Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Barry via cctalk]

Hello Phillip,
This is hastily prepared but I am interested in purchasing a OMNI to USB 
interface.
Is the list still open?
Barry McMahon

Sent from my iPad

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

Thanks,  Peter!

Here it's way not as bad as on the Linux Kernel mailing list... I once came up 
with some nice additions to the ftdi usb serial driver. Reaction was something 
like "Do it right! Now!" The "right" was only a question how the thing should 
be controlled from the system's perspective. I only added functionality and a 
simple sysfs interface. But that was not enough. They wanted it to be attached 
to the GPIO framework (which I still consider unsuitable for the issue).
Instead of taking my changes and staying with the wish that there should be 
even more stuff added, it was refused and I lost interest in upstreaming my 
mega-speed patch.

But I will produce my board (again). Withe xc9572xl and Eagle and without 
Arduino.
Whoever wants a different board, can make/derive one afterwards.

Kind regards
Philipp


--

Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Philipp Hachtmann
Buchdruck, Bleisatz, Spezialitäten

Alemannstr. 21, D-30165 Hannover
Tel. 0511/352, Mobil 0171/2632239
Fax. 0511/3500439
phil...@hachtmann.com
www.tiegeldruck.de 

UStdID DE 202668329

> Am 20.02.2017 um 15:53 schrieb Peter Coghlan :
> 
> Philipp wrote:
>> 
>> I am so sorry that I use Eagle!
>> 
>> Please let us stop this discussion. It's just a tool. And KiCAD is another 
>> tool. I currently use Eagle and that's it.
>> 
> 
> I'm with Philipp on this.
> 
> Every time someone posts to the list to offer some piece of hardware they
> are developing, our response is "You're doing it wrong.  Do it this way
> instead.".  Then there follows a long and useless debate, quite tangential
> to classic computing, which often ends up with the project getting delayed
> or shelved, possibly because of the added hassle for the person doing the
> work.
> 
> When someone comes offering something like this, couldn't we just accept
> that whoever is doing the work has already put some thought into it and
> has good reasons for the options they are going with?  If they post
> looking for suggestions, they are looking for suggestions, not looking
> for someone to convert them to a different religeon.
> 
> We could just be thankful that someone is willing to put the effort into
> doing something like this and make an effort to make things as easy as
> possible for them.
> 
> If anyone doesn't like what is on offer, they are free to put the work
> into creating what they believe would be a better project but not to
> hold up what has already begun. 
> Regards,
> Peter Coghlan.

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Mark J. Blair]

> On Feb 20, 2017, at 06:24, Holm Tiffe  wrote:
> 
> Why is that nice? This way the pcb company has your "sourcecode".
> Besides of that where is the real difference to going to
> "File->Plot", Select "Gerber" and push the "Plot" Button?
> 
> That can't really be to difficult...

In every PCB tool I've used, Gerber generation is a separate, configurable 
process which can easily be misconfigured. Visually checking my Gerbers for 
common mistakes is a normal part of my flow, no matter what tool I use, even 
after I have the settings dialed in. Yes, I usually just click "plot" as you 
say, but I still proof the plots for mistakes that can creep in, such as 
designing a board with more layers than I had previously used in that 
particular tool installation, and forgetting to emit the Gerbers for the added 
layers.

Back when I had to review a lot of customer PCB designs as an applications 
engineer for a chip manufacturer, I'd regularly get Gerbers from professional 
designers which required post-processing such as changing drill scaling and 
offset before I could even view them, and that taught me to be a lot more 
careful about my own Gerber generation. I suspect that full-service PCB houses 
would just quietly fix problems like that and only raise flags for serious 
errors, so many designers probably never got any feedback about their Gerbers 
being messy. But no-touch quick-turn shops require pretty clean Gerbers, so 
skipping Gerber generation lowers the bar for inexperienced PCB designers.

I don't personally send in PCB source files instead of Gerbers, but I can see 
how being able to do that can be helpful and convenient for beginners.


-- 
Mark J. Blair, NF6X 
http://www.nf6x.net/

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Peter Coghlan]

Philipp wrote:


I am so sorry that I use Eagle!

Please let us stop this discussion. It's just a tool. And KiCAD is 
another tool. I currently use Eagle and that's it.




I'm with Philipp on this.

Every time someone posts to the list to offer some piece of hardware they
are developing, our response is "You're doing it wrong.  Do it this way
instead.".  Then there follows a long and useless debate, quite tangential
to classic computing, which often ends up with the project getting delayed
or shelved, possibly because of the added hassle for the person doing the
work.

When someone comes offering something like this, couldn't we just accept
that whoever is doing the work has already put some thought into it and
has good reasons for the options they are going with?  If they post
looking for suggestions, they are looking for suggestions, not looking
for someone to convert them to a different religeon.

We could just be thankful that someone is willing to put the effort into
doing something like this and make an effort to make things as easy as
possible for them.

If anyone doesn't like what is on offer, they are free to put the work
into creating what they believe would be a better project but not to
hold up what has already begun. 


Regards,
Peter Coghlan.

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Holm Tiffe]

Paul Koning wrote:

> 
> > On Feb 17, 2017, at 2:35 PM, Noel Chiappa  wrote:
> > 
> > ...
> >> From: Guy Sotomayor Jr
> > 
> >> In terms of community supplied libraries, Eagle has those too and I've
> >> found that by and large they are junk (it's easier/quicker for me to
> >> create a part on my own
> >> ... While I haven't seen a lot of KiCAD contributed libraries (that's
> >> part of the problem)
> > 
> > KiCAD came with a fairly large set of user-contributed libraries. For 
> > various
> > reasons (including working with archaic parts), I've wound up adding quite a
> > few, but i've usally found it pretty easy to modify an exising part from the
> > libraries, to get what I need. YMMV.
> 
> One thing I learned with Eagle (an old version -- I started with it on DOS, 
> with a physical license dongle) is that you can define library stuff via 
> scripting.  This is very helpful when defining 120-pin PCB footprints.

I've made pcbnew footprints for PLCC Sockets in the past with some
scripting. In the meantime the footprint format has changed to that
.pretty. I don't had to make footprints with such big pincounts sine
them again, but I don't think they made it simpossible to use scripting
for that at all.
> 
> I don't remember precisely, but I think you can export libraries from Eagle 
> in some sort of text form.  If that's true, then it would be SMOP to write a 
> KiCAD library importer.  The key question is whether the library semantics 
> are compatible.  EAGLE is rather nice in the way it handles schematic symbols 
> vs. footprints and all that.


You can select footprints corrsponding to a part in the schematic editor
for each part. What's the problem?
> 
> I used EAGLE long ago for one project, and more recently for another, but I 
> haven't found it sufficiently useful to buy it a second time to get the 
> non-free version.  Not that I really need the autorouter, it isn't really all 
> that useful.  But still, it's pretty steep for a hobbyist.  I discovered 
> KiCAD, haven't used it yet, should give it a try.
> 
> One nice aspect of EAGLE is that a number of PCB fab shops will accept EAGLE 
> *.BRD files directly, rather than asking for Gerber and drill files.
> 
>   paul
> 

Why is that nice? This way the pcb company has your "sourcecode".
Besides of that where is the real difference to going to
"File->Plot", Select "Gerber" and push the "Plot" Button?

That can't really be to difficult...


Regards,

Holm
-- 
  Technik Service u. Handel Tiffe, www.tsht.de, Holm Tiffe, 
 Freiberger Straße 42, 09600 Oberschöna, USt-Id: DE253710583
i...@tsht.de Fax +49 3731 74200 Tel +49 3731 74222 Mobil: 0172 8790 741

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

On 02/20/2017 02:30 PM, Holm Tiffe wrote:

As I wrote two minutes ago: Perhaps I've gone too far by seeing KiCAD
too close to the Arduino thing. I know at least one clever guy using
KiCAD as well.


Thanks for the flowers :-)


Haha, I thought of someone outside of cctalk...!
But.. you're welcome :-)

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Holm Tiffe]

Philipp Hachtmann wrote:

> 
> > I don't have a problem with your arduino related point of view,
> :)
> 
> > but I'm
> > sure you never heard from the push and shove router that kicad implements?
> I admit: you're right.
> 
> > (take a look at youtube!)
> > If you have used it once, egale would look a lot like
> > copy-and-paste-maker-arduino-blinky-blinky-community-thingy..
> 
> As I wrote two minutes ago: Perhaps I've gone too far by seeing KiCAD 
> too close to the Arduino thing. I know at least one clever guy using 
> KiCAD as well.

Thanks for the flowers :-)

Regards,

Holm
-- 
  Technik Service u. Handel Tiffe, www.tsht.de, Holm Tiffe, 
 Freiberger Straße 42, 09600 Oberschöna, USt-Id: DE253710583
i...@tsht.de Fax +49 3731 74200 Tel +49 3731 74222 Mobil: 0172 8790 741

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

I am so sorry that I use Eagle!

Please let us stop this discussion. It's just a tool. And KiCAD is 
another tool. I currently use Eagle and that's it.

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Jon Elson]

On 02/19/2017 04:28 PM, Paul Koning wrote:

On Feb 19, 2017, at 5:22 PM, Mark J. Blair  wrote:
... and I only grudgingly use Fusion 360 because there's no viable 3D CAD/CAM 
competition that I know of in its very low price range.

A while ago I went looking for 3D CAD again, after giving up on TurboCAD in 
disgust.  Found FreeCAD (https://www.freecadweb.org).  Works on Mac, Windows, 
Linux.
Several of the guys at work are using FreeCAD and doing 
great stuff with it.


Jon

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Mark J. Blair]

> On Feb 19, 2017, at 2:28 PM, Paul Koning  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Feb 19, 2017, at 5:22 PM, Mark J. Blair  wrote:
>> ... and I only grudgingly use Fusion 360 because there's no viable 3D 
>> CAD/CAM competition that I know of in its very low price range.
> 
> A while ago I went looking for 3D CAD again, after giving up on TurboCAD in 
> disgust.  Found FreeCAD (https://www.freecadweb.org).  Works on Mac, Windows, 
> Linux.  It's a computational solid geometry program.

I do use FreeCAD as part of my KiCad flow, converting STEP models to VRML for 
KiCad's 3D renderer. But Fusion 360 offers real 3D CAM to drive my CNC mill, 
which is a big deal at its price point.


-- 
Mark J. Blair, NF6X 
http://www.nf6x.net/

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Paul Koning]

> On Feb 19, 2017, at 6:36 AM, Philipp Hachtmann  wrote:
> 
> ...
> Wen I first encountered eagle it was running under DOS. No windows. Don't 
> remember if there was a schematic editor. And not much to click.

Yes, it had schematic editor, board editor, and the same half-assed autorouter 
it still has today.  And library editor.  No CAM processor, though.  The fact 
that it used DOS probably accounts for the odd mouse and cut/paste conventions, 
although even back then there were semi-standards of a sort at least for 
cut/paste.  

paul

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Paul Koning]

> On Feb 19, 2017, at 5:22 PM, Mark J. Blair  wrote:
> ... and I only grudgingly use Fusion 360 because there's no viable 3D CAD/CAM 
> competition that I know of in its very low price range.

A while ago I went looking for 3D CAD again, after giving up on TurboCAD in 
disgust.  Found FreeCAD (https://www.freecadweb.org).  Works on Mac, Windows, 
Linux.  It's a computational solid geometry program.  One of the interesting 
features is a Python API; the model I created (Rolf Nelson's spaceship) is 5000 
lines of Python.  It also has a GUI, of course; I went the Python approach 
because it let me construct stuff numerically with ease.  It also let me 
customize the export machinery for POVray output.

paul

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Mark J. Blair]

> On Feb 19, 2017, at 9:01 AM, Holm Tiffe  wrote:
> Nevertheless, I don't think that I want to push you to use KiCad,
> but you _really_ should change your attitude about it. This isn't really
> playing stuff for kids anymore..

I previously paid about $1,500 for the top tier of Eagle for use at home on my 
Mac. When they briefly sprung network licensing on us around version 6 or so, I 
decided to try out KiCad. I now use KiCad not only for my home projects, but 
also every day for real product design in my job; on my Mac at home, and under 
Linux at work. It's not quite on par with Windows based $20k/seat tools I've 
used before yet, but it's more than good enough for the kinds of designs I'm 
doing. And it's continually improving. And it frees up $20k more of my boss's 
money to spend on test equipment and prototyping. And it never needs to phone 
home to a license server.

I am curious to see what Autodesk does with Eagle, though. I use Fusion 360 
both at home and work (on my personal MacBook at work since it doesn't run 
under Linux), and good integration between Eagle and Fusion 360 could be very 
compelling. But I really don't like cloud based software as a service, and I 
only grudgingly use Fusion 360 because there's no viable 3D CAD/CAM competition 
that I know of in its very low price range.

-- 
Mark J. Blair, NF6X 
http://www.nf6x.net/

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Holm Tiffe]

Philipp Hachtmann wrote:

> 
> >
> > For sure there are many things still todo for the KiCad people, but this
> > nose high attitude "thats vor arduino people only" is the wrong thing
> > for sure.. (german saying: Hochmut kommt vor dem Fall)
> Haha, you probably got me wrong. I never even tried out KiCAD - because 
> I had no idea why I should try out something else in the moment.
> 
> > It could do much much more and much better than what you pay for it.
> I am not sure. I have read about no tight coupling between schematic and 
> board. That's a no-go for me.

..and this is simply wrong.
Most eagle users are complaining aboZ
ut a not so tight coupling between the schematic symbols and the
footprint (which you can change in the schematic editor or in a program
called cvpcb) and this is a entirely different thing. 

