Hi all,
I am currently developing an emulator for the HHC (http://pockemul.free.fr).
I have the main unit running quite correctly (thanks to Tony Duell
schematics).
The main goal is to emulate all extensions. I have made the RL-p1004A Rom
dump with snapBASIC, but it is the only extension I own.
I you have other extensions (plotter, RLP-1005 printer, video, serial ..)
and snapBASIC, I'm interested in those ROM.
I read all information about the HHC on this mailing list. If you have any
other technical stuff .
Regards
Remy
Let's see...
We've had the discussion about the Raspberry Pi, and how it doesn't have
enough pins...
We talked about the i386and how no modern UNIX supports it anymore and
clearly this is a vast conspiracy by Microsoft...
We've had the discussion about how awful / lazy / stupid modern
developers and the kids on my lawn are...
And the discussion about how great / awful functional programming is
(oh, and Object Orientedprogramming). Outcome: C is the best, as usual...
Oh, and the discussion about how teachers are useless...
And a new one: discussion about eBooks vs. real paper books. Exciting
and new!
We also talked about how modern "PeeCee" (see, if you spell it funny
that emphasizes your point) hardware is all terrible and falls apart if
you look at it...
Don't forget the discussion about "tablets" and how they will never
catch on...
We've done the discussion about USPS and how anything you send via it
will be destroyed by monkeys in costumes or get lost...
We've come full circle around to X and how useful it is/ how people
don't need it...
I *think* that based on prior history (and correct me if I'm wrong) that
the next subject should be about how USB is not, infact, a "bus" and is
stupid and awful and can't be interfaced to a ZX Spectrum and therefore
is a failure oh God make it stop make it stop make it stop.
- Josh
As another sideline in my vintage computing, I've been wanting to get
a Xenix 2.3.4 system set up. No good reason, just because I think it
would be fun. I used it briefly early in my career so I have a soft
spot for it despite it's massive amounts of cruft and breakage. O_o I
currently have the base OS & Developer Kit set up in emulation. My
goal, unlikely though it is, is to get as complete a Xenix system as
possible up and running on an old 386 or 486 class laptop.
However, the various unbundled bits are rare as which ever proverb you
care to use.
The unbundled kits I'm still looking for are these:
386 Developer kit 2.3.1 (I have 2.3.0d)
CGI 1.1.0
Text Processing 2.3.0 (nroff & friends)
Manual Pages 2.3.0
VP/ix 1.2.0 vpix (run MS-DOS apps slowly.)
TCP/IP Runtime 1.2.0 tcprt (it'd be fun to run Lynx!) (Depends on Streams)
TCP/IP Development 1.0.1 tcpdev
Streams Runtime 1.0.0 streamsrt
Streams Toolkit 1.0.0 streamstk
Of course apps like Word, Multiplan, FoxPro & etc would be wonderful
if unlikely as well.
My budget is somewhere between slim and none.
Can anyone assist or point me in the right direction?
Thanks!
William
--
Live like you will never die, love like you've never been hurt, dance
like no-one is watching.
Alex White
I was contacted by Gary Berg about selling his late fathers Osborne computer systems and parts.
His father was a local Osborne computer repair guy in Orange County, CA, but not employed by Osborne.
During his time, he acquired hundreds of spare parts, and bought even more when Osborne went out of business.
Because of this, he has lots of parts, some brand new, never used.
This includes floppy drives, motherboards, keyboards, software, manuals, magazines, and even entire computers in the box, never opened.?
Almost entirely Osborne 01 and 01a related. Some Executive parts.
I can go back and look at stuff, but it is 30 miles away.
Most will eventually go on eBay, unless you get there first. Yes, they will ship.
Download pictures here (19 pictures, 4MB in total)
http://oldcomputers.net/temp/osborne-collection.zip
Contact Gary directly if interested in some or all -? garyvwguy at hotmail.com
Hi, All,
Going through stuff on the shelf and I've run across a couple of
486-based fully-integrated LCD/touchscreen machines. One is a SCAN
Corporation SCANtouch Model 3000, the other is a Planar Systems box.
Similarities include limited memory (2x 72-pin SIMM sockets on the
SCANtouch or 4x 30-pin SIMM sockets on the Planar, both with
"double-sided SIMM" support, so 64MB or 32MB max respectively), one
ISA socket (no PCI), onboard NE2000, serial, parallel, 2.5" PATA
disk... these systems will run MS-DOS, of course, and Win95 (the touch
screen on the SCANtouch is old enough that it apparently doesn't work
with Win98 mouse drivers, according to forum posts I dug up). I
really don't care about running DOS or Win95 on a touchscreen/LCD
machine, and the practical alternative is some flavor of Linux or
UNIX. What I'm having difficulty digging up is when the break from
low-mem/pre-Pentium systems happened and what distros are on which
side of the divide. RedHat 7/8/9 require a Pentium and 64MB minimum
>from what I can research/remember. The last time I ran Linux on a
486, it was Yggdrasil (and before that, some early form of Slackware
on a 386).
