Author Topic: IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion  (Read 69768 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #150 on: Sun, 04 October 2009, 12:32:20 »
Quote from: ripster;122856
I was dinking around with my 1397000 and originally I though the Blue Cube was passing the nonstandard (not on a 102 key keyboard) scan codes but I must have been mistaken.  On a recheck it didn't pass them to Windows at least.

Doesn't mean the hardware isn't seeing it though so maybe a HID mod would work.  I haven't seen a HID mod.


Well, to be clear on my intentions...

Refresher: the keyboard, in order to be rather usable (basically make it send break codes and NOT require hotplugging) needed the PS/2 driver altered to send certain commands (or not send certain ones, I forget). My hopes would be to be able to pass those same commands along to a keyboard on a USB converter (recall my rrrrrreeeeeeppppppeeeeeeaaaaaatttttt issues)

In other news, another myth busted. Windows 3.1 does not include out-of-the-box support for 122-key keyboards of any sort, but does allow you to add your own third party driver of course like 98, so this makes me wonder...did such a driver exist? Since people have these memories of support existing I'm sure such a thing must have at some point.

Code: [Select]

All AT type keyboards (84-86 keys)
AT&T '301' keyboard
AT&T '302' keyboard
Enhanced 101 or 102 key US and Non US keyboards
Hewlett-Packard Vectra keyboard (DIN)
Olivetti 101/102 A keyboard
Olivetti 83 key keyboard
Olivetti 86 key keyboard
Olivetti M24 102 key keyboard
PC-XT 83 key keyboard
PC/XT - type keyboard (84 keys)
Other (Requires disk provided by a hardware manufacturer)


Hey, check this out:
http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/9166/geekhackwin98.jpg
http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/751/geekhackwin31.jpg
« Last Edit: Sun, 04 October 2009, 21:46:03 by kishy »
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca


Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #152 on: Sun, 04 October 2009, 17:24:39 »
Quote from: pseudolobster;122952
There's a fair number of 122 key drivers out there, has anyone tried them?

http://www.listserv.uga.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0403a&L=sas-l&D=0&P=34336
http://www.brothersoft.com/free-122-key-keyboard-driver-138279.html
http://download.cnet.com/Free-122-Key-Keyboard/3000-2110_4-198745.html

etc

Thank you for the bookwork, though I should have mentioned I've looked as well.

The problem is those, at least the second two, appear to be for terminal emulation boards which actually work very differently.

Worth trying, of course, but the emulation boards already have the issues at hand fixed.
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline Shawn Stanford

  • Posts: 369
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #153 on: Sun, 04 October 2009, 17:32:34 »
Okay, well, I rewired that biatch and plugged it into one of the kids' computers and got nothing. Then I tried to other of their computers and got nothing. And now one of them (the 8 year-old) is complaining that her keyboard doesn't work.

Uh oh...
The Brat Prince of COBOL

Offline msiegel

  • Posts: 1230
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #154 on: Sun, 04 October 2009, 17:36:03 »
:(

maybe the other ports still work?

Filco Zero (Fukka) AEKII sliders and keycaps * Filco Tenkeyless MX brown * IBM F/AT parts: modding
Model F Mod Log * Open Source Generic keyboard controller

Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #155 on: Sun, 04 October 2009, 18:00:24 »
Quote from: Shawn Stanford;122956
Okay, well, I rewired that biatch and plugged it into one of the kids' computers and got nothing. Then I tried to other of their computers and got nothing. And now one of them (the 8 year-old) is complaining that her keyboard doesn't work.

Uh oh...


:( that doesn't sound good...

Are we talking about the one I sent you or the other older one?

The one I sent you should be no problem; 3488 terminals are compatible...at least according to kbdbabel.

The only thing I can think that could damage the controller interface on the computer is having voltage shorted to another pin...100% sure you have it wired right with no shorts?

I think I'll add somewhere a big notice informing people to test with an unimportant motherboard/computer first.
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline Shawn Stanford

  • Posts: 369
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #156 on: Sun, 04 October 2009, 18:17:35 »
Quote from: kishy;122961
The only thing I can think that could damage the controller interface on the computer is having voltage shorted to another pin...100% sure you have it wired right with no shorts?

Well, I was, now I'm not so sure... I figured the worst that could happen was that I'd burn out he controller on the keyboard. After all, if I'd wired it wrong it should send the 5v down the wrong line and fry the keyboard's circuitry.

Quote from: kishy;122961
I think I'll add somewhere a big notice informing people to test with an unimportant motherboard/computer first.
I did. :laugh:
« Last Edit: Sun, 04 October 2009, 18:20:28 by Shawn Stanford »
The Brat Prince of COBOL

Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #157 on: Sun, 04 October 2009, 18:21:43 »
Quote from: Shawn Stanford;122963
Well, I was, now I'm not so sure...

