perm filename WORKS.MSG[UP,DOC]13 blob
sn#656209 filedate 1982-05-03 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ⊗ VALID 00300 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00027 00002 Subject: Welcome to APOLLO
C00031 00003 Subject: Themes for discussion
C00034 00004 Subject: Preliminary results from the personal workstations survey
C00041 00005 Subject: personal computer economics
C00043 00006 Subject: Re: Another Xerox workstation.
C00045 00007 Subject: SAM/Worm/820
C00047 00008 Subject: personal computer economics
C00051 00009 Subject: personal computer economics
C00053 00010 Subject: Subjective value of Personal Workstations
C00056 00011 Subject: Star/Mesa
C00058 00012 Subject: Star
C00061 00013 [Subj: Mesa language, PDP10, etc]
C00063 00014 Subject: Re: Speaking up Xerox!
C00065 00015 Subject: Workstations, and their posts.
C00069 00016 Subject: correction on dlw's message
C00072 00017 Subject: Acquiring personal computers
C00077 00018 Subject: Arpanet usage
C00080 00019 Subject: Stars in the sky
C00084 00020 Subject: Productivity gains without using workstations
C00087 00021 Subject: Star Info
C00089 00022 Subject: Re: Apollo Network
C00095 00023 Subject: Quick overview/summary: The Apollo-I (Domain) computer.
C00098 00024 Subject: Re: Star Info
C00101 00025 Subject: Re: Star Info/Smalltalk
C00103 00026 Subject: Re: Smalltalk
C00105 00027 Subject: Chromatics
C00111 00028 Subject: Burroughs OFIS products
C00115 00029 Subject: Re: Works: Re RIvanciw: OA Architecture
C00119 00030 Subject: Apollo files and network
C00121 00031 Subject: Comment on note on Apollo Network
C00123 00032 Subject: Re: Quick overview/summary: The Apollo-I (Domain) computer.
C00125 00033 Subject: APOLLO net
C00128 00034 Subject: My CT system configuration and Chromatics
C00131 00035 Subject: Re: Personal Workstations -- who for?
C00137 00036 Subject: Interupting a workstation session
C00141 00037 Subject: Shades of Nicholas Negroponte
C00143 00038 Subject: Tools for personal workstations
C00146 00039 Subject: Languages for Distributed Workstations
C00152 00040 Subject: system architecture
C00155 00041 Subject: Mini/Micro Systems June 1981
C00156 00042 Subject: Re: Xerox Dolphin (alias 1100?)
C00162 00043 Subject: Personal Workstations
C00165 00044 Subject: The Economics of Workstations
C00172 00045 Subject: Interupting a workstation session
C00175 00046 Subject: Re: Tools for personal workstations
C00176 00047 Subject: frisbees and floppies...
C00178 00048 Subject: Addressing and File Accessing
C00181 00049 Subject: Re: el.POBox 19 Jun 81 7:36-EDT
C00182 00050 Subject: Multiple Levels Of State
C00186 00051 Subject: Re: Tools for personal workstations
C00190 00052 Subject: On productive text editors, suggested reading includes
C00191 00053 Subject: ALANTHUS System 1000 workstation
C00193 00054 Subject: Re: Xerox Dolphin (alias 1100?)
C00195 00055 Subject: Xerox 1100 (Dolphin)
C00197 00056 Subject: ALANTHUS System 1000 workstation
C00199 00057 Subject: Clarifications about interrupting workstaions
C00202 00058 Subject: Re: Multiple Levels Of State
C00204 00059 Subject: Question to field: Bit Mapped displays
C00205 00060 Subject: Addressing and File Accessing
C00207 00061 Subject: Re: File accessing?
C00208 00062 Subject: Re: Addressing and File Accessing
C00212 00063 Subject: Errata on Barns message "Addressing and File Accessing"
C00216 00064 Subject: Storage Question Restated
C00221 00065 Subject: Re: Addressing and File Accessing
C00224 00066 Subject: Re: Question to field: Bit Mapped displays
C00228 00067 Subject: capability machines
C00230 00068 Subject: Re: Addressing and File Accessing
C00234 00069 Subject: Re: Addressing and File Accessing
C00238 00070 Subject: Xerox 820 Ethernet compatability
C00240 00071 Subject: EMACS -vs- UNIX
C00247 00072 Subject: CMU Workstation milestone
C00248 00073 Subject: Re: Ethernet capabilities of 820 and STAR
C00256 00074 Subject: Switching tasks and context
C00260 00075 Subject: Multiple Levels of State
C00263 00076 Subject: Spatial design for a workstation
C00274 00077 Subject: Ivanciw's ideas &c: comments
C00279 00078 Subject: Re: Tools for personal workstations
C00281 00079 Subject: Re: capability machines
C00283 00080 Subject: Re: Spatial design for a workstation
C00285 00081 Subject: Contexts as Icons
C00289 00082 Subject: Multiple Levels of State
C00291 00083 Subject: Re: Switching tasks and context
C00295 00084 Subject: not putting phone messages into electronic mail files
C00297 00085 Subject: Re: A Quibble or two
C00301 00086 Subject: Re: not putting phone messages into electronic mail files
C00304 00087 Subject: Re: not putting phone messages into electronic mail files
C00307 00088 Subject: speaking of touch panels...
C00308 00089 Subject: Re: Spatial design for a workstation
C00310 00090 Subject: Context Managers
C00314 00091 Subject: Re: Re: Tools for personal workstations
C00315 00092 Subject: Re: Contexts as Icons
C00317 00093 Subject: Unfinished tasks, intra-office mail, and system death
C00321 00094 Subject: Re: A Quibble or two
C00323 00095 Subject: Reliability
C00327 00096 Subject: Re: JWalker comments on working at home, on planes, etc.
C00331 00097 Subject: Working at home
C00335 00098 Subject: Office of Tomorrow, where is it?
C00338 00099 [Subj: Bravo/Hypertext]
C00340 00100 Subject: Workstation Reliability and Redundancy
C00346 00101 Subject: Automated desk
C00349 00102 Subject: Re: Context Managers
C00350 00103 Subject: Icons
C00352 00104 Subject: Re: Reliability
C00356 00105 Subject: Touchpanels
C00360 00106 Subject: Re: Touchpanels
C00374 00107 Subject: Picture vs. Window names
C00381 00108 [Subj: more on icons]
C00383 00109 Subject: Re: Unfinished tasks, intra-office mail, and system death
C00385 00110 Subject: Reliablity
C00387 00111 Subject: SUN Workstation
C00389 00112 Subject: Collected Responses on Touchpanels II
C00404 00113 Subject: Re: Picture vs. Window names
C00406 00114 Subject: pukcba ekortsyek
C00408 00115 Subject: Making paper go away
C00413 00116 Subject: Programming by example
C00421 00117 Subject: Re: Reliablity
C00423 00118 Subject: PIE reports from PARC
C00424 00119 Subject: Quickie poll
C00425 00120 Subject: Re: Making paper go away
C00428 00121 Subject: Re: Making paper go away
C00432 00122 Subject: Making paper go away
C00436 00123 Subject: Re: Office of Tomorrow, where is it?
C00440 00124 Subject: Icons and analogy
C00444 00125 Subject: Redefining the art
C00446 00126 Subject: Re: Re: A Quibble or two
C00450 00127 Subject: Re: Spatial design for a workstation
C00457 00128 Subject: Re: Spatial design for a workstation
C00461 00129 Subject: Collected responses on terminal input devices
C00473 00130 Subject: Bell Labs "writers workbench"
C00474 00131 Subject: writing aids
C00475 00132 Subject: Realtime proofreaders
C00478 00133 Subject: Configuration
C00482 00134 Subject: [don: EP]
C00485 00135 Subject: Alternatives to making paper go away
C00488 00136 Subject: Re: Making paper go away
C00492 00137 Subject: Scanning structured text
C00494 00138 Subject: Editing
C00498 00139 Subject: Writing English
C00501 00140 Subject: Ideal word-processor
C00505 00141 ["Automate the Business Office--How and When"]
C00508 00142 Subject: Talking Workstations, that elusive 'external device'.
C00510 00143 Subject: mice,balls,touch-plates,pens.
C00513 00144 Subject: Re: Configuration
C00518 00145 Subject: Collected Responses on Terminal Input Devices
C00531 00146 Subject: terminals versus comp centers
C00534 00147 Subject: Collected responses on terminal input devices
C00555 00148 Subject: WorkS problems
C00559 00149 Subject: Realtime proofreaders
C00563 00150 Subject: File Backup
C00568 00151 Subject: Collected responses on terminal input devices
C00580 00152 Subject: More on configuration
C00586 00153 Subject: WorkS Software.
C00589 00154 Subject: Collected responses on useable systems
C00596 00155 Subject: Sperry Univac workstation design group -- eyewitness testimony
C00602 00156 Subject: Sperry Univac workstation design group -- eyewitness testimony
C00608 00157 ∂26-Jul-81 2028 AVB Xerox announcement on Dolphin/1100
C00616 00158 Subject: "mundane" systems
C00621 00159 Subject: re: REM' s remarks on Global configurations
C00626 00160 Subject: apollo s/w release 2.0
C00630 00161 Subject: Mouse Guts
C00636 00162 Subject: Big AND Small
C00644 00163 Subject: Keystroke Monitoring
C00647 00164 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #1
C00658 00165 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #3
C00669 00166 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #4
C00672 00167 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #5
C00690 00168 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #6
C00699 00169 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #7
C00706 00170 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #8
C00713 00171 Subject: Announcements - ANSI Standards Comm. & NCC82 Call for Papers
C00719 00172 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #9
C00722 00173 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #10
C00732 00174 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #11
C00740 00175 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #13
C00749 00176 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #13
C00755 00177 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #14
C00758 00178 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #16
C00764 00179 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #17
C00771 00180 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #18
C00773 00181 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #19
C00778 00182 Subject: WORKS Digest V1 #20
C00793 00183 Subject: WORKS Digest V1 #21
C00799 00184 Subject: WORKS Digest V1 #23
C00807 00185 Subject: WORKS Digest V1 #24
C00819 00186 Subject: WORKS Digest V1 #25
C00823 00187 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #26
C00830 00188 Subject: WORKS Digest V1 #27
C00840 00189 Subject: WORKS Digest V1 #28
C00871 00190 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #29
C00887 00191 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #30
C00891 00192 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #31
C00900 00193 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #32
C00911 00194 Subject: Works Digest V1 #33
C00920 00195 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #34
C00932 00196 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #35
C00945 00197 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #36
C00954 00198 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #37
C00960 00199 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #38
C00966 00200 Subject: WORKS Digest V1 #22
C00970 00201 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #39
C00974 00202 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #40
C00987 00203 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #41
C00994 00204 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #42
C00998 00205 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #43
C01002 00206 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #45
C01011 00207 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #46
C01019 00208 Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #47
C01026 00209 Subject: WorkS Digest V2 #1
C01034 00210 Subject: WorkS Digest V2 #2
C01052 00211 Subject: WorkS Digest V2 #3
C01062 00212 Subject: WorkS Digest V2 #4
C01077 00213 Subject: WorkS Digest V2 #5
C01095 00214 Subject: WorkS Digest V2 #6
C01118 00215 Subject: WorkS Digest V2 #7
C01134 00216 Subject: WorkS Digest V2 #8
C01140 00217 Subject: WorkS Digest V2 #9
C01150 00218 Subject: WorkS Digest V2 #10
C01170 00219 Subject: WorkS Digest V2 #11
C01175 00220 Subject: WorkS Digest V2 #12
C01180 00221 Subject: WorkS Digest V2 #13
C01196 00222 ∂23-Feb-82 2344 AVB WorkS Digest V2 #14
C01202 00223 ∂23-Feb-82 2345 AVB Perceived Complexity of computer and/or text editing systems
C01205 00224 ∂23-Feb-82 2345 AVB Test and archive
C01207 00225 ∂23-Feb-82 2359 AVB Workstations and multiprocessing
C01211 00226 ∂24-Feb-82 0004 AVB Fortune 32:16
C01220 00227 ∂24-Feb-82 0008 AVB Re: UNIX & Workstations & Networking ...
