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

List overview
Download

test-drb

test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org

101090 discussions

Start a nNew thread

APPLEVISION Monitor

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Chris [mailto:mythtech@mac.com] > If BMW doesn't suit your fancy as an example, replace it with > any small > market share high priced vehicle. Like maybe the Lotus, or > Lambrogini, or > Ferrari.... or for more mainstream, the Jaguar. People aren't buying > these cars because they need them, they are buying them > because they WANT > them. I think BMW is a good metaphor for a Mac -- it leaves nicer cars for the nicer workstations ;) Though, SGI isn't exactly what it used to be -- maybe they just had some "bad years," the Octane2 shows some promise. > bought out of desire, NOT out of neccessity. Once you have an > audience > that buys from desire, you can safely raise your prices to > the highest > point that audience will bear. They'll like it better, of course, if you don't. In the computer sense, people who know what they're doing will just go buy an old Cobra, or that Lamborghini that's setting out in the dumpster for some reason ;) Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

New Toy - VAX 4000-710

by Antonio.Carlini＠riverstonenet.com

>The futurebus was short lived... as >people say "it was in the future"... I never >saw any REAL options for it... DECnis used FB+, the DEC 4000-600/700 series used the FB+ (although apparently a sufficiently different version that interworking was not possible) and that was about it, at least as far as DEC was concerned. Antonio

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> And for the most part... this is perfectly fine with Jobs... he isn't > interested in ruling the PC world, he is interested in making stuff > people desire. He WANTS to be the BMW or Jaguar of the computer world. > MS, Dell, Gateway, et al can be the Ford or Chevy, let them deal with > having the bulk of the sales churning out the same old tired but reliable > designs at cut throat prices. Althought I'm no Jobs fan (hate Apple, love Mac), I must agree. Well said, Chris.

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

Tape dumping programs for Unix/Linux...

by LFessen106＠aol.com

In a message dated 5/2/02 9:33:25 AM Eastern Daylight Time, erd_6502(a)yahoo.com writes: > You misunderstand the direction I'm going. I have magtape with data > already on it. I want to extract that data into a file or set of > files on the disk that I can then burn to CD-R. I can use dd to move > raw records, but I would like to also know what the block size was > for a particular file so I could reconsitute the tape later if > necessary. I'm not so worried about the VMS BACKUP tapes I need to > spin off - I want one saveset per file. If I want to dup any install > tapes (non-VAX), the blocking becomes more critical. > > Essentially, a physical backup that is primarily for data recovery, > but secondarily for later restoration. > > I do not intend to use magtape as a primary backup media for Linux > or Solaris. Writing tape is not a concern here, only reading. I > do know how to operate dump/restore, tar, etc. They are of _no_ use > Wouldn't dd make an image preserving the original block sizes? -Linc. In The Beginning there was nothing, which exploded - Yeah right... Calculating in binary code is as easy as 01,10,11.

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

New Toy - VAX 4000-710

by erd_6502＠yahoo.com

Just dropped by the Uni Surplus for their grand unveiling... Open one day a week now, with inventory soon to appear on the web. Got a PowerMac 7200/90 for $10, just to get cables and accessories with it (needed a AV adapter for my 6100/60av). Also got a nice Barco monitor, c. 1989. Will go great with an old Amiga. The big win, though, was a fully loaded (SCSI drives, 4 x MS440 and TSZ07) VAX 4000-710. I would have thought it was an Alpha box, but unless the sun was in my eyes, it says "VAX 4000" on one name plate on one end, and "Model 710" on a name plate on the other end. It's still in the back of my station wagon, so I haven't even fired it up. From the stickers on the devices, it's running UNIX (/dev/whatever on all the disks and tape drives). I bought it without powering it on because a) I wanted the TSZ07 and it was cheaper than the shipping alone, and b) they don't have a 20A plug at the surplus barn (the one with the blades like (- |) not the usual (| |) for a 15A plug). I only found a few hits for it while googling. Any good resources for a box that new? I figure I'll get it home, stick a VT220 on it and go from there. Yes, I have MMJ cables to plug into the console port. If I decide to keep it, I'll want to think about OpenVMS on it. There's nothing magical about modern DEC Unix that makes it special to me. If I want Unix, I'll go with *BSD or Solaris on beefy hardware. Ultrix only in special cases. -ethan __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com

24 years, 1 month

4
5
0 0

"Non-Standard PCs"

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> What's always annoyed me with "brand-name" PC's is that the packaging ALWAYS > deviates from the "norm" established by the DIY market. Consquently, your > DELL, Gateway, or Compaq was never upgradable, because the CPU or hard disk > wasn't supported by the BIOS, or some peripheral wouldn't fit in the system > because of address conflicts. Simple things like the on-board video caused > problems when they failed because one couldn't disable them, or, if one did, > the now-broken native video interfered with the replacement. Even printer > ports posed such problems. Many times the packaging itself was the problem. > Have you ever tried to replace or upgrade the CDROM drive in an HP PC? It just depends on the model. We bought several Dell Precision Workstations, 410s and 420s. They use non-standard mobos and non-standard PSUs. Everything else is standard. We also have Dimensions, which have similar attributes w/r/t peripherals. -dq

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

AIM-65 displays

by mhstein＠canada.com

>From: Ethan Dicks <erd_6502(a)yahoo.com> >Would you have 10-12 DL1416s? That would give me enough for two >display boards and a spare or two for the future. --- Hmm.. probably not. I do have about a dozen, but I might need some of them for my AIMs if & when I finally get around to looking at them. Also, I doubt that there are even five matching ones; some are Siemens and some are Litronix/NSL, with different profiles, and they are also various brightness codes. But if you need a replacement or two I could probably help out. But from the other perspective, what were you planning to use? And do you know of a source for a cheap 1x20 parallel VF or LCD display? Lots of 2&4x20s; guess one of those would do... --- >Right now, my "spare" time is all focused on displays anyway - the >LCDProc project (http://lcdproc.omnipotent.net/) is closing in on >a new point release and I'm trying to debug a development environment >to be able to add support for some new display hardware (PD3000 "pole >displays" like you see attached to cash registers/tills). --- Looks like there are a few of these display/monitor projects out there; what's so different about the PD3000? Aren't they all RS-232? I'll be in touch off-list when I know more. mike

