To: comp.misc
CP/M is turning 50 this year.

The ancient Control Program for Microcomputers, or CP/M for short, has
been enjoying a modest renaissance in recent years. By 21st century
standards, it's unimaginably tiny and simple. The whole OS fits into
under 200 kB, and the resident bit of the kernel is only about 3 kB.
Today, in the era of end-user OSes in the tens-of-gigabytes size range,
this exerts a fascination to a certain kind of hobbyist. Back when it
was new, though, this wasn't minimalist - it was all that early
hardware could support.
Liam Proven

I'm a little too young to have experienced CP/M as anything other than
a retro platform - I'm from 1984, and we got our first computer in 1990
or so - but its importance and influence cannot be overstated. Many of
the conventions set by CP/M made their way to the various DOS variants,
and in turn, we still see some of those conventions in Windows today.
Had Digital Research, the company CP/M creator Gary Kildall set up to
sell CP/M, accepted the deal with IBM to make CP/M the default
operating system for the then newly-created IBM PC, we'd be living in a
very different world today.

Digital Research would also create several other popular and/or
influential software products beyond CP/M, such as DR DOS and GEM, as
well as various other DOS variants and CP/M versions with DOS
compatibility. It would eventually be acquired by Novell, where it
faded into obscurity.

https://www.osnews.com/story/140419/50-years-ago-cp-m-started-the-microcomputer-revolution/
--

Internetado.
bbs.alt119.net

"internetado" <internetado@fanless.alt119.net> writes:

> Had Digital Research, the company CP/M
> creator Gary Kildall set up to sell CP/M, accepted the deal with IBM
> to make CP/M the default operating system for the then newly-created
> IBM PC, we'd be living in a very different world today.

CP/M was reimplemented by Seattle Computer Products as "Quick and Dirty
Operation System"[0] and later Microsoft bought it and stripped the
"Quick and" and kept DOS as name. Shouldn't that once and forever
explain how to read the "D" of "DOS"? o;-)

I used CP/M-Z80 for a while and when MSDOS appeared, I avoided it for a
long time, but when I finally had to do some stuff on it, I immediately
felt kind of at home due to the similar structure of the OS function
calls. That felt strange. Maybe even a bit shady.

____________

0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quick_and_Dirty_Operating_System

--
I do not bite, I just want to play.

yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> wrote:
>"internetado" <internetado@fanless.alt119.net> writes:
>
>> Had Digital Research, the company CP/M
>> creator Gary Kildall set up to sell CP/M, accepted the deal with IBM
>> to make CP/M the default operating system for the then newly-created
>> IBM PC, we'd be living in a very different world today.

You could get CP/M-86 with the PC for a small fee, or PC-DOS for free,
or a couple other options including the UCSD P-System. Most people got
MS-DOS because they didn't have a need or know about the software available
already for CP/M-86. Note that what was available for CP/M-86 was a tiny
fraction of what was available for CP/M 2.2 on the 8080, even if it was a
lot more than was available for CP/M-68K.

>CP/M was reimplemented by Seattle Computer Products as "Quick and Dirty
>Operation System"[0] and later Microsoft bought it and stripped the
>"Quick and" and kept DOS as name. Shouldn't that once and forever
>explain how to read the "D" of "DOS"? o;-)

I wouldn't call Q-DOS and the later PC-DOS reimplementations of CP/M.
The user interface was more or less modelled on CP/M but with a lot of
important things done wrong because the people who did it didn't really
understand CP/M and because engineers shouldn't write code.

It does have lineage from CP/M but less than the lineage CP/M has from
RT-11. Notice that you use the PIP command to copy files in CP/M like
in RT-11 while PC-DOS introduces COPY, for instance.

>I used CP/M-Z80 for a while and when MSDOS appeared, I avoided it for a
>long time, but when I finally had to do some stuff on it, I immediately
>felt kind of at home due to the similar structure of the OS function
>calls. That felt strange. Maybe even a bit shady.