C01223 00228 ∂28-Feb-82 1126 AVB Re: Works archive...
C01226 00229 ∂28-Feb-82 1126 AVB General Works comments
C01235 00230 ∂28-Feb-82 1128 AVB Bit-map for the Wicat
C01239 00231 ∂28-Feb-82 1143 AVB Wicat Graphics
C01243 00232 ∂28-Feb-82 1144 AVB Re: Wicat Graphics
C01245 00233 ∂28-Feb-82 1145 AVB Window Management
C01248 00234 ∂28-Feb-82 1149 AVB Re: Wicat Graphics
C01250 00235 ∂28-Feb-82 2322 AVB
C01251 00236 ∂28-Feb-82 2322 AVB Victor Workstation
C01254 00237 ∂28-Feb-82 2322 AVB where's the innovation
C01256 00238 ∂28-Feb-82 2322 AVB
C01257 00239 ∂28-Feb-82 2323 AVB victor 9000
C01264 00240 ∂28-Feb-82 2323 AVB IBM PC Review
C01271 00241 ∂01-Mar-82 1223 AVB IBM PC Review
C01275 00242 ∂01-Mar-82 1223 AVB IBM PC Review
C01280 00243 ∂01-Mar-82 1225 AVB Re: Window Management
C01283 00244 ∂01-Mar-82 1226 AVB WorkS Now both DIGEST and Direct distribution
C01286 00245 ∂01-Mar-82 1226 AVB
C01288 00246 ∂01-Mar-82 1228 AVB IBM PC comments
C01293 00247 ∂04-Mar-82 2156 AVB Re: where's the innovation
C01296 00248 ∂04-Mar-82 2157 AVB Re: IBM PC Bus Extensionts)
C01298 00249 ∂04-Mar-82 2158 AVB
C01299 00250 ∂04-Mar-82 2159 AVB IBM PC Bus Extension
C01302 00251 ∂04-Mar-82 2200 AVB Innovation...
C01304 00252 ∂04-Mar-82 2209 AVB 68000 wait states
C01307 00253 ∂04-Mar-82 2345 AVB 68000 system performance
C01311 00254 ∂06-Mar-82 1203 AVB Innovation
C01314 00255 ∂06-Mar-82 1203 AVB re: 68000 wait states
C01315 00256 ∂06-Mar-82 1703 AVB Re: Innovation
C01319 00257 ∂08-Mar-82 2148 AVB Apollo system software
C01334 00258 ∂08-Mar-82 2148 AVB Ethernet Doomed?
C01336 00259 ∂08-Mar-82 2156 AVB Electronic Newsroom Info Request
C01338 00260 ∂09-Mar-82 1044 AVB Re: Ethernet Doomed?
C01340 00261 ∂11-Mar-82 1215 AVB Perqs, Accent, and Spice
C01343 00262 ∂11-Mar-82 1216 AVB
C01348 00263 ∂11-Mar-82 1216 AVB Re: Ethernet Doomed?
C01352 00264 ∂11-Mar-82 1217 AVB Administrivia - Archives.
C01356 00265 ∂11-Mar-82 1217 AVB Re: Ethernet Doomed?
C01362 00266 ∂11-Mar-82 1217 AVB Apollo
C01365 00267 ∂11-Mar-82 1218 AVB Ethernet Doomed?
C01368 00268 ∂11-Mar-82 1219 AVB Hardware Driven?
C01372 00269 ∂11-Mar-82 1219 AVB Re: WORKS Digest V2 #19
C01374 00270 ∂11-Mar-82 1220 AVB Mike O'Dell and Ethernet
C01377 00271 ∂11-Mar-82 1221 AVB Is UNIX really the answer ?
C01383 00272 ∂11-Mar-82 1221 AVB Re: is unix really the answer?
C01387 00273 ∂11-Mar-82 1222 AVB Re: is unix really the answer?
C01389 00274 ∂11-Mar-82 1223 AVB Re: Mail headers
C01391 00275 ∂11-Mar-82 1224 AVB Unix really isn't the answer
C01394 00276 ∂11-Mar-82 1225 AVB UNIX & "the" Answer
C01397 00277 ∂11-Mar-82 1226 AVB Ethernet Doomed?
C01399 00278 ∂11-Mar-82 1227 AVB ethernet, unix
C01404 00279 ∂11-Mar-82 1228 AVB TOPS-20 EXEC
C01407 00280 ∂11-Mar-82 1245 AVB Re: UNIX & "the" Answer
C01410 00281 ∂11-Mar-82 1652 AVB Re: Ethernet Doomed?
C01412 00282 ∂11-Mar-82 1653 AVB Re: Re: UNIX & "the" Answer
C01414 00283 ∂11-Mar-82 1653 AVB Someone's Theory
C01416 00284 ∂11-Mar-82 1930 AVB Re: Unix really isn't the answer
C01421 00285 ∂13-Mar-82 0958 AVB Opinions & Biases
C01426 00286 ∂13-Mar-82 0959 AVB UNIX as a working environment
C01432 00287 ∂13-Mar-82 0959 AVB Unix, IBM, humankind, Smalltalk, animation, parallelism
C01437 00288 ∂13-Mar-82 1000 AVB software releases
C01440 00289 ∂13-Mar-82 1001 AVB A minor point...
C01442 00290 ∂17-Mar-82 1139 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #24
C01469 00291 ∂20-Mar-82 1009 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #25
C01479 00292 ∂20-Mar-82 1010 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #26
C01486 00293 ∂22-Mar-82 0820 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #27
C01509 00294 ∂22-Mar-82 2216 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #28
C01518 00295 ∂23-Mar-82 2212 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #29
C01526 00296 ∂24-Mar-82 2318 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #30
C01549 00297 ∂26-Mar-82 2100 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #31
C01560 00298 ∂29-Mar-82 2342 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #34
C01567 00299 ∂30-Mar-82 2244 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #35
C01579 00300 ∂04-Apr-82 0100 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #38
C01592 ENDMK
C⊗;
Subject: Welcome to APOLLO
∂05-Jun-81 2215 DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II) Welcome to APOLLO
Date: 6 JUN 1981 0115-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II)
To: New APOLLO Subscribers
Hello,
Welcome to the APOLLO mailing list. APOLLO discusses personal
work station computers, like the APOLLO work station computer,
BBN's Jericho, the Three Rivers Corporation PERC, or the newly
announced Xerox STAR. APOLLO provides a way for interested
members of the ARPAnet community to discuss what is wrong with
these machines, compare notes on work in progress, and share
useful insights about these kinds of systems. The list is
managed by Hank Dreifus <Dreifus at WHARTON>.
APOLLO is currently discussing initial reactions to the Xerox
Star Workstation. Sandor Schoichet <SROSS at MIT-XX> has been
conducting an informal survey about the Star. The current
results are available in the file DUFFEY;APOLLO STARMS on MIT-AI
and the file <SROSS>STAR.MSS on MIT-XX. Please note that you do
not need to login to FTP the file from MIT-AI. People who cannot
obtain copies of the file themselves may request a copy of the
file by sending mail to APOLLO-REQUEST@AI.
Hank Dreifus <Dreifus at WHARTON> is conducting an initial
survey about the personal workstations people on this list
are using and/or developing. He would like to send him a
brief message describing the OA machine you use and why
(or why not). He will collect the responses and distribute
a final summary to the list.
A complete record of the APOLLO discussions will be maintained
in the file AI:DUFFEY;APOLLO ARCHIV. The archive is small now
because APOLLO is only a few days old. However, this will
change rapidly.
Comments in the ongoing discussions should be addressed to
APOLLO@MIT-AI. Administrative requests (eg. a message asking
to add someone to the mailing list) or questions about the
goals of this list should be addressed to APOLLO-REQUEST@MIT-AI.
Lastly, welcome to APOLLO. I trust you will enjoy being part of
these discussions.
Cheers,
Roger
Subject: Themes for discussion
∂11-Jun-81 0714 DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus) Themes for discussion
Date: 11 Jun 1981 (Thursday) 0915-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
To: APOLLO at MIT-AI
Some of the topics I would like to see discussed by this discussion
list are:
o Definition of a personal workstation.
o The IDEAL personal workstation.
o Technical review of all participating machines
where some accurate knowledge of the machine
can be presented.
o The introduction of personal workstations into large
business. The question of operational logistics,
transferring an application to a small machine.
o Is the right answer to make the small workstation
look like a very slow version of a large mainframe?
o Example applications.
o Trade offs in networking the workstations. Performance
weighed against cost and overhead.
o Some of the plans for introducing workstations in
operational areas.
o End user(s) of workstations, the application skewed
machines.
o User interfaces, factors.
------------------------------
There are but a few ideas. However one caveat. Facts are better
than Flames. Please no flaming, that is the one thing this list
is better off without.
Henry Dreifus
DREIFUS@WHARTON-10
-----
Subject: Preliminary results from the personal workstations survey
∂11-Jun-81 0735 DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus) Preliminary results from the personal workstations survey
Date: 11 Jun 1981 (Thursday) 0920-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
To: APOLLO at MIT-AI
Below is a condensed version of the various systems that people
have made an attempt to respond to. The interesting point(s)
that I have noticed are:
o Everyone's view of Personal Workstations is different.
o The machine(s) selected are wide ranged and apparently
well suited for each application chosen.
o There is no wrong Personal Workstation machine.
o The technology of Personal Workstations is not well
established as of yet.
o There is a demonstrated need for this technology,
it appears to be one year away from general use.
o Most have:
Large address space (or VM).
Networking capabilities.
Very good display hardware.
Large local storage capacity.
Micro-processor based.
Contain an external locator type input device.
o Most are missing:
Software tools to round out system.
Market recognition.
Gateway access, no gateway specifications.
Too many parts, development schedules are
full, revision schedules are bare.
Consistency. This is a result of different
definitions of what a personal workstation
is supposed to be.
------------------------------
Below is a summary of the survey responses. Eventually, each
machine will be examined in greater detail. The intention is
to educate ourselves about personal workstations. They sound
neat, but what they are under the surface is still a hot topic.
