Jump to content

Cory5412

Administrators
  • Content Count

    9349
  • Joined

  • Last visited

7 Followers

About Cory5412

  • Rank
    Daring Pioneer of the Future

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    Cory5412
  • Website URL
    http://www.stenoweb.net/

Profile Information

  • Location
    Arizona, USA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Cory5412

    Which printer should I get?

    Calling back to the OP, I think color might have been a diversion, so my apologies for that. There's no really great need for a particularly big printer, and depending on what OS you're running @Syntho you don't even have to go that old. Here are two options that should work in Mac OS 9. The 2300 advertises that it works with the LaserWriter 8 drivers, and explicitly states support for both AppleTalk and TCP/IP based printing. The 1320 might not have AppleTalk but it can accept TCP/IP based print jobs from Mac OS 9, so it might be worth considering if you primarily run 9. Just idly, I took a super brief look at eBay and it appears I was correct about the LaserJets 2300 and 2400. The 2300 is around $120 in buy-it-now auctions and the 2430N is around $200 or so in buy-it-now auctions. Xerox is selling a toner for the 2300 rated at roughly 6000 pages for $50. The LaserJet 1320N is an even smaller printer but appears to be that much less expensive on eBay. I have one in my office shared between a handful of us and it's been reliable. The manual confirms it can accept postscript input. It works with Mac OS 9 but the instructions in the manual are for TCP/IP, so I can't at the moment confirm whether or not it might work with AppleTalk. It appears the 1320 series had duplexing built in as well.
  2. Cory5412

    Which printer should I get?

    Yeah, there's always a trade-off there. You come out ahead even on HP's cheapest lasers, relative to inkjets, in several metrics, but if you can swing a bigger printer, there's more room for toner in it, and with HP in particular, a lot of the cost of each toner cartridge is the imaging drum in it, so it doesn't cost too much more to get a 2000-page toner for a bigger printer than to get a 1000-page one for the basic printer. When you're buying used and/or you have a relatively generous budget, you have some more latitude to make decisions like that. I bought close to the leading edge of "color lasers a single person can lift on their own" as a category, back when I got the 6120. (*Also, it was purchased for me as a school supply by my parents, and my track record up to that point buying used hardware had been very poor, so I suspect they would not have gone for the idea of buying something used.) For me, it's tough to say what the best mix would be today, if I had some reason to buy a new printer. (which is probably the real indicator: my print volume is under 100 pages a year) I need to look at some point because I have a mild fear that the decision might be made for me if there are no longer new toner cartridges being made for the 6120. It'd be tempting to go get a LaserJet 4 or 5 and start getting Staples' house-brand 98X cartridges for it, but I don't really print anywhere near often enough to merit that over a much less expensive printer, even if HP gets a few more bucks out of me every second or third year when I've exhausted a cartridge. EDIT/Add: Xerox appears to have discontinued its own 98x toner, which when theyw ere making it a decade ago claimed over 10,000 pages a cartridge. Staples' TRU-RED brand claims 8800ish pages. On the Phaser 6120, which I of course recommend if you need color and can find the supplies for it, there are standard and high capacities for each C/M/Y/K toner and a separate imaging unit, the bummer is that the standard capacity cartridges are $100 a pop and the high capacity ones are roughly $230 a pop (Staples pricing). Granted, I used the printer for like four years before the first toner ran out and then had to pack it up because it wouldn't print and I didn't have money at the time to get a new one. That inertia has carried me for around ten years and I'm still carrying the thing around with me. Xerox's pricing appears mostly comparable, but they appear to have it in stock and Staples doesn't.
  3. Cory5412

    Which printer should I get?

    My apologies for the confusion, I didn't intend for that to sound like a recommendation of the 2600 for this context. It's "fine" and it's okay as an OS X 10.2+ and Windows printer, but it's missing postscript emulation at the very least. I need to figure out what does which, but there was another color laser underneath the 2600, the 1600, which was completely host-based, but I might just be confusing "host-based and networked" for "host-based and USB-only". I don't have the time to re-research it at the moment and the last time I thought about this specifically was in 2005 or 2006, so, very possibly misremembering. That issue, anyway, was part of why I ended up picking the Xerox Phaser 6120 anyway. It speaks AppleTalk over ethernet and you can use it with the LaserWriter 8 driver, which, I was still daily driving Mac OS 9 for some things in that moment. (Although that only lasted a couple months and then I switched to Windows, but, having the extra options are great and if I ever need a printer regularly again, I'll pull my 6120 out of the box and hook it up and have it on my old Macs.
  4. Cory5412

    Which printer should I get?

