I got a PS/2 Model 60 and OS/2 2.0 (1992, but still classic)
PS/2:
a)How do I get rid of the mold inside?
b)What is the PSU pinout if I want to put in a regular motherboard?
c)Is there a way to upgrade the mb to 386 with <$10 and a 386 mb
OS/2:
a)I installed it on a 386 w/4 MB RAM (min. requirement). It CRAWLS.
Should I replace the MFM HDD w/ IDE?
b)Does anyone have os/2 1.x that they could send me?
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Although recent world-wide test results have proven otherwise, the
US board of education seems to think that calculators improve
students' minds (I feel that the insane amount of money that schools
put into technology these days is better spent on books and teachers).
Therefore, in our school most seniors and juniors either own or rent
a TI-8x. The TI-83 is the one that the school actually promotes, but
TI-85s are often stole...ahem....seen as well. My friend is probably
one of the few there to have a TI-92. I'll bet it could run System 1.0
with a few modifications ;)
>I wonder what the odds of finding a ti-85 are and cost? They are
hackable
>from what I gather.
>
>Allison
PS That OS I mentioned earlier is essentially Win3.1 for TI. It is a
concurrent windowing interface. Right now, he's trying to figure out the
concurrent part...
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
<Assuming that this is electrically the same as the S100 version, then...
<
<The 8097 is the data buffer betwen the RAM and the S100 DI lines. It's
<used on reading only. I don't see how it would affect writing to the RAM
If the input is internally shorted to either rail. I've seen this mode
of failure on old chips.
<There are some 74LS08 AND gates that are used as buffers between the S100
<DO lines and the RAM inputs. It's possible that one of these has become
<faulty, I think.
Entirely possible.
<There is a 74LS175 latch (well, actually a pair of them) between the RAM
<outputs and the character generator. Now one bit of that chip could well
<be faulty (IC6 on the S100 card, I think).
Yes, also possible.
<Not so. One of the most common failure modes of old IC's is that the
<bondout wire between a pin and the silicon die breaks or comes adrift. If
<the A2 line (pin 12) of the character generator had failed in this way -
<or if the input buffer in the ROM had failed - we'd see exactly this
<pattern.
Also true but less likely.
Allison
Every time I've tried to post to this list, I've been getting it bounced
back with a 'Full Mailbag' error. I hope this one gets through...
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Bruce Lane, Sysop, The Dragon's Cave BBS (Fidonet 1:343/272)
(Hamateur: WD6EOS) (E-mail: kyrrin(a)jps.net)
"Our science can only describe an object, event, or living thing in our own
human terms. It cannot, in any way, define any of them..."
I have the same problem, but my mail still gets to the list. Most annoying,
though.
A
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Lane <kyrrin(a)jps.net>
To: Discussion re-collecting of classic computers
<classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu>
Date: Saturday, March 07, 1998 7:16 AM
Subject: Is this getting out?
> Every time I've tried to post to this list, I've been getting it bounced
>back with a 'Full Mailbag' error. I hope this one gets through...
>
>
>-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>Bruce Lane, Sysop, The Dragon's Cave BBS (Fidonet 1:343/272)
>(Hamateur: WD6EOS) (E-mail: kyrrin(a)jps.net)
>"Our science can only describe an object, event, or living thing in our own
>human terms. It cannot, in any way, define any of them..."
>
In a message dated 3/6/98 1:00:49 AM Central Standard Time, dastar(a)wco.com
writes:
<< I believe there was an upgrade kit that came out a short while after the
//gs was introduced that allowed one to upgrade their //e to a //gs.
>>
Also, the original beta GS's were in //e cases. I've always wondered
what happened to the 2 our company had. I don't believe Apple wanted them
back.
Kelly
>Yes, you can diassemble the code, no problem. One thing to watch for is
>to make sure that you know how the address and data lines on the board
>are linked up. You see, all 8 data lines on an EPROM are equivalent. It
>may be conventional to assign a particular pin as D0, etc, but there's
>no reason that you have to. But obviously if you want to make sense of
>the code, you have to know how the bits in the word are connected to the
>8080.
Ummmmm.... I was stunned tonight to look under the motherboard of this
machine and find that it is totally wire-wrapped. Amazingly neat, but
wire-wrapped and socketed - every single chip. Finding paths in this thing
is going to be very very time consuming! This computer must have been
extremely expensive in its day - the amount of work involved is incredible -
not having made anything like it, I'm only guessing... but I'd guess many
tens of man-hours.
Coincidentally, I was on the hunt for another machine (Mattel Aquarius) and
the owner and I got into a discussion about S100 machines - he has a garage
of them, apparently (he used to design them) - and I told him about the
EPROMs (1702As) and how I was going to back mine up - and he said "I have
four of those things!!!" Yes, before you ask, I am going after those S100
machines :)
Cheers
A
< Seems like old hardware is more available than old software
<and documentation. I suppose copyrights still exist on this stuff,
<but it seems like the web is the perfect place for old tech reference
<manuals and schematics. Wasn't Allison involved with the TRS-80
<development? Know anyone at RS who might be able to sign off on
<putting this stuff into the public domain so our types can publish
<this documentation?
I have not been at shack for nearly 20 years. As far as I know the docs
for the TRS80 are still available from TANDY National Parts. Contact the
local shack and see. If that's true any effort to make them PD is
dubious.
Allison
It's getting out to ME. When you got the "full mailbag" error messages,
did they show up as "return e-mail" messages? That probably means that
one of the list-members who should have RECEIVED your message, had a "full
mailbag" and couldn't take another message. Everyone OTHER than that guy,
though, from whom you DIDN'T get an error message, probably DID get your
message.
Chris Chiesa "the new guy"
