RE: Connectors: Both contact surfaces must also be the same material?
-Original Message-
From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Jon Elson
Sent: Sunday, July 10, 2016 9:46 PM
To: gene...@classiccmp.org; discuss...@classiccmp.org:On-Topic and Off-Topic
Posts
Subject: Re: Connectors: Both contact surfaces must also be the same
material?
On 07/10/2016 01:58 PM, Al Kossow wrote:
>
> On 7/10/16 1:14 AM, Paul Birkel wrote:
>
>> Almost every DEC System Unit ("backplane") that I've ever seen uses
>> tinned-contacts, yet the Modules all use gold-plated fingers.
>>
> I'm not near one right now, but there should be gold plating on the
> finger in the DEC connector block at the point of contact with the pcb
> edge connector. It's easier to see on the VAX era blocks.
>
>
Absolutely. The WW pins were tinned, but there was selective gold plating
on the card edge contact fingers.
It would take a strong light and magnifier to see it down inside the
connector, but you can rest assured the contact was gold-gold.
Jon
-
Evidently a strong light *and* a strong magnifier (at least for me!). Off
to find one ... well, two.
paul
-
Re: IBM 360/30 in verilog (was: How do they make Verilog code for unknown ICs?)
And I'm very close to having a 360/65 in VHDL. Op 11 jul. 2016 2:44 a.m. schreef "Curious Marc" : > And Carl Claunch has an IBM 1130 in VHDL. > Marc > > Sent from my iPad > > > On Jul 10, 2016, at 10:23 PM, Lawrence Wilkinson > wrote: > > > > That'll be me, I guess, It's in VHDL. URL in sig. > > > >> On 10/07/16 15:21, Paul Birkel wrote: > >> -Original Message- > >> From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Guy > Sotomayor Jr > >> Sent: Monday, June 20, 2016 4:04 PM > >> To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts > >> Subject: Re: How do they make Verilog code for unknown ICs? > >> > >> What you can do (and I’ve seen it done) is define verilog modules that > provide the functions of the IC and use that in their designs. I’ve seen > at least two interesting classic computer recreations using this approach > (re-implemenation of the CADR lisp machine in verilog and an IBM 360/30 in > verilog). > >> > >> ROMs are easy (just instantiate a lookup table). PLCs are just > combinatorial equations which are relatively easy with the verilog “assign” > statement. > >> > >> TTFN - Guy > >> > >> > >> > >> Do you have a pointer to that "IBM 360/30 in Verilog", Guy? > >> > >> - > >> paul > > > > -- > > Lawrence Wilkinson lawrence at ljw.me.uk > > The IBM 360/30 page http://www.ljw.me.uk/ibm360 > > > > >
RE: IBM 360/30 in verilog (was: How do they make Verilog code for unknown ICs?)
-Original Message- From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Camiel Vanderhoeven Sent: Monday, July 11, 2016 4:31 AM To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Subject: Re: IBM 360/30 in verilog (was: How do they make Verilog code for unknown ICs?) And I'm very close to having a 360/65 in VHDL. - Sweet :->. What FPGA platform are you using? Lawrence used a Spartan 3. Don't know how close to "full" he pushed it. paul
Re: IBM 360/30 in verilog (was: How do they make Verilog code for unknown ICs?)
No kidding! That's a massive effort. How close is that to a 360/50? I have a front panel that needs a brain, could sure use that! Marc Sent from my iPhone > On Jul 11, 2016, at 5:31 PM, Camiel Vanderhoeven wrote: > > And I'm very close to having a 360/65 in VHDL. > Op 11 jul. 2016 2:44 a.m. schreef "Curious Marc" : > >> And Carl Claunch has an IBM 1130 in VHDL. >> Marc >> >> Sent from my iPad >> On Jul 10, 2016, at 10:23 PM, Lawrence Wilkinson >>> wrote: >>> >>> That'll be me, I guess, It's in VHDL. URL in sig. >>> On 10/07/16 15:21, Paul Birkel wrote: -Original Message- From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Guy >> Sotomayor Jr Sent: Monday, June 20, 2016 4:04 PM To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts Subject: Re: How do they make Verilog code for unknown ICs? What you can do (and I’ve seen it done) is define verilog modules that >> provide the functions of the IC and use that in their designs. I’ve seen >> at least two interesting classic computer recreations using this approach >> (re-implemenation of the CADR lisp machine in verilog and an IBM 360/30 in >> verilog). ROMs are easy (just instantiate a lookup table). PLCs are just >> combinatorial equations which are relatively easy with the verilog “assign” >> statement. TTFN - Guy Do you have a pointer to that "IBM 360/30 in Verilog", Guy? - paul >>> >>> -- >>> Lawrence Wilkinson lawrence at ljw.me.uk >>> The IBM 360/30 page http://www.ljw.me.uk/ibm360 >>
Successor models that never were
Unfinished or never launched follow-ons to classic 1980s home micros... http://uk.pcmag.com/desktop-reviews/82794/gallery/7-classic-home-pc-follow-ups-that-were-never-released -- Sent from my phone - please pardon brevity & typos.
