On 01/10/2013 14:43, Jerome H. Fine wrote:
>John Wilson wrote:
From: "Jerome H. Fine" <jhfinedp3k at compsys.to>
In another 30 years, it is almost certain that no one will even know
what these terminals are, let alone that any will actually work or that
there will be systems to use them with.
Even after the first 30 years, here's a dumb question: what color is
a VT52? Mine (which does work) is a nice cirty yellow, like coffee-stained
linoleum, even after a good scrub. But when I was working on an icon for
emulated VT52 sessions, it occurred to me that making it look like *my*
VT52 might be dumb. Were VT52s always yellowish, or did they begin life
as sparkly white as the bottom of a VT100 keyboard, and it takes 30 years
of sunburn to get them where they are now? I bought the stuff to make
some Retro-Brite ages ago but still haven't gotten around to mixing it up.
I can't EVER remember any VT52 being any color except "a nice dirty yellow"!!!!!
It is even possible that I used a VT52 before I used a VT100 at one of the many
consulting jobs in the 1970s or less likely in the 1980s. Still NO memory of any other
color.
It is very likely that my VT52 does still work, but I don't have a working PDP-11 at
the moment and even if I did, there is no purpose that seems useful to play with the
VT52. Since I write almost 100% of my code in MACRO-11, the VT100 support
for 132 columns is almost essential to read a listing. Although there is an option in
MACRO-11 for 80 column listings, that substantially reduces the number of
instructions per page of the listing.
NO, I will probably stay with the emulated VT100 terminal support provided by
Ersatz-11 which includes support for more than 24 lines. When I first used that
feature, it was a minor disadvantage since the text characters did seem a bit
challenged (in a vertical sort of manner). But now that I have used the feature
for over a year with K42.SAV (either 80 columns by 50 lines OR 132 columns
by 44 lines - largest options supported by my video card for my monitor in FULL
SCREEN mode), going back to 24 lines seems like SHOUTING when I look
at the text characters, especially for 80 columns by 50 lines. In fact, I almost
always use the 132 columns by 44 lines even for non-KED displays so that
I don't need to change my focus as I switch back and forth from and to each
emulated VT100 "terminal" under Ersatz-11 using <ALT/Fn>. My real DEC
PDP-11/83 system has SIX DEC VT100 terminals on the desktop (I have
a huge desk and they are stacked two high). With just the <ALT/Fn> key to
switch back and forth, the same monitor can be used to display all of the
terminals. And since my eyes can focus on only one "terminal" at a time,
using <ALT/Fn> instead of turning my head seems like a useful alternative.
Jerome Fine
Jerome,
I'd like to know more about what your MACRO-11 projects involve and I'm sure we'd all like to see a photo of your PDP-11/83 with terminal!!
Regards, Mark.
--
http://www.wickensonline.co.ukhttp://hecnet.euhttp://declegacy.org.ukhttp://retrochallenge.nethttps://twitter.com/#!/%40urbancamo
>John Wilson wrote:
From: "Jerome H. Fine" <jhfinedp3k at compsys.to>
In another 30 years, it is almost certain that no one will even know
what these terminals are, let alone that any will actually work or that
there will be systems to use them with.
Even after the first 30 years, here's a dumb question: what color is
a VT52? Mine (which does work) is a nice cirty yellow, like coffee-stained
linoleum, even after a good scrub. But when I was working on an icon for
emulated VT52 sessions, it occurred to me that making it look like *my*
VT52 might be dumb. Were VT52s always yellowish, or did they begin life
as sparkly white as the bottom of a VT100 keyboard, and it takes 30 years
of sunburn to get them where they are now? I bought the stuff to make
some Retro-Brite ages ago but still haven't gotten around to mixing it up.
I can't EVER remember any VT52 being any color except "a nice dirty yellow"!!!!!
It is even possible that I used a VT52 before I used a VT100 at one of the many
consulting jobs in the 1970s or less likely in the 1980s. Still NO memory of any other
color.
