On Mar 15, 19:46, Thorhallur Ragnarsson wrote:
> Subject: Re: Getting bent (ON topic if not thread)
>
> [ plain text
> Encoded with "quoted-printable" ] :
Hooray!
At 07:26 15.03.1998 PST, Max Eskin wrote:
>
> >Actually, I find most precautions such as anti-static and so forth to
> >be baloney.......
I've spent a lot of my working life repairing boards that have been blown up,
so I can't agree.
> No, unfortunately this can be a real problem, some years ago when working
> as test engineer for DNG Electronics, we suddenly had skyrocketing failure
> rates in assembly of equipment containing CMOS logic. Everybody involved
> was grounded with a 1Mohm wrist strap so this was quite a mystery until we
> noticed that when carrying the boards from the test bench to the final
> assembly, the lead from the strap was too short and the carrier had to
> disconnect it for the 6 feet trip across the floor, this zapped approx. 30%
> of the boards. His shoes must have been something!!
>
> >...................... When I was upgrading RAM in the machines in
> >my school's MacLab, the person in charge of it constantly looked over
> >my shoulder and bleated, "Touch the case again, Max. I want to SEE you
> >touch the case. OK, now gently, gently, now. Oooh! Yeesh! DON'T touch
> >those chips!",etc.etc. I didn't damage anything, ......
>
> Well, we have no way of knowing that. Static damage may just weaken the
> chips so they fail later.
That's quite a common effect. One of the big electronics companies published
some figures on it a ten years or so ago. Often, it may alter a device's
response to high frequencies as well. But I don't agree with those who say you
must never touch a chip, or must hold it by the ends without touching the pins.
If I have to carry an EPROM or similar without antistatic foam, I make a point
of ensuring that all the pins are touching my finger, on the grounds that my
slightly-conductive skin is keeping all the pins at the same potential.
> Yes, I hope we are lucky. I do not normally wear an antistatic wrist strap,
> I just try to wear cotton clothes, "touch the case" often and avoid rubbing
> against all those synthetic surfaces (table, chair, carpet etc.).
> When dealing with old equipment I try to be even more careful as it may be
> more static sensitive and spares harder to find.
I once (mid-80s) had several calls from a school that had refitted a computer
room; machines kept crashing, usually at the start of a class. I only remember
one permanent fault, but when I eventually asked the right question, it turned
out they had a new carpet with a high nylon content. I suggested they spray
the carpet with very dilute carpet cleaner in one of those mister bottles that
plant lovers always seem to have, and to repeat that once a week or so. The
problems went, and never came back.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
On Mar 15, 8:33, Tim Shoppa wrote:
> Subject: Re: What's with the raw HTML?
> [ snip ] but to me
> the real standard is:
>
> Flat text should be sent as flat text.
I couldn't agree more :-)
> The number of MIME-encoded flat text documents I receive every day is
> just plain silly.
And with this. That's why I don't even bother to read a lot of that stuff,
unless the Subject: line and/or From: makes me think I need to.
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
On Mar 15, 10:09, Dan Stephans II wrote:
> Subject: Re: What's with the raw HTML?
> Umm, HTML is pretty much a standard no matter what platform you are on as it
> is most certainly not platform dependent. The standard for 1.1 is specified
> in RFC 2068 and for 1.0 in RFC 1945.
Sure, but that's not really the issue. In any case, M$ blatantly ignore those
standards.
> If you mean that there are not standard
> tools to read html'ized mail under unix/linux, I say Netscape is available
> for almost any linux and most other unices running on sparc/intel/alpha
> hardware.
HTML is a markup language designed for web pages. Netscape is primarily
designed for web pages, not mail. It is a very inefficient tool for mail. And
what if you're not running X Windows? I completely agree with Allison and
others, that HTML has no place in textual mail. It is completely unneccessary,
and wastes both bandwidth and time. I suspect you agree, at least in part,
with that.
> I don't argue that HTML rich text is fine for mailing lists,
> however if you are going to argue that it is not you should formulate a
> proper argument.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dan
>
> Allison J Parent wrote:
>
> > <Text. If the e-mail that you wish to respond to's in plain text, that's
> > <what it'll send. The problem is that if M$ supports it, the WHOLE WORLD
> > <suddenly has to all have HTML-ized e-mail readers. It's nice if you hav
> > <it, but a pain in the A** if you don't.
> >
> > There is the little matter of some several million (or more) unix(linux,
> > and related cuzins) systems out there where HTML is far from a standard.
> > For me and many of the hybrid users HTML means slow, slower and special
> > utilities to handle it and for what? What a waste of bandwidth.
> >
> > Allison
--
Pete Peter Turnbull
Dept. of Computer Science
University of York
Aaah, I see! When it comes to system stability, you Linux geeks come
>from all over saying how you can DEVELOP patches, but when we have
some software that you don't, where is that trusty gcc? huh? huh?
But seriously, is it so hard to patch Linux mail for HTML?
>There is the little matter of some several million (or more)
unix(linux,
>and related cuzins) systems out there where HTML is far from a
standard.
>For me and many of the hybrid users HTML means slow, slower and special
>utilities to handle it and for what? What a waste of bandwidth.
>
>Allison
>
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Well, I was finally able to make two QIC tapes (boot and install) using
NetBSD for x86. The tape drive ran fine, with no errors.
So then I hooked the shoebox up to the 3/50 that I have, and using the
monitor, issued "b st(0,6,0)" to boot from the tape. The 3/50 seems to
access the drive (I can see the heads move), but either aborts with a
"Device Not Found" error, or the following:
scsi getbyte failed
invalid status message = FFFFFFFF
st: sense key = 6 error = 29
I'm not able to get any further than this. Any thoughts??
Rich Cini/WUGNET
<nospam_rcini(a)msn.com> (remove nospam_ to use)
ClubWin! Charter Member (6)
MCP Windows 95/Windows Networking
============================================
[Viewing an attached word file on an HP-UX]
a)Most people working on PCs with Word have no idea what an HP-UX is
b)Most such people have no idea that there is a machine on the planet
not running word
c)Most such people don't even realize that they are running word or
attaching a word format file to email
It is a byproduct of things being easy to use. Same reason as many
americans have no idea where England is.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
<I mean it's "software for the the masses," everything's a black box. If t
<Win 95 registry gets hosed, re-install the whole OS (I've yet to remedy
It's why win3.1 is the windowing system on my dosbox. It's stable enough
for me and my standard is VAX/VMS (24x7x365 and it's no joke!). But I had
to work to get it that way.
<damaged registry by restoring a backup), then all your apps (10 or 15 in
<case); it's a full 10 hour project for me, even with Win95 and most apps
<CD, and any install diskettes loaded on a single Zip disk.
Windows(3.x, 95, ???) is the only OS that ever needed to reload to fix!
VMS files that are that critical can be protected to the stars if need be.
<Linux/Unix OTOH, if it's screwed up, just figure out which script to fix
While I'm not excited about linux yet, I've never seen it eat itself
either.
<I think if there were only one target to go after, Gates would have the
<"owners" of Linux in his board room tomorrow, trying to pressure them int
<selling out so he could eliminate the threat. I wonder if he's tried to
<romance Linus yet?
Wouldn't do him much as the OS is PD and even if successivve versions
weren't it would be hard to lock that market.
<>But AFAIK, Gates's BASIC
<>interpreter for the altair required a RAM add-on pack! Truly bloatware
<>from day one. Why Gates decided to flip the switches on the front
<>panel several thousand extra times mystifies me. Maybe that's why
<>you're all getting Altairs with worn out switches;)
HUH? What? The altairs needed 4k of ram to run 4k basic and 8k to run
8kbasic. Basic8k for altair was only about 6100 bytes. THere were
smaller basics but all of them gave up something, like floating point
or strings.
As to the switch flipping, that was due to the crummy MITS 88ACR that
would often require several tries to get a clean load. After it BASIC
loaded the switches were an artifact though to could input data via port
FFh under program control. To beat the need to pound switches I put a
small 64byte bootrom on a board and copied the loaded image to phase
encoded digital tape(home brew) to get from the slow error prone 300baud
to a zippy and I may add very reliable 4800. Don't blame the cow for
soggy cereal.
I would say that 8kbasic was the first decent software product from MS
though it was soon to change in the early 80s.
FYI the Extended BASIC interpreter for CP/M-80 and the BASCOM Compiler
for CP/M-80 were excellent products. Neither were bloatware by any
standard.
Allison
I don't want to be the skunk at the lawn party here, but it should be
pointed out that e-mail is fast becoming the communication medium of choice
for both business and pleasure. I suppose you could argue that there is no
need for a company to have a fancy letterhead, nor a mass mailer to have
colored brochures, nor ladies to have flowered and/or scented stationery,
yet we do have all these things, and more. Consider how boring text-only,
fixed-font mail would be. Or did Henry Ford have it right when he proclaimed
that all we really "needed" was black automobiles?
Yes, I understand the argument that in the case of snail mail, the sender
pays for all the frills, but in the case of e-mail, the recipient more than
likely pays with longer download times, disk clutter, etc. A very valid and
not trivial point. Nevertheless, technology marches on, and as cable modems
(or whatever) become the norm rather than the exception, "waste" of
bandwidth and its associated costs will cease to an issue with the computing
public at large. If my wife wants to embed scanned newspaper clippings or a
kid's picture in an email to her cousin across country, who am I (or anyone)
to object?
I don't disagree with much that has been said here on the subject. I don't
use HTML formatted e-mail, and don't especially like receiving it,
nonetheless I accept that sooner or later it will become the norm (I don't
like the term "standard") rather than the exception. Formatted email may
never be, nor probably should be, appropriate on a classic computer
mailing list; yet, who knows, in ten years or so the definition of "classic
computer" may change as well.
Cliff Gregory
cgregory(a)lrbcg.com
-----Original Message-----
From: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu <classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
To: Cgregory <Cgregory>
Date: Sunday, March 15, 1998 3:14 PM
Subject: Re: What's with the raw HTML?
>
>You missed the point. There is no argument. As far as I'm concerned,
>there's absolutely no point to sending e-mail as HTML.
>
>Allison said it best though...
>
>> What a waste of bandwidth.
>
>And how.
>
>Sam Alternate e-mail:
dastar(a)siconic.com
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer,
Jackass
>
> Coming Soon...Vintage Computer Festival 2.0
> See http://www.siconic.com/vcf for details!
>
>
>> Also it was connected to an Apple IIe via a super serial port on the GS
and
>> an I/O controller on the IIe side. Is that some sort of "Networking"?
There
>> was no disk drive attached to the IIe.
>
>Either someone's idea of a joke or thrift shop ignorance.
Well actaully the guy pointed to the IIe when I asked about the keyboard.
They probably thought the the IIe WAS the keyboard!
BTW what kind of problems can I expect with the ROM 01 (wich is the one I
have)?
-------------------------------------------------------------
Francois
Visit the Sanctuary at: http://home.att.net/~francois.auradon
<And in my experience, IC's are not that easy to damage by overheating.
<I've soldered and desoldered hundreds of chips and never once overheated
<one. Yes I do use a temperature controlled iron, etc.
FYI in the old days when people would salvage chips of old unmarked cards
a popular way to remove them was a propane torch and pliers! Obviously
the board would get toasted but you could get the chips off fairly clean
and fast. Though once I seriously over did it on the heat. The result
is a old 7400 that is bent some in the middle...it still worked!
I also made copper heads with the right shape for round, 16pin and even
40pin footprints that I would use a ungar element to heat and desolder
chips cleanly from the board. I've also lifted chips by passing the
board through the wave solder machine that put them down to start with.
No majik, just carefull application of heat. The trick is heating all of
the pins or finding a way that doesn't require all of them to be heated
at once.
Allison
