mo@messy.bellcore.com (Michael O'Dell) (11/15/90)
I heard a rumor which I simply can't believe is true, but thought people here might know the answer. I was told that a DWB 3.1 source license costs $20,000!!!! More than the ENTIRE UNIX system did for COMMERCIAL purposes at one time???? This can't be true, can it?? I mean, I looked at what they give you over DWB 2.0 and that can't possibly be right, can it?? Does anyone know for sure?? Astonished minds want to know... -Mike
rstevens@noao.edu (Rich Stevens) (11/15/90)
As I understand, DWB 3.1 source is $20,000. DWB 3.1 Plus is $30,000. The latter comes with Picasso (a drawing package). Picasso by itself is $15,000. Rich Stevens
doug@letni.UUCP (Doug Davis) (11/16/90)
In article <1990Nov15.134714.15935@bellcore.bellcore.com> mo@messy.UUCP (Michael O'Dell) writes: >I heard a rumor which I simply can't believe is true, but thought >people here might know the answer. I was told that a DWB 3.1 source >license costs $20,000!!!! > >Does anyone know for sure?? Yes that true and very sad. We purchased DWB2.0 in June '90, and it will still cost us 15k to upgrade to 3.1! What could possibly justify the cost to upgrade from 2.0 to 3.1? From the document I have gotten (re: posting to this group) all I can see is a few new cute features, but nothing of substance. Someone explain what DWB 3.1 can do that I can't with 2.0 and a bit of net software? doug __ Doug Davis/4409 Sarazen/Mesquite Texas, 75150/214-270-9226 {texsun|lawnet|smu}!letni!doug doug@letni.lonestar.org "Be seeing you..."
npn@cbnewsl.att.com (nils-peter.nelson) (11/16/90)
In article <1990Nov15.134714.15935@bellcore.bellcore.com>, mo@messy.bellcore.com (Michael O'Dell) writes: > I heard a rumor which I simply can't believe is true, but thought > people here might know the answer. I was told that a DWB 3.1 source > license costs $20,000!!!! More than the ENTIRE UNIX system did > for COMMERCIAL purposes at one time???? This can't be true, can it?? > I mean, I looked at what they give you over DWB 2.0 and that > can't possibly be right, can it?? > > Does anyone know for sure?? > > Astonished minds want to know... > -Mike Well, prices have gone up since 1970, you know. This is a source license, so a company could/would install it on lots of machines. The sgml translator for the Sun is $12,500 for *binary*. S/370 Publishing System from IBM is $50,000 for *binary*. The target for this product is large companies and VARs. I would guess a binary from a VAR would price around $500 for a 386 or Sun 3, if they had a reasonable size market (in the thousands). University price is $1,000, so the only ones who should be chagrined at the price are small companies who want source. But why would you want source? Anyway, Bellcore already bought it!
npn@cbnewsl.att.com (nils-peter.nelson) (11/16/90)
In re: Someone explain what DWB 3.1 can do that I can't with 2.0 and a bit of net software? === DWB 2.0 was regrettably buggy and very nonportable. If you are a University with slave labor you perhaps did not mind the effort to make DWB run on various architectures. 3.1 is completely portable to BSD and all System V's. 3.1 also has a first-rate PostScript support package; with 2.0 and net software you are probably getting APS-5 width tables sent to PostScript, which yields sloppy spacing on final output. We have timed our troff-to-postscript translator against some of the commercial competition and measured 3 to 5 times speed improvement (not only CPU, but printer speed; the printer was running 2 ppm with some of the competitive products vs 8 ppm with dpost on conventional Canon printers). The 3.1 version has been used to publish many high-quality books and magazines, including some AT&T documentation that runs into the thousands of pages. This is "industrial strength" text formatting. I will concede that if all you want is a two page business letter, there are lots of PC alternatives. Oh yes, and there is now extensive documentation for end users, including tutorials with lots of examples. Machine readable (troff, of course).
tut@cairo.Eng.Sun.COM (Bill "Bill" Tuthill) (11/17/90)
I think this is finally the end of troff. Hallelujah! Thank you AT&T for finally driving a stake through its heart. Here are your choices: DWB 3.1 (with Picasso) $30,000 Frame 2.1 (graphics included) $ 2,500 Admittedly DWB 3.1 includes source, but who needs source if you have support? It's hard to imagine that any troff VAR would sell DWB 3.1 for significantly less than $2,500-- they don't now. So when Frame comes out with a great table package, what advantage could troff offer? A rebarbative input syntax, perhaps?
rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) (11/17/90)
npn@cbnewsl.att.com (nils-peter.nelson) writes: > ...The target > for this product is large companies and VARs. I would > guess a binary from a VAR would price around $500 > for a 386 or Sun 3, if they had a reasonable size market > (in the thousands). A large company is going to want the source license, I guess, so that they can afford DWB! What do the rest of us do? Does AT&T really believe that only "large companies and VARs" want nice-looking output from their laser printers? $500 is an exorbitant price for a "little" piece like DWB, when people are targeting complete System V.4 UNIX releases for something in the neighbor- hood of $1500-2000. I'm afraid O'Dell is right. I want DWB 3.1 for my use. But will I be able to afford (i.e., cost- justify) it? -- Dick Dunn rcd@ico.isc.com -or- ico!rcd Boulder, CO (303)449-2870 Cellular phones: more deadly than marijuana.
chip@chinacat.Unicom.COM (Chip Rosenthal) (11/17/90)
In article <1990Nov15.205157.20930@cbnewsl.att.com> npn@cbnewsl.att.com (nils-peter.nelson) writes: >I would guess a binary from a VAR would price around $500 for a 386 or Sun 3 Reality check. Most places selling DWB 2.0 based 386 binaries do so at nearly double this cost. I strongly doubt they will be providing 50% discounts with a 3.1 based release. (Please note I said "most" - there are some inexpensive troff's around too.) This, combined with earlier statements to the effect that we should throw all our non-postscript printers into the crapper, leads me to believe that either the DWB 3.1 distribution was concocted in an ivory tower, or AT&T is damned proud of this release. >University price is $1,000, so the only ones who should >be chagrined at the price are small companies who want >source. But why would you want source? I don't. But I want the people who provide my binaries to get it. And I've heard rumors to the effect that they aren't interested. -- Chip Rosenthal 512-482-8260 | We was raising insurance premiums, ma. Unicom Systems Development | We was spreading fear of arson. <chip@chinacat.Unicom.COM> | - Michelle Shocked
jay@silence.princeton.nj.us (Jay Plett) (11/17/90)
In article <2971@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>, tut@cairo.Eng.Sun.COM (Bill "Bill" Tuthill) writes: ... > Here are your choices: > > DWB 3.1 (with Picasso) $30,000 > Frame 2.1 (graphics included) $ 2,500 How about a NeXT at educational pricing? You get text processing, a dictionary, and the works of Shakespeare for $3200. They even throw in a computer to run it on for free! :-)
npn@cbnewsl.att.com (nils-peter.nelson) (11/19/90)
In article <2971@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>, tut@cairo.Eng.Sun.COM (Bill "Bill" Tuthill) writes: > I think this is finally the end of troff. Hallelujah! Thank you > AT&T for finally driving a stake through its heart. > > Here are your choices: > > DWB 3.1 (with Picasso) $30,000 > Frame 2.1 (graphics included) $ 2,500 > > Admittedly DWB 3.1 includes source, but who needs source if you > have support? It's hard to imagine that any troff VAR would sell > DWB 3.1 for significantly less than $2,500-- they don't now. So > when Frame comes out with a great table package, what advantage > could troff offer? A rebarbative input syntax, perhaps? For DWB 2.0, binary price ran as low as $99 (nroff for PC). List price for most workstations was under $1,000. Assuming the VAR has any significant business, the source license is less than 5% of his cost, so is unlikely to be a significant factor. Bill might also enjoy the current bantering (in comp.text.desktop, I think) ensuing from someone's complaint that it seems to be impossible to divert formatted output to a file using his favorite formatter.
