[cctalk] Re: Random items on Pascal #3

[Raymond Wiker via cctalk]

Norsk Data had at least two programming languages designed in-house: NPL and 
PLANC.

These had some fairly unusual features, reflecting the hardware.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 10 May 2024, at 15:45, Paul Koning via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> As for "language to the machine" that's pretty much unheard of.  While there 
> certainly are languages that only were seen on one or a few machines or 
> architectures -- SYMPL, CYBIL, BLISS, TUTOR -- it isn't because that was the 
> intent of those languages.  I suppose you could pose ESPOL as an example of a 
> language for a machine, though I suspect it could have been generalized, as C 
> was, if there had been a desire to do so.

[cctalk] Re: DOS p-System Pascal: (Was: Saga of CP/M)

[Raymond Wiker via cctalk]

The Sage machines had UCSD as one of their OS options (others were Mirage and 
probably also CP/M-68K). I've never heard of a native Pascal for Sage.

Sage had a multi-user BIOS, so you could have several people sharing a single 
machine. They were also quite popular and successful for a while.

> On 9 May 2024, at 13:39, Bill Degnan via cctalk  wrote:
> 
> Without doing the research before asking, there was the UCSD p-System
> Pascal for IBM PC which came out very early in the history of the IBM PC.
> It was not very popular.  The SAGE II that had native Pascal (68000) was
> not a popular machine.  Waterloo Pascal on the SuperPetPascal never
> really made it on the microcomputer platform did it?
> Bill
> 
> On Thu, May 9, 2024, 2:07 AM david barto via cctalk 
> wrote:
> 
>> At Ken Bowles retirement from UCSD (Ken was the lead of the UCSD Pascal
>> Project) he related a story that IBM came to UCSD after being ‘rejected’ by
>> DR to see if the Regents of the University would license UCSD Pascal (the
>> OS and the language) to IBM for release on the new hardware IBM was
>> developing. The UC Regents said ’no’.
>> 
>> He was quite sad that history took the very different course.
>> 
>>David
>> 
>>> On May 3, 2024, at 6:30 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> PL/M (think "PL/1") was a high level programming language for
>> microprocessors.
>>> 
>>> CP/M was also briefly called "Control Program and Monitor"
>>> It was written by Gary Kildall. (May 19, 1942 - july 11, 1994)
>>> 
>>> Gary taught at Navy Postgraduate School in Monterey.
>>> He took a break in 1972, to complete his PhD at University of Washington.
>>> 
>>> He wrote 8008 and 8080 instruction set simulators for Intel, and they
>> loaned him hardware.
>>> 
>>> In 1973? he wrote CP/M.
>>> He offered it to Intel, but they didn't want it, although they marketed
>> the PL/M.
>>> 
>>> He and his wife started "Intergalactic Digital Research" in Pacific
>> Grove. Later renamed "Digital Research, Inc."
>>> 
>>> CP/M rapidly became a defacto standard as operating system for 8080 and
>> later Z80 computers.
>>> 
>>> In the late 1970s, when CP/M computers were available with 5.25" drives,
>> and there were hundreds, soon thousands of different formats, I chatted
>> with Gary, and pleaded with him ot create a "standard" format for 5.25".
>>> His response was a very polite, "The standard format for CP/M is 8 inch
>> single sided single density."
>>> I pointed out that formats were proliferating excessively.
>>> His response was a very polite, "I understand. Sorry, but the standard
>> format for CP/M is 8 inch single sided single density."
>>> 
>>> 
>>> In 1980? IBM was developing a personal computer. (y'all have heard of
>> it) One of the IBM people had a Microsoft Softcard (Z80 plus CP/M) in his
>> Apple.  IBM went to Microsoft, to negotiate BASIC for the new machine, and
>> CP/M.
>>> 
>>> Bill Gates explained and sent them to Digital Research.
>>> 
>>> When the IBM representatives arrived, Gary was flying his plane up to
>> Oakland to visit Bill Godbout.  He hadn't seen a need to be present, and
>> assumed that Dorothy would take care of the [presumably completely routine]
>> paperwork. While visiting Bill godbout, and delivering some software was
>> important, it WAS something that a low level courier could have done.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> There was a little bit of a culture clash.
>>> The IBM people were all in identical blue suits.
>>> The DR people were in sandals, barefoot, shorts, t-shirts, braless
>> women, with bicycles, surfboard, plants and even cats in the office,
>>> 
>>> The IBM people demanded a signed non=disclosure ageement before talking.
>> Dorothy Kildall refused.
>>> 
>>> When Dorothy got Gary on the phone, it is unreliably reported that he
>> said, "well, let them sit on the couch and wait their turn like the rest of
>> the customers."
>>> 
>>> It is also been said that DR people upstairs saw the IBM people marching
>> up, and thought that it was a drug raid.  I have stood in that bay window
>> overlooking the front door, and can believe that.
>>> 
>>> IBM chose to not do business with DR and went back to Microsoft.
>>> When billg was unable to convince them that Microsoft was not in the
>> operating system business, Microsoft went into the operating system
>> business.  They bought an unlimited license to QDOS (Tim Paterson's work at
>> Seattle Computer Products).  They also hired Tim Paterson.
>>> 
>>> DR was working on CP/M-86, but it was a ways off.
>>> Paterson had written QDOS ("Quick and Dirty Operating System") as a
>> placeholder to be able to continue development while waiting for CP/M-86
>>> We've mentioned before, that Tim Paterson got the idea for the directory
>> structure from Microsoft Standalone BASIC.  As Chuck pointed out, that was
>> not a new invention, merely a choice of which way to do it.
>>> 
>>> billg knew how to deal with officious managers.  It is unreliably said
>> that he told the Microsoft people, 

