bob@imspw6.UUCP (Bob Burch) (12/27/88)
From Ted Holden, HTE:
Each year around Christmas time, a number of the magazines such as Byte
and PC Magazine publish a list of what they regard as the top ten products
of the ending year in our industry, or possibly what they regard as the
ten most "significant" products.
I have reached a point at which I no longer trust the motives of most
magazine editors and columnists, and have sharp disagreements with a
couple of the items which I have seen in the ten-best lists of at least a
couple of the magazines. I would be interested to see what Usenet readers
might regard as the ten best or ten most significant, as well as ten worst,
not just in the PC/DOS world, but across the industry.
My own tallies for "best/most-significant" and worst don't quite come to
exactly ten in either case, and reflect a rather parochial outlook, since
I deal mostly with UNIX and DOS equipment, and have little contact with
Macs, Ataris, and several other worlds, but would run roughly as follows:
Best or most important, not in any particular order:
The Zortech C++ compiler, baseline version 1.07
Ventura Publisher
The little $180-$250 hand scanners advertised now in virtually
all PC magazines
The X-11 graphics system from MIT
Open-Look
SemWare's "Quick Edit" or "Qedit" text editor
The Hewlett Packard Paint-Jet printer
The Publisher's Paintbrush package from Zsoft
The NeXt computer
The Yale Univ. "Linda" system for parallell processing.
The Compuserve GIF format for graphics interchange
The read/write/erase optical disk from MaxStor and, presumably,
other vendors
The losers category:
The proliferation of cheap FAX machines, X percent of which attach
to computers. Not that there arent legitimate uses for a FAX
machine here and there, but sometimes I think American businessmen
must all take stupid pills; most if not all of the uses I actually
see FAX machines being put to could be far more effectively and
inexpensively handled by cheap modems sending WordPerfect formatted
files over the phone lines using Procomm. Media hype wins again...
OS/2 or, as I refer to it, BS/2. In a couple of years, virtually all
normal computers will be running UNIX. Micro managers will be seeing
386-based desktop machines with applications for which DOS no longer
will suffice, and virtually all mid-sized machines, database servers
etc., which run UNIX. The choice for an OS for the desktop machines
will be simple: UNIX, and ordinary UUCP connections between the
desktops and the mid-sized machines, or OS/2 and forever endure the
pain of dealing with the two dissimilar worlds. This lack of
portability/connectivity will, more than anything else, kill OS/2.
The MCA architecture. Apparently, at this stage of the game, playing
the game under strict IBM rules is simply unacceptable to the majority
of the people who deal with microcomputers in America. There is a
guaranteed place in the history books still waiting for the first
yuppie manager to actually fire somebody for buying IBM hardware,
i.e. "Johnson, you're the idiot who bought those PS/2 model 80s over
there.... YOU'RE FIRED!!!!!!!".
Aldus Pagemaker, PC version: Somebody correct me if I'm wrong on this
one or if I've missed some reasonable method for using this product; I
don't claim to be any kind of expert on this topic. This product gets
a lot of hype in the media which I figure is ill-founded; the one
or two times I've ever tried to use it on 10-12mh ATs, which you have
to figure are the natural machines for it to run on, it has appeared
too slow to use, you mostly sit and watch disk lights flash for many
seconds while attempting font shifts and other simple operations.
The Ada programming language. Recent articles tell a grim story on
this one, especially the series of articles in the Dec. 88 issue of
Electronics Defense. Suppose that, after 15 years of effort, the best
anyone could say about C was "C: Maybe Not So Bad After All", or that
"with C, you will only have major language-related software problems
with ten percent of your requirements..", or that attempts to use C
for embedded systems, the stated main purpose of Ada, had utterly
failed due to the slowness of C and that project managers constrained
to use C regardless had ended up using VRTX and a reduced subset of
C functionality which effectively reduced the variant of C being
used on the project to a subset of Pascal. Would anybody want to be
in the business of selling C compilers after all that hit the news
stands? I know I wouldn't.
