looking for VME board manuals

[Rico Pajarola via cctalk]

Hi all

I acquired a "few" VME boards over the years, and I finally have time to
deal with some of the less cooperative ones.

I'm looking for the following VME board manuals (any information is
welcome, especially pinouts for the front panel or P2 connectors, jumpers,
how to re-create the nvram contents etc. ).

* Themis Sparc 10MP (not 20MP which is an entirely different board with a
different front panel)
* Force SPARC CPU 10
* MVME3600 (user's or installation manual, I can only find the programmer's
manual)

also looking for manuals for some HP VXI boards (more for completeness than
because they're necessary, the boards are pretty self-explanatory unless
you need to recreate the cables):
* HP E1499A (V/382)
* HP E1498A (V/743)
* HP E1480A (V/362)

Also anything about the Mercury RACE MCH6 or MCV6 system that's more than a
marketing brochure (actually, I'd even take a marketing brochure). I have
some i860 and PowerPC boards but absolutely no idea where to start. And of
course I'm also looking for software, but I'm not holding my breath...

thanks!
Rico

Re: 13W3 to HDMI/DisplayPort

[Alan Perry via cctalk]

Thx.

I haven’t seen many cheap VGA->HDMI adapters. The cheap ones went the other 
direction.

I have been using widescreen displays with my Suns (using Solaris/CDE and 
OPENSTEP) for some time. My last Sun-badged display was a widescreen.

Will look for Extron ones.

> On May 24, 2020, at 22:05, Rico Pajarola  wrote:
> 
> 
> I've had good success using various Extron adapters.
> 
> I'm currently using a RGB112xi to convert  => VGA.
> 
> So far the adapter works as advertised with anything I managed to connect it 
> to (various HP/DEC/Sun/SGI/RS6000, including mono and SoG) to a cheap Dell 
> monitor that definitely doesn't understand sync on green. The adapter fully 
> regenerates all signals including separate H/V sync.
> 
> From there I would assume any cheap VGA => HDMI adapter should work (but I 
> never had the urge, because HDMI monitors also tend to be wide format which 
> doesn't work very well for classic computing)
> 
> I also have other Extron converters, but the RGB112xi is best for 1990s 
> workstations. The only thing I wish it had was a way to choose the color when 
> the input signal is monochrome.
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 9:53 AM Alan Perry via cctalk 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> When I first started trying to use VGA LCD panels with my Suns (mostly 
>> lunchbox systems, all 4c and 4m desktops), I heard there could be a 
>> problem like that and stuck with a particular model Samsung that worked. 
>> Then I tried another one and it worked. And another. And another. I 
>> haven't encountered one (out of half a dozen) that didn't work.
>> 
>> alanp
>> 
>> On 5/24/20 9:29 AM, alan--- via cctalk wrote:
>> > 
>> > I've had the opposite experience.  I've been trying to find a 1U 
>> > pull-out keyboard/monitor/mouse combo for my E6500 rack.  Most of the 
>> > VGA LCD panels complain about signal out of range on both cg3 and cg6. 
>> > The E6500 really doesn't need a video console, but it'd be nice if one 
>> > was tucked in there.  Of course the weirdo Sun mounting rails in the 
>> > cabinet are yet another challenge.
>> > 
>> > -A
>> > 
>> > On 2020-05-24 11:16, Alan Perry via cctalk wrote:
>> > 
>> >> Every flat panel display with a SVGA connector that I have had has
>> >> worked with my 13W3-to-SVGA adapters. I have seen adapters that do the
>> >> SVGA to HDMI part. I am asking if someone else here has figured out
>> >> which one(s) work in this application.

Re: 13W3 to HDMI/DisplayPort

[Rico Pajarola via cctalk]

I've had good success using various Extron adapters.

I'm currently using a RGB112xi to convert  => VGA.

So far the adapter works as advertised with anything I managed to connect
it to (various HP/DEC/Sun/SGI/RS6000, including mono and SoG) to a cheap
Dell monitor that definitely doesn't understand sync on green. The adapter
fully regenerates all signals including separate H/V sync.

>From there I would assume any cheap VGA => HDMI adapter should work (but I
never had the urge, because HDMI monitors also tend to be wide format which
doesn't work very well for classic computing)

I also have other Extron converters, but the RGB112xi is best for 1990s
workstations. The only thing I wish it had was a way to choose the color
when the input signal is monochrome.



On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 9:53 AM Alan Perry via cctalk 
wrote:

>
> When I first started trying to use VGA LCD panels with my Suns (mostly
> lunchbox systems, all 4c and 4m desktops), I heard there could be a
> problem like that and stuck with a particular model Samsung that worked.
> Then I tried another one and it worked. And another. And another. I
> haven't encountered one (out of half a dozen) that didn't work.
>
> alanp
>
> On 5/24/20 9:29 AM, alan--- via cctalk wrote:
> >
> > I've had the opposite experience.  I've been trying to find a 1U
> > pull-out keyboard/monitor/mouse combo for my E6500 rack.  Most of the
> > VGA LCD panels complain about signal out of range on both cg3 and cg6.
> > The E6500 really doesn't need a video console, but it'd be nice if one
> > was tucked in there.  Of course the weirdo Sun mounting rails in the
> > cabinet are yet another challenge.
> >
> > -A
> >
> > On 2020-05-24 11:16, Alan Perry via cctalk wrote:
> >
> >> Every flat panel display with a SVGA connector that I have had has
> >> worked with my 13W3-to-SVGA adapters. I have seen adapters that do the
> >> SVGA to HDMI part. I am asking if someone else here has figured out
> >> which one(s) work in this application.
>

Re: history is hard (was: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC)

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

On Sun, 24 May 2020, Jecel Assumpcao Jr via cctalk wrote:

I had heard that Microsoft had licensed Xenix before the IBM thing.


I hadn't known that.

Bill thought he had a gentleman's agreement with Gary to not intrude in 
each other's turf and then DR came out with CBASIC. Furious, Bill got 
into operating systems in retaliation.


Gordon Eubanks (CBASIC) and gary were pretty tight.  I just looked up and 
found out that Gary was his thesis advisor in 1976, when he wrote CBASIC. 
It seems like it was inevitable that Gary would end up marketing it.


I played with it a little in mid 1980s; my recollection was that it was 
expensive, and impressive, but not especially suited for any of my 
projects.


When IBM came to Microsoft for an OS they had specs for a machine that 
was in no way up to running Xenix. So it is just simpler to tell the 
story as "Microsoft didn't have an operating system". Adding DOS 
complicated things for Microsoft so they planned to evolve the two 
systems towards each other until there was a single one. The January 
1982 Byte says instead that there would be 3 systems: Xenix at the high 
end, DOS at the low end and a hybrid in the middle. MS-DOS 2 was 
essentially this hybrid (so most system calls have two versions: a CP/M 
one and a Unix one).


I played briefly with Xenix on an XT (or MAYBE an AT) on a 15MB? drive 
partition.   MS-DOS was a better match for that hardware.


OS/2 (Gordon Letwin at Microsoft) was a substantial step up for MS-DOS.
Once they added "Windows For Os/2"/"Presentation Manager", . . .
BUT, then NT was not a direct transition from OS/2.
And, around 1986? IBM started pushing OS/2 with PS/2 (had they bought OS/2 
from Microsoft by then?)



MS-DOS was based heavily on CP/M.  Most university programming 
graduates were into unix.  When Microsoft or Apple were recruiting, 
most of the best pickings were C programmers on unix.  MS-DOS 2.00 was 
definitely moving towards unix, in terms of the sub directories, and file 
handle based API.
I didn't know that there were plans for three levels, just that they were 
moving MS-DOS towards being unix-like.  Keeping the CP/M style API kept 
most software compatible.  FCBs made parsing filenames in the command line 
convenient!




Hmmm... here it says that though CBASIC was developed in 1976 it only
became a DR product in 1981, which is too late for the story I told
above to make sense:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBASIC


Well Gary and Gordon were close in 1976, so you could use any date in that 
1976-1981 range.



I have just watched a talk with Gary where he introduced DR Logo. It
wasn't much cheaper than that. And at the end somebody asked about the
soon to be introduced C compiler and the answer was that it would cost
$600.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4P6MDuk3Zk


Yeah.  some software was free, or almost, and some was very expensive. 
$240 for CP/M-86 was not out of line for the time, other than the fact 
that it was going head to head with an already established $40 (later 
$60?) product.  A few years later, DR dropped the price of CP/M-86 down to 
$60.  TOO LATE.



