PDA

View Full Version : floppy for IBM PC convertible (5140)



hp
February 25th, 2004, 10:47 AM
I found an old pc convertible , but cannot find the floppy disks , do somebody knows where to download them ?
Thankyou

Terry Yager
February 25th, 2004, 01:46 PM
I found an old pc convertible , but cannot find the floppy disks , do somebody knows where to download them ?
Thankyou

Try here, you'll find several flavors to choose from:

www.bootdisk.com

I think it shipped with PCDOS v. 3.2, but later versions may have come with v. 3.3. (Any version of DOS should work as long as it's on a 720K floppy disk). You will need floppy disks that are formatted to 720K. If you don't know how to do this, post a message here and someone will get back to you with instructions.

--T

hp
February 25th, 2004, 08:05 PM
Thank you very much , i found there this ink:
www.oldstuff.myagora.net/powerload/bootdisk.htm
i hope it will work .

Terry Yager
February 26th, 2004, 04:45 AM
Thank you very much , i found there this ink:
www.oldstuff.myagora.net/powerload/bootdisk.htm
i hope it will work .

Kewl link, I never checked it out before. I D/L-ed MSDOS v. 1.25 from there. I'm going to try it on my Kaypro 10.

--T

CP/M User
February 27th, 2004, 02:02 PM
"Terry Yager" wrote:

> Kewl link, I never checked it out before.
> I D/L-ed MSDOS v. 1.25 from there.
> I'm going to try it on my Kaypro 10.

Would that work on that machine?

I heard MSDOS v1.25 was a joke! ;-)

CP/M User.

Terry Yager
February 27th, 2004, 06:15 PM
"Terry Yager" wrote:

> Kewl link, I never checked it out before.
> I D/L-ed MSDOS v. 1.25 from there.
> I'm going to try it on my Kaypro 10.

Would that work on that machine?

I heard MSDOS v1.25 was a joke! ;-)

CP/M User.

Not on a normal K10, but mine has an SWP CoPower 88 board installed, which gives it an 8088 processor and 256K of extra ram. The ram can only be used as a ramdisk under CP/M, but it's the main system memory when the 8088 is in control. I have two different versions of bootloader for MSDOS for it. One loads version 2.11 and the other is for v.1.25. I have the v.2.11 system disk but never had v. 1.25 before. Version 1.x didn't support subdirectories, but I really don't remember the other differences, even though I've used it before (on the Sanyo 555, and on my ol' Victor 9000s).
The SWP CoPower board started out as a third-party add-on for any(?) Z-80 system, but late in thier production run, Kaypro came out with a pair of computers that included it as standard. These were called the 2 +88, and the 4 +88. There is a 4 +88 on eBay right now, and it looks like it's gonna go pretty cheap. There is only a little time left, and it was only at $20.00. Wish I had the extra cash...

Just checked, auction is over now, but check it out anyways. Look closely at the pictures, and you can see a little round sticker in one of them that says plus88 on it. That is the only way to identify one from the outside, otherwise they look just like the plain K4.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2789427275&category=4193&sspagename=STRK%3AMEBWA%3AIT&rd=1

--T

CP/M User
February 27th, 2004, 09:13 PM
Terry Yager" wrote:

>> Would that work on that machine?

>> I heard MSDOS v1.25 was a joke! ;-)

> Not on a normal K10, but mine has an SWP
> CoPower 88 board installed, which gives it
>an 8088 processor and 256K of extra ram.
> The ram can only be used as a ramdisk
> under CP/M, but it's the main system
> memory when the 8088 is in control. I
> have two different versions of bootloader
> for MSDOS for it. One loads version 2.11
> and the other is for v.1.25. I have the
> v.2.11 system disk but never had v. 1.25
> before. Version 1.x didn't support
> subdirectories, but I really don't remember
> the other differences, even though I've
> used it before (on the Sanyo 555, and on
> my ol' Victor 9000s).

