<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_21_0849241</id>
	<title>Need Help Salvaging Data From an Old Xenix System</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1269174180000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Milo\_Mindbender writes <i>"I've recently gotten ahold of an old <a href="http://www.old-computers.com/MUSEUM/computer.asp?c=515&amp;st=1">Altos 586</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenix">Xenix</a> system (a late '80s Microsoft flavor of Unix) that has one of the first multi-user BBS systems in the US on it, and I want to salvage the historical BBS posts off it.  I'm wondering if anyone remembers what format Xenix used on the 10MB (yes MB) IDE hard drive and if it can still be read on a modern Linux system.  This system is quite old, has no removable media or ethernet and just barely works. The only other way to get data off is a slow serial port.  I've got a controller that should work with the disk, but don't want to tear this old machine apart without some hope that it will work.  Anyone know?"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Milo \ _Mindbender writes " I 've recently gotten ahold of an old Altos 586 Xenix system ( a late '80s Microsoft flavor of Unix ) that has one of the first multi-user BBS systems in the US on it , and I want to salvage the historical BBS posts off it .
I 'm wondering if anyone remembers what format Xenix used on the 10MB ( yes MB ) IDE hard drive and if it can still be read on a modern Linux system .
This system is quite old , has no removable media or ethernet and just barely works .
The only other way to get data off is a slow serial port .
I 've got a controller that should work with the disk , but do n't want to tear this old machine apart without some hope that it will work .
Anyone know ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Milo\_Mindbender writes "I've recently gotten ahold of an old Altos 586 Xenix system (a late '80s Microsoft flavor of Unix) that has one of the first multi-user BBS systems in the US on it, and I want to salvage the historical BBS posts off it.
I'm wondering if anyone remembers what format Xenix used on the 10MB (yes MB) IDE hard drive and if it can still be read on a modern Linux system.
This system is quite old, has no removable media or ethernet and just barely works.
The only other way to get data off is a slow serial port.
I've got a controller that should work with the disk, but don't want to tear this old machine apart without some hope that it will work.
Anyone know?
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31562930</id>
	<title>SCO Unix can read Xenix volumes</title>
	<author>kriston</author>
	<datestamp>1269186420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just download the SCO OpenServer trial download.  It reads Xenix filesystems with no problem.  After all, SCO Unix is Xenix.<br>Be careful, because I'm not talking about SCO Unixware, but the older software called SCO OpenServer.  That's the new name for Xenix-based SCO Unix.<br>This from an old-time Xenix on-site service guy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just download the SCO OpenServer trial download .
It reads Xenix filesystems with no problem .
After all , SCO Unix is Xenix.Be careful , because I 'm not talking about SCO Unixware , but the older software called SCO OpenServer .
That 's the new name for Xenix-based SCO Unix.This from an old-time Xenix on-site service guy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just download the SCO OpenServer trial download.
It reads Xenix filesystems with no problem.
After all, SCO Unix is Xenix.Be careful, because I'm not talking about SCO Unixware, but the older software called SCO OpenServer.
That's the new name for Xenix-based SCO Unix.This from an old-time Xenix on-site service guy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556988</id>
	<title>Not meant to be funny...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269180420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Screendump.</p><p>"WTF?"? Assuming most of the data is ASCII/ANSI, cat it to the screen, preferably with pagination (it will ease the conversion if pagination is used). Place a high res camera in front of the screen and photograph/video record the data then run the photos through OCR...voila! (of course if video is used you'll want to just grab 1 occurrence of each page...if you've just done a cat without pagination this is going to make the conversion a lot harder).</p><p>Of course the above sounds stupid but with hardware that age you want to do everything possible to capture the data as fast as possible. Depending on how much data you're talking about you might be able to do the above faster than transferring the data via serial.</p><p>Oopps, time for me to climb back into my box.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Screendump. " WTF ? " ?
Assuming most of the data is ASCII/ANSI , cat it to the screen , preferably with pagination ( it will ease the conversion if pagination is used ) .
Place a high res camera in front of the screen and photograph/video record the data then run the photos through OCR...voila !
( of course if video is used you 'll want to just grab 1 occurrence of each page...if you 've just done a cat without pagination this is going to make the conversion a lot harder ) .Of course the above sounds stupid but with hardware that age you want to do everything possible to capture the data as fast as possible .
Depending on how much data you 're talking about you might be able to do the above faster than transferring the data via serial.Oopps , time for me to climb back into my box .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Screendump."WTF?"?
Assuming most of the data is ASCII/ANSI, cat it to the screen, preferably with pagination (it will ease the conversion if pagination is used).
Place a high res camera in front of the screen and photograph/video record the data then run the photos through OCR...voila!
(of course if video is used you'll want to just grab 1 occurrence of each page...if you've just done a cat without pagination this is going to make the conversion a lot harder).Of course the above sounds stupid but with hardware that age you want to do everything possible to capture the data as fast as possible.
Depending on how much data you're talking about you might be able to do the above faster than transferring the data via serial.Oopps, time for me to climb back into my box.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31578548</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269269760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not sure what it being a '586' has to do with the serial port speed.  That number doesn't refer to the processor.  From the description on the old-computers.com web site:</p><p>"A fully-loaded 586 contained four printed-circuit boards.  The main board held the 80186 and 512 KB of RAM; a Z80 I/O processor supporting six serial I/O ports<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not sure what it being a '586 ' has to do with the serial port speed .
That number does n't refer to the processor .
From the description on the old-computers.com web site : " A fully-loaded 586 contained four printed-circuit boards .
The main board held the 80186 and 512 KB of RAM ; a Z80 I/O processor supporting six serial I/O ports ... "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not sure what it being a '586' has to do with the serial port speed.
That number doesn't refer to the processor.
From the description on the old-computers.com web site:"A fully-loaded 586 contained four printed-circuit boards.
The main board held the 80186 and 512 KB of RAM; a Z80 I/O processor supporting six serial I/O ports ..."</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558720</id>
	<title>Re:cu</title>
	<author>MightyMartian</author>
	<datestamp>1269198060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That would have been my first thought.  Kermit's probably the best of the bunch.  UUCP would be a bit of a pain to set up for what amounts to a one-time file copy session.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That would have been my first thought .
Kermit 's probably the best of the bunch .
UUCP would be a bit of a pain to set up for what amounts to a one-time file copy session .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That would have been my first thought.
Kermit's probably the best of the bunch.
UUCP would be a bit of a pain to set up for what amounts to a one-time file copy session.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558236</id>
	<title>Re:Not meant to be funny...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269193560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"...then run the photos through OCR... Depending on how much data you're talking about you might be able to do the above faster than transferring the data via serial."</i> <br> <br>Even if it's "only" 10MB, that would still be <i>thousands</i> of pages.  Not to mention the fact that OCR of binary data doesn't work (multiple values of unrepresentable characters showing up as blanks on the screen, tab characters vs. space characters, etc.), and even if it did it would have to be flawless from the first bit to the last.<br> <br>While it might sound... er, novel in theory, it isn't practical or effective.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" ...then run the photos through OCR... Depending on how much data you 're talking about you might be able to do the above faster than transferring the data via serial .
" Even if it 's " only " 10MB , that would still be thousands of pages .
Not to mention the fact that OCR of binary data does n't work ( multiple values of unrepresentable characters showing up as blanks on the screen , tab characters vs. space characters , etc .
) , and even if it did it would have to be flawless from the first bit to the last .
While it might sound... er , novel in theory , it is n't practical or effective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"...then run the photos through OCR... Depending on how much data you're talking about you might be able to do the above faster than transferring the data via serial.
"  Even if it's "only" 10MB, that would still be thousands of pages.
Not to mention the fact that OCR of binary data doesn't work (multiple values of unrepresentable characters showing up as blanks on the screen, tab characters vs. space characters, etc.
), and even if it did it would have to be flawless from the first bit to the last.
While it might sound... er, novel in theory, it isn't practical or effective.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31568468</id>
	<title>Dump the files, then the disk image</title>
	<author>WindShadow</author>
	<datestamp>1269273000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can certainly dump 10MB through the serial port, should only take a few hours (as noted by others). But if you dump a raw image copy of the entire hard drive, there's a high probability that you can run the whole machine as a virtual machine under Linux (or whatever). I had probably the first UNIX based BBS in the country, back when the "UNIX-PC" (aka at&amp;t 7300) came out with SysVR3. I ran both Citadel and my own MBS on it, with a modem on each serial port. Good fun!</p><p>Given the power of current hardware, you could probably put it back up in a VM and let people use it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can certainly dump 10MB through the serial port , should only take a few hours ( as noted by others ) .
But if you dump a raw image copy of the entire hard drive , there 's a high probability that you can run the whole machine as a virtual machine under Linux ( or whatever ) .
I had probably the first UNIX based BBS in the country , back when the " UNIX-PC " ( aka at&amp;t 7300 ) came out with SysVR3 .
I ran both Citadel and my own MBS on it , with a modem on each serial port .
Good fun ! Given the power of current hardware , you could probably put it back up in a VM and let people use it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can certainly dump 10MB through the serial port, should only take a few hours (as noted by others).
But if you dump a raw image copy of the entire hard drive, there's a high probability that you can run the whole machine as a virtual machine under Linux (or whatever).
I had probably the first UNIX based BBS in the country, back when the "UNIX-PC" (aka at&amp;t 7300) came out with SysVR3.
I ran both Citadel and my own MBS on it, with a modem on each serial port.
Good fun!Given the power of current hardware, you could probably put it back up in a VM and let people use it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557842</id>
	<title>Re:Are you sure it's an IDE drive? More likely MFM</title>
	<author>pongo000</author>
	<datestamp>1269189300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I haven't seen a computer manufactured with an ISA bus slot for well over 10 years. </i></p><p>ISA-equipped mobo's are still produced and in use (a Google search for "isa motherboard" will tell the tale), mainly for data acquisition.  There are a lot of legacy DAQ apps out there that depend on the ISA bus.  I have a chassis dyno in my shop, 4 years old that uses ISA for DAQ.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have n't seen a computer manufactured with an ISA bus slot for well over 10 years .
ISA-equipped mobo 's are still produced and in use ( a Google search for " isa motherboard " will tell the tale ) , mainly for data acquisition .
There are a lot of legacy DAQ apps out there that depend on the ISA bus .
I have a chassis dyno in my shop , 4 years old that uses ISA for DAQ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I haven't seen a computer manufactured with an ISA bus slot for well over 10 years.
ISA-equipped mobo's are still produced and in use (a Google search for "isa motherboard" will tell the tale), mainly for data acquisition.
There are a lot of legacy DAQ apps out there that depend on the ISA bus.
I have a chassis dyno in my shop, 4 years old that uses ISA for DAQ.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559156</id>
	<title>Re:Altos 586</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269201720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At one time I had a SCSI to st506 (dual) that was powered by a drive power connector and was not slot based.  I appear to longer have the beast.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At one time I had a SCSI to st506 ( dual ) that was powered by a drive power connector and was not slot based .
I appear to longer have the beast .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At one time I had a SCSI to st506 (dual) that was powered by a drive power connector and was not slot based.
I appear to longer have the beast.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556958</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556830</id>
	<title>Re:Use the serial port ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269178620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Indeed, assuming full 10 megabytes of data at 9600 baud, it'll take less than 2 hours 20 minutes.<br>Since there's probably only a few megabytes of actual data you need to copy, and the serial port might support faster data rates, it really won't take very long.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed , assuming full 10 megabytes of data at 9600 baud , it 'll take less than 2 hours 20 minutes.Since there 's probably only a few megabytes of actual data you need to copy , and the serial port might support faster data rates , it really wo n't take very long .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed, assuming full 10 megabytes of data at 9600 baud, it'll take less than 2 hours 20 minutes.Since there's probably only a few megabytes of actual data you need to copy, and the serial port might support faster data rates, it really won't take very long.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556772</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558840</id>
	<title>lol but .. err actually a good idea</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269199200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>using a video camera and some video code you could get some decent throughput, in theory.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>using a video camera and some video code you could get some decent throughput , in theory .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>using a video camera and some video code you could get some decent throughput, in theory.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31573362</id>
	<title>I just threw away...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269287880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just threw away some SCO Xenix manuals this last weekend... Oops... also worked on ACER/Altos many years ago...  you might just find out the Fstype if it is IDE/eIDE put it in an external HD case (saw some at Best Buy the otherday for eIDE/IDE) put it in there hook it up to your favorite Linux variant on it's USB, mount it any copy away.  Linux has quite a variety of legacy FS drivers, would have to look, but I'll bet you can mount it... and copy the entire FS to your favorite home NAS....  Used 586 Acer/Altos in mid 1990's... not that old, SCO Xenix early 90's... also... can put in external drive and dd the whole thing off for safe keeping at the device level... exactly what the FBI does when they save for forensic purposes... not a big deal.  You pay shippin' and handlin' and $500.00 I'll get it off for you...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just threw away some SCO Xenix manuals this last weekend... Oops... also worked on ACER/Altos many years ago... you might just find out the Fstype if it is IDE/eIDE put it in an external HD case ( saw some at Best Buy the otherday for eIDE/IDE ) put it in there hook it up to your favorite Linux variant on it 's USB , mount it any copy away .
Linux has quite a variety of legacy FS drivers , would have to look , but I 'll bet you can mount it... and copy the entire FS to your favorite home NAS.... Used 586 Acer/Altos in mid 1990 's... not that old , SCO Xenix early 90 's... also... can put in external drive and dd the whole thing off for safe keeping at the device level... exactly what the FBI does when they save for forensic purposes... not a big deal .
You pay shippin ' and handlin ' and $ 500.00 I 'll get it off for you.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just threw away some SCO Xenix manuals this last weekend... Oops... also worked on ACER/Altos many years ago...  you might just find out the Fstype if it is IDE/eIDE put it in an external HD case (saw some at Best Buy the otherday for eIDE/IDE) put it in there hook it up to your favorite Linux variant on it's USB, mount it any copy away.
Linux has quite a variety of legacy FS drivers, would have to look, but I'll bet you can mount it... and copy the entire FS to your favorite home NAS....  Used 586 Acer/Altos in mid 1990's... not that old, SCO Xenix early 90's... also... can put in external drive and dd the whole thing off for safe keeping at the device level... exactly what the FBI does when they save for forensic purposes... not a big deal.
You pay shippin' and handlin' and $500.00 I'll get it off for you...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31571212</id>
	<title>No compilers people!</title>
	<author>tbuskey</author>
	<datestamp>1269281220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My 1st admin was Xenix on a 386 with a 40MB MFM drive.  I worked as a computer operator before that at a place that had Altos Xenix, SunOS i386, Sequent and DTSS.</p><p>Anyways...</p><p>You have up to 10MB of data.  It can use a serial port.  Without hardware handshaking, 9600 baud is the fastest you can expect.</p><p>10485760 bytes @ 2400 bytes/sec  ~= 73 minutes.  Geez, why not just use the serial port?</p><p>Plug a PC with a 3 wire serial port cable &amp; a terminal program that can log to file.  Even Hyperterm can capure text.</p><p>If it's just text, cat it on the Xenix just after you start the capture txt on your terminal.</p><p>If it's binary, you have 2 choices.</p><p>1) Get something like xmodem, zmodem or kermit running on both ends.<br>2) uuencode the data to convert it to 7 bit ascii and cat it as above.</p><p>compress should be on Xenix to reduce the file size before you transfer.  uuencode will convert 3 bytes to 4 bytes.  gzip can uncompress.</p><p>I had xmodem and zmodem for Xenix back in the day.  Since I didn't have a compiler, I had to get a binary from CompuServ's Unix SIG.  If I had known about uuencode, I would have used that.</p><p>The only problem with uuencode it error checking.  You might want to do some kind of checksum on your data.<br>I don't remember the tools.  Zmodem and kermit both do error checking.  If you have a short cable ( 9600 baud without hardware handshaking, you <b>will</b> get errors.  I used to use a 50' 5 wire hardware handshaking cable for zmodem transfers at 115k all the time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My 1st admin was Xenix on a 386 with a 40MB MFM drive .
I worked as a computer operator before that at a place that had Altos Xenix , SunOS i386 , Sequent and DTSS.Anyways...You have up to 10MB of data .
It can use a serial port .
Without hardware handshaking , 9600 baud is the fastest you can expect.10485760 bytes @ 2400 bytes/sec ~ = 73 minutes .
Geez , why not just use the serial port ? Plug a PC with a 3 wire serial port cable &amp; a terminal program that can log to file .
Even Hyperterm can capure text.If it 's just text , cat it on the Xenix just after you start the capture txt on your terminal.If it 's binary , you have 2 choices.1 ) Get something like xmodem , zmodem or kermit running on both ends.2 ) uuencode the data to convert it to 7 bit ascii and cat it as above.compress should be on Xenix to reduce the file size before you transfer .
uuencode will convert 3 bytes to 4 bytes .
gzip can uncompress.I had xmodem and zmodem for Xenix back in the day .
Since I did n't have a compiler , I had to get a binary from CompuServ 's Unix SIG .
If I had known about uuencode , I would have used that.The only problem with uuencode it error checking .
You might want to do some kind of checksum on your data.I do n't remember the tools .
Zmodem and kermit both do error checking .
If you have a short cable ( 9600 baud without hardware handshaking , you will get errors .
I used to use a 50 ' 5 wire hardware handshaking cable for zmodem transfers at 115k all the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My 1st admin was Xenix on a 386 with a 40MB MFM drive.
I worked as a computer operator before that at a place that had Altos Xenix, SunOS i386, Sequent and DTSS.Anyways...You have up to 10MB of data.
It can use a serial port.
Without hardware handshaking, 9600 baud is the fastest you can expect.10485760 bytes @ 2400 bytes/sec  ~= 73 minutes.
Geez, why not just use the serial port?Plug a PC with a 3 wire serial port cable &amp; a terminal program that can log to file.
Even Hyperterm can capure text.If it's just text, cat it on the Xenix just after you start the capture txt on your terminal.If it's binary, you have 2 choices.1) Get something like xmodem, zmodem or kermit running on both ends.2) uuencode the data to convert it to 7 bit ascii and cat it as above.compress should be on Xenix to reduce the file size before you transfer.
uuencode will convert 3 bytes to 4 bytes.
gzip can uncompress.I had xmodem and zmodem for Xenix back in the day.
Since I didn't have a compiler, I had to get a binary from CompuServ's Unix SIG.
If I had known about uuencode, I would have used that.The only problem with uuencode it error checking.
You might want to do some kind of checksum on your data.I don't remember the tools.
Zmodem and kermit both do error checking.
If you have a short cable ( 9600 baud without hardware handshaking, you will get errors.
I used to use a 50' 5 wire hardware handshaking cable for zmodem transfers at 115k all the time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31564418</id>
	<title>*fwoing*</title>
	<author>YankDownUnder</author>
	<datestamp>1269289980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Would be great to know WHICH BBS this was - I used XENIX for a while, but on a PC based machine running xbbs - but also had a BNC/coaxial based 3com network card (8mbps) - painful to get set up properly, but worked like a champ once it WAS working...and I wouldn't even care of someone divulged the content of conversations back then - was a great time, had heaps of fun. Too bad you can't image the whole shebang and stick it in a VM and play with it from there...(gosh this brings back heaps of great late night memories)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Would be great to know WHICH BBS this was - I used XENIX for a while , but on a PC based machine running xbbs - but also had a BNC/coaxial based 3com network card ( 8mbps ) - painful to get set up properly , but worked like a champ once it WAS working...and I would n't even care of someone divulged the content of conversations back then - was a great time , had heaps of fun .
Too bad you ca n't image the whole shebang and stick it in a VM and play with it from there... ( gosh this brings back heaps of great late night memories )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Would be great to know WHICH BBS this was - I used XENIX for a while, but on a PC based machine running xbbs - but also had a BNC/coaxial based 3com network card (8mbps) - painful to get set up properly, but worked like a champ once it WAS working...and I wouldn't even care of someone divulged the content of conversations back then - was a great time, had heaps of fun.
Too bad you can't image the whole shebang and stick it in a VM and play with it from there...(gosh this brings back heaps of great late night memories)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558596</id>
	<title>Re:Altos 586</title>
	<author>sjames</author>
	<datestamp>1269196980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even if you could find a relic ST506 card, it would be ISA. You can't find that either. Then try to find a driver...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if you could find a relic ST506 card , it would be ISA .
You ca n't find that either .
Then try to find a driver.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if you could find a relic ST506 card, it would be ISA.
You can't find that either.
Then try to find a driver...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556958</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557046</id>
	<title>Use tar, uudecode, and capture it</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269181200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Setup your terminal emulator package to capture to a file.</p><p>You'll need to test this and make sure syntax is write because it has been a while since I've needed to do this.</p><p>tar -cvf -<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/datadir | uuencode data.tar -</p><p>Capture in emulator then transfer it to Linux and uudecode it and untar it.  10MB will take about 2 hours at 9600</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Setup your terminal emulator package to capture to a file.You 'll need to test this and make sure syntax is write because it has been a while since I 've needed to do this.tar -cvf - /datadir | uuencode data.tar -Capture in emulator then transfer it to Linux and uudecode it and untar it .
10MB will take about 2 hours at 9600</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Setup your terminal emulator package to capture to a file.You'll need to test this and make sure syntax is write because it has been a while since I've needed to do this.tar -cvf - /datadir | uuencode data.tar -Capture in emulator then transfer it to Linux and uudecode it and untar it.
10MB will take about 2 hours at 9600</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558512</id>
	<title>Re:Hard Drive Most Likely MFM...</title>
	<author>Anne Thwacks</author>
	<datestamp>1269196080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I <b>Guarantee</b> its MFM, unless the controller was a very special RLL unit. If its the original, it definitely can't be IDE. I designed MFM and RLL controllers in the 1980's and they were almost all analogue (the digital ones were mostly cheap crap and did not work very well). They were not interchangable meaning <b> Its very likely that the data can only be read by the controller that wrote it</b> OTOH, it might actually be SCSI, and could be read by any modern Un*x with a SCSI controller. As someone else said "mount -t xenix" will probably work on any Un*x or Linux.<p>
If its a 10MB drive, I would bet that there is not more than 5MB of data on the drive, and the serial chip is definitely not going to be a 16550 in a standard PC it <b> will </b> be terrible. I had a BBS in the '90s,
and paid a lot for high performance serial cards. However, its a Xenix system, and might have Zilog's SIO chips which can do 1MB synchronous serial (SDLC or HDLC) if you program them to.
</p><p>
I would not remove the HD from it under any circumstances if the machine can still boot. tar<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/home and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc through the serial port to something else - who cares if it takes a month! If they get through ok, then tar the lot as a separate operation. Much better you boot it and get the data, than you shut down and re-start several times. If its going to die, it will die during a boot sequence for sure. </p><p>
The OS will probably have been built without drivers for hardware thats not there, so unless you have access to the OS build tools, you wont have any ability to add hardware (that was normal i those days). An OS build would probably take 3 days (if you have the tools) It is basically the link stage of compiling a Un*x.</p><p>
Xenix only existed because the '86 family's memory mapping was too poor for real Un*x, and you can expect it to perform like NetBSD scaled by clockspeed over 4 Ie if it has a 10MHz clock it will be 400 times slower than NetBSD on i386 on a 1GHz processor (ie grimly slow).
p</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I Guarantee its MFM , unless the controller was a very special RLL unit .
If its the original , it definitely ca n't be IDE .
I designed MFM and RLL controllers in the 1980 's and they were almost all analogue ( the digital ones were mostly cheap crap and did not work very well ) .
They were not interchangable meaning Its very likely that the data can only be read by the controller that wrote it OTOH , it might actually be SCSI , and could be read by any modern Un * x with a SCSI controller .
As someone else said " mount -t xenix " will probably work on any Un * x or Linux .
If its a 10MB drive , I would bet that there is not more than 5MB of data on the drive , and the serial chip is definitely not going to be a 16550 in a standard PC it will be terrible .
I had a BBS in the '90s , and paid a lot for high performance serial cards .
However , its a Xenix system , and might have Zilog 's SIO chips which can do 1MB synchronous serial ( SDLC or HDLC ) if you program them to .
I would not remove the HD from it under any circumstances if the machine can still boot .
tar /home and /etc through the serial port to something else - who cares if it takes a month !
If they get through ok , then tar the lot as a separate operation .
Much better you boot it and get the data , than you shut down and re-start several times .
If its going to die , it will die during a boot sequence for sure .
The OS will probably have been built without drivers for hardware thats not there , so unless you have access to the OS build tools , you wont have any ability to add hardware ( that was normal i those days ) .
An OS build would probably take 3 days ( if you have the tools ) It is basically the link stage of compiling a Un * x . Xenix only existed because the '86 family 's memory mapping was too poor for real Un * x , and you can expect it to perform like NetBSD scaled by clockspeed over 4 Ie if it has a 10MHz clock it will be 400 times slower than NetBSD on i386 on a 1GHz processor ( ie grimly slow ) .
p</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I Guarantee its MFM, unless the controller was a very special RLL unit.
If its the original, it definitely can't be IDE.
I designed MFM and RLL controllers in the 1980's and they were almost all analogue (the digital ones were mostly cheap crap and did not work very well).
They were not interchangable meaning  Its very likely that the data can only be read by the controller that wrote it OTOH, it might actually be SCSI, and could be read by any modern Un*x with a SCSI controller.
As someone else said "mount -t xenix" will probably work on any Un*x or Linux.
If its a 10MB drive, I would bet that there is not more than 5MB of data on the drive, and the serial chip is definitely not going to be a 16550 in a standard PC it  will  be terrible.
I had a BBS in the '90s,
and paid a lot for high performance serial cards.
However, its a Xenix system, and might have Zilog's SIO chips which can do 1MB synchronous serial (SDLC or HDLC) if you program them to.
I would not remove the HD from it under any circumstances if the machine can still boot.
tar /home and /etc through the serial port to something else - who cares if it takes a month!
If they get through ok, then tar the lot as a separate operation.
Much better you boot it and get the data, than you shut down and re-start several times.
If its going to die, it will die during a boot sequence for sure.
The OS will probably have been built without drivers for hardware thats not there, so unless you have access to the OS build tools, you wont have any ability to add hardware (that was normal i those days).
An OS build would probably take 3 days (if you have the tools) It is basically the link stage of compiling a Un*x.
Xenix only existed because the '86 family's memory mapping was too poor for real Un*x, and you can expect it to perform like NetBSD scaled by clockspeed over 4 Ie if it has a 10MHz clock it will be 400 times slower than NetBSD on i386 on a 1GHz processor (ie grimly slow).
p</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31561672</id>
	<title>Re:Not all MFM controllers are compatible</title>
	<author>toygeek</author>
	<datestamp>1269177000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>c:\&gt;debug<br>g=c:800</p><p>"Those were the daaaaaaays"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>c : \ &gt; debugg = c : 800 " Those were the daaaaaaays "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>c:\&gt;debugg=c:800"Those were the daaaaaaays"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557532</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556806</id>
	<title>UUCP</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1269178440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It'll take a few hours at 9600 baud.  It's your best bet.  Let it run over night and the job is done.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 'll take a few hours at 9600 baud .
It 's your best bet .
Let it run over night and the job is done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It'll take a few hours at 9600 baud.
It's your best bet.
Let it run over night and the job is done.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557780</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269188700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The 14.4 modem didn't come out until 1991.  The serial port on that machine will do 19.2K though using a crossover cable.  That shouldn't take more than 80 minutes to transfer 10MB of data.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The 14.4 modem did n't come out until 1991 .
The serial port on that machine will do 19.2K though using a crossover cable .
That should n't take more than 80 minutes to transfer 10MB of data .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The 14.4 modem didn't come out until 1991.
The serial port on that machine will do 19.2K though using a crossover cable.
That shouldn't take more than 80 minutes to transfer 10MB of data.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556888</id>
	<title>Re:Use the serial port ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269179400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seconded, use the serial port.  Least invasive method, even if it takes ages.</p><p>There's also the human angle to consider.  If we are talking decades ago, can you be sure all folk who posted all those messages want them to come back to life again?  It wasn't unreasonable for the individuals of that time, when the Internet was something few had heard of and only a few Universities and research labs had access to, to assume that their postings to a BBS might only have a temporary existence - they weren't to know that some nerd would be archiving them and releasing them in the future to a world where an equivalent of an entire T1 internet connection to your own home would be considered by most as inadequate!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>As an example: I had to do some requests-for-deletion when Google got their hands on many decades old Usenet archives.  Now that every bugger has teh interweb tubes, there are people I don't fancy seeing that stuff from my yoof - when it was posted I didn't intend it to be pushed off into the future to be published to entire bloody world, forever.  Had enough bloody trouble with a stalker from back then as it was, I do not fancy them joining the dots and working out where I am now.  I don't fancy you guys digging either... hence posting Anon!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seconded , use the serial port .
Least invasive method , even if it takes ages.There 's also the human angle to consider .
If we are talking decades ago , can you be sure all folk who posted all those messages want them to come back to life again ?
It was n't unreasonable for the individuals of that time , when the Internet was something few had heard of and only a few Universities and research labs had access to , to assume that their postings to a BBS might only have a temporary existence - they were n't to know that some nerd would be archiving them and releasing them in the future to a world where an equivalent of an entire T1 internet connection to your own home would be considered by most as inadequate !
: ) As an example : I had to do some requests-for-deletion when Google got their hands on many decades old Usenet archives .
Now that every bugger has teh interweb tubes , there are people I do n't fancy seeing that stuff from my yoof - when it was posted I did n't intend it to be pushed off into the future to be published to entire bloody world , forever .
Had enough bloody trouble with a stalker from back then as it was , I do not fancy them joining the dots and working out where I am now .
I do n't fancy you guys digging either... hence posting Anon !
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seconded, use the serial port.
Least invasive method, even if it takes ages.There's also the human angle to consider.
If we are talking decades ago, can you be sure all folk who posted all those messages want them to come back to life again?
It wasn't unreasonable for the individuals of that time, when the Internet was something few had heard of and only a few Universities and research labs had access to, to assume that their postings to a BBS might only have a temporary existence - they weren't to know that some nerd would be archiving them and releasing them in the future to a world where an equivalent of an entire T1 internet connection to your own home would be considered by most as inadequate!
:)As an example: I had to do some requests-for-deletion when Google got their hands on many decades old Usenet archives.
Now that every bugger has teh interweb tubes, there are people I don't fancy seeing that stuff from my yoof - when it was posted I didn't intend it to be pushed off into the future to be published to entire bloody world, forever.
Had enough bloody trouble with a stalker from back then as it was, I do not fancy them joining the dots and working out where I am now.
I don't fancy you guys digging either... hence posting Anon!
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556772</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560530</id>
	<title>Re:Use the serial port ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269168420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ST-506 - also known as MFM.<br>The hardware would also have been likely compatible with an RLL controller but odds are at 10MB capacity it was an MFM drive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ST-506 - also known as MFM.The hardware would also have been likely compatible with an RLL controller but odds are at 10MB capacity it was an MFM drive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ST-506 - also known as MFM.The hardware would also have been likely compatible with an RLL controller but odds are at 10MB capacity it was an MFM drive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557234</id>
	<title>tar over serial?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269183240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can use tar and serial ports.</p><p>Once you get the systems connected via serial, you can do something like this on the Xenix box:</p><p>tar cf<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/serialdevice0<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/home   (or whatever directory you want to move)</p><p>then on the Linux box on the other end:</p><p>tar xpf<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/ttyS0</p><p>will unpack the data. Tar hasn't changed much in decades, and works very well through pipes like this. Good luck.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can use tar and serial ports.Once you get the systems connected via serial , you can do something like this on the Xenix box : tar cf /dev/serialdevice0 /home ( or whatever directory you want to move ) then on the Linux box on the other end : tar xpf /dev/ttyS0will unpack the data .
Tar has n't changed much in decades , and works very well through pipes like this .
Good luck .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can use tar and serial ports.Once you get the systems connected via serial, you can do something like this on the Xenix box:tar cf /dev/serialdevice0 /home   (or whatever directory you want to move)then on the Linux box on the other end:tar xpf /dev/ttyS0will unpack the data.
Tar hasn't changed much in decades, and works very well through pipes like this.
Good luck.
:)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558342</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269194640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly. And you could be done by now instead of reading comments by people telling you that you could be done by now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
And you could be done by now instead of reading comments by people telling you that you could be done by now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
And you could be done by now instead of reading comments by people telling you that you could be done by now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557056</id>
	<title>Re:audio</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1269181380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think the display offers more bandwidth: <a href="http://www.erikyyy.de/tempest/" title="erikyyy.de">http://www.erikyyy.de/tempest/</a> [erikyyy.de]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the display offers more bandwidth : http : //www.erikyyy.de/tempest/ [ erikyyy.de ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the display offers more bandwidth: http://www.erikyyy.de/tempest/ [erikyyy.de]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558816</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>mikael</author>
	<datestamp>1269199020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Best way is to get the data off that drive as quickly as possible. Even with old floppy disk and CD-ROMS, you may only get one chance to read the data, so you have to do it right the first time. Make sure you have a UPS when you are doing the work. A single scratch could lose you the data. Use the serial port. You just need to hex dump every file out. Don't try and tar things, because you would be writing to the drive, and things could be fried if there is a power failure or spike. One scrambled bit in a header could scramble everything, and you would have to start all over again.</p><p>I recovered files off an old Atari 800 in a similar way - set up the 850 serial port module to communicate to a laptop via a RS232 patch cable. Wrote a hex-dumper on the Atari side to write out the data, and used kermit on the other side to log all the output. All the disks copied within a day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Best way is to get the data off that drive as quickly as possible .
Even with old floppy disk and CD-ROMS , you may only get one chance to read the data , so you have to do it right the first time .
Make sure you have a UPS when you are doing the work .
A single scratch could lose you the data .
Use the serial port .
You just need to hex dump every file out .
Do n't try and tar things , because you would be writing to the drive , and things could be fried if there is a power failure or spike .
One scrambled bit in a header could scramble everything , and you would have to start all over again.I recovered files off an old Atari 800 in a similar way - set up the 850 serial port module to communicate to a laptop via a RS232 patch cable .
Wrote a hex-dumper on the Atari side to write out the data , and used kermit on the other side to log all the output .
All the disks copied within a day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Best way is to get the data off that drive as quickly as possible.
Even with old floppy disk and CD-ROMS, you may only get one chance to read the data, so you have to do it right the first time.
Make sure you have a UPS when you are doing the work.
A single scratch could lose you the data.
Use the serial port.
You just need to hex dump every file out.
Don't try and tar things, because you would be writing to the drive, and things could be fried if there is a power failure or spike.
One scrambled bit in a header could scramble everything, and you would have to start all over again.I recovered files off an old Atari 800 in a similar way - set up the 850 serial port module to communicate to a laptop via a RS232 patch cable.
Wrote a hex-dumper on the Atari side to write out the data, and used kermit on the other side to log all the output.
All the disks copied within a day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31569306</id>
	<title>Re:Are you sure it's an IDE drive? More likely MFM</title>
	<author>CompMD</author>
	<datestamp>1269275160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I still have several IDE Type 17 42MB hard drives, both in 5.25" and 3.5" form factors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I still have several IDE Type 17 42MB hard drives , both in 5.25 " and 3.5 " form factors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I still have several IDE Type 17 42MB hard drives, both in 5.25" and 3.5" form factors.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559050</id>
	<title>Re:cu</title>
	<author>pcjunky</author>
	<datestamp>1269201000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I got Kermit running on an old 8-bit Intel MDS system with 8 inch floppies from the late 70's.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I got Kermit running on an old 8-bit Intel MDS system with 8 inch floppies from the late 70 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I got Kermit running on an old 8-bit Intel MDS system with 8 inch floppies from the late 70's.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559762</id>
	<title>Re:Another interesting way to skin this cat..</title>
	<author>shippo</author>
	<datestamp>1269163320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I seriously doubt that there will be a VM capable of running this OS. The Altos 586 used an Intel 80186 processor, which was an 8086 with several external components (clock generator, interrupt controller, DMA controller etc.) integrated into the chip. Therefore the machine is not PC compatible as these bits of hardware will be accessed in a different mechanism compared to a standard PC.</p><p>The 80186 was typically used in embedded devices. A few non-PC compatible or semi-PC compatible machines did use it, most notably the Tandy 2000.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I seriously doubt that there will be a VM capable of running this OS .
The Altos 586 used an Intel 80186 processor , which was an 8086 with several external components ( clock generator , interrupt controller , DMA controller etc .
) integrated into the chip .
Therefore the machine is not PC compatible as these bits of hardware will be accessed in a different mechanism compared to a standard PC.The 80186 was typically used in embedded devices .
A few non-PC compatible or semi-PC compatible machines did use it , most notably the Tandy 2000 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I seriously doubt that there will be a VM capable of running this OS.
The Altos 586 used an Intel 80186 processor, which was an 8086 with several external components (clock generator, interrupt controller, DMA controller etc.
) integrated into the chip.
Therefore the machine is not PC compatible as these bits of hardware will be accessed in a different mechanism compared to a standard PC.The 80186 was typically used in embedded devices.
A few non-PC compatible or semi-PC compatible machines did use it, most notably the Tandy 2000.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31563550</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>The\_mad\_linguist</author>
	<datestamp>1269192000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It belongs in a museum.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It belongs in a museum .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It belongs in a museum.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31567228</id>
	<title>Re:tar over serial?</title>
	<author>MrKaos</author>
	<datestamp>1269269820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> You can use tar and serial ports.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Several people have suggested using this approach - but it will not work. The data has to be made 7 bit safe so the pipe has to include uuencode and uudecode. So if your commands are modified thus</p><p>

