| Old word processors [message #365199] |
Fri, 16 March 2018 16:27  |
Andreas Kohlbach
Messages: 1456
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I was writing a blog article about early word processors and spreadsheets
< https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/2018/03/history-of-wo rdprocessors-and-spread.html>
but only covered early 8-Bit micros. Assuming Electric Pencil was the
first while WordStar or SuperCalc (spreadsheet) only really became famous
in the early days of the late 70s to early 80s.
I know that in offices before that era type writers were used, even if an
IBM Selectric could ease the work. But they were hardware. They hadn't a
display (monitor) to edit text and only when done print it out.
Still I wonder if big machines like some IBM 360/370 did not have word
processors... By word processor I do not mean any text editor. A word
processor should at least be able to wrap a word into the next line if it
didn't fit into the current line. And had some markup for defining a bold
or italic character and sub- and superscript.
Apparently the IBM MT/ST (Magnetic Tape/Selectric Typewriter) from 1964
would match that description which was used only with an IBM
Selectric. But there should had been applications which would not depend
on an external type writer rather than using a dedicated printer, no?
--
Andreas
My random toughts and comments
https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365201 is a reply to message #365199] |
Fri, 16 March 2018 17:30  |
scott
Messages: 4237
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> writes:
> I was writing a blog article about early word processors and spreadsheets
> < https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/2018/03/history-of-wo rdprocessors-and-spread.html>
> but only covered early 8-Bit micros. Assuming Electric Pencil was the
> first while WordStar or SuperCalc (spreadsheet) only really became famous
> in the early days of the late 70s to early 80s.
>
> I know that in offices before that era type writers were used, even if an
> IBM Selectric could ease the work. But they were hardware. They hadn't a
> display (monitor) to edit text and only when done print it out.
>
> Still I wonder if big machines like some IBM 360/370 did not have word
> processors... By word processor I do not mean any text editor. A word
> processor should at least be able to wrap a word into the next line if it
> didn't fit into the current line. And had some markup for defining a bold
> or italic character and sub- and superscript.
UW (University of Waterloo) script.
Digital RUNOFF
Burroughs ADS (Automatic Documentation System).
troff
all used markup sequences
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365202 is a reply to message #365201] |
Fri, 16 March 2018 17:37 |
Jorgen Grahn
Messages: 606
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Fri, 2018-03-16, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> writes:
>> I was writing a blog article about early word processors and spreadsheets
>> < https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/2018/03/history-of-wo rdprocessors-and-spread.html>
>> but only covered early 8-Bit micros. Assuming Electric Pencil was the
>> first while WordStar or SuperCalc (spreadsheet) only really became famous
>> in the early days of the late 70s to early 80s.
>>
>> I know that in offices before that era type writers were used, even if an
>> IBM Selectric could ease the work. But they were hardware. They hadn't a
>> display (monitor) to edit text and only when done print it out.
>>
>> Still I wonder if big machines like some IBM 360/370 did not have word
>> processors... By word processor I do not mean any text editor. A word
>> processor should at least be able to wrap a word into the next line if it
>> didn't fit into the current line. And had some markup for defining a bold
>> or italic character and sub- and superscript.
>
> UW (University of Waterloo) script.
> Digital RUNOFF
> Burroughs ADS (Automatic Documentation System).
> troff
>
> all used markup sequences
And that non-WYSIWYG way of processing words still has a strong
following. HTML, Markdown, ...
/Jorgen
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365206 is a reply to message #365201] |
Fri, 16 March 2018 19:07 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 3/16/2018 4:30 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> writes:
>> I was writing a blog article about early word processors and spreadsheets
>> < https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/2018/03/history-of-wo rdprocessors-and-spread.html>
>> but only covered early 8-Bit micros. Assuming Electric Pencil was the
>> first while WordStar or SuperCalc (spreadsheet) only really became famous
>> in the early days of the late 70s to early 80s.
>>
>> I know that in offices before that era type writers were used, even if an
>> IBM Selectric could ease the work. But they were hardware. They hadn't a
>> display (monitor) to edit text and only when done print it out.
>>
>> Still I wonder if big machines like some IBM 360/370 did not have word
>> processors... By word processor I do not mean any text editor. A word
>> processor should at least be able to wrap a word into the next line if it
>> didn't fit into the current line. And had some markup for defining a bold
>> or italic character and sub- and superscript.
>
> UW (University of Waterloo) script.
> Digital RUNOFF
> Burroughs ADS (Automatic Documentation System).
> troff
>
> all used markup sequences
>
These things like RUNOFF are "text formaters", not word processors. And
IBM selectrics *are* typewriters.
--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365208 is a reply to message #365199] |
Fri, 16 March 2018 19:38 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
> I was writing a blog article about early word processors and spreadsheets
> < https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/2018/03/history-of-wo rdprocessors-and-spread.html>
> but only covered early 8-Bit micros. Assuming Electric Pencil was the
> first while WordStar or SuperCalc (spreadsheet) only really became famous
> in the early days of the late 70s to early 80s.
>
> I know that in offices before that era type writers were used, even if an
> IBM Selectric could ease the work. But they were hardware. They hadn't a
> display (monitor) to edit text and only when done print it out.
>
> Still I wonder if big machines like some IBM 360/370 did not have word
> processors... By word processor I do not mean any text editor. A word
> processor should at least be able to wrap a word into the next line if it
> didn't fit into the current line. And had some markup for defining a bold
> or italic character and sub- and superscript.
IME SCRIPT filled that roll. My first acquaintance with SCRIPT was seeing
someone generate documentation on a 2741. Markup was used even earlier - I
have an early PL/I book that was generated on a line printer that included
roman and Italic fonts.
>
> Apparently the IBM MT/ST (Magnetic Tape/Selectric Typewriter) from 1964
> would match that description which was used only with an IBM
> Selectric. But there should had been applications which would not depend
> on an external type writer rather than using a dedicated printer, no?
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365209 is a reply to message #365206] |
Fri, 16 March 2018 19:38 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Charles Richmond <numerist@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
> On 3/16/2018 4:30 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> writes:
>>> I was writing a blog article about early word processors and spreadsheets
>>> < https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/2018/03/history-of-wo rdprocessors-and-spread.html>
>>> but only covered early 8-Bit micros. Assuming Electric Pencil was the
>>> first while WordStar or SuperCalc (spreadsheet) only really became famous
>>> in the early days of the late 70s to early 80s.
>>>
>>> I know that in offices before that era type writers were used, even if an
>>> IBM Selectric could ease the work. But they were hardware. They hadn't a
>>> display (monitor) to edit text and only when done print it out.
