HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: btsg6965@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Briand T Sanderson)
Subject: Re: MBX
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 06:30:46 GMT

jim@accelr8.com (Jim Reiss) writes:

>Well, I'm back on the MBX topic again.  I was wondering if anyone knows of
>a source for a replacement MBX joystick.  I've tried several dealers and
>have had no luck.  I would appreciate any information.  I am also still
>interested in sources for complete MBX systems, if any.  Thanks.

How much are MBX systems going for these days? I have one I might be able to
sell. How much is it worth to anyone?

B. Sanderson

Newsgroups: comp.sys.ti
From: cohen@GOMEZ.phys.virginia.edu
Subject: Re: 9900 emulator for MS-DOS/UNIX
Reply-To: cohen@GOMEZ.phys.virginia.edu
Organization: Dept. of Physics, University of Virginia
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 18:36:46 GMT

Wonder around a little bit and enter the COMP.SYS.ATARI.8BIT group.  They have
a lively  discussion of an IBM software emulator for their Atari 8-bit line.
From  what I figured out, their probelm is easier (for reasons that Eric
mentions)  and the job has been partly successful, however  there seems to
be a real obstacle in reaching the goal of a 100% compatible emulator.
It seems to be possible to write an emulator  for a certain class of
programs, but beyond that it is diffucult.
They also mention that an emulator looses a factor of 10 in speed, so that
a fast 386 machine emulating their 8-bit processor (6502 ???) runs at
essentially the same speed as   the original processor; you don't gain
much in that respect.
And, the  practical question:  Why would this be useful?  If you decide
to go over to the  Intel microprocessor world, would you REALLY miss
Multiplan and TI LOGO?  (Not  to mention  TI  Invaders and Parsec!).
You would loose the most exciting part of the TI-99/4A, anyway, since
I do not suppose you intend to emulate the Speech  Synthesizer and the other
gadgets which make it all the more fun to use this computer inthe first place!
At least for me, it's "all or nothing".
Perhaps other people also felt that  way and that is why  the Geneve,for
example, was a much more popular  upgrade than Miller's Graphics Turbo XT
Bridgebox.
Speaking of which, does anybody have any experience on that piece of TI
history?  I would appreciate  hearing as many  details about it, bits
and pieces of info, hands-on experience story-telling, etc.
Please post or e-mail to my account.
Thanks to all.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ti
From: scannon@bluemoon.rn.com (Sam Cannon)
Subject: TI 3770 SysV SNA
Organization: Blue Moon BBS ((614) 868-998[024])
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 09:52:57 EDT

Looking for someone who has installed 3770 SNA product on TI 1500
class machine.  Would like to swap notes.  TNX.

 This is from
     scannon@bluemoon.rn.com
who doesn't have their own obnoxious signature yet
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ti
From: exudnw@exu.ericsson.se (Dave Williams)
Subject: Re: 9900 emulator for MS-DOS/UNIX
Reply-To: exudnw@exu.ericsson.se
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 16:47:54 GMT

A company called Ten-X made a 990 simulator for the TI Pro (TIPC) around
1985 or so.  It was a hardware board containing a 99000 chip, some memory 
and some bus logic.  I think it allowed DX10 and DNOS processes to run
(slowly) on the host PC.

Electro-archeology is an unappreciated field.  Anyone have an old TI 
960 or 980 still running?  How about an old 990/10 or 12? 

Just curious...

---
= exudnw@exu.ericsson.se                                                =
= David Williams              "You can't win, you can't break even,     =
= Ericsson Network Systems     and you can't quit"                      =
= Richardson, TX 75081                                  my opinions...  =
From: jdglasse@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Jeffrey D. Glasse)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ti
Subject: Re: MYARC HFDC
Date: 10 Apr 92 19:30:12 GMT
Organization: Princeton University
Originator: news@ernie.Princeton.EDU


For the less experienced among us, could someone go into some detail
about the HFDC -- i.e. what kinds of HDs does it control, what kind of
limitations does it have, etc?

