INFO-MAC@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU.UUCP (04/03/87)
INFO-MAC Digest Friday, 3 Apr 1987 Volume 5 : Issue 74
Today's Topics:
This disk is unreadable...
New Mac SE Keyboard Interfacing with Terminal Emulators
Further AppleTalk card/driver trivia (Apple version):
Slow Mac+ (still...)
Sample WriteNow
IBM's Product Announcement: 4/2/87
Mac II vs. IBM PS/2
re Mac fonts -> Laserjet fonts
Lisps on the new Mac models
Automac 2.0 ?
Microsoft listens
Other FullPaint strangenesses
re: FullPaint gripes
Re: FullPaint
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 87 14:44 N
From: FRUIN%HLERUL5.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu (Thomas Fruin)
Subject: This disk is unreadable...
An HD20sc just went sour at the computer centre here. The Macintosh Plus
it's sitting under won't boot from it and when I start the Mac with a floppy
(using the latest System 4.0, Finder 5.4) the disk initialisation dialog comes
up with the message 'This disk is unreadable', while displaying the hard disk
icon. Sigh.
Someone thinks the hard disk was turned off while it was being accessed, but
that doesn't have to be the case. Anyway, can anybody tell me what to do,
besides reformatting the hard disk?
Thomas
FRUIN@HLERUL5.BITNET
thomas@uvabick.UUCP
Leiden, Netherlands
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 87 12:27:47 PST
Subject: New Mac SE Keyboard Interfacing with Terminal Emulators
From: CLARKE@BCVAX3.BITNET
The new Mac SE keyboard is mapped differently than the old Mac+ keyboard.
Consequently, it appears (to me at least) that it does not allow the SE to
be used as a terminal emulator in some capacities. In particular, the keypad
section of the keyboard is totally different from the Mac+ keypad. This makes
it impossible to use the keypad in editing using the EDT editor on the VAX
system.
Does anyone know of a terminal emulator that corrects this problem? Is
Apple working to fix MacTerminal to handle this problem?
Right now this is a very serious problem, since I cannot efficiently use
my SE as a terminal.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 87 23:39 EST
From: Hess@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: Further AppleTalk card/driver trivia (Apple version):
Turns out that when using the Apple/Tangent software, in order to get
the LW.ENV file (which stores the LaserWriter's name and the zone) to be
found, it must *BOTH* be in a directory whose name is "LWDIR", *AND* be
on the DOS PATH. So the proper hack to the software is either to find
the comparison to the string "lwdir" and kill it, or change that string
to match the directory which you usually keep your path-found items,
e.g. "\ETC".
Further, it seems that in theory you can write your own software to
unload the driver, if you restore all the hooks it took over. But
you're on your own; if I make one, I'll post it. Guess if I do that I
can post the hacks to get rid of that awful screen- clearing as well.
Brian
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 87 14:32:03 PST
From: PUGH%CCC.MFENET@nmfecc.arpa
Subject: Slow Mac+ (still...)
In regards to Franklin's (davis%v750%wanginst.edu@RELAY.CS.NET) problem of
slow running Macs and how to test for speed.
The problem of speed has been debated here and on the DELPHI net for quite
some time (actually since the introduction of the second hard disk). Many
people want the FASTEST computer in the world, but they are unsure of how to
measure it. This problem is not merely related to the micro world, our
supercomputers run a series of timing programs (known as the Livermore Loops)
that are designed to evaluate various components of a computer's speed. These
include scalar cycle times, vector cycle times, MFLOPs (Mega FLoating point
OPerations), memory access times, io speeds, and others. Not all of these are
applicable to micros, but some are. The people at Levco were given these
codes and they have been getting them to compile with the Absoft Fortran
compiler. Their first try here was unsuccessful (it compiled but blew up when
executed).
So, after that long diatribe, what do we have to evaluate speed on the Mac.
Well, the answer is nothing. Like DoD said, Big Blue or Stars is as good as
any for measuring cycle times, ASSUMING THAT THEY ARE CONFIGURED IDENTICALLY.
Franklin actually suspects the truth when he asks "possible hints about hidden
system goodies that could eat up time." I think that this is the only place
that any time could be taken away from a program. Hardware damage would
result in a more dramatic failure, I suspect. Disk damage would result in
slower disk operations (such as booting applications and disk io) but wouldn't
effect a running memory resident program.
