|
I found god when I found displayports and the clip thing. Holds tight, better than screwing your monitors all day long.
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2017 21:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 21:54 |
|
|
HDMI sucks until you make the mistake of buying LCD monitors without HDMI. Then you really loving wish everyone had HDMI because it's super easy and supports almost everything. I've got so many drat adapters.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2017 21:53
|
|
|
Krispy Kareem posted:LCD monitors without HDMI. what e: wait no please do not destroy my blissful ignorance on this subject, just let me keep this one, last point of sanity in my life vvvvv: fffffffuuuuuuuuuuck The only things in our entire inventory that use DVI are a couple video mixers and we've gaffed the DVI->HDMI dongles to the back of it so some overzealous tech doesn't remove them during strike. Grand Prize Winner has a new favorite as of 21:59 on Aug 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2017 21:55
|
|
|
DVI/Displayport only. All the LCD monitors we get are like this, along with VGA.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2017 21:56
|
|
|
GreenNight posted:DVI/Displayport only. Greetings fellow HP monitor user.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
All our HP computers, laptops, and docks are DP, so it makes it pretty easy. We have HDMI to DP dongles zip tied to HDMI cords in each conference room.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2017 22:23
|
|
|
GreenNight posted:All our HP computers, laptops, and docks are DP, so it makes it pretty easy. I feel like I'm talking to someone from 5 years in the future. Is trump still president? What happened with doobie's hotdog hut?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2017 23:05
|
|
|
I pulled out a live monoprice boosted hdmi cable (was hooked up to my in another pet of the house) and fried the main board on my tv. I have since cut that cable to prevent is from being used again.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2017 23:26
|
|
|
Boiled Water posted:What if I need more precision? Can stripes be combined? Also can you make it $250k better? Budget year ends soon and we can't be under budget we just can't. We replace perfectly good stuff every year that really only gathers dust or is either underutilized or overpowered for its purpose for this reason. Grant money. Have to spend it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2017 23:38
|
|
|
Hey it's page 486! I have noticed HDMI tends to hate going down a resolution. So some older TVs seem to only run 720p or lower and will hate receiving 1080p signals. Plus certain cables can only do X type of resolution so people have been caught out trying to run 2k stuff and only getting a blown up to 1080p image because they didn't check before they brought cheap cables of eBay. It's a pain with vision switching desks as you'll dig out an old camera and despite it having HDMI it won't feed into the switch because the outputs is too low a resolution. The old way of BNC/comp adapters worked flawlessly. If not bulky and held together wth tape and a prayer. It makes some sense that passing an HDMI signal through a splitter works as it's effectively downscaling the signal. BogDew has a new favorite as of 00:18 on Aug 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 00:15
|
|
|
WebDog posted:Hey it's page 486! Yay! My whole RCS system for controlling trains across the state was (as of at least 2 years ago when I left) still running on a super special snowflake DOS varient in a VM. I somewhere still have a copy of the VM on a laptop here I used to use for training... Also the Holden parts database is similar and a very flaky piece of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 03:20
|
|
|
[quote="“Grand Prize Winner”" post="“475272517”"] what e: wait no please do not destroy my blissful ignorance on this subject, just let me keep this one, last point of sanity in my life vvvvv: fffffffuuuuuuuuuuck The only things in our entire inventory that use DVI are a couple video mixers and we’ve gaffed the DVI->HDMI dongles to the back of it so some overzealous tech doesn’t remove them during strike. [/quote] It’s often in monitors sold for corporate use. HDMI is licensed so I guess it’s a slightly cheaper to build them without the port. It’s not a problem unless you have a laptop without a variety of ports. Like a Mac. I’ve got a wide variety of DVI adapters since all monitors have those.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 04:35
|
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:Even today video is more black magic than science. Can confirm. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 05:15
|
|
|
Through The Decade posted:Can confirm. Are the blackmagic brand converters actually good? I know of their cameras by rep but we use cheapo monoprice units.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 05:50
|
|
|