I did. :laugh:


Lol, well, as long as it's not a big loss for you...
If you do find you did something wrong and it was because of my instruction please let me know how to fix it, I took notes as I did the conversion so it should all be right, though possibly confusing in places.

Please do post about what your findings are.

Let's not eliminate the chance that the keyboard blew the motherboard fuse (they draw a lot of power, sometimes I get graphics glitches because my 22 amp card is fighting for power with a keyboard...problem goes away if I switch to a more normal keyboard, even a typical Model M)
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #158 on: Sun, 04 October 2009, 18:26:24 »
Quote from: Shawn Stanford;122963
Well, I was, now I'm not so sure... I figured the worst that could happen was that I'd burn out he controller on the keyboard. After all, if I'd wired it wrong it should send the 5v down the wrong line and fry the keyboard's circuitry.

I did. :laugh:


Since I caught your post before the edit, I'll reply again.

I think the keyboard controller (or more specifically fuse) on the motherboard is more susceptible to damage, though I may be wrong on that. They're probably both pretty vulnerable (mobo and kb, that is).

In either case, putting 5V on something not intended for 5V isn't good. Specifically, any situation where +5V is going straight to ground is going to cause an overcurrent and burn (hopefully just) the fuse on the mobo.
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #159 on: Sun, 04 October 2009, 19:23:11 »
Quote from: ripster;122977
Bad Daddy!
Show Image


Now I know you make these on an as-needed basis. There's no way you had that stashed away for a 'rainy day'.

Oh, forgot to mention, about power draw:
when I hotplugged the keyboard to the Pentium 1 rig I built, the power supply audibly began stressing to supply enough juice. I'm going to be rigging up my multimeter at some point...hmmm, voltage in parallel, current in series...let's hope I remember that right.
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #160 on: Sun, 04 October 2009, 21:43:59 »
In response to pseudolobster's request for an Alt key scancode...

Quote from: kishy;121664
Thanks:)

You bet, I'll figure it out for you once I'm home again (sometime this evening).

I really doubt there's an electrical difference between our keyboards; they are identical in every way. Though, I won't rule it out until we see what scancode mine reports.

Did you apply jumpers to the pins in your keyboard? This could, in theory, be part of the issue if not done (nobody is 100% sure yet, at least that they've said, what consequences come from not jumpering the pins)

Sorry! I completely forgot to do that. It's first on the list for next time I have desktop running.

Edit: which, as it happens, is right now.

Passmark KeyboardTest reports the following information:

For left ALT:
Windows key code: 233 (0xe9)
BIOS key code: 113 (0x71)

For right ALT:
Windows key code: 255 (0xff)
BIOS key code: 114 (0x72)

Something that may be relevant: the Reset/Cancl key is, pre-remapping, the sole Alt key. Its info is as follows:
Windows key code: 18 (0x12)
BIOS key code: 56 (0x38)
« Last Edit: Sun, 04 October 2009, 21:49:52 by kishy »
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline Shawn Stanford

  • Posts: 369
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #161 on: Mon, 05 October 2009, 06:20:54 »
Quote from: ripster;122977
bad daddy!
Show Image

bwahahahahahaha!
The Brat Prince of COBOL

Offline Shawn Stanford

  • Posts: 369
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #162 on: Mon, 05 October 2009, 06:22:31 »
Quote from: kishy;122965
Since I caught your post before the edit, I'll reply again.

I think the keyboard controller (or more specifically fuse) on the motherboard is more susceptible to damage, though I may be wrong on that. They're probably both pretty vulnerable (mobo and kb, that is).

In either case, putting 5V on something not intended for 5V isn't good. Specifically, any situation where +5V is going straight to ground is going to cause an overcurrent and burn (hopefully just) the fuse on the mobo.


I think what I might try is swapping the controller board out of the Boscom and into the IBM.
The Brat Prince of COBOL

Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #163 on: Mon, 05 October 2009, 06:38:45 »
Quote from: Shawn Stanford;123067
I think what I might try is swapping the controller board out of the Boscom and into the IBM.

Argh, too many keyboards floating around my head.

Good luck with future science endeavours Shawn!

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

Keyboard power info:

Voltage: around 4.6 in my test
Current: moves around a lot, but is typically around 196mA. Hit 200+ at high point, 193 at low point. No distinct change when pressing keys.

I'm pretty sure PS/2 spec is limited to 200mA, but I forget where I read that. If so, that means a lot of "poorly compliant" or simply "new" motherboards probably just can't do it. 200mA isn't a lot of power but if the mobo can't supply it, it may as well be.
« Last Edit: Mon, 05 October 2009, 06:43:48 by kishy »
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline pseudolobster

  • Posts: 33
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #164 on: Mon, 05 October 2009, 14:17:27 »
OH-KAY... Now we're getting somewhere...

This morning I installed a 32bit copy of WinXP and I'm pleased as punch to say I now have the use of my ALT keys!

I suppose it's bad news that we can't get things sorted out in Win7, I'm guessing that means all future versions of windows will have this problem.

