Re: What did computers without screens do?
On 12/14/2015 04:31 PM, Mike wrote: What would you do with a home no screen computer? I mean what could be done with one that would benefit your work / hobby. I mean NO DISREPECT by asking this question. I saw plenty of early home computers with TTY or Selectric I/O. If you could find a timesharing service to hook your home up in the 60s and early 70s, it was probably with a TTY. (Anyone remember Call Computer in Mountain View?) Consider, for example the Honeywell H-316 "kitchen computer" from 1969: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honeywell_316 To the best of my knowledge, it was more of a concept than a real product. But no screen, notice? Legions of high-school and college students before about the mid-70s had no access to screens. If you didn't use punched cards, you probably used a TTY. But then, video output was rare for employees of the computer manufacturers. Too expensive. Paper--lots of it. You did your serious programming with pencil and paper, then punched or entered it. That was the old IDE. Considering the amount of code written, it wasn't too bad. --Chuck
Re: What did computers without screens do?
On 15 December 2015 at 01:31, Mike wrote: > > On 12/14/2015 08:21 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: >> Personally, I think the world is GUI-addicted. >> >> --Chuck >> > Chuck If I may ask... > > > What would you do with a home no screen computer? I mean what could be > done with one that would benefit your work / hobby. I mean NO DISREPECT > by asking this question. I'll jump in here - take the current microcontroller hobby segment. You have PIC, or AVR, or Propeller based setups which is used for all kind of things like programmed robots, model cars, drones and RC planes, home control, model trains, temperature- and humidity controlled garden greenhouses, chicken shed day/night door control, and numerous other uses. These things are computers, a Propeller, for example, is an 8-core 32-bit small computer all in one chip. Usually these things have no screen and no keyboard connected. So you program them by various other means, e.g. through a serial interface. For the programming part of it (or the preparation of what you load via the serial interface, or jtag or e.g. a flash or eeprom chip) you'll need something else, today that's usually a PC, but that's conceptually the same thing as in times past where you used a terminal or some device with a keyboard to prepare punched cards or paper tape.
IBM CMS dumpfile idiocy
Just finished reading a 9 track tape made with IBM CMS in its dumpfile format. Why on earth--or might I say, what idiot--designed this format? First the file data in a series of records, *then* the file name and other metadata. Anyone know of a DOS/Windows/Unix utility to unravel one of these things? I don't feel too much like coding for a single tape. --Chuck
Re: Display-less computing
On 12/14/2015 06:05 PM, Paul Koning wrote: I've only ever seen them called "12" and "11" for the top and next rows respectively. For example, the card code listing on the IBM 360 "green card" shows them that way (e.g., A is 12-1). Same here. But it's not outside the range of possibility that *someone* called them X and Y, although I don't know who did. Doug Jones doesn't mention it. Let's not forget the System/3 96-column cards. BA8421 (sort of like 7-track mag tape), with a really wacky way to combine the columns to make 8-bit bytes. Univac, of course, had their own system with their double-45 column system, round holes and all. --Chuck
Re: Mystery IC: Allen Bradley 314B102
On 2015-Dec-14, at 2:02 PM, Mike Ross wrote: > > - intention was to rip all this out and convert it to a full I/O > serial terminal, using an Arduino-based setup that Lawrence Wilkinson > has already built and tested: > https://www.flickr.com/photos/ljw/sets/72157632841492802/with/9201494189/ > - all the keyboard contacts are already in there, Western I/O just cut > the IBM wires off when they ripped the IBM guts out and converted it > printer-only. I'd like to figure out the interface that's presently in > it, just to check out the mechanism, and for that 'ah ha!' moment :) > - but I don't want to spend any significant time on it if I'm just > going to rip it all out. > > - but, although the Western I/O conversion 'butchered' a perfectly > good IBM 2970, it IS a rare representative of that era, when all kinds > of Selectric conversions were commonplace. So perhaps, as a nod to > that era, it should be left as-is, as a preserved example? What say > people? I've seen posts on old lists where people have referred to > buying these back in the day - converted Selectrics I mean - and > seeing 'mountains' of them in warehouses. They were once common. Where > have they all gone? Is mine the *only* survivor from those mountains > of 3rd-party backstreet conversions? Does anyone else have any? > > I've just spent a few hundred bucks with one of the few mechanical > Selectric gurus left standing - a local guy here in NZ who did an > amazing job, several broken and seized bits fixed, the mechanism is > now like new and works perfectly in typewriter mode - so it's going to > end up working, one way or another! Well, I vote for doing a little more work to get it working as is. If it's all there, it 'should' work as intended and really doesn't look to be very complex. Chances look good it will be adaptable to a centronics port. Pin 9-11 & 21-24 connect to the pull-up resistors and head in the the direction of the 7475 DFFs - that's likely the 7 data bits. Traces from the DFFs look like they then head to the proms which are likely 3 * 256*4. That leaves 13,17,19 for some combination of control signals such as print-strobe-in, ready-out, fault-out. I notice there is an MC14490 hex contact debouncer there. You say this is not a keyboard-send conversion, so I'd guess those debouncers may be picking up mechanical contacts that indicate end-of-operation, to produce a ready signal. If reverse engineering really isn't your shtick, send along reasonable-resolution photos of both sides of the board and I'll work on a schematic. Could do it with the photos you provided earlier except the solder-side photo isn't complete.
Re: PDP 11/05 S vs 11/05 NC
2015-12-15 3:15 GMT+01:00 william degnan : > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 1:33 PM, Mattis Lind wrote: > > > 2015-12-14 17:12 GMT+01:00 william degnan : > > > > > Just to change the subject.. > > > > > > There were "S" and an "NC" version of 11/05 high profile system. Why? > > > > > > I am curious if any DEC historians here know the reason for two > versions > > of > > > the same DEC PDP 11/05 *high profile* computer (not talking about the > low > > > profile).There are separate manuals for each type. > > > > > > > Age? The NC (and ND if you are in 230VAC area) are in the BA11-D chassis > > which uses the H750 PSU. The same chassis was used by for example 11/35. > > The H750 PSU has partly the same assemblies as the low PDP-11/05 chassis > > and then also a H744. The memory system is somewhat different in that the > > H214 is 8kW and the H217 is 16kW and the former is used in the NC/ND > while > > the S uses the latter. > > > > But of course there can be all sorts of other reasons as well. > > > > /Mattis > > > > > > > > > > Yes I did know that power supplies and RAM are different within the two > versions, being that have both types of 11/05. That's what prompted my > question - *why* did they make these two versions of the high-profile > 11/05? What was one used for vs. the other? *Why did DEC do this*? > > It is simply that as long as the box had the M7260/M7261 CPU cards it was > an "11/05"? (or 11/10) > > Those of you who knew DEC back then may have a perspective I don't on the > subject. Seems to me that they did not care, they just used what they had > available. > Yes, and my guess that they are of different vintage. The BA11-D is the older box used for the NC and the BA11-K is the more modern box used for the S model. Over the years the memory requirements increased and thus they had to increase the density. I think the NC/ND models are the first 11/05s along with the low cabinet model. The a few years later the S model was added. /Mattis > > -- > Bill >
Re: PDP 11/05 S vs 11/05 NC
> From: William Degnan > *why* did they make these two versions of the high-profile 11/05? > What was one used for vs. the other? *Why did DEC do this*? Check the dates on the machines. I'm pretty sure the -NC is the earlier version, with the bespoke H750 power supply (mounted alongside the boards, not at the end of the box as with the BA11-K, the basis for the -S). My guess as to why they upgraded from the -NC to the -S is that the latter used the H765 (plus 'bricks') power supply system, in common with the BA11-K and also the later PDP-11's (40's, 45's, etc). That probably provided a raft of advantages, including i) greater flexibility in the current and voltages being supplied, and ii) commonality with DEC's other machines (i.e. lower unit cost -> great per machine profit margin). The BA11-K based -S also (by being a couple of inches longer, and mounting the power supply off the back) had a couple of inches more width for boards, enough to hold an extra quad system unit. And the H765 may have been technically superior to the H750, too. Noel
RE: Anyone want a copy of DIGITAL ServerWORKS Manager ?
