Jump to content

Rasmus

6502
  • Content Count

    53
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://earlymacintosh.org

Profile Information

  • Location
    New Haven, CT

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Ha ha, yes! The sorry part is I may well have been involved in those threads! Technical details like this tend to flee the memory. I'm about to post a whole series of questions/mysteries/theories about the early Mac Software disks, and I keep getting this sense of deja vu as I pull it together...
  2. Yes. General information on MFS and System 7.5 at "System 7.x: Limitations on Use of 400k Disks" -- https://support.apple.com/kb/TA47951 System 7.5 can't directly format MFS disks, but Disk Copy 4.2 does it in the process of making the disk. It sounds like maybe you've stripped the resource forks from the disk images -- did you handle them in Windows? I don't think changing the file extension to .image (instead of .img) would help, but I would try it if nothing else works.
  3. Nice. Keep the rev A ROMs, obviously. Thanks for pointing to that 2016 thread. I knew about the three different Macintosh Plus 128k ROMs, but not about the revision of the 64k ROMs in the 128K/512K -- which makes perfect sense. I gather the switch from rev A to rev B occurred in August 1984 about the same time as the 512K went into production and they started using the dual-use motherboard. I think I should provide those part numbers on my site, as well as those for the Macintosh Plus ROMs. Is there actual evidence of a rev C for the 64k ROMs, or is that an assumption based on the
  4. That sounds like the ImageWriter I cord (not sure about II), and maybe other Japanese-made peripherals. LaserWriter (Canon)? If you put them in a Mac, they point up instead of down.
  5. I'm sorry, I'm an idiot. Of course the "rear panels" (buckets) were empty and the "identifying marks" (badges) were glued in at some point. So if there was remaining inventory as I claimed, it would have just been of badges, not whole buckets! I think it makes sense that the "Macintosh 128K" badge would have been designed at the same time they came up with the "Macintosh 512K" badge (squeezing them into the same space as the "Macintosh" badge), but serial numbers don't lie, and that early December date for the last shipments of "Macintosh" machines is accurate. That said, it's usef
  6. I believe that week 47 date for the last of the "Macintosh" buckets and the first of the "Macintosh 128K" buckets is accurate. I don't know if the week when they started using the redesigned 820-0086-F motherboards inside 128K Macs is known. If it was like the buckets, they had inventory to get rid of before the new design started going into machines. However, it seems possible the 128K motherboards would have changed right away, because the old 820-0086-C inventory could be used as replacements for swap-out repairs. That would not have been the case for the old buckets. I don't se
  7. Note: FWIW, this appears to have happened in the 47th week of 1984 (November). Apparently, the serial numbers support this conclusion. You don't find the "Macintosh" badge on the back after that week. So the second-generation 128Ks were shipping by December 1984.
  8. Also remember that the power cords were packed into the white plastic software "accessory" boxes along with the disks, manual, and so on. I can't remember of the box itself was shrink-wrapped, but most likely it was. So that was a different assembly line -- the cord and its Mac didn't meet until the customer opened up the box. So the obvious moment for a cord change was when the accessory box changed, which happened three times, in May 1984, September 1984, and June 1985. But yes, the real world isn't always so neat and tidy, and there's incontrovertible evidence that b
  9. Interesting. Just when I thought we'd reached the end of this!
  10. I went up into the attic and found another of the "later" cords. I'm pretty sure I got this one with a 512K, and it is noticeably different on the connector (female) end from the one that I got with the 1986 512Ke. It is possible that I have them mixed up, but I don't think so. The plug (male) ends with the Apple are almost exactly the same. So it looks like it is possible to tell the 1984/1985 cords from the 1986 cords used in the 512Ke and Plus. Both have "Electricord" with the lasso font but it is smaller, on the other side, and not isolated in a box. Here they are side-by-side:
  11. Ah, that at least shows me where I got the idea the cords were made by Electricord: both ends of the "early" cord say "Electri Cord, Westfield, PA" on them in tiny print: Also, one possibly useful detail there. The "early" cord says "Electri Cord" while the later cord that came with my 512Ke (see OP) says "Electricord" in a fancier font and has a sort of lasso motif going on. So I really wonder what the cord in those August 1984 boxes says on it. Is it "Electri Cord" or "Electricord" -- could help date them. One wonders if that design is Electri Cord's own -- and
  12. I'm starting to think the "early" (ribbed) cord shown in that drawing and the manual is one that was designed especially for the Macintosh, while the one I thought was a later (angular) cord is an more generic Apple cord? Used for another Apple product, then revived for the 512Ke/Plus. I'm getting this vision of Jobs looking at a prototype with that cord with the "Electricord" logo on it, and objecting to that, as well as wanting a cord that would match the squared-off style of the Macintosh connectors more perfectly. Or maybe the one that didn't get used was a design that was reje
  13. Okay, so I've got all the early manuals and while I wasn't sanguine, since the power cord is often cleverly hidden in promotional photos (to reduce the sense of clutter), nonetheless the cord is shown in the manual when it needs to be -- when they tell you to plug the machine in and turn it on! So I'm not going crazy, and I was right about the most basic sense of the timeline, i.e., which came first. Here's the relevant page from the first Macintosh manual, neatly showing the M0001 model number, the power cord, and the squared-off connector for the mouse:
  14. Yeah, that and a current seller including what I thought was a later cord in what is being sold as a complete 1984 Week 34 set is what set off my uncertainty about this. Your suggestion about the manuals has borne fruit, but I'll put that in a separate reply.
  15. Okay, so I'm the author of this ancient site: http://www.earlymacintosh.org I've recently been updating the links and such for it. The thing that triggered this was a question I got from a reader about the correct original power cords for the pre-SE machines. I've never addressed this question, and I responded by saying that there are two cords, one earlier and one later, but having looked around a bit on eBay I'm starting to wonder of I've gotten the cords mixed up. This is kind of an issue on eBay, as sellers cobble together materials to form "complete" se
×
×
  • Create New...