On 5/10/24 16:37, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> I was told that some of the many locally applied patches were done by
> writes to array elements with negative subscripts.
>
CDC 6000 (the one with PPUs) OS (SCOPE, KRNONOS, MACE and NOS) used a
single PPU that, among other things, monitored the
On 5/10/24 14:44, Doug Jackson via cctalk wrote:
> C didn't enter my world until I started running FreeBSD in the late 90's
> where it was essentially part of the OS. I remember paying $600 bucks AUD
> for a Borland C compiler running under Windows, but the whole concept of
> writing a simple
On 5/10/24 14:03, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote:
> On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 1:36 PM Fred Cisin via cctalk
> wrote:
> I developed quite a bit and for many years with Microsoft C v6.0 under DOS
> and it was not bad. The compiler was decently fast and once 486s and then
> Pentiums became
While doing my customary "whatever happened to" sweep, I ran across this
paper of Jules Schwartz (he of JOVIAL) A refreshingly frank evaluation
from the author from 1978.
http://jovial.com/documents/p203-schwartz-jovial.pdf
(Tidbit: The "J" in JOVIAL does stand for "Jules'", but was not of his
There have been some minor skirmishes in the MCU world over what
language should be used when programming.
C/C++ is very much top dog, probably because the development suites are
written for that.
There's a small group that advocates Python; and some say that Ada is
best. But they represent a
On 5/10/24 06:44, Paul Koning wrote:
>
> As for "language to the machine" that's pretty much unheard of. While there
> certainly are languages that only were seen on one or a few machines or
> architectures -- SYMPL, CYBIL, BLISS, TUTOR -- it isn't because that was the
> intent of those
On 5/9/24 18:16, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote:
>
> Thanks Chuck. Makes sense. I am sorting cables (fun) and I was unsure
> about this one.
Go on to Amazon and search for "cable RJ45 DB25"
The things are apparently still in use.
--Chuck
On 5/9/24 17:50, Bill Degnan via cctalk wrote:
> I have a cable with two heads on one end and a rj45 phone connector on the
> other end. On the two-headed side is a 25-pin ( serial female RS232 ?) and
> 9-pin (serial female RS232 ?)
>
> The 25 pin adapter has a GEM95 sticker on it.
>
> What was
On 5/9/24 16:30, Michael Thompson wrote:
> I have a source code tape for Pascal on a CDC 6600 from CDC in France.
> I am not sure which version it is.
Broadly speaking, there were only three major CDC versions; the 1972
original, the 1975 rewrite, and the (I think) 1980s version. There were
On 5/9/24 15:10, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
>>> Turbo-Pascal was quite popular. At the annnouncement of it (West
>>> Coast Computer Faire), Phillipe Kahn (Borland) was so inundated with
>>> "yeah, but what about C?" questions, that by the end of the first
>>> day, "Turbo C is coming soon"
>
>
On 5/8/24 11:54, John Maxwell via cctalk wrote:
> I recall an ad for a 'double-helix, special' 6-foot power cord going for $500
> (or more) claiming that it would make your main power amplifier sound better
> with better mains power - that's about the time I started calling them
> "audio-fools"
On 5/7/24 15:21, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> How difficult is it to measure and compare "With/Without" signals?
>
If you peruse the old Bob Pease articles on "Electronic Design"
magazine, I believe more than once, he alluded to a proposed "blind
test"--two boxes; one filled with the latest
On 5/7/24 10:31, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
>
>
>> On May 7, 2024, at 1:20 PM, Sellam Abraham via cctalk
>> wrote:
>> ...
>> Thus proving to
>> be complete horseshit all the educators that said if you want to get into a
>> computer career you must be good at math.
>
> Indeed.
