OT: card storage
D Yuniskis
Like most folks, I've accumulated a fair number of
"I/O cards" over the years. Many I need to hold onto
to give me certain capabilities (e.g., EIA485, certain
digital I/O's, etc.) to maintain old designs. Others
are worthwhile from time to time as I reorganize my
machine herd and opt to support different peripheral sets.
[I'm currently only speaking of COTS cards -- ISA, PCI,
various memory packages, etc. -- not custom stuff]
Storing these has proven to be not trivial. I've tried
different approaches over the years -- antistatic bags,
small boxes (e.g., "Wide SCSI HBA's", "TR NIC's", etc.),
big boxes (e.g., "Network cards", "Memory", etc.). None
really seem to work well. :<
The REAL solution is probably just to sh*tcan the lot
and <shrug> when I come across a future need! :>
Has anyone come up with a slick way of storing cards
that doesn't beat up on the cards, makes it relatively easy
to locate the card you want *and* doesn't dramatically
increase the volume required to store them (i.e., putting
each in "retail packaging")? Right now, I think the
most viable option (for me) is back to antistatic bags
(to help the cards slide over each other without "catching"
on protruding components) in *large* boxes :-(
Thx,
--don
Jeffrey D Angus
> Has anyone come up with a slick way of storing cards
> that doesn't beat up on the cards, makes it relatively easy
> to locate the card you want
Order the right size box for several cards to lay in without
having to show horn them in. The real key is uniform size
boxes so they all stak and play well with each other.
Similar to these:
http://www.uline.com/BL_425/White-Corrugated-Boxes
Then start labeling the boxes. NIC, Modem, VGA, etc.
Jeff
--
�Egotism is the anesthetic that dulls the pain of stupidity.�
Frank Leahy, Head coach, Notre Dame 1941-1954
D Yuniskis
Jeffrey D Angus wrote:
> D Yuniskis wrote:
>> Has anyone come up with a slick way of storing cards
>> that doesn't beat up on the cards, makes it relatively easy
>> to locate the card you want
>
> Order the right size box for several cards to lay in without
> having to show horn them in. The real key is uniform size
> boxes so they all stak and play well with each other.
>
> Similar to these:
> http://www.uline.com/BL_425/White-Corrugated-Boxes
>
> Then start labeling the boxes. NIC, Modem, VGA, etc.
That's been the problem! With the exception of "duplicates"
of individual cards, it seems like every card is a different
size (and even *shape*!). Couple that with the differences
in component heights/placement, heatsinks, coolers, etc. and
things just don't want to stack nicely. :<
Most of the memory sticks are reasonably well behaved
(though there are some exceptions -- like metal clad
RAMBUS memory, etc.). PCMCIA cards tend to be annoyances
(often due to accommodations for connectors, etc.)
That's why I feel it's probably not worth "fighting" with
them and just bag them and let them fall where they will
in an oversized box :-(
Or, cut some slots in a 1x4 and try to *stand* them in a
suitably dimensioned box...
1 Lucky Texan
Find a 'bin' box wide enough for the largest one. Use the bags as you
have mentioned and 'stand' them on edge in the bin box, perhaps
alpabetically front to back.
Or make a cheat sheet - possibly label/number the bags. ???
John O'Flaherty
If they all have edge connectors, you could put 1/16" slots in a
couple of square dowels mounted on a flat board, and store the cards
erect, connectors stuck into the slots, with a piece of paper with a
description next to each card.
--
John
D Yuniskis
> On May 11, 12:42 pm, D Yuniskis <not.going.to...@seen.com> wrote:
>> Hi Jeff,
>>
>> Jeffrey D Angus wrote:
>>> D Yuniskis wrote:
>>>> Has anyone come up with a slick way of storing cards
>>>> that doesn't beat up on the cards, makes it relatively easy
>>>> to locate the card you want
>>> Order the right size box for several cards to lay in without
>>> having to show horn them in. The real key is uniform size
>>> boxes so they all stak and play well with each other.
>>> Similar to these:
>>> http://www.uline.com/BL_425/White-Corrugated-Boxes
>>> Then start labeling the boxes. NIC, Modem, VGA, etc.
>> That's been the problem! With the exception of "duplicates"
>> of individual cards, it seems like every card is a different
>> size (and even *shape*!). Couple that with the differences
>> in component heights/placement, heatsinks, coolers, etc. and
>> things just don't want to stack nicely. :<
>>
>> them and just bag them and let them fall where they will
>> in an oversized box :-(
>>
>> Or, cut some slots in a 1x4 and try to *stand* them in a
>> suitably dimensioned box...
>
> Find a 'bin' box wide enough for the largest one. Use the bags as you
> have mentioned and 'stand' them on edge in the bin box, perhaps
> alpabetically front to back.
They don't like to stand :< I've tried standing them with
"connector down" as well as "connector up". They just don't
like either of those orientations "unassisted". That's why
I was thinking of just letting them "slosh around" (the bags
acting as the "lubricant") -- as long as they don't damage
each other.
> Or make a cheat sheet - possibly label/number the bags. ???
<grin> I'm not *that* anal retentive! :> If I can see the
card inside the bag, then I'm all set. E.g., "this box
contains network interface cards" (so I know everything in
it will be a NIC). I can dig through a dozen or two cards
to find what I want once it's narrowed down like that.
William R. Walsh
I put mine in anti-static bags and store the often used ones in a
metal file cabinet drawer. The less often used stuff goes into copy
paper boxes. It works well for ISA, PCI, and MCA. It should be EISA
compatible as well. <g>
A few end up stacked around The Lab, waiting to be knocked over, but I
didn't say that. ;-)
William
D Yuniskis
John O'Flaherty wrote:
> On Tue, 11 May 2010 09:45:06 -0700, D Yuniskis
> <not.goi...@seen.com> wrote:
>
>> Like most folks, I've accumulated a fair number of
>> "I/O cards" over the years. Many I need to hold onto
>> to give me certain capabilities (e.g., EIA485, certain
>> digital I/O's, etc.) to maintain old designs. Others
>> are worthwhile from time to time as I reorganize my
>> machine herd and opt to support different peripheral sets.
>>
>> Has anyone come up with a slick way of storing cards
>> that doesn't beat up on the cards, makes it relatively easy
>> to locate the card you want *and* doesn't dramatically
>> increase the volume required to store them (i.e., putting
>> each in "retail packaging")? Right now, I think the
>> most viable option (for me) is back to antistatic bags
>> (to help the cards slide over each other without "catching"
>> on protruding components) in *large* boxes :-(
>
> If they all have edge connectors, you could put 1/16" slots in a
> couple of square dowels mounted on a flat board, and store the cards
Yes, I've thought of a "slotted board" (run a 1x4 over a table
saw with blade set at 1/4" or so) without the "dowels" atop.
I'm just not thrilled that even *that* will keep them from
conspiring to topple once they're out of sight (i.e., box closed)
I guess its a lot easier if you have cards that are the same size,
etc. as you can support them (reliably) in more than one place.
D Yuniskis
William R. Walsh wrote:
> I put mine in anti-static bags and store the often used ones in a
> metal file cabinet drawer. The less often used stuff goes into copy
Yes, I am more and more convinced that this is the way to go.
I use smaller boxes (think of a 10 read copy paper box sliced
so it is half as deep) to cut down how much "digging" I need
to do. I tend not to be very patient when looking for a
card that I *know* I have so having too many boards in a
box is a Rx for *something* getting busted! :>
> paper boxes. It works well for ISA, PCI, and MCA. It should be EISA
> compatible as well. <g>
Yes, but only those certified to be Windows compatible!
Else the green electrons intermingle with the *blue*
ones and all hell breaks loose!
> A few end up stacked around The Lab, waiting to be knocked over, but I
> didn't say that. ;-)
<frown> Better than me -- mine end up on the floor waiting
to be *stepped* on! :-/ (OTOH, this is an excellent
deterrent to walking around barefoot!)
Jeff Liebermann
<not.goi...@seen.com> wrote:
>Has anyone come up with a slick way of storing cards
>that doesn't beat up on the cards, makes it relatively easy
>to locate the card you want *and* doesn't dramatically
>increase the volume required to store them (i.e., putting
>each in "retail packaging")? Right now, I think the
>most viable option (for me) is back to antistatic bags
>(to help the cards slide over each other without "catching"
>on protruding components) in *large* boxes :-(
That's exactly what I do. I saved and bought a mess of antistatic
bags of varying sizes. I'm partial to the pink plastic variety so I
can sorta see what's inside the bag. Each board goes in a bag and
then vertically into a cardboard box. For boards with projecting pins
and connectors the need extra protection where I drop a block of pink
foam or pink peanuts into the bag. I've learned not to over stuff the
cardboard box as overstuffing will tend to break pins and components
when I have to search for a specific board. That means one layer of
cards maximum, which also means cutting down the liquor store
cardboard box to a lower height. The outside of the box gets a
post-it note with a rough inventory of the contents. Valuable boards
that have software and accessories included usually get the retail
packaging treatment.
--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Robert Baer
slot spacing same as connector spacing in a PC MB.
Paul Keinanen
<quia...@yeeha.com> wrote:
>
>If they all have edge connectors, you could put 1/16" slots in a
>couple of square dowels mounted on a flat board, and store the cards
>erect, connectors stuck into the slots, with a piece of paper with a
>description next to each card.
If you have some old unused passive backplane computers, which usually
have a lot of ISA and PCI slots, just plug in the cards into these
empty slots :-)
colin_...@yahoo.com
were always very careful with them, helped by them being high value
and low volumes. I recently joined a much bigger company with 10
software, 5 firmware and 3 hardware guys on this project. The system
has mezzanine cards of various sizes and everyone seems to have piles
of them that they just rummage through to find what they need.
In three years one board has been damaged whilst not in its anti-
static bag.
Bag em, chuck them in a box and don't shake the box.
Colin
Robert Sneddon
<kein...@sci.fi> writes
>If you have some old unused passive backplane computers, which usually
>have a lot of ISA and PCI slots, just plug in the cards into these
>empty slots :-)
Get some old dead motherboards, hacksaw the PCI/ISA socket areas out
then screw them down to a piece of blockboard or similar sized to fit
the bottom of your storage box. Give the slots a spray of contact
cleaner before you stick the cards in to keep the edge connectors shiny.
I use 16"-20" plastic toolboxes to store my assorted ISA/PCI cards as
well as other general hardware such as CPUs, video cards, cables etc.;
they're cheap, rigid, stack nicely and they can be sealed with some
shrink-wrap film around the lids to prevent moisture getting in if they
spend any time in an unheated storage space.
--
To reply, my gmail address is nojay1 Robert Sneddon
N_Cook
news:hsc17e$tn0$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
I'm aware of a repair shop where they had strung steel wire near the ceiling
of the store, tensioned with turn-buckles (otherwise unused space). Then a
plastic curtain hook hot-melt glued to corner of each board, on a weekly
basis, then strung up. Timewise order to the boards , so could be
cross-referenced to repair job log so no logging of the boards as such
JosephKK
wrote:
>Hi,
For a quick help from what you are doing, sort the cards into boxes by
type and LABEL the boxes. Only one kind in a box. Put the boxes in
storage racks and label the racks.
If you really want to protect the cards build card board separation
racks, include space for matching specialty cables and driver software.
This eats up more space but keeps important combinations of things
together.
One of the smartest things i ever did was to package all the driver
software with each PC i have. I actually placed it inside the case.
Spehro Pefhany
Since every case designer seems to have their own bright ideas about
how to mount hard drives etc. it's not a bad idea to bag up all the
extra hardware in a 4 mil poly bag and store it inside the case. Then
you won't find yourself looking for an extra-long metric screw and
silicone grommet, or thin snap-in rails etc. Another possible place is
the mombo box- a dozen or two of them fit nicely on a high shelf.
You can buy boxes in various form factors from places like Uline. If
it isn't worth a 50-cent box to store neatly, maybe it should be
tossed?
Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
sp...@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
Robert Macy
I sotred mine in a dead PC shell
D Yuniskis
Spehro Pefhany wrote:
> On Wed, 12 May 2010 21:40:02 -0700, the renowned
> "JosephKK"<quiett...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 11 May 2010 09:45:06 -0700, D Yuniskis <not.goi...@seen.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Like most folks, I've accumulated a fair number of
>>> "I/O cards" over the years. Many I need to hold onto
>>> to give me certain capabilities (e.g., EIA485, certain
>>> digital I/O's, etc.) to maintain old designs. Others
>>> are worthwhile from time to time as I reorganize my
>>> machine herd and opt to support different peripheral sets.
>>>
>>> Has anyone come up with a slick way of storing cards
>>> that doesn't beat up on the cards, makes it relatively easy
>>> to locate the card you want *and* doesn't dramatically
>>> increase the volume required to store them (i.e., putting
>>> each in "retail packaging")? Right now, I think the
>>> most viable option (for me) is back to antistatic bags
>>> (to help the cards slide over each other without "catching"
>>> on protruding components) in *large* boxes :-(
>>
>> For a quick help from what you are doing, sort the cards into boxes by
>> type and LABEL the boxes. Only one kind in a box. Put the boxes in
>> storage racks and label the racks.
>> If you really want to protect the cards build card board separation
>> racks, include space for matching specialty cables and driver software.
>> This eats up more space but keeps important combinations of things
>> together.
>> One of the smartest things i ever did was to package all the driver
>> software with each PC i have. I actually placed it inside the case.
I create a directory containing all of the software installed
on a particular machine along with a text file documenting the
order in which the software was installed (so, if there is a
problem, I can figure out *why*; if not, I now have *one* way of
installing everything that is 'known' to work). I burn this
onto a set of DVD's so I can reinstall as needed.
(I also image the drive so I can restore it to its initial
configuration relatively easily without having to reinstall
all of the software *again*...)
> Since every case designer seems to have their own bright ideas about
> how to mount hard drives etc. it's not a bad idea to bag up all the
> extra hardware in a 4 mil poly bag and store it inside the case. Then
> you won't find yourself looking for an extra-long metric screw and
> silicone grommet, or thin snap-in rails etc. Another possible place is
> the mombo box- a dozen or two of them fit nicely on a high shelf.
I don't save cases. If it's not running (i.e., "in service"),
it goes in the recycle bin.
> You can buy boxes in various form factors from places like Uline. If
> it isn't worth a 50-cent box to store neatly, maybe it should be
> tossed?
I tried that route. You end up with *lots* of "wasted volume". :<
Just pilling boards into four "large" boxes resulted in about
4 cubic feet of "boards". I suspect that would double if each
board was packed in something akin to retail packaging.
E.g., I store my "spare" keyboards in "keyboard boxes" and
they easily take up twice their minimal volume.
I suspect most boards are such commodity items that a 50c
box would be a huge (relative) investment -- in cardboard. :>
(OTOH, if you just toss those commodity cards out, the cost
of acquiring a new one WHEN YOU NEED IT is ridiculously
expensive -- travel time, opportunity costs, etc.)
I'll see how the "sort into four categories" approach works.
If I can find boxes that are ~30% smaller, then I can, perhaps,
toss 30% of the boards (and *hope* I toss the ones that I
won't need NEXT WEEK! :> )
Michael A. Terrell
I use "Totino's Frozen Pizza" boxes to store keyboards. You can
stand about eight in each box. I pick them up at the grocery store for
free. Some of the other frozen food and packaged lunchmeat boxes are
great for storing PC boards & spare drives. The boxes for three, one
gallon bottles of water is good for CD & DVD drives, or other 5.25"
drives.
Empty 55 gallon steel drums are great for all those extra hard drive
cables, and other cables from dead PCs. When you get tired of digging
through them, they are already ready to haul to the recyclers. ;-)
> I suspect most boards are such commodity items that a 50c
> box would be a huge (relative) investment -- in cardboard. :>
> (OTOH, if you just toss those commodity cards out, the cost
> of acquiring a new one WHEN YOU NEED IT is ridiculously
> expensive -- travel time, opportunity costs, etc.)
> I'll see how the "sort into four categories" approach works.
> If I can find boxes that are ~30% smaller, then I can, perhaps,
> toss 30% of the boards (and *hope* I toss the ones that I
> won't need NEXT WEEK! :> )
I don't throw out any good boards. You never know when you'll need
one you can't replace. A few years ago I repaired a prototype IBM PC
for a retired IBM EE. The old man was in tears when he discovered that
I not only had a FDC board, but it was a genuine IBM board.
--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.
D Yuniskis
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> D Yuniskis wrote:
>>
>> Spehro Pefhany wrote:
>>> You can buy boxes in various form factors from places like Uline. If
>>> it isn't worth a 50-cent box to store neatly, maybe it should be
>>> tossed?
>> I tried that route. You end up with *lots* of "wasted volume". :<
>> Just pilling boards into four "large" boxes resulted in about
>> 4 cubic feet of "boards". I suspect that would double if each
>> board was packed in something akin to retail packaging.
>>
>> E.g., I store my "spare" keyboards in "keyboard boxes" and
>> they easily take up twice their minimal volume.
>
> I use "Totino's Frozen Pizza" boxes to store keyboards. You can
Huh? Oblong pizzas?? :> (sorry, I just can't picture this :< )
> stand about eight in each box. I pick them up at the grocery store for
> free. Some of the other frozen food and packaged lunchmeat boxes are
> great for storing PC boards & spare drives. The boxes for three, one
> gallon bottles of water is good for CD & DVD drives, or other 5.25"
> drives.
I've "standardized" on "Vacutainer" boxes (vacutainers are those
vacuum-filled, rubber-stoppered, "test tubes" that are used when
blood is drawn). They are ~18x12x6 so they fit nicely on my
(18 inch deep) shelves. They are big enough that I can store
"enough" in each -- yet not *too* big to end up with lots of
"empty space".
E.g., I have a box for SCSI "1" cables, "2", "wide", VHDCI,
DB25, VGA, DVI, 10Base2, "RJ45", etc.; boxes for screwdrivers,
chisels, drills, etc.; CD-ROMs, DVD writers, speech synthesizers,
barcode readers, PDAs, signature pads, etc.; development boards
(SBC's), hookup wire scraps, etc.; access points, routers, network
fabric, network appliances, etc.
[I think there are ~130 of these boxes currently]
> Empty 55 gallon steel drums are great for all those extra hard drive
> cables, and other cables from dead PCs. When you get tired of digging
> through them, they are already ready to haul to the recyclers. ;-)
I like the cables sorted. Probably 25% of my "storage" is
dedicated to cables. I suspect there is more *real* "value"
there than in any of the other stuff -- it seems like I
don't go more than a day without needing to dig out some
sort of cable! Especially all of the odd-ball "specials"
common for USB :-/
>> I suspect most boards are such commodity items that a 50c
>> box would be a huge (relative) investment -- in cardboard. :>
>> (OTOH, if you just toss those commodity cards out, the cost
>> of acquiring a new one WHEN YOU NEED IT is ridiculously
>> expensive -- travel time, opportunity costs, etc.)
>
>> I'll see how the "sort into four categories" approach works.
>> If I can find boxes that are ~30% smaller, then I can, perhaps,
>> toss 30% of the boards (and *hope* I toss the ones that I
>> won't need NEXT WEEK! :> )
>
> I don't throw out any good boards. You never know when you'll need
> one you can't replace. A few years ago I repaired a prototype IBM PC
> for a retired IBM EE. The old man was in tears when he discovered that
> I not only had a FDC board, but it was a genuine IBM board.
I don't throw *out* anything. Everything gets recycled.
I don't save "old" stuff anymore -- unless I need it to
support an old design, etc. E.g., I have only one ISA bus
PC -- but, it can support two *full* length cards.
OTOH, I got bit yesterday as I needed a PS2 keyboard and
didn't have a "spare" (I only keep a few spare keyboards
and most of those are "specials") so I had to borrow one from
one of my servers. :<
I really like these little *tiny* keyboards (about 12" wide?)
for those machines that I run headless -- yet "need" a keyboard
to be able to power it down "locally" (i.e., "typing blind").
[I keep a portable *7* inch LCD monitor for those times when
I need to connect a display to a headless machine... requires
a bit of squinting to read but a lot nicer than having to
lug a larger monitor around!]
Michael A. Terrell
D Yuniskis wrote:
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> > D Yuniskis wrote:
> >>
> >> Spehro Pefhany wrote:
> >>> You can buy boxes in various form factors from places like Uline. If
> >>> it isn't worth a 50-cent box to store neatly, maybe it should be
> >>> tossed?
> >> I tried that route. You end up with *lots* of "wasted volume". :<
> >> Just pilling boards into four "large" boxes resulted in about
> >> 4 cubic feet of "boards". I suspect that would double if each
> >> board was packed in something akin to retail packaging.
> >>
> >> E.g., I store my "spare" keyboards in "keyboard boxes" and
> >> they easily take up twice their minimal volume.
> >
> > I use "Totino's Frozen Pizza" boxes to store keyboards. You can
>
> Huh? Oblong pizzas?? :> (sorry, I just can't picture this :< )
Rectangular boxes the ship 10 pizzas in. 10" wide, 20" long and 7"
deep. Some come with lids, while others are just open trays.
>
> > stand about eight in each box. I pick them up at the grocery store for
> > free. Some of the other frozen food and packaged lunchmeat boxes are
> > great for storing PC boards & spare drives. The boxes for three, one
> > gallon bottles of water is good for CD & DVD drives, or other 5.25"
> > drives.
>
> I've "standardized" on "Vacutainer" boxes (vacutainers are those
> vacuum-filled, rubber-stoppered, "test tubes" that are used when
> blood is drawn). They are ~18x12x6 so they fit nicely on my
> (18 inch deep) shelves. They are big enough that I can store
> "enough" in each -- yet not *too* big to end up with lots of
> "empty space".
The water boxes are 6.25" wide, 18.5" long and 10" deep.
> E.g., I have a box for SCSI "1" cables, "2", "wide", VHDCI,
> DB25, VGA, DVI, 10Base2, "RJ45", etc.; boxes for screwdrivers,
> chisels, drills, etc.; CD-ROMs, DVD writers, speech synthesizers,
> barcode readers, PDAs, signature pads, etc.; development boards
> (SBC's), hookup wire scraps, etc.; access points, routers, network
> fabric, network appliances, etc.
>
> [I think there are ~130 of these boxes currently]
I'll see your 130, and raise you over 500 Banana Boxes. (16" wide,
20" long and 9" deep:) They are used for storage without shelves in one
of my small shop buildings. They are in three groups, stacked eight
high. They are two stacks deep along the outside walls, and a center
isle three deep down the center of the building. That leaves two long
three feet wide isles. This is where things are stored and sorted
before being recycled or dismantled. There are bulk components,
computer, test equipment and tooling stored there. A few complete
telephone systems & spare parts that I was using to support some radio
stations.
That was where I did most of my work before I became disabled. I
would grab some old equipment and decide if it was worth repairing. If
it was, I would look for the parts I needed, or just make notes and box
it up until I got the parts. Others were like the old WE or SC 2500
series five line phones. (1A2 type) I had a steady stream of bad phones
show up. The ones in good shape were repaired and boxed up. The rest
were scrapped as fast as I could. In 10 years I scrapped over 500 of
them. I still have some spare phones and 400 series cards. They are
going to a local tire business for spares as I find them. They help
local Veterans, so it's only fair to return that help. :)
> > Empty 55 gallon steel drums are great for all those extra hard drive
> > cables, and other cables from dead PCs. When you get tired of digging
> > through them, they are already ready to haul to the recyclers. ;-)
>
> I like the cables sorted. Probably 25% of my "storage" is
> dedicated to cables. I suspect there is more *real* "value"
> there than in any of the other stuff -- it seems like I
> don't go more than a day without needing to dig out some
> sort of cable! Especially all of the odd-ball "specials"
> common for USB :-/
The barrel is for things that I have way too many of. Like 25 foot
Centronics Printer cables or 50 foot RS232 cables. I will grab one of
those to make a custom cable for someone. I just dug out a 25 foot
Centronics Printer cable a few days ago to make a long Serial Printer
cable for an IOLine vinyl cutter for a friend to cut lettering. No one
stocks them anymore, around here. They probably never did stock
anything over six feet.
