See below, plz.
Dick
----- Original Message -----
From: "Tony Duell" <ard_at_p850ug1.demon.co.uk>
To: <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2002 3:54 PM
Subject: Re: Bell & Howell Apple II update
> > The discussion was about microcomputers and, specifically, the video
connector
> > on the Apple ][. When the Apple ][ came out, cable TV was not yet a
common
>
> No it is not. You are darn good at subtly changing the terms of an
> argument and thus proving your point to be correct.
>
That was not my intent at any point since it really doesn't matter whether I
prove my point or not. However, it's possible I misunderstood what the point
was. If that's the case, I certainly apologize.
>
> This discussion is about connectors that were used for composite video at
> the approximate time of the Apple ][. Not whether or not the Apple ][
> (itself) ever used that connector.
>
That's certainly not disputable. One needs merely to look. I certainly
didn't perceive THAT to be central to the discussion. I certainly inferred
from the reference to the Apple ][ and from allusions to various other related
details, that it was video signal of that era's microcomputers that were at
the heart of the discussion, and not the more general field of television
signals.
>
> Nobody is disputing that the external video connector on an Apple ][ is
> an RCA phono socket.
>
There seemed, initially, to be some doubt about whether the BNC's were used
on/with video signal from microcomputers of that time, however.
>
> > reality (That changed rapidly in the early '80's, but, in '77-'78, was not
yet
> > the case.) Video in this context, did not include notions like the VCR
and
> > set-top boxes, nor did it include other sorts of equipment that most folks
> > outside the TV production industry had not even yet seen, simply because
it
>
> At the time of the Apple ][, few people owned any video equipment other
> than a TV set. Maybe a VCR, but if so, then it was connected to the TV
> set via the aerial socket (the VCR had an internal modulator). Most home
> TVs, at least the ones sold in the UK, did not have composite video input
> sockets, or similar.
>
The Honeywell VTR I had back then (1977) used the UHF connectors, IIRC. I
never used it, though I did use the camera that came with it from time to
time, though not for any of the obvious purposes. I doubt I'd even seen a
VCR at that time, and if I did, it was probably a Beta type, normally found in
"component" groups rather than an integrated VHS unit as we have come to know
and love.
>
> [As an aside, the first home VCR sold in the UK didn't have a composite
> video input or output either. It had an audio input/output socket (a 5
> pin DIN) and a video output (separate luma and chroma), also a DIN
> socket, for use with a specially-modified TV. The optional video camera
> included a modulator and connected to the aerial input. ]
>
> Also at the time of the Apple ][ there were no special
> microcomputer monitors.
>
Which is exactly the reason folks went out looking for "something that would
work" yet not break the bank. The TV hardware that sported BNC connectors was
generally out of reach for use in the microcomputer market. Since
microcomputer graphics hardware of the time wasn't able to make full
utilization of an NTSC monitor, it made little sense to buy a monitor for that
purpose that was in the "high-end" market, and that's where the then somewhat
rapidly evolving repertoire using the more modern connection hardware was to
be found. Things are different now, of course.
>
> So if you wanted to display the output of an Apple ][ you had 2 main
> choices. Either get an RF modulator, connect it to the header plug inside
> the Apple (which carried power and composite video) and plug the other
> end into the aerial socket of a TV.
>
What I remember was that the modulator was tuned to channel 3 and, since that
was, then, scarcely used, it could be received by the TV tuner without much
help. I also remember seeing commercial 75-ohm RG-59 (coax) cables that had
an RCA plug at one end and a PL-259 at the other, and, in fact, still have
one.
>
> The other was to link up a standard composite video (mono, or NTSC
> colour) monitor. One used for CCTV applications, or security, or.... It's
> the connector on those monitors that this discussion seems to be about.
>
> I will happily agree that one popular connector on such monitors was the
> 'UHF' (PL259, SO239) connector. But another was most definitely the 75
> ohm BNC.
>
I've never seen in the flesh or in catalogs of various sorts, monitors for
low-end (costing as much as or less than an equivalent TV set) video equipment
that had BNC connectors on it. I do recall that some of the "component"
monitors from Hitachi, SONY and others, intended for the high-end NTSC market
had/have BNC's, however. The typical monitor on a microcomputer was of 9" -
12" diagonal, however, and these guys were in the 20"-27" range. No doubt
there were smaller ones, but for composite displays used on a microcomputer,
which I, oddly enough, concluded was what was being discussed, the connectors
were either the PL/SO-259 type, or the RCA type, to wit, the LEEDEX model I
still have in the original box, albeit well used, from 1978. The remaining
models I have tucked away all have the SO259 on their backs, and none have
BNC's. The first place in a microcomputer video application that I saw with a
BNC was on a Sync-On-Green monitor attached to a CAD system of the early
'80's.
Received on Mon Jan 28 2002 - 00:44:12 GMT