- test-drb@ccmp.vtda.org - classiccmp.org

by edick＠idcomm.com

The Feruson BIg Board ( of which I have a bunch) was single-density only, for which clock extraction was dirt simple. MFM requires a gentler hand. It was, as you suggest, straight from the WD App Notes. The Big Board-II used the 9216. Back in those days, there was a big fight between the analog guys and the digit-heads, and it didn't help a thing. It got me paid for designs that were never implemented on more than one occasion, even though my meticulously designed and carefully stolen and tested, then improved digital separators worked much faster and better than the analog ones. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Al Kossow <aek(a)spies.com> To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org> Date: Friday, February 04, 2000 6:18 PM Subject: Re: What's a WD2793A chip? >"I've often thought that a PAL or small CPLD would do the job. Has anyone >written the appropriate state machine or equations? >" > >From memory, didn't the Furgusson 'big board' use a digital data separator >that was a bipolar prom state machine? I know I've seen this same design in >several late 70's floppy controller boards (maybe it was even in the WDC >data sheets)

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

WD1770 help needed

by edick＠idcomm.com

Yes, I've considered that, but . . . there's a delay involved that wouldn't work with WD's chips unless you accumulate the pulses and disable ready. Then mask the delays by extending the head-load delay. Remember, every drive is different. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com> To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org> Date: Friday, February 04, 2000 6:12 PM Subject: Re: WD1770 help needed >"In the case of the 1771 and 179x series it's possible to build a really ne ><circuit I've seen but never tried to match, which uses the /TEST pin on th >< ><Sounds like an ideal candidate for reimplementation in a single chip ><microcontroller. > >Did that many years ago using 8748, worked very good too as I could count >the pulses then issue them out as a ramped rate so that the head was >accelerated and decelerated to the track. Didn't make any difference for >a few track move. Head movement that was about 15 tracks or more it was >very noticeable. CP/M does a lot of seek to the directory track (usually >track one or two) every time it writes an extent or closes/opens a file so >decreases in seek time payed nicely. > >Allison >

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

WD1770 help needed

by edick＠idcomm.com

It could be a microcontroller project, but it's easy enough if you use a relatively small CPLD. What's critical is that you need a VCO or some digital analog to it which causes the counters to run more quickly while the beginning track to ending track difference is large and ramps up slower than it ramps down. I'd not depend on that, since each drive will be different. It's best done, IMHO, if one uses a drive-resident circuit with slew rates tuned to the individual drive. Thos of us who can't remanufacture our drives NEED this in order to make our 8" drives stay well. I microcontroller could handle the job fine if it just could be adjusted with a pot rather than having to have parameters experimentally determined and then fit via cut-and-try. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Al Kossow <aek(a)spies.com> To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org> Date: Friday, February 04, 2000 2:51 PM Subject: Re: WD1770 help needed >"In the case of the 1771 and 179x series it's possible to build a really neat >circuit I've seen but never tried to match, which uses the /TEST pin on the >FDC to cause the device to put out its pulses much faster, allowing them to >be accumulated externally in a counter, which, drives a DAC which drives a >VCO, which drives the counter as it downcounts the number of steps, thereby >slewing the head assembly. This could lead to an interesting but lengthy >discussion. >" > >Sounds like an ideal candidate for reimplementation in a single chip >microcontroller.

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

WD1770 help needed

by Glenatacme＠aol.com

Hello all Sadly, the WD1770 fcd IC in my home-brew fd i/o board finally gave up the ghost. Fourteen years of service is admirable -- when it finally croaked, I felt like weeping. Additionally, in violation of my policy of *always* keeping spares of discontinued components which I use -- I have no spare. Does anyone know of a source for these? Or the 1772 (I believe Tony Duell once mentioned that the 1772 could replace the 1770 in most cases -- but I could be wrong). Also, I understand that the C64 floppy drives (1581?) used the 1770 but I'm not a commie and can't immediately verify this. Anyone out there with junk C64 drives who wants to liberate this IC -- to a good home?? Any help at all on this will be greatly appreciated. Glen Goodwin 0/0

26 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

What's a WD2793A chip?

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<In going through and sorting my piles of classic ICs, I ran across this Wes <Digital WD2793A chip. What is it? Take a 1793 and put some of the stuff needed to make it useful on the die, call it 2793. Basically it's a 1793 with data sep and precomp logic built on. Allison

26 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

How many mistakes can YOU spot in this eBay ad?

by aek＠spies.com

"Oh, one BLINDING error. Wouldn't that hook up to a VAX? I passed on one about a year ago, and a lot of parts. Though I might have gotten some software for it in the mess of DEC stuff that I did get. " ..or a Unibus PDP-11. What kind was it? I have some docs on the FPS-100. I keep meaning to stop over at the Physiology Department of the Medical College of Wisconsin to find out what ever happened to that 11/44 and FPS-100 that I used to take care of..

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

What's a WD2793A chip?

by aek＠spies.com

"I've often thought that a PAL or small CPLD would do the job. Has anyone written the appropriate state machine or equations? " >From memory, didn't the Furgusson 'big board' use a digital data separator that was a bipolar prom state machine? I know I've seen this same design in several late 70's floppy controller boards (maybe it was even in the WDC data sheets)

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Info needed: Eagle AVL S-100 computer

by allisonp＠world.std.com

drive and monitor for. The "monitor" looks like it started life as a 8" <security monitor. But I have to say that this is the first monitor that <I've ever seen that was connected with a coaxial cable with N-connectors! N??? more likely SO239 (matching plug is PL259). I still ahve a panasonic that was used for an apple][ /8" Monochrome TVscan rate/. <a general purpose S-100 computer. All the cards in it including the back <plane are marked "AV". There are warranty stickers in it dated 1978 and i <has an 8080 CPU. Does anyone have docs and software for it? Can't help on the computer from the description. Likely it's just another 8080 S100 box and therefor with the right floppy and boot proms quite useable for CPM (assuming enough ram). Allison

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

WD1770 help needed

by allisonp＠world.std.com

"In the case of the 1771 and 179x series it's possible to build a really ne <circuit I've seen but never tried to match, which uses the /TEST pin on th < <Sounds like an ideal candidate for reimplementation in a single chip <microcontroller. Did that many years ago using 8748, worked very good too as I could count the pulses then issue them out as a ramped rate so that the head was accelerated and decelerated to the track. Didn't make any difference for a few track move. Head movement that was about 15 tracks or more it was very noticeable. CP/M does a lot of seek to the directory track (usually track one or two) every time it writes an extent or closes/opens a file so decreases in seek time payed nicely. Allison

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Macintosh Portable battery rebild follow-up.

by netsurfer_x1＠hotmail.com

This posting is a follow up to my Mac Portable battery post: The cost of the individual 2V 5.0 Ah "Cyclon" size "X" is $7.25 (USD). The total for 3 is $25 (USD), not including s&h charges. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

How many mistakes can YOU spot in this eBay ad?

by aek＠spies.com

http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=253429580 Does anyone on the list even HAVE a working FPS-xxxx (any flavor) ? These have to be the white elephants of the 80's computing world. --al (who used an FPS-100 in the early 80's)

26 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

Info needed: Eagle AVL S-100 computer

by rigdonj＠intellistar.net

HI, I found one of these today. I also found the keyboard, external floppy drive and monitor for. The "monitor" looks like it started life as a 8" security monitor. But I have to say that this is the first monitor that I've ever seen that was connected with a coaxial cable with N-connectors! It looks like this computer was designed to control an audio visual system. Can anyone tell me about the computer? I'm wondering if it's usefull for a general purpose S-100 computer. All the cards in it including the back plane are marked "AV". There are warranty stickers in it dated 1978 and it has an 8080 CPU. Does anyone have docs and software for it? Joe

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

What's a WD2793A chip?

by edick＠idcomm.com

A 1781? !!GAWD!! I've not seen even an oblique reference to that number since back in the '70's. Wasn't that the one that died with MMFM? I don't believe I ever saw one in the "flesh." Nevertheless, the difference between it and any other member of the WD 8"-drive-capable controller line is probably pretty minor. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Dwight Elvey <elvey(a)hal.com> To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org> Date: Friday, February 04, 2000 3:09 PM Subject: Re[2]: What's a WD2793A chip? >"Richard Erlacher" <edick(a)idcomm.com> wrote: >> That's correct, Eric, it's a direct replacement, functionally, for the 1793, >> with an analog clock extraction circuit. It has the limitation that the >> analog clock processing circuit requires a different lowpass filter for 8" >> and 5-1/4" drives, and, IIRC for FM or MFM. > >Hi > I have a iSBX card that I wrote a driver for that uses a >2793. It is software compatable with the 1793. It does >1.44M disk with the right clock. What I'd like to >know is what are the software requirements for a 1781? >Dwight >

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

What's a WD2793A chip?

by edick＠idcomm.com

That's correct, Eric, it's a direct replacement, functionally, for the 1793, with an analog clock extraction circuit. It has the limitation that the analog clock processing circuit requires a different lowpass filter for 8" and 5-1/4" drives, and, IIRC for FM or MFM. The 9216 and 9229 are external clock recovery circuits tailored for the 179x series, but can be replaced with a PAL. The 8-pin 9216 is pretty handy, but doesn't handle the write-precompensation which the 20-pin (?) 9229 does. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Eric Smith <eric(a)brouhaha.com> To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org> Date: Friday, February 04, 2000 1:46 PM Subject: Re: What's a WD2793A chip? >> In going through and sorting my piles of classic ICs, I ran across this >> Western Digital WD2793A chip. What is it? > >It's a later replacement for the 1793 FDC. But not a drop-in replacement. >It has an on-board analog data separator, while the 1793 required an external >data separator. > >Some of the other 179x replacements had better digital data separators. >I've personally always had good luck using the 179x with external >SMC 9216 or 9229 data separators, which are probably hard to get by now.

