test-drb

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

101090 discussions

by dwollmann＠ibmhelp.com

Since there was talk here in the recent past of reviving one of these. I found the following on comp.sys.ibm.sys3x.misc: > I have about 40 logic cards, all the power supplies and an 8 inch floppy > drive from a > System/34. All are for sale for best offer. Could supply list of numbers > if interested. > > Norm Helmkay helmkay(a)ibm.net Don't reply to me, I'm just an innocent bystander. -- David Wollmann dwollmann(a)ibmhelp.com

27 years, 11 months

Original IBM PC (was Re: Prices to pay for old

by Marty＠itgonline.com

Are you saying that the original 16KB 5150 had four rows of 4KB dips? ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re: Original IBM PC (was Re: Prices to pay for old Author: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu at internet Date: 5/22/98 3:17 PM At 11:11 5/22/98 -0700, you wrote: >> Of the 16K-64K mb's there are reputed to have been two distinct series, >> called "Series 0" and "Series 1." A 16K, > >What distinguishes the two series? As noted, I don't know. I'm hoping that someone like Tony does. >I hope that "16K" means "16/64K model" as opposed to "actually equipped with >16K of memory." Your hopes are dashed. The only pricey IBM PCs are the ones that had 16K installed at the factory and weren't upgraded. The 64K ones are relatively common, although worth keeping; it's like the difference between a Lisa One and a Lisa 2. __________________________________________ Kip Crosby engine(a)chac.org http://www.chac.org/index.html Computer History Association of California ------ Message Header Follows ------ Received: from lists3.u.washington.edu by smtp.itgonline.com (PostalUnion/SMTP(tm) v2.1.9i(b5) for Windows NT(tm)) id AA-1998May22.151747.1767.43132; Fri, 22 May 1998 15:17:48 -0400 Received: from host (lists.u.washington.edu [140.142.56.13]) by lists3.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.05) with SMTP id MAA01354; Fri, 22 May 1998 12:09:17 -0700 Received: from mxu1.u.washington.edu (mxu1.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.8]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.05) with ESMTP id MAA18246 for <classiccmp(a)lists.u.washington.edu>; Fri, 22 May 1998 12:09:12 -0700 Received: from relay.batnet.com (relay1.batnet.com [204.188.144.18]) by mxu1.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.09) with SMTP id MAA25664 for <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>; Fri, 22 May 1998 12:09:11 -0700 Received: from goldrush by relay.batnet.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id MAA03963; Fri, 22 May 1998 12:08:41 -0700 Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19980522120840.00e606b0(a)pop.batnet.com> Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 12:08:40 -0700 Reply-To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu Sender: CLASSICCMP-owner(a)u.washington.edu Precedence: bulk From: Kip Crosby <engine(a)chac.org> To: "Discussion re-collecting of classic computers" <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Subject: Re: Original IBM PC (was Re: Prices to pay for old computers...) In-Reply-To: <199805221811.LAA28289(a)saul5.u.washington.edu> References: <3.0.5.32.19980522080349.00f4dc70(a)pop.batnet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Sender: chac(a)pop.batnet.com X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 beta -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN

27 years, 11 months

Original IBM PC (was Re: Prices to pay for old computers

by Marty＠itgonline.com

I have a 16KB-64KB 5150, it has one row of 16KB dips soldered in place with three rows of 16KB dips socketed. Pull the three rows of socketed 16KB dips and it's a 16KB 5150 equipped with 16KB of soldered in memory. ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Original IBM PC (was Re: Prices to pay for old computers...) Author: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu at internet Date: 5/22/98 2:18 PM > Of the 16K-64K mb's there are reputed to have been two distinct series, > called "Series 0" and "Series 1." A 16K, What distinguishes the two series? I hope that "16K" means "16/64K model" as opposed to "actually equipped with 16K of memory." -- Derek ------ Message Header Follows ------ Received: from lists2.u.washington.edu by smtp.itgonline.com (PostalUnion/SMTP(tm) v2.1.9i(b5) for Windows NT(tm)) id AA-1998May22.141838.1767.43121; Fri, 22 May 1998 14:18:39 -0400 Received: from host (lists.u.washington.edu [140.142.56.13]) by lists2.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.05) with SMTP id LAA05331; Fri, 22 May 1998 11:11:38 -0700 Received: from jason02.u.washington.edu (root(a)jason02.u.washington.edu [140.142.76.8]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.05) with ESMTP id LAA15582 for <classiccmp(a)lists.u.washington.edu>; Fri, 22 May 1998 11:11:35 -0700 Received: from saul5.u.washington.edu (dpeschel(a)saul5.u.washington.edu [140.142.83.3]) by jason02.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.05) with ESMTP id LAA49024 for <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>; Fri, 22 May 1998 11:11:34 -0700 Received: (from dpeschel@localhost) by saul5.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.04) id LAA28289 for classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu; Fri, 22 May 1998 11:11:33 - 0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199805221811.LAA28289(a)saul5.u.washington.edu> Date: Fri, 22 May 1998 11:11:33 -0700 (PDT) Reply-To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu Sender: CLASSICCMP-owner(a)u.washington.edu Precedence: bulk From: "D. Peschel" <dpeschel(a)u.washington.edu> To: "Discussion re-collecting of classic computers" <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Subject: Original IBM PC (was Re: Prices to pay for old computers...) In-Reply-To: <3.0.5.32.19980522080349.00f4dc70(a)pop.batnet.com> from "Kip Crosby" at May 22, 98 08:03:49 am MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 beta -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN

27 years, 11 months

Finds and questions

by sinasohn＠ricochet.net

At 12:47 PM 5/21/98 -0500, you wrote: >> Nope, HMR. First off, for those not in the know, HMR is HMR USA (see <http://www.hmrusa.com/>), a "global recycler". What they do mostly is take in a *HUGE* warehouse full of older computers and ship them overseas where they'll be used. They also sell stuff to individuals on Fridays and alternate Saturdays. >I called them once to inquire about their inventory, and I got the >impression that they were asking for real money (like $100 for obsolete, >err, classic, laptops). Do they drop prices on the weekend? It's all very subjective. You go in, find what you want, ask how much, and then haggle. $100 should get you a '386 Compaq, probably with docking station. But you never know. I've walked away from stuff I really wanted because the guy said too high a price. (Like my DG-1; the first time I saw it, I think the guy said $50, the next time, I think a different guy said like $20 or so.) >> You wouldn't know what type of HD is in there, would you? > >I think they were probably using Conners. It's easy to check. Pop off the >plastic feet on the back panel to reveal two screws. Remove them, and >then pop off the lid. Cool. I'll check it out. Thanks! >BTW, Doug Coward seems to have the world's supply of T100's, but he says >they're not laptops. I always assumed the rectangle in the upper right >corner I had seen in pix was an LCD, but apparently not (is it a cartridge >slot?). Hmmm... I may still have to get one. Have take a look at a pic. --------------------------------------------------------------------- O- Uncle Roger "There is pleasure pure in being mad roger(a)sinasohn.com that none but madmen know." Roger Louis Sinasohn & Associates San Francisco, California http://www.sinasohn.com/

27 years, 11 months

Guys, calm down! Please!

by kyrrin＠jps.net

C'mon, guys... this whole MS vs. DoJ mess is turning into another list-cluttering slug-fest. Contrary to what MS would, apparently, like the world to believe, there are choices when it comes to OS's. Run what best suits your needs and desires, and don't bash others for doing the same. Caveat emptor! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Bruce Lane, Sysop, The Dragon's Cave BBS (Fidonet 1:343/272) (Hamateur: WD6EOS) (E-mail: kyrrin(a)jps.net) "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..."

27 years, 11 months

cat Xerox | Apple | Microsoft ?

by photze＠batelco.com.bh

>> Linux is free and it may be better (it's abosolute hell to install) > >I'd disagree with you on "absolute hell". It's much less difficult >than the "historical" Unices that I've installed over the years on >PDP-11's. I have a shorter time installing Linux (Red Hat 5.0) than I do Windows 95/3.1!!! It's easy, if you're like me, using standard IDE/UDMA componets, a PCI bus, etc. >The only "difficult" Linux installs that I've done were when none of >the commonly-distributed kernels had support for some particular >device necessary for system operation (i.e. some obscure SCSI >host adapter), and I had to do a kernel build on another system >for this configuration first. SCSI makes things difficult. Seriously. On this 'ere machine, the SCSI contoller makes for... a partially cooled hell for instalation. >On the other hand, many "free" Unix ports I've seen are not only >absolute hell to install, mainly because the installation instructions/ >script are badly out of sync with the distributed binaries. NetBSD-VAX >is what springs to mind at the moment! I'll have to take your word on that. But then again, the first name usually denotes a total genius!!! (Tim O'Reilly, Tim Berners-Lee...) >Of course, it depends on what you're comparing against :-). From >your other comments it sounds like your standard of reference is >probably VMS, in which case I'll agree, by comparison Linux is >absolute hell. How 'bout comparing it to... FreeDOS? (http://www.freedos.org) I BTW, support this idea entirely, as after Windows 98, MS said they arn't going to include a DOS with Windows, so you'll need a DOS if MS isn't around/making OS's. Actually, I think that MS has had a smart strategy in recent months. Internet Explorer for Solaris, NetShow for Linux... I think that it's about time that MS dropped their dead-weight which gives them little profits and focus at what they're good at: Ease of use (on dirt cheap PC's), etc. Now, I kinda like Windows, like MacOS for the rest of us. But I think that if MS focused on other things, or stopped focusing on "We're the best at everything" and started thinking "We could save money, time, and PR funds by working on other OS's"... like making a cross NT-Linux.... that'd be COOL!!! >Tim. Yep.

