--
Dave McGuire "She's a cheek pincher. I have scars."
St. Petersburg, FL -Gary Nichols
--__--__--
Message: 3
Subject: RE: Core memory speeds
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 16:26:50 -0800
From: "Charles Ader" <Charles_at_socketcom.com>
To: <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jos Dreesen / Marian Capel [mailto:jos.mar_at_bluewin.ch]
> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 12:10 PM
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: Core memory speeds
>
>
> On Monday 20 January 2003 12:02 am, ben franchuk wrote:
> > Since I am building a classic TTL style computer,
> > what was the access and cycle time of core memory
> > before it vanished and just when did it do that?
> > Also when did 74LS come out? I am aiming for late
> > 70's early 80's time frame here since this looks
> > to be the transition stage from the the old to
> > the new. Ben
>
>
> My 1975 core memory products catalogue ( Philips components )
> lists modules with cycle times ranging from 0.65 to 1.5 us,
> both for 8kx18 stacks.
>
> My newest core memory stack sits in my Philips P856 :
> dated 1980, cycle time unknown.
>
> My own TTL computer, dated 1986, just uses 8kx8 SRAMs......
>
>
> Jos Dreesen
>
With core memory the general rule was the smaller the
donut the faster the cycle.
The real limiting factors have always been the physical
size of the array of cores. The plane, a mat of wires
with little teeny-tiny ferrite donuts at each intersection,
looks electrically like a lot of inductors all strung
in series. This is a good configuration for a low pass
filter that we are going to put a very fast pulse through.
The bottom line of all this is that even fast core
memory tends have around 0.490us write cycle times.
Read cycles are always twice the write cycle times.
This means you need to read the core memory specs
carefully. Be sure that you see the both read and
write cycle times. If you can only find one it will
most likely be the write cycle time.
--__--__--
Message: 4
From: "Witchy" <witchy_at_binarydinosaurs.co.uk>
To: <cctech_at_classiccmp.org>
Subject: RE: PET 2001 Oddity - 6550 unobtainium!
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 18:57:59 -0000
Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cctech-admin_at_classiccmp.org [mailto:cctech-admin_at_classiccmp.org]On
> Behalf Of Kevin Andres
> Sent: 20 January 2003 15:10
> To: 'cctech_at_classiccmp.org'
> Subject: RE: PET 2001 Oddity - 6550 unobtainium!
>
>
> To all, (for fear of missing someone!)
> I have a PET with the feared 6550 Unobtainiums. It doesn't
> even get to a
> prompt, but I suspect the screen full
> of characters with some blinking and some that change upon an [ENTER] key
> is telling me a video RAM went south. As
When my 2001 did that I got some 2114s from bgmicro.com to swap out the
video RAM and it works sweetly now.
--
adrian/witchy
www.binarydinosaurs.co.uk - the online computer museum
www.snakebiteandblack.co.uk - monthly gothic shenanigans
--__--__--
Message: 5
From: "Witchy" <witchy_at_binarydinosaurs.co.uk>
To: <cctech_at_classiccmp.org>, <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
Subject: RE: Dear Santa, I would like a VAX....
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 18:59:13 -0000
Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cctech-admin_at_classiccmp.org [mailto:cctech-admin_at_classiccmp.org]On
> Behalf Of Jochen Kunz
> Sent: 20 January 2003 10:15
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: Dear Santa, I would like a VAX....
>
>
> On 2003.01.19 12:30 Witchy wrote:
>
> > The thing that's puzzling me is the fact they've shoehorned an RX33
> > in there - I thought the 3100-10 was the only machine to have floppy
> > capability......
> I have a 2.88 MB SCSI floppy in my MV3100m95.
Live and learn eh :) I didn't know that was possible.
cheers
--
adrian/witchy
www.binarydinosaurs.co.uk - the online computer museum
www.snakebiteandblack.co.uk - monthly gothic shenanigans
--__--__--
Message: 6
Subject: RE: Dear Santa, I would like a VAX....
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 20:05:21 +0100
From: "Fred N. van Kempen" <Fred.van.Kempen_at_microwalt.nl>
To: <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>, <vance_at_neurotica.com>
Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
I have several 3100's with diskette drive (both MFM and SCSI).
--f
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Witchy [mailto:witchy_at_binarydinosaurs.co.uk]
> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 1:52 PM
> To: vance_at_neurotica.com
> Cc: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: RE: Dear Santa, I would like a VAX....
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: vance_at_neurotica.com [mailto:vance_at_neurotica.com]
> > Sent: 20 January 2003 06:20
> > To: Witchy
> > Cc: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> > Subject: RE: Dear Santa, I would like a VAX....
> >
> > > I certainly never sold any and I don't remember it being an
> > option for the
> > > bigger machines. Pity it's front cover is missing too, but for
> > 20-odd quid I
> > > wouldn't complain :)
> >
> > That's not exactly right. I've seen everything between
> TK50Z's and DLT
> > TZ87's in MicroVAX III-series machines.
>
> Sorry, I meant 3100 series uVAXen :)
>
> --
> adrian/witchy
> www.binarydinosaurs.co.uk - the online computer museum
> www.snakebiteandblack.co.uk - monthly gothic shenanigans
>
>
--__--__--
Message: 7
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 11:56:11 -0800 (PST)
From: "Peter C. Wallace" <pcw_at_mesanet.com>
To: "'ClassicComputers'" <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: Wanted : Pinouts for 9311, 93L14, 8273 chips
Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
On Sun, 19 Jan 2003, M H Stein wrote:
> ----------------------Original Message------------------------
> One question. Assuming the signal names are conventional, that's the same
> pinout as the '154 decoder. And yet my (ancient, hardbacked) TI TTL book
> says that while the 74154 is a logical replacement, it's not a direct
> replacement (this implies to me a different pinout). One of the pinouts I
> received had the A inputs in the oposite order (20 = A0 .. 23 = A3). Can
> somebody please check which is correct.
> -tony
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Well, you'll probably get another dozen replies from the other helpful
folks
> here, but the pinouts and logic tables are identical and 23=a0, 20=a3.
> I thought the same when I looked at the 9311, that it sure looked like a
> 74154 which was used everywhere, and that there must be a pinout or
> big characteristic difference to make it worth FSC's while (since they
> also made the '154, and TI, NSC and Motorola, who also made the 9311).
Didn't the 9311 pre-date the 74154? IICRC, a lot of the the 9300
series stuff got copied by TI (9300,9316 for example) when they got the
synchronous is better message that Fairchild was promoting with the 9300
series... (wish I still had that Orange 9300 series designers guide)
>
> But the only difference I can see is that the max propagation delay is
> less on the 9311; maybe someone else will see something else.
>
> mike
>
>
Peter Wallace
Mesa Electronics
--__--__--
Message: 8
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 12:27:38 -0700
From: Kevin Handy <kth_at_srv.net>
To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: Dear Santa, I would like a VAX....
Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
Witchy wrote:
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: cctech-admin_at_classiccmp.org [mailto:cctech-admin_at_classiccmp.org]On
>>Behalf Of Antonio Carlini
>>Sent: 19 January 2003 18:46
>>To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
>>Subject: RE: Dear Santa, I would like a VAX....
>>
>>
>>
>>>Frankly, the 8800 is too big, but that is too small...
>>>
>>>
>>Then I guess you need to aim for one of the VAX 4000
>>series, but shipping on those will be pretty
>>expensive.
>>
>>
>
>You're not kidding - not so long back a local college I do work for
decided
>to toss their 4000-500 plus RRD42 and TLZ06; fortunately I was there at
the
>time with a suitably sized estate car (station wagon for our US readers)
so
>2 of us managed to lift it into the back. When I got home I had to
>completely strip it down in situ just to lift the bits out on my own and
get
>it in the house. In my reseller days the 4000 series were delivered on a
>pallet with extra ramps to allow you to wheel the machine down to ground
>level and now I know why :)
>
>Spent a happy couple of hours or so tonight getting my Alpha 3000-400 and
>uVAX 3100-90 going again after a few months in storage, and I wish we
could
>afford the power to have 2 webservers going at the same time! Since we
moved
>into this house we've doubled our power requirements just for heating and
>lighting; 3 machines going at the same time hasn't helped, so an extra VAX
>sized load on things *definitely* won't help :)
>
If you have electrical heating (as opposed to gas/coal/oil/...), then
running
the VAX will not cost any more. Electricity generates the same amount of
heat per kilowatt, no matter how is used. It will not cost any more than
running
the electrical heating units for the same amount of power. Only problem
would be moving the heat to the proper location, and regulating it. ;-)
>cheers
>
>
>
--__--__--
Message: 9
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 11:13:49 -0800 (PST)
From: Sellam Ismail <foo_at_siconic.com>
To: "'ClassicComputers'" <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
Subject: Re: Any Cromemco USERS?
Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, M H Stein wrote:
> Just curious; is anybody actually using a Cromemco system
> out there, running either CDOS, Cromix or Unix? Or does
> anyone at least have one in running condition?
I have a System/One in running condition (last I checked) running Cromix
from the harddrive. I have two actually. One was exhibited at the first
VCF but because of all the moving the hard drive got crashed :(
To my knowledge, the other one is still running, but I haven't fired it up
in years.
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer
Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger
http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com
*
--__--__--
Message: 10
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 11:21:55 -0800 (PST)
From: Vintage Computer Festival <vcf_at_siconic.com>
To: Classic Computers Mailing List <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
Subject: Need manuals for Electrim EDC-1000 and Dycam Model 1 ($$$)
Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
----- Message Text -----
I have an outstanding bounty. I am seeking out manuals for the Electrim
EDC-1000 and Dycam Model 1 computer imaging cameras circa
late-80s/early-90s.
If you have these manuals and want to earn a little extra cash, please
contact me directly at <sellam_at_vintage.org>.
--
Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer
Festival
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
International Man of Intrigue and Danger
http://www.vintage.org
* Old computing resources for business and academia at www.VintageTech.com
*
--__--__--
Message: 11
From: "Bill Sudbrink" <wh.sudbrink_at_verizon.net>
To: <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
Subject: RE: Any Cromemco USERS?
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 14:31:19 -0500
Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
> Just curious; is anybody actually using a Cromemco system
> out there, running either CDOS, Cromix or Unix? Or does
> anyone at least have one in running condition?
I have an IMSAI chasis stuffed with cromemco boards. I run CP/M
on it... but I don't think there would be a reason it wouldn't run
a cromemco OS. It has a CPUZ, a 16FDC, a 64KZ and a TU-ART in it.
--__--__--
Message: 12
From: "Ed Tillman" <ETILLMAN_at_satx.rr.com>
To: <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
Subject: DOS1.0, 3.20, and the like...
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 13:58:40 -0600
Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
Hello...
Still looking. Someone sent me a reply in the list with a complete set of
IBM PC-DOS 1.0 still in the package. I replied, but never saw either my
reply or any answer come back. I'm still interested in buying, if I/we can
make arrangements...
Cheers!
Ed
--__--__--
Message: 13
From: Jos Dreesen / Marian Capel <jos.mar_at_bluewin.ch>
Organization: None
To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: Core memory speeds
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 21:09:41 +0100
Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
On Monday 20 January 2003 12:02 am, ben franchuk wrote:
> Since I am building a classic TTL style computer, what was the access
> and cycle time of core memory before it vanished and just when did it do
> that? Also when did 74LS come out? I am aiming for late 70's early 80's
> time frame here since this looks to be the transition stage from the the
> old to the new. Ben
My 1975 core memory products catalogue ( Philips components ) lists modules
with cycle times ranging from 0.65 to 1.5 us ,both for 8kx18 stacks.
My newest core memory stack sits in my Philips P856 : dated 1980, cycle
time
unknown.
My own TTL computer, dated 1986, just uses 8kx8 SRAMs......
Jos Dreesen
--__--__--
Message: 14
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 12:10:11 -0800 (PST)
From: Ethan Dicks <erd_6502_at_yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: PET 2001 Oddity - 6550 unobtainium!
To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
--- Kevin Andres <kandres_at_epssecurity.com> wrote:
> To all, (for fear of missing someone!)
> I have a PET with the feared 6550 Unobtainiums.
To my experience, those are the more common "static" PETs, but from
reading the list, perhaps there were more made with 2114s.
> It doesn't even get to a prompt, but I suspect the screen full
> of characters with some blinking and some that change upon an
> [ENTER] key is telling me a video RAM went south.
Perhaps. Could also be zero page.
> ...I have toyed with swapping a CD6264 and or multiples into the mother
> board even going so far as to quick doing an internet circuit board to
> accomodate them. Time is the major constraint here. I also remember an
> article or text which referenced adding perhaps a dynamic memory pack
> from another machine to the expander plug, with an appropriate R & C
> stobe assembly supplying what the PET didn't have. Whoa, memories!!!!
Not sure what you are referring to, but I know of a modern board that
plugs into the CPU socket that provides 100% of the ROM and program
RAM, but I am fairly certain that it does _not_ provide for RAM at
$8000.
Now... given how the circuit works, it might not be too hard to
remove the two video SRAMs (which should be side-by-side, not
next to the program RAM at the front edge of the board), replace
them with machined pin sockets (or four strips cut from .6" wide
sockets if you can't locate "real" 6550 sockets), then you could
either swap them out with ones from the front row to verify that
it _is_ a video SRAM, or just get some perfboard from Radio Shack
(or wherever you get parts these days) and hand-wire a daughter card
with just about any 8-bit-wide SRAM from a 2016 or 6116 on up to
a 6264 or 62256 or whatever. You could theoretically wire up a
socket adapter to use a 2114 in place of a 6550, but given the
reliability of the 2114s, I'd seriously consider a more modern
alternative.
I'm fairly certain the select lines for $8000 are not available
on the edge connector, so no matter how you do it, you'll have
to tap some lines from the motherboard. You _could_ build an
edge-card board with the SRAM on it, remove the internal ones,
and run the select lines as jumpers to your card, if you are
more comfortable building something for the edge card.
Don't know what to recommend for the "least time" solution, though.
Check the front row SRAMs first, to see if you have a zero page
problem. It's also possible that one of the TTL chips in the address
selector logic is faulty and you aren't writing to the video page at all.
If one SRAM were out, the machine would function, but look very odd.
Sounds like either both SRAMs are faulty or you have a problem elsewhere
either in the video chain or for the CPU itself.
I have this Fluke 9010A tester that would help establish which one... it
plugs into the CPU socket (I have a 6502 pod and a 68000 pod) and either
runs as if it were just the CPU in there, or you can break it out of
"emulation" mode and generate bus cycles... you can watch it test video
memory and use it to strobe lines to see if it's a selector or mux/demux
chip. A logic analyzer can also be helpful. I presume you have basic
tools but may not have more advanced tools, yes?
-ethan
> I have looked at the serial number several times and always neglect to
> write it down. I early on, 1975 or there
> abouts, added a reset button to the front panel because of my tendency to
>
> lock the silly thing up with my incessant
> poking around. I know I also have several of the early tomes on the PET
> in
> the basement, along with a couple of
> Kilobaud articles reference the machine.
>
> Kev
> kandres_at_epssecurity.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cctech-request_at_classiccmp.org [SMTP:cctech-request_at_classiccmp.org]
> Sent: Sunday, January 19, 2003 2:56 AM
> To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: cctech digest, Vol 1 #320 - 48 msgs
>
> Send cctech mailing list submissions to
> cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://www.classiccmp.org/mailman/listinfo/cctech
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> cctech-request_at_classiccmp.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> cctech-admin_at_classiccmp.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of cctech digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Got the second batch of -11 equipment (Bill Bradford)
> 2. Re: Got the second batch of -11 equipment (Dave McGuire)
> 3. Re: Update: BBC Acorn (=?iso-8859-1?q?Jules=20Richardson?=)
> 4. Re: PET 2001 oddity (pete_at_dunnington.u-net.com)
> 5. RE: MV3100 M90 / VAX 4100 (was: VXT X terminal question) (Antonio
> Carlini)
> 6. PET 2001 oddity - solved! (Adrian Vickers)
> 7. RE: Musings on BabyVAX video (Antonio Carlini)
> 8. RE: Hobbled NVAX (was: VXT X terminal question) (Antonio Carlini)
> 9. Re: PET 2001 oddity (Adrian Vickers)
> 10. Re: PET 2001 oddity (Adrian Vickers)
> 11. Apple Macintosh- where would this be useful? (Kenneth Donchatz)
> 12. Re: Apple Macintosh- where would this be useful? (Cameron Kaiser)
> 13. Re: PET 2001 oddity - solved! (pete_at_dunnington.u-net.com)
> 14. Re: PET 2001 oddity (pete_at_dunnington.u-net.com)
> 15. Re: PET 2001 oddity (pete_at_dunnington.u-net.com)
> 16. RE: Musings on BabyVAX video (Fred deBros)
> 17. Re: Update: BBC Acorn (pete_at_dunnington.u-net.com)
> 18. RE: Musings on BabyVAX video (Doc Shipley)
> 19. Re: VXT X terminal question (Jochen Kunz)
> 20. Re: VXT X terminal question (Jochen Kunz)
> 21. BBC Micro - assemblers - info needed (Philip Pemberton)
> 22. RE: Musings on BabyVAX video (Peter C. Wallace)
> 23. Re: IBM 5322 (Sellam Ismail)
> 24. SGI Discussions? was Re: Mac SE/30 accessories availability? (David
>
> Holland)
> 25. PET 2001 oddity (M H Stein)
> 26. T&B Ansley IDC connectors (M H Stein)
> 27. PerSci Model 277 Dual 8" Floppy Drives - Info Needed (M H Stein)
> 28. Re: About Electronics Questions (Tony Duell)
> 29. RE: Dear Santa, I would like a VAX.... (Zane H. Healy)
> 30. Re: Dear Santa, I would like a Yamaha CX5M ... (Sellam Ismail)
> 31. Re: Apple 1 schematics (Tothwolf)
> 32. Re: Wanted : Pinouts for 9311, 93L14, 8273 chips (David Gesswein)
> 33. Re: DOS 1.0 (Tothwolf)
> 34. RE: Hobbled NVAX (Michael Sokolov)
> 35. New classic (Gareth Knight)
> 36. RE: VXT X terminal question (Michael Sokolov)
> 37. MCA Fast Ethernet Cards (vance_at_neurotica.com)
> 38. Re: SGI Discussions? (Brian Chase)
> 39. RE: VXT X terminal question (Antonio Carlini)
> 40. RE: Musings on BabyVAX video (r. 'bear' stricklin)
> 41. Re: SGI Discussions? was Re: Mac SE/30 accessories availability?
> (r.
> 'bear' stricklin)
> 42. RE: VXT X terminal question (Fred N. van Kempen)
> 43. Apple 1 schematics (chris)
> 44. RE: VXT X terminal question (Fred N. van Kempen)
> 45. RE: VXT X terminal question (Michael Sokolov)
> 46. Re: Apple 1 schematics (Eric Smith)
> 47. Re: Got the second batch of -11 equipment (John Honniball)
> 48. Re: Apple 1 schematics (John Honniball)
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 15:11:17 -0600
> From: Bill Bradford <mrbill_at_mrbill.net>
> To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: Got the second batch of -11 equipment
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> Unfortunately, the actual "machine" (the guy didnt know that the MINC-11
> was
> a system as well) is just an 11/23 with some RL01s.
>
> Pictures:
>
> http://www.pdp11.org/minc/01-18-03/
>
> I have no idea if the RL01 disk packs are any good, but I've got one
> DEC-labled RT-11 v4.0, and one hand-labeled RT-11 v4.0C "patched to
> level F". The top RL01 is missing the hinged cover.
>
> Anybody want two RL02s (by the way, how the hell do I get the top covers
> open? The "switch" on the top wont budge), and two RL01s? Pickup in
> Austin, Texas..
>
> Not a bad haul for a total of $30, even if I do just keep the 11/23 and
> the MINC-11 and the racks.
>
> Bill
>
> --
> bill bradford
> mrbill_at_mrbill.net
> austin, texas
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 16:58:47 -0500
> Subject: Re: Got the second batch of -11 equipment
> From: Dave McGuire <mcguire_at_neurotica.com>
> To: mrbill_at_mrbill.net, cctech_at_classiccmp.org
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> On Saturday, January 18, 2003, at 04:11 PM, Bill Bradford wrote:
> > Anybody want two RL02s (by the way, how the hell do I get the top
> > covers
> > open? The "switch" on the top wont budge), and two RL01s? Pickup in
> > Austin, Texas..
>
> The top door latch on an RL drive is locked by a solenoid. Apply
> power to the drive, make sure the "load" button is out, wait for a
> "click" (the load light will come on) then you should be able to
> squeeze that little slide handle and open the top cover.
>
> I would really like to have the RL02s but I have no idea how I'd get
> them from you. :-(
>
> -Dave
>
> --
> Dave McGuire "She's a cheek pincher. I have scars."
> St. Petersburg, FL -Gary Nichols
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 10:23:31 +0000 (GMT)
> From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Jules=20Richardson?= <julesrichardsonuk_at_yahoo.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: Update: BBC Acorn
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
>
> >> just checked mine again and it's 25-ANC13-1000049
> >>
> >Mine is 25-ANC13-1000034, and Rob O'Donnell said his is
> 25-ANC13-1000038.
>
> well if Rob's was the last then they obviously didn't do a very good job
> of
> numbering things :-) Unless Rob's was the last one released by Acorn,
> but
> they
> all sat in storage for a while...
>
> > Do either of you think you have a Disc 1 for it?
>
> no discs at all I'm afraid :-( hence why I was asking about whther
> there's
> a
> sensible ftp site to put them on so if a working set can be collected at
> least
> they can be archived somewhere (the same goes for manuals really, but
> scanning
> those would be a major pain I expect!)
>
> that used to be the problem - the hardware used to get thrown out but
> discs
> would lie around on shelves until someone did a bit of spring cleaning
> now
> and
> then; they would have been trashed seperately and maybe straight into a
> bin
> in
> the office :-(
>
> cheers
>
> Jules
> (who has too many systems that don't work for lack of necessary discs :-)
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Everything you'll ever need on one web page
> from News and Sport to Email and Music Charts
> http://uk.my.yahoo.com
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 11:37:37 GMT
> From: pete_at_dunnington.u-net.com
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: PET 2001 oddity
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> On Jan 17, 18:18, Adrian Vickers wrote:
> >
> > Unfortunately, the PET seems to have developed an odd fault: It won't
> take
> > a BASIC program, and some keywords seem to be knackered...
>
> > So.... I figure the BASIC ROM has become slightly corrupted, OR I've
> got
> a
> > flakey memory chip which reads OK but doesn't write properly. The
> question
> > is, how to find out?
>
> Swap some of the RAM chips around and see if it makes a difference. If
> it
> does, particularly if it fixes it, swap them back -- it might just be a
> bad
> socket contact. Be careful with the RAM chips: if you have the type of
> PET
> I think you do, they're MOS Technology 6550, aka unobtainium, and unlike
> any other RAM chip.
>
> > 1) Can the BASIC ROM be swapped with one from, say, a 3032 or 4016? In
> > fact, which one IS the BASIC ROM?
>
> No. BASIC (and also the rest of the code, whether you call it a kernel
> or
> a monitor, or "stuff") is spread over several chips. And in the early
> PETs, the ROMs too are MOS Technology specials, and the different
> versions
> of PETs had different ROMs. In fact, there was an upgrade for the
> originals, because they didn't handle the IEEE routines properly, which
> made it impossible to use disks properly (amongst other things).
>
> > 2) If it's a dodgy memory chip, what's the best way of isolating it? I
> have
> > an oscilloscope, but nada skill in this sort of thing.
> > 3) If, as my money is on, it's the BASIC ROM, can it be replaced with
> an
> > EPROM - if so, there's a whole gamut of additional questions to
> follow....
>
> If it's a later unit with 24-pin 2332 mask ROMs, then a TMS2532 EPROM can
> be used (not a 2732, nor other 2532s that don't have the TMS prefix). If
> it's got 28-pin MOS Technology MPS6540 ROMs, you'd need a carrier to
> shuffle some signals, at the very least, and possibly some logic to
> handle
> the multiple select lines. The good news, though, is that I have a
> chicklet-keyboard 2001-N as well, and if necessary, I could probably do a
> ROM dump for you (though IIRC it used to be on the 'net somewhere). I
> wouldn't need to move more than a few hundreweight of stuff to get at it
> ;-)
>
> --
> Pete Peter Turnbull
> Network Manager
> University of York
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 5
> From: "Antonio Carlini" <arcarlini_at_iee.org>
> To: <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Subject: RE: MV3100 M90 / VAX 4100 (was: VXT X terminal question)
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 11:48:41 -0000
> Organization: me_at_home
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> > Wow! I thought the CQBIC was not populated on the KA50.
>
> I'm fairly sure the mainboards are identical (i.e. the same part
> number).
> I've never been inside a VAX 4000-100 so I've never had the
> chance to personally check this, but the last time I saw a
> parts list, the part numbers were the same.
>
> > Hmm. I do not suppose that this identity flag can be
> > permanently stored anywhere other than in the firmware flash
> > ROM. I'm sure DEC wouldn't want people to suddenly discover
> > that their machine shape-shifts when the NVRAM battery is
> > disconnected. So does this console test actually erase and
> > reprogram a sector in the firmware flash ROM, or is the
> > change only in effect until the next power cycle?
>
> It's stored in the flash EPROM - it rewrites it as
> part of the test (and warns you not to switch off
> while it is doing so). The change is permanent (until
> you run the test again and switch back).
>
> I doubt HP care whether customers know this or not now. I
> doubt they cared even back then: switching from a UV3100-90
> to a VAX 4000-100 didn't get you anything extra (unless
> you paid for a new case) and it did cost you more
> in licence fees. Switching the other way disabled Qbus
> and DSSI, so although your licence cost you less, you
> got less for it. And if you wanted the cheaper licence
> you would have bought the cheaper machine anyway!
>
> Antonio
>
> --
>
> ---------------
> Antonio Carlini arcarlini_at_iee.org
>
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 13:28:22 +0000
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> From: Adrian Vickers <avickers_at_solutionengineers.com>
> Subject: PET 2001 oddity - solved!
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> --=======74632786=======
> Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-671DF1C; charset=us-ascii;
>
> format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>
> Woohoo!
>
> Turned out to be dead simple; yet another blown 2114.
>
> I figured the chip _at_ $0400 (i.e. the start of BASIC) was faulty, seeing
> as
> how the machine wouldn't take a single line of BASIC. So, I swapped the
> appropriate bank out to another bank - and presto! BASIC worked again.
>
> Having done this, I then swapped *one* of the two chips (according to the
> schematic, there are two chips for each $0400 block of memory - why is
> this?) back to its original spot, and presto again - no BASIC. Swapped
> that
> chip for the one remaining spare, and presto^3! BASIC again.
>
> So, now I need more 2114's as an insurance policy...
>
> Meanwhile, I thank the list *again* for their invaluable help (Ethan,
> Mike
> & Pete in particular in this case). What would I do without you (except
> preside over a collection of steadily failing machines)?
>
> --
> Cheers, Ade.
> Be where it's at, B-Racing!
> http://b-racing.com
>
> --=======74632786=======--
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 7
> From: "Antonio Carlini" <arcarlini_at_iee.org>
> To: <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Subject: RE: Musings on BabyVAX video
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 12:06:37 -0000
> Organization: me_at_home
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> > I thought so too. But what about SPX? Can it go into a
> > pre-M76 VS3100? And what about VS2K SPX? (It would of course
> > be very silly in practice, but I'm talking in principle.)
>
> SPX will go into KA42s - although I don't know for sure whether
> it was ever sold and supported. It will probably plug into a
> VS2K but I have no idea whether it will work (or whether anything
> would run on it without more code being written).
>
> > So I thought that KA42 had one big CDAL-to-EDAL bridge
> > upfront and the rest of the system except memory was EDAL.
> > But I could be wrong, maybe different subsystems have their
> > own independent connections to CDAL.
>
> You are probably right - I just threw in "as necessary" because
> I don't have a KA42 block diagram handy (in fact, I may not have
> one at all - there is not much info floating around on these
> and the early UVAX 3100 systems).
>
> > But if KA42 indeed has one big CDAL-to-EDAL bridge upfront,
> > the million dollar question becomes: why did the VS4000 M90
> > dev team toil to design their own CDAL-to-EDAL bridge (CEAC)
> > if there already was one? The only plausible explanation I
> > could come up with is that perhaps on KA42 the CDAL-to-EDAL
> > bridge was inseparably integrated with the memory controller.
>
> I don't know why they rolled their own. Given that they used
> or modified existing designs where possible, I assume that there
> were good reasons. Perhaps the existing design was too slow or
> took up too much room (this latter consideration was definitely
> very important for the -90).
>
> > BTW, I have never found any references to a technical manual
> > for VS3100 (any
> > model) or for the corresponding early MV3100 models. It looks
> > like one never existed. Do you have any more info?
>
> No - and I could never find any even while I was inside
> DEC. There must have been *some* such documentation
> but it was nowhere I could find.
>
> > Does KA43 have memory on CDAL or on RDAL? I once had one in
> > my hands and when I looked on the board to see what chips it
>
> There's not a lot of technical info on the KA43 either!
>
> > Yeah, maybe that was the change. (Was that a typo or was
> > EDAQL a chip converting EDAL to SPX's internal bus?)
>
> Typo.
>
> >
> >http://www.research.compaq.com/wrl/DECarchives/DTJ/DTJ402/DTJ402SC.TXT
> >
> >But it talks about the X aspects of it and says nothing about VXT2000
> hardware.
>
> Yes, I've read that one and it's not the one. I was sure that there was
> an article describing the VXT2000 itself, but I guess since I cannot
> find it either on the web or in my docs, I must have
> imagined it. Oh well.
>
> Antonio
>
> --
>
> ---------------
> Antonio Carlini arcarlini_at_iee.org
>
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 8
> From: "Antonio Carlini" <arcarlini_at_iee.org>
> To: <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Subject: RE: Hobbled NVAX (was: VXT X terminal question)
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 12:11:19 -0000
> Organization: me_at_home
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> > I assume the NVAX microcode was patched via its PCS facility
> > by the boot firmware, not by making a different NVAX die with
> > different microcode I hope, right? If so the abomination is
>
> I assume so too.
>
> > to be reversed by reflashing the boot ROM with non-hobbled
> > firmware (stolen from a friend with a non-hobbled machine).
> > They had flash ROMs like all other NVAXen, right?
>
> I doubt that non-hobbled firmware exists. I doubt you
> could just use the UV3100-96 firmware upgrade on a
> UV3100-85 and have it work. In fact, I guess the firmware
> is the same but it looks at the machine's hardware (e.g.
> size and config of backup cache or something like that)
> to determine what it is running on, and disables the VIC
> if it thinks the machine is a UV3100-85.
>
> The easiest thing to do would be to try reenabling the VIC.
> If that is not enough, you would have to find the bit of code
> that disables the VIC and NOP it out. I doubt that the code
> was protected too much: it would have been way beyond most
> customers' ability to alter it.