Transmit;
</p><blockquote><div><p> <tt>tar cf -<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/home | uuencode &gt;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/serialdevice0</tt></p></div> </blockquote><p>
Receive;</p><blockquote><div><p> <tt>cat<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/ttyS0 | uudecode | tar xpf -</tt></p></div> </blockquote><p>to unpack the data it should be ok. "tar" is not 7 bit safe so it will *not* prepare the data for transport over a serial link. <strong>However</strong> if you are going to do this you will more than likely have to use the stty command as so</p><blockquote><div><p> <tt>stty line characteristics &gt;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/tty1A</tt></p></div> </blockquote><p>to set the serial characteristics of the line for the serial link to work properly. SCO nomenclature for serial ports were<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/tty1A for COM1 and tty2A for COM2 <i>with a modem</i> or the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/tty1a (/dev/tty2a) for a serial cable without a modem. Using the uppercase variant (from memory - so check) was hardware flow control over serial. I'd only use hardware handshaking to move this amount of data as it will have a hard time keeping up  on a system this old and XON/XOFF just won't cut it. The weakest link is the old system. </p><p>

<strong>However</strong> tar is not a good candidate for moving this amount of data on a system this old because as soon as the transmission drops out *for any reason* you won't know where from in the archive you were. If you want to use this method to transfer the data consider creating a file list on the XENIX box first and using </p><blockquote><div><p> <tt>cpio</tt></p></div> </blockquote><p>. If the transfer fails for some reason then you can delete the file list up to the point where the transfer failed and then continue, with tar you will have to start again.</p><p>
Some have suggested using UUCP and really this is the best option as it will manage the transfer of the files and checksum each one to ensure the receipt but it is understandable why you wouldn't set up UUCP as it is a bit of pain, but worth it when complete.</p><p>
Brings back memories of supporting SCO systems - good luck</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can use tar and serial ports .
Several people have suggested using this approach - but it will not work .
The data has to be made 7 bit safe so the pipe has to include uuencode and uudecode .
So if your commands are modified thus Transmit ; tar cf - /home | uuencode &gt; /dev/serialdevice0 Receive ; cat /dev/ttyS0 | uudecode | tar xpf - to unpack the data it should be ok. " tar " is not 7 bit safe so it will * not * prepare the data for transport over a serial link .
However if you are going to do this you will more than likely have to use the stty command as so stty line characteristics &gt; /dev/tty1A to set the serial characteristics of the line for the serial link to work properly .
SCO nomenclature for serial ports were /dev/tty1A for COM1 and tty2A for COM2 with a modem or the /dev/tty1a ( /dev/tty2a ) for a serial cable without a modem .
Using the uppercase variant ( from memory - so check ) was hardware flow control over serial .
I 'd only use hardware handshaking to move this amount of data as it will have a hard time keeping up on a system this old and XON/XOFF just wo n't cut it .
The weakest link is the old system .
However tar is not a good candidate for moving this amount of data on a system this old because as soon as the transmission drops out * for any reason * you wo n't know where from in the archive you were .
If you want to use this method to transfer the data consider creating a file list on the XENIX box first and using cpio .
If the transfer fails for some reason then you can delete the file list up to the point where the transfer failed and then continue , with tar you will have to start again .
Some have suggested using UUCP and really this is the best option as it will manage the transfer of the files and checksum each one to ensure the receipt but it is understandable why you would n't set up UUCP as it is a bit of pain , but worth it when complete .
Brings back memories of supporting SCO systems - good luck</tokentext>
<sentencetext> You can use tar and serial ports.
Several people have suggested using this approach - but it will not work.
The data has to be made 7 bit safe so the pipe has to include uuencode and uudecode.
So if your commands are modified thus

Transmit;
 tar cf - /home | uuencode &gt; /dev/serialdevice0 
Receive; cat /dev/ttyS0 | uudecode | tar xpf - to unpack the data it should be ok. "tar" is not 7 bit safe so it will *not* prepare the data for transport over a serial link.
However if you are going to do this you will more than likely have to use the stty command as so stty line characteristics &gt; /dev/tty1A to set the serial characteristics of the line for the serial link to work properly.
SCO nomenclature for serial ports were /dev/tty1A for COM1 and tty2A for COM2 with a modem or the /dev/tty1a (/dev/tty2a) for a serial cable without a modem.
Using the uppercase variant (from memory - so check) was hardware flow control over serial.
I'd only use hardware handshaking to move this amount of data as it will have a hard time keeping up  on a system this old and XON/XOFF just won't cut it.
The weakest link is the old system.
However tar is not a good candidate for moving this amount of data on a system this old because as soon as the transmission drops out *for any reason* you won't know where from in the archive you were.
If you want to use this method to transfer the data consider creating a file list on the XENIX box first and using  cpio .
If the transfer fails for some reason then you can delete the file list up to the point where the transfer failed and then continue, with tar you will have to start again.
Some have suggested using UUCP and really this is the best option as it will manage the transfer of the files and checksum each one to ensure the receipt but it is understandable why you wouldn't set up UUCP as it is a bit of pain, but worth it when complete.
Brings back memories of supporting SCO systems - good luck
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557062</id>
	<title>null modem cable</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269181440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>treat it like a bbs connection. have your new system connect to the old one and download the files and pray the 10mb IDE drive still works.<br>You obviously dont have to copy the whole drive just the relevant bbs files. Of course you might need to know the old passwords.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>treat it like a bbs connection .
have your new system connect to the old one and download the files and pray the 10mb IDE drive still works.You obviously dont have to copy the whole drive just the relevant bbs files .
Of course you might need to know the old passwords .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>treat it like a bbs connection.
have your new system connect to the old one and download the files and pray the 10mb IDE drive still works.You obviously dont have to copy the whole drive just the relevant bbs files.
Of course you might need to know the old passwords.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556836</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>jgardia</author>
	<datestamp>1269178680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>exactly, 10mb at 9600bps will take only 2-3 hours.</htmltext>
<tokenext>exactly , 10mb at 9600bps will take only 2-3 hours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>exactly, 10mb at 9600bps will take only 2-3 hours.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557252</id>
	<title>Re:Use the serial port ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269183480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also, the "IDE hard drive" is quite likely to be incompatible with modern IDEA controllers. The first Compaq IDE drives, for example, were incompatible with just about everything else in those days. Lord only knows what is in the Altos.</p><p>As others have said, if it is running at all I would NEVER try to remove the drive, but use the serial port and sufficient time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , the " IDE hard drive " is quite likely to be incompatible with modern IDEA controllers .
The first Compaq IDE drives , for example , were incompatible with just about everything else in those days .
Lord only knows what is in the Altos.As others have said , if it is running at all I would NEVER try to remove the drive , but use the serial port and sufficient time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, the "IDE hard drive" is quite likely to be incompatible with modern IDEA controllers.
The first Compaq IDE drives, for example, were incompatible with just about everything else in those days.
Lord only knows what is in the Altos.As others have said, if it is running at all I would NEVER try to remove the drive, but use the serial port and sufficient time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556772</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557608</id>
	<title>Re:My two cents</title>
	<author>vtcodger</author>
	<datestamp>1269187140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>***2) It should have the ability to make FAT format floppies. Do it piecemeal, if you can find a 1.2 MB 5-1/4 drive for a PC anymore.***</p><p>My memories of stuff two decades ago are hazy at best, but I have this vague memory of writing FAT formatted floppies in Xenix(?)/SCO Unix(?) (The outfit I worked for had clients with both) being VERY, VERY slow.   Something about resetting the drive and repositioning the heads between every sector(?).  Maybe it was some other situation.  Or maybe I didn't do things right.  But anyway, it might turn out that the serial port isn't that much slower than a floppy.</p><p>And since I haven't seen anyone else mention it, if the serial port is configured to use hardware flow control RTS, CTS, DTR etc, getting it to talk to another computer can be a non-trivial and decidedly annoying task.  If the two devices aren't configured compatibly, not only may they refuse to talk, they may talk, but cheerfully discard a lot of the data without notification.</p><p>It's a BBS?  Is it possible to call into it and extract the call logs through the BBS software?  My guess is that the system used an external modem and that calling in would be an enormous amount of work unless the modem it used is still hooked to it and works.  But still, it is another possibility.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>* * * 2 ) It should have the ability to make FAT format floppies .
Do it piecemeal , if you can find a 1.2 MB 5-1/4 drive for a PC anymore .
* * * My memories of stuff two decades ago are hazy at best , but I have this vague memory of writing FAT formatted floppies in Xenix ( ?
) /SCO Unix ( ?
) ( The outfit I worked for had clients with both ) being VERY , VERY slow .
Something about resetting the drive and repositioning the heads between every sector ( ? ) .
Maybe it was some other situation .
Or maybe I did n't do things right .
But anyway , it might turn out that the serial port is n't that much slower than a floppy.And since I have n't seen anyone else mention it , if the serial port is configured to use hardware flow control RTS , CTS , DTR etc , getting it to talk to another computer can be a non-trivial and decidedly annoying task .
If the two devices are n't configured compatibly , not only may they refuse to talk , they may talk , but cheerfully discard a lot of the data without notification.It 's a BBS ?
Is it possible to call into it and extract the call logs through the BBS software ?
My guess is that the system used an external modem and that calling in would be an enormous amount of work unless the modem it used is still hooked to it and works .
But still , it is another possibility .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>***2) It should have the ability to make FAT format floppies.
Do it piecemeal, if you can find a 1.2 MB 5-1/4 drive for a PC anymore.
***My memories of stuff two decades ago are hazy at best, but I have this vague memory of writing FAT formatted floppies in Xenix(?
)/SCO Unix(?
) (The outfit I worked for had clients with both) being VERY, VERY slow.
Something about resetting the drive and repositioning the heads between every sector(?).
Maybe it was some other situation.
Or maybe I didn't do things right.
But anyway, it might turn out that the serial port isn't that much slower than a floppy.And since I haven't seen anyone else mention it, if the serial port is configured to use hardware flow control RTS, CTS, DTR etc, getting it to talk to another computer can be a non-trivial and decidedly annoying task.
If the two devices aren't configured compatibly, not only may they refuse to talk, they may talk, but cheerfully discard a lot of the data without notification.It's a BBS?
Is it possible to call into it and extract the call logs through the BBS software?
My guess is that the system used an external modem and that calling in would be an enormous amount of work unless the modem it used is still hooked to it and works.
But still, it is another possibility.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31566834</id>
	<title>Re:No Removable Media?</title>
	<author>that this is not und</author>
	<datestamp>1269268800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Altos 586 has a 5-1/4" floppy drive.  But it's a quad density drive, that means it's 80 tracks and 720KB.  You can't find 80 track 5-1/4" media anymore, but you can use higher quality double-density (360K) media.  Don't try using High Density (1.2M) media.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Altos 586 has a 5-1/4 " floppy drive .
But it 's a quad density drive , that means it 's 80 tracks and 720KB .
You ca n't find 80 track 5-1/4 " media anymore , but you can use higher quality double-density ( 360K ) media .
Do n't try using High Density ( 1.2M ) media .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Altos 586 has a 5-1/4" floppy drive.
But it's a quad density drive, that means it's 80 tracks and 720KB.
You can't find 80 track 5-1/4" media anymore, but you can use higher quality double-density (360K) media.
Don't try using High Density (1.2M) media.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556810</id>
	<title>Probably more dangerous to move the drive</title>
	<author>assemblerex</author>
	<datestamp>1269178440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Old connectors, pcb cracks, static damage...why risk it? Write a script and automate it...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Old connectors , pcb cracks , static damage...why risk it ?
Write a script and automate it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Old connectors, pcb cracks, static damage...why risk it?
Write a script and automate it...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559964</id>
	<title>Probably can't read hard disk directly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269164700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I did a lot of work with hard disks in those days (of course I was a toddler cough cough) and I remember all too well that a hard disk formatted by one controller would almost always NOT work with a different controller.  The ST-506 interface carries quite raw signals and the timing would vary slightly from controller to controller.  So, plugging that disk into another machine's controller is not likely a good move, unless you can replicate the Altos' controller in an ISA controller form factor, and even then it's not likely.</p><p>Best bet is serial port with a null-modem   (crossover RX and TX).  Could the Altos only do 9600 BAUD?  I'd try for 38,400 or more and use X-MODEM, Y-MODEM, or best: Z-MODEM protocol for transfer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did a lot of work with hard disks in those days ( of course I was a toddler cough cough ) and I remember all too well that a hard disk formatted by one controller would almost always NOT work with a different controller .
The ST-506 interface carries quite raw signals and the timing would vary slightly from controller to controller .
So , plugging that disk into another machine 's controller is not likely a good move , unless you can replicate the Altos ' controller in an ISA controller form factor , and even then it 's not likely.Best bet is serial port with a null-modem ( crossover RX and TX ) .
Could the Altos only do 9600 BAUD ?
I 'd try for 38,400 or more and use X-MODEM , Y-MODEM , or best : Z-MODEM protocol for transfer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I did a lot of work with hard disks in those days (of course I was a toddler cough cough) and I remember all too well that a hard disk formatted by one controller would almost always NOT work with a different controller.
The ST-506 interface carries quite raw signals and the timing would vary slightly from controller to controller.
So, plugging that disk into another machine's controller is not likely a good move, unless you can replicate the Altos' controller in an ISA controller form factor, and even then it's not likely.Best bet is serial port with a null-modem   (crossover RX and TX).
Could the Altos only do 9600 BAUD?
I'd try for 38,400 or more and use X-MODEM, Y-MODEM, or best: Z-MODEM protocol for transfer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31564730</id>
	<title>Xenix had tar</title>
	<author>LostMyBeaver</author>
	<datestamp>1269252720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Simply tar the entire hard drive and direct it to a serial port. No special tools needed.<br><br>Oh... if I recall correctly, it also had compress, so you can probably tar | compress &gt;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/serialportdevice<br><br>no problems<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Simply tar the entire hard drive and direct it to a serial port .
No special tools needed.Oh... if I recall correctly , it also had compress , so you can probably tar | compress &gt; /dev/serialportdeviceno problems : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simply tar the entire hard drive and direct it to a serial port.
No special tools needed.Oh... if I recall correctly, it also had compress, so you can probably tar | compress &gt; /dev/serialportdeviceno problems :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557546</id>
	<title>Hard Drive Most Likely MFM...</title>
	<author>multimediavt</author>
	<datestamp>1269186600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The hard drive in that ancient behemoth is most likely a MFM device.  I don't think you're going to find anything "cheap" to read the data off that thing and onto some modern storage media.  Other than sending it to a data recovery lab, I would have to agree with the bulk of the posts here: USE THE SERIAL PORT!  Those are probably your only two options for a device that old with data that is irreplaceable and of an historic nature.</p><p>'Nuf said.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The hard drive in that ancient behemoth is most likely a MFM device .
I do n't think you 're going to find anything " cheap " to read the data off that thing and onto some modern storage media .
Other than sending it to a data recovery lab , I would have to agree with the bulk of the posts here : USE THE SERIAL PORT !
Those are probably your only two options for a device that old with data that is irreplaceable and of an historic nature .
'Nuf said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The hard drive in that ancient behemoth is most likely a MFM device.
I don't think you're going to find anything "cheap" to read the data off that thing and onto some modern storage media.
Other than sending it to a data recovery lab, I would have to agree with the bulk of the posts here: USE THE SERIAL PORT!
Those are probably your only two options for a device that old with data that is irreplaceable and of an historic nature.
'Nuf said.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31562970</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>dullnev</author>
	<datestamp>1269186780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Yep, and since your computer is a 586.....</p></div><p>The model is 586, but that's not the cpu in the beast. I know it's asking a lot but how about RTFA? Or even taking note of the date - late 80s. And when was the Pentium cpu (aka 586) first manufactured? 1993.

Turn in your geek card fool!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep , and since your computer is a 586.....The model is 586 , but that 's not the cpu in the beast .
I know it 's asking a lot but how about RTFA ?
Or even taking note of the date - late 80s .
And when was the Pentium cpu ( aka 586 ) first manufactured ?
1993 . Turn in your geek card fool !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep, and since your computer is a 586.....The model is 586, but that's not the cpu in the beast.
I know it's asking a lot but how about RTFA?
Or even taking note of the date - late 80s.
And when was the Pentium cpu (aka 586) first manufactured?
1993.

Turn in your geek card fool!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558830</id>
	<title>Re:Reading the disk will be tricky.</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1269199080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There were, you'll likely find several 'I owned one' posts following up.  The certainly werent' common, but they did exist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There were , you 'll likely find several 'I owned one ' posts following up .
The certainly werent ' common , but they did exist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There were, you'll likely find several 'I owned one' posts following up.
The certainly werent' common, but they did exist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557556</id>
	<title>Not a real request</title>
	<author>hduff</author>
	<datestamp>1269186660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>unless you post pr0^H^Hics of the machine . .<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>unless you post pr0 ^ H ^ Hics of the machine .
. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>unless you post pr0^H^Hics of the machine .
. .</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31569732</id>
	<title>Re:Not all MFM controllers are compatible</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269276540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In case of MFM HDD one might also run out of luck of retrieving the data from it. It needed a periodic refreshment, as the data would physically disappear from the disk itself over a period of time...</p><p>Although in 2001 I opened an industrial PC with MFM HDD in it. It was still happily working! Slow, noisy and dusty - but it still fully functional after a decade of hard work (and not a single day of maintenance, not even the dust cleaning).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In case of MFM HDD one might also run out of luck of retrieving the data from it .
It needed a periodic refreshment , as the data would physically disappear from the disk itself over a period of time...Although in 2001 I opened an industrial PC with MFM HDD in it .
It was still happily working !
Slow , noisy and dusty - but it still fully functional after a decade of hard work ( and not a single day of maintenance , not even the dust cleaning ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In case of MFM HDD one might also run out of luck of retrieving the data from it.
It needed a periodic refreshment, as the data would physically disappear from the disk itself over a period of time...Although in 2001 I opened an industrial PC with MFM HDD in it.
It was still happily working!
Slow, noisy and dusty - but it still fully functional after a decade of hard work (and not a single day of maintenance, not even the dust cleaning).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557532</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557464</id>
	<title>There are tonnes of ways to do this..!</title>
	<author>JasonStevens</author>
	<datestamp>1269185700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dude, it'd be easy....

First you need to make a raw disk image of the thing.  I'm assuming you can do that?  Your ancient machine should have one of those ST-506/MFM controllers.... You could even use dd on the native platform and swap floppies out of it just by grabbing how many kb you can fit on a floppy at a time, and reconstruct the hd image onto a linux PC..

From there you can either try to mount that hard disk image on linux with an old sysv filesystem driver...

Another alternative if you have a serial hookup is to simply hook up a serial port, and do something like

"tar -cvf<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/tty0a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/"

And redirect it on the other side.  If you have uuencode/uudecode you could throw that in there.

Heck, you could even use tar with floppy disks.

I don't know what you plan to do with your 'stuff' off of the old machine though.... Have you tried to score a copy of Xenix for the pc?  It runs on Virtual PC/VMWare ok, it'll boot from a HD with Qemu but the floppy emulation is screwed up in Qemu.  There is (was?) the ibcs2 emulation thing for linux as well...

There are ways of keeping these things going, although I know the Altos was a unique machine...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dude , it 'd be easy... . First you need to make a raw disk image of the thing .
I 'm assuming you can do that ?
Your ancient machine should have one of those ST-506/MFM controllers.... You could even use dd on the native platform and swap floppies out of it just by grabbing how many kb you can fit on a floppy at a time , and reconstruct the hd image onto a linux PC. . From there you can either try to mount that hard disk image on linux with an old sysv filesystem driver.. . Another alternative if you have a serial hookup is to simply hook up a serial port , and do something like " tar -cvf /dev/tty0a / " And redirect it on the other side .
If you have uuencode/uudecode you could throw that in there .
Heck , you could even use tar with floppy disks .
I do n't know what you plan to do with your 'stuff ' off of the old machine though.... Have you tried to score a copy of Xenix for the pc ?
It runs on Virtual PC/VMWare ok , it 'll boot from a HD with Qemu but the floppy emulation is screwed up in Qemu .
There is ( was ?
) the ibcs2 emulation thing for linux as well.. . There are ways of keeping these things going , although I know the Altos was a unique machine.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dude, it'd be easy....

First you need to make a raw disk image of the thing.
I'm assuming you can do that?
Your ancient machine should have one of those ST-506/MFM controllers.... You could even use dd on the native platform and swap floppies out of it just by grabbing how many kb you can fit on a floppy at a time, and reconstruct the hd image onto a linux PC..

From there you can either try to mount that hard disk image on linux with an old sysv filesystem driver...

Another alternative if you have a serial hookup is to simply hook up a serial port, and do something like

"tar -cvf /dev/tty0a /"

And redirect it on the other side.
If you have uuencode/uudecode you could throw that in there.
Heck, you could even use tar with floppy disks.
I don't know what you plan to do with your 'stuff' off of the old machine though.... Have you tried to score a copy of Xenix for the pc?
It runs on Virtual PC/VMWare ok, it'll boot from a HD with Qemu but the floppy emulation is screwed up in Qemu.
There is (was?
) the ibcs2 emulation thing for linux as well...

There are ways of keeping these things going, although I know the Altos was a unique machine...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557680</id>
	<title>A bit of advice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269187680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone who, even now, is buildworlding FreeBSD 4.9 on a 486 with 32MB of RAM; Craigslist that piece of junk and go outside for a walk. Look at the trees and clouds and the sun. On Monday make an appointment with a shrink. That's what I'm going to do, once I get ppp working.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who , even now , is buildworlding FreeBSD 4.9 on a 486 with 32MB of RAM ; Craigslist that piece of junk and go outside for a walk .
Look at the trees and clouds and the sun .
On Monday make an appointment with a shrink .
That 's what I 'm going to do , once I get ppp working .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who, even now, is buildworlding FreeBSD 4.9 on a 486 with 32MB of RAM; Craigslist that piece of junk and go outside for a walk.
Look at the trees and clouds and the sun.
On Monday make an appointment with a shrink.
That's what I'm going to do, once I get ppp working.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559254</id>
	<title>Re:audio</title>
	<author>the\_humeister</author>
	<datestamp>1269202800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why not just hook it up to some bongo drums instead? Too bad it's only 2bps though...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not just hook it up to some bongo drums instead ?
Too bad it 's only 2bps though.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not just hook it up to some bongo drums instead?
Too bad it's only 2bps though...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556834</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558808</id>
	<title>Re:Simplify... work smarter, not harder.</title>
	<author>ledow</author>
	<datestamp>1269198960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What on Earth makes you think that any modern adaptor will accept that ancient type of hard drive, even if it used IDE connectivity?  Hell, it's hard to read anything less than about a Gig with modern adaptors sometimes.  The addressing modes have been changed any number of times since then, and the specs in the article even refer to it as a "Winchester" drive... when was the last time you heard that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What on Earth makes you think that any modern adaptor will accept that ancient type of hard drive , even if it used IDE connectivity ?
Hell , it 's hard to read anything less than about a Gig with modern adaptors sometimes .
The addressing modes have been changed any number of times since then , and the specs in the article even refer to it as a " Winchester " drive... when was the last time you heard that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What on Earth makes you think that any modern adaptor will accept that ancient type of hard drive, even if it used IDE connectivity?
Hell, it's hard to read anything less than about a Gig with modern adaptors sometimes.
The addressing modes have been changed any number of times since then, and the specs in the article even refer to it as a "Winchester" drive... when was the last time you heard that?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558068</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557954</id>
	<title>Re:Not all MFM controllers are compatible</title>
	<author>JasonStevens</author>
	<datestamp>1269190740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the deal here was the interleave.... But yes it was quite the dance for disks that'd been formatted in some crazed interleave to move them around... I *THINK* the 1:1 cards that were fast enough could read any of those disks.....

Although it's been so long I'm just lucky to remember that you needed two ribbon cables for MFM/RLL and that you could use lots of MFM disks on RLL controllers.... and get that 'free' 30\% increase in storage space.....</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the deal here was the interleave.... But yes it was quite the dance for disks that 'd been formatted in some crazed interleave to move them around... I * THINK * the 1 : 1 cards that were fast enough could read any of those disks.... . Although it 's been so long I 'm just lucky to remember that you needed two ribbon cables for MFM/RLL and that you could use lots of MFM disks on RLL controllers.... and get that 'free ' 30 \ % increase in storage space.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the deal here was the interleave.... But yes it was quite the dance for disks that'd been formatted in some crazed interleave to move them around... I *THINK* the 1:1 cards that were fast enough could read any of those disks.....

Although it's been so long I'm just lucky to remember that you needed two ribbon cables for MFM/RLL and that you could use lots of MFM disks on RLL controllers.... and get that 'free' 30\% increase in storage space.....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557532</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557280</id>
	<title>Re:Research Resources</title>
	<author>Waffle Iron</author>
	<datestamp>1269183840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>No need to bother a million Slashdot readers.</p></div><p>I wasn't bothered. I thought it was worth it just to see the picture of the system in the link. I can't decide if it looks more like a prop from the set of Space:1999, or the hood scoop from some 1970s AMC muscle car.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No need to bother a million Slashdot readers.I was n't bothered .
I thought it was worth it just to see the picture of the system in the link .
I ca n't decide if it looks more like a prop from the set of Space : 1999 , or the hood scoop from some 1970s AMC muscle car .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No need to bother a million Slashdot readers.I wasn't bothered.
I thought it was worth it just to see the picture of the system in the link.
I can't decide if it looks more like a prop from the set of Space:1999, or the hood scoop from some 1970s AMC muscle car.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557474</id>
	<title>Re:Not meant to be funny...</title>
	<author>JamesP</author>
	<datestamp>1269185820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought of that, but OCR is definitely a NO-NO</p><p>However, enconding bits into different chars may work. If it's a color display you can put more data into each 'symbol', but even if you have 'dark square' / 'light square' this may work.</p><p>But using that encoding it's probably just as fast as a serial port<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought of that , but OCR is definitely a NO-NOHowever , enconding bits into different chars may work .
If it 's a color display you can put more data into each 'symbol ' , but even if you have 'dark square ' / 'light square ' this may work.But using that encoding it 's probably just as fast as a serial port : /</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought of that, but OCR is definitely a NO-NOHowever, enconding bits into different chars may work.
If it's a color display you can put more data into each 'symbol', but even if you have 'dark square' / 'light square' this may work.But using that encoding it's probably just as fast as a serial port :/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557068</id>
	<title>Nobody asked the name of the BBS?</title>
	<author>ibsteve2u</author>
	<datestamp>1269181500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Depending on which one it was, some of us may not want our beer-posts out there for the whole world to see....<br> <br> <br> <br> <br> <br>
(he says nervously)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Depending on which one it was , some of us may not want our beer-posts out there for the whole world to see... . ( he says nervously )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Depending on which one it was, some of us may not want our beer-posts out there for the whole world to see....     
(he says nervously)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558032</id>
	<title>Re:Are you sure it's an IDE drive? More likely MFM</title>
	<author>rickb928</author>
	<datestamp>1269191580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My first IDE drive was a 30MB or 40MB Seagate ST-138, I think that was the model.  There were smaller, HP made them.  You can still find them for sale , though other than a collector item I wonder why.</p><p>I have an ISA slot in my spare Sempron machine that's about 6 years old or so now.  ISA could be found up to about 2 years ago if you strayed off the beaten path.</p><p>There will be more trouble getting the drive booted to any new hardware.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My first IDE drive was a 30MB or 40MB Seagate ST-138 , I think that was the model .
There were smaller , HP made them .
You can still find them for sale , though other than a collector item I wonder why.I have an ISA slot in my spare Sempron machine that 's about 6 years old or so now .
ISA could be found up to about 2 years ago if you strayed off the beaten path.There will be more trouble getting the drive booted to any new hardware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My first IDE drive was a 30MB or 40MB Seagate ST-138, I think that was the model.
There were smaller, HP made them.
You can still find them for sale , though other than a collector item I wonder why.I have an ISA slot in my spare Sempron machine that's about 6 years old or so now.
ISA could be found up to about 2 years ago if you strayed off the beaten path.There will be more trouble getting the drive booted to any new hardware.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556860</id>
	<title>yeah</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269178980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Xenix used their "sco xenix" filesystem.  The Xenix filesystem is supported under the mount utility in modern 2.6 linux kernels<br>by Anonymous Coward</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Xenix used their " sco xenix " filesystem .
The Xenix filesystem is supported under the mount utility in modern 2.6 linux kernelsby Anonymous Coward</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Xenix used their "sco xenix" filesystem.
The Xenix filesystem is supported under the mount utility in modern 2.6 linux kernelsby Anonymous Coward</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508</id>
	<title>Are you sure it's an IDE drive?  More likely MFM</title>
	<author>laing</author>
	<datestamp>1269186240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>As I recall, IDE drives first appeared with about 200MB of capacity.  They replaced RLL drives which maxed out at about 140MB.  Before RLL there was MFM (same electrical interface, different coding).  If it's a 10MB drive, it's probably a Seagate ST506/412 (I had one on my CP/M box).  You'll need an MFM controller in anything you hook it up to.  You'll also need a BIOS that has a proper disk parameter table for the drive geometry.  One problem that you're going to have is that all MFM controllers use ISA bus interfaces.  (First there was ISA, then EISA, VLB, then PCI, then PCI-X and finally PCIe.)  I haven't seen a computer manufactured with an ISA bus slot for well over 10 years.
<p>
IMHO you should use the serial port to move whatever data you want moved.  Your chances of success with other methods are low.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As I recall , IDE drives first appeared with about 200MB of capacity .
They replaced RLL drives which maxed out at about 140MB .
Before RLL there was MFM ( same electrical interface , different coding ) .
If it 's a 10MB drive , it 's probably a Seagate ST506/412 ( I had one on my CP/M box ) .
You 'll need an MFM controller in anything you hook it up to .
You 'll also need a BIOS that has a proper disk parameter table for the drive geometry .
One problem that you 're going to have is that all MFM controllers use ISA bus interfaces .
( First there was ISA , then EISA , VLB , then PCI , then PCI-X and finally PCIe .
) I have n't seen a computer manufactured with an ISA bus slot for well over 10 years .
IMHO you should use the serial port to move whatever data you want moved .
Your chances of success with other methods are low .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As I recall, IDE drives first appeared with about 200MB of capacity.
They replaced RLL drives which maxed out at about 140MB.
Before RLL there was MFM (same electrical interface, different coding).
If it's a 10MB drive, it's probably a Seagate ST506/412 (I had one on my CP/M box).
You'll need an MFM controller in anything you hook it up to.
You'll also need a BIOS that has a proper disk parameter table for the drive geometry.
One problem that you're going to have is that all MFM controllers use ISA bus interfaces.
(First there was ISA, then EISA, VLB, then PCI, then PCI-X and finally PCIe.
)  I haven't seen a computer manufactured with an ISA bus slot for well over 10 years.
IMHO you should use the serial port to move whatever data you want moved.
Your chances of success with other methods are low.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556802</id>
	<title>Research Resources</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269178440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Now that this is an "Ask Slashdot," I'm sure someone (who probably helped develop Xenix or something) will give you an exact answer. But in general, "what file system does Xenix use and will it interoperate with Linux/anything modern" is not a difficult sort of question to research, if you're willing to go beyond a Google search. <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/search/ref=sr\_nr\_i\_0?rh=i\%3Astripbooks\%2Ck\%3Axenix&amp;keywords=xenix" title="amazon.com">Amazon</a> [amazon.com] has plenty of used Xenix books for cheap, and at least the Dallas and Cleveland (and based on that sample, I'm guessing most large city public) libraries have at least a title or two. Even Ebay has a Xenix manual up for sale.They should tell you whatever you need to know about Xenix, and then you can Google about support for it in modern OS's.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.<br> <br>
In fact, you may even be able to <a href="http://books.google.com/books?q=xenix&amp;btnG=Search+Books" title="google.com">just</a> [google.com] <a href="http://books.google.com/books?q=xenix+\%22file+system\%22&amp;btnG=Search+Books" title="google.com">Google </a> [google.com] <a href="http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/9604.1/0507.html" title="indiana.edu">it</a> [indiana.edu]. No need to bother a million Slashdot readers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Now that this is an " Ask Slashdot , " I 'm sure someone ( who probably helped develop Xenix or something ) will give you an exact answer .
But in general , " what file system does Xenix use and will it interoperate with Linux/anything modern " is not a difficult sort of question to research , if you 're willing to go beyond a Google search .
Amazon [ amazon.com ] has plenty of used Xenix books for cheap , and at least the Dallas and Cleveland ( and based on that sample , I 'm guessing most large city public ) libraries have at least a title or two .
Even Ebay has a Xenix manual up for sale.They should tell you whatever you need to know about Xenix , and then you can Google about support for it in modern OS 's .
. In fact , you may even be able to just [ google.com ] Google [ google.com ] it [ indiana.edu ] .
No need to bother a million Slashdot readers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now that this is an "Ask Slashdot," I'm sure someone (who probably helped develop Xenix or something) will give you an exact answer.
But in general, "what file system does Xenix use and will it interoperate with Linux/anything modern" is not a difficult sort of question to research, if you're willing to go beyond a Google search.
Amazon [amazon.com] has plenty of used Xenix books for cheap, and at least the Dallas and Cleveland (and based on that sample, I'm guessing most large city public) libraries have at least a title or two.
Even Ebay has a Xenix manual up for sale.They should tell you whatever you need to know about Xenix, and then you can Google about support for it in modern OS's.
. 
In fact, you may even be able to just [google.com] Google  [google.com] it [indiana.edu].
No need to bother a million Slashdot readers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557336</id>
	<title>Re:Not meant to be funny...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269184380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What a load of bullshit...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What a load of bullshit.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What a load of bullshit...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557158</id>
	<title>Re:Reading the disk will be tricky.</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1269182520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Firstly, I'm sure that there were never 10MB IDE drives. The drive will either be ST506, ESDI or possibly even SCSI.</p></div><p>I would be surprised if you were not wrong about 10MB IDE drives. I have a GRiDPad with a 20MB IDE. I didn't believe it either. Almost all the electronics in IDE are on the drive, so the cost differential in the system is minimal. However, I would also be surprised if you <em>were</em> wrong about what the disk probably is, in the long term. I'd guess MFM or ESDI. Both use the same cabling but not the same interface, which is annoying.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Secondly Xenix would create several filesystems within the Xenix partition, using its own separate partition table. As far as I'm aware no mechanism to read these tables was ever added to the Linux kernel.</p></div><p>I saw mention once of a Xenix slice patch, but I couldn't find it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Firstly , I 'm sure that there were never 10MB IDE drives .
The drive will either be ST506 , ESDI or possibly even SCSI.I would be surprised if you were not wrong about 10MB IDE drives .
I have a GRiDPad with a 20MB IDE .
I did n't believe it either .
Almost all the electronics in IDE are on the drive , so the cost differential in the system is minimal .
However , I would also be surprised if you were wrong about what the disk probably is , in the long term .
I 'd guess MFM or ESDI .
Both use the same cabling but not the same interface , which is annoying.Secondly Xenix would create several filesystems within the Xenix partition , using its own separate partition table .
As far as I 'm aware no mechanism to read these tables was ever added to the Linux kernel.I saw mention once of a Xenix slice patch , but I could n't find it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Firstly, I'm sure that there were never 10MB IDE drives.
The drive will either be ST506, ESDI or possibly even SCSI.I would be surprised if you were not wrong about 10MB IDE drives.
I have a GRiDPad with a 20MB IDE.
I didn't believe it either.
Almost all the electronics in IDE are on the drive, so the cost differential in the system is minimal.
However, I would also be surprised if you were wrong about what the disk probably is, in the long term.
I'd guess MFM or ESDI.
Both use the same cabling but not the same interface, which is annoying.Secondly Xenix would create several filesystems within the Xenix partition, using its own separate partition table.
As far as I'm aware no mechanism to read these tables was ever added to the Linux kernel.I saw mention once of a Xenix slice patch, but I couldn't find it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557748</id>
	<title>Re:Are you sure it's an IDE drive? More likely MFM</title>
	<author>jabuzz</author>
	<datestamp>1269188220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can still buy a brand new motherboard with an ISA slot <a href="http://www.orbitmicro.com/global/imba-9454isa-r10-p-8745.html?ref=base" title="orbitmicro.com"> today</a> [orbitmicro.com]. Admittedly they are more expensive than a more mainstream motherboard, but anyone telling you that they don't exist is just plain ignorant. The ISA slot is not going to disappear anytime soon. If I have $100,000 upwards worth of equipment that is controlled by a computer using an ISA expansion card, I am not throwing it out because the computer is now kaput There are a whole range of USB to ISA and PCI to ISA converters that you can buy as well. Personally a new motherboard with ISA slot is the way I have gone in the past and would again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can still buy a brand new motherboard with an ISA slot today [ orbitmicro.com ] .
Admittedly they are more expensive than a more mainstream motherboard , but anyone telling you that they do n't exist is just plain ignorant .
The ISA slot is not going to disappear anytime soon .
If I have $ 100,000 upwards worth of equipment that is controlled by a computer using an ISA expansion card , I am not throwing it out because the computer is now kaput There are a whole range of USB to ISA and PCI to ISA converters that you can buy as well .
Personally a new motherboard with ISA slot is the way I have gone in the past and would again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can still buy a brand new motherboard with an ISA slot  today [orbitmicro.com].
Admittedly they are more expensive than a more mainstream motherboard, but anyone telling you that they don't exist is just plain ignorant.
The ISA slot is not going to disappear anytime soon.
If I have $100,000 upwards worth of equipment that is controlled by a computer using an ISA expansion card, I am not throwing it out because the computer is now kaput There are a whole range of USB to ISA and PCI to ISA converters that you can buy as well.
Personally a new motherboard with ISA slot is the way I have gone in the past and would again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557230</id>
	<title>A few points</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269183240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1. One or more mentioned Google. It was obviously tldr for them. You should start at http://justfuckinggoogleit.com Serously.</p><p>2. That drive is most likely MFM due to it's size and age. Even if you find a controller you won't likely have a machine that you can plug it in to. When was the last time you saw an ISA slot? IDE was designed in 1986 and your machine was 1983ish. If it has 2 ribbon cables going to it, it's MFM (or RLL), or ESDI. If 1 it's going to be SCSI.</p><p>3. Linux should mount it just fine. Even if it runs MP/M-86 (a CP/M variant), Xenix, or MS-DOS.</p><p>4. Given the age everything is likely to be stored in straight text files.</p><p>5. Magnetic media used Ferric Oxide (Rust) to record on.  They were dying from the day the were manufactured. Good Luck with that!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
One or more mentioned Google .
It was obviously tldr for them .
You should start at http : //justfuckinggoogleit.com Serously.2 .
That drive is most likely MFM due to it 's size and age .
Even if you find a controller you wo n't likely have a machine that you can plug it in to .
When was the last time you saw an ISA slot ?
IDE was designed in 1986 and your machine was 1983ish .
If it has 2 ribbon cables going to it , it 's MFM ( or RLL ) , or ESDI .
If 1 it 's going to be SCSI.3 .
Linux should mount it just fine .
Even if it runs MP/M-86 ( a CP/M variant ) , Xenix , or MS-DOS.4 .
Given the age everything is likely to be stored in straight text files.5 .
Magnetic media used Ferric Oxide ( Rust ) to record on .
They were dying from the day the were manufactured .
Good Luck with that !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
One or more mentioned Google.
It was obviously tldr for them.
You should start at http://justfuckinggoogleit.com Serously.2.
That drive is most likely MFM due to it's size and age.
Even if you find a controller you won't likely have a machine that you can plug it in to.
When was the last time you saw an ISA slot?
IDE was designed in 1986 and your machine was 1983ish.
If it has 2 ribbon cables going to it, it's MFM (or RLL), or ESDI.
If 1 it's going to be SCSI.3.
Linux should mount it just fine.
Even if it runs MP/M-86 (a CP/M variant), Xenix, or MS-DOS.4.
Given the age everything is likely to be stored in straight text files.5.
Magnetic media used Ferric Oxide (Rust) to record on.
They were dying from the day the were manufactured.
Good Luck with that!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557666</id>
	<title>Not really all that *old*...</title>
	<author>pla</author>
	<datestamp>1269187560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>A working 586?  C'mon, not exactly modern, but not really ancient, either.  Also <b>zero</b> chance of your
box containing "one of the first" BBSs... For reference, Compuserve went live in 1969 - Six years before
even the legendary Altair 8800, 17 years before Western Digital developed the IDE standard, and a good 24+
years before Intel released the CPU in Altos to which you refer.<br>
<br>
I do find a 10MB HDD in a 586 somewhat strange, though... Yes, they certainly did exist, but it would have counted
as an antique even back then.  By the time I had a 586 (1994, they debuted in 1993), you could already get
drives measured in gigabytes, and most people ran drives in the high-3-digit megabytes.<br>
<br>
Others, however, have already given you your answer.  Dump the whole FS over the serial link.  Don't bother screwing
around with trying to get it running in a modern box, just get what you want off it while it still works in its
current form.</htmltext>
<tokenext>A working 586 ?
C'mon , not exactly modern , but not really ancient , either .
Also zero chance of your box containing " one of the first " BBSs... For reference , Compuserve went live in 1969 - Six years before even the legendary Altair 8800 , 17 years before Western Digital developed the IDE standard , and a good 24 + years before Intel released the CPU in Altos to which you refer .
I do find a 10MB HDD in a 586 somewhat strange , though... Yes , they certainly did exist , but it would have counted as an antique even back then .
By the time I had a 586 ( 1994 , they debuted in 1993 ) , you could already get drives measured in gigabytes , and most people ran drives in the high-3-digit megabytes .
Others , however , have already given you your answer .
Dump the whole FS over the serial link .
Do n't bother screwing around with trying to get it running in a modern box , just get what you want off it while it still works in its current form .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A working 586?
C'mon, not exactly modern, but not really ancient, either.
Also zero chance of your
box containing "one of the first" BBSs... For reference, Compuserve went live in 1969 - Six years before
even the legendary Altair 8800, 17 years before Western Digital developed the IDE standard, and a good 24+
years before Intel released the CPU in Altos to which you refer.
I do find a 10MB HDD in a 586 somewhat strange, though... Yes, they certainly did exist, but it would have counted
as an antique even back then.
By the time I had a 586 (1994, they debuted in 1993), you could already get
drives measured in gigabytes, and most people ran drives in the high-3-digit megabytes.
Others, however, have already given you your answer.
Dump the whole FS over the serial link.
Don't bother screwing
around with trying to get it running in a modern box, just get what you want off it while it still works in its
current form.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31572722</id>
	<title>Correct calculation</title>
	<author>TheLoneGundam</author>
	<datestamp>1269285420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>10*1024*1024*10/300/3600=97.09 hours because there are start/stop bits with each character transmitted.

Calculation needs to be further adjusted to account for any overhead of the protocol (not familiar with zmodem myself).</htmltext>
<tokenext>10 * 1024 * 1024 * 10/300/3600 = 97.09 hours because there are start/stop bits with each character transmitted .
Calculation needs to be further adjusted to account for any overhead of the protocol ( not familiar with zmodem myself ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>10*1024*1024*10/300/3600=97.09 hours because there are start/stop bits with each character transmitted.
Calculation needs to be further adjusted to account for any overhead of the protocol (not familiar with zmodem myself).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557426</id>
	<title>UUCP?</title>
	<author>gjyoung</author>
	<datestamp>1269185280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Inset witty quote about knowing a buncha binary evaporator languages here....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Inset witty quote about knowing a buncha binary evaporator languages here... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Inset witty quote about knowing a buncha binary evaporator languages here....
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31562942</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269186540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Yep, and since your computer is a 586, there's a good chance the serial port will do 192kbps which even faster still.</p></div><p>Well for starters, the max speed of the serial port is determined by the UART chips not the CPU.</p><p>Secondly, it's an Altos model 586 computer (which was "extremely high tech" with an 80186 CPU and 512K RAM on the main board and a Z80 supporting the six built-in serial I/O ports), not a 586 CPU.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep , and since your computer is a 586 , there 's a good chance the serial port will do 192kbps which even faster still.Well for starters , the max speed of the serial port is determined by the UART chips not the CPU.Secondly , it 's an Altos model 586 computer ( which was " extremely high tech " with an 80186 CPU and 512K RAM on the main board and a Z80 supporting the six built-in serial I/O ports ) , not a 586 CPU .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep, and since your computer is a 586, there's a good chance the serial port will do 192kbps which even faster still.Well for starters, the max speed of the serial port is determined by the UART chips not the CPU.Secondly, it's an Altos model 586 computer (which was "extremely high tech" with an 80186 CPU and 512K RAM on the main board and a Z80 supporting the six built-in serial I/O ports), not a 586 CPU.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559628</id>
	<title>Re:Are you sure it's an IDE drive? More likely MFM</title>
	<author>gjyoung</author>
	<datestamp>1269162360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hada 20 meg connor HDD IDE in my 286 back in the day.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hada 20 meg connor HDD IDE in my 286 back in the day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hada 20 meg connor HDD IDE in my 286 back in the day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558556</id>
	<title>Re:Reading the disk will be tricky.</title>
	<author>ISoldat53</author>
	<datestamp>1269196560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ah, I remember the Tandy Model 16 with two Floppy disks running Xenix. I used to upgrade them to the 10Mb hard drive. It took 2hrs to format. At $90 and hour plus travel time. Those were the days.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , I remember the Tandy Model 16 with two Floppy disks running Xenix .
I used to upgrade them to the 10Mb hard drive .
It took 2hrs to format .
At $ 90 and hour plus travel time .
Those were the days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, I remember the Tandy Model 16 with two Floppy disks running Xenix.
I used to upgrade them to the 10Mb hard drive.
It took 2hrs to format.
At $90 and hour plus travel time.
Those were the days.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558316</id>
	<title>Cough... Xenix...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269194340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://www.megaupload.com/?d=CGD3RFSD</p><p>Enjoy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.megaupload.com/ ? d = CGD3RFSDEnjoy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.megaupload.com/?d=CGD3RFSDEnjoy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558822</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>DerPflanz</author>
	<datestamp>1269199020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>so for G*ds sake</p></div><p>Is God profanity nowadays, that we have to mask it from the filters?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>so for G * ds sakeIs God profanity nowadays , that we have to mask it from the filters ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so for G*ds sakeIs God profanity nowadays, that we have to mask it from the filters?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31562738</id>
	<title>Re:Are you sure it's an IDE drive? More likely MFM</title>
	<author>multipart/mixed</author>
	<datestamp>1269184740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; As I recall, IDE drives first appeared with about 200MB of capacity.</p><p>Not so, I have a Western Digital Caviar 280 around here somewhere (I may have just thrown it out, actually) -- that's an 80MB IDE disk.</p><p>I also remember 40MB IDE drives quite clearly.</p><p>I may even remember 10MB "XT-IDE" drivers. These weren't ATAPI, they were IDE for PC-XT machines.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; As I recall , IDE drives first appeared with about 200MB of capacity.Not so , I have a Western Digital Caviar 280 around here somewhere ( I may have just thrown it out , actually ) -- that 's an 80MB IDE disk.I also remember 40MB IDE drives quite clearly.I may even remember 10MB " XT-IDE " drivers .
These were n't ATAPI , they were IDE for PC-XT machines .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; As I recall, IDE drives first appeared with about 200MB of capacity.Not so, I have a Western Digital Caviar 280 around here somewhere (I may have just thrown it out, actually) -- that's an 80MB IDE disk.I also remember 40MB IDE drives quite clearly.I may even remember 10MB "XT-IDE" drivers.
These weren't ATAPI, they were IDE for PC-XT machines.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557922</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>Hamoohead</author>
	<datestamp>1269190500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I was running QBBS multi-user with FrontDoor on an 8088 IBM PC with DOS 3.3 and DoubleDOS in '86.  And I thought my USR 9600 baud modems were fast and my Seagate ST-80 RLL was huge.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I was running QBBS multi-user with FrontDoor on an 8088 IBM PC with DOS 3.3 and DoubleDOS in '86 .
And I thought my USR 9600 baud modems were fast and my Seagate ST-80 RLL was huge .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was running QBBS multi-user with FrontDoor on an 8088 IBM PC with DOS 3.3 and DoubleDOS in '86.
And I thought my USR 9600 baud modems were fast and my Seagate ST-80 RLL was huge.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556832</id>
	<title>No Removable Media?</title>
	<author>lobiusmoop</author>
	<datestamp>1269178620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your website, along with <a href="http://www.classiccmp.org/dunfield/altos/index.htm" title="classiccmp.org">this website</a> [classiccmp.org] suggests that the ALTOS 586 has a 5 1/4 floppy drive in it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your website , along with this website [ classiccmp.org ] suggests that the ALTOS 586 has a 5 1/4 floppy drive in it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your website, along with this website [classiccmp.org] suggests that the ALTOS 586 has a 5 1/4 floppy drive in it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31564388</id>
	<title>Serial port.</title>
	<author>rew</author>
	<datestamp>1269289740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The disk probably is NOT IDE as the article says. The harddisk is probably MFM. It probably has 17 sectors per head, 4 tracks per cylinder and 312 cylinders.... IIRC...</p><p>The serial line sounds reasonable to me.</p><p>I'm currently recovering data from a seagate drive. The seagate drive has a debugging serial port. The sata port is completely dead.... I'm hoping to figure out which parts I need instead of having to copy everything over the serial port....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The disk probably is NOT IDE as the article says .
The harddisk is probably MFM .
It probably has 17 sectors per head , 4 tracks per cylinder and 312 cylinders.... IIRC...The serial line sounds reasonable to me.I 'm currently recovering data from a seagate drive .
The seagate drive has a debugging serial port .
The sata port is completely dead.... I 'm hoping to figure out which parts I need instead of having to copy everything over the serial port... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The disk probably is NOT IDE as the article says.
The harddisk is probably MFM.
It probably has 17 sectors per head, 4 tracks per cylinder and 312 cylinders.... IIRC...The serial line sounds reasonable to me.I'm currently recovering data from a seagate drive.
The seagate drive has a debugging serial port.
The sata port is completely dead.... I'm hoping to figure out which parts I need instead of having to copy everything over the serial port....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558660</id>
	<title>Re:Use the serial port ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269197520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Threre are 2 significantly different flavors of st506 drives: MFM and RLL. If you don't have a matching controller, you won't be able to read anything. In addition to that, there are ESDI drives, which use similar cables but a fully digital interface, instead of digital contol lines (small separate cables) and analog data (shared calbe).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Threre are 2 significantly different flavors of st506 drives : MFM and RLL .
If you do n't have a matching controller , you wo n't be able to read anything .
In addition to that , there are ESDI drives , which use similar cables but a fully digital interface , instead of digital contol lines ( small separate cables ) and analog data ( shared calbe ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Threre are 2 significantly different flavors of st506 drives: MFM and RLL.
If you don't have a matching controller, you won't be able to read anything.
In addition to that, there are ESDI drives, which use similar cables but a fully digital interface, instead of digital contol lines (small separate cables) and analog data (shared calbe).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557532</id>
	<title>Not all MFM controllers are compatible</title>
	<author>linebackn</author>
	<datestamp>1269186420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I worked with a lot of MFM (ST506 interface) drives back in the day, and from my experience it was very unlikely that different models of MFM controller cards could read the drives from one another. If I installed a newer MFM disk controller card in a machine or moved the drive to a different machine with a different MFM controller, I would almost always have to re-low level format the drive before I could even run DOS format. (And mine were just FAT16 so the file system was never the issue)</p><p>So even if you have another MFM controller card, unless it is the exact same model of card it is unlikely that you could read sectors off of the drive. Their underlying low-level formats seemed to differ.</p><p>I also actually had the pleasure of briefly using an older model Altos 8600. That model had a bunch of serial ports for dumb terminals, an 8 inch floppy drive and an *8 inch* 40 meg Quantum Q2040 hard drive. I still have the 8" Microsoft Xenix floppy disks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I worked with a lot of MFM ( ST506 interface ) drives back in the day , and from my experience it was very unlikely that different models of MFM controller cards could read the drives from one another .
If I installed a newer MFM disk controller card in a machine or moved the drive to a different machine with a different MFM controller , I would almost always have to re-low level format the drive before I could even run DOS format .
( And mine were just FAT16 so the file system was never the issue ) So even if you have another MFM controller card , unless it is the exact same model of card it is unlikely that you could read sectors off of the drive .
Their underlying low-level formats seemed to differ.I also actually had the pleasure of briefly using an older model Altos 8600 .
That model had a bunch of serial ports for dumb terminals , an 8 inch floppy drive and an * 8 inch * 40 meg Quantum Q2040 hard drive .
I still have the 8 " Microsoft Xenix floppy disks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I worked with a lot of MFM (ST506 interface) drives back in the day, and from my experience it was very unlikely that different models of MFM controller cards could read the drives from one another.
If I installed a newer MFM disk controller card in a machine or moved the drive to a different machine with a different MFM controller, I would almost always have to re-low level format the drive before I could even run DOS format.
(And mine were just FAT16 so the file system was never the issue)So even if you have another MFM controller card, unless it is the exact same model of card it is unlikely that you could read sectors off of the drive.
Their underlying low-level formats seemed to differ.I also actually had the pleasure of briefly using an older model Altos 8600.
That model had a bunch of serial ports for dumb terminals, an 8 inch floppy drive and an *8 inch* 40 meg Quantum Q2040 hard drive.
I still have the 8" Microsoft Xenix floppy disks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556842</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269178740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No way it would take weeks. Even if the serial port was only 300 bit per second and he had to copy the whole 10MB disk through it this would take 10*1024*1024*8/300/3600=77.6 hours.<br>Mid-80s I'd expect at least five-digit bps rates - at 14400bps this would take 1.6 hours</p><p>so for G*ds sake, JUST USE THE SERIAL PORT</p><p>I'd understand if he was talking about a terabyte via serial but 10 megabytes...</p><p>But the real important question is: what to do with the salvaged data? If he'd want to post them online he might get in seriously shark-infected legal waters. Not everything I'd have posted in a BBS with a defined usergroup I gave permission to put on the internet without access control.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No way it would take weeks .
Even if the serial port was only 300 bit per second and he had to copy the whole 10MB disk through it this would take 10 * 1024 * 1024 * 8/300/3600 = 77.6 hours.Mid-80s I 'd expect at least five-digit bps rates - at 14400bps this would take 1.6 hoursso for G * ds sake , JUST USE THE SERIAL PORTI 'd understand if he was talking about a terabyte via serial but 10 megabytes...But the real important question is : what to do with the salvaged data ?
If he 'd want to post them online he might get in seriously shark-infected legal waters .
Not everything I 'd have posted in a BBS with a defined usergroup I gave permission to put on the internet without access control .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No way it would take weeks.
Even if the serial port was only 300 bit per second and he had to copy the whole 10MB disk through it this would take 10*1024*1024*8/300/3600=77.6 hours.Mid-80s I'd expect at least five-digit bps rates - at 14400bps this would take 1.6 hoursso for G*ds sake, JUST USE THE SERIAL PORTI'd understand if he was talking about a terabyte via serial but 10 megabytes...But the real important question is: what to do with the salvaged data?
If he'd want to post them online he might get in seriously shark-infected legal waters.
Not everything I'd have posted in a BBS with a defined usergroup I gave permission to put on the internet without access control.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31565124</id>
	<title>What about Floppy Disks</title>
	<author>old unix admin</author>
	<datestamp>1269259440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My first real computer (after a few Tandy CoCos) was a Altos 586. It has long since passed away, but I still have a Altos 486 at home. I also still have the manuals (somewhere).<p>

Xenix on an Altos 586 would have been licenced from Microsoft, not SCO, and was Microsoft's version of Unix (they had a license from AT&amp;T / Bell Labs). Later Microsoft sold their Xenix stuff to SCO.</p><p>

I have install disks for Xenix 2 which was 7th edition Unix (manuals are on the web <a href="http://cm.bell-labs.com/7thEdMan/" title="bell-labs.com" rel="nofollow">http://cm.bell-labs.com/7thEdMan/</a> [bell-labs.com]) and Xenix 3 which was AT&amp;T System III (pre System V). </p><p>

My system had a 40 MB ST506 Hard disk (you could only access 32 Meg), a 720 KByte floppy drive (Double sided, Double Density 96TPI, 5 1/4") and 5 (or was it 6) serial ports, 512K of memory and an 8086 processor. I think that the 586 name indicated that you could have 5 users and a printer connected on a 8086 processor. The Altos 986 had 10 ports for 9 users!</p><p>

By far the easiest way to get data on and off at the time was using the floppy. With a 10 meg drive it would only take a dozen or so floppies to back the system up. Tar was the standard backup command, but I think there was an odd extension to tar for multi-volumes.</p><p>

I think all the machines should have had 720KB floppy drives. Xenix came on floppies and so did diagnostics. These are much easier to swap with other systems than ST506 hard disks. Other systems such as some NEC PCs (IBM clones) also used these 720 KB drives And they were pin compatible with 720k 3 1/2 drives (different connector, but same pins).
</p><p>
Second best method was kermit (I remember having a lot of trouble trying to compile kermit on this) and with a 10 meg system, it is quite possible that you don't have a C compiler. </p><p>

UUCP is an option, but it may not be installed. You could also use cu from another unix system, but it does not have error checking.
</p><p>
However if it was a BBS server, there is a better chance that it does have Kermit, UUCP, or X-modem software installed. I think the serial ports default to 9600 baud, 1 sotp bit, no parity.
</p><p>
Many of the comments suggest using SCO software. Most SCO software requires either a 286, 386, or higher processor and won't run on an Altos 586. SCO did sell Xenix for 8086, but it was not very widely used.
</p><p>
Of course I bought this machine around 1987 and threw it out around 2004, and my memory is a bit rusty, so my comments should probably be considered as hints at the truth.
</p><p>
Grant</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My first real computer ( after a few Tandy CoCos ) was a Altos 586 .
It has long since passed away , but I still have a Altos 486 at home .
I also still have the manuals ( somewhere ) .
Xenix on an Altos 586 would have been licenced from Microsoft , not SCO , and was Microsoft 's version of Unix ( they had a license from AT&amp;T / Bell Labs ) .
Later Microsoft sold their Xenix stuff to SCO .
I have install disks for Xenix 2 which was 7th edition Unix ( manuals are on the web http : //cm.bell-labs.com/7thEdMan/ [ bell-labs.com ] ) and Xenix 3 which was AT&amp;T System III ( pre System V ) .
My system had a 40 MB ST506 Hard disk ( you could only access 32 Meg ) , a 720 KByte floppy drive ( Double sided , Double Density 96TPI , 5 1/4 " ) and 5 ( or was it 6 ) serial ports , 512K of memory and an 8086 processor .
I think that the 586 name indicated that you could have 5 users and a printer connected on a 8086 processor .
The Altos 986 had 10 ports for 9 users !
By far the easiest way to get data on and off at the time was using the floppy .
With a 10 meg drive it would only take a dozen or so floppies to back the system up .
Tar was the standard backup command , but I think there was an odd extension to tar for multi-volumes .
I think all the machines should have had 720KB floppy drives .
Xenix came on floppies and so did diagnostics .
These are much easier to swap with other systems than ST506 hard disks .
Other systems such as some NEC PCs ( IBM clones ) also used these 720 KB drives And they were pin compatible with 720k 3 1/2 drives ( different connector , but same pins ) .
Second best method was kermit ( I remember having a lot of trouble trying to compile kermit on this ) and with a 10 meg system , it is quite possible that you do n't have a C compiler .
UUCP is an option , but it may not be installed .
You could also use cu from another unix system , but it does not have error checking .
However if it was a BBS server , there is a better chance that it does have Kermit , UUCP , or X-modem software installed .
I think the serial ports default to 9600 baud , 1 sotp bit , no parity .
Many of the comments suggest using SCO software .
Most SCO software requires either a 286 , 386 , or higher processor and wo n't run on an Altos 586 .
SCO did sell Xenix for 8086 , but it was not very widely used .
Of course I bought this machine around 1987 and threw it out around 2004 , and my memory is a bit rusty , so my comments should probably be considered as hints at the truth .
Grant</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My first real computer (after a few Tandy CoCos) was a Altos 586.
It has long since passed away, but I still have a Altos 486 at home.
I also still have the manuals (somewhere).
Xenix on an Altos 586 would have been licenced from Microsoft, not SCO, and was Microsoft's version of Unix (they had a license from AT&amp;T / Bell Labs).
Later Microsoft sold their Xenix stuff to SCO.
I have install disks for Xenix 2 which was 7th edition Unix (manuals are on the web http://cm.bell-labs.com/7thEdMan/ [bell-labs.com]) and Xenix 3 which was AT&amp;T System III (pre System V).
My system had a 40 MB ST506 Hard disk (you could only access 32 Meg), a 720 KByte floppy drive (Double sided, Double Density 96TPI, 5 1/4") and 5 (or was it 6) serial ports, 512K of memory and an 8086 processor.
I think that the 586 name indicated that you could have 5 users and a printer connected on a 8086 processor.
The Altos 986 had 10 ports for 9 users!
By far the easiest way to get data on and off at the time was using the floppy.
With a 10 meg drive it would only take a dozen or so floppies to back the system up.
Tar was the standard backup command, but I think there was an odd extension to tar for multi-volumes.
I think all the machines should have had 720KB floppy drives.
Xenix came on floppies and so did diagnostics.
These are much easier to swap with other systems than ST506 hard disks.
Other systems such as some NEC PCs (IBM clones) also used these 720 KB drives And they were pin compatible with 720k 3 1/2 drives (different connector, but same pins).
Second best method was kermit (I remember having a lot of trouble trying to compile kermit on this) and with a 10 meg system, it is quite possible that you don't have a C compiler.
UUCP is an option, but it may not be installed.
You could also use cu from another unix system, but it does not have error checking.
However if it was a BBS server, there is a better chance that it does have Kermit, UUCP, or X-modem software installed.
I think the serial ports default to 9600 baud, 1 sotp bit, no parity.
Many of the comments suggest using SCO software.
Most SCO software requires either a 286, 386, or higher processor and won't run on an Altos 586.
SCO did sell Xenix for 8086, but it was not very widely used.
Of course I bought this machine around 1987 and threw it out around 2004, and my memory is a bit rusty, so my comments should probably be considered as hints at the truth.
Grant</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557308</id>
	<title>Memory Lane...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269184200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Off topic but I'm gonna be an old man.. I remember those machines from the early 90s. Working at a consulting firm that sold accounting software I replaced many of them with X86 boxes running SCO UNIX driving serial terminals off digiboards and eventually ethernet. SCO owned the market back then for small business UNIX. That is why they fought so hard against linux, because suddenly there was a free solution out there spreading like a brush fire.</p><p>When it came time to extract the data off the old Altos boxes, we used magnetic tape. The machine you have should have a tape drive. Buy an old scsi tape drive off ebay and plug it into a modern box and away you go...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Off topic but I 'm gon na be an old man.. I remember those machines from the early 90s .
Working at a consulting firm that sold accounting software I replaced many of them with X86 boxes running SCO UNIX driving serial terminals off digiboards and eventually ethernet .
SCO owned the market back then for small business UNIX .
That is why they fought so hard against linux , because suddenly there was a free solution out there spreading like a brush fire.When it came time to extract the data off the old Altos boxes , we used magnetic tape .
The machine you have should have a tape drive .
Buy an old scsi tape drive off ebay and plug it into a modern box and away you go.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Off topic but I'm gonna be an old man.. I remember those machines from the early 90s.
Working at a consulting firm that sold accounting software I replaced many of them with X86 boxes running SCO UNIX driving serial terminals off digiboards and eventually ethernet.
SCO owned the market back then for small business UNIX.
That is why they fought so hard against linux, because suddenly there was a free solution out there spreading like a brush fire.When it came time to extract the data off the old Altos boxes, we used magnetic tape.
The machine you have should have a tape drive.
Buy an old scsi tape drive off ebay and plug it into a modern box and away you go...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31561102</id>
	<title>Re:Are you sure it's an IDE drive? More likely MFM</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269172140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IDE harddisk as small as 10MB from Conner Peripherals were used in orginial Compaq Portable III PC, so IDE drive were available at a lot smaller capacity then 200MB.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IDE harddisk as small as 10MB from Conner Peripherals were used in orginial Compaq Portable III PC , so IDE drive were available at a lot smaller capacity then 200MB .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IDE harddisk as small as 10MB from Conner Peripherals were used in orginial Compaq Portable III PC, so IDE drive were available at a lot smaller capacity then 200MB.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557638</id>
	<title>Re:NO DISASSEMBLE ALTOS!</title>
	<author>dbIII</author>
	<datestamp>1269187320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The funny thing is some loser on another thread was telling us all how fantasticly reliable hard drives are.  In contrast I've had in a few tapes older than that Xenix box transcribed this year already.<br>I'd go for the serial port as well, worked on my old Atari.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The funny thing is some loser on another thread was telling us all how fantasticly reliable hard drives are .
In contrast I 've had in a few tapes older than that Xenix box transcribed this year already.I 'd go for the serial port as well , worked on my old Atari .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The funny thing is some loser on another thread was telling us all how fantasticly reliable hard drives are.
In contrast I've had in a few tapes older than that Xenix box transcribed this year already.I'd go for the serial port as well, worked on my old Atari.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560722</id>
	<title>Re:Are you sure it's an IDE drive? More likely MFM</title>
	<author>KennyP</author>
	<datestamp>1269169800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Incorrect.<br><br>As an initial shareholder of Conner, I can assure you - they started at 10MB and went up, and up, and up...<br><br>If the drive is truly IDE - anything should be able to make a disk image. Hell - there might be a entry in the BIOS for that drive!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Incorrect.As an initial shareholder of Conner , I can assure you - they started at 10MB and went up , and up , and up...If the drive is truly IDE - anything should be able to make a disk image .
Hell - there might be a entry in the BIOS for that drive !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Incorrect.As an initial shareholder of Conner, I can assure you - they started at 10MB and went up, and up, and up...If the drive is truly IDE - anything should be able to make a disk image.
Hell - there might be a entry in the BIOS for that drive!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556866</id>
	<title>Re:cu</title>
	<author>Jah-Wren Ryel</author>
	<datestamp>1269179040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is a pretty good chance that kermit is available for that system.  I would go with kermit file transfers over uucp any day it being easier to set up, has decent error detection and better feedback for the average user.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a pretty good chance that kermit is available for that system .
I would go with kermit file transfers over uucp any day it being easier to set up , has decent error detection and better feedback for the average user .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a pretty good chance that kermit is available for that system.
I would go with kermit file transfers over uucp any day it being easier to set up, has decent error detection and better feedback for the average user.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556798</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556946</id>
	<title>Re:No Removable Media?</title>
	<author>TheSHAD0W</author>
	<datestamp>1269179940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yup.  Further, machines of that age were typically able to take 1.2 MB floppy drives.  Eight disks would cover that entire 10 MB drive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yup .
Further , machines of that age were typically able to take 1.2 MB floppy drives .
Eight disks would cover that entire 10 MB drive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yup.
Further, machines of that age were typically able to take 1.2 MB floppy drives.
Eight disks would cover that entire 10 MB drive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560208</id>
	<title>Disk is UFS, but do you have tape too?</title>
	<author>James Youngman</author>
	<datestamp>1269166200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Altos 586 I used to own also had a QIC tape drive in it (it's in the front of the unit).   It also had an Ethernet connector - blanked off in the case of my machine, the Ethernet controller wasn't installed.   But check yours.</p><p>The filesystem format is UFS and is intelligible by Linux (I verified this in the case of the 5.25" floppies, but the hard disk should be the same).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Altos 586 I used to own also had a QIC tape drive in it ( it 's in the front of the unit ) .
It also had an Ethernet connector - blanked off in the case of my machine , the Ethernet controller was n't installed .
But check yours.The filesystem format is UFS and is intelligible by Linux ( I verified this in the case of the 5.25 " floppies , but the hard disk should be the same ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Altos 586 I used to own also had a QIC tape drive in it (it's in the front of the unit).
It also had an Ethernet connector - blanked off in the case of my machine, the Ethernet controller wasn't installed.
But check yours.The filesystem format is UFS and is intelligible by Linux (I verified this in the case of the 5.25" floppies, but the hard disk should be the same).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557304</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>HBI</author>
	<datestamp>1269184140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I would be shocked if you couldn't get 38400 or even 57600 out of a null modem cable.  Assuming a buffered chip at the receiving end - 16550 type.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I would be shocked if you could n't get 38400 or even 57600 out of a null modem cable .
Assuming a buffered chip at the receiving end - 16550 type .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would be shocked if you couldn't get 38400 or even 57600 out of a null modem cable.
Assuming a buffered chip at the receiving end - 16550 type.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556932</id>
	<title>Serial port.</title>
	<author>mrbill1234</author>
	<datestamp>1269179880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hmm, well 'Xenix' is actually an old SCO product which SCO originally bought off Microsoft, but it was then licensed to several other vendors - but as has been said here, your best bet is the serial port.  Either use UUCP, or if you have a compiler on the host - compile up a simple xmodem/ymodem/zmodem binary and transfer like that.  Worst case scenario, tar up all the data, compress it (it would have old style unix compress -.Z), uuencode it (if you don't have uuencode, you can download it -it's just a shell script I recall), split it up into chunks, then just cat each individual chunk onto another host and reverse the process to decode it all back into a tar file.  You might want to checksum each bit too (sum should be on old Xenix systems).</p><p>I think removing the disk and mounting it on another host should be your absolute last resort.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmm , well 'Xenix ' is actually an old SCO product which SCO originally bought off Microsoft , but it was then licensed to several other vendors - but as has been said here , your best bet is the serial port .
Either use UUCP , or if you have a compiler on the host - compile up a simple xmodem/ymodem/zmodem binary and transfer like that .
Worst case scenario , tar up all the data , compress it ( it would have old style unix compress -.Z ) , uuencode it ( if you do n't have uuencode , you can download it -it 's just a shell script I recall ) , split it up into chunks , then just cat each individual chunk onto another host and reverse the process to decode it all back into a tar file .
You might want to checksum each bit too ( sum should be on old Xenix systems ) .I think removing the disk and mounting it on another host should be your absolute last resort .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmm, well 'Xenix' is actually an old SCO product which SCO originally bought off Microsoft, but it was then licensed to several other vendors - but as has been said here, your best bet is the serial port.
Either use UUCP, or if you have a compiler on the host - compile up a simple xmodem/ymodem/zmodem binary and transfer like that.
Worst case scenario, tar up all the data, compress it (it would have old style unix compress -.Z), uuencode it (if you don't have uuencode, you can download it -it's just a shell script I recall), split it up into chunks, then just cat each individual chunk onto another host and reverse the process to decode it all back into a tar file.
You might want to checksum each bit too (sum should be on old Xenix systems).I think removing the disk and mounting it on another host should be your absolute last resort.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557126</id>
	<title>Is this worth it?</title>
	<author>Profane MuthaFucka</author>
	<datestamp>1269182280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The porn from that era just wasn't as good as you remember it to be. Perhaps you're better off with the good memories that you have. The reality can only diminish them. Leave the data on that old machine and you'll be happier.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The porn from that era just was n't as good as you remember it to be .
Perhaps you 're better off with the good memories that you have .
The reality can only diminish them .
Leave the data on that old machine and you 'll be happier .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The porn from that era just wasn't as good as you remember it to be.
Perhaps you're better off with the good memories that you have.
The reality can only diminish them.
Leave the data on that old machine and you'll be happier.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557862</id>
	<title>Re:Are you sure it's an IDE drive? More likely MFM</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269189600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hm, my first PC in 1990 was a 286 with onboard IDE controller, and came with a 3.5in 40MB IDE drive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hm , my first PC in 1990 was a 286 with onboard IDE controller , and came with a 3.5in 40MB IDE drive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hm, my first PC in 1990 was a 286 with onboard IDE controller, and came with a 3.5in 40MB IDE drive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31561606</id>
	<title>1983?</title>
	<author>Bratmon</author>
	<datestamp>1269176400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>That thing's older than I am!
I refuse to get off your lawn.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That thing 's older than I am !
I refuse to get off your lawn .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That thing's older than I am!
I refuse to get off your lawn.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558128</id>
	<title>Late '80s == 1200/2400 baud at the low end</title>
	<author>tomhudson</author>
	<datestamp>1269192540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... so 10 million characters , at 100 cps, is only 100,000 seconds, or just over a day @ 1200 baud, or 14 hours@ 2400 baud. Of course, if you zipped it first, you could probably transfer it in an hour or two, since text files are VERY compressible, and you only want the data, not the system files. Heck, the zipped file might fit on one high-density 5-1/4" floppy.
</p><p>Forget about transplanting the hard drive into a more modern machine - it won't work.
</p><p>
Since many modern machines don't have a serial port, you may have to buy a serial-to-usb converter, as well as a null modem cable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... so 10 million characters , at 100 cps , is only 100,000 seconds , or just over a day @ 1200 baud , or 14 hours @ 2400 baud .
Of course , if you zipped it first , you could probably transfer it in an hour or two , since text files are VERY compressible , and you only want the data , not the system files .
Heck , the zipped file might fit on one high-density 5-1/4 " floppy .
Forget about transplanting the hard drive into a more modern machine - it wo n't work .
Since many modern machines do n't have a serial port , you may have to buy a serial-to-usb converter , as well as a null modem cable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... so 10 million characters , at 100 cps, is only 100,000 seconds, or just over a day @ 1200 baud, or 14 hours@ 2400 baud.
Of course, if you zipped it first, you could probably transfer it in an hour or two, since text files are VERY compressible, and you only want the data, not the system files.
Heck, the zipped file might fit on one high-density 5-1/4" floppy.
Forget about transplanting the hard drive into a more modern machine - it won't work.
Since many modern machines don't have a serial port, you may have to buy a serial-to-usb converter, as well as a null modem cable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556956</id>
	<title>Re:cu</title>
	<author>spong</author>
	<datestamp>1269180120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If it used to be a BBS system, it will probably have software for one of xmodem, ymodem or zmodem file transfers.  You should be able to use rzsz on Linux to transfer files</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it used to be a BBS system , it will probably have software for one of xmodem , ymodem or zmodem file transfers .
You should be able to use rzsz on Linux to transfer files</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it used to be a BBS system, it will probably have software for one of xmodem, ymodem or zmodem file transfers.
You should be able to use rzsz on Linux to transfer files</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556798</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556798</id>
	<title>cu</title>
	<author>jzu</author>
	<datestamp>1269178380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>UUCP had a command called cu (call up) which is what you need. From "apt-cache show cu" on Debian/Ubuntu:

<p>
 The  cu  command is used to call up another system and act
 as a dial in terminal.  It can also do simple file
 transfers with no error checking.
 cu is part of the UUCP source but has been split into its
 own package because it can be useful even if you do not do
 uucp.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>UUCP had a command called cu ( call up ) which is what you need .
From " apt-cache show cu " on Debian/Ubuntu : The cu command is used to call up another system and act as a dial in terminal .
It can also do simple file transfers with no error checking .
cu is part of the UUCP source but has been split into its own package because it can be useful even if you do not do uucp .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>UUCP had a command called cu (call up) which is what you need.
From "apt-cache show cu" on Debian/Ubuntu:


 The  cu  command is used to call up another system and act
 as a dial in terminal.
It can also do simple file
 transfers with no error checking.
cu is part of the UUCP source but has been split into its
 own package because it can be useful even if you do not do
 uucp.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31561136</id>
	<title>ethernet?</title>
	<author>cas2000</author>
	<datestamp>1269172320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>are you sure it has no ethernet?  that old-computers.com page you linked to says it has.</p><p>back in those days, ethernet ports were mostly either BNC (coax cable, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10BASE2" title="wikipedia.org">10base2</a> [wikipedia.org]) or <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attachment\_Unit\_Interface" title="wikipedia.org">AUI</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p>You can still find PCI cards for PCs with BNC connectors.  Probably not new any more, but try a swap meet or ebay or in the old-parts bins at small computer retailers.  lots of cheap NE2000 clones had both RJ45 and BNC.  you'd also need a length of cable and a terminator for each end of the cable.    this stuff is all long-obsolete but not that hard to find.  esp the connectors and terminators.</p><p>you can even find <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medium\_Attachment\_Unit" title="wikipedia.org">MAUs</a> [wikipedia.org] with RJ-45 connectors (i've still got one lying around some where).</p><p>of course, getting this working might end up transferring the data a lot faster but could take you days to figure out how to set up networking on the old machine.   serial is probably still best and easiest.</p><p>one easy way would be to use a linux box as a terminal (null-modem cable, running cu or minicom or something).  set the linux software to log everything to disk and then cat the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/ node for the hard disk through 'od'.  or, optionally, 'cat<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/XXX | compress | od'.</p><p>that will get you a text hex dump of the entire disk.  you can then extract that into a disk image.  you may even be able to mount that on linux.</p><p>NOTE: od will massively inflate the size of the transfer.  that's because it's converting the binary into an ascii representation.  if the altos system has uuencode installed, that would probably be a better choice than od (it's a lot more efficient, averaging about 40\% inflation of file size instead of more than doubling it with od).</p><p>similarly, you can get the files rather than a disk image by using tar. capture and log the output of "tar cf - / | od".  again, optionally use compress in the pipeline.    that will end up giving you a standard old-fashioned tar file which can just be extracted with GNU tar.</p><p>unfortunately, od has no ecc or even checksumming.  if you have awk on the altos system, it might be better to write an awk script that does a hex dump with support for error correction).  you could probably do it in sh too if you had to.  note: it would be better to do it in a scripting language rather than C because the system may not even have a compiler installed, and even if it does you don't want to thrash the disk to compile something.</p><p>if the altos system has zmodem software installed (quite likely since it was a BBS), that would be even better.  use minicom on the linux end (and make sure you have the lrzsz package installed for zmodem receive support), then pipe the output of cat or tar into sz instead of od.  that would give you a transfer with error detection and recovery (i.e. error free transfer) and no need to mess around with the log to extract the actual data.</p><p>carefully read the man page for sz on the altos system to find out how to set the filename when transferring stdin.  it may have a default filename that it uses, or it may let you set an env var (e.g. the linux version of sz you can set the $ONAME environment variable).</p><p>to summarise:</p><p>1. "cat<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/dev/XXX" (disk image) or "tar cf -<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/" (files).  or do both.<br>2. use zmodem "sz" if it's installed.<br>3. otherwise use "uuencode" if it's installed<br>4. otherwise, use "od"<br>5. if the system doesn't have od (unlikely) or some other hex-dumper, then write up a clone in awk or sh or something.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>are you sure it has no ethernet ?
that old-computers.com page you linked to says it has.back in those days , ethernet ports were mostly either BNC ( coax cable , 10base2 [ wikipedia.org ] ) or AUI [ wikipedia.org ] .You can still find PCI cards for PCs with BNC connectors .
Probably not new any more , but try a swap meet or ebay or in the old-parts bins at small computer retailers .
lots of cheap NE2000 clones had both RJ45 and BNC .
you 'd also need a length of cable and a terminator for each end of the cable .
this stuff is all long-obsolete but not that hard to find .
esp the connectors and terminators.you can even find MAUs [ wikipedia.org ] with RJ-45 connectors ( i 've still got one lying around some where ) .of course , getting this working might end up transferring the data a lot faster but could take you days to figure out how to set up networking on the old machine .
serial is probably still best and easiest.one easy way would be to use a linux box as a terminal ( null-modem cable , running cu or minicom or something ) .
set the linux software to log everything to disk and then cat the /dev/ node for the hard disk through 'od' .
or , optionally , 'cat /dev/XXX | compress | od'.that will get you a text hex dump of the entire disk .
you can then extract that into a disk image .
you may even be able to mount that on linux.NOTE : od will massively inflate the size of the transfer .
that 's because it 's converting the binary into an ascii representation .
if the altos system has uuencode installed , that would probably be a better choice than od ( it 's a lot more efficient , averaging about 40 \ % inflation of file size instead of more than doubling it with od ) .similarly , you can get the files rather than a disk image by using tar .
capture and log the output of " tar cf - / | od " .
again , optionally use compress in the pipeline .
that will end up giving you a standard old-fashioned tar file which can just be extracted with GNU tar.unfortunately , od has no ecc or even checksumming .
if you have awk on the altos system , it might be better to write an awk script that does a hex dump with support for error correction ) .
you could probably do it in sh too if you had to .
note : it would be better to do it in a scripting language rather than C because the system may not even have a compiler installed , and even if it does you do n't want to thrash the disk to compile something.if the altos system has zmodem software installed ( quite likely since it was a BBS ) , that would be even better .
use minicom on the linux end ( and make sure you have the lrzsz package installed for zmodem receive support ) , then pipe the output of cat or tar into sz instead of od .
that would give you a transfer with error detection and recovery ( i.e .
error free transfer ) and no need to mess around with the log to extract the actual data.carefully read the man page for sz on the altos system to find out how to set the filename when transferring stdin .
it may have a default filename that it uses , or it may let you set an env var ( e.g .
the linux version of sz you can set the $ ONAME environment variable ) .to summarise : 1 .
" cat /dev/XXX " ( disk image ) or " tar cf - / " ( files ) .
or do both.2 .
use zmodem " sz " if it 's installed.3 .
otherwise use " uuencode " if it 's installed4 .
otherwise , use " od " 5. if the system does n't have od ( unlikely ) or some other hex-dumper , then write up a clone in awk or sh or something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>are you sure it has no ethernet?
that old-computers.com page you linked to says it has.back in those days, ethernet ports were mostly either BNC (coax cable, 10base2 [wikipedia.org]) or AUI [wikipedia.org].You can still find PCI cards for PCs with BNC connectors.
Probably not new any more, but try a swap meet or ebay or in the old-parts bins at small computer retailers.
lots of cheap NE2000 clones had both RJ45 and BNC.
you'd also need a length of cable and a terminator for each end of the cable.
this stuff is all long-obsolete but not that hard to find.
esp the connectors and terminators.you can even find MAUs [wikipedia.org] with RJ-45 connectors (i've still got one lying around some where).of course, getting this working might end up transferring the data a lot faster but could take you days to figure out how to set up networking on the old machine.
serial is probably still best and easiest.one easy way would be to use a linux box as a terminal (null-modem cable, running cu or minicom or something).
set the linux software to log everything to disk and then cat the /dev/ node for the hard disk through 'od'.
or, optionally, 'cat /dev/XXX | compress | od'.that will get you a text hex dump of the entire disk.
you can then extract that into a disk image.
you may even be able to mount that on linux.NOTE: od will massively inflate the size of the transfer.
that's because it's converting the binary into an ascii representation.
if the altos system has uuencode installed, that would probably be a better choice than od (it's a lot more efficient, averaging about 40\% inflation of file size instead of more than doubling it with od).similarly, you can get the files rather than a disk image by using tar.
capture and log the output of "tar cf - / | od".
again, optionally use compress in the pipeline.
that will end up giving you a standard old-fashioned tar file which can just be extracted with GNU tar.unfortunately, od has no ecc or even checksumming.
if you have awk on the altos system, it might be better to write an awk script that does a hex dump with support for error correction).
you could probably do it in sh too if you had to.
note: it would be better to do it in a scripting language rather than C because the system may not even have a compiler installed, and even if it does you don't want to thrash the disk to compile something.if the altos system has zmodem software installed (quite likely since it was a BBS), that would be even better.
use minicom on the linux end (and make sure you have the lrzsz package installed for zmodem receive support), then pipe the output of cat or tar into sz instead of od.
that would give you a transfer with error detection and recovery (i.e.
error free transfer) and no need to mess around with the log to extract the actual data.carefully read the man page for sz on the altos system to find out how to set the filename when transferring stdin.
it may have a default filename that it uses, or it may let you set an env var (e.g.
the linux version of sz you can set the $ONAME environment variable).to summarise:1.
"cat /dev/XXX" (disk image) or "tar cf - /" (files).
or do both.2.
use zmodem "sz" if it's installed.3.
otherwise use "uuencode" if it's installed4.
otherwise, use "od"5. if the system doesn't have od (unlikely) or some other hex-dumper, then write up a clone in awk or sh or something.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560664</id>
	<title>textfiles.com</title>
	<author>Eil</author>
	<datestamp>1269169320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My advice is coming late in the thread, but I hope the submitter gets it:</p><p>The first person I would talk to is Jason Scott of <a href="http://textfiles.com/" title="textfiles.com">textfiles.com</a> [textfiles.com]. He collects old BBS files and some hardware. He would be able to give you some tips on the system or put you in touch with someone who can.</p><p>And if you do manage to get the data without his help, please send it to textfiles.com anyway so the world has access to it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My advice is coming late in the thread , but I hope the submitter gets it : The first person I would talk to is Jason Scott of textfiles.com [ textfiles.com ] .
He collects old BBS files and some hardware .
He would be able to give you some tips on the system or put you in touch with someone who can.And if you do manage to get the data without his help , please send it to textfiles.com anyway so the world has access to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My advice is coming late in the thread, but I hope the submitter gets it:The first person I would talk to is Jason Scott of textfiles.com [textfiles.com].
He collects old BBS files and some hardware.
He would be able to give you some tips on the system or put you in touch with someone who can.And if you do manage to get the data without his help, please send it to textfiles.com anyway so the world has access to it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560542</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269168480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why does the summary/author really act like 10MB should surprise most of us. Most of us aren't in our 20s last time I saw the marketing demographic for slashdot. And claiming a late 80s OS would be home to one of the first multi user BBS? Don't even make me laugh!</p><p>(Get off my lawn, etc)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does the summary/author really act like 10MB should surprise most of us .
Most of us are n't in our 20s last time I saw the marketing demographic for slashdot .
And claiming a late 80s OS would be home to one of the first multi user BBS ?
Do n't even make me laugh !
( Get off my lawn , etc )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does the summary/author really act like 10MB should surprise most of us.
Most of us aren't in our 20s last time I saw the marketing demographic for slashdot.
And claiming a late 80s OS would be home to one of the first multi user BBS?
Don't even make me laugh!
(Get off my lawn, etc)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557950</id>
	<title>Re:Hard Drive Most Likely MFM...</title>
	<author>CAIMLAS</author>
	<datestamp>1269190740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He could certainly use the serial port, but there are also "cheap" ways of doing it:</p><p></p><p>Granted, you'll have to find an old system with an ISA port to use the card, but it's quite doable. I did the same for a 10MB (IBM brand? I don't remember) 8" MFM years ago. In my case, it was actual data recovery: I had to locate the lost (previously deleted) files. That took some time; I wish there had been something like photorec back then.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He could certainly use the serial port , but there are also " cheap " ways of doing it : Granted , you 'll have to find an old system with an ISA port to use the card , but it 's quite doable .
I did the same for a 10MB ( IBM brand ?
I do n't remember ) 8 " MFM years ago .
In my case , it was actual data recovery : I had to locate the lost ( previously deleted ) files .
That took some time ; I wish there had been something like photorec back then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He could certainly use the serial port, but there are also "cheap" ways of doing it:Granted, you'll have to find an old system with an ISA port to use the card, but it's quite doable.
I did the same for a 10MB (IBM brand?
I don't remember) 8" MFM years ago.
In my case, it was actual data recovery: I had to locate the lost (previously deleted) files.
That took some time; I wish there had been something like photorec back then.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557546</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559764</id>
	<title>Recently used Xenix.</title>
	<author>MikeFM</author>
	<datestamp>1269163320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sadly I've recently worked for a place still using Xenix as their main computing platform. I was a bit amused.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sadly I 've recently worked for a place still using Xenix as their main computing platform .
I was a bit amused .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sadly I've recently worked for a place still using Xenix as their main computing platform.
I was a bit amused.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557402</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>JamesP</author>
	<datestamp>1269185100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm guessing the serial port can get to 115200bps it's modems that are a problem.</p><p>But still, even at 14400bps this is 'fast' (like, a couple of hours)</p><p>Funny story, I once made myself an ""mp3"" player using an old Pentium 100, <a href="http://www.damp-mp3.co.uk/" title="damp-mp3.co.uk">http://www.damp-mp3.co.uk/</a> [damp-mp3.co.uk] and a small parallel port keyboard. Loading files was done thru the serial port at 115200 using a zmodem client.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm guessing the serial port can get to 115200bps it 's modems that are a problem.But still , even at 14400bps this is 'fast ' ( like , a couple of hours ) Funny story , I once made myself an " " mp3 " " player using an old Pentium 100 , http : //www.damp-mp3.co.uk/ [ damp-mp3.co.uk ] and a small parallel port keyboard .
Loading files was done thru the serial port at 115200 using a zmodem client .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm guessing the serial port can get to 115200bps it's modems that are a problem.But still, even at 14400bps this is 'fast' (like, a couple of hours)Funny story, I once made myself an ""mp3"" player using an old Pentium 100, http://www.damp-mp3.co.uk/ [damp-mp3.co.uk] and a small parallel port keyboard.
Loading files was done thru the serial port at 115200 using a zmodem client.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559196</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269202080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>exactly, 10mb at 9600bps will take only 2-3 hours.</p></div><p>Yep, and since your computer is a 586, there's a good chance the serial port will do 192kbps which even faster still.  If you want to transfer binary files, I'd suggest using the zmodem protocol.  Since your Xenix system was running a BBS, it almost certainly has software installed that will do zmodem file transfers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>exactly , 10mb at 9600bps will take only 2-3 hours.Yep , and since your computer is a 586 , there 's a good chance the serial port will do 192kbps which even faster still .
If you want to transfer binary files , I 'd suggest using the zmodem protocol .
Since your Xenix system was running a BBS , it almost certainly has software installed that will do zmodem file transfers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>exactly, 10mb at 9600bps will take only 2-3 hours.Yep, and since your computer is a 586, there's a good chance the serial port will do 192kbps which even faster still.
If you want to transfer binary files, I'd suggest using the zmodem protocol.
Since your Xenix system was running a BBS, it almost certainly has software installed that will do zmodem file transfers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558976</id>
	<title>Re:cu</title>
	<author>BrokenHalo</author>
	<datestamp>1269200220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Finding a way to compile and transfer Kermit to such an ancient system would take some serious archeological research...</i> <br> <br>
No it wouldn't. Well, no more than 5 minutes' worth of research.<br> <br>
Kermit was a well established data transfer protocol during the heyday (such as it was) of Xenix. I remember there were definitely binaries of kermit that ran quite happily under Xenix, but since Kermit was (and presumably still is) standard ANSI C, there should be no difficulty in compiling the program to run on Xenix.<br> <br>
Kermit was ubiquitous across many platforms because of its ability to transfer individual files with a minimum of hassle. Transferring whole directories was less reliable, and if there was an opion, UUCP was the preferred channel.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Finding a way to compile and transfer Kermit to such an ancient system would take some serious archeological research.. . No it would n't .
Well , no more than 5 minutes ' worth of research .
Kermit was a well established data transfer protocol during the heyday ( such as it was ) of Xenix .
I remember there were definitely binaries of kermit that ran quite happily under Xenix , but since Kermit was ( and presumably still is ) standard ANSI C , there should be no difficulty in compiling the program to run on Xenix .
Kermit was ubiquitous across many platforms because of its ability to transfer individual files with a minimum of hassle .
Transferring whole directories was less reliable , and if there was an opion , UUCP was the preferred channel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finding a way to compile and transfer Kermit to such an ancient system would take some serious archeological research...  
No it wouldn't.
Well, no more than 5 minutes' worth of research.
Kermit was a well established data transfer protocol during the heyday (such as it was) of Xenix.
I remember there were definitely binaries of kermit that ran quite happily under Xenix, but since Kermit was (and presumably still is) standard ANSI C, there should be no difficulty in compiling the program to run on Xenix.
Kermit was ubiquitous across many platforms because of its ability to transfer individual files with a minimum of hassle.
Transferring whole directories was less reliable, and if there was an opion, UUCP was the preferred channel.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558478</id>
	<title>Re:Screen? What screen? How about Google Voice?</title>
	<author>LizardKing</author>
	<datestamp>1269195840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>According to the article about the Altos that's referenced in the summary, it did come with a matching monitor. Perhaps it was a terminal though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>According to the article about the Altos that 's referenced in the summary , it did come with a matching monitor .
Perhaps it was a terminal though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>According to the article about the Altos that's referenced in the summary, it did come with a matching monitor.
Perhaps it was a terminal though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557692</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557758</id>
	<title>Re:Serial port.</title>
	<author>LVSlushdat</author>
	<datestamp>1269188340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not to mention, the fact that an RLL/MFM controller will most defiantly be ISA, and.. good luck in finding a system with an ISA bus anymore...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not to mention , the fact that an RLL/MFM controller will most defiantly be ISA , and.. good luck in finding a system with an ISA bus anymore.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not to mention, the fact that an RLL/MFM controller will most defiantly be ISA, and.. good luck in finding a system with an ISA bus anymore...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556932</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557332</id>
	<title>SCO OpenServer on VMWare using disk image</title>
	<author>Craig Ringer</author>
	<datestamp>1269184380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Once you've taken a disk image of the original machine and have the image on a less fragile system, Linux will probably mount it with:</p><p>mount -t sysv -o loop<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/path/to/image<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/mnt/tmp</p><p>(possibly with any required -o offset= if it's a full-disk image not just an image of the partition/slice containing the file system).</p><p>Failing that, you can probably read it with SCO OpenServer 5.x if nothing else will handle it. SCO OpenServer still runs under current VMWare releases (though linux-kvm's SCSI HCI implementation is too incomplete so it crashes on kvm) and can be pointed at the disk image that way.</p><p>You can still find the old FreeSCO ISOs around on the mouldier corners of the 'net. I can't offer you any, since I only have fully licensed OpenServer 5.0.5 which I can't distribute. It's for a truly amazingly legacy Microsoft Xenix application from 1983!</p><p>SCO uses HPFS by default, but I think Xenix used something more elderly. SCO's mount(ADM) lists it only as fs type "XENIX".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Once you 've taken a disk image of the original machine and have the image on a less fragile system , Linux will probably mount it with : mount -t sysv -o loop /path/to/image /mnt/tmp ( possibly with any required -o offset = if it 's a full-disk image not just an image of the partition/slice containing the file system ) .Failing that , you can probably read it with SCO OpenServer 5.x if nothing else will handle it .
SCO OpenServer still runs under current VMWare releases ( though linux-kvm 's SCSI HCI implementation is too incomplete so it crashes on kvm ) and can be pointed at the disk image that way.You can still find the old FreeSCO ISOs around on the mouldier corners of the 'net .
I ca n't offer you any , since I only have fully licensed OpenServer 5.0.5 which I ca n't distribute .
It 's for a truly amazingly legacy Microsoft Xenix application from 1983 ! SCO uses HPFS by default , but I think Xenix used something more elderly .
SCO 's mount ( ADM ) lists it only as fs type " XENIX " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once you've taken a disk image of the original machine and have the image on a less fragile system, Linux will probably mount it with:mount -t sysv -o loop /path/to/image /mnt/tmp(possibly with any required -o offset= if it's a full-disk image not just an image of the partition/slice containing the file system).Failing that, you can probably read it with SCO OpenServer 5.x if nothing else will handle it.
SCO OpenServer still runs under current VMWare releases (though linux-kvm's SCSI HCI implementation is too incomplete so it crashes on kvm) and can be pointed at the disk image that way.You can still find the old FreeSCO ISOs around on the mouldier corners of the 'net.
I can't offer you any, since I only have fully licensed OpenServer 5.0.5 which I can't distribute.
It's for a truly amazingly legacy Microsoft Xenix application from 1983!SCO uses HPFS by default, but I think Xenix used something more elderly.
SCO's mount(ADM) lists it only as fs type "XENIX".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556972</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>nurb432</author>
	<datestamp>1269180240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree, I'm sure its minimal to read Xenix file formats for the data, but the risks of old components giving up the ghost are far to high.  If it works now, just do it via serial port and be patient. Only if its in the process of dying would i take it apart.</p><p>As an aside, i find it an odd odd claim that the 'first multi user BBS' would be on a 8086... Considering i did it on an 8bit machine long before the ix86 was on the market, and on a VAX before that. ( and wasn't chicago's Z80 powered cbbs multi line at one point? ) Still, sounds like it is worthy of saving for the sake of history, but it's not as special as you might think....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree , I 'm sure its minimal to read Xenix file formats for the data , but the risks of old components giving up the ghost are far to high .
If it works now , just do it via serial port and be patient .
Only if its in the process of dying would i take it apart.As an aside , i find it an odd odd claim that the 'first multi user BBS ' would be on a 8086... Considering i did it on an 8bit machine long before the ix86 was on the market , and on a VAX before that .
( and was n't chicago 's Z80 powered cbbs multi line at one point ?
) Still , sounds like it is worthy of saving for the sake of history , but it 's not as special as you might think... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree, I'm sure its minimal to read Xenix file formats for the data, but the risks of old components giving up the ghost are far to high.
If it works now, just do it via serial port and be patient.
Only if its in the process of dying would i take it apart.As an aside, i find it an odd odd claim that the 'first multi user BBS' would be on a 8086... Considering i did it on an 8bit machine long before the ix86 was on the market, and on a VAX before that.
( and wasn't chicago's Z80 powered cbbs multi line at one point?
) Still, sounds like it is worthy of saving for the sake of history, but it's not as special as you might think....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31568786</id>
	<title>BrandX</title>
	<author>tgeek</author>
	<datestamp>1269273780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your best bet is to call up Century Software and see if they still have a copy of "term" for the Altos laying around somewhere.  Developing this product for the Altos boxes was what put them into business. I first discovered it back around 1985 when I was developing vertical apps (medical) for the Altos boxes and needed a way to transfer programs to clients over 1200 baud dialup. Give my regards to Greg H. if he's still around (one of the founders).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your best bet is to call up Century Software and see if they still have a copy of " term " for the Altos laying around somewhere .
Developing this product for the Altos boxes was what put them into business .
I first discovered it back around 1985 when I was developing vertical apps ( medical ) for the Altos boxes and needed a way to transfer programs to clients over 1200 baud dialup .
Give my regards to Greg H. if he 's still around ( one of the founders ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your best bet is to call up Century Software and see if they still have a copy of "term" for the Altos laying around somewhere.
Developing this product for the Altos boxes was what put them into business.
I first discovered it back around 1985 when I was developing vertical apps (medical) for the Altos boxes and needed a way to transfer programs to clients over 1200 baud dialup.
Give my regards to Greg H. if he's still around (one of the founders).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556822</id>
	<title>Image it first</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269178620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You might have done this already, but since you do not mention it: I would highly suggest making an image of the disk (using dd or dd\_rescue) and working on a copy of that, before the original disk dies. Maybe <a href="http://www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/Foremost" title="forensicswiki.org" rel="nofollow">foremost</a> [forensicswiki.org] can be of any use, although I doubt it can either handle the original Xenix file system - whatever it might have been - or BBS text files very well...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You might have done this already , but since you do not mention it : I would highly suggest making an image of the disk ( using dd or dd \ _rescue ) and working on a copy of that , before the original disk dies .
Maybe foremost [ forensicswiki.org ] can be of any use , although I doubt it can either handle the original Xenix file system - whatever it might have been - or BBS text files very well.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You might have done this already, but since you do not mention it: I would highly suggest making an image of the disk (using dd or dd\_rescue) and working on a copy of that, before the original disk dies.
Maybe foremost [forensicswiki.org] can be of any use, although I doubt it can either handle the original Xenix file system - whatever it might have been - or BBS text files very well...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557356</id>
	<title>Re:cu</title>
	<author>tverbeek</author>
	<datestamp>1269184800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A late 80's version is hardly "ancient *nix".  For that you need to go back to UNIX's first decade, not just anything that predates Linux.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A late 80 's version is hardly " ancient * nix " .
For that you need to go back to UNIX 's first decade , not just anything that predates Linux .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A late 80's version is hardly "ancient *nix".
For that you need to go back to UNIX's first decade, not just anything that predates Linux.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31561656</id>
	<title>Re:Not meant to be funny...</title>
	<author>toygeek</author>
	<datestamp>1269176820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're not sure how to do this, I suggest renting and watching "Firewall" with Harrison Ford. You just need an iPod and a fax machine to tear into. There's a full tutorial in the movie. Works like a charm every time! Oh, and you'll need some tape.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're not sure how to do this , I suggest renting and watching " Firewall " with Harrison Ford .
You just need an iPod and a fax machine to tear into .
There 's a full tutorial in the movie .
Works like a charm every time !
Oh , and you 'll need some tape .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're not sure how to do this, I suggest renting and watching "Firewall" with Harrison Ford.
You just need an iPod and a fax machine to tear into.
There's a full tutorial in the movie.
Works like a charm every time!
Oh, and you'll need some tape.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556996</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269180480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hi,</p><p>Maybe you must considerer to mount old disk on  a linux filesystem. Take a look on mount man page and you will discover that usually it supports xenix filesystems. as "mount -t xenix'. Good luck,</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hi,Maybe you must considerer to mount old disk on a linux filesystem .
Take a look on mount man page and you will discover that usually it supports xenix filesystems .
as " mount -t xenix' .
Good luck,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hi,Maybe you must considerer to mount old disk on  a linux filesystem.
Take a look on mount man page and you will discover that usually it supports xenix filesystems.
as "mount -t xenix'.
Good luck,</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557164</id>
	<title>Re:Use the serial port ...</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1269182580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Given the speed of hard disks from that era, I'd imagine that removing the disk, putting it in another machine, copying it, and then putting it back would take about as long as copying via the serial port.  It's also worth noting that the machine has 5 serial ports, so if you're really in a hurry you can probably dump different bits of the filesystem in parallel over several ports (if the disk will handle that concurrent reads even at serial line speed).  </p><p>
10MB is a really small amount of data to copy via a serial link.  Back in the early '90s I had an 8086 PC with 5.25" disks and my father had a 386 laptop which took 3.5" disks.  The only way of copying games between them was via a serial link.  The 8086 machine could handle 115Kb/s, meaning that the entire transfer would only take about 10 minutes.  We usually ran it at about half this speed though, because our crappy serial cable didn't have the hardware error checking pins connected, so we needed to use software parity and reducing the line speed made things more reliable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Given the speed of hard disks from that era , I 'd imagine that removing the disk , putting it in another machine , copying it , and then putting it back would take about as long as copying via the serial port .
It 's also worth noting that the machine has 5 serial ports , so if you 're really in a hurry you can probably dump different bits of the filesystem in parallel over several ports ( if the disk will handle that concurrent reads even at serial line speed ) .
10MB is a really small amount of data to copy via a serial link .
Back in the early '90s I had an 8086 PC with 5.25 " disks and my father had a 386 laptop which took 3.5 " disks .
The only way of copying games between them was via a serial link .
The 8086 machine could handle 115Kb/s , meaning that the entire transfer would only take about 10 minutes .
We usually ran it at about half this speed though , because our crappy serial cable did n't have the hardware error checking pins connected , so we needed to use software parity and reducing the line speed made things more reliable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given the speed of hard disks from that era, I'd imagine that removing the disk, putting it in another machine, copying it, and then putting it back would take about as long as copying via the serial port.
It's also worth noting that the machine has 5 serial ports, so if you're really in a hurry you can probably dump different bits of the filesystem in parallel over several ports (if the disk will handle that concurrent reads even at serial line speed).
10MB is a really small amount of data to copy via a serial link.
Back in the early '90s I had an 8086 PC with 5.25" disks and my father had a 386 laptop which took 3.5" disks.
The only way of copying games between them was via a serial link.
The 8086 machine could handle 115Kb/s, meaning that the entire transfer would only take about 10 minutes.
We usually ran it at about half this speed though, because our crappy serial cable didn't have the hardware error checking pins connected, so we needed to use software parity and reducing the line speed made things more reliable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556772</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557198</id>
	<title>File systems were simpler back then</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269182880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah, the Altos systems.  8800 series, then 486, then 586.  They used up numbers years before Intel got to them (the Altos 486 had an Intel 80186 in it, and 4 serial ports).  Often paired with Wyse terminals.  Anybody else remember "business basic"?</p><p>It's almost certainly an ST506 drive; you will be very hard pressed to connect it to a PCI era system; probably can only get as far as AT bus machine.</p><p>In any case, if you do manage to image the drive, the filesystem will be based on either Unix version 7, Unix System V, or the Berkeley Fast File System.  It wasn't until Linux rolled along that we started to seriously fork into lots of file system variants.  It's most likely the basic System V file system, which is well documented, and pretty simple stuff.</p><p>The posters above are correct, however.  You really should try the serial port approach first.  I'd go for cu over uucp - getting uucp running can be quite an exercise in itself.  And you'll want either tar or cpio; probably tar, but watchout for version and format incompatibilities there as well.</p><p>You can also just cat the data out a serial port, and capture it as a session log on the other end.  That's likely to be the easiest solution, and perhaps more reliable than any other.</p><p>You haven't said what the nature of the data is, but after this much time laying dormant, you are likely to have substantial challenges at the application level interpreting the data as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , the Altos systems .
8800 series , then 486 , then 586 .
They used up numbers years before Intel got to them ( the Altos 486 had an Intel 80186 in it , and 4 serial ports ) .
Often paired with Wyse terminals .
Anybody else remember " business basic " ? It 's almost certainly an ST506 drive ; you will be very hard pressed to connect it to a PCI era system ; probably can only get as far as AT bus machine.In any case , if you do manage to image the drive , the filesystem will be based on either Unix version 7 , Unix System V , or the Berkeley Fast File System .
It was n't until Linux rolled along that we started to seriously fork into lots of file system variants .
It 's most likely the basic System V file system , which is well documented , and pretty simple stuff.The posters above are correct , however .
You really should try the serial port approach first .
I 'd go for cu over uucp - getting uucp running can be quite an exercise in itself .
And you 'll want either tar or cpio ; probably tar , but watchout for version and format incompatibilities there as well.You can also just cat the data out a serial port , and capture it as a session log on the other end .
That 's likely to be the easiest solution , and perhaps more reliable than any other.You have n't said what the nature of the data is , but after this much time laying dormant , you are likely to have substantial challenges at the application level interpreting the data as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, the Altos systems.
8800 series, then 486, then 586.
They used up numbers years before Intel got to them (the Altos 486 had an Intel 80186 in it, and 4 serial ports).
Often paired with Wyse terminals.
Anybody else remember "business basic"?It's almost certainly an ST506 drive; you will be very hard pressed to connect it to a PCI era system; probably can only get as far as AT bus machine.In any case, if you do manage to image the drive, the filesystem will be based on either Unix version 7, Unix System V, or the Berkeley Fast File System.
It wasn't until Linux rolled along that we started to seriously fork into lots of file system variants.
It's most likely the basic System V file system, which is well documented, and pretty simple stuff.The posters above are correct, however.
You really should try the serial port approach first.
I'd go for cu over uucp - getting uucp running can be quite an exercise in itself.
And you'll want either tar or cpio; probably tar, but watchout for version and format incompatibilities there as well.You can also just cat the data out a serial port, and capture it as a session log on the other end.
That's likely to be the easiest solution, and perhaps more reliable than any other.You haven't said what the nature of the data is, but after this much time laying dormant, you are likely to have substantial challenges at the application level interpreting the data as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560570</id>
	<title>Plug the cables in the CORRECT WAY!!!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269168720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>  &gt;&gt; JUST MAKE SURE THAT THE PIN 1s LINED UP<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; OTHERWISE YOU CAN BLOW THE DRIVE,<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; CONTROLLER, AND MAYBE EVEN THE COMPUTER.</p><p>Was it the ST-506's hard drives or the old 8 inch floppies that would write 1's all over head 1 if you plugged a cable in backwards?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; JUST MAKE SURE THAT THE PIN 1s LINED UP           OTHERWISE YOU CAN BLOW THE DRIVE ,           CONTROLLER , AND MAYBE EVEN THE COMPUTER.Was it the ST-506 's hard drives or the old 8 inch floppies that would write 1 's all over head 1 if you plugged a cable in backwards ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>  &gt;&gt; JUST MAKE SURE THAT THE PIN 1s LINED UP
          OTHERWISE YOU CAN BLOW THE DRIVE,
          CONTROLLER, AND MAYBE EVEN THE COMPUTER.Was it the ST-506's hard drives or the old 8 inch floppies that would write 1's all over head 1 if you plugged a cable in backwards?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557868</id>
	<title>Re:cu</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269189600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Kermit wasn't commercial software, it was (and is) freeware. (http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/)</p></div><p>Not exactly.  The spec itself is open; the sixth edition protocol manual dated June 1986 is floating around in PDF and PS.  gkermit is free (GPL); ckermit is zero-cost but not freeware.  Kermit95 is a commercial Windows client that costs about $50 per license (which is in truth a very good bargain considering its features).</p><p>ckermit is very portable and would probably compile pretty easily.  At worst the OP might need to find an earlier version.  As for transferring a kermit binary:  uuencode/uudecode could do it easily enough.</p><p>Disclaimer:  I'm not too familiar with Xenix, but I know kermit well enough to <a href="http://qodem.sf.net/" title="sf.net" rel="nofollow">implement it.</a> [sf.net]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Kermit was n't commercial software , it was ( and is ) freeware .
( http : //www.columbia.edu/kermit/ ) Not exactly .
The spec itself is open ; the sixth edition protocol manual dated June 1986 is floating around in PDF and PS .
gkermit is free ( GPL ) ; ckermit is zero-cost but not freeware .
Kermit95 is a commercial Windows client that costs about $ 50 per license ( which is in truth a very good bargain considering its features ) .ckermit is very portable and would probably compile pretty easily .
At worst the OP might need to find an earlier version .
As for transferring a kermit binary : uuencode/uudecode could do it easily enough.Disclaimer : I 'm not too familiar with Xenix , but I know kermit well enough to implement it .
[ sf.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kermit wasn't commercial software, it was (and is) freeware.
(http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/)Not exactly.
The spec itself is open; the sixth edition protocol manual dated June 1986 is floating around in PDF and PS.
gkermit is free (GPL); ckermit is zero-cost but not freeware.
Kermit95 is a commercial Windows client that costs about $50 per license (which is in truth a very good bargain considering its features).ckermit is very portable and would probably compile pretty easily.
At worst the OP might need to find an earlier version.
As for transferring a kermit binary:  uuencode/uudecode could do it easily enough.Disclaimer:  I'm not too familiar with Xenix, but I know kermit well enough to implement it.
[sf.net]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560636</id>
	<title>Re:Use the serial port ...</title>
	<author>Tubal-Cain</author>
	<datestamp>1269169080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>...contact an old hard drive recovery company like On-Track, and they should be able to hoover all of the data off for you, and <b>email</b> it to you in an easy to read format.</p></div><p>Fixed that for you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...contact an old hard drive recovery company like On-Track , and they should be able to hoover all of the data off for you , and email it to you in an easy to read format.Fixed that for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...contact an old hard drive recovery company like On-Track, and they should be able to hoover all of the data off for you, and email it to you in an easy to read format.Fixed that for you.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557850</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558290</id>
	<title>Re:Is this worth it?</title>
	<author>machine321</author>
