3 Apr
1999
3 Apr
'99
4:42 p.m.
I've finally gotten around to reading a LISP book that I had bought months
before, and I can see why people refer to LISP as a religious experience
(I've seen that said at least twice). It's really a wonderful language. I
wonder how it is worse than BASIC or Perl. Also, although I didn't really
take the time to really understand smalltalk (Squeak is slow and
unstable), I can see the beginnings of smalltalk in LISP. Wow. This thing
really is pretty amazing. This should be taught in every computer
programming course, along with PAL-8, C, and Perl. I am now certain that
if a language is hard to learn (C++ comes to mind), there's something
wrong with it :)
--Max Eskin (max82(a)surfree.com)
3 Apr
3 Apr
5:12 p.m.
I've finally gotten around to reading a LISP book
that I had bought months
before, and I can see why people refer to LISP as a religious experience
(I've seen that said at least twice). It's really a wonderful language. I
wonder how it is worse than BASIC or Perl. Also, although I didn't really
take the time to really understand smalltalk (Squeak is slow and
unstable), I can see the beginnings of smalltalk in LISP. Wow. This thing
really is pretty amazing. This should be taught in every computer
programming course, along with PAL-8, C, and Perl. I am now certain that
if a language is hard to learn (C++ comes to mind), there's something
wrong with it :)
Just think -- LISP is one of the oldest high-level computer languages ever,
and that it's still in use all the time in a form which is very similar to
versions that were written about forty years ago! There is probably a good
reason for that.
(Other old computer languages still in use are FORTRAN and COBOL, but I don't
think the reasons for using them are so good.)
I wouldn't say LISP is exactly the same; there are too many dialects and
people have thought of too many clever changes in the syntax and the
semantics. And even the original version on the IBM 7094 has a history
that's more complex than you would think (at least, _I_ don't understand all
the changes it went through). Also, Common LISP is orders of magnitude more
complex than LISP 1.5. But in spite of those changes, LISP's essence has
stayed the same.
By the way, "Common LISP" is the answer to "how is LISP worse than BASIC
or
Perl?" :) It can be very complicated and unwieldy.
I hope you'll try Squeak again, though. Are you using UNIX? You may find
the MS-Windows and Mac versions more stable. Smalltalk's mechanism of
message passing and the "everything is an object" philosophy give it a
unique power.
To add something on-topic... I've been playing with Bob Supnik's PDP-1
simulator, which comes with a version of LISP. Has anyone looked at this?
I have some questions about the LISP code; I've also thought about extending
the character set emulated by the simulator.
-- Derek
5:27 p.m.
On Sat, 3 Apr 1999, Derek Peschel wrote:
I hope you'll try Squeak again, though. Are you
using UNIX? You may find
the MS-Windows and Mac versions more stable. Smalltalk's mechanism of
message passing and the "everything is an object" philosophy give it a
unique power.
I was using the Windows 95 version, and it was constantly swapping. I have
16 megs RAM, but I hardly think it should take that much. Is there a GNU
smalltalk? Is it possible to get a PC-comptaible version of the type of
Smalltalk used for the Alto?
It seems that in LISP, everything is an object too, BTW. What I found
really amazing is that a name can have a function, a list, and a list of
properties associated with it. And, of course, how simple it is from a
low-level point of view.
--Max Eskin (max82(a)surfree.com)
6:18 p.m.
On Sat, 3 Apr 1999, Derek Peschel wrote:
I thought you meant it was crashing. It may well use up your 16 megs;
Smalltalk tends to be memory-hungry. See if there's a command-line option
to set the amount of memory used by the virtual machine. As I understand
it, the VM can easily _increase_ the amount of memory it uses, but
_decreasing_ isn't so easy. So download a fresh copy of the image file and
then try tweaking the memory sizes.
You can actually decrease the memory used by the image. I think you have to
use the system tracer. (That's a really slick tool that goes all the way
back to the original distribution. It can analyze your image; it can act as
a "super garbage collector" and even remove objects completely; if you write
enough extra code you can even use it to change the image in arbitrary ways.
