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

The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the80s

by CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.com

>> Just to put things into perspective, a week's groceries, these days, for a >> family of four, cost about $150, a decent mid-priced car costs $15000, and a >> farily well equipped and appropriately designated personal computer with a >> 400MHz pentium, 8GB HDD, 64MB of RAM, OS installed, all the multimedia >> features, plus a current-generation modem (V.90) costs $400 less the monitor >> with monitors costing $139 for a 15" and $300 for a 20" type. These prices >> are from Best-Buy's ad in last Sunday's paper. You can probably do better >> if you shop. >These prices are also based on technology that has had 50 years to mature, >and therefore the comparison is entirely invalid. "If the automobile had followed the same price-performance changes as the computer industry in the past 50 years, a Rolls Royce would today cost $4.95, get two million miles to the gallon, go 50000 MPH, and explode once a day, killing everyone inside." -- Robert X. Cringley -- 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

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the 80s

by jfoust＠threedee.com

At 11:31 PM 4/21/99 -0700, Sellam Ismail wrote: > >That's Doug Salot's (Yowza) creation. What about his assertion don't you >agree with? I think he's right on the mark. I became mightly confused when I searched my bookmarks for "classic computer" and found <http://www.yowza.com/classiccmp/faq.txt>, which was 404, so I trimmed off "faq.txt" and tried again, which 404'd, and then thought <http://www.yowza.com/> must be some kind of parody that Doug assembled, but now I'm not sure. Did he sell the domain? - John

27 years, 3 months

3
2
0 0

HP Apollo questions

by rigdonj＠intellistar.net

I was scrounging today and found a nice looking HP Apollo 400 in a surplus place. The owner didn't know anything about it but I dug around a bit more and found a monitor, mouse and keyboard that worked with it. Connected everything together and fired it up. It booted up with no problems but no one knows the pass word. Does anyone know how to bypass that? It's a model A2536A with a HP model A1097C monitor and HP/Apollo model A1630 keyboard. Can anyone tell me more about these? I know nothing about the Apollo computers. Any idea how usefull this thing is or what it's worth? Joe

27 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the80s

by edick＠idcomm.com

One aspect of this matter I'm already seeing ignored is the COST. That so-called FIRST personal computer which cost $300 in the early '50's, for example, cost quite a lot of money. In the '50's, it was unusual for anyone to earn $100 a week. A mid-priced Chevrolet cost less than $2000 and $10 a week was plenty for a week's groceries for a family of 4. Not even DEC's so-called personal computers were competitive enough to interest an industry professional. The DEC mini's weren't even a good buy as they became obsolete. I doubt DEC equipment was EVER used where there wasn't a third party present who profited from its use. That doesn't mean they weren't appropriate and suitable for a wide range of uses, but it certainly doesn't characterize a personal computer. Just to put things into perspective, a week's groceries, these days, for a family of four, cost about $150, a decent mid-priced car costs $15000, and a farily well equipped and appropriately designated personal computer with a 400MHz pentium, 8GB HDD, 64MB of RAM, OS installed, all the multimedia features, plus a current-generation modem (V.90) costs $400 less the monitor with monitors costing $139 for a 15" and $300 for a 20" type. These prices are from Best-Buy's ad in last Sunday's paper. You can probably do better if you shop. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Sellam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Thursday, April 22, 1999 3:21 AM Subject: Re: The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the80s >On Wed, 21 Apr 1999, Christian Fandt wrote: > >> This seems to be a well researched trail leading up to the Simon, IMO. > >Yes, Doug did a fantastic job. > >> However, any good guess as to how many Simons were actually made and >> successfully run from the over 400 plan sets sold? Any known to exist now? > >Doug is still looking for one, but he and another local Doug are looking >into building one. They've acquired a nice pile of relays and are hoping >to have one built by VCF 3.0 for exhibit. > >> To try to solve that First Microcomputer question, a set of attributes must >> first be set just like the set was to determine the 1st PC as shown in the >> above URL. Methinks that will be a bit troublesome as nobody seemed to >> agree on that during the last go-around of discussing the 1st Microcomputer >> here awhile back. > >Well, first what? First computer built around a microprocessor? That >would probably be Intel's development machines. Or should it include an >integrated CRT and keyboard? Or did it just have to have a serial >interface for a terminal? Or are lights and switches good enough for >output and input? > >Arguing firsts is mostly pointless because people have a problem agreeing >on the definition. I vote for the F14 CADC computer, since it was built >around what could be considered a "microprocessor" and was in production >and flying in the F14 in 1970. > >http://www.microcomputerhistory.com > >Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- >Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out. > > Coming this October 2-3: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0! > See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details! > [Last web site update: 04/03/99] >

27 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

More 3rd Party DEC boards

by CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.com

> Versatec > PDP-11 Matrix control > This is a dual height board, but I'm pretty sure it's for a UNIBUS system, > thanks to the wierd connector sticking out the side of it for another board. Yeah, connectors out the side almost always signals non-Q-bus. This is part of the set that runs (surprise!) a Versatec plotter - think of it as a really labor-intensive laserprinter and you won't be too far off. >DILOG DQ342 >Quad Height, has a 34 and a 10-pin connector I think this is a MSCP MFM disk controller (there was also a floppy-only version.) >SCD-RQD11/EC >Quad Height, 4 20-pin connectors, 1 34-pin, and 1 10-pin. 3 LED's 2 green, >1 red. I think it's a Sigma ESDI controller, based on doing a DejaNews >search, it also looks like it _might_ be basically a rebadged WQESD >controller, since the one article talks about WOMBAT. Is this correct, and >can I just use my WQESD manual for it? The WQESD is the same as the SCD-RQD11/EC is the same as the Qualogy equivalent is the same as the DSD equivalent is the same as the American Digital Equivalent... *All* designed by Webster out of Australia. >Plessey >P/N 705920-100A >Quad Height, RAM board Count the chips, identify their type, and you know the size! -- 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

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by edick＠idcomm.com

Since we've not seen any code for the 6502 yet, this may not be a problem, but since Apple didn't exactly make it easy to exchange diskettes with other systems, how would you propose to transfer a file, binary or otherwise between systems? Though I haven't gotten into it, I figured on cross-assembling from a PC to a PROM. That makes it easy for me, but how will others do it? It's enough of a problem transferring files from, say, a CP/M box running a Z-80, since PC's don't read 8" disks. How should this be dealt with? Dick -----Original Message----- From: Mike Ford <mikeford(a)netwiz.net> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Thursday, April 22, 1999 3:17 AM Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing >>> Some things in this contest that sound reasonable to me; >> >>> Input and output are to memory resident buffers. >> >>> Inline code is too boring, and subrountine calling too important, so the >>> "task" should require perhaps modules; maybe make the contest half a dozen >>> subroutines which get called from a contest defined main program (using >>> some typical non asm language like C or pascal). >> >>> Contest submissions could be a simple binary file, file length, predefined >>> jump table for subroutines, the actual code. Some third party, can run the >>> code and time it on the hardware of their choice. >> >>Nice, but with these things, like internas of the system for input/output, >>binary and similarities, you tie again all down to a single system to >>use - we loose the idea of a cross platform competition where only basic >>processor features are measured (see also the subject). > >I don't see what you mean. By setting some basic format for the file >structure you make it PORTABLE, not restricted. Each target system then can >read the common format and arrange it however is best suited to that target >system prior to execution of code. > >

