5 Aug
2011
5 Aug
'11
1:28 p.m.
[PCs as terminals]
> The big advantage over a conventional terminal
> was the capability of
> capturing output to a file or sending a file
Part of me still craves dedicated terminals
since they're just so reliable, and you can just swap
in another when it breaks. No (or few) stored settings.
Even "smart terminals" such as the BLIT
and "thin clients" are a pleasure to use
when in a properly supported environment.
But I'll admit that PROCOMM is still a wonderful program,
emulating all sorts of terminals
with screen capture, session capture and file transfer.
Not long ago, I used a DOS laptop with PROCOMM
for an embedded processor lab
so I was up and running instantly and consistently.
Incidentally, the first PC I owned was a genuine 5160
PC/XT
(It still runs, it's in front of me now).
Nice! There's been a resurgence in appreciation
of the "classics".
MARCH: the NJ Vintage Computer Museum
has a 5100 and 5150 on display!
Reminds me of the tremrinal emiulator ROM for th
HP9830,
Sweet! Google found this for pix and desc:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_9800_series_desktop_computers
My high school started everyone with programming BASIC
on the HP 9820A:
http://www.hpmuseum.org/hp9820.htm
http://www.oldcalculatormuseum.com/hp9820a.html
Somewhere I have 2 of the 'extra capacity' cards
(HP Part #9162-0045): 10 1/2" inches long,
storing 90 memory registers per side.
I traded it away long ago, but I had a HP terminal
that was extremely "smart"
- the lid opened up to add cards for RAM or peripherals
- I think it allowed 1-2 tape drives to store/xmt files
- the CRT was a 2:1 aspect ratio: twice as wide as high.
- external keyboard that was too thick and heavy
to ever put on your lap!
-- jeffj
6 Aug
6 Aug
1:47 p.m.
[PCs as terminals]
> The big advantage over a conventional
terminal
> was the capability of
> capturing output to a file or sending a file
Part of me still craves dedicated terminals
since they're just so reliable, and you can just swap
in another when it breaks. No (or few) stored settings. Incidentally,
the first PC I owned was a genuine 5160 PC/XT
(It still runs, it's in front of me now).
Nice! There's been a resurgence in appreciation
of the "classics".
MARCH: the NJ Vintage Computer Museum
has a 5100 and 5150 on display! Reminds me of the tremrinal emiulator ROM for th
HP9830,
Sweet! Google found this for pix and desc:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HP_9800_series_desktop_computers
My high school started everyone with programming BASIC
on the HP 9820A:
I find that hard to believe for one good reason. The HP9820 never ran
BASIC...
The HP9820 was HP's first infix-notation (as opposed to RPN/postfix)
calculator and used a language that developed into the 'HPL' of the 9825
etc.
The HP9830 was the machine in that family that ran BASIC. In many ways
it's the first personal computer, in that it was the first all-in-one
machine that you simply put on a desk, plugged into the mains, turned on
and started programming in BASIC.
You may have guessed I have something of a soft spot for these machines.
I own a 9810 (3 level stack RPN), 9820 amd 9830, and a considerable
number of the interfaces. One of my long-term goals is to get an HP9880
disk system for the 9830.
Things I like about them include :
-- They're one of the few bit-serial machines you are likely to find
(they're a lot more common than a PDP8/s for example) and that in itself
makes them interesting to me
-- The CPU is built mostly from TTL (there's no single-chip
microprocessor), so you can dive in with the logic analyser. On the other
hand, the machines are small enough to be easy to accomodate, unlike, say
a rack mounted minicomputer
-- They have the legendary HP build quality and though-out design.
-- Most faults can be easily fixed. Most of the electronic parts are
still easy to obtain -- the only custom ICs are the ROMs. The RAMs (1103
1K*1 DRAMs) are hard to find, though. The displays can fail and are vry
hard to get. But the TTL logic for the CPU and memory control is not a
problem. Debugging them is not too hard, but you do need a logic
analyser. Mechanical problems are normally just decayed rubber parts
(card reader rollers, printer platten), they can be replaced without too
much work.
-- A purely selfish rason. They are HP calculators, at least in name, and
are on the fringe of what HPCC (http://www.hpcc.org/) covers. This group
is the only place where I get to meet like-minded people, and while I
would have problems if I wanted to chat about PDP11s all the time, I can
get away with mentionign the HP9830 ;-)
There are also some pictures on the aforemntioned site, and in my flickr
accound (tony_duell). The latter contains no pictures of the complete
machine, but it does show all the plug-in PCBs, repairing the printr and
card reader, etc.
-tony
3:39 p.m.
On 6 Aug 2011 at 18:47, Tony Duell wrote:
I'm not following that logic. Short of some sort of storage (usually
floppy disk and controller), what's the big difference between most
microprocessor-based terminals and personal computers?
Many 8-bit personal computers (e.g. Televideo, Intertec, etc.) are
scarcely more than a terminal with a disk drive or two added.
--Chuck
Part of me
still craves dedicated terminals
since they're just so reliable, and you can just swap
in another when it breaks. No (or few) stored settings.
Or alternaticely, erminals are genrally much easier to repair to
compoent level than PCs.
7 Aug
7 Aug
1:11 p.m.
On 6 Aug 2011 at 18:47, Tony Duell wrote:
I'm not following that logic. Short of some sort of storage (usually
floppy disk and controller), what's the big difference between most
microprocessor-based terminals and personal computers?
I was using 'PC' to mean a modern-ish machine here...
In any case, not all terminals are microprocessor-controlled.
Unlike modern PCs, most video terminals are not just one ASIC after
anohter. Yes, a custom video controller chip is not uncommon, but most of
the time that's the only unrecognisable part. And a fair number of
terminals are all standard ICs. BGA ICs are not common in video
terminals, and it's much more likely you';ll find proper service
documentatiuon for a video terminal than for a PC.
Part of
me still craves dedicated terminals
since they're just so reliable, and you can just swap
in another when it breaks. No (or few) stored settings.
Or alternaticely, erminals are genrally much easier to repair to
compoent level than PCs.
Many 8-bit personal computers (e.g. Televideo, Intertec, etc.) are
scarcely more than a terminal with a disk drive or two added.
Some CP/M machines were genuinely a terminal and a computer system in the
smae box. The H88/H89/Z90 (etc) springs to mind, they're an H19 terminal
with a CP/M machine packied into the case, communicating serially. The
HP120 and HP125 machines are also really a seaprate terminal (Z80-based)
and CP/M computer (also Z80-based), communciting via a parallel interface.
Sure there are complicted terminals, but be honest. Which would you
rather fix : A VT100 or a modern Wintel PC?
-tony
3:14 p.m.
On 7 Aug 2011 at 18:11, Tony Duell wrote:
In any case, not all terminals are
microprocessor-controlled.
I've owned a couple of those, and also a couple of 8008-based ones
with 1702 EPROMs, shift-register memory...
Sure there are complicted terminals, but be honest.
Which would you
rather fix : A VT100 or a modern Wintel PC?
Oh, by far, the Wintel PC. You either replace the motherboard or the
power supply. There just isn't that much more to work on--and
nothing that warrants taking the time to bother working at the chip
level--if your time means anything to you.
(ducking the flames)
But it really is true.
Even with the issue of terminals, a modern terminal would require
what, less than 5 ICs, including RS-232 level translation and run
from a wall wart? That terminal using the Parallax
Propeller project
springs to mind as a "modern" terminal--and it's at
least a decade
behind the "bleeding edge".
Of course, a true "modern" terminal wouldn't use RS-232, either.
--Chuck
3:49 p.m.
On 7 Aug 2011 at 18:11, Tony Duell wrote:
I still have an duse several non-microprocessor based terminals. Those I
can understnad how to repair////
In any case, not all terminals are
microprocessor-controlled.
I've owned a couple of those, and also a couple of 8008-based ones
with 1702 EPROMs, shift-register memory... Sure there are complicted terminals, but be
honest. Which would you
rather fix : A VT100 or a modern Wintel PC?
Oh, by far, the Wintel PC. You either replace the motherboard or the
power supply. There just isn't that much more to work on--and nothing that warrants taking the time to bother
working at the chip
level--if your time means anything to you.
It doesn't. Since nobody will pay me for my time, my time is by defintion
worthless.
[...]
Of course, a true "modern" terminal
wouldn't use RS-232, either.
That surely depends on what you want to link it to. A terminal to use as,
say, a PDP11 console, ahs to have either a 20mA loop or an RS232
interface, becuase that's what it has to connect to.
And fortunately this is classiccmp, so we can tale about real VT100s, etc...
-tony
11 Aug
11 Aug
4:13 p.m.
On 7 August 2011 20:49, Tony Duell <ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk> wrote:
It doesn't. Since nobody will pay me for my time, my time is by defintion
worthless.
I am in the same boat, but recently, I have managed to get several
bits of paying work.
So, in the garage & attic, I have:
* 1 dead Apple iMac G5 20" with a well-known motherboard capacitor problem
* 1 dead Apple Mac SE/30, cause unknown, but I've bought a service manual
* 1 dead IBM ThinkPad 700, due to battery leakage, that needs to be
stripped down and given a good clean and checked for damage
* 1 dead Acorn RISC PC and a spare motherboard, which to be honest, I
suspect I can sort out myself :)
Fancy having a crack at the two Macs and the "Butterfly"? Happy to pay
for your time, and I'll deliver them to you. I'll buy and bring a set
of replacement capacitors for the iMac.
