26 Jun
2007
26 Jun
'07
5:53 a.m.
OK, branching off another thread. There probably aren't many, but there are
a few clones that I'd consider "interesting." I'd say the PCjr counts,
it
was a pretty strange system - the unsuccessful IIgs of the PC world. Sidecar
expansion slots, IR keyboard and cartridges...
The last of the PS/2's had some strange designs. The 95 was really strange -
a fold-out power supply design with a spring loaded plunger power supply
connector. C2 level hardware, which meant if you forgot the BIOS password
you're SOL. I'd count the whole MCA based PS/2 line as a string of oddities
in the PC world.
There were some really odd Japanese designs as well. My favorite is the FM
Townes, which was a hybrid PC and game console. It ran a proprietary OS, but
could run language-localized Windows. It also had an oddball graphics system
that could overlay multiple screen modes over each other, so you could play
full-motion video games with text overlay.
26 Jun
26 Jun
8:14 a.m.
On 26/06/07, Jason McBrien <jbmcb1 at gmail.com> wrote:
OK, branching off another thread. There probably
aren't many, but there are
a few clones that I'd consider "interesting." I'd say the PCjr counts,
it
was a pretty strange system - the unsuccessful IIgs of the PC world. Sidecar
expansion slots, IR keyboard and cartridges...
The last of the PS/2's had some strange designs. The 95 was really strange -
a fold-out power supply design with a spring loaded plunger power supply
connector. C2 level hardware, which meant if you forgot the BIOS password
you're SOL. I'd count the whole MCA based PS/2 line as a string of oddities
in the PC world.
There were some really odd Japanese designs as well. My favorite is the FM
Townes, which was a hybrid PC and game console. It ran a proprietary OS, but
could run language-localized Windows. It also had an oddball graphics system
that could overlay multiple screen modes over each other, so you could play
full-motion video games with text overlay.
Agreed, especially with the PS/2s. Lovely machines - I still have an
80-A21 and a 55slc. Alas I never saw the later ones.
How about the SGI Visual Workstations?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SGI_Visual_Workstation
Also lovely machines. Beautiful design & build. Not very
PC-compatible, but ran Windows NT.
--
Liam Proven ? Blog, homepage &c: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lproven at gmail.com
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884 ? Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AOL/AIM/iChat: liamproven at aol.com ? MSN/Messenger: lproven at hotmail.com
Yahoo: liamproven at yahoo.co.uk ? Skype: liamproven ? ICQ: 73187508
4:05 p.m.
On Jun 26, 2007, at 11:14 AM, Liam Proven wrote:
How about the SGI Visual Workstations?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SGI_Visual_Workstation
Also lovely machines. Beautiful design & build. Not very
PC-compatible, but ran Windows NT.
They are pretty machines, most definitely.
In the "odd PCs" department, I have to mention the Seequa
Chameleon. It has an 8088 and a Z80, so it can run DOS, CP/M-80, or
CP/M-86. A friend and mentor had one when I was in my teens
(mid-1980s) and I got to use it a fair bit. I really liked it. The
display (green) was bright and sharp, and the keyboard had a nice
feel. As a "luggable", the mechanical design was similar to that of
the Kaypro systems, but if memory serves, it was slightly smaller. A
good machine overall. I hope to have one here someday; that will
certainly bring back some memories.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
27 Jun
27 Jun
5:18 a.m.
On 6/26/07, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> wrote:
In the "odd PCs" department, I have to mention the Seequa
Chameleon. It has an 8088 and a Z80, so it can run
DOS, CP/M-80, or
CP/M-86.
The DEC Rainbow 100 was a similar machine, it had a 8086 and a Z/80, and
could triple (or quad) boot into CPM/80, CPM/86, MS-DOS, or act as a VT-220
via hardware emulation. It didn't get far as it used wacky 400Kb single
sided quad density floppies that hardly anyone else used. According to
Wikipedia, DEC even ported Windows 1.0 to it.
A couple more oddities-
The Tandy 2000 was one of the few 80186 based clones, and ran well behaved
MS-DOS apps, though it had somewhat oddball video hardware, keyboard and
serial port setup. It required a custom version of DOS, and MS even ported
Xenix to it.
The Atari Portfolio was probably the first palmtop device that ran DOS apps,
though it was such a wacky architecture it's software support was limited.
The HP 100 series were some of the first laptop computers that could run
DOS. It had DOS, Basic, Lotus and a few other productivity apps in ROM, and
used the somewhat odd HP-IL bus to interface with peripherals, among them a
battery powered disk drive.
9:26 a.m.
For "near-PC-compatibles", how about the Eagle 1600, Olympia People,
Apricot--and did anyone mention the HP 110?
The Eagle is interesting in that it shares some peripherals with the
earlier Eagle 8-bit CP/M systems. There were later PC-compatible
Eagles, like the "Eagle PC" and the "Espirit" luggable. At one time,
very popular systems.
Most of the 8-bit Eagle systems shipped with Spellbinder word
processing software; something that I thought would give WordStar a
run for its money. The machines were generally very easy to use
(Want to add a hard disk? Just plug it in) and well-constructed with
attractive price points.
Cheers,
Chuck
29 Jun
29 Jun
9:45 a.m.
Chuck Guzis wrote:
For "near-PC-compatibles", how about the
Eagle 1600, Olympia People,
Apricot--and did anyone mention the HP 110?
THe HP-100 series was mentioned...
(The 120 and 125 were CP/M machines...)
The 110 and 150 would run DOS programs but not (most) PC-compatible DOS
programs, especially those that dealt directly with hardware. IIRC, there were
more limitations and/or incompatibilities with the 110 than with the 150.
There was a IBMPC emulator (or was it called something else--can't recall but I
have it somewhere) for the 150. Worked best with the full 640K installed. Mostly
hooked BIOS and PC-specific DOS calls, translated the character set and faked
some hardware a bit. Did not work with programs that talked directly to hardware.
==
jd
"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a bit
longer."
-- Henry Kissinger
28 Jun
28 Jun
5:28 p.m.
--- Jason McBrien <jbmcb1 at gmail.com> wrote:
A couple more oddities-
The Tandy 2000 was one of the few 80186 based
clones, and ran well behaved
MS-DOS apps, though it had somewhat oddball video
hardware, keyboard and
serial port setup. It required a custom version of
DOS, and MS even ported
Xenix to it.
Make that EWB'ed (Extremely Well Behaved). It was
largely BIOS and DOS function call compatible, but
that was all.
There was at least 1 186 mobo/puter from a company
called Computer Products United. Said to be 100%
compatible (not possible if they utilized the 186's
onboard peripherals).
The Orchid PC-Turbo release 1 used a 186. Anyone have
experience with that? There is a patent document
regarding this device here:
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4799150.html
My Ampro LB/PC has a V40. Never ran much on it, but
does that chip pose the same problems a *real* 186
would?
____________________________________________________________________________________
Need a vacation? Get great deals
to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.
http://travel.yahoo.com/
6:33 p.m.
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007, Chris M wrote:
Make that EWB'ed (Extremely Well Behaved). It
was
largely BIOS and DOS function call compatible, but
that was all.
There was at least 1 186 mobo/puter from a company
called Computer Products United. Said to be 100%
compatible (not possible if they utilized the 186's
onboard peripherals).
