Hi, recently I acquired a 1980s Typewriter, a Brother TC-600. While not exactly a classic computer, this typewriter was often used as a low cost printing terminal (aka teletype).
It has a serial interface and I was able to connect it to my PC. I can SEND characters and text files to a terminal program. However I have not found out how to receive something back. Ideally it should print out what the host sends. On the internet I found a manual for the Brother EP-44 which is similar, but not identical. Does someone have a manual for the TC-600? Thanks, Martin > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: cctalk [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von cctalk- > [email protected] > Gesendet: Mittwoch, 7. Dezember 2016 19:00 > An: [email protected] > Betreff: cctalk Digest, Vol 30, Issue 7 > > Send cctalk mailing list submissions to > [email protected] > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://www.classiccmp.org/mailman/listinfo/cctalk > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > [email protected] > > You can reach the person managing the list at > [email protected] > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of cctalk digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: Double Buffer RK11-C (Fritz Mueller) > 2. Re: UNIBUS/QBUS interface chips Was: Re: MEM11 update (allison) > 3. Re: Intel C1101A (allison) > 4. Re: Double Buffer RK11-C (Paul Koning) > 5. Could somebody please help me identify this board? (Chris Pye) > 6. Re: Could somebody please help me identify this board? (Jon Elson) > 7. Re: Could somebody please help me identify this board? (Chris Pye) > 8. Miniscribe 6053 HD PCB needed (Mike Stein) > 9. Re: Could somebody please help me identify this board? > (Mike van Bokhoven) > 10. Re: Could somebody please help me identify this board? > (Eric Smith) > 11. Have lunch with Lee Felsenstein (Evan Koblentz) > 12. Wanted: Terminator for an RL02 (Tom Moss) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 11:56:38 -0800 > From: Fritz Mueller <[email protected]> > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Double Buffer RK11-C > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > > > On Dec 6, 2016, at 7:51 AM, Noel Chiappa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > [data fetch] can't be off-loaded onto a separate interface unit, as it needs > access to > > register contents held in the CPU. > > Yeah, it?s pretty interesting! My guess would be that it was a separate > register/command oriented interface, sitting on the Unibus, and didn?t actually > interface directly with the 11/20 CPU? Such an interface could limit the > instructions ?fed? to the FPU to those accessing its internal registers, etc. But > who knows? :-) > > I?ve gotten quite deep into the design of the FP11-B and associated KB11-A > interfacing during my debug (which is how I noticed all the 11/20 refs in the > docs, circuitry, and microcode), but I?m pretty ignorant of the 11/20 having > never worked on one. > > > I wouldn't be surprised if there's some microcode in the KB11 to support those > memory operations. > > Yes, there certainly is ? quite a bit of it actually. The are F/CLASS branches off all > three of the A, B, and C forks. > > ?FritzM. > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2016 14:24:21 -0500 > From: allison <[email protected]> > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: UNIBUS/QBUS interface chips Was: Re: MEM11 update > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > On 12/6/16 10:05 AM, Toby Thain wrote: > > On 2016-12-06 1:34 AM, Eric Smith wrote: > >> On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 6:53 PM, allison <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> A bunch of us old digits (former dec engineers) got together and were > >>> talking > >>> about old systems and the thing that stood out is a general dislike for > >>> having > >>> to use the limited set of bus interface chips when there were newer > >>> parts. It > >>> was a internal mandate not something that was better than could be had. > >>> The > >>> logic was the parts were known, the vendors vetted for quality and > >>> reliability > >>> and when you use hundreds of thousands to millions of a part like bus > >>> interface > >>> and ram quality is a critical thing. Were they special, a flat no. > >>> > >> > >> I don't fully agree. The receivers (and transceivers) had a threshold > >> voltage that is not available with modern parts, and that actually was > > > > I'm an electronics noob, but do you mean a threshold of 1.5V, as with > > DS8641? > > > I'm not a noob. I'm an engineer from the the realm of DEC engineering. > > I also forget the 74LS14 hex inverter with hysteresis which has a > threshold about 1.5V > depending on whos datasheet you believe. > > Bottom line is the older parts has a low Vih and a high Vil with a > resulting narrow noise immunity. > Increasing the Vih helps this and the driver/bus combo can support it. > The yabut is if the drivers > have leakage then attaining Vih on the bus is problematic as the leakage > was a undesired pull down. > The 8xxx parts used were screened for low leakage with output is in the > high state (open as they > are open collector). The bus loads assert the Voltage high state and > that is above 2.3V so the only > limiting factor then is excessive capacitive loading which smears pulsed > by RC time constant. The > other issue with slow edges is where the edge really is and that adds > uncertainty to timing. All > of those things were allowed for in the design of the bus. > > The voltage your hung up about was tested to insure it was never lower > than that or the noise > immunity was terrible. Its companion was was that the saturated device > in the package could > also achieve the limit or less or a low voltage at the rated current, at > that time (late 60s early 70s) > this was a hard parameter to control. > > The bottom lime is the better the logic high voltage and logic low > voltages achieved the greater > noise immunity. Adding hysteresis insure that a hig is high and a low > is low and not some random > analog voltage inbetween (or oscillation!). > > As to any slew rate testing the issue was that devices that could sink > the needed current were also > slow as sludge and had to be tested to insure they were fast enough not > that they would have a > slow propagation time and switching speed as that was also a undesired > in systems where fast > is important. Bottom line is the datasheet and purchase spec was to > insure the part worked to or > better than expected rather than implying magical properties. > > > Allison > > > I'm referring to this part of October's thread: > > http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/2016-October/028871.html > > > > > > --Toby > > > > > >> important for large systems with multiple bus segments. That was > >> particularly important for large Unibus systems, but even Qbus with only > >> two bus segments can get finicky when heavily loaded. > >> > >> DEC could easily have made custom interface ICs if they had needed them. > >> > >> AFAIK, *no* current production interface ICs have the right > >> threshold. It's > >> hard to meet the spec without using either NOS parts or comparators. > >> > >> It would certainly be possible to build a functionally equivalent bus > >> with > >> modern interface ICs, and it might have significantly better > >> performance, > >> but it wouldn't be compatible with the legacy systems. > >> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2016 14:27:22 -0500 > From: allison <[email protected]> > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic Posts" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Intel C1101A > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > On 12/6/16 11:46 AM, Brad H wrote: > > I kind of thought that might be a possibility. I might just let things lie for a > while.. I was concerned about stock disappearing, didn't think about price > tripling. Not sure I want to spend $1400 for 1K of RAM on a clone. :) > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: cctalk [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Corey > Cohen > > Sent: Tuesday, December 6, 2016 4:27 AM > > To: General Discussion: On-Topic Posts <[email protected]> > > Cc: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: Intel C1101A > > > > I do notice these "schlock" IC sellers actually raise the price the more "hits" > they get on an item. So your shopping around will actually make the price worse > and my even cause your earlier vendors to raise their price when you finally do > place an order. > > > > corey cohen > > u??o? ???o? > > > >> On Dec 4, 2016, at 9:00 PM, jim stephens <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >>> On 12/4/2016 3:29 PM, Brad H wrote: > >>> The supplier (a different one from the one I first used) that quoted > >>> me on C1101A for the second round sent me a picture.. exact same 'lot' or > 'job' > >>> number as the ones I have. So perhaps even that may not be meaningful? > >>> What are the odds I'd hit the exact same dates from two different suppliers? > >>> > >>> I'm thinking it's*fairly* safe to assume white ceramic is pre-76, at > >>> least.. but yeah.. might be impossible to ever really know. I'm just > >>> wondering why the price jumped to $40+ each all of a sudden! > >> Brad, > >> a very large number of schlock IC sellers all communicate with each other. > They all have a continuous stream of wants or needs that they exchange. but > they make their own prices. The probability is that you may have hit the original > stocking guy with your first query. Querying any others will result in them > looking at the wants that others shared, or buys, and he saw someone else had > it and quoted you the same info. > >> > >> I know this happens as I know two guys who trade in all manner of stock all > the time like this and have for 35 to 40 years. > >> > >> thanks > >> Jim > Considering the first 1101s I ever bought in the early 70s were around > 12-14$ each in small volumes (24-48). > By the mid 1975s they had dropped to a buck or so as there were faster > and denser parts. But then the first 2102s > cost me about 14$ in early 74 so that was the way it was. > > Allison > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 16:13:43 -0500 > From: Paul Koning <[email protected]> > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Double Buffer RK11-C > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > > > On Dec 6, 2016, at 2:56 PM, Fritz Mueller <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> On Dec 6, 2016, at 7:51 AM, Noel Chiappa <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> [data fetch] can't be off-loaded onto a separate interface unit, as it needs > access to > >> register contents held in the CPU. > > > > Yeah, it?s pretty interesting! My guess would be that it was a separate > register/command oriented interface, sitting on the Unibus, and didn?t actually > interface directly with the 11/20 CPU? Such an interface could limit the > instructions ?fed? to the FPU to those accessing its internal registers, etc. But > who knows? :-) > > I don't know anything of a DEC product along those lines, but a college > classmate of mine (Bill Black, Lawrence Univ. class of 1975) built a floating point > coprocessor for our PDP11/20 that was a Unibus peripheral. I helped with the > software interface. The device had 4 registers, two for source and two for > second source and result. They appeared at several different bus addresses; > you'd select the operation to perform based on which address you used. The > device would start when the 4 source words had been loaded, then a read cycle > of the result register would simply be held off until the operation was done > (since it would complete well within the SSYNC timeout). > > The implementation took, if I remember right, one hex-sized wire wrap board. > > paul > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 10:57:03 +1000 > From: Chris Pye <[email protected]> > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Could somebody please help me identify this board? > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > I?m moving my collection and found this board amongst some others. > > https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0m4VYF4tIU5aXJMSHBwUDJMUWM > <https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0m4VYF4tIU5aXJMSHBwUDJMUWM> > > Cheers, > Chris > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2016 20:32:10 -0600 > From: Jon Elson <[email protected]> > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Could somebody please help me identify this board? > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > > On 12/06/2016 06:57 PM, Chris Pye wrote: > > I?m moving my collection and found this board amongst some others. > > > > https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0m4VYF4tIU5aXJMSHBwUDJMUWM > <https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0m4VYF4tIU5aXJMSHBwUDJMUWM> > > > > Cheers, > > Chris > It appears to be an extended-length Multibus II board with 2 8-bit DACs > on it. Output for an XY scope? > > Jon > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 12:40:49 +1000 > From: Chris Pye <[email protected]> > To: [email protected], "General Discussion: On-Topic and > Off-Topic Posts" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Could somebody please help me identify this board? > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > > > On 7 Dec 2016, at 12:32 pm, Jon Elson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On 12/06/2016 06:57 PM, Chris Pye wrote: > >> I?m moving my collection and found this board amongst some others. > >> > >> https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0m4VYF4tIU5aXJMSHBwUDJMUWM > <https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0m4VYF4tIU5aXJMSHBwUDJMUWM> > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Chris > > It appears to be an extended-length Multibus II board with 2 8-bit DACs on it. > Output for an XY scope? > > > > Jon > > Thanks Jon > > If anybody wants it, they can have it for cost of postage. I am in Brisbane > Australia, so it?s probably going to be costly outside AU.. > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 8 > Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 21:58:24 -0500 > From: "Mike Stein" <[email protected]> > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Miniscribe 6053 HD PCB needed > Message-ID: <074CFFA13AFF454581BCC3E1EEEC5306@310e2> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Hi all, > > I accidentally dropped something on a Miniscribe 6053 44MB HD and cracked > the board; looks pretty dense and tricky to repair so I'm hoping that there's a > kind soul out there somewhere who happens to have a 6053 doorstop and can > spare the circuit board for a good cause? > > Removing the board shouldn't impair the door-stopping capability in any way... > > Mike (in Toronto) > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 18:18:36 +1300 > From: Mike van Bokhoven <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Could somebody please help me identify this board? > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > On 7/12/2016 1:57 p.m., Chris Pye wrote: > > I?m moving my collection and found this board amongst some others. > > > > https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0m4VYF4tIU5aXJMSHBwUDJMUWM > <https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0m4VYF4tIU5aXJMSHBwUDJMUWM> > > > > Cheers, > > Chris > > It's a Compugraphics board of some sort, I think. Couple of AD or DAs, > etc. I know nothing about these, just recognised the logo. > > > Cheers - Mike > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 10 > Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 22:57:08 -0700 > From: Eric Smith <[email protected]> > To: [email protected], "General Discussion: On-Topic and > Off-Topic Posts" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Could somebody please help me identify this board? > Message-ID: > <CAFrGgTTLic5hnQRwpDjAc- > [email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Jon Elson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > It appears to be an extended-length Multibus II board with 2 8-bit DACs on > > it. Output for an XY scope? > > > > Extended-length Multibus. Definitely not Multibus II, which uses Eurocard > 6Ux220 form factor with two 96-pin DIN 41612 connectors. > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 11 > Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 02:34:26 -0500 > From: Evan Koblentz <[email protected]> > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Have lunch with Lee Felsenstein > Message-ID: <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed > > Only 12 hours left to bid on lunch with legendary computer engineer Lee > Felsenstein! This benefits Vintage Computer Federation, a 501(c)3 > non-profit devoted to enabling collectors, growing the hobby, and > spreading awareness of computer history. Please see > https://www.charitybuzz.com/catalog_items/lunch-for-3-with-personal- > computing-social-media-icon-1198500. > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 12 > Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 16:10:16 +0000 > From: Tom Moss <[email protected]> > To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" > <[email protected]> > Subject: Wanted: Terminator for an RL02 > Message-ID: > <CAN69K+bG2C4xg5i7N_Vyc7gvGVYd7otHJwwqg2Rp4CytokhqfA@mail. > gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > > Hi All, > > Does anyone have a spare RL02 terminator for sale? > > Regards, > -Tom > > > End of cctalk Digest, Vol 30, Issue 7 > *************************************