I mean, if it'll help...
I also will try to sort you out with a decent fully-working tested
modern PC capable of running a current Linux distro with a full GUI
desktop, gratis, if you'd like. I am sure I can sort out screen,
mouse, keyboard etc.
--
Liam Proven ? Info & profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/lproven
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lproven at gmail.com
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884 ? Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AIM/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven ? MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? ICQ: 73187508
12 Aug
12 Aug
1:39 p.m.
On 7 August 2011 20:49, Tony Duell <ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk> wrote:
Unfortunately, I've been informed by the powers-that-be that while it is
perfectly legal for me to use my workshop for my hobby, if I make money
using it, it's a business and I have to meet all sorts of safety
regualtions, such as fitting guards to machine tools, fume estraction
equipment to the soldring iron, etc. Needless to say this would cost me a
lot more that I could evr make from doing such jobs, so while I'll hapily
help you fix your machines, I cannot accept payment for it.
It doesn't. Since nobody will pay me for my time, my time is by definti=
on
worthless.
I am in the same boat, but recently, I have managed to get several
bits of paying work.
So, in the garage & attic, I have:
* 1 dead Apple iMac G5 20" with a well-known motherboard capacitor proble=
m
Do you know which capactiros are involved? Do you have replacements (or
at least know what they should be)?
* 1 dead Apple Mac SE/30, cause unknown, but I've
bought a service manual
I doubt that's what I'd call a 'service manual' but I can take a look at
the machine anyway...
* 1 dead IBM ThinkPad 700, due to battery leakage,
that needs to be
stripped down and given a good clean and checked for damage
OK...
* 1 dead Acorn RISC PC and a spare motherboard, which
to be honest, I
suspect I can sort out myself :)
Pitty, that's the only one I have a schematic for.
Fancy having a crack at the two Macs and the "Butterfly"? Happy to pay
for your time, and I'll deliver them to you. I'll buy and bring a set
of replacement capacitors for the iMac.
Quite possibly, but as I said, there'll be no charge. Alternatively I can
bring a small-ish toolkit and test gear to you and at least fix the
easier machines, and get some idea what needs to be done ot the others.
Let me know...
-tony
13 Aug
13 Aug
9:27 a.m.
On 12 August 2011 18:39, Tony Duell <ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk> wrote:
OK, thanks, and I will do!
--
Liam Proven ? Info & profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/lproven
Email: lproven at cix.co.uk ? GMail/GoogleTalk/Orkut: lproven at gmail.com
Tel: +44 20-8685-0498 ? Cell: +44 7939-087884 ? Fax: + 44 870-9151419
AIM/Yahoo/Skype: liamproven ? MSN: lproven at hotmail.com ? ICQ: 73187508
On 7 August 2011 20:49, Tony Duell <ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk> wrote:
Unfortunately, I've been informed by the powers-that-be that while it is
perfectly legal for me to use my workshop for my hobby, if I make money
using it, it's a business and I have to meet all sorts of safety
regualtions, such as fitting guards to machine tools, fume estraction
equipment to the soldring iron, etc. Needless to say this would cost me a
lot more that I could evr make from doing such jobs, so while I'll hapily
help you fix your machines, I cannot accept payment for it.
It doesn't. Since nobody will pay me for my time, my time is by definti=
on
worthless.
I am in the same boat, but recently, I have managed to get several
bits of paying work.
So, in the garage & attic, I have:
* 1 dead Apple iMac G5 20" with a well-known motherboard capacitor proble=
m
Do you know which capactiros are involved? Do you have replacements (or
at least know what they should be)?
* 1 dead Apple Mac SE/30, cause unknown, but
I've bought a service manual
I doubt that's what I'd call a 'service manual' but I can take a look at
the machine anyway...
* 1 dead IBM ThinkPad 700, due to battery
leakage, that needs to be
stripped down and given a good clean and checked for damage
OK...
* 1 dead Acorn RISC PC and a spare motherboard,
which to be honest, I
suspect I can sort out myself :)
Pitty, that's the only one I have a schematic for.
Fancy having a crack at the two Macs and the "Butterfly"? Happy to pay
for your time, and I'll deliver them to you. I'll buy and bring a set
of replacement capacitors for the iMac.
Quite possibly, but as I said, there'll be no charge. Alternatively I can
bring a small-ish toolkit and test gear to you and at least fix the
easier machines, and get some idea what needs to be done ot the others.
Let me know... 
12:31 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
Unfortunately, I've been informed by the
powers-that-be that while it is
perfectly legal for me to use my workshop for my hobby, if I make money
using it, it's a business and I have to meet all sorts of safety
regualtions, such as fitting guards to machine tools, fume estraction
equipment to the soldring iron, etc. Needless to say this would cost me a
lot more that I could evr make from doing such jobs, so while I'll hapily
help you fix your machines, I cannot accept payment for it.
But that does NOT preclude you giving Tony an appropriate gift. Legally
gifts may include currency, but that might look like non-compliance on
Tony's part, so stick to interesting old hardware, or gift certificates to
his suppliers.
12:43 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
Fred Cisin wrote:
I am curious about the information that Tony received about various
safety equipment 'required'. Perhaps this extra investment is only
required if he has employees, but not if he does the work solo. I have
no idea of the laws in the UK, but have trouble believing they are that
intrusive to a small home-based business.
As long as Tony is declaring his income sources I fail to see where he
would run into any problems - considering that I doubt he would be
making much on the odd repair of equipment - and if he does end up
making money, then he can open a small shop and add the safety items as
required for small employers in his country.
John :-#)#
--
John's Jukes Ltd. 2343 Main St., Vancouver, BC, Canada V5T 3C9
Call (604)872-5757 or Fax 872-2010 (Pinballs, Jukes, VideoGames)
www.flippers.com
"Old pinballers never die, they just flip out"
Unfortunately,
I've been informed by the powers-that-be that while it is
perfectly legal for me to use my workshop for my hobby, if I make money
using it, it's a business and I have to meet all sorts of safety
regualtions, such as fitting guards to machine tools, fume estraction
equipment to the soldring iron, etc. Needless to say this would cost me a
lot more that I could evr make from doing such jobs, so while I'll hapily
help you fix your machines, I cannot accept payment for it.
But that does NOT preclude you giving Tony an appropriate gift. Legally
gifts may include currency, but that might look like non-compliance on
Tony's part, so stick to interesting old hardware, or gift certificates to
his suppliers.
15 Aug
15 Aug
9:37 a.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On Sat, 13 Aug 2011, John Robertson wrote:
I am
curious about the information that Tony received about various safety
equipment 'required'. Perhaps this extra investment is only required if he
has employees, but not if he does the work solo. I have no idea of the laws
in the UK, but have trouble believing they are that intrusive to a small
home-based business.
It's my understanding that the "health & safety" types in the UK
are so
over the top that they may eventually change the UK flag colors to be
safety yellow with reflective silver stripes.
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
http://www.simpits.org/geneb - The Me-109F/X Project
Some people collect things for a hobby. Geeks collect hobbies.
ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_!
Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical
minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which
holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd
by the clean end.
11:16 a.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
You wouldn't believe the ridiculous degree to which "health and safety" has
been taken in this country.
When it snows my son's school won't let the children out to play in the
snow, throw snow balls, make slides etc, all for fear of being sued. If you
drive a company car, that is considered a place of work and you are not
allowed to smoke in it (not that I smoke). Some councils (local government
in the UK) no longer decorate their town with hanging baskets of flowers in
case one will fall on someone's head. The list goes on and on.
I can quite believe what Tony says, particularly if it is considered a
business. Perhaps Tony's only way out is to find a way for it not to be
considered a business, but I don't know how he could do that.
Regards
Rob
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-
bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of John Robertson
Sent: 13 August 2011 17:43
To: General Discussion: On-Topic Posts Only
Subject: Re: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
Fred Cisin wrote:
>> Unfortunately, I've been informed by the powers-that-be that while it
>> is perfectly legal for me to use my workshop for my hobby, if I make
>> money using it, it's a business and I have to meet all sorts of
>> safety regualtions, such as fitting guards to machine tools, fume
>> estraction equipment to the soldring iron, etc. Needless to say this
>> would cost me a lot more that I could evr make from doing such jobs,
>> so while I'll hapily help you fix your machines, I cannot accept
payment for
it.
But that does NOT preclude you giving Tony an appropriate gift.
Legally gifts may include currency, but that might look like
non-compliance on Tony's part, so stick to interesting old hardware,
or gift certificates to his suppliers.
I am curious about the information that Tony received about various safety
equipment 'required'. Perhaps this extra investment is only required if he
has
employees, but not if he does the work solo. I have no
idea of the laws in
the
UK, but have trouble believing they are that intrusive
to a small
home-based
business.
As long as Tony is declaring his income sources I fail to see where he
would
run into any problems - considering that I doubt he
would be making much
on
the odd repair of equipment - and if he does end up
making money, then he
can open a small shop and add the safety items as required for small
employers in his country.
John :-#)#
--
John's Jukes Ltd. 2343 Main St., Vancouver, BC, Canada V5T 3C9 Call
(604)872-
5757 or Fax 872-2010 (Pinballs, Jukes, VideoGames)
www.flippers.com
"Old pinballers never die, they just flip out"
11:43 a.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On 15/08/2011 16:16, Rob Jarratt wrote:
You wouldn't believe the ridiculous degree to
which "health and safety" has
been taken in this country.
