On 2/28/2017 2:34 PM, Brent Hilpert wrote:
In answer to the final point, and the interests of some analog education,
looking at your reffed pdf, page 75, the reason (or one reason)
your duplicated Coco input circuit is not working is the gross impedance
mismatch between the coco tape output and
Mattias Engdegård wrote:
> Many thanks for the VT420 results!
I have a VT220 too, but it's in storage. I can dig it out if necessary,
but I'm hoping someone else can contribute those results.
Note that the setup probably can alter the results. I had "Auto Wrap"
enabled, which is probably what y
28 feb. 2017 kl. 20.10 skrev Lars Brinkhoff via cctalk :
> I have a VT420 set up for my kid to play with. I'll borrow it and
> submit a pull request with the results.
That is what I call being a responsible parent.
Many thanks for the VT420 results!
From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Dave Wade
G4UGM via cctalk
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 1:52 PM
> "reply all" seems to put the original sender and the list in the "to:"
> field..
Thanks, Dave, Dennis, and js.
I had no reason to reply (all) to any of these me
However it plays out for you, thanks for sharing with the group.
I always wanted a SPARCbook, never could afford one at the time, and according
to the wife, now would not be a good time to acquire one according to the wife
after just picking up a SPARCserver 1000e + 3 large SPARCarray's.
Livi
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 8:05 AM, Ethan Dicks via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Earl Evans via cctech
> wrote:
> > I'm on the other side of the country or I'd be all over this.
>
> I'm hours away myself...
>
> > Someone please rescue this equipment. The
On 02/28/2017 03:23 PM, Rich Alderson via cctalk wrote:
OK, it's official. I rarely criticize mail interfaces, because they're usually
mostly innocuous. However, today's change makes life a lot more difficult.
In the past, it was simple to direct a reply to an individual instead of to the
list
On 02/28/2017 05:21 PM, Jon Auringer wrote:
>
> Chuck,
>
> I had the same display issue. Uncheck "Show only display name for
> people in my address book" under Tools-Options-Display-Advanced.
Jon,
Thanks for the hint! I'm using the Linux version of Thunderbird, so the
setting isn't under "Tool
It was thus said that the Great Chuck Guzis via cctalk once stated:
> On 02/28/2017 03:40 PM, Paul Berger wrote:
> > Well I am using Thunderbird 45.7.1 and I see this "Chuck Guzis via
> > cctalk " as "From" in your message.
> >
>
> Hmmm, this is very puzzling. Your message does indeed show up a
On 02/28/2017 03:40 PM, Paul Berger wrote:
> Well I am using Thunderbird 45.7.1 and I see this "Chuck Guzis via
> cctalk " as "From" in your message.
>
Hmmm, this is very puzzling. Your message does indeed show up as being
from "Paul Berger", by the message you replied to shows up as being from
Well I am using Thunderbird 45.7.1 and I see this "Chuck Guzis via
cctalk " as "From" in your message.
Paul.
On 2017-02-28 7:32 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
On 02/28/2017 03:18 PM, Torfinn Ingolfsen via cctalk wrote:
FWIW, reply and reply all in Gmail web interface now lists both
addres
On 02/28/2017 03:18 PM, Torfinn Ingolfsen via cctalk wrote:
> FWIW, reply and reply all in Gmail web interface now lists both
> addresses (originator and mailing list). I don't know if this is a
> change again.
>
> Also, I find it somewhat funny in a bizarre way that people on this
> list who h
On 02/28/2017 03:05 PM, Noel Chiappa via cctalk wrote:
> I seem to have some bizarre brain dysfunction where I have a very
> hard time understanding even the simplest analog circuits. You, or
> someone like Brent Hilpert (whose explanation of core memory drivers
> I still remember :-) can explain
FWIW, reply and reply all in Gmail web interface now lists both
addresses (originator and mailing list). I don't know if this is a
change again.
Also, I find it somewhat funny in a bizarre way that people on this
list who have experience with all kinds of systems, all kinds of user
interfaces and
> From: Tony Duell
> I fail to see how anyone can be a good digital designer and not
> understand analogue electronics.
It's easy! As long as your devices are being run in a domain where their
behaviour is purely, well, digital, one can get away with it! :-)
I'm a perfect case in poi
>> [From: changing]
> You can blame me for the change to the way the From: header is
> handled. The purpose of this change is to try to solve the mass
> bounce problem.
Sounds as though this may be a cure worse than the disease, though.
> Actually, you should really blame the folks responsible
Simple question of policy (what do we WANT, not "what is the only sensible
right way"):
Do we want the DEFAULT to be replying to author, or replying to list?
