morus@netmbx.UUCP (Thomas M.) (07/20/88)
As a LOGO fanatic I would be very interested if there were any PC-based LOGO-implementations which use features like high resolution graphics (EGA, VGA), extended memory, multiple turtles, function closures, macros and the like. If you know of any new developments, please let me know and supply, if possible, some dealer, distributor, etc. Thanks a lot in advance! Thomas PS.: I would very much appreciate if you e-mail to my BITNET-address. -- ! Thomas Muhr Knowledge-Based Systems Dept. Technical University of Berlin ! ! BITNET/EARN: muhrth@db0tui11.bitnet ! ! UUCP: morus@netmbx.UUCP (Please don't use from outside Germany) ! ! BTX: 030874162 Tel.: (Germany 0049) (Berlin 030) 87 41 62 !
isaac@gethen.UUCP (Isaac Rabinovitch) (07/31/88)
In article <2131@netmbx.UUCP>, morus@netmbx.UUCP (Thomas M.) writes: > As a LOGO fanatic I would be very interested if there were any > PC-based LOGO-implementations which use features like high > resolution graphics (EGA, VGA), extended memory, multiple > turtles, function closures, macros and the like. > If you know of any new developments, please let me know and > supply, if possible, some dealer, distributor, etc. After seeing that intriguing (if somewhat off the wall) series, *Computer Science Logo Style*, I keep meaning to look for even a simple PC implementation of the LCSI version. I gather the version information in CSLS is a little out of date -- I'd settle for information even on a basic version. On a related problem: I recently picked up for very cheap a TI 99A. This piece of hardware is *truely* an orphan, it doesn't even have a power cable. The only reason I bothered is a dim memory that the machine had a good ROM based Logo. Indeed, the machine rather looks like it was designed by someone who read Paypert's claim that a simple computer should be to the kid of the 80s what a pencil was to a kid of the 50s. But now I wonder if it's worth the trouble. There are still fanatics for this hardware, but none seem interested in Logo.
larry@lunar.UUCP (08/07/88)
> On a related problem: I recently picked up for very cheap a TI 99A. > This piece of hardware is *truely* an orphan, it doesn't even have a > power cable. The only reason I bothered is a dim memory that the > machine had a good ROM based Logo. Indeed, the machine rather looks > like it was designed by someone who read Paypert's claim that a simple > computer should be to the kid of the 80s what a pencil was to a kid of > the 50s. But now I wonder if it's worth the trouble. There are still > fanatics for this hardware, but none seem interested in Logo. I've used it. It's good. The only reasons I don't still use it are that my hardware is busted, the kids lost interest, more important things have come up, and I have a different version of Logo for HP computers that a friend wrote. One of these days I'm gonna fire it up again and have some fun. Larry Fenske lunar!larry