walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Todd Walk) (12/10/90)
Does anyone know how tough it would be to make a Mac Classic run at 16Mhz with a 16Mhz 68000? I know that this chip is used in the portable and in several printers. (Sounds like a good future Apple upgrade [expensive] deal to me.) Also, why did Apple bother to put a ext. floppy port on their new computers? How many people actually use this port? I know that this is mostly on the computers for the educational programs, but it has been my experience that people wait in line to use the Macs with hard drives (irregardless of the number of floppy drives) and practically totally ignore the Macs wo/ hard drives unless they are desparate. (To anyone at UIUC, ever notice the lines to use the Macs at the Union (all with hd) and the people waiting to use the Mac IIs in the ME building while the 50-75 floppy based Mac pluses are unused exect by one or two desperate souls.) My suggestion, for use on the Mac Classic at least (since this is supposed to be the affordable Mac...), make a 25 pin centronics parrallel port. Include in the new 512K roms the code to translate quickdraw to bit-images, and include on disk a bunch of printer description files so that output could be custimized to your printer. Notice that this would allow both text and graphics output by using your printer's graphics modes. I'd like to hear replies to this. Todd Walk walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu walk@mrcne
6500erik@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Erik Adams) (12/11/90)
In article <1990Dec10.031031.24801@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Todd Walk) writes: > [stuff deleted about 16mhz Classic] >Also, why did Apple bother to put a ext. floppy port on their new computers? >How many people actually use this port? I know that this is mostly on the >computers for the educational programs, but it has been my experience that >people wait in line to use the Macs with hard drives (irregardless of the >number of floppy drives) and practically totally ignore the Macs wo/ hard >drives unless they are desparate. (To anyone at UIUC, ever notice the lines > [more stuff deleted] >My suggestion, for use on the Mac Classic at least (since this is supposed to >be the affordable Mac...), make a 25 pin centronics parrallel port. > [even more stuff deleted] >I'd like to hear replies to this. > Todd Walk > walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu > walk@mrcne Personally, I use only the internal and the external floppy drives on my 512ke, and I do it quite contentedly. I persist in thinking that while a hard-disk is fast becoming a necessity (I will have one soon, too), it is not yet. If you don't feel the need to be on "the bleeding edge" of technology, floppies are fine. As for putting a 25 pin centronics port on a Mac, I believe Apple already tried that on a machine. It was called a Lisa. Erik 6500erik@ucsbuxa.bitnet or 6500erik@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu "I'm a fan of Milli Vanilli now, but I wasn't before."
gross@umiami.ir.miami.edu (Mondo) (12/11/90)
In article <1990Dec10.031031.24801@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Todd Walk) writes: > > My suggestion, for use on the Mac Classic at least (since this is supposed to > be the affordable Mac...), make a 25 pin centronics parrallel port. > Include in the new 512K roms the code to translate quickdraw to bit-images, > and include on disk a bunch of printer description files so that output > could be custimized to your printer. Notice that this would allow both > text and graphics output by using your printer's graphics modes. Yeah, it seems silly that while Apple wants to join the rest of the world with all their ways of interconnection that they refuse to add something as basic as a RS-232C interface. I can see what Apple's reasoning would be: in public: "RS-232C would not deliver the type of performance our users expect from the Mac." in private: "By using proprietary techonology, you either buy our stuff or suffer." And I mean that while they helped establish SCSI as a stnadard, they shouldn't ignore others so entrenched as RS-232C. > > I'd like to hear replies to this. > Todd Walk > walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu > > walk@mrcne There you go. -- Jason Gross Comp Sci Ugrad University of Miami Class of '91 (?) =========================================================================== Hey, wanna save the world? | Got sumtin' to say? gross@umiami.bitnet Nuke a Godless, Communist, | Pick and choose! gross@umiami.ir.miami.edu gay whale for Christ. | gross@miavax.ir.miami.edu - Anonymous | jgross@umbio.med.miami.edu =========================================================================== The University of Miami has a lovely fountain.
fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (Steve Hix) (12/11/90)
In article <1990Dec10.192355.7500@umiami.ir.miami.edu>, gross@umiami.ir.miami.edu (Mondo) writes: > > Yeah, it seems silly that while Apple wants to join the rest of the > world with all their ways of interconnection that they refuse to add > something as basic as a RS-232C interface. > > And I mean that while they helped establish SCSI as a stnadard, they shouldn't > ignore others so entrenched as RS-232C. They didn't. The serial-port protocol on the Mac is RS-422. I think I remember that RS-232C is a subset of it, or at worst can be handled from the port. Note that the ImageWriter II uses an RS-232C connection. Worked that way on Apple//'s and even ///'s. Straight plug-in on the Mac from day one. (Hope the numbers are right...but then, what do I know? I just write about software.) -- ------------ The only drawback with morning is that it comes at such an inconvenient time of day. ------------
johnston@oscar.ccm.udel.edu (12/11/90)
In article <1990Dec10.192355.7500@umiami.ir.miami.edu>, gross@umiami.ir.miami.edu (Mondo) writes... >In article <1990Dec10.031031.24801@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>, walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Todd Walk) writes: >> >> My suggestion, for use on the Mac Classic at least (since this is supposed to >> be the affordable Mac...), make a 25 pin centronics parrallel port. >Yeah, it seems silly that while Apple wants to join the rest of the >world with all their ways of interconnection that they refuse to add >something as basic as a RS-232C interface. > >I can see what Apple's reasoning would be: > > in public: "RS-232C would not deliver the type of performance our > users expect from the Mac." > > in private: "By using proprietary techonology, you either buy our > stuff or suffer." >And I mean that while they helped establish SCSI as a stnadard, they shouldn't >ignore others so entrenched as RS-232C. Sorry ... the 25-pin centronics interface may be common, but RS-232C it ain't. RS-232C is a serial transmission protocol. Many computing devices such as IBM PC XT's used a DB-25 plug for RS-232 cables, but the protocol defines the functions of the wires rather than a particular plug or cable arrangement. Apple uses the RS-232 compatible RS-422 protocol for it's serial communications; the mini-8 plug and pin definitions may be unusual, but not 'proprietary'. Even IBM switched from the DB-25 to a DB-9 plug when it introduced the AT; RS-232 cable confusion was not invented by Apple! The Centronics interface is/was a DEC invention, used for parallel rather than serial data transmission. Parallel == one wire per data bit. This is the protocol that is being phased out, for the most part. Even PC-compatible printers are increasingly going with the serial protocol because it is simpler to implement for LAN-shared printers. I bet the customer would REALLY squawk if forced to buy parallel interface laser printers which SOME companies like to sell ... makes for plenty of business for the switch-box companies, that's for sure. Bill (johnston@oscar.ccm.udel.edu) Bill Johnston; 38 Chambers St.; Newark, DE 19711; (302)368-1949
russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) (12/11/90)
In article <7774@hub.ucsb.edu> 6500erik@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Erik Adams) writes: >In article <1990Dec10.031031.24801@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Todd Walk) writes: > >As for putting a 25 pin centronics port on a Mac, I believe Apple >already tried that on a machine. It was called a Lisa. So what's wrong with the Lisa? BTW, the Lisa did not have a parallel port standard-- it had a DB25 RS232 and a DB25 RS422 port-- with full handshaking available, no less. There were two and three port parallel cards. -- Matthew T. Russotto russotto@eng.umd.edu russotto@wam.umd.edu .sig under construction, like the rest of this campus.
siegel@endor.uucp (Rich Siegel) (12/11/90)
In article <1990Dec10.192355.7500@umiami.ir.miami.edu> gross@umiami.ir.miami.edu (Mondo) writes: >Yeah, it seems silly that while Apple wants to join the rest of the >world with all their ways of interconnection that they refuse to add >something as basic as a RS-232C interface. Every Macintosh since the first one comes with two RS-422 ports, which can be adapted to RS-232 with the proper cable. However, they were intelligent enough to realize that they didn't need to use all 25 pins of the connector, and given the space constraints, the original design team opted to use the DB-9 (and later a DIN-8) for the connectors. Either port can be driven at up to 57.6Kbaud, and with proper programming of the driver, even faster (as in the case of AppleTalk, which uses the serial port at 230.4Kbaud). It's hardly proprietary, though. R. Rich Siegel Symantec Languages Group Internet: siegel@endor.harvard.edu "...she's dressed in yellow, she says 'Hello, come sit next to me, you fine fellow..."
russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) (12/11/90)
In article <4278@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (Steve Hix) writes: >In article <1990Dec10.192355.7500@umiami.ir.miami.edu>, gross@umiami.ir.miami.edu (Mondo) writes: >> >> Yeah, it seems silly that while Apple wants to join the rest of the >> world with all their ways of interconnection that they refuse to add >> something as basic as a RS-232C interface. >> >> And I mean that while they helped establish SCSI as a stnadard, they shouldn't >> ignore others so entrenched as RS-232C. > >They didn't. > >The serial-port protocol on the Mac is RS-422. I think I remember that RS-232C >is a subset of it, or at worst can be handled from the port. > >Note that the ImageWriter II uses an RS-232C connection. Worked that way on >Apple//'s and even ///'s. Straight plug-in on the Mac from day one. > >(Hope the numbers are right...but then, what do I know? I just write about >software.) > Jason Gross has parallel confused with RS-232C. Though I wish Apple's serial ports had one more output handshake. -- Matthew T. Russotto russotto@eng.umd.edu russotto@wam.umd.edu .sig under construction, like the rest of this campus.
6500rgls@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Randall S Geels) (12/11/90)
RE: external floppy port on Classic One reason I'm glad my Mac plus has an external floppy port is that if the internal one ever breaks (what something on a Mac plus break? you say) I can buy a *new* external drive for about $100. However, if I decide to trade in my broken internal for a new one from Apple I can expect to pay over $200. The only thing that putting everything internal does is force you (or at least most people who balk at poking around inside their Mac) to buy everything from Apple.
6500rgls@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Randall S Geels) (12/11/90)
In the referenced article, Todd Walk writes: >My suggestion, for use on the Mac Classic at least (since this is supposed to >be the affordable Mac...), make a 25 pin centronics parrallel port. >Include in the new 512K roms the code to translate quickdraw to bit-images, >and include on disk a bunch of printer description files so that output >could be custimized to your printer. Notice that this would allow both >text and graphics output by using your printer's graphics modes. Apple doesn't need to do this since they already have! Although they use a serial port to communicate with the printer, instead of a parallel port, the Mac still can be used with many third party printers. There is no need to include code in the new ROMs to bitmap things since this is already taken care of. (ever use an ImageWriter?) The printer driver takes care of figuring out how to translate the quickdraw into a bitmap and sending it to the printer. The printer description files you refer to are unnecessary. (unless you use a PC) On the Mac the proper way to do things is to write a printer driver for the printer which can be selected by the Chooser desk accessory. This is the way it is actually done by many printer vendors for the Mac. --Randy
alex@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Alex Pournelle) (12/11/90)
russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) writes: >In article <4278@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> fiddler@concertina.Eng.Sun.COM (Steve Hix) writes: >>In article <1990Dec10.192355.7500@umiami.ir.miami.edu>, gross@umiami.ir.miami.edu (Mondo) writes: >>> >>> Yeah, it seems silly that while Apple wants to join the rest of the >>> world with all their ways of interconnection that they refuse to add >>> something as basic as a RS-232C interface. Everyone's forgotten the most BASIC of reasons to laud Apple's serial connections: bidirectionality. Anyone ever try to print to a laserprinter on a PC? Find out it will blindly download all the fonts it just downloaded a minute ago, for the previous document? Snarl at the 600K preamble to the 2K file? The Mac, in case you forgot how spoilt you were, will ask the printer a question--and the printer will answer. It can tell you what fonts, trays, paper size, &c, are loaded. (QMS implements the last two--trays "tell" the printer what size they are, which in turn goes back to the chooser dialogue for the printer. Too slick.) The