Small cap pads done, anything else?

rafpereira wrote on 2023-07-01, 21:07:

To be clear, the PGA168 TI486SXL-40 mentioned (which compared to your picture does not have the "FC2-" marking), can enable, and […]
Show full quote

To be clear, the PGA168 TI486SXL-40 mentioned (which compared to your picture does not have the "FC2-" marking), can enable, and I do enable clock double at 33Mhz FSB at 3.6v (not 66mhz FSB), the SXL was rated 40mhz FSB, so enabling clock double in the SXL for me was the only surprise. The specs call for 3.3v and 5v versions, how do we differentiate? (Never seen a V or G variant of the 40 and 50mhz)
https://ia903003.us.archive.org/35/items/bits … rence_Guide.pdf

at CLK/3 and 1ws setting, so far, I was unable to crash it no matter how many times I opened and closed IE5 on Windows 3.11 while on Solitaire. My current CF card is 1Gb and it is not setup for a MS Word, Excel installation.
I did install a Crystal CX4236B-X03 sound card and with Unisound I had a few games in SBpro setting: Jazz Jackrabitt (486DX2-50 setting, High detail, Turbo mode), Sam & Max, Tyrian, Darkforces... all with sound, and working as expected.

If I need to go and install NT 3.51 in this board, and spend time figuring out how to call cyrix.exe before the bootloader, then maybe I should ask if you have this installed in a disk image you can share. Going the long way will take me a while, and I am not sure it is worth for me.

Update: Windows 95 installed, Office 95 installed, Tom 2D benchmark ran for 6+ hours. Ethernet card added, IE searching on Google while Kayaker video playing. RAM upgraded from 8Mb to 16Mb.

Do you know what FC2 means? My SXL2-50 has it as well.

Looks good and tight.
Not sure about NY setup. Feels too much for poor 386 class cpu.

There's one more VCC location you can silk screen if so desired.

I don't know what you'd need a BIOS patch for. You will want to read through my L1 enabling guide for DLC and SXL chips here: Register settings for various CPUs

Sphere478 wrote on 2023-07-08, 01:27:

I’ve been having trouble getting files on this system. It isn’t reading burned CDs for some reason, and the files are too big for floppies. I may have to get creative and hook up a ide drive. The system is scsi.

File transfer via CD-ROM is probably #15 on my list of top 10 ways to get files onto your 386. There were very few SCSI CD-ROM drives which could read CD-RW disks, and in my experience, the CD-RW laser was the first feature to die on these drives.

There's the option of CF-IDE card as your fixed disk. Then put the CF card onto a CF-to-USB adaptor on your more modern system. You can use an ISA IDE card, but if you insisit on SCSI, there are SCSI to IDE adaptors.

There's LS-120.

There's ethernet (this is my go to for all my retro systems).

There's PCMCIA card readers, then plug in a PCMCIA-to-CF adaptor. This can be involved and I'd put it along side CD-ROM a not-so-good option.

You can add an ISA IDE controller card just for file transfer via a CF card. Best to limit the CF card to 512 MB to fit within the 386's BIOS translation scheme.

You can put your SCSI HDD onto a more modern system with an Adaptec PCI card to transfer files.

Back in the day there were these diskette split utilities which let you span larger files across several floppy disks. Only really practical for a half-dozen floppies though. In the late 90's, I think I used something called RZSplit97.

There's LPT to Ethernet. I use this on test systems so I don't have to dig out an ISA ethernet card. This is my #2 go-to.

There was LPT to CF card adaptor. I had one of those in the late 90's but sold it in 2006. I wish I'd have kept it.

There's LPT to LS-120. I have one of these, but haven't tested it yet.

You could also create a CD-R disc which your CD-ROM should be able to read still.

Sphere478 wrote on 2023-07-08, 01:43:

I’m voting for round pads, that whole D pad thing was a fiasco that I don’t think helped anything. The board is better with round pads anyway. I can make a note to elevate capacitors above pcb to deal with bridging conserns?

I think the D-pads are better. It lets users use 0603 capacitors easier.

