In search of SGI IRIS 1400 / 2000 era technical reference manuals & schematics
Title says all. Thanks, - Ian
In search of Apollo DN100 Technical Reference Manual
Hi folks, I've recently acquired an Apollo DN100 I'd like to restore to former glory. Sadly, there are no schematics anywhere that I can find. I have seen this alluded to, but do not have a part number- anyone got a lead? Even better would be to find anything describing the PALs in the system. Separately, there is a 14" Priam DISKOS hard drive in here- not with the Priam interface used by the later SAU2 Apollos (DN300, etc.) but something else- perhaps the early ANSI interface option provided by Priam. If anyone has leads on - 1) The failure modes of these drives and 2) A replacement … advice would be much appreciated. Thanks, - Ian
Re: Living Computer Museum
His sister now runs his companies and has been dismantling his dreams. She already wrecked his space launch company. On Thu, 28 May 2020, 00:29 Ethan O'Toole via cctalk, wrote: > > Indeed. This looks bad. Hopefully they can pull a rabbit out of their hat > > and figure out how to reopen, but I'm not holding my breath. > > Mike > > That place was funded by Paul Allen right? I would have thought it would > have been setup to last many years. > > - Ethan > > > -- > : Ethan O'Toole > > >
RE: Living Computer Museum
> -Original Message- > From: cctalk On Behalf Of Chris Hanson via > cctalk > Sent: 28 May 2020 04:54 > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > > Subject: Re: Living Computer Museum > > On May 27, 2020, at 8:48 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr > wrote: > > > > I would think that if people you liked got replaced with people who > > don't care then you might have a major battle trying to get back stuff > > you loaned. > > It might be a battle, possibly even a major one, but it would be > fundamentally winnable when there’s explicitly no transfer of ownership. > > That may, of course, be why they told Alan they don’t take loans; they may > want to not worry about dealing with people who want loaned pieces > returned, or dealing with the risk of loss or damage (e.g. insurance), and so > on. > > -- Chris Its a challenge. Most Museums refuse to accept loans. It’s a lot of admin. If the original owner dies what happens. Under what terms can it be removed. Value if stolen or damaged? If it is working and it breaks. A lot of hassle and risk. Dave
In search of Apollo DN100 Technical Reference Manual
Hi folks, I've recently acquired an Apollo DN100 I'd like to restore to former glory. Sadly, there are no schematics anywhere that I can find. I have seen this alluded to, but do not have a part number- anyone got a lead? Even better would be to find anything describing the PALs in the system. Separately, there is a 14" Priam DISKOS hard drive in here- not with the Priam interface used by the later SAU2 Apollos (DN300, etc.) but something else- perhaps the early ANSI interface option provided by Priam. If anyone has leads on - 1) The failure modes of these drives and 2) A replacement … advice would be much appreciated. Thanks, - Ian
Re: Living Computer Museum
I manage the finance for the VCF Museum and our shows, which means I also deal with our “artifact loans”. It is a lot of paperwork. Only “special” items are worth the hassle. As for museums closing… Its tough when you can’t have visitors who help pay for the day to day operational costs with the admission price and many of those visitors become potential sponsors. For us at VCF, this isn’t so bad because we don’t take any regular admission money from InfoAge (our parent museum) and are exclusively volunteers which allows us to have a much lower overhead than traditional museums like LCM. VCF is also an independent 501c3 charity which means there is a lot of help out there to keep our doors open and we also planned for rainy days. I can tell you that we had big plans for our shows this year, but so far two of those shows (including one at LCM) had to be moved to virtual thanks to Covid-19 so we are now in rainy day territory, but we actually planned for a monsoon, so we will be fine. Museums like LCM that aren’t quite a fully independent 501c3 charity yet (I think they had plans for this before Covid) will have trouble as their parent corporations look to save money. Hopefully LCM can make the transition and spread their support base out to the public, who I think are very appreciative of their mission. Cheers, Corey > On May 28, 2020, at 4:14 AM, Dave Wade via cctalk > wrote: > >> -Original Message- >> From: cctalk On Behalf Of Chris Hanson via >> cctalk >> Sent: 28 May 2020 04:54 >> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts >> >> Subject: Re: Living Computer Museum >> >> On May 27, 2020, at 8:48 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr >> wrote: >>> >>> I would think that if people you liked got replaced with people who >>> don't care then you might have a major battle trying to get back stuff >>> you loaned. >> >> It might be a battle, possibly even a major one, but it would be >> fundamentally winnable when there’s explicitly no transfer of ownership. >> >> That may, of course, be why they told Alan they don’t take loans; they may >> want to not worry about dealing with people who want loaned pieces >> returned, or dealing with the risk of loss or damage (e.g. insurance), and so >> on. >> >> -- Chris > > Its a challenge. Most Museums refuse to accept loans. It’s a lot of admin. If > the original owner dies what happens. > Under what terms can it be removed. Value if stolen or damaged? If it is > working and it breaks. > A lot of hassle and risk. > > Dave >
Re: Living Computers: Museum + Labs
On 5/27/20 9:13 PM, Rich Alderson via cctalk wrote: Hello, everyone, As I'm sure all of you are aware, the COVID-19 pandemic has led to a crisis with devastating effects on many cultural organizations, and more especially on those which rely on public gatherings and special events to achieve their mission. Since before we opened to the public in 2012, our philosophy has been a simple one: To understand computing technology of any period, you need to experience that technology at first hand. The current global situation has made it difficult for us to serve our mission, and given so much uncertainty we have made the difficult decision to suspend all operations of LCM+L for now. We will spend the months ahead reassessing if, how, and when to reopen. Because that will not happen in any short time frame, the staff, including me, have been laid off. On a personal note, the last 17 years, since July 2003, have been a time of growth, excitement, and backbreaking labor which I would not trade for anything. The friendships I have formed, in the community at large (and it is international in scope) as well as among my colleagues here, are a comfort to me. I'll be subscribed from a personal address once that is moderator-approved. Thank you all for your interest in and support for Living Computers: Museum + Labs, and our previous incarnations. It means a great deal to us as we wind down the current implementation. Does this mean the MineCraft Server will be going down, too? :-( bill
Re: Replacing cables sheaths?
On Wed, 27 May 2020, Matti Nummi via cctalk wrote: You can use cable lacing. It does not make it pretty(er), but usable. If You don't want to remove the connectors or cut the cable You cannot add any new sheath? There may be some fabric/wowen expandable sheaths which have been used on power cables earlier but I have no precise knowledge. Something like when You push it, it bulges. Waxed lacing tape could be a solution and there's also this stuff: https://www.amazon.com/X-Treme-Tape-TPE-X36ZLB-Silicone-Triangular/dp/B00HWROLIG/ref=sr_1_2?dchild=1&keywords=f4+tape&qid=1590670532&sr=8-2 It's effectively a silicone tape that will stick to itself. It's often used for outdoor and high temp applications, but could easily lend itself to the kind of task that OP has in mind. g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. http://www.diy-cockpits.org/coll - Go Collimated or Go Home. Some people collect things for a hobby. Geeks collect hobbies. ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://scarlet.deltasoft.com - Get it _today_!
Re: Living Computer Museum
On 5/27/20 11:02 PM, Alan Perry via cctalk wrote: That wasn’t an option for most folks. They told me that they didn’t accept items on loan. I once sent them some rather rare documentation (at the suggestion of other collectors). I got back a letter with a nasty tone stating they do not accept unsolicited items. I have no idea what that meant as to the continued existence of the item. It certainly did not come back to me. bill
Re: Algol W [was: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC]
> On May 28, 2020, at 12:01 AM, ben via cctalk wrote: > > ... > What keyboard are you using to get the fancy arrows? A Unicode keyboard? My Mac will happily produce those characters and thousands more. paul
Re: Algol W [was: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC]
The fancy arrows in Fira Code are ligatures. (Yuk! I'm not yet a convert) https://www.hanselman.com/blog/MonospacedProgrammingFontsWithLigatures.aspx ASCII-63 had a backward-arrow that disappeared in later revisions of the standard, replaced with underscore (and also an upward-arrow which was at the codepoint now used for the caret). But the PDP1 arrow wasn't ASCII. I believe it's the FIO-DEC encoding, and used an IBM typewriter console, https://archive.org/stream/bitsavers_decpdp1F17_28841238/F17_PDP1Maint_1962#page/n123/mode/2up On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 12:01 AM ben via cctalk wrote: > On 5/27/2020 8:43 PM, Toby Thain via cctalk wrote: > > >> At the moment I have no wish to fight a web site,to find what should be > >> simple information. > > > > It's a picture. They can be useful. > > That is why clicking with my mouse did nothing. > I like if eif else fi for if statements. > What keyboard are you using to get the fancy arrows? > Ben. > > >
Re: Living Computer Museum
Also remember that museums don't necessarily honor contracts, and when they don't, courts may fail to enforce them. There was a notorious case a few years ago involving a museum created by a bequest that required it to be remain located in whatever town it was founded in (a small town in PA, I think). At some point the people running the museum decided they didn't like that and moved it to another city (Philadelphia?). The descendants of the benefactor sued for breach of contract, and lost. I forgot what fancy BS the courts used to justify their decision, but in some lawyerly fashion they did. paul > On May 27, 2020, at 11:02 PM, Alan Perry via cctalk > wrote: > > That wasn’t an option for most folks. They told me that they didn’t accept > items on loan. > > alan > >> On May 27, 2020, at 19:33, Chris Hanson via cctalk >> wrote: >> >> This is why people should avoid donating equipment directly to institutions >> and instead lend hardware to them. >> >> At least then you have a claim with which to try to get your stuff back if >> they fold, close, or decide to go in a direction you don’t like. >> >> -- Chris >>
Re: Living Computer Museum
> I once sent them some rather rare documentation (at the suggestion of > other collectors). I got back a letter with a nasty tone stating they > do not accept unsolicited items. I have no idea what that meant as to > the continued existence of the item. It certainly did not come back > to me. Why did you not ask them first? -- Will
Re: Living Computer Museum
On 5/28/20 9:18 AM, William Donzelli wrote: I once sent them some rather rare documentation (at the suggestion of other collectors). I got back a letter with a nasty tone stating they do not accept unsolicited items. I have no idea what that meant as to the continued existence of the item. It certainly did not come back to me. Why did you not ask them first? Why would I do that? I had something people said was rare. I needed to do something with it. Suggestions were send it to the museum. I have given stuff to other, much smaller museums in the past that were happily accepted. Why would you refuse to accept something given with no strings and even worse send the donor a nasty letter? Result is I will never donate anything again. Who is the loser? bill
Re: Algol W [was: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC]
On 2020-05-28 12:01 AM, ben via cctalk wrote: > On 5/27/2020 8:43 PM, Toby Thain via cctalk wrote: > >>> At the moment I have no wish to fight a web site,to find what should be >>> simple information. >> >> It's a picture. They can be useful. > > That is why clicking with my mouse did nothing. > I like if eif else fi for if statements. > What keyboard are you using to get the fancy arrows? > Ben. > > The source code is ASCII; the arrows are ligatures in the Fira Code typeface. Arrows were also a typographic convention in many books, e.g. * Hundreds of textbooks using Pascal-ish pseudocode * the Smalltalk-80 books * Knuth's literate programs And many languages define -> and <- tokens, even => So it does seem to be a thing people like to see. --Toby
Re: Living Computer Museum
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 9:14 AM Paul Koning via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > Also remember that museums don't necessarily honor contracts, and when > they don't, courts may fail to enforce them. There was a notorious case a > few years ago involving a museum created by a bequest that required it to > be remain located in whatever town it was founded in (a small town in PA, I > think). At some point the people running the museum decided they didn't > like that and moved it to another city (Philadelphia?). The descendants of > the benefactor sued for breach of contract, and lost. I forgot what fancy > BS the courts used to justify their decision, but in some lawyerly fashion > they did. > > paul > > > What museum was that? Bill
Re: Living Computer Museum
> Why would I do that? I had something people said was rare. Museums with a lot of "gravity" (like LCM) tend to get offered a *lot* of REALLY RARE items, like broken C64s, Packard Bell desktops, boxes of ten year old games on CD-ROM, dirty USB keyboards, 56K Sportsters, and so forth. Yeah, super rare stuff like that. This is why museums ask that donors check before dropping off a load a REALLY RARE items at the museum. A simple email is all it takes. -- Will
Re: Living Computer Museum
On 5/28/20 9:53 AM, William Donzelli wrote: Why would I do that? I had something people said was rare. Museums with a lot of "gravity" (like LCM) tend to get offered a *lot* of REALLY RARE items, like broken C64s, Packard Bell desktops, boxes of ten year old games on CD-ROM, dirty USB keyboards, 56K Sportsters, and so forth. Yeah, super rare stuff like that. This is why museums ask that donors check before dropping off a load a REALLY RARE items at the museum. A simple email is all it takes. Nothing like asking people to jump thru hoops before you let them do you a favor. :-) bill
Re: Living Computer Museum
On Thu, May 28, 2020, 10:25 Bill Gunshannon via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > On 5/28/20 9:53 AM, William Donzelli wrote: > >> Why would I do that? I had something people said was rare. > > > > Museums with a lot of "gravity" (like LCM) tend to get offered a *lot* > > of REALLY RARE items, like broken C64s, Packard Bell desktops, boxes > > of ten year old games on CD-ROM, dirty USB keyboards, 56K Sportsters, > > and so forth. > > > > Yeah, super rare stuff like that. > > > > This is why museums ask that donors check before dropping off a load a > > REALLY RARE items at the museum. A simple email is all it takes. > > > > Nothing like asking people to jump thru hoops before you let them > do you a favor. :-) > If you want something nice, I can send you a few pallets of broken LCDs. They're all really rare - I've never seen ones with the same serial number on them. Don't worry, I won't ask first. ;-) Pat
Re: Living Computer Museum
> If you want something nice, I can send you a few pallets of broken LCDs. > They're all really rare - I've never seen ones with the same serial number > on them. > > Don't worry, I won't ask first. ;-) You pay for shipping, and I'll take them! -- Will
Re: Living Computer Museum
At 09:25 AM 5/28/2020, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote: >Nothing like asking people to jump thru hoops before you let them >do you a favor. :-) Much of the effort of running a thrift store is disposal of donated material that has no rapid resale value. - John
Re: Living Computer Museum
Much of the effort of running a thrift store is disposal of donated material that has no rapid resale value. - John Like all the vintage computers that must flow into Goodwill locations everywhere... that Dell then disposes of somehow? - Ethan -- : Ethan O'Toole
Back to tech: TK50 restoration and thoughts
Ok, so to get back to technology I have been working on fixing the TK50's I have here along with attempting to look at some old tapes from Bob's basement. It's been interesting. So far one of the units works well with one of my tapes (stored indoors for about 20 or so years) after a good cleaning with 95% isopropyl alcohol. From RT11 I was able to initialize the tape, write 40mb of .DSK image files, and consistently read the files back (to a VM: memory drive) and diff/bin them to make sure they are the same. Good. First test: A second TK50 drive I had banging around. This one will read the tape, but fail about half way through. May still be a bit dirty, will clean and check. Second test: Checking some of the tapes from Bob's basement. In addition to getting the PERQ tapes out of there I had a few TK50 tapes mixed in, most with degaussed stickers on them from long ago. These tapes appear to have been Vax 8650 load tapes of some sort, no idea if there is any value to the data but one was labelled Micro-pdp11 diagnostics and since I know those are backed up I started with that one. It loads, but fails with a DUP IO output error. It also messes up the tape head so I have to clean it after testing. Most of the dirt is at the bottom of the head. After cleaning the drive can load and read the "control" tape which has all of those image files on it, so it doesn't damage the drive. Still I see why taking the cage top off the TK50 is a good idea. :-) Took the cartridge apart and here is what I see: https://i.imgur.com/xHhiBAW.jpg This is... not good. Dirt or something on the bottom of the tape. Now these did spend the last 20 years in a pretty dank basement with an oil fired house heater so there is probably that. Still I used a Q tip on the tape with isopropyl alcohol and it came up dirty inside the cart and out: https://i.imgur.com/TB91gGx.jpg Also odd that the tape is wrapped in two different "levels" on the spindle. Maybe that's normal. So a question: Can one clean tape with isopropyl alcohol? In theory if I could get the controller to slowly run the tape onto the take-up real to the EOT marker I could soak some cotton swabs and use them to clean the tape before it hits the heads (to minimize head wear). Or I could just chuck these tapes and see how a couple I am buying from Ebay hold up. This is mostly an academic exercise: It gives me something to do. But I am wondering if the tapes were crudded by the environment or if this is just natural tape degradation. I do have one final tape that was in a closed tape holder so it might be better (it's clean on the outside). Will see C
Re: Living Computer Museum
> Much of the effort of running a thrift store is disposal of > donated material that has no rapid resale value. And cost. Dumpsters ain't cheap. -- Will
Re: Living Computer Museum
> On May 28, 2020, at 9:49 AM, Bill Degnan wrote: > > > > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 9:14 AM Paul Koning via cctalk > wrote: > Also remember that museums don't necessarily honor contracts, and when they > don't, courts may fail to enforce them. There was a notorious case a few > years ago involving a museum created by a bequest that required it to be > remain located in whatever town it was founded in (a small town in PA, I > think). At some point the people running the museum decided they didn't like > that and moved it to another city (Philadelphia?). The descendants of the > benefactor sued for breach of contract, and lost. I forgot what fancy BS the > courts used to justify their decision, but in some lawyerly fashion they did. > > paul > > What museum was that? > > Bill The Barnes Collection, from Merion, PA to Philadelphia, 2004. paul
Re: Living Computer Museum
On 2020-05-28 4:14 AM, Dave Wade via cctalk wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: cctalk On Behalf Of Chris Hanson via >> cctalk >> Sent: 28 May 2020 04:54 >> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts >> >> Subject: Re: Living Computer Museum >> >> On May 27, 2020, at 8:48 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr >> wrote: >>> >>> I would think that if people you liked got replaced with people who >>> don't care then you might have a major battle trying to get back stuff >>> you loaned. >> >> It might be a battle, possibly even a major one, but it would be >> fundamentally winnable when there’s explicitly no transfer of ownership. >> >> That may, of course, be why they told Alan they don’t take loans; they may >> want to not worry about dealing with people who want loaned pieces >> returned, or dealing with the risk of loss or damage (e.g. insurance), and so >> on. >> >> -- Chris > > Its a challenge. Most Museums refuse to accept loans. It’s a lot of admin. If > the original owner dies what happens. > Under what terms can it be removed. Value if stolen or damaged? If it is > working and it breaks. > A lot of hassle and risk. We must certainly not put a very very very very well endowed museum to any effort in the matter of museuming After all they might need to suddenly evaporate any moment for any reason > > Dave >
Re: Living Computer Museum
On 5/28/20 7:52 AM, William Donzelli via cctalk wrote: Dumpsters ain't cheap. s/Dumpsters/EWASTE disposal/
Re: Living Computer Museum
> > On 2020-05-28 4:14 AM, Dave Wade via cctalk wrote: >>> ... >> >> Its a challenge. Most Museums refuse to accept loans. It’s a lot of admin. >> If the original owner dies what happens. >> Under what terms can it be removed. Value if stolen or damaged? If it is >> working and it breaks. >> A lot of hassle and risk. Loans are standard practice in art museums, from other museums as well as from private collections. Perhaps not so much in science/technology museums. I do know of an example, though: the Electrologica X8 on display at the Boerhaave Museum in Leiden (Netherlands) is a loan, from the Electrologica Foundation. paul
Re: Living Computer Museum
> Loans are standard practice in art museums, from other museums as well as > from private collections. Perhaps not so much in science/technology museums. Art museums work under a different set of rules and ethics than other museums. -- Will
Re: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 21:35, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: > > Well, there were some products whose role was to SHEAR THE SHEEP. > The Apple3 belonged in a shearing section. Maybe even the Lisa, although > that wasn't its intended role. (?) > When I taught C, we gave the course a prerequisite of "any other > programming language", so that the beginning of the course wouldn't get > bogged down in "what is a program?", the concepts of stored programs, > compiling, etc. Sound plan. > In the first class session, I told the students, that if they had never > written a program in any other language, that before the second session > (in a week), they should teach themselves a little BASIC. Heh. Sounds reasonable. Now, the *nix weenies who know nothing else thing you could learn Python in a week. Yeah right. > Some of my students continued to use BASIC even after a semester of C. I can believe it. For a lot of stuff, it's all you need. > Americans were oblivious to anything that wasn't in USA. Yes. :-( > Yes. TRS80. > > It had a memory map that was incompatible with CP/M. BASIC in ROM at the > bottom, and RAM at the top. Which one? As they're purely a theoretical concept to me and AFAIK I've never actually touched one, the profusion of models is very confusing, and I'm not aware of an idiot's single-para overview. I vaguely know of: • TRS-80 Model 100 (8085), pre-laptop portable • Tandy 1000 (PC compatible) • TRS-80 Model 2000 (*before* the 1000?! Also kinda-sorta PC compatible, nearly?) • TRS-80 Colour, AKA CoCo -- 6809 • TRS-80 Pocket (no idea) Then there seem to be about 42 different computers called TRS-80 Model X where X is either a Roman or Arabic number under 1000, after which it all changed. Except 2000 comes before 1000. Obviously. The TRS-80 Model I, Model II, Model III, Model 4, Model 12, Model 16, etc. I know nothing at all about these but I believe the III ran Xenix on a 68000 and had some resemblance to the Apple Lisa, which would seem to preclude any relation to the Model I & Model II -- and Wikipedia suggests that the Model II is totally different from the Model I. But it claims the Model III is compatible with the Model I. (Wut?) It very quickly all becomes rather surreal and I rapidly lose track (and interest, TBH.) I suspect a graphic might be needed to disentangle it. > For those parts of the world that didn't have TRS80: > Note: Radio Shack TRS80 model 1, 3, 4 were a straightforward transition. > 4P was a luggable version of the 4. > > Model 2 (and 12, later) was a TOTALLY unrelated product consisting of a > "business" computer with 8" drives, with CP/M available. > Model 16 had coprocessor board with 68000. Er. Right. So it goes: Model I → Model III → Model 4 *And* ↘ Model 2 → Model 12 → Model 16 ... ? Where do the VideoGenie and Coco fit in? -- Liam Proven – Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk – gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: lpro...@gmail.com Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven – Skype: liamproven UK: +44 7939-087884 – ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053