For example, you may have changed some internal detail of the VM, like the
way pointers are stored. Therefore you'll need to change all the pointers
in the image. That's the sort of thing the system tracer is good for.)
Squeak is a direct descendant of the Alto's Smalltalk. Quite a bit of the
original Xerox code seems to be in there (you can tell if you look) though
there's some new code (e.g., for color) and some of the old code is gone
(e.g., some classes which let you write simulations). The virtual machine
which runs the Smalltalk bytecodes is completely rewritten.
Apple was one of the original licensees of the Smalltalk-80 project (along
with Tektronix, HP, and DEC); they had an experimental version of Smalltalk
running on the Mac and/or Lisa. I suspect Squeak happened when they dusted
off their old work. Unfortunately, you could still call Squeak "impure"
(because of the changes). I don't know of anything more pure, or of
anything that can simulate the NON-Smalltalk things the Alto did.
I hope you'll try Squeak again, though. Are
you using UNIX? You may find
the MS-Windows and Mac versions more stable. Smalltalk's mechanism of
message passing and the "everything is an object" philosophy give it a
unique power.
I was using the Windows 95 version, and it was constantly swapping. I have
16 megs RAM, but I hardly think it should take that much. Is there a GNU
smalltalk? Is it possible to get a PC-comptaible version of the type of
Smalltalk used for the Alto? It seems that in LISP, everything is an object too,
BTW. What I found
really amazing is that a name can have a function, a list, and a list of
properties associated with it. And, of course, how simple it is from a
low-level point of view.
Well, I wouldn't say LISP has as much of an idea of "object" as Smalltalk.
However, you can add objects (like CLOS does). But the idea that _is_ there
is very widespread.
The low-level simplicity is one of the reasons for LISP's popularity, I
think. Oddly, IIRC the simple syntax is an accident. Originally, there
were two formats for LISP code:
- S-expressions (symbolic expressions, which are just lists),
- M-expressions (meta-expressions, which look a bit more like
a block-structured language).
I think M-expressions were invnented even while LISP existed only on paper.
The first LISP program could only handle S-expressions, though, and the
plans to have the computer understand M-expressions basically died out.
Actually, you might say there were three formats for LISP code -- some old
versions of LISP, including the original IBM one, would represent this:
(f x y z...) f is a function, x y z... arguments
by this:
f (x y z...)
or possibly this (I'm confused about the details):
f ((x y z...))
but only at the top-level read/eval/print loop. That syntax is useful for
simple functions but painful for complicated ones. It's inconsistent too.
It died out. As I said, there have been a number of changes like that.
I just thought you might like to know that piece of trivia. :)
-- Derek
4 Apr
4 Apr
8:56 a.m.
Upon the date 11:27 PM 4/3/99 -0500, Max Eskin said something like:
On Sat, 3 Apr 1999, Derek Peschel wrote:
Although I cannot offer input on Squeak, etc. (I don't use it), I feel you
need to increase your RAM to 32 meg or even 64. Winslop95 is really rotten
at memory and resource management -especially when running apps that take
up a lot of resources. You've realized this by now I'm sure.
Hmmm . . . Could that have been a secondary reason the word "Windows 95"
was kept as this wannabe OS's name? "95% of resources escaped out the
Window" :-) :-)
My P200 machine, when with only 32 meg, swapped itself to pieces it seemed
after a few days since a reboot even though I'd shut down all unused apps
to run one. System resources still were not released. After kicking up to
64 meg I now can go for several weeks until needing a restart to recover.
Thanks a lot BG.
Good luck, Chris
-- --
Christian Fandt, Electronic/Electrical Historian
Jamestown, NY USA cfandt(a)netsync.net
Member of Antique Wireless Association
URL: http://www.ggw.org/awa
I hope you'll try Squeak again, though. Are
you using UNIX? You may find
the MS-Windows and Mac versions more stable. Smalltalk's mechanism of
message passing and the "everything is an object" philosophy give it a
unique power.