    Fair enough. My thinking was about the movement of color lasers toward being small. I didn't go look them up. 550 isn't that bad but it's also more than I'd want to be dealing with. For example, a Color LaserJet 2600 from roughly 2005 or so is cited by CNET as having a 190w power supply. (I couldn't find a number quickly for my Phaser 6120 and it needs a cartridge so it's not out and running otherwise I'd offer to measure it.) Although, the point about vintage color laser power usage is extremely elegantly put when you compared big color lasers that are all big to new modern color lasers and to the monochrome laserjet 4000 series which use a third of the power and are faster and so on. Point taken though. I went to go look at whatever the lowest-end HP Color LaserJet is today and, if I'm not reading it wrong, that's the M225 which HP cites as being able to draw 330 watts, which is "fine" but also seems more than the 2600, which was sort of middle of low end (there was a couple models below the 2600 but they had the same basic mechanism). Though, IDK, maybe I'm using the store wrong and HP "has" a cheaper color laser I'm not looking at. Another LaserJet series to look at though might be the LaserJet 2x00M series. 2100/2200/2300 with the networked or mac suffixes tend to work well/be reliable and work on classic Macs, in my experience. 2400 should too but if I remember, 2400 is new enough not to look old ("not beige") and so I don't know what pricing will be like for one of those.
  5. Cory5412

    MacSD - new SCSI SD card emulation tool

    If I'm interpreting what this device does that explicitly makes it Mac-friendly correctly, that depends on the Apple IIgs working well with the same SCSI devices Macs use. However, for IIgs there are also lots of other extant options including the focus IDE card (what I've got in mine), floppyemu, which will run smartport HDs on the II, and CFFA, which operates on a somewhat similar concept to this, except that it has an inline control panel for image swapping. @ymk - welcome in! With regard to >4GB images, I'm curious what the demand for that is like. Only '040 Macs will officially run volumes over 4GB, and your'e kind of getting closer at that point to the brief window where the SCSI2SD v6 makes more sense, for performance reasons, and then after that, where SATA cards make more sense. I can imagine a couple use cases for it, myself, but I'm also among the relatively few people I'm aware of running 2TB volumes Classic Mac OS at all. (Although, like, With regard to partitioning, what would that look like in terms of setup and configuration? It would seem like the biggest advantage you've really got here is that this device was "designed with the needs of the vintage Mac community in mind", I feel like it would be fair to describe it as explicitly to the exclusion of other platforms and applications where scsi2sd is also used (i.e. it's unlikely one of these will work in a synthesizer or a traffic light or a UNIX machine) and a big part of that is the simplicity afforded by the way this thing is configured. The people among us creating SCSI2SD preloads would be able to change to just zipping up the contents of the FAT32 filesystem as a download and people can avoid, say, DD or managing partitioning entirely. If this is in the docs, you can be like "hey, uh, RTFM" and I will at some point. I don't have the budget for one of these so this is purely speculation on my part.
  6. Cory5412

    Which printer should I get?