27 years, 3 months

3
2
0 0

Wang further info.

by jpl15＠netcom.com

Here are the model numbers/descriptions of the Wang system I mentioned back up the list aways: Wang VS7110 with 16MB mem (2) SMD disk controllers (3) 928 Workstation/Printer controllers (1) Multiline TC controller (2) 2295V Disk Storage Cabinets First one: (1) 75MB RSD removable (1) 454 MB SMD fixed (2) 314 MB SMD fixed Second one: (2) 454 MB SMD fixed (2) 5573-1 300 LPM Band Printers (2) third-party terminals. A note attached to the inventory sheet says that the CPU will not IPL due to bad disk in console SCU; disk cabs power up and pass self test. Printers not tested, no cables. ------------- PLEASE NOTE that I am awating the last corporate 'OK' on this stuff pending our Purchasing Department finding out that, in fact, no one is going to buy the gear. No one. Trust me folks.... ;} I imagine I will know Real Soon, because the stuff has to moved prior to May 10th. Again, I am listing this for those who need/love Wang gear... it's not for me. If there is no reasonably positive interest, I will most likely turn it down, and thus it will hit the skip. I can store it for a while if need be. Shipping is on you... (Why couldn't it have been an 11/780???) Cheers John

27 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by edick＠idcomm.com

In reality, I recall that though TI didn't market their products the way Intel does now, they did market their home computers back in the early '80's. What's more they advertised their electronic toys more than all the other fellows you've mentioned combined. The TI salesman called me as often as any of the others, if not more. I was, after all, a user of many of their products, since they had more than any other single manufacturer, and their efforts to make their products accessible to small developers were a great help. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Thursday, April 22, 1999 4:51 PM Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing ><Now I know that many people didn't consider it a reasonable computer, but ><the TMS-9900 did make a memorable appearance in the TI-99/4/4A of blessed ><memory - 16K if I recall correctly. Once you added a PEB, RS-232 card, 32 ><memory card, 2 HH DS/SD floppies and an Extended Basic cartidge, it was a ><fine computer. > >Not quite true. There were the TI business systems, the ti990-xxx boards >that could be systems or used as SBCs and after the TI99/4a there was the >Geneve system that was marketed. Another was a ti9900 board for S100. >Also Technico systems had both the basic Super starter system as a SBC >and expansion boards for it as well. > >It didn't make the impact because TI didn't market it like intel, moto or >Mos tech.. Actually they didn't market it at all until the were an also >ran. Shame too as it was the fist 16bit single chip and vastly better than >8086 considering it was 4 years earlier. >Allison >

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<Does anyone have one of those first 4004 terminals that started everything < <Were they even built? They were calculators. Allison

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

How scarce (valuable) is core for the PDP-8?

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<My first thought was something like a small compass near each bit. I want <to avoid lights since I think they are less engaging, less an indicator <that something has happened. Ideally this should be an attractive looking <toy, that sparks curiousity. The ferrite would not show enough external field change to be a reliable indicator. However when the wires were driven they indeed would! Allison

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

How scarce (valuable) is core for the PDP-8?

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<What might a drop of ferrofluid do if placed on a core? Show the fields induced by the wires and some of the remnant field (no current magnetic material is perfect magnetic conductor). Allison

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the 80s

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<Now, I have a decmate III, and that looks like a microcomputer to me. In effect it's the same damm thing. While the PDP-8 I'd concede is a mini of micro size it was not a single or multiple "chip based" system. That has to wait in the commercial realm for the 8008. <Exactly, yes I do define a microcomputer in those terms. it was a new <'era' in computing, just as the switch from mainframes to minicomputers Figures, retro revisionism. <microcomputers. One possible observation is that they cannot be <mounted in a 19" rack (as many minicomputers can be). Sure, you <can get a minicomputer in a non-rack mount version, but show <me the person or company that bought rack mounted apple ][ <microcomputers... Well the Altair, IMSAI, and even apple were available as rack cased and mounted as such. For the real rack king the OSI systems as most were rack frames in various forms. Again a rack doe not make it a mini as the LSI-11 was available as non rack and rack systems. The non rack would be PDT-11/1xx series and the racked would be the LSI-11/03. For the moment I'll for get the PRO3xx, Qbus and the Unibus systems that used the F (2-3chips) or J11 (one chip) versions of the PDP-11 mini. <Do we at least agree that there was a microcomputer era that <started either near the mid 70's or early 80's (depending on how <you define microcomputer)? If not, what do you call the change Microcomputer in 71 at the latest with the commercial deliver of the 8008. (there were non commercial systems before that). By the 80s the arguement was form not mini/micro as they were litereally the same in most cases. <that occured at that time. And what was the first computer or <computers that started ushering in that change (even though at the <time, they didnt realize it was a significant trend)? Well, I'd easily identify as for as 5 major trends and likely more in the span from the intro from the pdp-8 through the start of the 32bit era. Your forgetting I worked for NEC from 79 through 83 and before that TANDY Computer(z80), Hazeltine(8080 and 8048 in terminals), Automated processes (8008). I was one of the first 1000 (SN#200) to buy an Altair. If anything I not only realized the eras I was out there making them! Allison

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

OT: Re: Time to declare State of Massachusetts the ENEMY! Hey!

by SUPRDAVE＠aol.com

In a message dated 14/04/99 16:32:06 Eastern Daylight Time, max82(a)surfree.com writes: << Actually, you might see 486s also. I spent half an hour last saturday smashing all kinds of computers, from PS/2 Model 30 to DEC 486. They were being trashed, and we decided to have some fun while we were at it. We stomped on them till they were practically pancakes (the drives had been removed). It was quite fun :) >> that was a rather stupid thing to do. All of those computers could have been of some use, if not to just be salvaged for parts to revive other computers.

