>THAT is something that we are all more likely to agree with! If IBM ran
>a doughnut shop, how many WOULD be in a dozen??
Not only that, what would a doughnut look like? They'd redesign that, too.
And make in incompatible with existing doughnut boxes.
Hi all. Just thought I'd let you know about a cool product I've found.
My father, who up until this time has been running various apple2 computers,
(which is how I got into classic computers as a hobby, by the way) just
acquired an iMac. All is well and good except he wants to run his Sears Epson
fx85-alike from it. And as I discovered, the official Epson USB-Parallel
adapter doesn't do anything that far back.
So whilst at CompUSA last night I happened across InfoWave's PowerPrint
USB - Parallel adapter. After some checking to see if they claimed to support
old Epson 9pins, I bought it. Plugged it into the USB port on my wife's
mac, asked her to load the software, plugged it into my own Epson LX800 -
which uses the same driver - and it printed perfectly. It's a bit of a mess
to UNINSTALL, if you don't have extention management loaded, but my wife is a
mac power user and eventually got things cleaned up.
It's not cheap, - about a hundred bucks US - but even more than classic
computers, classic printers don't wear out, and with this package there's no
need to replace them just because you got an iMac.
Their web page is at www.infowave.com, and it lists what printers the software,
PowerPrint, supports. Apparently they also make a Mac-serial to parallel
adapter, and the USB version is just ported over from the software from that.
--
Jim Strickland
jim(a)DIESPAMMERSCUMcalico.litterbox.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Vote Meadocrat! Bill and Opus in 2000 - Who ELSE is there?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I found this in a news-group. I've never heard of a MAC-8 before.
The Bell Labs Technical Journal, Autumn 1997, p53 states:
The first microprocessor designed at Bell Labs
was the Mac-8, a general purpose 8-bit micro-
processor announced February 17, 1977. The
Mac-8 was designed in 5-micron CMOS, requiring
7,500 transistors in an area of 32,45 mm2. It was
packaged in a 40-pin dual inline package and ran at
3 mHz, providing 0.2 million instructions per sec-
ond (MIPS) in performance.
Long ago and far, far away in another lifetime; I somehow acquired a tube of
these chips. I've always wanted to get a minimal system going built around
this CPU. However I have NO DATA WHATEVER on them.
Does anyone, anywhere reading this have the necessary hardware/software tech
data to allow me to build and program a small system built around a Mac-8
????????
With the current foment and debate concerning the mechanics of
free-market capitalism as applied to Our Hobby.. this is prolly
on-topic.
It has been suggest to me (privately) that I have reacted to David
Freibrun's offer of a central Altair registry in a bitter and
unfriendly way.
Such was not my intent, though Freudians are undoubtedly nodding
their heads sagely right now saying "JaJa, he only sinks he means dat.."
For the *tone* of my message, I truly apologize.
For the *content* of my message, I reiterate, a little more calmly,
that I have no intrinsic problem with a centrally-maintained
database of who gots what where. BUT... tied in to some of the
concerns Doug has/is raising [not that I agree with all of it,
Doug... :) ] I am really leery of providing personal info on a
rare and perhaps desirably valuable item in my possesion.. which, in
the case of my Altair, is not for sale or trade, and I'd rather it
not be stolen, either.
That's all I tried to say, and I guess I got huffy in the process.
If such a list is set up and maintained well and seems trustworthy,
I have no problem with listing my gear.
David, I apologise if I offended you personally... again it was
not my intent.
Cheerz
John
Anyone know where I can find a Gorilla Banana printer? I have searched all
the "normal" channels. These things were so popular in the early 80's, I
can't believe they have all disappeared. Thanks,
--------------------------------------------------------
Todd Osborne
Senior Software Engineer
FMStrategies, Inc.
http://www.fmstrategies.com/
--------------------------------------------------------
FMStrategies, Inc: tosborne(a)fmstrategies.com
Internet E-Mail: todd.osborne(a)barnstormer-software.com
--------------------------------------------------------
Founder of the Virtual Windows Class Library (C++)
http://www.barnstormer-software.com/vwcl/
--------------------------------------------------------
Anagrams? (http://www.wordsmith.org/anagram/)
Can you figure out this one? Want the answer? E-Mail me.
COCO VERDI MOM (Hint: Think Late 1970's Computer)
--------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
"The timid die just like the daring, and if you don't take the plunge then
you'll just take the fall" - Michael Longcor
Well . . . CP/M "looked a lot like" the old OS/8, yet it wasn't. I guess
it depends on what your goal is. With the CP/M, it was having a console
protocol which was already understood by any unemployed DEC programmer so
they could be put to work on the 8-bit micros. Because it was already a
defined quantity, it didn't have to be too thoroughly documented, either.
I don't know about OS-9. I never saw it on a 6809 though I did see it
running on a 68008, which is quite a bit more processor. It didn't look
too much like *NIX either.l
Dick
----------
> From: Allison J Parent <allisonp(a)world.std.com>
> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
> Subject: Re: Unix for 8080/Z80? [Re: WooHoo!! PC/XT Unix anyone?]
> Date: Saturday, January 23, 1999 9:43 PM
>
>
> <This notion of cooking up or breathing new life into an old 8-bit model
to
> <run *NIX is probably a mite more than has been considered for one
reason.
> <*NIX tends to want to use virtual memory, without which many systems
would
> <quickly choke. The old CPM-capables don't support VM. A good reason
for
> <this is probably the lack of performance.
>
> Unix didn't always have the idea of virtual memory. See Minix for an
> example of that also V4 and maybe V5 unix didn't either.
>
> Also It's been done! UZI uses the total swaping model, IE: processes are
> swaped out of core to make room for others.
>
> Allison
-----Original Message-----
From: Fred Cisin (XenoSoft) <cisin(a)xenosoft.com>
>How many know about the IBM PC-JX? It had 5.25" 720K drives!
>Never sold in the U.S., just Japan and Australia?
Hmmm ... never sold in the US....I'll not dwell on the obvious about
collecting a load of JX systems that were used in some schools here and
selling them on e-bay ;)
Do you US collectors want these machines? I don't collect IBM PC's, although
I did relent once and pay $A20 for a JX machine (IBM Model 5511 with 5515
monitor and 5519 expansion unit - made in Japan and all in black with a 3.5"
drive in the main box and a 5.25" drive in the expansion box) that was in
good condition. As I suspected, not a very interesting computer to me. If
someone was prepared to foot the freight bill from Australia, I would be
prepared to sell or trade it. I also would be prepared to look out for
others and send them on.
Same applies to real Aussie micro's like Microbees and not-so-real Aussie
items like Dick Smith branded computers (which invariably were sold under
other brand/model names in the USA).
Trades are more interesting to me than sales - my main interest is roughly
defined as "1975-1985 home micros". It doesn't matter how much money I got
for this at auction, it wouldn't help me find a lot of stuff that seems
available to you lot at your local thrift store!
If anybody is interested, contact me by private e-mail. Just be prepared for
at least a 3-month shipping delay, unless it is only a light item, or you
can afford a hefty air-freight bill.
Phil
Brisbane, Australia.
How about no IBM PC's above the 5170?
--
-Jason Willgruber
(roblwill(a)usaor.net)
ICQ#: 1730318
<http://members.tripod.com/general_1>
-----Original Message-----
From: Doug <doug(a)blinkenlights.com>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Date: Sunday, January 24, 1999 2:49 PM
Subject: Re: Legitimacy of the Ten Year Rule.
>On Sun, 24 Jan 1999, Bill Yakowenko wrote:
>
>> 4. Simply having origins in something that is classic does not make a
>> thing classic. Otherwise *everything* would be classic.
>
>Here's the dictionary definition of "classic" that I think most of us mean
>when we use the word in the context of this list:
>
> Having lasting significance or worth; enduring.
>
>The problem is that "significance" and "worth" are personal judgement
>calls. I really think it's futile to try to define acceptable criteria.
>How about defining it this way:
>
> Discussions related to machines no longer supported by their
> manufacturers, with the exception of old IBM PCs, Macs, and their
> clones.
>
>-- Doug
>
>
This notion of cooking up or breathing new life into an old 8-bit model to
run *NIX is probably a mite more than has been considered for one reason.
*NIX tends to want to use virtual memory, without which many systems would
quickly choke. The old CPM-capables don't support VM. A good reason for
this is probably the lack of performance.
regards,
Dick
----------
> From: Tony Duell <ard(a)p850ug1.demon.co.uk>
> To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
> Subject: Re: Unix for 8080/Z80? [Re: WooHoo!! PC/XT Unix anyone?]
> Date: Saturday, January 23, 1999 11:44 AM
>
> > Any Unix clones for 8080/Z80 systems? It ought to be doable, given that
the
> > original Unix was done on a 64KB address space machine...
>
> The problem with any multi-tasking or multi-user system on a Z80 is that
> there is no easy way to write position-independant code. There is no
> relative call and no relative loads/stores (both the PDP11 and the 6809
> have them). There are workarounds (either you use RST instructions to
> simulate the relative call, etc or you relocate the task when you load
> it), but they make life a little harder.
>
> -tony
