27 Dec
1998
27 Dec
'98
12:04 p.m.
-----Original Message-----
From: David Wollmann <dwollmann(a)ibmhelp.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Date: Sunday, December 27, 1998 2:49 PM
Subject: Re: OT, but info needed: RAM uprade
On Sun, 27 Dec 1998, Jason Willgruber wrote:
When IBM ELS were designing the original 5150, 16-bit cards would have
driven
the cost out of their US$4,000.00 retail target range,
so they went with
the
crippled 8088. A decision that, in hindsight, makes
about as much sense as
including a cassette drive and (what was it???) 16K RAM on the first model.
The tape drive was actually a useful idea, which should have been continued
all the way throughout the PS/2 line. It allowed whoever was using the
computer to actually make use of the ROM BASIC. The floppies aren't
available in ROM BASIC, and once a program is typed in, there's no way to
save it. The cassette drive worked in the same way that the cassette drive
in TRS-80's did. It acted as the storage device in ROM BASIC. In fact, I
don't even think the PC came with a cable to connect it to a tape deck. You
had to run down to RadioShack and pick up a TRS-80 cassette cable.
I think I actually have an entire 60-minute tape full of PC-BASIC programs
(somewhere). I think one of the not-so-smart things that IBM did was to
remove the cassette interface and to keep the now-useless ROM-BASIC in
there.
--
-Jason Willgruber
(roblwill(a)usaor.net)
ICQ#: 1730318
<http://members.tripod.com/general_1>
27 Dec
27 Dec
10:14 a.m.
New subject: PC cassette interface and ROM BASIC (was Re: OT, but info needed: RAM uprade)
"Jason Willgruber" <roblwill(a)usaor.net> wrote:
The tape drive was actually a useful idea, which
should have been continued
all the way throughout the PS/2 line. It allowed whoever was using the
computer to actually make use of the ROM BASIC. The floppies aren't
available in ROM BASIC, and once a program is typed in, there's no way to
save it.
The PC was introduced in 1981. IBM had no clue as to how popular it would
become, or who their customers would be. The cassette interface was there
to provide for a less expensive entry-level system. They soon discovered
that almost everyone that bought a PC bought a floppy disk controller and
drive.
I think one of the not-so-smart things that IBM did
was to
remove the cassette interface
Leaving the cassette interface out of later models made perfect sense. It
was an extra cost that the vast majority of customers didn't need.
and to keep the now-useless ROM-BASIC in there.
Are you sure it's useless?
If you use IBM's disk BASIC or BASICA, you're actually using ROM BASIC.
Try running BASICA on a clone sometime. It won't work. That's why
MS-DOS for other platforms usually included GWBASIC.
On the other hand, you can argue that it is useless, since most IBM
customers don't use BASICA. Or QBASIC for that matter. Anyone using
BASIC these days is likely to be using Visual BASIC.
So why didn't IBM remove the ROM BASIC? Simple. Because it wouldn't
save them any money. There's a certain minimum cost for a masked ROM,
and going to smaller ones (if you can even get them) doesn't lower your cost.
I don't know what IBM's license from Microsoft for ROM BASIC is like; they
may have paid a one-time flat license fee for it, like Apple did for
Applesoft.
Eric
8:11 a.m.
New subject: PC cassette interface and ROM BASIC (was Re: OT, but info needed: RAM uprade)
The PC was introduced in 1981. IBM had no clue as to
how popular it
would become, or who their customers would be. The cassette interface
was there to provide for a less expensive entry-level system. They soon
discovered that almost everyone that bought a PC bought a floppy disk
controller and drive.
Yeah... actually, I'm really glad. Knowing the way that IBM handles
backwards compatiblity... we might just now be getting rid of our tape
interfaces.
Leaving the cassette interface out of later models made
perfect sense.
It was an extra cost that the vast majority of customers didn't need.
Exactly. That, and by the time of the AT and higher, low end was floppy,
high end hard drive. Floppies became affordable due to the AII's and the
PC's need for floppies.