24 years, 1 month

2
1
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>It's just that the 250% price premium >paid for it because it's mainly a single-vendor system is pretty steep. Now, >I haven't looked at any pricing in over 15 years, But when you compare a similar package Gateway, Dell, or other "name brand" PCs, you will find that there is actually very little difference in price. Certainly not enough to justify the significantly higher TCO of the PC. Where the price difference really shines is in the generic branded PCs, or in the "build your own" PCs. >What I don't understand is, if the >supply is lower and the devices are as reliable as those on the PC market, >where's the demand that drives the prices up coming from? Because people WANT a Mac. How does BMW get away with charging a price premium when they only have a 5% market share. People will pay the price because they want the item. I have long felt that Apple could make much larger sweeps into the market if they would stop being "cool" and just make a $400 bare bones iMac. -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 1 month

2
1
0 0

Mac topics (was Re: APPLEVISION Monitor)

by acme_ent＠bellsouth.net

> From: Richard Erlacher <edick(a)idcomm.com> > I'm also looking for a recommendation for a decent but not too rare or > expensive 56K dialup modem that's also fax-capable. Any external 56K modem should work, right? You should be able to get one for $20 or so. > I'm sure I can find a > reasonable MAC for a few dollars, but the real question with the MAC is the > peripherals. No doubt ;>) I don't know about availability where you are, but I get a couple of calls from PC parts vendors every day, and I have not had one call from a Mac vendor in 10 years. If I could find a reliable wholesaler of Mac parts and peripherals I'd start doing Mac repairs. > I've noticed that there's software out there for doing > long-distance jibberjabber between computers on the internet. If I equip one > of these babies with that and send it to my S.O's sister in Portland, they can > yack without running up the long distance bills. That's easily going to pay > for an older MAC in a week or so. Does anyone on this list know of anyone who has gotten "free long distance telephone calls over the internet" software to work consistently? Glen 0/0

24 years, 1 month

2
1
0 0

Mainframe emulation and serial comms (was Re: "Toy computers)"

by donm＠cts.com

On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Ethan Dicks wrote: > > --- "Douglas H. Quebbeman" <dquebbeman(a)acm.org> wrote: > > > ...will "Hercules" talk BISYNC or SNA down a sync serial pipe? > > > > I'd think you'd either need a PC serial card that uses a > > USART instead of a UART, or a convert of some kind... but > > I don't know how the converter would supply synch... > > Naturally. I wouldn't expect a 16550 to sprout clock lines and > stop being asynchronous. I guess I should have been a little > clearer on my inqury. I do not know of any off-the-shelf sync > serial cards for the PC, so I didn't know the best way to phrase > the question. There are/were apparently a number of Apple LocalTalk cards made for PC usage. One of them is the PC MacBridge by Tangent Technologies - now defunct - which is a short 8-bit card based on the Zilog Z8530APC chip. A google search will disclose multiple others also. - don > > But it wouldn't be too hard to kludge up a design for a > > single-port 8251a-based serial card... > > If I were going to build hardware, I'd probably go with the ZSIO > because a) I have some and b) I programmed one at the register > level for a living 10 years ago, and know how to make it tick. > > More to the point: does Hercules support any off-the-shelf sync > cards? I'd rather this be as light on the customization as possible. > > -ethan > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness > http://health.yahoo.com >

24 years, 1 month

2
1
0 0

MP/M was CP/M-86

by Innfogra＠aol.com

In a message dated 5/1/02 5:51:42 PM Pacific Daylight Time, doc(a)mdrconsult.com writes: > Sounds like an Altos. I'm looking for a BIOS file for my 580 with a > Seagate ST225..... > I will keep an eye out for my Altos SW, I too had a 580 at one time. Nice machine. I just salvaged an Altos 8000-12 out of my house. More about that later. The box I am referring to is a small white minitower that used RJ connectors for terminal connection. I believe it is an 8 bit machine like the Altos 580. I cannot remember the name, I will have to get it out of storage. Ran 8 bit MP/M. Cute. Paxton Astoria, OR

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

MP/M was CP/M-86

by Innfogra＠aol.com

In a message dated 5/1/02 12:55:08 PM Pacific Daylight Time, dquebbeman(a)acm.org writes: > > MP/M-86: multiuser, multi-terminal version of CP/M. Supports > more memory than CP/M-86 though... > I liked MPM. I am still sitting on a MPM box that supports 4 terminals and hope to get it running again some time. Hmm. that reminds me, I am going to need a new (used) 10 meg HD for it. It is nice to see the SW for it on the Internet. I should bring it home from the storage locker. Paxton Astoria, OR

24 years, 1 month

3
2
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

> *sigh* Chris, the evangelist... > >Someone gimme a rock, to knock him off his soapbox... :-) -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 1 month

