[cctalk] Re: LS120, LS240, Floptical Drives and DD, HD, ED, and ?TD? drives
> My floptical drive (20MB SCSI) could also handle 1.4M Yes, those could only write 20MB max though. Still pretty cool for the time. > > My 2.8M drive (Micro-Solutions "Backpack" parallel port) could also > handle 1.4M The BackPack drives are nice for quick testing or adding a temporary drive. I have only seen the 2.88MB version once on eBay and it was too rich for my blood. > > My LS120 (IDE) could also handle 1.4M So could the LS240. The LS240 could also write 32MB on a bog standard 1.44MB floppy although with limitations. It was like old school CD-RW. You had to erase the whole disk to make changes... > My Amlyn drives (disk-changer with 5 disks) was 1.2M per disk. The > disks in the changer cartridges were 1.2M, with an extra hole in the > jacket for the changer to grab. I have a similar system for 3.5" disks but for use with the Macintosh: https://www.macintoshrepository.org/26135-jukebox-five https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJsFxLQJaTY The plus side is that it does not need special disks. You can use standard 3.5" floppies. I think the floppy drive did not get its due. I mean for a technology that was so integral to the home computer segment it was very evolutionary and not revolutionary and evolved at a snail's pace. There were obviously some very cool floppy alternatives, which not only improved it but maintained backwards compatibility, but poor market introduction (Sony HiFD), cost (flopticals), or expensive media (ED disks) prevented large scale acceptance. Call me old fashioned but even to this day my new builds (ok my last new build was 10 years ago but still) have a FDD in them. I just feel better knowing I have one in there.
[cctalk] Re: LS120, LS240, Floptical Drives and DD, HD, ED, and ?TD? drives
> I never had problems with zip disks myself, but never dove into the > floppy > things since the price seemed prohibitive. I can't say either technology has been bad to me. I have found IDE and SCSI zip drives excellent for exchanging large amount of data between vintage and modern system. The LS240 drives are very reliable as well and I have not had any media issues. Plus, like Chuck said, they are so much faster than standard FDDs for regular floppy disks. -Ali
[cctalk] Re: Looking for EPROMs
You might try Utsource. utsource.net Don Resor Sent from someone's iPhone > On Mar 27, 2023, at 5:17 PM, John Robertson via cctalk > wrote: > > On 2023/03/27 2:10 p.m., Mark Linimon via cctalk wrote: On 03/27/2023 5:38 PM GMT rescue via cctalk wrote: >>> have a number of 2764, 27256, have some 27128 I think too >> Myself as well, probably down to 1702s. Right now with some current money >> trouble they are looking like assets :-/ >> >> mcl > > I'm looking for 100 lot quantities of 2716s...something a bit better than the > Chinese remarks (and very thin legs) would be nice! > > Thanks! > > John :-#)# > > -- > John's Jukes Ltd. > 7 - 3979 Marine Way, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5J 5E3 > Call (604)872-5757 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games) > flippers.com > "Old pinballers never die, they just flip out" >
[cctalk] Re: LS120, LS240, Floptical Drives and DD, HD, ED, and ?TD? drives
I never had problems with zip disks myself, but never dove into the floppy things since the price seemed prohibitive. The only problem I experienced with a zip disk was a too many folders deep error but that was from some program or operating system that didn't follow a FAT16 rule or something. What I liked was with a SCSI external I could use it between my PC and Amigas. On Mon, Mar 27, 2023, 8:24 PM Zane Healy via cctalk wrote: > On Mar 27, 2023, at 7:54 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk < > cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote: > > > > LS120's were the most unreliable format I ever used. Disks were > frequently > > Worse than a Zip disk?!?! > > Zane > > >
[cctalk] Re: LS120, LS240, Floptical Drives and DD, HD, ED, and ?TD? drives
On Mar 27, 2023, at 7:54 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote: > > LS120's were the most unreliable format I ever used. Disks were frequently > > unreadable mere weeks after making them and the drives were so touchy > > even a slight bump was enough to make them unusable. I still have one > > or two of the drives and a handful of disks around here somewhere but I would > > never consider trying to use them again. Worse than a Zip disk?!?! Zane
