Carlos Murillo-Sanchez <cem14(a)cornell.edu> wrote:
> I guess that the first thing that I have to do now that I tested the
> power supply and verified that the machine (seems to) turn on,
> is to build a serial console cable for this. I have several cables
> that will fit the BACI boards, but the connectors at the other
> end have been cut off. Does anybody have the pin out for the
> finger pads in the front of the BACI boards?
OK, so this morning I have in front of me a couple different versions of
HP part number 12966-90001: HP 12966A Buffered Asynchronous Data
Communications Interface Installation, Service, and Reference Manual.
The datacomm card-edge connector is called P1 in this manual, and
it's described in terms of letter codes A-F, H, J-N, P, R-Z, AA, and BB;
and then numbers 1-24. I'm guessing that these correspond to sides of
the board/connector but I'm not sure which side is the letters and which
is the numbers. Some help I am, huh?
It looks like HP typically shipped one of several cables with the board,
depending on what option the board was ordered with. What's copied below
is the configuration of the "default" cable, p/n 12966-60004, and which
I think is appropriate for a DTE-flavored RS-232 device (like a terminal)
with no hardware flow control.
pin Signal name Device pin RS-232C ckt Source
A Signal Ground (EIA) 7 AB Common
B F
C CA Inhibit
D Transmit Data (EIA) 3 BA Intfc
E Request to Send (EIA) CA
F Data Terminal Ready (EIA) CD
H Ext Freq
J F/4
K F/8
L F/16
M F/2
N P/Ext
P BSBA
R Ext Clock 16 Device
S Received Data (EIA) 2 BB Device
T Secondary Line Sig Det (EIA) SCF
U (spare) (EIA)
V Secondary Receive Data (EIA) SBB
W BSCA
X Clear to Send (EIA) CB
Y Data Set Ready (EIA) CC
Z Ring Indicator (EIA) CE
AA Receive Line Signal Detect (EIA) CF
BB Signal Ground
1 Signal Ground
2 CCNT 7
3 SXX (Secondary Chan) (EIA) SBA/SCA
4 BSCF
5 SIN
6 Xmit Data In
7 TTY OUT
8 +5 volts
9 TTY IN
10 +12 volts 5,6 Intfc
11 UCLK0
12 CLKP2
13 CLKP1
14 CLKP0
15 CLKP3
16 Recd Data Out
17 BSBB
18 DIAG
19 Spare
20 Run Disable
21 BSXX
22 UCLK
23 -12 volts
24 Signal Ground
There's a rather complex set of cross-connects in the card-edge
connector's hood:
(A, N, 1)
(F, X, Y, AA)
(J, K)
(W, 5)
(4, 21)
(11, 22)
Other cables described in the manual:
12966-60008, for HP 264X terminal
12966-60006, for modem
12966-60007, for HP 2749B teleprinter
12966-60010, for HP 2621 terminal
12966-60011, for HP 7221 plotter
12966-60012, for HP 264X terminal to HP 7221A plotter (???)
The cables for modem, 2749B, and 7221 look like they are intended to
go to something like a DB25 connector. The cables for 264X and 2621
terminal look like they're intended to go to the datacomm connectors
on those devices (264X would be a different card-edge, 2621 would be
an Amphenol 50-pin connector that looks like the "Centronics" SCSI
connector).
The cables can be wired to provide for an external clock source
(-60008 does this) or to provide a fixed? baud rate for the interface.
If you see connections to pins 12-15 and/or N that is what is going on
here. The -60004, -60006, and -60007 cables are shipped configured
for program control (i.e. code running on the processor can set the
interface's baud rate). I'm going to be lazy for now and not key that
table in. Maybe later if you want it.
How's that for too much info?
-Frank McConnell
> On Fri, 16 Jun 2000, Douglas Quebbeman wrote:
>
> > machine. While I understand that SOS (wasn't that the
> > name of the OS, Apple SOS, pronounced "Applesauce"?)
>
> Sophisticated Operating System
>
> > I'd start saving to disk every 5 lines. Since I compose
> > to paper (and still do and cannot understand why some
> > programmers compose directly into thr machine), at
>
> Um, speed and efficiency?
Haste makes waste.
The speed and effeciency people I've known get the job
done quicker but with a higher load of bugs. They (or
someone) have to re-work it until it's right. By
composing to paper, I catch everything except conceived-
of-the-wrong-solution-for-this-problem. All syntax
errors and all flow-of-logic errors show up on paper.