So... anyone have a "go-to" Linux distro for sticking on a 486? I
know RedHat 5.2 will work - that's what's on my PS/2-E (w/486SLC and
12MB of free mem I was recently discussing). Any other choices? At
one time, when a Dell P-133 Latitude laptop was my main machine, I ran
Solaris 7 on it (because it was a better choice than Linux at the
time) even though it still had some issues (and workarounds) with the
NeoMagic video chipset and the 3Com 3C589 PCMCIA NIC. I suspect this
is likely to have similar "challenges". I've dug up full specs on the
Scantouch 3000 innards - PCM-4890 integrated CPU board, NE2000
(Realtek RTL8019) Ethernet, C&T 65545 video chipset w/800x600 max LCD
resolution, Sharp LM10V33 VGA (640x480) 10.4" color LCD, VIA VT82C496G
chipset, , PC104 sockets... so I have little concern about getting
*something* working with it.
Getting 10-year-old RedHat working on a Pentium-class machine isn't a
real challenge, but it's been long enough since I've really fiddled
with 486s that specific memories of system configuration are getting a
bit fuzzy. At one time, over 15 years ago, it was a daily thing
knowing the ins and outs of what the 486 could and couldn't do, before
CPUs and memory and clock speeds took off like a rocket, and when 4MB
was ordinary, but more than 16MB was uncomfortably expensive for hobby
gear.
Helpful suggestions wanted.
Thanks,
-ethan
From: Fred Cisin
Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2013 1:19 PM
> Should we define Esperanto as a "living human language"?
That is a question that has arisen in the context of creole studies and
the study of linguistic universals in linguistics. Esperanto as defined
by Zamenhof violates several apparent universals of human language, and
speakers have smoothed out some of those rough edges.
In addition, there are reports of native speakers of Esperanto, defined
as children for whom it is the first language, learned in environments
in which only Esperanto was spoken. These reports have been questioned,
as one might imagine, but I personally have not followed up on them as
they fall outside my personal interests.
So: If there are children who speak it natively, then the answer to
Fred's question is certainly "yes". Given the very large community for
whom it is a useful second language, with literature as well, then the
answer is "yes, probably". If it were restricted (as it is not) to a
minimal vocabulary with no potential for growth, then the answer would
be "certainly not".
I'm of the "yes, probably" camp most of the time.
Rich Alderson
Vintage Computing Sr. Systems Engineer
Vulcan, Inc.
505 5th Avenue S, Suite 900
Seattle, WA 98104
mailto:RichA at vulcan.com
mailto:RichA at LivingComputerMuseum.orghttp://www.LivingComputerMuseum.org/
... 8/L ... ???
-----Urspr?ngliche Nachricht-----
Von: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org] Im
Auftrag von cctalk-request at classiccmp.org
Gesendet: Sonntag, 23. Juni 2013 19:00
An: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Betreff: cctalk Digest, Vol 118, Issue 73
Send cctalk mailing list submissions to
cctalk at classiccmp.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://www.classiccmp.org/mailman/listinfo/cctalk
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
cctalk-request at classiccmp.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
cctalk-owner at classiccmp.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of cctalk digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Pile on X11 - Re: Devs should be testing on slow machines
- Re: What versions of Linux (or UNIX) are good on old 486 boxes?
(Liam Proven)
2. Re: Devs should be testing on slow machines - Re: What
versions of Linux (or UNIX) are good on old 486 boxes? (Liam Proven)
3. Re: Devs should be testing on slow machines - Re: What
versions of Linux (or UNIX) are good on old 486 boxes? (Liam Proven)
4. Re: Devs should be testing on slow machines - Re: What
versions of Linux (or UNIX) are good on old 486 boxes? (Liam Proven)
5. RE: Circuit Cellar site... (Andrew Lynch)
6. Re: Which PDP-8 is this? (ebay: 261232211533) (Vincent Slyngstad)
7. wireless monitoring - need suggestions please (Tom Uban)
8. Re: Devs should be testing on slow machines - Re: What
versions of Linux (or UNIX) are good on old 486 boxes? (Tothwolf)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 14:07:01 +0100
From: Liam Proven <lproven at gmail.com>
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: Pile on X11 - Re: Devs should be testing on slow machines
- Re: What versions of Linux (or UNIX) are good on old 486 boxes?
Message-ID:
<CAMTenCHoPEiMG32+CbxDUu_0Seuxa+mCBuJJmCfzBo7Z2rSeBg at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
On 22 June 2013 04:04, Toby Thain <toby at telegraphics.com.au> wrote:
> On 21/06/13 9:59 AM, Liam Proven wrote:
>>
>> On 21 June 2013 05:09, Toby Thain<toby at telegraphics.com.au> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 20/06/13 10:22 PM, Liam Proven wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> Absolutely. But trying to be all things to all men leads to bloat.
>>>
>>> You're not seriously trying to tell us that X11 - which was designed
>>> to run, and ran, on machines older than some people subscribed to
>>> this list - is "bloated"?
>>
>> /Modern/ X.11 as used on modern Linux? Yes. It's
>> indirectly-composited via OpenGL and a plethora of layers.
>
> I haven't suffered by this inefficiency myself, but I'll take your
> word for it.
It works quite well for me. I merely report what others are saying.
> (Say, don't you spend more time using Windows than Linux?)
Me? Good gracious, no. My main PC doesn't even have a working copy of
Windows on it and neither did the previous one. My notebooks do, mainly for
BIOS flashing but occasionally for reproducing clients'
issues.
These days, I pretty much only use Windows if someone is paying me to.
>> Versus Wayland...
>>
>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=x_wayland_situatio
>> n&num=1
>>
>> http://askubuntu.com/questions/11537/why-is-wayland-better
>>
>> Versus Mir...
>>
>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/03/05/canonical_mir_announcement/
>>
>> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=MTMzMTQ
>
> So basically they've decided to do what NEXTSTEP (1989) and OS X (GPU
> acceleration since 10.2: 2001) did.