It is very likely that my VT52 does still work, but I don't have a working PDP-11 at
the moment and even if I did, there is no purpose that seems useful to play with the
VT52. Since I write almost 100% of my code in MACRO-11, the VT100 support
for 132 columns is almost essential to read a listing. Although there is an option in
MACRO-11 for 80 column listings, that substantially reduces the number of
instructions per page of the listing.
NO, I will probably stay with the emulated VT100 terminal support provided by
Ersatz-11 which includes support for more than 24 lines. When I first used that
feature, it was a minor disadvantage since the text characters did seem a bit
challenged (in a vertical sort of manner). But now that I have used the feature
for over a year with K42.SAV (either 80 columns by 50 lines OR 132 columns
by 44 lines - largest options supported by my video card for my monitor in FULL
SCREEN mode), going back to 24 lines seems like SHOUTING when I look
at the text characters, especially for 80 columns by 50 lines. In fact, I almost
always use the 132 columns by 44 lines even for non-KED displays so that
I don't need to change my focus as I switch back and forth from and to each
emulated VT100 "terminal" under Ersatz-11 using <ALT/Fn>. My real DEC
PDP-11/83 system has SIX DEC VT100 terminals on the desktop (I have
a huge desk and they are stacked two high). With just the <ALT/Fn> key to
switch back and forth, the same monitor can be used to display all of the
terminals. And since my eyes can focus on only one "terminal" at a time,
using <ALT/Fn> instead of turning my head seems like a useful alternative.
Jerome Fine
Mark Wickens <mark at wickensonline.co.uk> writes:
Very interesting! I have played a little with SMG$ as part of
Retrochallenge, and looked at the other projects, but as hinted there is
a steep learning curve with a lot of the products that is bound to put
most off.
Are you saying that there is a steep learning curve to SMG$?
--
VAXman- A Bored Certified VMS Kernel Mode Hacker VAXman(at)TMESIS(dot)ORG
Well I speak to machines with the voice of humanity.
what color is a VT52?
My VT52s both have a slight yellowish cast, but certainly not "coffee".
They're actually almost exactly the same color as, say, my VT100, VT241 box,
VR241 monitor, or VT220s. The newer terminals I have, like the VT4xx and
5xx ones, are distinctly off white and have much less of a yellow tint.
I'm quite sure some of that is due to aging, although it's hard to say how
much.
And it's probably foolish to assume that they were all exactly the same
color even when new. I imagine there was a significant variation in color
between different lots of plastic pieces.
[When I did the SBC6120 I tried very hard to match the colors of the
original 8/E front panel, and I even went as far as to borrow about four
faceplates for comparison. The trouble was, they weren't at all the same
colors! Again, some of it is aging but I also don't think DEC controlled
that carefully for the paint colors in those days.]
Bob
On 01/10/2013 10:41, Jordi Guillaumes i Pons wrote:
El 01/10/2013, a les 11:10, Mark Wickens <mark at wickensonline.co.uk> va escriure:
I understand where you're coming from Sampsa with regards to forms on text terminals. I've always found applications that do this strangely fascinating for no particular reason.
I remember back around 1992 when I was working for Cyberscience one of the lead developers wrote a terminal based application to create database queries visually and I thought it was just so cool!
DEC had several products which did forms. FMS was the oldest and IIRC the most extended. Then there was also TDMS and DecForms, which was very, very powerful but vastly complicated. I used it, and have to confess I liked it. A lot.
Then there was a product called RALLY, which was a 4G system to do database applications. It generated automatically database maintenance forms, including hyerarchical formats. It had a pascal-ish programming languange to do scripting and non-forms logic. I liked that one too (albeit it was slow as hell).
I also worked at the PPA in Newcastle around the 2000s which was an IBM mainframe shop. The JCL boys were a law unto themselves and it was clear they would have a job for life all the time no one switched off the big iron. I'm drawn to the esoteric so found that environment equally interesting, although I would be totally clueless to how it is driven.
That is job security thru obscurity. Believe me, JCL is _NOT_ that hard. It has basically four instructions (JOB, EXEC, PROC and DD) and their corresponding parameters, which if you read the docs can seem like a lot... until you realize you will be using just a small subset in real life.
