6 May
2018
6 May
'18
11:18 a.m.
Hi,
Does anyone have any recommendations for a '90s era PC that has PCI and
ISA slots? Ideally I'd like to have EISA slots too. ? At least I
think that's what I want.
I'm developing an itch to play with older networking equipment, Token
Ring, FDDI, etc. and I suspect that a machine running '98 / NT 4, or a
Unix / Linux from the late '90s would be a good candidate to mess with
things.
Obviously I'll need two devices to communicate. I may end up looking
for an older Cisco router that supports the various interface types.
Years ago I had a Compaq desktop that had PCI and EISA slots. I'm
trying to re-acquire it from the friend that it went to.
Does anyone have any Pro Tips on things to look for or avoid? ? One of
the worries that I have about the aforementioned Compaq is that it used
proprietary components (the keyboard connector looked like a PowerBook
SCSI connector) that would be hard to replace if (read: when) a problem
develops.
I would greatly appreciate any tips / tricks / things to avoid.
Thank you in advance.
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
6 May
6 May
3:45 p.m.
On 05/06/2018 11:18 AM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
Does anyone have any recommendations for a '90s
era PC that has PCI and
ISA slots? Ideally I'd like to have EISA slots too. ? At least I
think that's what I want.
Depends on your CPU needs, but if you're willing to settle for P2/P3
era, anything using the Intel i440BX or GX generally has very good ISA
support.
If you want to go earlier than that (90s covers a lot of ground), a 486
or P1 or SS7 board might also be a possibility.
I like the Supermicro and Advantech boards, but YMMV.
--Chuck
7:45 p.m.
On 05/06/2018 04:45 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
Depends on your CPU needs, but if you're willing
to settle for P2/P3 era,
anything using the Intel i440BX or GX generally has very good ISA support.
Well, to be honest, I don't have any real need beyond enough to run the
OS, a basic editor (preferably something more user friendly than
ed(lin)) and run a networking stack.
I /might/ consider playing some old DOS / Windows 3x / Windows 9x based
games, nothing fancy. (Yoda Stories is the most likely candidate.)
If you want to go earlier than that (90s covers a lot
of ground), a 486
or P1 or SS7 board might also be a possibility.
Ya.
I'm thinking more in the P I / II / III range.
I've long had a soft spot for the Pentium Pro. I wonder what those
machines are going for these days. ? A LONG time ago I saw an
advertisement for a system that could accept six Pentium Pros. ? This
could turn out to be dangerous.
I've got to say, I don't recognize SS7 as a CPU type. In fact, SS7
means Signaling System 7 to me. Different genera, but possibly the
proper time frame.
I like the Supermicro and Advantech boards, but YMMV.
ACK I'm fond of Supermicro machines too.
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
8 p.m.
On 05/06/2018 07:45 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
I've got to say, I don't recognize SS7 as a
CPU type. In fact, SS7
means Signaling System 7 to me. Different genera, but possibly the
proper time frame.
SS7 = Super Socket 7. P1 Socket 7 with extras:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Socket_7
Faster AMD P1-era CPUs. For example, K6-II and K6-III. Competes well
with P2 family.
PPros have been ruthlessly raided by the gold scrappers. So not cheap
for what you get.
--
--Chuck
8:10 p.m.
On 05/06/2018 09:00 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
SS7 = Super Socket 7. P1 Socket 7 with extras:
Ah. I wondered if it was Super Socket, but I'd (obviously) forgotten.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Socket_7
Faster AMD P1-era CPUs. For example, K6-II and K6-III. Competes well
with P2 family.
I remember my AMD K6-II fondly.
PPros have been ruthlessly raided by the gold
scrappers. So not cheap
for what you get.
I noticed the prices for machines were not cheap on eBay and there were
a number of people selling the CPUs on scales or in big batches. I'm
guessing that's why.
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
7 May
7 May
5:28 a.m.
On Mon, 7 May 2018 at 05:10, Grant Taylor via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org>
wrote:
I remember my AMD K6-II fondly.
I ran a Cyrix 6x86-P166+ for a while as my main PC and it was a lovely
machine.
