26 Oct
1999
26 Oct
'99
1:32 a.m.
At 10:08 PM 10/25/99 -0700, you wrote:
No, no and no. A dumb 4Mhz burst bus that requires cpu attention to work
will be many times slower in actual applications than two 1Mhz buses with
distributed arbitration and such smarts. That's all the point of the
discussion. That's why raw numbers tend to be meaningless. That's why
system designers nowadays make decisions based on simulations and not
on raw specs.
Carlos.
Two 1MHz busses
will be faster than a single 2MHz bus if they are being used
for different purposes, such as one for I/O and one for memory accesses.
But my point is that one 4 MHz synchronous bus is going to be faster than
two 1 MHz busses in all cases. 
26 Oct
26 Oct
12:48 a.m.
New subject: gauging interest in VAX 9210
A bit off topic; a friend of mine has been offered a 9210 and asked
me if it was worth the effort of moving it. Without considering the
power and space requirements, I would prefer a 780 to a 9000.
If you were offered a 9000 would you take it or let it be scrapped? In
this case the biggest problem is the distance; the machine is located
about 1000Km from us.
TIA
e.
========================================================================
Enrico Badella email: enrico.badella(a)softstar.it
Soft*Star srl eb(a)vax.cnuce.cnr.it
InterNetworking Specialists tel: +39-011-746092
Via Camburzano 9 fax: +39-011-746487
10143 Torino, Italy
Wanted, for hobbist use, any type of PDP and microVAX
hardware,software,
manuals,schematics,etc. and DEC-10 docs or manuals
==========================================================================
4:16 a.m.
New subject: gauging interest in VAX 9210
A bit off topic; a friend of mine has been offered a
9210 and asked
me if it was worth the effort of moving it. Without considering the
power and space requirements, I would prefer a 780 to a 9000.
If you were offered a 9000 would you take it or let it be scrapped? In
this case the biggest problem is the distance; the machine is located
about 1000Km from us.
The biggest problem isn't storage and power? I'm not sure how many racks
you're talking but I would think this could be a fairly large system.
Zane
| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Adminstrator |
| healyzh(a)aracnet.com (primary) | Linux Enthusiast |
| healyzh(a)holonet.net (alternate) | Classic Computer Collector |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------+
| Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
| and Zane's Computer Museum. |
| http://www.aracnet.com/~healyzh/ |
6:04 a.m.
New subject: gauging interest in VAX 9210
Zane wrote:
The biggest problem isn't storage and power?
I'm not sure how many racks
you're talking but I would think this could be a fairly large system.
Nah, a 9000-series machine isn't really any larger than a 780 that he
indicated he preferred.
It's somewhat heavier, though. Individual boards weigh over 100 lbs.
5:59 a.m.
New subject: gauging interest in VAX 9210
A bit off topic; a friend of mine has been offered a
9210 and asked
me if it was worth the effort of moving it. Without considering the
power and space requirements, I would prefer a 780 to a 9000.
If you were offered a 9000 would you take it or let it be scrapped? In
this case the biggest problem is the distance; the machine is located
about 1000Km from us.
I will not offer an opinion at this time regarding whether you should
rescue it. People who have been reading this list for at least a few
days will know how I fill about such things.
But one volume of VAX-9000 confidential internal documentation fell into
my lap recently (ouch!), so if anyone does have a 9000 or acquire one,
I'll make a copy available.
6:01 a.m.
New subject: gauging interest in VAX 9210
A bit off topic; a friend of mine has been offered a
9210 and asked
me if it was worth the effort of moving it.
By the way, I don't think that's off-topic. :-)
AFAIK, the charter of this list does not suggest that flaming
people who post factual information is on-topic, though that's
what we seem to get the most of in the last few days.
3:55 a.m.
At 10:08 PM 10/25/99 -0700, you wrote:
>>Two 1MHz busses will be faster than a single 2MHz bus if they are being used
>>for different purposes, such as one for I/O and one for memory accesses.
>
>But my point is that one 4 MHz synchronous bus is going to be faster than
>two 1 MHz busses in all cases.
No, no and no.
Yes, yes, and yes.