Current configuration has REPLY-TO being same as REPLY-ALL,
and has REPLY being a reply to list, with the TO: line having the
inconsisten
On 28/02/2017 21:23, Rich Alderson via cctalk wrote:
OK, it's official. I rarely criticize mail interfaces, because
they're usually mostly innocuous. However, today's change makes life
a lot more difficult.
Actually, I rather like it, because in my mail client (Thunderbird) it
shows as "From:
On 28/02/2017 22:06, Eric Christopherson via cctalk wrote:
At least in Gmail's web interface, I don't see reply and reply all having
any difference here; they both put both addresses in the To:. I'll have to
check how this works in an IMAP client later.
It may vary in different clients, but in
> From: Rich Alderson
> it is impossible to respond privately unless you happen to have a bunch
> of old messages archived and the person to whom you want to respond is
> someone who has written previously.
If you go into the list archive:
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cc
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:51 PM, Dave Wade G4UGM via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> > -Original Message-
> > From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Rich
> > Alderson via cctalk
> > Sent: 28 February 2017 21:23
> > To: 'General Discussion: On-Topic and Of
When I hit "reply" I get both the originator's email and the lists email in my
'to' field. I can simply delete the list when I want to only reply to the
originator.
-Original Message-
From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Dennis Boone
via cctalk
Sent: Tuesday,
if anyone has a cable for the trs 80 model 100 small compact cassette drive to
the 100 please lest us know. need this for demoing and display of the model 100
in the museum...
thanks ed# www.smecc.org
Sent from AOL Mobile Mail
On Tuesday, February 28, 2017 allison via cctalk wrote:
On 2/28/1
> -Original Message-
> From: cctalk [mailto:cctalk-boun...@classiccmp.org] On Behalf Of Rich
> Alderson via cctalk
> Sent: 28 February 2017 21:23
> To: 'General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts'
>
> Subject: I hate the new mail system
>
> OK, it's official. I rarely criticize mai
> Is this a conscious choice, or a configurable with a different
> default setting in a new mail system than was previously in place?
> However it came to be, it greatly diminishes communications quality
> (IMAO).
You can blame me for the change to the way the From: header is handled.
The purp
Thanks for spotting that the list was down, and for fixing it so quickly. I
can't begin to imagine how hard it is to move datacenters.
Regards,
Andrew Burton
aliensrcoo...@yahoo.co.uk
www.aliensrcooluk.com
- Original Message -
From: "Jay West"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 12
OK, it's official. I rarely criticize mail interfaces, because they're usually
mostly innocuous. However, today's change makes life a lot more difficult.
In the past, it was simple to direct a reply to an individual instead of to the
list because the originator's address was right there in the F
On 2/28/17 1:43 PM, Jim Brain via cctalk wrote:
On 2/28/2017 12:17 PM, Ethan Dicks via cctalk wrote:
It sounds like he is contemplating a battery-powered tape drive
emulator that plugs on the outside of the machine for users to use
without opening their boxes. It would then be portable to other
On 2017-Feb-28, at 7:55 AM, Jim Brain via cctalk wrote:
> Analog, which is my nemesis, curses me again.
>
> I have a cute idea for a cassette port project for the Tandy line of
> computers (the ones with the cassette port). I have a Coco 3 on the bench,
> so I scoped the output line while doing
It was thus said that the Great Tony Duell via cctalk once stated:
> On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 4:21 PM, allison via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>
> >
> > The tape recorders used had no agc. They were simple portables and used the
> > mic or line input and headphone output.
>
> I have to disagree with you
On Tue, 28 Feb 2017, Jim Brain via cctalk wrote:
This year's CocoFEST is open to all TRS-80 models, not just the Coco, and I
noticed that many of the models have a similar cassette port connector
yes. even the IBM PC 5150 uses the same connector and pinout, and cable
(Radio Shack #26-1207)
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 4:21 PM, allison via cctalk
wrote:
>
> The tape recorders used had no agc. They were simple portables and used the
> mic or line input and headphone output.
I have to disagree with you there. I have just looked at the documentation for a
couple of the Radio Shack tape r
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 6:10 PM, Jim Brain wrote:
> A digital one. The current goal is to feed the incoming data stream into an
> Atmel AVR running at 5V for parsing. The final goal is to do the same, but
> run the AVR at 3V on two coin cells.
OK. I assume you don't want to be running special
Mattias Engdegård wrote:
> Data for VT100, VT220 and VT510 have been collected, as well as
> several emulators
> (https://github.com/mattiase/wraptest/blob/master/results.txt). If
> anyone has access to other working terminals, VT3xx/VT4xx in
> particular, I'd be most grateful if you would take a f
On 2/28/2017 12:36 PM, allison via cctalk wrote:
A sound recorder, how novel. My I phone and androids already do that.
