test-drb

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

101090 discussions

by pvhp＠forte.com

classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu Subj: Re: Re[4]: Development, round II Barry Peterson wrote: >On Fri, 30 Jan 1998 19:41:15 -0600, you said: > >> >>IIRC they started officially calling it Warp with V2.0, the first = >release following the Microsoft/IBM breakup. > >I have a copy of 2.0; it is not called Warp. That started with version >3. The story that I read somewhere was that "Warp" was used internally at IBM. With version 3.0 they were explicit about it and put that name on the box. Peter Prymmer ,

28 years, 2 months

eBay and online auctions

by higginbo＠netpath.net

At 08:06 PM 1/30/98 -0800, you wrote: >Maybe not in this day and age. Who knows what wacky contraption some whiz >will invent in the future which will allow just such a thing? (Perhaps it >will be somebody among us here for just the purposes of restoring classic >computers in the year 2050). I can see someone developing good enough VR that you'd be able to scan in about 20 different pics of a dead pc inside and out, throw some emulator code in the fray, and you'd be able to go under the goggles and actually use the system in VR. (It never would be the same as actually being there (at least not for a few years) but wouldn't it save a whole lot of physical storage space!) -John Higginbotham- -limbo.netpath.net-

28 years, 2 months

Win 3.0

by lfb107＠psu.edu

At 11:43 PM 1/30/98 GMT, Barry Peterson wrote: >On Fri, 30 Jan 1998 17:17:51 -0500, you said: > >>Barry Peterson wrote: >>> >>> I sold a drive (IIRC, a micropolis 85MB) that would spool up and then >>> do a couple of "ching-chings" and worked fine. I tested the livin' >>> daylights out of it; no problems, but many folks told me and the >>> fellow I sold it to that it would die immediately. >> >>So how long has the guy you sold it to been using it? (I've had bad >>luck with the Micropolis 40MB drives in some AT&T 3B1s). > >I had it for >3 years, he had it for two more, now his grandson has >it... So far, so good. >_______________ The Micropolis I stuck in my AT&T has been dropped twice and actually caught on fire once! Still works too... Believe it or not, chkdsk and scandisk both give it the 100% ok. Les

28 years, 2 months

EPROM programmers

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<The PIC is a lot older than most people think - I seem to recall that the <16C54 was first produced by GI (before they became Microchip) in about <1979. Of course there have been many new devices since then. Earlier and it was the cp1600 series (I think '77). GI was heavy in the embedded market then and used in the intellivison game to name one. I knew of them as they were down the block from me when I lived on LI(NY). Allison

28 years, 2 months

Ricoh-based laser printers

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<Similar, but not the same. Most copies are 'illuminate for white', most <laserprinters are 'illuminate for black'. This means the corona wires are <at different voltages, amongst other things. Not as much as your expect. I worked with both the 3300 copier and the printer version (XP12/24) and same for the Ricoh 1040(40ppm). It was coincidence we had both in the group so copier repair was a common task and not in my basic training. ;) <Also, the scanning in a photocopier is entirely mechanical, and is (in <general) synchronised mechanically. Laser printers have a lot of <electronic sync stuff, things like the laser beam detect sensor, the <registration shutter, etc. Like I said different optics. <Still, understanding a copier is a good starting point for understanding <a laser printer. Just expect there to be a lot of changes. The packaging of of the optical system is where the differece are significant but a basic understanding of electrophotography is in order and the xerox texts does cover reverse printing (uses reversed relative electrostatic bias). FYI: when training the trainer I stopped a smart ass FSE cold by tweeking the bias so everything was reversed. Took him 4 hours to swap everthing and not fix it. Allison

28 years, 2 months

486 vs 386 (was Development, round II)

