Data transfer via parallel cable - what's your experience?

[redbox]

Bios: LPT1 Mode Normal, Port 378, IRQ 7

Is "Normal" the same as Bi-Directional?

[CPCIak]

According to CPC Oxygen it doesn't matter which operation mode is selected. Using port 378 und IRQ7 is neccessary.

[redbox]

Maybe I am going to have to write a Windows version after all 

[CPCIak]

YES

[Gryzor]

YES

Hahahah Thumbs up for first use of the Glow tag!

[CPCIak]

Maybe downscaling the FSB helps...

[scheeba]

Was thinking about building one of these for myself, but having trouble tracking down some of the right parts. Is there anywhere online that sells suitable connectors, especially those 34-way edge connectors?

[CPCIak]

According to your profile, you're from Ireland:
I've found a online shop for electronic supplies called "Digi-Key":
http://www.digikey.ie/

Edge Connectors: Catalogue -> Sections -> Section A (Cables,Connectors) -> Page 36

Unfortunately CPC-Boutique has closed, I hope these connectors are correct.

[scheeba]

Excellent, fingers crossed those are okay. Thanks for the help, I just couldn't track the things down anywhere.

[CPCIak]

Has anyone ever used the program "SEND2"?

[redbox]

Has anyone ever used the program "SEND2"?

No, but TurboTransfer works well for me and I presume it's faster because it's more recent...?

Interestingly though, this program appears to work with 464+ and tapes which could be good for diskless users.

[mr_lou]

Has anyone ever used the program "SEND2"?

I have. It worked fine for me.

[redbox]

I've just got round to looking into developing a Windows version of the parallel transfer (initially PC -> CPC) utility but have some problems...

The Windows software should be quite easy to write using a DLL for access to the parallel port.

However, the documentation on how the data should be sent from the PC is sketchy:

Marco Vieth describes the process in his original documentation, but doesn't give any information on the timings or rate of transfer from the PC side, and this would appear to be important as there have been speed issues in the past with users finding that faster PCs send it too quickly and the CPC can't cope.  The PC software really needs to wait a definite amount of real time between sending data, but I have no idea what this time should be or the format of the data to send.

The information on the cpctech website is helpful, but still doesn't contain any timing or formatting and also has some mistakes (it says the PC and CPC both send/receive on D0 which isn't right).

So before I go any further, does anyone have this information?  I can disassemble the CPC programs to see what's going on that end in the transfer, but can't do this for the current PC programs as my x86 assembler knowledge is poor and I expect they were written in C or something similar anyway.

[TFM]

... These specific 3,5" disc drives are sold for about 40EUR at ebay - quiet expensive

That's approx the price of 16 3" discs. So by migrating to 3.5" you will save a lot of money. However, you can buy a 3.5" for 5 Euros too. Get a cable and a psu. It's all doable for around 10-15 Euros. But if you have no time for a DIY, then 40 Euros is not too bad. Further you can ask here in the forum if somebody can sell you a 3.5" drive ready2go!
 

[andycadley]

I've just got round to looking into developing a Windows version of the parallel transfer (initially PC -> CPC) utility but have some problems...

I seriously doubt it's worth doing anymore, to be honest. Finding a PC with a parallel port is near impossible these days and even most 'parallel' adapters are only usable for printers as they don't provide a full parallel interface. And with the HxC interface, it's a lot easier and quicker to transfer data via sdcard.

[awergh]

 
I seriously doubt it's worth doing anymore, to be honest. Finding a PC with a parallel port is near impossible these days and even most 'parallel' adapters are only usable for printers as they don't provide a full parallel interface. And with the HxC interface, it's a lot easier and quicker to transfer data via sdcard.

Not everyone has can use the HxC interface, I have 2 464s and no DDI-1 so parallel seems like the solution to me,
not to mention I have lots of computers with a parallel port, I have 7 in this room although I would probably just use PCPARA under DOS because it isn't that hard but I would probably use a Windows utility if it existed.

[redbox]

Finding a PC with a parallel port is near impossible these days and even most 'parallel' adapters are only usable for printers as they don't provide a full parallel interface.

That's interesting, never knew that and it could explain why some people are having problems with transfer on newer PCs.

