2 Aug
2014
2 Aug
'14
5:08 p.m.
I'm trying to put together a DOS system on which to run the ImageDisk software, as
found here:
http://www.classiccmp.org/dunfield/img/index.htm
The ImageDisk documentation recommends at least a 486-class system for best results,
although it'll run on an original PC:
"ImageDisk requires a DOS based PC with an AT type floppy
controller. Although ImageDisk will run on a 4.77Mhz PC/XT type
machine, some of the analysis functions are real-time intensive
and best results will be obtained with a 486 class machine or
better."
ImageDisk is naturally finicky about its floppy controller, since it uses modes that are
not normally employed for MS-DOS disk formats. After studying the list of controllers
known to work well with ImageDisk, I ended up buying an Adaptec AHA-1522A SCSI controller
on eBay, because it's built-in floppy disk controller happens to be a good one for
this application. It's a 16-bit ISA card.
I thought I already had a computer to plug it in to on my junk pile, but those all turned
out to be much too new, with PCI slots only. Thus, I'm looking for some help looking
for a machine that I can buy for running ImageDisk on. I don't want to waste space
with any old arbitrary no-name clone machine; I'd like to get something that has some
collector appeal all by itself, besides its utility for running ImageDisk with that
AHA-1522A.
The only PCs I'm familiar with that particularly interest me on their merits would be
the original IBM PC and PC-XT. Those seem like they would be under-powered for this
application according to the ImageDisk documentation, though.
I hope that somebody who's more familiar with vintage PCs than I am can help me find a
machine that meets these goals:
* Must have at least one 16-bit ISA slot to accept the AHA-1522A board.
* Must be able to disable any on-board floppy controller so that the AHA-1522A's
floppy controller will not conflict with it.
* Should be "486 class" according to the ImageDisk notes... yeah, I know
that's a bit of a nebulous requirement.
* It would be nice if it has an IDE controller so I can use an IDE to CF adapter in place
of any hard drive.
* It would be nice if I can use an SVGA LCD monitor that I already have with it.
* It would be nice if I can use the Model M keyboard with PS/2 interface that I already
have.
* I really, really, hate orange Compaq displays. :)
* Preferably not too huge.
* Preferably not too expensive, and something I'll be able to find in short order on
eBay or from another collector on this list.
* I'd just run DOS on it, and I wouldn't care at all about things like mice,
sound, etc.
* Not a no-name clone; something that has some unique collector appeal of its own. This
will be hard to satisfy, as I consider the "486 era" to have been an especially
boring era of computing. :)
* It'll be helpful if the case is easy to open, since I'd regularly need to plug
in various disk drives, even including 8" ones.
Do any of y'all have suggestions?
--
Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x at nf6x.net>
http://www.nf6x.net/
2 Aug
2 Aug
5:52 p.m.
On 08/02/2014 02:08 PM, Mark J. Blair wrote:
I thought I already had a computer to plug it in to on
my junk pile,
but those all turned out to be much too new, with PCI slots only.
Thus, I'm looking for some help looking for a machine that I can buy
for running ImageDisk on. I don't want to waste space with any old
arbitrary no-name clone machine; I'd like to get something that has
some collector appeal all by itself, besides its utility for running
ImageDisk with that AHA-1522A.
My advice is to use the motherboard with a built-in controller that
supports 2 floppy drives (some only support a single floppy). Run the
single-density test program. If it passes, you're fine for almost any
common MFM/FM disk format. The only reason for going to a separate ISA
FDC is either non-support of FM or your need to handle 128-byte MFM sectors.
If you're dead-set on using a separate ISA floppy controller, be
careful. Some FDCs are worse than the built-in ones and many later
motherboards with PCI+ISA support and built-in FDCs will not allow
reassignment of IRQ6/DMA2 (e.g. Intel 820 chipsets in my experience).
That being said, a good candidate for support of an ISA FDC as well as
having decent on-board floppy support are the Intel 440BX-era P2/P3
boards. They're still fairly plentiful and won't bog down if you want
to run something like XP, Debian or Win98SE on the same machine.
For example, one of the systems I use routinely is a SuperMicro dual P3
server with a 440GX chipset. It's also got 2 ISA slots, with one
occupied by a Microsolutions Compaticard, allowing for up to 4 drives.
Really, it isn't terribly difficult to set up.
If you want the National DP8473-type controller so that you can write
128-byte MFM sectors (very unocmmon), you can also try DTC, Ultrastor or
Future Domain SCSI controllers, which will do the same thing as an
AHA1522 (same chip). Some of the DTCs have provision for supporting 3
or 4 floppy drives on the same cable.
--Chuck
6 p.m.
