My Uthernet II arrived...

Did it come with the card to back cable or do we need to order these ourselves?

Did it come with the card to back cable or do we need to order these ourselves?

You can order one yourself..

Or Glen sent out a Survey and you could request a Quantity to Purchase and he will request payment for them just before he ships your cards.. That way he could place a Bulk Order..

MarkO

David,

If yours have arrived, then mine should be coming along soon.

Steven

Saw the survey and volunteered to just get them through him, though either way is fine, I just haven't heard anything back and don't want the Uthernet team (or myself) to get stuck with a bunch of extra cables to lay about.

I ordered three one for myself, one for my uncle, and a spare... Soooo psyched up to get them.

Next a gglabs ram card and the transwarp clone when it makes it into production!!!

Then all my wildest childhood dreams will be realized!!! (Well except the stuff about riding in a spaceship or becoming an independently wealthy and hugely excentric professional race car driver. )

Don't really know the guy well enough to call him (or team involved) by his first name. It seems his asking price is a little low which actually slowed me to order 3. I hope he at least comes out a little on top to get something nice for himself.

If not we should take a little collection to buy him dinner (or a weekend holiday if enough folks signed up for the run).

It's just so magnanimous to develope something like this for the ][ in the first place for people like myself who haven't the time, nor wouldn't even know where to begin.

Looking forward to the transwarp clone too!!! All these people/projects just rock!

Ahhhh...

Eagerly anticipated, but with the recent delays and my order number north of 230, it will be a long while before I have mine. ...sigh...

Hurray for real Uthernet2 hardware. I was able to use the fast auto-increment mode that just wouldn't work on my homebrew card.

So, if you are looking to amaze your friends with your Apple II's internet prowess, here is a (extremely minimal) web server written in PLASMA. Simply boot the disk image (provided at the end) and type +HTTPD at the prompt (the + is required). Assuming you have DHCP configured for your network, you'll be off and running. It will auto-detect your card and slot - no need for configuration settings. I've included a super simple index.html file, but by using the SANDBOX text editor (included), you can modify and add as many html files as will fit on your drive. To run the SANDBOX editor, press any key to exit the web server and type -SANDBOX INDEX.HTML to edit the index.html file (the '-' is required). If you are unfamiliar with the SANDBOX editor, you should download the SANDBOX.PO image as well, or use your favorite Apple II ProDOS text editor.

Note: this won't work with the original Uthernet yet; I still have to finish the TCP stack. The Uthernet2 driver uses the built-in TCP/IP stack of the Wiznet 5100 chip.

https://github.com/dschmenk/PLASMA/blob/master/HTTPD.PO?raw=true

Dave...

I just got my Uthernet II Shipping Conformation, yesterday!!!!

MarkO

Me too!!! Psyched!

The OP on my IIe

The OP on my IIe

Very Cool!!!! I believe mine arrive today...

MarkO

The OP on my IIe

That is SOOOO awesome!!

Jennifer

Nothing interesting. An 80 column primitive terminal (an Apple //e) connected to an embedded contemporary computer with several hundred times more computational power than the A2 itself produce lynx style screen output.

Nothing interesting. An 80 column primitive terminal (an Apple //e) connected to an embedded contemporary computer with several hundred times more computational power than the A2 itself produce lynx style screen output.

I still think its really cool. The Uthernet card is pretty awesome.

Jennifer

Nothing interesting. An 80 column primitive terminal (an Apple //e) connected to an embedded contemporary computer with several hundred times more computational power than the A2 itself produce lynx style screen output.

I still think its really cool. The Uthernet card is pretty awesome.

Jennifer

I am wondering what kinds of Networked Apple ][ games can be developed...

Personally I am interested in Multi-Player Wolfenstien..

MarkO

Nothing interesting. An 80 column primitive terminal (an Apple //e) connected to an embedded contemporary computer with several hundred times more computational power than the A2 itself produce lynx style screen output.

Isn't that the point though? This is a text based browser running natively on a //e, not a dumb terminal. I think it's fantastic and I'm kicking myself for not getting in on the first batch. Are there any left?

There is already some a-hole selling on eBay for $400 a pop.

I pre-ordered 3 to tide me over till he does another run!

To the fellow that posted the cynical statement...

One might wonder why someone with such an opinion is hanging out at a site like applefritter rather than playing the latest Xbox game?