27 years, 11 months

North Star Help (xpost)

by rhblake＠bbtel.com

Found this on the Obsolete Computer Helpline (http://ncsc.dni.us/fun/user/tcc/cmuseum/helpline/helpline.htm) and since all the buzz about NorthStar's on here lately I figured someone might contact this person. I'm sure many of you are even nearby this guy and could easily get him what he needs. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- John Troxell <nitedriver(a)webtv.net> Vineland, NJ US - Thursday, May 21, 1998 at 12:08:26 Wanted: Boot Disk (and any other) for a Z-100 North Star Advantage. If I remember correctly these are special/different format/# of sectors than all others. Any help would be greatly appreciated. This ex-Fuzzari of all PC's is dead in water w/o it. TIA, John Troxell ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Russ Blakeman RB Custom Services / Rt. 1 Box 62E / Harned, KY USA 40144 Phone: (502) 756-1749 Data/Fax:(502) 756-6991 Email: rhblake(a)bbtel.com or rhblake(a)bigfoot.com Website: http://members.tripod.com/~RHBLAKE/ ICQ UIN #1714857 AOL Instant Messenger "RHBLAKEMAN" * Parts/Service/Upgrades and more for MOST Computers* --------------------------------------------------------------------

27 years, 11 months

Zenith 248's

by photze＠batelco.com.bh

Hi. Are these the 286's that Zenith sold by the mass-quadrillions to the US Gov't??? If so, they're pretty cool, when you get down to it. CPU's on a backplane, they had a 386 upgrade, and even a 486 one, but the 386's didn't sell, 486's were only prototypes, from what I can tell. By pressing CRL+INS you could get into this WAY COOL Apple II like ROM test program. Pleanty of RAM, etc. Trust me, I know. Every single day of the week, I USE ONE OF THESE in math class. Cool retro use, don't you agree??? It runs WP 5.1, they weren't equipped with Windows, but MS-DOS 5.0 (at least that's what I see, might have been 3.3), and some came with this cool monitor that had a Amber/Green/Normal switch, but only worked well in mono, not CGA mode. Tim D. Hotze

27 years, 11 months

cat Xerox | Apple | Microsoft ?