2
1
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>Are you certain? If the Mac was running the same network services as >that Unix box, I'd bet your chances of a problem are even -- if not >worse on the Mac, due to their popularity among "home users," which >unix isn't... The wonderful bonus you have here with the Mac is... AppleTalk isn't passed by home internet routers or modems. So you can safely have the default settings of a home file/print sharing turned on on your Macs, and no one outside of your home network will know it is there. This changes if you turn on AppleTalk over IP, but since that is off by default, you must explicitly set it when you turn on your filesharing. At that point, if you don't know what you are activating, you deserve what you get. Also, even if I run servers/services that DO interact with the internet... I am far less likely to be hacked simply by virtue of there is almost no one trying to hack the Mac servers. That isn't true with Windows and Unix where any 13yr old script kiddie can get tools to make attempts. I don't pretend that Mac internet servers are unhackable... just that people aren't making easy tools to try, so the script kiddies ignore them. Much like Mac users being "immune" to viruses. We are FAR from immune... we just don't really see them because no one is interested in trying. There are advantages to being a 5% market... small targets don't get hit often. (so how long now until someone hacks my web page to prove a point :-) ) -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 1 month

3
2
0 0

Googling and "egg-sucking" (was Re: "Toy" computers...)

by cdl＠proxima.ucsd.edu

> Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2002 14:49:00 -0700 (PDT) > From: Ethan Dicks <erd_6502(a)yahoo.com> > Subject: Googling and "egg-sucking" (was Re: "Toy" computers...) > To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org > In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0204281433220.29291-100000(a)george.home.org> > > --- Doc <doc(a)mdrconsult.com> wrote: > > On Sun, 28 Apr 2002, Peter C. Wallace wrote: > > > > > On Sun, 28 Apr 2002, Doc wrote: > > > > > > Dude. > > > > Fire up your favorite Open Source browser. Go to > > > > http://www.google.com > > > > Do a search for this (quotation marks included): > > > > > > > > "Teach Grandpa to suck eggs" > > > > > > BTW Google doesn't find the quoted string... > > I got one hit with this... > "teaching grandpa to suck eggs" > > And a bunch more by using the exact phraseology I heard growing up... > > "teach your grandma to suck eggs" > > With Google, spelling (and precise word selection) counts. > > > Argh. > > Once again, what I thought was a universal expression turns out to be > > a Texasism. > > I would count it as an American Colloquialism, but I don't think of the > phrase as uniquely Texan. Hey, guys. Simplify. A Google search on the phrase "suck eggs" leads to a clear explanation of the historical use of the phrase, dating back to the 16th century in English, and older in other languages. < http://www.quinion.com/words/qa/qa-tea1.htm > carl

24 years, 1 month

3
2
0 0

Info for IMS hardware needed

by Fritz_Chwolka＠t-online.de

There is someone searching for infos about IMS - hardware. Can you help ? Answer only to: arlen.michaels(a)sympatico.ca ==================BEGIN FORWARDED MESSAGE================== >Return-Path: <arlen.michaels(a)sympatico.ca> Just want to thank you for making the old manuals and image files available on http://oldcomputers.dyndns.org/public/ I found things here (like the IMS information) I have been hunting for years. I am still looking for documents etc for some other IMS S-100 boards dating from around 1980-84: - A862 Z80 CPU - A930 Floppy Controller - A821 Winchester Controller - A1100 Winchester Controller - A1021 64K RAM You don't by any chance have files for these, do you? :) Best wishes, Arlen Michaels arlen.michaels(a)sympatico.ca ===================END FORWARDED MESSAGE=================== -- Greetinggs from Fritz Chwolka < collecting old computers yust for fun > > at www.alterechner.de <

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

The toys just keep coming... Tek 4105 terminals

by erd_6502＠yahoo.com

I finally hooked up with an old college buddy of mine who works at OCLC. We had previously arranged to meet today before I filled up my car with wads o' DEC stuff. Fortunately there was still room for the three complete Tektronix 4105 terminals. He caught them on the way to the dumpster a few years ago, but hasn't done much with them. They all powered up and worked 4 months ago. Is anyone interested in one? I do not need three. Make offers off-list, please, to ethan_dicks(a)yahoo.com (if you reply to this message it will take longer for me to see your message). Offers exceeding S&H will receive first consideration. Given their size, I'd prefer pickup or even delivery at Dayton (if you are going). Packing will be a hassle. If you act now, you can have a Tek 4695 color printer... I got it at Dayton because there were Amiga drivers for it. Turns out I wanted a 4696. The 4695 is a messy beast that set back inkjet evolution several eons. I only mention it because it is specifically mentioned in the docs as supported as the standard color "Copier" device. I have offered the printer to the list once. I got no responses. This time, I will tear it down for interesting tidbits and junk the rest. It is too cantankerous and the ink is essentially not available, so as a printer, it's worthless. Its only value is as a decorative accessory to the terminal in a historical exhibit to show how it would have been used in period. Anybody have any interesting data files/software to throw at a Tek terminal to do cool stuff? -ethan __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness http://health.yahoo.com

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

New Toy - VAX 4000-710

by Antonio.Carlini＠riverstonenet.com

> I would have thought it was an Alpha > box, but unless the sun was in my eyes, it says "VAX 4000" on one > name plate on one end, and "Model 710" on a name plate on the other > end. I think the sun was in your eyes (or someone has been playing with labels). It might be a VAX 4000-700A or a VAX 4000-705A or it might indeed be an Alpha: a DEC 4000-710 (this was the Fang, a follow on to the DEC 4000-610, the Cobra). You can add a second CPU to obtain a 4000-720 (similarly you can get a 4000-620). > It's still in the back of my station wagon, so I haven't even > fired it up. From the stickers on the devices, it's running UNIX > (/dev/whatever on all the disks and tape drives). It's almost certainly a DEC 4000-710 (which is probably a win: they are rarer than VAX 4000-70x machines IMHO). I don't think Ultrix ever ran on the VAX 4000 machines. > I bought it without powering it on because a) I wanted the TSZ07 and > it was cheaper than the shipping alone, and b) they don't have > a 20A plug at the surplus barn (the one with the blades like (- |) > not the usual (| |) for a 15A plug). Sounds to me like you won big time here :-) Antonio