>
> Antonio
>
> --
>
> ---------------
> Antonio Carlini arcarlini_at_iee.org
>
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 12:49:24 +0000
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> From: Adrian Vickers <avickers_at_solutionengineers.com>
> Subject: Re: PET 2001 oddity
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> --=======54493991=======
> Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-671DF1C; charset=us-ascii;
>
> format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>
> At 06:41 18/01/2003, Ethan Dicks wrote:
>
> >--- Adrian Vickers <avickers_at_solutionengineers.com> wrote:
> > > I dug the 2001 out of the cupboard the other day...
> >
> >Can you give more information about *which* 2001 you have? There
> >are at least two major motherboard revisions for the static-RAM PETs.
> >They use different ROMs and RAMs.
>
> OK, I can but try....
>
> According to the sticker on the back, this is a 2001-8BS. The motherboard
> layout appears to be the same as the one pictured on www.zimmers.net on
> the
> 4k/8k layout. I've taken some photos of my motherboard, which can now be
> found here:
>
> http://helmies.org.uk/images/cbm2001/mobo_front.jpg
> http://helmies.org.uk/images/cbm2001/mobo_back.jpg
> http://helmies.org.uk/images/cbm2001/mobo_side.jpg
>
> NOTE: Each picture is approx 449K = long download over a modem!
>
> >Also, as I have one, there are also models of 2001 that have _dynamic_
> >RAMs. My 2001-N has 32K worth of 4116 chips (from the factory) and a
> >full-sized graphic keyboard. If it were for sale in Europe, it would
> >most likely been labelled a 3032, for comparison, but here in the
> States,
> >it says "2001" on the front.
> >
> >I bring it up because I _think_ you are talking about the original
> >chicklet-keyboard SRAM PET, but you didn't come right out and say so.
>
> Apologies, I didn't; I keep forgetting that the 2001 went through more
> development than perhaps any of the other PETs. Yes, it is a chicklet
> keyboard version, with static RAM (2114's) and original 28-pin MOS ROMs.
>
> >
> > > Unfortunately, the PET seems to have developed an odd fault: It won't
> > > take a BASIC program, and some keywords seem to be knackered...
> >.
> >.
> >.
> > > So.... I figure the BASIC ROM has become slightly corrupted, OR I've
> got
> > > a flakey memory chip...
> > >
> > > 1) Can the BASIC ROM be swapped with one from, say, a 3032 or 4016?
> >
> >Most likely not. If your 2001 has 2114 SRAMs, perhaps. There are
> >upgrade ROMs (BASIC 2.0, anyway) _for_ the 2001
>
> Personally, I'd rather keep this one as original as possible, i.e. keep
> the
> original (buggy) ROMs. However, if it means keeping it working, then I'm
> prepared to substitute the MOS ROMs with a board/set of boards containing
> more modern EPROMs wired appropriately containing the original images.
> Not
> that I've got a clue how to go about doing that, mind...
>
>
> > > In fact, which one IS the BASIC ROM?
> >
> >BASIC lives in several ROMs, the Kernel lives in several ROMs. BASICs
> >prior to 4.0 occupied $C000-$DFFF, and the Kernel occupied $E000-$FFFF,
> >minus the PIAs and VIAs, etc., at $E800. BASIC 4.0 starts at $B000
> >to add room for diskette commands.
> >
> >In my PET, $9000, $A000 and $B000 are filled with user-supplied firmware
> >(better machine-language monitor, BASIC extensions and a tape speeder).
> >These sorts of things, plus ROMs for word processors and other
> applications
> >were somewhat typical amongst serious PET users. Dunno if yours has
> >anything like that, but if you find ROMs where you expect none to be,
> >that's probably why.
>
> Well, there are no unpolulated sockets, so perhaps it's a fair bet that
> there's some extra stuff in there. Goodness knows what, though, all the
> ROMs are MOS 6540's.
>
> > > 2) If it's a dodgy memory chip, what's the best way of isolating it?
> I
> > > have an oscilloscope, but nada skill in this sort of thing.
> >
> >The typical way of testing RAMs in a C= service center was to rotate
> >a pair of them from bank to bank and see if the symptoms shift. It
> >was especially handy for detecting zero page problems.
>
> Figures :( I've had to do this once already to locate a broken 2114
> (when
> I got the machine, it claimed only 1600 bytes of memory were free).
> Luckily, I have one more spare 2114 (I got two from someone on this list,
> I
> forget who [for which I apologise] and thank them (again) profusely, as
> if
> it is a broken 2114, there's a chance the second spare might be
> essential).
>
> Anyway, if it *is* a failing RAM chip, my guess is it's the one which
> sits
> near the bottom of BASIC memory, since the first line number causes a
> crash. Does anyone have a map showing the correlation between memory
> addresses & specific chips?
>
> If it's on the schematics, I'll be looking there next (so no need to
> answer
> that question).
>
>
> <snip the rest for brevity>
>
> Ta for that, all good info!
>
> Thus, the order of the day is:
>
> 1) Try to determine which 2114 chip might have gone bad, either by
> sequenced swapping or by trying to be clever with the schematics.
>
> 2) If that doesn't fix it, re-seat all ROMs.
>
> 3) If that doesn't fix it, go to plan C - which doesn't exist yet...
>
> Also, I know this has been asked & answered before, but what's the best
> way
> of cleaning the board? It has more dust on it than I am properly
> comfortable with, and besides it looks horrible.
>
> I'm guessing that *ideally* it should be washed in distilled water with a
> very soft brush, then left in a warm place to dry thoroughly. OTOH, maybe
> alcohol would be a better idea? I have some disc head cleaning alcohol
> which would suffice - recommendations please!
>
>
> >Good luck,
>
> Thanks - I'm going to need that (in place of specific skills :)
>
>
> >P.S. - if you don't know about http://www.funet.fi/pub/cbm/ it's a
> >great site with schematics and firmware.
>
> I already knew of it, but had forgotten how useful it might be. Will
> check
> that out next. Ta!
>
>
> --
> Cheers, Ade.
> Be where it's at, B-Racing!
> http://b-racing.com
>
> --=======54493991=======--
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 12:55:43 +0000
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> From: Adrian Vickers <avickers_at_solutionengineers.com>
> Subject: Re: PET 2001 oddity
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> --=======37E27F29=======
> Content-Type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-671DF1C; charset=us-ascii;
>
> format=flowed
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>
> At 11:37 18/01/2003, you wrote:
>
> >On Jan 17, 18:18, Adrian Vickers wrote:
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, the PET seems to have developed an odd fault: It won't
> >take
> > > a BASIC program, and some keywords seem to be knackered...
> >
> > > So.... I figure the BASIC ROM has become slightly corrupted, OR I've
> got
> >a
> > > flakey memory chip which reads OK but doesn't write properly. The
> >question
> > > is, how to find out?
> >
> >Swap some of the RAM chips around and see if it makes a difference. If
> it
> >does, particularly if it fixes it, swap them back -- it might just be a
> bad
> >socket contact. Be careful with the RAM chips: if you have the type of
> PET
> >I think you do, they're MOS Technology 6550, aka unobtainium, and unlike
> >any other RAM chip.
>
> Hi Pete,
>
> It's not *quite* as bad as all that, it uses 2114's. Although they're not
> made of unobtainum, they ARE made of "rareium" (or R_at_RE!ium on eBay -
> probably the *WOW* *L_at__at_K* isotope, knowing my luck :).
>
> > > 1) Can the BASIC ROM be swapped with one from, say, a 3032 or 4016?
> In
> > > fact, which one IS the BASIC ROM?
> >
> >No. BASIC (and also the rest of the code, whether you call it a kernel
> or
> >a monitor, or "stuff") is spread over several chips.
>
> Damn, I just *knew* it wouldn't be that easy.
>
> > And in the early
> >PETs, the ROMs too are MOS Technology specials, and the different
> versions
> >of PETs had different ROMs.
>
> AFAICT, these are version 1 ROMs. Every socket is filled, and they're all
> MOS6540s.
>
> >If it's got 28-pin MOS Technology MPS6540 ROMs, you'd need a carrier to
> >shuffle some signals, at the very least, and possibly some logic to
> handle
> >the multiple select lines.
>
> Harrumph. Guess which one it has...
>
> Still, I've no fear of making carriers, etc. - albeit time constraints &
> lack of equipment will make it tough right now - at least until I can get
> my MicroMAT going.
>
> >The good news, though, is that I have a
> >chicklet-keyboard 2001-N as well, and if necessary, I could probably do
> a
> >ROM dump for you (though IIRC it used to be on the 'net somewhere). I
> >wouldn't need to move more than a few hundreweight of stuff to get at it
> >;-)
>
> That might be cool (and *snap* about the tons of stuff, although having
> seen your little collection I think you do have rather more to shift
> about
> than me!). However, let me try out the RAM swapping & chip re-seating
> first, and if that doesn't fix it, then we'll look into EPROMs &
> suchlike.
>
> --
> Cheers, Ade.
> Be where it's at, B-Racing!
> http://b-racing.com
>
> --=======37E27F29=======--
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 05:40:46 -0800 (PST)
> From: Kenneth Donchatz <kendonchatz_at_yahoo.com>
> Subject: Apple Macintosh- where would this be useful?
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> --0-1341891654-1042897246=:19979
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>
> I have a 13 year old apple macintosh that works like a dream. It's
> loaded
> with programs, and this great little machine got me through law school
> and
> helped me launch my career. When my employer switched over to a compaq
> system, I could no longer use this machine to work on projects at home
> and
> was forced to pick up an etower package instead. For the last 5 years,
> it's sat in my basement waiting. Everything works perfectly, including
> the
> printer, and all of the parts are original. Any tips on where I might
> take
> this machine so that it can be used? It's a shame to let it sit here and
> rot.
>
> Ken Donchatz
>
> kendonchatz_at_yahoo.com
>
> Columbus, Ohio
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
> --0-1341891654-1042897246=:19979
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
>
> <P>I have a 13 year old apple macintosh that works like a dream.
> It's
> loaded with programs, and this great little machine got me through law
> school and helped me launch my career. When my employer switched
> over
> to a compaq system, I could no longer use this machine to work on
> projects
> at home and was forced to pick up an etower package instead. For
> the
> last 5 years, it's sat in my basement waiting. Everything works
> perfectly, including the printer, and all of the parts are
> original.
> Any tips on where I might take this machine so that it can be used? It's
> a
> shame to let it sit here and rot. </P>
> <P>Ken Donchatz </P>
> <P><A href="mailto:kendonchatz_at_yahoo.com">kendonchatz_at_yahoo.com</A></P>
> <P>Columbus, Ohio</P><p><br><hr size=1>Do you Yahoo!?<br>
> <a
> href="http://rd.yahoo.com/mail/mailsig/*http://mailplus.yahoo.com">Yahoo!
