Hi,
In case it isn't common knowledge, the classiccmp list archives at the
u.washington can be accessed using a gopher client or web browser at
gopher://lists.u.washington.edu:70/11/public/classiccmp
Presumably if someone were to submit that URL to a search engine that can
handle gopher: URLs, they would be indexed...
-- Mark
-----Original Message-----
From: David Vohs <netsurfer_x1(a)hotmail.com>
To: classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org <classiccmp(a)classiccmp.org>
Date: Monday, April 10, 2000 5:19 PM
Subject: Re: Apple Mac (was: !Re: Nuke Redmond!)
>Well, since everyone on the list has thrown in their two (or more) cents,
I
>finally feel it is my turn.
>
>Anyway, Hans has a good point going here, Apple did with the Macintosh
what
>TI tried to do when the TI-99/4A was out: try to block out third party
>developers. What can we learn from this? Very simple, never try to tell
>people they can't develop hardware & software for a machine, because that
>will only give people the extra push they need to develop stuff for a
>computer.
>
>But this is something I have noticed: We all know how many PC
manufacturers
>are abound (maybe too many), by there are how many Macintosh clone
>manufacturers? (I can't think of any off the top of my head)
My understanding is that many people (including Bill Gates!) encouraged
Apple to allow licensing of the Macintosh OS and the building of Mac clones
in the 80s and early 90s. But the management team headed by John Sculley
felt that this would amount to giving away the company, because Apple was
making most of its profits on hardware sales. If cheap Mac clones were
everywhere, who would pay Apples prices for a true Mac?
This belief was not totally unreasonable - look at what happened to IBM's
sales of PCs once clones with 100% compatible third-party BIOSes were
widely available.
Apple failed to understand that their window to exploit the Mac's
innovations was short. Once someone else produced a windowing OS that ran
on cheaper PC hardware (as Microsoft eventually did), Apple's hardware
sales would die, and the Mac OS would have lost it's chance to dominate.
And that's what happened.
There were several Power PC Mac clone manufacturers, after Apple belatedly
changed it's mind in the mid-to-late 90s. Among them StarMax, Umax, and
Motorola (I think).
>
>And the Government is jumping in Microsoft's back for being monopolistic?
>They might want to look on the other end of the spectrum. (Now I can
>understand why IBM & Motorola are pissed off at Apple for not letting
clone
>manufacturers use G3/G4's in their Maclones.) If you ask me, (and so
begins
>my conspiracy theory) I think the Microsoft Antitrust Trial was a sham,
>because why would CEO's of major software houses go against Microsoft
when,
>in most cases, their software is flying off the shelves? You do not bite
the
>hand that feeds you, unless the hand being bitten is not feeding you! If
you
>ask me, I think only one man had something to gain from this, his name is
>Steve Jobs.
Aren't Oracle, Corel, Sun and Netscape major software houses? Larry
Ellison, Michael Cowpland, Scott McNeely, and Marc Andreesen have been
vocal opponents of Microsofts at one time or another.
And Steve Jobs can't afford to come out against Microsoft, because the
viability of the iMac depends to some extent on the availability of
Microsoft Office for that platform.
Apple doesn't effectively control segments of the marketplace the way
Microsoft does. There's nothing monopolistic about restricting access to
processors or components - lots of products are proprietary to one company
and not released for sale to other companies. It's just a bad idea,
something that Apple seems determined never to learn.
Regards,
Mark.
>____________________________________________________________
>David Vohs, Digital Archaeologist & Computer Historian.
>
>Computer Collection:
>
>"Triumph": Commodore 64C, 1802, 1541, FSD-1, GeoRAM 512, Okimate 20.
>"Leela": Macintosh 128 (Plus upgrade), Nova SCSI HDD, Imagewriter II.
>"Delorean": TI-99/4A.
>"Monolith": Apple Macintosh Portable.
>"Spectrum": Tandy Color Computer 3.
>"Boombox": Sharp PC-7000.
>____________________________________________________________
>______________________________________________________
>Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
-----Original Message-----
From: Geoff Roberts <geoffrob(a)stmarks.pp.catholic.edu.au>
>There is certainly a fairly wide variation between supposedly identical
>aircraft.
Training birds tend to be more out of rig. Use and abuse.
Mine was never a primary trainer and has better habits.
>Very. One of the guys I spoke too was literally chalk white when he got
>out of the aircraft.
>After years of flying a docile little Cherokee 140 he'd never
>experienced either a stall related
>snap or seen the effect of aileron on a dropped wing in a Cessna.
My first experience with a reall snap was a C152, it was flipped at
55hrs TT. It was a really nice bird but even clean approach stalls
it would violently snap to the right every time. There more about
that one but I prefer to not talk about it. Suffice to say it never got
to 150hrs. Most 152s do not fly like that.
>About sums it up. I did a Cherokee endorsement when I moved to Broken
>Hill in the 70's, and all
>they had was Cherokees, I used to fly a Cherokee Arrow
>(PA28-180-Retractable) home on some weekends, it was a nice ride. But
>the short field performance sucked and you can't taxi them through
>gates up to a house. (Both very important in a bush aircraft in this
>country.)
it was like landing a brick.