On Aug 2, 2014, at 14:52 , Chuck Guzis <cclist at sydex.com> wrote:
My advice is to use the motherboard with a built-in
controller that supports 2 floppy drives (some only support a single floppy). Run the
single-density test program. If it passes, you're fine for almost any common MFM/FM
disk format. The only reason for going to a separate ISA FDC is either non-support of FM
or your need to handle 128-byte MFM sectors.
Will I need 128 byte MFM support for any of the 8" formats I might encounter?
--
Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x at nf6x.net>
http://www.nf6x.net/
6:59 p.m.
On 08/02/2014 03:00 PM, Mark J. Blair wrote:
On Aug 2, 2014, at 14:52 , Chuck Guzis <cclist at sydex.com> wrote:
I remember only 2--one was a Jade controller 48x128.
There is a Superbrain 5.25" format that uses 30x128.
There may be one other, but it's not bubbling to the surface at the moment.
--Chuck
My advice is to use the motherboard with a
built-in controller that supports 2 floppy drives (some only support a single floppy).
Run the single-density test program. If it passes, you're fine for almost any common
MFM/FM disk format. The only reason for going to a separate ISA FDC is either non-support
of FM or your need to handle 128-byte MFM sectors.
Will I need 128 byte MFM support for any of the 8" formats I might encounter?
7:12 p.m.
On Aug 2, 2014, at 15:59 , Chuck Guzis <cclist at sydex.com> wrote:
On 08/02/2014 03:00 PM, Mark J. Blair wrote:
Thank you. Ok, I am not too likely to run into those formats.
I must admit that much of my motivation to put together something that covers all of the
formats supported by ImageDisk is a matter of "well, why not?". :)
--
Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x at nf6x.net>
http://www.nf6x.net/
Will I need 128 byte MFM support for any of the
8" formats I might encounter?
I remember only 2--one was a Jade controller 48x128.
There is a Superbrain 5.25" format that uses 30x128.
There may be one other, but it's not bubbling to the surface at the moment.
8:05 p.m.
Well, now, isn't that special... the seller of this here Vectra that I was looking
at:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/191252681193
doesn't appear to allow potential bidders to ask any questions. Attempting to contact
the seller through eBay produces this message:
"We're sorry we couldn't find an answer for you. Unfortunately, due to the
high volume of messages this seller receives, they are unable to respond to your specific
question right now. We suggest reviewing the item again to see if your answer is in the
seller's listing."
That certainly sounds like somebody who is much too busy to accept my money.
--
Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x at nf6x.net>
http://www.nf6x.net/
8:14 p.m.
On 8/2/2014 6:05 PM, Mark J. Blair wrote:
Well, now, isn't that special... the seller of
this here Vectra that
I was looking at:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/191252681193
doesn't appear to allow potential bidders to ask any questions.
Attempting to contact the seller through eBay produces this message:
"We're sorry we couldn't find an answer for you. Unfortunately, due
to the high volume of messages this seller receives, they are unable
to respond to your specific question right now. We suggest reviewing
the item again to see if your answer is in the seller's listing."
That certainly sounds like somebody who is much too busy to accept my
money.
Is it me or most of the listings on ebay from china.
8:27 p.m.
Only if I'm looking for replacement parts for late(ish) model x86 laptops
for my girlfriend and I. What are you shopping for??
Best,
Sean
On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 8:14 PM, ben <bfranchuk at jetnet.ab.ca> wrote:
On 8/2/2014 6:05 PM, Mark J. Blair wrote:
Well, now, isn't that special... the seller
of this here Vectra that
I was looking at:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/191252681193
doesn't appear to allow potential bidders to ask any questions.
Attempting to contact the seller through eBay produces this message:
"We're sorry we couldn't find an answer for you. Unfortunately, due
to the high volume of messages this seller receives, they are unable
to respond to your specific question right now. We suggest reviewing
the item again to see if your answer is in the seller's listing."
That certainly sounds like somebody who is much too busy to accept my
money.
Is it me or most of the listings on ebay from china.
9:05 p.m.
On 8/2/2014 6:27 PM, Sean Caron wrote:
Only if I'm looking for replacement parts for
late(ish) model x86 laptops
for my girlfriend and I. What are you shopping for??
USB to S/PDIF came to mind here. $39.99 from the FAR YEAST :)
CANADA/USA -- none for sale other than AMAZON.CA
I ordered a one, selecting standard shipping since the last time I got
dinged $49 by fedex. Next morning I got a email -- product was shipped
from Hong-Kong in French and English -- 1 month for
mail to arrive.
This is MODERN shopping???
Best,
Sean
Ben.
8:31 p.m.
On Aug 2, 2014, at 17:14 , ben <bfranchuk at jetnet.ab.ca> wrote:
Is it me or most of the listings on ebay from china.
It's not just you. A lot of them try to hide the fact that they're from China,
too, so they still show up in US only or North America only searches.