Not everyone has can use the HxC interface, I have 2 464s and no DDI-1 so parallel seems like the solution to me,
not to mention I have lots of computers with a parallel port, I have 7 in this room although I would probably just use PCPARA under DOS because it isn't that hard but I would probably use a Windows utility if it existed.

I didn't get a HxC interface because my PC doesn't have an SDCard slot and also I wanted a 'permanent' solution in as much that one PC is always linked to the CPC and I can use them both for development (and this means Windows instead of having to boot into DOS).  The HxC interface is still 'sneaker-ware' whichever way you look at it and I'd like to have the parallel cable's software enable you to quickly and easily whizz a binary across from the PC and execute it straight away to see if it works on a real CPC.

[awergh]

I don't have an SD Card reader for my computer either but It wouldn't be as much a problem as the lack of DDI-1 on the other end.
A dedicated computer for parallel transfers sounds nice, I have a computer in mind for it my 464s seem to live in my cupboard most of the time probably because I only have a small collection of games which means I don't have much I can do with it.

[steve]

If you want to transfer software from PC to CPC you might be able to connect your PC sound output to the CPC's tape input so it thinks your PC is a tape drive.

It might even be possible to increase the transfer speed since CD/MP3 transfers are faster than the normal cassette loading speed.

[Ynot.zer0]

I used to have a dedicated 486 PC with Parallel port and MS-DOS just for doing transfers to the CPC.  Sadly that machine died, so I "borrowed" my wifes PC (Pentium something or other), wiped XP off of it, put MS-DOS onto it and I now use that as it also has a proper parallel port.  (Yes, my wife did find out and I had to buy her a new machine)
I found that Windows XP and upwards put driver layers between the OS and the hardware, therefore not letting software directly access the parallel port unless it goes via their driver.  I discovered this as a problem when I was attempting to hook up my OOPIC to an XP laptop (as it uses a serial connector and not a USB one).  In the end I bought an old Dell laptop that was runing Windows98 and allows access to the serial port directly.


Just something to keep in mind if you're going to attempt to use the latest tech. / OS and the old software / ports, etc...

[awergh]

If you want to transfer software from PC to CPC you might be able to connect your PC sound output to the CPC's tape input so it thinks your PC is a tape drive.

It might even be possible to increase the transfer speed since CD/MP3 transfers are faster than the normal cassette loading speed.

I have thought about doing that but it means I have to go find a Tape adapter thingo, it would probably be an acceptable solution although a parallel cable would be more exciting although I would have to go buy myself some tapes so I can do the transfer I think.

[redbox]

I used to have a dedicated 486 PC with Parallel port and MS-DOS just for doing transfers to the CPC.  Sadly that machine died, so I "borrowed" my wifes PC (Pentium something or other), wiped XP off of it, put MS-DOS onto it and I now use that as it also has a proper parallel port.  (Yes, my wife did find out and I had to buy her a new machine)

I have this kind of setup too, but I want mainly want to use a Windows XP type OS because then it can easily fileshare on my network and also run WinAPE etc.  This, along with the parallel cable to the real CPC, would be a great development platform.

I found that Windows XP and upwards put driver layers between the OS and the hardware, therefore not letting software directly access the parallel port unless it goes via their driver.

Yes, this is what stops the currently available DOS programs from working in Windows, but as I said before there are DLL libraries that can take care of this for you and give direct access to the port even under Windows NT variants.

So now I've just got to work out exactly how the parallel cable process works and write the software...     Think I'll start by disassembling the CPC software and work backwards from there!

[awergh]

Perhaps this can help http://www.benchmarko.de/download/pcpara12.zip
pcpara appears to come with the C++ source code which would be easier then disassembling it.

[redbox]

Perhaps this can help http://www.benchmarko.de/download/pcpara12.zip
pcpara appears to come with the C++ source code which would be easier then disassembling it.

Thanks awergh, that's awesome! 

I only knew of the cpc-emu.org website and didn't know this was available - it should make the whole thing a lot easier.

I've got the code for the CPC end to receive/write files and disks and hopefully I'll make a ROM which can be put into a rombox or Plus cartridge so it's always available (eventually!).