28 Mar
2011
28 Mar
'11
9:12 p.m.
I just came across an 8086 S100 CPU board from Seattle Computer Products
and I started thinking... How much trouble would it be to use this board
to come up with an IBM 5150 work-alike? What sort of custom boards would
need to be made?
--
David Griffith
dgriffi at cs.csubak.edu
A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
28 Mar
28 Mar
9:52 p.m.
On 3/28/2011 9:12 PM, David Griffith wrote:
I just came across an 8086 S100 CPU board from Seattle Computer
Products and I started thinking... How much trouble would it be to
use this board to come up with an IBM 5150 work-alike? What sort of
custom boards would need to be made?
There apparently was work done in that vein by a small firm the bay area
using standard compupro boards. I scored a large S100 system about a
year ago from one of the engineers that worked on it - a Mr Gary Helbig.
Along with the hardware, I was handed 4 large boxes of docs and code
that supposedly contain the source code for a bootable MS-DOS C-Pro
system. Still sorting and scanning hardcopy but supposedly all the
code is in a set of 8" floppies that came with the system. It
apparently used the 8085/8088 dual cpu card and the CPro PCVideo card.
Steve....
11:05 p.m.
On 28 Mar 2011 at 21:52, steve shumaker wrote:
On 3/28/2011 9:12 PM, David Griffith wrote:
As I recall the 85/88 setup, Godbout initially did not want to invest
in an OEM license for MS-DOS, so a procedure was worked out where a
standard PC-DOS ($40 from your local IBM retailer) system was used as
the starting point with a new set of I/O drivers installed.
I used to have such a disk for test purposes--but I don't recall if I
still have it.
--Chuck
I just came across an 8086 S100 CPU board from Seattle Computer
Products and I started thinking... How much trouble would it be to
use this board to come up with an IBM 5150 work-alike? What sort of
custom boards would need to be made?
There apparently was work done in that vein by a small firm the bay
area using standard compupro boards. I scored a large S100 system
about a year ago from one of the engineers that worked on it - a Mr
Gary Helbig.
29 Mar
29 Mar
11:07 a.m.
On 3/28/2011 11:05 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote:
On 28 Mar 2011 at 21:52, steve shumaker wrote:
Helbig didn't say much about the relationship although I got the
impression this was not something that Godbout was involved in - they
were simply using their technology. Buried in the disks I have here
are a stack of 5 1/4 floppies labeled "MS-DOS 2.0 OEM Support" No
idea the contents. (He included over 200 pieces of media - mostly 8"-
and I've yet to open any of them.") Much of the documentation appears to
be a mix of MSDOS and CPRO BIOS listings. The company was "G and G
Engineering"
Steve
On 3/28/2011 9:12 PM, David Griffith wrote:
As I recall the 85/88 setup, Godbout initially did not want to invest
in an OEM license for MS-DOS, so a procedure was worked out where a
standard PC-DOS ($40 from your local IBM retailer) system was used as
the starting point with a new set of I/O drivers installed.
I used to have such a disk for test purposes--but I don't recall if I
still have it.
--Chuck
I just came across an 8086 S100 CPU board from
Seattle Computer
Products and I started thinking... How much trouble would it be to
use this board to come up with an IBM 5150 work-alike? What sort of
custom boards would need to be made?
There apparently was work done in that vein by a small firm the bay
area using standard compupro boards. I scored a large S100 system
about a year ago from one of the engineers that worked on it - a Mr
Gary Helbig.
12:52 p.m.
On 29 Mar 2011 at 11:07, steve shumaker wrote:
Helbig didn't say much about the relationship
although I got the
impression this was not something that Godbout was involved in - they
were simply using their technology. Buried in the disks I have here
are a stack of 5 1/4 floppies labeled "MS-DOS 2.0 OEM Support" No
idea the contents. (He included over 200 pieces of media - mostly 8"-
and I've yet to open any of them.") Much of the documentation appears
to be a mix of MSDOS and CPRO BIOS listings. The company was "G and
G Engineering"
I'll have to see if I have anything on it, but this would more likely
be from the PC-DOS 1.1 era. I still have my notes from working with
the OEM MS-DOS 2.0 kit; it was really the first version that had
decent OEM documentation--compared to 1.25, it was wonderful. What's
particularly funny is the stated goal of eventually merging DOS and
Xenix. File that one with Microsoft OS/2 3.0...