26 years, 5 months

3
2
0 0

Announcement: CHANGES TO THE LIST

by west＠tseinc.com

Hokay... In my own opinion, most of the comments on the list about the reply-to function preferred the "old" method. A fair number of the people who preferred the "new" method have since publicly changed their mind. As a result, the list now has the reply address set to the list which is how it used to be before the move. I'd be happy to take any criticism for my handling of the situation: send those emails to dev-null(a)tseinc.com For the non-unix non-sendmail oriented on the list, that's a joke, don't bother sending. Now that the major issue appears to be resolved, I'm taking requests on any other list behaviour that people don't like. I don't promise to implement all of them, but I'll gladly take a look at it. Quite a few people sent me... er.... "suggestions", but because of all the flurry of activity related to the "reply-to" dilemma I didn't do a good job of tracking those other requests. Here's what I can remember: 1) verify that digests are being built 2) check if the digests are sent automagically or does the list owner have to "goose" them out 3) if they can be done automagically, get input from the digest users as to how often they want them sent 4) Verify that digest people are on the digest list, not the non-digest list 5) See if users can be allowed to send to the list without getting daily traffic If you have anything to add to the above, please DO send in the request to west(a)tseinc.com Regards, Jay West

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

More C= disks (was Re: WD1770 help needed)

by ethan_dicks＠yahoo.com

--- Tony Duell <ard(a)p850ug1.demon.co.uk> wrote: > This is not really an OS issue. The PC disk controller can do MFM (and > some versions can do FM) recording. In other words, if the 1581 uses MFM > recording then most likely a PC controller can read its disks. If it uses > GCR, then it can't _no matter what OS is in use_. I meant that ISTR there is a utility that understands the 1581 filesystem for Linux, as well as the hardware being able to read the raw format. Sorry for the ambiguity. -ethan ===== Infinet has been sold. The domain is going away in February. Please send all replies to erd(a)iname.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

C= disks (was Re: WD1770 help needed)

by ethan_dicks＠yahoo.com

--- Pete Turnbull <pete(a)dunnington.u-net.com> wrote: > On Feb 4, 11:43, Ethan Dicks wrote: > > > The standard 5.25" drives _do_ use GCR for all native formats... > > I didn't know that. Did Commodore machines use a standard controller to > write the MFM, or did they use the same techniques as for the GCR? WD177x, AFAIK, in the 1570 (single-sided) and 1571 (double-sided) 5.25" disks and the 1581 (3.5") drive. > I know Amigas can read/write DOS disks, but they don't have any sort of > standard controller. Right. They can do MFM, GCR or whatever because the diskette interface is distributed amongst several custom chips including a 4096-bit shift register in the sound chip. The Amiga reads and writes an entire track at once and parses it in memory. The MFM stuff is efficient because it uses the masking logic of the graphic chip to convert MFM to binary and back. With a simple adapter, you can attach Macintosh drives to the Amiga and read/write _those_ as well (800K with a Mac drive, and 1.44Mb if your Amiga has a C= half-speed floppy drive). There is a read-only demo version of the Mac driver available, read-write is commercial software. There's even a floppy-based network for the Amiga, but it's around $100 per node. I was just at the web page for it this week. RG-58 cable, bus topology, and you can still have three floppy drives on the computer as well. It's great for those bitty-boxes that have no slots. -ethan ===== Infinet has been sold. The domain is going away in February. Please send all replies to erd(a)iname.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

TRS Model 2/16 keyboard

by donm＠cts.com

I have a chap who is trying to resurrect a Model 16 that is sans keyboard. Does anyone have one that they can spare? - don

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

WD1770 help needed

by edick＠idcomm.com

If you love your old drives, you'll operate the stepper at it's optimum rate, which should be essentially noise-free. If you can hear your drives, you need to tweak the step rate, usually upward. One alternative is to ad a mux or whatever to change the speed to the FDC when the step pulses are being transmitted, as nothing else is happening then. Many drives need rates somewhat faster than what the standard controller issues, hence, it's a good idea to consider a fix, involving clock selection via the to match the drive select. In the case of the 1771 and 179x series it's possible to build a really neat circuit I've seen but never tried to match, which uses the /TEST pin on the FDC to cause the device to put out its pulses much faster, allowing them to be accumulated externally in a counter, which, drives a DAC which drives a VCO, which drives the counter as it downcounts the number of steps, thereby slewing the head assembly. This could lead to an interesting but lengthy discussion. The point is that if you want your drives to suffer the least possible wear >from off-rate stepping, you'll do SOMETHING to reduce vibration due to an incorrect step rate. The vibration is on the same axis as the eventual misalignment that will result. None of this applies to the 1770/1772, which have reasonbly fast but not fast enough step rates. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Tony Duell <ard(a)p850ug1.demon.co.uk> To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org> Date: Friday, February 04, 2000 1:41 PM Subject: WD1770 help needed >> Hello all >> >> Sadly, the WD1770 fcd IC in my home-brew fd i/o board finally gave up the >> ghost. Fourteen years of service is admirable -- when it finally croaked, I >> felt like weeping. >> >> Additionally, in violation of my policy of *always* keeping spares of >> discontinued components which I use -- I have no spare. >> >> Does anyone know of a source for these? Or the 1772 (I believe Tony Duell >> once mentioned that the 1772 could replace the 1770 in most cases -- but I >> could be wrong). > >The 1772 appears to be identical to the 1770 apart from the step rates it >uses. If your drives can take said higher rates, then the 1772 will work >in your controller. > >The 1772 (although not the 1770) was, I believe, second-sourced by VLSI >(the company that made most of the ARM chips), as it was used in Acorn >Archimedes machines. The 1770 was used in later version of the BBC micro. > >The 1772 (I think) was used in Atari STs. > >I am not suggesting you raid a working example of any of these machines >for the chip, but maybe somebody has a dead ST with a working 1772 or >something. > >> >> Also, I understand that the C64 floppy drives (1581?) used the 1770 but I'm >> not a commie and can't immediately verify this. Anyone out there with junk >> C64 drives who wants to liberate this IC -- to a good home?? >> > >The 1570 and 1571 (5.25" CBM drives that could read GDR and MFM disks) >have a 1770 in them. Older CBM drives (1541, PET 5.25" drives) do not. I >don't know about the 1581. > >Again, I'd not want to raid a working unit for the chip. But if you have >a broken drive, it's a possible source. > >-tony >

