12 Nov
2005
12 Nov
'05
7:48 p.m.
Subject: Re: FPGA VAX update, now DIY TTL computers
From: Scott Stevens <chenmel at earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 19:27:33 -0500
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at
classiccmp.org>
On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 17:16:54 -0500
Allison <ajp166 at bellatlantic.net> wrote:
XT and XT clone motherboards are becoming increasingly rare. 286 and 386 motherboards are
falling into that class rapidly. 486 motherboards are still around but gradually becoming
rare, too.
What I have lying around in big annoying quantities at this point in time is all Pentium
and Pentium II motherboards. And actually, most of them are 'lying around'
because they've become defective and due to the finer pitch and custom-chip
construction are unservicible. All the XT hardware I still have is either working or
easily repairable.
Full AT hardware, i.e. motherboards before the 'Baby AT' generation, is close to
being 'key' as far as scarcity. The hardware of that era was a magnitude of scale
more expensive than the huge fleet 'Baby AT' that came after it. And much of it
was built like a Sherman Tank, as compared to the disposable humvee quality of the Baby AT
era hardware. Early and slow (less than 16 MHz) full AT '386 motherboards are quite
rare now. (aside- yes, in the eyes of the military the Humvee, like the Jeep before it,
is a cheap throwaway transport)
And oddly, at this point in time, people like me find ourselves with far more middle-era
Sun Microsystems hardware than we can use. Those nice little lunchbox Sparcs and Pizza
Box systems are plentiful and you can cart them off in whatever quantity they are
available at surplus gear auctions. They used to be the star item at said auctions.
There are historical books now that show all the wonderful architecture that has been
destroyed, i.e. the 'Lost Twin Cities' book and video series highlights some
marvelous buildings that were demolished in the name of 'progress.' Time rolls
on, and what's missed sorely 20 years after is always whatever was knocked down. This
also remains the case with old computer gear. Nobody imagined ten years ago that anybody
would have any use for a 8 MHz full-AT 80386 motherboard, so nobody kept any.
Ummm. Same as it ever was.
Save for the INboard386 (38616 for AT processor replacement) and the SIIG3000
bick thats a real 5mb, IDE disk and floppy 386/16 powered system I keep as
it's plain handy! It not only does VGA but RS170 video. I do have a small
footprint 386/25 (or 8mhz with turbo jumper off) board I keep as its plain
cute and works too.
Nope nobody kept them. ;)
Allison
Subject: Re: FPGA VAX update, now DIY TTL computers
From: ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk (Tony Duell)
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 21:33:43 +0000 (GMT)
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
There are tons of mostly unidentifyable boards with usable parts or we
know what they are and maybe they even work but heck there's a stack
of 100 in the corner with good parts for salvage.
Examples of salvage to me XT clones that were never rare, 386 and 486
boards with salvageable parts. A sharp TV with a dead red drive from
a doitall chip is junk for stripping. Non-salvage items, things I
keep and fix like my uVAX ADVICE as it's an in circuit emulator for
the uVAX chip so it both maybe the last in existance and unusual.
There is junk and not. The junk is there to make the not junk work.
One can have too much junk, rarely!
On 11/11/2005 at 11:12 PM woodelf wrote:
>PS. As for getting 7400 off scrap boards, if I had the scrap boards I
>would most likely try to get the scrap item working again. :D
Me too. I've got piles of obscure boards that I'd like to get going again
sometime. Most have no real practical function, but are part of the
history of computing/electronics.
About the only thing I'll raid for parts are no-name clone PC
motherboards and cards.. And those are not a good source of standard TTL,
alas.
There are plenty of junk boards that have no particular useful function.
I've got a bunch of ISA cards that I salvaged. All were old models of a
gizmo that appeared to a PC as a monochrome adapter, but which translated
the CPU writes to video memory to serial codes to a VT-220 type terminal.