[cctalk] Re: Looking for EPROMs
On 2023/03/27 2:10 p.m., Mark Linimon via cctalk wrote: On 03/27/2023 5:38 PM GMT rescue via cctalk wrote: have a number of 2764, 27256, have some 27128 I think too Myself as well, probably down to 1702s. Right now with some current money trouble they are looking like assets :-/ mcl I'm looking for 100 lot quantities of 2716s...something a bit better than the Chinese remarks (and very thin legs) would be nice! Thanks! John :-#)# -- John's Jukes Ltd. 7 - 3979 Marine Way, Burnaby, BC, Canada V5J 5E3 Call (604)872-5757 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games) flippers.com "Old pinballers never die, they just flip out"
[cctalk] Re: LS120, LS240, Floptical Drives and DD, HD, ED, and ?TD? drives
My floptical drive (20MB SCSI) could also handle 1.4M My 2.8M drive (Micro-Solutions "Backpack" parallel port) could also handle 1.4M My LS120 (IDE) could also handle 1.4M My Amlyn drives (disk-changer with 5 disks) was 1.2M per disk. The disks in the changer cartridges were 1.2M, with an extra hole in the jacket for the changer to grab. My Weltec drive (180RPM) did 1.2M in a 5160. -- Grumpy Ol' Fred ci...@xenosoft.com
[cctalk] Re: Looking for EPROMs
> On 03/27/2023 5:38 PM GMT rescue via cctalk wrote: > have a number of 2764, 27256, have some 27128 I think too Myself as well, probably down to 1702s. Right now with some current money trouble they are looking like assets :-/ mcl
[cctalk] Re: Looking for EPROMs
On 3/27/2023 1:07 PM, Mike Stein via cctalk wrote: 68764s and 2532s are still available if you look hard enough; if you can't find any, with a couple of jumpers the unusual TMS2564 can replace both of them As can a 23XX Adapter (shameless plug, but gerbers are available for anyone to roll their own). Jim
[cctalk] Re: Looking for EPROMs
68764s and 2532s are still available if you look hard enough; if you can't find any, with a couple of jumpers the unusual TMS2564 can replace both of them m. On Mon, Mar 27, 2023 at 1:38 PM rescue via cctalk wrote: > > Looking for MCM68764 and I could probably use some TMS2532 as well. > > I'm also always on the lookout for blank bipolar proms (chips stargin > with 82S, and compatables). > > Anyone have any of these they don't need. New, used, needing erasing, > doesn't matter. > > If you have any, let me know how many you have (of each if you have > both type) and what you are looking to get for them. > > If you need more standard/bigger EPROMs, I can trade too have a > number of 2764, 27256, have some 27128 I think too, and maybe some 27512 > ? > I'd have to go digging. > > Thanks, > > -- Curt > >
[cctalk] Looking for EPROMs
Looking for MCM68764 and I could probably use some TMS2532 as well. I'm also always on the lookout for blank bipolar proms (chips stargin with 82S, and compatables). Anyone have any of these they don't need. New, used, needing erasing, doesn't matter. If you have any, let me know how many you have (of each if you have both type) and what you are looking to get for them. If you need more standard/bigger EPROMs, I can trade too have a number of 2764, 27256, have some 27128 I think too, and maybe some 27512 ? I'd have to go digging. Thanks, -- Curt
[cctalk] looking for cable for Sun Sbus Expansion
I have 2 Sbus Expansion chassis, one Sun, and one Integrix (IIRC). I have the expansion chassis and the sbus controllers, but on both cases I do not have the cables. By looking at it, I believe they probably both use the same cable. Anyone out there have one or two cables to spare ? Thanks, -- Curt
[cctalk] Re: QIC tape restorations (IBM 5100)
On 2023-03-27 03:03, Steve Lewis via cctalk wrote: I've come across three original QIC tapes for the IBM 5100. DC300 I think, original IBM labels. They are in fair condition (the tape material itself seems fine, they are all on their reels), but the "rubbers" used to actually actuate the reels is degraded. I came across an article once on how to restore those (I think it involved gluing the rubber band directly to the ends of the media?) QIC media is not glued to the bands. The band is a fixed loop that runs off the driven wheel in the cartridge, and via friction (with the media side of the tape!) operates each wheel (source and take up) and the appropriate proportional speed (based on the amount of tape on the wheels) to maintain tape tension. These bands shrink, dry out, or completely deteriorate with age (3M fairs better generally). You can take some hot water (possibly even boiling (but I haven't tried that hot)), and drop the removed band