27 years, 3 months

24
67
0 0

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by wrm＠ccii.co.za

Hi all My name is Wouter, I'm new here, and I never throw anything away. <everyone>Hi Wouter!</everyone> :-) From: "Richard Erlacher" <edick(a)idcomm.com> >I saw one ad for an >SC/MP, in '77, but that one was a homebrewed model. Other than that, it was >not of much interest here. Was that not the case in Germany? The processor >was still in National's data book, but I really wasn't then and am not now >of any operating system or application software for it. I don't believe I >ever saw a real SC/MP based computer. http://ccii.dockside.co.za/~wrm/ccc.html Warning: pages in progress! Wouter

27 years, 3 months

3
5
0 0

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<Now I know that many people didn't consider it a reasonable computer, but <the TMS-9900 did make a memorable appearance in the TI-99/4/4A of blessed <memory - 16K if I recall correctly. Once you added a PEB, RS-232 card, 32 <memory card, 2 HH DS/SD floppies and an Extended Basic cartidge, it was a <fine computer. Not quite true. There were the TI business systems, the ti990-xxx boards that could be systems or used as SBCs and after the TI99/4a there was the Geneve system that was marketed. Another was a ti9900 board for S100. Also Technico systems had both the basic Super starter system as a SBC and expansion boards for it as well. It didn't make the impact because TI didn't market it like intel, moto or Mos tech.. Actually they didn't market it at all until the were an also ran. Shame too as it was the fist 16bit single chip and vastly better than 8086 considering it was 4 years earlier. Allison

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

more chording keyboards

by max82＠surfree.com

Hi, I still haven't built a chording keyboard, but I'd like to know, what are its advantages/disadvantages over a regular one? I realize the general differences, what I'm looking for is 'it would be great for typing because.., it would be awful for data entry because....' --Max Eskin (max82(a)surfree.com) http://scivault.hypermart.net: Ignorance is Impotence - Knowledge is Power

27 years, 3 months

5
8
0 0

The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the 80s

by cfandt＠netsync.net

Upon the date 02:12 AM 4/22/99 -0700, Sellam Ismail said something like: >On Wed, 21 Apr 1999, Christian Fandt wrote: > -- snip -- >> To try to solve that First Microcomputer question, a set of attributes must >> first be set just like the set was to determine the 1st PC as shown in the >> above URL. Methinks that will be a bit troublesome as nobody seemed to >> agree on that during the last go-around of discussing the 1st Microcomputer >> here awhile back. > >Well, first what? First computer built around a microprocessor? That Yes, 'first what?' That's pretty much my point in writing that paragraph above because there's no apparently clear concensus on the set of attributes. >would probably be Intel's development machines. Or should it include an Intel's devel machines would be a logical choice if one holds to the first microcomputer machine in question using a microprocessor. After all, since Intel is the "inventor" of the uP and the Busicom calculator product was probably not "programmable", then the first ones could have been from Intel. However, your F14 CADC computer choice below holds the most water when considering uP-based machines. Therefore, as a result of recently disclosed confidential information as many of us had already seen months ago on the microcomputerhistory.com site, the MP944 chipset-based computer should indeed be considered the first microcomputer. Ultimately, an etymology of the word 'microcomputer' should be undertaken with respect to its' being attached to a *particular* machine, whether uP-based or not, in order to answer the question clearly. I suggest we start there. What does the OED say? >integrated CRT and keyboard? Or did it just have to have a serial >interface for a terminal? Or are lights and switches good enough for >output and input? > >Arguing firsts is mostly pointless because people have a problem agreeing >on the definition. I vote for the F14 CADC computer, since it was built >around what could be considered a "microprocessor" and was in production >and flying in the F14 in 1970. > >http://www.microcomputerhistory.com Regards, Chris -- -- Christian Fandt, Electronic/Electrical Historian Jamestown, NY USA cfandt(a)netsync.net Member of Antique Wireless Association URL: http://www.ggw.org/awa

27 years, 3 months

3
2
0 0

The Paxton auction: any interest in rescues

by Innfogra＠aol.com

Yes, the dual 5 1/4" Andromeda drive has a single 34 pin connector in the back. What might it be worth to you? Paxton

27 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

How scarce (valuable) is core for the PDP-8?

by clintw＠colorado.cirrus.com

> From allisonp(a)world.std.com Wed Apr 21 17:10:05 1999 > Reply-To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu > Sender: CLASSICCMP-owner(a)u.washington.edu > Precedence: bulk > From: allisonp(a)world.std.com (Allison J Parent) > To: "Discussion re-collecting of classic computers" <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> > Subject: Re: How scarce (valuable) is core for the PDP-8? > X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN > Content-Length: 367 > X-Lines: 15 > > <How long does core stay magnetized without power? > > Years. > > <How many bytes of battery-backed RAM are there in a typical PC? > > Not a lot usually something in the 32-128byte range, maybe more. > > <Haven't there been contemporary memory devices that use nano-scale > <cores, to eliminate the battery needs and radiation sensitivity of RAM? > > Not that I'm aware of. > > Allison > > Actually, there are a few companys making FRAMs. Essentially they use a small amount of magnetic material to provide non-volatile storage. They may even be core shaped :) clint

27 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

Wang word proc Free in SoCal

by jpl15＠netcom.com

I have been offered a largish Wang word processor system... a washing-machine size CPU and two slightly smaller 8" floppy units, several terminals and two printers... no doc or software at this time. I will get model numbers etc. when I actually get to spend some time poking around the units. My question before I actually commit to saving this from the dumpster is: anybody want it??? I sure don't... They're *big* and heavy, so shipping is definately a factor, unless you want to arrange to pick it up, in which case there is a loading dock available. Cheers John PS: TRW Saturday.....

27 years, 3 months

5
4
0 0

The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the 80s

by CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.com

>Then the Cromemco Z-2 series was designed specifically for rack mount >applications... (I have an example of that one in my collection - >currently in a rack) B^} The catalogs usually pictured the Z-2 in a nice wooden office cabinet - often an integral part of a desk. In the field, certainly, open metal racks make much more sense :-). -- 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

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by edick＠idcomm.com

That 8073 from National is in my inventory, though I don't recall its being an SC/MP. It's probably something, though, and I somehow doubt it's an 8048-series component. Dick -----Original Message----- From: KFergason(a)aol.com <KFergason(a)aol.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 9:59 PM Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing >In a message dated 4/21/99 6:09:47 PM Central Daylight Time, >allisonp(a)world.std.com writes: > >> <Name a non-homebrew SC/MP based computer. >> <(note, I believe one existed, but memory is fuzzy till i get home to >> <the old magazines) >> >> Not including the three sold by National Semi or the ones that used the >> 8073 SC/MP with a internal rom tiny basic(also sold be national)??? >> >> Allison >> > >Yes, not including any by NS. I know they produced boards, >just like most manufacturers did. > >DigiKey had something in their catalogs, but its been so long, I >don't remember exactly what it was. (maybe just reselling the NS stuff?) > >Kelly > >

27 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

homemade computer for fun and experience...