by photze＠batelco.com.bh

Actually, the 486 had different things that made it different from the 386. There's the math-co-processor (DX only), the .8 micron design, (on DX/2 50 and above only), as well as a built in floating point. There's also the ZIF socket on MOST (but not all) 486 motheboards, as companies were using their own designs, some with integrated chip, others with this and that, etc. Tim D. Hotze -----Original Message----- From: jpero(a)cgo.wave.ca <jpero(a)cgo.wave.ca> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Saturday, January 31, 1998 5:34 AM Subject: Re: 486 vs 386 (was Development, round II) > > >And you'll have to pardon my ignorance of the Intel parts after the 8085, > >but why wouldn't a 386 work if the 486 works? (Other than the speed > >difference.) It has always been my impression that few OS's/applications > >need whatever extra software features that differentiate the 486 from the > 386. > > > I believe the 486 was supposed to be just a 386 with a built-in math > co-processor. Then Intel came out with the 486SX. Which was really just a > broken DX, a 486 in which the built-in math co-processor didn't work. > > -- Kirk Not very much difference but 486 is really ahead in getting more of performance usually runs at least 1 cycle per instruction. The 386dx excutes instuctions all over the map between 5 and 15 (guessing). Example: 386dx/387 33mhz bit slower than 486dx 25. Remembering from years gone by in clone/brands world... First, before I'm done, for clock to clock cycles, 286 and 386 is no better at excuting instructions most of time usually but buyer opted for XT's and 286's because Intel was asking Too Much for 386, the 387 chip actually cost 2k at that time. This is why 386 is sooo late becoming popular when win 3.1 came out. At that time, in late 91s loads of users were still on XTs and we upgraded them to either 286 boards (286/20mhz PcMate yuk!) and once in awhile series of 386sx or rare 386dx for other upgrades. Within short time later about half a year boatloads of 386dx 33/40 and few 386sx thrown in now and then were sold for either pc and upgrades when the price is Right Thing. After 93-94ish, things lost their luste n' fun then became very common thing. (yawn) while we sold long series of 486 machines then P5 ever since. I have NOT remembered how CHEAP, useful real and good pc anywhere or when til now. 1~2k CDN gets you *VERY* decent complete P5 or PII machine with 14" color monitor now. I'm kicking PS/1 original 2011 because it has no hd and too little ram and it did sport 1k price tag but! That old days is very interesting time indeed! Jason D. email: jpero(a)cgo.wave.ca Pero, Jason D.

28 years, 2 months

EPROM programmers

by higginbo＠netpath.net

At 08:27 PM 1/30/98, you wrote: >portable and an EPROM eraser for $100. I bought another new that >interfaces to a printer port for $25 at a hamfest. Hey, I'm going to the Charlotte, NC Hamfest in March. Maybe I'll pick one up then. -John Higginbotham- -limbo.netpath.net-

28 years, 2 months

EPROM programmers

by higginbo＠netpath.net

At 02:08 PM 1/30/98 -0800, you wrote: >If you want to build your own, find the 4-volume set of _Ciarcia's Circuit >Cellar_ (or find the corresponding late-70's issue of _BYTE_) and look >at some of his designs. Heck, if I could do all that, I wouldn't be asking about them. :) I never got into electronics too much, just one class in high school, and I have big clumsy hands when it comes to soldering irons. But thanks to everyone for providing information on this subject. Who knows? Maybe once I get a programmer, I'll start burning my hands again. :) -John Higginbotham- -limbo.netpath.net-

28 years, 2 months

Development, round II

by bwit＠pobox.com

IIRC they started officially calling it Warp with V2.0, the first release following the Microsoft/IBM breakup. Bob ---------- From: Kip Crosby[SMTP:engine@chac.org] Sent: Friday, January 30, 1998 10:40 AM To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers Subject: Re: Re[4]: Development, round II At 12:34 1/30/98 GMT, you wrote: >BTW What is Warp? Is it the OS/2 windowing system? If so, why would I >want to use it at all, let alone on a 286? ;-) Warp is OS/2v3. You couldn't use it on a 286, but if you had, say, a 486/33 -- do pardon me for mentioning a nine-year-old part -- it would begin to be worth playing with. My copy of Warp is still very much to hand, and I think anyone who can scrounge up an appropriate computer should run it (for a while) if they have the opportunity, because it's a real education. ____________________________________________________________ Kip Crosby, honcho, mechanic and sole proprietor, Kip's Garage http://www.kipsgarage.com: rumors, tech tips and philosophy for the trenches Coming Spring '98: The Windows 98 Bible by Kip Crosby and Fred Davis!

28 years, 2 months

Ricoh-based laser printers

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<There are _very_ few good books on laser printers - and the manufacturers <do NOT supply decent technical manual in my experience. I found a book at <a charity shop (thrift store?) called 'Electrophotography' that gives a Copiers are the same technology save for the imaging systems. I should know I had an engineering finger in every laser printer with a DEC label starting with the LN01 (Xerox XP12) through the 2250 series and my specialty was the over 8PPM Ricoh engines. Allison

28 years, 2 months

Point Four, Anadex, C-64 questions

by cgregory＠lrbcg.com

At the thrifts they are always priced at $50. or greater. The Adam is three pieces, and two of the pieces are on the large size. Those doing the pricing at the thrifts seem to equate size (and number of pieces) with price, so these systems tend to be priced higher than average. If you want one and can find one locally for $50 or less, then you should probably grab it. You can find them advertised on the net for less, but the shipping costs will kill any savings. BTW, don't make the mistake of leaving the printer behind if the pieces happen to be priced separately. The power supply for the computer is in the printer so you need it to power the system. Also the data tapes are non-standard and are becoming harder to come by. Cliff Gregory cgregory(a)lrbcg.com -----Original Message----- From: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> To: Cgregory <Cgregory> Date: Friday, January 30, 1998 3:43 AM Subject: Re: Point Four, Anadex, C-64 questions >At 08:36 PM 1/29/98 -0800, you wrote: >>> Also, what's a fair price for a Coleco Adam system: 2 keyboards, memory >>> box with datacassette drives, external numeric keypad with knob (paddle?), >>> and printer. >> >>$25 - $30 as long as it works. > >I have to disagree here... I'd say $50-75, possibly as high as $100 with >the extra parts, depending on how badly one wants one. (Again, assuming >it's working.) Mind you, that's what I'd feel comfortable selling it, >wihtout feeling like I'd ripped someone off. I don't know if I'd pay that >much right now, but catch me in a good month... >

