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

by edick＠idcomm.com

Unfortunately, the adoption of the IEEE696 standard was more or less, the cause of its demise. Whereas pre-696 board makers went to great lengths to make their products work with a range of CPU's, memory, FDC's, HDC's, I/O cards, etc, after the standard was adopted, these manufacturers used the standard as an excuse to ignore the others in the industry and the result was that interoperability suffered. If you want a current-generation computer with a useful front-panel display, you have to synthesize a single-step operation and dump the internals of the processor to the display hardware. Too much of the operation is packed inside the processor IC. If it's the front-panel you're after, and if you don't mind that the front panel needs to be shielded to meet FCC standards, as does the cabling you'll need, else you'll knock out all the broadcast TV reception in your neighborhood. Once that happens you'll have that ugly FCC van parked across your driveway. . . If you're bent on having an S-100 bus, it would work better to use an 8080 than a Z-80, as the S-100 signals were designed around an 8080. Most of the logic found on typical Z-80 cards for the S-100 is to regenerate those awkward and not terribly useful signals which Intel, Zilog, and others spent megabucks to eliminate so they'd be there to make the S-100 go. In this one respect, and recognizing the fact that hindsight is always 20-20, I'd say that Multibus-I was designed a lot better for general purpose computing. If you're really interested in running a "clever/new" S-100, you might try building a pod with which to emulate the 8080 processor from your PC. Old Intel documents will provide the desired timing, and I don't really think you need too fast a PC to emulate the old 8080 in real time. Writing the code to interpret the 8080 code correctly and produce the appropriate signal flow will show you definitely understand the workingsof the processor. You can even build a virtual front panel on your PC's CRT. Additionlly, you can run a window of "Hyperterminal" to support your need for a terminal with which to talk to the S-100 box as a console. I just took a look to see what I've got that would be interesting to integrate into a system on one of the big S-100 cardcages I've been hoping someone would take away. I must've hit my head . . . Dick -----Original Message----- From: John Ruschmeyer <jruschme(a)exit109.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, March 21, 1999 5:51 PM Subject: Re: Rebirth of IMSAI >> Why not create a current design for a modern front panel system? ok, retro >> styling because I like the silk screening of the 8800b and the 8080 but with >> *some* modern accoutrements while still providing that front panel >> experience. > >To me, that seems the best compromise between the extremes in this discussion. >Design a state-of-the-art S-100/IEEE-696 box and cardset (Z-80 based) >including an FDD controller which could use a standard 3.5" drive, offer >the whole thing as a kit with bundled CP/M (or clone). > >Sort of like the difference between a concours restoration of a Shelby >Cobra and one of the Cobra kits. > ><<<John>>>

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

SWTPC and NETRONICS Parts

by terryf＠intersurf.com

Hello folks: HEADS UP FOR COLLECTORS I have the following items. If anyone is interested, drop me an email, if not they will go to eBay. I must stress that I would consider these "PARTS ONLY", I do not intend to represent them as any thing in working condition. While they may work, they are AS IS! SWTPC: AC-30 Tape interface (dual tape IIRC) card MP-A2 CPU card SSB M-16-A Memory card MP-LA Com (IIRC) card MP-B Motherboard MP-P Power supply card (cap and bridge included) Lower Case Half (front, rear, and bottom pan -- Faceplate and 2 buttons included) NETRONICS ELECTRONIC EXPLORER (case, power supply, motherboard) PROFESSIONAL ASCII TERMINAL (appears to have been modified) SOLID STATE MUSIC MB7 - 16K Ram card These items will go to eBay at < $10.00 each if nobody snags em first, the dumpster if nobody grabs them there. Terryf(a)intersurf.com

27 years, 4 months

6
7
0 0

Victory! (was: seller's market)

by yakowenk＠cs.unc.edu

On Sat, 20 Mar 1999 Sellam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com> wrote: ] On Sat, 20 Mar 1999, Mike Ford wrote: ] > >emotions and how they affect bidding in an auction. All these factors ] > >contribute to the artificial inflation of prices. ] > I disagree with your premise that the auction is artificial or unfair. What ] Ok, you disagree with my premise. Care to provide any particular points ] ] > I don't understand is how you plan to stuff the genie back in the bottle. ] Which is exactly why I rail against ebay so much. If there's a price Crap. This is an easy topic to ramble on about. I just deleted a five page reply. No point in that; truth shouldn't be so hard to express. Now I've re-written it, and it is only 4.9 pages. :-) E-bay is just an open market, with all the same benefits and flaws. With Altairs and IMSAIs, we're seeing scarcity combined with ignorance. Marketers hype it up, of course, the few available units go to the highest bidders, of course, those bidders are not always veteran computer geeks, of course, and they can get overexcited and pay too much, of course. The shops that sell stuff at less-than-ebay prices are doing so out of ignorance. If you don't believe it, point them at e-bay, and wait. We've enjoyed garage-sale prices for a long time, but now there is growing public awareness of this stuff's value. (Due at least in part to our own efforts!) You didn't expect the world to say "Gee, this stuff is great! Lets sell it cheaper than ever!" Did you? With public awareness has to come higher prices, as well as people who are in it just for money, ready to exploit any weakness in any buyer. Think of it as a partial victory. People are paying attention, and no longer throwing away this stuff just because it is old. The next step has to be (more) education: it is not just Altairs and IMSAIs that are valuable. And they are not valuable just because of scarcity, but also because they are a snapshot of history, and because they are fun to use, play with, and experiment on. Now how do we get the word out?... Maybe some kind of high-publicity annual event, like an "Old Computer Faire", or "Retro Computer Bash", or.. Hey, I've got it, "Vintage Computer Festival!" Yeah! That's the perfect title! Part of the publicity could be to increase the public's awareness of more than just the monetary aspect of the machines, and make them see that Altairs and IMSAIs were just two instances in a horde of other equally-valuable machines. Maybe highlight the coolness of other particular classic machines, including some that are less scarce. Overall, prices are still likely to go up, but at least the going rate for each machine might be more in-line with its value relative to other machines, instead of "Altair/IMSAI 1, others 0". Finally, point out that current super-high prices are a fluke, because while there is no flood of these machines, there is a constant dribble; so smart buyers will wait, prices will drop, and early buyers will be left holding the bag. Of course, if you want prices to go back down to garage-sale levels, then you should instead give away (not sell!) your collection, sit quietly, and deride anyone who shows any interest in anything older than this year's Wintel. It won't succeed all the way, of course, but it might lower prices a little. So, what's the vote? Do we want lower prices, or public awareness? Cheers, Bill.

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

FREE: Vic-20

by fpp＠concentric.net

Wow, I have always wanted a vic30. If you still have it I'd love it. I have several Apple IIc if youd like one.

27 years, 4 months

2
1
0 0

H11 vs H11A ?

by cmcmanis＠mcmanis.com

Heathkit folks, What does the "LTC" switch do on an H11A ? Which is more common? (H11 or H11A) Can an H11 be "upgraded" to an H11A? --Chuck

27 years, 4 months

2
1
0 0

SWTPc 6800, common format (sharable?) repair journal?

by dogas＠leading.net

-----Original Message----- From: Tony Duell <ard(a)p850ug1.demon.co.uk> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, March 21, 1999 2:44 PM Subject: Re: SWTPc 6800, common format (sharable?) repair journal? >> First issue: Power system is missing the transformer. I do have the MP-P, >> the filter cap, and the rectifier bridge. > >MP-P? (Power supply) it's the fused board that I'm guessing puts the power on the buss. >> >> I found a nice ad in Kilobaud issue #2 on the inside cover that gave values: >> 10amp, 25amp rectifier bridge, and 91000mfd computer grade filter cap. My >> nighttime reading this evening shall be "Building Power Supplies", Archer, >> cat 62-5025. ;) > >>From those components, I think it must be a linear PSU (or at least a >mains frequency transformer). > >What secondary voltages do you need? What currents? The transformer T1 from specs lists at: 7.25vac @10amp and 24vac @0.5amp secondary 120 vac@1amp/240 vac(a)0.5amp primary, power transformer. >One way to work those out is to determine what voltages you need across >the smoothing caps and then divide by sqrt(2). For the currents, multiply >the maximum load current by sqrt(2) and add a bit for safety. > >Now work out the total power (sum of current*voltage of course). That'll >give you an idea of the VA rating of the transformer you need. I will spend some time to more understand those last two paragraphs... >The transformer might be a standard part, or it might have been custom. >If the latter, in the UK you can get 'transformer kits' - core + bobbin >with pre-wound mains primary. You wind the appropriate secondaries (the >kit instructions tell you how many turns you need for 1V output) and >assemble the core laminations. I'd definately buy one if still in production but I definately want to make a power supply (probably for the sym *if* that one can also not be bought. ;) >> First question: The baud lines on both busses (110,150,300,600,1200) caugt >> my eye and that ad above states: "Crystal controlled oscillator( 1,7971 ) >> provides the clock signal for the processor (before?) and is divided down by >> the MC14411 (both on MP-A2 GK) to provide the various baud rate outputs for >> the interface circuts. Full buffering on all data and address busses..." >> Does that mean that all these cards are serial? > >I doubt it. More likely they just bussed some useful clock frequencies >over the backplane. Then all the serial cards (using 6850s?) could use >them for the baud rate clocks. Saves putting a crystal + divider on each >serial port card. > >> reports and make some kind of open reference. I sure would find it usefull. >> (read that as alot of things to repair. :)) I imagine alot of you have >> encounters in repairland... It would be nice to have alot of this stuff in > >I seem to get ever more things to repair... (and not all of them are >classic computers...) i would imagine. ;) >> a prolog predicate database for pattern searches. > >-tony > > - Mike: dogas(a)leading.net

