dcw@goldilocks.lcs.mit.edu (12/05/90)
I just got my Zip Chip GSX yesterday and after having a hell of a time trying to pull my 65816 out, got it installed. I don't work right! In fact, it doesn't like my hard disk (80mb Quantum 32, 32, 16 connected to Rev C SCSI). I have to have the machine running at "normal" speed (Zip is off) for it to boot or access the HD at all. If I boot 5.0.3 off floppy, it crashes as soon as it locates the HD. It doesn't matter what speed setting I have the Zip at, so I figure I've got bad cache ram. Has anyone else had such problems? I'm calling tech support when I get home later. I also had it destroy the appledisk3.5 driver on my LOCKED system 5.0.3 floppy. It also didn't boot 100% reliably from floppy or HD when in slow (off) mode. system: 3mb AE GSRam+ in ROM 01, Rev C SCSI, system 5.0.3, 80mb Quantum. -- Dave Whitney Computer Science MIT 1990 | I wrote Z-Link and BinSCII. Send me bug dcw@lcs.mit.edu | reports. I need a job. Send me an offer. "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance" --Binky (aka Matt Groening)
whitewolf@gnh-starport.cts.com (Tae Song) (12/11/90)
I got my GSX a couple of days ago and it works GREAT! My setup is ROM 01, 4MB of RAM, RAMFast SCSI, 80MB (Seagate), and GSX. I haven't encountered any problems that I haven't had before, or isolate to some DA or INIT file. I have the GSX 1.01, but the manual says version 1.02. I'm using System 5.0.3 and also have used 5.0.2. I can't think of what to recommend... but I've heard some people have problems with GSX... actually, it was one person who sent me mail on AO... you're the only second person to have any problem far as I know. What slot do you have the GSZ in? I have mine in Slot 3. whitewolf@gnh-starport
-Rich-@cup.portal.com (Richard Sherman Payne) (12/12/90)
Hi, I called Zip, and they say that the ZipGSX should work OK with my setup. I can boot with no problems from floppy (3.5"), but if I try to access the HD from the boot, it either hangs or crashes. I called Roger Coats again yesterday, and the person who authorizes the RMA's was not in. I think that requiring multiple long distance calls to complete a transation stinks. I had to do this once already when they sent me a regular ZipChip on my first order. I have two long distance calls, and about $5 postage & insurance invested if rectifying this situation, and so far zip (OK, it's a pun). I left work early again to call Roger Coats today, and no one answered the phone. So far, I can say from direct experience, that RC's service is fast. But if something goes wrong, you will solve it at your own expense. And this is not an easy proposition. There seems to be no guarentee that the person you need to talk too will be in. And of course, when I do, I will have to explain the entire situation again. Zip's spokesman was very verbose, and hardly let me talk. It was mostly a prepared speech. I found out that if you upgrade the SRAM, then your warranty is null and void. He seemed to think that most people who upgraded their systems were somehow smart enough to pull the CPU (with extensive handholding), but nowhere near smart enough to replace the SRAM chips. He did not say this directly, and I never got a chance to make the comparison. So far, my experience has been very frustrating, and it is getting more and more expensive day by day. Rich -Rich-@cup.portal.com
toddpw@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) (12/12/90)
-Rich-@cup.portal.com (Richard Sherman Payne) writes: > Zip's spokesman was very verbose, and hardly let me talk. It was >mostly a prepared speech. I found out that if you upgrade the SRAM, then your >warranty is null and void. He seemed to think that most people who upgraded >their systems were somehow smart enough to pull the CPU (with extensive >handholding), but nowhere near smart enough to replace the SRAM chips. He >did not say this directly, and I never got a chance to make the comparison. I've talked to the zip guys (luckily for me they are within driving distance) on the phone (I haven't managed to get a ride over to swap my board for the RAMFast fix version yet). I have found them to be fairly nice but they got really awkward after I asked them a technical question -- until I told them to explain as techie as they wanted. Most people ARE smart enough to pull the CPU. Selecting SRAMs of the correct size and pinout for upgrades is not something I would want to try unless I knew more about which chips the Zip was designed for. Since Zip hasn't released this info, they are fully justified in discouraging people from risking their accelerators. The main reason I agree with this policy is that Zip is moving to a cache RAM combination that uses faster chips for tag (I assume in preparation for the ASIC 65816) -- chips which are NOT widely available to consumers. Looking at my Zip GSX, it has two skinny 25 ns tag RAM's -- don't count on JameCo carrying these. Todd Whitesel toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu
rankins@argentina.crd.ge.com (raymond r rankins) (12/12/90)