I have a stack of boxes full of hard and floppy drive cables. Others
are full of various power cables. About 500 AC adapters sorted by
voltage, or application. (EG: HP Printer power supplies)
> >> I suspect most boards are such commodity items that a 50c
> >> box would be a huge (relative) investment -- in cardboard. :>
> >> (OTOH, if you just toss those commodity cards out, the cost
> >> of acquiring a new one WHEN YOU NEED IT is ridiculously
> >> expensive -- travel time, opportunity costs, etc.)
> >
> >> I'll see how the "sort into four categories" approach works.
> >> If I can find boxes that are ~30% smaller, then I can, perhaps,
> >> toss 30% of the boards (and *hope* I toss the ones that I
> >> won't need NEXT WEEK! :> )
> >
> > I don't throw out any good boards. You never know when you'll need
> > one you can't replace. A few years ago I repaired a prototype IBM PC
> > for a retired IBM EE. The old man was in tears when he discovered that
> > I not only had a FDC board, but it was a genuine IBM board.
>
> I don't throw *out* anything. Everything gets recycled.
I can go one better. there is a local program to teach people to do
assembly work. At times they want scrap electronics to use to teach
soldering, and rework. :)
> I don't save "old" stuff anymore -- unless I need it to
> support an old design, etc. E.g., I have only one ISA bus
> PC -- but, it can support two *full* length cards.
>
> OTOH, I got bit yesterday as I needed a PS2 keyboard and
> didn't have a "spare" (I only keep a few spare keyboards
> and most of those are "specials") so I had to borrow one from
> one of my servers. :<
I'm 'down' to about 200 keyboards and about 130 mice right now. :(
I also have a couple 3' cubed shipping containers full of Commodore
computers. :)
> I really like these little *tiny* keyboards (about 12" wide?)
> for those machines that I run headless -- yet "need" a keyboard
> to be able to power it down "locally" (i.e., "typing blind").
>
> [I keep a portable *7* inch LCD monitor for those times when
> I need to connect a display to a headless machine... requires
> a bit of squinting to read but a lot nicer than having to
> lug a larger monitor around!]
You can't use VNC software to shut it down from another computer?
D Yuniskis
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> D Yuniskis wrote:
>> Michael A. Terrell wrote:
>>> D Yuniskis wrote:
>>>> Spehro Pefhany wrote:
>>>>> You can buy boxes in various form factors from places like Uline. If
>>>>> it isn't worth a 50-cent box to store neatly, maybe it should be
>>>>> tossed?
>>>> I tried that route. You end up with *lots* of "wasted volume". :<
>>>> Just pilling boards into four "large" boxes resulted in about
>>>> 4 cubic feet of "boards". I suspect that would double if each
>>>> board was packed in something akin to retail packaging.
>>>>
>>>> E.g., I store my "spare" keyboards in "keyboard boxes" and
>>>> they easily take up twice their minimal volume.
>>> I use "Totino's Frozen Pizza" boxes to store keyboards. You can
>> Huh? Oblong pizzas?? :> (sorry, I just can't picture this :< )
>
> Rectangular boxes the ship 10 pizzas in. 10" wide, 20" long and 7"
Ahhh! --------------------------^^^^^^^^
I was trying to imagine how the box for a *single* pizza
could possibly be useful <:-/
> deep. Some come with lids, while others are just open trays.
>
>>> stand about eight in each box. I pick them up at the grocery store for
>>> free. Some of the other frozen food and packaged lunchmeat boxes are
>>> great for storing PC boards & spare drives. The boxes for three, one
>>> gallon bottles of water is good for CD & DVD drives, or other 5.25"
>>> drives.
>> I've "standardized" on "Vacutainer" boxes (vacutainers are those
>> vacuum-filled, rubber-stoppered, "test tubes" that are used when
>> blood is drawn). They are ~18x12x6 so they fit nicely on my
>> (18 inch deep) shelves. They are big enough that I can store
>> "enough" in each -- yet not *too* big to end up with lots of
>> "empty space".
>
> The water boxes are 6.25" wide, 18.5" long and 10" deep.
OK, different form factor (narrower opening, deeper).
>> E.g., I have a box for SCSI "1" cables, "2", "wide", VHDCI,
>> DB25, VGA, DVI, 10Base2, "RJ45", etc.; boxes for screwdrivers,
>> chisels, drills, etc.; CD-ROMs, DVD writers, speech synthesizers,
>> barcode readers, PDAs, signature pads, etc.; development boards
>> (SBC's), hookup wire scraps, etc.; access points, routers, network
>> fabric, network appliances, etc.
>>
>> [I think there are ~130 of these boxes currently]
>
> I'll see your 130, and raise you over 500 Banana Boxes. (16" wide,
> 20" long and 9" deep:) They are used for storage without shelves in one
> of my small shop buildings. They are in three groups, stacked eight
--------^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If I had a "separate space" for work related stuff, the
gravitational field would probably be highly distorted in its
vicinity! :> (i.e., I learned not to have too much
"storage space" lest you end up storing too much *in* it! :> )
> high. They are two stacks deep along the outside walls, and a center
> isle three deep down the center of the building. That leaves two long
> three feet wide isles. This is where things are stored and sorted
> before being recycled or dismantled. There are bulk components,
Ah, I only keep what *I* will (personally) use.
> computer, test equipment and tooling stored there. A few complete
> telephone systems & spare parts that I was using to support some radio
> stations.
>
> That was where I did most of my work before I became disabled. I
> would grab some old equipment and decide if it was worth repairing. If
> it was, I would look for the parts I needed, or just make notes and box
> it up until I got the parts. Others were like the old WE or SC 2500
> series five line phones. (1A2 type) I had a steady stream of bad phones
> show up. The ones in good shape were repaired and boxed up. The rest
> were scrapped as fast as I could. In 10 years I scrapped over 500 of
(sigh) There was a time when I was looking for WE 500/2500 sets.
> them. I still have some spare phones and 400 series cards. They are
> going to a local tire business for spares as I find them. They help
> local Veterans, so it's only fair to return that help. :)
>
>>> Empty 55 gallon steel drums are great for all those extra hard drive
>>> cables, and other cables from dead PCs. When you get tired of digging
>>> through them, they are already ready to haul to the recyclers. ;-)
>> I like the cables sorted. Probably 25% of my "storage" is
>> dedicated to cables. I suspect there is more *real* "value"
>> there than in any of the other stuff -- it seems like I
>> don't go more than a day without needing to dig out some
>> sort of cable! Especially all of the odd-ball "specials"
>> common for USB :-/
>
> The barrel is for things that I have way too many of. Like 25 foot
> Centronics Printer cables or 50 foot RS232 cables. I will grab one of
> those to make a custom cable for someone. I just dug out a 25 foot
> Centronics Printer cable a few days ago to make a long Serial Printer
> cable for an IOLine vinyl cutter for a friend to cut lettering. No one
> stocks them anymore, around here. They probably never did stock
> anything over six feet.
I hang onto cables because I don't want to have to *make* any!
Just too damn much work for what it's worth, usually.
So, I keep a good assortment of various types of cables in
various lengths. The only ones I have in short supply are
the nice 12" wide SCSI cables. :<
> I have a stack of boxes full of hard and floppy drive cables. Others
> are full of various power cables. About 500 AC adapters sorted by
> voltage, or application. (EG: HP Printer power supplies)
I have two of the vacutainer boxes set aside for "unmatched" wall
warts/bricks. Anything that *needs* a wall wart/brick has that
stored with it.
OTOH, there are times when I need a standalone power supply
for some bit of kit. If I am lucky, I'll have a supply
in one of the boxes *with* the right connector. If not,
I'll find a suitable supply and cut the existing connector
off and replace it with another.
(I presently have to do that with a pair of external HD
enclosures that are missing their power packs)
>> I don't save "old" stuff anymore -- unless I need it to
>> support an old design, etc. E.g., I have only one ISA bus
>> PC -- but, it can support two *full* length cards.
>>
>> OTOH, I got bit yesterday as I needed a PS2 keyboard and
>> didn't have a "spare" (I only keep a few spare keyboards
>> and most of those are "specials") so I had to borrow one from
>> one of my servers. :<
>
> I'm 'down' to about 200 keyboards and about 130 mice right now. :(
I typically only keep one of each type of keyboard as a spare.
Recently, however, my spare PS2 keyboard was used to replace
one that developed a flakey spacebar. Unfortunately, I
didn't think to replace the *spare* at the time! :<
Yesterday, I needed to power down one of my headless servers
and discovered that it's keyboard had given up the ghost.
So, I had to resort to powering it down remotely.
> I also have a couple 3' cubed shipping containers full of Commodore
> computers. :)
>
>> I really like these little *tiny* keyboards (about 12" wide?)
>> for those machines that I run headless -- yet "need" a keyboard
>> to be able to power it down "locally" (i.e., "typing blind").
>>
>> [I keep a portable *7* inch LCD monitor for those times when
>> I need to connect a display to a headless machine... requires
>> a bit of squinting to read but a lot nicer than having to
>> lug a larger monitor around!]
>
> You can't use VNC software to shut it down from another computer?
Not all of my machines run GUI's.
I can telnet/ssh to any of them and shut down that way.
But, that means having to turn *on* a second computer
*just* to telnet to the *first*!
If, instead, I leave a keyboard attached to each, I can simply
type (without *seeing* what I'm typing):
root
<password>
shutdown -p now (or whatever)
wait a few seconds for confirmation that the box *is*
shutting down...
Michael A. Terrell
I've had as many as 50 boxes leave, or get emptied in a single
month. Some sold at hamfests, others scrapped for parts & recyecled.
>
> > high. They are two stacks deep along the outside walls, and a center
> > isle three deep down the center of the building. That leaves two long
> > three feet wide isles. This is where things are stored and sorted
> > before being recycled or dismantled. There are bulk components,
>
> Ah, I only keep what *I* will (personally) use.
Bulk is anything that won't fit in a single drawer in one of the ol;d
50 drawer 'Akro Mils' parts
Something like these, but five drawers wide & ten tall:
<http://www.akro-mils.com/image_library/view.asp?id=2636>
I give away a lot of used computers & parts, so any that work go into
boxes. There are times when I don't have any to spare.
> Yesterday, I needed to power down one of my headless servers
> and discovered that it's keyboard had given up the ghost.
> So, I had to resort to powering it down remotely.
>
> > I also have a couple 3' cubed shipping containers full of Commodore
> > computers. :)
> >
> >> I really like these little *tiny* keyboards (about 12" wide?)
> >> for those machines that I run headless -- yet "need" a keyboard
> >> to be able to power it down "locally" (i.e., "typing blind").
> >>
> >> [I keep a portable *7* inch LCD monitor for those times when
> >> I need to connect a display to a headless machine... requires
> >> a bit of squinting to read but a lot nicer than having to
> >> lug a larger monitor around!]
> >
> > You can't use VNC software to shut it down from another computer?
>
> Not all of my machines run GUI's.
>
> I can telnet/ssh to any of them and shut down that way.
> But, that means having to turn *on* a second computer
> *just* to telnet to the *first*!
>
> If, instead, I leave a keyboard attached to each, I can simply
> type (without *seeing* what I'm typing):
>
> root
> <password>
> shutdown -p now (or whatever)
>
> wait a few seconds for confirmation that the box *is*
> shutting down...
While waiting with baited breath and a fire extinguisher? ;-)
I had to shut down a Novell server I'd built, years ago. It had a
keyboard & monitor, but the video board had died. I had to just turn
the power off, since it wasn't responding to the keyboard.
D Yuniskis
[attributions elided]
>>> high. They are two stacks deep along the outside walls, and a center
>>> isle three deep down the center of the building. That leaves two long
>>> three feet wide isles. This is where things are stored and sorted
>>> before being recycled or dismantled. There are bulk components,
>> Ah, I only keep what *I* will (personally) use.
>
> Bulk is anything that won't fit in a single drawer in one of the ol;d
> 50 drawer 'Akro Mils' parts
I keep those mounted on one wall. I think there are currently
14 60-drawer cabinets. But, lately, I have been moving "small things"
into old pill bottles, etc. as wall space is at a premium, here.
