When we talked about this little bit ago I thought there were
a couple other people who had them.? Any chance someone
has a copy of the utilities disk they could rip and email to me?
I just tried to read? mine and it appears to have a bad spot
right on the oct.sav file which is the program for configuring
the card.
bill
> From: Al Kossow
> CHM has a rather large Intel Paragon system.
> I just recently snagged the software and manuals for it on eBay
> which we didn't have
Excellent! Congratulations!
So, I'm curious - what's the 'most important missing thing' at the
CHM - either am important machine that you don't have at all, or
part of something (like the above) that you really need to complete
something?
Noel
Anyone interested in three hardbound volumes of ACM CALGO, starting with
Algorithm 1, plus a large looseleaf binder and
assorted microfiche (assuming that I can still find them)?
Drop me a line if so.
--Chuck
If any of you are archiving old data for the public, like CD-ROMs or
whatever, and you are low on disk space.... A friend gives me surplus
data center hardware often, and I have some SATA disks. They have 4 years
or so on them so backup / redundancy is important, but I can offer
some to people that are running public archives of classic computer stuff
to help.
You just can't resell the hardware.
--
: Ethan O'Toole
Seeking User Manual for DEC M1710 Unibus Interface Foundation: I have been looking everywhere, without success. The closest I have come is a 3-page description in a DEC Logic Handbook from bitsavers.
Thanks in advance for any leads. Neil
I would like to make a correction: Paul Allen helped to create
Micro-Soft not MicroSoft as I had written. When trying to preserve
computing history it's really not permissable to make such an
error.(It's the prof. in me!)
Happy Computing!
Murray :)
On Tue, 23 Oct 2018, Liam Proven via cctalk wrote:
> How many graphical Unix desktops are sold or distributed in the world
> today that are not Linux? Excluding Mac OS X as I specifically address
> that point, I think.
I am replying to this email on a FreeBSD 10.3 box and Motif. I don't
know what FreeBSD runs out of the box because I immediately delete it
and install Motif.
FreeBSD may not have the installed base of Linux but it has a its fans.
--
Richard Loken VE6BSV : "...underneath those tuques we wear,
Athabasca, Alberta Canada : our heads are naked!"
** rlloken at telus.net ** : - Arthur Black
> From: Paul Koning
> A lot more comes from the CPU architecture. The instruction set, of
> course (arguably the first RISC).
An observation about RISC: I've opined before that the CISC->RISC transition
was driven, in part, by the changing balance of CPU speed versus memory
speed: with slow memory and fast CPUs, it makes sense to get as much
execution bang out of every fetch buck (so complex instructions); but when
memory bandwidth goes up, one needs a fast CPU to use it all (so simple
instructions).
It occurs to be that the same balance probably applies to memory _size_. When
memories are small, one wants dense code (which probably means CISC); only
with larger memories does RISC, with its less-dense code, make sense.
Noel
> Message: 28
> Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2018 13:16:44 -0400
> From: "Jeffrey S. Worley" <technoid6502 at gmail.com>
> To: cctalk at classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: "Object Oriented GUI"
> Message-ID: <01e83dac0a96469e425a0632bd07319351c9362d.camel at Gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> I used OS/2 from 1993 to 2003 almost exclusively. It has the most
> beautiful GUI on the planet, is object-oriented to a fault, and is the
> target of all the claims Microsoft was making with regard to the
> Object-orientedness of their new windows 95.
>
> Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workplace_Shell mentions some
> important attributes of a truely object-oriented gui.
>
> Someone mentioned inheritance and polymorphism. These are two products
> of true object oriented gui design. Applications inherit the ability
> to manipulate and use whatever objects exist in the system. A word
> processor is not limited to just text files, for example, or to only
> the files the programmer originally set out for it. The system allows
> the applications to grow in functionality as new object types are
> developed/assembled by other applications or the user.
All these years later, I'm still trying to wrap my head around what
the purpose of that in an OS/desktop environment/file-manager context
is. I guess that, say, you could have new file types implement their
own methods for things like printing, so the OS doesn't have to know
the details of the document structure or require a particular
application installed to be able to print it, but this seems like an
awfully limited use case to me - sure, it would be nice to have things
like audio and video codecs be universal and pluggable or things like
that, but I have a hard time seeing how it's all that revolutionary,
and I can easily see it being just as limiting as other non-OOP format
standards (after all, it's not going to magically add functionality
that the file format itself doesn't support, is it? And doesn't it
ultimately just come down to diking out a chunk of the application
code for the OS to use? What if two different programs both offer
their own handlers for the same file type?)