Machine Reason/Use Comments
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Perq Spice Project 15
Spice means: Scientific Personal Integrated Computing Environment.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Jericho BBN - Lisp machines 30
need large address
space and powerful
LISP processing.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
CTI For Alanthus. 16 workstations per
cluster capability.
(no numbers)
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
DEC-20/Ts computer Large Scale OA proj. 20
Interesting for discussion purposes.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Apollo Test/soft devt. 2 - max curr config.
existing in field
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Xerox Xerox Corp devt. 50-60
MIT, and others:
experimentation.
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Nu's MIT Workstation 15-25
prototype
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Wang WPS-25 Experiment 1-4
←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←←
Extending the survey:
Each technical group that has a machine; eg Xerox PARC,
please designate one person to introduce their machine(s)
with references in the literature. For each agency or
sponsored group, list the application and the reasons and
any other relevant information about their specific problem,
eg: general Office Management, or some application. This
should provide a good beginning in opening the discussions.
Henry Dreifus
DREIFUS@WHARTON-10
-----
Subject: personal computer economics
∂11-Jun-81 0759 Hank Walker at CMU-10A (C410DW60) personal computer economics
Date: 11 June 1981 1025-EDT (Thursday)
From: Hank Walker at CMU-10A (C410DW60)
To: apollo at MIT-AI
Most of the comments on the Xerox Star that have appearred in the paper say
something like "very nice...for half the price". VERY few companies have
computer capitalization that exceeds $10,000 per person. That's roughly
what it is at DEC (internal transfer cost), and the average outside company
would have to spend a lot more to reach the same level, which I consider
just adequate (terminal at home, one at work, access to several group
machines). The comments that I have heard from people in marketing are
that they don't think that large numbers of the Star will be sold to peons,
but rather to management types, who can use it as a status symbol.
So one requirement of a personal workstation that you are going to give
to everybody, including the secretaries, is a price of less than $10,000
including overhead from network, printer, file servers, etc. Also including
software.
Subject: Re: Another Xerox workstation.
∂11-Jun-81 1213 Charles B. Weinstock <Weinstock at SRI-KL> Re: Another Xerox workstation.
Date: 11 Jun 1981 1123-PDT
From: Charles B. Weinstock <Weinstock at SRI-KL>
To: TAW at SU-AI
cc: apollo at MIT-AI
In-Reply-To: Your message of 11-Jun-81 0918-PDT
The 820 (or Worm) is a 64k Z80 based machine that (at 3k) has a
keyboard, display, two mini-floppies, and can run either CP/M or
a Xerox hacked over Wordstar (this from the local representative).
The only current Ethernet capability is through a RS232 interface
(which means that an Apple or a Osborne has the same capability).
Xerox will have some sort of a real Ethernet available eventually.
According the the San Jose News of last night, the 820 has no
graphics capability. The main thing this @i[appears] to have going
for it is the Xerox name--many companies would rather deal with a
Xerox or an IBM than an Apple or a Radio Shack or a ...
The above is based on information gleaned from talking to various Xerox
people and is no doubt incomplete. I imagine there are Xeroxers on
this mailing list. Perhaps they can fill us in more.
-------
Subject: SAM/Worm/820
∂11-Jun-81 1241 Tom Wadlow <TAW at SU-AI> SAM/Worm/820
Date: 11 Jun 1981 1131-PDT
From: Tom Wadlow <TAW at SU-AI>
To: apollo at MIT-AI
Hopefully, Xerox will provide the software for the 820 to speak with Star
systems. That is where the 820 could have the advantage over the Apple
or Osbourne machines. I think that a lot of people who would like to
go into office automation are cringing at the price of the Star (when they
think of all the people that they would want on their office network).
If the 820 provides a thoughtfully designed subset of Star capabilities
(and I don't know whether it will or not) at a fraction of the price
it could be a wonderful bootstrapping mechanism for getting Ethernet
based systems into the offices. And you can always unplug the 820
and plug in a Star at a later date (perhaps allowing the employees
to take them home for telecommuting purposes).
Subject: personal computer economics
∂11-Jun-81 2242 Steven T. Kirsch <SK at MIT-MC> personal computer economics
Date: 12 June 1981 01:34-EDT
From: Steven T. Kirsch <SK at MIT-MC>
To: Hank Walker at CMU-10A
cc: apollo at MIT-AI
I think your argument is a little incomplete.
Suppose I make you the following deal: if you give me $10,000 today, I
will give you at least $5,000 every year for the next 5 years. I
think you will accept my deal, right?
Ok, now let's look at Star and suppose I can prove to you that it
makes me 10% more effective (this is hard to prove) or that it saves
me 10% of my time. My time actually costs the company $60,000 a year.
And I am but a lowly engineer making under $30K/year. So if the
if I do my work 10% faster, the company in some way, "saves"
$6,000/yr. (the savings could be in hiring less engineers or by
getting more work done per unit time or by getting the job done more
effectively).
In fact, the Booz-Allen study on the potential of office
automation (a very thorough case study of over 40 companies) concluded
the AVERAGE ROI on OA equipment was 86% annually and could be over
200% in some companies.
I think it is foolish to measure a system on cost. You measure on
price/performance or ROI. If Xerox can prove a high ROI, they will win.
I must work for one of those "VERY few" companies who spend over
$10,000 on computer equipment for engineers. It costs us $60,000 to
provide a computer port into our Data General Eclipse.
∂12-Jun-81 0051 Dave Dyer <DDYER at USC-ISIB> personal computer economics
Date: 12 Jun 1981 0043-PDT
From: Dave Dyer <DDYER at USC-ISIB>
Subject: personal computer economics
To: apollo at MIT-AI
While your fundamental argument is correct, you neglected two
important points.
First, the $10K (or whatever) is not free. At today's rates,
$10K capital investment costs the company 20% interest, either directly
because they had to borrow it, or indirectly, because they don't have
it to invest elsewhere. So your increase in productivity would have to
be at least 20% to break even.
Second, as someone else has pointed out, no one knows how to quantify
the increase (if any) in productivity from something like a star, especially
vis a vis similar software running on less flashy hardware. This makes
it impossible to "prove" any increase in productivity.
-------
Subject: personal computer economics
∂12-Jun-81 0051 Dave Dyer <DDYER at USC-ISIB> personal computer economics
Date: 12 Jun 1981 0043-PDT
From: Dave Dyer <DDYER at USC-ISIB>
To: apollo at MIT-AI
While your fundamental argument is correct, you neglected two
important points.
First, the $10K (or whatever) is not free. At today's rates,
$10K capital investment costs the company 20% interest, either directly
because they had to borrow it, or indirectly, because they don't have
it to invest elsewhere. So your increase in productivity would have to
be at least 20% to break even.
Second, as someone else has pointed out, no one knows how to quantify
the increase (if any) in productivity from something like a star, especially
vis a vis similar software running on less flashy hardware. This makes
it impossible to "prove" any increase in productivity.
-------
Subject: Subjective value of Personal Workstations
∂12-Jun-81 0447 Brian P. Lloyd <LLOYD at MIT-AI> Subjective value of Personal Workstations
Date: 12 June 1981 07:39-EDT
From: Brian P. Lloyd <LLOYD at MIT-AI>
To: APOLLO at MIT-AI
Regardless of the arguments for and against the economic value of the
Personal Workstation (PW), the numbers are beginning to tell. I work
for Alanthus Data Communications and we market the Convergent
Technologies system to end users. Our marketing strategy is to point
out how the system provides OA, communications, and user
programmability in one box.
The response is overwhelming! The average configuration seems to be
going out at about $20,000 including software. Granted, at this point
in time people are buying development systems, but the availablity of
OA software (WP, mail, etc.) has been a driving point in almost every
sale.
Obviously people believe in the PW concept and the market is still
growing. Since people rarely exhibit rational behavior (except in a
negative [fiscal] sense), I don't expect rational decisions either way
on the subject. We all realize that OA and PWs are coming and noone
is going to stop it.
Since we all tend to be in areas of development for OA products, let
us now discuss what the needs of the user really are. Perhaps we can
decide what Office Automation and Personal Workstation really means.
Brian
Subject: Star/Mesa
∂12-Jun-81 0841 LYNCH at USC-ISIB Star/Mesa
Date: 12 Jun 1981 0819-PDT
From: LYNCH at USC-ISIB
To: Apollo at MIT-AI
The Star is almost useless to any of us who are doing computer
science R&D unless we can program it as we see fit. The applications
that Xerox has seen fit to release at this time are indeed quite nice
but do not justify the cost ($20K with software if you buy 50 or more
of them in a year's time -- they give a nice discount for volume
buys (about 25% off)). We asked Xerox to include Mesa.
They said OK. They have not yet quoted a price to us however.
We also asked for the microcode. Thye said Not at this time.
The Mesa release was contigent upon us buying a lot of them
(like 50-100). They are still confused about where their marketplace
is. If commerical orders do not flow in rapidly in the next
few months then they might be much more interested in
turning it into a "programmer's workstation" that would suit us.
WEe have also asked them to include much more memory on the Star.
They admit it can be done but that they are trying to build even
smaller confiturations of it (it currently comes with 384 MB).
Dan
-------
Subject: Star
∂12-Jun-81 0940 Tom Wadlow <TAW at SU-AI> Star
Date: 12 Jun 1981 0917-PDT
From: Tom Wadlow <TAW at SU-AI>
To: apollo at MIT-AI
As I understand it, the Star comes with a somewhat low-power programming
language called CUSP. This is the only programming facility available to
the user. Rumor has it (and it would not surprise me) that there is an
extensive Mesa development system that could be run on the Star, but is
destined to never leave the hallowed halls of Xerox. (If I am wrong
on any of this I will cheerfully accept correct information from our
friends at Xerox who are reading this)
Apparently the reasoning behind this involves consistancy in system
software. If you don't give the users (who aren't supposed to be
programmers to begin with) access to the system programming language,
and armor-plate the language that you do give them, they can't
do themselves or the system any harm. Also, if you want a new
system application, you must ask Xerox to make it for you. Thus
it will be written properly (I am not being sarcastic here. There
is a lot to be said for this approach when your target market is
composed of non-programmers). Xerox doesn't want to find themselves
in the position of supporting outside software, because outsiders
don't have the information and the methodology to write that
software in a consistant manner with the rest of the Star system.
[Subj: Mesa language, PDP10, etc]
∂12-Jun-81 2016 Ian H. Merritt <MERRITT at USC-ISIB>
Date: 12 Jun 1981 1529-PDT
From: Ian H. Merritt <MERRITT at USC-ISIB>
To: CSVAX.fateman at BERKELEY
cc: apollo at MIT-AI, MERRITT at USC-ISIB
In-Reply-To: Your message of 12-Jun-81 0736-PDT
The major problem we have encountered at ISI is not the hardware costs, but
unwillingness of Xerox to supply us with the facilities to write our own
system software. The eventual availability of the Mesa language has been
discussed, but we need all the system software in order to configure the
system to be useful for our applications.
Another consideration is the internet protocols which are (as I am led to
believe) currently not supported.
The idea of using PDP-10s as 'glorified file servers' has been discussed
and seems to be the best way to proceed, since there is currently no part
of the product line which will afford us the massive storage and archival
system we require.
<>IHM<>
-------
Subject: Re: Speaking up Xerox!
∂12-Jun-81 2037 Hamilton.ES at PARC-MAXC Re: Speaking up Xerox!
Date: 12-Jun-81 16:32:59 PDT (Friday)
From: Hamilton.ES at PARC-MAXC
In-reply-to: GEOFF's message of 12 Jun 1981 1421-PDT, <[SRI-CSL]12-Jun-81 14:21:10.GEOFF>
To: Geoff at SRI-CSL
cc: Apollo@AI, Hamilton.ES
We (Xeroids) have been informed that "according to Xerox management,
Xerox policy is to send NO information on Xerox products over the
Arpanet. Thus, APOLLO should be considered to be one-way (inward
only) with regard to Xerox products."
I'm just a low man on the totem pole, so I speak only for myself,
but I suspect that there are two concerns here. One is that we
don't want to do anything that could be construed as "selling"
(even if only as a passive response to people's technical questions)
over the net. The other is that we insiders tend to lose track
of what's officially announced and what isn't, and what's part of
our product as opposed to our development environment.
I certainly encourage other Arpanet sites to share their perceptions
and expectations of Star. Doubtless such reactions will be one of
many valuable sources of input to determine the product's future.
--Bruce
Subject: Workstations, and their posts.
∂12-Jun-81 2244 DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus) Workstations, and their posts.
Date: 12 Jun 1981 (Friday) 2233-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
To: apollo at MIT-AI
User interface, how important?
The Apollo has nothing right at the moment, as compared to the Star, in
which almost the total software engineering effort has been skewed.
Building a powerful user interface is ''nice'', but what is left
with respect to processor cycles is not so ''nice''. The questions of
priorities for any given application is not clear.
Example:
o Personal workstations are purchased because;
(a) Small application program needs to be run off mainframe
(b) Office - management systems need more sophistication
(c) Need for specialized computing has grown
(d) Corporations can no longer shell out vast sums of
money on computing, when distributing is available.
o What personalities should personal workstations have?
In answering this, there are basically 2, a truely split
personality:
Consider:
System FOO runs on giant IBM-303x and can really be run on
lots of distributed perscoms [from G. Steckel].
Systems people would like to see a very interactive and
totally controllable system, perhaps right down to the
micro-code. The full power, memory management right through
to the disk-I/O routines. Engineering a product right is
as equivalent to engineering it well.
Management would want to see just the pretty pictures, the
finished product, none of the rough edges, that the software
engineers love to play with. All they want is a black box with
none of the 'hassles' of low level code.
A split personality indeed.
Most systems are geared towards the management. The fact that
few provisions have been made for the systems types is indeed a
potential tragedy. Much of the insulation is hindering a good job for
the programmer. Remember these things are nothing more powerful than
your Apple computer, doing a major application in-efficiently will hurt
the perscoms in the long run.
Opinions?
/Hank
Subject: correction on dlw's message
∂13-Jun-81 1122 CSVAX.halbert at Berkeley correction on dlw's message
Date: 13 Jun 1981 10:32:20-PDT
From: CSVAX.halbert at Berkeley
To: apollo@mit-ai
The Xerox Star does have virtual memory; it does page.
--Dan
∂13-Jun-81 1151 LYNCH at USC-ISIB Re: correction on dlw's message
Date: 13 Jun 1981 1144-PDT
From: LYNCH at USC-ISIB
Subject: Re: correction on dlw's message
To: CSVAX.halbert at BERKELEY, apollo at MIT-AI
cc: LYNCH
In response to the message sent 13 Jun 1981 10:32:20-PDT from CSVAX.halbert@Berkeley
But I have heard the paging on the Star is a terrible crock:
it does it by double lookup on every memory reference way down
in the microcode. At this time it has no hardware to assist
paging (like associative memory for the TLAs) or even a
klu`ge like KL-10s have. The (mis)feature makes it tough
to imaging the STar as a LISP machine host.
Dan
-------
∂13-Jun-81 1236 mike at RAND-UNIX MESA on Star
Date: Saturday, 13 Jun 1981 12:18-PDT
To: apollo at MIT-AI
Subject: MESA on Star
From: mike at RAND-UNIX
I have heard a rumor, from a source I trust, that MESA will be
available to those who buy 50 or more Star's. I do not know if there
will be a heavy price, nor do I know if this is a special deal to non-
profit or educational institutions or special in some other way.
There is someone on this list -- you know who you are -- who can
confirm or deny this rumor authoritatively if he chooses to.
In any case, I believe that MESA is a good systems programming
language, but you can certainly kiss portability goodbye!
Subject: Acquiring personal computers
∂13-Jun-81 1415 Sam.Harbison at CMU-10A Acquiring personal computers
Date: 13 June 1981 1534-EDT (Saturday)
From: Sam.Harbison at CMU-10A
To: apollo at mit-mc
Message-Id: <13Jun81 153417 SH01@CMU-10A>
There's been a lot of discussion about the pro's and con's of various personal
computers/personal workstations. Let me give a brief summary of some decisions
taken at CMU.
About two years ago, the CS department decided that our long-term computing
needs would be best met by a network of personal computers in offices, and
plans were made to embark on a research project (Spice) thatwould give us by
1985 the kind of software necessary for such an facility (including Lisp and
Ada programming environments, document production environments, and multi-media
communication). We thought thatit would be 1985 before personal computers
appeared with the right power and cost. Because we did not want to do any
hardware design, we began to canvas manufacturers to see 1) what was available
now to start with, @¬]H@d$AoQCPA[SO!hAEJ↓CmCS1CEYJ↓S\@bdpj\~(~∃)Q∀A[CG!S]Kf↓GY←g∀AK]←UOPAi<AoQCPAoJA]C]iK⊂Ai↑A¬GhACLABAaI←i←ieaJAo∃eJA!∃ecfX4∃βa←1Y←fX↓→Sg`↓≠CGQ%]KfX↓≥jA≠¬GQS]∃fXAC9HA1KI←pAλ5[CGQ%]Kf@! ←Ya!S\XA⊃←eCI<XAC]⊂~∃iQ∀A'iCHAG←[AkiKd$\@A∨UdAae%]GSa¬XAGe%iKeS∧AoKe∀AiQCPAiQJ↓[CGQ%]JAQ¬HAi↑↓QCmJ4∃CYX↓iQJA CgSF↓MKCiUeKfA=LAB@≥eKCX≤A[CG!S]J@!ISga1CrXA9KhXA∃iF\R↓C]HA JAMY∃qSEY∀~∃K]=kOPAQ↑ACY1←nAkLAi↑A⊃KmKY=`Ag←→ioCe∀AM←d↓iQJ@DrpjA5CGQS9KfA]=n\@A→keiQ∃e[←e∀X~∃SPAoCf↓S[a←IiC]h↓iQCh↓oJAE∀ACEY∀Ai↑A⊃Sgie%EkiJ↓←kdAM←Mio¬eJAi<A←iQ∃dAaK=aYJ\4∃)↑A5CWJA∧AY←]≤Agi←IrAgQ=ehXA¬a←YY=fAC]⊂A≥kf↓ISHA9←hAQ¬mJAi!JAoe%iCEY∀~∃[S
e←gi=eJAi!ChAo∀AG←]MSIKe∃HAGe%iSGC0XAC]⊂AiQK%dA[S
e←ae=GKgg=efAI%HA]←PAgKK4~∃i↑↓EJAC YJAi<AgkaA←ehAQQJAW%]HA←_A[kYQSae←≥eC[[%]NAo∀AoC]QKH\@↓→Sg`↓≠CGQ%]Kf~)oKeJ↓i←↑A∃qaK]MSmJA¬]HAaI←IkGQS←\@!iQK\$Ak]G∃eiCS8\@A1∃e←pA¬]HAi!KSdA5CGQS9Kf~∃]KeJAAQSY←M←aQS
CYYr↓GY←g∀Ai↑AUfXAEUhAiQ∀A ←YAQS\←⊃←eCI<AoKe∀A]←h↓G←[[∃eGSC0~∃ae=IkGiLXAC]⊂A1Ke=pAo←UYHA]=hAG←5[ShAQ↑AeK1KCgS9NA≠KMBXA[∃C]S]≤AiQCPAoJA5SOQh4∃MS]⊂AShA⊃SMMS
kYhAQ↑AISMieSEUiJAB↓gsgi∃ZAEk%YhAS8A≠Kg∧\@A/∀AMS]¬YYrA
Q←gJ↓i↑~∃ KOS\↓oSiP↓!KecLXAoQ%GPA←8AaCa∃dACe∀AChA1KCgh↓KckC0AS\AAKeM←I[C]G∀Ai↑A¬]rA←_~∃iQ∀A←iQ∃efAKaGKah↓iQJA⊃←eCI<AC]H↓→Sg`↓≠CGQ%]J\@Qβ]H↓oQSG AGC\↓EJ~∃5SGe←Ae←Oe¬[[KH↓i↑AE∀AmKedA[kG AYSW∀AiQJ↓[CGQ%]JAo∀AeKC1YrAo¬]hXA∃qGKaPAM←d4∃aKe→←e[C9GJ\RA)QJ↓'iCd≥fACIYC]iC≥JAck=iKHA rA←i!KefA%fXA∩↓iQS],XAIk∀Ai↑~)g←Mi]CeJAIKMS]∃[K]h8@A/J↓]←nA!CmJA→SMiK∃\A!KIcfACPAπ≠*0AC]H↓o←eV↓←\A'ASGJA%f~∃aI←GKK⊃S]NAICaSI1r\@A]JAG←9iS]k∀Ai↑A JA←\↓iQJA1←←W←UhAM←HA]Kn↓QCeI]CeJAQQChA
C\~∃ JAkg∃HAS\↓iQJAMaSGJ↓gsgi∃ZAS\↓sKCeLAi↑A
←[J\4∀~∃∨UdAGe%iKeS∧AM←d↓[CGQ%]KfA5CrA]=hAEJ↓iQJAMC[JA¬fA←i!KdAa∃←aYJ≥fvAo∀ACeJ↓QKCm%Yr~∃
←[[SQiKHAQ↑@EQ%OP[K9HDAa∃eg←]¬XAG←5akiKIfXAC9HAiQ∀Ag←MQoCeJ↓CmCS1CEYJ↓oCf~)eKYCQSmKYdAk]S5a←ei¬]hAi<Akf\A⊃←o∃mKdX↓SLA≠∃gBAC9HASiLAG←[ASYKeLAoKe∀AMeK∃Yr~∃¬mCSY¬EYJAQQJA1∃e←pA5CGQS9KfAo=kYHA!CmJA KK\AYKerA¬iieC
iSmJ8~∀~∀4∀~∀→'kE)KGht↓βeaC9KhAkMCOJ~(≡bn[)k\ZpD@@`jTb∪→S⊃IYJA¬hA!βIε[≠βaε@∪βIaC]KPAkgC≥J@~∃⊃CiJtblA∃U\@br`b@bnhhjA!⊃(~∃
I←ZtA1SIIY∀AChAAβ%ε[5β1ε~))↑tA¬YY →='<] 1∨&XA¬YY ∨M<] ∨LXAβY1 '<]∃&XAβ1Y⊃ ≥I<]⊃ 9$XAβ1Y!β<9!αX~(AβYY]¬')<9/¬'(0AβYYa%ππ<91%πε4∃GFt↓βa←Y1↑ACh↓≠∪([¬∩XA→%IIYJ4∀~∃≠¬]rA←_As←j↓S\A1∃e←pA¬eJAC]CeJA=LABA9KoYr↓GeKCQKHAβIaC]KPAISgQeSEkQS←\A1Sgh~)]C[K⊂Aβa←1Y↑\A%hAoCLAKgi¬EYSg!KHAi<Aae←5←iJA⊃SgGkMgS←\↓←LAa∃eg←]¬XAo←IWgiCQS←\~)G←[aUiKef8AβfAe←jA[%OQhA∃qaKGPXA[k
PA←L↓iQJAIKGK]PAISg
kggS=\AQCLAS]m=YmKH↓iQJ~)1Ke←`@p`b@A'iCHAS]M=e[Ci%←\AgegiKZ8A¬KG¬kgJA5C]rA=LAiQ∀A[KgMCOKf↓CgVA→←d~∃%]M←e5CiS←8ACE←UhAiQ%fAae=IkGh↓C]HA%ifACMg←GS¬iKHA⊃KmKY=a[K]PAg←MQoCeJ0As←j↓[Cr~)MKKX↓iK[aQKHAi<AeKa1rAi↑↓g←[J↓←LAi!KZ\~(~∃∪h↓SfAβI!αAa=YSGr↓iQCh↓iQJA¬eaC]∃hAEJ↓kgKH↓←]Yr↓M←dA≥←mKe9[K]h↓gkaa=eiKH4∃eKg∃CeGP↓C]HA⊃KmKY=a[K]P\A∪h↓SfAC≥CS]gPA1Ke=pAa←1SGrAQ↑Akg∀AiQJ↓βeaC9KhAi<AISg