--
Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x at nf6x.net>
http://www.nf6x.net/
3 Aug
3 Aug
12:12 a.m.
On Sat, 2 Aug 2014, Mark J. Blair wrote:
On Aug 2, 2014, at 17:14 , ben <bfranchuk at
jetnet.ab.ca> wrote:
I see nonsense like that in job advertisements. I'm looking for a job in
Region A and no matter what parameters I use, I keep getting hits for
Regions X, Y, and Z. For what it's worth, one of the places that does
this has a radio thing for "long name amazing results". Feh!
--
David Griffith
dgriffi at cs.csubak.edu
A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
Is it me or most of the listings on ebay from
china.
It's not just you. A lot of them try to hide the fact that they're from
China, too, so they still show up in US only or North America only
searches.
12:27 a.m.
On 8/2/2014 10:12 PM, David Griffith wrote:
On Sat, 2 Aug 2014, Mark J. Blair wrote:
I see nonsense like that in job advertisements.
I'm looking for a job
in Region A and no matter what parameters I use, I keep getting hits for
Regions X, Y, and Z. For what it's worth, one of the places that does
this has a radio thing for "long name amazing results". Feh!
My last gripe, is Google can not even find a match with ALL the words
for a search.
4:55 p.m.
On Sat, Aug 02, 2014 at 10:27:29PM -0600, ben wrote:
[...]
My last gripe, is Google can not even find a match
with ALL the words for a
search.
You've probably been bitten by Google having changed the syntax to do that a
few years back. It used to be the case that searching for '+word' (without the
quotes) would ensure that word exists in the result but that doesn't now work.
Instead, "word" (*with* the quotes) is what is required.
See https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/136861 for a description of
this and a few (but by no means all) other magic Google search incantations.
5:25 p.m.
On 8/3/2014 2:55 PM, Peter Corlett wrote:
On Sat, Aug 02, 2014 at 10:27:29PM -0600, ben wrote:
[...]
So is "1957" "red" "ford" "truck" a valid
search?
Ben.
My last gripe, is Google can not even find a
match with ALL the words for a
search.
You've probably been bitten by Google having changed the syntax to do that a
few years back. It used to be the case that searching for '+word' (without the
quotes) would ensure that word exists in the result but that doesn't now work.
Instead, "word" (*with* the quotes) is what is required.
See https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/136861 for a description of
this and a few (but by no means all) other magic Google search incantations.
4 Aug
4 Aug
11:38 a.m.
On 08/03/2014 10:39 PM, Fred Cisin wrote:
On Sun, 3 Aug 2014, ben wrote:
What with the slits either side of where the hood emblem should be, I think
that's actually a 1960 (if Google's even coughing up images in the same
order for everyone) third-gen - I don't think any of the '58 or '59 models
had those.
cheers
Jules
So is "1957" "red"
"ford" "truck" a valid search?
apparently.
BUT, in Google "images", the first one looks to me like a 1958!
3 Aug
3 Aug
5:37 p.m.
On 08/03/2014 01:55 PM, Peter Corlett wrote:
See https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/136861
for a description of
this and a few (but by no means all) other magic Google search incantations.
I get a kick out of this particular google search query "google ftp search":
FTP & File Search Engine - Google
www.google.com/cse/home?cx...vjhl_c5g
Google
A description for this result is not available because of this site's
robots.txt ? learn more.
Google evidently doesn't want to be searched.
An interesting google search is "recursion".
--Chuck
11:48 p.m.
On Sun, 3 Aug 2014, Chuck Guzis wrote:
I get a kick out of this particular google search
query "google ftp search":
FTP & File Search Engine - Google
www.google.com/cse/home?cx...vjhl_c5g
Google
A description for this result is not available because of this site's
robots.txt ? learn more.
Google evidently doesn't want to be searched.
I didn't get that
An interesting google search is "recursion".
It is traditional in computer science texts, dor the index entry for
"recursion" to say, "See Recursion"
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
4 Aug
4 Aug
1:48 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
From: "ben" <bfranchuk at jetnet.ab.ca>
To: <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2014 5:27 AM
Subject: Re: Help building a DOS system for ImageDisk
On 8/2/2014 10:12 PM, David Griffith wrote:
I have recently switched to using http://duckduckgo.com
There are alternatives (to fighting...)
Regards,
Andrew B
aliensrcooluk at yahoo.co.uk
On Sat, 2 Aug 2014, Mark J. Blair wrote:
I see nonsense like that in job advertisements.
I'm looking for a job
in Region A and no matter what parameters I use, I keep getting hits for
Regions X, Y, and Z. For what it's worth, one of the places that does
this has a radio thing for "long name amazing results". Feh!