24 years, 1 month

2
1
0 0

by Fritz_Chwolka＠t-online.de

There is someone searching for infos about IMS - hardware. Can you help ? Answer only to: arlen.michaels(a)sympatico.ca ==================BEGIN FORWARDED MESSAGE================== >Return-Path: <arlen.michaels(a)sympatico.ca> Just want to thank you for making the old manuals and image files available on http://oldcomputers.dyndns.org/public/ I found things here (like the IMS information) I have been hunting for years. I am still looking for documents etc for some other IMS S-100 boards dating from around 1980-84: - A862 Z80 CPU - A930 Floppy Controller - A821 Winchester Controller - A1100 Winchester Controller - A1021 64K RAM You don't by any chance have files for these, do you? :) Best wishes, Arlen Michaels arlen.michaels(a)sympatico.ca ===================END FORWARDED MESSAGE=================== Greetings from Fritz Chwolka - Duisburg / collecting old computers just for fun at www.alterechner.de \

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

by caprio＠dcms.com

Eric, Thank you. pkxarc did the job! >> I picked up a bunch of CPM archives from CPMUG. The files end with the >> ARK file extension. I've tried the unark16.exe I picked up from the >> oak.oakland.edu site but I can't seem to get them to unpack. > >ARK should be the same as ARC. You could probably use pkxarc if you can >still find it. I think pkunpack will work as well. Does anyone know if >WINZIP handles "ARC" type archives? > >> What MS-DOS command works on these archives or do I need to fetch a CP/M >> version and run under a CP/M emulator? > >Eric

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

MP/M was CP/M-86

by f.heite＠hccnet.nl

Oaxton wrote: >I liked MPM. I am still sitting on a MPM box that supports 4 terminals and >hope to get it running again some time. Hmm. that reminds me, I am going to >need a new (used) 10 meg HD for it. It is nice to see the SW for it on the >Internet. On what kind of hardware is this MPM (86?) running? Newbies that want to experiment with MPM, would most likely want an implementation of MPM for the IBM PC hardware - but is that available somewhere? The downloads that were mentioned a week ago (mpm8621i.zip etc.) are for some compupro hardware. Freek.

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

New Toy - VAX 4000-710

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Antonio Carlini [mailto:Antonio.Carlini@riverstonenet.com] > > a 20A plug at the surplus barn (the one with the blades like (- |) > > not the usual (| |) for a 15A plug). > Sounds to me like you won big time here :-) Sounds to me like a 16A plug. ;) Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

FW: Dig UNIX Alpha V3 CD-ROM Kit

by healyzh＠aracnet.com

> OpenVMS? Maybe eventually. When I started really getting into > computer work, it was as an operator, on an OpenVMS system... But since I > do have the CDs and docs here for D/UX, I'll give it a whirl, and see if it > fits my needs. > Does it allow only one user at a time, without the OSF-BASE PAK? > This afternoon I'll be firing up my 3000/400 to see what's > installed, before I try throwing D/UX on it... Without the PAK you'll be pretty restricted on what you can do, and can probably only log in on the console. I suspect you can't even bring up X-Windows. OpenVMS has the advantage of being cheaper to run for a Hobbyist, but the Hobbyist PAKs have to be renewed every year (for free). Tru64 costs about $100 for the hobbyist, but that includes a set of CD's and permanent PAK's. Personally I prefer OpenVMS on my Alpha's as I can run UNIX faster on x86. Zane

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

New Toy - VAX 4000-710

by healyzh＠aracnet.com

> The big win, though, was a fully loaded (SCSI drives, 4 x MS440 > and TSZ07) VAX 4000-710. I would have thought it was an Alpha > box, but unless the sun was in my eyes, it says "VAX 4000" on one > name plate on one end, and "Model 710" on a name plate on the other Lucky Bum!!!! That's one of the most powerful VAXen around! OpenVMS/VAX should rock on that sucker! It's interesting that there is a VAX 4000-710 and a DEC 4000-710 with the DEC being an Alpha. Zane

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by DAW＠yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu

> From: Christopher Smith > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: David Woyciesjes [mailto:DAW@yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu] > > > > From: Christopher Smith > > > > I certainly hope that changes. I could stand to see many people > > > replace their peesees with Macs. > > > Instead of a Mac, how about a DEC 3000/400, or Sun > > Ulltra1 Creator > > or an SGI, or... > > Even better, but there's less of a chance that will happen. > > Chris > Unless, of course, you hang around here... -- --- David A Woyciesjes --- C & IS Support Specialist --- Yale University Press --- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu --- (203) 432-0953 --- ICQ # - 905818 Mac OS X 10.1 - Darwin Kernel Version 5 Running since 01/22/2002 without a crash

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

what precautions are called for when moving an RM03 ?

by GOOI＠oce.nl

Hi all. Well, the weekend of the big move is getting closer. I intend to take 2 RM03's and not only for the good looks! I actually want to hook them to the 11/70 and operate them. Changing electricity cabling is planned ;-) The big question is: how do I move these "washing machines" so that afterward they still are in working order? I have experience with head locking RL01/RL02, RK05, RA81 and RA60. I suspect that the RM03 also have some head lock mechanism. Perhaps also some trick for the spindle like the tension of the drive belt in the RA81? Thanks for all the good advice received on the RM03's so far. I am looking forward to read more on topic info from this fine list. For those who like my StarShip website: I got the stars on the main screen correctly plotted with the rotation matrix algorithms, so an update will hit the site in a month or so. kind regards, - Henk.