> -Original Message- > From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Glen Slick > Sent: 14 December 2015 22:33 > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > Subject: Anyone want a copy of DIGITAL ServerWORKS Manager ? > > Before I chuck these in the recycle bin, does anyone want a copies of > DIGITAL ServerWORKS Manager? > > I have two boxes, QB-4QYAA-SA 3.2 sealed in shrink wrap, and QB-4QYAA-SA > 3.3 open box that is slightly crushed. > > The boxes (at least the still sealed one) look like this eBay item (not mine) > listing: > http://www.ebay.com/itm/321413114710 > > The DIGITAL ServerWORKS™ Manager Installation and User Guide in the QB- > 4QYAA-SA 3.3 open box is the ER-4QXAA-UA. G01 version of the ER-4QXAA- > UA. H01 manual here: > http://manx.classiccmp.org/collections/mds- > 199909/cd2/network/4qxaauah.pdf > > It doesn't look like there is a market for these worth the bother of listing > them on eBay. Free for the cost of covering postage from Seattle, WA if > anyone wants them. > Seems a shame to throw them away. What would postage of these to the UK cost? Regards Rob
IBM Selectric-based Terminals
> - intention was to rip all this out and convert it to a full I/O serial > terminal, using an Arduino-based setup > that Lawrence Wilkinson has already built and tested: > https://www.flickr.com/photos/ljw/sets/72157632841492802/with/9201494189/ Looks very nice! Is there documentation for it somewhere? I also have a Selectric (unfortunately it's located distant from me at the moment so I can't provide particulars) that I worked on interfacing to a micro in the mid-70's. I was using a MC6800 in my recollection, but I don't believe that I ever achieved operational status. Presumably I was working from an article in one of the hobbyist magazines of the era. I would have guessed Byte, but that doesn't seem to be the case based on recent search. Any hints from folks on what magazine/article that might have been? The Selectric wasn't one of the curvy(ier) office models; I recall it being a rather boxy affair with plenty of right-angles on the housing and a medium shade of blue -- presumably "IBM Blue". Rather utilitarian in design. Even *more* utilitarian than this one: http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/selectric/100112-Selectric-in-situ.jpg It included a full keyboard. I'm not sure anymore whether it operated in local-mode or was set up as two separate devices and therefore needed to be connected up to a remote controller to get local copy. It might have been a rehoused Selectric mechanism in a third-party enclosure and the IBM-like color a red herring. My recollection is that it was longer front-to-back; presumably the rearward extension housed the additional electronics. I have absolutely no idea how I acquired it. No luck finding a matching photo online as yet. I believe that the Selectric came configured for remote operation, but presumably using an EBCDIC-based data stream. I vaguely recall a DB-50 connector, but it's been an awfully long time ... Does this description sound familiar to anyone? - paul
Re: What did computers without screens do?
On 15/12/2015 00:31, Mike wrote: On 12/14/2015 08:21 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: On 12/14/2015 03:53 PM, Jay West wrote: In any case... early computers without screens weren't necessarily so "early" in the scheme of things, and often did process control and test & measurement :) The IBM 1710 didn't have a screen; neither did the 1800. Personally, I think the world is GUI-addicted. --Chuck Chuck If I may ask... What would you do with a home no screen computer? I mean what could be done with one that would benefit your work / hobby. I mean NO DISREPECT by asking this question. I started with computers around 1964. It depends what you define as a screen. From the first UK computer (U of M circa 1948) many systems had screens. They were oscilloscope tube based. The first one's I know of showed a line of dots Dot present = 1 No dot =0 they were probably register displays. So right away you are into binary. Its the underlying foundation of all digital computers. Lamps and switches are all you need for binary and boy is binary useful!! Analog computers are interesting but you really need degree level maths to get the best out of them. Rod Smallwood
Re: Mystery IC: Allen Bradley 314B102
Solder side pic sent to your email! Thanks! On Dec 16, 2015 2:22 AM, "Brent Hilpert" wrote: > On 2015-Dec-14, at 2:02 PM, Mike Ross wrote: > > > > - intention was to rip all this out and convert it to a full I/O > > serial terminal, using an Arduino-based setup that Lawrence Wilkinson > > has already built and tested: > > > https://www.flickr.com/photos/ljw/sets/72157632841492802/with/9201494189/ > > - all the keyboard contacts are already in there, Western I/O just cut > > the IBM wires off when they ripped the IBM guts out and converted it > > printer-only. I'd like to figure out the interface that's presently in > > it, just to check out the mechanism, and for that 'ah ha!' moment :) > > - but I don't want to spend any significant time on it if I'm just > > going to rip it all out. > > > > - but, although the Western I/O conversion 'butchered' a perfectly > > good IBM 2970, it IS a rare representative of that era, when all kinds > > of Selectric conversions were commonplace. So perhaps, as a nod to > > that era, it should be left as-is, as a preserved example? What say > > people? I've seen posts on old lists where people have referred to > > buying these back in the day - converted Selectrics I mean - and > > seeing 'mountains' of them in warehouses. They were once common. Where > > have they all gone? Is mine the *only* survivor from those mountains > > of 3rd-party backstreet conversions? Does anyone else have any? > > > > I've just spent a few hundred bucks with one of the few mechanical > > Selectric gurus left standing - a local guy here in NZ who did an > > amazing job, several broken and seized bits fixed, the mechanism is > > now like new and works perfectly in typewriter mode - so it's going to > > end up working, one way or another! > > Well, I vote for doing a little more work to get it working as is. > If it's all there, it 'should' work as intended and really doesn't look to > be very complex. > Chances look good it will be adaptable to a centronics port. > > Pin 9-11 & 21-24 connect to the pull-up resistors and head in the the > direction of the 7475 DFFs - that's likely the 7 data bits. > Traces from the DFFs look like they then head to the proms which are > likely 3 * 256*4. > That leaves 13,17,19 for some combination of control signals such as > print-strobe-in, ready-out, fault-out. > > I notice there is an MC14490 hex contact debouncer there. You say this is > not a keyboard-send conversion, so I'd guess those debouncers may be > picking up mechanical contacts that indicate end-of-operation, to produce a > ready signal. > > If reverse engineering really isn't your shtick, send along > reasonable-resolution photos of both sides of the board and I'll work on a > schematic. > Could do it with the photos you provided earlier except the solder-side > photo isn't complete. > >
Re: PDP 11/05 S vs 11/05 NC
> > > > Yes, and my guess that they are of different vintage. The BA11-D is the > older box used for the NC and the BA11-K is the more modern box used for > the S model. Over the years the memory requirements increased and thus they > had to increase the density. > > I think the NC/ND models are the first 11/05s along with the low cabinet > model. The a few years later the S model was added. > > /Mattis > > OK. My instinct was to suspect this, but I was unsure because I started with a bare BA11-K and empty H765, and then located the cards and brick regulators described in the DEC docs to determine and pick correct parts to complete the system. I have been using the 11/05 S in the BA11-K as a "bench" UNIBUS system for testing UNIBUS cards, I don't intend to rack this one up. I don't even have a front panel bracket or cover. The front panel is attached with two screws laced through the rack mount holes and into the screw opening of the two top front panel holes. Works well enough for testing purposes. I loaded BASIC into core as if it were an 8K system and left the top 8K open for other things. My NC model has just the 8K. Bill
Re: Re-inking printer ribbons
On 12/14/2015 08:13 PM, Jason Howe wrote: > On 12/13/2015 10:17 AM, william degnan wrote: >> I have found that most vintage ribbons can be replaced with new >> ribbons for >> new devices. Worst case you may find the right width but you'll have to >> re-thread to fit the vintage spindle. Just have to match the width. >> >> I recently bought new ribbons for Decwriter II and TI Omni 810 >> without any >> problem. >> >> Bill >> > I'm having this issue right now with a Panasonic printer. The black > ink ribbons are still a dime/dozen. The 4-color ribbons are NLA from > Panasonic and finding them is proving to get quite difficult. > > I'd be more than happy to re-thread a cartridge, but where does one > find CMYK 1 inch fabric ribbon? > > -Jason Jason, Is it cheaper to do it that way luckily I got 40 new ribbon cartrages with my C-64 purchase.. Do they have screws or are they hot glued together?