My last gripe, is Google can not even find a match with ALL the words
for a search.
9:03 p.m.
I have recently switched to using
http://duckduckgo.com
I switched to that a while ago and used that for as long as it worked;
then they broke it, returning redirects to https: for all the http:
pages, so I went back to Google because it, at least so far, still
supports HTTP. :-(
Unless you know of some way to coax it into working for HTTP even now,
which I would love go hear about. If you don't need to do any coaxing,
that would be of even more interest.
/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse at rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
5 Aug
5 Aug
7:02 a.m.
On 5 August 2014 03:03, der Mouse <mouse at rodents-montreal.org> wrote:
I switched to that a while ago and used that for as
long as it worked;
then they broke it, returning redirects to https: for all the http:
pages, so I went back to Google because it, at least so far, still
supports HTTP. :-(
Unless you know of some way to coax it into working for HTTP even now,
which I would love go hear about. If you don't need to do any coaxing,
that would be of even more interest.
It's not "broken". DuckDuckGo's main selling points are privacy and
security. Ergo, HTTPS.
Why would you not want HTTPS?
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) ? +420 702 829 053 (?R)
6 Aug
6 Aug
12:07 p.m.
On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 01:02:08PM +0200, Liam Proven wrote:
[...]
It's not "broken". DuckDuckGo's main
selling points are privacy and security.
Ergo, HTTPS.
WFM.
Why would you not want HTTPS?
Come on, this is cctalk. Maybe there isn't a SSL stack for the PDP-11s and
ZX81s people are using here :)
12:35 p.m.
New subject: duckduckgo vs HTTP [was Re: Help building a DOS system for ImageDisk]
(I assume this was in resposne to a response to my response to the
duckduckgo note.)
> It's not "broken".
It's broken as far as I'm concerned: it renders it unusable for me.
> Why would you not want HTTPS?
I neither have nor want HTTPS support; it provides little-to-nothing I
care about - possibly excepting interoperability with things like
duckduckgo that insist on refusing to operate over HTTP, and those few
aren't _nearly_ enough to make me jump through the hoops necessary to
make HTTPS work. (On at least two occasions I've looked at adding
HTTPS support to the lynx I use, and in each case I've gotten some four
or five levels deep in yak shaving before discovering I needed
something ridiculously heavyweight for the purpose, like perl. Someday
I may try to find enough documentation to build my own implementation
which doesn't depend on crap like that, but so far every time I've
looked I've rapidly ended up at pay-to-play "standards", which I of
course consider completely unacceptable - indeed, I think the IETF
should never have let HTTPS in the door until that was fixed.)
TLS is also fundamentally broken, in that what security it provides
depends critically on the CA hierarchy, which is laughably broken.
(Consider the number of non-Microsoft entities which have obtained
certs for microsoft.com - or the wildcard certs used to do things like
HTTPS snooping at national borders, the existence of even one of which
is a fundamental subversion of the trust model.)
/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse at rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
12:44 p.m.
New subject: duckduckgo vs HTTP [was Re: Help building a DOS system for ImageDisk]
On Aug 6, 2014, at 12:35 PM, der Mouse <mouse at rodents-montreal.org> wrote:
...
Interesting point. It would be a worthwhile exercise to extend TLS to work with the PGP
web of trust. That should be straightforward; an existence proof is the fact that IPSec
already has that capability (on paper, at least).
paul
> Why would you not want HTTPS?
...
TLS is also fundamentally broken, in that what security it provides
depends critically on the CA hierarchy, which is laughably broken.
1:53 p.m.
New subject: duckduckgo vs HTTP [was Re: Help building a DOS system for ImageDisk]
On 08/06/2014 09:35 AM, der Mouse wrote:
(I assume this was in resposne to a response to my
response to the
duckduckgo note.)
I have three different browsers installed, each with a different search
as default. DuckDuckGo compared with Google generally results in
smaller sets of returns. I don't know why, since I thought that DDG
uses Google.
Lycos/Hotbot is now owned by an Indian outfit, but I don't know where
they get their search database. Webcrawler is Google/Yahoo-based;
Altavista is Yahoo. I don't know if there's any real advantage to use a
multi-service search service such as Dogpile.
But heck, I've even been guilty of using Baidu and Yandex in really
challenging searches.
Other than NAPALM, does anyone know of a really good ftp search site?
--Chuck
2:07 p.m.
New subject: duckduckgo vs HTTP [was Re: Help building a DOS system for ImageDisk]
On 8/6/14 10:53 AM, Chuck Guzis wrote:
Other than NAPALM, does anyone know of a really good
ftp search site?
have you tried http://www.filewatcher.com/
6:05 p.m.