It's a neat product! I appreciate the time spent on it.

To the fellow that posted the cynical statement...

Oh, that's just the vulgar Bulgar. No need to take any notice. He literally hates everything.

I'd have to agree with georgel on this. I view this product as only a component for making an Apple ii into a somewhat more complete system. There's nothing spectacular in what it actually does but the Apple ii would not be complete without one. Imagine a modern computer without an Ethernet connector on it.

I decided not to get the Uthernet II at this time as I see no significant new functionality from it except for the physical aspect. That adafruit cable that you can only get with the Uthernet II is the real difference maker.

But being in debt as I am compels me to not buy anything that I really do not want.

If someone would develop a capable browser that won't crash (capable in browsing modern websites with a GUI interface) then perhaps the Uthernet would be a more attractive product to get. And yes, I know of Spectrum Internet Suite. For me however, I have two Uthernet I cards and I would also get the benefit if one were to be developed.

The fact that no such browser exists makes it incomprehensible to me how we are trying so hard to make the Apple ii up to date, yet we really aren't.

And since we all know that an Apple ii will never display the aspects of modern websites, there is nothing preventing us from developing a browser which would simply copy the text in the correct locations and simply blot out the graphics and videos that come from modern websites and replace them with error messages which won't crash the computer yet be understandable.

This whole situation is completely and utterly illogical.

Any problem using slot 3 on a IIgs?

I'd have to agree with georgel on this. I view this product as only a component for making an Apple ii into a somewhat more complete system. There's nothing spectacular in what it actually does but the Apple ii would not be complete without one. Imagine a modern computer without an Ethernet connector on it.

I decided not to get the Uthernet II at this time as I see no significant new functionality from it except for the physical aspect. That adafruit cable that you can only get with the Uthernet II is the real difference maker.

But being in debt as I am compels me to not buy anything that I really do not want.

If someone would develop a capable browser that won't crash (capable in browsing modern websites with a GUI interface) then perhaps the Uthernet would be a more attractive product to get. And yes, I know of Spectrum Internet Suite. For me however, I have two Uthernet I cards and I would also get the benefit if one were to be developed.

The fact that no such browser exists makes it incomprehensible to me how we are trying so hard to make the Apple ii up to date, yet we really aren't.

And since we all know that an Apple ii will never display the aspects of modern websites, there is nothing preventing us from developing a browser which would simply copy the text in the correct locations and simply blot out the graphics and videos that come from modern websites and replace them with error messages which won't crash the computer yet be understandable.

This whole situation is completely and utterly illogical.

I don't understand why you all think TCP/IP equates to web browsers. Certainly, it's the most common use for modern computers, but I think we can all agree that the Apple II isn't a modern computer. The Apple II is never going to run a web browser that you would use every day (Apple II Pi excepted). However, the Uthernet II offloads most of the TCP/IP transaction details so the Apple II can run a whole new class of programs, most which have yet to be written. It is pretty amazing what was done with the original Uthernet hardware, but it is like bit-banging a serial interface vs using a 6551 ACIA.

The modern day example is the Arduino Universe, where the Ethernet Shield uses the same Wiznet 5100 chip as the Uthernet II. The Arduino Uno, for instance, may have the edge in CPU performance, but can't match the memory+interface+storage options of the Apple II.

I don't see what is so illogical about it, perhaps you should broaden your horizons,

Dave...

I'd have to agree with georgel on this. I view this product as only a component for making an Apple ii into a somewhat more complete system. There's nothing spectacular in what it actually does but the Apple ii would not be complete without one. Imagine a modern computer without an Ethernet connector on it.

I decided not to get the Uthernet II at this time as I see no significant new functionality from it except for the physical aspect. That adafruit cable that you can only get with the Uthernet II is the real difference maker.

But being in debt as I am compels me to not buy anything that I really do not want.

If someone would develop a capable browser that won't crash (capable in browsing modern websites with a GUI interface) then perhaps the Uthernet would be a more attractive product to get. And yes, I know of Spectrum Internet Suite. For me however, I have two Uthernet I cards and I would also get the benefit if one were to be developed.

The fact that no such browser exists makes it incomprehensible to me how we are trying so hard to make the Apple ii up to date, yet we really aren't.

And since we all know that an Apple ii will never display the aspects of modern websites, there is nothing preventing us from developing a browser which would simply copy the text in the correct locations and simply blot out the graphics and videos that come from modern websites and replace them with error messages which won't crash the computer yet be understandable.