into the hot water. You will see it shrink. Then reinstall the band. The process sucks, and it can be difficult to avoid having the tape tension be too loose or too tight. If the tape was not rewound, then the magnetic surface where the band was sitting for years may likely be ruined and non recoverable. If the tape was rewound, then the spots where the band was sitting do not contain recorded material, and you have a good chance of data recovery (I use tape copy software under Linux to make an image of a tape I can write back out... used do the same on Suns years ago). I went through most of my QIC tapes and imaged them. Most tapes I recovered, some tapes I partially recovered, and only one tape was I unable to recover anything worthwhile. Having a good drive with a non deteriorated drive roller is a must. These rollers turn to goo with time. -- Curt The three tapes are labeled as follows: 5721-XM3 THE IBM 5100 PROBLEM SOLVER LIBRARY TAPE PART NO. 1608361 E.C. NO 829643 DATE 7/29/76 (this one is in a form fitted sealed ziploc-like bag, which I haven't opened; the early magazine ads for the 5100 reference this solver library -- I assume it is a mix of BASIC and APL) 5721-EAB THE IBM 5100 BASIC COMPUTER AIDED INSTRUCTION TAPE PART NO. 1608376 E.C. NO 829482 DATE 11/13/75 VERSION 1 MOD 0 FEAT 9021 PROGRAM NO. 5721-EAB CARTRIDGE 3 OF 3 (what does FEAT mean? and sadly, I don't have cartridge 1 or 2, but I assume this is probably some BASIC code that runs some kind of tutorial about the system) TAPE PART NO. 1608705 E.C. NO 829637DATE 1/10/77 DIAGNOSTIC CARTRIDGE. DO NOT ALTER THE CONTENTS OF THIS TAPE. (I believe when accessing the built in DCP, it has options to load and run additional diagnostics that would be contained on this tape -- I think "IMF" stuff, so it would be in native PALM machine code) Anyone interested in a restoration or any contacts to folks who have worked on QIC tape before? I have a working IBM 5100 (with working internal tape and external 5106), but I absolutely haven't tried to insert or use these tapes, and I have 0 experience in trying to extract data from raw media. I don't mind shipping them off to an expert - such as anyone who maybe can copy the data content to a new tape? (which I know is probably some specialized equipment - I probably can't self fund that, but I am interested to know what the options here might be) -Steve / v*
[cctalk] Re: LS120, LS240, Floptical Drives and DD, HD, ED, and ?TD? drives
On 3/27/23 07:54, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk wrote: > > LS120's were the most unreliable format I ever used. Disks were frequently > > unreadable mere weeks after making them and the drives were so touchy > > even a slight bump was enough to make them unusable. I still have one > > or two of the drives and a handful of disks around here somewhere but I > would I confess to never owning an authentic LS120 disk. The drives work fine for reading 1.44M 3.5" HD floppies, however--and do so at twice the speed of a legacy floppy. --Chuck
[cctalk] Re: LS120, LS240, Floptical Drives and DD, HD, ED, and ?TD? drives
On 3/27/2023 10:49 AM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote: However, the LS120 drives do have a practical use--I put them in later systems with IDE connectors that would otherwise go unused (the primary-use connections are SATA), when I'm building a system into an older case that still has a place for a 3.5" floppy. Linux still recognizes the the drive. LS120's were the most unreliable format I ever used. Disks were frequently unreadable mere weeks after making them and the drives were so touchy even a slight bump was enough to make them unusable. I still have one or two of the drives and a handful of disks around here somewhere but I would never consider trying to use them again. bill
[cctalk] Re: LS120, LS240, Floptical Drives and DD, HD, ED, and ?TD? drives
