ASR33/35 Controls
Adrian Wise
what all the control knobs and buttons do, and what they are labelled?
None of the photos I can find on the web are high enough resolution
for me to read the legends. I'm not interrested in the keyboard itself
but rather in the controls for the reader and punch and any
other "mode" switches.
I use a PC running a simple terminal emulator program as an "ASR"
for my H316.I'm think about improving that terminal emulator program,
giving it a GUI with the correct buttons - hence my interest in the
detail about those buttons.
thanks
Adrian
CBFalconer
As I recall there was a single panel three position knob for off,
local, and online. Full/half duplex was controlled by wiring.
The tape reader had a three position momentary lever, one of which
started the reader, and the other either or both stopped it and
freed the detent so you could position the tape. This is for an
ASR33.
You used local to compose and punch a tape. Later on you could
connect to the expensive network at 110 baud and transmit the
pre-edited tape on-line.
I think there was a button to start (engage) the punch, and
another to stop it.
The whole reader/punch mechanism was a separate add-on. You could
upgrade a KSR to an ASR.
--
Chuck F (cbfal...@yahoo.com) (cbfal...@XXXXworldnet.att.net)
Available for consulting/temporary embedded and systems.
(Remove "XXXX" from reply address. yahoo works unmodified)
mailto:u...@ftc.gov (for spambots to harvest)
Heinz W. Wiggeshoff
>
...
> connect to the expensive network at 110 baud and transmit the
> pre-edited tape on-line.
Which took about as long as downloading one of those over-featured
World Wide Wait pages using a 33.6 modem.
Don Chiasson
"CBFalconer" <cbfal...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3BD310E4...@yahoo.com...
> Adrian Wise wrote:
> >
> > Could someone with a ASR-33 (and someone with an ASR-35)
remind me
> > what all the control knobs and buttons do, and what they
are labelled?
The ASR-35 was a completely different beast, with a
different
base and print head. The punch mechanism internals may have
been
the same.
> > None of the photos I can find on the web are high enough
resolution
> > for me to read the legends. I'm not interrested in the
keyboard itself
> > but rather in the controls for the reader and punch and
any
> > other "mode" switches.
> >
> > I use a PC running a simple terminal emulator program as
an "ASR"
> > for my H316.I'm think about improving that terminal
emulator program,
> > giving it a GUI with the correct buttons - hence my
interest in the
> > detail about those buttons.
Do you mean a real H316?? I used one many years ago.
> As I recall there was a single panel three position knob
for off,
> local, and online. Full/half duplex was controlled by
wiring.
Yep, on the front vertical panel below the keyboard.
> The tape reader had a three position momentary lever, one
of which
> started the reader, and the other either or both stopped
it and
> freed the detent so you could position the tape. This is
for an
> ASR33.
And to load the tape you flipped up a plastic cover.
> You used local to compose and punch a tape. Later on you
could
> connect to the expensive network at 110 baud and transmit
the
> pre-edited tape on-line.
>
> I think there was a button to start (engage) the punch,
and
> another to stop it.
My fingers seem to recall four (?) clear plastic buttons
over
the punch. Release and tape feed (punch leader or blank
tape),
but I forget what else there might have been.
>
> The whole reader/punch mechanism was a separate add-on.
You could
> upgrade a KSR to an ASR.
Never seen the reader/punch as an add-on, all the ones I
used
had them attached. But it looks as if it could have been.
Don
e-mail: it's not not, it's hot.
jchausler
Adrian Wise wrote:
I could but its at home in western NY and I'm in Nashville, TN. If no
one else has gotten you the info (on 33's anyway, I haven't seen a 35
in 30 or so years) in the next week, email me a week from now
when I'm back home and I'll take a look at mine. IIRC there's a
three position lever switch on the reader and four "push button"
thingies on the punch (one is on one is off one is back space, but
the fourth escapes me. The back space was so you could back
up the just punched tape a space and "rubout" a mistake :-).
I have both a 33KSR and 33ASR.
Chris
AN GETTO$;DUMP;RUN,ALGOL,TAPE
$$
David Gesswein
Adrian Wise <adr...@sapere.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Could someone with a ASR-33 (and someone with an ASR-35) remind me
>what all the control knobs and buttons do, and what they are labelled?
>
See page intro-6 on of System User's Guide for PDP-8/I PDP-8/L and PDP-8
PDP-8/S PDP-5
http://www.pdp8.net/pdp8cgi/query_docs/view.pl?id=30
The Teletype maintenance manuals are also available in my document search
but pictures are scattered through the manuals.
http://www.pdp8.net/pdp8cgi/query_docs/query.pl
David Gesswein
http://www.pdp8.net/ -- Run an old computer with blinkenlights
Have any PDP-8 stuff you're willing to part with?
no-spam
"Don Chiasson" <don_ch...@notmail.com> wrote in message
news:SSFA7.87352$5h5.34...@news3.rdc2.on.home.com...
>
> (snip)
>
> My fingers seem to recall four (?) clear plastic buttons
> over
> the punch. Release and tape feed (punch leader or blank
> tape),
> but I forget what else there might have been.
On, Off, Release, and Backspace.
Punching only feed holes was done with NUL characters (Cntrl-Shift-P, IIRC).
Hitting RUBOUT punched all coumns in a row, so as to wipe out a previous
error to which you had backspaced.
no-spam
"jchausler" <jcha...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3BD3431A...@earthlink.net...
>
> (snip)....
>
> IIRC there's a
> three position lever switch on the reader and four "push button"
> thingies on the punch (one is on one is off one is back space, but
> the fourth escapes me.
4th button is for "Tape Release".
Joe Morris
>Adrian Wise wrote:
>> Could someone with a ASR-33 (and someone with an ASR-35) remind me
>> what all the control knobs and buttons do, and what they are labelled?
[snip]
>As I recall there was a single panel three position knob for off,
>local, and online. Full/half duplex was controlled by wiring.
>The tape reader had a three position momentary lever, one of which
>started the reader, and the other either or both stopped it and
>freed the detent so you could position the tape. This is for an
>ASR33.
The machine controls depended on whether the TTY33 had a built-in
WECO DataPhone 109 or not. Systems that did had a dial or TouchTone
pad mounted in the panel to the right of the keyboard, and a row
of lighted buttons below it that controlled both the modem and the
Teletype itself; systems without a 109 were shipped by Teletype with
the three-position switch. Several sources would buy TTY33 boxes
without a 109 (I'm not sure you *could* buy one with a 109; this
is before the Bell System breakup), then resell them with a third-party
modem (sometimes with an acoustic coupler) in the panel where the dial
or TT pad was placed in a 109-equipped box.
Joe Morris
Steve O'Hara-Smith
"no-spam" <nos...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> "Don Chiasson" <don_ch...@notmail.com> wrote in message
> news:SSFA7.87352$5h5.34...@news3.rdc2.on.home.com...
> >
> > (snip)
> >
> > My fingers seem to recall four (?) clear plastic buttons
> > over
> > the punch. Release and tape feed (punch leader or blank
> > tape),
> > but I forget what else there might have been.
>
> On, Off, Release, and Backspace.
Yep on four clear plastic post like buttons about an inch when
extended and less than 1/4" when depressed.
> Punching only feed holes was done with NUL characters (Cntrl-Shift-P, IIRC).
I recall a "Here Is" key for that (at least that's what we used it
for).
--
Directable Mirrors - A Better Way To Focus The Sun
CBFalconer
>
> On Mon, 22 Oct 2001 02:39:38 GMT
> "no-spam" <nos...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> >
> > "Don Chiasson" <don_ch...@notmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:SSFA7.87352$5h5.34...@news3.rdc2.on.home.com...
> > >
> > > (snip)
> > >
> > > My fingers seem to recall four (?) clear plastic buttons over
> > > the punch. Release and tape feed (punch leader or blank tape),
> > > but I forget what else there might have been.
> >
> > On, Off, Release, and Backspace.
>
> Yep on four clear plastic post like buttons about an inch when
> extended and less than 1/4" when depressed.
>
> > Punching only feed holes was done with NUL characters (Cntrl-Shift-P, IIRC).
>
> I recall a "Here Is" key for that (at least that's what we used it for).
That worked until you broke off the little spines to create a
response to an ENQ character. That brown cylinder was the
machines EPROM.
John L. Pearlman
: On Mon, 22 Oct 2001 02:39:38 GMT
: "no-spam" <nos...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
: >
: > "Don Chiasson" <don_ch...@notmail.com> wrote in message
: > news:SSFA7.87352$5h5.34...@news3.rdc2.on.home.com...
(snip)
: > Punching only feed holes was done with NUL characters (Cntrl-Shift-P, IIRC).
: I recall a "Here Is" key for that (at least that's what we used it
: for).
In some systems, the "Here Is" key was even used for its original
purpose: to inform the "other end" who it was connected to.