>>>
>>> Still I wonder if big machines like some IBM 360/370 did not have word
>>> processors... By word processor I do not mean any text editor. A word
>>> processor should at least be able to wrap a word into the next line if it
>>> didn't fit into the current line. And had some markup for defining a bold
>>> or italic character and sub- and superscript.
>>
>> UW (University of Waterloo) script.
>> Digital RUNOFF
>> Burroughs ADS (Automatic Documentation System).
>> troff
>>
>> all used markup sequences
>>
>
> These things like RUNOFF are "text formaters", not word processors. And
> IBM selectrics *are* typewriters.
>
What's your distinction? I seem to recall that Wordstar wasn't WISIWIG. The
only difference between Wordstar and something like Script is what you use
for markup: control characters vs. dot-commands.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365216 is a reply to message #365199] |
Fri, 16 March 2018 20:35 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Grant Taylor
On 03/16/2018 02:27 PM, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
> I know that in offices before that era type writers were used, even
> if an IBM Selectric could ease the work. But they were hardware. They
> hadn't a display (monitor) to edit text and only when done print it out.
I distinctly remember typewriters in the '90s that had a small (single
line?) display on them for management and could record and edit
documents for subsequent re-typing.
> Still I wonder if big machines like some IBM 360/370 did not have word
> processors...
I'm guessing that "Professional Office", a.k.a. "PROFS", or subsequent
versions, "Office Vision", a.k.a. "OV", very likely qualify.
> By word processor I do not mean any text editor. A word processor
> should at least be able to wrap a word into the next line if it didn't
> fit into the current line. And had some markup for defining a bold or
> italic character and sub- and superscript.
I don't know how advanced they were, but they are very likely on your
scale. They might (I don't know) not have been able to manage bold /
italic / other fonts. But that was very likely a limitation of the
printing technology (used in conjunction with the systems) of the time
(as opposed to what was available).
> Apparently the IBM MT/ST (Magnetic Tape/Selectric Typewriter) from
> 1964 would match that description which was used only with an IBM
> Selectric. But there should had been applications which would not depend
> on an external type writer rather than using a dedicated printer, no?
I thought the MT/ST as a PoC type project (that did make it to market?)
that took IBM's typewriter, Selectric, and allowed it to save and
re-type documents. I think it was an early version of the typewriters
from the '90s I was referencing above.
I would be shocked if IBM did something with a typewriter other than the
Selectric. I would also be surprised if anyone else bothered to, or
even could, re-use the MT/ST technology.
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365217 is a reply to message #365199] |
Fri, 16 March 2018 20:56 |
Anne & Lynn Wheel
Messages: 3156
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> writes:
> I was writing a blog article about early word processors and spreadsheets
> < https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/2018/03/history-of-wo rdprocessors-and-spread.html>
> but only covered early 8-Bit micros. Assuming Electric Pencil was the
> first while WordStar or SuperCalc (spreadsheet) only really became famous
> in the early days of the late 70s to early 80s.
>
> I know that in offices before that era type writers were used, even if an
> IBM Selectric could ease the work. But they were hardware. They hadn't a
> display (monitor) to edit text and only when done print it out.
>
> Still I wonder if big machines like some IBM 360/370 did not have word
> processors... By word processor I do not mean any text editor. A word
> processor should at least be able to wrap a word into the next line if it
> didn't fit into the current line. And had some markup for defining a bold
> or italic character and sub- and superscript.
>
> Apparently the IBM MT/ST (Magnetic Tape/Selectric Typewriter) from 1964
> would match that description which was used only with an IBM
> Selectric. But there should had been applications which would not depend
> on an external type writer rather than using a dedicated printer, no?
some of the CTSS
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compatible_Time-Sharing_System
went to the 5th flr, 545 tech sq, to do MULTICS
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multics
and others went to the science center on the 4th floor and did virtual
machines, online computing, internal network, computer performance,
etc. As might be expected there was a little competition between the 4th
& 5th flrs. One of my hobbies was developing & supporting enhanced
operating systems for internal datacenters. It wasn't fair to compare
the total number of VM customers to MULTICS or even the number of VM
internal datacenters to MULTICS .... however I could compare the number
of my "CSC/VM" internal datacenters ... which was more than the total
number of all MULTICS installations (over its lifetime).
they initially did virtual machine CP/40 (& CMS) on 360/40 with hardware
modifications supporting virtual memory
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/cp40seas1982.txt
CP/40 morphed into CP/67
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP/CMS
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_CP/CMS
when 360/67 became available that came standard with virtual memory.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_System/360-67
CMS had standard conversational editor. Also CTSS RUNOFF
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TYPSET_and_RUNOFF
CTSS RUNOFF manual
http://web.mit.edu/Saltzer/www/publications/CC-244.html
was re-implemented on CMS as "script" & looked very much
like CTSS RUNOFF
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCRIPT_(markup)
At the univ. I added TTY/ASCII terminal support to CP/67 (existing
2741&1052 terminal support). Then I hacked os/360 HASP ... and added
CRJE-like terminal support to HASP and editor that re-implemented the
CMS editor systax from scratch.
In 1969 GML was invented at the science center ("G", "M", "L" chosen for
the 1st letter from the inventors last name) and GML tag processing
support added to CMS script. After a decade GML evolves into ISO
international standard SGML.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Generalized_Markup_La nguage
past posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#sgml
After another decade SGML morphs into HTML at CERN.
http://infomesh.net/html/history/early/
Waterloo script original derived from CMS script
http://csg.uwaterloo.ca/sdtp/watscr.html
Univ of Michigan implemented MTS for their 360/67 and wrote lots
of their own online apps (like editors)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_Terminal_System
Stanford implemented Orvyl for their 360/67
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORVYL_and_WYLBUR
and the editor WYLBUR was later ported to VS2 and is still in some use.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ORVYL_and_WYLBUR#SuperWylbur%E 2%84%A2
trivia: One of the guys on the 5th flr & MULTICS ... leaves for one of
the CP67/CMS virtual machine commercial online service spinoffs from
the science center (along with some of the CP67 people out at MIT
Lincoln Labs) ... which fairly quickly moves up the value stream
to specializing in offering online services and information to
the financial industry. In the late 70s, he teams up with Bricklin
to do Visicalc
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VisiCalc
IBM marketing CP/CMS, VM370/CMS, z/VM history
https://www-01.ibm.com/events/wwe/grp/grp019.nsf/vLookupPDFs /7%20-%20VM-45-JahreHistory-EA-J-Elliott%20%5BKompatibilit%C 3%A4tsmodus%5D/$file/7%20-%20VM-45-JahreHistory-EA-J-Elliott %20%5BKompatibilit%C3%A4tsmodus%5D.pdf
science center, 545tech sq posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#545tech
other trivia: 1st web server in the US was at CERN's sister
site, SLAC on their VM370 system
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/history/earlyweb/history.shtml
http://www.slac.stanford.edu/history/earlyweb/firstpages.sht ml
even more trivia: one of the IBM SEs (system engineers) in the IBM LA
branch office redid CMS script clone in the late 70s on trs80 and sold
it on trs80 and other machines (wrote "NewScript" and "Allwrite!")