>
> Mail Plus</a> - Powerful. Affordable. <a
> href="http://rd.yahoo.com/mail/mailsig/*http://mailplus.yahoo.com">Sign
> up
> now</a>
> --0-1341891654-1042897246=:19979--
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 12
> From: Cameron Kaiser <spectre_at_stockholm.ptloma.edu>
> Subject: Re: Apple Macintosh- where would this be useful?
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 06:09:47 -0800 (PST)
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> > I have a 13 year old apple macintosh that works like a dream.
>
> Which model?
>
> --
> ----------------------------- personal page:
> http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ --
> Cameron Kaiser, Point Loma Nazarene University *
> ckaiser_at_stockholm.ptloma.edu
> -- Of course I run NetBSD. ---------------------------------------------
>
> -------
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 15:34:45 GMT
> From: pete_at_dunnington.u-net.com
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: PET 2001 oddity - solved!
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> On Jan 18, 13:28, Adrian Vickers wrote:
>
> > Turned out to be dead simple; yet another blown 2114.
> >
> > I figured the chip _at_ $0400 (i.e. the start of BASIC) was faulty, seeing
> as
> > how the machine wouldn't take a single line of BASIC. So, I swapped the
> > appropriate bank out to another bank - and presto! BASIC worked again.
>
> Good!
>
> > Having done this, I then swapped *one* of the two chips (according to
> the
> > schematic, there are two chips for each $0400 block of memory - why is
> > this?)
>
> A 2114 is 1K x 4 bits wide, so they're used in pairs to make bytes.
>
> --
> Pete Peter Turnbull
> Network Manager
> University of York
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 15:11:59 GMT
> From: pete_at_dunnington.u-net.com
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: PET 2001 oddity
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> Hi, Ade.
>
> On Jan 18, 12:55, Adrian Vickers wrote:
>
> > It's not *quite* as bad as all that, it uses 2114's. Although they're
> not
> > made of unobtainum, they ARE made of "rareium" (or R_at_RE!ium on eBay -
> > probably the *WOW* *L_at__at_K* isotope, knowing my luck :).
>
> Good! If it *is* a RAM fault, and you can't find one at a reasonable
> price, let me know. I think I still have a small number spare.
>
> > AFAICT, these are version 1 ROMs. Every socket is filled, and they're
> all
> > MOS6540s.
>
> Drat. Let's hope it's not a ROM fault. Sadly, my copy of "The PET
> Revealed" with its mostly-legible (!) circuit diagrams, shows the later
> board with 2332s. But I do have a copy of the MPS6540 pinout somewhere.
>
> > Harrumph. Guess which one it has...
> >
> > Still, I've no fear of making carriers, etc. - albeit time constraints
> &
> > lack of equipment will make it tough right now - at least until I can
> get
> > my MicroMAT going.
> >
> > >The good news, though, is that I have a
> > >chicklet-keyboard 2001-N as well, and if necessary, I could probably
> do
> a
> > >ROM dump for you (though IIRC it used to be on the 'net somewhere). I
> > >wouldn't need to move more than a few hundreweight of stuff to get at
> it
> > >;-)
> >
> > That might be cool (and *snap* about the tons of stuff, although having
> > seen your little collection I think you do have rather more to shift
> about
> > than me!). However, let me try out the RAM swapping & chip re-seating
> > first, and if that doesn't fix it, then we'll look into EPROMs &
> suchlike.
>
> OK. Give me shout if you want me to start burrowing. Or come and pay a
> visit...
>
> --
> Pete Peter Turnbull
> Network Manager
> University of York
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 15:29:23 GMT
> From: pete_at_dunnington.u-net.com
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: PET 2001 oddity
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> On Jan 18, 12:49, Adrian Vickers wrote:
> > At 06:41 18/01/2003, Ethan Dicks wrote:
> >
> > >I bring it up because I _think_ you are talking about the original
> > >chicklet-keyboard SRAM PET, but you didn't come right out and say so.
> >
> > Apologies, I didn't; I keep forgetting that the 2001 went through more
> > development than perhaps any of the other PETs. Yes, it is a chicklet
> > keyboard version, with static RAM (2114's) and original 28-pin MOS
> ROMs.
>
> > Well, there are no unpolulated sockets, so perhaps it's a fair bet that
> > there's some extra stuff in there. Goodness knows what, though, all the
> > ROMs are MOS 6540's.
>
> Then there's no extras. The MOS Technology 6540 ROMs are half the
> capacity
> of the 2332s in later boards, so there are seven of them in a standard
> PET
> and no spare sockets.
>
> > Figures :( I've had to do this once already to locate a broken 2114
> (when
> > I got the machine, it claimed only 1600 bytes of memory were free).
> > Luckily, I have one more spare 2114 (I got two from someone on this
> list,
> I
> > forget who [for which I apologise] and thank them (again) profusely, as
> if
> > it is a broken 2114, there's a chance the second spare might be
> essential).
>
> I think it was me (and I think you already said thankyou :-))
>
> > Also, I know this has been asked & answered before, but what's the best
> way
> > of cleaning the board? It has more dust on it than I am properly
> > comfortable with, and besides it looks horrible.
> >
> > I'm guessing that *ideally* it should be washed in distilled water with
> a
> > very soft brush, then left in a warm place to dry thoroughly. OTOH,
> maybe
> > alcohol would be a better idea? I have some disc head cleaning alcohol
> > which would suffice - recommendations please!
>
> Start by vacuuming it with a powerful vacuum and a soft, small,
> paintbrush
> (about 1/2" - 1") to help disldge the dirt. You might not need to wash
> it
> after that. It's not too important for a board like this, but the air
> rushing through a plastic vacuum nozzle can generate a surprising amount
> of
> static, so ideally the nozzle should be conductive, and grounded.
>
> If you do wash it, use some detergent, do not get it too hot, rinse with
> distilled water and a *very small* amount of wetting agent (to help the
> water drain). Blowing off the excess with low-pressure compressed air
> and/or rinsing in IPA or meths (which mix with water and helps remove it)
> may also be a good idea. Do make sure you get all the water out of
> places
> like IC sockets, switches, and connectors, as residues may eventually
> lead
> to corrosion.
>
> In extreme cases, or where I've had a lot of boards to clean, I've used
> the
> dishwasher -- but do not let the dishwasher do the normal drying cycle as
> it's too hot for safety. Some dishwashers seem to use very hot water,
> too,
> and some types of PCB and some types of plastic don't like that. Don't
> use
> a dishwasher on boards that have non-sealed relays, transformers, paper
> labels, etc.
>
> --
> Pete Peter Turnbull
> Network Manager
> University of York
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 16
> From: "Fred deBros" <fdebros_at_verizon.net>
> To: <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Subject: RE: Musings on BabyVAX video
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 10:34:21 -0500
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> I'm pretty sure that a VS3100-76 with no graphics board *will* come up
> using onboard monochrome (use the green signal).
> I don't think I've ever actually used one this way, but I do
> know that the GPX and SPX options came with a little stick-on
> panel that said either "GPX" or "SPX" in about the right size
> and font to stick right after the "VAXstation 3100 M76" nameplate.
>
> Mine does and it is just a matter on which pin you pick it up in the
> back of the box! I'd have to go to my office to ck it again.
>
> Fred
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 17
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 15:42:37 GMT
> From: pete_at_dunnington.u-net.com
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: Update: BBC Acorn
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> On Jan 18, 10:23, Jules Richardson wrote:
>
> > > Do either of you think you have a Disc 1 for it?
> >
> > no discs at all I'm afraid :-( hence why I was asking about whther
> there's a
> > sensible ftp site to put them on so if a working set can be collected
> at
> least
> > they can be archived somewhere (the same goes for manuals really, but
> scanning
> > those would be a major pain I expect!)
>
> Well, someone else has offered to copy Disc 1 for me. I've also found a
> few other people who have ARM Evaluation Systems, so once I get a good
> Disc
> 1, I'll put the set of six on my website (and if anyone from any of the
> Beeb sites wants to make a copy, that's fine by me). Any suggestions as
> to
> format to use for the images?
>
> I've also just been told that the production run of ARM (not ARM2) chips
> was 2000. I know some were used in-house for other types of development
> system (like the A500) and more were used for Springboard (an ISA card,
> the
> PC equivalent of the ARM Development System), so 50 or 100 seem likely
> numbers for the quantity of ARM Development Kits made to fit Beebs.
>
> --
> Pete Peter Turnbull
> Network Manager
> University of York
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 18
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 10:09:30 -0600 (CST)
> From: Doc Shipley <doc_at_mdrconsult.com>
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: RE: Musings on BabyVAX video
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> On Sat, 18 Jan 2003, Antonio Carlini wrote:
>
> > > I thought so too. But what about SPX? Can it go into a
> > > pre-M76 VS3100? And what about VS2K SPX? (It would of course
> > > be very silly in practice, but I'm talking in principle.)
> >
> > SPX will go into KA42s - although I don't know for sure whether
> > it was ever sold and supported. It will probably plug into a
> > VS2K but I have no idea whether it will work (or whether anything
> > would run on it without more code being written).
>
> I'll look when I get home (next month), but I'm pretty sure one of my
> VS3100 m38 machines was labelled SPX from the factory.
>
> Doc
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 19
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 15:21:03 +0100
> From: Jochen Kunz <jkunz_at_unixag-kl.fh-kl.de>
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: VXT X terminal question
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2003 at 11:38:58PM -0000, Antonio Carlini wrote:
>
> > Obviously you have to have a Qbus extension cable and some way
> > of connecting it - the easiest way is a VAX 4000-1xx cab :-)
> Well, the enclosure is the same. It is only a set of additional
> connectors on the back an internal cabling. At least I interpreted
> pictures of a VAX4k105 this way. But all I need is the pinout.
> Building some cables is no problem and I have a QBus backplane
> from a dead and rotten BA23.
>
> > > Sad that I have not the QBus cabling for my MV3100m95. A 83
> > > MHz NVAX (32 VUPs?) desktop VAX wirh QBus would be nice.
> > It would indeed. The VAX 4000-1xx range is something that
> > I only rarely got to play on. But there are plenty of
> > other Qbus boxes around.
> I have a MV II, MV III, MV3900, MV4k200, VAX4k300, VAX4k400
> and a PDP11-73. Enough QBus boxen to play. OK. I miss a KA640
> based machine. But none of them brings that power in that small
> footprint and is easy to interface to lots of storage, i.e.
> SCSI.