New subject: duckduckgo vs HTTP [was Re: Help building a DOS system for ImageDisk]
On 08/06/2014 11:07 AM, Al Kossow wrote:
On 8/6/14 10:53 AM, Chuck Guzis wrote:
Yes--even fewer results than NAPALM. Oh well...
--Chuck
Other than NAPALM, does anyone know of a really
good ftp search site?
have you tried http://www.filewatcher.com/ 
4:45 p.m.
New subject: duckduckgo vs HTTP [was Re: Help building a DOS system for ImageDisk]
On 08/06/2014 12:53 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote:
On 08/06/2014 09:35 AM, der Mouse wrote:
I usually find everything I need using DuckDuckGo. On
the rare occasion
I then go to Google.
I noticed that Firefox 31 for mint has a drop down for Startpage.
Anybody know anything about it?
(I assume this was in resposne to a response to
my response to the
duckduckgo note.)
I have three different browsers installed, each with a different
search as default. DuckDuckGo compared with Google generally results
in smaller sets of returns.
--Chuck
Tom
7 Aug
7 Aug
7:34 a.m.
New subject: duckduckgo vs HTTP [was Re: Help building a DOS system for ImageDisk]
On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 12:35:42PM -0400, der Mouse wrote:
[...] (On at least two occasions I've looked at
adding
HTTPS support to the lynx I use, and in each case I've gotten some four
or five levels deep in yak shaving before discovering I needed
something ridiculously heavyweight for the purpose, like perl.
Debian's lynx(1) supports SSL out of the box:
abuse at mooli:~$ lynx -dump http://duckduckgo.com
#[1]DuckDuckGo (Lite)
DuckDuckGo
________________________________________ Quack
References
1. https://duckduckgo.com/opensearch_lite.xml
abuse at mooli:~$ lynx -version
Lynx Version 2.8.8dev.12 (22 Feb 2012)
libwww-FM 2.14, SSL-MM 1.4.1, GNUTLS 2.12.18, ncurses 5.9.20110404(wide)
Built on linux-gnu Mar 25 2012 22:14:49
Copyrights held by the Lynx Developers Group,
the University of Kansas, CERN, and other contributors.
Distributed under the GNU General Public License (Version 2).
See http://lynx.isc.org/ and the online help for more information.
Someday I may try to find enough documentation to
build my own implementation
which doesn't depend on crap like that, but so far every time I've looked
I've rapidly ended up at pay-to-play "standards", which I of course
consider
completely unacceptable - indeed, I think the IETF should never have let
HTTPS in the door until that was fixed.)
If you're looking to implement the actual crypto, you're doing it wrong. It's
a
fairly major endeavour and very easy to make critical mistakes that ruin the
crypto. Fortunately, experts have alrady done the work and packaged it into
libraries for you to use. You will observe that lynx uses the GNUTLS library.
Anyway, AFAICS, all of the sailient details are right there in the RFCs or
other public domain sources for anybody who still wants to go ahead and write
their own implementation.
TLS is also fundamentally broken, in that what
security it provides depends
critically on the CA hierarchy, which is laughably broken. (Consider the
number of non-Microsoft entities which have obtained certs for microsoft.com
- or the wildcard certs used to do things like HTTPS snooping at national
borders, the existence of even one of which is a fundamental subversion of
the trust model.)
TLS is certainly trivially vulnerable to MITM by anybody who can get a
certificate issued by a CA your browser trusts, but that's still a relatively
high bar. It protects against passive network sniffing, which is the most
common threat, especially now Wifi is so heavily-used.
There is the "Certificate Patrol" for Firefox that flags up strange changes of
certificate that might be indicative of a MITM attack. I've yet to see anything
but false positives, although this would likely be different if I was living in
a repressive regime that actually understood technology.
9:35 a.m.
New subject: duckduckgo vs HTTP [was Re: Help building a DOS system for ImageDisk]
Debian's lynx(1) supports SSL out of the box:
How fortunate, then, that I am not using Debian. (Though I have many
other reasons.)
Someday I may
try to find enough documentation to build my own
implementation which doesn't depend on crap like that, but so far
every time I've looked I've rapidly ended up at pay-to-play
"standards", which I of course consider completely unacceptable -
indeed, I think the IETF should never have let HTTPS in the door
until that was fixed.)
If you're looking to implement the actual crypto,
you're doing it
wrong. It's a fairly major endeavour and very easy to make critical
mistakes that ruin the crypto. Anyway, AFAICS, all of the sailient details are right
there in the
RFCs or other public domain sources
Most RFCs are not public domain.
for anybody who still wants to go ahead and write
their own
implementation.
I'll have to have another look sometime, then. Fuzzy memory says it
depended on X.something or some such from the ISO.
[TLS] protects against passive network sniffing, which
is the most
common threat, especially now Wifi is so heavily-used.
