24 Apr
2002
24 Apr
'02
8:48 a.m.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ethan Dicks [mailto:erd_6502@yahoo.com]
If he means "no internal mass storage
interface", he might
...but what is "internal?" If the storage interface is in
a separate rack, does that make the machine a toy?
After that, what is a "storage interface?" A common 'IDE' disk
will plug nearly directly into an ISA bus. Does that mean that
any system with an ISA bus could not be a "toy?" We could further
assume that most busses could be adapted in similar ways to drive
mass storage devices, and claim that no computer with any bus which
could do this can be a toy.
have something
of a point. Ignoring audio cassette, I can think of few
computers more
complicated than a traditional "single-board" computer that
lack an in-
cabinet mass storage interface. The PET, VIC-20 and C-64 all
Well, again, which cabinet?
interfaces. Non-
Zorro-equipped Amigas (A1000, A500, A500+) have floppy but
not hard disk
interfaces in-box, but the A600 and A1200 have 44-pin
internal IDE ports.
Does that make the A500 a toy, but not the A600?
What about the Mac plus which had a SCSI interface, but Apple
discouraged its use (preferring, rather, that you plug your
hard drive into the floppy interface, IIRC)...
I would propose that the label "toy" might
be suitable for
machines that
have external disk controllers _and_ an external network interface (if
any; I'll bend and accept a serial port as a network
interface if it runs
some network protocol - SLIP, PPP, LocalTalk, DDCMP...) I'm not sure
how to classify single-boards, though. By the nature of them being
Transputers might also be tricky.
Mind you, I love toy computers. They have been fun
and profitable for
me. Others, though, need that "bittybox" label to glorify whatever
they like at the expense of others. Let's at least agree on what
constitutes a "toy", even in the most general of terms.
I'd say anything that runs windows primarily. *duck*
Chris
Christopher Smith, Perl Developer
Amdocs - Champaign, IL
/usr/bin/perl -e '
print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl
Hacker.")."\x08!\n");
'
24 Apr
24 Apr
11:20 a.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 947 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/20020425/5b2ef9ac/at…
3:22 p.m.
Hey! I did say the mass storage interface had to be internal to the
"computer" and not necessarily the mass storage devices. Now, there can be
varying definitions as to what internal means. If it's a mainframe, then the
campus is the enclosure, while if it's a desktop, it's pretty obvious what
that is.
Besides, though I didn't originally point this out, some of you guys have, as
toys, some of those very machines that you're pointing out aren't really toys.
Are you guys trying to have it both ways?
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Smith" <csmith(a)amdocs.com>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 2:48 PM
Subject: RE: "Toy" computers (was Re: Micro$oft Biz'droid Lusers)
-----Original
Message-----
From: Ethan Dicks [mailto:erd_6502@yahoo.com]
If he means "no internal mass storage
interface", he might
...but what is "internal?" If the storage interface is in
a separate rack, does that make the machine a toy?
After that, what is a "storage interface?" A common 'IDE' disk
will plug nearly directly into an ISA bus. Does that mean that
any system with an ISA bus could not be a "toy?" We could further
assume that most busses could be adapted in similar ways to drive
mass storage devices, and claim that no computer with any bus which
could do this can be a toy.
have something
of a point. Ignoring audio cassette, I can think of few
computers more
complicated than a traditional "single-board" computer that
lack an in-
cabinet mass storage interface. The PET, VIC-20 and C-64 all
Well, again, which cabinet?
interfaces. Non-
Zorro-equipped Amigas (A1000, A500, A500+) have floppy but
not hard disk
interfaces in-box, but the A600 and A1200 have 44-pin
internal IDE ports.
Does that make the A500 a toy, but not the A600?
What about the Mac plus which had a SCSI interface, but Apple
discouraged its use (preferring, rather, that you plug your
hard drive into the floppy interface, IIRC)...
I would propose that the label "toy"
might be suitable for
machines that
have external disk controllers _and_ an external network interface (if
any; I'll bend and accept a serial port as a network
interface if it runs
some network protocol - SLIP, PPP, LocalTalk, DDCMP...) I'm not sure
how to classify single-boards, though. By the nature of them being
Transputers might also be tricky.
Mind you, I love toy computers. They have been
fun and profitable for
me. Others, though, need that "bittybox" label to glorify whatever
they like at the expense of others. Let's at least agree on what
constitutes a "toy", even in the most general of terms.