I'm still getting used to this direction pad... It's a bit weird stretching your finger down for the down arrow key, and I find myself hitting the "enter" key by mistake.. Unfortunately if I try and remap this in KeyMapper, it decides to remap the actual enter key instead. I think I'm going to need to start over with the remapped layout since it does seem to make a difference what order you do things in.

Oh, and the home key ("dup") still gives a system beep. Odd.

Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #165 on: Mon, 05 October 2009, 14:57:25 »
Quote from: ripster;123092
Just don't mess up your kid's computer.  I also don't experiment with my wife's computer - that's REALLY asking for trouble.


Fortunately I have neither problem, being only 19 and all.

Quote from: pseudolobster;123174
OH-KAY... Now we're getting somewhere...

This morning I installed a 32bit copy of WinXP and I'm pleased as punch to say I now have the use of my ALT keys!

I suppose it's bad news that we can't get things sorted out in Win7, I'm guessing that means all future versions of windows will have this problem.

I'm still getting used to this direction pad... It's a bit weird stretching your finger down for the down arrow key, and I find myself hitting the "enter" key by mistake.. Unfortunately if I try and remap this in KeyMapper, it decides to remap the actual enter key instead. I think I'm going to need to start over with the remapped layout since it does seem to make a difference what order you do things in.

Oh, and the home key ("dup") still gives a system beep. Odd.


That key will always give a beep because, as JohnElliott explained it to me (maybe publicly in thread, I forget) it sends the "error" key sequence as its break code (you may also notice it doesn't send a break code, and stays permanently "down"). Not easy to fix but if anyone can it's him...last I heard he was looking into it but didn't think it would be easy enough to be worth it.

Glad to hear it's working in XP...that means we have a fundamental Win7 compatibility issue to make note of. Probably the same for Vista...I can check when I have time.

On a side note, I now legally own Windows 7 both 32 and 64 bit versions courtesy of the MSDN Academic Alliance program my college now subscribes to. I have the ISOs and keys ready...testing time will come soon enough on my aging-but-still-competent computers. Of course, with OS testing also comes keyboard testing.

About that layout: yeah, it can be a bit of a mess sometimes, particularly if you position your hands properly on a keyboard (I never, ever do...I type with 2 fingers per hand (plus thumbs for space) and still manage to type quite quickly and with very few errors. When on the terminal board, I usually have one hand over the cursor keys anyway, so it ends up working out for me (I don't use a mouse for anything unless necessary).

I will at some point be integrating a facility for showcasing and providing remap files in the big mod article...still need to do the write-up on driver replacement though.
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline msiegel

  • Posts: 1230
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #166 on: Mon, 05 October 2009, 15:05:35 »
hey kishy, speaking of terminal keyboard conversions... what do you make of this thing:
http://geekhack.org/showthread.php?p=123099#post123099

Filco Zero (Fukka) AEKII sliders and keycaps * Filco Tenkeyless MX brown * IBM F/AT parts: modding
Model F Mod Log * Open Source Generic keyboard controller

Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #167 on: Tue, 06 October 2009, 21:33:56 »
Quote from: msiegel;123196
hey kishy, speaking of terminal keyboard conversions... what do you make of this thing:
http://geekhack.org/showthread.php?p=123099#post123099


Was that just mentioned here for completeness, or did you post it before I mentioned it in that thread (and you acknowledged it)?

In any event I did reply there, but just to summarize the info here (for completeness):

Keyboard is for a 319x terminal; 319x terminal keyboards theoretically can be converted; conversion is possible

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

HEY, LOOK AT ME!

If you use Passmark KeyboardTest, you may find this enjoyable:
http://passmark.com/download/keyboards.htm

Scroll down and find my layout :)
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline pseudolobster

  • Posts: 33
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #168 on: Wed, 07 October 2009, 20:43:13 »
Posting a pic of my layout for ****s and giggles... I need more clear keycaps for all the wonderful shortcut keys I intend to map to all these extra keys... I've started to think of this board as the poor man's optimus maximus in a way.

One of my ambitions is to figure out how to hook up status LED's to this, mount one under a key, add a clear keycap, figure out how to remap windows' "Change keyboard layout" hotkey to scrolllock, then make myself a "dvorak-lock" key so other people can use my computer without fiddling around with alt+shift and whatnot.



The only things that've consistently bugged me about this keyboard so far is the lack of an escape key in the familiar location, and the lack of the distinctive "model M shelf" behind the F-keys where I normally stash pens and whatnot. It's nice that it has a beer coaster tray, but it's at a weird angle.
« Last Edit: Thu, 08 October 2009, 00:54:50 by pseudolobster »

Offline Rajagra

  • Posts: 1931
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #169 on: Thu, 08 October 2009, 07:01:36 »
Quote from: pseudolobster;123809
It's nice that it has a beer coaster tray, but it's at a weird angle.


