware, since that seems >to be the quickest route. > >Fucken-A people! Is this supposed to be a simple coding challenge, or a >competition to see how much work we can create around the same? At the >rate you all are going, it will be a year before we can even decide what >it is we'll be coding! > >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, 8 months

Coding competitions

by cmcmanis＠mcmanis.com

Are a waste of time on separate architectures. We've basically seen the benchmark discussion recreated in what is a somewhat classic vein. If there were really old Usenet archives around you could search comp.sys.arch for the keyword Dhrystone and get this same conversation all over again. However, there are fun competitions, and I'll toss one out for y'all: Compute as many digits of pi as you can on a CARDIAC. Lowest score wins, points scored as follows: +1 for every memory location used. (0 and 99 don't count) +4 for every space on the output card that doesn't contain part of the answer. A card has 24 slots so submitting no program at all will score 96. --Chuck

26 years, 8 months

Amiga 2000HD Hard disk

by ethan_dicks＠yahoo.com

--- LordTyran <a2k(a)one.net> wrote: > Hello, a while ago I got a semi-functioning Amiga 2000HD... after > tinkering with it for a bit, the accelerator crashed the machine every few > minutes, the install was screwed, etc. So, After finding the 68k chip bad, > I pulled one from my dead A500 I can sell you another 68K chip, cheap. I have several. > ...I now how a functioning system... except the HD with a screwed > up install. I want to use a 105-meg SCSI drive that I rescued from a Mac > at school. I have an complete set of install disks for the 2.1 OS but for > some reason it can't detect my drive when I try to format it. None of the > hard disk programs detect it. (When I boot from the install disk with the > old HD installed, it appears as an icon on the Workbench, but when I boot > with my 105 meg drive installed, no other icons appear. There is a prep phase before which you will get no icons. Amigas use a thing called the RDB which contains, among other things, the partition table. Look for HDToolbox in (I think) the Tools drawer of one of the bootable OS2.1 floppies. You can low-level format the drive, check for bad blocks, add new blocks by number, test the surface (read only) and write out a partition table. OS2.1 might insist on a couple of partitions, WB_2.x and WORK. My old A3000 came with some interesting disks for Workbench 2.01 and 2.02; there's some extra stuff that is helpful for auto-partitioning disks with script files. You will want at least 15Mb for WB_2.x All it has to hold is the OS itself (5 880Kb floppies) and anything you add of that sort (drivers, fonts, etc). All the real stuff should go into WORK. Good Luck, -ethan _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

26 years, 8 months

x86, x86 everywhere, but... (was OT: Re: Time to declare State

by ethan_dicks＠yahoo.com

--- Tony Duell <ard(a)p850ug1.demon.co.uk> wrote: > > What? Valueless? Not at all. Get an XT or an 286, give it a 10 or 20 meg > > HD, throw a 10BaseT network card in it (I have those coming out of my > > ears, thanks to all my friends!), install Minix on it, and make it a node > > on your friendly house-hold network. Or forget the network card and use a > > Oh, sure. _I_ don't think they're valueless either. On the desk in front > of me is an XT (original IBM5160). It runs my EPROM programmer, my GAL > programmer, my cable tester, etc. It reads PERQ disks. It is certainly > useful to me. I use a Commodore Colt for the same thing - 8088, soft turbo mode, 3 8-bit slots, supports 3.5" 720K floppies, built-in XT-IDE (I've got a WD93028X on it). I have my ROM programmer on it, an 8003 Ethernet card and I move files to and from it with Kermit over TCP/IP. This does not mean that it's all I would ever want... I enjoy the web, and it's not suitable for more than Lynx, but I do use it and I wouldn't retire it easily. -ethan _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

26 years, 8 months

Burroughs 205 anyone??? (fwd)

by siconic＠jasmine.psyber.com

Can anyone help this guy out? Please reply to the original sender. Reply-to: B9BUILDER(a)aol.com ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 23:37:53 EDT From: B9BUILDER(a)aol.com Subject: Help!!!! Hello My name is Doug Hines, I am trying to build a set from the tv show lost in space. I have been told by several people that the main flight deck had several burroughs 205 computers. I am trying to find someone that might have that model for sale. Any help would be super. Thank's. Doug Hines Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)verio.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Puttin' the smack down on the man! Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0! See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details [Last web site update: 04/03/99]