kgf~)ae←IUGif\↓∪hASLAG←[AYKiK1rAS]¬aae←AeSCi∀Ai↑AUgJAi!JAβeAC]Kh↓S\AB↓oCrAQQChA5CrAE∀~∃G←9giek∃HACf↓gKYY%]NA←HAae←5←iS]≤ABA1∃e←pAAe←Ik
h@Q←HAMkiUeJAaI←IkGPR\A1∃e←p~)K[aY=sKKf↓kgJAQQJAβIaC]KPAM←d↓β%!α↓eKYCQKHAe∃gKCe
PAakIa←gKLA←]YdXA]←PAM←d4∃C]g]KeS]≤AckKMiS←]LA←dA⊃Sgie%EkiS9NAS]→←e[CQS←\A¬E←kh↓←kdAAe←Ik
if\~(~∃#k∃giS←9fAMe=ZAa←QK]iS¬XAGkMi←[KIfACE=khAi!JA1KI←p@p@b`AC9HA←i!KdA∨AλAae=IkGiL~∃gQ=kYHA JAeK→KeeK⊂Ai↑A¬e]←Y⊂A!CY5KdXA→SKYH↓'CYKLA≠C]¬OKdX↓1Ke←`Aπ←eA←eCi%←\X~(bfhb↓/Kgh↓≠←GW%]OESIHA→C9JXA ¬YYCf0A)Kq¬f@njHhnXAAQ←]JPdbh$@lpr4llpr8~∀~∃⊃CmSH↓
\A→%IIYJ4∃-SG∀A!eKMSIK]P~∃∨M→SGJAAe←Ik
ifA %mSgS=\~∀~(→'kE)KGht↓'iCeLAS\AQQJAg-r~∀≡Dr[∃k8Zpb@`jjj%[↑ACPA→¬_5+≥∪0Q≠SW∀A≡O ∃YXR@%'iCeLAS\AQQJAg-r@@@~∃ CQJt@b\A∃k\brpb`rtbTtjh[A (~∃→e←Zt↓[↑ACPA→¬_5+≥∪0Q≠SW∀A≡O ∃YXR~))↑tA%]M↑[5SGe↑↓ChA[%h[CR4∃%KI%gieS kiKH5)↑tA]←eW&↓ChAβ$~∃%K⊃Sgie%EkiK⊂[¬rt↓∂ ∨
_AChAM%∩[πM_~∃%∃ISgiISEki∃H[ CQJt@b\A∃k\brpb4∀~∃→¬ghAo∃KVAo∀AQCH↓BAEe%KMS]≤A←\AQQJA'QCdXAM↑A∩A]SYXAIKYCi∀AoQCPAoCf↓gCSH8~∃)Q∀Aae←
Kgg←HASfA∧AλfA5CGQS9JXAC9HASf↓GYCS5KHAi<Aek\↓≠KgB↓CE←kP@~∀f↓iS[KLAMCgQKdAi!C\AB↓λ`A←HABA =YaQS8\@A)e D3 is a 32-bit, virtual
memory design. The Star only has about 200kb
of memory on it, expandable to about .5 megs, but there is every
reason to believe it can have a lot more than that on it. The
office automation software is all written in Mesa and the base of
the machine is Pilot, but you can't get to any of this. The is a lot
of discussion about making the Mesa environment available, but so
far there is a negative corporate attitude. If they would just
realize how neat that would be.... Anyway, the office software is
pretty classy, but their pricing is repressive. By the time you
license all the software (math editor, graphics, spelling corrector, etc),
which must be done for EACH machine, you add about $5K to the price.
The killer, however, is software maintenance for that machine will
be close to $500 per month!!!!! The pricing structure allows hardware
quantity levels to count the various servers (com, file, print, etc)
as well as Stars because they all use the same CPU box, but
quantity levels for software count only Stars. Software for the
other servers is priced the same way. The basic file server does NOT
come with the electronic mail facility. That handy option costs extra.
Rumors abound pertaining to the transport of Smalltalk and Interlisp
to the machine, but like with Mesa, Xerox doesn't see any demand for
user programmable machines. Moreover, if they can continually
squeeze money out of you for software, it is to their advantage
that no one else can build software for it. (Personal comment)
If any mere mortal (other than MIT, CMU, and Stanford) can
shake Mesa out of Xerox, let me know.
-Mike
Subject: Productivity gains without using workstations
∂24-Jun-81 0511 DPR at MIT-XX Productivity gains without using workstations
Date: Tuesday, 23 June 1981 10:02-EDT
From: DPR at MIT-XX
To: WORKS at MIT-MC
Kirsch has an extremely valid point. The fundamental question is what
leverage does computerization provide in doing a function. However, let's
not be miserly--even Xerox STAR's are incredibly cheap as an investment,
so the amount of leverage they must provide is small.
Personally, I think companies with cash to invest ought to invest it
in ecnomic sectors of maximum productivity gain--however, there are
immense barriers to this. Most companies restrict themselves to internal
reinvestment of their funds. Since our largest and least productive
companies have the higher percentages of funds to invest, and since they
are largely white-collar offices, there is a great move toward
office automation, even though productivity gains are slim in most
office applications.
The sterling exception to this observation about the utility of workstations
lies in tools of high leverage like VisiCalc--which make order of magnitude
changes in labor required to do a task. The Star seems to be able to do this
with the production of business graphics--but I am not sure that they
will be largely used in this domain, or if the graphics thus produced
would have been produced had there not been a Star.
Subject: Star Info
∂24-Jun-81 0533 UOFILLINOIS at WPAFB-AFWAL Star Info
Date: 23 Jun 1981 (Tuesday) 1419-EDT
From: UOFILLINOIS at WPAFB-AFWAL
To: works at MIT-AI
cc: gdh at MIT-AI
The STAR people came here to talk today.
Here's some facts/rumors that were new
to me:
o Mesa will probably be released for
the STAR either the 4th quarter of
this year or the 2nd quarter of next
year.
o Smalltalk "will NOT be released on the
STAR or anywhere else" -- a "small
outfit in Silicon Valley" (not PARC --
I'm not sure who they're talking about)
licensed it to HP, TI, and Apple. When
the STAR marketing people found out,
they "put a stop to it"
o A personal computer called the "inch-
worm" will apparently be announced
soon. It is about book-sized, has
a bitmapped display, and measures
about an inch thick (hence the name).
Could this be a first pass at the
Dynabook?
o They won't sell just one STAR until
next year
-geo
Subject: Re: Apollo Network
∂24-Jun-81 0554 mike at RAND-UNIX Re: Apollo Network
Date: Tuesday, 23 Jun 1981 10:39-PDT
To: Eric Benson <BENSON at UTAH-20>
Cc: WorkS at MIT-ML, DLW at MIT-AI
In-reply-to: Your message of 22 Jun 1981 1043-MDT.
From: mike at RAND-UNIX
You say that the 'apollo software is another story'.
Well, OK, what's the story?
When I was visiting Apollo, it was clear that the hardware was close
to working and that they had no idea just how hard the software they
were planning was going to be to write. Either they didnt know or
they were trying to tell me a story.
Specifically, they intended to write a truly network distributed file
system: with paging, swapping and file transfers all completely
independant of the local machine which might or might not have a disk
drive. When I asked them what file names would look like, to get an
idea of whether the file name would contain the name of the root file
system (location) or whether the location would be 'hidden' from the
user: they had no idea. They had never even thought of the question.
It is possible that there was someone in the building who knew
something about software, but I didnt have the opportunity to meet
them.
I was also not overwhelmed with their desire to build a non-standard
network. But their attitude seemed to be: this is what Prime is doing
and we are really from Prime so this is what we are doing.
Update ??
∂24-Jun-81 0606 Dave Crocker <dcrocker@udel> Apollo gatewaying
Date: 23 Jun 81 11:11:25-EDT (Tue)
From: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@udel>
To: Works at Mit-Ai
Subject: Apollo gatewaying
We had an Apollo presentation, given by Dave Nelson, one of
their Development VPs. He said that a gateway (to unspecified
other networks) was planned. Guess I would expect the initial
one to be to others of their (Domain) rings.
It was my impression that the basic network environment is
strictly message/packet oriented, without connections or other
efficiency mechanisms. Nelson pointedly stated (it was too
affirmative to class as an "admission") that they were not
oriented toward file transfers . Such things can and are done,
but the environment is not tuned to them.
Dave
∂24-Jun-81 0617 DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus) Quick overview/summary: The Apollo-I (Domain) computer.
Date: 23 Jun 1981 (Tuesday) 2308-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
Subject: Quick overview/summary: The Apollo-I (Domain) computer.
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
The structure of the Apollo computer network:
--- --------- -- --- ------ -------- --------
Summary:
o ~~ 12 Mbit bandwidth
o standard Coaxial RG58 cable
o Ring structure, single band.
o Token passing [Cambridge Ring Network concept]
Fixed packet sizes [I believe 4K bytes] are constructed for
transmission from one "node" to another. A "node" consists of a
68000 and a winchester disk drive.
∂24-Jun-81 0627 Griss at UTAH-20 (Martin.Griss) More on DOMAIN
Date: 23 Jun 1981 0741-MDT
From: Griss at UTAH-20 (Martin.Griss)
Subject: More on DOMAIN
To: Works at MIT-ML
cc: griss at UTAH-20
Discussions we have had with Apollo indicate that they are aware of the
MultiBus Ethernet board, and certainly plan to use the MUltiBus crate for this
level of I/O support board (NOT MultiMaster usage); my guess is that one of the
university people with an Apollo is likely to try to do the Ethernet Interface
software, most likely after a C is working. Any comments from Brown U. ?