[cctalk] Re: Vintage Computer Fest Midwest "DECnut" pizza party

[Raymond Wiker via cctalk]

> On 8 Sep 2023, at 15:20, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 9/7/2023 9:20 PM, Gavin Scott via cctalk wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 4:49 PM ste...@malikoff.com steven--- via
>> cctalk  wrote:
>>> Here in Oz, VAX has been a popular brand of vacuum cleaner for many 
>>> decades. We had one until recently.
>>> https://www.vax.com.au/
>> http://catb.org/jargon/html/V/VAX.html
> 
> 
> "Nothing sucks like a VAX!!"   :-)

I remember seeing that slogan in the 80s, when I was a student in Glasgow.

[cctalk] Re: Silly question about S-100 and video monitors

[Raymond Wiker via cctalk]

> On 2 Sep 2023, at 15:07, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> 
> On 9/1/2023 11:45 AM, dwight via cctalk wrote:
>> My first computer was a Poly-88. I had no monitor and no keyboard.
>> I read and understood the instructions about finding a TV that used a 
>> transformer power supply. Many newer TV's of that day were not using a 
>> transformer for the main supply. I went to several secondhand stores and 
>> found one that would work.
>> The keyboard was from a surplus Singer data entry machine ( I thought they 
>> only made sewing machines ).
> 
> 
> Believe it or not, at one time they even made Flight Simulators. Early 70's I 
> wanted
> 
> to work at their Binghamton, NY facility but like IBM in Endicott I couldn't 
> even get my
> 
> foot in the door.
> 
> 
> bill
> 
> 

The Singer Link F-16 simulator used Norsk Data superminis (initially ND50, but 
later ND500). This is not really relevant to S-100 and video monitors, but I 
like to mention Norsk Data whenever the opportunity arises.

[cctalk] Re: Super I/O chips

[Raymond Wiker via cctalk]

The C256Foenix FMX uses a SuperIO chip: 
https://wiki.c256foenix.com/index.php?title=ICs

> On 24 May 2023, at 12:18, emanuel stiebler via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> Anybody out here, still in business using them?
> Which ones are still easily available?
> (I look for something which has 2 UARTs, FDC and IDE?)
> Thanks

[cctalk] Re: what is on topic?

[Raymond Wiker via cctalk]

>From the headers of your message (and most likely the one you responded to):

To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" 
Reply-To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" 

List-Id: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" 


Seems like this is the list for on-topic and off-topic discussions?

Further,

List-Help: 
List-Subscribe: 
List-Unsubscribe: 


> On 21 Dec 2022, at 12:44, Peter Coghlan via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Windows 2003 and XP is about as obsolete now as the IBM PC was in 1995.
>> Probably more so. XP is popular on Vogons but I'm sure considerably less
>> then 5% of computers actually host it.
>> 
>> There's also the issue of beating a dead horse. There will always and
>> forever (and forever...) be some esoteric issue to discuss about some
>> bizzare and mostly unknown 8 bit system that 3 people on the whole of
>> planet earth own (now not to brag, but chances are there are a dozen or
>> less Northstar Dimension owners (never mind users) out there. And I'm
>> proud to be 1). Who am I going to discuss that with?? And a larger issue
>> is what? An even larger issue is why? Well I got plans ...
>> 
>> Lists of this sort are about tech and used by people who love it. Windows
>> 11 is not germain to these conversations. But what about, and I'm just
>> putting this out there, making pre UEFI shtuff -on-? I don't even know
>> how I personally feel about such a delineation. But the suggestion is
>> there. Nostalgic weirdos like older tech. Yes often dang old. Now a
>> Thinkpad T60p doesn't exactly seem dang old. But it's pretty much dang
>> obsolete (can't remember what sort of firmware it has but the processor,
>> though 64 bit, is part of that hazy quasi transitional grouping that had
>> more similarities to a 32 bit chip). On Tuesday, December 20, 2022,
>> 10:05:06 PM EST, Fred Cisin via cctalk  wrote:  
>> 
>> On Wed, 21 Dec 2022, Chris via cctalk wrote:
>>> Well there doesn't seem to be a great deal of activity these days, I has 
>>> thought the suggestion about relaxing the rules might need discussing.
>>> I know there are people still using Windows 2003 puters, or a near 
>>> equivalent based on XP? But that's entirely irrelevant, as I'm quite 
>>> sure you could find someone out there still utilizing an 8088/286/386. 
>>> Of course that's the discretion of the sysop. As it stands there's at 
>>> least 1 opinion for every ahole attached to the person who types on this 
>>> board. Whateber. The way I see it dang obsolete shouldd be open for 
>>> discussion.
>> 
>> To summarize:  "On-Topic" == "Dang obsolete"
>> 
> 
> 
> It seems that the previous list owner lost interest in this mailing list
> and turfed us over to someone else who doesn't really say anything some
> time ago.  At least I think that's what happened.  Nobody really said
> anything.
> 
> So, can someone enlighten me on how to stop receiving mail from the list
> until the holidays and/or this discussion are over under the new regime?
> 
> Regards,
> Peter Coghlan

Re: BASIC environment ending with "run complete", and slashed 'O' characters?

[Raymond Wiker via cctalk]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CDC_Kronos 
, perhaps? 