That is, or
The thing that many audiophiles fail to grasp is that there's a
difference between listening and hearing. The fact is that I'm just as
content listening to a recording of an old scratchy 78 with, say, Albert
Schweitzer (yes, that guy) playing Bach on organ as the latest
wunderkind flogging at the
On 5/6/24 21:16, Don R wrote:
> Maybe I need one of these power cords for my Monroe-Litton 1830 aka
> Compucorp 485. It might make the calculations more precise? ;)
That's the economy version. If you're *really* serious, you'll grab
this one (on sale: 6% off!):
On 5/6/24 20:25, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/134706639303
>
> include a basic feature for rewinding rental DVDs before returning them.
>
Of course, you need a pure silver AC cable for those:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/115970049389
--Chuck
On 5/6/24 15:12, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> Radio Shack used to sell a "Bulk Tape Eraser". I gave mine to the college.
> Those are on eBay, and even Amazon.
>
I've had one of those for years. Resembles a kitchen Mixmaster without
the beaters. The problem is that it has a limited working
On 5/6/24 11:28, Wayne S via cctalk wrote:
> You do need a very strong magnet. I’ve put 3.5 floppies on top of a mag tape
> demagnitizer ( not technically called that, but you know what i mean) and it
> had no effect at all. I could still read them fine in my pc. I surmised that
> the magnetic
On 5/3/24 17:41, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote:
> I wonder if some intermediary is buying it for a country that cannot
> legally purchase something like that from the USA.
>
> I'm not normally a conspiracy guy but why would any normal company pay
> half a million dollars for something that could be
On 5/3/24 18:30, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> PL/M (think "PL/1") was a high level programming language for
> microprocessors.
Notable that a subset of PL/I was marketed for CP/M around 1981 or so.
I've heard from some folks that Gary developed ISIS for Intel. That is
definitely not true. It
On 5/3/24 17:48, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
I seem to recall that MCBA's business applications were originally coded
in DG BASIC.
--Chuck
On 5/3/24 11:05, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> "Remembering his conversation at NCC with Marc McDonald about File Allocation
> Tables in his unfinished, large, and never-released 8-bit MIDAS operating
> system, Paterson decided that the FAT scheme was a better way to handle disk
> information
On 5/3/24 08:07, jim stephens via cctalk wrote:
>> https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2024/04/us-government-auctions-5-34-petaflop-cheyenne-supercomputer/
2.3-GHz Intel Xeon E5-2697v4 processors,
I think that's a close relative to what I'm running on the X99 desktop...
--Chuck
On 5/2/24 13:59, Gavin Scott via cctalk wrote:
> There's also Geoff Graham's BASIC for the Pi Pico.
>
> https://geoffg.net/picomite.html
Then there's the 8042 MCU-embedded BASIC, the BASIC stamp, etc.
I have a little MicroPy board here that's fun to play with.
--Chuck
Thinking back over the last couple of months, I realize that most of my
recent programming has been in Linux Bash scripts.
--Chuck
I'll add a postscript with my reaction upon seeing my first Microsoft
Visual BASIC program code:
"What the hell is this? It's not BASIC!"
--Chuck
On 5/2/24 07:02, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
>
> My guess is that the languages you use routinely are the ones that work best,
> and which languages those are depends on where you work and on what projects.
> For example, I don't *like* C (I call it a "feebly typed language") and C++
> not
On 5/1/24 23:00, CAREY SCHUG via cctalk wrote:
> I recall IITRAN for the IBM 7044, and am i correct that there was an IITRAN
> for the Univac 1108, which was significantly different?
I believe that IITRAN was moved from the 7040 to a 360/40 for a few
years, then to an Univac 1108. All
Am I the only one on this list who designed and implemented a business
BASIC? (I did have two programmers to work with me. Did it in about 4
months).
Multiuser on an 8085; later versions were re-hosted on Xenix.