Oh okay, I've heard that some Kaypros
had support for MSDOS, but I didn't realise
the Kaypro 10 was one of them.

> The SWP CoPower board started out as
> a third-party add-on for any(?) Z-80
> system, but late in thier production run,
> Kaypro came out with a pair of computers
> that included it as standard. These were
> called the 2 +88, and the 4 +88. There
> is a 4 +88 on eBay right now, and it looks
> like it's gonna go pretty cheap. There is
> only a little time left, and it was only at
> $20.00. Wish I had the extra cash...

> Just checked, auction is over now, but
> check it out anyways. Look closely at the
> pictures, and you can see a little round
> sticker in one of them that says plus88 on
> it. That is the only way to identify one
> from the outside, otherwise they look just
> like the plain K4.

Thanks for the link.

Cheers,
CP/M User.

Terry Yager
February 28th, 2004, 01:34 PM
Oh okay, I've heard that some Kaypros
had support for MSDOS, but I didn't realise
the Kaypro 10 was one of them.



I don't think Kaypro ever installed the 8088 board in any K10s, just the 2+ and the 4+. The 2+ machines are very rare these days, but the 4+ is a little more common, but still pretty rare. (I don't think the seller on eBay really knew what they were selling, or they could have got a lot more for it). Acording to my 1985 Bowker's Sourcebook, the 8088 board added an extra $700.00 to the price of the Kaypros that it came in. Before that time it used to be a $1000.00 add-in. If I understand it correctly, Kaypro bought a piece of SWP when they started to go under. The SWP version could be installed in any Z-80 machine, AFAIK. I have seen a couple of them in non-Kaypro machines. One of them was a Xerox of some kind. (I don't remember if it was an 820, or a 8/16). The one in the Xerox had 512K installed, and another set of empty sockets to go up to 1MB.
As far as MSDOS compatability, it isn't very good. It will run MSDOS, but not much more. I have only ever found one IBM program that runs correctly, MicroSoft MultiMate spreadsheet. (Even WordStar for IBM has problems).

--T

barryp
February 28th, 2004, 05:02 PM
I don't think Kaypro ever installed the 8088 board in any K10s

I have (somewhere in the garage) part of a Kaypro 10. What I think I have is the case and keyboard. The keyboard is Kaypro-shaped but PC-style (10 function keys, etc.) Said keyboard will work when attached to a PC or XT.


As far as MSDOS compatability, it isn't very good. It will run MSDOS, but not much more. I have only ever found one IBM program that runs correctly, MicroSoft MultiMate spreadsheet. (Even WordStar for IBM has problems).

Multimate was a word processor, not spreadsheet nor by Microsoft. I used it a lot but never liked it.

Terry Yager
February 28th, 2004, 05:20 PM
I have (somewhere in the garage) part of a Kaypro 10. What I think I have is the case and keyboard. The keyboard is Kaypro-shaped but PC-style (10 function keys, etc.) Said keyboard will work when attached to a PC or XT.

I think what you have is probably a Kaypro 16, the first IBM-compatable portable that Kaypro built (1986?). That would have a peecee-style keyboard. Does it have a backplane with all the boards, including the (8086?) processor board mounted vertically in it? (All inside a metal card-cage, right above and to the rear of the video tube).



As far as MSDOS compatability, it isn't very good. It will run MSDOS, but not much more. I have only ever found one IBM program that runs correctly, MicroSoft MultiMate spreadsheet. (Even WordStar for IBM has problems).

Multimate was a word processor, not spreadsheet nor by Microsoft. I used it a lot but never liked it.

Oh, DUH! (My bad). I meant to say MultiPlan...

--T

CP/M User
February 28th, 2004, 07:13 PM
"Terry Yager" wrote:

> As far as MSDOS compatability, it isn't very
> good. It will run MSDOS, but not much
> more. I have only ever found one IBM
> program that runs correctly, MicroSoft
> MultiMate spreadsheet. (Even WordStar for
> IBM has problems).