A fair summary, yes.
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 14:15:05 +0100
From: Liam Proven <lproven at gmail.com>
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: Devs should be testing on slow machines - Re: What
versions of Linux (or UNIX) are good on old 486 boxes?
Message-ID:
<CAMTenCHMTGcsqpssTZR-9SF7+p7HteS7Ljg5WqsQR3bnPi1Jhg at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
On 22 June 2013 18:29, Tothwolf <tothwolf at concentric.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Jun 2013, Liam Proven wrote:
>>
>> On 21 June 2013 15:21, Tothwolf <tothwolf at concentric.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Most servers do not show up in browser and http server estimates
>>
>>
>> Who's talking about servers? We all know Linux is really strong in
>> servers. No argument there.
>
> We are talking about usage share.
Are we?
I thought I was talking about networkable X.11, which by and large
doesn't really apply to servers. I don't know what you feel that we're
talking about.
> Just as you cannot accurately measure the
> number of servers out there that make use Linux, you similarly cannot
> /accurately/ measure the number of workstations which make use of Linux.
Definte "accurately", with your idea of acceptable error bars, and
compare those to the accuracy of figures for Macs and Windows.
*I* find the figures acceptable, myself.
> Those that tamper with the headers more often than not either strip the
> useragent or replace it with their own useragent.
[[Citation needed]]
More to the point, some kind of evidence that this is a significant
factor. TBH it sounds like special pleading to me: "we don't know how
many desktop Linux users are, we can't know, but probably there are
more than reported and logged because lots of them are _hiding_."
>> Either way, such things would affect /all/ users on all platforms, no?
>
> Yes, however given Microsoft's market share, it is going to skew the
numbers
> for operating systems such as Linux more than it would for Microsoft
> Windows.
You'll have to walk me through that reasoning. I do not understand or
see what you mean at all.
>>> That isn't even taking into account that many Linux users end up
>>> configuring their browsers to report false user agent strings
>>
>> Very very rare, IME.
>>
>>> in order to force the numerous broken websites out
>>> there to still work with browsers other than Firefox and Internet
>>> Explorer
>>> under MS Windows.
>>
>> That way something the hardcore did in the 1990s. It's unheard-of now.
>> I see a broken site a few times a /decade./
>
> No, it isn't unheard of, rather it is actually quite a common practice due
> to bonehead server administrators running software such as 'mod_security'
> along with rules that only allow browsers with "popular" useragents to
> access sites (on the false premise that the other useragents are faked
> and/or are "hackers" trying to break into their website, and that
"blocking"
> them makes their website more secure). Assuming that this is a rare 1990s
> practice and that no-one really does this anymore would be rather foolish.
> In fact, I ran into this issue with Consumer Reports website last year and
> took the time to try to educate them. Their reply? "We outsource our web
> administration and they can't fix it."
Again, [[citation needed]]. I've been a desktop Linux user full-time
for a decade now, and part-time for about 6-7y before that. I have
encountered this problem so very, *very* seldom it is not a factor and
has not been this century.
> Moreover, these browser-based usage share meters all share another common
> fault -- they only make one report per IP address per sample window, which
> is usually 24 hours (although some only take one sample per IP every 7
> days). This means if you have a NAT router (who doesn't?) and have say a
> Mac, and Windows PC, and a Linux workstation, only the first used in that
> sample window is going to be recorded, and there is no real way of knowing
> which website you visit is doing the sampling. If you also have a
smartphone
> connected to your NAT via WiFi, then that smartphone's useragent is going
to
> be the one recorded for your IP during the sample window. This affects
usage
> numbers for the "less common" operating systems more than the "more
popular"
> operating systems, because operating systems such as Microsoft Windows
have
> a larger market share.
That one is interesting, I'll give you. I've not heard that before and
you do have a possible point there, although once again, I'd like to
see some actual evidence that it was occurring.
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 14:18:50 +0100
From: Liam Proven <lproven at gmail.com>
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: Devs should be testing on slow machines - Re: What
versions of Linux (or UNIX) are good on old 486 boxes?
Message-ID:
<CAMTenCFdCMDXKKrV9-6whaTK7H_VbbRHFiR_T-tW3vnAE9tw3A at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
On 23 June 2013 00:19, Mouse <mouse at rodents-montreal.org> wrote:
>>>> [...] the numerous broken websites out there to still work with
>>>> browsers other than Firefox and Internet Explorer under MS Windows.
>
>>> That way something the hardcore did in the 1990s. It's unheard-of
>>> now. I see a broken site a few times a /decade./
>
> Tell that to Facebook, which still refuses to serve up any kind of
> content to me when I try to script-fetch an image someone links me to
> or some such, instead returning a redirect to a "you're using an
> unsupported browser, use one of this half-dozen" (all, of course, are
> thoroughly bloated monstrosities). I haven't bothered trying providing
> a lying User-Agent: header, largely because it would be fairly
> inconvenient for me to capture a sample header to base my forgery on.
>
> I think Facebook hardly counts as "unheard-of".
[1] You do realise that you are over-trimming (*again*) and replying
to 2 different people in a single message here, don't you?
In this one, you're answering me, via an answer to someone else who
quoted my text.
[2] You're trying to do something which FB is specifically trying to
block -- IOW you're not using a browser, you're trying to scrape
images directly via a script -- and you're complaining that FB's
efforts to prevent /exactly the sort of thing that you're doing/ are
successful?