This whole situation is completely and utterly illogical.

I don't understand why you all think TCP/IP equates to web browsers. Certainly, it's the most common use for modern computers, but I think we can all agree that the Apple II isn't a modern computer. The Apple II is never going to run a web browser that you would use every day (Apple II Pi excepted). However, the Uthernet II offloads most of the TCP/IP transaction details so the Apple II can run a whole new class of programs, most which have yet to be written. It is pretty amazing what was done with the original Uthernet hardware, but it is like bit-banging a serial interface vs using a 6551 ACIA.

The modern day example is the Arduino Universe, where the Ethernet Shield uses the same Wiznet 5100 chip as the Uthernet II. The Arduino Uno, for instance, may have the edge in CPU performance, but can't match the memory+interface+storage options of the Apple II.

I don't see what is so illogical about it, perhaps you should broaden your horizons,

Dave...

I just don't see myself upgrading from the Uthernet I to the Uthernet II when I can't get any practical and additional functionality from doing so.

It is not logical when people try so hard to make the Apple ii be like a modern computer when there is no useful browser for it.

It's like trying to make a 1973 Volkswagen Bug seem like a modern car but no GPS or an airbag.

I broadened my horizons fine.

I have the Uthernet I, the Apple ii PI 4.4b, the Focus IDE card, the Microdrive Turbo, Nishida Radio's component adapter for both the Apple iie and the iigs, the Apple iigs SCART cable and so I have many options for connecting a iie and a iigs to a modern monitor.

I'd have to agree with georgel on this. I view this product as only a component for making an Apple ii into a somewhat more complete system. There's nothing spectacular in what it actually does but the Apple ii would not be complete without one. Imagine a modern computer without an Ethernet connector on it.

I decided not to get the Uthernet II at this time as I see no significant new functionality from it except for the physical aspect. That adafruit cable that you can only get with the Uthernet II is the real difference maker.

But being in debt as I am compels me to not buy anything that I really do not want.

If someone would develop a capable browser that won't crash (capable in browsing modern websites with a GUI interface) then perhaps the Uthernet would be a more attractive product to get. And yes, I know of Spectrum Internet Suite. For me however, I have two Uthernet I cards and I would also get the benefit if one were to be developed.

The fact that no such browser exists makes it incomprehensible to me how we are trying so hard to make the Apple ii up to date, yet we really aren't.

And since we all know that an Apple ii will never display the aspects of modern websites, there is nothing preventing us from developing a browser which would simply copy the text in the correct locations and simply blot out the graphics and videos that come from modern websites and replace them with error messages which won't crash the computer yet be understandable.

This whole situation is completely and utterly illogical.

I don't understand why you all think TCP/IP equates to web browsers. Certainly, it's the most common use for modern computers, but I think we can all agree that the Apple II isn't a modern computer. The Apple II is never going to run a web browser that you would use every day (Apple II Pi excepted). However, the Uthernet II offloads most of the TCP/IP transaction details so the Apple II can run a whole new class of programs, most which have yet to be written. It is pretty amazing what was done with the original Uthernet hardware, but it is like bit-banging a serial interface vs using a 6551 ACIA.

The modern day example is the Arduino Universe, where the Ethernet Shield uses the same Wiznet 5100 chip as the Uthernet II. The Arduino Uno, for instance, may have the edge in CPU performance, but can't match the memory+interface+storage options of the Apple II.

I don't see what is so illogical about it, perhaps you should broaden your horizons,

Dave...

I just don't see myself upgrading from the Uthernet I to the Uthernet II when I can't get any practical and additional functionality from doing so.

It is not logical when people try so hard to make the Apple ii be like a modern computer when there is no useful browser for it.

It's like trying to make a 1973 Volkswagen Bug seem like a modern car but no GPS or an airbag.

I broadened my horizons fine.

I have the Uthernet I, the Apple ii PI 4.4b, the Focus IDE card, the Microdrive Turbo, Nishida Radio's component adapter for both the Apple iie and the iigs, the Apple iigs SCART cable and so I have many options for connecting a iie and a iigs to a modern monitor.

I'm still trying to follow your argument. I agree that upgrading from the Uthernet I to the Uthernet II doesn't provide any real benefit at the moment. Point taken.