Finally, the thing to do is make a couple of floppies that are identical.
Start with a blank disk and make a working system. Then use CopyIIMac to make
a sector copy so that you have IDENTICAL disks (does dragging a disk onto
another disk in the Finder do a Diskcopy? I suspect so). Then boot both
machines and run your arbitrary comparison program (be it Stars or Big Blue or
some floating point thing) and see what they results are. I suspect that they
should both run the same. Make sure all the Control Panel settings are the
same too (primarily I would be concerned about Appletalk).
After all this, if one machine still appears to be slower then use the other
one instead. :{)
Jon
N L pugh@nmfecc.arpa
M A L National Magnetic Fusion Energy Computer Center
F T N Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
E L PO Box 5509 L-561
C Livermore, California 94550
C (415) 423-4239
Mutants for Nuclear Power Unite!
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 87 09:15:20 EST
From: Jonathan K. Millen <jkm@mitre-bedford.ARPA>
Subject: Sample WriteNow
I have been experimenting with the "Sample WriteNow" teaseware to
see if WriteNow is a good alternative to Word 3.0. I have encountered
one apparent bug, and one apparent limitation with
superscripts.
The bug occurred with 11-point Times text sent to a laserwriter.
Horizontal spaces were added or removed strangely. Spaces seem
consistently to be added at the end of a boldface phrase, and
occasionally just before a superscript. A space disappeared
after an italics phrase.
There is an apparent limitation with superscripting and subscripting,
namely, that the vertical line spacing increases when the -script goes
above or below the normal range. Netnotes have said that there is a
non-obvious trick to fix this problem in Word 3.0, so maybe there is just
some control I don't know about that would fix this in WriteNow.
Are these problems reproducible or fixable in the actual WriteNow?
Jon Millen
jkm@mitre-bedford.arpa
decvax!linus!security!jkm
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 87 17:57:18 PST
From: Dorothy Bender <HK.DEB@forsythe.stanford.edu>
Subject: IBM's Product Announcement: 4/2/87
FORWARDED MESSAGE 04/02/87 FROM GE.JCN "Jane Norris": IBM's new products
IBM today announced a new generation of personal computing products, both
hardware and software, called the personal System/2. The PCs include the
model 30 (8086, 8 MHz microprocessor, 640 k RAM), model 50 (80286, 10 MHz
microprocessor, 1 MB - 7MB RAM), model 60 (80286, 10 MHz microprocessor,
1MB - 15 MB RAM), and model 80 (80386, 16 or 20 MHz microprocessor, 1MB- 16
MB RAM). All models are available now except the 70 MB version of the
model 60 and the model 80, which will not be available until July. They
all offer improved graphics capability featuring 640 x 480 pels resolution,
all points addressable, and the 3.5" floppy disk drives. The graphics
chips are now all on the main system board along with ports for serial,
parallel and pointing devices, and a clock/calendar. Four new analog
monitors are available featuring non glare screens with decreased flicker.
Those on display were impressive. The hard disks range from the slow (80
ms) 20 MB drive for the model 30 to fast, high capacity drives up to 115 MB
for the high end models. IBM offers these machines at prices considerably
below their current similar products.
They announced an upgrade to DOS and a new operating system as well. The
new line of PCs require DOS 3.3, which is reportedly available now.
According to IBM, it supports all the old hardware plus the new high
capacity hard disks. There is an upgrade policy for users of earlier DOS
versions. IBM Operating System/2, developed with Microsoft, will let users
run multiple applications, exceed the 640 k RAM limit and provide a
consistent user interface. It will be used on the 286 and 386 machines and
will be available in stages starting in the first quarter of 1988. AIX,
IBM's implementation of UNIX, is under development and its availability
will be announced in the 4th quarter of this year.
Five new printers were announced. A quieter, faster version of the 9-wire
Proprinter, called the Proprinter II, is now available. The Proprinter
X24 and LX 24 (standard and wide carriage versions) feature NLQ printing
at 120 cps and quieter operation. The Quietwriter III has a draft mode and
is twice as fast as the earlier models. The Personal Page Printer, a
desktop laser printer, was noticeably absent at the demo. It prints at 6
pages/ min. and supports 300 dots/" graphics. One curiosity was that it
"attaches to the System/2 Model 30, XT 286 and selected AT models". Why
it doesn't (appear to) work on other PCs was not answered by IBM
during the question and answer session.