Trabant posted:It's only tangential, but funny (at least to me): Obviously I was not alive for this. Back in the Cretaceous Era (1969) when computers were becoming a corporate "thing", Xerox's Palo Alto Research Center wanted a PDP-10. These were 36-bit machines made by Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC) which were exceedingly popular in research circles. I really do mean "exceedingly". A large fraction of the arpanet was made up of PDP-10 sites. They were fast, relatively reliable, easy to work with, and much cheaper than a comparable IBM. This made them almost as popular as breathing. Xerox didn't make anything remotely like it, so the researchers thought they wouldn't have any issues buying one. Unfortunately, just as the paperwork was being filled out, another branch of Xerox announced the acquisition of a computer manufacturer that DID have products "comparable" to the PDP-10 - Scientific Data Systems, or SDS. The problem was that the SDS equipment stank out loud. They were slow, expensive, difficult to work with, and unreliable. This was why they were failing in the market and why Xerox was able to buy them out. PARC wanted a PDP-10, not a SDS. Of course, as soon as the paperwork for the PDP-10 purchase was filed the request came under fire - Xerox could not be seen buying hardware from a now competitor, that would be admitting defeat! They would use SDS or nothing. The researchers went back and forth with their corporate overlords but one in particular refused to budge - Max Palevsky, the former owner of SDS, who was now Xerox management. The request was denied with prejudice and implications made to the effect that anyone who did not embrace the SDS product line wholeheartedly would be dismissed. Dissent in the ranks would not be tolerated. Thus foiled, the researchers took a different tack. Being a research center, they started a project to design and build a new computer for their internal use. This was approved. With this approval in hand, they got the publicly released documentation for the PDP-10 and built their own clone of it from scratch at great expense. The result became the main computer of the research center and Xerox's gateway to the arpanet, the Xerox MAXC - pronounced "MAX", after Palevsky, whose ego and pride had denied them the machine they wanted. The SDS division went on to be a complete flop. Palevsky left Xerox after three years. The SDS division was closed two years later, having lost hundreds of millions of dollars. The MAXC ran another ten years after that, well into the 80s, before being replaced by newer equipment.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 07:05
|
|
|
The PDP-11, on the other hand, doesn't belong here yet. It's still in operational use, notably in GE nuclear power plants in Canada. As far as I know the only PDP-10s in use anymore are hobbyist machines... but I wouldn't be surprised to hear there's still one or two performing some critical function somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 07:46
|
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:Are the blackmagic brand converters actually good? I know of their cameras by rep but we use cheapo monoprice units. Black magic make great hardware, and their software is being better too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 07:50
|
|
|
Toast Museum posted:I was getting this with my PC until I swapped in a new cable. Give that a shot if you haven't already. I've tried about a half dozen cables - turns out, it's apparently a bug in the TV's firmware that just doesn't play nice with the PS3. It's really weird. I should try to upgrade the TV's firmware, but now I've just got a FireTV on it, which works fine, so meh.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 07:54
|
|
|
Keiya posted:The PDP-11, on the other hand, doesn't belong here yet. It's still in operational use, notably in GE nuclear power plants in Canada. As far as I know the only PDP-10s in use anymore are hobbyist machines... but I wouldn't be surprised to hear there's still one or two performing some critical function somewhere. PDP-11s aren't just still operational, they're still building new ones. Same for the PDP-8. They implement the processor, memory, and storage devices in modern parts, then provide the standard UNIBUS/QBUS interfaces to whatever custom equipment you might have. They're not exactly common, but they are out there. As for PDP-10s, the Living Computer Museum has several examples in more or less continuous use. Mine is still in working order, but I don't have any storage devices for it. There's a Massbus disk replacement project underway, but I haven't checked in on it in awhile. The last one in actual commercial use that I know about was replaced with an emulator and turned off in 2010-ish.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 08:13
|
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:Are the blackmagic brand converters actually good? I know of their cameras by rep but we use cheapo monoprice units. Somewhere I have a Pinnacle capture card that was worth a good thousand used to capture off DV tape.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 09:01
|
|
|
That is a fantastic story, thank you. It's amazing how much tech development depended on the "Oh yeah? Well, gently caress you buddy!" school of business.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 09:12
|
|
|
Jerry Cotton posted:But enough about Bad Dragon. Grand Prize Winner posted:Are there any situations where the legacy hardware goes on the fritz and it turns out it hadn't been doing anything but drawing power since '93 or something? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 09:15
|
|
|
Funzo posted:Greetings fellow HP monitor user.  