Before that I use tape recorders.
Using a classic machine, how novel. My iPhone and androids already
compute everything I need. Before that I used other machines still more
On 2/28/2017 11:42 AM, Seth Morabito via cctalk wrote:
Hi Jim,
When I was building a cassette circuit for my homebrew 6502 computer,
I essentially stole the Synertek SYM-1 circuit wholesale. See:
http://www.loomcom.com/blog/2013/01/04/retrochallenge-update-comparator-vs-zero-crossing-detector/
On 2/28/17 12:56 PM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
On 02/28/2017 09:42 AM, Seth Morabito via cctalk wrote:
Synertek used an LM311 (an LM358 would work just fine) to build a
comparator circuit. I _think_ you could use this exact circuit to
take the analog output from the CoCo and turn it into a
On 2/28/17 1:17 PM, Ethan Dicks via cctalk wrote:
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 11:21 AM, allison via cctalk
wrote:
On 2/28/17 10:55 AM, Jim Brain via cctalk wrote:
I have a cute idea for a cassette port project for the Tandy line of
computers (the ones with the cassette port)
Why not just go
On 2/28/2017 12:17 PM, Ethan Dicks via cctalk wrote:
It sounds like he is contemplating a battery-powered tape drive
emulator that plugs on the outside of the machine for users to use
without opening their boxes. It would then be portable to other
machines. Sounds like a great idea.
This year's
On 2/28/2017 11:56 AM, Chuck Guzis via cctalk wrote:
On 02/28/2017 09:42 AM, Seth Morabito via cctalk wrote:
Synertek used an LM311 (an LM358 would work just fine) to build a
comparator circuit. I _think_ you could use this exact circuit to
take the analog output from the CoCo and turn it into
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 11:21 AM, allison via cctalk
wrote:
> On 2/28/17 10:55 AM, Jim Brain via cctalk wrote:
>> I have a cute idea for a cassette port project for the Tandy line of
>> computers (the ones with the cassette port)
>>
> Why not just go inside and grab the signal at it source bef
On 2/28/17 12:09 PM, Paul Berger via cctalk wrote:
74LS of 74HC gates are not going to work, the signal level is only 1V
the threshold for 74LS is 2V and for 74HC it is 3.7V. I would
probably use something like a compatator or an opamp but I don't have
a circuit handy to use, but tehy should b
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Earl Evans via cctech
wrote:
> I'm on the other side of the country or I'd be all over this.
I'm hours away myself...
> Someone please rescue this equipment. The thought of it going to the
> scrappers is, well, brutal.
Indeed.
> Aren't PDP-11/60s kind of a ra
On 2/28/17 10:55 AM, Jim Brain via cctalk wrote:
Analog, which is my nemesis, curses me again.
I have a cute idea for a cassette port project for the Tandy line of
computers (the ones with the cassette port). I have a Coco 3 on the
bench, so I scoped the output line while doing 'csave "jim"'.
> > I'm on the other side of the country or I'd be all over this. Someone
> > please rescue this equipment. The thought of it going to the scrappers is,
> > well, brutal. Aren't PDP-11/60s kind of a rare beast?
> >
> > - Earl
> >
>
> yes, yes they are. ug.
I've contacted Greg, haven't heard back
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Earl Evans via cctech <
cct...@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> I'm on the other side of the country or I'd be all over this. Someone
> please rescue this equipment. The thought of it going to the scrappers is,
> well, brutal. Aren't PDP-11/60s kind of a rare beast?
>
> -
I'm on the other side of the country or I'd be all over this. Someone
please rescue this equipment. The thought of it going to the scrappers is,
well, brutal. Aren't PDP-11/60s kind of a rare beast?
- Earl
On 2/28/2017 11:43 AM, Tony Duell via cctalk wrote:
I fail to see how anyone can be a good digital designer and not
understand analogue
electronics.
A couple points:
* It is entirely possible I am not a good digital designer
* I believe I have a basic understanding of analog, but I may not be
All I can say is good luck. These are typically the limiting reagent to
portable use. About half my sparcbooks have sleds, optimistically.
Any tadpole series 2 (P-series, N40, AlphaBook, Sparcbook) sled will work.
Sparcbook 3000 series caddies look identical but will not.
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at
Now that I read your whole email I would like to ask what you plan to do
with this boosted signal? I have never had a CoCo, but most cassette
interfaces on these old computers pretty much all worked like a modem
but you where recording the signal instead of sending it down a phone line.
From
On 02/28/2017 09:42 AM, Seth Morabito via cctalk wrote:
> Synertek used an LM311 (an LM358 would work just fine) to build a
> comparator circuit. I _think_ you could use this exact circuit to
> take the analog output from the CoCo and turn it into a 5V sqauare
> wave.