by rigdonj＠intellistar.net

This is too good! I just can't resist getting my two cents worth in! At 06:23 PM 5/21/98 -0700, you wrote: >Sure the DOS license was a big initial push, but to say it was solely >responsible for the success of Microsoft is like saying the Model T is >responsible for Ford having the best selling vehicle in America today. Then you had better go back and look at automotive history. Ford was just another car company among dozens, yes dozens, of similar companies until they brought out the model T. That put them in the lead and they've been there ever since. Since the model T they've bought up or plowed under most of the competion with the exception of the other major companies like GM and Chrysler. That seems to be the same strategy that MS is using. MS Hell! ALL companies do it! I used to work for Martin Marietta, look at all the competitors they've bought up in the last couple of years! > >Microsoft was a development products company, not an OS company. When I got >here in 1988, I remember seeing a revenue pie chart at the company meeting. >We were at around 60-70% revenue from development products like C++ & >FORTRAN, with a big slice from apps like Word & Multiplan, and DOS revenue >was a tiny slice. Exactly and I'm sure that Win 95 or Win 98 will also be a tiny slice. MS gives away the OS, then makes up the profit by selling you all the applications that require that OS. In a decade where everything had to be written directly >to the hardware to get any speed out of the 8088, you can hardly say that >the DOS license had much to do with the success of the dev products. > >Our first, all time most successful Windows app, Excel, that nuked the Lotus >1-2-3 monopoly through ease of use and customer demand alone, was _ported >from the Macintosh_. How exactly could we have leveraged our ownership of >Windows to make Excel successful when it wasn't even written for Windows? What do mean, wasn't written for Windows??? You certainly couldn't take a Mac disk and put it in a PC with Windows and run it! It may have ORIGINALLY been written for a Mac but it was certainly rewritten for Windows. The Windows very only looked and actly like the Mac version, the code was entirely rewritten. > >If IBM endorsing & bundling an OS makes it a monopoly, why is OS/2 dead? Because (1) MS very publicly announced that they were dropping support for it (2) MS (and others) never sold any significant application programs for it. That's exactly what a monoply is all about, the power to kill a rival product through direct action or in this case a lack of action. That's why DOJ and a lot of others would like to see MS's monopoly broken. Joe > >etc. > >Kai > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Doug Yowza [mailto:yowza@yowza.com] >Sent: Thursday, May 21, 1998 5:37 PM >To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers >Subject: RE: cat Xerox | Apple | Microsoft ? > > >On Thu, 21 May 1998, Kai Kaltenbach wrote: > >> We weren't, and aren't, Orwellian characters, >> just folks trying to write software that people want to buy. Gee, I guess >> it worked! So sue us! > >I think one reason Microsoft is being sued is that Microsoft software does >not compete on the merits of the software alone. Windows 3.0 was the >first almost barely usable/tolerable version of Windows. I'm not a Mac >fan, but if you look at something like the Amiga and AmigaOS from 1985, it >was such a clearly better operating system and windowing system PC >environment compared to Microsoft's offering that if Microsoft had to >compete on technical merit alone, they would have been out of business >weeks after the Amiga's introduction. > >To suggest that Microsoft's success is due to writing software that people >*want* to buy is disingenuous. Microsoft's success is due solely to the >monopoly IBM gave them in 1982. To their credit, Microsoft is only about >five years behind the curve. If IBM had kept the monopoly to themselves, >we'd all be closer to ten years behind the curve. > >-- Doug > >

27 years, 11 months

IBM PC DOS 1.00, anybody???

by desieh＠southcom.com.au

-----Original Message----- From: Uncle Roger <sinasohn(a)ricochet.net> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Friday, 22 May 1998 3:18 Subject: Re: IBM PC DOS 1.00, anybody??? >At 10:17 PM 5/19/98 -0400, you wrote: >>> anybody have IBM PC DOS 1.00? or know of where I may d/l it from the net >>> somewhere?? >> >>Lad, we don't do that here. Copyright situation. Besides, PC-DOS 1.0 > >I don't know for sure, but knowing M$, I strongly suspect that they still >retain the rights to it as a commercial product (and all versions since), >unlike Apple, which makes the 6.0.x and 7.0 versions of the MacOS available >for free from their FTP site. > >Perhaps the original poster was thinking that M$ might be so gracious as to >do as Apple did? (Woooheee.... Boy, I crack myself up sometimes... 8^) > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- O- > >Uncle Roger "There is pleasure pure in being mad >roger(a)sinasohn.com that none but madmen know." >Roger Louis Sinasohn & Associates >San Francisco, California http://www.sinasohn.com/ > well there was talk at sometime that Microsoft was going to make DOS shareware......... dont know what evunated out of it but isnt Win 98 the last OS to have MS-DOS?? so whenever they release a next OS that would be the time they make DOS shareware......... this is probably so they dont have to support it anymore........

27 years, 11 months

Which boards were changed when upgrading VAX 780 to a 785?

by DSEAGRAV＠toad.xkl.com

I have lots of a 780, and lots of a 785. Which boards were changed when upgrading to a 785? Can I somehow combine the two and get a CPU? If I can, I can get a set of backplanes from ATS, but they're supposed to be spares for the VAX they've already decomissioned. They don't really want to give them to me unless I have a use for them. -------

27 years, 11 months

Fair software pricing

by maxeskin＠hotmail.com

I remember asking a while ago, and only a couple of people on the list had a copy >Xenix? Rare? > >> 3)Famous software, like VisiCalc > >Way too much according to what I see some packages selling on the net for >($50-$100). > >> Should these things be expensive? > >Depends. How much do you want to pay? > >> More specifically, and perhaps more to the point, do you think that >> a copy of VisiCalc (black binder/manual c1981) and MS Multiplan are >> each worth $5? > >Not bad. Considering I've seen some fools pay ten times that. > >Sam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com >------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Ever onward. > > September 26 & 27...Vintage Computer Festival 2 > See http://www.siconic.com/vcf for details! > [Last web page update: 05/11/98] > > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