28 years, 2 months

Portables with printers attached (was Re: Interesting Find)

by kaikal＠MICROSOFT.com

Ya, that was the IBM PC Convertible. There's a picture of one with the printer attached at http://www.geocities.com/~compcloset/IBMPCConvertible.htm. Kai > -----Original Message----- > From: PG Manney [SMTP:manney@nwohio.nwohio.com] > Sent: Friday, January 30, 1998 5:14 PM > To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers > Subject: Re: Interesting Find > > > (Sharp PC-7100) > > > Notice how the handle can slide towards the back so it's off-center? > > Notice the little metal inserts along the top edge of the back? There's > a > > printer (I've only got one) that attaches to the back for portability. > > Didn't the IBM Portable (or convertible...whatever) do that?

28 years, 2 months

Commodore Cable

by foxnhare＠goldrush.com

From: Joe <rigdonj(a)intellistar.net> Subject: More stuff [snip!] > Also got a strange Commodore cable. It has what looks like a double > ended HP-IB connector one end and a card edge connector on the other. All > the connectors have 24 contacts. Both ends have a heavy braided ground > strap. It looks like it's about 2 foot long. Any one know what this is >for? That is a PET to IEEE-488 cable, used to interface Commodore IEEE-488 Printers, Modems and Disk Drives to the PET/CBM, B-128 or P-500 series computers. They are getting hard to come by so if you think you may get a Commodore PET/CBM/B/P computer one day I would advise you hang onto it. Larry Anderson -- -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+- Visit our web page at: http://www.goldrush.com/~foxnhare/ Call our BBS (Silicon Realms BBS 300-2400 baud) at: (209) 754-1363 -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-

28 years, 2 months

Development, round II

by manney＠nwohio.nwohio.com

> Nope, xt286 was a way to put a cheap system of slightly higher performance > out there using slower parts. ...as with the 8088 vs 8086 and 386SX vs DX

28 years, 2 months

Win 3.0

by manney＠nwohio.nwohio.com

> I saw a package of Win 2.0 in a surplus store here if anyone really wants > it I'll pick it up. No docs just the set of disks. I'd love it, if it's super cheap. Thanks. manney(a)nwohio.com

28 years, 2 months

Interesting Find

by manney＠nwohio.nwohio.com

(Sharp PC-7100) > Notice how the handle can slide towards the back so it's off-center? > Notice the little metal inserts along the top edge of the back? There's a > printer (I've only got one) that attaches to the back for portability. Didn't the IBM Portable (or convertible...whatever) do that?

28 years, 2 months

Development, round II

by manney＠nwohio.nwohio.com

> Speaking of polygonical manholes, does anyone know where to get a copy of > turtle logo for older macs? Or, perhaps even better, a cartridge version > for one of the 6502 machines (Atari, c64, etc.)? (This is for my niece who > is probably about ready to at least watch logo pgms.) > > At 01:06 PM 1/29/98 GMT, you wrote: > >indeed round because they then won't fall down the hole if you drop > >them. But other shapes share this property - triangular manholes are > > You may have triangular manholes (and, I assume, covers), but I disagree > with the statement that they won't fall in. (Mind you, they may not be > *likely* to, but that doesn't mean they won't.) > > Consider any regular (is that the right term?) polygon (i.e., all sides, > angles are equal). > > For an odd number of sides: imagine a line from an angle to the midpoint of > the opposite side. Imagine a second line, from that same angle to either > end of the opposite side. You've just created a right triangle (imaginary > lines, half the opposite side) wherein the first imaginary line *must* be > shorter than your second line. Put your first line parallel to the ground, > line up the manhole vertically above the corresponding second line on the > manhole, and drop. > > For an even number of sides: Do the same thing, only the reverse (opposite > angle and connected side, etc.) > > Oh, make sure there's no one down below before dropping *please* > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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.crl.com/~sinasohn/ >

28 years, 2 months

Off-topic again (Waz: Military Computer Books...)