	<datestamp>1269194040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're assuming the porn is graphical, not written.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're assuming the porn is graphical , not written .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're assuming the porn is graphical, not written.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557126</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766</id>
	<title>I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269177900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Even if it would take weeks. You're handling a historical relic, don't want to mess it up.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if it would take weeks .
You 're handling a historical relic , do n't want to mess it up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if it would take weeks.
You're handling a historical relic, don't want to mess it up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558140</id>
	<title>Wow; lots of people who don't know what they're on</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269192600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>about.</p><p>Oh, wait.  This is Slashdot.</p><p>The filesystem is going to be BFFS or Xenix format, and you could, in fact, mount those, *if* you have a controller that a) has drivers in  Linux (the last one I remember is the WD 100...3? 7?) b) for which you have a bus slot.</p><p>The xda drivers haven't been in the kernel since, I think, 2.2; maybe 2.0.</p><p>But the *real* problem is that Xenix is going to have wrapped the actual filesystem partiiton inside a "division", with a divvy table, which is *then* further inside the disk partiiton.</p><p>To the best of my knowledge, Linux has never had divvy table handling; you could mount Xenix filesystems, but only if they'd manually been made on an entire partition, instead of inside a division -- I had to do this a couple times, during conversions.</p><p>If you have a working ethernet adapter and the TCP stack, by all means, FTP the entire raw division image over to a Linux box, and then loopback mount it there.  If not, then UUCP it over the serial port.</p><p>Once you *do* have it in a file on a current linux box, you should be able to mount it, though you may have to rebuild some things into your kernel that aren't there by default.</p><p>If you need details, I have a complete set of SCO Xenix manuals, including development and, I think, TCP, on my shelf, ca 2.3.4 timeframe; let me know.</p><p>(I would sign in, but Slashdot won't let me from the laptop for some reason; jra/5600)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>about.Oh , wait .
This is Slashdot.The filesystem is going to be BFFS or Xenix format , and you could , in fact , mount those , * if * you have a controller that a ) has drivers in Linux ( the last one I remember is the WD 100...3 ?
7 ? ) b ) for which you have a bus slot.The xda drivers have n't been in the kernel since , I think , 2.2 ; maybe 2.0.But the * real * problem is that Xenix is going to have wrapped the actual filesystem partiiton inside a " division " , with a divvy table , which is * then * further inside the disk partiiton.To the best of my knowledge , Linux has never had divvy table handling ; you could mount Xenix filesystems , but only if they 'd manually been made on an entire partition , instead of inside a division -- I had to do this a couple times , during conversions.If you have a working ethernet adapter and the TCP stack , by all means , FTP the entire raw division image over to a Linux box , and then loopback mount it there .
If not , then UUCP it over the serial port.Once you * do * have it in a file on a current linux box , you should be able to mount it , though you may have to rebuild some things into your kernel that are n't there by default.If you need details , I have a complete set of SCO Xenix manuals , including development and , I think , TCP , on my shelf , ca 2.3.4 timeframe ; let me know .
( I would sign in , but Slashdot wo n't let me from the laptop for some reason ; jra/5600 )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>about.Oh, wait.
This is Slashdot.The filesystem is going to be BFFS or Xenix format, and you could, in fact, mount those, *if* you have a controller that a) has drivers in  Linux (the last one I remember is the WD 100...3?
7?) b) for which you have a bus slot.The xda drivers haven't been in the kernel since, I think, 2.2; maybe 2.0.But the *real* problem is that Xenix is going to have wrapped the actual filesystem partiiton inside a "division", with a divvy table, which is *then* further inside the disk partiiton.To the best of my knowledge, Linux has never had divvy table handling; you could mount Xenix filesystems, but only if they'd manually been made on an entire partition, instead of inside a division -- I had to do this a couple times, during conversions.If you have a working ethernet adapter and the TCP stack, by all means, FTP the entire raw division image over to a Linux box, and then loopback mount it there.
If not, then UUCP it over the serial port.Once you *do* have it in a file on a current linux box, you should be able to mount it, though you may have to rebuild some things into your kernel that aren't there by default.If you need details, I have a complete set of SCO Xenix manuals, including development and, I think, TCP, on my shelf, ca 2.3.4 timeframe; let me know.
(I would sign in, but Slashdot won't let me from the laptop for some reason; jra/5600)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557808</id>
	<title>Re:cu</title>
	<author>bhtooefr</author>
	<datestamp>1269189000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except it's early 80's (1983,) and it <a href="http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/1997-December/093046.html" title="classiccmp.org">appears to be</a> [classiccmp.org] Version 7.</p><p>Which is Ancient Unix, although barely.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except it 's early 80 's ( 1983 , ) and it appears to be [ classiccmp.org ] Version 7.Which is Ancient Unix , although barely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except it's early 80's (1983,) and it appears to be [classiccmp.org] Version 7.Which is Ancient Unix, although barely.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557356</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31564406</id>
	<title>Re:</title>
	<author>clint999</author>
	<datestamp>1269289860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><strong>Split, compress, and uuencode it before sending.  Reverse process on other side.</strong></htmltext>
<tokenext>Split , compress , and uuencode it before sending .
Reverse process on other side .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Split, compress, and uuencode it before sending.
Reverse process on other side.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558080</id>
	<title>Re:Not all MFM controllers are compatible</title>
	<author>rickb928</author>
	<datestamp>1269191940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That won't be as much trouble as you think.  If they used a standard table, it will read fine.</p><p>Now a lot of larger MFM drives kept a CHS table on their own firmware and used that instead, but a 10 MB model probably did not.  That was usually used after about 120MB, when LBA was needed but not supported.  And I'm not sure how many &gt;120MB MFM drives there were.  Early IDE drives did the same thing, bypassing the BIOS tables.  Often with marginal results.  At one time, if you weren't careful, you could program your own I/O and let your application talk to the BIOS directly isntead of using the OS (DOS) calls.  I supported one such bit of joy that, when it finally had to write to the last block, happily started over from 0.  Your next data write started in writing to the partition table.  When I figured it out and told the developers, they went past telling me wrong and asked that I be fired.  Two days later and half of them weren't answering their phones any more.  Someone learned to use Norton Disk Editor real quick.  The next version of their app was much slower, but at least it didn't erase your disk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That wo n't be as much trouble as you think .
If they used a standard table , it will read fine.Now a lot of larger MFM drives kept a CHS table on their own firmware and used that instead , but a 10 MB model probably did not .
That was usually used after about 120MB , when LBA was needed but not supported .
And I 'm not sure how many &gt; 120MB MFM drives there were .
Early IDE drives did the same thing , bypassing the BIOS tables .
Often with marginal results .
At one time , if you were n't careful , you could program your own I/O and let your application talk to the BIOS directly isntead of using the OS ( DOS ) calls .
I supported one such bit of joy that , when it finally had to write to the last block , happily started over from 0 .
Your next data write started in writing to the partition table .
When I figured it out and told the developers , they went past telling me wrong and asked that I be fired .
Two days later and half of them were n't answering their phones any more .
Someone learned to use Norton Disk Editor real quick .
The next version of their app was much slower , but at least it did n't erase your disk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That won't be as much trouble as you think.
If they used a standard table, it will read fine.Now a lot of larger MFM drives kept a CHS table on their own firmware and used that instead, but a 10 MB model probably did not.
That was usually used after about 120MB, when LBA was needed but not supported.
And I'm not sure how many &gt;120MB MFM drives there were.
Early IDE drives did the same thing, bypassing the BIOS tables.
Often with marginal results.
At one time, if you weren't careful, you could program your own I/O and let your application talk to the BIOS directly isntead of using the OS (DOS) calls.
I supported one such bit of joy that, when it finally had to write to the last block, happily started over from 0.
Your next data write started in writing to the partition table.
When I figured it out and told the developers, they went past telling me wrong and asked that I be fired.
Two days later and half of them weren't answering their phones any more.
Someone learned to use Norton Disk Editor real quick.
The next version of their app was much slower, but at least it didn't erase your disk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557532</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557692</id>
	<title>Screen? What screen? How about Google Voice?</title>
	<author>name\_already\_taken</author>
	<datestamp>1269187800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>uh... you know the Altos doesn't have a screen, right?</p><p>Like most older Unix-y systems, you plug a terminal (or a bank of modems, or a protocol converter or whatever) into one of the serial ports, just like how you might configure a router these days.  The system might have been sold with a terminal, but video output was not part of the computer itself.</p><p>Wait a minute, computers have serial ports nowadays too!  Seems like you could just use those, with a null modem cable.</p><p>I'm waiting for someone to suggest plugging in a speech synthesizer and a DTMF dialer, then using a Google Voice account to transcribe the speech back into text which would then be emailed to you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>uh... you know the Altos does n't have a screen , right ? Like most older Unix-y systems , you plug a terminal ( or a bank of modems , or a protocol converter or whatever ) into one of the serial ports , just like how you might configure a router these days .
The system might have been sold with a terminal , but video output was not part of the computer itself.Wait a minute , computers have serial ports nowadays too !
Seems like you could just use those , with a null modem cable.I 'm waiting for someone to suggest plugging in a speech synthesizer and a DTMF dialer , then using a Google Voice account to transcribe the speech back into text which would then be emailed to you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>uh... you know the Altos doesn't have a screen, right?Like most older Unix-y systems, you plug a terminal (or a bank of modems, or a protocol converter or whatever) into one of the serial ports, just like how you might configure a router these days.
The system might have been sold with a terminal, but video output was not part of the computer itself.Wait a minute, computers have serial ports nowadays too!
Seems like you could just use those, with a null modem cable.I'm waiting for someone to suggest plugging in a speech synthesizer and a DTMF dialer, then using a Google Voice account to transcribe the speech back into text which would then be emailed to you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556988</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559970</id>
	<title>RS422 to USB?</title>
	<author>otis wildflower</author>
	<datestamp>1269164700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This could be helpful if it has linux drivers?</p><p><a href="http://www.iofast.com/product\_info.php/products\_id/3949" title="iofast.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.iofast.com/product\_info.php/products\_id/3949</a> [iofast.com]</p><p>Should be much quicker than any RS232 ports..  It advertises OSX compatibility so presumably there are linux drivers for it or something like it?  Likely a rather long shot though, RS232 and a long coffee break or two are likely your best bets<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This could be helpful if it has linux drivers ? http : //www.iofast.com/product \ _info.php/products \ _id/3949 [ iofast.com ] Should be much quicker than any RS232 ports.. It advertises OSX compatibility so presumably there are linux drivers for it or something like it ?
Likely a rather long shot though , RS232 and a long coffee break or two are likely your best bets : /</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This could be helpful if it has linux drivers?http://www.iofast.com/product\_info.php/products\_id/3949 [iofast.com]Should be much quicker than any RS232 ports..  It advertises OSX compatibility so presumably there are linux drivers for it or something like it?
Likely a rather long shot though, RS232 and a long coffee break or two are likely your best bets :/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556772</id>
	<title>Use the serial port ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269177900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I mean, why not? Yeah, it's slow, but you only have 10 meg of data!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... I mean , why not ?
Yeah , it 's slow , but you only have 10 meg of data !</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ... I mean, why not?
Yeah, it's slow, but you only have 10 meg of data!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31563452</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269191280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>2 things: a) them old serial ports were unreliable above 9600 and even then I would make sure that nothing is keeping the processor busy. b) I probably still have a version of the installation disks on 5" and/or 3.5" format. arthur@horizoninfosys.com.au  (assuming they still read).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>2 things : a ) them old serial ports were unreliable above 9600 and even then I would make sure that nothing is keeping the processor busy .
b ) I probably still have a version of the installation disks on 5 " and/or 3.5 " format .
arthur @ horizoninfosys.com.au ( assuming they still read ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2 things: a) them old serial ports were unreliable above 9600 and even then I would make sure that nothing is keeping the processor busy.
b) I probably still have a version of the installation disks on 5" and/or 3.5" format.
arthur@horizoninfosys.com.au  (assuming they still read).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558862</id>
	<title>Re:Are you sure it's an IDE drive? More likely MFM</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1269199380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a 105MB WD IDE drive in my desk draw and I've seen 10MB ide drives sold as replacements for failed  equipment.</p><p>However, I'd say its highly unlikely its an IDE drive as they were very rare at that size.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a 105MB WD IDE drive in my desk draw and I 've seen 10MB ide drives sold as replacements for failed equipment.However , I 'd say its highly unlikely its an IDE drive as they were very rare at that size .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a 105MB WD IDE drive in my desk draw and I've seen 10MB ide drives sold as replacements for failed  equipment.However, I'd say its highly unlikely its an IDE drive as they were very rare at that size.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557300</id>
	<title>Re:Reading the disk will be tricky.</title>
	<author>systemeng</author>
	<datestamp>1269184140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Take a look at the unix heritage society. See <a href="http://minnie.tuhs.org/TUHS/" title="tuhs.org">http://minnie.tuhs.org/TUHS/</a> [tuhs.org]  I once used some code I found there as the basis of a program I wrote that could read an antique CCC scsi disk from that era on a Sun workstation and export the files.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Take a look at the unix heritage society .
See http : //minnie.tuhs.org/TUHS/ [ tuhs.org ] I once used some code I found there as the basis of a program I wrote that could read an antique CCC scsi disk from that era on a Sun workstation and export the files .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take a look at the unix heritage society.
See http://minnie.tuhs.org/TUHS/ [tuhs.org]  I once used some code I found there as the basis of a program I wrote that could read an antique CCC scsi disk from that era on a Sun workstation and export the files.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557030</id>
	<title>Re:UUCP</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1269180960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But be absolutely sure that you got checksums and error correction working. You don&rsquo;t want to lose valuable data becuase of some bad old wiring.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But be absolutely sure that you got checksums and error correction working .
You don    t want to lose valuable data becuase of some bad old wiring .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But be absolutely sure that you got checksums and error correction working.
You don’t want to lose valuable data becuase of some bad old wiring.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31561038</id>
	<title>Re:Reading the disk will be tricky.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269171780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This takes me back....</p><p>Firstly, I'm sure that there were never 10MB IDE drives. The drive will either be ST506, ESDI or possibly even SCSI.</p><p>Secondly Xenix would create several filesystems within the Xenix partition, using its own separate partition table. As far as I'm aware no mechanism to read these tables was ever added to the Linux kernel.</p></div><p>I owned at 10mb IDE hdd,  we used to back it up on 1.44mb 3.5" floppies..</p><p>It finally got close to being full (took about 4 years with a 2400baud modem), then we upgrade to a wd 100mb  drive.</p><p>this was in an Epson 8086xt clone.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This takes me back....Firstly , I 'm sure that there were never 10MB IDE drives .
The drive will either be ST506 , ESDI or possibly even SCSI.Secondly Xenix would create several filesystems within the Xenix partition , using its own separate partition table .
As far as I 'm aware no mechanism to read these tables was ever added to the Linux kernel.I owned at 10mb IDE hdd , we used to back it up on 1.44mb 3.5 " floppies..It finally got close to being full ( took about 4 years with a 2400baud modem ) , then we upgrade to a wd 100mb drive.this was in an Epson 8086xt clone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This takes me back....Firstly, I'm sure that there were never 10MB IDE drives.
The drive will either be ST506, ESDI or possibly even SCSI.Secondly Xenix would create several filesystems within the Xenix partition, using its own separate partition table.
As far as I'm aware no mechanism to read these tables was ever added to the Linux kernel.I owned at 10mb IDE hdd,  we used to back it up on 1.44mb 3.5" floppies..It finally got close to being full (took about 4 years with a 2400baud modem), then we upgrade to a wd 100mb  drive.this was in an Epson 8086xt clone.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557338</id>
	<title>dd, slip</title>
	<author>knarf</author>
	<datestamp>1269184440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Assuming you have raw disk access I'd just dd the entire filesystem out over the serial port. If you have slip on that machine I'd create a slip link between the Altos and a Linux (or *BSD) box so you can use TCP. Once you have the whole disk image in an image you can use whatever tools available to extract the data.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Assuming you have raw disk access I 'd just dd the entire filesystem out over the serial port .
If you have slip on that machine I 'd create a slip link between the Altos and a Linux ( or * BSD ) box so you can use TCP .
Once you have the whole disk image in an image you can use whatever tools available to extract the data .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Assuming you have raw disk access I'd just dd the entire filesystem out over the serial port.
If you have slip on that machine I'd create a slip link between the Altos and a Linux (or *BSD) box so you can use TCP.
Once you have the whole disk image in an image you can use whatever tools available to extract the data.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556952</id>
	<title>Make a disk image</title>
	<author>jdimpson</author>
	<datestamp>1269180060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the system isn't bootable, and you have the right drive controller, carefully connect the old drive to a new system and use something like "ddrescue" ( <a href="http://www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/Ddrescue" title="forensicswiki.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/Ddrescue</a> [forensicswiki.org]) or "dd\_rescue" ( <a href="http://www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/Dd\_rescue" title="forensicswiki.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/Dd\_rescue</a> [forensicswiki.org]) to take a disk image. Both those programs try to recover from bad blocks, whereas standard dd usually will error out. (Personally, I'd make an image even if the system is bootable.)</p><p>With the disk image extracted, you can pack the hardware away or do whatever with it. Then you can focus on finding (or writing) tools to read the disk image. If you find that there is a Linux filesystem driver, you can use the loopback behaviour (see the man pages for "mount" or "losetup") to treat the disk image as if it were a drive. If you don't find a driver, perhaps you'll find some specialty command-line tools that can extract information, or documentation to write your own. At worst, you could use the "strings" command to read any text found on the image. Since you're working against an image, you can take your time, experiment with ad hoc techniques, make mistakes (remember to make backups), and try again and again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the system is n't bootable , and you have the right drive controller , carefully connect the old drive to a new system and use something like " ddrescue " ( http : //www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/Ddrescue [ forensicswiki.org ] ) or " dd \ _rescue " ( http : //www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/Dd \ _rescue [ forensicswiki.org ] ) to take a disk image .
Both those programs try to recover from bad blocks , whereas standard dd usually will error out .
( Personally , I 'd make an image even if the system is bootable .
) With the disk image extracted , you can pack the hardware away or do whatever with it .
Then you can focus on finding ( or writing ) tools to read the disk image .
If you find that there is a Linux filesystem driver , you can use the loopback behaviour ( see the man pages for " mount " or " losetup " ) to treat the disk image as if it were a drive .
If you do n't find a driver , perhaps you 'll find some specialty command-line tools that can extract information , or documentation to write your own .
At worst , you could use the " strings " command to read any text found on the image .
Since you 're working against an image , you can take your time , experiment with ad hoc techniques , make mistakes ( remember to make backups ) , and try again and again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the system isn't bootable, and you have the right drive controller, carefully connect the old drive to a new system and use something like "ddrescue" ( http://www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/Ddrescue [forensicswiki.org]) or "dd\_rescue" ( http://www.forensicswiki.org/wiki/Dd\_rescue [forensicswiki.org]) to take a disk image.
Both those programs try to recover from bad blocks, whereas standard dd usually will error out.
(Personally, I'd make an image even if the system is bootable.
)With the disk image extracted, you can pack the hardware away or do whatever with it.
Then you can focus on finding (or writing) tools to read the disk image.
If you find that there is a Linux filesystem driver, you can use the loopback behaviour (see the man pages for "mount" or "losetup") to treat the disk image as if it were a drive.
If you don't find a driver, perhaps you'll find some specialty command-line tools that can extract information, or documentation to write your own.
At worst, you could use the "strings" command to read any text found on the image.
Since you're working against an image, you can take your time, experiment with ad hoc techniques, make mistakes (remember to make backups), and try again and again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556828</id>
	<title>Get in touch with a data restoration specialist.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269178620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do some research, and find professional data restoration specialists in your area. If there aren't any nearby, get ready to travel. You've got a real gem on your hands. DON'T FUCK THIS UP. Get it to a professional who does data retrieval of this sort for a living, and knows how to avoid cock-ups. You'll probably have to pay at least a few hundred dollars, but it will probably be worth it.</p><p>What you've got could very well be one of the most important finds in the field of technoanthropology.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do some research , and find professional data restoration specialists in your area .
If there are n't any nearby , get ready to travel .
You 've got a real gem on your hands .
DO N'T FUCK THIS UP .
Get it to a professional who does data retrieval of this sort for a living , and knows how to avoid cock-ups .
You 'll probably have to pay at least a few hundred dollars , but it will probably be worth it.What you 've got could very well be one of the most important finds in the field of technoanthropology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do some research, and find professional data restoration specialists in your area.
If there aren't any nearby, get ready to travel.
You've got a real gem on your hands.
DON'T FUCK THIS UP.
Get it to a professional who does data retrieval of this sort for a living, and knows how to avoid cock-ups.
You'll probably have to pay at least a few hundred dollars, but it will probably be worth it.What you've got could very well be one of the most important finds in the field of technoanthropology.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558068</id>
	<title>Simplify... work smarter, not harder.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269191820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jesus, make the job harder than it has to be.</p><p>Take the hard drive out, stick it in a Linux box (PATA-SATA adapter if need be), and dd the device to an image file.</p><p>Then you can screw around with it all you want without worrying that anything is going to fail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jesus , make the job harder than it has to be.Take the hard drive out , stick it in a Linux box ( PATA-SATA adapter if need be ) , and dd the device to an image file.Then you can screw around with it all you want without worrying that anything is going to fail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jesus, make the job harder than it has to be.Take the hard drive out, stick it in a Linux box (PATA-SATA adapter if need be), and dd the device to an image file.Then you can screw around with it all you want without worrying that anything is going to fail.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31588972</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>Milo\_Mindbender</author>
	<datestamp>1269337200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The system actually dates from 1985 or so.  I'm aware it isn't "the first" however it is one of the first BBS systems that:</p><p>* Was privately owned (not Compuserve or a university computer)<br>* Had 5 simultaneous dial-up connections.<br>* Was designed for and used mainly by non-computer people.</p><p>There were plenty of single-line BBSs at the time but very few multi-line ones that were available to the general public.</p><p>This system used the general BBS structure made popular by the CDC Plato system back in the early 1970's.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The system actually dates from 1985 or so .
I 'm aware it is n't " the first " however it is one of the first BBS systems that : * Was privately owned ( not Compuserve or a university computer ) * Had 5 simultaneous dial-up connections .
* Was designed for and used mainly by non-computer people.There were plenty of single-line BBSs at the time but very few multi-line ones that were available to the general public.This system used the general BBS structure made popular by the CDC Plato system back in the early 1970 's .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The system actually dates from 1985 or so.
I'm aware it isn't "the first" however it is one of the first BBS systems that:* Was privately owned (not Compuserve or a university computer)* Had 5 simultaneous dial-up connections.
* Was designed for and used mainly by non-computer people.There were plenty of single-line BBSs at the time but very few multi-line ones that were available to the general public.This system used the general BBS structure made popular by the CDC Plato system back in the early 1970's.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31599126</id>
	<title>Xenix and the rz sz command</title>
	<author>sglines</author>
	<datestamp>1269451140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you can bring the system to life then login as root and make an old fashioned tar file of whatever you want to recover. Then use something like Windows Hyperterminal that supports Z-Modem file transfer (gosh I'm old) . On the Xenix side just type "sz filename" and the transfer should start up. A word of caution however. I did this once (about 20 years ago) and the transfer took 4 days. On the last day we had a power failure and I had to start all over again so make sure both boxes are on reliable power.</p><p>If you want to mount the disk on a new machine good luck. The disks are ST506 format.</p><p>SG</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you can bring the system to life then login as root and make an old fashioned tar file of whatever you want to recover .
Then use something like Windows Hyperterminal that supports Z-Modem file transfer ( gosh I 'm old ) .
On the Xenix side just type " sz filename " and the transfer should start up .
A word of caution however .
I did this once ( about 20 years ago ) and the transfer took 4 days .
On the last day we had a power failure and I had to start all over again so make sure both boxes are on reliable power.If you want to mount the disk on a new machine good luck .
The disks are ST506 format.SG</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you can bring the system to life then login as root and make an old fashioned tar file of whatever you want to recover.
Then use something like Windows Hyperterminal that supports Z-Modem file transfer (gosh I'm old) .
On the Xenix side just type "sz filename" and the transfer should start up.
A word of caution however.
I did this once (about 20 years ago) and the transfer took 4 days.
On the last day we had a power failure and I had to start all over again so make sure both boxes are on reliable power.If you want to mount the disk on a new machine good luck.
The disks are ST506 format.SG</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558450</id>
	<title>Re:NO DISASSEMBLE ALTOS!</title>
	<author>LizardKing</author>
	<datestamp>1269195540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Err, I have music equipment that's as sophisticated and old (if not older) than the Altos which still works fine. This is music gear that's unlikely to have ever been serviced, and I can assure you that it's had a far rougher time of it than most computers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Err , I have music equipment that 's as sophisticated and old ( if not older ) than the Altos which still works fine .
This is music gear that 's unlikely to have ever been serviced , and I can assure you that it 's had a far rougher time of it than most computers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Err, I have music equipment that's as sophisticated and old (if not older) than the Altos which still works fine.
This is music gear that's unlikely to have ever been serviced, and I can assure you that it's had a far rougher time of it than most computers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560258</id>
	<title>Document</title>
	<author>Noodlenose</author>
	<datestamp>1269166560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you manage it, could you please document the process and share it with the rest of us? Sounds fascinating.
<p>
NN</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you manage it , could you please document the process and share it with the rest of us ?
Sounds fascinating .
NN</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you manage it, could you please document the process and share it with the rest of us?
Sounds fascinating.
NN</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557832</id>
	<title>Re:Not really all that *old*...</title>
	<author>Ambient Sheep</author>
	<datestamp>1269189120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you look at the specification page, it actually has an 80186 processor in it.  "586" was the model number of the machine.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you look at the specification page , it actually has an 80186 processor in it .
" 586 " was the model number of the machine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you look at the specification page, it actually has an 80186 processor in it.
"586" was the model number of the machine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557666</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556834</id>
	<title>audio</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269178680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if the thing has a pc speaker you can (with a bit of work) and a noisy export via modulated audio.</p><p>of course if you have access to a serial port controller that's easily the simplest method.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if the thing has a pc speaker you can ( with a bit of work ) and a noisy export via modulated audio.of course if you have access to a serial port controller that 's easily the simplest method .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if the thing has a pc speaker you can (with a bit of work) and a noisy export via modulated audio.of course if you have access to a serial port controller that's easily the simplest method.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557250</id>
	<title>Re:Serial port.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269183480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dude, serious mistake, announcing your ties to SCO<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I mean they are going to sue the hell out of you, and if they don't it means you're working for them, so<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.ers lynch him!</p><p>btw, why don't you wait another decade or so and sell it for tons of cash?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dude , serious mistake , announcing your ties to SCO ... I mean they are going to sue the hell out of you , and if they do n't it means you 're working for them , so /.ers lynch him ! btw , why do n't you wait another decade or so and sell it for tons of cash ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dude, serious mistake, announcing your ties to SCO ... I mean they are going to sue the hell out of you, and if they don't it means you're working for them, so /.ers lynch him!btw, why don't you wait another decade or so and sell it for tons of cash?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556932</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557002</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269180540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <b> <i>Even if it would take weeks.</i> </b></p> </div><p><div class="quote"><p>exactly, 10mb at 9600bps will take only 2-3 hours.</p></div><p><div class="quote"><p>No way it would take weeks. Even if the serial port was only 300 bit per second<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... 10*1024*1024*8/300/3600=77.6 hours<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... at 14400bps this would take 1.6 hours</p></div><p>Dear Slashtards, <br>
  When he said <i>Even if it would take weeks</i> he meant it as a figure of speech, used to encourage the poster to take his time and get it right (you know, kind of like <i>sex</i>). It was <b>not</b> an actual estimation of time.<br> <br>
Your Pal,<br>
Get A. Clue</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if it would take weeks .
exactly , 10mb at 9600bps will take only 2-3 hours.No way it would take weeks .
Even if the serial port was only 300 bit per second ... 10 * 1024 * 1024 * 8/300/3600 = 77.6 hours ... at 14400bps this would take 1.6 hoursDear Slashtards , When he said Even if it would take weeks he meant it as a figure of speech , used to encourage the poster to take his time and get it right ( you know , kind of like sex ) .
It was not an actual estimation of time .
Your Pal , Get A. Clue</tokentext>
<sentencetext>  Even if it would take weeks.
exactly, 10mb at 9600bps will take only 2-3 hours.No way it would take weeks.
Even if the serial port was only 300 bit per second ... 10*1024*1024*8/300/3600=77.6 hours ... at 14400bps this would take 1.6 hoursDear Slashtards, 
  When he said Even if it would take weeks he meant it as a figure of speech, used to encourage the poster to take his time and get it right (you know, kind of like sex).
It was not an actual estimation of time.
Your Pal,
Get A. Clue
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557070</id>
	<title>Not IDE</title>
	<author>BBCWatcher</author>
	<datestamp>1269181560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The Altos 586 was available in 1983 and predated Western Digital's invention of IDE. Most likely the Altos 586 would have used the so-called ST-506 interface (also colloquially known at the time as the MFM or RLL interface), although SASI or a proprietary interface would have been possibilities. If it's ST-506 then you might be able to fire up a old 386 or 486 PC/AT-compatible with an old ST-506 controller and copy the contents of the drive using Linux. But I would agree with essentially everyone else: use one of the serial ports to get the data transferred. Xenix has uucp available, and uucp is also still available for today's operating systems. That'll work.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Altos 586 was available in 1983 and predated Western Digital 's invention of IDE .
Most likely the Altos 586 would have used the so-called ST-506 interface ( also colloquially known at the time as the MFM or RLL interface ) , although SASI or a proprietary interface would have been possibilities .
If it 's ST-506 then you might be able to fire up a old 386 or 486 PC/AT-compatible with an old ST-506 controller and copy the contents of the drive using Linux .
But I would agree with essentially everyone else : use one of the serial ports to get the data transferred .
Xenix has uucp available , and uucp is also still available for today 's operating systems .
That 'll work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Altos 586 was available in 1983 and predated Western Digital's invention of IDE.
Most likely the Altos 586 would have used the so-called ST-506 interface (also colloquially known at the time as the MFM or RLL interface), although SASI or a proprietary interface would have been possibilities.
If it's ST-506 then you might be able to fire up a old 386 or 486 PC/AT-compatible with an old ST-506 controller and copy the contents of the drive using Linux.
But I would agree with essentially everyone else: use one of the serial ports to get the data transferred.
Xenix has uucp available, and uucp is also still available for today's operating systems.
That'll work.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558156</id>
	<title>Re:cu</title>
	<author>fizzup</author>
	<datestamp>1269192720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's Xenix. Ancient Xenix. </p></div><p>It was a bulletin board system. It probably has kermit (1981), xmodem (1977),  maybe ymodem (1985), and possibly zmodem (1986) already installed on it. Others have mentioned uucp (1979?), which was probably included in the default installation of Xenix.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Finding a way to compile and transfer Kermit to such an ancient system would take some serious archeological research, and some luck, because I certainly wouldn't expect to find it in Xenix from the days when Microsoft published it.</p></div><p>I have personally written a basic stop-and-wait kermit in Bourne shell for a lark. It's not as hard as you think.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's Xenix .
Ancient Xenix .
It was a bulletin board system .
It probably has kermit ( 1981 ) , xmodem ( 1977 ) , maybe ymodem ( 1985 ) , and possibly zmodem ( 1986 ) already installed on it .
Others have mentioned uucp ( 1979 ?
) , which was probably included in the default installation of Xenix.Finding a way to compile and transfer Kermit to such an ancient system would take some serious archeological research , and some luck , because I certainly would n't expect to find it in Xenix from the days when Microsoft published it.I have personally written a basic stop-and-wait kermit in Bourne shell for a lark .
It 's not as hard as you think .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's Xenix.
Ancient Xenix.
It was a bulletin board system.
It probably has kermit (1981), xmodem (1977),  maybe ymodem (1985), and possibly zmodem (1986) already installed on it.
Others have mentioned uucp (1979?
), which was probably included in the default installation of Xenix.Finding a way to compile and transfer Kermit to such an ancient system would take some serious archeological research, and some luck, because I certainly wouldn't expect to find it in Xenix from the days when Microsoft published it.I have personally written a basic stop-and-wait kermit in Bourne shell for a lark.
It's not as hard as you think.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556924</id>
	<title>Re:cu</title>
	<author>Antique Geekmeister</author>
	<datestamp>1269179760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's Xenix. Ancient Xenix. Kermit wasn't commercial software, it was (and is) freeware. (http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/) Finding a way to compile and transfer Kermit to such an ancient system would take some serious archeological research, and some luck, because I certainly wouldn't expect to find it in Xenix from the days when Microsoft published it.</p><p>Given that it's only 10 Megabytes, "cu" or "uucp" it over the serial port twice and compare the results. Then, when you're entirely confident, consider using your controller in a newer system to do a modern Linux or UNIX "dd" of the entire disk image. I'd be fascinated to know what filesystem that ancient OS used, and if there are drivers available in a modern Linux to actually read it directly. Perhaps someone here or on an old Xenix support group would know.</p><p>There's also an odd source of SCO expertise that may be helpful, since SCO took over Xenix: the forums over at www.groklaw.net.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's Xenix .
Ancient Xenix .
Kermit was n't commercial software , it was ( and is ) freeware .
( http : //www.columbia.edu/kermit/ ) Finding a way to compile and transfer Kermit to such an ancient system would take some serious archeological research , and some luck , because I certainly would n't expect to find it in Xenix from the days when Microsoft published it.Given that it 's only 10 Megabytes , " cu " or " uucp " it over the serial port twice and compare the results .
Then , when you 're entirely confident , consider using your controller in a newer system to do a modern Linux or UNIX " dd " of the entire disk image .
I 'd be fascinated to know what filesystem that ancient OS used , and if there are drivers available in a modern Linux to actually read it directly .
Perhaps someone here or on an old Xenix support group would know.There 's also an odd source of SCO expertise that may be helpful , since SCO took over Xenix : the forums over at www.groklaw.net .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's Xenix.
Ancient Xenix.
Kermit wasn't commercial software, it was (and is) freeware.
(http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/) Finding a way to compile and transfer Kermit to such an ancient system would take some serious archeological research, and some luck, because I certainly wouldn't expect to find it in Xenix from the days when Microsoft published it.Given that it's only 10 Megabytes, "cu" or "uucp" it over the serial port twice and compare the results.
Then, when you're entirely confident, consider using your controller in a newer system to do a modern Linux or UNIX "dd" of the entire disk image.
I'd be fascinated to know what filesystem that ancient OS used, and if there are drivers available in a modern Linux to actually read it directly.
Perhaps someone here or on an old Xenix support group would know.There's also an odd source of SCO expertise that may be helpful, since SCO took over Xenix: the forums over at www.groklaw.net.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556866</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31565126</id>
	<title>Re:Are you sure it's an IDE drive? More likely MFM</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269259440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, my first one was 80Mb. I seem to remember that being reasonably respectable for a desktop at the time, so there were probably lower capacity ones. In fact, I seem to remember my office PC at the time had a 30Mb drive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , my first one was 80Mb .
I seem to remember that being reasonably respectable for a desktop at the time , so there were probably lower capacity ones .
In fact , I seem to remember my office PC at the time had a 30Mb drive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, my first one was 80Mb.
I seem to remember that being reasonably respectable for a desktop at the time, so there were probably lower capacity ones.
In fact, I seem to remember my office PC at the time had a 30Mb drive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557520</id>
	<title>where's Milo?</title>
	<author>karlzt</author>
	<datestamp>1269186360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>so where's the guy who posted this?

