- TechToolsList - listserv.classicarcade.com

Re: 8086 pod for fluke?
by Mark Shostak 17 Jan '00

17 Jan '00

Mainly industrial computers from the '70s. I seem to recall seeing at least one game that used it. I just can't remember which. What did Rotten8 use? (or was that Rotation8) ---------- > From: John Robertson <jrr(a)flippers.com> > To: TechToolsList(a)flippers.com > Subject: Re: 8086 pod for fluke? > Date: Monday, January 17, 2000 2:08 AM > > Opps....ok, back under the rock for me...it was the 8088 in the IBM PC/XT. > Dang...did ANYTHING use the 8086? > > John :-#(# > > At 01:48 AM 1/17/2000 -0600, you wrote: > >From: John Robertson <jrr(a)flippers.com> > > > Hate to sound rude, but the early IBM's were 8086...check this link: > > > > > > http://www.mkdata.dk/click/module3a2.htm#8086komp > > > >It's not rude; however, it's incorrect. > >In a past life, I repaired PCs and XTs > >to the component level; they are 8088. > > > >Plus, the only reference I saw at that URL was: > > > > >These instructions were originally written for the Intel 8086 > > processor, >which founded > >the concept "the IBM compatible PC." The 8086 from 1978 >received its > >instructions in a > >certain format. > > > >The PC's INSTRUCTIONS are 8086 compatible, > >but the pins on the CPU are not. > > > >Check out: http://www.tardis.ed.ac.uk/~alexios/MACHINE-ROOM/IBM_PC.html > >under "CPU". > > > >-Mark > > > > > > > > John :-#)# > > > > > > At 01:18 AM 1/17/2000 -0600, you wrote: > > > >Actually, the original PC, XT and clones were all 8088 as well. > > > > > > > >Sounds like a "trader" to me. > > > > > > > >---------- > > > > > From: John Robertson <jrr(a)flippers.com> > > > > > To: TechToolsList(a)flippers.com > > > > > Subject: Re: 8086 pod for fluke? > > > > > Date: Monday, January 17, 2000 1:09 AM > > > > > > > > > > Then the only thing the 8086 pod is good for is fixing old IBM PC's, or > > > > > XT's or clones of them...not too useful I suspect... > > > > > > > > > > John :-#(# > > > > > > > > > > At 12:50 AM 1/17/2000 -0600, you wrote: > > > > > > > Didn't Gottlieb use the 8086 for games like Q-Bert, Reactor and > > > > others? Or > > > > > > > was it the 8088...? > > > > > > > > > > > >8088 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > John :-#)# > > > > > > > > > > > > > > At 12:09 AM 1/17/2000 -0600, you wrote: > > > > > > > >Hello All, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >I am about to obtain an 8086 pod for a fluke 9010. Did any > > arcade > > > > games > > > > > > > >use the 8086 or am I going to have to trade this puppy away?? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Thanks! > > > > > > > >Noel > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > John's Jukes Ltd. 2343 Main St., Vancouver, BC, Canada V5T 3C9 > > > > > > > Call (604)872-5757 or Fax 872-2010 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games) > > > > > > > http://www.flippers.com > > > > > > > "Old pinballers never die, they just flip out." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > John's Jukes Ltd. 2343 Main St., Vancouver, BC, Canada V5T 3C9 > > > > > Call (604)872-5757 or Fax 872-2010 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games) > > > > > http://www.flippers.com > > > > > "Old pinballers never die, they just flip out." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > John's Jukes Ltd. 2343 Main St., Vancouver, BC, Canada V5T 3C9 > > > Call (604)872-5757 or Fax 872-2010 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games) > > > http://www.flippers.com > > > "Old pinballers never die, they just flip out." > > > > > > John's Jukes Ltd. 2343 Main St., Vancouver, BC, Canada V5T 3C9 > Call (604)872-5757 or Fax 872-2010 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games) > http://www.flippers.com > "Old pinballers never die, they just flip out." >

1 0

Re: 8086 pod for fluke?
by Mark Shostak 17 Jan '00

17 Jan '00

Actually, the original PC, XT and clones were all 8088 as well. Sounds like a "trader" to me. ---------- > From: John Robertson <jrr(a)flippers.com> > To: TechToolsList(a)flippers.com > Subject: Re: 8086 pod for fluke? > Date: Monday, January 17, 2000 1:09 AM > > Then the only thing the 8086 pod is good for is fixing old IBM PC's, or > XT's or clones of them...not too useful I suspect... > > John :-#(# > > At 12:50 AM 1/17/2000 -0600, you wrote: > > > Didn't Gottlieb use the 8086 for games like Q-Bert, Reactor and others? Or > > > was it the 8088...? > > > >8088 > > > > > > > > > > John :-#)# > > > > > > At 12:09 AM 1/17/2000 -0600, you wrote: > > > >Hello All, > > > > > > > >I am about to obtain an 8086 pod for a fluke 9010. Did any arcade games > > > >use the 8086 or am I going to have to trade this puppy away?? > > > > > > > >Thanks! > > > >Noel > > > > > > > > > John's Jukes Ltd. 2343 Main St., Vancouver, BC, Canada V5T 3C9 > > > Call (604)872-5757 or Fax 872-2010 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games) > > > http://www.flippers.com > > > "Old pinballers never die, they just flip out." > > > > > > John's Jukes Ltd. 2343 Main St., Vancouver, BC, Canada V5T 3C9 > Call (604)872-5757 or Fax 872-2010 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games) > http://www.flippers.com > "Old pinballers never die, they just flip out." >