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Reply To: change

by jpl15＠netcom.com

Thank you Jay and Derek... it's my opinion that the List is better served by having the replies redirected back to itself. Now, about that HTML filter... Cheers John

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

A good way to find out what all those pesky IC's are

by xds_sigma7＠hotmail.com

Hi, I don't work for them or get any money for telling the list about it or anything like that, but I found http://www.icmaster.com and it works most of the time. It's best used to look up chips made by companies that are still in business, though. Will J ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

test reply-to - please ignore

by west＠tseinc.com

testing the reply-to configuration. Please ignore

26 years, 5 months

3
3
0 0

WD1770 help needed

by pete＠dunnington.u-net.com

On Feb 4, 11:43, Ethan Dicks wrote: > --- Pete Turnbull <pete(a)dunnington.u-net.com> wrote: > > The 1772 was designed to be a plug-in replacement. The main (only?) > > difference is in the programmed step rates. > > I am looking at a WDC-1772. It has 28 pins. Doesn't the 1770 have 40 pins? No, you're thinking of a 1790. 1770 and 1772 are both 28-pin devices. There's also a 1772-2 which is just a mask revision of the 1772, and a 1772-2-2 which can run faster. Ataris sometimes have the latter. > The standard 5.25" drives _do_ use GCR for all native formats, but the later > stuff (1570/1571) also do MFM for CP/M compatibility. The aforementioned 1581 > is a 3.5" device (~720K; the not-released 1591 was ~1.44Mb) and does have some > form of MFM-capable chip, AFAIK. You can read 1581 disks in other machines, > Linux included, I think. I didn't know that. Did Commodore machines use a standard controller to write the MFM, or did they use the same techniques as for the GCR? I know Amigas can read/write DOS disks, but they don't have any sort of standard controller. -- Pete Peter Turnbull Dept. of Computer Science University of York

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

What's a WD2793A chip?

by ethan_dicks＠yahoo.com

In going through and sorting my piles of classic ICs, I ran across this Western Digital WD2793A chip. What is it? Thanks, -ethan ===== Infinet has been sold. The domain is going away in February. Please send all replies to erd(a)iname.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com

26 years, 5 months

4
3
0 0

WD1770 help needed

by ethan_dicks＠yahoo.com

--- Pete Turnbull <pete(a)dunnington.u-net.com> wrote: > On Feb 3, 22:53, Glenatacme(a)aol.com wrote: > > > Sadly, the WD1770 fcd IC in my home-brew fd i/o board finally gave up the > > ghost. > The 1772 was designed to be a plug-in replacement. The main (only?) > difference is in the programmed step rates. I am looking at a WDC-1772. It has 28 pins. Doesn't the 1770 have 40 pins? > > Also, I understand that the C64 floppy drives (1581?) used the 1770 but > > I'm not a commie and can't immediately verify this. > > I'd be surprised if so. I thought all Commodore micros apart from their > ill-fated PCs used GCR. The standard 5.25" drives _do_ use GCR for all native formats, but the later stuff (1570/1571) also do MFM for CP/M compatibility. The aforementioned 1581 is a 3.5" device (~720K; the not-released 1591 was ~1.44Mb) and does have some form of MFM-capable chip, AFAIK. You can read 1581 disks in other machines, Linux included, I think. -ethan ===== Infinet has been sold. The domain is going away in February. Please send all replies to erd(a)iname.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com

26 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

WD1770 help needed

by ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk

A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text Size: 1621 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/20000204/513f97ba/at…

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

To anybody & everybody who needs to rebuild their Macintosh Portable batteries.

by ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk

A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text Size: 727 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/20000204/f44fe1f1/at…

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Last Find

by Hans.Franke＠mch20.sbs.de

Well, beside the anoying new headers there's still a CC-life (Ommmm :). As of my last stopover in the new world, I aquired a Tandy DT-1. Quite a cute pice of hardware. For the uninformed (as I have been until someone offered it to me via mail) it's basicly a Tandy Model III/IV case build as a Terminal. The Keyboard is a bit different labeled (of course), and the latch closing the empty FD slots is different than the one used on FD less M3/4 (suprise). Mine is working fine (except the A key), I just miss any kind of documentation at all. I'd apreciate any hint where to find more info or maybe manuals. A quick web search turned nothing up. Gruss H. A missing Reply-to header is a fool proof way to loose contact with your friends.

