3 Sep
2009
3 Sep
'09
12:22 a.m.
I picked up a Omrom programmable terminal. Picked up is the operative
word as the thing weights around 70 pounds!
It appears to work in spite of a disjointed space bar (fixed) and the
model number is 8030.
There is a rotary knob on the back that sets the baudrate (up to a
whopping 4800 baud) and what appears to be 4 rs-232 ports, one parallel
port and a coax port labeled TV ??
Anyone ever use these? is there a manual/pdf out there. A google search
does not appear to bring any good results. It does have a cool NASA/DOD
sticker on it!
Cheers
Tom P.
3 Sep
3 Sep
2 a.m.
On 2 Sep 2009 at 16:22, tp wrote:
I picked up a Omrom programmable terminal. Picked up
is the operative
word as the thing weights around 70 pounds! It appears to work in
spite of a disjointed space bar (fixed) and the model number is 8030.
There is a rotary knob on the back that sets the baudrate (up to a
whopping 4800 baud) and what appears to be 4 rs-232 ports, one
parallel port and a coax port labeled TV ??
Is that really Omrom and not Omron?
--Chuck
4:17 a.m.
Chuck Guzis wrote:
On 2 Sep 2009 at 16:22, tp wrote:
My Bad, It is Omron Information Systems out of Sunnyvale. California
Cheers
Tom P.
I picked up a Omrom programmable terminal. Picked
up is the operative
word as the thing weights around 70 pounds! It appears to work in
spite of a disjointed space bar (fixed) and the model number is 8030.
There is a rotary knob on the back that sets the baudrate (up to a
whopping 4800 baud) and what appears to be 4 rs-232 ports, one
parallel port and a coax port labeled TV ??
Is that really Omrom and not Omron?
--Chuck
7:53 a.m.
On 2 Sep 2009 at 16:22, tp wrote:
Tom, there's a product announcement of the 8030 in the September 1976
IEEE Computer magazine. Says it's 8080 based, with editing features
(e.g. protected fields) and two display pages. The announcement
claims a top speed of 9600 bps, however.
The "New Products" section for that month is certainly interesting.
Intersil announced their Intercept Jr. evaluation kit for the IM6100.
American MIcrosystems trotted out their development system for the
6800. EAI announced a new hybrid computer system. North Star had a
floating-point board for their systems. Interdata introduced two new
minis.
But the thing that caught my eye was the HP 548A "logic clip"--a
device built into a DIP test clip with an LED for each pin. It
featured self-seeking logic and would display the state of all pins
for RTL, TTL, DTL and CMOS logic families. It sounds very cool--and
I have never seen one in the flesh.
If you're an IEEE CS member, you can pick up a PDF of the "new
products" section from the IEEE web site. Otherwise, I can pass it
on to you for browsing.
Best regards,
Chuck
6:27 p.m.
Chuck Guzis wrote:
On 2 Sep 2009 at 16:22, tp wrote:
Tom, there's a product announcement of the 8030 in the September 1976
IEEE Computer magazine. Says it's 8080 based, with editing features
(e.g. protected fields) and two display pages. The announcement
claims a top speed of 9600 bps, however.
This is 1976 ... did they have 9600 modems back then that a human could
afford!
The "New Products" section for that month is
certainly interesting.
Intersil announced their Intercept Jr. evaluation kit for the IM6100.
American MIcrosystems trotted out their development system for the
6800. EAI announced a new hybrid computer system. North Star had a
floating-point board for their systems. Interdata introduced two new
minis.
Any guesses what the hardware on the floating point board was?
But the thing that caught my eye was the HP 548A
"logic clip"--a
device built into a DIP test clip with an LED for each pin. It
featured self-seeking logic and would display the state of all pins
for RTL, TTL, DTL and CMOS logic families. It sounds very cool--and
I have never seen one in the flesh.
If you're an IEEE CS member, you can pick up a PDF of the "new
products" section from the IEEE web site. Otherwise, I can pass it
on to you for browsing.
Text based is fine with me.
Best regards,
Chuck
PS. The problem with old catalogs and products for sale, is that
it reminds me I wanted to buy said item at one time.
6:59 p.m.
New subject: 9600 bps in 1976 [was RE: Omrom programmable terminal]
From: Ben
Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2009 10:28 AM
Chuck Guzis wrote:
> On 2 Sep 2009 at 16:22, tp wrote:
> Tom, there's a product announcement of the
8030 in the September 1976
> IEEE Computer magazine. Says it's 8080 based, with editing features
> (e.g. protected fields) and two display pages. The announcement
> claims a top speed of 9600 bps, however.
This is 1976 ... did they have 9600 modems back then
that a human could
afford!
This would have been an acceptable speed on a hardwired terminal line into,
for example, a DEC-20. Terminals aren't always connected to modems.
Rich Alderson
Vintage Computing Server Engineer
Vulcan, Inc.
505 5th Avenue S, Suite 900
Seattle, WA 98104
mailto:RichA at Vulcan.com
mailto:RichA at LivingComputerMuseum.org
(206) 342-2239
(206) 465-2916 cell
http://www.PDPplanet.org/
http://www.LivingComputerMuseum.org/
7:27 p.m.
New subject: 9600 bps in 1976 [was RE: Omrom programmable terminal]
Rich Alderson wrote:
Yes,9600 is a acceptable direct connect speed.
The main problem I find with what few terminals I have used is 'line
scroll' flicker - the characters on the bottom line not cleared and
flicker for a bit until the CR comes in after a LF.
In 1976 I would have been happy to find a local data center, but
computing was expensive back then - $1 minute long distance phone,
$1 data center usage. ( Rounded figures ).
This is 1976
... did they have 9600 modems back then that a human could
afford!
This would have been an acceptable speed on a hardwired terminal line into,
for example, a DEC-20. Terminals aren't always connected to modems. Rich Alderson
Vintage Computing Server Engineer
Vulcan, Inc.
505 5th Avenue S, Suite 900
Seattle, WA 98104
mailto:RichA at Vulcan.com
mailto:RichA at LivingComputerMuseum.org
(206) 342-2239
(206) 465-2916 cell
http://www.PDPplanet.org/
http://www.LivingComputerMuseum.org/
7:52 p.m.
New subject: 9600 bps in 1976 [was RE: Omrom programmable terminal]
On Sep 3, 2009, at 1:59 PM, Rich Alderson wrote:
Indeed, far more terminals were (and still are) connected to
computers than to modems.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
> On 2 Sep
2009 at 16:22, tp wrote:
> Tom, there's a product announcement of
the 8030 in the September
> 1976
> IEEE Computer magazine. Says it's 8080 based, with editing features
> (e.g. protected fields) and two display pages. The announcement
> claims a top speed of 9600 bps, however.
This is 1976 ... did they have 9600 modems back
then that a human
could
afford!
This would have been an acceptable speed on a hardwired terminal
line into,
for example, a DEC-20. Terminals aren't always connected to modems.
7:11 p.m.
On 3 Sep 2009 at 11:27, Ben wrote:
This is 1976 ... did they have 9600 modems back then
that a human
could afford!
Sure they did--you leased a 209 from Ma Bell--but that was IIRC,
sync, not async. But no one said anything about modems--more likely,
these things just connected to a mainframe.
Any guesses what the hardware on the floating point
board was?
TTL glue and bipolar PROMs, believe it or not, operating in BCD. Add
time was quoted at 20 uzec and multiply at 100 usec. The most
complex function IC was a 74S181 ALU.
Text based is fine with me.
Here's the PDF download link:
http://csdl2.computer.org/comp/mags/co/1976/09/01647483.pdf
I don't know if the IEEE gateway will block access or not. But the
HTML rendition of the document is nearly unreadable because of OCR
errors.
--Chuck
11:57 p.m.
Ben wrote:
This is 1976 ... did they have 9600 modems back then
that a human could
afford!
Yes, but they only worked on point-to-point leased lines with
significantly greater bandwidth than normal voice-grade PSTN (Public
Switched Telephone Network) lines. Expensive stuff.
AFAIK, the first commercially available modem for voice-grade PSTN to
achieve 9600 bps or more was the Telebit Trailblazer, introduced in
1985. It was half-duplex at approximately 18,000 bps (peak) with a low
bit rate reverse channel. The firmware automatically did line
turnarounds based on buffer depths, so it simulated full duplex but with
relatively high latency.
The Trailblazer used proprietary Packetized Ensemble Protocol (PEP),
which used up to 512 narrow-band carriers. It was a forerunner of OFDM
modulation, which is now used for 802.11a/g/n and many other high
performance data radio applications.
The Trailblazer is a 6 baud modem! :-)
A baud is a symbol per second, NOT a bit per second. A symbol can
encode multiple bits, and in PEP modulation a symbol encodes thousands
of bits. For comparison, a V.32 9600 bps modem actually communicates at
2400 baud, with four bits per symbol (16-point constellation).
Eric
4 Sep
4 Sep
12:39 a.m.
On 3 Sep 2009 at 15:57, Eric Smith wrote:
Yes, but they only worked on point-to-point leased
lines with
significantly greater bandwidth than normal voice-grade PSTN (Public
Switched Telephone Network) lines. Expensive stuff.
I recall that the cost circa 1982 of a 9600 bps synchronous (209
modems) leased line between Santa Clara and Minneapolis was about $5K
per month. (1982 dollars, yet). Of course that included the modem
rental. While the protocol for the 209 was synchronous, I recall
that there was another bit of gear (TDM?) that could take that 9600
bps and give you several channels of async 300, 1200 or 2400 bps.
Time has a funny way of distorting values without one even realizing
that it's happening.. Yesterday I picked up a 20" LCD monitor (NEC
2010) that carried an MSRP of $4995 in 1999. Still works just fine,
but you'd be lucky to get $50 for it today.
--Chuck
1:47 a.m.
On Sep 3, 2009, at 7:39 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote:
Time has a funny way of distorting values without one
even realizing
that it's happening.. Yesterday I picked up a 20" LCD monitor (NEC
2010) that carried an MSRP of $4995 in 1999. Still works just fine,
but you'd be lucky to get $50 for it today.
Thus illustrating the difference between "worthless" and
"useless".
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
2:55 a.m.
On 3 Sep 2009 at 20:47, Dave McGuire wrote:
Thus illustrating the difference between
"worthless" and "useless".
Yeah, but why can't I still get "lifeline" phone service for $3 a
month? If the decreasing cost of technology still applied, it'd cost
me about the price of a pack of chewing gum today.
--Chuck
2:06 a.m.
On Sep 3, 2009, at 6:57 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
AFAIK, the first commercially available modem for
voice-grade PSTN
to achieve 9600 bps or more was the Telebit Trailblazer, introduced
in 1985. It was half-duplex at approximately 18,000 bps (peak)
with a low bit rate reverse channel. The firmware automatically
did line turnarounds based on buffer depths, so it simulated full
duplex but with relatively high latency.
The Trailblazer used proprietary Packetized Ensemble Protocol
(PEP), which used up to 512 narrow-band carriers. It was a
forerunner of OFDM modulation, which is now used for 802.11a/g/n
and many other high performance data radio applications.
