Discussion:
How a Hardware Genius Turned a 1930s Teletype Into a Linux Terminal
(too old to reply)
Peter Flass
2020-04-30 13:25:42 UTC
Permalink
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a30647778/linux-teletype-programming-hardware-video/
--
Pete
Scott Lurndal
2020-04-30 14:11:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Flass
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a30647778/linux-teletype-programming-hardware-video/
Considering that:

1) Unix was developed on an ASR-33 teletype
2) Converting from RS232C to 20ma (or 60ma) current loop requires
a small handful of discrete components and was widely used to
interface unix systems to said teletypes almost fifty years
ago
3) Most uarts still support 5 bit serial transmission at very slow
baud rates (the 'u' in uart does stand for universal :-)
4) Unix worked with all-uppercase terminals just fine, including
the ability to enter lower-case characters via a two character
sequence.

I'm not sure it's such a big deal that linux can also do this.
Bob Eager
2020-04-30 14:57:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Flass
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a30647778/linux-teletype-
programming-hardware-video/
1) Unix was developed on an ASR-33 teletype 2) Converting from RS232C
to 20ma (or 60ma) current loop requires
a small handful of discrete components and was widely used to
interface unix systems to said teletypes almost fifty years ago
3) Most uarts still support 5 bit serial transmission at very slow
baud rates (the 'u' in uart does stand for universal :-)
4) Unix worked with all-uppercase terminals just fine, including
the ability to enter lower-case characters via a two character
sequence.
When I started using UNIX, we only had a couple of mixed case terminals.
The rest were ASR-33s.

We managed.
--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
Quadibloc
2020-04-30 14:58:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
I'm not sure it's such a big deal that linux can also do this.
Well...

It's certainly true that Linux has a command-line interface.

Even making that work on an ASR 33 terminal might be problematic, as Unix tends
to have a preference for lower-case. Also, the character | which is not in the
upper-case only subset of ASCII is very useful in that operating system.

So using a 5-level terminal, with an even more restricted character set,
probably would require, at least, including some sort of character translation
layer.

It is true that hooking up 5-level Teletypes to computers was rather common in
the early days of the microcomputer era. Still, I'm not surprised that there is
media attention to their use, if only because they're now almost a forgotten
technology.

John Savard
Scott Lurndal
2020-04-30 16:33:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
I'm not sure it's such a big deal that linux can also do this.
Well...
It's certainly true that Linux has a command-line interface.
Even making that work on an ASR 33 terminal might be problematic, as Unix tends
to have a preference for lower-case.
The part you snipped, above, stated that unix worked just fine with
upper case. As Bob pointed out, the ASR-33 was the standard terminal
for unix development.

Also, the character | which is not in the
Post by Quadibloc
upper-case only subset of ASCII is very useful in that operating system.
It was, however, a character on the ASR-33 keyboard.
Post by Quadibloc
So using a 5-level terminal, with an even more restricted character set,
probably would require, at least, including some sort of character translation
layer.
Generally handled by the terminal driver based on 'stty' settings.
Quadibloc
2020-04-30 19:39:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Also, the character | which is not in the
Post by Quadibloc
upper-case only subset of ASCII is very useful in that operating system.
It was, however, a character on the ASR-33 keyboard.
No it wasn't.

I mean, you could get { by pressing ALT MODE, but there was absolutely no way to
generate ` | } and ~ on an ASR 33 ... unless you punched one on a piece of paper tape.

You did have the ASCII characters [ \ ] ^ and _.

John Savard
r***@gmail.com
2020-05-01 02:28:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Also, the character | which is not in the
Post by Quadibloc
upper-case only subset of ASCII is very useful in that operating system.
It was, however, a character on the ASR-33 keyboard.
No it wasn't.
I mean, you could get { by pressing ALT MODE, but there was absolutely no way to
generate ` | } and ~ on an ASR 33 ... unless you punched one on a piece of paper tape.
You did have the ASCII characters [ \ ] ^ and _.
There are no [ and ] characters on the keyboard of the ASR 33 (see Wiki).

Can't see the ^ and _ either.

To get those, you'd need the ASR 37 or 38.
Quadibloc
2020-05-01 07:07:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@gmail.com
There are no [ and ] characters on the keyboard of the ASR 33 (see Wiki).
Can't see the ^ and _ either.
To get those, you'd need the ASR 37 or 38.
^ is up-arrow on an ASR 33, and _ is back-arrow on an ASR 33. Same character
codes, just different graphics.

[ is shift-K, \ is shift-L, ] is shift-M, ^ is shift-N, and _ is shift-O.

John Savard
r***@gmail.com
2020-05-01 07:47:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by r***@gmail.com
There are no [ and ] characters on the keyboard of the ASR 33 (see Wiki).
Can't see the ^ and _ either.
To get those, you'd need the ASR 37 or 38.
^ is up-arrow on an ASR 33, and _ is back-arrow on an ASR 33. Same character
codes, just different graphics.
[ is shift-K, \ is shift-L, ] is shift-M, ^ is shift-N, and _ is shift-O.
None of those is shown in the keyboard of the ASR-33 on wiki.
Quadibloc
2020-05-01 08:58:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
Post by r***@gmail.com
There are no [ and ] characters on the keyboard of the ASR 33 (see Wiki).
Can't see the ^ and _ either.
To get those, you'd need the ASR 37 or 38.
^ is up-arrow on an ASR 33, and _ is back-arrow on an ASR 33. Same character
codes, just different graphics.
[ is shift-K, \ is shift-L, ] is shift-M, ^ is shift-N, and _ is shift-O.
None of those is shown in the keyboard of the ASR-33 on wiki.
So? There were a number of variations of the keyboard over its lifetime. And, in
fact, some illustrations of the ASR 33 keyboard even on Wikipedia do show those
characters.