He got lots of replies.</htmltext>
<tokenext>so where 's the guy who posted this ?
He got lots of replies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so where's the guy who posted this?
He got lots of replies.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560174</id>
	<title>I'd like to know more about this BBS</title>
	<author>FrankHS</author>
	<datestamp>1269166020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd like to know more about this BBS. How many incoming lines did it have? What modem speeds did it support? What topics did it cover?</p><p>Will the OP put the BBS (or a copy of it)  back on line (perhaps in read only mode)? I'm not sure how easy this would be to do but it would be cool if it were possible. Or perhaps just the text of the messages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd like to know more about this BBS .
How many incoming lines did it have ?
What modem speeds did it support ?
What topics did it cover ? Will the OP put the BBS ( or a copy of it ) back on line ( perhaps in read only mode ) ?
I 'm not sure how easy this would be to do but it would be cool if it were possible .
Or perhaps just the text of the messages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd like to know more about this BBS.
How many incoming lines did it have?
What modem speeds did it support?
What topics did it cover?Will the OP put the BBS (or a copy of it)  back on line (perhaps in read only mode)?
I'm not sure how easy this would be to do but it would be cool if it were possible.
Or perhaps just the text of the messages.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556992</id>
	<title>Google?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269180420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have people lost the ability to Google for answers before pestering other people? After about 5 seconds I found this:</p><p><a href="http://aplawrence.com/SCOFAQ/FAQ\_scotec1linuxfs.html" title="aplawrence.com" rel="nofollow">http://aplawrence.com/SCOFAQ/FAQ\_scotec1linuxfs.html</a> [aplawrence.com]</p><p>You're welcome. =P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have people lost the ability to Google for answers before pestering other people ?
After about 5 seconds I found this : http : //aplawrence.com/SCOFAQ/FAQ \ _scotec1linuxfs.html [ aplawrence.com ] You 're welcome .
= P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have people lost the ability to Google for answers before pestering other people?
After about 5 seconds I found this:http://aplawrence.com/SCOFAQ/FAQ\_scotec1linuxfs.html [aplawrence.com]You're welcome.
=P</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560448</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>independent123</author>
	<datestamp>1269167760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Split, compress, and uuencode it before sending.  Reverse process on other side.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Split , compress , and uuencode it before sending .
Reverse process on other side .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Split, compress, and uuencode it before sending.
Reverse process on other side.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31563952</id>
	<title>Re:Are you sure it's an IDE drive? More likely MFM</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269196320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Segate had a 30MB IDE drive that shipped with some 386 SX units.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Segate had a 30MB IDE drive that shipped with some 386 SX units .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Segate had a 30MB IDE drive that shipped with some 386 SX units.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557774</id>
	<title>Re:cu</title>
	<author>brusk</author>
	<datestamp>1269188580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Fairly recent Xenix binaries of Kermit exist:
<a href="http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ck80binaries.html#sco" title="columbia.edu">http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ck80binaries.html#sco</a> [columbia.edu]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Fairly recent Xenix binaries of Kermit exist : http : //www.columbia.edu/kermit/ck80binaries.html # sco [ columbia.edu ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fairly recent Xenix binaries of Kermit exist:
http://www.columbia.edu/kermit/ck80binaries.html#sco [columbia.edu]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556924</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557036</id>
	<title>DD</title>
	<author>AC-x</author>
	<datestamp>1269181080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the drive is actually compatible with a modern PC you could start by just taking a straight rip of the data using DD. That way you've at least got an archive of the data, and at only 10 megs you could probably analyse the data in a hex editor fairly easily.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the drive is actually compatible with a modern PC you could start by just taking a straight rip of the data using DD .
That way you 've at least got an archive of the data , and at only 10 megs you could probably analyse the data in a hex editor fairly easily .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the drive is actually compatible with a modern PC you could start by just taking a straight rip of the data using DD.
That way you've at least got an archive of the data, and at only 10 megs you could probably analyse the data in a hex editor fairly easily.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31561252</id>
	<title>no way!  the best way is...</title>
	<author>Kwirl</author>
	<datestamp>1269173220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>these people are all wrong...just take it to Best Buy!  the Geek Squad could save the data for you fo' sure!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>these people are all wrong...just take it to Best Buy !
the Geek Squad could save the data for you fo ' sure !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>these people are all wrong...just take it to Best Buy!
the Geek Squad could save the data for you fo' sure!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31579690</id>
	<title>Nabu 1600</title>
	<author>Hugh Redelmeier</author>
	<datestamp>1269281280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My Xenix box is actually a little older.  It's a Nabu 1600.  It has an 8086 CPU plus an MMU built out of TTL chips.  It uses ST506 disk drives (broken now).</p><p>The filesystem is the standard 7th edition Unix filesystem.  Partitioning is compiled into the kernel (if I remember correctly).  Actually, so is disk drive geometry.  This makes it hard to substitute other drives.</p><p>The original Nabu Xenix port was done by HCR, starting from Altos work done by Microsoft (and possibly SCO).  Years later SCO bought HCR, but that is another story.</p><p>Xenix at this point was really 7th Edition Unix.  Right down to using the Ritchie C compiler, not PCC.  The system was very much like a PDP-11, right down to the limitation of 64k bytes for code and 64k bytes for data ("split I and D").</p><p>Obvious ways of getting data off this machine (might apply to the OP's machine): uucp (9600 baud is probably the limit on mine) or tar to raw floppies.  Using 7th edition filesystem floppies is probably a mistake.  Linux could surely read tar files off of raw (no-filesystem) floppies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My Xenix box is actually a little older .
It 's a Nabu 1600 .
It has an 8086 CPU plus an MMU built out of TTL chips .
It uses ST506 disk drives ( broken now ) .The filesystem is the standard 7th edition Unix filesystem .
Partitioning is compiled into the kernel ( if I remember correctly ) .
Actually , so is disk drive geometry .
This makes it hard to substitute other drives.The original Nabu Xenix port was done by HCR , starting from Altos work done by Microsoft ( and possibly SCO ) .
Years later SCO bought HCR , but that is another story.Xenix at this point was really 7th Edition Unix .
Right down to using the Ritchie C compiler , not PCC .
The system was very much like a PDP-11 , right down to the limitation of 64k bytes for code and 64k bytes for data ( " split I and D " ) .Obvious ways of getting data off this machine ( might apply to the OP 's machine ) : uucp ( 9600 baud is probably the limit on mine ) or tar to raw floppies .
Using 7th edition filesystem floppies is probably a mistake .
Linux could surely read tar files off of raw ( no-filesystem ) floppies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My Xenix box is actually a little older.
It's a Nabu 1600.
It has an 8086 CPU plus an MMU built out of TTL chips.
It uses ST506 disk drives (broken now).The filesystem is the standard 7th edition Unix filesystem.
Partitioning is compiled into the kernel (if I remember correctly).
Actually, so is disk drive geometry.
This makes it hard to substitute other drives.The original Nabu Xenix port was done by HCR, starting from Altos work done by Microsoft (and possibly SCO).
Years later SCO bought HCR, but that is another story.Xenix at this point was really 7th Edition Unix.
Right down to using the Ritchie C compiler, not PCC.
The system was very much like a PDP-11, right down to the limitation of 64k bytes for code and 64k bytes for data ("split I and D").Obvious ways of getting data off this machine (might apply to the OP's machine): uucp (9600 baud is probably the limit on mine) or tar to raw floppies.
Using 7th edition filesystem floppies is probably a mistake.
Linux could surely read tar files off of raw (no-filesystem) floppies.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557850</id>
	<title>Re:Use the serial port ...</title>
	<author>farrellj</author>
	<datestamp>1269189360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Geepers, people...a non-Compaq 8086 system from that era would almost certainly have an ST-506 interface hard drive, not IDE! Those old hard drives were built like tanks, and tend to keep their data. If you can't get the system running, you can probably dig up some old 286 system, or even a *Pentium* system, and plug an 8 or 16 ST506 hard drive card, like the old Western Digital W8006, and access the data that way. A ST-506 drive will have three cables connecting it...one for power, one (the fat ribbon cable) for control, and the last one (skinny ribbon cable) for data. JUST MAKE SURE THAT THE PIN 1s LINED UP OTHERWISE YOU CAN BLOW THE DRIVE, CONTROLLER, AND MAYBE EVEN THE COMPUTER. If the cable is not "keyed", that is, has a vertical piece of plastic to make sure pin 1 connects to pin 1 on the edge connector, you have to figure out which is pin 1 on the cable...If it is a grey cable with a red strip on one side, that is pin 1, which should connect to the edge connector side that has the notch in it. If you have a braided, multi-color cable...sorry, you will have to figure it out yourself.</p><p>Of course, if you really want to be paranoid, and have the money, contact an old hard drive recovery company like On-Track, and they should be able to hoover all of the data off for you, and give it to you in an easy to read format.</p><p>ttyl<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Farrell</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Geepers , people...a non-Compaq 8086 system from that era would almost certainly have an ST-506 interface hard drive , not IDE !
Those old hard drives were built like tanks , and tend to keep their data .
If you ca n't get the system running , you can probably dig up some old 286 system , or even a * Pentium * system , and plug an 8 or 16 ST506 hard drive card , like the old Western Digital W8006 , and access the data that way .
A ST-506 drive will have three cables connecting it...one for power , one ( the fat ribbon cable ) for control , and the last one ( skinny ribbon cable ) for data .
JUST MAKE SURE THAT THE PIN 1s LINED UP OTHERWISE YOU CAN BLOW THE DRIVE , CONTROLLER , AND MAYBE EVEN THE COMPUTER .
If the cable is not " keyed " , that is , has a vertical piece of plastic to make sure pin 1 connects to pin 1 on the edge connector , you have to figure out which is pin 1 on the cable...If it is a grey cable with a red strip on one side , that is pin 1 , which should connect to the edge connector side that has the notch in it .
If you have a braided , multi-color cable...sorry , you will have to figure it out yourself.Of course , if you really want to be paranoid , and have the money , contact an old hard drive recovery company like On-Track , and they should be able to hoover all of the data off for you , and give it to you in an easy to read format.ttyl           Farrell</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Geepers, people...a non-Compaq 8086 system from that era would almost certainly have an ST-506 interface hard drive, not IDE!
Those old hard drives were built like tanks, and tend to keep their data.
If you can't get the system running, you can probably dig up some old 286 system, or even a *Pentium* system, and plug an 8 or 16 ST506 hard drive card, like the old Western Digital W8006, and access the data that way.
A ST-506 drive will have three cables connecting it...one for power, one (the fat ribbon cable) for control, and the last one (skinny ribbon cable) for data.
JUST MAKE SURE THAT THE PIN 1s LINED UP OTHERWISE YOU CAN BLOW THE DRIVE, CONTROLLER, AND MAYBE EVEN THE COMPUTER.
If the cable is not "keyed", that is, has a vertical piece of plastic to make sure pin 1 connects to pin 1 on the edge connector, you have to figure out which is pin 1 on the cable...If it is a grey cable with a red strip on one side, that is pin 1, which should connect to the edge connector side that has the notch in it.
If you have a braided, multi-color cable...sorry, you will have to figure it out yourself.Of course, if you really want to be paranoid, and have the money, contact an old hard drive recovery company like On-Track, and they should be able to hoover all of the data off for you, and give it to you in an easy to read format.ttyl
          Farrell</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557164</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556958</id>
	<title>Altos 586</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269180120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>What a great machine.  The Altos 586 was the first machine I used to run my BBS <a href="http://uncensored.citadel.org/" title="citadel.org">(which has run nonstop since 1988 and is still online today)</a> [citadel.org] before SCO Xenix and later Linux arrived on the scene.  It was an insanely cool computer.<br> <br>Anyway, even if there were an operating system available today that is still capable of parsing the Xenix filesystem, you wouldn't be able to get to it because the disk is attached to the system I/O board using an ST506 controller.  Good luck finding a modern computer with one of those in it.<br> <br>You're going to have to move that data off the machine the way we did it back in the days when an Altos <i>was</i> a modern computer.  Plug a null modem cable into that serial port and use UUCP to get the data moved.  Or if the machine has rzsz installed, you might be able to get away with using Zmodem instead.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What a great machine .
The Altos 586 was the first machine I used to run my BBS ( which has run nonstop since 1988 and is still online today ) [ citadel.org ] before SCO Xenix and later Linux arrived on the scene .
It was an insanely cool computer .
Anyway , even if there were an operating system available today that is still capable of parsing the Xenix filesystem , you would n't be able to get to it because the disk is attached to the system I/O board using an ST506 controller .
Good luck finding a modern computer with one of those in it .
You 're going to have to move that data off the machine the way we did it back in the days when an Altos was a modern computer .
Plug a null modem cable into that serial port and use UUCP to get the data moved .
Or if the machine has rzsz installed , you might be able to get away with using Zmodem instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What a great machine.
The Altos 586 was the first machine I used to run my BBS (which has run nonstop since 1988 and is still online today) [citadel.org] before SCO Xenix and later Linux arrived on the scene.
It was an insanely cool computer.
Anyway, even if there were an operating system available today that is still capable of parsing the Xenix filesystem, you wouldn't be able to get to it because the disk is attached to the system I/O board using an ST506 controller.
Good luck finding a modern computer with one of those in it.
You're going to have to move that data off the machine the way we did it back in the days when an Altos was a modern computer.
Plug a null modem cable into that serial port and use UUCP to get the data moved.
Or if the machine has rzsz installed, you might be able to get away with using Zmodem instead.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560656</id>
	<title>old sub 100MB hard drives</title>
	<author>juliusbeezer</author>
	<datestamp>1269169260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I had a lot of fun with machines equipped with low end hard drives at a time when 40MB seemed like a big deal compared with 20.

