callen@inmet.UUCP (04/04/87)
Last weekend I helped a friend do the old Dr. Dobbs upgrade on his
128K Mac to 512K, bringing it into the 20th century. Today he went down
to a local Apple dealership to finish the job, by getting the ROM/disk
upgrade, so he would have a 512KE.
Imagine his surprise when the dealer told him that the latest rev of the
ROMs (rev "C"?) will NOT work with most 3rd party upgrades, only with a
"real" 512K Mac! The dealer had run into this problem several times.
Luckily for my friend, the dealer was able to scrounge some old
rev "B" ROMs off a floor demo 512KE.
I *KNOW* that this has to be a recent change, because a Mac that I
upgraded a few months ago accepted new ROMs and drive without a hitch.
How can this be? Does a "real" 512K board decode some address lines
that the Dr. Dobbs upgrade does not? I mean, how can the ROMs even
FIND OUT that this upgrade is not "the real mac-coy?" (sorry... :-)
Does anyone have any idea what would have to be done to make a homebrew
upgrade look like a factory board?
And now...
>>>>> FLAME ON! <<<<<
What POSSIBLE reason could CRAPple, uh, Apple have for introducing this
sort of problem EXCEPT to force their customers to buy THEIR upgrades?!?
THIS SUCKS! All it is going to do is generate 1) a lot of hostility
among their customers and 2) a traffic in black market ROMs. I have every
intention of taking my 512KE ROMs that *DO* work with the Dr. Dobbs
upgrade and offering to copy them FOR ANY POOR SLOB WHO NEEDS THEM!
512Kbit EPROMs have finally dropped a price where that's a reasonable
option.
I really like my Mac, but Apple just keeps right on stickin' it to us.
<<<<< flame off >>>>>
-- Jerry "not one penny for blackmail" Callen
Intermetrics, Inc.
733 Concord Ave.
Cambridge, MA 01238
...{ima,ihnp4}!inmet!ada-uts!callen
Do *YOU* speak for your employer? I certainly don't.dgold@apple.UUCP (04/08/87)
In article <127200004@inmet> callen@inmet.UUCP writes: >What POSSIBLE reason could CRAPple, uh, Apple have for introducing this >sort of problem EXCEPT to force their customers to buy THEIR upgrades?!? >THIS SUCKS! All it is going to do is generate 1) a lot of hostility >among their customers and 2) a traffic in black market ROMs. I have every >intention of taking my 512KE ROMs that *DO* work with the Dr. Dobbs >upgrade and offering to copy them FOR ANY POOR SLOB WHO NEEDS THEM! >512Kbit EPROMs have finally dropped a price where that's a reasonable >option. I'm not familiar with the particulars of this problem, but I have to say I am surprised by the tone that you show in this posting. As far as I know, all of the 128K ROM changes which have been made in the last year or so are to correct minor problems with the SCSI interface. As someone who works on a daily basis with the people who produce the ROMs, I can assure you that this sort of Machiavellian idea would not cross their minds. Anything which lets people get the most out of their Macintoshes, including third-party memory upgrades, is just fine with us. Otherwise, why would we have put SIMM sockets in the Mac Plus and later machines, and why would we have put slots in the Mac SE and Mac II? If the problem is as your dealer says (which is by no means certain), what may have happened is that some of the code changed for SCSI purposes may have inadvertantly broken third-party memory upgrades (we don't have many 512 machines in house, fewer still with third-party upgrades to test on), depending on how their address lines work and so forth. This is all speculation, of course. I can't believe that you think we oppose third-party add-ons. We actively promote Radius, E-Machines, Levco, etc, etc, etc. in our co-marketing programs. I also can't believe you think we'd stoop to such a rotten trick. Anyway, enough said. Obviously, this message represents my own opinion and not any official position of Apple Computer, Inc. Harrumph. -- David Goldsmith Apple Computer, Inc. MacApp Group AppleLink: GOLDSMITH1 UUCP: {nsc,dual,sun,voder,ucbvax!mtxinu}!apple!dgold CSNET: dgold@apple.CSNET, dgold%apple@CSNET-RELAY BIX: dgoldsmith
jww@sdcsvax.UUCP (04/08/87)