I know this, because I was _there_.

As well:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/twylo/9795932916
Loading Image...
Loading Image...

Can't quite make out the keys on this one...

https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/internet-doesnt-become-mainstream.425625/page-2

John Savard
Bob Eager
2020-05-01 09:31:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
Post by r***@gmail.com
There are no [ and ] characters on the keyboard of the ASR 33 (see Wiki).
Can't see the ^ and _ either.
To get those, you'd need the ASR 37 or 38.
^ is up-arrow on an ASR 33, and _ is back-arrow on an ASR 33. Same
character codes, just different graphics.
[ is shift-K, \ is shift-L, ] is shift-M, ^ is shift-N, and _ is shift-O.
None of those is shown in the keyboard of the ASR-33 on wiki.
So? There were a number of variations of the keyboard over its lifetime.
And, in fact, some illustrations of the ASR 33 keyboard even on
Wikipedia do show those characters.
I know this, because I was _there_.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/twylo/9795932916
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mappa_Teletype_ASR-33.jpg
https://vintagecomputer.net/teletype/asr33/ASR-33_keyboard.JPG
Can't quite make out the keys on this one...
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/internet-doesnt-become-
mainstream.425625/page-2
Post by Quadibloc
John Savard
From tty(4), Sixth Edition:

When desired, all upper-case letters are mapped into the
corresponding lower-case letter. The upper-case letter may
be generated by preceding it by `\'. In addition, the fol-
lowing escape sequences are generated on output and accepted
on input:

for use
` \'
| \!
~ \^
{ \(
} \)
--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
r***@gmail.com
2020-05-02 02:39:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
Post by r***@gmail.com
There are no [ and ] characters on the keyboard of the ASR 33 (see Wiki).
Can't see the ^ and _ either.
To get those, you'd need the ASR 37 or 38.
^ is up-arrow on an ASR 33, and _ is back-arrow on an ASR 33. Same character
codes, just different graphics.
[ is shift-K, \ is shift-L, ] is shift-M, ^ is shift-N, and _ is shift-O.
None of those is shown in the keyboard of the ASR-33 on wiki.
So? There were a number of variations of the keyboard over its lifetime.
It means that ASR-33's did not all have those characters.

There were various print cylinders that could be fitted.
Post by Quadibloc
And, in
fact, some illustrations of the ASR 33 keyboard even on Wikipedia do show those
characters.
Not on the one that I looked at.
Post by Quadibloc
I know this, because I was _there_.
You are not the only person who has used an ASR 33.
Post by Quadibloc
https://www.flickr.com/photos/twylo/9795932916
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mappa_Teletype_ASR-33.jpg
https://vintagecomputer.net/teletype/asr33/ASR-33_keyboard.JPG
Can't quite make out the keys on this one...
https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/internet-doesnt-become-mainstream.425625/page-2
Quadibloc
2020-05-02 06:57:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@gmail.com
You are not the only person who has used an ASR 33.
I don't claim to be. You are the one who is in effect making such a claim by
categorically asserting that certain characters aren't found on the ASR 33.

John Savard
r***@gmail.com
2020-05-02 13:06:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
I know this, because I was _there_.
You are not the only person who has used an ASR 33.
I don't claim to be. You are the one who is in effect making such a claim
I'm not making any such claim. Your statement
"I know this because I was _there_"
implies that you are the only person who has used and ASR-33
and that nobody else knows what they are talking about.
Post by Quadibloc
by
categorically asserting that certain characters aren't found on the ASR 33.
Its true. There's a photo of the keyboard of an ASR-33 in wiki.

I have already stated that 3 posts ago.
You have had ample opportunity to look at it and see for yourself.
Quadibloc
2020-05-02 22:59:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
by
categorically asserting that certain characters aren't found on the ASR 33.
Its true. There's a photo of the keyboard of an ASR-33 in wiki.
There are a *pile* of photos of keyboards of ASR 33 Teletypes all over the
Internet. I posted the URLs of about four of them a few posts back.

I don't _need_ a photo to tell me what the keyboard of an ASR 33 looks like.

The fact that you have seen one picture of the keyboard of an ASR 33 on
Wikipedia which doesn't have these symbols on its keyboard does not mean that
this was typical or usual of them.

Indeed, the picture here

Loading Image...

shows one where [, \, and ] aren't printed on the keys. However, they would
still have been on the print head for shift-K, shift-L, and shift-M
respectively.

John Savard
r***@gmail.com
2020-05-03 08:01:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
by
categorically asserting that certain characters aren't found on the ASR 33.
Its true. There's a photo of the keyboard of an ASR-33 in wiki.
There are a *pile* of photos of keyboards of ASR 33 Teletypes all over the
Internet. I posted the URLs of about four of them a few posts back.
I don't _need_ a photo to tell me what the keyboard of an ASR 33 looks like.
But you do, because there were variations.
Post by Quadibloc
The fact that you have seen one picture of the keyboard of an ASR 33 on
Wikipedia which doesn't have these symbols on its keyboard does not mean that
this was typical or usual of them.
There were 69 different print wheels for the ASR-33.
And all with different keyboards.
Post by Quadibloc
Indeed, the picture here
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TTY33ASR.jpg
shows one where [, \, and ] aren't printed on the keys.
That's what I posted earlier.
You chose to ignore it.
Post by Quadibloc
However, they would
still have been on the print head for shift-K, shift-L, and shift-M
respectively.
Rubbish.
Had you bothered to read the WIKI description to which I referred you,
you would have read that there were 69 DIFFERENT print wheels,
and most of them omitted those characters from the shift-KLM positions.
Quadibloc
2020-05-03 19:03:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
However, they would
still have been on the print head for shift-K, shift-L, and shift-M
respectively.
Rubbish.
Had you bothered to read the WIKI description to which I referred you,
you would have read that there were 69 DIFFERENT print wheels,
and most of them omitted those characters from the shift-KLM positions.
I did see the reference to 69 different print elements. However, the particular
keyboard in the photo is not of a machine that omitted those characters on its
print element.

John Savard
r***@gmail.com
2020-05-05 05:43:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
However, they would
still have been on the print head for shift-K, shift-L, and shift-M
respectively.
Rubbish.
Had you bothered to read the WIKI description to which I referred you,
you would have read that there were 69 DIFFERENT print wheels,
and most of them omitted those characters from the shift-KLM positions.
I did see the reference to 69 different print elements.
Good.
Post by Quadibloc
However, the particular
keyboard in the photo is not of a machine that omitted those characters on its
print element.
You really don't know what you are talking about.
You obviously don't have the manual.

Of those 69 different type wheels, only a handful of them
had those particular characters [\] on the KLM keys.

The reason for the blank keytops on the KLM keys in the
photo of an actual ASR-33 was because alternative characters
could be provided on most of the 69 type wheels.

And in any case, a type wheel was easily changed for another.
Quadibloc
2020-05-05 07:11:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@gmail.com
And in any case, a type wheel was easily changed for another.
Fairly easily, perhaps, but in practice it was very seldom done. An ASR 33 is not
a Selectric typewriter.

John Savard
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2020-05-05 08:04:33 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 5 May 2020 00:11:33 -0700 (PDT)
Post by Quadibloc
Post by r***@gmail.com
And in any case, a type wheel was easily changed for another.
Fairly easily, perhaps, but in practice it was very seldom done. An ASR
33 is not a Selectric typewriter.
One thought springs to mind, and I could well be wrong if so
please correct me, but isn't it the case that no matter what type wheel is
installed, or what is printed on the key caps the key combinations referred
to up-thread will always put the right ASCII characters on the tape (ASR-33)
and/or serial line (KSR-33 or ASR-33).
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
Quadibloc
2020-05-05 23:12:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ahem A Rivet's Shot
One thought springs to mind, and I could well be wrong if so
please correct me, but isn't it the case that no matter what type wheel is
installed, or what is printed on the key caps the key combinations referred
to up-thread will always put the right ASCII characters on the tape (ASR-33)
and/or serial line (KSR-33 or ASR-33).
That's true enough. You would have to change the code bars in the keyboard
asembly to change what sequence of bits was sent out for a particular key
combination.

But I don't think that was the issue under discussion.

John Savard
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2020-05-06 05:39:20 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 5 May 2020 16:12:52 -0700 (PDT)
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Ahem A Rivet's Shot
One thought springs to mind, and I could well be wrong if so
please correct me, but isn't it the case that no matter what type wheel
is installed, or what is printed on the key caps the key combinations
referred to up-thread will always put the right ASCII characters on the
tape (ASR-33) and/or serial line (KSR-33 or ASR-33).
That's true enough. You would have to change the code bars in the
keyboard asembly to change what sequence of bits was sent out for a
particular key combination.
But I don't think that was the issue under discussion.
It seemed to have started about whether an ASR-33 was usable as a
terminal to a modern unix system. Given the above it will work but you might
see blanks on the paper.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
r***@gmail.com
2020-05-05 09:26:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by r***@gmail.com
And in any case, a type wheel was easily changed for another.
Fairly easily, perhaps, but in practice it was very seldom done. An ASR 33 is not
a Selectric typewriter.
Certainly, it's not a Selectric, but type wheels can be changed
for special characters, and because a type wheel can be damaged.
Substitutions can be done rapidly for a temporary change.

Recall that the wheel is hit by a rubber hammer. The rubber
part is fitted over a steel holder. Though the
hammer is made of tough rubber, it can wear completely through.
Once the rubber hammer is worn through, the metal part comes
into direct contact with the aluminium wheel, and characters on the
type wheel rapidly become mutilated.
f***@hotmail.com
2020-05-16 14:29:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
Post by r***@gmail.com
And in any case, a type wheel was easily changed for another.
Fairly easily, perhaps, but in practice it was very seldom done. An ASR 33 is not
a Selectric typewriter.
Certainly, it's not a Selectric, but type wheels can be changed
for special characters, and because a type wheel can be damaged.
Substitutions can be done rapidly for a temporary change.
Recall that the wheel is hit by a rubber hammer. The rubber
part is fitted over a steel holder. Though the
hammer is made of tough rubber, it can wear completely through.
Once the rubber hammer is worn through, the metal part comes
into direct contact with the aluminium wheel, and characters on the
type wheel rapidly become mutilated.
You guys are funny. The daisy wheel was invented in 1970. The Model 33 used a rotating cylinder, and was introduced in 1963. I do not know how easy it
is to replace the cylinder, because I have never needed to do so.

FredW
Peter Flass
2020-05-16 14:39:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@hotmail.com
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
Post by r***@gmail.com
And in any case, a type wheel was easily changed for another.
Fairly easily, perhaps, but in practice it was very seldom done. An ASR 33 is not
a Selectric typewriter.
Certainly, it's not a Selectric, but type wheels can be changed
for special characters, and because a type wheel can be damaged.
Substitutions can be done rapidly for a temporary change.
Recall that the wheel is hit by a rubber hammer. The rubber
part is fitted over a steel holder. Though the
hammer is made of tough rubber, it can wear completely through.
Once the rubber hammer is worn through, the metal part comes
into direct contact with the aluminium wheel, and characters on the
type wheel rapidly become mutilated.
You guys are funny. The daisy wheel was invented in 1970. The Model 33
used a rotating cylinder, and was introduced in 1963. I do not know how easy it
is to replace the cylinder, because I have never needed to do so.
I don’t recall that either. The cylinder was high-grade steel, daisy wheels
were made of some cheap, thin substance, maybe aluminum (as mentioned) or
plastic. This is the crossover point between sturdy and well- made, like
Teletypes and 2741s, and cheap and disposable.
--
Pete
Charlie Gibbs
2020-05-16 15:41:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Flass
Post by f***@hotmail.com
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
Post by r***@gmail.com
And in any case, a type wheel was easily changed for another.
Fairly easily, perhaps, but in practice it was very seldom done.
An ASR 33 is not a Selectric typewriter.
<nit>
Nor, for that matter, is a KSR33 or a 33RO.
</nit>
Post by Peter Flass
Post by f***@hotmail.com
Post by r***@gmail.com
Certainly, it's not a Selectric, but type wheels can be changed
for special characters, and because a type wheel can be damaged.
Substitutions can be done rapidly for a temporary change.
Recall that the wheel is hit by a rubber hammer. The rubber
part is fitted over a steel holder. Though the
hammer is made of tough rubber, it can wear completely through.
Once the rubber hammer is worn through, the metal part comes
into direct contact with the aluminium wheel, and characters on the
type wheel rapidly become mutilated.
You guys are funny. The daisy wheel was invented in 1970. The Model 33
used a rotating cylinder, and was introduced in 1963. I do not know how
easy it is to replace the cylinder, because I have never needed to do so.
On the other hand, the Model 35's typebox is very easy to replace. :-)
Post by Peter Flass
I don’t recall that either. The cylinder was high-grade steel, daisy wheels
were made of some cheap, thin substance, maybe aluminum (as mentioned) or
plastic. This is the crossover point between sturdy and well- made, like
Teletypes and 2741s, and cheap and disposable.
Most daisy wheels I saw were plastic, although the period tended to
be metal (plated?) to withstand the pounding it would take.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <***@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
r***@gmail.com
2020-05-16 17:05:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@hotmail.com
Post by f***@hotmail.com
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
Post by r***@gmail.com
And in any case, a type wheel was easily changed for another.
Fairly easily, perhaps, but in practice it was very seldom done. An ASR 33 is not
a Selectric typewriter.
Certainly, it's not a Selectric, but type wheels can be changed
for special characters, and because a type wheel can be damaged.
Substitutions can be done rapidly for a temporary change.
Recall that the wheel is hit by a rubber hammer. The rubber
part is fitted over a steel holder. Though the
hammer is made of tough rubber, it can wear completely through.
Once the rubber hammer is worn through, the metal part comes
into direct contact with the aluminium wheel, and characters on the
type wheel rapidly become mutilated.
You guys are funny. The daisy wheel was invented in 1970.
A similar principle was used on very early teleprinters, c. 1920s.
Post by f***@hotmail.com
The Model 33
Post by f***@hotmail.com
used a rotating cylinder, and was introduced in 1963. I do not know how easy it
is to replace the cylinder, because I have never needed to do so.
A small spanner and a tool made from piece of fencing wire
to hold the wheel steady while you changed it.
Post by f***@hotmail.com
I don’t recall that either. The cylinder was high-grade steel,
Light-weight aluminium.
Post by f***@hotmail.com
daisy wheels
were made of some cheap, thin substance, maybe aluminum (as mentioned) or
plastic.
I think that the Diablo wheel was plastic.
Post by f***@hotmail.com
This is the crossover point between sturdy and well- made, like
Teletypes and 2741s, and cheap and disposable.
Quadibloc
2020-05-17 16:48:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Flass
I don’t recall that either. The cylinder was high-grade steel, daisy wheels
were made of some cheap, thin substance, maybe aluminum (as mentioned) or
plastic. This is the crossover point between sturdy and well- made, like
Teletypes and 2741s, and cheap and disposable.
The IBM Selectric typewriter was introduced in 1961.

Selectric elements were made out of plastic, with a metal coating; some
daisywheel printers could also use daisywheels with a metal layer on the
printing side for higher quality printing.

John Savard
r***@gmail.com
2020-05-18 03:04:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Flass
I don’t recall that either. The cylinder was high-grade steel, daisy wheels
were made of some cheap, thin substance, maybe aluminum (as mentioned) or
plastic. This is the crossover point between sturdy and well- made, like
Teletypes and 2741s, and cheap and disposable.
The IBM Selectric typewriter was introduced in 1961.
Selectric elements were made out of plastic, with a metal coating; some
daisywheel printers could also use daisywheels with a metal layer on the
printing side for higher quality printing.
It was mainly for longevity of the type faces that a metal
coating was used.
r***@gmail.com
2020-05-18 03:07:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Peter Flass
I don’t recall that either. The cylinder was high-grade steel, daisy wheels
were made of some cheap, thin substance, maybe aluminum (as mentioned) or
plastic. This is the crossover point between sturdy and well- made, like
Teletypes and 2741s, and cheap and disposable.
The IBM Selectric typewriter was introduced in 1961.
Selectric elements were made out of plastic, with a metal coating;
The weakness of the plastic thimbles was the toothed part;
the teeth regularly broke off.
IBM usually replaced those free of charge.

Peter Flass
2020-05-01 13:39:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Also, the character | which is not in the
Post by Quadibloc
upper-case only subset of ASCII is very useful in that operating system.
It was, however, a character on the ASR-33 keyboard.
No it wasn't.
I mean, you could get { by pressing ALT MODE, but there was absolutely no way to
generate ` | } and ~ on an ASR 33 ... unless you punched one on a piece of paper tape.
You did have the ASCII characters [ \ ] ^ and _.
There are no [ and ] characters on the keyboard of the ASR 33 (see Wiki).
Can't see the ^ and _ either.
To get those, you'd need the ASR 37 or 38.
Somhow could they develop C on a 33?
--
Pete
Bob Eager
2020-05-01 14:29:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Flass
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Also, the character | which is not in the
Post by Quadibloc
upper-case only subset of ASCII is very useful in that operating system.
It was, however, a character on the ASR-33 keyboard.
No it wasn't.
I mean, you could get { by pressing ALT MODE, but there was absolutely
no way to generate ` | } and ~ on an ASR 33 ... unless you punched one
on a piece of paper tape.
You did have the ASCII characters [ \ ] ^ and _.
There are no [ and ] characters on the keyboard of the ASR 33 (see Wiki).
Can't see the ^ and _ either.
To get those, you'd need the ASR 37 or 38.
Somhow could they develop C on a 33?
Exactly. See my earlier post. Although I'm sure Bell bought them
something better.
--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
Radey Shouman
2020-05-01 17:27:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Flass
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Also, the character | which is not in the
Post by Quadibloc
upper-case only subset of ASCII is very useful in that operating system.
It was, however, a character on the ASR-33 keyboard.
No it wasn't.
I mean, you could get { by pressing ALT MODE, but there was
absolutely no way to
generate ` | } and ~ on an ASR 33 ... unless you punched one on a piece of paper tape.
You did have the ASCII characters [ \ ] ^ and _.
There are no [ and ] characters on the keyboard of the ASR 33 (see Wiki).
Can't see the ^ and _ either.
To get those, you'd need the ASR 37 or 38.
Somhow could they develop C on a 33?
The magic of C trigraphs:

??( == [
??) == ]
Peter Flass
2020-05-01 18:19:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Radey Shouman
Post by Peter Flass
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Also, the character | which is not in the
Post by Quadibloc
upper-case only subset of ASCII is very useful in that operating system.
It was, however, a character on the ASR-33 keyboard.
No it wasn't.
I mean, you could get { by pressing ALT MODE, but there was
absolutely no way to
generate ` | } and ~ on an ASR 33 ... unless you punched one on a
piece of paper tape.
You did have the ASCII characters [ \ ] ^ and _.
There are no [ and ] characters on the keyboard of the ASR 33 (see Wiki).
Can't see the ^ and _ either.
To get those, you'd need the ASR 37 or 38.
Somhow could they develop C on a 33?
??( == [
??) == ]
Aha! A light dawns. PL/I(F) also initially had facilities for programming
in a 48-character set, minus the characters ><|(not), etc. Likewise Algol
had problems with the “back arrow”, except on Burroughs systems, which
supported it.
--
Pete
r***@gmail.com
2020-05-02 02:52:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Flass
Post by Radey Shouman
Post by Peter Flass
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Also, the character | which is not in the
Post by Quadibloc
upper-case only subset of ASCII is very useful in that operating system.
It was, however, a character on the ASR-33 keyboard.
No it wasn't.
I mean, you could get { by pressing ALT MODE, but there was absolutely no way to
generate ` | } and ~ on an ASR 33 ... unless you punched one on a
piece of paper tape.
You did have the ASCII characters [ \ ] ^ and _.
There are no [ and ] characters on the keyboard of the ASR 33 (see Wiki).
Can't see the ^ and _ either.
To get those, you'd need the ASR 37 or 38.
Somhow could they develop C on a 33?
??( == [
??) == ]
Aha! A light dawns. PL/I(F) also initially had facilities for programming
in a 48-character set,
That character set used substitutions for some characters such as
semicolon, and keywords for others such as GT, LT, CAT, etc.

It enabled source produced by a Baudot machine (5-channel tape)
to be compiled. (as well as, of course, from an older BCD card key-punch.
Post by Peter Flass
minus the characters ><|(not), etc. Likewise Algol
had problems with the “back arrow”, except on Burroughs systems, which
supported it.
When Algol source was prepared with punch card equipment, substitutions
were used for various characters including the single character "10"
and logical operators.

When prepared on such paper tape equipment as a Friden flexowriter,
substitutions were not always necessary.
Peter Flass
2020-05-02 16:24:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Peter Flass
Post by Radey Shouman
Post by Peter Flass
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Also, the character | which is not in the
Post by Quadibloc
upper-case only subset of ASCII is very useful in that operating system.
It was, however, a character on the ASR-33 keyboard.
No it wasn't.
I mean, you could get { by pressing ALT MODE, but there was absolutely no way to
generate ` | } and ~ on an ASR 33 ... unless you punched one on a
piece of paper tape.
You did have the ASCII characters [ \ ] ^ and _.
There are no [ and ] characters on the keyboard of the ASR 33 (see Wiki).
Can't see the ^ and _ either.
To get those, you'd need the ASR 37 or 38.
Somhow could they develop C on a 33?
??( == [
??) == ]
Aha! A light dawns. PL/I(F) also initially had facilities for programming
in a 48-character set,
That character set used substitutions for some characters such as
semicolon, and keywords for others such as GT, LT, CAT, etc.
It enabled source produced by a Baudot machine (5-channel tape)
to be compiled. (as well as, of course, from an older BCD card key-punch.
Post by Peter Flass
minus the characters ><|(not), etc. Likewise Algol
had problems with the “back arrow”, except on Burroughs systems, which
supported it.
When Algol source was prepared with punch card equipment, substitutions
were used for various characters including the single character "10"
and logical operators.
When prepared on such paper tape equipment as a Friden flexowriter,
substitutions were not always necessary.
“10” was a single character? What genius thought of that?
--
Pete
r***@gmail.com
2020-05-02 17:23:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Flass
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Peter Flass
Aha! A light dawns. PL/I(F) also initially had facilities for programming
in a 48-character set,
That character set used substitutions for some characters such as
semicolon, and keywords for others such as GT, LT, CAT, etc.
It enabled source produced by a Baudot machine (5-channel tape)
to be compiled. (as well as, of course, from an older BCD card key-punch.
Post by Peter Flass
minus the characters ><|(not), etc. Likewise Algol
had problems with the “back arrow”, except on Burroughs systems, which
supported it.
When Algol source was prepared with punch card equipment, substitutions
were used for various characters including the single character "10"
and logical operators.
When prepared on such paper tape equipment as a Friden flexowriter,
substitutions were not always necessary.
“10” was a single character? What genius thought of that?
It was intended to make a float number look more like scientific
notation. Thus, 1.23456'10'5
where the '10' represents a single character, small,
and printed below the line, so that it looks like you
have written "10 to the power of".
We're used to writing the letter 'E' for that.

The '10' is part of the Algol language and was designed by the Algol
Committee.
Bob Eager
2020-05-01 18:31:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Radey Shouman
Post by Peter Flass
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Also, the character | which is not in the
Post by Quadibloc
upper-case only subset of ASCII is very useful in that operating system.
It was, however, a character on the ASR-33 keyboard.
No it wasn't.
I mean, you could get { by pressing ALT MODE, but there was
absolutely no way to generate ` | } and ~ on an ASR 33 ... unless you
punched one on a piece of paper tape.
You did have the ASCII characters [ \ ] ^ and _.
There are no [ and ] characters on the keyboard of the ASR 33 (see Wiki).
Can't see the ^ and _ either.
To get those, you'd need the ASR 37 or 38.
Somhow could they develop C on a 33?
??( == [
??) == ]
Those hadn't been invented then. They used the \ and [ escape.
--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
J. Clarke
2020-05-01 22:55:34 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 01 May 2020 13:27:47 -0400, Radey Shouman
Post by Radey Shouman
Post by Peter Flass
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Quadibloc
Also, the character | which is not in the
Post by Quadibloc
upper-case only subset of ASCII is very useful in that operating system.
It was, however, a character on the ASR-33 keyboard.
No it wasn't.
I mean, you could get { by pressing ALT MODE, but there was
absolutely no way to
generate ` | } and ~ on an ASR 33 ... unless you punched one on a
piece of paper tape.
You did have the ASCII characters [ \ ] ^ and _.
There are no [ and ] characters on the keyboard of the ASR 33 (see Wiki).
Can't see the ^ and _ either.
To get those, you'd need the ASR 37 or 38.
Somhow could they develop C on a 33?
??( == [
??) == ]
For certain values of "magic". I have an abiding hatred for those
things.
Quadibloc
2020-04-30 19:40:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
It was, however, a character on the ASR-33 keyboard.
Up-arrow is ^ not |.

John Savard
Bob Eager
2020-04-30 21:05:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
It was, however, a character on the ASR-33 keyboard.
Up-arrow is ^ not |.
It was used as | in the same way that upper case letters were generated;
by prefixing with a \.
--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
John Varela
2020-04-30 18:49:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Quadibloc
Post by Scott Lurndal
I'm not sure it's such a big deal that linux can also do this.
Well...
It's certainly true that Linux has a command-line interface.
Even making that work on an ASR 33 terminal might be problematic, as Unix tends
to have a preference for lower-case. Also, the character | which is not in the
upper-case only subset of ASCII is very useful in that operating system.
So using a 5-level terminal, with an even more restricted character set,
probably would require, at least, including some sort of character translation
layer.
It is true that hooking up 5-level Teletypes to computers was rather common in
the early days of the microcomputer era. Still, I'm not surprised that there is
media attention to their use, if only because they're now almost a forgotten
technology.
We had KSR- and ASR-28s talking to the AN/FSQ-7 at Lincoln Labs in
1961. A 1962 photo of SAGE consoles that were used for experiments
in applying air defense technology to air traffic control is at
<https://flickr.com/photos/184595836/498378291/in/>
--
John Varela
Peter Flass
2020-04-30 17:05:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Scott Lurndal
Post by Peter Flass
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a30647778/linux-teletype-programming-hardware-video/
1) Unix was developed on an ASR-33 teletype
2) Converting from RS232C to 20ma (or 60ma) current loop requires
a small handful of discrete components and was widely used to
interface unix systems to said teletypes almost fifty years
ago
3) Most uarts still support 5 bit serial transmission at very slow
baud rates (the 'u' in uart does stand for universal :-)
4) Unix worked with all-uppercase terminals just fine, including
the ability to enter lower-case characters via a two character
sequence.
I'm not sure it's such a big deal that linux can also do this.
Right, I think they made a bit too much of it, but I still thought it was
interesting. Apparently his next project is something to so with Morse
Code.
--
Pete
r***@gmail.com
2020-04-30 14:13:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Flass
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a30647778/linux-teletype-programming-hardware-video/
That was done in the 1970s by "Electronics Australia" magazine
using a microprocessor.

No hardware alterations were required.
r***@gmail.com
2020-04-30 14:22:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Peter Flass
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a30647778/linux-teletype-programming-hardware-video/
That was done in the 1970s by "Electronics Australia" magazine
using a microprocessor.
No hardware alterations were required.
It was in October 1976 that Jim Rowe designed the interface
ASCII-BAUDOT translator.
John Levine
2020-04-30 18:32:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@gmail.com
It was in October 1976 that Jim Rowe designed the interface
ASCII-BAUDOT translator.
There have been two way ASCII<->Baudot translators as long as there
has been ASCII, used to forward telex messages between the older
Baudot Telex and TWX networks and the newer ASCII TWX network. I
believe that started in 1959.

Back in the 1980s when I had an MCI Mail account which had a gateway
between their ASCII mail system and the Baudot telex network. I used
it to send joke telexes to hotels in Europe where my father was
staying, most starting with DISREGARD PREVIOUS MESSAGE.

It's a cute hack but it's not technically very interesting.
--
Regards,
John Levine, ***@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly
r***@gmail.com
2020-05-01 01:41:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Levine
Post by r***@gmail.com
It was in October 1976 that Jim Rowe designed the interface
ASCII-BAUDOT translator.
There have been two way ASCII<->Baudot translators as long as there
has been ASCII, used to forward telex messages between the older
Baudot Telex and TWX networks and the newer ASCII TWX network. I
believe that started in 1959.
But not using a microprocessor, and with the express purpose of using
a Baudot teleprinter as an ASCII computer printer.
Post by John Levine
Back in the 1980s when I had an MCI Mail account which had a gateway
between their ASCII mail system and the Baudot telex network.
David Lesher
2020-05-06 01:34:46 UTC
Permalink
How did an ASR-33 get to be "1930's"?
Try the Model 15.
--
A host is a host from coast to ***@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close..........................
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
Quadibloc
2020-05-06 03:27:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Lesher
How did an ASR-33 get to be "1930's"?
Try the Model 15.
It is the use of a 5-level Teletype as a Linux terminal that started this thread.
But then there was a discussion of how even an upper-case only ASCII Teletype
would have some limitations when used with Unix.

John Savard
Charlie Gibbs
2020-05-06 03:42:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by David Lesher
How did an ASR-33 get to be "1930's"?
Try the Model 15.
That was my first impression. But if you look closely
at the pictures you'll see that it's not a Teletype[tm]
machine but some sort of German equivalent.

A PPOE had two machines: an ASR33 for TWX and a Siemens
machine for Telex which was basically Baudot but with a
couple of different characters, like the "iron cross".
Somewhere I still have a 5-level paper tape I punched
on it - it prints an image of the Madonna and child.
--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | Microsoft is a dictatorship.
\ / <***@kltpzyxm.invalid> | Apple is a cult.
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | Linux is anarchy.
/ \ if you read it the right way. | Pick your poison.
Quadibloc
2020-05-06 06:36:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Charlie Gibbs
Post by David Lesher
How did an ASR-33 get to be "1930's"?
Try the Model 15.
That was my first impression. But if you look closely
at the pictures you'll see that it's not a Teletype[tm]
machine but some sort of German equivalent.
In the video, the Teletype trademark is visible clearly on the machine, and it
has the form of a Model 15. It also has a label on it referring to it as
"Printer TG-7-B", which suggests that it is a military model. And indeed it is,
it's described in TM 11-352, for example.