While it is not hard to get CLOSE, Truly 100% compatability would
also require 100% copyright infringement.
8:48 p.m.
--- Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> wrote:
While it is not hard to get CLOSE, Truly 100%
compatability would
also require 100% copyright infringement.
Can you name specific examples of programs that if
we're *allowed* to run would place the designer in the
danger zone?
____________________________________________________________________________________
Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for
today's economy) at Yahoo! Games.
http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow
29 Jun
29 Jun
4:51 p.m.
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007, Chris M wrote:
Can you name specific examples of programs that if
we're *allowed* to run would place the designer in the
danger zone?
It is possible for non-BASIC programs to call subroutines in the BASIC
ROMs directly to their addresses. The Vertex "OEM IBM ONLY" edition of
Xeno-Copy, which was supposed to never be released, but was used by
PC-WORLD in a January 1983? comparison of compatibles.
All early versions of XenoCopy would run on an 8088, but not 8086 or
above, due to my failure to prepare for a change in the size of the
pre-fetch buffer.
I will accept the title of "pedantic". There DO exit exceptions, just not
any that matter.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
5:58 p.m.
--- Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> wrote:
All early versions of XenoCopy would run on an 8088,
but not 8086 or
above, due to my failure to prepare for a change in
the size of the
pre-fetch buffer.
Oi I would not have guessed that the size of the
queue would affect program operation in any way. But
wasn't the 8086 released first?
____________________________________________________________________________________
Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/
6:30 p.m.
On Fri, 29 Jun 2007, Chris M wrote:
Oi I would not have guessed that the size of the
queue would affect program operation in any way. But
wasn't the 8086 released first?
How would you write a subroutine (for C) that would permit calling an INT
that is defined at runtime? (I didn't know any better ways at the
time)
. . .
MOV BX, offset stepon3
INC BX
MOV [BX], AL ; change the INT to the one specified in AL
. . .
stepon3: INT 00h
. . .
It is easily fixed to handle a different prefetch buffer size by:
. . .
MOV BX, offset stepon3
INC BX
MOV [BX], AL ; change the INT to the one specified in AL
. . .
JMP SHORT $ +2 ; or JMP stepon3 ; clears the prefetch buffer
; and does little else
stepon3: INT 00h
. . .
"Do NOT ever use self-modifying code. It may not happen for a LONG time,
but it WILL eventually come back to bite your foot off."
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
1 Jul
1 Jul
12:39 p.m.
Fred Cisin wrote:
All early versions of XenoCopy would run on an 8088,
but not 8086 or
above, due to my failure to prepare for a change in the size of the
pre-fetch buffer.
Wow -- prefetch buffer was only 2 bytes larger in 8086, what in your
code was dependent on that?? Self-modifying code maybe?
--
Jim Leonard (trixter at oldskool.org) http://www.oldskool.org/
Help our electronic games project: http://www.mobygames.com/
Or check out some trippy MindCandy at http://www.mindcandydvd.com/
A child borne of the home computer wars: http://trixter.wordpress.com/
1:28 p.m.
On Sun, 1 Jul 2007, Jim Leonard wrote:
Wow -- prefetch buffer was only 2 bytes larger in
8086, what in your
code was dependent on that?? Self-modifying code maybe?
Yep.
I already admitted how I screwed up:
On Fri, 29 Jun 2007, I wrote:
How would you write a subroutine (for C) that would
permit calling an
INT that is defined at runtime? (I didn't know any better ways at the
time)
. . .
MOV BX, offset stepon3
INC BX
MOV [BX], AL ; change the INT to the one specified in AL
. . .
stepon3: INT 00h
. . .
It is easily fixed to handle a different prefetch buffer size by:
. . .
. . .
MOV BX, offset stepon3
INC BX
MOV [BX], AL ; change the INT to the one specified in AL
. . .
JMP SHORT $ +2 ; or JMP stepon3 ; clears the prefetch buffer
; and does little else
stepon3: INT 00h
. . .
"Do NOT ever use self-modifying code. It may not happen for a LONG
time, but it WILL eventually come back to bite your foot off."
2:17 p.m.
On 1 Jul 2007 at 13:28, Fred Cisin wrote:
How would you write a subroutine (for C) that would
permit calling an
INT that is defined at runtime? (I didn't know any better ways at the
time)
. . .
MOV BX, offset stepon3
INC BX
MOV [BX], AL ; change the INT to the one specified in AL
. . .
> stepon3: INT 00h
Why not
PUSHF
CALL FAR...?
There are cases where self-modifying code is unavoidable. For
example, on an 8080, 8085 IN our OUT instruction where the port is
not known ahead of time.
Although modifying the code, as in:
LDA PORTNUM
STA INCOCD+1
INCODE:
IN $-$
works--it gets nasty if what you're writing is boot code in ROM. You
have to move your code to RAM to do this. I don't know if the V20
prefetch would kill you in emulation mode on this sort of thing.
Cheers,
Chuck
28 Jun
28 Jun
9:05 p.m.
Fred Cisin wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007, Chris M wrote:
Then how was Compaq able to get around it? The original Compaq is the
only compatible I've ever used that -- BASIC programs aside -- ran
everything a real 5150 would, without exception.
--
Jim Leonard (trixter at oldskool.org) http://www.oldskool.org/
Help our electronic games project: http://www.mobygames.com/
Or check out some trippy MindCandy at http://www.mindcandydvd.com/
A child borne of the home computer wars: http://trixter.wordpress.com/
Make that EWB'ed (Extremely Well Behaved).
It was
largely BIOS and DOS function call compatible, but
that was all.
There was at least 1 186 mobo/puter from a company
called Computer Products United. Said to be 100%
compatible (not possible if they utilized the 186's
onboard peripherals).
While it is not hard to get CLOSE, Truly 100% compatability would
also require 100% copyright infringement. 
29 Jun
29 Jun
10:14 a.m.
Jim Leonard <trixter at oldskool.org> says:
Then how was Compaq able to get around it? The
original Compaq is
the only compatible I've ever used that -- BASIC programs aside --
ran everything a real 5150 would, without exception.
Classic clean-room reverse engineering. Compaq put the effort into it
that no one else did, meaning that Compaqs were the only clones that
exceeded the "95% compatibility" barrier until the Phoenix BIOS came
along.
--
Yeechang Lee <ylee at pobox.com> | +1 650 776 7763 | San Francisco CA US
30 Jun
30 Jun
1:12 p.m.
On Fri, 29 Jun 2007, Yeechang Lee wrote:
Classic clean-room reverse engineering. Compaq put the
effort into it
that no one else did, meaning that Compaqs were the only clones that
exceeded the "95% compatibility" barrier until the Phoenix BIOS came
along.
or was it 99 44/100 % compatability?
What do they MEASURE?
3:04 p.m.
In article <20070630131121.Q58804 at shell.lmi.net>,
Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> writes:
What do they MEASURE?
Its my understanding that these compatability metrics relate to how
compatible the BIOS is with the IBM PC bios.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" -- DirectX 9 draft available for download
<http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/download/index.html>
Legalize Adulthood! <http://blogs.xmission.com/legalize/>
3:11 p.m.
On Sat, 30 Jun 2007, Richard wrote:
Its my understanding that these compatability metrics
relate to how
compatible the BIOS is with the IBM PC bios.
