info-mac-request@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU (The Moderators) (01/02/91)
Info-Mac Digest Tue, 1 Jan 91 Volume 91 : Issue 1
Today's Topics:
Administrivia
[*] 1990 Chess Championship, games 12-24
[*] Extractor 1.12.sit.hqx
[*] Font and Sound Valet Updater
[*] Font Harmony Updater
[*] Suitcase II updater
[*] UUTool
compactor
graphing programs
Importing PCW (PC) text files to Word 4 ?
Printing with Compactor
Problems with FileList 1.4
ResEdit 2.0
ThunderScan
Unique Folder Icons for Different HD Volumes
Why the Mac may not survive
Your Info-Mac Moderators are Bill Lipa, Lance Nakata, and Jon Pugh.
The Info-Mac archives are available (by using FTP, account anonymous,
any password) in the info-mac directory on sumex-aim.stanford.edu
[36.44.0.6]. Help files are in /info-mac/help. Indices are in
/info-mac/help/recent-files.txt and /info-mac/help/all-files.txt.
Please send articles and binaries to info-mac@sumex-aim.stanford.edu.
Send administrative mail to info-mac-request@sumex-aim.stanford.edu.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 1991 14:31:29 PST
From: The Moderators <Info-Mac-Request@sumex-aim.stanford.edu>
Subject: Administrivia
We begin the new year with a change in the volume-numbering scheme, from
V8 to V91. Hopefully that will give a little more meaning to the numbers.
Welcome to the ninth year of Info-Mac!
Bill
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 91 10:32:07 PST
From: deichman@cod.nosc.mil (Shane D. Deichman)
Subject: [*] 1990 Chess Championship, games 12-24
Attached is a stuffed, binhexed folder containing the latter
half of the 1990 Kasparov/Karpov World Chess Championship, from
Lyon, France. Games 1-12 are available at sumex-aim.stanford.edu
in /info-mac/misc/chess-1990-championship.hqx. These files are for
use with the Sargon chess programs.
Kasparov won the 24 game tournament outright with Karpov's acceptance
of a draw at move 36 in game 24, giving him a 12.5 - 11.5 victory.
Kasparov retained the crown in game 22 by attaining 12 points (the
rules state that in the event of a 12-12 tie, the former champ keeps
the championship), but Karpov took game 23 to force the final match.
With this victory, Kasparov receives $1.7 million cash, plus a diamond-
studded trophy valued at $1 million (provided by the Lyon sponsors).
Karpov receives $1.3 million cash.
The games are arranged in chronological order (i.e., "KK90/01" "KK90/02"
etc.) with the victor's name appearing after the game number.
-shane
[Archived as /info-mac/misc/chess-1990-championship-2.hqx; 10K]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 90 00:04:29 EST
From: Peter Galko <PTRPB%UOTTAWA.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu>
Subject: [*] Extractor 1.12.sit.hqx
Extractor 1.10 was recently uploaded here. Here is version 1.12 of this
freeware utility (which will decompress Compactor and Stuffit archives).
[Archived as /info-mac/util/extractor-112.hqx; 24K]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 90 13:10:55 EST
From: Tom Prusa <TPRUSA@sbccvm>
Subject: [*] Font and Sound Valet Updater
The following file (compacted and binhexed) updates F-S Valet
to version 1.2. This new version has a number of "bug" fixes and
now properly works with TrueType Fonts. Downloaded from GEnie.
tom prusa
[Archived as /info-mac/util/fs-valet-12-updater.hqx; 16K]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 90 13:12:41 EST
From: Tom Prusa <TPRUSA@sbccvm>
Subject: [*] Font Harmony Updater
The following file (compacted and binhexed) updates Font Harmony
to version 1.3. This new version has a number of "bug" fixes and
now properly works with TrueType Fonts. Downloaded from GEnie.
tom prusa
[Archived as /info-mac/util/font-harmony-13-updater.hqx; 26K]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 90 13:06:26 EST
From: Tom Prusa <TPRUSA@sbccvm>
Subject: [*] Suitcase II updater
The following file (compacted and binhexed) updates Suitcase II
to version 1.2.8. This new version has a number of "bug" fixes and
now properly works with TrueType Fonts. Downloaded from GEnie.
tom prusa
[Archived as /info-mac/util/suitcase-ii-128-updater.hqx; 44K]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 91 15:23:06 MST
From: wieser@cpsc.ucalgary.ca (Bernhard Wieser)
Subject: [*] UUTool
Greetings Netters!