26 years, 8 months

OT Was z80 timing... 6502 timing

by edick＠idcomm.com

I was trying to figure out whether it was politically correct to correct someone else's spelling in this forum. I had the impression that there was no orthographic police here. There certainly is a lot of error in that department. Even my rented fingers don't spell any worse than the average here. Now . . . What do you mean your money's on TONY? Which Tony? Dick -----Original Message----- From: jax <jax(a)tvec.net> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Saturday, April 17, 1999 10:49 AM Subject: Re: OT Was z80 timing... 6502 timing > >>Ooh! A machine code competition. I'm in! I'll do the 6502 and whoop >>EVERYONE'S ass! >> > > >Wait just a minute..... > >Since we have been discussing various "ethnic" pronunciations, I am >compelled to point out that this statement may be interpeted differently >than intended. > >As a born\bred survivor of the land of redneck, pickup truck, and chewing >tobacco, I assert that a "whoop" is a loud yelling type of activity. The >execution of which on someone's posterior will bring a certain confusion to >your enemy ( he will think you are a fruit ), but will not render him >defeated. > >I laughed so hard at this mental image it made me hurt. :) > >Try "whup" next time, as in "opening a can of whup-ass". > >My 2 centavos from the Republic of Texas. > >BTW, my money's on Tony. > > > jax(a)tvec.net >

26 years, 8 months

unsubscribing/resubscribing

by roblwill＠usaor.net

Can someone please tell me how to unsubscribe/resubscribe? I currently have a dedicated classiccmp email address, and would like to switch the list over to it, but I forget how. ThAnX, -- -Jason Willgruber (roblwill(a)usaor.net) ICQ#: 1730318 <http://members.tripod.com/general_1>

26 years, 8 months

FM, MFM, and GCR channel codes (was Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive)

by mark_k＠iname.com

On 10 Apr 1999 Richard Erlacher wrote: >YES! and that's exactly why the pulse overlap was correctable with >write-precompensation at least in hard disks at 10x the data rate. In >general the amplitude of the pulses was sufficient to be detected by the >usual circuitry, but because the timing was quite far off due to the peak >shift introduced by the summing effect of the head/media combination. >Precompensation, which was not needed for FM, was between 188 and 125 nsec, >depending on the drives in use. On the older drives, 188 was pretty common. >The "bit-shift" was mitigated somewhat by the reduction of write-current on >the inner tracks. Can someone explain exactly what precompensation is? I remember reading about this in the Amiga hardware manual; in the ADKCON register there are two bits which set the precompensation (none, 140ns, 280ns or 560ns), and also one that selects GCR precompensation or MFM precompensation. Note that the encoding method is implemented completely in software, so you are not limited to MFM and GCR. (There's also a control to set the data rate, 2us or 4us per bit cell. 2us is used for MFM, apparently for GCR 4us is necessary.) -- Mark

26 years, 8 months

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<What were the Z80 instructions? I'd like to test them on a SBC and documen <them for the future. <Thanks, <-Dave Found this on my disk. Allison ***************************************************************** Undocumented Z80 Instructions (apply only to Z80) The Z80 IX/IY operators are missing (byte ops) mnemonic: IN ,(C) OP code: 0EDh,070h Description: Same as IN A,(C) except the A register isn't changed (flags are set as if it was changed). NOTES: This instruction can be used to test and discard the value of a port without destroying any registers. mnemonic: SLAS B OP code: 0CBh,030h Description: Shift Left Arithmetic Special B. Same as SLA B except bit 0 of B is set instead of cleared. mnemonic: SLAS C OP code: 0CBh,031h Description: Shift Left Arithmetic Special C. Same as SLA C except bit 0 of C is set instead of cleared. mnemonic: SLAS D OP code: 0CBh,032h Description: Shift Left Arithmetic Special D. Same as SLA D except bit 0 of D is set instead of cleared. mnemonic: SLAS E OP code: 0CBh,033h Description: Shift Left Arithmetic Special E. Same as SLA E except bit 0 of E is set instead of cleared. mnemonic: SLAS H OP code: 0CBh,034h Description: Shift Left Arithmetic Special H. Same as SLA H except bit 0 of H is set instead of cleared. mnemonic: SLAS L OP code: 0CBh,035h Description: Shift Left Arithmetic Special L. Same as SLA L except bit 0 of L is set instead of cleared. mnemonic: SLAS (HL) OP code: 0CBh,036h Description: Shift Left Arithmetic Special (HL). Same as SLA (HL) except bit 0 of (HL) is set instead of cleared. mnemonic: SLAS A OP code: 0CBh,037h Description: Shift Left Arithmetic Special A. Same as SLA A except bit 0 of A is set instead of cleared. *****************************************************************

