[comp.unix.i386] Norton Utilities

root@grumbly.UUCP (rb duc) (05/07/90)

I read recently in a trade rag, that the new Norton Utilities *will* be able
to restore deleted files.  Does anyone have any more information on this?

It is supposed to be out this month (May) - for Interactive's unix.  Is it
going to be able to do its tricks on SCO ?

rb duc



-- 
\\\   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > 
 - -   Richard Ducoty                               ..uunet!grumbly!root
 _]    Capitola, Calif                                root@grumbly.com
 U 

root@maxed (0000-Admin(0000)) (05/08/90)

In article <67@grumbly.UUCP> root@grumbly.com writes:
>I read recently in a trade rag, that the new Norton Utilities *will* be able
>to restore deleted files.  Does anyone have any more information on this?
>
>It is supposed to be out this month (May) - for Interactive's unix.  Is it
>going to be able to do its tricks on SCO ?
>
No, ISC's  won't work with SCO, but there will be other 
versions of the Norton Utilities for other flavors of UNIX.

Unlike the DOS version, you will have to have the "unerase" programs
previously installed, to "unerase" a file.
-- 
 Ed Whittemore 		uunet!maxed!ed
 American Micro Group 		201 944 3293

root@grumbly.UUCP (rb duc) (05/08/90)

There is some more news about Norton Utilities for Unix in this weeks PC WEEK.

18 utilities are included for $295 list.  It will include Norton Disk Explorer,
Norton Shell Enhancer, Norton Integrator and Norton Change Directory (whee)
plus others.

The initial release will support Interactive Unix and AT&T System V/386.
Support for SunOS and HP-UX by year's end.  SCO Unix, AIX and Ultrix will
eventually be supported.

It will be marketed solely by Interactive Systems Corp.

It seems like SCO Unix would be one of the first ports, since it is so
similar to ISC Unix ?

Can someone from ISC comment on any of the above, or add any more to the pot?
 
rb duc
-- 
\\\   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > 
 - -   Richard Ducoty                               ..uunet!grumbly!root
 _]    Capitola, Calif                                root@grumbly.com
 U 

cpcahil@virtech.uucp (Conor P. Cahill) (05/08/90)

In article <68@grumbly.UUCP> root@grumbly.com writes:
>
>Can someone from ISC comment on any of the above, or add any more to the pot?

This from the same guy that was complaining about ISC making comments on 
thier products last week?  Will wonders never cease?



-- 
Conor P. Cahill            (703)430-9247        Virtual Technologies, Inc.,
uunet!virtech!cpcahil                           46030 Manekin Plaza, Suite 160
                                                Sterling, VA 22170 

byoder@smcnet.smc.edu (Brian Yoder) (05/09/90)

In article <67@grumbly.UUCP> root@grumbly.com writes:
>I read recently in a trade rag, that the new Norton Utilities *will* be able
>to restore deleted files.  Does anyone have any more information on this?

Quite True. UnErase(tm) is also guaranteed to be able to restore your deleted
files for as long as your customization parameters request.  It isn't
an unused sector twiddler like the original UnErase(tm) from DOS.
There are also 16 other handy utilities including a low-level sector
editor (scary huh?) called Disk Explorer, a directory tree browser, and
a whole raft of other goodies.  If you would like any additional information
please let me know.

>It is supposed to be out this month (May) - for Interactive's unix.  Is it
>going to be able to do its tricks on SCO ?

Yup, it's due out this month for 386/ix (and AT&T System V for 386).  We have
also announced ports for later this year to HP, Sun, and SCO.

Brian Yoder
-- 
-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-
| Brian Yoder                 | answers *byoder();                            |
| uunet!ucla-cs!smcnet!byoder | He takes no arguments and returns the answers |
-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-

byoder@smcnet.smc.edu (Brian Yoder) (05/09/90)

In article <68@grumbly.UUCP> root@grumbly.com writes:
>There is some more news about Norton Utilities for Unix in this weeks PC WEEK.

>18 utilities are included for $295 list.  It will include Norton Disk Explorer,
>Norton Shell Enhancer, Norton Integrator and Norton Change Directory (whee)
>plus others.