27 years, 4 months

3
3
0 0

SWTPc 6800, common format (sharable?) repair journal?

by dogas＠leading.net

I have started restoring a swtpc 6800 and thought I'd ask for some comments on restoration journaling. I've completed as detailed an initial inventory as I can manage. I recorded the two busses on MP-B and some part numbers that were disappearing from memory chips( 4x9 819 MM5257 ) on SSB M-16-R, and transister( 18n9 ) from rectifier bridge. The soldering job on MP-A2 has alot of resin around connnections that I'm already pretty leary of. Ill start off by digging for all the hardware documentationI can find... First issue: Power system is missing the transformer. I do have the MP-P, the filter cap, and the rectifier bridge. I found a nice ad in Kilobaud issue #2 on the inside cover that gave values: 10amp, 25amp rectifier bridge, and 91000mfd computer grade filter cap. My nighttime reading this evening shall be "Building Power Supplies", Archer, cat 62-5025. ;) First question: The baud lines on both busses (110,150,300,600,1200) caugt my eye and that ad above states: "Crystal controlled oscillator( 1,7971 ) provides the clock signal for the processor (before?) and is divided down by the MC14411 (both on MP-A2 GK) to provide the various baud rate outputs for the interface circuts. Full buffering on all data and address busses..." Does that mean that all these cards are serial? Any switheads out there? Any thoughts on the forthcomming "This Old Computer" episode? It would be cool to accumulate these restoration reports and make some kind of open reference. I sure would find it usefull. (read that as alot of things to repair. :)) I imagine alot of you have encounters in repairland... It would be nice to have alot of this stuff in a prolog predicate database for pattern searches. - Mike: dogas(a)leading.net "I am but an egg" -VMS

27 years, 4 months

4
4
0 0

Seller's market

by fauradon＠pclink.com

Oh boy I'm getting in the eBay discussion. I must be really bored. I've been using eBay for a few years now and here's how I deal with it: When I find an "object" of interest, I set a limit as to what I'm willing to pay for it. If the item goes beyond that, I STOP. There is no overinflating prices because I got pissed for being outbid, it's just that someone else is willing to pay more and so be it (I'm cheap). But so far I got some items that I have not seen anywhere else and believe me I search... On another side I once found an item that I had no (read NO) interest in and I had to pay $1 for it to get it because it came with a bucnh of stuff I wanted. I placed it on eBay and got $150 fo it (double of what I paid fo the whole deal of stuff I wanted: about five computers and accessories) I felt sorry for the guy who bought it but I'm sure that he was happy with his purchase (I actually send an extra something with it out of guilt). Now where am I doing something wrong? What would be the ideal system? How can you at the same time make peolple happy and optimize your return? I'm a hobbyist, I don't speculate on value of computers but I want to be able to: 1) Find computers that were not popular in my area and are almost impossible to find. 2) Be able to get at least what I paid for when I sell an item (I prefer trade though). 3) When I find something on the net, have at least a chance to get it if I really really want it. Francois

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

"new" classics (was Re: Pre-history of Digital Research)

by dogas＠leading.net

-----Original Message----- From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com> >Actually while that is true you far from limited to that. I'm building a >Z280 system, the parts of which were found from old PC motherboards and disk >controllers. A little torch work to remove them or their sockets netted >Simm sockets, PLCC and other chip sockets and the z280s were socketed to >start with. Cool... Can I have a copy of your assembly documentation? Thanks - Mike

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

"new" classics (was Re: Pre-history of Digital Research)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<> Homebrewing is a lost pasttime for the most part. I want to bring it <> back, at least for myself. < <It's different now, you use different chips & environment. But now you can <define your own cpu & peripherials, what is somekind of fun. Actually while that is true you far from limited to that. I'm building a Z280 system, the parts of which were found from old PC motherboards and disk controllers. A little torch work to remove them or their sockets netted Simm sockets, PLCC and other chip sockets and the z280s were socketed to start with. Also parts like FPGAs depending on type are easily programmable so that custom parts are doable on modest budgets. If anything it's better than ever... Now to get that PDP-8 clone project going. ;) Allison

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

OT: Re: Security question (sort of)/goodbye

by edick＠idcomm.com

What the BIOS does, in this case, isn't relevant, though that should work, I guess. It's what M$ did in MSD and Windows that matters, since that's what's getting confused. 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: Sunday, March 21, 1999 12:53 PM Subject: Re: OT: Re: Security question (sort of)/goodbye >> As for the serial ports, the UART or maybe ART (also a valid acronymn, I > >You know, I've heard of (and used) UARTs, USRTs, USARTs, ACIAs, ACEs >(Async Communcation Element, I think, which it what Intel called the >8250). Never ARTs... > >> guess, since they're hardly universal any more) these are normally >> recognized by means of the interrupt they return. If, let's assume, the > >Well, the PC/AT simply looks at the Interrupt ID registers of the UARTs at >$3FA and $2FA. If it gets the right value back, it assumes the UART >exists. I've just checked the BIOS source listing (section TEST2) > >Of course modern BIOSs probably do something totally different, but without >the source listing it's impossible to be sure. > >-tony >

27 years, 4 months

2
1
0 0

PDP-11/23 question

by cmcmanis＠mcmanis.com

Would someone with a PDP-11 configuration guide describe for me what I need to do to populate my PDP-11/23 chassis? Here are the questions, the Chassis has a 9 x 4 Q-bus and is about 6" tall, says PDP-11/23 on the front and has a few switches (3) and a display. 1) What is the designation for this chassis? (BA11?) 2) Looking at it from the back, what boards should be where? (I will have a CPU, memory, serial interface, BDV11, RX02 interface and RL01 interface. 3) Are "bus grants" required on this system as well? 4) Would an RQDX1 work in this system? --Chuck

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

Sony 650MB Magneto-Optical drive

by mark_k＠iname.com

Hi, Yesterday I bought an old Sony SMO-S501-11 external SCSI 650MB magneto-optical drive. This takes 5.25" double-sided 600MB or 650MB disks; it came with 15 600MB disks. There are some things which hopefully someone on classiccmp will know about, or at least know where to point me. The drive works, at least partly. I think the lens may need cleaning, since sometimes it does not recognise disks; this is using freshly-cleaned disks. Does anyone have a spare 5.25" MO head cleaning disk? Or a cleaning kit for 5.25" MO disks themselves? (But see below, the real fault may be temperature-related.) I got the drive working on my Amiga, and also an (emulated) Macintosh. Does anyone have the driver software for MS-DOS PCs that would have come with this drive? This is necessary to allow 650MB disks to be used under MS-DOS (650MB disks use 1024-byte sectors). When the drive refuses to work, inserting a disk results in: - Drive spins up - A click sound about every two seconds for about ten times - Drive spins down. This repeats twice, after which the drive reports: Sense Key : Not Ready (0x02) Add. SenseCode : Logical Unit Not Ready, Cause not Reportable (0x04) I'll describe a little about the drive itself. It was made in March 1990. It is SCSI-1, and old MO drives were much slower than current ones; according to the manual, the drive has a read speed of 680K/sec with an average seek time of 95ms. Spindle speed is 2400rpm. Interestingly, the actual mechanism does not seem to be SCSI. It is attached to a SCSI controller inside the case. The drive mechanism part number is SMO-D501-99. It uses two card-edge connectors, one 34 way the other 20 way. Is this EDSI or something??? On the SCSI controller PCB is one firmware EPROM, whose label reads: C501-00 CCP-2.11 ? SONY '88 '89 On (one of) the mechanism's PCBs are three EPROMs, whose labels read: D501 D501 D501-00 MMP-32 MDP-21 DCP-83 ? SONY '88 '89 ? SONY '88 '89 ? SONY '88 '89 I tried to dump the data from all four EPROMs. Three seem okay, but the DCP-83 one gave errors. If this EPROM is marginal/bad, that may explain the problems I have been having getting disks to be recognised -- it seems that immediately after powering up the drive from cold, disks can be recognised, but after it has warmed up the drive is much more picky. Do bad EPROMs usually behave like this, or is it more likely to be some other component? If anyone has one of these drives, and has dumped the DCP-83 EPROM, or knows where I might get hold of an image of this EPROM, please let me know. I would also like to get hold of the OEM manual(s) for this drive. On a related subject, I want to get hold of disk geometry information for various types of MO disk for a FAQ that I'm writing. For example, 600MB 5.25" disks have 576999 sectors of 512 bytes. 640MB 3.5" disks have 310352 sectors of 2048 bytes. I need this info for all other types of 5.25" MO disks. -- Mark