BTW, once Microsoft started work, IBM insisted on upgraded security and
locks.  For a while, it was referred to as "Project Commodore" as a red
herring for any leaks.


They installed barbed wire in the air ducts going into the room with the
prototype.


I hadn't known that, but it fits with an IBM PHYSICAL SECURITY attitude.
(and totally out of character for west coast software culture!)

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

Re: history is hard (was: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC)

[Jecel Assumpcao Jr via cctalk]

Fred,

> Quite true that Gary did not have the ruthless personality to compete. 
> If the roles had been reversed, Gary would NOT have become a bill Gates.
> Yes, the final outcome was inevitable, although the one incident set the 
> path.   It is fairly commonly believed that MS-DOS would not have EXISTED 
> without the DR/IBM incompatability.  Would Microsoft have gotten into 
> operating systems LATER?   Eventually.  Probably.  But probably not for 
> years.   For instance Microsoft Xenix would probably not have happened if 
> they hadn't already been doing MS-DOS.

I had heard that Microsoft had licensed Xenix before the IBM thing. Bill
thought he had a gentleman's agreement with Gary to not intrude in each
other's turf and then DR came out with CBASIC. Furious, Bill got into
operating systems in retaliation.

When IBM came to Microsoft for an OS they had specs for a machine that
was in no way up to running Xenix. So it is just simpler to tell the
story as "Microsoft didn't have an operating system". Adding DOS
complicated things for Microsoft so they planned to evolve the two
systems towards each other until there was a single one. The January
1982 Byte says instead that there would be 3 systems: Xenix at the high
end, DOS at the low end and a hybrid in the middle. MS-DOS 2 was
essentially this hybrid (so most system calls have two versions: a CP/M
one and a Unix one).

Hmmm... here it says that though CBASIC was developed in 1976 it only
became a DR product in 1981, which is too late for the story I told
above to make sense:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CBASIC

> My recollection (not reliable) was that PC-DOS was originally $40, and 
> then went up to $60 with version 1.10 or 2.00.  (Is that right?)
> There are also conflicting stories about WHO set the price, and HOW; even 
> a conspiracy theory that IBM chose the $240 price to hinder CP/M-86 
> competition.  But, $240 was not grossly out of line in those days, so it 
> very well could have been set by DR, in which case, THAT was a substantial 
> mistake.  At $40 for PC-DOS and $60 or even $80 for CP/M-86, there would 
> have been a better chance to compete, but not at $240.

I have just watched a talk with Gary where he introduced DR Logo. It
wasn't much cheaper than that. And at the end somebody asked about the
soon to be introduced C compiler and the answer was that it would cost
$600.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4P6MDuk3Zk

> BTW, once Microsoft started work, IBM insisted on upgraded security and 
> locks.  For a while, it was referred to as "Project Commodore" as a red 
> herring for any leaks.

They installed barbed wire in the air ducts going into the room with the
prototype.

-- Jecel

Re: history is hard (was: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC)

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

Quite true that Gary did not have the ruthless personality to compete. 
If the roles had been reversed, Gary would NOT have become a bill Gates.
Yes, the final outcome was inevitable, although the one incident set the 
path.   It is fairly commonly believed that MS-DOS would not have EXISTED 
without the DR/IBM incompatability.  Would Microsoft have gotten into 
operating systems LATER?   Eventually.  Probably.  But probably not for 
years.   For instance Microsoft Xenix would probably not have happened if 
they hadn't already been doing MS-DOS.




I maintain that IF IBM and DR had hit it off, that CP/M-86 would have been 
cheaper, and available at the time of the release of the PC, or at least 
VERY soon after.


I have heard (unsubstantiated) that IBM did not give DR any units of 
hardware to develop on (they DID provide Microsoft with some hardware), 
so there was very little work on CP/M-86 for the PC until August 1981 
when the PC was released to the public.


It is not clear whether IBM marketing of CP/M-86 was agreed to before 
finalizing the PC-DOS decisions,or whether it was added on as an 
alternative LATER.  UCSD P-System was ALSO added as an alternative.


There are unconfirmed rumors that IBM had not intended to also provide 
CP/M-86, but that DR screamed until they agreed.  The similarities in the 
operating systems were enough that DR could have had a legal case (even 
before current "look and feel" precedents), but Gary was not into legal 
battles, and being sold IN ADDITION was good enough for him.

IBM had nothing to lose by offering other Operating Systems as alternatives.

My recollection (not reliable) was that PC-DOS was originally $40, and 
then went up to $60 with version 1.10 or 2.00.  (Is that right?)
There are also conflicting stories about WHO set the price, and HOW; even 
a conspiracy theory that IBM chose the $240 price to hinder CP/M-86 
competition.  But, $240 was not grossly out of line in those days, so it 
very well could have been set by DR, in which case, THAT was a substantial 
mistake.  At $40 for PC-DOS and $60 or even $80 for CP/M-86, there would 
have been a better chance to compete, but not at $240.



Nevertheless, in August 1981, when the PC came out, PC-DOS was ready (due 
to IBM and Microsoft working with each other?), and CP/M-86 was 
announced as "coming soon".  Of course CP/M-86 "coming soon" but not 
being ready YET, MUCH earlier, was why Tim Paterson had written 
86-DOS/QDOS.  It was largely intended as a place holder and temporary 
substitute to be able to work on the rest of the projects UNTIL CP/M-86 
was completed and available.


MANY people (not all) thought that CP/M-86 would still become the primary 
operating system, in spite of the price differential.  BUT, "PC-DOS is so 
cheap, that I'll buy a copy of it to use and work on my programs, UNTIL 
CP/M-86 comes out and BECOMES the dominant one."   I did.
By the time that CP/M-86 finally did come out, there was an enormous 
installed base of PC-DOS.  "Are you going to sell software to THEM?"  I 
did. "or wait until CP/M-86 catches up?"  Soon there was also an enormous 
installed base of PC-DOS software.  As I mentioned before, porting to it 
was pretty easy.  "I'll sell my program on PC-DOS.  WHEN (and if) CP/M-86 
catches up, THEN I'll sell it on that."


Soon, it was too late for CP/M-86 to catch up.


A plane is real handy for going to business meetings.  And, is tax 
deductible because of that, even if it is primarily a recreational 
activity and hobby, and the "business meetings" consist of going to hang 
out with friends.  It has been stated that the meeting in question was 
with Bill Godbout, whose business was housed in the north buildings of the 
Oakland Airport, along with Mike Quinn, etc.  Godbout was a valid 
business contact (Compupro) as well as a personal friend, and Gary often 
flew up to visit him.


At the time, there was a minor corruption of the story, that Gary had gone 
off to sail his boat.  It has been reasonably established that it was a 
short flight to Oakland.


I personally think that Gary's attitude was that the money (not clear AT 
THE TIME how much) was not important enough to let IBM push him around.

He was a competnet businessman, but not ruthless.


BTW, once Microsoft started work, IBM insisted on upgraded security and 
locks.  For a while, it was referred to as "Project Commodore" as a red 
herring for any leaks.


I only knew a few people at Microsoft; met Bill Gates a couple of times, 
but he would have no reason to remember me; and met Gary a couple of 
times, but he would have had no reason to remember me (other than as one 
of the many pre-PC jerks who tried to convince him to standardize 5.25 
inch disk formats - his response: "The standard disk format for CP/M 
remains 8 inch Single Sided Single Density"). 
So, my opinions are speculation based on third hand perception of the 
elephant's tail.



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


On 

Re: history is hard (was: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC)

[Jecel Assumpcao Jr via cctalk]

Fred,

> To me, the culture clash aspect makes it one of the greatest stories of 
> the time.
> Was Gary not taking the meeting seriously enough to be there on time, and 
> as a consequence, ending up being $80B behind Bill Gates, the stupidest 
> mistake anybody has ever made?
> Or the bravest thing that anybody has ever done to stand up to them and 
> put refusal to be subservient ahead of the money by deciding that the men 
> from IBM did not deserve different treatment than other customers?

The only world I can imagine where Bill wouldn't be orders of magnitude
richer than Gary would be one where they were equal partners in a single
company (with Gary either instead of, or in addition to, Paul Allen).
The difference in their personalities was a far larger factor in the
results than any particular event, though having a single moment be
"pivotal" is better drama.