[Mocking laughter] Yeah, right.
>> I ran into this issue with Consumer Reports website last year and
>> took the time to try to educate them. Their reply? "We outsource
>> our web administration and they can't fix it."
>
> "You need to fire them and hire _competent_ web admins." (Yes, I
> realize that's preaching to the choir. :/)
>
>> This means if you have a NAT router (who doesn't?)
>
> I don't. Well, I do have NAT set up, but I don't have anything in the
> NATted range except for a SIP phone.
All this proves is that you're a weirdo who likes to do things the
hard way. As was evinced earlier in your reply. No news there.
>> and have say a Mac, and Windows PC, and a Linux workstation, only the
>> first used in that sample window is going to be recorded, [...] This
>> affects usage numbers for the "less common" operating systems more
>> than the "more popular" operating systems, because operating systems
>> such as Microsoft Windows have a larger market share.
>
> Actually, if you think of it as measuring "number of uses" rather than
> "number of installed hosts", it's measuring exactly what it should be
> measuring. (Measuring it imprecisely, because of the "first hit within
> the sample window" effect, but that's what it's measuring.)
A fair point. (Also, in saying so, I hope that I am showing that I am
not being biased or taking an ad-hominem approach.)
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 14:20:22 +0100
From: Liam Proven <lproven at gmail.com>
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: Devs should be testing on slow machines - Re: What
versions of Linux (or UNIX) are good on old 486 boxes?
Message-ID:
<CAMTenCFpmAhzsvY=STu4dg-RwCxGCVXm9f-CdaLztRborL88Og at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
On 23 June 2013 02:40, Alexander Schreiber <als at thangorodrim.de> wrote:
> Well, I _did_ try to use a MacBook as a laptop at work once. I gave it
> back in disgust after two months because I couldn't get _work_ done with
> the darn thing. Returned to my Thinkpad running Linux and work got done
> again ;-)
So long as you have something that works for you, good.
I must say, though, that most of the old-time Linux users that I know
-- the determined hardcore who were using it in the 1990s, who've been
on it for a decade or more -- have almost *all* switched to Mac OS X
now.
> But Android solves a different problem: a mobile phone/tablet OS, not
> a workstation OS.
Sure.
But this shows that the approach of getting rid of X.11 is not limited
to a single niche.
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 09:49:44 -0400
From: "Andrew Lynch" <LYNCHAJ at YAHOO.COM>
To: <n8vem at googlegroups.com>
Cc: cctalk at classiccmp.org, 'Oscar Vermeulen' <o.vermeulen at altis.ch>
Subject: RE: Circuit Cellar site...
Message-ID: <002801ce7018$850de750$8f29b5f0$(a)YAHOO.COM>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Woo Hoo! Check out the new article on the N8VEM on Circuit Cellar!
http://circuitcellar.com/featured/diy-single-board-computers/
Oscar has put together the N8VEM articles and has done all the work for the
publication.
Congratulations Oscar! This is wonderful!
Thank you very much! Have a nice day!
Andrew Lynch
From: Oscar Vermeulen [mailto:o.vermeulen at altis.ch]
Sent: Friday, June 14, 2013 4:05 PM
To: Andrew Lynch
Subject: Circuit Cellar site...
Andrew,
Wow! The N8VEM article is on their web site!
Cheers,
Oscar.
--
Oscar Vermeulen <o.vermeulen at altis.ch>
Altis Investment Management AG
Poststrasse 18, 6300 Zug, Switzerland
T: +41-415601311
www.altis.ch
This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the
individual or entity named herein. If you are not the herein named addressee
you should not disseminate, distribute, copy or otherwise make use of this
e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received
this e-mail by mistake, and delete this e-mail from your system.
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 08:05:40 -0700
From: Vincent Slyngstad <vrs at msn.com>
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: Which PDP-8 is this? (ebay: 261232211533)
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP146A4AF31C109CE00B58429B2890 at phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
reply-type=response
From: Jos Dreesen: Saturday, June 22, 2013 11:19 PM
> On 06/22/2013 11:38 PM, Vincent Slyngstad wrote:
>> I did hear of the existence of at least one other. Basically, I had
>> speculated that
>> I had the only one, and someone said "No you don't.". I forget who said
>> that,
>> though.
>
> Not that it is important, but I also have a BM8L .
> I send you paper copies of the documentation, but that was already some
years
> before. ( ~2004)
Cool, and thanks! My memory is so odd for these sorts of things. (I've
thought
of cool things
to do CAD drawings for, only to find them already finished years prior, and
I'd
forgotten doing
them.) Your posting reminds me that I was waiting for the BM8L drawings at
one
point, so I
have no doubt you are correct. Perhaps I had munged it in my memory with
the
BM812i
drawings.
> I could use a pic of the innards, for when I actually get around to doing
> something with it !
I'll probably have to pull it out when I move that rack. I'll try to
remember
to snap a photo
then, if I don't get to it before.
> Further rare PDP8 items in my home : a fully maxed up 8A. (128K memory,
RL01
> drive, and FPP-8A )
Nice. I have the memory for mine, but I don't think I have an FPP-8A
(unless it
is like those
CAD drawings).
> Furthermore some omnibus boards for hardware acceleration of an OCR
> application.
I wonder about the Omnibus boards used in CNC, medical, other applications.
As
far as
I can tell there's no-one collecting and documenting those.