That is certainly the intent. But the actual numbers used - 99.9%, 89%,
99 44/100 % are uncalibrated derivatives of thin air.
(86.54% of all statistics are made up out of thin air. It used to be 84%,
but it has been climbing rapidly.)
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
29 Jun
29 Jun
12:43 p.m.
On 29/06/07, Jim Leonard <trixter at oldskool.org> wrote:
Fred Cisin wrote:
I bet it didn't have a ROM BASIC, for example - so it wouldn't load
BASIC programs from tape, like a real ib machine.
--
Liam Proven ? Blog, homepage &c: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lproven at gmail.com
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884 ? Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AOL/AIM/iChat: liamproven at aol.com ? MSN/Messenger: lproven at hotmail.com
Yahoo: liamproven at yahoo.co.uk ? Skype: liamproven ? ICQ: 73187508
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007, Chris M wrote:
Then how was Compaq able to get around it? The original Compaq is the
only compatible I've ever used that -- BASIC programs aside -- ran
everything a real 5150 would, without exception. Make that EWB'ed (Extremely Well Behaved).
It was
largely BIOS and DOS function call compatible, but
that was all.
There was at least 1 186 mobo/puter from a company
called Computer Products United. Said to be 100%
compatible (not possible if they utilized the 186's
onboard peripherals).
While it is not hard to get CLOSE, Truly 100% compatability would
also require 100% copyright infringement.
3:25 p.m.
Liam Proven wrote:
I bet it didn't have a ROM BASIC, for example - so it wouldn't load
BASIC programs from tape, like a real ib machine.
But it did have a ROM BIOS, obviously. So the question still stands.
--
Jim Leonard (trixter at oldskool.org) http://www.oldskool.org/
Help our electronic games project: http://www.mobygames.com/
Or check out some trippy MindCandy at http://www.mindcandydvd.com/
A child borne of the home computer wars: http://trixter.wordpress.com/
While it is not hard to get CLOSE, Truly 100%
compatability would
also require 100% copyright infringement.
Then how was Compaq able to get around it? The original Compaq is the
only compatible I've ever used that -- BASIC programs aside -- ran
everything a real 5150 would, without exception.
4:09 p.m.
On 29 Jun 2007 at 17:25, Jim Leonard wrote:
But it did have a ROM BIOS, obviously. So the
question still stands.
The answer's pretty simple. Compaq had the time and money to do it
right. When IBM started suing clone makers for infringement over
BIOS issues, Compaq did a "double-blind" clone of the 5150 BIOS.
Two sets of programmers were used. The first studied the IBM BIOS
and wrote up detailed specifications about its function, without
including any code from the original. The second team coded a BIOS
to these specs. Lather, rinse, repeat until right.
IIRC, it cost Compaq about a million dollars and took a year.
DTK did a similar effort, supported by a grant from the Taiwanese
government.
Now, of course, such an effort would be in violation of DMCA, but it
worked back then. I'm surprised that no one did that with the Mac
ROMs--anyone know why not?
Cheers,
Chuck
4:12 p.m.
I should hastily add that the Compaq story does seem to smack a bit
of "urban legend", so there may be other takes on it. But that's
what I heard at the time...
Cheers,
Chuck
1 Jul
1 Jul
12:37 p.m.
Chuck Guzis wrote:
I should hastily add that the Compaq story does seem
to smack a bit
of "urban legend", so there may be other takes on it. But that's
what I heard at the time...
It's been confirmed several times, actually, including Robert X.
Cringley's documentary Triumph of the Nerds.
--
Jim Leonard (trixter at oldskool.org) http://www.oldskool.org/
Help our electronic games project: http://www.mobygames.com/
Or check out some trippy MindCandy at http://www.mindcandydvd.com/
A child borne of the home computer wars: http://trixter.wordpress.com/
1:08 p.m.
On 1 Jul 2007 at 14:37, Jim Leonard wrote:
Chuck Guzis wrote:
Well, that may be, but I've heard an alternate version from a ex-
Compaq employee that says that it's only partially accurate.
According to this fellow, the first team (the "dirty" group) never
looked at the source code for the BIOS, but wrote their spec by
"black boxing" BIOS functions. That would be considerably harder to
do, I'd think.
Cheers,
Chuck
I should hastily add that the Compaq story does
seem to smack a bit
of "urban legend", so there may be other takes on it. But that's
what I heard at the time...
It's been confirmed several times, actually, including Robert X.
Cringley's documentary Triumph of the Nerds.
7:01 p.m.
Chuck Guzis wrote:
Well, that may be, but I've heard an alternate
version from a ex-
Compaq employee that says that it's only partially accurate.
According to this fellow, the first team (the "dirty" group) never
looked at the source code for the BIOS, but wrote their spec by
"black boxing" BIOS functions. That would be considerably harder to
do, I'd think.
Yes, and would take considerably longer than a year, I'd imagine.
--
Jim Leonard (trixter at oldskool.org) http://www.oldskool.org/
Help our electronic games project: http://www.mobygames.com/
Or check out some trippy MindCandy at http://www.mindcandydvd.com/
A child borne of the home computer wars: http://trixter.wordpress.com/
7:02 p.m.
Fred Cisin wrote:
I did write "including" and not "solely". :-)
--
Jim Leonard (trixter at oldskool.org) http://www.oldskool.org/
Help our electronic games project: http://www.mobygames.com/
Or check out some trippy MindCandy at http://www.mindcandydvd.com/
A child borne of the home computer wars: http://trixter.wordpress.com/
It's been
confirmed several times, actually, including Robert X.
Cringley's documentary Triumph of the Nerds.
Cringely writes very entertaining stories, but his strict historical
accuracy is sometimes questionable.
29 Jun
29 Jun
4:35 p.m.
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007, Jim Leonard wrote:
Then how was Compaq able to get around it? The
original Compaq is the
only compatible I've ever used that -- BASIC programs aside -- ran
everything a real 5150 would, without exception.
ALMOST everything.
Check the 1983? PC-WORLD "round up the compatibles", in which like every
other non-IBM machine, the Compaq filed to be able to run the "OEM IBM
ONLY" edition of Xeno-Copy.
howzbout the undocumented "Model ID" in ROM? No sane programmer used
that, due to the fact that IBM did not originally document it, and so
machines intended to be compatible did not implement it. Not all of us
are sane.
BTW, in August 1983, I used a Compaq for MOST of the programming of
Xeno-Write. Nice machine, but the handle was too flexible for serious
carrying, and the latches of the keyboard do not extend far enough (to
keep the keyboard from getting knocked off by a bump against an airport
escalator)
Yes, I will be pedantic, and insist that there ARE exceptions.
Fortunately none that really matter.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
1 Jul
1 Jul
12:38 p.m.
Fred Cisin wrote:
ALMOST everything.
Check the 1983? PC-WORLD "round up the compatibles", in which like every
other non-IBM machine, the Compaq filed to be able to run the "OEM IBM
ONLY" edition of Xeno-Copy.
What about that version made it "IBM ONLY"? Checking for the string
"IBM" somewhere in ROM?
--
Jim Leonard (trixter at oldskool.org) http://www.oldskool.org/
Help our electronic games project: http://www.mobygames.com/
Or check out some trippy MindCandy at http://www.mindcandydvd.com/
A child borne of the home computer wars: http://trixter.wordpress.com/
28 Jun
28 Jun
6:38 p.m.