I may run HVAC into the little (100 sq ft?) store room off the
garage and convert that into usable storage space. But, too many
other "more pressing" projects before that...
> Something like these, but five drawers wide & ten tall:
> <http://www.akro-mils.com/image_library/view.asp?id=2636>
Mine are 6 wide and 10 tall. Same general idea. I passed up
two "revolving racks" of drawer units (each 4 sided, 6 ft tall
made of those little drawers) simply because I didn't have the
space to store them. :< I'm trying *not* to store little
parts any more as i can just have Digikey drop a package on
my doorstep in a few days (instead of tying up space *anticipating*
future needs)
>>>> OTOH, I got bit yesterday as I needed a PS2 keyboard and
>>>> didn't have a "spare" (I only keep a few spare keyboards
>>>> and most of those are "specials") so I had to borrow one from
>>>> one of my servers. :<
>>> I'm 'down' to about 200 keyboards and about 130 mice right now. :(
>> I typically only keep one of each type of keyboard as a spare.
>> Recently, however, my spare PS2 keyboard was used to replace
>> one that developed a flakey spacebar. Unfortunately, I
>> didn't think to replace the *spare* at the time! :<
>
> I give away a lot of used computers & parts, so any that work go into
> boxes. There are times when I don't have any to spare.
Yes, there is a group here that does that on a large scale
(probably a thousand PC's yearly) so I bring any "recyclable"
items to them. Stuff like this turns up far too frequently
to set aside places to *store* it!
(OTOH, 13W3 KVM's tend to be "keepers" when I do come across them!)
>> I can telnet/ssh to any of them and shut down that way.
>> But, that means having to turn *on* a second computer
>> *just* to telnet to the *first*!
>>
>> If, instead, I leave a keyboard attached to each, I can simply
>> type (without *seeing* what I'm typing):
>>
>> root
>> <password>
>> shutdown -p now (or whatever)
>>
>> wait a few seconds for confirmation that the box *is*
>> shutting down...
>
> While waiting with baited breath and a fire extinguisher? ;-)
No, most systems (especially if they don't have "MS" anywhere
in their name!) can handle even abrupt power cycles. The
only frustrating part is if the keyboard had been "bumped"
in the past N days so that the console wasn't sitting
at the "login: " prompt -- since I can't verify that visually.
In that case, I have no way of knowing that my login was
unsuccessful! So, if the machine doesn't start shutting down
when I expect it to, then I have to go back through a more
systematic set of keystrokes to *ensure* I am at a "login: "
prompt, etc.
<shrug> And, if push comes to shove, take the 7" LCD out of
it's case and plug that in. (I have learned to leave a video
cable dangling out of the back of every headless machine here
so I don't have to try to crawl behind it when I *need* to
plug in a monitor! :> Painful lessons learned through
experience...)
Michael A. Terrell
D Yuniskis wrote:
>
> Hi Michael,
> >
> > 50 drawer 'Akro Mils' parts
>
> I keep those mounted on one wall. I think there are currently
> 14 60-drawer cabinets. But, lately, I have been moving "small things"
> into old pill bottles, etc. as wall space is at a premium, here.
> I may run HVAC into the little (100 sq ft?) store room off the
> garage and convert that into usable storage space. But, too many
> other "more pressing" projects before that...
I mounted a bunch of them on an old 9-track computer tape storage
rack. I added heavy casters and covered the back side with these:
<http://www.harborfreightusa.com/usa/itemdisplay/displayItem.do?itemid=41949&CategoryName=&SubCategoryName=>
That way I can roll it around the storeroom, or turn it around to get
the hardware stored in the open bins.
> > Something like these, but five drawers wide & ten tall:
> > <http://www.akro-mils.com/image_library/view.asp?id=2636>
>
> Mine are 6 wide and 10 tall. Same general idea. I passed up
> two "revolving racks" of drawer units (each 4 sided, 6 ft tall
> made of those little drawers) simply because I didn't have the
> space to store them. :< I'm trying *not* to store little
> parts any more as i can just have Digikey drop a package on
> my doorstep in a few days (instead of tying up space *anticipating*
> future needs)
I had a repair buisness years ago. Why throw out the parts, and buy
more? :)
> > I give away a lot of used computers & parts, so any that work go into
> > boxes. There are times when I don't have any to spare.
>
> Yes, there is a group here that does that on a large scale
> (probably a thousand PC's yearly) so I bring any "recyclable"
> items to them. Stuff like this turns up far too frequently
> to set aside places to *store* it!
Now that I was declared 100% disabled and not allowed to work, it's
just a hobby.
> (OTOH, 13W3 KVM's tend to be "keepers" when I do come across them!)
I have several of the Sony versions of those SUN monitors with the
BNC connectors.
> >> wait a few seconds for confirmation that the box *is*
> >> shutting down...
> >
> > While waiting with baited breath and a fire extinguisher? ;-)
>
> No, most systems (especially if they don't have "MS" anywhere
> in their name!) can handle even abrupt power cycles. The
> only frustrating part is if the keyboard had been "bumped"
> in the past N days so that the console wasn't sitting
> at the "login: " prompt -- since I can't verify that visually.
> In that case, I have no way of knowing that my login was
> unsuccessful! So, if the machine doesn't start shutting down
> when I expect it to, then I have to go back through a more
> systematic set of keystrokes to *ensure* I am at a "login: "
> prompt, etc.
>
> <shrug> And, if push comes to shove, take the 7" LCD out of
> it's case and plug that in. (I have learned to leave a video
> cable dangling out of the back of every headless machine here
> so I don't have to try to crawl behind it when I *need* to
> plug in a monitor! :> Painful lessons learned through
> experience...)
I prefer a monitor switch to switch through the various machines, but
I do have a background in TV Broadcasting. :)
D Yuniskis
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> D Yuniskis wrote:
>> Hi Michael,
>>> Bulk is anything that won't fit in a single drawer in one of the old
>>> 50 drawer 'Akro Mils' parts
>> I keep those mounted on one wall. I think there are currently
>> 14 60-drawer cabinets. But, lately, I have been moving "small things"
>> into old pill bottles, etc. as wall space is at a premium, here.
>> I may run HVAC into the little (100 sq ft?) store room off the
>> garage and convert that into usable storage space. But, too many
>> other "more pressing" projects before that...
>
> I mounted a bunch of them on an old 9-track computer tape storage
Huh? The 9T racks I have seen were basically "open" -- nothing to
hang things off of (besides the tapes' "hooks")
> rack. I added heavy casters and covered the back side with these:
> <http://www.harborfreightusa.com/usa/itemdisplay/displayItem.do?itemid=41949&CategoryName=&SubCategoryName=>
>
> That way I can roll it around the storeroom, or turn it around to get
> the hardware stored in the open bins.
Yeah, the key there is "storeroom" :> As I said previously, if I
had a place to dedicate to this stuff, I'd do things differently.
But, with age, I've found I like having less and less "stuff"
around to deal with (though I am still not to the point of
wanting to "live in two rooms" someplace! ;-) Probably NEVER
trim down *that* much!)
>>> Something like these, but five drawers wide & ten tall:
>>> <http://www.akro-mils.com/image_library/view.asp?id=2636>
>> Mine are 6 wide and 10 tall. Same general idea. I passed up
>> two "revolving racks" of drawer units (each 4 sided, 6 ft tall
>> made of those little drawers) simply because I didn't have the
>> space to store them. :< I'm trying *not* to store little
>> parts any more as i can just have Digikey drop a package on
>> my doorstep in a few days (instead of tying up space *anticipating*
>> future needs)
>
> I had a repair buisness years ago. Why throw out the parts, and buy
> more? :)
Depends on whether or not you have the space to store them.
My first move (out of college) my "load" was 19,000 pounds.
Amusing considering I was just a college kid, etc. :> (I
think all I had by way of "traditional belongings" was a
bed, a couch, a kitchen table and a refrigerator)
I live in terror of ever having that much "stuff" again.
It would be *so* nice to be one of those guys who can get by
with just a laptop. *ONE* laptop! :>
>> (OTOH, 13W3 KVM's tend to be "keepers" when I do come across them!)
>
> I have several of the Sony versions of those SUN monitors with the
> BNC connectors.
4BNC and 5BNC. Actually, I think finding that sort of KVM would be
even harder than a 13W3! (though you could adapt one with an
appropriate set of cables, etc.)
>> <shrug> And, if push comes to shove, take the 7" LCD out of
>> it's case and plug that in. (I have learned to leave a video
>> cable dangling out of the back of every headless machine here
>> so I don't have to try to crawl behind it when I *need* to
>> plug in a monitor! :> Painful lessons learned through
>> experience...)
>
> I prefer a monitor switch to switch through the various machines, but
> I do have a background in TV Broadcasting. :)
I found most KVMs don't like the typical mix of machines that
I have, here. They'd "hang" at inopportune times, etc.
So, for "headed" machines, I usually use monitors with two
or more video inputs and just do the switching in the monitor.
This is a little tedious as I usually run dual-headed on
most machines -- but, can also be a win as I can switch one
monitor to machine A while the other is on B and do two
things at once (with careful planning of screen real estate).
The pisser comes from the keyboards (and mice, if I'm running
a GUI). It is *really* hard to keep track of which keyboard
to type on for which "monitor" (machine) -- especially as
you could have the screens set up as A1+A2, B1+B2, A1+B2 or
B1+A2 (so you never really know *what* you're doing until you
get some feedback from a screen :< )
<shrug> Life was so much simpler with a Bell 103 and ASR33...
(though considerably more BORING!)
Michael A. Terrell
D Yuniskis wrote:
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> >
> > I mounted a bunch of them on an old 9-track computer tape storage
>
> Huh? The 9T racks I have seen were basically "open" -- nothing to
> hang things off of (besides the tapes' "hooks")
That's it, in one! I screwed a sheet of scrap 1/4" pegboard to one
side to hold the bins, and stacked the metal framed 50 drawer cabinets
on the other. A narrow piece of angle aluminum was run vertically on
both outside edges to tie them together, and to the frame.
> Yeah, the key there is "storeroom" :> As I said previously, if I
> had a place to dedicate to this stuff, I'd do things differently.
> But, with age, I've found I like having less and less "stuff"
> around to deal with (though I am still not to the point of
> wanting to "live in two rooms" someplace! ;-) Probably NEVER
> trim down *that* much!)
The 'Storeroom' is an old 10' * 10' 'Office' off the back of the
shop, where I store tools & parts to keep them away from 'Visitors' with
sticky fingers. I had planned on opening a small shop when I retired,
but I ended up disabled, instead.
> Depends on whether or not you have the space to store them.
> My first move (out of college) my "load" was 19,000 pounds.
Heh. I moved over 18,000 pounds when I moved south. I hauled it in
two trips in an old Chevy stepvan.
> Amusing considering I was just a college kid, etc. :> (I
> think all I had by way of "traditional belongings" was a
> bed, a couch, a kitchen table and a refrigerator)
I've had almost a ton of electronic equipment show up at my shop one
day while I was out to lunch. It took me the rest of the day to move it
all from the front door, then into the storeroom. :(
> I live in terror of ever having that much "stuff" again.
> It would be *so* nice to be one of those guys who can get by
> with just a laptop. *ONE* laptop! :>
>
> >> (OTOH, 13W3 KVM's tend to be "keepers" when I do come across them!)
> >
> > I have several of the Sony versions of those SUN monitors with the
> > BNC connectors.
>
> 4BNC and 5BNC. Actually, I think finding that sort of KVM would be
> even harder than a 13W3! (though you could adapt one with an
> appropriate set of cables, etc.)
> >
> > I prefer a monitor switch to switch through the various machines, but
> > I do have a background in TV Broadcasting. :)
>
> I found most KVMs don't like the typical mix of machines that
> I have, here. They'd "hang" at inopportune times, etc.
Not a KVM, just a monitor switch. Separate keyboards & mice per
machine.
> So, for "headed" machines, I usually use monitors with two
> or more video inputs and just do the switching in the monitor.
> This is a little tedious as I usually run dual-headed on
> most machines -- but, can also be a win as I can switch one
> monitor to machine A while the other is on B and do two
> things at once (with careful planning of screen real estate).
>
> The pisser comes from the keyboards (and mice, if I'm running
> a GUI). It is *really* hard to keep track of which keyboard
> to type on for which "monitor" (machine) -- especially as
> you could have the screens set up as A1+A2, B1+B2, A1+B2 or
> B1+A2 (so you never really know *what* you're doing until you
> get some feedback from a screen :< )
>
> <shrug> Life was so much simpler with a Bell 103 and ASR33...
> (though considerably more BORING!)
You had an ASR33? I started with a pair of Kleinschmidt 60 mA
machines on leased lines. They were replaced with KSR33s, which was
cheaper than adding sound deadening to the radio & TV station building.
D Yuniskis
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> D Yuniskis wrote:
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> Michael A. Terrell wrote:
>>> I mounted a bunch of them on an old 9-track computer tape storage
>> Huh? The 9T racks I have seen were basically "open" -- nothing to
>> hang things off of (besides the tapes' "hooks")
>
> That's it, in one! I screwed a sheet of scrap 1/4" pegboard to one
> side to hold the bins, and stacked the metal framed 50 drawer cabinets
> on the other. A narrow piece of angle aluminum was run vertically on
> both outside edges to tie them together, and to the frame.
Ah, OK. Must have been a real b*tch to try to move it!
>> Yeah, the key there is "storeroom" :> As I said previously, if I
>> had a place to dedicate to this stuff, I'd do things differently.
>> But, with age, I've found I like having less and less "stuff"
>> around to deal with (though I am still not to the point of
>> wanting to "live in two rooms" someplace! ;-) Probably NEVER
>> trim down *that* much!)
>
> The 'Storeroom' is an old 10' * 10' 'Office' off the back of the
> shop, where I store tools & parts to keep them away from 'Visitors' with
> sticky fingers. I had planned on opening a small shop when I retired,
> but I ended up disabled, instead.
I'd like a basement -- except it would quickly end up cluttered.
:< With limited space, you think real hard before you *keep*
something. Especially anything sizable! Hence the appeal
of things that can get "stored" *inside* other things. Like
cards installed in a PC (instead of piled in a box!).
I've been slowly scanning the paperwork that I deem worthy
of saving. That will clear up a fair bit of space (volume).
>> Depends on whether or not you have the space to store them.
>> My first move (out of college) my "load" was 19,000 pounds.
>
> Heh. I moved over 18,000 pounds when I moved south. I hauled it in
> two trips in an old Chevy stepvan.
Now imagine that much stuff when you're "just getting started
in your 'adult' life"! :>
>> Amusing considering I was just a college kid, etc. :> (I
>> think all I had by way of "traditional belongings" was a
>> bed, a couch, a kitchen table and a refrigerator)
>
> I've had almost a ton of electronic equipment show up at my shop one
> day while I was out to lunch. It took me the rest of the day to move it
> all from the front door, then into the storeroom. :(
Like odd bits of furniture, best not to let it in the door
to begin with -- as it is hard to get it back *out*, later! :>
>>> I prefer a monitor switch to switch through the various machines, but
>>> I do have a background in TV Broadcasting. :)
>> I found most KVMs don't like the typical mix of machines that
>> I have, here. They'd "hang" at inopportune times, etc.
>
> Not a KVM, just a monitor switch. Separate keyboards & mice per
> machine.
Ah, OK.
It's too bad someone hasn't hacked together a laptop that
is *just* a monitor + keyboard! I imagine there would be
a market for such a beast.
>> The pisser comes from the keyboards (and mice, if I'm running
>> a GUI). It is *really* hard to keep track of which keyboard
>> to type on for which "monitor" (machine) -- especially as
>> you could have the screens set up as A1+A2, B1+B2, A1+B2 or
>> B1+A2 (so you never really know *what* you're doing until you
>> get some feedback from a screen :< )
>>
>> <shrug> Life was so much simpler with a Bell 103 and ASR33...
>> (though considerably more BORING!)
>
> You had an ASR33?
Yeah, I still have one in the garage. Don't want to scrap
it but *shipping* it anyplace is a real chore. :<
Michael A. Terrell
D Yuniskis wrote:
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> > D Yuniskis wrote:
> >> Hi Michael,
> >>
> >> Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> >>> I mounted a bunch of them on an old 9-track computer tape storage
> >> Huh? The 9T racks I have seen were basically "open" -- nothing to
> >> hang things off of (besides the tapes' "hooks")
> >
> > That's it, in one! I screwed a sheet of scrap 1/4" pegboard to one
> > side to hold the bins, and stacked the metal framed 50 drawer cabinets
> > on the other. A narrow piece of angle aluminum was run vertically on
> > both outside edges to tie them together, and to the frame.
>
> Ah, OK. Must have been a real b*tch to try to move it!
Not really. It was only a single 4' wide frame that I picked up at a
local school board auction for $5. Everyone thought I was crazy for
wasting the $5. ;-)
> > The 'Storeroom' is an old 10' * 10' 'Office' off the back of the
> > shop, where I store tools & parts to keep them away from 'Visitors' with
> > sticky fingers. I had planned on opening a small shop when I retired,
> > but I ended up disabled, instead.
>
> I'd like a basement -- except it would quickly end up cluttered.
Basements are rare in this part of Florida. :(
That's why I bought a house with a 1200 Sq' garage, an 18' * 28' shop
building and two 12' * 12' outbuildings. There is also a single bedroom
cottage on the property that's 12' * 24'.
> :< With limited space, you think real hard before you *keep*
> something. Especially anything sizable! Hence the appeal
> of things that can get "stored" *inside* other things. Like
> cards installed in a PC (instead of piled in a box!).
>
> I've been slowly scanning the paperwork that I deem worthy
> of saving. That will clear up a fair bit of space (volume).
What are you scanning? A lot of manuals are available on sites like
'retrevo.com'. Other sites have free downloads of service manuals &
test equipment manuals, as well.
> >> Depends on whether or not you have the space to store them.
> >> My first move (out of college) my "load" was 19,000 pounds.
> >
> > Heh. I moved over 18,000 pounds when I moved south. I hauled it in
> > two trips in an old Chevy stepvan.
>
> Now imagine that much stuff when you're "just getting started
> in your 'adult' life"! :>
I had more than that when I moved my shop out of my parent's
basement, and all I had was a long wheelbase GMC van. :(
> >> Amusing considering I was just a college kid, etc. :> (I
> >> think all I had by way of "traditional belongings" was a
> >> bed, a couch, a kitchen table and a refrigerator)
> >
> > I've had almost a ton of electronic equipment show up at my shop one
> > day while I was out to lunch. It took me the rest of the day to move it
> > all from the front door, then into the storeroom. :(
>
> Like odd bits of furniture, best not to let it in the door
> to begin with -- as it is hard to get it back *out*, later! :>
It was a complete CAD system, with two color Tektronix terminals, a
huge Tektronix inkjet plotter/w the rasterizer and a small VAX based
computer. Some of the students at the local vocational electronics
school would bring me stuff they didn't want, in exchange for free
access to my technical library and some tutoring. Their teacher would
give them a project to design & build before they graduated, and the
school's collection of databooks was about 25 years out of date.
> > Not a KVM, just a monitor switch. Separate keyboards & mice per
> > machine.
>
> Ah, OK.
>
> It's too bad someone hasn't hacked together a laptop that
> is *just* a monitor + keyboard! I imagine there would be
> a market for such a beast.
Yes, but not enough to convince the bean counters to let them bring
it to market. :(
> >> The pisser comes from the keyboards (and mice, if I'm running
> >> a GUI). It is *really* hard to keep track of which keyboard
> >> to type on for which "monitor" (machine) -- especially as
> >> you could have the screens set up as A1+A2, B1+B2, A1+B2 or
> >> B1+A2 (so you never really know *what* you're doing until you
> >> get some feedback from a screen :< )
> >>
> >> <shrug> Life was so much simpler with a Bell 103 and ASR33...
> >> (though considerably more BORING!)
> >
> > You had an ASR33?
>
> Yeah, I still have one in the garage. Don't want to scrap
> it but *shipping* it anyplace is a real chore. :<
Someone on the 'Green Keys' group would love to have it.
> > I started with a pair of Kleinschmidt 60 mA
> > machines on leased lines. They were replaced with KSR33s, which was
> > cheaper than adding sound deadening to the radio & TV station building.
D Yuniskis
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
>> :< With limited space, you think real hard before you *keep*
>> something. Especially anything sizable! Hence the appeal
>> of things that can get "stored" *inside* other things. Like
>> cards installed in a PC (instead of piled in a box!).
>>
>> I've been slowly scanning the paperwork that I deem worthy
>> of saving. That will clear up a fair bit of space (volume).
>
> What are you scanning? A lot of manuals are available on sites like
> 'retrevo.com'. Other sites have free downloads of service manuals &
> test equipment manuals, as well.
These are either documents for old projects that I did
(and didn't have the foresight to save the electronic versions
of those documents at the time -- something I quickly
learned!), tax and business records, etc.
The most tedious are the print manuals that were never
available (publicly) in electronic form. In addition
to the actual *scanning*, there is a lot of work
getting the manuals "disassembled" to the point where
they *can* be scanned (e.g., ripping "perfect binding").
I've got ~5 cu ft of MULTICS manuals that have been
staring me in the face for a while, now... most of
them are printed on "european size" paper (is that
A4?) so it's also a bit "different" to handle.
<shrug>
>>> Not a KVM, just a monitor switch. Separate keyboards & mice per
>>> machine.
>> Ah, OK.
>>
>> It's too bad someone hasn't hacked together a laptop that
>> is *just* a monitor + keyboard! I imagine there would be
>> a market for such a beast.
>
> Yes, but not enough to convince the bean counters to let them bring
> it to market. :(
I may see if I can hack together a little adapter to fit inside
just such a beast next time I come across one that "feels
right". Doesn't have to be "pretty" -- just functional.
Maybe turn it into a Hackable?
>>>> <shrug> Life was so much simpler with a Bell 103 and ASR33...
>>>> (though considerably more BORING!)
>>> You had an ASR33?
>> Yeah, I still have one in the garage. Don't want to scrap
>> it but *shipping* it anyplace is a real chore. :<
>
> Someone on the 'Green Keys' group would love to have it.
Oh, there are lots of folks who would "love to have it"! :>
Problem is, getting it out of here requires considerable
effort on my part to ensure it will "travel well". It's
just not high on my ToDo list (I got rid of another one a few
months ago so I figure I'm already "50% done"! :> )
Paul Carpenter
says...
> Hi Michael,
>
> Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> >> :< With limited space, you think real hard before you *keep*
> >> something. Especially anything sizable! Hence the appeal
> >> of things that can get "stored" *inside* other things. Like
> >> cards installed in a PC (instead of piled in a box!).
> >>
> >> I've been slowly scanning the paperwork that I deem worthy
> >> of saving. That will clear up a fair bit of space (volume).
> >
> > What are you scanning? A lot of manuals are available on sites like
> > 'retrevo.com'. Other sites have free downloads of service manuals &
> > test equipment manuals, as well.
>
> These are either documents for old projects that I did
> (and didn't have the foresight to save the electronic versions
> of those documents at the time -- something I quickly
> learned!), tax and business records, etc.
We all have one or two (or several) of these...
> The most tedious are the print manuals that were never
> available (publicly) in electronic form. In addition
> to the actual *scanning*, there is a lot of work
> getting the manuals "disassembled" to the point where
> they *can* be scanned (e.g., ripping "perfect binding").
I know various place like The British Library, has special research
centres so they can make electronic copies of various documents,
books etc..
Bear in mind they CANNOT rip the bindings or damage some books
many HUNDREDS of years old, so they use special prism like structures
to scan two partially open pages, often in special chambers to
avoid damp, dirt, insects etc.. getting in whilst scanning.
They cannot afford to damage most books as they are even less
obtainable than your old Multics manuals.
> I've got ~5 cu ft of MULTICS manuals that have been
> staring me in the face for a while, now... most of
> them are printed on "european size" paper (is that
> A4?) so it's also a bit "different" to handle.
Slight correction ISO standard paper size, used in most of the world
major exception North America.