The Trailblazer is a 6 baud modem! :-)
A baud is a symbol per second, NOT a bit per second. A symbol can
encode multiple bits, and in PEP modulation a symbol encodes
thousands of bits. For comparison, a V.32 9600 bps modem actually
communicates at 2400 baud, with four bits per symbol (16-point
constellation).
And there's a 68K under the hood!
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
2:10 a.m.
New subject: Omrom programmable terminal -joke
I want a all TUBE modem. :)
Ben.
PS. To go with my all tube computer of course.
PPS. Even a all tube computer has solid state diodes.
2:19 a.m.
New subject: Omrom programmable terminal -joke
You might like a CV-89.
It is essentially an all tube modem.
Obviously, one can argue that the associated RTTY machine performs
coding functions.
Steve
Ben wrote:
I want a all TUBE modem. :)
Ben.
PS. To go with my all tube computer of course.
PPS. Even a all tube computer has solid state diodes.
2:29 a.m.
New subject: Omrom programmable terminal -joke
Ben wrote:
I want a all TUBE modem. :)
Ben.
PS. To go with my all tube computer of course.
PPS. Even a all tube computer has solid state diodes.
They are out there in the form of RTTY FSK devices from the 50's or earlier.
We have a couple at (the) radio museum, I have to keep others from throwing
them out.
4:35 a.m.
New subject: Omrom programmable terminal -joke
I want a all
TUBE modem. :)
Ben.
They are out there in the form of RTTY FSK devices from the 50's or
earlier.
We have a couple at (the) radio museum, I have to keep others from throwing
them out.
3:04 a.m.
New subject: Omrom programmable terminal -joke
On 3 Sep 2009 at 19:10, Ben wrote:
I want a all TUBE modem. :)
Ben.
PS. To go with my all tube computer of course.
PPS. Even a all tube computer has solid state diodes.
Well, I seem to remember that the old Bell Dataphones (e.g. 401E)
didn't have much in the way of active components in them. One using
tubes should be very easy to work out.
Getting it type-approved would be another kettle of fish. Wonder if
you can still get a DAA?
--Chuck
4:44 a.m.
New subject: Omrom programmable terminal -joke
Well, I seem to remember that the old Bell Dataphones
(e.g. 401E)
didn't have much in the way of active components in them. ?One using
tubes should be very easy to work out.
Not hard. The military AN/FGC-5 is pretty straightforward, except for
Teletype's retarded decision to use a magnetically controlled triode.
The rest is textbook dual-triode and mini-thyratron stuff.
--
Will
7:15 p.m.
New subject: DAA (was Re: Omrom programmable terminal -joke)
Chuck Guzis wrote:
Wonder if you can still get a DAA?
Not as a standalone piece of equipment, except for surplus. But you can
still get DAA modules and chips:
http://www.cermetek.com/Catalog/Telephone-Line-Interface/
https://www.silabs.com/products/voice/daa/Pages/default.aspx
Eric
7:23 p.m.
New subject: DAA (was Re: Omrom programmable terminal -joke)
> Wonder if you can still get a DAA?
On Fri, 4 Sep 2009, Eric Smith wrote:
Not as a standalone piece of equipment, except for
surplus. But you can
still get DAA modules and chips:
http://www.cermetek.com/Catalog/Telephone-Line-Interface/
https://www.silabs.com/products/voice/daa/Pages/default.aspx
Unless you are going for some ridiculously high speed, like over 300 bits
per second, that wouldn't work with acoustic coupling, why would you need
a DAA?
8:01 p.m.
New subject: DAA (was Re: Omrom programmable terminal -joke)
On 4 Sep 2009 at 11:23, Fred Cisin wrote:
Unless you are going for some ridiculously high speed,
like over 300
bits per second, that wouldn't work with acoustic coupling, why would
you need a DAA?
How many modern handsets can even fit an acoustic coupler? The one
in my workshop is one, but then it's an old rotary dial wall model.
Even the rotary dial Trimline that I have in the garage won't work
with an acoustic coupler. I think I've got a 2500 series desk set
stashed away somewhere...
--Chuck
9:04 p.m.
New subject: DAA (was Re: Omrom programmable terminal -joke)
Chuck Guzis wrote:
On 4 Sep 2009 at 11:23, Fred Cisin wrote:
http://www.uncrate.com/men/gear/cell-phones/bluetooth-retro-handset/
Doc
Unless you are going for some ridiculously high
speed, like over 300
bits per second, that wouldn't work with acoustic coupling, why would
you need a DAA?
How many modern handsets can even fit an acoustic coupler? The one
in my workshop is one, but then it's an old rotary dial wall model.
Even the rotary dial Trimline that I have in the garage won't work
with an acoustic coupler. I think I've got a 2500 series desk set
stashed away somewhere...
9:34 p.m.
New subject: DAA (was Re: Omrom programmable terminal -joke)
On 4 Sep 2009 at 15:04, Doc Shipley wrote:
Oh now, that's just sick!
--Chuck
10:41 p.m.
New subject: DAA (was Re: Omrom programmable terminal -joke)
At 12:01 PM 9/4/2009 -0700, you wrote:
On 4 Sep 2009 at 11:23, Fred Cisin wrote:
I have to place an order for 2500 sets every 6-8 months. I order about 5 at
a time. Wish I could remember the brand I got last time. Had one die after
15 days- mechanical bell-chime ringer wouldn't work, checked continuity to
the coil, all good, still no ringy-dingy.
I work for a public transit property.
-----
231. [Internet] .sigs are the bumper stickers of the information superhighway.