I should add that these are not direct ports from DOS, the ideas behind them
are pretty much the same as the DOS utilities, but the details have been
carefully worked over to make them work like you would expect unix tools
to work.

>The initial release will support Interactive Unix and AT&T System V/386.
>Support for SunOS and HP-UX by year's end.  SCO Unix, AIX and Ultrix will
>eventually be supported.

>It will be marketed solely by Interactive Systems Corp.

I believe that they will also be selling it through Softsel, but you'd
ahve to ask a marketing person for that kind of info...I'm just a humble
technician. ;-)

>It seems like SCO Unix would be one of the first ports, since it is so
>similar to ISC Unix ?

Actually, my understanding is that we have announced a SCO port too.  Actually,
the SCO port is a little more difficult than it might appear on first 
glance because the file systems work differently than on 386/ix and some
of our tools (UnErase(tm) specifically) need considerable revision to
work under SCO.

>Can someone from ISC comment on any of the above, or add any more to the pot?

Won't I do? ;-)

Brian Yoder

-- 
-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-
| Brian Yoder                 | answers *byoder();                            |
| uunet!ucla-cs!smcnet!byoder | He takes no arguments and returns the answers |
-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-

byoder@smcnet.smc.edu (Brian Yoder) (05/09/90)

In article <1990May8.000451.4054@maxed> root@maxed (0000-Admin(0000)) writes:

>Unlike the DOS version, you will have to have the "unerase" programs
>previously installed, to "unerase" a file.

This is true, but on the other hand you are guaranteed of getting the file
back intact unlike the DOS versionwhere often files came back corrupted.

Brian Yoder
-- 
-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-
| Brian Yoder                 | answers *byoder();                            |
| uunet!ucla-cs!smcnet!byoder | He takes no arguments and returns the answers |
-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-

m1jjh00@fed.frb.gov (Jeffrey J. Hallman) (05/09/90)

In article <1990May9.064608.14464@smcnet.smc.edu> byoder@smcnet.smc.edu (Brian Yoder) writes:

   >Unlike the DOS version, you will have to have the "unerase" programs 
   >previously installed, to "unerase" a file.

   This is true, but on the other hand you are guaranteed of getting
   the file back intact unlike the DOS versionwhere often files came
   back corrupted.

Can you tell us a little bit about how this works?  Does it slow down
writing to disk? 

root@grumbly.UUCP (rb duc) (05/10/90)

In article <1990May8.124423.20965@virtech.uucp> cpcahil@virtech.UUCP (Conor P. Cahill) writes:
->In article <68@grumbly.UUCP> root@grumbly.com writes:
->>
->>Can someone from ISC comment on any of the above, or add any more to the pot?
->
->This from the same guy that was complaining about ISC making comments on 
->thier products last week?  Will wonders never cease?

My 'phone' post from last week wasn't meant to be serious - I should have
put a face on it :^>  I think I said something several post later about it.
It was a comment on commercialism - not one of my better ones.

rb duc



-- 
\\\   - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > 
 - -   Richard Ducoty                               ..uunet!grumbly!root
 _]    Capitola, Calif                                root@grumbly.com
 U 

johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us (John R. Levine) (05/25/90)

In article <1990May24.224704.7557@smcnet.smc.edu> byoder@smcnet.smc.edu (Brian Yoder) writes:
>Clearly the Disk Explorer is a guru only tool (that's BRAVE guru only).

Not so fast, I didn't write it just for brave gurus.  The disk explorer has
a read-only mode (it's the default, in fact) which is quite handy for looking
around the disk to understand better how the partition tables, superblocks,
inodes, and other disk structures are laid out and relate to each other.  It
is an excellent way to learn about the mysteries of the Unix file system
without having to destroy a disk in the process.

It is also quite usable on plain old files, in which case it is a nice
screen oriented binary editor, something Unix has lacked for a long time.

Like any good tool, each of the Norton programs has uses that are not
immediately obvious and that neither we nor our users have thought of yet.