Vince
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 10:43:40 -0500
From: Tom Uban <uban at ubanproductions.com>
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Subject: wireless monitoring - need suggestions please
Message-ID: <51C717AC.9040503 at ubanproductions.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I'm wanting to add some wireless monitoring of temperatures and power
on various devices throughout my brewery and I suspect someone on this
list is up to date on the technology which would work well and be a
good low cost starting point. I am mostly looking for guidance on the
best board to use for interconnect. I will take care of the programming
and any hardware modifications and/or additions. Is zigbee what I want?
I have fermenters, chillers, condensing units coolers, etc throughout
the building, so minimally one or so A/D inputs and possibly a couple
of digital inputs on the board should suit my needs. In the long run I
want to check on status from my smartphone as well as have the system
alert me if there is an alarm condition. If the "base station" is either
connected to our local network or plugs into a PC/mac, that should be
workable.
Thanks in advance...
--tom
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2013 10:52:11 -0500 (CDT)
From: Tothwolf <tothwolf at concentric.net>
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: Devs should be testing on slow machines - Re: What
versions of Linux (or UNIX) are good on old 486 boxes?
Message-ID:
<alpine.DEB.2.00.1306230950340.30736 at brioche.invalid.domain>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII; format=flowed
On Sun, 23 Jun 2013, Liam Proven wrote:
> On 22 June 2013 18:29, Tothwolf <tothwolf at concentric.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Jun 2013, Liam Proven wrote:
>>> On 21 June 2013 15:21, Tothwolf <tothwolf at concentric.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Most servers do not show up in browser and http server estimates
>>>
>>> Who's talking about servers? We all know Linux is really strong in
>>> servers. No argument there.
>>
>> We are talking about usage share.
>
> Are we?
>
> I thought I was talking about networkable X.11, which by and large
> doesn't really apply to servers. I don't know what you feel that we're
> talking about.
It certainly seems like you were, until you just now claimed claimed
otherwise...
: In-Reply-To: <201306211137.HAA10837 at Chip.Rodents-Montreal.ORG>
: Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 14:44:00 +0100
: Message-ID:
<CAMTenCGtZVXaRstyrQ6_uRT7+vtdUSY1Nd-deXeNHg2PeE57sA at mail.gmail.com>
: Subject: Re: Devs should be testing on slow machines - Re: What versions
of Linux (or UNIX) are good on old 486 boxes?
: From: Liam Proven <lproven at gmail.com>
:
[SNIP]
: There are evidence-backed estimates.
:
http://askubuntu.com/questions/80379/how-many-ubuntu-users-are-there-worldwi
de
: 12-20 million.
: Various other measures estimate around 0.8% to 1.25% of the market:
: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems
: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_uptake#Measuring_desktop_adoption
[SNIP]
: Mac usage is /way/ higher.
: http://www.numberof.net/number%C2%A0of%C2%A0mac%C2%A0users/
:
http://techcrunch.com/2012/06/11/apple-there-are-now-66-million-mac-users-40
-run-lion-22-million-copies-of-lion-shipped/
[SNIP]
>> Just as you cannot accurately measure the
>> number of servers out there that make use Linux, you similarly cannot
>> /accurately/ measure the number of workstations which make use of Linux.
>
> Definte "accurately", with your idea of acceptable error bars, and
> compare those to the accuracy of figures for Macs and Windows.
>
> *I* find the figures acceptable, myself.
>
>> Those that tamper with the headers more often than not either strip the
>> useragent or replace it with their own useragent.
>
> [[Citation needed]]
Look it up yourself. I've already done so (many years ago -- Wikipedia
doesn't write itself) and I certainly don't feel the need to look it up
for you. Hint: AT&T, Comcast, COX, Time Warner, and :gasp: AOL have all
done this at various times and various other ISPs (transparent proxies)
and some webhosts (load balancing, caching) /still/ do.
> More to the point, some kind of evidence that this is a significant
> factor. TBH it sounds like special pleading to me: "we don't know how
> many desktop Linux users are, we can't know, but probably there are
> more than reported and logged because lots of them are _hiding_."
Straw Man.
[[Insert giant ASCII middle finger]]
>>> Either way, such things would affect /all/ users on all platforms, no?
>>
>> Yes, however given Microsoft's market share, it is going to skew the
numbers
>> for operating systems such as Linux more than it would for Microsoft
>> Windows.
>
> You'll have to walk me through that reasoning. I do not understand or
> see what you mean at all.
Let me get this straight...you don't understand how the percentages are
calculated?
>>>> That isn't even taking into account that many Linux users end up
>>>> configuring their browsers to report false user agent strings
>>>
>>> Very very rare, IME.
>>>
>>>> in order to force the numerous broken websites out
>>>> there to still work with browsers other than Firefox and Internet
>>>> Explorer
>>>> under MS Windows.
>>>
>>> That way something the hardcore did in the 1990s. It's unheard-of now.
>>> I see a broken site a few times a /decade./
>>
>> No, it isn't unheard of, rather it is actually quite a common practice
due
>> to bonehead server administrators running software such as 'mod_security'
>> along with rules that only allow browsers with "popular" useragents to
>> access sites (on the false premise that the other useragents are faked
>> and/or are "hackers" trying to break into their website, and that
"blocking"
>> them makes their website more secure). Assuming that this is a rare 1990s
>> practice and that no-one really does this anymore would be rather
foolish.
>> In fact, I ran into this issue with Consumer Reports website last year
and
>> took the time to try to educate them. Their reply? "We outsource our web
>> administration and they can't fix it."