> --
>
>
>
> tschu?,
> Jochen
>
> Homepage: http://www.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de/~jkunz
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 20
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 12:29:24 +0100
> From: Jochen Kunz <jkunz_at_unixag-kl.fh-kl.de>
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: VXT X terminal question
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> On Sat, Jan 18, 2003 at 10:50:58AM +0100, Fred N. van Kempen wrote:
>
> > I have the Ultrix V4.50 source tree [no comment] and will be porting it
>
> to
> > the M76, *and* (which is my target) my beloved 4000-700A.
> Someone on the PUPS / TUHS list has ported 4.3BSD-Tahoe and / or
> 4.3BSD-Reno to the VAX4000-7xx. AFAIK he had some porblems with
> interrupts at autoconfig time, but got it running.
> --
>
>
>
> tschu?,
> Jochen
>
> Homepage: http://www.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de/~jkunz
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 21
> From: "Philip Pemberton" <philpem_at_dsl.pipex.com>
> To: <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Subject: BBC Micro - assemblers - info needed
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 16:16:39 -0000
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> Hi all,
> I've just downloaded three assemblers from the ROM archive at
> http://bbc.nvg.org . Catch is, none of them include manuals. I've got
> copies
> of:
> VASM65 v2.0E by Vida Rebus
> ASM 1.10 by SYSTEM (claims to be the "ASM 6502 Macro assembler
> V1.10",
> "Copyright (C) 1984 SYSTEM"). Contains text strings like "Press play", so
> may be a tape->ROM conversion.
> ROMAS 3.02 by TBK Associates (full copyright string = "ROMAS 3.02
> (C)1985 TBK Associates - S.C."
>
> Has anyone here got any documentation for these assemblers? I'd like
> to
> get at least one of them to assemble *something*. Perhaps a "Hello World"
> program?
> Also, Vasm outputs Intel Hex files from what I can gather - does
> anyone
> here have an Intel Hex -> Binary converter for the BBC Micro?
> Finally, does anyone know how some discs were formatted so they were
> compatible with 40-track and 80-track disc drives?
>
> Thanks.
> --
> Phil.
> philpem_at_dsl.pipex.com
> http://www.philpem.dsl.pipex.com/
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 22
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 09:07:36 -0800 (PST)
> From: "Peter C. Wallace" <pcw_at_mesanet.com>
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: RE: Musings on BabyVAX video
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> On Sat, 18 Jan 2003, Antonio Carlini wrote:
>
> > > I thought so too. But what about SPX? Can it go into a
> > > pre-M76 VS3100? And what about VS2K SPX? (It would of course
> > > be very silly in practice, but I'm talking in principle.)
> >
> > SPX will go into KA42s - although I don't know for sure whether
> > it was ever sold and supported. It will probably plug into a
> > VS2K but I have no idea whether it will work (or whether anything
> > would run on it without more code being written).
>
>
> I have a few VT1300's with SPX badges and SPX cards inside, so at least
> the
> Xterm verison of the KA42/SPX seems to have been supported...
>
>
> Peter Wallace
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 23
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 09:23:06 -0800 (PST)
> From: Sellam Ismail <foo_at_siconic.com>
> To: <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Subject: Re: IBM 5322
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, Tony Duell wrote:
>
> > The System 23 I briefly worked on (as in 'got inside') had a DE9
> > connector for the printer IIRC. It was a _current loop_ serial port,
> and
> > of course the character set is EBCDIC (but as you say, that's a minor
> > problem).
>
> I was wondering what that connector was. Now I know :)
>
> > I think (based on the current loop on the PC Async card) that IBM's
> > convention was that transmiters were active and non-isolated, receivers
> > were passive and opto-isolated, but do check this before hooking
> > anything up.
>
> Cool, after the punch card project I actually know what you're talking
> about ;)
>
> Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer
> Festival
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ------
> International Man of Intrigue and Danger
> http://www.vintage.org
>
> * Old computing resources for business and academia at
> www.VintageTech.com
> *
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 24
> Subject: SGI Discussions? was Re: Mac SE/30 accessories availability?
> From: David Holland <dholland_at_woh.rr.com>
> To: Classic Computer Talk <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Date: 18 Jan 2003 13:07:13 -0500
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> Wot about SGI Crimson's? (Or in my case, a Power Series frame, w/
> Crimson boards in it) Or are they too new (and LARGE :-) ) for the
> list?
>
> (Now for the possibly Off List questions of my post)
>
> I'd like to get hold of a Reality Engine for it as mine (alas) only has
> a VGXT boardset. Anyone know where I could find one?
>
> I'd also be interested if anyone has interfaced a Sun Type 5 mouse to
> it, as they look like they use the same protocol, just one is +5v logic,
> the other is RS232? (Maxim's MAX232's sound vaguely useful, but they're
> hard to find around here in 1sie 2sie counts)
>
> (The optical mouse I have for it is in too bad a shape to be really
> usable anymore - the felts shot, and it sticks to the metal plate/mouse
> pad too much for my tastes.)
>
> The whole thing that torque's me off the worst about it is.. its 3x's
> bigger than my PC, and its 3x's quieter... :)
>
> Anyways, If I'm off list focus, someone point it out to me, and I'll
> hush, and wait for the Apple II stuff to respond too.. :-)
>
> David
>
> On Fri, 2003-01-17 at 23:19, Brian Chase wrote:
> > On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, Zane H. Healy wrote:
> >
> > > It's not just on a system like that. Earlier this week I got my
> first
> SGI
> > > system, a nice little O2. It's about the crappiest of the O2's, but
> it's
> > > still a *very* nice UNIX workstation. I thought that it was doing OK
>
> at
> > > surfing until yesterday when I wanted to check something on gamespot,
>
> it
> > > absolutly crawled to a halt trying to render the pages (well the
> browser
> > > did, the rest of the system was nice and responsive). I swear it
> took
> close
> > > to 10 minutes to get to the third page (the one that had the data I
> was
> > > curious about).
> > >
> > > I think I'll now run the browser on my Linux box and retarget it to
> the
> > > SGI's desktop (at least until I get an Octane).
> >
> > I'll wait to get an Onyx. Actually, the Origin 2000s are quite lovely,
> > too. They're still really off topic for this list.
> >
> > -brian.
> >
>
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 25
> From: M H Stein <mhstein_at_canada.com>
> To: "'ClassicComputers'" <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Subject: PET 2001 oddity
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 13:19:36 -0500
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> Ethan: thanks for the info; I've never seen a
> dynamic RAM 2001N, although a friend of mine
> home-brewed a static > dynamic conversion.
> 4032s of course, but I take it you're talking
> about a real small-B/W-screen 2001.
>
> I sometimes toy with the idea of building
> a PET using modern chips; shouldn't be too
> big a deal (very low on my to-do list though).
>
> Adrian: Was working on adding my .02 to the
> discussion, but read on and saw that you're
> in business. If you can't find any locally,
> I've got several tubes of 2114s here in frosty
> Canada. And they are used in pairs because
> they're only 4 bits wide (x 1K).
>
> One of my PETs, with an MTU graphics board,
> is dead as well; this discussion just might
> motivate me to have a look at it.
>
> Good luck!
>
> mike
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 26
> From: M H Stein <mhstein_at_canada.com>
> To: "'ClassicComputers'" <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Subject: T&B Ansley IDC connectors
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 13:25:29 -0500
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
>
> ---------------Original Message---------------
> Subject: T&B Ansley IDC connectors
> From: "Jeffrey H. Ingber" <jingber_at_ix.netcom.com>
> Date: 17 Jan 2003 19:17:20 -0500
>
> Does anyone know where I can aquire the T&B ansley "light blue" IDC
> ribbon cable connectors that were used by MITS?
>
> Googling reveals that Tyco purchased this line of connectors in 2001,
> but I can't find any mention of T&B Ansley on their web site.
>
> Thanks,
> Jeff
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Used to use a lot of these & have a few left; Exactly which ones are
> you looking for?
>
> mike
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 27
> From: M H Stein <mhstein_at_canada.com>
> To: "'ClassicComputers'" <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Subject: PerSci Model 277 Dual 8" Floppy Drives - Info Needed
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 13:29:05 -0500
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> ---------------------Original Message-------------------------
> From: "Tim Myers" <tim.myers_at_sunplan.com>
> To: <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Subject: PerSci Model 277 Dual 8" Floppy Drives - Info Needed
>
> Does anyone have any info on these drives? I have some in a CP/M system
> (Ithaca Intersystems DPS-1), and they seem completely dead. They have an
> electric load mechanism, but when I insert a disk, nothing happens.
> Popped the case and can't see anything obviously out of place.
>
> Tim.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Cromemco used these in early models of the System 3; not exactly the most
> reliable. Sorry to say, I scrapped several of them a year ago and,
> although
> I've
> got manuals for most Cromemco stuff I don't think I've got any docs on
> these.
>
> But I'll have a look and let you know if I find anything. Meanwhile,
> there
> are
> probably several people on this list who have them and could perhaps at
> least compare notes with ya. They are getting power?
>
> Good luck,
>
> mike
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 28
> From: ard_at_p850ug1.demon.co.uk (Tony Duell)
> Subject: Re: About Electronics Questions
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 19:32:58 +0000 (GMT)
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> > The biggest thing however for anybody doing repair
> > is get all the doc's you can even before you start
> > repairing something.A schematic is a very useful
>
> Agreed (why do you think I have a few _thousand_ scheamtics/repair
> manuals...). However, the schematic is not always available (maybe not
> anywhere any more), so it can be useful to be able to make guesses and
> 'find your way aobut' without a schematic. Alas this comes with (a lot
> of) practice...
>
> > PS Caps are the first thing to go in any equiment
> > unless you let the magic smoke out first.
>
> Hmmm.. Not always. I've had a number of HP98x0 machines on the bench in
> the last few months. I've had to change _one_ electrolytic capacitor and
> about 20 TTL chipes (particularly 74Hxx parts). And we all know that 2114
> RAM chips are often dead...
>
> -tony
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 29
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 19:13:48 -0800
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> From: "Zane H. Healy" <healyzh_at_aracnet.com>
> Subject: RE: Dear Santa, I would like a VAX....
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> >Didn't see one at a fiver. Saw
> >http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=1484&item=23017
> >94356
> >which is claimed to be a UV3100-95. Assuming it is, then it's
> >a darned fast VAX (in VAX terms) and really well worth having.
>
> That's one nice VAX, I'm glad it's on the other side of the pond :^)
>
> >The DLT looks more like a TZ30 to me (still nice to have) and
>
> A good indication that it's a TZ30 is that it's a half-height drive. The
> TZ30 is the only half-height drive that uses Compact-Tapes.