I don't care about passive network sniffing. Once packets leave my
border I consider them exposed to the world anyway.
/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse at rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
9:44 a.m.
New subject: duckduckgo vs HTTP [was Re: Help building a DOS system for ImageDisk]
On 6 August 2014 18:35, der Mouse <mouse at rodents-montreal.org> wrote:
OIC. The Duell defence, as I think of it -- "I don't want it,
therefore it is a useless waste of bytes, no matter if the rest of the
world runs on it."
This being so, rationality is discarded and it is purely a matter of
personal preference. And as we all know, /de gustibus non est
disputandum/, or perhaps /chacun ? son go?t/.
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) ? +420 702 829 053 (?R)
(I assume this was in resposne to a response to my
response to the
duckduckgo note.)
So your email threading is also broken. Right.
> It's
not "broken".
It's broken as far as I'm concerned: it renders it unusable for me.
> Why would you not want HTTPS?
I neither have nor want HTTPS support; it provides little-to-nothing I
care about
4 Aug
4 Aug
2:01 a.m.
On 08/02/2014 05:05 PM, Mark J. Blair wrote:
Well, now, isn't that special... the seller of
this here Vectra that
I was looking at:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/191252681193
I'm having difficulty following this discussion. I've mentioned that
expanding to later P2/P3 systems will work just fine--there's no need to
limit yourself to a 5160 or 5170 type of system. Eventually, you'll run
into something that needs more.
If it's lotsa ISA slots that's important, pick up an industrial
PC/passive backplane system. 13-slot backplanes are not usual there.
--Chuck
2:26 a.m.
On Aug 3, 2014, at 23:01 , Chuck Guzis <cclist at sydex.com> wrote:
If it's lotsa ISA slots that's important, pick
up an industrial PC/passive backplane system. 13-slot backplanes are not usual there.
Lotsa slots isn't important at all for my application. One should be enough. :)
--
Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x at nf6x.net>
http://www.nf6x.net/
10:39 a.m.
On Aug 3, 2014, at 23:01 , Chuck Guzis <cclist at sydex.com> wrote:
I'm having difficulty following this discussion.
It has wandered pretty far from what I originally asked.
--
Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x at nf6x.net>
http://www.nf6x.net/
8:45 a.m.
On Aug 2, 2014 5:13 PM, "Mark J. Blair" <nf6x at nf6x.net> wrote:
Oh, the seller vintagecomputermuseum. Don't most people on the list filter
them out of their eBay searches? If you're considering buying anything from
them you have too much money too spend on your hobby. I wouldn't buy even a
reasonable priced item from them (not that they have any) just on principle.
Well, now, isn't that special... the seller of this here Vectra that I
was
looking at:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/191252681193
doesn't appear to allow potential bidders to ask any questions.
Attempting to
contact the seller through eBay produces this message:
10:43 a.m.
On Aug 4, 2014, at 05:45 , Glen Slick <glen.slick at gmail.com> wrote:
Oh, the seller vintagecomputermuseum. Don't most
people on the list filter
them out of their eBay searches?
One of the user interface features that I really wish eBay had is a global blocked-seller
list that applies to all searches. I suppose they can't afford the disk space for the
list I'd make, though. :)
--
Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x at nf6x.net>
http://www.nf6x.net/
11:17 a.m.
On 8/4/2014 8:43 AM, Mark J. Blair wrote:
On Aug 4, 2014, at 05:45 , Glen Slick <glen.slick at gmail.com> wrote:
Like ebay.com ?
I don't like the phone,tablet or CD of the HOUR, pushed on me
Since I need something NOW , Just use BUY IT NOW and that cuts
out 75% of the listings,
Ben,
PS: tried ebay again -- the search still sucks!
PPS: Looking for a pair of quad 57 speakers.
Oh, the seller vintagecomputermuseum. Don't
most people on the list
filter them out of their eBay searches?
One of the user interface features that I really wish eBay had is a
global blocked-seller list that applies to all searches. I suppose
they can't afford the disk space for the list I'd make, though. :)
11:28 a.m.
On Aug 4, 2014, at 08:17 , ben <bfranchuk at jetnet.ab.ca> wrote:
PS: tried ebay again -- the search still sucks!
This isn't much of a compliment, but their search is still much better than
Amazon's. :(
--
Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x at nf6x.net>
http://www.nf6x.net/
2 Aug
2 Aug
6:06 p.m.
On Aug 2, 2014, at 14:52 , Chuck Guzis <cclist at sydex.com> wrote:
If you want the National DP8473-type controller so
that you can write 128-byte MFM sectors (very unocmmon), you can also try DTC, Ultrastor
or Future Domain SCSI controllers, which will do the same thing as an AHA1522 (same chip).
Some of the DTCs have provision for supporting 3 or 4 floppy drives on the same cable.