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

Memorex Telex 2079 Color Display

by rigdonj＠intellistar.net

I have a User's Manual and Quick Reference Guide for the 2079 terminal that needs a home. I'm going to pitch it if no one wants it. $5 plus shipping. Joe

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

Date and Time in RT-11 and RSX-11

by jhfine＠idirect.com

I am looking for a very simple explanation as to how the date and time are handled in RSX-11? Just a short description which is parallel to what is here about RT-11. In RT-11, the date and time are two very separate quantities. There is no interaction between the two except: (a) When the user requests the time, the size of the time value is checked to see if it exceeds "24 hours" (b) If the time exceeds "24 hours", the time is reduced by "24 hours" and the date is incremented by ONE day, the algorithm dependent on if the SYSGEN has rollover for end of month (and after 31-Dec-99) included or not. The DATE command accepts dates from 01-Jan-73, although the date of 01-Jan-72 is displayed correctly in the DIR utility. For non-Y2K versions of RT-11 (V5.6 and prior), the DATE command accepts and displays dates up to 31-Dec-99. For Y2K versions of RT-11 (V5.7), the DATE command accepts and displays dates up to 31-Dec-2099. The DATE value is kept in a location within the resident monitor and may be requested by any program via a .DATE request. The USR tags a newly created file with the current DATE value (whatever quantity is in the DATE value - no checking is done), otherwise, the DATE is not used or manipulated by the operating system (except as noted in b above) and the DATE command. Other than the utilities (DIR, PIP, etc.) which look at the DATE and especially look at the creation date of a file (which is not actually looking at the actual date - but the DATE value at the time when the file was created), RT-11 does not care about or use the DATE in any manner and the operating system is totally independent of the quantity in the DATE value and unaffected by that quantity. I guess that changing the creation date of a file via PIP to be the current DATE value via the SET option in PIP is an exception, but no different than what happens when the USR creates a files and uses the current DATE value as the creation date. There could be application programs set up by the user which do more than simply display or set the DATE value. DATIME.SAV only does what the DATE command does, but a program executing as a system job could do much more. In general, I want to ignore such possibilities in both RT-11 and RSX-11. One other very minor aspect. In RT-11, the LTC is used to increment the time at either 50 or 60 Hertz. The time value is available to the user in ticks. An RT-11 program can request certain time based operations in terms of the number of ticks. Does RSX-11 have similar types of things available? Sincerely yours, Jerome Fine RT-11/TSX-PLUS User/Addict

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

Rebirth of IMSAI

by dogas＠leading.net

-----Original Message----- From: Sellam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com> >Only in sufficient quantity, but remember this was about the price of a >new kit in 1976 (ok, maybe a bit higher), and therefore inflation would >dictate a much higher cost these days. that's accelerating inflation if todays cosmologists are on the right track.. ;) Mike: dogas(a)leading.net

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

Couple oddball RSX-11M questions

by CLASSICCMP＠trailing-edge.com

>Now the first quesiton is this. I've got a bunch of RL01's and RL02's with >software on them, and when I got them I backed them up onto my Linux box so >I could play with them in the Emulator without having RL01/02 drives in the >house. Using the network I should be able to transfer those Disk Images >over to the PDP-11. However, can I mount those disk images under RSX-11M >4.2 like I can RT-11 disk images under RT-11? If so what do I need to do >this? If you wanted access to the RT-11 files on the RL02, you'd use FLX. Type HELP FLX at the MCR prompt. I suspect that you want to access the "raw" image, though. If you were using 11M+, you'd do a MOU /FOR, then you'd be able to block-address the drive as the file "DL0:", etc. Under 11M you don't even have to do the /FOR (though you may have to do an ALLocate.) >Second question. As I understand it, using DECnet it is possible to use >the tape drive on VAX from another VAX. Depending on the version and the tape interface and what software you have, yes it can be accessed over the network. The best way to do this is to have the machine with the drive do TMSCP serving to the rest of the cluster, though there do exist DECUS freeware tools for non-cluster serving across DECNET. > Well, the VAX in the house doesn't >have a tapedrive, and I've not run the network out to the garage. So is it >possible to have the VAX access the TK-50 on the PDP-11/73 via DECnet? FAL on RSX won't let you do so. But you could upgrade to 11M+ 4.5, and use VCP to make a tape image. But even this isn't very smooth. My favorite solution would be sneakernet - pull the drive and controller and move it ! -- 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, 4 months

3
2
0 0

OT: Re: Security question (sort of)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<tricky to exploit anyway -- the cracker needed to have read the <source code). I'd say VMS is the best I've worked with as the base security is pretty tight. It also has the less than common attribute. As a system it falls into my criteria: Stable mature systems I know how to use. Allison

27 years, 4 months

6
5
0 0

OT: Re: Security question (sort of)/goodbye

by edick＠idcomm.com

A few posts back I remember this young man relying on MSD to figure out what he had. I personally have always found MSD to be worse than useless. If he's confused, that's why. As for the serial ports, the UART or maybe ART (also a valid acronymn, I guess, since they're hardly universal any more) these are normally recognized by means of the interrupt they return. If, let's assume, the plug-N-play was altered by enabling the control parameter in the CMOS ram, which allows this, then it might physically assign a different interrupt than previously. Possibly a new hardware device was installed. It then causes the firmware to reallocate resources, but perhaps not modify the tables, hence fail to recognize devices because it was not told to update the table. Now it doesn't get the correct interrupt from the serial ports, hence concludes the port is absent. Does that sound possible? 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: Saturday, March 20, 1999 6:29 PM Subject: Re: OT: Re: Security question (sort of)/goodbye >> As for those of you addressing a BIOS problem, you are wrong. First of all, >> I could no longer enter the CMOS setup- the computer would freeze. > >But isn't this one heck of a clue? Damage to serial ports can't affect >configuring the CMOS RAM AFAIK. But damage to the bios ROM itself could. >As could (in theory) misprogramming an address decoder.... > >> Secondly, I bought a new AMIBOIS chip at the computer show today, and >> installed it in the motherboard. Booted, reconfigured, re-ran Windows >> setup. No serial ports detected (yes, I am smart enough to enable them in >> the CMOS setup). Windows says that the secondary controller of the dual IDE >> controller is "not present or not working properly" - yes, it is enabled in >> the CMOS. > >Again, this looks like an address conflict or similar. > >Are the UARTs on the motherboard or an expansion card? Are they part of >some large ASIC, or do you have a chance to probe the chip select pin? > >That's what I would do if possible, btw. Trigger a logic analyser off the >CS/ pin and see what's on the address bus at the time. > >-tony >

