| Re: Old word processors [message #365703 is a reply to message #365603] |
Mon, 26 March 2018 12:10   |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2018-03-24, J Clarke <jclarke.873638@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Mar 2018 04:49:27 -0500, Charles Richmond
> <numerist@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>
>> On 3/24/2018 3:25 AM, Andreas Eder wrote:
>>
>>> On Sa 24 Mär 2018 at 00:53, Charles Richmond <numerist@aquaporin4.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Try using Wordstar under CP/M on a 4 megahertz Z80 machine...
>>>
>>> It worked quite well. Iused it for years on an Osborne I.
>>>
>>
>> I mentioned Wordstar because Mr. Hancock was complaining that the
>> original IBM PC did not have the horsepower to run a word processor well.
>>
>> Wordstar was a counter-example, as I thought the original IBM PC had a
>> more powerful, faster processor than a 4 megahertz Z80... and the Z80
>> handled word processing well using Wordstar.
A 4.77-MHz 8088 wasn't that much more powerful than a 4-MHz Z80.
> Wordstar is a bad counterexample with regard to the PC though. It
> took a signfiicant performance hit going from CP/M to MS-DOS and if
> one's early PC experiences involved Wordstar on the PC one might have
> a false impression--Wordstar on the PC literally could not keep up
> with a fast typist. We had a big proposal to get out one time against
> a tight deadline and ended up using the PCs as terminals to a Z/80
> CompuPro running Wordstar for CP/M because we were never going to get
> it out using Wordsar for MS-DOS on the PC.
Did your machines have CGA? Much of the speed problem was in the
display adapter. A PPOE's first IBM PC clones all came with CGA;
everyone was dazzled by colour graphics, even though most of the
machines were to be used for word processing. A good typist could
easily stay a word ahead of the display. We eventually swallowed
our pride and swapped out the CGAs for monochrome adapters, which
were much faster and had razor-sharp displays.
--
/~\ 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 #365707 is a reply to message #365638] |
Mon, 26 March 2018 14:18 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Saturday, March 24, 2018 at 4:52:31 PM UTC-4, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>> Dot matrix printers came with built-in RAM buffers... which often
>> could be expanded with additional RAM. If you only print a few pages,
>> it might all fit in the RAM buffer... and your computer would consider
>> the print job finished. Thus you only needed an additional print
>> spooler if you often printed large print jobs.
> Would they take several pages (one page text might be around 1KB)? What
> about daisywheel printers and RAM?
> Why would they advertise RAM spoolers if there was no need for?
Printer buffers expanded over time. Our early Okidata printers
had very little buffering, maybe one or two lines at best. Later
Okidata units had a full page.
My Panasonic printer could keep about 3/4 of a page.
As an aside, the Panasonic printer had a control panel where one
could select the typeface and size. It was kind of tricky to
use and I never bothered with it. It was far easier to run
a one line BASIC program with PRINT CHR$(n) with the appropriate
printer codes to set it up.
The Panasonic supported...
10, 12, and 15 chars/inch. The 15 cpi was very useful at times.
typefaces included Prestige Elite, Courier, Sans Serif, Script,
and a proportional. For correspondence, I preferred Prestige Elite
(elite pitch 12 cpi) or Courier (pica pitch 10 cpi).
The printer handled card stock easily. I often sent out postcards.
I had a box of sprocket fed 4x6" card stock which was very useful
as postcards. There were times I wanted to pack a lot of information
on the card, and used 15 cpi. Certainly adequate. (Most of the
things I did with postcards are now obsolete; can be done with
email.)
There was also a double width/double height which was could
for labels and headings, though that printed very slowly.
While it could print graphics, they were very coarse and printed
very slowly. Not really worth it.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365708 is a reply to message #365684] |
Mon, 26 March 2018 14:28 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sunday, March 25, 2018 at 1:27:06 PM UTC-4, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> I do recall a story about overprinting on a mainframe printer --
> it might have been here even -- where the paper disintegrated.
Didn't take too many strikes to disintegrate the paper and cause
trouble for the compute operator. Mgmt didn't like that at all,
which is why many sites did not like overprinting.
In my simple mainframe print program, I used overstrikes to
put an underscore in the text. That worked well on the
laser printer. For boldface, a special code (IIRC `b) put
the printer in boldface.
On the PC, there were codes on the dot matrix printer that
caused it to add underscore, go to italic mode, or go to
boldface mode. These could be automatically added by the
word processing software, or sent by BASIC commands.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365709 is a reply to message #365199] |
Mon, 26 March 2018 14:44 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Saturday, March 24, 2018 at 8:20:31 PM UTC-4, Dave Garland wrote:
> I see WP from the viewpoint of the typist or secretary, not an author.
> Spell checks were typically done in a second pass AFTER the document
> was typed. That's much faster than fixing words as you type (real
> typists wouldn't make typos very often). Real-time spell checking
> doesn't add anything when the typist isn't looking at the screen while
> she's working. You look at the copy stand. Anything that makes you
> take your eyes off of the copy stand or your hands off of the keyboard
> breaks the rhythm and slows you down. Not only do they break the
> rhythm, but then afterward you have to find the place in the hard copy
> where you were looking before, or you're liable to type the same
> paragraph a second time without realizing it. Take you hand off the
> keyboard, and if it doesn't return to the home position when you
> replace it, you're liable to type a paragraph or more of gibberish
> before you notice.
>
> If you're not a touch typist (i.e. type slowly and with many errors)
> or you're composing what you're writing as you type, you'll be going
> slow no matter what you do. Real-time spell checking is helpful there,
> but neither of those is what the employer would have been looking for
> if they advertised for a "word processor".
Some observations...
1) In 1978, most of the white collar workers did NOT know how
to type. It was corporate policy to send all typing to a secretary
or typist; they didn't want better paid workers wasting their
time typing. Likewise, programmers were directed to have new
programs sent to keypunch (they were allowed to keypunch a few
lines of change.)