>
> Zane
> --
> | Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Administrator |
> | healyzh_at_aracnet.com (primary) | OpenVMS Enthusiast |
> | | Classic Computer Collector |
> +----------------------------------+----------------------------+
> | Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
> | PDP-10 Emulation and Zane's Computer Museum. |
> | http://www.aracnet.com/~healyzh/ |
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 30
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 19:26:42 -0800 (PST)
> From: Sellam Ismail <foo_at_siconic.com>
> To: <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Subject: Re: Dear Santa, I would like a Yamaha CX5M ...
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> On Sat, 18 Jan 2003, Cameron Kaiser wrote:
>
> > Anyone ever seen someone out there trying to get rid of a Yamaha CX5M?
> It's
> > about the only MSX machine I have significant curiosity about due to
> its
> > specialised music abilities.
>
> Yes, and I helped them get rid of it by taking it away for them ;)
>
> Sellam Ismail Vintage Computer
> Festival
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ------
> International Man of Intrigue and Danger
> http://www.vintage.org
>
> * Old computing resources for business and academia at
> www.VintageTech.com
> *
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 31
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 21:38:05 -0600 (CST)
> From: Tothwolf <tothwolf_at_concentric.net>
> To: Classic Computer <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Subject: Re: Apple 1 schematics
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> On Sat, 18 Jan 2003, chris wrote:
>
> > In reading my copy of Collectible Microcomputers (yes yes, you all get
> > it by now, I like the book... ok, I'll stop refering to it after
> > this)... I noticed in the Apple Computer section a mention of how
> > Apple's first customers were the folks that got schematics for the
> Apple
> > 1 when it was first shown at Home Brew.
> >
> > Although I already knew that they alledgedly gave out schematics... I
> > began to wonder A: did they really (probably) and B: do any copies
> exist
> > anywhere?
> >
> > I thought it might be a fun project to try an build an Apple 1 from the
> > schematics... just as the first users probably did. So, does anyone
> know
> > if they are available, or does anyone have a copy and might want to
> send
> > me a set? Or are copies just as elusive as the Apple 1 itself and there
> > is no shot in ever getting them.
>
> Ok, I guess its time I post on the list about this...
>
> I've been thinking about this very project for sometime. The main
> problems
> that I came up with are:
> 1. certain parts are difficult to find
> 2. ROM source and/or binary image availability
> 3. re-creating the pc boards
>
> The first problem should be possible to overcome either by finding a
> stock
> of surplus parts, or should significant demand exist, having the parts
> made by a company that specializes in fabricating out of production
> parts.
> I've actually looked into the later a couple times in the past, and the
> prices didn't seem to be out of line. I've even wondered if it would be
> possible to get a copy of the mask from Intel for say the i8008 or i4004
> and have reproductions made.
>
> The second and third problems may be slightly more difficult to overcome.
> One option would be to find an Apple 1, dump the ROMs, carefully unsolder
> all the parts and scan each side of the cleaned pc boards. The scanned
> images can then be used to create gerber files. I personally don't have
> the funds to go out and buy an Apple 1, and I don't know of anyone who
> would give up one just for it to be taken to bits.
>
> Another option for the second and third problems is to contact Woz and
> see
> if he would be willing to help. I have so far restrained myself from
> emailing him, since I know he gets tons and tons of emails, including
> people asking him if he has an Apple 1 he could give them, etc. I'd
> imagine Woz would very much like to see the Apple 1 preserved, but it
> would probably take him quite a bit of time to find all the docs and info
> that we'd need.
>
> -Toth
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 32
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 22:41:14 -0500
> From: David Gesswein <djg_at_drs-esg.com>
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: Wanted : Pinouts for 9311, 93L14, 8273 chips
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> Subject: Wanted : Pinouts for 9311, 93L14, 8273 chips
>
> Fairchild 9311 (4 bit -> 16 line decoder?)
>
> 1 of 16 decoder
>
> 1 : 0
> 2 : 1
> 3 : 2
> 4 : 3
> 5 : 4
> 6 : 5
> 7 : 6
> 8 : 7
> 9 : 8
> 10 : 9
> 11 : 10
> 12 : Gnd
> 13 : 11
> 14 : 12
> 15 : 13
> 16 : 14
> 17 : 15
> 18 : E1
> 19 : E2
> 20 : A3
> 21 : A2
> 22 : A1
> 23 : A0
> 24 : Vcc
>
> E1 and E2 both low to enable output. Outputs 0-15 are active low
>
> Fairchild 93L14 (latch?)
> Probably same as NSC
> http://www.national.com/ds/93/93L14.pdf
>
> Signetics 8273 (10 bit serial-in, parallel out shift register)
>
> 1 : Q6
> 2 : Q7
> 3 : Q8
> 4 : Q9
> 5 : Q10
> 6 : ClK1/
> 7 : CLK2
> 8 : Gnd
> 9 : Clr/
> 10 : Serial In
> 11 : Q1
> 12 : Q2
> 13 : Q3
> 14 : Q4
> 15 : Q5
> 16 : Vcc
>
> Clk2 low and clk1 works
> clk1 high and clk2 works
> clk1 feeds an inverter then is ored with clk2 and result inverted to
> clock the flip flops.
>
> David Gesswein
> http://www.pdp8.net/ -- Run an old computer with blinkenlights.
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 33
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 21:53:42 -0600 (CST)
> From: Tothwolf <tothwolf_at_concentric.net>
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: DOS 1.0
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Live Wire wrote:
>
> > > I do also memember Wordstar and it's arcane command sequences. Those
> > > commands persisted though, through a number of ordinary text editors
> > > for programmers & such.
> >
> > http://sourceforge.net/projects/joe-editor/
> >
> > This is as close to wordstar and the WS CTRL-K-x command set I have
> > found. I used to use wordstar on a tiny portable computer with a 4 line
> > display to write asm for the amiga 500 and then dump it via the built
> in
> > modem. Joe is my favorite editor today, though I find myself living in
> > vi for the most part...
>
> I use 'joe' constantly myself. It's my day to day editor for editing
> source code. I have used vi and vim somewhat, but I've honestly not yet
> taken the time to learn vi as well as I should. I'm sure I must be
> missing
> out by not using vi (well, thats what other software developers tell me),
> but joe is fast and does what I need it to.
>
> Somewhere, I have a complete Wordstar set for the Apple II. IIRC, I
> pulled
> it and some other complete Apple II software from a trash pile back in
> 1998 or so.
>
> -Toth
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 34
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 03 11:13:01 PST
> From: msokolov_at_ivan.Harhan.ORG (Michael Sokolov)
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: RE: Hobbled NVAX
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> Antonio Carlini <arcarlini_at_iee.org> wrote:
>
> > I doubt that non-hobbled firmware exists. I doubt you
> > could just use the UV3100-96 firmware upgrade on a
> > UV3100-85 and have it work. In fact, I guess the firmware
> > is the same but it looks at the machine's hardware (e.g.
> > size and config of backup cache or something like that)
> > to determine what it is running on, and disables the VIC
> > if it thinks the machine is a UV3100-85.
>
> Umm, I don't think so. It looks like the firmware is the only difference
> between M85 and the equivalent M9x model and the hardware is the same. In
>
> this
> case flashing M9x firmware would obviously give you the M9x model. But
> even
> if
> the M85 board was really different in B-cache or something from all M9x
> models,
> I doubt that the firmware could detect this by "looking at the hardware".
>
> AFAIK
> it's the firmware that has to tell the chips how the board is configured,
>
> not
> the other way around.
>
> If indeed the hobbled and non-hobbled firmware are the same code, what it
>
> looks
> at to make the decision is most probably a flag in the second longword of
>
> the
> ROM.
>
> > The easiest thing to do would be to try reenabling the VIC.
> > If that is not enough, you would have to find the bit of code
> > that disables the VIC and NOP it out.
>
> Well, if it munges the microcode I would go for option 2 in any case.
>
> BTW, do you know for sure that it really munges the microcode and not
> just
> disables the VIC in the same way normal caches from CVAX onward can be
> enabled
> and disabled as you like?
>
> MS
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 35
> From: "Gareth Knight" <knight.beat_at_ntlworld.com>
> To: <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Subject: New classic
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 19:20:36 -0000
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> http://c64upgra.de/c-one/s_pictures.htm
> First pictures of the CommodoreOne pre-production board are now online:
> ""the pictures section has been extended by 11 pictures of the
> pre-production board. Basic testing has already been done, all chips are
> responding positively to diagnostic access. A 100% test procedure will be
> developed this weekend."
> --
> Gareth Knight
> Amiga Interactive Guide | Team *AMIGA* member
> http://amiga.emugaming.com | http://www.amigau.com/aig/index.html
>
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 36
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 03 11:28:06 PST
> From: msokolov_at_ivan.Harhan.ORG (Michael Sokolov)
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: RE: VXT X terminal question
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> Fred N. van Kempen <Fred.van.Kempen_at_microwalt.nl> wrote:
>
> > Ugh. Make that V4.20, obviously. Development is done on my V4.5 box..
> >
> > Shitty thing is, that I probably will also have to run a 4.2 system as
> > a second-step system for bootstrapping, and I dont have a 4.2/vax tk50
> > or cd set.
>
> Why can't you compile and use the V4.20 kernel on your V4.50 system?
>
> BTW, have you tried booting VXT on different VS3100s? I would really like
>
> to
> use a KA43 for my own VXT if possible, but I need to know if it is or
> not.
>
> MS
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 37
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 15:23:31 -0500 (EST)
> From: vance_at_neurotica.com
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org, <geeks_at_sunhelp.org>
> Subject: MCA Fast Ethernet Cards
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
>
> Would the people who wanted the PS/2 100Mbps ethernet cards send me an
> email? I have access to them now and can ship soon.
>
> Peace... Sridhar
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 38
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 12:32:12 -0800 (PDT)
> From: Brian Chase <vaxzilla_at_jarai.org>
> To: Classic Computer Talk <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Subject: Re: SGI Discussions?
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> On 18 Jan 2003, David Holland wrote:
>
> > Wot about SGI Crimson's? (Or in my case, a Power Series frame, w/
> > Crimson boards in it) Or are they too new (and LARGE :-) ) for the
> > list?
>
> Pfft! You call that large!? There are plenty of folks on this list
> who'd mock the relatively dainty size of the SGI Power Series frames.
> There are people on the list with IBM mainframes, PDP-10s, big VAXen,
> and a few Crays.
