80-Bus News


March–April 1984, Volume 3, Issue 2

Page 4 of 51

NasPen Problem Revisited

Thank you for the answers to my questions in a recent 80-BUS which have now been extracted for filing in an appropriate place (not a waste bin).

We do have our wires crossed on the bit “NasPen Problem”. I am actually running a Nascom 2 with Nas-Sys 3 monitor BUT the NasPen was the same set of EPROMs that I had for Nas-Sys 1 monitor. It was during the time between writing to you for help, and the letter being published, and getting more frustrated in between, that I learned that it was all to do with the off-set on the READ command. I have since had my EPROMs modified and all is now well. What did cause some confusion was that in all the literature I could find, no mention was made that NasPen was different for Nas-Sys 3. (My original 2708 ROMs are labelled NasPen VS 1-1 and NasPen VS 1-2.) It occurs to me that it might be worth while mentioning this to anyone who might be considering obtaining NasPen from someone who no longer requires it. In short NasPen to run with Nas-Sys 3 is not the same as NasPen made to run with Nas-Sys 1.

Incidentally, when I contacted Lucas about it, they would not accept that my original copy was from a bona fide dealer at the time. I bought my NASCOM as a kit when RAM A cards were being included for free.

Thanks again for the reply and I felt that the record had to be straightened out.

Yours sincerely, H.B. Piper, Sheffield.

Some Suggestion

Here are a number of suggestions I would like to make and they maybe worth a few words in a future issue:

Submitting programs and/or articles

– Do you prefer “camera-ready” listings or tapes? (We don’t all have disks.) If tapes are used, which format would be both general or convenient? (We don’t all have the same word-processor if any.)

– Some feedback on submitted material would be, to say the least, encouraging! (I submitted a software version of a real-time clock and my last hope of hearing about it is that it was published in the issue I did not receive.)

To be pragmatical why not print in each issue the list of received and not yet published material? It would be enough to have one line per entry stating for example the name, status (reviewed or not/​will/​will not be published/​kept for special issue/ etc.), and any particular comments (unreadable​/simplistic/​send more of the same kind/etc.)

Subscriptions Why not print the “subscription due date” on the mailing stickers? It could be a useful reminder!

Thanks for the magazine quality, Jean-Michel Dasnoy, Brussels, Belgium

[Ed. – Thanks for the suggestions, comments are always welcome and will be ignored in the usual fashion acted on where appropriate. Some form of magnetic media is always preferable to hard listings – preferably Nascom 2 or Gemini RP/M formats if tapes are to be sent, we can’t cope with Nascom 1 tapes. As far as the actual data format,we can cope with NasPen or WordStar type files, and failing that just send a straight ASCII file. As far as sub. reminders are concerned, these are always included in the last mag(s) on your current sub.]

Deliberate Errors!

Many thanks for publishing my two programms, COMPARE and INTEL-HEX DUMP, in the (rather belated!) Vol. 2 Iss. 6 80-BUS NEWS. To save you all the aggro, I’ll tell you where DRH put in the deliberate mistakes when he transcribed them!

Page 4 of 51