Re: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 6:38 PM Liam Proven via cctalk wrote: > > Americans were oblivious to anything that wasn't in USA. > > Yes. :-( > > > Yes. TRS80. > > > > It had a memory map that was incompatible with CP/M. BASIC in ROM at the > > bottom, and RAM at the top. > > Which one? The Model 1 and Model 3. The Model 4 was like a model 3 at switch-on, but you could write to an output port to shuffle things around, take the ROM out of the memory map and have 64K of RAM. There was an official CP/M for the Model 4 (but I prefer LSDOS on mine...) > > As they're purely a theoretical concept to me and AFAIK I've never > actually touched one, the profusion of models is very confusing, and > I'm not aware of an idiot's single-para overview. > > I vaguely know of: > • TRS-80 Model 100 (8085), pre-laptop portable > • Tandy 1000 (PC compatible) > • TRS-80 Model 2000 (*before* the 1000?! Also kinda-sorta PC > compatible, nearly?) > • TRS-80 Colour, AKA CoCo -- 6809 > • TRS-80 Pocket (no idea) There were many TRS-80 'Pocket Computers'. All were essentially re-badged versions of either Sharp or Casio machines. Sometimes with minor differences, the Pocket Computer 2 is essentially a Sharp PC1500 but the keyboard layout is different so overlays for one do not fit the other. > > Then there seem to be about 42 different computers called TRS-80 Model > X where X is either a Roman or Arabic number under 1000, after which > it all changed. Except 2000 comes before 1000. Obviously. > > The TRS-80 Model I, Model II, Model III, Model 4, Model 12, Model 16, > etc. I know nothing at all about these but I believe the III ran Xenix > on a 68000 and had some resemblance to the Apple Lisa, which would No, that's the Model 16 (think of 16 as '16 bit') > seem to preclude any relation to the Model I & Model II -- and > Wikipedia suggests that the Model II is totally different from the > Model I. It is. The Model 2 (which begat the Model 12 and the Model 16) could run CPM from the beginning (IIRC there was no BASIC in ROM, just a disk bootstrap) and had 8" floppy drives. > > But it claims the Model III is compatible with the Model I. (Wut?) Sort-of. The Model 4 is compatible with the Model 3 (but the Model 4 does rather more). The Model 3 is related to the Model 1 (ROM at the start of the memory map, maximum of 48K RAM, etc) but there are enough differences to make them not-quite-compatible.A model 3 will not boot from a model 1 disk, for example. The Model 3 has a double density disk controller (which can also do single density), the model 1 is single-density only. Perhaps the largest change is that almost all I/O on the Model 1 is memory mapped, the Model 3 has them as Z80 I/O ports. (But as so many programs read the printer startus _memory address_ input port on the Model 1 to check that a printer existed, etc, the Model 3 has the printer status port available both as memory mapped or I/O mapped). > > It very quickly all becomes rather surreal and I rapidly lose track > (and interest, TBH.) > > I suspect a graphic might be needed to disentangle it. > > > For those parts of the world that didn't have TRS80: > > Note: Radio Shack TRS80 model 1, 3, 4 were a straightforward transition. > > 4P was a luggable version of the 4. > > > > Model 2 (and 12, later) was a TOTALLY unrelated product consisting of a > > "business" computer with 8" drives, with CP/M available. > > Model 16 had coprocessor board with 68000. > > Er. Right. > > So it goes: > > Model I → Model III → Model 4 > > *And* > > ↘ > Model 2 → Model 12 → Model 16 Yes. > > ... ? > > Where do the VideoGenie and Coco fit in? The Video Genie is not a Tandy machine. It was a clone of the Model 1 (almost) and ran the same software. Much as there were copies of the Apple ][ doing the rounds in the Far East. The CoCo is a totally different family, based on the 6809 (the other machines used a Z80). Basically CoCo 1 (officially maximum of 32K RAM, but you could fit 64K chips and access it all with some trickery) CoCo 2 (offically up to 64K RAM, redesigned PCB and case but otherwise compatible with the CoCo 1. The CoCo 1 has a 'chicklet keyboard', the CoCo2 has something approaching a full-size one). CoCo 3 (No longer based on the Motorola 6883 application note. The 6883 + 6847 chips are replaced by a custom Tandy IC called 'GIME' (Graphics Interrupts Memory Enhancement). Some of the 'semigraphics modes' no longer exist, meaning some software will not run. On the other hand you could have up to 512K RAM, 80 column text, true lower case, 640*200 graphics, etc) -tony
Re: Living Computer Museum
They would have to when items can be worth millions each and are one of a kind. -Original Message- From: William Donzelli via cctalk Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 1:31 PM To: Paul Koning ; General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Subject: Re: Living Computer Museum Loans are standard practice in art museums, from other museums as well as from private collections. Perhaps not so much in science/technology museums. Art museums work under a different set of rules and ethics than other museums. -- Will -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Re: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 21:52, Jim Brain via cctalk wrote: > > Well, *I've* heard of them, but I enjoy knowing about such things. Most > in the US do not. *Nod* Shame but it's fair enough. I think there is at the least an article (and possibly an entire university course module) comparing European and United States hardware and software design schools in the early, pre-standardisation days before the general-purpose computing market collapsed down to, essentially, x86 versus ARM and Windows NT versus *nix, which is where we are today. One could usefully compare this to the Japanese market, for a long time _entirely_ separate and almost unknown anywhere else... and the relatively tiny but important and totally different Japanese _export_ market. In extremely broad, hand-wavey strokes: In the early *microcomputer* days (1970s and early 1980s) US: CP/M in business, meaning Z80. Home computers mainly 6502. Converged by putting Z80s into 6502 machines, eventually built-in. EU: lots of totally dissimilar, incompatible makes and models, with Z80 having a slight edge. No real convergence, CP/M much rarer due to cost, and only ever becomes noticeably significant due to the Amstrad PCW range from 1985-1990, by which point it was dead in its home market. After the IBM PC became dominant: US focusses on increasingly large/complex OSes to run on x86, and to a lesser extent, 680x0 and later RISC. Windows 3 finally brings grown-up font handling in the 1990s, allowing vanilla PCs to finally conquer the Japanese domestic market. EU: custom hardware continues, running custom OSes. Psion does EPOC for its tiny power-efficient PDAs, then rewrites it totally in C++ for ARM, creating EPOC32. EPOC32 becomes Symbian and makes smartphones quite mainstream, aided by a unified world cellphone market for GSM devices. US/Canada: no GSM, so no unified cellphone market, so pagers continue, leading to increasingly elaborate devices with QWERTY keyboards, fostering the development of multiple proprietary devices: RIM Blackberry, Danger Hiptop, PalmPilot/Handspring. MS WinCE makes some headway with very complex, fiddly little pocket computers with poor performance and disastrous battery life, which also sell well in gadget-obsessed Japan. Finally in 2007 Apple sweeps all this away with the iPhone: very complex desktop-derived software requiring an extremely powerful device, but giving a very simple user interface. Google hastily pivots its Android aquisition from being a Blackberry-killer to being an iPhone-ripoff. This finally makes US smartphones competive in the European/Japanese markets, previously dominated by Symbian on Nokia, Sony/Ericsson and other hardware with one tenth or less of the resources of the iPhone. Moore's law makes these affordable, bringing tech originating in the PC/Mac desktop market -- iOS, derived from Mac OS X, derived from NeXTstep, originating from the Apple cofounder -- into the pocket computer market and eliminating all other players. Rare exceptions, such as Apple and Be, who did European-style designs (relatively small/simple proprietary OSs and apps on proprietary machines with non-industry-standard CPUs) surrender and die or join the mainstream, first by moving to an xNix base, then to x86. > But, to be fair, most in the US don't even remember > all of the US-based systems. Altair gets a nod as it shows up in > articles concerning computer firsts, but none of the proto or early > S-100 based systems are remembered (Cromemco, Northstar, etc.) nor the > other Z80 machines like the Kaypro and Osborne. True, but I mean, I'm heading for my mid-50s and all that was before my time. > FOlks know about IBM, > but most don't know they still make mainframes and midrange (OS400 or > whatever it is called now) machines, and Burroughs, Wang, Amdahl, > Hitachi are missed. , Super computer is forever linked with Cray, but > Control Data, Thinking Machines, Silicon Graphics, and even Sun are no > more remembered. True. :-( > On the micro front, Atari still carries some name > recognition, mainly because of the coin ops and consoles, but everyone > has forgotten about Commodore or that HP and TI made computers and that > Tandy Radio Shack made a computer themselves and didn't just resell PC > clones. THat doesn't even include the semi-pro machines or hobbyist > options. So, while we didn't know about all the non US machines, we > didn't even know about all the US ones, and folks have forgotten about > the ones we did know about. People remember IBM because of the PC, and > Apple because of the Mac (and that they did a "proto" mac machine back > in the late 1970s (Hey, not saying it is true, it's just how people > choose to position the Apple II). :-( > It is a shame we didn't see the BBC machines here, and the > Timex/Sinclair joint venture to bring out the TS1000 made a mockery of > the entire line, apologize for that. I agree the unit was plucky and I > have one here :-) >. Evidently, t
Re: Algol W [was: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC]
On Thu, 28 May 2020 at 06:01, ben via cctalk wrote: > What keyboard are you using to get the fancy arrows? Unmodified IBM Model M from 1991 in my case. ⇒ is compose, equals, greater-than Snag is, I can't get one going the other way... I get less-than-or-equal-to etc: ≤ ≥ -- Liam Proven – Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk – gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: lpro...@gmail.com Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven – Skype: liamproven UK: +44 7939-087884 – ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053
Re: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
On Thu, 28 May 2020, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote: I guess I am realising that CP/M was a much bigger deal there than here. CP/M was huge in the US, especially among the S-100 system users. It was a pretty narrow window though - from probably 1978-1982. Kaypro had a good portion of the market as well, but like pretty much all the other manufacturers of CP/M machines, the IBM PC compatible juggernaut beat them cold before they fully understood the fight. I'm not aware of any CP/M machine manufacturer that was able to successfully transition to the PC compatible market. Some (like Kaypro) tried with offerings like the Kaypro 16 and Kaypro 2000, but I suspect at that point it was too little, too late. They simply couldn't compete with the uber cheap hardware coming in from overseas. g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. http://www.diy-cockpits.org/coll - Go Collimated or Go Home. Some people collect things for a hobby. Geeks collect hobbies. ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://scarlet.deltasoft.com - Get it _today_!