In article <36819@cup.portal.com>, -Rich-@cup (Richard Sherman Payne) writes: > Zip's spokesman was very verbose, and hardly let me talk. It was >mostly a prepared speech. I found out that if you upgrade the SRAM, then your >warranty is null and void. He seemed to think that most people who upgraded >their systems were somehow smart enough to pull the CPU (with extensive >handholding), but nowhere near smart enough to replace the SRAM chips. He >did not say this directly, and I never got a chance to make the comparison. I found the Zip tech support guys to be pretty good. I was missing a page of my manual, and they faxed right out to me the newest copy of their manual. One of the guys I spoke to, I believe his name was Steve, answered all of my questions, and gave me a lot of information. I asked him about upgrading the SRAM, and he said that they don't consider it a user-upgradeable option anymore, and that they recommend you send it in for the upgrade. Apparently a number of their beta testers (people who should have been technically competent to do it) had a lot of trouble installing the cache ram properly. But, he said if I wanted to do it myself, he'd tell me how. Basically, you need to get 32k x 8 static ram chips (Microprocessors Unlimited sells them pretty reasonably - check the classifieds in the back of a PC Week). You need 2 chips (one for tag ram & one for data ram) for 32k, and 4 chips for 64k. The important thing is that the tag ram must be faster than the data ram. To run at 8MHz, you need tag ram at 70ns and data ram at 100ns. If you plan on upgrading the Zip CPU to a faster one, then you need a 25/45 ns ram combination. This is what Zip will install (the faster ram) for the upgrade for $75/32k. Microprocessors Unlimited sells these chips for $25 and $19.50 each for the 25 and 45 Mhz chips respectively. If you don't plan on going beyond the 8Mhz CPU in the near future, you can purchase 70 and 100 ns chips for $10.50 and $6.50 each respectively. The guy I talked to said that going from 16k to 64k of cache ram will make a noticeable difference in speed (more than upgrading from an 8Mhz to a 10Mhz cpu) as the CPU won't need to slow down as often to regular system speed to access standard IIGS memory. I plan on purchasing the 70/100ns chips for now because they're not that expensive and when faster 65816s become more readily available, I'll buy the faster ram chips then. Ray Ray Rankins |(518) 387-7174 | INTERNET: rankins@argentina.crd.ge.com 2 Moonglow Rd. |(518) 583-3320 | COMPUSERVE: 71131,3236 Gansevoort, NY 12831 | | AmericaOnline: RayRankins <insert standard disclaimer here> | GEnie: R.Rankins
-Rich-@cup.portal.com (Richard Sherman Payne) (12/13/90)
>-Rich-@cup.portal.com (Richard Sherman Payne) writes: > >> Zip's spokesman was very verbose, and hardly let me talk. It was >>mostly a prepared speech. I found out that if you upgrade the SRAM, then your >>warranty is null and void. He seemed to think that most people who upgraded >>their systems were somehow smart enough to pull the CPU (with extensive >>handholding), but nowhere near smart enough to replace the SRAM chips. He >>did not say this directly, and I never got a chance to make the comparison. > >I've talked to the zip guys (luckily for me they are within driving distance) >on the phone (I haven't managed to get a ride over to swap my board for the >RAMFast fix version yet). I have found them to be fairly nice but they got >really awkward after I asked them a technical question -- until I told them >to explain as techie as they wanted. > >Most people ARE smart enough to pull the CPU. Selecting SRAMs of the correct >size and pinout for upgrades is not something I would want to try unless I >knew more about which chips the Zip was designed for. Since Zip hasn't >released this info, they are fully justified in discouraging people from >risking their accelerators. The main reason I agree with this policy is that >Zip is moving to a cache RAM combination that uses faster chips for tag >(I assume in preparation for the ASIC 65816) -- chips which are NOT widely >available to consumers. Looking at my Zip GSX, it has two skinny 25 ns tag >RAM's -- don't count on JameCo carrying these. > >Todd Whitesel >toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu Gee Todd, I asked them about SRAM speed, and got the propaganda speech about idiots putting chips in backwards. Never was access speed mentioned, even thoug h this was my question. I got the feeling that he thought I had something to destroy my ZipChip GSX, and he referred me back to Roger Coats. Guess what, I got off work early again today to call RC. They do not answer their phone. Since warranty's are somewhat time dependant, I am beginning to get concerned. Three days of effort, and nothing. Did RC close for the holidays? Did they change their hours? If not, I will have to attempt to get in some words with that chatterbox from Zip. I work with CMOS all day, every day, and can give lectures on static hazards, and proper grounding. I do not revert to a caveman (static filled) the moment I get home. I have taked much better than reasonable precautions, after all, this is ***my*** stuff. Like I said, if it works, great. If it don't, expect your cost's to double, wether or not anything happens, at least if you order from Roger Coats. I have gone to a great deal of trouble, and not inconsiderable expense, with nothing at all to show for it. And there is an irregularity on my Zip. It came with a score mark on the front. I have no idea how it could be done, but it seemed only to affect the breadboar d area for the voltage regulator. Perhaps it goes farther than the eye can see. To everyone who's Zip works, congratulations. To everyone considering purchacin g one, be advised. At least if you own a RAMFAST, or intend to buy one... Rich -Rich-@cup.portal.com