>
> Again, [[citation needed]]. I've been a desktop Linux user full-time
> for a decade now, and part-time for about 6-7y before that. I have
> encountered this problem so very, *very* seldom it is not a factor and
> has not been this century.
You must not get around the web very much, then.
[5 Aug 2012]
: "Our host operates a security perimeter that performs this and other
filtering, the rules simply aren't under our control. The Comodo browser,
based on the Chromium codebase, also sports a u-a that the security
perimeter does not allow through."
:
: "I apologize again for the inconvenience and hope you'll be able to stay
with us."
I still don't know why he mentioned Comodo, since that wasn't what I was
using or asking about. I had reported to them that Firefox (nightly
builds) and Lynx (all versions) were not working with their site.
http://yousefourabi.com/blog/2007/10/blocking-bots-with-mod-security/
: "There are two approaches: 1) Block everything but a pre-approved white
list, 2) Allow everything except a pre-denied black list."
The first approach may not be a workable solution, and as stupid as it
might it, that doesn't stop people from _trying_ anyway.
>> Moreover, these browser-based usage share meters all share another common
>> fault -- they only make one report per IP address per sample window,
which
>> is usually 24 hours (although some only take one sample per IP every 7
>> days). This means if you have a NAT router (who doesn't?) and have say a
>> Mac, and Windows PC, and a Linux workstation, only the first used in that
>> sample window is going to be recorded, and there is no real way of
knowing
>> which website you visit is doing the sampling. If you also have a
smartphone
>> connected to your NAT via WiFi, then that smartphone's useragent is going
to
>> be the one recorded for your IP during the sample window. This affects
usage
>> numbers for the "less common" operating systems more than the "more
popular"
>> operating systems, because operating systems such as Microsoft Windows
have
>> a larger market share.
>
> That one is interesting, I'll give you. I've not heard that before and
> you do have a possible point there, although once again, I'd like to
> see some actual evidence that it was occurring.
http://www.google.com/ ...
End of cctalk Digest, Vol 118, Issue 73
***************************************
Hi!
There are fourteen (14) of the S-100 IDE V2 reorder PCBs available.
http://s100computers.com/My%20System%20Pages/IDE%20Board/My%20IDE%20Card.htm
The S-100 PCBs cost the same as before ($20 each).?
Shipping in the US is $3 for a single PCB and $2 for each additional PCB.?
Shipping internationally is $10 for a single PCB and $3 for each additional
PCB.? This is for the bare basics USPS first class postage with no tracking
or insurance.? The builder assumes all risk of delivery as per usual
arrangement.
If you would like one or more S-100 PCBs please send a PayPal to
LYNCHAJ at YAHOO.COM
Thanks and have a nice day!
Andrew Lynch
A complete "Video Display Terminal Zentec 8392 Operator's Manual", Pub. No. 88-0486-201, Issue A, May 1986 appeared at my recycler. Free for shipping from 85704, USA to first responder.
->CRC
Just cataloguing a small reference card for this item, Google fails to find it
Seems SEED sold the MSI-6800 from adverts I have found
but did they also produce/sell something else?
or is that reference (MP6800) the part number of CPU card of the MSI-6800?
Dave Caroline
Thanks for the information all. I didn't expect anyone to have the
software but you never know unless you ask :)
A few things - the OS & Dev Kit can be found. The torrents & such
suggested up thread are only various versions of the OS. They work in
QEMU with some fd fiddling. I can't get it to run right in Virtual Box
:( which I'd far prefer to use. There are lots of blog posts and
Youtube videos on how to get the OS running in emulation.
My next step in the emulated OS is to get the y2k patches installed as
well as the various ported free software onto the emulated drive for
installation. Lacking a TCP/IP stack probably means I'll have to
somehow do it by serial or by (somehow) creating diskette images with
various software on them. Perhaps with real floppy then dd ing it and
mounting the resulting image?
The other unbundled kits are what is missing. I'd really like the text
processing, streams & TCP/IP kits but they & their licenses seem to
have vanished into the ether.
The only copies of Word and FoxPro that I've found I can not get to
work correctly in Xenix386. They may or may not work correctly in a
later (Unix, Open Desktop or Open Server) version.
One other "just in case" - anyone got a copy of SCO Open Desktop 1.1?
That was about the same time as Xenix386, had X11 & TCP/IP built in
and Ingres DB bundled.
I'll keep plugging away at it in case I get lucky :)
William
--
Live like you will never die, love like you've never been hurt, dance
like no-one is watching.
Alex White
On Fri, 21 Jun 2013 03:22:55 +0100, Liam Proven <lproven at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 20 June 2013 12:16, Alexander Schreiber <als at thangorodrim.de> wrote:
>> >On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 02:23:44AM +0100, Liam Proven wrote:
>>> >>On 15 June 2013 00:14, Peter Corlett<abuse at cabal.org.uk> wrote:
>>>> >> >BeOS was sort of a single user Unix: it was sufficiently POSIXy for me to fire
>>>> >> >up a shell prompt and feel at home, although it did not support multiple users
>>>> >> >at all.
>>> >>
>>> >>For my money -- as someone whose hobby is OSes, basically, and who has
>>> >>played with as many as I can lay hands upon for about 30y now -- BeOS
>>> >>is the most important OS for home/personal computers in the last few
>>> >>decades.
>>> >>
>>> >>Which is, naturally, why it's obscure, dead & forgotten.