M
-------
Subject: Quick overview/summary: The Apollo-I (Domain) computer.
∂24-Jun-81 0617 DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus) Quick overview/summary: The Apollo-I (Domain) computer.
Date: 23 Jun 1981 (Tuesday) 2308-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
The structure of the Apollo computer network:
--- --------- -- --- ------ -------- --------
Summary:
o ~~ 12 Mbit bandwidth
o standard Coaxial RG58 cable
o Ring structure, single band.
o Token passing [Cambridge Ring Network concept]
Fixed packet sizes [I believe 4K bytes] are constructed for
transmission from one "node" to another. A "node" consists of a
68000 and a winchester disk drive.
∂24-Jun-81 0627 Griss at UTAH-20 (Martin.Griss) More on DOMAIN
Date: 23 Jun 1981 0741-MDT
From: Griss at UTAH-20 (Martin.Griss)
Subject: More on DOMAIN
To: Works at MIT-ML
cc: griss at UTAH-20
Discussions we have had with Apollo indicate that they are aware of the
MultiBus Ethernet board, and certainly plan to use the MUltiBus crate for this
level of I/O support board (NOT MultiMaster usage); my guess is that one of the
university people with an Apollo is likely to try to do the Ethernet Interface
software, most likely after a C is working. Any comments from Brown U. ?
M
-------
Subject: Re: Star Info
∂24-Jun-81 1838 Deutsch at PARC-MAXC Re: Star Info
Date: 24 Jun 1981 10:17 PDT
From: Deutsch at PARC-MAXC
In-reply-to: UOFILLINOIS' message of 23 Jun 1981 (Tuesday) 1419-EDT
To: UOFILLINOIS at WPAFB-AFWAL
cc: works at MIT-AI, gdh at MIT-AI
I would like to correct some erroneous information about Smalltalk and the Star.
o Smalltalk "will NOT be released on the
STAR or anywhere else" -- a "small
outfit in Silicon Valley" (not PARC --
I'm not sure who they're talking about)
licensed it to HP, TI, and Apple. When
the STAR marketing people found out,
they "put a stop to it"
The truth is that LRG, a group within PARC, has licensed Smalltalk-80 (the only
Xerox-authorized version of Smalltalk to be released) to a number of micro- and
mini-computer manufacturers. The release consists of detailed specifications for
the machine-dependent kernel, plus a mag tape containing the rest of the system
(windows, editor, compiler, file system, etc., etc.) Several of these manufacturers
have made excellent progress on implementing the system, to the point of having
windows appear on their displays. I can't comment on the specific list of
manufacturers, since we prefer to let them make their own announcements. The
Star marketing people have not exerted any pressure in either direction with
respect to this; the release/license process was properly cleared with our legal
department and all relevant product organizations within Xerox, and we are
currently working out ways to license the system to manufacturers (and
universities) beyond the original group. I can't comment on the availability of
Smalltalk for the Star, except to say that the Star hardware is definitely powerful
enough to support Smalltalk.
Subject: Re: Star Info/Smalltalk
∂24-Jun-81 1911 Ron Newman <Newman.es@Parc-Maxc> Re: Star Info/Smalltalk
Sender: Newman.ES at PARC-MAXC
Date: 24-Jun-81 9:48:22 PDT (Wednesday)
In-reply-to: UOFILLINOIS' message of 23 Jun 1981 (Tuesday) 1419-EDT
From: Ron Newman <Newman.es@Parc-Maxc>
To: UOFILLINOIS at WPAFB-AFWAL
cc: Newman.es, works at MIT-AI, gdh at MIT-AI
Who were "the STAR people" that came to talk to you?
Smalltalk IS being released by PARC this summer. There was a big presentation
on the subject at this year's NCC. Apple, DEC, HP and other companies are
doing research into implementing it on their machines. (In fact, one of the
primary Smalltalk implementors, Larry Tesler, is now at Apple and was one of
the speakers at NCC.) A huge article on the subject will appear in the
August issue of BYTE.
The deal is that PARC gives you an "image" file on a tape, whichcontains
all of Smalltalk ready to run. To run it, you have to implement an
interpreter on your machine for the 256 Smalltalk bytecodes. Just like you
can run Pascal, if you have a P-code interpreter.
(I don't think anyone at Xerox will beat up on me for this message; all of
it comes from strictly public sources.)
/Ron
Subject: Re: Smalltalk
∂24-Jun-81 1951 mike at RAND-UNIX Re: Smalltalk
Date: Wednesday, 24 Jun 1981 11:45-PDT
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
From: mike at RAND-UNIX
Forgetting for a moment about Xerox marketting, Xerox intends to
release a book on Smalltalk called Smalltalk 80. This version of
Smalltalk is intended to be easily portable. There was some
discussion within Xerox legal about whether the Smalltalk virtual
image would be released. But the book which describes the interpreter
plus the virtual image would result in a very easily portable
language.
One could then port it to the machine of your choice, including the
STAR, assuming that you could PROGRAM the STAR. When MESA gets
released you will be able to implement it in that: but a better place
is microcode. I haven't heard anything definitive about whether Xerox
intends to microcode the Dandelion (STAR workstation) for Smalltalk.
Xerox marketing wasn't trying to mislead, I'm sure. They have no
interest in marketing Smalltalk; just word processing.
Michael
Subject: Chromatics
∂24-Jun-81 2036 cfh at CCA-UNIX (Christopher Herot) Chromatics
Date: 24 Jun 1981 10:39:46-EDT
From: cfh at CCA-UNIX (Christopher Herot)
To: WorkS at mit-ai
I saw the Chromatics CGC 7900 "Color Graphics Computer" at
the National Computer Graphics Association show last week.
It's hardware is:
Motorola 68000
1024 x 768 x 8 bit color display w/24 bit lookup table
10Mb Winchester disk
Dual Floppies
Light Pen
Joy Stick
151 (I'm not kidding) Key Keyboard
Prices range from $25,000 to $50,000 depending on how much memory
and other options you buy. It doesn't have virtual memory like
the Apollo but can take quite a bit (at least a meg) of real memory.
They plan on supporting IDRIS, a UNIX clone, sometime soon.
Address:
Chromatics, Inc.
2558 Mountain Industrial Boulevard
Tucker, Georgia 30084
404-493-7000
∂24-Jun-81 2052 guyton at RAND-UNIX Re: Chromatics Personal Workstation
Date: Wednesday, 24 Jun 1981 16:13-PDT
To: PRSPOOL at RUTGERS
Cc: WorkS at MIT-AI
Subject: Re: Chromatics Personal Workstation
In-reply-to: Your message of 23 Jun 1981 1139-EDT.
From: guyton at RAND-UNIX
The Chromatic 7900 workstation has been announced for a while now and they
had one at the Chicago NCC. Their address/phone:
Chromatics
2558 Mountain Industrial Boulevard
Tucker, Georgia 30084
(404)493-7000
Here a few facts off their CGC 7900 literature:
16-Bit processor (MC68000)
19" color monitor
1024x768 viewable bitmap (in a 1024x1024 bitmap memory)
Up to 256 simultaneously displayed colors
Palette of over 16 million colors (i.e. 8-bit DAC for RGB)
10MB Fixed Winchester Disk (8.4 MB formatted)
Dual floppies
light pen, joystick
Maximum of 16-bitmap planes (no more than 8 displayed at once)
Maximum of 2MB of processor memory
Rand reviewed this machine last year and might have purchased one if it
hadn't been quite so new (at the time they had not delivered any, and we
needed a mature system). When I priced it, a useful system was running
around $60K.
Oh yes, they're planning on running the 68000 unix look-alike.
Jim
∂24-Jun-81 2109 Robert A. Morris <RAM at MIT-MC> Chromatics Personal Workstation
Date: 24 June 1981 18:57-EDT
From: Robert A. Morris <RAM at MIT-MC>
Subject: Chromatics Personal Workstation
To: PRSPOOL at RUTGERS
cc: WorkS at MIT-AI
According to a sales engineer I spoke to in Atlanta las week, the software is
IDRIS, Whitesmith's UNIX look alike, none of which had yet been
dleivered to them (or any one else???), nor could he say when an
order placed for the IDRIS software for Chromatics be filled.
If color isn't mandatory and if you are willing to think about systems
with not yet ready software, ask Three Rivers whether/when the Tom Duff
port of Coherent, the Mark WIlliams company version 7 unix look-alike,
will be sold for PERQ's
--bob morris
p.s. A great deal of the Apollo software is also "not quite ready" but
they at least don't advertise it. It's just that Apollo's will presently
do much less than the world of WorkS expects them to. I will flame
after some less biased view of this week's Brown University
Apollo Users workshop appears in this forum.
Subject: Burroughs OFIS products
∂25-Jun-81 0537 Mike Leavitt <LEAVITT at USC-ISI> Burroughs OFIS products
Date: 24 Jun 1981 1748-PDT
Sender: LEAVITT at USC-ISI
From: Mike Leavitt <LEAVITT at USC-ISI>
To: works at AI
Message-ID: <[USC-ISI]24-Jun-81 17:48:50.LEAVITT>
The following is an excerpt from the New York Times, 6/23/81,
p. D5
"The Burroughs Corporation moved more aggressively into the
market for the automated office yesterday with the introduction
of a new type of information processing system that can be used
by managers and other professionals with no computer training.
"The system, called OFIS 1 Information Systems, connects
various electronic office machines together and allows them to
communicate. It includes such functions as word processing,
automatic filing and retrieval of business information and
electronic mail communications. . . .
"The system competes head-on with automated office systems
introduced in recent months by IBM, the Datapoint Corporation
and Xerox, and will be compatible with electronic equipment
made by other manufacturers. One shortcoming, according to
some analysts, is that the new system will not be able to
generate and display graphics. But the analysts were unable
to provide detailed comparisons with the competitors' systems.
. . .
"The most important innovation is a component of the OFIS
1 system called OFISfile, which permits up to 80,000 [Sic]
pages of text to be filed automatically and retrieved on
demand. OFISfile was designed to locate any document or group of
related documents with nothing more than an instruction phrased
in common English and containing a name, date, or other words in
the text being sought. . . .
"The basic OFISfile sells for $59,400, while prices for
the OFISdirector, the information processor that permits
system components to communicate with each other, starts at
$33,500. The company said that initial deliveries for the new
system are scheduled for this fall."
Burroughs?????
Mike
Subject: Re: Works: Re RIvanciw: OA Architecture
∂25-Jun-81 0600 Rivanciw at Darcom-HQ Re: Works: Re RIvanciw: OA Architecture
Date: 24 Jun 81 15:52:56-EDT (Wed)
From: Rivanciw at Darcom-HQ
To: Barns at Office-2
cc: Works at Mit-Ml, Barns at Office-2,
cc: UDel.POBox; 17 Jun 81 9:16-EDT at Office-2
Via: Darcom-HQ; 25 Jun 81 0:01-EDT
I will restate my case for the development of a systems architecture
as an early step in addressing the issue of office automation.
