gupta@prlhp1.prl.philips.co.uk (gupta) (10/06/89)
I've just read a *great* paper - twice - and I want to bring it to the attention of everyone alive today. This newsgroup will do for starters ! The paper is "The Xerox Star : A Retrospective" by Jeff Johnson, Teresa Roberts, William Verplank, David Smith, Charles Irby, Marian Beard and Kevin Mackey. It's in the September 1989 issue of IEEE Computer. Read it - it's *sexy* No, really, it is. :-) The authors detail the revolutionary software and hardware and show great humility : they give due acknowledgement to other developments (in & outside PARC) and point out the mistakes made. Inevitably though, a paper like that also raises many questions. Surely, one of the main reasons why the machine (or its PARC descendents) is not widespread is because of PARC policy (or lack of it). I'm referring to the 1186 - a great love of mine. Is it not true, that management just did not back the machines as aggresively as they could ? Sure, they were interested in fundamental research. And PARC has notable successes in laser printing, Ethernet etc... But, did Xerox not throw away the great commercial success that could have been possible - had the delivery system been marketed aggressively. I wonder. I'd like to hear from people who were involved. What happened ? What was the strategy that drove management ? What did the developers feel ? Related to this, is the departure from Xerox of some brilliant thinkers, visionaries, designers and software engineers ... OK, Xerox views the formation of spin-offs like ParcPlace Systems and Envos favourably. But, they aren't always wholly owned subsidiaries. I believe copyright & patent laws in the USA differ widely from those here in the UK. Here ones intellectual labours (during office time) are the property of ones employer. You, can't just quit and start up on your own, in direct competition. So, how did people like Charles Simonyi leave Xerox PARC to work on Microsoft Word, or Tom Malloy to work on LisaWrite, or the developers of Press and InterPress to develop Postscript ? Was it under some licensing agreement or is it back to the laws again ...? Lastly, the authors refer to NLS, (called On-Line System and also abbreviated to FLS) that is marketed by McDonnell Douglas under the name Augment. It was the first to use a CRT, was interactive and screen oriented and used a mouse. They don't say when it was introduced, though. And they don't give references. Please mail details if you have any. Ashok "Ash" Gupta Post : Philips Research Labs, Crossoak Lane, Redhill, Surrey, RH1 5HA, U.K. Voice: +44 293 785544 ext 5647 JANET: gupta@prl.philips.co.uk ARPA: gupta%prl.philips.co.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk