23 May
2006
23 May
'06
6:39 p.m.
Dave R from UWM (Milwaukee) asked me if I knew how to read his old 9-track
tapes. I told him one of the best places to ask was here. So I'm asking.
Al, this is tall Dave I'm talking about.
He doesn't have a drive, working or not, and I have no clues about what
format it is. I'm in the process of asking.
Any ideas?
[Authors] "90% of everything is crap" --T. Sturgeon "111% of crap is
everything" --L. Wall
--... ...-- -.. . -. ----. --.- --.- -...
tpeters at nospam.mixcom.com (remove "nospam") N9QQB (amateur radio)
"HEY YOU" (loud shouting) WEB ADDRESS 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
23 May
23 May
7:07 p.m.
Dave R from UWM (Milwaukee) asked me if I knew how to
read his old
9-track tapes. I told him one of the best places to ask was here. So
I'm asking. Al, this is tall Dave I'm talking about.
He doesn't have a drive, working or not, and I have no clues about
what format it is. I'm in the process of asking.
Any ideas?
A variety of list.people seem to have working 9-track drives.
I've just recently read some of my old Pr1me tapes on mine.
There are a few common formats used with machine emulators; the simh
one is pretty simple. I wrote my own unix C code to read tapes into
that type of file; there are other programs around too.
If he wants to do it himself, SCSI 9-track drives (e.g. DEC TSZ07
units, or Overland hardware) do trade on eBay.
De
7:42 p.m.
Dennis Boone wrote:
If he wants to do it himself, SCSI 9-track drives (e.g.
DEC TSZ07
units, or Overland hardware) do trade on eBay.
If he is looking to buy a drive, there is one on epay now, that I was eyeing
for parts.
8816272606
this is the scsi overland unit, which is pretty gentle with tapes which
may be old,
rather than trying to go a million miles an hour, like the bigger
cipers, etc.
Some others may be willing to take them and read them for him, which might
be better than trying to assemble a tape reading capability just for a
single
set of tapes.
Jim
8 p.m.
Dennis Boone wrote:
If he wants to do it himself, SCSI 9-track drives (e.g. DEC TSZ07
units, or Overland hardware) do trade on eBay.
Having read a few hundred old tapes, I would not recommend the TSZ07.
It's a nice drive, easy to clean, works well with scsi, etc... but it's
not very good with older tapes. Works fine with new tapes. The tape
path puts a lot of tension on the tape over the heads and it will shut
down easily.
I don't have any experience with overland drives.
I recently got a "Sun badged HP 88780". This drive is *much* better. It
seems to be easier on the tapes and much more robust in the face of
problems. I've had very good luck reading old tapes with it. It's easy
to clean and service and the scsi works well.
There's another discussion about tape baking which should be inserted
here but I believe it's in the archives (as long as you search between
11pm - 2pm :-)
-brad
8:36 p.m.
On 5/23/2006 at 8:00 PM Brad Parker wrote:
I don't have any experience with overland drives.
The problem with a lot of old Overland drives is that they're basically
plastic wonders, where many of the heavy-duty units have at least some part
of the chassis that's diecast. Normally, this wouldn't be too awful, but
the plastic used on the Overland seems to age badly and break easily. I've
had two not survive eBay shipping--no external signs of damage on units
packed in styrofoam blocks, but one broken to smithereens and the other
badly damaged (but repairable). Some of the Overlands will talk to a PC
parallel port, however.
If you need SCSI, one of the HP's or Ciphers are pretty good--and many of
the HP's can tackle 800 bpi tapes, in addition to the 1600 and 6250
densitites But in the sub-200 lb. category, if you're willing to go with a
Pertec interface, the Fujitsu open-reel drives are hard to beat for being
nearly indestructible. Sun used them extensively.
I understand that there existed a SCSI interface card for the Fuji M2444,
but I've never seen one, nor heard of anyone actually using one.
Cheers,
Chuck
24 May
24 May
2:04 p.m.
In article <200605231736400505.4E29E27F at 10.0.0.252>,
"Chuck Guzis" <cclist at sydex.com> writes:
[...] Normally, this wouldn't be too awful, but
the plastic used on the Overland seems to age badly and break easily. I've
had two not survive eBay shipping--no external signs of damage on units
packed in styrofoam blocks, but one broken to smithereens and the other
badly damaged (but repairable).
I hate it when people send stuff to me packed in styrofoam blocks.
Those things do *nothing* to dissipate high g-shocks to the box (like
when its tossed off a truck). In this respect I think packing
peanuts do a better job because the forces are diffused across many
small moving items that compress easily, while the styrofoam blocks
are less compressive and tend to transmit the forces directly to the
unit.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ:
<http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/>
Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty
<http://pilgrimage.scene.org>
2:30 p.m.
On 5/24/2006 at 12:04 PM Richard wrote:
I hate it when people send stuff to me packed in
styrofoam blocks.
Those things do *nothing* to dissipate high g-shocks to the box (like
when its tossed off a truck). In this respect I think packing
peanuts do a better job because the forces are diffused across many
small moving items that compress easily, while the styrofoam blocks
are less compressive and tend to transmit the forces directly to the
unit.
OT on the matter of packing:
Just as bad are those self-inflating urethane foam packets. Yes, they can
secure an item from moving around--if properly placed, which rarely
happens. On the other hand, I've used sheets of styrofoam building
insulation to pack delicate objects, firmly encasing them and not allowing
any motion at all. In my experince, damage most often occurs to an item
being shipped when the item can move even a small amount in the container.
Sometimes, adequately bracing and securing the item can eliminate the need
for any filler material (anyone remember excelsior?) at all.
Styrofoam peanuts are okay, as long as they're contained in a bag. I've
got equipment that has peanuts lodged in inaccessible (at least without
complete disassembly) places.
Another disaster are those cornstarch-based peanuts. Fine when dry, but if
they get wet, they turn to a sloppy mess and offer no protection at all.
Cheers,
Chuck
2:59 p.m.
Rumor has it that Chuck Guzis may have mentioned these words:
In my experince, damage most often occurs to an
item
being shipped when the item can move even a small amount in the container.
At least in my experience, you're better off over-packing [[ non-fragile
items at least ]] the peanuts into the package instead of underpacking...
Styrofoam peanuts are okay, as long as they're
contained in a bag.
Or the item being packed is contained in a bag & taped well, so the peanuts
can't get in.
I usually wrap items in bubble-wrap & then "float" said item in peanuts.
Haven't had any problems yet...
Laterz,
Roger "Merch" Merchberger
--
Roger "Merch" Merchberger -- SysAdmin, Iceberg Computers
_??_ zmerch at 30below.com
(?||?) If at first you don't succeed, nuclear warhead
_)(_ disarmament should *not* be your first career choice.
4:12 p.m.
In article <200605241130410812.52012EFF at 10.0.0.252>,
"Chuck Guzis" <cclist at sydex.com> writes:
Just as bad are those self-inflating urethane foam
packets. Yes, they can
secure an item from moving around--if properly placed, which rarely
happens.
Yeah, I don't trust the average ebay dufus with those.
In my experince, damage most often occurs to an item
being shipped when the item can move even a small amount in the container.
While this is true for many things, like most general rules of thumbs
there are exceptions. I was shipped a Heathkit Z89 terminal and it
was securely fastened and didn't move a bit during packing. However,
this just meant that the g-forces were transmitted straight through
to the three plastic mounting posts on the CRT in the enclosure
resulting in them being sheared off due to the g-force shocks. Had
the thing been wrapped in bubble wrap and enclosed in peanuts I doubt
this would have happened because the force wouldn't be spiking
through the enclosure to the heavy CRT tube.
Styrofoam peanuts are okay, as long as they're
contained in a bag.
Or if the item is in a bag.
Another disaster are those cornstarch-based peanuts.
Fine when dry, but if
they get wet, they turn to a sloppy mess and offer no protection at all.
I hadn't thought about that, good point.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ:
<http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/>
Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty
<http://pilgrimage.scene.org>
5:01 p.m.
On Wednesday 24 May 2006 16:12, Richard wrote:
Uhh, if what you're shipping gets wet enough during shipping to turn
cornstarch peanuts into goo, your shipper has other problems... and I'd
say you have just cause for an insurance claim.
[[ I guess it's time for the annual "how to ship things and how to not
ship things" thread... ]]
Pat
--
Purdue University Research Computing --- http://www.rcac.purdue.edu/
The Computer Refuge --- http://computer-refuge.org
In article <200605241130410812.52012EFF at
10.0.0.252>,
Peanuts work great for things that weigh less than about 10-20lbs. Once
you get much heavier than that, the peanuts end up migrating towards
the "top" of the box, than the item you've packed settles towards the
bottom.
Also, picking up the mess from someone shipping something in packing
peanuts is a pain in the ass.
In my experince, damage most often occurs to an
item
being shipped when the item can move even a small amount in the
container.
While this is true for many things, like most general rules of thumbs
there are exceptions. I was shipped a Heathkit Z89 terminal and it
was securely fastened and didn't move a bit during packing. However,
this just meant that the g-forces were transmitted straight through
to the three plastic mounting posts on the CRT in the enclosure
resulting in them being sheared off due to the g-force shocks. Had
the thing been wrapped in bubble wrap and enclosed in peanuts I doubt
this would have happened because the force wouldn't be spiking
through the enclosure to the heavy CRT tube. Another
disaster are those cornstarch-based peanuts. Fine when
dry, but if they get wet, they turn to a sloppy mess and offer no
protection at all.
I hadn't thought about that, good point. 
7:41 p.m.
Patrick Finnegan wrote:
[[ I guess it's time for the annual "how to
ship things and how to not
ship things" thread... ]]
you mean like these don'ts:
1. Don't pack items with spray foam, without first putting
the item being shipped into a plastic bag.
2. Don't expect office tape (scotch tape) to hold a box
together.
3. Sticks, bark, and rocks don't make good packing material.
4. Don't try to eat those corn-starch peanuts. They really
don't taste very good.
or these do's
1. Use double walled boxes for larger/expensive items.
2. Insure expensive items.
3. Expect the package to be dropped from the roof of a building,
and pack it accordingly. The more expensive the item. the
taller the building.
7:35 p.m.
Kevin Handy wrote:
3. Expect the package to be dropped from the roof of a
building,
and pack it accordingly. The more expensive the item. the
taller the building.
I think packages are expected to have a 3 foot drop limit as normal.
PS Watch out for fork-lifts placing nice holes in your package too.
25 May
25 May
1:37 a.m.
On 5/25/06, woodelf <bfranchuk at jetnet.ab.ca> wrote:
Kevin Handy wrote:
I've said this here before, but it's in context - I was told by a
friend who worked at UPS that there's a conveyor belt at the central
UPS depot in Columbus that is 3'-4' off the ground and moves at 30 mph
- stuff falls off every day. He said to pack your stuff as if it were
going to be flung from a moving car - because it might.
-ethan
3. Expect the package to be dropped from the roof
of a building,
and pack it accordingly. The more expensive the item. the
taller the building.
I think packages are expected to have a 3 foot drop limit as normal.
PS Watch out for fork-lifts placing nice holes in your package too.
1:55 a.m.
On 5/25/2006 at 5:37 PM Ethan Dicks wrote:
I've said this here before, but it's in context
- I was told by a
friend who worked at UPS that there's a conveyor belt at the central
UPS depot in Columbus that is 3'-4' off the ground and moves at 30 mph
- stuff falls off every day. He said to pack your stuff as if it were
going to be flung from a moving car - because it might.
...and don't confuse Fedex Ground (the green logo) with the express
service (blue logo). Fedex Ground is nothing more than RPS, and they're no
better at package handling or claims service than UPS. I had them
practically destroy a tuba and then claim it must have been that way when I
shipped it. Fortunately, I shipped it through a packaging outfit, who made
good on the thing.
One of the best ways I've found to ship heavy objects is depot-to-depot
Amtrak Express service. Not every city has freight facilities, but it's
great when you can use them. Insurance to $5K, and your package rides in a
baggage car. Usually about 3 days coast-to-coast and $60 for 75 lbs.
Cheers,
Chuck
5:04 a.m.
New subject: More shipping problems was:Re: Reading old tapes
At 10:55 PM 5/24/06 -0700, you wrote:
On 5/25/2006 at 5:37 PM Ethan Dicks wrote:
I beg to differ. I use FedEx ground almost everyday and I've never seen
them pick up or deliver ANYTHING in a RPS truck. I also frequently drop
packages at the local FedEx office and there are always trucks there but
I've never seen a RPS truck there. Futhermore I recently shipped a DEC disk
to Richard and the package was damaged and FedEx repacked it imporperly so
when Richard got it the shock indicator was showing red. I filed a claim
with FedEx and they paid the claim in about two weeks with no problems or
quibbling what so ever. They even refunded the shipping costs. Try to get
that out of USPS or UPS!
I had them
I've said this here before, but it's in
context - I was told by a
friend who worked at UPS that there's a conveyor belt at the central
UPS depot in Columbus that is 3'-4' off the ground and moves at 30 mph
- stuff falls off every day. He said to pack your stuff as if it were
going to be flung from a moving car - because it might.
...and don't confuse Fedex Ground (the green logo) with the express
service (blue logo). Fedex Ground is nothing more than RPS, and they're no
better at package handling or claims service than UPS. practically destroy a tuba and then claim it must have
been that way when I
shipped it. Fortunately, I shipped it through a packaging outfit, who made
good on the thing.
One of the best ways I've found to ship heavy objects is depot-to-depot
Amtrak Express service. Not every city has freight facilities, but it's
great when you can use them. Insurance to $5K, and your package rides in a
baggage car. Usually about 3 days coast-to-coast and $60 for 75 lbs.
That's an interesting idea. How big/heavy a package will they take? The
warehouse that I use is directly across the street from an Amtrak station
so that might be VERY handy.
Joe
Cheers,
Chuck
11:45 a.m.
New subject: More shipping problems was:Re: Reading old tapes
Joe R. wrote:
At 10:55 PM 5/24/06 -0700, you wrote:
That's an interesting idea. How big/heavy a
package will they take? The
warehouse that I use is directly across the street from an Amtrak station
so that might be VERY handy.
Forget computer's Joe, start collecting trains instead. :)
You may be lucky as you might have a sideing(sp) across the street
to the warehouse.
Joe
11:50 a.m.
New subject: OT Re: More shipping problems was:Re: Reading old tapes
Woodelf wrote...
Forget computer's Joe, start collecting trains
instead. :)
You may be lucky as you might have a sideing(sp) across the street
to the warehouse.
Actually, the Museum of Transportation here in St. Louis is a
100% train
museum. I is REALLY nice and well worth visiting when you're here.
Back on topic - you will find shipping large things MUCH cheaper if you drop
the last leg off each end of the journey - in other words, drop off the item
at the freight terminal instead of them picking it up at your house, and
have the recipient pick up the item at his freight terminal instead of them
delivering it. This saves a VERY large percentage of the shipping price if
you have a shipper that will do terminal to terminal shipping.
I had one package go from $400 shipping to $75 shipping because of this.
Jay
12:32 p.m.
New subject: OT Re: More shipping problems was:Re: Reading old tapes
Jay West wrote:
Back on topic - you will find shipping large things
MUCH cheaper if you
drop the last leg off each end of the journey - in other words, drop off
the item at the freight terminal instead of them picking it up at your
house, and have the recipient pick up the item at his freight terminal
instead of them delivering it. This saves a VERY large percentage of the
shipping price if you have a shipper that will do terminal to terminal
shipping.
I had one package go from $400 shipping to $75 shipping because of this.
And, in my experience, dock-to-dock shippling also cuts the
likelihood of damage by about 90%. Especially with very heavy items.
Doc
12:16 p.m.
New subject: More shipping problems was:Re: Reading old tapes
On 5/25/2006 at 9:04 AM Joe R. wrote:
I beg to differ. I use FedEx ground almost everyday
and I've never seen
them pick up or deliver ANYTHING in a RPS truck.
That's because FedEx bought RPS, and retired the aging fleet. On the
matter of the destroyed tuba (it had to have been dropped from quite a
distance to sustain the damage it did)--they essentially gave me the
run-around for almost a year (while keeping the damaged goods and further
damaging it). When confronted about the delaying tactics, they pleaded
organizational problems (we closed the customer service office in your area
and the records are a mess). Maybe they've improved since that time, but
the only way I got my money back was to file a small-claims action against
the packaging outfit. I don't know if Fedex ever paid the claim.
Now Fedex express service (not the green logo trucks, but the blue logo
trucks) is exemplary. They've always paid off on claims promptly, are
courteous, and appear to handle things carefully. I'm a loyal customer
there. But for bulk packages, I don't see a lot of difference between
Fedex Green and UPS. In my area, I actually get better service from the
UPS personnel.
Cheers,
Chuck
1:11 p.m.
New subject: More shipping problems was:Re: Reading old tapes
Chuck Guzis wrote:
On 5/25/2006 at 9:04 AM Joe R. wrote:
Yup.
FedEx Ground is often a little cheaper than UPS or USPS.
But, I haven't found any of them to be particularly
"exemplary".
I ship a lot of cookies (!). Much more fragile than
most electronic things (e.g., pizzelles break if you LOOK
at them funny!) What I have learned with all of the
carriers is that you REALLY have to pack things well.
And, have to *expect* the package to be manhandled by
800 pound gorillas. If you cringe when you accidentally
drop the package on your way out to the car, then you
*know* you haven't packed it well!
I am trying to find a urethane foam that I can use
to "conformal pack" electronic devices (wrap object
in lightweight plastic then fill the box with
foam and let it expand to fill all voids). But, the
only material I have found tends to get expensive
(many dollars per package) and isn't dense enough
for really heavy items.
I beg to differ. I use FedEx ground almost
everyday and I've never seen
them pick up or deliver ANYTHING in a RPS truck.
That's because FedEx bought RPS, and retired the aging fleet. On the matter of the destroyed tuba (it had to have been
dropped from quite a
distance to sustain the damage it did)--they essentially gave me the
run-around for almost a year (while keeping the damaged goods and further
damaging it). When confronted about the delaying tactics, they pleaded
organizational problems (we closed the customer service office in your area
and the records are a mess). Maybe they've improved since that time, but
the only way I got my money back was to file a small-claims action against
the packaging outfit. I don't know if Fedex ever paid the claim.
Now Fedex express service (not the green logo trucks, but the blue logo
trucks) is exemplary. They've always paid off on claims promptly, are
courteous, and appear to handle things carefully. I'm a loyal customer
there. But for bulk packages, I don't see a lot of difference between
Fedex Green and UPS. In my area, I actually get better service from the
UPS personnel.
1:40 p.m.
New subject: More shipping problems was:Re: Reading old tapes
On Thursday 25 May 2006 05:04 am, Joe R. wrote:
At 10:55 PM 5/24/06 -0700, you wrote:
That's because they've re-painted all of the RPS trucks withthe fedex
paint-job...
We have one of their shipping distribution facilities in the area, in
Lewisberry, York County (PA).
--
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
On 5/25/2006 at 5:37 PM Ethan Dicks wrote:
I beg to differ. I use FedEx ground almost everyday and I've never seen
them pick up or deliver ANYTHING in a RPS truck. I also frequently drop
packages at the local FedEx office and there are always trucks there but
I've never seen a RPS truck there. I've said this here before, but it's in
context - I was told by a
friend who worked at UPS that there's a conveyor belt at the central
UPS depot in Columbus that is 3'-4' off the ground and moves at 30 mph
- stuff falls off every day. He said to pack your stuff as if it were
going to be flung from a moving car - because it might.
...and don't confuse Fedex Ground (the green logo) with the express
service (blue logo). Fedex Ground is nothing more than RPS, and they're
no better at package handling or claims service than UPS. 
5:06 p.m.
Patrick Finnegan wrote:
Experimental evidence in the UK suggests that carriage companies use a
'misleading English phrase book' (with apologies to Monty Python). In
particular, the phrase 'Delicate Scientific Instrument' is translated to
the phrase 'This package is to be used for playing (American) football'
-tony
[[ I guess it's time for the annual "how
to ship things and how to not
ship things" thread... ]]
you mean like these don'ts:
1. Don't pack items with spray foam, without first putting
the item being shipped into a plastic bag.
2. Don't expect office tape (scotch tape) to hold a box
together.
3. Sticks, bark, and rocks don't make good packing material.
4. Don't try to eat those corn-starch peanuts. They really
don't taste very good.
or these do's
1. Use double walled boxes for larger/expensive items.
2. Insure expensive items.
3. Expect the package to be dropped from the roof of a building,
and pack it accordingly. The more expensive the item. the
taller the building.
24 May
24 May
10:25 p.m.
In article <200605241701.13332.pat at computer-refuge.org>,
Patrick Finnegan <pat at computer-refuge.org> writes:
Peanuts work great for things that weigh less than
about 10-20lbs. Once
you get much heavier than that, the peanuts end up migrating towards
the "top" of the box, than the item you've packed settles towards the
bottom.
This hasn't been true for any of the CRTs/terminals I've had shipped
to me and I'm pretty sure they are all heavier than 20 lbs. The
problem with securing everything tight is that you're then conducting
all the shocks straight into the equipment. Some of it can handle it.
Some of it can't. Anything with a plastic enclosure and heavy items
inside it like CRTs is not something I'd trust to having the g-forces
directly conducted to the equipment.
The peanuts shouldn't migrate unless you leave open space in the box.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ:
<http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/>
Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty
<http://pilgrimage.scene.org>
10:44 p.m.
On Wednesday 24 May 2006 22:25, Richard wrote:
In article <200605241701.13332.pat at
computer-refuge.org>,
Patrick Finnegan <pat at computer-refuge.org> writes:
If you have enough weight, you'll end up crushing the peanuts if the box is
ever dropped, which makes free space.
The best way to ship a monitor/CRT is to find a box that was used to ship a
monitor, and re-use it (including the foam).
Pat
--
Purdue University ITAP/RCAC --- http://www.rcac.purdue.edu/
The Computer Refuge --- http://computer-refuge.org
Peanuts work great for things that weigh less
than about 10-20lbs. Once
you get much heavier than that, the peanuts end up migrating towards
the "top" of the box, than the item you've packed settles towards the
bottom.
This hasn't been true for any of the CRTs/terminals I've had shipped
to me and I'm pretty sure they are all heavier than 20 lbs. The
problem with securing everything tight is that you're then conducting
all the shocks straight into the equipment. Some of it can handle it.
Some of it can't. Anything with a plastic enclosure and heavy items
inside it like CRTs is not something I'd trust to having the g-forces
directly conducted to the equipment.
The peanuts shouldn't migrate unless you leave open space in the box.
10:50 p.m.
In article <200605242244.31058.pat at computer-refuge.org>,
Patrick Finnegan <pat at computer-refuge.org> writes:
The best way to ship a monitor/CRT is to find a box
that was used to ship a
monitor, and re-use it (including the foam).
Well, the best way to ship it is clearly in the original packing
material. But honestly, unless the item is NIB, that doesn't happen
even 5% of the time.
I'm fairly certain that the delivery agencies that have brought stuff to
my house don't purposely treat the peanut packed items with care and the
other stuff with disregard. I'm betting that they all received equal
treatment. Stuff packed with block styrofoam always had more voids
and "give" in the items that arrived and some have arrived damaged.
Those that have been sent wrapped in bubblewarap and placed in a box
with all voids packed with at least 3" of peanuts have arrived in
perfect condition.
My assertions about "best" packing methods are based entirely on my
experience with what I've recieved and are not theoretical. My sample
is fairly large, being more than 20 but less than 100 items shipped.
(I haven't bothered to calculate an exact count.) Your experience may
vary and of course no matter what the packing method if the packer is
a dufus that doesn't take any care in packing, then the method of
packing doesn't matter. Weak boxes. Used boxes. Voids in the box.
Little or no padding. Weak taping of seams. etc.
--
"The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline"-- code samples, sample chapter, FAQ:
<http://www.xmission.com/~legalize/book/>
Pilgrimage: Utah's annual demoparty
<http://pilgrimage.scene.org>
11:57 p.m.
New subject: FOG disks.
I had a plea from a site visitor today asking about the source code to
corewars. He referenced a FOG index file that listed COREWARS.C. I've
never seen any of the FOG DOS disks online. Does anyone have FOG DOS
disk #292 or the corewars.c file?
Thanks.
g.
25 May
25 May
12:07 a.m.
New subject: FOG disks.
Try nosing around here:
http://www.retroarchive.org/cpm/cdrom/FOG/
On 5/24/2006 at 8:57 PM Gene Buckle wrote:
I had a plea from a site visitor today asking about the
source code to
corewars. He referenced a FOG index file that listed COREWARS.C. I've
never seen any of the FOG DOS disks online. Does anyone have FOG DOS
disk #292 or the corewars.c file?
Thanks.
g.
12:24 a.m.
New subject: FOG disks.
Chuck Guzis wrote:
Try nosing around here:
http://www.retroarchive.org/cpm/cdrom/FOG/
Well, I think this is the first time anyone has pointed me to my own
website. It's nice to know at least someone besides me still looks at
it. *laughs*
Unfortunately, all I have are the indices, none of the actual content.
BTW, is there any interest in the PC-SIG disks? I know where some of
that collection is hiding.
g.
1:33 p.m.
New subject: FOG disks.
On Thursday 25 May 2006 12:24 am, Gene Buckle wrote:
Chuck Guzis wrote:
:-)
Try nosing around here:
http://www.retroarchive.org/cpm/cdrom/FOG/
Well, I think this is the first time anyone has pointed me to my own
website. It's nice to know at least someone besides me still looks at
it. *laughs* Unfortunately, all I have are the indices, none of the
actual content.
BTW, is there any interest in the PC-SIG disks? I know where some of
that collection is hiding.
Nice thing is, he also pointed _me_ to that site, which I hadn't seen
before. I've gotta see if I can find the time to go into there and do some
digging...
--
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
12:31 a.m.
New subject: FOG disks.
Sorry, that URL that I gave just has the index.
However, if you look here:
http://cd.textfiles.com/carousel/002A/
you'll find COREWARS.ZIP, complete with the Lattice C version of Core Wars.
This looks to be the file that you want.
Cheers,
Chuck
1:01 a.m.
New subject: FOG disks.
Chuck Guzis wrote:
Sorry, that URL that I gave just has the index.
However, if you look here:
http://cd.textfiles.com/carousel/002A/
you'll find COREWARS.ZIP, complete with the Lattice C version of Core Wars.
This looks to be the file that you want.
Bingo! Thanks Chuck!
g.
12:33 a.m.
New subject: BASIC...
In my digging I've come across the Heath/Zenith BASIC-80 manual. Any
interest?
I've also got an original Microsoft GW-BASIC manual which can
be scanned as well.
I've noticed that the Bitsavers archive doesn't have _any_
Heathkit documentation. Why is that?
g.
1:43 a.m.
New subject: Public archiving--was: BASIC...
On 5/24/2006 at 9:33 PM Gene Buckle wrote:
I've noticed that the Bitsavers archive doesn't
have _any_
Heathkit documentation. Why is that?
Given that we're asking "why", I was wondering about the state of things
that clearly weren't public domain or shareware and placing them in a
public archive.
For example, I've got a few CD's from an outfit called i-Mode, called
"Developer Source"--basically a compendium of source code from a whole mess
of computer magazines. I take it that said source is still under copyright
and must be squirreled away until about 2080. Am I right? Will the CD
last that long? Will there still be CD readers in 2080?
How about some of the old subscription disk publications, like Big Blue
Disk? Fair game to publicly archive or not?
That GW-BASIC manual as well as several other publications would still be
under copyright--has Microsoft given its consent to republish old manuals?
Cheers,
Chuck
1:35 p.m.
New subject: Public archiving--was: BASIC...
On Thursday 25 May 2006 01:43 am, Chuck Guzis wrote:
How about some of the old subscription disk
publications, like Big Blue
Disk? Fair game to publicly archive or not?
My recollection of the one or two of those that I've encountered is that the
copyright is on the compliation, but that often much of the contents were
online at the time anyhow, for whatever that's worth...
--
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
8:39 p.m.
New subject: Public archiving--was: BASIC...
For example, I've got a few CD's from an
outfit called i-Mode, called
"Developer Source"--basically a compendium of source code from a whole mess
of computer magazines. I take it that said source is still under copyright
and must be squirreled away until about 2080. Am I right? Will the CD
last that long? Will there still be CD readers in 2080?
How about some of the old subscription disk publications, like Big Blue
Disk? Fair game to publicly archive or not?
That GW-BASIC manual as well as several other publications would still be
under copyright--has Microsoft given its consent to republish old manuals?
If the material is no longer available commercially and the material is
at least 10 years old then I would put it on line. In those rare
circumstances where I know the whereabouts of the rights holder, I will
take the effort to ask permission first. If denied, then the material
never hits the site.
I also hold the policy that if the legitimate rights holder contacts me
and asks for the material to be removed, I'll do so immediately. This
has (if my memory hasn't failed completely) happened only once.
In order to save software & documentation for old platforms, it may be
necessary to take the stance that it's easier to apologize afterwards
than ask permission before hand.
g.
4:45 a.m.
New subject: BASIC...
At 09:33 PM 5/24/06 -0700, you wrote:
In my digging I've come across the Heath/Zenith
BASIC-80 manual. Any
interest?
That should be scanned and posted. A lot of systems besides the Zenith
used BASIC-80. I have a copy (and the manual) for the Intel MDS systems.
Joe
I've also got an original Microsoft GW-BASIC manual which can
be scanned as well.
I've noticed that the Bitsavers archive doesn't have _any_
Heathkit documentation. Why is that?
g.
10:55 a.m.
New subject: Heathkit documentation ( was Re: BASIC...)
I've noticed that the Bitsavers archive
doesn't have
_any_
Heathkit documentation. Why is that?
There are several sites that sell Heathkit docs,
either originals, paper copies, or pdf files. I've
been told that Heathkit has on occasion hassled people
selling copies. Heathkit will sell you their
authorized copies but they're pretty expensive. For
example, I was quoted $45 + $7.50 for the ET-3400
(micro trainer) manual. See their web page for
contact information.
I later got a pdf copy and even better found a working
unit with manual for $20 at a local flea market.
(yes, I'm bragging)
Jim
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
25 May
25 May
12:04 a.m.
New subject: 2nd documentation update...
CP/M 68k: Users guide, system guide, programmer's guide, and C
programmer's guide.
GEMDOS Tech. reference, version 8
Lisp80, muMath/muSimp, muLisp/muStar and Algol 60.
I found my copy of the bios listing for CP/M v2.2.04 for the H89. Is it
available already?
I also have "CLIBRARY v3.2a" for C/80 documentation. Many thanks to Mr.
Stenzel(sp?) for sending those to me.
g.
8:20 a.m.
At 09:44 PM 5/24/2006, Patrick Finnegan wrote:
The best way to ship a monitor/CRT is to find a box
that was used to ship a
monitor, and re-use it (including the foam).
Which is why I like the box-within-a-box method. Support the inner
box with spare foam (so the box doesn't shift, and such that the
foam won't shift) as well as spare peanuts or other material to
give some support to the other spaces.
Double-wall boxes (like from many tube monitors and some PCs)
are great for the outer box, too - but we do realize that our
market for big tube monitor boxes will fade over time, too,
as LCDs dominate.
A good, sturdy box makes all the difference. Kept in dry conditions,
they last a long time. I once had a 20+ year-old Terak shipped to
me in the original boxes. They still looked brand-new and shipped well.
A box gets some of its inner strength from edge-to-edge integrity.
I like to be sure that the flaps meet precisely, then tape them down
well. Lots of good-quality shipping tape, covering every flap seam.
I repeat a mantra I learned when packing up endless boxes of crap
after trade shows: packing tape is cheap insurance.
- John
12:40 p.m.
New subject: Shipping - was: Reading old tapes.
On 5/25/2006 at 7:20 AM John Foust wrote:
Double-wall boxes (like from many tube monitors and
some PCs)
are great for the outer box, too - but we do realize that our
market for big tube monitor boxes will fade over time, too,
as LCDs dominate.
If it's big and heavy and valuable, build a crate with some cheap wood
paneling (hunt the scrap stock at your local home-improvement store) and
strapping material (an air-powered nail gun makes this go fast) using
construction adhesive. Brace the device in the crate so it can't move and
strap it to a pallet and ship depot-to-depot truck freight. If you're
willing to handle the "first and last mile" yourself, it's surprising how
competitive truck freight can be with UPS and Fedex. That pallet will
prevent anything from getting too close to your baby.
A number of friends who frequently ship tubas internationally tell me that
BAX Global offers about the best rates between Europe and the US. I
haven't discovered a similar outfit that offers good service to
Australia/New Zealand, however.
Cheers,
Chuck
23 May
23 May
8:48 p.m.
At 05:39 PM 5/23/2006, Tom Peters wrote:
Dave R from UWM (Milwaukee) asked me if I knew how to
read his old 9-track tapes. I told him one of the best places to ask was here. So I'm
asking. Al, this is tall Dave I'm talking about.
I recently bought an M4 9914, an Overland Data 5622, and an HP 88780
in the hopes that one would work. None do, so far. I've sent three
emails to http://www.comco-inc.com/ in the hope of getting one
of them fixed. Maybe the Overland, because it'll do 800.
However, Comco doesn't seem to like to answer email so I may be
forced to pick up the phone. I go way back with Dave Rasmussen
and am not too far from him.
- John
6635
days inactive
6637
days old
42 comments
21 participants
participants (21)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
brad＠heeltoe.com -
cclist＠sydex.com -
dgy＠DakotaCom.Net -
doc＠mdrconsult.com -
drb＠msu.edu -
ethan.dicks＠gmail.com -
geneb＠simpits.com -
gordon＠gjcp.net -
jfoust＠threedee.com -
jgessling＠yahoo.com -
jwest＠classiccmp.org -
jwstephens＠msm.umr.edu -
kth＠srv.net -
legalize＠xmission.com -
pat＠computer-refuge.org -
rigdonj＠cfl.rr.com -
rtellason＠blazenet.net -
tpeters＠mixcom.com -
zmerch-cctalk＠30below.com