I was using the Windows 95 version, and it was constantly swapping. I have
16 megs RAM, but I hardly think it should take that much. Is there a GNU 
3 Apr
3 Apr
5:31 p.m.
I hope you'll try Squeak again, though. Are you
using UNIX? You may find
the MS-Windows and Mac versions more stable. Smalltalk's mechanism of
message passing and the "everything is an object" philosophy give it a
unique power.
Where do you find "Squeak"? This is a Smalltalk-ish language from Disney
isn't it? I seem to recall hearing about it roughly a year ago.
Zane
| Zane H. Healy | UNIX Systems Adminstrator |
| healyzh(a)aracnet.com (primary) | Linux Enthusiast |
| healyzh(a)holonet.net (alternate) | Classic Computer Collector |
+----------------------------------+----------------------------+
| Empire of the Petal Throne and Traveller Role Playing, |
| and Zane's Computer Museum. |
| http://www.dragonfire.net/~healyzh/ |
6:21 p.m.
Where do you find "Squeak"? This is a
Smalltalk-ish language from Disney
isn't it? I seem to recall hearing about it roughly a year ago.
It's not Smalltalk-ish, it IS Smalltalk. As I said to Max, it was written
at Apple. They often abandon projects... lucky for us Disney took it up.
See
http://www.create.ucsb.edu/squeak/
Also look at the page at UIUC which you can get to from UCSB.
-- Derek
11:04 p.m.
Derek Peschel wrote:
(Other old computer languages still in use are FORTRAN and COBOL, but I don't
think the reasons for using them are so good.)
I used to think that COBOL was old hat unitl I actually had to use it
for a project during my degree. I was very impressed with its simmple
syntax and easy data handling, but I haven't come across a better
database handling language than another one which I had to use at
University - RPG, it is just a pity that OS/400 is so cryptic ;-)
Regards
Pete
5 Apr
5 Apr
7:22 a.m.
Peter Joules wrote:
Derek Peschel wrote:
> (Other old computer languages still in use are
FORTRAN and COBOL, but I don't
> think the reasons for using them are so good.)
I used to think that COBOL was old hat unitl I
actually had to use it
for a project during my degree. I was very impressed with its simmple
syntax and easy data handling, but I haven't come across a better
database handling language than another one which I had to use at
University - RPG, it is just a pity that OS/400 is so cryptic ;-)
I was going to mention RPG in my original post but I changed my mind. I
don't think it's quite as old as COBOL and FORTRAN.
Some of IBM's development environments are called "VisualAge". There is a
VisualAge Smalltalk and a VisualAge Java (written in VisualAge Smalltalk :)).
Well, there's also a VisualAge RPG. I find that quite ironic considering
the utter opacity of RPG.
As for OS/400, all you have to do is use the ELMCRPF command... Eliminate
Cryptic Features. What? You can't find it? Well, I don't have any other
suggestions then. :)
-- Derek
10:06 a.m.
Os/400 is the operating system made for the AS/400 which is newer than the System/3x
machines. COBOL and FORTRAN should be older than that. RPG/400 is fairly easy once
you get used to it. Not sure about Visual RPG/400 though, just getting into that at
work.
Derek Peschel wrote:
Peter Joules wrote:
Derek Peschel wrote:
> (Other old computer languages still in use
are FORTRAN and COBOL, but I don't
> think the reasons for using them are so good.)
I used to think that COBOL was old hat unitl I
actually had to use it
for a project during my degree. I was very impressed with its simmple
syntax and easy data handling, but I haven't come across a better
database handling language than another one which I had to use at
University - RPG, it is just a pity that OS/400 is so cryptic ;-)
I was going to mention RPG in my original post but I changed my mind. I
don't think it's quite as old as COBOL and FORTRAN.
Some of IBM's development environments are called "VisualAge". There is a
VisualAge Smalltalk and a VisualAge Java (written in VisualAge Smalltalk :)).
Well, there's also a VisualAge RPG. I find that quite ironic considering
the utter opacity of RPG.