Alas, I needed to review one of the last versions of Aldus PageMaker and it
wouldn't run on a Cyrix chip -- only on Intel. That drove me to get a new
box -- a PII-450 which served me well for several years.
https://liam-on-linux.livejournal.com/49259.html
But they were good chips. Some unfortunate software accidents more or less
killed them.
As that blog post says, I'm still waiting for Via to do something
interesting, but they don't seem to be interested.
--
Liam Proven ? Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? Google Mail/Hangouts/Plus: lproven at gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven ? Skype/LinkedIn: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 ? ?R (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053
9:41 a.m.
On 05/07/2018 06:28 AM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
I ran a Cyrix 6x86-P166+ for a while as my main PC and
it was a lovely
machine.
I think I had a Cyrix CPU in an Acer Aspire that I had years ago. It
served me well. Though I didn't do much that would push the system.
But they were good chips. Some unfortunate software
accidents more or
less killed them.
Ya.
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
6 May
6 May
8:01 p.m.
On Sun, May 6, 2018 at 10:45 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk <
cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
On 05/06/2018 04:45 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
I think I'd rather have a NeXT if I had an unlimited budget and it was say
1993, but that's also when Pentiums came out and changed everything.
I have set aside a few intel machines from the 90's. I really like the
quality of the Dell Dimension 466V.
Bill
Depends on your CPU needs, but if you're
willing to settle for P2/P3
era,
anything using the Intel i440BX or GX generally
has very good ISA
support.
Well, to be honest, I don't have any real need beyond enough to run the
OS, a basic editor (preferably something more user friendly than
ed(lin)) and run a networking stack.
I /might/ consider playing some old DOS / Windows 3x / Windows 9x based
games, nothing fancy. (Yoda Stories is the most likely candidate.)
If you want to go earlier than that (90s covers a
lot of ground), a 486
or P1 or SS7 board might also be a possibility.
Ya.
I'm thinking more in the P I / II / III range.
8:09 p.m.
On 05/06/2018 09:01 PM, Bill Degnan wrote:
I think I'd rather have a NeXT if I had an
unlimited budget and it was
say 1993, but that's also when Pentiums came out and changed everything.
I have a lot of respect for NeXT machines. I think I'd like to own one
some day. But I think I'm going to stick with x86 to scratch this itch.
I have set aside a few intel machines from the
90's.? I really like the
quality of the Dell Dimension 466V.
I had a non-trivial number of machines that would fit the bill before I
moved. Quite a bit of the network equipment too. But I moved ~1000
miles and a LOT of things didn't make the move. :-(
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
7 May
7 May
9:47 a.m.
On 05/06/2018 12:18 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
Years ago I had a Compaq desktop that had PCI and EISA
slots. I'm trying
to re-acquire it from the friend that it went to.
Lo and behold the friend that has the old Compaq desktop agreed to sell
it to me. Presumably it's still in working condition.
It does have EISA and PCI slots as well as what seems to be called a
Vocalist keyboard from Compaq.
I /think/ it's a Compaq Deskpro XL 560, but I'm not completely sure on
the specific model.
Here's a quick link with some overview of the Deskpro XL line.
Link - Compaq Deskpro XL Desktop PC series
- https://support.hp.com/us-en/document/c00355459/
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
12:12 p.m.
On 5/7/2018 10:47 AM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
On 05/06/2018 12:18 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk
wrote:
Unless you have a old copy of DOS, what OS can you get for the OLD MACHINES?
Ben.
Years ago I had a Compaq desktop that had PCI and
EISA slots. I'm trying
to re-acquire it from the friend that it went to.
Lo and behold the friend that has the old Compaq desktop agreed to sell
it to me. Presumably it's still in working condition.
It does have EISA and PCI slots as well as what seems to be called a
Vocalist keyboard from Compaq.
I /think/ it's a Compaq Deskpro XL 560, but I'm not completely sure on
the specific model.
Here's a quick link with some overview of the Deskpro XL line.
Link - Compaq Deskpro XL Desktop PC series
- https://support.hp.com/us-en/document/c00355459/
12:37 p.m.
On 05/07/2018 01:12 PM, ben via cctalk wrote:
Unless you have a old copy of DOS, what OS can you get
for the OLD
MACHINES?
I have multiple copies of older OSs that will run on the machine.