Sphere478 wrote on 2023-07-08, 01:43:

If you are really set on having the D pads I will add them back. :-) Reminder though, jlc sometimes sends them clearanced for D but pads themselves are round. Another reason to just make them round..

My pads came out as D shaped. I don't understand why you want to make them round vias again. If you make them D-shaped, and you so happen to get round pads, then what's the difference?

Sphere478 wrote on 2023-07-08, 01:43:

Feiopa, could you whip up a recommended BOM with alternates and explainations for components as well as assembly notes I will include it in the final file. Kinda like a pdf instruction sheet for the end user ya know?

It's on my list and will get done, ideally this year. Do we want to apply some Creative Commons Attribution? https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Scroll to the bottom half of the page. Attribution-NonCommercial, Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike, etc. Does the audience have any opinion on this?

Sphere478 wrote on 2023-07-08, 01:56:

anything else?

Since JLCPCB appears to be sticking with cheap PCB's for up to 8-layers, I wonder if there could be any benefit in adding 2 additional layers, e.g. GND, VCC3, etc?

Oh that’s a good point, forgot about my cf to 8 bit isa, lemme see if that works.

I tried putting ide drive on the system, ide takes priority, so I will have to actually boot from the ide, so that will have to be setup. Bios doesn’t allow scsi to take president over ide hard drive.

My cd drive is a dvd cd rw ide. On a soundblaster.

I will try my 8-bit to ide next.

I don’t have a pci scsi controller

I could transfer the isa conteoller to another system.

I actually did use a cd-r and was surprised it didn’t work. Odd.

The D pads do take away a little of the conductive plane

I’ll add D pads back.

I’ll add that other cap location

Adding two more layers can be done, it will help some planes and hurt others. It will decrease the distance between layers. I don’t think we should do it. I don’t think it is a good idea unless it can go between all layers.

The pcb will be public domain. That is my decision as its unpaid drafter/creator. I give it to you, the group, and the world freely, and without reservation. Your assembly guide can be whatever you like it to be 😀

How’s it looking?

Do you know what the Creative Commons Attribution means? It is a public domain license, giving permissions for anyone to do with it as they like, provided they credit the original source. This is not agreeable to you as an unpaid drafter?

There are then mildly more restrictive classifications, like Creative Commons Attribution, Non-Commercial. Same as above, but cannot be used for commercial purposes. I think this classification is the most fitting. Thus, any ideas which employed that have originated from my person would be Creative Commons Attribution, Non-Commercial.

feipoa wrote on 2023-07-09, 04:47:

Do you know what the Creative Commons Attribution means? It is a public domain license, giving permissions for anyone to do with it as they like, provided they credit the original source. This is not agreeable to you as an unpaid drafter?

There are then mildly more restrictive classifications, like Creative Commons Attribution, Non-Commercial. Same as above, but cannot be used for commercial purposes. I think this classification is the most fitting. Thus, any ideas which employed that have originated from my person would be Creative Commons Attribution, Non-Commercial.

Let’s not kid ourselves if somebody takes this, nobody’s taking it to court there’s not a lot of money to be made with this, certainly not enough to justify a court battle, if any money at all. I am aware that there are licenses that only require someone give credit to the previous author. I’m not worried, I don’t need to turn someone else’s fork into a billboard for my vanity, it’s public domain and that’s it, no complications. All my work is public domain. The point for me is helping others and having fun, not getting credit.

As far as commercial, I actually DO hope that someone starts cranking them out. Because I will buy some. They are a little tedious to assemble. That would only be good for the community.

I also know what its like to want to use a piece of someone else's work to save time, like a footprint, small element, or something, but then have to include a copy of their work in the release and a bunch of credit all for some small element and suddenly they are as much a part of your big project as you are. That has happened several times, I end up just making the element myself from scratch to avoid the headache. Na man, public domain. I’m not playing that game. If someone uses the work, then I am glad.

Is there anything else before I upload?

Just a quick note to say that releasing this fully public domain is a BOSS move. Thanks so much for your hard work, last night I bought a slx2-66 in anticipation of giving this project a go.

