At 08:59 AM 6/27/97 BST, you wrote:
>> I do use my old machines now and then, but if anyone here has never ran a
>> modern MAC or PC, they have NO idea what is bieng missed. web pages in full
>> photo quality color, realistic games, PPP connections, Realaudio etc. I am
>
>I have used 'modern' PC's (well, at least pentiums with 16 MBytes RAM,
>SVGA card, etc), and I know I'm not missing _anything_ by sticking to
>classic computers. Let's go through your points.
>
What I mean is that we must realize that there is only so much you can do
with classic computers. after all, if they were the best than why we have
faster and better?
>'Web pages in full photo quality colour'. Well, I access the web to get
>information, not look at pretty pictures. Most of the information I want
>is _text_, or at least monochrome graphics (things like IC data sheets).
>So I don't need 'photo quality colour'. And if I did, I could easily find
well at the moment you dont need it, but its nice to know that you can see
it when you need it.
>a classic system that could display them. Evans and Sutherland, Grinnell,
>Ramtek, I2S, PPL, etc all made high-res colour displays that make most
>PC's look like toys. And you can pick one up second-hand for less than an
>SVGA card + monitor.
SVGA a toy? I used many an apple ][ + and C=64 with 80 col RGB monitors, and
I can take only so much eyestrain. sharp graphics make your eyes feel good...
also I would like to clarify somthing. I am not a billy gates follower. I
despise his efforts and his software. and winsucks 95 is a laugh!!<G> but
the issue is machines, and if you run Linux, as I do, that pentium will
spring to life! so the PC is not the greatest machine, but if you run
software that was properly written, (i.e. not from microsuck) you get
fantastic results, that is why I like my commodore 64, it can do alot on 1 MHZ.
>'Realistic games'. I don't play many games, but I'll agree that modern
>games running on modern hardware do _look_ a lot more realistic than the
>text+block graphics we had on home computers 15 years ago. The problem is
>that IMHO (and YMMV) the old games are just more fun to play. That's a
>personal judgement, though.
I have an Atari 2600, and the best racing game is from Acivision called Enduro.
>'PPP connections' Oh come on. I've run a PPP client on an _XT_. No problem
>at all. I'll happily believe they're available for other old machines as
>well.
well we all believe, but sadly, this does not always work that way. I have
an XT too, and yes you can load a packet driver, but then 640K is not big
enough except to run telnet or ftp from. I use my XT as a file server...
>'Realaudio' I assume that's some audio standard for modern machines. But
Realaudio is a standard, but it is an INTERNET standard for sending LIVE
SOUND from any web server. it has many uses, and the fun part of it is that
I live in Indiana, and when I lived in St Petersburg FL, there was a good
radio station there that I loved, and through Realaudio I can now listen to
it here. and this is not just for PC's, it runs on MACs, UNIX Linux, and
most Sun machines.
>we had good quality audio on PDP11's (thanks to a little board from 3RCC)
>in 1976. It's not exactly hard to add a DAC and a DMA engine or even a DSP
>to a lot of classic computers (and classic computer != cheap home micro so
>there's easily enough RAM space for a reasonable length sample).
to me, a PDP11 is WORLDS apart from classic HOME computers, If I had the
fortune of actually owing a PDP11, I would use it extensively..... :)
also about enough ram space...NOT!
I have some software for the C=64 that plays back digital sound files. with
the stock 64K of ram, I can hold a 6 second clip. with the 1764 ram
expansion with 512K of ram, I can hold a 60 second clip, but no longer than
that.
>What I'd be missing by going to a modern machine would be :
>Documentation. Since I don't just run prepackaged software and plug in
>prebuilt hardware, I need good technical manuals. They just don't exist
I programmed in BASIC, and that is fun, and I tried 6502 assembler, and
almost had a working interrupt handler going, but my brain fried, the
opcodes are easy, but remembering memory addresses when deprived of caffeine
is hard! the interrupt handler was for a terminal program that I was writing
that utilized a 6551 UART in a commodore 64. I love hacking old hardware!
and it also had interupt driven multitasking, as in this terminal, you can
use the modem and play .sid music files at the same time!
that was fun!! now I program in C, and if you do it right, you can make any
machine dance to your beat.
>for most modern machines
>Repairability. I can fix classic computers with no problem at all. Just
I have never had any hardware failures in ANY of my machines so far (knock
on silicon), with the exception that I accidentally cooked a 6526.
>try getting a custom chip for a PC motherboard. And don't tell me to
>replace the motherboard - if the PC is a few years old I'd probably have
>to replace the CPU and memory as well.
that is just the ticket. A brand new 486 motherboard cost $90. with it you
get real functionality.