When it snows my son's school won't let the children out to play in the
snow, throw snow balls, make slides etc, all for fear of being sued.
Even when I was at junior school back in the 70s we where asked not to
throw snowballs incase they contained stones (by mistake), so nothing
new there.
If you
drive a company car, that is considered a place of work and you are not
allowed to smoke in it (not that I smoke).
That's nothing to do with H&S, that's to do with the smoking in public
places law, which makes it an offense to smoke in an enclosed public
space or workplace. I guess non-smokers have a right to not be exposed
to harmfull substances whilst doing their job.
Some councils (local government
in the UK) no longer decorate their town with hanging baskets of flowers in
case one will fall on someone's head. The list goes on and on.
There are also a lot of people that don't know what they talk about and
site H&S as the reason. The reason for this is that there is a lot of
misconception about H&S. H&S law doesn't say that you have to prevent
every possible risk, just that you have to minimise them whenever
possible, and that anyone taking a risk for whatever reason should be
fully aware of it.
In the above case as long as said council had done all it reasonably
could to ensure that said hanging baskets where well maintained then
they shouldn't have a problem.
Cheers.
PS usual disclaimer I'm not a lawyer or in anyway an expert however I am
married to the deputy departmental safety officer in a UK academic
institution....so hopefully I have picked some of it up.
Phill.
12:53 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-
bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Phill Harvey-Smith
Sent: 15 August 2011 16:43
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On 15/08/2011 16:16, Rob Jarratt wrote:
> You wouldn't believe the ridiculous degree to which "health and
> safety" has been taken in this country.
>
> When it snows my son's school won't let the children out to play in
> the snow, throw snow balls, make slides etc, all for fear of being
sued.
Even when I was at junior school back in the 70s we where asked not to
throw
snowballs incase they contained stones (by mistake),
so nothing new there.
Fine, but you were allowed out into the playground weren't you? You could
make slides in the snow couldn't you? They won't even let them outside now!
If you
drive a company car, that is considered a place of work and you are
not allowed to smoke in it (not that I smoke).
That's nothing to do with H&S, that's to do with the smoking in public
law, which makes it an offense to smoke in an enclosed
public space or
workplace. I guess non-smokers have a right to not be exposed to harmfull
substances whilst doing their job.
And why do we have that law, it is as you say, to protect people's health,
but it is taken to extremes when it applies to company cars.
> Some councils (local government
> in the UK) no longer decorate their town with hanging baskets of
>flowers in case one will fall on someone's head. The list goes on and
on.
There are also a lot of people that don't know what they talk about and
site
H&S as the reason. The reason for this is that
there is a lot of
misconception
about H&S. H&S law doesn't say that you
have to prevent every possible
risk,
But that is how it is interpreted by many people, and also just the worry of
getting a letter from a legal firm and having to justify yourself is
something many people don't want to be bothered with, so they just ban
everything.
just that you have to minimise them whenever possible,
and that anyone
taking a risk for whatever reason should be fully aware of it.
In the above case as long as said council had done all it reasonably could
to
ensure that said hanging baskets where well maintained
then they shouldn't
have a problem.
OK, but what would they have to do to prove it?
Cheers.
PS usual disclaimer I'm not a lawyer or in anyway an expert however I am
married to the deputy departmental safety officer in a UK academic
institution....so hopefully I have picked some of it up.
Phill.
1:22 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On 15/08/2011 17:53, Rob Jarratt wrote:
So where do you draw the line then ? Company car does not neseserraly
mean single occupant. By banning it outright there's no ambiguity.
Besides I believe that you are also by law meant to take regular breaks
when driving, smoking can be done in those breaks.
Then they should educate themselves, and take advice from those in the
know. Of course the real problem here is the 'compensation culture' we
seem to have at the moment where everything has to be someone else's
fault, get rid of that and most of the supposed problems disappear.
Show documentation to the fact that the things had been checked before
hanging as being fit for purpose and that the situation had been
risk-assessed.
I'm sorry I'm not going to bow down to the dogma of 'all H&S is bad'.
For some of the myths surrounding h&s the HSE website is quite good :
http://www.hse.gov.uk/myth/
Cheers.
Phill.
--
Phill Harvey-Smith, Programmer, Hardware hacker, and general eccentric !
"You can twist perceptions, but reality won't budge" -- Rush.
Fine, but you were allowed out into the playground weren't you? You could
make slides in the snow couldn't you? They won't even let them outside now!
Whilst I don't have chidren so have no experience of this, I find it
hard to believe that this is applied everywhere.
That's
nothing to do with H&S, that's to do with the smoking in public
places
law, which makes it an offense to smoke in an
enclosed public space or
workplace. I guess non-smokers have a right to not be exposed to harmfull
substances whilst doing their job.
And why do we have that law, it is as you say, to protect people's health,
but it is taken to extremes when it applies to company cars. There are also
a lot of people that don't know what they talk about and
site
H&S as the reason. The reason for this is
that there is a lot of
misconception
about H&S. H&S law doesn't say that
you have to prevent every possible
risk,
But that is how it is interpreted by many people, and also just the worry of
getting a letter from a legal firm and having to justify yourself is
something many people don't want to be bothered with, so they just ban
everything. just that you
have to minimise them whenever possible, and that anyone
taking a risk for whatever reason should be fully aware of it.
In the above case as long as said council had done all it reasonably could
to
ensure that said hanging baskets where well
maintained then they shouldn't
have a problem.
OK, but what would they have to do to prove it?
4:29 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
The bit where I completely agree with you is the compensation culture, get
rid of that and I would have little to complain about. The real villains in
my view are the lawyers.
Regards
Rob
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-
bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Phill Harvey-Smith
Sent: 15 August 2011 18:22
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On 15/08/2011 17:53, Rob Jarratt wrote:
to
Fine, but you were allowed out into the playground weren't you? You
could make slides in the snow couldn't you? They won't even let them
outside now!
Whilst I don't have chidren so have no experience of this, I find it hard believe that this is applied everywhere.
So where do you draw the line then ? Company car does not neseserraly
mean single occupant. By banning it outright there's no ambiguity.
Besides I believe that you are also by law meant to take regular breaks
when
That's nothing to do with H&S, that's to do with the smoking in
public
places
law, which makes it an offense to smoke in an
enclosed public space
or workplace. I guess non-smokers have a right to not be exposed to
harmfull substances whilst doing their job.
And why do we have that law, it is as you say, to protect people's
health, but it is taken to extremes when it applies to company cars. driving, smoking can be done in those breaks.
Then they should educate themselves, and take advice from those in the
know. Of course the real problem here is the 'compensation culture' we
seem
There are
also a lot of people that don't know what they talk about
and
site
H&S as the reason. The reason for this is
that there is a lot of
misconception
about H&S. H&S law doesn't say that
you have to prevent every
possible
risk,
But that is how it is interpreted by many people, and also just the
worry of getting a letter from a legal firm and having to justify
yourself is something many people don't want to be bothered with, so
they just ban everything. to have at the moment where everything has to be
someone else's fault, get
rid of that and most of the supposed problems disappear.
Show documentation to the fact that the things had been checked before
hanging as being fit for purpose and that the situation had been
risk-assessed.
just that
you have to minimise them whenever possible, and that
anyone taking a risk for whatever reason should be fully aware of it.
In the above case as long as said council had done all it reasonably
could
to
ensure that said hanging baskets where well
maintained then they
shouldn't have a problem.
OK, but what would they have to do to prove it?
I'm sorry I'm not going to bow down to the dogma of 'all H&S is
bad'.
For some of the myths surrounding h&s the HSE website is quite good :
http://www.hse.gov.uk/myth/
Cheers.
Phill.
--
Phill Harvey-Smith, Programmer, Hardware hacker, and general eccentric !
"You can twist perceptions, but reality won't budge" -- Rush.
8:20 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On 15/08/11 17:53, Rob Jarratt wrote:
And a good 80% of smokers ignore it anyway. Bus stations, transport
interchanges (combined bus/rail stations), bus shelters and train
stations are really bad for this... funnily enough there's usually a
large congregation around the "No Smoking" signs...
--
Phil.
classiccmp at philpem.me.uk
http://www.philpem.me.uk/
>
> That's nothing to do with H&S, that's to do with the smoking in public
places
> law, which makes it an offense to smoke in
an enclosed public space or
> workplace. I guess non-smokers have a right to not be exposed to harmfull
> substances whilst doing their job.
And why do we have that law, it is as you say, to protect people's health,
but it is taken to extremes when it applies to company cars.
16 Aug
16 Aug
3:01 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
And a good 80% of smokers ignore it anyway. Bus stations, transport
interchanges (combined bus/rail stations), bus shelters and train
I thought that smoking was allowed in bus shelteres if less than 50% of
the walls were there (if you see what I mean). Not that I intend to smoke....
I did however hear the following announceent at Hammersmith bus station :
'You are reminded that smoking is prohibited within this bus station.
This includes the drivers hiding behind their buses'
-tony
15 Aug
15 Aug
7:43 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On 15/08/2011 16:43, Phill Harvey-Smith wrote:
Phill is absolutely correct. If you surf the HSE website you'll even
find a set of pages making fun of the more silly claims that are made in
the name of H&S, and explaining what the reality is. Google "Myth of
the Month". They've also made several statements in the press in recent
years, particularly aimed at overzealous application of "health and
safety" to children at play.
I'm curious about Tony's alleged requirements for all sorts of safety
equipment; what they were and where they came from, because I know HSE
don't generally make much fuss about small self-employed operations.