Other hardware included a optical disk unit and a tape backup device.
By the way, HP has just reduced the price on all Vectras by 15%.
------------------------------
Date: 3 Apr 87 02:58:06 GMT
From: jww@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu (Joel West)
Subject: Mac II vs. IBM PS/2
Here's what I could come up with comparing the top end of the IBM
Personal System/2 line with the Macintosh II. I think the Apple manages
a win or draw in most categories. -- Joel West
IBM PS/2 Model 80 Mac II
Availability July 1987 May 1987
Processor 16 MHz 80386 16 MHz 68020
20 MHz 4th Q
Floating point CP optional standard
Color display 640x480, 16 of 256 640x480, 256 of 16M
Optional display 1024x768, 256 of 256K 1024x768, 256 of 16M (3rd pty)
Internal Floppy 3.5", 1.4Mb 3.5", 800K
Hard disk standards ESDI (optional) SCSI (standard)
Bus IBM 'Micro Channel' NuBus (IEEE P1196)
Width 32 bits 32 bits
Maximum slots 16 16
Number of slots 4 (+ 3 old-style) 6
Multiple bus masters yes yes
DIP switches? no no
Address assignment vendor-based slot-based
Existing OS compatible with prior machines
MS/DOS 3.3 Macintosh System 4.1
Multitasking no planned? (Bix says yes)
Availiability now May
Graphics interface no yes
Maximum memory 640K 8Mb
New OS OS/2 A/UX
Multi-user no yes (?)
Multitasking yes yes
Availability "1988" "summer 1987"
Graphics interface 1989? same
Also, Bix had an observation on the price and features. Since they
frequently quote from INFO-MAC and comp.sys.mac, I'm sure they won't
mind if I quote from them:
microbytes/items #1030, Thu Apr 2 12:47:28 1987
TITLE: Cost Comparison: IBM's PS/2 Model 80 vs. Macintosh II
How does IBM's new 32-bit machine compare on a cost basis with
Apple's recently introduced Macintosh II? The prices look pretty
even until you start adding things, like a math coprocessor, to
the PS/2.
IBM's PS/2 Model 80-041 Apple's Mac II Model HD40
----------------------- -------------------------
Standard equipment: Standard equipment:
16-MHz 80386 16-MHz 68020
1 megabyte of RAM 1 megabyte of RAM
1.44-megabyte floppy 800K-byte floppy
44-megabyte hard disk 40-megabyte hard disk
3 open 32-bit slots 5 open 32-bit slots
keyboard keyboard
video card video card
68881 coprocessor
system software
13-inch color monitor
Price: $6995 Price: $6996
But to get a PS/2 that has features comparable to what comes
standard with the high-end color Mac II, you have to add these
options: 80387 math coprocessor ($795); 12-inch color monitor
($685); and the OS/2 operating system ($325), which lacks
graphics and windowing (but IBM said a later version will offer a
graphics environment). Tack the costs of the options to the cost
of the Model 80 and the price tag reads $8800. The difference in
price between the PS/2 and the Mac II then runs to about $1800 --
more than enough to buy AST Research's Mac286 board ($1499) that
enables the Mac to run MS-DOS programs.
Joel West
{ucbvax,ihnp4}!sdcsvax!jww (ihnp4!gould9!joel once I fix news)
jww@sdcsvax.ucsd.edu if you must
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 87 12:30:08 PST
From: USER=QCZ4%SFU.Mailnet%UBC.MAILNET@MIT-MULTICS.ARPA
Subject: re Mac fonts -> Laserjet fonts
I haven't got LaserStart+ yet. This info applies to Laserstart 2.5.
If you select 'Faster' in the Print dialog, you get screen fonts
printed at 150dpi. If you select 'Best', you get screen fonts at
300dpi -- but you'll only get the top 2/3 of the page.
If you select 'Draft', it prints with built-in fonts. No full
justification, and font selection is done by the program. With the
Times Roman/Helvetica 14(b) cartridge, the closest screen subs are
Geneva 9 -> Times Roman 10 Monaco 14 -> Helvetica 14 bold.
Geneva 10 maps to a more widely spaced TR 10, and Geneva 12 maps
to the built-in 'typewriter' font.
I'll post an evaluation once I get my hands on Laserstart Plus.
------------------------------
Date: Tue 31 Mar 87 12:39:09-PST
From: Rich Alderson <A.ALDERSON@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU>
Subject: Lisps on the new Mac models
Is anyone out there who can comment on the various versions of Lisp with regard
to compatibility issues on the SE and Mac II? Before I retire my 128, I'd like
to know that it will be worth it.
Rich Alderson
A.Alderson@{Lear, Othello, Hamlet, Macbeth}.Stanford.EDU
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 87 16:58:58 est
From: michel jacquemin <jacquemin-michel>
Subject: Automac 2.0 ?
I have have heard a little bit about Automac 2.0 by Anderson.
>From what I heard, it seems to be a "macro manager" (I'd better
say a "(shell) script" instead of a "macro") and to be very
neatly done, selling around 50$.
Does anyone have additional info on this product and where
to find it ?
Thanx,
Michel. (jacquemin@yale.arpa)
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 87 17:11 EDT
From: BELSLEY%BCVAX3.BITNET@wiscvm.wisc.edu (DAVID A. BELSLEY)
Subject: Microsoft listens
Now let me tell you, I'm impressed - and pleased. Several issues ago of
infomac, I posted some bugs about Microsoft Word 3.0. Today they actually
called me to get more information. The chap was responsive and sincere;
one can't ask a great deal more.
Whereas I was able to pinpoint some of the problems, the most serious one
remains somewhat amorphous. This is the one where Word 3.0 freezes during
the Save As command. The percentage saved clicks along until it gets to
100% - and then nothing. The watch cursor remains showing, there is no
disk action - nothing - no matter how long you wait. I've had this happen
to me at least four times, several of them under fairly clean conditions.
That is, no RamDisk, a proper configuration of the system and application.
But it has always occurred following a set of circumstances that were
entirely too complex for me to recall to see if the problem could be
reproduced. So I was unable to be as helpful in pinpointing this bug as
for some others.
Thus, have any of you had a similar problem? If so, has it occurred in
a reproducable set of circumstances. If not, do you at least have a
document upon which it happens inexplicably?
Microsoft seems properly responsive in getting these bugs fixed, are there
any out there who can help shorten the process? Please let me know, and
I'll pass on any good information.
Thanks,
david a. belsley
boston college belsley@bcvax3.bitnet
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 87 11:08:01 est
From: wilson@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Nathan Wilson)
Subject: Other FullPaint strangenesses
When I first got System 4.0 and Finder 5.4 after playing with it for
awhile I started up FullPaint. Once in the application the mouse suddenly
slowed way down. On the order of move the mouse an inch and the cursor
moves a pixel! It was a serious chore to get to the quit in the file menu!
Once out of it the mouse recovered beautifully. I then called up the
Control Panel and noticed that I had the mouse set on Very Slow (which in
the finder really isn't all that slow). I changed this and went back into
FullPaint. Once again the mouse slowed way down. I just tried to
replicate this before posting but was unsuccessful. Has anyone else seen
this happen? At the time it happened I tried other applications which
worked just fine. The one thing I did just note was that changing the
mouse speed setting while in FullPaint has no effect on the speed of the
mouse, and ends up not getting remembered when you leave. They are
obviously doing something strange with the mouse, probably forcing it into
their own version of tablet mode.
Oh, one other factor that may have been important in the Molasses-Mouse
is that the system and finder were on a RamDisk created with RamStart1.23.
I tried this just now and it didn't seem to change anything.
Nathan Wilson
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 87 05:54:52 PST
Subject: re: FullPaint gripes
From: BOYD@TAMLSR.BITNET (Scott T. Boyd)
> From: bouldin@ceee-sed.arpa
> Subject: Fullpaint Hassle
How many of us on this list are developers? This is just the
kind of thing this forum can help avoid. Maybe it seems like
common sense in retrospect to think that the Ann Arbor boys
should have left at least one person on FullPaint for support.
Consider for a minute what they thought as they decided to
create the hottest word-processing tool. It probably seemed
pretty obvious to them that they needed all of their talent
on the new project. Imagine trying to convince a talented
person to stay on in 'support.'
Now imagine trying to bring a new person on to do support. It
seems to me that every time I've ever talked to a support
technician (e.g. Manx Aztec C and TML Pascal) that person was
new and useless for answering my questions. Heck, even when
I was in that kind of position, I couldn't really do much more than
say, "We're sorry," and take good notes about their problem.
What can they do now to fix the problem? Probably nothing right
now. They're committed to a new product which could really
make a difference in the future success of their firm, so they're
not gonna pull anybody off the project, right? And new people
for support really is a pretty weak answer. Looks to me like
they're probably stuck in a bad spot.
What can we learn from this? I think that when you ship multiple
thousands of copies of something, you should plan on bringing
someone into the project early enough that they can watch the
creation of the project and learn to support it. This person
probably wouldn't be a principal programmer.
Another option might be guaranteeing a specified amount of time
from one or more of the original authors for updates and bug
fixes. That means NOT overextending on future commitments.
That's one of the reasons I suspect Donald Knuth gives away
TeX, because he doesn't want to be saddled with the responsibility
of supporting that product for the next ten years. Let's
face it, if we write software that sells, people are going
to look to us to support them if they send us money.
What are your thoughts on reasonable ways to provide support
while you go on about writing the next great work?
scott boyd
The MacHax Group
PS: About 'seeing into the future', my response to the Ann Arbor
spokesperson (to quote Opus), "Pphfft!" Learn to do it right
or learn to lose customers.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 1 Apr 87 23:26:40 PST
From: digiorgi@Jpl-VLSI.ARPA
Subject: Re: FullPaint
I guess I feel like putting my two cents in:
in issue #73, a complaint was made concerning FullPaint and the fact that it
does not recognize the FPD and 'stepping out' large displays. The reason it
doesn't is due to a (probable) three line piece of code: they didn't check
for screenBits.bounds at the top of the program to get the real size of the
screen from the system global, they hardwired the screen size into the
code.
This is a common error and, while not excusable, simple enough to correct. But
if they go to the trouble of correcting it, and want to continue competing
with SuperPaint and the like, they need to extend the program a lot more.
That is rather more complicated.
In my needs for bitmap creation and editing, I use FullPaint more than
SuperPaint or MacPaint or whatever because I like its feel and the way it
works. I don't have a large screen display, and in the sampling i've
had of 'stepping out', I find it more confusion than its worth. My terminal
emulators don't work with it: the ones that do are slow.
What is really lacking in the world of software marketing is a way to evaluate
whether or not the software that looks good on the package is suitable and
desirable to you. At less than $80, I can hardly call FullPaint a ripoff if
it doesn't take full advantage of a $2000 enhancement to a $1999 computer...
Neither does MacPaint, currently about $125. Did you try it out before
you paid the $80 or the $2000?
On the other hand, the dealer support, particularly with a significantly more
complex computer like the Mac II, is definitely going to be a serious problem.
I have a 'good' dealer nearby who tries to be responsive to my needs and the
needs of the people who have machines at my place of business. I stop there
and chat with them on a regular basis about what's up, where there are
difficulties, etc. I try to help out when I can.
There is absolutely no way for them to help a customer in an adequate sense
with a problem relating to, say, MPW. I assume that users of this new and
powerful hardware are planning serious, complex tasks to accomplish with it.
Who will they turn to for solutions?
APDA has no mechanism for assisting users with problems like this either.
My dealing with them (starting at the MacExpo) left me in a fury about a
product which they had in stock when I paid for it and took nearly two
months to arrive at my door. Many dozens of phone calls.
This is totally unacceptable.
I asked a question at a MacExpo forum that I thought was particularly weakly
answered. I repeat it: 'If APDA is your sole official channel for Macintosh
development system software and a user is neither a registered nor a certified
developer, to whom does such a user turn for technical support?' The
slightly muffled answers were something about a users group and "we're working
on that" noises.
If I buy any other software product, I have in my hot
little hands a phone number to call when I got stuck. Even if the
problem could be resolved with "look at page 35, paragraph 3" (something
like that happened with Silicon Press and I was very relieved to have that
hot line), it is not a trivial problem that i can wait a minimum of three
or four days to get feedback. I believe that Apple has to do something
more then hire evangelists to sort this situation out: Apple has to rethink
the service end of their organization and deal with customer support
in a more responsive fashion from above the distribution level.
Godfrey DiGiorgi
digiorgi@jpl-vlsi
------------------------------
End of INFO-MAC Digest
**********************