3 2

Re: 8086 pod for fluke?
by Mark Shostak 17 Jan '00

17 Jan '00

> Didn't Gottlieb use the 8086 for games like Q-Bert, Reactor and others? Or > was it the 8088...? 8088 > > John :-#)# > > At 12:09 AM 1/17/2000 -0600, you wrote: > >Hello All, > > > >I am about to obtain an 8086 pod for a fluke 9010. Did any arcade games > >use the 8086 or am I going to have to trade this puppy away?? > > > >Thanks! > >Noel > > > John's Jukes Ltd. 2343 Main St., Vancouver, BC, Canada V5T 3C9 > Call (604)872-5757 or Fax 872-2010 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games) > http://www.flippers.com > "Old pinballers never die, they just flip out." >

2 1

RE: Signature Analyzers
by James Marous 15 Jan '00

15 Jan '00

On the subject of KK units.... I have a KK ROM tester, no documentation, it just has 2 rows of machine pin sockets on the top and inputs for the sig analysis connections. I always assumed is just calculates sigs on the ROMs, but I never really knew, or used it for that matter. Anyone know about this one? I also picked up a Bugtrap DRAM tester on Fleabay for $10, works great. Does everything down to 4116s... It is configurable for the timing and everything. Works great for me, as my current eprom burner/chip tester doesn't handle triple power supply parts. If you get a chance to grab one, I would definitely go for it. I think it's the Bugtrap model 8000. James -----Original Message----- From: Kev [mailto:KKlopp@EROLS.COM] Sent: Friday, January 14, 2000 3:20 PM To: TechToolsList(a)flippers.com Subject: Re: Signature Analyzers > For some dumb reason I have several of them, I have the HP 5004 and 5006, a > bug trap sig analyzer and a Kurz Kasch model. All are basically about the > same, at least as much as I use them. Honestly, I find I seldom use > signature analysis. About the only time it really comes in handy is working > on vector mathboxes. But it's nice to have it for well documented projects, > like the cinematronics boards. > > James Gosh I thought I was the only "dummy" with 3 sig analyzers in the house. I've got the Bugtrap (My personal favorite) Kurz Kash and the Cat Box. If anyone is interested in the KK box I'll sell it or trade it. I've also go the KK eprom copier & several modules if anyone has any need for that (read vintage equipment). My use of a SA? Well I was fighting enough with Bally pinball boards MPU 17 & 35 that I went thru & did some SA. I started to do Pac-Man but the buffering circuits complicates SA implimentation. I have used the SA on Pac-Man to catch funky 74ls161's in the timing section. This is a rare case where a using an O-scope the way I do (probe, see if the signal is full range & looks "normal") would not have found the faulty 74ls161, since the outputs were toggling & appeared to work, they just were not correct. I have unsuccefully SA a Battlezone Math box before. The SA is an okay tool, it will be more powerful the more people document & share Signatures. I'd take an O-scope of a SA any day but the SA is cheaper and depending on your focus not a bad tool. Kev mowerman(a)erols.com http://www.erols.com/mowerman

5 4

RE: Fluke replacement??
by Chris Loggans 15 Jan '00

15 Jan '00

If you hook the logic analyzer to the data lines on the CPU, the disassembler can recognize the binary words as CPU instructions and actually print out the instructions as they are executed. I've never done this so I'm not exactly sure when it would be useful since there are easier ways to read the source code. -Chris -----Original Message----- From: Noel Johnson To: TechToolsList(a)flippers.com Sent: 1/14/00 7:36 PM Subject: Re: Fluke replacement?? Chris Loggans wrote: > > That link is for a logic analyzer which is slightly different from the > function of the Fluke 9010. The equipment you found is more like a > Tektronics 1240/1241 or an HP 1650. The Fluke controls the board from the > CPU socket, where as a logic analyzer simply reads the binary outputs at > various points on the board. > > -Chris Interesting! (I am still very much a newbie at this stuff) :-) The ad does mention: Optional disassemblers for popular microprocessors (Z80, 8031/8051, 8085, 8086, 8088, 6502) What do these do? Thanks, Noel