27 years, 4 months

3
2
0 0

Seller's market

by edick＠idcomm.com

Well, I'm with you on this one. Your remarks are right on the money. An item is worth exactly what someone will pay, no more, and no less. As I wrote before, I may see some of them as idiots, but idiots have a right to the market as much as any of us. If my hardware is worth more to someone else than it is to you, it is my responsibility to see that I get the benefit I feel I deserve. If I sell to you for $50 when someone else offers $500, the blame is on me for taking less than the highest offer, not on someone else for overbidding. You've undoubtedly read my comments about the low (70%) completion rate of eBay transactions. It is easy to agree that people should follow through when they offer the winning bid as opposed to what nearly one in three apparently does, which is to walk away, having ruined the auction by bidding out the more serious bidders, when there was no serious commitment to buy. Unfortunately the law is unclear as to the rights and obligations of the parties involved in this type of transaction. I've always felt that internet commerce needs to be handled in such a way as to share the risk, i.e. not require that one party take all the risk by, say, demanding the buyer pay in advance, using "good" funds (cash or certified) or that the seller ship in advance of payment. There are escrow agencies who support transactions of this type, and they can superficially verify that the package sent contains something other than a brick, but they can't be relied upon to verify that the condition of the package contents are as the seller advertised beyond superficial examination. How, then, could one improve on the 70% completion rate? The validity of the funds is easy enough to verify, but what about the merchandise? It would cost a fortune to verify that every item, be it a Ming Dynasty vase, or a memory card from an antique 8008-based computer is in the condition advertised by the seller. You'd have to engage a panel of experts. True, every item could be sold "as is" in order to avoid having to verify condition, but what about completeness and authenticity? The problem with "bonded" status for buyers and sellers, is that it essentially means that the organization becomes involved in the transaction. EBay manages to avoid this. The eBay auction does essentially nothing more than the misc.forsale.whatever newsgroups, except for the very thing that Sam Ismail has been complaining about, which is imposing a hysterical framework around what should be a sensible and orderly process. Now, I don't draw the same conclusions he does, nor do I believe people to be the "idiots" he finds them to be. I do see his viewpoint, but, like you, I disagree with his ultimate conclusions. EBay does charge the would-be seller a fee based on the final bid price and not on the actual selling price. It benefits them to have the prices as high as they will go. My belief on this matter is that the very thing which drives the prices up is also the thing that causes the high transaction failure rate. The various auction pages around the web stay out of the transaction in order to avoid liability for perceived misrepresentation on the part of the seller as well as failure of the buyer to make valid payment. That's the only position they can take in order to avoid this liability. The buyer is, indeed, offering to pay for an item, sight unseen, while the seller is offering to deliver the merchandise without any binding assurance that the funds will be forthcoming. How can you envision solving this dilemma? Dick -----Original Message----- From: Barry A. Watzman <Watzman(a)ibm.net> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, March 21, 1999 9:13 AM Subject: Seller's market The messages by some of the participants shows that they really do not understand [or perhaps do not want] the concept of a free market. What they really want is a highly imperfect market so that they can buy things at low prices even though there are people around who are willing to pay more [given the presumption that all sellers will sell to the highest bidder ..... and I use the term bidder loosely, not necessarily to imply an auction type format]. The internet is having a huge impact on buying and selling because it is creating the most free and perfect market that ever existed. The definition of such a market is that every buyer knows of every seller, and vice versa; the sellers are able to find the buyer willing to pay the highest price, AND the buyers are able to find the sellers willing to sell for the lowest price. GROW UP ! You have no right to complain because someone else is willing to pay more than either you are willing to pay or than you think that the item is worth. In the latter case, someone else obviously disagrees with you, and IS willing to put their money where their mouth is. That said, I do feel that steps should be taken to INSURE that bidders complete their deals. If I were a seller, and someone bid $5,000 and then backed out, I'd seriously consider legal action to enforce specific performance. I believe that bids on E-Bay are legally enforceable, but in 90% of the cases, because of both the amount and the fact that the buyer and seller are probably in different states, it is just not practical to try and enforce it. However when the bids get into the thousands of dollars, the situation changes and it may become practical to seek a court order of specific performance. But, perhaps a better way would be for E-Bay to create a new class of "Bonded Buyers and Sellers", in which E-Bay has credit card numbers from both buyer and seller, and both buyer and seller have agreed to binding arbritration by a 3rd party [E-Bay]. A bonded seller could designate an auction as open only to bonded bidders, with the assurance on both sides that the transaction WOULD be completed and that items offered would be as described.

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

Apollo 400

by edick＠idcomm.com

If you're thinking about the monitor as being useable with a PC, it depends on which type it is. The lower-resolution type (I once had one) will work at 1024x768 if you connect a resistor of about 500 ohms between the composite blanking signal on the "application connector" to the GREEN output >from the card. This will impose the composite blanking beneath the GREEN video, and bias the GREEN up by about enough to make the composite blanking look like a composite sync, since it's of the right frequency. The GREEN input is usually AC coupled at the monitor, and terminated to ground through 75 ohms. This is worth a try, but may not work on all card-monitor combinations. It will of course not work at all until you load the 1kx768 driver, which will only happen when the hi-res GUI is loaded. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Merle K. Peirce <at258(a)osfn.org> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Thursday, March 18, 1999 5:27 PM Subject: Re: Apollo 400 > >Ours stands about waist high and has to weigh over 100#. since it has >wheels, it is, of course, portabel...;) The monitor on ours appears to >be secured to the top. Ours was the main server on a token ring. > >On Thu, 18 Mar 1999, John Amirault wrote: > >> Merle, >> I would not call my HP Apollo 400 a portable by any means. It stands >> about 2' tall and weighs in @ about 70 pounds, which is the top end of >> what my doctors say I can lift and I find that trying to do this is very >> pain full, thank goodness for friends and hand trucks. Mine has no >> wheels. Mine also has a cable with three BNC connectors on each end to >> hook up the monitor. I have been told of a possible source for a monitor >> and I say thanks Sellam and I will check into it. >> >> JOhn Amirault >> >> "Merle K. Peirce" wrote: >> > >> > Perhaps I'm thinking of the 300 series? Is the 400 the very large >> > portable with its own wheels? >> > >> > On Wed, 17 Mar 1999, Merle K. Peirce wrote: >> > >> > > I think the 400 series have integral monitors, John. >> > > >> > > >> > > On Wed, 17 Mar 1999, John Amirault wrote: >> > > >> > > > Mike, >> > > > Is this the HP Apollo 400? If yes,are there any monitors? >> > > > JOhn Amirault >> > > > >> > > > Mike Ford wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > I had a pleasant afternoon poking around one of my favorite scrappers, and >> > > > > noticed on an incoming cart about two dozen Apollo 400 computers (says >> > > > > model 425 on the back). Hard drives are pulled, but otherwise they are >> > > > > supposed to be complete. Any interest? (he is in Santa Ana CA) >> > > > >> > > >> > > M. K. Peirce >> > > Rhode Island Computer Museum, Inc. >> > > 215 Shady Lea Road, >> > > North Kingstown, RI 02852 >> > > >> > > "Casta est qui nemo rogavit." >> > > >> > > - Ovid >> > > >> > > >> > >> > M. K. Peirce >> > Rhode Island Computer Museum, Inc. >> > 215 Shady Lea Road, >> > North Kingstown, RI 02852 >> > >> > "Casta est qui nemo rogavit." >> > >> > - Ovid >> > >M. K. Peirce >Rhode Island Computer Museum, Inc. >215 Shady Lea Road, >North Kingstown, RI 02852 > >"Casta est qui nemo rogavit." > > - Ovid >

27 years, 4 months

6
10
0 0

Security question (sort of)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<What are "ART" chips? I've never heard of them, and apparently none of <my serial ports have them. < <And if your serial ports do have ART chips, how is it that a software <virus managed to remove them? Good questions... I just put up a new PIII system and there ain't no art chips on it, just standard EX chipset. Allowing for the possibility that the UART (16550s) are somehow cooked the solution would be a serial board plugged in. However the level of integration is so high on the new generation board if the serial dies the whole board is dead and would fail POST. I'll assume you mean UART chips. If its a late model motherboard the two serial ports, the parallel The FDC and IDE are all comming out of one of the 144leg chips. They have little likelyhood of failure (they are 16550 cell libraires in the ASIC) without taking other functions with them. they can be programatically turned of from the CMOS setup (usually the advanced chipset function in AMI). I've used that capability to map out on board serial port 2 for a modem at the same address. However if the bios chip is wrong and does not know of the local chipset capabilities the board level initilization will not work and devices can and will be left out. I found that out trying to use a bios chip from a 386 board for a more highly integrated 486 board... it did boot but many functions were not right. it did prove the original bios chips was fried (27C512P (OTC eprom) totally dead) I used my programmer to copy a BIOS from a similar card into a handy 27C eprom and it worked fine. Like I said if winders boots, major part of the machine has to be there and working. It was true with ALTAIR and hasn't changed. Then again I still run S100 hardware and VAX next to my P166. Current prices for a new mother board without cpu are low enough to consider replacement a viable option. Allison

27 years, 4 months

2
1
0 0

"new" classics (was Re: Pre-history of Digital Research)

by emu＠ecubics.com

Hi, ---------- > From: Sellam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com> > To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> > Subject: Re: "new" classics (was Re: Pre-history of Digital Research) > Date: Saturday, March 20, 1999 8:03 PM > > Unfortunately I think this is way off topic for this group. > I don't think so. But we could have Doug create a new list called > homebrew. Try the comp.arch.hobbyist newsgroup. It's moderated, and all this PC crap stays outside. > Homebrewing is a lost pasttime for the most part. I want to bring it > back, at least for myself. It's different now, you use different chips & environment. But now you can define your own cpu & peripherials, what is somekind of fun. cheers & have fun, emanuel

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

"New" IMSAI

by Watzman＠ibm.net

You are never going to see a "new" IMSAI for $500. In the first place, many of the parts that would be needed for a complete system are no longer available. In the second place, the original IMSAI was not UL approved (or even safe, really) and could probably not be sold today. In the third place, the original IMSAI was not even close to meeting FCC Class A much less B. Finally, $500 would be cheap for a low-volume copy, regulatory issues aside. Do not be surprised when your unrealistic expectations are not realized.