Whew! After a couple releases and several quick bug fixes,
here is UUTool 1.2. It is a utility (yet another) for
uuencode/uudecoding. It is fairly small, does not use
stream I/O, does use standard file, and support Macintosh
file encoding/decoding.
Note on Mac format:
The first 'begin' 'end' pair is for the data fork so it is
happy with UNIX systems. The next pair is for the resource
fork. The final pair is for finder information.
It is freeware, and obsoletes util/uudecode2.1 in the archives.
Thanks, and enjoy.
Bernie Wieser
BSWieser@uncamult.BITNET
*:O)X-
[Archived as /info-mac/util/uutool-12.hqx; 28K]
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 90 22:43:22 EST
From: phssra@mathcs.emory.edu (Scott Robert Anderson)
Subject: compactor
In Info-Mac Digest V8 #219, abboud%cuavax.dnet@netcon.cua.edu (Hisham) writes,
>
>I just wanted to suggest that, while self-extracting archives are a cool
>feature, they also take up additional space. I don't know how much that is,
>but it sure adds up, makes the life of our moderators a little bit more
>difficult, and archives take longer to download.
It adds 14K to the size of any file. For an average file size in the archives
of 140K (simple, probably high, estimate), we would add 10% to the size of the
archives if everything were self-extracting.
Bill da Moderator replies:
> I don't object to self-extracting archives. Although they do take up a little
> more room in the archive, I feel that the extra convenience is worth it.
> I am always grateful when I download a file and find it to be self-extracting!
I myself feel exactly the opposite, especially when I start up the
self-extractor and Gatekeeper steps in to prevent it from changing the file
info on the applications it is extracting! I know, I know, I should use the
override, but I never think of it beforehand. And when I do use it, I need to
scan the self-extractor for viruses first.
I would therefore prefer to see self-extractors used only for Compactor and
Extractor themselves (and StuffIt, too! :-).
*
* ** Scott Robert Anderson gatech!emoryu1!phssra
* * * ** phssra@unix.cc.emory.edu phssra@emoryu1.bitnet
* * * * * **
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
------------------------------
Date: 1 January 1991 00:48:53 CST
From: U40857%UICVM.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu
Subject: graphing programs
I have a few questions regarding graphing programs.
1. Are there any graphing programs which do a good job graphing
polar plots?
CricketGraph v1.2 only plots the data points and does not connect
the points with a line. It also does not give you much control
over the number of tick marks for the angular coordinate. The
demo version of Kaleidagraph 2.0 draws a line between data points
on a polar plot but does not plot tick marks for the angular
coordinate. Kaleidagraph also puts the axis and the labels for
the radial coordinate to the left of the plot instead of
overlaying it on the plot.
2. Are there any graphing programs which allow you to specify the
exact size of the plot when it is displayed on the screen and
when it is printed.
When printing a graph CricketGraph gives you a crude method for
changing the the size of the printed graph but this does not
affect the size of the graph as displayed in the plot window.
Kaleidagraph allows you to specify the exact print size for a
graph but like CricketGraph this does not affect the size of the
graph in the plot window. Also when specifying the exact size for
either the x or y axis Kaleidagraph scales the text for the x and
y axes and the text in the legends.
Stephen Kawalko u40857@uicvm.bitnet
u40857@uicvm.cc.uic.edu
------------------------------
Date: 31 Dec 90 15:31
From: "(jordi)" <jordi@sicsun3.epfl.ch>
Subject: Importing PCW (PC) text files to Word 4 ?
Hi info-mac readers,
does anyone here know how to import pc files in Pc-Write format to Mac Word 4?
I've got a lot of files ( >1000 ) and I didn't find any translator utility...
Thanks
Sincerely
Steve Jordi
jordi@sicsun3.epfl.ch or
jordi@cgeuge52.bitnet of
70143,3056 on Compuserve
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 Dec 90 23:45 EST
From: LLEDUC%LAUVAX01.BITNET@forsythe.stanford.edu
Subject: Printing with Compactor
Seeing that a few netters have expressed their opinion on the Stuffit VS
Compactor competition, I would like to say that I am very pleased with
Compactor and that I prefer it over Stuffit Classic. However, I do have a
minor problem with Compactor as it relates to printing on the ImageWriter II.
I am hoping that someone out there can be helpful. I have reached the author
of Compactor, Bill Goodman, and have asked for his assistance in solving the
problem. The problem is as follows:
Everytime I print an archive on my ImageWriter II, the first
two letters of every file in the archive does not print. This creates a lot
of confusion because many of my files have similar names (e.g. N1A vs N2B).
Are you aware of this problem? Do you have a solution? I have a 4 MG Mac SE
running under Multifinder.
I have noticed that the problem seems to occur only with rather large archives
(i.e. more than one screen full) and that the first file of the archive is
always printed properly. I thought that the problem might have been ATM 2.0
but the problem still exists when ATM 2.0 is deactivated. Does anyone have
this problem? Any help would be appreciated. Please respond directly to me.
Many thanks and Happy New Year to all netters.
Leo G. Leduc
LLEDUC@LAUVAX01.LAURENTIAN.CA
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 90 21:56 PST
From: Robert Front <T121267%TWNCU865@ricevm1.rice.edu>
Subject: Problems with FileList 1.4
On 28 Dec 90 20:44 EST GORDON DOHLE writes:H
> I recently downloaded FileList 1.4 from sumex-aim and am having problems
> getting it to launch.
I've downloaded it twice (to be sure there wasn't some error in the
downloading) and it bombs! I suggest, since many people are interested in this
new version of FileList, that it be uploaded once again.
[Thanks for the report. Normally, though, you should mail the original
submitter rather than posting this kind of message to info-mac-request
or the digest at large. -Bill]
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 Dec 90 20:19:29 -0800
From: alobar@ucscb.ucsc.edu (66532000)
Subject: ResEdit 2.0
I am looking for the most up to date version of ResEdit - which I thought
should be available via anonymous ftp. If it is, would someone please
e-mail me with the address and directory of the ftp site I can find
it in. If not, and you know how to go about getting it, please let me
know!
Thanks in advance.
Greg Friedman
alobar@ucscb.UCSC.EDU
[I don't think you can legally FTP ResEdit from anywhere. You have to
get it through APDA. -Bill]
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 91 18:29:07 +0200
From: kobi@BIMACS.BIU.AC.IL (sambrano Kobi)
Subject: ThunderScan
Hello Netters!
A friend of mine experienced a problem: for five years he had a ThunderScan
connected to his Plus (probably the old model) and since he upgraded to an
SE/30 5/105, the ThunderScan software generates BUS ERRORs every time he tries
to scan a document, prescan, or even focus. Is there a solution to this
problem? (he uses System 6.0.7).
Thanks in advance,
Kobi Sambrano
(bitnet: kobi@bimacs, internet: kobi@bimacs.biu.ac.il)
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 90 13:18:11 PST
From: siegman@sierra.stanford.edu (Anthony E. Siegman)
Subject: Unique Folder Icons for Different HD Volumes
A while back I asked if one could have different icons for folders
coming from different HD volumes, so that one could visually identify
for each folder on your desktop which HD it came from.
The general answer was that this is not possible. One can,
however, give different colors to different folders, and thus code the
folders from each HD by a different co
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Dec 90 00:03 PST
From: Ron Webster <IC6JRHW@oac.ucla.edu>
Subject: Why the Mac may not survive
Dear Info-Mac Digest readers:
In two previous postings, I indicated my discontent with the Mac
environment. In the more recent of these, I stated that I would be
submitting follow-up discussions. As we complete the decade of the
eighties and are about to begin the final decade of this century, now
seems an appropriate time to launch my series.
On the surface, the unifying question in these discussions will be
"Will the Macintosh survive the 90s?" But the more important, underlying
questions will address the awareness and intelligence of the Mac user
community at large--our wisdom as computer users and as consumers of
computer-related products, and how we are perceived by the pundits, not
only of our own platform, but of other platforms, as well.
I have great respect for individual Mac users--persons who have
provided courteous and helpful information to Mac users in need (myself
included among the beneficiaries). Some among us are as intelligent,
thoughtful, and knowledgeable as any computer users, regardless of
platform. But in the current economic climate, the name of the game is
numbers. And I have very little respect for Mac users as a group.
Indeed, my impression is that MS-DOS users are a far more sophisticated
bunch than us Mac folks. And this, far more than the arrival of Windows
3.0 (although Win3 may provide a boost), will, in my estimation, be the
most formidable obstacle to the Mac's survival in the 90s.
The purpose of my series of discussions will be to try to remedy this
situation--to spark the Mac community into taking a harsh look at itself
and, I hope, wise up. I expect to draw lots of flack. Mac users are fans
(derived from "fanatic"), and have demonstrated a willingness to act from
their hearts rather than from their heads. Thus, I won't be surprised if
many users prefer to go into defensive mode rather than confronting and
correcting the shortcomings I will be attempting to reveal. Defensiveness
is the characteristic behavioral manifestation of denial, and denial is
the primary inhibitor of progress.
The purpose of the present posting is to dispense with preliminaries
(such as what I plan to do and why) so that each upcoming discussion can
deal with its topic as specifically as possible without the need to divert
back to justifications and explanations of design, purpose, and intent.
A few fundamental premises underlie my upcoming comments:
1) The MS-DOS platform is inherently limited, whereby shortcomings
(or inadequacies) in software and hardware can often be largely
attributed to shortcomings (or inadequacies) in the underlying
platform. Or, said another way, developers of software and
hardware for the MS-DOS-platform are pretty much doing the best
they can with what they have. With the Mac platform, on the other
hand, all things seem possible, so to speak; hence, inadequacies
in Mac software and hardware are generally artificially limiting
and, therefore, inexcusable.
2) As I stated above, the name of the game is (unfortrunately)
numbers. If a developer can market a piece of junk and achieve
enormous sales, then there is little (or no) incentive for that
developer to take corrective action. In sum, thoughtful and
discriminating users, who recognize software and hardware
deficiencies, can be hamstrung by the masses if those masses fail
to recognize and appreciate the failures of developers and
responsibly disribute their patronage accordingly. It is,
therefore, incumbent upon each user to be well-informed,
discriminating, and vocal, because all users suffer whenever any
one user is an unwise consumer.
3) Regardless of the inherent considerable superiority of the
platform, the Mac can survive in an overwhelmingly MS-DOS-
dominated world only if Mac applications and peripherals do not
impose artificial ceilings on Mac performance. That is, Mac
applications must be judged primarily on the basis of the extent
to which they take advantage of the Mac's particular and special
qualities--it is not nearly enough for a Mac application to be
superior to its MS-DOS counterpart(s), and Mac users should not
settle for so little (although superiority to MS-DOS counterparts
would, in many cases, be considerably more than Mac users are
currently getting).
A corrallary to this is that it is appropriate to compare a Mac
application to a corresponding MS-DOS application only when the
MS-DOS offering is superior (because that makes a clear case for
the inadequacy of the particular Mac application). It is not
appropriate, however, to make such a comparison when the Mac
application is superior, because that is generally the least that
is expected--in general, the primary consideration should be
whether the Mac application performs its tasks WELL.
Before someone jumps up and screams "Who the hell do you think you
are?," or "Who appointed you spokesperson?," or "How dare you be so
audacious as to unleash your opinions on us?," I'll offer two tempering
remarks: First, I will try to concentrate on facts and comparatively
undisputed and uncontroversial supportive evidence, limiting editorial
comment as much as my anemic powers of restraint will permit. And second,
I think the discussions I have in mind are important, and no one else is
speaking up (or, said another way, it may be dirty job, but I think
someone has to do it). Nothing would please me more than to discover that
there are like-minded others out there with similar experiences who will
step forth and take the ball from my hands, and then run with it (with the
dual benefits of freeing me of the "burden" and removing me from the line
of fire).
So, I beg your indulgence, and ask you to please stay tuned.
Ron Webster
-------------
------------------------------
End of Info-Mac Digest
******************************