Re: IBM Selectric-based Terminals
On 2015-12-15 1:54 AM, Paul Birkel wrote: Looks very nice! Is there documentation for it somewhere? I also have a Selectric (unfortunately it's located distant from me at the moment so I can't provide particulars) that I worked on interfacing to a micro in the mid-70's. I was using a MC6800 in my recollection, but I don't believe that I ever achieved operational status. Presumably I was working from an article in one of the hobbyist magazines of the era. I would have guessed Byte, but that doesn't seem to be the case based on recent search. Any hints from folks on what magazine/article that might have been? The Selectric wasn't one of the curvy(ier) office models; I recall it being a rather boxy affair with plenty of right-angles on the housing and a medium shade of blue -- presumably "IBM Blue". Rather utilitarian in design. Even *more* utilitarian than this one: http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/selectric/100112-Selectric-in-situ.jpg It included a full keyboard. I'm not sure anymore whether it operated in local-mode or was set up as two separate devices and therefore needed to be connected up to a remote controller to get local copy. It might have been a rehoused Selectric mechanism in a third-party enclosure and the IBM-like color a red herring. My recollection is that it was longer front-to-back; presumably the rearward extension housed the additional electronics. I have absolutely no idea how I acquired it. No luck finding a matching photo online as yet. I believe that the Selectric came configured for remote operation, but presumably using an EBCDIC-based data stream. I vaguely recall a DB-50 connector, but it's been an awfully long time ... Does this description sound familiar to anyone? - paul The selectric pictured in your link above is a standard Office Products (OP) Selectric II. Some of the selectric terminals where in a enclosure that was very similar. The 2741, 2741 and 1980 I/O units where in a similar case but where sunk into a cutout in the desk they where mounted in. The 2970 mod 8 and mod 11 banking terminals where in larger boxy enclosures to accommodate extra hardware that was hung on them for banking applications. The 3735 programmable terminal had a Selectric I/O II attached that looked just like an OP Selectric except for some indicator lights and the big cable exiting out the back. None of the Selectric terminals I worked on had any electronics inside, except arc suppression diodes, all of the electronics where housed in an attached control unit. The selectric terminals I worked on where mostly used for banking teller station and finance company terminals. The coding of the data was more geared towards the position of the characters on the type ball with 4 bits for rotate (+1, +1, +2, and -5) and two bits for tilt (+1 and +2) and there where also code points allocated to function such as tab, CR + LF, space, shift up and shift down. The relation of the code point to the graphic printed depended on the layout of the type ball being used, and they where not always the same as the OP selectric. The type ball used by the banks for instance, was laid out so that no two numbers where adjacent to each other on the type ball to lessen the risk of printing an incorrect number. Paul.
Re: IBM Selectric-based Terminals
> On Dec 15, 2015, at 12:54 AM, Paul Birkel wrote: > ... > I believe that the Selectric came configured for remote operation, but > presumably using an EBCDIC-based data stream. I vaguely recall a DB-50 > connector, but it's been an awfully long time ... > > Does this description sound familiar to anyone? For a while, RSTS/E supported 2741 terminals, which are Selectric terminals with a UART interface. It wasn't EBCDIC -- instead, it had one of several possible conversion tables. I forgot the number of bits per character. Also, the speed used was peculiar: 134.5 bits per second. 2741 support was dropped at some point; I think V7 has it but it disappeared by V9 if not sooner. paul
RE: Display-less computing
> -Original Message- > From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Chuck > Guzis > Sent: 15 December 2015 05:37 > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > > Subject: Re: Display-less computing > > On 12/14/2015 06:05 PM, Paul Koning wrote: > > > I've only ever seen them called "12" and "11" for the top and next > > rows respectively. For example, the card code listing on the IBM 360 > > "green card" shows them that way (e.g., A is 12-1). > > Same here. But it's not outside the range of possibility that *someone* > called them X and Y, although I don't know who did. Doug Jones doesn't > mention it. > I have seen ICT punches labelled this way. There is one here where "X" and "Y" have been manually added. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keypunch#/media/File:Hand-operated_Card_Punch- 2.jpg I think the one I own is labelled > Let's not forget the System/3 96-column cards. BA8421 (sort of like 7-track > mag tape), with a really wacky way to combine the columns to make 8-bit > bytes. > > Univac, of course, had their own system with their double-45 column system, > round holes and all. > > --Chuck Dave G4UGM
RE: IBM CMS dumpfile idiocy
> -Original Message- > From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Chuck > Guzis > Sent: 15 December 2015 06:21 > To: CCtalk > Subject: IBM CMS dumpfile idiocy > > Just finished reading a 9 track tape made with IBM CMS in its dumpfile > format. > > Why on earth--or might I say, what idiot--designed this format? First the > file > data in a series of records, *then* the file name and other metadata. > > Anyone know of a DOS/Windows/Unix utility to unravel one of these things? > I don't feel too much like coding for a single tape. > > --Chuck The files are in the same format as on disk. The system just copies them back to disk. What size are the blocks as I have a "C" utility that will read the older smaller block size files. You can always download Hercules and VM/370 Dave
RE: Mystery IC: Allen Bradley 314B102
> > I guessed that might be the case... any suggestions for what were > common pinouts and signals used? I can analyze 'backwards', testing There were just about as many parallel interface versions as devices that used them back then. Nothing 'common' really... The idea of 7 or 8 data lines, a strobe, and a ready signal was certainly arround back then, but the timing, polarity (active high or low) and timing were not standardised. A couple of examples that I can see without getting up are the Facit 4070 paper tape punch and the HP9866A thermal printer. Those were both around in the early-mid 1970s and are rather different parallel interface. OK, what I would do to get some idea is focus on those 7475 chips. Get the pinout. The most obvious use for them on this board is as the character input latch. IIRC each is really 2 2-bit latches, so 2 enable/clock pins on each chip. So : 1) Are the 4 clock pins linked together (if so, it loads a character at a time [1]), or are they in pairs or what 2) Where do the D inputs go? Are any of them linked together, or do 7 or 8 of them go to the interface connector? If the latter, then those are the data inputs. [1] Before anyone suggests you could use them as a sort-of shift register and load half a character into one, then copy it into the second one while loading the other half character, remember the 7475 is a transparent latch, not an edge-triggered flip-flop making this a very difficult thing to do. If you can identify the data lines on the connector you are getting there. See if you can trace the other pins to inputs or outputs. -tony
RE: Mystery IC: Allen Bradley 314B102
> > > Well, 19 could be a general printer-ready pin in that if the paper runs > > out it would say the printer is not ready for another character but > > it might well also be put to the not-ready state when the printer > > was printing the current character. Seen that before. > > Maybe, but Selectrics aren't exactly fast devices; there's a whole lot > of potential 'no, wait, I'm not ready!' conditions. Would they all be > ORed onto one pin? Why not? It's all the host really needs to know -- can I send another character or not. [...] > I've gone over the connector again and we have ten signal pins plus a > ground plane... that's *just* enough for 8 data bits, a strobe, a > ready/wait line... but that Allen Bradley pull-up pack is only 14 Why 8 data bits? ASCII (which we are assuming this is) is a 7 bit code. A number of older printers did indeed only have 7 parallel data lines. > > This board does not look that complicated and all the ICs have known > > numbers on them (mostly TTL logic). If it were mine I'd trace out the > > schematic. > > That's true and possible. I'm in two minds on this thing: I reckon it would take me a couple of hours at most. > - intention was to rip all this out and convert it to a full I/O > serial terminal, using an Arduino-based setup that Lawrence Wilkinson > has already built and tested: In some ways I agree with doing that (other than using a a million more components than you need...). On the other hand this board is part of the history of the unit, so I would keep that if at all possible I think. -tony
RE: Display-less computing
I've only ever seen them called "12" and "11" for the top and next rows respectively. For example, the card code listing on the IBM 360 "green card" shows them that way (e.g., A is 12-1). Same here. But it's not outside the range of possibility that *someone* called them X and Y, although I don't know who did. Doug Jones doesn't mention it. On Tue, 15 Dec 2015, Dave Wade wrote: I have seen ICT punches labelled this way. There is one here where "X" and "Y" have been manually added. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keypunch#/media/File:Hand-operated_Card_Punch- 2.jpg I think the one I own is labelled In my experience, they were called 'X'/'Y', or "12"/"11", but there were occasional other names, even "high"/"low". Since the cards were not marked, people could come up with all sorts of other cockamamie choices. > Let's not forget the System/3 96-column cards. BA8421 (sort of like > 7-track mag tape), with a really wacky way to combine the columns to > make 8-bit bytes. > Univac, of course, had their own system with their double-45 column > system, round holes and all. There were "window" cards that carried a piece of micro-fiche. Were the makers of those aware of Gldberg's "Rapid-Selector" and/or Vannevar Bush's Memex? (Both of which were motion picture film based microfilm with optical reading of dot patterns for selection) There were even punched cards that also carried a mag-stripe (a transitional device?) I even saw some crude attempts to implement McBee edge sort - set of holes around the perimeter that were linked or not linked with a slot to the edge; poke a knitting needle through the hole(s) and see which ones shook out. Some also carried "normal" punched card data punched on them. Only once did I see a "multi-value" system - multiple holes punched in a column, and edge slot going varying number of holes deep - "I want a value of greater than or equal 3": poke the needle through 3, and 3, 2, and 1 would all shake out. My father claimed that the use of round holes on divergent cards was due to an attempt by IBM to patent the shape of the hole in the cards. He also thought that the development of optical card readers was significantly boosted along by an IBM attempt to patent use of a brass roller. For "The National Driving Test" (CBS 1966?), he had a sample MAIL back port-a-punch (pre-perfed alternate columns) cards! IBM succeeded in reading them! But, IBM's statistical programming resulted in our whole family starting to learn FORTRAN the next day.