24 years, 1 month

3
2
0 0

Seeking Interest in Group Purchase, Avery Magtape Labels

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> > Tape Reel High Speed Computer Labels > > 3-7/8" x 1-13/16", White, Dot Matrix, > > Removable, 5000 labels per box > > 04052 5000 Labels per Box $139.15 > > > > If there are just ten people on the list who'd have use > > for 500 labels, it's close to fifteen bucks per person. > > > > OTOH, is anyone sitting on a stash of them? I found a > > sheet with precisely three labels, and I've quite a > > few more tapes than that... > > Check to see if the adhesive still sticks to anything. My long-term > experience with tape-reel labels is that the "permanent' adhesive > lets go after 10 years or so, leaving me with a rack of unlabeled > tapes and a bunch of labels on the floor. Dunno what kind of labels my old ones are, but labels applied in the 1978 through 1983 period remain firmly fastened to the reels. I took one of the three unused label, peeled it from the backing paper, and applied it to a new reel of tape. It stuck, but threatened to not do so very well. Some hand pressure seems to have done the trick. It looks ok now... write me back in 10 years for an update. ;)

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: David Woyciesjes [mailto:DAW@yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu] > > From: Christopher Smith > > I certainly hope that changes. I could stand to see many people > > replace their peesees with Macs. > Instead of a Mac, how about a DEC 3000/400, or Sun > Ulltra1 Creator > or an SGI, or... Even better, but there's less of a chance that will happen. Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> On Wed, 1 May 2002, Douglas H. Quebbeman wrote: > > > OK, so who knows the sequence and differences between: > > > MP/M-86 > > > Concurrent CP/M-86 > > > Concurrent PC-DOS (announced by DRI at Comdex, because IBM did NOT > > > trademark "PC-DOS" ("It's a description, not a name"), but > > > then DRI backed down and changed the name) > > > Concurrent DOS > > > DR DOS > > Very good, Fred! The answer to your question is "Fred Cisin"! > > Well, you confirmed my guess as to the sequence, but it wasn't a > rhetorical question. I really DON'T know what the differences are. Oops! My bad... MP/M-86: multiuser, multi-terminal version of CP/M. Supports more memory than CP/M-86 though... Concurrent CP/M-86: MP/M-86 with multi-terminal support removed. User can run multiple programs simultaneously. Concurrent PC-DOS: Concurrent CP/M-86 with support for Microsoft loader conventions, Microsoft disk formats, etc. while pre- serving existing CP/M-86 program & media support Concurrent DOS: Don't know the differences but whatever it is it's Concurrent PC-DOS modified to do <xyz> DR DOS: Lots of support added for stuff like running mouse and network drivers in upper memory blocks, etc. Generally a catch-up revision of the previous product, but was already surpoassed by the latest Microsoft DOS. hth,-dq

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by DAW＠yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu

> From: Christopher Smith > > > There are advantages to being a 5% market... small targets > > don't get hit > > often. > > I certainly hope that changes. I could stand to see many people > replace their peesees with Macs. > > Chris > Instead of a Mac, how about a DEC 3000/400, or Sun Ulltra1 Creator or an SGI, or... -- --- David A Woyciesjes --- C & IS Support Specialist --- Yale University Press --- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu --- (203) 432-0953 --- ICQ # - 905818 Mac OS X 10.1 - Darwin Kernel Version 5 Running since 01/22/2002 without a crash

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

New Toy - VAX 4000-710

by dittman＠dittman.net

BTW, if you decide not to keep it, I'll buy it from you. -- Eric Dittman dittman(a)dittman.net Check out the DEC Enthusiasts Club at http://www.dittman.net/

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> OK, so who knows the sequence and differences between: > > MP/M-86 > > Concurrent CP/M-86 > > Concurrent PC-DOS (announced by DRI at Comdex, because IBM did NOT > trademark "PC-DOS" ("It's a description, not a name"), but > then DRI backed > down and changed the name) > > Concurrent DOS > > DR DOS Very good, Fred! The answer to your question is "Fred Cisin"! ;)

24 years, 1 month

2
1
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Chris [mailto:mythtech@mac.com] > The wonderful bonus you have here with the Mac is... AppleTalk isn't > passed by home internet routers or modems. So you can safely have the > default settings of a home file/print sharing turned on on > your Macs, and > no one outside of your home network will know it is there. Won't argue with that. In fact, that sounds like just what I was saying. ;) > This changes if you turn on AppleTalk over IP, but since that > is off by > default, you must explicitly set it when you turn on your > filesharing. At > that point, if you don't know what you are activating, you > deserve what > you get. If you make changes to the configuration, as I said, it's likely to get worse. > Also, even if I run servers/services that DO interact with the > internet... I am far less likely to be hacked simply by > virtue of there > is almost no one trying to hack the Mac servers. That isn't true with > Windows and Unix where any 13yr old script kiddie can get > tools to make > attempts. It's a trivial, but not obvious to an idiot, exercise to make those "tools" work under Unix, too, and they become outdated very quickly. If you're running a newer or older Unix than the "tool" is designed to break, you'll likely have no problem there, either. This whole part of the discussion might be irrelevant, though, since nobody does anything interesting in that area any more. It's generally "denial of service" crap, and mostly depends on saturating peoples' network pipe, but what can you expect? > I don't pretend that Mac internet servers are unhackable... just that > people aren't making easy tools to try, so the script kiddies > ignore them. Possible. Just imagine how "safe" Amiga users are in that respect :) > Much like Mac users being "immune" to viruses. We are FAR > from immune... > we just don't really see them because no one is interested in trying. Wait 'till I get my Prime. ;) > There are advantages to being a 5% market... small targets > don't get hit > often. I certainly hope that changes. I could stand to see many people replace their peesees with Macs. Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

> And I should clarify, the only reason this machine has been rebooted >since I loaded OS X back on 1/22/2002 is because Apple hasn't figured out >how to update the system without a reboot... So that's only 3 reboots, all >by choice, not crashes. Now if they can just fix Classic so when a freaking installer forces you to reboot after installing a classic app, it doesn't take down the whole machine! 4 different installers did that to me. After installing in classic, it forced me to reboot, and rather than just rebooting classic, it froze the entire computer. Of course, that brings up another pet peeve of mine... installers that FORCE you to reboot after installing. Thanks, but I'll decide when it is a good time to reboot, give me the option of rebooting then, or quitting and doing it myself later. -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