The old Mac Plus, the first 9" B&amp;W classic. Of course, its users were normally well content with an 800kB floppy drive, but the former owner had lashed out on a 20MB external hard drive whose audible chattering betrayed its good humour and continuing health. I believe it was powered mainly by clockwork, but it also had a SCSI controller, oldie stylie 50 PIN cables, and a military-grade steel case of generous proportions and massive weight, and a hardworking fan. The sound it made as it booted from off was lovely: like a miniature knife-grinding museum starting up at 11am for Visitors' Hour.

But hey! If it's worked this long, it'll probably work a bit longer. I'd advise techniques that use the absolute minimum of violence on the hardware. And once you've got the data backed up and reformatted for the modern reader, think of all the fun you can have if you network up that machine and use it as a webserver for a couple of novels or something.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I had a lot of fun with machines equipped with low end hard drives at a time when 40MB seemed like a big deal compared with 20 .
The old Mac Plus , the first 9 " B&amp;W classic .
Of course , its users were normally well content with an 800kB floppy drive , but the former owner had lashed out on a 20MB external hard drive whose audible chattering betrayed its good humour and continuing health .
I believe it was powered mainly by clockwork , but it also had a SCSI controller , oldie stylie 50 PIN cables , and a military-grade steel case of generous proportions and massive weight , and a hardworking fan .
The sound it made as it booted from off was lovely : like a miniature knife-grinding museum starting up at 11am for Visitors ' Hour .
But hey !
If it 's worked this long , it 'll probably work a bit longer .
I 'd advise techniques that use the absolute minimum of violence on the hardware .
And once you 've got the data backed up and reformatted for the modern reader , think of all the fun you can have if you network up that machine and use it as a webserver for a couple of novels or something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had a lot of fun with machines equipped with low end hard drives at a time when 40MB seemed like a big deal compared with 20.
The old Mac Plus, the first 9" B&amp;W classic.
Of course, its users were normally well content with an 800kB floppy drive, but the former owner had lashed out on a 20MB external hard drive whose audible chattering betrayed its good humour and continuing health.
I believe it was powered mainly by clockwork, but it also had a SCSI controller, oldie stylie 50 PIN cables, and a military-grade steel case of generous proportions and massive weight, and a hardworking fan.
The sound it made as it booted from off was lovely: like a miniature knife-grinding museum starting up at 11am for Visitors' Hour.
But hey!
If it's worked this long, it'll probably work a bit longer.
I'd advise techniques that use the absolute minimum of violence on the hardware.
And once you've got the data backed up and reformatted for the modern reader, think of all the fun you can have if you network up that machine and use it as a webserver for a couple of novels or something.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31561286</id>
	<title>Serial is not so bad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269173700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just because the hayes modems could only modulate at 9600 baud didn't mean that was the speed limit of the old serial ports. The UART chip on the old x86 PCs would often support 56Kb or 110kb transfers when using a hard-wired "null modem" cable with RTS and CTS wires crossed internally. You had to put the UART into 8-bit transfer mode with hardware flow control and NO PARITY (that allows the use of the 8th bit for data instead of parity on the 7-bit character). But then a protocol like xmodem or zmodem would provide the error detection coding/retransmission, and you could send files over at a really good clip. Send 10MB in about 1/2 hour,easy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just because the hayes modems could only modulate at 9600 baud did n't mean that was the speed limit of the old serial ports .
The UART chip on the old x86 PCs would often support 56Kb or 110kb transfers when using a hard-wired " null modem " cable with RTS and CTS wires crossed internally .
You had to put the UART into 8-bit transfer mode with hardware flow control and NO PARITY ( that allows the use of the 8th bit for data instead of parity on the 7-bit character ) .
But then a protocol like xmodem or zmodem would provide the error detection coding/retransmission , and you could send files over at a really good clip .
Send 10MB in about 1/2 hour,easy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just because the hayes modems could only modulate at 9600 baud didn't mean that was the speed limit of the old serial ports.
The UART chip on the old x86 PCs would often support 56Kb or 110kb transfers when using a hard-wired "null modem" cable with RTS and CTS wires crossed internally.
You had to put the UART into 8-bit transfer mode with hardware flow control and NO PARITY (that allows the use of the 8th bit for data instead of parity on the 7-bit character).
But then a protocol like xmodem or zmodem would provide the error detection coding/retransmission, and you could send files over at a really good clip.
Send 10MB in about 1/2 hour,easy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557898</id>
	<title>Another interesting way to skin this cat..</title>
	<author>mswhippingboy</author>
	<datestamp>1269190140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can try porting the entire system over to a virtual machine, using dd to copy the entire system, then booting it up in qemu...

Here's a link to someone who's had success with this approach...

<a href="http://virtuallyfun.blogspot.com/2007/05/running-xenix-on-qemu.html" title="blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">http://virtuallyfun.blogspot.com/2007/05/running-xenix-on-qemu.html</a> [blogspot.com]

Good luck!</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can try porting the entire system over to a virtual machine , using dd to copy the entire system , then booting it up in qemu.. . Here 's a link to someone who 's had success with this approach.. . http : //virtuallyfun.blogspot.com/2007/05/running-xenix-on-qemu.html [ blogspot.com ] Good luck !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can try porting the entire system over to a virtual machine, using dd to copy the entire system, then booting it up in qemu...

Here's a link to someone who's had success with this approach...

http://virtuallyfun.blogspot.com/2007/05/running-xenix-on-qemu.html [blogspot.com]

Good luck!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557404</id>
	<title>Oh Brother....</title>
	<author>NoOnesMessiah</author>
	<datestamp>1269185160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh, Hesu..., you whiners haven't looked in my garage, ever!;  Apple<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/// with 5Mb Profile Hard Disk anyone?  If I recall correctly,  that flavour of xenix is EFS and there are still some old unixes (and early 90s BSDs) that can bridge that gap.  It's probably an MFM or RLL ISA controller but I'm sure you could cobble together the hardware to either extract data or image the drive.  The people whining about "OMG!  Don't Touch It!  You might break it!" never lived through that vintage of hardware....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , Hesu... , you whiners have n't looked in my garage , ever !
; Apple /// with 5Mb Profile Hard Disk anyone ?
If I recall correctly , that flavour of xenix is EFS and there are still some old unixes ( and early 90s BSDs ) that can bridge that gap .
It 's probably an MFM or RLL ISA controller but I 'm sure you could cobble together the hardware to either extract data or image the drive .
The people whining about " OMG !
Do n't Touch It !
You might break it !
" never lived through that vintage of hardware... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, Hesu..., you whiners haven't looked in my garage, ever!
;  Apple /// with 5Mb Profile Hard Disk anyone?
If I recall correctly,  that flavour of xenix is EFS and there are still some old unixes (and early 90s BSDs) that can bridge that gap.
It's probably an MFM or RLL ISA controller but I'm sure you could cobble together the hardware to either extract data or image the drive.
The people whining about "OMG!
Don't Touch It!
You might break it!
" never lived through that vintage of hardware....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558950</id>
	<title>Re:Are you sure it's an IDE drive? More likely MFM</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269200040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nope, I distinctly remember the first IDE drive I used was a Western Digital 40 Meg, had that shiny gold metal look, with a stick on sticker on top, and a clear cover over the head stepper motor that stuck out and it had a pretty loud head movement to it too...They were neat because we didn't have to low level format'em!  AND they only had a single cable to the computer instead of two on ST506, so that was different.  I don't think this system used IDE.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nope , I distinctly remember the first IDE drive I used was a Western Digital 40 Meg , had that shiny gold metal look , with a stick on sticker on top , and a clear cover over the head stepper motor that stuck out and it had a pretty loud head movement to it too...They were neat because we did n't have to low level format'em !
AND they only had a single cable to the computer instead of two on ST506 , so that was different .
I do n't think this system used IDE .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nope, I distinctly remember the first IDE drive I used was a Western Digital 40 Meg, had that shiny gold metal look, with a stick on sticker on top, and a clear cover over the head stepper motor that stuck out and it had a pretty loud head movement to it too...They were neat because we didn't have to low level format'em!
AND they only had a single cable to the computer instead of two on ST506, so that was different.
I don't think this system used IDE.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557400</id>
	<title>Re:I'd do it the slow but secure way.</title>
	<author>bkeahl</author>
	<datestamp>1269185100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree.  Even at 9600 baud you'd get 3.5MB in about an hour.  I was performing data transfers @ 19200 all over the place back in the 80's, so 9600 or 4800 should be a snap.  Most likely a couple hours, and at worst overnight.

The big question is do you have the software on the Xenix box to perform a file unload like that. I remember sitting in front of one once upon a time as part of an engineering project but don't remember a darn thing other than thinking this was not going to be the OS of the future, so I have no clue what is built into the OS.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
Even at 9600 baud you 'd get 3.5MB in about an hour .
I was performing data transfers @ 19200 all over the place back in the 80 's , so 9600 or 4800 should be a snap .
Most likely a couple hours , and at worst overnight .
The big question is do you have the software on the Xenix box to perform a file unload like that .
I remember sitting in front of one once upon a time as part of an engineering project but do n't remember a darn thing other than thinking this was not going to be the OS of the future , so I have no clue what is built into the OS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
Even at 9600 baud you'd get 3.5MB in about an hour.
I was performing data transfers @ 19200 all over the place back in the 80's, so 9600 or 4800 should be a snap.
Most likely a couple hours, and at worst overnight.
The big question is do you have the software on the Xenix box to perform a file unload like that.
I remember sitting in front of one once upon a time as part of an engineering project but don't remember a darn thing other than thinking this was not going to be the OS of the future, so I have no clue what is built into the OS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556842</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556872</id>
	<title>NO DISASSEMBLE ALTOS!</title>
	<author>NNKK</author>
	<datestamp>1269179100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, don't go there, not until you get the data off via the serial port (or flatly establish that you \_can't\_).</p><p>You are dealing with a system that is lucky to be functional \_at all\_ after 25+ years, and presumably got heavy use while it was active. Corrosion, brittle plastics, dust worked into dangerous areas, etc..</p><p>If it's working now, taking it apart stands a good chance of breaking something that is difficult or impossible to fully repair, and you don't want to go there until the information is preserved.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , do n't go there , not until you get the data off via the serial port ( or flatly establish that you \ _ca n't \ _ ) .You are dealing with a system that is lucky to be functional \ _at all \ _ after 25 + years , and presumably got heavy use while it was active .
Corrosion , brittle plastics , dust worked into dangerous areas , etc..If it 's working now , taking it apart stands a good chance of breaking something that is difficult or impossible to fully repair , and you do n't want to go there until the information is preserved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, don't go there, not until you get the data off via the serial port (or flatly establish that you \_can't\_).You are dealing with a system that is lucky to be functional \_at all\_ after 25+ years, and presumably got heavy use while it was active.
Corrosion, brittle plastics, dust worked into dangerous areas, etc..If it's working now, taking it apart stands a good chance of breaking something that is difficult or impossible to fully repair, and you don't want to go there until the information is preserved.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556964</id>
	<title>Reading the disk will be tricky.</title>
	<author>shippo</author>
	<datestamp>1269180180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This takes me back....</p><p>Firstly, I'm sure that there were never 10MB IDE drives. The drive will either be ST506, ESDI or possibly even SCSI.</p><p>Secondly Xenix would create several filesystems within the Xenix partition, using its own separate partition table. As far as I'm aware no mechanism to read these tables was ever added to the Linux kernel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This takes me back....Firstly , I 'm sure that there were never 10MB IDE drives .
The drive will either be ST506 , ESDI or possibly even SCSI.Secondly Xenix would create several filesystems within the Xenix partition , using its own separate partition table .
As far as I 'm aware no mechanism to read these tables was ever added to the Linux kernel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This takes me back....Firstly, I'm sure that there were never 10MB IDE drives.
The drive will either be ST506, ESDI or possibly even SCSI.Secondly Xenix would create several filesystems within the Xenix partition, using its own separate partition table.
As far as I'm aware no mechanism to read these tables was ever added to the Linux kernel.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557132</id>
	<title>My two cents</title>
	<author>Ken Hall</author>
	<datestamp>1269182340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I worked on these way back when.  I'm surprised it still works.  I agree with the above, you have two options:</p><p>1) tar up the whole filesystem (if it will fit), and use uucp to move it via serial port.  Make a null-modem cable and ship it across.  Be careful to get the flow control right.  Some of the old machines had serial ports that couldn't keep up with 9600 baud, so needed RTS/CTS or DTR flow control to avoid overruns.</p><p>2) It should have the ability to make FAT format floppies.  Do it piecemeal, if you can find a 1.2 MB 5-1/4 drive for a PC anymore.</p><p>The filesystem is XENIX format, not FAT.  If I recall, it's similar to the original SVRX filesystem.  It MIGHT mount under Linux, but I'd be more afraid of an incompatible controller frying the drive.  I don't recall these machines used IDE, I could have sworn they predate IDE, and the drive would have been either the old Shugart interface, or some kind of SCSI.  The Altos machines I used had either a 10MB or 40 MB Shugart, and those were the BIG sealed units.  IDE didn't come in till 3-1/2" drives, and I believe the later Altos machines had at best 5-1/4 drives either ESDI or SCSI.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I worked on these way back when .
I 'm surprised it still works .
I agree with the above , you have two options : 1 ) tar up the whole filesystem ( if it will fit ) , and use uucp to move it via serial port .
Make a null-modem cable and ship it across .
Be careful to get the flow control right .
Some of the old machines had serial ports that could n't keep up with 9600 baud , so needed RTS/CTS or DTR flow control to avoid overruns.2 ) It should have the ability to make FAT format floppies .
Do it piecemeal , if you can find a 1.2 MB 5-1/4 drive for a PC anymore.The filesystem is XENIX format , not FAT .
If I recall , it 's similar to the original SVRX filesystem .
It MIGHT mount under Linux , but I 'd be more afraid of an incompatible controller frying the drive .
I do n't recall these machines used IDE , I could have sworn they predate IDE , and the drive would have been either the old Shugart interface , or some kind of SCSI .
The Altos machines I used had either a 10MB or 40 MB Shugart , and those were the BIG sealed units .
IDE did n't come in till 3-1/2 " drives , and I believe the later Altos machines had at best 5-1/4 drives either ESDI or SCSI .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I worked on these way back when.
I'm surprised it still works.
I agree with the above, you have two options:1) tar up the whole filesystem (if it will fit), and use uucp to move it via serial port.
Make a null-modem cable and ship it across.
Be careful to get the flow control right.
Some of the old machines had serial ports that couldn't keep up with 9600 baud, so needed RTS/CTS or DTR flow control to avoid overruns.2) It should have the ability to make FAT format floppies.
Do it piecemeal, if you can find a 1.2 MB 5-1/4 drive for a PC anymore.The filesystem is XENIX format, not FAT.
If I recall, it's similar to the original SVRX filesystem.
It MIGHT mount under Linux, but I'd be more afraid of an incompatible controller frying the drive.
I don't recall these machines used IDE, I could have sworn they predate IDE, and the drive would have been either the old Shugart interface, or some kind of SCSI.
The Altos machines I used had either a 10MB or 40 MB Shugart, and those were the BIG sealed units.
IDE didn't come in till 3-1/2" drives, and I believe the later Altos machines had at best 5-1/4 drives either ESDI or SCSI.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558644</id>
	<title>Re:cu</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1269197400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I'd be fascinated to know what filesystem that ancient OS used, and if there are drivers available in a modern Linux to actually read it directly.</p></div></blockquote><p>According to fdisk (command l) it has its own - user and root with IDs of 3 and 2 respectively.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd be fascinated to know what filesystem that ancient OS used , and if there are drivers available in a modern Linux to actually read it directly.According to fdisk ( command l ) it has its own - user and root with IDs of 3 and 2 respectively .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd be fascinated to know what filesystem that ancient OS used, and if there are drivers available in a modern Linux to actually read it directly.According to fdisk (command l) it has its own - user and root with IDs of 3 and 2 respectively.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556924</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556888
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558068
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558808
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560448
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31561656
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31561102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558080
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557954
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557780
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558840
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558976
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31561672
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560542
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558816
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558556
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31563952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557002
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31563452
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557400
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558450
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558236
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557356
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557808
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556996
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31567228
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31578548
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31588972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31569306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557126
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556972
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557922
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557252
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31562970
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556956
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31564730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557336
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558660
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556932
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557758
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557692
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558478
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31561038
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558950
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31572722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557868
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557950
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31562942
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31565126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556932
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557250
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31562738
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558032
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31563550
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559254
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558512
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556958
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559628
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556988
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31566834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557056
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558342
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556772
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557164
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560530
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557748
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556866
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556924
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558156
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31569732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557030
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556946
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_21_0849241_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557666
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556988
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557336
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557474
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31561656
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557692
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558478
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558236
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557546
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558512
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557950
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31567228
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559762
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556802
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557280
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556766
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558128
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556972
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557922
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31588972
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558342
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556996
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556842
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557780
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558816
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557304
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557402
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31572722
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557400
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31563550
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557002
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556836
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560542
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31563452
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31564730
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559196
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31562942
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31562970
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31578548
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556958
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558596
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559156
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556992
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31564388
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556806
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557030
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557638
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557230
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557070
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557132
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557608
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556828
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558290
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31561252
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558068
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558808
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557532
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31569732
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557954
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558080
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31561672
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557068
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557666
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557832
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556964
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31561038
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557300
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558556
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557158
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557338
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557198
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556834
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557056
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558840
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559254
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556798
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556866
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558720
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556924
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557356
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557808
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557868
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558156
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558644
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559050
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557774
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558976
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556956
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556832
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31566834
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556946
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31565126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31562738
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558032
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31569306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557748
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558862
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31561102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558950
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31559628
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31563952
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557862
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556932
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557250
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557758
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_21_0849241.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556772
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556888
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557164
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557850
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560636
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31558660
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560530
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31560570
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31556830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_21_0849241.31557252
</commentlist>
</conversation>