Cheers,
John
John L. Pearlman <j...@world.std.com> or <j.pea...@ieee.org>
If one man calls you a donkey, pay him no heed. If two men call you
a donkey, get yourself a saddle. (ancient Rabbinic saying)
--
John L. Pearlman <j...@world.std.com> or <j.pea...@ieee.org>
The optimist proclaims we live in the best of all possible worlds,
and the pessimist fears this is true. -James Branch Cabell
Henny Olesen
Steve O'Hara-Smith skrev i meddelelsen
<20011022205817....@eircom.net>...
>> Punching only feed holes was done with NUL characters (Cntrl-Shift-P,
IIRC).
>
> I recall a "Here Is" key for that (at least that's what we used it
>for).
>
That key could be used for many special things, if programmed properly. the
programming consisted of breaking off some metal plates on a rotating drum.
Now then, _that_ was called haredware-close programming!
I used it for automated logon. the system in question simulated an IBM 3780
Nico
Charles Richmond
>
> Steve O'Hara-Smith skrev i meddelelsen
> <20011022205817....@eircom.net>...
> >> Punching only feed holes was done with NUL characters (Cntrl-Shift-P,
> IIRC).
> >
> > I recall a "Here Is" key for that (at least that's what we used it
> >for).
> >
>
> That key could be used for many special things, if programmed properly. the
> programming consisted of breaking off some metal plates on a rotating drum.
> Now then, _that_ was called haredware-close programming!
>
--
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Charles and Francis Richmond <rich...@plano.net> |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
Joe Morris
>x-no-archive: yes
>> Could someone with a ASR-33 (and someone with an ASR-35) remind me
>> what all the control knobs and buttons do, and what they are labelled?
>As someone mentioned, the right hand side may have contained dial-up
>controls or be blanked out.
>IIRC, all machines had a main power knob on the right with three
>positions: online, off, local. Local was used to punch paper
>tapes off line. To save on transmission and time shared billing time, this
>was typically done. (Or perhaps the dialup machines used the control
>buttons for this function.)
Nope. The DataPhone 109 was designed for use with Teletype boxes, and
included the power controls for the machine. Local mode was controlled
through the buttons...at least on the systems my PPOE first installed
with TTY33 boxes leased from Southern Bell. We quickly wised up and
replaced them with purchased TTY33 boxes on hardwired circuits (no
modems). I don't recall the figures but I think that we passed the
lease/purchase break-even point in just over a year.
Joe Morris
Joe Morris
>> Could someone with a ASR-33 (and someone with an ASR-35) remind me
>> what all the control knobs and buttons do, and what they are labelled?
>I don't remember the other button's functions. There were also
>4 indicator lights at the top of this panel.
Oops...missed this note in my prior response.
*Four* indicator lights on the top? The only other light on the
machines I used was the lighted RESTRAIN button in the center of
the panel. It served no purpose in a DP environment; it existed
for use in configurations where the 100 wpm TTY33 was communicating
with a 60 wpm 5-level machine through a speed and code converter.
It was obviously possible for a long transmission from the 100 wpm
box to exceed the buffering capacity of the speed conversion mechanism,
so when a buffer-nearly-full condition was detected the converter would
send an out-of-band signal to the TTY33 to light the RESTRAIN light
(essentially a "stop for a moment while I catch up" warning); if
overflow occurred the converter would send a line break.
Joe Morris
Joe Morris
>Henny Olesen wrote:
>> That key could be used for many special things, if programmed properly. the
>> programming consisted of breaking off some metal plates on a rotating drum.
>> Now then, _that_ was called haredware-close programming!
>Could that be called "programming down to the bare metal???"
More like "programming down to the bare plastic" -- that was the material
used to make the drum. Think of a dowel rod maybe 2" or 3" long; look
at it along the axis of the dowel and you'll see 20 radial spikes of
maybe 1/2" length; look at it from the side and you'll see that there
are eight sets of spikes along the dowel. Each of the 20 radial
positions was one character of the "here is" message, and each longitudinal
set of spikes was one bit. You "programmed" the answerback drum by
taking a pair of needlenose pliers and breaking off spikes where
you wanted a mark element in the response.
This was, obviously, a WORM device.
Joe Morris
Steve O'Hara-Smith
j...@world.std.com (John L. Pearlman) wrote:
JP> : I recall a "Here Is" key for that (at least that's what we used it
JP> : for).
JP>
JP> In some systems, the "Here Is" key was even used for its original
JP> purpose: to inform the "other end" who it was connected to.
I suspected that may have been its original purpose. I was never
allowed to use the beast on line :)
CBFalconer
>
... snip ...
>
> Nope. The DataPhone 109 was designed for use with Teletype boxes, and
> included the power controls for the machine. Local mode was controlled
> through the buttons...at least on the systems my PPOE first installed
> with TTY33 boxes leased from Southern Bell. We quickly wised up and
> replaced them with purchased TTY33 boxes on hardwired circuits (no
> modems). I don't recall the figures but I think that we passed the
> lease/purchase break-even point in just over a year.
Which was just about end-of-useful-life for any TTY, unless you
left them in the 'off' position.
Charlie Gibbs
writes:
[description of TTY answerback drum snipped]
>This was, obviously, a WORM device.
I suppose it even looked a bit like a worm if you use your imagination.
Recently in this newsgroup someone called it a "pine cone".
I'd never heard that description before, but I like it.
--
cgi...@nowhere.in.particular (Charlie Gibbs)
I'm switching ISPs - watch this space.
Floyd Davidson
>Joe Morris wrote:
>>
>... snip ...
>>
>> Nope. The DataPhone 109 was designed for use with Teletype boxes, and
>> included the power controls for the machine. Local mode was controlled
>> through the buttons...at least on the systems my PPOE first installed
>> with TTY33 boxes leased from Southern Bell. We quickly wised up and
>> replaced them with purchased TTY33 boxes on hardwired circuits (no
>> modems). I don't recall the figures but I think that we passed the
>> lease/purchase break-even point in just over a year.
>
>Which was just about end-of-useful-life for any TTY, unless you
>left them in the 'off' position.
Model 15, but even more so the Model 28's, were very reliable under
heavy use.
--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.ptialaska.net/~floyd>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) fl...@barrow.com
Don Stokes
Floyd Davidson <fl...@ptialaska.net> wrote:
>CBFalconer <cbfal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Which was just about end-of-useful-life for any TTY, unless you
>>left them in the 'off' position.
>
>Model 15, but even more so the Model 28's, were very reliable under
>heavy use.
The Model 33 was a departure from earlier Teletype models in that it was
intended for a lower duty cycle. Earlier models were intended for 7x24
operation, while the 33 was designed to be (relatively) cheap.
If you bought a Model 33 to stick on the end of a news wire feed, you
were likely to be disappointed. But they were fine for occasional use
and as computer terminals, and a heck of a lot cheaper than their more
industrial grade brethren, hence the huge numbers sold.
-- don
Christopher Stacy
>>I don't recall the figures but I think that we passed the
>> lease/purchase break-even point in just over a year.
CBFalconer> unless you left them in the 'off' position.
Huh? We used our ASR-33s all day long in school for about five years
before abandoning them for CRTs. When I worked in radio, the old '28
(I think that's the model) at the station for the newswire was used
for many more years than that (as late as 1980).
Floyd Davidson
That is exactly the difference between models up to an including
the 28 and those which followed. Later models were not designed
for continious duty, and in those applications the model 28
continued to be used until computerized terminals replaced them.
I never saw a Model 33 used for a "news feed" either. If cheap
was a requirement, a older Model 15 was usually found (at least
up until maybe 1970, though I don't recall seeing any in
commercial use after that). Otherwise Model 28's were used.
However, I don't know that anyone ever used a Model 28 for Telex
or other message switched traffic. They were normally used for
full period TTY circuits such as used by airlines, the FAA, and
the long distance telephone companies themselves.
However, by the late 70's computerized models using regular
printers made all of those mechanical monsters obsolete.
But for those of us who had learned to type on a Teletype
machine, computer keyboards were somewhat of a difficult
adjustment because the mechanical feedback was non-existant.
Jim Thomas
Floyd> But for those of us who had learned to type on a Teletype
Floyd> machine, computer keyboards were somewhat of a difficult
Floyd> adjustment because the mechanical feedback was non-existant.
Not to mention those of us who learned to type on mechanical typewriters
before that :-)
Jim
Ric Werme
>Recently in this newsgroup someone called it a "pine cone".
>I'd never heard that description before, but I like it.
I kinda like that, except the tabs need to be rotated 90 degrees to be more
like pine cones.
Umm, it just occurred to me that no one has pointed out that Model 35s
implement WRU, I guess now ENQ (Ctrl/E), which triggers the answer back drum.