Now that sounds unusual enough to be very interesting. Put it this way,
if I had something like that I'd be trying to track down a dump of that
missing ROM. I would not be raiding it for parts.
-tony 
12 Nov
12 Nov
8:34 p.m.
On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 19:48:13 -0500
Allison <ajp166 at bellatlantic.net> wrote:
One of the virtues of some of the 'full AT' motherboards was that they didn't
use custom VLSI chips. I mean boards like the IBM PC-AT and it's clones. It was all
done using standard TTL and the regular Intel family 8xxx LSI chips. I am not sure if
there were any 80386 motherboards made with this similar construction, but if there were,
these are the boards I refer to, that have largely disappeared, and are 'classic,
servicible forever' hardware, the kind the Tony likes.
Hmm, I just pulled off the shelf my copy of the 'Compaq Deskpro 386 Technical
Reference Manual' and the schematic shows that it indeed used the 'classic'
LSI architecture. It has two 8259's, an 8254, two 8237's. All standard stuff
except for a few small PALs.
Is this particular tech ref manual very common? It gives complete schematics for a
'386 class machine. I remember latching onto it back in the day specifically because
of that.
I should really try to track down a machine to go with the docs. The first Deskpro 386
has historical merit, because it was THE first desktop '386 system (IBM at the time
was foundering in their proprietary PS/2 stuff)
As we have said, most of that stuff is scrapped now.
Subject: Re: FPGA VAX update, now DIY TTL computers
From: Scott Stevens <chenmel at earthlink.net>
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 19:27:33 -0500
To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <cctalk at
classiccmp.org>
On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 17:16:54 -0500
Allison <ajp166 at bellatlantic.net> wrote:
XT and XT clone motherboards are becoming increasingly rare. 286 and 386 motherboards are
falling into that class rapidly. 486 motherboards are still around but gradually becoming
rare, too.
What I have lying around in big annoying quantities at this point in time is all Pentium
and Pentium II motherboards. And actually, most of them are 'lying around'
because they've become defective and due to the finer pitch and custom-chip
construction are unservicible. All the XT hardware I still have is either working or
easily repairable.
Full AT hardware, i.e. motherboards before the 'Baby AT' generation, is close to
being 'key' as far as scarcity. The hardware of that era was a magnitude of scale
more expensive than the huge fleet 'Baby AT' that came after it. And much of it
was built like a Sherman Tank, as compared to the disposable humvee quality of the Baby AT
era hardware. Early and slow (less than 16 MHz) full AT '386 motherboards are quite
rare now. (aside- yes, in the eyes of the military the Humvee, like the Jeep before it,
is a cheap throwaway transport)
And oddly, at this point in time, people like me find ourselves with far more middle-era
Sun Microsystems hardware than we can use. Those nice little lunchbox Sparcs and Pizza
Box systems are plentiful and you can cart them off in whatever quantity they are
available at surplus gear auctions. They used to be the star item at said auctions.
There are historical books now that show all the wonderful architecture that has been
destroyed, i.e. the 'Lost Twin Cities' book and video series highlights some
marvelous buildings that were demolished in the name of 'progress.' Time rolls
on, and what's missed sorely 20 years after is always whatever was knocked down. This
also remains the case with old computer gear. Nobody imagined ten years ago that anybody
would have any use for a 8 MHz full-AT 80386 motherboard, so nobody kept any.
Ummm. Same as it ever was.
Save for the INboard386 (38616 for AT processor replacement) and the SIIG3000
bick thats a real 5mb, IDE disk and floppy 386/16 powered system I keep as
it's plain handy! It not only does VGA but RS170 video. I do have a small
footprint 386/25 (or 8mhz with turbo jumper off) board I keep as its plain
cute and works too.