I believe it would be very good, if you can
find programs which were mean't for your
system, rather than trying pot luck testing
IBM based programs, which obviously
program the hardware & or interrupts. This
is big trouble for machines like the Sirus
(Victor 9000) or Sanyo 555, which weren't
quite like an IBM or compatable. This is
why I've said in the past, machines like
those need to be kept seperate, because
while they may use the same processor,
& OS (in CP/M-86s case there's a special
version for those machines & one specific
to the IBM), they are far different in terms
of hardware.

Some actually think that writing an emulator
based on something like the Victor 9000 is
a joke, but I think that is in a sense a joke,
because it's clearly not an IBM.

Cheers,
CP/M User.

Terry Yager
February 29th, 2004, 01:05 PM
I believe it would be very good, if you can
find programs which were mean't for your
system, rather than trying pot luck testing
IBM based programs, which obviously
program the hardware & or interrupts.

Oh, I do have a whole lot of "toys" for CP/M, but I like running MSDOS on my K10, "just because I can". I think you're on the right track, tho. A lot of the incompatability issues are probably
the result of the programmer writing directly to the hardware (faster) rather than using system calls like they're "supposed" to do (slower, but more compatable; doesn't require identical hardware).


This is big trouble for machines like the Sirus
(Victor 9000) or Sanyo 555, which weren't
quite like an IBM or compatable. This is
why I've said in the past, machines like
those need to be kept seperate, because
while they may use the same processor,
& OS (in CP/M-86s case there's a special
version for those machines & one specific
to the IBM), they are far different in terms
of hardware.

Let's not forget the Tandy Model 2000, always one of my favorites.


Some actually think that writing an emulator
based on something like the Victor 9000 is
a joke, but I think that is in a sense a joke,
because it's clearly not an IBM.

Cheers,
CP/M User.

I wish I had a Victor 9000 emulator...even a Sanyo 555 emu would be nice. (Do you know of any?)

--T

barryp
February 29th, 2004, 03:52 PM
I think what you have is probably a Kaypro 16, the first IBM-compatable portable that Kaypro built (1986?). That would have a peecee-style keyboard. Does it have a backplane with all the boards, including the (8086?) processor board mounted vertically in it? (All inside a metal card-cage, right above and to the rear of the video tube).


I just found the subject of my response. It is a Kaypro 10 but is a (nearly) empty shell. It looks like someone had a plan to do something but lost interest. I was wrong about the keyboard, it's separate from the 10 because there's a regular kb with the 10.


My Kaypro inventory: a full 2 (x? or II?) with books/disks, a shell of a 10 with keyboard and a keyboard from a 16.

barryp
February 29th, 2004, 04:02 PM
As far as MSDOS compatability, it isn't very good.

I believe it would be very good, if you can
find programs which were meant for your
system, rather than trying pot luck testing
IBM based programs, which obviously
program the hardware & or interrupts.

But by definition, if you have to pick specific programs, it ISN'T very compatible.

Terry Yager
February 29th, 2004, 04:03 PM
I just found the subject of my response. It is a Kaypro 10 but is a (nearly) empty shell. It looks like someone had a plan to do something but lost interest. I was wrong about the keyboard, it's separate from the 10 because there's a regular kb with the 10.


My Kaypro inventory: a full 2 (x? or II?) with books/disks, a shell of a 10 with keyboard and a keyboard from a 16.

I'm sorry to hear that your K-10 is gutted. Hopefully some day you'll get one that works. Good luck. BTW, does your 10 still have the hard drive with it? (I may be in the market for one in the near future).

--T

barryp
February 29th, 2004, 04:08 PM
BTW, does your 10 still have the hard drive with it? (I may be in the market for one in the near future).

What size would it have been? 10MB? I may have it here somewhere.

As far as I can tell, the only thing left in the case is the CRT.

Terry Yager
February 29th, 2004, 04:11 PM
BTW, does your 10 still have the hard drive with it? (I may be in the market for one in the near future).

What size would it have been? 10MB? I may have it here somewhere.

As far as I can tell, the only thing left in the case is the CRT.

Yeah, 10 MB. Mine crashed real hard a few weeks ago. Still works, but it's just limping along on it's last leg.

--T

Terry Yager
February 29th, 2004, 04:17 PM
But by definition, if you have to pick specific programs, it ISN'T very compatible.

Yes, but it allowed Kaypro to sell a bunch of 'em by advertising them as "IBM Compatable", at a time when those words were important to a lot of buyers. (Heh, there really is one born every minute, isn't there?)

--T

Terry Yager
February 29th, 2004, 04:21 PM
IBM Compatability:

Legend (urban?) has it that the way IBM-compatability was determined back in the day, was to attempt to run the 100 top-selling IBM programs for that week. If 95 of 'em ran ok, then the computer was considered to be 95% IBM compatable, etc.

--T

Terry Yager
February 29th, 2004, 05:39 PM
My Kaypro inventory: a full 2 (x? or II?) with books/disks, a shell of a 10 with keyboard and a keyboard from a 16.

Here's a very nice pic I just kicked up:

http://www.mynewoffice.com/pcmuseum/Kaypro343.jpg

--T

CP/M User
February 29th, 2004, 09:47 PM
"Terry Yager" wrote:

> IBM Compatability:

> Legend (urban?) has it that the way
> IBM-compatability was determined
> back in the day, was to attempt to
> run the 100 top-selling IBM programs
> for that week. If 95 of 'em ran ok,
> then the computer was considered to
> be 95% IBM compatable, etc.

Actually, when I first got into IBM & IBM
compatable programs, one of the first
games I got (which supported CGA)
specifically stated 100% IBM
compatability.

95% IMO isn't good enough. Which is
why I think that systems which are like
this, don't fall into the IBM compatability
list.

They should have done like they did with
the Victor 9000 & make better hardware
which beated the IBM standards. At least
show it was better than an IBM of the
time! ;-)

Cheers,
CP/M User.

Terry Yager
March 1st, 2004, 08:23 AM
"Terry Yager" wrote:

> IBM Compatability:

Actually, when I first got into IBM & IBM
compatable programs, one of the first
games I got (which supported CGA)
specifically stated 100% IBM
compatability.

95% IMO isn't good enough. Which is
why I think that systems which are like
this, don't fall into the IBM compatability
list.

They should have done like they did with
the Victor 9000 & make better hardware
which beated the IBM standards. At least
show it was better than an IBM of the
time! ;-)

Cheers,
CP/M User.

I tend to think of those older machines as coming in three classes:

1) Compatable (100%)
2) Almost compatable (about 90 - 99%)
3) Incompatable (everything else)

I agree that some of those less-than-100%-compatable machines were in some ways better than IBM, like the Tandy 2000 (which would run some IBM programs, if you could get them on the proper disk format). It was one of the few machines that used the 80186 processor.

--T

CP/M User
March 2nd, 2004, 01:06 AM
"Terry Yager" wrote:

> I tend to think of those older machines
> as coming in three classes:

> 1) Compatable (100%)
> 2) Almost compatable (about 90 - 99%)
> 3) Incompatable (everything else)

> I agree that some of those
> less-than-100%-compatable machines
> were in some ways better than IBM, like
> the Tandy 2000 (which would run some
> IBM programs, if you could get them on
> the proper disk format). It was one of
> the few machines that used the 80186
> processor.

What those machines really need is an
emulator, which could at least perform like
an IBM Personal Computer or XT perhaps?

As you say, some of them are superior to
the IBM, so with the right sort of program
it could be more a true IBM! :-)

Cheers,
CP/M User.

Terry Yager
March 3rd, 2004, 04:40 PM
What those machines really need is an
emulator, which could at least perform like
an IBM Personal Computer or XT perhaps?

As you say, some of them are superior to
the IBM, so with the right sort of program
it could be more a true IBM! :-)

Cheers,
CP/M User.