This rule was enforced--I knew how to type, and sometimes would
type up a document and get reprimanded by management. Indeed, this
would happen even if I was working after hours. (In certain
places, like a steel mill, it was a serious violation of the
union contract to do someone else's work.)
In contrast, 30 years later (maybe sooner) most white collar
workers DID know how to type and usually typed their own work.
Secretaries became scarce.
2) As described above, "touch typing" was more than just knowing
the keyboard--those other aspects, too, led to better
accuracy and speed. They were taught in typing class.
To this day, some computer keyboards have a little rise on the
F and J keys to aid the user to find the "home row" for their
fingers. My Dell and HP keyboards have them.
3) For myself, using the Teletype in timesharing helped by
typing skills.
4) For myself, I could not type well on an 029 keypunch machine.
The letters were in the usual place, but I wasn't used to the
numeric keypad, and special characters--used a lot in programming--
were all over the keyboard. Further, the keypunch keyboard was
designed for speed and was very sensitive--I think even more
sensitive than a Selectric keyboard. It seemed very easy to
make typos, which meant duping and redoing the card. I did
like the IBM 129 since it allowed corrections.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365710 is a reply to message #365701] |
Mon, 26 March 2018 14:45 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Monday, March 26, 2018 at 12:11:06 PM UTC-4, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> I do recall a story about overprinting on a mainframe printer --
>> it might have been here even -- where the paper disintegrated.
>
> I once heard that the IBM 1403 tied its ribbon advance mechanism
> to the form advance mechanism. Hence the following FORTRAN program:
>
> 10 PRINT(6,1)
> 1 FORMAT("+THIS PROGRAM CHEWS UP THE PRINTER RIBBON.")
> GOTO 10
That won't make you any friends. <g>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365712 is a reply to message #365709] |
Mon, 26 March 2018 15:26 |
Anne & Lynn Wheel
Messages: 3156
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
> 2) As described above, "touch typing" was more than just knowing
> the keyboard--those other aspects, too, led to better
> accuracy and speed. They were taught in typing class.
> To this day, some computer keyboards have a little rise on the
> F and J keys to aid the user to find the "home row" for their
> fingers. My Dell and HP keyboards have them.
>
> 3) For myself, using the Teletype in timesharing helped by
> typing skills.
junior high in the 50s, I found an old discarded typewriter and taught
myself how to touch type (got to 50-60 words/min)
later in collete, I didn't notice particular problems with 026, 029,
2741 (80-100 words/min) ... but I found that tty33 ... required
significant more pressure and much more distance ... distance
compareable to discarded typewriter when I was kid ... but more
resistance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teletype_Model_33
--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365716 is a reply to message #365712] |
Mon, 26 March 2018 15:47 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Monday, March 26, 2018 at 3:26:08 PM UTC-4, Lynn Wheeler wrote:
> junior high in the 50s, I found an old discarded typewriter and taught
> myself how to touch type (got to 50-60 words/min)
Today, from time to time I have found perfectly good nice
electric typewriters discarded in the trash, including an
IBM Executive (had no room for it, weighed a ton, had to let
it go). Soon my Selectric III will join them as I have no room
for it. Sad, but the world marches on.
Indeed, years ago my employer let me have a no longer wanted
Selectric II correcting dual pitch typewriter for the grand
sum of $1. I thought it would be a neat thing to have, but
in reality I rarely used it as my word processor did almost
all the things I wanted.
> later in collete, I didn't notice particular problems with 026, 029,
> 2741 (80-100 words/min) ... but I found that tty33 ... required
> significant more pressure and much more distance ... distance
> compareable to discarded typewriter when I was kid ... but more
> resistance.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teletype_Model_33
Yes, the TTY 33 felt like a manual, not an electric. I wonder if
that was intentional to slow fast typists down, though the
machine could handle 10 characters/sec (about 100 words/minute),
which is pretty fast.
I don't know the internals of the 33. Older teletypes were
somewhat manual internally, that is, depressing a key lowered
a lever which activated 'code bars' which were notched to generate
the character code. The model 33 was intended to be a light duty
occasional use machine, not a full time computer terminal, even
though many places used it as such.
Later model Teletypes were better, and competing machines were
better. I don't know about the model 35--the heavy duty version.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365717 is a reply to message #365689] |
Mon, 26 March 2018 17:27 |
Andreas Kohlbach
Messages: 1456
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 18:44:02 -0500, JimP wrote:
>
> I was finally able to remember/discover online, the name of the Amiga
> word processor software: Final Writer. it was great, until I tried
> printing. Then it was incredibly slow.
That might depend on the printer used. Or that Final Writer is rendering
the output on the fly and it takes a while to print. Was an ASCII file
sent from a text editor to the printer faster?
--
Andreas
My random toughts and comments
https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365718 is a reply to message #365199] |
Mon, 26 March 2018 17:31 |
Andreas Kohlbach
Messages: 1456
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 01:16:35 -0500, Dave Garland wrote:
>
> On 3/25/2018 4:50 PM, Andreas Kohlbach wrote:
>
>> What is with the Osborne and the office software coming along with it?
>> Since WordStar and other could run on any Z80 (8080) I assume that at
>> least small businesses used it a lot.
>>
> If you're asking why buy a computer with bundled software instead of
> just buying the software for the computer you already had, mostly the
> buyer didn't have a computer already. At least not one available to
> the buyer. (At my PPOE, accounting had just bought a mini, but that
> was only for accounting and nobody else touched it, including the
> boss.)
You could buy an Apple 2 or TRS-80 before the Osborne. They didn't come
with much software other than the OS and may be a game or two. But no
business software.
> Osborne's marketing gimmick was, "everything you need except a printer
> is in the box, you don't need to know anything about computers".
Not sure about "you don't need to know anything about computers". That
was probably more what the Coleco Adam and the Amstrad PCW advertised.
[...]