😊

Sphere478 wrote on 2023-07-09, 06:30:

Let’s not kid ourselves if somebody takes this, nobody’s taking it to court there’s not a lot of money to be made with this, cer […]
Show full quote

feipoa wrote on 2023-07-09, 04:47:

Do you know what the Creative Commons Attribution means? It is a public domain license, giving permissions for anyone to do with it as they like, provided they credit the original source. This is not agreeable to you as an unpaid drafter?

There are then mildly more restrictive classifications, like Creative Commons Attribution, Non-Commercial. Same as above, but cannot be used for commercial purposes. I think this classification is the most fitting. Thus, any ideas which employed that have originated from my person would be Creative Commons Attribution, Non-Commercial.

Let’s not kid ourselves if somebody takes this, nobody’s taking it to court there’s not a lot of money to be made with this, certainly not enough to justify a court battle, if any money at all. I am aware that there are licenses that only require someone give credit to the previous author. I’m not worried, I don’t need to turn someone else’s fork into a billboard for my vanity, it’s public domain and that’s it, no complications. All my work is public domain. The point for me is helping others and having fun, not getting credit.

As far as commercial, I actually DO hope that someone starts cranking them out. Because I will buy some. They are a little tedious to assemble. That would only be good for the community.

I also know what its like to want to use a piece of someone else's work to save time, like a footprint, small element, or something, but then have to include a copy of their work in the release and a bunch of credit all for some small element and suddenly they are as much a part of your big project as you are. That has happened several times, I end up just making the element myself from scratch to avoid the headache. Na man, public domain. I’m not playing that game. If someone uses the work, then I am glad.

Is there anything else before I upload?

I highly respect that you understand these "licenses" are basically a joke and nothing more than nerds jerking each other off on the internet.

That said I don't understand not caring about credit for the work, even if it was requested by gentlemen's agreement

Max, trying to control a digital work on the internet is naïve. It won’t stop those who would take it anyway, and only hurts those trying to respect it. I would rather release it in a way that puts no restrictions on its use so that those who are respectful can use it as they like without dancing around restrictions and help our fun hobby. If someone in china starts cranking them out, that is only good for us, many of us aren’t skilled enough to solder this. And I certainly would rather buy one than assemble one by hand.

I understand some maybe think of this in a way where someone is proffiting from our labor, I would argue they are profiting from their labor in setting up manufacturing and taking on the risk of inventory. And we are profiting by having access to the product which was our goal.

Sphere478 wrote on 2023-07-09, 15:12:

Max, trying to control a digital work on the internet is naïve.

Agree 100%. I just meant when I release my designs I do so with the stipulation that I request attribution. No "license" or "terms" or any silly imagined enforcement. Just a statement of honor.

maxtherabbit wrote on 2023-07-09, 21:09:

Sphere478 wrote on 2023-07-09, 15:12:

Max, trying to control a digital work on the internet is naïve.

Agree 100%. I just meant when I release my designs I do so with the stipulation that I request attribution. No "license" or "terms" or any silly imagined enforcement. Just a statement of honor.

Makes sense 😀

Sphere478 wrote on 2023-07-09, 06:30:

Is there anything else before I upload?

There's been almost no change since the last revision and I don't see any urgency. I'm sure more changes will emerge in due course. The majority of interested parties have likely already ordered the PCB for $6 shipped.

Sphere478 wrote on 2023-07-09, 23:27:

maxtherabbit wrote on 2023-07-09, 21:09:

Sphere478 wrote on 2023-07-09, 15:12:

Max, trying to control a digital work on the internet is naïve.

Agree 100%. I just meant when I release my designs I do so with the stipulation that I request attribution. No "license" or "terms" or any silly imagined enforcement. Just a statement of honor.

Makes sense :-)

It is my understanding that this was the original purpose of the Creative Commons Attribution.

Sphere478 wrote on 2023-07-09, 06:30:

Let’s not kid ourselves if somebody takes this, nobody’s taking it to court there’s not a lot of money to be made with this, certainly not enough to justify a court battle, if any money at all. I am aware that there are licenses that only require someone give credit to the previous author. I’m not worried, I don’t need to turn someone else’s fork into a billboard for my vanity, it’s public domain and that’s it, no complications. All my work is public domain. The point for me is helping others and having fun, not getting credit.