Re: IBM 360/30 in verilog (was: How do they make Verilog code for unknown ICs?)
On 7/11/16 1:31 AM, Camiel Vanderhoeven wrote: > And I'm very close to having a 360/65 in VHDL. > Op 11 jul. 2016 2:44 a.m. schreef "Curious Marc" : > Was the microcode derived from the engineering drawings? >From memory, the 65 is the bigger brother to the 50 with a wider memory bus. It was also the base machine for their first machine with paging, the model 67.
Re: IBM 360/30 in verilog
On 07/11/2016 06:40 AM, Curious Marc wrote: No kidding! That's a massive effort. How close is that to a 360/50? I have a front panel that needs a brain, could sure use that! 360/50 is a 32-bit machine, the real thing has a core memory "local store" and (3, IIRC) built-in channels. it does not allow memory interleaving. The 360/65 has a 64-bit path to memory, and does permit interleaving. it also allows two /65s to be put together in a multiprocessor system. There are a few additional instructions to communicate between CPUs. The 65 has solid state local store, and a 56-bit ALU, so it can do double-precision floating-point arithmetic without having to double up the cycles, as the /50 does. The /65 has no built-in channels. Jon
Re: IBM 360/30 in verilog
On 07/11/2016 10:44 AM, Al Kossow wrote: On 7/11/16 1:31 AM, Camiel Vanderhoeven wrote: And I'm very close to having a 360/65 in VHDL. Op 11 jul. 2016 2:44 a.m. schreef "Curious Marc" : Was the microcode derived from the engineering drawings? The microcode was in the ALD drawings, and might even be in bitsavers archive, if they have the right manual. These machines didn't have a huge amount of microcode, about 2000 words if no emulation options. Jon
Re: IBM 360/30 in verilog (was: How do they make Verilog code for unknown ICs?)
> > And I'm very close to having a 360/65 in VHDL. > > Was the microcode derived from the engineering drawings? Yes, from hand-corrected OCR scans. To be precise, the ALDs and microcode I'm using are not for a plain 2065, but for a 7201-02, the variant that was used in the 9020 complex. I'm making modifications that I hope make it work like a 2065 again. > From memory, the 65 is the bigger brother to the 50 with a wider memory bus. And a bigger ALU, so the microcode for floating point operations is very different I believe. Camiel
RE: IBM 360/30 in verilog (was: How do they make Verilog code for unknown ICs?)
> And I'm very close to having a 360/65 in VHDL. > - > > Sweet :->. What FPGA platform are you using? Lawrence used a Spartan 3. Don't know how close to "full" he pushed it. I'm using the XUPV5 PCIE board (Xilinx Virtex-5 XC5VLX110T); currently about 60% occupied, but the design needs lots of debugging. I'm only implementing the CPU on the FPGA, transcribing from the IBM ALDs. I/O channels will be provided by the Hercules emulator (with its cpu ripped out) on the system the PCIe card is plugged into.
Re: IBM 360/30 in verilog
On 7/11/16 9:14 AM, Jon Elson wrote: > The microcode was in the ALD drawings, and might even be in bitsavers > archive, if they have the right manual. > 360 CPU ALDs are extremely difficult to find. If the 65 set could be scanned, I'd be happy to upload them to bitsavers.