I know some who will pay twice that for a doorstop...
actually, you can get a decent modern PC together just by scrounging
computer shows and bargaining for parts. assembling a system from scratch
with old parts is very fun and rewarding. and the reliablity rate for modern
chips is very high. in fact the monitor or hard disk probably will die
before the motherboard will.
also I am speaking of those who NEVER touched anything new, and passing
judgment. if you tried the
new stuff, and hate it, that is fine, but I can't stand those who never
tried it then saying it sux.
At 23:55 28/06/97 -0500, you wrote:
>
>WAHOO! I am in as Root! And I ain't gonna tell you what it was!
>
>Now, anyone know what the Streaming Tape Drive device is called?
>I can boot with this (an old Adaptec SCSI board) installed.
I have the TI 1300, and the device was called /dev/rct0
you should have the "help" command available, try also with ? and
the topic.
>I also have 2 CB811 cards but only one seems to come up with a light,
>the other one just flashes?
> *** CB811 -- (C) Copyright 1986 Computone Systems, Inc.
> (C) Copyright 1987, 1988 Texas Instruments Inc.
>
>I can not boot with either or both of these installed. I haven't tried
>real hard, maybe the console port changes with these in. But I also don't
>hear all the beeps if these are in.
I guess you are using built-in vga card and keyboard connected directly
in the machine, instead of using "tty0a" port of the CB811 with a vt 100 as
console. This, usually, make the difference.
>Here's my last bootup record
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Sat Jun 28 23:11:07
> *** CB811 -- (C) Copyright 1986 Computone Systems, Inc.
> (C) Copyright 1987, 1988 Texas Instruments Inc.
>
>Can't find any CB811 boards
>Texas Instruments print screen v1.01
>SPA initialization complete
>Streaming cartridge tape v2.00[A] (int=3,dma=3,base=00000220)
>Irootdev 1/40, pipedev 1/40, swapdev 1/41
>JKL0L1L2L3disk[W] drive 0: cyls = 918, heads = 15, secs = 17
>nswap = 5610, swplo = 0, Hz = 50
>L4maximum user process size = 8655k
>L5MNOPmem: total = 8064k, reserved = 4k, kernel = 1088k, user = 6
>Sat Jun 28 23:11:08
>972k
>kernel: drivers = 4k, 0 screens = 0k, 600 i/o bufs = 600k, msg bufs = 8k
>QRSTUVWXYZdisk[W] drive 1: cyls = 918, heads = 15, secs = 17
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>I have looked and can not find any docs on the CB811's or the Tape Drive
>8-( 8-( 8-(
>
>Anybody know anything about either of these?????
I will try to ask my old TEXAS suppliers and let you know
Riccardo
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Riccardo Romagnoli,collector of:CLASSIC COMPUTERS,TELETYPE UNITS,PHONE
AND PHONECARDS I-47100 Forli'/Emilia-Romagna/Food Valley/ITALY
Pager:DTMF PHONES=+39/16888(hear msg.and BEEP then 5130274*YOUR TEL.No.*
where*=asterisk key | help visit http://www.tim.it/tldrin_eg/tlde03.html
Subject: Home computer: Definition
My opinions and to disgress;
"Home Computer" term is invented by corporations to supposely help
define their markets and totally miss it all the time because users
needs is usually higher than their corporates' computers by factor of
1.5 to 2. At same time tries to pull off a coup on "home" users by
selling stripped down with loads of cut corners and oft-nonstandard
parts machine at horrible prices. Case in point: PCjr. PCjr and
orignal 2 piece PS/1 (sold at 1000 bux cdn but you get no HD in it,
introduced 1990's but users right away dumped them by pallets barely
2 years after. Yuk!) Side note: I traded few things to get this PS/1
2011 and used it for a while but sold it cheaply to a user who have
modest needs than I. (for me, I can't manage well without hard drive
attached even all the down to XT but not for apple II's their floppy
drive is very fast enough to forgo hd, very impressed but at that
time too expensive for my taste but now they are so cheap now.)
So there was a bad taste to this name "home computers" in general.
Similar types of computers did well in many areas but
happened to lack important areas that killed it. Ironically, better
to build DIY similar capablies 386, 80mb, 1mb, desktop/mono vga and
still easily interchangable than that darned PS/1 2011 models. When I
read about many machines and few "home computers" as called toys but
I was mistaken when I saw and heard that "toy", boy, they're mistaken
and I was taken too for a while! Indeed they were used for anything
within their capablies so I accept anything that has CPU in it at
same time useful and expandable should be decent computers, no more
or less. :)
C64, PET's, apples and such has just right stuff to keep users
happy.
In closing, corporations always underestimate "home" users.
But now they are not pushing this word and crippled machines anymore,
now selling them in general to any users execpt for corporations who
needs turnkey system just to do very specific jobs like weak machine
strictly for WP use, alphas for servers and heavy graphics, fast
processor for programming but that is getting blurred that most users
can afford them and can put them in their homes.
Ok, now I could respond to yours... :)
> I've seen a couple of posts in here that declare, in very firm terms
> indeed, that machines like the MicroVAX and PDP's are not "home" computers.
Suppose, Digital did not cared a whit and cut prices on that and we
would be sure many would have one in home if they're small enough and
easy on power requirements. Linux is there now and NT can be run on
alphas but bit late and cost is fast appoaching to affordable levels
where getting a pentium pro machine is not only option.
>
> For the sake of discussion in this list, and computer hobbyists in
> general, I would like the world to know that I define 'home computer' as
> any machine that you can:
>
> * Comfortably fit through your door...
>
> * Doesn't test the load limits of your target floor...
>
> * Power and run without tripping your main breaker...
>
> * (most importantly) Have fun restoring and working with... in your home!
>
> Which just goes to show that such terminology is so relative, there's
> little point in debating it. Why waste the bandwidth over something as
> trivial as a difference in wording?
>
> (No, I'm not trying to start a flamewar; I posted this because I'm
> concerned that the current thread regarding 'home' computers may erupt into
> one!)
>
> Caveat Emperor!
I just discovered some *VERY* interesting S100 boards that I didn't
realize I had in my box 'o S-100 boards. They seem to be some kind of
Atari development/prototyping system. The boards are:
65xx Emulator, part no. 100-015-2, (c) 1983 Atari [this is the PCB only]
Trace Memory Interface, part no, 100-003-2, (c) 1983 Atari
6502 Processor, part no. 100-003-2, has a 6502 and some other stuff, such
as a clock speed DIP switch (1, 2, 4 MHZ settings), some RAM, a couple
ribbon cable connectors. I have 2 of these boards but one is incomplete
(does not have all the chips the other one does).
All have the Atari name and logo and a copyright date of 1983.
Also have these:
the Encryptor, Jones Futura Corporation, Model ENC 100-1
California Computer Systems, Model 2832 [has this big, black 3"x3" square
and 3/8" thick block of resin on it, have no idea what it's hiding]
Any idea what this stuff is?
Sam
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer, Jackass
I have,
BASIC
Lotus 1-2-3, {but can't get to work}
Mouser
MineShaft
I'd like to have anything you can find.
----------
> From: thedm <thedm(a)sunflower.com>
> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
> Subject: Re: PCjr Cartridges?
> Date: Thursday, June 26, 1997 9:08 PM
>
> Im interested in the PCjr carts. I have the basic one, but I can post a
> list of what I have.
>
> ----------
> > From: Uncle Roger <sinasohn(a)crl.com>
> > To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
> <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
> > Subject: PCjr Cartridges?
> > Date: Thursday, June 26, 1997 8:27 PM
> >
> > Saw today a few cartridges which I'm guessing are PCjr carts. They
said
> > (among other things) "Cartridge BASIC". Anyone interested in them?
They
> > were (I think) a buck.
> >
> > They also had some misc Apple II cards (about $5 each, I think), some
> Atari
> > 800 ROM's (or RAM? I didn't look that closely). Lemme know if there's
> any
> > interest.
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
O-
> >
> > Uncle Roger "There is pleasure pure in being mad
> > sinasohn(a)crl.com that none but madmen
know."
> > Roger Louis Sinasohn & Associates
> > San Francisco, California http://www.crl.com/~sinasohn/
----------
> ???o?l : Ward Griffiths and/or Lisa Rogers <gram(a)cnct.com>
> ???? : Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
> ???? : RE: which month?
> ???M???? : 1997?N6??28?? 23:57
>
> On Sat, 28 Jun 1997, Cord Coslor wrote:
>
> > What was the name of that book? Wasn't it something about a mouse?
Like,
> > To Catch a Mouse, Make a Noise Like A Cheese?
> >
> > On Sat, 28 Jun 1997, Matt Pritchard wrote:
> >
> > > I have a book about marketing, written by a Tandy VP which has a
large
> > > chapter on the birh of the TRS-80. He mentioned the day of the first
> > > produced unit, (sept 15th I think) and game totals for the first
months
> > > or two (It seemed they only managed 3 computer a day for the first
week
> > > or two).
>
> _To Catch a Mouse, Make a Noise Like a Cheese_ was indeed the title, by
> Lou Kornfeld, president of Radio Shack and originator of the "Flyer-Side
> Chat" column that was a regular feature in Radio Shack retail flyers for
> so many years. He was managing one of the (8 or 9) original Radio Shack
> stores in Boston when Charles Tandy bought the company in about 1964 (and
> proceeded to expand the chain by three orders of magnitude). I forget if
> the book was released before or after he retired.
> --
> Ward Griffiths
> "America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within
> the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." --Claire Wolfe
I have a book about marketing, written by a Tandy VP which has a large
chapter on the birh of the TRS-80. He mentioned the day of the first
produced unit, (sept 15th I think) and game totals for the first months
or two (It seemed they only managed 3 computer a day for the first week
or two).
-Mp
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bwit(a)pobox.com [SMTP:bwit@pobox.com]
> Sent: Friday, June 27, 1997 11:51 AM
> To: 'classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu'
> Subject: RE: which month?
>
>
> IIRC the TRS-80 was introduced in September 1977.
>
> ----------
> From: e.tedeschi
> Sent: Friday, June 27, 1997 7:39 AM
> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
> Subject: which month?
>
> I wonder if anybody here has the *exact* months of introduction
> of the
> three first *real* home computers introduced in 1977:
>
> a) the Apple II
> b) the Tandy TRS-80
> c) the Commodore Pet
>
> I need them for a book on collecting home computers I am
> researching
> for.
>
> Thank you
>
> enrico
> --
> ================================================================
> Enrico Tedeschi, 54, Easthill Drive, BRIGHTON BN41 2FD, U.K.
> tel/fax +(0)1273 701650 (24 hours) or 0850 104725 mobile
> website <http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~e.tedeschi>
> ================================================================
> visit Brighton: <http://www.brighton.co.uk/tourist/welcome.htm>
>
>
In message <Pine.SUN.3.91.970628111459.3115L-100000(a)crl4.crl.com> classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu writes:
> Also have these:
>
> the Encryptor, Jones Futura Corporation, Model ENC 100-1
> California Computer Systems, Model 2832 [has this big, black 3"x3" square
> and 3/8" thick block of resin on it, have no idea what it's hiding]
I think this is what it says it is - a data encyption/decryption system.
I have a thing called a 'modem maximiser' (a serial port data buffer box with
a real time clock, parallel printer port, etc) that has an optional
encryption unit. It too was a potted module. As I had a few spare modules I cut
one apart and found it contained an 8032 (I think) microcontroller, RAM, a ROM
(I must desolder that and examine it) and a TTL latch. Pretty much what you'd
expect - a little microcontroller that reads in data, encrypts it, and sends
it out again.
>
> Any idea what this stuff is?
>
>
> Sam
-tony
Sam:
> 1. Record format: open (depending on software for EPROM programmer);
S-records, Intel Hex, binary.
>> I'm no expert at this so I'll defer.
The various hex records are ASCII representations, so I figured that they can
be transferred with no problem by e-mail. If we're doing ftp, it doesn't
matter
> 2. Submission & storage: UUEncoded image file e-mailed to "repository";
ROM/EPROM chips sent by snail mail and returned. All
submissions should have as much info about the source computer as
possible (board revisions, date of manufacture, etc.)
>>Sounds good. The repository then is a "soft" repository of ROM images?
Yes. This way, we can transfer it, or burn it.
> 3. Requests & withdrawls: by e-mail to those with programmers; by mail for
those supplying their own chips; e-mail request with no chip
sent.
>> I assumed since the images are merely files they could be downloaded by
anyone requesting them. Is the repository also going to have physical EPROMS
that someone can request? If so, why?
THe only reason to have EPROMs available is for those who are incapable of
burning EPROMs them selves.
> 4. Cost: nominal (cost of postage and EPROM).
>> Is the repository also going to be in the business of supplying people
with pre-burnt EPROMS? If so then 3 makes more sense now.
Sure, why not. I don't think that there will be a huge demand, so the
repository will not keep pre-burned ROMs on hand.
------------------------
Rich Cini/WUGNET
- ClubWin Charter Member (6)
- MCPS Windows 95/Networking
At 01:07 PM 6/27/97 -0400, you wrote:
>> Anyone remember a trivial-pursuit-like Computer Trivia game? It was
>I have computer-based trivia game (shareware, I think) on a CD-ROM. I could
>dig it up, if anyone want it...it had pretty hard questions, which went
>'way back to the dawn of time (you know, like the 1950's :> ))
Actually, that does sound neat -- if you com across it, I'd love a copy.
However, the game I was thinking of was one that had cards and (I think) a
board, like trivpursuit. (I know my brother actually won a copy at the West
Coast Computer Faire, but he's an a$$h@le and we aren't in contact.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------- O-
Uncle Roger "There is pleasure pure in being mad
sinasohn(a)crl.com that none but madmen know."
Roger Louis Sinasohn & Associates
San Francisco, California http://www.crl.com/~sinasohn/