by edick＠idcomm.com

I'm going to have to take an opposing position once again. I'd never have given up on terminals, having invested hundreds of kilobucks in them over time. My recollection, biased, I'm sure, by the ten years of trouble-free, experience, thanks to being terminal-free is that they were more trouble than I ever expected. Since I stopped using terminals, I've not once been unable to use a software package because I didn't have the right terminal. Whether it's VMS or WORDSTAR, it is a royal pain if the hardware I've got won't work. Terminals are different. They behave differently, given various commands. Yes, ANSI terminals are more or less compatible, but they won't work with the applications I used to use under CP/M at all. I have never had a desire for DEC hardware, mainly because of my distaste (and disdain) for their application of technology, and of course for their overemphasis on the bottom line, meaning THEIR bottom line. If you read the fine print, their sales documents specifically deny that they claim their products work. argghhh! I'm GLAD they're gone. THEY were the reason I had to have terminals around as long as I did. A keyboard interface is quite straightforward. A video display is not. I agree that there's reason why so many computers used terminals, but now that we don't have to do that, I propose that we not limit ourselves to what little a terminal can do. See . . . there are reasons NOT to use a terminal. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Tony Duell <ard(a)p850ug1.demon.co.uk> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Monday, April 05, 1999 3:01 PM Subject: Re: homemade computer for fun and experience... >> >> While I agree fundamentally in that you really don't have to have graphic >> output capabilities, to wit, I did without it for over 30 years of computer >> use, I don't believe there's any reason to favor the terimnal over the >> direct-mapped monochrome video display. It's nominally a 2000 character > >A few reasons. It's a lot easier to add a serial port than add a video >display/keyboard system (I've done both, many times). And Tim is right : >Serial terminals are probably a lot more universal than whatever flavour >of monitor that you pick. > >> as for what you find difficult to get fixed . . . (a) who cares about fixing >> a serial card? Another costs $3. (b) pre-vga monochrome cards and monitors > >I care. Particularly when I need the darn thing over a weekend, it's >failed on Saturday night, and I have a junk box full of chips, but no >spare boards... I also care about keeping the landfills empty. > >And I specificially mentioned the IBM Async card for a reason. It has a >current loop I/O facility. AFAIK none of the cheap clones - the ones >you'll get for $3 - have this facility. Adding it wouldn't be hard given >a schematic and a well-stocked junk box, but what's the point? By the >time you've traced out the schematic and made the mods you might as well >have fixed the original card. > >Suffice it to say that I have full schematics of this PC and intend to >keep on fixing it properly... > >> abound at the thrift stores. Keyboards do as well. (c) so long as hard disk >> drives of the ST506 variety still abound in the thrift stores, the > >Those drives are getting fairly hard to find in the UK :-( > >> controllers will too. I passed on an 'AT box a week ago, which had a VGA >> card, a 200+ MB eide 3.5" 1/3-height hard disk, and much of the usual stuff > >You're missing the point. If I have my data on an ST506 drive and the >controller fails, the last thing I need is an EIDE drive, however big it >is. I need a controller, or the chips to fix my existing controller. I >want to get my data back. > >> I figure, if I can't replace it with something similar, then I'll replace it >> with something more current. > >Maybe... You might find you're replacing an awful lot of the machine, >though... ISA is on the way out, remember.. > >Personally, I'll stick to machines that I can maintain properly (no board >swapping!). And _I_'ll decide when I want to upgrade. > >-tony >

27 years, 3 months

9
17
0 0

SUN tape drive was RE: Sun 1 question

by rigdonj＠intellistar.net

Aaron, Got it open. It has a Exabyte EXB-8505 drive in it. Don't know what I'll use it for. I haven't even been able to get my SUN IPC to boot yet. Thanks for the help. Joe At 08:39 PM 4/21/99 -0700, you wrote: >Hi Joe, > >Simple, once you know the trick. You have to push in hidden tabs through >the holes in the side of the case. Stick a straightened paper-clip in the >third hole from the back, second row down and lift the case off from the >rear... > >BTW, if for some reason you need a replacement drive for it, let me know >(I've got a couple doing dust-collection duty somewhere). > >Cheers, > >Aaron > > >On Wed, 21 Apr 1999, Joe wrote: > >> Aaron, >> >> OK now how the hell do I get it out to find out what's in there? >> >> Joe >> >> At 01:27 PM 4/21/99 -0700, you wrote: >> >The 411 is just the box. Mine has an Archive Viper QIC-150 in it that I >> >use with an Emulex MT-02 controller. You'll have to take a look inside to >> >see what you've got in there. Under SunOS, you should be able to access >> >this as device st[devnum]. Check the man page for "st" for some more info. >> > >> >Aaron >> > >> >On Wed, 21 Apr 1999, Joe wrote: >> > >> >> I just picked up a SUN model 411 tape drive PN 595-1711-03. I can't find it >> >> in the SUN FAQ , does anyone have any info on it? >> >> >> >> Joe >> >> >> > >> > >> > >

27 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

VME? related to College search.

by edick＠idcomm.com

I'm quite certain that VME predates the 1983 date you've specified. I made/sold a wirewrap card for VME back in the early portion of 1982 at which time I was a latecomer to the VME Bus Manufacturers' Group. Mostek and Motorola both had complete systems available for 68K development and such. Not much effort had been put into making it useful for anything else, but FORCE Computers, apparently a German company with outlets here in the US, had a complete set of boards for nearly any common purpose and some kind of OS available. at that time. BICC-Vero made cardcages, backplanes, and wire-wrap boards for the VME of the time, and several inependent card makers were making the little "single-connector" cpu and interface boards for embedded applications in 1982. This happened to be at the same time as my last divorce, so I have realatively good recall due to association with other events of the time. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Christian Fandt <cfandt(a)netsync.net> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Thursday, April 22, 1999 7:18 AM Subject: Re: VME? related to College search. >Upon the date 12:07 AM 4/22/99 -0400, jpero(a)cgocable.net said something like: >>What's about this VME and programming on that 68000 type? > >If I understand your question, the VMEbus is a 32-bit microcomputer bus >which is used primarily in industrial computers. Certain Sun products also >used it but I defere to those experts for further Sun comment. > >VMEbus was invented by John Black and others at Motorola in 1983. Came from >the now-obsolete VersaModule bus structure Moto had since I think the >mid-70's. Basic form factor was the Eurocard with DIN 46xxx connector >(can't recall DIN number at moment). Hence, VMEbus = VersaModule Eurocard >bus. Quickly became a standardized bus protocol worldwide. > >Moto, Mostek and Philips were earliest suppliers of hardware. Others >followed. Still somewhat popular and well supported today. The 68k >processor family was the most used uP. However, Intel uP's, Moto's 88000 >RISC uP, some Transputer devices and other uP's were also used in VMEbus >module designs. > >A fairly recent extension of the VMEbus protocol, VME64, extends the bus to >64 bits. The physics community is a major user of VME64 nowadays. > >> >>Don't anyone have graphics of VME stuff like cages, cards, VME > >Start by looking at this URL from eg3 which has a good list of VMEbus >resources: http://www.eg3.com/indc/indcxvme.htm. > >VITA - The VMEBus International Trade Association, has a URL: >http://www.vita.com/ . You could find more info and links there. > >>equipments? And how common is this out in that canadian field? > >Should be as common as it was in the States as it was found usually in >embedded industrial control and data collection systems in factories, etc. >Of course, the PeeCee stuff replaced some installations if the user wanted >to move to or start his/her design using the Intel processor or go for a >design 'on the cheap and dirty' as VMEbus products and s/w could be a bit >pricey. Multibus I and II and, to a smaller extent, STDbus and G64 were >competition to VMEbus. > >> >>I see that in my college electronic engineering technology course >>info by Algonquin College in canada within Ottawa, Ontario. >> >>Other college St. Lawerence College offers same type of course >>but uses x86 and pc type circuits in their courses which in my >>opinion bit shortsighted and lacks "commerical" areas compared to >>Algonquin's. > >I agree. Algonquin is fine with including VMEbus and other industrial >busses in their course structure. PeeCee could be included but for critical >real time apps it should be stated that VMEbus and its board products and >OS's are one the several non-PeeCee systems which really shine. > >> >>Keep your thoughts freely flowing! > >Yeah, well the on topic ones are fine from us, but . . . ;) > >Regards, Chris >-- -- >Christian Fandt, Electronic/Electrical Historian >Jamestown, NY USA cfandt(a)netsync.net >Member of Antique Wireless Association > URL: http://www.ggw.org/awa