Re: cctalk Digest, Vol 25, Issue 10
On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 9:41 PM, Fred wrote: > On Sat, 9 Jul 2016 cctalk-requ...@classiccmp.org wrote: > > [talk about word processors, specifically WordPerfect] > > I would LOVE to find a (hobbyist) copy of WordPerfect for OpenVMS some > day. Back in the day I could fly through those key combos on WP 5.1 ... I used to work for a guy who resold WordPerfect for VMS, but I haven't seen that in the wild since 1988 (he showed me a box with a media kit and a 50-seat license, I forget the exact amount but I think it was around $30,000). So I've seen it, but I never used it myself. Other places I worked, we used MASS-11. _That_ I have. -ethan
Re: DEC PDT-150 software
On 07/10/2016 14:13, Fred Jan Kraan wrote: > > On 2016-07-10 07:00 PM, cctalk-requ...@classiccmp.org wrote: >> >> I have a restored and (I think) functional PDT-150 with dual 8? floppy >> drives but no software. [...] >> >> Any assistance would be appreciated. Happy to pay for OS/Application >> diskettes and freight etc > > The PDT-150 was also sold with a VT-105 as the MiniMINC and can run some > versions of RT-11 (at least V3b). Back in the later 80s I picked up an ex-Digit's PDT-11/150, which was sold to her with a VT52. It came with RT-11 v4 and random bits and bobs, all of which is lost in storage somewhere at the moment. Just wanted to point out that the PDT will happily run RT-11 v4, and I'm not sure what the last version would be. I see a reference to using VTCOM with the PDT-11/150 in the RT-11 v5.1 release notes, so... --S.
Re: IBM 360/30 in verilog
Hi Al, I have a 7201-2 set that I scanned. They're ~64 MB TIF files per sheet, about ~150GB in total. I can upload those where ever you want. Op 11 jul. 2016 6:58 p.m. schreef "Al Kossow" : On 7/11/16 9:14 AM, Jon Elson wrote: > The microcode was in the ALD drawings, and might even be in bitsavers archive, if they have the right manual. > 360 CPU ALDs are extremely difficult to find. If the 65 set could be scanned, I'd be happy to upload them to bitsavers.
Re: DEC PDT-150 software
On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Brendan McNeill wrote: > Greetings > > I have a restored and (I think) functional PDT-150 with dual 8” floppy drives > but no software. I do have some blank 8” diskettes but no real means of > transferring an operating system or (say) a word processing program onto them. This reminds me to ask, since I also have a PDT-150... there's vtserver for larger machines (ftp://minnie.tuhs.org/pub/PDP-11/Vtserver/vtreadme.html - 192K of RAM required) that can be used to image 8" floppies on a bare machine. Every few years, I keep tossing around the idea to bang out a less-feature-rich vtserver client with only one device driver loaded and target a machine with 56Kbytes (or 60Kbytes - PDT-150) but I've never sat down to check the level of effort, or if it's just worth starting from scratch with an RX (or RL or RK) target and make a new app and client. The advantage of reusing the vtserver server part is that it's been in use for long enough to find the obvious bugs, and the limitation of 16-bit block counts (32MB) isn't an issue for most 1970s media, even up to RK07s. Once you have a working RT-11 system, things like Kermit are handy enough for moving files, but I think we are still lacking in the "bootstrapping a small machine" department. For me, since I have alternatives, the "simpler" option is to turn a MicroPDP-11 (w/256Kbytes or more) into an RX01/RX02/RL01/RL02 imaging machine and just use vtserver. I still dream of a bare-metal solution for 64KB machines, since that _is_ viable for a small RT-11 rig. -ethan
Re: IBM 360/30 in verilog
On 7/11/16 10:46 AM, Camiel Vanderhoeven wrote: > Hi Al, > > I have a 7201-2 set that I scanned. They're ~64 MB TIF files per sheet, > about ~150GB in total. I'll have to wait until Jay increases the amount of disk space available to bitsavers.
