ant@brolga.cc.uq.oz.au (Anthony Murdoch) (01/27/91)
Hi netters, I was wondering if anyone had ever gone to the effort of trying to convert the mushtool code in mush to use X or Xview ? I had a quick look at it just recently, but I have never programmed in either and even with the conversion scripts I found the job beyond me. If anyone hase performed this miracle I would be very interested in hearing from you. ant -- V ant "It's great to be young and insane" \o/ ant@brolga.cc.uq.oz.au - Dream Team -O- Anthony Murdoch Prentice Computer Centre /0\ Phone (07) 36 54078 University of Qld
ant@brolga.cc.uq.oz.au (Anthony Murdoch) (01/29/91)
ant@brolga.cc.uq.oz.au (Anthony Murdoch) [me] writes: >I was wondering if anyone had ever gone to the effort of trying to convert >the mushtool code in mush to use X or Xview ? I had a quick look at it >just recently, but I have never programmed in either and even with the >conversion scripts I found the job beyond me. >If anyone hase performed this miracle I would be very interested in hearing >from you. Hi guys, Well apparently there is an X version of mush. It is called zipmail and is a commercial product. Also, the copyright on mush dissallows converting it to use in X windows etc. The word from Dan : ->The new version is called "zipmail" currently (it's name is going to ->change) and this is strictly a *commercial product*. It is not free ->software. The advantage is that there is complete documentation (a ->500 page O'Reilly book and a smaller "user's guide") and there is a ->full support staff behind it. We have done a Motif and Open Look version ->and are sending out Beta shipments on Feb 1 -- full release on March 1. -> ->"Mush" is still owned strictly by me and I prohibit anyone from ->modifying Mush to work under X windows or to make any modifications ->whatsoever publically available. Obviously, this is to prohibit ->competition with my new business. Mush has never been in the public ->domain; it has always been owned by me with these restrictions (see ->the README). I still support mush in fact and am about to release ->a new version of it (7.2.2). -> ->You may repost this to the net, forward it to others if necessary, ->etc.. I appologize for the "stern" sounding language I'm using, ->but it is necessary to impress upon people that this is now my own ->business and how I make a living... After all, I'd rather do Mush ->than anything else, so why should I work for someone else to pay the ->bills and do mush in my spare time? We are talking to *lots* of OEM's ->so you might see it on your desktop before the end of the year :-). -> ->Of course, interested people can certainly contact me. -> ->--dan ant -- V ant "It's great to be young and insane" \o/ ant@brolga.cc.uq.oz.au - Dream Team -O- Anthony Murdoch Prentice Computer Centre /0\ Phone (07) 36 54078 University of Qld
QQ11@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK (Alan Thew) (02/06/91)
In article <1991Jan29.044604.14153@brolga.cc.uq.oz.au>, ant@brolga.cc.uq.oz.au (Anthony Murdoch) says: > ..... > >Hi guys, > >Well apparently there is an X version of mush. It is called zipmail and is >a commercial product. Also, the copyright on mush dissallows converting it >to use in X windows etc. The word from Dan : > ...... >->The new version is called "zipmail" currently (it's name is going to >->change) and this is strictly a *commercial product*. It is not free >->software. The advantage is that there is complete documentation (a >->500 page O'Reilly book and a smaller "user's guide") and there is a >->full support staff behind it. We have done a Motif and Open Look version >->and are sending out Beta shipments on Feb 1 -- full release on March 1. >-> >->"Mush" is still owned strictly by me and I prohibit anyone from >->modifying Mush to work under X windows or to make any modifications >->whatsoever publically available. Obviously, this is to prohibit >->competition with my new business. Mush has never been in the public >->domain; it has always been owned by me with these restrictions (see >->the README). I still support mush in fact and am about to release >->a new version of it (7.2.2). Sorry if this issue has been flogged to death but I seem to have missed it. While I understand that Dan has a business to run and his product comes first, what are the likely 'support' implications for the version that is currently available ? I have to admit that although I prefer mush, the competition (i.e. elm) looks to have a better/more secure future as regards versions that I can get for nothing (note that I DID NOT say 'free' or 'PD'). No flames please...just some informed comment preferred. Thanks. Alan Thew : University of Liverpool Computer Laboratory Bitnet/Earn: QQ11@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK or QQ11%UK.AC.LIVERPOOL @ UKACRL UUCP : ....!mcsun!ukc!liv!qq11 Voice : +44 51 794 3735 FAX : +44 51 794 3759 Internet : QQ11@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK or QQ11%LIVERPOOL.AC.UK @ NSFNET-RELAY.AC.UK
argv@turnpike.Eng.Sun.COM (Dan Heller) (02/08/91)
In article <91037.133433QQ11@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK> QQ11@LIVERPOOL.AC.UK (Alan Thew) writes: > Sorry if this issue has been flogged to death but I seem to have missed > it. While I understand that Dan has a business to run and his product > comes first, what are the likely 'support' implications for the version > that is currently available ? Bart and I view mush as an important and significant product that can help us leverage the sale of zipmail (which is being renamed to "zmail"). It is virtually a "demo" product that is far enough ahead of Elm and Mail that people familiar with those products can appreciate it. Once Mush is understood, people will more easily see the stepping stone to Zmail. It is completely backwards compatible with mush, as mush was to Mail and mailtool at one time, but zmail now introduces multiple and simultaneous folder access, shell functions, an X interface, a stronger scripting language as well as support for multimedia and other mail transport protocols. Through the support of Mush users, we have been able to start this new business but we don't want to leave you all behind. We want to remain to be the focal point for mush so it doesn't turn into what happened to Elm when it became a "committee-maintained" product. > I have to admit that although I prefer mush, the competition (i.e. elm) > looks to have a better/more secure future as regards versions that I > can get for nothing (note that I DID NOT say 'free' or 'PD'). The reason for Elm's strnegth is that HP is pushing it very hard and that's a commendable force. They show it a trade shows and give it away to licensees. "Email" is a checklist item for corporate america and there aren't many options to choose from. By diluting the market with Elm, getting a more technologically advanced product like Zmail into everyone's hands is going to be more difficult. Elm's limited user interface, configurability and feature set does not represent a threat to mush or Zmail in the future. We hope that through trade shows and other marketing ploys, we will be able to proliferate zmail better and let the marketplace decide. > No flames please...just some informed comment preferred. Thanx for bringing this up -- However, I would also like the public to realize that Bart and I are in no control whatsoever to the marketing and sales side of zmail-- we are strictly the engineering half of a two-company effort. -- dan ---------------------------------------------------- O'Reilly && Associates argv@sun.com / argv@ora.com Opinions expressed reflect those of the author only.