--... ...-- -.. . -. ----. --.- --.- -...
tpeters at nospam.mixcom.com (remove "nospam") N9QQB (amateur radio)
"HEY YOU" (loud shouting) WEB: http://www.mixweb.com/tpeters
43? 7' 17.2" N by 88? 6' 28.9" W, Elevation 815', Grid Square
EN53wc
WAN/LAN/Telcom Analyst, Tech Writer, MCP, CCNA, Registered Linux User 385531
Unless you are going for some ridiculously high
speed, like over 300
bits per second, that wouldn't work with acoustic coupling, why would
you need a DAA?
How many modern handsets can even fit an acoustic coupler? The one
in my workshop is one, but then it's an old rotary dial wall model.
Even the rotary dial Trimline that I have in the garage won't work
with an acoustic coupler. I think I've got a 2500 series desk set
stashed away somewhere...
10:56 p.m.
New subject: DAA (was Re: Omrom programmable terminal -joke)
Tom Peters wrote:
I have to place an order for 2500 sets every 6-8
months. I order about 5
at a time. Wish I could remember the brand I got last time. Had one die
after 15 days- mechanical bell-chime ringer wouldn't work, checked
continuity to the coil, all good, still no ringy-dingy.
I work for a public transit property.
Laugh In: One Ringy-Dingy ...
5 Sep
5 Sep
12:14 a.m.
New subject: DAA (was Re: Omrom programmable terminal -joke)
On 4 Sep 2009 at 16:41, Tom Peters wrote:
I have to place an order for 2500 sets every 6-8
months. I order about
5 at a time. Wish I could remember the brand I got last time. Had one
die after 15 days- mechanical bell-chime ringer wouldn't work, checked
continuity to the coil, all good, still no ringy-dingy.
Other than the old WE ones, ITT made some decent ones. Wonder where
these new ones are made...
Is your need for 2500 sets because of some peculiar ancient key
system requirement?
--Chuck
1:19 a.m.
New subject: DAA (was Re: Omrom programmable terminal -joke)
At 04:14 PM 9/4/2009 -0700, you wrote:
On 4 Sep 2009 at 16:41, Tom Peters wrote:
No, more an ancient user requirement. We have new and old-- we have Nortel
Meridian option 31 and 61 at our sites, depending on size, which we are
working towards replacing with Asterisk on Linux boxes. We also have an
ancient phone system on the wall at some sites, right next to the (smaller)
Meridian system, that is entirely relay driven. No electronics, just
stepping and rotary relays. It's for the old intercom system out in the bus
lanes in the bus barns. It expects a rotary dial 500 set (what most people
call a 2500 set) and it's for drivers to yack to the front desk,
schedulers, etc. Only knows about 20 extensions. Really noisy to be
standing next to the system box when someone dials up a call. We used to
run all the paging through it too, until it started to get twitchy and we
cooked up something else.
The 2500 sets have touchtone keypads and are used on the station for
drivers to call home and other station, the garage managers, and the
transportation managers. They are on analog ports on the meridian and we
use them because they're harder to destroy than the meridian electronic
sets. And easier to use.
-----
211. [Commentary] "How do you tell a Communist? Well, it's someone who reads
Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who
understands Marx and Lenin." --Ronald Reagan, Arlington, Virginia,
September 25, 1987
--... ...-- -.. . -. ----. --.- --.- -...
tpeters at nospam.mixcom.com (remove "nospam") N9QQB (amateur radio)
"HEY YOU" (loud shouting) WEB: http://www.mixweb.com/tpeters
43? 7' 17.2" N by 88? 6' 28.9" W, Elevation 815', Grid Square
EN53wc
WAN/LAN/Telcom Analyst, Tech Writer, MCP, CCNA, Registered Linux User 385531
I have to place an order for 2500 sets every 6-8
months. I order about
5 at a time. Wish I could remember the brand I got last time. Had one
die after 15 days- mechanical bell-chime ringer wouldn't work, checked
continuity to the coil, all good, still no ringy-dingy.
Other than the old WE ones, ITT made some decent ones. Wonder where
these new ones are made...
Is your need for 2500 sets because of some peculiar ancient key
system requirement?
1:57 a.m.
New subject: DAA (was Re: Omrom programmable terminal -joke)
On 4 Sep 2009 at 19:19, Tom Peters wrote:
We also have an ancient phone system on the wall at
some sites, right
next to the (smaller) Meridian system, that is entirely relay driven.
No electronics, just stepping and rotary relays. It's for the old
intercom system out in the bus lanes in the bus barns. It expects a
rotary dial 500 set (what most people call a 2500 set) and it's for
drivers to yack to the front desk, schedulers, etc. Only knows about
20 extensions. Really noisy to be standing next to the system box when
someone dials up a call. We used to run all the paging through it too,
until it started to get twitchy and we cooked up something else.
Heh, I remember those--during my college years, I did evening shift
on the (ancient) switchboard (shades of Lily Tomlin). Racks of lead-
acid batteries and something that went click-click-click, about twice
a second (selector?).
--Chuck
2:08 a.m.
New subject: DAA (was Re: Omrom programmable terminal -joke)
Chuck Guzis wrote:
Heh, I remember those--during my college years, I did
evening shift
on the (ancient) switchboard (shades of Lily Tomlin). Racks of lead-
acid batteries and something that went click-click-click, about twice
a second (selector?).
Hmm... When I here Cell Phone, I still think of Maxwell Smart
and the SHOE PHONE.
--Chuck
PS. That gag wore out ... They have the Sock Phone. :)
5:32 p.m.
New subject: DAA (was Re: Omrom programmable terminal -joke)
>How many modern handsets can even fit an acoustic
coupler? The one
I am pretty sure I've seen an acoustic coupler consisting of separate
microphone ans speaker units with elastic velcro straps to fix them onto
just about any handset.