    Laser is a much better print technology thank inkjet. Only bother with inkjet if you need a brand new printer for $30 or you frequently need detailed color prints. Even then, I ended up with a color laser and it was going to be much cheaper per page over the life of the printer than any inkjet would be. I don't know if that has changed in the modern time now that we have stuff like big-tank and explicitly refillable inkjet printers. The trade-off is that, especially older lasers are big and take a lot of energy. They take longer to get warmed up if you leave them switched off but they typically print faster than inkjet and so you definitely make up your time if you print often or if you print larger jobs. There are cheap, plentiful laser printers from the last 20 years that'll talk the Apples over Ethernet (Ethertalk) which can be adapted to older Macs with Ethertalk/Localtalk bridges (which I consider to be an important tool for networking anyway) and of course will be able to talk to a 9600 directly over Ethernet. I got a Xerox Phaser 6120EN back in ~2006. I don't remember if there was a dedicated PPD for it, but you can point the Laserwriter 8 driver on shstem 7 or newer at it and say "that's an apple color laserwriter" or "that's an hp color laserjet" and it works great. I also have some friends who bought less expensive monochrome lasers. You can tell a Mac that something like a Brother HL2070N is a laserwriter 16/600 or so and it should work. I don't remember if these printers included dedicated PPDs that worked on OS 9, but you don't strictly speaking need it for simple print jobs on PostScript printers. There's also older HP LaserJets. LaserJets 4M and 5M will probably live longer than you will, a couple companies are still making toner for them and I believe you can more or less still get spares of all the other consumable supplies, like rollers and stuff. When I was looking, a cartridge for the LJ4M or LWP600-LWP630-LW16/600PS was being sold by Xerox and advertised as having around 15,000 pages of print life. With regard to Apple LaserWriters specifically, the only model that I would say to avoid unless you get one that includes a lot of supplies is the LaserWriter Select series. These use a print engine that as far as I know is unique to that printer. The smaller laserwriters, Personal 300/320 and 4/600 and the bigger 600-16 series share engines with HP printers and so they're easier to find parts for. (I don't know this detail about the LW8500, the 12/640, or any of the color lasers, though.) One other note about color lasers is that you might not want to go too old if you can avoid it. Really old color lasers like the Apple color laserwriters and the HP 4500/4550 were GARGANTUAN and took inordinate amounts of electricity and had specialty supplies like oils. I don't know if supplies for those are still in common circulation the way they are for older heavy duty monochrome lasers. Whether you want something relatively modern or modern-usable or want to "collect" something that's vintage is sort of up to you. There's low hanging fruit out there in terms of compatibility. Conversely to the modern laser situation, some of the higher end LaserWriters can accept print jobs over TCP/IP and might be more usable on modern computers as well. I pretty much outright wouldn't consider buying an older inkjet or dot-matrix printer. Even ones that share parts and supplies with other printers and where you might still be able to buy ink, or use refill kits. Text will look awful by modern standards, probably on either of these, and inkjets were really terrible technology that existed only for cheap, infrequent usage by consumers where $700 + for a laser printer wasn't reasonable. Today, you can get new HP LaserJet for $110, so unless inkjet has changed a lot in the last fifteen years (and: it might have, I don't keep up) a laser printer would be a better buy. (Though on hp.com at least the least expensive handful of models are out of stock, suggesting a possible rush on printers suitable for home as part of the global pandemic, I don't know if this has done anything to pricing on userd printers.) (That's me though and I have little enough space at the moment that it wouldn't make sense for me to use any printers not usable by most or all of my computers, and, I also don't really have a daily need to print, if I did, I'd get my old Phaser 6120 out of its box.)
  7. Hello, as is tradition: Brief site outage today due to an electrical problem. Power has been restored and the UPSes are now recharging. Best, Cory W
  8. Cory5412

    MacSD - new SCSI SD card emulation tool

    @aperezbios - Please disengage from this thread, unless discussion shifts and you've got something technical or stock related to answer. Feedback and commentary was offered about something you managed, you addressed it, and now we don't need to continue this line of discussion.
  9. Cory5412

    PB Duo schematics?

    TO the extent that this is something Apple kept and didn't see the need to destroy instead of archive, it would be at Stanford University. In 1997, Jobs, upon returning to Apple, ordered the archives to be removed and the contents were generally sent to Stanford. Apple Computer collections | Stanford Libraries So, I don't know if you'll actually find any schematics here but if they exist this is one of the more probable places.
  10. Cory5412

    MacSD - new SCSI SD card emulation tool

    That would be a fine use case for it. As I understand it, A/UX supports "big" volumes poorly anyway, so the thing that makes me not want to put it in, like, my own 840 (I'd use bigger volumes) aren't that big of a deal for A/UX. It'l be slower than a scsi2sd v6 if you were planning a swole AWGS95 or Quadra 950 build, but it'll be both the CDROM drive and the storage device in that scenario.
  11. Cory5412

    Bondi Clamshell!

    Hey, congratulations! These are great machines! The iBook G3 is among the first totally fresh NewWorld designs after that switchover. (The Blue-And-White G3 being a faster beige platform with the new ROM on it.) It gets some neat stuff like USB booting (volumes under 200GB) of Classic Mac OS and, well, they're nice machines in general. I'm using a 2TB pocket hard disk on a PowerMac G4's onboard USB 1.1 port and it behaves what you'd expect of as "correctly", so this will definitely work. Mac OS 9 has a maximum volume size of 2TB, I have yet to test larger maximum disk sizes, however, on controllers that might support it (USB in particular because the real controller is going to be whatever the USB/SATA Bridge is). 120/128-ish gig limits as often cited for this era are going to be related to IDE on certain older systems. I've seen various reports of ways to skirt this but for an internal boot volume, 120GB is probably enough for a system like this. There's a separate "around 200 gigs" limit for boot volumes for Classic Mac OS, which does also apply to USB/Firewire devices. I second the idea of reformatting or repartitioning the USB device on the iBook, if you intend to use it for backup or as swing space or for transfers. (unless you did that on the iMac, which you also mentioned and I missed on my first read-through, which definitely makes this a bit more of a stumper.) The other thing, of course, is to make sure you're correctly dismounting the drive before disconnecting it, and stuff like that. You probably are, esp. since it works fine on your iMac.
  12. Hello everybody: As always, thank you again very much for your patience. The site appears not to have come back after some planned maintenance the other day, or it went down unexpectedly shortly thereafter, and then a series of work emergencies caused it a bit more delay than normal in coming back. Best, Cory W
  13. Cory5412