>>> >>
>>> >>It had many of the best aspects of xNix -- it was POSIX-like, had a
>>> >>familiar shell, etc. -- but was free of all the decades of cruft
>>> >>around Unix. I mean, Mac OS X is a gorgeous OS, but it's huge, vastly
>>> >>complex, not very flexible or customisable, and it's only quick
>>> >>because it runs on massively powerful hardware.
>>> >>
>>> >>I don't need a network-transparent GUI. I'm sure it's a great thing,
>>> >>but in some 20y of using systems with X.11 available, I've/never/
>>> >>needed that.
>> >
>> >I use that regularly. It is an incredibly useful detail of the way the
>> >X Window system is designed. So you can, e.g. run the process on the
>> >machine where the big pile of data lives and have it displayed on your
>> >workstation. Or run the process on the workstation inside the corporate
>> >security perimeter, but have the display on your laptop in the hotel,
>> >with the connection piped back through ssh.
> I am sure it is very useful /if you need it./ However, I submit that
> the majority of personal computer users do not need it.
>
> Consider: the most popular desktop Unix by an order of magnitude (or
> 2) is Mac OS X. It's outsold all other commercial Unix variants put
> together.
>
> No X.11 and no networkable GUI.
>
> Consider: the most popular Linux by a similar proportion, with many
> hundreds of millions of users is Android. Its GUI is based on OpenGL
> on the framebuffer, with no networkable GUI.
>
> In fact it is fair to say that/only/ deskop/portable/handheld Unix
> variants that*don't* have X.11 have been commercial successes.
>
>>> >>I don't need a multiuser PC. It's mine. I'm the only user. I only need
>>> >>multiuser servers. It's great but it's baggage. Security, sure, some,
>>> >>but not a minicomputer/server OS on my desktop.
>> >
>> >Again, very useful: allows separating access privileges. Quite a bit
>> >of the stuff even on my workstation needs neither full system access
>> >(i.e. root) nor access to my user data.
> Conceded, yes. But Windows shows that this is possible on a
> single-user OS with no multiuser support: it's one user at a time, per
> machine. Yes, there are hacks to make it multiuser -- Terminal Server,
> Winframe, Citrix, and desktop solutions such as Softxpand or BeTwin.
>
> But as standard, it isn't. No vconsoles, no ssh or telnet, nothing.
>
>>> >>I want a solid, multitasking, multithreading OS, running on lots of
>>> >>cores, delivering a fast, responsive experience. I want rich media. I
>>> >>want productivity apps, but Linux and C21 FOSS delivers all I want and
>>> >>more, really. I don't need anything proprietary. I want flexible
>>> >>networking and plug-and-play hardware. I don't need a huge fat
>>> >>dual-slot GPU -- I just want 2 or 3 smallish cheap monitors.
>>> >>
>>> >>Linux is a great server OS, but it's not a great desktop. Never was.
>>> >>It's better than it used to be but it's still not great. It's good
>>> >>enough, no more.
>> >
>> >Works for and gives me all I need. But then my idea of a "graphical desktop
>> >environment" has been "a couple browser windows and 20-50 xterms" for the
>> >last 15+ years;-)
>> >
>> >As usual: different people, different use cases and needs;-)
> Absolutely. But trying to be all things to all men leads to bloat.
>
> To invoke the Pareto Principle, the way to slim, elegant S/W is to
> work out the 20% of the features that are all that 80% of users need.
>
The problem with most of this is that what you either do not realise, or
choose to ignore, is that there is a *very big* set of applications
which have *nothing whatsoever* to do with desktop users or mobile
phones - industrial control systems, traffic control systems, military
systems, all sorts of applications.
These non-desktop, non-mobile phone systems have completely different
requirements, and for many of them the facilities that X-Windows
provides are extremely useful, if not essential.
This isn't the first time you produce strawman arguments like this one.
I don't know why you keep doing it, surely it must be obvious from
reading the list that most people here are not concerned with what the
average consumer needs or wants, or with what is a commercial success in
the consumer arena. What becomes a "commercial success" according to
your definition (sold to millions of average consumers) depends very
little on technical merit and very much on marketing, trends, perceived
coolness, what celebrities do, and so on. There is a huge area of
applications outside of that world where technical merit is actually
important.
/Jonas
On 6/15/2013 10:37 PM, Ben wrote:
> On 6/15/2013 8:48 PM, Cory Smelosky wrote:
>
> > That bothers me too...I'm accumulating adapters and gender > changers
> > though. ;)
> >
> USB has RS232 adapters, now you can have the best of both worlds.
> 2 GHZ download for your 110 baud TTY.
> >> -tony
> Ben.
Only one problem there, most (if not all) EIA-232 adapters for USB won't go below 300 Baud. It is a problem when trying to get the old ASR33 to type things out!
Of course you need to also add two stop bits, but that is pretty easy (as he notes the only place two stop bits were used was for the 33/35 teletypes).
I received this interesting message - I have no affiliation:
______________________________________
For sale:
I have 378 old eMacs, all in one with mice, keyboards & power cords, most colors.
I Have 399 old iMacs, all in one with mice, keyboards ("chicklet" style) & power cords.
$7 ea., min order= 50 units (2 pallets) & you pay truck freight. Email me
msmith at moxproject.com
______________________________________
On Fri, 21 Jun 2013 15:04:39 +0100, Liam Proven <lproven at gmail.com> wrote:
> And as I usually say -- and as usually gets completely ignored -- I am
> sure that the older, less-populist ways of doing things are not going
> to instantly go away. They will still be available, especially in FOSS
> systems, and as long as people want them and use them and are willing
> to either keep them in active maintenance and development, or are
> willing to pay someone to do so, then long may they persist.