It's less like RT-11, sadly. And the memory map is very strange to someone
used to writing CP-M 2.2 code.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 15:03:21 +0000, Scott Dorsey wrote:

> yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> wrote:
>>"internetado" <internetado@fanless.alt119.net> writes:
>>
>>> Had Digital Research, the company CP/M creator Gary Kildall set up to
>>> sell CP/M, accepted the deal with IBM to make CP/M the default
>>> operating system for the then newly-created IBM PC, we'd be living in
>>> a very different world today.
>
> You could get CP/M-86 with the PC for a small fee, or PC-DOS for free,

PC DOS was charged for by IBM, as I remember. Most other vendors bundled
MS-DOS (which was slightly different)

--
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

On 8/11/24 2:38 PM, internetado wrote:

> Digital Research would also create several other popular and/or
> influential software products beyond CP/M, such as DR DOS and GEM, as
> well as various other DOS variants and CP/M versions with DOS
> compatibility. It would eventually be acquired by Novell, where it
> faded into obscurity.
>
> https://www.osnews.com/story/140419/50-years-ago-cp-m-started-the-microcomputer-revolution/

Nobody ever mentions GEM! I used Ventura Publisher under GEM -- an
expensive and unweildy piece of software which produced excellent
results once you beat it into submission and never tried to make it do
anything it really didn't want to do.

I didn't know that GEM was a Kildall thing. Novell seemed to be as good
at killing things as Microsoft is at stealing them.

--
Cheers, Bev
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can
only exist until a majority of voters discover that they can vote
themselves largess out of the public treasury."
-- Alexander Tyler (Unverified)

On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 08:24:46 -0700, The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 8/11/24 2:38 PM, internetado wrote:
>> Digital Research would also create several other popular and/or
>> influential software products beyond CP/M, such as DR DOS and GEM, as
>> well as various other DOS variants and CP/M versions with DOS
>> compatibility. It would eventually be acquired by Novell, where it
>> faded into obscurity.
>> https://www.osnews.com/story/140419/50-years-ago-cp-m-started-the-microcomputer-revolution/
>
>Nobody ever mentions GEM! I used Ventura Publisher under GEM -- an
>expensive and unweildy piece of software which produced excellent
>results once you beat it into submission and never tried to make it do
>anything it really didn't want to do.
>I didn't know that GEM was a Kildall thing. Novell seemed to be as good
>at killing things as Microsoft is at stealing them.

couldn't recall "gem" . . .

(using Tor Browser 13.5.2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEM_(desktop_environment)
>GEM (for Graphics Environment Manager[2]) is a discontinued operating
>environment released by Digital Research in 1985. GEM is known primarily
>as the native graphical user interface of the Atari ST series of computers,
>providing a WIMP desktop. It was also available for IBM PC compatibles
>[3][4] and shipped with some models from Amstrad. GEM is used as the core
>for some commercial MS-DOS programs, the most notable being Ventura
>Publisher. It was ported to other computers that previously lacked
>graphical interfaces, but never gained traction. The final retail version
>of GEM was released in 1988.
>Digital Research later produced X/GEM for their FlexOS[3][5] real-time
>operating system with adaptations for OS/2 Presentation Manager[6][3] and
>the X Window System under preparation as well.[3]
[end quote]

but i did use ventura publisher extensively back in the day . . .