I don't think anyone is kidding themselves in this regard. We can put forward our wishes with the Creative Commons Attribution; if someone is in contravention of the Creative attribution, the probability of anyone putting money out for legal enforcement on an open source project is almost nil. As the original designer and prototyper of this project, and the one with the largest financial involvement, I can only let it be know that I politely request it to follow the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial, CC-BY-NC-4.0. If anyone elects not to respect this, there isn't much I can do about it.

I do not know to what extent, if any, my wishes take presedence over a drafter's wishes, one who has elected to voluntarily work on another individual's initiative, but it would be befitting if my viewpoint was respected. This would also be my stance if I was working on someone else's project, that is, I would not attempt to assume ownership. Based on the conversation, it appears that Sphere has an alternate point of view and is steadfast. Whatever the case may be, my wishes have been clearly expressed, that is, for the work to contain the CC-BY-NC-4.0 attribution, whether enforceable, agreeable, or otherwise. If some company or individual has intentions to profit off of the ideas and work presented forth, then in the least, they will know that they have gone against the original wishes of this initiate.

Sphere478 wrote on 2023-07-09, 06:30:

As far as commercial, I actually DO hope that someone starts cranking them out. Because I will buy some. They are a little tedious to assemble. That would only be good for the community.

If anyone sees these for sale commercially, please contact me. Depending on my available time, I will likely assemble one for you at cost. However, I strongly encourage everyone to give assembly a go themselves. It is relatively straight-forward and can be rewarding when you finish.

I'd like one! I didn't order for six dollars, I just got here. 🤣

Feiopa, I will respect your wishes and use a license for pi.0

The previous developmental uploads were already uploaded as public domain, I will leave those as is.

A request: if you can modify the license to allow small parts of it to be taken and used by other drafters without the need to give credit? Footprints, design elements, etc.

Upload the license file you wish me to include with the release. And I will do so, along with your guide. Also please specify which option I should select on vogons drop down license menu. Creative commons 4.0 international?

Thanks Feipoa, it has been a fun project. 😀 time to get sxl2s in everyone’s 386! :p

Not to butt in, but I really like this idea for licensing. To add to Feipoa's point, it might be worth considering CC's ShareAlike feature. That would require such that all descendants of your project license their product similarly and provide some attribution, kind of like a fork on a GitHub repo. It seems like a good idea, but I am admittedly no expert. It seems kind of neat, though, and I've had personal success with this similar model on GitHub.

This project has been great and I'm excited to build my interposers and see where this goes! 😀

The final mockups look great Sphere and Feipoa! I am going to put together an Alpha 1, since that's what I ordered a while ago, but I will get to the final product soon enough and when time permits. Either way, this is a blessing, as now I can finally use those darned SXL2-66 chips on far more than the one motherboard I have that natively takes them!

WJG6260 wrote on 2023-07-10, 21:57:

Not to butt in, but I really like this idea for licensing. To add to Feipoa's point, it might be worth considering CC's ShareAlike feature. That would require such that all descendants of your project license their product similarly and provide some attribution, kind of like a fork on a GitHub repo. It seems like a good idea, but I am admittedly no expert. It seems kind of neat, though, and I've had personal success with this similar model on GitHub.

This project has been great and I'm excited to build my interposers and see where this goes! 😀

The final mockups look great Sphere and Feipoa! I am going to put together an Alpha 1, since that's what I ordered a while ago, but I will get to the final product soon enough and when time permits. Either way, this is a blessing, as now I can finally use those darned SXL2-66 chips on far more than the one motherboard I have that natively takes them!

I can mail you a pre release prototype. Suggest always using latest version. Or at least the pre release since no bugs were found

Don’t push the license thing, please 😀 I’m barely onboard as is. Doing as favor to feipoa.

Thanks for letting me know! I ordered these a while ago and haven't had the time to assemble them. I'll place another order ASAP and use the pre-release or the latest when it's released!