A dumb 4Mhz burst bus that requires cpu attention to
work
will be many times slower in actual applications than two 1Mhz buses with
distributed arbitration and such smarts. That's all the point of the
discussion. That's why raw numbers tend to be meaningless. That's why
system designers nowadays make decisions based on simulations and not
on raw specs.
Carlos, my man, I find this style of discussion disingenuous. In the absence
of any other data, when somebody says that two 1 MHz busses are better than
one 2 MHz bus, then we must assume that all other conditions are equal.
If, indeed, it's possible to arbitrarily inject post-conditions into our
discussions, then, OF COURSE you can destroy an argument, because you are
making an argument against something that was not supported in the first
place!
Now, I have proven to the satisfaction of everybody that, ASSUMING
synchronous buses that are identical in every way except speed
(one being twice as fast as the two half-speed busses) that in two
real-life situations, one faster bus is BETTER than two separate busses.
-----
I'm waiting for somebody who knows what he/she is talking about on this
issue and provides data, assumptions, references, and, if necessary,
simulation software, etc.
Opinions and vague handwaving won't do for me anymore, sorry.
Carlos.
-Mike "Hard Data, Please!" Cheponis
4:21 a.m.
Mike Cheponis wrote:
[stuff deleted]
Now, I have proven to the satisfaction of everybody
that, ASSUMING
synchronous buses that are identical in every way except speed
(one being twice as fast as the two half-speed busses) that in two
real-life situations, one faster bus is BETTER than two separate busses.
*sighs* And it's just as easy to demonstrate cases where multiple
buses are superior to a single, faster bus. What does this have to do
with old iron?
I'm waiting for somebody who knows what he/she is
talking about on this
issue and provides data, assumptions, references, and, if necessary,
simulation software, etc.
I'd suggest any early 80's or later text on system or CPU architecture.
Patterson does a reasonable treatment of the subject, despite it
not being his principle focus. You could go earlier, I suppose, and
look at some of Cray's earlier work, and you could do a literature
search of "Harvard Architecture". That would make for a good start.
Opinions and vague handwaving won't do for me
anymore, sorry.
Could you please take this to one of the architecture groups? It
really doesn't seem to belong here.
Best,
Chris
--
Chris Kennedy
chris(a)mainecoon.com
http://www.mainecoon.com
PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97
10:02 a.m.
On Tue, 26 Oct 1999, Chris Kennedy wrote:
Mike Cheponis wrote:
*sighs* And it's just as easy to demonstrate cases
where multiple
buses are superior to a single, faster bus. What does this have to do
with old iron?
I do not accept your assertion, simply because you asserted it(!).
Relevance to old iron? Because old iron had lots of busses, new ones don't.
Why is that?
I'd suggest any early 80's or later text on
system or CPU architecture.
Tnx for your refs, I'll look 'em up.
Could you please take this to one of the architecture
groups? It
really doesn't seem to belong here.
Chris, I didn't bring this up. I am merely trying to keep cannards out of
the discussion. Truth must prevail, eh? Fuzzy thinking must be eliminated,
etc.
Best,
Chris
same! -mac
12:38 p.m.
Mike Cheponis wrote:
I understand, but perhaps this isn't the best place to do so?
Best,
Chris
--
Chris Kennedy
chris(a)mainecoon.com
http://www.mainecoon.com
PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97
On Tue, 26 Oct 1999, Chris Kennedy wrote:
Of course not. Nor am I compelled to do your homework for you.
Mike Cheponis wrote:
*sighs* And it's just as easy to demonstrate
cases where multiple
buses are superior to a single, faster bus. What does this have to do
with old iron?
I do not accept your assertion, simply because you asserted it(!).
Relevance to old iron? Because old iron had lots of busses, new ones don't.
Why is that?
Because it isn't the case. For example, the E4500 and its ilk have
multiple busses (mezzanine busses on the CPU and I/O board, I believe
built around Sun's UPA switch, in addition to the Gigaplane main bus,
which in and of itself has multiple buses, at least in the case
of the Starfire's Gigaplane-XB bus). Other examples include the
Cray/whatever 6400 SMP, Pyramid Nile, Sequent S5000 and I suspect
the SGI Challenge and HP T500, although I'd have to check. I
suppose the Sequent (or do they call themselves IBM now) NUMA/
NUMA-Q architecture is multiple bus as well, but not in the
sprit of what you've been discussing.
