walsh@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Edward E Walsh) (04/04/89)
My classical Chinese professor recently replaced his Tandy PC (it sort of blew up or something; he wasn't very clear--blamed it on the maid) with a PC compatible (don't remember the make, a 47th Street Photo special that weekend). He'd like to keep using his fancy Tandy daisywheel printer with the compatible. He got a standard parallel cable and plugged it in, but then the printer goes dead--you don't get that nice "click-click" sound when you turn it on, the online light won't light, etc. The printer self-tests ok as long as the cable's not plugged into it. An Epson printer hooked up to the same computer with the same cable works fine. The dip switches on the printer were all set as they should be for an IBM. The printer still works fine with a Tandy cable and computer. Any suggestions? Will it only work with a true IBM or what? Tandy said it should work, they don't know what's wrong, try another cable, etc., etc. Also, know if there's a printwheel he could get that has special characters for Swedish? Please reply to me via e-mail--I try to avoid addictive bboards...:)
tif@cpe.UUCP (04/06/89)
Written 5:50 pm Apr 3, 1989 by cunixa.cc.columbia.edu!walsh in comp.sys.tandy >My classical Chinese professor recently replaced his Tandy PC (it sort >of blew up or something; he wasn't very clear--blamed it on the maid) >with a PC compatible (don't remember the make, a 47th Street Photo >special that weekend). He'd like to keep using his fancy Tandy >daisywheel printer with the compatible. He got a standard parallel >cable and plugged it in, but then the printer goes dead--you don't get >that nice "click-click" sound when you turn it on, the online light This isn't my area of specialization but I have been told that (back when the standards weren't quite so clear and nobody cared much) Tandy's printer interface went a slightly different direction than IBM PC's. Tandy is now in the process of changing to the now-industry-standard. Until then, the typical Tandy-cable is slightly different than the standard cable. Tandy should be selling an IBM-PC-style cable now or very soon. I suspect that that is what you need. P.S. I think it has something to do with the INIT line. <disclaimer's apply and are available upon request> I wonder if that line would hold up if we got sued? Paul Chamberlain Computer Product Engineering, Tandy Corp. {killer | texbell}!cpe!tif
japplega@csm9a.UUCP (Joe Applegate) (04/06/89)
In article <136500014@cpe>, tif@cpe.UUCP writes: > > Written 5:50 pm Apr 3, 1989 by cunixa.cc.columbia.edu!walsh in comp.sys.tandy > >My classical Chinese professor recently replaced his Tandy PC (it sort > >of blew up or something; he wasn't very clear--blamed it on the maid) > >with a PC compatible (don't remember the make, a 47th Street Photo > >special that weekend). He'd like to keep using his fancy Tandy > >daisywheel printer with the compatible. He got a standard parallel > >cable and plugged it in, but then the printer goes dead--you don't get > >that nice "click-click" sound when you turn it on, the online light > > when the standards weren't quite so clear and nobody cared much) Tandy's > printer interface went a slightly different direction than IBM PC's. The real facts are that Tandy has designs their peripherals and computers to NOT use industry standards in order to force their customers to ALWAYS BUY TANDY... Case in point: The Tandy 1000 Non-Compatible hard disk interrupt Reversed drive cable Non-standard JoyStick Non-standard Parallel Port Uses Tandy Specific 8087 (won't use IBM chip) Non-Standard Monitor scan rate Very Non-Standard - Not replacible keyboard! I could beleive that 1 or 2 incompatibilities in a system were the result of lack of standardization but for a computer bought in 1986, such radical departure from standards in every peripheral interface on a machine sold as an IBM compatible could only be acomplished by design! As to the comment that "nobody cared much", every other manufacturer had adapted the IBM PC architecture by 1984... Tandy was still trying to lock in their customer base, while claiming compatibility in 1986! "Tandy, There are so many better values" "Tandy, In Business for OUR business" "Tandy, Sales, Sales, and Sales" - Joe Applegate - ======================STANDARD DISCLAIMER============================ All views and opinions are my own and do not represent the views or opinions of the Colorado School of Mines, whatever they might be. =====================================================================
andyross@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Andrew Rossmann) (04/08/89)
In article <1407@csm9a.UUCP! japplega@csm9a.UUCP (Joe Applegate) writes:
!! when the standards weren't quite so clear and nobody cared much) Tandy's
!! printer interface went a slightly different direction than IBM PC's.
!
!The real facts are that Tandy has designs their peripherals and
!computers to NOT use industry standards in order to force their customers
!to ALWAYS BUY TANDY...
!
!Case in point: The Tandy 1000
!Non-Compatible hard disk interrupt
The SX/TX can use standard PC hard disk controllers after flipping a DIP
switch. The SL/TL only use the IBM PC standard.
!Reversed drive cable
?????
!Non-standard JoyStick
Who uses joysticks???