--
Andreas
My random toughts and comments
https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365719 is a reply to message #365698] |
Mon, 26 March 2018 17:33 |
Andreas Kohlbach
Messages: 1456
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 03:24:47 -0500, Andy Leighton wrote:
>
> On Sat, 24 Mar 2018 16:50:11 -0400, Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
>>
>> I think I once ran in on an emulated Spectrum. It used graphics to
>> display an 80 columns display. Cannot locate the tape image on my
>> computer anymore to verify.
>
> The Spectrum's display was only 256 pixels wide so you may be
> misremembering.
>
> The Spectrum word processor I am familiar with is Tasword which did
> 64 columns (and that was difficult to read). I believe it originated
> on the ZX81.
Yes, Tasword. Now I remember. Might as well have been 64 instead of 80
then. I remember it was incredible slow. You could type faster than the
characters appeared on the screen.
--
Andreas
My random toughts and comments
https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365720 is a reply to message #365699] |
Mon, 26 March 2018 17:56 |
Andy Leighton
Messages: 203
Registered: July 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 10:32:37 +0100, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 03:24:47 -0500
> Andy Leighton <andyl@azaal.plus.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 24 Mar 2018 16:50:11 -0400, Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net>
>> wrote:
>
>>> I think I once ran in on an emulated Spectrum. It used graphics to
>>> display an 80 columns display. Cannot locate the tape image on my
>>> computer anymore to verify.
>>
>> The Spectrum's display was only 256 pixels wide so you may be
>> misremembering.
>>
>> The Spectrum word processor I am familiar with is Tasword which did
>> 64 columns (and that was difficult to read). I believe it originated
>> on the ZX81.
>
> Not a chance! 64 columns gives only 4 pixels wide
Only if all characters are the same width.
It was still pretty difficult to read, especially on old crappy TVs.
It was also pretty awful to use too.
--
Andy Leighton => andyl@azaal.plus.com
"We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!"
- Douglas Adams
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365721 is a reply to message #365717] |
Mon, 26 March 2018 19:43 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On Mon, 26 Mar 2018 17:27:15 -0400, Andreas Kohlbach
<ank@spamfence.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Mar 2018 18:44:02 -0500, JimP wrote:
>>
>> I was finally able to remember/discover online, the name of the Amiga
>> word processor software: Final Writer. it was great, until I tried
>> printing. Then it was incredibly slow.
>
> That might depend on the printer used. Or that Final Writer is rendering
> the output on the fly and it takes a while to print. Was an ASCII file
> sent from a text editor to the printer faster?
I believe it was faster just plain text from an ASCII editor.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365723 is a reply to message #365716] |
Mon, 26 March 2018 23:03 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2018-03-26, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
> Yes, the TTY 33 felt like a manual, not an electric. I wonder if
> that was intentional to slow fast typists down, though the
> machine could handle 10 characters/sec (about 100 words/minute),
> which is pretty fast.
>
> I don't know the internals of the 33. Older teletypes were
> somewhat manual internally, that is, depressing a key lowered
> a lever which activated 'code bars' which were notched to generate
> the character code. The model 33 was intended to be a light duty
> occasional use machine, not a full time computer terminal, even
> though many places used it as such.
>
> Later model Teletypes were better, and competing machines were
> better. I don't know about the model 35--the heavy duty version.
I think the problem is that fast typists tend to type characters
in bursts. Even though it averages out to 10 characters per second,
some of those bursts come in considerably faster. The Teletype
keybaord, on the other hand, wanted a consistent 10 characters
per second; bursts wouldn't work. In addition, it was hard to
type fast given the long key travel and high pressure required.
--
/~\ 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 #365724 is a reply to message #365723] |
Tue, 27 March 2018 01:01 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 3/26/2018 10:03 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
> On 2018-03-26, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes, the TTY 33 felt like a manual, not an electric. I wonder if
>> that was intentional to slow fast typists down, though the
>> machine could handle 10 characters/sec (about 100 words/minute),
>> which is pretty fast.
>>
>> I don't know the internals of the 33. Older teletypes were
>> somewhat manual internally, that is, depressing a key lowered
>> a lever which activated 'code bars' which were notched to generate
>> the character code. The model 33 was intended to be a light duty
>> occasional use machine, not a full time computer terminal, even
>> though many places used it as such.
>>
>> Later model Teletypes were better, and competing machines were
>> better. I don't know about the model 35--the heavy duty version.
>
> I think the problem is that fast typists tend to type characters
> in bursts. Even though it averages out to 10 characters per second,
> some of those bursts come in considerably faster. The Teletype
> keybaord, on the other hand, wanted a consistent 10 characters
> per second; bursts wouldn't work. In addition, it was hard to
> type fast given the long key travel and high pressure required.
>
Typists on manual typewrites... had to type in rhythm. That was the
important thing, rather than the speed. If you got out of rhythm, the
keys would jam. Unlike a computer keyboard, when you type "the"... you
can *not* hit the t-h in rapid succession. You have to stay in a
rhythmic pattern.
--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365725 is a reply to message #365724] |
Tue, 27 March 2018 03:12 |
mausg
Messages: 2483
Registered: May 2013
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2018-03-27, Charles Richmond <numerist@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
> On 3/26/2018 10:03 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> On 2018-03-26, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>
>> keybaord, on the other hand, wanted a consistent 10 characters
>> per second; bursts wouldn't work. In addition, it was hard to
>> type fast given the long key travel and high pressure required.
>>
>
> Typists on manual typewrites... had to type in rhythm. That was the
> important thing, rather than the speed. If you got out of rhythm, the
> keys would jam. Unlike a computer keyboard, when you type "the"... you
> can *not* hit the t-h in rapid succession. You have to stay in a
> rhythmic pattern.
>
Therefore, the qwerty keyboards was brought in to slow things down?