I've already bought an AHA-1522A for this purpose, so barring any fatal issues with
it, that's what I'll use.
By the way, for anybody who uses KryoFlux with Kierf's Disk-Utilities software, there
have been some very interesting commits in the last few days... ;)
--
Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x at nf6x.net>
http://www.nf6x.net/
3 Aug
3 Aug
12:40 a.m.
On Aug 2, 2014, at 2:08 PM, Mark J. Blair <nf6x at nf6x.net> wrote:
The only PCs I'm familiar with that particularly
interest me on their merits would be the original IBM PC and PC-XT. Those seem like they
would be under-powered for this application according to the ImageDisk documentation,
though.
You could always install one of the 386 Intel Inboard cards.
--
Follow me on twitter: @FozzTexx
Check out my blog: http://insentricity.com
12:51 a.m.
On Aug 2, 2014, at 21:40 , Chris Osborn <fozztexx at fozztexx.com> wrote:
You could always install one of the 386 Intel Inboard
cards.
That's an interesting idea. I'll look into that some more. I don't really like
the looks of the PC AT... it looks like an boxy behemoth to me, compared to the PC and PC
XT. However, I don't know yet whether that AHA-1525A will work on the 8-bit bus of the
PC or XT, since it's a 16 bit card. If it'll work in a PC or XT with an Inboard
card, that might be a neat option. Not a cheap one at the prices I've seen 5150/5160
systems selling for lately, though!
Thanks for the suggestion!
--
Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x at nf6x.net>
http://www.nf6x.net/
4:12 p.m.
That's an interesting idea. I'll look into that some more. I don't
really like the looks of the PC AT... it looks like an boxy behemoth to
me, compared to the PC and PC XT. However, I don't know yet whether that
AHA-1525A will work on the 8-bit bus of the PC or XT, since it's a 16
bit card. If it'll work in a PC or XT with an Inboard card, that might
be a neat option. Not a cheap one at the prices I've seen 5150/5160
systems selling for lately, though!
What a bout an IBM 5162 (XT-286)? It's essentially the AT motherboard
circuit re-packed onto an XT-size motherboard (the main difference being
that it accepts 640K on the motehrboard -- 2 256K SIMMs and 128K in 4 off
64K*4 DRAMs and 2 off 64K*1 dRAMs (for parity). It has the smae mix of 8
bit and 16 bits slots as the 5170, but unlike that machine, you can't add
the extra conenctors to ttrun 8 bit slots into 16 bit oens, the space is
not there.
The downside is that thit fits in an normal PC/XT case, and thus won't
take the taller cards that will fit in a 5170.
The other problem, I guess, is finding one...
-tony
5:22 p.m.
On Aug 3, 2014, at 13:12 , Tony Duell <ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk> wrote:
What a bout an IBM 5162 (XT-286)? It's essentially
the AT motherboard
circuit re-packed onto an XT-size motherboard (the main difference being
that it accepts 640K on the motehrboard -- 2 256K SIMMs and 128K in 4 off
64K*4 DRAMs and 2 off 64K*1 dRAMs (for parity). It has the smae mix of 8
bit and 16 bits slots as the 5170, but unlike that machine, you can't add
the extra conenctors to ttrun 8 bit slots into 16 bit oens, the space is
not there.
Hmm, that would be interesting. I presume that it also had its floppy controller on a
plug-in card, and thus it's trivial to replace the original controller with a
different one?
The downside is that thit fits in an normal PC/XT
case, and thus won't
take the taller cards that will fit in a 5170.
Taller in height, or longer in length? The AHA-1522A is a half-length card, and I
don't know how its height compares to PC/XT cases. Here's a random internet
picture of the card:
http://www.zdtronic.com/images/AHA-1522A.jpg
Does that look like it would fit in an XT case?
The other problem, I guess, is finding one...
Right, the same problem as the Intel Inboard card mentioned previously.
--
Mark J. Blair, NF6X <nf6x at nf6x.net>
http://www.nf6x.net/
6 p.m.
For my imaging system I'm using an Abit KV8PRO motherboard, with an
Athlon CPU, onboard 10/100/1000 ethernet, 1 AGP 8X/4X slot, 5 PCI slots,
SATA and IDE drive support, and 4 USB ports. The onboard floppy
controller will handle all formats except 128 byte/sector MFM. I haven't
run across anything yet that uses that format. I also have a Catweasel
MK4+ for things that Dave Dunfields's IMD or the native floppy controller
won't handle. I have the motherboard installed in a full size tower case,
with lots of places to mount drives.
There's a list of IMD "compatible" motherboards and chipsets on
Dave's
site, but it's not completely accurate. For example, I had been using an
Abit KT7A motherboard (on the list) for some time, until I discovered it
wouldn't handle single-density (250Kbps FM).