-=jueff
.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ti
From: cohen@GOMEZ.phys.virginia.edu
Subject: Re: MYARC HFDC
Reply-To: cohen@GOMEZ.phys.virginia.edu
Organization: Dept. of Physics, University of Virginia
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 21:56:41 GMT

The  HFDC will control both  floppy drives and HD.  Itcan control up to 4
floppies in addition to the 3 (4) that the TI  (Myarc DDCC-1, CorComp 9900)
floppy controllers will.  In fact, I know of a power-hungry nut who has
8 floppy drives  set  up this way...  The HD is will  control without any
modifications are for example  ST-225  20 Meg and  similar   MFM ST-506 (???)
HD's.  When it get to bigger drives there are some permanent midifications
needed in the HD's as discussed recently by Barry Boone.
As a matter of opinion, the price/performance ratio  is really awkward
here.  You can buy an MFM hard  & floppy controller  in the  IBM world
for a few dozens  $$$, while the HFDC costs in the hundreds $$$.
The  same is true of ANY non-mass produced (a/k/a original TI :-) equipment
for this computer:  better keyboards (unless you are technical enough to
build your own), RAM disks (can you imagine paying $565 for a  1.5 Meg
RAM Disk?!?), $179 for the TIM etc.
One more thing about the  HFDC- it  has all(???) the hardware for controlling
a tape backup unit, but no software whatsoever.  Unlikelt to ever come out
of Myarc.
Despite all these grim remark (sorry, fellow 99'ers), I strongly  feel that
this is a FUN machine, even if you  haven't got a HD.
Joseph
From: mdchaney@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (M Darrin Chaney)
Subject: Re: 9900 emulator for MS-DOS/UNIX
Keywords: TI-99/4A, DOS, UNIX, 9900
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 92 14:48:06 GMT

In article <2366@rwzl10.zld.rws.nl> ton@rwzl10.zld.rws.nl (Ton Damen) writes:
>Yesterday, at our monthly TI meeting, we discussed the possibility to
>build a TMS 9900 emulator for MSDOS and/or UNIX. My friend Ton Brouwer
>(ton2@zld.rws.nl) said that it shouldn't be that complicated to emulate 
>a TMS9900.
>Well, i think it is difficult to build a proccessor emulator.
>Now my question:
>
>Are there people who have tried to build such a emulator? Is it
>difficult to build a TMS 9900 emulato?. Are there people willing te
>help?

I built a dissembler for the 9900 (in 9900 code).  I had considered
building a cross-assembler, but I didn't have a good enough reference
for their object code.

Anyway, an emulator is really just a step up from a dissembler, and
that's easy.  First, figure out which format of instruction you have.
Then (perhaps in a mondo case statement) get the operands, figure out
what the operation is, and apply it to the operands.  Very easy.  I just
never got around to doing it.

As for emulating the entire 99/4A, that would be a bit more difficult
because of the memory setup, etc.  You'd also have to emulate the GROM's.
It'd be a pain, but possible.

	Darrin
-- 

mdchaney@iubacs mdchaney@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu mdchaney@rose.ucs.indiana.edu

"It's a marvel of vegetable containment..."
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ti
From: kmason@triton.unm.edu (Kirk L. Mason)
Subject: hard disk controllers
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 19:53:06 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Summary: Need software
Followup-To: comp.sys.ti 
Keywords: Ye olde WD100 

I was recently given an old WD100 and controller by a good friend who had two
but does not have the boot(?) floppy required to acess it.  Checking with the 
local 4/a user group I discovered they have the same problem. So, if some
kind soul could inform me how to replace this disk it would make three groups
out here quite happy.

If it were posted/emailed to me I might figure out how to download it to the 
4/a since I do my posting on a T.I.955w/s (pc clone).

Any help is appreciated (I think my spelling needs help too :)  )

kmason
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ti
From: u001@csx.cciw.ca (Clint Pulley)
Subject: TI-99/4A and Myarc Geneve files on cs910.cciw.ca
Organization: Canada Centre for Inland Waters
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 21:00:56 GMT
Summary: Files available by anonymous ftp

Files for the TI-99/4A and Myarc Geneve computers are available by anonymous
ftp from cs910.cciw.ca in the directory /pub/u001 . This list is current as 
of 92/04/15.

