From: Claus Just Rasmussen (Claus_at_just-rasmussen.dk)
Date: 2006-02-28 23:17:02
Hi Ruud,
Ruud@baltissen.org wrote:
> Hallo Claus,
>
>
>> [ Note: This mail was converted from HTML to text by majordomo.
>> Formatting might be poor. ]
>>
>
> Which makes it a bit hard to read when used to using '>' etc.
>
>
I noticed, and I'll try to remember to use txt! :-)
>> OK. And the diodes etc to be added to the cable ?!
>>
>
> I was a bit wrong with the number of diodes etc. please see:
> http://www.baltissen.org/images/xieee1b.gif
> My own solution was soldering a 25-pins female and male D-connector to
> eachother and place that between the origanal cable and the LPT-port. The
> transistors, diodes etc. were soldered on a piece of experimental print
> which was connected with two cables to this D-connector combination and a 9-
> pin D-connector for the RS232 port
>
>
OK. Tnx for the diagram. That's not too bad. And a nice idea to add this
female/male connector to a cable instead of modding an existing cable!
>> BTW: My impression is that the 'Commodore-related' PC software are
>> all running under DOS, sometimes W95 but never WinXP. Except for the
>> Vice emulators. Is that true?
>>
>
> This is because of the tricky timing needed for some operations. In some
> cases you only have a window of less then 70 micro-seconds to react. With
> DOS you can time things quite good, but with Windows it can be horrible
> because of a bossy OS that sticks his nose in everything you do.
>
Yes. True. 70us, that's snappy =:-O
It would actually be interesting to use some new cpu-ram-flash
single-chip combination as middle-man and program it to do the
timing-critical parts. But... I must admit that I would also prefer a sw
solution, it's easier after all. Don't know XP well enough - it might be
possible to do a low-lever driver with ok timing? Or maybe Linux instead?
How about running W98 as a virtual PC under Linux or WinXP. Would that
work? (actually expect not, since at least XP would still prevent direct
HW access, or?!)
> Vice is a different thing because with emulation there is no external
> device putting a pressure on you. OK, I know that the new version can
> handle external drives as well buy IMHO it was only possible by using the
> massive power of nowadays processors. I wonder if it could be done with,
> let's say, a 100 MHz Pentium-1.
> Spiro, maybe could you explain this a bit more, please? Thanks.
>
Yes, no doubt that modern processors helps a lot. I also find it amazing
that we can run stuff like Vice and run these old computers (virtually).
Of course - computers at that time were slow, but we still has to
emulate the HW too. Really nice !!
> A personal note: there are a lot of discussions going on about "why doesn't
> Star Commander run under XP?" and "how can we can we make it work under
> XP". It works perfectly under DOS. So I have a 486-80 MHz doing this for me
> running under W98-DOS. And if I need to exchange files, I start up the GUI
> to be able to use my network. Really no Windows version of SC needed, I
> think.
>
I can easily follow you here. For my part, I dropped older than WinXP
due to stability. But W98 is far better when it comes to playing with
hw-near stuff. So...
Cheers,
Claus
>
> --
> ___
> / __|__
> / / |_/ Groetjes, Ruud
> \ \__|_\
> \___| http://Ruud.C64.org
>
>
>
>
>
> Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
>
>
>
--
------------------------------------------------------------
Claus Just Rasmussen
www.just-rasmussen.dk
------------------------------------------------------------
Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Archive generated by hypermail pre-2.1.8.