[HN Gopher] DB-19: Resurrecting an Obsolete Connector (2016)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       DB-19: Resurrecting an Obsolete Connector (2016)
        
       Author : jimmaswell
       Score  : 148 points
       Date   : 2024-05-18 09:22 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.bigmessowires.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.bigmessowires.com)
        
       | gumby wrote:
       | That's not a "DB"-19. The DB shell is much wider, sized to
       | accommodate up to 25 pins. It's more likely a DA-19, or maybe a
       | DE-19. Or, as the author specified their own dimensions, an
       | unofficial variant.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-subminiature
        
         | throw0101d wrote:
         | > _That 's not a "DB"-19._
         | 
         | It is the colloquial term for the connector (regardless of what
         | the 'official' name may be):
         | 
         | > _Several computers also used a non-standard 19-pin D-sub
         | connector, sometimes called DB-19,[8] including Macintosh
         | (external floppy drive), Atari ST (external hard drive), and
         | NeXT (Megapixel Display monitor[9] and laser printer)._
         | 
         | *
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-subminiature#Common_misnomer...
         | 
         | * https://iec.net/what-is-a-db19-connector/
         | 
         | * https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=db19+connector
         | 
         | > _The early Macintosh and late Apple II computers used a non-
         | standard 19-pin D-sub for connecting external floppy disk
         | drives._
         | 
         | * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-subminiature#Other
         | 
         | *
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mac512k-rear_DB-19_Smartp...
        
           | raggles wrote:
           | It might be the colloquial term, but if you ask someone for a
           | DB-15 connector then theres a good chance you'll get the
           | wrong one. I regularly use both DE-15 and DA-15 in my line of
           | work (among others), and any document that refers to a DB-xx
           | for anything that isn't the DB shell size will be corrected.
        
         | gugagore wrote:
         | So when people call the (smaller) PC serial port connector DB9,
         | they're technically wrong? TIL
        
           | ssl-3 wrote:
           | For some versions of "technically," yes: A DB9 isn't really a
           | thing.
           | 
           | But ostensibly, everyone who needs to know will know what is
           | meant when a person says "DB9," and thus it works fine.
           | 
           | (Relatedly, the connector used for Ethernet is not an RJ45.)
        
             | javawizard wrote:
             | > (Relatedly, the connector used for Ethernet is not an
             | RJ45.)
             | 
             | Wait, what? I cannot find a single source on Google for
             | this - they all say RJ45 is the correct term.
             | 
             | If it's not an RJ45, what is it?
        
               | andrewshadura wrote:
               | 8P8C
        
               | formerly_proven wrote:
               | Registered Jacks are always for phone stuff, the general-
               | purpose name would be 8P8C.
        
               | atombender wrote:
               | Wikipedia has a good explanation:
               | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modular_connector#8P8C
        
               | colejohnson66 wrote:
               | RJ45 is/was the pinout/wiring of an 8P8C[1] (eight
               | pin/eight contact) connector designed for the telephone
               | system.[0] The wiring specification of Ethernet is
               | ANSI/TIA-568[2].
               | 
               | The only thing RJ45 has in common with Ethernet is that
               | it used the same 8P8C-sized connector. But even then,
               | RJ45 had a key notch on the side and Ethernet does not.
               | 
               | [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Registered_jack#RJ45S
               | 
               | [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modular_connector#8P8C
               | 
               | [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANSI/TIA-568
        
               | jes5199 wrote:
               | all the examples with the notch say "RH45S" - what does
               | the S stand for?
        
               | ssl-3 wrote:
               | The antiquated Registered Jack standard is RJ45S, which
               | always gets butchered to RJ45 in common parlance [and
               | this sans-S version has never actually existed].
               | 
               | For RJ standards, an S suffix signifies that it is a
               | "single line" circuit.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Registered_jack#Types
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Registered_jack#RJ45S
        
               | gumby wrote:
               | I have always loved that the 6P4C fits into the 8P8C such
               | that when wired up as RJ11 or RJ12 it interoperates
               | properly.
        
               | ssl-3 wrote:
               | IIRC, that was one of the reasons we had the center pair
               | available with Ethernet for such a long time:
               | 
               | A given jack on a wall in a given office could be wired
               | for a regular single-pair phone, or for Ethernet, or for
               | both -- even at the same time (using the same cabling),
               | as a design intent.
               | 
               | Of course this doesn't work with the gigabit spec we all
               | wound up using, but it was never a popular option to
               | begin with (and nowadays, we usually have VOIP if we even
               | bother with desk phones at all).
        