On 28 Jun 2007 at 17:28, Chris M wrote:
At a maximum, no more than a V20 would in a PC. It did have several
interesting features, including 8080 emulation (like the V20) and the
ability to address 4MB of memory. I liked the chip--and there was at
least one portable/luggable based on it.
Cheers,
Chuck
My Ampro
LB/PC has a V40. Never ran much on it, but
does that chip pose the same problems a
*real* 186
would? 
29 Jun
29 Jun
3:46 a.m.
On Friday 29 June 2007 02:38:14 Chuck Guzis wrote:
On 28 Jun 2007 at 17:28, Chris M wrote:
At a maximum, no more than a V20 would in a PC. It did have several
interesting features, including 8080 emulation (like the V20) and the
ability to address 4MB of memory. I liked the chip--and there was at
least one portable/luggable based on it.
It was a common retrofit in a lot of XT-alikes. I fitted a few to Amstrad
PPCs, way way back.
Gordon
My Ampro
LB/PC has a V40. Never ran much on it, but
does that chip pose the same problems a *real* 186
would?
30 Jun
30 Jun
10:57 a.m.
--- Gordon JC Pearce <gpearce at curiousgroup.co.uk>
wrote:
On Friday 29 June 2007 02:38:14 Chuck Guzis wrote:
It did have several
Fine, but does a V40 present the same *possible*
incompatibility issues as an 80186. And for that
matter but OI NOT THE ORIGINAL QUESTION does a V20/V30
present any of it's own...
____________________________________________________________________________________
Get the Yahoo! toolbar and be alerted to new email wherever you're surfing.
http://new.toolbar.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/index.php
On 28 Jun 2007 at 17:28, Chris M wrote:
>> My Ampro LB/PC has a V40. Never ran much on
it, but
>
> does that chip pose the same problems a *real*
186
would?
At a maximum, no more than a V20 would in a PC. interesting features, including 8080 emulation
(like the V20) and the
ability to address 4MB of memory. I liked the
chip--and there was at
least one portable/luggable based on it.
It was a common retrofit in a lot of XT-alikes. I
fitted a few to Amstrad
PPCs, way way back.
11:44 a.m.
On 30 Jun 2007 at 10:57, Chris M wrote:
Fine, but does a V40 present the same *possible*
incompatibility issues as an 80186. And for that
matter but OI NOT THE ORIGINAL QUESTION does a V20/V30
present any of it's own...
Well, if you had a decent programmer writing the code, s/he would use
a fairly standard routine to differentiate between an 808x and a V-
series chip as well as an 80286 and 80386. The code was widely
published.
You mostly saw V40/V50 for embedded use, although there were one or
two portables that used them.
Indecent programmers can go debug themselves. :)
Cheers,
Chuck
12:04 p.m.
On Sat, 30 Jun 2007, Chuck Guzis wrote:
Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2007 11:44:09 -0700
From: Chuck Guzis <cclist at sydex.com>
Reply-To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts"
<cctalk at classiccmp.org>
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at
classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: Semi-OT: Interesting or unusual PC Compatibles?
On 30 Jun 2007 at 10:57, Chris M wrote:
We used the V40 for embedded applications many years ago, The DMA controller
is totally different than the 8257? used in a PC (in a good way, it had direct
linear 1M addressability)
We covered up the differences by emulating the 8257 (and 8255) in software --
access to DMA or 8255 I/O locations:
1. Remaps ROM to bottom to replace NMI vector with our hardwired vector
2. Generates NMI
3. NMI ISR backtracks to find I/O operation, address, and data, Then ISR does
appropriate thing with V40 DMA or our I/O bit hardware
Just why I remember this I do not know...
Peter Wallace
Fine, but does a V40 present the same
*possible*
incompatibility issues as an 80186. And for that
matter but OI NOT THE ORIGINAL QUESTION does a V20/V30
present any of it's own...
Well, if you had a decent programmer writing the code, s/he would use
a fairly standard routine to differentiate between an 808x and a V-
series chip as well as an 80286 and 80386. The code was widely
published.
You mostly saw V40/V50 for embedded use, although there were one or
two portables that used them.
Indecent programmers can go debug themselves. :)
Cheers,
Chuck
2:43 p.m.
On Sat, 30 Jun 2007, Chuck Guzis wrote:
Well, if you had a decent programmer writing the code,
s/he would use
a fairly standard routine to differentiate between an 808x and a V-
series chip as well as an 80286 and 80386. The code was widely
published.
But not "officially" documented, and based entirely on variations in
side-effects.
20+ years ago, I saw a mention in an article in Microcornucopia? or
Programmer's Journal? that mentioned "Intel official" method.
The author split town, and when I tried to verify with intel, I bounced
around a lot of people before I got through to somebody who understood.
And asked me to send him a copy if I found it.
It wasn't until much later that intel started including a processor ID.
Indecent programmers can go debug themselves. :)
1:30 p.m.
On Sat, 30 Jun 2007, Chris M wrote:
Fine, but does a V40 present the same *possible*
incompatibility issues as an 80186. And for that
matter but OI NOT THE ORIGINAL QUESTION does a V20/V30
present any of it's own...
a few, but very few. For example, 8086/8088 has a few bugs. One of those
is that if you have TWO prefixes (segment override , and REP) to a MOVSB,
. . . if there is an interrupt during execution of that instruction, then
the first? prefix is forgotten. NEC failed to provide that bug in the
V20/V30.
In addition, there are instructions to invoke the 8080 mode of the
V20/V30. That behaves differently than those instructions on an
8088/8086.
29 Jun
29 Jun
9:33 a.m.
New subject: (way OT)--Re: Semi-OT: Interesting or unusual PC Compatibles?
Jason McBrien wrote:
The HP 100 series were some of the first laptop computers that could run
DOS. It had DOS, Basic, Lotus and a few other productivity apps in ROM, and
used the somewhat odd HP-IL bus to interface with peripherals, among them a
battery powered disk drive.
Hmmm...
HPIL -> HPHIL -> + -> USB?
|
PCI
(just a dash of)
I wonder...
==
jd
Don't get suckered in by the comments -- they can be terribly
misleading. Debug only code.
-- Dave Storer
11:03 a.m.
New subject: (way OT)--Re: Semi-OT: Interesting or unusual PC Compatibles?
Jason McBrien wrote:
Why on earth go via HP-HIL? HPIL and HP-HIL are totally different
interfaces, I've never seen an HPIL to HP-HIL interface,
HP-HIL interface chips are hard to find (much harder than HPIL chips),
and so on.
If I wanted to do something like this, I'd link a 1LB3 (HPIL interface
chip) to a microconroller with an on-chip USB interface.
-tony
The HP 100 series were some of the first laptop computers that could run
DOS. It had DOS, Basic, Lotus and a few other productivity apps in ROM, and
used the somewhat odd HP-IL bus to interface with peripherals, among them a
battery powered disk drive.
Hmmm...
HPIL -> HPHIL -> + -> USB?
|
PCI
(just a dash of)
1 Jul
1 Jul
8:39 a.m.
New subject: (way OT)--Re: Semi-OT: Interesting or unusual PC Compatibles?