I don't know a thing abo
On Tue, 28 Feb 2017, Tony Duell via cctalk wrote:
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:12 PM, Tapley, Mark via cctalk
wrote:
On Feb 28, 2017, at 9:55 AM, Jim Brain via cctalk wrote:
Analog, which is my nemesis, curses me again.
In my opinion, I fail to see how anyone can be a good digital designer
a
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 5:12 PM, Tapley, Mark via cctalk
wrote:
> On Feb 28, 2017, at 9:55 AM, Jim Brain via cctalk
> wrote:
>
>> Analog, which is my nemesis, curses me again.
I fail to see how anyone can be a good digital designer and not
understand analogue
electronics.
>>
>> I have a cute i
* On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 09:55:30AM -0600, Jim Brain via cctalk
wrote:
> Analog, which is my nemesis, curses me again.
>
> I have a cute idea for a cassette port project for the Tandy line of
> computers (the ones with the cassette port). I have a Coco 3 on the bench,
> so I scoped the output
On Feb 28, 2017, at 9:55 AM, Jim Brain via cctalk wrote:
> Analog, which is my nemesis, curses me again.
>
> I have a cute idea for a cassette port project for the Tandy line of
> computers (the ones with the cassette port). I have a Coco 3 on the bench,
> so I scoped the output line while do
74LS of 74HC gates are not going to work, the signal level is only 1V
the threshold for 74LS is 2V and for 74HC it is 3.7V. I would probably
use something like a compatator or an opamp but I don't have a circuit
handy to use, but tehy should be easy to find.
Paul.
On 2017-02-28 11:59 AM, Ale
Hi Jerry, thanks for the info. I do have a some SCSI2SD adapters, though I
would still have the problem with the weird internal connector and lack of
a drive caddy to hold anything.
I mean, I can't use a Sparcbook at the coffee shop with an external
drive... That would be embarrassing!
On Mon, Fe
74hc(or ls)14
Enviado do meu Tele-Movel
On Feb 28, 2017 12:55 PM, "Jim Brain via cctalk"
wrote:
> Analog, which is my nemesis, curses me again.
>
> I have a cute idea for a cassette port project for the Tandy line of
> computers (the ones with the cassette port). I have a Coco 3 on the bench,
Are you aware of “See MIPS Run” by Sweetman? That’s what I always used
as a reference for the early MIPS stuff.
TTFN - Guy
> On Feb 28, 2017, at 3:16 AM, Eric Smith via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 11:59 PM, Angelo Papenhoff via cctalk <
> cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
>
>> I'
Analog, which is my nemesis, curses me again.
I have a cute idea for a cassette port project for the Tandy line of
computers (the ones with the cassette port). I have a Coco 3 on the
bench, so I scoped the output line while doing 'csave "jim"'. The
signal looks to be just under 1V PtP (0-1V
Some time ago I solicited help investigating how DEC VT terminals handle line
wrapping, mainly for the purpose of accurate emulation. Having received
assistance from very kind people -- many thanks! -- some of the findings have
now been summarised at https://github.com/mattiase/wraptest, in case
Via Mike Ross, but contact Greg with any questions!
-- Forwarded message --
From: "Greg Bebermeyer"
Date: Feb 27, 2017 4:44 AM
Subject: IBM System/32 - web response
To:
Cc:
Hi Mike,
Maybe this is no longer relevant since I can't tell from the web page
how recent the post is..
On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 11:59 PM, Angelo Papenhoff via cctalk <
cctalk@classiccmp.org> wrote:
> I'm wondering where the MIPS I-IV standards that are referenced
> everywhere are defined. I was able to actually find what seems to be the
> IV standard [1] but found no such thing for I-III. I didn't e
Angelo Papenhoff wrote:
> I'm wondering where the MIPS I-IV standards that are referenced
> everywhere are defined. I was able to actually find what seems to be the
> IV standard [1] but found no such thing for I-III.
Anything you find, I'd like to add to
https://github.com/larsbrinkhoff/awesome-c
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 4:12 PM, Jason T via cctalk
wrote:
> Did anyone win this and/or make a deal with the seller?
I'm curious too, seemed like fairly complete systems and we now have
most of the software that was released for these systems and nearly a
complete Displaywriter emulator.
I had o
I'm wondering where the MIPS I-IV standards that are referenced
everywhere are defined. I was able to actually find what seems to be the
IV standard [1] but found no such thing for I-III. I didn't even find
any bibliographic references to them. Did they only exist as printed
books and nobody bother
66 matches
Mail list logo
