[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Chris via cctalk]

 Yep. It's called dang old Guy. Anything dang-old is like totally appropriate 
dude.

On Wednesday, December 21, 2022, 10:23:36 PM EST, Guy N. via cctalk 
 wrote:

Perhaps a good but blurry line is "old enough not to be of much
practical use anymore for most people, but significant in the history of
computing for some reason"?

[1] http://www.macos9lives.com, for anyone else playing with such toys.

  

[cctalk] transcoding etc. was Re: Re: what is on topic?

[Chris via cctalk]

 I obtained a copy of Image Processing in C recently, with the disk, a book 
which is nearly vintage in it's own right. Back in the 90s I wanted to digitize 
my then vast library of books. That book, which I foumd at a library, seemed a 
good starting point. Truth is though it really didn't seem practical prior to 
the availability of cheap digital cameras. And transcoding would have a 
necessary service as the only framegrabber I had at the time was some weird 
little box for a Mac. And the only mac I had was a IIx. It's surprising what 
you can accomplish sometimes with very little. But sometimes you need a little 
more for the job too be even feasible. I abandoned  

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Guy N. via cctalk]

Oh, funny, I was just thinking of asking this same question as I
resurrect a Mac G4 from about 2001, running Mac OS 9 (not OS X). There's
a whole website and forum[1] for that, though.

I read this list a lot more than I post. I enjoy some of the tales of
old machines, especially anything DEC. Sometimes I learn things from
tangentially off-topic posts (like discussions of software tools and
image file formats best for making archival copies of documentation, or
the best formulation for trapping fruit flies in the kitchen).
Personally, I'm not very interested in C64, TRS-80, or peecees, but
that's just me.

It takes me a trivial amount of time to delete a message and move on to
the next if I'm not interested. Since the average traffic is low, I
don't have a problem with a low bar for "on topic".

Perhaps a good but blurry line is "old enough not to be of much
practical use anymore for most people, but significant in the history of
computing for some reason"?

[1] http://www.macos9lives.com, for anyone else playing with such toys.

[cctalk] DLV11 M7940 SLU header wire colours?

[Steve Malikoff via cctalk]

Sorry this post isn't about whether something is regarded as classic or not.

I am almost done putting together a little 4-card Qbus machine using a H9281-BA 
card frame. Eschewing a piece of plywood, the frame, power supply, fans,
Heeltoe POR board are all mounted on a clear acrylic A4-sized office 'In Tray' 
I picked up at a recycling centre. Hence I've named it PERSPEX-11 :)

So..
For a DLV11 EIA serial connection, I am about to wire up a fly lead cable to go 
from an M7940 SLU (no dash version) 40-pin header to a DB25P.
After finding the pinout on page 178 in the 1980 Interfaces Handbook, on header 
J1 I know only need the usual basic RS232 setup:
J - Received Data
F - Transmitted Data
B - Signal Ground
M to E loopback

I have a blank 40-pin header shell and a pile of DuPont leads of all colours 
ready to slot into their respective locations in the header. I could use
any colours but I'd really like to use the original colours for the above wires.

So, the only wire colour reference in the handbook is for a J1 and J2 header 
DRV11 pinout on page 275. Pin B is Black, and Transmit is Red but Pin J
Receive is marked as Orange/Ground, for that device. Also M and E don't have 
their colours specified for the loopback wire.

I've also looked at the Gunkies 'DEC asynchronous serial line pinout' page 
which has the pinout but it doesn't mention the original wire colours sadly.
Could someone point me to what colours the M7940 cable should be?
Thanks for any help,

Steve.

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[ben via cctalk]

On 2022-12-21 6:32 p.m., Tomasz Rola via cctalk wrote:

On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 04:28:35AM +, Chris via cctalk wrote:
[...]

Transcoding as in vcr to mpegs? I wasn't suggesting XP was utterly
entirely useless. Video editing in a modern sense requires loads of
processing h.p. to be efficient. And no transcodimg is
necessary. Certainly not an expert. But I should think older
hardware would be very very slow.



From my rather limited experience, it grossly depends on cache size vs

size of movie frame, at least for some kinds of processing. I can,
(well, could) have seen it very well - processing (say, denoising) a
1:1.85 ratio material with 560x304 resolution was going with, say,
acceptable speed. Of course I would love it ten times, hundred,
thousand times faster, because, why not. But, acceptable. Increase
frame size twofold (because experimenting - is it worth to process
like this, will results be any better?), still fits in cache, I still
can live with it even if it is circa four times slower. Increase
fourfold, eightfold, and it seems to choke my 8-10yo cpu.

So, yeah, modern formats, 4K and whatnot, they would not fit in cache.

On the positive side, even old cpu for which new Windows is "too good
to install" can still do a lot of sound processing - which is, again,
as far as I understand it, related to cpu cache vs problem size. And why
would anybody waste cpu cycles on showing all the Windows menus and
stuff :-).

Unless you guys talk about video crunching on PDP-8? (runs and ducks)


Modern computers still need to faster, for real I/O. This is PDP 1 here.
https://spacewar.oversigma.com/
Ben.

[cctalk] Re: Using Gesswein board with RQDX3

[Mike Loewen via cctalk]

On Wed, 21 Dec 2022, Nigel Johnson Ham via cctalk wrote:

I am trying to do the above. ZRQC comes up and says four drives of unknown 
type.


Has anybody done this?  I figure there must be a configuration that needs to 
be done, but found nothing in the documentation to do it.


   Have you tried contacting Dave Gesswein directly? He's usually very 
responsive to questions, and is a DEC guru.


https://www.pdp8online.com/


Mike Loewen mloe...@cpumagic.scol.pa.us
Old Technology  http://q7.neurotica.com/Oldtech/

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[ben via cctalk]

On 2022-12-21 6:44 p.m., Tomasz Rola via cctalk wrote:

On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 04:17:19PM -0800, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote:

I am going to ditto Zane because I basically could've written that same
exact message like an infinite monkey on an infinite typewriter.

Sellam


Turing Monkey? Does it have infinite roll of paper?


Forget that, when does get he his bananas. :)
Ben.

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Tomasz Rola via cctalk]

On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 04:17:19PM -0800, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote:
> I am going to ditto Zane because I basically could've written that same
> exact message like an infinite monkey on an infinite typewriter.
> 
> Sellam

Turing Monkey? Does it have infinite roll of paper?

-- 
Regards,
Tomasz Rola

--
** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature.  **
** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home**
** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened...  **
** **
** Tomasz Rola  mailto:tomasz_r...@bigfoot.com **

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Tomasz Rola via cctalk]

On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 04:28:35AM +, Chris via cctalk wrote:
[...]
> Transcoding as in vcr to mpegs? I wasn't suggesting XP was utterly
> entirely useless. Video editing in a modern sense requires loads of
> processing h.p. to be efficient. And no transcodimg is
> necessary. Certainly not an expert. But I should think older
> hardware would be very very slow.