[..]
I have to place an order for 2500 sets every 6-8
months. I order about 5 at=
=20
a time. Wish I could remember the brand I got last time. Had one die after=
=20
15 days- mechanical bell-chime ringer wouldn't work, checked continuity to=
=20
the coil, all good, still no ringy-dingy.
Do you mean that the coil was continuous, or that you know all components
in series with the coil were good (e.g. a capacitor)? Was the ringer
mechancially jammed?
I bought an interesting model 746 (common UK telephone) a couple of
months back. It has a neon lamp in the handset which flashes when it
rigns (wired in series with the ringer) so that you can tell which 'phone
is ringing if you have several on a desk. And it has the amplifier and
coupling coil in the earpiece for use with hearing aids. Anyway, I was
told it didn't ring (and that it wasn't supposed to, which is nonsense).
When I took the cover off at home, the dial fell out. Lookig at it, I
noticed a missing fixing screw. I was about to raid my hardware box for a
6BA screw when I noticed the original -- stuck to the magnet of the
ringer and jamming the armature. Put it back in the right place and of
course it rings properly now.
-tony
12:16 a.m.
New subject: DAA (was Re: Omrom programmable terminal -joke)
> Unless you are going for some ridiculously high
speed, like over 300
> bits per second, that wouldn't work with acoustic coupling, why would
> you need a DAA?
On Fri, 4 Sep 2009, Chuck Guzis wrote:
How many modern handsets can even fit an acoustic
coupler? The one
in my workshop is one, but then it's an old rotary dial wall model.
Even the rotary dial Trimline that I have in the garage won't work
with an acoustic coupler. I think I've got a 2500 series desk set
stashed away somewhere...
I have seen acoustic couplers that fit the newer squared-off handsets.
Somebody said that those are a "type K"; is that correct?
And, at Oakland airport [2 years ago], I saw a hotels display that had a
phone as part of it for making reservations. It had a Krown TTY (one of
the cheapest TDDs), that had been manually cut and glued to make its
coupler fit the squared-off handset!
If somebody is putting together a tube (valve) based modem, would it be
likely that somebody with that many tubes might also have a normal
handset?
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
8:10 a.m.
New subject: DAA (was Re: Omrom programmable terminal -joke)
Fred Cisin wrote:
Unless you are going for some ridiculously high speed,
like over 300 bits
per second, that wouldn't work with acoustic coupling, why would you need
a DAA?
You need something to provide galvanic isolation, hook switch control,
ring detection, and transient voltage protection. It's possible to do
all those with your own circuitry using one or more transformers,
capacitors, or optoisolators, or a combination thereof, along with
various linear circuitry. Of course, even if you build it yourself,
it's a DAA. Much easier to buy a module or chips. If you're designing
a high volume cost-sensitive product, the module probably won't be
cost-effective, but the chips probably will.
Eric
4 Sep
4 Sep
4:53 a.m.
New subject: Omrom programmable terminal -joke
PPS. Even a all tube computer has solid state diodes.
It did not have to. There are computer rated 6AL5s. I forget the number.
And if you expand on Roger's (yes, from the Great White North) 6074
(number?) Addatron concept, you do not need any diodes to provide
gating for logic functions. A complete full adder in a nine pin mini
tube, all done with steering the electron beams in a very clever way.
Certainly you could make all sorts of different gates by moving the
elements around.
--
Will
4:20 p.m.
New subject: Omrom programmable terminal -joke
William Donzelli wrote:
Any tubes around I wonder ... make a nice demo machine.
PPS. Even a
all tube computer has solid state diodes.
It did not have to. There are computer rated 6AL5s. I forget the number.
And if you expand on Roger's (yes, from the Great White North) 6074
(number?) Addatron concept, you do not need any diodes to provide
gating for logic functions. A complete full adder in a nine pin mini
tube, all done with steering the electron beams in a very clever way.
Certainly you could make all sorts of different gates by moving the
elements around. --
Will
4:26 p.m.
New subject: Omrom programmable terminal -joke
Any tubes around I wonder ... make a nice demo
machine.
As far as we tube collectors know, Rogers made a bomb - none of us
have actually seen an Addatron, just the data sheet and EIA
registrations. It is likely it was introduced just too late for any of
the computer makers to pick up on.
--
Will
7:11 p.m.
New subject: Omrom programmable terminal -joke
I want a all TUBE modem. :)
I don;t see why that's particularly difficult (or indeed novel). One of
my old modems (A 'Modem 2B' for those who care) uses discrete
transistors, LC filters, and relays for the control circuitry. It usses
the normal CCITT 300 baud tones, and will work with many more modern
modems. It would be pretty easy to make that sort of thing using valves.
Radio amateurs (at least over here) used valved FSK modulators and
demodulators for RTTY work (Radio TeleTYpe). Although they didn't use the
normal tones you'd use on the phone systemm, I claim those are modems. I
am pretty sure some old RSGB Radio Communication Handbooks (and maybe the
RSGB Teleprinter Handbook) contain schematics. Maybe similar ARRL books
do too, I don't have them.
Ben.
PS. To go with my all tube computer of course.
PPS. Even a all tube computer has solid state diodes.
I see no reason why it has to use solid-state diodes.
-tony
7:10 p.m.
New subject: Telebit trailblazer (was Re: Omrom programmable terminal)
I wrote;
AFAIK, the first commercially available modem for
voice-grade PSTN to
achieve 9600 bps or more was the Telebit Trailblazer, introduced in
1985.
Dave McGuire wrote:
And there's a 68K under the hood!