Files in this directory contain freely-distributable programs and information
for the TI-99/4A and Myarc 9640 computers. Unless otherwise noted, files are
in the TIFILES format for downloading with all current 99/4A and 9640 terminal
software. Files with names ending in _ark have been archived with Barry Boone's
archiver (cf. arc303g).

If you know of other freely distributable files which you would like to see 
here, send email to <u001@csx.cciw.ca> or <u001@cs.cciw.ca>.
 
Filename	System Type	Description

arc303g		99/4A|GPL	Program file containing archiver.
arc3_doc	99/4A|GPL	Documentation for archiver.
arc3doc.txt	99/4A|GPL	arc3_doc in unix text format
c99lbs_ark	99/4A|GPL	source files for c99/GPL libraries v4.0.
c99src_ark	99/4A|GPL	source files for the c99/GPL compiler v4.0.
exec13_ark	9640		MDOS program to run GPL programs.
ged12_ark	9640		MDOS program to encode/decode ark files.
gendoc_ark	9640		assorted 9640 documentation files.
gfv10_ark	9640		MDOS program to convert between DV80 & DF128.
pfc_ark		99/4A|GPL	program to create self-uncompressing pgm files.
roff26_ark	9640		MDOS/TIC version of the RUNOFF text formatter.
tel23a_ark	99/4A|GPL	Telco terminal program v2.3, part 1.
tel23b_ark	99/4A|GPL	Telco terminal program v2.3, part 2.
tied12_ark	99/4A|GPL	GPL program to encode/decode ark files.
tifv_ark	99/4A|GPL	GPL program to convert between DV80 & DF128.

Clint

-- 
Clint Pulley <u001@csx.cciw.ca>      |  Canada Centre for Inland Waters
Head, Computer Services              |  867 Lakeshore Road, Burlington, Ontario
National Water Research Institute    |  Canada  L7R 4A6     (416) 336-4930
Environment Canada                   |  "Water is Life"
From: ericl@cs.kuleuven.ac.be (Eric Lafortune)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ti
Subject: Re: 9900 emulator for MS-DOS/UNIX
Keywords: TI-99/4A, DOS, UNIX, 9900
Date: 6 Apr 92 09:04:11 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science K.U.Leuven

In article <2366@rwzl10.zld.rws.nl> ton@rwzl10.zld.rws.nl (Ton Damen) writes:

>Now my question:
>
>Are there people who have tried to build such a emulator? Is it
>difficult to build a TMS 9900 emulato?. Are there people willing te
>help?

I have considered implementing an 99/4A-emulator too (for my Acorn Archimedes).
Imagine how wonderful it would be to run one or more 99/4A's at high speed in
some windows... However, I have abandonned the idea because IMO it would bring
along an enormous amount of work and a lot of problems:

- Maybe it would be feasible to emulate the TMS-9900 processor. I have tried
  this once, on the 99/4A itself. But you have to make sure all addressing modes
  are implemented, all status bits are set properly, ... Not an easy task.

- But then, if you would like to see some results on your screen, you will have
  to start emulating the TMS-9918 video processor as well. Even if you don't
  bother with sprites (limiting the software base seriously), you would have
  to take into account the screen memory, character redefinition, color tables,
  interrupt requests, ... (And if you don't implement some undocumented features
  you won't be able to run my game Boulder Dash / Rock Runner :-)

- To be able to load any software you will need to emulate the CRU, or otherwise
  rewrite the whole DSR to access your hardware directly.

- Maybe you could do without sound, but the sound processor has to react
  properly to any requests made by the CPU.

And I am probably forgetting many things. But it would be great if you can
prove me wrong! Please keep us posted of any progress.