Depending on which tools I need to use, I can run Linux, Windows XP or
FreeDOS on this system. I've archived over 200 8" diskettes on this
setup. On one batch of 100 8" diskettes, I only had problems reading 2
diskettes. Not bad for 30-year old media. However, I've found that Tandy
branded media for the Model II/16/6000 machines is absolutely awful.
They shed like a long-haired cat. :-)
Mike Loewen mloewen at cpumagic.scol.pa.us
Old Technology http://q7.neurotica.com/Oldtech/
4 Aug
4 Aug
9:54 a.m.
On Aug 3, 2014, at 3:00 PM, Mike Loewen <mloewen at cpumagic.scol.pa.us> wrote:
There's a list of IMD "compatible"
motherboards and chipsets on Dave's site, but it's not completely accurate. For
example, I had been using an Abit KT7A motherboard (on the list) for some time, until I
discovered it wouldn't handle single-density (250Kbps FM).
I'm using a KT7A-RAID and I've been using it to read & write single-density
TRS-80 model 1 disks without any issues. I've also had to resort to using teledisk to
image 3.5" floppies from the HP150 because ImageDisk absolutely refuses to read
them.
--
Follow me on twitter: @FozzTexx
Check out my blog: http://insentricity.com
10:15 a.m.
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014, Chris Osborn wrote:
On Aug 3, 2014, at 3:00 PM, Mike Loewen <mloewen at cpumagic.scol.pa.us> wrote:
In that case, there must be more than one version of the KT7A-RAID
(that's the one I used). Mine definitely would not do single-density.
Mike Loewen mloewen at cpumagic.scol.pa.us
Old Technology http://q7.neurotica.com/Oldtech/
There's a list of IMD "compatible"
motherboards and chipsets on Dave's site, but it's not completely accurate. For
example, I had been using an Abit KT7A motherboard (on the list) for some time, until I
discovered it wouldn't handle single-density (250Kbps FM).
I'm using a KT7A-RAID and I've been using it to read & write
single-density TRS-80 model 1 disks without any issues. I've also had to
resort to using teledisk to image 3.5" floppies from the HP150 because
ImageDisk absolutely refuses to read them.
5:35 p.m.
[IBM 5162 XT-286]
Height. That is distanec from motherboard to top of case. The XT cas uis
not as tall as the AT case.
AFAIK there is no problem with length (distance from connector bracket to
front cf case). The origianl video cards (MDA and CGA) fill the XT and AT
cases, so I guess said cases are the same length
-tony
Hmm, that would be interesting. I presume that it also
had its floppy
controller on a plug-in card, and thus it's trivial to replace the
original controller with a different one?
Origianlly it had a Western Digital floppy/ST42 hard disk controller
card. Not the orgiianl PC/AT one, which won't fit in the case, but the
later one. Of course you can replace that with <whatever>
The downside is that thit fits in an normal PC/XT
case, and thus won't
take the taller cards that will fit in a 5170.
Taller in height, or longer in length? The AHA-1522A is a half-length
3 Aug
3 Aug
9:15 p.m.
On 08/02/2014 04:08 PM, Mark J. Blair wrote:
Do any of y'all have suggestions?
As an alternative to what you've suggested, I've had some success with
local Facebook groups (vile though the UI is for such things) when it comes
to acquiring old PC hardware - generally the inhabitants of such groups
consider a "vintage computer" to be a P3-based machine running Windows XP
(i.e. not the 8-bit monsters or Unix systems that I'm more interested in),
but I have acquired a few freebie ISA-era PC bits and pieces that way.
I can understand you not wanting to spend money on something unless it's
[vaguely] interesting, but if the cost is $0 then maybe it's a worthwhile
route (unless space really is at a premium).
Craigslist might be another option; I've never tried (but really should)
If you really do want to spend money on a "brand", though, then I'd suggest
going with a Compaq - either a '386 or '486. They seem to be good,
reliable, solid machines, and I expect in decades to come they'll still be
remembered, unlike the cheaper junk that saturated the market back then.
cheers
Jules
3637
days inactive
3642
days old
48 comments
18 participants
participants (18)
-
abuse＠cabal.org.uk -
aek＠bitsavers.org -
aliensrcooluk＠yahoo.co.uk -
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
cclist＠sydex.com -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
dgriffi＠cs.csubak.edu -
fozztexx＠fozztexx.com -
glen.slick＠gmail.com -
jules.richardson99＠gmail.com -
lproven＠gmail.com -
mloewen＠cpumagic.scol.pa.us -
mouse＠Rodents-Montreal.ORG -
nf6x＠nf6x.net -
paulkoning＠comcast.net -
scaron＠umich.edu -
thomas.w.cranston＠gmail.com