> >>> Not a KVM, just a monitor switch. Separate keyboards & mice per
> >>> machine.
> >> Ah, OK.
> >>
> >> It's too bad someone hasn't hacked together a laptop that
> >> is *just* a monitor + keyboard! I imagine there would be
> >> a market for such a beast.
Nearest thing is ultra thin clients.
--
Paul Carpenter | pa...@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/> PC Services
<http://www.pcserviceselectronics.co.uk/fonts/> Timing Diagram Font
<http://www.gnuh8.org.uk/> GNU H8 - compiler & Renesas H8/H8S/H8 Tiny
<http://www.badweb.org.uk/> For those web sites you hate
JosephKK
wrote:
It not only has been done, but is still available, mouse included.
But most of such currently are just repurposed laptops. Probably more
user hacks than commercial sales. A great excuse to buy a laptop that is
otherwise relatively CPU underpowered.
D Yuniskis
JosephKK wrote:
>> It's too bad someone hasn't hacked together a laptop that
>> is *just* a monitor + keyboard! I imagine there would be
>> a market for such a beast.
>
> It not only has been done, but is still available, mouse included.
> But most of such currently are just repurposed laptops. Probably more
> user hacks than commercial sales. A great excuse to buy a laptop that is
> otherwise relatively CPU underpowered.
This is something that *looks* like a laptop but, in
reality, is just the laptop's *screen* with a video
INput and keyboard with a PS/2 or USB OUTput?
Pointers, please?
Paul Keinanen
<not.goi...@seen.com> wrote:
>
>The most tedious are the print manuals that were never
>available (publicly) in electronic form. In addition
>to the actual *scanning*, there is a lot of work
>getting the manuals "disassembled" to the point where
>they *can* be scanned (e.g., ripping "perfect binding").
Have you tried photographing those pages using a digital camera ?
This way, the book only needs to be opened to 90 degrees, compared to
180 degrees on an ordinary flat scanner.
A 12 Mpix photograph of the A4 paper will be about 14 pixels/mm.
Compare this to the older CRT computer monitors that had a 0.25 mm
pitch (4 pixels/mm) shadow mask, thus the picture can even be enlarged
on the screen, compared to the original page size.
Of course, the Bayer camera cell will degrade the resolution as well
as the quality of the optics.
JosephKK
wrote:
>Hi Joseph,
Not knowing your specific application i suggest using this in your
favorite search engine:
X-terminal device
You could probably find brick-like devices that do what you want.
D Yuniskis
No, X Terminals, thin clients, etc. are different beasts entirely.
I have several from NCD, Neoware, HP, etc. (I tend to like
using them because they have very little maintenance overhead)
I want a portable LCD monitor and a portable keyboard.
I want to be able to connect that monitor to any old PC
just like any *other* LCD monitor.
I want to be able to connect that keyboard to that same PC
just like any other keyboard.
Gee, a laptop has an LCD *panel* in it. And a set of keys.
Even laptops that are DOG SLOW have these things!
I.e., a laptop that one is likely to DISCARD (recycle) as being
too slow would make an ideal device to *gut* and convert into
a "portable LCD monitor with attached portable keyboard"
(i.e., no CPU inside).
*That* is what I am asking for.
I can do this with a (*fast*) laptop and a video digitizer
card and some software. But, if I could remove the processor
from the laptop along with 95% of its guts and leave *just*
the LCD panel and keyboard, I could get the same sort of
capabilities by adding enough guts to turn it into *just*
an "LCD display".
This should be possible (as a "hackable") with a small board
installed in place of the laptop's guts. I.e., take the guts
out of an LCD monitor and wire them to the connector for the
LCD *panel* inside the gutted laptop (the keyboard is a
simple thing to hack)
Michael A. Terrell
The problem is that LCD display isn't a monitor. It is mated to the
LCD video interface on the laptop's system board.
The keyboard isn't encoded, it is just a set of raw, matrixed
switches.
<http://www.earthlcd.com/> makes some small SVGA LCD monitors, starting
at 6.4 inches.
<http://store.earthlcd.com/LCD-Products/LCD-Monitors-by-Size>
> I can do this with a (*fast*) laptop and a video digitizer
> card and some software. But, if I could remove the processor
> from the laptop along with 95% of its guts and leave *just*
> the LCD panel and keyboard, I could get the same sort of
> capabilities by adding enough guts to turn it into *just*
> an "LCD display".
>
> This should be possible (as a "hackable") with a small board
> installed in place of the laptop's guts. I.e., take the guts
> out of an LCD monitor and wire them to the connector for the
> LCD *panel* inside the gutted laptop (the keyboard is a
> simple thing to hack)
It hasn't come up lately, but for a while someone asked that question
about once a month. Then they would find that it cost more for the
custom elcetronics, than to buy a new monitor.
D Yuniskis
Correct. But, the LCD *panel* in the laptop is no different from
the LCD *panel* in an LCD monitor. I.e., there is nothing to
prevent it from being used as such.
> The keyboard isn't encoded, it is just a set of raw, matrixed
> switches.
Keyboard debounce and encode is a trivial task. :>
> <http://www.earthlcd.com/> makes some small SVGA LCD monitors, starting
> at 6.4 inches.
>
> <http://store.earthlcd.com/LCD-Products/LCD-Monitors-by-Size>
>
>> I can do this with a (*fast*) laptop and a video digitizer
>> card and some software. But, if I could remove the processor
>> from the laptop along with 95% of its guts and leave *just*
>> the LCD panel and keyboard, I could get the same sort of
>> capabilities by adding enough guts to turn it into *just*
>> an "LCD display".
>>
>> This should be possible (as a "hackable") with a small board
>> installed in place of the laptop's guts. I.e., take the guts
>> out of an LCD monitor and wire them to the connector for the
>> LCD *panel* inside the gutted laptop (the keyboard is a
>> simple thing to hack)
>
> It hasn't come up lately, but for a while someone asked that question
> about once a month. Then they would find that it cost more for the
> custom elcetronics, than to buy a new monitor.
Understood. But I'm not looking for an LCD monitor, per se.
What I want is the portability that the laptop offers for
screen *and* keyboard.
I.e., currently, I carry a 7" portable LCD monitor and a
(generic) PC keyboard to interact with headless machines.
I would much prefer the LCD and keyboard be in one neat little
case -- like a laptop -- so easier to carry and store.
Making a suitable interface (to convert a "laptop LCD + keypad"
into a "portable monitor + keyboard") isn't a real problem. The
bigger problem is finding a suitable laptop on which to do this.
(i.e., so that the design effort for the interface isn't "wasted"
on a "qty one" product). Everyone would have their own special
wants -- namely, that it work with *their* (scrap) laptop
(fitting *their* laptop's keypad and display connections,
fitting *their* laptop's mechanical constraints, etc.)
It would only make sense to do if you had a known supply of
a particular laptop (or netbook, etc.) to use.
D Yuniskis
Paul Keinanen wrote:
> On Sun, 16 May 2010 10:08:23 -0700, D Yuniskis
> <not.goi...@seen.com> wrote:
>
>> The most tedious are the print manuals that were never
>> available (publicly) in electronic form. In addition
>> to the actual *scanning*, there is a lot of work
>> getting the manuals "disassembled" to the point where
>> they *can* be scanned (e.g., ripping "perfect binding").
>
> Have you tried photographing those pages using a digital camera ?
It's too labor intensive. You have to arrange for the book
to be held open "enough", even lighting, transfer photos
to PC, convert to TIFF, trim them, import them (in the correct
order) to a PDF, etc.
A lot of time, you end up with crappy image quality "in the
binding edge" as the paper curls and you can't get a clear
view of stuff at that edge, etc.
Instead, I bring the manuals to a print shop and have them
*cut* the binding edge off of the pages. They have large,
electric stack paper cutters (do ~1000 pages at a time
*without* the inevitable skew that a manual/guillotine paper
cutter imparts to the cut!). Then, I can just feed the
"individual pages" through the document feeder (instead of
having to manually flip pages, etc.).
It ends up destroying the original *bound* document (<shrug>)
but most of the folks who look for this sort of information
would gladly see a paper document "sacrificed" if it makes
that document more readily available (in electronic form).
It's just a hugely BORING activity (tedious?) and demands
large blocks of time to get anything done. So, I don't
rush to "do more of it"! :>
This works for most "A" size manuals. Things with fold-out
pages (e.g., a B size fold-out in a "regular" manual)
have to be processed differently. I have a 12x17 scanner
for larger documents. Anything bigger than that I have to
piece together from partial scans (which gets *really*
time consuming!)
> This way, the book only needs to be opened to 90 degrees, compared to
> 180 degrees on an ordinary flat scanner.
Even that approach won't work for a lot of materials.
E.g., the scanner in the original KRM was deliberately
designed (for obvious reasons!) to be able to scan
a book in this way. With particular care to being
able to bring the camera *deep* into the binding edge
I.e., the scanner glass came right to the edge of the
case over which the book's binding would sit (the 3rd
photo in http://www.kurzweiltech.com/raybio.html is
*just* the scanner)
Yet, it still had problems with some printed materials.
"Perfect" binding sucks :>
JosephKK
wrote:
>Hi Joseph,
Sounds a lot like an X-terminal. Due to volume issues the laptop may yet
be lower cost.
D Yuniskis
No. An X terminal has a processor in it, understands the
X protocol, has a network interface, etc.
I.e., if I gave you an LCD monitor and a keyboard, you could
never run xdm -- unless you added a processor and a NIC.
The device I am describing could be used "as a TV" (with
an NTSC-VGA adapter) -- something you aren't going to do
with an X Terminal.
Paul Keinanen
<not.goi...@seen.com> wrote:
>Hi Paul,
>
>Paul Keinanen wrote:
>> On Sun, 16 May 2010 10:08:23 -0700, D Yuniskis
>> <not.goi...@seen.com> wrote:
>>
>>> The most tedious are the print manuals that were never
>>> available (publicly) in electronic form. In addition
>>> to the actual *scanning*, there is a lot of work
>>> getting the manuals "disassembled" to the point where
>>> they *can* be scanned (e.g., ripping "perfect binding").
>>
>> Have you tried photographing those pages using a digital camera ?
>
>It's too labor intensive. You have to arrange for the book
>to be held open "enough", even lighting, transfer photos
>to PC, convert to TIFF, trim them, import them (in the correct
>order) to a PDF, etc.
I have seen a video footage of a machine used by a library (sorry, I
did not record the details), which opened the book about 120 degrees.
One arm took the next page down to horizontal level, a horizontal
glass sheet was put on the page to make sure the page was truly
horizontal, the flash light was activated and the class sheet was
removed and the sequence restarted.
The sequence took about 2-3 seconds. Apparently some auto-focus was
used, since the distance between the lens and the paper changed each
time a new page was added.
The odd pages could be processed in one run and a separate run would
be required to process the even pages (including flipping the page and
inverting the picture order).
>A lot of time, you end up with crappy image quality "in the
>binding edge" as the paper curls and you can't get a clear
>view of stuff at that edge, etc.
Put a heavy glass sheet on the page you are photographing, this will
flatten out the page and you will get equal focus across the page.
>Instead, I bring the manuals to a print shop and have them
>*cut* the binding edge off of the pages. They have large,
>electric stack paper cutters (do ~1000 pages at a time
>*without* the inevitable skew that a manual/guillotine paper
>cutter imparts to the cut!). Then, I can just feed the
>"individual pages" through the document feeder (instead of
>having to manually flip pages, etc.).
If you do the trouble of carrying the manuals to the print shop, why
not let them scan the pages ?
In a law abiding print shops you may have to prove that you have the
copyright to make your own copies.
----------------
Then there is the question how to store the scanned pages and also how
to distribute the (web) pages in a bandwidth efficient way.
I previously thought that storing and displaying the scanned pages as
simply bilevel (1 bit/pixel) bitmaps (typically run length encoded as
in faxes) would be sufficient, however, such page pictures look
horrible and the OCR software does not reliably make sense of the
text.
1 bit/pixel is really too little and 8 bits/pixel would be excessive.
How many bits/pixel would be sufficient for pleasant visual rendering
or required by OCR software ?