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.com

>Since we've not seen any code for the 6502 yet, this may not be a problem, >but since Apple didn't exactly make it easy to exchange diskettes with other >systems, how would you propose to transfer a file, binary or otherwise >between systems? Though I haven't gotten into it, I figured on >cross-assembling from a PC to a PROM. That makes it easy for me, but how >will others do it? Easy: Run Kermit on both ends of the link. Kermit is available for everything from IBM mainframes to HP calculators, and has been the standard solution for decades for those of us who have to deal with diverse systems. See http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ for details. >It's enough of a problem transferring files from, say, a CP/M box running a >Z-80, since PC's don't read 8" disks. Huh? I've been doing this with 22Disk and/or Teledisk on PC-clones for over a decade. See http://www.sydex.com/ for details. See the comp.os.cpm FAQ for details about the cabling, and see my recent posts here or the discussions in comp.os.cpm about single-density FDC chips in PC clones if you need to read single-density formats on your PC-clone. -- 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

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by edick＠idcomm.com

That is really interesting! I was pretty disappointed when I got my first "kit" and found that, while it had provisions for a front-panel in its design, none was ever offered. I'm glad to know that there actually were such things. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Hans Franke <Hans.Franke(a)mch20.sbs.de> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Thursday, April 22, 1999 4:52 AM Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing > >> My name is Wouter, I'm new here, and I never throw anything away. >> <everyone>Hi Wouter!</everyone> :-) > >Hi <howeverthisispronounced>, > >> >I saw one ad for an >> >SC/MP, in '77, but that one was a homebrewed model. Other than that, it was >> >not of much interest here. Was that not the case in Germany? The processor >> >was still in National's data book, but I really wasn't then and am not now >> >of any operating system or application software for it. I don't believe I >> >ever saw a real SC/MP based computer. > >> http://ccii.dockside.co.za/~wrm/ccc.html > >CUTE! >H. > >-- >Stimm gegen SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/de/ >Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/en/ >Votez contre le SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/fr/ >Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut >HRK

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

How scarce (valuable) is core for the PDP-8?

by CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.com

>> take about 90VDC to light up, but after they light up they'll stay on >> until the voltage drops below 60VDC or so. Only problems are: >> >> 1. The thresholds can vary greatly from unit to unit. >> >> 2. The thresholds will vary depending on ambient light, as well. >Use pulse coupleing so each runs at it's range. Also I do have a basic >design for a TTT machine using neons and 2d21 thyratrons. >I feel personally that would be good for demonstrating some for the other >forms of logic used. Absolutely - a lot about logic, especially pulse-coupled logic, is there to be learned. >Then again someone would want that interfaced to PCI too. Hmm - there's enough loopholes in the PCI spec already, maybe we can sneak 90V logic levels in? :-). Tim.

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

Now OT: Re: Roman numerals

by CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.COM

>> > And no doubt some poor slave just finished chisling in all the closing >> > stock prices for the Roman Stock Exchange and some spelling weenie piped up >> > and said only, "You misspelled 18 on line 30 there." >> and said only, "You misspelled XVIII on line XXX there." >Now we know where his family went after there was no longer >a roman stock exchange :) OTOH, if we all used Roman Numerals for data storage still, there would be no Y2K problem due to "extra" digits! -- 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

27 years, 3 months

4
4
0 0

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by edick＠idcomm.com

I just never considered a computer a useful tool if you couldn't use it until you rebuilt it (hardware or software). That was the case with the early TI home computer boxes. They had totally unexploited potential for a long time. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Sellam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 2:36 PM Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing >On Wed, 21 Apr 1999, Richard Erlacher wrote: > >> For the longest time, the TMS 9900 didn't appear in anything one could >> consider a reasonable computer. There was one model I saw at a colleagues >> home which had expansion capability, but he often complained that cards for >> interesting applications, like mass storage, etc, were not available. I >> didn't pursue it and so I believe(d) it to be true. I saw one ad for an >> SC/MP, in '77, but that one was a homebrewed model. Other than that, it was >> not of much interest here. Was that not the case in Germany? The processor >> was still in National's data book, but I really wasn't then and am not now >> of any operating system or application software for it. I don't believe I >> ever saw a real SC/MP based computer. > >Richard, the rest of the world does not peer through the same blinders you have on. > >Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- >Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out. > > Coming this October 2-3: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0! > See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details! > [Last web site update: 04/03/99] >

27 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the 80s

by cfandt＠netsync.net

Upon the date 04:28 PM 4/21/99 -0700, Sellam Ismail said something like: -- snip -- >Ok, you asked for it. > >http://www.blinkenlights.com/pc.shtml Thanls for the URL! > >This should answer the question "What was the first personal computer?" >once and for all. Well, that's certainly an understatement Sellam! This seems to be a well researched trail leading up to the Simon, IMO. However, any good guess as to how many Simons were actually made and successfully run from the over 400 plan sets sold? Any known to exist now? To try to solve that First Microcomputer question, a set of attributes must first be set just like the set was to determine the 1st PC as shown in the above URL. Methinks that will be a bit troublesome as nobody seemed to agree on that during the last go-around of discussing the 1st Microcomputer here awhile back. Regards, Chris -- -- Christian Fandt, Electronic/Electrical Historian Jamestown, NY USA cfandt(a)netsync.net Member of Antique Wireless Association URL: http://www.ggw.org/awa

27 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

How scarce (valuable) is core for the PDP-8?

