Aucbvax.5209
fa.works
utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!works
Mon Nov 16 01:54:23 1981
WorkS Digest V1 #36
>From JSol@RUTGERS Mon Nov 16 01:14:55 1981
WorkS Digest Monday, 16 Nov 1981 Volume 1 : Issue 36
Today's Topics: C Compilers Available From DECUS
WorkStations for Programmers Vs. Users
More On The "Lisa" Project
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 15 November 1981 0309-EST
From: The Moderator <JSOL AT RUTGERS>
Subject: WorkS Archives
The WorkS Archives are kept in two places. The traditional place for
digest archives is at MIT-AI in the file DUFFEY;_DATA_ WORKS. A copy
of the archives are also kept at Rutgers, however all but the most
recent issues are offline. Due to MIT-AI's recent disk problems, the
archives were not accessable from MIT-AI, so I retrieved the entire
archive from backup tapes at Rutgers.
Now that the disk problems seem to be cleared up at MIT-AI, I am
deleting the offline files from the WorkS Archive at Rutgers. If you
have need for the files on Rutgers for any reason, then please send
mail to WorkS-Request@MIT-AI and I will retrieve them from tape again.
MTFBWY,
JSol
------------------------------
Date: 15 November 1981 0216-PST (Sunday)
From: lauren at UCLA-Security (Lauren Weinstein)
Subject: C compilers
To: WORKS at AI
There is a fairly full C compiler in the DECUS library. I'm not
sure whether it is oriented towards RT-11, RSX-11, or both...
--Lauren--
P.S. It's free.
--LW--
------------------------------
Date: 15 November 1981 12:27-EST
From: Mark L. Miller <MILLER AT MIT-AI>
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #35
In response to DLW's remarks about things like the Apollo probably
losing out to slick end-user applications, I think perhaps a key point
has been overlooked. [I have seen major companies lose by providing
"non-programmable" (and thus hard to upgrade, inflexible, etc.)
systems geared to particular (usually incorrect) perceptions of
"slick" end-user applications.] Although it is probably accurate that
most end-users are not programmers and that it is the slick
applications (e.g.,VISICALC) that sell systems, it is also probably
accurate to assume that most slick applications (e.g., VISICALC) will
be written by software and OEM-systems companies, rather than hardware
manufacturers. The OEM's and software developers will choose things
like Apollos or LISP machines based on several factors: perceived
power and flexibility of the basic programming environment and
development tools, price relative to the market for the slick
application, etc. I believe that Apollos and LISPM's will flourish,
but that most sales will be via demand for particular packages (e.g.,
"What machine do I need if I want to run VISICALC" -> "What machine do
I need to run Daedalus?" etc.) Perhaps the best OA systems will be
written by separate software vendors serving as OEM's for systems such
as Apollo. Regards, Mark (Miller, DallaSoft)
------------------------------
Date: 15 Nov 1981 1417-EST
From: G.PALEVICH at MIT-EECS
Subject: Smalltalk 80 bible
So just where do I (a humble student) go to get a copy of the
Smalltalk 80 specifications book and the 380K byte system tape?
I read in Infoworld that the Apple IV is 68000 based. I seem
to remember rumours that they had at least the window portion of
Smalltalk 80 up.
The Infoworld article also talked about two other Apple
computers: a redesign of the Apple II for 64K chip, and some sort of
portable (ala Osborne I) 68000 based machine -- possibly code-named
the Mackentosh.
I believe that Tandy is working on a 68000 based machine, too.
In fact, I bet just about everyone is going 16bit because of the
greater speed/power/RAM.
------------------------------
Date: 15 November 1981 23:13-EST
From: Brian P. Lloyd <LLOYD AT MIT-AI>
Subject: Apple and 'Lisa'
While visiting Apple several months ago, I caught a glimple of a box
that bore no resemblence to any current Apple product. I snooped
around a bit and read the memos that people had tacked on the walls of
their cubicals. Although I could be wrong, I got the strong
impression that I saw their 'top secret' product (this was the new
products development group).
The device I saw looked much like a VT-100 (same form factor) and had
a mouse. They were experimenting with color graphic printers, and I
overheard some discussion of the quality of the bitmapped display. I
was unable to find out what processor is being used, but I did learn
that it is a 16 bit chip. They were most interested in my experience
with the Convergent Technologies cluster communications and OS
architecture.
If I had to guess I would say that Apple is trying to build a cross
between the Xerox 'Star' and the Convergent Technologies system. They
could actually have something as far as the hardware is concerned, but
I wasn't too sure about their software crew.
Brian
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen <
[email protected]>
of
http://communication.ucsd.edu/A-News/
This Usenet Oldnews Archive
article may be copied and distributed freely, provided:
1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles.
2. The following notice remains appended to each copy:
The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright (C) 1981, 1996
Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.