rstevens@noao.edu (Rich Stevens) (11/19/90)
In article <1990Nov19.143129.12604@cbnewsl.att.com> npn@cbnewsl.att.com (nils-peter.nelson) writes: > >List price for most workstations was under $1,000. Not quite. I talked to Elan (one of the bigger troff VARS, I'd guess) and two months ago they wanted $1,795 for DWB 2.0 with a PostScript filter. Add an X11 previewer and it's another $495. This was all for a SPARCstation SLC, which I consider to be a single-user system. I'd bet SoftQuad is as much, if not more. After posting to this newsgroup I finally found one VAR whose price is $750 for a 1-2 user workstation. In fact, after posting to this group no one gave me the names of any VARs selling binary DWB for a SPARC other than these three. And then I found groff ... Rich Stevens
woods@eci386.uucp (Greg A. Woods) (11/20/90)
In article <1990Nov15.205157.20930@cbnewsl.att.com> npn@cbnewsl.att.com (nils-peter.nelson) writes: > In article <1990Nov15.134714.15935@bellcore.bellcore.com>, mo@messy.bellcore.com (Michael O'Dell) writes: > > I heard a rumor which I simply can't believe is true, but thought > > people here might know the answer. I was told that a DWB 3.1 source > > license costs $20,000!!!! > >[....] >[...various words about other high priced software, but yes it is $20,000...] > University price is $1,000, so the only ones who should > be chagrined at the price are small companies who want > source. But why would you want source? Oh, so we can do silly things like change it! :-) Hopefully one of the primary reasons from the past for wanting easy access to source has been eliminated. This reason being the necessity of having source to fix bugs.... Actually, unless DWB 3.1 has been tuned up as well as something like SoftQuad's version of 2.0 (i.e. with many of the limits removed, long macro names added, enhanced error reporting, better kerning, etc.), it won't be worth much. On the other hand, some of us might prefer to hack these features in ourselves, rather than pay a third party to do it *their* way.... Also, if the source has really been cleaned up it might be a thing of beauty to behold, and worth having for its own sake! :-) -- Greg A. Woods woods@{eci386,gate,robohack,ontmoh,tmsoft}.UUCP ECI and UniForum Canada +1-416-443-1734 [h] +1-416-595-5425 [w] VE3TCP Toronto, Ontario CANADA
kim@Software.Mitel.com (Kim Letkeman) (11/20/90)
In article <1990Nov19.155006.8461@noao.edu> rstevens@noao.edu (Rich Stevens) writes: | In article <1990Nov19.143129.12604@cbnewsl.att.com> npn@cbnewsl.att.com (nils-peter.nelson) writes: | > | >List price for most workstations was under $1,000. | | Not quite. I talked to Elan (one of the bigger troff VARS, I'd | guess) and two months ago they wanted $1,795 for DWB 2.0 with a | PostScript filter. Add an X11 previewer and it's another $495. | This was all for a SPARCstation SLC, which I consider to be a | single-user system. I'd bet SoftQuad is as much, if not more. We're evaluating SoftQuad at this moment. They want about $2800 CDN per server. At least, that's what I got verbally. This makes them a good value for a shop with a number of users on a server. I called AT&T and was passed to head office in Toronto. They say that DWB 3.1 is not a supported product yet (i.e. I can't get it yet.) This may only apply to Canada, but from some of the recent postings, it looks like it's still a bit rough. -- Kim Letkeman kim@software.mitel.com uunet!mitel!spock!kim
woods@eci386.uucp (Greg A. Woods) (11/21/90)
In article <2971@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> tut@cairo.Eng.Sun.COM (Bill "Bill" Tuthill) writes: > I think this is finally the end of troff. Hallelujah! Thank you > AT&T for finally driving a stake through its heart. Well, it's clear where your predjudices are.... :-( > Here are your choices: > > DWB 3.1 (with Picasso) $30,000 > Frame 2.1 (graphics included) $ 2,500 > > Admittedly DWB 3.1 includes source, but who needs source if you > have support? It's hard to imagine that any troff VAR would sell > DWB 3.1 for significantly less than $2,500-- they don't now. So > when Frame comes out with a great table package, what advantage > could troff offer? A rebarbative input syntax, perhaps? Excuse me? Where did you get your facts? I can buy a fully blown, supported, DWB-2.0 for my 386, 3b2, risc, vax, ncr, sun, next, etc. for about $275 from at least one source, and get supported jetroff or devps for about another $200. SoftQuad's sqtroff starts at ~$975. Elan's troff is somewhat less than SQ's. DWB-2.0 from ISC was ~$200. I recall that DWB-2.0 was ~$20,000, and the additional $10,000 is for Picasso if I rememer right. Regardless, any increase in price would only be in line with recent increases in other AT&T licenses. What's a source license for Frame cost? When Frame runs on character terminals (and/or my 5620), I'll buy it. Out of my own pocket even! -- Greg A. Woods woods@{eci386,gate,robohack,ontmoh,tmsoft}.UUCP ECI and UniForum Canada +1-416-443-1734 [h] +1-416-595-5425 [w] VE3TCP Toronto, Ontario CANADA