Back when I was a freshman at C-MU, I heard a story that someone had
gotten CS Dept head Alan Perlis's Teletype's phone number and called
it up from a terminal room in Baker Hall. He then sent many FFs,
which Model 35s also implement. Perlis, attracted by the racket,
found paper spewing out, but had the presense of mind to send a WRU.
The answerback mechanism dutifully reported it was a Baker Hall TTY.
The room was just down the hall from Campus security, which Perlis called,
and a security person ambled down the hall can caught the perp.
-Ric Werme
--
"When we allow fundamental freedoms to be sacrificed in the name of real or
perceived emergency, we invariably regret it. -- Thurgood Marshall
Ric Werme | we...@nospam.mediaone.net
http://people.ne.mediaone.net/werme | ^^^^^^^ delete
Bob Powell
"Jim Thomas" <tho...@atlas.cfht.hawaii.edu> wrote in message
news:wwadyil...@atlas.cfht.hawaii.edu...
> >>>>> "Floyd" == Floyd Davidson <fl...@ptialaska.net> writes:
>
> Floyd> But for those of us who had learned to type on a Teletype
> Floyd> machine, computer keyboards were somewhat of a difficult
> Floyd> adjustment because the mechanical feedback was non-existant.
>
Ah yes, I was a lazy touch typist and liked to rest my hands on the eight
home keys of the '33 asdf jkl; since it didn't matter how much pressure
was on the keys as long as it was balanced, none of the keys would fire.
Vaguely remember a period of adjustment to an electronic keyboard.
Sold it for $750 in '79, when the market was still pretty strong. Seems
like they all disappeared overnight after that, with the first wave of cheap
dot matrix printers.
Really an incredible device, the all-electromechanical translation from key
to serial and serial to printhead and punch... I'd love to take one apart
just to document it.
CBFalconer
We used them as terminals in the 24/7 hospital clinical labs, and
equipped them with automatic motor turn-offs (meaning the
mainframe had to be gimmicked to send a wake up null or two and
wait a few seconds). In one year 50% were in the trash heap, and
we switched to silent 700 TI terminals, at a blinding 300 baud.
Floyd Davidson
Totally different feel though. Moving from a electric
typewriter to a computer keyboard isn't all that bad, and from a
manual typewriter it is worse, but just barely. That is because
in all cases the _typist_ decided when it is OK to go to the
next key. On a TTY, the machine will do that for you.
The thing about a Teletype machine was that you _could_ press on
the next key before the current one was complete! And as soon
as the machine was ready, it would let that second key become
mechanically functional and able move down. It was a nice
smooth transition from one key to the next too; and hence a good
typist could literally make the machine move along at "machine
speed" where it appeared to the distant end as if it was from a
tape rather than a keyboard. I was doing this a 60 wpm, but I
suppose there were people equally able at 100 wpm too. I know a
fellow who is well into his 70's now, that 30 years ago could
type any standard sentence you liked, such as a Quick Brown Fox,
and put each word in brackets or between dashes or whatever, all
at machine speed, and carry on a normal conversation about the
weather at the same time... it was impressive!
Moving to a computer keyboard, or for that matter to an electric
typewriter, left the (Tele)typist with absolutely no sense of
rythem at all! Every third key would cause a halt because it
didn't feel right.
Floyd Davidson
I totally disassembled and refurbished a couple of Model 15s,
mostly just to see if I could do it. I never had any desire to
do that on a regular basis, or to try it with a Model 28 or any
of the later models.
People who went to school on them could literally take a box of
parts and build a working machine as a matter of routine, because
that is just about what a normal trip to the maintenance shop
meant for each basket.
Charles Richmond
are like the "Flintstone's" idea of a computer terminal... IMHO that does
*not* mean that teletypes are bad, only that they use primative means to
accomplish their aims... (And very *noisy* means, at that...)
Joe Morris
>Umm, it just occurred to me that no one has pointed out that Model 35s
>implement WRU, I guess now ENQ (Ctrl/E), which triggers the answer back drum.
So do the TTY33 boxes -- more correctly, TTY33 boxes that were shipped
with a stunt box. That was the nominal function of the answerback
drum: to respond automatically (a) when a call is received (assuming
that you have a DataPhone 109) and (b) when queried by the distant
station via a WRU (later ENQ) character.
IIRC the easiest way to identify ASR33 machines with a stunt box was
to look at the tape reader controls: if there was a spring-loaded
lever switch used to start and stop the reader, a stunt box was
installed; if the tape reader control was a toggle you don't. (The
stunt box also decoded XON and XOFF as remote reader-start and reader-
stop commands.)
Joe Morris
jchausler
Ric Werme wrote:
> Back when I was a freshman at C-MU, I heard a story that someone had
> gotten CS Dept head Alan Perlis's Teletype's phone number and called
> it up from a terminal room in Baker Hall. He then sent many FFs,
> which Model 35s also implement. Perlis, attracted by the racket,
> found paper spewing out, but had the presense of mind to send a WRU.
> The answerback mechanism dutifully reported it was a Baker Hall TTY.
>
> The room was just down the hall from Campus security, which Perlis called,
> and a security person ambled down the hall can caught the perp.
Hi Ric,
I recall this story as well although I don't know if it was actually true. I
do know of an incident where one of the professors who had their own
35 at home got called and the entire box of paper was form fed..........
The Here-is drum on the TTY's was used by the G-20's as a log in as it
transmitted some unprintable (and in theory un-typable) characters in
addition to identifying the specific TTY in human readable form (the
readable part said something like "CIT Remote NN" where NN was
the identifying number.
Chris
AN GETTO$;DUMP;RUN,ALGOL,TAPE
$$
Simon Slavin
Steve O'Hara-Smith <ste...@eircom.net> wrote:
> > On, Off, Release, and Backspace.
>
> I recall a "Here Is" key for that (at least that's what we used it
> for).
'Release' was what we would now-days call 'Tape Feed': it just
made the tape-punch spew-out some tape without punching it.
You used it to get blank leader and trailer tape.
'Here is' did appear on that button some of the time. It was
wrong as far as I know: I never saw a machine which actually
did a 'Here is' when it was pressed. The ones with it on did
a 'Release' like all the others.
The reason for this illusion was that the 'Here is' code (a
single-character terminal-ID function) was encoded on a piece
of plastic which had prongs for all the bits. One was meant
to break-off whichever prongs would encode that particular
terminal. The computer could then send an ASCII 'Who Are You'
character to the terminal which would respond by automatically
sending back a 'Here Is ...' character identifying itself.
Since almost no installations used this feature most of the
plastic reels didn't have any teeth broken-off and therefore
the 'Here is' button would cause blank tape to issue from the
punch.
Simon.
--
http://www.hearsay.demon.co.uk | I have a hunch that [] the unknown sequences
No junk email please. | of DNA [will decode into] copyright notices
| and patent protections. -- Donald E. Knuth
The French Was There.
CBFalconer
So you wrote paper tapes with the line ending sequence
x-off,cr,lf. The x-off didn't come back on an echo until the cr
was being sent, and didn't take effect until the lf had gone. If
you were especially careful you added a couple of rubs after the
line end sequence.
Now the remote end emitted a prompt that terminated in x-on. So
you could pre-cook all your responses into a paper tape, and the
system that was fed by the terminal ran unattended.
Henny Olesen
Joe Morris skrev i meddelelsen <9r6t3s$lur$1...@top.mitre.org>...
>Ric Werme <we...@mediaone.net> writes:
>
>>Umm, it just occurred to me that no one has pointed out that Model 35s
>>implement WRU, I guess now ENQ (Ctrl/E), which triggers the answer back
drum.
>
>So do the TTY33 boxes -- more correctly, TTY33 boxes that were shipped
>with a stunt box. That was the nominal function of the answerback
>drum: to respond automatically (a) when a call is received (assuming
>that you have a DataPhone 109) and (b) when queried by the distant
>station via a WRU (later ENQ) character.
>
Back when I was young and beautiful (now I'm just beautifil...) I was
employed by the Dutch PTT. We used Siemens teleprinters. The WRU function
even had an undisclosed feature: when you stuck a pencil between the keys,
in such a way that the spacebar was held down, the DER state (DERanged = out
of service) would be sent through the switchboard. In other words, a call
would only be connected when a WRU function was completed from the receivers
site
Nico
Brian Inglis
wrote:
Don't forget TAPE ON and TAPE OFF (DC2/4) characters as punch
start and stop commands.
Thanks. Take care, Brian Inglis Calgary, Alberta, Canada
--
Brian....@CSi.com (Brian dot Inglis at SystematicSw dot ab dot ca)
fake address use address above to reply
tos...@aol.com ab...@aol.com ab...@yahoo.com ab...@hotmail.com ab...@msn.com ab...@sprint.com ab...@earthlink.com ab...@cadvision.com ab...@ibsystems.com u...@ftc.gov
spam traps
Joe Morris
>Don't forget TAPE ON and TAPE OFF (DC2/4) characters as punch
>start and stop commands.
