25 Apr
2002
25 Apr
'02
9:42 a.m.
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Erlacher [mailto:edick@idcomm.com]
Hey! I did say the mass storage interface had to be
internal to the
"computer" and not necessarily the mass storage devices.
Sure, but my point was, for instance, the C64 had drives that used
what basically amounts to a straight serial (or is that parallel?)
interface, and that is in the computer. But they're "toys," right?
campus is the enclosure, while if it's a desktop,
it's pretty
Is that like "the network is the computer?" :)
Besides, though I didn't originally point this
out, some of
you guys have, as
toys, some of those very machines that you're pointing out
aren't really toys.
Are you guys trying to have it both ways?
Just because they're not toys doesn't make it impossible to play
with them like toys.
We could just define anything that's not necessary for survival
to be a toy, and be done with it. :)
Chris
Christopher Smith, Perl Developer
Amdocs - Champaign, IL
/usr/bin/perl -e '
print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl
Hacker.")."\x08!\n");
'
25 Apr
25 Apr
10:13 a.m.
And thusly Christopher Smith spake:
Yes, it was a serial interface. But there were a couple of companies that
offered a parallel interface cable. There are also plans on the web so you
can build your own.
Bryan
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Erlacher [mailto:edick@idcomm.com]
Hey! I did say the mass storage interface had to
be internal to the
"computer" and not necessarily the mass storage devices.
Sure, but my point was, for instance, the C64 had drives that used
what basically amounts to a straight serial (or is that parallel?)
interface, and that is in the computer. But they're "toys," right?
10:51 a.m.
> > Hey! I did say the mass storage interface
had to be internal to the
> > "computer" and not necessarily the mass storage devices.
> Sure, but my point was, for instance, the C64 had
drives that used
> what basically amounts to a straight serial (or is that parallel?)
> interface, and that is in the computer. But they're "toys," right?
Yes, it was a serial interface. But there were a
couple of companies that
offered a parallel interface cable. There are also plans on the web so you
can build your own.
The host adaptor for the SCSI Lt. Kernal external HD used a parallel-style
interface through the expansion port and is capable of considerable speed.
CMD hard disks, of course, can be connected through the parallel interface
on a RAMLink for added performance also.
And there's IDE64, which is also parallel through the expansion port.
--
----------------------------- personal page: http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ --
Cameron Kaiser, Point Loma Nazarene University * ckaiser(a)stockholm.ptloma.edu
-- TRUE HEADLINE: Astronaut Takes Blame for Gas in Spacecraft -----------------
11:49 a.m.
--- Cameron Kaiser <spectre(a)stockholm.ptloma.edu> wrote:
> > Sure, but my point was, for instance, the
C64 had drives that used
> > what basically amounts to a straight serial (or is that parallel?)
Serialized IEEE-488, essentially - Tramiel demanded that Commodore not
be stuck not being able to buy enough connectors for the next generation
of product. There was some sort of supply problem with them in the
PET days.
And there's IDE64, which is also parallel through
the expansion port.
Yes. I have one. Got a 20MB HP Kittyhawk 1.8" IDE drive on it (talk
about *tiny*) I did think of that, but I declined to mention it because
it _is_ an external drive controller of the sort that Dick was railing
against in the first place.
I have no problem calling the C-64 a "toy" (it's been called much worse
over the years, especially by Atari and Apple zealots ;-) Nevertheless,
it was one of my favorite machines; it got me my first job 20 years ago,
and I spent countless hours programming it, building doodads for it,
etc. It took the Amiga to get me to shelve my C-64, and even then,
for the first year, I used the C-64 more because I could get more done
with it (Kickstart 1.1 sucked! I switched to the Amiga when KS1.2 came
out and the market began to open up and disgorge useful goodies for it).
It took a combination of the Web and cheap SPARC hardware to get me to
give up the Amiga. I haven't powered on my A4000 in months. :-( I
suppose the moribund nature of the Amiga market was a contributing
factor, too, but AMosaic on a tiny screen just doesn't cut it. At least
I had ethernet, or I'd have dumped the Amiga long, long ago.
These days, my personal criteria is "no ethernet == toy" (for stuff made
after 1990) The iOpener or Audrey as shipped is a toy; add USB Ethernet
and it graduates to "potentially useful tool".