-- 
John R. Levine, Segue Software, POB 349, Cambridge MA 02238, +1 617 864 9650
johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us, {ima|lotus|spdcc}!esegue!johnl
Marlon Brando and Doris Day were born on the same day.

byoder@smcnet.smc.edu (Brian Yoder) (05/26/90)

In article <1990May25.032711.1725@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us> johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us (John R. Levine) writes:
>In article <1990May24.224704.7557@smcnet.smc.edu> byoder@smcnet.smc.edu (Brian Yoder) writes:
>>Clearly the Disk Explorer is a guru only tool (that's BRAVE guru only).

>Not so fast, I didn't write it just for brave gurus.  The disk explorer has
>a read-only mode (it's the default, in fact) which is quite handy for looking
>around the disk to understand better how the partition tables, superblocks,
>inodes, and other disk structures are laid out and relate to each other.  It
>is an excellent way to learn about the mysteries of the Unix file system
>without having to destroy a disk in the process.

OK, OK, OK.  I guess I should have put a smiley after that one.  Sorry.

Indeed, DIsk Explorer can be used safely to fiddle around with files, and to
look around the file system (it's worthwhile just as an educational tool
to show how the disk structures really work).

>It is also quite usable on plain old files, in which case it is a nice
>screen oriented binary editor, something Unix has lacked for a long time.

Good point.

>Like any good tool, each of the Norton programs has uses that are not
>immediately obvious and that neither we nor our users have thought of yet.

Brian Yoder
-- 
-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-
| Brian Yoder           | "Somehow I don't feel like killing anymore."        |
| byoder@smcnet.smc.edu |                          -- Crusty the Clown        |
-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-<>-

fischer@utower.gopas.sub.org (Axel Fischer) (05/26/90)

johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us (John R. Levine) writes:
>It is also quite usable on plain old files, in which case it is a nice
>screen oriented binary editor, something Unix has lacked for a long time.

GNU Emacs is a great binary editor.

-Axel
-- 
    fischer@utower.gopas.sub.org / fischer@db0tui6.BITNET / fischer@tmpmbx.UUCP

                                    That is not dead, which can eternal lie
                                    Yet with strange aeons, even death may die.

ihaka@diamond.tmc.edu (Ross Ihaka) (05/28/90)

In article <LW1FOO@utower.gopas.sub.org> fischer@utower.gopas.sub.org writes:
>johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us (John R. Levine) writes:
>>It is also quite usable on plain old files, in which case it is a nice
>>screen oriented binary editor, something Unix has lacked for a long time.
>
>GNU Emacs is a great binary editor.
>
>-Axel

The screen oriented binary editor bpatch has been around for a while.
Its in comp.sources.unix.
	Ross

jeff@samna.UUCP (Jeff Barber) (05/30/90)

In article <1990May24.224704.7557@smcnet.smc.edu> byoder@smcnet.smc.edu (Brian Yoder) writes:
:NCD is in there and works quite well (both in graphical mode and 
:command-line mode).  Actually, I kind of like the Unix graphical
:version better than the DOS counterpart because it allows you to see
:some tree parents on the screen that the DOS version wouldn't show
:(without some scrolling and searching).  Like I said though, the
:product will have to speak for itself.  If you liked NCD under DOS,
:I am sure you'll like it under Unix. 

How does NCD change directories?  (I mean so that your active shell
is affected, of course.)

Have they hacked the C, Bourne shells &c to include the NCD stuff?

Curious,
Jeff

johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us (John R. Levine) (05/31/90)

In article <250@samna.UUCP> jeff@samna.UUCP (Jeff Barber) writes:
>How does NCD change directories?  (I mean so that your active shell
>is affected, of course.)
>
>Have they hacked the C, Bourne shells &c to include the NCD stuff?

There's nothing exotic involved, we give you aliases for the C shell and shell
functions for the Bourne and Korn shell that run ncd, read the new directory,
and change there.  If you run ncd without having the aliases set up it offers
to add appropriate lines to the end of your .profile or .cshrc to set them up.

-- 
John R. Levine, Segue Software, POB 349, Cambridge MA 02238, +1 617 864 9650
johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us, {ima|lotus|spdcc}!esegue!johnl
Marlon Brando and Doris Day were born on the same day.