[comp.sys.next] NeXT AppleTalk

wln@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (William L Nussbaum) (10/28/90)

...Given that AppleTalk is implemented over RS-422, how difficult would it be
to implement AppleTalk directly for the NeXT's serial ports (they are 422's,
aren't they?) and make a Macintosh think it's printing to a PostScript printer
(or spooler) when the NeXT is actually doing the work of a printer as a
background job?  Has it already been done?  If so, by whom?  If not, is it
possible and is it a realistic project?

  - Lee
| William illiam Lee Nussbaum, Jr.
|   >> InterNet: wln@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu
|      >> CompuServe: 72401.3554 (@compuserve.com)
|  <attach usual non-representation disclaimer>

saunders@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Kevin Saunders) (10/31/90)

In article <1990Oct28.020457.10908@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> wln@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (William L Nussbaum) writes:
>...Given that AppleTalk is implemented over RS-422, how difficult would it be
>to implement AppleTalk directly for the NeXT's serial ports?

Uh, I had this great idea too, and thought for a few moments about it.
Having had some experience with the 8530 and Apple's LocalTalk (.MPP)
driver (color me black and blue), I can state forthrightly that
1) it might work 2) and would bring your machine to its knees with
the interrupts required to service the 3-character buffer on the 8530,
or, alternatively, grovel at the feet of the 8530 waiting for the next
character to arrive.

So somebody out there needs to develop a NeXTBus AppleTalk board!

Rats,
kevin

Kevin Eric Saunders, Systems Programmer, Cornell U/Info-Tech/Network Resources
   cqu@cornellc.cit.cornell.edu




 

   
-- 

Kevin Eric Saunders
   cqu@cornellc.cit.cornell.edu

dan@gacvx2.gac.edu (11/01/90)

In article <1990Oct31.144607.25123@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu>, saunders@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Kevin Saunders) writes:
> 
> So somebody out there needs to develop a NeXTBus AppleTalk board!
> 
> Rats,
> kevin
> 
> Kevin Eric Saunders, Systems Programmer, Cornell U/Info-Tech/Network Resources
>    cqu@cornellc.cit.cornell.edu
> 

This NeXTbus board would need not be more than an "Internal" Shiva FastPath on
a board.  It would be tough to justify spending $1600 (FastPath at edu pricing
levels) for a board that would hook a single NeXT to an AppleTalk.

-- 
Dan Boehlke                    Internet:  dan@gac.edu
Campus Network Manager         BITNET:    dan@gacvax1.bitnet
Gustavus Adolphus College
St. Peter, MN 56082 USA        Phone:     (507)931-7596

minich@d.cs.okstate.edu (Robert Minich) (11/01/90)

saunders@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Kevin Saunders) writes:
| So somebody out there needs to develop a NeXTBus AppleTalk board!
 
From article <1990Oct31.114439.133@gacvx2.gac.edu>, by dan@gacvx2.gac.edu:
| This NeXTbus board would need not be more than an "Internal" Shiva FastPath on
| a board.  It would be tough to justify spending $1600 (FastPath at edu pricing
| levels) for a board that would hook a single NeXT to an AppleTalk.

  Why not be more creative and do a little box that buffer LocalTalk (ie
240Kbps line) and then blast that over as fast as possible when the NeXT
was the target of the packet (broadcast included)? Perhaps this could connect
up through the DSP port? 
  How fast can the NeXT talk to the serial chip if external clocking is used?
On a mac, this can get up to around 900Kbps. At any rate, I imagine the expense
of a building a NeXTBus anything would far outweight the cost of everything
else. Ick.
-- 
|_    /| | Robert Minich            |
|\'o.O'  | Oklahoma State University| A fanatic is one who sticks to 
|=(___)= | minich@d.cs.okstate.edu  | his guns -- whether they are 
|   U    | - Ackphtth               | loaded or not.

eps@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott) (11/02/90)

In article <1990Oct31.114439.133@gacvx2.gac.edu> dan@gacvx2.gac.edu writes:
>          It would be tough to justify spending $1600 (FastPath at edu pricing
>levels) for a board that would hook a single NeXT to an AppleTalk.

We found it tough to justify spending for a single FastPath to
connect many, many NeXTs to many, many Macs.  My department
finally did it, and no regrets.  The cost "per machine" is quite
reasonable, and the performance is far better than we expected
(although we still prefer dropping Ethernet cards in Macs).
EtherTalk and MacTCP are much better than plain ol' LocalTalk.

Sometimes I think the only reason we still bother with LocalTalk
is for the LaserWriters-that-won't-go away.  I'd love to use the
NTX SCSI port, but apparently Apple doesn't support it for
anything but a font disk.  The NeXT laser printers are *much*
nicer, but the "only 13 fonts" limitation is crippling, and
Mr. Blue Pencil still won't approve purchasing Adobe Plus Pack
("why spend $500 for what you can already do with a
LaserWriter?").  The Mac users are chuckling because they can
get screen fonts for 33 *families* for free by anonymous FTP.
And you wonder why we're still doing DTP on Macs...

					-=EPS=-

glenn@heaven.woodside.ca.us (Glenn Reid) (11/03/90)

In article <998@toaster.SFSU.EDU> eps@cs.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott) writes:
>			   The NeXT laser printers are *much*
>nicer, but the "only 13 fonts" limitation is crippling, and
>Mr. Blue Pencil still won't approve purchasing Adobe Plus Pack
>("why spend $500 for what you can already do with a
>LaserWriter?").

Now you can buy individual typeface packages or other combinations
of fonts, and the "only 13 fonts" limitation should be a thing of the
past.  You can also buy some more interesting fonts than those in the
Plus Pack, making your NeXT printer more valuable than just another
LaserWriter.

Disclaimer: we re-sell Adobe fonts, but this isn't intended as an
advertisement.

Glenn

-- 
 Glenn Reid				RightBrain Software
 glenn@heaven.woodside.ca.us		PostScript/NeXT developers
 ..{adobe,next}!heaven!glenn		415-851-1785