> 
> > Do you want to know how eagles UI feels from my point of view?

yes .. but from far away. :-)
> 
> It's a well known disaster for newcomers. Many completely un-logic 
> aspects. Evil pitfalls in the schematic editor. The strangest copy and 
> paste mechanisms.
> But... If you are throgh that. And have already forgotten how 
> frustrating Eagle's UI once was... everything is fine then.
> I really love the console input on Eagle. I can do many things by just 
> typing in commands. Normal work does not involve pulldown menus.
> 
> Wen I first encountered eagle it was running under DOS. No windows. 
> Don't remember if there was a schematic editor. And not much to click.
> 
> :-)

To this times I've used Orcad on a Robotron EC1834 :-) It don't even had
a mice, I've managed to use a graphics tablet (K6405) for that but it
wasn't rally neccessary.

Nevertheless, I don't think that I want to push you to use KiCad,
but you _really_ should change your attitude about it. This isn't really
playing stuff for kids anymore..
simply watch some of the youtube videos explainig that push and shove
router, that is a really nice thing I don't want to miss anymore.
For sure you will find out that KiCad isn't eagle, but it never wanted
it to be..

Regards,

Holm

-- 
  Technik Service u. Handel Tiffe, www.tsht.de, Holm Tiffe, 
 Freiberger Straße 42, 09600 Oberschöna, USt-Id: DE253710583
i...@tsht.de Fax +49 3731 74200 Tel +49 3731 74222 Mobil: 0172 8790 741

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

On 18.02.2017 04:07, Jay Jaeger wrote:

On 2/17/2017 10:01 AM, Philipp Hachtmann wrote:



On 02/17/2017 01:02 AM, Jay Jaeger wrote:

First of all THANKS. I hope this works out.

?!?



The thanks was for your effort.  The hope that it works out was to say
that I hope that you decide to make some more and sell them, which seems
uncertain at this point.


No. I already decided to do them. It's just the details.


That was why I specifically wrote *shield*.  There are a lot of SPI
interface boards out there, and if there were a little room in the chip
to handle an Omnibus/SPI interface, a lot could conceivably be done with
it.  Examples:  SD Cards, Ethernet and so on.
With an FPGA I even would have considered soldering an ether net PHY 
onto the board..




As others have since pointed out, KiCAD has nothing whatsoever to do
with Arduino.  Others have addressed its strengths and weaknesses.  In
my case, the comment stemmed from perhaps wanting to take you hardware
design, and adapt it for other purposes, without having to start from
scratch.


Haha :-)

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

For sure there are many things still todo for the KiCad people, but this
nose high attitude "thats vor arduino people only" is the wrong thing
for sure.. (german saying: Hochmut kommt vor dem Fall)
Haha, you probably got me wrong. I never even tried out KiCAD - because 
I had no idea why I should try out something else in the moment.



It could do much much more and much better than what you pay for it.
I am not sure. I have read about no tight coupling between schematic and 
board. That's a no-go for me.



Do you want to know how eagles UI feels from my point of view?


It's a well known disaster for newcomers. Many completely un-logic 
aspects. Evil pitfalls in the schematic editor. The strangest copy and 
paste mechanisms.
But... If you are throgh that. And have already forgotten how 
frustrating Eagle's UI once was... everything is fine then.
I really love the console input on Eagle. I can do many things by just 
typing in commands. Normal work does not involve pulldown menus.


Wen I first encountered eagle it was running under DOS. No windows. 
Don't remember if there was a schematic editor. And not much to click.


:-)

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

On 19.02.2017 12:15, Holm Tiffe wrote:

In my opinion the learning step from using a fancy Arduino library to
understanding/modifying/writing another is too big.
In BASIC it started with little things like peek and poke.
There was no hidden C++ :-)



Agreed.
I'm used some of the "shields" for aruinos from time to time, but I
never used that arduino software for it. Ok, sometimes it is neccesary
to look into a library to finally find out how the hardware is to be
programmed..but I always wrote the code of my own. At least the masses
of arduino related stuff drops the prices for interresting hardware stuff
to play with.


Yes, I have some Arduino nano flying around. I even sometimes use their 
bootloader.

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

I don't have a problem with your arduino related point of view,

:)


but I'm
sure you never heard from the push and shove router that kicad implements?

I admit: you're right.


(take a look at youtube!)
If you have used it once, egale would look a lot like
copy-and-paste-maker-arduino-blinky-blinky-community-thingy..


As I wrote two minutes ago: Perhaps I've gone too far by seeing KiCAD 
too close to the Arduino thing. I know at least one clever guy using 
KiCAD as well.

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Holm Tiffe]

Philipp Hachtmann wrote:

> 
> 
> On 17.02.2017 17:21, Kyle Owen wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 10:01 AM, Philipp Hachtmann 
> 
> > KiCad has no affiliation to Arduino; in fact, it's being heavily maintained
> > by CERN.
> But wherever I (!) look, in my part of the universe, a strongly biased 
> and personal view, I see only those Arduino folks using it.
> Might be different in other places, but...
> 
> > With the licensing model Eagle has just moved
> > to, alternatives like KiCad sure seem attractive.
> The new Eagle license model is a mess. I will stick to my Eagle 7. The 
> idea of my little board designs being held hostage by a company 
> somewhere is not good.
> And when the day has come that I can't go with the then old Eagle 
> anymore and the licensing has not been repaired, then I will think about 
> alternatives. Perhaps then KiCAD has already changed into the greatest 
> EDA tool ever made.

Simply take a look now and then ..to adjust your point of view.
> 
> 
> > Why are you bent out of shape over the Arduino community? It seems clear to
> > me that teenagers growing up with them will outgrow the language and
> > hardware limitations and move onto more advanced things before starting
> > their careers. I think one could make a decent analogy to BASIC on many
> > 8-bit microcomputers from decades past.
> 
> Easy: If I had the impression that it is like you write, I'd be totally 
> fine with it!
> But back in those days with BASIC it was easier to take the next step. 
> If you want to go further beyond Arduino, you will have to instantly 
> understand a huge amount of stuff.
> In my opinion the learning step from using a fancy Arduino library to 
> understanding/modifying/writing another is too big.
> In BASIC it started with little things like peek and poke.
> There was no hidden C++ :-)
> 

Agreed.
I'm used some of the "shields" for aruinos from time to time, but I
never used that arduino software for it. Ok, sometimes it is neccesary
to look into a library to finally find out how the hardware is to be
programmed..but I always wrote the code of my own. At least the masses
of arduino related stuff drops the prices for interresting hardware stuff
to play with.

Regards,

Holm

-- 
  Technik Service u. Handel Tiffe, www.tsht.de, Holm Tiffe, 
 Freiberger Straße 42, 09600 Oberschöna, USt-Id: DE253710583
i...@tsht.de Fax +49 3731 74200 Tel +49 3731 74222 Mobil: 0172 8790 741

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

On 17.02.2017 17:55, Jon Elson wrote:

On 02/17/2017 10:01 AM, Philipp Hachtmann wrote:

The CPLD you had on the last board, XC9572XL is a bit long in the tooth,
perhaps?   Would you expect to use that one again, or a newer chip?

I will use it again. It was already old when I decided to use it. It
has 5V tolerant inputs.


It seems that Xilinx has made some hints that they do NOT plan to retire
the XC95xxXL series any time soon.

:-)


If they do, the CoolRunner II family can be used with the addition of
one more voltage regulator.
By the way my handmade prototype with three CPLDs (I ordered the wrong 
pincount) had CoolRunner II.

I then switched to the old one because the IO voltage compatibility.
I was unsure if I could connect TTL IN(!!!)-puts to the pins without 
degrading the chip too much: TTL inputs go up to 5V when they are left 
floating. I was simply not sure if the CoolRunner pins are properly 
protected against that. So I chose the safe option.

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

On 17.02.2017 17:21, Kyle Owen wrote:

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 10:01 AM, Philipp Hachtmann 



KiCad has no affiliation to Arduino; in fact, it's being heavily maintained
by CERN.
But wherever I (!) look, in my part of the universe, a strongly biased 
and personal view, I see only those Arduino folks using it.

Might be different in other places, but...


With the licensing model Eagle has just moved
to, alternatives like KiCad sure seem attractive.
The new Eagle license model is a mess. I will stick to my Eagle 7. The 
idea of my little board designs being held hostage by a company 
somewhere is not good.
And when the day has come that I can't go with the then old Eagle 
anymore and the licensing has not been repaired, then I will think about 
alternatives. Perhaps then KiCAD has already changed into the greatest 
EDA tool ever made.




Why are you bent out of shape over the Arduino community? It seems clear to
me that teenagers growing up with them will outgrow the language and
hardware limitations and move onto more advanced things before starting
their careers. I think one could make a decent analogy to BASIC on many
8-bit microcomputers from decades past.


Easy: If I had the impression that it is like you write, I'd be totally 
fine with it!
But back in those days with BASIC it was easier to take the next step. 
If you want to go further beyond Arduino, you will have to instantly 
understand a huge amount of stuff.
In my opinion the learning step from using a fancy Arduino library to 
understanding/modifying/writing another is too big.

In BASIC it started with little things like peek and poke.
There was no hidden C++ :-)

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Jay Jaeger]

On 2/17/2017 10:01 AM, Philipp Hachtmann wrote:
> 
> 
> On 02/17/2017 01:02 AM, Jay Jaeger wrote:
>> First of all THANKS. I hope this works out.
> ?!?
> 

The thanks was for your effort.  The hope that it works out was to say
that I hope that you decide to make some more and sell them, which seems
uncertain at this point.

> 
>> An area with place to mount, say, a 40 pin header (2x20) or the like, on
>> one edge of the board, with a set of places where one could jumper those
>> pins to a set of I/O pins of the CPLD/FPGA would be really cool.
> As far as I just remember, there are no substantial IO pins left.
> And there is no FPGA.

I knew you had used an CPLD in the first version, but I had no idea what
you intended to do for the next one.  That was why I wrote CPLD/FPGA.

> 
>> A spot where one could mount an Arduino compatible shield - again with
>> no actual connections, but a place where one could jumper them to some
>> I/O pins on the CPLD/FPGA might be really cool.  (e.g., using the CPLD
>> to run an SPI bus connection to a shield).
> No support for Arduino. Unter no circumstanced. I really don't like
> Arduino except for:
> 
> - I can get extremely cheap AVR boards ("nano") for arbitrary use.
> 

That was why I specifically wrote *shield*.  There are a lot of SPI
interface boards out there, and if there were a little room in the chip
to handle an Omnibus/SPI interface, a lot could conceivably be done with
it.  Examples:  SD Cards, Ethernet and so on.


>> In short, ways that folks could take your basic board and make it
>> possible to do other things with it could increase the value of the
>> board enormously.
> Probably. But I want to create/use/provide a simple tool that does
> exactly one thing perfectly.

I understand, and have no problem with that as a philosophy.

> 
>> You might consider KiCAD as an alternative to Eagle.  It works pretty
>> darned well.
> Why should I? If you look at the board's size you probably see that it
> cannot be made using the free version. I own a paid Eagle 7 license. Why
> should I throw that away? Started to use Eagle as a child. Have my own
> libraries and footprints. Got used to the odds. And I won't use that
> KiCAD thing. It smells too much like dumb Arduino folks. And I do not
> want to share to much with that community.

The why was that, before today, I had not realized that there might be
tools to convert from Eagle to KiCAD, which made Eagle files of no use
to me.

As others have since pointed out, KiCAD has nothing whatsoever to do
with Arduino.  Others have addressed its strengths and weaknesses.  In
my case, the comment stemmed from perhaps wanting to take you hardware
design, and adapt it for other purposes, without having to start from
scratch.

> 
> Kind regards
> 
> Philipp
> 

Thanks again.

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Jon Elson]

On 02/17/2017 01:35 PM, Noel Chiappa wrote:

 > From: Jon Elson



 > I'm most concerned about the reliability of the design rules check
 > ...
 > If these checks miss errors, I REALLY don't want to use the package.

I'm not quite sure what's covered here, but I have used the checker on my
admittedly-tiny projects, and been happy with it.

 > and layout vs. schematic.

Again, Dave has used it to lay out at least one moderately-sized card, and
seems to have been happy with the results.
I do some 4-layer and 6-layer boards, where the possibility 
for things to get shorted together multiply,
and it is easy to overlook it when manually checking.  I 
can't say about KiCad as I have not done anything over 2 
layers with it.


 > (KiCad seems to still require picking operations from a menu, Protel
 > has user-configurable keyboard shortcuts that are a big help. Maybe
 > KiCad has that and I just need to learn them.)

KiCAD does have keyboard shortcuts. I don't know if they are configurable.
EVERYTHING on Protel is configurable, you can add items to 
the menus, create the picture for the menu item, etc.



As for libraries, I really don't trust ANYBODY else's 
library parts, at least until I've checked them.  Protel's 
are actually pretty bad, by the way, so most of them are now 
MY parts, not theirs.


Jon

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Eric Smith]

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Paul Koning  wrote:

> I don't remember precisely, but I think you can export libraries from
> Eagle in some sort of text form.


That was possible with Eagle 5 (and probably earlier), but is no longer
necessary since Eagle 6, as the native file formats (schematic, board, and
library) are now XML.  This was a huge advance for anyone who wanted to
write tools to manipulate the files. I've both edited the files by hand,
and written Python programs to generate and manipulate Eagle files.

Of course, KiCAD uses open file formats, so I'm not touting that as an
advantage of Eagle over KiCAD, but it is an advantage of Eagle over other
proprietary EDA packages.

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Charles Dickman]

Philipp,

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Philipp Hachtmann  wrote:
> On 02/17/2017 01:02 AM, Jay Jaeger wrote:

>> In short, ways that folks could take your basic board and make it
>> possible to do other things with it could increase the value of the
>> board enormously.

I tend to agree with Jay here. It would be great to have a way of
expanding the board. From your standpoint, the advantage might be
larger volumes. I was ready to order and then thought about what I
would do with it. I have a high speed serial interface (RX8E) and that
works for me. What I would like to have is a way to experiment with
some other peripherals that I will never have and see how to
virtualize them in an FPGA or CPLD.

> Probably. But I want to create/use/provide a simple tool that does exactly
> one thing perfectly.