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

IBM parts to donate (fwd)

by dastar＠siconic.com

This guy has an IBM 5360 (huge beast) to give to a good home. He also wants to trade PDP and VAX stuff. Please reply directly to the original sender. Reply-to: cureau(a)pcstarnet.com ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2000 08:41:03 -0500 From: Chris Cureau <cureau(a)pcstarnet.com> To: sellam(a)siconic.com Subject: IBM parts to donate Hi there. :-) I've got an IBM 5360, a 5224 printer and two 5291 terminals with keyboards. If you're interested, please let me know... I'm also looking for a few parts for projects I'm working on...specifically from PDPs and MicroVAXen. If you'd like to trade, let me know. :-) Cheers, Chris Cureau Pumpelly Oil Company (337) 625-1117 Sellam International Man of Intrigue and Danger ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Looking for a six in a pile of nines... VCF Europe: April 29th & 30th, Munich, Germany VCF Los Angeles: Summer 2000 (*TENTATIVE*) VCF East: Planning in Progress See http://www.vintage.org for details!

26 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

regarding the reply address on the list....

by pete＠dunnington.u-net.com

On Feb 3, 20:16, Allison J Parent wrote: > I had to edit the header again, or this reply would have gone to Eric. > > I checked what the mailer(RFDmail) at home does... Same thing it did > before. The last FROM: address it sees is the assumed reply address. In compliance with RFC 822. About the only thing that can legitimately override that is a "Reply-to:". I wonder why no-one has thought of simply swapping the "Sender:" and "From:" headers? -- Pete Peter Turnbull Dept. of Computer Science University of York

26 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

IBM card punches (was Re: Keydisc?)

by ethan_dicks＠yahoo.com

--- James Willing <jimw(a)agora.rdrop.com> wrote: > Well... while I don't have one (tho it would look kool next to my '029) You have an 029? I've got an 026 that is in need of some cleaning/adjusting. Have you ever gone through the process? When we fire it up, not all the right things happen when feeding a card from the hopper. Where do you get your punch cards from? I know you can still order them, but I don't want to buy 10,000 cards at a time. I'm thinking more like a few hundred at a time, and a few colored cards for dividers. Also, do you have a set of the leaf-spring force measurement thingies? I need to aquire a set for the 026 and TTY adjustment, and have no idea where to buy them. Thanks, -ethan ===== Infinet has been sold. The domain is going away in February. Please send all replies to erd(a)iname.com __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com

26 years, 5 months

3
2
0 0

test

by west＠tseinc.com

Test... Jay West

26 years, 5 months

18
35
0 0

Focal sources

by CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.com

Kevin wrote: >>Do you have the original source code for focal....I've looked at the >>focal.txt file, but i'd like to know how everything works >>JON > >I don't have the FOCAL source. I'm not sure it is available. Anyone comment? The DECUS PDP-8 Focal sources (in PAL10) are available. FOCAL.PA begins with: /**** FOCAL 5/69 **** /E.A.TAFT - REVISION OF FOCALW 8/68 /EAT/ 25-JUL-72 /ASSEMBLY INSTRUCTIONS FOR DECUS VERSION: /INPUT FILES: / FOCAL.569 FOCAL LANGUAGE PROCESSOR / FLOAT.569 FLOATING POINT PACKAGE / EXTEND.569 EXTENDED FUNCTION PACKAGE / 2USER.569 2-USER OVERLAY What I have is in the "nickel" PDP-8 DECTAPE archive rescued by me from the University of Indiana several years ago. The Focal stuff, in particular, is on the web at: http://www.trailing-edge.com/~shoppa/focal/ If you were asking about FOCAL-10 (for a PDP-10), this is available on the web as well, from the home to all good software that's PDP-10 related: http://pdp-10.trailing-edge.com/www/lib10/0462/ If you want the PDP-11 (specifically, for RT-11) sources, you can find this at the Metalab.unc.edu PDP-11 archives as DECUS entry 11-0447. Go to http://metalab.unc.edu/pub/academic/computer-science/history/pdp-11/ then go into the RT-11 archives, pick the "decus11" directory, and you'll see three 110477 directories (d1, d2, and d3), one for each original floppy. I also have much RSX and DOS-11 FOCAL stuff that's not indexed yet. I hope this helps. If none of these packages meets your needs, you might ask again for your specific platform(s). Enjoy! -- Tim Shoppa Email: shoppa(a)trailing-edge.com Trailing Edge Technology WWW: http://www.trailing-edge.com/ 7328 Bradley Blvd Voice: 301-767-5917 Bethesda, MD, USA 20817 Fax: 301-767-5927