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<How long does core stay magnetized without power? Years. <How many bytes of battery-backed RAM are there in a typical PC? Not a lot usually something in the 32-128byte range, maybe more. <Haven't there been contemporary memory devices that use nano-scale <cores, to eliminate the battery needs and radiation sensitivity of RAM? Not that I'm aware of. Allison

27 years, 3 months

3
2
0 0

Saving *BIG* Old Iron...

by mbg＠world.std.com

>This seems very melancholy to me. Delightful that you're there to >preserve the machines for posterity, but sad that prodcutive machines are >being shut down after long service. > >"Farewell, o' good and faithful servant". I know what you mean... I've read the story about the shutdown of a -10 system back in october of 82(?) which is on Tim Shoppa's ftp area... I wish I could have something as touching... What is sad about it is the fact that part of the reason the machines are being decomissioned is the person who cared for them apparently died recently of cancer... today's shutdown was part of the ongoing grieving process for the people who had been using them. It was difficult for them... They are, however, very glad that the machines won't simply be relegated to a trash heap somewhere... they're really glad that they will have new owners who will care for them and keep them running... So we don't have to say farewell to them, they wll find service. Part of that service will be to provide a base system against which some KS10 emulators which I know are being developed can be compared against. I also hope that someday we will be able to get them on the net and let others use them. 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 | +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+

27 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by edick＠idcomm.com

Since we all see to have so much time on our hands . . . perhaps it would be amusing to attempt to write the SAME logic in the SAME way on each processor, then compare to see which is faster. THEN turn around and try to improve the implementation of this logic to see which is easier to speed up, and perhaps see which has the greatest cost in terms of memory usage, etc. It's truly a retrocomputing exercise, as neither processor is "still around" in the sense of mainstream applications, or even as an "active" product. I guess that qualifies it as an extended topic in this forum. Dick -----Original Message----- From: allisonp(a)world.std.com <allisonp(a)world.std.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Friday, April 16, 1999 2:00 PM Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing >> I realy love your mails - Just reading all of this I felt almost >> 20 years younger - I was involved _very_ heavyly into the Z80/8080 >> vs. 6502 discusion back then - weh had a circle of engeneers where >> one part wher 8085/Z80 advocates, whie some (like me) where 6502 >> boreheads. > >Actually I'm not done with it. just have the time. The fundemental >problem is not really which is faster, I think for the real world >applications they are likely close but the arguement is flawed. It >misstates the z80 and 6502 timing vs real useage. > >What's funny is I have a kim one I can run and a z80 SBC for comparison. > > >Allison > > >

27 years, 3 months

7
13
0 0

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by edick＠idcomm.com

The TI computers in general were a bit off center in a number of ways. They certainly had potential which was under utilized, I suspect, because of a strange way of interfacing to their video subsystem. Lacking an OS and the usual assortment of non-game (carefully not using words like "serious" or "real-world" or . . .) software applications was a bit of a hindrance, though. I ws never interested in the TI stuff for my own use, as it didn't offer anything I didn't already have with other systems. I looked into their 9980 (single chipper) for a while. It turned out not to be much of an improvement over the 8748 for which I'd already done all the requisite suffering, so that's what I used. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Mark Gregory <gregorym(a)cadvision.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 8:52 PM Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing >Now I know that many people didn't consider it a reasonable computer, but >the TMS-9900 did make a memorable appearance in the TI-99/4/4A of blessed >memory - 16K if I recall correctly. Once you added a PEB, RS-232 card, 32 K >memory card, 2 HH DS/SD floppies and an Extended Basic cartidge, it was a >fine computer. > >So bite your tongue. > >Cheers, >Mark "They'll pry my TI out of my cold, dead hands" Gregory > >At 02:16 PM 4/21/99 -0600, you wrote: >>For the longest time, the TMS 9900 didn't appear in anything one could >>consider a reasonable computer. There was one model I saw at a colleagues >>home which had expansion capability, but he often complained that cards for >>interesting applications, like mass storage, etc, were not available. I >>didn't pursue it and so I believe(d) it to be true. I saw one ad for an >>SC/MP, in '77, but that one was a homebrewed model. Other than that, it was >>not of much interest here. Was that not the case in Germany? The processor >>was still in National's data book, but I really wasn't then and am not now >>of any operating system or application software for it. I don't believe I >>ever saw a real SC/MP based computer. >> >>Dick >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Hans Franke <Hans.Franke(a)mch20.sbs.de> >>To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers >><classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> >>Date: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 2:10 PM >>Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing >> >> >>>> I suppose that's true, Hans, BUT, in1982, there were few other >>processors >>>> than the 6502 and Z-80 in popular use, with the exception of the 8080A >>and >>>> the 8085, of course. The majority of home computers, though, used one of >>>> these two, at that time. Several years later, we found the 6510 and 6809 >>in >>>> commercially interesting applications, but not for as long a period as >>the >>>> Z-80 and 6502. These two had a life of nearly ten years before the >>IBM-PC >>>> and its clones wrenched the home computer market from their grasp. >>> >>>in 1982, the 9900 was also big and beasts like SC/MP where still on >>>the run (and 680xx, 808x and 160xx comming up), but you're right if >>>you want to pich the two mayor player in the SOHO market. >>> >>>But still, a general measurement includes them. >>> >>>Gruss >>>H. >>> >>>-- >>>Stimm gegen SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/de/ >>>Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/en/ >>>Votez contre le SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/fr/ >>>Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut >>>HRK >> >> >>

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

SUN tape drive was RE: Sun 1 question

by rigdonj＠intellistar.net

Aaron, OK now how the hell do I get it out to find out what's in there? Joe At 01:27 PM 4/21/99 -0700, you wrote: >The 411 is just the box. Mine has an Archive Viper QIC-150 in it that I >use with an Emulex MT-02 controller. You'll have to take a look inside to >see what you've got in there. Under SunOS, you should be able to access >this as device st[devnum]. Check the man page for "st" for some more info. > >Aaron > >On Wed, 21 Apr 1999, Joe wrote: > >> I just picked up a SUN model 411 tape drive PN 595-1711-03. I can't find it >> in the SUN FAQ , does anyone have any info on it? >> >> Joe >> > >

27 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

The "FIRST PC" and personal timelines (Was: And what were the 80s

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<Ah, but what was the first Microcomputer (including at least a monitor with <bitmap display, some sort of disk or floppy drive, as standard features, <and 'personal' in nature)? That could be a pdp-12 or a POLY-88 depending on your point of view. Clearly a northstar horizon with a compucolor would fit that requirement though at that time useres didn't feel the need for more than a good terminal. That would be 1978. Why bit mapped monitor? Allison

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

more chording keyboards

by gregorym＠cadvision.com

At 09:42 PM 4/21/99 +0100, you wrote: >> >> Hi, >> I still haven't built a chording keyboard, but I'd like to know, what are >> its advantages/disadvantages over a regular one? I realize the general >> differences, what I'm looking for is 'it would be great for typing >> because.., it would be awful for data entry because....' > >Well, what it's useful for often depends on how the chords are assigned. >I have a Microwriter Agenda, and it's quite difficult to type some of the >characters like '{' that are rarely used in English (but which are common >in programming). The one I built for my PERQ (hopefully) makes it easier >to type some of the common programming symbols (at the expense of making >some letters a little harder to type). > >The main advantage is that (a) they're very fast to use (once you learn >to use them, which I haven't) and (b) they can be used 1-handed. The >original idea (from Xerox IIRC) was that you used the chording pad with >one hand and the mouse with the other. I want to try a mouse with a >chording keypad built in, but I've not got round to making it. > >-tony > I thought that the chording keyboard was one of Doug Engelbart's innovations. I believe he envisioned them as a way to move through Cyberspace more efficently than with a mouse. So that would pre-date PARC, being at Arpa or at Tymshare. Mark.