RE: IBM 360/30 in verilog
That should be "very soon", as that was part of the reason for the server maintenance last week to lay some groundwork. Stay tuned
Re: DEC PDT-150 software
On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 5:13 PM, Fred Jan Kraan wrote: > On 2016-07-10 07:00 PM, cctalk-requ...@classiccmp.org wrote: >> Greetings >> >> I have a restored and (I think) functional PDT-150 with dual 8" floppy >> drives... > > The PDT-150 was also sold with a VT-105 as the MiniMINC and can run some > versions of RT-11 (at least V3b). I happen to have a VT-105, but I don't recall much in the way of non-lab apps that ever used the graphing capability of the VT-105 (or any of the other semi-graphical DEC terminals). > On my site there are images of disks, but > it requires a PC capable of writing single density format to an 8" disk. IMD > is not the most common format in DEC circles, but it is in PC land. > > http://fjkraan.home.xs4all.nl/comp/miniminc/floppyImages/ IMD is good. John Wilson's putr is good. Plenty of ways to write an RX01 with a PC that can write the format and has an 8" drive on it. I'm working on that myself (John recently sent me a 24V boost PSU, so I'm going to try to hang a Tandon TM-848 off a DOS/Win3.11 PC, but I'm also likely to grab an RXV21 and stuff it into a MicroPDP-11 and use vtserver with an enclosed RX02 from a MINC-11 - after I run it through a refurb to clean out dust and hardened positioner grease). -ethan
Re: DEC PDT-150 software
On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 1:46 PM, Steven M Jones wrote: > Just wanted to point out that the PDT will happily run RT-11 v4, and I'm > not sure what the last version would be. I see a reference to using > VTCOM with the PDT-11/150 in the RT-11 v5.1 release notes, so... As long as you have a suitable PD driver, any version ought to work... http://www.pdp-11.nl/pdt11-150/pdt11-150-info.html -ethan
Re: IBM 360/30 in verilog
Al said: > On 7/11/16 9:14 AM, Jon Elson wrote: >> The microcode was in the ALD drawings, and might even be in bitsavers >> archive, if they have the right manual. > > 360 CPU ALDs are extremely difficult to find. > If the 65 set could be scanned, I'd be happy to upload them to bitsavers. Indeed they must be. I've been looking for /40 ALDs for some time but haven't struck any. I wonder if they're scarce becase the 40 was a AFAIK a british-developed 360. My dad was posted to Hursley to learn the /40 in 64-65. The only Model 40 docs I have left are less than a dozen pages of 'IBM SYSTEM/360 MODEL 40 DEVELOPMENT MANUAL' from March 1965 from 'IBM BRITISH LABORATORIES'. Why do I have these? Dad used to bring home Model 40 binders in the late 60s so my brother and I had a good supply of paper to scribble and paint on as kids. All the pages I have left have drawings on the blank side and that was why my parents kept them :) Steve.
Re: cctalk Digest, Vol 25, Issue 10
On 11 July 2016 at 03:41, Fred wrote: > On Sat, 9 Jul 2016 cctalk-requ...@classiccmp.org wrote: > > [talk about word processors, specifically WordPerfect] > > I would LOVE to find a (hobbyist) copy of WordPerfect for OpenVMS some > day. Back in the day I could fly through those key combos on WP 5.1 ... Ahh, yes. I did install one instance of MS Word 5 on SCO Xenix/386. That was... interesting. The client had 2 printers, a high-speed dot-matrix and a slower, higher-quality one. Getting the font support for Word working with both was a significant exercise. I think I wrote more and longer shell scripts for that single job than all the rest of my entire career (& hobbyist use) put together. Word worked surprisingly well. A 9600bps Wyse-60 struggled to keep up with Word's inverse-video highlighting, but if you were patient, or used block select rather than character-by-character (Ctrl+Shift+cursors instead of Shift+cursors) it could keep up. A _lot_ of work to get it all working, and honestly, while it did work, it didn't work particularly well. I think the client replaced terminals with PCs + a terminal emulator for people who needed WP functionality. They could print to the Xenix printer spools and that worked fairly well. Some clever PC terminal emulator from James River... [*Googles*] Ah, yes, ICE.TEN I think it was: http://www.icetcp.com/ I can't remember if I ever saw or used WordPerfect on Xenix. Maybe. I did want to see if I could find an old copy of Word for Xenix and run it under Xenix compatibility on a modern Linux, but I never could find it, and I think Linux's Xenix-compatibility functionality was quietly deprecated and dropped decades ago... -- Liam Proven • Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven MSN: lpro...@hotmail.com • Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) • +420 702 829 053 (ČR)
Re: IBM 360/30 in verilog
I haven't looked yet, but are the 360/50 ALDs available anywhere? Marc > On Jul 12, 2016, at 2:00 AM, Al Kossow wrote: > > > >> On 7/11/16 9:14 AM, Jon Elson wrote: >> >> The microcode was in the ALD drawings, and might even be in bitsavers >> archive, if they have the right manual. > > 360 CPU ALDs are extremely difficult to find. > If the 65 set could be scanned, I'd be happy to upload them to bitsavers. > > >
Re: IBM 360/30 in verilog