On 3/26/23 23:10, Ali via cctalk wrote: > In the golden age of the floppy before its downfall caused by CD-R, CD-RW > and flash USB a number of new technologies were introduced to allow for > cheap removable storage (Yes MO drives existed but they were expensive). > Many of the tech were a great step forward. For example the LS-240 drives > from Panasonic/3M (Imation) allowed reading and writing to 120MB, 240MB, > 1.44MB, and 720KB disks. They were also compatible with weird formats like > IBM's XDF and even allowed the storage of 32MB on a standard 1.44MB floppy > disk. To be backwards compatible they used a separate read/write head for > regular floppies. However, none of the formats with backward compatibility > read or wrote to 2.88MB ED disks. ED never caught on, I suspect because of very little bang-for-the-buck. The disks never came down very far off the $5/disk level. Too little, too late. As far as high-density floppies, there were many contenders, all failing to capture significant market share. I still have a pile of Caleb "IT" drives and disks offering 144 MB, for example. However, the LS120 drives do have a practical use--I put them in later systems with IDE connectors that would otherwise go unused (the primary-use connections are SATA), when I'm building a system into an older case that still has a place for a 3.5" floppy. Linux still recognizes the the drive. --Chuck
[cctalk] Re: LS120, LS240, Floptical Drives and DD, HD, ED, and ?TD? drives
On 3/26/23 23:18, Ali via cctalk wrote: > To answer my own question apparently sun made a triple density drive: SUN > 370-1420. Based on online pictures it uses a 34pin connector although I > believe it is keyed differently than standard floppy drives. Also, I > couldn't find any info on its capacity other than the standard 720/1.44. Any > Sun enthusiasts can shed some light? Most likely, the 3-mode drive. 8x1024 sectors on each track, giving a capacity of about 1.23MB. Many PCs of the era could also handle the drives, which would change spindle speed from 300 to 360 RPM. 3 mode drives were manufactured right up until the end, but usually were configured as 2-mode (720/1.44) unless jumpering changes were made to the drive. As an example, consider the very popular Samsung SFB-321B drive. Used in many PCs; the OEM data sheet should still be online describing the jumper changes. But Teac FD321HG and some HF drives could be made to do the same trick, as well as Mitsubishi and Canon drives that I've worked with. I don't know if the Mitsumis could do it also, but it wouldn't surprise me. Many USB floppy drives will also handle 3-mode media and I believe that Windows NT supported it right from at least 4.0. The 1.23MB format was very popular in Japan, originating, I believe, with NEC, who had the idea that all floppies should mimic the 8" drives. Simplified things quite a bit. Since Japan was also dominant in CNC PLCs, you'll find that the 1.23M format is one used by Mitsubishi/Mazak on much of their gear. --Chuck
[cctalk] VAX books available
I have the following 2 books available for the taking: VAX architecture Reference Manuals-1987 Version 4.4 VAX/VMS Internals & Data Structures Email tpisek at pobox dot com
[cctalk] QIC tape restorations (IBM 5100)
I've come across three original QIC tapes for the IBM 5100. DC300 I think, original IBM labels. They are in fair condition (the tape material itself seems fine, they are all on their reels), but the "rubbers" used to actually actuate the reels is degraded. I came across an article once on how to restore those (I think it involved gluing the rubber band directly to the ends of the media?) The three tapes are labeled as follows: 5721-XM3 THE IBM 5100 PROBLEM SOLVER LIBRARY TAPE PART NO. 1608361 E.C. NO 829643 DATE 7/29/76 (this one is in a form fitted sealed ziploc-like bag, which I haven't opened; the early magazine ads for the 5100 reference this solver library -- I assume it is a mix of BASIC and APL) 5721-EAB THE IBM 5100 BASIC COMPUTER AIDED INSTRUCTION TAPE PART NO. 1608376 E.C. NO 829482 DATE 11/13/75 VERSION 1 MOD 0 FEAT 9021 PROGRAM NO. 5721-EAB CARTRIDGE 3 OF 3 (what does FEAT mean? and sadly, I don't have cartridge 1 or 2, but I assume this is probably some BASIC code that runs some kind of tutorial about the system) TAPE PART NO. 1608705 E.C. NO 829637DATE 1/10/77 DIAGNOSTIC CARTRIDGE. DO NOT ALTER THE CONTENTS OF THIS TAPE. (I believe when accessing the built in DCP, it has options to load and run additional diagnostics that would be contained on this tape -- I think "IMF" stuff, so it would be in native PALM machine code) Anyone interested in a restoration or any contacts to folks who have worked on QIC tape before? I have a working IBM 5100 (with working internal tape and external 5106), but I absolutely haven't tried to insert or use these tapes, and I have 0 experience in trying to extract data from raw media. I don't mind shipping them off to an expert - such as anyone who maybe can copy the data content to a new tape? (which I know is probably some specialized equipment - I probably can't self fund that, but I am interested to know what the options here might be) -Steve / v*