Are you sure it's useless?
If you use IBM's disk BASIC or BASICA, you're actually using ROM BASIC.
Try running BASICA on a clone sometime. It won't work. That's why
MS-DOS for other platforms usually included GWBASIC.
Hehehe... just a year ago, I remember getting boco credits and saving like
40 minutes in math class by writing GWBASIC programs on a Zenith 248... if
I didn't live overseas, I'd love to get a 248...
On the other hand, you can argue that it is useless,
since most IBM
customers don't use BASICA. Or QBASIC for that matter. Anyone using
BASIC these days is likely to be using Visual BASIC.
So you're saying if I go and get an IBM PC it has BASICA on it? (I mean a
new one).
I don't know what IBM's license from Microsoft
for ROM BASIC is like;
they may have paid a one-time flat license fee for it, like Apple did for
Applesoft.
Hmm... that was a pretty good move on Apple's part, seeing how many
computers with Applesoft were sold.
Eric
Tim
------------------------------------------------------*
*Ever onward, always forward. *
*Tim D. Hotze Panel Member, The Ultimate Web Host List*
*http://www.webhostlist.com worldsfate(a)geocities.com *
------------------------------------------------------*
10:56 a.m.
New subject: PC cassette interface and ROM BASIC (was Re: OT, but info needed: RAM uprade)
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 1917 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19981228/d9d5d80b/at…
29 Dec
29 Dec
10:47 a.m.
New subject: PC cassette interface and ROM BASIC (was Re: OT, but info needed: RAM uprade)
Tony Duell wrote:
Yup. Unimpressed me. Cost a bloody fortune and wasn't as good as a
Radio Shack Color Computer, let alone the TRS-80 Model 2 that'd been
around a couple of years. After I saw it _with_ disk drives, I wasn't
very impressed either. No 8088 box ever equalled a contemporary 6809
box, and was hard-pressed to rival a Z-80. (I can track down
documentation to the effect that the IBM PC was in large part a
reaction to the mainframe connectivity options of the TRS-80 Model 2
-- though it was a long while before IBM offered SNA/SDLC in its
"personal" computers).
--
Ward Griffiths <mailto:gram@cnct.com> <http://www.cnct.com/home/gram/>
WARNING: The Attorney General has determined that Alcohol, Tobacco,
and Firearms can be hazardous to your health -- and get away with it.
The PC was introduced in 1981. IBM had no clue
as to how popular it would
become, or who their customers would be. The cassette interface was there
to provide for a less expensive entry-level system. They soon discovered
that almost everyone that bought a PC bought a floppy disk controller and
drive.
Has anyone ever seen an IBM PC without disk drives? I certainly never have.
12:43 p.m.
New subject: PC cassette interface and ROM BASIC (was Re: OT, but info needed: RAM uprade)
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 454 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19981230/9f5bc479/at…
5:16 p.m.
New subject: PC cassette interface and ROM BASIC (was Re: OT, but info needed: RAM uprade)
Tony Duell wrote:
Yes, but few micros were as good as a CoCo, particularly if you added
OS-9 to it. And the CoCo 3 (OK, it came out several years later) is still
my favourite home computer of all time. The 6809 is a very nice chip.
Tell me about it. I'm converting a Compaq luggable to an OS-9 Level2
machine (still haven't found a good colour tube for it, but even so
I'll have it going hopefully in a couple weeks) with some CoCo 3 bits
and pieces and the gutted Compaq case I found. Been in love with OS-9
since the day I met it.
--
Ward Griffiths <mailto:gram@cnct.com> <http://www.cnct.com/home/gram/>
WARNING: The Attorney General has determined that Alcohol, Tobacco,
and Firearms can be hazardous to your health -- and get away with it.
Has
anyone ever seen an IBM PC without disk drives? I certainly never have.
Yup. Unimpressed me. Cost a bloody fortune and wasn't as good as a
Radio Shack Color Computer, let alone the TRS-80 Model 2 that'd been 
5:32 p.m.