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by gregorym＠cadvision.com

Now I know that many people didn't consider it a reasonable computer, but the TMS-9900 did make a memorable appearance in the TI-99/4/4A of blessed memory - 16K if I recall correctly. Once you added a PEB, RS-232 card, 32 K memory card, 2 HH DS/SD floppies and an Extended Basic cartidge, it was a fine computer. So bite your tongue. Cheers, Mark "They'll pry my TI out of my cold, dead hands" Gregory At 02:16 PM 4/21/99 -0600, you wrote: >For the longest time, the TMS 9900 didn't appear in anything one could >consider a reasonable computer. There was one model I saw at a colleagues >home which had expansion capability, but he often complained that cards for >interesting applications, like mass storage, etc, were not available. I >didn't pursue it and so I believe(d) it to be true. I saw one ad for an >SC/MP, in '77, but that one was a homebrewed model. Other than that, it was >not of much interest here. Was that not the case in Germany? The processor >was still in National's data book, but I really wasn't then and am not now >of any operating system or application software for it. I don't believe I >ever saw a real SC/MP based computer. > >Dick >-----Original Message----- >From: Hans Franke <Hans.Franke(a)mch20.sbs.de> >To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers ><classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> >Date: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 2:10 PM >Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing > > >>> I suppose that's true, Hans, BUT, in1982, there were few other >processors >>> than the 6502 and Z-80 in popular use, with the exception of the 8080A >and >>> the 8085, of course. The majority of home computers, though, used one of >>> these two, at that time. Several years later, we found the 6510 and 6809 >in >>> commercially interesting applications, but not for as long a period as >the >>> Z-80 and 6502. These two had a life of nearly ten years before the >IBM-PC >>> and its clones wrenched the home computer market from their grasp. >> >>in 1982, the 9900 was also big and beasts like SC/MP where still on >>the run (and 680xx, 808x and 160xx comming up), but you're right if >>you want to pich the two mayor player in the SOHO market. >> >>But still, a general measurement includes them. >> >>Gruss >>H. >> >>-- >>Stimm gegen SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/de/ >>Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/en/ >>Votez contre le SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/fr/ >>Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut >>HRK > > >

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

Saving *BIG* Old Iron...

by gregorym＠cadvision.com

This seems very melancholy to me. Delightful that you're there to preserve the machines for posterity, but sad that prodcutive machines are being shut down after long service. "Farewell, o' good and faithful servant". Cheers, Mark. At 01:37 PM 4/21/99 -0400, you wrote: > >It looks like everything is coming together... We have a team >assembled (compiled?) to decommission and move a set of KS10 >decsystem-10 36-bit machines and the move happens this weekend! > >I was in attendance earlier today as the machines were shut >down for the final time where they have been for quite a few >years. I got a picture of the final systat screen, and they >stopped timesharing... > >We then got busy unloading and shutting down all the disk drives. >I then shut down the individual boxes and power controllers for >the system cabinets and isolated the cabling (they had LOTS of >terminal cables). I then raised all the stabilizing feet and >used a tie-wrap to attach the panel keys inside the cabinet. I >then closed and latched the front doors. I also did the same >for the tape drive cabinets. They're all rolling free and ready >to go. > >On friday, we'll be pre-staging all the disk drives, and on >saturday we load-out to trucks. > >I'll be taking more pictures as we go along... > > Megan Gentry > Former RT-11 Developer > >+--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+ >| Megan Gentry, EMT/B, PP-ASEL | Internet (work): gentry(a)zk3.dec.com | >| Unix Support Engineering Group | (home): mbg(a)world.std.com | >| Compaq Computer Corporation | | >| 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 | >+--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+ > >

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

And what were the 80s like for you? (Was: z80 timing...

by ddameron＠earthlink.net

At 03:05 PM 4/21/99 -0700, Sam wrote: >Check this excellent timeline out for updating your microcomputer history >knowledge: > >http://www1.islandnet.com/~kpolsson/comphist.htm Here's another one describing many (micro)computers: Including 2901's, 6502, Moto's 1 bit, etc. http://wwwcsif.cs.ucdavis.edu/~csclub/museum/cpu.html > >Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- >Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out. > -Dave

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

The Paxton auction: any interest in rescues

by rigdonj＠intellistar.net

At 11:52 AM 4/21/99 -0700, you wrote: >On Wed, 21 Apr 1999, Joe wrote: > >> I'd go with a pickup load of $$$ and come back with several loads of junk, >> er, umm, stuff. Good thing I'm on the wrong side of the country. > >Hans Franke came all the way from Germany last year and bought a truck >load of stuff, so what's stopping you (besides sanity)? > >(Unfortunately, that truckload of stuff ended up taking up valuable space >in my closet...some people just don't know their limits :) LOL! At least he can say he owns it even if it's in a different country! Joe

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

PDP-11/44 CPU Configuration

by CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.COM

>> Speaking from decades of experience, you *do not* put a Unibus machine >> together in a big configuration, especially from mix-and-match used >> parts, and get it to work. You go down to the most basic configuration >> possible, and then add parts one at a time, testing as you go. >Well, with the exception of the DELUA, and RAM everything is configured the >way it was when I got the machine, but that's a good point. I hope nobody takes it as an insult when I try to encourage them to take a system down to its bare-bones and build it back up step-by-step, but this really is the best way to debug a system that one knows little about the history of. Just because something is written on the sticker on the cover of a system about its configuration doesn't mean that it was working in that last configuration! In particular, with Unibus machines you have to check the presence of the NPG jumpers on the backplane if you have the slightest reason to believe that the configuration has been meddled with in the slightest since it last worked. A single mis-placed jumper anywhere in the system can cause the entire system to lock up when the first DMA attempt is made... Tim.