--
greymaus.ireland.ie
Just_Another_Grumpy_Old_Man
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365742 is a reply to message #365199] |
Tue, 27 March 2018 15:41 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Monday, March 26, 2018 at 2:16:41 AM UTC-4, Dave Garland wrote:
> If you're asking why buy a computer with bundled software instead of
> just buying the software for the computer you already had, mostly the
> buyer didn't have a computer already. At least not one available to
> the buyer. (At my PPOE, accounting had just bought a mini, but that
> was only for accounting and nobody else touched it, including the
> boss.) Osborne's marketing gimmick was, "everything you need except a
> printer is in the box, you don't need to know anything about
> computers". Buying software retail wasn't cheap. The original price
> for WordStar was $495 plus $40 for the printed manual; Visicalc
> (similar to the SuperCalc spreadsheet bundled with Osbornes) was
> around $100; I can't find a price for MBASIC (CP/M computers mostly
> did not have BASIC in ROM). But Osborne's price at $1795 included all
> that, and even better it was already configured to go with the
> hardware. CP/M hardware was not standardized except for the CPU chip,
> you couldn't just buy software and load it in, because every company
> used a different format for floppies. (I had a program named UniForm,
> that could read/write/format around 100 different formats, but that
> was only for soft-sectored disks, not for drives where the floppies
> were hard-sectored.) And even if you could read the disks, it probably
> wouldn't work well without telling it things like the escape sequences
> to move the cursor on the screen, do a highlight, etc. Bundling turned
> out to be a very successful marketing strategy, and was copied by the
> competition (other stand-alone single-board CP/M computers like Kaypro
> and Morrow). (Prices in 1983-ish dollars, multiply by 2.5 for today's
> dollars.)
In addition to purchasing the hardware and software, there was also
the need to train everyone who would operate the computer. Today,
we take computer operation for granted since almost everyone knows
it, but back then, computers were totally new to most people and
they needed training on how to do every little thing. Anyway,
just the lost time of employees going to training and then getting
up to speed was an expense in itself. I don't know if the computer
retailers back then offered training as part of the sale, or if that
was another cost. (Yes, some users were pretty smart and could
figure out things for themselves, but most weren't like that
and needed to be taught things like how to save data, backup data,
and hit the return key after typing a line.)
There was also the cost, sometimes considerable, of typing in all of
the existing manual records into the computer. Conversions are rarely
easy.
Until about the early 1970s, IBM bundled operating and application
software with its computers and tabulating machines*. To fend
off anti-trust efforts, IBM decided to unbundle and sell software
separately. This resulted in an explosion of software products.
It seemed that every data center used SYNCSORT instead of the IBM
sort, for instance.
IBM had a detailed accounting package for hospitals, dating
from the 1401 era, and revised for S/360 and later. AFAIK, it
was quite popular.
* For tabulating machines, IBM had an application description,
with suggested wiring of boards to accomplish various purposes.
For instance, in the 1930s, they had a very sophisticated
accounting system design for railroad needs. It handled things
like freight car accounting and station revenue and expenses,
even handling things like the station agent selling newspapers
and candy, and rent from rented space.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365753 is a reply to message #365199] |
Tue, 27 March 2018 17:11 |
Gene Wirchenko
Messages: 1166
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 27 Mar 2018 07:56:31 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
[snip]
> Which is why my wife and mother, both of whom worked as secretaries at
> one point, learned to type to music. On typewriters with blank keycaps
> (no point in looking at the keyboard, that way). Indeed, on my Mother's
> current PC keyboard, most of the keycaps at the left hand end have worn
> away, but she has no trouble using it, whereas I find it nearly
> impossible.
Not a customer for Das Keyboard then.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das_Keyboard
On my keyboards, the E tends to wear away. On my current
keyboard, there is but the shadow of the letter on the key. Some
other keys are also showing significant wear. I had not noticed
previously, but they are all on the left side (C, S, D, A in declining
wear).
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365756 is a reply to message #365753] |
Tue, 27 March 2018 17:50 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Bob Eager
On Tue, 27 Mar 2018 14:11:00 -0700, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> On my keyboards, the E tends to wear away. On my current
> keyboard, there is but the shadow of the letter on the key. Some other
> keys are also showing significant wear. I had not noticed previously,
> but they are all on the left side (C, S, D, A in declining wear).
On my keyboard, there is no discernible wear after 26 years. It did,
however, cost me about £130 ($180 or so).
--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365759 is a reply to message #365466] |
Tue, 27 March 2018 18:57 |
Jorgen Grahn
Messages: 606
Registered: March 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Wed, 2018-03-21, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>> Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 15:21:20 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:
....
>>>> It took Linus to turn unix into a true, and widely-used, personal
>>>> operating system.
>>>
>>> Well ... 386BSD (becoming {Free,Net,Open}BSD was stable a little bit
>>> earlier, but didn't get Linus' marketing push.
>>
>> That was my other thought: why Linux and not BSD?
>
> I suspect the SYSV v. BSD issue. Linux is much closer
> to system V than BSD.
>
> Then there was IBM, SGI, HP and others pumping tons
> of money into linux (by allowing employees to contribute
> to Linux on company time, sponsering conventions, etc).
They do that /now/, but I don't remember that they did in the 1990s,
when Linux won.
/Jorgen
--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365760 is a reply to message #365753] |
Tue, 27 March 2018 19:49 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Tue, 27 Mar 2018 14:11:00 -0700, Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net>
wrote:
> On 27 Mar 2018 07:56:31 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> Which is why my wife and mother, both of whom worked as secretaries at
>> one point, learned to type to music. On typewriters with blank keycaps
>> (no point in looking at the keyboard, that way). Indeed, on my Mother's
>> current PC keyboard, most of the keycaps at the left hand end have worn
>> away, but she has no trouble using it, whereas I find it nearly
>> impossible.
>
> Not a customer for Das Keyboard then.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das_Keyboard
>
> On my keyboards, the E tends to wear away. On my current
> keyboard, there is but the shadow of the letter on the key. Some
> other keys are also showing significant wear. I had not noticed
> previously, but they are all on the left side (C, S, D, A in declining
> wear).
