30 Jun
1999
30 Jun
'99
2:12 p.m.
Hi Scott:
In a message dated 6/30/99 7:04:18 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
scott(a)saskatoon.com writes:
My point exactly -- in '82 $100 US was no sweat, but $500 US was more than I
could afford. So, my choice, again, was crap computer or no computer.
> Other than the Timex/Sinclairs, what's the
cheapest machine which was
> available in 1982 that I could have used to learn BASIC and assembler
and
machine code
-- at home?
VIC-20. I bought mine for $600CDN in either 1981 or 1982 (not sure) I hope this doesn't really sway the argument
either way. I'm really
neutral on the subject. Some people collect PDP-8s, some people collect
what's 'popular', as for me, I'm still looking for a VIC-1540 because I
could never afford one back in the early 80s.
And some of us are sentimental old fools who just collect for purely sappy
reasons. In Feb '99, I hadn't seen or thought about a Timex/Sinclair for 13
years. One day I found the manual while cleaning out a closet (computer long
since lost or given away). I did a web search and was _floored_ to find an
intensely active international user community still supporting these critters.
This led me to another discovery: development of the ZX81 platform
continues. Examples are: bumping the tape transfer rate from native 300 bps
to 4800 bps _using_software_. Efficient BASIC and FORTH compilers. Hi-res
graphics utilizing non-volatile memory (the ZX81 inventor, Sir Clive
Sinclair, repeatedly stated that this was impossible). IDE hard drive and
floppy drive i/fs. RAM expansion to 1 MB. I.e., developments by users which
go completely beyond what was originally imagined by the makers of the ZX81.
Sincere question: is this also the case with the larger machines which are
being collected/restored? Has anyone figured out how to connect (for
example) a Snappy to a PERQ? No disrespect intended, as I have nothing but
admiration for folks who take the huge amount of time & trouble to revive a
PDP-8 or 370, but it appears to me (and I'm new here, so don't clobber me too
badly) that "big" classic computer collectors take pride in returning a
machine to its original condition, whereas the ZX81 crowd is by and large
more interested in "how can I make this thing act more like a 'real'
computer."
Anyway, when I began to collect them, I had no idea they were "popular."
Also, back to the question above, I think by 1982 we
might also have had
the Atari400. The C64 must have been around this time too. Probably the
Coco as well. Really, 1982 is pretty close to the start of the 8bit
explosion.
CoCo I'm not sure of (without checking), 400 & C64 yes. But, all of these
sold for many times the cost of a ZX81. Additionally, none of the above have
that perfect wedge shape, which really does make a perfect door-stop. ;>)
Regards & thanks for your input,
Glen Goodwin
A Fledgling Collector
0/0
30 Jun
30 Jun
2:26 p.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 2918 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19990701/aa4166d2/at…
2:32 p.m.
Sincere question: is this also the case with the
larger machines which are
being collected/restored? Has anyone figured out how to connect (for
example) a Snappy to a PERQ? No disrespect intended, as I have nothing but
admiration for folks who take the huge amount of time & trouble to revive a
PDP-8 or 370, but it appears to me (and I'm new here, so don't clobber me too
badly) that "big" classic computer collectors take pride in returning a
machine to its original condition, whereas the ZX81 crowd is by and large
more interested in "how can I make this thing act more like a 'real'
computer."
I think it has to do with the philosophies of the machines, and the
people that use(d) them. Micros could be tinkered with very easily - my
father purchased the ZX81 kit for that very reason (worst instruction
manual in the world). Atari joystick ports were subjected to all sorts of
interface hacking. The list goes on and on, and in fact continues today
in the PeeCee world. Nothing really depends on the computers operation.
With big machines, tinkering was generally frowned upon, especially with
the hardware. The only big machines that did get tinkered with were some
of those in academia. A grad student could hack with a PDP-11 in the
middle of the night and nobody might care (as long as the machine would
work later on!). On the other hand, a PDP-8 doing embedded control at a
factory or telephone switch was basically off limits - they ran all of
the time, and some geek building a OS/8 doorbell ring counter could cost the
company real money in downtime. Fooling around on an S/370 would lead to an
execution at dawn. Anyway, channels are not exactly easily tinkerable things.
William Donzelli
aw288(a)osfn.org
2 Jul
2 Jul
5:08 a.m.
Rumor has it that Glenatacme(a)aol.com may have mentioned these words:
have
In a message dated 6/30/99 7:04:18 PM Eastern Daylight
Time,
scott(a)saskatoon.com writes:
Also, back to
the question above, I think by 1982 we might also have had
the Atari400. The C64 must have been around this time too. Probably the
Coco as well. Really, 1982 is pretty close to the start of the 8bit
explosion.
CoCo I'm not sure of (without checking), 400 & C64 yes. But, all of these
sold for many times the cost of a ZX81. Additionally, none of the above that perfect wedge shape, which really does make a
perfect door-stop. ;>)
The CoCo was up for sale in Fall of 1979, IIRC, and sales lasted on the
CoCo3 thru mid-1992 (again, IIRC). I'm pretty sure that it was the first
commercial 8-bitter with a multi-user, multi-tasking OS available as
well... (when did M/PM (??) arrive?) IIRC, OS/9 was available around the
fall of 1981.
The CoCo also had a nice wedge shape to it giving it those nice doorstop
properties... however, as it was much bigger, you needed a much bigger door
to stop. ;-)
See ya,
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.
9077
days inactive
9079
days old
3 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
aw288＠osfn.org -
Glenatacme＠aol.com -
zmerch＠30below.com