Thanks for the detailed answer. I see the front panels look remarkably similar though. Short of redoing a 360/50 on an FPGA (I'd need to retire to have enough time for this one!), could I use the /50 panel with the /65 emulator? Marc > On Jul 12, 2016, at 1:11 AM, Jon Elson wrote: > >> On 07/11/2016 06:40 AM, Curious Marc wrote: >> No kidding! That's a massive effort. How close is that to a 360/50? I have a >> front panel that needs a brain, could sure use that! > 360/50 is a 32-bit machine, the real thing has a core memory "local store" > and (3, IIRC) built-in channels. it does not allow memory interleaving. > > The 360/65 has a 64-bit path to memory, and does permit interleaving. it > also allows two /65s to be put together in a multiprocessor system. There > are a few additional instructions to communicate between CPUs. The 65 has > solid state local store, and a 56-bit ALU, so it can do double-precision > floating-point arithmetic without having to double up the cycles, as the /50 > does. The /65 has no built-in channels. > > Jon
Re: IBM 360/30 in verilog
On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:36 AM, wrote: > Al said: >> On 7/11/16 9:14 AM, Jon Elson wrote: >>> The microcode was in the ALD drawings, and might even be in bitsavers >>> archive, if they have the right manual. >> >> 360 CPU ALDs are extremely difficult to find. >> If the 65 set could be scanned, I'd be happy to upload them to bitsavers. > > Indeed they must be. I've been looking for /40 ALDs for some time but haven't > struck any. I wonder if they're > scarce becase the 40 was a AFAIK a british-developed 360. My dad was posted > to Hursley to learn the /40 in 64-65. > > The only Model 40 docs I have left are less than a dozen pages of 'IBM > SYSTEM/360 MODEL 40 DEVELOPMENT MANUAL' > from March 1965 from 'IBM BRITISH LABORATORIES'. > Why do I have these? Dad used to bring home Model 40 binders in the late 60s > so my brother and I had a good > supply of paper to scribble and paint on as kids. All the pages I have left > have drawings on the blank side > and that was why my parents kept them :) > > Steve. I have some 360 ALDs - and I think they may include 40. About to go on holiday with kids; ping me from time to time and I'll check! 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 360/30 in verilog
Mike said: > On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 10:36 AM, wrote: >> Al said: >>> On 7/11/16 9:14 AM, Jon Elson wrote: The microcode was in the ALD drawings, and might even be in bitsavers archive, if they have the right manual. >>> >>> 360 CPU ALDs are extremely difficult to find. >>> If the 65 set could be scanned, I'd be happy to upload them to bitsavers. >> >> Indeed they must be. I've been looking for /40 ALDs for some time but >> haven't struck any. I wonder if they're >> scarce becase the 40 was a AFAIK a british-developed 360. My dad was posted >> to Hursley to learn the /40 in 64-65. >> >> The only Model 40 docs I have left are less than a dozen pages of 'IBM >> SYSTEM/360 MODEL 40 DEVELOPMENT MANUAL' >> from March 1965 from 'IBM BRITISH LABORATORIES'. >> Why do I have these? Dad used to bring home Model 40 binders in the late 60s >> so my brother and I had a good >> supply of paper to scribble and paint on as kids. All the pages I have left >> have drawings on the blank side >> and that was why my parents kept them :) >> >> Steve. > > I have some 360 ALDs - and I think they may include 40. About to go on > holiday with kids; ping me from time to time and I'll check! That would be great thanks Mike. In the meantime if anyone's interested I can scan those few 'ModForty' (as my Dad always used to refer to it as) pages. The original side, not the drawn-on side.. Steve
Re: IBM 360/30 in verilog
On 07/11/2016 05:36 PM, ste...@malikoff.com wrote: Indeed they must be. I've been looking for /40 ALDs for some time but haven't struck any. I wonder if they're scarce becase the 40 was a AFAIK a british-developed 360. My dad was posted to Hursley to learn the /40 in 64-65. LOTS of model /40s were sold in the US. EVERY one had its own set of ALDs, with the serial number of the CPU on them. They not only recorded the general info for the model, but they had specific changes to reflect the exact configuration of THAT machine. Jon
Re: IBM 360/30 in verilog
On 07/11/2016 07:35 PM, Curious Marc wrote: Thanks for the detailed answer. I see the front panels look remarkably similar though. Short of redoing a 360/50 on an FPGA (I'd need to retire to have enough time for this one!), could I use the /50 panel with the /65 emulator? Not really! The 360/50 had 4 "rollers" for 4 rows of lights, and one row of data switches, and 2 rows of dedicated lights. The 360/65 had 6 rollers with 6 rows of lights, plus TWO rows of data switches, and pretty much no dedicated lights other than associated with the rollers. Both had a row of address switches under the data switches. So, yes, in GENERAL, they had a similar look and layout, but in detail, there was a lot different, some of it specifically related to the memory word width. The only machine that looked really different was the 360/30, that had a panel more reminiscent of the 1401. And, of course, the 360/85, which was really a prototype of the 370/165. As far as software was concerned, it was just a really fast 360, but the hardware was MUCH more advanced. Jon
Re: IBM 360/30 in verilog
Jon said: > LOTS of model /40s were sold in the US. EVERY one had its > own set of ALDs, with the serial number of the CPU on them. > They not only recorded the general info for the model, but > they had specific changes to reflect the exact configuration > of THAT machine. I didn't know that every machine came with a set of ALDs but you are right that a lot of /40's were sold stateside. My dad was re-posted directly from Hursley to Poughkeepsie in '65 which I was where some (or all?) the /40s were assembled. One of the IBM Journals (75 years?) has a large colour photo of a row of 40s on the final assembly floor at Poughkeepsie, everyone in it striking that characteristic 60s/70s IBM-photo-pose, eg. someone leaning over a table, another reaching for a console knob, one changing a tape and at least two people earnestly discussing a printout. Steve.