NewScript version 7, 1982 at wayback machine
https://archive.org/details/NewScript_v7.0_1982_Tesler_Softw are_Corporation
--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365228 is a reply to message #365209] |
Fri, 16 March 2018 22:36 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 3/16/2018 6:38 PM, Peter Flass wrote:
> Charles Richmond <numerist@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>> On 3/16/2018 4:30 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>> Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> writes:
>>>> I was writing a blog article about early word processors and spreadsheets
>>>> < https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/2018/03/history-of-wo rdprocessors-and-spread.html>
>>>> but only covered early 8-Bit micros. Assuming Electric Pencil was the
>>>> first while WordStar or SuperCalc (spreadsheet) only really became famous
>>>> in the early days of the late 70s to early 80s.
>>>>
>>>> I know that in offices before that era type writers were used, even if an
>>>> IBM Selectric could ease the work. But they were hardware. They hadn't a
>>>> display (monitor) to edit text and only when done print it out.
>>>>
>>>> Still I wonder if big machines like some IBM 360/370 did not have word
>>>> processors... By word processor I do not mean any text editor. A word
>>>> processor should at least be able to wrap a word into the next line if it
>>>> didn't fit into the current line. And had some markup for defining a bold
>>>> or italic character and sub- and superscript.
>>>
>>> UW (University of Waterloo) script.
>>> Digital RUNOFF
>>> Burroughs ADS (Automatic Documentation System).
>>> troff
>>>
>>> all used markup sequences
>>>
>>
>> These things like RUNOFF are "text formaters", not word processors. And
>> IBM selectrics *are* typewriters.
>>
>
> What's your distinction? I seem to recall that Wordstar wasn't WISIWIG. The
> only difference between Wordstar and something like Script is what you use
> for markup: control characters vs. dot-commands.
>
My distinction is: word processors allow you to edit the actual text and
make changes to the file. The word processor handles word wrap and
paragraphs... and often more. The text formatters, the source file
contains formatting codes and the text formatter follows those codes
later and produces the finished document.
With text formatters, the source document may have a single word on each
line or any sort of rag-tag arrangement. The final result can still
look good.
Think of the word processors like an interpreter, and the text formatter
like a compiler.
But although the IBM selectrics allowed type-ahead, I believe it all was
done electro-mechanically and *not* with memory chips. And the IBM
selectric *is* a typewriter.
--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365229 is a reply to message #365216] |
Fri, 16 March 2018 22:39 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 3/16/2018 7:35 PM, Grant Taylor wrote:
>
> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...]
>
> I would be shocked if IBM did something with a typewriter other than the
> Selectric. I would also be surprised if anyone else bothered to, or
> even could, re-use the MT/ST technology.
>
IBM had another typewriter *without* the ball called an IBM Quietwriter.
--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365230 is a reply to message #365229] |
Fri, 16 March 2018 23:33 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Grant Taylor
On 03/16/2018 08:39 PM, Charles Richmond wrote:
> IBM had another typewriter *without* the ball called an IBM Quietwriter.
*Blink*
Okay.
Thank you for the information.
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365231 is a reply to message #365199] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 00:12 |
|
|
Originally posted by: roger.ivie
On Friday, March 16, 2018 at 1:27:45 PM UTC-7, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
> I know that in offices before that era type writers were used, even if an
> IBM Selectric could ease the work. But they were hardware. They hadn't a
> display (monitor) to edit text and only when done print it out.
>
> Still I wonder if big machines like some IBM 360/370 did not have word
> processors...
Don't know about big iron, but the vocational center across from the high
school I attended had an IBM Office System/6 that was a very nice machine,
when it was working (sadly, it seemed to require a lot of maintenance).
It had a CRT display, 8" floppies, and the nicest keyboard I've ever
used; it felt and sounded just like typing on a Selectric.
They had only the one OS/6 and it didn't get used a lot. They also had
a room full of Commodore PETs with nice keyboards and a word processor
in ROM, which is what the students mostly used.
--
roger ivie
roger.ivie@gmail.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365236 is a reply to message #365231] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 01:20 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2018-03-17, roger.ivie@gmail.com <roger.ivie@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, March 16, 2018 at 1:27:45 PM UTC-7, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>
>> I know that in offices before that era type writers were used, even if an
>> IBM Selectric could ease the work. But they were hardware. They hadn't a
>> display (monitor) to edit text and only when done print it out.
>>
>> Still I wonder if big machines like some IBM 360/370 did not have word
>> processors...
>
> Don't know about big iron, but the vocational center across from the high
> school I attended had an IBM Office System/6 that was a very nice machine,
> when it was working (sadly, it seemed to require a lot of maintenance).
>
> It had a CRT display, 8" floppies, and the nicest keyboard I've ever
> used; it felt and sounded just like typing on a Selectric.
>
> They had only the one OS/6 and it didn't get used a lot. They also had
> a room full of Commodore PETs with nice keyboards and a word processor
> in ROM, which is what the students mostly used.
That just about completes the list of OS/x operating systems and/or hardware.
Here are the ones I know of:
OS/2 (IBM PC)
OS/3 (Univac 90/30, System 80)
OS/4 (Univac 9400)
OS/6 (see above)
OS/7 (Univac 9700, stillborn)
OS/8 (PDP-8)
OS-9 (Motorola 6809, TRS-80 Color Computer, etc.)
Note that the slash is replaced by a hyphen in OS-9.
"I'm electric, I'm eclectic, got an IBM Selectric..."
-- National Lampoon
--
/~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365241 is a reply to message #365236] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 07:23 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Bob Eager
On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 05:20:00 +0000, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2018-03-17, roger.ivie@gmail.com <roger.ivie@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Friday, March 16, 2018 at 1:27:45 PM UTC-7, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>>
>>> I know that in offices before that era type writers were used, even if
>>> an IBM Selectric could ease the work. But they were hardware. They
>>> hadn't a display (monitor) to edit text and only when done print it
>>> out.