Tony Duell wrote:
Ummm....
(possible evolution of USB? maybe?)
Sorry, forgot to mention that bit.
==
jd
Bombeck's Rule of Medicine:
Never go to a doctor whose office plants have died.
Jason McBrien
wrote:
The HP 100 series were some of the first laptop
computers that could run
DOS. It had DOS, Basic, Lotus and a few other productivity apps in ROM, and
used the somewhat odd HP-IL bus to interface with peripherals, among them a
battery powered disk drive.
Hmmm...
HPIL -> HPHIL -> + -> USB?
|
PCI
(just a dash of)
29 Jun
29 Jun
10:21 a.m.
Also, hardly classic but it is unusual and interesting:
(SonicBlue) ProGear tablet based on the TransMeta Crusoe CPU
It is now a rare toy originally running Win98 and people have installed DOS, ME,
and XP on it.
It's a nice, lightweight tablet with a 10" XVGA colour touchscreen.
It seems fairly well built to me. (Maybe it was too well built?)
It looks somewhat like a digital picture frame.
Ahead of it's time, I would say. Maybe a future classic?
==
jd
Every program has at least one bug and can be shortened by at least one
instruction -- from which, by induction, one can deduce that every
program can be reduced to one instruction which doesn't work.
30 Jun
30 Jun
11:18 a.m.
--- jd <onymouse at garlic.com> wrote:
Also, hardly classic but it is unusual and
interesting:
(SonicBlue) ProGear tablet based on the TransMeta
Crusoe CPU
I saw *my* first piece of Transmeta hardware, some
box, on ePay the other day. Don't ask me the details,
I don't even think I "watched" the auction.
____________________________________________________________________________________
No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go
with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started.
http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail
4 Aug
4 Aug
9:16 a.m.
On 30/06/07, Chris M <chrism3667 at yahoo.com> wrote:
I saw *my* first piece of Transmeta hardware, some
box, on ePay the other day. Don't ask me the details,
I don't even think I "watched" the auction.
That surprises me! They weren't that uncommon. I've used a Transmeta
Sony Vaio; nice little machine. Interesting to watch it playing video:
the first few frames are really slow while the code-morphing software
optimises the chunk of translated code doing the playback, then it
accelerates and plays at full speed.
I always thought the Crusoe was a very interesting chip that was
massively under-exploited. For starters, it was only emulating x86 in
software, it wasn't /remotely/ x86-compatible. So, in principle, there
was no reason one couldn't write code-morphing firmware for any
comparable CPU: 68040 or 68060, for instance. It should have beaten a
pure software emulation hollow for performance at the time, and still
would beat a modern chip in terms of power efficiency, I'd think.
Not much point emulating something for which there was current
shipping hardware, like PowerPC, but it could have effectively
resurrected a number of "obsolete" 32-bit architectures.
--
Liam Proven ? Blog, homepage &c: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lproven at gmail.com
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884 ? Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AOL/AIM/iChat: liamproven at aol.com ? MSN/Messenger: lproven at hotmail.com
Yahoo: liamproven at yahoo.co.uk ? Skype: liamproven ? ICQ: 73187508
11:14 a.m.
--- Liam Proven <lproven at gmail.com> wrote:
On 30/06/07, Chris M <chrism3667 at yahoo.com>
wrote:
I wasn't looking mind you :)
I saw *my* first piece of Transmeta hardware,
some
box, on ePay the other day. Don't ask me the
details,
I don't even think I "watched" the
auction.
That surprises me! They weren't that uncommon. I've
used a Transmeta
Sony Vaio; nice little machine.
Now that you mention it, it makes perfect sense that
some of the diminutive Vaios used Transmeta hardware.
My Vaio (currently in suspended animation :( ), is a
big honker. 8 or 9 lbs. iirc.
I've been told the problem might just be a solder
crack. Here's hoping...
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/
11:47 a.m.
Chris M wrote:
--- Liam Proven <lproven at gmail.com> wrote:
Sounds like you have the same vaio I have. Perhaps it's a GRX series?
Beautiful, 16" 1600*1200 screen, weighs a ton, but bad design on the
simm sockets.
I'm going to take mine to work where I have the proper tools to do a
rework. It's almost on topic, but I'm not waiting 3 years to reply.
BTW: their was a movement for a class action lawsuit, but I don't think
it ever got off the ground.
Jim.
On 30/06/07, Chris M <chrism3667 at
yahoo.com> wrote:
I wasn't looking mind you :)
I saw *my* first piece of Transmeta hardware,
some
box, on ePay the other day. Don't ask me the
details,
I don't even think I "watched" the
auction.
That surprises me!
They weren't that uncommon. I've
used a Transmeta
Sony Vaio; nice little machine.
Now that you mention it, it makes perfect sense that
some of the diminutive Vaios used Transmeta hardware.
My Vaio (currently in suspended animation :( ), is a
big honker. 8 or 9 lbs. iirc.
I've been told the problem might just be a solder
crack. Here's hoping...
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/
12:04 p.m.
--- davis <davis at saw.net> wrote:
Yep. GRX560. I should have waited a bit longer and
got the 570 though, but I still haven't found the need
to burn a DVD. Funny, when it started flaking out, I
pulled the simm and plugged it back in. It worked for
another minute or so. Happened one more time, then it
wouldn't ever reboot. So it's probably a localized
problem. Good to hear. What sort of tools are you
referring to? Best to reply offlist. These things are
nowhere nears being on-topic. Oomphuh
____________________________________________________________________________________Ready
for the edge of your seat?
Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV.
http://tv.yahoo.com/
Chris M wrote:
I wasn't looking mind you :)
that
____________________________________________________________________________________
--- Liam Proven <lproven at gmail.com>
wrote:
> On 30/06/07, Chris M <chrism3667 at yahoo.com>
wrote:
I saw *my* first piece of Transmeta hardware,
some
box, on ePay the other day. Don't ask me the
details,
I don't even think I "watched" the
auction.
That surprises me!
They weren't that uncommon. I've
used a Transmeta
Sony Vaio; nice little machine.
Now that you mention it, it makes perfect sense some of the diminutive Vaios used Transmeta
hardware.
My Vaio (currently in suspended animation :( ),
is
a
big honker. 8 or 9 lbs. iirc.
I've been told the problem might just be a solder
crack. Here's hoping...
Looking for a
deal? Find great prices on flights
and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
Sounds like you have the same vaio I have. Perhaps
it's a GRX series?
Beautiful, 16" 1600*1200 screen, weighs a ton, but
bad design on the
simm sockets.
I'm going to take mine to work where I have the
proper tools to do a
rework. It's almost on topic, but I'm not waiting 3
years to reply.
BTW: their was a movement for a class action
lawsuit, but I don't think
it ever got off the ground.
Jim.
12:32 p.m.
Chris M wrote:
--- davis <davis at saw.net> wrote:
Yep. GRX560. I should have waited a bit longer and
got the 570 though, but I still haven't found the need
to burn a DVD. Funny, when it started flaking out, I
pulled the simm and plugged it back in. It worked for
another minute or so. Happened one more time, then it
wouldn't ever reboot. So it's probably a localized
problem. Good to hear. What sort of tools are you
referring to? Best to reply offlist. These things are
nowhere nears being on-topic. Oomphuh
____________________________________________________________________________________Ready
for the edge of your seat?
Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV.
http://tv.yahoo.com/
Yep, Same model. The simm sockets connections break due to the poor
thermal design., Some very hot chips live on the other side of the
board. When I was at intel and radisys, I had SMD rework station access,
but now it's just a nice metcal iron and a couple pairs of reading
glasses supplemented with a inspection magnifier. old age sucks.
Jim Davis.
Chris M wrote:
that
____________________________________________________________________________________
--- Liam Proven <lproven at gmail.com>
wrote:
> On 30/06/07, Chris M <chrism3667 at yahoo.com>
>
wrote:
> I saw *my* first piece of Transmeta hardware,
>
>
some
> box, on ePay the other day. Don't ask me the
>
>
details,
> I don't even think I "watched" the auction.
>
>
That surprises me!
I wasn't looking mind you :)
They weren't that uncommon. I've
used a Transmeta
Sony Vaio; nice little machine.
Now that you mention it, it makes perfect sense
some of the diminutive Vaios used Transmeta
hardware.
My Vaio (currently in suspended animation :( ),
is
a
> big honker. 8 or 9 lbs. iirc.
> I've been told the problem might just be a solder
> crack. Here's hoping...
>
>
>
>
> Looking
for a deal? Find great prices on flights
and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
Sounds like you have the same vaio I have. Perhaps
it's a GRX series?
Beautiful, 16" 1600*1200 screen, weighs a ton, but
bad design on the
simm sockets.
I'm going to take mine to work where I have the
proper tools to do a
rework. It's almost on topic, but I'm not waiting 3
years to reply.
BTW: their was a movement for a class action
lawsuit, but I don't think
it ever got off the ground.
Jim.
12:52 p.m.
New subject: OMG Re: Semi-OT: Interesting or unusual PC Compatibles?
... snip of 3,335 bytes ...
Most of that was blank lines.... PLEASE trim your replies or just don't
bother to hit "send"!
Jay West
9:23 p.m.
--- davis <davis at saw.net> wrote:
Yep, Same model. The simm sockets connections break
due to the poor
thermal design., Some very hot chips live on the
other side of the
board. When I was at intel and radisys, I had SMD
rework station access,
but now it's just a nice metcal iron and a couple
pairs of reading
glasses supplemented with a inspection magnifier.
old age sucks.
Jim Davis.
would a decent eye loupe do the trick, as far as
determining where the problem lay? Truthfully I've had
problem power supplies in the past, and nailed each
solder junction (on the underside of the board) w/a
hot iron, and it always seemed to work like a charm
(can't remember why I suspected it was cracked solder
though). Soldering iron tips are made of copper, so I
don't see any reason why I couldn't chisel one down
for a specific task. Any thoughts? Am I courting
disaster?
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for a deal? Find great prices on flights and hotels with Yahoo! FareChase.
http://farechase.yahoo.com/
9:55 p.m.
New subject: Rasterops drivers for Mac OS 6.0x
Anybody have some Rasterops drivers for Mac OS 6.0x? I had asked here before
and somebody said they had some but nothing ever came of it. I have drivers
that work in OS 7.x+ but nothing for OS 6.0x.
(Nubus video cards from the 68K Mac era).
Thanks
TZ
11:59 p.m.
Chris M wrote:
--- davis <davis at saw.net> wrote:
<snip>
would a decent eye loupe do the trick, as far as
determining where the problem lay? Truthfully I've had
problem power supplies in the past, and nailed each
solder junction (on the underside of the board) w/a
hot iron, and it always seemed to work like a charm
(can't remember why I suspected it was cracked solder
though). Soldering iron tips are made of copper, so I
don't see any reason why I couldn't chisel one down
for a specific task. Any thoughts? Am I courting
disaster?
From what I understand about the problem, just remelting the junctions and not applying
solder will do the trick. I'm not sure how long this type of fix will work. The tricky
part is not being too ham-handed and blobbing the connections together. There is much
written about this problem, a few years ago, more than one repair house would do it for
$150.
Cheers,
Jim Davis
5 Aug
5 Aug
12:03 a.m.
Chris M wrote:
would a decent eye loupe do the trick, as far as
determining where the problem lay? Truthfully I've had
problem power supplies in the past, and nailed each
solder junction (on the underside of the board) w/a
hot iron, and it always seemed to work like a charm
(can't remember why I suspected it was cracked solder
though). Soldering iron tips are made of copper, so I
don't see any reason why I couldn't chisel one down
for a specific task. Any thoughts? Am I courting
disaster?
I'm good at reading a question and not ansering it. I don't think you can see the
problem at any magnification, since I seem to remember that the actual connections hide a
few mills under the socket.
Jim Davis.
12:09 a.m.
Chris M wrote:
--- davis <davis at saw.net> wrote:
would a decent eye loupe do the trick, as far as
determining where the problem lay? Truthfully I've had
problem power supplies in the past, and nailed each
solder junction (on the underside of the board) w/a
hot iron, and it always seemed to work like a charm
(can't remember why I suspected it was cracked solder
though). Soldering iron tips are made of copper, so I
don't see any reason why I couldn't chisel one down
for a specific task. Any thoughts? Am I courting
disaster?
Did it again, Copper will get eaten by lead solder. I tried this with a old weller as a
kid and the tip didn't seem to last a hr. I don't know about the new leadfree pain
in the ass techmology. I'm sure your and mine GRX560 is one of the last laptops to use
leaded solder. Or maybe the problem is lead-free with bad processes?
Jim Davis.
1:08 a.m.
On Sat, 2007-08-04 at 21:23 -0700, Chris M wrote:
would a decent eye loupe do the trick, as far as
determining where the problem lay? Truthfully I've had
problem power supplies in the past, and nailed each
solder junction (on the underside of the board) w/a
hot iron, and it always seemed to work like a charm
(can't remember why I suspected it was cracked solder
though). Soldering iron tips are made of copper, so I
don't see any reason why I couldn't chisel one down
for a specific task. Any thoughts? Am I courting
disaster?
I regularly resolder entire boards of electronics from a certain make of
car that regulars will know I'm nearly as obsessed with as other people
around here are obsessed with certain makes of computers.
I've yet to see an actual dry joint on some of the boards, but that's
clearly what the problem is - flexing and poking the board brings it
back to life temporarily, resoldering cures it for another ten years
hopefully. Some are glaringly obvious; one board has a big power
darlington and a 0.47 ohm current sensing resistor that get very hot.
These nearly always have dry joints.
Gordon
9:32 a.m.
On Sunday 05 August 2007 00:23, Chris M wrote:
Soldering iron tips are made of copper, so I don't
see any reason why I
couldn't chisel one down for a specific task. Any thoughts? Am I courting
disaster?
They're made of copper, but they're also plated with iron, and once that
plating is gone the copper doesn't last -- it gets pitted, etc. On really
old stuff I used to file tips, but not any more...
--
Member of the toughest, meanest, deadliest, most unrelenting -- and
ablest -- form of life in this section of space, ?a critter that can
be killed but can't be tamed. ?--Robert A. Heinlein, "The Puppet Masters"
-
Information is more dangerous than cannon to a society ruled by lies. --James
M Dakin
9:53 a.m.