Re: Living Computer Museum
On May 28, 2020, at 10:31 AM, William Donzelli via cctalk wrote: > >> Loans are standard practice in art museums, from other museums as well as >> from private collections. Perhaps not so much in science/technology museums. > > Art museums work under a different set of rules and ethics than other museums. Do tell. -- Chris
Re: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
On Thu, 28 May 2020 at 21:11, geneb wrote: > > CP/M was huge in the US, especially among the S-100 system users. It was > a pretty narrow window though - from probably 1978-1982. Kaypro had a > good portion of the market as well, but like pretty much all the other > manufacturers of CP/M machines, the IBM PC compatible juggernaut beat them > cold before they fully understood the fight. I'm not aware of any CP/M > machine manufacturer that was able to successfully transition to the PC > compatible market. Some (like Kaypro) tried with offerings like the > Kaypro 16 and Kaypro 2000, but I suspect at that point it was too little, > too late. They simply couldn't compete with the uber cheap hardware > coming in from overseas. The $64K question is, of course, how big that market was. I was reading computer magazines back then, but I didn't have one for a good while. I was aware of the prevalence of CP/M, sure. But I was a kid -- 12 at the end of 1980 -- and not interested in business/office computing. I have no idea if many UK offices or businesses were using CP/M computers. I wouldn't have paid much attention if I saw them, but I don't remember seeing many. I know when I entered the business, in 1988, some companies had old computers around, sure. Very early PCs, including clones from Epson and Sony and so on, and a few things like Apricots and Victors running DOS but not PC-compatible. I saw a handful of minicomputers -- one PDP-11, one IBM S/36 and one AS/400 in that job; the next AS/400 being about 15y later in 2002. One company sold computers that ran an OS _called_ CPM-something, but it wasn't CP/M. I am not in regular touch with anyone I worked with back then to ask, sadly. They were big chunky desktops with screen built into the case, an 8" floppy and an 8" or even 12" hard disk. I has used DR CP/M and this was utterly different. I don't think it had a microprocessor at all. I have asked on the list before and never found out any candidates for what it might be. I did one job extracting data from a laboratory BBC Micro-based system with a Torch "bridge". BBC Micros were a big desktop slab -- the classic all-in-one keyboard and system unit, but the back was a foot deep so big enough (but *not* strong enough) for a CRT to sit on it. So serious users got a 5¼" drive in a metal chassis that went over the back of the computer and was strong enough to sit a CRT on top. Like this, but on legs to go over not under the computer: http://chrisacorns.computinghistory.org.uk/8bit_Upgrades/Torch_Z80Discpack.html http://www.computinghistory.org.uk/det/1341/Torch-Z80-Disc-Pack/ It turns the 6502 Beeb into a Z80 CP/M machine. They had both CP/M files (trivial to convert) and BBC files (_not_ trivial and took us some work). I think in my first decade at work, that is the only time I ever saw an old DR CP/M system -- but I came in about a decade after CP/M's peak. -- Liam Proven – Profile: https://about.me/liamproven Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk – gMail/gTalk/gHangouts: lpro...@gmail.com Twitter/Facebook/LinkedIn/Flickr: lproven – Skype: liamproven UK: +44 7939-087884 – ČR (+ WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal): +420 702 829 053
Re: Living Computer Museum
> Do tell. "Normal" museums do not assign values to artifacts, and are very much against (for the most part) buying artifacts directly, as doing so basically assigns numeric values. This is to discourage "pot hunting", named so after the looters of antiquities. Art museums generally do not have issues with the money involved. They have no problems bending the rules. -- Will
Re: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
On Thu, 28 May 2020, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote: On Thu, 28 May 2020 at 21:11, geneb wrote: CP/M was huge in the US, especially among the S-100 system users. It was a pretty narrow window though - from probably 1978-1982. Kaypro had a good portion of the market as well, but like pretty much all the other manufacturers of CP/M machines, the IBM PC compatible juggernaut beat them cold before they fully understood the fight. I'm not aware of any CP/M machine manufacturer that was able to successfully transition to the PC compatible market. Some (like Kaypro) tried with offerings like the Kaypro 16 and Kaypro 2000, but I suspect at that point it was too little, too late. They simply couldn't compete with the uber cheap hardware coming in from overseas. The $64K question is, of course, how big that market was. For businesses, I expect it was pretty large. CP/M was never really aimed at home users. There were also things like TurboDOS and MP/M-II that were basically multi-user CP/M systems. Two or more Z-80 SBCs in an S-100 bus with serial terminals. They shared disk (hard & floppy) resources. g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. http://www.diy-cockpits.org/coll - Go Collimated or Go Home. Some people collect things for a hobby. Geeks collect hobbies. ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://scarlet.deltasoft.com - Get it _today_!
Re: Living Computer Museum
Does anyone know what it would take to sustain the museum until it can reopen? Are tickets a major source of income? This is the first I have heard of the museum, so I don’t know much about it, but it sounds like something worthy to try to save. Sent from my iPhone > On May 28, 2020, at 1:30 AM, Guy Sotomayor via cctech > wrote: > > I just received an email from the Living Computer Museum that they were > suspending operations. It wasn't clear from the email what that > actually means. > > TTFN - Guy >
Re: Living Computer Museum
If museums allowed for all donations without prior approval, they would have to build a receiving dock and warehouse. A simple contact takes care of the problem. The museums website should include a section on their donation policy to make it easier. What they may accept, what they won’t, who to contact, etc. Sent from my iPhone > On May 28, 2020, at 11:18 AM, Al Kossow via cctalk > wrote: > > On 5/28/20 7:52 AM, William Donzelli via cctalk wrote: >>> Dumpsters ain't cheap. > > s/Dumpsters/EWASTE disposal/ > >
Re: Replacing cables sheaths?
Thanks for the suggestions. I currently have Rescue Tape brand self adhesive silicone tape on the cable, but it looks like it is causing corrosion of the spiral-wound metal shield wires. The wrap around heat shrink might cost more than just buying a new adapter! It looks like there is an 1/8" split wire loom that could work, or perhaps Plasti Dip spray would make a reasonable coating.