1 0

RE: Fluke replacement??
by Chris Loggans 15 Jan '00

15 Jan '00

That link is for a logic analyzer which is slightly different from the function of the Fluke 9010. The equipment you found is more like a Tektronics 1240/1241 or an HP 1650. The Fluke controls the board from the CPU socket, where as a logic analyzer simply reads the binary outputs at various points on the board. -Chris -----Original Message----- From: Noel Johnson To: TechToolsList(a)flippers.com Sent: 1/14/00 6:51 PM Subject: Fluke replacement?? While wandering around the net last night I stumbled accross this: http://elexp.com/tst_ta32.htm Could this be a modern day equivalent to the Fluke 9010? Opinions? Course you'd have to mortgage the Quantum to buy one... :-( Noel

2 1

Re: Signature Analyzers
by Mark Shostak 14 Jan '00

14 Jan '00

---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: "Peter Fyfe" <peter(a)bombjack.freeserve.co.uk> >Dear all, > >I'm obviously in the minority here. My signatures don't match the >Atari guides using the CAT box. Sounds like a the problem with your NOP card. Either the one I mentioned in my other post, or some other problem. Is the "unstable signature" led lit or flashing when you take your measurements? I seem to recall seeing incorrect signatures when I used the NOP method. >Granted, i get the same signatures for the mathbox on the vector >games but for the rest of the board i get completely different >signatures. This also points to your NOP card, because the mathbox doesn't use any signals from the NOP card when in SA mode. <snip> > >-----Original Message----- >From: Chris Loggans <chris.loggans(a)deltasolutions.com> >To: 'TechToolsList(a)flippers.com' <TechToolsList(a)flippers.com> >Date: Friday, January 14, 2000 4:39 PM >Subject: RE: Signature Analyzers > > >>Every time I've used my HP 5006, the signatures have matched the Atari >>documentation. >> >>-Chris >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Jon Raiford >>To: TechToolsList(a)flippers.com >>Sent: 1/14/00 11:27 AM >>Subject: Re: Signature Analyzers >> >>Ok, thanks. I guess it really is the right one to go after. Is it true >>that the it reports the same signature as a cat box? I've heard two >>different stories, so I wasn't sure what to believe :) >> >>Thanks again >> >>Jon >> >>At 08:20 AM 01/14/2000 -0800, you wrote: >>>As far as I know - any signature analyzer should do fine. The HP 5004A >>>has the most documentation available online as far as troubleshooting >>>video game boards. >>> >>>I bought the HP 5004a for $100 although you may see it for slightly >>less >>>on ebay. I got mine simply because most of the documentation on using >>the >>>Cinematronics exorsizor mentions this particular model. >>> >>>Just my 2 cents. >>> >>> >>>Matt >>> >>> >>>_____________________________________________________________________ >>> >>>On Fri, 14 Jan 2000, Jon Raiford wrote: >>> >>> > I have decided that I should get a Sig. Analyzer. What is the one >>to >>> > get? I keep seeing people talk about the HP 5004A, is that was I >>> > should be targeting? I'm sorry if this has been discussed to death >>> > already, I just now finally joined this list. Also, what should I >>> > expect to pay for one? >>> > >>> > Thanks, Jon >>> > >>> > >> >> > >

1 0

Re: Signature Analyzers
by Mark Shostak 14 Jan '00

14 Jan '00

From: Matt Rossiter - Verio Southern California <matt(a)rossiters.com> >I may have asked this before on Vectorlist, but how exactly do you >generate the proper signatures on Atari boards without the CAT >box? Do you hardwire the data lines on the CPU to something specific? It depends what you want to fix. Most Atari boards have two "sides", the front end (CPU/ROM/RAM/GLUE) and the "video" section. For the "video" section, the manual tells you where to connect the str/stp/clk lines and how to put the board in SA mode. For the front end, you need at least one more piece. Either: 1) A CAT box 2) An HP CPU test jig 3) A NOOP CPU jig 4) A home made test jig Most people don't have a CAT and/or don't want to pay $500 for one. I have yet to see a real HP test jig. I found the NOOP to have an unstable clock and I never hooked the logic analyzer up to it to find out why, although I thought about it. So finally, I made a test jig that plugs into the CPU socket and generates the correct signals (with a clean clock) to do SA. However, there are better ways to trouble shoot a uP system in the '00s and not all of the reasons for using SA are still valid. Back in the '70s and early '80s, SA was a good because: 1) EPROM programers were expensive and rare 2) We didn't have a checksum reference 3) We didn't have ROM images for all the ROMs of all the games on a PC in front of us 4) RAM testers were rare and expensive SA was handy because it allowed you test a game ROM *WITHOUT* requiring any of that hardware. All you had to do was read the sig on each pin of the ROM and you knew if it was working. SA also allowed you to easily test RAM without additional h/w. Today, I find it much quicker to just pull the ROM out, read it, verify the checksum and even the image, than to set up the SA and read each pin on each ROM. For the glue and RAM, I use the fluke. But... For the "video" generator, you can't beat SA. It is definitely the easiest and fastest way to go. Best of all, no additional hardware (noop cpu, etc) is required. > >Where do the stop/start/clock wires go? > Where the manual says to connect them. > >Just curious. > > >Matt > > > >_____________________________________________________________________ > >On Fri, 14 Jan 2000, Mark Shostak wrote: > >> > Is it true that the it reports the same signature as a cat box? >> >> Yes, the HP reports the same signatures as the CAT box. >> >> However, the HP is a lot nicer to use. I have both and for SA >> I use the HP over the CAT. It has better probes, a bigger display, >> it's like a bench meter in that you can read it while your working, >> on the CAT, the display is oriented up, towards the ceiling, >> so you can't just glance over at it to read the sig. >> >> -Mark >> >> > >