FW: Dig UNIX Alpha V3 CD-ROM Kit

by DAW＠yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu

> From: Zane H. Healy > > > I've got here the Digital UNIX (a.k.a. D/UX, right?) v3.2F CD box > >here. The way the docs read, without an OSF-BASE license PAK, I can have > >only 1 user logged in at a time, not counting root. the OSF-BASE PAK will > >let me have 2 simultaneous users, and anything higher needs an > appropriate > >OSF-USER PAK, right? > > Either way, I'm hoping to get my hands on a OSF-BASE PAK, at least. > > You might just want to buy the Tru64 V5.1 Hobbyist Kit. It's about $100, > and it includes PAK's. Or better yet, put OpenVMS on the system :^) > > Zane > -- > OpenVMS? Maybe eventually. When I started really getting into computer work, it was as an operator, on an OpenVMS system... But since I do have the CDs and docs here for D/UX, I'll give it a whirl, and see if it fits my needs. Does it allow only one user at a time, without the OSF-BASE PAK? This afternoon I'll be firing up my 3000/400 to see what's installed, before I try throwing D/UX on it... -- --- David A Woyciesjes --- C & IS Support Specialist --- Yale University Press --- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu --- (203) 432-0953 --- ICQ # - 905818 Mac OS X 10.1 - Darwin Kernel Version 5 Running since 01/22/2002 without a crash

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

by knightstalkerbob＠netscape.net

Dan Wright <dtwright(a)uiuc.edu> wrote: >Tarsi said: > >Though, I think any machines that are truly on-topic wouldn't be able to run >IRIX 6.5 anyway ;) > >- Dan Wright >(dtwright(a)uiuc.edu) >(http://www.uiuc.edu/~dtwright) > I've successfully installed 6.5 on an Indy with a 2 Gig drive. Barebones with only 2 Gig, but it runs:) -- Bob Mason 2x Amiga 500's, GVP A530 (40mhz 68030/68882, 8meg Fast, SCSI), 1.3/3.1, 2meg Chip, full ECS chipset, EZ135, 1084S, big harddrives, 2.2xCD Gateway Performance 500 Piece 'o Crap, 'ME, 128meg, 20Gig & 40Gig, flatbed. Heathkit H-89A, 64K RAM, hard and soft-sectored floppies, SigmaSoft and Systems 256K RAM Drive/Print Spooler/Graphics board HDOS 2 & CP/M 2.2.03/2.2.04 __________________________________________________________________ Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! http://shopnow.netscape.com/ Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Mail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/

24 years, 1 month

10
15
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by DAW＠yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu

> From: Chris > > > And Chris, couldn't you tell I' was breaking your stones? C'mon, > >you've seen my basement... :) > > Yes... but your statement was still correct. I implied that Apple was far > better than it really is when compared to things outside the wintel > world. I was simply wrong in that respect. > > Besides, how could you be anything but pro-Mac... you proudly display > your OS X uptime in your sig > > -chris > Well, I'm not sure if it's really pro-Mac, but more of pro-OS X, or is it pro-*BSD, and a bit of 'about time someone took it to the masses'. And I should fix my sig, it's now 10.1.4... [~] dwoycies% uname -a Darwin dwoyciesjes-g4.unipress.yale.edu 5.4 Darwin Kernel Version 5.4: Wed Apr 10 09:27:47 PDT 2002; root:xnu/xnu-201.19.3.obj~1/RELEASE_PPC Power Macintosh powerpc And I should clarify, the only reason this machine has been rebooted since I loaded OS X back on 1/22/2002 is because Apple hasn't figured out how to update the system without a reboot... So that's only 3 reboots, all by choice, not crashes. So, technically the "Running without a crash" isn't really wrong. -- --- David A Woyciesjes --- C & IS Support Specialist --- Yale University Press --- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu --- (203) 432-0953 --- ICQ # - 905818 Mac OS X 10.1.2 - Darwin Kernel Version 5.2: Fri Dec 7 21:39:35 PST 2001 Running since 01/22/2002 without a crash

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>You mean it'll work with the older mac's? It has a "normal" (for MAC's) >video >cable, and its model number is 1710AV. I just checked the tech manual for the 1710AV, it indeed has the standard RGB plug, so you should be good to go with just about any mac that has an RGB port. Some of the older ones will only be able to display in 640x480 resolution, but the Q650 you are looking into will do higher. If you want the PDF of the manual, let me know, I'll send it to you offlist. It's about 3.6MB, has some interesting notes about repair problems with that model (Apple even has/had a repair extension program in place for some of it) >It has what appears to be >pass-through's for the mouse and for a mike, that funny thing that looks like >the USB symbol but isn't That's the ADB port. Predates USB by some time. The idea was you could run one cable bundle from the screen to the Mac, and then be able to plug the keyboard and mic into the screen (mouse would be connected to the keyboard's ADB port). >but it's only a 16" >diagonal visible (not viewable) screen so I don't think it's supposed to be a >17", though you never know these days. It is listed as a 17" with 16.1" viewable image size. Although, it was made back in the day when apple was a little less than honest with their screen sizes (before they were sued over it), so who knows what it really has. >I saw a >Quadra 650 or something on that order for $5 earlier today. It had a part of >the front face missing, else I'd have probably looked inside. Probably missing the CD bezel. Most likely it was stripped of the CD before being junked. If the CD is missing, verify that the rest of the system is there, who knows what else was pulled. -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 1 month

