mrk@gvgspd.UUCP (Michael R. Kesti) (09/13/87)
In comp.sys.ibm.pc article <135@splut.UUCP> jay@splut.UUCP (Jay Maynard) writes: > >Considering the list of things that won't work quite right on a 6300, I hope >AT&T (Olivetti?) did a better job of engineering this time around. I've lost >track of the things that wouldn't quite work on AT&Ts. You know, I've heard this kind of thing before, and in the two+ years that I've had my 6300, the only thing that didn't "work quite right" is a back scroller that works just fine on my machine, but mysteriously malfunctions on true blues and other clones. Could someone supply a list of the troubles I am supposed to be having? BTW, I am not a one application user. I do many things on this machine, including applications development. Further, I am most pleased with the performance of this machine, except, of course, that it uses a toy OS (:-)! -- =================================================================== Michael Kesti Grass Valley Group, Inc. P.O. Box 1114 Grass Valley, CA 95945 UUCP: ...!tektronix!gvgpsa!gvgspd!mrk
rps@homxc.UUCP (R.SHARPLES) (09/24/87)
In article <862@sask.UUCP>, coleman@sask.UUCP (Geoff Coleman @ College of Engineering) writes: > Me too please! I run a microcomputer lab for the College of > Engineering here and we have 22 AT&T 6300s and have not found one program > that won't run on them. We use software that ranges in quality from ACAD > to softwre programs written by Profs in Basic for their classes use. > I would settle for the name of one program that will run on one or > more IBM compatibles and won't run on the AT&T 6300. For that matter I'll > settle for a commercial package that will run on an IBM (not marketed by IBM > because they check machine ID) and not on a 6300. Maybe the stock system setup is 100% compatible (I'm not saying this but I can't think of any software that I have ever heard of that doesn't work on the stock AT&T PC 6300). But, just try to add an EGA card! I know this is a pain. There are certain problems with the way the EGA memory is handled, etc. In this respect, it is not a 100% compatible. Russ Sharples homxc!rps NOTE: The above in NO WAY reflects the opinions of AT&T. These opinions are my own and the results of un-scientific and highly irregular analysis methods.
vg55611@ihuxy.ATT.COM (gopal) (09/25/87)
In article <1409@homxc.UUCP>, rps@homxc.UUCP (R.SHARPLES) writes: > > I would settle for the name of one program that will run on one or > > more IBM compatibles and won't run on the AT&T 6300. For that matter I'll > > settle for a commercial package that will run on an IBM (not marketed by IBM > > because they check machine ID) and not on a 6300. > Maybe the stock system setup is 100% compatible (I'm not saying this > but I can't think of any software that I have ever heard of that > doesn't work on the stock AT&T PC 6300). But, just try to add an > EGA card! I know this is a pain. There are certain problems with the > way the EGA memory is handled, etc. In this respect, it is not a 100% > compatible. Sure, it is not a 100% compatible - that is because it is better. The problem with adding an EGA card etc. is due to the fact that the the 6300 comes with a built-in video display board (on the orig. IBM PC, you had to add a card !) - naturally, when you want to disable something that is built-in, it may not always be easy. You buy a 6300 and you don't have to worry about buying, and installing a video card - both involve time and money - same thing goes for the built-in parallel and serial ports. A user that buys a 6300 can usually gets the final system he/she wants - can run most of the software he/she wants to run right off the bat! The compatibility you are talking about is perhaps better described by the words "mirror image". AT&T sells a video bridge adapter and also a spider chip so that you may install third-party video boards - and as far as I know, the latest ROM BIOS supports EGA. I don't know what problems you have had in trying to install an EGA card - but on my 6300 plus, I have an EGA card running and have had absolutely no problems with it! And have you noticed that you don't have to pay extra bucks to get a high resolution graphics mode (640x400) which, I find, most of the major packages have support for! Think again. Venu P. Gopal ihnp4!ihuxy!vg55611
vg55611@ihuxy.ATT.COM (gopal) (09/25/87)
In article <299@octopus.UUCP>, pete@octopus.UUCP (Pete Holzmann) writes: > The 6300/6300+ do not have completely compatible BUSES. Thus, not all > boards are compatible. An esoteric example is that my Periscope III debugger > board will not work. (Which is why I hope that it isn't really my program's How many clones does this debugger work on ? Venu P. Gopal ihnp4!ihuxy!vg55611
E8D@PSUVM.BITNET (09/25/87)
"SHAPE A computer program for Drawing Crystals Copyright (C) 1986
by Eric Dowty is a nice package that runs fine on an AT but bombs
on exit on my 6300 forcing me to use the reset button. Also, the aspect
ratio for the graphs is off on my ATT. This is a FORTRAN 77 program with
I believe, some assembly language plotting routines compiled under
MS FORTRAN 3.13. I haven't tried recompileing with a real FORTRAN
(he supplies the source!) since I of course only use it
on "one computer at a time".
Yes it still doesn't work with my new 1.43 BIOS.
-------
Disclaimer: Sorry about the spelling.
Evan Dresel
Dept. of Geochemistry E8D @ PSUVM (bitnet)
228 Deike Bldg. ...!psuvax1!psuvm.bitnet!e8d (uucp <-->
Penn State University bitnet gateway)
University Park, PA 16802 e8d%psuvm.bitnet@wiscvm.arpa (arpa)
(814) 863-0672
rps@homxc.UUCP (R.SHARPLES) (09/26/87)
In article <2150@ihuxy.ATT.COM>, vg55611@ihuxy.ATT.COM (gopal) writes: > > Maybe the stock system setup is 100% compatible (I'm not saying this > > but I can't think of any software that I have ever heard of that > > doesn't work on the stock AT&T PC 6300). But, just try to add an > > EGA card! I know this is a pain. There are certain problems with the > > way the EGA memory is handled, etc. In this respect, it is not a 100% > > compatible. > > Sure, it is not a 100% compatible - that is because it is better. The problem > with adding an EGA card etc. is due to the fact that the the 6300 comes with > a built-in video display board (on the orig. IBM PC, you had to add a card !) ... > The compatibility you are talking about is perhaps better described by the > words "mirror image". > > AT&T sells a video bridge adapter and also a spider chip so that you may > install third-party video boards - and as far as I know, the latest ROM BIOS > supports EGA. I don't know what problems you have had in trying to install > an EGA card - but on my 6300 plus, I have an EGA card running and have had > absolutely no problems with it! ... > > Think again. > > Venu P. Gopal > ihnp4!ihuxy!vg55611 The 6300 and 6300 Plus are very different animals, or fruit if you want to talk apples and oranges. They learned from the 6300 that it was a good idea to make it possible to put a different video adapter in the computer. I don't have any direct experience, but I have heard that is not possible to put one in the early 6300s. In the recent ones you still have to go through the replacement of a chip and I don't think it is 100% compatible even after that. If done right it should be either DIP switch controlable or you should be able to pull out the card that comes with the machine. There are few reasons why the IDB can't be easily removable (the only one I can think of is the power for the monochrome monitor, which was a stupid idea anyway). With the Plus, *assuming you have the 2.05A ROM/PAL upgrade*, it is supposed to be fairly straight forward to switch cards and actually 100% compatible, sort of. I do agree, that if you will never need EGA, and many users don't, the 6300 package is a good one. The legible text, extra Hi-res mode and 100% compatible CGA mode are a good combination. If you do need EGA, you are probably better off with a 6310, 6312, 6386 or a compatible. The 6300/6300+ is not your machine. Russ Sharples homxc!rps NOTE: The above in NO WAY reflects the opinions of AT&T. These opinions are my own and the results of un-scientific and highly irregular analysis methods.
wtm@neoucom.UUCP (09/28/87)
<< Re: stuff about an EGA card being a pain to run in the AT&T 6300 >> Well, I'm writing this from an AT&T 6300 running with an EGA card. I didn't think "ugrading" to an EGA was too awful. First, old versions of the 6300's BIOS did not test for the presence of the EGA BIOS. Anybody remember the old IBM XT's made before March, 1982? They couldn't use EGAs either. AT&T isn't the only company that has improved its BIOS over the years. Update your 6300 by calling 1-800-222-PART. Just ask for the version 1.43 BIOS chip set. They'll know what you want, so you don't even have to scrounge for the infamous AT&T com item number!! They'll accept Visa/MC and ship it to you within 7 days. The cost is aobut $35.00 US. The kit includes two ROMs and a PAL chip. It takes about 10 minutes to install the chips. The instruction manual is pretty clear about what to do. If you are just updating the BIOS, you don't need to change any of the dip switch settings. The PAL chip fixes a bug related to putting out the bytes of a 16-bit OUT instruction in reverse order. Since the 6300 was actually desinged before the AT hit the market, AT&T just happened to pick the opposite order of IBM for 16 bit OUTs. AT&T has become IBM compatible as of v 1.43. Note that some EGA cards use 16 bit OUTs (eventhough designed for an 8 bit buss) when they shouldn't. They intend for the unneeded 8 bits to fall off into never-never land. Unfortunately, old 6300s kept the garbage and threw away the real data. -- While you have the bottom cover off, try substituting a NEC V-30 vor the original 8086-2 CPU. Integer mults are performed in 1/2 the number of clock cycles on the V-30. A very noticable performance boost results. I have had a V-30 since Jan 21, 1987 in my 6300 and have nary an ill experience with it. It is also fully compatible with my 8087-2. I wish I could say nice things about the V-20 like that w.r.t. subbing for an 8088. Elec-tek has V-30s for about $12 + S/H. Very much recomended. -- If you are installing an EGA card. You might want to consider getting the STB Co. "Multires EGA". You should be able to find it for around $230 or so. It has modes that allow it use the AT&T color monitor in full EGA display mode. Neat. Actually, I had a Taxan 640 which is a clone of the AT&T monitor. You