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 12:28
|
|
|
WebDog posted:Black Magic started out creating capture cards as stuff since 1984 until they acquired DaVinci Systems in a bankruptcy fire sale in 2008. Using that money to buy Resolve and release the base version for free was loving brilliant, and really useful. The push into editing AND audio is something I didn't expect but I Like It. WebDog posted:Somewhere I have a Pinnacle capture card that was worth a good thousand used to capture off DV tape.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 16:16
|
|
|
Suzuran posted:As for PDP-10s, the Living Computer Museum has several examples in more or less continuous use. Mine is still in working order, but I don't have any storage devices for it. There's a Massbus disk replacement project underway, but I haven't checked in on it in awhile. The last one in actual commercial use that I know about was replaced with an emulator and turned off in 2010-ish. I always wanted a PDP-10, but the space and power requirements, plus the sheer scarcity, means the best I got was an 11. Where do you keep yours, and what OS are you running on it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
I was watching an early (1960s) French Chef With Julia Child. She spent a fair bit of time complaining about/working around her mixers. She had these: (shown in case it was the only kind you had, I think)  as well as an imported French gadget for chopping nuts and breadcrumbs; it didn't have enough power to do anything else. I kept thinking about how ecstatic she must have been the first time she got her hands on a Kitchen Aid planetary mixer, with enough oomph to thwump bread dough.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
Der Kyhe posted:Its probably because it is old as balls system, with connections to who knows where, storing *something* no-one is fully certain of exactly what, and an integral component to anyone's guess of other systems, built entirely on programming language for which no longer exists any sane developers, running on a custom OS which has not been supported in the last two decades. Do you want 40k? Because this is how you get 40k!
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2017 21:20
|
|
|
Pham Nuwen posted:I always wanted a PDP-10, but the space and power requirements, plus the sheer scarcity, means the best I got was an 11. Where do you keep yours, and what OS are you running on it? There's four models of PDP-10 that were sold by DEC. I'm not going to cover Jupiter or Dolphin (those were never released) or the various clones (MAXC, Foonly/Super Foonly, SC-40, etc). Before we get into those, we have to mention the PDP-6. The PDP-6 was the PDP-10s immediate parent. It was a slightly bigger and somewhat slower machine, but set the standard for most of the processor architecture and instruction format. No PDP-6es exist today, with the last known example disappearing decades ago in some inter-museum shenanigans. There are accusations it was parted out and sold as scrap, but the people involved aren't alive anymore so it's doubtful we'll ever know what really became of it. A "rack" here is the standard DEC "business" rack size. Your PDP-11 is probably in one of these, unless it's a MicroPDP or a loose BA box or something. It's basically the standard computer rack size, 5 feet and some odd inches high, with a few inches to either side for cable management. The first PDP-10 is the KA-10. This was the slowest model. It had a discrete logic processor that came in 4 racks, which required industrial cooling and lots of 3-phase power. Each memory "board" was a rack, each IO device was a rack, and the disks were huge washing machines. These are the second rarest, with only two known to still exist. One is in a museum and the other a private collection. It has lots of blinking lights and switches. It would be difficult to fit this into a normal office, let alone a private residence. The second is the KI-10. This was the upgrade from the KA. It's still a discrete logic processor but it was denser than the KA and much faster. It still came in 4 racks but required slightly less three phase power and cooling. It used the same IO devices and disks as the KA. These are the rarest model, with only one known to still exist. It belongs to LCM and they are restoring it to working order. It has the best lights and switches. You still aren't fitting one in a house unless you're very rich and/or very crazy. The third is the KL-10. This was the fastest, the peak of PDP-10 development. It had a microcoded ECL processor which came in two racks. A big chunk of the first rack was a PDP-11/45 whose job it was to load firmware and software into the KL and manage its slower IO devices. IO devices were no longer separate racks, they were now