My "E"s go away too on cheap keyboards. My current one is a Logitech
gamer board with double-shot keys like IBM used to use. Those don't
have that problem.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365764 is a reply to message #365759] |
Tue, 27 March 2018 23:17 |
ted@loft.tnolan.com (
Messages: 161
Registered: August 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
In article <slrnpblj1u.eu5.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid>,
Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> wrote:
> On Wed, 2018-03-21, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>>> Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 15:21:20 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:
> ...
>>>> > It took Linus to turn unix into a true, and widely-used, personal
>>>> > operating system.
>>>>
>>>> Well ... 386BSD (becoming {Free,Net,Open}BSD was stable a little bit
>>>> earlier, but didn't get Linus' marketing push.
>>>
>>> That was my other thought: why Linux and not BSD?
>>
>> I suspect the SYSV v. BSD issue. Linux is much closer
>> to system V than BSD.
>>
>> Then there was IBM, SGI, HP and others pumping tons
>> of money into linux (by allowing employees to contribute
>> to Linux on company time, sponsering conventions, etc).
>
> They do that /now/, but I don't remember that they did in the 1990s,
> when Linux won.
>
> /Jorgen
I think there were issues with lingering AT&T claims to BSD which
slowed things down for a while as parts had to be rewritten "clean",
and also 386BSD stalled for a while as the author had in mind more
of a teaching tool than a supported, stable system and things didn't
take off for FreeBSD & NetBSD until it was forked.
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365765 is a reply to message #365725] |
Wed, 28 March 2018 00:52 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 3/27/2018 2:12 AM, mausg@mail.com wrote:
> On 2018-03-27, Charles Richmond <numerist@aquaporin4.com> wrote:
>> On 3/26/2018 10:03 PM, Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>> On 2018-03-26, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com <hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> keybaord, on the other hand, wanted a consistent 10 characters
>>> per second; bursts wouldn't work. In addition, it was hard to
>>> type fast given the long key travel and high pressure required.
>>>
>>
>> Typists on manual typewrites... had to type in rhythm. That was the
>> important thing, rather than the speed. If you got out of rhythm, the
>> keys would jam. Unlike a computer keyboard, when you type "the"... you
>> can *not* hit the t-h in rapid succession. You have to stay in a
>> rhythmic pattern.
>>
>
> Therefore, the qwerty keyboards was brought in to slow things down?
>
>
Stories are many concerning the QWERTY keyboard...
--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365767 is a reply to message #365756] |
Wed, 28 March 2018 02:33 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 27 Mar 2018 21:50:05 GMT
Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Mar 2018 14:11:00 -0700, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>
>> On my keyboards, the E tends to wear away. On my current
>> keyboard, there is but the shadow of the letter on the key. Some other
>> keys are also showing significant wear. I had not noticed previously,
>> but they are all on the left side (C, S, D, A in declining wear).
>
> On my keyboard, there is no discernible wear after 26 years. It did,
> however, cost me about £130 ($180 or so).
Double shot keycaps last forever my cordless Rapoo has them (cost
rather less than half that, but it's also rather newer) as did most
keyboards before the price dropped to disposable levels.
--
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 #365769 is a reply to message #365764] |
Wed, 28 March 2018 03:50 |
Ahem A Rivet's Shot
Messages: 4843
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 28 Mar 2018 03:17:00 GMT
ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote:
> In article <slrnpblj1u.eu5.grahn+nntp@frailea.sa.invalid>,
> Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> wrote:
>> On Wed, 2018-03-21, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>>>> Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
>>>> > On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 15:21:20 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:
>> ...
>>>> >> It took Linus to turn unix into a true, and widely-used, personal
>>>> >> operating system.
>>>> >
>>>> > Well ... 386BSD (becoming {Free,Net,Open}BSD was stable a little bit
>>>> > earlier, but didn't get Linus' marketing push.
>>>>
>>>> That was my other thought: why Linux and not BSD?
>>>
>>> I suspect the SYSV v. BSD issue. Linux is much closer
>>> to system V than BSD.
>>>
>>> Then there was IBM, SGI, HP and others pumping tons
>>> of money into linux (by allowing employees to contribute
>>> to Linux on company time, sponsering conventions, etc).
>>
>> They do that /now/, but I don't remember that they did in the 1990s,
>> when Linux won.
>>
>> /Jorgen
>
> I think there were issues with lingering AT&T claims to BSD which
> slowed things down for a while as parts had to be rewritten "clean",
Yes there were, the clean versions didn't come out until near the
end of 1994.
> and also 386BSD stalled for a while as the author had in mind more
> of a teaching tool than a supported, stable system and things didn't
> take off for FreeBSD & NetBSD until it was forked.
Yes, I discovered the BSDs shortly after the fork (1993) after
trying Linux (bought on floppies) and finding it OK but not good enough for
what I wanted. It was confusing 386BSD, BSD386, NetBSD, FreeBSD were all
talked about with some people managing to mix up the first two (one was
commercial for the 386) - I wound up asking on USENET and getting a good
answer (even if it did claim that Linux was a toy).
So in 1992/3 Linux could be found advertised in local papers on a
stack of floppies, the BSDs took digging and asking about to find and
required a painful download (at 14.4k peak often less than a kilobyte per
second) before trying. By the time the BSDs were more visible with web
sites and fast ftp sites (1994) Linux was appearing on CDs stuck to
magazines and in the back of books about Linux.
The early gap wasn't big but it didn't need to be to make a big
difference, the ramp up was steep!
--
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 #365772 is a reply to message #365199] |
Wed, 28 March 2018 05:56 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Kerr-Mudd,John
On Tue, 27 Mar 2018 21:27:22 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> On 2018-03-27, Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> wrote:
>> On 27 Mar 2018 07:56:31 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> Which is why my wife and mother, both of whom worked as secretaries at
>>> one point, learned to type to music. On typewriters with blank keycaps
>>> (no point in looking at the keyboard, that way). Indeed, on my
Mother's
>>> current PC keyboard, most of the keycaps at the left hand end have
worn
>>> away, but she has no trouble using it, whereas I find it nearly
>>> impossible.
