HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: alh@einoed.in-berlin.de (Adrian Le Hanne)
Subject: Re: SUN == "San University Net|Node"?
Organization: Einoed Unix & Netzwerke, Berlin (FRG)
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 21:11:10 GMT

s.telford@ed.ac.uk (Scott Telford) writes:

>In article <4819@calmasd.Prime.COM>, gdh@calmasd.Prime.COM (Gerald
>Hall) writes:

>> I can't remember.  SUN produced the first(?) Multibus MC68000 CPU
>> board that could run UNIX (V7!) and about half a dozen companies
>> licensed it and went into production.  SMI (Sun) was the only one to
>> fully appreciate the importance of the graphics capabilities of
>> this board and was the only one to really make it big. (Pun?)
> 
>Does anybody remember how the original SUN board (or the Sun-100, for that
>matter) managed to run "real" Unix (Sun UNIX 1.0?), given that the
>MC68000 didn't really have proper memory management? Did they use the
>same "shadow memory" kludges used in the 68k ports of Minix?

I would assume that they built up an discrete logic :-) MMU. There were
some other hardware manufactures, who built such a system (Dual Systems, 
as example), until the 68451 MMU (?) was available.
If i remember right, even the 3/xx series (except the 3/80) used a proprietary 
memory management. Maybe Sun did this to have more context switches in 
hardware?

Adrian
-- 
Adrian S. Le Hanne        Einoed Unix & Netzwerke, Koepenicker Str.154, D-1000
alh@einoed.in-berlin.de   Berlin 36. Tel.: 030/611 31 26,  Fax.: 030/826 98 75
                                         "Christianity Is Stupid" -Negativland
From: unknown@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (tuu)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: GUI's (was:progress?)
Date: 21 Jul 92 11:04:39 GMT
Article-I.D.: darkstar.14gr07INN8ot
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: ucscb.ucsc.edu


In article <1992Jul10.060452.4358@iat.holonet.net> jthill@iat.holonet.net (Jim Hill) writes:
}Interesting fact from forgotten person on one of the compsysmac groups: 
}they've done a _lot_ of testing of user interfaces, and one thing shows up
}repeatedly:  user reports that the keyboard is faster.  The stopwatch
}shows the mouse is faster.  It's very strange.  I half suspect that the
}mouse involves so much less brainwork that you're more aware of the time.

	This was a study done by Apple sometime in the past, right?  It was
mentioned in Bruce Tognazzini's (sp?) book.

}Function keys are very, very nice.  Quick, though:  how do you find out

	Ugh. Obviously IMHO, they're the bane of the universe.. It really
stinks that the high end ADB keyboards even have function keys. Mainly
I don't like them BECAUSE they are inconsistently used between applications,
and openapple-S for _S_ave (or ^S for older text based apps) makes a lot more
sense than F3.
-- 
/unknown@ucscb.ucsc.edu   used ADB trackball WANTED          Apple II Forever!\
\Mail me:Get INFOCOM GAMES RERELEASED,ULT VI GS done,for UNIX GS&CHEAP CD info/
What the world needs now is another folk singer like I need a hole in my head.
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.unix.misc
From: lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner)
Subject: Re: Unix Roots of DOS?
Reply-To: lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 06:00:09 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.011003.9565@colorado.edu> drew@caesar.cs.colorado.edu (Drew Eckhardt) writes:
>In article <1992Jul14.113341.27333@bas-a.bcc.ac.uk> ucacmsu@ucl.ac.uk (Mr Stephen R Usher) writes:
>>In article <1992Jul13.111139.62@news.uwyo.edu> rtravsky@news.uwyo.edu (Rich Travsky) writes:
>>
>>Version 2 soon arrived, this was more stable, though I don't think it had
>>directories yet.
>
>Version 2 had directories and hard disk support, up to ~16M.
>
I currently run MS-DOS 2.11 on the DECmate with 32 Meg partitions.

cjl


Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,alt.sex
From: anthony@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Anthony J Stieber)
Subject: Phil Donahue and online sex (was Re: Looking for Steven K. Roberts' internet address)
Keywords: nomadness, bikes, e-erotica, donahue
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 03:10:07 GMT

In article <1992Jul25.191414.23321@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu> panisset@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu (Jean-Francois Panisset) writes:
>In article <1992Jul25.031719.20424@sq.sq.com> msb@sq.sq.com (Mark Brader) writes:
>>> I saw a video tape of a Phil Donahue interview of a very interesting
>>> gentleman named Steven K. Roberts, who, among other endeavors, travels
>>> around the country on an amazingly equipped bicycle.