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

classiccmp-digest V1 #3

by foxvideo＠wincom.net

>Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2000 09:14:09 -0500 >To: classiccmp(a)opal.tseinc.com (This address bounced) From: "Charles E. Fox" <foxvideo(a)wincom.net> >Subject: Re: classiccmp-digest V1 #3 >In-Reply-To: <200002031957.NAA33069(a)opal.tseinc.com> > > > > Since the restart of classiccmp I have only been getting classiccmp-digest, not individual messages. This is really time consuming as I have to check the entire message and not just the header. Is this a feature of the new setup, or have I just been left off a list? > > Regards > > Charlie Fox Charles E. Fox Chas E. Fox Video Productions 793 Argyle Rd. Windsor N8Y 3J8 Ont. Canada email foxvideo(a)wincom.net Homepage http://www.wincom.net/foxvideo

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

WD1770 help needed

by pete＠dunnington.u-net.com

On Feb 3, 22:53, Glenatacme(a)aol.com wrote: > Sadly, the WD1770 fcd IC in my home-brew fd i/o board finally gave up the > ghost. Fourteen years of service is admirable -- when it finally croaked, > I felt like weeping. > Does anyone know of a source for these? Or the 1772 (I believe Tony Duell > once mentioned that the 1772 could replace the 1770 in most cases -- but I > could be wrong). The 1772 was designed to be a plug-in replacement. The main (only?) difference is in the programmed step rates. > Also, I understand that the C64 floppy drives (1581?) used the 1770 but I'm > not a commie and can't immediately verify this. I'd be surprised if so. I thought all Commodore micros apart from their ill-fated PCs used GCR. There are plenty of list members who know much more about C= stuff than I do, though... Atari STs used the 1772, so that's another potential source. -- Pete Peter Turnbull Dept. of Computer Science University of York

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Focal

by dylanb＠sympatico.ca

When requesting original DEC source code one must include flavor (12 bit, 16bit, 18bit, 36 bit) and vintage (Focal-1968, Focal-1969, Focal-1970, Focal 1.0b, etc), and style (preliminary, beta, released). I received a huge amount of original commented FOCAL source code/OP system source code in many different formats [paper tapes, dectapes, floppies, rk05 packs, etc..] from the DEC load. I hope to put the code online this year but....what do you need? john PDP-8 and other rare mini computers http://www.pdp8.com -----Original Message----- From: Kevin McQuiggin <mcquiggi(a)sfu.ca> To: Jon Andrews <Jon.Andrews(a)jaywalk.co.uk> Cc: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org> Date: Thursday, February 03, 2000 10:35 PM Subject: Re: Focal >Hi Jon: > >I don't have the FOCAL source. I'm not sure it is available. Anyone comment? > >Kevin > >At 03:32 PM 00/02/03 +0000, you wrote: >>Do you have the original source code for focal....I've looked at the >>focal.txt file, but i'd like to know how everything works >> >>JON >> >> > >--- >Kevin McQuiggin VE7ZD >mcquiggi(a)sfu.ca >

26 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

Focal

by mcquiggi＠sfu.ca

Hi Jon: I don't have the FOCAL source. I'm not sure it is available. Anyone comment? Kevin At 03:32 PM 00/02/03 +0000, you wrote: >Do you have the original source code for focal....I've looked at the >focal.txt file, but i'd like to know how everything works > >JON > > --- Kevin McQuiggin VE7ZD mcquiggi(a)sfu.ca

26 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

regarding the reply address on the list....

by mbg＠world.std.com

>NOBODY had any serious difficulty using the old system. That is an assumption on your part... it just so happens that some of us did have problems with the old system. It seems that maybe we just didn't complain about it enough... :-) >SOME people have some difficulty with the new system. Parity... In fact, for this 'response', I decided to simply make it a new 'send' to the list, so the original author won't get a second copy of this message... this is easier for me than to have to search for and then cut-and-paste the address of the author if I want to send just to them... after all, the list is at a fixed address (for now). After all that, however, I'm going to withdraw my vote for the new system, I'll abstain. I'll get by with whatever is available (so long as it isn't the HTML-cr*p)... I do like Sellam's argument about information lost due to doing a reply and having it go only to the author and not the list. My $.02 Megan Gentry Former RT-11 Developer +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+ | Megan Gentry, EMT/B, PP-ASEL | Internet (work): gentry!zk3.dec.com | | Unix Support Engineering Group | (home): mbg!world.std.com | | Compaq Computer Corporation | addresses need '@' in place of '!' | | 110 Spitbrook Rd. ZK03-2/T43 | URL: http://world.std.com/~mbg/ | | Nashua, NH 03062 | "pdp-11 programmer - some assembler | | (603) 884 1055 | required." - mbg | +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+

26 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

CDC 9448

by jeff.kaneko＠juno.com

Guys: Anyone out there that still uses these? I have a bunch of spares (boards and r/w heads) for 'em. If there's any interest, please e-mail me privately. Jeff ________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Identification of EPROM Programming board - AIM or KIM or ???