!Non-standard Parallel Port
Dates back to the Model I. Reduced costs by using an existing design. Can
EASILY be built into motherboard. Doesn't require an expensive DB25
connection and the space it requires.
!Uses Tandy Specific 8087 (won't use IBM chip)
BULL: I'm using a stock 8087 in my SX.
!Non-Standard Monitor scan rate
AS A DEFAULT, Tandy adds an extra blank scan line between lines. This
allows a QUALITY monitor with adjustable vertical height to squash the scan
lines slight closer together for more readable text. A simple MODE 200 will
make it completely compatbile with 'normal' monitors.
!Very Non-Standard - Not replacible keyboard!
Northgate offers a replacement keyboard.
!
!I could beleive that 1 or 2 incompatibilities in a system were the result
!of lack of standardization but for a computer bought in 1986, such radical
!departure from standards in every peripheral interface on a machine sold
!as an IBM compatible could only be acomplished by design!
The 1000 was originally designed to be a PCjr compatible, and was
brought out in 1984, not 1986.
!As to the comment that "nobody cared much", every other manufacturer had
!adapted the IBM PC architecture by 1984... Tandy was still trying to
!lock in their customer base, while claiming compatibility in 1986!
!
!"Tandy, There are so many better values"
!
!"Tandy, In Business for OUR business"
!
!"Tandy, Sales, Sales, and Sales"
!
! - Joe Applegate -
! ======================STANDARD DISCLAIMER============================
! All views and opinions are my own and do not represent the views or
! opinions of the Colorado School of Mines, whatever they might be.
! =====================================================================
If you hate Tandy so much, why do you read this conference???
andyross@ddsw1.MCS.COM, andyross@igloo.UUCPgmadison@pnet02.cts.com (George Madison) (04/09/89)
[Much flamage from Joe Applegate over supposed incompatibilities with the T1000 series, ably refuted by Andy Ross] This is entirely aside from the fact that the T3000/4000/5000 series are about as interchangeable with other machines in their class as any other good PClone. The T1000 series was intended for homes, *small* businesses and schools where the comparatively lower price and the minor peculiarities (which ARE there for good reasons) would make them fit that niche well. Tandy tends to engineer machines for specific niche markets, rather than trying to force ONE design into ALL markets. If you have problems with the design of the 1000 series, go take a look at the 3000's or 4000's. Or quit complaining. |George Madison, a/k/a George The Bear Cub, a/k/a Furr ** BEAR POWER **| |INET: gmadison@pnet02.cts.com 8-{)> ames!elroy!pnet02.cts.com!gmadison| |GEnie: GEORGE.M Arctophiles & Barbophiles Unite! PLink: BEARDLOVER| "We can't afford to be innocent; stand up and face the enemy. It's a do or die situation -- we will be Invincible. And with the power of conviction, there is no sacrifice. It's a do or die situation -- we will be Invincible." ---- "Invincible" by Pat Benatar
leonard@bucket.UUCP (Leonard Erickson) (04/09/89)
In article <1407@csm9a.UUCP> japplega@csm9a.UUCP (Joe Applegate) writes:
<The real facts are that Tandy has designs their peripherals and
<computers to NOT use industry standards in order to force their customers
<to ALWAYS BUY TANDY...
<
<Case in point: The Tandy 1000
<Non-Compatible hard disk interrupt
<Reversed drive cable
<Non-standard JoyStick
<Non-standard Parallel Port
<Uses Tandy Specific 8087 (won't use IBM chip)
<Non-Standard Monitor scan rate
<Very Non-Standard - Not replacible keyboard!
<
<I could beleive that 1 or 2 incompatibilities in a system were the result
<of lack of standardization but for a computer bought in 1986, such radical
<departure from standards in every peripheral interface on a machine sold
<as an IBM compatible could only be acomplished by design!
First of all, the entire Tandy 1000 line was never intended to be PC
compatible. It was intended to be *PCjr* compatible! That takes care of
several of your objections right there (HD interrupt, video, and [maybe]
the keyboard and 8087)
The joysticks and printer port were designed to allow use of exiisting
units (CoCo joysticks, Model 1/3/4 printer cables). Note that the
connector is the *only* non-standard item about the printer port!
Tandy hasn't *tried* to be incompatible for some time, they just don't
see much point in working any harder at compatibility than they have to.
Thus the 1000 series will *never* be "compatible". But they have added
switches to allow you to use standard video and HD.
Note that the 3000, 4000, and 5000 are all *very* compatible. And
there are so many 1000's that there are 1000 versions of most software.
(nobody ignores *that* big a market!)
--
Leonard Erickson ...!tektronix!reed!percival!bucket!leonard
CIS: [70465,203]
"I'm all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools.
Let's start with typewriters." -- Solomon Shortjapplega@csm9a.UUCP (Joe Applegate) (04/10/89)
In article <3254@ddsw1.MCS.COM>, andyross@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Andrew Rossmann) writes: > In article <1407@csm9a.UUCP! japplega@csm9a.UUCP (Joe Applegate) writes: > !! when the standards weren't quite so clear and nobody cared much) Tandy's > !! printer interface went a slightly different direction than IBM PC's. > ! > !The real facts are that Tandy has designs their peripherals and > !computers to NOT use industry standards in order to force their customers > !to ALWAYS BUY TANDY... > ! > !Case in point: The Tandy 1000 > !Non-Compatible hard disk interrupt > The SX/TX can use standard PC hard disk controllers after flipping a DIP > switch. The SL/TL only use the IBM PC standard. gee, thats nice.... I'll gladly trade you my 1000A for an SX or whatever.... The salesman that sold it guarenteed that it would work with a standard hard drive... however by the time I bought one 3 months later he no longer worked for Dandy Tandy... I know shoe stores that don't turn their personel around as fast as Tandy.... and they know more about computers! > !Reversed drive cable > ????? Power cable on the 1000 and 1000A is reversed because Tandy used an OEM drive from Teac... interestingly the folks with TEAC told me the drive used by Tandy is the cheapest they make... and they consider it a sub- standard product.... adding decent drives after mine failed within 6 months required cutting and reversing the cable AFTER I first burned out a drive! > !Non-standard JoyStick > Who uses joysticks??? I do! Most games do! AND I HAVE TO FOR WINDOWS... THE JUNK MOUSE THAT TANDY SELLS IS NOT MS COMPATIBLE! (Digi-Mouse)... of course the salesjerk that sold it said it was! > !Non-standard Parallel Port > Dates back to the Model I. Reduced costs by using an existing design. Can > EASILY be built into motherboard. Doesn't require an expensive DB25 > connection and the space it requires. But does require you to buy a Tandy printer cable even though my printer came with one that works on a real PC! > !Uses Tandy Specific 8087 (won't use IBM chip) > BULL: I'm using a stock 8087 in my SX. Like I said... I'll trade any day... I'd even buy an upgrade from Tandy... seeing they got my money in the first place.... I bought an 8087-3 for an IBM PC... put it in my 1000A and AutoCad went crazy testing confirmed that double precision reals were random numbers! Replaced it 3 times... finally I had to buy Tandy's chip... I tried for 3 months... made numerous calls to Ft. Worthless... no one would tell me what the Tandy required other than TANDY's CHIP... so I paid ~$250 in advance (the 8087-3 cost $100)... My 1000 required an 80C87... this is not a laptop??? The only reason to require a CMOS chip is to force users to buy your over- pricced product! > !Very Non-Standard - Not replacible keyboard! > Northgate offers a replacement keyboard. Where.... and does it only work on the SX and later????? Tandy also has a replacement... but it requires a software driver and so does not work with all software and definately not with Minix! > !I could beleive that 1 or 2 incompatibilities in a system were the result > !of lack of standardization but for a computer bought in 1986, such radical > !departure from standards in every peripheral interface on a machine sold > !as an IBM compatible could only be acomplished by design! > The 1000 was originally designed to be a PCjr compatible, and was > brought out in 1984, not 1986. I bought the 1000A which was advertised and sold as a redesign to by IBM PC compatible. The salesjerk who I bought it from guarenteed 100% IBM Compatiblility... Now I have been told numerous times by Tandy folks that the 1000 series has never been advertised as 100% IBM compatible so some of us from the local Tandy users group went around to over 20 Radio Shacks in the Denver area and asked if the 1000 SX was 100% IBM compatible... 88% of the responses was yes, 100% hardware and software compatible! Now who are we to believe... the administrators or the shoe salemen they hire to sell, sell, and sell... > !"Tandy, There are so many better values" > ! > !"Tandy, In Business for OUR business" > ! > !"Tandy, Sales, Sales, and Sales" > > If you hate Tandy so much, why do you read this conference??? For the same reason that I'm pres. of a Tandy Users Group and run a Tandy support BBS... because I got suckered into spending $2000+ for a system that has caused me nothing but grief and the years I spent getting around the problems engineered into the system by Tandy allow me to: A: help other users who have encoountered the same problems... and if possible let them know that Tandy has a 30 day no question asked return policy.... B: keep other users from making the same mistake that I have... I take great pleasure in the fact that over 30 people have not bought Tandy's after talking to me. And it may be more... after showing our bookstore personel the problems with Tandy's they dropped their Tandy line for PS/2's (which were actually LESS expensive anyway!)... As I have told Ed Juge on several occasions... I will happily stop bad mouthing Tandy if they take back the computer they sold me under false pretenses and give me my money back... I will never buy another Tandy computer... and will do whatever I can to discourage others from makeing the mistake I did! Fool me once shame on you.... fool me twice shame on me! - Joe Applegate - ======================STANDARD DISCLAIMER============================ All views and opinions are my own and do not represent the views or opinions of the Colorado School of Mines, whatever they might be. =====================================================================
uhclem@trsvax.UUCP (04/10/89)
<> Undoubtedly others will go/have gone through this procedure, but here are my old-timers' two-cents worth: S>The real facts are that Tandy has designs their peripherals and S>computers to NOT use industry standards in order to force their customers S>to ALWAYS BUY TANDY... And what was the IBM Microchannel? Cloners Liberty Hall? A "standard" that no one is allowed to copy? Face it, everyone protects themselves. But you are a bit paranoid about the 1000. Baseline note. Tandy has had three generations of 1000s to date and each has addressed and/or changed the following complaints in some way. So keep in mind this rebuttal is for the 1000/1000A, not the SX/TX/SL/TL/S%c/T%c. S>Case in point: The Tandy 1000 Which was designed to compete against the PCjr. The design period ended in Oct. 1984. At that time, the IBM AT was only a rumor, IBM was selling the PC, PC/XT and PCjr. Clones were mostly cheap things from Taiwan. Only two months before the 1000s annoucement, IBM announced it was stopping production of the PCjr. This started the drift more towards the plain-old PC, but the original 1000 was pretty much committed to the PCjr scheme of things at that point. The 1000 did have a PC expansion cage and extended video from day 1. S>Non-Compatible hard disk interrupt Not for the PC Jr. Newer machines eliminate this complaint by providing a strap. S>Reversed drive cable So they force you to set the strap on the drive instead of building a more expensive cable. So what? Many people who bought Model I/III/4's complained about the custom cable it used that prevented you stacking the drives in the order you preferred. The second plug would ALWAYS be drive 2 and so on. So they avoided a customer complaint and made the cable simpler in one shot. I can't see this as a issue unless you have a supply of drives with no DS straps. S>Non-standard JoyStick Compatible with the PCjr. Show me a stock IBM PC or PC/XT that had a joystick! I can show you the original IBM PC that had a cassette port, which no one bothered to clone (good for them.) S>Non-standard Parallel Port Actually, Tandys mistake was that they were standard. They used the Centronics printer interface standard, as they had for several years. But IBM used 90% of the Centronics interface standard with deviations, like adding a few signals and changing a few others. IBM also switched the job of generating the print strobe to software, whereas everyone up to that point used a one-shot since the Centronics spec called for a 1.5usec pulse all the time. So, PC printer drivers are timing dependent thanks to IBM's lack of compatibility with a good standard. Now, whom is "non-standard" with whom? S>Uses Tandy Specific 8087 (won't use IBM chip) Um, if you have information of a supply of 8087s other than the ones from Intel or someone who is a second-source, I think Intel would like to know so that they can sue that sucker. The bottom line is that Tandy is using the same part you can buy anywhere else. At most they sand the Intel part number off and put their own on (dumb). S>Non-Standard Monitor scan rate Again, compare it against a PCjr. It actually has more modes than the PCjr and that was done for competition purposes. S>Very Non-Standard - Not replacible keyboard! I can't say that it is the same as the PCjr because it isn't. No infrared support. But you can get a little adapter and use a standard PC keyboard on a 1000 if you desire. And there are some outfits that that sell a 1000 equivalent keyboard with a PC/XT or AT layout. All the newer 1000 systems (SL/TL) come with AT-enhanced keyboards anyway. An interesting side note is that people I have talked to that worked on the original PC development say the keyboard interface used in the PC was copied from the R/S Model II. S>I could beleive that 1 or 2 incompatibilities in a system were the result S>of lack of standardization but for a computer bought in 1986, such radical S>departure from standards in every peripheral interface on a machine sold S>as an IBM compatible could only be acomplished by design! Again, you are comparing alar-free apples and watermellons. At the same time, the marketing people didn't make it easy to tell since they did market it as a PC "compatible" system, although they were probably talking about the card cage. Recall that the previous year Tandy released the 2000 that did not have a PC-style card cage and they took considerable heat because of it, so they would be sure to list that as a big feature. And there were design flaws or shortcomings that cleared up over time, but every manufacturer has those. Anyone care to recall the original IBM AT hard disk and controller? S>As to the comment that "nobody cared much", every other manufacturer had S>adapted the IBM PC architecture by 1984... Tandy was still trying to S>lock in their customer base, while claiming compatibility in 1986! Hmmm, the 1000A came out in November of 1984. But the PC architecture is not perfect. If it was, then why are we talking about Microchannel and EISA? Why didn't Apple, Next, Sun, MIPS, DEC, and all other IBM products switch over? Perhaps they needed more than four interrupt sources, or a DMA that would transfer a sector to any address in memory, not just convenient ones. On the other hand, Apollo has 68030 systems with PC-AT card cages.... Better check the canary. :-) <My opinion, and not that of my employer who is still trying to sell those flavor-radios(tm) in attractive Miami-Vice(tm) colors.> "Thank you, Uh Clem." Frank Durda IV @ <trsvax!uhclem> ...decvax!microsoft!trsvax!uhclem ...sys1!hal6000!trsvax!uhclem Innovation != Compatibility
tif@cpe.UUCP (04/11/89)
Written 12:17 am Apr 10, 1989 by csm9a.UUCP!japplega in cpe:comp.sys.tandy >Now I have been told numerous times by Tandy folks that the 1000 series has >never been advertised as 100% IBM compatible so some of us from the local >Tandy users group went around to over 20 Radio Shacks in the Denver area >and asked if the 1000 SX was 100% IBM compatible... 88% of the responses >was yes, 100% hardware and software compatible! It must have been too small of a sample size 'cause I'm sure that the 1000 is more than 88% compatible. < This space intentionally left blank because any time I post useful information, someone gripes. > Paul Chamberlain Computer Product Engineering, Tandy Corp. {killer | texbell}!cpe!tif
andyross@igloo.Scum.COM (Andrew Rossmann) (04/11/89)
In article <1411@csm9a.UUCP> japplega@csm9a.UUCP (Joe Applegate) writes: !In article <3254@ddsw1.MCS.COM>, andyross@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Andrew Rossmann) writes: !! !The real facts are that Tandy has designs their peripherals and !! !computers to NOT use industry standards in order to force their customers !! !to ALWAYS BUY TANDY... !! ! !! !Case in point: The Tandy 1000 !! !Non-Compatible hard disk interrupt !! The SX/TX can use standard PC hard disk controllers after flipping a DIP !! switch. The SL/TL only use the IBM PC standard. ! !gee, thats nice.... I'll gladly trade you my 1000A for an SX or whatever.... !The salesman that sold it guarenteed that it would work with a standard !hard drive... however by the time I bought one 3 months later he no longer ^^^^ ^^^^^ !worked for Dandy Tandy... I know shoe stores that don't turn their personel !around as fast as Tandy.... and they know more about computers! Notice he said drive, not controller. !! !Non-standard JoyStick !! Who uses joysticks??? ! !I do! Most games do! !AND I HAVE TO FOR WINDOWS... THE JUNK MOUSE THAT TANDY SELLS IS NOT MS !COMPATIBLE! (Digi-Mouse)... of course the salesjerk that sold it said it !was! The salesjerk was obviously wrong. The DigiMouse was out before a true standard for mice was around. Many famous mice (such as PCMouse) were not Microsoft compatible at the time. Tandy's latest serial mouse is not only compatible with Microsoft, you are expected to use the Microsoft drivers! !! !Uses Tandy Specific 8087 (won't use IBM chip) !! BULL: I'm using a stock 8087 in my SX. ! !Like I said... I'll trade any day... I'd even buy an upgrade from Tandy... !seeing they got my money in the first place.... !I bought an 8087-3 for an IBM PC... put it in my 1000A and AutoCad went crazy !testing confirmed that double precision reals were random numbers! !Replaced it 3 times... finally I had to buy Tandy's chip... I tried for !3 months... made numerous calls to Ft. Worthless... no one would tell me !what the Tandy required other than TANDY's CHIP... so I paid ~$250 in advance !(the 8087-3 cost $100)... My 1000 required an 80C87... this is not a laptop??? !The only reason to require a CMOS chip is to force users to buy your over- !pricced product! This is the first time I ever heard of this. But then, the 1000A went out of production several years ago. !! !Very Non-Standard - Not replacible keyboard! !! Northgate offers a replacement keyboard. ! !Where.... and does it only work on the SX and later????? !Tandy also has a replacement... but it requires a software driver and !so does not work with all software and definately not with Minix! The Northgate is supposed to be compatible with all, although I haven't seen one personally (but would like to know of others who have tried it.) The key layout may be non-standard, but it is highly-compatible. With a small program, I can emulate, fairly well, an extended keyboard. !! The 1000 was originally designed to be a PCjr compatible, and was !! brought out in 1984, not 1986. ! !I bought the 1000A which was advertised and sold as a redesign to by IBM !PC compatible. The salesjerk who I bought it from guarenteed 100% IBM !Compatiblility... The 1000A was in truth a minor upgrade, reducing the parts count required, and adding the 8087 socket. !Now who are we to believe... the administrators or the shoe salemen they !hire to sell, sell, and sell... ! - Joe Applegate - I doubt if many 'big name' sellers are all that much better. Not all salesmen are total dolts. Some few are surprisingly good. The person I bought my Model III from in '83 was extremely knowledgable. Like anything else, you have shop around. andyross@ddsw1.MCS.COM, andyross@igloo.UUCP
bevans@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Brian Evans) (04/11/89)
My question is, "Who the Hell in the Head Division decided that the PLUS RS232 port would be a 25 pin FEMALE instead of MALE?" Not one computer center in the area had a female-male gender bender. I ended up going to a ComputerLand to get a 6 ft cable with the appropriate connecters on the ends. I suppose that one of these days I MIGHT actually enjoy having a cable that runs to the equipment as opposed to have the equipment have a cable that run to the computer, but I doubt it. -- Brian Evans "In any formula, constants (especially bevans@hmcvax.bitnet those obtained from engineering bevans@jarthur.claremont.edu textbooks) are to be treated as or !uunet!jarthur!bevans variables."