PC, and most machines, only get "I'm full--stop sending!" back. If that... The person who creebed about connecting parallel printers over a network forgot: at least parallel gives you an unambiguous paper-out and write-fault condition. And it is MUCH faster, potentially, than serial communication for those 600K preambles I creebed about above. That doesn't EVEN address the non-standard RS-232 "standard" which *EVERYONE* implements utterly differently--as anyone trying to lash a printer to a PC will tell you. Fie on RS-232 connections: give me Centronics (who the HECK mentioned that Centronics was promulgated by DEC--Centronics is the name of a company fwgawdsakes!) any day. Or, give me true appletalk printer-inquiries, preferably--at least the results are worth it. And note: yes, this is the same Alex who grotches at length about the Mac. Whatever else their faults, the design team made the right printing decisions on the Mac. Alex -- Alex Pournelle, freelance thinker Also: Workman & Associates, Data recovery for PCs, Macs, others ...elroy!grian!alex; BIX: alex; voice: (818) 791-7979 fax: (818) 794-2297 bbs: 791-1013; 8N1 24/12/3
jfr@locus.com (Jon Rosen) (12/11/90)
In article <7774@hub.ucsb.edu> 6500erik@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Erik Adams) writes: > >Personally, I use only the internal and the external floppy drives >on my 512ke, and I do it quite contentedly. I persist in thinking >that while a hard-disk is fast becoming a necessity (I will have >one soon, too), it is not yet. If you don't feel the need to be >on "the bleeding edge" of technology, floppies are fine. > Jeez, <blink> <blink> am I dreaming? Hard disks the "bleeding edge of technology"??? This from a Mac user (and a Usenet user no less)??? Maybe the Corvus (remember that one) 5megabyte drive for $3995 in 1981 was bleeding edge (although it was reliable) or the Syquest 10Mb removable in 1985... These days, bleeding edge is 600Mb optical eraseable rewritables... 1.2Gb SCSIs... but a 40Mb Seagate???? NO WAY!!! THIS IS A NECESSITY!!!! If you ain't used a hard drive on a Mac, you ain't used a Mac... trust me... PS: Sorry for the flames... I couldn't help myself... Jon Rosen
minich@d.cs.okstate.edu (Robert Minich) (12/12/90)
by 6500erik@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Erik Adams): | Personally, I use only the internal and the external floppy drives | on my 512ke, and I do it quite contentedly. I persist in thinking | that while a hard-disk is fast becoming a necessity (I will have | one soon, too), it is not yet. If you don't feel the need to be | on "the bleeding edge" of technology, floppies are fine. I guess you probably avoid that bleeding edge auto industry and ride your bicycle? Hard disks are not new technology and the vast majority of them are proven work horses. -- |_ /| | Robert Minich | |\'o.O' | Oklahoma State University| "I'm a newcomer here, but does the |=(___)= | minich@d.cs.okstate.edu | net every lay any argument to rest?" | U | - Ackphtth | -- dan herrick
walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Todd Walk) (12/12/90)
>Anyone ever try to print to a laserprinter on a PC? Find out it will >blindly download all the fonts it just downloaded a minute ago, for the >previous document? Snarl at the 600K preamble to the 2K file? Modern PC programs don't have any problems like this. >The Mac, in case you forgot how spoilt you were, will ask the printer a >question--and the printer will answer. It can tell you what fonts, >trays, paper size, &c, are loaded. (QMS implements the last two--trays >"tell" the printer what size they are, which in turn goes back to the >chooser dialogue for the printer. Too slick.) >The PC, and most machines, only get "I'm full--stop sending!" back. If >that... >The person who creebed about connecting parallel printers over a network >forgot: at least parallel gives you an unambiguous paper-out and >write-fault condition. And it is MUCH faster, potentially, than serial >communication for those 600K preambles I creebed about above. >That doesn't EVEN address the non-standard RS-232 "standard" which >*EVERYONE* implements utterly differently--as anyone trying to lash a >printer to a PC will tell you. Fie on RS-232 connections: give me >Centronics (who the HECK mentioned that Centronics was promulgated by >DEC--Centronics is the name of a company fwgawdsakes!) any day. >Or, give me true appletalk printer-inquiries, preferably--at least the >results are worth it. >And note: yes, this is the same Alex who grotches at length about the >Mac. Whatever else their faults, the design team made the right >printing decisions on the Mac. Yes they did. However, I believe that both you and about 99% of the other people who posted on this subject missed the point, which is that for good output, yes buy a good printer and hook it up to the computer. However, if you can only afford a Mac Classic, then you are not going to spend much on a printer (do you really think that a person that buys a $1500 Classic will also go out and buy a $2500 laser printer?). A person that buys a Classic is not a person that is going to spend $$$ for a printer, but instead they are going to cring at the thought of spending at least $600 for a printer setup when a person with an IBM system can get a decent 9-pin printer and cable for under $200. (Note: I did not mention the print quality from a $200 printer, but if you want laser quality output, many of the copy shops in towns offer Mac to laserwriter printing.) NOTE: I am not suggesting that this be used in all Macs, and I am not suggesting that the Classic should have its serial ports ripped out. What I am suggesting is for a usually unused, expensive, floppy port be replaced by a cheap Centronics port for cheap printing on cheap Macs so that they can be more cost effective compared to IBM systems. Todd Walk walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu
gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu (12/14/90)
Why doesn't apple drop the stupid hardwired floppy interfaces and use
SCSI to support all disk drives (hard and floppy)? This would have
allowed old users to upgrade 800K -> 1400K very easily (but alas,
users wouldn't have to retire so many g*dd*mn machines, I forgot).
Either drop the floppy port entirely, or drop the port and add a
second SCSI bus (to keep the same throughput)!
Don W. Gillies, Dept. of Computer Science, University of Illinois
1304 W. Springfield, Urbana, Ill 61801
ARPA: gillies@cs.uiuc.edu UUCP: {uunet,harvard}!uiucdcs!gilliesrfischer@Neon.Stanford.EDU (Raymond C. Fischer) (12/14/90)
In article <1990Dec10.031031.24801@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Todd Walk) writes: >Does anyone know how tough it would be to make a Mac Classic run at 16Mhz >with a 16Mhz 68000? I know that this chip is used in the portable and >in several printers. (Sounds like a good future Apple upgrade [expensive] >deal to me.) Very tough. You'd be better off buying an accelerator. In order to handle a 16MHz processor, you'd need to change the 68000 (to start), then the crystals that provide the clocking for the CPU, then any support chips that won't run at the higher rate, then maybe the memory chips, video circuitry, etc. In short, you'd end up with a new computer. Since a Classic is basically just an SE on a smaller PC board, you can see why Apple didn't make the Classic a 16MHz machine: not having to redesign the system doubtless made it cheaper. Ray Fischer rfischer@cs.stanford.edu
russotto@eng.umd.edu (Matthew T. Russotto) (12/14/90)
In article <77800073@m.cs.uiuc.edu> gillies@m.cs.uiuc.edu writes: > >Why doesn't apple drop the stupid hardwired floppy interfaces and use >SCSI to support all disk drives (hard and floppy)? This would have >allowed old users to upgrade 800K -> 1400K very easily (but alas, >users wouldn't have to retire so many g*dd*mn machines, I forgot). 8 device limit, there already are SCSI floppies for those older machines, SCSI floppies are more expensive. -- Matthew T. Russotto russotto@eng.umd.edu russotto@wam.umd.edu .sig under construction, like the rest of this campus.
isr@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Michael S. Schechter - ISR group account) (12/14/90)
Gee, somehow I think there's $200 9-pin printers for the Mac also... What do you IBM freaks you drool over every page and ad in COmputer Shopper think the "AP" suffix at the end of amodel number stands for in a number of popular manufacturer's lines? if you'r going to flame the Mac market 'cause Apple's printer is a lot of $, then flame the IBM market cause IBM's is a lot of $ Just how friggin stupid do you think we are?