(using Tor Browser 13.5.2)
https://archive.org/details/xerox-ventura-publisher-4.1-for-windows-4.1-1992-10-english-3.5-1.44-mb
>Xerox Ventura Publisher 4.1 For Windows
>by Xerox
>Publication date 1992
>Topics Xerox, Ventura, Publisher, Corel
>Language English
>Xerox Ventura Publisher 4.1 For Windows ( 4.1) ( 1992 10) [ English]
>( 3.5'' 1.44 MB)
>Addeddate 2020-08-01 13:03:00
>Identifier xerox-ventura-publisher-4.1-for-windows-4.1-1992-10-
> english-3.5-1.44-mb
>Scanner Internet Archive HTML5 Uploader 1.6.4
>There are no reviews yet. Be the first one to write a review.
>576 Views
>3 Favorites
>ZIP FILES
>Media Scans.zip 43.0M
>https://archive.org/download/xerox-ventura-publisher-4.1-for-windows-4.1-1992-10-english-3.5-1.44-mb/Media%20Scans.zip
>Xerox Ventura Publisher 4.1 for Windows (4.1)
>(1992-10) [English] (3.5''-1.44MB).zip 5.7M
>https://archive.org/download/xerox-ventura-publisher-4.1-for-windows-4.1-1992-10-english-3.5-1.44-mb/Xerox%20Ventura%20Publisher%204.1%20for%20Windows%20%284.1%29%20%281992-10%29%20%5BEnglish%5D%20%283.5%27%27-1.44MB%29.zip
Xerox Ventura Publisher 4.1 for Windows (4.1) (1992-10) [English] (3.5''-1.44MB).zip
/ 5.67 MB, extracted folder . . .
Xerox Ventura Publisher 4.1 for Windows (4.1) (1992-10) [English] (3.5''-1.44MB)
/ 8.01 MB, 7 Files, 3 Folders
disk1.img
\APP
\DAN
\DEU
\ENG
\ESP
\FRA
\ITA
\NED
\NOR
\POR
\SVE
B
CMYKPROC.TX_
CMYKSPOT.TX_
DEFAULT.ST_
DIALOG3D.DLL
DITHER.VP
HPGL.BF_
LZEXPAND.DLL
MUSCROLL.DLL
PALETTE.HL_
PARAMS.PP_
PCTTOGEM.CN_
README.TXT
RGBPROC.TX_
RGBSPOT.TX_
SETUP.EXE
SETUP2.EXE
SPLDICT.PD
VER.DLL
VPWIN.EX_
VPWIN.ME_
VPWIN.MS_
WFNTLOOK.UP
WHM_ENG.WH_
WVENT72.FO_
WVENT96.FO_
disk2.img
&BOOK-P1.CA_
&BOOK-P1.CH_
... (*.*_)
WWSUK.WL_
WXYWRITE.WL_
disk3.img
\PFM
\UTILITY
DANSK.WH_
DEUTSCH.WH_
... (*.*_)
WINHELP.HL_
WUENGLSH.WH_
disk4.img
\NFILTERS
COMMDLG.DL_
DDEML.DL_
... (*.*_)
VSEPS.DL_
VSEPS.HL_

On 8/12/24 9:12 AM, D wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 08:24:46 -0700, The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On 8/11/24 2:38 PM, internetado wrote:
>>> Digital Research would also create several other popular and/or
>>> influential software products beyond CP/M, such as DR DOS and GEM, as
>>> well as various other DOS variants and CP/M versions with DOS
>>> compatibility. It would eventually be acquired by Novell, where it
>>> faded into obscurity.
>>> https://www.osnews.com/story/140419/50-years-ago-cp-m-started-the-microcomputer-revolution/
>>
>>Nobody ever mentions GEM! I used Ventura Publisher under GEM -- an
>>expensive and unweildy piece of software which produced excellent
>>results once you beat it into submission and never tried to make it do
>>anything it really didn't want to do.
>>I didn't know that GEM was a Kildall thing. Novell seemed to be as good
>>at killing things as Microsoft is at stealing them.
>
> couldn't recall "gem" . . .
>
> (using Tor Browser 13.5.2)
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEM_(desktop_environment)
>>GEM (for Graphics Environment Manager[2]) is a discontinued operating
>>environment released by Digital Research in 1985. GEM is known primarily
>>as the native graphical user interface of the Atari ST series of computers,
>>providing a WIMP desktop. It was also available for IBM PC compatibles
>>[3][4] and shipped with some models from Amstrad. GEM is used as the core
>>for some commercial MS-DOS programs, the most notable being Ventura
>>Publisher. It was ported to other computers that previously lacked
>>graphical interfaces, but never gained traction. The final retail version
>>of GEM was released in 1988.
>>Digital Research later produced X/GEM for their FlexOS[3][5] real-time
>>operating system with adaptations for OS/2 Presentation Manager[6][3] and
>>the X Window System under preparation as well.[3]
> [end quote]
>
> but i did use ventura publisher extensively back in the day . . .
>
> (using Tor Browser 13.5.2)
> https://archive.org/details/xerox-ventura-publisher-4.1-for-windows-4.1-1992-10-english-3.5-1.44-mb
>>Xerox Ventura Publisher 4.1 For Windows
>>by Xerox
>>Publication date 1992 ...