>>
>> Not a customer for Das Keyboard then.
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das_Keyboard
>
> Wow. Didn't know about that.
>
>> On my keyboards, the E tends to wear away. On my current
>> keyboard, there is but the shadow of the letter on the key. Some
>> other keys are also showing significant wear. I had not noticed
>> previously, but they are all on the left side (C, S, D, A in declining
>> wear).
>
> On my Mum's (bearing in mind I haven't seen it for a year) IIRC, the
> left most 3 keys in all three rows and now blank and the 4th key is
> starting to wear. She touch types at enormous speed and I suppose I
> can guess that the "E" and "A" are going to wear (in fact, I've just
> noticed the "A" on this one is beginning to go) because of their
> frequency in English. Why the "Z" and "X" would go is a mystery. She
> types plain English text - she's not a computer geek - except in the
> context of her old people's home! :o)
>
>
It might be she's playing a computer game that uses those!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow_keys#Less_common_variati ons
--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365773 is a reply to message #365199] |
Wed, 28 March 2018 08:04 |
|
|
Originally posted by: Bob Eager
On Wed, 28 Mar 2018 11:27:58 +0000, Huge wrote:
>>> On my Mum's (bearing in mind I haven't seen it for a year) IIRC, the
>>> left most 3 keys in all three rows and now blank and the 4th key is
>>> starting to wear. She touch types at enormous speed and I suppose I
>>> can guess that the "E" and "A" are going to wear (in fact, I've just
>>> noticed the "A" on this one is beginning to go) because of their
>>> frequency in English. Why the "Z" and "X" would go is a mystery. She
>>> types plain English text - she's not a computer geek - except in the
>>> context of her old people's home! :o)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> It might be she's playing a computer game that uses those!
>
> She's 86. The chances that she is playing a computer game are about the
> same as me winning a marathon.
She's deleting text by highlighting and cutting, and making a lot of
mistakes and undoing them?
OK, perhaps she unconsciously moves her fingers slightly on that side.
--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365778 is a reply to message #365753] |
Wed, 28 March 2018 09:46 |
scott
Messages: 4237
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> writes:
> On 27 Mar 2018 07:56:31 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> Which is why my wife and mother, both of whom worked as secretaries at
>> one point, learned to type to music. On typewriters with blank keycaps
>> (no point in looking at the keyboard, that way). Indeed, on my Mother's
>> current PC keyboard, most of the keycaps at the left hand end have worn
>> away, but she has no trouble using it, whereas I find it nearly
>> impossible.
>
> Not a customer for Das Keyboard then.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das_Keyboard
>
> On my keyboards, the E tends to wear away. On my current
> keyboard, there is but the shadow of the letter on the key. Some
> other keys are also showing significant wear. I had not noticed
> previously, but they are all on the left side (C, S, D, A in declining
> wear).
>
On my keyboards, the 'L' and 'C' keys are the first to go (and are completely
blank now). Very little remains of the '>', '?' 'M', 'N' and 'K' key legends.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365779 is a reply to message #365759] |
Wed, 28 March 2018 09:48 |
scott
Messages: 4237
Registered: February 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> writes:
> On Wed, 2018-03-21, Scott Lurndal wrote:
>> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>>> Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 15:21:20 -0700, Peter Flass wrote:
> ...
>>>> > It took Linus to turn unix into a true, and widely-used, personal
>>>> > operating system.
>>>>
>>>> Well ... 386BSD (becoming {Free,Net,Open}BSD was stable a little bit
>>>> earlier, but didn't get Linus' marketing push.
>>>
>>> That was my other thought: why Linux and not BSD?
>>
>> I suspect the SYSV v. BSD issue. Linux is much closer
>> to system V than BSD.
>>
>> Then there was IBM, SGI, HP and others pumping tons
>> of money into linux (by allowing employees to contribute
>> to Linux on company time, sponsering conventions, etc).
>
> They do that /now/, but I don't remember that they did in the 1990s,
> when Linux won.
I was at SGI in the 1990's, as part of a group that contributed
to linux (my contribution was kdb - the in-kernel debugger). Sequent (IBM)
was contributing RCU about then.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365780 is a reply to message #365199] |
Wed, 28 March 2018 10:01 |
Peter Flass
Messages: 8375
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> On 2018-03-28, Kerr-Mudd,John <notsaying@invalid.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, 27 Mar 2018 21:27:22 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2018-03-27, Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> wrote:
>>>> On 27 Mar 2018 07:56:31 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>> > Which is why my wife and mother, both of whom worked as secretaries at
>>>> > one point, learned to type to music. On typewriters with blank keycaps
>>>> > (no point in looking at the keyboard, that way). Indeed, on my
>> Mother's
>>>> > current PC keyboard, most of the keycaps at the left hand end have
>> worn
>>>> > away, but she has no trouble using it, whereas I find it nearly
>>>> > impossible.
>>>>
>>>> Not a customer for Das Keyboard then.
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das_Keyboard
>>>
>>> Wow. Didn't know about that.
>>>
>>>> On my keyboards, the E tends to wear away. On my current
>>>> keyboard, there is but the shadow of the letter on the key. Some
>>>> other keys are also showing significant wear. I had not noticed
>>>> previously, but they are all on the left side (C, S, D, A in declining
>>>> wear).
>>>
>>> On my Mum's (bearing in mind I haven't seen it for a year) IIRC, the
>>> left most 3 keys in all three rows and now blank and the 4th key is
>>> starting to wear. She touch types at enormous speed and I suppose I
>>> can guess that the "E" and "A" are going to wear (in fact, I've just
>>> noticed the "A" on this one is beginning to go) because of their
>>> frequency in English. Why the "Z" and "X" would go is a mystery. She
>>> types plain English text - she's not a computer geek - except in the
>>> context of her old people's home! :o)
>>>
>>>
>>
>> It might be she's playing a computer game that uses those!