Even the venerable Victor/Sirius 9000, in it's latter years, came out with an add-in called the Plus PC (or PC Plus?) board which made it (more) IBM compatable. They even managed to get the Victor's "wierd" disk drives to read/write/format IBM style disks.

--T

CP/M User
March 3rd, 2004, 09:26 PM
"Terry Yager" wrote:

> Even the venerable Victor/Sirius 9000, in
> it's latter years, came out with an add-in
> called the Plus PC (or PC Plus?) board
> which made it (more) IBM compatable.
> They even managed to get the Victor's
> "wierd" disk drives to read/write/format
> IBM style disks.

Well see that's great, but I never knew about
this hardware which made Sir Vic 9000 more
compatable.

Of course this machine came out well before
the IBM (or so I've read somewhere I
believe).

Would have thought it would have revitialised
that machine though!

Cheers,
CP/M User.

Terry Yager
March 3rd, 2004, 11:43 PM
Well see that's great, but I never knew about
this hardware which made Sir Vic 9000 more
compatable.

Of course this machine came out well before
the IBM (or so I've read somewhere I
believe).

Would have thought it would have revitialised
that machine though!

Cheers,
CP/M User.

One of the first two Victors I had was equipped with one. Unfortunatly, it had been left in a garage for several years, and the plus board was corroded way beyond any hope of repair. The good news is that it came with a large pile of software and manualage! It didn't cost me anything except the gas to drive about 40 miles (into the backwoods) to pick 'em up. Some guy had put an ad in the paper that he had a couple of computers, free for the picking up, so I went out to have a look. Sure enough, he had two Victors. The second machine fared better than it's sister, and actually worked when I got it home, but no Plus board in it. The documentation for the plus was there, so I knew wat it was and what it was s'pozed to do. A few years (and several Victors) later, I was in the computer store when a lady brought in another 9000 hoping to use it as a trade in. This one even had the very hard to find hard drive, but refused to boot from it. We got it to boot to a floppy tho. Mark was in the process of giving her the ol' "we can't give you anything for it , but we'll gladly take it off your hands" speech, when I brought to his attention that the keyboard had some very interesting stickers attached to some of the keytops, with labels like "alt" and others not found on the usual Victor keyboard, but which are on the IBM. This got his curiosity up, so we took the time to remove the 2 screws from the back and have a look inside. Sure enough, there was the plus board installed in it. That instantly raised the value of it (to a collector like Mark), so he gave her $20. for it, which she was happy to get.
The plus board comes in (at least) two completely different versions. The (dead) one in my old machine was a large daughterboard that was mounted "piggy-back" on the mainboard, but the one (working) in Mark's machine is a regular expansion card that plugs into one of the slots.
As far as revitalising the machine (and possibly saving the company), I don't think it was non-IBM-compatability that caused the death of the Victor. I think the cause was purely economic. The V 9000 was a very expensive machine, costing around $5000.00 (without the plus option). You could get a real IBM-PC for about half that much at the time. (The base PC listed for $2205.00 in 1985).

--T

CP/M User
March 4th, 2004, 12:34 AM
"Terry Yager" wrote:

> One of the first two Victors I had was
> equipped with one. Unfortunatly, it
> had been left in a garage for several
> years, and the plus board was corroded
> way beyond any hope of repair. The
> good news is that it came with a large
> pile of software and "manualage"! It
> didn't cost me anything except the gas
> to drive about 40 miles (into the
> backwoods) to pick 'em up. Some guy
> had put an ad in the paper that he had
> a couple of computers, free for the
> picking up, so I went out to have a
> look. Sure enough, he had two
> Victors. The second machine fared
> better than it's sister, and actually
> worked when I got it home, but no
> Plus board in it. The documentation
> for the plus was there, so I knew wat
> it was and what it was s'pozed to do.
> A few years (and several Victors) later,
> I was in the computer store when a
> lady brought in another 9000 hoping
> to use it as a trade in. This one even
> had the very hard to find hard drive,
> but refused to boot from it.