>>>
>>> Still I wonder if big machines like some IBM 360/370 did not have word
>>> processors...
>>
>> Don't know about big iron, but the vocational center across from the
>> high school I attended had an IBM Office System/6 that was a very nice
>> machine,
>> when it was working (sadly, it seemed to require a lot of maintenance).
>>
>> It had a CRT display, 8" floppies, and the nicest keyboard I've ever
>> used; it felt and sounded just like typing on a Selectric.
>>
>> They had only the one OS/6 and it didn't get used a lot. They also had
>> a room full of Commodore PETs with nice keyboards and a word processor
>> in ROM, which is what the students mostly used.
>
> That just about completes the list of OS/x operating systems and/or
> hardware.
>
> Here are the ones I know of:
>
> OS/2 (IBM PC)
> OS/3 (Univac 90/30, System 80)
> OS/4 (Univac 9400)
> OS/6 (see above)
> OS/7 (Univac 9700, stillborn)
> OS/8 (PDP-8)
> OS-9 (Motorola 6809, TRS-80 Color Computer, etc.)
>
> Note that the slash is replaced by a hyphen in OS-9.
Also Strachey's OS6 (no slash or hyphen), later renamed to OSpub,
although the papers on it call it OS6:
http://www.cs.ox.ac.uk/publications/publication3726-abstract .html
http://www.cs.ox.ac.uk/publications/publication5955-abstract .html
--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365242 is a reply to message #365199] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 00:56 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Carlos E.R.
On 2018-03-16 21:27, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
> I was writing a blog article about early word processors and spreadsheets
> < https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/2018/03/history-of-wo rdprocessors-and-spread.html>
> but only covered early 8-Bit micros. Assuming Electric Pencil was the
> first while WordStar or SuperCalc (spreadsheet) only really became famous
> in the early days of the late 70s to early 80s.
>
> I know that in offices before that era type writers were used, even if an
> IBM Selectric could ease the work. But they were hardware. They hadn't a
> display (monitor) to edit text and only when done print it out.
>
> Still I wonder if big machines like some IBM 360/370 did not have word
> processors... By word processor I do not mean any text editor. A word
> processor should at least be able to wrap a word into the next line if it
> didn't fit into the current line. And had some markup for defining a bold
> or italic character and sub- and superscript.
And also know when to flow onto another page.
Which meant that soon they had to do page numbering, then customize the
numbering, then (automatic) header/footer.
A word processor also had some type of font handling: Bold/underline and
if the printer allowed, italics. Then letter width/height. With any of
those, the word processor had to calculate the correct line size and
page size so as to not overflow the page limits.
WordStar was the one I knew that could handle all of that. I saw it
first on a CP/M machine, but I didn't use it enough to find out its
capabilities. Nor did I see the first versions.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365243 is a reply to message #365236] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 09:52 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> wrote:
> On 2018-03-17, roger.ivie@gmail.com <roger.ivie@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Friday, March 16, 2018 at 1:27:45 PM UTC-7, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>>
>>> I know that in offices before that era type writers were used, even if an
>>> IBM Selectric could ease the work. But they were hardware. They hadn't a
>>> display (monitor) to edit text and only when done print it out.
>>>
>>> Still I wonder if big machines like some IBM 360/370 did not have word
>>> processors...
>>
>> Don't know about big iron, but the vocational center across from the high
>> school I attended had an IBM Office System/6 that was a very nice machine,
>> when it was working (sadly, it seemed to require a lot of maintenance).
>>
>> It had a CRT display, 8" floppies, and the nicest keyboard I've ever
>> used; it felt and sounded just like typing on a Selectric.
>>
>> They had only the one OS/6 and it didn't get used a lot. They also had
>> a room full of Commodore PETs with nice keyboards and a word processor
>> in ROM, which is what the students mostly used.
>
> That just about completes the list of OS/x operating systems and/or hardware.
>
> Here are the ones I know of:
>
> OS/2 (IBM PC)
> OS/3 (Univac 90/30, System 80)
> OS/4 (Univac 9400)
> OS/6 (see above)
> OS/7 (Univac 9700, stillborn)
> OS/8 (PDP-8)
> OS-9 (Motorola 6809, TRS-80 Color Computer, etc.)
>
> Note that the slash is replaced by a hyphen in OS-9.
>
> "I'm electric, I'm eclectic, got an IBM Selectric..."
> -- National Lampoon
>
What's the DEC system: OS/8, OS-8, or OS8?
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365244 is a reply to message #365199] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 09:52 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> On 2018-03-16, Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
>> I was writing a blog article about early word processors and spreadsheets
>> < https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/2018/03/history-of-wo rdprocessors-and-spread.html>
>> but only covered early 8-Bit micros. Assuming Electric Pencil was the
>> first while WordStar or SuperCalc (spreadsheet) only really became famous
>> in the early days of the late 70s to early 80s.
>>
>> I know that in offices before that era type writers were used, even if an
>> IBM Selectric could ease the work. But they were hardware. They hadn't a
>> display (monitor) to edit text and only when done print it out.
>
> You might like some of these;
>
> http://www.digibarn.com/collections/systems/xerox860/index.h tml
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bravo_(software)
> (Look at the name of the second co-developer and ask yourself "Who wrote
> MS Word?")
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Star
>
> http://www.digibarn.com/collections/systems/xerox-8010/
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVw86emu-K0
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xerox_Daybreak
>
> And once you've marvelled at what was being done by Xerox nearly 50 years
> ago, ask yourself where it all went wrong?
I think the Digibarn article says it, something like " few people know
about the Xerox 860." They had stuff that was ahead of it's time, but
marketed it poorly.
> (Xerox was last month subsumed
> by its Japanese joint venture, Fuji Xerox). And yes, I worked for them for
> some years, using (and in some cases programming) all the above systems. I
> wish them well, since they still have a pension of mine!
>
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365245 is a reply to message #365206] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 11:18 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 18:07:52 -0500
Charles Richmond <numerist@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
> On 3/16/2018 4:30 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> UW (University of Waterloo) script.
>> Digital RUNOFF
>> Burroughs ADS (Automatic Documentation System).
>> troff
>>
>> all used markup sequences
>>
>
> These things like RUNOFF are "text formaters", not word processors. And
> IBM selectrics *are* typewriters.
True enough, but the first word processors I used (Electric Pencil,
WordStar) essentially integrated a text editor and a formatter to some
extent.
Personally I have always preferred using a separate text editor
and formatter with some kind of markup over using a wsinqwyg word
processor, they fight back far less painfully, scale way better and can
easily be used with version control systems, database extracts ...