On 5/1/24 16:51, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> APL was incredible. I was amazed. I was immediately able to do a few
> simple things that were useful for my boss and myself, and writing
> simple programs within hours. Its matrix arithmetic was awesome. APL
> typeball on a selectric terminal at
On 5/1/24 16:37, Sellam Abraham via cctalk wrote:
> On Wed, May 1, 2024 at 4:36 PM Chuck Guzis via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>> To be sure, BASIC was hardly unique in terms of the 1960s interactive
>> programming languages. We had JOSS, PILOT, IITRAN and a host of others,
>>
To be sure, BASIC was hardly unique in terms of the 1960s interactive
programming languages. We had JOSS, PILOT, IITRAN and a host of others,
based on FORTRAN-ish syntax. not to forget APL, which was a thing apart.
--Chuck
On 4/27/24 19:09, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> How many know that AAM is a two byte instruction, with te second byte
> beint 0Ah?
> Changing the second byte to 8 gave division by 8, etc.
Argh! I said earlier that the NEC V20 assumed that the value of the
second byte of AAM was always 0x0a.
On 4/27/24 19:09, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> How many know that AAM is a two byte instruction, with the second byte
> being 0Ah?
> Changing the second byte to 8 gave division by 8, etc.
Only for sure on Intel x86 processors. I believe that the NEC V20
assumes that the second byte is 0x0a
On 4/27/24 18:46, Jon Elson via cctalk wrote:
> On 4/27/24 17:02, ben via cctalk wrote:
>> Did any one need REAL BCD math like the Big Boys had?
>>
>>
> No, this is a fallacy. Binary arithmetic is as "accurate" as decimal.
> Handling VERY large numbers in floating point loses some precision, but
On 4/24/24 15:32, ben via cctalk wrote:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJeu3LCo-6A
> Dr who ads for prime.
I think old Dr. Who shows are also on Pluto TV.
--Chuck (not a fan)
On 4/24/24 13:10, David Brownlee via cctalk wrote:
> Typically the second processor would run as primary, using the
> original 6502 to handle input, display and I/O (and on 32016 you
> *really* wanted someone else to deal with anything time critical like
> interrupts :)
Thats the way we did it
On 4/24/24 11:34, Fred Cisin wrote:
>>>> Did the Dimension 68000 (a multi-processor machine) have Z80 and 6502?
>
> On Tue, 23 Apr 2024, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
>> Couldn't Bill Godbout's CPU-68K board co-exist with other CPU boards?
>
> Did he, or anybody els
On 4/24/24 10:54, Robert Feldman via cctalk wrote:
> The Otrona Attache 8:16 had a Z80A and an 8086 on a daughter card.
Of course, Godbout offered the S100 85/88 board in the same vein.
--CHuck
On 4/23/24 21:06, ben via cctalk wrote:
>>
> I remember Bill Godbout's PACE ads. Now I got the $$$ and time I can't
> find any chips.
National was handing the chips with manuals out for free at on WESCON--I
got mine there, built up an S100 board with all of the interface logic
(I think the PACE
On 4/23/24 17:18, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
>
>
> On 4/23/2024 8:06 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
>> Did the Dimension 68000 (a multi-processor machine) have Z80 and 6502?
Couldn't Bill Godbout's CPU-68K board co-exist with other CPU boards?
--Chuck
On 4/22/24 20:36, Chris Elmquist wrote:
> Hey, I did that on Sunday afternoons on the Star-100 with Lincoln and his son
> PD when I was in 8th grade. I never became a manager though :-)
>
> Chris
Trying to remember, was the star the same as the 6000 as far as wiring?
That is, twisted pair and
On 4/22/24 17:35, Paul Koning wrote:
> What about the coincidence that a lot of today's logic runs on 3.3 volts,
> just about the same as the first generation of IC logic (RTL).
I think I still have some survivors from the Motorola HEP mwRTL kit.
TO-100, I think. RTL was pretty cool--slow,
On 4/22/24 14:34, dwight via cctalk wrote:
> For those that don't know what a UV(UX)201 was, it was most commonly used for
> audio amplification in early battery powered radios. These used a lot of
> filament current, not like later miniature tubes.
> They had a UV(UX)200 tube for RF detections
On 4/22/24 14:04, Paul Koning wrote:
> I never had my hands on a 6600, only a 6400 which is a single unit machine.