Re: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
On 28-05-2020 19:38, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote: > Now, the *nix weenies who know nothing else thing you could learn > Python in a week. Yeah right. Well, I did... Julf
Re: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
For want of a POP, Tandy Radio Shack computers became relegated to the scrape heap. Their word processing program, SCRIPSIT, had a bug in the block text copy/move command that garbled large documents. I was able to buy a bunch of Model III/IV from a law firm that switched to MSDOS machines because of that bug. At the time I thought TRSDOS was as good as or better than MSDOS. It came with features like print spooling that I think were added later to MSDOS. Could be wrong about that. The fix was SuperScripsit which was not as user friendly. Sent from my iPhone > On May 28, 2020, at 2:24 PM, Liam Proven via cctalk > wrote: > > On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 21:52, Jim Brain via cctalk > wrote: >> >> Well, *I've* heard of them, but I enjoy knowing about such things. Most >> in the US do not. > > *Nod* Shame but it's fair enough. > > I think there is at the least an article (and possibly an entire > university course module) comparing European and United States > hardware and software design schools in the early, pre-standardisation > days before the general-purpose computing market collapsed down to, > essentially, x86 versus ARM and Windows NT versus *nix, which is where > we are today. > > One could usefully compare this to the Japanese market, for a long > time _entirely_ separate and almost unknown anywhere else... and the > relatively tiny but important and totally different Japanese _export_ > market. > > In extremely broad, hand-wavey strokes: > > In the early *microcomputer* days (1970s and early 1980s) > > US: CP/M in business, meaning Z80. Home computers mainly 6502. > Converged by putting Z80s into 6502 machines, eventually built-in. > > EU: lots of totally dissimilar, incompatible makes and models, with > Z80 having a slight edge. No real convergence, CP/M much rarer due to > cost, and only ever becomes noticeably significant due to the Amstrad > PCW range from 1985-1990, by which point it was dead in its home > market. > > After the IBM PC became dominant: > US focusses on increasingly large/complex OSes to run on x86, and to a > lesser extent, 680x0 and later RISC. > > Windows 3 finally brings grown-up font handling in the 1990s, allowing > vanilla PCs to finally conquer the Japanese domestic market. > > EU: custom hardware continues, running custom OSes. Psion does EPOC > for its tiny power-efficient PDAs, then rewrites it totally in C++ for > ARM, creating EPOC32. EPOC32 becomes Symbian and makes smartphones > quite mainstream, aided by a unified world cellphone market for GSM > devices. > > US/Canada: no GSM, so no unified cellphone market, so pagers continue, > leading to increasingly elaborate devices with QWERTY keyboards, > fostering the development of multiple proprietary devices: RIM > Blackberry, Danger Hiptop, PalmPilot/Handspring. MS WinCE makes some > headway with very complex, fiddly little pocket computers with poor > performance and disastrous battery life, which also sell well in > gadget-obsessed Japan. > > Finally in 2007 Apple sweeps all this away with the iPhone: very > complex desktop-derived software requiring an extremely powerful > device, but giving a very simple user interface. Google hastily pivots > its Android aquisition from being a Blackberry-killer to being an > iPhone-ripoff. > > This finally makes US smartphones competive in the European/Japanese > markets, previously dominated by Symbian on Nokia, Sony/Ericsson and > other hardware with one tenth or less of the resources of the iPhone. > Moore's law makes these affordable, bringing tech originating in the > PC/Mac desktop market -- iOS, derived from Mac OS X, derived from > NeXTstep, originating from the Apple cofounder -- into the pocket > computer market and eliminating all other players. > > Rare exceptions, such as Apple and Be, who did European-style designs > (relatively small/simple proprietary OSs and apps on proprietary > machines with non-industry-standard CPUs) surrender and die or join > the mainstream, first by moving to an xNix base, then to x86. > > >> But, to be fair, most in the US don't even remember >> all of the US-based systems. Altair gets a nod as it shows up in >> articles concerning computer firsts, but none of the proto or early >> S-100 based systems are remembered (Cromemco, Northstar, etc.) nor the >> other Z80 machines like the Kaypro and Osborne. > > True, but I mean, I'm heading for my mid-50s and all that was before my time. > >> FOlks know about IBM, >> but most don't know they still make mainframes and midrange (OS400 or >> whatever it is called now) machines, and Burroughs, Wang, Amdahl, >> Hitachi are missed. , Super computer is forever linked with Cray, but >> Control Data, Thinking Machines, Silicon Graphics, and even Sun are no >> more remembered. > > True. :-( > >> On the micro front, Atari still carries some name >> recognition, mainly because of the coin ops and consoles, but everyone >> has forgotten about Commodore or that HP and TI mad
SAIL (was ALGOL-W)
As a past occasional maintainer of SAIL, I'll add my version of history: I believe the compiler originated as a class assignment for Jerry Feldman's compiler writing class. As noted, Dan Swinehart was one of the principal contributors. The addition of LEAP to SAIL was a direct result of Feldman's past work at Lincoln Labs. SAIL was used by everyone for everything at the AI Lab because of it's "kitchen sink" philosophy including the link to assembly language inside the language. Eventually, a source language debugger called BAIL was written by John Reiser. With the slow and steady decline of the PDP-10 and the ascent of Unix, SAIL went off into the sunset. [MWK,AIL]
Re: Living Computer Museum
On May 28, 2020, at 9:41 AM, Robert Harrison via cctalk wrote: > > Does anyone know what it would take to sustain the museum until it can > reopen? Are tickets a major source of income? > This is the first I have heard of the museum, so I don’t know much about it, > but it sounds like something worthy to try to save. LCM+L is owned and operated by Paul Allen’s $20 billion estate. They are not hurting for cash, though I’m certain some bean-counter at Vulcan sees continuing its operations during the pandemic as a drain on resources. Management by the numbers. The actual Living Computer Museum + Labs was *great* to visit, and from the outside worked exactly like you would expect a museum about computing history to work: A visitor to the museum could actually *interact* with most of the systems they had, they weren’t just displaying static artifacts behind a velvet rope or pane of glass with a placard describing them. The stuff you couldn’t interact with directly you could still interact with through terminals and even the Internet. This is one of the things that disappointed me most about the Computer History Museum in Mountain View, CA. Sure you can’t let the public interact with *everything*, but since so much of computing since its inception has been about interaction with active systems, just displaying them is leaving out a large amount of what really makes them interesting. The CHM does a lot of great preservation, archival, and curatorial work, but this really feels like a glaring omission. -- Chris
Re: Living Computer Museum
> This is one of the things that disappointed me most about the Computer > History Museum in Mountain View, CA. Sure you can’t let the public interact > with *everything*, but since so much of computing since its inception has > been about interaction with active systems, just displaying them is leaving > out a large amount of what really makes them interesting. The CHM does a lot > of great preservation, archival, and curatorial work, but this really feels > like a glaring omission. The problem is that the public wrecks stuff. Big time. And they steal stuff. Just for the thrill. Even just the stupidest little thing, like a keycap. A long time ago, I volunteered on BB-59 (battleship MASSACHUSETTS), and dealt with the radars. I was warned about people stealing stuff. One night I was in the ET shack (radar technician compartment) - a small room maybe 15 by 5 feet. Normally locked with a USN padlock, I was at the bench with a radar scope, door unlocked so visitors could come in and ask questions. I left the padlock open and hanging from the latch. Yup, some kid stile the lock. So yes, every museum must weigh public interaction against artifact damage, and what is the mission of the museum. CHM is more conservative, LCM more liberal*. I think it is good to have both sides. -- Will * 100 percent not political, but in the more classic sense. If you bring this up politically, I will shit down your throat.
Re: Living Computer Museum
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 1:36 PM William Donzelli via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > This is one of the things that disappointed me most about the Computer > History Museum in Mountain View, CA. Sure you can’t let the public interact > with *everything*, but since so much of computing since its inception has > been about interaction with active systems, just displaying them is leaving > out a large amount of what really makes them interesting. The CHM does a > lot of great preservation, archival, and curatorial work, but this really > feels like a glaring omission. > > The problem is that the public wrecks stuff. Big time. And they steal > stuff. Just for the thrill. Even just the stupidest little thing, like > a keycap. > You know, in general I don't disagree with this statement, but I'll go on record here and say that in my 5 years at LCM, I don't recall a single keycap going missing, or anything getting stolen. Nor were any switches broken off of the various front-panel systems. Teletypes did occasionally need repair, but that's par for the course for those. People seemed to have a good deal of respect for our equipment, and yes, sometimes kids did get a bit rough but you'd be surprised what your average C64 can put up with. We had consumables for things like joysticks and mice that would tend to get more abuse, but the only things that tended to break incredibly frequently were the modern tech devices on the 1st floor. No end of trouble with those. - Josh > > A long time ago, I volunteered on BB-59 (battleship MASSACHUSETTS), > and dealt with the radars. I was warned about people stealing stuff. > One night I was in the ET shack (radar technician compartment) - a > small room maybe 15 by 5 feet. Normally locked with a USN padlock, I > was at the bench with a radar scope, door unlocked so visitors could > come in and ask questions. I left the padlock open and hanging from > the latch. Yup, some kid stile the lock. > > So yes, every museum must weigh public interaction against artifact > damage, and what is the mission of the museum. CHM is more > conservative, LCM more liberal*. I think it is good to have both > sides. > > -- > Will > > * 100 percent not political, but in the more classic sense. If you > bring this up politically, I will shit down your throat. >
Re: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
On 5/28/2020 12:38 PM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote: Yes. TRS80. It had a memory map that was incompatible with CP/M. BASIC in ROM at the bottom, and RAM at the top. Which one? As they're purely a theoretical concept to me and AFAIK I've never actually touched one, the profusion of models is very confusing, and I'm not aware of an idiot's single-para overview. I vaguely know of: • TRS-80 Model 100 (8085), pre-laptop portable Rebadged Kyotronic 85. Was pretty well received in US by journalists and those who needed some computing power on the go. • Tandy 1000 (PC compatible) Yep, there's a whole line (HX, LX, EX, etc.) • TRS-80 Model 2000 (*before* the 1000?! Also kinda-sorta PC compatible, nearly?) Maybe due to other vendors having a "1000" machine, this put Tandy in front. Or, depending on what the Tandy 6000 was introduced, maybe they had a product lineup dreamed... • TRS-80 Colour, AKA CoCo -- 6809 Started life as a farming-related Videotex terminal. Pics will show the amazing similarity. Was a joint venture between Motorola and Tandy, and used essentially the 6809 reference design. • TRS-80 Pocket (no idea) These were all rebadged items from other manufacturers (PC-1,II,34, etc..). Went all the way up to 8. But, folks prefer the 2, as it was most expandable, etc. Then there seem to be about 42 different computers called TRS-80 Model X where X is either a Roman or Arabic number under 1000, after which it all changed. Except 2000 comes before 1000. Obviously. Al PC compatibles. The TRS-80 Model I, Model II, Model III, Model 4, Model 12, Model 16, etc. I know nothing at all about these but I believe the III ran Xenix on a 68000 and had some resemblance to the Apple Lisa, which would seem to preclude any relation to the Model I & Model II -- and Wikipedia suggests that the Model II is totally different from the Model I. IN the beginning, there was the Model 1 (actually, it was called the Micro Computer System at intro. It got back-numbered when the II came out). It was a fat KB shell with a computer board in it (think C64, but less aerodynamic :-) Fred's right, it should be considered a home computer. No color, Z80 1.7MHz (half the 3.59MHz of NTSC TV signal fame). FOr the business crowd, TANDY designed the Model II, which is distinctive due to the 8" drives used. In fact, I think it's the only mainstream US computer offered with such drives straight from the factory, though someone will correct me if not. Enter the FCC, and the 1981 regulations concerning EMI. The Model I didn't pass muster, so the Model III (which was mainly an extension of the Model I specs, but in a nicely polished case, including monitor and drives. It's what people think of when they remember the TRS-80 computers, I think. But it claims the Model III is compatible with the Model I. (Wut?) Yep, and the 4 was a follow on from the 3. It very quickly all becomes rather surreal and I rapidly lose track (and interest, TBH.) I suspect a graphic might be needed to disentangle it. So it goes: Model I → Model III → Model 4 1-3-4-4p *And* ↘ Model 2 → Model 12 → Model 16 II-16A II-12/16B (16B had the card cage) I see the 16A and the 12/16B as different sublines, as the II/16A used a passive backplane with cards, while the 12/16B/6000 had a motherboard with the z80 on it, and the card cage was for extensions (and the 68K card). Both sublines merged back together with the 6000 Units were Z80 based, but a 68K daughtercard was sold to enable Xenix. The 6000 has an 8MHz 68K, I think the rest are 6MHz ... ? Where do the VideoGenie and Coco fit in? VideoGenie is not a TANDY item (most folks consider it a clone of the Model I), and the Coco was a different home computer line with color. -- Jim Brain br...@jbrain.com www.jbrain.com