In my mind, at least, such machines don't qualify as "old iron" :-)
[snip]
Could you please take this to one of the
architecture groups? It
really doesn't seem to belong here.
Chris, I didn't bring this up. I am merely trying to keep cannards out of
the discussion. Truth must prevail, eh? Fuzzy thinking must be eliminated,
etc.
2:42 p.m.
> I do not accept your assertion, simply because you
asserted it(!).
Of course not. Nor am I compelled to do your homework
for you.
Whoa! You make an assertion, and -I- have to disprove it? Yow!
> Relevance to old iron? Because old iron had lots
of busses, new ones don't.
> Why is that?
Because it isn't the case. For example, the E4500
and its ilk have
multiple busses (mezzanine busses on the CPU and I/O board, I believe
built around Sun's UPA switch, in addition to the Gigaplane main bus,
which in and of itself has multiple buses, at least in the case
of the Starfire's Gigaplane-XB bus). Other examples include the
Cray/whatever 6400 SMP, Pyramid Nile, Sequent S5000 and I suspect
the SGI Challenge and HP T500, although I'd have to check. I
suppose the Sequent (or do they call themselves IBM now) NUMA/
NUMA-Q architecture is multiple bus as well, but not in the
sprit of what you've been discussing.
In my mind, at least, such machines don't qualify
as "old iron" :-)
Still seems to me that the busses break down into "few", that is,
Memory, Fast I/O, and Slow I/O.
I can understand a separate Memory and I/O bus (different speeds) ONLY
if the I/O devices can't run at memory speeds. (And, DRAM memory is, after
all, "L3 cache" if you will...).
What I see is that the earliest iron had few "channels" (busses) and then
during the computer baroque period (of which the vax is the prime example)
busses exploded, and now, there is a bus consolidation. For example, the PC
has two primary busses AGP and PCI (we will conveniently ignore memory
busses because memory subsystems must be tightly coupled to the processor
for decent performance).
But I'm not going to talk any more about this subject until somebody comes up
with data to support these architectural features, or until some references
I've been recommended come in.
But I find the history of computer bus architectures absolutely fascinating!
-mac
4:58 a.m.
Now, I have proven to the satisfaction of everybody
that, ASSUMING
synchronous buses that are identical in every way except speed
(one being twice as fast as the two half-speed busses) that in two
real-life situations, one faster bus is BETTER than two separate busses.
In the real world there are to many conditions on things to make general
assumtions that always work. For simplicity and cost as a generalization
one fast bus will meet those needs and give good performance.
Now a counter to that. For error/fault tolerence, and if the fastest bus
is not fast enough then two (or more) will always win but will not be
cheaper.
I don't need number to prove that, the logic is deeper. To tie that to
the "old" machines they ran their generations PCI and then some. I'll bet
in a year or two you make the exact same arguement about the obsolete PCI
bus. To make a machine I'd consider to be in the same class as the 6000
was when new right now I'd expect to see all of the fastest busses in use
and multiples of them for parallelism.
Current generation PCs most of us have access to are not this case and do
perform well below the processor chips capabilities despite AGI, PCI,
SCSI++ (LVUW), copper giga and fibre. Because even the simplest process
like routing a packet requires the cpu to look at the address and see if
it belongs to the port A or port B list and all the DMA in the world
doenst get around that.
A good example is the DEC ugly(by some) RQDX MSCP disk controller.
While Qbus is maxed out around 4m words a second this controller can do
one thing to keep the lowly vax off it. It can DO DMA from LINKED lists
so that the controller is doing queued IOs. Now thats low end 1987
MicrovaxII technology but if we scaled that and put it on the PC it could
be keeping the cache filled and other tasks while all the cpu has to do is
set up task lists for it.
Another is this RAID thing, a good idea if you have SCSI. The VAX
was doing it over 14 years ago as part of the OS (disk shadowing).