Of course that is your prerogative. I respect that this is real and
not some paper design that gets discussed forever and comes to
nothing.

I also see all that board area with nothing on it and think why not
populate it with a layout for some other things.

What I am wishing for are Omnibus and Unibus adapters to an FPGA.

> Kind regards
>
> Philipp

Regards,

-chuck
http://www.chdickman.com/

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Holm Tiffe]

Alan Hightower wrote:

>  
> 
> Being a long time Eagle user, I'll chime in too. Most responses from
> KiCAD advocates miss the mark on the fundamental issue. Sure the
> features are converging and I have no doubt KiCAD will catch-up. It has
> already surpassed Eagle in many feature areas. But people who routinely
> spend dozens of hours a week doing eCAD work (> than a hobbyist), use
> their tool as a super-efficient extension of their workflow intent. To
> suddenly switch to a tool with an entirely different workflow or UI
> mechanics is like a right handed person trying to relearn how to do
> everything left handed. It's takes a really long frustrating time. Maybe
> even longer than if you didn't know Eagle, Altium, Cadence, DS5000, etc
> to begin with. 
> 
> My hope is the KiCAD community would see this as an opportunity to
> significantly grow the user base by adding conversion tools and UI
> improvements designed to help new-comers from other tools transition
> more easily; even prioritize them short-term over additional new
> features. Even vi and emacs have mutual key-binding compatibility modes
> designed to ease transitions - and the user base couldn't be more
> divided on pride. 
> 


Who should made those tools if not the people that needs them ..eg. you?
And why you think should KiCad priorize your wishes over new features or
the others? YOU want this, do it.

I'm not a full time layouter but that KiCad thing fits my needs very
well. I can do commercial stuff w/o pay thousend Dollars to someone to
have a software handy (not for owning it like before Autodesk was the
owner) that connects every now and then to a license Server on the net...
..and is doing what exactly? Nothanks.


> I find the KiCAD UI 'clunky' and it really isn't. It's only clunky
> coming from my Eagle point of view. 
> 
> -Alan 

For sure there are many things still todo for the KiCad people, but this
nose high attitude "thats vor arduino people only" is the wrong thing
for sure.. (german saying: Hochmut kommt vor dem Fall)

It could do much much more and much better than what you pay for it.

I had a KiCad development version for approx a year running on my
FreeBSD Host that I'm using for my delay work, updated for a week or so
and I can say de biggest difference to the previous version is a well
sorted and big footprint libraryw with many additional 3D Extensions!
Maybe you should have a look again.



I've used the predecessor of KiCad's PCBnew (simply PCB) before KiCad,
it had no Schematics Editor but could use Netlists, wasn't restriced in
PCB sizes and could do 6 layers (more than I ever would need). I've done
footprints on my own in the past..so what?

Do you want to know how eagles UI feels from my point of view?

Regards,

Holm
-- 
  Technik Service u. Handel Tiffe, www.tsht.de, Holm Tiffe, 
 Freiberger Straße 42, 09600 Oberschöna, USt-Id: DE253710583
i...@tsht.de Fax +49 3731 74200 Tel +49 3731 74222 Mobil: 0172 8790 741

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Kyle Owen]

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Paul Koning  wrote:

>
> I don't remember precisely, but I think you can export libraries from
> Eagle in some sort of text form.  If that's true, then it would be SMOP to
> write a KiCAD library importer.  The key question is whether the library
> semantics are compatible.  EAGLE is rather nice in the way it handles
> schematic symbols vs. footprints and all that.
>

There seem to be a few projects out there that do that. Here's one:
https://github.com/lachlanA/eagle-to-kicad

I recall there also being a wizard utility for creating pad arrays and such
in KiCad; haven't played with that too much yet.


> I used EAGLE long ago for one project, and more recently for another, but
> I haven't found it sufficiently useful to buy it a second time to get the
> non-free version.  Not that I really need the autorouter, it isn't really
> all that useful.  But still, it's pretty steep for a hobbyist.  I
> discovered KiCAD, haven't used it yet, should give it a try.
>

Autorouters anywhere seem like they're pretty much garbage.


> One nice aspect of EAGLE is that a number of PCB fab shops will accept
> EAGLE *.BRD files directly, rather than asking for Gerber and drill files.


OSH Park, who I've used the most (Advanced Circuits second), will now
accept KiCad project files, which is handy. The automated board preview
lets you quickly verify that things are correct before hitting "order."

I recently designed a board with matched-length differential traces. KiCad
made that process very easy. Push 'n' shove routing, as mentioned here
before, is also incredibly nice.

Kyle

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Paul Koning]

> On Feb 17, 2017, at 2:35 PM, Noel Chiappa  wrote:
> 
> ...
>> From: Guy Sotomayor Jr
> 
>> In terms of community supplied libraries, Eagle has those too and I've
>> found that by and large they are junk (it's easier/quicker for me to
>> create a part on my own
>> ... While I haven't seen a lot of KiCAD contributed libraries (that's
>> part of the problem)
> 
> KiCAD came with a fairly large set of user-contributed libraries. For various
> reasons (including working with archaic parts), I've wound up adding quite a
> few, but i've usally found it pretty easy to modify an exising part from the
> libraries, to get what I need. YMMV.

One thing I learned with Eagle (an old version -- I started with it on DOS, 
with a physical license dongle) is that you can define library stuff via 
scripting.  This is very helpful when defining 120-pin PCB footprints.

I don't remember precisely, but I think you can export libraries from Eagle in 
some sort of text form.  If that's true, then it would be SMOP to write a KiCAD 
library importer.  The key question is whether the library semantics are 
compatible.  EAGLE is rather nice in the way it handles schematic symbols vs. 
footprints and all that.

I used EAGLE long ago for one project, and more recently for another, but I 
haven't found it sufficiently useful to buy it a second time to get the 
non-free version.  Not that I really need the autorouter, it isn't really all 
that useful.  But still, it's pretty steep for a hobbyist.  I discovered KiCAD, 
haven't used it yet, should give it a try.

One nice aspect of EAGLE is that a number of PCB fab shops will accept EAGLE 
*.BRD files directly, rather than asking for Gerber and drill files.

paul

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Noel Chiappa]

> From: Jon Elson

Dave Bridgham and I have been using KiCAD for our stuff, and we're pretty
happy with it.

Here are a few bits: this is just data, I'm not trying to convince anyone to
use it - the points about 'complex tools one is already very used to' are
very good ones.

> I'm most concerned about the reliability of the design rules check
> ...
> If these checks miss errors, I REALLY don't want to use the package.

I'm not quite sure what's covered here, but I have used the checker on my
admittedly-tiny projects, and been happy with it.

> and layout vs. schematic.

Again, Dave has used it to lay out at least one moderately-sized card, and
seems to have been happy with the results.

> (KiCad seems to still require picking operations from a menu, Protel
> has user-configurable keyboard shortcuts that are a big help. Maybe
> KiCad has that and I just need to learn them.)

KiCAD does have keyboard shortcuts. I don't know if they are configurable.


> From: Guy Sotomayor Jr

> In terms of community supplied libraries, Eagle has those too and I've
> found that by and large they are junk (it's easier/quicker for me to
> create a part on my own
> ... While I haven't seen a lot of KiCAD contributed libraries (that's
> part of the problem)

KiCAD came with a fairly large set of user-contributed libraries. For various
reasons (including working with archaic parts), I've wound up adding quite a
few, but i've usally found it pretty easy to modify an exising part from the
libraries, to get what I need. YMMV.

Noel

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Alan Hightower]

 

Being a long time Eagle user, I'll chime in too. Most responses from
KiCAD advocates miss the mark on the fundamental issue. Sure the
features are converging and I have no doubt KiCAD will catch-up. It has
already surpassed Eagle in many feature areas. But people who routinely
spend dozens of hours a week doing eCAD work (> than a hobbyist), use
their tool as a super-efficient extension of their workflow intent. To
suddenly switch to a tool with an entirely different workflow or UI
mechanics is like a right handed person trying to relearn how to do
everything left handed. It's takes a really long frustrating time. Maybe
even longer than if you didn't know Eagle, Altium, Cadence, DS5000, etc
to begin with. 

My hope is the KiCAD community would see this as an opportunity to
significantly grow the user base by adding conversion tools and UI
improvements designed to help new-comers from other tools transition
more easily; even prioritize them short-term over additional new
features. Even vi and emacs have mutual key-binding compatibility modes
designed to ease transitions - and the user base couldn't be more
divided on pride. 

I find the KiCAD UI 'clunky' and it really isn't. It's only clunky
coming from my Eagle point of view. 

-Alan 

On 2017-02-17 12:46, Guy Sotomayor Jr wrote: 

> Just to add my $0.02 to this conversation. I'm an Eagle (professional) user 
> for
> well over a decade. The issue the Phillip mentioned about footprints and 
> designs
> is real.
> 
> On my last design I decided to give KiCAD a try and quickly realized that the
> large libraries of parts and footprints I have would have to be completely 
> re-done.
> That made the bar too high to switch. Most of my designs use footprints that 
> I have
> developed or are readily available. Also, many new parts vendors supply Eagle
> libraries for their parts so I don't have to develop them. I haven't seen 
> anything
> for KiCAD regarding that...which means even more work for me.
> 
> Tool lock-in is a real phenomenon not just for the "wet-ware" but also for 
> all of the
> parts libraries that exist for the tools (either vendor, community or self 
> developed).
> So without a support infrastructure for parts libraries, a tool is just a 
> "toy" regardless
> of how good the underlying implementation is.
> 
> In terms of community supplied libraries, Eagle has those too and I've found 
> that
> by and large they are junk (it's easier/quicker for me to create a part on my 
> own
> than to try and figure out what bizarre thing the contributor actually did 
> and I still
> need to check it anyway). While I haven't seen a lot of KiCAD contributed 
> libraries
> (that's part of the problem) I have no expectation that they would be better 
> than
> the Eagle contributed libraries.
> 
> TTFN - Guy
 

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Guy Sotomayor Jr]

> On Feb 17, 2017, at 9:16 AM, Holm Tiffe  wrote:
> 
> Philipp Hachtmann wrote:
> 
> [..]
>> 
>>> You might consider KiCAD as an alternative to Eagle.  It works pretty
>>> darned well.
>> Why should I? If you look at the board's size you probably see that it 
>> cannot be made using the free version. I own a paid Eagle 7 license. Why 
>> should I throw that away? Started to use Eagle as a child. Have my own 
>> libraries and footprints. Got used to the odds. And I won't use that 
>> KiCAD thing. It smells too much like dumb Arduino folks. And I do not 
>> want to share to much with that community.
>> I am an engineer and no Arduino fool... Even if KiCAD was a really great 
>> program, it would still have the smell of the 
>> copy-and-paste-maker-arduino-blinky-blinky-community.
>> 
>> Sorry for the rant but  Arduino is just fubar..
>> 
>> If I would migrate to another EDA tool, I would probably migrate up to 
>> something more elaborated than Eagle or KiCAD :-)
>> 
>> 
>> Kind regards
>> 
>> Philipp
> 
> 
> I don't have a problem with your arduino related point of view, but I'm
> sure you never heard from the push and shove router that kicad implements?
> (take a look at youtube!)
> 
> If you have used it once, egale would look a lot like
> copy-and-paste-maker-arduino-blinky-blinky-community-thingy..
> 
> People at the swiss CERN are developing it, for sure they only know how
> to make arduinos, dnon't they?
> 

Just to add my $0.02 to this conversation.  I’m an Eagle (professional) user for
well over a decade.  The issue the Phillip mentioned about footprints and 
designs
is real.

On my last design I decided to give KiCAD a try and quickly realized that the
large libraries of parts and footprints I have would have to be completely 
re-done.
That made the bar too high to switch.  Most of my designs use footprints that I 
have
developed or are readily available.  Also, many new parts vendors supply Eagle
libraries for their parts so I don’t have to develop them.  I haven’t seen 
anything
for KiCAD regarding that…which means even more work for me.

Tool lock-in is a real phenomenon not just for the “wet-ware” but also for all 
of the
parts libraries that exist for the tools (either vendor, community or self 
developed).
So without a support infrastructure for parts libraries, a tool is just a “toy” 
regardless
of how good the underlying implementation is.

In terms of community supplied libraries, Eagle has those too and I’ve found 
that
by and large they are junk (it’s easier/quicker for me to create a part on my 
own
than to try and figure out what bizarre thing the contributor actually did and 
I still
need to check it anyway).  While I haven’t seen a lot of KiCAD contributed 
libraries
(that’s part of the problem) I have no expectation that they would be better 
than
the Eagle contributed libraries.

TTFN - Guy

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Jon Elson]

On 02/17/2017 10:21 AM, Kyle Owen wrote:


KiCad has no affiliation to Arduino; in fact, it's being heavily maintained
by CERN. I don't suppose you've had a need to being an Eagle guy, but have
you tried out KiCad before? With the licensing model Eagle has just moved
to, alternatives like KiCad sure seem attractive.
I have a paid license for Protel 99SE, which is a very 
powerful, reliable and intuitive (to me, anyway) package.  
Maybe intuitive because I've been using it so long.  (Too 
long??)


Anyway, a guy gave me a design to manufacture made with 
KiCad, so I installed it.  Well, it certainly is not as 
intuitive to ME as Protel, but maybe I just need to use it 
more.  But, even as of a couple of years ago, it showed a 
LOT of promise!
I'm most concerned about the reliability of the design rules 
check and layout vs. schematic.  If these checks miss 
errors, I REALLY don't want to use the package.  I know 
Protel got it right, in hundreds of board designs, it has 
never once let me down.  Not totally sure KiCad gives that 
level of coverage, so I'm just being cautious.  KiCad is 
open source, so they can't ever pull the plug on users, or 
just go out of business and bury the source code.


But, setting up a virtual machine to run an old Windows 
version just so I can run Protel is a bit of a hassle.  
KiCad runs on Linux quite well (as well as Windows, too.)  I 
think with a couple more years of development, KiCad might 
be as good as Protel.  (KiCad seems to still require picking 
operations from a menu, Protel has user-configurable 
keyboard shortcuts that are a big help.  Maybe KiCad has 
that and I just need to learn them.)