27 years, 3 months

4
7
0 0

Programming fixtures for Panasonic HHC

by rcini＠email.msn.com

Hello, all: A friend of mine has a small quantity (~30) of adapters to enable one to program the EPROMs used in the Panasonic HHC with a standard EPROM programmer. The adaptor houses the 8K eprom, most commonly used is the MCM68764 by Motorola, but a special crimping device is used on the chips before they can seat in the HHC proper. If this was not the case, you wouldn't need the special insertion socket to burn chips, you would be able to seat the eproms directly into the ZIF sockets on the programmer being used. These adapters were supposedly hand-crafted for the purpose. Asking price is $15@ plus shipping from New Jersey. If anyone needs more details, e-mail me privately and I can hook you up with the guy selling them. [ Rich Cini/WUGNET [ ClubWin!/CW7 [ MCP Windows 95/Windows Networking [ Collector of "classic" computers [ http://highgate.comm.sfu.ca/~rcini/classiccmp/ [ http://highgate.comm.sfu.ca/~rcini/pdp11/ <---------------------------- reply separator

27 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

And what were the 80s like for you? (Was: z80 timing...

by edick＠idcomm.com

In '76 a couple of my friends and I were ogling at ads for Alpha Micro and some self-contained Z-80-based unit from CompuTrol or some such manufacturer. The latter had a built in display and printer, though I don't recall what kind of display and printer. It might have been an EPN9120-based printer, but it appeared it was a small CRT from the ads. It might have been a small, e.g. 20-character alpha-numeric LED display, though. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Jim Strickland <jim(a)calico.litterbox.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 4:09 PM Subject: Re: And what were the 80s like for you? (Was: z80 timing... >> >> No, I was referring to your comment of the TRS-80 M1 being the "first >> personal computer". We won't argue about the definition of "personal >> computer", but for the sake of this discussion, the Apple ][ and Commodore >> PET were both introduced in April 1977 at the first West Coast Computer >> Faire. The TRS-80 M1 was introduced in August of 1977. > >Really? I stand corrected then. I always assumed the TRS-80 came out before >the A2 and the PET. And I should have specified first commercially sold >ready-to-use personal computer. And I might have been wrong even with that. >Would you believe first computer I ever saw for sale? :) > > >-- >Jim Strickland >jim(a)DIESPAMMERSCUMcalico.litterbox.com >----------------------------------------------------------------------- >Vote Meadocrat! Bill and Opus in 2000 - Who ELSE is there? >-----------------------------------------------------------------------

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

And what were the 80s like for you? (Was: z80 timing...

by edick＠idcomm.com

>10 years? >Does this imply that the PC was not the dominant force until the end of the 80s? > No, I'd say it was a force to be reckoned with from the first day it appeared, but it was several years before a reasonably useful suite of software was available at a reasonable price. The Z-80 and Apple-II continued to be a force in the marketplace until the late '80's. By 1988, the PC was completely dominant in the general purpose microcomputer market, with the exception of the desktop publishing market, which the Apple MacIntosh, in case you've forgotten about it, had pretty well dominated up to the release of Windows 3.0. The appearance of WIndows 3.0 got the MAC people to look at the pricetag for the first time. Up to then there had been few WYSIWYG graphics tools for the PC. Once the PC started showing up with WYSIWYG graphics applications, the MAC's days were numbered. This could have been fixed with a timely price cut, but that wasn't forthcoming. I even had pretty decent cross-development tools for the PC, yet continued using my CP/M tools until about 1987. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Fred Cisin (XenoSoft) <cisin(a)xenosoft.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 2:38 PM Subject: And what were the 80s like for you? (Was: z80 timing... >On Wed, 21 Apr 1999, Richard Erlacher wrote: >> I suppose that's true, Hans, BUT, in1982, there were few other processors >> than the 6502 and Z-80 in popular use, with the exception of the 8080A and >> the 8085, of course. > >In it's first couple of years, the IBM PC (introduced 8/11/1981) sold >enough machines that surely the 8088 could have been said to be in popular >use! >[this is a comment about market, NOT an endorsement] > >> The majority of home computers, though, used one of >> these two, at that time. Several years later, we found the 6510 and 6809 in >> commercially interesting applications, but not for as long a period as the >> Z-80 and 6502. These two had a life of nearly ten years before the IBM-PC >> and its clones wrenched the home computer market from their grasp. > >10 years? >Does this imply that the PC was not the dominant force until the end of >the 80s? >[this is a comment about market, NOT an endorsement] > >

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by edick＠idcomm.com

History ran a different course from where I sit. In 1985, the R65C02 was in almost every new communications product I saw, e.g. FAX machines, though many had a custom device. Those custom devices in many cases had a 65C02 core. Rockwell pushed it into those applications by making many of their other parts "friendly" to the 650x core. The 805x was a mite slow out of the blocks, and in '85, it was real but not appealing and certainly not taking much business from the Z-80 or 650x because its price was still WAY too high. It was, however, a single-chip device . . . There's this old military saying, that "where you sit determines what you see." Dick -----Original Message----- From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 5:17 PM Subject: Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing ><For the longest time, the TMS 9900 didn't appear in anything one could ><consider a reasonable computer. There was one model I saw at a colleagues > >One of the first commercial lorans had it! it was big in embedded circles >that needed some oomph or were replacing ti990 minis. > ><didn't pursue it and so I believe(d) it to be true. I saw one ad for an ><SC/MP, in '77, but that one was a homebrewed model. Other than that, it wa > >You didn't look hard. It was popular in embedded apps at the low end as it >was cheap and easy to code for. > ><of any operating system or application software for it. I don't believe ><ever saw a real SC/MP based computer. > >For the consumer market? Well, that's what we're discussing, isn't it? >In the 1981 to 1982 timeframe: > > 808x was getting into embeeded apps and there were few general computer apps for it. > > Z8000 series were getting in to military boxes. >

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

Program Challenge (was Re: z80 timing... 6502 timing)

by mbg＠world.std.com

I have found a reference which has some rules for constructing roman numerals. Firstly, four of a given numeral is okay, but five or more is not. This allows VIIII to be valid. You must use the largest numeral at a given stage, so for 15, you don't write VVV, you write XV. Numerals of a lower value, when written in front of a higher valued numeral subtract their value from the higher valued numeral. Further rules for the subtraction: o Only I X and C can be used in this way. V, L and D cannot (nor can M) o Only one smaller numeral can be written first. So XIIX is not valid for 18. o The lower numeral must be no less than a tenth of the value of the higher numeral. o It specifically states that each power of ten is handled separately, and uses the example that 49 is NOT IL, it is correctly XLIX. These are the rules I have used in my routine... 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 | +--------------------------------+-------------------------------------+

27 years, 3 months

4
4
0 0

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<Name a non-homebrew SC/MP based computer. <(note, I believe one existed, but memory is fuzzy till i get home to <the old magazines) Not including the three sold by National Semi or the ones that used the 8073 SC/MP with a internal rom tiny basic(also sold be national)??? Allison

27 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

z80 timing... 6502 timing

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<For the longest time, the TMS 9900 didn't appear in anything one could <consider a reasonable computer. There was one model I saw at a colleagues One of the first commercial lorans had it! it was big in embedded circles that needed some oomph or were replacing ti990 minis. <didn't pursue it and so I believe(d) it to be true. I saw one ad for an <SC/MP, in '77, but that one was a homebrewed model. Other than that, it wa You didn't look hard. It was popular in embedded apps at the low end as it was cheap and easy to code for. <of any operating system or application software for it. I don't believe <ever saw a real SC/MP based computer. For the consumer market? In the 1981 to 1982 timeframe: 808x was getting into embeeded apps and there were few general computer apps for it. Z8000 series were getting in to military boxes. 8051 was well on the way and pushing out 6502s. In the embedded market is where most started. Allison

27 years, 3 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