What I have heard about the "Gary was away flying" story was that he
used his small private plane to travel to business meetings. The airport
was open for instrument traffic (like what the IBM folks were arriving
in) but not for visual traffic (like Gary coming back from his previous
meeting) so there was no way for him not to be late.

Given that Bill Gates had called him to say he was sending some
important people (but he didn't say who) that he should treat well, he
must have been in his office earlier since this was the era of land
lines. He could have then cancelled his previously scheduled meeting to
make sure he would be present for this one even if normally there would
be plenty of time to come back. But he had no clue who was coming. We
know who it was and what it meant but it is not fair for us to pan his
decision based on what he knew.

In any case he did get the contract. When the IBM PC came out Byte
magazine called it the Rosetta Stone of computing:
https://tech-insider.org/personal-computers/research/acrobat/8201.pdf

We know that CP/M86's $240 price made it lose big time against the $60
PC-DOS (prices from memory and could be very wrong) but at that time
there were people betting on a different result. The first network
operating system in Brazil (NetMB), for example, was compatible with
CP/M86. Only in its third version did it add MS-DOS compatibility as by
1985/1986 the OS war was over (and the UCSD system mentioned in the
January 1982 Byte lost by a huge margin to even QNX and others). It is
funny that the DOS-only era was followed by Windows, Linux, BeOS and
eventually even MacOS as options of the PC making the original prophecy
come true.

-- Jecel

Re: history is hard

[Bill Gunshannon via cctalk]

On 5/24/20 5:30 PM, Peter Coghlan via cctalk wrote:



CP/67 or something like that maybe?  I don't think there was a VM/360 either.



There was VM/370 in 1980.  I worked under it from May to August.
Hosted on a 4331 at Ft. Ben Harrison, IN.  The launch of the
Mainframe and COBOL facet of my career and life.

bill

The massive effort to rebuild an LK201

[Electronics Plus via cctalk]

Yes, I know this will never again be used on a terminal, but the lengths to
which he went are extraordinary to me!

https://deskthority.net/viewtopic.php?f=7
 =23965

He could have bought several new in box LK201, with terminals, for what he
spent on this project!

 

Cindy Croxton

Electronics Plus

1613 Water Street

Kerrville, TX 78028

830-370-3239 cell

sa...@elecplus.com

 



-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Re: history is hard

[Toby Thain via cctalk]

On 2020-05-24 4:13 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 2:01 PM Toby Thain  > wrote:
> 
> On 2020-05-24 3:20 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sun, May 24, 2020, 11:04 AM Toby Thain via cctalk
> > mailto:cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> >> wrote:
> >
> >     On 2020-05-24 11:17 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
> >     > ... IBM was doing
> >     > Virtualization in the 70's.
> >
> >     1968 and probably before.[1]
> >
> >     Most operating systems concepts[2] are much older than people
> think.
> >
> >
> > The topic for my talk next week. Unix had virtualization in 74. The
> > second Unix port ran under OS/360's VM in 78.
> 
> I thought the Interdata port was second?
> 
> 
> Wollongong to the interdata 7/32 was April of 77. Went into production
> July 77.
> Bell Labs to the closely related interdata 8/32 was June of 77. Never
> went into production, but portability fixes plowed back into V7.
> Tom Lyons had his booting to a similar level around May of 77 ("end of
> his junior year"), though he wasn't hired by Amdahl unti the following
> summer and he reports having the full V6 up early in 1979. V7 up later
> in the year when they got it from AT
> 
> I kinda lump the two interdata ports together as 'the first' and I don't
> have good dates for when Tom Lyons booted beyond hello-world, or what
> the benchmark for 'first' should be.

Thanks for the detail! I meant "second after PDP-11" so the confusion
was only an off-by-one error.

--Toby

> 
> Warner
> 
> --T
> 
> >
> > Warner
> >
> >
> >     --T
> >
> >     [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_CP/CMS
> >     [2] e.g. ref: Per Brinch Hansen, Classic Operating Systems
> >
> >     >
> >     > bill
> >     >
> >
> 

Re: history is hard

[Warner Losh via cctalk]

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 3:47 PM Peter Coghlan via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 15:18:34 -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > The topic for my talk next week. Unix had virtualization in 74. The
> >> second
> >> > Unix port ran under OS/360's VM in 78.
> >> >
> >>
> >> What do you mean by "Unix had virtualization"?
> >>
> >
> > I mean that 4th edition UNIX ran under a hypervisor in MERT in 74 as a
> > process in that real-time executive.
> >
>
> Oh.  I thought maybe you meant Unix was able to do virtualization.
>
> What's special about being able to run under a hypervisor?  If the
> hypervisor does it's job right, whatever is running under it should
> not be aware that it is not running directly on hardware.
>

MERT was more a real-time executive than a hypervisor, so there was some
work needed to port UNIX to run as a process in MERT. The port was the unix
kernel, so that programs could have a UNIX API. It wasn't a pure
hypervisor, though, since a number of changes were required to Unix itself
to cope with running in what we'd likely call a paravirtualized environment.

>> Come to think of it, what do you mean by "OS/360's VM"?
> >>
> >
> > IBM's standard VM/360. Sorry for the confusion.
> >
>
> CP/67 or something like that maybe?  I don't think there was a VM/360
> either.
>

Sorry, it was VM/370, so the successor to CP/67 with virtual memory added.
https://akapugs.blog/2018/05/12/370unixpart2/

Warner

RE: DECstation 220/Olivetti M250E Documentation

[Dave Wade via cctalk]

Rob,

I have what is laughingly labelled as a "Field Engineering Library - M250 
Service Manual" but its actually almost totally devoid of any technical 
information.
Not sure what the difference between the M250 and M250E is but looking at the 
pocket guide they are very similar.
In fact the pocket guide seems to have more technical information than the 
service guide :-(
I have no idea from whence it came, but if you would like it I can either pop 
it in the post to you, or you can arrange to do your exercise near me and 
collect.

Dave

> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk  On Behalf Of Rob Jarratt via
> cctalk
> Sent: 24 May 2020 21:48
> To: anto...@acarlini.com; 'Antonio Carlini' ;
> 'General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts' 
> Subject: RE: DECstation 220/Olivetti M250E Documentation
> 
> Hello Antonio,
> 
> I have a couple of user manuals too, I am not sure they are going to help
> much. I am thinking more like technical documentation, if any exists.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Rob
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: cctalk  On Behalf Of Antonio
> > Carlini via cctalk
> > Sent: 24 May 2020 20:53
> > To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
> > Subject: Re: DECstation 220/Olivetti M250E Documentation
> >
> > On 24/05/2020 17:00, Robert Jarratt via cctalk wrote:
> > > I have a DECstation 220 (an Olivetti M250E under the covers) that
> > > needs
> > repair. I have a pocket service guide, but I have not found any other
> > documentation. Is there any?
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > >
> > > Rob
> >
> > I'm *sure* I've got some DECstation 220 manuals, but (a) I can't find
> > them right now and (b) they're only user manuals.
> >
> > When I come across them, I'll send you an email.
> >
> >
> > Antonio
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Antonio Carlini
> > anto...@acarlini.com

Re: history is hard

[Peter Coghlan via cctalk]

On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 15:18:34 -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > The topic for my talk next week. Unix had virtualization in 74. The
>> second
>> > Unix port ran under OS/360's VM in 78.
>> >
>>
>> What do you mean by "Unix had virtualization"?
>>
>
> I mean that 4th edition UNIX ran under a hypervisor in MERT in 74 as a
> process in that real-time executive.
>

Oh.  I thought maybe you meant Unix was able to do virtualization.

What's special about being able to run under a hypervisor?  If the
hypervisor does it's job right, whatever is running under it should
not be aware that it is not running directly on hardware.

>
>> Come to think of it, what do you mean by "OS/360's VM"?
>>
>
> IBM's standard VM/360. Sorry for the confusion.
>

CP/67 or something like that maybe?  I don't think there was a VM/360 either.

Regards,
Peter Coghlan.