> On 26 Apr 2022, at 03:08, Jules Richardson via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> 
> Perhaps a long shot, but I've got an old piece of paper here showing a BASIC 
> listing followed by a program run where the BASIC environment terminates with 
> "run complete" - does that behavior ring any bells with anyone? I'm mildly 
> curious what machine it may have come from.
> 
> The other interesting thing is that the output is from a teletype and the 
> zero characters appear with no slash, while the uppercase 'O' characters do 
> have a diagonal slash through them (e.g. the 'run complete' mentioned above 
> comes out as 'RUN C0MPLETE') - certainly not unheard of, but I think doing 
> the opposite had become typical practice by what, very early 1970s?
> 
> At the top of the page there is a paragraph as follows (all in uppercase on 
> the printout, obviously, and with slashed 'O' characters):
> 
> "The following output is an example of BASIC language and the resulting run 
> of a program. A punched paper tape of the program is included in the kit. 
> This output was produced on a teletype."
> 
> I don't know if that means anything to anyone? I have no idea what "the kit" 
> was but am guessing that the printout I have was once part of some kind of 
> educational material.
> 
> I do have another printout from the MECC timeshare system (dated 78/9/1) 
> which may have originated with the same teletype - it's different paper 
> stock, but has the same slashed 'O' characters. The welcome message on that 
> says 'Kronos 2.12-439', if that's meaningful...
> 
> cheers
> 
> Jules
> 

Re: 2 2010 macbook pro's --- vast performance differences....

[Raymond Wiker via cctalk]

It may be good idea to check the CPU temperature and the airflow inside the 
computer - dust buildup may reduce airflow and cooling, which in turn may cause 
CPU throttling.

> On 21 Aug 2020, at 07:50, George Rachor via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> I’ll check in the morning but believe the 2 machines are identical except for 
> screen size.  I’ll also check for the same version of Parallels.  I assume 
> since these are 2010 machines I could upgrade the Parallels to current.  They 
> are both running High Sierra.
> 
> On startup the 17” . Takes a very long time to show the 
> desktop icons.  I have the feeling the problem isn’t Parallels as there is 
> slowness in email and iTunes without Parallels being started up.
> 
> 
> George
> 
> 
>> On Aug 20, 2020, at 10:44 PM, Zane Healy  wrote:
>> 
>> On Aug 20, 2020, at 5:14 PM, George Rachor via cctalk 
>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> I have 2 2010 macbook pro's. Each have 8GB of Ram and both have a 2 TB 
>>> hybrid seagate hard drives. Running Windows via Parallels. 15 inch system 
>>> have reasonable perfomance. 17 inch system just crawls running windows. 
>>> With RAM maxed out what else should I be looking for?
>> 
>> Do they have the same CPU’s, and the same version of Parallels?  Might be 
>> something with the Windows install on the one?
>> 
>> Zane
>> 
>> 
> 

Re: HP 16C Badge (logo)

[Raymond Wiker via cctalk]

> On 10 Jul 2020, at 21:21 , William Sudbrink via cctalk 
>  wrote:
> 
> This is not exactly vintage computer, but it is very close.  A friend just
> gave me an HP 16C calculator in excellent, working condition, EXCEPT the 16C
> badge (or logo if you prefer) is missing.  I seem to recall that, some years
> ago, someone on this list knew of a source for replacements but I can't find
> it in the archive.  So, I'll ask, does anyone know where to get a
> replacement 16C badge?
> 


There was an announcement on hpmuseum.org  some time 
back: https://www.hpmuseum.org/forum/thread-13014.html 
 

Re: HELP needed on a vocabulary problem ;-)

[Raymond Wiker via cctalk]

"zebra connector", perhaps?

On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 1:03 PM GerardCJAT via cctalk 
wrote:

> The TECHNICAL problem : I am repairing a not so old electric typewriter.
> I need to replace what I call : a flexible printed circuit ( strip /
> ribbon /  what's the "correct" word ??? ) *** AND *** the associated
> connector
> I searched Mouse, Digikey, Arrow, etc ... catalogues and find absolutly
> nothing !!
>
> I think I DO NOT use the correct WORD(s) for my search.
>
> What are the "usual" words for the TWO items I describe ??
> Many thanks for your help, Guys
>

Re: Ciarcia Micromint (was: Steve Garcia / Micromint SB180

[Raymond Wiker via cctalk]

> On 3 Jul 2017, at 01:49 , John Wilson via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Jul 02, 2017 at 03:54:44PM -0700, Fred Cisin wrote:
>> On Sun, 2 Jul 2017, John Wilson wrote:
>>> That sounds like the MPX16?  I thought the SB180 was a Z180 thing.
>> 
>> You're right.
>> 
>> Sorry
>> thinking about the wrong one.
> 
> Well they were both super cool.  And what was that Z8000-based BASIC
> coprocessor (or at least, I think that was the only software for it)
> on a long ISA card?  He did some crazy stuff!

I think that was called the "Trump Card" (which was generally a much more 
positive thing in the past).

Re: Architectural diversity - was Re: Pair of Twiggys

[Raymond Wiker via cctalk]

> On 19 Mar 2017, at 16:14 , Paul Koning via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Mar 19, 2017, at 11:04 AM, Bill Gunshannon via cctalk 
>>  wrote:
>> ...
>> That's because, unlike the COBOL Professionals, the Fortran people drank from
>> the OO KoolAid.
> 
> Speaking of OO and COBOL, a colleage of mine has a button with the text "ADD 
> 1 TO COBOL".
> 
>   paul
> 

Given that C++ is the object-oriented descendant of C, one might expect 
object-oriented COBOL to be named "ADD 1 TO COBOL". In my opinion, the 
object-oriented successor to COBOL is called Java - it's similarly verbose, and 
like COBOL, originally intended for average, fungible programmers.