That's not to say there aren't regulations they would enforce, but I'd
not expect them to be onerous. For example, I know places that don't
have specific fume extractions for soldering stations, if they have a
room extractor fan or other ventilation. I think Tony would have more
hassle from insurance (for a business) than from the HSE.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Network Manager
University of York
On 15/08/2011 16:16, Rob Jarratt wrote:
> You wouldn't believe the ridiculous degree to which "health and
> safety" has
> been taken in this country.
Some councils (local government
in the UK) no longer decorate their town with hanging baskets of
flowers in
case one will fall on someone's head. The list goes on and on.
There are also a lot of people that don't know what they talk about and
site H&S as the reason. The reason for this is that there is a lot of
misconception about H&S. H&S law doesn't say that you have to prevent
every possible risk, just that you have to minimise them whenever
possible, and that anyone taking a risk for whatever reason should be
fully aware of it.
16 Aug
16 Aug
2:57 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
Phill is absolutely correct. If you surf the HSE
website you'll even
find a set of pages making fun of the more silly claims that are made in
Indeed. I am sure many of the more silly ones come from the 'compensation
culture' and a desire to avoid being sued.
I'm curious about Tony's alleged requirements
for all sorts of safety
equipment; what they were and where they came from, because I know HSE
don't generally make much fuss about small self-employed operations.
I cna't rememebr the exact source, but it was 'official', possibly
somebody at the DTI. I was told that if I used my hobby workshop for
business (meaning I was doing work for money), even if I was the only
person there and the only person in said businsess, then I would have to
have various guards on my machine tools, I would have to have fume
extraction on the soldering iron, and so on.
From what I've heard, one-man clock repairers (who
not suprisingly use
lathes) have been hassled by safety officiers about such
things.
And here we come to the problem. Even if I am in the right and I don't
legally require, say, a fume extrraction set-up, I have neither the time
nor the money to do battle in court. I'd much rather be fixing old
computers, etc, than battling with officials. Period.
And then there's the question of 'is it worth it'. I am not pestered by
people who want me to fix their machines or make parts for them. Yes, I
am asked -- a lot -- for advice, but that's a diffrent matter, and
doesn't have any legal implications.
Think of a repair you might want me to do for you. Now think how much
you'd want to pay for it. And then how many such repairs I might get in a
year. The conculsion I quickly came to was that it simply wasn't worth
it.
Yes, it's worth me stickign a bit of 7/8" brass rod in the 3-jaw amd
making a hub for an HP9810 card reader for a fellow HPCC member. But
given that if I did it commercially, I'd have many more expenses
(insurance, possible safety upgrades ot th workshop, etc), and that I'd
be lucky to sell 10 a year at, perhaps \pounds 5.00 each, I don't see it
being worthwhile.
-tony
3:42 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
Funny you should mention clock makers and their workshops, that was
the job I got made redundant from and
I did take some equipment pictures before we cleared the place, some
machines are now at home as an addition to the redundancy payment so
that I can do work.
http://www.archivist.info/cnc/works/
Some may fall off their chairs at those pics, but in some cases you
just cannot do the work in a way some HS person may think is safe.
eg we hand turn with a graver, the wheel cutter is a wonder with the
open and above rubber belt/rope
but sticking fingers in it was safe (ish) because the friction is very
low and just causes a stall (uses stored energy in the spindle)
Yes this one bites http://www.archivist.info/cnc/works/P1010234.JPG
and was a bugger to set up and was the bosses toy, I kept well clear,
far safer to use http://www.archivist.info/cnc/works/P1010235.JPG even
if it looks just as bad
These 1950's and earlier machines were safe in experienced hands when
used properly, I still have all my flesh
although the boss lost a bit, he had a .8 MOD gear slot in a finger
because he was feeling for the cutter to vibrate the stock and had his
finger wrong side.
There are places where guards positively make a job more dangerous or
impossible to do.
Back in the old days a few cuts and bruises were the best way to teach safety.
Those grazed knees did more than hurt a bit as a kid, they taught one
to be careful of falling over.
Dave Caroline
17 Aug
17 Aug
3:17 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
Funny you should mention clock makers and their workshops, that was
Well, horology has been an interest of mine for many years. It is my
intention to make a clock sometime (that's a real mechanical clock, of
course, I've made plenty of electronci ones already).
Some may fall off their chairs at those pics, but in
some cases you
just cannot do the work in a way some HS person may think is safe.
Same applies to electronic reapirs, of course. I had a run-in with a
safety officer who objected to any bare wires/contacts at all, even those
carrying 5V logic singals -- and this was in a research lab. You know as
well as I do that it's impossible to desgin something if you can't connct
a 'scope to any point you want without having to unscrew a covr, connect
the probe and screw the cover back again. But anyway...
eg we hand turn with a graver, the wheel cutter is a wonder with the
open and above rubber belt/rope
I don;t have a wheel cutting engine (I would use a dividing head on a
milling set-up). I do have some specialised clock/watch tools, like a set
of hand-bowed turns., jacot tool, mainswring winder, staking set, etc.
Not terribly useful, but I acquired an old, valved watch timing machine.
It's quit an interesting piece of electronics and combines 2 of my
hobbies :-)
but sticking fingers in it was safe (ish) because the
friction is very
low and just causes a stall (uses stored energy in the spindle)
Quite apart from the fact that uou know not to stick your fingers in a
running amchine tool. I've used plenty of tools here that could inflict
serious injury, but they don't becasue I know what they are capable of
and take care.
Mind you I really must rememebr that the flutes on a slot drill are
cutting edges, and taht it's a bad idea to pick on up by said flutes,
even when stationary....
Back in the old days a few cuts and bruises were the
best way to teach safety.
I am incluned to agree with you. You can make things too safe IMHO.
-tony
5:32 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On 08/17/2011 05:23 PM, Fred Cisin wrote:
horology and whoring-around need not be mutually exclusive
In fact, one can do both at the same time!
Heck, I know what I'm doing this weekend! ;)
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
Well, horology has been an interest of mine for many
years...
Me too...no, scratch that--no "w"...
5:52 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
Well, horology
has been an interest of mine for many years...
Me too...no, scratch that--no "w"... Heck, I know what I'm doing this weekend! ;)
both can be expensive
18 Aug
18 Aug
1:38 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On 17 Aug 2011 at 20:17, Tony Duell wrote:
I'm intersted in just about all timekeeping deviuces from sundials ot
atomic clocks -- with one exception. I don't have much interst in modern
electrronic clock projects that consist of a programmed microcontroller
and a display. I know microcontrollers cna do that...
Mechanicla clocks interest me a lot, and always have. Alas I cna't afford
the things I'd really like to work on, but ther are plenty of 20th
century clocks around for a few pounds htat I can have fun getting to run
again. Other things that interest me (and I can obtain) include older
synchonous-motor clocks, elctrically-rewound spring-driven clocks,
electorncially-maintaind balance-wheel clocks (normally just a single
germanium trransitor triggeredby one winding on the balanace and
energising a second winding.
Older eleectornci clocks, before everything went into 1 chip are also of
interest, I have an HP59309 (of course!). I'd like to find a Rb standard
[1] one day...
[1] Yes, I realise that a Cs beam is a primary standard, but the tubes in
said units have a finite life by design (the Cx is being used up all the
time). The Rb tube opeates on a ratehr different principle and lasts a
lot longer. THus it's more practical for me.
-tony
Well, horology has been an interest of mine for
many years...
Me too...no, scratch that--no "w"...
2:43 p.m.
New subject: Clocks - was Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On 18 Aug 2011 at 18:38, Tony Duell wrote:
Mechanicla clocks interest me a lot, and always have.
Alas I cna't
afford the things I'd really like to work on, but ther are plenty of
20th century clocks around for a few pounds htat I can have fun
getting to run again. Other things that interest me (and I can obtain)
include older synchonous-motor clocks, elctrically-rewound
spring-driven clocks, electorncially-maintaind balance-wheel clocks
(normally just a single germanium trransitor triggeredby one winding
on the balanace and energising a second winding.
Then there are the "stamped out of tin can stock" that used to come
in autos and kitchen appliances. On a 56 Chevy, I replaced the
dashboard clock with one from a Soviet tank--it fit perfectly and
worked much better--the tank clock had the additional bonus of
allowing it to be hand-wound by turning the bezel--it didn't wind
electrically. It'd run for about two weeks on a winding and was
probably better-constructed than the tank itself.
Lately, the clock in my kitchen wall oven has gone on the fritz.
It's a cheap GE model that was probably standard on a dozen brands.
The problem is that the works were never enclosed and dust and grease
gummed things up, leading to one of the smaller brass pinions
becoming stripped. I got it working temporarily by inserting a small
washer (there's enough lateral slop), offsetting the pinion slightly.
But the wear on the shaft is evident, so it's bound to fail again.
Replacement clock prices on eBay are insane--$100 for a used unit
which is essentially a cheap bit of stamping.
Makes me angry at the poor design. A bit of card stock wrapped
around the works would have kept the dust out and considerably
extended the working life. Cost would have been negligible.
--Chuck
3:06 p.m.
New subject: Clocks - was Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96,
Then there are the "stamped out of tin can stock" that used to come
Some car clocks were better than others... I remember repairing a
spring-driven (electrically wound) clock for a friend. It didn't see many
worse than other cheap clocks of thast periud, and had quite thick brass
plates, for example.
Lately, the clock in my kitchen wall oven has gone on
the fritz.