>
> That will teach me to reply on my phone...
> 
> Warner
> 
> 
>> Regards,
>> Peter Coghlan
>>

Re: history is hard

[Warner Losh via cctalk]

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 3:14 PM Peter Coghlan via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 13:20:41 -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
> > On Sun, May 24, 2020, 11:04 AM Toby Thain via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 2020-05-24 11:17 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
> >> > ... IBM was doing
> >> > Virtualization in the 70's.
> >>
> >> 1968 and probably before.[1]
> >>
> >> Most operating systems concepts[2] are much older than people think.
> >>
> >
> > The topic for my talk next week. Unix had virtualization in 74. The
> second
> > Unix port ran under OS/360's VM in 78.
> >
>
> What do you mean by "Unix had virtualization"?
>

I mean that 4th edition UNIX ran under a hypervisor in MERT in 74 as a
process in that real-time executive.


> Come to think of it, what do you mean by "OS/360's VM"?
>

IBM's standard VM/360. Sorry for the confusion.

That will teach me to reply on my phone...

Warner


> Regards,
> Peter Coghlan
>
> >
> > Warner
> >
> >
> > --T
> >>
> >> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_CP/CMS
> >> [2] e.g. ref: Per Brinch Hansen, Classic Operating Systems
> >>
> >> >
> >> > bill
> >> >
> >>
> >>
>

Re: history is hard

[Peter Coghlan via cctalk]

On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 13:20:41 -0600, Warner Losh wrote:
> On Sun, May 24, 2020, 11:04 AM Toby Thain via cctalk 
> wrote:
> 
>> On 2020-05-24 11:17 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
>> > ... IBM was doing
>> > Virtualization in the 70's.
>>
>> 1968 and probably before.[1]
>>
>> Most operating systems concepts[2] are much older than people think.
>>
>
> The topic for my talk next week. Unix had virtualization in 74. The second
> Unix port ran under OS/360's VM in 78.
>

What do you mean by "Unix had virtualization"?

Come to think of it, what do you mean by "OS/360's VM"?

Regards,
Peter Coghlan

>
> Warner
>
>
> --T
>>
>> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_CP/CMS
>> [2] e.g. ref: Per Brinch Hansen, Classic Operating Systems
>>
>> >
>> > bill
>> >
>>
>>

Re: 13W3 to HDMI/DisplayPort

[Craig Ruff via cctalk]

Just bought an Extron RGB-HDMI 300 (A) that handles VGA and other RGB type 
signals and has HDMI output. I've connected it to my VAXstation 4000/60 (very 
successfully), and my IIgs (reasonable but this is at the low end of what the 
unit can manage). Output on either my Sony 46" TV or Apple 1600x1050 monitor. 
Found one (pull from service) at surpluscrestron.com for $53 shipped. It didn't 
come with the power supply (12 V @ 1 A) and needed this connector 
(https://www.digikey.com/product-detail/en/molex/039502/WM7732-ND/1280583) 
to attach the power supply.

RE: DECstation 220/Olivetti M250E Documentation

[Rob Jarratt via cctalk]

Hello Antonio,

I have a couple of user manuals too, I am not sure they are going to help much. 
I am thinking more like technical documentation, if any exists.

Regards

Rob

> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk  On Behalf Of Antonio Carlini via
> cctalk
> Sent: 24 May 2020 20:53
> To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: DECstation 220/Olivetti M250E Documentation
> 
> On 24/05/2020 17:00, Robert Jarratt via cctalk wrote:
> > I have a DECstation 220 (an Olivetti M250E under the covers) that needs
> repair. I have a pocket service guide, but I have not found any other
> documentation. Is there any?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Rob
> 
> I'm *sure* I've got some DECstation 220 manuals, but (a) I can't find them 
> right
> now and (b) they're only user manuals.
> 
> When I come across them, I'll send you an email.
> 
> 
> Antonio
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Antonio Carlini
> anto...@acarlini.com

Re: history is hard

[Warner Losh via cctalk]

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 2:01 PM Toby Thain  wrote:

> On 2020-05-24 3:20 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sun, May 24, 2020, 11:04 AM Toby Thain via cctalk
> > mailto:cctalk@classiccmp.org>> wrote:
> >
> > On 2020-05-24 11:17 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
> > > ... IBM was doing
> > > Virtualization in the 70's.
> >
> > 1968 and probably before.[1]
> >
> > Most operating systems concepts[2] are much older than people think.
> >
> >
> > The topic for my talk next week. Unix had virtualization in 74. The
> > second Unix port ran under OS/360's VM in 78.
>
> I thought the Interdata port was second?
>

Wollongong to the interdata 7/32 was April of 77. Went into production July
77.
Bell Labs to the closely related interdata 8/32 was June of 77. Never went
into production, but portability fixes plowed back into V7.
Tom Lyons had his booting to a similar level around May of 77 ("end of his
junior year"), though he wasn't hired by Amdahl unti the following summer
and he reports having the full V6 up early in 1979. V7 up later in the year
when they got it from AT

I kinda lump the two interdata ports together as 'the first' and I don't
have good dates for when Tom Lyons booted beyond hello-world, or what the
benchmark for 'first' should be.

Warner

--T
>
> >
> > Warner
> >
> >
> > --T
> >
> > [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_CP/CMS
> > [2] e.g. ref: Per Brinch Hansen, Classic Operating Systems
> >
> > >
> > > bill
> > >
> >
>
>

Re: history is hard

[Chuck Guzis via cctalk]

On 5/24/20 10:04 AM, Toby Thain via cctalk wrote:
> On 2020-05-24 11:17 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
>> ... IBM was doing
>> Virtualization in the 70's.
> 
> 1968 and probably before.[1]

Don't forget Peter Denning!

--Chuck

Re: history is hard

[Toby Thain via cctalk]

On 2020-05-24 3:20 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sun, May 24, 2020, 11:04 AM Toby Thain via cctalk
> mailto:cctalk@classiccmp.org>> wrote:
> 
> On 2020-05-24 11:17 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
> > ... IBM was doing
> > Virtualization in the 70's.
> 
> 1968 and probably before.[1]
> 
> Most operating systems concepts[2] are much older than people think.
> 
> 
> The topic for my talk next week. Unix had virtualization in 74. The
> second Unix port ran under OS/360's VM in 78.

I thought the Interdata port was second?

--T

> 
> Warner
> 
> 
> --T
> 
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_CP/CMS
> [2] e.g. ref: Per Brinch Hansen, Classic Operating Systems
> 
> >
> > bill
> >
> 

Re: DECstation 220/Olivetti M250E Documentation

[Antonio Carlini via cctalk]

On 24/05/2020 17:00, Robert Jarratt via cctalk wrote:

I have a DECstation 220 (an Olivetti M250E under the covers) that needs repair. 
I have a pocket service guide, but I have not found any other documentation. Is 
there any?

Thanks

Rob


I'm *sure* I've got some DECstation 220 manuals, but (a) I can't find 
them right now and (b) they're only user manuals.


When I come across them, I'll send you an email.


Antonio



--
Antonio Carlini
anto...@acarlini.com

RE: Alternative Monitor for VAXmate

[Rob Jarratt via cctalk]

I have a Viewsonic VA912 which has worked well for me before in other
circumstances, but doesn't go down to 26KHz. I can't find a VP150 on ebay or
amazon at the moment, but I will keep a look out and see if there are any
others with a lower horizontal frequency too. Looks like a VX715 might do
the trick and I have found one of those!

 

From: j...@cimmeri.com  
Sent: 24 May 2020 17:21
To: r...@jarratt.me.uk; Rob Jarratt ; General
Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts 
Subject: Re: Alternative Monitor for VAXmate

 



On 5/23/2020 8:45 AM, Rob Jarratt via cctalk wrote: 

As it looks like I am not going to be able to repair the monitor board for
my VAXmate I am wondering if I can do anything with the outputs from the I/O
board to drive an external monitor instead. 
 
...
 
I had a go at building this
http://www.dasarodesigns.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/pet-composite-video-
adapter.jpg feeding its output to a composite to VGA device to see if it
would convert it to VGA, but no luck.
 
Any ideas?


For starters, try a Viewsonic VP-150.   Syncs horizontally from 24-61khz.  I
use these or a 
few other monitors for syncing to odd DEC or HP systems.

- John Singleton  

Re: history is hard

[Warner Losh via cctalk]

On Sun, May 24, 2020, 11:04 AM Toby Thain via cctalk 
wrote:

> On 2020-05-24 11:17 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
> > ... IBM was doing
> > Virtualization in the 70's.
>
> 1968 and probably before.[1]
>
> Most operating systems concepts[2] are much older than people think.
>

The topic for my talk next week. Unix had virtualization in 74. The second
Unix port ran under OS/360's VM in 78.