Yes, you have said so.
>
> For me, what is interesting is the direction that the mainstream of
> the computer industry is going. It moves like an am?ba: it extends
> exploratory pseudopods in multiple directions at once, and when one of
> them finds an advantage -- or if you like, when it finds a toe-hold in
> some niche -- then the rest of the organism goes that way.
Yes, but you are equating the "mainstream of the computer industry" with
desktop machines, phones and Web servers, more or less. What I mean is
that those parts are a large portion of the computer industry, but not
necessarily the "mainstream". For very many applications of computers,
they are completely irrelevant. It is like saying that Hollywood is the
mainstream of the movie industry. True if you restrict the world to the
US and Europe, but if you look at the world as a whole, it is only a
part of the movie industry.
/Jonas
Can anyone think of a cheap, simple way to connect a DVI-only PC to an
old Apple 17" CRT with only an Apple DA-15 connector?
I have just been given a neat small-form-factor Dell P4 3GHz PC. I
would like to give it to my mother.
Her current computer is an old beige G3 Mac with a 17" Apple display.
I will probably have to fly to visit her, and I can't afford to buy
her a new screen. So, if I could connect the PC to her old monitor,
that would be ideal...
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884
I have a line on a bunch of Wyse 50's in the KC area that may be in
danger of scrapping. Is there anyone interested in a load?
I'm not sure if you need to do much but pick them up or have them shipped.
thanks
Jim
Selling off one of my rarer ram cards
Applied Engineering GSRAM Plus, Expandable to 6MB RAM, Has 1MB On the
card
$100 shipped via USPS Priority Mail or Best offer
Thanks
Steve
Hello list:
Going back on-topic from the recent wave of off-topic posts (that is,
assuming people consider the PDP-11 both classic and on-topic), I have
five PDP-11 questions which I wish to post to the list.
1. Is the bootstrap for the MRV11-D (the MXV11-BF boot ROMs
apparently) "conversational" or "automatic." Conversational being
defined as similar to the BDV11's bootstrap, automatic being, you hit
the boot toggle and the system automatically brings up a <device>.
2. Is there a 22-bit QBUS bus terminator board? (I.e. only a 22-bit
terminator, no bootstrap/ROM, no DMA refresh, et cetera.) If there is
what is it's name?
3. Somewhat tying into the above, but; is there a 22-bit version of
the BDV11 bootstrap ROM/bus terminator board? Because personally I'd
rather deal with a single quad-wide board I've dealt with before, then
deal with a pair of boards I've never even *SEEN* before.
4. This is more an opinion question but... Would trading a KDJ11-BF
(yes, -BF; it has an FPU) for a KDJ11-AC (or -AB with FPU; FPU
required because it took me long enough to get a J-11 with an
FPJ11-AA, I'm going to run my '11/73 with an FPU if it kills me), a
MRV11-D/terminator or 22-bit BDV11, and a DLV11-J be a good trade?
(More on this question later...)
5. What size of wire, and wirewrap tool is the one most best usable
when dealing with the jumpers (and possibly backplane) of a DEC
system? (Specifically, in this case, wirewrap jumpers on various
PDP-11 option boards).
In terms of my question number four; I ask of that trade because I
have a KDJ11-BF and an H9275-A backplane (that's the Q22/Q22
serpentine 9x4 one), as I'm in the process of replacing my PDP-11
system. And -- natrually -- the -BF (being PMI) won't play nice in the
H9275-A. So I would like a trade for a functionally similar set of
devices in this case a KDJ11-AC (or -AB with FPU; read my FPU
statement), some form of bootstrap, and a SLU (the bus terminator
would be nice as I plan on filling up said H9275-A).
Thank you, any who respond,
Christian G.
K4/84 has 2 new drives. Thanks Dave.
ON that success, I pulled the K10, and temp attached a TEAC FD55. No joy
on the boot disk I created (it goes to top left screen with cursor, then
resets), but Gene B had sent me a complete set (I assume HDD restore
set) of K10 disks (again, thanks Gene), and Disk #1 booted the machine.
The same disk does not work in the internal FDD, even though the
internal FDD does the same reset cycle when used with some boot disks.
the existing HDD must partially work.
Anyway, I wonder if someone else has a K10 and could help with HDD
diagnosis. If I leave out the boot disk, the HDD ready light comes on
after a bit, but then the K10 Disk #1 won't boot the system. If I boot
the floppy, the drive ready light never comes on. And, things like
checkbad.com won't find the HDD
And, in either case, I can't hear the ST225 spin up. Should it?
I am perfectly content if the diagnosis is a toasted HDD (expect it, I
do). But, if so, where should I go looking for a spare? I see this on
eBay:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/SEAGATE-ST-225-21MB-MFM-5-25-HH-Hard-Drive-with-ORI…
And I understand it's a gamble, but I assume my options are limited.
Jim
--
Jim Brain
brain at jbrain.comwww.jbrain.com
I'm trying to free up slots in my PDP-11, so I'm looking to remove the DL11's I'm using
and want to replace them with a single 20ma DZ11.? Does anyone have a DZ11 20ma
dist panel they'd part with?
I also seem to have lost my LA34 tractor feed assembly.? Would anyone have a spare
they'd sell?
TIA,
-scott