Good point, but you should use the names of the codes as they appeared
on the keytops of an ASR33:
TAPE turned the punch on.
____
TAPE <with an overline above the word> turned the punch off.
Joe Morris
Charlie Gibbs
>x-no-archive: yes
>
>> Good point, but you should use the names of the codes as they
>> appeared on the keytops of an ASR33:
>>
>> TAPE turned the punch on.
>> ____
>> TAPE <with an overline above the word> turned the punch off.
>
>IIRC, the keycap labelling varied from one machine to another,
>even though the functions were the same.
For example, the ones I recall had the line drawn right through
the middle of the word TAPE, as if striking it out.
William Hamblen
> ... I think I only saw one TTY with
>an actual paper forms tractor on it, everyone else used the
>standard yellow roll of paper. (Why yellow?)
Cheap paper eventually turns yellow, so why not start with yellow
paper (which eventually turns brown). Just a guess.
Ric Werme
Dye is cheaper than bleach?
Yellow made for more readable text? My main slide rule is a Pickett
N4-ES (ES for Eye Saver yellow).
Ric Werme
>BTW, IIRC, IBM's Selectric Terminal typewriters (2741?) operated
>at a speed of 15 characters per second, while the Teletypes ran
>at only 10, yet the IBM's were quieter and easier to use.
Easier to use? Ever used one on a PDP-10 or other system that like full
duplex terminals? The 2741 keyboard was locked while it printing. In fact,
it stayed locked until commanded to be released. Once released, it stayed
released (and hence, not printing) until you hit return or break.
CMU (not me, thank God) added 2741 support to TOPS-10 SCNSER. It was about
1/3 of the whole module. I don't recall if it had a "control" key, it may be
that you had to type break, uparrow/caret C to stop a program that was in a
loop.
The Teletypes
>used a single typeball, not a carriage like the Selectrics did.
Model 33s have a cylindrical type framus on a carriage. 2741s have a golf
ball size framus on a carriage. It didn't take tools to change the 2741
type ball. Model 35s have a type box mounted on a carriage.
>I wondered why the IBM machines didn't have more widespread use except
>as dedicated terminal units, but again IIRC, they were only EBCIDIC
>and not ASCII compatible.
I imagine cost and pain of use on full duplex systems. They weren't
EBCDIC (note spelling), at least not in the 8 bit sense I connect to
it. I think they used a 6 bit code (with commands for essentially
using the shift key). They also use 134.5 baud and 1 1/2 stop bits
which is why that goofy setting is available on PCs.
-Ric
jchausler
Adrian Wise wrote:
> Could someone with a ASR-33 (and someone with an ASR-35) remind me
> what all the control knobs and buttons do, and what they are labelled?
This has probably all been answered in this now rather long thread but to
avoid rereading it again, I just glanced at my 33ASR.
There are four "buttons" on the punch. Upper left corner is: REL.
Lower left corner is: B.SP. Upper right corner is: OFF Upper
left corner: ON
There is one three position "switch" on the reader. Towards
operator: FREE Centered: STOP Away from the operator:
START
The rotary 3-position power switch is labeled:
LINE OFF LOCAL
On the Punch, the REL. released the clutch feed for the
paper tape so the user could manually thread a new roll of
paper tape or clear a jam or.....B.SP. has been explained,
the rest is obvious.
On most 33's I worked with, START on the reader did not
actually start the reader but allowed an external signal to
control the reader usually coming from a mini-computer. I
seem to recall once using a 33 where this START position
was momentary but this is a fuzzy memory at best.
jchausler
Ric Werme wrote:
> lwi...@bbs.cpcn.com (lwin) writes:
>
> >BTW, IIRC, IBM's Selectric Terminal typewriters (2741?) operated
> >at a speed of 15 characters per second, while the Teletypes ran
> >at only 10, yet the IBM's were quieter and easier to use.
>
> Easier to use? Ever used one on a PDP-10 or other system that like full
> duplex terminals? The 2741 keyboard was locked while it printing. In fact,
> it stayed locked until commanded to be released. Once released, it stayed
> released (and hence, not printing) until you hit return or break.
A story about this. The 2741 adjacent to the PDP-10 at CMU (actually in the
old G-20 line printer room) had its own 103A modem to dial in to the 10.
This was "stupid" in that it used up a phone line to get to the next room. I was
asked as a tech in the computer science dept. to direct wire it. So I
constructed
what we now call a Null Modem cable and connected it up. But it didn't work.
It seems that the 2741 is not immediately able to accept an "unlock the keyboard
command" after its done typing. With the phone company "in the way" enough
delay was being generated so that it worked. With the Null Modem, it did not.
The systems programmer had to add a delay before the Null Modem would
work. Sometime within the year, the 2741 was removed and I de-installed the
Null Modem cable. I still have it :-)
John Francis
>
>I didn't know an IBM terminal could be used on a PDP-10; I assumed
>they were always a TTY ASCII interface.
You'd be amazed at the variety of terminals you could hook up to a 10.
That's why grown men would run screaming from the room rather than dip
their hands into SCNSER. Or the same ones did, anyway. Personally I
thought that tweaking SCNSER was fun, but nobody's ever accused me of
being sane.
Chris Hedley
> I didn't know an IBM terminal could be used on a PDP-10; I assumed
> they were always a TTY ASCII interface.
That reminds me, didn't someone mention a while back (or possibly not,
I may have read it elsewhere) that DEC made a terminal controller that
allowed 3270-type mainframe terminals to connect to an S/3x0 in the
usual manner as well as giving them ASCII-datastream access to the DEC
equipment using LAT? AIUI, the intelligence for the 3270 protocol was
in the 3274 controller, the terminals themselves being fairly
unintelligent pollable devices, so they could be made to emulate a DEC
VT-style terminal quite easily if the controller wanted them to. So
along comes a controller with the relevant software and both a channel
and a DeathNet connection. It sounded pretty neat, anyway.
I still can't figure out how someone got "vi" working in standard 3270
mode, though. I've heard that it was quite usable, though I can't
imagine how...
Chris.
Chris Hedley
> You'd be amazed at the variety of terminals you could hook up to a 10.
> That's why grown men would run screaming from the room rather than dip
> their hands into SCNSER. Or the same ones did, anyway. Personally I
> thought that tweaking SCNSER was fun, but nobody's ever accused me of
> being sane.
Funny how many programmers seem to end up being propped up with
antipsychotics and assorted other tranquilisers; the combination
of bizarre code and PHBs is a dangerous one!
Chris.
Joe Morris
>BTW, IIRC, IBM's Selectric Terminal typewriters (2741?) operated
>at a speed of 15 characters per second, while the Teletypes ran
>at only 10, yet the IBM's were quieter and easier to use. The Teletypes
>used a single typeball, not a carriage like the Selectrics did.
>I wondered why the IBM machines didn't have more widespread use except
>as dedicated terminal units, but again IIRC, they were only EBCIDIC
>and not ASCII compatible.
The Selectric ran at 14.6 cps, with a line speed of 134.5 baud. OTOH
unlike the TTY33 or TTY35 the Selectric-based terminals used shifting
to overload most of the character codes, so the actual output of
typed characters had the same problem as was the case with 5-level
teleprinters in that the shift codes could eat up a significant
amount of bandwidth.
Also, the TTY33 printhead was a cylinder that moved both up/down
as well as rotating to select the desired glyph, after which
it was forced against the ribbon to print the character. The
TTY35 used a typebox with individual slugs for the characters;
the box was positioned horizontally and vertically to put the
desired slug above the current print location, at which time a
hammer whacked the slug into the ribbon. Both were noisy, but
IIRC (from too long ago) the TTY35 was a far quieter machine.
(And both were much more noisy than the 2741 which was, of
course, based on the standard office Selectric design.)
Joe Morris
John Francis
Oh, I'm perfectly well adjusted to reality without the aid of
any medications. Whether it's the same reality as the one you
live in, and whether others are well adjusted to my presence,
are questions that may be a little harder to answer.
Charlie Gibbs
>Teletypes were much noisier than Selectric terminals, but Selectrics
>were faster.
Well, model 33 Teletypes were noisier than Selectrics. The model 35
was quieter, especially in the higher frequencies. And the model 37
was almost as fast as a Selectric, although it wasn't around long.
Jay Maynard
<c...@ieya.co.REMOVE_THIS.uk> wrote:
>That reminds me, didn't someone mention a while back (or possibly not,
>I may have read it elsewhere) that DEC made a terminal controller that
>allowed 3270-type mainframe terminals to connect to an S/3x0 in the
>usual manner as well as giving them ASCII-datastream access to the DEC
>equipment using LAT?
I don't know if DEC did this, but IBM offered a feature for the 3174 that
allowed a 3270 terminal to act like a VT100 over a serial connection.