In article <127200004@inmet>, callen@inmet.UUCP writes: > And now... > > >>>>> FLAME ON! <<<<< > > What POSSIBLE reason could CRAPple, uh, Apple have for introducing this > sort of problem EXCEPT to force their customers to buy THEIR upgrades?!? > THIS SUCKS! All it is going to do is generate 1) a lot of hostility > among their customers and 2) a traffic in black market ROMs. > -- Jerry "not one penny for blackmail" Callen > Do *YOU* speak for your employer? I certainly don't. I think Jerry doesn't speak for many people in this group. Apple has done many stupid things (being a big company with more employees, they get to make more mistakes than most of us) but I have yet to find one that deserves profanity. Also, when they make a really big boo-boo, they usually fix it, although due to their bigness, the progress may seem glacial at times. I know nothing about the particulars of this case, but the complaint here doesn't ring true. The article certainly indicated to me that not enough investigation had been done to make such strong charges. There are many reasons why computers don't work (anyone who knows anything about debugging knows this) and it is impossible to say a priori that one particular cause MUST be the answer. If you really think the ROM's are different, prove it. Find the instruction that causes the problem. If that's beyond your capabilities, just prove that the ROM's are different. A 4-line MS-Basic program could be used to dump the ROM to disk, and then a simple file compare would establish which bytes (if any) are different. Laziness doesn't justify libel. -- Joel West {ucbvax,ihnp4}!sdcsvax!jww (ihnp4!gould9!joel once I fix news) jww@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu if you must
suhler@im4u.UUCP (04/08/87)
In article <608@apple.UUCP> dgold@apple.UUCP (David Goldsmith) writes: >I can't believe that you think we oppose third-party add-ons. We actively >promote Radius, E-Machines, Levco, etc, etc, etc. in our co-marketing >programs. I also can't believe you think we'd stoop to such a rotten trick. Does this mean that having one of these upgrades leaves AppleCare still in effect? I've been under the impression that if anyone other than an authorized Apple repair outfit opened the box, for any reason, then AppleCare was invalidated for any repairs. -- Paul Suhler suhler@im4u.UTEXAS.EDU 512-474-9517/471-3903
clive@druhi.UUCP (04/09/87)
in article <608@apple.UUCP>, dgold@apple.UUCP says: > > In article <127200004@inmet> callen@inmet.UUCP writes: >>What POSSIBLE reason could >>etc. vitriolic > I'm not familiar with the particulars of this problem, but I have to say > I am surprised by the tone that you show in this posting. I'm really sorry you had to hear this, David. Probably you are already aware that this kind of talk, and its more subtle (?) variants, is a regular feature of Usenet, which has a large audience of college students and many others, perhaps not so young, who unfortunately feel that for any lack of perfection, fault is to be immediately assigned, insults levied, and retribution demanded. I believe this atmosphere is perfectly summed up by the word sophomoric. Anyway, be assured that there are also many active and thoughtful listeners (not just a silent majority), who are very happy to have you and your colleagues on the net. Many of the ones in this group, are making daily use of the tools you have provided for the world. They're probably among the more technically sophisticated of your customers, and often enough may be responsible for new applications, new software, and also purchasing decisions that put Macs into the hands of others in school and industry. You can see them by the occasional very informative article, or contributed program. The rest of the time, they listen. Let me thank you for the clear and informative information and answers you and other people who work at Apple have provided often, and politely, to anyone with a substantive question to ask. Clive Steward
stevel@dartvax.UUCP (04/09/87)
If you have a third party upgrade that won't work with a
particular set of roms, the cause is likely to be that the
upgrade doesn't have pullups on the added address lines. Some
roms may be fussy about the levels. This problem can exist with
the Dr. Dobbs upgrade. I don't know of it causing problems, but
it might. It's simple enough to duplicate the Apple 512k
circuitry exactly. On upgrades I do, don't quite duplicate
Apple's circuitry. Let me try to describe: (I'll assume that
you know the basics of the upgrade - where to put the 253, and
about the row of pads near it, since I do it by instinct now,
and don't remember the coordinates.)