Re: Pair of Twiggys

[Raymond Wiker via cctalk]

> On 15 Mar 2017, at 16:37 , Noel Chiappa via cctalk <cctalk@classiccmp.org> 
> wrote:
> 
>> From: Raymond Wiker
> 
>> Steve Jobs ... was also a stickler for perfection and largely unwilling
>> to make compromises.
> 
> Absolutely; and that's a large part of the reason for the success of Apple.
> His products were just really well done.
> 
> It's also, I think, a big part of the causality for another Apple
> characteristic: their push for closed systems. The thing is that Steve wanted
> to make the user experience as good as possible (another hallmark of Apple
> stuff) - and when the 'system' includes pieces being independently sourced
> from multiple entities, it's hard to make that happen - there will be
> glitches, etc. So that's why he usually wanted to bring the entire thing
> inside the Apple envelope.
> 
>> So, Steve Jobs ... should get some of the credit for the fact that
>> we're not all running Windows on variations of crappy PC hardware.
> 
> I think that's not accurate; Linux may not have a large user base among
> non-technical people in the laptop area, but it does show that there are other
> alternatives. And when it gets to smart-phones, of course, things which are
> neither Apple nor uSloth are the majority there, no?
> 

I was hoping, for the longest time, that Linux or the various BSDs would break 
the Windows dominance. That never happened, except for in certain areas, like 
server and HPC applications.

As for smart-phones, it was Apple that introduced the idea of having 
smart-phones that were almost all battery and display, and using a purely 
graphical/touch interface. That class of device might have emerged eventually 
without Apple, but it's a fact that most of the mobile phone vendors had to do 
a lot of redesign in a short time after the iPhone was introduced (or a few 
months before, in the case of Google).

If you haven't guessed, I like Apple – for several reasons, but mainly because 
they make good, solid products that work well, and they actually work well for 
both ordinary users and enthusiasts. I have absolutely no problem with paying a 
little extra for a computer that lasts a little longer, keeps its value longer 
and works better in many ways, both subtle and obvious. 

Re: Pair of Twiggys

[Raymond Wiker via cctalk]

> On 14 Mar 2017, at 23:49 , TeoZ via cctalk  wrote:
> 
> Jobs had to get fired for Apple to recall the expansion capabilities of the 
> Apple II days and start making the Mac II series.

Jobs left Apple in 1985 and returned in 1997. The Macintosh II was introduced 
in 1987; two years after Jobs left and 10 years before he returned.

Re: Pair of Twiggys

[Raymond Wiker via cctalk]

> On 14 Mar 2017, at 21:31 , Noel Chiappa via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> (Every time I hear someone saying marketing people are useless - first up
> against the wall, etc - I reply 'No, only bad ones - which is a lot of them.
> The very best ones, like Steve Jobs, are worth their weight in triple-refined
> iridium. A _good_ marketing person can tell you what customers _want_. A
> _truly great_ one can tell you what they _need_, but don't yet even realize
> they do.')
> 
> 
> However, the people (and there are quite a few of them) who have gone way off
> the deep edge, and have turned him (and Apple) into some sort of overblown
> cult, just don't have a balanced perspective.

On the other hand, Steve Jobs wasn't really just a marketing wizard – he was a 
visionary, although some of his visions were less than great. He was also a 
stickler for perfection and largely unwilling to make compromises.

So, Steve Jobs may not have invented the personal computer, or graphical user 
interfaces, but he should get some of the credit for the fact that we're not 
all running Windows on variations of crappy PC hardware.

Re: help needed installing USB to Serial Cable for ADTPro

[Raymond Wiker via cctalk]

> On 11 Mar 2017, at 06:39 , Joe Giliberti via cctalk  
> wrote:
> 
> Greetings!
> I am trying to connect my IIc to my laptop through ADTPro and am
> having trouble getting the FT232R adapter I bought from Retro Floppy.
> The host computer is an HP Elitebook running Windows 7 Pro 64-bit.
> When I first plugged in the cable, Windows tried and failed to find
> the device drivers. I downloaded the drivers from the manufacturer of
> the chip and and ran it. It told me installation was successful and
> device manager recognized that there was a USB serial port, but
> reported an Unknown Device and a Base System Device that didn't have
> drivers installed. I tried to use ADTPro but it didn't see a serial
> port.
> 
> Has anyone run into this issue before?
> 
> Thank you in advance!
> Joe Giliberti

Could it be that your FT232R adapter is using a counterfeit chip? FTDI changed 
their drivers some time back so that they refuse to work with chips that are 
not manufactured by FTDI.

Re: OT: RANT (Was: [cctalk-requ...@classiccmp.org: confirm 38290c8a992491eda604beff5a06ff20cd7e85f5]

[Raymond Wiker]

On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 2:51 AM, Ian S. King  wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:24 PM, geneb  wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2 Feb 2017, Ian Finder wrote:
> >
> > WTF did I just read.
> >>
> >> Fred in absolutely rare form.  I nearly choked on coffee at the
> "yodeling
> > jellyfish" bit. I'd give him fake internet points if I could. :)
> >
> > Also, QUIT TOP POSTING.
> >
> > Be gentle, Gene.  Ian works for the Evil Ex-Empire and is required as a
> term of his indenture to use Outhouse-look, part of the Microsoft Orifice
> suite of floating turds.  Even if you set it to do the right thing, it will
> randomly choose to once again do the Microsoft Thing.
> -- Ian (obviously the other one again)
>
> I read that at first as "Ex-Evil Empire", which does not sound quite
right. I have no problem with "Evil Ex-Empire", though.