--Chuck
2 p.m.
On 3/29/2011 12:52 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote:
On 29 Mar 2011 at 11:07, steve shumaker wrote:
Based on some of the cryptic notes I've found, they actually had a 1.1
version of MS-DOS running on a CPRO system. They were apparently
working on ver 2.0 when they abandoned the effort...
Interesting! I'm just starting to look through a lot of the stuff that
came with it as part of a big scan-to-file effort to be rid of anything
hardcopy-wise not of collectible value. As it progresses, I'll let you
know what I find. It would eventually be fun to fire up an S100 box
with MS-DOS.
Steve
Helbig didn't say much about the relationship
although I got the
impression this was not something that Godbout was involved in - they
were simply using their technology. Buried in the disks I have here
are a stack of 5 1/4 floppies labeled "MS-DOS 2.0 OEM Support" No
idea the contents. (He included over 200 pieces of media - mostly 8"-
and I've yet to open any of them.") Much of the documentation appears
to be a mix of MSDOS and CPRO BIOS listings. The company was "G and
G Engineering"
I'll have to see if I have anything on it, but this would more likely
be from the PC-DOS 1.1 era. I still have my notes from working with
the OEM MS-DOS 2.0 kit; it was really the first version that had
decent OEM documentation--compared to 1.25, it was wonderful. What's
particularly funny is the stated goal of eventually merging DOS and
Xenix. File that one with Microsoft OS/2 3.0...
--Chuck
9:13 p.m.
On 3/29/2011 12:52 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote:
On 29 Mar 2011 at 11:07, steve shumaker wrote:
Your original comment about Seattle Computer triggered a vague recollection so
I went looking through the material and found a Seattle Computers Glossy Brochure from Dec
1983 that advertises business grade S100 systems with the 8086 CPU and MS-DOS 2.0. If I
can get Google to cooperate, I'll push scans up to Picasa and post the link.
Steve
Helbig didn't say much about the relationship
although I got the
impression this was not something that Godbout was involved in - they
were simply using their technology. Buried in the disks I have here
are a stack of 5 1/4 floppies labeled "MS-DOS 2.0 OEM Support" No
idea the contents. (He included over 200 pieces of media - mostly 8"-
and I've yet to open any of them.") Much of the documentation appears
to be a mix of MSDOS and CPRO BIOS listings. The company was "G and
G Engineering"
I'll have to see if I have anything on it, but this would more likely
be from the PC-DOS 1.1 era. I still have my notes from working with
the OEM MS-DOS 2.0 kit; it was really the first version that had
decent OEM documentation--compared to 1.25, it was wonderful. What's
particularly funny is the stated goal of eventually merging DOS and
Xenix. File that one with Microsoft OS/2 3.0...
--Chuck
30 Mar
30 Mar
12:22 p.m.
On 3/29/2011 9:13 PM, steve shumaker wrote:
On 3/29/2011 12:52 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote:
Seattle Computer Products Brochure and price sheet
Here's the link to the scans:
https://picasaweb.google.com/114639080007220617932/SeattleComputerBrochure?…
steve
On 29 Mar 2011 at 11:07, steve shumaker wrote:
Your original comment about Seattle Computer triggered a vague
recollection so I went looking through the material and found a
Seattle Computers Glossy Brochure from Dec 1983 that advertises
business grade S100 systems with the 8086 CPU and MS-DOS 2.0. If I
can get Google to cooperate, I'll push scans up to Picasa and post the
link.
Steve
Helbig didn't say much about the relationship
although I got the
impression this was not something that Godbout was involved in - they
were simply using their technology. Buried in the disks I have here
are a stack of 5 1/4 floppies labeled "MS-DOS 2.0 OEM Support" No
idea the contents. (He included over 200 pieces of media - mostly 8"-
and I've yet to open any of them.") Much of the documentation appears
to be a mix of MSDOS and CPRO BIOS listings. The company was "G and
G Engineering"
I'll have to see if I have anything on it, but this would
more likely
be from the PC-DOS 1.1 era. I still have my notes from working with
the OEM MS-DOS 2.0 kit; it was really the first version that had
decent OEM documentation--compared to 1.25, it was wonderful. What's
particularly funny is the stated goal of eventually merging DOS and
Xenix. File that one with Microsoft OS/2 3.0...
--Chuck
29 Mar
29 Mar
1:58 p.m.
The Steve Ciarcia "Micromint"? PC used a terminal as it's default console.
Its BIOS and/or I/O drivers might help as a starting point.
But, because a significant portion of their users actually wanted a "real"
5150, they came out with an ISA board for it with a 5150 style keyboard
interface. Studying that might help with building an S100 imitation of
the 5150 keyboard interface.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
11:06 p.m.
Hi
I don?t know if this helps. I worked in VDU design and development in the
mid 1970's. The keyboards used a system with a 74150 and I think a '154.
These are a 16 line binary to decimal decode and an eight line to binary
encoder. The outputs of the one and the inputs of the other formed a matrix
with the keys (switches) at the junctions. A counter drove the inputs of one
and the selects of the other. As soon as you got an output the counter
stopped and its value became the pressed key value.
Regards
?
Rod Smallwood
-----Original Message-----
From: cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org [mailto:cctech-bounces at classiccmp.org]
On Behalf Of Fred Cisin
Sent: 29 March 2011 21:58
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: IBM 5150 in S100?
The Steve Ciarcia "Micromint"? PC used a terminal as it's default console.
Its BIOS and/or I/O drivers might help as a starting point.
But, because a significant portion of their users actually wanted a "real"
5150, they came out with an ISA board for it with a 5150 style keyboard
interface. Studying that might help with building an S100 imitation of
the 5150 keyboard interface.
--
Grumpy Ol' Fred cisin at xenosoft.com
30 Mar
30 Mar
8:29 a.m.
On 3/30/11 2:06 AM, Rod Smallwood wrote:
I don?t know if this helps. I worked in VDU design
and development in the
mid 1970's. The keyboards used a system with a 74150 and I think a '154.
These are a 16 line binary to decimal decode and an eight line to binary
encoder. The outputs of the one and the inputs of the other formed a matrix
with the keys (switches) at the junctions. A counter drove the inputs of one
and the selects of the other. As soon as you got an output the counter
stopped and its value became the pressed key value.
Fairly standard matrix scanner..
-Dave
--
Dave McGuire
Port Charlotte, FL
11:09 a.m.
The Steve Ciarcia "Micromint"? PC used a terminal as it's default console.
Its BIOS and/or I/O drivers might help as a starting point.
But, because a significant portion of their users actually wanted a "real"
5150, they came out with an ISA board for it with a 5150 style keyboard
interface. Studying that might help with building an S100 imitation of
the 5150 keyboard interface.
Unlike the PC/AT (5170) and later machines, the 5150 (PC) (and thus the
5160 (XT)) keyboard interfaces did not use a custom-programmed
microcotnroller at the motherboard end. Insted, the 5150/5160 used a TTL
shidt register (74LS323 I think), and a bit of supporting logic. It was
linked to the ports of an 8255 chip. The schematics are in the TechRef,
of course, and since there are no programmed parts involved, that's all
you would need to recreate it.
-tony
5016
days inactive
5017
days old
11 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
cclist＠sydex.com -
cisin＠xenosoft.com -
dgriffi＠cs.csubak.edu -
mcguire＠neurotica.com -
rodsmallwood＠btconnect.com -
shumaker＠att.net