DOS / Windows: MS-DOS, PC-DOS, DR-DOS, FreeDOS, Windows 3.x, Windows
9x, Windows NT 3.x, Windows NT 4
Novell: NetWare 3.x, 4.x, 5.x, maybe 6.x
OS/2: Warp 3, Warp 4
Linux: (multiple)
FreeBSD: (multiple)
SCO OpenServer 5.<something>, UnixWare 7.<something>
I'd like to get my hands on Banyan Vines and / or Artisoft LANtastic to
play with things. }:-)
I don't know how much memory is installed in the machine. But i would
expect that various versions of all of the above can install and run on
a machine with between 16 MB and 64 MB. As for drive, anything between
200 MB and 2 GB will likely work.
I know that I've had Linux installed on the machine before.
There are a LOT of options on such machines.
One thing that I really like is the fact that it's a combination of PCI
and EISA bus. Which means that I can mess with just about any add-on /
expansion card that I want to. ? Save for MCA and VLB. Though I doubt
that I'll want to play with those cards.
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
12:48 p.m.
New subject: R: '90s era PC recommendation.
Windows from 1.x up to 98 SE
Linux / bsd
OS/2
NextStep
BeOS likely
Novell Netware
Likely forgot something
-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org] Per conto di ben via cctalk
Inviato: luned? 7 maggio 2018 21:12
A: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Oggetto: Re: '90s era PC recommendation.
On 5/7/2018 10:47 AM, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
On 05/06/2018 12:18 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk
wrote:
Unless you have a old copy of DOS, what OS can you get for the OLD MACHINES?
Ben.
Years ago I had a Compaq desktop that had PCI and
EISA slots. I'm trying
to re-acquire it from the friend that it went to.
Lo and behold the friend that has the old Compaq desktop agreed to sell
it to me. Presumably it's still in working condition.
It does have EISA and PCI slots as well as what seems to be called a
Vocalist keyboard from Compaq.
I /think/ it's a Compaq Deskpro XL 560, but I'm not completely sure on
the specific model.
Here's a quick link with some overview of the Deskpro XL line.
Link - Compaq Deskpro XL Desktop PC series
- https://support.hp.com/us-en/document/c00355459/
4:38 p.m.
On Mon, 7 May 2018, ben via cctalk wrote:
Unless you have a old copy of DOS, what OS can you get
for the OLD MACHINES?
MS-DOS will, of course, work for all.
Xenix 3.0 (1984?) worked with 8088, 512K RAM, 10MB disk.
Microsoft had a license for Unix, since 1978, but NOT for the "Unix" name.
By mid 1980s, Microsoft had the highest volume AT&T Unix license.
Windows 3.00 is the last Windows that will work with an 8088.
Windows 3.10 wants a 286, won't install without A20, with 64K of RAM
above 1MB (640K, or even 512K in main RAM, and 64K of Extended RAM)
Officially? it needs 2MB, but that is not true.
It would like VGA, but "Hercules" MDA works.
It WILL work with CGA (640x200), using the Win3.0 driver.
It looked at the time that Microsoft porgrammers were using 800x600,
because that is the only one that really looked "right".
Win95 wants a 386 or above.
(SX was limited to 16MB of RAM, which prob'ly won't work)
Win98 said that it "needs" 486, but 386 works.
Notice that Windoze was in an "I386" directory.
BUT, MICROS~1 often blurred the lines between what was "NEEDED" V what was
"RECOMMENDED". Performance issues with Windoze made the
"recommendations"
more important. And ANY complaints about performance, if answered at all,
were answered with implications of personal inadequacy, "solution" of
having you throw hardware at it, and variants of
"233 MHZ Pentium?? I'm amazed that it would even RUN on that!"
"Deskpro XL?? That's almost 6 months old! What kind of performance would
you expect from something that ancient?"
XP calls for a 233MHz with 64MB RAM, 1.5GB disk space, 800x600 display.
Vista calls for 1GHZ, 1GB
Win7 same, but requires internet connection (during installation)
Most will probably run on 386DX, with unacceptable performance.
But, Windoze has raised "unacceptable performance" to a level where even
we can't tolerate it!
I thought that I could tolerate slow turn-around for batch processing,
such as "Handbrake", but I eventually broke down and bought performance.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
5:06 p.m.