> AIUI, the intelligence for the 3270 protocol was
>in the 3274 controller, the terminals themselves being fairly
>unintelligent pollable devices, so they could be made to emulate a DEC
>VT-style terminal quite easily if the controller wanted them to.
This is indeed how the IBM feature worked...
>I still can't figure out how someone got "vi" working in standard 3270
>mode, though. I've heard that it was quite usable, though I can't
>imagine how...
For a while, I used an async emulation product that connected to an IBM
system (can't remember the name, darn it), from a 3270. You hit a PF key to
send the characters you'd typed without a CR (hitting ENTER sent the stuff
you'd typed with a CR). It was possible to use vi this way, but it was *not*
fun.
Jim Thomas
lwin> BTW, IIRC, IBM's Selectric Terminal typewriters (2741?) operated
lwin> at a speed of 15 characters per second, while the Teletypes ran
lwin> at only 10, yet the IBM's were quieter and easier to use.
lwin> used a single typeball, not a carriage like the Selectrics did.
lwin> I wondered why the IBM machines didn't have more widespread use except
lwin> as dedicated terminal units, but again IIRC, they were only EBCIDIC
lwin> and not ASCII compatible.
If you look at any old listing of baud rates, you will see "134.5". That
was for the Selectric IIRC. Maybe that wasn't sexy enough to catch on :-)
Jim
Jay Maynard
<jmay...@thebrain.conmicro.cx> wrote:
>For a while, I used an async emulation product that connected to an IBM
>system (can't remember the name, darn it), from a 3270.
Just remembered...it was called ANET. Anyone else get to enjoy this one?
Dennis Ritchie
Joe Morris wrote:
...
>
> The Selectric ran at 14.6 cps, with a line speed of 134.5 baud. OTOH
> unlike the TTY33 or TTY35 the Selectric-based terminals used shifting
> to overload most of the character codes, so the actual output of
> typed characters had the same problem as was the case with 5-level
> teleprinters in that the shift codes could eat up a significant
> amount of bandwidth.
Morris pretty much nailed this. The Selectric-based terminals
(1050 and close relatives, and 2741 and its relatives) ran at
a line bit-rate of 134.5, and used a 6-bit encoding with upper-
and lower-case shifts, and the same basic golf-ball mechanism
as the office typewriters, but a bit more rugged. The 1050 seemed
designed for higher duty cycle, and was definitely heavier and
bigger.
One fact about both was that there were two separate character
encodings and sets of golf-balls. The "correspondence" series
were used with the office/typist Selectrics and offered a nicer
selection of font styles. The other encoding was more oriented
to computer use. I forget its generic name, but it was typified
and often named the 938 character set after its part number.
(There was also the APL character golf-ball; I can't remember
which it resembled more).
I had a 1050 in my basement at home for a couple of years ca. 1969-70.
It was replaced by a TTY 37, then by a GE Terminet 300, then an
HP 2621P. Ken Thompson used an IBM 2741 for a while. However,
I think that we both used these for Multics and CTSS, and had
moved on before were able to get comms hardware for the PDP-11.
Still, quite early Unix supported the half-duplex IBM 1050 and 2741
terminals, as had Multics and CTSS before that. It was a
bit of a struggle, but it worked. The 2741 in particular
needed the "reverse break" feature (maybe even RPQ) to stop
some program from typing at you.
>
> Also, the TTY33 printhead was a cylinder that moved both up/down
> as well as rotating to select the desired glyph, after which
> it was forced against the ribbon to print the character. The
> TTY35 used a typebox with individual slugs for the characters;
> the box was positioned horizontally and vertically to put the
> desired slug above the current print location, at which time a
> hammer whacked the slug into the ribbon....
Just so. The TTY37 used the same basic configuration (rectangular
dancing (in a plane) type-box with a hammer that hit the selected
type slug.
Dennis
Chris Hedley
> I don't know if DEC did this, but IBM offered a feature for the 3174 that
> allowed a 3270 terminal to act like a VT100 over a serial connection.
It could've been IBM rather than DEC that I'd heard about, my memory's
rarely that great...
> For a while, I used an async emulation product that connected to an IBM
> system (can't remember the name, darn it), from a 3270. You hit a PF key to
> send the characters you'd typed without a CR (hitting ENTER sent the stuff
> you'd typed with a CR). It was possible to use vi this way, but it was *not*
> fun.
Thanks for the explanation. I've been wondering about this one for over
10 years (believe it or not!) The person who described it as "quite
usable" clearly has a different interpretation of usability to most others,
by the sound of it.
Chris.
Nick Spalding
> Morris pretty much nailed this. The Selectric-based terminals
> (1050 and close relatives, and 2741 and its relatives) ran at
> a line bit-rate of 134.5, and used a 6-bit encoding with upper-
> and lower-case shifts, and the same basic golf-ball mechanism
> as the office typewriters, but a bit more rugged. The 1050 seemed
> designed for higher duty cycle, and was definitely heavier and
> bigger.
The mechanism came out of the 6-bit IBM era. The selectric was used
as the console printer on 1410s, 1440s, 1460s, 7010s.
--
Nick Spalding
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
>
> One fact about both was that there were two separate character
> encodings and sets of golf-balls. The "correspondence" series
> were used with the office/typist Selectrics and offered a nicer
> selection of font styles. The other encoding was more oriented
> to computer use. I forget its generic name, but it was typified
> and often named the 938 character set after its part number.
> (There was also the APL character golf-ball; I can't remember
> which it resembled more).
& pulling out trusty cp-67 manual ... 2741 keyboard
compared to current PC keyboards the "return" key was two rows high
(eliminating the left/right bracket keys). The tab key on the left was
two rows high, eliminating the approximation/reverse quote key.
On the 2741, feature Receive Interrupt (#4708) was required and either
feature Transmit Interrupt (#7900) or Transmit Interrupt Control (RPQ
E40681) was required. Also feature Print Inhibit (#5501) was desirable.
2741 ... standard selectric (correspondence) configuration
looks a little more like curent PC keyboard
except there was
+/- combo symbol above the one/1
cent-sign above 6
only one key to the right of the P, uppercase "degree" symbol, lowercase was !
the comma key to the right of the M was comma for both lower & upper case
the period key to the right of the comm, was period for both lower & upper case
2741 ... PTTC/EBCD (computer) configuration
more different than current PC keyboard.
< less-than above the two
; semi-colon above the three
: colon above the four
' single quote above the six
> greater than above the seven
key next to the backspsace had "&" in lowercase (instead of equal/=)
key next to the P had lower case @ sign and upper case cent sign
key next to the L had lower case $/dollar, and uppercase !
key between "$" & return had lowercase #/pound and uppercase "/quote
the comma key (next to M) had uppercase !/exclamation
the period key had uppercase "not" sign.
I still have an APL PTTC/EBCD ball.
The correspondance/PTTC encodings were different. CP-67 would get
initial incoming 2741 message (assumed to be login), use the
PTTC->EBCDIC translate table and check for an "l/L", if it wasn't an
"l/L" it would check for a "y/Y". If it was an "y/Y", it would assume
that it was a correspondance terminal and retranslate the message with
the correspondance->EBCDIC translate table (and then check again for
"l/L").
=============================
The 33 KSR (keyboard send/receive) is supported by CP-67
The control panel to the right of the keyboard contains six buttons
below the telephone dial, and two lights, a button, and the
NORMAL-RESTORE knob above the dial. The buttons and lights are as
follows:
ORIG (ORIGINATE). This button obtains a dial tone before dialing. The
volume control ont eh loadpseaker (under the keybarod shelf to the
right) should be turned up such that the dial tone is audible.
CLR (CLEAR). This button, wheen depressed, turns off the typewriter
ANS (Answer). This button is not used by CP-67
TST (TEST). This button is used for testing purposes only
LCL (Local)> This button turns on the typerwriter for local or offline use.
BUZ-RLS (Buzzer-release). This button turns off the buzzer that warns
of a low paper supply.
BRK-RLS (Break-Release). This buttons unlocks the keyboard after
program execution has been interrupted by the BREAK key.
REST. This light is not used by CP-67
NORMAL-RESTORE. This knob is set to NORMAL, except to change the ribbon, in which case the knob is twisted to the OUT-OF-SERV light.
OUT-OF-SERV (Out of Service). This light goes on when the
NORMAL-RESTORE knob is pointed to it for ribbon changing.
The KSR (Keyboard Send/Receive) model of the teletype Type 35 terminal
is supported by CP-67.
random postings.
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#2 360/67, was Re: IBM's Project F/S ?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/93.html#15 unit record & other controllers
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#2 Schedulers
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/94.html#33a High Speed Data Transport (HSDT)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#9 cics
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#12 IBM song
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#30 interdata and perkin/elmer
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#37 interdata & perkin/elmer machines
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/96.html#39 Mainframes & Unix
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/97.html#22 Pre S/360 IBM Operating Systems?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/97.html#25 Early RJE Terminals (was Re: First Network?)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#2 CP-67 (was IBM 360 DOS (was Is Win95 without DOS...))