             | Suzuran wrote:
             | There actually _WAS_ a DB9 connector, that is 9 pins in the
             | B-side shell. They were used for manufacturing equipment.
             | They carried 4 high-voltage differential pairs and a common
             | signal for negotiation /detection. IIRC part of the
             | specification was that the signal pins had to be milled
             | solid parts rather than the much cheaper/more common rolled
             | hollow pins.
        
           | blueflow wrote:
           | Yes, and this is a common problem with language. There are
           | many instances where colloquial knowledge is just wrong and
           | its not clear how people even came up with their alternative
           | interpretation. Maybe you have seen me previously ranting
           | about such things.
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | A recent one used around these parts is "hallucinating".
             | There have been multiple pro/con threads on using it when
             | discussing the failing of LLMs.
        
         | buttocks wrote:
         | Thankfully, the blog's comments section was still open so that
         | you could pollute it with your smug pedantry.
        
           | gumby wrote:
           | It's confusing. It's a technical spec and the wrong use can
           | be confusing, and can cause you to discover you have the
           | wrong part at an inconvenient time. It's a case where "size
           | matters".
           | 
           | It used to be quite common to see a serial port wired in a B
           | shell, sometimes with just three pins, making a DB-3.
           | 
           | If you were making the point that I shouldn't care if a bird
           | were a raven or a crow in the background of a painting, sure,
           | that would be pedantry (unless there were some important
           | symbolism). But this is a simple case where a modicum of
           | accuracy can make a big difference.
        
             | psim1 wrote:
             | Apple themselves call the floppy connector a DB-19
             | (https://support.apple.com/en-me/112201). In this case, it
             | would be better to use the "wrong" DB-19 term so that
             | people seeking the referenced connector can find it.
        
           | wannacboatmovie wrote:
           | It's not "smug pedantry", it's literally correct.
        
           | eesmith wrote:
           | Already commented, on August 9th, 2016 at 7:23 am.
        
         | JeremyHerrman wrote:
         | In the comments Steve addresses this:
         | 
         | "The DB-19 isn't really a B shell and probably shouldn't be
         | called "DB" anything if you're being precise about naming.
         | Apple called it DB-19 in their documentation, though, and the
         | name stuck."
        
       | lpmay wrote:
       | I would never have guessed this configuration was so rare. D-sub
       | connectors seem to have more active use in aerospace and defense
       | that you might expect (Until I started working professionally, I
       | always associated them with "old" computers, not high end stuff).
        
         | Dwedit wrote:
         | 9 and 25 are the common ones, 19 is the rare one.
        
           | mrWiz wrote:
           | 37 is surprisingly common too.
        
       | quink wrote:
       | (2016)
        
       | neilv wrote:
       | > _but then I found an old mechanical drawing of a DB-25. I
       | photoshopped that sucker, edited some key measurements, and that
       | was what they used for the very expensive mold-making process._
       | 
       | I'm glad that didn't result in five figures of group-buy money
       | wasted.
        
         | eternauta3k wrote:
         | The article mentions prototyping, maybe they sent a connector
         | for testing before making the Very Expensive Molds.
        
       | neilv wrote:
       | If you pay for a factory to make unique tooling like this, can
       | you avoid them using the tooling for their own runs, to undercut
       | you as the sole source for your target market (such as on
       | Alibaba/Aliexpress)?
        
         | s0rce wrote:
         | You could ask them for the molds at the end or stipulate in the
         | contract that they can't use them for anyone else, they might
         | not abide by this or might not sign a contract requiring this
         | but you can ask.
        
         | analog31 wrote:
         | I worked for a molding company long ago, and exclusivity for
         | customer tooling was part of the standard agreement. I don't
         | remember the verbiage.
        
           | janekm wrote:
           | Yes, but this scenario is a bit different. If you ask a
           | connector factory to custom-make you a connector it's common
           | that they are allowed to add it to their catalogue, though
           | you can of course stipulate something else in the contract.
           | You'll see this in the electronics markets in Shenzhen for
           | example... they still have a lot of the connectors and
           | switches from MP3 players, which I believe was one of the
           | early boom industries in the region.
        
           | echoangle wrote:
           | Did you work in china though? I don't want to make wrong
           | assumptions but I think the intellectual property protections
           | are taken a bit less serious there.
        