Re: PS2 Model 30 memory

[Raymond Wiker]

According to http://www.vcfed.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-28274.html ,
this machine has 128KB soldered in, and can optionally use 2 256KB SIMMs.
If this is the case, I may have some SIMMs of the right type. Do you have
the exact details of the correct SIMMs to use?

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 9:09 AM, jim stephens  wrote:

> I have a friend who wants to add more memory to a PS2 model 30. They are
> off in the wilds of Oz and acquired this for a good price and would like to
> just upgrade it to run some programs they have which do not run on modern
> faster systems.
>
> I know this is a snake pit to deal with, and can get more info if someone
> can get me some information or point me at references for them to look at.
>
> What I'm really interested in doing is seeing if just the memory can be
> had, and it isn't easy to find Sim modules these days, though I suspect
> there are metric tons of them rotting in places forgotten and not recycled
> yet.
>
> anyway any info to get started would be useful.
>
> i see there are entire systems on epay, and may suggest just buying one of
> them and cannibalizing them for their memory should the asking price for
> the individual SIMM parts be ridiculous.  i could buy the system, us the
> system to be sure the memory does something and send them the memories
> alone for reasonable shipping.  It would also net them a backup hard drive
> which are very scarce in even good times as well.
>
> I'm hoping that the memories were common to other systems and not some
> oddball special IBM part.  Old advertisements that show up on google show a
> number of people making them, but that doesn't mean they can be found now
> of course.
>
> thanks
> jim
>
>

Re: What's the rarest or most unusual computer-related item do you own?

[Raymond Wiker]

> On 16 Jan 2017, at 21:42 , Chris Hanson <cmhan...@eschatologist.net> wrote:
> 
> On Jan 12, 2017, at 12:54 PM, Raymond Wiker <rwi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> I've been following this topic, and suddenly realised… that I don't actually 
>> have any particularly rare or unusual items – the nearest I can think of is 
>> a Commodore N-60 navigation calculator, but I also have two early Apple IIs.
>> 
>> If I can mention items that I have owned, the list becomes slightly longer: 
>> a PC532, Symbolics MacIvory II and a TI microExplorer.
> 
> What happened to the MacIvory II and microExplorer?

I sold the MacIvory II, and traded the microExplorer to one of the serious 
collectors on this mailing list.

Re: What's the rarest or most unusual computer-related item do you own? [Tek 4132]

[Raymond Wiker]

> On 15 Jan 2017, at 17:23 , Al Kossow  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 1/14/17 7:20 PM, allison wrote:
> 
>> If the 32016 had a second generation
> 
> It had several generations. The 32532 saw some use in laser printers.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NS320xx 

There was an MMU-less version of the 32532 (32gx32, I think) which was more 
common in embedded applications. The 32532 was used in the PC532 – I'm 
sometimes regretting letting mine go.

Re: What's the rarest or most unusual computer-related item do you own?

[Raymond Wiker]

I've been following this topic, and suddenly realised… that I don't actually 
have any particularly rare or unusual items – the nearest I can think of is a 
Commodore N-60 navigation calculator, but I also have two early Apple IIs.

If I can mention items that I have owned, the list becomes slightly longer: a 
PC532, Symbolics MacIvory II and a TI microExplorer.

Re: National Semiconductor IMP mini

[Raymond Wiker]

I see he also has an Apple II that he wants $2000 for --- it's listed as "NON
WORKING ELECTRICAL COMPONENTS FROM EXTREME AGE", and from date codes and
copyright markings it appears to be far from original. In fact, the
motherboard seems to be a Rev 7 RFI motherboard, and the processor is (I
think) from 1985. If that one is worth $2000, my Apple IIs must be worth at
least $6000 each :-)

On Tue, Jan 3, 2017 at 5:24 AM, jim stephens  wrote:

>
>
> On 1/2/2017 8:08 PM, Josh Dersch wrote:
>
>> On 1/2/17 7:58 PM, Brad H wrote:
>>
>>
>>>  Original message 
>>> From: Josh Dersch 
>>> Date: 2017-01-02  7:37 PM  (GMT-08:00)
>>> To: "General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts" <
>>> cctalk@classiccmp.org>
>>> Subject: Re: National Semiconductor IMP mini
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/2/17 7:22 PM, jim stephens wrote:
>>>
 This system looks pretty interesting, though pricey. I'm thinking it
 is going to be a development machine as all the switches and display
 would not probably have been on a production machine.