I will restate my position with some real world truths here at DARCOM.
It is possible at DARCOM to have office automation services for a
one time cost as low as $5634.00. That full purchase price for 100%
availability on a micro computer. Since most folks currently operate
in a timesharing mode with a multitude of user via for available ports
on a given machine, 100% availability is a step up. This price will
continue to drop as technology moves forward.
That system is based on an 8 user micro supporting 8 users. There are
8 ports on that micro so every user can run her/his office tools
whenever they want. They can currently run a host of tools including
a word processor, 3 different mail systems, a calendar system, a suspense
tool, a tickler system, a conference scheduler, a phone directory, a
reminder services, automated weekly activity reporting, and a couple
of other tools integral to the office.
Since most folks entering the realm of office automation do not use
their system for 8 hours a day, it is most acceptable that a micro with
8 user ports could easily support 16 office workers. Thus the cost
of that system is now $2817.00 one time purchase cost. On a lease that
price would be somewhere around $1000.00 or less a year cost per user
for full office automation tool usage. Now even the most pessimistic
predictions about the field of office automation would conclude that
a grand/year is very, very cost effective.
We are able to offer these cost effective systems because we have an
architecture.
As for being limited to 64K core, what micros are you looking at? The
last one I took delivery on had 1MB core. It was running a full
version 7 of UNIX plus all the software I mentioned above with 8 users.
Randy Ivanciw
Subject: Apollo files and network
∂25-Jun-81 0730 cfh at CCA-UNIX (Christopher Herot) Apollo files and network
Date: 24 Jun 1981 10:14:53-EDT
From: cfh at CCA-UNIX (Christopher Herot)
To: WorkS at mit-ai
When I last played with an Apollo a few weeks ago, it appeared
to have a hierarchical file structure very similar to UNIX.
The operating system treats local files and files on other
nodes of the ring net identically, e.g. you can copy a file
from one machine to another by typing
copy //mike/foo/bar //mary/foo/bar
and can do any file operation without respect to which machine
the file lives on. As I recall, a single slash at the beginning
of a file name indicated a pathname relative to the local node,
while two slashes indicated a pathname rooted in some master node
for the entire network. Hopefully someone at MIT, Harvard, or
Brown can elaborate (or correct).
Apollo claims that local and network file access are within
a factor of two of each other in speed. Neither appeared
particularly fast in the preliminary version I saw.
Subject: Comment on note on Apollo Network
∂25-Jun-81 0754 Dave Farber <farber@udel> Comment on note on Apollo Network
Date: 25 Jun 81 5:35:03-EDT (Thu)
From: Dave Farber <farber@udel>
To: works at Mit-Ai
The Apollo network is a token network as stated. However the
Cambridge folk are not the originators of the token ring idea. In
fact the Cambridge ring is NOT a token ring. It is a slotted ring
with small slot size.
Tokens rings come via Newhall/Farmer - the DCS process addressed
ring (the first with a real token) - the LNI/MIT LCS I ring with
the Prime ring being derived from the DCS instance.
Dave
Subject: Re: Quick overview/summary: The Apollo-I (Domain) computer.
∂25-Jun-81 0822 SHOCH at PARC-MAXC Re: Quick overview/summary: The Apollo-I (Domain) computer.
Date: 24 JUN 1981 1730-PDT
From: SHOCH at PARC-MAXC
To: DREIFU at WHARTON-10, WorkS at MIT-AI
cc: SHOCH
In response to the message sent 23 Jun 1981 (Tuesday) 2308-EDT from DREIFU@WHARTON-10
One fine point on local networks:
a) The ring produced by Prime Computer is a "token passing" design,
and it appears that the Apollo system follows this design.
Token passing systems trace their roots back to the work of
Newhall and Farmer at Bell Labs.
b) A recent message suggested that the Cambridge Ring
was also in this family; however, that design would more properly
be described as an "empty slot" ring. The empty slot systems trace
their roots back to the work of Pierce, et al., also at Bell Labs.
John Shoch
[PS: For more than you ever wanted to know on this subject, interested
readers might like to consult the "Annotated bibliography on local
computer networks, third edition," April 1980, Xerox Parc Report
SSL 80-2. Also available as IFIP Working Group 6.4 Working Paper 80-12.]
Subject: APOLLO net
∂25-Jun-81 1602 Griss at UTAH-20 (Martin.Griss) APOLLO net
Date: 25 Jun 1981 1021-MDT
From: Griss at UTAH-20 (Martin.Griss)
To: WORKS at MIT-AI
cc: griss at UTAH-20
I have seen a two node configuration of Apollo's working (Mountain View
Branch), and was able to see a file shipped from one node to the other,
and to compare the times required to count the number of lines
in the local copy and also in the remote copy, accessed via "//<host>file..".
It was interesting that in the first test, the times local and remote
were essentially; after a reboot, the remote time increased slightly
(about 5%). This was explained as an effect of the Unique global ID; in
the first test, the system "knew" the local and remote file by the same
Global ID, and also that the local copy was in the Memory space.
I do not recall the exact number of lines (it was a LARGE file), and the
time was about 1minute. The timing was done by submitting to the
SHell the concatenated commands:
time; countlines //host/... ; time; (This is NOT verbatim).
We also saw the multiple INPUT/OUTPUT windows and PADs working, the
various Display Manager options, the ability to Grow and Shrink windows,
the ability to run separate processes in each Window (in this case,
it was Edit in one, LIST in the other, as I recall).
We were not able to see any real graphics (ie line drawing), tho a small
program was demonstrated that was able to BLT screen areas around.
Martin Griss
-------
Subject: My CT system configuration and Chromatics
∂25-Jun-81 1657 Brian P. Lloyd <LLOYD at MIT-AI> My CT system configuration and Chromatics
Date: 25 June 1981 08:29-EDT
From: Brian P. Lloyd <LLOYD at MIT-AI>
To: WORKS at MIT-AI
Bruce Daniels wrote asking about the configuration of my CT system at
home. Here is what I have:
Workstation with 256Kb RAM, 5Mhz 8086, 2xRS-232, Centronics
printer port
10Mb 8" winchester (Shugart 1004 drive)
0.5Mb 8" floppy (single side, double density Shugart 800
drive)
Soon to be added (awaiting delivery only):
Additional Workstation to be clustered on the first using CT's
local network (multi-drop, 615Kbaud, half-duplex, RS-422 line)
GE 510 300lpm printer
For software I have:
CTOS multi-task, real-time OS
Pascal
FORTRAN
Word Processor
ISAM
Forms
Sort/Merge
Multiple-window Screen-oriented text editor
Basic
and several programs of my and others design...
For those of you used to home computer prices you may find things just
a bit steep, but if you compare performance per dollar it seems to be
a fairly good deal. Price for a 128K dual floppy system is $13,300 in
unit quantities. The 256K winchester system comes in at about $21,000.
All stand-alone systems include OS (linker, assembler, screen-oriented
editor, and asynchronous terminal emulator). Additional workstations
go for $6,490 for a 128K version or $7,900 for a 256K version.
I like the system a lot. It is easier to use/develop software for
than my PDP-11/23 with RSTS/E was (I know most of you are UNIX hackers
but you have to take what you can get).
Brian
Subject: Re: Personal Workstations -- who for?
∂26-Jun-81 0604 Rivanciw.DHQ at UDel Re: Personal Workstations -- who for?
Date: 25 Jun 81 8:26:40-EDT (Thu)
From: Rivanciw.DHQ at UDel
To: JWALKER at Bbna
cc: WorkS at Mit-Ai
Subject: el.POBox; 19 Jun 81 7:36-EDT
Via: Darcom-HQ; 25 Jun 81 8:26-EDT
I agree wholeheartedly with the comments put forth in JWALKER's
message on Personal Workstations -- who for?
There currently seems to be one of two approaches taken in
applications for office automation:
(1) Develop an application that answers a specific
functional requirement. For example, a budget
preparation tool or a project management (pert)
tool. JWALKER is very right in stating that all
to often these applications are written FOR the
functional and indeed do narrowly define the scope
and processes of usually complex functions. What
results is an application that does not quite do the
job and is too inflexible to mold to the nuances
of the functional task which it attempts to address.
Bottom line is that the functional user must adapt
the way she/he does business to the application.
(2) Develop a general tool (or set of tools) that can
be used in a wide range of functional applications.
Here I am speaking of a message system, and editor,
a suspense tool, etc. While these give the functional
user much more flexibility on how she/he will use
the tool in his/he job, often this adaptation is
cumbersome. Many time we have given a message system
to a user with the response being "What can I use this
for in my job?" Then we explain how and they ask why
and we explain more and they ask how and why and....
Thus we seem once again to be telling them how to do
their business.
The folks here in are branch spent an entire day discussing this
very problem last week. What we came up with was that there is
a need for general tools AND a need for specific applications.
The problem really is that we are addressing office automation
as a tool or an application and it is really much richer than
a single tool (or set) or a single application.
What we are planning to do is to develop an office automation
system which puts emphasis on the work ENVIRONMENT. We are
going to try to structure the user's terminal like a desk.
For example, when they reach for their inbox they will end
up in the mail system. If they suddenly get a call in the middle
of reading their inbox they will not have to exit the
mail system to get to their telephone pad or calendar or whatever.
They will simply reach for it. The system will suspend processing
in the inbox and move to the telephone pad or whatever the user
wants. At the conclusion of the telephone call the user will
say something like "continue" (or hit a button) and the system
will remember where he/she was in the inbox.
In this type of environment tools and applications are transparent
to the user. They are called into use by the system, not the user.
I would really appreciate any comments or suggestions on what this user
environment should look like or include.
Randy Ivanciw
Subject: Interupting a workstation session
∂27-Jun-81 1006 Steven H. Gutfreund <SHG at MIT-AI> Interupting a workstation session
Date: 26 June 1981 14:13-EDT
From: Steven H. Gutfreund <SHG at MIT-AI>
To: WORKS at MIT-AI
cc: Rivanciw.DHQ at UDEL
I would like to comment on one part of Randy Ivanciw's letter about
the need for an integrated environment for workstations. (Which I
believe much of the world is coming around to endorsing even if they
do not know how to do).
Randy gives the example where one is reading a mail inbox and gets a call
on the phone. It would be very useful to be able to drop the mail, pick
up the phone, answer the call, and then return to one's mail.
With iconographic systems (such as STAR or SMALLTALK-80) this would be
quite simple. One would use the mouse to drag the cursor away from
the current icon (be it editor window, mail inbox, virtual terminal)
and position the cursor to the telephone icon. There one would
expand the telephone icon and answer the phone. Later one could return
to the old mail inbox icon.
However, there is a problem here that several Human Factor's people
have pointed out. That is, one could easily have quite a few "pushed"
windows, each one deep in some command dialog. The Human Factor's
people have pointed out that humans have a real scarcity of short
term memory (about 4-7 chunks). Clearly, we humans are going
to have a real problem understanding what was going on in our
workstations after a couple of interruptions.
Therefore, I would like to propogate, to designers of workstations,
a user interface folk theorem that I heard recently: NEVER HAVE
MULTIPLE LEVELS OF STATE ENCODED INTO A DISPLAY.
