From: clemc at ccc.com (Clem Cole)
Subject: [COFF] 52-pin D-Sub?
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:36:20 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAC20D2M1FEkx83PVp+cmGRpg573cgyEMwoVnL17A-SiwAqtq=Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6108e507-1dc2-4b09-9121-48c2727513cf.maildroid@localhost>
below...
On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 5:26 PM William Pechter <pechter at gmail.com> wrote:
> Could it be because they all started with current loop tty interfaces?
> Most of the old DEC guys started with teletypes.
>
Very possible...
>
> Having struggled with a breakout box and different mini and micro vendors
> implementations of serial ports... Ugh. And in three-wire the use of
> Xon-Xoff varied big time. No standard was the standard. IIRC the IBM
> Series/1 had a different 9pin layout than the PC/AR. Why?
>
RS-232A/B/C was DB-25 P for the DTE (terminating equiment - a.k.a.
terminal) and S for DCE (communications equipment - a.k.a. modem). It was
standardized. At one time, I (sadly) could quote the paragraph number....
Then in 1978 #$%^& Lear Seglier put a DB-25S on a DTE (terminal). They
were the cheap terminal vendor and all hell broke loose.
The PC/AT used 9 pin because the back of the unit was small and -- well
there could because IBM said so .... But at least the IBM engineers kept
to Plug and Sockets from the standard. I did not know the Series/1 used 9
pin. Learn something new.
> At least DEC was reasonably consistent until they moved too the Vax
> modified RJ design.
>
Indeed - that was a huge issue - the modified RJ block -- sigh...
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/coff/attachments/20200228/53d54e93/attachment.html>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-28 22:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-27 23:37 athornton
2020-02-28 0:04 ` dave
2020-02-28 1:37 ` stewart
2020-02-28 2:12 ` athornton
2020-02-28 4:12 ` dave
2020-02-28 4:18 ` dave
2020-02-28 14:11 ` clemc
2020-02-28 14:34 ` athornton
2020-02-28 21:23 ` dave
2020-02-28 16:35 ` krewat
2020-02-28 21:28 ` dave
2020-02-28 21:44 ` clemc
2020-02-28 21:58 ` dave
2020-02-28 22:20 ` clemc
2020-02-28 23:22 ` pechter
2020-02-29 13:12 ` emu
2020-02-29 15:45 ` krewat
2020-02-29 15:49 ` clemc
2020-02-28 22:38 ` pechter
2020-02-28 22:05 ` drb
2020-02-28 22:28 ` clemc
2020-02-28 22:26 ` pechter
2020-02-28 22:36 ` clemc [this message]
2020-02-28 23:40 ` pechter
2020-02-29 16:52 ` clemc
2020-02-28 23:54 ` pechter
2020-02-29 9:59 rudi.j.blom
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAC20D2M1FEkx83PVp+cmGRpg573cgyEMwoVnL17A-SiwAqtq=Q@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=coff@minnie.tuhs.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).