Jordi Guillaumes i Pons
jg at jordi.guillaumes.name
HECnet: BITXOV::JGUILLAUMES
Very interesting! I have played a little with SMG$ as part of Retrochallenge, and looked at the other projects, but as hinted there is a steep learning curve with a lot of the products that is bound to put most off.
Your last comment made me think of a job interview I had at the Skandia factory who were a big IBM user in Luton when I was leaving University. After the interview I was quietly told that although they thought I was fantastic that I'd be better off getting a job somewhere else as working there would 'bore me to tears'!
--
http://www.wickensonline.co.ukhttp://hecnet.euhttp://declegacy.org.ukhttp://retrochallenge.nethttps://twitter.com/#!/%40urbancamo
El 01/10/2013, a les 11:10, Mark Wickens <mark at wickensonline.co.uk> va escriure:
I understand where you're coming from Sampsa with regards to forms on text terminals. I've always found applications that do this strangely fascinating for no particular reason.
I remember back around 1992 when I was working for Cyberscience one of the lead developers wrote a terminal based application to create database queries visually and I thought it was just so cool!
DEC had several products which did forms. FMS was the oldest and IIRC the most extended. Then there was also TDMS and DecForms, which was very, very powerful but vastly complicated. I used it, and have to confess I liked it. A lot.
Then there was a product called RALLY, which was a 4G system to do database applications. It generated automatically database maintenance forms, including hyerarchical formats. It had a pascal-ish programming languange to do scripting and non-forms logic. I liked that one too (albeit it was slow as hell).
I also worked at the PPA in Newcastle around the 2000s which was an IBM mainframe shop. The JCL boys were a law unto themselves and it was clear they would have a job for life all the time no one switched off the big iron. I'm drawn to the esoteric so found that environment equally interesting, although I would be totally clueless to how it is driven.
That is job security thru obscurity. Believe me, JCL is _NOT_ that hard. It has basically four instructions (JOB, EXEC, PROC and DD) and their corresponding parameters, which if you read the docs can seem like a lot... until you realize you will be using just a small subset in real life.
Jordi Guillaumes i Pons
jg at jordi.guillaumes.name
HECnet: BITXOV::JGUILLAUMES
I understand where you're coming from Sampsa with regards to forms on text terminals. I've always found applications that do this strangely fascinating for no particular reason.
I remember back around 1992 when I was working for Cyberscience one of the lead developers wrote a terminal based application to create database queries visually and I thought it was just so cool!
I also worked at the PPA in Newcastle around the 2000s which was an IBM mainframe shop. The JCL boys were a law unto themselves and it was clear they would have a job for life all the time no one switched off the big iron. I'm drawn to the esoteric so found that environment equally interesting, although I would be totally clueless to how it is driven.
Mark.
--
http://www.wickensonline.co.ukhttp://hecnet.euhttp://declegacy.org.ukhttp://retrochallenge.nethttps://twitter.com/#!/%40urbancamo
At Fujitsu we did have an IBM mainframe (dos/vse and VM). It had no network interface by itself. Eventually it was connected to the LAN via a channel attached DECnet gateway. In order to test connectivity we had to submit jcl decks. I agree fully with you how that language (?) was designed: a mess. On Burroughs one has WFL and that looks like A lol. Jcl looks like assembler without a proper design...
Van: Sampsa Laine
Verzonden: maandag 30 september 2013 21:38
Aan: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Beantwoorden: hecnet at Update.UU.SE
Onderwerp: Re: [HECnet] Humour value alternative to DCL - a port OS/390 ISPF to
VMS :)
>> name but it was a blessing because the shell commands were beyond human
Ever try to write anything in JCL? :)
That language is messed up, I have about 3 books on it and still can't really figure out how it works except by direct copying scripts from the book to a live system. Sometimes I even manage to compile COBOL programs, but I haven't figured out the LINK EDITOR which one needs to turn the output into an executable.
Interesting experience though, might come in handy when I come across clients with big System z or S/390 setups..
From: "Jerome H. Fine" <jhfinedp3k at compsys.to>
In another 30 years, it is almost certain that no one will even know
what these terminals are, let alone that any will actually work or that
there will be systems to use them with.
