English Amiga Board Amiga Lore


Go Back   English Amiga Board > Main > Amiga scene

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 19 January 2017, 08:51   #21
Hewitson
Registered User
Hewitson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Age: 34
Posts: 2,235
What's wrong with calling something "buggery" or "short pcb trix"? Do you think all schematics are 100% professional? You've obviously got absolutely no idea about the electronics industry, and you are doing nothing but making an absolute dick of yourself.

Get a clue, and a sense of humour, and I'm sure you'll have a much more enjoyable time on this forum. Tosser.
Hewitson is offline  
AdSense AdSense  
Old 19 January 2017, 09:19   #22
Pat the Cat
Banned

 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hewitson View Post
What's wrong with calling something "buggery" or "short pcb trix"? Do you think all schematics are 100% professional? You've obviously got absolutely no idea about the electronics industry, and you are doing nothing but making an absolute dick of yourself.

Get a clue, and a sense of humour, and I'm sure you'll have a much more enjoyable time on this forum. Tosser.
Oh right, so you knew all this stuff, thought it was completely unremarkable and normal, and somehow I'm a bad guy for finding it even remotely worth mentioning or indeed possibly funny? This could be why I've never seen an Australian schematic diagram to fault find with. I'd have to go to an adult shop to obtain one, according to you, anyway. Tell me, do they come with a complimentary lubrication aid as well? Or just when you supply them? And don't you just recognize a larrikin when you try troling one?
Pat the Cat is offline  
Old 19 January 2017, 10:15   #23
nobody
Registered User

nobody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: GR
Age: 40
Posts: 914
I dont get it. What is the problem, they wrote some sh1t on the schematic so what. I wrote sh1t also when I was 25 and playing World of Warcraft so who cares. What is this some post 20 years public court
nobody is offline  
Old 19 January 2017, 13:36   #24
Daedalus
Registered User

Daedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dublin, then Glasgow
Posts: 2,147
So you've decided to finally have a look at the schematics and learn about them, rather than making vague guesses at how Amigas work? Excellent. Bizarre that you're finding all this "evidence" of some weird cover up, it's a strange mindset that finds things like this when there is a much simpler, more obvious answer available.

As was pointed out to you repeatedly in the other thread, there's no way they were intending any other purpose for the RAM expansion headers, other than RAM expansion and a real-time clock. The headers are basically the A1200's equivalent of the A500 and A600 trapdoor slots in a different form factor. The clockport pins are the only ones accessible for GPIO, all the others are simply lines from the chip RAM bus. The guys designing these boards knew what they were doing - if they'd wanted an I/O port for high-speed audio sampling or whatever, they'd have come up with something more suitable... Like Zorro. The A1200's trapdoor slot is the mythical expansion port you seem to be trying and failing to find - it's basically a restricted Zorro slot, so can be used for general expansion. See the unreleased A1200 CD32-compatible drive, Mediator cards, and all the sophisticated accelerators available for examples.

The RAM expansion pins were for RAM expansion. Nothing more, nothing less. As for "buggery", many words have more than one meaning, and it's common enough to refer to something that doesn't work as "buggered". In this case, a bug in a chip buggered up their schematic, requiring extra logic to work around it. Seems more like a little clever wordplay by an engineer, rather than some cryptic message left behind by the Illuminati for you to find.
Daedalus is offline  
Old 19 January 2017, 14:04   #25
Pat the Cat
Banned

 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daedalus View Post

The RAM expansion pins were for RAM expansion. Nothing more, nothing less. As for "buggery", many words have more than one meaning, and it's common enough to refer to something that doesn't work as "buggered". In this case, a bug in a chip buggered up their schematic, requiring extra logic to work around it. Seems more like a little clever wordplay by an engineer, rather than some cryptic message left behind by the Illuminati for you to find.
There is one snag with your version of events. It does not address the other terms used. Namelly, "More JOY" (There were no more joysticks added. "Small Hole", which is exactly the same size of wole used to make the same connection. "Tricks" or "Trix" I'm not even going to explain. It is an American euphemism, exactly what you can find out elsewhere,

This Schematic then - who had one prior to CBM going bust? You say there was no cover up, well to prove that Mr Daed, you've got to show this particular document ever left Commodore before they filed for chapter 11. That one, I admit, I'm not sure about.