toddpw@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel) (12/13/90)
You're talking to the wrong people at Zip. Ask to talk to one of the techies or something -- I don't know, I just called their tech support number and got a reasonable engineer after nominal time on hold. Todd Whitesel toddpw @ tybalt.caltech.edu
ericm@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Eric Mulholland) (12/15/90)
In article <36819@cup.portal.com> -Rich-@cup.portal.com (Richard Sherman Payne) writes: > I called Zip, and they say that the ZipGSX should work OK with >my setup. I can boot with no problems from floppy (3.5"), but if I try to >access the HD from the boot, it either hangs or crashes. This sounds very simular to my situation. I pulled everything out of my computer except the Zip Chip and RamFast. Trying to boot the hard drive always resulted in a freeze or crash. > Zip's spokesman was very verbose, and hardly let me talk. It was >mostly a prepared speech. I found out that if you upgrade the SRAM, then your When I called Zip and explained my situation with 2 Zip Chips and my setup, he seemed very willing to help. They are sending me a new (and modified Zip Chip) while I mail my current one to them. They think my problem is because of noise and the replacement chip will be more tolerant of it. > So far, my experience has been very frustrating, and it is getting more >and more expensive day by day. I'm frustrated in not having a working chip, but the calls I made to Zip and Programs Plus have all been helpful. This is taking awhile, I hope it's all worth it. Those who already have Zip Chips and are worried about the cable connection to the CPU socket coming loose. Go to Radio Shack and buy a $1 40 pin low-profile chip socket. This fits real well into the CPU socket and the Zip cable is almost unseperatable after plugging it in. -- ____ Y_,_|[]| Eric Mulholland {|_|_|__| ericm@sage.cc.purdue.edu //oo--OO ...!pur-ee!sage.cc!ericm
sysadmin@pnet91.cts.com (Matthew Montano) (12/18/90)
> >To everyone who's Zip works, congratulations. To everyone considering purchacin >g >one, be advised. At least if you own a RAMFAST, or intend to buy one... > > > > > Rich > > > -Rich-@cup.portal.com Gee... To show the other side of the coin now: I have had my grubby hands on TWO Zip GSX's. (Same revision; v1.01). I've also had my hands on two RAMFast's... One is serial # 64, the other is # 967 (or something close). The newer RAMFast is running ROM v1.11, the older one v1.01 or v1.0. I have used BOTH of them in a ROM01 and ROM03.. never any problems. Except during a GS/OS copying of a file, where it will bonk into the monitor and require a power off/power on combo to get the machine back. The TWGS used to cause the same weird problem as well. There have been MANY people who have used the Zip GSX and RAMFast in tandem with no problems.. Me being one, and counted as two. Matthew --- Email: sysadmin@pnet91.cts.com (most mailers won't barf on that..) My comments aren't even worth a disclaimer... pnet91 - 416-237-{1204|0308}. 2400bps only. 1200bps if you do hard breaks.
-Rich-@cup.portal.com (Richard Sherman Payne) (12/20/90)
>> >>To everyone who's Zip works, congratulations. To everyone considering purchac i >n >>g >>one, be advised. At least if you own a RAMFAST, or intend to buy one... >> >> >> >> >> Rich >> >> >> -Rich-@cup.portal.com > >Gee... To show the other side of the coin now: > >I have had my grubby hands on TWO Zip GSX's. (Same revision; v1.01). I've also >had my hands on two RAMFast's... One is serial # 64, the other is # 967 (or >something close). The newer RAMFast is running ROM v1.11, the older one v1.01 >or v1.0. > >I have used BOTH of them in a ROM01 and ROM03.. never any problems. Except >during a GS/OS copying of a file, where it will bonk into the monitor and >require a power off/power on combo to get the machine back. The TWGS used to >cause the same weird problem as well. > >There have been MANY people who have used the Zip GSX and RAMFast in tandem >with no problems.. Me being one, and counted as two. What is your point, are you saying that mine works? You may add input, and let everyone know that you are another satisfied user, but how can you imply that they ***all*** work. Let me also add that I have been attempting to contact Roger Coats for 2 WEEKS, with no success. I am not a happy camper. And my Zip does not crash when using a program, I have not gotten that far, it crashed while booting GS/OS. It boots and runs without error from floppy, but the moment I attempt to access something on my HD, I get a crash to monitor. It is a certain, long tested compatibility issue, despite the fact that Zip claims that it should work. They referred my to my Dealer, Roger Coats, whom I cannot contact. You may be happy, but I am not. You would be stupid to be happy under such circumstances. I have given a valid trouble report, not out of malice, and stated the circumstances and facts. I think your comments add nothing, and inply that I do not really have a problem. But I will not go as far as to suggest what you do with the "other side of the coin". Ten million functional Zips would change things not one bit. > >Matthew >--- >Email: sysadmin@pnet91.cts.com (most mailers won't barf on that..) >My comments aren't even worth a disclaimer... >pnet91 - 416-237-{1204|0308}. 2400bps only. 1200bps if you do hard breaks. Rich -Rich-@cup.portal.com