OK so your 486 can do interger math faster, few said it was false. It's
just not enough of a measure. Less so to those guy where processing is
putting the right data (or part) in the correct bin and charging off
10,223.245 (yes three digits!) each for them. It may be meaningless
to the weather service that runs models that have data matricies that can
fill gigabytes of ram (which has to be filled first!) from their terabyte
disk farms.
All those MIPS, MFLOP and Dhrystones are wasted if the system structure
is hung up waiting for the floppy.
If your are preaching newer is faster, the choir is over there, they know
the words. If your saying PCs are better, well, put some bounds around
that as I really feel it's one of those ALWAYS/NEVER generalizations
that often bite.
Allison
7:27 p.m.
> real-life situations, one faster bus is BETTER
than two separate busses.
In the real world there are too many conditions on
things to make general
assumtions that always work.
Including this one, no doubt? ;-)
For simplicity and cost as a generalization
one fast bus will meet those needs and give good performance.
That statement is supported by fact!
Now a counter to that. For error/fault tolerence, and
if the fastest bus
is not fast enough then two (or more) will always win but will not be
cheaper.
I'm not sure I understand this: the fastest bus is not fast enough?
I don't need numbers to prove that, the logic is
deeper.
? Deep sub-micron or something?
To tie that to
the "old" machines they ran their generations PCI and then some. I'll bet
in a year or two you make the exact same arguement about the obsolete PCI
bus.
Gee, as much as folks like to pidgen-hole me, I'm really only trying to
understand the performance and lure of the old iron, like vaxes, in
relation to newer iron that I have or can use, and also understand better.
Call it "Comparative Computer Anatomy" if you will...
Perhaps people do not like my approach, but my aim is true.
To make a machine I'd consider to be in the same
class as the 6000
was when new right now I'd expect to see all of the fastest busses in use
and multiples of them for parallelism.
This is, unfortunatly, gobbdleygook to me. "multiples of them for parallelism"?
Why would this be necessary? Why can't one fast one be used?
Current generation PCs most of us have access to are
not this case and do
perform well below the processor chips capabilities
I don't understand this, either. Are you saying that if there were
memory-speed peripherals, I/O could flow through the processor faster than
existing PC busses? If so, then I definitely agree with you. However,
then bus design gets complicated with cache-coherency etc. I think this
is why you want at least two busses on a machine: memory and I/O. (As
network speeds increase beyond 1 Gb/s, then perhaps a special Network Bus
will be required, too.)
despite AGI, PCI,
SCSI++ (LVUW), copper giga and fibre. Because even the simplest process
like routing a packet requires the cpu to look at the address and see if
it belongs to the port A or port B list and all the DMA in the world
doenst get around that.
right! That's what I was arging before concerning "processing".
A good example is the DEC ugly(by some) RQDX MSCP disk
controller.
While Qbus is maxed out around 4m words a second this controller can do
one thing to keep the lowly vax off it. It can DO DMA from LINKED lists
so that the controller is doing queued IOs. Now thats low end 1987
MicrovaxII technology but if we scaled that and put it on the PC it could
be keeping the cache filled and other tasks while all the cpu has to do is
set up task lists for it.
Sounds like what we now call "scatter/gather DMA" - and is a great idea
for networking stacks.
Another is this RAID thing, a good idea if you have
SCSI. The VAX
was doing it over 14 years ago as part of the OS (disk shadowing).
This is, as I understand it, not -quite- true. Disk Shadowing (what is
that, RAID-1 ?) is a simple technique, not as sophisticated as RAID-5,
for example.
But I remain unclear how this helps us understand busses?
OK so your 486 can do interger math faster, few said
it was false.
Right, and those that few that disagreed were wrong. ;-)
It's
just not enough of a measure. Less so to those guy where processing is
putting the right data (or part) in the correct bin and charging off
10,223.245 (yes three digits!) each for them. It may be meaningless
to the weather service that runs models that have data matricies that can
fill gigabytes of ram (which has to be filled first!) from their terabyte
disk farms.
Right. But, for my goal of attempting to put these old, "obsolete", err, I
mean "ancient", err, I guess it's PC (Politically Correct!) to say
"Classic"
machines in perspective.