27 years, 11 months

IBM PC DOS 1.00, anybody???

by maxeskin＠hotmail.com

I'm sorry if am a little slow, but why is that a curse? > >Remember the old Chinese curse "May you live in interesting times". >-- >Ward Griffiths >They say that politics makes strange bedfellows. >Of course, the main reason they cuddle up is to screw somebody else. > Michael Flynn, _Rogue Star_ > ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

27 years, 11 months

Adaptec ACB 4070 Bridge (MFM/RLL to SCSI)

by djenner＠halcyon.com

I have two of these MFM to SCSI adapters up for grabs. They screw onto the bottom of an MFM drive and convert the drive from MFM to SCSI. (It might be RLL instead of MFM.) Complete with cables. I don't have any docs, but it appears that you can get something from the Adaptec FAX number. See http://www.adaptec.com and search for ACB 4070. If anyone wants these for the cost of shipping, please let me know. Dave

27 years, 11 months

cat Xerox | Apple | Microsoft ?

by photze＠batelco.com.bh

>Sure the DOS license was a big initial push, but to say it was solely >responsible for the success of Microsoft is like saying the Model T is >responsible for Ford having the best selling vehicle in America today. Exactly. It's kind of like how scientists can associate one thing with another, such as "Salt increases people's chances of having a heart attack, therefore having little/no salt reduces it". It's not true; see if ANY living being can go without salt. If DOJ's going to punish MS, the LEAST they could to would be to get their facts strait. >Microsoft was a development products company, not an OS company. When I got >here in 1988, I remember seeing a revenue pie chart at the company meeting. >We were at around 60-70% revenue from development products like C++ & >FORTRAN, with a big slice from apps like Word & Multiplan, and DOS revenue >was a tiny slice. In a decade where everything had to be written directly >to the hardware to get any speed out of the 8088, you can hardly say that >the DOS license had much to do with the success of the dev products. I think that you'll agree with me when I say that revenues arn't everything, and in some cases, anything. Take Internet Explorer, for example. I'd imagine that the product (which, BTW, is an excellent browser) doesn't make much, if any money, due to the fact that the only way you pay for it is $5 for a CD or $30 or whatever for Internet Explorer Plus. But still, IE makes up between 30-50% of the browser wars. >Our first, all time most successful Windows app, Excel, that nuked the Lotus >1-2-3 monopoly through ease of use and customer demand alone, was _ported >from the Macintosh_. How exactly could we have leveraged our ownership of >Windows to make Excel successful when it wasn't even written for Windows? Exactly. MS shouldn't be punished for making good desisions or good luck. Now, the ONLY thing that would actually call for an anti-trust hearing would be if the Gov't offered MS money for something. DOJ really doesn't know what they're talking about once they get to computers. That judge was happy to see the IE logo off his computer!!! The disputed files still existed. >If IBM endorsing & bundling an OS makes it a monopoly, why is OS/2 dead? IBM... now, I don't think that they're guilty, but they call for anti-trust hearings. They make their own hard drives, OS's, chips (x86 and otherwise), PC's, mainframes.... talk about BUNDLING... A good point, which I think needs to be made is that the PC industry has reached an odd point. It's at an area where products can be hyped enough for a idiot with some cash to want to get a PC for a couple of reasons. For instance, someone was talking to their sister and was asking me for help on the Internet, and he was concerned that her sister's Mac wasn't a Pentium. All he knew was how the Pentium was hyped. PowerPC was not, except for a 3-6 month Motorola campaign. Seriously, I happen to kind of like Windows. It's pretty easy to use. Now, due to Autoplay in Windows 95, I can get even the most BASIC to install a program. Needless to say, that's something that has considerably lowered my phone bill. ;-) >Kai Don't worry. We're mostly geeks on this list, meaning we want the Government to stay in it's own territory. Hey... anyone think about launching anti-trust hearings against the government/IRS??? They're monopolies.... BTW, what exactly do you do at Microsoft???? Ciao, Tim D. Hotze

27 years, 11 months

IBM PC DOS 1.00, anybody???