Eric.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric.Lafortune@cs.kuleuven.ac.be     Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium
                                     Research group: Computer Graphics
                         Research: realistic image synthesis using radiosity
From: ton@rwzl10.zld.rws.nl (Ton Damen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ti
Subject: Re: 9900 emulator for MS-DOS/UNIX
Date: 9 Apr 92 09:31:43 GMT
Organization: Dutch Min. of transport Zeeland, Middelburg

In article <00958B3F.E4929560@GOMEZ.PHYS.VIRGINIA.EDU>, cohen@GOMEZ.phys.virginia.edu writes:

> Wonder around a little bit and enter the COMP.SYS.ATARI.8BIT group.  They have
> a lively  discussion of an IBM software emulator for their Atari 8-bit line.
> From  what I figured out, their probelm is easier (for reasons that Eric
> mentions)  and the job has been partly successful, however  there seems to
> be a real obstacle in reaching the goal of a 100% compatible emulator.
> It seems to be possible to write an emulator  for a certain class of
> programs, but beyond that it is diffucult.
> They also mention that an emulator looses a factor of 10 in speed, so that
> a fast 386 machine emulating their 8-bit processor (6502 ???) runs at
> essentially the same speed as   the original processor; you don't gain
> much in that respect.

I don't have the intention to get a  faster ti-99, but  am looking for a
continuation of my ti-hobby on my (now-a-days) regular machine: a 386-40
Unix box. And building a 9900 emulator is a programmers challenge...


> And, the  practical question:  Why would this be useful?  If you decide
> to go over to the  Intel microprocessor world, would you REALLY miss
> Multiplan and TI LOGO?  (Not  to mention  TI  Invaders and Parsec!).
> You would loose the most exciting part of the TI-99/4A, anyway, since
> I do not suppose you intend to emulate the Speech  Synthesizer and the other
> gadgets which make it all the more fun to use this computer inthe first place!
> At least for me, it's "all or nothing".

Well we considered the aspect of not be able to port everything. And We
don't mind, like you wrote, every port is not 100%.

Over here in the Netherlands there is a great need for a 9900 (ti-99)
emulator. Our usersgroup is getting smaller by the day. Most of our
members have bought a PC but they still interrested in the ti. We have
had several questions to look for a 9900-emulator on a PC, so that they
can continue their hobby.

I have had also e-mail responses. I have now two (dutch) people who
are willing to give it a try (the port of the TMS9900, that is).


Ton Damen
From: asb@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Anthony Scott Botham)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun.misc
Subject: SunOS  4.1.1_U1 (Sun3/60) and performance
Date: 8 Apr 92 09:17:43 GMT
Organization: Comp Sci, RMIT, Melbourne, Australia

I have recently upgraded a Sun 3/60 from SunOS 4.1 to SunOS 4.1.1_U1
and the performance degraded substantially.

Some informal and semi-formal bench marks that I ran indicated that
the performance was 2-3 times slower than under 4.1. (and trying to
log in and do anything verified this !!)

Has anybody else encounted this ?  I rebuilt a lean kernel but it
only inproved the performance about 20%.

Perhaps Sun didn't bother to optimise the Sun3 version because it's
no longer a supported product ?

Comments ?

Anthony (asb@kbs.citri.edu.au)
From: thad@public.BTR.COM (Thaddeus P. Floryan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun.misc
Subject: Re: SunOS  4.1.1_U1 (Sun3/60) and performance
Date: 12 Apr 92 06:26:21 GMT
Organization: BTR Public Access UNIX, Mountain View CA

In article <10144@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au> asb@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Anthony Scott Botham) writes:
|I have recently upgraded a Sun 3/60 from SunOS 4.1 to SunOS 4.1.1_U1
|and the performance degraded substantially.
|
|Some informal and semi-formal bench marks that I ran indicated that
|the performance was 2-3 times slower than under 4.1. (and trying to
|log in and do anything verified this !!)
|
|Has anybody else encounted this ?  I rebuilt a lean kernel but it
|only inproved the performance about 20%.
|
|Perhaps Sun didn't bother to optimise the Sun3 version because it's
|no longer a supported product ?
|
|Comments ?

Well, you asked for comments!  :-)

Doesn't make sense, UNLESS you only have 4MB RAM on that system.

I've had versions from SunOS 3.2 on up to the present 4.1.1 on 3/60 and
simply have NOT noticed any performance degradation.