pin 1 - jumper to ground (pin 8).
pin 2 - solder to pin 2 below it.
pins 3,4 - tie to +5, pin 16. I use a bare wire so I can solder
the pullups from pins 5, 6 to it.
pins 5,6 - a 2.2k pullup from each to the wire mentioned above,
and a wire to pads 6, 3 (!maybe!) in the nearby group.
pin 7 - connect with a 47 ohm resistor to pad 2 in the group.
pins 8, 9 solder to pins 8, 9 below
pins 10,11,12,13 - tie to +5.
pin 14 - solder to pin 14, below.
pin 15 - tie to +5. I solder a bare wire across 10, 11, 12, 13,
and 15 to pin 16.
pin 16 - solder to pin 16 (+5) below.
Don't forget to cut the jumper from pad 1 to 2 in the group.
Hmmm, the diagram below is almost understandable to me. If
you use it with the text above, you might be able to do an
upgrade.
+--------------+
| -------- |
+==1 +++--*--+ |
* ||| 15==+ |
3-+RR * | |
4-+|| 13==+ |
+--==5--+| 12==+ |
|+-==6---+ 11==+ |
||+==7 10==+ |
||| +* * |
||| |-------- |
||R +------------+
|||
||| O
||+---*
|=----*
| O
| O
+-----*
O
Warning - This may have errors.
Apology - I didn't mean to write this much.
Disclaimer - It's not my fault if you break your Mac. I've done
a couple hundred upgrades this way, and only one didn't work.
But on that one, I hadn't tested the board before doing the
upgrade, so maybe it didn't work as a 128k. (some day I'll have
to get back to that board...)
--
Steve Ligett stevel@dartmouth.edu or
(astrovax cornell decvax harvard ihnp4 linus true)!dartvax!steveldgold@apple.UUCP (04/09/87)
In article <1707@im4u.UUCP> suhler@im4u.UUCP (Paul A. Suhler) writes: >Does this mean that having one of these upgrades leaves AppleCare still >in effect? I've been under the impression that if anyone other than an >authorized Apple repair outfit opened the box, for any reason, then >AppleCare was invalidated for any repairs. Certain third-party add-ons for the Mac Plus do not invalidate Apple's warranty or AppleCare. I can't give a comprehensive list, but I know that GCC's HyperDrive is in that category. Before Apple can validate a warranty on a Mac with a third-party upgrade, we have to make sure that the upgrade is reliable and won't cause problems. Since all third-party upgrades for Mac Plus and earlier involve modifying the machine, we've had to do it on a case-by-case basis. Now that we have machines with slots, and there are specs for those slots, there should be no problem. I'm not sure what the exact status of this issue is right now, so it would be best to check with someone who does know. -- David Goldsmith Apple Computer, Inc. MacApp Group AppleLink: GOLDSMITH1 UUCP: {nsc,dual,sun,voder,ucbvax!mtxinu}!apple!dgold CSNET: dgold@apple.CSNET, dgold%apple@CSNET-RELAY BIX: dgoldsmith
pgn@osupyr.UUCP (04/11/87)
I think the poblem is that Apple gave us the Mac which represents the almost non-plus-ultra computer (according to our present day standards), and thus made us believe that perfection is achievable. This decreased our tolerance level, and made us expect even more. This in turn forces the production of even better computers etc. ad infinitum. Summary: Apple is great, but could be better, and will be better if more is expected from her. Have Orthogonal Polynomials Will Travel Paul Nevai pgn%osupyr.uucp (PREFERRED) Department of Mathematics nevai-p@osu-eddie.uucp The Ohio State University ...!ihnp4!cbatt!osupyr!pgn 231 West Eighteenth Avenue TS1171@OHSTVMA.bitnet Columbus, OH 43210, U.S.A. 1-614-292-5688
espen@well.UUCP (04/24/87)
