Willard McCarty <MCCARTY@vm.epas.utoronto.ca> (02/09/90)
Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 3, No. 1020. Thursday, 8 Feb 1990. (1) Date: 07 Feb 90 21:45:43 EST (33 lines) From: George Aichele <73760.1176@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Workstations (2) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 90 20:12:13 EST (44 lines) From: Geoffrey Rockwell <Geoffrey_Rockwell@poczta.utcs.utoronto.ca> Subject: 3.1019 ideal workstation, M-I (1) -------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 07 Feb 90 21:45:43 EST From: George Aichele <73760.1176@CompuServe.COM> Subject: Workstations I support the views of both A.Gilmartin and A.C.Lee (or was it J. Allegrezza?) re computer workstations for scholars. And I'm glad to hear that someone else is using a micro other than a Mac or IBM-type. But C.Faulhaber makes an important point: incompatibility seriously limits every computer, and users of the minority types necessarily bear the worst of it. Text/data exchange between different computers is readily achieved via modem, but more work needs to be done on the problem of program compatibility. I recently learned that WordPerfect documents can be transferred by modem to a different type of computer without loss of wordprocessing codes, provided the receiving machine also runs WordPerfect--I'm not sure that this will work for every possible combination of computers or editions of the program, however. Also, by adding presently-available hardware to my Apple IIGS (which, like the Amiga, is an odd duck in higher education), I can run almost any PC application on it--but not MacIntosh or Commodore or Atari programs. (The hardware isn't cheap, but it's cheaper than buying another computer!) Are these cases unique, or are there other possibilities for compatibility out there? The question is not merely theoretical--I'm presently part of a group writing/editing project which, among its various members, is using three different types of microcomputer, plus assorted mainframes. I'm sure we're not alone. George Aichele 73760,1176@compuserve.com (2) --------------------------------------------------------------55---- Date: Thu, 8 Feb 90 20:12:13 EST From: Geoffrey Rockwell <Geoffrey_Rockwell@poczta.utcs.utoronto.ca> Subject: 3.1019 ideal workstation, M-I Here are some of the things I would like to see in a working station: 1) The ability to handle video with the ease we can handle text. That would mean being able to save and play TV quality video in real time. (Waiting for a file to load is "fake time.") That would probably mean compression hardware and large removable storage devices. Why video? For one thing, it would mean one doesn't have to "animate" things are best recorded with a video camera. For another, the same hardware could store large amounts of pictures - one could keep thousands of images and sounds. One could also cut down on the number of storage devices kept around the house (VCR, Record Player, Tape Deck, Hard Drive, Floppy, and CD.) The computer could manage a single storage system for all the different types of information we like to keep. 2) I would like hypertextual tools to be built into the system so that they are available to any well behaved program. All the hypertext systems I've seen so far work only with files they create. If the hypertextual tools were part of the distributed system software, developers could give you links with little additional work. I could be in my word-processor and create a link to a another file that is maintained by the operating system. The interface to the operating system would also display the links and let one browse them. The publish feature promised in system 7 of the Mac OS promises less than this. 3) Above all, I appreciate portability. I have a Mac II at home and a T1000 laptop. Guess which one I use the most. The laptop is where I want it when I want it. It goes to the library with me and leaves room in my briefcase for a book or two. Geoffrey Rockwell rockwell@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca