13 Apr
2001
13 Apr
'01
9:49 a.m.
On Thu, 12 Apr 2001, Tony Duell wrote:
So presumably using an all-pins-wired cable to link it to some true RS232
device that happens to implement all the pins is a good way to let magic
smoke out...
I suppose that might be the case, but I don't really think the
Commodore/Amiga engineers were stupid enough to place those outputs at
volatile positions.
According to HWB, they're at pins 11 and 18.
I have done (and a DIN14, which is actually easier to wire than the
DIN13). I still think the mini DIN 9 is the worst to do (it was used on the
mouse port of the Archimedes, for instance), and the mini DIN 8 is only
slightly better than the 9 (and a lot worse than the DIN 13 and DIN 14).
It's bad enough that there aren't any "shoes" for the cables, but the
density gives it a striking resemblance to a jungle.
IIRC, the RS232 standard specifies a 25 pin connector.
So strictly there
are no 9 pin RS232 ports. If you mean why do PC/AT machines have a DE9P
for the serial port, it was because (a) 9 pins is enough for the active
signals on said port and (b) you can fit a DE and a DB on a single PC
bracket, so you could have a combined parallel/serial adapter card. Which
IBM introduced with the PC/AT IIRC.
Oh, but then you lose a lot of fun. The Amiga DB25 serial port features
among others audio output on some pins. =) I've actually seen a device that has a single DB25
with the stnadard set
of RS232 signals on the stnadard pins (1-8 and 20 I think), and a
TTL-level Centronics-like parallel port on the other pins. Now that is a
device that you certainly don't connect to just any RS232 port.
What about those two-in-one DB 25 serial ports seen on SUNs and big-name
PCs?
And Apple used the 8 pin mini-DIN on the Mac+ and
later because there
wasn't room for the DE9 connector used on the earler Macs. Hardware
hackers have been complaining ever since -- those mini-DINs are about the
worst connectors in the world to wire!
Try a DIN-13 for size.