In article <2969@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU>, jww@sdcsvax.UCSD.EDU (Joel West) writes: > In article <127200004@inmet>, callen@inmet.UUCP writes: > > And now... > > > > >>>>> FLAME ON! <<<<< > > > > What POSSIBLE reason could CRAPple, uh, Apple have for introducing this > > sort of problem EXCEPT to force their customers to buy THEIR upgrades?!? > > THIS SUCKS! All it is going to do is generate 1) a lot of hostility > > among their customers and 2) a traffic in black market ROMs. I did the Dr. Dobbs upgrade to my 128K Mac a couple of years back when the article was first published in DDJ. The upgrade has worked fine wiht NO problems since. About 7 months ago I had the 128K ROMS and 800K drive upgrade done to my DDJ upgraded Mac and have had ZERO problems with that also. I havn't experienced ANY compatability problems that do not also occur on a Mac+ running non-HFS compatable software. It has been my experience that many Apple dealers will tend to spout off blatantly incorrect facts and information for various reasons including ignorance and the tendency to pass along unsubstantiated rumors beacuse they are unwilling to find out the TRUE facts. This thread started because someone said their dealer told them that the Rev C 128K roms were "incompatable" with most third party upgrades. I would have pushed this dealer a little further and asked him in WHAT WAY the third party upgrades were incompatable, where the dealer got this info etc.. Perhaps the dealer simply wanted to unload some earlier REV 128K ROMS!! I personally don't believe this accusation. My DDJ upgrade has worked fine with my 128K roms for quite some time. Don't accuse someone of "SUCKING" unless your sure they are really the source of the SUCTION!!! FINISHED FLAMING!! >
callen@inmet.UUCP (04/29/87)
OK, let's try this again, without the flame, which I will apologize for
right now. I was pretty P.O.ed at the moment. Apple has given us some
slick machines. I don't like everything they do. ANYWAY...
What the original posting was REALLY about is this issue of whether or
not the latest revisions of the ROMs work with the Dr. Dobbs upgrade.
The dealer in question claims to have seen several cases of the latest
ROMs not working with 3rd party upgrades. In my friend's case, the
dealer managed to dig up some OLD ROMs, and then all worked just fine.
I CAN'T vouch for the dealer, and since I haven't got the latest ROMs
to drop into my OWN Dr. Dobb's upgraded mac, I can't try it myself.
Since the dealer DID manage to get my friend's Mac upgraded, I don't
think that they were trying to pull a fast one (like sell him a new
logic board).
NOW - What's the difference between the DDJ upgrade and a REAL 512K
Macintosh? I suspect that there may be a difference in the address
decoding logic. If some address lines aren't being looked at by the
DDJ upgrade that ARE looked at by a real 512K mac then conceivably
the code that looks for a SCSI boot device could get confused.
Any ideas?
-- Jerry "less heat, more light" Callen
...!{ihnp4,ima}!inmet!ada-uts!callen ching@amd.UUCP (Mike Ching) (05/01/87)
In article <127200005@inmet> callen@inmet.UUCP writes: > >NOW - What's the difference between the DDJ upgrade and a REAL 512K >Macintosh? The only difference I've seen is that the REAL Mac has pullup resistors on address lines A17 and A18 and they're needed for reliable operation. mike ching
dwb@apple.UUCP (Dave W. Berry) (05/04/87)
Shortly after the Dr. Dobbs upgrade was published, I performed similar surgery on my mac. It was similar because I took a variety of similar mods, and compiled an average of them if you will, which I then applied to my mac. At about the time the plus was announced I put a Monster Mac 2 Meg board in. Later on I upgraded to the new ROM's. All this went without a hitch. (Well there was one hitch, I eventually found a loose connection my original upgrade, after that there weren't any hitches) I later added the Levco SCSI board and the conglomerate has worked like a champ ever since. The only thing I can imagine causing problems is if they didn't user the "F" version of the multiplexer. Without that you might very well have timing problems on some of the upgrades and not on others. -- David W. Berry dwb@well.uucp dwb@Delphi dwb@apple.com 293-0752@408.MaBell