As for OS/400, all you have to do is use the ELMCRPF command... Eliminate
Cryptic Features. What? You can't find it? Well, I don't have any other
suggestions then. :)
-- Derek 
1:24 p.m.
On Mon, 5 Apr 1999, Derek Peschel wrote:
I was going to mention RPG in my original post but I
changed my mind. I
don't think it's quite as old as COBOL and FORTRAN.
Some of IBM's development environments are called "VisualAge". There is a
VisualAge Smalltalk and a VisualAge Java (written in VisualAge Smalltalk :)).
Well, there's also a VisualAge RPG. I find that quite ironic considering
the utter opacity of RPG.
Believe it or not people still use that abomination. My first exposure to
it was in 12th grade. My counselor showed me some programs he wrote and
wanted me to learn RPG so I could do some programming for him (he used to
pull me out of class to ask me computer questions :)
Its funny because it's programmed much like the earlier versions of
ForTran, where each statement and associated arguments and data must start
in a particular column due to its origins as a punched card language.
I would hope the latest version of RPG does away with the archaic column
specificity.
Sellam Alternate e-mail: dastar(a)siconic.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Don't rub the lamp if you don't want the genie to come out.
Coming in 1999: Vintage Computer Festival 3.0
See http://www.vintage.org/vcf for details!
[Last web site update: 04/03/99]
12 Apr
12 Apr
8:46 a.m.
New subject: Columne orientated programming (was: Hallelujah!)
Its funny because it's programmed much like the
earlier versions of
ForTran, where each statement and associated arguments and data must start
in a particular column due to its origins as a punched card language.
I would hope the latest version of RPG does away with
the archaic column
specificity.
Why ?
Gruss
H.
--
Stimm gegen SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/de/
Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/en/
Votez contre le SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/fr/
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK
8:46 a.m.
> > (Other old computer languages still in use
are FORTRAN and COBOL, but I don't
> > think the reasons for using them are so good.)
> I used to think that COBOL was old hat unitl I actually had to use it
> for a project during my degree. I was very impressed with its simmple
> syntax and easy data handling, but I haven't come across a better
> database handling language than another one which I had to use at
> University - RPG, it is just a pity that OS/400 is so cryptic ;-)
I was going to mention RPG in my original post but I
changed my mind. I
don't think it's quite as old as COBOL and FORTRAN.
I'll go in with a barrel of bavarian beer, that COBOL is still in use
30 years from now (I would also go for 50 years, but chances are low that
I can claim my fortune :).
Some of IBM's development environments are called
"VisualAge". There is a
VisualAge Smalltalk and a VisualAge Java (written in VisualAge Smalltalk :)).
Well, there's also a VisualAge RPG. I find that quite ironic considering
the utter opacity of RPG.
RPG, is a nice language, and with VisualAge/RPG, there is an environment
without any question.
As for OS/400, all you have to do is use the ELMCRPF
command... Eliminate
Cryptic Features. What? You can't find it? Well, I don't have any other
suggestions then. :)
Cryptic ? come on - nice, structured and logical - and BTW, no OS
can be mastered without some time to learn the internals - some might
offer fun wile learning (I still considere VMS the most cryptic one).
Gruss
H.
--
Stimm gegen SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/de/
Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/en/
Votez contre le SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/fr/
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK
8:41 a.m.
As for OS/400,
all you have to do is use the ELMCRPF command... Eliminate
Cryptic Features. What? You can't find it? Well, I don't have any other
suggestions then. :)
Cryptic ? come on - nice, structured and logical - and BTW, no OS
can be mastered without some time to learn the internals - some might
offer fun wile learning (I still considere VMS the most cryptic one).
10:59 a.m.
> > As for OS/400, all you have to do is use the
ELMCRPF command... Eliminate
> > Cryptic Features. What? You can't find it? Well, I don't have any
other
> > suggestions then. :)
> Cryptic ? come on - nice, structured and logical - and BTW, no OS
> can be mastered without some time to learn the internals - some might
> offer fun wile learning (I still considere VMS the most cryptic one).