Unless you
have a old copy of DOS, what OS can you get for the OLD
MACHINES?
MS-DOS will, of course, work for all. 
5:55 p.m.
On 05/07/2018 07:38 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
On Mon, 7 May 2018, ben via cctalk wrote:
My old dell 486DX/66, 32mb,
800xx600 video pizza box runs 3.11 95, 98,
NT4.? NT4 does run slowly
but for testing it proved near impossible to crunch.? DOS and 3.11 runs
like the wind on that.? I keep
the box for ISA-8/16 bus needs. I have minix for it and a old Slackware
linux as well.? The only
yabut is the disk must be partitioned 500meg for the first as the BIOS
can't figure out larger so all
the disks have a 500/and remainder partition.? I swap drives as needed
for what OS is in need.? I
have two as they are good fairly compact? boxes.? I must have at least
five WD4.3gb drives with various
OSes plus a few 500mb drives with win3.11/DOS.
For occasional needs I have a Compaq 333/384meg box that also has ISA
and PCI for those needs.
Its handy when I need a low end classic with Ethernet, USB plus all the
legacy ports.? Fair linux machine
running Ubuntu 10.4 on a 20gb drive.
And a white box Celeron 1ghz/1gb box for more modern needs.? It happens
to have a single ISA slot
plus the usual PCI.? I got that MB new back in '03 real cheap as the
board was being phased out but
the shop had one new but not much interest for celeron.? ITs plus is all
the legacy IO, USB, decent VGA,
and Ethernet.? The legacy IO keeps it around after all what can't you do
with a parallel port!
Alternate systems for utility work are epia-M board (ITX) also 1ghz/1gb
all running Ubuntu linux
version 10.4 as it has very low needs.? They are good for IO as most of
the ITX board have serial,
parallel, USB, Ethernet, good VGA, S-video, sound, and PS2 mouse and
keyboard.? Good enough
to run a HP4L and CUPS. or logging for field day.
Allison
Unless you have a old copy of DOS, what OS can
you get for the OLD
MACHINES?
MS-DOS will, of course, work for all.
Xenix 3.0 (1984?) worked with 8088, 512K RAM, 10MB disk.
Microsoft had a license for Unix, since 1978, but NOT for the "Unix"
name.
By mid 1980s, Microsoft had the highest volume AT&T Unix license.
Windows 3.00 is the last Windows that will work with an 8088.
Windows 3.10 wants a 286, won't install without A20, with 64K of RAM
above 1MB (640K, or even 512K in main RAM, and 64K of Extended RAM)
Officially? it needs 2MB, but that is not true.
It would like VGA, but "Hercules" MDA works.
It WILL work with CGA (640x200), using the Win3.0 driver.
It looked at the time that Microsoft porgrammers were using 800x600,
because that is the only one that really looked "right".
Win95 wants a 386 or above.
(SX was limited to 16MB of RAM, which prob'ly won't work)
Win98 said that it "needs" 486, but 386 works.
Notice that Windoze was in an "I386" directory.
BUT, MICROS~1 often blurred the lines between what was "NEEDED" V what
was "RECOMMENDED".? Performance issues with Windoze made the
"recommendations" more important.? And ANY complaints about
performance, if answered at all, were answered with implications of
personal inadequacy, "solution" of having you throw hardware at it,
and variants of "233 MHZ Pentium?? I'm amazed that it would even RUN
on that!"
"Deskpro XL?? That's almost 6 months old!? What kind of performance
would you expect from something that ancient?"
XP calls for a 233MHz with 64MB RAM, 1.5GB disk space, 800x600 display.
Vista calls for 1GHZ, 1GB
Win7 same, but requires internet connection (during installation)
Most will probably run on 386DX, with unacceptable performance.
But, Windoze has raised "unacceptable performance" to a level where
even we can't tolerate it!
I thought that I could tolerate slow turn-around for batch processing,
such as "Handbrake", but I eventually broke down and bought performance.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred???????????? cisin at xenosoft.com
2382
days inactive
2384
days old
15 comments
8 participants
participants (8)
-
allisonportable＠gmail.com -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
billdegnan＠gmail.com -
cclist＠sydex.com -
cctalk＠gtaylor.tnetconsulting.net -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
lproven＠gmail.com -
mazzinia＠tin.it