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to sound pushy, and certainly don't want to impose. This project is wonderful and I know that many of us are extremely appreciative of your hard work! 😀

I appreciate any added understanding. My intentions were to make my opinions know, not force any hands. If any decision twists too tight of a knot in your brain, go another direction. Keep in mind that knots loosen in time... all on their own.

Ideally, with the next release upload, all other revisions of the gerbers would be removed, not just because it would clash with licensing, but because you'd get a variety of individuals using outdated gerbers, generating confusion. In fact, it has already generated confusion with some people.

I'm not familiar with pi.0, but a quick DuckDuckGo search reveals CC-BY-ND, or NonDerivitave, which is dissimilar from CC-BY-NC, Noncommercial.

My plans were to put on the first page of any document,
Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 4.0 International
CC-BY-NC-4.0

Then at the bottom of each subsequent page, if any:
CC-BY-NC-4.0

Ideally the PCB would be stamped with:
CC-BY-NC-4.0

As for the upload, one must adapt to the limitations of the forum, thus I'd select Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 during upload and within the file name itself [and description, if any] include CC-BY-NC-4.0. Inside the zip file, I think one normally creates a text file called license.txt, which contains in its body:
Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 4.0 International
and the information pasted from here: https://spdx.org/licenses/CC-BY-NC-4.0.html

Ideally, this license.txt file would be included in the gerbers package, and in a location that machines or bots go fishing for. I'm not sure where that is, so

If there's adequate space, it would be a good idea to write on the PCB, a VOGONS innitiave by feipoa/sphere478, or similar, so people know where to look for information.

Sphere478 wrote on 2023-07-10, 21:22:

A request: if you can modify the license to allow small parts of it to be taken and used by other drafters without the need to give credit? Footprints, design elements, etc.

I suspect that would negate the whole Creative Commons Attribution. Personally, I cannot envision anyone not wanting to make mention of the original work. We learn this from early age in late primary school, when we write out first reports. My MB-8433UUD manual also references the original work and it didn't have any licence that I could find. Attempts to contact the original author were unsuccessful.

WJG6260 wrote on 2023-07-10, 21:57:

I really like this idea for licensing. To add to Feipoa's point, it might be worth considering CC's ShareAlike feature. That would require such that all descendants of your project license their product similarly and provide some attribution, kind of like a fork on a GitHub repo. It seems like a good idea, but I am admittedly no expert. It seems kind of neat, though, and I've had personal success with this similar model on GitHub.

I too thought ShareAlike aspect of, say, Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike would be most fitting but decided not to mention it in fear that it would create too much of an uproar. From the latest texts, it looks like my crystal ball was 'on the ball'.

The assembly guide isn't finished; I've only taken photos thus far. BOM is coming along. My summers are usually the worst time for me to do any of this type of work.

One idea I had been contemplating along the way was to assemble several in batch and offer them out either at cost, no cost, or by donation with all proceeds going towards a registered charity of my choosing. The latter option would provide the least hesitation and, more importantly, not upset the wife. The opportunity to let, say, 10 people cultivate generosity is far more important than the product being provided. The donation amount to be determined solely by the donor. On the flip side, I've assembled batch items in the past (vintage Mercedes adaptors) and sold them at near cost, but it was fairly stressful dealing with the people and the batch assembly. If I recall right, I let the forum posters name the price.

Still, summers don't bode well. Wives sometimes have this oblivious way of making spouses responsible for their happiness, and unfortunately, this makes me the entertainment director of the family. Not to mention the 3 kids home all day long in the summer, whereby the absence of school makes them bounce off the walls, scream, break things, fight, etc.

feipoa wrote on 2023-07-12, 03:32:

Ideally, with the next release upload, all other revisions of the gerbers would be removed, not just because it would clash with licensing, but because you'd get a variety of individuals using outdated gerbers, generating confusion.

Older versions were already of a working design, what confusion would there be? I really dont understand that push for non-commercial for something with a whole world wide market for maybe 10 more units unless someone actively advertises it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_hardware