You definitely have a point about VMS.
I was making fun of OS/400's abbreviated command
style more than anything
else. (You know "Work with print queues" becomes "WRKPRTQ", etc.)
I know only our 'new' (some 6 years ago) BS2000 command interface
(SDF) is more OT for an OS command line - they canged simple commands
like CAT[aloge] (to modify catalog entries - like renaming or change
attributes) into Modify-Cataloge-Attributes - together with changing
from simple position and keyword parameters into some
kind of parenthes
driven madness - a simple 'CAT a,b,STATE=U' to change a
filename (a to b)
became 'MODIFY-FILE-ATTRIBUTES FILE-NAME=a,NEW-NAME=b' simple, isn't it ?
Some simple comands now need several lines to type ...
Gruss
H.
--
Stimm gegen SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/de/
Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/en/
Votez contre le SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/fr/
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK
9:40 a.m.
I was making
fun of OS/400's abbreviated command style more than anything
else. (You know "Work with print queues" becomes "WRKPRTQ", etc.)
I know only our 'new' (some 6 years ago) BS2000 command interface
(SDF) is more OT for an OS command line - they canged simple commands
like CAT[aloge] (to modify catalog entries - like renaming or change
attributes) into Modify-Cataloge-Attributes - together with changing
from simple position and keyword parameters into some kind of parenthes
driven madness - a simple 'CAT a,b,STATE=U' to change a filename (a to b)
became 'MODIFY-FILE-ATTRIBUTES FILE-NAME=a,NEW-NAME=b' simple, isn't it ?
Some simple comands now need several lines to type ... 
10:12 a.m.
It IS a stupid question, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be asked!
Sometimes the silly ones are the ones with the most interesting answers!
:)
I don't actually know the answer, but perhaps it might be fun to take
some guesses (some serious, some not so serious!)...
1) Blue is psychologically a color that evokes feelings of calmness. If
I had to guess I would think this was the real reason (or am I giving
the Redmonites too much credit?!?)
2) It looks like a Commodore 64 screen which is about how much an NT box
that has experienced a BSOD is worth at that point (actually, I'm a huge
fan of the good 'ole C64 so I say this tongue in cheek since I'd pick a
C64 over an NT box anyway!)
3) The color combination is very easy to read, so this way you can very
clearly read a bunch of crap that no human being understands anyway!
4) Couldn't be green because Green Screen Of Death doesn't flow off the
tongue as easy (the Green-Screen part I think).
5) Red, for obvious reasons, was quickly dismissed as a possibility.
Red reminds people of Hell which is where you wish you were when your
eCommerce server BSOD's on you at 7pm on a Saturday night!
6) Bill Gates wanted it to be Bill's Screen Of Death originally but
Balmer talked him out of it. Less to explain at a trial years later he
figured.
7) Green wouldn't have worked because then every time your servers
crashed you'd be remininded how much green your wasting by not just
running Linux instead!
8) Couldn't have been green because GSOD could mean God is full of shit,
which is exactly what he is when NT crashes (God in this case being Bill
Gates. That's what He says anyway!)
9) White-on-black was the first choice since it's the hardware default
and would require less coding, plus it's easy to read. But then the
marketing boys got a hold of it and they said "Yeah, right, we put
dominating white letters on a subordinate black background and we'll
start a race war". (Please, no letter over that one, it's mearly a
joke!)
10) The RGB hex code for blue is #0000FF. This means: a) exactly 00
reasons to choose NT over Linux, b) NT's mean time between failure
record (00 seconds), and c) two loud FUCK's! every time you see a BSOD.
Ok, now that I've insulted half the list, hope someone gets a laugh at
at least some of these!
Any others??
Derek Peschel wrote:
When I used OS/400 it was on a 327x terminal (wiht lousy editing keys and
not much real-time interaction). Does OS/400 still use or support those? I
would hate to type your enormous commands on a 3278.
What's BS2000? Some international standard?
-- Derek
--
--------------------------------------------------
Frank W. Zammetti
Programmer/Analyst
First Data Investor Services Group
King Of Prussia, PA
http://www.fdisgkop.com
Work Phone: (610)/312-5534
Fax: (610)/312-5910
eMail: fzammett(a)fdisgkop.com
ICQ: 20974794
AOL IM: fzammett
My Home Page: http://www.voicenet.com/~fzammett
--------------------------------------------------
I was
making fun of OS/400's abbreviated command style more than anything
else. (You know "Work with print queues" becomes "WRKPRTQ", etc.)
I know only our 'new' (some 6 years ago) BS2000 command interface
(SDF) is more OT for an OS command line - they canged simple commands
like CAT[aloge] (to modify catalog entries - like renaming or change
attributes) into Modify-Cataloge-Attributes - together with changing
from simple position and keyword parameters into some kind of parenthes
driven madness - a simple 'CAT a,b,STATE=U' to change a filename (a to b)
became 'MODIFY-FILE-ATTRIBUTES FILE-NAME=a,NEW-NAME=b' simple, isn't it ?
Some simple comands now need several lines to type ...
12:18 p.m.
New subject: Pink Screen of Death? (was: Re: Hallelujah!)
On Mon, 12 Apr 1999, Frank W. Zammetti wrote:
3) The color combination is very easy to read, so this
way you can very
clearly read a bunch of crap that no human being understands anyway!
Well, I don't know. However, MS Word/Windows and /Macintosh has a strange
option: to have large white letters on a blue background instead of black
on white. This has nothing to do with any color settings, and no other
colors can be used in a similar way. This may have classic reasons. Anyone
know?
--Max Eskin (max82(a)surfree.com)
1:22 p.m.
New subject: Pink Screen of Death? (was: Re: Hallelujah!)
Well, I don't know. However, MS Word/Windows and
/Macintosh has a strange
option: to have large white letters on a blue background instead of black
on white. This has nothing to do with any color settings, and no other
colors can be used in a similar way. This may have classic reasons. Anyone
know?
Don't know the exact reason but that was the default color
combination of the DOS version of MS Word (and every day I use
the current version, I long for the old one).
George
1:31 p.m.
New subject: Pink Screen of Death? (was: Re: Hallelujah!)
Well, I
don't know. However, MS Word/Windows and /Macintosh has a strange
option: to have large white letters on a blue background instead of black
on white. This has nothing to do with any color settings, and no other
colors can be used in a similar way. This may have classic reasons. Anyone
know?
Don't know the exact reason but that was the default color
combination of the DOS version of MS Word (and every day I use
the current version, I long for the old one). 
2:12 p.m.
New subject: White on blue (was Re: Pink Screen of Death? (was: Re: Hallelujah!)
This [white on blue] may have classic reasons. Anyone
know?
In 1984 Commodore produced as the reason for white letters on a blue
background a NASA study that found this to be the easiest combination on
the eyes, especially when you had limitied resolution.
--Chuck
12:57 p.m.
New subject: White on blue (was Re: Pink Screen of Death? (was: Re: Hall
On 12 Apr 99 at 16:12, Chuck McManis wrote:
What else would you expect from NASA corporate(BIG BLUE) shills.
ciao larry
Sorry for all the bandwidth, but I'm giddy because CXQ-net has just voted the
T3C site as the most promising collectors site on the web with "pages for all
ages" of collectors and now with an events page for your up and coming.
ciao larry
Spam ? Whot Spam ? I don't need your steenking Spam.
lwalker(a)interlog.com
Collectors List and info http://members.xoom.com/T3C
This [white on
blue] may have classic reasons. Anyone know?
In 1984 Commodore produced as the reason for white letters on a blue
background a NASA study that found this to be the easiest combination on
the eyes, especially when you had limitied resolution.
--Chuck
7:36 p.m.