I have never said there is definite evidence that the clockport can be made better than it was. Nor have I said there is definite evidence of a conspiracy by an outside agency, the "Illuminati" as you put it. Yet all those concepts come from yourself. Can't seem to find a reference to them in this thread.

You will have to admit, it's a bit of a coincidence. And the presence of these electrically dubious names for things would explain WHY the document was withheld from me at least. Quite possibly everybody else outside CBM until they went to their corporate grave.

I don't even know if the thing is 100% genuine, but YOU seem pretty sure it is. Why is that?

Last edited by Pat the Cat; 19 January 2017 at 14:11.
Pat the Cat is offline  
Old 19 January 2017, 14:11   #26
demolition
Unregistered User
demolition's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Copenhagen / DK
Age: 37
Posts: 3,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat the Cat View Post
I don't even know if the thing is genuine, but YOU seem pretty sure it is. Why is that?
Doesn't matter if it originated from Commodore or not, it doesn't mean anything other than whoever wrote those texts had some sense of humor.

And btw, humans really landed on the moon in '69 and no government or agency was behind 9/11. That should get you going..
demolition is offline  
Old 19 January 2017, 14:26   #27
Pat the Cat
Banned

 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by demolition View Post
Doesn't matter if it originated from Commodore or not, it doesn't mean anything other than whoever wrote those texts had some sense of humor.
I haven't really judged them as accurate anyway. If the pieces are a part of a deception, it would be wrong to accept them as anything factual really, apart from the electrical information.


Quote:
Originally Posted by demolition View Post
And btw, humans really landed on the moon in '69


I agree.

Quote:
Originally Posted by demolition View Post
and no government or agency was behind 9/11. That should get you going..
Broadly true. I did see some powerful stuff pointing at Rumsfeld as an individual, but even that does not conflict with your statement, even if he was largely responsible for orchestrating the events after 9/11, which he earned very large sums of money for. Honestly or dishonestly is irrelevant in this thread anyway
Pat the Cat is offline  
Old 19 January 2017, 14:57   #28
Daedalus
Registered User

Daedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dublin, then Glasgow
Posts: 2,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat the Cat View Post
There is one snag with your version of events. It does not address the other terms used. Namelly, "More JOY" (There were no more joysticks added. "Small Hole", which is exactly the same size of wole used to make the same connection. "Tricks" or "Trix" I'm not even going to explain. It is an American euphemism, exactly what you can find out elsewhere,
Paranoid much? Maybe the joy is a reference to the 2B board having a separate PCB for port 0 - something the revision 1 boards didn't have.

Anyway, if an engineer is given creative freedom, they will do things like that. They always have. They always will. I've done it, every engineer I know has done it. It's just a way of putting a personal touch and a bit of humour into what is otherwise quite a monotonous task. So what if they used offensive or politically incorrect? Those schematics were never intended for human consumption. I'm sure they'd be quite amused to think that someone is reading so much into what was probably a 30 second throwaway joke a quarter of a century ago.

Quote:
This Schematic then - who had one prior to CBM going bust? You say there was no cover up, well to prove that Mr Daed, you've got to show this particular document ever left Commodore before they filed for chapter 11. That one, I admit, I'm not sure about.
Burden of proof and all that. You're claiming there's a cover up, it's up to you prove your assertion. I'm taking all the documentation at face value.

Quote:
I have never said there is definite evidence that the clockport can be made better than it was. Nor have I said there is definite evidence of a conspiracy by an outside agency, the "Illuminati" as you put it. Yet all those concepts come from yourself. Can't seem to find a reference to them in this thread.
No, but you seem to be frantically looking for such a purpose and a conspiracy all the same.

Quote:
You will have to admit, it's a bit of a coincidence.
What is? Sometimes things are just coincidences, but here I can't even fathom what you think is or was going on. Not everything is part of a grand, devious plan.

Quote:
And the presence of these electrically dubious names for things would explain WHY the document was withheld from me at least. Quite possibly everybody else outside CBM until they went to their corporate grave.
Were you a CBM employee or service agent? If you were neither, why *wouldn't* they withhold them from you? I certainly wouldn't give you access to the schematics of any of the instrumentation I develop. Is there some reason you feel it was your right to get access to this proprietary internal company documentation?