On 5 Aug 2007 at 12:32, Roy J. Tellason wrote:
They're made of copper, but they're also
plated with iron, and once that
plating is gone the copper doesn't last -- it gets pitted, etc. On really
old stuff I used to file tips, but not any more...
Back in the old days, we used to coat the copper tips with silver
(hard) solder (56% silver) to extend the life. But you need a torch
to do that--silver solder melts at about 1100F and requires a special
flux.
Cheers,
Chuck
7 Aug
7 Aug
9:39 p.m.
--- "Roy J. Tellason" <rtellason at verizon.net> wrote:
On Sunday 05 August 2007 00:23, Chris M wrote:
I bring this up for argument's sake. I had thought
they were plated with tin. Now...that may not make a
lot of sense (and according to Roy isn't even true),
but is coating something with tin (i.e soldering) and
plating a surface largely different in the durability
of the coating?
____________________________________________________________________________________
Luggage? GPS? Comic books?
Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search
http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs…
Soldering iron tips are made of copper, so I
don't
see any reason why I
couldn't chisel one down for a specific task.
Any
thoughts? Am I courting
disaster?
They're made of copper, but they're also plated
with iron, and once that
plating is gone the copper doesn't last -- it gets
pitted, etc. On really
old stuff I used to file tips, but not any more...
8 Aug
8 Aug
8:49 a.m.
On 7 Aug 2007 at 21:39, Chris M wrote:
I bring this up for argument's sake. I had
thought
they were plated with tin. Now...that may not make a
lot of sense (and according to Roy isn't even true),
but is coating something with tin (i.e soldering) and
plating a surface largely different in the durability
of the coating?
Apples and oranges, for the most part. "Tinning" something requires
that the base metal molecularly bond ("wet") with what's being used
for a coating. On the other hand, it's possible, via several
processes, to plate just about any metal onto anything, even
nonconductive plastics.
Hot-dipping/tinning requires that the substrate melt at a higher
temperature than the material used to coat it. Dipping copper into
liquid iron to coat it, for example, would only result in melting the
copper.
As a general rule, plated coatings tend to be thinner (but they don't
have to be) than hot-dipped coatings. The next time you put a new
roof on your house for example, try using electro-galvanized nails
instead of hot-dipped ones. You'll have rusty nails in less than a
year.
There is one other method used for coating, and that's vapor
deposition ("sputtering", PVD, etc.) which tends to produce coatings
much thinner than plated ones.
I don't know if that answers the question.
Cheers,
Chuck
6 Aug
6 Aug
10:38 a.m.
New subject: Running OS-9 on: (Interesting or unusual PC Compatibles?
Rumor has it that davis may have mentioned these words:
Ontopically:
.... When I was at intel and radisys...
The same Radisys that bought out MicroWare (and subsequently, OS-9)?
/me rubs hands greedily and says "Eeeeeeexcellent!" ;-)
Still have any contacts there? I've been running OS-9 for a over a couple
of decades now, loving every minute of it. I've always had one burning
question, tho: Was Basic09 ported to the newer platforms as well, and was
it "improved" at all, or is it basically the same it always was?
For the 6809 platform, there's a cleanroom freeware port of it called
"NitrOS-9" and can be seen here:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/nitros9/
Way too many questions, so little time. But my lust for OS-9 goes *very
deep.* ;-)
Offtopically:
I have a Fujitsu-built Crusoe laptop - it's made me happy for over 4 years
that I didn't buy a Sony.
Oddtopically:
Anyone know what would be the chance of getting OS-9 running on said
laptop? It's x86 on the outside, VLIW on the inside, but I have no idea if
OS-9 would come anywhere close to supporting the hardware
(video/lcd/ethernet/etc.) Answers to this offlist, please.
Laterz,
Roger "Merch" Merchberger
--
Roger "Merch" Merchberger -- SysAdmin, Iceberg Computers
zmerch at 30below.com
Hi! I am a .signature virus. Copy me into your .signature to join in!
11:20 a.m.
New subject: Running OS-9 on: (Interesting or unusual PC Compatibles?
On Aug 6, 2007, at 1:38 PM, Roger Merchberger wrote:
I've been running OS-9 for a over a couple of
decades now, loving
every minute of it.
Please forgive me for jumping in, but I have a question. I've
never had a chance to play with OS-9. What would be the easiest way
to get started, meaning, what hardware should I look for, and where
might I find the software?
I have a CoCo (actually two, both an original and a 2) but no mass
storage..
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
Farewell Ophelia, 9/22/1991 - 7/25/2007
12:01 p.m.
New subject: Running OS-9 on: (Interesting or unusual PC Compatibles?
Dave McGuire wrote:
Please forgive me for jumping in, but I have a question. I've never
had a chance to play with OS-9. What would be the easiest way to get
started, meaning, what hardware should I look for, and where might I
find the software?
I have a CoCo (actually two, both an original and a 2) but no mass
storage..
Well you do need mass storage for a real OS, and the COCO disk
drive is very questionable mass storage.
The hardest part is nobody can sell you a disk with OS/9 on it
since the OS/9 is not supported anymore.(1)
Here is the FAQ on OS/9
http://os9archive.rtsi.com/os9faq.html
-Dave
--Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
Farewell Ophelia, 9/22/1991 - 7/25/2007
(1)If you can find a better 6809 system than a COCO/Dragon
it may already have OS/9 with it.
1:18 p.m.
New subject: Running OS-9 on: (Interesting or unusual PC Compatibles?
Rumor has it that Dave McGuire may have mentioned these words:
On Aug 6, 2007, at 1:38 PM, Roger Merchberger wrote:
Hardware: If you have access to unlimited funds, I'd go with a 512K CoCo3
(80-columns shore is nice! ;-) a monitor to use said 80-col. mode or Roy's
RGB to SVGA adaptor which works well, and one of Cloud-9's SuperIDE
adapters, which can handle 2 drives, but if you wish to use a CF card as a
drive, it has an adapter built-in. Small, compact system with the ability
to have big mass storage... 1G CF cards are awfully cheap nowadays.
http://www.cloud9tech.com/
If you don't, I'd still go with a CoCo3 (even if only in 40-col mode) and
either a DSDD floppy drive, which can be found pretty cheap... or Cloud-9's
DriveWire, which emulates a floppy and/or hard drive on a PC with a serial
port. IMHO, a floppy is still slightly faster, but for the amount of
storage you have accessible with it, it's a bargain.
For software, go here:
http://sourceforge.net/projects/nitros9/
Click the download link, and for your CoCo1/2 machines, you'd need the
6809L1v030206.zip (Level 1, runs in 64K) link, for a "normal" CoCo3, you'd
need 6809L2v030206.zip (Level 2, takes 128/512K & HiRes), for a CoCo3
upgraded with the Hitachi 6309, you'd need 6309L2v030206.zip.
It's released under the GPL, so you can find source & everything.
I've been running OS-9 for a over a couple of
decades now, loving
every minute of it.
Please forgive me for jumping in, but I have a question. I've
never had a chance to play with OS-9. What would be the easiest way
to get started, meaning, what hardware should I look for, and where
might I find the software? I have a CoCo (actually two, both an original and a
2) but no mass
storage..
You'd need a floppy drive of some sort - they can be had pretty
inexpensively nowadays, or one of the solutions I'd listed above.