Re: What did computers without screens do?
What would you do with a home no screen computer? I mean what could be done with one that would benefit your work / hobby. I mean NO DISREPECT by asking this question. Use the lights. Wish for a teletype Buy Don Lancaster's books (How many copies did he sell?) Not having a screen made it a little more difficult to answer the inevitable, "What is it good for?" "What can you do with it?" The answer of course was that a hobby/home computer had exactly the same usefulness as a model train going round and round. You could speculate about maybe someday making the train deliver beer, or making the home/hobby computer do "home automation" (turn lights on and off) or bookkeeping, or filing recipes, keeping track of phone numbers, etc. Most of the "uses" were better handled by magnets on the door of the refrigerator. Once you had a screen and printer, word processing became the first practical use, followed by Visicalc and Flight Simulator.
Re: Mystery IC: Allen Bradley 314B102
>> [T]here's a whole lot of potential 'no, wait, I'm not ready!' >> conditions. Would they all be ORed onto one pin? > Why not? It's all the host really needs to know -- can I send > another character or not. Well...it can be very nice for the host to report "out of paper" differently from "paper jam" differently from "motor or position encoder failure" differently from "failed selftest" etc. /~\ The ASCII Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTMLmo...@rodents-montreal.org / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
Re: IBM Selectric-based Terminals
On 2015-12-15 11:27 AM, Paul Koning wrote: On Dec 15, 2015, at 12:54 AM, Paul Birkel wrote: ... I believe that the Selectric came configured for remote operation, but presumably using an EBCDIC-based data stream. I vaguely recall a DB-50 connector, but it's been an awfully long time ... Does this description sound familiar to anyone? For a while, RSTS/E supported 2741 terminals, which are Selectric terminals with a UART interface. It wasn't EBCDIC -- instead, it had one of several possible conversion tables. I forgot the number of bits per character. Also, the speed used was peculiar: 134.5 bits per second. 2741 support was dropped at some point; I think V7 has it but it disappeared by V9 if not sooner. paul They used a 6 bit code with odd parity so some of the code sheets refer to it as a 7 bit code because they include the "C" parity bit. Paul.
Re: IBM CMS dumpfile idiocy
> On Dec 14, 2015, at 10:21 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: > > Just finished reading a 9 track tape made with IBM CMS in its dumpfile format. > > Why on earth--or might I say, what idiot--designed this format? First the > file data in a series of records, *then* the file name and other metadata. > > Anyone know of a DOS/Windows/Unix utility to unravel one of these things? I > don't feel too much like coding for a single tape. > Use VM/370 under Hercules to read in the dumpfile tape and write it back out in either AWS or HET format. TTFN - Guy
Re: IBM CMS dumpfile idiocy
On 12/15/2015 07:37 AM, Dave Wade wrote: The files are in the same format as on disk. The system just copies them back to disk. What size are the blocks as I have a "C" utility that will read the older smaller block size files. You can always download Hercules and VM/370 Jim, Dave, Peter, Harry et al.: Thanks for your responses. The customer says that the tape was made during the 1970s on an S/370 system. He doesn't care about the binaries; he'd just like the source code files translated in ASCII. That makes the job quite a bit easier. The general format of the tape looks like this: 34 x 4101 bytes 1 x 2581 bytes 1 x 87 bytes 1 x 177 bytes 1 x 87 bytes 39 x 4101 bytes 1 x 3515 bytes 1 x 87 bytes 39 x 4101 bytes 1 x 3775 bytes 1 x 87 bytes 62 x 4101 bytes 1 x 1013 bytes 1 x 87 bytes 1 x 1125 bytes 1 x 87 bytes ... (2 x file mark) The 87 byte records appear to be the metadata; each block has a 2-character type prefix. I'll have to sit down and suss the rest out, but the 87 byte records appear to contain the file metadata. The content of much of it does appear to be card images--I recognized the first logical record as the travel table from the "Adventure" game, so I expect that complete source is there. If anyone gets a lightning strike about this, I can check it out. Thanks again, Chuck
Re: What did computers without screens do?