We need more keyboards with cup holders. I think IBM were heading this way when they put drainage channels in the Model M, but never followed through.

Offline ironcoder

  • Posts: 559
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #170 on: Thu, 08 October 2009, 08:09:41 »
Quote from: pseudolobster;123809
The only things that've consistently bugged me about this keyboard so far is the lack of an escape key in the familiar location


Esc is a key that has no meaning in IBM-land. It's only on PCs that it's used so in one way it's amazing that any IBM keyboard has one at all.
In the office: Filco 87 Cherry Browns x 2 (one with coffee damage, recovered) ● Lexmark IBM Model M 52G9658 1993 & 1996

Offline Shawn Stanford

  • Posts: 369
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #171 on: Thu, 08 October 2009, 10:09:43 »
Quote
Esc is a key that has no meaning in IBM-land. It's only on PCs that it's used so in one way it's amazing that any IBM keyboard has one at all.

Yep, used to be 'Attn', but it was useless under VTAM. The PA1 key was more useful; which is why it's more closely tied to the main typing area.
The Brat Prince of COBOL

Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #172 on: Wed, 14 October 2009, 20:35:43 »
Hey pseudolobster, could use your help...

I'm trying to do the driver swap on Win7.

Even if I don't use the keyboard in Win7, it's necessary because the Win7 bootloader comes before the XP bootloader meaning Win7 kills the keyboard (necessitates a hot plug).

Booted into safe mode, took ownership of the necessary files, swapped it, rebooted. It might have worked because the keyboard was working at the 7 bootloader screen, but after booting into Windows nothing, it was dead. Checked device manager and I have a:

Quote

The software for this device has been blocked from starting because it is known to have problems with Windows. Contact the hardware vendor for a new driver. (Code 48)


I'm almost tempted to believe that's because of the lack of support for unsigned drivers. How did you go about it? Did you just use that utility that's floating around to "fake sign" the file or what?
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline pseudolobster

  • Posts: 33
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #173 on: Wed, 14 October 2009, 20:47:54 »
Hmm. That's odd.
You're using the 32bit version?

All I did is boot into a linux livecd and simply copy the file over, I didn't reset any permissions or anything, I didn't do anything to sign the file... It simply just started working after the first reboot.

I wasn't dual-booting, so I never ran into the bootloader issue, but if I'm not mistaken, I don't think that driver is loaded at that point, so it shouldn't make a difference.

I'm not sure if it matters, but I was using the release candidate, not the RTM version. In either case I'll give it another try on one of the Win7 machines at work tomorrow.

Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #174 on: Wed, 14 October 2009, 21:10:47 »
Quote from: pseudolobster;125479
Hmm. That's odd.
You're using the 32bit version?

All I did is boot into a linux livecd and simply copy the file over, I didn't reset any permissions or anything, I didn't do anything to sign the file... It simply just started working after the first reboot.

I wasn't dual-booting, so I never ran into the bootloader issue, but if I'm not mistaken, I don't think that driver is loaded at that point, so it shouldn't make a difference.

I'm not sure if it matters, but I was using the release candidate, not the RTM version. In either case I'll give it another try on one of the Win7 machines at work tomorrow.

64 bit, but apparently that shouldn't make a difference anymore (it seems they also applied that same "no unsigned drivers" rule to 32 bit, but that was probably after RC)

Since it can't hurt I'll try a swap from a liveCD, I have Ubuntu stashed somewhere around here.

I also thought the driver wouldn't be loaded yet at the bootloader but I had at least a few times where it didn't work on that screen (may just be because the keyboard was "killed" during a session in xp x64 during the same power-on session, I've been rebooting and switching operating systems multiple times per hour today)

Edit: it appears you're right, the bootloader doesn't care about the driver.

And I can't access my hard drive with Ubuntu 8.10. "Unable to mount location", "Internal error: No mount object for mounted volume"

Not the end of the world; in reality it shouldn't make a difference, it's still the same file either way.
« Last Edit: Wed, 14 October 2009, 21:27:09 by kishy »
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline pseudolobster

  • Posts: 33
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #175 on: Wed, 14 October 2009, 23:18:44 »
Yeah, I'm 99% sure it's a 64bit problem then... A 64bit OS is good at running 32bit programs in userland, but any kernel stuff like drivers needs to be compiled for 64bit.

I'll try the driver on a 32bit copy of the RTM version at work tomorrow and I'll keep you posted.. I'm cautiously optimistic it'll work fine.

Offline Shawn Stanford

  • Posts: 369
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #176 on: Fri, 16 October 2009, 13:41:54 »
Quote from: Shawn Stanford;123067
I think what I might try is swapping the controller board out of the Boscom and into the IBM.

Okay, when we last left Our Hero, he had rewired an IBM Model M 1390572 with a PS/2 connector from a defunct keyboard and - on testing - succeeded in causing a seemingly-permanent crippling of the keyboard port on his younger daughter's PC (she is now using Rip's 'Bad Daddy' vignette as her desktop).