=-=-=-=-=
And... Rumor has it that woodelf may have mentioned these words:
Well you do need mass storage for a real OS, and the
COCO disk
drive is very questionable mass storage.
Why? The controller can support 720K DSDD 3.5" drives, and OS-9 has the
drivers for them - I've found RS drive hardware no less reliable than the
other manufacturers of the day...
Even then, 180K (SSDD 40 track) is still enough to do "real work" - I had a
boot disk with Rogue (think: nethack), Dynacalc (spreadsheet program),
TS-Edit (word processor - think: vi) and a few other apps all on a 180K disk.
... Unless you were talking about the "Mass" part and were referring to
today's mega-gig drives... but even then, I'd think OS-9's support of up to
4G partitions is better than a lot of other machines of the period.
The hardest part is nobody can sell you a disk with
OS/9 on it
since the OS/9 is not supported anymore.(1)
No, but NitrOS-9 is - see link above.
HTH,
Roger "Merch" Merchberger
--
Roger "Merch" Merchberger -- SysAdmin, Iceberg Computers
zmerch at 30below.com
Hi! I am a .signature virus. Copy me into your .signature to join in!
3:49 p.m.
New subject: Running OS-9 on: (Interesting or unusual PC Compatibles?
Roger Merchberger wrote:
And... Rumor has it that woodelf may have mentioned
these words:
*NO RUMOR* I said them!
> Well you do need mass storage for a real OS, and
the COCO disk
> drive is very questionable mass storage.
Why? The controller can support 720K DSDD 3.5"
drives, and OS-9 has the
drivers for them - I've found RS drive hardware no less reliable than
the other manufacturers of the day...
I think I had 360K, DSDD but only one floppy. Not the greatest
for compiling C programs.I tended to bump the controller every
so often so I was not impressed with rom slot used for the expansion
bus.
Even then, 180K (SSDD 40 track) is still enough to do
"real work" - I
had a boot disk with Rogue (think: nethack), Dynacalc (spreadsheet
program), TS-Edit (word processor - think: vi) and a few other apps all
on a 180K disk.
No, but NitrOS-9 is - see link above.
No coco here, so I never dug around the page for downloads.
26 Jun
26 Jun
1:20 p.m.
On Tue, 26 Jun 2007, Jason McBrien wrote:
OK, branching off another thread. There probably
aren't many, but there are
a few clones that I'd consider "interesting." I'd say the PCjr counts,
it
was a pretty strange system - the unsuccessful IIgs of the PC world. Sidecar
expansion slots, IR keyboard and cartridges...
The PCJr was a bad case of giving people what they asked for, and not
doing enough research to find out what they really wanted.
"Well, for my HOME machine, I don't need much memory, and one floppy drive
should do it, and I don't need a hard drive, . . . "
As soon as they took delivery, the users demanded the capability of
upgrading into a complete XT.
The last of the PS/2's had some strange designs.
I like that mechanical linkage running from the front to a physical switch
at the rear. Now THAT had style.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
1:51 p.m.
On 6/26/07, Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> wrote:
The Amiga 3000 had that sort of thing, too... a latching pushbutton
mounted right on the PSU, activated by a pushrod and a button on the
front of the machine. I think at the time, I heard it was to satisfy
German electrical code (to not run mains to a switch in the front),
but perhaps it was just cheaper, somehow, than how PCs did it with a
heavy insulated cable from the PSU in the back to a heavy-duty power
switch in the front. Certainly it makes it easy to have the user
power switch not mechanically attached to the electrical bit, allowing
the cover to slide off the front.
-ethan
The last of
the PS/2's had some strange designs.
I like that mechanical linkage running
from the front to a physical switch
at the rear. Now THAT had style.
2:49 p.m.
On 26 Jun 2007 at 16:51, Ethan Dicks wrote:
The Amiga 3000 had that sort of thing, too... a
latching pushbutton
mounted right on the PSU, activated by a pushrod and a button on the
front of the machine. I think at the time, I heard it was to satisfy
German electrical code (to not run mains to a switch in the front),
but perhaps it was just cheaper, somehow, than how PCs did it with a
heavy insulated cable from the PSU in the back to a heavy-duty power
switch in the front. Certainly it makes it easy to have the user
power switch not mechanically attached to the electrical bit, allowing
the cover to slide off the front.
I think it's more common than commonly thought. Most of the front-
loading Overland Data 9-track tape drives use the same scheme. Now,
PCs with *real* (mains disconnect) power switches seem to be getting
very rare.
Cheers,
Chuck
27 Jun
27 Jun
3:31 p.m.
On 6/26/07, Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com>
wrote:
The Amiga 3000 had that sort of thing, too... a latching pushbutton
mounted right on the PSU, activated by a pushrod and a button on the
front of the machine. I think at the time, I heard it was to satisfy
Some of the HP disk and tape 'shoeboxes' (9133J, 9142, etc) did something
similar. There's an SMPSU board that runs the whole deptho of the case,
with the mains input connector soldered to it (when the PSU is in place,
this lines up with a hole in the case). The on-off switch is also near
the back of the PCB with a plastic pushrod linking it to the button on
the front.
I've also seen stuff where noise could be a problem (audio and test gear)
which has the switch at the back, near the mains input connector and PSU
input circuitry, and a pushrod to the front. Here, I ususpect the aim was
to cut down loaise pickup, not necessrily to meet safety requirements.
-tony
The last
of the PS/2's had some strange designs.
I like that mechanical linkage running
from the front to a physical switch
at the rear. Now THAT had style.
29 Jun
29 Jun
9:48 a.m.
Tony Duell wrote:
IIRC, the HP-150C had the same kind of power switch. The 150A & B's had the
power switch on the back, next to the power connector.
It's been a loooong time since I took a 150C apart.
==
jd
Bureaucrat, n.:
A person who cuts red tape sideways.
-- J. McCabe
On 6/26/07,
Fred Cisin <cisin at xenosoft.com> wrote:
The Amiga 3000 had that sort of thing, too... a
latching pushbutton
mounted right on the PSU, activated by a pushrod and a button on the
front of the machine. I think at the time, I heard it was to satisfy
Some of the HP disk and tape 'shoeboxes' (9133J, 9142, etc) did something
similar. There's an SMPSU board that runs the whole deptho of the case,
with the mains input connector soldered to it (when the PSU is in place,
this lines up with a hole in the case). The on-off switch is also near
the back of the PCB with a plastic pushrod linking it to the button on
the front.
The last
of the PS/2's had some strange designs.
I like that mechanical linkage running
from the front to a physical switch
at the rear. Now THAT had style.
6345
days inactive
6388
days old
69 comments
21 participants
participants (21)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
cclist＠sydex.com -
chrism3667＠yahoo.com -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
davis＠saw.net -
ethan.dicks＠gmail.com -
gordon＠gjcp.net -
gpearce＠curiousgroup.co.uk -
jbmcb1＠gmail.com -
jwest＠classiccmp.org -
legalize＠xmission.com -
lproven＠gmail.com -
mcguire＠neurotica.com -
onymouse＠garlic.com -
pcw＠mesanet.com -
rtellason＠verizon.net -
teoz＠neo.rr.com -
trixter＠oldskool.org -
ylee＠pobox.com -
zmerch-cctalk＠30below.com