It's a cheap GE model that was probably standard on a dozen brands.
The problem is that the works were never enclosed and dust and grease
This sounds like the sowrt of thing that should be taken apart and
cleaned once a year or so. But who is going to do that?
gummed things up, leading to one of the smaller brass
pinions
becoming stripped. I got it working temporarily by inserting a small
washer (there's enough lateral slop), offsetting the pinion slightly.
But the wear on the shaft is evident, so it's bound to fail again.
Sometimes goy can move the pinion along the arbor. Or machine one end of
the arbor and fit an extrended bush in the plate at the other end to move
the whole thing along a bit.
Of course the proper repair involves cutting a new pinion...
Replacement clock prices on eBay are insane--$100 for a used unit
which is essentially a cheap bit of stamping.
Probably becasue most have failed by now and the ones that remair are
**RARE**
Makes me angry at the poor design. A bit of card stock wrapped
around the works would have kept the dust out and considerably
extended the working life. Cost would have been negligible.
Oh don;'t get me started. It's what you get when companies are run by
accountants who can't see beyond the next balance sheet. They figure that
if you can save $0.10 on each item the profits go up. Yes, they do, for
that quarter (or whatever. But then the likes of us buy them, they fail,
and we see how bad the design was. And then we never buy for said company
again./ Whereas if it had been well-deisgned, we'd go back for more and
more things.
Oh well...
-tony
3:31 p.m.
New subject: Clocks - was Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
Having repaired one of those tin and zinc clocks at the last job
before redundancy,
$100 is a lot cheaper than the invoice for fixing your dead one.
I had to carefully craft a newly cut gear on the old mechanism.
Dave Caroline
19 Aug
19 Aug
3:05 p.m.
New subject: Clocks - was Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96,
Having repaired one of those tin and zinc clocks at the last job
before redundancy,
$100 is a lot cheaper than the invoice for fixing your dead one.
I had to carefully craft a newly cut gear on the old mechanism.
This is, unfortunately a problem with fixing many vintage devices :-(
To get back to classic computers... Think of just about any machine that
you like, and think of the difference in price (Ebay if you like) betwen
a working example and a non-working one. Even for quite rare machines,
it's not that much. And now think how long it would take to fix the
non-working one (fiding the fualt, tracking down spares, soldering in the
componnts, etc). And thus work out what thest rpeairs would pay per hour.
That's why it's not worth the hassle of running a business for this.
On the other hand, fixing these machines is fun, and it's a great hobby.
Hobbies don';t make financial sense. So I am happy to cerry on fixing
things and to share my experiences
-tony
18 Aug
18 Aug
3:15 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On 08/18/2011 01:38 PM, Tony Duell wrote:
I'd like to find a Rb standard [1] one day...
[1] Yes, I realise that a Cs beam is a primary standard, but the tubes in
said units have a finite life by design (the Cx is being used up all the
time). The Rb tube opeates on a ratehr different principle and lasts a
lot longer. THus it's more practical for me.
Decent Rb modules can be had for well under $100 nowadays. You
should pick one up!
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
17 Aug
17 Aug
4:43 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
If you need gears making :)
gears.archivist.info
Dave
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 8:17 PM, Tony Duell <ard at p850ug1.demon.co.uk> wrote:
Funny you should mention clock makers and their workshops, that was
Well, horology has been an interest of mine for many years. It is my
intention to make a clock sometime (that's a real mechanical clock, of
course, I've made plenty of electronci ones already).
Some may fall off their chairs at those pics, but
in some cases you
just cannot do the work in a way some HS person may think is safe.
Same applies to electronic reapirs, of course. I had a run-in with a
safety officer who objected to any bare wires/contacts at all, even those
carrying 5V logic singals -- and this was in a research lab. You know as
well as I do that it's impossible to desgin something if you can't connct
a 'scope to any point you want without having to unscrew a covr, connect
the probe and screw the cover back again. But anyway...
eg we hand turn with a graver, the wheel cutter is a wonder with the
open and above rubber belt/rope
I don;t have a wheel cutting engine (I would use a dividing head on a
milling set-up). I do have some specialised clock/watch tools, like a set
of hand-bowed turns., jacot tool, mainswring winder, staking set, etc.
Not terribly useful, but I acquired an old, valved watch timing machine.
It's quit an interesting piece of electronics and combines 2 of my
hobbies :-)
but sticking fingers in it was safe (ish) because
the friction is very
low and just causes a stall (uses stored energy in the spindle)
Quite apart from the fact that uou know not to stick your fingers in a
running amchine tool. I've used plenty of tools here that could inflict
serious injury, but they don't becasue I know what they are capable of
and take care.
Mind you I really must rememebr that the flutes on a slot drill are
cutting edges, and taht it's a bad idea to pick on up by said flutes,
even when stationary....
Back in the old days a few cuts and bruises were
the best way to teach safety.
I am incluned to agree with you. You can make things too safe IMHO.
-tony
15 Aug
15 Aug
11:45 a.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
I did look on the UK .gov site when I first saw this thread, iirc when
you get into the real info self employed are not required to have the
same safety equipment as an employer would.
The front page I saw was mostly planning and rates and blanked health
and safety, says me hiding from .gov types in the UK too :)
Hence my collection site only mentions donations and even if I get
asked up front before I scan something I just say donation, and just
do the scan, provide the url, and hope for the best.
Doing the occasional job for a few notes is also within planning I
believe if its not the main job and also not more than x times a year,
I remember reading something about the frequency test of amateur car
car sales in that regard.
Also working from hope planning has been relaxed a bit for teleworking
etc. but the official line often shows the onerous catch all wording.
Dave Caroline
12:08 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On Mon, 15 Aug 2011, Dave Caroline wrote:
Hence my collection site only mentions donations and
even if I get
asked up front before I scan something I just say donation, and just
do the scan, provide the url, and hope for the best.
There are even some places that post "suggested donation amount"!
12:04 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On Mon, 15 Aug 2011, Rob Jarratt wrote:
I can quite believe what Tony says, particularly if it
is considered a
business. Perhaps Tony's only way out is to find a way for it not to be
considered a business, but I don't know how he could do that.
EXACTLY as he is doing.
By his refusal to accept payment, he makes it completely clear that it is
NOT a business, merely a home hobby workshop, for which many safety-nanny
requirements do not apply.
But, even with that, there is nothing precluding him letting it be known
what gifts, including gift certificates, he would like to receive from
generous people that he helps.
The prosecution LOST a case near here recently against a prostitute who
advertised that she would like "assignations with generous men".
I think that I would far rather trust Tony's judgement rather than the
guvmint when it comes to decisions of what constitutes appropriate health
and safety measures.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
1:10 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-
bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Fred Cisin
Sent: 15 August 2011 17:05
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: RE: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On Mon, 15 Aug 2011, Rob Jarratt wrote:
Well yes of course, what I was trying to say was that maybe there could be a
way for him to be paid without it being called a business. Along the lines
of Dave Caroline's reply.
I can quite believe what Tony says, particularly
if it is considered a
business. Perhaps Tony's only way out is to find a way for it not to
be considered a business, but I don't know how he could do that.
EXACTLY as he is doing. By his refusal to accept payment, he makes it
completely clear that it is
NOT a
business, merely a home hobby workshop, for which many
safety-nanny
requirements do not apply.
But, even with that, there is nothing precluding him letting it be known
what
gifts, including gift certificates, he would like to
receive from generous
people
that he helps.
The prosecution LOST a case near here recently against a prostitute who
advertised that she would like "assignations with generous men".
I think that I would far rather trust Tony's judgement rather than the
guvmint
when it comes to decisions of what constitutes
appropriate health and
safety
measures.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
4:46 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
I can quite believe what Tony says, particularly if it
is considered a
business. Perhaps Tony's only way out is to find a way for it not to be
considered a business, but I don't know how he could do that.
Exactly...
There is a very easy way for it not to be a business, and that's for me
to use said workshop for my hobby, not making any money doing it. It is
perfectly legal for me to enjoy myself fixing old computers, making
clocks, etc in this way uysing whatever tools I like with no safety
requirements at all.
It is also legal for me to allow friends to come into my workshop (they
are then repsonsible for their own actions).
But if I make mony, it's a business and has to meet said safety
requiurements. Since this would cost a lot more than I could ever make
back from said business, it makes more sense to me to ru8n it as a hobby,
and if j-random-HP-enthusiast wants to fix his card reader, he can pop
over with said unit. Even if I do all the metal turning, there is no
problem if I don't charge him.
-tony
16 Aug
16 Aug
3:14 a.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
It's probably obvious but surely you only start to make money once you have
covered the costs.
?
Rod Smallwood
?
?
-----Original Message-----
From: cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org]
On Behalf Of Tony Duell
Sent: 15 August 2011 21:46
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
I can quite believe what Tony says, particularly if it
is considered a
business. Perhaps Tony's only way out is to find a way for it not to be
considered a business, but I don't know how he could do that.
Exactly...
There is a very easy way for it not to be a business, and that's for me
to use said workshop for my hobby, not making any money doing it. It is
perfectly legal for me to enjoy myself fixing old computers, making
clocks, etc in this way uysing whatever tools I like with no safety
requirements at all.
It is also legal for me to allow friends to come into my workshop (they
are then repsonsible for their own actions).
But if I make mony, it's a business and has to meet said safety
requiurements. Since this would cost a lot more than I could ever make
back from said business, it makes more sense to me to ru8n it as a hobby,
and if j-random-HP-enthusiast wants to fix his card reader, he can pop
over with said unit. Even if I do all the metal turning, there is no
problem if I don't charge him.