Jon

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Jon Elson]

On 02/17/2017 10:01 AM, Philipp Hachtmann wrote:





The CPLD you had on the last board, XC9572XL is a bit 
long in the tooth,
perhaps?   Would you expect to use that one again, or a 
newer chip?
I will use it again. It was already old when I decided to 
use it. It has 5V tolerant inputs.


It seems that Xilinx has made some hints that they do NOT 
plan to retire the XC95xxXL series any time soon.
If they do, the CoolRunner II family can be used with the 
addition of one more voltage regulator.  The internal 
architecture is more FPGA-like, but the Xilinx tools hide 
all of that in almost all cases.  The 9500 architecture is 
good for recognizing long address fields, but otherwise is 
not all that efficient for general logic.


Jon

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Kyle Owen]

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 10:01 AM, Philipp Hachtmann 
wrote:
>
> Why should I? If you look at the board's size you probably see that it
> cannot be made using the free version. I own a paid Eagle 7 license. Why
> should I throw that away? Started to use Eagle as a child. Have my own
> libraries and footprints. Got used to the odds. And I won't use that KiCAD
> thing. It smells too much like dumb Arduino folks. And I do not want to
> share to much with that community.
> I am an engineer and no Arduino fool... Even if KiCAD was a really great
> program, it would still have the smell of the copy-and-paste-maker-arduino-b
> linky-blinky-community.
>
> Sorry for the rant but  Arduino is just fubar..
>
> If I would migrate to another EDA tool, I would probably migrate up to
> something more elaborated than Eagle or KiCAD :-)
>

KiCad has no affiliation to Arduino; in fact, it's being heavily maintained
by CERN. I don't suppose you've had a need to being an Eagle guy, but have
you tried out KiCad before? With the licensing model Eagle has just moved
to, alternatives like KiCad sure seem attractive.

Why are you bent out of shape over the Arduino community? It seems clear to
me that teenagers growing up with them will outgrow the language and
hardware limitations and move onto more advanced things before starting
their careers. I think one could make a decent analogy to BASIC on many
8-bit microcomputers from decades past.

Kyle

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

On 02/17/2017 01:02 AM, Jay Jaeger wrote:

First of all THANKS. I hope this works out.

?!?


It looks like you have a JTAG connector on there - please keep that.

Of course - it's needed for initial programming.


The CPLD you had on the last board, XC9572XL is a bit long in the tooth,
perhaps?   Would you expect to use that one again, or a newer chip?
I will use it again. It was already old when I decided to use it. It has 
5V tolerant inputs.



An area with place to mount, say, a 40 pin header (2x20) or the like, on
one edge of the board, with a set of places where one could jumper those
pins to a set of I/O pins of the CPLD/FPGA would be really cool.

As far as I just remember, there are no substantial IO pins left.
And there is no FPGA.


A spot where one could mount an Arduino compatible shield - again with
no actual connections, but a place where one could jumper them to some
I/O pins on the CPLD/FPGA might be really cool.  (e.g., using the CPLD
to run an SPI bus connection to a shield).
No support for Arduino. Unter no circumstanced. I really don't like 
Arduino except for:


- I can get extremely cheap AVR boards ("nano") for arbitrary use.

- Young people stay on the surface of microcontroller programming. So 
there is less professional competition.




In short, ways that folks could take your basic board and make it
possible to do other things with it could increase the value of the
board enormously.
Probably. But I want to create/use/provide a simple tool that does 
exactly one thing perfectly.



You might consider KiCAD as an alternative to Eagle.  It works pretty
darned well.
Why should I? If you look at the board's size you probably see that it 
cannot be made using the free version. I own a paid Eagle 7 license. Why 
should I throw that away? Started to use Eagle as a child. Have my own 
libraries and footprints. Got used to the odds. And I won't use that 
KiCAD thing. It smells too much like dumb Arduino folks. And I do not 
want to share to much with that community.
I am an engineer and no Arduino fool... Even if KiCAD was a really great 
program, it would still have the smell of the 
copy-and-paste-maker-arduino-blinky-blinky-community.


Sorry for the rant but  Arduino is just fubar..

If I would migrate to another EDA tool, I would probably migrate up to 
something more elaborated than Eagle or KiCAD :-)



Kind regards

Philipp

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Jay Jaeger]

First of all THANKS. I hope this works out.

Some thoughts:

It looks like you have a JTAG connector on there - please keep that.

The CPLD you had on the last board, XC9572XL is a bit long in the tooth,
perhaps?   Would you expect to use that one again, or a newer chip?

An area with place to mount, say, a 40 pin header (2x20) or the like, on
one edge of the board, with a set of places where one could jumper those
pins to a set of I/O pins of the CPLD/FPGA would be really cool.

A spot where one could mount an Arduino compatible shield - again with
no actual connections, but a place where one could jumper them to some
I/O pins on the CPLD/FPGA might be really cool.  (e.g., using the CPLD
to run an SPI bus connection to a shield).

In short, ways that folks could take your basic board and make it
possible to do other things with it could increase the value of the
board enormously.

But, these are JUST SUGGESTIONS / THOUGHTS I am throwing out.  I would
not be at all disappointed if such things were not done.

You might consider KiCAD as an alternative to Eagle.  It works pretty
darned well.

JRJ


On 2/13/2017 9:00 AM, Philipp Hachtmann wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> it has taken a while but I'm now actively planning to shift out another
> batch of OmniUSB boards. The last batch is sold out for a long time and
> I've been asked for more from time to time.
> 
> As some of you might remember, it's a cool device to connect your
> pdp8/f/a/m/e to the modern world using lightning fast USB.
> 
> The originial board has it's website here:
> 
> http://pdp8.hachti.de/projects/omni_usb/
> 
> The new board will do the same, perhaps even more.
> 
> - the USB connector will be replaced by a mini (NOT micro!!) USB connector.
> - The connector position and cable routing will be improved.
> - The board will be shorter. But it will come by default with a laser
> cut acrylic extension that makes it full size again.
> 
> There will be at least those options to buy:
> 
> - Kit (board + all parts)
> - Kit+ (board + all parts, SMT already assembled)
> 
> Possible:
> - complete version - Everything soldered and tested.
> - discount for omitting acrylic extender
> 
> I cannot guarantee that I can deliver fully assembled boards
> (regulations) and would be able to do that only if there's a reasonable
> number of interested buyers.
> 
> If have set up a doodle poll to get a realistic picture of the interest
> in the board/kit/device:
> 
> http://doodle.com/poll/d7y524mvyfezqp9w
> 
> PLEASE take the minute and fill in your name (ideally that I can
> recognise you) and check the options which most precisely match your
> demands.
> 
> PLEASE be as honest as possible as I will base my decisions IF and for
> which PRICE I can run the show.
> 
> Thank you!!!
> 
> Kind regards
> 
> Philipp :-)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Tony Duell]

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 1:59 PM, Paul Koning  wrote:
>
> The LA36 was an excellent machine.  Unlike the LA30, with its atrocious 
> keyboard
> and a print mechanism that jammed about every 20th carriage return.

I have to disagree with that. The LA36 is horrible. There is a major
design misfeature.

There is no separate home sensor. Instead the carriage is run into the
left end-stop,
the motor stalls, and the logic detects this by a lack of pulses from
the rotary encoder
on the motor spindle. Now, if the (weak, plastic) key in the carriage
belt sprocket
breaks, the motor doesn't stall. It keeps turning, slowly, with the
spindle slipping
in the sprocket. The logic sees encoder pulses and keeps it turning.
But the load
is excessive for the motor, which generally gets hot enough to burn
the enamel off
the windings.

Do NOT ask how I found this out. Suffice it to say a friend and I had
to rewind the motor
in an LA36 at the university we were studying at.

-tony

Re: Amateur Radio use of Teleprinters (was Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!)

[Ethan Dicks]

On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 3:30 AM, Eric Smith  wrote:
> I'm told that Teletype models 15, 19, and 28 were very common here. I've
> mostly seen models 15 and 28. I've only once seen a mdoel 32 (ITA2
> five-level version of model 33).

I'm helping restore a Model 19 with a friend (he's a WW II re-enactor
and he does Signal Corps stuff).  That's the only 5-level stuff I've
touched.

I did see a Model 28 in Antarctica that had been there since the 60s...

http://antarcticdispatches.blogspot.com/2014/03/science-post-cosray.html

... and its bit bucket...

https://www.polartrec.com/files/resize/members/eric-thuma/images/bit_bucket_copy-500x667.jpg

-ethan

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Paul Koning]

> On Feb 16, 2017, at 12:40 AM, Eric Smith  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 7:22 AM, Tony Duell  wrote:
> 
>> Over here, the only Teletypes we generally see are Model 33s. Even the
>> Model
>> 35 is very uncommon,
> 
> 
> In my experience, it's the same in the US: the model 33 has always been
> MUCH more common than the 35.  Every model 35 I actually saw in service
> back in the day was a system console, not for "end users". Presumably it
> was desired for the system console to be a heavy-duty and high-reliability
> device, and the model 35 was built like a battleship. Actually, even better
> than that: it was built like a model 28!

I first saw a model 35 as a computer terminal in Holland, not sure what 
computer (it showed up in an Open House demonstration).  But yes, model 33 was 
far more common.  Presumably because of being far cheaper, and "good enough".  
They were rated for intermittent duty, and sure enough, when used intensely in 
college timesharing setups they tended to fall apart.

> ...
> I used the model 33 a huge amount from 1977 to 1979, but from 1979 to 1982
> I mostly used the DEC LA36 DECwriter II and various CRT terminals.

The LA36 was an excellent machine.  Unlike the LA30, with its atrocious 
keyboard and a print mechanism that jammed about every 20th carriage return.

> ...
> OK, we do see BRPE
>> punches from time to time.
> 
> 
> I'd really like to get one of those!

I remember my father used them in his lab, to capture experimental data for 
subsequent processing.  Nice machines.  The most amazing catch would be a 
Soroban punch, those apparently could go at 200 or 400 bytes per second (vs. 
BRPE at around 120 or so).

paul

Re: Amateur Radio use of Teleprinters (was Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!)

[Eric Smith]

I wrote:

> The FCC order authorizing Amateur Radio use of ASCII went into effect in
> March of 1980, but at the moment I can't track down a copy of the actual
> order.
>

Found it.  "Deregulation of Part 97 of the Rules Regarding Emissions
Authorized in the Amateur Service", Third Report and Order, Docket No.
20777, 45 Fed. Reg. 8990-8992, published February 11, 1980, effective March
17, 1980.

PDF of the order:
  http://www.brouhaha.com/~eric/ham/ascii/fcc-20777-ascii-1980.pdf

Replaces entirety of §97.69 "Digital Transmissions".  Doesn't use the term
RTTY. Doesn't make any general distinction between ITA2 and ASCII, except
in details of baud rates, emission types, and frequency shifts. Allows ITA2
at 60, 67, 75, or 100 WPM (45, 50 56.25, or 75 bauds). Allows ASCII with F1
emission at no more than 300 bauds between 3.5 and 21.25 MHz, with F1, F2,
or A2 emission at no more than 1200 bauds between 28 and 225 MHz, and F1,
F2 or A2 emission at no more than 19.6 kilobauds above 420 MHz.

The requirements have been further relaxed since that time.

Amateur Radio use of Teleprinters (was Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!)

[Eric Smith]

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 11:29 PM, Tony Duell  wrote:

> I think at one time radio amateurs (at least over here) had to use 5 bit
> ITA2
> machines for RTTY.


Same here.


> It may even be to this day that RTTY implies that, and
> that ASCII is classed as 'data'.


The FCC order authorizing Amateur Radio use of ASCII went into effect in
March of 1980, but at the moment I can't track down a copy of the actual
order.  The current FCC regs (§97.309) are more recent, and lump RTTY and
"data emission" together, allowing ITA2, AMTOR, or ASCII, or, with
additional limitations, "an unspecified digital code".  I suppose I could
use EBCDIC, FIELDATA, or the IBM Stretch character code, as long as I
didn't use it for the purpose of obscuring the meaning of the
communications, or to communicate with a station in a country with which
the US doesn't have an agreement allowing those codes to be used.

But the 5 level machines that were used over
> here tend to be Creeds (Creed 7s, 75s and 444s mostly).
>

I'm told that Teletype models 15, 19, and 28 were very common here. I've
mostly seen models 15 and 28. I've only once seen a mdoel 32 (ITA2
five-level version of model 33).

I've seen some Kleinschmidt teleprinters, but I've never seen a Creed.

RE: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[dave . g4ugm]

> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Tony Duell
> Sent: 16 February 2017 06:29
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
> 
> Subject: Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and
> react!
> 
> >> and 5 bit stuff almost unheard-of.
> >
> >
> > In the US, common for hams, not common for computers. Maybe they
> were
> > common for computers in the early 1960s.
> 
> I think at one time radio amateurs (at least over here) had to use 5 bit ITA2
> machines for RTTY. It may even be to this day that RTTY implies that, and that
> ASCII is classed as 'data'. 

Yes RTTY is de-facto 5-bit. I have never heard plain ASCII being used on-air.  
In its day AMTOR which uses 5-bit codes and adds error was also popular. The 
most common ASCII modes were AX25 and TCPIP over AX25.

> But the 5 level machines that were used over here
> tend to be Creeds (Creed 7s, 75s and 444s mostly).
> 

I think it depends on "when". When RTTY first started Creed 7Bs were common 
cheap and had governed motors so could be adjusted to run on 45.5 or 50 baud. 
Later on 75's (which is my favourite) started to become available but many of 
these had synchronous motors so  could not be adjusted.
Finally 444's became available. I really don't like the 444 much. The 
typewriter style type basket seems to be a backward step over the neat single 
element of the 75...
I used a 7B with my "Newbear 7768"  6800 system.