Re: Living Computer Museum
> You know, in general I don't disagree with this statement, but I'll go on > record here and say that in my 5 years at LCM, I don't recall a single keycap > going missing, or anything getting stolen. Good fortune, maybe! On another ship I sometime volunteer on (DE-766 SLATER), someone stole a piece of silverware from the officer's ward room (the dining room, basically)., Yes, just a knife or fork or whatever... but gone forever. -- Will
Re: Living Computer Museum
Good fortune, maybe! On another ship I sometime volunteer on (DE-766 SLATER), someone stole a piece of silverware from the officer's ward room (the dining room, basically)., Yes, just a knife or fork or whatever... but gone forever. Perhaps it is the audience of people who attend these different museums? -- Will
Re: Living Computer Museum
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 2:20 PM Chris Hanson via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > This is one of the things that disappointed me most about the Computer > History Museum in Mountain View, CA. Sure you can’t let the public interact > with *everything*, but since so much of computing since its inception has > been about interaction with active systems, just displaying them is leaving > out a large amount of what really makes them interesting. The CHM does a > lot of great preservation, archival, and curatorial work, but this really > feels like a glaring omission. > When we restored the PDP-1 at CHM, we *really* wanted to make sure that the public could interact with it, though in a limited fashion. Ken Sumrall and I built quick-and-dirty Spacewar control boxes out of particle board and arcade switches, which were intended for restoration team use, and we originally thought that we would later build some "more authentic" control boxes. (The control boxes used in Boston had disappeared, and in any case we don't know whether they were "original".) However, Steve Russell (author of the Spacewar game) pointed out that our hastily knocked together control boxes actually were "authentic" in the sense that the originals were also hastily knocked together out of whatever was at hand. It would certainly be nice if there was a practical way to allow more hands-on use of the PDP-1, but I can't think of any way of doing that which CHM would be likely to approve, and I don't disagree with them. It's somewhat difficult to keep the machine in good working order even when only a few skilled people operate it. Eric
Re: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
Jim Brain wrote on Thu, 28 May 2020 15:54:10 -0500 > On 5/28/2020 12:38 PM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote: > > ? TRS-80 Colour, AKA CoCo -- 6809 > Started life as a farming-related Videotex terminal. Pics will show the > amazing similarity. Was a joint venture between Motorola and Tandy, and > used essentially the 6809 reference design. It was originally a 6800 reference design that was upgraded for this machine. This slightly later model was closer to the original with a 6803: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRS-80_MC-10 About Z80 based home computers, I would consider this to be one though it wasn't cheap: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exidy_Sorcerer Other people might have a longer list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Z80-based_home_computers -- Jecel
Re: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 2:54 PM Jim Brain via cctalk wrote: > I see the 16A and the 12/16B as different sublines, as the II/16A used a > passive backplane with cards, while the 12/16B/6000 had a motherboard > with the z80 on it, and the card cage was for extensions (and the 68K > card). > > Both sublines merged back together with the 6000 > Merged in what sense? AFAICT, aside from branding, the only difference between the 16B and 6000 was that the latter used the newer 8 MHz version of the 68000 card, which was also available as an upgrade for the 16B. If you consider the II/16A as a "subline", I don't see how the 6000 "merged back" with that subline in any way.
Re: Living Computer Museum
yep the theft part is always present and very aggravating many things are just best kept behind glass and you can open the sliding 8 footer on the side of display and and let someone go in and play if they are deserving sometimes... Keeps the dust off too... Ed# In a message dated 5/28/2020 1:36:18 PM US Mountain Standard Time, cctalk@classiccmp.org writes: > This is one of the things that disappointed me most about the Computer > History Museum in Mountain View, CA. Sure you can’t let the public interact > with *everything*, but since so much of computing since its inception has > been about interaction with active systems, just displaying them is leaving > out a large amount of what really makes them interesting. The CHM does a lot > of great preservation, archival, and curatorial work, but this really feels > like a glaring omission. The problem is that the public wrecks stuff. Big time. And they steal stuff. Just for the thrill. Even just the stupidest little thing, like a keycap. A long time ago, I volunteered on BB-59 (battleship MASSACHUSETTS), and dealt with the radars. I was warned about people stealing stuff. One night I was in the ET shack (radar technician compartment) - a small room maybe 15 by 5 feet. Normally locked with a USN padlock, I was at the bench with a radar scope, door unlocked so visitors could come in and ask questions. I left the padlock open and hanging from the latch. Yup, some kid stile the lock. So yes, every museum must weigh public interaction against artifact damage, and what is the mission of the museum. CHM is more conservative, LCM more liberal*. I think it is good to have both sides. -- Will * 100 percent not political, but in the more classic sense. If you bring this up politically, I will shit down your throat.
Re: Early Nubus history
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 12:15 AM Mark Linimon via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > But just imagine what > the tech world would have looked like with interchangeable cards for > PCs and Apples. > We have that now, and it really doesn't seem to be of all that much benefit.
CHM software
Follow up to the Living Computer Museum discussion... I can understand why CHM does not allow access to the hardware, But what about the software? It should all be downloadable. Randy
Re: CHM software
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 4:05 PM Randy Dawson via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > Follow up to the Living Computer Museum discussion... > I can understand why CHM does not allow access to the hardware, > But what about the software? > It should all be downloadable. > CHM is in the United States. Ever hear of Title 17 of United States Code?
TRS80s and TRSDOS (Was: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
> > Outside of CP/M were *any* mainstream American home computers Z80
> > based before the C128?
Yes. TRS80.
It had a memory map that was incompatible with CP/M. BASIC in ROM at the
bottom, and RAM at the top.
On Thu, 28 May 2020, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
Which one?
"TRS80" was the original one. LATER, when other derivative models came
out, it began to be called "TRS80 Model 1".
(Note: either Roman Numerals or arabic)
Similar to the way that "The Great War" began to be called "World War 1".
If you wade through old archives, you will find that the phrase "Word War
2" or "WW2" came into existence as a phrase or name BEFORE the existence
of "World War 1" as a phrase or name. (Bar bet: "Which came first,
'World War 1' or 'World War 2'?")
Similarly, depending on the clientele of the bar you frequent, and
dependent on relatively non-existent archives for settling the bet,
"Single Density" never existed as a phrase until AFTER marketing started
to call MFM, "Double Density". ("Which came first,...?")
TRS80 base model had 4K of RAM (upgradable to 16K), and "Level 1 BASIC" in
ROM at the bottom (preventing easy use of CP/M), which was a derivative of
Li-Chen Wang's "Tiny BASIC", changed to single precision floating point
instead of 16 bit integer, etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_I_BASIC
David Lien's "User Manual For Level 1" was highly regarded as a beginninng
intro.
https://archive.org/stream/Level_1_Users_Manual_1977_David_Lien#mode/1up
Upgradeable to "Level 2" (Microsoft BASIC) for about $100. (with some
string handling, trig, error messages, etc.)
The TRS80 [Model 1] default sale package at $600USD was the computer, an
ordinary cassette recorder (CTR-41?), cable to connect cassette recorder
(#26-1201?), and video monitor, which was the same as a certain model of
cheap RCA TV, without tuner (might have had some isolation?) and painted
gray. That model of TV (in white) shows up in the background on kitchen
counter in "Married With Children" (a USA sitcom whose lead character, Al
Bundy, is similar to Victor Meldrew of "One Foot In The Grave")
There was a little known POSSIBILITY to order one without the monitor and
cassette for $400 (I did.)
The TRS80 [Model 1] had three 5 pin DIN connectors on the back for Video
(Composite), Cassette (26-1201 cable) and power supply (a large cord
wart).
And a 40 pin expansion port. There were a few peripherals for the
expansion port, such as a "cable" (with some circuitry) for driving
Centronics syle printers. YES, their first printer was built by
Centronics, so they were a major contributor to the misuse of calling the
36 pin Blue Ribbon connector "Centronics".
They came out with an "Expansion Interface", with sockets for an
additional 32K of RAM, a "Centronics Port" (34 pin edge connector and
26-1401 printer cable), a continuation of the 40 pin expansion port, an
FDC (WD 1771, configured for 5.25" FM/SD with inadequate data separation),
and an empty compartment with connector for an "RS232 Adapter" (the RS232
adapter did not make good electrical connection, requiring modification
or twiddling). The Expansion Interface had its own power supply,
identical to the computer power supply, but had a large open space inside
to hold both power supplies. Cords going out the back, but a hole or
notch could be made to get rid of the excess length/route of the
computer power suppies cord to the computer.
The connection (40 pin to 40 pin) between the computer and the Expansion
Interface was fraught with problems, and resulted in NUMEROUS recalls,
no-charge modifications, including one model with a box in the middle with
buffers, some with an added wire to bypass the buffers, etc.
Since the edge connectors were without gold plating, there was constant
connector problems, easily significantly reduced by bolting the computer,
E.I., and a power strip to a piece of plywood.
The initial operating system was written by Randy Cook. It was OVERLY
sophisticated, and he never finished it. It had multi-level passwords,
and used a hash table to speed up directory searches. The first version
released was "Version 2", before Randy Cook OK'd release, with a few
mimeographed pages (influencing Apple to call the first release of theirs
"Version 2.2"). Radio Shack quickly released version 2.1, with ALMOST
everything ALMOST working. Randy Cook and RS parted company partway
through writing V2.2. There were bugs in 2.1. Apparat patched a lot of
them, and came out with "APR-DOS" that included a list of hundreds of bugs
that they had fixed, and a statement that it was only for use by
legitimate owners of TRSDOS. It is not clear whether that was an amazing
disassembly, or whether they had access to some or all of the source code.