New subject: Looking for cheap Powerbook Duo parts
Happy, Happy, Joy, Joy to all.
I've been assembling some random Duo parts into working Duos, but I need a
few more parts cheap. If you don't have parts, sources for cheap parts
are also welcome.
I need:
a couple of 2.5" SCSI drives, any capacity
install disks for MacOS 7.5.3 or 7.5.5
a couple of Duo keyboards
a pair of Duo rubber side-inserts
a few Duo RAM cards of any capacity
OK, these Duos aren't 10 years old yet (closer to 5), but they're
pretty cool, perhaps even Classic.
I'm Mac-illiterate, but I've discovered that Apple somehow embedded
product info at the board or ROM level. If I don't have MacOS running on
one of these guys, is there a keyboard sequence that will show me this
info? What sort of stuff is stored? Product id? Board rev? Serial
number? Is there software that will dump this info in great detail? And,
is there enough info in there to distinguish, say, prototypes from
production runs?
-- Doug
5:49 p.m.
New subject: paper -> HTML (and The First PC)
I struggled for a bit trying to convert paper to HTML, but found it an
awkward task. I'm sure the state of the art has advanced beyond:
1) do a color scan to grab images
2) clean up images
3) resize based on guess at a good size and res for web pages
4) scan again as B/W line art
5) OCR
6) clean up OCR
7) create HTML combining OCR'd text and images
I don't much like PDF for web docs, so an HTML solution would be best. It
looks like the "pro" version of Xerox's OCR software might automate the
task somewhat. Any recommendations?
In any case, here's a picture of Simon, the first personal computer from
~1950:
http://www.yowza.com/classiccmp/berkeley/simon.gif
More info will be made available as I get this scanning stuff down to a
science.
-- Doug
7:15 p.m.
New subject: paper -> HTML (and The First PC)
On Wed, 30 Dec 1998, Doug Yowza wrote:
I struggled for a bit trying to convert paper to HTML,
but found it an
awkward task. I'm sure the state of the art has advanced beyond:
<...>
I don't much like PDF for web docs, so an HTML
solution would be best. It
looks like the "pro" version of Xerox's OCR software might automate the
task somewhat. Any recommendations?
I'm having the same trouble. I'm using TextBridge Classic (which is a
lame way of saying "pared-down version"). It has lots of trouble just
scanning the characters as it sees them on the page and putting them in a
text file. Instead, it tries to make some wacky sense out of columnar
text in a page and turns ASCII art graphics into garbage, throwing text
sections all over the place. It doesn't like the zeroes in my Apple
Pascal Operating System Manual. It inserts tabs where it should just put
spaces. I don't see any options anywhere to fix these problems.
I'm also having trouble getting a clean scan of a black text on white
type-written page. I'm doing it at 300dpi and the page comes out looking
like shit on the computer. There are all sorts of spots and blotches
everywhere that are clearly not on the original, and the glass of the
scanner is crystal clear. I don't see an easy way of cleaning the page up
with the software I'm using (PaintShop Pro 3.0, I just downloaded 4.12 but
am still getting used to it).
There was a discussion a short while ago on the techniques people were
using to successfully scan in docs. I wish I'd saved that.
The OCR is OK when the text is just normal, and does remarkably well. But
I need an OCR suite smarter than Xerox's TextBridge Classic. I also need
some good post-processing software, or at least need to know how to scan a
simple black & white document without the scanner introducing blotches and
crap. Any suggestions?
Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Always being hassled by the man.
Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0
See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details!
[Last web site update: 12/07/98]
7:53 p.m.
New subject: paper -> HTML (and The First PC)
On Wed, 30 Dec 1998, Sam Ismail wrote:
I'm also having trouble getting a clean scan of a
black text on white
type-written page. I'm doing it at 300dpi and the page comes out looking
like shit on the computer. There are all sorts of spots and blotches
everywhere that are clearly not on the original, and the glass of the
scanner is crystal clear. I don't see an easy way of cleaning the page up
with the software I'm using (PaintShop Pro 3.0, I just downloaded 4.12 but
am still getting used to it).