Everyone makes a big deal about that, but all the interesting work was being
done by the TMS32010 DSP. The 68K was just supervising and running
the error control and compression.
The prototype used a 6809 processor for control, and a DSP section using a
TRW multiplier chip, a lot of TTL, and some high-speed memory. I donated
the last remaining prototype board to CHM a few years ago. Paul Baran,
the inventor of packet switching and founder of Telebit, authenticated it.
Eric
7:23 p.m.
New subject: Telebit trailblazer (was Re: Omrom programmable terminal)
On Sep 4, 2009, at 2:10 PM, Eric Smith wrote:
I just think it's neat. :)
AFAIK, the
first commercially available modem for voice-grade
PSTN to
achieve 9600 bps or more was the Telebit
Trailblazer, introduced
in 1985.
Dave McGuire wrote:
And there's a 68K under the hood!
Everyone makes a big deal about that, but all the interesting work
was being
done by the TMS32010 DSP. The 68K was just supervising and running
the error control and compression. The prototype used a 6809 processor for control, and a
DSP section
using a
TRW multiplier chip, a lot of TTL, and some high-speed memory. I
donated
the last remaining prototype board to CHM a few years ago. Paul
Baran,
the inventor of packet switching and founder of Telebit,
authenticated it.
I remember your talking about that some time ago. That's
amazingly cool.
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
3 Sep
3 Sep
8:41 p.m.
But the thing that caught my eye was the HP 548A
"logic clip"--a
device built into a DIP test clip with an LED for each pin. It
featured self-seeking logic and would display the state of all pins
for RTL, TTL, DTL and CMOS logic families. It sounds very cool--and
I have never seen one in the flesh.
I have (both the HP one and clones), but I don't own one. To be honest,
it _looks_ cool, but it's fairly useless. The ones I used had no
pulse-stretching circuitry, the LEDs just displayed the state of each pin
(on for '1', off for '0' and on-but-dim for toggling -- the brightness
depended on the mark/space ratio). It was OK on slow circuity, but that's
easy to debug anyhow. On anything with a reasonable clock frequency, it
didn't tell you much.
HP made a couple of other devices that I don't own and could never see
the point of. One was the 'signature analyser' which will tell you if a
logic signal differes from the correct version (well, provided you have a
'correct version' to also test) but won't tell you _how_ it differs. So
actually finding the fault doesn't seem to be any easier.
The other is the 'logic comparator' which effectively lets you connect a
known-good example of a simple (SSI, MSI) TTL chip to the one under test.
The inputs get the same signals, the outputs of the 2 chips are compared.
Any differences are shown on LEDs. It seems to me to be a very slow way
of findign a fault by just testing each chip, rather than actually
looking for the symptoms and working out what's wrong.
-tony
9:12 p.m.
On 3 Sep 2009 at 20:41, Tony Duell wrote:
I have (both the HP one and clones), but I don't
own one. To be
honest, it _looks_ cool, but it's fairly useless. The ones I used had
no pulse-stretching circuitry, the LEDs just displayed the state of
each pin (on for '1', off for '0' and on-but-dim for toggling -- the
brightness depended on the mark/space ratio). It was OK on slow
circuity, but that's easy to debug anyhow. On anything with a
reasonable clock frequency, it didn't tell you much.
I can see that without pulse stretching or even a "pulse" as opposed
to "steady state" indication that the utility would be marginal.
HP made a couple of other devices that I don't own
and could never see
the point of. One was the 'signature analyser' which will tell you if
a logic signal differes from the correct version (well, provided you
have a 'correct version' to also test) but won't tell you _how_ it
differs. So actually finding the fault doesn't seem to be any easier.
I remember reading about signature analysis in the HP Journal. It
looked like a promising technology--not for the lone self-employed
technician, but for the field engineer who saw the same equipment day
in and day out.
It's a method of automating the diagnostic procedure; in a sense, a
predecessor to modern boundary-scan techniques.
--Chuck
9:18 p.m.
On Sep 3, 2009, at 4:12 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote:
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
I remember reading about signature analysis in the HP
Journal. It
looked like a promising technology--not for the lone self-employed
technician, but for the field engineer who saw the same equipment day
in and day out.
Well, the signatures are found in many of the service manuals..
-Dave
9:25 p.m.
New subject: Signature Analysis (was Re: Omrom programmable terminal)
Dave McGuire wrote:
On Sep 3, 2009, at 4:12 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote:
Atari and Fluke also provided signature analysis on some of their
schematics. The Fluke 9010 microprocessor analyzer had a signature
analysis option.
I remember reading about signature analysis in
the HP Journal. It
looked like a promising technology--not for the lone self-employed
technician, but for the field engineer who saw the same equipment day
in and day out.
Well, the signatures are found in many of the service manuals..
-Dave
8 Sep
8 Sep
10:23 p.m.
New subject: Signature Analysis (was Re: Omrom programmable terminal)
On 9/3/09, Al Kossow <aek at bitsavers.org> wrote:
Atari and Fluke also provided signature analysis on
some of their
schematics. The Fluke 9010 microprocessor analyzer had a signature
analysis option.
We used a Fluke 9010 for initial hardware checkout of COMBOARDs (the
very 9010 that I still have). We never put the time into it to
generate signatures, though. We just checked ROM (checksums), RAM,
and stuck bus bits, the three simplest and most common symptoms of
manufacturing defects for our product. After that, we just hit "Run
UUT" and used firmware-level diagnostics since we were confident that
the boards would run our code at that point.
Did anyone reading this ever generate signatures for a Fluke 9010, or
did most people just use it the way we did?
-ethan
3 Sep
3 Sep
9:28 p.m.