 I don't think National made many minicomputer format machines, in
 their history, someone correct me.  That might make this pretty rare
 on that front as well.

 thanks
 Jim

 Beautiful-1974-NATIONAL-SEMICONDUCTOR-COMPUTER-model-imp-16p/
 http://www.ebay.com/itm/252700755919

 Yeah, it's pretty cool but I don't think the seller has reasonable
>>> expectations for actually selling it -- the auction started (I believe)
>>> at $1500 (which may have been a reasonable price), then the seller
>>> raised it to $2500, now it's at $3500 (which is fairly outrageous, in my
>>>
 opinion).  I'm not sure what his strategy is.
 Bitsavers has manuals (of course...)
 - Josh

>>> I think he figured toggle switches and lights = .  He might be
>>> correct, given the obscene money I've seen laid out just for a PDP 8/e
>>> faceplate. You never know a) what will motivate a collector and b) when
>>> just the right collector for a given item will show up.  Every day I thank
>>> my lucky stars they didn't, for whatever reason, show up for my Mark-8
>>> boards.
>>>
>>
>> With the "No shipping cash on pickup" proviso the seller provides, I feel
>> fairly certain no one's biting.  But I've been surprised before...
>>
>> - Josh
>>
>
> I also passed on a PDP8/M he had, which was quite rangy then posted this
> auction.  I had not come across the listing from before.
>
> The "Oh it must be worth a fortune", even canceling an auction 2 weeks ago
> on me.  I didn't think to pay for it on auction closing, since I'd been
> sniping it, or I could have really reamed the seller.  I have not gotten a
> straight response from them since then.
>
> I would not have noted this other than what i think is a rarity. Sad that
> the guy is holding it hostage from someone who could get hold of it and run
> it.  I think there is one in the CHM collection from what i was told when I
> checked on it before sharing here, so there is one preserved.  However
> would be interesting to see one in such as Josh's or Ian's hands running.
> (or many others, just share a lot with them and they are lighting blink'n
> lights more than me right now).
>
> thanks
> Jim
>
>

Re: The infinitely profitable program

[Raymond Wiker]

> On 03 Jul 2016, at 01:00 , Eric Smith  wrote:
> 
> On Sat, Jul 2, 2016 at 11:29 AM, Eric Christopherson
>  wrote:
>> Genius. But I would have thought CP/M would at least require a .com file to
>> have a header.
>> http://peetm.com/blog/?p=55
> 
> Multiple people independently invented the zero-byte CP/M program,
> which is obviously the shortest possible useful computer program, but
> I'd never before heard of anyone succeeding, or even attempting, to
> sell the program.

I think the original implementation of /bin/true was a zero-length file, while 
/bin/false worked by not existing at all.

Re: Apple & SGI keyboards (Re: NEC ProSpeed 386)

[Raymond Wiker]

> On 01 Jun 2016, at 16:46 , Liam Proven  wrote:
> 
> On 1 June 2016 at 00:16, Swift Griggs  wrote:
>> I've never
>> known them to create "clackety" keyboards with mechanical switches
> 
> But that's the point. This here Extended II has them, as did the
> Extended I before it. (I have one of them too, but I couldn't find it
> in my storage unit in London to bring it over here to the Czech
> Republic.)
> 
> I think the earlier ones do too, but they, although pleasant to type
> on, have weird key layouts, especially of the cursor keys. The
> Extended I & II have a PC-like layout, which minimised the mental
> effort of switching between my Mac, my PC laptops and my IBM Model-M
> equipped Raspberry Pi. "Inverted T" FTW!

The Apple //e, //c, //c+ and //GS all had mechanical and somewhat clicky 
keyboards (using various types of Alps keyswitches). I'm also pretty certain 
that the original Mac had a (very nice) clicky keyboard.

Re: Programming language failings [was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from]

[Raymond Wiker]

> On 29 Apr 2016, at 22:31 , Diane Bruce  wrote:
> 
> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 02:23:55PM -0600, Eric Smith wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Ian S. King  wrote:
>>> C is a lot like that saw - it doesn't have a lot of guards on it, and you
>>> can do stupid things.
>> 
>> The problem is that C doesn't just allow you to do stupid things, it's
>> actively encouraged. C doesn't just let you aim at your foot, it
>> defaults to aiming at your foot.
>> 
>> C is not bad as a fairly portable assembly language, but it is NOT a
>> high-level language.
> 
> Yes it is known as a high level assembler.

Taking this a bit further:

C++ is an object-oriented, high-level assembler.
Java is an object-oriented, high-level assembler with support wheels.
C# is an object-oriented, high-level assembler with support wheels that are not 
interchangeable with those of Java.

At least C is a useful language for coding the lowest level of Lisp 
implementations :-)

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

[Raymond Wiker]

> On 29 Apr 2016, at 22:24 , Paul Koning  wrote:
> 
>>> So does Pascal.
>> 
>> Which didn't have a lot of the capabilities needed to be system language at
>> _that point in time_ (remember, this is about 'why did C succeed, back 
>> then');
>> it was, after all, originally designed as a pedagogical language.
> 
> Pedagogical language?  I'm not sure.  BASIC, yes.  But Pascal I believe was a 
> serious language.  I learned it in one week, and used it to build a code 
> generator for a compiler in a compiler construction class.  We originally 
> used PL/1 there (the Cornell implementation) but had to stop because it was 
> utterly unreliable, and switched to PDP-10 Pascal instead.  Worked great.


Pascal most certainly was a pedagogical language - it started out as a 
pseudo-code notation, which was eventually implemented. 

Interestingly, Lisp was originally just a mathematical notation for computer 
programs devised by John McCarthy; Steve Russell realized (to McCarthy's 
surprise) that it was actually possible to implement the eval function, turning 
Lisp into a programming language rather than just a notation.