             | analog31 wrote:
             | It was the 1990s and we were in the US.
        
         | usefulcat wrote:
         | For a large order this might be a concern, but for a smaller
         | order (as it sounds like this one was) I would think it's
         | unlikely to be worth their time to compete with you.
        
         | lelanthran wrote:
         | Their price for the small runs already is discounted if they
         | think they can reuse them.
         | 
         | You don't really want to pay full price anyway.
        
       | qiqitori wrote:
       | I've always been wondering, could you build connectors like this
       | by CNCing the metal parts and 3d-printing the insulation? (Maybe
       | add in some metal bending, but maybe that could be done manually
       | using hand tools?) In this case, there actually seems to be a
       | market for thousands of these connectors, but for many other
       | connectors the market is... a couple dozen or so. Note: I have
       | very little knowledge in this field.
        
         | upwardbound wrote:
         | Yes you definitely can. Obviously you should buy the pins
         | instead of CNCing pins, but for the complex geometry of the
         | main connector body you can definitely CNC it. Example of the
         | pins being sold on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/JRready-
         | Terminal-Connector-205089-1-c...
        
         | lelanthran wrote:
         | If not needed under 10 I'd make it manually like you say.
         | 
         | For above 10 I'd make a jig to either cut and punch holes in
         | 3mm plexiglass sheets, or a jig to quickly make cardboard
         | moulds into which I'd place the pins and pour resin into.
         | 
         | To me, either of the above is preferable to ordering 10k of
         | them.
        
         | ssl-3 wrote:
         | In the past, I've seen examples of D-shell connectors with
         | molded all-plastic connectors.
         | 
         | The most common example is perhaps the Atari 2600's molded
         | female joystick connector, but I've also seen male iterations
         | (usually on IDC connectors).
         | 
         | Other than lack durability and lack of built-in shielding, I
         | don't see any problem with the idea of 3D printing such a
         | thing.
         | 
         | With a decent resin printer, one should even be able to design
         | it to use removable pins that just snap into place (which are
         | things that are still made in factories every day).
        
       | userbinator wrote:
       | Almost 8 years later, I wonder if he's managed to sell the whole
       | lot, and whether some obscure Chinese company has started making
       | them again.
        
         | ted_dunning wrote:
         | Well, IEC doesn't seem to have any 19 pin DB style connectors
         | for sale (9, 15, 23 and 25 are available).
         | 
         | So maybe he did sell them all.
        
           | TonyTrapp wrote:
           | According to the comments under the article, this is the
           | item: http://iec.net/product/d-style-male-solder-type-
           | connector/ - so it still appears to be in stock.
        
           | atombender wrote:
           | The 19-pin is there (https://iec.net/product/d-style-male-
           | solder-type-connector/), but the connector has a blue
           | interior, which suggests it's a different source than OP? I
           | suppose it could be a stock photo of a different version.
        
         | tecleandor wrote:
         | Well, they just re-stocked their Mac Floppy Emulator, that uses
         | one of those connectors, so I guess they still have a bunch of
         | them :)
         | 
         | https://shop.bigmessowires.com/products/floppy-emu-model-c-b...
        
         | Frenchgeek wrote:
         | https://www.bigmessowires.com/2018/05/10/10000-more-db-19-co...
        
           | fragmede wrote:
           | oh wow, 10,000 more in 2018, and that's only 2 years later
           | than the article. there's probably been a couple more buys in
           | the six years since!
        
             | zoeysmithe wrote:
             | Stuff like this made me realize how I have no idea how big
             | enthusiast markets are. If you asked me how many weirdo
             | disk connectors for vintage macs and Apple II's could be
             | sold today I would have guessed maybe one or two hundred at
             | most, sold over many years.
             | 
             | It looks like they've sold tens of thousands of these.
             | 
             | If we guess 50,000 at $129, with say a 30% profit margin,
             | which might be low for hobbyist markets, its $2m net. These
             | "little" enthusiast markets are much larger and lucrative
             | than I thought.
        
       | Suppafly wrote:
       | Now someone needs to do this for the 8 pin 'DIN' commodore
       | connector. They seem impossible to find now other than from
       | people who've already bought up all of them to make commodore
       | video cables.
        
         | rhubarbtse wrote:
         | Male 262 degrees 8 pin DIN connectors (for C64 video cables
         | etc) are readily available from for example AliExpress.
         | 
         | Couldn't find any female connectors (for the motherboard)
         | though.
        
           | pezezin wrote:
           | If I am not mistaken, it is the same connector as the one
           | used by the Sega Megadrive 1, although with a different
           | pinout. In principle, you should be able to get a Megadrive
           | cable, cut it, and reorder the pins.
        
         | mrweasel wrote:
         | I believe it's the same issue with the DB-23 connector on the
         | Amiga. It's would be somewhat surprising if no one has done
         | something similar for that connector. Then again, to build an
         | entirely new Amiga you'd still need to harvest the custom chips
         | and then you may very well be able to get the DB-23 connector
         | as well.
        
           | actionfromafar wrote:
           | IIRC you can build a completely new Amiga now, or very close
           | to it.
           | 
           | Plus there are FPGA Amigas, but that is another matter.
        
             | mrweasel wrote:
             | I don't think you can replace the custom chips, without
             | using FPGAs. If FPGA replacements exists for all of the
             | custom chips I don't know.
             | 
             | There's also weird resistor or capacity pack somewhere that
             | doesn't have a modern replacement.
             | 
             | You can get an entire Amiga as an FPGA, but that's a little
             | different than a chip for chip replacement.
        
       | YZF wrote:
       | If you just want a one-off you can try something I did way back
       | to make my own HP48-SX connector. Get some pins that match.
       | Solder or crimp wires onto them. Put the pins in the mating
       | connector. Careful use of epoxy to make the "body" of the
       | connector. Viola- your own custom connector.
        
         | thsksbd wrote:
         | At least on the GX, you could use the audio cable connector
         | that connected (computer) CD drives to audio cards [1]. The fit
         | is perfect
         | 
         | You do gave to then splice that wire to a 9 serial. But thats
         | not too hard and with some shrink tubing it'll look great.
         | 
         | [1] I think the connector is a fairly standard part.in the 90s,
         | though, we were flooded with those cables so the tutorials just
         | had us use those
        
           | banish-m4 wrote:
           | Specifically, a SCSI cdrom audio cable worked although I
           | can't recall if ATA and SCSI cdrom drives has identical
           | connectors or not. Perhaps the SCSI one tended to be white
           | rectangle without a retention mechanism while the ATA one was
           | one was black thinner, and longer, with a retention
           | mechanism.
           | 
           | 3 of the 4 wires (RX, TX, and GND) would then be soldered to
           | a DB-9 female plug.
           | 
           | https://www.hpcalc.org/contents/4741/48techni.pdf
        
       | stuaxo wrote:
       | Ah, very similar to what happened with 23 pin connectors for the
       | Amiga, which have since been made again.
        
       | jesprenj wrote:
       | What about the female connector? Did he also order it? Or are
       | only male connectors needed/in shortage for some reason?
       | 
       | Edit: there's some discussion about female counterparts in the
       | comment section of the website.
        
         | krs_ wrote:
         | No there's still no new production of those, as mentioned in
         | the comments. It's kind of a shame. You can adapt a DB-25M to
         | fit a DB-19F by cutting some of the hood to size and removing
         | the extra pins. It's not pretty but it works. That's not really
         | possible to do with the female connector though.
        
       | ano-ther wrote:
       | I am still amazed about how the internet enabled such small-scale
       | production runs from the other side of the world.
        
       | newswasboring wrote:
       | > I photoshopped that sucker, edited some key measurements, and
       | that was what they used for the very expensive mold-making
       | process.
       | 
       | I work in manufacturing and this sentence made me feel so many
       | feelings. Surprise that this worked, envy that this worked,
       | remorse on how hard we try to make things precise AND THIS
       | WORKED. Just so, so many feelings.
        
         | boricj wrote:
         | Wait until you see how computer programs are made.
        
           | baq wrote:
           | 'it compiles, ship it!'
           | 
           | except we don't even compile programs anymore... (in the
           | traditional sense, anyway; I try to look the other way when
           | build engineering does dark magic with webpacks and esbuilds)
        
             | fragmede wrote:
             | At the point where JScrambler is implementing a VM in
             | JavaScript to run the obfuscated code, I think it actually
             | qualifies as being compiled. Which is unholy, but that's
             | the world we live in.
        
           | jollyllama wrote:
           | Assuming there was inaccuracy in the author's approach, some
           | poor low-level guy probably noticed the flaws and took it
           | upon himself to correct it.
        
         | jes5199 wrote:
         | what do you think is likely to go wrong if you do it this way?
        