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365246 is a reply to message #365199] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 12:41 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 09:41:24 -0500, Dave Garland
<dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
> On 3/16/2018 3:27 PM, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>> I was writing a blog article about early word processors and spreadsheets
>> < https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/2018/03/history-of-wo rdprocessors-and-spread.html>
>> but only covered early 8-Bit micros. Assuming Electric Pencil was the
>> first while WordStar or SuperCalc (spreadsheet) only really became famous
>> in the early days of the late 70s to early 80s.
>
> The IBM MT/ST (Mag Tape) was introduced in 1964. Electric Pencil may
> have been one of the first that used a CRT, but it didn't appear until
> 1976. By then, the IBM had been through several generations (Mag Card,
> Mag Card II) and similar machines were being manufactured by Wang,
> CPT, Lanier, and probably others.
>
>> I know that in offices before that era type writers were used, even if an
>> IBM Selectric could ease the work. But they were hardware. They hadn't a
>> display (monitor) to edit text and only when done print it out.
>>
>> Still I wonder if big machines like some IBM 360/370 did not have word
>> processors... By word processor I do not mean any text editor. A word
>> processor should at least be able to wrap a word into the next line if it
>> didn't fit into the current line. And had some markup for defining a bold
>> or italic character and sub- and superscript.
>
> That really depended on hardware. A formed-character printer (ball or
> daisywheel) couldn't change font without the ball/wheel being manually
> changed by the operator. You could, of course, program a halt to
> permit for that, but it was a PITA and really balked workflow. Some
> type balls had a superscript 2 and 3 , but anything else had to be
> done by manually rolling the platen, Dot matrix printers weren't used
> for WP in business, because the print quality was too poor (the
> standard was pretty much, it ought to look like it was done on a
> Selectric with a film ribbon).
>
>> Apparently the IBM MT/ST (Magnetic Tape/Selectric Typewriter) from 1964
>> would match that description which was used only with an IBM
>> Selectric. But there should had been applications which would not depend
>> on an external type writer rather than using a dedicated printer, no?
>>
> Pretty much all the printing was done by dedicated printers, in that
> an "ordinary" typewriter (including an ordinary Selectric) wasn't
> heavy duty enough, or have a suitable interface.
I think the system being sought in this discussion was the IBM 2680,
available in 1967 or 1968, which was a phototypesetting system driven
by a System/360 with associated software. There were similar systems
from RCA, Harris, and Mergenthaler.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365250 is a reply to message #365246] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 14:24 |
Quadibloc
Messages: 4399
Registered: June 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Saturday, March 17, 2018 at 10:41:49 AM UTC-6, J. Clarke wrote:
> I think the system being sought in this discussion was the IBM 2680,
> available in 1967 or 1968, which was a phototypesetting system driven
> by a System/360 with associated software. There were similar systems
> from RCA, Harris, and Mergenthaler.
I had never heard of that system.
I found more information here:
https://circuitousroot.com/artifice/letters/phototypesetting /aps/index.html
The IBM 2680 CRT Printer was originally the Autologic APS-3; their APS-2, I had
seen pictures of before, it was built around a PDP-8. Autologic certainly got
around.
John Savard
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365253 is a reply to message #365199] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 15:38 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Friday, March 16, 2018 at 10:10:48 PM UTC-4, Dave Garland wrote:
> The MT/ST and MC/ST were not really "typewriters", they were
> standalone WP machines that included a selectric for IO. It's true
> that their capabilities were limited compared to later machines, but
> they could edit text (in a linear way, not random access), do word
> wrap, accept run-time insertions like mail merge (the operator
> manually provided the merge text), etc.
They were very sophisticated machines for their time.
Here is an ad from 1966:
https://books.google.com/books?id=sCvjjWpUMDUC&lpg=PA998 &dq=aba%20mt%2Fst&pg=PA998#v=onepage&q&f=fal se
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365254 is a reply to message #365228] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 15:42 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Friday, March 16, 2018 at 10:36:23 PM UTC-4, Charles Richmond wrote:
> But although the IBM selectrics allowed type-ahead, I believe it all was
> done electro-mechanically and *not* with memory chips. And the IBM
> selectric *is* a typewriter.
Yes, the basic IBM Selectric was just a typewriter. No electronics.
IBM also continued to make conventional typebar typewriters for
many years in addition to the Selectrics.
In the 1980s, some IBM typewriters got electronics, as did many
other brands of typewriters. These could do some basic functions.
Here is an ad for one from 1982:
https://books.google.com/books?id=s5v1cGp1Fi0C&lpg=PA909 &dq=aba%20electronic%20typewriter&pg=PA909#v=onepage &q&f=false
I picked up a nice SCM unit at a yard sale for $1. It was in good
shape and included the manual. Unfortunately, it did not include
the ribbon. The ribbon cartridge for that particular machine was
obsolete and rather expensive to buy. I ended up tossing the machine.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365255 is a reply to message #365199] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 15:56 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Friday, March 16, 2018 at 4:27:45 PM UTC-4, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
> I was writing a blog article about early word processors and spreadsheets
> < https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/2018/03/history-of-wo rdprocessors-and-spread.html>
> but only covered early 8-Bit micros. Assuming Electric Pencil was the
> first while WordStar or SuperCalc (spreadsheet) only really became famous
> in the early days of the late 70s to early 80s.
Word processing dates back to at least the 1940s, when catalogs
and directories were stored on punched cards and sorted and
printed out on tabulator machines.
In the 1950s, Friden came out with the Flexowriter, a nice typewriter
that stored documents on paper tape. In the 1960s, Friden added
electronics to this so that it could do more functions, including
calculations. It could also serve as a terminal.
> I know that in offices before that era type writers were used, even if an
> IBM Selectric could ease the work. But they were hardware. They hadn't a
> display (monitor) to edit text and only when done print it out.
To clarify, a basic IBM Selectric was just a typewriter. It was
nicer than many other brands, but still just a typewriter.
> Still I wonder if big machines like some IBM 360/370 did not have word
> processors... By word processor I do not mean any text editor. A word
> processor should at least be able to wrap a word into the next line if it
> didn't fit into the current line. And had some markup for defining a bold
> or italic character and sub- and superscript.
As mentioned by others, some IBM manuals were maintained on the
mainframe and printed by the 1403 printer.
I think almost every programmer prepared some documentation on
punched cards and printed it out.
