OT: A call to arms (sort of)

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Mon Jul 5 11:18:55 1999

No. Your point is well taken, though. What I'm advocating in this case is
the adoption of VME, which has shown itself to be as good as any more or
less standard bus and better than most.

The connector hardware doesn't define the bus, but it restricts it to the
ones which used that connector. You then have to adopt a signal set which
complies with that standard in both its definition and its usage if you want
to consider yourself using that BUS. However, it's conceivable one might
use a "modified" XXX bus, with changes implemented in a way which doesn't
conflict with the use of certain cards already in existence.

This is not easy, nor is it easly understood, particularly in its
motivation, since you have the option of doing whatever you want. It is
YOUR computer, after all.


-----Original Message-----
From: Max Eskin <max82_at_surfree.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
Date: Monday, July 05, 1999 6:08 AM
Subject: Re: OT: A call to arms (sort of)

>On Sun, 4 Jul 1999, Richard Erlacher wrote:
>>If I were using the DIN connectors, I'd get a standard out, read and
>>understand it, and then use it, calling it VME, its rightful name.
>>Unfortunately, I'd not be able to get a two-port serial board or a LAN
>>for VME from the local thrift store.
>I don't get it...are you saying that the connector somehow determines the
>bus? Any bus could in theory be compatible with ISA and use some other
>connector, and still be ISA for the most part.
>--Max Eskin (max82_at_surfree.com)
> http://scivault.hypermart.net: Ignorance is Impotence - Knowledge is
Received on Mon Jul 05 1999 - 11:18:55 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:32:11 BST