Dave McGuire wrote:
On Sep 3, 2009, at 4:12 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote:
But a catch 22 if the equipment don't work in the first place.
I remember reading about signature analysis in
the HP Journal. It
looked like a promising technology--not for the lone self-employed
technician, but for the field engineer who saw the same equipment day
in and day out.
Well, the signatures are found in many of the service manuals..
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
9:31 p.m.
HP made a
couple of other devices that I don't own and could never see
the point of. One was the 'signature analyser' which will tell you if
a logic signal differes from the correct version (well, provided you
have a 'correct version' to also test) but won't tell you _how_ it
differs. So actually finding the fault doesn't seem to be any easier.
I remember reading about signature analysis in the HP Journal. It
looked like a promising technology--not for the lone self-employed
technician, but for the field engineer who saw the same equipment day
in and day out. 
9:27 p.m.
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org
[mailto:cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org] Namens Tony Duell
Verzonden: donderdag 3 september 2009 21:41
Aan: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Onderwerp: Re: Omrom programmable terminal
I have the signature analyser and the logic comparator.
The signature analyser is usefull if you have a HP equipment with the
according serv. Manual under test.
Fault finding goes rather quick then, the logic comparator is only usefull
with clock frequenties below aprox. 10Mhz above that the cable impedance is
to big.
Using a Fluke 9100A boardtester is much more usefull, because you can test
in cuircit ram, drivers and processor.
I keep the HP stuff for collecting purpose ;-)
And it's nicely build...
-Rik
But the thing that caught my eye was the HP 548A
"logic clip"--a
device built into a DIP test clip with an LED for each pin. It
featured self-seeking logic and would display the state of all pins
for RTL, TTL, DTL and CMOS logic families. It sounds very
cool--and I
have never seen one in the flesh.
I have (both the HP one and clones), but I don't own one. To
be honest, it _looks_ cool, but it's fairly useless. The ones
I used had no pulse-stretching circuitry, the LEDs just
displayed the state of each pin (on for '1', off for '0' and
on-but-dim for toggling -- the brightness depended on the
mark/space ratio). It was OK on slow circuity, but that's
easy to debug anyhow. On anything with a reasonable clock
frequency, it didn't tell you much.
HP made a couple of other devices that I don't own and could
never see the point of. One was the 'signature analyser'
which will tell you if a logic signal differes from the
correct version (well, provided you have a 'correct version'
to also test) but won't tell you _how_ it differs. So
actually finding the fault doesn't seem to be any easier.
The other is the 'logic comparator' which effectively lets
you connect a known-good example of a simple (SSI, MSI) TTL
chip to the one under test.
The inputs get the same signals, the outputs of the 2 chips
are compared.
Any differences are shown on LEDs. It seems to me to be a
very slow way of findign a fault by just testing each chip,
rather than actually looking for the symptoms and working out
what's wrong.
-tony
4 Sep
4 Sep
7:02 p.m.
I have the signature analyser and the logic
comparator.
The signature analyser is usefull if you have a HP equipment with the
according serv. Manual under test.
Sure, the service manuals often give the signatures. So you connect up
the signature analyser (start/stop/clock leads) and stick the probe on a
given point. If the signature agrees with the one in the manual, fine. If
it doesn't, then what? OK, there's a fault, but in a lot of complicated
systesm, particularly if state-machine or microprocessor based, a fault
just about anywherre will corrupt all the signatures, So how do you
determine which device has actually failed?
Fault finding goes rather quick then, the logic
comparator is only usefull
with clock frequenties below aprox. 10Mhz above that the cable impedance is
to big.
Using a Fluke 9100A boardtester is much more usefull, because you can test
in cuircit ram, drivers and processor.
I keep the HP stuff for collecting purpose ;-)
To be honest, if I saw either instrument at a low-ish price (including
shipping!), I'd probably buy it. I like HP stuff :-)
And it's nicely build...
You do not need to tell me that :-)
-tony
8:50 p.m.
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-
bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Tony Duell
Sent: Friday, September 04, 2009 11:03 AM
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: Omrom programmable terminal
Why, if you're an authorized [insert company here] field service engineer, you replace
the entire subunit containing the offending component, of course. <sigh> -- Ian
I have the signature analyser and the logic
comparator.
The signature analyser is usefull if you have a HP equipment with the
according serv. Manual under test.
Sure, the service manuals often give the signatures. So you connect up
the signature analyser (start/stop/clock leads) and stick the probe on
a
given point. If the signature agrees with the one in the manual, fine.
If
it doesn't, then what? OK, there's a fault, but in a lot of complicated
systesm, particularly if state-machine or microprocessor based, a fault
just about anywherre will corrupt all the signatures, So how do you
determine which device has actually failed?
5 Sep
5 Sep
5:20 p.m.
Why, if you're an authorized [insert company here]
field service engineer, =
you replace the entire subunit containing the offending component, of cours=
e. <sigh> -- Ian=20
I thought such people just replaced parts at random until the unit
appeared to work again. Most of them don't seem to bother with a
multimeter, let alone a signature analyser :-(
-tony
8:04 a.m.
Tony Duell wrote:
Sure, the service manuals often give the signatures.
So you connect up
the signature analyser (start/stop/clock leads) and stick the probe on a
given point. If the signature agrees with the one in the manual, fine. If
it doesn't, then what? OK, there's a fault, but in a lot of complicated
systesm, particularly if state-machine or microprocessor based, a fault
just about anywherre will corrupt all the signatures, So how do you
determine which device has actually failed?
If a simple fault really makes all or even most of the signatures wrong,
then the test engineers didn't design the test mode(s) of the product
properly. I haven't observed that problem with HP or Atari products
that have documented signatures.
