[cctalk] Re: ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.

[Nigel Johnson Ham via cctalk]

On 2023-05-27 16:38, Alexander Schreiber via cctalk wrote:

On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 12:30:52PM -0700, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:

On 5/25/23 10:06, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:

The way SPARK works is that you have code and then can also provide
proofs for the code.  Proofs are you might expect are *hard* to write
and in many cases are *huge* relative to the actual code (at least if
you want a platinum level proof).

...and we still get gems like the Boeing 737MAX...

That was Working As Implemented. Turns out, if you change the way
the aircraft behaves under some conditions and you can't be bothered
to tell the pilots about it, bad things are eventually going to happen.

Bonus points for making safety related features extra-cost items
(so your cheaper airlines won't buy them, with predictable results).

Extra bonus points for having achieved regulatory capture and so
being allowed to handwave "It will be fine, trust us" the certifications.

One long term result is that European agencies learned to no longer
trust the FAA.

The root cause was that Boeing was trying to do things on the cheap,
going "This is still your fathers old 737, just a little spruced up"
when it was effectively a different plane - but admitting that would
have triggered lots of expensive things (certifications, pilot training
for a new aircraft, ...).

There are businesses where you can get away with being cheap and
there are types of business where a little extra profit will be
paid for with _someones_ blood.

Kind regards,
 Alex.


I think you have hit the nail on the head there, Alex. not wanting to 
cause airlines to analyse the cost of extra pilot training and thus 
compare to the cost of equivalent Airbus product. I have a friend who 
has a full 737 simulator in his house (no FO seat though) and he put me 
through a trim runaway. Two toggle switches down on the engine quadrant 
just disabled the system if the pilots knew what was happening!


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

[cctalk] Re: ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.

[Alexander Schreiber via cctalk]

On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 12:30:52PM -0700, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
> On 5/25/23 10:06, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:
> > 
> 
> > The way SPARK works is that you have code and then can also provide
> > proofs for the code.  Proofs are you might expect are *hard* to write
> > and in many cases are *huge* relative to the actual code (at least if
> > you want a platinum level proof).
> 
> ...and we still get gems like the Boeing 737MAX...

That was Working As Implemented. Turns out, if you change the way
the aircraft behaves under some conditions and you can't be bothered
to tell the pilots about it, bad things are eventually going to happen.

Bonus points for making safety related features extra-cost items
(so your cheaper airlines won't buy them, with predictable results).

Extra bonus points for having achieved regulatory capture and so
being allowed to handwave "It will be fine, trust us" the certifications.

One long term result is that European agencies learned to no longer
trust the FAA.

The root cause was that Boeing was trying to do things on the cheap,
going "This is still your fathers old 737, just a little spruced up"
when it was effectively a different plane - but admitting that would
have triggered lots of expensive things (certifications, pilot training
for a new aircraft, ...).

There are businesses where you can get away with being cheap and
there are types of business where a little extra profit will be
paid for with _someones_ blood.

Kind regards,
Alex.
-- 
"Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and
 looks like work."  -- Thomas A. Edison

[cctalk] Re: ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.

[Christian Kennedy via cctalk]

On 5/25/23 13:38, geneb via cctalk wrote:
That wasn't a software problem, that was a criminally cheap management 
problem - they deleted the comparator for the AoA indexer to save money.


Yes, but probably not Boeing's.  AoA disagree was an available option 
that most /airlines/ explicitly elected not to purchase. Part of the AD 
was requiring that system, plus limiting MCAS authority so that if you 
hadn't noticed the trim wheel whacking you in the side of the leg you at 
least couldn't get into a situation where it would take three people to 
overpower the combined trim and aeroloading forces, and notably, sim 
time to review trim runaway procedures.  It's not reassuring how many 
crews got trim runaway wrong in the sim.


AoA disagreement on the B737 is weird anyway.  Each AoA sensor drives 
one half of the cockpit stall avoidance systems, so the way you 
typically tell that a sensor has failed is when the stick shaker on one 
side starts going nuts while the other one doesn't.


Honestly, the biggest blame here probably belongs on the doorstep of 
Southwest.


--
Christian Kennedy, Ph.D.
ch...@mainecoon.com AF6AP | DB0692 | PG00029419
http://www.mainecoon.comPGP KeyID 108DAB97
PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97
"Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration…"

[cctalk] MCAS (was: Re: Re: ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.)

[Christian Kennedy via cctalk]

On 5/25/23 12:30, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:

...and we still get gems like the Boeing 737MAX...


I get your point, but it's a bad example.  MCAS worked precisely as 
specified, and while one could have a discussion regarding if those 
specifications were wrong, the logic was that a MCAS failure was 
indistinguishable from any other 737 trim runaway and was to be handled 
in the same fashion. Perhaps this is an example of Brooks' observation 
that most bugs in software are in fact bugs in specification.


I can even sorta understand the thought processes behind the specs. 
While there were two hull losses, there have been many, many, many more 
MCAS failures; the only time they resulted in holes in the ground is 
when the trim runaway procedures weren't followed -- that being a sort 
of sobering thought given that there are all sorts of other things that 
can lead to that happening beyond MCAS.


--
Christian Kennedy, Ph.D.
ch...@mainecoon.com AF6AP | DB0692 | PG00029419
http://www.mainecoon.comPGP KeyID 108DAB97
PGP fingerprint: 4E99 10B6 7253 B048 6685 6CBC 55E1 20A3 108D AB97
"Mr. McKittrick, after careful consideration…"

[cctalk] Re: ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.

[Paul Koning via cctalk]

> On May 25, 2023, at 4:38 PM, geneb via cctalk  wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 25 May 2023, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
> 
>> On 5/25/23 10:06, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:
>>> 
>> 
>>> The way SPARK works is that you have code and then can also provide
>>> proofs for the code.  Proofs are you might expect are *hard* to write
>>> and in many cases are *huge* relative to the actual code (at least if
>>> you want a platinum level proof).
>> 
>> ...and we still get gems like the Boeing 737MAX...
>> 
> That wasn't a software problem, that was a criminally cheap management 
> problem - they deleted the comparator for the AoA indexer to save money.

So?  We know managers often don't know engineering or reliability, that's why 
we have engineers.  It's not just the job of the engineer to follow orders; 
it's also his job to make the right thing happen, and to complain if it isn't.

Engineers keeping quiet has been a key contributor in many spectacular 
failures, from the 737 MAX to the two Space Shuttle failures.

paul

[cctalk] Re: ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.

[geneb via cctalk]

On Thu, 25 May 2023, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:


On 5/25/23 10:06, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:





The way SPARK works is that you have code and then can also provide
proofs for the code.  Proofs are you might expect are *hard* to write
and in many cases are *huge* relative to the actual code (at least if
you want a platinum level proof).


...and we still get gems like the Boeing 737MAX...

That wasn't a software problem, that was a criminally cheap management 
problem - they deleted the comparator for the AoA indexer to save money.


g.

--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
http://www.diy-cockpits.org/coll - Go Collimated or Go Home.
Some people collect things for a hobby.  Geeks collect hobbies.

ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
http://scarlet.deltasoft.com - Get it _today_!

[cctalk] Re: ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

Just wondering what's marking Guy's posts with ***SPAM***.  It's
beginning to look like a Monty Python sketch.

--Chuck

[cctalk] Re: ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

On 5/25/23 10:06, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:
> 

> The way SPARK works is that you have code and then can also provide
> proofs for the code.  Proofs are you might expect are *hard* to write
> and in many cases are *huge* relative to the actual code (at least if
> you want a platinum level proof).

...and we still get gems like the Boeing 737MAX...

--Chuck

[cctalk] Re: ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.

[Guy Sotomayor via cctalk]

On 5/25/23 10:00, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:

On 5/25/23 08:58, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:

ADA and SPARK (a stripped down version of ADA) are used heavily in
embedded that has to be "safety certified".  SPARK also allows the code
to be "proven" (as in you can write formal proofs to ensure that the
code does what you say it does).  Ask me how I know.  ;-)

I was aware of Ada's requirements in the defense- and aerospace-related
industry.  Is that where your experience lies?  Is SPARK the "magic
bullet" that's been searched for decades to write provably correct code?


I'm familiar with it from the higher end automotive perspective 
(self-driving cars).  Even when using C/C++ we have *lots* of standards 
that we have to adhere to (MISRA, CERT-C, ISO-26262, etc).


The way SPARK works is that you have code and then can also provide 
proofs for the code.  Proofs are you might expect are *hard* to write 
and in many cases are *huge* relative to the actual code (at least if 
you want a platinum level proof).


--
TTFN - Guy

[cctalk] Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

On 5/25/23 08:58, Guy Sotomayor via cctalk wrote:
> 
> ADA and SPARK (a stripped down version of ADA) are used heavily in
> embedded that has to be "safety certified".  SPARK also allows the code
> to be "proven" (as in you can write formal proofs to ensure that the
> code does what you say it does).  Ask me how I know.  ;-)

I was aware of Ada's requirements in the defense- and aerospace-related
industry.  Is that where your experience lies?  Is SPARK the "magic
bullet" that's been searched for decades to write provably correct code?

Now, let's hear from the Nim, Zig...etc. enthusiasts.  There's a YT
video that claims that Zig code execution is faster than assembly.
Exactly how does that work?

--Chuck

[cctalk] Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Getting floppy images to/from real floppy disks.

[Guy Sotomayor via cctalk]

On 5/25/23 07:55, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:

On 5/25/23 04:52, Tony Duell via cctalk wrote:

For the programming language, I stick with C, not C++, not Python and
plain old makefiles--that's what the support libraries are written in.
I don't use an IDE, lest I become reliant on one--a text editor will do.
I document the heck out of code.  Over the 50 or so years that I've been
cranking out gibberish, it's nice to go back to code that I wrote 30 or
40 years ago and still be able to read it.


That's basically what I do too.  It's too easy to get stuck with an 
unsupported environment.  A text editor and makefiles mean that I can 
(generally) port my code over to any new environment fairly easily.




I'm all too aware of the changing trends in the industry--and how
quickly they can change.  I remember when there was a push in embedded
coding not long ago to use Ada--where is that today?
ADA and SPARK (a stripped down version of ADA) are used heavily in 
embedded that has to be "safety certified".  SPARK also allows the code 
to be "proven" (as in you can write formal proofs to ensure that the 
code does what you say it does).  Ask me how I know.  ;-)


--
TTFN - Guy

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] RQDX3's: Lessons learned.

[Chris Zach via cctalk]

Yeah at this point pop it open, unlock the heads (the white cam down at 
the base there, trip it) and get the heads to move. They should smoothly 
move with a bit of effort. Then fire it up and see if anything works.


I'm going to run this one for a bit in the backup pdp11 here, see if it 
runs if you fire it up every month or two. Once again what do I have to 
lose :-)


I should probably install a TK50 for backups.

C

On 2/3/2023 11:34 PM, Zane Healy wrote:

I’d just like to say that 25 years ago, RD53’s were *EVIL*.  I do have one that 
I should try taking apart.  I failed to back it up the first time I powered it 
on.  It didn’t boot the second time.

ESDI or SCSI is the way to go, at least that was true 20-25 years ago.  Today 
I’d be inclined to say SCSI is the way to go.

Zane




On Feb 3, 2023, at 7:48 PM, Chris Zach via cctalk  wrote:

Some thoughts on this day of working on MFM drives:

1) MFM drives are just going bad. They were always kind of meh in terms of 
reliability, but I think even since 2019 (the last time I checked these drives) 
things have gotten worse. Drives which were readable and good then are now 
either shot or throwing errors and they have had an easy 3+ years in my 
upstairs room.

2) There are at least two RQDX3 ROM sets. The earlier one does not support the 
RX33 floppy and doesn't give any info during formatting. The later version 
(Version 4) does support the RX33 and is a lot nicer.

3) Seagate drives seem to be pretty good, especially the 20mb ones. They have 
no problems, work well, and are pretty right-sized for an RT11 system.

4) RD53 drives are weird. Their main failure is the drive head positioner just 
gets stuck and needs to be worked loose. Unfortunately that requires removing 
the lid. Fortunately there is a good filter in the drive along with an air 
handler that runs air from inside the drive body through the filter, then into 
the spindle where it is blown over the heads. Result is a pretty clean drive on 
the inside and so far opening the lid doesn't seem to be a recipe for instant 
destruction. Go figure.

I may try an RD53 in one of my Pro/380's. It's about time I loaded up the final 
version of P/OS, as I can use the Gotek floppy to load everything instead of 
screwing with the RX50's. Or can I do that and switch disks on the fly with a 
single Gotek... Hm.

5) For anything bigger, it's time to retire the MFM drives. Unlike RL02's these 
things just were not that reliable when new and at this point are kind of 
falling apart. I have not had any trouble with the ESDI disks, but it might 
just be a matter of time. Perhaps I should look into duplexing my 330mb CDC 
drive in the 11/84

CZ

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] RQDX3's: Lessons learned.

[Zane Healy via cctalk]

I’d just like to say that 25 years ago, RD53’s were *EVIL*.  I do have one that 
I should try taking apart.  I failed to back it up the first time I powered it 
on.  It didn’t boot the second time.

ESDI or SCSI is the way to go, at least that was true 20-25 years ago.  Today 
I’d be inclined to say SCSI is the way to go.

Zane



> On Feb 3, 2023, at 7:48 PM, Chris Zach via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> Some thoughts on this day of working on MFM drives:
> 
> 1) MFM drives are just going bad. They were always kind of meh in terms of 
> reliability, but I think even since 2019 (the last time I checked these 
> drives) things have gotten worse. Drives which were readable and good then 
> are now either shot or throwing errors and they have had an easy 3+ years in 
> my upstairs room.
> 
> 2) There are at least two RQDX3 ROM sets. The earlier one does not support 
> the RX33 floppy and doesn't give any info during formatting. The later 
> version (Version 4) does support the RX33 and is a lot nicer.
> 
> 3) Seagate drives seem to be pretty good, especially the 20mb ones. They have 
> no problems, work well, and are pretty right-sized for an RT11 system.
> 
> 4) RD53 drives are weird. Their main failure is the drive head positioner 
> just gets stuck and needs to be worked loose. Unfortunately that requires 
> removing the lid. Fortunately there is a good filter in the drive along with 
> an air handler that runs air from inside the drive body through the filter, 
> then into the spindle where it is blown over the heads. Result is a pretty 
> clean drive on the inside and so far opening the lid doesn't seem to be a 
> recipe for instant destruction. Go figure.
> 
> I may try an RD53 in one of my Pro/380's. It's about time I loaded up the 
> final version of P/OS, as I can use the Gotek floppy to load everything 
> instead of screwing with the RX50's. Or can I do that and switch disks on the 
> fly with a single Gotek... Hm.
> 
> 5) For anything bigger, it's time to retire the MFM drives. Unlike RL02's 
> these things just were not that reliable when new and at this point are kind 
> of falling apart. I have not had any trouble with the ESDI disks, but it 
> might just be a matter of time. Perhaps I should look into duplexing my 330mb 
> CDC drive in the 11/84
> 
> CZ

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Re: PKBACK Floppies?

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

On Wed, 1 Feb 2023, Zane Healy via cctalk wrote:
You have that right Sellam, the more that I look into this, based on 
Fred’s info, I think that I need to get MS-DOS running under DOSBOX-X.


Probably worthwhile.

Although the truncation of file content after EOF during concatenation is 
somewhat esoteric.

There may be plenty of other things to check out.

Are you using the correct version of PKZIP?
I'm wondering how well PKZIP handles features that were added to PKZIP in 
versions newer than itself.
Ideally, PKZIP should include metadata in files, including version number, 
to let you know whether it's a suitable version for a given file, . . .


--
Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Re: PKBACK Floppies?

[Zane Healy via cctalk]

On Feb 1, 2023, at 11:59 AM, Sellam Abraham via cctalk  
wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 11:45 AM Fred Cisin via cctalk 
> wrote:
> 
>>> On Wed, 1 Feb 2023, Zane Healy via cctalk wrote:
>>> So far I’ve tackled one split zip.  I wasn’t having any luck with
>>> the version of PKZIP that I assume created this.  I copied the files
>>> into a directory, and did COPY
>>> FILE1.ZIP+FILE2.ZIP+FILE3.ZIP+FILE4.ZIP+FILE5.ZIP COMBINED.ZIP
>> 
>> THAT will give you a corrupted file!
>> 
>> Concatenated copy (COPY with '+') has a behavior that you need to take
>> into account.
>> 
>> PC/MS-DOS 1.00 kept track of the file size with a course granularity.
>> (logical sectors, not bytes)
>> Therefore, PC/MS-DOS supported CTRL-Z as an end of file character!
>> (A legacy of CP/M)
>> 
>> When you cop a file, it copies the whole thing.  Any extraneous content
>> after EOF won't matter.
>> 
>> BUT!  When you concatenate files,
>> COPY FILE1.ZIP + FILE2.ZIP COMBINED.ZIP
>> COPY will terminate FILE1.ZIP at the first CTRL-Z that it encounters!
>> When copying text files, Concatenated COPY will trim off all content after
>> EOF!
>> It is called "text mode".
>> 
>> You need to change your command to
>> COPY /B  FILE1.ZIP+FILE2.ZIP+FILE3.ZIP+FILE4.ZIP+FILE5.ZIP COMBINED.ZIP
>> to get "binary mode", so that it will copy ALL of each file, rather than
>> just to the "end of file character" of each!
>> 
>> Compare the final resulting file size of  COPY and COPY /B
>> 
>> --
>> Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
> 
> 
> Excellent knowledge transfer, Fred.  That is what makes this list great.
> 
> Sellam

You have that right Sellam, the more that I look into this, based on Fred’s 
info, I think that I need to get MS-DOS running under DOSBOX-X.

Zane

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Re: PKBACK Floppies?

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

FILE1.ZIP+FILE2.ZIP+FILE3.ZIP+FILE4.ZIP+FILE5.ZIP COMBINED.ZIP

THAT will give you a corrupted file!
Concatenated copy (COPY with '+') has a behavior that you need to take into 
account.
PC/MS-DOS 1.00 kept track of the file size with a course granularity. (logical 
sectors, not bytes) Therefore, PC/MS-DOS supported CTRL-Z as an end of file 
character!
(A legacy of CP/M)
When you copy a file, it copies the whole thing.  Any extraneous 
content after EOF won't matter.

BUT!  When you concatenate files,
COPY FILE1.ZIP + FILE2.ZIP COMBINED.ZIP
COPY will terminate FILE1.ZIP at the first CTRL-Z that it encounters!
When copying text files, Concatenated COPY will trim off all content after EOF!
It is called "text mode".
You need to change your command to
COPY /B  FILE1.ZIP+FILE2.ZIP+FILE3.ZIP+FILE4.ZIP+FILE5.ZIP COMBINED.ZIP
to get "binary mode", so that it will copy ALL of each file, rather than just to the 
"end of file character" of each!
Compare the final resulting file size of  COPY and COPY /B


On Wed, 1 Feb 2023, Zane Healy wrote:
I’m running the version of DOS that comes with DOSBOX-X (I think 
it’s FreeDOS?).  Checking COPY, and I’m not sure it supports /B, but 
it also doesn’t complain, the resulting combined ZIP is the same in 
both cases.  Turns out that I have three corrupted files in the fixed 
Zip, before fixing it there are a lot more.  That’s based on telling 
PKZIP to check the ZIP integrity.


If you get a convenient chance, try COPY /A ...+...+... ...

/A ("ASCII" or text mode) is the default in PC/MS-DOS, where CTRL-Z, and 
any padding/junk after the EOF (CTRL-Z) character in the files in the 
middle is truncated.  That is so that when you concatenate text files, you 
don't leave EOFs and sector/record padding in the middle.


If /A gives the same as /B and the same as no switch, then either your 
version does not have that "feature", OR there are no CTRL-Z's (1Ah) 
anywhere in the middle files!
If /A gives a shorter result, stay away from it, but that would mean that 
/B is the default in your version.


--
Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: [SPAM] Re: PKBACK Floppies?

[Zane Healy via cctalk]

On Feb 1, 2023, at 11:44 AM, Fred Cisin via cctalk  
wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 1 Feb 2023, Zane Healy via cctalk wrote:
>> So far I’ve tackled one split zip.  I wasn’t having any luck with the 
>> version of PKZIP that I assume created this.  I copied the files into a 
>> directory, and did COPY FILE1.ZIP+FILE2.ZIP+FILE3.ZIP+FILE4.ZIP+FILE5.ZIP 
>> COMBINED.ZIP
> 
> THAT will give you a corrupted file!
> 
> Concatenated copy (COPY with '+') has a behavior that you need to take into 
> account.
> 
> PC/MS-DOS 1.00 kept track of the file size with a course granularity. 
> (logical sectors, not bytes) Therefore, PC/MS-DOS supported CTRL-Z as an end 
> of file character!
> (A legacy of CP/M)
> 
> When you cop a file, it copies the whole thing.  Any extraneous content after 
> EOF won't matter.
> 
> BUT!  When you concatenate files,
> COPY FILE1.ZIP + FILE2.ZIP COMBINED.ZIP
> COPY will terminate FILE1.ZIP at the first CTRL-Z that it encounters!
> When copying text files, Concatenated COPY will trim off all content after 
> EOF!
> It is called "text mode".
> 
> You need to change your command to
> COPY /B  FILE1.ZIP+FILE2.ZIP+FILE3.ZIP+FILE4.ZIP+FILE5.ZIP COMBINED.ZIP
> to get "binary mode", so that it will copy ALL of each file, rather than just 
> to the "end of file character" of each!
> 
> Compare the final resulting file size of  COPY and COPY /B
> 
> --
> Grumpy Ol' Fred   ci...@xenosoft.com

I’m running the version of DOS that comes with DOSBOX-X (I think it’s 
FreeDOS?).  Checking COPY, and I’m not sure it supports /B, but it also doesn’t 
complain, the resulting combined ZIP is the same in both cases.  Turns out that 
I have three corrupted files in the fixed Zip, before fixing it there are a lot 
more.  That’s based on telling PKZIP to check the ZIP integrity. 

Zane

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: PKBACK Floppies?

[Sellam Abraham via cctalk]

On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 11:45 AM Fred Cisin via cctalk 
wrote:

> On Wed, 1 Feb 2023, Zane Healy via cctalk wrote:
> > So far I’ve tackled one split zip.  I wasn’t having any luck with
> > the version of PKZIP that I assume created this.  I copied the files
> > into a directory, and did COPY
> > FILE1.ZIP+FILE2.ZIP+FILE3.ZIP+FILE4.ZIP+FILE5.ZIP COMBINED.ZIP
>
> THAT will give you a corrupted file!
>
> Concatenated copy (COPY with '+') has a behavior that you need to take
> into account.
>
> PC/MS-DOS 1.00 kept track of the file size with a course granularity.
> (logical sectors, not bytes)
> Therefore, PC/MS-DOS supported CTRL-Z as an end of file character!
> (A legacy of CP/M)
>
> When you cop a file, it copies the whole thing.  Any extraneous content
> after EOF won't matter.
>
> BUT!  When you concatenate files,
> COPY FILE1.ZIP + FILE2.ZIP COMBINED.ZIP
> COPY will terminate FILE1.ZIP at the first CTRL-Z that it encounters!
> When copying text files, Concatenated COPY will trim off all content after
> EOF!
> It is called "text mode".
>
> You need to change your command to
> COPY /B  FILE1.ZIP+FILE2.ZIP+FILE3.ZIP+FILE4.ZIP+FILE5.ZIP COMBINED.ZIP
> to get "binary mode", so that it will copy ALL of each file, rather than
> just to the "end of file character" of each!
>
> Compare the final resulting file size of  COPY and COPY /B
>
> --
> Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com


Excellent knowledge transfer, Fred.  That is what makes this list great.

Sellam

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: PKBACK Floppies?

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

On Wed, 1 Feb 2023, Zane Healy via cctalk wrote:
So far I’ve tackled one split zip.  I wasn’t having any luck with 
the version of PKZIP that I assume created this.  I copied the files 
into a directory, and did COPY 
FILE1.ZIP+FILE2.ZIP+FILE3.ZIP+FILE4.ZIP+FILE5.ZIP COMBINED.ZIP


THAT will give you a corrupted file!

Concatenated copy (COPY with '+') has a behavior that you need to take 
into account.


PC/MS-DOS 1.00 kept track of the file size with a course granularity. 
(logical sectors, not bytes) 
Therefore, PC/MS-DOS supported CTRL-Z as an end of file character!

(A legacy of CP/M)

When you cop a file, it copies the whole thing.  Any extraneous content 
after EOF won't matter.


BUT!  When you concatenate files,
COPY FILE1.ZIP + FILE2.ZIP COMBINED.ZIP
COPY will terminate FILE1.ZIP at the first CTRL-Z that it encounters!
When copying text files, Concatenated COPY will trim off all content after 
EOF!

It is called "text mode".

You need to change your command to
COPY /B  FILE1.ZIP+FILE2.ZIP+FILE3.ZIP+FILE4.ZIP+FILE5.ZIP COMBINED.ZIP
to get "binary mode", so that it will copy ALL of each file, rather than 
just to the "end of file character" of each!


Compare the final resulting file size of  COPY and COPY /B

--
Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: CD-R, DVD-R media available

[Zane Healy via cctalk]

Kodak Gold CD-R’s were supposed to be the best as I recall.

The Verbatim DataLifePlus are definitely long lived. 

I can’t remember if I’ve found any Sony or TDK disks in the stuff I’ve 
recovered recently, I believe I used both on occasion, but not for archives 
(though I’ve recovered CD’s I didn’t intend to be archives).  I have no 
experience with FujiFilm, except for DLT Tapes.

Zane




> On Feb 1, 2023, at 8:51 AM, Anders Nelson via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> Does anyone here know which brands/lines had the best longevity?
> 
> --
> Anders Nelson
> 
> 
> On Wed, Feb 1, 2023 at 11:28 AM David Barto via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> 
>> 100’s of CD-R, Sony, TDK, and FujiFilm.
>> 25-30 DVD-R Sony and TDK
>> 
>> And CD cases sufficient to hold all the disks
>> 
>> Heavy, available for the cost of shipping.
>> I’m in San Diego, so local delivery is possible.
>> 
>>David
>> 
>> 

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: PKBACK Floppies?

[Zane Healy via cctalk]

> On Jan 31, 2023, at 1:26 PM, David Glover-Aoki via cctalk 
>  wrote:
> 
> On Jan 29, 2023, at 9:37 PM, Zane Healy via cctalk  
> wrote:
>> 
>> Some of the floppies I’m recovering data look to be either a multi-part ZIP 
>> file, or something.  Was this a separate product from PKZIP?  I’m not sure 
>> if I have a copy of PKZIP in the stuff I’ve recovered thus far.  I’ve not 
>> pulled them into DOSBOX to try and restore them, so far I’ve just tried to 
>> use Stuffit-Expander.   Part of the problem is every file has the same name, 
>> just on different floppies.
> 
> Info-ZIP still supports "split" archives, and spanned archives can be 
> converted to split archives by renaming them to the appropriate extension. 
> From the man page:
> 
> zip version 3.0 and later can create split archives.  A split archive is a 
> standard zip archive split over multiple files.  (Note that split archives 
> are not just archives split in to pieces, as the offsets of entries are now 
> based on the start of each split.  Concatenating the pieces together will 
> invalidate these offsets, but unzip can usually deal with it.  zip will 
> usually refuse to process such a spliced archive unless the -FF fix option is 
> used to fix the offsets.)
> 
> One use of split archives is storing a large archive on multiple removable 
> media.  For a split archive with 20 split files the files are typically named 
> (replace ARCHIVE with the name of your archive) ARCHIVE.z01, ARCHIVE.z02, 
> ..., ARCHIVE.z19, ARCHIVE.zip. Note that the last file is the .zip file.  In 
> contrast, spanned archives are the original multi-disk archive generally 
> requiring floppy disks and using volume labels to store disk numbers.  zip 
> supports split archives but not spanned archives, though a procedure exists 
> for converting split archives of the right size to spanned archives.  The 
> reverse is also true, where each file of a spanned archive can be copied in 
> order to files with the above names to create a split archive.
> 
> A split archive with missing split files can be fixed using -F if you have 
> the last split of the archive (the .zip file).  If this file is missing, you 
> must use -FF to fix the archive, which will prompt you for the splits you 
> have.
> 
> David.

So far I’ve tackled one split zip.  I wasn’t having any luck with the version 
of PKZIP that I assume created this.  I copied the files into a directory, and 
did COPY FILE1.ZIP+FILE2.ZIP+FILE3.ZIP+FILE4.ZIP+FILE5.ZIP COMBINED.ZIP

That still wasn’t working, as the file was corrupt, but I managed to use 
PKZIPFIX to fix it, and then I could unzip it.  The info above will definitely 
help, especially with regards to the ZIPs missing the first part.

Slowly I’m recovering my old DOS system.

Zane

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man

[Zane Healy via cctalk]

> On Jan 31, 2023, at 2:19 PM, Paul Koning  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On Jan 31, 2023, at 5:03 PM, Zane Healy via cctalk  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> On Jan 31, 2023, at 10:22 AM, Steve Lewis via cctalk  
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I know the first generation CD/DVD disc are known to "go bad" - the
>>> material itself somehow degrades and becomes unreadable by modern drives.
>>> I'm not sure if that's still the case with newer or more modern CD/DVD disc
>>> (not just that they're newer, but are they a more durable material or
>>> casing?)
>> 
>> Choosing the right blanks made a world of difference.  The as I said 
>> recently, all the Verbatim DataLifePlus I’ve tried to recovered have been 
>> fine.  The main data I lost was stored on a DVD-R blank from another 
>> manufacturer.
>> 
>> I’m now looking at switching to Verbatim M-Disc’s.
>> 
>> As part of my recent efforts I’ve regained access to data that while live on 
>> spinning disk, had become corrupted sometime between 1997 and 1999.
>> 
>> Zane
> 
> I don't remember if RW (erasable) DVDs exist, or if that is only offered for 
> CD blanks.  As I understand it, the RW technology has nowhere the longevity 
> of the write-once kind.  Makes sense since those are reversible, which 
> suggests that the reversing might happen gradually in storage, similar to the 
> way that NVRAM (flash memory) gradually fades which OTP ROMs tend to last 
> forever unless they have a process defect.
> 
>   Paul

I was quite frankly amazed that I was able to recover data from Memorex CD-RW 
disks.

I don’t remember if I’ve run across any DVD-RW disks in my efforts (they do 
exist).

Zane

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man

[Paul Koning via cctalk]

> On Jan 31, 2023, at 5:03 PM, Zane Healy via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> On Jan 31, 2023, at 10:22 AM, Steve Lewis via cctalk  
> wrote:
>> 
>> I know the first generation CD/DVD disc are known to "go bad" - the
>> material itself somehow degrades and becomes unreadable by modern drives.
>> I'm not sure if that's still the case with newer or more modern CD/DVD disc
>> (not just that they're newer, but are they a more durable material or
>> casing?)
> 
> Choosing the right blanks made a world of difference.  The as I said 
> recently, all the Verbatim DataLifePlus I’ve tried to recovered have been 
> fine.  The main data I lost was stored on a DVD-R blank from another 
> manufacturer.
> 
> I’m now looking at switching to Verbatim M-Disc’s.
> 
> As part of my recent efforts I’ve regained access to data that while live on 
> spinning disk, had become corrupted sometime between 1997 and 1999.
> 
> Zane

I don't remember if RW (erasable) DVDs exist, or if that is only offered for CD 
blanks.  As I understand it, the RW technology has nowhere the longevity of the 
write-once kind.  Makes sense since those are reversible, which suggests that 
the reversing might happen gradually in storage, similar to the way that NVRAM 
(flash memory) gradually fades which OTP ROMs tend to last forever unless they 
have a process defect.

paul

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man

[Zane Healy via cctalk]

On Jan 31, 2023, at 10:36 AM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk  
wrote:
> 
> Half-inch open-reel 9 track tape seems to withstand the test of time as
> well as anything.
> 
> The problem with the high-capacity tape used for server backup will be
> finding drives and controllers compatible with it in years to come.  I
> don't know how many people, for example, squirrel away LTO drives of
> various types, but you're not going to read that LTO-2 tape on your
> LTO-9 drive.  Then there's the matter of finding the apppropriate
> controller.
> 
> 8mm and DDS drives are starting to become uncommon.  And we all know the
> fate of QIC/Travan tapes.
> 
> The rule seems to be that if you want to hang onto something, keep
> migrating it to newer storage.
> 
> --Chuck

When using tape as an archive medium, you must include a plan for refreshing 
those tapes.  When creating an archive solution, it’s important that the 
refresh of the media is an automated process that doesn’t require headcount.

Having a system in place for tracking where all your archive media is, and what 
it is, is equally important.  Case in point, I’ve spent the last 3 weekends 
trying to find some boxes of floppies.  I found “them” on Sunday, only to find 
that they are apparently no longer in one of the boxes, and that box must be 
one of the others I’ve found, and it’s been reused.  

Zane

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: Computer Museum uses GreaseWeazle to help exonerate Maryland Man

[Zane Healy via cctalk]

On Jan 31, 2023, at 10:22 AM, Steve Lewis via cctalk  
wrote:
> 
> I know the first generation CD/DVD disc are known to "go bad" - the
> material itself somehow degrades and becomes unreadable by modern drives.
> I'm not sure if that's still the case with newer or more modern CD/DVD disc
> (not just that they're newer, but are they a more durable material or
> casing?)

Choosing the right blanks made a world of difference.  The as I said recently, 
all the Verbatim DataLifePlus I’ve tried to recovered have been fine.  The main 
data I lost was stored on a DVD-R blank from another manufacturer.

I’m now looking at switching to Verbatim M-Disc’s.

As part of my recent efforts I’ve regained access to data that while live on 
spinning disk, had become corrupted sometime between 1997 and 1999.

Zane

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: USB Attached 5.25" drives?

[Jim Brain via cctalk]

On 1/20/2023 2:31 PM, Zane Healy wrote:

Realistically that’s good enough Jim, though I find the way the 3.5” floppies 
are working to be quite useful.  I can take a look at what’s on them, and in 
many cases, I just pull the files off.  As there is no reason to image them.


No doubt.  Don't get me wrong, GW and KryoFlux and Catweazel(sp?) and 
others serve a great purpose.  But, most media is not so important.  I 
have some geneology disks a family member worked on in the 1980s that I 
need to archive.  But, it does not rise to the need to flux image.  I'll 
just pop them into a DOS PC and grab the data.  If there are issues, 
we'll cross that bridge then.


Jim

--
Jim Brain
br...@jbrain.com
www.jbrain.com

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: USB Attached 5.25" drives?

[Zane Healy via cctalk]

> On Jan 20, 2023, at 11:19 AM, Jim Brain via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> On 1/20/2023 1:05 PM, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote:
>> Using the Greaseweazel is a two stage process.  The GW itself connects to 
>> the actual drive and just records the flux transitions as a series of zeros 
>> and ones.  This is transferred to a computer (PC, MAC, Linux) where the 
>> captured flux image is analyzed by a second program which understands floppy 
>> formats.  You tell the analyzer what you are looking at.
>> 
>> The analyzer can then provide a binary dump of the actual data (track by 
>> track) or for operating systems that it understands it can extract 
>> directories and files.
>> 
>> On 1/20/2023 12:52 PM, Zane Healy via cctalk wrote:
>>> I’m now aware of the GreaseWeazle, but what I’ve not seen is if it allows 
>>> standard access to the data on a floppy, or only provides a way to image 
>>> the disk.  With an USB attached 3.5” floppy the disk mounts on my Mac, and 
>>> I can easily pull files off the disk.  Does this work with the GreaseWeazle 
>>> and a 5.25” floppy drive?
>>> 
>>> Zane
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> Not to discount Mike's response, but to Zane's original question:  At this 
> time, No, the GW only allows imaging.
> 
> *BUT*, there is nothing preventing the firmware Keir wrote from being 
> extended to support accessing the actual floppy disk directly via the USB 
> interface (by emulating a regular USB floppy drive set of commands).
> 
> In reality, most people just do with Mike is suggesting.  Grab the image and 
> then mount it as a virtual floppy and read the files/dirs as needed.
> 
> Jim
> 
> -- 
> Jim Brain
> br...@jbrain.com
> www.jbrain.com

My thanks to all that answered.  I’ll probably pick up a GreaseWeazel at some 
point.  Right now I’m trying to judge my need.  I’ve only found a fraction of 
the 5.25” floppies I should have.  For that matter, I’ve only found about 60% 
of the 3.5” floppies I should have.  I’m mystified as to where three big boxes 
are, and those include the bulk of my 5.25” floppies.

Realistically that’s good enough Jim, though I find the way the 3.5” floppies 
are working to be quite useful.  I can take a look at what’s on them, and in 
many cases, I just pull the files off.  As there is no reason to image them.

Zane

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] LINC-8 sells for $2,150

[Bob Roswell via cctalk]

Confirmed that the LINC in question is now at the Computer Museum @ System 
Source
This one is in great condition (except for the large live spider)  Pictures 
from unloading the truck
https://photos.app.goo.gl/2GvqTQukSEEnyoQp8


Bob Roswell
mus...@syssrc.com
https://museum.syssrc.com

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] LINC-8 sells for $2,150

[Chris Zach via cctalk]

Cool! Let me know when you get it running, I've got a box of LINCTapes I 
wanted to read from the pdp12.


CZ

On 1/19/2023 4:29 PM, rar--- via cctalk wrote:

We (Computer Museum @ System Source) picked up this unit today.
Here are a few snapshots after we pulled the unit off of the truck.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/2GvqTQukSEEnyoQp8

Bob Roswell

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] LINC-8 sells for $2,150

[rar via cctalk]

The machine is in great condition.  It was (carefully) turned on this evening!  
Blinking Lights!
Bob Roswell

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] LINC-8 sells for $2,150

[Tom Hunter via cctalk]

You got an amazing bargain. I was expecting at least a magnitude higher
price.

On Fri, 20 Jan 2023, 8:29 am rar--- via cctalk, 
wrote:

> We (Computer Museum @ System Source) picked up this unit today.
> Here are a few snapshots after we pulled the unit off of the truck.
>
> https://photos.app.goo.gl/2GvqTQukSEEnyoQp8
>
> Bob Roswell
>

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] LINC-8 sells for $2,150

[rar--- via cctalk]

We (Computer Museum @ System Source) picked up this unit today.
Here are a few snapshots after we pulled the unit off of the truck.

https://photos.app.goo.gl/2GvqTQukSEEnyoQp8

Bob Roswell

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] LINC-8 sells for $2,150

[h...@dec.dog via cctalk]

it was not LSSM, i asked one of their docents last night.

—
.hush
Got interesting stuff to sell? Let me know!
Looking for DEC, IBM, CDC, SGI, Data General, and more!

> On Wednesday, Jan 18, 2023 at 1:43 PM, Jon Elson via cctalk 
> mailto:cctalk@classiccmp.org)> wrote:
> On 1/17/23 21:34, Wayne S via cctalk wrote:
> > Another forum said a museum
> > in Pa won it.
>
> LSSM (Large Scale Systems Museum)? I just donated some
> stuff to them.
>
> Jon
>

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] LINC-8 sells for $2,150

[Bill Degnan via cctalk]

I am told System Source north of Baltimore, MD

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 1:43 PM Jon Elson via cctalk 
wrote:

> On 1/17/23 21:34, Wayne S via cctalk wrote:
> > Another forum said a museum
> >   in Pa won it.
>
> LSSM  (Large Scale Systems Museum)?  I just donated some
> stuff to them.
>
> Jon
>
>

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] LINC-8 sells for $2,150

[Jon Elson via cctalk]

On 1/17/23 21:34, Wayne S via cctalk wrote:

Another forum said a museum
  in Pa won it.


LSSM  (Large Scale Systems Museum)?  I just donated some 
stuff to them.


Jon

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] LINC-8 sells for $2,150

[Mike Loewen via cctalk]

   A smaller one.

On Wed, 18 Jan 2023, Bill Degnan wrote:


Didnt they already have a LINC?
B

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 12:15 AM Mike Loewen via cctalk 
wrote:



No, it went to the System Source museum in Huntsville, MD.

On Tue, 17 Jan 2023, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote:


So it must have gone to the LSSM.  It did not go to kennett classic.

Maybe

the "computer church" in Parkesburg bought it.
BIll

On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 10:35 PM Wayne S via cctalk <

cctalk@classiccmp.org>

wrote:


Another forum said a museum
 in Pa won it.


Sent from my iPhone


On Jan 17, 2023, at 17:55, Tony Jones via cctalk <

cctalk@classiccmp.org>

wrote:


On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 5:52 PM Bill Degnan via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:


That bwas a good price I think.



Yes, just imagine all the cool things you could do with it :-)






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




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

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] LINC-8 sells for $2,150

[Bill Degnan via cctalk]

Didnt they already have a LINC?
B

On Wed, Jan 18, 2023, 12:15 AM Mike Loewen via cctalk 
wrote:

>
> No, it went to the System Source museum in Huntsville, MD.
>
> On Tue, 17 Jan 2023, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote:
>
> > So it must have gone to the LSSM.  It did not go to kennett classic.
> Maybe
> > the "computer church" in Parkesburg bought it.
> > BIll
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 10:35 PM Wayne S via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Another forum said a museum
> >>  in Pa won it.
> >>
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >>
> >>> On Jan 17, 2023, at 17:55, Tony Jones via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 5:52 PM Bill Degnan via cctalk <
> >>> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >>>
>  That bwas a good price I think.
> 
> >>>
> >>> Yes, just imagine all the cool things you could do with it :-)
> >>
> >
>
> Mike Loewen mloe...@cpumagic.scol.pa.us
> Old Technology  http://q7.neurotica.com/Oldtech/

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] LINC-8 sells for $2,150

[Chris Zach via cctalk]

Does it have a floating point unit? You could mine bitcoins

C

On 1/17/2023 8:55 PM, Tony Jones via cctalk wrote:

On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 5:52 PM Bill Degnan via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:


That bwas a good price I think.



Yes, just imagine all the cool things you could do with it :-)

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] LINC-8 sells for $2,150

[Mike Loewen via cctalk]

   Correction: Hunt Valley, MD.

On Wed, 18 Jan 2023, Mike Loewen via cctalk wrote:



  No, it went to the System Source museum in Huntsville, MD.

On Tue, 17 Jan 2023, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote:


 So it must have gone to the LSSM.  It did not go to kennett classic.
 Maybe
 the "computer church" in Parkesburg bought it.
 BIll

 On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 10:35 PM Wayne S via cctalk
 
 wrote:


 Another forum said a museum
  in Pa won it.


 Sent from my iPhone


 On Jan 17, 2023, at 17:55, Tony Jones via cctalk 

 wrote:


 On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 5:52 PM Bill Degnan via cctalk <
 cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:


 That bwas a good price I think.



 Yes, just imagine all the cool things you could do with it :-)






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



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

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] LINC-8 sells for $2,150

[Mike Loewen via cctalk]

   No, it went to the System Source museum in Huntsville, MD.

On Tue, 17 Jan 2023, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote:


So it must have gone to the LSSM.  It did not go to kennett classic.  Maybe
the "computer church" in Parkesburg bought it.
BIll

On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 10:35 PM Wayne S via cctalk 
wrote:


Another forum said a museum
 in Pa won it.


Sent from my iPhone


On Jan 17, 2023, at 17:55, Tony Jones via cctalk 

wrote:


On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 5:52 PM Bill Degnan via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:


That bwas a good price I think.



Yes, just imagine all the cool things you could do with it :-)






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

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] LINC-8 sells for $2,150

[Bill Degnan via cctalk]

So it must have gone to the LSSM.  It did not go to kennett classic.  Maybe
the "computer church" in Parkesburg bought it.
BIll

On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 10:35 PM Wayne S via cctalk 
wrote:

> Another forum said a museum
>  in Pa won it.
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Jan 17, 2023, at 17:55, Tony Jones via cctalk 
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 5:52 PM Bill Degnan via cctalk <
> > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >
> >> That bwas a good price I think.
> >>
> >
> > Yes, just imagine all the cool things you could do with it :-)
>

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] LINC-8 sells for $2,150

[Wayne S via cctalk]

Another forum said a museum
 in Pa won it.


Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 17, 2023, at 17:55, Tony Jones via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 5:52 PM Bill Degnan via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> 
>> That bwas a good price I think.
>> 
> 
> Yes, just imagine all the cool things you could do with it :-)

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] LINC-8 sells for $2,150

[Tony Jones via cctalk]

On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 5:52 PM Bill Degnan via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> That bwas a good price I think.
>

Yes, just imagine all the cool things you could do with it :-)

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] LINC-8 sells for $2,150

[Bill Degnan via cctalk]

I planned to bid but forgot...live pretty nearby too I could have picked
up.  Oh well.  Thatbwas a good price I think.
B

On Tue, Jan 17, 2023, 8:44 PM Zane Healy via cctalk 
wrote:

> Yes, but they have to move it now!
>
> Zane
>
>
>
> > On Jan 17, 2023, at 5:09 PM, Sellam Abraham via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >
> > That LINC-8 sold for $2,150.  A total bargain.
> >
> >
> https://hibid.com/lot/143159802/digital-equipment-corp-linc-eight-vintage
> >
> > Sellam
>
>

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] LINC-8 sells for $2,150

[Zane Healy via cctalk]

Yes, but they have to move it now!

Zane 



> On Jan 17, 2023, at 5:09 PM, Sellam Abraham via cctalk 
>  wrote:
> 
> That LINC-8 sold for $2,150.  A total bargain.
> 
> https://hibid.com/lot/143159802/digital-equipment-corp-linc-eight-vintage
> 
> Sellam

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: long lived media (Was: Damage to CD-R from CD Sleeve

[Zane Healy via cctalk]

On Jan 17, 2023, at 2:02 AM, Peter Corlett via cctalk  
wrote:
> 
> If you mean CHKDSK.EXE, it's broadly equivalent to Unix fsck plus a surface
> scan, and all fsck does is check and repair filesystem _metadata_. If the
> metadata is corrupt then that's a good sign that the data itself is also
> toast, but a successful verification of the metadata does not tell you
> anything useful about the data itself.

And this is where having Optical Discs help.  As part of my project, I’ve found 
backups from as far back as ’97, and as a result, recovered data that I’d lost 
by ’99.  That includes an update to a book that can no longer be found on the 
Internet, and all the code for a Shareware program I wrote in ’96/97.

The 3-2-1 rule says you should have at least 3 copies of your data, including 
two on different types of media, and a 3rd copy off-site.

Zane

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Liam Proven via cctalk]

On Mon, 9 Jan 2023 at 03:45, Ethan Dicks via cctalk
 wrote:

> I have a memory of installing Windows 95 on a monochrome 386SX laptop
> w/4MB of RAM in August, 1995 at McMurdo because that's the equipment
> we had on hand when Win95 arrived on the continent. It was
> unpleasantly slow but it did run.
>
> Way better on a 486 w/8MB.

Oh my word yes.

But the surprising thing was that it did work, my careful
benchmarking, using MS Office, Photoshop and some other real apps,
automated with macros, showed that MS' optimization work had gone in
the right places.

WfWg 3.11 with 32-bit disk access and 32-bit file access had a fast
disk subsystem, but it wasn't able to adjust cache sizes on the fly.
You set min/max sizes and that was that.

W95 could shrink them to next to nothing if it needed.

Result: W95 started slower and felt slower on a very low-end machine,
such as a 386 with 4MB, the min spec. WfWg 3.11 started quicker and
was much more responsive.

But put both through the same set of demanding exercises in real apps,
doing a lot of work, generating documents, outputting info over OLE
into other apps and things, and W95 ran the whole benchmark suite
quicker.

It _felt_ slower but it actually traded off responsive feel for doing
big demanding jobs faster overall.

In comparison, an OS that went the other way was BeOS, which was tuned
to feel maximally responsive at all times... and for the most part it
didn't _have_ big demanding apps that could be scripted into long
heavy workloads, so BeOS felt much massively quicker on
turn-of-the-century PCs.





-- 
Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lpro...@gmail.com
Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven
UK: (+44) 7939-087884 ~ Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Ethan Dicks via cctalk]

On Sun, Jan 8, 2023 at 11:52 AM Liam Proven via cctalk
 wrote:
> > Win95/Win98 would be happy with a PC/AT 286, with appropriate RAM
>
> Nope. 32-bit only. 386DX or later. I tried it and benchmarked it at
> the time of release. And it beat WfWg 3.11 by a significant margin, to
> everyone's amazement.

I have a memory of installing Windows 95 on a monochrome 386SX laptop
w/4MB of RAM in August, 1995 at McMurdo because that's the equipment
we had on hand when Win95 arrived on the continent. It was
unpleasantly slow but it did run.

Way better on a 486 w/8MB.

-ethan

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Liam Proven via cctalk]

On Fri, 23 Dec 2022 at 07:54, Chuck Guzis via cctalk
 wrote:

> Well, if you want to pedantic about it, you certainly could emulate a
> 32-bit processor on any reasonably Turing-equivalent processor, given
> sufficient memory.  It might be incredibly slow, but you could do it.

Noted Australian Mac hacker Dana Silbera -- "nanoraptor" on Twitter --
got Mac OS X to boot on a 68040 Mac this way. EXTREMELY slowly, in the
PearPC PowerPC emulator, compiled on 680x0 Linux, IIRC.

It took 2 days to show the desktop or something.

-- 
Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lpro...@gmail.com
Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven
UK: (+44) 7939-087884 ~ Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Liam Proven via cctalk]

On Thu, 22 Dec 2022 at 23:41, Fred Cisin via cctalk
 wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Dec 2022, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote:
> > You've apparently never heard of Tony Duell: last I read he was running
> > Windows 98 on an IBM PC/XT or something like that :)

Linux on a heavily-upgraded PC-AT with a '386 board in it, I believe.

> Tony,
> are you around?

He is, still posts occasionally, and I believe he has a more modern PC now. :-)

> Win95/Win98 would be happy with a PC/AT 286, with appropriate RAM

Nope. 32-bit only. 386DX or later. I tried it and benchmarked it at
the time of release. And it beat WfWg 3.11 by a significant margin, to
everyone's amazement.

-- 
Liam Proven ~ Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk ~ gMail/gTalk/FB: lpro...@gmail.com
Twitter/LinkedIn: lproven ~ Skype: liamproven
UK: (+44) 7939-087884 ~ Czech [+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal]: (+420) 702-829-053

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Bill Gunshannon via cctalk]

On 12/22/22 22:31, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:


Software development calls for more speed, for decent compile, assmble, 
and link times.




Come on Fred.  You have been around long enough to know this isn't
really true.  It's nice to have but we did just fine developing real
software (not Candy Crush Saga) back when turnaround time on a compile
could easily be more than 24 hours.  The things you mention above have
only made developers more lazy.

bill

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Chris via cctalk]

 




On Friday, December 23, 2022, 01:54:57 AM EST, Chuck Guzis via cctalk 
 wrote:


On 12/22/22 18:45, Glen Slick via cctalk wrote:

> Shirley none of you are serious about a 32-bit (at least partially)
> operating system being able to execute on a 286 processor.
>
> You couldn't even run Windows 3.1 in Enhanced mode on a 286 processor.

Well, if you want to pedantic about it, you certainly could emulate a
32-bit processor on any reasonably Turing-equivalent processor, given
sufficient memory. It might be incredibly slow, but you could do it.

--Chuck

I was going to say assembly language texts and maybe even Intel docs give 
examples of substituting 2 or more instructions to replace a newer processors 
instructions, that the earlier one never heard of. Not sure if that's what Fred 
was talking about.

Who cares about W95/98. I want to see NT 4.0 running on PC Peanut.  

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

On 12/22/22 18:45, Glen Slick via cctalk wrote:
> Shirley none of you are serious about a 32-bit (at least partially)
> operating system being able to execute on a 286 processor.
>
> You couldn't even run Windows 3.1 in Enhanced mode on a 286 processor.
Well, if you want to pedantic about it, you certainly could emulate a
32-bit processor on any reasonably Turing-equivalent processor, given
sufficient memory.  It might be incredibly slow, but you could do it.

--Chuck

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Tony Duell via cctalk]

On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 10:41 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk
 wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Dec 2022, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote:
> > You've apparently never heard of Tony Duell: last I read he was running
> > Windows 98 on an IBM PC/XT or something like that :)
>
> Tony,
> are you around?

QSL

The only 'classic' Windows system I have is an HP150. Of course that
is a specially modified version of Windows1 (doesn't even have
overlapping windows)

Alas I have had to get a more modern PC to have access to the internet
and this list. I don't regard it as a computer. I do not know how to
program it, I do not know how to interface it. It does what the
manufacturers want, not what I want. And we call this progress.

Still got all my classics though, and a few more. Spent the last
couple of months sorting out a strange 68020 box called a Stride 440.
I guess that's on-topic here.

-tony

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

Win95/Win98 would be happy with a PC/AT 286, with appropriate RAM

On Thu, 22 Dec 2022, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:

I don't think "happy" is how I would describe that.
Would it run?  Maybe.
Would I want to run it like that?  Nope.  Not at all.

I stand corrected.
"Run", no.
"limp along", yes
It could do a few useful things; but was far from suitable for general
purpose.




On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 6:46 PM Glen Slick via cctalk 
wrote:

Shirley none of you are serious about a 32-bit (at least partially)
operating system being able to execute on a 286 processor.

You couldn't even run Windows 3.1 in Enhanced mode on a 286 processor.


On Thu, 22 Dec 2022, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote:


Seems a bit impossible to me as well but Fred has made computers do things
that would make ordinary men involuntarily lose their bladder so I look
forward to the story/explanation.


Well, some of that was just being ignorant that certain things weren't 
"possible" until after they were done.


but, really, nothing fancy.
If you have A computer, and need it to do many different things 
adequately, you have much greater requirements, than if you have MANY 
computers, many of which are dedicated to specific tasks.


"Telephone log", "order entry", "order processing", "bookkeeping and 
accounting" don't require much; "documentation" and "desktop publishing"
need a bit more, but different needs.  And NONE of those should EVER be on 
the same machines used for software development and testing.


Software development calls for more speed, for decent compile, assmble, 
and link times.


Software testing must be done on a variety of machines, specifically 
including ones at the level of the customer.
XenoCopy 1.000 was tested on 5150.  And that was ALL that it ran 
on.  Changes had to be made when "compatible" machines came out.


Many companies make the mistake of providing state of the art machines to 
their testers, who therefore don't experience the kinds of problems that 
the customers get on crappy machines.


For example, when an operating system company uses high end RELIABLE 
machines for testing, they don't experience the problems, and end up with 
very poor error handling.


For example, Microsoft was unaware that a disk error, even a minor one, 
could/would corrupt the content being written to disk by write cacheing in 
SMARTDRV.  When that was reported to them by Win3.1 beta testers, their 
response was LITERALLY, "That's a hardware issue; NOT OUR PROBLEM."  They 
had to do a major free "update" towards DOS 6.2x because of that (SMARTDRV 
was the only issue that actually forced that free update; the "problems 
with disk compression" were virrtually ALL SMARTDRV.)


--
Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Will Cooke via cctalk]

> On 12/22/2022 8:45 PM CST Glen Slick via cctalk 
> 
> Shirley none of you are serious about a 32-bit (at least partially)
> operating system being able to execute on a 286 processor.
> 
> You couldn't even run Windows 3.1 in Enhanced mode on a 286 processor.
> 
> >
Well, there's always Linux on an 8 bit microcontroller...
https://hackaday.com/2012/03/28/building-the-worst-linux-pc-ever/

Will

I do not think you can name many great inventions that have been made by 
married men. Nikola Tesla

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Sellam Abraham via cctalk]

Seems a bit impossible to me as well but Fred has made computers do things
that would make ordinary men involuntarily lose their bladder so I look
forward to the story/explanation.

Sellam

On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 6:46 PM Glen Slick via cctalk 
wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 22, 2022, 6:16 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk  >
> wrote:
>
> > >> Win95/Win98 would be happy with a PC/AT 286, with appropriate RAM
> >
> > On Thu, 22 Dec 2022, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
> > > I don't think "happy" is how I would describe that.
> > > Would it run?  Maybe.
> > > Would I want to run it like that?  Nope.  Not at all.
> >
> > I stand corrected.
> > "Run", no.
> > "limp along", yes
> > It could do a few useful things; but was far from suitable for general
> > purpose.
> >
>
> Shirley none of you are serious about a 32-bit (at least partially)
> operating system being able to execute on a 286 processor.
>
> You couldn't even run Windows 3.1 in Enhanced mode on a 286 processor.
>
> >
>

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Glen Slick via cctalk]

On Thu, Dec 22, 2022, 6:16 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk 
wrote:

> >> Win95/Win98 would be happy with a PC/AT 286, with appropriate RAM
>
> On Thu, 22 Dec 2022, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:
> > I don't think "happy" is how I would describe that.
> > Would it run?  Maybe.
> > Would I want to run it like that?  Nope.  Not at all.
>
> I stand corrected.
> "Run", no.
> "limp along", yes
> It could do a few useful things; but was far from suitable for general
> purpose.
>

Shirley none of you are serious about a 32-bit (at least partially)
operating system being able to execute on a 286 processor.

You couldn't even run Windows 3.1 in Enhanced mode on a 286 processor.

>

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

Win95/Win98 would be happy with a PC/AT 286, with appropriate RAM


On Thu, 22 Dec 2022, Grant Taylor via cctalk wrote:

I don't think "happy" is how I would describe that.
Would it run?  Maybe.
Would I want to run it like that?  Nope.  Not at all.


I stand corrected.
"Run", no.
"limp along", yes
It could do a few useful things; but was far from suitable for general 
purpose.


"Happy"??!?  as in a "happy holiday season"

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Grant Taylor via cctalk]

On 12/22/22 2:24 PM, Zane Healy via cctalk wrote:

For PC’s, being able to run WinXP is an interesting cutoff


Why use a cut off that's based on a date?

After all, the list is a moving / sliding window.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Grant Taylor via cctalk]

On 12/22/22 3:41 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:

Win95/Win98 would be happy with a PC/AT 286, with appropriate RAM


I don't think "happy" is how I would describe that.

Would it run?  Maybe.

Would I want to run it like that?  Nope.  Not at all.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

On Thu, 22 Dec 2022, Jim Brain via cctalk wrote:


On 12/22/2022 5:02 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:


Another possible exception for banning XP:
I think that the OQO is interesting enough to call for inclusion.
It is a handheld, running XP.   Screen slides partway off to reveal a 
keyboard.


/me looks at his OQO 2, which still works (and has XP on it, as I recall).  
Battery is no more, though.


it has the docking station as well.  Bought new in 2005 or something.


There is a common problem, that if that battery is discharged below some 
threshold, it won't charge on the normal charger(s).  But, SOMETIMES, if 
you open the battery and force a little bit of charge into it, sometimes 
that will revive it.


--
Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Jim Brain via cctalk]

On 12/22/2022 5:02 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:


Another possible exception for banning XP:
I think that the OQO is interesting enough to call for inclusion.
It is a handheld, running XP.   Screen slides partway off to reveal a 
keyboard.


/me looks at his OQO 2, which still works (and has XP on it, as I 
recall).  Battery is no more, though.


it has the docking station as well.  Bought new in 2005 or something.

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

We used to shun anything newer than and including the IBM PC but
time.marches on.  You're safe if you discuss systems produced before 1990.
After that put an OT in the front of your subject so as not to offend the
purists.  Personally I think anything built after 1995 is too new for
cctalk, but thats just me.

As mentioned elsewhere, the old "10 year" rule is long irrelevant.
I think 1995 is a good general cut-off for a strictly time-based
threshold, but it's not a hard boundary - PPC Macs I would think
should still be in bounds.

A softer rule would probably be "(nearly) anything goes except
nearly-current Windows PCs".  If a machine can run WinXP, it's too
new.  Also as mentioned, there are plenty of lists about modern PCs.


On Thu, 22 Dec 2022, Zane Healy via cctalk wrote:
For PC’s, being able to run WinXP is an interesting cutoff, and I 
think makes sense.


Another possible exception for banning XP:
I think that the OQO is interesting enough to call for inclusion.
It is a handheld, running XP.   Screen slides partway off to reveal a 
keyboard.


--
Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

On Thu, 22 Dec 2022, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote:

You've apparently never heard of Tony Duell: last I read he was running
Windows 98 on an IBM PC/XT or something like that :)


Tony,
are you around?

My experience was that Windoze 3.00 was the last that could be installed 
on an 8088.
Win 3.10 and above demanded at least a few K of RAM above the 1MB 
boundary. (Himem.sys, A20)  You could easily get away (3.10, 3.11) with 
512K plus 64K addressed with A20.
There MIGHT be some clever tricks to fool the SETUP program, which also 
installed SMARTDRV.



Win95/Win98 would be happy with a PC/AT 286, with appropriate RAM

--
Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Sellam Abraham via cctalk]

On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 1:31 PM Zane Healy via cctalk 
wrote:

> For PC’s, being able to run WinXP is an interesting cutoff, and I think
> makes sense.

Zane
>

You've apparently never heard of Tony Duell: last I read he was running
Windows 98 on an IBM PC/XT or something like that :)

Sellam

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Zane Healy via cctalk]

On Dec 22, 2022, at 11:29 AM, Ethan Dicks via cctalk  
wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 5:35 PM Bill Degnan via cctalk
>  wrote:
>> We used to shun anything newer than and including the IBM PC but
>> time.marches on.  You're safe if you discuss systems produced before 1990.
>> After that put an OT in the front of your subject so as not to offend the
>> purists.  Personally I think anything built after 1995 is too new for
>> cctalk, but thats just me.
> 
> As mentioned elsewhere, the old "10 year" rule is long irrelevant.
> 
> I think 1995 is a good general cut-off for a strictly time-based
> threshold, but it's not a hard boundary - PPC Macs I would think
> should still be in bounds.
> 
> A softer rule would probably be "(nearly) anything goes except
> nearly-current Windows PCs".  If a machine can run WinXP, it's too
> new.  Also as mentioned, there are plenty of lists about modern PCs.
> 
> -Ethan


For PC’s, being able to run WinXP is an interesting cutoff, and I think makes 
sense.  Though in my case, my need for WinXP is due to a 35mm film scanner that 
only works with the OEM software, and that only runs on WinXP.  Currently I use 
it via Parallels Desktop running on a 2010 Mac Pro.  People lucky enough to 
have drum scanners run them with potentially older hardware, especially if 
connected to a Mac.

I’ll argue that Intel-based Macs or newer are off-topic, and I say that even 
though I’m a heavy user of Macs, even 10+ year old ones, including having 
software that only runs on even older ones.

I’d also argue pretty much any DEC Alpha, Sun, HP-UX, SGI IRIX, or non-PC IBM 
system is on topic.  Even the current IBM z16 Mainframe is something of a 
classic in my mind. :-)

Zane

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Sellam Abraham via cctalk]

On Thu, Dec 22, 2022, 9:51 AM Zane Healy  wrote:

>
> Having seen another of your posts, I’m left to wonder how many of us had
> our eyes opened by this list back in 1997.  In my case having worked on
> some systems decidedly “vintage” systems, prior to joining the list helped
> spark my interest.  That and my love of Operating Systems.  I want to say
> that I found the list after picking up my first couple vintage computers,
> back when you could find them at Goodwill cheap.
>

We all in some way owe a debt of gratitude to Bill Whitson (wherever he is
these days) for bringing us all together and being the impetus for so much
of what this hobby has become today.

Sellam

[cctalk] Re: [SPAM] Re: what is on topic?

[Zane Healy via cctalk]

Anything up to 64-bit has been on topic over the life of this list.  Though 
64-bit initially was pushing it, less so now, as I’d definitely consider 
something like a Sun Ultra 2, or DEC Alpha to be very much on topic.  I 
definitely participated in discussions of early Macintosh systems back around 
’97.  I doubt I participated much (if at all) in discussions of early PC’s.  
I’ve always viewed discussion of off-topic PC’s to be of more interest, though 
I am starting to look at vintage PC’s a bit differently (simply due to wanting 
to still access some vintage software, and needing to move off Parallels 
Desktop on my Mac).

While I probably wouldn’t want to participate in a discussion of them, I’d 
argue that a “Willamette” Pentium 4 is sufficiently vintage, and something of 
an odd-ball today.  Same with any PPC based Mac.  While I have Intel based 
Mac’s that are 10+ old, I don’t consider them to be classic, especially as one 
is still in nearly daily use.

I like your proposal of, "don't bring up boring modern topics that have a 
better home somewhere else."

Having seen another of your posts, I’m left to wonder how many of us had our 
eyes opened by this list back in 1997.  In my case having worked on some 
systems decidedly “vintage” systems, prior to joining the list helped spark my 
interest.  That and my love of Operating Systems.  I want to say that I found 
the list after picking up my first couple vintage computers, back when you 
could find them at Goodwill cheap. 

Zane



> On Dec 21, 2022, at 11:58 AM, Sellam Abraham via cctalk 
>  wrote:
> 
> 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

RE: Spam

[Chris Long via cctalk]

I actually thought the spam most was better than some of the usual postings
on here!

-Original Message-
From: cctalk  On Behalf Of Peter Coghlan via
cctalk
Sent: 01 September 2020 09:01
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts 
Subject: Re: Spam

Paul Koning wrote:
> > On Aug 31, 2020, at 6:55 PM, Peter Coghlan via cctalk
 wrote:
> >
> > Anybody else on cctech/cctalk receive a blatant spam today from an 
> > outfit called "SparkPost" with "OptIn Live" in the subject?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Peter Coghlan.
>
> Nope.
>
> Keep in mind that criminals often forge source addresses.  So while it 
> may say it came from cctalk, it doesn't mean it actually did.  Looking 
> at the full headers will often tell you, if you care to go to the trouble.
>

The spam I got did not come from cctalk.  I didn't say it came from cctalk,
I said it came from an outfit called "SparkPost".  I asked if anyone else on
cctalk received the same spam because I am attempting to figure out how
SparkPost obtained the email address that I use only for cctalk.

>From the responses received, it appears that other cctalk list members did
not receive the same spam.  This reduces the likelyhood that someone has
subscribed to cctalk specifically to harvest the email addresses of the list
members, a possibility which was advanced on this list a while back.

>
> For example, I get spam every few weeks claiming to be from one 
> specific person on the list here, but it never actually is from that
address.
>

Same here except that it is in regard of the freecycle mailing list rather
than cctalk.

Regards,
Peter Coghlan.

>   paul
>

Re: Spam

[Peter Coghlan via cctalk]

Paul Koning wrote:
> > On Aug 31, 2020, at 6:55 PM, Peter Coghlan via cctalk 
> >  wrote:
> >
> > Anybody else on cctech/cctalk receive a blatant spam today from an outfit
> > called "SparkPost" with "OptIn Live" in the subject?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Peter Coghlan.
>
> Nope.
>
> Keep in mind that criminals often forge source addresses.  So while it may
> say it came from cctalk, it doesn't mean it actually did.  Looking at the
> full headers will often tell you, if you care to go to the trouble.
>

The spam I got did not come from cctalk.  I didn't say it came from cctalk,
I said it came from an outfit called "SparkPost".  I asked if anyone else
on cctalk received the same spam because I am attempting to figure out
how SparkPost obtained the email address that I use only for cctalk.

>From the responses received, it appears that other cctalk list members did
not receive the same spam.  This reduces the likelyhood that someone has
subscribed to cctalk specifically to harvest the email addresses of the
list members, a possibility which was advanced on this list a while back.

>
> For example, I get spam every few weeks claiming to be from one specific
> person on the list here, but it never actually is from that address.
>

Same here except that it is in regard of the freecycle mailing list rather
than cctalk.

Regards,
Peter Coghlan.

>   paul
>

RE: Spam

[Dave Wade via cctalk]

Peter,

I seem to have been receiving various adds for "optimised SMTP" delivery but
not sure if any relate to SparkPost. 
The version of you address with "at" rather than "@" is visible in a couple
of places 

Dave

> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk  On Behalf Of Peter Coghlan
> via cctalk
> Sent: 01 September 2020 09:11
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
> 
> Subject: Re: Spam
> 
> Paul Koning wrote:
> > > On Aug 31, 2020, at 6:55 PM, Peter Coghlan via cctalk
>  wrote:
> > >
> > > Anybody else on cctech/cctalk receive a blatant spam today from an
> > > outfit called "SparkPost" with "OptIn Live" in the subject?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Peter Coghlan.
> >
> > Nope.
> >
> > Keep in mind that criminals often forge source addresses.  So while it
> > may say it came from cctalk, it doesn't mean it actually did.  Looking
> > at the full headers will often tell you, if you care to go to the
trouble.
> >
> 
> The spam I got did not come from cctalk.  I didn't say it came from
cctalk, I
> said it came from an outfit called "SparkPost".  I asked if anyone else on
cctalk
> received the same spam because I am attempting to figure out how
> SparkPost obtained the email address that I use only for cctalk.
> 
> From the responses received, it appears that other cctalk list members did
> not receive the same spam which reduces the likelyhood that someone (ie
> SparkPost) had subscribed to cctalk specifically to harvest the email
> addresses of the list members, a possibility which was advanced on this
list a
> while back.
> 
> >
> > For example, I get spam every few weeks claiming to be from one
> > specific person on the list here, but it never actually is from that
address.
> >
> 
> Same here except that it is in regard of the freecycle mailing list rather
than
> cctalk.
> 
> Regards,
> Peter Coghlan.
> 
> >   paul
> >

Re: Spam

[Peter Coghlan via cctalk]

Paul Koning wrote:
> > On Aug 31, 2020, at 6:55 PM, Peter Coghlan via cctalk 
> >  wrote:
> >
> > Anybody else on cctech/cctalk receive a blatant spam today from an outfit
> > called "SparkPost" with "OptIn Live" in the subject?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Peter Coghlan.
>
> Nope.
>
> Keep in mind that criminals often forge source addresses.  So while it may
> say it came from cctalk, it doesn't mean it actually did.  Looking at the
> full headers will often tell you, if you care to go to the trouble.
>

The spam I got did not come from cctalk.  I didn't say it came from cctalk,
I said it came from an outfit called "SparkPost".  I asked if anyone else
on cctalk received the same spam because I am attempting to figure out
how SparkPost obtained the email address that I use only for cctalk.

>From the responses received, it appears that other cctalk list members did
not receive the same spam which reduces the likelyhood that someone (ie
SparkPost) had subscribed to cctalk specifically to harvest the email
addresses of the list members, a possibility which was advanced on this
list a while back.

>
> For example, I get spam every few weeks claiming to be from one specific
> person on the list here, but it never actually is from that address.
>

Same here except that it is in regard of the freecycle mailing list rather
than cctalk.

Regards,
Peter Coghlan.

>   paul
>

Re: Spam

[dwight via cctalk]

I had troubles with a fellow in England using my email address to mail spam. I 
traced down his IP address and the company that was being used. I sent mail to 
him a couple times and asked him to stop using my address. I then sent copies 
of the junk he was sending to his provider and  within a week it stopped.
Dwight



From: cctalk  on behalf of Tom Hunter via cctalk 

Sent: Monday, August 31, 2020 7:28 PM
To: jim stephens ; General Discussion: On-Topic and 
Off-Topic Posts 
Subject: Re: Spam

Today I received two empty emails from Bill Degnan via this list. No
subject and no message body.
Googled put them into the Spam folder.

Tom Hunter

On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 8:38 AM jim stephens via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

>
>
> On 8/31/2020 3:55 PM, Peter Coghlan via cctalk wrote:
> > Anybody else on cctech/cctalk receive a blatant spam today from an outfit
> > called "SparkPost" with "OptIn Live" in the subject?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Peter Coghlan.
> >
> i've found that someone who has had their emails in someones inbox may
> get their emails harvested and added to spam lists.
>
> I've got some past members here who still send spam.
>
> Unfortunately since we want to respond directly thru this to users, the
> email addresses are in the email messages.  If a spam creating exploit
> is through, it will pluck off the sender's email, which is the reply-to
> address.
>
> It may have nothing to do with the list or any user you can determine,
> but sometimes  it does.
>
> Thanks
> JIm
>

Re: Spam

[Lawrence Wilkinson via cctalk]

As a moderator, I am quite sure that no spam actually came through the
list. On a few occasions the spam has come from a list member's address
and gets passed straight through, but that's quite rare.

However the number of spam posts to the list exceeds real posts by a
factor of about 10. So it's quite possible that I will click the wrong
button and you will all get a spam message. For some reason almost all
the current spam is in German.

(And if you can, please don't post messages with spammy subjects like
"Look at this!" if you want it to go through.)

Bill Degnan (or an imposter) did post a couple of empty messages
recently, no great harm done there.

Lawrence


On 1/09/20 12:55 am, Peter Coghlan via cctalk wrote:
> Anybody else on cctech/cctalk receive a blatant spam today from an outfit
> called "SparkPost" with "OptIn Live" in the subject?
>
> Regards,
> Peter Coghlan.

-- 
Lawrence Wilkinson  lawrence at ljw.me.uk
The IBM 360/30 page   http://www.ljw.me.uk/ibm360

Re: Spam

[Tom Hunter via cctalk]

Today I received two empty emails from Bill Degnan via this list. No
subject and no message body.
Googled put them into the Spam folder.

Tom Hunter

On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 8:38 AM jim stephens via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

>
>
> On 8/31/2020 3:55 PM, Peter Coghlan via cctalk wrote:
> > Anybody else on cctech/cctalk receive a blatant spam today from an outfit
> > called "SparkPost" with "OptIn Live" in the subject?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Peter Coghlan.
> >
> i've found that someone who has had their emails in someones inbox may
> get their emails harvested and added to spam lists.
>
> I've got some past members here who still send spam.
>
> Unfortunately since we want to respond directly thru this to users, the
> email addresses are in the email messages.  If a spam creating exploit
> is through, it will pluck off the sender's email, which is the reply-to
> address.
>
> It may have nothing to do with the list or any user you can determine,
> but sometimes  it does.
>
> Thanks
> JIm
>

Re: Spam

[jim stephens via cctalk]

On 8/31/2020 3:55 PM, Peter Coghlan via cctalk wrote:

Anybody else on cctech/cctalk receive a blatant spam today from an outfit
called "SparkPost" with "OptIn Live" in the subject?

Regards,
Peter Coghlan.

i've found that someone who has had their emails in someones inbox may 
get their emails harvested and added to spam lists.


I've got some past members here who still send spam.

Unfortunately since we want to respond directly thru this to users, the 
email addresses are in the email messages.  If a spam creating exploit 
is through, it will pluck off the sender's email, which is the reply-to 
address.


It may have nothing to do with the list or any user you can determine, 
but sometimes  it does.


Thanks
JIm

Re: Spam

[Chris Zach via cctalk]

Yeah, I run spf and DKIM on the crystel.com domain here, I'm not giving 
up my personal bit of string to give google control of my mail. SPF has 
helped a lot to be honest, every once in awhile I get a surge of reports 
from the big guys and I know someone's trying to spoof my From:


Annoying, but we built email to do this because it was a lot more 
efficient to be polite. Pity people are jerks.


C

On 8/31/2020 7:37 PM, Doug Jackson via cctalk wrote:

Not me either,

But I pass all of my email through gmail, and it filters out all of the
spam for me anyway.

A couple of years ago, some helpful person selected my email for sending
millions of messages and it broke my email environment, the only way I
could get it working again was to either abandon my email, or use gmail for
everything.

instant, clean email feed.

Kindest regards,

Doug Jackson

em: d...@doughq.com
ph: 0414 986878

Check out my awesome clocks at www.dougswordclocks.com
Follow my amateur radio adventures at vk1zdj.net

---

Just like an old fashioned letter, this email and any files transmitted
with it should probably be treated as confidential and intended solely for
your own use.

Please note that any interesting spelling is usually my own and may have
been caused by fat thumbs on a tiny tiny keyboard.

Should any part of this message prove to be useful in the event of the
imminent Zombie Apocalypse then the sender bears no personal, legal, or
moral responsibility for any outcome resulting from its usage unless the
result of said usage is the unlikely defeat of the Zombie Hordes in which
case the sender takes full credit without any theoretical or actual legal
liability. :-)

Be nice to your parents.

Go outside and do something awesome - Draw, paint, walk, setup a
radio station, go fishing or sailing - just do something that makes you
happy.

^G ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G- In more laid back days this line would literally
sing ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G




On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 9:33 AM mazzinia--- via cctalk 
wrote:


Not me

-Original Message-
From: cctalk  On Behalf Of Peter Coghlan
via
cctalk
Sent: 01 September 2020 00:55
To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
Subject: Spam

Anybody else on cctech/cctalk receive a blatant spam today from an outfit
called "SparkPost" with "OptIn Live" in the subject?

Regards,
Peter Coghlan.

Re: Spam

[Paul Koning via cctalk]

> On Aug 31, 2020, at 6:55 PM, Peter Coghlan via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> Anybody else on cctech/cctalk receive a blatant spam today from an outfit
> called "SparkPost" with "OptIn Live" in the subject?
> 
> Regards,
> Peter Coghlan.

Nope.

Keep in mind that criminals often forge source addresses.  So while it may say 
it came from cctalk, it doesn't mean it actually did.  Looking at the full 
headers will often tell you, if you care to go to the trouble.

For example, I get spam every few weeks claiming to be from one specific person 
on the list here, but it never actually is from that address.

paul

Re: Spam

[Bill Degnan via cctalk]

Gmail flags a lot of messages from cctalk/tech as spam but I did not get
that one

On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 7:38 PM Doug Jackson via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> Not me either,
>
> But I pass all of my email through gmail, and it filters out all of the
> spam for me anyway.
>
> A couple of years ago, some helpful person selected my email for sending
> millions of messages and it broke my email environment, the only way I
> could get it working again was to either abandon my email, or use gmail for
> everything.
>
> instant, clean email feed.
>
> Kindest regards,
>
> Doug Jackson
>
> em: d...@doughq.com
> ph: 0414 986878
>
> Check out my awesome clocks at www.dougswordclocks.com
> Follow my amateur radio adventures at vk1zdj.net
>
> ---
>
> Just like an old fashioned letter, this email and any files transmitted
> with it should probably be treated as confidential and intended solely for
> your own use.
>
> Please note that any interesting spelling is usually my own and may have
> been caused by fat thumbs on a tiny tiny keyboard.
>
> Should any part of this message prove to be useful in the event of the
> imminent Zombie Apocalypse then the sender bears no personal, legal, or
> moral responsibility for any outcome resulting from its usage unless the
> result of said usage is the unlikely defeat of the Zombie Hordes in which
> case the sender takes full credit without any theoretical or actual legal
> liability. :-)
>
> Be nice to your parents.
>
> Go outside and do something awesome - Draw, paint, walk, setup a
> radio station, go fishing or sailing - just do something that makes you
> happy.
>
> ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G- In more laid back days this line would literally
> sing ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 9:33 AM mazzinia--- via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Not me
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: cctalk  On Behalf Of Peter Coghlan
> > via
> > cctalk
> > Sent: 01 September 2020 00:55
> > To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
> > Subject: Spam
> >
> > Anybody else on cctech/cctalk receive a blatant spam today from an outfit
> > called "SparkPost" with "OptIn Live" in the subject?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Peter Coghlan.
> >
> >
>

Re: Spam

[Doug Jackson via cctalk]

Not me either,

But I pass all of my email through gmail, and it filters out all of the
spam for me anyway.

A couple of years ago, some helpful person selected my email for sending
millions of messages and it broke my email environment, the only way I
could get it working again was to either abandon my email, or use gmail for
everything.

instant, clean email feed.

Kindest regards,

Doug Jackson

em: d...@doughq.com
ph: 0414 986878

Check out my awesome clocks at www.dougswordclocks.com
Follow my amateur radio adventures at vk1zdj.net

---

Just like an old fashioned letter, this email and any files transmitted
with it should probably be treated as confidential and intended solely for
your own use.

Please note that any interesting spelling is usually my own and may have
been caused by fat thumbs on a tiny tiny keyboard.

Should any part of this message prove to be useful in the event of the
imminent Zombie Apocalypse then the sender bears no personal, legal, or
moral responsibility for any outcome resulting from its usage unless the
result of said usage is the unlikely defeat of the Zombie Hordes in which
case the sender takes full credit without any theoretical or actual legal
liability. :-)

Be nice to your parents.

Go outside and do something awesome - Draw, paint, walk, setup a
radio station, go fishing or sailing - just do something that makes you
happy.

^G ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G- In more laid back days this line would literally
sing ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G ^G




On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 9:33 AM mazzinia--- via cctalk 
wrote:

> Not me
>
> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk  On Behalf Of Peter Coghlan
> via
> cctalk
> Sent: 01 September 2020 00:55
> To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
> Subject: Spam
>
> Anybody else on cctech/cctalk receive a blatant spam today from an outfit
> called "SparkPost" with "OptIn Live" in the subject?
>
> Regards,
> Peter Coghlan.
>
>

RE: Spam

[mazzinia--- via cctalk]

Not me

-Original Message-
From: cctalk  On Behalf Of Peter Coghlan via
cctalk
Sent: 01 September 2020 00:55
To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
Subject: Spam

Anybody else on cctech/cctalk receive a blatant spam today from an outfit
called "SparkPost" with "OptIn Live" in the subject?

Regards,
Peter Coghlan.

Re: Spam [was Re: still looking for that stuff?]

[Mouse]

> Firstly, there are many types of unwanted e-mail, and using the term
> SPAM to cover them all is a dis-service.

Using the term SPAM to cover any of them is a disservice - to Hormel,
who has been relatively gracious about the use of "spam" for something
other than their product.

Of course, posting on a list like this is not something trademark law
generally applies to, so it us unlikely to lead to immediate legal
repurcussions.  But it is good to get into appropriate habits, and it
is good to try to cooperate with companies who are trying to cooperate
with us.

> The e-mail in question was not one of those, it was almost certainly
> sent by a criminal attempting to steal and re-sell some ones
> credentials.

It can still be spam.  It was unsolicited and it was email; the only
leg of the UBE tripod that's questionable is the "bulk" one, and I have
little doubt there.

/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTMLmo...@rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email!   7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B

Re: Spam [was Re: still looking for that stuff?]

[drlegendre .]

> Spam should reduce when word gets around that spammers are being
> tortured to death.

I doubt it, some one will invent a religion that says tortured spammers get
to heaven first..

Yeah, wow.. not to put too fine a point on it, HA!



On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 1:26 AM, Dave Wade <dave.g4...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > -Original Message-
> > From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Fred
> Cisin
> > Sent: 11 August 2016 16:38
> > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
> > <cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> > Subject: Re: Spam [was Re: still looking for that stuff?]
> >
> > On Thu, 11 Aug 2016, geneb wrote:
> > > I think it would be more effective to stuff the spammer into a Brazen
> > > Bull and then force his children/family members to light the fire.
> > > Televise it across all media outlets.  Spam should slow to a tiny,
> > > tiny, trickle after one or two of these little events...
> >
>
> Firstly, there are many types of unwanted e-mail, and using the term SPAM
> to
> cover them all is a dis-service.
> A lot of reported SPAM simply comes from lists folks have signed up to, and
> who can't be bothered to un-sign themselves off the list.
>
> The e-mail in question was not one of those, it was almost certainly sent
> by
> a criminal attempting to steal and re-sell some ones credentials.
>
> I am fairly certain the e-mail originated from 102.47.65.89. Sticking that
> into an Internet Search engine reports...
>
> IP General Information
>
> IP Address: 103.47.65.89
> Hostname: 103.47.65.89
> ISP: Zapbytes Technologies Pvt.
>
> Geolocation Information
>
> Continent: Asia (AS)
> Country: India (IN) IN
> City: Delhi
> Latitude: 28.6667 (28°40'0.12" N), Longitude: 77.2167 (77°13'0.12" N)
>
>
> > Spam should reduce when word gets around that spammers are being
> > tortured to death.
>
> I doubt it, some one will invent a religion that says tortured spammers get
> to heaven first..
>
> >
> > Decriminalize spammercide.
> >
> >
> > Spread the word - "spammers are already being murdered."
> >
> >
> Dave
> G4UGM
>
>
>

RE: Spam [was Re: still looking for that stuff?]

[Dave Wade]

> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Fred
Cisin
> Sent: 11 August 2016 16:38
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
> <cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> Subject: Re: Spam [was Re: still looking for that stuff?]
> 
> On Thu, 11 Aug 2016, geneb wrote:
> > I think it would be more effective to stuff the spammer into a Brazen
> > Bull and then force his children/family members to light the fire.
> > Televise it across all media outlets.  Spam should slow to a tiny,
> > tiny, trickle after one or two of these little events...
> 

Firstly, there are many types of unwanted e-mail, and using the term SPAM to
cover them all is a dis-service. 
A lot of reported SPAM simply comes from lists folks have signed up to, and
who can't be bothered to un-sign themselves off the list.

The e-mail in question was not one of those, it was almost certainly sent by
a criminal attempting to steal and re-sell some ones credentials.

I am fairly certain the e-mail originated from 102.47.65.89. Sticking that
into an Internet Search engine reports...

IP General Information

IP Address: 103.47.65.89
Hostname: 103.47.65.89
ISP: Zapbytes Technologies Pvt.

Geolocation Information

Continent: Asia (AS)
Country: India (IN) IN
City: Delhi
Latitude: 28.6667 (28°40'0.12" N), Longitude: 77.2167 (77°13'0.12" N)


> Spam should reduce when word gets around that spammers are being
> tortured to death.

I doubt it, some one will invent a religion that says tortured spammers get
to heaven first..

> 
> Decriminalize spammercide.
> 
> 
> Spread the word - "spammers are already being murdered."
> 
> 
Dave
G4UGM

Re: Spam [was Re: still looking for that stuff?]

[william degnan]

I remember the first time I encountered spam1995 or so using my old
CompuServe account.  One day I was like "what is all this crap?" Now that
was some serious spam going on then.  Today's is nothing like that if you
ask me.  I have a nice filter system on my private server.  Botta bing.
B

-- 
Bill Degnan

Re: Spam [was Re: still looking for that stuff?]

[Ian S. King]

On Thu, Aug 11, 2016 at 9:48 AM, ANDY HOLT  wrote:

>
> >> Spam will not stop until the last spammer is dead.
> >
> > Actually, it's really simple to stop spam.  Simple, not easy.
> >
> > You just need to delegate responsibility along with authority when
> > handing out netblocks, registering domain names, and the like.
>
> When there were only tens of thousands of mail nodes (few of which had
> more than a
> few thousand accounts it was practical to put the responsibility on
> postmasters.
> With tens of millions (often with millions of customers) that is no longer
> so.
>

"Every time you send a spam message, you kill a kitten.  Think of the
kittens.  Unless you're a dog person - then think of the puppies."

-- 
Ian S. King, MSIS, MSCS, Ph.D. Candidate
The Information School 
Dissertation: "Why the Conversation Mattered: Constructing a Sociotechnical
Narrative Through a Design Lens

Archivist, Voices From the Rwanda Tribunal 
Value Sensitive Design Research Lab 

University of Washington

There is an old Vulcan saying: "Only Nixon could go to China."

Re: Spam [was Re: still looking for that stuff?]

[ANDY HOLT]

>> Spam will not stop until the last spammer is dead.
>
> Actually, it's really simple to stop spam.  Simple, not easy.
>
> You just need to delegate responsibility along with authority when
> handing out netblocks, registering domain names, and the like.

When there were only tens of thousands of mail nodes (few of which had more 
than a
few thousand accounts it was practical to put the responsibility on 
postmasters. 
With tens of millions (often with millions of customers) that is no longer so.

Re: Spam [was Re: still looking for that stuff?]

[Fred Cisin]

On Thu, 11 Aug 2016, geneb wrote:
I think it would be more effective to stuff the spammer into a Brazen Bull 
and then force his children/family members to light the fire.  Televise it 
across all media outlets.  Spam should slow to a tiny, tiny, trickle after 
one or two of these little events...


Spam should reduce when word gets around that spammers are being tortured 
to death.


Decriminalize spammercide.


Spread the word - "spammers are already being murdered."

Re: Spam [was Re: still looking for that stuff?]

[geneb]

On Wed, 10 Aug 2016, Mouse wrote:


Spam will not stop until the last spammer is dead.


Actually, it's really simple to stop spam.  Simple, not easy.

You just need to delegate responsibility along with authority when
handing out netblocks, registering domain names, and the like.

I think it would be more effective to stuff the spammer into a Brazen Bull 
and then force his children/family members to light the fire.  Televise it 
across all media outlets.  Spam should slow to a tiny, tiny, trickle after 
one or two of these little events...



g.


--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
http://www.diy-cockpits.org/coll - Go Collimated or Go Home.
Some people collect things for a hobby.  Geeks collect hobbies.

ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
http://scarlet.deltasoft.com - Get it _today_!

Re: Spam [was Re: still looking for that stuff?]

[Todd Goodman]

* Mouse  [160810 21:59]:
[..SNIP..]
> I suppose that's what happens when you put the Department of Commerce
> in charge of something.  As long as it doesn't collapse far enough to
> stop concentrating money in the hands of large corporations, there's
> nothing wrong with it.
> 
> /~\ The ASCII   Mouse
> \ / Ribbon Campaign
>  X  Against HTML  mo...@rodents-montreal.org
> / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B

That's what happens when you put a government in charge of anything.

My $.02,

Todd

Re: Spam [was Re: still looking for that stuff?]

[Mouse]

>> Actually, it's really simple to stop spam.  Simple, not easy.

>> You just need to delegate responsibility along with authority when
>> handing out netblocks, registering domain names, and the like.

> I'm not sure what you're getting at here.  The trouble with email is that th$

That's a technical issue.  The probjlem is not technical.

In a civilized net, I could write to the postmaster at the host that
handed me the spam, who would then either smack down their local user
or chase the pointer to the next hop, as applicable.  Postmasters that
refused to act against abusers would find themselves without
connectivity, because providers would enforce terms-of-service against
them.  (Providers that refused to do so would find themselves without
address space and/or peering.  This chases up the governance pyramid,
hence the remark about needing will-to-enforce at the top.)

Time was - say, back when Jon Postel, rather than the US Department of
Commerce, was the top of the pyramid - back about when the MicroVAX-II
was new, to put it in terms people here can relate to :-) - I could
have lost my access for forging email.  Today?  Today I'd be surprised
if anyone even noticed, much less cared.  And nobody caring, and being
permitted to not care all the way up the governance chain, is exactly
the problem I'm talking about.

I suppose that's what happens when you put the Department of Commerce
in charge of something.  As long as it doesn't collapse far enough to
stop concentrating money in the hands of large corporations, there's
nothing wrong with it.

/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTMLmo...@rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email!   7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B

Re: Spam [was Re: still looking for that stuff?]

[Paul Koning]

> On Aug 10, 2016, at 8:57 PM, Mouse  wrote:
> 
>> Spam will not stop until the last spammer is dead.
> 
> Actually, it's really simple to stop spam.  Simple, not easy.
> 
> You just need to delegate responsibility along with authority when
> handing out netblocks, registering domain names, and the like.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here.  The trouble with email is that the 
addresses you see are just text strings in a protocol that has no security or 
authentication.  The route data in the full headers tend to tell a more 
accurate story, but the "from" string is just a string that carries no weight 
whatsoever.  It's undoubtedly possible to design protocols that don't have this 
defect, but SMTP is not such a protocol.  (Nor is SMTP the only one, witnessing 
the famous "kremvax" hoax.)

paul

Re: [SPAM key] - Re: memory map for RT-11 v 5

[Don North]

On 7/26/2016 7:17 PM, Jerome H. Fine wrote:

On Sunday, July 24th, 2016 at 14::29:59 -0700, Don North wrote:



>On 7/24/2016 8:06 AM, william degnan wrote:


>On Jul 24, 2016 8:58 AM, "Jerome H. Fine"  wrote:


>On Wednesday, July 20th, 2016 at 18:02:44 - 0400, william degnan wrote:
Is there a minimum memory requirement for RT-11 v5?  I was discussing with



Ray Fantini about it today, unsure...anyone know if 16K will work (from
00).

Bill


You need to be more specific!  Starting with V05.00 of RT-11 in 1983,
there were a total of 17 versions released up to V05.07 in 1998, including
sub-versions V05.01B, V05.01C, and V05.04A to V05.04G of RT-11.

Up until V05.05 of RT-11, RT11SJ.SYS required the least memory which
was replaced with RT11SB.SYS for V05.06 and V05.07 of RT-11.

Attempts to boot from RT11SJ.SYS under V05.00 of RT-11 with 24K
bytes of memory were successful.  Attempts to boot with 16K bytes of
memory were unsuccessful.  An RK05 was used as the disk drive since
it is close to the smallest device driver.  The answer to your question
about using 16K bytes of memory is NO for all versions of RT-11 starting with
V05.00 or RT-11.

Attempts to boot from RT11SJ.SYS under V04.00 of RT-11 with 24K
bytes of memory were successful.  Attempts to boot with 16K bytes of
memory were also successful.  An RK05 was used as the disk drive.  The
error message "Insufficient memory" is displayed, but some useful work
might be done with just 16K bytes of memory. However, you did not
ask if useful work being done was one of the criteria?

NOTE that I used the Ersatz-11 emulator to check the above details,
so there might be a difference with actual hardware.

If you have any more questions, please ask.

Jerome Fine


Thanks for the details.  I had been trying to boot rt-11 v5.3 on a 16k core
11/40 using RL11 (rl02) and it did not work.   The system was unable to
complete the initialization.  CPU diagnostics passed, I could load BASIC
papertape.  RL11 working correctly.  In this context I posted my question.

After I posted my message here I loaded up simh and emulated an 11 with
32k.  RT-11 v5.3 disk boots.  When I re-built the system and reduced to
16k, I could not boot, bombed.

One thing to remember is 16KW in a pdp11 is not the same thing that simh
refers to when one sets the CPU to 16K.  WWW do not all make this
distinction clearly.  I get it, just making this comment for future readers
of this thread.

Bill



RT-11 v5.03 single job monitor boots fine and runs in just 32KB (16KW) of 
memory.


You need to be more specific about how you specify the memory configuration 
(words vs bytes).


DEC routinely specified everything in KW (words) but most users and tools use 
KB (bytes) nowadays.


Note that to force RT11SJ (vs RT11FB) to boot on the below image I booted 
first using FB

in a larger memory configuration, did a:

COPY/BOOT DL1:RT11SJ.SYS DL1:

to force it to boot using the SJ monitor the next time.


NOTE that while the above command is REQUIRED to perform a
hardware boot (from boot ROMs on real hardware or from
within the SimH emulator.  Starting at least with V04.00 of RT-11,
a software boot (which uses DUP.SAV) is supported from within
RT-11 from within any disk (with the files required to support being
a System Disk) to boot any specific monitor file (in this example
RT11SJ.SYS) using the RT-11 command:
BOOT  DL1:RT11SJ


Bill's original issue is he wanted to boot RT-11 v5 on a 16KW 11/40 system, so 
the only

option that would work would be to boot directly to RT11SJ. Booting into XM or 
FB
and then rebooting into SJ via executing the BOOT command is not possible in 
such
a memory configuration.


Thus even if there has been the RT-11 command to set up a
boot block on a specific disk for a specific RT-11 monitor
file, it is possible to override the boot block and use any
qualified RT-11 monitor file via an RT-11 software boot
(which uses DUP.SAV).

It is also possible from within RT-11 to force the use of the Primary
Boot Code (which is placed in block zero via the COPY/BOOT
command) via the RT-11 command:
BOOT/FOREIGN  DL1:
If the user includes a specific monitor in the command:
BOOT/FOREIGN  DL1:RT11FB
then the specified monitor file is ignored and the boot code in
block zero of DL1: (placed there via the COPY/BOOT command)
is used instead along with the actual monitor file that had been
specified during the COPY/BOOT command.



Don


PDP-11 simulator V4.0-0 Betagit commit id: 4065f47f


This portion of my reply contains many questions.  If possible,
answers to all of them would be appreciated, not just the first
question.

Is this the latest version of SimH?  Also, is is possible to support
a VT100 display.  I have heard that telnet can be used, but I have
never been able to do so.  Since I always use the RT-11 SL:
(Single Line Editor) device driver to support a command stack,
it is essential to support a VT100 display, etc. in order to use
the ARROW keys to 

Re: [SPAM key] - Re: memory map for RT-11 v 5

[Jerome H. Fine]

On Sunday, July 24th, 2016 at 14::29:59 -0700, Don North wrote:



>On 7/24/2016 8:06 AM, william degnan wrote:

>On Jul 24, 2016 8:58 AM, "Jerome H. Fine"  
wrote:


>On Wednesday, July 20th, 2016 at 18:02:44 - 0400, william degnan 
wrote:
Is there a minimum memory requirement for RT-11 v5?  I was 
discussing with


Ray Fantini about it today, unsure...anyone know if 16K will work 
(from

00).

Bill


You need to be more specific!  Starting with V05.00 of RT-11 in 1983,
there were a total of 17 versions released up to V05.07 in 1998, 
including

sub-versions V05.01B, V05.01C, and V05.04A to V05.04G of RT-11.

Up until V05.05 of RT-11, RT11SJ.SYS required the least memory which
was replaced with RT11SB.SYS for V05.06 and V05.07 of RT-11.

Attempts to boot from RT11SJ.SYS under V05.00 of RT-11 with 24K
bytes of memory were successful.  Attempts to boot with 16K bytes of
memory were unsuccessful.  An RK05 was used as the disk drive since
it is close to the smallest device driver.  The answer to your question
about using 16K bytes of memory is NO for all versions of RT-11 
starting with

V05.00 or RT-11.

Attempts to boot from RT11SJ.SYS under V04.00 of RT-11 with 24K
bytes of memory were successful.  Attempts to boot with 16K bytes of
memory were also successful.  An RK05 was used as the disk drive.  The
error message "Insufficient memory" is displayed, but some useful work
might be done with just 16K bytes of memory. However, you did not
ask if useful work being done was one of the criteria?

NOTE that I used the Ersatz-11 emulator to check the above details,
so there might be a difference with actual hardware.

If you have any more questions, please ask.

Jerome Fine


Thanks for the details.  I had been trying to boot rt-11 v5.3 on a 
16k core

11/40 using RL11 (rl02) and it did not work.   The system was unable to
complete the initialization.  CPU diagnostics passed, I could load BASIC
papertape.  RL11 working correctly.  In this context I posted my 
question.


After I posted my message here I loaded up simh and emulated an 11 with
32k.  RT-11 v5.3 disk boots.  When I re-built the system and reduced to
16k, I could not boot, bombed.

One thing to remember is 16KW in a pdp11 is not the same thing that simh
refers to when one sets the CPU to 16K.  WWW do not all make this
distinction clearly.  I get it, just making this comment for future 
readers

of this thread.

Bill



RT-11 v5.03 single job monitor boots fine and runs in just 32KB (16KW) 
of memory.


You need to be more specific about how you specify the memory 
configuration (words vs bytes).


DEC routinely specified everything in KW (words) but most users and 
tools use KB (bytes) nowadays.


Note that to force RT11SJ (vs RT11FB) to boot on the below image I 
booted first using FB

in a larger memory configuration, did a:

COPY/BOOT DL1:RT11SJ.SYS DL1:

to force it to boot using the SJ monitor the next time.


NOTE that while the above command is REQUIRED to perform a
hardware boot (from boot ROMs on real hardware or from
within the SimH emulator.  Starting at least with V04.00 of RT-11,
a software boot (which uses DUP.SAV) is supported from within
RT-11 from within any disk (with the files required to support being
a System Disk) to boot any specific monitor file (in this example
RT11SJ.SYS) using the RT-11 command:
BOOT  DL1:RT11SJ

Thus even if there has been the RT-11 command to set up a
boot block on a specific disk for a specific RT-11 monitor
file, it is possible to override the boot block and use any
qualified RT-11 monitor file via an RT-11 software boot
(which uses DUP.SAV).

It is also possible from within RT-11 to force the use of the Primary
Boot Code (which is placed in block zero via the COPY/BOOT
command) via the RT-11 command:
BOOT/FOREIGN  DL1:
If the user includes a specific monitor in the command:
BOOT/FOREIGN  DL1:RT11FB
then the specified monitor file is ignored and the boot code in
block zero of DL1: (placed there via the COPY/BOOT command)
is used instead along with the actual monitor file that had been
specified during the COPY/BOOT command.



Don


PDP-11 simulator V4.0-0 Betagit commit id: 4065f47f


This portion of my reply contains many questions.  If possible,
answers to all of them would be appreciated, not just the first
question.

Is this the latest version of SimH?  Also, is is possible to support
a VT100 display.  I have heard that telnet can be used, but I have
never been able to do so.  Since I always use the RT-11 SL:
(Single Line Editor) device driver to support a command stack,
it is essential to support a VT100 display, etc. in order to use
the ARROW keys to move the cursor around.  Is it possible
to support VT100 escape sequences when SimH is being used?
If so, how is that done in general and what specific programs
are required along with the specific commands to implement?
I would need to know how to do this from a 64-bit Windows 10
point of view since that is the 

Re: [SPAM key] - Re: Can Windows 98SE run on an Intel I7 with SATA gard drives?

[Jerome H. Fine]

>m...@markesystems.com wrote:


Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 11:44:44 -0500
From: "Jerome H. Fine" 
Subject: Can Windows 98SE run on an Intel I7 with SATA gard drives?

I run Windows 98SE on a 14 year old Pentium III.  I have
replaced the power supply twice and all three hard disk drives. 



QUESTION:  Is it even possible to run Win98SE on a current
Intel I7 CPU with SATA hard disk drives?  I realize that it might
be possible under a virtual machine, but I really want all of the
advantages that Win98SE provides.  One problem, of course, 


Almost certainly not, at least practically.  Even if you can get it to 
boot and install, it will have no idea how to handle any of the modern 
peripherals, and drivers certainly won't be available.  So sound won't 
work, the screen will be limited to VGA-16, and I'm not sure about the 
keyboard and mouse (there's a reasonable chance that the BIOS will 
emulate the legacy PS-2 devices, just as it's abstracting the details 
of the SATA disks).


Then I am really confused.  I have two older systems that
are able to run 64-bit Windows 7, an E8400 and a Q9550.
Both take SATA drives which are still available.  The mother
boards are ASUS5B.  I would guess they are both about
7 years old and I would hope that some of that old hardware
might be a bit easier to find.

I can also still boot from both system using an old DOS 3.5"
floppy media and run Ghost 7.0 with these old SATA drives,
but as far as I can understand, using the device drivers on the
floppy drive.

Is it likely that either of these two systems be able to run
Win98SE with the SATA hard drives, in one case 500 GB
each and the other system has 1 TB drives.  In that case, it
would still be possible to use current SATA drives, but the
1 GB limit on physical memory for Win98SE would need
to be patched.  By the way, the Pentium III that is 12 years
old has 768 MB of memory, so it is possible to run Win98SE
with more than 500 MB of physical memory.

As I mentioned, the only two applications I would run would
be the DOS variant of Ersatz-11 and Netscape 7.2 for e-mail
and newsgroups.

Jerome Fine

Re: [SPAM key] - Re: Software for DEC MINC systems

[Jerome H. Fine]

>Jay Jaeger wrote:


On 12/29/2015 2:47 PM, Jay Jaeger wrote:
 


I have had several folks express the desire for them. Over the day or
few days (we have a gathering coming up tomorrow, and not sure I will
get to it today, so it could be as late as next week), I will load them
up on my Google drive in a directory structure analogous to what
bitsavers uses, and send out the link.

JRJ


https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B2v4WRwISEQRWWFFdVpCZWFTZEU=sharing

The structure is similar to bitsavers, so look in:

bits/DEC/pdp11/floppyimages

There are two folders, rx01 and rx02 with .img files.

The image files INCLUDE TRACK 0, so depending on how you plan to use
them, you may need to trim off the first track first.


Any possibility you could provide the full link?  I don't see much
in the way of information at that site to get me to those floppy images.
There might be other DEC and non-DEC PDP-11 images that are
of interest.

This site also has many DEC and non-DEC files for the PDP-11
http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/academic/computer-science/history/pdp-11/

I usually find that anything to do with google that is not totally obvious
to usually be a pain.

Just on doing a search, the usual > 1,000,000 items stop being anything
at all relevant after item 100.

google is often good to check spelling though (LOL) - I can't spell,
so I always use the Spell checker.

Jerome Fine

Re: [SPAM key] - Re: Advice and Suggestions for a Debug Feature

[Jerome H. Fine]

>Tapley, Mark wrote:


On Dec 16, 2015, at 9:22 AM, Jerome H. Fine  wrote:



Note that for many CPUs, adding values (a push) results in the
stack pointer becoming numerically smaller (unsigned of course).
Internally, the code would handle the actual arithmetic.


(Warning: assembly language noob talking, please disregard if I see to be 
making no sense.)

1) Does the debugger enhancement trigger a stop on overall size of stack 
pointer or on cumulative changes? Or could it be selectable (maybe via a 
negative argument?)

Here’s what I’m thinking: suppose a routine is expected to remove things from 
the stack sequentially, then branch at some point to a subroutine. I want the 
debugger to halt execution when it branches. So I want the stop to occur when 
the stack pointer first increases, even if it has already decreased several 
times and its new value (on branching) is lower than where it was when the 
debug command was issued.

2) Some machines (6809, which is the only one I’m familiar with) have a rapid-response branching mechanism for real-time control applications (on the 6809 it’s a Fast Interrupt input). Fewer registers are pushed onto the stack so the service routine can execute sooner. Is there a way to handle this situation? Say I expect two levels of subroutine calls, each stacking a full set of registers, but instead I get for the second subroutine a Fast Interrupt and don’t stack enough registers to trigger the debug counter to halt execution. 


Hope this is useful.

 - Mark


Yes, it is useful since it helps to be aware of what other
systems do.  So thank you.

For those of you who might not have known, this is the
Y01.16 Symbolic Debugger from RT-11 and in particular
the SDHX.SYS variant.  From the point of view of
interrupts, when stopped at a breakpoint, the complete
system is FROZEN - including RT-11 itself which is the
operating system that is being used on the PDP-11.

As for the user's stack, that is not even a factor since the
Symbolic Debugger has its own stack and executes in
Kernel mode.  In fact, one of the other enhancements was
to ass code to monitor the size of the stack for the Symbolic
Debugger - which also allowed that stack to decrease.  That
was especially helpful since the stack must be in Low Memory
in order to handle interrupts and subroutine calls.

And as for the user's program stack, there is no effect at all.
What the Symbolic Debugger does is save all of the user's
registers, including the stack pointer of course.  The enhanced
code would then compare the original value of the Stack
Pointer (actually as noted after the current instruction had
been executed) with any subsequent value to determine if the
conditions had been met to stop the execution of additional
instructions, assuming that the value of the Stack Pointer
was included (via value2 and / or value3) in the command
to execute more instructions.

Jerome Fine

Re: [SPAM key] - Re: Software for small-memory PDP-11s?

[Jerome H. Fine]

>Paul Koning wrote:


On Nov 13, 2015, at 5:45 PM, Josh Dersch  wrote:

Hey all --

Now that I have my PDP-11/05 running nicely, I'm curious what others are
running on small systems like this -- until this point I've only played
with larger (i.e. at least 28KW memory) systems.  I have only 8KW of memory
(with no viable options for expansion) and there's not much out there that
I've found.  There's paper-tape BASIC (which is always fun) and FOCAL, and
PTS-11 (http://iamvirtual.ca/PDP-11/PTS-11/PTS-11.htm) which is pretty cool
if a bit cumbersome.  Any other suggestions?

I'm also curious if any version of RT-11 that supports the TU58 could be
made to run on this system -- I have two SLUs in the system so in theory I
can boot from an emulated TU58. However RT-11 4.0's SYSGEN manuals suggest
that 12KW is the minimum supported (and experimentation bears this out) and
I can't find much in the way of manuals for RT-11 V3B -- which I believe is
the earliest version with TU58 support.  (V3B seems to be different enough
from later versions that I'm not quite sure how the SYSGEN process works.)
   



RT11 V2 SJ will certainly fit easily in that size memory.  DOS will fit even in 
4K (at least the older versions).  Come to think of it, RT might also; I 
haven't tried it that small.

paul


NOTE:  I don't have a real PDP-11/05.  All my tests
were done under Ersatz-11.

I just tried to boot V04.00 of RT-11 on a PDP-11/05
using an RK05 device (RK:) under the RT11SJ.SYS
monitor.  First I set the memory to 32 KB (16KW)
and it worked quite well.  Then I tried with 16 KB
(8KW) and while it did boot, during the boot process
of V04.00 of RT-11, I did see the error message:

Insufficient Memory

On the other hand, I was able to perform a DIR
and a few other tests which did work.

I then attempted to confirm with V2 and 16 KB of
memory and that also worked with the RK05 device.
Obviously, it is not possible to do very much with
just 16 KB (8KW) of memory.

As for support for the TU58 device (DD:), I also
attempted that and came up empty. using V3B
of RT-11.  The V3B distribution which I have
does not seem to support the TU58 since RT-11
crashes when I attempt to use the TU58 device.

There may be some bad code in RT-11 when the
TU58 is used with a PDP-11/05.  I just don't have
the resources in the time that is available to find out.

Josh, you don't mention if you have a disk drive
of any kind on the PDP-11/05,  It would help
if you could describe all of the available hardware.
If the TU58 is the only "disk drive" available, then
I am not sure what to suggest in order to get RT-11
to run in any case.

Jerome Fine

Re: [SPAM key] - Re: How many use old browsers (e.g. = Netscape 4 or IE 6) as their ONLY source of web content?

[Liam Proven]

On 3 July 2015 at 18:22, Jerome H. Fine jhfined...@compsys.to wrote:
 I understand that Netscape has been replaced by Mozilla.  HOWEVER,
 since CHROME seems to be the most widely used, would CHROME
 be able to support the retention of ALL of my old e-mails and posts
 from usenet?  Over the past 15 years, I probably have accumulated
 over 100,000 e-mails and posts in about 130 folders!  So I would like
 an easy upgrade path which supports being able to view and modify those
 old e-mails and usenet posts.  Can CHROME support that?


Chrome is just a web browser. It does not do email at all.

However, the program that was called Netscape 6.x  7.x is alive and
well. It was the Mozilla Internet Suite -- the final Netscape
releases were Mozilla, rebadged. As Mozilla Inc now focuses on
Firefox, the old Internet Suite was forked and is now called
SeaMonkey.

http://www.seamonkey-project.org/

SeaMonkey will run fine on Windows 7.

What you may have to do is this:

[1] Use an old version of Thunderbird (Mozilla's standalone email
client) to import your Netscape 7 profile. Details here:

http://kb.mozillazine.org/Migrate_from_Mozilla_Suite_or_Netscape_to_Thunderbird

[2] Use a newer version of Thunderbird to import the profile from old
Thunderbird:

http://kb.mozillazine.org/Profile_migration_-_SeaMonkey

This should import your entire Netscape profile and continue to work just fine.

However, in the first instance, copy your whole Netscape 7.2 profile
from the Win98 machine to your unused Win7 machine. Reinstall Netscape
7.2 on the new machine and check it works.

You can download it here:
http://sillydog.org/narchive/full67.php

Then install SeaMonkey. It *should* notice and import your profile.

It is very important to install Netscape *before* SeaMonkey.


-- 
Liam Proven • Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lpro...@hotmail.com • Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) • +420 702 829 053 (ČR)