>>Naturally, it gives Robert's radio call sign (N4RVE), but no email address.

Geez, still no email address!  Well, I stumbled across the Donahue show
too.  I remember reading about the original Winnebiko years ago.
Archie provided me with the pointer to ftp.telebit.com:/pub/nomad.
There is lots of stuff there.  His address is wordy@bikelab.corp.sun.com.

Did you see the part where Phil asked him about "erotic encounters"? heheh.
Think I'll crosspost to alt.sex.
--
<-:(= Anthony Stieber	anthony@csd4.csd.uwm.edu   uwm!uwmcsd4!anthony
From: thad@btr.BTR.COM (Thaddeus P. Floryan)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: Did the 80186 exist?
Date: 30 Jul 92 11:01:43 GMT
Organization: BTR Public Access UNIX, Mountain View CA

In article <1992Jul28.125321.7937@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> waigh@csri.toronto.edu (Geoffrey Waigh) writes:
|In article <1992Jul28.000006.27461@csi.uottawa.ca> cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca (Christopher Browne) writes:
|>>In article <1992Jun26.183126.17648@shell.shell.com> pace@fmcrunch
|>(Stephen O. Pace) writes:
|>>    My question is, was there a 186?  Was this a minor revision of the 8086?
|>>[...]
|[...]
|Intel is still tweaking the 186 (80C186-16 was the fastest I've used)
|and it is a popular chip in the embedded controller world.  - About a
|[...]

Precisely.  And as recently as 1988, AT&T was using them in their StarLAN
RS-232 NAU (a 1Mbit/S 802.3e-1988 1BASE2 Ethernet over twisted pair) terminal/
modem/printer "servers" to great effect.

Thad Floryan [ thad@btr.com (OR) {decwrl, mips, fernwood}!btr!thad ]
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
From: lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner)
Subject: Re: MS-LOSS Stupidity (Wasn't: Computer Button Sayings)
Reply-To: lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 19:23:49 GMT

In article <phillips.711728500@infs4> phillips@swanee.ee.uwa.oz.au (Christopher Phillips) writes:
>lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner) writes:
>...
>>the latest crop of Sierra games, although it's cute to see slimy walls with
>>MCGA details scanned in and the slime "sweats" as in SQ4.  But in Sierra
>>games, there is no motion other than your player moving under your control.
>>The Apogee games often have quite a few things moving at once.
>
>I take it I am supposed to be impressed that 'quite a few things are moving
>at once'.

On a literal plane, YES.  But look at the motion and its subleties, not
the overall body count.

In any case, the point is for comparison purposes only.  The Sierra games
have almost *nothing* moving.

Realistic motion of semi-complex objects or figures coupled with shear
quantity represents a pretty good implementation IMHO.  If the resolution is
fairly good at the same time, you are talking about a fair clip of
crunch rate.

In any case, I am expecting you to judge by looking, and not just dismissing
it by comparison with other PC games which are unrelated.

cjl
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re:  Life machines?
From: liam@durie.amigans.gen.nz (Liam Greenwood)
Date: 21 Jul 92 22:24:22 GMT+12
Distribution: world
Organization: It's Home, really...

In article <1992Jul20.003128.28058@news.uiowa.edu> dsiebert@icaen.uiowa.edu (Doug Siebert) writes:
>
>Possibly, with two caveats.  One, you shouldn't allow use of extra hardware
>unrelated to the processor in question.  So an Amiga benchmark shouldn't allow
>use of a dedicated graphics chip.  Otherwise, where would we be with other
    But the Blitter isn't a dedicated graphics chip. Better described as a
support processor with specialist graphics capabilities.

    I think you have to look at the 'processor' that the machine comes with
rather than any one chip, to take the example of the Amiga again it has a
system processor which consists of a number of chips, some of which take
responsibilities for certain tasks. Take any of the processor chips away and
the machine no longer functions.

    I also can't see how you can remove the display function from a Life
benchmark, unless you're going to require all benchmarkable programs to
display on a serial terminal. I 'spose you could write a Life program which
didn't display, just reported what it had done at the end however it see
a bit useless....

--
 Liam Greenwood ------ liam@durie.amigans.gen.nz ------ Wanganui, N.Z.
                Don't tell my Mother I'm a programmer,
              she thinks I'm a piano player in a brothel

Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
From: chapman@cs.cornell.edu (Richard Chapman)
Subject: Re: Cathode ray memory
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 15:22:32 GMT

russ@bbxrbk (Russ Kepler) writes:

>In article <jimf.712419799@centerline.com> jimf@centerline.com (Jim Frost) writes:
>>Anyway what makes me respond to this is that mercury tubs were used
>>for memory at one time.  When you want to store something in memory
>>you made waves in the mercury; the waves would propagate to the other

>I never heard of that... my "exposure" to mercury memory was in
>temperature controlled columns.  The data would propagate through the
>Hg using a speaker at the bottom and a microphone at the top,
>connected through an amplifier.  It was something like 2 1/2 feet
>high, and I don't have an idea in the world how much data it contained.

Mercury delay lines were also used in Tektronix storage (or maybe just
delay) oscilloscopes around 1964. The lines "stored" a bit of an analog
signal. 
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
From: lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner)
Subject: Re: Computers in magazines (was movies)
Reply-To: lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 15:44:31 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.060934.26869@news.weeg.uiowa.edu> smills@news.weeg.uiowa.edu (MuffinHead) writes:
>In the August Playboy in the "Domestic Bliss" pictorial is by far the best
>setting for a Powerbook I've seen.

I hope her application doesn't crash because I don't think she can hit
CTL-ALT-DEL like that :-).

cjl
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
From: hollombe@polymath.tti.com (The Polymath)
Subject: Re: Computer Relics (Was: 9 track data storage?)
Organization: The Cat Factory
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 00:51:25 GMT

In article <7560@public.BTR.COM> thad@public.BTR.COM (Thaddeus P. Floryan) writes:

}If you wanna talk old tape stuff, then let's go back even before the
}DECtapes and talk 7 track.  Yeah, at 220, 556 and 800 BPI!  ...
						       ^^^
Just had a flashback.  How many people pronounce BPI "bippy"?  Now
_there's_ one for the Jargon File (it's not in there.  I checked).  I've
heard it from multiple sources, too, so it's legit.

As noted earlier, when used with respect to 9-track tape it means _both_
"bits per inch" (across the width of the tape) _and_ "bytes per inch"
(along the tape's length).

I've got some 6250 bippy tapes hanging next to my desk as I write this
(yes, we still use them).

The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe, M.A., CDP, aka: hollombe@polymath.tti.com)
Head Robot Wrangler at Citicorp                   Turn the rascals out!
3100 Ocean Park Blvd.   (310) 450-9111, x2483     No incumbents in '92!
Santa Monica, CA  90405
From: smckinty@sunicnc.France.Sun.COM (Steve McKinty - Sun ICNC)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: 9 track data storage???????????????READ/NEW/FOLLOWUP
Date: 21 Jul 1992 17:35:26 GMT
Organization: SunConnect
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: hardy.france.sun.com

In article <3897202@zl2tnm.gen.nz>, don@zl2tnm.gen.nz (Don Stokes) writes:

> 
> At a different site I once saw an operator stagger back from a TA78 drive,
> totally covered in tape.  I'm not sure quite what happened there....
> 
Maybe he opened the door while the tape was running flat out in mid-rewind?
(yes, I did. Once. That was enough...)

Steve
Xref: sparky alt.folklore.computers:11136 comp.unix.misc:3016
From: 9125113g@lux.latrobe.edu.au (Not Available)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re:  Re: Unix Roots of DOS?
Date: 25 Jul 92 15:27:32 GMT
Organization: La Trobe University

In article <1992Jul20.142943.7242@cdsmn.mn.org> wells@cdsmn.UUCP (Rich Wells) writes:
>There were two different 4.0 versions of MS-DOS.  One was released only
>in Europe, and did some degree of multitasking (perhaps only a 286-class
>machine?), while the other came out many years later in the US and was
>just another upgrade (it supported disk partitions >32Mb, as I recall).
>The multitasking 4.0 was never heard of again.  I don't know how
>compatible it was with normal MS-DOS, or for that matter it was at all
>compatible.
>
>Does anyone have some concrete information about this phantom DOS 4.0?

Ralf Brown's interrupt listing has entries for the task switching
primitive present under the european DOS 4.0.

I can remember evaluating Olivetti's rebadged DOS 4.01 on Olivetti PCs.
We (AustPost) rejected DOS 4.01 at the time because Multimate did really
odd things.  In these enlightened times, I'm tempted to say "but no
odder than the way that Multimate ran anyway"...

Mitch.
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
From: dougm@cns.caltech.edu (Doug McNaught)
Subject: Re: Unix Roots of DOS?
Organization: California Institute of Technology
	<1992Jul19.162435.27689@NCoast.ORG>
	<1992Jul25.144803.25174@lugb.latrobe.edu.au>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 06:04:56 GMT

In article <1992Jul25.144803.25174@lugb.latrobe.edu.au> 9125113g@lux.latrobe.edu.au (Mitch Davis) writes:

   The shortest possible program for the IBM is one byte long, and can be
   created thus:

[Debug session deleted]

   CP/M programs could exit by doing a RET, and the IBM has maintained this
   tradition.  On startup, all .COM programs have a 0000 already pushed
   onto the stack for this very purpose.  The RET causes a branch to CS:0,
   which always has an INT 20.

   I occasionally use this when a .COM program MUST be as small as
   possible.

   Try it!  Can you get any shorter, or an equal alternative?

The shortest Mac program is two bytes and consists of an RTS
instruction. Can't be any shorter because the 68000 has 16-bit
opcodes. 
(Ack--actually there's some Segment Loader and jump table stuff in
there once it's assembled and linked. It still fits in one disk
sector, which is all that counts...)

-doug
--
Doug McNaught              |"Sadder still to watch it die/ Then never to have
dougm@cns.caltech.edu      | known it/ For you, the blind who once could see/
doug@midget.towson.edu     | The bell tolls for thee..." --Neil Peart
  Nobody approves my opinions! Not even me, sometimes. Read at your own risk.
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
From: cole@lea.csc.ncsu.edu (Robert Cole)
Subject: Re: And what about this DogCow business ? ( moof! )
Organization: North Carolina State University
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 04:33:50 GMT

Speaking of DogCow, I've seen something for DOS which goes by the same
name.  It's an icon for Windows (well more than an icon actually).
Looks like a dog colored (? marked) like a cow.  He wags his tail and
the settings for tail speed go from happy to sad.  It was pretty neat
but I managed to erase it (didn't think I would miss it).  Anyone know
where to locate a copy?

Is this connected at all with the Mac DogCow?  I'm not sure but it
sounds a bit too coincidental.

Robert Cole
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: 9 track data storage???????????????
From: don@zl2tnm.gen.nz (Don Stokes)
Date: 21 Jul 92 13:43:57 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Wolery

terry@spcvxb.spc.edu (Terry Kennedy, Operations Mgr.) writes:
>   No, it's the drive that's brain-dead, the cartridges are fine 8-). Seriously,
> the later implementations aren't bad. Consider the TZ30, which is a 1/2 height
> 5.25" drive that read/writes TK50's. It seems to be a lot faster, is certainly
> a better mechanism, and doesn't self-destruct if you try to do things out of
> sequence.

You noticed that too, huh?  The spex say that the TZ30 and TK50 are the
same performance wise, but the SCSI/TZ30 "feels" a *lot* faster than
the TQK50/TK50 combo.  Maybe loading a tape is faster (it's dreadfully
slow on a TK50), maybe the overall read-data-pass-to-controller-stuff-
into-memory process is faster ("inches per second" doesn't tell the
whole story) or maybe it's just that the TZ30 makes different noises in
a quieter box, so just sounds faster (although the DECmate IIIplus chassis
my TK50 s mounted inside is even quieter than the average VAXstation).

I felt that the TK50-Z (TK50 drive with SCSI interface in an external
box) was just as slow as a normal TK50.

Ever tried booting Standalone Backup off TK50?  You get time not only
to eat dinner, but to cook it as well.  But it's still not as bad as
doing anything with a TU58....

--
Don Stokes, ZL2TNM (DS555)                        don@zl2tnm.gen.nz (home)
Network Manager, Computing Services Centre            don@vuw.ac.nz (work)
Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand              +64-4-495-5052
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
From: cline@cs.scarolina.edu (Ernest Cline)
Subject: Re: Unix Roots of DOS?
Followup-To: alt.flame
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date: 22 Jul 92 07:19:42 GMT

lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner) writes:

> MS-DOS 4.01 was released several times.  The version where all files are
> dated about April, 1989 is stable and functional.  I even use it today
> sometimes.

ARRGH!!!
Number 1 reason I use Macs instead of DOS/Windows
Most vendors are not afraid to admit that there was bug, so when they do a bug
fix, they change the version number. Makes it much easier to determine which
is latest version, and which is not.

Lets face it most PC software companies are too wimpy and afraid to admit
they had a bug, so they'd rather hide the fact. In the Mac world bug fixes
are seen as a sign that you care about the product enough to fix it. Of
course, Mac companies have an advantage in this regard, most Mac users know
that it is almost impossible to write bug free software, so they are
willingto forgive a company if there are a few minor bugs.

Note: Followups directed to alt.flame

Ernest Cline	cline@cs.scarolina.edu		TheUSC
"To turn the computer on, turn the on switch on to the on position."
From: avg@rodan.UU.NET (Vadim Antonov)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: Computers killing people?  (WAS Re: 9 track data storage???)
Date: 30 Jul 1992 14:57:29 -0400
Organization: Berkeley Software Design
NNTP-Posting-Host: rodan.uu.net

I've heard some tales about industrial robots going wild and crashing
bones of spectators. Not quite believable (taking into account
the level of "intelligence" they have) but theoretically they can do it.

The most known computer-related bloody accident was the Chernobyl disaster,
though it was a lack of proper action (i.e. immediate shutting down
the reactor as soon as it got into non-standard mode) rather than
action on the computer's own behalf.

And don't forget 100k (?) Iraquis. All that modern military stuff
is computer-guided.

--vadim
From: avg@rodan.UU.NET (Vadim Antonov)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: What does dd stand for?
Date: 26 Jul 1992 20:39:50 -0400
Organization: Berkeley Software Design
NNTP-Posting-Host: rodan.uu.net

>(*)PS:  Why did IBM have to put such a sucky OS into a wicked fast
>machine like that?

A friend of mine works for IBM in AIX group. He said that they
have seven ranks of programmers topped by nine ranks of managers.
Any questions?

--vadim
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
From: horne@birch35.cray.com (Billy Jean Horne)
Subject: Re: dinosaur horsepower
Originator: horne@birch35
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 30 Jul 92 12:32:18 CDT


In article <1992Jul30.140329.9868@alliant.com>, werme@alliant.com (Ric Werme) writes:
> In article <1992Jul28.155852.23608@sctc.com> smith@sctc.com (Rick Smith) writes:
> >I was a fan of papertape myself. (5 points: can you spot the pun?)
> 
> "The only thing worse than fan-fold paper tape is non-fan-fold
> paper tape."  - Bob Clements
> 
> 
You don't fan-fold paper tape, you "butterfly it, chad out"!
(Actually that is wrap it figure 8 around the thumb and little finger
with the "flaps" of chadless tapes on the outside.  Obviously
this only works for short tapes )
B.J.Horne
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: Data General
From: don@zl2tnm.gen.nz (Don Stokes)
Date: 30 Jul 92 08:57:20 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Wolery

lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner) writes:
> DEC came out with an imbedded servo version of the same overall form-factor
> disk called RL01 (5 meg) and RL02 (10 meg).  I used a Western Dynex version
> good for 10 fixed and 10 removable.

Aha.  The "fly-by-wire" disk drive.... the heads are attached to a little
wire which in turn is pulled on by the actuator motor.  The heads slide
in and out like a floppy drive head (except mounted on this wire-guided
arrangement rather than a worm rod) rather than pivoting out like on most
hard disk drives.

An odd aspect of this drive is the pair of brushes that fold out onto the
platter to wipe the dust off....
 
> The neat thing about these packs is the handle.  It lays down flat in an
> inscribed area.  Lifting it up 90 degrees it's a plain handle.  But if you
> slide a white plastic piece on the handle before lifting it, then the lift
> action is noticably more effort, and it releases the bottom cover.  Also,
> the pack is always sealed this way, so you don't have exposed areas to worry
> about such as on RK05 packs, etc.  Many of the drives require that you also
> mount the cover above the pack as an additional interlock; no lost covers
> that way!

What you don't say is _how_ the latch works.

An RL01 (or RL02) pack is attached to the hub magnetically.  That's right,
a big magnet is placed within an inch of your valuable data, not only when
in the drive, but when in storage, since the pack cover is also attached
magnetically. 

The plastic slide causes the handle to act as a lever to haul the pack off
the magnetic hub.  A field servoid once told me of the recommended approach 
to removing a pack when the handle failed (ie the levering action failed
to engage due to a broken handle) -- this apparently involved standing on
top of the drive (which would be mounted at the top of a 3'6" cabinet) and
pulling straight up.  Personally, I think it would be easier to just repair
the handle assembly in situ....

--
Don Stokes, ZL2TNM (DS555)                        don@zl2tnm.gen.nz (home)
Network Manager, Computing Services Centre            don@vuw.ac.nz (work)
Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand              +64-4-495-5052