Eric
5:43 p.m.
If a simple fault really makes all or even most of the
signatures wrong,
then the test engineers didn't design the test mode(s) of the product
My experience is that the systems that are hard to debug are those with
multiple 'feedback loops' -- things like complex state-machine based
control systems. And with those any fault is likely to affect just about
every waveform in the system.
Signature analysis might be useful for simpler systems, but those are not
hard to sort out anyway.
properly. I haven't observed that problem with HP
or Atari products
that have documented signatures.
Perhaps that why few of the HP service manuals I have contain signatures
(I think the only one that does is the one for the 82163 HPIL video
interface). Any whay in at least one case (the HP7245A printer/plotter)
HP provided some extra circuitry on the processor board (a 7474
dual-D-type and bits) to control a signature analyser but didn't put any
signatures in the service manual. I guess the signatures would tell you
if it wasn;'t working correctly but wouldn't help you find the fault.
-tony
9:52 a.m.
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org
[mailto:cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org] Namens Tony Duell
Verzonden: vrijdag 4 september 2009 20:03
Aan: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Onderwerp: Re: Omrom programmable terminal
In most cases the fault finding tree of HP serv. doc. is more then
sufficient.
Remember those were het same engineers who build all those nice machines ;-)
And of cause by observing the behaviour(and error leds/codes) of a machine
you get a reasonable clou where to search for a fault.
I have the signature analyser and the logic
comparator.
The signature analyser is usefull if you have a HP
equipment with the
according serv. Manual under test.
Sure, the service manuals often give the signatures. So you
connect up the signature analyser (start/stop/clock leads)
and stick the probe on a given point. If the signature agrees
with the one in the manual, fine. If it doesn't, then what?
OK, there's a fault, but in a lot of complicated systesm,
particularly if state-machine or microprocessor based, a
fault just about anywherre will corrupt all the signatures,
So how do you determine which device has actually failed? > Fault finding goes rather quick then, the logic
comparator is only
> usefull with clock frequenties below aprox. 10Mhz above that the
> cable impedance is to big.
High of cause ..
Using a Fluke
9100A boardtester is much more usefull,
because you can
test in cuircit ram, drivers and processor.
I keep the HP stuff for collecting purpose ;-)
To be honest, if I saw either instrument at a low-ish price
(including shipping!), I'd probably buy it. I like HP stuff :-)
And it's nicely build...
You do not need to tell me that :-) -tony
-Rik
5:51 p.m.
And of cause by observing the behaviour(and error
leds/codes) of a machine
you get a reasonable clou where to search for a fault.
Self-diagnostics always worry me in that you're using a faulty device to
tell you what's wrong with itself. How do you know the bits needed for
the diagnostics are working correctly?
To be fair well-designed self-diagnostics start by assuming that only a
tiny part of the machine is working (and testing that), and then going to
using more and more features, but never depending on a feature that's not
been previously tested. But an awful lot of self-diagnositcs are not
well-desiogned. I've repaired at least one HP instrument where, if one of
the RAMs had failed in a particular way, it did not give the expected 'RAM
U<n> failed' pattern on the LEDs, but something totally different.
Fortunately I only got a list of the erorr codes _after_ I'd found the
fault by the old-fashioned method.
Some of the HP9000/200 power-on self test error messages are little
weird. I got confused by erorrs relating to the disk controller in 9836,
for example. If I was a board-swapper, I proably would have replaced the
rgith FRU first (namely the FDC board), but the message pointed in
totally the wrong direction for component-level repair.
-tony
4 Sep
4 Sep
12:05 a.m.
New subject: signature analysis (was Re: Omrom programmable terminal)
Tony Duell wrote:
HP made a couple of other devices that I don't own
and could never see
the point of. One was the 'signature analyser' which will tell you if a
logic signal differes from the correct version (well, provided you have a
'correct version' to also test) but won't tell you _how_ it differs. So
actually finding the fault doesn't seem to be any easier.
Of course it makes finding the fault easier. The general approach is
that if the signature at an output signal of a chip is bad, but the
signatures at all of the input signals to that chip are good, then the
chip is almost certainly bad. You find a bad signature, and work your
way upstream.
The purpose is to make it possible for technicians with only basic
electronics knowledge to diagnose a failure, without requiring them to
have intimate knowledge of how the product works. In many cases the
technician can repair the fault, but if not, then it can be escalated to
a more knowledgeable technician or engineer. (Or simply scrapped.)
Obviously signature analysis is going to be of limited or no utility to
someone like yourself.
Eric
3 Sep
3 Sep
8:42 p.m.
I picked up a Omrom programmable terminal. Picked up is the operative
word as the thing weights around 70 pounds!
It appears to work in spite of a disjointed space bar (fixed) and the
model number is 8030.
There is a rotary knob on the back that sets the baudrate (up to a
whopping 4800 baud) and what appears to be 4 rs-232 ports, one parallel
port and a coax port labeled TV ??
My guess is that the last socket is a composite video output (it's unlike
to be modulated RF, but it could be) for feeding an external monitor.
-tony
5368
days inactive
5374
days old
57 comments
17 participants
participants (17)
-
aek＠bitsavers.org -
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
cclist＠sydex.com -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
doc＠vaxen.net -
eric＠brouhaha.com -
ethan.dicks＠gmail.com -
hilpert＠cs.ubc.ca -
hp-fix＠xs4all.nl -
IanK＠vulcan.com -
mcguire＠neurotica.com -
RichA＠vulcan.com -
steve＠radiorobots.com -
tpeters＠mixcom.com -
tponsford＠rnsmte.com -
wdonzelli＠gmail.com