Nope nobody kept them. ;)
Subject: Re: FPGA VAX update, now DIY TTL computers
From: ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk (Tony Duell)
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 21:33:43 +0000 (GMT)
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
>
> On 11/11/2005 at 11:12 PM woodelf wrote:
>
> >PS. As for getting 7400 off scrap boards, if I had the scrap boards I
> >would most likely try to get the scrap item working again. :D
Me too. I've got piles of obscure boards that I'd like to get going again
sometime. Most have no real practical function, but are part of the
history of computing/electronics.
About the only thing I'll raid for parts are no-name clone PC
motherboards and cards.. And those are not a good source of standard TTL,
alas.
>
> There are plenty of junk boards that have no particular useful function.
> I've got a bunch of ISA cards that I salvaged. All were old models of a
> gizmo that appeared to a PC as a monochrome adapter, but which translated
> the CPU writes to video memory to serial codes to a VT-220 type terminal.
Now that sounds unusual enough to be very interesting. Put it this way,
if I had something like that I'd be trying to track down a dump of that
missing ROM. I would not be raiding it for parts.
-tony
There are tons of mostly unidentifyable boards with usable parts or we
know what they are and maybe they even work but heck there's a stack
of 100 in the corner with good parts for salvage.
Examples of salvage to me XT clones that were never rare, 386 and 486
boards with salvageable parts. A sharp TV with a dead red drive from
a doitall chip is junk for stripping. Non-salvage items, things I
keep and fix like my uVAX ADVICE as it's an in circuit emulator for
the uVAX chip so it both maybe the last in existance and unusual.
There is junk and not. The junk is there to make the not junk work.
One can have too much junk, rarely!
9:03 p.m.
On 11/12/2005 at 8:34 PM Scott Stevens wrote:
> Nope nobody kept them. ;)
Not true. I keep one of everything. An XT, an AT, a 386, a 386SX, a
486, and several flavors of Pentium I. So if I need to run Topview, I've
got a system that will do it. Of course, I could also just emulate an XT
on a more modern system.
The rule of thumb for the computer industry has been "better faster
cheaper". I paid almost $3000 for a bare-bones 5150 with 64K, one disk
drive (single-sided) and a monochrome display adapter. What will that
$3000 buy now (adjusted for inflation)?
If the violin industry ran the way the computer industry did, a
Stradivarius would just be a quaint old violin that no one wanted to play
because it sounded so awful.
But sometimes old is better. I play a tuba made in 1915 and own several
that are over the century mark. These are exceptional instruments that
modern manufacturers have tried to reproduce with only fair success. And
there are terrible old tubas that deserve nothing more than to be
disassembled and used for parts.
I don't think of the PC business as being particularly noteworthy from the
aspect of groundbreaking technology and design effort. A couple of guys
down in Boca Raton put together a box on the cheap for IBM using available
(not even leading edge) technology. There wasn't a chip in the PC that I
hadn't heard of before.
The work that was required to engineer the System/360, Burroughs B5000,
CDC 6600 or even the VAX was really noteworthy and deserves our respect.
Certainly we should at least do our best to preserve the knowledge of how
these systems were built.
Some of the more innovative Apple and Sun hardware represents some
brilliant minds at work. But the PC?
Cheers,
Chuck
11:23 p.m.
Chuck Guzis wrote:
The rule of thumb for the computer industry has been
"better faster
cheaper". I paid almost $3000 for a bare-bones 5150 with 64K, one disk
drive (single-sided) and a monochrome display adapter. What will that
$3000 buy now (adjusted for inflation)?
A sh*t PC, but some support arrangement to keep replacing bits as they
break? :-)
But sometimes old is better. I play a tuba made in
1915 and own several
that are over the century mark. These are exceptional instruments that
modern manufacturers have tried to reproduce with only fair success. And
there are terrible old tubas that deserve nothing more than to be
disassembled and used for parts.
I'm like that with cars - I hate modern vehicles, not only from a design
point of view but because of the investment car manufacturers have made
in technology. OK, so the technology works - until the point that it
doesn't, when failures tend to be rapid, catastrophic and costly. I'd
rather have simple technology that might make a vehicle more tiring to
drive, but where I at least know what it's doing at any moment in time
and I can fix it at the roadside using materials to hand if needs be.