need to make a small adapter cord to go from the db-9 on the STB card to the 25 pin cord of the AT&T monitor. If you aren't electrically adept, the cord should be available from STB. If you don't have an "investment" in an AT&T color monitor. You should be able to use most any EGA card and EGA monitor. -- There are two methods for shutting of indigenous video on the 6300, which you must do to enable an EGA card. If you have a relatively recent 6300, moving the jumper, W1, near the front of the bord next to C11 will disable internal video. W1 should be on pins 1&2. By the way, these boards are indentified as version P8. On older machines, a 74LS00 IC must be pulled from its socket and a header installed. These boards are indentified as P4. The offending 74LS00 is in a socket near the bottom of the board right above where the thick red&black wires attach to the buss adapter. On some particularly ancient 6300s, the 74LS00 might be soldered in (ugh!!). The header to install in place of the 74LS00 is as follows: jumper pin 3 to pin 14 jumper pin 6 to pin 7 to pin 8. leave every other pin unconnected. (The above info on making the header comes from Mike Slifcak of Olivetti ATC.) Neither Mike nor I can take responsibility if you burn up your computer trying this. If you have any reservations about your abilities, by all means, get somebody that knows about electronics to assist you. -- I really like my 6300. It is still my favorite MS-DOS (gurgh!) machine. Unfortunately, AT&T / Olivetti / Xeorx were just a bit ahead of their time bringing it out. At the time the 6300 made its debut, most PC buyers were more than satisfied with the lumbering, noisy 4.77 MHz XT. I mean buyer, in the sense of coportate buyer. The corporate mentaility was locked in by IBM f.u.d., and wouldn't risk anyting like a 6300 when the XT would do the job. --Bill Bill Mayhew (wtm@neoucom.UUCP)
broehl@watdcsu.UUCP (09/29/87)
In article <2150@ihuxy.ATT.COM> vg55611@ihuxy.ATT.COM (gopal) writes: > >Sure, it is not a 100% compatible - that is because it is better. Really? We have half a dozen of them, and we wish we'd bought PC-compatibles instead. >The problem >with adding an EGA card etc. is due to the fact that the the 6300 comes with >a built-in video display board (on the orig. IBM PC, you had to add a card !) - Being able to add any of a variety of video cards is really very handy; one of the major mistakes IBM has made on the new PS/2 series machines is having the video resident on the motherboard (the same mistake that AT&T made with the 6300). At least with the PS/2's, it's pretty straightforward to disable that circuitry (though having to pay more for something you don't use is annoying). >naturally, when you want to disable something that is built-in, it may not >always be easy. It ought to be. It is on the PS/2 series. >You buy a 6300 and you don't have to worry about buying, >and installing a video card For all the users out there who are using PC-compatibles, this has been no great hardship. For those who have AT&T 6300's, the problems can be far greater. >A user that buys a 6300 can >usually gets the final system he/she wants - can run most of the software... ^^^^^^^ ^^^^ It's not unreasonable for users to get what they want when they buy a system. All the time, not "usually". A system that runs the software that's available... all of it, not "most" of it. >The compatibility you are talking about is perhaps better described by the >words "mirror image". No, when the original poster speaks of "compatibility" he means exactly that. And so do I. A machine that is compatible with software and hardware designed for the IBM-PC architecture. If people didn't care about compatability, they would have bought something else entirely; an Amiga or an ST or a Mac or whatever. They bought the 6300 at least in part because it pretends to be a PC-compatible machine. >AT&T sells a video bridge adapter and also a spider chip so that you may >install third-party video boards Which is an additional expense, a nuisance, and far more complicated than simply installing a video board the way you would with a true compatible. >Think again. If they'd thought in the first place, they may not have bought the 6300. (In all fairness, there are other machines that have undocumented incompatabilities. We just recently bought 10 Packard-Bells, and have had problems with the DMA on them, as well as with the video. Nice machines, good price, but it took a *lot* of fiddling to get some of the stuff we've got to work right). >Venu P. Gopal >ihnp4!ihuxy!vg55611
aptr@ur-tut.UUCP (09/30/87)
Speaking of EGA:
There is now a new board out from AT&T that is supposed to replace
the indigenous video card and provide both standard AT&T graphics
(including 640x400 mono) and EGA graphics. The only information I have
on it is that it is supposed to have been just announced. I recieved
the information from a reliable source at a local AT&T computer dealer.
My source is currently trying to find out more details including price
and availablity. I will post these when I find them out.
--
The Wumpus UUCP: {cmcl2!decvax}!rochester!ur-tut!aptr
BITNET: aptrccss@uorvm
Internet: aptr@tut.cc.rochester.edu
Disclaimer: "Who? When? Me? It was the Booze!" - M. Binkley