New subject: Software collectors list
I have been thinking about and looking for a list like this one, except
instead of hardware collecting, it would be about collecting software. I
haven't found any existing list, so I am getting motivated to start a list
on one of the various services that will host a list for free (free free
ideally, but I don't have a problem with an ad supported list server
either). I have a fair amount of feedback that such a list would be
desirable, so other than a charter which I am still thinking on, two basic
questions need answering in the next few days so I can get going.
If anybody knows of an existing list targeted to software collectors,
please tell me before I run around trying to do it again.
Anybody have some suggestions for a list server host (either free or ad
supported, but reliable and easy are top rec's)?
13 Apr
13 Apr
4:26 a.m.
New subject: Software collectors list
Mike Ford wrote:
I have been thinking about and looking for a list like
this one, except
instead of hardware collecting, it would be about collecting software. I
haven't found any existing list, so I am getting motivated to start a list
on one of the various services that will host a list for free (free free
ideally, but I don't have a problem with an ad supported list server
either). I have a fair amount of feedback that such a list would be
desirable, so other than a charter which I am still thinking on, two basic
questions need answering in the next few days so I can get going.
If anybody knows of an existing list targeted to software collectors,
please tell me before I run around trying to do it again.
Anybody have some suggestions for a list server host (either free or ad
supported, but reliable and easy are top rec's)?
Jerome Fine replies:
I would be quite interested in this proposed software list if there
is any interest in RT-11 (I am an Addict as most of you know).
Sorry I can't help with the other questions since I am just a
PC dummy and stuck back 10 years ago with RT-11 and no
internet understanding.
Sincerely yours,
Jerome Fine
RT-11/TSX-PLUS User/Addict
10:34 a.m.
New subject: Software collectors list
I would be quite interested in this proposed software
list if there
is any interest in RT-11 (I am an Addict as most of you know).
The list will be open to software and manuals for all platforms, since many
people will be collecting for more than one brand, and most of all many
people will buy some auction lot that contains things they want, and also
items they don't want that will be of interest to others. I suspect many
basic topics will be common for everyone, like modern backup formats, sales
events, cleaning old media etc. My target is to have a list running within
the week too.
12 Apr
12 Apr
2:10 p.m.
New subject: White on blue (was Re: Pink Screen of Death? (was: Re:
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 728 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19990412/74990c71/at…
12:57 p.m.
New subject: White on blue (was Re: Pink Screen of Death? (was: Re:
On 12 Apr 99 at 16:10, Cameron Kaiser wrote:
::> This [white on blue] may have classic reasons.
Anyone know?
::
::In 1984 Commodore produced as the reason for white letters on a blue
::background a NASA study that found this to be the easiest combination on
::the eyes, especially when you had limitied resolution.
April Fools was a few weeks ago, wasn't it? :-P
--
-------------------------- personal page: http://calvin.ptloma.edu/~spectre/ --
Cameron Kaiser Database Programmer/Administrative Computing
Somewhere I have a copy of a study that proves amber is the easiest on the
eyes. Now if Tramiel had adopted that instead of green maybe HE would be king
of the world instead of Gates. I suspect however that "Big Blue" had long
before planted a subliminal message in our collective minds which negated all
this. They just forgot to update in regard to Gates.
ciao larry
lwalker(a)interlog.com
Collectors List and info http://members.xoom.com/T3C
2:22 p.m.
New subject: White on blue (was Re: Pink Screen of Death? (was: Re:
It was [4/1 was two weeks ago], but I'm not fooling. Amiga Inc was told to
make the colors of the "Command line interface" (aka CLI) white on blue by
Commoodore. When they asked why (I believe it was RJ Mical who asked) they
produced this report. I can see if one the original Amiga guys still has it
in their files but that was the stated reason.
--Chuck
At 04:10 PM 4/12/99 -0700, you wrote:
::> This [white on blue] may have classic reasons.
Anyone know?
::
::In 1984 Commodore produced as the reason for white letters on a blue
::background a NASA study that found this to be the easiest combination on
::the eyes, especially when you had limitied resolution.
