ul01+@andrew.cmu.edu (Urbano Adolfo Lopez) (06/02/90)
Has anyone used or tried the Mac implementation of APL by STSC? I am interested in a review. Any leads will also be appreciated. Thanks. Al.
davin@whitwiz.UUCP (Davin Church) (06/05/90)
Well, I got to see the APL/Mac product shortly after it's release in '87, and it seemed to be a good product at the time. I've not heard much about it since then, so I suppose they haven't been pushing it much. I remember they were very proud of the fact that it was well-integrated into the Mac operating system and facilities without sacrificing any important parts of the traditional APL interface. ================================================================ Davin Church // home:214-289-0195 ...!texbell!digi!whitwiz!davin // work:214-285-0976 davin@whitwiz // usmail: 735 Pebble Creek \\ // Mesquite, TX \X/ 75149 ================================================================ An APL a day... ================================================================
DLB@psuvm.psu.edu (Dan Bernitt) (06/06/90)
I also looked at it shortly after its release and, while I was able to transfer some workspaces from an IBM PC (including binding them so that they start APL when selected), I was not really impressed with its MAC interface. Haven't heard a peep about it since and have not investigated further. I don't believe it was actually written by STSC and their continued releases of the IBM product leave the MAC version in the dust, as far as I know.
pool@milton.u.washington.edu (Jonathan Pool) (07/04/90)
STSC took over Portable Software's PortaAPL for the Mac and made a few improvements, then sold it as APL*PLUS for the Mac. It wasn't bad by usual APL standards, but fell far short of expectations of Mac programmers for full access to the Toolbox. Anyway, STSC promised further improvements and asked for user feedback. It got some feedback, which apparently persuaded it to let the product die rather than keep developing it. It turned out that the product had not sufficiently followed the Mac interface guidelines to let it function on the SE and the Mac II when these subsequently came out, and STSC never made the modifications that would let it work on these machines. Strangely enough, the original PortaAPL does work on my Mac IIx, while STSC's adaptation of it crashes on launch.
vignaux@rua.isor.vuw.ac.nz (Tony Vignaux) (07/05/90)
I enjoyed using the above implementation of APL on a Mac while in the States - even though it wasn't really Mac oriented. Can someone post the address for purchase of PortaAPL or any other Mac implementations of APL? Any chance of APL2? It would be useful to have both UK and USA addresses and those of any agencies in out part of the world. Prof G A (Tony) Vignaux vignaux@isor.vuw.ac.nz Institute of Statistics and Operations Research Tel:(4)721-000 Victoria University, PO Box 600, Wellington Fax:(4)712-070 New Zealand
amichiel@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Allen J Michielsen) (07/05/90)
In article <4753@milton.u.washington.edu> pool@milton.u.washington.edu (Jonathan Pool) writes: >followed the Mac interface guidelines to let it function on the SE and >the Mac II when these subsequently came out, and STSC never made the >modifications that would let it work on these machines. Strangely >enough, the original PortaAPL does work on my Mac IIx, while STSC's >adaptation of it crashes on launch. Hum, That's funny it runs on all the SE's in my dept, as well as the II's IIc's, IIx's & IIcx's that we own & are located in the public clusters. Besides incompatability with SOME desk acc's & init's and the extended keyboard, it works fine. However, it is a sad case to have to own 2 keyboards for a computer because different software each requires a different one. al
pool@milton.u.washington.edu (Jonathan Pool) (07/05/90)
Allen J Michielsen says STSC's APL*PLUS runs on all sorts of recent Macs. Strange, since STSC told me an SE fix was not too difficult but a Mac II fix was not user-feasible. When using the extended keyboard, what happens? Just curious, since I don't really plan to enslave myself to software whose developer can't be expected to provide user support and occasional updates.