The ROSCOE text editor had some formatting functions. Before PC's
were widely distributed, I used it for documentation and it was
very useful. Our Xerox mainframe printer handled upper and
lower case and a bit of formatting (e.g. boldface and several
portrait fonts). I wrote a simple COBOL program to do some
additional formatting. This worked out very well, especially
for documents of systems under development which changed very
often.
> Apparently the IBM MT/ST (Magnetic Tape/Selectric Typewriter) from 1964
> would match that description which was used only with an IBM
> Selectric. But there should had been applications which would not depend
> on an external type writer rather than using a dedicated printer, no?
Not sure of your question. The IBM MT/ST and MC/ST was integrated
with a Selectric typewriter which provided the keyboard and 'printer'.
As others mentioned, they were word processors.
IBM also had the Displaywriter word processing system. 1983 ad:
https://books.google.com/books?id=qgJ-2YapQ_oC&lpg=PA106 5&dq=aba%20displaywriter&pg=PA1065#v=onepage&q&a mp;f=false
In addition, numerous companies had their alone standalone
word processors: Vydec 1976
https://books.google.com/books?id=ofVUb1zr41YC&lpg=PA289 &dq=aba%20vydec&pg=PA289#v=onepage&q&f=false
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365265 is a reply to message #365216] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 17:04 |
Andreas Kohlbach
Messages: 1456
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 18:35:54 -0600, Grant Taylor wrote:
>
> On 03/16/2018 02:27 PM, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>
>> By word processor I do not mean any text editor. A word processor
>> should at least be able to wrap a word into the next line if it
>> didn't fit into the current line. And had some markup for defining a
>> bold or italic character and sub- and superscript.
>
> I don't know how advanced they were, but they are very likely on your
> scale. They might (I don't know) not have been able to manage bold /
> italic / other fonts. But that was very likely a limitation of the
> printing technology (used in conjunction with the systems) of the time
> (as opposed to what was available).
WordStar, one of the first word processors, did support font weight (like
bold or italics). Whether a printer can then print that has nothing to do
with a word processor. If you used a daisy-wheel printer you were usually
out of luck. Matrix printers then could, so did laser printers.
--
Andreas
My random toughts and comments
https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365266 is a reply to message #365265] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 17:06 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 17:04:19 -0400, Andreas Kohlbach
<ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 18:35:54 -0600, Grant Taylor wrote:
>>
>> On 03/16/2018 02:27 PM, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>>
>>> By word processor I do not mean any text editor. A word processor
>>> should at least be able to wrap a word into the next line if it
>>> didn't fit into the current line. And had some markup for defining a
>>> bold or italic character and sub- and superscript.
>>
>> I don't know how advanced they were, but they are very likely on your
>> scale. They might (I don't know) not have been able to manage bold /
>> italic / other fonts. But that was very likely a limitation of the
>> printing technology (used in conjunction with the systems) of the time
>> (as opposed to what was available).
>
> WordStar, one of the first word processors, did support font weight (like
> bold or italics). Whether a printer can then print that has nothing to do
> with a word processor. If you used a daisy-wheel printer you were usually
> out of luck. Matrix printers then could, so did laser printers.
Daisies could often do bold the same way a typewritter does--offset a
little to one side and restrike. Italic not so much.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365267 is a reply to message #365199] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 17:12 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 3/17/2018 11:19 AM, Huge wrote:
> On 2018-03-17, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 18:07:52 -0500
>> Charles Richmond <numerist@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/16/2018 4:30 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>
>>>> UW (University of Waterloo) script.
>>>> Digital RUNOFF
>>>> Burroughs ADS (Automatic Documentation System).
>>>> troff
>>>>
>>>> all used markup sequences
>>>>
>>>
>>> These things like RUNOFF are "text formaters", not word processors. And
>>> IBM selectrics *are* typewriters.
>>
>> True enough, but the first word processors I used (Electric Pencil,
>> WordStar) essentially integrated a text editor and a formatter to some
>> extent.
>>
>> Personally I have always preferred using a separate text editor
>> and formatter with some kind of markup over using a wsinqwyg word
>> processor, they fight back far less painfully, scale way better and can
>> easily be used with version control systems, database extracts ...
>
> *applause*
>
>
Formatters are very useful and require the user to imagine what they
want the final document to be. But like a compiled computer language,
you have to execute the formatter software to see what the final
document will look like.
This may be a moot point today... since compilers and text formatters
are blazingly fast on current computer hardware!
--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365268 is a reply to message #365255] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 17:13 |
Andreas Kohlbach
Messages: 1456
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 12:56:32 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>
> I think almost every programmer prepared some documentation on
> punched cards and printed it out.
This you can do with any text editor. I do not use LibreOffice here when
when coding (using vi or Emacs).
>> Apparently the IBM MT/ST (Magnetic Tape/Selectric Typewriter) from 1964
>> would match that description which was used only with an IBM
>> Selectric. But there should had been applications which would not depend
>> on an external type writer rather than using a dedicated printer, no?
>
> Not sure of your question. The IBM MT/ST and MC/ST was integrated
> with a Selectric typewriter which provided the keyboard and 'printer'.
> As others mentioned, they were word processors.
I think I understand a word processor is something you edit a text. It
assists you by wrapping text and allow modification of characters, like
bold. Only *after* you are done editing you would print it out or save it
to a file. You could move paragraphs around and often do mail
merge. Things a Selectric could not do.
The Selectric did not (for my knowledge) had a display. Even if it might
had "write ahead" you could not see what you wrote until it was printed
on paper. If you made a mistake it was too late. Because of that
typewriters soon vanished after word processors were available in the
late 70s to early 80s.
Which again raises the question: if word processors were around before
the 70s, why didn't they supersede typewriters in offices already?
--
Andreas
My random toughts and comments
https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365269 is a reply to message #365246] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 17:17 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 3/17/2018 11:41 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
>
> [snip...] [snip...] [snip...]
>
> I think the system being sought in this discussion was the IBM 2680,
> available in 1967 or 1968, which was a phototypesetting system driven
> by a System/360 with associated software. There were similar systems
> from RCA, Harris, and Mergenthaler.
>
An interesting video about Mergenthaler's typesetter is:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVxeuwlvf8w
--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365270 is a reply to message #365199] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 17:20 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 3/17/2018 3:09 PM, Dave Garland wrote:
> On 3/17/2018 11:41 AM, J. Clarke wrote:
>
>> I think the system being sought in this discussion was the IBM 2680,
>> available in 1967 or 1968, which was a phototypesetting system driven
>> by a System/360 with associated software. There were similar systems
>> from RCA, Harris, and Mergenthaler.