Of course, they show up during execution, too. Along
with hair that either disappears or turns grey.
Then again, people vote with their checkbooks, and over
and over, buggy software that's available NOW sells better
than the bug-free software that's just-around the-corner.
Talk about being trapped on the wheel of Karma!
> > 'Nuff said; I intended and maintain committed no disparagement
> > of Louis, only of the Apple ///. I was this very day going
> > to compose and post a message about Computers I Love to Hate,
> > but the timing of his posting changed the opportunity.
>
> Do it! Do it!
Not today, but soon...
> My vote is for the Commodore 64. Whenever you find one, if the
> motherboard isn't dead, the power supply is! And if it does
> work, it will die quite more readily than any other computer
> I've ever used. I've never had as many other computers up
> and die on me as the C64.
I once tried to help a friend stuck working on a C64- once,
and never again. ;-)
-dq
In a message dated Fri, 16 Jun 2000 8:33:41 AM Eastern Daylight Time, Douglas Quebbeman <dhquebbeman(a)theestopinalgroup.com> writes:
<<
> Speaking of searches, I have been searching and searching
> for an Apple III motherboard. Mein ist kaput, I am afraid.
> Anyone have a spare they would like to part with?
Louis-
Not meaning to be rude, but even when they work, an
Apple /// is kaput.
Are you aware of how buggy those things were? Did you
ever do any extensive programming for one?
Again, sorry, I truly mean no offense, but I grew to
loathe Apple for making this machine, and it's a wonder
that I was able to overcome that loathing and buy a Mac.
-doug quebbeman
>>
sheesh, just because it wasnt the greatest of designs doesnt give you carte blanche to disparage the person wanting to fix one. I have a /// that still boots off its profile drive, but i wonder when it will stop working. 2 years ago i gave a nonworking /// to a friend who ebayed it. he actually got $60 for it.
On June 15, R. D. Davis wrote:
> > I would add to this another pet dislike I have for E-bilk (much better
> > name, BTW). To my eyes, they are in large part (sheer unmitigated greed
> > makes up the other part) responsible for the decline in quality and
> > quantity of equipment that used to show up at hamfests and other
> > electronic-oriented swap meets.
>
> You've noticed this decline as well? :-( Interesting hackish things
> seem to be getting more and more difficult to find a hamfests. The
> last one I went to had very little, and most I've been to, I've seen
...but this has been going on for years! I've always attributed it
to the unfortunate proliferation of PCs. Most of the good hamfests
have turned into new-windoze-hardwarefests.
I don't know about you...but when I go to a hamfest, I want to see
rows and rows of 70-year-old guys selling cool old
Heathkit/Collins/Hallicrafters transceivers, HUGE RF power
amplifiers, and commercial-quality (but homebrewed) yagi
antennas...not row after row of taiwanese folks selling new, cheap-ass
windoze hardware that would better be sold via mail-order...which is all I
see at hamfests nowadays.
I, for one, absolutely LOVE eBay. That's where I find all the radio
gear I'm looking for that doesn't show up at hamfests anymore because
of the damned windoze lemmings!!
-Dave McGuire
-----Original Message-----
From: William Donzelli <aw288(a)osfn.org>
To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Date: Friday, June 16, 2000 9:29 AM
Subject: RE: A Great Find & A Defense of E-Bay
>
>Ebay does not want keep all of the auctions as a publicly accessable
>database, simply because it is not their job. After a few months, they
>can "wash their hands" of the deal, and with it, any disputes that may
>come up afterwards (problems in the car auctions leap to mind). They don't
>want the legal hassles, basically.
>
Given that collecting (of anything) is a very large industry, they're
missing a chance to _make_ a lot of money.
Every bookstore has dozens of price guides to collectibles in it, which
sell for upwards of $40 each. A lot of those are based on the results of a
few hundred auctions a year. eBay could "publish" (whether in print or
electronically) guides based on thousands of auctions a year.
If they published electronically, they could charge a nominal fee for
access to the price guide - say 5 cents per successful search. They already
have a structure in place to bill all of their sellers. It would be easy to
require that anyone searching the price guides register as a seller (and
provide credit card info) first. Then you bill them for their accumulated
search charges monthly, or whenever they have another sales transaction.