Warner


--T
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_CP/CMS
> [2] e.g. ref: Per Brinch Hansen, Classic Operating Systems
>
> >
> > bill
> >
>
>

RE: history is hard (was: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC)

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

Some don't matter; some can be enough to ruin a good anecdote; some create
a different story.

I'm saddened that Jim Adkisson and Don Massaro of Shugart have changed
their story and now deny that the size of the 5.25" disk was based on Dr.
Wang pointing to a bar napkin.  The "Bar Napkin Disk" was a GREAT
anecdote; now ruined.



On Sun, 24 May 2020, Tom Gardner via cctalk wrote:

It's probably OK for Fred to be saddened at the demise of a good story but
isn't it better to have the true story?


"better", yes.
but still sadder


Neither Jim Adkisson nor Don Massaro of Shugart ever promulgated the urban
legend of Dr. Wang and the napkin in the bar - as near as I can tell it was
invented from whole cloth by Jim Porter who repeated it so many times that
it became legend.


I read it in one of the popular magaazines decades ago.


The final media size was determined by Shugart Engineering led by Al Chou
from the size of the 8-track tape drive that the 5¼-inch FDD was to replace
in Wang and other systems.  As near as I can tell it was not the same size
as a “standard” cocktail napkin.


"standard"??!?
"I believe in standards.  Everyone should have [a unique] one [of their 
own]." - George Morrow

I have seen napkins that are about 5.25".


I wanted to track down which bar, and get napkins from them.
And/or get napkins commercially printed (and give them a supply) with the 
bar personalization on one side, and an outline picture of a 5.25" disk 
jacket and the story on the other.  optional signatures of those 
involved, and provide to CHM to sell in the giftshop.




The idea for a smaller FDD with cocktail napkin sized medium did come
through Adkisson but it originated at his customers such as Lanier,
Phillips and Varisyst among others before it was taken to Wang.
History is hard - I researched this for the Computer History Museum and
prevented the legend from making it into their exhibits.


I have to thank you for debunking a cherished legend.

Myths and legends can be nice, even if they have to be disproven.  Even 
nonexistent characters can be handy, such as Santa Claus and \newline



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

Re: history is hard

[Bill Gunshannon via cctalk]

On 5/24/20 1:04 PM, Toby Thain via cctalk wrote:

On 2020-05-24 11:17 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:

... IBM was doing
Virtualization in the 70's.


1968 and probably before.[1]

Most operating systems concepts[2] are much older than people think.

--T

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_CP/CMS
[2] e.g. ref: Per Brinch Hansen, Classic Operating Systems



bill





I only picked 70's because I used VM370 on a 4331 in 1980
and it was a mature product already then.

bill

RE: history is hard (was: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC)

[Tom Gardner via cctalk]

Fred Cisin [mailto:ci...@xenosoft.com]  wrote on Saturday, May 23, 2020
11:28 PM





Some don't matter; some can be enough to ruin a good anecdote; some create 

a different story.

 

I'm saddened that Jim Adkisson and Don Massaro of Shugart have changed 

their story and now deny that the size of the 5.25" disk was based on Dr. 

Wang pointing to a bar napkin.  The "Bar Napkin Disk" was a GREAT 

anecdote; now ruined.

 

http://archive.computerhistory.org/resources/access/text/2013/05/102657925-0
5-01-acc.pdf

 



 

It's probably OK for Fred to be saddened at the demise of a good story but
isn't it better to have the true story?

 

Neither Jim Adkisson nor Don Massaro of Shugart ever promulgated the urban
legend of Dr. Wang and the napkin in the bar - as near as I can tell it was
invented from whole cloth by Jim Porter who repeated it so many times that
it became legend.

 

The final media size was determined by Shugart Engineering led by Al Chou
from the size of the 8-track tape drive that the 5¼-inch FDD was to replace
in Wang and other systems.  As near as I can tell it was not the same size
as a “standard” cocktail napkin.

 

The idea for a smaller FDD with cocktail napkin sized medium did come
through Adkisson but it originated at his customers such as Lanier,
Phillips and Varisyst among others before it was taken to Wang.

 

History is hard - I researched this for the Computer History Museum and
prevented the legend from making it into their exhibits.

 

Tom

 

 

Re: history is hard

[Toby Thain via cctalk]

On 2020-05-24 11:17 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
> ... IBM was doing
> Virtualization in the 70's.

1968 and probably before.[1]

Most operating systems concepts[2] are much older than people think.

--T

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_CP/CMS
[2] e.g. ref: Per Brinch Hansen, Classic Operating Systems

> 
> bill
> 

Re: 13W3 to HDMI/DisplayPort

[Alan Perry via cctalk]

When I first started trying to use VGA LCD panels with my Suns (mostly 
lunchbox systems, all 4c and 4m desktops), I heard there could be a 
problem like that and stuck with a particular model Samsung that worked. 
Then I tried another one and it worked. And another. And another. I 
haven't encountered one (out of half a dozen) that didn't work.


alanp

On 5/24/20 9:29 AM, alan--- via cctalk wrote:


I've had the opposite experience.  I've been trying to find a 1U 
pull-out keyboard/monitor/mouse combo for my E6500 rack.  Most of the 
VGA LCD panels complain about signal out of range on both cg3 and cg6. 
The E6500 really doesn't need a video console, but it'd be nice if one 
was tucked in there.  Of course the weirdo Sun mounting rails in the 
cabinet are yet another challenge.


-A

On 2020-05-24 11:16, Alan Perry via cctalk wrote:


Every flat panel display with a SVGA connector that I have had has
worked with my 13W3-to-SVGA adapters. I have seen adapters that do the
SVGA to HDMI part. I am asking if someone else here has figured out
which one(s) work in this application.

Re: 13W3 to HDMI/DisplayPort

[alan--- via cctalk]

I've had the opposite experience.  I've been trying to find a 1U 
pull-out keyboard/monitor/mouse combo for my E6500 rack.  Most of the 
VGA LCD panels complain about signal out of range on both cg3 and cg6.  
The E6500 really doesn't need a video console, but it'd be nice if one 
was tucked in there.  Of course the weirdo Sun mounting rails in the 
cabinet are yet another challenge.


-A

On 2020-05-24 11:16, Alan Perry via cctalk wrote:


Every flat panel display with a SVGA connector that I have had has
worked with my 13W3-to-SVGA adapters. I have seen adapters that do the
SVGA to HDMI part. I am asking if someone else here has figured out
which one(s) work in this application.

Re: Alternative Monitor for VAXmate

[js--- via cctalk]

On 5/23/2020 8:45 AM, Rob Jarratt via 
cctalk wrote:

As it looks like I am not going to be able to repair the monitor board for
my VAXmate I am wondering if I can do anything with the outputs from the I/O
board to drive an external monitor instead.

...

I had a go at building this
http://www.dasarodesigns.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/pet-composite-video-
adapter.jpg feeding its output to a composite to VGA device to see if it
would convert it to VGA, but no luck.

Any ideas?


For starters, try a Viewsonic VP-150.   
Syncs horizontally from 24-61khz.  I use 
these or a
few other monitors for syncing to odd 
DEC or HP systems.


- John Singleton

DECstation 220/Olivetti M250E Documentation

[Robert Jarratt via cctalk]

I have a DECstation 220 (an Olivetti M250E under the covers) that needs repair. 
I have a pocket service guide, but I have not found any other documentation. Is 
there any?

Thanks

Rob

Re: 2.11bsd unix resolver

[Maciej W. Rozycki via cctalk]

On Thu, 21 May 2020, Richard Sheppard via cctalk wrote:

> On Solaris it’s the “hosts” line in the /etc/nsswitch.conf/ file. 

 Having /etc/nsswitch.conf was actually Solaris's invention and Solaris 
itself came from System V rather than BSD.  It was only adopted by the 
freely available *BSD systems much later.

> Perhaps something similar in BSD.

 Ultrix as a sole notable exception had /etc/svc.conf, and anyway with a 
BSD version as early as 2.11 I'd expect the resolver's sequence of queries 
to be hardcoded.

