nevai@function.mps.ohio-state.edu (Paul Nevai) (06/13/91)
This is serious: a quotation form an article which will appear in the June issue of Microtimes, a local California magazine. The NeXT and Former King (The Boy Who Cried, "Insanely Great!") by John Perry Barlow Thursday, May 30, 1991 *************************************************************************** TEX. Probably named after the macho dude who wrote it. This is page layout and document processing for real men. Incredibly rich and capable. Also incredibly difficult. *************************************************************************** Paul Nevai nevai@mps.ohio-state.edu (Internet) Department of Mathematics nevai@ohstpy (BITNET) The Ohio State University 1-(614)-292-3317 (Office) P.O. Box 3341 1-(614)-292-5310 (Answering Machine) Columbus, Ohio 43210-0341, USA 1-(614)-459-5615 (FAX)
barry@joshua.math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) (06/13/91)
In article <1991Jun13.004311.27226@zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu> nevai@function.mps.ohio-state.edu (Paul Nevai) writes: >This is serious: a quotation form an article which will appear in the June >issue of Microtimes, a local California magazine. > >The NeXT and Former King (The Boy Who Cried, "Insanely Great!") >by John Perry Barlow Thursday, May 30, 1991 >*************************************************************************** >TEX. Probably named after the macho dude who wrote it. This is page layout >and document processing for real men. Incredibly rich and capable. Also >incredibly difficult. >*************************************************************************** Anyone who thinks it is pronounced "teks" should not be taken too seriously. Also, LaTeX (thats "lay-tek" :-) is equally powerful but far easier to use---not too hard at all, really, especially with the excellent manual by Leslie Lamport. Barry Merriman UCLA Dept. of Math UCLA Inst. for Fusion and Plasma Research barry@math.ucla.edu (Internet) barry@arnold.math.ucla.edu (NeXTMail)
jpl1@ra.MsState.Edu (Jean P. Legrand) (06/14/91)
barry@joshua.math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) writes: >>*************************************************************************** >>TEX. Probably named after the macho dude who wrote it. This is page layout >>and document processing for real men. Incredibly rich and capable. Also >>incredibly difficult. >>*************************************************************************** >Anyone who thinks it is pronounced "teks" should not be taken too >seriously. Also, LaTeX (thats "lay-tek" :-) is equally powerful >but far easier to use---not too hard at all, really, especially with the >excellent manual by Leslie Lamport. >Barry Merriman Maybe we should take him seriously. I personally would like to see even wider acceptance of TeX. 1) because it means more ancillary support products, and 2) because I know it to be the best way to put text on a page. However, there are a lot of uninformed people who have never tried TeX BUT THEY ARE WRITING CRITICAL REVIEWS OF IT--AND THEY ARE BEING BELIEVED!!. Oh, and one more thing, I have worked with TeX and LaTeX for 10 years and I don't think LaTeX is easier. Not in the long run.
jtchew@csa2.lbl.gov (JOSEPH T CHEW) (06/15/91)
>>*************************************************************************** >>TEX. Probably named after the macho dude who wrote it. This is page layout >>and document processing for real men. Incredibly rich and capable. Also >>incredibly difficult. >>*************************************************************************** >Anyone who thinks it is pronounced "teks" should not be taken too >seriously. Knuth, "TeX and Metafont: New Directions in Typesetting" (American Mathematical Society and Digital Press, 1979, p. 4): <1> The name of the game English words like "technology" stem from a Greek root beginning with the letters {tau, epsilon, chi}... and this same Greek word means art as well as technology. Hence the name TEX, which is an upper- case form of {tau, epsilon, chi}. Insiders pronounce the {chi} of TEX as a Greek chi, not as an "x," so that TEX rimes with blecchhh. It's the "ch" sound in Scottish words like loch or German words like ach; it's a Spanish "j" and a Russian "kh." When you say it properly to your computer, the terminal may become slightly moist. On the other hand, you might find it more comfortable to pronounce TEX as a Texan would and to shrug off all this high-falutin' nonsense about beauty and quality. Go ahead and do what you want; your computer won't mind. So wrote its inventor on the lone prairie of Palo Alto. Yippie ki-yo ki-yay. --Joe "Just another personal opinion from the People's Republic of Berkeley"
barry@pico.math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) (06/15/91)
In article <jpl1.676906782@Ra.MsState.Edu> jpl1@ra.MsState.Edu (Jean P. Legrand) writes: >>>*************************************************************************** >>>TEX. Probably named after the macho dude who wrote it. This is page layout >>>and document processing for real men. Incredibly rich and capable. Also >>>incredibly difficult. >>>*************************************************************************** > > >Maybe we should take him seriously. I personally would like to see even >wider acceptance of TeX. 1) because it means more ancillary support >products, and 2) because I know it to be the best way to put text on a >page. Actually, I would like to see TeX replaced by something better. These days, much more should be possible. Don't get me wrong---I agree TeX does a great job of typesetting---but it could be easier to use. For example, the TeX macro language is pretty grungy. Basically, if the algorithms for typsetting could be preserved, but put into a nice object oriented formulation---Knuths paradigm is ripe for object orientation---and with a nice low level macro facility, and PostScript as its imaging model, a good high level macro package (a la LaTeX) plus a graphical interface for the NeXT---now that would be good. > >Oh, and one more thing, I have worked with TeX and LaTeX for 10 years >and I don't think LaTeX is easier. Not in the long run. Well, I suspect you used raw TeX too long, and became a TeXpert. I only used it for a year, so I was still ripe for the transition. But, sure, if you do a lot of very fancy typsetting, you use raw TeX a lot anyway. -- Barry Merriman UCLA Dept. of Math UCLA Inst. for Fusion and Plasma Research barry@math.ucla.edu (Internet) barry@arnold.math.ucla.edu (NeXTMail)
eps@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott) (06/15/91)
In article <1991Jun13.004311.27226@zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu> nevai@function.mps.ohio-state.edu (Paul Nevai) writes: >This is serious: a quotation form an article which will appear in the June >issue of Microtimes, a local California magazine. MicroTimes publishes separate Northern California and Southern California editions on a staggered schedule. It's not in the Northern June issue. -=EPS=-
eps@toaster.SFSU.EDU (Eric P. Scott) (06/15/91)
In article <1991Jun14.173831.10415@math.ucla.edu> barry@pico.math.ucla.edu (Barry Merriman) writes: >Basically, if the algorithms for typsetting could be preserved, but >put into a nice object oriented formulation---Knuths paradigm >is ripe for object orientation--- I understand that InterViews does something along these lines. There was a recent message on comp.sys.next about it being ported to the NeXT. It's C++ and X based (oh well). -=EPS=-
sdawalt@valhalla.wright.edu (Shane Dawalt) (06/16/91)
From article <jpl1.676906782@Ra.MsState.Edu>, by jpl1@ra.MsState.Edu (Jean P. Legrand): >>Anyone who thinks it is pronounced "teks" should not be taken too >>seriously. Also, LaTeX (thats "lay-tek" :-) is equally powerful >>but far easier to use---not too hard at all, really, especially with the >>excellent manual by Leslie Lamport. >>Barry Merriman .... stuff deleted .... > > Oh, and one more thing, I have worked with TeX and LaTeX for 10 years > and I don't think LaTeX is easier. Not in the long run. LaTeX is definitely easier on beginners. Absolutely. For one thing, the beginner doesn't have to worry about the nonsensical notation used to define fonts. Perhaps there are other problems or maybe not. Once I saw the bizarre font definition notation, I placed TeX on the back burner and continued to use LaTeX. One day, however, I do plan to figure out what's happening with TeX. Right now, I'm trying to figure out C++. <ack!> Shane(); -------------------------------------------------------------------------- From the keyboard of: email: sdawalt@cs.wright.edu Shane A. Dawalt --------------------------------------------------------------------------
burchard@math.utah.edu (Paul Burchard) (06/16/91)
In article <jpl1.676906782@Ra.MsState.Edu> jpl1@ra.MsState.Edu (Jean P. Legrand) writes: > Oh, and one more thing, I have worked with TeX and LaTeX for 10 years > and I don't think LaTeX is easier. Not in the long run. Yes it is. Even though you end up hacking just as much, your hacks are easier to use and re-use, in your own code and by beginners. Comp.sys.next-ers can appreciate the reason: LaTeX has a better User Interface. (Uh oh, don't mean to start the UI flame wars again :-). -------------------------------------------------------------------- Paul Burchard <burchard@math.utah.edu> ``I'm still learning how to count backwards from infinity...'' --------------------------------------------------------------------
jtchew@csa2.lbl.gov (JOSEPH T CHEW) (06/17/91)
I'm posting the following at the request of a fellow netter who can't get onto comp.text.tex. >From: bbeeton <BNB@MATH.AMS.COM> >your citation of knuth's statement in "tex and metafont: new >directions ..." is unfortunatly out of date. that was written >before he was aware that honeywell had registered the trademark >"TEX" ("pronounced tecks", according to "the texbook", p. 1). >the first chapter in the later book (also entitled "the name of >the game") explains why TeX shouldn't be confused with TEX. >it's very important to keep that distinction clear -- honeywell >could still send lawyers out and enjoin the tex community from >using the term if it's not. we're able to use the name only >because the stature of donald e. knuth in the computer field >was great enough that someone (probably not a lawyer) recognized >that it would be good pr to settle on a gentlemen's agreement. >things would have been very much different, i think, if "our" >tex had been written by john q. nobody. > -- barbara beeton > editor, tugboat > also, employee of ams, to whom > knuth has assigned the trademark As for me, I'm going over to rec.humor to see if anyone has posted any good lawyer jokes lately. Or maybe I'll just go downtown and have a few drinks before "martini" becomes a registered trademark. Followup to comp.sys.next or, perhaps, misc.civilization.decline-and-fall. Needless to say, my employer is indemnified from, confounded by, and oblivious to the opinions stated hereintofore. In hoc marca registrada vinces, forever and ever, Amen.
texinfo1@rusmv1.rus.uni-stuttgart.de (Rainer Schoepf) (06/18/91)
In article <jpl1.676906782@Ra.MsState.Edu> jpl1@ra.MsState.Edu (Jean P. Legrand) writes: > >Oh, and one more thing, I have worked with TeX and LaTeX for 10 years >and I don't think LaTeX is easier. Not in the long run. Why? Could you explain, please? What do you mean by "not easier in the long run"? Rainer Schoepf