Com Ports

[kr2j at aol.com]

There are plenty of affordable imported "multi I/O" boards available in the
under $30 range. These boards usually have 2 serial ports and a parallel port
as well as a game port (joystick).  At the least, you'll get one or two
additional serial ports and another printer port for a very nominal cost.   
Look for the ones that will allow selection of other than IRQ 3 and 4 for the
serial ports and will also allow selecting any comport number 1 to 4 with
various addresses.   IRQ 2 (com 3) and IRQ 5 (com 4) are the "oddball" ones
that CT (both ver 7 & 8) would support.  As someone else said, IRQ 2 is
probably not available due to cascading of the IRQ's 9 and up.  I have found
boards like this in Dayton for $16. "Sharing" IRQ5 with your printer port is
ok under DOS, but with OS/2, neither will work properly.     
73,
Bob Naumann  KR2J at aol.com

>From robert penneys <penneys at freezer.cns.udel.edu>  Sat Apr  9 00:42:09 1994
From: robert penneys <penneys at freezer.cns.udel.edu> (robert penneys)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 94 19:42:09 EDT
Subject: CT ver 9?
Message-ID: <9404082342.AA07159 at freezer.cns.udel.edu>


I hear CT ver 9 is on the way. Any ideas on what new it might offer?
Such as customizable for whatever contest?  Tnx Bob
Bob Penneys, WN3K   Frankford Radio Club  Internet: penneys at pecan.cns.udel.edu
Work: Ham Radio Outlet (Delaware) (800) 644-4476;  fax (302) 322-8808
Mail at home:  12 East Mill Station Drive   Newark, DE 19711  USA

>From robert penneys <penneys at freezer.cns.udel.edu>  Sat Apr  9 00:43:52 1994
From: robert penneys <penneys at freezer.cns.udel.edu> (robert penneys)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 94 19:43:52 EDT
Subject: 4 serial ports
Message-ID: <9404082343.AA07162 at freezer.cns.udel.edu>


I see the thread about 4 com ports.

I run a 486 with 2 serial, 2 parallel and 1 sound blaster.

How inexpensively and dependably could I go to 4 com ports?

Tnx Bob
Bob Penneys, WN3K   Frankford Radio Club  Internet: penneys at pecan.cns.udel.edu
Work: Ham Radio Outlet (Delaware) (800) 644-4476;  fax (302) 322-8808
Mail at home:  12 East Mill Station Drive   Newark, DE 19711  USA

>From Don Nutt KJ6TC <kj6tc at netcom.com>  Sat Apr  9 01:01:36 1994
From: Don Nutt KJ6TC <kj6tc at netcom.com> (Don Nutt KJ6TC)
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 1994 17:01:36 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Future of Single Op?
Message-ID: <Pine.3.85.9404081736.A7686-0100000 at netcom4>


I agree.....  I have been in a location where ther was no "PACKET
CLUSTER".  I was on my own in SO catagory.  I still like the SO catagory
(though lately I have been MO at another station).  To remove it would 
just leave a gap.  I have never operated a SO assisted.

On Fri, 8 Apr 1994, John Dorr K1AR wrote:

------------

> The fact is that there are huge numbers of people who still choose to 
> operate "real" single operator. It's either by choice or perhaps due to
> limited access to packet (or lack of equipment). I think it's dangerous 
> to assume that the world is no longer interested in single operating
> (unassisted) by simply measuring it according to what the big boys are
> doing and how they compare to each other across categories. 
>
>
------Hack hack, the rest is gone......to the bit bucket..... -------


Don Nutt
kj6tc at netcom.com