> So I had to do some thinking to understand why someone would do a register
> transfer with L (shift operation) rather than B (boolean operation) when I
> first saw that in my
On 4/22/24 13:53, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
> In COMPASS:
>
> MORE SA1 A1+B2 (B2 = 2)
> SA2 A2+B2
> BX6 X1
> LX7 X2
> SB3 B3-2
> SA6 A6+B2
> SA7 A7+B2
> PL b3,MORE
My recollection is that putting the stores
On 4/22/24 13:53, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
> In COMPASS:
>
> MORE SA1 A1+B2 (B2 = 2)
> SA2 A2+B2
> BX6 X1
> LX7 X2
> SB3 B3-2
> SA6 A6+B2
> SA7 A7+B2
> PL b3,MORE
On 4/22/24 13:02, Wayne S wrote:
> I read somewhere that the cable lengths were expressly engineered to provide
> that signals arrived to chips at nearly the same time so as to reduce chip
> “wait” times and provide more speed.
That certainly was true for the 6600. My unit manager, fresh out
On 4/22/24 12:31, ben via cctalk wrote:
>
>
> Classic cpu designs like the PDP-1, might be better called RISC.
> Back then you matched the cpu word length to data you were using.
> 40 bits made a lot of sense for real computing, even if you
> had no RAM memory at the time, just drum.
I'd call
On 4/22/24 11:46, Paul Koning wrote:
>
> Probably not. Cycle accurate simulation is very hard. It's only rarely been
> done for any CPU, and if done it tends to be incredibly slow. I remember
> once using a MIPS cycle-accurate simulator (for the SB-1, the core inside the
> SB-1250, later
On 4/22/24 11:09, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
>
> Following along this line of thought but also in regards all our
> other small CPUs
>
> Would it not be possible to use something like a Blue Pill to make
> a small board (small enough to actually fit in the CPU socket) that
> emulated
A bit of a postscript: The ALU on the 8085 according to Ken is 8 bits wide.
https://www.righto.com/2013/01/inside-alu-of-8085-microprocessor.html
--Chuck
On 4/22/24 09:54, Lamar Owen via cctalk wrote:
> On 4/22/24 12:18, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
>> I don't know if this applies to the Z80, but on the 8080, 16-bit
>> increment/decrement is handled by a separate increment block (also used
>> to advance the P-counter
On 4/22/24 08:36, Lamar Owen via cctalk wrote:
> Die real estate forced the design to do without a full 8-bit ALU. When
> you have a 4-bit ALU, and you are doing 16-bit math, you will need 4
> cycles through the ALU.
I don't know if this applies to the Z80, but on the 8080, 16-bit
On 4/21/24 17:44, ben via cctalk wrote:
> On 2024-04-21 5:26 p.m., Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
>> On 4/21/24 12:11, ben via cctalk wrote:
>>> I keep finding I still need 74XX just for having 10 TTL loads,
>>> and 74LSXX just does not have the power.
>>
On 4/21/24 12:11, ben via cctalk wrote:
> I keep finding I still need 74XX just for having 10 TTL loads,
> and 74LSXX just does not have the power.
Ever try BiCMOS chips? IIRC, the 74ABTxxx will drive loads of up to 60
ma, far in excess of old 74xx parts.
--Chuck
On 4/21/24 09:37, Mike Katz wrote:
> Even the 6809 could push up to 8 registers (up to 10 bytes) at once on
> one of two stacks in a single two byte instruction.
The 6809 was introduced the same year as the 8086. The 80186,
introduced in 1982, did have the "PUSHA POPA" instructions and was
On 4/21/24 07:45, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote:
> One of the biggest features of the Z-80, the extra register set, was
> rarely used in open source software in order to maintain compatibility
> with the 8080.
My understanding of the extra (partial) set of registers on the Z80 was
that they were
On 4/20/24 01:37, Peter Corlett via cctalk wrote:
> There's this thing called "inflation", which does tend to become somewhat
> significant after four decades.