I'd say anything that runs windows primarily. *duck*
Chris
Christopher Smith, Perl Developer
Amdocs - Champaign, IL
/usr/bin/perl -e '
print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl
Hacker.")."\x08!\n");
'
26 Apr
26 Apr
7:42 p.m.
On Wednesday 24 April 2002 22:22, you wrote:
If it's a mainframe, then the campus is the
enclosure,
while if it's a desktop, it's pretty obvious what that is.
Today that campus worth of hardware is emulated in the hercules
s360/370/390/ zSeries emulator http://www.conmicro.cx/hercules
running on a PC running linux or winbloZ
OS, DOS, MVS, VM ... running on your pc, serves x3270
terms over the network etc etc.
So now the "real computer" runs as a small program on a PC
Yes its the same deal as simh or p11, but this one will run
the same systems as IBM's current top line hardware.
27 Apr
27 Apr
9:28 a.m.
On Sat, 27 Apr 2002, Raymond Moyers wrote:
Ow! You're killing me!
Peace... Sridhar
--
"How do you fight such a savage?"
"With heart, faith, and steel. There can be only one."
-MacLeod and Ramirez, "Highlander"
If it's a
mainframe, then the campus is the enclosure,
while if it's a desktop, it's pretty obvious what that is.
Today that campus worth of hardware is emulated in the hercules
s360/370/390/ zSeries emulator http://www.conmicro.cx/hercules
running on a PC running linux or winbloZ
OS, DOS, MVS, VM ... running on your pc, serves x3270
terms over the network etc etc. 
30 Apr
30 Apr
7:41 a.m.
New subject: Mainframe emulation and serial comms (was Re: "Toy" computers)
--- Raymond Moyers <rmoyers(a)nop.org> wrote:
On Wednesday 24 April 2002 22:22, you wrote:
I have visited the site, but my question is apparently not
frequent enough... from those who know, will "Hercules"
talk BISYNC or SNA down a sync serial pipe? I have some
toys here that emulate PU Type 2s (i.e., include a 3274
cluster controller emulator) and older HASP and 3780 workstations,
but they all expect a sync serial feed. I have the modem
eliminators, etc., so that's not a problem. The problem is
what to stick in a PeeCee that can be the Host end of the
conversation (i.e., the 37x5 end, from the viewpoint of my
peripherals). The Zilog 8530 SIO is smart enough to handle
the link-level protocol (we used it and the COM5025), but
outside of the classic Mac/Sun product line, you don't see
a ZSIO in every box.
Running x3270 is cool enough, but I want _real_ emulated
network traffic, to talk to 20-year-old "compatible"
products. I could even move data to and from VAXen over
SNA or HASP if the Hercules end is savvy enough.
Thanks,
-ethan
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness
http://health.yahoo.com
If it's a mainframe, then the campus is the
enclosure,
while if it's a desktop, it's pretty obvious what that is.
Today that campus worth of hardware is emulated in the hercules
s360/370/390/ zSeries emulator http://www.conmicro.cx/hercules
running on a PC running linux or winbloZ
OS, DOS, MVS, VM ... running on your pc, serves x3270
terms over the network etc etc. 
7:57 a.m.
New subject: Mainframe emulation and serial comms (was Re: "Toy" computers)
On Tue, 30 Apr 2002, Ethan Dicks wrote:
--- Raymond Moyers <rmoyers(a)nop.org> wrote:
Its also used in 5000 series Decstations and at least TC Alphas...
On Wednesday 24 April 2002 22:22, you wrote:
I have visited the site, but my question is apparently not
frequent enough... from those who know, will "Hercules"
talk BISYNC or SNA down a sync serial pipe? I have some
toys here that emulate PU Type 2s (i.e., include a 3274
cluster controller emulator) and older HASP and 3780 workstations,
but they all expect a sync serial feed. I have the modem
eliminators, etc., so that's not a problem. The problem is
what to stick in a PeeCee that can be the Host end of the
conversation (i.e., the 37x5 end, from the viewpoint of my
peripherals). The Zilog 8530 SIO is smart enough to handle
the link-level protocol (we used it and the COM5025), but
outside of the classic Mac/Sun product line, you don't see
a ZSIO in every box. If it's a mainframe, then the campus is the
enclosure,
while if it's a desktop, it's pretty obvious what that is.