D Yuniskis
Paul Keinanen wrote:
> On Mon, 17 May 2010 07:37:06 -0700, D Yuniskis
> <not.goi...@seen.com> wrote:
>
>>>> The most tedious are the print manuals that were never
>>>> available (publicly) in electronic form. In addition
>>>> to the actual *scanning*, there is a lot of work
>>>> getting the manuals "disassembled" to the point where
>>>> they *can* be scanned (e.g., ripping "perfect binding").
>>> Have you tried photographing those pages using a digital camera ?
>> It's too labor intensive. You have to arrange for the book
>> to be held open "enough", even lighting, transfer photos
>> to PC, convert to TIFF, trim them, import them (in the correct
>> order) to a PDF, etc.
>
> I have seen a video footage of a machine used by a library (sorry, I
> did not record the details), which opened the book about 120 degrees.
> One arm took the next page down to horizontal level, a horizontal
> glass sheet was put on the page to make sure the page was truly
> horizontal, the flash light was activated and the class sheet was
> removed and the sequence restarted.
I suspect such a device is considerably beyond my *practical*
budget! :>
> The sequence took about 2-3 seconds. Apparently some auto-focus was
> used, since the distance between the lens and the paper changed each
> time a new page was added.
>
> The odd pages could be processed in one run and a separate run would
> be required to process the even pages (including flipping the page and
> inverting the picture order).
Yes. I do similarly when running the sheets through the
document feeder. Once "prepared", I can do 5 or 6 pages
a minute -- not too bad but, when you have tens of thousands
of pages... :<
>> Instead, I bring the manuals to a print shop and have them
>> *cut* the binding edge off of the pages. They have large,
>> electric stack paper cutters (do ~1000 pages at a time
>> *without* the inevitable skew that a manual/guillotine paper
>> cutter imparts to the cut!). Then, I can just feed the
>> "individual pages" through the document feeder (instead of
>> having to manually flip pages, etc.).
>
> If you do the trouble of carrying the manuals to the print shop, why
> not let them scan the pages ?
1) I didn't realize they could do this
2) it's probably not inexpensive
3) copyright issues
> In a law abiding print shops you may have to prove that you have the
> copyright to make your own copies.
Exactly. It seems like the attitude towards this waxes and wanes.
And, no doubt, varies based on who's working on that day, etc.
> Then there is the question how to store the scanned pages and also how
> to distribute the (web) pages in a bandwidth efficient way.
>
> I previously thought that storing and displaying the scanned pages as
> simply bilevel (1 bit/pixel) bitmaps (typically run length encoded as
> in faxes) would be sufficient, however, such page pictures look
> horrible and the OCR software does not reliably make sense of the
> text.
That is where the manual aspects come into play. You need to review
the results of the scan to decide how best to proceed. I've not found
any "magic bullet" -- unless you don't care about size (or quality).
> 1 bit/pixel is really too little and 8 bits/pixel would be excessive.
> How many bits/pixel would be sufficient for pleasant visual rendering
> or required by OCR software ?
It depends on the sizes of the typefaces used. Note that this
can vary within a document.
And, whether there are illustrations, etc.
Sometimes, you get really grainy images -- as if there was
dust on the scanner (though it is NOT the scanner that is
the source of the problem).
For decent typeface sizes, I will use 1bpp at 400-600dpi.
This is readable *and* OCR-able (not to be confused with
ocre-able -- which is the ability to turn something into ocre!)
Other times, I will use 8bpp and drop down to 300dpi
(trying to balance the added image depth against the
decreased resolution).
I wrote some utilities to create *4* bit TIFFs but very few
programs will recognize this encoding (despite adhering to the
letter of the spec).
I generally avoid the OCR stage as it requires *lots* of
proofreading. Images often get mishandled. Text often
gets misrecognized (remember, these are "computer manuals"
so "pigx" and "pigy" might be real "words" despite the OCR
packages attempts to "fix" them into "pigs" and "piggy", etc.).
I figure just creating the (electronic) documents is
enough of a "donation" so if folks want to grumble, they
can go find better versions (hint: most of this stuff is
simply NOT AVAILABLE). :>
"If you don't like what I'm serving for dinner, you're welcome
to eat elsewhere..."
Jeffrey D Angus
> Paul Keinanen wrote:
>> In a law abiding print shops you may have to prove that
>> you have the copyright to make your own copies.
>
> Exactly. It seems like the attitude towards this waxes
> and wanes. And, no doubt, varies based on who's working
> on that day, etc.
My standard comment to those that "make the decision" at
places like Kinko's is. "These copies are being made because
the technicians at my shop at complete assh**es and destroy
original manuals every time they pick one up. Now if I can
keep them from writing on the monitor screens with a Sharpie
I'd be a happy camper."
Usually I get the eye roll, but after they stop laughing,
they authorize the full copying and or scanning of the
documents.
Jeff
--
�Egotism is the anesthetic that dulls the pain of stupidity.�
Frank Leahy, Head coach, Notre Dame 1941-1954
D Yuniskis
Jeffrey D Angus wrote:
> D Yuniskis wrote:
>> Paul Keinanen wrote:
>>> In a law abiding print shops you may have to prove that
>>> you have the copyright to make your own copies.
>>
>> Exactly. It seems like the attitude towards this waxes
>> and wanes. And, no doubt, varies based on who's working
>> on that day, etc.
>
> My standard comment to those that "make the decision" at
> places like Kinko's is. "These copies are being made because
> the technicians at my shop at complete assh**es and destroy
> original manuals every time they pick one up. Now if I can
> keep them from writing on the monitor screens with a Sharpie
> I'd be a happy camper."
>
> Usually I get the eye roll, but after they stop laughing,
> they authorize the full copying and or scanning of the
> documents.
Ha! I'm not sure I want to rely on that sort of
response... :<
Michael A. Terrell
That's just a sample of Jeff's 'VERY' warped sense of humor. You'll
get used to it. ;-)
JosephKK
wrote:
All read up. Now i see what you want. The best approach still looks
like a really serious hack of a laptop. The monitor part is going to be
really tough. Keyboard and one or more pointing devices should be pretty
easy.
You may have to hack the power brick, or the batteries or both.
Once USB3 (3 Gb/s) becomes common you only need the one interface.
Paul Keinanen
<not.goi...@seen.com> wrote:
>Hi Paul,
>
>Paul Keinanen wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 May 2010 07:37:06 -0700, D Yuniskis
>> <not.goi...@seen.com> wrote:
>> Then there is the question how to store the scanned pages and also how
>> to distribute the (web) pages in a bandwidth efficient way.
>>
>> I previously thought that storing and displaying the scanned pages as
>> simply bilevel (1 bit/pixel) bitmaps (typically run length encoded as
>> in faxes) would be sufficient, however, such page pictures look
>> horrible and the OCR software does not reliably make sense of the
>> text.
>
>That is where the manual aspects come into play. You need to review
>the results of the scan to decide how best to proceed. I've not found
>any "magic bullet" -- unless you don't care about size (or quality).
I think it is important to keep the distinction between
scanning/storage format and on the other hand the publishing format.
These days 1 TB of storage costs practically nothing (and an other TB
for backup), IMHO the source should be scanned and stored with the
best available resolution and bit planes, possibly with some very mild
compression.
You can then make some 1 bit/pixel encoding for publishing and heavy
compression.
After a few years, you can reprocesses your digital source archives,
without rescanning the original documents when better software is
available, in order to produce smaller or higher quality publishing
formats.
>> 1 bit/pixel is really too little and 8 bits/pixel would be excessive.
>> How many bits/pixel would be sufficient for pleasant visual rendering
>> or required by OCR software ?
>
>It depends on the sizes of the typefaces used. Note that this
>can vary within a document.
>
>And, whether there are illustrations, etc.
>
>Sometimes, you get really grainy images -- as if there was
>dust on the scanner (though it is NOT the scanner that is
>the source of the problem).
>
>For decent typeface sizes, I will use 1bpp at 400-600dpi.
>This is readable *and* OCR-able (not to be confused with
>ocre-able -- which is the ability to turn something into ocre!)
>Other times, I will use 8bpp and drop down to 300dpi
>(trying to balance the added image depth against the
>decreased resolution).
>
>I wrote some utilities to create *4* bit TIFFs but very few
>programs will recognize this encoding (despite adhering to the
>letter of the spec).
4 bit/pixel might be a usable format for _storage_, since this can
register the varying illumination, the whiteness of the paper and how
black the ink is. This might be usable information when postprocessing
to 1 bit/pixel.
>I generally avoid the OCR stage as it requires *lots* of
>proofreading. Images often get mishandled. Text often
>gets misrecognized (remember, these are "computer manuals"
>so "pigx" and "pigy" might be real "words" despite the OCR
>packages attempts to "fix" them into "pigs" and "piggy", etc.).
As a compromise, you might publish the scans as bit maps, however, it
might be a good idea to run your original scans through some OCR
software and use the result to build an index. While a "pig" might be
a bit unexpected in a computer manual index, there is much less manual
proofreading.
IMHO the worst problem with scanned documents is that it does not
usually contain a searchable index, so including even somewhat flaked
index would be a great service.
>I figure just creating the (electronic) documents is
>enough of a "donation" so if folks want to grumble, they
>can go find better versions (hint: most of this stuff is
>simply NOT AVAILABLE). :>
>
>"If you don't like what I'm serving for dinner, you're welcome
>to eat elsewhere..."
Scanning fragile (and often disintegrating) paper documents is a way
of preserve our cultural heritage.
Unfortunately, intellectual property laws (with protection times
decades after the IP holders death), may in fact cause a loss of the
human intellectual heritage.
Albert van der Horst
At the Dutch tax office I fell in love with some Fujitsu scanner,
capable of two sided scanning.
(It is on sale, *refurbished*, second hand... Where do you hear
that, PC equipment that is worth revising, then doing hundred of
Euro's.)
There are machines like the Brother MFX-8860DN.
This scans sheets two sided, dozens at a time, with the sheet
feeder. (It prints two-sided too. It copies. It faxes.)
It is not cheap, but seems like a good deal and well supported
by Linux.
Groetjes Albert.
--
--
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst
Jeffrey D Angus
> D Yuniskis wrote:
>> response... :<
>
>
> That's just a sample of Jeff's 'VERY' warped sense of humor. You'll
> get used to it. ;-)
Aye, but it works. That's the bottom line.
Jeff Liebermann
wrote:
>I have seen a video footage of a machine used by a library (sorry, I
>did not record the details), which opened the book about 120 degrees.
Ooooh... I want one of those for plagerism. If I'm going to break the
law, I might was well go first class.
I copy a few service manuals, where the original is in ring binder
format. One of my customers has a Canon ImageRunner 5000 copier,
scanner, printer, etc conglomeration. Here's a video clip of it
scanning both sides of service manual:
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/CanonImageRunner5000.wmv> (4MBytes)
Unfortunately, scanning large size foldout pages had to be done by
hand and usually in pieces. Some of the results are here:
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/AN-SRD-21/>
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/AN-SRD-22/>
Bottom line is that it's a HUGE waste of time trying to scan anything
on a typical home bed scanner. The 180 page AN/SRD-22 manual took
about 45 minutes (including screwups) on the Canon ImageRunner. I
once did a similar manual at home on my HP bed scanner which took a
total of about 6 hours to scan, cleanup, make searchable, and assemble
into a document.
--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
D Yuniskis
Paul Keinanen wrote:
>
>>> Then there is the question how to store the scanned pages and also how
>>> to distribute the (web) pages in a bandwidth efficient way.
>>>
>>> I previously thought that storing and displaying the scanned pages as
>>> simply bilevel (1 bit/pixel) bitmaps (typically run length encoded as
>>> in faxes) would be sufficient, however, such page pictures look
>>> horrible and the OCR software does not reliably make sense of the
>>> text.
>> That is where the manual aspects come into play. You need to review
>> the results of the scan to decide how best to proceed. I've not found
>> any "magic bullet" -- unless you don't care about size (or quality).
>
> I think it is important to keep the distinction between
> scanning/storage format and on the other hand the publishing format.
In my case, they are one in the same. I'm not in this as a "business"
(I am uncompensated for the *many* hours it takes to convert the
documents)
> These days 1 TB of storage costs practically nothing (and an other TB
> for backup), IMHO the source should be scanned and stored with the
> best available resolution and bit planes, possibly with some very mild
> compression.