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#29 Drive letters
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#32 Drive letters
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/98.html#49 Edsger Dijkstra: the blackest week of his professional life
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#37 why is there an "@" key?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#42 Enter fonts (was Re: Unix case-sensitivity: how did it originate?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#43 Enter fonts (was Re: Unix case-sensitivity: how did it originate?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#51 Internet and/or ARPANET?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#76 Mainframes at Universities
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#77 Are mainframes relevant ??
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#92 MVS vs HASP vs JES (was 2821)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#109 OS/360 names and error codes (was: Humorous and/or Interesting Opcodes)http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#6 History of ASCII (was Re: Why Not! Why not???)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#58 360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000f.html#71 HASP vs. "Straight OS," not vs. ASP
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#12 360 Architecture, Multics, ... was (Re: X86 ultimate CISC? No.)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#0 First video terminal?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#3 First video terminal?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#15 IBM Model Numbers (was: First video terminal?)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001.html#17 IBM 1142 reader/punch (Re: First video terminal?)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#50 IBM 705 computer manual
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001e.html#53 Pre ARPAnet email?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#64 Converting Bitmap images
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#78 HMC . . . does anyone out there like it ?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001g.html#32 Did AT&T offer Unix to Digital Equipment in the 70s?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#30 IBM OS Timeline?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001i.html#47 Withdrawal Announcement 901-218 - No More 'small machines'
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001k.html#38 3270 protocol
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001l.html#43 QTAM (was: MVS History)
--
Anne & Lynn Wheeler | ly...@garlic.com - http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/
jmfb...@aol.com
jo...@panix.com (John Francis) wrote:
>In article <9rmfr2$l...@netaxs.com>, lwin <lwi...@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>
>>I didn't know an IBM terminal could be used on a PDP-10; I assumed
>>they were always a TTY ASCII interface.
>
>You'd be amazed at the variety of terminals you could hook up to a 10.
>That's why grown men would run screaming from the room rather than dip
>their hands into SCNSER.
<GRIN> I can attest to that.
> ... Or the same ones did, anyway. Personally I
>thought that tweaking SCNSER was fun, but nobody's ever accused me of
>being sane.
The problem with tweaking SCNSER was that it took weeks to
get the damn thing untweaked so that the monitor load could
get run.
/BAH
Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.
jmfb...@aol.com
"Charlie Gibbs" <cgi...@nowhere.in.particular> wrote:
>In article <9rmfr2$l...@netaxs.com> lwi...@bbs.cpcn.com (lwin) writes:
>
>>Teletypes were much noisier than Selectric terminals, but Selectrics
>>were faster.
>
>Well, model 33 Teletypes were noisier than Selectrics. The model 35
>was quieter, especially in the higher frequencies.
The 35 was quieter only if the glass was still intact. There
was a guy who was famous for the intersections of his temper
and 35 glass breakage. Field service finally refused to repair
them.
<snip>
Bruce B. Reynolds
>encodings and sets of golf-balls. The "correspondence" series
>were used with the office/typist Selectrics and offered a nicer
>selection of font styles. The other encoding was more oriented
>to computer use. I forget its generic name, but it was typified
>and often named the 938 character set after its part number.
>(There was also the APL character golf-ball; I can't remember
>which it resembled more).
>
The Selectric encoding tables I have (for 1816, 1053, etc.), are
PTTC/Correspondence and
PTTC/BCD.
Bruce B. Reynolds, Trailing Edge Technologies, Glenside PA
Charles Richmond
terminal for an old IBM 1620 that was used by beginning students
in an "open shop" arrangement. Of course the beginning students
did *not* use the selectric, but only loaded cards in the hopper
and pressed the button...
--
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Charles and Francis Richmond <rich...@plano.net> |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+
Charles Richmond
floor of a building, and that there were *bars* on the windows
to keep people from throwing their computers out the window...
Perhaps this man who broke the glass...needed some kind of metal
screen protecting the glass...
Dave Daniels
Jay Maynard <jmay...@thebrain.conmicro.cx> wrote:
> For a while, I used an async emulation product that connected to an IBM
> system (can't remember the name, darn it), from a 3270. You hit a PF key to
> send the characters you'd typed without a CR (hitting ENTER sent the stuff
> you'd typed with a CR). It was possible to use vi this way, but it was *not*
> fun.
If it is what I think it is, it was called 'Anet' and was
developed by Teubner and Associates. Typically you would use it
as a Telnet client so that you could gain access to your Unix
boxes from the mainframe. I do not know if it is still sold today
but it was definitely around in the mid 90s. I used it plus
another package based on the same program called Fullview/VT. I
thought it was a fairly heroic attempt to provide as full an
emulation as possible of a VT100 on a 3270. It was probably 90% of
the way there, but, as you found out, you ended up having to do
such things as using a PF key on the 3270 to act as a 'send' key
when you wanted to send a single character. You also had to do
things like using PF Keys for cursor movement. Anet had rules you
could select to adjust things like attribute byte placement on the
3270 but it was a case of trying to find the best compromise. It
had a menu system so that you could adjust the ASCII->EBCDIC->
ASCII tranlate tables and how the PF keys were mapped. I think it
worked very well given the number of ways in which the basic
operation of 3270s and VT100s differ. IMHO it was too cumbersome
to use for such tasks as editing files but it was quite usable for
data entry applications where, for example, you are updating or
displaying customer information.
Fullview/VT was a special version of Anet that was designed to
work with VMS. I think that there was a device driver on the Vax
side so the software was much more closely tied to the OS. You
still had all the VT100 -> 3270 translation headaches, though.
Dave Daniels
Chris Hedley
> Fullview/VT was a special version of Anet that was designed to
> work with VMS. I think that there was a device driver on the Vax
> side so the software was much more closely tied to the OS. You
> still had all the VT100 -> 3270 translation headaches, though.
At Philips, our UNIX boxes had quite a nice 3270 emulator for VT screens
installed. I can't remember who originally wrote it, unfortunately, just
that it was distributed by Motorola. The software emulated a complete
3274 controller (the boxes in question had a SDLC line to the mainframe
attached via a converted X.25 card) and seemed to be pretty complete as
far as I could tell; the only slight headache was effectively mapping all
the function keys to the VT's slightly arcane layout. The terminals we
were using were made by Ampex and had an additional fully-customisable
status line, so it didn't have the nasty effect of sharing the bottom
line between what it was supposed to display and for status, which I've
seen on a few emulators.
The main problem was that full-screen updates on a 9600 baud VT were a
bit slow, although people who dialled in from home used to go via the
UNIX systems even when they just wanted to use the mainframe as the
curses protocol was apparently more efficient at compressing the screen
updates than the native SNA-attached modems.
Chris.
Jay Maynard
<c...@ieya.co.REMOVE_THIS.uk> wrote:
>The main problem was that full-screen updates on a 9600 baud VT were a
>bit slow, although people who dialled in from home used to go via the
>UNIX systems even when they just wanted to use the mainframe as the
>curses protocol was apparently more efficient at compressing the screen
>updates than the native SNA-attached modems.
The 3270 protocol lends itself to redundant space elimination and not
retransmitting parts of the screen that haven't changed. Unfortunately, the
standard software didn't take advantage of that, though some applications
(most notably [I]SPF) did. One of BMC Software's early products was a
package that inserted itself in the path to the terminal and did that
optimization for it. Since that's the kind of optimization that curses does
automagically, I can believe that folks would want to go that way.
ic0c...@ic24.net
wrote:
>The mechanism came out of the 6-bit IBM era. The selectric was used
>as the console printer on 1410s, 1440s, 1460s, 7010s.
And 1620s
--
aml
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
>
> The 3270 protocol lends itself to redundant space elimination and not
> retransmitting parts of the screen that haven't changed. Unfortunately, the
> standard software didn't take advantage of that, though some applications
> (most notably [I]SPF) did. One of BMC Software's early products was a
> package that inserted itself in the path to the terminal and did that
> optimization for it. Since that's the kind of optimization that curses does
> automagically, I can believe that folks would want to go that way.
we eventually got a large batch of (ascii) 3101s ... that have a vague
resemblance to 3270s ... which had both block mode & line mode (as
well as attached printer for various kinds of stuff). an internal
application did a heavy job of transmission optimization for 3270s on
3101s (as part of home terminal program). It wasn't all that different
of some of the stuff done earlier for line-mode2 emulation on things
like adm3a (tymshare which used same operating system had something
similar for optimal transmission for line-mode emulation).
the next advance was large availability of ibm/pcs for the home
terminal program ... and an advanced PC/host emulation of 3270 over
ascii lines where the PC/host kept something akin to dictionary of
already transmitted data (at the PC) ... and the host would transmit
the index to the (previously displayed) data to be displayed (as
opposed to the data itself). This worked especially well for
partially updated screens (this is analogous, but less sophisticated
to some of the current video MP3 compression techniques).
random refs:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#9 IBM S/360
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/99.html#69 System/1 ?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000b.html#29 20th March 2000
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#17 IBM's mess (was: Re: What the hell is an MSX?)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2000g.html#36 stupid user stories
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#12 Now early Arpanet security
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001b.html#13 Now early Arpanet security
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001e.html#66 line length (was Re: Babble from "JD" <dy...@jdyson.com>)
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001f.html#57 any 70's era supercomputers that ran as slow as today's supercomputers?