I have since received an IBM Model M 1394167 from Kishy and I have the following report:

1. I've heard the Model M called a 'battleship' and the 122-key terminal emulation Model M's 'aircraft carriers'. If that's the case, then the 1390572 is a super carrier, since it has a full inch in width and length on the 1394167.

2. The 1394167 is the 'father' of the Boscom 122 BO40B56 that I've been using for a few weeks. The internals on those two are very similar, while the guts of the 1390572 are different. The biggest difference between the Bos and the IBM is that the plastic keywell on the Bos has the 'drainage channels', where the IBM doesn't. Both cases, however, have the 'drainage holes' at the front.

3. I pulled apart the 1394167 and while the controller was completely different, it had the same ribbon inputs and the same six-pin cable connector. Since Kishy had said that the conversion of his keyboard amounted to splicing in a new cable, I decided to swap the controller from the 4167 into the 0572, along with the cable I'd cobbled together. I confirmed that the cable pinouts matched what I had written down for the six-pin connector on the board and put everything together.

The question of course was: where to test it? I didn't want to risk one of the adult's computers (mine, my wife's, my son's) and Trinity's computer was already broken (Bad Daddy!). That left Shelby's computer. I hemmed and hawed for a minute; but reasoning that I could always plug in a USB keyboard (such as that now sported by Trinity's computer), I gave it a try. I plugged it in, booted, launched NotePad and experimentally whacked at a couple alpha keys.

IT FREAKIN' WORKS!

I was able to use all the alphanumeric keys (and without any of the odd repeating that Kishy had). The function and special keys are different, so they'll need investigated and remapped. But, I think we've got a winner!

For the curious, the dimensions of the keyboards in question are:

Model M 101 Key: 19.25 x 8.25 x 1.75
Model M 1394167: 20.75 x 8.5 x 2.25
Model M 1390527: 22 x 9 x 2.25

For the morbidly curious: I'll post the remapping results when I get that done.
The Brat Prince of COBOL

Offline itlnstln

  • Posts: 7054
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #177 on: Fri, 16 October 2009, 13:43:55 »
Congrats!  Good Daddy.


Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #178 on: Fri, 16 October 2009, 16:55:25 »
Awesome Shawn, glad to hear it worked. The repeat issues by the way were only when attached to a USB converter; Windows was smart enough (for once) to identify I didn't want to repeat the keystrokes when on PS/2 alone.

Yeah, the old-style ones are way bigger. In a sense that's part of the appeal to me; it's so ridiculously impractical I just had to use it lol.

Did you figure out exactly what went wrong the first time Shawn?
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline Shawn Stanford

  • Posts: 369
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #179 on: Sat, 17 October 2009, 05:33:33 »
No, I'm not sure what when wrong the first time. Maybe the keyboard wasn't sending the right scancodes?

I have it plugged in to my son's computer now that it has been proven safe and the scancodes are completely freaking Windows out. I've just started looking at it, but I can tell that the left hand keybank are scanning as F1 through F10 (and they send make codes, but no break codes) and that the top row CMD keys throw unknown scan codes. The Ctl, Alt, Shift and CapsLock keys are also seemingly mixed up. This could definitely take some screwing around to get right, and I'm not sure it's worth the effort.
The Brat Prince of COBOL

Offline quadibloc

  • Posts: 745
  • Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
  • Layout Fanatic
    • John Savard's Home Page
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #180 on: Sat, 17 October 2009, 06:37:58 »
Quote from: Shawn Stanford;126112
succeeded in causing a seemingly-permanent crippling of the keyboard port on his younger daughter's PC (she is now using Rip's 'Bad Daddy' vignette as her desktop).


If she is still able to use the computer... ah, she is probably limping along with one of those newfangled USB keyboards.

Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #181 on: Sat, 17 October 2009, 09:18:46 »
Quote from: Shawn Stanford;126313
No, I'm not sure what when wrong the first time. Maybe the keyboard wasn't sending the right scancodes?

I have it plugged in to my son's computer now that it has been proven safe and the scancodes are completely freaking Windows out. I've just started looking at it, but I can tell that the left hand keybank are scanning as F1 through F10 (and they send make codes, but no break codes) and that the top row CMD keys throw unknown scan codes. The Ctl, Alt, Shift and CapsLock keys are also seemingly mixed up. This could definitely take some screwing around to get right, and I'm not sure it's worth the effort.


Everything you described there is quite normal; the keyboard functions like an 84-key AT keyboard by design (consider what keyboard design existed when the original design was being worked out in the 80s).

The break codes are resolved by using John's modified keyboard driver, (his website) or you could go check out the article I wrote in the mods area (I believe, if I'm not mistaken, I threw a download link in there).

Swapping said driver into place, well, I'm still half asleep so let's not go there yet. Expect to be putting that info in the mod article this coming week, but no promises.

(all that assumes Windows XP or 2000, previous will probably be a no-go, and newer will probably not cooperate as much as we'd like)

As for keys being all mixed up, that's where you've got to remap keys via the Windows registry (or your preferred method). The registry-based mappings are certainly more permanent than some methods, but can still be undone later. Keep in mind they apply globally to all keyboards so if you plug in a normal keyboard after, it will be all mixed up because of the remaps you did for the terminal board.
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline ch_123

  • * Exalted Elder
  • Posts: 5849
  • Hello Baton Rouge
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #182 on: Sat, 17 October 2009, 09:23:40 »
I was thinking the other day - would it be possible to design some kind of microcontroller to interface between the keyboards controller and the computer that would do all the scancode translation?

Offline pseudolobster

  • Posts: 33
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #183 on: Sat, 17 October 2009, 11:05:22 »
Sorry kishy, I meant to test that driver with win7 on a different computer at work, but never got around to it, incredibly busy. I might just go in tomorrow to catch up on some work, so I might give it a shot then. Still, I do think it's a 64 bit problem you were having.

Quote from: ch_123;126338
I was thinking the other day - would it be possible to design some kind of microcontroller to interface between the keyboards controller and the computer that would do all the scancode translation?

Yep, that's a work in progress.. http://www.kbdbabel.org/

Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #184 on: Sat, 17 October 2009, 13:36:01 »
Quote from: ch_123;126338
I was thinking the other day - would it be possible to design some kind of microcontroller to interface between the keyboards controller and the computer that would do all the scancode translation?


See pseudolobster's reply. I intend to make one of those actually; the problem is I don't have the resources to at this time.

Quote from: pseudolobster;126353
Sorry kishy, I meant to test that driver with win7 on a different computer at work, but never got around to it, incredibly busy. I might just go in tomorrow to catch up on some work, so I might give it a shot then. Still, I do think it's a 64 bit problem you were having.


Do it at your convenience, please.
It very well may be a 64 bit problem, but it doesn't make sense if it is...a keyboard driver is so low-level it should be identical for either 32 or 64 bit versions. Silly Microsoft.
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline Shawn Stanford

  • Posts: 369
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #185 on: Mon, 19 October 2009, 10:14:45 »
So, I lugged the IBM Model M 1390572 into work to plug it into the PS2-USB adapter and, sure enough, the repeat problem reared its head. So, the supercarrier is relegated to a corner of my cube for now, and I'm back to a 'plain' Model M (Not so plain: it's sporting a hot rod red case. Ha!).

I read back through the thread and if I understood correctly, Ripster had fewer or no problems while using the Blue Cube adapter. I've ordered one from Amazon and we'll make another assessment when it arrives.
The Brat Prince of COBOL

Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #186 on: Mon, 19 October 2009, 12:45:20 »
Quote from: Shawn Stanford;126854
So, I lugged the IBM Model M 1390572 into work to plug it into the PS2-USB adapter and, sure enough, the repeat problem reared its head. So, the supercarrier is relegated to a corner of my cube for now, and I'm back to a 'plain' Model M (Not so plain: it's sporting a hot rod red case. Ha!).

I read back through the thread and if I understood correctly, Ripster had fewer or no problems while using the Blue Cube adapter. I've ordered one from Amazon and we'll make another assessment when it arrives.


The fundamental problem is of course that the keyboard, at least with the software configuration you are using, is not sending break codes for its keys. For some reason I don't entirely understand, Windows does not interpret the "held down keys" as being repeating if it's connected to a PS/2 port. However, something about those cheapo PS/2-USB converters causes the keys to repeat for a certain number of times (if you don't interrupt it, it always repeats the same number of times and stops after...the USB converter then sends a break code for the key after the repeating finishes).

The problem is the keyboard...but if these "blue cube" adapters somehow correct the problem, I may get one and do a "USB mod" on a terminal board lol.

Quote from: ripster;126856
My 1397000 review has all the detailed scancodes for what I got.  Each had a make and break.


Did you have ANY repeat issues, where there was some sort of delay in the break code showing up? I could probably go and read it there but it's probably something useful to have in this thread as well.
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #187 on: Mon, 19 October 2009, 13:01:41 »
Quote from: ripster;126912
If you have a suggestion for a test I'm more than willing to try it.  I think all I did was hold down a sampling of keys and make sure they repeated.  Then I made sure the next keypress on another key registered.


Hmm...it seems that was probably extensive enough to figure out it works.

The problems I had with my converter were quite obvious...if you hit a key, just any random one, that key would repeat something like 8 times (roughly, I forget). You could prevent the repeating by typing fluently with no delay between key presses, but as soon as you stopped typing for even the slightest delay, it would repeat the last key pressed.