As I recall, when you executed Ventura (from a floppy, of course) it
first brought up GEM. That was the only time I ever saw it. I used VP
first in 1988 or 89, and then at a different job in 1991. Before
Windows 3.0 in 1990, according to Gemini. Must have been MSDOS...

--
Cheers, Bev
The stone age didn't end for lack of stones.
-- Troy the Troll

On 12/08/2024 18:04, The Real Bev wrote:

> As I recall, when you executed Ventura (from a floppy, of course) it
> first brought up GEM.  That was the only time I ever saw it.  I used VP
> first in 1988 or 89, and then at a different job in 1991.  Before
> Windows 3.0 in 1990, according to Gemini. Must have been MSDOS...
>
>

GEM was DR's Graphics Environment Manager and was available for x86 and
also ran on the Atari ST. It was a total dog, at least on the Atari. I
had the misfortune to have to write software for it on the ST a long
time back. I'm trying to suppress the nightmares returning.

On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 10:04:28 -0700, The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>On 8/12/24 9:12 AM, D wrote:
snip
>> but i did use ventura publisher extensively back in the day . . .
>> (using Tor Browser 13.5.2)
>> https://archive.org/details/xerox-ventura-publisher-4.1-for-windows-4.1-1992-10-english-3.5-1.44-mb
>>>Xerox Ventura Publisher 4.1 For Windows
>>>by Xerox
>>>Publication date 1992 ...
>
>As I recall, when you executed Ventura (from a floppy, of course) it
>first brought up GEM. That was the only time I ever saw it. I used VP
>first in 1988 or 89, and then at a different job in 1991. Before
>Windows 3.0 in 1990, according to Gemini. Must have been MSDOS...