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

[Raymond Wiker]

> On 29 Apr 2016, at 21:10 , Paul Koning  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Apr 29, 2016, at 3:01 PM, ben  wrote:
>> 
>> I liked Forth when it was still threaded.
> 
> ???
> 
> Base FORTH is not, in and of itself, threaded.  PolyFORTH was if memory 
> serves.  Then again, creating a thread scheduler (cooperative scheduler) for 
> FORTH is just a modest exercise for the programmer.

I'm guessing Ben means threaded as in "Threaded Interpretative Language", and 
not a concurrent programming language.

There are still plenty of Forth implementations based on threading (of words).

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

[Raymond Wiker]

> On 29 Apr 2016, at 19:03 , Swift Griggs <swiftgri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 29 Apr 2016, Raymond Wiker wrote:
>> The regular expression support in Perl is implemented in C, and are 
>> supposedly fairly fast.
> 
> They are faster than some, like Ruby and slower than others like 
> (apparently) LISP. 


It's not *generally* the case that cl-ppcre is faster than PCRE - it depends
completely on the (Common) Lisp implementation that it is running in.
> 
>> That didn't stop a Lisp programmer from implementing PCREs in Lisp (that 
>> supposedly slow and inefficient language),
> 
> Cool. Which LISP ? CL ?

The original benchmark was run using CMUCL, which is generally considered to
be a high-quality, fast implementation of Common Lisp. The benchmarks are not 
part of the cl-ppcre homepage anymore, but an old version can be found at 
the Wayback Machine 
<http://web.archive.org/web/20080624164217/http://weitz.de/cl-ppcre/#bench>.

>> and getting better performance than Perl :-)
> 
> Hehe, well, right on then.
> 
> My opinion is that benchmarking and subsequent proclamations using 
> scripting languages is like racing snails vs slime molds (my money is on 
> the snails, BTW). It's all fun until someone shows you a graph of the same 
> algorithm in C and puts a quarter-horse in the race. Then your saying to 
> yourself things like "Should I be 10x or 15x slower?" :-P
> 
> http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/which-programs-are-fastest.html
> 
> -Swift
> 

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

[Raymond Wiker]

> On 29 Apr 2016, at 16:05 , Swift Griggs  wrote:
> 
> While I know exactly what folks mean, I will attempt a weak defense. Perl 
> has extremely strong string manipulation features, including strong (and 
> easy) support for PCRE's. Those regex's are the main reason folks recoil 
> (because of how often they appear inline in Perl code). Also, if you ask 
> me, most folks beginning to code in a scripting language will produce some 
> nasty code. Since Perl attracted a large number of beginners, you'd often 
> run into line noise style code. However, just to play the devils advocate, 
> Perl can often pack a tremendous amount of logic and functionality in 
> those regex strings. It's often stuff that'd take dozens of lines of C for 
> me to reproduce.

The regular expression support in Perl is implemented in C, and are 
supposedly fairly fast. That didn't stop a Lisp programmer from implementing
PCREs in Lisp (that supposedly slow and inefficient language), and getting
better performance than Perl :-)

Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

[Raymond Wiker]

> On 27 Apr 2016, at 22:13 , Sean Conner  wrote:
> 
>  COBRA was dead by the mid-90s and had nothing (that I know of) to do with
> Linux.  And the lumbering GUI apps, RPC, etc that you are complaining about
> is the userland stuff---nothing to do with the Linux kernel (okay, perhaps
> I'm nitpicking here).

Who uses Linux to refer to just the kernel these days? GNOME used (uses?) CORBA 
- I assume this is what Liam meant.

CORBA was standardised in 1997, and had significant momentum up to at least 
2000. I'm very happy that there is no chance that anybody will ever be in a 
position to ask me to work with CORBA again.

Re: The Ivory Tower saga was Re: strangest systems I've sent email from

[Raymond Wiker]

> On 26 Apr 2016, at 05:39 , Swift Griggs  wrote:
> 
> It's probably a bad idea to dismiss anyone's experience when you haven't 
> "walked a mile in his moccasins.", including mine.  Though my attempt may 
> have been inarticulate, I was talking about my own experience in academia 
> and not trying to pick a fight with every LISP coder on the planet. If I 
> was more clever, I'd have probably had the foresight to say simply say 
> $academic_only_language instead of using the pit-bull attack trigger word: 
> LISP.

If you think that Lisp is an "academic only language", you probably need to 
spend a little time with actually using it.

Re: High performance coprocessor boards of the 80s and 90s - was Re: SGI ONYX

[Raymond Wiker]

Steve Ciarcia (BYTE) had a Z8000-based PC coprocessor ("Trump Card"?) which
main purpose was (I think) to run BASIC programs faster.

Another of those things that I wanted in the early 80s, along with a PC to
use it with.

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 10:18 PM, Chuck Guzis  wrote:

> Would the Palantir 68K ISA OCR boards be considered as high-performance?
>  There was also, IIRC, a NSC 32016 board made by someone.
>
> --Chuck
>
>

Re: ND-10 software - Re: Harris H800 Computer

[Raymond Wiker]

> On 21 Apr 2016, at 14:43 , Mattis Lind  wrote:
> 
>>> 
>>> Hey, this is useful.
>>> Thanks for doing it!
>> 
>> Yep!
>> Already investigating. IMD gave me some trouble, had to resort to
>> dosbox. Source for PED (Programmer's Editor) version G? I've never
>> seen source. I have version F as a :PROG file. I'm guessing that Planc
>> version C may compile it.. this will stretch my emulator. Haven't yet
>> figured out how to handle that PED2.DMK file, so I don't know what it
>> contains - executable?
>> 
>> 
>> 
> PED2.DMK and DISK8.IMD is the same disk, but different ways of reading it
> off the disk. I used both the standard PC-floppy and then also the
> catweasel card. I tried the catweasel for some floppies that I had reading
> trouble with.
> 
> I am really interested in hearing more about your emulator!