-tony
3:41 a.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
Actually the costs are significant so what may appear profit at first
are only partly covering equipment
,costs of sourcing manuals, etc, in my case internet hosting of the catalogue
I doubt the electricity cost is covered by this years donations so far.
Dave Caroline
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Rod Smallwood
<rodsmallwood at btconnect.com> wrote:
It's probably obvious but surely you only start to make money once you have
covered the costs.
Rod Smallwood
-----Original Message-----
From: cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org]
On Behalf Of Tony Duell
Sent: 15 August 2011 21:46
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
I can quite believe what Tony says, particularly
if it is considered a
business. Perhaps Tony's only way out is to find a way for it not to be
considered a business, but I don't know how he could do that.
Exactly...
There is a very easy way for it not to be a business, and that's for me
to use said workshop for my hobby, not making any money doing it. It is
perfectly legal for me to enjoy myself fixing old computers, making
clocks, etc in this way uysing whatever tools I like with no safety
requirements at all.
It is also legal for me to allow friends to come into my workshop (they
are then repsonsible for their own actions).
But if I make mony, it's a business and has to meet said safety
requiurements. Since this would cost a lot more than I could ever make
back from said business, it makes more sense to me to ru8n it as a hobby,
and if j-random-HP-enthusiast wants to fix his card reader, he can pop
over with said unit. Even if I do all the metal turning, there is no
problem if I don't charge him.
-tony
18 Aug
18 Aug
11:54 a.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On Tue, 16 Aug 2011, Rod Smallwood wrote:
It's probably obvious but surely you only start to
make money once you have
covered the costs.
Covering the costs by charging for your work is considered to be
"re-investment of profits" (which ARE likely to be taxable)
19 Aug
19 Aug
2:01 a.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
That may be the case in the US. However in the UK and having run my own
business for the last twenty five years, it?s a case of income minus
expenses. Not only that, a loss can be carried forward to the next year.
You can't live off of a hobby business but you might make it cost you less.
Regards
?
Rod Smallwood
?
?
-----Original Message-----
From: cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org]
On Behalf Of Fred Cisin
Sent: 18 August 2011 16:55
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: RE: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On Tue, 16 Aug 2011, Rod Smallwood wrote:
It's probably obvious but surely you only start to
make money once you
have
covered the costs.
Covering the costs by charging for your work is considered to be
"re-investment of profits" (which ARE likely to be taxable)
15 Aug
15 Aug
4:15 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
I am curious about the information that Tony received
about various
safety equipment 'required'. Perhaps this extra investment is only
required if he has employees, but not if he does the work solo. I have
No, I was told that this would apply even if I was the only person in the
company (and indeed in the workshop). If I am using it for work where I
expect paymet, then it's a business and I have to meet all sorts of rules
no idea of the laws in the UK, but have trouble
believing they are that
intrusive to a small home-based business.
As long as Tony is declaring his income sources I fail to see where he
would run into any problems - considering that I doubt he would be
Ypu've not met the ridiculous red tape we have in the UK...
-tony
16 Aug
16 Aug
1:38 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
Ypu've not met the ridiculous red tape we have in the UK...
-tony
It's almost as bad in the US. They don't come in and make you install saw
guards, but if you don't have a tax attourney they will claim that anything
above a loss can't be a hobby and is self employment income.
A Nascar team or horse breeder can be a (profit generating) hobby, but
according to the IRS making kits has a profit motive even when it is only 5%
of your claimed income.
3:47 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
It's almost as bad in the US. ?They don't come
in and make you install saw
guards, but if you don't have a tax attourney they will claim that anything
above a loss can't be a hobby and is self employment income.
A Nascar team or horse breeder can be a (profit generating) hobby, but
according to the IRS making kits has a profit motive even when it is only 5%
of your claimed income.
Lets be realistic here.
The IRS does not have the manpower to go chase after someone that is
making a few thousand on the side as a hobby business. They have
bigger fish to catch. And if someone with a little "hobby business"
does get audited, it is extremely easy to bury the profit with
writeoffs.
I know quite a few people in the US, and even some in the UK, that
have turned a basement electronics hobby into a business, and somehow
everyone seems to be cool with the government and make money.
--
Will
4:47 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On Tue, 16 Aug 2011, William Donzelli wrote:
Lets be realistic here.
THIS group??
The IRS does not have the manpower to go chase after
someone that is
making a few thousand on the side as a hobby business. They have
bigger fish to catch. And if someone with a little "hobby business"
does get audited, it is extremely easy to bury the profit with
writeoffs.
Actually, some IRS agents consider home businesses and small sole
proprietorships to be "low hanging fruit". They OFTEN audit home
businesses, and some things, such as operation at a home are flags that
significantly increase likelihood of audit. Especially if the business
operates at a loss. (Contrary to internet, there is NOT a "law" that a
business must make a profit 2 years out of every 5, nor any other such
defined limit. Instead, determination of "business" V "hobby" is
very
loosely defined, and to a large extent determined by the whim of the
agent, based on things such as, "is the intent of the enterprise 'to make
a profit'?", "is it conducted with conventional business practices?",
"business type location?", "regular hours?", advertising?,
interaction
with people not already known to proprietor?, etc. with NONE of those
being sole determinator.
The "hobby" V "business", although not readily objectively
determinable,
is VERY important. If there is gross profit, then the IRS wants tax
forms. If there is net profit, then it IS taxable. If there are
recurring losses, the IRS may decide that it is a "hobby businesess" and
disallow any losses or expenses past the gross. A home business is much
more likely to get such restrictions than a big business that might ALSO
operate at a loss for many years, since that is much more clearly "not a
hobby".
I know quite a few people in the US, and even some in
the UK, that
have turned a basement electronics hobby into a business, and somehow
everyone seems to be cool with the government and make money.
In the USA, if the business is making money and paying taxes, very little
else matters. If Al Capone were to have paid his taxes, it might have
become president.
5 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
Actually, some IRS agents consider home businesses and
small sole
proprietorships to be "low hanging fruit". ?They OFTEN audit home
businesses,
This is true ONLY for those home business that are greedy - trying to
deduct too much, for example. Living beyond the means of the business
income is another. Or too many cash or check deposits at the bank.
As long as you have half a brain, and not try to cheat too much - no
audits. Simple.
And those "low hanging fruit" are those hobby businesses that are
pulling in $50K plus...
--
Will, son of a CPA
18 Aug
18 Aug
12:18 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
> Actually, some IRS agents consider home
businesses and small sole
> proprietorships to be "low hanging fruit". ?They OFTEN audit home
> businesses,
On Tue, 16 Aug 2011, William Donzelli wrote:
This is true ONLY for those home business that are
greedy -
WRONG
I might be the greediest SOB who ever walked the earth' OK, we will ASSUME
that, and you are the least greedy, most altruistic saint, . . .
trying to
deduct too much, for example. Living beyond the means of the business
income is another. Or too many cash or check deposits at the bank.
As long as you have half a brain, and not try to cheat too much - no
audits. Simple.
WRONG.
Selection for audit is NOT based on CHEATING, although admittedly it may
sometimes be based on the perception that there is a POSSIBILITY of
cheating.
Operating at a loss with a home business can get you audited, even if you
are the least greedy, most altruistic saint.
Just checking the "use of home" box on the schedule C more than doubnles
your chance of being audited.
If you are creating a retail product, OR have significant expenses to
bring your workshop up to code, you ARE likely to operate at a loss for a
while, and ARE likely to get audited.
And those "low hanging fruit" are those
hobby businesses that are
pulling in $50K plus...
WRONG. operating at a loss of a $1K with a gross of ~$10K WHILE
developing a product can do it.
Will, son of a CPA
Then you are well aware that
preparation for an audit for somebody who is
not a good bookkeepper is major punishment, no matter how honest you are.
You know what is or isn't deductible. Howzbout the $35 per month that you
electric bill went up? Do you need to go through your home workshop to
get to the washing machine? Do you store any of your hobby materials in a
corner of your office? Do you let your kid play in a corner of your
office, or use your office computer(s) to play games?
You know all of the details about 1099 issuance. Do you file one for your
landlord for commercial property that you rent to avoid audits by working
out of home? Do you file one for the gardener that your commercial
landlord requires ($15 per week)? How about the commercial artist who
designs your ad? How about your CPA?
Who is or isn't an "employee"? How about that gardener?
If you do a tradeshow to advertise your product, which of those expenses
are deductible?
When I was audited for filing a schedule C, the auditor did want to make
multiple changes, in both directions, and ended up finding that I was due
back a few hundred more dollars. That was "declared a wash".
Cheating? NO.
Not having a CPA in the family to make your tax forms look nice.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
17 Aug
17 Aug
3:21 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
It's almost as bad in the US. =A0They
don't come in and make you instal=
l saw
guards, but if you don't have a tax attourney
they will claim that anyt=
hing
above a loss can't be a hobby and is self
employment income.
A Nascar team or horse breeder can be a (profit generating) hobby, but
according to the IRS making kits has a profit motive even when it is on=
ly 5%
of your claimed income.
Lets be realistic here.
The IRS does not have the manpower to go chase after someone that is
I would not bet on that in the UK.
making a few thousand on the side as a hobby business.
They have
bigger fish to catch. And if someone with a little "hobby business"
Problem is that over here the size of the 'fish' doesn't matter, only
that they've caught one.
does get audited, it is extremely easy to bury the
profit with
writeoffs.