for me it was back in the mid-80s when most computer users at a local
newspaper office in the denver area were using compaq/xt/286/mac, etc.
there could've been a gem logo when starting ventura publisher, but i
just don't recall; i do somewhat remember testing those archived 1992
vp "4.1" disks in dosbox (0.74-3) about ten months ago, but even then
i don't recall if any gem logo appeared for sure ... i suspect it did;
aldus pagemaker was my favorite, others preferred quarkxpress, but it
was wordstar and later wordperfect where most of the work i was doing
took place . . . (these articles are handy so i'm posting them again):
_______________________________________________________________________________
https://winworldpc.com/product/wordstar/300
>WordStar 3.00
>WordStar, originally from MicroPro, was a popular word processor during the
>early 80s. It was ported to a number of CP/M architectures as well as Unix
>and PC/MS-DOS. It competed directly against many word processors, including
>WordPerfect, Microsoft Word for DOS, and Multimate. By the late 80s most
>business word processing had moved to WordPerfect. In the early 90s, Microsoft
>Word for Windows took over.
>Also see a history of WordStar: A Potted History of WordStar and some earlier
>0.x versions at The WordStar Collection
>Wanted: Pre-1.0 versions were sold publicly. WordStar 0.87 redump, WordStar
>0.89, WordStar 0.91, WordStar 0.92, (Google results indicate these existed)
>WordStar 1.0. Early WordStar 2.0 releases were reported to be copy protected.
>Available releases
> 0.x/1.x
> 2.x
> 3.00 (current)
> 3.30
> for PCjr
> 2000
> 4.0
> 1512
> 5.0
> COLT
> 5.5
> 6
> 1.5 for Windows
> 7
> 2.0 for Windows
>Release notes
>Wanted: Wordstar 3.00 for PC/MS-DOS. Reportedly 3.0 was the first version available for DOS.
>Information
>Product type
> Application Word Processor
>Vendor
> MicroPro
>Release date
> 1982
>Minimum CPU
> Z80
>User interface
> Text
>Platform
> CPM
>Download count
> 35 (1 for release)
>Downloads
>Download name Version Language Architecture File size Downloads
> WordStar 3.00 for CPM Manuals 3.00 for CPM English [Z80] 17.19MB 1
> WordStar 3.00 for CPM-80 (files) 3.00 for CPM-80 English [Z80] 189.76KB 0
> https://winworldpc.com/download/08c3841f-c383-c398-c2b3-11c3a5c28f13
> https://winworldpc.com/download/08c3841f-c383-c398-c2b3-11c3a5c28f13/from/c3ae6ee2-8099-713d-3411-c3a6e280947e
("WordStar 3.00 for CPM-80 (files).7z" ; 188 KB / 192,512 bytes)
> WordStar 3.01 for CPM-80 (1982) (5.25-DSQD) 3.01 for CPM-80 English [Z80] 11.05MB 0
> https://winworldpc.com/download/348b9ab2-df7d-11ec-8dc3-0200008a0da4
> https://winworldpc.com/download/348b9ab2-df7d-11ec-8dc3-0200008a0da4/from/c3ae6ee2-8099-713d-3411-c3a6e280947e
("WordStar 3.01 for CPM-80 (1982) (5.25-DSQD).7z" ; 10.5 MB / 11,055,104 bytes)
> WordStar 3.01 for CPM-80 Manuals (1982) 3.01 for CPM-80 English [Z80] 145.37MB 0
>Comments
_______________________________________________________________________________
https://archive.org/details/WordPerfect5.1.1989-11-06
>WordPerfect 5.1 (1989-11-06)
>by WordPerfect
>Publication date 1989-11-06
>Usage Public Domain Mark 1.0 Creative Commons License publicdomain
>Topics WordPerfect, MS-DOS, Word Perfect, WordPerfect 5.1, Word Perfect 5.1, DOS
>Language English
>WordPerfect 5.1 for MS-DOS (11-06-89) (5.25 inch floppy)
>WordPerfect 5.1 for MS-DOS was first released on November 6, 1989. It was followed
>by numerous minor 5.1 updates, indicated by the file date stamps.
>This was the most popular and widely used version of the WordPerfect product.
>WordPerfect 5.1 for DOS adds drop-down menus, context sensitive help, tables, an
>equation editor, and spreadsheet handling.
>A stripped-down lightweight version of WordPerfect 5.1 was sold as LetterPerfect.
>The program was originally developed under contract at Brigham Young University
>for use on a Data General minicomputer in 1979. The authors retained the rights to
>the program, forming Satellite Systems International (SSI) to sell it under the