All those MIPS, MFLOP and Dhrystones are wasted if the
system structure
is hung up waiting for the floppy.
You mean if the system is waiting for some I/O device? Sure!
If your are preaching newer is faster, the choir is
over there, they know
the words.
I'm not. (But it -is- a fact, though. "Obsolete Ready" as they say...)
If your saying PCs are better, well, put some bounds
around
that as I really feel it's one of those ALWAYS/NEVER generalizations
that often bite.
For the nth time: a dx2/66 is 2 to 3x as fast as a uniprocessor 6500 on
Dhrystone 2.1; this is what I've maintained, and it helps put at least
part of the history of vaxes in perspective for me.
I think we are all fully aware that there are other aspects that need to
be considered to put the vax history in total perspective.
-Mike C
p.s. Allison, just curious, are you a recovering DECaholic? ;-) Your ferver
for the old DEC stuff is amazing to me! Religion? It's fun to watch!
27 Oct
27 Oct
3:37 a.m.
On Wed, 27 Oct 1999, Mike Cheponis wrote:
p.s. Allison, just curious, are you a recovering
DECaholic? ;-) Your ferver
for the old DEC stuff is amazing to me! Religion? It's fun to watch!
Jeeeeezus. You, sir, are capable of being one of the largest assholes I've
ever seen online.
-Dave McGuire
4:17 a.m.
Based on comments to date I'm dismissing you as a troll.
p.s. Allison, just curious, are you a recovering
DECaholic? ;-) Your ferver
for the old DEC stuff is amazing to me! Religion? It's fun to watch!
Insults?
DEC is not religon for me. Those that know it's really CPM and z80s.
Allison
4:58 a.m.
Wow, people sure get defensive here!
That line was a -compliment- !!! I -love- reading Allison's posts! It's
the fervor that I rarely see these days, and is only rivaled by the FORTH
people!
It's a compliment!
Jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeezus, people!
Again, thanks, Allison, for your posts!
-mac
p.s. The first non-discrete homebrew machine I designed was a Z80
(ceramic package, no less!) And the first commercial machine I owned outright
was a Kaypro II.
On Wed, 27 Oct 1999 allisonp(a)world.std.com wrote:
Based on comments to date I'm dismissing you as a troll.
p.s. Allison, just curious, are you a recovering
DECaholic? ;-) Your ferver
for the old DEC stuff is amazing to me! Religion? It's fun to watch!
Insults?
DEC is not religon for me. Those that know it's really CPM and z80s.
Allison
7:50 a.m.
That line was a -compliment- !!! I -love- reading
Allison's posts! It's
the fervor that I rarely see these days, and is only rivaled by the FORTH
people!
I use what I know.
It's a compliment!
Yike! ;)
p.s. The first non-discrete homebrew machine I
designed was a Z80
(ceramic package, no less!) And the first commercial machine I owned outright
was a Kaypro II.
Still have one of those... yep I use that too!
Allison
5:05 a.m.
New subject: Using insults when arguments fail
Based on comments to date I'm dismissing you as a
troll.
Paraphrasing; Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable
p.s. Allison, just curious, are you a recovering
DECaholic? ;-) Your
ferver
for the old DEC stuff is amazing to me! Religion? It's fun to watch!
Insults?
DEC is not religon for me. Those that know it's really CPM and z80s. from magic (religion). People who don't really
understand technology in the
depth it gets tossed around here (perhaps shoveled at
times) may assume
incorrectly that its same for others as it is for them, a mystery one takes
on faith from the advertising. I don't think we have any true brand zealots
in this group, but we certainly don't mind splitting a few hairs to "iron
out" the details, and that could appear to such a person as ferver.
OTOH I think we should work out some kind of 12 step program.....
Hi my name is Mike (Hi Mike)
I'm not really a DECaholic. (sage nodding of heads)
I'm just here because I picked this Rainbow out of a dumpster. (more
nodding, quiet gossip begins)
Really I'm not a DECaholic, it had this network card in it so I had to buy
a VAX to hook up to it. (gossip no longer quiet, Rainbow vs Decmate
discussion getting animated, origin of networking chatter warming up)
<another person stands up>
I'm not a DECaholic either, whats wrong with a raised floor in the family
room? (cheer goes up from the group, settles into chaos of small groups
comparing wiring and A/C techniques)
5:09 a.m.