I'm much the same with computers - I'd rather it be simple but
well-engineered such that I can understand the processes involved and
dive in to fix stuff myself if it does go wrong. Hardware hasn't been
like that for what, 20 years? Software does fair a little better though
so long as you stick clear of anything by you-know-who...
Some of the more innovative Apple and Sun hardware
represents some
brilliant minds at work. But the PC?
Indeed. Proof that you can make the public buy junk if you have a big
enough name. Heck, look at Windows - it's crud, but it's not even
*cheap* crud. Proof that it's not a case of "must produce junk in order
to keep the cost low". Have a big enough name and you can peddle
anything to the masses at any price and they'll still lap it up.
cheers
Jules
11:57 p.m.
On 11/12/2005 at 9:31 PM woodelf wrote:
Brilliant Marketing... not hardware.
Not even! IBM had the idea that they were going to offer a "Home
Computer"; witness the casette tape connection and the 16K minimum memory
increment on the 5150. They were shocked when businesses started ordering
them--and why was that?
Because of the blue sky that years and years of mainframe equipment sales
had gotten IBM. Customers were fairly certain that IBM wasn't due to go
out of business any time soon. So purchasing a PC was a pretty safe deal.
Honestly, I don't think that IBM had a clue at the outset. I think they
half expected the PC to be the disaster that the 5000 was, so they didn't
put much money into R&D. I can remember going to the IBM regional sales
office to order 3 of them and the people there had never even seen one.
--Chuck
13 Nov
13 Nov
2:15 a.m.
Chuck Guzis declared on Saturday 12 November 2005 21:03:
On 11/12/2005 at 8:34 PM Scott Stevens wrote:
Adjusting for inflation, that's about $7000 from the chart I looked at.
An IBM 9110-510B (RS/6000 p5-510) w/2 POWER5s 2GB RAM, 2x73GB SCSI disk
comes in at $7150, which I'd call "Close enough".
That machine is probably a bit better engineered for the time than your
5160, though somewhat less hackable (of course, most modern machines are
less hackable than their older counterparts).
Pat
--
Purdue University ITAP/RCAC --- http://www.rcac.purdue.edu/
The Computer Refuge --- http://computer-refuge.org
> Nope nobody kept them. ;)
Not true. I keep one of everything. An XT, an AT, a 386, a 386SX,
a 486, and several flavors of Pentium I. So if I need to run
Topview, I've got a system that will do it. Of course, I could also
just emulate an XT on a more modern system.
The rule of thumb for the computer industry has been "better faster
cheaper". I paid almost $3000 for a bare-bones 5150 with 64K, one
disk drive (single-sided) and a monochrome display adapter. What
will that $3000 buy now (adjusted for inflation)? 
12 Nov
12 Nov
10:20 p.m.
[one-long-line formatting botch repaired manually -dM]
I am not sure if there were any 80386 motherboards
made with this
similar construction, but if there were, these are the boards I refer
to, that have largely disappeared, and are 'classic, servicible
forever' hardware, the kind the Tony likes.
I just had a look at the one 386 board I still have around. It's heavy
on the 74-series logic, but it has about 15 chips that I suspect of
being PALs. (I can't read the markings without removing sticky labels
with dot-matrix printing. But a few of the labels are applied slightly
off-centre one way or another, and what I can see is consistent with
part numbers beginning "PAL".) The board worked last time I tried to
use it, IIRC, which would have been within the last year or so.
Make of that what you will. :-)
/~\ The ASCII der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse at rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
6827
days inactive
6827
days old
7 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
ajp166＠bellatlantic.net -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
cclist＠sydex.com -
chenmel＠earthlink.net -
julesrichardsonuk＠yahoo.co.uk -
mouse＠Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA -
pat＠computer-refuge.org