Jump to content
SoulBuster

Percom AT88-S1PD

Recommended Posts

Finally got around to scanning my schematics for the AT88-S1PD. It could use a good cleaning, but I pieced it together and edited some things that got lost in the scan.

 

Percom AT88-S1PD schematic

 

I'm currently typing up my disassembly of the rom. It's a printout with hand written notes... in pencil... in cursive. Well, it was almost 35 years ago. And looking at the schematic and going over the rom, I have to correct something I said earlier in the thread - the AT88-S1PD has the hardware for high speed serial, but not the rom support. The default the code uses is high speed off, which clocks the serial chip at 16X 19230 baud. It's actually off from what the Atari uses (19040 baud), but close enough I guess. If high speed is turned on (and there's nothing in the rom code to do so), it would clock the serial chip at 1X the Atari peripheral port clock. If I were to hazard a guess, I was working on adding the '?' command to the rom - there's plenty of room in the rom for more commands. I'll probably have the rom listing ready to post next weekend.

 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice Chilly Willy! It sounds like you were one of the original firmware authors then, or just your own hacking?

 

Do you have an actual Percom Drive that a dump could be made of it's ROM/EPROM?

 

Your comments about highspeed capability are interesting, because in the Altirra Hardware Reference manual, phaeron's reverse engineering of a Percom RFD-40S1 found this:

Quote

Communication over the serial I/O bus is handled by a 6850 ACIA. The transmit and receive clocks are hardwired to 19200 baud (4MHz ÷ 13 as the 16x clock, to be exact), so the RFD-40S1 is one of the few drives that cannot do high-speed operation even with modified firmware.

But... your schematics show a 6821 in the AT-88S1PD. Is this the case for the AT-88 with the Double Density upgrade as well? Ultraspeed support on a Percom drive would be pretty cool if the hardware is capable..

 

The only other PERCOM related ROM that has been dumped (in my current day knowledge) is from an Aastra 1001, which appears to use a Percom derivative ROM, or maybe it is actual (later) Percom code. (see ROM dump & pictures and dissasembled source)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never worked for Percom, I just got lucky when I bought my first floppy for my Atari 400. I ordered their single-density drive, but they upgraded me to the (then brand spanking new) double-density with built-in printer port for free. The printer port is why they have the 6821 in that unit - they use one port for the drive control, and the other port for the printer. I wrote an app for my Olivetti SparkJet printer for the Atari to print various Atari picture formats, then later made a printer driver for it for my Amiga. But back to the AT88. When my brother got a Happy for his 1050, I wondered if the Percom could do higher speeds. I wrote to Percom asking about the schematics, and they sent me a nice BIG blueprint for the model I had. I pulled the EPROM from the Percom and plugged it into an Atari cart with a socket so I could dump it like a regular Atari cart. I should look around for that. Then I wrote a 6809 disassembler for the Atari to make a file of the disassembled code. I printed it out on my SparkJet and made notes on every routine. Before I could get around to actually upgrading the Percom for high speed, I got an Amiga 500 and moved into Amiga programming.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that drive "felt" so ancient handling it.. i dont ever remember a single problem in use though.. same time i dont remember it being much faster....

 

had a pretty brown spined notebook manual with mine.. i cringe to think of what shipping was when i bought that fucker... same with the amdek dual 3" for the Tandy I had for a fleeting moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/3/2019 at 9:48 AM, Chilly Willy said:

Haven't had the time for typing, so I scanned my rom listing instead. Here's an arc.

First of all, thanks for the scans! I was going to convert this to PDF and ask you permission to post it on Archive.org (may I?) - But I noticed even though your page scans you provided are lossless PNG, upon close inspection, they exhibit heavy JPEG artifacting. Any chance you still have scans of the pages prior to when they got JPEG'd? Or maybe it's just an internal limitation of your scanner...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, doctor_x said:

just as a side note.. dont ever let the percom go.. definitely becoming a rare beast.

I don't plan on it. I've had that Percom forever!

 

12 hours ago, Nezgar said:

First of all, thanks for the scans! I was going to convert this to PDF and ask you permission to post it on Archive.org (may I?) - But I noticed even though your page scans you provided are lossless PNG, upon close inspection, they exhibit heavy JPEG artifacting. Any chance you still have scans of the pages prior to when they got JPEG'd? Or maybe it's just an internal limitation of your scanner...

?? Not sure what you mean... I double-checked the pngs and they are definitely png, and I don't see any artifacts at all. I scanned raw RGB at 200 dpi, and saved as lossless PNG. Maybe your viewer is doing some bad/fast rescaling to show the image. Make sure you look at them at 1:1 as they are BIG scans (2480x3507 typically).

 

But yes, you can make it into a PDF for Archive.org. I get quite a few old manuals from there.

 

Here's a screenshot of part of one at 1:1. Looks good to me...

 

https://i.imgur.com/dXmAlwQ.png

Edited by Chilly Willy
Add pic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chilly Willy said:

I double-checked the pngs and they are definitely png, and I don't see any artifacts at all.

If you look even closer than 1:1, there are jpeg-like artifacts in the PNG's in your ZIP, like this:

jaggies.thumb.jpg.1feb7e123d4e95be80f7bd5428d8caeb.jpg

The PDFing process jpeg's them anyway, it's just nice to avoid 2nd generation jpeg if possible...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, um, that's a 200 DPI approximation of 35 years of dust and yellowing printer paper, not artifacts. 😂

 

I could scan it at an even higher resolution so you can see the dirt and age in better detail if you want...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...