>
> She's 86. The chances that she is playing a computer game are about
> the same as me winning a marathon.
>
It's possible. In her late 80s we got M-I-L a computer specifically so she
could play stuff like solitaire. It kept her busy for a few years. I don't
think she ever learned to do anything else.
--
Pete
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365781 is a reply to message #365778] |
Wed, 28 March 2018 11:35 |
Charlie Gibbs
Messages: 5313
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 2018-03-28, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
> Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> writes:
>
>> On 27 Mar 2018 07:56:31 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> Which is why my wife and mother, both of whom worked as secretaries at
>>> one point, learned to type to music. On typewriters with blank keycaps
>>> (no point in looking at the keyboard, that way). Indeed, on my Mother's
>>> current PC keyboard, most of the keycaps at the left hand end have worn
>>> away, but she has no trouble using it, whereas I find it nearly
>>> impossible.
>>
>> Not a customer for Das Keyboard then.
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das_Keyboard
>>
>> On my keyboards, the E tends to wear away. On my current
>> keyboard, there is but the shadow of the letter on the key. Some
>> other keys are also showing significant wear. I had not noticed
>> previously, but they are all on the left side (C, S, D, A in declining
>> wear).
>
> On my keyboards, the 'L' and 'C' keys are the first to go (and are completely
> blank now). Very little remains of the '>', '?' 'M', 'N' and 'K' key legends.
For what it's worth, my main keyboard (an IBM-branded unit which I've used
heavily for years - non-clicky keys, though) is showing wear on A, S, C, D,
E, R, T, N, J, and L. Go figure.
--
/~\ 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 #365784 is a reply to message #365199] |
Wed, 28 March 2018 11:44 |
|
|
Originally posted by: JimP
On 28 Mar 2018 11:27:58 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
> On 2018-03-28, Kerr-Mudd,John <notsaying@invalid.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, 27 Mar 2018 21:27:22 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2018-03-27, Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> wrote:
>>>> On 27 Mar 2018 07:56:31 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> [snip]
>>>>
>>>> >Which is why my wife and mother, both of whom worked as secretaries at
>>>> >one point, learned to type to music. On typewriters with blank keycaps
>>>> >(no point in looking at the keyboard, that way). Indeed, on my
>> Mother's
>>>> >current PC keyboard, most of the keycaps at the left hand end have
>> worn
>>>> >away, but she has no trouble using it, whereas I find it nearly
>>>> >impossible.
>>>>
>>>> Not a customer for Das Keyboard then.
>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das_Keyboard
>>>
>>> Wow. Didn't know about that.
>>>
>>>> On my keyboards, the E tends to wear away. On my current
>>>> keyboard, there is but the shadow of the letter on the key. Some
>>>> other keys are also showing significant wear. I had not noticed
>>>> previously, but they are all on the left side (C, S, D, A in declining
>>>> wear).
>>>
>>> On my Mum's (bearing in mind I haven't seen it for a year) IIRC, the
>>> left most 3 keys in all three rows and now blank and the 4th key is
>>> starting to wear. She touch types at enormous speed and I suppose I
>>> can guess that the "E" and "A" are going to wear (in fact, I've just
>>> noticed the "A" on this one is beginning to go) because of their
>>> frequency in English. Why the "Z" and "X" would go is a mystery. She
>>> types plain English text - she's not a computer geek - except in the
>>> context of her old people's home! :o)
>>>
>>>
>>
>> It might be she's playing a computer game that uses those!
>
> She's 86. The chances that she is playing a computer game are about
> the same as me winning a marathon.
I'm 71 years this year, and I play Everquest, an online MMO. There are
apparently people older than me playing it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365790 is a reply to message #365724] |
Wed, 28 March 2018 17:13 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Tuesday, March 27, 2018 at 1:01:00 AM UTC-4, Charles Richmond wrote:
> Typists on manual typewrites... had to type in rhythm. That was the
> important thing, rather than the speed. If you got out of rhythm, the
> keys would jam. Unlike a computer keyboard, when you type "the"... you
> can *not* hit the t-h in rapid succession. You have to stay in a
> rhythmic pattern.
Another reason to type in rhythm on a manual was to produce an
even copy. Otherwise, on a manual, some letters would be hit hard
and some hit soft, with the copy looking lousy. We've all seen
blackened "e" and punched out "o".
This was especially important when typing a mimeograph stencil.
AB Dick Mimeograph ads (first ad explains good stencil cutting, also
has article on Detroit's troubles).
https://books.google.com/books?id=v04EAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA14& amp;dq=life%20mimeograph%20typing&pg=PA14#v=onepage& q=life%20mimeograph%20typing&f=false
https://books.google.com/books?id=9EEEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA14& amp;dq=life%20mimeograph&pg=PA14#v=onepage&q&f=f alse
https://books.google.com/books?id=ckoEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA10& amp;dq=life%20mimeograph&pg=PA10#v=onepage&q&f=f alse
I'm guessing that in the old days, tabulating machines were
used on occasion to cut a mimeo stencil for things like a
directory or catalog. I don't know about a computer driven
1403, but probably done there as well, especially back in the
early 1960s.
On our Univac 90/30, we had a film ribbon which we used from
time to time to produce a directory that was photocopied. But
the printer of the 90/30 was pretty crappy and even with a film
ribbon the output looked lousy, indeed even worse, such as with
only partly formed characters. Our office had a mag card, and
that should've been used instead to maintain the directory, even
if it meant duplicate typing.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365791 is a reply to message #365760] |
Wed, 28 March 2018 17:14 |
hancock4
Messages: 6746
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On Tuesday, March 27, 2018 at 7:49:18 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
> My "E"s go away too on cheap keyboards. My current one is a Logitech
> gamer board with double-shot keys like IBM used to use. Those don't
> have that problem.
Does it have a mark on the F and J keys?
