Prev: BlockParty 2008 photos (Was: New Videos featuring...)
Next: Maxx Pedal controller?
From: Pinacolada on 23 Apr 2008 07:18
On Apr 21, 8:25 pm, Rick Youngman <wl...(a)commspeed.net> wrote:
> It's kinda funny now... I got the 128D, JUST to run a BBs off it...
> tried a bunch of them, and nothing seemed to work right, so I litterly
> gave the "hunk a junk" away ( besides I hated the 1571 dirve ).

I'm curious as to why you hate the 1571 drive. It was faster and
could
store more than the 1541.

> It was years latter, I saw some message about the clock conflict on a
> 128D, when running a BBs on it ( keep in mind the "flat" 128 had no
> problems... from what I understand)

You must be talking about the software jiffy clock (TI$) vs. the
Time of Day
(CIA) clock? TI$ was accurate to a point; disk access could throw
it off.
The hardware clock was more accurate. Check your "Mapping the C64"
for
details (that's one reference, anyhow).

~ Pina
From: Rick Youngman on 23 Apr 2008 22:29
On Apr 23, 4:18 am, Pinacolada <sym.rsherw...(a)gmail.com> wrote:

> > It was years latter, I saw some message about the clock conflict on a
> > 128D, when running a BBs on it ( keep in mind the "flat" 128 had no
> > problems... from what I understand)
>
>   You must be talking about the software jiffy clock (TI$) vs. the
> Time of Day
>   (CIA) clock?  TI$ was accurate to a point; disk access could throw
> it off.
>   The hardware clock was more accurate.  Check your "Mapping the C64"
> for
>   details (that's one reference, anyhow).
>
>   ~ Pina

yeh.... it had "something" to do with that.... I really don't remember
the whole thing now, because I got frustrated not only with the clock
thing but the 1571 itself. (another story)

As I remember..(foggy of details)... if the BBs locked uped for some
reason, and had to be rebooted, caller logs, message posts ect. were
either blown to cyber heaven, or coruppted.... and it seems, even
powering down the 128D manualy, after closing the BBs did some wierd
stuff too.

I clearly remember, that adding files to the database, would not
showup to calers, even if added from the Sysop side, because the date/
time was never seen by the BB's ???

Andrew says he ran a 128D, with no problems... I can believe, that
maybe I had a defective 128D... and all these "clock issue's" might
have been because of my machine ???? I dunno

The BBs I tried and ran on the 128D, were just totally unstable and
couldn't remember what time it was........ which makes a BBs unstable

I just gave up ( maybe prematurely) and went back to the good old 64,
and Ran C*base for another 5 years,
with absolutley no crashes AT ALL :-)).. and that say's a lot, in
itself
From: Ryan Sherwood on 24 Apr 2008 12:38
Rick Youngman wrote:
> yeh.... it had "something" to do with that.... I really don't remember
> the whole thing now, because I got frustrated not only with the clock
> thing but the 1571 itself. (another story)

Ok, fair enough.

> As I remember..(foggy of details)... if the BBs locked uped for some
> reason, and had to be rebooted, caller logs, message posts ect. were
> either blown to cyber heaven, or coruppted.... and it seems, even
> powering down the 128D manualy, after closing the BBs did some wierd
> stuff too.

Well, that sounds like a nasty bug in the BBS code, nothing to do with
the hardware clock.

> I clearly remember, that adding files to the database, would not
> showup to calers, even if added from the Sysop side, because the date/
> time was never seen by the BB's ???

Don't know what would be causing it. I'd be interested in seeing the
code on that one. I am planning some fixes to Centipede one of these
days, actually.

> Andrew says he ran a 128D, with no problems... I can believe, that
> maybe I had a defective 128D... and all these "clock issue's" might
> have been because of my machine ???? I dunno

Don't have a 128D myself, just a flat 128. Which doesn't have a
working 40 column video cable at the moment.

> The BBs I tried and ran on the 128D, were just totally unstable and
> couldn't remember what time it was........ which makes a BBs unstable

That sounds awful. I would have contacted the author and demanded my
money back!

~ Pina
From: Rick Youngman on 24 Apr 2008 20:54
On Apr 24, 9:38 am, Ryan Sherwood <sym_rsherw...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
>    Don't have a 128D myself, just a flat 128.  Which doesn't have a
>    working 40 column video cable at the moment.
>
>  > The BBs I tried and ran on the 128D, were just totally unstable and
>  > couldn't remember what time it was........ which makes a BBs unstable
>
>    That sounds awful.  I would have contacted the author and demanded my
>    money back!
>
>    ~ Pina

FYI. all the BBs ran puurrfect on a 128 FLAT, at my buddies house...
it was a 128D problem.

BBs I remember I tried:

Protolink ( a 128 only BBs )
Centipede
Color 64 (in c64mode) (that REALLY didn't work)
AABBS 128 --- it had promise.... but the 1571 built in drive by then
had pissed me off enough to can the 80 col BBs
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: BlockParty 2008 photos (Was: New Videos featuring...)
Next: Maxx Pedal controller?