           | bombela wrote:
           | Any measurement off by some small amount, and the connector
           | won't insert, or be too tight or too loose.
           | 
           | It is the equivalent of code that compiles and runs
           | successfully at the first attempt. It is nice, and with
           | experience easier to achieve. But it is still part lucky.
        
             | poizan42 wrote:
             | It probably helps that it's a large-ish connector (by
             | modern standards) and tolerances aren't that tight.
        
         | crote wrote:
         | One thing to keep in mind is that connectors are often
         | parametric: You got some end bits, and a middle section you
         | repeat N times. This means a lot of your dimensions are going
         | to be "Y = AX + B", where X is just the pin spacing. If you
         | know they're from the same family, you can extrapolate the
         | dimensions without too much trouble.
         | 
         | Of course there's still a huge risk with DB-19 being a semi-
         | custom format. Sure, it's almost certainly derived from the
         | standard, but are you willing to bet the cash equivalent of a
         | car that they didn't _slightly_ tweak it for one reason or
         | another?
        
           | wildzzz wrote:
           | It was a standard D-sub connector at one point in time, DA19P
           | is going to be the first part of the real part number. Only
           | issue is that no one makes this one anymore as the D-sub is
           | pretty much abandoned by the consumer electronics industry.
           | Serial ports, single density 9 pin, and VGA, double density
           | 15 pin, being the only survivors and even those have been
           | almost entirely removed. Defense contractors still use lots
           | of D-subs as it's a simple and cheap way to pass a bunch of
           | signals. The major connector manufacturers stopped making 19
           | pins because no one was asking for it. Defense contractors
           | aren't going to keep that model alive with their low volume
           | orders, it's easier to just use a 15 or 25 pin D-sub.
           | 
           | Since there are so many compatible drawings out there of
           | D-subs, it's easy to find one that shows the breakdown of why
           | the measurements are what they are. From there, you can
           | easily backtrack and get the exact dimensions of a DA19P.
        
         | amelius wrote:
         | Yeah. Especially after reading this sentence:
         | 
         | > Early on, it became clear they'd need more specific
         | directions than simply "make it like a DB-9 but with more
         | pins."
        
         | treflop wrote:
         | From what I gathered, they Photoshopped a CAD drawing and
         | changed numbers around (and not far presumably) -- I'm not sure
         | why that is too surprising given that the manufacturer is
         | building it off the measurements and not literally the scale of
         | the actual drawing?
         | 
         | (And given that drawings used to be hand drawn with pencil and
         | paper, you have way more ton of precision control in a non-
         | linear tool like Photoshop that gives you precise measurements
         | than some rulers and those types of tools.)
        
           | sidewndr46 wrote:
           | if he had molds made, the manufacturer actually sent the
           | dimensions to a 3rd party mold maker. That company put them
           | into some sort of CAD software to build a mold (which is
           | basically a negative). Once that was completed, the mold was
           | brought back to make the product
        
       | chiffre01 wrote:
       | Is 'mold' the right word here. Looking at the connectors, I would
       | assume they are stamped out with a die or something similar.
        
         | Milner08 wrote:
         | There is a plastic part in the middle to hold the pins which
         | would need a mold. But you are correct that the outside would
         | probably be formed with a die
        
       | rkagerer wrote:
       | I miss how solid these connectors were once screwed in, compared
       | to e.g. USB or HDMI* connections of today.
       | 
       | (*once had an HDMI soften over time due to all the heat spewing
       | out of the graphics card it plugged into, took a few cables
       | before I found one that didn't want to melt)
        
       | mrlonglong wrote:
       | Next life hack, resurrect the 3.5" floppy disk.
        
       | samatman wrote:
       | Reading along with great enjoyment, until I got to the part where
       | the author is photoshopping and editing a component diagram of
       | the D19 to get more manufactured.
       | 
       | I think to myself, "how strange! even if the manufacturer isn't
       | willing to pay for the standard, it's got to be worth it for the
       | guy who's trying to get them built!"
       | 
       | A small bit of Wikipedia browsing followed, in which I realized
       | that I've been laboring under a decades-long misapprehension that
       | the D in D-sub connectors stands for DIN. Nope, just the shape,
       | and not a DIN, or ANSI, or ISO standard. Just de facto.
       | 
       | Note that this isn't totally insane, there are in fact DIN
       | connectors https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DIN_connector. Just so
       | happens that D-sub connectors have nothing to do with them.
       | 
       | Always more to learn...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-05-20 23:00 UTC)