>>
> Yes, the phototypesetting gear was pretty sophisticated. I wouldn't call
> it "word processing" myself, though. To me, WP is an improved version of
> what was done by secretaries or typists with typewriters in a typical
> office, rather than something that replaced a Linotype. YMMV. I did
> typeset a few things using PS typewheels and WordStar, but that was not
> fun (WordStar did have character-width tables, but you had to hex-edit
> the binary to change them). WP (and page-layout programs) really had to
> wait for decent (and affordable) laser printers before they were very
> useful for fancier output.
More advanced and more involved software was called "desktop publishing"
software instead of being called a word processor. There was much
overlap in the two types of software.
--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365271 is a reply to message #365268] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 18:16 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Carlos E.R.
On 2018-03-17 22:13, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 12:56:32 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
>>
>> I think almost every programmer prepared some documentation on
>> punched cards and printed it out.
>
> This you can do with any text editor. I do not use LibreOffice here when
> when coding (using vi or Emacs).
>
>>> Apparently the IBM MT/ST (Magnetic Tape/Selectric Typewriter) from 1964
>>> would match that description which was used only with an IBM
>>> Selectric. But there should had been applications which would not depend
>>> on an external type writer rather than using a dedicated printer, no?
>>
>> Not sure of your question. The IBM MT/ST and MC/ST was integrated
>> with a Selectric typewriter which provided the keyboard and 'printer'.
>> As others mentioned, they were word processors.
>
> I think I understand a word processor is something you edit a text. It
> assists you by wrapping text and allow modification of characters, like
> bold. Only *after* you are done editing you would print it out or save it
> to a file. You could move paragraphs around and often do mail
> merge. Things a Selectric could not do.
>
> The Selectric did not (for my knowledge) had a display. Even if it might
> had "write ahead" you could not see what you wrote until it was printed
> on paper. If you made a mistake it was too late. Because of that
> typewriters soon vanished after word processors were available in the
> late 70s to early 80s.
>
> Which again raises the question: if word processors were around before
> the 70s, why didn't they supersede typewriters in offices already?
Cost.
You needed a good printer plus a computer, so not cheap at that time.
And also you needed to train the typist on using a computer and the
software.
Also the "personal computer" boom started in the 80s.
Me, I started using a wordprocesor somewhere around 1982 or later, and a
9 pin printer years later.
--
Cheers, Carlos.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365273 is a reply to message #365209] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 19:33 |
Gene Wirchenko
Messages: 1166
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 16:38:49 -0700, Peter Flass
<peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
[snip]
> What's your distinction? I seem to recall that Wordstar wasn't WISIWIG. The
> only difference between Wordstar and something like Script is what you use
> for markup: control characters vs. dot-commands.
WordStar was WYSIWYG within the limits of a character-only
terminal.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365277 is a reply to message #365199] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 20:56 |
danny burstein
Messages: 78
Registered: October 2012
Karma: 0
|
Member |
|
|
In <87d1024d2r.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> writes:
> I seem to recall some newer fully formed character printers could do bold
> by movie the paper just a little but and print the same character
> "almost" over itself again. Didn't some matrix printers employed this
> method too to print bold if their character set wasn't made up for this?
Available in the Decwriter II.
We used one with a TRS-80, and I still remember
some of the codes:
"Escape", aka chr$(27), then "B" chr$(66) for Bold...
other options included underscore, shrunken text,
and I think italics, too.
--
_____________________________________________________
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365280 is a reply to message #365277] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 21:02 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Bob Eager
On Sun, 18 Mar 2018 00:56:34 +0000, danny burstein wrote:
> In <87d1024d2r.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> Andreas Kohlbach
> <ank@spamfence.net> writes:
>
>> I seem to recall some newer fully formed character printers could do
>> bold by movie the paper just a little but and print the same character
>> "almost" over itself again. Didn't some matrix printers employed this
>> method too to print bold if their character set wasn't made up for this?
>
> Available in the Decwriter II.
>
> We used one with a TRS-80, and I still remember some of the codes:
>
> "Escape", aka chr$(27), then "B" chr$(66) for Bold...
>
> other options included underscore, shrunken text,
> and I think italics, too.
Not to mention the 'Near Letter Quality' dot matrix printers. I bought a
Canon PW1080A printer in 1984 that had that. 9 pins (I think). The
printer did a line using the 9 pins, then reversed the carriage and moved
the paper up by a fractional amount. It then printed back the other way,
filling in the gaps between the dots. There was a separate bold function.
--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365282 is a reply to message #365241] |
Sat, 17 March 2018 21:46 |
Richard Thiebaud
Messages: 222
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 03/17/2018 07:23 AM, Bob Eager wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 05:20:00 +0000, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>
>> On 2018-03-17, roger.ivie@gmail.com <roger.ivie@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Friday, March 16, 2018 at 1:27:45 PM UTC-7, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>>>
>>>> I know that in offices before that era type writers were used, even if
>>>> an IBM Selectric could ease the work. But they were hardware. They
>>>> hadn't a display (monitor) to edit text and only when done print it
>>>> out.
>>>>
>>>> Still I wonder if big machines like some IBM 360/370 did not have word
>>>> processors...
>>>
>>> Don't know about big iron, but the vocational center across from the
>>> high school I attended had an IBM Office System/6 that was a very nice
>>> machine,
>>> when it was working (sadly, it seemed to require a lot of maintenance).
>>>
>>> It had a CRT display, 8" floppies, and the nicest keyboard I've ever
>>> used; it felt and sounded just like typing on a Selectric.
>>>
>>> They had only the one OS/6 and it didn't get used a lot. They also had
>>> a room full of Commodore PETs with nice keyboards and a word processor
>>> in ROM, which is what the students mostly used.
>>
>> That just about completes the list of OS/x operating systems and/or
>> hardware.
>>
>> Here are the ones I know of:
>>
>> OS/2 (IBM PC)
>> OS/3 (Univac 90/30, System 80)
>> OS/4 (Univac 9400)
>> OS/6 (see above)
>> OS/7 (Univac 9700, stillborn)
>> OS/8 (PDP-8)
>> OS-9 (Motorola 6809, TRS-80 Color Computer, etc.)
>>
>> Note that the slash is replaced by a hyphen in OS-9.
>
> Also Strachey's OS6 (no slash or hyphen), later renamed to OSpub,
> although the papers on it call it OS6:
>
> http://www.cs.ox.ac.uk/publications/publication3726-abstract .html
> http://www.cs.ox.ac.uk/publications/publication5955-abstract .html
>
How about Unisys OS/1100 and OS/2200?