Me too!

Re: Harris H800 Computer

[Raymond Wiker]

On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 6:46 AM, Mark Linimon  wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 11:21:03PM -0500, Kyle Owen wrote:
> > I seem to have acquired a few boards from a decommissioned system.
>
> 74S00s, they were going for speed.
>
> The 2900s are the well-known bit-slice chips.
>
> All definitely the level of technology I cut my teeth on.
>

I was a bit surprised to see that it used 2901 with a date code of 1985 -
the 2901 was introduced 10 years before.

In the late 1970s, Norsk Data implemented the ND10 architecture with the
2901. It was thought that this would give a modest uplift over the previous
generation, and the planned name was ND10S. It turned out to be so fast
that Norsk Data gave it the name ND100 instead :-)

Re: Virtualizing AIX 1.3 - WAS::::Re: AIX for IBM PS/2

[Raymond Wiker]

> On 05 Feb 2016, at 18:34 , Guy Sotomayor  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Feb 5, 2016, at 4:56 AM, Steven Hirsch  wrote:
>> 
>> On Thu, 4 Feb 2016, Kevin Bowling wrote:
>> 
>>> This comes up often and usually with a lot of people that have no idea what
>>> they are talking about chiming in that you are stupid for asking.  They are
>>> wrong, HW emulation is not that difficult:
>> 
>>> https://sites.google.com/site/rhdisk0/unix/aix/aixps2
>> 
>> Is anyone else having issues with that URL?  I get a quick flash of a 
>> legitimate web page before the browser fills up with ASCII garbage.
>> 
>> 
> Works fine for me (OS X 10.11.2, Safari 9.0.2).

validator.w3.org does not think it's a particularly great example of HTML 
coding:

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=https%3A%2F%2Fsites.google.com%2Fsite%2Frhdisk0%2Funix%2Faix%2Faixps2=%28detect+automatically%29=Inline=0

Re: Bull DPX/2 and B.O.S. help wanted.

[Raymond Wiker]

This was from an install floppy, which means that it had (probably) only
mounted a mini-root file system, and was (again, probably) running a shell
with restricted functionality.

On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 7:28 AM, E. Groenenberg  wrote:

> Hello Pontus.
>
> As far as I remember, DPX/2 uses AT System 5 rel. 0 with some additions
> in the terminal database for the specific Bull terminals.
>
> So, basically all standard command could be find in the usual places.
>
> Ed
> --
> Ik email, dus ik besta.
> BTC : 1J5fajt8ptyZ2V1YURj3YJZhe5j3fJVSHN
> LTC : LP2WuEmYPbpWUBqMFGJfdm7pdHEW7fKvDz
>
> On Thu, February 4, 2016 21:50, Pontus wrote:
> > On 02/03/2016 09:35 PM, Torfinn Ingolfsen wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Pontus Pihlgren 
> >> wrote:
> >>> I have a OS install kit with bootable floppies and I managed to get a
> >>> prompt using the "boot_unix" floppy and following the manuals that I
> >>> have.
> >>>
> >>> However, not even "ls" would work from this prompt, only "cat". (You
> >>> are
> >>> supposed to enter "os_install", but I don't want to mess up the
> >>> existing
> >>> installtion.
> >>>
> >> I don't have experience with Bull at all. However, I have some
> >> experience with other limited environments.
> >> Does "echo" work?
> >> If it does, you can try "echo *" as a (poor) substitute for "ls".
> >> Apologies if you already know this.
> >>
> >> HTH
> >
> > Rather obvious, but I hadn't though of it. Thank you. Will try it next
> > time.
> >
> > /P
> >
>
>

Re: ISO: VAX-11/750

[Raymond Wiker]

> On 04 Feb 2016, at 03:41 , Josh Dersch  wrote:
> 
> So, I figure it's unlikely, but I've been jonesing for a "larger" VAX and I'd 
> like to track down an 11/750 (or an 11/730).  If anyone out there has one for 
> sale trade (in any condition apart from "pile of slag"), let me know.  I have 
> DEC and various other gear for trade.
> 

This may be of interest: 
http://www.vintage-computer.com/vcforum/showthread.php?51013-VAX-11-730-San-Francisco-Bay-Area

Re: Building a PC - then & now

[Raymond Wiker]

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:29 PM, Murray McCullough <
c.murray.mccullo...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I was reading in a dated magazine article on the "freedom to build(a
> PC)": Well you can't build phone; can't build a car; can't build a
> refrigerator; can't build a TV. Do we have the freedom to build a
> computer? We did in the earliest days of the PC- the 8-bit era. Heck,
> that's all one could do! It was limited and is to this day. AMD vs
> INTEL control what we can do. Has anything really changed?
>

I'd say that we still have the freedom to build a computer; in fact, it's
probably easier than it ever was. True, it may not be feasible to build
a high-performance computer based on current generation x86 chips,
but there are so many alternatives: some of the 8-bit favourites are still
being made (6502, z80); then there's the AVR, PIC, TI 430, the Propeller,
various ARM chips.

There are free or low-cost CAD packages, and having small series of PCBs
made is almost ridiculously cheap. You can get logic analyzers for $150 or
so, and if you want to experiment with FPGAs, you can get useful
development systems for well below $100.