woods@eci386.uucp (Greg A. Woods) (11/21/90)
In article <1706@chinacat.Unicom.COM> chip@chinacat.Unicom.COM (Chip Rosenthal) writes: > This, combined with earlier statements to the effect that we should throw > all our non-postscript printers into the crapper, leads me to believe > that either the DWB 3.1 distribution was concocted in an ivory tower, or > AT&T is damned proud of this release. I suspect the latter is the truth. Regardless, the same device independent output is still there, and unless you missed it, so is a new post-processor for HP PCL. > >[....] But why would you want source? > > I don't. But I want the people who provide my binaries to get it. And > I've heard rumors to the effect that they aren't interested. I suspect it is because they either think they have already done the same work to get similar features (as I think is the case at SoftQuad), or they don't want to start from scratch with something that in the previous release needed significant work to just get up and running. Personally I think the "starting over" step is very important in the evolution of a product. Look at the history of UNIX and what was done each time a new Edition was released. I too hope that either current DWB-2.0 vendors, or new ones, promptly switch to 3.1, since I can't afford the source! -- Greg A. Woods woods@{eci386,gate,robohack,ontmoh,tmsoft}.UUCP ECI and UniForum Canada +1-416-443-1734 [h] +1-416-595-5425 [w] VE3TCP Toronto, Ontario CANADA
woods@eci386.uucp (Greg A. Woods) (11/23/90)
In article <1990Nov19.155006.8461@noao.edu> rstevens@noao.edu (Rich Stevens) writes: > In article <1990Nov19.143129.12604@cbnewsl.att.com> npn@cbnewsl.att.com (nils-peter.nelson) writes: > > > >List price for most workstations was under $1,000. > > Not quite. I talked to Elan (one of the bigger troff VARS, I'd guess) > and two months ago they wanted $1,795 for DWB 2.0 with a PostScript > filter. Add an X11 previewer and it's another $495. This was all > for a SPARCstation SLC, which I consider to be a single-user system. > I'd bet SoftQuad is as much, if not more. After posting to this > newsgroup I finally found one VAR whose price is $750 for a 1-2 user > workstation. In fact, after posting to this group no one gave me the > names of any VARs selling binary DWB for a SPARC other than these three. SoftQuad prices start at ~$975.00, according to the last price list I saw. For a 3B2/400 they quoted me $2,700.00 with PostScript, though this will definitely be a multi-user license. Not to mention that sqtroff, and probably Elan's too, have some of the features 3.1 has, as well as other features that may make it better for some people. Why would anyone *buy* an X11 previewer? You should get it from your X11 vendor, or from the MIT contrib tape in souce form. The cheap DWB-2.0 I was refering to in this newsgroup is the Leverage Programmable Publishing System. It's from Urban Applied Science, Inc. They were showing at the Fujitsu booth at UNIX Expo. According to their literature their port is currently available for 386's, 286's, Amdahl/Fujitsu UTS, and 3B2's. Even on the Fujitsu it's only $500 (+$275 for devps). They have 1-800 support (30 days free, then $40/quarter), and e-mail support, ($20/quarter). They have a Cyrillic Edition too! They supply jetroff and devps as options. Urban Applied Science, Inc. 24 Commerce St. Newark, NJ 07102 {attmail,uunet},!urban!sales (201) 242-7230 (800) 872-8763 159 266 382 (urban) [Telex] [ We should all fill their mailbox with requests for 3.1! :-) ] -- Greg A. Woods woods@{eci386,gate,robohack,ontmoh,tmsoft}.UUCP ECI and UniForum Canada +1-416-443-1734 [h] +1-416-595-5425 [w] VE3TCP Toronto, Ontario CANADA
al@escom.com (Al Donaldson) (11/24/90)
> The cheap DWB-2.0 I was refering to in this newsgroup is the Leverage > Programmable Publishing System. It's from Urban Applied Science, > Inc. They were showing at the Fujitsu booth at UNIX Expo. According > to their literature their port is currently available for 386's, > 286's, Amdahl/Fujitsu UTS, and 3B2's. Even on the Fujitsu it's only > $500 (+$275 for devps). Greg didn't mention Urban's Sun 3 version of DWB 2. I don't know if Urban sells many of these, but I bought one (the first?) and it works fine. I've cranked out well over a thousand pages of ditroff with embedded PostScript graphics for a Gov't contract using DWB 2 and devps (ditroff-PS filter from Pipeline Assoc.) on a NEC 890 printer. Both DWB and devps cost around $600-$650 total -- your pricing may vary. I am very pleased with both packages and I believe they stand up well against the higher-priced products. Even though both Urban and Pipeline are fairly small, their support has been quite good (perhaps BECAUSE they are small...). > Urban Applied Science, Inc. > {attmail,uunet},!urban!sales > (800) 872-8763 Also Pipeline Associates 201-731-7860 I know I've gotten off the track a bit here (talking about DWB 2.0), but I just wanted to echo Greg's observations (say "Amen!") I've not followed this group recently -- can someone fill me in on the differences between 2.0 and 3.1 (email is fine). Why would I want to buy 3.1 if 2.0 is working so well? Al
lark@tivoli.UUCP (Lar Kaufman) (11/27/90)
On the other hand, a locked FrameMaker license (currently available for
Macintosh and NeXT) goes for $995. I have seen the Mac version discounted
by a mail-order house to $695. Maybe what we should be lobbying for is
for Frame to offer locked licenses for all platforms...
-lar
--
--------- TIVOLI Systems, Inc.
Lar Kaufman (voice) 512-329-2455
(fax) 512-329-2755
Austin, Texas USA (e) lark@tivoli.comjay@silence.princeton.nj.us (Jay Plett) (11/28/90)
In article <1990Nov15.211043.21640@cbnewsl.att.com>, npn@cbnewsl.att.com (nils-peter.nelson) writes: > In re: Someone explain what > DWB 3.1 can do that I can't with 2.0 and a bit of net software? > === > DWB 2.0 was regrettably buggy and very nonportable. > If you are a University with slave labor... [ and so on, justifying the price ] Nelson is justifiably proud of his product. I can understand and appreciate his enthusiasm. But his words would have been more appropriate in comp.newprod where exaggeration, misleading inference, and hyperbole are expected. And his product's venerable heritage deserves more respect than he accords it. Troff has a history. Troff, tbl and eqn participated in the birth of Unix. Troff begat ditroff, and more accessories were added. ATT shipped them over a period of years in several versions under two package names, Typesetter-Independent Troff (a/k/a Ditroff) and Documenter's WorkBench. These programs are notable for their portability--no slaves required. Like most programs, they contain bugs. Yet, in spite of the bugs, this software has produced millions of pages of high-quality documents. Indeed, one of the reasons often given for the rise of Unix is its *inclusion* of powerful text processing utilities. I'll leave it to others to debate whether a maintenance release warrants a fivefold price hike. What prompts me to respond is the--IMHO--cavalier attitude apparent in ATT's marketing of DWB. Bill Tuthill said it well: > I think this is finally the end of troff. Hallelujah! Thank you > AT&T for finally driving a stake through its heart. Unlike Tuthill, I think we've lost something. Sure, troff is in its declining years. Alternatives have appeared; for lots of text munching jobs, some of them are superior. For the kinds of job that troff excels at, there is at least one alternative, tex, with its own merits. As a publishing system, DWB's share of the Unix audience is limited and dwindling. Dick Dunn referred to DWB as a "'little' piece." That it is, but it is also a "key" piece when properly positioned. Troff and its accessory programs were invented to play a role in a system that was designed as a toolbox. Troff's great strength lies in its ubiquity and its "toolness". Old CAT troff is too tired for contemporary duty, but ditroff still has spunk. If its presence could be relied on, software developers and mobile users could build from it. It's no prima donna, but--as an integral part of Unix--ditroff's supporting role could help carry the show. While troff, in its current incarnation as ditroff, still has legitimate uses, I believe that it is being misused by ATT's marketing arm. Now would have been a good moment in this tool's history to enlarge, not diminish, its availability. It ought to be bundled with the OS where it could play the part it was conceived for, not exiled to a loyal fan club's salon. Reality check. There's money to be made from a robust version of ditroff. There are organizations who, for whatever reason, depend on it and can afford it. I would like to argue that this overlooks ditroff's potential to enhance the profitability of Unix itself. But, despite ditroff's potential to enhance the *utility* of The Unix Operating System, my naive argument probably won't wash. Unix's market position has grown strong enough that it can be sustained by marketing methods alone. Unix no longer needs to rely on its integrity. The play has moved from Murray Hill to Greensboro. So how can I deny ATT its right to profit from its intellectual property? I can't. I can only clasp my hat to chest, cast my eyes downward, and mumble: "I think we've lost something". Jay Plett jay@silence.princeton.nj.us
npn@cbnewsl.att.com (nils-peter.nelson) (11/29/90)
I hope this is of interest to the general community. I have no intention of boring the world with interpersonal chit-chat. Jay Plett writes an excellent essay, and I find relatively little fault with what he says. First, the nits. Plett upholds the history of troff. So do I. My criticism was of the externally packaged DWB 2.0 release compared with what was being used internally at the time. The internal package was considerably more robust and modern. The goal in bringing out 3.1 was to give the outside world access to the same technology afforded to Bell Labs people. Plett and Dunn call DWB a 'little' piece. There are 112 files in the version on this system, and that doesn't count the font tables and files. 35,000 blocks of source code hardly qualifies at little. There are 23 new postscript programs alone. It was certainly my own personal preference to package DWB with UNIX. I lost. As a result, the current UNIX shipped by USL doesn't even include the 'man' command (because man relies on nroff). Having lost that battle, what is a reasonable price for 60,000 or so lines of well-tested, portable source code? As mentioned earlier, some VARs paid $4,000 for the 2.0 source license, compiled it, and sold binaries for $8,000 apiece (Amdahl price)! The grand strategy, so to speak, is that large companies would do well to buy a source license for their own internal use; it's cheaper and gives them the obvious benefit of source code. Most important, they get *identical* software on Amdahl, AT&T, DEC, IBM, Sun, hardware. Smaller companies will have to rely on VARs selling binary. AT&T should be coming out with a complete set (386, 486, 3B2, System 7000) early next year. I've been unable to get the attention of anyone at Sun and the others, but perhaps this will help. And, last, the university license of $1,000 for source is, to my mind, generous. A guy who works for me has *two* kids at Princeton, and that's $40,000 in tuition room and board. My own personal vision is for DWB to be something you can count on wherever you compute. It's not the sexiest formatter around, but it is the most dependable. I can ship troff files to any of several thousand people inside AT&T via e-mail with confidence that they will be able to run off exactly what I intended on their local printer. Unlike PostScript, these files are revisable and so promote multiple-authored, inter- location documents. That's our target: distributed, multi-machine, multi-vendor environment with "industrial strength" needs (dozens to thousands of pages).
ilan343@violet.berkeley.edu (Geraldo Veiga) (11/29/90)
In article <1990Nov28.193202.19684@cbnewsl.att.com> npn@cbnewsl.att.com (nils-peter.nelson) writes: > >It was certainly my own personal preference to package DWB >with UNIX. I lost. As a result, the current UNIX shipped by >USL doesn't even include the 'man' command (because man >relies on nroff). I've been looking into 386 SysV 4.0 recently and at least 2 of them -- Dell and Microport -- say they include some version of troff. Does any one know what version of troff (if any) is included with the official Sys V 4.0 release? I couldn't figure out from the information vendors gave me, but at least one of them told me that they used whatever version they have to generate their published versions of the manuals. From the point of view of an end user, I think DWB is in trouble whatever AT&T does with it (short of giving it away). I am a troff user moving more and more into the TeX world. I'd love to have some usable version of DWB 3.1 with whatever PC Unix I decide on, but I doubt I'd be willing to pay whatever VARs will have to charge for the binaries. Without arguing technical issues, the portability of TeX makes it the unavoidable choice. It runs anywhere and prints to any printer. With most users moving to PCs or workstations for their writing chores, AT&T has to rethink dramatically how their software is distributed. >My own personal vision is for DWB to be something you can >count on wherever you compute. It's not the sexiest formatter >around, but it is the most dependable. I can ship troff files >to any of several thousand people inside AT&T via e-mail with >confidence that they will be able to run off exactly what I >intended on their local printer. Unlike PostScript, these >files are revisable and so promote multiple-authored, inter- >location documents. That's our target: distributed, >multi-machine, multi-vendor environment with "industrial >strength" needs (dozens to thousands of pages). Maybe internally at AT&T it might be possible, but it is too late for the rest of the world. I deal with 2 different versions of troff/DWB and they have very different features. I use DWB 2.0 on a 3b2 where I use "grap", but I have no useful printer support, no bibliography package, no ms macros. The version I use under BSD have the "bib" bibliography package, PS filters, but an older ditroff, no grap and an ancient version of "mm". After some gimnastics I can come up with a "portable" version of the document, but the actual source cannot be shipped back and forth between co-authors. Geraldo
wsb@boise.Eng.Sun.COM (Walt Brainerd) (11/30/90)
In article <1990Nov28.193202.19684@cbnewsl.att.com>, npn@cbnewsl.att.com (nils-peter.nelson) writes: > > ... I've been unable to > get the attention of anyone at Sun and the others, but IBM now bundles DWB 2.0 with their 6000 system. Others will bundle some old version of troff with SVR4. Suppose one of these companies decided they wanted to bundle DWB 3.1 instead. According to my reading of the sublicensing agreement, they must pay AT&T a royalty of max ($120, 1% x system price, 10% x DWB price), with a maximum of $750 for each binary distributed. Suppose that next year this company ships 50,000 workstations selling for $20,000 each (a little low for Sun and perhaps IBM). They then owe royalties of 1% x $2B = $20M. I suppose AT&T might work out a better deal than the standard volume discounts, but maybe this explains why you haven't been able to get their attention. It's great that we all agree that ditroff, though creaky, is still a nice thing to have around. The problem is that not many people are willing to pay a very large price for it, especially with gnu troff and tex available. Hence it will be difficult to justify bundling it and it will be more difficult for a small VAR to make any money reselling binaries when the initial cost and royalties are not Real Cheap. -- Walt Brainerd Sun Microsystems, Inc. wsb@eng.sun.com MS MTV 5-40 Mountain View, CA 94043 415/336-5991
wsb@boise.Eng.Sun.COM (Walt Brainerd) (11/30/90)
In article <3691@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>, wsb@boise.Eng.Sun.COM (Walt Brainerd) writes: > that next year this company ships 50,000 workstations > selling for $20,000 each (a little low for Sun and perhaps > IBM). They then owe royalties of 1% x $2B = $20M. I I was going to say 100,000 workstations (but I didn't want to make the low-volume folks look bad :) and forgot to change 1% x $2B = $20M to 1% x $1B = $10M. -- Walt Brainerd Sun Microsystems, Inc. wsb@eng.sun.com MS MTV 5-40 Mountain View, CA 94043 415/336-5991
rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) (12/01/90)
npn@cbnewsl.att.com (nils-peter.nelson) writes, in reply to Jay Plett and bits from others... > Plett upholds the history of troff. So do I. My criticism > was of the externally packaged DWB 2.0 release compared > with what was being used internally at the time... Having tried to rebuild 2.0, I have to concur with npn's earlier assessments of the problems there. > Plett and Dunn call DWB a 'little' piece. There are 112 files > in the version on this system, and that doesn't count the font > tables and files. 35,000 blocks of source code hardly qualifies > at little. There are 23 new postscript programs alone. First, let me explain my characterization of size: I think of "DWB" as troff, tbl, eqn, pic, grap, a back-end, and some miscellaneous others. It's a lot of code, sure, and it's valuable code. (I wouldn't complain about the cost so much if I didn't want it!!) But DWB is typically something like 5% of a complete UNIX system in size. That doesn't mean I expect it to be 5% of the price--that would be unrealistic. But I think having it be 30-50% of the price of a complete UNIX system is unrealistic in the other direction. I'm hoping that "35,000 blocks" was really meant to be 35,000 lines! I'm unwilling to think of 17 Mb of source code for DWB--that would be about a ten-folk expansion. > Having lost that battle, what is a reasonable price for > 60,000 or so lines of well-tested, portable source code? Pricing is always tricky. However, you do have to take into account the market--it's not closed; there are a few other serious text-processing systems out there. The price needs to be set based on what it's worth to people, not what it cost you to develop it. (The relationship between worth-to-customer and cost-to-developer is only the minor matter of whether you make money on it.:-) > My own personal vision is for DWB to be something you can > count on wherever you compute... The trouble with that is that the unbundling killed it. I'm with you--AT&T should have bundled it with UNIX. But as long as it's an option, and an expensive one (relative to the rest of the system) it's not likely that enough people will have it that you can count on it. That's too bad. -- Dick Dunn rcd@ico.isc.com -or- ico!rcd Boulder, CO (303)449-2870 ...Mr. Natural says, "Use the right tool for the job."
ronald@robobar.co.uk (Ronald S H Khoo) (12/03/90)
rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) writes: > But as long as it's an option, and an > expensive one (relative to the rest of the system) it's not likely that > enough people will have it that you can count on it. That's too bad. There is something ISC could do to counter this, though. What about trying to persuade to boss to make some money available to James Clark so that he can bring groff up to the polish where you would be happy to ship it in your product? THen everyone else would as well :-) Then we can *all* have DWB 3.1 functionality, be real grateful to ISC (so we'd spend more time convincing the boss to switch to it :-) and you can depend upon folx having said functionality ? Just a pipedream, I know. Sigh. -- ronald@robobar.co.uk +44 81 991 1142 (O) +44 71 229 7741 (H)
jmm@eci386.uucp (John Macdonald) (12/04/90)
In article <1990Dec1.004822.6498@ico.isc.com> rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) writes: |npn@cbnewsl.att.com (nils-peter.nelson) writes: | |> My own personal vision is for DWB to be something you can |> count on wherever you compute... | |The trouble with that is that the unbundling killed it. I'm with you--AT&T |should have bundled it with UNIX. But as long as it's an option, and an |expensive one (relative to the rest of the system) it's not likely that |enough people will have it that you can count on it. That's too bad. I agree with Dick here, and I consider irresponsible of AT&T to have acted in this way. DWB and its precursors have been included as part of the standard distribution for most of the history of Unix (which of course was mostly done by Bell Labs, before it became a significant commercial product). When DWB was unbundled it changed the value of Unix for the worse - it was no longer obviously correct to write documentation in troff, because suddenly there was no assurance that your target audience might be able to read it. Now AT&T has put the nail in the coffin of "Unix standard documentation". I don't expect that Posix will be able to mandate a single ubiquitous standard documentation format - I'm sure that there will be too much pressure to approve some form of TeX as well as some form of [nt]roff and it will be a long time (if ever) before you can depend upon *all* possible customers being able to use a single document format. There were definite advantages to the days when "purchasing" Unix meant leaving a tape around Bell Labs for a while and having it "accidentally overwritten" while you were off at lunch. (Of course there are other advantages to these days too, it's not all for the worse.) -- Cure the common code... | John Macdonald ...Ban Basic - Christine Linge | jmm@eci386
clewis@ecicrl.UUCP (Chris Lewis) (12/04/90)
In article <1990Dec1.004822.6498@ico.isc.com> rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) writes: >The price needs to be set based on what it's worth to >people, not what it cost you to develop it. (The relationship between >worth-to-customer and cost-to-developer is only the minor matter of whether >you make money on it.:-) Precisely right - if what it cost you to develop it was more than it was worth, why bother doing it at all? You're certainly not going to make any money on it then. -- Chris Lewis, Phone: (613) 832-0541 UUCP: uunet!utai!lsuc!ecicrl!clewis Moderator of the Ferret Mailing List (ferret-request@eci386) Psroff mailing list (psroff-request@eci386)
jay@silence.princeton.nj.us (Jay Plett) (12/04/90)
In article <983@ecicrl.UUCP>, clewis@ecicrl.UUCP (Chris Lewis) writes: > ... if what it cost you to develop it was more than it > was worth, why bother doing it at all? Because it was there. A proposition that once had currency at a certain _laboratory_ operated by a company known as Western Electric. ...jay
tut@cairo.Eng.Sun.COM (Bill "Bill" Tuthill) (12/07/90)
Is DWB 3.1 now 8-bit clean? That is, can I type ISO Latin-1 characters into my workstation and expect to see them on output? And is DWB 3.1 now multi-byte clean? Is it able to produce output for Kanji PostScript and other output devices intended for East Asia? I've seen "A Troff Tutorial" in Kanji, so this is a distinct possibility. If the answer to both questions is yes, then DWB 3.1 is worth $30,000. Bill