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001h.html#32 Wanted: pictures of green-screen text
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2001k.html#35 Newbie TOPS-10 7.03 question
Eric Smith
> The mechanism came out of the 6-bit IBM era. The selectric was used
> as the console printer on 1410s, 1440s, 1460s, 7010s.
And it was first used in 1961 on the IBM 7030 Data Processing System
(STRETCH) before the Selectric had been announced as either a typewriter
or an I/O device, so the early STRETCH marketing materials were
reportedly somewhat vague about the nature of the console typewriter.
Charles Richmond
>
> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...]
>
> The main problem was that full-screen updates on a 9600 baud VT were a
> bit slow, although people who dialled in from home used to go via the
> UNIX systems even when they just wanted to use the mainframe as the
> curses protocol was apparently more efficient at compressing the screen
> updates than the native SNA-attached modems.
>
to a Unix network via a termserver. The baud rate was 19.2k, but the
terminal could *not* keep up if the screen displayed was pretty full
of text. The bottleneck was the speed that the terminal could display
the text. Pop a vt420 open, and you'll see that it uses an Intel
8048 as the main processor there...same processor that you used
to find in IBM keyboards. Heck, I was hoping for at least a Z80!!!
jmfb...@aol.com
Charles Richmond <rich...@ev1.net> wrote:
>Chris Hedley wrote:
>>
>> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...]
>>
>> The main problem was that full-screen updates on a 9600 baud VT were a
>> bit slow, although people who dialled in from home used to go via the
>> UNIX systems even when they just wanted to use the mainframe as the
>> curses protocol was apparently more efficient at compressing the screen
>> updates than the native SNA-attached modems.
>>
>Where I used to work, we sometimes had a DEC vt420 terminal connected
>to a Unix network via a termserver. The baud rate was 19.2k, but the
>terminal could *not* keep up if the screen displayed was pretty full
>of text. The bottleneck was the speed that the terminal could display
>the text. Pop a vt420 open, and you'll see that it uses an Intel
>8048 as the main processor there...same processor that you used
>to find in IBM keyboards. Heck, I was hoping for at least a Z80!!!
>
too. Insistence to rewrite the whole screen can bring any
terminal to its knees. IIRC, one of the problems of a VT05...
at least I think that's the one--it might have been a later model...
was that the screen wasn't direct-addressable. So to display a
character in the postion of [15,20] a program had to HOME then
count out the LFs and spaces with the cursor before printing.
Besides, who in the hell can read at 19.2k anyway? ;-)
Joe Morris
>At my college circa 1972, a selectric was used as the console
>terminal for an old IBM 1620 that was used by beginning students
>in an "open shop" arrangement. Of course the beginning students
>did *not* use the selectric, but only loaded cards in the hopper
>and pressed the button...
That would be a 1620 mod II; the mod I used an IBM Executive typewriter.
That's the model that got an urgent Engineering Change to put a guard
bracket where the carriage would be following a carriage return
event. The problem was that the typewriter was at the far right end
of the console, and the carriage could extend out into an area
where a person might be standing...the remainder of the explanation
is left to the reader's imagination.
Joe Morris
ic0c...@ic24.net
>That would be a 1620 mod II; the mod I used an IBM Executive typewriter.
>
ISTR it was a B1 tripewriter.
--
aml
Jim Thomas
Dennis> Still, quite early Unix supported the half-duplex IBM 1050 and 2741
Dennis> terminals, as had Multics and CTSS before that. It was a
Dennis> bit of a struggle, but it worked. The 2741 in particular
Dennis> needed the "reverse break" feature (maybe even RPQ) to stop
Dennis> some program from typing at you.
In about 1970 Jim de la Houssaye wrote code for the LSUNO 680/i PDP-10
front end to support a selectric :-)
Nothead
Jim Thomas
Charles> Nick Spalding wrote:
>> The mechanism came out of the 6-bit IBM era. The selectric was used
>> as the console printer on 1410s, 1440s, 1460s, 7010s.
Charles> At my college circa 1972, a selectric was used as the console
Charles> terminal for an old IBM 1620 that was used by beginning students
Charles> in an "open shop" arrangement. Of course the beginning students
Charles> did *not* use the selectric, but only loaded cards in the hopper
Charles> and pressed the button...
Was that a model II ? I don't think the model I ever used anything but a
"regular" typewriter.
Jim
Nick Spalding
> IBM continued to make conventional typewriters (with typebars)
> along with Selectrics. (I'm not sure why, or what features
> the conventional models had that a Selectric didn't.)
Some had proportional spacing, I don't think any Selectrics did.
--
Nick Spalding
Eric Smith
> The mechanism came out of the 6-bit IBM era. The selectric was used
> as the console printer on 1410s, 1440s, 1460s, 7010s.
ic0c...@ic24.net writes:
> And 1620s
Really? The 1620 at the Computer Museum History Center has an older
non-Selectric IBM typewriter. It appears to be nearly identical to the
console typewriter of the DEC PDP-1, which presumably was OEM'd from IBM.
This particular 1620 console was obviously designed with this specific
typewriter in mind.
Of course, the 1620 went through a lot of revisions over the years, so
it wouldn't surprise me too much if later ones used a Selectric.
no-spam
was a Selectric too.
On the 2nd thought, I'm sure the IBM repairmen won't forget them. They sure
cussed alot when they had to work on it :-)
<ic0c...@ic24.net> wrote in message
news:ds61utsksplop2a0o...@4ax.com...
John Francis
>x-no-archive: yes
>
>> Some had proportional spacing, I don't think any Selectrics did.
>
>supported proportional spacing. I don't know if regular models
>for office use had proportional spacing, however.
There certainly were IBM office typewriters with proportional
spacing, built on what appeared to be the Selectric chassis.
I believe they were sold under the 'Executive' sub-brand.
ic0c...@ic24.net
<eric-no-s...@brouhaha.com> wrote:
>ic0c...@ic24.net writes:
>> And 1620s
>
>Really? The 1620 at the Computer Museum History Center has an older
>non-Selectric IBM typewriter.
Yes the 1620 model I had a standard IBM electric typewriter model
B1
>It appears to be nearly identical to the
>console typewriter of the DEC PDP-1, which presumably was OEM'd from IBM.
If you say so.
>
>This particular 1620 console was obviously designed with this specific
>typewriter in mind.
Yes the 1620 mod I was designed / manufactured for the power roll
electric typewriter model B1 (non proportional spacing). The clue
is the continuously rotating cam driven circuit breakers living
under the console table.
>
>Of course, the 1620 went through a lot of revisions over the years, so
>it wouldn't surprise me too much if later ones used a Selectric.
Yes the 1620 model II used a Selectric.
chris 'fufas' grace
The Selectric Composer did. It was a special model for graphic design
houses and had multiple point sizes. I believe it cost 10 times as
much as the ordinary selectric and you pretty much needed to be a
typographer to use it.
--
For a dining "experience" visit the "Killer Prawn" in Whangarei!
Be served and charged for food *without even ordering it*!
Let the staff treat you with undisguised condescension and contempt!
Experience the total incompetence of the management! Book today!
ic0c...@ic24.net
<eric-no-s...@brouhaha.com> wrote:
>Really? The 1620 at the Computer Museum History Center has an older
>non-Selectric IBM typewriter. It appears to be nearly identical to the
>console typewriter of the DEC PDP-1, which presumably was OEM'd from IBM.
>
The IBM B1 typewriter found itself in many places. Even in the IBM
870 system.
--
aml
Charles Richmond
Lars Poulsen
> Don't forget the console typewriter on the IBM 1130 systems (1131 CPU).
> It was a Selectric too.
The 1130 console was as mongrel as the rest of the machine.
While the console printer was a 1052 golf ball mechanism, the keyboard
was lifted from the 029 keypunch. The result had none of the elegance
of the selectric console of the 1620 mod II or the S/360 console.
jmfb...@aol.com
Right. Selectrics had a maximum character count which was
always a subset of characters available on a manual. The
typewriter in the math department was great demand because
you could type up a paper without having to switch balls.
Selectrics also had to have electricity to work...or are
you talking strictly about non-manuals?
jmfb...@aol.com
Wow! That's a name from the past. There was also a driver
written for the PDP-10 that treated the Selectric as an
ouput device kinda under a guise of a terminal.
