On 12/6/16 10:05 AM, Toby Thain wrote:
On 2016-12-06 1:34 AM, Eric Smith wrote:
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 6:53 PM, allison wrote:
A bunch of us old digits (former dec engineers) got together and were
talking
about old systems and the thing that stood out is a general dislike for
having
to use th
On 2016-12-06 1:34 AM, Eric Smith wrote:
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 6:53 PM, allison wrote:
A bunch of us old digits (former dec engineers) got together and were
talking
about old systems and the thing that stood out is a general dislike for
having
to use the limited set of bus interface chips whe
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 6:53 PM, allison wrote:
> A bunch of us old digits (former dec engineers) got together and were
> talking
> about old systems and the thing that stood out is a general dislike for
> having
> to use the limited set of bus interface chips when there were newer
> parts. It
>
On 12/05/2016 06:35 PM, Toby Thain wrote:
> On 2016-05-02 9:48 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote:
>> > From: Pete Lancashire
>>
>> > Do you or someone have a list of all the Unibus bus chips ?
>>
>> I have seen the following bus interface chips used on DEC UNIBUS boards:
>>
>> Drivers:
>>
>> 8881 - Sp
On Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Toby Thain wrote:
> Has anyone looked at the TI Signal Switch family for QBus? (hat tip Ian
> Finder)
>
I use those for interfacing 5V TTL-compatible stuff to 3.3V logic.
It doesn't really solve the major Qbus problems. In particular, it doesn't
help with either
On 2016-05-02 9:48 AM, Noel Chiappa wrote:
> From: Pete Lancashire
> Do you or someone have a list of all the Unibus bus chips ?
I have seen the following bus interface chips used on DEC UNIBUS boards:
Drivers:
8881 - Sprague, Signetics - Quad NAND
Receivers:
380 - Signetics - Quad
> On Oct 24, 2016, at 12:34 PM, allison wrote:
>
>> ...
> And the RQDX1/2/3 used T11 for the job so its not that intense save for speed.
> The other part of it is much of the code is likely the interface to the MFM
> disk and thats
> speed intensive and likely more hardware than software.
FWIW
On 10/24/16 8:51 AM, Paul Koning wrote:
On Oct 24, 2016, at 7:39 AM, allison wrote:
On 10/22/16 6:05 PM, Toby Thain wrote:
On 2016-10-22 4:08 PM, allison wrote:
...
FYI I have never heard of any one recreating the RQDX1/2/3 software
protocol MSCP
as it was nontrivial, proprietary, and copyrig
On Sat, Oct 22, 2016 at 5:39 PM, emanuel stiebler wrote:
> Every time I thought about it, or even started, I gave up, because there
> aren't simply enough people who would buy such a thing. The prices for an
> old working Qbus SCSI controller are low enough, to just wait until you get
> one on eba
> On Oct 24, 2016, at 7:39 AM, allison wrote:
>
> On 10/22/16 6:05 PM, Toby Thain wrote:
>> On 2016-10-22 4:08 PM, allison wrote:
>>> ...
>>> FYI I have never heard of any one recreating the RQDX1/2/3 software
>>> protocol MSCP
>>> as it was nontrivial, proprietary, and copyrighted.
>>
>> It's
On 10/22/16 6:05 PM, Toby Thain wrote:
On 2016-10-22 4:08 PM, allison wrote:
...
FYI I have never heard of any one recreating the RQDX1/2/3 software
protocol MSCP
as it was nontrivial, proprietary, and copyrighted.
It's been implemented in simh, afaik. Its reputation is a little more
imposing
On 2016-10-22 4:08 PM, allison wrote:
...
FYI I have never heard of any one recreating the RQDX1/2/3 software
protocol MSCP
as it was nontrivial, proprietary, and copyrighted.
It's been implemented in simh, afaik. Its reputation is a little more
imposing than the reality.
--Toby
Allison
> On Oct 22, 2016, at 6:05 PM, Toby Thain wrote:
>
> On 2016-10-22 4:08 PM, allison wrote:
>> ...
>> FYI I have never heard of any one recreating the RQDX1/2/3 software
>> protocol MSCP
>> as it was nontrivial, proprietary, and copyrighted.
>
> It's been implemented in simh, afaik. Its reputati
On 2016-10-22 22:08, allison wrote:
So to do that you have two project the hardware is fairly straight
forward (see the
applicable Bus interfacing books put out by DEC) but the software to use
it is a project.
FYI I have never heard of any one recreating the RQDX1/2/3 software
protocol MSCP
as i
On 10/22/2016 03:18 PM, shad wrote:
> Hello,
> we are discussing on separate thread about doing an universal interface for
> PDP11.
> I'm taking all the relevant documentation about Unibus and Qbus busses,
> aiming to check the possibility of doing a board compatible, with some
> adjustments, w
On 5/2/2016 7:04 AM, Mattis Lind wrote:
The following chips have been used by DEC to interface to the QBUS, and
I have seen many of the above chips (e.g. 8641's) used there too, so I
think chips seen on one bus could be used on the other:
Drivers:
7439 - Various - Quad NAND
Transceivers:
2908
I did a bit of searching in the fall for an 8881 (to fix a busted HALT
instruction on a PDP8a). I concluded the 7439 is a pin-for-pin replacement
- I can't claim all credit for this, it's probably known by a few people
here. My notes say the 8881 will handle 30mA loads. The 7401 will handle
16mA
> The following chips have been used by DEC to interface to the QBUS, and
> I have seen many of the above chips (e.g. 8641's) used there too, so I
> think chips seen on one bus could be used on the other:
>
> Drivers:
>
> 7439 - Various - Quad NAND
>
> Transceivers:
>
> 2908 - AMD - Quad latching t
18 matches
Mail list logo