So I guess no further testing needed...but if you have some time to mess with it I'd say to make note of any problems you do find that maybe were overlooked before.
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline Shawn Stanford

  • Posts: 369
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #188 on: Mon, 19 October 2009, 14:32:31 »
I'm guessing that the Blue Cube is a little brighter than the average PS2-USB converter (I think Rip said as much in a thread somewhere). It would be interesting to see the source code.
The Brat Prince of COBOL

Offline ironcoder

  • Posts: 559
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #189 on: Tue, 20 October 2009, 02:54:48 »
Source code!? We don't need no stinkin' source code!

(sorry, that's what came to mind!)
In the office: Filco 87 Cherry Browns x 2 (one with coffee damage, recovered) ● Lexmark IBM Model M 52G9658 1993 & 1996

Offline IBMMuseum

  • Posts: 5
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #190 on: Wed, 21 October 2009, 22:04:53 »
Ok, I´m jumping in on the thread, Kishy made me aware of it from another forum. I´m also had a little correspondence with John about the 3270 PC system, where these keyboards came in to connect up to the PC. My interests are still vintage, and my focus for now is about connecting the terminal keyboards (even though I do have an IBM ¨Host Connect¨ 122-key keyboard) to the IBM PS/2s.

Offline ironcoder

  • Posts: 559
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #191 on: Thu, 22 October 2009, 02:40:40 »
Lemme be the first to welcome you to this awesome forum!
In the office: Filco 87 Cherry Browns x 2 (one with coffee damage, recovered) ● Lexmark IBM Model M 52G9658 1993 & 1996

Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #192 on: Fri, 23 October 2009, 17:50:17 »
Quote from: IBMMuseum;127526
Ok, I´m jumping in on the thread, Kishy made me aware of it from another forum. I´m also had a little correspondence with John about the 3270 PC system, where these keyboards came in to connect up to the PC. My interests are still vintage, and my focus for now is about connecting the terminal keyboards (even though I do have an IBM ¨Host Connect¨ 122-key keyboard) to the IBM PS/2s.

First let me apologize for not acknowledging your great information on the other site yet; I've been a bit busy and trying to keep track of a lot of stuff so it's best to keep one idea at a time in mind.

Regarding PS/2s, that's something I'm interested in, though my Model 56 is going to be leaving me at some time in the future. The 30-286 will remain.
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline IBMMuseum

  • Posts: 5
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #193 on: Sat, 24 October 2009, 01:56:24 »
Quote from: kishy;127959
First let me apologize for not acknowledging your great information on the other site yet; I've been a bit busy and trying to keep track of a lot of stuff so it's best to keep one idea at a time in mind.

Regarding PS/2s, that's something I'm interested in, though my Model 56 is going to be leaving me at some time in the future. The 30-286 will remain.


Before the Model 56SX leaves your hands, I need you to run a DOS program for me if possible (it has the 122-key keyboard support, the Model 30 286 does not). I´m having some roadblocks come up with the terminal keyboard types I have, and have to study all the variables more. But the information I am learning (understand that I was looking at a small part of this more than four years ago, to put information about the Keyboard IDs online) is great.

One very amazing thing to me is that the keyboard PCB for my part number 6110345 Model F terminal keyboard (screwing cylinder shield on the plug for a 3270PC or 3180 terminal) is exactly the same as the keyboard PCB in the 84-key AT keyboard. There are rows for jumpers to apparently set the Keyboard ID, but the last (of the B-row) seems like it is also associated with the lock lights. I´ll connect it to one of my ATs tomorrow to see how things work.

The 1389162 keyboards I have look like a very similiar keyboard PCB to your 1386887 model. I still get errors (currently a 306) that doesn´t let me test further though. I have far more 1390876 (right-angle plug) and 1395660 (RJ-45, which may end up being the easiest cable to work with for that reason) to run through for tests.

Ultimately I hope for some sort of compilation of models for what works...

I haven´t had much time in this last week either...

Now that the weekend has arrived I hope to devote more attention to it...
« Last Edit: Sat, 24 October 2009, 01:58:58 by IBMMuseum »

Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #194 on: Sat, 24 October 2009, 10:24:28 »
Quote from: IBMMuseum;127985
Before the Model 56SX leaves your hands, I need you to run a DOS program for me if possible (it has the 122-key keyboard support, the Model 30 286 does not).


Well...no, the Model 56SX has support for 122-key host connect keyboards which are quite different from real terminal keyboards that have had their cord swapped. I'm 100% positive that I'll get an equal level of compatibility on the 30-286 because the keyboard will function like an 84-key AT keyboard, exactly like it does on my Athlon64 system.

It's important not to lump all of these things together as just "122-key" because there are significant differences between the host connect boards and the "real thing", which is what I have.
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline JohnElliott

  • Posts: 109
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #195 on: Sat, 24 October 2009, 12:56:50 »
Quote from: IBMMuseum;127985
One very amazing thing to me is that the keyboard PCB for my part number 6110345 Model F terminal keyboard (screwing cylinder shield on the plug for a 3270PC or 3180 terminal) is exactly the same as the keyboard PCB in the 84-key AT keyboard. There are rows for jumpers to apparently set the Keyboard ID, but the last (of the B-row) seems like it is also associated with the lock lights. I´ll connect it to one of my ATs tomorrow to see how things work.