RS lawyers considered the "only supplemental" terms INADEQUATE, since
somebody could buy and use that without spending $15 at RS for TRSDOS.
There are many undocumented rumo
Re: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
On 5/28/2020 4:50 PM, Eric Smith via cctalk wrote: On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 2:54 PM Jim Brain via cctalk wrote: I see the 16A and the 12/16B as different sublines, as the II/16A used a passive backplane with cards, while the 12/16B/6000 had a motherboard with the z80 on it, and the card cage was for extensions (and the 68K card). Both sublines merged back together with the 6000 Merged in what sense? AFAICT, aside from branding, the only difference between the 16B and 6000 was that the latter used the newer 8 MHz version of the 68000 card, which was also available as an upgrade for the 16B. If you consider the II/16A as a "subline", I don't see how the 6000 "merged back" with that subline in any way. My knowledge of the line is arguable. I do feel the 11/16A differ non trivially from the 12/16B and I agree the 6000 is closer to the 12/16B. I guess I meant "merged" in the same way that Windows NT and the Windows 95 sublines "merged" in Windows XP (maybe it was 2000, but I think it was XP). True, very little if anything was brought over from the 95/98/ME line, but if you wanted to upgrade the 16A, the 16B/6000 was the next logical step. My other option was to say the II/16A terminated at the 16A point, but that seems wrong as well. Jim -- Jim Brain br...@jbrain.com www.jbrain.com
Re: Living Computer Museum
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 05:28:06PM -0400, Chris Zach via cctalk wrote: > >Good fortune, maybe! > > > >On another ship I sometime volunteer on (DE-766 SLATER), someone stole > >a piece of silverware from the officer's ward room (the dining room, > >basically)., Yes, just a knife or fork or whatever... but gone > >forever. > > Perhaps it is the audience of people who attend these different museums? I would almost want to bet money on this if I actually liked betting money. Once the ignorantariat starts pushing the doors, I expect them to sing under their nose to the rhyme of "some Lisa went for 5 bricks so I will pickup a keycap". (here I wrote "A fork up theirs" but then I have promptly deleted it). -- Regards, Tomasz Rola -- ** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. ** ** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home** ** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... ** ** ** ** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_r...@bigfoot.com **
Re: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
On 5/28/2020 1:24 PM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote: . Evidently, there exists a lower bound of functionality of computing capability in the US, and the little wedge just didn't make it. No no. It wasn't that. It was _money_. I think we're saying the same thing, but... I agree all things revolve around money, and US folks appreciate a good value. But, given all of the options in the US, the ZX81's lower cost did not appear to provide enough value, so it was passed over in lieu of slightly more expensive options that offered many more features. You know that MSX was an American design, right? It just happened that it only succeeded in Japan. It was broadly a Spectravideo-based design with a Microsoft ROM. Yes, some design input from ANSI Corp of Japan, but basically an American thing. I did not know that, or I forgot it. Interesting. Fred has one counter-example. Just the one. Very interesting. His is valid. I didn't see the TRS80 Model 1 as a home machine, but it fits the general parameters Jim -- Jim Brain br...@jbrain.com www.jbrain.com
Re: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
Is nobody going to mention the cute little MC-10 (the only R-S computer I ever owned, briefly, aside from the M100), purportedly the cheapest colour-capable computer at the time ? m - Original Message - From: "Jim Brain via cctalk" To: Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 4:54 PM Subject: Re: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC > On 5/28/2020 12:38 PM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote: >> >>> Yes. TRS80. >>> >>> It had a memory map that was incompatible with CP/M. BASIC in ROM at the >>> bottom, and RAM at the top. >> Which one? >> >> As they're purely a theoretical concept to me and AFAIK I've never >> actually touched one, the profusion of models is very confusing, and >> I'm not aware of an idiot's single-para overview. >> >> I vaguely know of: >> • TRS-80 Model 100 (8085), pre-laptop portable > Rebadged Kyotronic 85. Was pretty well received in US by journalists > and those who needed some computing power on the go. >> • Tandy 1000 (PC compatible) > Yep, there's a whole line (HX, LX, EX, etc.) >> • TRS-80 Model 2000 (*before* the 1000?! Also kinda-sorta PC >> compatible, nearly?) > Maybe due to other vendors having a "1000" machine, this put Tandy in > front. Or, depending on what the Tandy 6000 was introduced, maybe they > had a product lineup dreamed... >> • TRS-80 Colour, AKA CoCo -- 6809 > Started life as a farming-related Videotex terminal. Pics will show the > amazing similarity. Was a joint venture between Motorola and Tandy, and > used essentially the 6809 reference design. >> • TRS-80 Pocket (no idea) > These were all rebadged items from other manufacturers (PC-1,II,34, > etc..). Went all the way up to 8. But, folks prefer the 2, as it was > most expandable, etc. >> >> Then there seem to be about 42 different computers called TRS-80 Model >> X where X is either a Roman or Arabic number under 1000, after which >> it all changed. Except 2000 comes before 1000. Obviously. > Al PC compatibles. >> >> The TRS-80 Model I, Model II, Model III, Model 4, Model 12, Model 16, >> etc. I know nothing at all about these but I believe the III ran Xenix >> on a 68000 and had some resemblance to the Apple Lisa, which would >> seem to preclude any relation to the Model I & Model II -- and >> Wikipedia suggests that the Model II is totally different from the >> Model I. > > IN the beginning, there was the Model 1 (actually, it was called the > Micro Computer System at intro. It got back-numbered when the II came > out). It was a fat KB shell with a computer board in it (think C64, but > less aerodynamic :-) Fred's right, it should be considered a home > computer. No color, Z80 1.7MHz (half the 3.59MHz of NTSC TV signal fame). > > FOr the business crowd, TANDY designed the Model II, which is > distinctive due to the 8" drives used. In fact, I think it's the only > mainstream US computer offered with such drives straight from the > factory, though someone will correct me if not. > > Enter the FCC, and the 1981 regulations concerning EMI. The Model I > didn't pass muster, so the Model III (which was mainly an extension of > the Model I specs, but in a nicely polished case, including monitor and > drives. It's what people think of when they remember the TRS-80 > computers, I think. > > >> >> But it claims the Model III is compatible with the Model I. (Wut?) > Yep, and the 4 was a follow on from the 3. >> >> It very quickly all becomes rather surreal and I rapidly lose track >> (and interest, TBH.) > >> >> I suspect a graphic might be needed to disentangle it. > > > >> >> >> So it goes: >> >> Model I → Model III → Model 4 > 1-3-4-4p >> >> *And* >> >> ↘ >>Model 2 → Model 12 → Model 16 > > II-16A > > II-12/16B (16B had the card cage) > > I see the 16A and the 12/16B as different sublines, as the II/16A used a > passive backplane with cards, while the 12/16B/6000 had a motherboard > with the z80 on it, and the card cage was for extensions (and the 68K card). > > Both sublines merged back together with the 6000 > > Units were Z80 based, but a 68K daughtercard was sold to enable Xenix. > The 6000 has an 8MHz 68K, I think the rest are 6MHz > >> >> ... ? >> >> Where do the VideoGenie and Coco fit in? >> > VideoGenie is not a TANDY item (most folks consider it a clone of the > Model I), and the Coco was a different home computer line with color. > > > -- > Jim Brain > br...@jbrain.com > www.jbrain.com >
Re: Living Computer Museum
On 2020-05-28 5:02 PM, William Donzelli via cctalk wrote: >> You know, in general I don't disagree with this statement, but I'll go on >> record here and say that in my 5 years at LCM, I don't recall a single >> keycap going missing, or anything getting stolen. > > Good fortune, maybe! > > On another ship I sometime volunteer on (DE-766 SLATER), someone stole > a piece of silverware from the officer's ward room (the dining room, > basically)., Yes, just a knife or fork or whatever... but gone > forever. If that annoys you, imagine a whole museum going missing overnight. > > -- > Will >
Re: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
[NON-CP/M home computers] What IS a "home" computer? I say that an unexpanded TRS80 is a home computer. EXPANDED, it can have other uses. If you take total number sold, MINUS sales of the expansion interface, then you will have the number. Although it was not Z80, the original ads for the Lisa showed it on the living room floor with a toddler playing with it. THAT wouldn't justify its price range. Even the 5150 had a couple of ads like that. Without disk drives, is it anything other than a home computer? On Thu, 28 May 2020, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote: Interesting. Fred has one counter-example. Just the one. Very interesting. Epson RC20 (1985)(wristwatch with Z80, RAM, ROM, touch screen, serial port.) Sega (SG-1000) Memotech MTX ColecoVision I think that there were more, but not my corner of the field. What about MSX? Not in USA, but Z80, and not CP/M, although the OS might have had similarities. Was it a "home" computer? You will want to classify Northstar as "business" not home, but NSDOS was not CP/M.
