CompuServe Thread

A4091 Controller

13 messages in this thread
#103457From: Paul WrightJun 10, 1993 7:25 PM
Many and many a year ago I bought a CBM PET 8032 and a dual disk drive (4050?). The drive used the HPIB (IEE488) bus. The cable to connect the two was not included. It cost an extra $50. Nobody mentioned it when I ordered the system.
#103471From: John GagerJun 10, 1993 10:17 PM
Well I did some checking today on the external SCSI-II connector and hopefully will have that problem resolved. I ordered a high density DB-50 to standard SCSI-50 cable. Since I'm building a tower case for all my external drives, this should work out. Actually, it wouldn't be too hard to make a DB-50 SCSI-II to DB-25 SCSI adapter if I could just get my hands on the high density DB-50 connector. Which brings me to a question for you SCSI guru's. While looking at the pinout for the DB-50 external connector on the 4091, something doesn't seem right. If it is truly SCSI-II then shouldn't it have more than a 8-bit data bus, like 16 or 32? Here is the pinout and maybe you can see what I'm talking about: Pin's 1-25 are ground with except for pin's 12 & 14 reserved, and pin 13 open. Pins 26-33 are /DB0-DB7, and then the rest are other SCSI command and handshaking lines. The only data path is DB0-DB7. Now I don't know that much about the SCSI-II spec, but it sure looks like regular SCSI to me. Which brings another question of why they used a DB-50 external connector if it is just regular SCSI specs? Maybe it's a misprint in the manual, but if it isn't, then I would like to hear from someone on how they are managing SCSI-II with such an arrangement.
#103481From: Don Curtis/SYSOPJun 11, 1993 1:16 AM
SCSI-II is only 8 bit. It is backward compatible with SCSI-I.
#103498From: Dave CinegeJun 11, 1993 9:25 AM
SCSI-WIDE is SCSI-II with 16 bit transfer.
#103513From: John GagerJun 11, 1993 2:10 PM
Well like I said, I don't know very much about the SCSI-II spec so wasn't sure whether or not it was 8-bit. So how are they doing the claimed 10MB/s transfers, through more efficient handshaking? To everyone to update you on the continuing saga. I found out through Gold Service today that the 4000 is NOT covered through them for the motherboard replacement for the Super Buster chip. According to the Gold Service representative, since the 4000 is not actually broken, but rather is just incompatible with the 4091, it is not covered under Gold Service. Makes a lot of sense, eh? To me, the 4000 is broken since it doesn't work with a card designed for the 4000 in the first place. But I guess my logic and CBM's doesn't match. I tell you, I'm about fed up with CBM and their lousy attitude. Maybe I should just fry one of the chip's in the 4000. Then I could probably get a new computer in a couple of days <g>. So I'm in the process of trying to get a new motherboard through our local repair center 160 miles away. BTW, he told me that because of CBM's lack of support, they are just about ready to drop CBM servicing also. So that's where I'm at right now. How long it will take the service center to get a motherboard replacement is anyone's guess, but I would be surprised if it was anytime soon.
#103617From: Jun 12, 1993 3:12 PM
John, how much did you pay for the A4091 ? Regards, J0RGEN ….from DENMARK
#103623From: John GagerJun 12, 1993 5:20 PM
The 4091 was $319 US from Tenex. Safe Harbor was selling them for $299 but didn't have any in stock. Creative Computers hadn't even heard of it yet <g>.
#103733From: Wayne ColeJun 14, 1993 2:58 AM
John, A word of caution about the idea of a 25/50 adaptor for the SCSI-II to I cables. Cheap SCSI cables use only 18 wires by running all the grounds to a common wire and sometimes shoring that wire to the connector shell. This apparently works great in the MAC world, but those same cables in most Unix and Amiga environments will give you no end of problems. Spend the extra bucks, get the sheilded 50 conductor stuff for the SCSI II, otherwise you'll regret it. wmc – via Autopilot!
#103492From: Jonathan HirschmanJun 11, 1993 2:24 AM
John, Perhaps someone could correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that SCSI-II uses an 8-bit data path, while Wide SCSI-II would implement a 16-bit data path. //Jonathan, \\//via AutoPilot
#103732From: Wayne ColeJun 14, 1993 2:58 AM
As I understand it (and the standard is just now or not quite yet finalized) there is SCSI-II and SCSI-II wide. The WIDE does a 16 bit parallel transfer whereas the II plain is 8 bit, I think. (gotta go back to the research center…[aka library]) wmc – via Autopilot!
#104847From: Joanne DowJun 25, 1993 4:26 AM
SCSI-II is always parallel transfer. SCSI-II can be 8, 16, or 32 bits wide. 16 bits wide requires a different cable and connector. 32 bit wide requires both the different connector and the original on two cables with VERY fancy software handling the timing skew in the cables. {@_@}
#103478From: Betty Clay/SYSOPJun 11, 1993 12:47 AM
The drive was an 8050 – and those IEEE cables were awfully expensive! But I did love that 8032. Betty
#103553From: Paul WrightJun 11, 1993 10:18 PM
Oh, yeah. It was a great machine. Especially after I found the program that would fool it back into being a 40 column machine to run PET games. Amazing how well that little program worked too. But I never did find a decent telecommunications program for it. —–Paul—–