reyn@trsvax.UUCP (04/11/89)
Apologies to those who are getting tired of this extended flame session, but Joe has remarked that the Digi-Mouse won't work with MS-Windows. I don't know what your situation was, but I've used a Digi-Mouse with Windows and it worked just fine. Possibly you were trying to use the mouse with the MicroSoft driver rather than the Mouse.Sys written for the Tandy mouse. All in all, you seem to be about three years behind the times on your knowledge of Tandy products. Judging by what I've seen since I've worked at Tandy, there has been a tremendous effort to rectify exactly the types of things you've been coplaining about. Virtually every deficiency you have stated for your 1000A no longer exists on the 1000 SL or 1000 TL. For instance, the Hard Drive Interrupt is now selectable, and comes factory configured to the IBM "standard". The Keyboard now has an identical layout to the PS/2 keyboard. A nine-pin serial port is standard and accepts either the Tandy Serial or LogiTech serial mouse (no more Digi-Mouse). Now it is true that the 1000's still have those short card slots, and the 640 by 200 16 color mode isn't a "standard" IBM mode, and the A/D D/A sound chip isn't found on the PS/2, and the built in joystick port (which IBM never had) is designed to fit Tandy joysticks, and IBM doesn't have MS-DOS in ROM .... but most people are able to overlook those shortcomings. Anyway, I'm sure you,re not about to be converted, but you should make a better effort to know your enemy. In a very real sense you've already won judging by the products Tandy is now selling. John Reynolds DeskMate is my life!!!
bevans@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Brian Evans) (04/12/89)
The DigiMouse IS Microsoft Mouse compaitble. In fact, the driver they give you IS the Microsoft Mouse driver. -- Brian Evans "In any formula, constants (especially bevans@hmcvax.bitnet those obtained from engineering bevans@jarthur.claremont.edu textbooks) are to be treated as or !uunet!jarthur!bevans variables."
rbc@cuuxb.ATT.COM (~XT6511100~Rick Clark~C24~G15~6011~) (04/12/89)
In article <1370@cunixc.cc.columbia.edu> walsh@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Edward E Walsh) writes: >My classical Chinese professor recently replaced his Tandy PC (it sort >of blew up or something; he wasn't very clear--blamed it on the maid) >with a PC compatible (don't remember the make, a 47th Street Photo >special that weekend). He'd like to keep using his fancy Tandy >daisywheel printer with the compatible. He got a standard parallel >cable and plugged it in, but then the printer goes dead--you don't get >that nice "click-click" sound when you turn it on, the online light >won't light, etc. The printer self-tests ok as long as the cable's >not plugged into it. An Epson printer hooked up to the same computer >with the same cable works fine. The dip switches on the printer were >all set as they should be for an IBM. The printer still works fine >with a Tandy cable and computer. Any suggestions? Will it only work >with a true IBM or what? Tandy said it should work, they don't know >what's wrong, try another cable, etc., etc. > >Also, know if there's a printwheel he could get that has special >characters for Swedish? > >Please reply to me via e-mail--I try to avoid addictive bboards...:) For some reason this sparked a flame war by third parties about Tandy incompatibility, and no one got around to answering the poor guys question, unless they did so by e-mail as requested. I was hoping to see the answer posted as I had the same problem trying to connect my Tandy DMP130 printer to an AT&T PC 7300. Power on does not go through the initialization cycle, and the printer is unusable. I eventually figured it out from the pin outs in the tech manuals. The PC puts out its INIT lead on pin 31, while the printer is expecting it on pin 33. The PC puts out GND on pin 33. The INIT input is active low strobe, so the GND is holding the printer hostage. The proper thing to do would be to invert pins 31 and 33 at one end. What I did was just disconnect pin 33 in the cable. I didn't really care if my PC could send an init signal to the printer. I don't think the driver knows how to anyway. My PC is not an IBM compatible, so it is not guaranteed to be the same situation as an IBM PC, but disconnecting pin 33 is a safe enough experiment. -- =Richard B. Clark Lisle, IL ...!{att,lll-crg}!cuuxb!rbc OR cuuxb!rbc@arpa.att.com
japplega@csm9a.UUCP (Joe Applegate) (04/13/89)