26 years, 8 months

FM, MFM, and GCR channel codes (was Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive)

by edick＠idcomm.com

Yes, . . . at least I think I can. When data is written to magnetic media, there is a maximal bit density which can be written which is a function of the head and media characteristics as well as the velocity with which the data stream passes the heads. each transition is detected (read) as a pulse of a given width and amplitude. Changes in the sense of the data are recorded by reversing the magnetic flux written on the medium. If two flux reversals are written close together, they can overlap slightly. The consequence of this overlap is that their peaks are effectively pushed apart by the summing of the adjacent flux reversals, since the two amplitudes are never zero but are simply reversed while still having a non-negative value. The pulses resulting from the recovery of these reversals in flux are added together. Since they overlap, the insignificant portion close to the crossover are nonzero, so in the sum, the rising waveform of the second pulse is subtractively combined with the falling waveform of the first. This means that neither pulse reaches its maximum amplitude but its apparent peak appears at the point on the rising waveform at which the difference between the two pulses is reached, which makes the first pulse peak earlier and the second pulse peak later. In order to compensate for this, the pulse which would logically be detected "too early" is written late, and the pulse which would be detected late is written early, and as a result, the resulting pulse train is slightly reduced in amplitude, but the peaks are detected at the proper times, which is what matters. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Mark <mark_k(a)iname.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Saturday, April 17, 1999 3:20 PM Subject: Re: FM, MFM, and GCR channel codes (was Re: stepping machanism of Apple Disk ][ drive) >On 10 Apr 1999 Richard Erlacher wrote: >>YES! and that's exactly why the pulse overlap was correctable with >>write-precompensation at least in hard disks at 10x the data rate. In >>general the amplitude of the pulses was sufficient to be detected by the >>usual circuitry, but because the timing was quite far off due to the peak >>shift introduced by the summing effect of the head/media combination. >>Precompensation, which was not needed for FM, was between 188 and 125 nsec, >>depending on the drives in use. On the older drives, 188 was pretty common. >>The "bit-shift" was mitigated somewhat by the reduction of write-current on >>the inner tracks. > >Can someone explain exactly what precompensation is? > >I remember reading about this in the Amiga hardware manual; in the ADKCON >register there are two bits which set the precompensation (none, 140ns, 280ns >or 560ns), and also one that selects GCR precompensation or MFM >precompensation. Note that the encoding method is implemented completely in >software, so you are not limited to MFM and GCR. > >(There's also a control to set the data rate, 2us or 4us per bit cell. 2us is >used for MFM, apparently for GCR 4us is necessary.) > > > >-- Mark >

26 years, 8 months

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by allisonp＠world.std.com

The 6502 series ahd all sorts of undocumented opcodes and they tended to change with later versions. <THe 65xx stuff is quite known, but what has been new to my ears are the <8085 'hidden' operations. Those were more useful as the 8085 had some rather open holes in the instruction set. The z80 also had a raft of them all commonly supported though officially unofficial. and none were compatable with the 8085 hidden ops (in either direction). Allison

26 years, 8 months

How to read recalcitrant floppies?

by cisin＠xenosoft.com

On Sat, 17 Apr 1999, Ethan Dicks wrote: > . . . > that have read errors that DOS won't get past, bad sectors and the like. For most situations it surely wouldn't matter. But for diskette repair, it would actually help to be more specific on the exact error messages. For example, with a "Parity error", or even "Data error during read", then it may be possible to easily recover a partially correct sector content. But NOT with a "sector not found" error, which can only be fixed by patching up the sector headers. > Are there any tools to go divining on DOS floppies that work better than > an endless succession of "R"etries? It's an all or nothing prospect; the > first disk has the install file, the remaning disks have a chopped monolithic > data file. If one disk can't be read, the whole set is fundamentally useless. > Thanks for any suggestions. The Central Point "Option Board", running the TE (Track Editor) program can be quite useful for such repairs. It will let you view what it thinks are the data bits, and/or what it thinks are the clock bits. By fiddling with them and then writing it back, you may be able to repair the damage, even damage to the sector headers! Another similar tool is Trakcess running on a TRS-80 model 3. Sometimes R-etrying enough times can actually work. If you write a short routine to read the suspect sector with INT13 in a loop, you might eventually get a successful read. -- Fred Cisin cisin(a)xenosoft.com XenoSoft http://www.xenosoft.com 2210 Sixth St. (510) 644-9366 Berkeley, CA 94710-2219