by manney＠nwohio.nwohio.com

<snip> However - we better watch our step as this is > a clip from email I received from the Sam Ismail about information like > this > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Once again, you've perpetuated off-topic non-sense thus <snip> 'Scuse me, but... No matter what the private differences...no matter the language used...perhaps private e-mail should stay private. I am uncomfortable at your sharing Sam's private opinions with everyone. Perhaps I'm defending Sam's feeling needlessly (Not meaning to do that, as Sam can do it himself without my unsolicited help), but defending my interests as well -- I, too send private e-mail to list members. If the discussion on this listserv continues to degenerate to that level -- and with the constant name-calling -- I, for one, will not feel that my interests are well-served by subscribing. manney(a)nwohio.com

28 years, 2 months

Development, round II

by jfoust＠threedee.com

On my web site, I express my hopes to develop software to help rescue old cassette data by digitizing the tapes. I'm still hunting for specifications of the old formats. I just got a box full of Altair-era cassettes on loan. I plan to digitize them now and rescue the data later. - John Jefferson Computer Museum <http://www.threedee.com/jcm>

28 years, 2 months

toner cleaning

by jfoust＠threedee.com

>Anyone here ever study >moon shining? Fasinating subject (except to Sam of course). Shore! And I can even tie these threads together in a relevant fashion. At a regular auction I'd once visit, I could pick up computer and video equipment for a song, and once I got a handmade, Prohibition-era copper still for $50, and met the guy whose grandfather made it. :-) - John

28 years, 2 months

Development, round II

by agammuto＠konics.com

If I remember correctly, IBM released the XT 286 when the second generation PC/AT (with a faster clock - wasn't it 8 MHz?) came out. It was my impression then that the XT286 was an XT case with the older original AT motherboard inside. -----Original Message----- From: Mike Allison <mallison(a)konnections.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Thursday, January 29, 1998 10:04 PM Subject: Re: Development, round II >Tony: > >I just seem to remember _something_ about the XT286 that made me avoid >it for true 286 stuff. Maybe it was the memory. Most after market AT >boards had room for a meg or two. Maybe it was the 640... > >-Mike > >Tony Duell wrote: > >> I've not got the XT-286 techref to hand, so I can't look at the >> schematics. But I seem to remember that it's _very_ similar to the PC/AT >> - it's a lot closer to that machine than to the XT. There are 2 DMA >> controllers, 2 interrupt controllers, the 8042 keyboard controller (so it >> takes an AT keyboard), etc. My thoughts when I looked at the schematics >> were that it was a repackaged AT. Of course they could have missed out >> the extra reset logic, but I doubt it. >> >> It does use a non-standard motherboard, though. The memory is a little >> odd - 128K in DIPs (4 off 64K*4, 2 off 64K*1 for the parrity) and 2 256K >> SIMMs for a total of 640K. >> >> > >> > I guess.... >> > >> > -Mike >> >> -tony >

28 years, 2 months

Update on finds

by Philip.Belben＠powertech.co.uk

> > Sun SPAREprinter model QA-6, anyone know how to do a self > > print test on this unit I can not find any buttons or anything; > > It will not do much unless you have it connected to a SPARCstation > running NeWSprint. The SPARCstation also requires a special S-bus card to > interface to the printer. > > In other words, you have either a worthless printer, or a good excuse to > go get yourself a SPARCstation. Oh, come off it! Surely there must be some way of finding out the protocol and building an interface and/or writing drivers for another machine! Which reminds me - I have a couple of Diablo 630 printers with ECS daisywheels which have strange edge connectors on the back. I am told this is a Qume Sprint 3 interface - has anyone got a technical spec.? Philip.

28 years, 2 months

Development, round II

by Philip.Belben＠powertech.co.uk

> I looked in my never used copy of os2 version 1.3 standard edition and found > no mention of rexx so maybe it arrived in version 2.x but i'm not opening my > shrinkwrapped version to find out! minimum requirements for 1.3 are a 286, > 2meg, and 12 meg of hdd space. Worth a try then. But am I right in thinking that the AT doesn't implement all the 286 modes properly? I'm sure the XT286 doesn't.

28 years, 2 months

Update on finds

by KFergason＠aol.com

In a message dated 1/30/98 6:49:52 AM Central Standard Time, Philip.Belben(a)powertech.co.uk writes: > > In other words, you have either a worthless printer, or a good excuse to > > go get yourself a SPARCstation. > > Oh, come off it! Surely there must be some way of finding out the > protocol and building an interface and/or writing drivers for another > machine! > umm, the Sparcprinters are pretty useless without the card and the software. They really are dumb printers. I might have an old CD of NeWSprint, but then you might have licensing issues to deal with. Kelly KFergason(a)aol.com

28 years, 2 months

eBay and online auctions

by Philip.Belben＠powertech.co.uk

Tony Duell wrote: > I suspect the real collectables will be the really obscure machines - > development systems, parallel machines, experimental machines, etc. No > idea if any will ever turn up second-hand, alas. Whyever not? You got a DAP didn't you? Philip.

28 years, 2 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