3
2
0 0

FW: Dig UNIX Alpha V3 CD-ROM Kit

by DAW＠yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu

Yep, this is about 4 years shy of being on topic, but I know I can find help here... I've got here the Digital UNIX (a.k.a. D/UX, right?) v3.2F CD box here. The way the docs read, without an OSF-BASE license PAK, I can have only 1 user logged in at a time, not counting root. the OSF-BASE PAK will let me have 2 simultaneous users, and anything higher needs an appropriate OSF-USER PAK, right? Either way, I'm hoping to get my hands on a OSF-BASE PAK, at least. The DEC 3000/400 that this will be installed on, I have never seen what OS is on there now. Maybe I'll get lucky and there will be a valid OSF-BASE PAK there already? Nah, doubt it. Not my luck. I think the previous owner said something about NetBSD on it... -- --- David A Woyciesjes --- C & IS Support Specialist --- Yale University Press --- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu --- (203) 432-0953 --- ICQ # - 905818 Mac OS X 10.1.2 - Darwin Kernel Version 5.2: Fri Dec 7 21:39:35 PST 2001 Running since 01/22/2002 without a crash

24 years, 1 month

2
1
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>Now there's one of the problems with Apple's approach ... My old (1993-94) >'486 setups support PCI, (some of 'em ... the ones I use) while these old >MAC's don't because Apple was slow to adopt PCI. Not slow to adopt... too arrogant to get with the program and stop using their own standards. The first PCI based macs showed up in 1995 -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 1 month

2
1
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

> And Chris, couldn't you tell I' was breaking your stones? C'mon, >you've seen my basement... :) Yes... but your statement was still correct. I implied that Apple was far better than it really is when compared to things outside the wintel world. I was simply wrong in that respect. Besides, how could you be anything but pro-Mac... you proudly display your OS X uptime in your sig -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by dquebbeman＠acm.org

> >Now there's one of the problems with Apple's approach ... My old (1993-94) > >'486 setups support PCI, (some of 'em ... the ones I use) while these old > >MAC's don't because Apple was slow to adopt PCI. > > Not slow to adopt... too arrogant to get with the program and stop using > their own standards. I've always thought of apple as the Sony of Computing... there may be fans of the memory stick here, but Sony was slow to come out with high-density versions... hell, in the CompactFlash format, I can eschew solid state for a tiny 1-inch IBM 1GB hard drive... now *that's* density! -dq

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Chris [mailto:mythtech@mac.com] > specifying that on this list, I opened the comment to compare > them to a > slew of machines that would blow Apple out of the water. I imagined you would be comparing them directly to peesees, but I couldn't pass that up. > Sorry it was my > Mac Evangelist side popping out too quickly. That's ok. I like to evangelize VMS once in a while. > Ok... I was thinking security as in how often we loose or > destroy your > files. Not how often we let someone steal your files. No That's different. I've seen it happen, of course, but I'd rather handle the MacOS "corrupt preferences" problem that is so common than the windows "I just stomped on the wrong DLL" counterpart. :) > Apple doesn't > excel at keeping the files intact, but they are no worse than > many others. I often think that windows machines should come with a VAX/PDP-like "Write protect fixed disk 0" button. :) > In terms of allowing someone to steal or alter your files, I > agree, short > of encrypting the files, there is nothing acceptable on the > Mac pre-OS X Of course, PGP is fine for that, but I wasn't counting it since it's third-party. > I have seen few even half way decent security systems to keep > people off > your Mac. And even the half way decent ones tend to be easy > to bypass if > you have sufficient access to the machine (ie: steal it and take your > time) Even if not, I've seen far too many that can be disabled by hitting "shift" during boot-up. > Although, in the Mac's defense, in terms of "hacker" access > from over the > internet, I will trust my Mac running any pre-OS X version of the OS > before I will trust ANY other OS (even well configured Unix). In that Are you certain? If the Mac was running the same network services as that Unix box, I'd bet your chances of a problem are even -- if not worse on the Mac, due to their popularity among "home users," which unix isn't... > line, then I stand by my overly stated statement saying that > the Mac has > far better security. I think that the closer-to-default Mac configuration is better by virtue of it's not running unnecessary network services. The Unix one needs a lot of help in that respect. Now, if a given system must run these services, or if you want to compare a Unix set up to be "Mac like" in this respect to a Mac, it's a whole different thing. Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by DAW＠yalepress3.unipress.yale.edu

> From: Chris > > >> WOAH?!? That's just a shot from the dark... Apple is known for how good > > >> their quality IS... sure they had a few flops, but most of their > hardware > >> is built well, and built to last. And security? Um... compared to what? > > >> Windows? BWAA HAA HAA HAA HAA!!! > >> > >> -chris > >> > > Really Chris? Then why was I very busy making good money doing > >Apple/Mac support at Electric Boat up here? ;) > > Sorry, that was a poorly worded direct comparison to the PC WinTel world. > Having done Mac and PC hardware repair for the last don't know how long, > I can tell you that PCs break down 10x more often than a Mac. Hardware > wise that is. Software wise, well, that isn't fair... Windows just isn't > up to the task of being compared to anything. > > Alas, I forgot what list I was on, and many (if not most) of the > computers applicable to this list would blow Apple stuff out of the water > in terms of reliability in hardware AND software. > - Hmmm, actually, compared to x86/Win stuff, Apple is generally better, so your comment isn't that far off. And Chris, couldn't you tell I' was breaking your stones? C'mon, you've seen my basement... :) -- --- David A Woyciesjes --- C & IS Support Specialist --- Yale University Press --- mailto:david.woyciesjes@yale.edu --- (203) 432-0953 --- ICQ # - 905818 Mac OS X 10.1.2 - Darwin Kernel Version 5.2: Fri Dec 7 21:39:35 PST 2001 Running since 01/22/2002 without a crash

24 years, 1 month

3
2
0 0

by f.heite＠hccnet.nl

Pat Finnegan wrote: >Cool. Next question: is there any software for MSDOS or Linux (preferably >that I don't need to pay for) that will read/write CP/M-86 (1) hard disk >partitions or (2) 1.44M floppies. I've noticed 22DSK doesn't support much >more than 5-1/4" floppies. Out-of-the-box "CP/M-86 for the IBM PC" does not support 1.44 MB diskettes. But if you still need it: some time ago I wrote a software package called "The 1.44 MB Feature for CP/M-86" that provides this support as an add-on to standard CP/M-86 for IBM. See the CP/M-86 software repository at www. seanet.com/~klaw There's also a definition for 22disk in the package. Freek Heite.