In article <834@jarthur.Claremont.EDU>, bevans@jarthur.Claremont.EDU (Brian Evans) writes: > > The DigiMouse IS Microsoft Mouse compaitble. In fact, the driver > they give you IS the Microsoft Mouse driver. You are correct... it was made by MicroSoft but it was made to Tandy Specs... The driver that comes with it is equivelent to vs. 1 of the MS Mouse. The hardware uses a different interrupt and different addressing from the IBM version and newer versions of the MS Mouse software and their menu manger do not work... the software also has a major bug that causes it to leave trails (shadows?) in the 640X200 BW mode, thus making it useless for MS Word. It also does not work with Windows which has it's own Mouse driver in it's overlay! A few years back I talked to some folks at MS who told me that they offered to make Tandy Digi-Mouse versions of their newer drivers, fix the Word bug, and write a windows driver for the Digi-Mouse but Tandy chose not to pay to support the customers who had bought the product (on the promise of MS compatiblity I might add!)... instead choosing to tell their customers to buy another mouse! I offered and still offer to try to fix the driver and support it in the public domain if only Tandy will release the source! MS said it is Tandy's option! In our users group alone their were 10 people with Digi-Mice on their Tandy 1000 or 1000A... and they are perhaps the most vocally opposed to Tandy... What I want to know is that once Tandy has suceeded in totally alienated their user base what will they do next? It's so easy to say... ok here is the source for the mouse, if you can fix the bugs fine... after all they don't sell the thing anymore... and in one conversation I had with Fast Eddy Juge, he denied they ever sold it! Of course they could offer a mother board to upgrade the 1000 to an SX or SL also... but why please customers when you can SELL... SELL... SELL... "Get em out by Friday.... I've always said that Cash... Cash... Cash... can do anything well!" Peter Gabriel - Joe Applegate - ======================STANDARD DISCLAIMER============================ All views and opinions are my own and do not represent the views or opinions of the Colorado School of Mines, whatever they might be. =====================================================================
japplega@csm9a.UUCP (Joe Applegate) (04/13/89)
In article <193300123@trsvax>, reyn@trsvax.UUCP writes: > Anyway, I'm sure you,re not about to be converted, but you should make a > better effort to know your enemy. In a very real sense you've already won > judging by the products Tandy is now selling. Perhaps you are better off... but I still have a computer that cost me over $2000 by the time I was through, which was advertised to me as 100% compatible, and isn't, and which has no upgrade path other than the garbage can... As far as the newer Tandy's go: I am not impressed... last year we evaluated the 4000 and I found it to have some major flaws... a drive cable that was so short it kept popping off the hard disk... expanded memory that wouldn't work with Personal Consultant Plus or AutoCad... in fact we never did get either of these to work, and they work fine on our Kaypro 386's (which cost quite a bit LESS than the Tandy's anyway!) And then there is the new SL/TL computers... imagine a computer with the worlds poorest designed integrated package built in... A package that does not support industry standard peripherals or file transfer protocols! > John Reynolds > DeskMate is my life!!! Deskmate is worth every cent you pay for it... "Tandy, there are so many better values" - Joe Applegate - ======================STANDARD DISCLAIMER============================ All views and opinions are my own and do not represent the views or opinions of the Colorado School of Mines, whatever they might be. =====================================================================
japplega@csm9a.UUCP (Joe Applegate) (04/13/89)
In article <193300123@trsvax>, reyn@trsvax.UUCP writes: > but Joe has remarked that the Digi-Mouse won't work with MS-Windows. I > don't know what your situation was, but I've used a Digi-Mouse with Windows > and it worked just fine. Possibly you were trying to use the mouse with > the MicroSoft driver rather than the Mouse.Sys written for the Tandy mouse. > > John Reynolds > DeskMate is my life!!! Stick to DeskCrate, John.... Microsoft Windows does not use any MOUSE.SYS... and the MOUSE.SYS that comes with the MS Mouse will NOT work with the Tandy Digi-Mouse AT ALL! MS Windows uses a reentrant device driver that is a part of the windows user.exe module... this is required as a result of the multi-tasking nature of Windows (another reason it is far superior to DeskCrate)... I have the source for the mouse.drv that supports the MS Mouse but without addressing and interrupts for the Tandy version I have little hope of conversion... Yes, I could throw the Tandy mouse into the trash BUT ON A MACHINE WITH ONLY 3 SLOTS where do I fit another Mouse???? I have heard from several sources at Tandy that there is a driver for the Digi-Mouse and Windows that was developed at Tandy... but since their is not much money to be made supporting past customers they have never released it (I admit that is my opinion why it is not available, but everyone who's mentioned it said they didn't have it and why don't I just buy a new mouse)... - Joe Applegate - ======================STANDARD DISCLAIMER============================ All views and opinions are my own and do not represent the views or opinions of the Colorado School of Mines, whatever they might be. =====================================================================
georgem@microsoft.UUCP (George Moore) (04/16/89)