kibo@pawl12.pawl.rpi.edu (James Parry) (12/27/88)
[] Please include my 'vote' for PageStream for one of the best products of '88, in terms of power for the price. It's the only piece of software I've ever seen that can make an Epson RX-80 like mine produce Times-Roman, Helvetica, etc., scaled, distorted, etc., just like a LaserWriter can. For $120 (For the Atari ST, I believe an Amiga version is in preparation), that's power... -- James "Kibo" Parry userfe0n@rpitsmts (bitnet) kibo%pawl.rpi.edu@itsgw.rpi.edu (internet)
bradb@ai.toronto.edu (Brad Brown) (12/27/88)
My votes, very biased and to be taken with grains of salt. Not in any particular order, either: The GNU software project, for their efforts over the last while, especially their editor which I use when I'm on Suns. Underware, for Brief 2.1, a programmer's editor running on PCs. It doesn't have all the power of gnuemacs, but it does a whole lot of stuff a whole lot better. The Borland 'Jumbo Pack,' with which they let people who owned any one of a number of Borland programming languages upgrade to a bundle of C, Pascal, assembler, and a debugger. These are all *great* packages and the upgrade cost of 150$US makes it one of the deals of the year. Microsoft Word 4.0. More improvements to one of the best word processors you can get on the PC. (-: Brad Brown :-) bradb@ai.toronto.edu
len@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Leonard P Levine) (12/28/88)
From article <210@imspw6.UUCP>, by bob@imspw6.UUCP (Bob Burch): > From Ted Holden, HTE: > [...] > The losers category: > The proliferation of cheap FAX machines, X percent of which attach > to computers. Not that there arent legitimate uses for a FAX > machine here and there, but sometimes I think American businessmen > must all take stupid pills; most if not all of the uses I actually > see FAX machines being put to could be far more effectively and > inexpensively handled by cheap modems sending WordPerfect formatted > files over the phone lines using Procomm. Media hype wins again... > > I think you miss the point on fax. Many users do not keyboard well or at all. Many jobs are on preprinted forms (orders, drawings, etc.) Fax is just right for this. Fax on PC however, has other utility, such as remote printing directly from a mainframe, and such. We should not ignore the process, just because it takes 1000 times the band- width of the modem equivalent of the text. The overall picture is more important than that. + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + | Leonard P. Levine e-mail len@evax.milw.wisc.edu | | Professor, Computer Science Office (414) 229-5170 | | University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Home (414) 962-4719 | | Milwaukee, WI 53201 U.S.A. Modem (414) 962-6228 | + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +
gal@atux01.UUCP (G. Levine) (12/31/88)
In article <210@imspw6.UUCP>, bob@imspw6.UUCP (Bob Burch) writes: > The losers category: > > The proliferation of cheap FAX machines. Add another to the list--junk mail being sent through FAX lines. Apparently some senders of junk mail have access to FAX numbers and are sending FAX owners junk mail. The main difference is that you can tell junk mail in your mailbox from the envelope, usually, but you'll generally read anything that comes to your FAX machine. I hope FAX owners know of a way to keep FAX lines private in the future. I'm sure FAX machines weren't installed as yet another repository of unwanted stuff. gary -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hello, Sarah, get me Juanita down at the Diner. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
childers@avsd.UUCP (Richard Childers) (01/01/89)
In article <210@imspw6.UUCP> bob@imspw6.UUCP (Bob Burch) writes: >I have reached a point at which I no longer trust the motives of most >magazine editors and columnists ... What took you so long ? -- richard -- * Supernovae are a blast * * * * ..{amdahl|decwrl|octopus|pyramid|ucbvax}!avsd.UUCP!childers@tycho * * AMPEX Corporation - Audio-Visual Systems Division, R & D *
root@blender.UUCP (Super user) (01/02/89)
In article <867@atux01.UUCP>, gal@atux01.UUCP (G. Levine) writes: > In article <210@imspw6.UUCP>, bob@imspw6.UUCP (Bob Burch) writes: > > The losers category: > > > > The proliferation of cheap FAX machines. > > Add another to the list--junk mail being sent through FAX lines. > Apparently some senders of junk mail have access to FAX numbers > and are sending FAX owners junk mail. The main difference is Our office is a victim of Junk-Fax but we've found a solution to the problem. Coming into the office one morning we were greeted by a 5 foot long banner with a fax number on top, an order form and then the message (in big letters) "ARE YOU OUT OF PAPER?". What we did was to chop the banner into 8x10 pieces, put them in the sheet feeder and told it to send 99 copies of each page. We had set it up at night so hopefully no one was there to stop it. Anyways, as a result, we no longer get junk-fax from THAT company.
kurt@tc.fluke.COM (Kurt Guntheroth) (01/03/89)
Best products
Mathematica -- This symbolic algebra package does for algebra homework
what pocket calculators did for arithmetic homework. An immesureable
boon for physicists, it may just possibly be the death nell for any
future generation of mathematicians. How will they learn if they can
just get the answers (to all known problems) out of a computer?
NeXT -- Whether it is a success or not, the NeXT box has upped the ante
in the workstation market. The integration of sound in a serious
machine is in my opinion its most important feature, but the advanced
manufacturing technology and improvements in user interface are also
important.