>I did an endorsement on a Victa Airtourer (looks a bit like a 2 seat
>AA5) locally (then - we sold the factory to New Zealand, then the Air
I've seen one.
>engine. Unusual control setup, instead of dual's it had a single stick
>with a spade grip in the middle of the cockpit and a central throttle.
>Easy once you get used to it. Was a lot of fun to fly, I first learnt
>how to spin in that, since spins are classed as an aerobatic manouevre
>in this country - and a stock C150 isn't cleared for them - they teach
>you how to recover from an INCIPIENT spin instead. Not sure I'm
>comfortable with that, spins are very disconcerting the first couple of
>times you encounter them, it should be a requirement.
>I have more hours in C150's than anything else, I liked them a lot.
I feel spins are important training. That and basic acro so there are no
unusual attitudes after that. Of my hours, 600 or so are in '528 my C150
and two others I trained in. It a bird I know very well right to the
screws.
I've flown it for 21 years and done a lot of the lighter maintenance even
part of the ovehaul.
>(First plane, first car, first computer, first love - they all seem to
>be special)
ah, yes.
>One day when I am rich and famous (yeah, right) I'm going to buy me one.
>I'd like the one I
>learnt in if I can, last time I looked in a register VH-KQY was still
>doing mustering on a station in Western Australia. Been there since 85.
>At least it's still flying.....
That or one of those odd aussi ag birds.
Allison
Re:
> I stopped in to the Hillsboro Wacky Willies about an hour ago. They had a
Where's Hillsboro? (city, state?)
> HP 3000/925LX in a rack with I believe a 9-Track tape drive, a pallet of
> terminals with I believe a small rack, and several boxes of MPE manuals.
An HP 3000/925LX is a PA-RISC system (probably 1.0 architecture),
with a clock of about 10 MHz. It's a CIO-based I/O architecture,
so the PuffinGroup Linux port will *not* run on it, nor will MPE/iX 6.5 (the
last release that will run on it is MPE/iX 6.0). It's one of the three or
four slowest PA-RISC systems ever built.
Stan
Stan Sieler sieler(a)allegro.com
www.allegro.com/sieler/wanted/index.htmlwww.allegro.com/sieler
On Mon, 10 Apr 2000 Bill Pechter wrote:
> > Uh, Duh. Ok, I wondered if it was an IR led but now I know it is and that
> > it is working because I can get the mouse to move a teeny bit by running
> > it over dense text.
> >
> > I think I have to make a mousepad. Any ideas on the distance between
> > lines etc? --
>
> Is this a Sun4 mouse or Sun3.
I recently bought three padless type 4 Sun mice, with the aim of hacking one
to work on my Amiga, and also as a PC bus mouse.
Does type 4 mean the type that came with Sun4 workstations? How do Sun3 and
Sun4 mouse pads differ? Are replacements still available? Are Mouse Systems
still alive?
-- Mark
>being produced by M$ since Win'9x came along. Moreover, the level of
>documentation available for M$ operating systems is, quite simply, a JOKE!
Actually the documentation is good but also there is tons of it worse than
the
vax grey wall if you try to get it all in one place. Its also a hell of a
task to find
things you need among all of that.
>If, for example, IBM hadn't given in so easily with OS/2 we'd have had a
>much leaner, faster, RELIABLE OS running on our desktop systems years ago -
>not necessarily OS/2, but then it wouldn't be the crap we're stuck with now
>either.
I wonder... Linux is getting bigger by the day and the desktops for it do
add
weight.
Allison
>> I have to agree with Pete on this one. I am an American and his
>> definitions are correct. Slew also used as a term of flight orientation
>> in Aircraft is all I can add.
>
>Interesting! Will you provide a sample for illustration?
I'd be interested. I know pitch, roll and yaw. Though the slew rate for
C150 ailerons is a slow 6 degrees/sec. ;)
Allison
If David Williams is still subscribed, please drop me a line
privately.
TIA for the egregious theft of bandwidth.... it *is* on-topic
related, however.... :)
Cheers
John
From: Richard Erlacher <edick(a)idcomm.com>
>I'd be interested in knowing what support there is for GPIB on the ISA bus
>in a PC. I've got a National Instruments GPIB interface card, yet have
>never seen fit to lay out the dough for their GUI-based software. Is there
>anything out there other than LabView? I have some equipment that might
>like the GPIB, but have not had need to use it since Windows became the
>de-facto standard. Labview doesn't have drivers for the 'scope and logic
>analyzer that I'd be wanting to use.
I must have at least three or four of them in use. We connect them to
Keithley 706A scanners and Keithley 2000DMMs to measure production
units under test. Others are used for lab use and various test setups.
Nothing exciting or gui, just down in the trenches test and data logging.
Text mode output and write logging to floppy. It's not a process that can be
done fast so theres no rush.
We don't however use labview. the usual rig is a dosbox (ISA 286/386/486)
running homegrown QuickBasic4.5 code and the supplied dos/qb45 driver. They
are pretty easy to talk to. I've used the dos drivers under w95 for testing
and it's a workable arrangement. One thing I'm trying under W95 is the
Pascal drivers with Delphi as the GUI, this has potential as the database is
handy for post logging analysis.
Allison