>name WordPerfect in 1980. A port to MS-DOS followed in 1982 and several greatly
>updated versions quickly followed. The application's feature list was considerably
>more advanced than contemporary MS-DOS applications like WordStar, and it rapidly
>displaced most other systems, especially after the 4.2 release in 1986. By release
>5.1 in 1989, WordPerfect had become a standard in the MS-DOS market.
>Addeddate 2017-03-12 19:10:38
>Identifier WordPerfect5.1.1989-11-06
>Scanner Internet Archive HTML5 Uploader 1.6.3
>There are no reviews yet. Be the first one to write a review.
>2,333 Views
>2 Favorites
>DOWNLOAD OPTIONS
>7Z 1 file
>https://archive.org/download/WordPerfect5.1.1989-11-06/WordPerfect%205.1%20%2811-06-89%29%20%285.25%29.7z
>TORRENT 1 file
>https://archive.org/download/WordPerfect5.1.1989-11-06/WordPerfect5.1.1989-11-06_archive.torrent
WordPerfect 5.1 (11-06-89) (5.25).7z / 3.98 MB, extracted folder . . .
WordPerfect 5.1 (11-06-89) (5.25) / 5.74 MB / 15 Files, 0 Folders
D1_Install1.img
README.UTL
INSTALL.EXE
UPDATE.INS
LEARN.SPN
LEARN.S01
D2_Install2.img
LEARN.S02
D3_Program1.img
README.WP
UPDATE.INS
WP.SPN
WP.S01
D4_Program2.img
WP.S02
D5_Spell1.img
README.SPL
UPDATE.INS
SPELL.SPN
SPELL.S01
D6_Spell2.img
SPELL.S02
D7_Ptr1.img
README.PTR
UPDATE.INS
PTR.SPN
PTR.S01
D8_Ptr2.img
PTR.S02
D9_Printer1.img
INSTALL.LST
WPR1.SPN
WPR1.S01
D10_Printer2.img
WPR1.S02
D11_Printer3.img
WPR1.S03
Graphics1.img
1.BAT
ABACUS.WPG
... (*.WPG)
ICECREAM.WPG
LIST.COM
README.DOC
Graphics2.img
1.BAT
1913FORD.WPG
3_5DISK.WPG
5_25DISK.WPG
DL.COM
JAG.WPG
... (*.WPG)
XMASTREE.WPG
`89TBIRD.WPG
Graphics3.img
README.BAT
INSTALL.BAT
PICTURES.EXE
winworldpc.com.txt
_______________________________________________________________________________
https://archive.org/details/word-perfect-5.2-for-windows-5.2-1993-04-english-3.5-1.44-mb
>by WordPerfect
>Publication date 1993-04
>Topics WordPerfect, 5.2, Corel
>Language English
>WordPerfect 5.2 For Windows ( 5.2) ( 1993 04) [ English] ( 3.5'' 1.44 MB)
>Two incredible resources for WordPerfect can be found online at:
>WPUniverse.com - an independent and active community dedicated to WordPerfect
>and WordPerfect Office products like Quattro Pro, Presentations, Paradox, etc.
>WPDos.org - an amazing site for fans of the older versions of WordPerfect for
>DOS and Windows. The site has numerous well-written and thorough tutorials
>for installing WordPerfect for DOS on modern Windows and Mac computers.
>Addeddate 2020-11-24 11:53:53
>Identifier word-perfect-5.2-for-windows-5.2-1993-04-english-3.5-1.44-mb
>Scanner Internet Archive HTML5 Uploader 1.6.4
>There are no reviews yet. Be the first one to write a review.
>340 Views
>3 Favorites
>DOWNLOAD OPTIONS
>ZIP
>https://archive.org/download/word-perfect-5.2-for-windows-5.2-1993-04-english-3.5-1.44-mb/WordPerfect%205.2%20for%20Windows%20%285.2%29%20%281993-04%29%20%5BEnglish%5D%20%283.5%27%27-1.44MB%29.zip
WordPerfect 5.2 for Windows (5.2) (1993-04) [English] (3.5''-1.44MB).zip
/ 8.70 MB, extracted folder . . .
WordPerfect 5.2 for Windows (5.2) (1993-04) [English] (3.5''-1.44MB)
/ 10.6 MB, 9 Files, 1 Folders
atm.img
ATM.CNF
ATM16.DLL
ATM32.DLL
ATMCNTRL.EXE
ATMSYS.DRV
INSTALL.CNF
INSTALL.EXE
PROGDISK
PSFONTS
WPBD____.PFB
WPBD____.PFM
WPBE____.PFB
WPBE____.PFM
WPBR____.PFB
WPBR____.PFM
WPCE____.PFB
WPCE____.PFM
WPCP____.PFB
WPCP____.PFM
WPCS____.PFB
WPCS____.PFM
WPEU____.PFB
WPEU____.PFM
WPHO____.PFB
WPHO____.PFM
WPMH____.PFB
WPMH____.PFM
WPOE____.PFB
WPOE____.PFM
WPOT____.PFB
WPOT____.PFM
WPST____.PFB
WPST____.PFM
README.TXT
faxdirect.img
DSK9555-.1
EXPCOMM.DRV
EXPVCD.386
FAXDIR.S01
FAXDIR.SPN
INSTALL.DAT
INSTALL.EXE
README.LCN
README.TXT
gramm5.img
BITMAPS
GWARC1
GWARC2
INSTALL.EX$
INSTALL.EXE
INSTALL.INS
NETWORK.HLP
NETWORK.INS
README.TXT
program1.img
INSTALL.DAT
INSTALL.EXE
INSTALL.LST
README.LCN
VER.DLL
WP.S01
WP.SPN
WPBRIDGE.SER
WPGIUS.HLP
program2.img
WP.S02
program3.img
WP.S03
program4.img
WP.S04
program5.img
WP.S05