I know quite a few people in the US, and even some in the UK, that
have turned a basement electronics hobby into a business, and somehow
everyone seems to be cool with the government and make money.
AFAIK, this would not have been a problem for me. Sure I would have had
to declare all the income from my hobby/businsess, and possibly pay tax
on it, but that is not what stopped be from running said business.
Provided yuo make that declaration and keep reasonable records (accounts,
etc) then there is no problem.
-tony
8:21 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 11:47 AM, William Donzelli <wdonzelli at gmail.com>wrote:
It happened to me. They wouldn't give up. Paying the $1000 or so in taxes
and interest was easier than fighting after about 6 months of
correspondance.
It's
almost as bad in the US. They don't come in and make you install
saw
guards, but if you don't have a tax attourney
they will claim that
anything
above a loss can't be a hobby and is self
employment income.
A Nascar team or horse breeder can be a (profit generating) hobby, but
according to the IRS making kits has a profit motive even when it is only
5%
of your claimed income.
Lets be realistic here.
The IRS does not have the manpower to go chase after someone that is
making a few thousand on the side as a hobby business. They have
bigger fish to catch. And if someone with a little "hobby business"
does get audited, it is extremely easy to bury the profit with
writeoffs. 
8:36 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On 17/08/11 8:21 PM, Grant Stockly wrote:
On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 11:47 AM, William Donzelli
<wdonzelli at gmail.com>wrote:
It happened to me. They wouldn't give up. Paying the $1000 or so in taxes
and interest was easier than fighting after about 6 months of
correspondance.
This is officially the most boring OT thread in history.
zzzzZZ
It's
almost as bad in the US. They don't come in and make you install
saw
guards, but if you don't have a tax attourney
they will claim that
anything
above a loss can't be a hobby and is self
employment income.
A Nascar team or horse breeder can be a (profit generating) hobby, but
according to the IRS making kits has a profit motive even when it is only
5%
of your claimed income.
Lets be realistic here.
The IRS does not have the manpower to go chase after someone that is
making a few thousand on the side as a hobby business. They have
bigger fish to catch. And if someone with a little "hobby business"
does get audited, it is extremely easy to bury the profit with
writeoffs.
8:43 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On 08/17/2011 08:36 PM, Toby Thain wrote:
This is officially the most boring OT thread in history.
zzzzZZ
Wow, and look! Your new mail client has...[gasp]...a DELETE button!
What will they think of next?!
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
New Kensington, PA
Lets be realistic here.
The IRS does not have the manpower to go chase after someone that is
making a few thousand on the side as a hobby business. They have
bigger fish to catch. And if someone with a little "hobby business"
does get audited, it is extremely easy to bury the profit with
writeoffs.
It happened to me. They wouldn't give up. Paying the $1000 or so in taxes
and interest was easier than fighting after about 6 months of
correspondance.
18 Aug
18 Aug
11:17 a.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 8:43 PM, Dave McGuire <mcguire at neurotica.com> wrote:
?Wow, and look! ?Your new mail client has...[gasp]...a
DELETE button! ?What
will they think of next?!
A bobbing glass "bird" filled with dichloromethane that pecks the
delete key for you?
-ethan
12:26 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
?Wow, and
look! ?Your new mail client has...[gasp]...a DELETE button! ?What
will they think of next?!
A bobbing glass "bird" filled with
dichloromethane that pecks the
delete key for you? 
12:55 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
> It is true that those who have never done a
schedule C will not find
> anything of interest in THIS thread.
On Thu, 18 Aug 2011, Barry L. Kline wrote:
The 'C' is for cavity -- as in "Cavity
Search"
But only those who are greedy or guilty get searched.
12:23 p.m.
New subject: Non-revenue-producing (Was: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
> The IRS does not have the manpower to go chase
after someone that is
> making a few thousand on the side as a hobby business. They have
> bigger fish to catch. And if someone with a little "hobby business"
> does get audited, it is extremely easy to bury the profit with
> writeoffs.
On Wed, 17 Aug 2011, Grant Stockly wrote:
It happened to me. They wouldn't give up. Paying
the $1000 or so in taxes
and interest was easier than fighting after about 6 months of
correspondance.
That's just because we are greedy and stubborn!
Taking out a loan to build the business and paying that off out of part of
the profits over 10 years is OK. Using all of the gross to bootstrap the
business and not having any NET profits for 5 is NOT. Even with the same
dollar numbers.
Folding a business at the first sign of poor profitability is OK.
Continuing to try while developing more new products is not.
7 Aug
7 Aug
4:07 p.m.
Sure there are complicted terminals, but be honest.
Which would you rather
fix : A VT100 or a modern Wintel PC?
Answer: A modern Wintel PC: I can just go to one of any number of shops and
buy a replacement part :-)
But there again, I don't have a VT100 (yet) :-(
Regards
Rob
5:13 p.m.
Rob Jarratt quoted and wrote:
I think you may have missed the word "fix" in there. You may consider
the modern wintel box to be a disposable tool, but Tony doesn't. There's
not much merit in arguing either way: the vast majority of the
population
would chuck both a VT100 and a wintel box in the bin when they stop
working.
(Since "working" to them probably means "reads email, surfs the web and
plays
games", the VT100 will hit the bin first and they'll think you're *both*
mad :-)).
Antonio
Sure there are complicted terminals, but be
honest. Which would you
rather fix : A VT100 or a modern Wintel PC?
Answer: A modern Wintel PC: I can just go to one of any
number of shops and buy a replacement part :-)
5:37 p.m.
New subject: Wintel box vs. terminal WAS: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On 7 Aug 2011 at 22:13, arcarlini at iee.org wrote:
Rob Jarratt quoted and wrote:
>
> > Sure there are complicted terminals, but be honest. Which would
> > you rather fix : A VT100 or a modern Wintel PC?
> >
>
> Answer: A modern Wintel PC: I can just go to one of any
> number of shops and buy a replacement part :-)
I think you may have missed the word "fix"
in there. You may consider
the modern wintel box to be a disposable tool, but Tony doesn't.
Well, most modern Wintel boxes use fine-pitch BGA packages. While
it's possible to remove and re-ball such stuff, it's not something I
care to waste my time doing.
Slightly vintage Wintel boxes can be had for the asking and it really
makes no sense to run a multi-core speed demon to emulate a terminal.
The last time I needed a standalone text terminal, I just built one
from a uC, a MAX232, a wall wart and a PC keyboard. I
could have
put the entire thing but for the monitor in the keyboard housing.
Complete terminal makings can be found in any moderately-well-stocked
hellbox.
--Chuck
7:37 p.m.
New subject: Wintel box vs. terminal WAS: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
-----Original Message-----
From: cclist at sydex.com
Sent: Sun, 07 Aug 2011 14:37:54 -0700
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Subject: RE: Wintel box vs. terminal WAS: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On 7 Aug 2011 at 22:13, arcarlini at iee.org wrote:
While all of these things may be true, I really like the idea of using
purpose-built tools for the task at hand. In this case, I can think
of a couple of reasons why I would prefer a dedicated terminal over
a PeeCee:
1. Typically very nice font rendering on analog CRT's made for use
with the terminal. I'm particularly fond of AMBER screen phosphors.
2. Easily adjustable contrast/brightness (two knobs, usually).
3. I don't ever recall a terminal crashing
4. No waiting for boot-up for $OS_DEJURE
5. Dedicated terminals are usually smaller, lighter, easier to handle
physically, unless you're considering 'thin-client' PeeCees of course.
The dedicated data terminal is a simple machine, to do a simple task,
with alot of utility. My favorite being the WY-50, as it emulates
many kinds of commonly-used terminals, comes in amber, and overall
is easy to use.
just my $0.02
____________________________________________________________
Publish your photos in seconds for FREE
TRY IM TOOLPACK at http://www.imtoolpack.com/default.aspx?rc=if4
Rob Jarratt quoted and wrote:
>
>> Sure there are complicted terminals, but be honest. Which would
>> you rather fix : A VT100 or a modern Wintel PC?
>>
>
> Answer: A modern Wintel PC: I can just go to one of any
> number of shops and buy a replacement part :-)
I think you may have missed the word
"fix" in there. You may consider
the modern wintel box to be a disposable tool, but Tony doesn't.
Well, most modern Wintel boxes use fine-pitch BGA packages. While
it's possible to remove and re-ball such stuff, it's not something I
care to waste my time doing.
Slightly vintage Wintel boxes can be had for the asking and it really
makes no sense to run a multi-core speed demon to emulate a terminal.
The last time I needed a standalone text terminal, I just built one
from a uC, a MAX232, a wall wart and a PC keyboard. I could have
put the entire thing but for the monitor in the keyboard housing.
Complete terminal makings can be found in any moderately-well-stocked
hellbox.
--Chuck
8 Aug
8 Aug
3 p.m.
New subject: Wintel box vs. terminal WAS: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
While all of these things may be true, I really like the idea of using
purpose-built tools for the task at hand. In this case, I can think
of a couple of reasons why I would prefer a dedicated terminal over
a PeeCee:
1. Typically very nice font rendering on analog CRT's made for use
with the terminal. I'm particularly fond of AMBER screen phosphors.
I think an original IBM MDA card with a good monitor (the original 5151
for example) comes close to this.
2. Easily adjustable contrast/brightness (two knobs,
usually).
All my PC monitors have analogue brightness and contrast controls. I
don't think I'd even consider a monitor which doesn't.