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365299 is a reply to message #365199] |
Sun, 18 March 2018 09:51 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Kerr-Mudd,John
On Sun, 18 Mar 2018 06:50:12 GMT, Dave Garland
<dave.garland@wizinfo.com> wrote:
> On 3/17/2018 4:13 PM, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>> On Sat, 17 Mar 2018 12:56:32 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I think almost every programmer prepared some documentation on
>>> punched cards and printed it out.
>>
>> This you can do with any text editor. I do not use LibreOffice here
>> when when coding (using vi or Emacs).
>>
>>>> Apparently the IBM MT/ST (Magnetic Tape/Selectric Typewriter) from
>>>> 1964 would match that description which was used only with an IBM
>>>> Selectric. But there should had been applications which would not
>>>> depend on an external type writer rather than using a dedicated
>>>> printer, no?
>>>
>>> Not sure of your question. The IBM MT/ST and MC/ST was integrated
>>> with a Selectric typewriter which provided the keyboard and
>>> 'printer'. As others mentioned, they were word processors.
>>
>> I think I understand a word processor is something you edit a text.
>> It assists you by wrapping text and allow modification of characters,
>> like bold. Only *after* you are done editing you would print it out
>> or save it to a file. You could move paragraphs around and often do
>> mail merge. Things a Selectric could not do.
>
> WP existed with hard-copy IO. There were people who did WP using
> teletypes. Yes, CRTs were much nicer, but that's a later development.
>
> And with an MC/ST you could in fact move paragraphs around, by saving
> them separately (the magnetic cards could hold units of text smaller
> than a page. But note that such gear was not normally used by writers,
> but by secretaries or typists. Authors didn't type their own stuff.
> And even if they were capable of it (believe me, most weren't), the
> gear was far too expensive to give them their own, and they wouldn't
> want to devote the time to training in on it.
>
>
>> The Selectric did not (for my knowledge) had a display.
>
> Correct.
>
> Even if it might
>> had "write ahead" you could not see what you wrote until it was
>> printed on paper. If you made a mistake it was too late.
>
> Sorta. But the Correcting Selectric had a lift-off tape so you could
> backspace an error out. If you're a typist, you probably know without
> looking (you're looking at the copy stand, not the typewriter) as soon
> as you press the wrong key. So many mistakes could be immediately
> corrected without even losing much rhythm.
>
> Because of that
>> typewriters soon vanished after word processors were available in the
>> late 70s to early 80s.
>>
>> Which again raises the question: if word processors were around
>> before the 70s, why didn't they supersede typewriters in offices
>> already?
>
> The IBM Displaywriter was IBM's CRT word processor, and came out in
> 1982. According to an IBM website, "A system of three displays sharing
> a single higher speed printer and a paper handler sold for $26,185 and
> leased for $845 a month." (That's $67,555 and $2180 in 2018 dollars.
> Granted, it's for 3 workstations sharing a printer.)
>
>
At a PPOE the secretaries had to use PC's with DisplayWrite (I,II, 3, 4 )
It was 'oribble to a simple programmer like me, used to a program editor.
Text saved in EBCDIC. The only feature that appealed was "cursor-draw".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_DisplayWrite
--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365300 is a reply to message #365273] |
Sun, 18 March 2018 10:15 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Mar 2018 16:38:49 -0700, Peter Flass
> <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> What's your distinction? I seem to recall that Wordstar wasn't WISIWIG. The
>> only difference between Wordstar and something like Script is what you use
>> for markup: control characters vs. dot-commands.
>
> WordStar was WYSIWYG within the limits of a character-only
> terminal.
Fixed-width characters with no bold or italic. I think it used attributes
like underline and reverse video to indicate bf and ital.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Gene Wirchenko
>
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365301 is a reply to message #365245] |
Sun, 18 March 2018 11:20 |
Andreas Eder
Messages: 128
Registered: October 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sa 17 Mär 2018 at 15:18, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> Personally I have always preferred using a separate text editor
> and formatter with some kind of markup over using a wsinqwyg word
> processor, they fight back far less painfully, scale way better and can
> easily be used with version control systems, database extracts ...
True enough, but tell that to zhe unwashed masses. :-)
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365304 is a reply to message #365301] |
Sun, 18 March 2018 12:32 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sun, 18 Mar 2018 16:20:21 +0100
Andreas Eder <a_eder_muc@web.de> wrote:
> On Sa 17 Mär 2018 at 15:18, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
>
>> Personally I have always preferred using a separate text editor
>> and formatter with some kind of markup over using a wsinqwyg word
>> processor, they fight back far less painfully, scale way better and can
>> easily be used with version control systems, database extracts ...
>
> True enough, but tell that to zhe unwashed masses. :-)
The one time I succeeded in doing so our documentalist went from
swearing at Word and falling ever further behind on our own documentation to
using docbook-xml and being so far ahead she was touting for business from
other groups.
--
Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays
C:\>WIN | A better way to focus the sun
The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see
You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365306 is a reply to message #365199] |
Sun, 18 March 2018 14:48 |
Anne & Lynn Wheel
Messages: 3156
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com> writes:
> The IBM Displaywriter was IBM's CRT word processor, and came out in
> 1982. According to an IBM website, "A system of three displays sharing
> a single higher speed printer and a paper handler sold for $26,185 and
> leased for $845 a month." (That's $67,555 and $2180 in 2018
> dollars. Granted, it's for 3 workstations sharing a printer.)
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2018b.html#94 Old word processors
followon to displaywriter was going to be 801/ROMP running CP.r written
in PL.8 (they had something like 200 people working on it in Austin).
the followon is canceled (plausibly because people moving to IBM/PCs).
They then decide to retarget to the unix workstation market and get the
company that did AT&T unix port to IBM/PC for PC/IX to do a port to
801/romp. This is then announced as PC/RT with AIX.
The followon to romp is rios for the RS/6000. The group also cuts
a deal with wang
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wang_Laboratories
typsetters, linasec, 1964
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wang_Laboratories#Typesetters
word processors (including wang 1200, 1972)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wang_Laboratories#Word_process ors
one of the executives we worked with in RS/6000 (and HA/CMP) went over
to the wang effort in new england.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wang_Laboratories#Decline_and_ fall
In June 1991, Wang started reselling IBM computers, in exchange for IBM
investing in Wang stock. Wang hardware strategy to re-sell IBM RS/6000s
also included further pursuit of UNIX software.
.... snip ...
801, iliad, romp, rios, pc/rt, rs/6000, power/pc, etc posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#801
HA/CMP posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#hacmp
--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