In article <1419@csm9a.UUCP> japplega@csm9a.UUCP (Joe Applegate) writes: >In article <193300123@trsvax>, reyn@trsvax.UUCP writes: >> [... much deleted ...] >> In a very real sense you've already won judging by the products >> Tandy is now selling. > > But I still have a computer that cost me over $2000 by the time I was > through, [...] and which has no upgrade path other than the garbage can... I find it amusing that Mr. Applegate some how expects his 4 year old computer to be just as good as a machine you buy in the store today, and if it isn't, then one should somehow magically be able to upgrade it (for a nominal fee, of course. Users don't expect upgrades for free unless they are software ;-). When this discussion was first started, Mr. Applegate was attempting to tell everyone that Tandy's machines weren't any good and to stay away from them. After several people at Tandy posted articles addressing each of his compatibility problems, which are fixed in the current generation of machines, his argument degraded into a "b-b-but what about *my* machine?" Tell me, if you purchased a 1984 Porsche 944, would you expect to somehow upgrade this into a 1989 Turbo-944? Of course not. Besides the differences in engines, there are hundreds of enhancements elsewhere in the body. You would wind up paying far more than the cost of a new 1989 Turbo-944 to upgrade your 1984 944. Computers go through evolutionary changes just like any other product. One doesn't expect any manufacturer to get *any* product right on the first try. Or even on the second try sometimes. Please don't turn this into a "computer users need free upgrades" vs. "computer users have to pay for upgrades" flame-fest. -George Moore (georgem@microsoft.com.UUCP) [As usual, these ramblings are my own and not of my employer who probably wouldn't even know I worked here except that I often show up in tank-tops and bicycling shorts just to piss off the vendors in the front lobby...]
jeff@cullsj.UUCP (Jeffrey C. Fried) (04/17/89)
gave any indication that the 2000 was not compatible, and to the best of my knowledge Tandy continued this policy up until the last 2000 was dumped. For those unfamiliar with the differences, the two major ones are that the base address for the video moves upward depending on the amount of memory you have, and, the serial port uses a completely different chip. To be fair to Tandy one could argue that they had constructed a "better" machine (the 80186 is almost as fast as a 80286), but that's not how they sold it; it was sold implicitly as a compatible. With the 3000 they've become compatible. The only problems i've observed could be ascribed to the failure of particular software manufacturers to test their products properly. For example one problem was due to the usage of a particular bios call that in one version of the operating system failed; had they tried their product on a Tandy for at least two minutes they would have observed the problem. In summation, i have to agree with the person who complained that the 1000 was not compatible in that i'm sure that it was NEVER made clear to those who purchased the machine. However, it is also important to say that they are perhaps no less dishonest than the rest of the used-car- turned-computer-salespersons. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Jeff Fried UUCP: ...!ames!cullsj!jeff San Jose, CA, 95134 (clearly work) San Mateo, CA (home) (408) 434-6636 (415) 349-3744 Because a liar speaks the truth, does not mean that the truth is a lie. Disclaimer: Opinions expressed are solely those of the author.
jeff@cullsj.UUCP (Jeffrey C. Fried) (04/22/89)
I disagree with Mr. Moore's analysis of Mr. Applegates complaints concerning compatibility. Radio Crap could, if they had any integrity, offer upgrades to earlier, flawed, versions of the 1000. Moore's analogy doesn't reflect the problem at hand; Radio Crap produced new versions of the machine with bug fixes, not enhancements. They could have offered these same fixes to owners of existing machines, but they would rather you tossed out your old machine and purchased another - they make more money that way. As i understand it, Mr. Applegate's main complaint is the lack of support for those people who have placed their trust in Radio Crap. And in that i have to agree with him. They should post a sign at the front of each store which says "either we don't know what we're doing, or we don't care; caveat emptor". ... Jeff Fried P.S. I owned a Model III and now own a model 3000.
walsh@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Edward E Walsh) (04/24/89)
Gee, looks like my original posting struck a nerve.
I had asked what to do for my professor's non-Tandy computer + Tandy
printer incompatibility problem. He had a working, standard parallel
cable that seemed to incapacitate the printer. Tandy couldn't explain
what was going wrong, but wanted to blame the computer or cable.
I got a couple of responses, much appreciated, suggesting pin
re-assignments that might explain/fix the problem. When I mentioned
these to my professor, he told me Tandy had just sold him a Tandy
"standard" parallel printer cable and the printer was working
perfectly fine now. I assume the cable has the fixes built in.
Not very nice of Tandy, I'd say.
Thanks for the help, everyone.
--Ned Walsh