The device had to be assigned as any dedicated printer
would have been; but a SEND ALL would appear on the
repro that I was (trying) to produce. I have no
idea where the specs for that one disappeared to.
Joe Morris
>Don't forget the console typewriter on the IBM 1130 systems (1131 CPU). It
>was a Selectric too.
>On the 2nd thought, I'm sure the IBM repairmen won't forget them. They sure
>cussed alot when they had to work on it :-)
*Especially* when the service call was to replace a broken drive belt.
Fixing this problem required that the CE remove the main driveshaft,
which for a CE not trained primarily as a Selectric repairman was
a *long* job. (When doing this, the CE would always put a spare
drive belt over the driveshaft and use rubber bands to keep it out
of the way. Doing this meant that the next time the drive belt broke
the repair job consisted only of moving the spare into position over
the motor pulley.)
Joe Morris
Heinz W. Wiggeshoff
>
...
> which for a CE not trained primarily as a Selectric repairman was
> a *long* job. (When doing this, the CE would always put a spare
> drive belt over the driveshaft and use rubber bands to keep it out
> of the way. Doing this meant that the next time the drive belt broke
> the repair job consisted only of moving the spare into position over
> the motor pulley.)
Now that's what I call "out of the box" thinking. Congrats to the
person(s) who tried to make life a little less miserable for others.
If only there was a similar solution for those pesky CPU fans today.
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Lars Poulsen <la...@beagle-ears.com> wrote:
LP> no-spam wrote:
LP> > Don't forget the console typewriter on the IBM 1130 systems (1131 CPU).
LP> > It was a Selectric too.
LP>
LP> The 1130 console was as mongrel as the rest of the machine.
LP> While the console printer was a 1052 golf ball mechanism, the keyboard
LP> was lifted from the 029 keypunch. The result had none of the elegance
LP> of the selectric console of the 1620 mod II or the S/360 console.
OTOH it worked well enough and nobody was going to be doing much
typing on the console of an 1130 (at least not without risking a lynching
fro the job queue).
--
Directable Mirrors - A Better Way To Focus The Sun
Charlie Gibbs
(chris 'fufas' grace) writes:
>Nick Spalding wrote:
>
>> lwin wrote, in <9rru72$m...@netaxs.com>:
>>
>> > IBM continued to make conventional typewriters (with typebars)
>> > along with Selectrics. (I'm not sure why, or what features
>> > the conventional models had that a Selectric didn't.)
>>
>> Some had proportional spacing, I don't think any Selectrics did.
>
>The Selectric Composer did. It was a special model for graphic design
>houses and had multiple point sizes. I believe it cost 10 times as
>much as the ordinary selectric and you pretty much needed to be a
>typographer to use it.
I once saw a demo of a large electronic programmable calculator
(made by Wang, perhaps?) that used a hopped-up Selectric as a
printer/plotter. It could roll the platen in both directions,
and seemed to have very good carriage control. Watching it
draw a plot was pretty fascinating. It was a pretty impressive
machine for its day (1969?).
--
cgi...@nowhere.in.particular (Charlie Gibbs)
I'm switching ISPs - watch this space.
Michael J. Albanese
>
> On the 2nd thought, I'm sure the IBM repairmen won't forget them. They sure
> cussed alot when they had to work on it :-)
IBM repairmen? Cuss? Perish the thought!
I once called out an IBM repairman on night shift for a malfunctioning
card reader on a 360/30. He drove in from home, about 50 miles over an
icy mountain during an intense winter snowstorm. Came in around 3 A.M.
with traditional white shirt, tie, and tool case only to discover he
didn't have the part he needed to make the repair. He got back in his
2WD car and fought his way across town to another site to get a spare
part from their cabinet. Returned and promptly fixed the unit. After
hanging around for a half-hour or so to make sure everything was OK, I
thanked him profusely and he headed home, back over that nasty mountain.
Well, you guessed it -- an hour after he left, CLINK! Red light and no
more card reader. I had no choice but to page him again, when he was
about 10 miles from reaching home. He turned around and came the whole
way back over that icy mountain to fix the unit a second time. Now I
have no idea what he was saying in his car, but he never once cussed, at
least within earshot of me. Actually, he never even frowned or otherwise
looked tired or displeased! It was commonly said back then that you
bought IBM for the service, and after that night, I certainly was impressed.
Now Honeywell repairmen...a few of those guys could cuss like sailors.
And after the merger with that big French company, some of them really
seemed to relish answering the phone rather gruffly with: "This is
so-and-so....Honeywell <long pause> Bull!"
Mike
--
(remove 'revoke-my-' from address for email)
Brian Inglis
wrote:
All the typewriters at my first POE were IBM executive and had
proportional fonts and must have had memory for backspace
correction. Selectrics on the mag card typesetters also had
proportional spacing, as we had to support this feature on the
runoff/troff workalike program we wrote to replace them.
Thanks. Take care, Brian Inglis Calgary, Alberta, Canada
--
Brian....@CSi.com (Brian dot Inglis at SystematicSw dot ab dot ca)
fake address use address above to reply
tos...@aol.com ab...@aol.com ab...@yahoo.com ab...@hotmail.com ab...@msn.com ab...@sprint.com ab...@earthlink.com ab...@cadvision.com ab...@ibsystems.com u...@ftc.gov
spam traps
Jeff Jonas
>at a speed of 15 characters per second, while the Teletypes ran
>at only 10, yet the IBM's were quieter and easier to use. The Teletypes
>used a single typeball, not a carriage like the Selectrics did.
I never had to repair genuine Teletypes, but I did maintain a pair of
IBM system 1130 computers. The console typewriters were Selectrics.
Some used steel cables and bands, others nylon.
Repairing a snapped carriage cable was not fun.
>I wondered why the IBM machines didn't have more widespread use except
>as dedicated terminal units, but again IIRC, they were only EBCIDIC
>and not ASCII compatible.
I suspect that depends on the controller/adapter.
Peripherals on the IBM system 1130 tended to have their own native codes,
the software performing all conversions.
The Selectric console typewriter was a 6 bit tilt/rotate code
so changing the "golfball" printing element could change all the codes
(particularly when using the APL character set).
--
Jeffrey Jonas
jeffj@panix(dot)com
The original Dr. JCL and Mr .hide
Jeff Jonas
>in the 1980s.
>
>Teletype was a subsidiary of Western Electric, which in turn
>was owned by AT&T. Divesture killed it all.
*sigh* I agree, AT&T killed trademarks that were well known and trusted.
The "Teletype" terminal division made printers, CRTs and such that were
all rugged and reliable. But NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO, AT&T wanted their
name to rule so terminals after the BLIT were AT&T logo.
I wish the "Western Electric" name were brought back
instead of "Avaya" or "Lucent".
Michael J. Albanese
> I wish the "Western Electric" name were brought back
> instead of "Avaya" or "Lucent".
I like the old names better, too, but today the execs would think
"Western Electric" sounds too much like something which needs... wires
<gasp!>
Joe Morris
>Jeff Jonas wrote:
>> I wish the "Western Electric" name were brought back
>> instead of "Avaya" or "Lucent".
>I like the old names better, too, but today the execs would think
>"Western Electric" sounds too much like something which needs... wires
><gasp!>
Then just call it by its common initials: WECo ("WHEE-ko"). The same
idea was applied to its non-Bell competitor: Automatic Electric was AECo
(pronunced "A-E-ko").
Joe Morris
jmfb...@aol.com
"Michael J. Albanese" <mjalb...@revoke-my-charter.net> wrote:
>Jeff Jonas wrote:
>
>> I wish the "Western Electric" name were brought back
>> instead of "Avaya" or "Lucent".
>
>
>I like the old names better, too, but today the execs would think
>"Western Electric" sounds too much like something which needs... wires
><gasp!>
I'm to the point that I don't care what they call themselves as
long as they stick with it. This renaming the company every
year stuff sucks. I've stopped hoping that a name would kinda
tell me what business they're in about five years ago.
Michael J. Albanese
> I've stopped hoping that a name would kinda
> tell me what business they're in about five years ago.
There is at least some hope. Recently USX announced a reorganization,
with the resulting businesses named, surprisingly -- United States Steel
Corporation and Marathon Oil Corporation.
Charlie Gibbs
writes:
>I'm to the point that I don't care what they call themselves as
>long as they stick with it. This renaming the company every
>year stuff sucks. I've stopped hoping that a name would kinda
>tell me what business they're in about five years ago.
I think the idea is that if the name means nothing, it can mean
anything. That's probably what passes for versatility these days.
Sam Yorko
Woolworth's -> Venator Group, Inc. -> Foot Locker, Inc.
Alan Barclay
>with the resulting businesses named, surprisingly -- United States Steel
>Corporation and Marathon Oil Corporation.
It happened too when AT&T burped out what it called AT&T GIS, to become
NCR again.