Even after the first 30 years, here's a dumb question: what color is
a VT52? Mine (which does work) is a nice cirty yellow, like coffee-stained
linoleum, even after a good scrub. But when I was working on an icon for
emulated VT52 sessions, it occurred to me that making it look like *my*
VT52 might be dumb. Were VT52s always yellowish, or did they begin life
as sparkly white as the bottom of a VT100 keyboard, and it takes 30 years
of sunburn to get them where they are now? I bought the stuff to make
some Retro-Brite ages ago but still haven't gotten around to mixing it up.
John Wilson
D Bit
>Bob Armstrong wrote:
What can be done (non-destructive suggestions only, please) with a VT-62? This is NOT a VT52 (although it looks like one). The VT62 is a block mode terminal that, I think, actually speaks DDCMP. AFAIK it's incapable of being a plain ASCII terminal unless there's some hack I'm unaware of.
If you are able to use the VT62 terminal under RT-11,
DEC supported a special variant of KED specifically
for the VT62, namely K62.SAV, as opposed to the
variant, Ked.SAV, for the VT100. There is also a variant
of KED specifically for the VT52, namely K52.SAV, in
addition to a separate variant for the VT100, Ker.SAV,
which is used when RSTS/E is the PDP-11 operating
system.
While these two special variants of Ked.SAV, namely
K52.SAV and K62.SAV, are not generally available,
at least K52.SAV can be downloaded as part of the
binary RT-11 distribution from some of those distributions
starting with V04.00 of RT-11. After DEC stopped
supporting the VT52 and VT62 terminals (around 1989),
the KED variants for these two terminals were still
maintained, but not longer included in the standard
RT-11 binary distributions.
All of the KED variants, including K62.SAV, can still
be produced for V05.06 of RT-11. Although it is not
possible to determine if K62.SAV is correct, the two
variants of KED which are included in the distribution
for V05.06 of RT-11, Ked.SAV and Kex.SAV, are
identical to the copies produced from the source code
when all nine of the DEC supported variants of KED
are assembled and linked. So it seems very probable
that the K52.SAV and K62.SAV variants are correct
as well.
I am not familiar with exactly what special features
K62.SAV uses in the VT62 terminal, so it is not
possible for me to advise you in that regard.
Aside from RT-11, I am not aware of any other
application program which knows anything at all about
the VT62 terminal, let alone the differences between
the VT52 and the VT62.
Right now the only thing I can think of is to part it out as spares for my VT52. I have two of the latter and it looks like at least some of the major assemblies - CRT, keyboard, power supply - are identical. I hate to do that, though, if there's a better use for it.
If you really do have a working VT62 (or one that can
be repaired), that would be sad situation if you were
to use the VT62 are spares for the VT52. There are
probably very few working VT52 terminals around
these days although I may still have one (it has not been
turned on for at least a few years). I doubt that there
are even a fraction of that number of VT62 terminals
left anywhere. On the other hand, all the VT52 and
VT62 terminals are over 30 years old. In another 30
years, it is almost certain that no one will even know
what these terminals are, let alone that any will actually
work or that there will be systems to use them with.
So if you can use the VT62 parts to keep a VT52
in working order, it is your terminal to do as you wish.
For example, there has been no one interested in a
new variant of KED which supports the VT420 with
more than 24 lines, named (appropriately I think) the
K42.SAV, which I use under Ersatz-11. Since there
is support, under the VT100 emulation included with
Ersatz-11, for up to 255 columns by 255 lines (in
particular for the Win32 variant), K42.SAV has
been enhanced to support both of those screen sizes,
although NOT at the same time. In practical terms,
the best my monitor can support under the DOS
variant of Ersatz-11 is either 80 columns by 50 lines
OR 132 columns by 44 lines. For the Win32 variant
of Ersatz-11, there is support for a screen size on the
monitor of up to approximately 200 columns by 70 lines.
Along with a much larger cut / paste buffer and some
very nice extra features for the HELP screens, I find
that K42.SAV is much improved over DEC variant,
Ked.SAV, which is limited to 24 lines.
Jerome Fine