26 years, 8 months

Apple HAL XEBEC controller

by pete＠dunnington.u-net.com

One of today's acquisitions is a small card for an Apple ][ (or Apple ///), labelled "APPLE 2/3 XEBEC INTERFACE REV 1". I happen to have a couple of old Xebec ST412 winchester controllers, so I'd like to try this out. Can anyone tell me the pinout of the 26-pin header at the end of the card? Pins 3,7,11,15,17,19,21,23,25 are grounded, the other seventeen seem to be signal lines. Pins 1,5,9,13,20 are high impedance; the other even-numbered pins are terminated by a 220/330R resistor pack. Does it need any other software (like a formatting disk)? The on-board 4K EPROM contains only the strings "(C) HAL COMPUTERS LTD 1983", "A/XHAL SHARED RESOURCE WINCHESTER SYSTEM", "NOT CONNECTED", and "SRS ERROR", so I guess there would have been a floppy with it, originally. -- Pete Peter Turnbull Dept. of Computer Science University of York

26 years, 8 months

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by edick＠idcomm.com

I've been told, can't prove it, though, that the NEC version of the Z-80 didn't have that "bug" (short for undocumented feature, as in "one man's feature is another man's creature") that in certain instances the flags were incorrectly set by a block load instruction or some such. It's little things like that that can throw folks off. That, actually, is why I favor a simulator. I've just never seen a proper simulator for either processor in an "open" environment, i.e. where only the processor is simulated. That makes it entirely hardware independent. Some folks would believe, however, that since it's not possible to build a system that's hardware independent, it's not valid to simulate one. Do we really want to build hardware for the sake of this comparison? Writing a bare-bones simulator would be straightforward enough. It's really just a big switch statement. The beauty is that you can include/exclude undocumented features as you see fit. The gotcha is that it's easy to go down a road which has no relevance to reality, i.e. if the processor doesn't work like that, even though it should, then simulating it like that is not valid. 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: Saturday, April 17, 1999 9:20 AM Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing ><65C02, because it was buillt in several conflicting versions. What about ><the Z-80 core? Whose? Which one? Speed, of course, should be "limited" t ><whatever was available in 1982. That certainly includes the Synertek (MOS > >In 1982 all of the z80s in the market had the same hidden features >including the IX/IY 8bit ops. I know of no z80 that didn't have them. >Not all of them were available to the 6mhz spec though many could be >pushed. Also allowed is the 8085 (available as a 5-6mhz part then). Again >all of the 8085s had the extra unsupported instructions as they were deem >important! > >Allison >

26 years, 8 months

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by edick＠idcomm.com

about those undocumented opcodes . . . I didn't pursue what happened to them in the UMC, VLSI, SYNERTEK, Mitsubishi, or WDC (WSI) parts. I heard rumors, but wasn't concerned about it then. After 1982 I only used the ROCKWELL CMOS parts. Rockwell took care of them by getting rid of them. Of course they expanded the instruction set as did several others. 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: Saturday, April 17, 1999 1:42 PM Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing >The 6502 series had all sorts of undocumented opcodes and they tended to >change with later versions. Rockwell made a specific point about the undocumented opcodes in their version, in that all the unimplemented opcode values in their CMOS parts were NO-OP's. ><THe 65xx stuff is quite known, but what has been new to my ears are the ><8085 'hidden' operations. > >Those were more useful as the 8085 had some rather open holes in the >instruction set. The z80 also had a raft of them all commonly supported >though officially unofficial. and none were compatable with the 8085 hidden >ops (in either direction). > >Allison >

26 years, 8 months

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<The one I routinely hear about the Z-80 is one which places the odd parity <of the bytes (or maybe the lsb's of the bytes) in a block moved with an LDI <or INIR instruction into the carry or some such. This instruction is <supposed to leave carry unaffected, but doesn't. If it did it never happens to me and ouls severly break code. The block moves and compares are widely used in z80s. The only flag affected is the P/V and that is documented BC-1=0. The z80 does have a difference from the 8080 for some operation regarding the parity/overflow flag.

26 years, 8 months

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<I've been told, can't prove it, though, that the NEC version of the Z-80 <didn't have that "bug" (short for undocumented feature, as in "one man's <feature is another man's creature") that in certain instances the flags wer Did not have that "bug". I don't know that any z80 had it. It was exact. What was missing was a odd address bus burp during t3-t4 transistion. If your design compensated for it the NEC part didn't hurt you and if you didn't It might help. Now the z180 between zilog and hitachi had bugs. The Z280 was buggy too. Allison