Re: Wanted: VT5x roll-around stand
I have 3 stands, but I only need 1 for my VT-50. I am taking offers on the other 2 :-) I believe these stands to be authentic DEC VT5X stands. Is there any way of telling for sure? There are no markings on the stands. Here is a picture of the stand: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BzqkBl9PETyQek51bFlXTU53a1E The tray dimensions (all inside dimensions) are as follows: width: 16-13/16" length: 22-7/8" height (floor to base of tray including casters): 25" The lip of the stand is approx 7/16" The metal is approx 1/16" thick. --barrym On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 12:55 AM, Fritz Mueller wrote: > On 06/27/2016 10:06 PM, Ethan Dicks wrote: > >> ...could you measure, and/or photograph the part that the VT52 sits on? >> > > Yes please, pictures appreciated, thanks! > > --FritzM. > >
Re: Wanted: VT5x roll-around stand
Sorry. I forgot to mention that I live near Calgary Alberta Canada. --barrym On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 7:31 PM, B M wrote: > I have 3 stands, but I only need 1 for my VT-50. I am taking offers on > the other 2 :-) > > I believe these stands to be authentic DEC VT5X stands. Is there any way > of telling for sure? There are no markings on the stands. > > Here is a picture of the stand: > https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BzqkBl9PETyQek51bFlXTU53a1E > > The tray dimensions (all inside dimensions) are as follows: > > width: 16-13/16" > length: 22-7/8" > height (floor to base of tray including casters): 25" > > The lip of the stand is approx 7/16" > The metal is approx 1/16" thick. > > --barrym > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 12:55 AM, Fritz Mueller wrote: > >> On 06/27/2016 10:06 PM, Ethan Dicks wrote: >> >>> ...could you measure, and/or photograph the part that the VT52 sits on? >>> >> >> Yes please, pictures appreciated, thanks! >> >> --FritzM. >> >> >
Re: Wanted: VT5x roll-around stand
I've been trying to find vendors who sell the parts to build stands like that. Ideally I'd like the column height to be adjustable, but I obviously can't come up with the right words for a search because I can't find them even in fixed height. I'd like to build one specifically for a DEC GT40 terminal, with a keyboard tray. Someone I know has a stand that is almost perfect for the GT40, but there's no identifying information on it, so I can't easily search for a matching stand.
Re: Wanted: VT5x roll-around stand
On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 9:31 PM, B M wrote: > I have 3 stands, but I only need 1 for my VT-50. I am taking offers on the > other 2 :-) I would love one, but I am afraid of the shipping costs to Ohio. I've had small packages shipped from Toronto and it seems to run over $10/lb. > I believe these stands to be authentic DEC VT5X stands. Is there any way > of telling for sure? There are no markings on the stands. I can't be certain, but the height and the appearance suggest to me that they are. > Here is a picture of the stand: > https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BzqkBl9PETyQek51bFlXTU53a1E Superb! > The tray dimensions (all inside dimensions) are as follows: > > width: 16-13/16" > length: 22-7/8" > height (floor to base of tray including casters): 25" > > The lip of the stand is approx 7/16" > The metal is approx 1/16" thick. Thanks for the info! I can check the bottom of a VT52 to see what's there at those dimensions - feet or any corner/edge features. Anyone have a photo handy of the bottom of a VT52? With a scale ruler? I can take one but it'll be a week or two until I'm in the right place. -ethan