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365797 is a reply to message #365791] |
Wed, 28 March 2018 18:47 |
|
|
Originally posted by: J. Clarke
On Wed, 28 Mar 2018 14:14:05 -0700 (PDT), hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 27, 2018 at 7:49:18 PM UTC-4, J. Clarke wrote:
>
>> My "E"s go away too on cheap keyboards. My current one is a Logitech
>> gamer board with double-shot keys like IBM used to use. Those don't
>> have that problem.
>
> Does it have a mark on the F and J keys?
I don't recall encountering a keyboard in the last 30 years or so that
did not have such a mark.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365800 is a reply to message #365790] |
Wed, 28 March 2018 20:09 |
Anne & Lynn Wheel
Messages: 3156
Registered: January 2012
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com writes:
> I'm guessing that in the old days, tabulating machines were
> used on occasion to cut a mimeo stencil for things like a
> directory or catalog. I don't know about a computer driven
> 1403, but probably done there as well, especially back in the
> early 1960s.
>
> On our Univac 90/30, we had a film ribbon which we used from
> time to time to produce a directory that was photocopied. But
> the printer of the 90/30 was pretty crappy and even with a film
> ribbon the output looked lousy, indeed even worse, such as with
> only partly formed characters. Our office had a mag card, and
> that should've been used instead to maintain the directory, even
> if it meant duplicate typing.
re:
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2018b.html#94 Old word processors
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2018b.html#100 Old word processors
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2018b.html#103 Old word processors
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2018b.html#109 Old word processors
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2018c.html#1 Old word processors
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2018c.html#7 Old word processors
CP67 and VM370 were being done in CMS script (originally started out as
CTSS RUNOFF reimplementation) ... for official ibm publication ... some
run off on 2741 using film ribbon and some being run off on 1403N1 with
film ribbon ... used for photo offset
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offset_printing
First major mainstream IBM pub was principles of operation .... where
the architecture "red book" was moved to CMS script ... command line
option would either select printing the full "red book" (with
engineering notes, implementation notes, alternative considerations,
etc) or the princles of operation subset.
GML had been invented at the science center ... and GML tag support was
added to CMS script which started seeing a lot more use in the first
part of 70s ... and then 2nd half of the 70s started seeing lots of 3800
laser printers at internal datacenters (75-76)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_3800
then in 79/80, 6670s (ibm copier3 with computer interface) started
showing up in departmental areas (supported fonts for printing text)
.... originally for OS/6 ... OPD, replacing mag card selectrics,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS/6
replaced by displaywriter
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Displaywriter_System
then mainframe support was added. san jose research did the
enhancements for sherpa/6670APA (being able to do images). old
email about sherpa
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2006p.html#email820304
one of the people responsible for sherpa ... worked on including
postscript processing in sherpa ... and then left IBM for adobe.
directory trivia: Friday's after work had discussions what could be done
about middle management and upper executives mostly being computer
illiterate and what might be done to get them to use computers. we hit
on trying online phone directory ... Jim Gray (before he left research
for tandem) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Gray_(computer_scientist)
would spend max. of 2 person weeks developing the lookup program and I
would spend max. of 2 person weeks writing process collecting and
reformating as many company phone directories as possible (one of
problems ran into was lawyers & security people wanted to insist that
while paper directories weren't corporate confidential ... if they were
online, they had to be classified confidential restricted and employees
couldn't have access).
this was in period (late 70s/early 80s) where 3270 terminals were part
of fall budget cycle and each one required VP-level sign-off. Then there
was a rapidly spreading rumor that some of the corporate executive
committee members were using email ... and all of a sudden every middle
manager in the company had to have 3270 terminal on their desk (even if
they never actually used them, spending the day with the vm370 login
screen or possibly PROFS menu being burned into screen) ... pre-empting
annual 3270 terminal deliveries justified for development projects.
other trivia: PROFS group had collecting some number of internal
applications (including telephone books) and wrapping MENUs around
them. They had taken very early version of VMSG for the email
client. When the VMSG tried to offer them a much enhanced version, the
PROFS group attempted to get him fired (since they had already claimed
credit for everyting). Things quieted down when VMSG author
demonstrated that every PROFS email had his initials in non-displayed
field (after that the VMSG author only shared source with me and one
other person).
science center posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/subtopic.html#545tech
GML/SGML posts
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/submain.html#sgml
some CP67/CMS pubs
http://bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/360/cp67/
http://bitsavers.org/pdf/ibm/360/cms/
--
virtualization experience starting Jan1968, online at home since Mar1970
|
|
|
|
| Re: Old word processors [message #365809 is a reply to message #365778] |
Thu, 29 March 2018 02:08 |
Charles Richmond
Messages: 2754
Registered: December 2011
Karma: 0
|
Senior Member |
|
|
On 3/28/2018 8:46 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
> Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> writes:
>> On 27 Mar 2018 07:56:31 GMT, Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>> Which is why my wife and mother, both of whom worked as secretaries at
>>> one point, learned to type to music. On typewriters with blank keycaps
>>> (no point in looking at the keyboard, that way). Indeed, on my Mother's
>>> current PC keyboard, most of the keycaps at the left hand end have worn
>>> away, but she has no trouble using it, whereas I find it nearly
>>> impossible.
>>
>> Not a customer for Das Keyboard then.
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Das_Keyboard
>>
>> On my keyboards, the E tends to wear away. On my current
>> keyboard, there is but the shadow of the letter on the key. Some
>> other keys are also showing significant wear. I had not noticed
>> previously, but they are all on the left side (C, S, D, A in declining
>> wear).
>>
> On my keyboards, the 'L' and 'C' keys are the first to go (and are completely
> blank now). Very little remains of the '>', '?' 'M', 'N' and 'K' key legends.
>
On some older typewriters, the keycaps are metal rings around the edge
with clear plastic in the middle. Underneath the plastic is a paper
with the letter or graphic printed on the paper. So your finger does
*not* touch the actual imprint of the letter or graphic...
--
numerist at aquaporin4 dot com
|
|
|
|
Members
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