New subject: Using insults when arguments fail
Mike Ford wrote:
[stuff deleted]
<another person stands up>
I'm not a DECaholic either, whats wrong with a raised floor in the family
room?
Oh dear. You're suggesting there's something unusual about a raised floor
in the family room? :-)
Best,
Chris
--
Chris Kennedy
chris(a)mainecoon.com
http://www.mainecoon.com
PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97
6:30 a.m.
New subject: Using insults when arguments fail
On Wed, 27 Oct 1999, Chris Kennedy wrote:
Mike Ford wrote:
[stuff deleted]
Unfortunately, I don't have enough ceiling height for a raised floor
in my "family" room... I'm going to have to set the raised floor tiles
directly on the concrete, Sigh...
clint
PS My family includes:
Dad - 11/750
Mom - uVax III (in world box)
Mom2 - uVax II (in world box) (their mormons :^)
LilSis - VaxStation II (in BA23)
Bro - uVax 3100 (headless)
Baby - uVax 2000 (headless)
Still looking for the grandparents (PDP-11/73,PDP-11/xx)
And five rodents (PCs) running various flavors of FreeBSD/Linux
<another person stands up>
I'm not a DECaholic either, whats wrong with a raised floor in the family
room?
Oh dear. You're suggesting there's something unusual about a raised floor
in the family room? :-)
Best,
Chris
7:22 a.m.
New subject: Using insults when arguments fail
"Clint Wolff (VAX collector)" wrote:
PS My family includes:
Dad - 11/750
Mom - uVax III (in world box)
Mom2 - uVax II (in world box) (their mormons :^)
LilSis - VaxStation II (in BA23)
Bro - uVax 3100 (headless)
Baby - uVax 2000 (headless)
You should pose them for a family portrait sometime :-)
Best,
Chris
--
Chris Kennedy
chris(a)mainecoon.com
http://www.mainecoon.com
PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97
11:42 a.m.
New subject: Using insults when arguments fail
On Wed, 27 Oct 1999, Chris Kennedy wrote:
"Clint Wolff (VAX collector)" wrote:
Until the "family" room is complete, they all live on separate floors.
Mom is upstairs, Dad is on the main level, and Mom2 is in the basement...
The kids are scattered on the first and second floor. For some reason,
the breakers pop if I plug them all in in the same room :)
clint
PS My family includes:
Dad - 11/750
Mom - uVax III (in world box)
Mom2 - uVax II (in world box) (their mormons :^)
LilSis - VaxStation II (in BA23)
Bro - uVax 3100 (headless)
Baby - uVax 2000 (headless)
You should pose them for a family portrait sometime :-)
Best,
Chris 
1:44 p.m.
New subject: Using insults when arguments fail
Chris Kennedy wrote:
Mike Ford wrote:
[stuff deleted]
Especially when it's the only room in the house with a ceiling high
enough to leave room for it. (Other than the master bedroom, I'm
still negiotiating with the wife on that one...)
Of course, putting in a raised floor makes it a bit tight for 96"
racks, and those are the excuse for the raised floor...
--
Ward Griffiths wdg3rd(a)home.com http://members.home.net/wdg3rd/
"It is not merely that I dislike, distrust and disbelieve anyone who
seeks political office. I would extend privacy rights even to
politicians were it not for two countervailing circumstances. First,
they themselves violate privacy rights wholesale. They regulate
virtually everything that peaceful people can do behind closed doors,
<another person stands up>
I'm not a DECaholic either, whats wrong with a raised floor in the family
room?
Oh dear. You're suggesting there's something unusual about a raised floor
in the family room? :-) from taking drugs to having sex. It is elitist
hypocrisy for them to
demand the privacy rights that they routinely deny to
ordinary people.
If a politician wishes me to respect his personal life, then he needs
to respect mine." Wendy McElroy
3:23 p.m.