On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 11:51:32 +0042, yeti wrote:

> Shouldn't that once and forever explain how to read the "D" of "DOS"?

There have been umpteen different OSes called “DOS” or variations thereon,
over the last sixty, maybe getting on to seventy years. The name “DOS” is
as old as hard drives. In fact, it was intended to distinguish OSes that
had adopted hard drives.

On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 08:24:46 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:

> I didn't know that GEM was a Kildall thing. Novell seemed to be as good
> at killing things as Microsoft is at stealing them.

Part of the blame has to go to Apple. Back then, they were very jealous of
other companies trying to do GUIs that looked even remotely like the
Macintosh in any way, shape or form. They sic’d their lawyers onto DR
because GEM had, of all things, pull-down menus.

Finally Kildall was able to appease the Apple hounds by having the menus
simply fall down when you moused over them.

(Yeah, I was an Apple Mac fan(atic) back then.)

On 8/12/24 1:53 PM, D wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 10:04:28 -0700, The Real Bev <bashley101@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On 8/12/24 9:12 AM, D wrote:
> snip
>>> but i did use ventura publisher extensively back in the day . . .
>>> (using Tor Browser 13.5.2)
>>> https://archive.org/details/xerox-ventura-publisher-4.1-for-windows-4.1-1992-10-english-3.5-1.44-mb
>>>>Xerox Ventura Publisher 4.1 For Windows
>>>>by Xerox
>>>>Publication date 1992 ...
>>
>>As I recall, when you executed Ventura (from a floppy, of course) it
>>first brought up GEM. That was the only time I ever saw it. I used VP
>>first in 1988 or 89, and then at a different job in 1991. Before
>>Windows 3.0 in 1990, according to Gemini. Must have been MSDOS...
>
> for me it was back in the mid-80s when most computer users at a local
> newspaper office in the denver area were using compaq/xt/286/mac, etc.
> there could've been a gem logo when starting ventura publisher, but i
> just don't recall; i do somewhat remember testing those archived 1992
> vp "4.1" disks in dosbox (0.74-3) about ten months ago, but even then
> i don't recall if any gem logo appeared for sure ... i suspect it did;

There were a LOT of disks, and I was really sorry when I pitched them
into the recycling bin along with a lot of other stuff that I used to
use. I gave the books to the library because I'm unable to throw books
away -- at least they can do the triage with a professional attitude.

I really liked WordStar and was really regretful when I switched to Word
Perfect because it did SOMETHING better that I wanted done. A curious
WP thing: I temped for some title insurance people for a few weeks.
They had a system where knowledgeable people would fill in (pencil) a
template with codes indicating various descriptions etc. for the drones
to type in. After a while I (a drone) realized that the whole system
was done with Word Perfect macro codes, a pretty slick application.

> aldus pagemaker was my favorite, others preferred quarkxpress, but it
> was wordstar and later wordperfect where most of the work i was doing
> took place . . . (these articles are handy so i'm posting them again):
> _______________________________________________________________________________
> https://winworldpc.com/product/wordstar/300

<snip>

--
Cheers, Bev
If you have one lawyer in town, he goes hungry.
If you have two lawyers in town, they both get rich.

On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 08:40:55 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:

> A curious WP thing: I temped for some title insurance people for a few
> weeks. They had a system where knowledgeable people would fill in
> (pencil) a template with codes indicating various descriptions etc. for
> the drones to type in. After a while I (a drone) realized that the
> whole system was done with Word Perfect macro codes, a pretty slick
> application.

So they were reinventing the kind of thing that typesetting markup systems
(troff/groff, TEX, SGML) have been doing for decades.

On 8/13/24 2:51 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 08:40:55 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:
>
>> A curious WP thing: I temped for some title insurance people for a few
>> weeks. They had a system where knowledgeable people would fill in
>> (pencil) a template with codes indicating various descriptions etc. for
>> the drones to type in. After a while I (a drone) realized that the
>> whole system was done with Word Perfect macro codes, a pretty slick
>> application.
>
> So they were reinventing the kind of thing that typesetting markup systems
> (troff/groff, TEX, SGML) have been doing for decades.

Possibly, but these were generating legal documents with a lot of
legalisms of various sorts and combinations, not just making pretty
documents. Same thing, I guess. I once did some sort of document using
something that required typing in codes by hand and found it extremely
unpleasant.

--
Cheers, Bev
I see your point, but I still think you're full of crap. --Shea

On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 21:47:14 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:

> On 8/13/24 2:51 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 08:40:55 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:
>>
>>> A curious WP thing: I temped for some title insurance people for a
>>> few weeks. They had a system where knowledgeable people would fill in
>>> (pencil) a template with codes indicating various descriptions etc.
>>> for the drones to type in. After a while I (a drone) realized that
>>> the whole system was done with Word Perfect macro codes, a pretty
>>> slick application.
>>
>> So they were reinventing the kind of thing that typesetting markup
>> systems (troff/groff, TEX, SGML) have been doing for decades.
>
> Possibly, but these were generating legal documents with a lot of
> legalisms of various sorts and combinations, not just making pretty
> documents.

One of the groundbreaking features of troff was its ability to do line
numbering -- rather important in legal documents such as patent
applications.

That was likely crucial in getting the Bell Labs crew the funding from the
higher-ups at AT&T to develop Unix.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:

> On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 21:47:14 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:
>
>> On 8/13/24 2:51 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 08:40:55 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:
>>>
>>>> A curious WP thing: I temped for some title insurance people for a
>>>> few weeks. They had a system where knowledgeable people would fill in
>>>> (pencil) a template with codes indicating various descriptions etc.
>>>> for the drones to type in. After a while I (a drone) realized that
>>>> the whole system was done with Word Perfect macro codes, a pretty
>>>> slick application.
>>>
>>> So they were reinventing the kind of thing that typesetting markup
>>> systems (troff/groff, TEX, SGML) have been doing for decades.
>>
>> Possibly, but these were generating legal documents with a lot of
>> legalisms of various sorts and combinations, not just making pretty
>> documents.
>
> One of the groundbreaking features of troff was its ability to do line
> numbering -- rather important in legal documents such as patent
> applications.
>
> That was likely crucial in getting the Bell Labs crew the funding from the
> higher-ups at AT&T to develop Unix.

Thanks for sharing that. Can you give me a historical reference about
that? I'd like to read it. Thank you!

Johanne Fairchild <jfairchild@tudado.org> wrote:
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>
>> On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 21:47:14 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:
>>
>>> On 8/13/24 2:51 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 08:40:55 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> A curious WP thing: I temped for some title insurance people for a
>>>>> few weeks. They had a system where knowledgeable people would fill in
>>>>> (pencil) a template with codes indicating various descriptions etc.
>>>>> for the drones to type in. After a while I (a drone) realized that
>>>>> the whole system was done with Word Perfect macro codes, a pretty
>>>>> slick application.
>>>>
>>>> So they were reinventing the kind of thing that typesetting markup
>>>> systems (troff/groff, TEX, SGML) have been doing for decades.
>>>
>>> Possibly, but these were generating legal documents with a lot of
>>> legalisms of various sorts and combinations, not just making pretty
>>> documents.
>>
>> One of the groundbreaking features of troff was its ability to do line
>> numbering -- rather important in legal documents such as patent
>> applications.
>>
>> That was likely crucial in getting the Bell Labs crew the funding from the
>> higher-ups at AT&T to develop Unix.
>
> Thanks for sharing that. Can you give me a historical reference about
> that? I'd like to read it. Thank you!

Search for "patent" in these two pages, you'll get some info:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Unix

https://spectrum.ieee.org/the-strange-birth-and-long-life-of-unix

Feel free to also read the remainder of each if you so choose.