26 years, 8 months

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<b) unsupported OPCs in the 8085 ? Did I miss them ? I did 2 years of <8085 development projects, and never heared of (also of course never <used) - can you tell what they where alike ? Yes, They are somewhat handy. 08h DSB double subtract HL-BC->HL 10h SHRL shift right HL Shift HL pair right, MSB is copied 10001000:00000010 becomes 11000100:00000001 18h RDEL Rotate DE right through carry, handy 16bit rotate. SLDE (intel used this neumonic) 28h LRI h,D8 load relative pointer immediate The value of HL is added with the immediate placed in the DE pair. 38h LRI SP,D8 similar to the previous, good for SP relative ops. D9h SHLX Store HL at DE an indexed 16bit store. EDh LHLX Load HL from where DE points. 16 bit indexed load. This is from memory... so if there are errors let me know, I'll dig out the docs. I do remember that NEC up to at least '85 actively supported these as they were in the intel, OKI and AMD designs. Allison

26 years, 8 months

*.cam files

by roblwill＠usaor.net

Thanks! I should have the pictures up and my web page updated by the end of the week! -- -Jason Willgruber (roblwill(a)usaor.net) ICQ#: 1730318 <http://members.tripod.com/general_1> -----Original Message----- From: Michael Passer <mwp(a)acm.org> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Saturday, April 17, 1999 6:00 AM Subject: Re: *.cam files >If those files are from a Casio QV digital camera, a program to convert >them to the JPG format is available at > >ftp://ftp.itojun.org/pub/digi-cam/QV10/ > >There are both Unix and Windows versions available. I tested the >Windows version and it's straightforward and works. > >Hope this helps! > >--Michael Passer >mwp(a)acm.org > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: Jason Willgruber <roblwill(a)usaor.net> >To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers ><classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> >Sent: Saturday, April 17, 1999 12:33 AM >Subject: *.cam files > > >> Hi! >> >> I was just given some *.cam files. They're supposed to be image files >of a >> computer to put on my webpage (classic computer section). They were >taken >> with a digital camera, and downloaded to a PC. My question is: how >in the >> heck do I view them?? Anyone have any idea? >> -- >> -Jason Willgruber >> (roblwill(a)usaor.net) >> ICQ#: 1730318 >> <http://members.tripod.com/general_1> >> >> > >

26 years, 8 months

x86, x86 everywhere, but... (was OT: Re: Time to declare State of MA)

by yakowenk＠cs.unc.edu

I am slowly coming to accept that my value set was molded when certain things were scarce, and no longer are. I would have been thrilled to get any kind of computer when I was in high school. So it is hard for me to imagine people willing to throw away _any_ computer. But now I am starting to see that XT's and 286's are like paper cups. Not only do they tend to work less well as they age (they eventually break and lack support from their manufacturers), but they are really next to valueless in terms of replacement cost. Even if getting a computer to somebody who is destitute, the time of the compu-geek who sets it up is worth more than a newer faster machine would be. The only difference between the old x86 machines and paper cups is quantity: there are fewer paper cups. Bill. (I'm not advocating a throw-away culture, BTW. Just noting the economics of the situation. I wish we could convince people to put in the effort to use and learn from the old machines rather than continuously filling up landfills with them just to make more. But I'm still a long way from getting the rest of the world to see things my way.) (Okay, so that's another difference between XTs and paper cups: paper cups are more landfill-friendly.) On 15 Apr 1999, Mike Ford <mikeford(a)netwiz.net> wrote: ] The Goodwill near me just got 600 computers from Pacific Bell, all 486 and ] older, most in pretty good shape. The result is that a LOT more only ] slightly wanky 486 boxes are getting tossed in the scrappers bin. Goodwill ] won't take a 386, or if it gets in the product stream it goes either to the ] scrapper or the huge AS-IS morning auction of bins of stuff only loosely ] sorted by category. ] ] However painfull you may find it personally, it only takes a TINY bit wrong ] to make an old computer have negative value except as scrap or parts.

26 years, 8 months

OT: Welfare state morality

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<is simply that these computers aren't new enough. They can be used for <anything that a new one can be used for, but they won't read the newest MS BZZT. i'm running a PS/250z with a scanner and I can and do. <Word files. Microsoft made sure of that. Believe it or not, people can be Simple dont use word, it's virus prone. <very picky about such things. Also, there is the issue that the computer <will never be used, or will get thrown away the next day, whatever. The <point is that there is no justification for the trouble it takes to <distribute computers to individuals. If these individuals want to get a <computer, fine. I have found dozens of computers in garbage cans, I'm sure <they can do no worse. There is a lot of truth to that. I think it's more the matter of where Max is a decent 386 is trash fodder but in may parts of this country (USA!) that would be a windfall. After a day of trying to make billies OS and code work, killing a gutted clone sounds like a great release of stress. ;) Allison

26 years, 8 months

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