On 12/14/2015 06:31 PM, Mike wrote: What would you do with a home no screen computer? I mean what could be done with one that would benefit your work / hobby. I mean NO DISREPECT by asking this question. Well, that would severely limit things. But, it could still be useful. I have one app that runs on my home everything-server, that doesn't have a normal screen. It takes temperature, humidity and energy consumption measurements and records them to a file every 15 seconds. it also puts time, date, temp and humidity on some 20-character LCD screens around the house. So, that is SORT OF a screen, but not in the traditional sense of an interactive terminal. My laser photoplotter has no screen or other HMI connected to it, just a network cable. So, I log into it from another computer to make artwork films. A lot of people have 3D printers with no screen at all, or a very limited LCD screen that lets them set a few options and shows the percentage progress of the build. Oh, for the lowest possible case, I have a computer-controlled air compressor. This is an AVR chip which manages starting/stopping the motor and loading/unloading the compressor valves. (This is called automatic dual-mode control, when the tank is full, it unloads the compressor and leaves the motor running for a minute to see if there is more demand for air before shutting it off.) Jon
Re: Making a serial board for Briel Altair Micro
Needs some more for the read and write controls. Is the address latched from the altairmicro? if not you'll need a latch using the ALE. You need to add a read port for the various status bits. Dwight From: cctalk on behalf of d...@661.org Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2015 12:02 AM To: cctalk Subject: Making a serial board for Briel Altair Micro After fiddling around with my Briel Altair Micro, I've come to desire more than just the console serial port. To that end, I read up on the 16550A UART, line drivers, line receivers, and schematics for other implementations of serial ports. I came up with this: http://661.org/tmp/altairmicro-serial.pdf How close am I to this design making sense and working? -- David Griffith d...@661.org A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text. Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? A: Top-posting. Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
RE:Mystery IC: Allen Bradley 314B102
HI, I would take the bet that this IC is simply a R network, 1 KOhm, 1 resistor "across" ie from pin 1 to opposite pin, from pin 2 to opposite pin, etc What about simple and quick Ohmmeter check ?? --- L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Re: Mystery IC: Allen Bradley 314B102
On 12/15/2015 10:34 AM, GerardCJAT wrote: I would take the bet that this IC is simply a R network, 1 KOhm, 1 resistor "across" ie from pin 1 to opposite pin, from pin 2 to opposite pin, etc What about simple and quick Ohmmeter check ?? That was my first guess--the numbering matches the general scheme of other A-B DIP resistor networks that are rattling around in my hellbox. --Chuck
Rectangular holes punched from cards [was RE: Display-less computing]
From: Fred Cisin Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 9:12 AM > My father claimed that the use of round holes on divergent cards was due > to an attempt by IBM to patent the shape of the hole in the cards. http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/ibm100/us/en/icons/punchcard/ Prior to 1928, the holes in IBM's cards were round, too. The use of round holes by Univac was an avoidance of paying royalties to IBM, which held a patent on 80-column rectangularly punched cards. Rich Rich Alderson Vintage Computing Sr. Systems Engineer Living Computer Museum 2245 1st Avenue S Seattle, WA 98134 mailto:ri...@livingcomputermuseum.org http://www.LivingComputerMuseum.org/
RE: Mystery IC: Allen Bradley 314B102
[Printer's Ready signal] > > Why not? It's all the host really needs to know -- can I send > > another character or not. > > Well...it can be very nice for the host to report "out of paper" > differently from "paper jam" differently from "motor or position > encoder failure" differently from "failed selftest" etc. True it's nice, but back then such things were often handled by indicators on the printer itself (possibly even by a flashing combination of indicators, so that something like On-line, paper-out and 12cpi all flashing together means 'RAM failed') OK, the Centronics interface does have a paper-out line that most printers implemented, but AFAIK if a printer asserted paper-out then it also asserted busy (or would do when the buffer was full) so that the host really only _had_ to check for busy. It is certainly possible to make a parallel printer interface with 7 or 8 data lines, a strobe and a ready line. Only. -tony
Re: IBM Selectric-based Terminals
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 4:27 AM, Paul Koning wrote: > >> On Dec 15, 2015, at 12:54 AM, Paul Birkel wrote: >> ... >> I believe that the Selectric came configured for remote operation, but >> presumably using an EBCDIC-based data stream. I vaguely recall a DB-50 >> connector, but it's been an awfully long time ... >> >> Does this description sound familiar to anyone? > > For a while, RSTS/E supported 2741 terminals, which are Selectric terminals > with a UART interface. It wasn't EBCDIC -- instead, it had one of several > possible conversion tables. I forgot the number of bits per character. > Also, the speed used was peculiar: 134.5 bits per second. 2741 support was > dropped at some point; I think V7 has it but it disappeared by V9 if not > sooner. That IS interesting. I have two 2741s - one mostly working, needs a little mechanical fettling, one untested but believed needing work. It seems I could bring up a pre-V7 RSTS and incant the right runes at it and the 2741 would Just Work. What other OSes might have native 2741 support built in, anyone know? Mike http://www.corestore.org 'No greater love hath a man than he lay down his life for his brother. Not for millions, not for glory, not for fame. For one person, in the dark, where no one will ever know or see.'
Re: IBM Selectric-based Terminals
On 12/15/15 12:05 PM, Mike Ross wrote: What other OSes might have native 2741 support built in, anyone know? I would expect that IBM mainframe OS's would support it (especially older ones). The issue there would be getting the 2741 connected up. I have a DECWriter III with the APL option on it. I'd really like to get that hooked up to MVT running APL\360! Of course, I'd *really* like to have a 2741 with an APL typeball for that! ;-) TTFN - Guy
Re: Anyone want a copy of DIGITAL ServerWORKS Manager ?
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 10:49 PM, Robert Jarratt wrote: > >> I have two boxes, QB-4QYAA-SA 3.2 sealed in shrink wrap, and QB-4QYAA-SA >> 3.3 open box that is slightly crushed. >> >> The boxes (at least the still sealed one) look like this eBay item (not mine) >> listing: >> http://www.ebay.com/itm/321413114710 > > Seems a shame to throw them away. What would postage of these to the UK cost? > If the package weighs around one pound (under 0.5kg) or less it might be around $18 or so from the US to the UK for First-Class Package International Service. The main manual is already available online. I could image the CD-ROMs from both boxes (not sure if they are actually different between the two) and make that available to archive if it is not already archived somewhere so nothing would be really lost if I recycled these. -Glen
RE: VAX 4000-500 PSU Overload?
> -Original Message- > From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Robert > Jarratt > Sent: 13 December 2015 15:47 > To: 'General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts' > Subject: RE: VAX 4000-500 PSU Overload? > > > > > I have been able to remove the leaking ones from the +12V and -12V board, I > just have to wait for the new parts to arrive. The two on the 5V and 3.3V > board have not leaked, are not bulging, and are harder to remove without > removing the bottom heatsink or pulling from above as you suggest. I have > not been able to reach them with my ESR meter either, unfortunately. I am > tempted to leave them, although pulling from above is an option. Does > anyone else agree with the pull from above solution? In case you have not > seen it, the design makes it very hard to get at the underside, you have to > desolder a load of transistors to do so, and they are not in easy locations > either. > Tonight I replaced the leaking capacitors on the +12V/-12V board, and also replaced the two similar ones that looked and measured fine. I put the PSU back together, put in a couple of less important boards and drives, and the machine now seems to power on OK. I measured the ripple using the power connector for the front panel and that looks OK too. Unfortunately though, that connector only sends out +12V, +5V and -12V. It does not have output for +3.3V, so I have not, so far, been able to check the ripple for this. It is a bit awkward to test on the bench with a dummy load. As I did not replace the capacitors on the +5V/3.3V board, because the underside is very hard to access, and I am reluctant to pull them off and solder from above, I would like to be sure there is no ripple on the 3.3V supply. So, I was wondering if anyone has any neat tricks for probing the +3.3V supply with the PSU installed in the machine? Next job is to replace the capacitors on the little DSSI terminator, they are easy to change. Thanks Rob
WTB: PDP-11/03 front bezel
Hi It's a longshot. But recently I aquired two BA11-N. One is just the cage and power supply. Looks just like this: http://www.ricomputermuseum.org/_/rsrc/1300059803599/Home/equipment/dec-pdp-11-03/DEC_PDP-11_03-inside.jpg The other came with mounting box but no front panel. I would like to make it complete with the white front bezel seen here: http://hampage.hu/pdp11/kepek/11-03.jpg Does anyone have one for sale? The greyish plastic arround the front panel would be a bonus since mine got a small crack in it. Regards, Pontus.