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

SWTPc 6800, common format (sharable?) repair journal?

by dogas＠leading.net

-----Original Message----- From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Sunday, March 21, 1999 9:39 AM Subject: Re: SWTPc 6800, common format (sharable?) repair journal? ><and transister( 18n9 ) from rectifier bridge. The soldering job on MP-A2 ><has alot of resin around connnections that I'm already pretty leary of. Il ><start off by digging for all the hardware documentationI can find... The documentation is great. Including just the spine of the yellow SWTCP binder for the docset. The Computer System Addendum listed everything I should find but it gets pretty unorganized at section 3. Out of Section 1(hardware) I'm missing a page, PIA-9 & PIA-10. I'd ask for a copy now but I think I may have a few more to add >Wash with alcohol, then put in dish washer to clean up the boards. Really? It seems like microscopic moleculer soap minutia or the drying cycle heat would try and hurt some of the ic's. >The bulk of the SWTP hardware was hand assembled so removing the resion was >often not done. > ><First question: The baud lines on both busses (110,150,300,600,1200) caug ><my eye and that ad above states: "Crystal controlled oscillator( 1,7971 ) ><provides the clock signal for the processor (before?) and is divided down b ><the MC14411 (both on MP-A2 GK) to provide the various baud rate outputs fo ><the interface circuts. Full buffering on all data and address busses..." ><Does that mean that all these cards are serial? > >No! They had a common baud rate generation to avoid repeating a circut that >generally appears on every serial card. It was one way to reduce the cost Architected to accomodate many (just?) serial cards? >by elimintaing redundant circutry. the transfers were via 8bit dat and >16bit address plus a hand ful of control lines. It was compact hence the >name SS50 for the bus. What does the full buffering on all data and address busses mean? I think the TOP of MP-B is the most artistic layouts I've seen >Allison > > > - Mike: dogas(a)leading.net

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

OT: Re: Security question (sort of)/goodbye

by roblwill＠usaor.net

You know, this is exactly the reason that I left the last mailing list. I mention that I'm only 16 years old, and ask a simple opinion such as "what would you do if your computer was hacked into?", and I get stuff like this. John, don't you think you could have been tactful enough to either send this directly to Sellam or to me?? As for my "security reasons", the pictures were removed so that certain people would not see them. They were posted for exactly 45 minutes. If you feel that you need to see them, email me, and I'll gladly send them to you. As for those of you addressing a BIOS problem, you are wrong. First of all, I could no longer enter the CMOS setup- the computer would freeze. Secondly, I bought a new AMIBOIS chip at the computer show today, and installed it in the motherboard. Booted, reconfigured, re-ran Windows setup. No serial ports detected (yes, I am smart enough to enable them in the CMOS setup). Windows says that the secondary controller of the dual IDE controller is "not present or not working properly" - yes, it is enabled in the CMOS. Answer me this question, John -- How am I supposed to access the Internet with the modem unplugged? My computer can't be hacked into when I'm not on the Internet, so I really don't think that's going to be a feasible solution, is it? Same goes for the hold button. I will say once again that I do not have a Windows configuration problem, and if someone on the list feels like sending me a check for $1600 for a new computer, I'll gladly have it thrown off the top of the Empire State Building, provided that you pay the top Ebay list price and shipping for it. And with this, I take my classic computing questions elsewhere. Flame away.-- -Jason Willgruber (roblwill(a)usaor.net) ICQ#: 1730318 <http://members.tripod.com/general_1> ------///////// -----// // ----// ## ---// ////### --// //#### -/////////## ## -----------/ ## / ## / ## / ######## /-----------> -----Original Message----- From: John Amirault <amirault(a)epix.net> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Saturday, March 20, 1999 7:27 AM Subject: Re: OT: Re: Security question (sort of) >Sellam, >If you read the RED words at the top of Jason's web page it says all the >pictures have been removed "FOR SECURITY REASONS". I for one do not know >what type of "SECURITY REASONS" he has, maybe he will enlighten us all. >I do know that my PENTIUM HAS THREE TYPES OF COMPUTERS IT CAN BE SET UP >AS 1. DESK TOP, 2.NETWORK SERVER(in my opinion not a good choice) 3. I >can't remember right now as I am on my 486 @ my girlfriends. If Jason is >using Windoze 98 or any OS he can check his MANUAL to find out about >security. When Jason is off line he can unplug his modem and NO ONE can >hack into his computer. Another thing you can do if you don't want to >keep plugging and unplugging is get a hold button from someplace like >"Radio Shack" and put it inline on your modem line and then when you >hang up push the button to place the computer on "hold", that is the >phone line is physically disconnected from the computer by a switch. > >Jason, please take this cordially as it is intended to HELP not to >chastise. I am sure there are many people out there that know much more >than I do about computers and I hope that they will share some knowledge >with you. > >John Amirault > >Sellam Ismail wrote: >> >> On Fri, 19 Mar 1999, Max Eskin wrote: >> >> > On Fri, 19 Mar 1999, Jason Willgruber wrote: >> > >Check out my website: >> > > >> > >http://members.tripod.com/general_1 >> > > >> > In summary, it caused damage to the serial ports. Any computer whose >> > hardware can be damaged by software in this way should be thrown off the >> > Empire State Building. >> >> I think what Jason may not have initially realized (and maybe still not >> yet even) is that his Windows system configuration files got screwed and >> therefore his serial ports are no longer accessible under windows. As far >> as I know, its impossible to physically damage a serial port through >> software unless you make it possible by building a device whose soul >> purpose is to electrically short pins on the serial port on command. And >> of course, no sane persson would go through the trouble. >> >> So all he really needs to do is probably go into the Cntrol Panel, select >> System, then go to ports, remove the old serial ports (if they are still >> there) then add them again. Or maybe let windows find them for you with >> the Add New Hardware icon. >> >> BTW, I checked out the web site but all the links are bad. They all end >> up at a Tripod "page not found" page. >> >> Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- >> Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out. >> >> Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0 >> See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details! >> [Last web site update: 02/15/99] >

27 years, 4 months

4
3
0 0

Sellam's market

by jfoust＠threedee.com

Hey, sellam.com isn't taken. :-) - John

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

SWTPc 6800, common format (sharable?) repair journal?

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<and transister( 18n9 ) from rectifier bridge. The soldering job on MP-A2 <has alot of resin around connnections that I'm already pretty leary of. Il <start off by digging for all the hardware documentationI can find... Wash with alcohol, then put in dish washer to clean up the boards. The bulk of the SWTP hardware was hand assembled so removing the resion was often not done. <First question: The baud lines on both busses (110,150,300,600,1200) caug <my eye and that ad above states: "Crystal controlled oscillator( 1,7971 ) <provides the clock signal for the processor (before?) and is divided down b <the MC14411 (both on MP-A2 GK) to provide the various baud rate outputs fo <the interface circuts. Full buffering on all data and address busses..." <Does that mean that all these cards are serial? No! They had a common baud rate generation to avoid repeating a circut that generally appears on every serial card. It was one way to reduce the cost by elimintaing redundant circutry. the transfers were via 8bit dat and 16bit address plus a hand ful of control lines. It was compact hence the name SS50 for the bus. Allison

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

SWTPc 6800, common format (sharable?) repair journal?

by dogas＠leading.net

-----Original Message----- From: Sellam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com> >> Any switheads out there? Any thoughts on the forthcomming "This Old >> Computer" episode? It would be cool to accumulate these restoration > >What? You aren't referring to a TV show, are you? yeah... The Switheads ;)

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

PDP 11/44 RSTS/E Tape ops.

by jpl15＠netcom.com

Let's see if a small classic computer question stands a chance against the Din of Dissension and the Cacophony of Contumely that swirls in Voracious Votices of Vitriolic Vituperation... but I digress. The Question: Given, a PDP 11/44 system with attached SMD drive and 9trk streamer drive, running under RSTS/e V9.7. No OS docs are availble. 'Help' is. I would like to be able to move files to and from the 9trk unit. The controller is a TM11 and the device is MS0:. I have spent some hours reading to 'help' files related to this operation. I am pretty sure the *hardware* is correct and functional. I have played with Init-ing, Allocate-ing, and Mount-ing and the using PIP to move files. It is likely PIP doesn't speak sequential file devices but I'm not sure. I am leery of experimenting with Backup and Restore until I know more about the subtleties of their operations. Thanks in Advance Cheers John

