argv%eureka@Sun.COM (Dan Heller) (07/06/89)
I have had a number of letters saying that my digitcal clock that I recently posted to comp.sources.x was just like the one in the Interviews distribution. One letter even implied that I "stole" their idea. Just to set the record straight, I am the author of the digital clock that I posted and whoever wrote the "interviews" version based their program on my idea. To wit, I originally wrote that program under SunView and posted it to the net about 2.5 years ago. Functionally, it's just about the same as what you see now. dan <island!argv@sun.com> ----- My postings reflect my opinion only -- When on the net, I speak for no company.
calder@aramis (Paul Calder) (07/09/89)
In article <113769@sun.Eng.Sun.COM>, argv%eureka (Dan Heller) writes: >I have had a number of letters saying that my digitcal clock >that I recently posted to comp.sources.x was just like the >one in the Interviews distribution. One letter even implied >that I "stole" their idea. > >Just to set the record straight, I am the author of the digital >clock that I posted and whoever wrote the "interviews" version >based their program on my idea. To wit, I originally wrote that >program under SunView and posted it to the net about 2.5 years >ago. Functionally, it's just about the same as what you see now. It seems that both versions of 'dclock' appeared at about the same time. I wrote the InterViews version was written about 3 years ago, although it was not distributed at that time (and did not run on X). The similarity of the clocks' appearances (and the names!) is purely coincidental -- I guess this in just another example of parallel evolution! Paul Calder Stanford calder@interviews.stanford.edu