> The RSGB (Radio Society of Great Britain, a bit like the ARRL) 'Teleprinter
> Handbook' (on RTTY operation) does have some details of things like the
> Teletype 28, so I guess some made it over here, but I've yet to see one.
> 

I have seen a couple of 28s crop up on E-Bay and I am sure I have seen one "in 
the flesh" in some museum..

> >
> >> OK, we do see BRPE
> >> punches from time to time.
> >
> >
> > I'd really like to get one of those!
> 
> I think shipping one is out of the question. Anyway, mine have 240V 50Hz
> motors.
> 
> -tony

Dave

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Tony Duell]

>> and 5 bit stuff almost unheard-of.
>
>
> In the US, common for hams, not common for computers. Maybe they were
> common for computers in the early 1960s.

I think at one time radio amateurs (at least over here) had to use 5 bit ITA2
machines for RTTY. It may even be to this day that RTTY implies that, and
that ASCII is classed as 'data'. But the 5 level machines that were used over
here tend to be Creeds (Creed 7s, 75s and 444s mostly).

The RSGB (Radio Society of Great Britain, a bit like the ARRL) 'Teleprinter
Handbook' (on RTTY operation) does have some details of things like the
Teletype 28, so I guess some made it over here, but I've yet to see one.

>
>> OK, we do see BRPE
>> punches from time to time.
>
>
> I'd really like to get one of those!

I think shipping one is out of the question. Anyway, mine have 240V 50Hz
motors.

-tony

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Eric Smith]

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 7:22 AM, Tony Duell  wrote:

> Over here, the only Teletypes we generally see are Model 33s. Even the
> Model
> 35 is very uncommon,


In my experience, it's the same in the US: the model 33 has always been
MUCH more common than the 35.  Every model 35 I actually saw in service
back in the day was a system console, not for "end users". Presumably it
was desired for the system console to be a heavy-duty and high-reliability
device, and the model 35 was built like a battleship. Actually, even better
than that: it was built like a model 28!

Too bad there wasn't (AFAIK) an upper/lower case version of the 35.  I've
never seen a model 37 or model 38 in person, but it appears that they were
light-duty machines like the 33.

I used the model 33 a huge amount from 1977 to 1979, but from 1979 to 1982
I mostly used the DEC LA36 DECwriter II and various CRT terminals.

and 5 bit stuff almost unheard-of.


In the US, common for hams, not common for computers. Maybe they were
common for computers in the early 1960s.

OK, we do see BRPE
> punches from time to time.


I'd really like to get one of those!

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[COURYHOUSE]

They are  really  neat looking!  Phillipp!
 
http://www.radista.info/tt_units/teleprinter_T-68d.jpg
 
Yes I like  the  colors!   what is the   weight!
 
Anyone heading to western US  with large suitcase soon? (grin!)
 
Another one our favorite sortta cute teletypes we like here at the SMECC  
museum is the model 31. we are looking to  get all possible variants of  this 
machine.
 
We have some interesting stuff at this  link here
 
http://web.archive.org/web/20170103075925/http://www.smecc.org/teletype_mode
l_31.htm
 
And... we are interested in more of them,  any photos of them or  scans  of 
them in various uses to continue to build this section out.  Please drop us 
a line  offlist at  couryho...@aol.com
 
Ed#  _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org)  
 
 
In a message dated 2/15/2017 11:22:51 A.M. US Mountain Standard Time,  
hac...@hachti.de writes:

Hi,
On 02/15/2017 03:16 PM, couryho...@aol.com wrote:
>  there are  one of the  Siemens teletypes  thatprint  tape and has a 
dial
> on the  front  from Germany  I have  seen  very compact nice  unit used 
for
> telex I  would love to  have.

It's the t68d. Exists in very different  versions. With paper tape, 
without, with dial, black, brown, etc.
I  have a few of those.
I even have one sitting in Morocco. I brought it there  by car...

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[COURYHOUSE]

Always  good  to review what  the terms of  each is.  Newcomersmay not  
understand completely. 
 
Same  with photo usage and video and music  usage  -   there are   various  
terms of  usage  for these  media  types.
 
Ed#  _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org)  
 
 
In a message dated 2/15/2017 9:13:36 A.M. US Mountain Standard Time,  
hac...@hachti.de writes:

One  should also be aware of the difference between public domain, open 
source,  free software and the different license models and have an 
understanding  of the applicable rights and obligations.

Kind  regards

Philipp

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[ben]

On 2/15/2017 7:16 AM, couryho...@aol.com wrote:

there are  one of the  Siemens teletypes  that   print  tape and has a dial
on the  front  from Germany I have  seen  very compact nice  unit used for
telex I would love to  have.  shipping on teletypes   from overseas is
expensive  though.

If  one was local ad  inn really nice  shape  we would  be a candidate  fro
it   for the telecom display at   SMECC.


Hurry up with the RTTY to cctalk mesage system.
Ben.

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

Hi,
On 02/15/2017 03:16 PM, couryho...@aol.com wrote:

there are  one of the  Siemens teletypes  that   print  tape and has a dial
on the  front  from Germany I have  seen  very compact nice  unit used for
telex I would love to  have.


It's the t68d. Exists in very different versions. With paper tape, 
without, with dial, black, brown, etc.

I have a few of those.
I even have one sitting in Morocco. I brought it there by car...

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

Hi,

On 02/15/2017 04:24 PM, Alan Hightower wrote:

Perhaps I was unclear. It is not a direct port. It was inspired by your
board during a road-trip to VCF-E to make an easier-to-assemble design.

Ah, ok.


There is obviously no FT245 support. And just about any implementation
of logic responding as a KL8E would look very similar. The code is
available under MAIN.pld on the previous link.

Oh, I did not see that. No, that file has nothing to do with my source.
I have never seen that strange language. I only use VHDL (and verilog if 
I'm forced to) for logic descriptions... So this .pld looked like some 
binary for me. OK, I even didn't know that there are Atmel CPLDs.



The design uses a UART and can be run up to 230 Kbps and tested up to
460 Kbps. It runs faster than the original hardware. The UART design
certainly has limitations as you point out.


The speed does not matter. There it exactly one fault: The design uses 
an UART. The qualities or speed of the UART are irrelevant. But it's too 
slow, of course.



But it is still an
improvement on the original DEC serial hardware which most people still
use.
The design goals of this board are not the same as yours.

Probably :-)

I have to admit that I don't understand the design goal: Why should one 
*not* want to use a KL8 serial board? I like it very much and 
use some of them from 110 baud to 19200 baud.

I use them only as terminal connection.
So I see no use case for a however improved serial card - except when 
you don't have a KL8E. But that's a very theoretical assumption.


When I design something to be used with vintage hardware, I usually 
think of it as an addition instead of a replacement. I use OmniUSB IN 
ADDITION to KL8E. At the same time, of course. Console over KL8E, high 
speed data communication <-> PC over OmniUSB. I use it with Kermit, 
dumprest etc.
It's of course also possible to have several OmniUSB boards in the 
system :-)


 > It was designed to be easy to assemble without SMT. While I personally

agree with your SMT comments, most people do have problems soldering
.5mm pitch leaded components -


Yes, that's because they just did not try at all. They're stuck with the 
idea that they would have to solder the stuff pin by pin with a 
microscopic soldering tip. But I use a big reservoir tip. And then it's 
REALLY becoming easy! I also belonged to the fraction that thought it 
would be somehow impossible to solder TQFP and friends. Until I tried 
it. That was the day I started to forget about which THT components I 
could have laying around. With normal SMT and 0805 resistors I am 
completely happy.



The ATF1508 was chosen after noticing it's data
sheet revealed it could source the current requirements of the omnibus;
a rare thing.

Yes, really.


After your reaction, clearly... Look, no one is trying to step on toes.
I did not expect that. Don't worry! I just wanted point out how things 
in that area are handled properly.
I'm working in the software business and that kind of thought is part of 
my day job.
One should also be aware of the difference between public domain, open 
source, free software and the different license models and have an 
understanding of the applicable rights and obligations.


Kind regards

Philipp

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Alan Hightower]

 

Perhaps I was unclear. It is not a direct port. It was inspired by your
board during a road-trip to VCF-E to make an easier-to-assemble design.
There is obviously no FT245 support. And just about any implementation
of logic responding as a KL8E would look very similar. The code is
available under MAIN.pld on the previous link. 

The design uses a UART and can be run up to 230 Kbps and tested up to
460 Kbps. It runs faster than the original hardware. The UART design
certainly has limitations as you point out. But it is still an
improvement on the original DEC serial hardware which most people still
use. The design goals of this board are not the same as yours. 

It was designed to be easy to assemble without SMT. While I personally
agree with your SMT comments, most people do have problems soldering
.5mm pitch leaded components - as evidenced by the number of new-run
orders you have taken. The ATF1508 was chosen after noticing it's data
sheet revealed it could source the current requirements of the omnibus;
a rare thing. 

> Using traditional RS232 somewhere in between is just stupid bullshit. It 
> completely spoils the beauty of the idea. But why should one make another 
> design? Through hole parts?!?
> 
> They just should have asked me about cooperation :-)

After your reaction, clearly... Look, no one is trying to step on toes.
It's an alternative project and fully open source. I do not belive it's
existence is harming you or the community. After reviewing the code, if
you still believe there is an outstanding IP credit issue, we will
resolve it. It is clearly NOT a derived work and does not warrant a
derived license. 

Thanks Phil, 

-Alan 

On 2017-02-15 08:55, Philipp Hachtmann wrote: 

> On 02/15/2017 12:45 AM, Alan Hightower wrote: 
> 
>> Not sure if you are aware, but FYI - Malcolm MacLeod with some
>> involvement from Kyle Owen, Jack Rubin, and others ported your code to a
>> ATF1508 CPLD with a minimal test board.
> Oh, ah! I looked into their github and the README.md.
> There is a copy of the GPLv3 and as it looks no source code. And no hint that 
> they used code from me.
> 
> That would NOT be ok!!!
> 
> Even if I have disclosed the source code, I have not licensed it under GPLv3 
> or put it into the public domain. It's a copyrighted work and I am the 
> author. And the code is currently not licensed to anyone. And nobody but me 
> has the right to license that code or parts of it to anyone.
> 
> That rant only to be clear... How something like that should happen:
> 
> 1. Ask the author to license the stuff under a free license like GPL
> (I probably would do that!)
> 
> 2. Start own project, copy and reuse as much or little as desired.
> The new project's license *must* be compatible to the license of the used 
> other code.
> You have to mention the original author ("based on ... by...", "in parts 
> based on ... by ...").
> 
>> I believe the longer term plan
>> was to make a full featured community project from it, but it's stalled
>> a bit atm.
> 
> Why?!? To have a single board KL8E replacement? Which it actually is.
> 
> OmniUSB's strong points are the following:
> 
> - HIGH speed
> - No baudrate setting
> - Direct USB connection
> - Special instructions to use really tight loops.
> - USB FIFO solution implicitely double buffered AND locked on both sides: As 
> long as you obey the teleprinter flag on the 8, you cannot create a buffer 
> overrun and lose data. On the PC's side you access the device with usual 
> blocking I/O. You can't write more data when the PDP8 has not read from the 
> FIFO. Therefore no single byte lost without thinking about it.
> Example: PDP8 does a disk dump. PC program is stopped. The pdp8 waits.
> Example: PC is sending a huge block of data to the pdp8. It just writes as 
> fast as possible. The pdp8 is stopped for an our during the transmission. No 
> byte is lost.
> 
> Using traditional RS232 somewhere in between is just stupid bullshit. It 
> completely spoils the beauty of the idea.
> 
> Of course one could add an FTDI 240x FIFO (NOT!!! NOT!!! UART) to the 
> design - then it would be equivalent to OmniUSB.
> 
> But why should one make another design? Through hole parts?!? We're living in 
> the 21st century! The company where I want to bring the stuff for soldering 
> just told me that they usually don't stock that old and clumsy 0805 
> components by default...
> 
> Soldering a 200 pin TQFP is easier than doing some wire wrap connections and 
> takes 4 minutes if you are UNexperienced. SMT soldering is easier than THT if 
> you have done it for more than one half hour! (Of course with SMT you're on 
> the way to really difficult stuff, but that's not part of the discussion)
> 
> They just should have asked me about cooperation :-)
 

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[E. Groenenberg]

On Wed, February 15, 2017 15:12, Philipp Hachtmann wrote:
>
>>> I could swap something for a nice creed machine.
>>
>> I suspect they're more common in the UK than elsewhere. They were used
>> by the Post Office
>> for the Telex service, for example.
>
> I know. Here everything is full with Siemens and Lorenz.
> Je aussi voudrais avoir une machine de Sagem...!
>
>> are wondering). Obviously these machines are normally 'collection
>> only' the sellers will not ship
> That's the main problem :-(
>
> But teletypes are easier to find here than in US :-P :-P :-P
>

Really?? I could use another ASR33 or an ASR32.

Ed
--
Ik email, dus ik besta.
BTC : 1Lk6141nvDKPxtCa5erfFyovsoJN2LKqNJ

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

On 02/15/2017 03:40 PM, couryho...@aol.com wrote:

I have not heard of  40 mil loop  here on ttys...   generally  20 mil or
60 mil.  - At  least  what   I have encountered. Is the 40 mil.  standard in
Europe?


I have not heard about 60mA - at least not in the Telex network.
All mechanical 5 step teleprinters I have ever seen and owned run on 
40mA. And my test equipment has a mark on the scale at 40mA.
I thought that this is international. But I also know that with respect 
to teleprinters there are some CCITT norms that are internationally used 
- except for the US.
It starts with ITA2 code which is the official international 5-bit telex 
code. But US uses "US-TTY" which slightly differs.


Only the ASCII stuff (asr 33/35 etc) run on 20mA. But that's a totally 
different thing.