Quote:
I don't even know if the thing is 100% genuine, but YOU seem pretty sure it is. Why is that?
They're obviously not original documents. They're remakes based on old fax copies of the Commodore documents, so the providence can't possibly be traced. If you weren't so busy trying to find hidden messages you'd have noticed that already. It all depends on how faithfully they were reproduced. But, since the Rev. 1 versions match the old documents pretty exactly, I have absolutely no reason to doubt the accuracy of these reproductions. I certainly trust the guys who did these reproductions far more than you.
Daedalus is offline  
Old 19 January 2017, 14:57   #29
thgill
Registered User

thgill's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Mason, Ohio / USA
Age: 41
Posts: 359
What is that phrase? Tempest or storm in a teapot?


I personally find it amusing that all you UK and Euro folks are debating about American slang in an American companies schematics.

thgill is offline  
Old 19 January 2017, 15:01   #30
Daedalus
Registered User

Daedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dublin, then Glasgow
Posts: 2,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by thgill View Post
What is that phrase? Tempest or storm in a teapot?


I personally find it amusing that all you UK and Euro folks are debating about American slang in an American companies schematics.

Don't worry, we do the very same thing with our schematics this side of the pond. It's only one person who is suddenly seeing something else in them that we've all missed the past 20 years.
Daedalus is offline  
Old 19 January 2017, 15:19   #31
Pat the Cat
Banned

 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daedalus View Post

They're obviously not original documents. They're remakes based on old fax copies of the Commodore documents, so the providence can't possibly be traced. If you weren't so busy trying to find hidden messages you'd have noticed that already. It all depends on how faithfully they were reproduced. But, since the Rev. 1 versions match the old documents pretty exactly, I have absolutely no reason to doubt the accuracy of these reproductions. I certainly trust the guys who did these reproductions far more than you.
Sir, they are digital rescalable documents, but a fax transmission simply would struggle and fail at this level of detail. Even a local dump of the digital fax file would not do this. You cannot do this with fax of that period. Consid er the file sizes, and how long they would take to transmit over a 9600 modem of the period. They are not in fax format, but PDF. This format did not exist at that time. Postscript was around, from Adobe, and that is one encoding method for rescalable documents.

Ever heard of Formscan? They produced the digital reproduction, encoding, and tranmission techniques for digital document transmission. They weren't the only people who did those things, but they were supplying the equipment a long time before you could walk into a shop and buy a fax machine over the counter. Faxes have to scan a document to reproduce it. Commodore could have sent this doument by fax, received by fax, never printed it, true. Over the phone lines at the time, that would have been bonkers.

If the electrical connections are correct, then THAT is the most important thing.
Pat the Cat is offline  
Old 19 January 2017, 15:21   #32
demolition
Unregistered User
demolition's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Copenhagen / DK
Age: 37
Posts: 3,274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat the Cat View Post
Sir, they are digital rescalable documents, but a fax transmission simply would struggle and fail at this level of detail. Even a local dump of the digital fax file would not do this. You cannot do this with fax of that period. Consid er the file sizes, and how long they would take to transmit over a 9600 modem of the period. They are not in fax format, but PDF. This format did not exist at that time. Postscript was around, from Adobe, and that is one encoding method for rescalable documents.

... that would have been bonkers.
Well, someone here's bonkers for sure..
demolition is offline  
Old 19 January 2017, 15:36   #33
Pat the Cat
Banned

 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 482
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daedalus View Post

They're obviously not original documents. They're remakes based on old fax copies of the Commodore documents, so the providence can't possibly be traced. If you weren't so busy trying to find hidden messages you'd have noticed that already. It all depends on how faithfully they were reproduced. But, since the Rev. 1 versions match the old documents pretty exactly, I have absolutely no reason to doubt the accuracy of these reproductions. I certainly trust the guys who did these reproductions far more than you.
Sir, they are digital rescalable documents, but a fax transmission simply would struggle and fail at this level of detail. Even a local dump of the digital fax file would not do this. You cannot do this with fax of that period. Consid er the file sizes, and how long they would take to transmit over a 9600 modem of the period. They are not in fax format, but PDF. This format did not exist at that time. Postscript was around, from Adobe, and that is one encoding method for rescalable documents.