>
> In the mid-80s, a pint of beer cost about 70 pence. I've escaped that
> benighted island, but according to friends who were not so
On 4/19/24 19:39, ben via cctalk wrote:
> There still are RADIO SHACK 8080A's still on ebay, with @RARE@ prices.
> NO thank you, z80's are the way to go.
I found 8085 generally easier to work with, but that's just me.
> Now is a good time to stock up for any z80 projects
> or repair, while they
On 4/19/24 11:55, Peter Schow via cctalk wrote:
>
> https://www.mouser.com/PCN/Littelfuse_PCN_Z84C00.pdf
>
I should add parenthetically that in my wildest fevered dreams did I
ever think that Zilog would be a division of Littlefuse--even after the
Exxon debacle.
--Chuck
On 4/19/24 11:55, Peter Schow via cctalk wrote:
> In case you missed it, Zilog has issued a Last Buy notification for the Z80:
>
> https://www.mouser.com/PCN/Littelfuse_PCN_Z84C00.pdf
>
> Looks like Mouser and Digikey still have decent inventory of them.
There should still be a reliable supply
On 4/18/24 14:01, paul.kimpel--- via cctalk wrote:
> The tape for the Burroughs 220 drives was not metallic. It was 3/4-inch wide,
> and I think a Mylar sandwich. It could be spliced much the same way you would
> have spliced quarter-inch reel-to-reel audio tape back in the day.
>
The Datamatic
Don't know if it's germane, but the CDC STAR-100 (Cyber 200 series) MCU
used a small drum. 70s-80s. Don't recall if the stations did also.
There was the "STAR Drum" blue sky that was part of the boilerplate in
proposals at the time. STAR had a 512-bit wide data channel reserved
for a paging
On 4/13/24 11:22, Michael Thompson via cctalk wrote:
>>> On Apr 12, 2024, at 9:55 PM, ben via cctalk
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Did any one ever use a keyboard to magtape as input device?
>>
>> My wife did, sort of: for a while she worked with IBM MT/ST word
>> processors. Those were very early word
On 4/13/24 10:20, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
>
>
> PLATO was the system where a whole lot of early games first appeared,
> especially multi-player games. Among them were any number of variations of
> "Star Trek" inspired ones. While you couldn't refresh a screen full of space
> ships in
On 4/12/24 14:27, Van Snyder via cctalk wrote:
> On Fri, 2024-04-12 at 16:13 -0400, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
>> Not all that fast, well, it depends on what you're comparing with.
>> Given tube logic with cycle times measures in microseconds, quite
>> possibly serial rather than parallel
On 4/12/24 14:54, CAREY SCHUG via cctalk wrote:
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_IBM_products for genuine ibm devices.
>
> Calcomp (and others?) had automated tape libraries for reel to reel taps.
> The cartridge tape library that staged onto 3350s (and later 3380s?)
The
On 4/12/24 12:04, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
> I remember a concept for a very fast magnetic storage system that didn't
> become a product, as far as I know. The scheme was to build a large array of
> heads, using IC-manufacturing type techniques, and mount that array in
> contact or
On 4/12/24 11:10, Tom Gardner via cctalk wrote:
problems too and in the end I'm told it was a rather successful product.
>
> NCR CRAM (Card Random Access Memory) truly considered magnetic cards as the
> media, see
> https://www.computerhistory.org/brochures/m-p/national-cash-register-company
>
On 4/12/24 09:45, Christian Kennedy via cctalk wrote:
>
> On 4/12/24 05:31, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote
>
> [snip]
>> Yes. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_2321_Data_Cell . By
>> the standards of the time it was an unusually high capacity storage
>> device, way faster than a room
On 4/11/24 11:01, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote:
> Then, there was the "64-256KB" motherboard. It had one row of 4164s
> soldered in, and three rows of sockets. Populating those with 4164s
> gave you 256K of RAM. BUT, there was an empty socket on the board, that
> you could populate; I don't know
On 4/10/24 10:20, Jon Elson via cctalk wrote:
> OK, never worked on one, I did actually see one in a tour once. So,
> there's a lot I don't know about the /20. Thanks for the correction.