Ed#  _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org)


In a message dated 2/14/2017 2:24:15 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time,
hac...@hachti.de writes:



On 14.02.2017 22:18, geneb wrote:

On Tue, 14 Feb  2017, ben wrote:


On 2/14/2017 6:27 AM, Alfred M. Szmidt  wrote:

FWIW, Mini-B connectors are on their way out, nor USB  OTG compliant.
Though agreed that they are flimsy... Why not  just a type A or
something? Easy, big, and  robust.


Why not mini and regular?
 Ben.
PS: Add a 45.5 baud serail port. Control everything with  a  5 level
TTY. :)


Dirty casual.  20mA  current loop or nothing.

The 45 baud machines do NOT run on 20mA. They  usually run on 40mA :-)

20mA is the domain of model 28, 32, 33  etc.



--

Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Philipp Hachtmann
Buchdruck, Bleisatz, Spezialitäten

Alemannstr. 21, D-30165 Hannover
Tel. 0511/352, Mobil 0171/2632239
Fax. 0511/3500439
phil...@hachtmann.com
www.tiegeldruck.de

UStdID DE 202668329

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[COURYHOUSE]

I have not heard of  40 mil loop  here on ttys...   generally  20 mil or  
60 mil.  - At  least  what   I have encountered. Is the 40 mil.  standard in 
Europe?
 
Ed#  _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org)  
 
 
In a message dated 2/14/2017 2:24:15 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time,  
hac...@hachti.de writes:



On 14.02.2017 22:18, geneb wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Feb  2017, ben wrote:
>
>> On 2/14/2017 6:27 AM, Alfred M. Szmidt  wrote:
>>> FWIW, Mini-B connectors are on their way out, nor USB  OTG compliant.
>>> Though agreed that they are flimsy... Why not  just a type A or
>>> something? Easy, big, and  robust.
>>>
>> Why not mini and regular?
>>  Ben.
>> PS: Add a 45.5 baud serail port. Control everything with  a  5 level
>> TTY. :)
>
> Dirty casual.  20mA  current loop or nothing.
The 45 baud machines do NOT run on 20mA. They  usually run on 40mA :-)

20mA is the domain of model 28, 32, 33  etc.

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Tony Duell]

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 2:12 PM, Philipp Hachtmann  wrote:

>> I suspect they're more common in the UK than elsewhere. They were used
>> by the Post Office
>> for the Telex service, for example.
>
>
> I know. Here everything is full with Siemens and Lorenz.
> Je aussi voudrais avoir une machine de Sagem...!

Over here, the only Teletypes we generally see are Model 33s. Even the Model
35 is very uncommon, and 5 bit stuff almost unheard-of. OK, we do see BRPE
punches from time to time. There was a UK company, Data Dynamics, who used
the Teletype Model 33 mechanics and put it in their own case with their own
electronics. I think they re-cased the BRPE too, in a very odd case (light bulbs
under the chad box, it looks very pretty).

5 bit stuff is generally Creed here. Teleprinters, paper tape readers, etc. And
a few real oddities. Like a keyboard tape punch (no electronic communications,
it just punches 5-level tape from the keyboard) made by a company called
Booth-Willmott who I have never heard of in any other connection,

Never seen a Siemens, Lorenz or Sagem machine.


-tony

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[COURYHOUSE]

there are  one of the  Siemens teletypes  that   print  tape and has a dial 
on the  front  from Germany I have  seen  very compact nice  unit used for 
telex I would love to  have.  shipping on teletypes   from overseas is 
expensive  though. 
 
If  one was local ad  inn really nice  shape  we would  be a candidate  fro 
it   for the telecom display at   SMECC.
 
 
Ed#  _www.smecc.org_ (http://www.smecc.org)  
 
 
In a message dated 2/15/2017 7:12:47 A.M. US Mountain Standard Time,  
hac...@hachti.de writes:


>> I could swap something for a nice creed  machine.
>
> I suspect they're more common in the UK than  elsewhere. They were used
> by the Post Office
> for the Telex  service, for example.

I know. Here everything is full with Siemens and  Lorenz.
Je aussi voudrais avoir une machine de Sagem...!

> are  wondering). Obviously these machines are normally 'collection
> only'  the sellers will not ship
That's the main problem :-(

But teletypes  are easier to find here than in US :-P :-P  :-P

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

I could swap something for a nice creed machine.


I suspect they're more common in the UK than elsewhere. They were used
by the Post Office
for the Telex service, for example.


I know. Here everything is full with Siemens and Lorenz.
Je aussi voudrais avoir une machine de Sagem...!


are wondering). Obviously these machines are normally 'collection
only' the sellers will not ship

That's the main problem :-(

But teletypes are easier to find here than in US :-P :-P :-P

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

On 02/15/2017 12:45 AM, Alan Hightower wrote:

Not sure if you are aware, but FYI - Malcolm MacLeod with some
involvement from Kyle Owen, Jack Rubin, and others ported your code to a
ATF1508 CPLD with a minimal test board.

Oh, ah! I looked into their github and the README.md.
There is a copy of the GPLv3 and as it looks no source code. And no hint 
that they used code from me.


That would NOT be ok!!!

Even if I have disclosed the source code, I have not licensed it under 
GPLv3 or put it into the public domain. It's a copyrighted work and I am 
the author. And the code is currently not licensed to anyone. And nobody 
but me has the right to license that code or parts of it to anyone.


That rant only to be clear... How something like that should happen:

1. Ask the author to license the stuff under a free license like GPL
   (I probably would do that!)

2. Start own project, copy and reuse as much or little as desired.
The new project's license *must* be compatible to the license of the 
used other code.
You have to mention the original author ("based on ... by...", "in parts 
based on ... by ...").



 I believe the longer term plan
was to make a full featured community project from it, but it's stalled
a bit atm.


Why?!? To have a single board KL8E replacement? Which it actually is.

OmniUSB's strong points are the following:

- HIGH speed
- No baudrate setting
- Direct USB connection
- Special instructions to use really tight loops.
- USB FIFO solution implicitely double buffered AND locked on both 
sides: As long as you obey the teleprinter flag on the 8, you cannot 
create a buffer overrun and lose data. On the PC's side you access the 
device with usual blocking I/O. You can't write more data when the PDP8 
has not read from the FIFO. Therefore no single byte lost without 
thinking about it.

Example: PDP8 does a disk dump. PC program is stopped. The pdp8 waits.
Example: PC is sending a huge block of data to the pdp8. It just writes 
as fast as possible. The pdp8 is stopped for an our during the 
transmission. No byte is lost.


Using traditional RS232 somewhere in between is just stupid bullshit. It 
completely spoils the beauty of the idea.


Of course one could add an FTDI 240x FIFO (NOT!!! NOT!!! UART) to 
the design - then it would be equivalent to OmniUSB.


But why should one make another design? Through hole parts?!? We're 
living in the 21st century! The company where I want to bring the stuff 
for soldering just told me that they usually don't stock that old and 
clumsy 0805 components by default...


Soldering a 200 pin TQFP is easier than doing some wire wrap connections 
and takes 4 minutes if you are UNexperienced. SMT soldering is easier 
than THT if you have done it for more than one half hour! (Of course 
with SMT you're on the way to really difficult stuff, but that's not 
part of the discussion)


They just should have asked me about cooperation :-)

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Peter Corlett]

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 10:02:55AM -0500, Ethan Dicks wrote:
[...]
> This is a peripheral. USB OTG doesn't apply, and USB-A would be
> "inappropriate". Pretend this is an inkjet printer. What plug would you
> expect to find on that?

Choose your own facile answer:

a) None, printers have *sockets*;
b) RJ-45; or
c) The only thing I'd connect to an inkjet printer is a steel-toecapped boot.

I much prefer regular USB A/B connectors, as the "micro" form is rather
mechanically weak and seems to break easily. The USB 3 variant is particularly
awful. I have yet to handle any USB C kit, which seems OK on paper, but only
time will tell how good it is in practice.

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Pontus Pihlgren]

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:50:40AM -0800, W2HX wrote:
> Don't laugh

I'm not laughing, if anything I'm jealous :)
 
> http://w2hx.com/x/New%20Shack/0224151752b.jpg
> 
> 
> 
> From: ben 
> Sent: Feb 14, 2017 1:54 PM
> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
> Subject: Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and 
> react!
> 
> On 2/14/2017 6:27 AM, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> > FWIW, Mini-B connectors are on their way out, nor USB OTG compliant.
> > Though agreed that they are flimsy... Why not just a type A or
> > something? Easy, big, and robust.
> >
> Why not mini and regular?
> Ben.
> PS: Add a 45.5 baud serail port. Control everything with a  5 level TTY. :)

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Tony Duell]

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Philipp Hachtmann  wrote:
> I!
>
> WANT!
>
> A!
>
> CREED!!
>
> Completely missing on my side. And.. I always mix up numbers. I have
> (several of each) Lorenz lo15 (model 15), Siemens t100, Siemens t68d, Lorenz
> lo133, model 33, and model 35 (the greatest teleprinter in history).
>
> I could swap something for a nice creed machine.

I suspect they're more common in the UK than elsewhere. They were used
by the Post Office
for the Telex service, for example.

They are less common over here than they were perhaps 30 years ago,
but not impossible to
find. I think one was up for sale for a few 10's of pounds a few weeks
ago (it did sell in case you
are wondering). Obviously these machines are normally 'collection
only' the sellers will not ship
them.

-tony

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Alan Hightower]

 

Not sure if you are aware, but FYI - Malcolm MacLeod with some
involvement from Kyle Owen, Jack Rubin, and others ported your code to a
ATF1508 CPLD with a minimal test board. I believe the longer term plan
was to make a full featured community project from it, but it's stalled
a bit atm. You can find the code repo here: 

https://github.com/malmacleod/omni-serial [1] 

And the Eagle files for the minimal test board here: 

https://www.retrotronics.org/svn/omniserial/ [2] 

All 5V PTH with minimal component count. However the FTDI micro-USB DE-9
shell connector violates the component height requirements. But it could
be sub'd for a 6 pin header and USB serial cable. 

-Alan 

On 2017-02-14 16:21, Philipp Hachtmann wrote: 

> On 14.02.2017 19:13, W2HX wrote: 
> 
>> Personally, i don't care about lead free solder.
> I care about lead: It's essential!
> 
>> Is there a rohs requirement for small production, non profit, prototyping 
>> project?
> Yes. At least here: You are not allowed to put anything on the market which 
> is not RoHS conform. And "putting on the market", in german 
> "inverkehrbringen" does explicitly not mean "large quantity, for profit etc." 
> Even doing it for fun and giving the product away for free is not allowed. 
> With that they want to catch the smart people who try to sell kits and 
> assemble them for free afterwards.
> 
> BTW the OmniUSB is NOT a non profit project!! I have to admit that! It gives 
> me some funding for my Eagle license and workshop equipment. But not that 
> much. And it does actually not cover a fraction of the development work. So 
> it's for fun on the one hand but officially run by my small business on the 
> other hand.
> 
> The CPLD and board design are not secret...
> 
> Kind regards
> 
> Philipp :-)
 

Links:
--
[1] https://github.com/malmacleod/omni-serial
[2] https://www.retrotronics.org/svn/omniserial/

RE: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Bill Gunshannon]

From: cctalk [cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] on behalf of W2HX [w...@w2hx.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2017 4:19 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: RE: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

Thanks. I meant that the comment about 45.5 was in jest but I actually have a 
plan to use a baudot to ascii converter box I have (also converts 60mA current 
loop to RS232) to allow me to connect my M28 TTYs to my PDP-8 and IMSAI. I 
think it will be much cooler than a 33 ASR. Of course the tape stuff won't be 
very useful :).

Eugene W2HX

_

My first hardcopy printer for the TRS-80 was a Lorenz LO15 connected thru a 
homebrew
interface on the cassette port.  I later upgraded to a Portacom-110 on the 
RS-232 port.

bill

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

On 14.02.2017 23:44, Ethan Dicks wrote:


I have an older JTAG adapter that has, IIRC, a 2x5 header plug

If you get it working with Xilinx SW, then it's good.
You'll need an adapter...

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Ethan Dicks]

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Philipp Hachtmann  wrote:
>> What does it take to post-program the CPLD?
>
> The board has a programming header. So after soldering it's no problem.

Perfect.

> You need a JTAG programming adapter that can be used by the Xilinx tools
> (impact).
> I use this one:
> https://shop.trenz-electronic.de/en/24624-JTAG-HS2-Programming-Cable

I have an older JTAG adapter that has, IIRC, a 2x5 header plug

> Perhaps you can borrow one. The tools can be downloaded on the Xilinx
> website. Then you are also able to alter the code and make the ting do other
> stuff for you.

Awesome.  I'm definitely interested in the least amount of
pre-assembly.  I've been burning PALs and GALs and EPROMs for over 30
years.  I own several full-sized programmers, I just wasn't sure what
adapter this CPLD was happy with.

Thanks!

-ethan

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

On 14.02.2017 22:36, W2HX wrote:

Two or three of my machines can be seen working in the movie Operation Valkyrie 
with Tom Cruise :-)


Interesting! One of my TTYs was in The Good Shepherd


Wow :-)

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

What does it take to post-program the CPLD?  SMT package aside, if
it's possible to install some flying wires going off to a device
programmer, which programmers would be able to load the CPLD in the
first place?


The board has a programming header. So after soldering it's no problem. 
You need a JTAG programming adapter that can be used by the Xilinx tools 
(impact).
I use this one: 
https://shop.trenz-electronic.de/en/24624-JTAG-HS2-Programming-Cable


Perhaps you can borrow one. The tools can be downloaded on the Xilinx 
website. Then you are also able to alter the code and make the ting do 
other stuff for you.

RE: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[W2HX]

>Two or three of my machines can be seen working in the movie Operation 
>Valkyrie with Tom Cruise :-)

Interesting! One of my TTYs was in The Good Shepherd 

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Ethan Dicks]

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Philipp Hachtmann  wrote:
> But I don't know yet how I will preprogram the CPLD.