Re: Accessible Computing
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 09:20:35PM +0100, Tomasz Rola wrote: [...] > Now, the funny stuff: I try "print preview" in Firefox and it shows me > sixty three pages, because, you know, apart from the original article > I was interested in there is a side frame with about twenty (forty?) > others and for whatever reason they all want to go into > printer. Actually those are not full articles, just enough of them to > constitute sixty pages of worthless addendum, full of color photos and > scraps of text. > > http://www.nasa.gov/press-release/goddard/plunging-into-the-ionosphere-satellite-s-last-days-improve-orbital-decay-predictions Ah. Somehow I forgot to mention that scraps of text are accompanied by buttons saying "Read Full Article", which are going to be printed, too. For my amusement, I have just printed it all to pdf file... -- Regards, Tomasz Rola -- ** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. ** ** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home** ** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... ** ** ** ** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_r...@bigfoot.com **
Re: Mystery IC: Allen Bradley 314B102
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 4:35 AM, tony duell wrote: >> >> I guessed that might be the case... any suggestions for what were >> common pinouts and signals used? I can analyze 'backwards', testing > > There were just about as many parallel interface versions as devices > that used them back then. Nothing 'common' really... > > The idea of 7 or 8 data lines, a strobe, and a ready signal was > certainly arround back then, but the timing, polarity (active high > or low) and timing were not standardised. A couple of examples > that I can see without getting up are the Facit 4070 paper > tape punch and the HP9866A thermal printer. Those were > both around in the early-mid 1970s and are rather different > parallel interface. > > OK, what I would do to get some idea is focus on those 7475 chips. Get > the pinout. The most obvious use for them on this board is as the > character input latch. IIRC each is really 2 2-bit latches, so 2 enable/clock > pins on each chip. So : > > 1) Are the 4 clock pins linked together (if so, it loads a character at a > time [1]), > or are they in pairs or what > > 2) Where do the D inputs go? Are any of them linked together, or do 7 or > 8 of them go to the interface connector? If the latter, then those are the > data > inputs. > > [1] Before anyone suggests you could use them as a sort-of shift register and > load > half a character into one, then copy it into the second one while loading the > other half > character, remember the 7475 is a transparent latch, not an edge-triggered > flip-flop > making this a very difficult thing to do. > > If you can identify the data lines on the connector you are getting there. > See if you > can trace the other pins to inputs or outputs. > > -tony Tony, good advice but probably more work than I'm inclined to put in. As you said there were many interfaces with different standards - different polarities and timing - and either way it's quite likely this will never work with a standard modern parallel port without building some converter, after first finding out what has to be converted and designing it! There are seven lines in parallel all going through that Allen Bradley pullup network so I'm tentatively assuming it's accepting seven bit parallel data so one character at a time - not nybbles or anything else. That leaves three other lines which I'm assuming are some kind of strobe; 'busy' or a functional equivalent; and the one we know is 'paper out'. That's enough for a working interface. Timing and levels undetermined as you said. I did have what I technically refer to as a 'poke' at it last night; sent some text to the raw parallel device from a Linux box - and was able - inconsistently - to get the Selectric mechanism to cycle intermittently by rapidly inserting and removing jumpers in the breakout box on the seven presumed data lines; essentially triggering a kinda 'manual' strobe. So something is kinda sorta getting through and I think I may leave it at that - unless I stumble across any doc. I tried it with the presumed 'busy' and 'strobe' lines connected in various ways that might make logical sense but could never get it to 'just work' and accept and print characters or continuously print a stream of characters; it just cycled the mechanism intermittently on manually making and breaking connections on the data lines as I said. So I suspect the strobe/busy signaling is something different from standard parallel. And of course I have no idea of the bit order on those data lines; I have a seven-way matrix of possible combos so hitting the right one to actually print valid characters might be a job of work! If and when I do remove the Western I/O stuff and convert it to the Arduino full serial terminal I'll photograph document and keep what I remove - so it could be restored to 'as converted' condition in the future if anyone wants to try it! Mike http://www.corestore.org 'No greater love hath a man than he lay down his life for his brother. Not for millions, not for glory, not for fame. For one person, in the dark, where no one will ever know or see.'
Re: Accessible Computing
On Sun, Dec 13, 2015 at 01:18:01PM -0800, Chuck Guzis wrote: [...] > > I've tried reading my email using text-to-speech software and felt > like I wanted to throw the damned machine out the window. I wonder how tts would manage with a website like nasa.gov ... Some time ago they became javascript-only. At least this is what I see. I do not need accessibility option but I always admire a website which can be read in text-only mode. In many cases this means that I will have to slide down past meaningless crap, like fifty or hundred links to other "interesting" articles du jour, until finally I get to the thing which I wanted to read (in a graphical mode, the crap is semi hidden in marginal parts of the page and does not get in my way). When I try nasa with a browser like Lynx, the website is not showing anything at all. When I load an article in Firefox, then try to open same URL in Lynx, once again, nothing. Source view in Lynx displays lots of html without actual content, which needs to get loaded by JS. Now, the funny stuff: I try "print preview" in Firefox and it shows me sixty three pages, because, you know, apart from the original article I was interested in there is a side frame with about twenty (forty?) others and for whatever reason they all want to go into printer. Actually those are not full articles, just enough of them to constitute sixty pages of worthless addendum, full of color photos and scraps of text. http://www.nasa.gov/press-release/goddard/plunging-into-the-ionosphere-satellite-s-last-days-improve-orbital-decay-predictions [...] > Technology, it seems, hasn't served us well in some respects. I am afraid technology is no longer oriented towards helping with technical problem as much as it used to be. I would say, it is increasingly more about serving the purpose to "being liked" or actually "being like us" (as opposed to those who do not use said technology and are therefor "not like us"). In other words, if you ever disliked the mob of goodwilling citizens [1], today this mob has a deciding voice about what technology will be like. There used to be a time of "revenge of geeks", now the "revenge of cheerleaders" is approaching. Empire strikes back, heheheheh. This and pitiful approach to design, which has to be new, shiny and blinking. And this is just a beginning of a long sliding down. :-/ Of course I am wrong. There is a good chance fifty years from now some people will point to today's nasa.gov as a wonderful example of classic web design - now, what kind of horror will be modern at that time so that nasa.gov will be opposed to it as classy ideal? But it was nice to write all this. And if I am right I will point to this piece and say "see, I was right, I only had to pretend I was joking". -- [1] Like archetypical football players, cheerleaders and their minions who boo at nerds and other weirdos [2], but it is not really so much about players vs nerds, perhaps more like people who want purposeful tech and those who want pretty tech? Pretty tech to show off how much modern and up to date they are, when in fact this is just about being fashionable. [2] I do not take such tales too seriously as I never have been booed at back in a days when cheerleaders were all jumping high - not for being weird. But I keep hearing stories about booing which is why I am using this rhetorical device here. Then again, back in a days we did not have cheerleaders in Poland and weirdos who could do a computer were actually kind of admired :-). Perhaps more because they had access to the half mythical hard-to-get hardware and not because of their abilities, but still. -- Regards, Tomasz Rola -- ** A C programmer asked whether computer had Buddha's nature. ** ** As the answer, master did "rm -rif" on the programmer's home** ** directory. And then the C programmer became enlightened... ** ** ** ** Tomasz Rola mailto:tomasz_r...@bigfoot.com **
Re: IBM Selectric-based Terminals
On 15 December 2015 at 15:05, Mike Ross wrote: > What other OSes might have native 2741 support built in, anyone know? > I might be completely wrong, but I think some of the early UNIX versions might "speak" 2741. But I'm not sure. Perhaps a sufficiently "vintage" RSX-11 might as well? Of course like Guy Sotomayor said, IBM mainframe operating systems can speak 2741. OS/360 can, and I'm pretty sure so can MVS and VM/370 but my IBM knowledge is somewhat limited. Also, I really want one of those 2741s. Selectrics that can do I/O are *bleep*ing cool. Regards, Christian -- Christian M. Gauger-Cosgrove STCKON08DS0 Contact information available upon request.
RE: IBM Selectric-based Terminals
> -Original Message- > From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Guy > Sotomayor > Sent: 15 December 2015 20:26 > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > > Subject: Re: IBM Selectric-based Terminals > > > > On 12/15/15 12:05 PM, Mike Ross wrote: > > What other OSes might have native 2741 support built in, anyone know? > I would expect that IBM mainframe OS's would support it (especially older > ones). The issue there would be getting the 2741 connected up. > Hercules now has support for 2741 via Telnet > I have a DECWriter III with the APL option on it. I'd really like to get that > hooked up to MVT running APL\360! Of course, I'd *really* like to have a > 2741 with an APL typeball for that! ;-) Again 2708 with 2741 supported.. > > TTFN - Guy Dave G4UGM
RE: VAX 4000-500 PSU Overload?
