Text File

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 <jgoerzen@complete.org> 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.