by whdawson＠mlynk.com

To All, I just obtained a board which I think is an EPROM programming board for the AIM or KIM or ???, and I'm trying to find some information on it. It is not an RM65 board, the connector looks like it would plug right to an AIM. Here is a description: Measures 4-7/16 (4.4375)inches wide by 6-1/2 (6.5) inches long, including edge connector, lengthwise insertion. 44 pin gold plated edge connector with a 44 pin socket mounted immediately behind and parallel to the edge connector, on the component side of the PCB. 24 pin ZIF connector in the upper LH corner, viewing with the edge connector facing me (all descriptions below assume this position). 10 position DIP switch immediately to the right of the ZIF socket (no labeling), and another 10 position dip switch about halfway up the RHS, labeled 1 to 7 and B, C, D (probably address selection since one row of pins is all tied common and most of the pins on the other side of it go to a 74LS154). One LED, immediately to the right of the first 10 position DIP switch mentioned above, at the edge of the board. Two trimpots about center of the far edge of the board, to the right of the LED. Two jumper blocks, one with 2 pins, labeled W1, and one with 3 pins, labeled RO and RA. Two Toshiba 24 pin TMM2016P-1 RAMs left of center in second row of DIPs on the board. One 2516-45 EPROM to the left of the RAMS, with a label on top "6517A". On the solder side the only markings (in etch) are CUBIT INC, 1981 and the numbers 10362 and 6583. Most of the date codes on the ICs are between 8037 and 8203. There is no other model number, manufacturer, or other ID marking on this board. If anyone has any information on this board, please let me know (through the list). Thanks all, Bill whdawson(a)mlynk.com

26 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

To anybody & everybody who needs to rebuild their Macintosh Portable batteries.

by netsurfer_x1＠hotmail.com

Great news! If there is anybody looking for replacement cells for their Macintosh Portable batteries, go to this site: http://www.hepi.com/ look for 2V 5.0Ah "Cyclon" size "X" cells They don't mention prices on the site, however, so buyer beware. Also, I don't want to get 20 e-mails saying that I led you to a company that ripped you off. I cannot, & will not, be held accountable for your actions! ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

regarding the reply address on the list....

by allisonp＠world.std.com

I had to edit the header again, or this reply would have gone to Eric. I checked what the mailer(RFDmail) at home does... Same thing it did before. The last FROM: address it sees is the assumed reply address. Oh well. Allison

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

regarding the reply address on the list....

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<I'm not sure what you mean, here. RFC 822 specifies that the Reply-To: <is to be set by the originator, but the rest of your post seems to <suggest that majordomo should change it. Could you clarify? < < -Rich Majordomo is the originator when we are talking mailing list. If you want replies to stay on list classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org (aka majordomo) should be the target address. Since I've edited the header the only reply to address should be Classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org and the poster, me. Allison

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

Sony SMC-70 floppy disks

by ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk

A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text Size: 2436 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/20000204/d97ee4b3/at…

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

IMPORTANT PLEASE READ

by west＠tseinc.com

I can't believe I heard someone say just go back to the old software. With the level of expertise of the people on this list, I should *NOT* have to say the following, but I'm apparently going to have to - PLEASE READ THIS: Majordomo is perfectly capable of making the list work just the way it always did. Period. It is not an issue of the list software forcing the configuration this way. It is not an issue with the host system. It is simply a configuration issue which can be easily changed. It can be done any way the folks here want it done and will work just as well as it always did. The problem I'm having is this: I am a relative newcomer to this list (about the last 12 months perhaps). I was not around when this list was started. As such, I have no knowledge as to if this list is owned by Derek and thus he has total sayso or if everything was always done by group concensus or what. I assumed (perhaps incorrectly - to this date I still have no idea if this is correct or not) that Derek ran the list. Please imagine my position. Everyone is saying do it one way or another and I don't know if I'm supposed to go with whatever Derek says or if I'm supposed to be listening and counting votes. I'm stuck in the middle because a fair number of folks aren't happy. I haven't received any email from Derek for several days so I don't know what should be done. I CAN do whatever should be done but SOMEONE has to tell me definitively what to do. My personal preference at this point is to change the configuration so that it works as it did on u.washington.edu. and we can always discuss the merits of doing it a different way later. That would be easy to do and I can do it right now. But there's the rub - if I go do that right now and make the reply-to stuff work the way it did am I stepping on Derek's toes? Or am I ignoring the will of the group? I would greatly appreciate it if someone could just authoritatively say "do it this way". I offered to do this free of charge and I have no problem with that at all. I just don't know who to listen to. Somebody educate me on this please. Jay West

26 years, 5 months

4
4
0 0

regarding the reply address on the list....

by pete＠dunnington.u-net.com

On Feb 3, 18:00, Hans Franke wrote: > So here's my ME-TOO-NOT-LIKE-THE-NEW mail: > Last but not least, it's the RFC 822 way - and standards are the > only real chance to go along. Except that mailing lists are not what RFC 822 defined "Reply-to:" for. Its primary purpose is quite different; it's to force a reply to a valid address when the sender's "From:" is not valid. Quote: "The "Reply-To" field is added by the originator" The RFC 822 method would be to set the "From:" field to "classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org" , and set the "Sender:" field to the name of the person who originated the message (which is exactly the opposite to what majordomo is doing, I notice, but that's perfectly legitimate). -- Pete Peter Turnbull Dept. of Computer Science University of York