 Perhaps the source of the problem is something as silly as the use of 
+ as line endings in /etc/hosts, causing the entry for 127.0.0.1 
to correspond to `localhost^M' rather than expected `localhost' (a common 
and confusing issue with shebang scripts imported or transmitted over FTP 
in the binary rather than text mode from a foreign system causing an error 
like:

$ ./myscript.sh
./myscript.sh: No such file or directory
$ ls -l ./myscript.sh
-rwxr-xr-x 1 macro macro 251 Jan  1  1970 ./myscript.sh
$ head -1 ./myscript.sh
#!/bin/sh
$ # Hmm...
$ 

)?

 For the record older versions of Linux (up to libc 5), including a.out 
ones in particular, used /etc/host.conf to configure the resolver.

  Maciej

Re: Early Nubus history

[Al Kossow via cctalk]

On 5/24/20 8:20 AM, Michael Thompson via cctalk wrote:





George White went from MIT->Computer Automation->Western
Digital->TI->Corollary->Intel. Corollary's cache technology was licensed by
DEC and many others.


So George would have been person connecting MIT WD and TI ..

Re: Early Nubus history

[Al Kossow via cctalk]

On 5/24/20 8:34 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote:

On 5/24/20 8:20 AM, Michael Thompson via cctalk wrote:


 Ron Hochsprung(Apple)


Ron was the senior engineer working on the Mac II
with Mike Dewey. With 20/20 hindsight, the DIN connector
should have been on the far end from the I/O fence
on the Mac form-factor Nubus.



The issue was it was very crowded on the right side of the
card when doing board layout with the nubus and I/O there.

But then, you couldn't have built short-length cards later.

I'd have to dig out my spec to see if those were even
standard compliant.

NeXT pushed for the double-clock edge version of the bus.
I think block mode happened around then as well.

Re: Early Nubus history

[Al Kossow via cctalk]

On 5/24/20 8:20 AM, Michael Thompson via cctalk wrote:


 Ron Hochsprung(Apple)


Ron was the senior engineer working on the Mac II
with Mike Dewey. With 20/20 hindsight, the DIN connector
should have been on the far end from the I/O fence
on the Mac form-factor Nubus.

Re: Early Nubus history

[Michael Thompson via cctalk]

>
> Date: Sat, 23 May 2020 07:07:52 -0700
> From: Al Kossow 
> Subject: Early Nubus history
>
> Did anyone ever do any research into the early history of Nubus, wrt
> Western Digital, TI or Steve Ward/MIT/Numachine?
>

I was a member of the IEEE-1196 committee that wrote the NuBus standard and
IEEE-1101 committee that wrote the mechanical standard for the NuBus. Eike
Waltz and I did a lot of the mechanical standards work.

The members of the IEEE-1196 committee were George White (Chairman) R.
Gordon Cook, Mark Garetz(CompuPro and IEEE-696), Richard Greenblatt(MIT AI
Lab, LMI Founder), Ron Hochsprung(Apple), Richard Kalish, Rikki Kirzner(
Dataquest), Gerry Laws(TI), Rae Mclellan(Bell Labs), Gregory
Papadopoulos(MIT), Dan Schneider, Dave Stewart, Michael Thompson(me), Jim
Truchard(Founder National Instruments), Eike Waltz, *Steve Ward*(MIT), and
Fritz Whittington.

George White went from MIT->Computer Automation->Western
Digital->TI->Corollary->Intel. Corollary's cache technology was licensed by
DEC and many others.

My memories of this committee are a little vague after 40 years, other than
being very impressed with the other members. I will see if I kept any notes
from the meetings.

-- 
Michael Thompson

Re: history is hard

[Bill Gunshannon via cctalk]

On 5/24/20 2:28 AM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
 

Either way, changing it from IBM not wanting to deal with DR into Bill 
Gates cold calling IBM to tell them "what an operating system is" is 
totally invalidating, marginalizing, and misrepresenting a significant 
aspect of the microcomputer culture, and the people who made it.  (AND 
is ridiculously insulting to the IBM culture to state that they didn't 
know what an operating system is!)




Even more-so in todays light when you realize that IBM was doing
Virtualization in the 70's.

bill

Re: 13W3 to HDMI/DisplayPort

[Alan Perry via cctalk]

> On May 24, 2020, at 06:31, emanuel stiebler via cctalk 
>  wrote:
> 
> On 2020-05-23 21:35, Alan Perry via cctalk wrote:
>> Anyone here know of a SVGA-to-HDMI (or DisplayPort) adapter that a 
>> 13W3-to-SVGA adapter 
>> so I can connect my Sun frame buffers to a HDMI display? I am hoping someone 
>> here has already figured this one out.
> 
> SVGA should be possible, but Sun Frame Buffer? Which ones are you
> talking about?
> 
> Resolution? Framerate?

Which frame buffers? The typical cg3 cg6 with 13W3. Resolution? Framerate? 
Don’t care as long as it displays.

Every flat panel display with a SVGA connector that I have had has worked with 
my 13W3-to-SVGA adapters. I have seen adapters that do the SVGA to HDMI part. I 
am asking if someone else here has figured out which one(s) work in this 
application.

Re: 13W3 to HDMI/DisplayPort

[emanuel stiebler via cctalk]

On 2020-05-23 21:35, Alan Perry via cctalk wrote:
> Anyone here know of a SVGA-to-HDMI (or DisplayPort) adapter that a 
> 13W3-to-SVGA adapter 
> so I can connect my Sun frame buffers to a HDMI display? I am hoping someone 
> here has already figured this one out.

SVGA should be possible, but Sun Frame Buffer? Which ones are you
talking about?

Resolution? Framerate?

RE: Alternative Monitor for VAXmate

[Rob Jarratt via cctalk]

> -Original Message-
> From: Tony Duell 
> Sent: 24 May 2020 10:28
> To: r...@jarratt.me.uk
> Cc: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts ;
> Paul Koning 
> Subject: Re: Alternative Monitor for VAXmate
> 
> On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 9:23 AM Rob Jarratt 
> wrote:
> 
> >
> > Tony, are you aware of any device I could buy or circuit I could build to 
> > get a
> decent image out of it? It doesn't have to be perfect, but at least usable.
> 
> Unfortunately not. That 26kHz horizontal frequency is the problem...
> 
> It's not close to any of the PC standards (MDA, CGA, EGA, VGA). Nor television
> (I even thought of the French System E 819 line, but that's around 20kHz). And
> those are the common standards.
> 
> I think you options are either to try to modify VGA monitor to scan a little
> slower, to design some kind of standards converter (which is a lot of work!) 
> or
> to make a new flyback transformer. The last would be what I would look into, 
> if
> only because it keeps the machine original.
> You would probably have to vacuum-impregnate the windings to prevent
> flashover, but the model internal combustion engine crowd make their own
> ignition coils and manage to do things like that.

Everything I have ever heard would suggest that making my own flyback is the 
hardest option and well nigh impossible without expensive industrial equipment. 
If there was a way I would certainly look into it. I have no idea where to 
begin, but if anyone on this list has any pointers?

> 
> -tony

RE: Alternative Monitor for VAXmate

[Rob Jarratt via cctalk]

> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk  On Behalf Of Dave Wade via
> cctalk
> Sent: 24 May 2020 10:57
> To: 'Tony Duell' ; 'General Discussion: On-Topic and
> Off-Topic Posts' 
> Subject: RE: Alternative Monitor for VAXmate
> 
> 
> 
> > -Original Message-
> > From: cctalk  On Behalf Of Tony Duell
> > via cctalk
> > Sent: 24 May 2020 10:28
> > To: r...@jarratt.me.uk
> > Cc: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
> > 
> > Subject: Re: Alternative Monitor for VAXmate
> >
> > On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 9:23 AM Rob Jarratt
> > 
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Tony, are you aware of any device I could buy or circuit I could
> > > build to get a
> > decent image out of it? It doesn't have to be perfect, but at least usable.
> >
> > Unfortunately not. That 26kHz horizontal frequency is the problem...
> >
> > It's not close to any of the PC standards (MDA, CGA, EGA, VGA). Nor
> > television (I even thought of the French System E 819 line, but that's
> > around 20kHz). And those are the common standards.
> >
> 
> The only think I found was a reference to the IBM 3179G.
> 
> > I think you options are either to try to modify VGA monitor to scan a
> > little slower, to design some kind of standards converter (which is a
> > lot of work!)
> 
> If the output is digital, would it be possible to build an FPGA scan 
> converter to
> go to VGA?
> Is the output always 26Khz?