>
> > (Now for the possibly Off List questions of my post)
> >
> > I'd like to get hold of a Reality Engine for it as mine (alas) only has
> > a VGXT boardset. Anyone know where I could find one?
> >
> > I'd also be interested if anyone has interfaced a Sun Type 5 mouse to
> > it, as they look like they use the same protocol, just one is +5v
> logic,
> > the other is RS232? (Maxim's MAX232's sound vaguely useful, but
> they're
> > hard to find around here in 1sie 2sie counts)
> >
> > (The optical mouse I have for it is in too bad a shape to be really
> > usable anymore - the felts shot, and it sticks to the metal plate/mouse
> > pad too much for my tastes.)
>
> I'll see if we have any spare older mice. I know at least with the Indy
> and Indigo2s onward they all used regular PS/2 mice. I'm not sure about
> the Onyx systems, or the gear predating the mid-1990s time frame. My
> introduction to SGI equipment came around 1994 or so.
>
> About a year ago my employer returned several pallets worth of Indigo2s
> and Indys (~80-100 systems) to SGI for trade ins on Octane2s. It took
> about 6 months for SGI to even bother to come and pick them up. I've a
> feeling they all ended up being dumpstered once they got back to SGI.
> Saving them was out of the question as a list of serial numbers had been
> given to SGI; because they were trade ins, they actually had to be
> traded in. It's too bad.
>
> On another note, perhaps more related to the list, the new building that
> the Computer History Museum is moving into is actually the old SGI
> headquarters on Shoreline Dr. in Mountain View. It's a lovely building;
> I can't wait until they get things prettied up and moved into the new
> location.
>
> -brian.
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 39
> From: "Antonio Carlini" <arcarlini_at_iee.org>
> To: <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Subject: RE: VXT X terminal question
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 20:51:41 -0000
> Organization: me_at_home
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> > Well, the enclosure is the same. It is only a set of additional
> > connectors on the back an internal cabling. At least I interpreted
> > pictures of a VAX4k105 this way. But all I need is the pinout.
> > Building some cables is no problem and I have a QBus backplane
> > from a dead and rotten BA23.
>
> I have a UV3100-90 and I've been close to a VAX 4000-100 (it
> just wasn't mine). The VAX 4000-100 enclosure has a distinctive
> sloping part at the back which houses the Qbus (and DSSI?)
> connectors. I didn't get to look closely enough to see whether
> this housing is an add-on to the UV3100-90 enclosure or the whole
> case is a manufacturing modification of that enclosure. Either way,
> the standard shipping UV3100-90 enclosure does not have anywhere
> for Qbus and DSSI connectors.
>
> I'll look for pinouts if I can dig up the right docs.
>
> Antonio
>
> --
>
> ---------------
> Antonio Carlini arcarlini_at_iee.org
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 40
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 16:04:54 -0500 (EST)
> From: "r. 'bear' stricklin" <red_at_bears.org>
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: RE: Musings on BabyVAX video
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> On Sat, 18 Jan 2003, Doc Shipley wrote:
>
> > I'll look when I get home (next month), but I'm pretty sure one of my
> > VS3100 m38 machines was labelled SPX from the factory.
>
> I just hauled home an m38 that had... an SPX installed. Right after I
> bought an SPX card for my m76, to replace the GPX in it. The two SPX
> cards
> are identical in every way (except possibly dustiness).
>
> ok
> r.
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 41
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 16:08:55 -0500 (EST)
> From: "r. 'bear' stricklin" <red_at_bears.org>
> To: Classic Computer Talk <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Subject: Re: SGI Discussions? was Re: Mac SE/30 accessories availability?
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> On Sat, 18 Jan 2003, David Holland wrote:
>
> > (The optical mouse I have for it is in too bad a shape to be really
> > usable anymore - the felts shot, and it sticks to the metal plate/mouse
> > pad too much for my tastes.)
>
> Uh..
>
> Or you could go spend $1 on some felt and glue at the craft store, and
> fix
> it.
>
> ok
> r.
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 42
> Subject: RE: VXT X terminal question
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 22:14:35 +0100
> From: "Fred N. van Kempen" <Fred.van.Kempen_at_microwalt.nl>
> To: <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> All,
>
> Although I have both the M38 and M76 set up, I cant get the video
> part to work - tube (that is on a VXT2000 right now) doesn't seem
> to sync on either model. The M38 is standard, the M76 is the SPX
> model. Anyone have a clue?
>
> --fred
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 43
> Subject: Apple 1 schematics
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 16:22:30 -0500
> From: chris <cb_at_mythtech.net>
> To: "Classic Computer" <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> In reading my copy of Collectible Microcomputers (yes yes, you all get it
> by now, I like the book... ok, I'll stop refering to it after this)... I
> noticed in the Apple Computer section a mention of how Apple's first
> customers were the folks that got schematics for the Apple 1 when it was
> first shown at Home Brew.
>
> Although I already knew that they alledgedly gave out schematics... I
> began to wonder A: did they really (probably) and B: do any copies exist
> anywhere?
>
> I thought it might be a fun project to try an build an Apple 1 from the
> schematics... just as the first users probably did. So, does anyone know
> if they are available, or does anyone have a copy and might want to send
> me a set? Or are copies just as elusive as the Apple 1 itself and there
> is no shot in ever getting them.
>
> -chris
> <http://www.mythtech.net>
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 44
> Subject: RE: VXT X terminal question
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 22:23:32 +0100
> From: "Fred N. van Kempen" <Fred.van.Kempen_at_microwalt.nl>
> To: <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> Jochen writes:
>
> > Someone on the PUPS / TUHS list has ported 4.3BSD-Tahoe and / or
> > 4.3BSD-Reno to the VAX4000-7xx. AFAIK he had some porblems with
> > interrupts at autoconfig time, but got it running.
> Heh. This is not too hard, but *only* if he used the machine with
> a KFQSA (DSSI-to-MSCP) controller, rather than the onboard SHAC.
>
> It'd be a start, though. Michael, was this you?
>
> --fred
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 45
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 03 13:44:31 PST
> From: msokolov_at_ivan.Harhan.ORG (Michael Sokolov)
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: RE: VXT X terminal question
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> Fred N. van Kempen <Fred.van.Kempen_at_microwalt.nl> wrote:
>
> > > Someone on the PUPS / TUHS list has ported 4.3BSD-Tahoe and / or
> > > 4.3BSD-Reno to the VAX4000-7xx. AFAIK he had some porblems with
> > > interrupts at autoconfig time, but got it running.
> > Heh. This is not too hard, but *only* if he used the machine with
> > a KFQSA (DSSI-to-MSCP) controller, rather than the onboard SHAC.
> >
> > It'd be a start, though. Michael, was this you?
>
> Not me. My 4.3BSD suffix is Quasijarus, not Tahoe or Reno. But my opinion
>
> on
> SHAC is radically different from yours. SHAC is a darling beauty. It is a
> problem only for cheap OSes like NutBSD and Linsux. Since SHAC is a true
> CI
> host adapter with the true Generic VAX Port (GVP) it is perfectly
> supported
> by
> the SCA CI port driver present in every proper VAX OS with SCA such as
> Ultrix.
> Although DEC killed VAX Ultrix before MicroVAXen with SHAC came about,
> source
> examination shows that the Ultrix V4.20 CI port driver supports SHAC (on
> XMI).
> Some day I will lift the SCA code wholesale from Ultrix and plop it into
> 4.3BSD-Quasijarus.
>
> MS
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 46
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 14:13:56 -0800 (PST)
> Subject: Re: Apple 1 schematics
> From: "Eric Smith" <eric_at_brouhaha.com>
> To: <cctalk_at_classiccmp.org>
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> chris asks about Apple I schematics.
> > Although I already knew that they alledgedly gave out schematics... I
> > began to wonder A: did they really (probably) and B: do any copies
> exist
> > anywhere?
>
> A: Yes.
> B: Google is your friend.
>
> > I thought it might be a fun project to try an build an Apple 1 from the
> > schematics...
>
> It's *extremely* difficult to find some of the Apple I parts, which have
> been out of production for over years. Particularly the seven 1024-bit
> MOS shift registers, and one hex-40-bit MOS shift register.
>
> > just as the first users probably did.
>
> Not quite, since they had a PCB. (Unless you plan to lay out a PCB
> yourself.)
>
>
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 47
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 22:16:19 +0000
> From: John Honniball <coredump_at_gifford.co.uk>
> Organization: Stoke Gifford Computer Museum
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: Got the second batch of -11 equipment
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> Bill Bradford wrote:
> > Anybody want two RL02s (by the way, how the hell do I get the top
> covers
> > open? The "switch" on the top wont budge), and two RL01s?
>
> If the RL02s are like the RL01, there's a little metal panel on the
> side, near the "switch". Unscrew that, and you should see the solenoid
> interlock mechanism. Fiddle with that, and the "switch" should open
> the top cover.
>
> You'll need to lock the heads down if you're going to ship the drives.
> There's a little metal flap below the head carriage, visible with the
> top cover open and no pack in the drive. A single screw holds it in the
> "open" position. Loosen the screw, turn the flap 90 degrees, then
> tighten the screw. The flap is now in front of the head carriage,
> preventing it from moving.
>
> > Pickup in Austin, Texas..
>
> I know someone here in Bristol who'd take the RL02s, if they weren't
> so far away.
>
> --
> John Honniball
> coredump_at_gifford.co.uk
>
>
> -- __--__--
>
> Message: 48
> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2003 22:19:34 +0000
> From: John Honniball <coredump_at_gifford.co.uk>
> Organization: Stoke Gifford Computer Museum
> To: cctalk_at_classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: Apple 1 schematics
> Reply-To: cctech_at_classiccmp.org
>
> chris wrote:
> > Although I already knew that they alledgedly gave out schematics... I
> > began to wonder A: did they really (probably) and B: do any copies
> exist
> > anywhere?
>
> Parts of the Apple I schematics are shown in the second edition of
> "Fire In The Valley". Not enought to build a complete replica,
> though. You can see, however, that there's an option for installing
> either a 6502 CPU or a 6800.
>
> --
> John Honniball
> coredump_at_gifford.co.uk
>
>
>
>
> End of cctech Digest
>
> ---
> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.443 / Virus Database: 248 - Release Date: 1/10/2003
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.443 / Virus Database: 248 - Release Date: 1/10/2003
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com
End of cctech Digest
---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.443 / Virus Database: 248 - Release Date: 1/10/2003
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.443 / Virus Database: 248 - Release Date: 1/10/2003
Received on Wed Jan 22 2003 - 00:15:34 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Oct 10 2014 - 23:36:02 BST