Today that campus worth of hardware is emulated in the hercules
s360/370/390/ zSeries emulator http://www.conmicro.cx/hercules
running on a PC running linux or winbloZ
OS, DOS, MVS, VM ... running on your pc, serves x3270
terms over the network etc etc.
Running x3270 is cool enough, but I want _real_ emulated
network traffic, to talk to 20-year-old "compatible"
products. I could even move data to and from VAXen over
SNA or HASP if the Hercules end is savvy enough.
Thanks,
-ethan
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Health - your guide to health and wellness
http://health.yahoo.com
Peter Wallace
25 Apr
25 Apr
2:35 a.m.
--- Christopher Smith <csmith(a)amdocs.com> wrote:
What about the Mac plus which had a SCSI interface,
but Apple
discouraged its use (preferring, rather, that you plug your
hard drive into the floppy interface, IIRC)...
I think there was exactly one product from Apple that plugged into
the floppy port - a 20MB disk that required strange drivers. I
don't recall the part number, but when Apple came out with a 20MB
SCSI disk, they called it the "20SC" or something similar (IIRC)
to distinguish it from the older product.
That having been said, I would question how much Apple "discouraged"
people from using the SCSI port on the Mac Plus. There may have
been an alternative and Apple may have pushed it over third-party
disks, but once the stock of strange disks ran out, presuming
the Mac Plus was still being made, I doubt Apple would continue
to urge people to ignore the SCSI port.
-ethan
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more
http://games.yahoo.com/
3:56 a.m.
That having been said, I would question how much Apple
"discouraged"
people from using the SCSI port on the Mac Plus. There may have
been an alternative and Apple may have pushed it over third-party
disks, but once the stock of strange disks ran out, presuming
the Mac Plus was still being made, I doubt Apple would continue
to urge people to ignore the SCSI port.
There were several Plus-focused SCSI drives, too. I have a Rodime 20MB HD
that's even labeled "PLUS" and precisely mirrors the Plus' base (looks
like
it was designed to sit under the Plus, so that's where this one resides).
I guess Apple wasn't all that discouraging :-)
--
----------------------------- personal page: http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ --
Cameron Kaiser, Point Loma Nazarene University * ckaiser(a)stockholm.ptloma.edu
-- Put your Nose to the Grindstone! -- Plastic Surgeons-Toolmakers Union Ltd. -
8:52 a.m.
Some of the disks that Apple pushed off on the unsuspecting public didn't even
talk SCSI. I believe that's why they had to maintain such tight control over
what you could attach to their early SCSI channels. If it didn't say the
right words, it wasn't recognized.
Several of the Apple external SCSI drives I've got bying about (and that's all
they'll do because of their "special" firmware, use bridge controllers that
have Apple-specific firmware. In a couple of cases I've had similar non-Apple
boards and substituted the ROM from one of them only to have the drive
suddenly spring to life on a diagnostic channel where it previously gave no
evidence of its presence.
I do not believe Apple did this so much to thwart the user's attempt to use
non-Apple products as it was an effort to maintain backwards-compatibility
with earlier generations of "SCSI" (their version) hardware. The fact it made
it difficult to use non-Apple stuff was a desirable side-effect.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ethan Dicks" <erd_6502(a)yahoo.com>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 8:35 AM
Subject: RE: "Toy" computers (was Re: Micro$oft Biz'droid Lusers)
--- Christopher Smith <csmith(a)amdocs.com> wrote:
What about the Mac plus which had a SCSI
interface, but Apple
discouraged its use (preferring, rather, that you plug your
hard drive into the floppy interface, IIRC)...
I think there was exactly one product from Apple that plugged into
the floppy port - a 20MB disk that required strange drivers. I
don't recall the part number, but when Apple came out with a 20MB
SCSI disk, they called it the "20SC" or something similar (IIRC)
to distinguish it from the older product.
That having been said, I would question how much Apple "discouraged"
people from using the SCSI port on the Mac Plus. There may have
been an alternative and Apple may have pushed it over third-party
disks, but once the stock of strange disks ran out, presuming
the Mac Plus was still being made, I doubt Apple would continue
to urge people to ignore the SCSI port.
-ethan
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more
http://games.yahoo.com/
8054
days inactive
8060
days old
10 comments
9 participants
participants (9)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
csmith＠amdocs.com -
edick＠idcomm.com -
erd_6502＠yahoo.com -
pcw＠mesanet.com -
rmoyers＠nop.org -
spectre＠stockholm.ptloma.edu -
vance＠ikickass.org