Low power high contrast flat displays -- The paper-white LCD, and some
new EL display technologies are making laptop computers far more
acceptable. I hope the laptop will be the big product of 1989, and this
is the enabling technology.
There should be a vaporware award too.dennisg@felix.UUCP (Dennis Griesser) (01/05/89)
From article <210@imspw6.UUCP>, by bob@imspw6.UUCP (Bob Burch): > The losers category: > The proliferation of cheap FAX machines, X percent of which attach > to computers. Not that there arent legitimate uses for a FAX > machine here and there, but sometimes I think American businessmen > must all take stupid pills; most if not all of the uses I actually > see FAX machines being put to could be far more effectively and > inexpensively handled by cheap modems sending WordPerfect formatted > files over the phone lines using Procomm. Media hype wins again... In article <109@csd4.milw.wisc.edu> len@csd4.milw.wisc.edu (Leonard P Levine) writes: >I think you miss the point on fax. Many users do not keyboard well or at >all. Many jobs are on preprinted forms (orders, drawings, etc.) Fax is >just right for this. Fax on PC however, has other utility, such as remote >printing directly from a mainframe, and such. > > We should not ignore the process, just because it takes 1000 times the band- > width of the modem equivalent of the text. The overall picture is > more important than that. I vote with Bob. Fax is becoming a fad, much-used in places where it doesn't really need to be. This includes most PCs, I think. If you want to scrawl on a preprinted form and get it to somebody fast, one of the cheap dedicated FAX machines might be a less expensive and more user- friendly choice than a PC - especially since you have to add a scanner at the transmitting end of a PC setup anyway. If you have a PC anyway and figure that the added cost of a cheap Fax card is better that buying a dedicated machine, you probably "keyboard" well enough to just type the thing in. Remote printing directly from a mainframe is the worst example that you could use to justify Fax. The printing is probably text anyway, and if the host is smart enough to send graphics, he probably uses something better than Fax anyway! Fax has some good uses. Fax has some good uses on a PC. Fax on a PC is currently being sold as if it's the greatest invention since sliced bread.
bucher@eos.UUCP (Nancy Bucher) (01/05/89)
From article <210@imspw6.UUCP>, by bob@imspw6.UUCP (Bob Burch): > > > The little $180-$250 hand scanners advertised now in virtually > all PC magazines and lets not forget the OCR software options that you can usually get for less that $100. Oh sure, these packages can be a little temperamental but just THINK of the possibilities ! Also another TERRIFIC product for those of you into CAD is the transplotter software from Epson... For $100 you can turn any Epson dot matrix printer into a plotter and the output is VERY impressive ! krisy
sl@van-bc.UUCP (pri=-10 Stuart Lynne) (01/06/89)
In article <77200@felix.UUCP> dennisg@felix.UUCP (Dennis Griesser) writes: >From article <210@imspw6.UUCP>, by bob@imspw6.UUCP (Bob Burch): >> The losers category: >> The proliferation of cheap FAX machines, X percent of which attach >> to computers. Not that there arent legitimate uses for a FAX >> machine here and there, but sometimes I think American businessmen >> must all take stupid pills; most if not all of the uses I actually >> see FAX machines being put to could be far more effectively and >> inexpensively handled by cheap modems sending WordPerfect formatted >> files over the phone lines using Procomm. Media hype wins again... No, because these fax machines solve a basic problem in a simple and expedient manner. Get a copy of *this* piece of paper to someone else quickly. Last week we got a new WD1006 hard disk controller couriered over from the distributer. It arrived without documentation. Ten minutes later we had a fax of the relevant pages. They are fast. They are cheap (both from the price of the machine and for using them). They are simple to use. The installed base of G3 fax machines is probably higher than the installed base of PC's with modem with Procomm. Finally, they are dedicated. I don't have to figure out if the pc with modem with procomm is turned on waiting for me to call. >> We should not ignore the process, just because it takes 1000 times the band- Not neccessarily true. A more typical ratio would be between 10 or 20 times. The compression method used for G3 fax is fairly efficent (for example if you try to compress a fax data file, it will usually just return as the result would be larger). Typical times for a single 8x11 page of text is around one minute. Assuming 60 lines by 60 chars at 200 cps gives us about 18 seconds. So the actual transfer comparison assuming a 2400 bps modem would be about 3. If both end's had a 9600 bps modem then 12. >Fax is becoming a fad, much-used in places where it doesn't really need to be. >This includes most PCs, I think. .. >Fax has some good uses. Fax has some good uses on a PC. Fax on a PC is >currently being sold as if it's the greatest invention since sliced bread. I get a kick out of computer store salesman. If you mention a PC fax card they immediately trundle out a scanner to sell you as well. (Could it be they make more money selling you a high priced scanner than a cheap fax card?) The biggest use of PC Fax is to simply extend you electronic messaging capabilities. You can now send "electronic" mail to a much larger number of destinations. For example I send email to my accountant and lawyer via their fax because they don't have a Unix system (yet). >Remote printing directly from a mainframe is the worst example that you could >use to justify Fax. The printing is probably text anyway, and if the host >is smart enough to send graphics, he probably uses something better than Fax >anyway! Not true. I have one client who needs to "print" reports for several dozen of his clients and have them delivered quickly (i.e. same day basis). Alternatives include printing on line printer, burst, stuff, address, and use courier or mail (depending on time vs. cost benefits). Or installing a fax on the client site and simply fax'ing the report to him. The benefits of using the fax include elimination of the handling of the printed report, reduced communications costs (postage/courier vs phone costs, which may be zero for local call), and reduced delivery time. The dis-advantage is capital cost of installing fax-originating hardware on the originating system and fax receiving hardware at the remote client sites. Often the client sites have a fax or are willing to help pay to install one because they wish to use it for other purposes anyway. >If you want to scrawl on a preprinted form and get it to somebody fast, one >of the cheap dedicated FAX machines might be a less expensive and more user- >friendly choice than a PC - especially since you have to add a scanner at the >transmitting end of a PC setup anyway. >If you have a PC anyway and figure that the added cost of a cheap Fax card >is better that buying a dedicated machine, you probably "keyboard" well enough >to just type the thing in. My rule of thumb is to use: a fax card to transmit what you already have in the computer. a fax machine to transmit what you already have on paper. a scanner for desktop publishing. Of course if your need to transmit existing documents is small, and you are going to be doing desktop publishing buy a scanner instead of a standalone fax machine. -- Stuart.Lynne@wimsey.bc.ca {ubc-cs,uunet}!van-bc!sl Vancouver,BC,604-937-7532
sl@van-bc.UUCP (pri=-10 Stuart Lynne) (01/06/89)
>>> The losers category: >>> The proliferation of cheap FAX machines, X percent of which attach >>> to computers. Not that there arent legitimate uses for a FAX >>> machine here and there, but sometimes I think American businessmen >>> must all take stupid pills; most if not all of the uses I actually >>> see FAX machines being put to could be far more effectively and >>> inexpensively handled by cheap modems sending WordPerfect formatted >>> files over the phone lines using Procomm. Media hype wins again... > Interesting sideline, just after I hit the send key for my last message I heard an interesting report on NPR. Somewhere in the "bay" area a company called Grocery Express will take you Fax'd order for up to $100 of groceries and deliver it to you for $5. People seem to like the convience. One woman interviewed now works at home (so she can look after her baby) and has an in home fax. It would seem that a Fax machine will be the next yuppie phenomana. -- Stuart.Lynne@wimsey.bc.ca {ubc-cs,uunet}!van-bc!sl Vancouver,BC,604-937-7532
ads4@tank.uchicago.edu (adam david sah) (01/06/89)
Pagemaker is a PERFECTLY acceptable program for desktop publishing. 1. It works FINE on an AT- that's what I have (10mhz 640K...) and I have NO problems!!!! 2. Though I HATE windows with a passion- the fact is that having windows on your system is not as much a waste as having GEM (which is what I believe Ventura uses)... It works. EOD. -A.Sah'89
bcw@rti.UUCP (Bruce Wright) (01/07/89)
In article <2106@van-bc.UUCP>, sl@van-bc.UUCP (pri=-10 Stuart Lynne) writes: > > Interesting sideline, just after I hit the send key for my last message I > heard an interesting report on NPR. > > Somewhere in the "bay" area a company called Grocery Express will take you > Fax'd order for up to $100 of groceries and deliver it to you for $5. > > People seem to like the convience. One woman interviewed now works at home > (so she can look after her baby) and has an in home fax. It would seem that > a Fax machine will be the next yuppie phenomana. > As a sidebar to all this about fax, I have considered getting a cheap fax machine for my wife (who is deaf). The crushing problem with things like TDD's (Telecommunications Device for the Deaf) is that they are totally incompatible with everything else (they use an ancient protocol predating even 110 baud modems) - the other party has to have one in order to talk to them, and they aren't very common except for the deaf and certain "core" social services (911 and similar services, at least in some cities). They are getting common enough (and cheap enough) so that this sort of application is becomming possible. If things continue as they have been for a while, they could become a truly universal communications medium, supplanting TDDs and modems for "bread-and-butter" uses like this (there are SO MANY incompatible modem protocols ...). That time has not yet arrived however. Bruce C. Wright