>From my rather limited experience, it grossly depends on cache size vs
size of movie frame, at least for some kinds of processing. I can,
(well, could) have seen it very well - processing (say, denoising) a
1:1.85 ratio material with 560x304 resolution was going with, say,
acceptable speed. Of course I would love it ten times, hundred,
thousand times faster, because, why not. But, acceptable. Increase
frame size twofold (because experimenting - is it worth to process
like this, will results be any better?), still fits in cache, I still
can live with it even if it is circa four times slower. Increase
fourfold, eightfold, and it seems to choke my 8-10yo cpu.

So, yeah, modern formats, 4K and whatnot, they would not fit in cache.

On the positive side, even old cpu for which new Windows is "too good
to install" can still do a lot of sound processing - which is, again,
as far as I understand it, related to cpu cache vs problem size. And why
would anybody waste cpu cycles on showing all the Windows menus and
stuff :-).

Unless you guys talk about video crunching on PDP-8? (runs and ducks)

-- 
Regards,
Tomasz Rola

--
** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature.  **
** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home**
** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened...  **
** **
** Tomasz Rola  mailto:tomasz_r...@bigfoot.com **

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Glen Slick via cctalk]

100's of replies later...

The first rule of Off-Topic Club is that you do not talk about Off-Topic
Club.

[cctalk] Re: OT: Win2K+3 on a Dell Poweredge 2600

[Grant Taylor via cctalk]

On 12/20/22 10:12 PM, Chris via cctalk wrote:
This beast was given to me by a neighbor. Dual socket 604. Windows 
2003 in some RAID configuration.


It might help us to know what model the Dell server is.

I understand (or used to understand) RAID levels somewhat. But iinm he 
tells me the OS is "split" over 6 scsi drives.


That could mean many different things.

Aside:  Is "iinm" short of "if I'm not mistaken"?

Not getting this, but I don't need all the redundancy/striping.  I 
understand (or used to understand) RAID levels somewhat. But iinm he 
tells me the OS is "split" over 6 scsi drives. Not getting this, but 
I don't need all the redundancy/striping.  I want it all on 1 drive.


It's technically possible, though unlikely, that the RAID is of really 
small drives, and you may need the aggregate space of multiple drives to 
do the install.


Though I'd be surprised if they are smaller than 4.3 GB drives, and 
Windows 2003 itself will easily fit in that space.



What to use to image what comstitutes 1 volume I guess.


It really depends what the RAID technology is.

PowerEdge servers used a combination of PowerEdge RAID Controller 
(a.k.a. PERC) cards (read: hardware) and / or Windows (read: software) 
RAID technologies.  --  At least from Dell.  There are lots of other 
more esoteric options too.


You / we really need to know what /type/ of RAID is used to be able to 
move forward with any certainty.



Norton Ghost?


If it's a PERC and it presents itself to the BIOS as a SCSI card, then 
chances are decent that you can get (Norton) Ghost to work on the drive.


Aside:  There's every chance that Ghost will refuse to work on a server 
OS and require you to use a different version.  --  This was the case 
with PowerQuest's PartitionMagic vs ServerMagic.


Further Aside:  I'd expect that PQ-SM would at lease see the /logical/ 
/volume(s)/, even if it was software RAID.  I don't think there was much 
change between NT's software RAID and Windows 2000 / 2003 counterparts.


This is assuming that you do the cloning from outside of Windows, which 
is usually a safe bet.


I have routinely used Acronis TrueImage from inside of Windows to backup 
systems.  I believe that such a backup can be used to restore to bare metal.


Acronis even has options for -- what I think they call -- disaster 
recovery that will allow the backup and / or restore process to inject 
generic drivers into the recovered system so that you can restore to 
dissimilar hardware.


All of this ignores what i consider to be the elephant in the room.  -- 
What is on the server that you care about retaining?  Or why don't you 
just blow it away and do a fresh install of Windows on the drive 
configuration that you want?


I have an extra scsi drive, I can always restore the image to the 1 
drive (yes?), before or without alterimg the currently embedded stack.


Maybe.  Probably.  Capacity /may/ be an issue.  Especially if there's 
software other than /just/ Windows Server 2003 that you want to retain; 
e.g. application data.


This thing is heavy. I secured a copy of the Corel Linux Starter Kit 
and want to load it into the Poweredge. For chips and pringles. I 
have other pre uefi boxes around but this is lying dormant. And 6 
drives for my purposes is stupid. And heavy.


If you're going to install Corel Linux, do you even really care about 
the Windows installation?


There is actually a chance that installing Linux on the spare drive may 
be one of the better paths moving forward.  I say this because it should 
be possible to make Linux see just about any type of RAID on the system.


Chances are extremely good that Linux will see the PERC -- if that's 
what it is -- as well as Microsoft Dynamic Volume -- if it's software 
RAID inside of Windows.


At least I think Linux's Dynamic Volume support includes software RAID.

You probably have many more tools available in Linux to image the 
logical volume(s), whether they be hardware and / or software. 
PartImage comes to mind.


Once you have the image, you can then do away with the RAID as it exists 
and do whatever you want with the rest of the drives.




--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Chris via cctalk]

 On Wednesday, December 21, 2022, 05:14:13 PM EST, Sean Conner via cctalk 
 wrote:

 One rule I remember (from the early 2000s) is that anything 10 years or
older is on-topic. At that point, it was pretty much stuff up to around
1990 or there abouts. I personally feel that MS-DOS is fine, and even
Windows up through 2.x is okay, but Windows 3 or higher is probably not a
fit for this list (aka, anything Wintel is not fine).

 As far as 1990 goes, that is now 30 years ago (nearly 33 in fact). The
SGI I used in 1992 is probably on topic (as it was never mainstream, but a
cool machine nonetheless), but not a PC from 1992.

 -spc

As a general rule, by my reckoning, something 1990 ish is the breakpoint for 
what's truly vintage also. Sgi, Amiga, Atari, all vintage. 386 pc's, I tend to 
say no, but wouldn't howl about it. There's a lot of shooting from the hip , 
but my opinion is real close to Sean's and a lot of other people. And like 
someone said there is loads of expertise on forums like this. It's seems a 
shame not to tap into it.


  

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Sean Conner via cctalk]

It was thus said that the Great Chris via cctalk once stated:
>  I just don't remember anyone declaring this to be an 8-bit list. Back
>  when I was a member no one said pc stuff was off topic. Which is why I
>  asked. And wasn't aware JW didn't own or run tne list anymore.

  One rule I remember (from the early 2000s) is that anything 10 years or
older is on-topic.  At that point, it was pretty much stuff up to around
1990 or there abouts.  I personally feel that MS-DOS is fine, and even
Windows up through 2.x is okay, but Windows 3 or higher is probably not a
fit for this list (aka, anything Wintel is not fine).

  As far as 1990 goes, that is now 30 years ago (nearly 33 in fact).  The
SGI I used in 1992 is probably on topic (as it was never mainstream, but a
cool machine nonetheless), but not a PC from 1992. 

  -spc

[cctalk] Re: Win2K+3 on a Dell Poweredge 2600

[Dave Wade G4UGM via cctalk]

John,
Win2003 had software raid. Does ghost see this?
Dave

> -Original Message-
> From: John Herron via cctalk 
> Sent: 21 December 2022 20:27
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts 
> Cc: John Herron 
> Subject: [cctalk] Re: Win2K+3 on a Dell Poweredge 2600
> 
> I'm not sure but Ghost will at least tell you what it sees. Then you can 
> choose to
> back it up. If you can tell it's the right size of the partition you expect 
> then you
> should be good to go. You'd just need the raid partition or a regular drive 
> of that
> size to restore it.
> 
> The catch will be wether Ghost  recognizes the raid card.
> 
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2022, 7:34 AM Bill Degnan via cctalk 
> wrote:
> 
> > So Chris, your subject should be OT: Win2K+3 on a Dell Poweredge 2600
> > because this is not on topic for this list.After all of our comments
> > about topic/off topic hopefully you understand what we're talking about.
> > If it's newer than 1990 then your post could very well be off topic
> > (OT) unless there is something novel about the item that makes it
> > unique and worth pushing into newer time periods.
> >
> > To answer your question - read up about this Dell 2600's and the RAID
> > array types available.  There will have been a driver/setup CD that
> > came with the system that allows the set up of the drives and RAID
> > prior to installation of the operating system.  RAID comes first, then
> > the OS is installed on top of it as if the multiple drives were one
> > logical hard drive.  The original OS would have been something older
> > than Win 2003.  It is a good thing to have RAID if it works for
> > redundancy purposes.  You can't remove the RAID configuration stick
> > the OS on one drive without the setup disk. That's not the mentality
> > you're looking for here.  I have one of these in my basement.  It came with
> RedHat 6.2 I believe.
> >
> > Bill
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 12:12 AM Chris via cctalk
> > 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > This beast was given to me by a neighbor. Dual socket 604. Windows
> > > 2003
> > in
> > > some RAID configuration. I understand (or used to understand) RAID
> > > levels somewhat. But iinm he tells me the OS is "split" over 6 scsi
> > > drives. Not getting this, but I don't need all the
> > > redundancy/striping. I want it all on 1 drive. What to use to image what
> comstitutes 1 volume I guess.
> > Norton
> > > Ghost? I have an extra scsi drive, I can always restore the image to
> > > the
> > 1
> > > drive (yes?), before or without alterimg the currently embedded stack.
> > >
> > > This thing is heavy. I secured a copy of the Corel Linux Starter Kit
> > > and want to load it into the Poweredge. For chips and pringles. I
> > > have other pre uefi boxes around but this is lying dormant. And 6
> > > drives for my purposes is stupid. And heavy.
> > >
> >

[cctalk] Using Gesswein board with RQDX3

[Nigel Johnson Ham via cctalk]

Merry Christmas, everybody,

I am trying to do the above. ZRQC comes up and says four drives of 
unknown type.


Has anybody done this?  I figure there must be a configuration that 
needs to be done, but found nothing in the documentation to do it.


cheers,

Nigel

Nigel Johnson, MSc., MIEEE, MCSE VE3ID/G4AJQ/VA3MCU
Amateur Radio, the origin of the open-source concept!
Skype:  TILBURY2591

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Chris via cctalk]

 Sellam, I find nearly everything you said cogent and well appreciated. 
Especially coming from someone like you who is a prime mover-shaker in this 
hobby. I'd like to give a better more detailed reply, but don't have the time 
presently. And I realize people get tired of a topic when it's drawn out for 
too long. But perhaps new insights can be brought to light when an old issue is 
revisited. 

I don't know, what do I know. No one ever said I was an authoriry on anything. 
Except Suzi-Qs. And I can't even seem to find them anymore! On Wednesday, 
December 21, 2022, 02:59:10 PM EST, Sellam Abraham via cctalk 
 wrote:  
 
 Chris,

This list was never declared to be exclusively an 8-bit affair.  I'm not
sure where you're getting that from.  From the get go in 1997 when Bill
Whitson founded the list, all computers of a vintage or obsolete nature
were game for discussion.  It's only after a few years and time marching on
with its inevitable technological progress, and companies that were once
industry stalwarts started to fall by the wayside, that we began to
question what the cut-off is.  And as far as the IBM PC, it was definitely
vintage by the time the list was launched.  The objections back in the day
as I remember them were to questions pertaining to modern x86 or Macintosh
systems that had plenty of forums elsewhere on the internet to engage in
discussions of those (i.e. this is not a tech support forum) (...unless
it's vintage tech).  These days, however, I think it's fine to discuss
286/386/486 and even Pentium (below the II, at least) systems because
they're sufficiently "vintage" now in the sense of the word that I think
brings focus to the purpose and nature of this hobby.

In the interest of putting this thread to rest, if I were to call the rule,
I'd make it simple: don't bring up boring modern topics that have a better
home somewhere else.

And with that, I hope we can move on, or at least morph this thread into a
more interesting topic.

Sellam

On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 11:34 AM Chris via cctalk 
wrote:

>  I just don't remember anyone declaring this to be an 8-bit list. Back
> when I was a member no one said pc stuff was off topic. Which is why I
> asked. And wasn't aware JW didn't own or run tne list anymore.
>
> Evan Koblentz used to hate anything remotely connected to IBM for reasons
> (more then likely) I won't get into. Everyone has a preference as to what a
> list like this should focus on. Their preference is their business. But
> their preference doesn't need to be forced on everyone else. Jay would
> chime me when it was needed and cite the rules. This is why I asked,
> expecting a moderator or someone well acquainted with the rules to read me
> the riot act.
>
> So Win2003 is off topic, but allowed as long as I say that it is. But I
> still want to know when or even if this was formerly declared an 8 bit
> list.
>
> As to your response to my other question, I need to know if ghost will
> reliably image the 2003 imstall. As I want to keep it. The other issues
> I'll deal with afterwards. I'm not sure I'll need a setup disk, of course
> it wouldn't hurt. But he warned me to enter setup each time it was powered
> on and specify 'raid' in one of the settings, for tbe default was 'scsi',
> and if I didn't make that adjustment (I think because the backup battery is
> dead) it would wipe out rje current OS.
>      On Wednesday, December 21, 2022, 02:05:19 PM EST, Bill Degnan via
> cctalk  wrote:
>
>  Chris,
> That was me saying after 1990, within the context that one should start
> thinking "is this on topic" if the thing is any newer, and I gave some
> examples of then it would be and not so much be in my opinion.  I also
> mentioned that to high school kids interested in vintage computers, their
> *start* point is 1990 many of them based on what I have seen at Kennett
> Classic museum.  They're interested in much newer stuff.  Also, smartphones
> and devices, not just computers.
>
> But for this list, as we are today, we're vintage of the 8-bit era vintage
> computer hobbyist.
>
> b
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:52 PM Chris via cctalk 
> wrote:
>
> >  So Jay West doesn't own the list anymore? Since when was the cutoff
> > declared to be 1990? No one is in charge here? What if a revolution takes
> > place? Who will martial the forces to put ot down and hang all the
> > imsurgents?
>
  

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Mike Katz via cctalk]

There were many computers that predate the 8 bit microprocessor based 
computers.


Most of these systems are 12 bits, 16 bits, 18 bits and 36 bits (I 
excluded 32 bits because I'm not familiar with any 32 bits systems that 
were not microprocessors)


DEC, Data General, CDC, IBM, Honeywell, Amdahl, GE & Cray to name just a 
few systems that predate 1990 that are not 8 bit microprocessor based 
systems.


All of these would be totally on topic.

On 12/21/2022 1:05 PM, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote:

Chris,
That was me saying after 1990, within the context that one should start
thinking "is this on topic" if the thing is any newer, and I gave some
examples of then it would be and not so much be in my opinion.  I also
mentioned that to high school kids interested in vintage computers, their
*start* point is 1990 many of them based on what I have seen at Kennett
Classic museum.  They're interested in much newer stuff.  Also, smartphones
and devices, not just computers.

But for this list, as we are today, we're vintage of the 8-bit era vintage
computer hobbyist.

b

On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:52 PM Chris via cctalk 
wrote:


  So Jay West doesn't own the list anymore? Since when was the cutoff
declared to be 1990? No one is in charge here? What if a revolution takes
place? Who will martial the forces to put ot down and hang all the
imsurgents?

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Chris via cctalk]

 You see, you see. A lot of people are getting stressed oit! Somebody please 
give me a pillow. And a candy bar would be nice. A draw the shades LOL

 On Wednesday, December 21, 2022, 02:38:37 PM EST, Alan Perry via cctalk 
 wrote:  
 
 

> On Dec 21, 2022, at 11:05, Bill Degnan via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> But for this list, as we are today, we're vintage of the 8-bit era vintage
> computer hobbyist.

Is that what is on-topic for this list?

To me those were kinda cute toys in the day. But I was using CYBERs and PDPs 
and VAXen and Burroughs mainframes then. That stuff and JAWS-era workstations 
and pre-Ultra Sun boxes are what interest me.

Am I in the wrong place?  

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Tony Jones via cctalk]

On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 12:35 PM Mike Katz via cctalk 
wrote:

> If old 8 bits are fun, older 12 bits are even more fun (50% more fun by
> word size).
>

What about VLIW?Not that many places to discuss Itanic these days :)

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Mike Katz via cctalk]

If old 8 bits are fun, older 12 bits are even more fun (50% more fun by 
word size).


And who needs BASIC in ROM (or on cassette), just toggle in your program 
with the switch register or load it by paper tape.



On 12/21/2022 12:40 PM, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote:

Old 8-bits are fun. All you need is a television generally and you're ready
to go. Power it up, drop into BASIC, and start doing stuff.

With a PC you need a keyboard, a monitor, a mouse probably, a desktop, some
software, etc. How cumbersome. And uninteresting. And boring.

Maybe not the greatest comparison but that's why I don't come to the
ClassicCmp maillist expecting PC discussions.

Sellam

On Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 11:22 PM Chris via cctalk 
wrote:


  Ok for cbm and atari yes I'm familiar with most of those. I meant in
general. And specifically where would you go for server related discussions
for pII through socket 771? Every classic/vintage forum seems to adhere to
a classic in it's own right (but perhaps totally valid) definition of
obsolete hardware and software. Remember before this stuff was classic it
was overwhelmingly considered to be obsolete junk. Win98/2000/XP has been
moderately collectible for a while. Don't care what category it falls into.
Socket 775 stuff is more or less just obsolete junk. There's a grouping
between and contemporary somewhat with those 2 and that's the early-ish
server class, which no one may _ever_ care much about, because it's
comparitively rare (few can relate) and lacks agp, so less then ideal for
gaming. So where do I go for those discussions?

As an aside 2000+\- beige boxes have become pretty collectible, and the
larger server cases like an Inwin A500 has a chassis that slides out. Real
nifty. It'll take a full size ssi-eeb mobo, and standard atx. If someone
gets their hands on 1 they'll likely toss the serverboard and replace it
with something more appropriate for gaming.

On Wednesday, December 21, 2022, 01:49:24 AM EST, Jim Brain via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:


On 12/21/2022 12:28 AM, Chris via cctalk wrote:

I keep hearing allusions to many forums. I think there are very few. I

don't do FB.

There are many web forums. Just for CBM, there's lemon 64, vcforum,
atariage (yes, CBM on atariage), denial, Everything 64, and 6502.org
handles a few things. If you can grok German, there's forum64.de

Mailing lists include cbm-hackers.

Apple, TI, Atari all have similar. AtariAge handles all of them
nominally. Retro Hackers also handles multiple.

Jim

[cctalk] Re: Win2K+3 on a Dell Poweredge 2600

[John Herron via cctalk]

I'm not sure but Ghost will at least tell you what it sees. Then you can
choose to back it up. If you can tell it's the right size of the partition
you expect then you should be good to go. You'd just need the raid
partition or a regular drive of that size to restore it.

The catch will be wether Ghost  recognizes the raid card.

On Wed, Dec 21, 2022, 7:34 AM Bill Degnan via cctalk 
wrote:

> So Chris, your subject should be OT: Win2K+3 on a Dell Poweredge 2600
> because this is not on topic for this list.After all of our comments
> about topic/off topic hopefully you understand what we're talking about.
> If it's newer than 1990 then your post could very well be off topic (OT)
> unless there is something novel about the item that makes it unique and
> worth pushing into newer time periods.
>
> To answer your question - read up about this Dell 2600's and the RAID array
> types available.  There will have been a driver/setup CD that came with the
> system that allows the set up of the drives and RAID prior to installation
> of the operating system.  RAID comes first, then the OS is installed on top
> of it as if the multiple drives were one logical hard drive.  The original
> OS would have been something older than Win 2003.  It is a good thing to
> have RAID if it works for redundancy purposes.  You can't remove the RAID
> configuration stick the OS on one drive without the setup disk. That's not
> the mentality you're looking for here.  I have one of these in my
> basement.  It came with RedHat 6.2 I believe.
>
> Bill
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 12:12 AM Chris via cctalk 
> wrote:
>
> > This beast was given to me by a neighbor. Dual socket 604. Windows 2003
> in
> > some RAID configuration. I understand (or used to understand) RAID levels
> > somewhat. But iinm he tells me the OS is "split" over 6 scsi drives. Not
> > getting this, but I don't need all the redundancy/striping. I want it all
> > on 1 drive. What to use to image what comstitutes 1 volume I guess.
> Norton
> > Ghost? I have an extra scsi drive, I can always restore the image to the
> 1
> > drive (yes?), before or without alterimg the currently embedded stack.
> >
> > This thing is heavy. I secured a copy of the Corel Linux Starter Kit and
> > want to load it into the Poweredge. For chips and pringles. I have other
> > pre uefi boxes around but this is lying dormant. And 6 drives for my
> > purposes is stupid. And heavy.
> >
>

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Grant Taylor via cctalk]

I've not (yet) read 40+ messages in this thread.

I'd borrow a measure from vehicle licensing in what defines a "classic" 
car.  Specifically any care 25 years old or older.


It's not a perfect line, but it is a relatively easy line.  I find that 
a quarter of a century to be easier to remember than something else; 20 
/ 30 years.


Of course, this is a guideline and things will fall either side thereof.

Just my 2¢ worth.

On 12/20/22 4:36 PM, Zane Healy via cctalk wrote:
The original rule, back around ’96/97 was anything older than 10 
years was on-topic.  I think the idea behind that is still valid, 
but these days a 10 year old system isn’t that much different from 
a current one.  I think at one point someone suggested it should be 
shifted to 20+ years.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Sellam Abraham via cctalk]

Chris,

This list was never declared to be exclusively an 8-bit affair.  I'm not
sure where you're getting that from.  From the get go in 1997 when Bill
Whitson founded the list, all computers of a vintage or obsolete nature
were game for discussion.  It's only after a few years and time marching on
with its inevitable technological progress, and companies that were once
industry stalwarts started to fall by the wayside, that we began to
question what the cut-off is.  And as far as the IBM PC, it was definitely
vintage by the time the list was launched.  The objections back in the day
as I remember them were to questions pertaining to modern x86 or Macintosh
systems that had plenty of forums elsewhere on the internet to engage in
discussions of those (i.e. this is not a tech support forum) (...unless
it's vintage tech).  These days, however, I think it's fine to discuss
286/386/486 and even Pentium (below the II, at least) systems because
they're sufficiently "vintage" now in the sense of the word that I think
brings focus to the purpose and nature of this hobby.

In the interest of putting this thread to rest, if I were to call the rule,
I'd make it simple: don't bring up boring modern topics that have a better
home somewhere else.

And with that, I hope we can move on, or at least morph this thread into a
more interesting topic.

Sellam

On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 11:34 AM Chris via cctalk 
wrote:

>  I just don't remember anyone declaring this to be an 8-bit list. Back
> when I was a member no one said pc stuff was off topic. Which is why I
> asked. And wasn't aware JW didn't own or run tne list anymore.
>
> Evan Koblentz used to hate anything remotely connected to IBM for reasons
> (more then likely) I won't get into. Everyone has a preference as to what a
> list like this should focus on. Their preference is their business. But
> their preference doesn't need to be forced on everyone else. Jay would
> chime me when it was needed and cite the rules. This is why I asked,
> expecting a moderator or someone well acquainted with the rules to read me
> the riot act.
>
> So Win2003 is off topic, but allowed as long as I say that it is. But I
> still want to know when or even if this was formerly declared an 8 bit
> list.
>
> As to your response to my other question, I need to know if ghost will
> reliably image the 2003 imstall. As I want to keep it. The other issues
> I'll deal with afterwards. I'm not sure I'll need a setup disk, of course
> it wouldn't hurt. But he warned me to enter setup each time it was powered
> on and specify 'raid' in one of the settings, for tbe default was 'scsi',
> and if I didn't make that adjustment (I think because the backup battery is
> dead) it would wipe out rje current OS.
>  On Wednesday, December 21, 2022, 02:05:19 PM EST, Bill Degnan via
> cctalk  wrote:
>
>  Chris,
> That was me saying after 1990, within the context that one should start
> thinking "is this on topic" if the thing is any newer, and I gave some
> examples of then it would be and not so much be in my opinion.  I also
> mentioned that to high school kids interested in vintage computers, their
> *start* point is 1990 many of them based on what I have seen at Kennett
> Classic museum.  They're interested in much newer stuff.  Also, smartphones
> and devices, not just computers.
>
> But for this list, as we are today, we're vintage of the 8-bit era vintage
> computer hobbyist.
>
> b
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:52 PM Chris via cctalk 
> wrote:
>
> >  So Jay West doesn't own the list anymore? Since when was the cutoff
> > declared to be 1990? No one is in charge here? What if a revolution takes
> > place? Who will martial the forces to put ot down and hang all the
> > imsurgents?
>

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Mike Stein via cctalk]

No personal experience but maybe this'll help:
https://corei64.com/shop/index.php?route=product/product_id=285

Sorry for encouraging inappropriate threads ;-)

m

On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:56 PM steve shumaker via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> OK..Now that you mention it, I do have a CBM PET question.  I'm
> searching for replacement key tops for the chicklet keyboard.  There are
> stems available (apparently 3d printed) on EPay but no caps. Any
> suggestions on where to look?I have the keyboard and it seems a
> little silly to spend $300 on EPay if I only need 3 keys
>
> Steve
>
> On 12/20/22 10:19 PM, Jim Brain via cctalk wrote:
> > On 12/21/2022 12:03 AM, Chris via cctalk wrote:
> >> Apples and Coco's and C64's would be the common sublist
> >>
> > As much as I enjoy these machines, I ask that we do not create yet
> > another list for them.  There are many fine forums for all of these
> > machines.  The occasional PET or VIC question in here surely won't
> > ruffle too many feathers, and those of us who know quite a bit about
> > these machines can redirect the OP elsewhere if needed.
> >
> >
>
>

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Sellam Abraham via cctalk]

I will have to admit that, until I joined the CC list in 1997 when it was
first launched by Bill Whitson (anyone ever heard from him since he last
posted about sticking razorblades to the underside of his dashboard to
thwart thieves, which apparently worked?) I didn't have much knowledge
about computers before 1980, and I was amazed to learn that the first
computers were being built in the 1930s (to say nothing of Charles
Babbage's work in the 1830s).  I was pretty much a neophyte of computer
history.  However, I quickly became interested in all machines of all eras
after joining the mailing list.

Sellam

On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 11:05 AM Bill Degnan via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> Chris,
> That was me saying after 1990, within the context that one should start
> thinking "is this on topic" if the thing is any newer, and I gave some
> examples of then it would be and not so much be in my opinion.  I also
> mentioned that to high school kids interested in vintage computers, their
> *start* point is 1990 many of them based on what I have seen at Kennett
> Classic museum.  They're interested in much newer stuff.  Also, smartphones
> and devices, not just computers.
>
> But for this list, as we are today, we're vintage of the 8-bit era vintage
> computer hobbyist.
>
> b
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:52 PM Chris via cctalk 
> wrote:
>
> >  So Jay West doesn't own the list anymore? Since when was the cutoff
> > declared to be 1990? No one is in charge here? What if a revolution takes
> > place? Who will martial the forces to put ot down and hang all the
> > imsurgents?
>

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Sellam Abraham via cctalk]

Hi Steve.

(Long time no talk.)

My suggestion to you, as abhorrent as it may seem, is to buy a complete PET
2001, take your 3 keycaps, and part the rest out.  Preferably one that's in
crap shape.  They aren't that uncommon.

Sellam

On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 10:56 AM steve shumaker via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> OK..Now that you mention it, I do have a CBM PET question.  I'm
> searching for replacement key tops for the chicklet keyboard.  There are
> stems available (apparently 3d printed) on EPay but no caps. Any
> suggestions on where to look?I have the keyboard and it seems a
> little silly to spend $300 on EPay if I only need 3 keys
>
> Steve
>
> On 12/20/22 10:19 PM, Jim Brain via cctalk wrote:
> > On 12/21/2022 12:03 AM, Chris via cctalk wrote:
> >> Apples and Coco's and C64's would be the common sublist
> >>
> > As much as I enjoy these machines, I ask that we do not create yet
> > another list for them.  There are many fine forums for all of these
> > machines.  The occasional PET or VIC question in here surely won't
> > ruffle too many feathers, and those of us who know quite a bit about
> > these machines can redirect the OP elsewhere if needed.
> >
> >
>
>

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Alan Perry via cctalk]

> On Dec 21, 2022, at 11:05, Bill Degnan via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> But for this list, as we are today, we're vintage of the 8-bit era vintage
> computer hobbyist.

Is that what is on-topic for this list?

To me those were kinda cute toys in the day. But I was using CYBERs and PDPs 
and VAXen and Burroughs mainframes then. That stuff and JAWS-era workstations 
and pre-Ultra Sun boxes are what interest me.

Am I in the wrong place?

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Chris via cctalk]

 I just don't remember anyone declaring this to be an 8-bit list. Back when I 
was a member no one said pc stuff was off topic. Which is why I asked. And 
wasn't aware JW didn't own or run tne list anymore.

Evan Koblentz used to hate anything remotely connected to IBM for reasons (more 
then likely) I won't get into. Everyone has a preference as to what a list like 
this should focus on. Their preference is their business. But their preference 
doesn't need to be forced on everyone else. Jay would chime me when it was 
needed and cite the rules. This is why I asked, expecting a moderator or 
someone well acquainted with the rules to read me the riot act.

So Win2003 is off topic, but allowed as long as I say that it is. But I still 
want to know when or even if this was formerly declared an 8 bit list. 

As to your response to my other question, I need to know if ghost will reliably 
image the 2003 imstall. As I want to keep it. The other issues I'll deal with 
afterwards. I'm not sure I'll need a setup disk, of course it wouldn't hurt. 
But he warned me to enter setup each time it was powered on and specify 'raid' 
in one of the settings, for tbe default was 'scsi', and if I didn't make that 
adjustment (I think because the backup battery is dead) it would wipe out rje 
current OS.
 On Wednesday, December 21, 2022, 02:05:19 PM EST, Bill Degnan via cctalk 
 wrote:  
 
 Chris,
That was me saying after 1990, within the context that one should start
thinking "is this on topic" if the thing is any newer, and I gave some
examples of then it would be and not so much be in my opinion.  I also
mentioned that to high school kids interested in vintage computers, their
*start* point is 1990 many of them based on what I have seen at Kennett
Classic museum.  They're interested in much newer stuff.  Also, smartphones
and devices, not just computers.

But for this list, as we are today, we're vintage of the 8-bit era vintage
computer hobbyist.

b

On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:52 PM Chris via cctalk 
wrote:

>  So Jay West doesn't own the list anymore? Since when was the cutoff
> declared to be 1990? No one is in charge here? What if a revolution takes
> place? Who will martial the forces to put ot down and hang all the
> imsurgents?
  

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Bill Degnan via cctalk]

Chris,
That was me saying after 1990, within the context that one should start
thinking "is this on topic" if the thing is any newer, and I gave some
examples of then it would be and not so much be in my opinion.  I also
mentioned that to high school kids interested in vintage computers, their
*start* point is 1990 many of them based on what I have seen at Kennett
Classic museum.  They're interested in much newer stuff.  Also, smartphones
and devices, not just computers.

But for this list, as we are today, we're vintage of the 8-bit era vintage
computer hobbyist.

b

On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 1:52 PM Chris via cctalk 
wrote:

>  So Jay West doesn't own the list anymore? Since when was the cutoff
> declared to be 1990? No one is in charge here? What if a revolution takes
> place? Who will martial the forces to put ot down and hang all the
> imsurgents?

[cctalk] new topic: CBM PET Keyboard

[steve shumaker via cctalk]

apologies for hijacking the "on topic" thread

Steve

On 12/21/22 10:55 AM, steve shumaker via cctalk wrote:
OK.. Now that you mention it, I do have a CBM PET question.  I'm 
searching for replacement key tops for the chicklet keyboard. There 
are stems available (apparently 3d printed) on EPay but no caps. Any 
suggestions on where to look?    I have the keyboard and it seems a 
little silly to spend $300 on EPay if I only need 3 keys


Steve

On 12/20/22 10:19 PM, Jim Brain via cctalk wrote:

On 12/21/2022 12:03 AM, Chris via cctalk wrote:

Apples and Coco's and C64's would be the common sublist

As much as I enjoy these machines, I ask that we do not create yet 
another list for them.  There are many fine forums for all of these 
machines.  The occasional PET or VIC question in here surely won't 
ruffle too many feathers, and those of us who know quite a bit about 
these machines can redirect the OP elsewhere if needed.

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[steve shumaker via cctalk]

OK..    Now that you mention it, I do have a CBM PET question.  I'm 
searching for replacement key tops for the chicklet keyboard.  There are 
stems available (apparently 3d printed) on EPay but no caps. Any 
suggestions on where to look?    I have the keyboard and it seems a 
little silly to spend $300 on EPay if I only need 3 keys


Steve

On 12/20/22 10:19 PM, Jim Brain via cctalk wrote:

On 12/21/2022 12:03 AM, Chris via cctalk wrote:

Apples and Coco's and C64's would be the common sublist

As much as I enjoy these machines, I ask that we do not create yet 
another list for them.  There are many fine forums for all of these 
machines.  The occasional PET or VIC question in here surely won't 
ruffle too many feathers, and those of us who know quite a bit about 
these machines can redirect the OP elsewhere if needed.

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Chris via cctalk]

 So Jay West doesn't own the list anymore? Since when was the cutoff declared 
to be 1990? No one is in charge here? What if a revolution takes place? Who 
will martial the forces to put ot down and hang all the imsurgents?  

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Sellam Abraham via cctalk]

Old 8-bits are fun. All you need is a television generally and you're ready
to go. Power it up, drop into BASIC, and start doing stuff.

With a PC you need a keyboard, a monitor, a mouse probably, a desktop, some
software, etc. How cumbersome. And uninteresting. And boring.

Maybe not the greatest comparison but that's why I don't come to the
ClassicCmp maillist expecting PC discussions.

Sellam

On Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 11:22 PM Chris via cctalk 
wrote:

>  Ok for cbm and atari yes I'm familiar with most of those. I meant in
> general. And specifically where would you go for server related discussions
> for pII through socket 771? Every classic/vintage forum seems to adhere to
> a classic in it's own right (but perhaps totally valid) definition of
> obsolete hardware and software. Remember before this stuff was classic it
> was overwhelmingly considered to be obsolete junk. Win98/2000/XP has been
> moderately collectible for a while. Don't care what category it falls into.
> Socket 775 stuff is more or less just obsolete junk. There's a grouping
> between and contemporary somewhat with those 2 and that's the early-ish
> server class, which no one may _ever_ care much about, because it's
> comparitively rare (few can relate) and lacks agp, so less then ideal for
> gaming. So where do I go for those discussions?
>
> As an aside 2000+\- beige boxes have become pretty collectible, and the
> larger server cases like an Inwin A500 has a chassis that slides out. Real
> nifty. It'll take a full size ssi-eeb mobo, and standard atx. If someone
> gets their hands on 1 they'll likely toss the serverboard and replace it
> with something more appropriate for gaming.
>
> On Wednesday, December 21, 2022, 01:49:24 AM EST, Jim Brain via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
>
> On 12/21/2022 12:28 AM, Chris via cctalk wrote:
> > I keep hearing allusions to many forums. I think there are very few. I
> don't do FB.
>
> There are many web forums. Just for CBM, there's lemon 64, vcforum,
> atariage (yes, CBM on atariage), denial, Everything 64, and 6502.org
> handles a few things. If you can grok German, there's forum64.de
>
> Mailing lists include cbm-hackers.
>
> Apple, TI, Atari all have similar. AtariAge handles all of them
> nominally. Retro Hackers also handles multiple.
>
> Jim
>
>
>

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Mike Katz via cctalk]

After seeing way more than a dozen messages about what is on topic I 
question whether this topic is on topic.


Tongue firmly planting in cheek.

Maybe we should apply some topical antiseptic and kill off this topic.

On 12/21/2022 1:39 AM, Jim Brain via cctalk wrote:

On 12/21/2022 1:22 AM, Chris via cctalk wrote:
  Ok for cbm and atari yes I'm familiar with most of those. I meant 
in general. And specifically where would you go for server related 
discussions for pII through socket 771?


I admit Pentium and newer forums are a bit harder to find, but some 
stuff is at:


https://forums.tomshardware.com/

https://forum.vcfed.org/index.php?forums/pentium-2nd-and-3rd-generation-class-machines.1230007/ 



https://forums.anandtech.com/categories/hardware-and-technology.27/

The first two are probably closer to what you're looking for, though I 
don't see server-specific groups.


Jim

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Jon Elson via cctalk]

On 12/20/22 20:51, Chris via cctalk wrote:

  Well there doesn't seem to be a great deal of activity these days, I has 
thought the suggestion about relaxing the rules might need discussing.

I know there are people still using Windows 2003 puters, or a near equivalent 
based on XP? But that's entirely irrelevant, as I'm quite sure you could find 
someone out there still utilizing an 8088/286/386. Of course that's the 
discretion of the sysop. As it stands there's at least 1 opinion for every 
ahole attached to the person who types on this board. Whateber. The way I see 
it dang obsolete shouldd be open for discussion.


We inherited an expensive piece of gear from a different 
department in our university.  It came with an ISA-bus 
computer that ran DOS 3.1  That computer was very cranky and 
finally died.  I tried putting the hard drive in one of my 
old computers, and it showed the instrument was working.  
So, we bought an industrial PC with ISA slots that was 
guaranteed to run software as far back as DOS.  Then, we 
installed DOS 6.2 on it, and had to put in some fancy 
drivers to get the ancient ANSI graphics the software 
required to show up on the screen.  This thing doesn't even 
use a mouse, you click the arrow keys and it highlights 
boxes on the screen, then you hit F keys to activate options.


I bought a Quad QSA30A pick and place machine, made around 
2000.  It runs a Celeron 733 MHz CPU and has one ISA slot 
that interfaces to a dual port memory card that connects to 
a 68040 VME processor that runs the whole machine.  The PC 
is just the user interface, and how you set up the assembly 
job and deal with errors. The software runs under Win 95, 
and needs to be 95 or 98 since the software goes directly to 
the hardware. There is an "optimizer" that reorders the part 
placement sequence and nozzle changes for faster production, 
and it was (occasionally) screwing up the placement file.  I 
got a slightly newer version of that program, and so far it 
SEEMS to not cause the scrambling, but it was intermittent.  
So, maybe that was a case of "bit rot".


So, I still use some old PC systems by necessity.

I also use an electronic design program (Protel 99 SE) that 
originally ran on Win 95, then Win2K, and now I run it under 
VirtualBox with Win XP on my Linux system.


Jon

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Andrew Diller via cctalk]

There is also TinkerDifferent- which is growing in size quickly (covers all 
systems, but is skewed a bit towards apple):

https://tinkerdifferent.com/forums/pentium-6x86.185/ 




> On Dec 21, 2022, at 2:39 AM, Jim Brain via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> On 12/21/2022 1:22 AM, Chris via cctalk wrote:
>>  Ok for cbm and atari yes I'm familiar with most of those. I meant in 
>> general. And specifically where would you go for server related discussions 
>> for pII through socket 771?
> 
> I admit Pentium and newer forums are a bit harder to find, but some stuff is 
> at:
> 
> https://forums.tomshardware.com/
> 
> https://forum.vcfed.org/index.php?forums/pentium-2nd-and-3rd-generation-class-machines.1230007/
> 
> https://forums.anandtech.com/categories/hardware-and-technology.27/
> 

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Bill Degnan via cctalk]

I typically change the subject header when I reply to a post that I
consider OT with the hopes that the original poster gets my point that
way...

On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 11:46 PM Sellam Abraham via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> This is really funny.  Do you all realize how many times we've gone over
> this over the past 25 years?
>
> As Bill poignantly explained, maybe instead of trying to establish a
> cut-off date, we instead think outside of the box:
>
> If enough people object to a topic, it stops.  Let's call it three
> objections.  If three different people reply to a post objecting to it then
> whoosh, off it goes into the bit bucket, never to be spoken of again.
>
> Example:
>
> Someone A: Hey, is it OK if I talk about Windows 11?
> Someone B: Objection.
> Someone C: Objection.
> Someone D: Objection.
> Someone A: Ok, sorry [bashfully skulks away]
>
> Food for thought.
>
> Sellam
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 8:33 PM Tony Jones via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Traffic on the list is so low I'm not seeing the issue.I'm also not
> > seeing complaints about threads being off topic.Seems like solution
> > seeking a problem.
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 20, 2022, 8:28 PM Chris via cctalk 
> > wrote:
> >
> > >  On Tuesday, December 20, 2022, 11:11:27 PM EST, Fred Cisin via cctalk
> <
> > > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > I was not disagreeing with you.
> > >
> > >
> > > Ok. Wonderful. I guess we've sufficiently established that from
> > henceforth
> > > anything dang-old is totally on topic. Any detractors? :)
> > >
> > > Transcoding as in vcr to mpegs? I wasn't suggesting XP was utterly
> > > entirely useless. Video editing in a modern sense requires loads of
> > > processing h.p. to be efficient. And no transcodimg is necessary.
> > Certainly
> > > not an expert. But I should think older hardware would be very very
> slow.
> >
>

[cctalk] Re: Win2K+3 on a Dell Poweredge 2600

[Bill Degnan via cctalk]

So Chris, your subject should be OT: Win2K+3 on a Dell Poweredge 2600
because this is not on topic for this list.After all of our comments
about topic/off topic hopefully you understand what we're talking about.
If it's newer than 1990 then your post could very well be off topic (OT)
unless there is something novel about the item that makes it unique and
worth pushing into newer time periods.

To answer your question - read up about this Dell 2600's and the RAID array
types available.  There will have been a driver/setup CD that came with the
system that allows the set up of the drives and RAID prior to installation
of the operating system.  RAID comes first, then the OS is installed on top
of it as if the multiple drives were one logical hard drive.  The original
OS would have been something older than Win 2003.  It is a good thing to
have RAID if it works for redundancy purposes.  You can't remove the RAID
configuration stick the OS on one drive without the setup disk. That's not
the mentality you're looking for here.  I have one of these in my
basement.  It came with RedHat 6.2 I believe.

Bill

On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 12:12 AM Chris via cctalk 
wrote:

> This beast was given to me by a neighbor. Dual socket 604. Windows 2003 in
> some RAID configuration. I understand (or used to understand) RAID levels
> somewhat. But iinm he tells me the OS is "split" over 6 scsi drives. Not
> getting this, but I don't need all the redundancy/striping. I want it all
> on 1 drive. What to use to image what comstitutes 1 volume I guess. Norton
> Ghost? I have an extra scsi drive, I can always restore the image to the 1
> drive (yes?), before or without alterimg the currently embedded stack.
>
> This thing is heavy. I secured a copy of the Corel Linux Starter Kit and
> want to load it into the Poweredge. For chips and pringles. I have other
> pre uefi boxes around but this is lying dormant. And 6 drives for my
> purposes is stupid. And heavy.
>

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Raymond Wiker via cctalk]

>From the headers of your message (and most likely the one you responded to):

To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" 
Reply-To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" 

List-Id: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" 


Seems like this is the list for on-topic and off-topic discussions?

Further,

List-Help: 
List-Subscribe: 
List-Unsubscribe: 


> On 21 Dec 2022, at 12:44, Peter Coghlan via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Windows 2003 and XP is about as obsolete now as the IBM PC was in 1995.
>> Probably more so. XP is popular on Vogons but I'm sure considerably less
>> then 5% of computers actually host it.
>> 
>> There's also the issue of beating a dead horse. There will always and
>> forever (and forever...) be some esoteric issue to discuss about some
>> bizzare and mostly unknown 8 bit system that 3 people on the whole of
>> planet earth own (now not to brag, but chances are there are a dozen or
>> less Northstar Dimension owners (never mind users) out there. And I'm
>> proud to be 1). Who am I going to discuss that with?? And a larger issue
>> is what? An even larger issue is why? Well I got plans ...
>> 
>> Lists of this sort are about tech and used by people who love it. Windows
>> 11 is not germain to these conversations. But what about, and I'm just
>> putting this out there, making pre UEFI shtuff -on-? I don't even know
>> how I personally feel about such a delineation. But the suggestion is
>> there. Nostalgic weirdos like older tech. Yes often dang old. Now a
>> Thinkpad T60p doesn't exactly seem dang old. But it's pretty much dang
>> obsolete (can't remember what sort of firmware it has but the processor,
>> though 64 bit, is part of that hazy quasi transitional grouping that had
>> more similarities to a 32 bit chip). On Tuesday, December 20, 2022,
>> 10:05:06 PM EST, Fred Cisin via cctalk  wrote:  
>> 
>> On Wed, 21 Dec 2022, Chris via cctalk wrote:
>>> Well there doesn't seem to be a great deal of activity these days, I has 
>>> thought the suggestion about relaxing the rules might need discussing.
>>> I know there are people still using Windows 2003 puters, or a near 
>>> equivalent based on XP? But that's entirely irrelevant, as I'm quite 
>>> sure you could find someone out there still utilizing an 8088/286/386. 
>>> Of course that's the discretion of the sysop. As it stands there's at 
>>> least 1 opinion for every ahole attached to the person who types on this 
>>> board. Whateber. The way I see it dang obsolete shouldd be open for 
>>> discussion.
>> 
>> To summarize:  "On-Topic" == "Dang obsolete"
>> 
> 
> 
> It seems that the previous list owner lost interest in this mailing list
> and turfed us over to someone else who doesn't really say anything some
> time ago.  At least I think that's what happened.  Nobody really said
> anything.
> 
> So, can someone enlighten me on how to stop receiving mail from the list
> until the holidays and/or this discussion are over under the new regime?
> 
> Regards,
> Peter Coghlan

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Peter Coghlan via cctalk]

>
> Windows 2003 and XP is about as obsolete now as the IBM PC was in 1995.
> Probably more so. XP is popular on Vogons but I'm sure considerably less
> then 5% of computers actually host it.
>
> There's also the issue of beating a dead horse. There will always and
> forever (and forever...) be some esoteric issue to discuss about some
> bizzare and mostly unknown 8 bit system that 3 people on the whole of
> planet earth own (now not to brag, but chances are there are a dozen or
> less Northstar Dimension owners (never mind users) out there. And I'm
> proud to be 1). Who am I going to discuss that with?? And a larger issue
> is what? An even larger issue is why? Well I got plans ...
> 
> Lists of this sort are about tech and used by people who love it. Windows
> 11 is not germain to these conversations. But what about, and I'm just
> putting this out there, making pre UEFI shtuff -on-? I don't even know
> how I personally feel about such a delineation. But the suggestion is
> there. Nostalgic weirdos like older tech. Yes often dang old. Now a
> Thinkpad T60p doesn't exactly seem dang old. But it's pretty much dang
> obsolete (can't remember what sort of firmware it has but the processor,
> though 64 bit, is part of that hazy quasi transitional grouping that had
> more similarities to a 32 bit chip). On Tuesday, December 20, 2022,
> 10:05:06 PM EST, Fred Cisin via cctalk  wrote:  
> 
> On Wed, 21 Dec 2022, Chris via cctalk wrote:
>> Well there doesn't seem to be a great deal of activity these days, I has 
>> thought the suggestion about relaxing the rules might need discussing.
>> I know there are people still using Windows 2003 puters, or a near 
>> equivalent based on XP? But that's entirely irrelevant, as I'm quite 
>> sure you could find someone out there still utilizing an 8088/286/386. 
>> Of course that's the discretion of the sysop. As it stands there's at 
>> least 1 opinion for every ahole attached to the person who types on this 
>> board. Whateber. The way I see it dang obsolete shouldd be open for 
>> discussion.
>
> To summarize:  "On-Topic" == "Dang obsolete"
>


It seems that the previous list owner lost interest in this mailing list
and turfed us over to someone else who doesn't really say anything some
time ago.  At least I think that's what happened.  Nobody really said
anything.

So, can someone enlighten me on how to stop receiving mail from the list
until the holidays and/or this discussion are over under the new regime?

Regards,
Peter Coghlan

[cctalk] Re: Win2K+3 on a Dell Poweredge 2600

[Dave Wade G4UGM via cctalk]

> -Original Message-
> From: Chris via cctalk 
> Sent: 21 December 2022 05:13
> To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
> Cc: skogkatt...@yahoo.com
> Subject: [cctalk] Win2K+3 on a Dell Poweredge 2600
> 
> This beast was given to me by a neighbor. Dual socket 604. Windows 2003 in
> some RAID configuration. I understand (or used to understand) RAID levels
> somewhat. But iinm he tells me the OS is "split" over 6 scsi drives. Not 
> getting
> this, but I don't need all the redundancy/striping. I want it all on 1 drive. 
> What to
> use to image what comstitutes 1 volume I guess. Norton Ghost? I have an extra
> scsi drive, I can always restore the image to the 1 drive (yes?), before or 
> without
> alterimg the currently embedded stack.

If the RAID is Windows Software Raid only Windows will know.

> 
> This thing is heavy. I secured a copy of the Corel Linux Starter Kit and want 
> to
> load it into the Poweredge. For chips and pringles. I have other pre uefi 
> boxes
> around but this is lying dormant. And 6 drives for my purposes is stupid. And
> heavy.

Dave