Ever heard of Formscan? They produced the digital reproduction, encoding, and tranmission techniques for digital document transmission. They weren't the only people who did those things, but they were supplying the equipment a long time before you could walk into a shop and buy a fax machine over the counter. Faxes have to scan a document to reproduce it. Commodore could have sent this doument by fax, received by fax, never printed it, true. Over the phone lines at the time, that would have been bonkers. Let's see, with a little boost for encoding, call it 240 characters per seocnd. 4 seconds per K of data. Perhaps half an hour to send the Rev 2 file, assuming roughly as efficient storage as original. However, to fax it, about 6-7 minutes per page. Around 1 hour, 45 minutes or so. To send one person one copy tha could only be as good as theprinter that made them.

If the electrical connections are correct, then THAT is the most important thing.
Pat the Cat is offline  
Old 19 January 2017, 16:47   #34
Thorham
Computer Nerd

Thorham's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Rotterdam/Netherlands
Age: 41
Posts: 2,962
I googled buggery. Sounded so innocent. Cant blame Pat for his interpretation of the document, really.

Note: Guys, take a chill pill, please
Thorham is offline  
Old 19 January 2017, 17:11   #35
Akira
Registered User

Akira's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 17,921
@1m23s
[ Show youtube player ]
Akira is offline  
Old 19 January 2017, 17:29   #36
Daedalus
Registered User

Daedalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dublin, then Glasgow
Posts: 2,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat the Cat View Post
Sir, they are digital rescalable documents, but a fax transmission simply would struggle and fail at this level of detail.

... Much pointless off-topic waffle...

If the electrical connections are correct, then THAT is the most important thing.
Amazing. Just amazing. The documents I have had for 15 or 20 years are pretty low resolution so it is sometimes difficult to discern detail, but they were the only ones available to most people at the time. This is why the project was initiated to recreate the drawings in the scalable format you've just discovered them in. They appear to have many artifacts typical of faxed documents, it has those lovely square pixels typical of a thermal printhead found rarely anywhere outside fax machines, label printers and receipt printers, and their resolution of around 400dpi is suspiciously close to that of a high resolution fax. So, while I wasn't there to receive it off a fax machine, there's nothing that tells me anything other than it's a fax. Looks and sounds like a duck and all that.

But don't let that get in the way of your mission to fill the forum with pointless waffle, vague guesses and plain noise in your quest to appear as some sort of "expert".
Daedalus is offline  
Old 19 January 2017, 18:35   #37
plasmab
Registered User

plasmab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 1,408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locutus View Post
I think i know what is giving me this 'mental constipation'......


Indeed :/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
plasmab is offline  
Old 19 January 2017, 18:40   #38
ptyerman
Registered User

ptyerman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Worksop/UK
Age: 53
Posts: 940
More Prozac required!
ptyerman is offline  
Old 19 January 2017, 18:41   #39
DamienD
Global Moderator

DamienD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: London / Sydney
Age: 40
Posts: 9,252
Ok, this thread is really going nowhere and there's a lot of disagreement / agro from various people...

Sorry, but no choice left except to close before it gets any worse
DamienD is offline  
AdSense AdSense  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Voices8" 8 Channel Soundtracker "DemoSongI" song - "This is the Amiga with 8 Voices" DemosongIHunter request.Music 40 13 April 2017 05:06
"Reminder "Lincs Amiga User Group aka "LAG" Meet Sat 5th of January 2013" rockape News 4 30 January 2013 00:06
DOS-Error #205 on reading "Disk.1". e5frog project.WHDLoad 6 22 July 2010 18:03
"DOS-Error #205 (object not found) on reading "devs:kickstarts/kick 40068.a4000" Brutal_dentist New to Emulation or Amiga scene 10 03 April 2005 23:12
"DOS-Error #205 (object not found) on reading "devs:kickstarts/kick 40068.a4000" Unregistered New to Emulation or Amiga scene 1 22 December 2004 09:48

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 02:33.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Page generated in 0.31882 seconds with 12 queries