CompuServe Thread

#A2000A/A2000B

14 messages in this thread
#216234From: Tom JonesOct 22, 1995 9:56 PM
I wouldn't doubt your word, Phillip, but I do know it says made in germany right on my 2000B motherboard and I bought it in Frankfurt.de My machine looks just like any other A2000 box. I was in germany during the entire period the Amiga was introduced and developed, had my first A1000 shipped from the USA as soon as it came available. I don't recall ever seeing a machine that looked like a 1000 made for the german market but I might have missed that. Cheers Tom alternate: jonest@amigat.com I never met a man I didn't like…Will Rogers
#216266From: Phillip WoollerOct 23, 1995 4:35 AM
I could be wrong about the a2000a looking like an a1000, that may have been a prototype. I think most of the problems were ironed out before the machine was manufactured in significant numbers. The 2000b was a lot better for a number of reasons, I think this was designed in the usa, but could have been manufactured in germany. Have you still got the a1000???? What is the serial number? Phill
#216777From: Tom JonesOct 26, 1995 9:26 PM
Phillip I don't have the A1000 anymore, and don't even know the serial number. It was probably low though, and I wish I hadn't sold it to that young airman at Rhein Main AB to play games on. Hey, talk about antiques, how about this one: I have a copy of the issue of Popular Electronics that announced the kit project for the very first home computer. It was such an exciting thing at the time so I kept it hoping to get enough $$ together to buy one and never did. Still have the RCA ELF II kit computer based on the famous 1802 cmos cpu chip too. I think I learned electonics on that one. Tom alternate: jonest@amigat.com I never met a man I didn't like…Will Rogers
#216804From: Phillip WoollerOct 27, 1995 3:22 AM
1802, never heard of that one, it's a good job IBM didn't pick that one to put in the pc 😉 Phill
#217158From: Tom JonesOct 29, 1995 9:07 PM
Hi Wrong answer: it is too damned bad that IBM picked the most crippled mpu out there to base their Personal Computer on instead of the 1802 or at least the 6800. Today's desktop computer would almost certainly be a generation further ahead of where it is today. In other words, like an Amiga. Seriously, the only reason IBM did that was probably due to business alliances and such things, it could not possibly have been because their very capable and intelligent engineering staff did not know which mpu chips were superior. To prove the point, NASA and a large number of prime contractors for the military put the 1802 into sattelites, F15 fighters, the Jupiter probe, AMSAT (I think that was what the ARRL called their first sattelite relay) and plenty of other cutting edge projects. Just as it is today, superior technology took back seat to price and company politics and the consumer has paid a heavy price by being saddled with 640K Dos and Windows3.x and now Win95, not to mention Microsoft itself. Sad. alternate: jonest@amigat.com I never met a man I didn't like…Will Rogers
#217188From: Phillip WoollerOct 30, 1995 6:15 AM
When IBM chose a processor, they had the option of the 68000, but intel offered them a better deal ( a couple of dollars per chip probably ). The people who worked on the original pc have stated that they regretted their choice. Phill
#216903From: Betty Clay/SYSOPOct 27, 1995 8:07 PM
I have a copy of the Popular Electronics issue that first explained how transistors work. —Betty
#217022From: Jim ButterfieldOct 28, 1995 7:22 PM
Umm .. did you get around to reading that article about how transistors work yet, Betty? 🙂 Jim
#217061From: Betty Clay/SYSOPOct 29, 1995 12:19 AM
Of course, I read it, Jim. I even understood part of it.<g> —Betty
#217159From: Tom JonesOct 29, 1995 9:07 PM
Ooooh! Gosh Betty, I didn't even know PE went back that far, I first became aware of the transistor through a project in the ARRL bible. The RCA CK721 or CK722 as I recall (amazing, I remembered). Couldn't build it, xistors cost nearly $100 each back then and had a mtbf of months or weeks. I'm half a century old more or less, and the computer has come so far it is incredible. My first job was installing the then new all-transistor mainframes of Honeywell Data Products division, and in only 25-30 years the profession of mainframe guru has already come and gone. Most of us have gone into related jobs (I'm a CNE) but too many are now eating dogfood and doing warranty work on PC's in the homes. Oh well, Amerika love it or lieb it. alternate: jonest@amigat.com I never met a man I didn't like…Will Rogers
#217175From: Betty Clay/SYSOPOct 29, 1995 10:36 PM
That definitive article explaining transistors for the non-engineer types was written by none other than Amiga-Forum member, Jim Butterfield – and quite an article it was, too. Popular Electronics had been around for a while before that, though. I cleared out an almost complete set from about 1952-1985 or so – don't recall just when it stopped – a year or so ago. My husband subscribed to it for years and years. —Betty
#217190From: Jim ButterfieldOct 30, 1995 8:02 AM
The CK722 and the 2N104 were the first transistors that could be bought at a price of less than $10, so their appearance was quite a breakthrough. The CK722 was NPN and the 2N104 PNP, so you could try one of each. Economical power transistors started arriving a year later. > xistors .. had an mtbf of months or weeks .. That's the myth that was being put around by the old tube hands .. tubes were sturdy, transistors would blow if you even looked at them hard, if you weren't equipped with special soldering tools and techniques, that trivial voltage fluctuations would pop them, that they would wear out soon … … all nonsense. You COULD pop a transitor by putting too high a voltage on it, or trying to make it drive an unprotected inductive load (same thing). But it was almost impossible to destroy the little devils with heat; I often demonstrated heating an in-circuit transistor with a cigarette lighter (changed the operating characteristics but didn't bust it). Wearing out? Anyone who has a transistor radio from the 60s knows that doesn't happen. The world was shot through with myths about transistors back in the 1960s .. much of my article was directing at debunking this stuff. And saying, "Switch your thinking from voltage to current". –Jim
#217030From: Bart MathiasOct 28, 1995 8:27 PM
Tom, Do you still use your ELF II ever? Mine is right here beside me as I type this. But my terminal board no longer works, and I haven't used it since 1986 when I bought my first Amiga. Actually, I bought the Amiga because I was upgrading my ELF (from 20K to 64K, and adding disk drives) and needed a computer badly for work I was doing. The 64K board tested out, but I never got the disk drives (8 1/2 inchers) installed. By the time I got caught up enough to work on it again the terminal wouldn't output the proper video anymore, and I've never succeeded in fixing or replacing the terminal board. Somebody replied to you that it was a good thing that IBM hadn't used the 1802, but when I found out that the PC was based on an 8085, I lost all temptation to buy one. If I could get my ELF working again, I'd use it at the office instead of the 486-based thing my employers provided me with. Bart P.S. I thought the ELF project WAS Popular Electronics' first home computer. It ran in four parts from August 76 July 77.
#217160From: Tom JonesOct 29, 1995 9:08 PM
Bart, pisano! You have an ELFII? You know what this means? We can ask CIS to start up an 1802 forum for us. Actually mine is packed in a box but I have kept all the parts through moves to and from Germany over the years and have meant to reassemble it someday. Maybe I will do it now. I only got mine to 48K mem but I did install Fig Forth and worked hard integrating Steve Nies's text editor with the OS favored by ACE, the Amateur Computer Experimenter group based in Ontario. If you knew their newsletter Ipso Facto, you probably saw my name on some of the articles. A few reviews to the Pet User's Group newsletter also. Those were fun times, weren't they? I still have my MC6847 video board in the box, 100% homemade of course. Like you I never got a Harddrive or even a floppy interfaced to it. for years it used a keyin loader to boot in the hand-pulled paper tape monitor which then booted in the cassette O/S including the editor and Forth. When I packed it she was using a 2716 Eprom to boot up the cassette. I used a GE Terminet 300 for my ascii printer at that time. I agree of course that IBM would have done the world a favor by opting for a CMOS based MPU with 16 (count 'em) 16 bit (!!) registers, and the incredibly fast register pointers to instantly switch programs with a single cycle after an interrupt, and all the other advantages. With computers that ran from a small battery right back there in 1978, what would the PC look like today? wear iot in you eyeglass frames probably. Instead they opted for Nmos and powersupplys that could do double duty as arc-welders and a fixed register based/seperate I/O bus architecture rooted in ancient mainframe theory. The 4040 was actually a japanese customer inspired attempt by Intel to pack a primative DEC mini into a couple of chips, I am told. Too bad they didn't also look at the PDP architecture and instruction set, which was great. I was also dismayed when IBM made that stupid choice and followed up on it by adopting Dos instead of multitasking CP/M. Still makes me burn. No, the ACE projects appeared in PE many months after they presented the first project to build the Altair 8800 in Jan 1975. It was designed by MITS of Albuquerque NM, Intel 80f80 2mhz based, had 256 bytes of main memory, and used toggle switches to program it, leds for output. That's it. (later I read that the designers showed the editor of PE a singular prototype which they knew didn't work yet to get free advertising. For their failing company it was a last ditch effort to survive. When the orders for the $397kit/$498 assembled Altair flooded in tfhey had to rush to hire engineers and get it working. Sound like any other intel based machines we know?) I'm not positive but I believe SWTP in Texas had already introduced their 6800 based machine (to increase sales of their ascii television based terminal IMHO) before Netronics introduced the ELF single board project in or near 1978. I still have some software for the 1802 like PaloAlto Basic (Oak Ridge Version), Pilot, Assembler, full screen Text Editor, Fig Forth, 1802 disassembler, DDT full screen dynamic debugger, …all the foregoing for 40×16 video screen….plus for 1861 output I have Netronics original monitor ElfBug, CSTP debug/trace, Super Graphics, Morsecode decoder, Life, Space war, a lightpen pgm and more. Gotta go. Tom alternate: jonest@amigat.com I never met a man I didn't like…Will Rogers