What does it take to post-program the CPLD?  SMT package aside, if
it's possible to install some flying wires going off to a device
programmer, which programmers would be able to load the CPLD in the
first place?

> I am very sorry but it has really become illegal to use real 60/40 solder if
> you want to ship that stuff anywhere except the military.

Yeah... it's a real PITA.  I've had several devices fail due to
mechanical impact (dropping) and RoHS solder fracturing.

-ethan

RE: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[W2HX]

>The 45 baud machines do NOT run on 20mA. They usually run on 40mA :-) 20mA is 
>the domain of model 28, 32, 33 etc.

14's, 15's 19's, 28s are generally 60mA 120VDC signaling. My 28s have speed 
select for 60 WPM (45.45 baud), 75 WPM (56.9 Baud) and 100 WPM (74.2 baud). 100 
WPM is very fast. It is amazing these things don't fly apart! Lots of great 
videos on you tube of these things running.

Current Loops and TTYs (was Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!)

[Ethan Dicks]

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 4:22 PM, Philipp Hachtmann  wrote:
>>> PS: Add a 45.5 baud serail port. Control everything with a  5 level
>>> TTY. :)
>>
>> Dirty casual.  20mA current loop or nothing.
>
> The 45 baud machines do NOT run on 20mA. They usually run on 40mA :-)

The M19 is 60mA at 100VDC... takes a bit to pull that relay.

> 20mA is the domain of model 28, 32, 33 etc.

Yep.  That's all I have in my own pile... (33 and 35).

-ethan

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

On 14.02.2017 20:27, Tony Duell wrote:


Personally I _do_ care about lead free solder. I won't have it.

I don't want it, too.


The
fact that part
of this board comes pre-assembled with that horrible muck means I won't
even consider buying one.


You will get a fresh board, no problem! ENIG gold, no tin, nothing 
lead-free pre-applied - you can do what you like (and what lasts the best!).

But I don't know yet how I will preprogram the CPLD.

I am very sorry but it has really become illegal to use real 60/40 
solder if you want to ship that stuff anywhere except the military.

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

I!

WANT!

A!

CREED!!

Completely missing on my side. And.. I always mix up numbers. I have 
(several of each) Lorenz lo15 (model 15), Siemens t100, Siemens t68d, 
Lorenz lo133, model 33, and model 35 (the greatest teleprinter in history).


I could swap something for a nice creed machine.




On 14.02.2017 20:57, Tony Duell wrote:

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 7:50 PM, W2HX  wrote:

Don't laugh

http://w2hx.com/x/New%20Shack/0224151752b.jpg


Why should I laugh? They look beautiful.

Incidentally, in those pictures of my PDP8/e that I posted the
link to last week you can see a the corners of a couple of
teleprinters in one of them. Both are Creeds. One is a
Creed 7E (Goverend motor, I think currently set to 50
baud, but I could tweak the screw), the other a Creed
444 (with 75 baud gears, one day I must learn how to
cut skew helical gears and make the 50 baud gearing
for it). Both are, of course 5-level ITA2 machines

-tony



--
Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Philipp Hachtmann
Buchdruck, Bleisatz, Spezialitäten

Alemannstr. 21, D-30165 Hannover
Tel. 0511/352, Mobil 0171/2632239
Fax. 0511/3500439
phil...@hachtmann.com

www.tiegeldruck.de
facebook.com/buchdruck

UStdID DE 202668329

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

On 14.02.2017 22:18, geneb wrote:

On Tue, 14 Feb 2017, ben wrote:


On 2/14/2017 6:27 AM, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:

FWIW, Mini-B connectors are on their way out, nor USB OTG compliant.
Though agreed that they are flimsy... Why not just a type A or
something? Easy, big, and robust.


Why not mini and regular?
Ben.
PS: Add a 45.5 baud serail port. Control everything with a  5 level
TTY. :)


Dirty casual.  20mA current loop or nothing.

The 45 baud machines do NOT run on 20mA. They usually run on 40mA :-)

20mA is the domain of model 28, 32, 33 etc.

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

On 14.02.2017 19:13, W2HX wrote:

Personally, i don't care about lead free solder.

I care about lead: It's essential!


Is there a rohs requirement for small production, non profit, prototyping 
project?
Yes. At least here: You are not allowed to put anything on the market 
which is not RoHS conform. And "putting on the market", in german 
"inverkehrbringen" does explicitly not mean "large quantity, for profit 
etc." Even doing it for fun and giving the product away for free is not 
allowed. With that they want to catch the smart people who try to sell 
kits and assemble them for free afterwards.


BTW the OmniUSB is NOT a non profit project!! I have to admit that! It 
gives me some funding for my Eagle license and workshop equipment. But 
not that much. And it does actually not cover a fraction of the 
development work. So it's for fun on the one hand but officially run by 
my small business on the other hand.


The CPLD and board design are not secret...


Kind regards

Philipp :-)





From: Philipp Hachtmann 
Sent: Feb 14, 2017 11:54 AM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

Hi,


I'm interested. How much did a board from the previous batch cost?

Was different. I first made a poll and sold a batch of boards in my
online shop for a certain price. It was somewhere about 105 EUR without VAT.
After I received the payment, I made the boards and delivered them (I
announced exactly that procedere!!).
Later, as a few boards were left, I increased the price up to nearly EUR
200. I did it like with kickstarter - the people who trusted and funded
got it cheaper. The whole thing barely covered the costs btw.


And
will that be any indication of what the new boards price?

No, not really. But I already have some rough idea.
The board will most probably be full size again. Reducing the size does
seems not to offer enough benefit with respect to the hassle of adding
enlargement afterwards.

After my poll it looks as if there will be the following options:

- Kit with full size board and SMT already soldered RoHS compliant.
This will most probably go for short under EUR 100 (without VAT where it
applies).

I have to check with the assembly house. This time I try not to sit
there and solder lead free SMD by hand for days. I like soldering SMT
but that lead-free stuff and masses of boards can get quite annoying.
The last boards were all hand soldered by me.
One problem could be the gold fingers: My usual board house finally
realized that their calculation tool was plain wrong when it charged me
extra EUR 1,50 per board for the hard gold fingers.

The board will be like the old ones but:

* some unused (upper bit) IC positions removed
* The diode stuff moved away from the edge (that was so stupid, sorry!)
* The USB connector will be moved away from the edge, I will think about
some holes to fix the cable using a strap. The USB will become mini USB.

- Wonderful handle/set of handles to attach to the board. Probably made
of milled wood, still thinking about it.
This will be extremely expensive, I have no idea yet. Perhaps EUR 30 per
"one piece" or set.

And if someone really insists, I will manually complete and test a
board. That would add another EUR 65 to the game. And perhaps an USB cable.

If I continue to sell boards in that way, it will take not even 5 more
years until it has paid for my Eagle 6 and 7 licenses..

Please continue to add to the doodle "calendar", if you are interested.

Kind regards,

Philipp



--
Dipl.-Inf. (FH) Philipp Hachtmann
Buchdruck, Bleisatz, Spezialitäten

Alemannstr. 21, D-30165 Hannover
Tel. 0511/352, Mobil 0171/2632239
Fax. 0511/3500439
phil...@hachtmann.com

www.tiegeldruck.de
facebook.com/buchdruck

UStdID DE 202668329

RE: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[W2HX]

Thanks. I meant that the comment about 45.5 was in jest but I actually have a 
plan to use a baudot to ascii converter box I have (also converts 60mA current 
loop to RS232) to allow me to connect my M28 TTYs to my PDP-8 and IMSAI. I 
think it will be much cooler than a 33 ASR. Of course the tape stuff won't be 
very useful :).

Eugene W2HX


-Original Message-
From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Tony Duell
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2017 2:57 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 7:50 PM, W2HX  wrote:
> Don't laugh
>
> http://w2hx.com/x/New%20Shack/0224151752b.jpg

Why should I laugh? They look beautiful.

Incidentally, in those pictures of my PDP8/e that I posted the link to last 
week you can see a the corners of a couple of teleprinters in one of them. Both 
are Creeds. One is a Creed 7E (Goverend motor, I think currently set to 50 
baud, but I could tweak the screw), the other a Creed
444 (with 75 baud gears, one day I must learn how to cut skew helical gears and 
make the 50 baud gearing for it). Both are, of course 5-level ITA2 machines

-tony

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[geneb]

On Tue, 14 Feb 2017, ben wrote:


On 2/14/2017 6:27 AM, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:

FWIW, Mini-B connectors are on their way out, nor USB OTG compliant.
Though agreed that they are flimsy... Why not just a type A or
something? Easy, big, and robust.


Why not mini and regular?
Ben.
PS: Add a 45.5 baud serail port. Control everything with a  5 level TTY. :)


Dirty casual.  20mA current loop or nothing.


:)

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: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

On 14.02.2017 20:09, Ethan Dicks wrote:


I'm restoring a Model 19 teletype with a friend, so I happen to _need_
a 45.5 baud serial port that spits 5-level Baudot...


A model 19?
I have some model 28 ASR and KSR (ASCII), and of course 33. And some 
Lorenz Lo15 which are license built model 15s. Like them a lot.
Are you sure that it's 45.5 baud?!? The normal telex networks operates 
on 50 baud. 45.5 baud is for RTTY.


A normal UART16550 can at least output 5N2 at 50 baud (yes, two stop 
bits!!) and of course 8n2 at 110 baud for the ASCII teletypes...


I also could just hook up another teleprinter off my shelf of teleprinters.

Two or three of my machines can be seen working in the movie Operation 
Valkyrie with Tom Cruise :-)
But I lost track which ones in the room. Not all were working so the 
machines were moved without the covers several times. In the end they 
were sorted, of course...


:-)

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Noel Chiappa]

> From: Tony Duell

> Personally I _do_ care about lead free solder. I won't have it. The
> fact that part of this board comes pre-assembled with that horrible
> muck means I won't even consider buying one.

Gee, Tony, why don't you tell us what you _really_ think! :-)

Noel

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Tony Duell]

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 7:50 PM, W2HX  wrote:
> Don't laugh
>
> http://w2hx.com/x/New%20Shack/0224151752b.jpg

Why should I laugh? They look beautiful.

Incidentally, in those pictures of my PDP8/e that I posted the
link to last week you can see a the corners of a couple of
teleprinters in one of them. Both are Creeds. One is a
Creed 7E (Goverend motor, I think currently set to 50
baud, but I could tweak the screw), the other a Creed
444 (with 75 baud gears, one day I must learn how to
cut skew helical gears and make the 50 baud gearing
for it). Both are, of course 5-level ITA2 machines

-tony

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Fred Cisin]

Personally, i don't care about lead free solder. I am quite happy with lead. Is
there a rohs requirement for small production, non profit, prototyping project?

On Tue, 14 Feb 2017, Tony Duell wrote:

Personally I _do_ care about lead free solder. I won't have it. The
fact that part
of this board comes pre-assembled with that horrible muck means I won't
even consider buying one.


I'm sure that it would be possible to special order an unsoldered one, if 
ARD actually wants a pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface!

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[W2HX]

Don't laugh

http://w2hx.com/x/New%20Shack/0224151752b.jpg



From: ben 
Sent: Feb 14, 2017 1:54 PM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

On 2/14/2017 6:27 AM, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> FWIW, Mini-B connectors are on their way out, nor USB OTG compliant.
> Though agreed that they are flimsy... Why not just a type A or
> something? Easy, big, and robust.
>
Why not mini and regular?
Ben.
PS: Add a 45.5 baud serail port. Control everything with a  5 level TTY. :)

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Tony Duell]

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 6:13 PM, W2HX  wrote:
> Personally, i don't care about lead free solder. I am quite happy with lead. 
> Is
> there a rohs requirement for small production, non profit, prototyping 
> project?

Personally I _do_ care about lead free solder. I won't have it. The
fact that part
of this board comes pre-assembled with that horrible muck means I won't
even consider buying one.

-tony

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Fred Cisin]

This is a peripheral.  USB OTG doesn't apply, and USB-A would be
"inappropriate".  Pretend this is an inkjet printer.  What plug would
you expect to find on that?

On Tue, 14 Feb 2017, Chris Elmquist wrote:

A Centronics-style 36-pin Amphenol.
oh, sorry.  

("blue-ribbon")

A DB25

Howzbout a DE-9?

Original style USB-B

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Ethan Dicks]

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 1:53 PM, ben  wrote:
> PS: Add a 45.5 baud serail port. Control everything with a  5 level TTY. :)

I'm restoring a Model 19 teletype with a friend, so I happen to _need_
a 45.5 baud serial port that spits 5-level Baudot...

-ethan

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[ben]

On 2/14/2017 6:27 AM, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:

FWIW, Mini-B connectors are on their way out, nor USB OTG compliant.
Though agreed that they are flimsy... Why not just a type A or
something? Easy, big, and robust.


Why not mini and regular?
Ben.
PS: Add a 45.5 baud serail port. Control everything with a  5 level TTY. :)

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Chris Elmquist]

On Tuesday (02/14/2017 at 10:02AM -0500), Ethan Dicks wrote:
> 
> This is a peripheral.  USB OTG doesn't apply, and USB-A would be
> "inappropriate".  Pretend this is an inkjet printer.  What plug would
> you expect to find on that?

A Centronics-style 36-pin Amphenol.

oh, sorry.  

-- 
Chris Elmquist

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Ethan Dicks]

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:09 AM, Philipp Hachtmann  wrote:
>> This is a peripheral.  USB OTG doesn't apply, and USB-A would be
>> "inappropriate".  Pretend this is an inkjet printer.  What plug would
>> you expect to find on that?
>
> Haha :-)
> It is not an inkject printer!

Indeed, but as far as USB is concerned, there's more similarity than difference.

> But I actually have written a (very limited)
> HPGL interpreter which controls a Calcomp 565/563 plotter. So it's --
> actually! -- more a plotter.

Interesting.

>> I don't _mind_ Mini...
>
> Ok, micro is out of discussion. It won't be applied.
>
>> I have a suggestion... put 4 vias on 0.1" spacing...
>
> Ha, that's a nice idea.