26 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

regarding the reply address on the list....INTERESTING

by ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk

A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text Size: 3332 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/20000203/78f0428e/at…

26 years, 5 months

2
1
0 0

Sony SMC-70 floppy disks

by jmd＠infinet.com

Hi all........ Good to see the list back again...... Recently I picked up a Sony SMC-70 with CP/M for Sony on floppy disks. I have recreated what the original owner had by purchasing the same model monitor and using his cable to connect the computer to the monitor. This is not the OEM monitor (anybody know what was?) but this setup worked for him. When I turn on the computer it scans for the floppy in a:, b: and then pauses and comes back to a: and reads the disk for about 12 seconds. Nothing more happens. There is no display on the screen. If I leave the a: drive empty and have *any* floppy in b: the computer scans a:, then b: goes back to b: for a couple of seconds then begins to beep until I put a floppy in a:. Still nothing on the screen. There is a switch on the side that has 3 options: OFF DISK ROM I have tried all three with no output to screen. Things I have done. 1) Double checked the pinouts against the drawing I was given. 2) I have tried the cable that connects to a B/W port on the box. I connect this to video on the monitor. 3) I have tested the monitor. I know it works in TV and video mode, but have no way to test for RGB. Which is how I am connecting. I am wondering if the floppies may have gone bad. (There are 4 disks labeled CP/M 2.2 and one also says Sony CP/M 2.2) They have been laying around for several years I think. If this is a possibility does anyone have known good floppies? thanks for any info jeff duncan

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

regarding the reply address on the list....

by Philip.Belben＠powertech.co.uk

>> >> The best text on the subject i've seen is ``Reply-To'' Munging Considered >> Harmful by Chip Rosenthal. >> >> http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html > > And the rebuttle: http://www.metasystema.org/reply-to-useful.mhtml > > I personally like Reply-To: set to the mailing list. All the lists I'm on > are set up that way and there have been no problems that I could see (yes, > you see the occasional private message sent but it's not that big a > problem). Hello again everyone! Good to be back! I have read both the above web articles. I'd like to cast my vote in favour of REPLY-TO: == THE LIST Why? 1. I don't want to receive two messages when someone replies to me and the list 2. With the old system, if someone forgot to change the header, there was a spurious message, which I deleted. Some people might object to the waste of bandwidth, but it merely gave me one extra message to delete. With the new system, if someone forgets to change the header, the information doesn't reach the list. This causes a bigger waste of bandwidth, because you get more people answering the same question, not having seen each other's replies. And it stifles discussion, because replies-to-replies often never get generated (and these are sometimes the most useful). So the new method gives less info to the list for more use of bandwidth. IMHO, not good. I am on several lists, of which about half work the old way (reply to the list by default). This is very convenient on all of them. Of the others, on the one where I have asked questions I have received substantially the same reply privately from several people, but the discussion hasn't borne fruit on the list. Just my two penn'orth... Philip. PS I almost forgot to edit the addressees of this one... ********************************************************************** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses. Power Technology Centre, Ratcliffe-on-Soar, Nottingham, NG11 0EE, UK Tel: +44 (0)115 936 2000 http://www.powertech.co.uk **********************************************************************

26 years, 5 months

11
15
0 0

regarding the reply address on the list....INTERESTING

by pete＠dunnington.u-net.com

On Feb 3, 21:50, Tony Duell wrote: > > The reasons you give for wishing to change back are the reasons I wish > > things to stay as they are now. I hit "Reply to All" and the reply goes to > > you, and to the list. I hit "Reply", and only you get the reply. I can > > Ah, but that doesn't work properly if you're replying to a message that > somebody else has already group-replied to. > > Supposing you post to classiccmp, and I group-reply. The message is now > going to classiccmp@... _and you_. Suppose Philip Belben then > group-replies to the message. It now has you, me, and the list as > addresses. Then Megan (say) group-replies to that. Before long, the > header contains the address of every 'regular' here. And we all get > things twice. > > The only ways for me to reply to the list _only_ seem to be : You missed one: "reply-all" and remove the original author's address. It obviously depends on the mailer(s) involved. With the one I use nearly all the time (zmail under Unix), if I hit "reply all" then both the list and original author addresses appear in the "To:" header, and because of the way that's presented by this particular mailer, it's easy for me to remove the one I don't want (two keystrokes). However, if I reply to a followup that someone else has already responded to, and that message has the list address in the "Cc:" instead of the "To:" header, zmail keeps it in the "Cc:" and it means two more keystrokes to fix. I can do exactly the same thing in BSD Mail but it take an extra keystroke or two. And I apologise not always practising what I preach, i.e. for sending 3 extra copies of an earlier followup :-( -- Pete Peter Turnbull Dept. of Computer Science University of York

26 years, 5 months

1
0
0 0

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

test-drb