I'm using PSP 5.0, and the built-in filters help a bit, but it seems like
there should be a better "get rid of background noise" filter. The
despeckle filter will help somewhat with scans of dithered material, but
to get a white background for greyscale scans, I ended up doing a flood
fill with the "tolerance" set to a suitably high value (like 60).
-- Doug
30 Dec
30 Dec
6:23 a.m.
New subject: paper -> HTML (and The First PC)
Doug Yowza wrote:
I don't much like PDF for web docs, so an HTML
solution would be best. It
looks like the "pro" version of Xerox's OCR software might automate the
task somewhat. Any recommendations?
I own Xerox TextBridge Pro and Caere OmniPage Pro 8.0; you're welcome to
try them out. I haven't even gotten around to installing them yet.
Eric
6 Jan
6 Jan
10:55 a.m.
New subject: paper -> HTML
I tried Xerox TextBridge Pro 98 last night. Not great, but not bad
either. It does capture both text and images and can generate HTML with
the basic format intact. It also gives you the opportunity to
proof/correct the OCR, and the clean-up needed wasn't too bad -- a couple
of minutes for the type-written pages I scanned.
It has a poor user interface, but the "wizard" is pretty helpful (perhaps
required).
The worst misfeature, from my perspective, was that it could only handle
b/w scans, so the images look about like they would if somebody faxed them
to you. This makes no sense to me. If they could handle color scans
(perhaps by internally converting to b/w before the OCR if needed), then
I would use this to webify lots of docs.
As it is now, I'd still need to do separate scans for images if I wanted
nice images. I'll try to crank out a few webified pages this week, and
you can see the results.
-- Doug
30 Dec
30 Dec
2:16 a.m.
New subject: Looking for cheap Powerbook Duo parts
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 890 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19981230/4bd9e650/at…
5:07 a.m.
New subject: PC cassette interface and ROM BASIC (was Re: OT, but info needed: RAM uprade)
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 667 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19981230/6c97e093/at…
28 Dec
28 Dec
7:04 a.m.
New subject: PC cassette interface and ROM BASIC (was Re: OT, but info needed: RAM uprade)
On 28 Dec 1998, Eric Smith wrote:
[snippage]
ROM BASIC is a very important feature on the machines with CMOS. If the CMOS
reg's get hosed and the machine can't find anything to boot from, you can
usually fix the problem from BASIC instead of having to open the case and move
a jumper or disconnect the CMOS battery (and I don't think you can disconnect
the CMOS battery on the PS/2s with the Dallas clock chip).
--
David Wollmann
DST / DST Data Conversion
http://www.ibmhelp.com/
ICQ: 10742063
AIM: FathomS36
and to keep
the now-useless ROM-BASIC in there.
Are you sure it's useless?
If you use IBM's disk BASIC or BASICA, you're actually using ROM BASIC.
Try running BASICA on a clone sometime. It won't work. That's why
MS-DOS for other platforms usually included GWBASIC.
On the other hand, you can argue that it is useless, since most IBM
customers don't use BASICA. Or QBASIC for that matter. Anyone using
BASIC these days is likely to be using Visual BASIC.
So why didn't IBM remove the ROM BASIC? Simple. Because it wouldn't
save them any money. There's a certain minimum cost for a masked ROM,
and going to smaller ones (if you can even get them) doesn't lower your cost.
27 Dec
27 Dec
10:48 a.m.
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19981228/6487c73e/at…
9482
days inactive
9492
days old
16 comments
9 participants
participants (9)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
dastar＠ncal.verio.com -
dwollmann＠ibmhelp.com -
eric＠brouhaha.com -
gram＠cnct.com -
healyzh＠aracnet.com -
roblwill＠usaor.net -
tim＠thereviewguide.com -
yowza＠yowza.com