large boards installed into the processor racks. Disks however are still huge washing machines that want many amps to operate. KLs are the third rarest machine, there's somewhere between 6 and 12 that still exist. It has only a handful of lights and switches. You could conceivably stuff one of these into a house, but you'd be dedicating a bedroom or basement to it. Power and cooling expenses would be your major issue. The original KL power supplies were very inefficient by even 80s standards and used lots of 3-phase power to make lots of single-phase power to run the machine. This resulted in the creation of several types of aftermarket PSU replacements that allowed it to run on much less 3-phase power (or large but not absurd amounts of single-phase power) instead. Compuserve, being a large user of PDP-10s, manufactured and sold the most popular type. The last is the KS-10. This is the type I have, the smallest and last PDP-10 to make it out of DEC. It was somewhere between a KA and KI in performance because of its built-in cache. With the cache disabled it was slower than a KA. It had a microcoded TTL processor that came on two large boards installed in a modified PDP-11 processor box. The box was installed into a single rack along with another "expansion" box that held the IO devices. It had an Intel 8080 microprocessor in it whose job was to load firmware and software into the KS, similar to the PDP-11 used in the KL. It used about 1000 watts of standard single-phase 120 volt AC power and expected normal office air conditioning. Disks were washing machines at first, but later disks that were about the size of a full-tower PC came along. Tape drives were still racks. There's probably 20 or 30 of these still in existence, maybe more. You can easily fit one into a normal home or office. Mine was in my living room when I had an apartment. Two people can comfortably move a KS as long as there's no stairs involved. There are three commonly available PDP-10 OSes. DEC sold TOPS-10 (which was called MONITOR initially) for all four machine types and TOPS-20 for the "Model B" KL and KS. TOPS-10 was your typical 1970s timesharing system and had very minimal system requirements, and TOPS-20 was a later 80s design that was much more user-friendly but required much more memory and disk space. The third operating system is MIT's Incompatible Timesharing System, or ITS. The ITS was originally made for MIT's PDP-6, and then the KA-10 came along it was ported to that. Later the MIT KA became a KL, and ITS was ported to the KL. Later still the KL was replaced by a KS, and ITS was ported again. I originally planned to run the ITS, but it didn't work out for reasons beyond the scope of this post. Suffice it to say I never had a working set of disk and tape drives necessary to bring up the machine properly. I bring it up to the console firmware every other month or so to make sure it stays in working order and to clean out all the cobwebs and dust. The Living Computer Musem people are working on a modern replacement for the original disks which might let me actually run my machine. I haven't checked their progress in awhile though.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
Remulak posted:Lol, I bet I worked on that. I never got the breakout box with it tho. The price was $999US but Aussie tech tax would have blown that up to $1500 ignoring any mark-up the store put on. And all I ever used it for was DVtools, let alone any of the features like the real time previews in Premier.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2017 00:41
|
|
|
My first computer was an Amiga 1000. We had a few different Workbench disks, but the only ones that worked well enough were the 1.1 disks. They had Amiga Basic on them, which was made by Microsoft. Apparantly Microsoft also made BASIC for the Macintosh. The Amiga was really quite good at certain things. It could do speech synthesis, and the graphics were pretty amazing compared to other computers of the time. Deluxe Paint seemed so much better than any paint program that I tried for years after this.  The monitor was awesome, and when I plugged my Nintendo into it - it looked WAY better than on any TV. My Grandpa had originally bought the Amiga to set up a database for his travel agency business. The Amiga turned out to be horrible at this, and whatever software he was trying this with was insanely buggy. It also didn't help that this Amiga did not have a hard drive - just two floppy drives. I believe he went to a DOS PC and Quattro Pro or Lotus 1-2-3 next.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2017 05:49
|
|
|