The horizontal sync is 26KHz, yes. Maybe an FPGA could do it I would 
definitely prefer a replacement flyback, but really no idea how to go about 
building one.

> 
> > or to make a new flyback transformer. The last would be what I would
> > look into, if only because it keeps the machine original You would
> > probably have to vacuum-impregnate the windings to prevent flashover,
> > but the model internal combustion engine crowd make their own ignition
> > coils and manage to do things like that.
> 
> Sounds harder to me than an FPGA scan converter...
> 
> >
> > -tony
> 
> Dave

RE: Alternative Monitor for VAXmate

[Dave Wade via cctalk]

> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk  On Behalf Of Tony Duell via
> cctalk
> Sent: 24 May 2020 10:28
> To: r...@jarratt.me.uk
> Cc: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
> 
> Subject: Re: Alternative Monitor for VAXmate
> 
> On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 9:23 AM Rob Jarratt 
> wrote:
> 
> >
> > Tony, are you aware of any device I could buy or circuit I could build to 
> > get a
> decent image out of it? It doesn't have to be perfect, but at least usable.
> 
> Unfortunately not. That 26kHz horizontal frequency is the problem...
> 
> It's not close to any of the PC standards (MDA, CGA, EGA, VGA). Nor
> television (I even thought of the French System E 819 line, but that's around
> 20kHz). And those are the common standards.
> 

The only think I found was a reference to the IBM 3179G.  

> I think you options are either to try to modify VGA monitor to scan a little
> slower, to design some kind of standards converter (which is a lot of work!)

If the output is digital, would it be possible to build an FPGA scan converter 
to go to VGA?
Is the output always 26Khz?

> or to make a new flyback transformer. The last would be what I would look
> into, if only because it keeps the machine original
> You would probably have to vacuum-impregnate the windings to prevent
> flashover, but the model internal combustion engine crowd make their own
> ignition coils and manage to do things like that.

Sounds harder to me than an FPGA scan converter...

> 
> -tony

Dave

Re: Alternative Monitor for VAXmate

[Tony Duell via cctalk]

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 9:23 AM Rob Jarratt  wrote:

>
> Tony, are you aware of any device I could buy or circuit I could build to get 
> a decent image out of it? It doesn't have to be perfect, but at least usable.

Unfortunately not. That 26kHz horizontal frequency is the problem...

It's not close to any of the PC standards (MDA, CGA, EGA, VGA). Nor
television (I even thought of the French System E 819 line, but that's
around 20kHz). And those are the common standards.

I think you options are either to try to modify VGA monitor to scan a
little slower, to design some kind of standards converter (which is a
lot of work!) or to make a new flyback transformer. The last would be
what I would look into, if only because it keeps the machine original.
You would probably have to vacuum-impregnate the windings to prevent
flashover, but the model internal combustion engine crowd make their
own ignition coils and manage to do things like that.

-tony

RE: Alternative Monitor for VAXmate

[Rob Jarratt via cctalk]

> -Original Message-
> From: Tony Duell 
> Sent: 24 May 2020 03:13
> To: r...@jarratt.me.uk; Rob Jarratt ; General
> Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts 
> Cc: Paul Koning 
> Subject: Re: Alternative Monitor for VAXmate
> 
> On Sat, May 23, 2020 at 10:49 PM Rob Jarratt via cctalk
>  wrote:
> 
> 
> > > > The horizontal sync has a frequency of 26.6KHz, active low with
> > > > the high voltage 3.7V, Vertical sync is 60Hz. I don't believe that
> > > > corresponds to any known standard, does it?
> > >
> > > I assume it's the same as the Pro video.  That might not exactly
> > > match standards.  But the intensity output is an acceptable 480i
> > > monochrome
> > video
> > > signal.  I've fed mine into a video capture device and into a TV
> > > display,
> > both
> > > work.
> 
> Err, no. The Pro (and Rainbow, DECmate II, etc) are TV rate. The horizontal
> frequency is 15.57kHz or thereabouts. Those machines  will work with TV-rate
> video capture devices.
> 
> [...]
> 
> > I have wondered about RGB, the I/O board does output an RGB signal
> > along with Intensity, Horizontal Sync and Vertical Sync, but I don't
> > know if I could feed that to a monitor that accepts RGB signals as I
> > don't know what the voltage levels should be. I have a VR241 which
> > seems to have suitable inputs but I don't know if I dare send the
> > signals from the I/O board straight to the VR241. I can't find a manual for 
> > it.
> 
> Again the VR241 is TV rate. The inputs are, I think, the normal 1V levels into
> 75ohms.
> 
> My experience is that sensible over-voltages on monitor inputs (e.g.
> 5V TTL signals into 1V analogue inputs) do no damage. It may not work, if it
> does it may look terrible, but it won't let the magic smoke out.
> 

Tony, are you aware of any device I could buy or circuit I could build to get a 
decent image out of it? It doesn't have to be perfect, but at least usable.

Thanks

Rob

> 
> -tony

RE: H960 repo stabiliser feet redux

[Rob Jarratt via cctalk]

I could do with a pair of those at some point.  If anyone has any spare or 
makes any I would be interested in a pair.

Regards

Rob

> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk  On Behalf Of Steve Malikoff via
> cctalk
> Sent: 24 May 2020 08:24
> To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
> Subject: H960 repo stabiliser feet redux
> 
> Here's my conclusion to the H960 stabiliser feet thread from a while ago where
> I was after measurements of the originals. And thanks for all the help from
> cctalk (especially Noel) who supplied dimensions and photos.
> 
> I finished these last year but moved on to other projects and hadn't returned 
> to
> the list to discuss them, so I am doing that now. I made a pair each for my 
> two
> H960's.
> 
> The feet consist of welded steel load-bearing frames with a C-profile that 
> fits
> snugly onto the H960 base, a lower leg from a shelf bracket and a support 
> strut.
> The leg is located by a steel bolt. The bolt has the head machined to a disc, 
> I
> was going to turn the taper and machine the slot but I lost the photo of the
> original bolt that a listmember had posted so I left them at that. They could 
> do
> with nickel electroplating sometime. The frame is super strong, although I 
> have
> not physically loaded them to any great extent.
> 
> The outer end has a threaded adjustable pad the same size (AFAIK) as the
> originals, which are still available. I found some correct size el-cheapo 
> ones at
> the hardware store that did the job just fine.
> The frame is threaded for the pad post and a nut on the pad then locks the pad
> from turning.
> 
> The outside aesthetics are taken care of with a 3D printed hollow shell
> modelled from the measurements of the original casting. It slides onto the leg
> and is secured by the bolt. The shell CAD model still needs some work to get
> the fit and front holes right, and a few other things but overall they look 
> fine
> and obey the 6 foot rule. A few coats of satin black enamel helps hide the 
> print
> layering a bit.
> 
> Photo showing the frame (spray finished in silver epoxy primer, what I had at
> hand), the other frame inside a shell, and some of the test shells:
> http://www.surfacezero.com/g503/data/500/Stabiliser_feet_01.png
> 
> As attached to one of the H960s. (I have yet to do the kick panel, may laser 
> cut
> that sometime):
> http://www.surfacezero.com/g503/data/500/Stabiliser_feet_02.png
> 
> Steve.

RE: TK50 cleaning and unloading issues, new thought:

[Rob Jarratt via cctalk]

To recover a TK50 What I do is run up the machine with the TK50 drive and mount 
the tape (not foreign), COPY the files to disk. Then I transfer the files to a 
SIMH machine and COPY them to a virtual tape (again not mounted foreign). 
Obviously the hard bit is getting a successful read of the TK50 tape.

Regards

Rob

> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk  On Behalf Of Chris Zach via
> cctalk
> Sent: 24 May 2020 02:42
> To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: TK50 cleaning and unloading issues, new thought:
> 
> Ok. Any way to suck data off them to an image file? I have some Vax 8600
> diagnostics, would hate to just toss.
> 
> C
> 
> 
> On 5/23/2020 9:10 PM, Al Kossow via cctalk wrote:
> > On 5/23/20 5:58 PM, Chris Zach via cctalk wrote:
> >> Tapes are shedding that much
> >
> > yup, they are garbage.
> >
> > high probability that you will make the first pass across the tape and
> > it will stick when it reverses direction for the second pass
> >
> > the only TK drive I will even use is the TZ30 1/2 height because it is
> > easy to get to the tape path to clean
> >
> >
> >

Re: H960 repo stabiliser feet redux

[Paul Anderson via cctalk]

Very nice!!