Thanks.

> I'll plan in a white 90° pinhead connector - only the footprint, of course.

Yes.  Footprint only.  And I love the idea of holes in the board to
strap down the cable.

As for the connector placement on the original board, I'm thinking
it's fine for the -8/e/f/m, but it might be in an awkward place for an
-8/a.  What you have been describing for this new board sounds like it
will be good for both (conveniently for me, I have both types of
boxes...)

Thanks!

-ethan

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

What's wrong with USB-B?
Too big. Does not properly fit into the DEC board spacing. The rest is 
just perfect.



I consider both Mini and Micro as not
mechanically reliable, i.e. I fear that the cable will unplug itself or
the mechanical strain will break the leads in the plug (I have too many
Mini and Micro cables that suffer from this)
Oh, my DSLR has such a mini USB. And my USBlink board as well. I did 
never have problems. And I did not handle the cables with care.



or rip off the SMD pins
from the copper traces (also very common in my experience).

That ahould be avoidable.

I don't want

to pull out a fully equipped pdp8 of the rack and open it just to


Strap it to the board. I will include holes for that purpose.

By the way: Do you still like the old board?

Kind regards

Philipp

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

Hi,


I'm interested. How much did a board from the previous batch cost?
Was different. I first made a poll and sold a batch of boards in my 
online shop for a certain price. It was somewhere about 105 EUR without VAT.
After I received the payment, I made the boards and delivered them (I 
announced exactly that procedere!!).
Later, as a few boards were left, I increased the price up to nearly EUR 
200. I did it like with kickstarter - the people who trusted and funded 
got it cheaper. The whole thing barely covered the costs btw.



And
will that be any indication of what the new boards price?

No, not really. But I already have some rough idea.
The board will most probably be full size again. Reducing the size does 
seems not to offer enough benefit with respect to the hassle of adding 
enlargement afterwards.


After my poll it looks as if there will be the following options:

- Kit with full size board and SMT already soldered RoHS compliant.
This will most probably go for short under EUR 100 (without VAT where it 
applies).


I have to check with the assembly house. This time I try not to sit 
there and solder lead free SMD by hand for days. I like soldering SMT 
but that lead-free stuff and masses of boards can get quite annoying.

The last boards were all hand soldered by me.
One problem could be the gold fingers: My usual board house finally 
realized that their calculation tool was plain wrong when it charged me 
extra EUR 1,50 per board for the hard gold fingers.


The board will be like the old ones but:

* some unused (upper bit) IC positions removed
* The diode stuff moved away from the edge (that was so stupid, sorry!)
* The USB connector will be moved away from the edge, I will think about 
some holes to fix the cable using a strap. The USB will become mini USB.


- Wonderful handle/set of handles to attach to the board. Probably made 
of milled wood, still thinking about it.
This will be extremely expensive, I have no idea yet. Perhaps EUR 30 per 
"one piece" or set.


And if someone really insists, I will manually complete and test a 
board. That would add another EUR 65 to the game. And perhaps an USB cable.


If I continue to sell boards in that way, it will take not even 5 more 
years until it has paid for my Eagle 6 and 7 licenses..


Please continue to add to the doodle "calendar", if you are interested.

Kind regards,

Philipp

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

This is a peripheral.  USB OTG doesn't apply, and USB-A would be
"inappropriate".  Pretend this is an inkjet printer.  What plug would
you expect to find on that?

Haha :-)
It is not an inkject printer! But I actually have written a (very 
limited) HPGL interpreter which controls a Calcomp 565/563 plotter. So 
it's -- actually! -- more a plotter.
And even a plotter would have an USB B something. Oh, wait...! If it was 
a Zuse Z64 Graphomat which worked offline reading papertape, the plotter 
would probably need an USB host interface (A receptable) where I can put 
my stick with the HPGL data ;-) ;-)



I don't _mind_ Mini (I have a number of devices and cables that are
mini) and it _is_ more robust than Micro (I have seen plenty of phones
and tablets with broken micro plugs).

Ok, micro is out of discussion. It won't be applied.


I have a suggestion... put 4 vias on 0.1" spacing next to the micro
connector so we could, for example, add a chassis-friendly exit cable
of our own purchase/manufacture if we choose, to have a nice fat USB-B
on the outside of the case.
https://newnex.com/images/UHR1-B-0005Blarge.jpg


Ha, that's a nice idea.
I'll plan in a white 90° pinhead connector - only the footprint, of course.


Philipp

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

   This is a peripheral.  USB OTG doesn't apply, and USB-A would be
   "inappropriate".  Pretend this is an inkjet printer.  What plug would
   you expect to find on that?

A type B plug.

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[W2HX]

That is a very nice and robust part you linked to. Looks perfect


From: Ethan Dicks 
Sent: Feb 14, 2017 10:03 AM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 8:27 AM, Alfred M. Szmidt  wrote:
> FWIW, Mini-B connectors are on their way out, nor USB OTG compliant.
> Though agreed that they are flimsy... Why not just a type A or
> something? Easy, big, and robust.

This is a peripheral.  USB OTG doesn't apply, and USB-A would be
"inappropriate".  Pretend this is an inkjet printer.  What plug would
you expect to find on that?

I don't _mind_ Mini (I have a number of devices and cables that are
mini) and it _is_ more robust than Micro (I have seen plenty of phones
and tablets with broken micro plugs).

I have a suggestion... put 4 vias on 0.1" spacing next to the micro
connector so we could, for example, add a chassis-friendly exit cable
of our own purchase/manufacture if we choose, to have a nice fat USB-B
on the outside of the case.

https://newnex.com/images/UHR1-B-0005Blarge.jpg

-ethan

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Ethan Dicks]

On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 8:27 AM, Alfred M. Szmidt  wrote:
> FWIW, Mini-B connectors are on their way out, nor USB OTG compliant.
> Though agreed that they are flimsy... Why not just a type A or
> something? Easy, big, and robust.

This is a peripheral.  USB OTG doesn't apply, and USB-A would be
"inappropriate".  Pretend this is an inkjet printer.  What plug would
you expect to find on that?

I don't _mind_ Mini (I have a number of devices and cables that are
mini) and it _is_ more robust than Micro (I have seen plenty of phones
and tablets with broken micro plugs).

I have a suggestion... put 4 vias on 0.1" spacing next to the micro
connector so we could, for example, add a chassis-friendly exit cable
of our own purchase/manufacture if we choose, to have a nice fat USB-B
on the outside of the case.

https://newnex.com/images/UHR1-B-0005Blarge.jpg

-ethan

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Alfred M. Szmidt]

FWIW, Mini-B connectors are on their way out, nor USB OTG compliant.
Though agreed that they are flimsy... Why not just a type A or
something? Easy, big, and robust.

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Philipp Hachtmann]

On 02/13/2017 05:34 PM, W2HX wrote:

Thanks for doing this project and I have signed up!
Thanks! The list already looks very good. I'll probably make 50 boards 
this time!



Curious why mini
usb and why the exclamation points regarding "NOT micro?" Micro is so
common.

I don't like micro. That's all. The plugs are ugly. And look delicate.


I don’t
think I've seen a device made in the last several years with a mini.
My Canon 5D III has mini. My USBlink-board has mini. I have a box full 
of SMD usb mini connectors (oh, another reason).


Kind regards

Philipp

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Christian Corti]

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017, Philipp Hachtmann wrote:

- the USB connector will be replaced by a mini (NOT micro!!) USB connector.


What's wrong with USB-B? I consider both Mini and Micro as not 
mechanically reliable, i.e. I fear that the cable will unplug itself or 
the mechanical strain will break the leads in the plug (I have too many 
Mini and Micro cables that suffer from this) or rip off the SMD pins from 
the copper traces (also very common in my experience). I don't want to 
pull out a fully equipped pdp8 of the rack and open it just to reinsert 
the cable. ;-)


Christian

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Pontus Pihlgren]

Hi Philipp

I'm interested. How much did a board from the previous batch cost? And 
will that be any indication of what the new boards price?

Thank you,
Pontus

On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 04:00:26PM +0100, Philipp Hachtmann wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> it has taken a while but I'm now actively planning to shift out another
> batch of OmniUSB boards. The last batch is sold out for a long time and I've
> been asked for more from time to time.
> 
> As some of you might remember, it's a cool device to connect your
> pdp8/f/a/m/e to the modern world using lightning fast USB.
> 
> The originial board has it's website here:
> 
> http://pdp8.hachti.de/projects/omni_usb/
> 
> The new board will do the same, perhaps even more.
> 
> - the USB connector will be replaced by a mini (NOT micro!!) USB connector.
> - The connector position and cable routing will be improved.
> - The board will be shorter. But it will come by default with a laser cut
> acrylic extension that makes it full size again.
> 
> There will be at least those options to buy:
> 
> - Kit (board + all parts)
> - Kit+ (board + all parts, SMT already assembled)
> 
> Possible:
> - complete version - Everything soldered and tested.
> - discount for omitting acrylic extender
> 
> I cannot guarantee that I can deliver fully assembled boards (regulations)
> and would be able to do that only if there's a reasonable number of
> interested buyers.
> 
> If have set up a doodle poll to get a realistic picture of the interest in
> the board/kit/device:
> 
> http://doodle.com/poll/d7y524mvyfezqp9w
> 
> PLEASE take the minute and fill in your name (ideally that I can recognise
> you) and check the options which most precisely match your demands.
> 
> PLEASE be as honest as possible as I will base my decisions IF and for which
> PRICE I can run the show.
> 
> Thank you!!!
> 
> Kind regards
> 
> Philipp :-)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Liam Proven]

On 13 February 2017 at 19:10, Fred Cisin  wrote:
> THAT is apparently why USB-C was developed.   it is symmetrical.


Well, it's not _only_ that, but it's part of it.

Apple led the way with its symmetrical Lightning connector:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_(connector)

This introduced millions of customers to a USB-sized single plug for
data, audio & power that could go into its socket either way. That
"primed the pump".

Then a design student published a, well, um, a design for a USB plug
that could go in either way:

http://dornob.com/double-sided-usb-solves-painfully-universal-design-problem/

This was widely admired and discussed, or as they say now, "went
viral". I think some companies implemented it but it violates the USB
formal spec.

(Not that that bothers the cheapo vendors -- e.g. I have both external
hard disks and a laptop cooling stand that both take a USB *A* to *A*
cable. I.e. the computer-end connector on both ends. This is highly
illegal -- you could connect 2 computers directly and blow at least
one of them up thereby -- but nobody enforces the rules.)

The bi-directional plug and Lightning both demonstrated that this was
desirable, possible, and that there was demand.

Also, there were the bodges of USB 3 extensions to the micro-USB spec
such as this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_3.0#/media/File:Connector_USB_3_IMGP6033_wp.jpg

... and this...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_3.0#/media/File:USB-3.0-Stecker_(Typ_B).jpg

And commentary such as this:

http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/5/4696874/galaxy-note-3-usb-3-0-power-connector-explained

Sort of Siamese-twin double connectors -- big and ugly and a very
visible kludge.

Something Had To Be Done.

USB C is the result.

And although owners and prospective owners of the new MacBook Pro
laptops are complaining widely that they *only* have USB-C ports, it's
actually a good thing, IMHO.

As this eloquently explains:

https://medium.com/@ageitgey/the-new-macbook-pro-is-kind-of-great-for-hackers-64c1c577a4d2#.bfca5smcu

The higher-end MacBook Pro has 4 of them -- *and nothing else*.

You can plug the power cable into any of them. Doesn't matter. Plug a
display in to any of them. Doesn't matter. Phone, memory stick, wired
network cable, docking station. Any port. Doesn't matter.

Plug the power supply into the MacBook, the MacBook charges. Plug the
same cable into your phone, the phone charges. Plug the phone into the
MacBook -- same cable -- the phone charges and syncs.

I really like the idea of a small silent computer that's got a bunch
of ports and anything plugs into anything. 2 or 3 screens? Just works.
Sync several phones? Just works. Where's the power socket? There isn't
one. Plug it in anywhere. If it fits, it works, either way round.

-- 
Liam Proven • Profile: https://about.me/liamproven
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • Google Mail/Talk/Plus: lpro...@gmail.com
Twitter/Facebook/Flickr: lproven • Skype/LinkedIn/AIM/Yahoo: liamproven
UK: +44 7939-087884 • ČR/WhatsApp/Telegram/Signal: +420 702 829 053

RE: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Fred Cisin]

On Mon, 13 Feb 2017, W2HX wrote:
Thanks for doing this project and I have signed up! Curious why mini usb 
and why the exclamation points regarding "NOT micro?" Micro is so 
common. I have tons of usb-micro cables for all my devices. I don’t 
think I've seen a device made in the last several years with a mini. I 
have no mini usb cables, not that I can't purchase one, of course!


There are claims that MICRO-USB has better reliability, with many more 
insertion cycles than MINI-USB.


But, MICRO has more of a symmetry problem than MINI.  In poor light, it is 
easier to get MINI right-side-up than MICRO.

THAT is apparently why USB-C was developed.   it is symmetrical.
Apple has shown with "LIGHTNING", single button mouse, etc.,  that it is 
always safer to under-estimate the intelligence and abilities of your 
users.

Re: New batch of pdp8 OMNIBUS to USB interface! Please Read and react!

[Ethan Dicks]

On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 11:34 AM, W2HX  wrote:
> Thanks for doing this project and I have signed up!

Me too.

> Curious why mini usb and why the exclamation points regarding "NOT micro?
> " Micro is so common. I have tons of usb-micro cables for all my devices. I 
> don’t
> think I've seen a device made in the last several years with a mini. I have 
> no mini
> usb cables, not that I can't purchase one, of course!

I was also slightly curious, but I have a pile of mini USB cables from
external drives, a ZipIt palmtop texting device, and even my
ZoomFloppy, so I'm all set there.  I don't mind a dedicated cable
sticking out of my PDP-8.

-ethan