by peacock＠simconv.com

From: Max Eskin [mailto:maxeskin@hotmail.com] I'm sorry if am a little slow, but why is that a curse? > >Remember the old Chinese curse "May you live in interesting times". >-- When you are sitting on the customer's computer room floor at 3am, and the paychecks are distributed at 7am, to the 300 angry miners who dynamited cars during the last strike, and that new "interesting" technology isn't working, then you will understand why it is a curse. Jack Peacock

27 years, 11 months

cat Xerox | Apple | Microsoft ?

by jfoust＠threedee.com

At 04:57 PM 5/21/98 -0700, Kai Kaltenbach wrote: > >In regard to Windows being a clone of the Macintosh, that's also false. The >intended competitive target for Windows 1.0 was somebody's PC based product >which in turn was intended as a competitor to IBM's TopView. That's not to say, of course, that Windows 1.0 would not have been better had it cloned the Mac. :-) >People think Windows was successful because of some >big Microsoft master plan, which is ridiculous. It didn't sell hardly at >all until it really took off with 3.0, I was one of a handful of guys who wrote a Windows 2.0 illustration program that we sold to SPC that became Harvard Draw. Speaking with that experience in mind, programming for Win 2.0 was hell on Earth. :-) All the fun of 16-bit x86 plus a toddling GUI API. Relax, Kai. Some of us are hoping the DOJ would leave Microsoft alone, and hope they don't go after the next software company. ("Why, I'm shocked, shocked, shocked that one software company would wish another would dry up!" Government officials who accept covert international espionage are surprised by corporate managers playing "us-vs.-them" in blustery memos?) And this wouldn't be the first time a Mac-flavored columnist had a strange spin on the world. At 07:37 PM 5/21/98 -0500, Doug Yowza wrote: >I'm not a Mac >fan, but if you look at something like the Amiga and AmigaOS from 1985, it >was such a clearly better operating system and windowing system PC >environment compared to Microsoft's offering that if Microsoft had to The Amiga's GUI, Intuition, will go down in history as being almost religiously nonconformist and anti-standard - in the first few years, the evangelists seemed in love with the idea that, for example, every program's Open/Save dialogs would be hand-rolled and completely different from the next. By the time they changed their mind about that, it was too late. It didn't track most resources - even Win 1.0 tried to do that. Another great flaw of the Amiga core (on which Intuition relied) was its lack of task-to-task memory protection, indeed, a reliance on free access to all memory by all tasks. The Amiga had great multitasking and a generally clean feel to its "Exec" mainly because the guy who was assigned to write it was wise enough to recognize that he was no expert, and picked up a textbook on OS design. This free access to all memory gave the machine and its custom hardware its lean-and-mean feel, but it wasn't scalable or very portable. That's about it. It inherited all sorts of crud from Martin Richard's B and BCPL languages, for heaven's sake, because Amiga Corp. wasn't capable (given CBM's time and money constraints) of producing an OS to sit on top of the Exec, so they grafted his Tripos OS on it instead. I can say all this only because I devoted many years and much soul to the Amiga. :-) Early Windows suffered the most from the 16-bit legacy of the Intel processor. At least it attempted to abstract the graphics interface, tracked resources, encouraged standard GUIs, etc. - John Jefferson Computer Museum <http://www.threedee.com/jcm>

27 years, 11 months

Extreme Geek

by rax＠warbaby.com

Compound emulation, anyone? BeOS emulating MacOS emulating Win3.1 emulating Apple][e to play Dig Dug. http://www.bedope.com/digdug.jpg How far could one go with this cool silliness? R. -- Robert Arnold Managing Editor The MonkeyPool WebSite Content Development http://www.monkeypool.com Creator and Eminence Grise Warbaby: The WebSite. The Domain. The Empire. muahahahahaaaaa http://www.warbaby.com Dreadlocks on white boys give me the willies.

27 years, 11 months

cat Xerox | Apple | Microsoft ?