On Sun, May 24, 2020 at 2:24 AM Steve Malikoff via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:

> Here's my conclusion to the H960 stabiliser feet thread from a while ago
> where I was after measurements of
> the originals. And thanks for all the help from cctalk (especially Noel)
> who supplied dimensions and photos.
>
> I finished these last year but moved on to other projects and hadn't
> returned to the list to discuss them,
> so I am doing that now. I made a pair each for my two H960's.
>
> The feet consist of welded steel load-bearing frames with a C-profile that
> fits snugly onto the H960
> base, a lower leg from a shelf bracket and a support strut. The leg is
> located by a steel bolt. The
> bolt has the head machined to a disc, I was going to turn the taper and
> machine the slot but I lost
> the photo of the original bolt that a listmember had posted so I left them
> at that. They could do with
> nickel electroplating sometime. The frame is super strong, although I have
> not physically loaded them
> to any great extent.
>
> The outer end has a threaded adjustable pad the same size (AFAIK) as the
> originals, which are still
> available. I found some correct size el-cheapo ones at the hardware store
> that did the job just fine.
> The frame is threaded for the pad post and a nut on the pad then locks the
> pad from turning.
>
> The outside aesthetics are taken care of with a 3D printed hollow shell
> modelled from the measurements
> of the original casting. It slides onto the leg and is secured by the
> bolt. The shell CAD model still
> needs some work to get the fit and front holes right, and a few other
> things but overall they look
> fine and obey the 6 foot rule. A few coats of satin black enamel helps
> hide the print layering a bit.
>
> Photo showing the frame (spray finished in silver epoxy primer, what I had
> at hand), the other frame
> inside a shell, and some of the test shells:
> http://www.surfacezero.com/g503/data/500/Stabiliser_feet_01.png
>
> As attached to one of the H960s. (I have yet to do the kick panel, may
> laser cut that sometime):
> http://www.surfacezero.com/g503/data/500/Stabiliser_feet_02.png
>
> Steve.
>
>

H960 repo stabiliser feet redux

[Steve Malikoff via cctalk]

Here's my conclusion to the H960 stabiliser feet thread from a while ago where 
I was after measurements of
the originals. And thanks for all the help from cctalk (especially Noel) who 
supplied dimensions and photos.

I finished these last year but moved on to other projects and hadn't returned 
to the list to discuss them,
so I am doing that now. I made a pair each for my two H960's.

The feet consist of welded steel load-bearing frames with a C-profile that fits 
snugly onto the H960
base, a lower leg from a shelf bracket and a support strut. The leg is located 
by a steel bolt. The
bolt has the head machined to a disc, I was going to turn the taper and machine 
the slot but I lost
the photo of the original bolt that a listmember had posted so I left them at 
that. They could do with
nickel electroplating sometime. The frame is super strong, although I have not 
physically loaded them
to any great extent.

The outer end has a threaded adjustable pad the same size (AFAIK) as the 
originals, which are still
available. I found some correct size el-cheapo ones at the hardware store that 
did the job just fine.
The frame is threaded for the pad post and a nut on the pad then locks the pad 
from turning.

The outside aesthetics are taken care of with a 3D printed hollow shell 
modelled from the measurements
of the original casting. It slides onto the leg and is secured by the bolt. The 
shell CAD model still
needs some work to get the fit and front holes right, and a few other things 
but overall they look
fine and obey the 6 foot rule. A few coats of satin black enamel helps hide the 
print layering a bit.

Photo showing the frame (spray finished in silver epoxy primer, what I had at 
hand), the other frame
inside a shell, and some of the test shells:
http://www.surfacezero.com/g503/data/500/Stabiliser_feet_01.png

As attached to one of the H960s. (I have yet to do the kick panel, may laser 
cut that sometime):
http://www.surfacezero.com/g503/data/500/Stabiliser_feet_02.png

Steve.

Re: history is hard (was: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC)

[Fred Cisin via cctalk]

Yes, there will always be discrepancies.
I have to admit that many/most?/all? of my memories may be inaccurate or 
wrong.



Some don't matter; some can be enough to ruin a good anecdote; some create 
a different story.


I'm saddened that Jim Adkisson and Don Massaro of Shugart have changed 
their story and now deny that the size of the 5.25" disk was based on Dr. 
Wang pointing to a bar napkin.  The "Bar Napkin Disk" was a GREAT 
anecdote; now ruined.

http://archive.computerhistory.org/resources/access/text/2013/05/102657925-05-01-acc.pdf

Whether Jobs saw the Apple1 after it was finished V had worked on it seems 
pretty big, but might not necessarily really be, since they HAD worked 
together on other projects around the same time.


Whether Gary missed the meeting, or was late for it will matter to some 
people.  To Gary, it might not have mattered much, but to the IBM people, 
EITHER is inexcusably disrespectful.  Gary's wife was quite capable of 
handling everything that needed to be done (although the IBM suits likely 
didn't see it that way - women in authority was contrary to their culture 
at the time). A comment by Gary of let them wait in the living room like 
any other customer seems in character with Gary's personality, but would 
enrage certain IBM types.


There was certainly significant culture clash.  Whether it was solely 
Gary's casual and informal attitude to business relationships, or whether 
it was the IBM people SHOCKED by the casual and informal business behavior 
and attire and unable to consider doing business with such a "hippy" 
doesn't surprise me.
I had dealings with similar culture clashes around that time.  Maybe I'm 
just still pissed off about how my uncle, who was an IBM suit, used to be 
extremely obnoxiously unpleasant about my having a beard. Was I the ONLY 
programmer without a crew-cut and not wearing a suit and tie at all times?


To me, the culture clash aspect makes it one of the greatest stories of 
the time.
Was Gary not taking the meeting seriously enough to be there on time, and 
as a consequence, ending up being $80B behind Bill Gates, the stupidest 
mistake anybody has ever made?
Or the bravest thing that anybody has ever done to stand up to them and 
put refusal to be subservient ahead of the money by deciding that the men 
from IBM did not deserve different treatment than other customers?


It might be excusable if the film makers chose to downplay that, or even 
not mention it (which they didn't), but to replace it with a grossly 
untrue "historical lesson" reversing and incompatible with the truth is 
not excusable, and incompatible with the spirit of the story.



Either way, changing it from IBM not wanting to deal with DR into Bill 
Gates cold calling IBM to tell them "what an operating system is" is 
totally invalidating, marginalizing, and misrepresenting a significant 
aspect of the microcomputer culture, and the people who made it.  (AND is 
ridiculously insulting to the IBM culture to state that they didn't know 
what an operating system is!)



The gratuitous fourth wall "Study this, because this is the way that it 
really happened" finally took it COMPLETELY out of the realm of 
"differing memories", "artistic license", and "improving the narrative" 
(all of which have a place) into gross misrepresentation.



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

On Sun, 24 May 2020, Jecel Assumpcao Jr via cctalk wrote:


Fred Cisin advised on: Sat, 23 May 2020 20:29:28 -0700 (PDT)

But, read carefully the corrections that others made!


Some things are easy to check, like the fact that the Z80 came out in
1976 when Woz was already finishing the Apple II so he couldn't have
considered using it for the Apple I. Note that this correction doesn't
really add anything to your nice history and I am only using it to
illustrate the general topic.

People's memories are complicated. I used to tell people a story from
1983 about something I did. But around 2010 I found a text I had written
in 1989 and it had a very different version of what happened. While my
current memory is the same as in 2010 I have to trust that my 1989
self's memory was more correct. That is a good rule to follow, though
sometimes I learn things that change how I remembered something so that
the new memories are the more accurate ones.

A good example is the Gary Kildall and the IBM guys story that you
mentioned. Gary claimed that though the meeting was delayed by the NDA
thing, it eventually started without him since his wife took care of
100% of the business side of DR. Then he arrived and was able to discuss
the technical side. The IBM people remember the meeting not happening at
all and not talking to Gary. How is this possible? Was one of them
lying?

I recently saw a very old interview with Steve Jobs. The reporter asked
what had been his reaction when he first saw the Apple I. Steve claimed
the question didn't make sense because he and Woz had come up with the
computer