iPhone
in [UK Mac]
|
From: Woody on 19 Feb 2010 07:26 On 19/02/2010 12:04, Rowland McDonnell wrote: > Woody<usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: > >> Rowland McDonnell wrote: >>> Woody<usenet(a)alienrat.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>>> Rowland McDonnell<real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Those watches were reliable if you'd made them carefully enough. What I >>>>> recall reading, the dodgy ones were dodgy due to dodgy construction, not >>>>> dodgy design. >>>> >>>> These were the ones already built, and they were anything but reliable. >>> >>> But how does that preclude the accuracy of my `dodgy build' memory? >> >> Well, I guess it doesn't, but if the factory where they were made can't >> make them well, that doesn't make them very reliable. As was quoted, the >> return rate was enormous, so it can hardly have been that reliable. > > Yes, but the point I was getting at is that the basic design was okay, > it was let down by poor quality problems elsewhere in the supply chain. > > Or so my memory says.<shrug> Well, clearly the design wasn't ok if it couldn't be manufactured by the facilities they had. But no, as a design they used far too much power and were too likely to drift due to temperature variations. Now they did have a LCD version planned at one point, my uncle had one the first LCD modules I ever saw, it was fascinating (even though it is like one of those you get for 50p in petrol stations now). They never did it though. But then on the fascinating things my uncle had (which was most things, he was the reason I got into electronics) was a nixie tube clock. I loved watching that thing. Oh god that was a stupid thing to remember.. look at all the pretty nixie tube clocks on google.. <wanders off>.. -- Woody
From: David Sankey on 19 Feb 2010 07:30 In article <1je5t2y.24dzyv1o28433N%real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid>, real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid (Rowland McDonnell) wrote: > Jim <jim(a)magrathea.plus.com> wrote: > > > On 2010-02-19, Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie(a)sometimes.sessile.org> wrote: > > >> > > >>That matches my experience. The idea was sound but the implementation > > >>was...less so. > > > > > > I don't know what you're talking about. Who couldn't love a storage > > > media that gets more capacious as you use it? > > > > Look, I still _use_ tape drives in my day-to-day work. Mostly Travan and > > DAT, but a few older DC6150 stuff as well. > > > > I bloody hate the lot of them. They're all One Big Point Of Failure. > > CERN operates an automated tape library for storing its collider data. > > They've got a protocol for keeping all of it available all the time, and > also providing rolling upgrades to the tape storage technology. > > The idea is to achieve a data loss rate of zero while permitting any of > the data to be used by legitimate researchers and keeping up with the > latest `big data store' technology, for all the usual reasons. > > The data's not just held at CERN. It's a *BIG* job, a vast ocean of > numbers, and it's backed up all over the globe! It's staggering! Big > enough to make even Google blink. We still lose tapes.
From: Woody on 19 Feb 2010 07:45 On 19/02/2010 12:21, Duncan Kennedy wrote: > In message > <1je5s10.nk5w0hscjxwvN%real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid>, > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> writes >> Duncan Kennedy <nospam(a)nospam.otterson-bg.couk> wrote: >>> The box also contains a multi option joystick controller and a socket >>> for tape with the essential tape volume VU meter. >> >> Why essential? I never used one and my ZX81 tapes never gave me any >> trouble. Dunno about now - for one thing, the cassette player I used >> died a long time back. > > There was always a chance of a program dropping out if you didn't get > the volume right. Strangely, cheaper tape recorders seemed more reliable > than more expensive ones. Yes, but some also you had to adjust the height of the head to load from the tape. I had a tape recorder that I got from a car boot sale which was fantasic at loading spectrum games. -- Woody
From: Jim on 19 Feb 2010 07:50 On 2010-02-19, Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: > >> The best keyboards of that era (IMHO) were on the Tandy model 1/2/3 >> machines. Good, full sized, full travel jobbies whose only problem (on the >> model 1 at least) was a tendency towards bounce - you'd type 'z' and >> sometimes get 'zzz' > > Did you never try the early IBM PC keyboards? They date from that era. Oh yes - lovely. Early Compaq luggables had quite nice keyboards as well, but I don't tend to group IBM PCs and their ilk in the same camp as 'proper' home computers. > Best computer keyboards that I've ever met, some of them. Some of them > were even better than the keyboard on my mother's IBM Selectric > typewriter, and that was fantastic; but I met an IBM PC keyboard one day > that was so incredibly gorgeous it very nearly gave me the horn. Well, > maybe not quite, but still... The famous Model 'M' keyboards are supposedly very good indeed. Never used one personally. >> Commodore VIC20 and C64s were pretty good as well, if a bit 'heavy' for my >> tastes. > > I much preferred the BBC Micro keyboard for typing on Did you know there were two different keyboards (at least) for the BBC 'B's? They looked the same, but one was light-and-clacky (and suffered occasionally from bounce - I've got one of those) and the other was a heavier, deader-feeling keyboard (although, oddly, not in a bad way). I've never quite worked out if there was anything that defined which keyboard got used. I used to think the deader ones were fitted to model 'B's that came pre-installed with the DFS, but that frankly doesn't make any sense. It certainly wasn't an issue issue (if you see what I mean) as I've seen issue 7 Beebs with either keyboard. I guess Acorn just sourced their keyboards from two different suppliers, or the supplier themselves had two different sources. Or something. Maybe. >, although those > Commodore keyboards seemed `higher quality' somehow. They did, didn't they? And like you I can't explain what it was about them that made them so. One thing I will say - Commodore keyboards seemed amazingly consistent in quality - every C64 keyboard I used felt *exactly* like every other C64 keyboard I used. Ditto the VIC20. If you ever get a chance then the book "On The Edge" is worth a read. It's the history of Commodore. Jim (note to everyone else: I got rid of the killfile after a day. I just hate the things.) -- http://www.ursaMinorBeta.co.uk http://twitter.com/GreyAreaUK "Get over here. Now. Might be advisable to wear brown trousers and a shirt the colour of blood." Malcolm Tucker, "The Thick of It"
From: Woody on 19 Feb 2010 07:59
On 19/02/2010 12:50, Jim wrote: > On 2010-02-19, Rowland McDonnell<real-address-in-sig(a)flur.bltigibbet.invalid> wrote: >> >>> The best keyboards of that era (IMHO) were on the Tandy model 1/2/3 >>> machines. Good, full sized, full travel jobbies whose only problem (on the >>> model 1 at least) was a tendency towards bounce - you'd type 'z' and >>> sometimes get 'zzz' >> >> Did you never try the early IBM PC keyboards? They date from that era. > > Oh yes - lovely. Early Compaq luggables had quite nice keyboards as well, > but I don't tend to group IBM PCs and their ilk in the same camp as 'proper' > home computers. I had one as my spectrum keyboard. It sucked unfortunately as then you didn't know what the keys were! It was good for typing though. >> Best computer keyboards that I've ever met, some of them. Some of them >> were even better than the keyboard on my mother's IBM Selectric >> typewriter, and that was fantastic; but I met an IBM PC keyboard one day >> that was so incredibly gorgeous it very nearly gave me the horn. Well, >> maybe not quite, but still... > > The famous Model 'M' keyboards are supposedly very good indeed. Never used > one personally. I loved the PS/2 ones. mechanically the best keyboards I used. There is one up there ^ but I only use split keyboards on the PCs these days. -- Woody |