New subject: Using insults when arguments fail
Chris Kennedy wrote:
We used to have computers in the master bedroom (my wife is also
in the computer field). We removed them after a few months, it
made it too hard for one of us to sleep while the other was
pulling an all nighter!
--
Dr. Mark Green mark(a)cs.ualberta.ca
Professor (780) 492-4584
Director, Research Institute for Multimedia Systems (RIMS)
Department of Computing Science (780) 492-1071 (FAX)
University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, T6G 2H1, Canada
Mike Ford wrote:
[stuff deleted]
Especially when it's the only room in the house with a ceiling high
enough to leave room for it. (Other than the master bedroom, I'm
still negiotiating with the wife on that one...)
<another person stands up>
I'm not a DECaholic either, whats wrong with a raised floor in the family
room?
Oh dear. You're suggesting there's something unusual about a raised floor
in the family room? :-) 
29 Oct
29 Oct
12:57 p.m.
New subject: Using insults when arguments fail
Oh dear. You're suggesting there's something unusual about a raised floor
in the family room? :-)
Best,
Chris
We're finishing the basement this winter. In my computer room I'm
thinking of installing a fake floor if I can find one... next to my full
groovy little darkroom (woowoo! It sucks trying to do ANYTHING at school
cuz periods are only 55 minutes long! <A Colour test stript takes two
hours>)
Kevin
Anybody got floor tiles?
27 Oct
27 Oct
5:37 a.m.
New subject: Using insults when arguments fail
I'm not a DECaholic either, whats wrong with a
raised floor in the family
room? (cheer goes up from the group, settles into chaos of small groups
comparing wiring and A/C techniques)
Actually I think the garage is the proper place for the raised floor. That
way you've got a nice cement slab under it in most cases! At least around
here you've got cemement in garages made in at least the last 50 years or
so.
I'd like a nice house with a three car garage, no cars in it, but with a
nice raised floor! Seal two doors, and leave one able to open with an
inner wall and a ramp so you can get systems in and out, without
destroying your ability to keep it clean in the computer room (err, I mean
garage...).
Zane
| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Adminstrator |
| healyzh(a)aracnet.com (primary) | Linux Enthusiast |
| healyzh(a)holonet.net (alternate) | Classic Computer Collector |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------+
| Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
| and Zane's Computer Museum. |
| http://www.aracnet.com/~healyzh/ |
5:37 p.m.
New subject: Using insults when arguments fail
----- Original Message -----
From: Mike Ford <mikeford(a)socal.rr.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 1999 4:05 AM
Subject: Using insults when arguments fail
I don't think we have any true brand zealots
in this group, but we certainly don't mind splitting a few hairs to "iron
out" the details, and that could appear to such a person as ferver.
I'll fess up, if it ain't C= it ain't a real computer :-)
cheers,
Lance
6:09 p.m.
New subject: Using insults when arguments fail
I don't
think we have any true brand zealots
in this group, but we certainly don't mind splitting a few hairs to "iron
out" the details, and that could appear to such a person as ferver.
I'll fess up, if it ain't C= it ain't a real computer :-)
cheers,
Lance 
5 Nov
5 Nov
4:30 a.m.
New subject: Using insults when arguments fail
>I don't think we have any true brand zealots
> in this group, but we certainly don't mind splitting a few hairs to "iron
> out" the details, and that could appear to such a person as ferver.
I'll fess up, if it ain't C= it ain't a
real computer :-)
They did computers ?
Grins
H.
27 Oct
27 Oct
6:27 a.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 1294 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19991027/81eb4da3/at…
9179
days inactive
9189
days old
29 comments
16 participants
participants (16)
-
a2k＠one.net -
allisonp＠world.std.com -
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
black＠gco.apana.org.au -
cem14＠cornell.edu -
chris＠mainecoon.com -
enrico.badella＠softstar.it -
eric＠brouhaha.com -
Hans.Franke＠mch20.sbs.de -
healyzh＠aracnet.com -
mac＠Wireless.Com -
mark＠cs.ualberta.ca -
mcguire＠neurotica.com -
mikeford＠socal.rr.com -
vaxman＠uswest.net -
wdg3rd＠home.com