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<could be made for the Wright Brothers, etc. No invention springs wholly <formed from teh forehead of the inventor, everything builds on previous <innovations. Xerox invented the GUI for all practical purposes. Rather than say "Xerox invented..." I'd say they codified, or otherwise choherently assembled many known concepts into a working system. <planning on inventing an airplane. And besides, the GUI wasn't even a sp <in Apple's eye in 1979, they were just introducing the Apple II+ at that <time! It also forgets the DRI work on GUI kernel (GEM). <The Xerox Star was introduced in May, 1981, and the Apple Lisa 1 wasn't <announced until January, 1983. It shipped in June of that year, more tha <two years after the Xerox. Two years is a freaking LIFETIME in the compu <industry. What is this columnist smoking? agreed! <competitor was Quarterdeck's DesqView, partly GEM too, and some other thi <most people have forgotten like VM/386, not the Mac. Desqview was the leader for a while and rather good as well. <user interface because it was graphical, we did it because it was WYSIWYG <note that the first real Windows app was Aldus PageMaker, a desktop <publishing application. People think Windows was successful because of s WYSIWYG rather than WYGINS (what you get is no surprise) was the driving force. To do that you needed a system that was not bound to hardware and could scale clip and draw or your dead. <interface must be genuinely easy to use and that doing things that way ar <natural. There's this misperception that there's some bad blood between <Microsoft and Apple because they sued us, which couldn't be farther from <truth. When the lawsuit came through, we weren't saying "Those bastards! <we were saying "Huh? Why would they do that to their buddies?" And we I remember the microsoft softcard that was a z80 for Apple that ran CP/M supplied with MS Basic! It was a case of making neat products that worked! If anything it was DRIs lack of agressive drive that made an opening that someone had to fill with DOS and later winders. PS I like most MS products mostly it's their marketing strategies that are a bit suspect and that has little to do with product. Allison

27 years, 11 months

cat Xerox | Apple | Microsoft ?

by kaikal＠MICROSOFT.com

The assertion that Xerox did not "invent" the GUI and that many of the concepts had existed separately prior to their fusion at PARC is both true and completely irrelevant, in exactly the same way that a similar assertion could be made for the Wright Brothers, etc. No invention springs wholly formed from teh forehead of the inventor, everything builds on previous innovations. Xerox invented the GUI for all practical purposes. Likewise, whether Apple was "planning" on implementing a GUI is completely facetious. To return to the Wright Brothers analogy, lots of people were planning on inventing an airplane. And besides, the GUI wasn't even a spark in Apple's eye in 1979, they were just introducing the Apple II+ at that time! The Xerox Star was introduced in May, 1981, and the Apple Lisa 1 wasn't announced until January, 1983. It shipped in June of that year, more than two years after the Xerox. Two years is a freaking LIFETIME in the computer industry. What is this columnist smoking? In regard to Windows being a clone of the Macintosh, that's also false. The intended competitive target for Windows 1.0 was somebody's PC based product which in turn was intended as a competitor to IBM's TopView. I was here in the Windows 2.x/3.0 days, in fact, I was the beta administrator for 3.0, and I can tell you that competing with the Macintosh was the furthest thing from our minds. Nobody in the dev group had worked on a Mac, we didn't have any Macs anywhere in the area, and nobody ever mentioned the Mac as we made product decisions. In those days, our competitor was Quarterdeck's DesqView, partly GEM too, and some other things most people have forgotten like VM/386, not the Mac. We were not trying to compete with or clone the Mac. We were trying to (and this is not a corporate 'line', I'm serious, I was there) 1. make the PC easier to use, and 2. break the '640K barrier'. We didn't do a graphical user interface because it was graphical, we did it because it was WYSIWYG -- note that the first real Windows app was Aldus PageMaker, a desktop publishing application. People think Windows was successful because of some big Microsoft master plan, which is ridiculous. It didn't sell hardly at all until it really took off with 3.0, and that's just because the incredibly small dev team (like 25 including management) just wanted to do some really cool software. Hell, at launch, we all had buttons that said "Windows 3.0 - It's Cool." We weren't, and aren't, Orwellian characters, just folks trying to write software that people want to buy. Gee, I guess it worked! So sue us! Remember that Windows back then wasn't remotely similar to the Mac apart >from it being graphical and using icons. Any similarity to the Mac that grew over time was the result of tons of usability studies with people who had never used a computer before. If implementing features via usability studies makes Windows more like the Mac, that only means that Apple's user interface must be genuinely easy to use and that doing things that way are natural. There's this misperception that there's some bad blood between Microsoft and Apple because they sued us, which couldn't be farther from the truth. When the lawsuit came through, we weren't saying "Those bastards!", we were saying "Huh? Why would they do that to their buddies?" And we never held a grudge either, up to and including our recent financial investments in Apple and our continuing successful software line for the Mac. Kai (my opinions, not my employer's) -----Original Message----- From: Max Eskin [mailto:maxeskin@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 21, 1998 4:17 PM To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers Subject: cat Xerox | Apple | Microsoft ? I am curious as to the veracity of the article at http://www.MacKiDo.com/DarkSide/Coates.html It is a criticism of another article, partly quoted. The original article says the Apple got their idea from xerox in 1979, and MS got their ideas from Apple, and now they have copied the Mac w/Win98 The article in the link argues that Win98 is much worse than the mac, which I agree with. I am wondering about its statement that Apple knew all about GUI before 1979 with their Lisa. AFAIK, the lisa is ~1982... The author argues that the other one should get his facts and MS propaganda in check. Is he practicing hypocrisY? ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