0toShifty posted:My first computer was an Amiga 1000. We had a few different Workbench disks, but the only ones that worked well enough were the 1.1 disks. They had Amiga Basic on them, which was made by Microsoft. Apparantly Microsoft also made BASIC for the Macintosh. I read the book First Byte: Choosing and Using a Home Computer from 1983 recently, because dad has had it on his bookshelf since approximately then, when the only part of it I found interesting was the picture of the computer-shaped cake on the front (from when a computer looked like a Commodore 64), and I was wondering what kind of advice one might get back then. I've been meaning to post about some of the stuff I learned from it, but one part related to the above, from p74: quote:Manufacturers presently equip their machines with their own versions of BASIC, however outdated and idiosyncratic. As a result they or independent manufacturers have to bring out an expanded version of BASIC - usually expensive and memory-hungry - or a whole new version. This is usually close to the excellent BASIC developed by the US firm Microsoft; this, particularly in its Extended Colour form, is as near a standard as anyone gets at the moment. But, judged by the number of users, the most popular dialect is Sinclair BASIC; as it is also very clear to follow, it is used in our program examples later in this chapter. I'm glad that dad decided to just save up for a PC  Anyway I found it interesting that Microsoft BASIC was popular on that generation of computer.Unrelated, but interesting to me, from p38-9: "16K is a reasonable working minimum [amount of RAM for your home computer to have]". The book covers some computers on the market at the time including the Sinclair ZX-81, which only came with 1K  Also, a question: p40 says this in the "Floppy disks" section: quote:The disk is 'posted', still in its sleeve, into a slot at the front of the disk drive. Okay, I guess it's like putting mail in a post box, but has anyone ever heard that term used before for inserting floppy disks into drives? Maybe it's a UK thing (that's where the book is from)? Seems like it'd be easy to get confused with someone saying their machine "POSTed", i.e. successfully completed Power-On Self Test.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2017 09:09
|
|
|
As someone who was a member of the UK Amiga crowd I can say I have never heard of posting a floppy disk.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2017 10:02
|
|
|
Dysgenesis posted:As someone who was a member of the UK Amiga crowd I can say I have never heard of posting a floppy disk. Ditto. If you had asked me to 'Post' a diskette in 1983, I would have replied 'to whom?' Also, the 'sleeve' was the paper protector that you put a 5.25 diskette in, not part of the diskette itself. In 1983 the arguments were Sinclair vs Commodore BASIC. Any serious programming would have been in COBOL or Assembly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2017 10:09
|
|
|
Buttcoin purse posted:Seems like it'd be easy to get confused with someone saying their machine "POSTed", i.e. successfully completed Power-On Self Test. I recall reading all sorts of bizarre analogies in school books about explaining basic computer skills, so posting a disc into a drive fits that logic as you don't really shove in a letter into a mail slot. Though was power on self test a thing in 84? Thought it was an IBM-PC invention that was adopted. The term I know would be booting as you had boot discs on older systems. The term allegedly it comes from "bootstrap'. It dates back to the late 50s IBM mainframes, referring to loading a program via punch or tape that usually prepped the system to load a bigger program such as an operating system.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2017 10:10
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtMWEiCdsfc If you are interested in retro-computing, then the BBC's 'The Computer Programme' is a perfect snapshot of the time,
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2017 10:19
|
|
|
Phyllis is dead now 
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2017 10:28
|
|
|
Metal Geir Skogul posted:Phyllis is dead now She's got an IMDB entry! http://www.imdb.com/name/nm7904507/
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2017 10:48
|
|
|
Buttcoin purse posted:Anyway I found it interesting that Microsoft BASIC was popular on that generation of computer. Microsoft BASIC, on the Commodore PET, is still the only Microsoft product I ever used voluntarily.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2017 11:13
|
|
|
spog posted:In 1983 the arguments were Sinclair vs Commodore BASIC. Any serious programming would have been in COBOL or Assembly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2017 12:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 21:54 |
|
|
SubG posted:What, wasn't there an Amiga FORTRAN compiler? Not in 1983 
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2017 12:19
|
|