If someone didn't acquire the Uthernet I when it was available, then getting an Uthernet II now should be considered illogical? Just because the Wiznet 5100 uses an embedded ARM core changes the game?

The fact that someone wrote a browser for the 8 bit Apple II is a pretty amazing feat. I don't see anyone trying hard to make their Apple II a modern computer, but just running it for the "Look what I did" factor.

You clearly have many Apple II goodies which is why I didn't understand your "This whole situation is completely and utterly illogical" statement. It seemed rather harsh.

I'd have to agree with georgel on this. I view this product as only a component for making an Apple ii into a somewhat more complete system. There's nothing spectacular in what it actually does but the Apple ii would not be complete without one. Imagine a modern computer without an Ethernet connector on it.

I decided not to get the Uthernet II at this time as I see no significant new functionality from it except for the physical aspect. That adafruit cable that you can only get with the Uthernet II is the real difference maker.

The Apple ][, not being a Modern Computer, can exist With-Out a Network Interface, but in accordance with Metcalfe's Law, "The value of a telecommunications network is proportional to the square of the number of connected users of the system (n2)"

With a Larger Operating System, like GS/OS and the Appropriate Drivers, it won't matter if you have the Uthernet I or Uthernet II, but for a simply Apple ][ or ][+, having the TCP/IP built into the Uthernet, will mean that making Networked Applications will be so much simpler. The Adafruit cable is definitely a nice addition..

But being in debt as I am compels me to not buy anything that I really do not want.

Being in Debt is always a good reason to scale back purchases..

I "applaud" you for Knowing your Limitations and that you Respect those Limitations.

If someone would develop a capable browser that won't crash (capable in browsing modern websites with a GUI interface) then perhaps the Uthernet would be a more attractive product to get. And yes, I know of Spectrum Internet Suite. For me however, I have two Uthernet I cards and I would also get the benefit if one were to be developed.

Lynx is a Text Mode Browser that runs on Un*x and on M-S Windows in a Command Line Window, and could possibly be ported to something like the Apple ][.

The fact that no such browser exists makes it incomprehensible to me how we are trying so hard to make the Apple ii up to date, yet we really aren't.

Who said that the Uthernet will make the Apple ][, "Up to Date"??

In referring to Metcalfe's Law, there is a lot of reasons to Network Devices.. How many of the "Internet of Things", ( IoT ) are going to be HTML Enabled??

As pointed out by others, a Web Browser is not the only application that uses a Network Link.

For Example:

FTP Files directly from Asimov's, or the Apple ][ Game Server... No Disk ][ needed...

My focus would be something like "hacking" Wolfenstein to be Multi-Player.... How about Networked Chess... or even a Text/Graphic Game like "Odyssey: The Compleat Apventure" or even the Original Colossal Cave Adventure.

How about making an X10-Eithernet Bridge with your Apple ][?? Controlling your lights remotely with your Smart Phone by sending messages to your Apple ][??

How about an Apple ][ Security System?? Have the Apple ][ monitor Switches on the Windows and Doors and report to your Smart Phone.

And since we all know that an Apple ii will never display the aspects of modern websites, there is nothing preventing us from developing a browser which would simply copy the text in the correct locations and simply blot out the graphics and videos that come from modern websites and replace them with error messages which won't crash the computer yet be understandable.

Very True, see my comment on Lynx, the Text Mode Browser.

This whole situation is completely and utterly illogical.

Not at All...

The power to make the Apple ][ More Useful in our Daily Lives has never been more Possible than right this moment with the Uthernet II...

You should check out Make Magazine and the Do It Yourself ( DIY ) Projects with the Internet of Things ( IoT ).. The Apple ][ can be right there with them, bring Retro-Goodness with Modern Functionality..

MarkO

Well, I for one missed the uthernet I, so getting in on another run of cards was wonderful. I ordered 3! If Glenn jones does another run I'll order a couple more... $59 is way better than the slobs that turn around and sell them for $400 on eBay.

I ain't rich, I'll not miss a couple beers or Starbucks that I don't drink anyway to buy some at $59

And well, new features or not it's nice having some network functionality so I can closet the old Mac I've had to keep around to make CDs for the gs and eventually closet the SCSI card in the gs in favor of that transwarp clone!

Got bless the ship of these righteous hobby developer and all that sail in her.

Well, I for one missed the uthernet I, so getting in on another run of cards was wonderful. I ordered 3! If Glenn jones does another run I'll order a couple more... $59 is way better than the slobs that turn around and sell them for $400 on eBay.

I missed out on the Uthernet I too, but this version is better for Small Computers.. So it's a Win in My Book.

I ain't rich, I'll not miss a couple beers or Starbucks that I don't drink anyway to buy some at $59

And well, new features or not it's nice having some network functionality so I can closet the old Mac I've had to keep around to make CDs for the gs and eventually closet the SCSI card in the gs in favor of that transwarp clone!

I in the Not Rich category too. And I see a lot of potential for the Uthernet II...

Got bless the ship of these righteous hobby developer and all that sail in her.

Definitely!!!!!

MarkO

I'd have to agree with georgel on this. I view this product as only a component for making an Apple ii into a somewhat more complete system.

<< BIG SNIP >>

I don't understand why you all think TCP/IP equates to web browsers. Certainly, it's the most common use for modern computers, but I think we can all agree that the Apple II isn't a modern computer. The Apple II is never going to run a web browser that you would use every day (Apple II Pi excepted). However, the Uthernet II offloads most of the TCP/IP transaction details so the Apple II can run a whole new class of programs, most which have yet to be written. It is pretty amazing what was done with the original Uthernet hardware, but it is like bit-banging a serial interface vs using a 6551 ACIA.

My Thoughts and Point Exactly!!!! The Apple ][ family will be able to interact with the "real world" in a way that has never been achieved before. I see all these Maker Articles, like getting "Twitter Updates from your Cat", or a "Doorbell CAM".

The modern day example is the Arduino Universe, where the Ethernet Shield uses the same Wiznet 5100 chip as the Uthernet II. The Arduino Uno, for instance, may have the edge in CPU performance, but can't match the memory+interface+storage options of the Apple II.

Again, My Thoughts and Point Exactly!!!! And add Display options too..

I don't see what is so illogical about it, perhaps you should broaden your horizons,

Dave...

I really envision some Very Cool networking applications on the Apple ][...

I think that Applications that connect people will be very popular...

MarkO

I'm still trying to follow your argument. I agree that upgrading from the Uthernet I to the Uthernet II doesn't provide any real benefit at the moment. Point taken.

If someone didn't acquire the Uthernet I when it was available, then getting an Uthernet II now should be considered illogical? Just because the Wiznet 5100 uses an embedded ARM core changes the game?

The fact that someone wrote a browser for the 8 bit Apple II is a pretty amazing feat. I don't see anyone trying hard to make their Apple II a modern computer, but just running it for the "Look what I did" factor.

You clearly have many Apple II goodies which is why I didn't understand your "This whole situation is completely and utterly illogical" statement. It seemed rather harsh.

Perhaps I am creating extreme confusion by using the word, "illogical".

I am referring to the aspect of logic known as the "law of non-contradiction".

That law says (when understanding first the law of identity [A is equal to A and B is equal to B]) that two different things being opposite cannot both be true at the same time in the same sense.

To put it another way:

The law of identity: A is equal to A. B is equal to B.

The law of non-contradiction: A is not equal to non-A or A is not equal to B or anything else other than A.

Now, when I used it to describe the situation: it is illogical that we are trying to make the apple ii function like a modern computer as much as possible. Yet, we are actually not. <-- there's the contradiction. Why? Because not having a browser and having an Ethernet interface is at odds with the goal of our making the apple ii apple ii function like a modern computer. In order to accomplish this task, we must work just as hard to achieve both goals. Our real task, our objective is NOT complete.

I apologize for my seeming harsh. That was not my intention.

What is bothering me is that I was told that when it concerns a new browser: -->" there may be another stand-alone browser in the works "<--.

Yes. It's been a LONG TIME under the category of. "maybe".

Perhaps in development hell like Duke Nukem Forever was.

I am sorry if I did not mention that one was possibly being worked on but this waiting is the source of my frustration, not you or the fine people who developed and are contributing to our community by bringing this product to us. I am simply saying that I might get the Uthernet II if perhaps there was a browser available then it would seem like a good idea to upgrade, as I am sure the new chip in the Uthernet II would make the Apple ii run faster.

Here is the entire message about a new browser that sounds discouraging to me:

"One last thing to note, there may be another stand-alone browser in the works. There is no solid plans, but, there might be something that is released in the future (not from us) which will be actively developed on the gsPort platform to ensure compatibility. We are still in talks with the potential developer as we want to have this as well to enjoy."

And when was this written..?

Jun 22, 2014

While I understand that the business of creating new Apple ii hardware is difficult (possibly due to there being small companies with very limited resources) making a new browser should not be outside the scope of development. It's within the realm of programming. Even some knowledgeable single programmer within our community who does not even run their own company could do it.

<<< REALLY BIG SNIP >>>

While I understand that the business of creating new Apple ii hardware is difficult (possibly due to there being small companies with very limited resources) making a new browser should not be outside the scope of development. It's within the realm of programming. Even some knowledgeable single programmer within our community who does not even run their own company could do it.

My concern as a programmer, is that the "modern" Web Browser does so much, with so many "add ons", that the power of an Apple ][, solely focused on Rendering the Page, will still be extremely limited and slow.. Too Many generations of Computing Power have elapsed, and the Software ( and the Web Site Content ) has been written to expect that Computing Power...

I don't think that an Apple ][ Based Web Browser will very "rewarding". But I am willing to try and see how well it works... Because ANY HTML is better than NO HTML....

MarkO

BTW, My Uthernet II's arrived Friday, 06-NOV-2015, but I haven't had a chance to even test them yet..

I am still trying to UnPack from moving from one House to another, and Everything is Everywhere....

MarkO

<<< REALLY BIG SNIP >>>

While I understand that the business of creating new Apple ii hardware is difficult (possibly due to there being small companies with very limited resources) making a new browser should not be outside the scope of development. It's within the realm of programming. Even some knowledgeable single programmer within our community who does not even run their own company could do it.

My concern as a programmer, is that the "modern" Web Browser does so much, with so many "add ons", that the power of an Apple ][, solely focused on Rendering the Page, will still be extremely limited and slow.. Too Many generations of Computing Power have elapsed, and the Software ( and the Web Site Content ) has been written to expect that Computing Power...

I don't think that an Apple ][ Based Web Browser will very "rewarding". But I am willing to try and see how well it works... Because ANY HTML is better than NO HTML....

MarkO

Yeah, if Safari can bring my 3.7 GHz, 8 GB iMac to its knees, imagine trying to get an equivalent experience in a 1 Mhz, 64 Kb machine. This is not to say that trying to get something on the Apple II is a waste of time. Case in point is my Java VM experiment: VM02. Although building such a project might be considered "illogical", it was a huge learning experience that led me to develop PLASMA. A Java VM, just like a modern web browser, is much too much for an Apple II. But attempting such an endeavor could lead to other, more successful projects. Like many things in life, you never know until you try.

Yeah, if Safari can bring my 3.7 GHz, 8 GB iMac to its knees, imagine trying to get an equivalent experience in a 1 Mhz, 64 Kb machine. This is not to say that trying to get something on the Apple II is a waste of time. Case in point is my Java VM experiment: VM02. Although building such a project might be considered "illogical", it was a huge learning experience that led me to develop PLASMA. A Java VM, just like a modern web browser, is much too much for an Apple II. But attempting such an endeavor could lead to other, more successful projects. Like many things in life, you never know until you try.

Simple HTML should be fairly fast, but JavaScript and Flash/Shockwave would be impossible..

I mentioned the Lynx Browser, that has Source Code available, in 'C'.. Maybe a very "thin" version of Lynx could be ported to the Apple ][. The ][gs might be able to do some simple graphics....

MarkO

My concern as a programmer, is that the "modern" Web Browser does so much, with so many "add ons", that the power of an Apple ][, solely focused on Rendering the Page, will still be extremely limited and slow..

I know this. I would not like to see a browser with addons and such.

Simple HTML should be fairly fast

That is exactly what I would like to see.

...Like A][ pages as a resource and file archive that render well (and as zippy as possible for others on an A][! Heck make sure they look like hud for a non-A][ browser ain't like you're gonna create a page for Citibank or att for A][ folk anyway. (Not so bad it scares a 20year old from getting into the scene to rock some robotron on the machine his grandpa just gave him )

"Membership has its privledges"

It just occurred to me that HTTP Proxies have been used to Block certain Web Sites.

So it would possible, in a limited fashion to have a Lynx type WWW Browser for the Apple ][, that uses a Proxies hosted on a Windows/Mac/Linux system to fetch Web Pages, and Strip or convert Graphics to let the Apple ][ display them..

That would be an interesting project...

MarkO

Is there any way to use it to emulate a floppy drive(s) or a printer? If there was a way to do that I'd definitely buy one.

That would be an awesome project. Make it emulate an Epson printer but convert it to HP jet direct or LPR over IP.

I haven't poked around in the guts of my old 2+ since 1985, but it would seem to be a fairly complex (near impossible?) undertaking? I guess you'd need a custom rom to allow it to boot from the network card? It's certainly out of the range of my capabilities, but wondered if somebody else more capable had already done it.

I haven't poked around in the guts of my old 2+ since 1985, but it would seem to be a fairly complex (near impossible?) undertaking? I guess you'd need a custom rom to allow it to boot from the network card? It's certainly out of the range of my capabilities, but wondered if somebody else more capable had already done it.

Intel made Network Cards for the PC that allowed Booting off of the Network.. So it's very possible...

The "Preboot_Execution_Environment" or PXE might be a little complex for the Apple, so a subset or Work Alike System could be developed...

MarkO

[quote=MarkO]

The "Preboot_Execution_Environment" or PXE might be a little complex for the Apple, so a subset or Work Alike System could be developed...

MarkO

Oh, no doubt it's possible, but I suspect it would be a hardware solution. I think you'd need some hardware/firmware on the network card that would allow it to emulate the behavior the standard floppy controller, much as the SD card emulators do; or alternately a modified version of the autostart ROM that is capable of dealing with the NIC.

Maybe you could patch the OS so that it would do an initial boot from floppy or floppy emulator and then go off to do a secondary boot from a network card? I freely admit that I'm talking out of my backside on this last suggestion.

Edit:: Yeah, never mind. That last idea was a dumb one. The moment that the O/S being loaded from the network drive overwrote the patched O/S, it would lose the connection to the network.

I guess if it was easy, somebody would have done it.

I think you'd need some hardware/firmware on the network card that would allow it to emulate the behavior the standard floppy controller, much as the SD card emulators do; or alternately a modified version of the autostart ROM that is capable of dealing with the NIC.

If you're looking for a solution to boot the Apple from a network disk image (.dsk file), that's exactly what I'm working on, and yes - it's essentially a NIC with a Disk II emulator built in (or vice-versa). Actually, I've got it working already - but if you want one, you'll need to get the parts and assemble it yourself. No soldering required, just 6 jumper wires.

More details in this thread...

http://www.applefritter.com/content/inexpensive-fpga-based-6502-cpu-replacement-and-disk-ii-emulator

That is very very cool! I'm impressed. If you get to the point where you have it on an interface card, sign me up! Now... if you could come up with a way for it to fake a printer card that would hypothetically deposit printer output files onto a network (maybe with a secondary card and an interconnecting cable between the NIC and the "printer card"??) then you would have truly the ultimate Apple II peripheral. It would allow these old machines to effectively and (sortof usefully!) function on a modern network!

Now... if you could come up with a way for it to fake a printer card that would hypothetically deposit printer output files onto a network

http://www.classiccmp.org/cini/pdf/Apple/Apple%20II%20Parallel%20Interface%20Card.pdf

Interesting idea. The parallel port looks pretty well documented (not surprising), so I'm guessing it would be straightforward to emulate. The hard part would be interpreting the dump files. It would work fine for raw text output... Graphics would require some parsing of the output to further emulate a particular printer.

Interesting idea. The parallel port looks pretty well documented (not surprising), so I'm guessing it would be straightforward to emulate. The hard part would be interpreting the dump files. It would work fine for raw text output... Graphics would require some parsing of the output to further emulate a particular printer.

I think that would be the easy bit. You would need some software running on the print server that monitored the "dump directory". I suspect that it would be relatively easy to write a bit of code that emulates an Epson MX-80 (or some similar well supported printer from the Apple II era) and spools out to a Windows printer. The graphics mode on the MX-80 is dirt-simple and converting it to a bitmap wouldn't be tough.

Looks like Apple already did the conversion work for us. Turns out they created a PostScript file called IWEM (ImageWriter emulation) which teaches a PostScript printer (e.g. a LaserWriter) how to interpret ImageWriter commands. My googling suggests it at least works with Acrobat Distiller, maybe GhostScript too.