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

SWTPc 6800, common format (sharable?) repair journal?

by dogas＠leading.net

Hey, I'd watch it.... -----Original Message----- From: Sellam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Saturday, March 20, 1999 11:43 PM Subject: Re: SWTPc 6800, common format (sharable?) repair journal? >On Sat, 20 Mar 1999, Mike wrote: > >> Any switheads out there? Any thoughts on the forthcomming "This Old >> Computer" episode? It would be cool to accumulate these restoration > >What? You aren't referring to a TV show, are you? > >Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- >Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out. > > Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0 > See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details! > [Last web site update: 02/15/99] > >

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

Security question (sort of)

by roblwill＠usaor.net

If the ART chips that drive the serial ports are gone, they won't work no matter what it used to access them. -- -Jason Willgruber (roblwill(a)usaor.net) ICQ#: 1730318 <http://members.tripod.com/general_1> ------///////// -----// // ----// ## ---// ////### --// //#### -/////////## ## -----------/ ## / ## / ## / ######## /-----------> -----Original Message----- From: Eric Smith <eric(a)brouhaha.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Friday, March 19, 1999 10:25 PM Subject: Re: Security question (sort of) >Jason wrote: > >> A virus planted by a hacker can damage hardware by "eating" at the chips, > >I'm not a virus expert, but I am an experienced embedded systems programmer, >and have done some hardware design. That said, this claim sounds completely >ridiculous to me, on par with an urban legend. Care to explain this from a >electronics (or physics, or chemistry) point of view? > >> or just scrambling the code in the chip. > >In a flash BIOS, maybe, although that would be tend to be specific to a >certain motherboard. There's no general way to write a virus that can trash >the BIOS on any arbitrary motherboard, because unlike much of the >"PC standard", there is not a stanard for how the flash BIOS programming >works. Different motherboards use different types of flash chips that >have different programming requirements. > >I've never yet heard of a virus doing this, although I'll concede that it is >possible. Decent motherboards require you to physically move a jumper in >order to enable programming the BIOS, to prevent exactly this kind of problem. > >However, changing the BIOS such that the machine still booted but simply >didn't have INT 13 serial support wouldn't prevent all software from >using the serial port. Most software these days doesn't even bother to >go through the BIOS to access the ports, because (1) the BIOS interface >is incredibly lame, and (2) on some machines the BIOS functions don't even >work correctly. > >> (I know someone (Ironically, it's the sister of the person that did this >> to my computer), who's keyboard controller chip got scrambled. > >Sounds like a complete coincidence to me. Except for exotic (and fairly >expensive) keyboards, the firmware is in masked ROM inside a microcontroller, >and there is no way to modify it without physically replacing the chip. > >Eric >

27 years, 4 months

9
9
0 0

Computers in Parallel

by roblwill＠usaor.net

I'm certain that some other method other than Beowulf will be used for the Commodore project. -- -Jason Willgruber (roblwill(a)usaor.net) ICQ#: 1730318 <http://members.tripod.com/general_1> ------///////// -----// // ----// ## ---// ////### --// //#### -/////////## ## -----------/ ## / ## / ## / ######## /-----------> -----Original Message----- From: Mike Ford <mikeford(a)netwiz.net> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Saturday, March 20, 1999 2:48 AM Subject: Re: Computers in Parallel >>> I think you should do it. I have a batch of Mac IIfx and I may try a >>> parallel arrangement with them one of my friends told me about. >>> >>> As an experiment lots is to be learned from this. I don't however have any >>> plans to "use" it. >>> >>> For a start I suggest looking at some of the encryption cracking efforts. >> >>Well, I haven't heard of Beowulf being implemented under MacLinux.

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

Pre-history of Digital Research

by edick＠idcomm.com

Yes, but what's not off topic is that they're planning to revive support, at least to the extent of providing documentation, etc, (on what basis, I don't know) for their whole product line, at least as it's available. This will be helpful to some, who still (rarely) use the old stuff, and to other who would like to but can't because they haven't got the required spec's. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Steve Robertson <steverob(a)hotoffice.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Saturday, March 20, 1999 2:35 PM Subject: OT: Pre-history of Digital Research >Based on the proposed hardware descripition (Pentium MB, etc..), the >"rebirth" of the IMSAI is completely off topic. > >Steve Robertson <steverob(a)hotoffice.com>

27 years, 4 months

4
3
0 0

Fw: Pre-history of Digital Research

by steverob＠hotoffice.com

> This web site is worth a visit. It seems to imply that as time allows, > they're going to publish documents on the web, and perhaps even produce more > of their old product line. Yep.. That's what I got from the site. I don't own an IMSAI (yet) and certainly don't feel like paying $2000 for one. This could provide a viable alternative. Personally, I prefer to build a new one, using old technology, than to deal with a kit someone else built 25 years ago. Of course the components and methods would have to remain true to the original. The tenative price of $500 seems awfully high to me. After all, it's not like there is a lot of R&D involved, the components aren't exactly cutting-edge, and to some extent the markets are already established. This would certainly drive down the prices of the originals. For most of us that would be a good thing. If anyone has one that they want to unload before the bottom drops completely out, let me know ;-) Steve Robertson <steverob(a)hotoffice.com>

27 years, 4 months

4
3
0 0

Fw: Pre-history of Digital Research

by edick＠idcomm.com

There were PLL devices I played with back then, e.g. Signetics 564, among others, which boasted 50 MHz operation, but standard TTL logic was spec'd at 20-25 MHz at the top end, frequency wise, and one had to use H-TTL or S-TTL to make your circuitry remain within specified limits. If you weren't into worst-case analysis, you might get away with operating a circuit outside those limits more often than not, but while the cases that worked might on occasion get you some praise or a bonus, the ones that didn't would absolutely get you fired. Back in those days, although the S-TTL ran some 50-75% faster, it cost well over double, if the function you needed was available. It often required that several parts be replaced with schottky parts to avoid races, as synchronous design was not yet as popular as it is today, and synchronous circuitry has to have everybody synchronized with the same clock, hence, able to function at the schottky rate which increased the cost even more. I'll stick with my earlier complaint, that the most annoying problems I saw back then were unconnected inputs and races, both of which became VERY troublesome when a substitution of either LS or, worse, HCMOS parts was made as the product matured. Often this required extensive redesign, frequently with the addition of pipeline registers to synchronize asynchronous events, which made for ugly reworks. 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: Saturday, March 20, 1999 4:02 PM Subject: Re: Fw: Pre-history of Digital Research ><designs of yesteryear. Back then we were still learning about race ><conditions and setup and hold time violations, and the like. Back then, a ><circuit designed to operate from a 25 MHz clock was taxing the limits of th ><technology, while today, people don't even blink when the clocks are over 1 ><times that fast. > >While the parts werent fast and there were things to be aware of it wasn't >that backward. There were however sloppy designers doing sloppy designs. > >I did a PLL design, direct counting to 50mhz in 1973, that was near the >TTL upper limit but not that hard to do. Doing 25mhz plus logic in 1975 >was not unheard of and Mini makers were doing it but there were economic >issues in doing that not technical. > >The most common errors were lousy board layouts and weak ground planes. >the altair suffered from both severely. Another fault was many designers >were forgetting that backplanes and other busses were trnasmisstion lines >and needed to be terminated properly, again the altair was the worst going >from the front pannel to the bus with a bundle of wires the shortest near >6 inches long. Even at 2MHz this was sloppy practice. Looking at >contemporary DEC and DG backplanes for the time it was clear the design >techniques were known. > >Don't forget in 1989 (-10y) a PC running at 25mhz was the hottest thing >going. It would take another decade to get from 25 to 250+ as a mator of >routine for PCs but there were system going much faster than PCs in 1989. > > >Allison >