> Tonight I replaced the leaking capacitors on the +12V/-12V board, and also > replaced the two similar ones that looked and measured fine. I put the PSU > back together, put in a couple of less important boards and drives, and the > machine now seems to power on OK. I measured the ripple using the power > connector for the front panel and that looks OK too. Unfortunately though, > that connector only sends out +12V, +5V and -12V. It does not have output > for +3.3V, so I have not, so far, been able to check the ripple for this. It is a bit > awkward to test on the bench with a dummy load. > > As I did not replace the capacitors on the +5V/3.3V board, because the > underside is very hard to access, and I am reluctant to pull them off and > solder from above, I would like to be sure there is no ripple on the 3.3V > supply. So, I was wondering if anyone has any neat tricks for probing the > +3.3V supply with the PSU installed in the machine? > > Next job is to replace the capacitors on the little DSSI terminator, they are > easy to change. > I spoke too soon :-( The machine stayed on for a couple of minutes and then powered off. I suspect there is a problem with it detecting an overload that may not actually be there. Looks like I will need to get a dummy load and put it on the bench to see if it still happens there. I do recall that when it first failed it would stay on for shorter and shorter periods each time I tried it. So perhaps there is some component warming up and then causing a failure? Regards Rob
Re: IBM Selectric-based Terminals
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 9:26 AM, Guy Sotomayor wrote: > > > On 12/15/15 12:05 PM, Mike Ross wrote: >> >> What other OSes might have native 2741 support built in, anyone know? > > I would expect that IBM mainframe OS's would support it (especially older > ones). The issue there would be getting the 2741 connected up. Well IBM of course - I was thinking more other DEC OS's and various flavors of Unix... Mike http://www.corestore.org 'No greater love hath a man than he lay down his life for his brother. Not for millions, not for glory, not for fame. For one person, in the dark, where no one will ever know or see.'
RE: IBM CMS dumpfile idiocy
What I meant was are they still on 9-track, or some kind of tape-in-a-file disk? IBM tapes are usually written to AWS format files not the formats (.TAP ?) used by SIMH... Some source to extract some versions of these from AWS files (and windows executables) are in this ZIP file:- http://1drv.ms/1NS4wuo Dave G4UGM > -Original Message- > From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Chuck > Guzis > Sent: 15 December 2015 17:31 > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > > Subject: Re: IBM CMS dumpfile idiocy > > On 12/15/2015 07:37 AM, Dave Wade wrote: > > > The files are in the same format as on disk. The system just copies > > them back to disk. What size are the blocks as I have a "C" utility > > that will read the older smaller block size files. You can always > > download Hercules and VM/370 > > Jim, Dave, Peter, Harry et al.: > > Thanks for your responses. The customer says that the tape was made > during the 1970s on an S/370 system. He doesn't care about the binaries; > he'd just like the source code files translated in ASCII. > That makes the job quite a bit easier. > > The general format of the tape looks like this: > > 34 x 4101 bytes > 1 x 2581 bytes > 1 x 87 bytes > 1 x 177 bytes > 1 x 87 bytes > 39 x 4101 bytes > 1 x 3515 bytes > 1 x 87 bytes > 39 x 4101 bytes > 1 x 3775 bytes > 1 x 87 bytes > 62 x 4101 bytes > 1 x 1013 bytes > 1 x 87 bytes > 1 x 1125 bytes > 1 x 87 bytes > ... > (2 x file mark) > > The 87 byte records appear to be the metadata; each block has a 2-character > type prefix. I'll have to sit down and suss the rest out, but the 87 byte > records appear to contain the file metadata. The content of much of it does > appear to be card images--I recognized the first logical record as the travel > table from the "Adventure" game, so I expect that complete source is there. > > If anyone gets a lightning strike about this, I can check it out. > > Thanks again, > Chuck
Re: VAX 4000-500 PSU Overload?
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 12:38 PM, Robert Jarratt wrote: > > Tonight I replaced the leaking capacitors on the +12V/-12V board, and also > replaced the two similar ones that looked and measured fine. I put the PSU > back together, put in a couple of less important boards and drives, and the > machine now seems to power on OK. I measured the ripple using the power > connector for the front panel and that looks OK too. Unfortunately though, > that connector only sends out +12V, +5V and -12V. It does not have output > for +3.3V, so I have not, so far, been able to check the ripple for this. It > is a bit awkward to test on the bench with a dummy load. > Nice work and good outcome. Gives me some hope I might be able to get the H7874 supply from my BA430 VAX 4000-200 repaired and running again. > As I did not replace the capacitors on the +5V/3.3V board, because the > underside is very hard to access, and I am reluctant to pull them off and > solder from above, I would like to be sure there is no ripple on the 3.3V > supply. So, I was wondering if anyone has any neat tricks for probing the > +3.3V supply with the PSU installed in the machine? On the BA440 pedestal chassis lift off the two front door panels and then remove the 5 screws on the left side and the 6 screws on the right side that hold the front door mounting brackets in place and then you can lift off the outer skin panels in one piece. After you remove the outer skin there are 18 screws (if I counted correctly) that hold the rear metal skin over the backplane area. After you remove that you'll have full access to probe the square pads on the backplane next to the power supply connectors. The pads are not labeled on the back so make a note of the voltages when looking at them in from the front when the power supply is removed. It might sound like a lot of work but it's really not bad, assuming the BA440 chassis isn't buried under stuff where you can only get at it from the front.
RE: IBM CMS dumpfile idiocy
> -Original Message- > From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Guy > Sotomayor > Sent: 15 December 2015 17:09 > To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > > Subject: Re: IBM CMS dumpfile idiocy > > > > On Dec 14, 2015, at 10:21 PM, Chuck Guzis wrote: > > > > Just finished reading a 9 track tape made with IBM CMS in its dumpfile > format. > > > > Why on earth--or might I say, what idiot--designed this format? First the > file data in a series of records, *then* the file name and other metadata. > > > > Anyone know of a DOS/Windows/Unix utility to unravel one of these > things? I don't feel too much like coding for a single tape. > > > Use VM/370 under Hercules to read in the dumpfile tape and write it back > out in either AWS or HET format. > > TTFN - Guy You don't need VM/370, Hercules includes a "tapecopy" command that will copy from SCSI tape to AWS format... (and back) Dave
Re: Mystery IC: Allen Bradley 314B102
- Original Message - From: "Mike Ross" Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 3:41 PM > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 4:35 AM, tony duell wrote: >> If you can identify the data lines on the connector you are getting there. >> See if you >> can trace the other pins to inputs or outputs. >> >> -tony > > Tony, good advice but probably more work than I'm inclined to put in. > As you said there were many interfaces with different standards - > different polarities and timing - and either way it's quite likely > this will never work with a standard modern parallel port without > building some converter, after first finding out what has to be > converted and designing it! - Reply - Tony just makes everything sound more complicated than it is ;-) Actually I suspect it might indeed quite possibly work with a standard parallel port without any conversion at all other than a rewired cable and maybe a very minor change or two on the board. For the most part a parallel port is a parallel port; data and strobe going out, strobe acknowledge and printer status coming in, nothing more complicated than that and timing is rarely an issue. In the Selectric there is the R/T code conversion of course but that's done for you already and it should be simple to find the data bit order. I had a contract years ago that involved adding a serial or parallel interface to Olivetti typewriters and it's really not rocket science; I even still have some info on interfacing to Selectrics but unfortunately not relevant to yours. Your choice of course but I'd take Brent up on his generous offer to reverse engineer that interface; you may find it's a much simpler project than you think. (another) mike
Re: Anyone want a copy of DIGITAL ServerWORKS Manager ?
On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 2:43 PM, Glen Slick wrote: > The main manual is already available online. I could image the CD-ROMs > from both boxes (not sure if they are actually different between the > two) and make that available to archive if it is not already archived > somewhere so nothing would be really lost if I recycled these. I was going to offer to scan and image the lot, but if the scan is already done and you can image the CDs, that would be ideal.