April Fools was a few weeks ago, wasn't it? :-P
--
-------------------------- personal page:
http://calvin.ptloma.edu/~spectre/ --
Cameron Kaiser Database
Programmer/Administrative
Computing
Point Loma Nazarene University
Fax: +1 619 849
2581
ckaiser(a)ptloma.edu
Phone: +1 619 849
2539
-- The reader this message encounters not failing to
understand is cursed.
----
2:20 p.m.
New subject: White on blue (was Re: Pink Screen of Death? (was: Re:
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text
Size: 891 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :
http://www.classiccmp.org/pipermail/cctalk/attachments/19990412/1ecc1acb/at…
3:16 p.m.
New subject: White on blue (was Re: Pink Screen of Death? (was: Re:
Heh, Commodore thinking about user interfaces! What a
concept! :-) (Sits
down at his AmigaOS 3.0 1200, next to the C128DCR.)
Hey...Amiga wasn't totally at fault on the user interface...they
contracted it out to someone in England (Tim King?). He came up
with the strange stuff, and wrote it in BCPL (causing problems with
the kernel group, IIRC). I remember because Amiga called me in
1983 (again, IIRC) and asked me to bid on writing a user interface
so that they'd have one if Tim's fell through. I was in the process of
starting my own company, so I said "sorry, no".
(Why me? I'd interviewed with them in 1982 the same day a friend
of mine, Carl Sassenrath, interviewed with Symantec. We each
got an offer, and turned it down saying "you should talk to my friend,
instead". So, I then interviewed at Symantec, Carl interviewed at
Amiga. We both got offers, but I said "no, I'll stay at HP ... maybe
they'll really implement a technical ladder [they didn't]". Carl
accepted his. A year later I left HP.)
SS
12:31 p.m.
> > I was making fun of OS/400's abbreviated
command style more than anything
> > else. (You know "Work with print queues" becomes
"WRKPRTQ", etc.)
> I know only our 'new' (some 6 years ago)
BS2000 command interface
> (SDF) is more OT for an OS command line - they canged simple commands
> like CAT[aloge] (to modify catalog entries - like renaming or change
> attributes) into Modify-Cataloge-Attributes - together with changing
> from simple position and keyword parameters into some kind of parenthes
> driven madness - a simple 'CAT a,b,STATE=U' to change a filename (a to b)
> became 'MODIFY-FILE-ATTRIBUTES FILE-NAME=a,NEW-NAME=b' simple, isn't it
?
> Some simple comands now need several lines to
type ...
When I used OS/400 it was on a 327x terminal (wiht
lousy editing keys and
not much real-time interaction). Does OS/400 still use or support those? I
would hate to type your enormous commands on a 3278.
At least tey are still possible to use :)
What's BS2000? Some international standard?
Sounds possible if you take this cruel and horrible command format :)
No, in fact it's an OS for /370ish mainframe computers. Think about
the whole galaxy of and IBM OS (like DOS etc.) and all the add ons
and tools integrated into one OS and you get BS2000. I love it,
I whish there where an equivalent OS for mini/PC systems. Incredible
fast and reliable, easy to handle (if you know how) and almost limitless.
But still a mainframe syste, so no memory mapped graphic adaptors :)))
Gruss
H.
--
Stimm gegen SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/de/
Vote against SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/en/
Votez contre le SPAM: http://www.politik-digital.de/spam/fr/
Ich denke, also bin ich, also gut
HRK
9215
days inactive
9225
days old
30 comments
16 participants
participants (16)
-
cfandt＠netsync.net -
ckaiser＠oa.ptloma.edu -
cmcmanis＠mcmanis.com -
dastar＠ncal.verio.com -
dpeschel＠u.washington.edu -
fzammett＠fdisgkop.com -
g＠kurico.com -
Hans.Franke＠mch20.sbs.de -
healyzh＠aracnet.com -
jhfine＠idirect.com -
lwalker＠mail.interlog.com -
max82＠surfree.com -
mikeford＠netwiz.net -
pjoules＠joules.enterprise-plc.com -
rhblake＠bigfoot.com -
ss＠allegro.com