-tony
7 Aug
7 Aug
7:16 p.m.
I do hope everyone saw the smiley, it was intended to be a little
tongue-in-cheek.
I realise that Tony wishes to understand how a machine works and repair the
least possible. I like that principle too, especially when it comes to
vintage equipment. I also understand the argument about what you consider a
valuable use of your time. In the end it just boils down to your personal
preference in each situation, so I am not going to argue one way or the
other.
Regards
Rob
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-
bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of arcarlini at iee.org
Sent: 07 August 2011 22:13
To: 'General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts'
Subject: RE: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
Rob Jarratt quoted and wrote:
I think you may have missed the word "fix" in there. You may consider the
modern wintel box to be a disposable tool, but Tony doesn't. There's not
much merit in arguing either way: the vast majority of the population
would
Sure there are complicted terminals, but be
honest. Which would you
rather fix : A VT100 or a modern Wintel PC?
Answer: A modern Wintel PC: I can just go to one of any number of
shops and buy a replacement part :-) chuck both a VT100 and a wintel box in the bin when
they stop working.
(Since "working" to them probably means "reads email, surfs the web and
plays games", the VT100 will hit the bin first and they'll think you're
*both*
mad :-)).
Antonio
8 Aug
8 Aug
2:30 p.m.
I realise that Tony wishes to understand how a machine
works and repair the
least possible. I like that principle too, especially when it comes to
I find that the only way to be sure I have cured the fualt is to know
what the fault was. Replaicng parts until the fualt seems to go away is
very unsatisfactory (particularly with intermittent faults), you might
well have distrubed a bad connection when replacing some other part, for
example.
vintage equipment. I also understand the argument
about what you consider a
I have to say that you were very much 'thrown in the deep end' by having
an H7140 PSU as one of your first repairs. I'd not wish that on anybody :-)
With vintage machines, you often hgave to repair to compoent level for
the simple reason that you can stil lget the components (even if they are
not still being made, there are likely to be NO ones around), but you
can't find _known-good_ spare bartds, etc to swap in. I couldn't repair
my HP9800s as HP intended (by repacing boards until the machine works)
becasue finding a known-good HP9800 board set is imposible. FortunatelyI
am not afraid to use a logic anaylser...
-tony
4:34 p.m.
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-
bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Tony Duell
Sent: 08 August 2011 19:31
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
the
I realise that Tony wishes to understand how a
machine works and
repair the least possible. I like that principle too, especially when
it comes to
I find that the only way to be sure I have cured the fualt is to know what fault was. Replaicng parts until the fualt seems to go
away is very
unsatisfactory (particularly with intermittent faults), you might well
have
distrubed a bad connection when replacing some other
part, for example.
an
vintage equipment. I also understand the argument
about what you
consider a
I have to say that you were very much 'thrown in the deep end' by having
H7140 PSU as one of your first repairs. I'd not
wish that on anybody :-)
Despite the frustrations it has actually been quite an enjoyable experience
so far, I am just hoping the last little repair will really be the last, I
will know in a few days. I have really learned a lot, which is all thanks to
your amazing help. My initial comment was really tongue in cheek,
particularly knowing who I was replying to... :-)
With vintage machines, you often hgave to repair to compoent level for the
simple reason that you can stil lget the components (even if they are not
still
being made, there are likely to be NO ones around),
but you can't find
_known-good_ spare bartds, etc to swap in. I couldn't repair my HP9800s as
HP intended (by repacing boards until the machine works) becasue finding a
known-good HP9800 board set is imposible. FortunatelyI am not afraid to
use
a logic anaylser...
-tony
4:51 p.m.
On 8/8/11 1:34 PM, Rob Jarratt wrote:
Despite the frustrations it has actually been quite an
enjoyable experience
so far, I am just hoping the last little repair will really be the last, I
will know in a few days. I have really learned a lot, which is all thanks to
your amazing help. My initial comment was really tongue in cheek,
particularly knowing who I was replying to... :-)
Care to write down the whole process? Failures are pretty common for that
supply, and it might help someone else.
5:08 p.m.
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-
bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Al Kossow
Sent: 08 August 2011 21:52
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
On 8/8/11 1:34 PM, Rob Jarratt wrote:
I have already been writing some of it down, when I am done I will complete
it and let you take a look before sending it to the list.
Regards
Rob
Despite the frustrations it has actually been
quite an enjoyable
experience so far, I am just hoping the last little repair will really
be the last, I will know in a few days. I have really learned a lot,
which is all thanks to your amazing help. My initial comment was
really tongue in cheek, particularly knowing who I was replying to...
:-)
Care to write down the whole process? Failures are pretty common for that
supply, and it might help someone else.
9 Aug
9 Aug
1:53 p.m.
Care to write down the whole process? Failures are
pretty common for that
supply, and it might help someone else.
That PSU is one of the most complex ones you are likely to come across.
It's actually 3 SMPSUs in one box, with aditional complications. All run
off the same rectifier/smoothign circuit, the capacitros for which are
the 2 coke-can sized ones at the left hand side.
There's a small, and relatively convientional SMPSU to provide power for
the rest of the supply. This one is nasty in that much of the circuitry
is not isolated from the power line. It also has no overcurrent
protection, so a fault in one of its loads can caus the chopper transitro
to fail.
The logic supply (+5V @ 125A and +/-15V) has its control circuity on the
ouput (isolated) side of the supply, powered by the above SMPSU.
The memory supply starts with a 36V SMPUS which is similar in design to
the logic PSU. The rail can be battery-backed, and powers non-isolating
switching regulatrors to provide +-5V and+/-12V for the memroy boards. It
also powers a full-H driver circuit to operate the unconventional 35V
70Hz AC fans.
There is a ltitle control circuitry to enable the appropriate supplies
for each postion of the console switch. Note that when mains is applied,
the first PSU I mentiond will be running (irrespectvie of the position of
the cosole swtich), and the large cpaactiros will be charigng from the
mains. There is a relay in the mains inptu circuit, but it's not an
on-off switch. Its function is to short-circuit an inrush limiter (either
a resistor or a thermistor depending on the version) once the PSU has got
going.
Repairing it can be easy or difficult depending on the fault. The first
thing to nore is that the 350V DC from thos large capacitors, which is
fed to the logic and memory supply boards by wires on barrier strip
terminal, is letjhal. Very lethal. Take great care if you have to work on
the unit when it's powered up.
The first PSU, the little one, is probably the worst to repair in that
it's mostly on the mains side of the isolation barrier, so an isolating
transformer is very useful.
-tony
8 Aug
8 Aug
4:53 p.m.
I have to say
that you were very much 'thrown in the deep end' by having
an
H7140 PSU as one of your first repairs. I'd
not wish that on anybody :-)
Despite the frustrations it has actually been quite an enjoyable experience so far, I am just hoping the last little repair will
really be the last, I
I wil lget easier. The first few reparis are always the hardest, after a
bit you get to know what to look for, what tests to do, etc.
This won;t be your last ever repari, I can assure you -), at least not if
you stick with classic computers. But I find fault tracing to be fun.
It's a puzzle. You have to gather clues (using the 'scope, logic
analyser, etc) and think about what they mean. Probabyl about as sueful
as solving other sorts of puzzles...
-tony
2:24 p.m.
Sure there are complicted terminals, but be
honest. Which would you rather
fix : A VT100 or a modern Wintel PC?
Answer: A modern Wintel PC: I can just go to one of any number of shops and
buy a replacement part :-)
4:32 p.m.
-----Original Message-----
From: cctalk-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctalk-
bounces at classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Tony Duell
Sent: 08 August 2011 19:24
To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: cctech Digest, Vol 96, Issue 5
Odd... I've never ben able to find the PC spares that _I_ want in any shop
or
Sure there are complicted terminals, but be
honest. Which would you
rather fix : A VT100 or a modern Wintel PC?
Answer: A modern Wintel PC: I can just go to one of any number of
shops and buy a replacement part :-) catalogue :-(
-tony
Ahhh, but you said "modern" PC, I suppose it depends on what you mean by
modern.... :-)
I suspect your definition of modern probably differs considerably from that
of the ordinary person in the street :-)
Of course when it comes to laptops you can forget it even with "modern"
ones, which is one of the reasons why I don't like them.
Regards
Rob
4:49 p.m.
Ahhh, but you said "modern" PC, I suppose it
depends on what you mean by
modern.... :-)
No, I think it's more what I man by 'spare parts' :-)
A Modern PC is the sort of thing I could go and buy in PC World or
similar. As in 'buy brand new today'.
But as for spares, I was thinking of things like a replacement video
controller chip, or a chopper transformer for the PSU, or ...
-tony
4716
days inactive
4730
days old
73 comments
22 participants
participants (22)
-
aek＠bitsavers.org -
afra＠aurigae.demon.co.uk -
arcarlini＠iee.org -
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
blkline＠attglobal.net -
cclist＠sydex.com -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
classiccmp＠philpem.me.uk -
dave.thearchivist＠gmail.com -
ethan.dicks＠gmail.com -
geneb＠deltasoft.com -
grant＠stockly.com -
jeffj＠panix.com -
lproven＠gmail.com -
mcguire＠neurotica.com -
n0body.h0me＠inbox.com -
pete＠dunnington.plus.com -
pinball＠telus.net -
robert.jarratt＠ntlworld.com -
rodsmallwood＠btconnect.com -
toby＠telegraphics.com.au -
wdonzelli＠gmail.com