Re: WTB: PDP-11/03 front bezel
> Hi > > It's a longshot. But recently I aquired two BA11-N. One is just the cage > and power supply. Looks just like this: > > http://www.ricomputermuseum.org/_/rsrc/1300059803599/Home/equipment/dec-pdp-11-03/DEC_PDP-11_03-inside.jpg > > The other came with mounting box but no front panel. I would like to > make it complete with the white front bezel seen here: > > http://hampage.hu/pdp11/kepek/11-03.jpg > > Does anyone have one for sale? > > The greyish plastic arround the front panel would be a bonus since mine > got a small crack in it. > > Regards, > Pontus. I've been after one for a while, too. I was very kindly offered one from a listmember who would have taken it off his own machine, but I felt that would have deprived that box. I've tried DEC resellers but no luck there. If I can get accurate measurements I think i should be able to knock up a CAD drawing and construct a passable replica from styrene sheet, a material with which I am very familiar working with. I have a number of large sheets of it in different thicknesses already. So if anyone can take some photos and measurements for me I'll add this project to the pile :) Steve.
Re: WTB: PDP-11/03 front bezel
I think that is a BA11-M in the picture. The M parts are easier to find. On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 2:48 PM, Pontus Pihlgren wrote: > Hi > > It's a longshot. But recently I aquired two BA11-N. One is just the cage > and power supply. Looks just like this: > > > http://www.ricomputermuseum.org/_/rsrc/1300059803599/Home/equipment/dec-pdp-11-03/DEC_PDP-11_03-inside.jpg > > The other came with mounting box but no front panel. I would like to > make it complete with the white front bezel seen here: > > http://hampage.hu/pdp11/kepek/11-03.jpg > > Does anyone have one for sale? > > The greyish plastic arround the front panel would be a bonus since mine > got a small crack in it. > > Regards, > Pontus. >
Re: WTB: PDP-11/03 front bezel
opps... The "N" parts are easier to find. On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Paul Anderson wrote: > I think that is a BA11-M in the picture. The M parts are easier to find. > > On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 2:48 PM, Pontus Pihlgren > wrote: > >> Hi >> >> It's a longshot. But recently I aquired two BA11-N. One is just the cage >> and power supply. Looks just like this: >> >> >> http://www.ricomputermuseum.org/_/rsrc/1300059803599/Home/equipment/dec-pdp-11-03/DEC_PDP-11_03-inside.jpg >> >> The other came with mounting box but no front panel. I would like to >> make it complete with the white front bezel seen here: >> >> http://hampage.hu/pdp11/kepek/11-03.jpg >> >> Does anyone have one for sale? >> >> The greyish plastic arround the front panel would be a bonus since mine >> got a small crack in it. >> >> Regards, >> Pontus. >> > >
Re: IBM Selectric-based Terminals
DEC made a Selectric interface called LT33 or something, consisting of a general purpose parallel card for a PDP-8/E coupled to a small chassis with a bunch of solenoid drivers and stuff for the Selectric. I think it was a CSS product, so I doubt it was supported by any official OS. I have three or four of the things, plus docs. -- Will On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 4:41 PM, Mike Ross wrote: > On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 9:26 AM, Guy Sotomayor wrote: >> >> >> On 12/15/15 12:05 PM, Mike Ross wrote: >>> >>> What other OSes might have native 2741 support built in, anyone know? >> >> I would expect that IBM mainframe OS's would support it (especially older >> ones). The issue there would be getting the 2741 connected up. > > Well IBM of course - I was thinking more other DEC OS's and various > flavors of Unix... > > Mike > > http://www.corestore.org > 'No greater love hath a man than he lay down his life for his brother. > Not for millions, not for glory, not for fame. > For one person, in the dark, where no one will ever know or see.'
Re: IBM Selectric-based Terminals
On 15 December 2015 at 20:21, William Donzelli wrote: > DEC made a Selectric interface called LT33 or something, consisting of If I recall my DEC naming correctly, the LT33 is *not* for the Selectric. It (and the corresponding LT35) are the modifications made to private line Model 33 (and Model 35, respectively) ASR Teletype machines to make them work as the console teleprinter (and have the reader work under computer control). Then again, they could have reused the name "LT33" but that would get confusing. Regards, Christian -- Christian M. Gauger-Cosgrove STCKON08DS0 Contact information available upon request.
Re: IBM Selectric-based Terminals
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Dave Wade wrote: >> -Original Message- >> From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Guy >> Sotomayor >> Sent: 15 December 2015 20:26 >> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts >> >> Subject: Re: IBM Selectric-based Terminals >> >> >> >> On 12/15/15 12:05 PM, Mike Ross wrote: >> > What other OSes might have native 2741 support built in, anyone know? >> I would expect that IBM mainframe OS's would support it (especially older >> ones). The issue there would be getting the 2741 connected up. >> > > Hercules now has support for 2741 via Telnet That is cool - but requires a host OS that supports 2741 login so you can then telnet to Herc... does Linux have 2741 support? I have vague memories of tweaking ?termcap? to support something odd I once shoved into a serial port - but not 2741 odd! What would be considerably cooler is if you could dedicate a serial port to Herc - plug in the 2741; switch it on; get an IBM login prompt *directly*. Mike http://www.corestore.org 'No greater love hath a man than he lay down his life for his brother. Not for millions, not for glory, not for fame. For one person, in the dark, where no one will ever know or see.'
Re: IBM CMS dumpfile idiocy
On 12/15/2015 01:48 PM, Dave Wade wrote: What I meant was are they still on 9-track, or some kind of tape-in-a-file disk? IBM tapes are usually written to AWS format files not the formats (.TAP ?) used by SIMH... Some source to extract some versions of these from AWS files (and windows executables) are in this ZIP file:- Came right off a 1600 cpi tape, identified as a CMS dumpfile. What really strikes me as odd, is that ANSI/IBM tape labels were pretty much the standard rule of thumb then; why the heck did IBM invent something new and obscure? --Chuck
Re: Mystery IC: Allen Bradley 314B102
On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Mike Stein wrote: > - Original Message - > From: "Mike Ross" > Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 3:41 PM > > >> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 4:35 AM, tony duell wrote: >>> If you can identify the data lines on the connector you are getting there. >>> See if you >>> can trace the other pins to inputs or outputs. >>> >>> -tony >> >> Tony, good advice but probably more work than I'm inclined to put in. >> As you said there were many interfaces with different standards - >> different polarities and timing - and either way it's quite likely >> this will never work with a standard modern parallel port without >> building some converter, after first finding out what has to be >> converted and designing it! > > - Reply - > > Tony just makes everything sound more complicated than it is ;-) > > Actually I suspect it might indeed quite possibly work with a standard > parallel port without any conversion at all other than a rewired cable and > maybe a very minor change or two on the board. > > For the most part a parallel port is a parallel port; data and strobe going > out, strobe acknowledge and printer status coming in, nothing more > complicated than that and timing is rarely an issue. In the Selectric there > is the R/T code conversion of course but that's done for you already and it > should be simple to find the data bit order. > > I had a contract years ago that involved adding a serial or parallel > interface to Olivetti typewriters and it's really not rocket science; I even > still have some info on interfacing to Selectrics but unfortunately not > relevant to yours. > > Your choice of course but I'd take Brent up on his generous offer to reverse > engineer that interface; you may find it's a much simpler project than you > think. > > (another) mike I have taken Brent up on that :-) I'll poke a bit more myself and see what we can work out together before I decide if the effort is worth it. http://www.corestore.org 'No greater love hath a man than he lay down his life for his brother. Not for millions, not for glory, not for fame. For one person, in the dark, where no one will ever know or see.'
Re: IBM Selectric-based Terminals
Like I said "or something". I could not recall that the time. A quick look shows that it is actually LT73. -- Will On Tue, Dec 15, 2015 at 9:13 PM, Christian Gauger-Cosgrove wrote: > On 15 December 2015 at 20:21, William Donzelli wrote: >> DEC made a Selectric interface called LT33 or something, consisting of > If I recall my DEC naming correctly, the LT33 is *not* for the > Selectric. It (and the corresponding LT35) are the modifications made > to private line Model 33 (and Model 35, respectively) ASR Teletype > machines to make them work as the console teleprinter (and have the > reader work under computer control). > > Then again, they could have reused the name "LT33" but that would get > confusing. > > Regards, > Christian > -- > Christian M. Gauger-Cosgrove > STCKON08DS0 > Contact information available upon request.