27 years, 11 months

Historic Microsoft anti-trust happenings

by dastar＠wco.com

Hey, this whole deal with Microsoft and the government anti-trust lawsuit is pretty historic. Unless Microsoft all of a sudden decides to come back to the table (I think at this point the egos have bloated out so far that they are irreversibly colliding with one another) then it will be very interesting to see what comes of this. Ten years from now we'll be looking back, much like we did when they killed Ma Bell, and for better or worse, lamenting on the days when Microsoft was king. I think it went from interesting side note to full-blown event when Microsoft said "screw it" and decided to go ahead and ship Win98. That was a decidedly brash decision. It will be very fun to watch this unfold over the next few weeks. Take notes, all you amateur computer historians. This is the kind of stuff people always refer back to when discussing the politics of business and the forces that change industry. Sam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ever onward. September 26 & 27...Vintage Computer Festival 2 See http://www.siconic.com/vcf for details! [Last web page update: 05/11/98]

27 years, 11 months

cat Xerox | Apple | Microsoft ?

by maxeskin＠hotmail.com

I am curious as to the veracity of the article at http://www.MacKiDo.com/DarkSide/Coates.html It is a criticism of another article, partly quoted. The original article says the Apple got their idea from xerox in 1979, and MS got their ideas from Apple, and now they have copied the Mac w/Win98 The article in the link argues that Win98 is much worse than the mac, which I agree with. I am wondering about its statement that Apple knew all about GUI before 1979 with their Lisa. AFAIK, the lisa is ~1982... The author argues that the other one should get his facts and MS propaganda in check. Is he practicing hypocrisY? ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

27 years, 11 months

Questions, questions

by g＠kurico.com

A few questions: Recently acquired a Heathkit computer. Looks to be a pc compatable (din keyboard plug, 1/2 height 5 /14, etc). Plate on back says model U 148. Any clues? This is not quite a classic, but almost there. I have a few Mac Portables (the original model 5120). Inside one was a add-on card in the ROM slot (not the RAM expansion). The card has two roms on it labeled: Esprit Rom 1.087" dated 7/14/89. The card itself says Esprit Rom. Anyone know what this could be. The Mac doesn't seem to behave any differently with or without the card. Also, I have another portable that has no identification silkscreened on to the bottom where it would normally be. Could this be some type of prototype, since it looks like it never did have anything printed there (i.e. no one removed it). Totally off-topic. I also just got a Code-A-Phone 700 from Western Electric. It's an old answering machine that uses some sort of funky reel to reel to store messages. I think it was only meant to be used at CO's as it says "not for resale" on the bottom. The power connector is a weird three prong male connector with two cylindrical prongs and one flat prong (the opposite of todays common connector). This unit is from the 70's. Again, any clues? Or any pointers to where (other lists, web sites, books) I might look. And finally, anyone know of a good way to remove the dark brown adhesive left on my the metallic inventory tags used by some companies? I've try rubbing alcohol, wd40, and goo gone. I'm afraid to try anything too strong as it might hurt the case. TIA George

27 years, 11 months

What does an M8579 go into?

by DSEAGRAV＠toad.xkl.com

The book says 11-bit MOS RAM. What's 11 bits? -------

27 years, 11 months

What does an M8579 go into?

by peacock＠simconv.com

From: Daniel A. Seagraves [mailto:DSEAGRAV@toad.xkl.com] Wait a minute! ECC uses 2 bits? That leaves 9. 9, 18, 27, *36*. Hmm! Something 36 bits maybe? ------- There were several types of ECC schemes. Some worked at the byte level, some by the word. PDP memory boards commonly uses 22 bit words (16 data + 6 ECC), or accessible as 11 bit byte (8 data + 3 ECC). Memory boards based around Intel 256K DRAM controllers also supported this type of ECC (I think it was the 8206/8207 chipset?). The Intel ECC scheme was neat because it would scan for errors during refresh cycles, "bit scrubbing". Memory is vague, but I believe the 11 bit ECC byte was a Reed-Solomon type ECC pattern? Jack Peacock

27 years, 11 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