1 0

Re: Signature Analyzers
by Peter Fyfe 14 Jan '00

14 Jan '00

Matt, You need to hardwire the NOP code onto the data lines. The Start/Stop both go to the highest address line (pin 25 on the 6502) the Clk basically goes to the clock to the processor. I like to use the test point on the board for the clock as this ensures that the buffer for the clock is operational. There should be some NOP card info on spies, try under the HP signature analysis section. Peter -----Original Message----- From: Matt Rossiter - Verio Southern California <matt(a)rossiters.com> To: Mark Shostak <shostak(a)directlink.net> Cc: TechToolsList(a)flippers.com <TechToolsList(a)flippers.com> Date: Friday, January 14, 2000 9:53 PM Subject: Re: Signature Analyzers >I may have asked this before on Vectorlist, but how exactly do you >generate the proper signatures on Atari boards without the CAT >box? Do you hardwire the data lines on the CPU to something specific? > >Where do the stop/start/clock wires go? > > >Just curious. > > >Matt > > > >_____________________________________________________________________ > >On Fri, 14 Jan 2000, Mark Shostak wrote: > >> > Is it true that the it reports the same signature as a cat box? >> >> Yes, the HP reports the same signatures as the CAT box. >> >> However, the HP is a lot nicer to use. I have both and for SA >> I use the HP over the CAT. It has better probes, a bigger display, >> it's like a bench meter in that you can read it while your working, >> on the CAT, the display is oriented up, towards the ceiling, >> so you can't just glance over at it to read the sig. >> >> -Mark >> >> > >

1 0

Re: Signature Analyzers
by Peter Fyfe 14 Jan '00

14 Jan '00

Dear all, I'm obviously in the minority here. My signatures don't match the Atari guides using the CAT box. Granted, i get the same signatures for the mathbox on the vector games but for the rest of the board i get completely different signatures. I've already knocked up a couple of my guides. Could someone volunteer to try them out for me. It probably shouldn't take more than 30 minutes per board. Jess has kindly offered to host them on his site so i'd like someone just to give them the once over. The guides are based on the Atari guides but i used an HP5004A and my handmade NOP card. If anyone can help me out then i'd appreciate it. Thanks Peter -----Original Message----- From: Chris Loggans <chris.loggans(a)deltasolutions.com> To: 'TechToolsList(a)flippers.com' <TechToolsList(a)flippers.com> Date: Friday, January 14, 2000 4:39 PM Subject: RE: Signature Analyzers >Every time I've used my HP 5006, the signatures have matched the Atari >documentation. > >-Chris > >-----Original Message----- >From: Jon Raiford >To: TechToolsList(a)flippers.com >Sent: 1/14/00 11:27 AM >Subject: Re: Signature Analyzers > >Ok, thanks. I guess it really is the right one to go after. Is it true >that the it reports the same signature as a cat box? I've heard two >different stories, so I wasn't sure what to believe :) > >Thanks again > >Jon > >At 08:20 AM 01/14/2000 -0800, you wrote: >>As far as I know - any signature analyzer should do fine. The HP 5004A >>has the most documentation available online as far as troubleshooting >>video game boards. >> >>I bought the HP 5004a for $100 although you may see it for slightly >less >>on ebay. I got mine simply because most of the documentation on using >the >>Cinematronics exorsizor mentions this particular model. >> >>Just my 2 cents. >> >> >>Matt >> >> >>_____________________________________________________________________ >> >>On Fri, 14 Jan 2000, Jon Raiford wrote: >> >> > I have decided that I should get a Sig. Analyzer. What is the one >to >> > get? I keep seeing people talk about the HP 5004A, is that was I >> > should be targeting? I'm sorry if this has been discussed to death >> > already, I just now finally joined this list. Also, what should I >> > expect to pay for one? >> > >> > Thanks, Jon >> > >> > > >

1 0