I don't understand your point about eBay wanting to avoid "legal hassles"
over auctions gone bad. They are just the middleman, all of their contracts
state that they are not responsible for the authenticity, condition,
delivery, etc. of the items. The buyer and seller voluntarily assume all
the risk. I don't see how providing a database of past transactions
involves them any further in a legal sense.
Just my 2 cents (Cdn).
Mark Gregory
On June 16, Sellam Ismail wrote:
> > I don't know about you...but when I go to a hamfest, I want to see
> > rows and rows of 70-year-old guys selling cool old
> > Heathkit/Collins/Hallicrafters transceivers, HUGE RF power
> > amplifiers, and commercial-quality (but homebrewed) yagi
> > antennas...not row after row of taiwanese folks selling new, cheap-ass
>
> Sorry to have to break it to you, but those guys sold all their stuff and
> then died.
>
> :)
8-< NOOOOO!!!
-Dave McGuire
> You can't beat the variety. I look for the Yogi Bear doll I had
> in the 60s, and presto, there it is for $40, in several permutations.
For me, it's the Big Bruiser(tm) tow truck by Marx. Haven't yet
seen one with a) all the parts and b) the same color pickup
truck (towed vehicle) that I had, but sooner ot later...
-dq
Today, I became the owner of an HP-1000E. :-)
One slight problem: I'm told that the PSU is bad. Upon removing the
cover from the PSU, I noticed that there are three plug-in boards in
the PSU, and one empty PCB connector, the second one back from the
front. Is this circuit board supposed to be missing? I've not teted
the PSU yet, as I didn't know if doing so with this (optional? a
regulator for a voltage this system doesn't need?) board removed will
damage it. Is it safe to power it up with this board missing?
--
R. D. Davis
rdd(a)perqlogic.com
http://www.perqlogic.com/rdd
410-744-4900
I think I need a vacation... a -real- one!
I apologize for adding fuel to the fire on the E-bay thread. While I may
not agree with the way it works all the time, and what it may or may not
have done to the retail and swap-meet level surplus scenes, we're stuck
with it for better or worse, and I have better uses for my energy than
polluting the list with pointless rants about it.
Admittedly, I have found it useful. Even now, there's some stuff on there
that I could use that has not gathered any bids, and it's less than three
days from finishing.
On a wider scope, I also apologize for being a lot snappier than normal
lately. Whatever's happening in my own head, the residents of CLASSICCMP
certainly deserve better than to get dumped on about it.
Keep the peace(es). Methinks I'll just lurk for a while.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Bruce Lane, Owner and head honcho, Blue Feather Technologies
http://www.bluefeathertech.com // E-mail: kyrrin(a)bluefeathertech.com
Amateur Radio: WD6EOS since Dec. '77
"Our science can only describe an object, event, or living thing in our
own human terms. It cannot, in any way, define any of them..."
On Jun 15, 10:36, Mark Champion wrote:
> Peter,
>
> Sorry for causing any trouble. I only recently joined this group and I
> wasn't aware of this groups' desire for 80 character line lengths limits.
Well, the convention is actually for less than 80; there's no set rule but
commonly-mentioned lengths are between 78 and 72.
> I never intended to suggest that all email revolves around MS Outlook.
That was just my jibe, not to be taken too personally :-) BTW, though I
wrote that "we had this discussion a few months ago", I realise you may not
have been on this list at the time.
> I use it because it works well for me. I know that the mail readers in
> Netscape and IE both support autowrap and the ability to size the
> window as desired. When this approach is used for email, the added
> > > (or | | or whichever) characters only appear at the beginning of each
> paragraph, so they don't scramble the contents of the email. So, nesting
> can continue forever, if desired. I (and others) think this is a big
> advantage - especially in mail groups where replies bounce back and
> forth. But, it's just suggestion.
Most people I know would disagree. The idea is to indent paragraphs, a
long-cherished system on Usenet and mailing lists. Just as it appears in
the paragraph above (you must have turned wrapping on before you composed
it -- thanks for that :-)).
> BTW, would it cause you any problems to turn wrap on? This way you
> could handle any line length you encountered.
I *HAD* wrap turned on -- that was my point about losing the indentations.
I could see what you typed in 78-column form, but there would be others on
this list who wouldn't be able to do that; and when you turn the wrap on,
the wrapped lines still don't get indented/quoted as God intended.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