In point of fact, given the constraints posed by the small register file
and lack of instructions, the
On 4/10/24 08:17, Jon Elson via cctalk wrote:
> The 360/20 had only halfword instructions, no float, no char strings.
> But, main storage was 16 bits wide.
>
I'm not quite sure what you mean by "char strings", but SS instructions
MVC, MVN, MVZ, CLC, ED, TR were in the set, (but not, say, TRT,
On 4/10/24 08:11, Jon Elson via cctalk wrote:
> On 4/10/24 00:21, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
>> On 4/9/24 22:03, ben via cctalk wrote:
>>>
>> What model of a 360? 8K sounds a lot like a Model 20, which the purists
>> may not consider to be a "real"
On 4/9/24 23:51, Van Snyder via cctalk wrote:
> I don't remember whether it was one of the docents at Haus zur
> Geschichte der IBM Datenverarbeitung at Sindelfingen, or at the
> Computer History Museum at Mountain View, who told me that IBM was
> developing a machine to be designated 1480, as
On 4/9/24 22:03, ben via cctalk wrote:
> On 2024-04-09 8:53 p.m., Murray McCullough via cctalk wrote:
>> I had not realized the IBM 360 was 60 yrs. old this month. I worked on
>> such
>> a computer in the late 60s in Toronto. What one could do with 8 Kbytes of
>> ram was remarkable!
>>
>> Happy
On 4/4/24 09:54, CAREY SCHUG wrote:
> my syquests say 135 mb, though IIRC that must be raw, because useable was a
> more even number, like 125mb, which the formatting program agreed with. I
> made it my c: drive on my I386 pc so I could switch operating systems before
> virtualization. I was
On 4/4/24 09:27, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
>
> Was there any other kind?
>
> Oh yeah, I also have one marketed for use on the Mac. It says 88M
> on the front.
Zip, Jazall Iomega. The Zips were 100MB, 250MB and 750MB. The Jaz
was 1 GB and 2 GB, if memory serves.
The 88M sounds
On 4/4/24 08:05, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
> One more list before I give up.
>
> Anybody interested in Iomega drive?
>
> I have:
> 2 - 90 Pro
> 2 - 150 Multidisk
> and somewhere here I have a 230M but I haven't come across it yet.
>
> To go along with them I have:
>
On 4/3/24 09:01, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote:
> I still have a TEK 475A (with the DMM4 on top) and a TEK 11043A
> mainframe scope.
I still occasionally haul out my 465A. If I got rid of it, I'd have to
figure out what to do with the scope cart...
--Chuck
Well, if you're after an EMP-tolerant oscilloscope, there's always the
mirror-galvanometer + rotating mirror variety. Precedes the development
of the CRT by quite a bit. Runs fine with clockwork.
It's amazing what can be done with simple electrics and mechanics.
Anyone remember using the
Back in the day (early 90s, IIRC), there was a package called "SyDupe"
from modesty-forbids. It could use up to 3 diskette controllers, each
with up to 4 drives (grand total 3). Simultaneously copying three disks,
sensing disk changes, so no keyboard interaction aside from startup.
Stick a disk
Just curious--how many old Formasters are still in operation?
--Chuck
On 2/27/24 18:34, CAREY SCHUG via cctalk wrote:
> And the 1620 does addition and multiplication by table lookup.
That was only the CADET; the Model II had the math hardcoded. There was
an octal arithmetic option for the Model II, so it could do binary math
of a sort. Spent lots of fun hours
On 2/27/24 15:43, Wayne S via cctalk wrote:
> I know you do this for a living and are good at it. Most of us don’t do it as
> a living but have piles of floppies that we want to recover cheaply using an
> existing method. Grease, cat and other wezels, are fine but you have to do
> more work
On 2/27/24 14:50, CAREY SCHUG via cctalk wrote:
> but still only floppy speeds. maybe they have software mods for larger
> capacity, but
> still only floppy speeds. emulate the western digital chip and go as fast as
> the
> original machine can handle it.