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

"new" classics (was Re: Pre-history of Digital Research)

by edick＠idcomm.com

I'm not so sure you're as far off-topic as you think. The connectors you mentioned were all "old" technology back in the mid '70's when MITS and IMSAI were pups. I'd submit that the DIN41612 connectors as used in VME bus cards and in Apple Macintosh's NuBus are inexpensive enough today that your can afford them. They're also 20 years old, as I was including them with my VME wire-wrap boards in 1981-82. IIRC, the first run (20 boards) cost about $19 per board for the connectors and mounting hardware. That's not much more than the then-popular S-100's would have cost for 2 of each gender. The notion of a front panel has often intrigued me, but recently I've thought of using it more as a bus monitor probe, perhaps with an ethernet connection to a PC and used for diagnosing functional anomalies. Instead of discrete logic, it would use one or two of the SCENIX -SX processors and drive the bus directly, loading memory and I/O features and storing the monitored information in local memory for transmission to the PC host. information could be displayed more effectively at the PC, but immediate readouts in the form of discrete LED's, bit for bit, could be driven as could HEX displays. The part I would view as important, however, is the diagnostic function. As for your loadable control store, I'd suggest you consider a mid-sized FPGA. These can be loaded from a local processor and the architecture changed at will, by reloading the device to suit the desired architecture. if pinouts don't work, there are electrically reprogrammable crosspoint switches routinely used every day, e.g. Lattice' GSX devices, to correct unresolved routing problems, and there you are. You could actually fashion your own processor right on your desk, but that really is off-topic. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Chuck McManis <cmcmanis(a)mcmanis.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Saturday, March 20, 1999 4:18 PM Subject: "new" classics (was Re: Pre-history of Digital Research) >About every three weeks or so I kick around this idea of building a "new" >classic computer. Lately my thoughts have been to build something with a >loadable control store so that I could microprogram different instructions >as I saw fit or was necessary. Of course the machine would have a front >panel with switches and LEDs to indicate state. > >I then come to the question of "add in" boards. Ideally one would like to >establish some sort of bus and make available a wide variety of add in >boards that could be used to customize the system. > >Then there is cost, one would like to keep the cost at a minimum as well. > >So in the connector area I've been considering something "VME" like which >would consist of two 50 pin right angle molex connectors and the >"mainboard" would consist of 50 pin AMP sockets. These are pretty cheap >because of SCSI and they should provide enough pins. (one could imagine >three connectors for a total of 150 pins but that seems like overkill.) > >Unfortunately I think this is way off topic for this group. >--Chuck > >

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

Fw: Pre-history of Digital Research

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<designs of yesteryear. Back then we were still learning about race <conditions and setup and hold time violations, and the like. Back then, a <circuit designed to operate from a 25 MHz clock was taxing the limits of th <technology, while today, people don't even blink when the clocks are over 1 <times that fast. While the parts werent fast and there were things to be aware of it wasn't that backward. There were however sloppy designers doing sloppy designs. I did a PLL design, direct counting to 50mhz in 1973, that was near the TTL upper limit but not that hard to do. Doing 25mhz plus logic in 1975 was not unheard of and Mini makers were doing it but there were economic issues in doing that not technical. The most common errors were lousy board layouts and weak ground planes. the altair suffered from both severly. Another fault was many designers were forgetting that backplanes and other busses were trnasmisstion lines and needed to be terminated properly, again the altair was the worst going >from the front pannel to the bus with a bundle of wires the shortest near 6 inches long. Even at 2MHz this was sloppy practice. Looking at contemporary DEC and DG backplanes for the time it was clear the design techniques were known. Don't forget in 1989 (-10y) a PC running at 25mhz was the hottest thing going. It would take another decade to get from 25 to 250+ as a mator of routine for PCs but there were system going much faster than PCs in 1989. Allison

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

Fw: Pre-history of Digital Research

by edick＠idcomm.com

That's truer today than it was 20-25 years ago. Much of what we saw on S-100 equipment was used not because, say a J-K flipflop pair was the best choice of devices, but because the boss had just bought a barrel full of the things as surplus and wanted them used. My concern in the previous post was over the performance of presently available components in old circuit boards. First, because they were often designed with the performance of the devices used figured into the timing equations, and secondly, because it no longer works to leave device inputs unconnected as was frequently the practice in the mid-late (Pre-LSTTL, Pre-HCMOS) -70's. 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: Saturday, March 20, 1999 3:45 PM Subject: Re: Fw: Pre-history of Digital Research >> >> I've got to disagree on this one. From what I've observed the 100-pin >> card-edge connectors are pretty common. I really don't know why, but they >> are. Every time I look at the local surplus parts house, I see those old >> connectors, in the same box they were in 20 years ago, even though the store > >Sure, but you can't design something, certainly not something that's >going into production, based on parts you find in a surplus shop. > >You need to use parts that are in current production IMHO. I won't even >do one-off designs based on parts I've found surplus. I don't know I'll >be able to get parts to maintain it in the future. > > >> on the secondary connector for Multibus-I, nor do they often have the >> 31-pair or 18-pair connectors used on a PC backplane. Now, I didn't say I > >Odd... Those are available _new_ in the UK without much problem... > >Does anyone know of a source (UK prefereably) of 0.125" 44 pin doublesided >(22 pins on each side) connectors. No, I don't mean 0.156" ones. I >believe they fit the expansion connector on the HP9100, for example. > >-tony >

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

A couple of books available

by steverob＠hotoffice.com

Stopped by the thrift store today and grabbed a handful of books. I don't have use for these so if anyone wants them, let me know. I'd like to get $1.oo plus postage for each of them. All are softcover in very good condition. 128 Internals - The Authoritative insiders' guide. 1985 Abacus software. Softcover 500 pages. This looks like a *great* resource for anyone interested in the COMMODORE 128. A Practical Guide to the TANDY 1000SX. Radio Shack, Spiral Bound, 350 ppg. This is the original manual that came with the system. WORDSTAR Made Easy - Osborne / McGraw Hill 1982, 160 PPG. A baisc users guide to the word processor. First Come, First Serve --- Steve Robertson <steverob(a)hotoffice.com>

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

AIM65s available

by rcini＠email.msn.com

Hello, all: Well, it seems that my deal for a bunch of AIMs is finally coming through. I should have two extras available within the next two weeks from I guy that I know in NJ. Cost: $100 + S/H. Anyone interested should contact me off-list. Sorry, US shipments only. [ 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, 4 months

1
0
0 0

decwriter III problem

by lemay＠cs.umn.edu

I hooked up an decwriter III that hasnt been used in over 10 years. When I turn on teh power, every LED lights up, and the 4 digit display lights up to all 8's. The printhead doesnt return to the left. Any suggestions? -Lawrence LeMay

27 years, 4 months

2
1
0 0

Western Digital PASCAL microengine / p-system.

by pete＠dunnington.u-net.com

On Mar 19, 16:29, Dean Billing wrote: > Subject: Western Digital PASCAL microengine / p-system. > I have also been scanning all of the WEB sights that have information about > UCSD PASCAL and obsolete and disappeared computers and I find no reference > to Sage Computer Technology of Reno, NV. They made the Sage II/IV systems > that came with UCSD PASCAL installed. They were M-68000 based systems and > probably ran other operating systems too. Anybody remember them? If you mean what I think, I have two of them (Sage-II's). A Sage-II is a cream-coloured box with dark grey front and rear panels.

27 years, 4 months

3
2
0 0

sellers market

by zmerch＠30below.com

Once upon a midnight dreary, Sellam Ismail had spoken clearly: >On Fri, 19 Mar 1999, Aaron Christopher Finney wrote: >> I don't have much time at all, but have a lot of experience with web >> programming and would definitely donate whatever time and energy I could >> to something like this, if someone wanted to actually organise a >> project... >This is exactly the type of trading board that I've been meaning to add >to the VCF web site for aeons now. If you can provide the programming >I'll certainly host it. Its definitely a needed service. [snip] Hey! Hey! Hey! Yes, this is a *shameless* plug, but try this place: http://www.the-dock.com/club100.html and click on either the For Sale, Wanted or GuestBook... (It's an ontopic site - Model 100/102/200's...) And.... I wrote the programs that do that. It's simple, it's basic, but hey... it works! And... it's free, too! And... it's written in Perl, so it can run under most any operating system. And... And... Darn, ran out of Ginzu Knives... Oh well! ;^> If anyone wants the code, just zing me a private email... Thanks, Roger "Merch" Merchberger -- Roger "Merch" Merchberger --- sysadmin, Iceberg Computers Recycling is good, right??? Ok, so I'll recycle an old .sig. If at first you don't succeed, nuclear warhead disarmament should *not* be your first career choice.