24 years, 1 month

2
1
0 0

MacEthernet (Was: RE: APPLEVISION Monitor)

by mythtech＠mac.com

>> networks, but they've since been renamed by Apple to 'PhoneNet' because of >> the satin phone cable you typically use to connect the adaptors together. > >Actually, I think 'LocalTalk' is what they now call the serial-connected >network. Not quite sure where I got 'phonenet' from... LocalTalk was always technically the cabling system that Apple developed. It uses a 4 wire round cable and connects to a box that connects to the serial port of the Mac (traditionally the printer port) PhoneNet/TeleNet/TeleTalk was always technically the cabling system that used 2 wires in a phone cable to connect. I believe this was first developed by TOPS, but I'm probably wrong. Also connected to an adaptor that connected to the serial port. Serial was always technically the cabling system where you take a mac printer cable and connect two macs together with it (AppleTalk over Serial... wonder why it was never refered to as SerialTalk) Localtalk has been perverted into meaning any of the above topologies, and any others that use the serial port on the Mac. And Farallon perverted the PhoneNet name by using it in one of their ethernet cards (PhoneNet EN) -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>> their hardware >> is built well, and built to last. And security? Um... > >I've seen better. I have better. (I also have a couple of >Macintosh's, a IIGS, etc... which still work fine, to be >fair) I was making the comparison to the WinTel world, forgetting that without specifying that on this list, I opened the comment to compare them to a slew of machines that would blow Apple out of the water. Sorry it was my Mac Evangelist side popping out too quickly. >> compared to what? > >VMS? :) Even a poorly configured Unix -- until OS X. >MacOS had no built-in security at that point. (I hope you >won't seriously suggest that "At Ease" counts... :) Ok... I was thinking security as in how often we loose or destroy your files. Not how often we let someone steal your files. No Apple doesn't excel at keeping the files intact, but they are no worse than many others. In terms of allowing someone to steal or alter your files, I agree, short of encrypting the files, there is nothing acceptable on the Mac pre-OS X (at least OS 9 finally added built in encryption if you wanted to use it). I have seen few even half way decent security systems to keep people off your Mac. And even the half way decent ones tend to be easy to bypass if you have sufficient access to the machine (ie: steal it and take your time) Although, in the Mac's defense, in terms of "hacker" access from over the internet, I will trust my Mac running any pre-OS X version of the OS before I will trust ANY other OS (even well configured Unix). In that line, then I stand by my overly stated statement saying that the Mac has far better security. -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by mythtech＠mac.com

>> WOAH?!? That's just a shot from the dark... Apple is known for how good >> their quality IS... sure they had a few flops, but most of their hardware >> is built well, and built to last. And security? Um... compared to what? >> Windows? BWAA HAA HAA HAA HAA!!! >> >> -chris >> > Really Chris? Then why was I very busy making good money doing >Apple/Mac support at Electric Boat up here? ;) Sorry, that was a poorly worded direct comparison to the PC WinTel world. Having done Mac and PC hardware repair for the last don't know how long, I can tell you that PCs break down 10x more often than a Mac. Hardware wise that is. Software wise, well, that isn't fair... Windows just isn't up to the task of being compared to anything. Alas, I forgot what list I was on, and many (if not most) of the computers applicable to this list would blow Apple stuff out of the water in terms of reliability in hardware AND software. -chris <http://www.mythtech.net>

24 years, 1 month

1
0
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Chris [mailto:mythtech@mac.com] > >Apple Computer Co. always impressed me as being > >entirely too willing to compromise the quality of MY > hardware/software, and > >the security of my data, in favor of their profits. > WOAH?!? That's just a shot from the dark... Apple is known > for how good > their quality IS... sure they had a few flops, but most of I wouldn't say that. Apple hardware is passable for "consumer" stuff, sure, but it's not good. Better than most peesee clone manufacturers? Sure, but again, that doesn't make it good. You're welcome to buy an all-in-one box with a plastic bubble for a case if you like, but I'm not going to. :) I will also grant that Apple's hardware used to be better when compared to peesee stuff than it is now (possibly due to Apple's cutting costs)... > their hardware > is built well, and built to last. And security? Um... I've seen better. I have better. (I also have a couple of Macintosh's, a IIGS, etc... which still work fine, to be fair) > compared to what? VMS? :) Even a poorly configured Unix -- until OS X. MacOS had no built-in security at that point. (I hope you won't seriously suggest that "At Ease" counts... :) > Windows? BWAA HAA HAA HAA HAA!!! Heh. Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 1 month

3
3
0 0

APPLEVISION Monitor

by csmith＠amdocs.com

> -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Erlacher [mailto:edick@idcomm.com] > Does the MAC support USB? How about USB-2? 5-port boards Yes, and "possibly" -- if a USB-2 interface is available on a PCI board, there's a good chance of finding one supported by Apple. Chris Christopher Smith, Perl Developer Amdocs - Champaign, IL /usr/bin/perl -e ' print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl Hacker.")."\x08!\n"); '

24 years, 1 month

2
1
0 0

Jump to page: