[cctalk] VCF MW 2023 recap (Fri/Sat only)

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

I got the chance to attend another great VCF!  This time in Chicago over
this past weekend.

Most images should be able to click and enlarge (if not, wiggle the page a
bit and try again).

https://voidstar.blog/vcf-mw-midwest-2023/

[cctalk] Re: Looking for NORTRONICS Read/Write head for IBM 5100/5110/5106 tape unit

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Thanks, I see the listing.

Here is my notes on what tape head I was looking for:  (it is about 3/4th
of the way down the page; there is one photo and then one "diagram" I put
together)
https://voidstar.blog/ibm-5100-internal-tape-and-5106/

And I appreciate you taking the time to bring this to my attention (and the
community in general).   Tentatively, I'd say the ones you have aren't
quite a match for the 5100-series.  To explain:

In the image/notes linked above, one photo has the tape unit head out with
a blue label on it.  That label says NORTRONICS P.N. 1608752 C584980  (then
there are other numbers on it, like 269 and 24256).  I mention these in
text just since a search might happen across them someday, as opposed to
images.

Now across all this time, sure, we don't need EXACT part number matching.
Across years or seasons, it's a good chance NORTRONICS changed part
numbers.  Recall, the tape unit itself was put together by 3M.

The part number you referenced - it does seem to be from a "2-track" tape
of some sort, so that's promising.  But also in my link above, there is
another photo - hard to describe, but it shows the "front" of the head.
 The discussion group I don't think would let me attach a small image? I've
never actually tried.  But anyhow, in that image: the head has "two
halves".  One half looks like an "upper and lower" for the two tracks, then
next to that is a "vertical bar."   I've never quite understood what that
vertical bar is - I assume a WRITE portion of some sort?? The ones in
the ebay listing don't have this "vertical bar."

Then the pins on the back of the head:  the one I have for my 5100/5110 is
"6 small pins" next to "4 fat pins" (the 4 fat pins are in line with the
"vertical bar" mentioned above).   Of all the heads I came across, I could
find the "6 small pin" configuration, but never the "4 fat pins."


Now... in the past year or two, my trails have led me to getting two
working tape units, and two broken ones.   I've mulled over whether I
should keep using the two working ones every now then (like once a year)
just to keep tabs on them - or "lock them down" and never use them until I
come across some confirmed tape (that has 5100/5110 content) that needs
reading.But recently, I've been focused on a POLY88 restoration, but
also the "new 8-bit system" the 6502-based Commander X16 (which its second
round of pre-orders have done well, nearly sold out now).  I've also
learned about dishonest contractors recently, the hard way - construction
related, not computer related; but it's eaten up a lot of time dealing with
that.

But my point there was: yep, I'm still interested in finding a working
head.

One other related note here: the earliest reference to the term "QIC" that
I ever came across - after pouring through BYTE and PC Magazine - was
around 1983 (early-mid 1980s), but NOT earlier than 1980.  And I know some
people don't like me calling those QIC tapes.  But the description you
provide in the Ebay listing is "track 2, single gap."   Maybe.  I noticed
the 6 pins on the back of those being offered resemble the "fat pins" on
the back of one mine (except mine only has 4 such pins, not 6).


So I'll think it over some more if more information comes available, but
most likely I may need to pass on the ones listed here.

-SteveL (v*)









On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 12:27 AM Mark Perullo via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> Hey Steve I know this is a year later but I have the Nortronic Read Write
> heads you were looking for. They are currently on eBay. The listing is
> below. Just do a search and they will come up.
>
> Nortronics Magnetic Head Assembly. NOS Part 9164-0068. Radio Cart
> Machines.
>
>
> Hope this helps.
> Mark
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>

[cctalk] Re: IBM 5100 discussion

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

I'm here (voidstar) :)  I think at the time I wasn't aware of cctalk, or it
wasn't working for me at the time.

This past summer I got to explore the actual original SCAMP!   I'm still
(slowly) going through the Joe George journals.But one of the most
interesting things - I found a reference to PALM as early as 1972!  (i.e. a
manual similar to your Chapter 2 reference, but written during the SCAMP
development - the instruction set was mostly the same, except they did add
one instruction later to the IBM 5100; a shift left/rotate I think, I'll
have to double check tomorrow)

https://voidstar.blog/scamp-a-review-50-years-later/

More recently I've gotten distracted on an almost-working Poly88.  It has a
chance of working, I feel a pulse in there!  After that, I'll get back to
the 5100 PALM...


I think my most recent 5110 work was a PALM app as follows (which I've
probably shared here already)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=geiprqvhZUY
Mainly at 1:20 into that video I try to show the extent of audio that we
can make a 5110 do.  The other features in here are draft ideas to put into
a more comprehensive demo (i.e. can do a counter, and those are the set of
symbols we have to work with).

And the most recent update: a local associate has gotten a disk drive
working on his 5110, and demo'd running a football game on that system from
BASIC!  Looking forward to more titles getting loaded and running, and also
hoping we can get a process to get those disk files transferred over to
tape (except my 5106 only works on my 5100, turns out it can't work on a
5110!).. so we're thinking if we can get one of the 5103 printers working,
we just print the BASIC code out, and I use my "serial typer" to write it
back into the other system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sV3NBAmFd8A

Alternatively, I'm still learning how to do input/output on those rear-side
external pins.

-Steve / v*



On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 2:47 AM Christian Corti via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> I have been pointed to the following discussion
>
> https://forum.vcfed.org/index.php?threads/ibm-5110-initial-info.1224000/page-2
>
> There, voidstar78 was apparently trying to contact me. Since my mail
> addresses are all functional (noone else had any problem with them, be it
> my personal or our museum's address), I wonder what he did, and I don't
> have a gmail address.
> I'm not on this forum, and I don't want to register to "yet another
> forum", so I can't even look at the pictures. But it seems to have been an
> interesting discussion. Pity it wasn't on this list.
>
> Christian
>

[cctalk] Re: Apple 1

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

The MITS emulator can't play Daisy :D

As I was leaving VCF late a few months ago, I was rolling an Apple2 around
outside on a cart - and a student across the street was walking by.  I
didn't think much of it, then he ran over and asked "isn't that an Apple?"
  So it occured to me:  he was excited to see an old computer that was
probably twice his age.  And, he recognized it from far away just by the
shape (he sure didn't see the logo from that far away).Nice young lad,
we chatted a few minutes.  But the incident made me realize that, anywhere
in the world, an Apple will get recognized - can't say the same for an
IMSAI or MITS box.

Then the Apple1 advantage is we know fairly precisely how many were made,
and combined that each one (likely) was handled by at least one of the
Steve's personally.  I tried to suggest to Woz for him to go ahead and
finally make an "official case" for the Apple1! He could probably sell them
for a lot, even if it was just basla wood that he glued himself.  But he
wanted to do stuff with near earth satellite tracking instead.  That's
probably more useful.

Anyway, the "personally handled" stuff doesn't mean a thing to our
engineering minds- but people do still acknowledge a spirit or essence
about objects.   Shroud of Turin type stuff, or StJohn the Baptist hand in
Topkapi Palace. Soaked up blood from King Charles I beheading.  But if we
need to channel the 1970s, we'll have these IC chips with Jobs dandruff or
Woz drool on it.  Can't say that about the 15,000th KIM-1 or the 10million
C64's.   (I'm teasing, not meaning any offense -- all those C64's are
special and valuable each in their own way).

-Steve
v*








On Sat, Aug 5, 2023 at 5:32 PM Chuck Guzis via cctalk 
wrote:

> I have a MITS Altair 8800 that I constructed from the kit back in 1975.
>  I haven't touched the thing in over 30 years--nor am I likely to.
> It'll probably go to the e-recycler (hopefully not the landfill) when I
> shed this mortal coil or simply become incompetent.  IIRC it ran about
> $1,000--and that was without keyboard or display (TVT used).  I didn't
> use it that long because of its rather cheesy construction--I moved to
> an Integrand S100 box as soon as they were available.  Still have that
> one too--and not an icon to the Apple Fanboiz.
>
> There's nothing that the MITS box can do today that an emulator or other
> equipment can.  And in spite of its early appearance, it's not an icon
> to the über wealthy.
>
> --Chuck
>
>
>
>

[cctalk] Re: datapoint 2200 programming

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Thanks.  I was curious about if I found a Datapoint 2200 "in the wild" --
what could be done with it, if no floppy nor any working tapes (then again,
such a system is well retired and really no need to power it on).  "good
tapes" would probably be degraded by now (although the media has probably
been extracted and archives somewhere? so like with a TRS-80 today, can you
just use any tape deck or even a smartphone to just play back the tape?
not quite that simple, as the DP2200 digital data would have to converted
into appropriate audio tones -- unless they didn't actually use audio tape?)

Sounds like the "systems debugging" might allow injecting direct machine
code at addresses   (the IBM 5100 has a DSP that allows this, to Alter
addresses to apply PALM instructions, then do a "BR" branch run at your
starting address to kick things off).   I'm reading through the Lamont Wood
Datapoint book, maybe it will have more insight here.   I was just curious
how the first tape (for the DP2200) was produced.

I recall the story by Paul Allen - they had developed a BASIC, but didn't
have a boot loader to load it, and Paul wrote one while on the airplane to
MOS.  That's not quite the same - but I imagine a similar story with the
DP2200.  An early incomplete DP2200 was built, someone coded some save/load
routines, tested, and once perfected maybe it was formalized into (a part
of) what became the bootrom?   (if you have a correct "CTOS" tape, does the
DP2200 just load it or is an initial command needed?) Sorry, as
mentioned I'm reading the Datapoint book, and after that will explore the
manuals mentioned here that will probably explain it.   (I see reference to
a DP2200 emulator made on the System/360 - but none ever made it to a
"modern" x86 PC?)




On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 3:11 AM jos via cctalk 
wrote:

> On 12.10.22 22:54, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote:
> > Does anyone know how the 1970/1971 original Datapoint 2200 was
> programmed?
> > It had tapes containing terminal programs to access different types of
> > systems.  And the instruction set was said to be similar what became the
> > 8008.   But how were these terminal programs created and how were the
> tapes
> > written?Were they under emulators on larger systems, like a PDP-10?
> >   Were there any tapes that had something like a machine code editor and
> > tape-write routines?  I assume no kind of ROM was built into the system
> > (unless it had a built in machine code editor, and routines to write that
> > content to a tape?)   Was a version of BASIC ever built for the 8008 that
> > ran on a Datapoint 2200 or similar system?
> >
> > -Steve
>
> Look here to wat was available for this class of machines :
>
>
> http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/datapoint/software/6_Datapoint_Software_Catalog_Sep1982.pdf
>
>
> So, yes, Basic, RPG, Cobol ( for 5500 upwards), Databus, Datashare,
> Dataform were available.
>
> Programs development could be done standalone, even on a cassette-only
> system.
>
> Keep in mind that Diablo 14" diskdrives were available for these system,
> allowing for quite a comfortable environment. For early 70's standards of
> course...
>
> My DP2200 does have a bootrom, allowing for booting from floppy, or some
> simnple ad-hoc systems debugging. Look for the deocumented source code for
> this bootrom on Bitsavers.
>
>
> Jos
>
>

[cctalk] PALM assembler now available (5100/5110/5120)

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Wanted to pass along that PALM has been added as a target to the Macro
Assembler AS.  This means writing some assembly stuff for the old IBM
5100/5110/5120 systems.

Assembler available here:
http://john.ccac.rwth-aachen.de:8000/as/

So no one has to re-type it, the "bounce" sample is located here:
https://github.com/voidstar78/5110VEMU/blob/main/bin/sample1_palm.asm


Norbert has the online IBM5110 emulator, but it doesn't have a way to
"script inputs".  Not sure if he's in the mood to crack that open again,
but it would be a nice feature to add (a kind of "File Open" and just
script the content of the file like typing on its emulated keyboard)..


Alternative way to test some compiled assembly is to script it into the
5110VEMU located here:
https://github.com/voidstar78/5110VEMU/tree/main/bin
(Wintel builds, uses pdcurses which might not be too hard to port to other
systems)


Or if have a physical system willing to power up, you can use a serial port
as a proxy to the keyboard:
https://github.com/voidstar78/KBD5110/tree/main/CODE


Screen is port mapped at 0x0200, so drawing stuff is easy.  I'll work on an
example to poll keyboard inputs - then we're in business for some
interactive software content :D  (well, will need some RNG solution next)


Cheers!

[cctalk] Re: PALM assembler now available (5100/5110/5120)

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Christian!  I tried contacting you a few months ago.  Apologies, I suspect
some intermediate ISP may be blocking gmail? I've seen this happen with
other contacts.

Alfred Arnold made the changes to Macro AS himself, and he used both yours
and the IBM mnemonics since there were no conflicts.

And now, I think it's time for a "Bad Apple" style demoscene for the 5100
(as one was made for the 5150), before its 50th in 2025.  Let's see what
some raw PALM can do.


Quick question, Christian were you aware of the microcode Appendix C in the
original IBM 5100 MIM?  I'd assume Yes - but it's something I've always
been curious about, if that appendix had ever helped you at all, or if it
was too lacking in details?  That Appendix C got removed for the 5110
(which has the same Processor/Controller).   I'd assume you alway had
access to the 5100 manuals, not just the 5110's.

-Steve












On Tue, Oct 25, 2022 at 3:01 AM Christian Corti via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On Mon, 24 Oct 2022, Steve Lewis wrote:
> > Wanted to pass along that PALM has been added as a target to the Macro
> > Assembler AS.  This means writing some assembly stuff for the old IBM
> > 5100/5110/5120 systems.
> >
> > Assembler available here:
> > http://john.ccac.rwth-aachen.de:8000/as/
>
> Funny, as this is the very assembler that I had added the PALM target
> years ago for my simulator ;-)
>
> It would have been nice if you had talked to me before as to have one
> single implementation. But as I see, you took the original IBM mnemonics
> whereas I have created more readable ones that make more sense :-)
>
> Christian
>

[cctalk] Re: PALM assembler now available (5100/5110/5120)

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

> Hehe, this sounds like a great idea!
> Did I send you my Kermit implementation or my Infocom V2 interpreter?

Nope - would love to check them out, any PALM examples.  Your annotated
disassemble of the Executive ROS is helping a lot, of examples of how to do
certain things in native PALM examples.   Some idea for implementing a RNG
in PALM is probably going to be needed (for any gaming).

Does your Kermit use the rear external IO?  I don't have any of the asynch
IO or comm. cards.  But I've imagined it would be possible to attach a
WiModem232 to the rear external IO and (using 3 wires) to implement a
terminal in PALM.  But being completely "CPU" based, unsure what baud rate
it could achieve.   This is similar to the original Tandy Color Computer -
if you use its built in "Serial IO" connector, you can only get 1200 baud.
But if you use the "RS232 Pak" with the proper buffer, it can do 9600
baud.   So, you can get a CoCo1 on the internet (or even a PET) - and I
think it actually would be possible to get a 5100 on the internet in a
similar way!


I recently got in contact with Hal Prewitt who made CoreNet for the IBM
5110.  He confirmed that the hardware no longer exist (as far as he is
aware), but he does still have a copy of PC51 (essentially a 5110 BASIC
emulator that runs on the IBM PC -- so those fancy BASIC programs that use
the FORMS feature of the IBM 5110 can continue to run on the IBM PC;
unclear if he still has the source code for it).



> differences between the 5100 and the 5110 concerning the different ROS and
> the I/O functions like switching between ROS/RWS or controlling the
> display adapter.

Indeed, I ran into the same issue when running the extracted 5100 Executive
ROS in your PALM emulator.  It can run the BUP, and I think I managed to
send the scancode early to activate its DCP (if you do so too early, the
BUP just shows you the scan code - but if you wait to a certain time just
before BUP finishes, some CMD-ATTN {I forget the exact scan code} like
combination activates the DCP).  So the 5100 ROS binary is extracted
correctly, but I had issues as well in the ROS/RWS transition.  Solving
that before 2025 would be a nice 50th gift as well, since otherwise there
is still no 5100 emulator -- where it helps to dev/test things in an
emulator, before powering up a physical 5100.

Aside from github, I'm not sure of a convenient repository to archive/share
any PALM assembly examples.

-Steve



On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 3:23 AM Christian Corti via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 25 Oct 2022, Steve Lewis wrote:
> > Christian!  I tried contacting you a few months ago.  Apologies, I
> suspect
> > some intermediate ISP may be blocking gmail? I've seen this happen with
> > other contacts.
>
> Oh my, yes I have some mail chaos on my system and I guess yours must have
> been "lost" somewhere. I need to dig through my pile
>
> > Alfred Arnold made the changes to Macro AS himself, and he used both
> yours
> > and the IBM mnemonics since there were no conflicts.
>
> Perfect! I didn't know that.
>
> > And now, I think it's time for a "Bad Apple" style demoscene for the 5100
> > (as one was made for the 5150), before its 50th in 2025.  Let's see what
> > some raw PALM can do.
>
> Hehe, this sounds like a great idea!
> Did I send you my Kermit implementation or my Infocom V2 interpreter?
>
> > Quick question, Christian were you aware of the microcode Appendix C in
> the
> > original IBM 5100 MIM?  I'd assume Yes - but it's something I've always
> > been curious about, if that appendix had ever helped you at all, or if it
> > was too lacking in details?  That Appendix C got removed for the 5110
> > (which has the same Processor/Controller).   I'd assume you alway had
> > access to the 5100 manuals, not just the 5110's.
>
> Yes I'm aware of that. But I noticed that there are significant
> differences between the 5100 and the 5110 concerning the different ROS and
> the I/O functions like switching between ROS/RWS or controlling the
> display adapter.
> At the time when I reverse-engineered the 5110 I didn't have access to the
> 5100 docs, though, only to some copies of IBM internal papers (on my
> 5110 site).
>
> Christian
>

[cctalk] Re: Great Vintage Computer Heist of 2012

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

I had a thought once that the ultimate computer museum would be in orbit.
 Actually, I think there was some Star Trek episode along those lines (not
the one where Data was captured to be put into a museum, but something
similar).

I like how having the old hardware gives physical "witness" and "evidence"
that all the old stories are true - people did invent and create these
things, they didn't just appear from aliens.


I get sentimental thinking how we're the "last generation" to know the
world before computers.   I understand computers have technically "run the
world" maybe since the 1950s (in terms of big business accounting and
logistics, air traffic control, world banking, the tech that got us to the
moon, and long distance calls -- my father says he remembers talking to a
switchboard operator and asking to be connected to his grandmother by first
name, i.e. "Hi Susan, can you connect me to Martha Bell?", and the operator
recognized his voice and made the connection).   But you know what I mean
-- a world with no smartphone, no spycams at every corner, no logins,
paying with cash, and NOT having 24/7 international news.


Not saying things were better, just that it's a transition in humanity and
we are "digital pioneers."  What if the next "country" isn't physical, but
is a whole virtual space?  I think the day is coming on that -- if we
can't  move out into space, folks might "move" into the meta-virtual space
perhaps.  And why can't CyberSpace be a new "continent" or multiple ones?
  Humans shouldn't live like chickens in a henhouse (well, in my opinion)
-- but on the other hand, maybe that's a necessary step to (eventually) get
the critical-mass of engineering/theoretical physicists-type stuff in
virtual space that does lead to more advanced techniques to get into
space?   And if ISP servers are in orbit, what jurisdiction do physical
governments now have?


Not saying any of that is a Good-Thing - however, in general, we can't stop
"progress."

I see these online quantum computers that we can rent time on now -- and
it's like the 1950s/1960s all over again, when they rented time on
mainframes.  We'll see where it leads!

"smaller" collections - those are important, we need backup and redundancy
for all the usual reasons.  Fires and weather calamity still happen.  But
as the cost of real estate and land increases, that also increases the tax
burden -- sadly, eventually we can't reserve comfortable space for old
equipment.

If computer museums become "Digital Temples" and we start the Order of Bit
Twiddlers, could we then claim a religious exemption for tax purposes?















On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 10:46 AM William Donzelli via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> > All you need is a the local government to declare eminent domain and
> > greater user for the public good.
>
> Those would be the "significant barriers to cross".
>
> --
> Will
>

[cctalk] IBM 5100 emulation

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Greetings, we've extracted the Executive ROS of the IBM 5100.  The PALM
opcodes between the 5100 and 5110 should be identical.  So we have
used Christian Corti emulator code to run that Executive ROS (under Wintel
environment).  However, the CRC checks and transition to the Language ROS
apparently works a little differently on the IBM 5100 (compared to the
5110).

Not the CRC check method itself, but perhaps the addressing used to look
for the Common ROS.  In the 5110, the Common ROS is more obviously a
separate device/card.  For the 5100, I'm not exactly sure where the Common
ROS is (part of the Executive ROS card, or part of the BASIC ROS card?).
I've seen some APL-only 5100's, so I think that system could operate with
the BASIC card (but maybe that device slot still would have the Common ROS
segments?).

Hoping someone is available to maybe give suggestions or tips in how to get
this emulator code going with the IBM 5100 ROS's (see EMUV5110 in github;
trying to use that to run the IBM 5100 ROS's that are at archive.org).

NOTE: The Executive ROS for the IBM 5100 is a 64K binary (I think the last
20K of that is blank, all 0's).  In contrast, the Executive ROS for the IBM
5110 is 32K.

[cctalk] datapoint 2200 programming

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Does anyone know how the 1970/1971 original Datapoint 2200 was programmed?
It had tapes containing terminal programs to access different types of
systems.  And the instruction set was said to be similar what became the
8008.   But how were these terminal programs created and how were the tapes
written?Were they under emulators on larger systems, like a PDP-10?
 Were there any tapes that had something like a machine code editor and
tape-write routines?  I assume no kind of ROM was built into the system
(unless it had a built in machine code editor, and routines to write that
content to a tape?)   Was a version of BASIC ever built for the 8008 that
ran on a Datapoint 2200 or similar system?

-Steve

[cctalk] PALM assembler (IBM 5110)

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

There is a note from Christian Corti last updated 2017:

"..assembler listing generated with AS V1.41 from Alfred Arnold. ...which I
have added a code generator for the PALM processor."

I believe I've found a V1.42 of this on github.  But the 5110 support is
not listed in the github or pre-packaged builds.

If Corti is available to help resurrect the notes on doing this, or if is
more familiar with AS and can help get things going?

Thanks!
Steve

[cctalk] bubble memory stable?

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

How "stable" is bubble memory, over decades?

There is a Sharp PC-5000 that may be available, I believe from 1983-1985
era, which is said to have bubble memory.  But the owner can't find a power
cable, to verify if anything still works.

I have older systems with ICs that are still working OK, but I was
wondering thoughts on any risk associated with bubble memory?  (likelihood
of not working at all, or being damaged in long distance shipping)

Actually another thought, can any "normal" ICs be used to
replace/substitute the bubble memory?

Regards,
Steve

[cctalk] Re: best C compiler(s) for varied vintage programming

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

I haven't followed the full thread here, but perhaps this might help:
 when I ported DestinyHunter (destinyhunter.org) from the 6502-based PET to
the IBM PC, I gathered some notes on that process here
https://destinyhunter.org/ibm-5150-development-notes/

Basically: programming on an actual vintage MS-DOS system is very painful
these days.  For starters, the 8.3 filenames and lack of COPY-PASTE.
 True, there are some vintage editors that will have a form of copy-paste.
Another issue is some of those old editors are limited to 32KB or 64KB
files (which with comments, sometimes you might get to pretty large files),
and such old editors might not have multi-file support (like having .h and
.c open at the same time).  I programmed many years in the "old DOS days"
with 8.3 filenames - reliving that wasn't for me.  BUT, it is do-able.

I did try Turbo C 2.0 to make a real-mode .com (the notes in the page setup
a 486-emulation in 86BOX with a DOS 6.0 configuration).

Since I had a project that already used long filenames, that was another
reason I wanted to cross-compile from a modern system instead.  If all the
existing code was already in 8.3 filenames, maybe it would have been less
of an issue.  But in any case, the modern system is faster, so you can
experiment and compile things in a few seconds -- but then you have to
transfer the resulting binary to your vintage system (I was able to use
FTP, but I can understand that' not being easy for everyone).

As another option: I came across the WATCOM C/C++ compiler, but (AFAIK)
it's no longer maintained and getting a "reliable" download of it was a
challenge.  All I recall was I ended up using version 1.9 instead of 2.0.
It is an IDE of sorts, though I mostly still used an external editor
(notepad++).   I can't recall why I didn't use Lattice - maybe it/was
Commercial?  Another compiler is the Intel iC-86, but you end up having to
use the Borland TLINK anyway with that.  NOTE: I think both Turbo C and
WATCOM C have code generation options for 80186 - although offhand I can't
think of any specific code that would need/use 80186 features.And each
of these compilers does have a slightly different variation of C (with some
settings dials inside on how compliant to be).

Another note: despite using _TINY_, Borland C is still going to make an EXE
- you have to use Microsoft DOS 2.10 - 3.21 to run EXE2BIN to convert it to
a .com.


The next mess is "standard libraries."  Borland was great, but they royally
confused a whole generation of developers on what the "standard C library"
actually meant.   Like, conio.h is not standard.   But regardless - when
implementing the "C standard library" for disk I/O, no one would be
re-implementing FAT -- that'd miss the whole point of having a "DOS".
They'd implement it in terms of software interrupts - that hopefully were
compatible between PC/DR/MS-DOS."Self Booters" (like early versions of
Zork, Microsoft Flight Simulator, early versions of King's Quest) had to
implement their own file systems (and it's why they aren't easy to copy,
since they use a non-MS-DOS format).

Thinking about it now, I think making a self-booter disk of DestinyHunter
might be an interesting challenge.  For reference, some notes are as
follows:
https://www.cs.uaf.edu/2011/fall/cs301/lecture/11_18_bootblock.html
http://philipstorr.id.au/pcbook/book1/post.htm

That is, the IBM PC BIOS is pre-programmed to examine the first sector for
code, and do the work of copying 512 bytes to RAM and running it.  What you
choose to do in that boot loader is then up to you (or the OS) -- which
can't be any MS-DOS interrupt calls.   I'm not sure what existing code
could be borrowed to read additional bytes from the disk (an annotated
disaassembly of the BIOS, or examining the MS-DOS code in github maybe as a
starting point).   Nothing in the "standard" library of Borland Turbo C or
WATCOM C, etc. really helps here (none of the fopen, fscanf, stuff).

So it's not that the compiler you're seeking doesn't exist -- but some "off
the shelf" utility functions doesn't readily exist.  You'd have to borrow
or re-implement much of what MS-DOS is already doing (if the 180KB format
was ok).  Again, the early MS-DOS source code is out on github as a
starting reference... As far as writing it specifically to the first sector
of a 5.25" disk -- I never found a "USB adapter" for a 5.25" disk drive;
plenty for the 3.5" drives, but maybe the 525" drw too much power for USB?).

Good Luck!












On Mon, Dec 26, 2022 at 8:20 PM Chris via cctalk 
wrote:

> It cannot rely on bios/ms-dos services for compiling preferably. Iow I'd
> like to perform what I want to do on the target machine itself, LOL which
> is hysterical as I've never even seen it boot even once. I could complie on
> a standard pc I suppose and pop a disk in the Northstar Dimension. It would
> be nice if it's optimized for it's 80186. Or at least supports it's
> instructions. My goal is to get MINIX running on it, as 

[cctalk] pc magazine Nov 1983

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Does anyone have a November 1983 issue of PC Magazine?

I did find one on eBay, but it apparently got lost in transit during recent
storms.

That issue has been digitally archived
https://archive.org/details/PC-Mag-1983-11/

But I was hoping to come across a physical copy.


Thanks!

[cctalk] Looking for NORTRONICS Read/Write head for IBM 5100/5110/5106 tape unit

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

I have a 5100 and 5106 both with a working tape unit.

But the tape unit in my 5110 is not working, and I believe it is the
read/write head.  The REWIND command works, but the MARK command does not
(ERR 3).

I took the Tape Card from the 5110 and swapped it into the 5106, and the
5106 continued to work (and 5110 then had same result, ERR 3).  This tells
me the issue isn't any electronics in the Tape Card electronics (such as
bad IC's).


Swapping the electronics card is easy.  But I haven't yet tried taking the
read/write head from the 5106 and putting it into 5110's tape unit (they
both use all the same components) -- it's not that difficult, but I don't
really want to put a working 5106 at more risk of becoming non-working.


Hence, that's why I'm asking around first if anyone might happen to have
one of these NORTRONICS or a suitable substitute to try.   For example, it
may be the same kind of read/write head used in some reel-to-reel systems
of that era (early/mid 1970s).

The various numbers on the read/write head are as follows:

NORTRONICS
PN 1608752
C584980
269
24256

I have measurements and photos of what I'm looking for at the bottom of
this link:
https://voidstar.blog/ibm-5100-internal-tape-and-5106/
The head is about a 15mm x 20mm, with a 26mm ground extension on one side
for mounting.

A few months ago I contacted Nortronics.  They had some stock that was
close, but not this exact pin out (4-pins on one side, 6-pins on the other;
not sure which is read vs write).  I think all the ones they had were
4-pin/4-pin.

I've also tried different brand tapes, DC6150 vs DC600A (which all of them
do work in the 5100, but not the 5110).



-Steve

[cctalk] Re: Computer of Thesus

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

I'm all for using original hardware, I enjoy those more than emulators as
well.   Except, I don't miss old CRTs.  Using a modern LCD on a vintage
system doesn't bother me.   Even on the IBM 5100, I tend to use the
external BNC connector adapted to HDMI and unplug the internal CRT.   But
sometimes the LCD (or the intermediate adapter to VGA/HDMI) might lose
something in translation, some slight color hue or graphic effect.

To me, I'm somewhat concerned on the "health risk" of CRTs - I know there
is no direct evidence about it.  But they're fundamentally like old radar
systems, using a directed beam.  I'm not really that paranoid about it --
but I do try to limit exposure.  Old computer labs, with rows and rows and
rows of CRTs, always made me wonder how healthy all that was (the
collective exposure at multiple angles).   But also just that working CRTs
are hard to replace, so I'd rather save them for limited/focused
presentations.   Also, I have no idea of modern LCDs are less "radiating"
(EM-wise) than old CRTs - but they're certainly easier to find and
connect.   I think that transition from "line printers" to "screens" has
always been underappreciated - and I've always been curious how in old
magazine (late 60s, early 70s), there wasn't more apparent excitement about
CRT/screens.  There was no clever term like "digital paper" or "electronic
paper" - it just became "the screen."   I guess once the microprocessor was
developed, all the excitement was focused around that.

And, for me, same for old mechanical drives: I don't mind the SD
emulations.   It is nice to hear the original drive sound, or to actually
show concepts like "flipping a disk over."  The whole idea of using
magnetic phase to store bits is still fascinating to me - but then, vinyl
records are also fascinating to me (mankind figured out a way to precisely
mold a microscopic groove that corresponds to a desired audio effect,
that's wild).Still, read/write heads do eventually fail, and disk media
itself gets harder and harder to source.   I think the SD emulators have
made the hobby more approachable to me - I want to see software cranked
through a processor; how the software got loaded into main memory is of
less interest to me (give me an interface and I'll just POKE machine code
directly into memory, or make some MCU device to type it in for me).

As others have said, for "intense" software development I'd rather use an
emulator, to save "wear and tear" on the original vintage equipment.  Which
brings me to another point:  "large" computers have always been used to
help make the next smaller computers.   Machines-making-machines indeed.
 The original building-size "hulking giants" helped make the minis, which
helped make the micros (emulators on the PDP-11/8's or S/360's), and today
we use our micros to dev/emulate MCUs (because all the development tools
are more matured in the "next up" larger system from the prior pioneering
work).


One last thing: I've pondered vintage computing is like finding old Roman
artifacts.  Like a chariot.  As-is, it's fairly useless - you'd need horses
to pull the thing.  Or, "emulated" horses.  But finding such a thing, in
complete or operational condition, gives witness that such things did exist
-- the craftmanship of it, bound to the talent and time that they had to
build/engineer it.   And that, "has value" it telling and verifying our
history.

-Steve




On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 3:18 PM js--- via cctalk 
wrote:

>
> Would a few people here be willing to share their approaches to their
> collection?
>
> I'll start.I've collected a variety of mainly DEC, HP, and Apple
> machines, and have restored or repaired them slowly over time.  However,
> as they fail from now on, I will *not* be doing modern upgrades or
> repairs.   As they die, so shall they be retired or given away.
>
>
>

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

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Is there a public article about this?   I know it's a recent announcement,
but I couldn't find the article.  I'm not doubting the article, just wanted
to share a link with some friends about it.

BTW, I've wondered if some form of stenography could be used for software
development.   In my mind, it would make sense to just program directly in
a kind of Abstract Syntax Tree (AST) from the beginning - why bother with
all the syntaxic sugar and peddling ascii text characters around a file to
form a program.   So now I wonder if "building" a program using an AST
might be possible in VR.. you "grab" a FOR loop virtually from a box on the
left, add it to your program tree, and build out from there decorating the
tree






On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 3:33 PM rar via cctalk 
wrote:

> Museum Staff Helps Exonerate David Veney
>
> January 19, 2023, Hunt Valley, MD — Staff members of the System Source
> Computer Museum recently completed a project that helped exonerate David
> Veney, wrongly convicted of rape in 1997. In 2005, after Mr. Veney sought a
> new trial, the state found irregularities in the prosecution, released Mr.
> Veney from prison, and declined to re-prosecute.
>
>

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

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

I'm familiar with Scratch, my daughter used it in elementary.  I had
forgotten about it though - it seemed focused on the task of depicting and
moving objects on a 2D area, not so much in general information processing
(but still, yes it could be a starting point).   One hallmark of a "good
development environment" that someone once told me is that that development
environment can be used to create itself.   Like, by Borland Delphi 2, they
used Delphi to create Delphi.   Same on the Visual Studio development team
- they compile and develop VS using VS.   So, I wonder if Scratch can
create itself?   It's not a hard rule, just a casual observation on the
"robustness" or maturity of a given development environment.

There's always been a kind of "two tiers" of software developers - those
who can create reusable routines (libraries) and those who can mold
existing libraries to build applications.  Obviously some can do both, but
generally the latter get "stuck" if there isn't some existing
function/routine in an API to do what they need to do -- like open a
socket, start a thread, or query system time.  The former tends to need to
sink into OS and HW specifics.

With this "blocked" code floating in VR -- the idea is then "behind the
code" to show a virtualization of the resources needed by that code, to
quickly get an idea of the hardware requirements (relative to how many
resources it is using) and also linkages to other software, to get a feel
for the overall complexity.These are important metric to see the
versatility of re-using that code in other environments/platforms.

And back on the stenography-keyboard like thing -- what about morphing
keys?  If a keyboard had actual screens on the keys, and the keys change
(the actual symbol) based on the context of whatever you're doing.  I know
we have macros and reprogrammable keyboards, but morphing the actual symbol
on the keys might be neat.

Also, does any processor support a dynamic instruction set?  I've wonder if
some instruction-set optimizer might find improvements by indicating your
program could be executed more efficiently if such-and-such instruction was
available.





On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 11:49 PM Sellam Abraham via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 6:41 PM Steve Lewis via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
> > BTW, I've wondered if some form of stenography could be used for software
> > development.   In my mind, it would make sense to just program directly
> in
> > a kind of Abstract Syntax Tree (AST) from the beginning - why bother with
> > all the syntaxic sugar and peddling ascii text characters around a file
> to
> > form a program.   So now I wonder if "building" a program using an AST
> > might be possible in VR.. you "grab" a FOR loop virtually from a box on
> the
> > left, add it to your program tree, and build out from there decorating
> the
> > tree
> >
>
> Are you familiar with Google Scratch?
>
> https://scratch.mit.edu/
>
> Add the VR interface and you basically have what you describe.
>
> Sellam
>

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

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

> Changing keys would be rather hard on a touch typist, don't you think?

As for what I said of morphing shape of keycaps:  I think I recall a
MacBook circa 2018 having something like this - at least one special row
near the top? It had programmatically controlled colorized symbols, and was
a small touch screen.There's also been anime depiction of "projected
keyboards" -- the keys are projected onto a surface, and some AI-assisted
camera monitors your finger motions and is able to compute/interpret what
projected keys are being pressed (and those projections of course can be of
any symbol shape).


I recently came across the old H.S. yearbook of my grandmother from 1940s,
and it had a report/atrticle of a typing-class (all female; it mentioned
there were two males but they dropped out of the class), and the young
ladies had won a regional contest at a blazing speed of ~20 wpm.I
recall actually using a typewriter long ago, and I recall there being an
implicit speed limit because if you went too fast, the metal hammers would
bind up -- so I imagine in the 1940s the mechanical design of consumer/H.S.
grade typewriters maybe wasn't the best (so 20wpm then maybe was
reasonable).

I remember even by the late 1980s, "most" people still didn't know how to
type very efficiently (as "most" people still didn't even have a computer
at home).  If I had to guess, I'd say in the 1980s the average WPM was
still ~20, while today I suspect it's over 100 wpm (be it either thumbing
text messages or actual typing) -- that's just a guess, no research.   But
now-a-days, I don't ever see any "Typing Class" specific classes at H.S. or
college.   Collectively or in aggregate, we've "all" learned that skill at
a sufficient speed and accuracy.   It's like the width of roads -- or the
width of lanes within a road -- we're forever stuck making those about the
width of two horses pulling a carriage.

But if your keyboard was some kind rubix-cube type device (which I think I
had once seen such a thing, as a keyboard) -- maybe some specialized
training would be needed again.  But I guess to be worth it, it would have
to show trained operators can get some kind of orders-of-magnitude
improvement (300+ wpm), and maybe with the "speed of human thought" that's
still not necessary, because we're still going to pause and think in
between typing.   Good point in stock brokers using some special keyboard
-- I wonder if perhaps not just for speed, but perhaps also security?   I
wonder if a kind of "morphing organic" keycap keyboard might help in
password/identity verification?  (sort of like private keys -- instead of
typing a password, what if a few keys are configured to show your chosen
codewords mingled in with a few random words, and you just press the key
with your codewords in the right sequence -- afterwhich the keys revert to
their normal purpose?  not sure if that really helps, since the keyboard is
then showing portions of your password -- maybe the keycaps could be angled
or polarized to be less visible from side angles {like screen privacy
things}).


I recall looking up the origin of the QWERTY keyboard - a rough beginning
in 1874 but rather refined by 1878, and having essentially the same layout
we have today.So it's neat to me that for all the advances in computing
processors and memory -- but we're still basically using a typewriter as
our primary input :DI'm not sure if any alternative can really give any
orders-of-magnitude improvement to the average user (in speed or
accuracy).  BUT, it's really hard to think outside the box on a 150+ year
old design that's so well accepted by the general public -- like the
pen/pencil, it's still a good intuitive design.


-SL











On Wed, Jan 25, 2023 at 2:53 PM Bill Gunshannon via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

>
> On 1/25/2023 3:22 PM, John-Paul Stewart via cctalk wrote:
> > On 1/25/23 11:53, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote:
> >> And back on the stenography-keyboard like thing -- what about morphing
> >> keys?  If a keyboard had actual screens on the keys, and the keys change
> >> (the actual symbol) based on the context of whatever you're doing.  I
> know
> >> we have macros and reprogrammable keyboards, but morphing the actual
> symbol
> >> on the keys might be neat.
> > A keyboard using small 48x48 pixel OLED screens on each of the keys has
> > been done.  It was many years ago and they were super expensive at the
> > time.  As a result they were not commercially successful.
> >
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optimus_Maximus_keyboard
>
> Changing keys would be rather hard on a touch typist, don't you think?
>
>
> bill
>
>
>

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

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Regarding the 1940s high school yearbook article I mentioned:   I think it
was 1942 - so the war was still hot.  The two boys dropped the typing class
since they had signed up for the Service and had other training
commitments.  On the next page was a list of those who had recently signed
up, along with a list of recent graduates who had already been KIA (and on
which front it was - Pacific vs Eastern).


I'll try to remember next time I'm back home, to get a photocopy of that
article - maybe post it at the CHM forum as an interesting reminder about
the past.   I remember chuckling that the 20wpm wasn't too much to be proud
of.  But, do have to consider the context: they probably didn't have
typewriters at home, not sure how the requested content to type was
presented (projected onto a wall or on a lettersheet next to them?), and
what equipment they had.

And just had a thought:  if we could find 20-30 working condition type
writers today, I wonder how modern high school students would do in a
"typing contest" in that equipment -- would they type too fast and jam the
things up, ruining both their accuracy and wpm average? :) Hmmm!




On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 10:15 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> It seems as though MOST of us chose the typing class elective.
> Disproportionately more than the general population.
>
>
> We also probably don't have very many athletes here.  Although lugging
> this shit around does build up some strength.
>
> --
> Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
>
>
>

[cctalk] Re: 5150 cassette (Was: DLOAD BASIC command for Color Comp

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

For reference, my notes on the CTR/CCR tape units (and its relationship to
CoCo's and the 5150):
https://voidstar.blog/all-about-tandy-radio-shack-computer-cassette-recorder-trs-ccr/
(the Tandy Modem 1 from 1981 also used the cassette port, on one of the
TRS-80 systems - at least per its manual)


I know IBM had many NDA's when developing the 5150, and also that
development was done as secretly and quickly as possible.  I don't have any
evidence for it, but I always assumed that IBM ended up "borrowing" the
tape-cassette interface of the TRS-80, directly because of their
relationship with Microsoft.

Microsoft released TRSDOS Disk BASIC in 1979 - so they knew how to
interface BASIC with disks.

TRS-80 Model 3 release date was July 1980
CoCo release date is September 1980

I don't know exactly when the 5150 prototype started (there is an online
claim about someone having "the" IBM 5150 prototype board - with a bunch of
breadboard yellow wiring like they used on the 5100).

There is a date on when IBM contacted Microsoft: July 21st, 1980 (Jack Sams
call to Gates) -- same month as the TRS-80 Model 3 release.

Then, about a week later: July 27th, 1980 is the date noted when Microsoft
bought QDOS.

So if Microsoft knew IBM was in a rush, and that IBM wouldn't want to R
or consider any other new type of cassette-storage system (and there are
QIC-based backup systems in early PC Magazine up to even '83 or '84 --
decent capacity, but still expensive as a standalone storage solution) --
Microsoft engineers probably suggested a design they were already familiar
with.  There was no serial port (on the 5150 mainboard).  Maybe they used
the tape system to bootstrap early BIOS or MS-DOS revisions? (the disk
drive system hadn't been developed yet)   OR, maybe use of the tape system
was to distract anyone who might ask questions about the system (i.e. keep
the system uninteresting).

Did IBM also borrow aspects of the 5.25" disk drive system from the TRS-80
Model 3?  Maybe not, if the ISA bus required something different for that.
But to both Microsoft and IBM, "borrowing" the existing tape system from
the TRS-80 seems like a logical decision (cheap, quick, and can test some
stuff before the floppy disk solution was finished) - but it's just my
speculation.

-Steve










> On Mon, 30 Jan 2023, Jim Brain via cctalk wrote:
> > Lots of systems had dedicated cassette ports, but yes, CoCo has a
> dedicated
> > cassette port, as does all the 8 bit CBM machines, I think the Model
> 1/3/4
> > also, and doesn't the Apple II have one as well.  I am sure I am
> forgetting
> > a bunch.
>
>
>

[cctalk] CoreNET PC-51 info (IBM 5110)

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Is anyone familiar with PC-51 and/or CoreNET?

These are IBM 5110/5120 related tools developed by an individual in the
early 1980s.

My understanding is PC-51 was an emulator that ran BASIC programs from the
IBM 5110.   One keyword new in the IBM 5110 was the "FORMS" keyboard, and
you could define input fields (including type-formatting constraints, like
sequence of letters and numbers) -- and once defined, you could
relatively-easily store all the contents of the fields to a file (on tape
or disk).   I'm not entirely sure what format PC-51 supported (e.g. could
read in ASCII text files containing the BASIC programs?).  But I always
imagined those customer data entry forms in old Radio Shack or Sears stores
-- large department stores -- being developed in something like this.



And CoreNET, I think was some kind of "null modem cable" that let the IBM
5110 communicate with an IBM PC 5150.  The IBM 5110 has 3x DB25 connectors
at the backside (and 1x DB15 cable like what became the "standard" joystick
port on some systems in mid-late 1980s).  The external tape and disk system
would use these connectors -- with software driven from the ROS.  I've
always imagined it would be possible to "bit bang" across these external IO
pins with some PALM-assembly -- the machine should be fast enough to encode
7-bit ASCII at 300 baud across those pins, maybe 1200.   I'm not sure if
CoreNET used or required any async card or the parallel communication card
(that did IEEE-488), i.e. not sure if it was more than just a cable.




But what's more interesting - apparently Sony is now the owner of both
these assets, PC51 and CoreNET.  Maybe Hal Prewitt sold it to them? Why
would Sony be interested in it?   Anyone happen to know anyone who works at
Sony, or ideas on where to start on even "asking them" about it?  Might be
a lost cause these days.


Anyone happen to have a copy of the old manuals of either of these?


-Steve

[cctalk] Re: CoreNET PC-51 info (IBM 5110)

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

> Remember: this card is absolutely dumb, it essentially only has shift
> registers and a clock generator

Ah, the clock might be important.  I was thinking of a terminal that could
be written without the async card, and using maybe 3 pins on those set of
external DB25 connectors.   This is possible using the 4-pin connector
"serial IO" connector on the 1980 Color Computer (but it struggles to do
1200 baud).  And yes part of the work would be receiving ASCII and
translating those results to "display character codes."  I don't think the
5110 has a clock on its own, so you'd have to carefully time things? (like
doing audio on an original Apple 2 with no RTC module).



> But back to your questions: I personally have never heard of these
> products. I only know that there was a third-party hard disk option.

I got a response from Hal Prewitt  a couple months ago (apparently the
creator of these products), who stated he did still have a copy of PC-51,
but said "none of the hardware" was still available for CoreNET.   I asked
if PC-51 could be made available basically into the public domain, but
hadn't heard a response (then later I learned of the Sony connection, which
maybe is the reason).


-Steve


On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 4:22 AM Christian Corti via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 9 Nov 2022, Steve Lewis wrote:
> > always imagined it would be possible to "bit bang" across these external
> IO
> > pins with some PALM-assembly -- the machine should be fast enough to
> encode
> > 7-bit ASCII at 300 baud across those pins, maybe 1200.   I'm not sure if
>
> The PALM and thus the 51[012]0 is much much faster than that (I guess
> about 0.7 MIPS).
> I do bit-banging on the Asynchronous Serial I/O card with twice the baud
> rate (to sample the center of a bit) and am able to do *full-duplex*
> communications *with* terminal emulation *and* character set conversion at
> 4800 baud.
> Using the byte mode of the I/O adapter I can go up to 38400 baud (used for
> file transfers).
> Remember: this card is absolutely dumb, it essentially only has shift
> registers and a clock generator. The benefits come from the zero-overhead
> interrupt context switches and the great number of fast processor
> registers.
>
>
> But back to your questions: I personally have never heard of these
> products. I only know that there was a third-party hard disk option.
>
> Christian
>

[cctalk] Re: CoreNET PC-51 info (IBM 5110)

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Just yesterday, I received the following notes from Hal Prewitt of CORE
(see below).

Some highlights:
- confirmation that use of async, comm, parallel card was not necessary
- from the PC51 manual, their hard drives were accessed as "device 08" (D08
instead of D80 for the IBM disk drive)
- gives me hope that doing a similar thing with a modern SD card might be
possible !
- Hal's notes (not shown below) indicate that "5,000 to 30,000 users of
5110s and 5120s,"
- does anyone have insight into NASA's usage of PALM in the 1960s?


Notes from Hal Prewitt (HP):

"CoreNET was our storage & network for the 5110/5120 systems. We wrote
PALM assembler, linker and IO drivers.  We engineered an interface
card that connected to the 5110/20 cabling design. Build cables and
assorted storage systems. Did not use Async, Comm or parallel card
features. The HDD interface inside our drive boxes used SASI
(predecessor to SCSI). On the 5110/20 we loaded a driver from the
floppy which provided access to the CoreNet and our HD drives. The
5110/20 could directly access its storage devices (tape & floppies)
and our HD systems just by using new references for our storage
devices.

We also had a card for the PC bus and box that connected to the
5110/20 cables which provided the PC with access to the CoreNet and
IBM machines.  Had a box with 8" flopies for the PC and when running
PC-51 turned the PC into a 5110/20 replacement running Basic.

The term "PALM" refers to the processor. I was not involved but think
it was created for NASA for use in the 1960-1970s Apollo missions. IBM
was the computer equipment contractor.  And yes, the ROS emulated
S/360 code."



On Wed, Nov 9, 2022 at 2:17 AM Steve Lewis  wrote:

>
> Is anyone familiar with PC-51 and/or CoreNET?
>
> These are IBM 5110/5120 related tools developed by an individual in the
> early 1980s.
>
> My understanding is PC-51 was an emulator that ran BASIC programs from the
> IBM 5110.   One keyword new in the IBM 5110 was the "FORMS" keyboard, and
> you could define input fields (including type-formatting constraints, like
> sequence of letters and numbers) -- and once defined, you could
> relatively-easily store all the contents of the fields to a file (on tape
> or disk).   I'm not entirely sure what format PC-51 supported (e.g. could
> read in ASCII text files containing the BASIC programs?).  But I always
> imagined those customer data entry forms in old Radio Shack or Sears stores
> -- large department stores -- being developed in something like this.
>
>
>
> And CoreNET, I think was some kind of "null modem cable" that let the IBM
> 5110 communicate with an IBM PC 5150.  The IBM 5110 has 3x DB25 connectors
> at the backside (and 1x DB15 cable like what became the "standard" joystick
> port on some systems in mid-late 1980s).  The external tape and disk system
> would use these connectors -- with software driven from the ROS.  I've
> always imagined it would be possible to "bit bang" across these external IO
> pins with some PALM-assembly -- the machine should be fast enough to encode
> 7-bit ASCII at 300 baud across those pins, maybe 1200.   I'm not sure if
> CoreNET used or required any async card or the parallel communication card
> (that did IEEE-488), i.e. not sure if it was more than just a cable.
>
>
>
>
> But what's more interesting - apparently Sony is now the owner of both
> these assets, PC51 and CoreNET.  Maybe Hal Prewitt sold it to them? Why
> would Sony be interested in it?   Anyone happen to know anyone who works at
> Sony, or ideas on where to start on even "asking them" about it?  Might be
> a lost cause these days.
>
>
> Anyone happen to have a copy of the old manuals of either of these?
>
>
> -Steve
>
>

[cctalk] Any working Datapoint 2200 systems?

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

I've been looking for a video or image that shows what font the original
Datapoint 2200 used.

It's not shown in the manual.   There is one vintage image with the office
lady and the DP2200 on the desk- but the font isn't very clear in that.

In any modern video about the DP2200, none of them seem to power it on --
which is certainly understandable.   From what I've read, the power supply
of that system is prone to failure.  Also, the system is hard-coded to load
from Tape 1 -- which means both the tape drive, and tape media, still needs
to be in good working order (which would be pretty rare after this time).

In "the" DP2200 book, it only briefly mentions that the original tape
software was developed "on an HP system" (without any elaboration that I
could tell on which HP system that was).

Nothing in the manual suggests the original DP2200 could "program itself"
(i.e. no built in machine code monitor -- those TTL chips had one strict
boot up sequence: load from tape 1).   If there was a read error or no tape
available, I'm curious if any message showed on the CRT.

So, I was just wondering if there was any known pre-1973 Datapoint 2200's
that are still working? (and/or if any HD video of them powered on and
legible font can be seen)  Or any other more current system that we know
for sure used the same font?

Thanks!
-Steve

[cctalk] Re: Any working Datapoint 2200 systems?

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

True, I'd have to assume actual usage degrades the longevity of some
electronics (and number of hot/cold cycles).   But there is still some
natural shelf-life decay (maybe moisture in the air can find its way, even
in what should be sealed components).


> I am completely ignorant to the operation of the 5100 but can't you just
> dump that memory when the system is on?  Or is there some Jon Titor type
> reason behind it?

Some of it, yes.  Enough that a viable 5110 emulator was made (5100
emulator still in work).   But there is some code in the PALM processor
itself (about a dozen "tin cans" on there, related to how it actually
executed instructions), the Base IO card, display card, comm. cards.   Like
for the display card, and how its character set is generated (there should
be similar code like was shown for the DP).   So there are some limits to
the emulator, such as MARKing a tape/disk and doing both a read/write of
tape/disk images (there is some limited read capability).   So, true,
baring some of the I/O features and some precise timing of the processor, a
reasonable replica could be made (a good replica of the font is in Corti's
X11 parts of the emulator - one of the sets at least).  But that's an
emulation, not a replica :D






On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 3:00 PM Sellam Abraham via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> Steve said:
>
> >  I recall a talk from one of the early 1980s Commodore engineer, where he
> was amazed ANY C64 was still
> > running since the components were truly not designed to last more than a
> few years.
>
> Me too, to be honest.  But then, they seem to just randomly die at any
> moment, so maybe the C64 components are only good for so many hours of use,
> like a light bulb.  The fact that so many of them were made (upwards of 25
> million) is probably why some can still be found working.  Those are still
> somewhere on the vertical of the bathtub curve on the backend, where their
> useful life is fast coming to an end.  We will all probably witness the
> last working Commodore 64's in our lifetimes :D
>
> > But, in extracting the data on those TTLs, it seems like a modern replica
> of a DP2200 would be possible.
> > Can't say the same for the 5100 because apparently nobody left on the
> planet understands those MOSFET
> > silver cans (and how to extract the 6KB of content from them).
>
> I am completely ignorant to the operation of the 5100 but can't you just
> dump that memory when the system is on?  Or is there some Jon Titor type
> reason behind it?
>
> Sellam
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 12:15 PM Steve Lewis via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Jos, I hadn't realized how similar the DP1100 is.
> >
> > This brochure has a great image of the font right on the front page
> (80x12
> > text):
> >
> http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/datapoint/1100/Dataform_1100_Brochure_1974.pdf
> >
> > And it's probably a safe bet that it's the same font as in the 1972
> > models.   Would be neat to see the entire character set.  In the photo,
> the
> > screen looks fairly inset -- like maybe an inch?  That's good for keeping
> > glare off the screen.
> >
> > I see there was a Cassette 1100 and Disk 1100 (by '75):
> > http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/datapoint/1100/60259_1100_Brochure_1975.pdf
> >
> > Then I came across a DP2200 emulator, except -- it was apparently made in
> > 1973 and ran on a DP2200!  (ACM link, but click the PDF, it's freely
> > available)
> > https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/800192.805722
> >
> >
> > What a neat system.   In an old IBM 5110, I replaced its power supply
> with
> > modern components. From the DP2200 manual, it looks like it needs -5
> > -12 +5 +12 and +24V?  There is a "trick" in the modern buck-boost voltage
> > converters to get negative voltage (the IBM PSU needs -5 -12 +5 +12
> > and +8.5V).   I put notes about it here:
> > https://voidstar.blog/ibm-5100-power-supply/
> >
> > Maybe something similar can be done for the old DP's?  I understand for
> > authentic/historical perspective all original components is prefered, but
> > using a substitute PSU is reasonable for checking out the rest of the
> > system.
> >
> > Were there any contemporary complaints about the DP PSU in the mid-1970s?
> >  Like was it noisy, ran hot, cause any fires?   I recall a talk from one
> of
> > the early 1980s Commodore engineer, where he was amazed ANY C64 was still
> > running since the components were truly not designed to last more than a
> > few years.
> >
> >
> > What an amazing system those Datapoints were, for their time.  The
> > chicken-farm 

[cctalk] Re: Any working Datapoint 2200 systems?

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Thanks Jos, I hadn't realized how similar the DP1100 is.

This brochure has a great image of the font right on the front page (80x12
text):
http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/datapoint/1100/Dataform_1100_Brochure_1974.pdf

And it's probably a safe bet that it's the same font as in the 1972
models.   Would be neat to see the entire character set.  In the photo, the
screen looks fairly inset -- like maybe an inch?  That's good for keeping
glare off the screen.

I see there was a Cassette 1100 and Disk 1100 (by '75):
http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/datapoint/1100/60259_1100_Brochure_1975.pdf

Then I came across a DP2200 emulator, except -- it was apparently made in
1973 and ran on a DP2200!  (ACM link, but click the PDF, it's freely
available)
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/800192.805722


What a neat system.   In an old IBM 5110, I replaced its power supply with
modern components. From the DP2200 manual, it looks like it needs -5
-12 +5 +12 and +24V?  There is a "trick" in the modern buck-boost voltage
converters to get negative voltage (the IBM PSU needs -5 -12 +5 +12
and +8.5V).   I put notes about it here:
https://voidstar.blog/ibm-5100-power-supply/

Maybe something similar can be done for the old DP's?  I understand for
authentic/historical perspective all original components is prefered, but
using a substitute PSU is reasonable for checking out the rest of the
system.

Were there any contemporary complaints about the DP PSU in the mid-1970s?
 Like was it noisy, ran hot, cause any fires?   I recall a talk from one of
the early 1980s Commodore engineer, where he was amazed ANY C64 was still
running since the components were truly not designed to last more than a
few years.


What an amazing system those Datapoints were, for their time.  The
chicken-farm story in the DP2200 book is really fun - these farmers being
savvy enough to code up what they needed, and the systems compact enough to
fit in the farms and using modems even to sync up data (pre-1975).

The IBM 5100:  64x16 screen (instead of 80x12 used in DP), and a slightly
larger "box"(case) that had a "horn" inside for better airflow over all the
components (not an audible horn, but a thing that channel air from the PSU
fan to distribute over all the electronic cards and display circuits).
Plus the 5100 supported the external BNC video (I'm not sure if any of the
DP systems had an external video connector? I didn't see it mentioned in
the DP2200 manual) - I've put 3x extra CRT's chained up to the IBM 5100, in
the manual I think it says it can go up to 16 (not sure what the limiting
factor of that signal is).   I'm not sure if quality-wise the IBM PSU was
"better" (it takes about 3/4th of the back half of the case, the other
1/4th for the fan) - other than to say quite a few 5100's are still running
in the world.  Maybe all that altogether makes it (the 5100) a more
"portable" system (construction sites, forward edge battlespace, etc --
i.e. being more robust to handle outside heat).  Also it had a minimum of
8K. The APL stuff made the 5100 expensive, but the base BASIC model was
~$9K (I think even with the single QIC tape for 207KB storage; but that
price didn't include async/comm cards).  Weren't base DPs $5K-$7K (all
throughout 72-75) ?


But, in extracting the data on those TTLs, it seems like a modern replica
of a DP2200 would be possible.   Can't say the same for the 5100 because
apparently nobody left on the planet understands those MOSFET silver cans
(and how to extract the 6KB of content from them).


Sorry for the tangent:) I really was just curious about the DP2200 font,
and possibly seeing where it came from (just based on its style).  The DP
has a better "0" (zero) font than the 5100 :) (IMO)


-Steve



On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 3:45 AM jos via cctalk 
wrote:

> On 13.11.22 07:13, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote:
> > I've been looking for a video or image that shows what font the original
> > Datapoint 2200 used.
> >
> > It's not shown in the manual.   There is one vintage image with the
> office
> > lady and the DP2200 on the desk- but the font isn't very clear in that.
> >
> > In any modern video about the DP2200, none of them seem to power it on --
> > which is certainly understandable.   From what I've read, the power
> supply
> > of that system is prone to failure.  Also, the system is hard-coded to
> load
> > from Tape 1 -- which means both the tape drive, and tape media, still
> needs
> > to be in good working order (which would be pretty rare after this time).
> >
> > In "the" DP2200 book, it only briefly mentions that the original tape
> > software was developed "on an HP system" (without any elaboration that I
> > could tell on which HP system that was).
> >
> > Nothing in the manual suggests the original DP2200 could "program itself"

[cctalk] Re: DLOAD BASIC command for Color Computer 1/2 heritage

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Just some references:

https://techheap.packetizer.com/computers/coco/unravelled_series/color-basic-unravelled.pdf
This states DLOAD is input only
On page 88, I don't see DLOAD listed - it goes from CLOADM straight to EXEC
(so it is not clear to me on how DLOAD is implemented)

https://colorcomputerarchive.com/repo/Documents/Books/Unravelled%20Series/extended-basic-unravelled.pdf
"DLOAD is the most obscure command in the Color
Computer and absorbs a substantial amount of space in the ROM. DLOAD is so
poorly
understood because Tandy has never made the necessary companion routine,
DSEND.
DLOAD will DOWNLOAD a file over the RS 232 line from another system,
however there
is no companion routine, which will transmit a file over the RS 232 line to
another
Color Computer. Once a DSEND routine is built and made available to the
masses,
DLOAD will be much better understood."
In the Extended BASIC ROM, it does have a section for DLOAD (and I think a
DLOADM?).   Maybe inspecting that code might give some idea on its origin.
 Maybe DLOAD was a way to stream in a newer test ROM or other system
test/support software from a "larger" machine {e.g. a mainframe with a
6809E emulator?}).


http://vtda.org/docs/computing/RadioShack-Tandy/8759038-780-SL_TRS-80ModelIIIBasicQuckRef.pdf
I don't see DLOAD listed for the TRS-80 Model 3  (there is an INP keyword
that talks about PORT 0-255, and this manual talks about supporting two
cassette ports)

https://ia801906.us.archive.org/30/items/Introduction_to_TRS-80_Level_II_BASIC_1980_Michael_Zabinski/Introduction_to_TRS-80_Level_II_BASIC_1980_Michael_Zabinski.pdf
No DLOAD in the TRS-80 Level 2 BASIC  (I spot checked to see if it might be
under a different name, nothing stood out)

https://archive.org/details/IBMBASICAV1.10Manual/page/n13/mode/2up
No DLOAD in the IBM 5150 BASIC 1.10   (some suspects: LOG, LOF, GET/PUT,
COMn statement, IN/OUT - maybe one this means DLOADM?).
Appendix F-2 describes using BASIC to interface with the Async Serial IO
Adapter, page F-8 describes using the INP keyword)


Not sure if any that helps on the lineage of DLOAD.   I looked at the
Altair BASIC manual, didn't see any DLOAD there. And also the IBM
5110,  (NOT a Microsoft BASIC)
http://www.bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/5110/SA21-9308-0_IBM_5110_BASIC_Reference_Manual_Jan1978.pdf


Not sure if any of that helps, in terms of finding the DLOAD protocol.  In
the Color BASIC unravelled (first link), some of the code talked about
using SPACE?   As-in, something different than 8-N-1  (the SerialIO could
also be used for a printer, so maybe 7-SPACE-1?).


-SL







On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 12:02 AM Jim Brain via cctalk 
wrote:

> Over at the CoCo Mailing List, there's a archeological discussion about
> the DLOAD BASIC command in older versions of the Color Computer BASIC.
> It uses the serial port (and no doubt was designed for computer sharing
> in classrooms or similar), but the questions are around how it was
> designed and what inspiration is drew from.
>
> I infer MS wrote the code, and the protocol includes:
>
> P.ACK - Acknowledge - C8 hex.
> P.ABRT - Abort - BC hex.
> P.BLKR - Block request - 97 hex.
> P.FILR - File request - 8A hex.
> P.NAK - Negative Acknowledge - DE hex.
>
> Does that look like any protocol anyone has seen before?
>
> Jim
>
>
>

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

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Regarding the recent GreaseWeazle story in Maryland:

What do you guys think of the "archive-ness" of current solid state
devices?  M.2, NVMe, SSD, or even USB thumb sticks?   A friend proposed
that when one of those starts to go bad, any kind of partial data recovery
becomes difficult - but any more difficult than the old traditional
magnetic media?

I noticed IBM still sells high speed large capacity tape backup.  Large
capacity as in gigabytes if not terabytes (think maybe a 17TB tape was
offered).  But for high speed, I think they are still "SATA-speeds"
(300-600 MB/s)?

Over the past decade or so, I've had a few SSD go bad.  In fact just a few
months ago, I had a main boot drive of a laptop (using an SSD) start to
develop bad sectors and gradually got worse and worse performance - I
mirrored it to a new SSD while the system was still bootable and that
worked out.  But I've never had to really do "data recovery" on any solid
state device.   I do recall once in awhile, "just pulling" a USB thumb
drive corrupted the data - this was more in the early days of USB (maybe
it's still an issue, just modern faster machines are quicker at closing
files and flushing caches, so it's less probable of an issue - but I see
kids at school yanking thumb drives all the time these days).

So I was just curious on other peoples thoughts on that.   Maybe we just
haven't had enough time to really tell yet.

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?)


-Steve




On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 3:33 PM rar via cctalk 
wrote:

> Museum Staff Helps Exonerate David Veney
>
> January 19, 2023, Hunt Valley, MD — Staff members of the System Source
> Computer Museum recently completed a project that helped exonerate David
> Veney, wrongly convicted of rape in 1997. In 2005, after Mr. Veney sought a
> new trial, the state found irregularities in the prosecution, released Mr.
> Veney from prison, and declined to re-prosecute.
>
>
>

[cctalk] on the origin of home computers

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Greetings,

We're making final touches on a short history-video we've been making about
home computers (my daughter, in middle school, has been helping).

If anyone has time/interest to do a review, the draft listing is here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9mgSVJZoFc

Unless anyone spots a gross technical error, we're hoping to render the
final sometime this weekend or sometime this month.

Thanks,
Steve

[cctalk] Re: on the origin of home computers

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Adrian,

> There's a long tail to the video with no video and blank audio. After a
> while, a section of audio from the main flow is repeated.

Thanks, yeah that was a left over to compare an alternate ending. One
idea is to make it such that the video can "loop" seamlessly for continuous
play, at say a museum.   And the plan is to put it under Creative Commons
since I'm told that's the best way to help ensure it can be re-used without
question.

The plan was to keep it to 10min - at one point we had it up to 30min!!
 Minus the inadvertent excess, it'll be exactly 15min.  A part2 might focus
more on the Z80 and 6502 lines themselves, or I was thinking a kind of bio
on the actual engineers involved ("the names and faces").

Canada is represented also :)  And I just recalled, the "TK-80" (training
kit Z80 board) is also a "made in Japan" item (and led to the PC-8001 in
'79), it probably needs a flag (and I wanted to show a France flag for the
Micral-N -- but in the effort to keep it closer to 10min, we just couldn't
cover every item to keep a reasonable tempo). So then we debated to not
have popup flags at all, but I felt it was important to note that there was
international involvement here.

-Steve



On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 5:55 AM Adrian Godwin via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> Not really technical, but a couple of presentation points :
>
> There's a long tail to the video with no video and blank audio. After a
> while, a section of audio from the main flow is repeated.
>
> It seems to be common to consider Youtube videos more approachable if
> they're up to about 10 minutes long. You might benefit by splitting it into
> 2 parts.
>
> And even further off topic ..  I see that the pictorial guide includes
> machines from GB and Japan (and I think a Sharp is mentioned in the
> description). Although GB was heavily influenced by USA machines it did
> have it's own distinct history and so, I think, did Japan. Russia also had
> clones of well known machines and their own designs. Did any other
> countries have a history that was more complex than  picking the best known
> parts of the international trade ?
>
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 11:24 AM Steve Lewis via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
> > Greetings,
> >
> > We're making final touches on a short history-video we've been making
> about
> > home computers (my daughter, in middle school, has been helping).
> >
> > If anyone has time/interest to do a review, the draft listing is here:
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9mgSVJZoFc
> >
> > Unless anyone spots a gross technical error, we're hoping to render the
> > final sometime this weekend or sometime this month.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Steve
> >
>

[cctalk] Re: on the origin of home computers

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Tarek,

> This is awesome, Steve. First of all please give a high five to your
middle-schooler daughter whom you had her help make such a high
> quality video. I assume that such videos will also be shared at schools,
and your daughter’s friends. It would help raise awareness on
> the history of computers that ultimately led to today’s devices and
software. For once, our kids can say “aha, so this is where home computers
came from?” :)

You got it, the hope is to help awareness and be something acceptable for
schools to use.   And part of this started when my daughter asked me "what
was the first home computer?"   I just couldn't give a simple answer :)
She did the background (her signature is at the bottom left, "Carrion" --
and its subtle, but the gray at the top and bottom was intended to
represent silica sand) and picked most of the system arrangement.


Thanks!
Steve



On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 9:25 AM Tarek Hoteit via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> This is awesome, Steve. First of all please give a high five to your
> middle-schooler daughter whom you had her help make such a high quality
> video. I assume that such videos will also be shared at schools, and your
> daughter’s friends. It would help raise awareness on the history of
> computers that ultimately led to today’s devices and software. For once,
> our kids can say “aha, so this is where home computers came from?” :)
> In terms of content, I love the wealth of photos that are included. I can
> see that a lot of research was made for each item. As for the chronology of
> events or machines, there is never a 100% accurate story. Adrian, talked
> about US, UK, and Japan influence  Yes but then what’s the fine line of
> telling the story without getting too long and too technical. I think you
> managed to strike a good balance in your video in terms of content and
> machines. Well done!
>
> Regards,
> Tarek Hoteit
>
> > On Mar 8, 2023, at 3:25 AM, Steve Lewis via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >
> > Greetings,
> >
> > We're making final touches on a short history-video we've been making
> about
> > home computers (my daughter, in middle school, has been helping).
> >
> > If anyone has time/interest to do a review, the draft listing is here:
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9mgSVJZoFc
> >
> > Unless anyone spots a gross technical error, we're hoping to render the
> > final sometime this weekend or sometime this month.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Steve
>

[cctalk] Re: mainframe vs mini

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Actually, to answer my own question:  if "main frame" refers to the actual
framing... well the PDP-1, PDP-10, PDP-10 were minicomputers and still
required a lot of metal "framing" to set up.  So, can't they be considered
mainframes?

(another notion is that mainframes are "multi-user" -- most early
microcomputers were not multi-user, as they just barely supported the needs
of one user;  I'm not sure if the very first minicomputers were multi-user?)

The term minicomputer has always been awkward to me -- "mini" in my head
just means something smaller than me, which most minicomputers aren't (but
they are much smaller than a building).   But to say "mainframe" when
showing a minicomputer then necessitates some explanation...  Can't win :(

-Steve



On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 3:51 PM Steve Lewis  wrote:

> Not to open a huge can of worms but...
>
> I always considered a mainframe to basically be a "fully decked out"
> minicomputer.
>
> A minicomputer has a core CPU and memory (or racks of memory), then is
> "decked out" with data storage (racks of wall-sized tape decks), printers,
> pick-your-typewriter input (or two, or three), and maybe cabinets for
> serial IO or modem of some sort.
>
> So, sometimes I say mainframe when I really mean minicomputer (generally
> because mainframe just sounds cooler than "mini-computer" -- that is,
> mainframe clearly conveys the notion of "some big ass computer" whereas
> minicomputer just needs more clarification).
>
>
> What do you guys think?   Or is a mainframe one of those giants so large,
> you walk inside its CPU?
>
> Or, is it like this...
>
> computer  (a whole building, generally at least two story to support
> ac ducting and raised floor maintenance -- are these exclusively
> mainframes?)
>
> minicomputer(a single floor or room of a building or possibly a full
> top of a desk - and, these are NOT mainframes?)
>
> microcomputer   (half a deck top or smaller, memory and accessories mostly
> self contained - doesn't necessarily have to have a microprocessor, but
> typically does)
>
> nanocomputer   (modern MCU ? like Raspbery Pi)
>
>
> Also - on "personal computer", it's generally implied "digital electronic
> computers" so we don't have to dwell too much on rocks and beads as
> computers.  Glad we didn't call them "coordinated electron pumpers" :)
>
>
>
> -Steve
>
>

[cctalk] Re: on the origin of home computers

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Sellam,

> It seems to come down to agreement (or lack thereof) on the definition of
> "personal computer".

One criteria to me is not so much about the machine/system itself, but on
how it is originally financed.

If it costs more than a house or has to be financed by a committee, then
it's not personal in the same sense as something like "my toothbrush."
Because the use of that system is (generally) then under the control and
whims of that committee or owners - they paid for it, so they get to decide
what to do with it and who is authorized to use it.

Once such a system retires or gets replaced, and then becomes part of 2nd
hand market or surplus, then it's a "found object" that could
coincidentally become "personally owned."  But I think the original context
on how the system came to exist stands.

Then a second criteria (to me) is like the "my toothbrush" sentiment - it
is something small enough or compact enough that an individual can manage
putting it where they personally want it to be.  That doesn't necessarily
mean it fits in a pocket - but something about the size of small furniture
or a typical kitchen appliance or smaller is about right.


A third criteria is that it was built as a consumer product - meaning not
just a hand full exist.  The rationale here is that it is a "repeatable
product" and the process of how the thing was made isn't so esoteric or
obscure (or enough "production line" effort was made to make it repeatable,
if only for a time),   This helps draw the line between one-off custom
builds -- which those are the ultimate personal computer ("I made it") but
(to me) are just a different category  (I didn't make my toothbrush, but
the process for making it is so well understood its become a consumer
product).


-Steve





>

[cctalk] Re: on the origin of home computers

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Well thanks to ya'll prodding - I've brought it up to her again, and she
actually said "hmm, alright, maybe" !   Next week happens to be our spring
break - so. we might give it a shot !

So probably no final rendering this weekend - but hopefully by the end of
the month.







On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 1:39 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk 
wrote:

> Most important of all, for the video,
> your daughter should decide what parameters matter to her!
>
>
> On Thu, 9 Mar 2023, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote:
>
> > Sellam,
> >
> >> It seems to come down to agreement (or lack thereof) on the definition
> of
> >> "personal computer".
> >
> > One criteria to me is not so much about the machine/system itself, but on
> > how it is originally financed.
> >
> > If it costs more than a house or has to be financed by a committee, then
> > it's not personal in the same sense as something like "my toothbrush."
> > Because the use of that system is (generally) then under the control and
> > whims of that committee or owners - they paid for it, so they get to
> decide
> > what to do with it and who is authorized to use it.
> >
> > Once such a system retires or gets replaced, and then becomes part of 2nd
> > hand market or surplus, then it's a "found object" that could
> > coincidentally become "personally owned."  But I think the original
> context
> > on how the system came to exist stands.
> >
> > Then a second criteria (to me) is like the "my toothbrush" sentiment - it
> > is something small enough or compact enough that an individual can manage
> > putting it where they personally want it to be.  That doesn't necessarily
> > mean it fits in a pocket - but something about the size of small
> furniture
> > or a typical kitchen appliance or smaller is about right.
> >
> >
> > A third criteria is that it was built as a consumer product - meaning not
> > just a hand full exist.  The rationale here is that it is a "repeatable
> > product" and the process of how the thing was made isn't so esoteric or
> > obscure (or enough "production line" effort was made to make it
> repeatable,
> > if only for a time),   This helps draw the line between one-off custom
> > builds -- which those are the ultimate personal computer ("I made it")
> but
> > (to me) are just a different category  (I didn't make my toothbrush, but
> > the process for making it is so well understood its become a consumer
> > product).
> >
> >
> > -Steve
>

[cctalk] Re: mainframe vs mini

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Speaking of pornography, the ad on page 14 of 80 Micro magazine August 1980
was a bit of a shocker.

https://archive.org/details/80-microcomputing-magazine-1980-08/page/n13/mode/2up

On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 5:40 PM Sellam Abraham via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 2:18 PM Chuck Guzis via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> wrote:
>
> > On 3/9/23 13:51, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote:
> > >...
> >
> > Use the NYT definition of a minicomputer from 1970.  "Costs less than
> > $25,000" (in 1970 dollars).
> >
> > --Chuck
>
>
> Like "vintage", or pornography, it's one of those things that you know it
> when you see it.
>
> Of course, everyone sees different.  Your red may not be what I call red.
> 
>
> So basically we're doomed to misunderstand one another into eternity.
>
> Nothing new under the sun.
>
> Sellam
>
> >
> >
>

[cctalk] mainframe vs mini

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Not to open a huge can of worms but...

I always considered a mainframe to basically be a "fully decked out"
minicomputer.

A minicomputer has a core CPU and memory (or racks of memory), then is
"decked out" with data storage (racks of wall-sized tape decks), printers,
pick-your-typewriter input (or two, or three), and maybe cabinets for
serial IO or modem of some sort.

So, sometimes I say mainframe when I really mean minicomputer (generally
because mainframe just sounds cooler than "mini-computer" -- that is,
mainframe clearly conveys the notion of "some big ass computer" whereas
minicomputer just needs more clarification).


What do you guys think?   Or is a mainframe one of those giants so large,
you walk inside its CPU?

Or, is it like this...

computer  (a whole building, generally at least two story to support ac
ducting and raised floor maintenance -- are these exclusively mainframes?)

minicomputer(a single floor or room of a building or possibly a full
top of a desk - and, these are NOT mainframes?)

microcomputer   (half a deck top or smaller, memory and accessories mostly
self contained - doesn't necessarily have to have a microprocessor, but
typically does)

nanocomputer   (modern MCU ? like Raspbery Pi)


Also - on "personal computer", it's generally implied "digital electronic
computers" so we don't have to dwell too much on rocks and beads as
computers.  Glad we didn't call them "coordinated electron pumpers" :)



-Steve

[cctalk] domesticating the computer

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

(I think I prefer the original title of the video my daughter and I have
been working on - but still open to opinions about it)

Here is TAKE #10 (still AI narrated and a draft, but I found some Census
data that may be interesting and had some other revisions that I hope some
folks like!)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eaolOAcvmg

In the Description of the above, I have a note on where to get the image
link if anyone is interested in that.

Thanks again for the support and encouragement.  Over the next week I hope
to try out a Live Narration and wrap this up.

-Steve


summary of changes

0:28  expanded note on CRT (more time to press pause if you want to read)
5:04  new assembly line image, from actual TRS-80 "factory"
(still using term "motherboard")
5:55  Apple2 date set to April (going with "announcement dates")
revised "BYTE" quote (to be a little better organized)
6:46  revised intro of Z80
6:55  added Kildall image
7:12  revised intro of 6502
7:41  revised VisiCalc presentation (in 1979 he had split window, plotting,
and freeze panes!)
9:42  clarify credit of suggesting 86-DOS to Paul Allen (instead of Bill)
10:11  minor revisions in Tandy 1000 presentation
12:31  revised wording of Alto description
13:35  shortend PC-5000 description slightly
13:47  added census report
13:55  (forgot delay in showing critters)
14:04  added online services note
14:22  (more personal computers! extra points if you can name them)

[cctalk] Re: FW: 80 Micro Aug 1980 page scan

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Haven't found a physical copy yet (also been probing around on eBay).   I'm
just looking for a high resolution scan of page 10 of the images in the
lower half (of inside "factory").  The ones at archive.org are "grainy"
(but it could just be a side effect of the printing in that issue, so maybe
there is no real improvement we can obtain).

cc here if no other "cloud" option available:
contact.steve@gmail.com

Thanks!
Steve


On Sat, Mar 11, 2023 at 10:34 AM David Williams via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> I believe I have that issue, at least it is on my list of issues in the
> collection. Traveling at the moment but if you don't get it elsewhere
> I'll check when I am home tomorrow.
>
> David
>
> On 3/10/2023 11:48 PM, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote:
> > Was looking for a higher resolution scan of page 10 of August 1980 issue
> of
> > 80 Microcomputing magazine.
> >
> > The one online has some "square markings" -- and maybe that's just the
> way
> > it is, from the original photographs and how they got published in that
> > issue.  But finding a physical copy might clarify.
> >
> > But really after any image of a 1977-1978 inside-the-factory shot of
> Tandy,
> > Commodore, or Apple (mostly on the "motherboard" assembly itself).   I
> did
> > find one from 1982 for Commodore (German factory), and an Apple one from
> > 1984 (Macintosh assembly), but was hoping for a pre-1980 shot.
> >
> >
> > -Steve
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 11:01 PM Bill Degnan via cctalk <
> > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >
> >> I'm not sure what you're asking for, can you clarify?
> >> Bill
> >>
> >> On Fri, Mar 10, 2023, 11:52 PM Mark Huffstutter via cctalk <
> >> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Ah, I missed the physical copy part, You might have already found this
> >> one
> >>> online.
> >>>
> >>> Mark
> >>>
> >>> -Original Message-
> >>> From: Mark Huffstutter
> >>> Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 8:45 PM
> >>> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <
> >>> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> >>> Subject: RE: [cctalk] 80 Micro Aug 1980 page scan
> >>>
> >>> Steve,
> >>>  There is a pretty good copy on archive.org
> >>>
> >>> https://archive.org/details/80-microcomputing-magazine-1980-08
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Mark
> >>>
> >>> -Original Message-
> >>> From: Steve Lewis via cctalk 
> >>> Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 8:40 PM
> >>> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <
> >>> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> >>> Cc: Steve Lewis 
> >>> Subject: [cctalk] 80 Micro Aug 1980 page scan
> >>>
> >>> Anyone here have a physical copy of 80 Microcomputing (TRS-80 themed)
> >>> issue from August 1980?  There is a better quality scan of a page I'm
> >>> trying to get.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Steve
> >>>
> >>
>

[cctalk] domesticating the computer (take #12)

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

We're going to stick to the original title of "Domesticating the Computer"
- since that's more in tune with the intended theme.

TAKE #11:   (reference, revision listed below)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLHcUbVO_G0


And here's the narration situation.  My daughter said she'd try it, and she
did :)  But here's the problem, she has those painful metal braces.  Point
in fact, she got them tightened yesterday and in general speaking for very
long isn't her favorite thing right now.  So she's requested to just stick
to being in the Art department (recall, she did the background art and
overall arrangement and selection of the systems).

But, I still wanted to share this Take#12 to show she is real and is
involved in the project :)  And also that there were a few visual updates
planned.

TAKE #12:  (daughter narration)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2flzdzM-ZKM

Here is a summary of some of the visual updates...

01:11  added the ComputerWorld article referencing Pillsbury Farms and
Datapoint, in case there were any doubters about that.  [ the article is
from '73 and by that time they had been using the system for a couple years
- I think the original sales contract is in a museum down in San Antonio
still ]
(she botched the Odyssey audio - and this is a casual draft, so it's just
blanked out)
02:16  added a visual reference to Apollo program (since yes there are some
people who didn't catch what that means)
05:03  updates to the "factory" photos (found shot of Tandy's wave
soldering machine)  [ I still am aware and agree the use of the word
"motherboard" here isn't quite right -- but, acceptable anachronism? ]
05:21 (just wanted to point out - some complained I didn't mention the
Sphere, which recently a runnable board was revived and demonstrated; can't
fit em all, and the Sphere is mentioned at the bottom here as one of the
"early competitors")
07:32  looking for more "zip-loc bag" examples (Scott Adams has spoken and
confirms he used "baby bottle liners" - it's a small technicality that I
may just address visually on screen);  I'm hoping Ken and Roberta might
have photos of some of their old HiRez adventure in bags, but I suspect
that all burned in their house years ago ('91 or so?)
   (I wanted a small segment to explain why Zork couldn't be made available
on cassette tape-- I content that Zork itself motivated the purchase of
many early disk drives :)  but that'll be for another day )
07:49  minor updates for VisiCalc presentation (it's so neat that in '79,
it had effectively Freeze Panes, split window, and could do Plotting!)  Dan
confirms that yes, "software patent" (lack of it) was an issue at the time
09:46  adjusted to give "credit" of 86-DOS to Paul Allen and Tim Patterson.
13:50  the census report of 8% of "households of computer" is an important
part of the theme
(...some bloopers at the end...)


I now have two (separate) folks who can maybe help with the narration.   If
that comes together, then I'll add a note to a review of that in the
description or comments of TAKE #11 and TAKE #12.


-Steve
(voidstar)

[cctalk] delphi, before 1990

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Hey all, was Delphi accessible as a bulletin board before 1990?

I'm only finding logos and info about Delphi post-1990.

But for early 1980s, what as Delphi?  Was it a telnet-sort-of-thing only
accessed only from universities?

I've searched through early BYTE and PC Mag and just not finding any
advertisements about it.

-Steve

[cctalk] Re: delphi, before 1990

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Tom Baker, the best Doctor of all?  I'm in, grabbing popcorn.

I recall using GEnie (at least once) and I recall hearing about Delphi.   I
was trying to find early versions of their logo, such as from early
advertisements - but so far can only find "late model" versions.

Then I started thinking about "how were they even advertised? having lots
of phone numbers in different area codes would have been expensive, maybe
they only advertised in a few cities back in those days?"   But I don't
remember any flyers about it - I think we just knew it from the local
Computer Club, word of mouth.

(I also remember Intel coming to early computers clubs, and raffling or
tossing out a processor after a talk)





On Sat, Mar 11, 2023 at 10:38 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 11 Mar 2023, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote:
> > Hey all, was Delphi accessible as a bulletin board before 1990?
> > I'm only finding logos and info about Delphi post-1990.
> > But for early 1980s, what as Delphi?  Was it a telnet-sort-of-thing only
> > accessed only from universities?
> > I've searched through early BYTE and PC Mag and just not finding any
> > advertisements about it.
>
> They started in 1981, and expanded in 1983.
> They apparently still exist.
> http://forums.delphiforums.com/delphihistory/messages/10/1
>
> Competing with AOL, Prodigy, Netcom, etc.
>
> In those days, the internet was not open to the public (guvmint, academia,
> military, etc.), so, to some extent those "services" were trying to
> compete with the internet.
>
>
>
> Also, in your historical research, if you have not already done so, you
> and your daughter have got to watch "Hyperland".
> It was a 50 minute long BBC documentary in 1991? (PRE WWW) about the
> future of the internet.  It was written by Douglas Adams and Ted Nelson,
> and starring Tom Baker.
>
> https://archive.org/details/DouglasAdams-Hyperland
>
> If you want subtitles/captions, 6 years ago, I created an .SRT (captions
> file of it!
>
> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4hCJm9ZEADCblVSVlBxdmZyREU/view?usp=drive_web
> (400MB
> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4hCJm9ZEADCblVSVlBxdmZyREU/view?usp=drive_web(400MB>
> video with subtitles burned in)
> .SRT file:
> http://www.xenosoft.com/HyperlandCAPS_En_US_0_77.srt
>
> --
> Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
>

[cctalk] domesticating the computer - call for last inputs

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Ok, I think we have a good narrated composition!  It is still
Unlisted since there are a few more things to finalize/decide.  But unless
we spot any major flaw in the rendering, this should be wrapped up over the
next day or so.   There are a few somewhat subtle easter eggs added.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPrHfUrhjQk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HPrHfUrhjQk>>


One question is: should this be set to "Yes it is for kids"?  My
understanding is Enabling that prevents Comments being enabled, but I'm not
sure if there is any other benefit. But yes, this is NOT a documentary
and is intended more for a middle/high school audience.


Other decisions are things like final thumbnail and writing up the
Description, credits, etc.

And - recall - this wasn't intended as a "full history of computing", the
focus was on the 1970s.  But there is a brief segment towards the end that
honors some pre-1970s work.

Also, this may be the only "history of personal computer" related video
that doesn't mention the word Gates or Wozniak  [ that wasn't exactly
intentional! ;) actually the original intent was to avoid any names at all,
it wasn't a biography - but a few do end up mentioned ]

Thanks for all the feedback and criticism - it won't be perfect for
everyone, but I think it is far better than what we started with.   My
"technical review team" has included:

Dennis Roberson (SCAMP/IBM 5100 lead engineer)
Dan Bricklin (VisiCalc)
Scott Adams (Adventure and many other games)
Ken Williams (Sierra OnLine)




-Steve

[cctalk] Re: Visiting the computer history museum (chm)

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

> I am visiting the Computer History Museum in California next week.
> I always wanted to check it out and spend a day there, but something else
happens. Any recommendations
> of what is a must see at the museum and anything else classic computing
nearby in one day only (March 15)?

I've only been once a couple years ago.It's an excellent and worthwhile
visit.  I only had a day as well, and can't note on other nearby "classic
computing" places (I think the DigiBarn is a bit further to the south, not
sure if open to the public).  But just a quick note about food:  The
cafeteria they had downstairs wasn't open at the time.  You might prepare
your own snack since as I recall there wasn't much eating options in the
immediate area (there is a coffee and sandwich shop across the street, easy
walking distance).

-Steve

[cctalk] Re: Visiting the computer history museum (chm)

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

> Hello. I am visiting the Computer History Museum in California next week

Tarek,

I forgot, I have my own little CHM notes page here:
https://voidstar.blog/vcf-west-2021/

Not much, since at the time not all the exhibits were re-opened yet - so
there is much more to see now-a-days. May look into the schedule of their
1401 demo (I think they do fairly regularly, but schedule may vary).

While in the area, I did make it over to Oakhurst to see the old Sierra
(software company) buildings - it was meaningful to me, but it's a far
drive.  I have notes about it at the bottom of this page:
https://voidstar.blog/san-francisco-california-2021/

-Steve





On Sun, Mar 12, 2023 at 11:28 AM Tarek Hoteit via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> Hello. I am visiting the Computer History Museum in California next week.
> I always wanted to check it out and spend a day there, but something else
> happens. Any recommendations of what is a must see at the museum and
> anything else classic computing nearby in one day only (March 15)?
>
> Regards,
> Tarek Hoteit

[cctalk] Re: Low cost logic analyzer

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

I'm probing two DB25 connectors on the old IBM 5110 to figure out how to
programmatically jiggle some pins and get some serial IO going.I've
been working on writing a terminal emulator in its PALM machine code (now
that we have an excellent assembler for it) - I may go lazy and just have
it wrap around on the screen, instead of actually scrolling the screen (the
display circuit apparently has no scrolling, you have to DIY).

I've also written a kind of "synthesizer" to toy around with the timing of
its speaker.  It's a video I'll be working on after the "domesticating the
home computer" stuff is done.

Anyway, as an option slightly cheaper than the Saleae, I'm trying the
32-channel version of the DreamSourceLab U3Pro32.  It's not horrible, I've
24 pins hooked up so far.  I debated on if 2x16's would be better.
 Amazon is good about returns, but this little DSL probe is good enough,
I'll be keeping it.

DreamSourceLab DSLogic U3Pro32 USB-Based Logic Analyzer with 1GHz Sampling
Rate, 2Gbits Memory, USB 3.0 Interface, 32 Channels


-Steve


On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 8:12 PM Paul Koning via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> Gents,
>
> I've been doing logic debugging (on a fairly primitive software defined
> radio I designed back in 1999) with an old Philips logic analyzer.  It's
> not bad, certainly fast enough (I need 100 Msamples/s, it can do twice
> that) and it's more than wide enough (I need 32 channels).  But its capture
> memory is microscopic so I struggle to see more than one or two
> transactions, and I need to see more than that.
>
> Some poking around shows various USB-connected logic analyzers for quite
> low prices, and a number of them seem to have suitable specs.  I also ran
> across sigrok.org which seems to be an open source logic analysis
> framework that can drive a bunch of those devices.  Nice given that too
> many of them only come with Windows software.
>
> I suspect there are others that have not too expensive logic analyzers and
> might be able to offer up suggestions or product reviews.
>
> paul
>
>

[cctalk] Re: on the origin of home computers

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

A revised TAKE #10 version of the video is here to clean up some aspects
(some notes in the Description; still DRAFT and unlisted)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eaolOAcvmg

On Thu, Mar 9, 2023 at 1:39 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk 
wrote:

> Most important of all, for the video,
> your daughter should decide what parameters matter to her!
>
>
> On Thu, 9 Mar 2023, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote:
>
> > Sellam,
> >
> >> It seems to come down to agreement (or lack thereof) on the definition
> of
> >> "personal computer".
> >
> > One criteria to me is not so much about the machine/system itself, but on
> > how it is originally financed.
> >
> > If it costs more than a house or has to be financed by a committee, then
> > it's not personal in the same sense as something like "my toothbrush."
> > Because the use of that system is (generally) then under the control and
> > whims of that committee or owners - they paid for it, so they get to
> decide
> > what to do with it and who is authorized to use it.
> >
> > Once such a system retires or gets replaced, and then becomes part of 2nd
> > hand market or surplus, then it's a "found object" that could
> > coincidentally become "personally owned."  But I think the original
> context
> > on how the system came to exist stands.
> >
> > Then a second criteria (to me) is like the "my toothbrush" sentiment - it
> > is something small enough or compact enough that an individual can manage
> > putting it where they personally want it to be.  That doesn't necessarily
> > mean it fits in a pocket - but something about the size of small
> furniture
> > or a typical kitchen appliance or smaller is about right.
> >
> >
> > A third criteria is that it was built as a consumer product - meaning not
> > just a hand full exist.  The rationale here is that it is a "repeatable
> > product" and the process of how the thing was made isn't so esoteric or
> > obscure (or enough "production line" effort was made to make it
> repeatable,
> > if only for a time),   This helps draw the line between one-off custom
> > builds -- which those are the ultimate personal computer ("I made it")
> but
> > (to me) are just a different category  (I didn't make my toothbrush, but
> > the process for making it is so well understood its become a consumer
> > product).
> >
> >
> > -Steve
>

[cctalk] Re: on the origin of home computers

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

It's helping arrange content and tempo, so it's been good for that (and why
it is still a "draft").   We'll try to get it read (but no sound studio, so
then you end up with dog barks, lawn mowers, and airplanes in the
background haha).I don't think I can do attachments here, but could
post the "script" instead.

On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 12:28 PM geneb via cctalk 
wrote:

> On Fri, 10 Mar 2023, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote:
>
> > A revised TAKE #10 version of the video is here to clean up some aspects
> > (some notes in the Description; still DRAFT and unlisted)
> >
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_eaolOAcvmg
> >
>
> The speech synthesis basically wrecks it for me, sorry.
>
> 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: on the origin of home computers

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Grumpy Ol' Fred ,

On the GENIAC -- thanks for sharing that!  It has this "killer app" called
 "Masculine–Feminine Testing Machine"  Brilliant!







On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 2:41 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk 
wrote:

> Since we are never going to completely agree on
> "First",
> "computer",
> "home computer",
> "home computing", (using a a terminal with a remote computer)
>
> might I suggest the works of Edmund Berkeley.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geniac
> https://www.instructables.com/GENIAC-Electric-Brain-Replica/
>
> Full text of "Giant Brains, or, Machines That Think"
> https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.233530
> https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/68991
>
>
> OB_tangent: I remember that Jim Warren said "machinew WHO think"
>
>
> On the issue of "first", many authors on the topic have personal
> "requirements" for it to be considered. (such as storage, video display,
> keyboard, HDD, etc.) "It wasn't REALLY a computer, unless it had ..." In
> MOST cases, they will declare the "first" to be one generation before they
> got one.  CP/M users often choose Altair; People who started in PC will
> often pick CP/M; people who started with Windoze might pick DOS, Mac
> users declare Apple2, etc.
>
> --
> Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
>

[cctalk] Re: on the origin of home computers

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Thank you all for the notes (and feedback).

The 1964 skit of Patty Duke using that Univac-422 - all the markings of a
personal computer right there, no doubt.  But dragging that into a home
doesn't make it a home computer.  As engineers, sure, we're good with that
- I don't even put cases on my computers.   Air flow, p, overrated.
Unless the AC cuts out in the summer.

The original video title I had was "domesticating the computer."  Like
taming wild cats and wolves, and finally bringing them into our homes as
tamed beasts that become our companions.  Maybe I should go back to that
title?


Some thoughts:

You can drag something like a LINC or Univac home, but it's still quite a
beast - and you'll be on your own with what is essentially a one-off system
(i.e. for finding parts and tech manuals).   Even if they made 1000 of them
at best, that's still rare to find an expert to help with those systems.  A
few technical folks could handle that - spending all evening loading some
kind of software, and all weekend replacing tubes.  But the typical
consumer won't bother.


One of my favorite references:
https://www.tech-insider.org/personal-computers/research/acrobat/7807.pdf

And here is my summary of that article:
May 5 1966: (Steven B Gray founded Amateur Computer Society)
  1966: book "We Built Our Own Computer" by A B Bolt
(not much for 1967 - some CQ magazine kits that were never built)
April 1968: ECHO IV (Jim Sutherland; 8K, 18 instructions, 160 kHz)
(no highlights for 1969/1970 - but CTC/Datapoint was active around this
time on their 3300)
  1971: 1000 Minutemen I missile guidance processors became available
in surplus
  1971: first "computer kit" (Louis E Frenzel, 15 instructions)
  1971: Kenbak-1 (65 instructions, audio cassette storage)
  1972: Don Tarbell - editor program and assembler program
early 1972: opening of "several used computer equipment stores"   (used as
in surplus)
  1972: 8008, TTL price drops, 1101 programmable memory (and the 1702)
  1972: Roger Amidon's 4-bit "Spider" (TTL, RTTY, featured in BYTE
April 1977)
Sept. 1972: Hal Chamberline, HAL-4096 (surplus IBM 1620 core, 16-bit system)
Sept. 1972: Electronic Design article, 1024 ASCII chars on a TV set
  May 1973: EPD System One kit
Sept. 1973: Don Lancaster TVT-1
 Late 1973: Scelbi-8H ($2760 for 16KB, cassette IO, ASCII keyboard, o-scope
output), defunct Dec. 1974
  1973: PDP-8A under $900
 July 1974: Radio Electronics Jonathan Titus, Mark-8 (est. 500 units built)
 Oct. 1974: SwTPC TVT-II kit and ASCII keyboard ($220 total)
April 1975: *first deliveries *of Altair 8800 (kit had no IO, 10k sold by
end of year per MITS)
April 1975: first computer-club meeting (Bob Reiling, Gordon French)
 Fall 1975: MITS 4K/8K BASIC interpreters
 Fall 1975: SwTPC 6800-based microcomputer
(end of first decade of "amateur computing")

Other notes:
1969: Busicom/Intel contract for printer-calculator ($200 4004)
1971: Datapoint/Intel relationship ($200 8008, interrupt capability), Intel
introduces 1101 and 1702
1972: National Semiconductor introduces IMP-16 ("user definable instruction
set")
1973: Intel 8080 ("still required an external clock and multiple power
supplies", vs 6800 required one TTL power supply)
1975-1976: "3rd gen microprocessors" Z-80, enhanced 8080 (on chip clock),
6502, TMS9900/TMS9980 (16-bit)
1977: "4th gen microprocessors" (actual "microcomputers in a single IC" --
microprocessor, ROM, programmable memory, IO on one chip)


As to opinions from younger folks:  one thing I'd like to say is "don't
give up on them."  Teenagers may be aloof and not seem interested now - but
don't be overly discouraged.  Years later, perhaps even decades, they may
remember something about the experience and come back to it.I think my
Ice Breaker with my daughter was playing 1987 Wheel of Fortune (or maybe
1988) on the IBM PC a couple years ago -- it's "fugly" in CGA but yet
charming in its way.  But the real kicker is, my daughter won (virtually)
"5000 lbs of pot" when she won one of the rounds in that version, and we
still laugh about that since it was so unexpected from a "family game from
the 1980s".



-Steve




On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 1:55 PM Will Cooke via cctalk 
wrote:

>
>
> > On 03/08/2023 11:59 AM CST Tarek Hoteit via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >
>
> > We probably need to get more advice from her on what we all, old-school
> timers, should do to help keep the legacy going on !
> >
> > Regards,
> > Tarek Hoteit
> >
>
> That statement may be the most important one on this list in a long, long
> time.
>
> Will
>

[cctalk] ATA-3 50-pin IDE

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Is anyone familiar with the 50-pin IDE interface, which I think is called
ATA-3?  It is from around 1997-2002.   Normally IDE is 40-pin, or in
laptops might be a 44-pin.

But in a COMPAQ Presario 1220, I've come across its hard drive that is
using this 50-pin interface (two rows of 25-pin that are quite
small/tightly spaced - moreso than even PCMCIA).

I believe it is different (electrically) than the 1.8" 50-pin interface.  I
ordered a CF-to-50-pin adapter that is intended for those 1.8" drives, and
it won't work on this ATA-2 port (system won't boot with it inserted).
However, all my CF cards are larger than 2GB - so I'm not sure if that was
the issue (don't think so, I think even with 8GB or larger it would still
at least try to boot).


The 2GB drive in this Presario (with the "weird' 50-pin IDE) contains
Windows ME and Office 2000.  That's cute, but I'm not so interested in that
- I was hoping to image that drive for archive, then install something else
(OS2).  But I can't find any "ATA-3 to normal 40-pin IDE" adapter.

I think the "6 extra pins" on this 50-pin (relative to normal 44-pin laptop
drives of those days) -- 2 of those pins (5-6) aren't used (maybe a kind of
key) and the 4 others (1-4) are vendor specific.  So I may just be out of
luck here in upgrading or replacing this drive with a more modern
solution.  But wanted to run it by the crew here before giving up.

Thanks,

-Steve / v*

[cctalk] Re: ATA-3 50-pin IDE

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Picture is on the VCF discussion here:

50-pin ATA to 44-pin ATA conversion options | Vintage Computer Federation
Forums (vcfed.org)
<https://forum.vcfed.org/index.php?threads/50-pin-ata-to-44-pin-ata-conversion-options.1242427/#post-1307018>
https://forum.vcfed.org/index.php?threads/50-pin-ata-to-44-pin-ata-conversion-options.1242427/#post-1307018


I could be wrong, maybe it is a SCSI interface.



On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 3:22 PM Wayne S via cctalk 
wrote:

> Can you post a picture somewhere?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Mar 26, 2023, at 13:20, Paul Berger via cctalk 
> wrote:
> >
> > I have seen lots of laptop drives that would fit a 50 pin connector
> that is about 2mm pitch  Looking at the back of the drive from the left
> there are 44 pins in a group then 2 pins missing and the remaining 4 are
> for selecting master and slave.
> >
> > Paul.
> >
> >> On 2023-03-26 4:33 p.m., Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote:
> >> Is anyone familiar with the 50-pin IDE interface, which I think is
> called
> >> ATA-3?  It is from around 1997-2002.   Normally IDE is 40-pin, or in
> >> laptops might be a 44-pin.
> >>
> >> But in a COMPAQ Presario 1220, I've come across its hard drive that is
> >> using this 50-pin interface (two rows of 25-pin that are quite
> >> small/tightly spaced - moreso than even PCMCIA).
> >>
> >> I believe it is different (electrically) than the 1.8" 50-pin
> interface.  I
> >> ordered a CF-to-50-pin adapter that is intended for those 1.8" drives,
> and
> >> it won't work on this ATA-2 port (system won't boot with it inserted).
> >> However, all my CF cards are larger than 2GB - so I'm not sure if that
> was
> >> the issue (don't think so, I think even with 8GB or larger it would
> still
> >> at least try to boot).
> >>
> >>
> >> The 2GB drive in this Presario (with the "weird' 50-pin IDE) contains
> >> Windows ME and Office 2000.  That's cute, but I'm not so interested in
> that
> >> - I was hoping to image that drive for archive, then install something
> else
> >> (OS2).  But I can't find any "ATA-3 to normal 40-pin IDE" adapter.
> >>
> >> I think the "6 extra pins" on this 50-pin (relative to normal 44-pin
> laptop
> >> drives of those days) -- 2 of those pins (5-6) aren't used (maybe a
> kind of
> >> key) and the 4 others (1-4) are vendor specific.  So I may just be out
> of
> >> luck here in upgrading or replacing this drive with a more modern
> >> solution.  But wanted to run it by the crew here before giving up.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >> -Steve / v*
>

[cctalk] Re: domesticating the computer - call for last inputs

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Ok, the final is up!   If anyone wants the background image, the link is in
the description.

Thank you all for helping to make this far better than what my daughter and
I started with.

Domesticating the Computer: how the appliance computer came to be - YouTube


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dTHV-qRf-0c





On Fri, Mar 17, 2023 at 2:46 PM Erik Bruchez  wrote:

> One question is: should this be set to "Yes it is for kids"?  My
>> understanding is Enabling that prevents Comments being enabled, but I'm
>> not
>> sure if there is any other benefit. But yes, this is NOT a documentary
>> and is intended more for a middle/high school audience.
>
>
> You probably shouldn't enable "Made for kids" as it will disable lots of
> other features, including saving the video to a playlist including Watch
> Later. So it's essentially all drawbacks and no benefits.
>
> -Erik
>

[cctalk] Re: IBM 5110 external IO (was Re: Low cost logic analyzer)

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

> This is easy since it is an I/O bus. The instructions are GETB, PUTB, STAT
> and CTRL. In any case the corresponding control line is asserted.
> This means, a PUTB will put the device address on the X/Y lines, the data
> byte onto the Bus Out lines, and assert Put Strobe.
> Oh yes, one interesting thing to note: the STAT instruction (usually to
> get some status information from the device) will put the register
> *number* onto the Bus Out lines. I think IBM did this to be able to select

Alfred Arnold's AS assembler is working very good for with your
mnemonics for PALM assembly.
We debugged a few issues (including also that he supports the original IBM
mnemonics - he had a few inconsistencies on those, but I think we got them
all ironed out -- but in any case, I much prefer your mnemonics anyway).
His newer AS build/updates as of this month should have all those fixes.


I started preparing a library of assembly functions for basic things (like
binary to decimal string conversion), and polling keyboard inputs -
standard things I'd need to build up to the terminal program.  Along the
way, I got sidetracked into making this demo that I think is the first time
anyone has showcased a special feature of the IBM 5110 character set:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5ewb1BOgzE


I got the DB25 pins wired up, and was going to start experimenting with
those GETB, PUTB, CTRL and STAT opcodes.  I don't have any actual serial IO
card for the 5100 - but I figure I should be able to purely "bit bang" off
the external IO in my own main-loop.  It might only get 50 or 110 baud, but
I'm fine with that -- anything to let me stream in some code without having
to re-type it.

Input would be the first goal: monitor the 8 data lines on the external
pins, start writing one byte at a time to RWS (and just do something like
press spacebar to toggle the writing).  Then I use an MCU connected to
those 8 data lines with some TBD timing (probably 330ohm resistors
inline?).   And I only need to support streaming in machine code (a binary
produced by AS).  That is, find some minimal bootloader (using GETB and
CTRL?) to load a larger terminal program - then that terminal program
should be able to interface with a WiModem ("RS232" device connected up
with 3 pins). I'd be happy to just get the input loader working for
starters, but I can't use the 5110 emulator for that and have to be hands
on with the real system.

That's the dream, anyway.My internal cassette deck on that system is
still working, but that may not last forever (and in any case, I can't
write new code from the PC onto a QIC tape in a format the 5110
understands).

Note, I'm booked to go to VCF East this year, if anyone wants to talk
5100/5110 stuff.


-Steve






>

[cctalk] 80 Micro Aug 1980 page scan

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Anyone here have a physical copy of 80 Microcomputing (TRS-80 themed) issue
from August 1980?  There is a better quality scan of a page I'm trying to
get.

Thanks,
Steve

[cctalk] Re: FW: 80 Micro Aug 1980 page scan

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Was looking for a higher resolution scan of page 10 of August 1980 issue of
80 Microcomputing magazine.

The one online has some "square markings" -- and maybe that's just the way
it is, from the original photographs and how they got published in that
issue.  But finding a physical copy might clarify.

But really after any image of a 1977-1978 inside-the-factory shot of Tandy,
Commodore, or Apple (mostly on the "motherboard" assembly itself).   I did
find one from 1982 for Commodore (German factory), and an Apple one from
1984 (Macintosh assembly), but was hoping for a pre-1980 shot.


-Steve



On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 11:01 PM Bill Degnan via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> I'm not sure what you're asking for, can you clarify?
> Bill
>
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2023, 11:52 PM Mark Huffstutter via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
> > Ah, I missed the physical copy part, You might have already found this
> one
> > online.
> >
> > Mark
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Mark Huffstutter
> > Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 8:45 PM
> > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <
> > cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> > Subject: RE: [cctalk] 80 Micro Aug 1980 page scan
> >
> > Steve,
> > There is a pretty good copy on archive.org
> >
> > https://archive.org/details/80-microcomputing-magazine-1980-08
> >
> > Regards,
> > Mark
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Steve Lewis via cctalk 
> > Sent: Friday, March 10, 2023 8:40 PM
> > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <
> > cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> > Cc: Steve Lewis 
> > Subject: [cctalk] 80 Micro Aug 1980 page scan
> >
> > Anyone here have a physical copy of 80 Microcomputing (TRS-80 themed)
> > issue from August 1980?  There is a better quality scan of a page I'm
> > trying to get.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Steve
> >
>

[cctalk] WTB Sharp PC-5000

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

If anyone knows of a Sharp PC-5000 that might be available.

I've been looking for one for a while.

Might be more in the Japanese or European vintage market?

Prefer working, I've been curious about the MS DOS 2.0 ROM that it has.

-Steve
voidstar

[cctalk] QIC tapes

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Is there anyone familiar with restoring or recovering QIC tapes?

I have some original tapes from an IBM 5100.(DC300 media, I think?)

A couple of them have the band loose -- I've seen these replaced in the
past.

One of them looks in decent condition, but want a second opinion before
trying to read it in the IBM 5100.  Can send preview images of the
conditions.

I do also have an external 5106 and, if the tapes are still readable, I
should be able to make "fresh" backup copies (as far as the DC6150 media
that I have which is from the 90's).

From there, I'm not exactly sure how to digitally extract the content to
have preserved.

-SL

[cctalk] Re: Booting from B: (Was: Getting QRST files onto

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Can't help with booting DOS to a B: drive.  But, in case of interest - I do
keep the IBM PC 5150 notes here:
Specifically as might be related here, I have some notes on using 4 disk
drives:

https://voidstar.blog/5150-setting-up-floppy-disk-controller/

And main point is, the DOS DRIVER.SYS might let you control the disk drive
letters in a way that
might help in some way.  I think it was available pretty early on -- if not
PC-DOS 1.0, at least PC-DOS 2.0.

DEVICE=\DOS\DRIVER.SYS /d:2 /t:80 /s:9
DEVICE=\DOS\DRIVER.SYS /d:3 /t:80 /s:9

There is also a SUBST command.  Can't remember if SUBST lets you override
an existing letter -- I think is probably does.
But if you don't have a B: drive at all, you can do something like:
SUBST B: C:\UTILS
Then the whole B: drive gets substitutes to that given folder.


My more main IBM PC 5150 notes are here:

https://voidstar.blog/ibm-pc-5150-notes/



On Sun, Feb 26, 2023 at 5:55 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk 
wrote:

> > Which versions of DOS let you boot off B: ?
>
> CORRECTION:
> Although the default of DOS used to be A: then first HDD (usually C:), it
> is the computer firmware, not DOS that decides that.
>
> The assumption that C: is the HDD can be annoying. I used to use PCs with
> four floppies.  If jumpered properly, the HDD was E:.
>
>
> Many "modern" PCs, within the "CMOS" setup, have provision for changing
> the boot sequence.  Mostly, in order to default to booting from HDD,
> rather than floppy, but also for CD or USB boot.
> I do not know of any that permit selecting floppy B: for boot, but there
> could exist some with that option, . . .
>
> On a PC with a single physical floppy, asking for any command with B: will
> trigger a prompt to put the B: disk in drive A:, and have a phantom B:
> that shares the physical drive with A:
>
> Swapping A: and B: is, of course, trivial to do with hardware, and/or
> messing with the cable.  (pin 10 of the cable [at the FDC] is A: and 12 is
> B:, but the usual supplied cables are twisted and missing pins so that
> every drive, on the drive itself is jumpered as if it were B:).  An
> untwisted cable, with switch[es] would be one way.
>
> --
> Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
>

[cctalk] HP9825A for sale

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

There is a gentlemen in New Jersey willing to sell his HP9825A

I believe he is the original owner.  It has 4 ROM cartridges (that go in
the front) and several data cartridges for the slot on the top left.

He is asking $2000 but can probably negotiate (as he didn't find any takers
in VCF East).  As far as he knows, everything still works (LED lights came
on when he powered it up a few months ago).

I've met this seller and can vouch for him, but I don't know much about
this particular item.

I have some photos of it at the bottom of this page:
https://voidstar.blog/vcf-east-2023-part-3/

I may try a VCF forum topic about it.  Just trying to help him find a good
home for the equipment.  E-mail/reply direct and I can provide some contact
info.

(BTW not sure if my cctalk posts are working anymore??)

-Steve / voidstar

[cctalk] VCF East 2023 photos

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Videos are nice, but I still like to make a kind of "scrap book" of events
I've been to.  Link is below.

Also, most exhibitors were occupied interacting with the public and maybe
didn't get a chance to see what else was presented at this VCF.  Or, maybe
they didn't get to see what all else the museum and local area had to
present - so seeing photos might give them ideas of things to check out
next time.

Or, in general, for anyone not able to attend, here are some photos also.

https://voidstar.blog/vcf-east-2023/


Feel free to use/share, no permission needed.

[cctalk] Re: VCF East 2023 photos

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Glad the photos help.  I hope the average general public wasn't too
disappointed or discouraged by the crowd on Saturday - but I tried to think
of the positive side, of there still being interest in vintage computing at
all.A "web cam" preview of the consignment might have helped that line
- some were interested in a specific thing, then to wait 45min in line to
find it's already gone.  But I guess that's just part of the experience.

For exhibits, the interior noise/acustics got loud and made hard to engage
and ask questions (since you couldn't even hear them across the table).
I also felt a little guilty of intentionally getting there early to get a
close parking spot.   I mean, I don't think there is anything really wrong
with that - but if I know I'm going to be there all day, I wouldn't mind
parking further away and taking a shuttle bus.   In my defense, I knew I'd
be getting things from consignment and wanted to drop them back to the car
(I just got some of the laptops).


Sellam, thanks for the note about the geese!!   Honkers, yes, that's very
appropriate!  But why Honking at 3am!? haha, maybe I don't want to know!?


I'm on travel again for the rest of this week, so kind of rushed to get
notes up today before heading back to the airport.


-Steve





On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 1:04 PM Brian L. Stuart 
wrote:

> Thank you very much for posting these pictures.  I ended up having to
> cancel my plans at the last minute due to covid.  Yeah, I had succeeded
> in avoiding it for 3 years, but it finally caught up to me.
>
> BLS
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 05:39:04 PM UTC, Steve Lewis via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Videos are nice, but I still like to make a kind of "scrap book" of events
> I've been to.  Link is below.
>
> Also, most exhibitors were occupied interacting with the public and maybe
> didn't get a chance to see what else was presented at this VCF.  Or, maybe
> they didn't get to see what all else the museum and local area had to
> present - so seeing photos might give them ideas of things to check out
> next time.
>
> Or, in general, for anyone not able to attend, here are some photos also.
>
> https://voidstar.blog/vcf-east-2023/
>
>
> Feel free to use/share, no permission needed.
>

[cctalk] Re: VCF East 2023 photos

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

W2HX,

Im hosted by WordPress - and I've noticed this about their sites, the
hyperlinks are sometimes "not selectable" (this includes links in images
too).  I sometimes I have to "wiggle the page" (scroll up or down a bit)
first.   I'm not sure if it a little easter egg they do to penalize Windows
users, or a browser bug in Edge or something.   But I've noticed in other
WordPress hosted pages, and also when using an entirely different computer
(such as at my parents house in Florida).   I've been meaning to send them
a support message about it, it's something I've noticed for over a year now.






On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 12:52 PM W2HX via cctalk 
wrote:

> Thanks for taking the time to document the show. I went to the link
> provided and only PART 1 and PART 6 link to other pages. Are parts 2-5 just
> not written yet? Or a bug in the html?
>
>
> 73 Eugene W2HX
> Subscribe to my Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/@w2hx/videos
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Steve Lewis via cctalk 
> Sent: Monday, April 17, 2023 1:38 PM
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> Cc: Steve Lewis 
> Subject: [cctalk] VCF East 2023 photos
>
> Videos are nice, but I still like to make a kind of "scrap book" of events
> I've been to.  Link is below.
>
> Also, most exhibitors were occupied interacting with the public and maybe
> didn't get a chance to see what else was presented at this VCF.  Or, maybe
> they didn't get to see what all else the museum and local area had to
> present - so seeing photos might give them ideas of things to check out
> next time.
>
> Or, in general, for anyone not able to attend, here are some photos also.
>
> https://voidstar.blog/vcf-east-2023/
>
>
> Feel free to use/share, no permission needed.
>

[cctalk] Re: HP9825A for sale

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

I decided to buy the 5120 from this same seller, which is how I can vouch
for him.  It's already damaged, so I don't feel as guilty having it
shipped.  (no we don't know the exact damage, but by June VCF I'll probably
have it opened up and see more on what's going on there)

For the HP, I think it's a fair asking price because of all the cables,
manuals, and accessories that he's got -- he's got all the SerialIO
stuff, so it would be a fun project (to me) to try to write a terminal
program and get that calculator on the internet :)  Just I've got too many
projects going on right now - and after the 5120, I'll really be struggling
for space. But yes, he's at a point where he just needs to clear out
space, which is why he might even go half his asking price (especially for
a local pick up)?I think he's going to post it on eBay within the next
month.

As for rarity - I'm not sure.  I think the HP9825 is actually from the year
1976 (that should be good for having a more recent power supply, so more
likely to remain as a working system?), so a HP9830 would be a more sought
out item.  Also the 9825 uses HP's "HPL" (or something), not quite "normal
BASIC."  And if no "monitor" or machine code input is available, not sure
how much custom software could be written.

-Steve






On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 11:18 AM Sellam Abraham via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> Hmm, somehow that didn't come up in Terapeak search.
>
> Crazy.
>
> Sellam
>
> On Mon, Apr 17, 2023, 9:16 AM John Robertson via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
> > On 2023/04/17 9:12 a.m., Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote:
> > > My initial reaction is that $2,000 seems a "bit" optimistic.
> > >
> > > That being said, I'm surprised to see (on eBay's Terapeak) a couple of
> > > these sold within the past year for around $1,100.
> > >
> > > Sellam
> >
> > One sold on eBay for $2492USD...Apr 6, 2023:
> >
> > https://www.ebay.com/itm/225512121074?hash=item348191e2f2
> >
> > John :-#)#
> >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 17, 2023, 8:52 AM Steve Lewis via cctalk <
> > cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> There is a gentlemen in New Jersey willing to sell his HP9825A
> > >>
> > >> I believe he is the original owner.  It has 4 ROM cartridges (that go
> in
> > >> the front) and several data cartridges for the slot on the top left.
> > >>
> > >> He is asking $2000 but can probably negotiate (as he didn't find any
> > takers
> > >> in VCF East).  As far as he knows, everything still works (LED lights
> > came
> > >> on when he powered it up a few months ago).
> > >>
> > >> I've met this seller and can vouch for him, but I don't know much
> about
> > >> this particular item.
> > >>
> > >> I have some photos of it at the bottom of this page:
> > >> https://voidstar.blog/vcf-east-2023-part-3/
> > >>
> > >> I may try a VCF forum topic about it.  Just trying to help him find a
> > good
> > >> home for the equipment.  E-mail/reply direct and I can provide some
> > contact
> > >> info.
> > >>
> > >> (BTW not sure if my cctalk posts are working anymore??)
> > >>
> > >> -Steve / voidstar
> > >>
> >
> > --
> >   John's Jukes Ltd.
> > 7 - 3979 Marine Way, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5J 5E3
> > Call (604)872-5757 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games)
> >   flippers.com
> >   "Old pinballers never die, they just flip out"
> >
> >
>

[cctalk] Re: HP9825A for sale

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

In a similar shenanigans vein, I've no explanation for the $20k+  IBM
5120's being listed.I think one of them has been listed as such for
over a year now.

- Steve v*

On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 9:09 AM Sellam Abraham via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 18, 2023, 6:59 AM Tom Hunter via cctalk  >
> wrote:
>
> > The Ebay listing hasn't sold but has been relisted at the same price.
> >
>
> Indeed, it appears to be:
>
> https://www.ebay.com/itm/225514573805
>
> Non-paying "buyer"? Or shenanigans?
>
> Sellam
>
> >
>

[cctalk] QIC tape restorations (IBM 5100)

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

I've come across three original QIC tapes for the IBM 5100.  DC300 I think,
original IBM labels.

They are in fair condition (the tape material itself seems fine, they are
all on their reels), but the "rubbers" used to actually actuate the reels
is degraded.   I came across an article once on how to restore those (I
think it involved gluing the rubber band directly to the ends of the media?)

The three tapes are labeled as follows:

5721-XM3
THE IBM 5100 PROBLEM SOLVER LIBRARY
TAPE PART NO.  1608361
E.C. NO 829643   DATE  7/29/76
  (this one is in a form fitted sealed ziploc-like bag, which I haven't
opened; the early magazine ads for the 5100 reference this solver library
-- I assume it is a mix of BASIC and APL)


5721-EAB
THE IBM 5100 BASIC COMPUTER AIDED INSTRUCTION
TAPE PART NO.  1608376
E.C. NO 829482   DATE  11/13/75
VERSION 1   MOD 0  FEAT 9021
PROGRAM NO.  5721-EAB   CARTRIDGE 3 OF 3
(what does FEAT mean? and sadly, I don't have cartridge 1 or 2, but I
assume this is probably some BASIC code that runs some kind of tutorial
about the system)


TAPE PART NO.  1608705
E.C. NO 829637DATE   1/10/77
DIAGNOSTIC CARTRIDGE.  DO NOT ALTER THE
CONTENTS OF THIS TAPE.
(I believe when accessing the built in DCP, it has options to load and run
additional diagnostics that would be contained on this tape -- I think
"IMF" stuff, so it would be in native PALM machine code)


Anyone interested in a restoration or any contacts to folks who have worked
on QIC tape before?  I have a working IBM 5100 (with working internal tape
and external 5106), but I absolutely haven't tried to insert or use these
tapes, and I have 0 experience in trying to extract data from raw media.

I don't mind shipping them off to an expert - such as anyone who maybe can
copy the data content to a new tape?  (which I know is probably some
specialized equipment - I probably can't self fund that, but I am
interested to know what the options here might be)

-Steve / v*

[cctalk] WICAT Systems

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Is anyone familiar with WICAT Systems?

I came across their ad in BYTE Nov 1981 (page 84), with a claim of
"first family of microcomputers with mainframe capability"

It is a 68000 based system (like the Lisa?), one configuration offers
400x300 monochrome graphics.  Ad also claims 1.5MB main memory and a
multi-user operating system ("UNIX/V7 and a CP/M Emulation also available")
called MCS.

Address mentions Orem, Utah.

Haven't come across a price sheet, but I imagine they were quite expensive
($6000+ would be my guess).

From the images, looks to me the main problem is a lack of an expansion bus
(and overall not a very appealing-looking system).

Was just curious if anyone had witnessed one ever running.

-Steve

[cctalk] Re: Wireless phone

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

In the 1980's Annie, didn't Oliver Warbucks have a phone in his helicopter
car from the 1930s?  Maybe I'm remembering it wrong.

On Sat, Apr 8, 2023 at 12:14 PM ben via cctalk 
wrote:

> On 2023-04-08 8:27 a.m., Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 3, 2023, 9:40 AM ben via cctalk 
> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I disagree, I decided to buy new computer game after about 20 years.
> >> The last game I played was Tomb Raider I. I like the explore type rather
> >> than the RPG games. Being muilt-platform the game has over 20 keys
> >> that map to game pad rather than keyboard.
> >>The game pad is more important the cell phone. If you can't play
> games
> >> (or in my case save the game) what use is the phone or a computer.
> >> I miss games like ADVERTURE.
> >> Ben.
> >>
> >
> > In that case the cable coming out of the gamepad is more important than
> the
> > gamepad itself because without the cable the signals from your fingers
> will
> > never get to the computer.
> >
> > No, I'm not serious, and neither so do I take the assertion above. My
> claim
> > is meant to be as dumb as Ben's.
> >
> > Sellam
>
> Well for stupid stuff, I claim the Smart phone is not needed at all.
> Just all marketing by APPLE and JAPAN. I think more game pads have sold
> than smart phones. You are half right, you can by a new game pad but will
> it plug in to the old machine, like a C64.
> Ben.
> PS: Mobile phones have long been around,as analog devices,for those that
> really need them.
> PPS. I have two phones and they have bell and number pad and a long cord.
> PPPS. The same goes for wifi, not really needed since the USB no
> computer had real I/O devices to connect mice,printers,networks.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[cctalk] Re: ZFS, was [... GreaseWeazle ..]

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

On Thu, Feb 2, 2023 at 5:54 AM emanuel stiebler via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On 2023-02-02 04:38, David Brownlee wrote:
>
> > So, what else do you guys use, to make sure your data is safe for the
> > years to come?
>


I wanted to note a story about AWS:   I used to be heavy into astronomy
imaging (I still am, just less so at the moment since building a new house
and other projects is taking much of my attention for now).

There is a site Astrobin.com specifically for astronomers to share their
images, with a sort of database to store equipment metrics used for each
image.   It's an interesting service, since with decades of image data, you
can now compare your image processing results with similar equipment and
gauge how efficiently you're using a tracking mount, focuser, or imaging
camera (or judge if quality issues are equipment related or post-processing
related).Another interesting aspect of this database is users provide
"versions" of their images -- that's been an annoying thing about YouTube
for me: you can't revise a video, like you can't have editions.  If you've
learned new information or want to correct or clarify things, you can try
to do cc comments, but basically have to start over with a new video link.
 That's a pain for content creators who have to "start over" back to 0
views on a video with a new edition, and also annoying for us users who now
have to sort through dozens of variants of how-to's or guides, etc.

Anyway...

What I'm getting to is, the Astrobin database crashed a few years back.
Was wiped out and (I think) they were using AWS.  The site administration
completely confessed it was his mistake -- I forget the details, his letter
may be still up somewhere at the site.  But basically he clicked something
wrong on AWS, and ended up deleting files by accident.

Being Amazon, you'd think it was just an easy recovery - no big deal.  But
nope, the nature of what the admin had done ended up being not easy
to undo.   Astrobin is a pay service and many people were bitterly angry
for losing years of archives.  Yes, most users should have their own backup
-- but it was the database also of equipment, and decades of revision info
(to see the progress of terrestial imaging capability over the years).   A
good 80+% of my own were wiped.  I wasn't bitter - I appreciated that the
admin immediately took blame, didn't try to hide it, and "to err is
human."  But it was a mess for that community.

Well - to Amazon's credit, they didn't give up either.  Months and months
later, gradually some files did end up getting recovered.  Again, I don't
know the specifics of what Amazon did -- I just know about a year later, I
logged in and noticed a great many of my image records had been recovered,
and the admin had a note to expect more to get recovered since they were
still actively working on the problem.

I'm just relaying the story as a real-world example of a recent "data
disaster recovery" - sorry I'm not more specific on the details, but
astrobin.com still exists and the admin is approachable and may be willing
to share lessons learned for those interested.

[cctalk] Re: Store with "vintage" computers and parts

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Wait, are Web Rings going to come back into fashion? :D

Speaking of shady vintage websites, what the heck is up with this guy
trying to sell a late model IBM laptop for more than an Apple-1 ?  Is that
Hunter's laptop?
https://www.ebay.com/itm/183849347474




On Fri, Feb 10, 2023 at 10:15 AM Ethan O'Toole via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> > I would be interested in knowing some of those options.
> > Thanks,
> > Will
>
> Brave Search / Brave Browser is one.
>
> Yandex is a Russian search engine that can come in useful sometimes.
>
> Trying to find ISO CD images of discs for music hardware (Samplers) it
> feels like the internet through google is way smaller than it used to be.
>
> The bad thing is there is a ton of knowledge on facebook that isn't
> indexed to the public web.
>
>
> --
> : Ethan O'Toole
>
>
>

[cctalk] Re: Don Lancaster has passed away at 83

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Sad to hear about Don Lancaster.   Things like this is what motivated me to
make the "domesticating the computer" video, which briefly mentions the TV
Typewriter - to honor these "living legends".  I wish I could have fit in
more about Don and also Ted Nelson, author of Computer Lib.  And speaking
of Ted, I wish I could grasp/understand Project Xanadu better. My only
explanation is that our typical/classical approach to "file management" has
borrowed all the concepts of the physical world -- a desktop, a cabinet
with drawers, containing folders and files.  But in cyberspace there was no
real reason to follow that model, and we could have had a better approach
to linking information (in some more bi-directional fashion).  I don't know
if that comes close to Xanadu's ideals, but that's my gist understanding.
 Our spoken languages I think sometimes make it difficult to convey novel
ideas sometimes.

-SL

On Sat, Jul 8, 2023 at 10:08 PM Ethan Dicks via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 6, 2023 at 6:26 PM Bill Degnan via cctalk
>  wrote:
> > I am going throw out a Jim Butterfield too
>
> I never got to meet him or correspond with him directly, but through
> his articles and his work with TORPUG, he absolutely had a huge
> indirect influence on my early years.
>
> I did learn plenty from Don Lancaster too, but it was more general
> knowledge than anything.  I don't think I ever read something of his
> that I didn't learn something from.
>
> -ethan
>

[cctalk] Re: SCAMP at 61 (IBM Scientific Computer And Modular Processor) was Re: SCAMP at 50 (IBM 5100)

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Hey, it is interesting!   It has a reference to microcode and a ROS/ROM
type storage.  Paul Friedl's January 1973 initial diagram of SCAMP includes
a "circular shaped device" at the base - I always took it to be a hard
drive platter, but maybe not - maybe it is this older SCAMP type storage
(which actually makes more sense -- Paul would know a HDD head and all that
wouldn't fit in there).

And it's plausible that Mr Friedl "re-purposed" the acronym of SCAMP - no
direct evidence as of yet.  But I think in 1973 it's possible Paul had 10+
years with IBM by then.  I'm also not yet sure if Paul had (by Jan 1973)
seen the HP9830 or an earlier sampling of it in late 1972 (my understanding
is that the HP9830 was "announced" in late 1972, but not actually available
until early 1973 - the IBM engineer's technical journal doesn't mention the
HP9830 until October 1973) -- BUT that January 8th 1973 diagram from Paul
is suspiciously similar in shape as the HP9830 (including the "printer on
top"). See the first image in my summary here:
https://voidstar.blog/ibm-scamp-joe-george-notebook/

I see it as 50/50:  Possible that these are coincidentally the same name to
two different projects.   But it also possible the tech of this modular
processor perhaps did help inspire the idea of more portable computing?
 Just unfortunate that Paul Friedl's notes and letters that we have
available from 1972/1973, he never elaborates or explains the origin of the
name SCAMP.

-Steve



On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 5:01 PM ste...@malikoff.com steven--- via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> Lee said
> > Note "Scientific Computer and Modular Processor (SCAMP) was developed
> during 1961 and 1962" <> SCAMP (Special Computer APL Machine Portable)
> developed in the early 1970s and the subject of the original post.
>
> Yes, I know. I still have that massive issue of PC World in which I read
> about it in the early 80s, been interested in it ever since. It was a
> tremendous achievement. Hmm two admonishments for taking the thread
> tangentially (I even changed the title) so perhaps this happens only rarely
> on cctalk. OK no more from me on SCAMP #1, I'll sincerely try and find
> something more interesting and on-topic before posting next time.

[cctalk] Re: SCAMP at 61 (IBM Scientific Computer And Modular Processor) was Re: SCAMP at 50 (IBM 5100)

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Glad ya'll are in a good mood.  And it was a Monday!

On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 11:56 PM Chuck Guzis via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On 7/31/23 18:41, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
>
> > The best collections include links/pointers to holdings elsewhere.
>
> As we all know, web sites and online content is forever
>
> --Chuck
>
>
>

[cctalk] IBM 8" disk drives - anyone need?

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

I have a pair of IBM 8" disk drives - they are from an 1980 IBM 5120

I simply won't have the time to give them the attention they deserve for
many years.  They seem mechanically ok (they spin) but I don't know much
more about them, or how "universal" they might be as 8" floppy disk drives.

I think I do have to cut them from the transformer they are connected to
(couple thick red wires), but otherwise they have all the original power
harness stuff as well.

Thinking just cost of shipping plus rounded to nearest $10 or $100.  They
are about 20lbs (together, and I would like to keep them together - there
is a pin/clip that is used to latch them together, but I do think they can
be separated fairly easily).

Message me if any interest.   If you do need/want them for another 5120
project, I can probably include some adapter cards.

-Steve

[cctalk] Re: IBM 8" disk drives - anyone need?

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Ah, I'm on VCF.  Actually forgot the item/trade/etc section there.  But
still, prefered to offer them here first.  I'll wait a few days.

Also I might make it to VCF MW (Chicago) in September - still not 100%
sure.  But possible I could just bring them with me to that (I mean if
someone wanted to pick them up there, not for the free table! :D )

-Steve


On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 8:49 PM Chuck Guzis via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On 7/25/23 18:33, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote:
> > I have a pair of IBM 8" disk drives - they are from an 1980 IBM 5120
> >
> > I simply won't have the time to give them the attention they deserve for
> > many years.  They seem mechanically ok (they spin) but I don't know much
> > more about them, or how "universal" they might be as 8" floppy disk
> drives.
> >
> > I think I do have to cut them from the transformer they are connected to
> > (couple thick red wires), but otherwise they have all the original power
> > harness stuff as well.
> >
> > Thinking just cost of shipping plus rounded to nearest $10 or $100.  They
> > are about 20lbs (together, and I would like to keep them together - there
> > is a pin/clip that is used to latch them together, but I do think they
> can
> > be separated fairly easily).
> >
> > Message me if any interest.   If you do need/want them for another 5120
> > project, I can probably include some adapter cards.
>
> My recollection of the 5120 drives is that they're sui generis in terms
> of interface--i.e. not Shugart-type.  However, I suspect that they'll be
> of great interest to several folks on the Vintage Computer Forum.
>
> If you'd like, I can post the availability there.
>
> --Chuck
>
>
>

[cctalk] SCAMP at 50 (IBM 5100)

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

For anyone interested, I'm placing my SCAMP notes here!
Had an incredibly great opportunity to learn more about it.

https://voidstar.blog/scamp-a-review-50-years-later/

[cctalk] Re: VCF this weekend, any one up for a trade?

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

( I'm not sure how to change topic subjects! )

Regarding the Poly-88, I'm not seeing much about it on YouTube.  If you've
got a working one, it would be good to "get one on record."  If you're
willing to part with it or loan it - let me know (can also run it by
ActionRetro, although he's concentrating on some Russian imports at the
moment).

But back to the original topic, hope VCF West went well !   Looks like I've
been talked into going to the September 9th VCF near Chicago.

-Steve

On Mon, Aug 7, 2023 at 10:07 AM dwight  wrote:

> Hi Steve
> I see. You were asking if anyone had a working Poly-88.
> Yes, I believe mine is likely still working. I also have a 8813 that was
> working when I put it away.
> At the VCF, I was talking to another fellow about the video board used on
> the Poly-88. It was said by the other person that the board was basically
> copied by others and some even had the same error, causing distortion of
> the first line by incorrect timing of the H retrace time, on many monitors.
> Dwight
>
> --
> *From:* Steve Lewis 
> *Sent:* Sunday, August 6, 2023 4:52 PM
> *To:* General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> *Cc:* dwight 
> *Subject:* Re: [cctalk] Re: VCF this weekend, any one up for a trade?
>
> Oh it wasn't my Poly88 - but the person who had it, they just didn't have
> a CRT or screen to test it out with.  So it may be working fine.  Original
> owner, said he put it together himself (and 16K).
>
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 6, 2023 at 3:11 PM dwight via cctalk 
> wrote:
>
> My Poly-88 should be working but I've not played with it for a few years.
> The last time I had it up and doing something was at the last MakerFaire .
> What Is your issue?
> Dwight
>
> 
> From: Steve Lewis via cctalk 
> Sent: Thursday, August 3, 2023 10:19 PM
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> Cc: Steve Lewis 
> Subject: [cctalk] Re: VCF this weekend, any one up for a trade?
>
> I can't make it to VCF this weekend - though I'm hoping to make it to the
> one in September.
>
> I actually am looking for something: any working IEC device for a C64 (1541
> drive, printer, plotter?).   More for an experiment than collection, but do
> prefer clean and presentable.
>
>
> Earlier this year, I reached someone with a working Poly-88.  But then in
> March they reported health issues and hospital stays, so I haven't heard
> since.  Would be interested if anyone else is aware of a still-working one.
>
> We're still working on recovery of an IBM 5100 "launch title" tape
> (analytic functions) - practicing with other tapes first.  Its 2-channel
> deal so far isn't quite that straightforward.  But if the Tektronics folks
> can do it with their QIC tapes, I'm somewhat hopeful we can too (although
> late 70s/early 80s Tektronic is apparently a more proper IEEE-488).
>
> Only thing I could offer right now is a fairly not-working 5110 (display
> don't work, PSU don't work, cards don't work - but the case is pristine).
>
> -Steve
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 8:49 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> wrote:
>
> > >> I did not get any of whatever mailings there were.
> > >>
> > >> I don't exhibit, but I do have an excessive amount of stuff to sort
> and
> > >> pack for sale and giveaway.
> > >> --
> > >> Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 3 Aug 2023, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote:
> > > We'll just have to organize a VCF Fred at some point.  That way, they
> > come
> > > to you.
> > >
> > > I mean, after all, that's why I started the VCF ;)
> >
> > Yes, but you handed it over to a swell bunch of people before I finished
> > parting with my stuff!
> >
> > --
> > Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
> >
>
>

[cctalk] Re: Polymorphic Systems Poly88

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

That's fantastic to hear some Poly88 systems are still around !  Yes, the
graphic capability of the Poly88 is what caught my attention.  But I think
recall also reading that it wasn't quite "S-100" compatible?  Maybe that's
not quite accurate, or at least no worse than other "S-100" systems in
those very early days.   Can't recall if the Poly's had a MicroSoft derived
BASIC.

Well, if you do make it to VCF MW - maybe some room might yet come
available, as some peoples plans change.  Or I'll only be there Saturday,
can give up my half-table after that!

-Steve


On Wed, Aug 9, 2023 at 2:16 PM Marvin Johnston via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> FWIW and as some of you might know, Polymorphic was manufactured here in
> Santa Barbara (also Lobo Drives/Systems, and Street Electronics.) After
> Poly had gone out of business, a friend of mine ended up getting all (or
> most) of the remaining Poly documentation and most of the remaining
> hardware from the person who owned the Polymorphic remains. After he had
> sold off some of that "stash", he gave the remaining stuff to me. I
> spent a week or so taking the remaining original masters documentation
> and putting it in a filing cabinet. That stuff included approximately
> 200 S-100 boards in various states of being built and maybe up to ten
> thousand (WAG) 1/4" and 8" disks of stuff that was being worked on at
> Poly when they shut down.
>
> On my to-do list is to scan the remaining documentation (about a four
> drawer filing cabinet) as well putting together the remaining Poly88s
> (four- six) and other boards. I had planned on bringing some of that
> "stuff" to VCFMW, but found out last night the exhibit area was filled.
> So at this point, I don't know if I will be attending or not.
>
> I am more concerned with getting the documentation scanned and archived
> and will most likely end up buying a high speed double sided scanner. So
> this is just a heads up that a lot (most?) of the original Polymorphic
> documentation does still exist. Years ago, some highly uninformed
> individual said this could not be original since there were no graphics
> in the Circa early 1970 docs. He was wrong about this not being original
> documentation!!! I also tried to keep any marked diskettes with the
> docs.  Those disks were primarily system disks. And those disks NEED to
> be backed up before they degrade to the point they would be difficult to
> read.
>
> FWIW, I would have liked to get this stuff scanned, etc but at that
> time, I didn't have enough money to pay attention let alone buy a
> scanner to scan this stuff :).
>
> Marvin
>
>

[cctalk] Re: 50 pins in three rows

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

While probably unrelated, the mentioning of 3 rows of pins did remind me
about what I recently learned about the 1973 IBM SCAMP...

On the back side of it, it has a 3-row of 14-13-14 female pins (next to
what became a DB25 connector - did DEC come up with DB25??).

Was curious if anything ideas on what that 3-row might be for.  The photo
should be here:
https://voidstar.blog/scamp-a-review-50-years-later/#jp-carousel-6400

-Steve



On Sun, Aug 6, 2023 at 4:35 PM Chuck Guzis via cctalk 
wrote:

> On 8/6/23 14:08, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
> >
> >
> >> On Aug 4, 2023, at 10:10 PM, Jonathan Chapman via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Anyone seen those before, and is it actually SCSI, or is it something
> else?
> >>
> >> Common on old Sun SCSI stuff, it's a DD-50. Could be something else,
> but they were indeed used for SCSI termination.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Jonathan
> >
> > The D-sub shells come in standard and high density flavors.  For all
> except the biggest one (DD), standard is two rows and HD is three.  But DD
> has three rows in the standard density and 4 rows in high density.
>
> DC62 was used in several tape drive controllers.
>
> --Chuck
>
>
>

[cctalk] Re: VCF this weekend, any one up for a trade?

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Seeing what (if any) IEC devices work with the Commander X16.  1541
emulator is working, would like to verify with real hardware tho (and also
verify if can "daisy chain" multiple Devices).  Tentatively someone is
having an issue with the 1541 physical drive on that system (think it has a
"software controlled" thing to change it's Device Number, and maybe that's
not working? still investigating, but not yet ready to gamble on an
untested ebay one -- and need some physical disks to go with it, don't
think my 8" IBM floppies will fit { joke! :P }).

Very happy with the PC-5000!  Just still couldn't find a compatible disk
drive (turns out the 37-pin at the rear isn't compatible with the IBM
drives, need to find some Sharp specific model).
But sorry, what monitor?  I am kind of "monitor'd out" right now - have
about five CRTs, they all work well, but they eat up quite a bit of space.

-Steve

On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 12:42 PM Mike Stein via cctalk 
wrote:

> Too far away to make shipping practical, but I'm curious: what's the
> experiment about?
>
> Glad you're happy with the PC-5000 etc.; no interest in the monitor I take
> it?
>
> m
>
> On Fri, Aug 4, 2023 at 1:19 AM Steve Lewis via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> wrote:
>
> > I can't make it to VCF this weekend - though I'm hoping to make it to the
> > one in September.
> >
> > I actually am looking for something: any working IEC device for a C64
> (1541
> > drive, printer, plotter?).   More for an experiment than collection, but
> do
> > prefer clean and presentable.
> >
> >
> > Earlier this year, I reached someone with a working Poly-88.  But then in
> > March they reported health issues and hospital stays, so I haven't heard
> > since.  Would be interested if anyone else is aware of a still-working
> one.
> >
> > We're still working on recovery of an IBM 5100 "launch title" tape
> > (analytic functions) - practicing with other tapes first.  Its 2-channel
> > deal so far isn't quite that straightforward.  But if the Tektronics
> folks
> > can do it with their QIC tapes, I'm somewhat hopeful we can too (although
> > late 70s/early 80s Tektronic is apparently a more proper IEEE-488).
> >
> > Only thing I could offer right now is a fairly not-working 5110 (display
> > don't work, PSU don't work, cards don't work - but the case is pristine).
> >
> > -Steve
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 8:49 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk <
> > cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > >> I did not get any of whatever mailings there were.
> > > >>
> > > >> I don't exhibit, but I do have an excessive amount of stuff to sort
> > and
> > > >> pack for sale and giveaway.
> > > >> --
> > > >> Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, 3 Aug 2023, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote:
> > > > We'll just have to organize a VCF Fred at some point.  That way, they
> > > come
> > > > to you.
> > > >
> > > > I mean, after all, that's why I started the VCF ;)
> > >
> > > Yes, but you handed it over to a swell bunch of people before I
> finished
> > > parting with my stuff!
> > >
> > > --
> > > Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
> > >
> >
>

[cctalk] Re: VCF this weekend, any one up for a trade?

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Oh it wasn't my Poly88 - but the person who had it, they just didn't have a
CRT or screen to test it out with.  So it may be working fine.  Original
owner, said he put it together himself (and 16K).



On Sun, Aug 6, 2023 at 3:11 PM dwight via cctalk 
wrote:

> My Poly-88 should be working but I've not played with it for a few years.
> The last time I had it up and doing something was at the last MakerFaire .
> What Is your issue?
> Dwight
>
> ________
> From: Steve Lewis via cctalk 
> Sent: Thursday, August 3, 2023 10:19 PM
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> Cc: Steve Lewis 
> Subject: [cctalk] Re: VCF this weekend, any one up for a trade?
>
> I can't make it to VCF this weekend - though I'm hoping to make it to the
> one in September.
>
> I actually am looking for something: any working IEC device for a C64 (1541
> drive, printer, plotter?).   More for an experiment than collection, but do
> prefer clean and presentable.
>
>
> Earlier this year, I reached someone with a working Poly-88.  But then in
> March they reported health issues and hospital stays, so I haven't heard
> since.  Would be interested if anyone else is aware of a still-working one.
>
> We're still working on recovery of an IBM 5100 "launch title" tape
> (analytic functions) - practicing with other tapes first.  Its 2-channel
> deal so far isn't quite that straightforward.  But if the Tektronics folks
> can do it with their QIC tapes, I'm somewhat hopeful we can too (although
> late 70s/early 80s Tektronic is apparently a more proper IEEE-488).
>
> Only thing I could offer right now is a fairly not-working 5110 (display
> don't work, PSU don't work, cards don't work - but the case is pristine).
>
> -Steve
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 8:49 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> wrote:
>
> > >> I did not get any of whatever mailings there were.
> > >>
> > >> I don't exhibit, but I do have an excessive amount of stuff to sort
> and
> > >> pack for sale and giveaway.
> > >> --
> > >> Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 3 Aug 2023, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote:
> > > We'll just have to organize a VCF Fred at some point.  That way, they
> > come
> > > to you.
> > >
> > > I mean, after all, that's why I started the VCF ;)
> >
> > Yes, but you handed it over to a swell bunch of people before I finished
> > parting with my stuff!
> >
> > --
> > Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
> >
>

[cctalk] Re: VCF this weekend, any one up for a trade?

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

I can't make it to VCF this weekend - though I'm hoping to make it to the
one in September.

I actually am looking for something: any working IEC device for a C64 (1541
drive, printer, plotter?).   More for an experiment than collection, but do
prefer clean and presentable.


Earlier this year, I reached someone with a working Poly-88.  But then in
March they reported health issues and hospital stays, so I haven't heard
since.  Would be interested if anyone else is aware of a still-working one.

We're still working on recovery of an IBM 5100 "launch title" tape
(analytic functions) - practicing with other tapes first.  Its 2-channel
deal so far isn't quite that straightforward.  But if the Tektronics folks
can do it with their QIC tapes, I'm somewhat hopeful we can too (although
late 70s/early 80s Tektronic is apparently a more proper IEEE-488).

Only thing I could offer right now is a fairly not-working 5110 (display
don't work, PSU don't work, cards don't work - but the case is pristine).

-Steve





On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 8:49 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk 
wrote:

> >> I did not get any of whatever mailings there were.
> >>
> >> I don't exhibit, but I do have an excessive amount of stuff to sort and
> >> pack for sale and giveaway.
> >> --
> >> Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
>
>
> On Thu, 3 Aug 2023, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote:
> > We'll just have to organize a VCF Fred at some point.  That way, they
> come
> > to you.
> >
> > I mean, after all, that's why I started the VCF ;)
>
> Yes, but you handed it over to a swell bunch of people before I finished
> parting with my stuff!
>
> --
> Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
>

[cctalk] IBM 5120/5110-3 casual notes / 8" disks question

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

I finally got an IBM 5120 earlier this month, to complement the 5100 and
5110 that I already have.

It had a few issues, but I did manage to get it to "boot" to BASIC.

I put together a few notes about it here.  Nothing too exciting, but two
things I've learned: (1) the 5120 does actually still have the video
REVERSE feature.  (2) the 5120 has both an external (red power switch) and
internal power switch (internal one is at rear below disk drives).

Notes here:

https://voidstar.blog/ibm-5120-aka-ibm-5110-3/
IBM 5120 (aka IBM 5110-3) — voidstar



My only question is: how "universal" are 8" disk?  This 5120 only came with
a single IBM 8" Diagnostics disk.  It looks to be in fine condition, but
I've no idea about the data.

So far I haven't been able to read it - it's probably more hardware/drive
issues, I'm still investigating.   But I'm wondering if I had other 8"
disks (3M SS/SD), should I be able to format/MARK them?

I've used old tape decks and 5.25" drives - but 8" drives is all new
territory for me.



Also, I'll be talking about the 5100/5110 at VCF next Sunday on the 25th of
this month, June.

[cctalk] Re: Did Bill Gates Really Say That?

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

I don't think Gates ever actually said this - but that's just based on my
own examination into this from a few years back.

But, over the years I've done some thread programming, and I was once
solving a problem by loading a lot of data into main memory (like 8-16GB of
data to process as one huge chunk, on a system that only had 32GB total).

A while later, I had a thought that actually maybe this quote has some
merit.  Maybe not the specific amount (of 640KB) - but the general notion
that there is rarely a reason for a single application to consume the
entirety of main memory.It may be better, especially with threads or
multi-core, to work a problem in smaller chunks -- specifically, to work a
problem in chunks smaller than the CPU cache.   And in fact, I found a huge
jump in my programs performance when I kept the buffers exactly 1 byte less
than the CPU cache (at the time that was 1MB) - as soon as I went 1 byte
over, I noticed a huge (~3X) hit in performance.   Now that's just a single
data point, and the old advise of "never optimize your program for
performance too early" is probably still good.  And especially most shops
won't spend the time/resources to cache optimize their builds - I suspect
some games do at startup, they maybe profile what your L3 cache size.


Anyhow, years ago I recall coming across a quote or an article where Gates
stated the IBM PC (or maybe the 8088 cpu itself) was designed or intended
to only "last" about 10 years.  Not that the system components itself would
only last that long, but as it being a "useful" system.   In that context,
maybe he was right (if he had said it) - 640K was maybe "enough for anyone"
for the remainder of the 1980s.   I recall starting with 384KB (thinking
anything past 128KB was "huge") and doing upgrades in the late 1980s to get
to 640KB, and not getting into extended/expanded memory until the early
90s.  This would be for "typical" household applications (taxes, small
business, word processing) - obviously image processing (CAD, movie
rendering, etc.) or multi-user servers do need more memory.

I also recall that it was Intel that requested to keep it to 10 segments of
64KB (640KB), not really a Microsoft or MS-DOS doing.  i.e. aspects beyond
Microsoft wanted to reserve the "upper memory" for other stuff (video
memory). You have 16 segments, how many to hold in reserve?  Someone
chose 6.  Quick and Dirty OS indeed.



On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 11:47 PM Ali via cctalk 
wrote:

> So I had always heard the quote "640KB is enough memory" being attributed
> to
> Bill Gates. However, recently I was watching Dave Plummer on YT and he said
> that it is not true:
>
> https://youtu.be/bikbJPI-7Kg?t=372
>
> And apparently the man himself has denied it as well but it just will not
> go
> away...
>
> https://abcnews.go.com/Technology/PCWorld/story?id=5214635
>
> So I guess like the napkin/disk story and the DR/IBM story this is another
> one of those vintage myths and folk lore with no real basis in reality
>
> -Ali
>
>
>
>

[cctalk] VCF Southwest 2023 some highlights

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

VCF SW was this past weekend near Dallas, Texas.

Here are some highlights from my perspective.

https://voidstar.blog/vcf-southwest-2023/


Most photos you can click to enlarge (Edge has bugs with WordPress, you may
need to scroll up/down a little bit to get the click thing working)


Cheers,
Steve

[cctalk] Re: IBM 5120/5110-3 casual notes / 8" disks question

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Ok, so I grabbed some DS/DD 3M 8" disks - I assume I can "MARK" them
(reformat).  But so far no luck.   I never had disks on the 5110, so still
learning about them on the 5120 - I assume they still need to be "MARK"
just like the tapes are?

Here is a short video I made of the 5120 disk drives I have during startup
of the system.   I'll double check the fuses of the system tomorrow - the
fuse behind the CRT was blown, so I'm thinking it's possible this system
had some other electrical problems.

IBM 5120 Disk Drive Example (benchtop experiment) - YouTube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxyDDx8LOGw

Much to investigate, but so many other projects - I may need to just put
away these 8" drives for a while.


OH, and I finally got to talk about the 5100 series.I'm not the best
speaker and a couple mistakes I noticed - but mostly I hope I didn't
horribly misrepresent your prior work.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIJNrBaTenM


-Steve



On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 3:38 AM Christian Corti via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 17 Jun 2023, Steve Lewis wrote:
> > My only question is: how "universal" are 8" disk?  This 5120 only came
> with
> > a single IBM 8" Diagnostics disk.  It looks to be in fine condition, but
> > I've no idea about the data.
>
> I can answer your question very quickly:
> A 5120 is exactly the same as a 5110 plus 5114. This said, the diagnostics
> and any software apply to both systems.
>
> You can take any 5110 floppy image and recreate a real floppy from it. The
> format BTW is "the" standard IBM format. The 5114/5120 can handle
> everything from single-sided single-density up to double-sided
> double-density. The firmware OTOH has a predefined set called "formats",
> ranging from 1 to 9, with an optional suffix indicating the number of
> additional directory tracks (only available with DD). The list is
> somewhere in the manual, e.g. format 1 is SS/SD 128 bytes/sect. 26
> sects/track, and format 8b (b=blank) is DS/DD 512 bytes/sect. 15
> sects/track.
> IIRC format 1-3 are SS/SD, 4-6 SS/DD and 7-9 DS/DD
>
> Christian
>

[cctalk] Re: VCF Southwest 2023 some highlights

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

I think you're right - I hadn't realized such a shift from the 4051, but
makes sense.  Demos of the original 4051 that I've seen, the system seemed
"painfully slow." Updated to try to clarify, thanks!


On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 7:12 AM Tony Duell  wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 1:06 PM Steve Lewis via cctalk
>  wrote:
> >
> > VCF SW was this past weekend near Dallas, Texas.
> >
> > Here are some highlights from my perspective.
> >
> > https://voidstar.blog/vcf-southwest-2023/
> >
> >
> > Most photos you can click to enlarge (Edge has bugs with WordPress, you
> may
> > need to scroll up/down a little bit to get the click thing working)
>
> I may be talking nonsense, but you describe the Tektronix 4054 as a
> 6800-based system. I thought the 4051 used that processor, but the
> 4052 and 4054 used a board of AM2900-series bitslice chips that
> implement a processor with an instruction set similar to the 6800 but
> with no BCD operations and some 16 bit extensions.
>
> -tony
>

[cctalk] VCF SoCal Saturday

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

There's a good chance I'll make it to the upcoming VCF SoCal coming up on
Sat. the 17th.

Some things I'm looking for:
- recently an associate of mine gifted me their original 1978 TRS-80 (Model
1).  But not much in accessories.  I have a suitable tape deck, but other
accessories might be nice.  His father used this particular unit while he
worked in the Tandy Towers in downtown FW (that's all I know about it so
far).

- any IBM 5100/5110 parts (including 8" disks); an associate here in Texas
has gotten their IBM 5114 disk drive unit working, so we'd be interested in
maybe copying disk files over to QIC tapes, and then somehow off-system to
archive.And I'm still looking for a copy of "PC51" (a 5110 BASIC
emulator that ran under MS-DOS 2.0), it was by CORE NET.   Probably at most
only a few hundred customers bought it (at its $3000 price tag) around 1983.

- any parts for a Sharp PC-5000.  Mine works, but I've been looking for a
Sharp CE-510F floppy disk drive (that has a "special" 37-pin connector that
makes it only work with some of the Sharp models - and I've verified it is
not the same as the 37-pin connector used on the IBM PC 5150 controller
card).

- anyone who can replace the screen on an Atari Lynx.  I have the parts,
just don't have the talent :)

- a ThinkPad 385CD.  I have one and it's in really decent condition, but
thinking I'd like to have a spare.  Nice thing about the 385CD is it has
both 3.5" floppy and CD-ROM. [ I'm specifically looking for 486DX or
Pentium, so mid-1990s, not late 1990s -  I have plenty of Pentium 3's and
onward;  going for a "period correct" OS/2 Warp setup, even though I do
have ArcaOS on some 2001-era systems ]

- I guess while I'm at it, I've also been seeking for a working Datapoint
2200 (or equivalent variant, any 1974 or earlier) or Wang 2200.  Even just
seeing either of those in working condition would be neat (working in terms
of still booting to BASIC).   I was surprised I didn't see one at VCF in
Dallas last year (but they did have a HP9830 and Tek4051, those were neat
to see and still working)..  The Wang systems have some decent emulators,
but I don't recall emulators for the early Datapoints.- so I've been
curious about their font and if it was as good at the brochures show.
 I've read that the thing that really got Datapoint some money (initially)
was they pulled off crisp 80-column early on (and from the IBM SCAMP
journals, I read that even IBM struggled to do 80 cols - part of why the
IBM 5100 was only 64-column).


I just happen to be near LA that weekend, so hopefully it works out that I
can get to this VCF event.  Is it the first time being held in that area?

Cheers, hope weather all works out for this event!
-Steve

[cctalk] Re: SOCAL VCF

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

I was able to make it, and the weather turned out very fair.

Here is my summary review of the two days.Sorry about the ticket issue
- I was able to get an online ticket the day before the event without
issue.


VCF SoCal 2024 — voidstar 

https://voidstar.blog/vcf-socal-2024/


-SteveL




On Sun, Feb 18, 2024 at 10:11 PM Ali via cctalk 
wrote:

> So did anyone go? How was it? I never heard back from the organizers
> regarding the ticketing situation despite my, and Sellam's, best efforts so
> I skipped it. Hopefully, the event went better then the organization and
> the
> next one will have the bugs ironed out.
>
> -Ali
>
>
>
>
>

[cctalk] some old PC-DOS file managers

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Hey all!

I'm looking for a couple "file manager" type pieces of software.  I can't
find them on WinWorld.

First one is from about 1984-1985, possibly called DRBOSS.COM, I just
remember it used IBM extended graphics for "window" borders (which were
colored red) and the filenames were either in gray or green.   The main
feature was you could select a few files at a time, then do some operation
on those selected ones.   And as a .COM it was well under 64K.

The other is from around 1996, and called MWIZ or Menu Wizard.  Apparently
there were a few variations with possibly the same/similar name.  All I
recall about this one is it came with both a .EXE and a .COM, and was
written by a person named Tony.  I believe it was available on the '96 or
'97 BYTE magazine CD, and possibly also on CompuServe (I'm not current on
what the state of any CompuServe archives are these days).


Not urgent - just curious if they could be found.



And if anyone is in an MS-DOS mood throughout the holiday break:  I still
find my ancient CDIR.EXE useful even in DOSBOX or on my physical IBM 5150.
It is available in my utility collection archived here:
https://github.com/voidstar78/VUC4DOS


For other early IBM PC notes (like floppy drive emulators and NIC setup), I
have some notes here:  https://voidstar.blog/ibm-pc-5150-notes/
(including all about using the tape deck!)


-Steve / v*

[cctalk] qbert license?

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Perhaps slightly off topic, but perhaps someone here has a contact or idea
on how to get started on this:

Someone has done a Q-Bert port in 2023 to a new system.  The title is
different, but the "look and feel" (and audio) is pretty "authentic" to the
original (not sure if using exactly the same original tiles and such, I
believe it was all original work - but still, it's very much an
arcade-style clone).We see now that Sony "owns" it these days (I seem
to remember decades ago there a Q-bert cartoon? But perhaps remembering it
wrong).

The question is, how would one start on obtaining a license?  I assume it
wouldn't be cost effective (for a free casual port), but still just
curious.I've tried to contact Sony in the past (on a different software
title), but it's just a huge enterprise it's a bit challenging to
approach.   Just wondering on the off chance if maybe someone around here
has gone down this road already?

-Steve

[cctalk] Re: RIP: Software design pioneer and Pascal creator Niklaus Wirth

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

In further honor of Niklaus Wirth and Pascal:

In a Poly-88 system I acquired last year, it had a printing of the Tiny
Pascal Compiler article in a 1978 BYTE publication.   That has BASIC source
code for the initial interpreter of a Pascal compiler.  We ported that over
to the Commodore BASIC V2, as used on the Commander X16 system.   As-is it
only supported the INTEGER type (and arrays thereof).  It compiles to a
"p-code" where then an interpreter executes those results.The thing
about the X16 system is we have BASLOAD that adds a few features to BASIC:
long variable names, and symbolic GOTO/GOSUB so that line numbers aren't
needed (effectively a kind of QuickBASIC front end to the native BASIC of
the host system).  It works splendidly at making it far easier to write up
more complex BASIC programs.

With the original TinyPascal baseline all working, now Martin Schmalenbach
is taking the initiative of expanding the type support (including pointer
support) and has a working "Version 1" that handles some simple input and
output.

We realize use of BASIC and p-code was never the most efficient approach to
building a robust compiler and development environment.  But we still
consider it fun to use modern tools and perspective and pulling further on
the threads of that 1978 article and see where it goes.   It may be a
helpful tutorial on the process of using one language to create another,
then using that result to develop the language you really wanted (e.g.
using tinyPascal to later write an on-system C compiler).  Or it may be an
example of a "super sized" BASIC program doing an interesting application
(and exercising the multiple banks of the X16 system).

Original discussion thread:
https://cx16forum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6833

V1 introductory thread:
https://cx16forum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6947


-Steve


On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 10:08 PM Paul Berger via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> Pascal did not have strings originally, but it is a common
> "enhancement".  I recall 40 years ago setting out to write a program to
> create a data file using the S/370 ANSI Pascal compiler and it did not
> have strings.
>
> Paul.
>
> On 2024-01-04 8:51 p.m., Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote:
> > Pascal has strings.
> >
> > Sellam
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 4:19 PM Warner Losh via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> My first two pascal programs of any size were an Alarm Clock for my DEC
> >> Rainbow and a PDP-11 simulator, also for my DEC Rainbow (I did a science
> >> fair project comparing stack machines to traditional ones, but invented
> my
> >> own stack machine and was too young to know the right way to
> >> compare/contrast the two different machines, so I scraped by with a
> better
> >> than average rating... mostly because nobody knew how to evaluate it,
> but
> >> that was to my advantage thinking back on it...). Ah, fond memories of
> >> Turbo Pascal.
> >>
> >> Lack of strings, and lack of a good way to do portable I/O doomed the
> >> language.
> >>
> >> Warner
> >>
>

[cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?)

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Well, just to throw this into the conversation:

Over this past summer, I was studying the SCAMP (
https://voidstar.blog/scamp-a-review-50-years-later/ )

In that collection I came across a very early printing of the PALM
instruction set, with the cover page dated March 21, 1972 of the printing,
and on the next page a date of March 16, 1972 of the document number.  My
photos of that document is here:
https://github.com/voidstar78/SCAMP/blob/main/IBM_SCAMP_PALM_InstructionSet_March1972.pdf

We can't infer from this on when the actual PALM processor was developed
(which took place in or around Boca Raton, FL).  We can only say this
description of the instruction set was published in early 1972, and we know
it was "fielded" (used in the SCAMP prototype) by September 1973 in a
fully functional "desktop computer" (though despite the sleek case, it was
still a "rough around the edges" prototype).  Isn't the March 1972 date is
at least earlier than the Intel 8008 ?  Also, digging through the Joe
George tech journal, I believe I recall a reference in those pages that
IBM's internal parts cost of the PALM processor itself was around $200-$300
(that being in 1973/1974 dollars) [at least a couple pages, Joe itemized
component parts, since they had specific cost goals to stay under]

As others have suggested, the idea of a microprocessor was very much in the
air, as an idea whose time had come.  Recall the story that Datapoint was
"begging" Intel to make a processor, but Intel essentially cost Datapoint a
year since Intel was plenty happy selling the very profitable memory chips
(but also that TI's alternative didn't work out).

Now, of course an argument is then is PALM a microprocessor?  Perhaps not
by todays standards and expectations, as it is a series of about 14
"Dutchess" chips, which is claimed to consist of MOSFET.  I'm not enough of
a hardware person to really argue on the nuance of the specific technology
involved inside there.  But as I understand, neither of the 4004 or 8008
did much on their own and still needed quite a few chips to make a viable
system.

Anyhow - I'm not suggesting the PALM was special or particularly
innovative, but it did have multiple sets of 16x 16-bit registers (which
were referenced using memory addresses 0-128, but they were physically "on
the CPU board" itself) - which is interesting since the "many registers" is
the path Intel went (in contrast to processors like 6502, 6809).   The
System/3 before all this also had "memory mapped registers" (which I don't
know enough about that system to know if they were "memory mapped" like
PALM were, in that they were physically on the processor; or were they
"memory mapped" in like how 6502-based systems reserve R0-R16 in their
zeropage?).

-Steve




On Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 4:31 AM Christian Corti via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 22 Nov 2023, Fred Cisin wrote:
> > An absurd argument:
> > It could be argued that the 8085, rather than being designed from
> scratch was
> > simply a modification of the 8080.  Perhaps significant modifications,
> but
> > nevertheless modifications, not redesign from scratch.
>
> 8080 and 8085 are essentially the same (from the programmer's view).
>
> > If we accept arguments such as that, then we could argue that Pentium is
> a
> > modified 80486,
> > which is a modified 80386,
> > which is a modified 80286,
> > which is a modified 80186,
> > which is a modified 8086,
> > ...
> > all the way down to the 4004  :-)
>
> Right, this is what I always say.
> BUT the cut is with the 8008. The 4004 is a completely different beast
> and has absolutely no ressemblence to the 8008, e.g. Harvard vs.
> Von-Neumann architecture etc.
>
> The "modifications" (or better: heritage) can be seen if you look at the
> registers. Initially A, B, C, D, E, H and L, they were the same in the
> 8080. When going 16 bits, they were "extended", i.e. called A extended, B
> extended and so on, with names AX, BX, CX, DX, and the addition of
> segmenmt registers. Later, when going to 32 bits, Intel already "forgot"
> what AX stood for, and so they called the registers "extended A extended"
> (EAX) and so on.
>
> > Therefore, it could be argued that Win11 can be run on a "heavily
> modified
> > modified 4004"
>
> 8008, not 4004.
>
> > Motorola tended to redesign from scratch, whereas Intel would modify
> their
> > previous design.
>
> Yes, but that is a widely known fact.
>
> > [I warned you that it was absurd]
>
> It isn't absurd at all, or not more absurd as my post ;-)
>
> Christian
>

[cctalk] Re: Intel 4004

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

I heard the Aztecs went to the moon eons before that other Armstrong guy :)




On Tue, Nov 21, 2023 at 6:34 PM Paul Koning via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

>
>
> > On Nov 21, 2023, at 7:13 PM, Antonio Carlini via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> >
> > On 21/11/2023 23:14, Will Cooke via cctalk wrote:
> >> More information is here:
> >>
> https://firstmicroprocessor.com/?doing_wp_cron=1700608229.8666059970855712890625
> >>
> >> I think that is the designers (Rod Holt?) website.  Apparently he won a
> legal battle to use the term "first microprocessor" for whatever that is
> worth.
> >
> > Details were published in 1998 and the chip was available approximately
> never (I presume, unless you were building a Tomcat) so I'm not sure you
> should count it. Perhaps "first microprocessor, until someone else claims
> another secret design that was even earlier" would be a more accurate claim?
>
> Remember the guy at the British spook agency (GCHQ?) who said he invented
> RSA a long time before Rivest, Shamir, and Adleman did?  Perhaps so, but
> the fact that it was all secret means it didn't matter to the real world.
>
> This sort of thing happens a lot, in inventions or discoveries.  There
> were types of telegraphs before S.F.B. Morse came along, but his design
> took over the world.  There were Europeans who traveled to America before
> Columbus, but nothing came of those explorations and they were pretty much
> forgotten.  And FM radio was first invented in 1919 by a Dutch engineer
> (Hanso Idzerda), not around 1930 by Edwin Armstrong -- but Idzerda's design
> was a technological dead end and disappeared from view by the late 1920s,
> while Armstrong's design became universal and remains so.
>
> So I tend to qualify "first to invent" (or "discover") as "first to invent
> and make it matter".
>
> paul
>
>
>

[cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?)

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Haven't caught up on the whole 4004 discussion here,

but my understanding was that the 4004 and 8008 were effectively developed
at the same time?   And were announced or available about within one month
of each other?


On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 2:51 AM ED SHARPE via cctalk 
wrote:

> Was there ever a COMPUTER using a 4004   that  you  cud  really  do
> something or  did  tat finally arrive with the 8008  as  in the skelby
> shelby  sp? 8008 i now there  was an Intel   INTELIC 4 (?sp)could n
> that  use 4004  or one of  the  later 4000 numbered proc. We have an
> intelec 8 and 8 inch floppy  drives here at smecc musem  always
> wanted  a 4!Ed#
> In a message dated 11/21/2023 11:31:55 AM US Mountain Standard Time,
> dkel...@hotmail.com writes:
> There is little surviving software for the 4004. There are a few places
> with snippets of code to do things like add or subtract several digits but
> my searches of the internet have shown little actual code. The NBS has some
> code to track satellites and correct for time delays from their clocks (
> think GPS ).I'd had a spare 4004 and always wanted to do something with it.
> I found that the library for work done at the Navy Post Graduate School in
> Monterey California had 2 projects that students of Gary Kildall created.
> One was a load calculator for helicopters and the other was for calculating
> closest point of approach for ships. I'd been unsuccessful at down loading
> the helicopter code but was able to down load the ships document.I'd let
> the listing sit for 10's of years while always on the back burner. Over the
> years I'd acquired the needed parts. I did make a few substitutions,
> though. The original used 13 each 1702A EPROMs. Since that exceed my budget
> for a PC board space, I chose the option of using a 4289 and a 2732 EPROM.
> I did use the original designs number of 4002s, as using RAM through the
> 4289 would have made significant changes to the software.The problem of the
> circuit needed to be dealt with. The document had a page labelled
> 'schematic' that turned out to be the keyboard layout and display layout(
> both of which I ignored and used my own layout that I though was better
> ).Before getting to the board design, I needed to get working software. The
> listing was done on a ASR33 with a deeply rutted platen, typical of
> hand-me-down things used by a school's command. Letters like R or P would
> look like F and 0 would look like C. Other letters were easy to figure out
> but still often had their right edge missing.After entering the list by
> hand, I'd feed it into my assembler and the tried to run it with my
> simulator.I'd make corrections as I got the code running.I need to create
> the circuitry for the keyboard decoder, that took 25 buttons to the 4 bit
> data bus input of the 4004. There was enough description in the document to
> create the LED display but I did missed one thing ( that I'll mention later
> ).I created the board with my typical incorrect wiring, requiring several
> extra cuts and jumpers. ( the concept was right but I got the pins of the
> 7402 mixed up.) The one thing that I'd missed was the order of the digit
> scan. I assumed left to right but the code was actually right to left.
> After so many cuts and jumpers to get the keyboard right, I dreaded more to
> fix the scan order so I made the one change to the original software to do
> right to left ( I still feel bad about that change ).I thought I'd talk a
> little about how a Closest Point of Approach Calculation is done. Normally
> it had been done by a graphical method of line drawing on what is called a
> plotting maneuver board. One used graphical calculations for the trig used.
> It was all done by pencil and parallel. It is so important that, I believe,
> that to this day a ship's pilot still needs to be able to do this
> calculation on a maneuver board, even though such graphical displays are
> capable of doing such, today. Large ships require significant knowledge of
> where they are relative to other fixed and moving objects in order to
> determine the safest path to proceed. A broken display is not time to learn
> how to do such a calculation.This 4004 calculator used a newly found way of
> doing tangent calculations, called the CORDIC method. One could clearly see
> the influence of Gary Kildall's hand in this code. It is noted that he
> wrote the division routine used and the organization of the code clearly
> shows the influence of a seasoned programmer. Bring such code back to life
> was almost as much as making a 4004 processor from discrete transistors but
> I felt was for me as part of my bucket list.Things I needed to do, included
> writing an assembler, writing a simulator, learn a PC board CAD,
> transcribing a poor quality listing, debugging the poorly transcribed
> listing, creating the keyboard decoder and instrumenting my simulator to be
> the calculator.Dwight   From: ED SHARPE via cctalk 
> Sent: Tuesday, November 

[cctalk] Re: Intel 4004(sp?)

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

Yes, it seems PALM did have a few evolutions, which just makes me curious
if there were even earlier editions than this one from 1972.But even if
so - then like the 4004, we're struggling to find evidence of actual
products that made use of them.  Wasn't the 4004 used in some cash
registers, street lights, or some weighing machines? (I don't have any
specific references, just recollections from past reading)

My suspicion is that something like the PALM was used in the large (later
model) IBM 9-track tape systems (forget the model numbers offhand, but in
their manuals they describe a full instruction set) or "industrial systems"
like that.

I think at that time (1972) PALM was also lacking a SHIFT or ROTATE code -
since in part of the Joe George tech manual, they mention having to
implement this in the SCAMP prototype themselves (a hardware solution
workaround to a missing processor capability) until that instruction got
added later (before the IBM 5100 release).  [ specifically it is mentioned
by Pat Smith in an entry from February 1973, who had come up with the
workaround; this SHIFT I think was essential to some keyboard integration
work ]

Note that there is also evidence that as many as 400 early IBM 5100's were
actually made in 1974 (based on an early bulk order of keyboards of that
quantity, and a sales projection graph that includes a column for 1974) --
those early ones most likely were all APL only (since that was all that was
yet available as it carried over from the SCAMP).

Very nice images of the Philips tape.  Yes, in the last few pages of that
System/7 document, it has the 1972 article from Eletronic News about it -
IBM was pretty proud of that, and it's the earliest example I've come
across of using audio cassette tapes for digital data storage.  So right
around '71/'72 was the origin of that, as far as I know (at least as far as
used in commercial products).


Steve



On Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 2:56 AM Christian Corti via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> > Well, just to throw this into the conversation:
> >
> > Over this past summer, I was studying the SCAMP (
> > https://voidstar.blog/scamp-a-review-50-years-later/ )
> >
> > In that collection I came across a very early printing of the PALM
> > instruction set, with the cover page dated March 21, 1972 of the
> printing,
> > and on the next page a date of March 16, 1972 of the document number.  My
> > photos of that document is here:
> >
> https://github.com/voidstar78/SCAMP/blob/main/IBM_SCAMP_PALM_InstructionSet_March1972.pdf
>
> This seems to be an older revision than the photocopied document that
> I have. The instruction set described in the '72 document is not the final
> one. Some opcodes are missing or are not complete (like the JUMP
> instruction).
> A transcription of my photocopy is here:
>
> http://computermuseum.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de/dev/ibm_5110/technik/instr_set.html
>
> BTW voidstar also has a document called System/7 tape cassette attachment.
> I do have the original IBM cassette recorder (a Philips EL 3302) with
> cable and System/7 diagnostics cassettes ;-) This was the tape recorder
> used with the SCAMP.
> Pictures can be found here:
> http://computermuseum.informatik.uni-stuttgart.de/pics/ibm/s7
>
> > Now, of course an argument is then is PALM a microprocessor?  Perhaps not
> > by todays standards and expectations, as it is a series of about 14
> > "Dutchess" chips, which is claimed to consist of MOSFET.  I'm not enough
> of
>
> I'd say yes. It's not a single-chip processor, but the i8008 wasn't either
> (it couldn't work without support chips.
>
>
> Christian
>

[cctalk] Re: Z80 vs other microprocessors of the time.

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

After learning more about the PALM processor in the IBM 5100, it has a
similarity to the 6502 in that the first 128 bytes of RAM is a "register
file."  All its registers (R0 to R15, across 4 interrupt "layers") occupy
those first addresses.  In addition, they are physically on the processor
itself (not in actual RAM).   I've been meaning to come up with a sample
PALM program that verifies if there is any performance advantage on that
(that is, something that "does stuff" with data in addresses 0 to 127, then
"does that same stuff" in a higher address like $800+ and see if there is a
noticeable performance difference).   The earliest document I can find on
PALM is from 1972 (or just a few months after the 8080 - the actual initial
production date of PALM is unknown, the 1972 date is just when IBM
documented the instruction set).  But I think the IBM System/3 had a
similar design (or at least, just I recall a mention of the System/3
registers are in RAM -- not sure if that's literal or just
address-access-wise, but in any case the System/3 was said to be pretty
difficult to program for).

Anyhow, to me the PALM may be an earlier "RISC" approach in that its
instructions are always 2-bytes (4-bits for a main opcode -- yes only 16
categories, then a few bits for a "modifier" while the middle pair of bits
specify a register R0 to R15 that the instruction involves), in contrast to
the variable instruction length used by the System/360.There is one
exception in PALM where a kind of "long jump" instruction is followed by
another 2-bytes that is the target address.


You won't hear much about PALM - though I am excited that emulation support
for it has recently been added into MAME!  I ponder if maybe Chuck Peddle
somehow crossed paths with PALM in his early engineering career, or if in
some indirect way there was some lineage or connection there (in a "dude,
your processor doesn't need to be that complicated, I know a system that in
16 instructions does all sort of stuff" kind of way).  BTW, IBM's costs
list during the IBM SCAMP development put the PALM processor card costing
about $300 (in c. 1973).

All that said, in early 1970s, I don't think anyone was yet using the term
RISC vs CISC.

-Steve v*




On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 7:50 PM Peter Coghlan via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> My first exposure to a computer at home was a BBC Micro with 32kB of RAM
> and
> 32kB of ROM.  Included in this was a 16kB BASIC ROM which was regarded as
> fast
> and powerful, featuring 32 bit integer variables, 40 bit floating point
> variables, variable length strings, structured programming constructs and
> everything accessed by keyword statements rather than PEEK this and POKE
> that.
>
> This was implemented by a humble 6502 running at (mostly) 2MHz, with one 8
> bit
> arithmetic register, two 8 bit index registers, one 8 bit stack pointer,
> a 16 bit program counter and a few flag bits.
>
> I would have expected that a computers featuring a Z80 with its larger
> register
> set, 16 bit arithmetic operations, richer instruction set and general bells
> and whistles would have been able to produce a much superior
> implementation in
> terms of speed or features or both but I never came across one.
>
> Why is that?  Did the Z80 take more cycles to implement it's more complex
> instructions?  Is this an early example of RISC vs CISC?
>
> Regards,
> Peter Coghlan
>
>

[cctalk] Re: New VCF Video bumper

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

I picked the regular Daisy Bell one (except there is a little blip/bump at
the 2-second mark that is a little jarring).   It's a homage to what the
IBM 7094 did back in 1961 (while that one did have vocals, it is a bit
eerie, and so just an audio track like a PDP-1 might play it is good).


On Sat, May 4, 2024 at 12:03 AM Jeffrey Brace via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> The Vintage Computer Federation is looking for a new bumper to add to the
> front and back of all their new videos.
> There are 7 different versions. Vote on the one that you like best!
>
> https://forms.gle/Y9Qrj26xokeFXjub6
>

[cctalk] Re: BASIC

[Steve Lewis via cctalk]

>  ROM BASICs outlived their usefulness very quickly.
> Certainly a very subjective statement.

I was thinking the other day, that I wish the startup BIOS of modern
systems had BASIC - such as in a modern i7 based laptop.   At the very
least, with all the trig functions, it's as useful as any graphing
calculator, or time features make it useful as a clock or stopwatch.

In the variants that had PEEK/POKE, then BASIC essentially becomes as
useful as an assembler (since you can place the opcodes into DATA
statements and POKE and SYS them anywhere into memory).  It took me awhile
to realize why original variants of BASIC didn't have PEEK/POKE:  they were
probably timeshare systems, and so arbitrary access to write to system
memory would be taboo in those environments.  But in a single-user micros,
that address space is all yours.

Even if your main storage components are kaput, boot up BASIC still allows
the system to be useful.   Most variants will have keywords or features to
make use of serial IO, so you could pipe in a larger program through that
(or do a simple terminal program).  For sure BASIC has its limitations, but
I appreciate how it can function with extremely limited resources (and as a
somewhat intuitive interface to programmatically access other system calls).


-Steve



On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 8:59 AM Sellam Abraham via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On Thu, May 2, 2024, 7:58 PM Just Kant via cctalk 
> wrote:
>
> >
> >  ROM BASICs outlived their usefulness very quickly.
>
>
> Certainly a very subjective statement.
>
> Sellam
>