My guess is that the difference comes in the microcontroller programming -- in the 122-key version, those lines are configured as input lines for the keyboard ID jumpers, and in the 84-key version they're configured as output lines for the LEDs. What we'd need is dumps of the keyboard microcontroller ROM, if anyone's got the knowledge to obtain that and then interpret it.

Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #196 on: Sat, 24 October 2009, 14:18:57 »
Quote from: kishy;128008
Well...no, the Model 56SX has support for 122-key host connect keyboards which are quite different from real terminal keyboards that have had their cord swapped. I'm 100% positive that I'll get an equal level of compatibility on the 30-286 because the keyboard will function like an 84-key AT keyboard, exactly like it does on my Athlon64 system.

It's important not to lump all of these things together as just "122-key" because there are significant differences between the host connect boards and the "real thing", which is what I have.


I've since tried the board on my 30-286 and was surprised to find it works the same as it does on my Athlon64 desktop, quite probably because the 30-286 was never designed to support 122-key keyboards (therefore the keyboard can function, unlike a properly supporting computer would expect, as an 84-key AT)

On the 56SX (this time with Win95) it still types garbage, apparently because the 56SX by design supports 122-key keyboards, but this keyboard is of course behaving like an 84-key AT rather than a host-connect (there's probably more to it than that though).

Quote from: JohnElliott;128029
My guess is that the difference comes in the microcontroller programming -- in the 122-key version, those lines are configured as input lines for the keyboard ID jumpers, and in the 84-key version they're configured as output lines for the LEDs. What we'd need is dumps of the keyboard microcontroller ROM, if anyone's got the knowledge to obtain that and then interpret it.


I'm willing to send one of my PCBs to someone with this ability so long as they cover shipping there, I pay shipping back.
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline IBMMuseum

  • Posts: 5
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #197 on: Sat, 24 October 2009, 21:51:36 »
Quote from: JohnElliott;128029
My guess is that the difference comes in the microcontroller programming -- in the 122-key version, those lines are configured as input lines for the keyboard ID jumpers, and in the 84-key version they're configured as output lines for the LEDs. What we'd need is dumps of the keyboard microcontroller ROM, if anyone's got the knowledge to obtain that and then interpret it.


If I can have someone confirm my keyboard PCB berg connector - My 84-key AT keyboard isn´t working with the connection either (but 101s with an SDL and cable are). Here is what I have:

Shield (or unused)....o.....o...5 volts
.................Clock....o..o..o...Data
.................Ground on center pin

This is as it is on the PCB, and http://www.bbdsoft.com/keyboard.html for the AT keyboard connector...
« Last Edit: Sat, 24 October 2009, 21:55:12 by IBMMuseum »

Offline kishy

  • Thread Starter
  • Posts: 1576
  • Location: Windsor, ON Canada
  • Eye Bee M
    • http://kishy.ca/
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #198 on: Sat, 24 October 2009, 22:06:11 »
Looks right to me IBMMuseum.
http://geekhack.org/showwiki.php?title=Island:7306

Code: [Select]
NO CONN .   . +5VDC

  CLOCK . . . DATA    BETW/ CLK & DATA: GND
Enthusiast of springs which buckle noisily: my keyboards
Want to learn about the Kishsaver?
kishy.ca

Offline IBMMuseum

  • Posts: 5
IBM 1386887 (3179 terminal) keyboard conversion
« Reply #199 on: Sun, 25 October 2009, 00:08:14 »
I have figured out the Keyboard ID settings on the terminal keyboard PCB below - A reverse of the jumpers on other PCBs:



In the upper right-hand corner there is the metal piece inserted into the socket. Default ID (all pins in the socket) is 8080. The high order bits start on the right, and progress as you go to the left (A0 and A1 are set to ´10´, as you go left it is A2, A3, A4, etc.).

For instance, you leave the double-pin furthest right in the socket as the picture has it straight. Your first byte (8, as in 86AB) is already correct, so also leave the next two (single) pins down: 1000b, 8h.

The next byte of the ID would be 6h for the Host Connect keyboard. Leave the first pin (A4) of the byte straight, bend the next two out of the way (A5  = ´1´, A6 = ´1´), A7 is left straight.

To set the third byte of the Keyboard ID, bend B2 out of the way. B3 stays straight. Since B0 and B1 are ´10´, the byte comes out as 1010b, Ah.

Bend B4, B6, and B7 out of the way. That gives 1011b, Bh. All told we now have 86AB.

From the aspect of the picture (in reverse order from above) I will give a diagram. The double-pin on the right of the socket will be shown as ´II´ at the end of the sequence. Bent (or removed) pins will be shown as ´x´:

B7 -> B2, A7 -> A2
xxIxIxIxxIIII