John Savard
Andy Burns
2020-05-06 06:55:37 UTC
Permalink
a Siemens machine for Telex which was basically Baudot but with a
couple of different characters, like the "iron cross".
That's the "WRU?" character.
r***@gmail.com
2020-05-06 08:48:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Charlie Gibbs
Post by David Lesher
How did an ASR-33 get to be "1930's"?
Try the Model 15.
That was my first impression. But if you look closely
at the pictures you'll see that it's not a Teletype[tm]
machine but some sort of German equivalent.
A PPOE had two machines: an ASR33 for TWX and a Siemens
machine for Telex which was basically Baudot but with a
couple of different characters, like the "iron cross".
That possibly was a Siemens M100 machine.
Very reliable.
Post by Charlie Gibbs
Somewhere I still have a 5-level paper tape I punched
on it - it prints an image of the Madonna and child.
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
2020-05-01 07:42:21 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 30 Apr 2020 07:13:07 -0700 (PDT)
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by Peter Flass
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a30647778/linux-teletype-programming-hardware-video/
That was done in the 1970s by "Electronics Australia" magazine
using a microprocessor.
Pretty much anything with a keyboard and a print head got hooked up
to a microprocessor in the 1970s - people hooked up whatever they could lay
their hands on, getting it working was what the hobby was all about.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
f***@hotmail.com
2020-05-16 16:49:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Flass
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a30647778/linux-teletype-programming-hardware-video/
--
Pete
Sorry, completely off-topic

Since I repaired daisy wheel mechanisms "back in the day" -- the operation is:

A metal hammer that moves freely inside an electro-magnet. When the wheel is
about to expose the desired glyph, the magnet is fired, causing the hammer
to drive to the wheel. The hammer hits the wheel, and bounces off. It returns
back. IF IT STICKS, THE WHEEL GETS MANGLED. The spoke then impacts the ribbon, and the paper. The spoke then bounces back, and the wheel is moved to the next
desired glyph. You don't want to operate this mechanism without the wheel.
You don't want the hammer to stick. You need the glyph to move -- many times.
It would be useful to "metallize" the wheel -- probably more important at
the center! of the spokes. Two elastic collisions per impact.

Yes, the character would degrade. But the wheel typically lost spokes sooner
than the type became muddy.

All of this because the print speed of 10cps was too slow. Daisy wheels achieved 30+ cps.

FredW
Peter Flass
2020-05-16 18:45:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@hotmail.com
Post by Peter Flass
https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/a30647778/linux-teletype-programming-hardware-video/
--
Pete
Sorry, completely off-topic
A metal hammer that moves freely inside an electro-magnet. When the wheel is
about to expose the desired glyph, the magnet is fired, causing the hammer
to drive to the wheel. The hammer hits the wheel, and bounces off. It returns
back. IF IT STICKS, THE WHEEL GETS MANGLED. The spoke then impacts the
ribbon, and the paper. The spoke then bounces back, and the wheel is moved to the next
desired glyph. You don't want to operate this mechanism without the wheel.
You don't want the hammer to stick. You need the glyph to move -- many times.
It would be useful to "metallize" the wheel -- probably more important at
the center! of the spokes. Two elastic collisions per impact.
Yes, the character would degrade. But the wheel typically lost spokes sooner
than the type became muddy.
All of this because the print speed of 10cps was too slow. Daisy wheels achieved 30+ cps.
The 2741 was 15, so half.
--
Pete
r***@gmail.com
2020-05-17 03:14:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by f***@hotmail.com
A metal hammer that moves freely inside an electro-magnet. When the wheel is
about to expose the desired glyph, the magnet is fired, causing the hammer
to drive to the wheel. The hammer hits the wheel, and bounces off. It returns
back. IF IT STICKS, THE WHEEL GETS MANGLED. The spoke then impacts the ribbon,
and the paper. The spoke then bounces back, and the wheel is moved to the next
desired glyph. You don't want to operate this mechanism without the wheel.
You don't want the hammer to stick. You need the glyph to move -- many times.
It would be useful to "metallize" the wheel -- probably more important at
the center! of the spokes. Two elastic collisions per impact.
Weren't the characters metallized?
Post by f***@hotmail.com
Yes, the character would degrade. But the wheel typically lost spokes sooner
than the type became muddy.
All of this because the print speed of 10cps was too slow. Daisy wheels achieved 30+ cps.
Nominally, 30 cps, but with a "catch-up" speed more than 30 cps
when the carrier returned
Quadibloc
2020-05-17 16:51:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by r***@gmail.com
Post by f***@hotmail.com
It would be useful to "metallize" the wheel -- probably more important at
the center! of the spokes. Two elastic collisions per impact.
Weren't the characters metallized?
They _could_ be, and in some cases were, but in general they were not. Thus, the
Diablo 630 and a few other professional daisy-wheel printers could use, as an
alternative to all-plastic daisywheels, ones that were metal at least on the
printing side.

John Savard
Loading...