I will say that I've seen a 4MB RAM 3/60 and my subjective impression is
that my C64 outperforms it!  :-)

Seriously, RAM is inexpensive, so go to 24MB and let your system b-r-e-a-t-h-e.

Heck, even CONSUMER-type stores now sell Sun-specific RAM.  For example, in
this past week's Fry's Electronics (Silicon Valley and Los Angeles) ads in
the San Jose Mercury News, they listed all Sun models and Sun part numbers
and the prices.  Their ad even states "Please consult your reference manual for
RAM upgrade limitations.  Most systems require modules be installed in sets
of four." [which is true for the 3/60]

I'm not going to type in the ad, but they list 4MB, 16MB, 32MB and 64MB RAM
modules for 3/60, 3/80, Sparc 1(4/60), Spare 1 Plus (4/65), SLC 4/20, Sun 330,
Sun 4/110, Sun IPX, Sun ELC, Sun 670 Galaxy (64MB for $2,239.79),
Sparc IPC (4/40), and Sparc 2 (4/75).

The reason I mention Fry's (and why I'm astonished) is that they are usually
a Mac/DOS-type of store.  I suppose they'll soon be selling Suns, too!  :-)

Thad Floryan [ thad@btr.com (OR) {decwrl, mips, fernwood}!btr!thad ]
Xref: sparky comp.sys.sun.misc:1862 comp.lang.c:7475
From: lmb@netcom.com (Larry Blair)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.lang.c
Subject: Why aren't my floats passing as doubles?
Date: 8 Apr 92 22:14:17 GMT
Organization: Glenwood Consulting, Scotts Valley, CA

I'm using Sun's ANSI C compiler on a SS2 under SunOS 4.1.1.  The total project
consists of perhaps 1000 C files.  My problem is occurring with a small group
of these files.

What's happening is that in some of the files, for no apparent reason, if
there is a formal parameter of "float" the generated code is looking for a
4-byte float to be passed in.  Since all floats are actually passed as
doubles, occupying two registers, this is causing an argument mismatch.  The
symptoms look like the files were compiled with an option flag asking for
floats to be passed as singles, but there is no such flag.

Does anyone know what can be causing this?
-- 
Larry Blair   lmb@netcom.com       Glenwood Consulting 408-438-6386
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.unix.sysv386,comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc
From: bbrown@b11.ingr.com (Bailey Brown)
Subject: Re: SCO SYSV386 3.2r2.0 ODT 1.1 80486-33 outperforms SUN SPARC 4/260
Organization: Intergraph Corp. Huntsville, AL
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 22:55:49 GMT

tse@ra.nrl.navy.mil (Anthony Tse) writes:

>  Is the 486-33 running Unix??  If so, how about running say 5 or 6 copies
>of the same thing so we can get some swapping action going.  My main
>grip with PC with DOS or Window is you can't do more then one thing
>at a time and I am not sure how well a PC will do running Unix with
>multiple processes.

Windows 3.x can do more than one thing at a time and even do preemptive 
multitasking on a 386.  Unfortunately, all Windows apps are one pre-empted 
task (they can cooperatively multitask among themselves) but each dos session 
is run on its own virtual machine preemptively.  I can run a make 
in a dos sesion, download a file over my modem with either a dos or
windows comm program, and play solitaire all at the same time.
Of course, it doesn't multitask as well as unix does, but it's alot easier
to deal with on a home system.
 

>-Anthony

------------
Bailey Brown                               "Above all else, confusion reigns."
Intergraph Corporation                                  
bbrown@casca.b11.ingr.com                              Procol Harum
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.unix.sysv386
From: jim@ferkel.ucsb.edu (Jim Lick)
Subject: Re: New viking sparc processor?
Organization: University of California, Santa Barbara
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 18:29:16 GMT

In <1992Apr7.211331.1526@wsrcc.com> wolfgang@wsrcc.com (Wolfgang S. Rupprecht) writes:
>All the tests I've seen show the PC's I/O running at a significantly
>slower I/O rate.  How many KB/sec to/from the disk does your PC do?

>    # time dd if=/dev/rsd0b of=/dev/null bs=10240k count=1
>    1+0 records in
>    1+0 records out
>	   10.5 real         0.0 user         2.2 sys  

>Thats ~1 Megabyte per second on a lowly SLC w. a 766 Meg Seagate WREN.
>Care to do the same for a Dell running the same or similar disk?

I alluded to this in an earlier post.  Here's figures for your test
above.  The first two are for the same exact model hard disk:

	Sun 4/330, VME Bus, Maxtor 8760S, moderate system load
	real time: 12.94 seconds

	486-25, 256k cache, ISA Bus, 1542B controller, 8760S, very light load
	real time: 54.4 seconds (this is the swap disk too)

	Sun 4/330, VME Bus, Fujitsu M2263SA, moderate system load
	real time: 14.27 seconds (this is the swap disk too)

	Sun Sparc 1, Sbus, Quantum 105S, moderate to high system load
	real time: 24.65 seconds (this is the swap disk too)

	Sun Sparc 2, Sbus, Maxtor 210, light load
	real time: 18.03 seconds (this is the swap disk too)

This isn't all that fair of a test.  The Sun figures would be lower,
especially for the Sparc 1, if they weren't doing so much work while
the test was running.  But the Suns still completely blew away my
486 system at home.

                            Jim Lick		       
Work: University of California	| Play: 6657 El Colegio #24
      Santa Barbara		|       Isla Vista, CA 93117-4280
      Dept. of Mechanical Engr. |	(805) 968-0189 voice/msg
      2311 Engr II Building     | "when you gonna make up your mind?
      (805) 893-4113            |  when you gonna love you as much
      jim@ferkel.ucsb.edu	|  as i do?" -Tori Amos

Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun.misc
From: denys@ctp.com (Denys Chen)
Subject: RPC CIDL 4 ONC & NCS
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 18:34:33 GMT
Distribution: us
Organization: Cambridge Technology Partners

Hello there,

First, I'm a novice in RPC. 
I'm currently trying to find out if I should go for OSF's NCS/RPC 
or SUN's ONC/RPC. In my search, I read an relatively old (April 1991) 
article talking about SUN and HP's agreement on a joint effort to 
propose an ORB to the OMG. One of the things that SUN and HP agreed 
upon was to stop the once white-heated RPC war -- to come up with a
"Common Interface Definition Language" (CIDL) that would interface
into both SUN and HP's RPC.

My questions are : Has the CIDL been released ? What's the current
status ? If it's out, hwo do I get more info about it ?

I've searched a lot of articles for that topic without any luck.
-- 
<*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*><*>
Denys J. Chen                             dchen@ctp.com
Cambridge Technology Partners             Voice: 1-617-349-1271 
301 Vassar St.  Cambridge, MA 02139       Fax:   1-617-349-1201
From: jh@cadre.com (Joe Hartley)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun.misc
Subject: Re: How to set my modem in auto-answer modem on
Date: 13 Apr 92 13:06:32 GMT
Reply-To: jh@cadre.com
Organization: Cadre Technologies Inc.

First, the obligatory RTFM - pages 326 - 332 in the (4.1) System and Network
Administration manual.

Briefly, edit the /etc/ttytab file so that the line reads similar to this:

ttya    "/usr/etc/getty Fast-Dial-9600" dialup          on remote

Give the command "ttysoftcar -a".

Then make sure your modem is set to answer the phone. (Issue an "ATS0=1" command
to a Hayes-type modem.)  (Use "tip" to access the modem - RTFM under "tip".)

You should now see a getty process running on ttyb when you do a "ps ax".

That's it; you should be all set.  If this doesn't work, you may need to build a
cua device for the port - refer to the Admin manual mentioned above.
---
===============================================================================
Joe Hartley          | jh@cadre.com  -  Whenever you find that you are on the
Cadre Technologies   | side of the majority, it is time to reform. - M. Twain
222 Richmond St.     | --------------------------------------------------------
Providence, RI 02903 | Overman 1st Class - the Kilgore Trout Memorial Clench
(401) 351-5950 x266  |            of the Church of the SubGenius  
===============================================================================