I had a simular case with my first IBM
(an XT) which had one of those early
Hard Disks (the one where you had to
tell the hard disk to park itself - through
a program). It was a mystery which
was never solved, until I tried to recover
it. I got it to boot, but figured the Hard
Disk must of being faulty because it
didn't hold it's info for long, or would
corrupt it. So, I figured the Hard Disk
has gone.

I still have my XT, in case I want to do
something else, like add another more
modern Hard Disk to it, or perhaps just
a floppy & run a network from it to one
of my 386 Hard Disks or perhaps a
Superdisk - if it can do it!

> We got it to boot to a floppy tho. Mark
> was in the process of giving her the ol'
> "we can't give you anything for it ,
> but we'll gladly take it off your hands"
> speech, when I brought to his attention
> that the keyboard had some very
> interesting stickers attached to some
> of the keytops, with labels like "alt"
> and others not found on the usual
> Victor keyboard, but which are on the
> IBM. This got his curiosity up, so we
> took the time to remove the 2 screws
> from the back and have a look inside.
> Sure enough, there was the plus board
> installed in it. That instantly raised the
> value of it (to a collector like Mark), so
> he gave her $20. for it, which she was
> happy to get.

> The plus board comes in (at least) two
> completely different versions. The
> (dead) one in my old machine was a
> large daughterboard that was mounted
> "piggy-back" on the mainboard, but the
> one (working) in Mark's machine is a
> regular expansion card that plugs into
> one of the slots.

> As far as revitalising the machine (and
> possibly saving the company), I don't
> think it was non-IBM-compatability that
> caused the death of the Victor. I think
> the cause was purely economic. The V
> 9000 was a very expensive machine,
> costing around $5000.00 (without the
> plus option). You could get a "real"
> IBM-PC for about half that much at the
> time. (The base PC listed for $2205.00
> in 1985).

Well that's also a good possibility, I
remember you telling me this once before,
but I keep forgetting everytime I open
that book & look at those machines. Price
is usually the last thing to consider. It
book hasn't helped either, because it fails
to mention this, but it had to talk about
the price tag of the Apple Lisa didn't it! :-)

It's also why Apple are second to IBM in
the stakes. No matter how more
sofisicated the public get, they always go
for that cheaper machine! Oh well, I guess
it's better when they throw it out 3 years
down the track to buy a new one! ;-)

I think "Sir Vic 9000" has a form of honor
to it, unfortunately no-one will know what
I'm talking about when I'm talking about
it NeXT time! ;-)

Terry Yager
March 9th, 2004, 11:53 AM
I think "Sir Vic 9000" has a form of honor
to it, unfortunately no-one will know what
I'm talking about when I'm talking about
it NeXT time! ;-)

Oh, some people will remember: I was watching a show on PBS a few years ago, in which several PC-industry leaders were competing against one another (for charity, of course) in a sort of trivia contest. The question came up; What was the distinguishing feature of the Victor 9000? (I of course got it right--the variable-speed drives). The question was answered correctly by none other than Bill Gates! (I was surprized that he remembered).

--T

CP/M User
March 11th, 2004, 09:26 PM
"Terry Yager"] wrote:

> Oh, some people will remember: I
> was watching a show on PBS a few
> years ago, in which several
> "PC-industry" leaders were competing
> against one another (for charity, of
> course) in a sort of trivia contest.
> The question came up; What was the
> distinguishing feature of the Victor
> 9000? (I of course got it right--the
> variable-speed drives). The question
> was answered correctly by none other
> than Bill Gates! (I was surprized that
> he remembered).

Perhaps Mr Bates envisioned this would
eventually become the standard for IBMs.

The only problem & the one which might
of stopped IBM from doing this, was trying
to work out a way of having this type of
setup compatable with the other Drives.

But if Mr Bates did in fact hope for
something like this for the IBM-compatable
then it just shows that the top dog doesn't
always get his bone! ;-)

Cheers,
CP/M User.