There are inexpensive floppy
On 2/27/24 14:42, Wayne S via cctalk wrote:
> Take a look at the Applesauce.
> It hooks up to a lot of different floppy drives and records and decodes the
> flux.
> Version2 of the hardware is being sourced and should be available in a few
> months.
>
Good grief, there are more of these
On 2/27/24 14:09, Paul Koning via cctalk wrote:
> Suppose you had schematics of, say, a KA-10. You could turn those gates into
> VHDL or Verilog, and that should deliver an exact replica of the original
> machine, bug for bug compatible. That assumes the timing quirks are
> manageable, which
On 2/27/24 13:28, CAREY SCHUG wrote:
> you are correct. Packard Bell. apologies. And the picture on page 8 is (or
> is close to)
> the paper tape reader I remember. So many fun things to program (I
> programmed in octal only).
I like the description on that same page referring to "octal
On 2/27/24 10:10, ben via cctalk wrote:
> On 2024-02-27 9:20 a.m., CAREY SCHUG via cctalk wrote:
>> It's not a cassette, but the PB-440 (Pitney-Bowes), renamed Raytheon
>> 440 and its upgrade the raytheon 520 had a large reel paper tape with
>> a bidirectional read and an "operating system" Load
On 2/23/24 20:32, steve shumaker via cctalk wrote:
> Would you consider parting with it? I've actually got the 1052S up and
> working with the Depot4 software but I'm still looking for a 6250 unit.
>
Hi Steve,
I might consider a trade, but to be perfectly frank, I don't think you'd
like it.
At
I wonder if the XT2180 uses the same mech as the XT1140. That thing's
initial seek would wake the dead..
--Chuck
In my experience, the Qualstar drives aren't the best tool for the job.
They're basically a cost-minimized apparatus for handling tapes under
the most optimistic of conditions. In particular, they don't really
move the tape quickly enough at 6250 fci to get a decent read signal.
SCSI drives for
On 2/9/24 10:16, Gary Sparkes via cctalk wrote:
> Do we have anyone who can read these tapes? Maybe Al at CHM?
Any number of folks here should be able to read them. I certainly can,
but that's business for me, so not free.
--Chuck
On 2/7/24 22:59, Nico de Jong via cctalk wrote:
>
> Maybe you dont know, but all the Qualstars I've met, are basically
> Pertec. I've run some 1052's on Overland software.
>
I have a 1260S that's a SCSI interface. The 1052 was also available
with a SCSI interface. Basically a 1260 or 1052
On 1/31/24 13:03, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote:
> Michael,
>
> Thank you, that was what I was planning as my next step. I haven't
> checked to see if the service manual has a full schematic.
>
> The main purpose of my message on here was to see if I was missing
> something obvious like an option
On 1/31/24 11:12, Mike Katz via cctalk wrote:
> I have not yet tried installing terminating resistors...
That might help. It's also possible that the LED/phototransistor for
the SS index position is faulty. The two LEDs (SS and DS) are connected
in series, so you know that at least one isn't
On 1/23/24 02:13, ED SHARPE via cctalk wrote:
> FASTBACK bak up ptogrsm...Help how to recover files stored in this backup
> format,?
> Back when the museum was next to computer exchange Inc. Pre '94. We put out
> a journal once a year Over 100 pages tightly leaded would like to access
> files
On 12/30/23 22:26, Jim Brain via cctalk wrote:
> https://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/23/12/30/0151241/documentarians-secure-original-reboot-master-tapes-but-need-help-to-play-them
>
The Bosch unit may be very difficult to find. Will a Sony
DVR-1000/2000/2100 do the same job for those
1 - 100 of 3017 matches
Mail list logo