You'd be amazed at how quickly that eats up disk space! I scanned
a disintegrating book on origami a few years ago seeking to
preserve color, etc. It was over 100MB compressed. You can't
store very many books if you preserve that much detail. :<
> You can then make some 1 bit/pixel encoding for publishing and heavy
> compression.
>
> After a few years, you can reprocesses your digital source archives,
> without rescanning the original documents when better software is
> available, in order to produce smaller or higher quality publishing
> formats.
<grin> I don't know about *you*, Paul, but I don't get enough
sleep as it is! :> I want things over and done with *now*. :-/
>>> 1 bit/pixel is really too little and 8 bits/pixel would be excessive.
>>> How many bits/pixel would be sufficient for pleasant visual rendering
>>> or required by OCR software ?
>> It depends on the sizes of the typefaces used. Note that this
>> can vary within a document.
>>
>> And, whether there are illustrations, etc.
>>
>> Sometimes, you get really grainy images -- as if there was
>> dust on the scanner (though it is NOT the scanner that is
>> the source of the problem).
>>
>> For decent typeface sizes, I will use 1bpp at 400-600dpi.
>> This is readable *and* OCR-able (not to be confused with
>> ocre-able -- which is the ability to turn something into ocre!)
>> Other times, I will use 8bpp and drop down to 300dpi
>> (trying to balance the added image depth against the
>> decreased resolution).
>>
>> I wrote some utilities to create *4* bit TIFFs but very few
>> programs will recognize this encoding (despite adhering to the
>> letter of the spec).
>
> 4 bit/pixel might be a usable format for _storage_, since this can
> register the varying illumination, the whiteness of the paper and how
> black the ink is. This might be usable information when postprocessing
> to 1 bit/pixel.
But, it's a "proprietary format", then. I used this on a manual
I produced and it was nothing but trouble since I had to explicitly
"unpack" each image before I could create the final artwork...
then, repack everything to conserve space on disk.
>> I generally avoid the OCR stage as it requires *lots* of
>> proofreading. Images often get mishandled. Text often
>> gets misrecognized (remember, these are "computer manuals"
>> so "pigx" and "pigy" might be real "words" despite the OCR
>> packages attempts to "fix" them into "pigs" and "piggy", etc.).
>
> As a compromise, you might publish the scans as bit maps, however, it
> might be a good idea to run your original scans through some OCR
> software and use the result to build an index. While a "pig" might be
> a bit unexpected in a computer manual index, there is much less manual
> proofreading.
>
> IMHO the worst problem with scanned documents is that it does not
> usually contain a searchable index, so including even somewhat flaked
> index would be a great service.
I guess I look at it differently. The original PAPER document
didn't have a (electronic) searchable index and "somehow" seemed
to work. So, if the electronic document doesn't have that
searchable index, it's no *loss* (it's just not a *gain*!).
E.g., I have lots of novels that I would love to preserve
in this way. I don't care if they are available as text.
I just want to be able to re-read them after the paper
versions have disintegrated (paperbacks being notoriously
short-lived). So, an "image" of a page that my brain
can process -- even if it doesn't have enough fidelity for
an OCR package to handle -- is quite adequate.
>> I figure just creating the (electronic) documents is
>> enough of a "donation" so if folks want to grumble, they
>> can go find better versions (hint: most of this stuff is
>> simply NOT AVAILABLE). :>
>>
>> "If you don't like what I'm serving for dinner, you're welcome
>> to eat elsewhere..."
>
> Scanning fragile (and often disintegrating) paper documents is a way
> of preserve our cultural heritage.
>
> Unfortunately, intellectual property laws (with protection times
> decades after the IP holders death), may in fact cause a loss of the
> human intellectual heritage.
See AEK's work at bitsavers.org. Be prepared to be blown away!
(be friendly to the server as I think it's his personal expense)
Michael A. Terrell
Jeffrey D Angus wrote:
>
> Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> > D Yuniskis wrote:
> >> Ha! I'm not sure I want to rely on that sort of
> >> response... :<
> >
> >
> > That's just a sample of Jeff's 'VERY' warped sense of humor. You'll
> > get used to it. ;-)
>
> Aye, but it works. That's the bottom line.
I know it works. :)
I just thought it was only fair to issue the standard warning: 'This
individual is classed as "Mostly Harmless!"' Do not look him directly
in his good eye, or take his last doughnut and your chances of survival
will be 93%. ;-)
Michael A. Terrell
D Yuniskis wrote:
>
> You'd be amazed at how quickly that eats up disk space! I scanned
> a disintegrating book on origami a few years ago seeking to
> preserve color, etc. It was over 100MB compressed. You can't
> store very many books if you preserve that much detail. :<
Have you tried 'Paperport'? Its compression is impressive. Its .max
file format makes small files, and you can drag the individual pages
into chapters or whole documents. The basic version was shipped with a
lot of flatbed scanners a few years ago, and includes a stand alone
reader.
D Yuniskis
> D Yuniskis wrote:
>> You'd be amazed at how quickly that eats up disk space! I scanned
>> a disintegrating book on origami a few years ago seeking to
>> preserve color, etc. It was over 100MB compressed. You can't
>> store very many books if you preserve that much detail. :<
>
> Have you tried 'Paperport'? Its compression is impressive. Its .max
> file format makes small files, and you can drag the individual pages
> into chapters or whole documents. The basic version was shipped with a
> lot of flatbed scanners a few years ago, and includes a stand alone
> reader.
I have to use formats that are "open" and/or widely
accepted (which often ends up with them being "open").
I don't live in *just* the "Windows World"
Michael A. Terrell
Paperport will print to a PDF driver program if you want. I like it for
storing the raw scans because the file size VS image quality is great. I
don't know if it works with other OS or not.
Rich Grise on Google groups
> scanner, printer, etc conglomeration. Here's a video clip of it
> scanning both sides of service manual:
> <http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/CanonImageRunner5000.wmv>
Man, that's a looooooong download for 15 seconds of video.
Thanks,
Rich
Paul Keinanen
<not.goi...@seen.com> wrote:
>Hi Paul,
>
>Paul Keinanen wrote:
>>
>> These days 1 TB of storage costs practically nothing (and an other TB
>> for backup), IMHO the source should be scanned and stored with the
>> best available resolution and bit planes, possibly with some very mild
>> compression.
>
>You'd be amazed at how quickly that eats up disk space! I scanned
>a disintegrating book on origami a few years ago seeking to
>preserve color, etc. It was over 100MB compressed. You can't
>store very many books if you preserve that much detail. :<
The storage cost for those 100 MB would be about one cent with current
1 TB drives.
Albert van der Horst
A good advice.
It seems that Adobe has software to add OCR to a bitmap document.
That means text is searchable. For an example see the old issues
of Forth Dimensions (http//www.forth.org ) under the heading
Forth Online documentation. So although you're looking at
a scan you can search for e.g. DROP and get it right most of the
time.
(But I'm convinced that there will be a time that you ocr
a 19-th century book, and the result will be better than
the original.)
>
>IMHO the worst problem with scanned documents is that it does not
>usually contain a searchable index, so including even somewhat flaked
>index would be a great service.
See above.
>
>>I figure just creating the (electronic) documents is
>>enough of a "donation" so if folks want to grumble, they
>>can go find better versions (hint: most of this stuff is
>>simply NOT AVAILABLE). :>
>>
>>"If you don't like what I'm serving for dinner, you're welcome
>>to eat elsewhere..."
>
>Scanning fragile (and often disintegrating) paper documents is a way
>of preserve our cultural heritage.
>
>Unfortunately, intellectual property laws (with protection times
>decades after the IP holders death), may in fact cause a loss of the
>human intellectual heritage.
>
This is one of my grave concerns. The program SchoonSchip of
(Nobel price winner) Veltman has a nice manual, that is free.
The original manual (197x, mainly of historic interest) sits behind a
(ca) 30 Euro fee. (I'm involved with this, trying to port SchoonSchip
from 68K assembler to Intel.)
It is not hard to imagine a hardcore Elsevier executive to drop
all papers not downloaded for 5 years.
(This has been a seminal activity for the "standard model"
in physics, but what do they know ...)
Throughout history it has been a fight to have libraries in shape.
We don't need another destructive force, besides wars and
ignorance.
Please note that IP laws give protection. We are in no obligation
to exert these rights to the full. A movement that establishes
the habit of pushing all legacy documentation into the public domain
would get my backing.
Groetjes Albert
Jeff Liebermann
Sorry. I didn't bother to reduce it down to YouTube minimalist
standards of blurriness, smear, pixelation, and tiny size. I did note
that it was 4MBytes big. Unless you're on dialup, it should have been
all that slow (about 45 seconds on my 1.5Mbit/sec DSL line).
However, I lied a little. It is scanning both sides on the fly, but
it's not reading (make searchable in PDF) either side. That was done
later with the e-Copy program from Canon. It took about 90 seconds to
do the entire 180 pages.
<http://www.ecopy.com/Products-eCopy-ShareScan-Essentials.asp>
Andrew Smallshaw
>
> D Yuniskis wrote:
>>
>> I want a portable LCD monitor and a portable keyboard.
>> I want to be able to connect that monitor to any old PC
>> just like any *other* LCD monitor.
>> I want to be able to connect that keyboard to that same PC
>> just like any other keyboard.
>>
>>
>> installed in place of the laptop's guts. I.e., take the guts
>> out of an LCD monitor and wire them to the connector for the
>> LCD *panel* inside the gutted laptop (the keyboard is a
>> simple thing to hack)
>
> It hasn't come up lately, but for a while someone asked that question
> about once a month. Then they would find that it cost more for the
> custom elcetronics, than to buy a new monitor.
I remember hearing about an NTI adapter that does exactly this.
It only a few weeks since they sent me some marketing blurb about
it so I assume it's fairly new. Looks like it could be quite useful
but the price they are asking means it needs a lot of justification.
http://www.networktechinc.com/usb-lap-console.html
--
Andrew Smallshaw
and...@sdf.lonestar.org
D Yuniskis
Yes, this is probably the only (reasonable) commercial way
to make sucha device -- as a peripheral to an existing system.
If, however, you could identify a reasonably *popular* laptop
that is now "too old to be practical", you could put together
a kit to convert that laptop into the same sort of device
(i.e., gut the laptop, install a little PCB, connect LCD
panel and keyboard switch array)
D Yuniskis
> Hi,
>
> Like most folks, I've accumulated a fair number of
> "I/O cards" over the years. Many I need to hold onto
> to give me certain capabilities (e.g., EIA485, certain
> digital I/O's, etc.) to maintain old designs. Others
> are worthwhile from time to time as I reorganize my
> machine herd and opt to support different peripheral sets.
>
> [I'm currently only speaking of COTS cards -- ISA, PCI,
> various memory packages, etc. -- not custom stuff]
>
> Storing these has proven to be not trivial. I've tried
> different approaches over the years -- antistatic bags,
> small boxes (e.g., "Wide SCSI HBA's", "TR NIC's", etc.),
> big boxes (e.g., "Network cards", "Memory", etc.). None
> really seem to work well. :<
>
> The REAL solution is probably just to sh*tcan the lot
> and <shrug> when I come across a future need! :>
>
> Has anyone come up with a slick way of storing cards
> that doesn't beat up on the cards, makes it relatively easy
> to locate the card you want *and* doesn't dramatically
> increase the volume required to store them (i.e., putting
> each in "retail packaging")? Right now, I think the
> most viable option (for me) is back to antistatic bags
> (to help the cards slide over each other without "catching"
> on protruding components) in *large* boxes :-(
I opted to use the poly (?) bags (instead of the "silver-ized")
antistatic bags. Last night, had to sort through the boxes for
for the first time since doing this.
The results were "satisfactory". Would have been nicer if the
boards would stand up neatly so you could just flip through
them. But, the bags are slick enough (and, being heavier
than the silver-ized bags, they deform less so they *rarely*
catch on other "things") that you can stir-the-pot until you've
examined every board.
Probably wouldn't work well for *larger* boxes but these seem
adequate.