Re: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
> Is nobody going to mention the cute little MC-10 (the only R-S computer > I ever owned, briefly, aside from the M100), purportedly the cheapest > colour-capable computer at the time ? The one that Creative Computing infamously referred to as the "poor man's CoCo"? ;) -- personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ -- Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckai...@floodgap.com -- yankee hotel foxtrot. yankee hotel foxtrot. yankee hotel foxtrot. konec. ---
Re: Living Computer Museum
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 4:36 PM William Donzelli via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > This is one of the things that disappointed me most about the Computer > History Museum in Mountain View, CA. Sure you can’t let the public interact > with *everything*, but since so much of computing since its inception has > been about interaction with active systems, just displaying them is leaving > out a large amount of what really makes them interesting. The CHM does a > lot of great preservation, archival, and curatorial work, but this really > feels like a glaring omission. > > The problem is that the public wrecks stuff. Big time. And they steal > stuff. Just for the thrill. Even just the stupidest little thing, like > a keycap. > So depressingly true. I run the little museum in Google's NYC office. I've had a bunch of working 80's-90's era machines and workstations on display, but they require constant repair because people are too lazy or entitled to treat them with care - people erase boot disks - they bring in children as visitors and let them pound the keys until they break - the open cabinets and pull out trays marked "DO NOT OPEN. IT WILL GET STUCK". Do you know what? Once a week I have to go and close chassis that is stuck open. - They drop and crack any artifacts in a glass display case (I now encase boards in plexiglass frames) and then stick them out of sight - despite our blameless "if you see something, report it" policy. - They drop broken old hardware off - anonymously. - They want me to take the stuff from their basement and do the work to make it displayable - while promising that people won't break it. When colleagues ask about setting up displays in their offices I tell them not to. It is 10x more work than they think, and frustrating to receive rare and interesting items that you know will be ruined. A long time ago, I volunteered on BB-59 (battleship MASSACHUSETTS), > and dealt with the radars. I was warned about people stealing stuff. > One night I was in the ET shack (radar technician compartment) - a > small room maybe 15 by 5 feet. Normally locked with a USN padlock, I > was at the bench with a radar scope, door unlocked so visitors could > come in and ask questions. I left the padlock open and hanging from > the latch. Yup, some kid stile the lock. > It might not have been a kid. Adults are often class one miscreants. > So yes, every museum must weigh public interaction against artifact > damage, and what is the mission of the museum. CHM is more > conservative, LCM more liberal*. I think it is good to have both > sides. > There was a great bit in a "Most Interesting Man in the World" commercial "When he goes to museums, he is allowed to touch the art." > > -- > Will > > * 100 percent not political, but in the more classic sense. If you > bring this up politically, I will shit down your throat. >
Re: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
On Thu, 28 May 2020, Mike Stein via cctalk wrote: Is nobody going to mention the cute little MC-10 (the only R-S computer I ever owned, briefly, aside from the M100), purportedly the cheapest colour-capable computer at the time ? The QUESTION (which has been dropped from the quoting chain) was NON-CP/M Z80 home computers. The MC-10 seems like a home computer, but it was not Z80. The MC-10 was a Motorola 6803. It was an extremely cut-corner machine intended to have some vague similarities to the Coco, but priced at less than half of VIC-20 and not much more than the ZX81 (except maybe in Isle Of Man)
Re: TRS80s and TRSDOS (Was: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
On 5/28/20 6:15 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk wrote: TRS80 base model had 4K of RAM (upgradable to 16K), and "Level 1 BASIC" in ROM at the bottom (preventing easy use of CP/M), KiloBaud Microcomputing April 1979 Page 148: FMG Corporation -- CP/M for the TRS-80 That wasn't the one I used but the magazine was sitting right here and I don't have time to dig up which one I had. CP/M was available for all the TRS-80's never looked to see how it got around the ROM stuff, but I know it did. Even had CP/M 3.0 for the Model4 and the Model 2/12/16. bill
Re: Living Computer Museum
On May 28, 2020, at 5:25 PM, Tony Aiuto via cctalk wrote: > > So depressingly true. I run the little museum in Google's NYC office. > I've had a bunch of working 80's-90's era machines and workstations on > display, but they require constant repair because people are too lazy or > entitled to treat them with care At the fruit company there are a few such employee-curated displays but so far as I know we’ve never had such problems. Of course, there’s also the fact that only employees have access. (And even before the phone, when some guests were allowed in some areas, they had to be personally escorted at all times.) Back during the mid-1990s there was a small “museum” display by the cafeteria of some inactive hardware under glass, and there was also a big lab of our products from every era off the engineering support library upstairs in the same building. That lab was more like LCM in that you could just go to it and work with anything; it was maintained by the engineering support library and only accessible to employees, so that’s probably why it never had serious problems with people breaking or stealing things. -- Chris
Re: TRS80s and TRSDOS (Was: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC
PREVIOUS POST:
> It had a memory map that was incompatible with CP/M. BASIC in ROM at
> the bottom, and RAM at the top.
> FMG marketed a "relocated" CP/M for it, but that never caught on.
> numerous incompatabilities, and few commercial programs were happy
> with the TPA having been moved.
> Howard Fulmer ("Parasitic Engineering") sold [expensive] daughter
> boards for the Model 1 to remap the memory, and convert the FDC for 8"
> SSSD.
> Also Omikron. Both were walking distance from me in Berkeley, but they
> were much too expensive to catch on. (I eventually found used ones)
> Similar products became available after the model 3 came out, and
> Radio
> Shack included CP/M capability in the Model 4 (and 80 column screen)
TRS80 base model had 4K of RAM (upgradable to 16K), and "Level 1 BASIC" in
ROM at the bottom (preventing easy use of CP/M),
On Thu, 28 May 2020, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote:
KiloBaud Microcomputing April 1979
Page 148: FMG Corporation -- CP/M for the TRS-80
That wasn't the one I used but the magazine was sitting right here
and I don't have time to dig up which one I had.
CP/M was available for all the TRS-80's never looked to see how it
got around the ROM stuff, but I know it did.
FMG sold a MODIFIED/RELOCATED CP/M. It put the TPA (Transient Program
Area) in a different place, and meant that TPA was limited to about 32K
Parasitic Engineering's "Shuffleboard", and Omikron "Mapper" (and Memory
Merchant?) placed daughterboards under the Z80 to rearrange the memory
lines.
FMG's relocation of the OS and TPA meant that a LOT of commercial CP/M
software woudn't run on it. But some would!
Nevertheless, when I was teaching a TRS80 based operating systems class, I
used FMG on my demo machine (plywood mounted, that I carried in to UC
Berkeley Evans 10, and used the BIG overhead monitors) to be able to show
the class everything that I wanted to show them about CP/M. Even stuff
like use of DDT and also creating a zero byte executable file for
restarting a program.
I don't remember whether FMG was CP/M 1.4 or 2.x (I think that it was
2.2), but it was "real" CP/M, enough to use as a teaching/demo tool, but
with TPA too constrained to run Wordstar with large files, or to run
dBase.
IOW, not suitable for some of the work that I would use CP/M for.
When my business included resale of commercial software, I bought ten
copies. I only sold about half of them.
Even had CP/M 3.0
for the Model4 and the Model 2/12/16.
Yes, indeed! Radio Shack marketed the CP/M 3.0 as "CP/M PLUS".
ZX81 killers (was: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC)
Jim Brain wrote on Thu, 28 May 2020 18:15:19 -0500 > On 5/28/2020 1:24 PM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote: > > > >> . Evidently, there exists a lower bound of functionality > >> of computing capability in the US, and the little wedge just didn't make > >> it. > > No no. It wasn't that. It was _money_. > > I think we're saying the same thing, but... > > I agree all things revolve around money, and US folks appreciate a good > value. But, given all of the options in the US, the ZX81's lower cost > did not appear to provide enough value, so it was passed over in lieu of > slightly more expensive options that offered many more features. There were ZX81 ads in Byte magazine before the Timex thing. I bought one (Brazil is 60Hz so it had to be an American version) as a major upgrade to my MEK6800D2, but then replaced it with a TI99/4A. The threat of the ZX81 (and a bit more distantly the Spectrum) in the US lead to machines such as the TRS-80 MC10, TI99/2 and Commmodore C116 to try to compete with it. Then the video game crash happened which killed this market. In the UK this nearly happened a little later as well, but Sinclair was saved by Alan Sugar and Acorn by Olivetti while all other companies were less lucky. Acording to Gordon Bell's theory of computer classes this shouldn't have happened. Once introduced, the $100 computer should have remained a viable class from the ZX80 to eventually the OLPC and then the Raspberry Pi. My own theory is that the lack of a suitable storage device for this class made it a passing fad in the 1980s. That would only change when 3.5" floppy drives dropped from over $100 to about $10 in the very late 1990s (though nobody took advantage of that), but specially when we got pen drives and SD cards. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell%27s_law_of_computer_classes I think that the ZX81 class computers arrived later in the US and were gone sooner. In the UK and other places they were around much longer. Like a TV series that gets cancelled before the first episode airs, they never even got a chance to be rejected by the American public. -- Jecel
Anyone using RK06/07 drives?
I think I have a spare set of boards for the controller. C
Re: Anyone using RK06/07 drives?
I know where to get a RK06 drive or two but I don't have one. I might be interested if no one else wants this. I have a lot of RK06 packs, some are new. Location - Southeastern Pennsylvania USA. On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 10:26 PM Chris Zach via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > I think I have a spare set of boards for the controller. > > C >
Re: ZX81 killers (was: Microsoft open sources GWBASIC)
On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 9:58 PM Jecel Assumpcao Jr via cctalk < cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > Jim Brain wrote on Thu, 28 May 2020 18:15:19 -0500 > > On 5/28/2020 1:24 PM, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote: > > > > > >> . Evidently, there exists a lower bound of functionality > > >> of computing capability in the US, and the little wedge just didn't > make > > >> it. > > > No no. It wasn't that. It was _money_. > > > > I think we're saying the same thing, but... > > > > I agree all things revolve around money, and US folks appreciate a good > > value. But, given all of the options in the US, the ZX81's lower cost > > did not appear to provide enough value, so it was passed over in lieu of > > slightly more expensive options that offered many more features. > > There were ZX81 ads in Byte magazine before the Timex thing. I bought > one (Brazil is 60Hz so it had to be an American version) as a major > upgrade to my MEK6800D2, but then replaced it with a TI99/4A. > > The threat of the ZX81 (and a bit more distantly the Spectrum) in the US > lead to machines such as the TRS-80 MC10, TI99/2 and Commmodore C116 to > try to compete with it. > > > I can attest to that, Mike Tomczak told me the story of the C116 and the ZX81 when he came to visit our Sinclair exhibit, which has a C116 nearby for comparison. I have the good fortune to have Mike live nearby. He's a very friendly and knowledgeable guy about the business of the micro business from 80's. Bill Kennettclassic.com
Re: Living Computer Museum
Eric Smith wrote: > When we restored the PDP-1 at CHM, we *really* wanted to make sure > that the public could interact with it, though in a limited > fashion. Ken Sumrall and I built quick-and-dirty Spacewar control > boxes out of particle board and arcade switches, which were intended > for restoration team use, and we originally thought that we would > later build some "more authentic" control boxes. (The control boxes > used in Boston had disappeared, and in any case we don't know whether > they were "original".) However, Steve Russell (author of the Spacewar > game) pointed out that our hastily knocked together control boxes > actually were "authentic" in the sense that the originals were also > hastily knocked together out of whatever was at hand. Random tidbit. I heard from Richard Greenblatt the PDP-1 Spacewar consoles (original or not, I don't know) had a really great feel, and when Spacewar was ported to the PDP-6 the new consoles were not as good. Asking around about this, Michael Beeler said he make the PDP-6 consoles and conceded the original consoles were better.