    MacSD - new SCSI SD card emulation tool

    A thing that does exist, although I don't know how reliable they are, is SD card slot extenders, so you could put this inside a mac and then route the actual SD card out the back or through the front. An external version that hung off the SCSI port like the scsi2sd does would be great, but youd' need to deal with the sound stuff. (line out like a real external CDROM drive would be fine, I suspect.) From a "The Future" perspective, that's absolutely the most exciting thing there, I agree entirely. Probably lots is possible. I'm not particularly creative on that front, but I know that the idea of a modern replica SCSI ethernet solution is a hotly interesting item to many.
  14. Hello everybody, my apologies for the late notice on this, but the site will be down from roughly 12am to 1am tonight 2020-09-11. That's in roughly 4 hours. We're adding some machines to the resource pool that runs the site.
  15. This flew by my radar a couple weeks ago, and then @Trash80toHP_Mini mentioned it in the eBay finds thread. Nobody else has created a dedicated thread about it yet, so, here we are. I don't have one, I don't know who built it or if they're even here, but I'd love to try one out, I just don't have the money to do it, so if you've got one, I'd love to hear more about what it's like and why you picked it! That starts here: then, more here, and on the next page: The MacSD is a new storage replacement tool for vintage Macs, featuring CD-ROM emulation and CD audio in/out. It stores disk and CDROM images as files on an SD card, itself formatted as FAT32, and the configuration is a plain text file. THe main selling point seems to be the simple configuration. More info at MacSD This was originally my reply: Me receiving a bunch of notifications like "uh oh". w/re a new thread: "eeehhhh" (making it) In terms of what this thing is targeting: Straight-up the answer is that it's targeting people who come to sixty eight kay M L A dot org and say that they are having trouble configuring the SCSI2SD. This thing has all appearances of being intentionally as simple as possible, which is why it uses image files on a FAT32 filesystem, a configuration file you can edit with a text editor, and physical switches to control certain other aspects. The goal of this device is to be your only SCSI device. The trade-offs are this: Costs more than the SCSI2SD v5 and v6 (this price will never come down as far as the scsi2sd v5 has, because it has very little viable market outside of the Mac) Slower than v6 Only 4GB volumes supported, regardless of the Mac you put it in (for ex. if you put a scsi2sd v6 in a PPC Mac it should hypothetically support 2TB volumes, my v6 has a 30GB volume in my 8600, whether that's important to you will of course depend on context -- 040s generally support 4GB+ volumes with 7.6 and newer, 030s are normally limited to 4 unless something else has come up (or some third party software has like a boot + driver + data arrangement) better CDROM + audio support (better for multimedia/game cdrom consumption, make it easier to, say, do a CDROM-based install of the OS without having any other devices) MacSD is easier to configure than SCSI2SD If I had to guess, under the hood, the MacSD is simulating apple-branded hard disks, which would make it unsuitable to industrial and music gear that's looking for other specific things. (the SCSI2SD is thusly configurable, The most recent overall comparisons we've got in performance of some different options were provided by @Fizzbinn here: At the moment, none of these options is as fast as the potential a high end or modern disk can be. e.g. except in seek times Fizzbin's Savvio probably should top the charts, as a disk from probably 2005 or so. My experience with the SCSI2SD v6 has been that it's fast enough and generally feels sprightly in use on the PowerMac 8600, although the 8600 specifically is new enough that there's other options like PCI SCSI/IDE/SATA cards, so my take generally is that the scsi2sd v6 should be reserved for x100 PowerMacs and that most 68k Macs are probably well-enough served by the v5. There's also the rascsi, which I haven't tracked closely. When it first came into being, it cost more than a scsi2sd v5 to build and was slower. It's my understanding that it has sped up a lot, perhaps with the pi4, but the disclaimer still applies that I don't have the latest on it. It's less "appliancized" than any of the other options, but, in that as pi speed boosts it could have the potential for the greatest performance. General note as always for any of the SD-based solutions is that they generally want the best SD card you can get and benefit from buying further upscale.
×