-ethan
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Games - play chess, backgammon, pool and more
http://games.yahoo.com/
27 Apr
27 Apr
2:16 a.m.
There are fast ethernet interfaces that attach to a USB2 port. I don't know
what they cost, but that may actually end up reducing the number of interfaces
we see on PC's of the future. USB2 is purported to have quite a lot of
bandwidth.
more below ...
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ethan Dicks" <erd_6502(a)yahoo.com>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 10:49 AM
Subject: Re: "Toy" computers (was Re: Micro$oft Biz'droid Lusers)
--- Cameron Kaiser <spectre(a)stockholm.ptloma.edu> wrote:
I'm not against the concept. I certainly was opposed to the way in which that
sort of thing was done, back in the '80's, however, and what it cost.
> > Sure, but my point was, for instance,
the C64 had drives that used
> > what basically amounts to a straight serial (or is that parallel?)
Serialized IEEE-488, essentially - Tramiel demanded that Commodore not
be stuck not being able to buy enough connectors for the next generation
of product. There was some sort of supply problem with them in the
PET days.
And there's IDE64, which is also parallel
through the expansion port.
Yes. I have one. Got a 20MB HP Kittyhawk 1.8" IDE drive on it (talk
about *tiny*) I did think of that, but I declined to mention it because
it _is_ an external drive controller of the sort that Dick was railing
against in the first place.
I have no problem calling the C-64 a "toy" (it's been called much worse
over the years, especially by Atari and Apple zealots ;-) Nevertheless,
it was one of my favorite machines; it got me my first job 20 years ago,
and I spent countless hours programming it, building doodads for it,
etc. It took the Amiga to get me to shelve my C-64, and even then,
for the first year, I used the C-64 more because I could get more done
with it (Kickstart 1.1 sucked! I switched to the Amiga when KS1.2 came
out and the market began to open up and disgorge useful goodies for it).
It took a combination of the Web and cheap SPARC hardware to get me to
give up the Amiga. I haven't powered on my A4000 in months. :-( I
suppose the moribund nature of the Amiga market was a contributing
factor, too, but AMosaic on a tiny screen just doesn't cut it. At least
I had ethernet, or I'd have dumped the Amiga long, long ago.
These days, my personal criteria is "no ethernet == toy" (for stuff made
after 1990) The iOpener or Audrey as shipped is a toy; add USB Ethernet
and it graduates to "potentially useful tool".
-ethan
25 Apr
25 Apr
3:56 p.m.
I guess it depends on what you mean by "straight" serial. Is that as opposed
to "gay" serial?
They are toys, since they didn't have a disk interface in them. They, in
fact, if your description is correct, needed a toy interface to talk to
another toy interface that talked to what was probably a smarter computer that
had a disk interface in it.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Smith" <csmith(a)amdocs.com>
To: <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2002 8:42 AM
Subject: RE: "Toy" computers (was Re: Micro$oft Biz'droid Lusers)
No ... but if the interface hardware is in a separate box, then the enclosure
in which all these boxes live is the real system enclosure, isn't it.
Networks weren't that common on microcomputers in 1980.
-----Original
Message-----
From: Richard Erlacher [mailto:edick@idcomm.com]
Hey! I did say the mass storage interface had to
be internal to the
"computer" and not necessarily the mass storage devices.
Sure, but my point was, for instance, the C64 had drives that used
what basically amounts to a straight serial (or is that parallel?)
interface, and that is in the computer. But they're "toys," right?
campus is the enclosure, while if it's a
desktop, it's pretty
Is that like "the network is the computer?" :)
Besides, though I didn't originally point
this out, some of
you guys have, as
toys, some of those very machines that you're pointing out
aren't really toys.
Are you guys trying to have it both ways?
Just because they're not toys doesn't make it impossible to play
with them like toys.
We could just define anything that's not necessary for survival
to be a toy, and be done with it. :)
Chris
Christopher Smith, Perl Developer
Amdocs - Champaign, IL
/usr/bin/perl -e '
print((~"\x95\xc4\xe3"^"Just Another Perl
Hacker.")."\x08!\n");
'
8285
days inactive
8287
days old
5 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
bpope＠wordstock.com -
csmith＠amdocs.com -
edick＠idcomm.com -
erd_6502＠yahoo.com -
spectre＠stockholm.ptloma.edu