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

OT: Re: Security question (sort of)

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<I do know that my PENTIUM HAS THREE TYPES OF COMPUTERS IT CAN BE SET UP <AS 1. DESK TOP, 2.NETWORK SERVER(in my opinion not a good choice) 3. I <can't remember right now as I am on my 486 @ my girlfriends. If Jason is Generally and based on experience with 35 desktop W95 sytems and 3 NT servers as an internal (only) intranet. W95 has minimal security and is difficult to make hard for security. Suitable as webserver in a non hostile environment not requiring security >from malicious users. Win NT can be secure, but watch those service packs as some improve it and a few reduce it (bugs!). Generally fairly secure, common enough in use that security holes are well known and publicized. I'm currently looking at linux, it has potential. Another I do know well is VMS as its generally very secure and made very secure. It also has security by obscurity, most PC heads haven't a clue want a VAX(alpha) or VMS is. Allison

27 years, 4 months

3
2
0 0

Fw: Pre-history of Digital Research

by allisonp＠world.std.com

<An important thing to remember is that the Original IMSAI sold for almost <$1000. SO even though a new Pentium II 400 is only $1000 with all the bell <and whistles there is a cost savings due to selling hundres of thousands o <the thing. An IMSAI kit maybe a few hundred or so.< Doing an Imsai would be expsnsive as finding the parts would be costly. Many arent made or are such low volume (100pin connector for sure) that it isn't going to be cheap. For example the backplane 18 slots (or was it 22) roughly 13"x18" two sided in quantities of 100, I'd bet that would be a $100 right there. Even in the S100 heyday $49 was cheap (no connectors or anything else). Allison

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

Security question (sort of)

by roblwill＠usaor.net

The serial ports are no longer recognized ANYWHERE - in the BIOS, in DOS, by MSD, Windows, anything. I have already re-installed Windows. A virus planted by a hacker can damage hardware by "eating" at the chips, or just scrambling the code in the chip. (I know someone (Ironically, it's the sister of the person that did this to my computer), who's keyboard controller chip got scrambled. If you noticed the red text on the top of the page, I have removed all of the images. I just didn't feel like deleting all the links. -- -Jason Willgruber (roblwill(a)usaor.net) ICQ#: 1730318 <http://members.tripod.com/general_1> -----Original Message----- From: Sellam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Friday, March 19, 1999 6:51 PM Subject: OT: Re: Security question (sort of) >On Fri, 19 Mar 1999, Max Eskin wrote: > >> On Fri, 19 Mar 1999, Jason Willgruber wrote: >> >Check out my website: >> > >> >http://members.tripod.com/general_1 >> > >> In summary, it caused damage to the serial ports. Any computer whose >> hardware can be damaged by software in this way should be thrown off the >> Empire State Building. > >I think what Jason may not have initially realized (and maybe still not >yet even) is that his Windows system configuration files got screwed and >therefore his serial ports are no longer accessible under windows. As far >as I know, its impossible to physically damage a serial port through >software unless you make it possible by building a device whose soul >purpose is to electrically short pins on the serial port on command. And >of course, no sane persson would go through the trouble. > >So all he really needs to do is probably go into the Cntrol Panel, select >System, then go to ports, remove the old serial ports (if they are still >there) then add them again. Or maybe let windows find them for you with >the Add New Hardware icon. > >BTW, I checked out the web site but all the links are bad. They all end >up at a Tripod "page not found" page. > >Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- >Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out. > > Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0 > See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details! > [Last web site update: 02/15/99] > >

27 years, 4 months

7
6
0 0

sellers market

by edick＠idcomm.com

You're right, of course. The fact that they've decided on this auctioneer model for their business is simply a business decision. Judging from the price at which their stock trades, I'd say it was a good one. There is absolutely an evironment implicit in their business model, which encourages higher rather than lower prices. They get a cut of the final price. You, Sam, object to that, meaning their business model, and I don't blame you. I personally dislike even more, the fact that their transaction-completion-ratio is so low. It also encourages overbidding because it does not "force" either party to fulfil the obligations which are part of the implied relationship between seller and bidder. As a consequence, I, or anyone else, can overbid in an effort to punish the seller for starting the bidding at too high a level, i.e. I bid 20% high in the belief that no one will outbid that value, and then abort the transaction after the auction ends. This gets the auctioneer paid at the seller's expense, yet costs me nothing. Next month I use a different email account to identify myself, and all's well with eBay. You're right . . . it's not perfect. It's not my place to object, however, until something more to my liking comes along. I don't see that happening any time soon. Dick -----Original Message----- From: Sellam Ismail <dastar(a)ncal.verio.com> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu> Date: Saturday, March 20, 1999 11:07 AM Subject: Re: sellers market >On Sat, 20 Mar 1999, Richard Erlacher wrote: > >> Sam objects to "idiots" bidding against presumably rational people and >> allowing the prices to escalate (he believes) due to the auction atmosphere >> presented by eBay. I don't happen to agree with him. The people who sell >> their good at auction wish for a ridiculously hign price. They don't often > >Of course they wish for a ridiculously high price. And my argument, which >you did not address, is that ebay's auction mechanism encourages >such ridiculously high prices. > >> It's true, that eBay seeks to benefit by this overall-inane-if-not-insane >> auction environment, simply because their fee is tied to the final bid >> offered. Sam objects to this, while I object to the high precentage of > >And thus it is in ebay's best interest to put mechanisms in place which >encourage over-bidding for an item. In the end they will collect the >most revenues from the auction! > >> A few days ago, I was visiting Best Buy, which is a common source of >> computer hardware at reasonable prices. I declined to pay $180 for a 10GB >> hard disk because I though the price was a mite high. That was not the only >> reason, but it was a factor. Twenty years ago, I paid $1500 for a 5MB >> Winchester drive. Lots of other people thought the price was a mite high, >> but I paid the price, believing that I needed the drive more than I needed >> the $1500. Does that make me an idiot? Does that make all the people who >> didn't buy the things twenty years ago fools? I think not. > >Well, who really NEEDS an Altair 8800? > >> All this is an allusion to the fact that it's called a "free" market. I >> guess that means that there's no restriction against fools and idiots. > >Its a free market sure, but the prices that come out of ebay auctions are >by no measure "fair market value". > >Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- >Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out. > > Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0 > See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details! > [Last web site update: 02/15/99] >

27 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

LSI-11 question

by mbg＠world.std.com

>I would like to put together a simple PDP-11 system. I've got a M7270 >card (LSI 11 processor) and an M8044-DB card (32KW MOS memory). I've also >got a couple of PDP-11/03 and PDP-11/23 rack chassis that are both QBUS. >I've also got a pair of RX02 drives. Does the M7270 go into an 11/03 >chassis? Yes, it does... same ole' qbus... >What other cards would I need to build a usable '11 ? No doubt a floppy >controller card of some sort (although I also recently got the DSD440 to >go with the funky RX02 emulator card) Some sort of serial port for a >terminal (M number?) What is the minimum RT-11 system? You'll need processor (M7270), memory (M8044), serial line card (dlv11-J, M8043), boot/terminator (BDV11, REV11, etc), disk interface card, disk, terminal. Of that list, I think you'll need a BDV11 or REV11, unless the disk controller you have has on-board boot (which the DSD880 controllers do have). If I remember correctly, RT-11 originally booted in as little as 8kb of memory. Later we had to increase the minimum to 12 or 16 kb. >I also picked up the programmers panel for a PDP-11/10. I'd love to put >together a PDP-11/10 if I new what to look for. I wish I'd known earlier... I have a couple of pdp-11/05,10 chassis which I am giving to a group in Rhode Island... 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, 4 months

4
6
0 0

My pdp-8 move this weekend...

by mbg＠world.std.com

Thanks to all those who made suggestions on how to do the move. It turns out that the problem with lift gates has more to do with the fact that both Ryder and Budget (and I'm sure other places which rent vehicles) have separated their 'consumer' and 'commercial' truck rental groups. I found that although it is possible to find a truck with a lift-gate in the consumer division, they aren't generally where you want them to be (I'm in framingham, MA, and the closest one they could find was south boston... and at $.39 a mile for Ryder, that would add up quickly). The commercial division is where you would find the lift-gates, but they would be on larger trucks (>24ft) with air brakes, etc... things which would require CDL... So, that is out. The only thing I could find was a 15' long 7' high truck with a ramp... I got dollies, so I'll be able to roll things into the truck. I'm getting moving pads to protect everything. I'm going to take tools to dismantle things, rope to tie things down, and a digital camera to take pictures of cabling and/or locations of things so I can restore them at my place. Now, the only problem I've got is that the person who had offered to help in the move is sick and can't help, so unless I can find someone to help, I'll be wrangling this stuff alone at my place. If there is anyone in the framingham, ma (sudbury, natick, marlboro, maynard, etc) area who might be able to help, it would be much appreciated. Meal/snacks are on me... Please write to me off-line any time between now and about 9am tomorrow... Thanks in advance to anyone who can help... Think of the chance to handle some *real iron* (tm) :) And look for pictures of the move in a few days on my web page... 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, 4 months

4
3
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