Naturally, I am curious as to what others feel this restriction will
do to programming a user interface. I would also be interested in
collecting other folk theorems.
- Steven Gutfreund
Subject: Shades of Nicholas Negroponte
∂27-Jun-81 1022 PRSPOOL at RUTGERS Shades of Nicholas Negroponte
Date: 26 Jun 1981 1406-EDT
From: PRSPOOL at RUTGERS
To: Rivanciw.DHQ at UDEL
cc: WorkS at MIT-AI
The second part of Rivanciw's recent comments on Personal Workstations
sound very much like the DATALAND concept of Nicholas Negroponte of the
Architecture Department at MIT. Negroponte's ideas have progressed to a
somewhat more grandiose scale. He has built a special room containing a
wall-size screen and an armchair with input controls on both the arms.
His basic concept is that people often organize themselves SPATIALLY
rather than with the alphabetic keys by which ordinary random data files
are sometimes accessed. He has described the organization of a person's
desk at the office in such SPATIAL terms.
--Peter R. Spool
-------
Subject: Tools for personal workstations
∂27-Jun-81 1040 Eric Benson <BENSON at UTAH-20> Tools for personal workstations
Date: 26 Jun 1981 1103-MDT
From: Eric Benson <BENSON at UTAH-20>
To: Rivanciw.DHQ at UDEL, JWalker at BBNA
cc: WorkS at MIT-ML
One thing we should avoid in designing tools for use by non-programmers is
condescension. Elegance of design, yes, but simple-mindedness, no. There are
three aspects I see to this:
1. It should be possible in a short period of time (perhaps less than a day,
depending on the application) to learn enough about it to be productive.
2. The expert user should be able to make maximal use of the features available
without being hampered by the requirements for (1).
3. A smooth transition from (1) to (2) should be possible.
An excellent example of this is the Tops-20 command language (EXEC). I
assume most of you are familiar with it. By combining command completion
(recognition), abbreviation and menu-on-demand, the needs of expert and
novice are served equally well.
Another example is the Emacs text editor. It is used by nearly everyone
here, including administrators and secretaries. It is possible to learn
enough in an hour to make productive use of it, then acquire facility in
advanced features (editing modes, TAGS, word abbreviations, etc.) to make
it a powerful tool. In addition, since it is programmable (all key
definitions are soft), a wizard can add features for specialized
applications. (Admittedly, no one in their right mind would use TECO as a
programming language; that was a design error not likely to be repeated.)
We don't have to choose between programs that are continually asking
Do you want to pick your nose (Answer YES or NO)?
and the arcana of Unix command names. We can have the best of both worlds.
-- Eric
-------
Subject: Languages for Distributed Workstations
∂27-Jun-81 1101 Steven H. Gutfreund <SHG at MIT-AI> Languages for Distributed Workstations
Date: 26 June 1981 12:15-EDT
From: Steven H. Gutfreund <SHG at MIT-AI>
To: WORKS at MIT-AI
cc: SHG at MIT-AI
As a researcher in local-area networks I have been quite puzzled by the
rash of comments in this digest about MESA. Many people seem to feel
that having MESA will solve their programming problems.
Personally I have found MESA to be just another member of the new class of
operating system / user environment / system programming language that is
coming on the scene. I have seen nothing that especially recommends it
for local area distributed processing (either closely coupled or loosely)
and it certainly does not have the graphics or user customizability that
a language such as Smalltalk-80 has.
I believe that the choice of which language to run on a distributed
workstation is probably the most imporant one that a workstation
ARCHITECT will make. Especially since this new class of programming
languages not only define a programmer interface, but since they
are so expansive in character and tend to want to run stand-alone
and replace the exec, they also define: the user interface, the performance
of the exec, the higher level flow control protocols, the network
wide naming conventions...
The PARC group has certainly done outstanding work in many of the
areas of research in local area network languages: name servers,
flow control, metaphors for network communication, resource allocation,
distributed file systems (Woodstock), and network servers. However,
I encourage serious students of these issues to look at what other
fine researches have done:
EPL - Experimental Programming Language, Developed at the
University of Warwick, An Actor based language, currently
in use at the University of Conn. by Ed Balkovitch.
CPascal Concurrent Pascal, Per Brinch Hansen's Language for easily
building concurrent programs such as SOLO, a simple O.S.
CSP - Communicating Sequential Processes, CAR Hoare seminal work
on abstractions for distributed parallel computing.
Aug 1978, CACM
CLU - Barabara Liskov's (MIT) concurrent programming language, intro-
duces the idea of Guardians, currently in use at MIT by
Micheal Hammer's group working on the NU machine.
?? - Distributed Processes, another Brinch Hansen lanaguage for
concurrent distributed. Nov 1978 CACM
Act1 - One of the numerous Actor Languages from Carl Hewitt (MIT)
Edison Per Brinch Hansen's latest language on for multi-computer
systems.
*Mod - Modula based language being used at University of WISC in
their distributed programming project.
Actors Viewing Control Structures as Patterns of Passing Messages,
MIT AI Memo 410. Carl Hewitt's paper on Actors, Some of the
most difficult reading to be found.
DC-Pascal Distributed Concurrent Pascal, this is a language I developed,
which tries to be a fusion of the above mentioned languages.
I have not even begun to cover the full scope of literature. Clearly
this is an active area for reseach, and clearly there will be more
papers since there are plenty open areas for research.
- Steven Gutfreund
Subject: system architecture
∂27-Jun-81 1124 Rivanciw.DHQ at UDel system architecture
Date: 26 Jun 81 15:20:27-EDT (Fri)
From: Rivanciw.DHQ at UDel
To: works at Mit-Ai
cc: Rivanciw.DHQ at UDel
Via: Darcom-HQ; 26 Jun 81 16:29-EDT
Peter Deutsch requested that I send along a short summation of
DARCOM's system architecture for OA (in particular hardware, software)
so here goes.
The software that DARCOM is running in its OA architecture is UNIX.
Right now we have some v6, some pwb, and some v7. We will standarize
on the latest release of UNIX from BELL. Our tools are currently all
in the public domain except for an office package that we have running
on our HQ machine called OPUS. The public domain software includes
NED, ED, MSG, MS, and (I think its public) XMSG, as well as some
home grown tools such as a suspense program (which is really a shell
rkutine) and an automated weekly activity report.
The hardware for our architecture is simply any machine that runs
UNIX. Currently we have 11/70s and ONYXs operational. We are
looking into the C machine from BBN. Of course we are interested in
the latest announcement on ZENIX (Unix look alike for any 16-bit
micro).
Randy
Subject: Mini/Micro Systems June 1981
∂27-Jun-81 1138 KESSLER at UTAH-20 (Robert R. Kessler) Mini/Micro Systems June 1981
Date: 26 Jun 1981 0743-MDT
From: KESSLER at UTAH-20 (Robert R. Kessler)
To: Works at MIT-AI
Two possibly useful articles:
"Xerox 'Star' shines on professionals", page 23 and
"Novell's Nexus addresses work-station market", page 99.
Bob.
-------
Subject: Re: Xerox Dolphin (alias 1100⊗?)
∂27-Jun-81 1151 Chris Ryland <RYLAND at SRI-KL> Re: Xerox Dolphin (alias 1100⊗?)
Date: 26 Jun 1981 1200-PDT
From: Chris Ryland <RYLAND at SRI-KL>
To: TEITELBAUM at RUTGERS
In-Reply-To: Your message of 25-Jun-81 1836-PDT
Yes, the Dolphin is being sold by XEROX EOS as the 1100 "Interlisp Machine."
It is about $60K, last I heard (someone at Rand or ISI correct me here.)
It is also about 3 times as slow as the Dandelion (what's inside the Star),
according to very reliable people at PARC; that is surprising, since the
Star costs little by comparison ($6K in parts costs, I've heard.)
Also, XEROX is now putting up Smalltalk on the Star, for internal use.
I have no idea, and I suppose neither does XEROX, if they'll ever release
it.
-------
∂27-Jun-81 1204 Newman.ES at PARC-MAXC Re: Xerox Dolphin (alias 1100⊗?)
Date: 26-Jun-81 12:12:38 PDT (Friday)
From: Newman.ES at PARC-MAXC
Subject: Re: Xerox Dolphin (alias 1100⊗?)
In-reply-to: TEITELBAUM's message of 25 Jun 1981 2136-EDT
To: TEITELBAUM at RUTGERS
cc: works at MIT-MC, archer at SU-SCORE
Looks like a true rumor to me. The following is excerpted from a PARC Forum
announcement sent to all users of the Xerox message system. It was an open
forum, so this is public information.
-----
The Xerox 1100 Scientific Information Processor, currently being marketed by
Xerox EOS to the research community, is a Dolphin processor running
Interlisp-D. Not only does this configuration provide comfortable
interactive performance, but the availability of Interlisp on such a low cost
machine makes economically viable the widespread use of knowledge based
technology, such as the deployment of intelligent servers in a distributed
network environment.
-----
(Xerox EOS = Xerox Electro-Optical Systems of Pasadena, Calif.)
The "Dolphin" is the same processor used in the Xerox 5700 laser printer.
This is NOT the "Dandelion" processor used in the Xerox Star.
/Ron
∂27-Jun-81 1221 mike at RAND-UNIX Re: Xerox Dolphin (alias 1100⊗?)
Date: Friday, 26 Jun 1981 11:10-PDT
To: TEITELBAUM at RUTGERS
Cc: works at MIT-MC, archer at SU-SCORE
Subject: Re: Xerox Dolphin (alias 1100⊗?)
In-reply-to: Your message of 25 Jun 1981 2136-EDT.
From: mike at RAND-UNIX
The Xerox SIP 1100 (Scientific Information Processor 1100) is really
going to be marketed by Xerox EOS (Electro Optical Systems). Here's
the deal:
It will sell for $60,000 a copy
It will have Interlisp. It will not have Mesa. It will not
have Smalltalk. (Maybe later it will, but they are not
promising it today).
It will have the 3mbit Ethernet. 10mbit later, but not this
year.
They wont sell any unless they get 'some minimum number of
orders'. The number that is most often mentioned is 40. (That
is, 40 altogether, nationwide. Not from one customer.)
The kind of maintenance available depends on where you live.
If you are not in LA or Palo Alto, then you will probably have
to do maintenance by paying time, materials and travel. The
other possibility is to stock spare parts and swap boards.
XEOS is considering, and would prefer, to have a complete
maintenance organization if there is the interest and enough
Dolphins in one place.
This deal is taking place because, among other reasons, ARPA
is looking for a way to get personal, networked Interlisp
machines to some of their researchers.
Xerox is accepting purchase orders now.
Let me know if you want a phone number for a Xerox contact. Your
local sales organization will probably not be of any help.
Michael
Subject: Personal Workstations
∂27-Jun-81 1240 Rivanciw.DHQ at UDel Personal Workstations
Date: 25 Jun 81 9:08:01-EDT (Thu)
From: Rivanciw.DHQ at UDel
To: works at Mit-Ai
Via: Darcom-HQ; 25 Jun 81 9:01-EDT
In Kevin Dowling's message of 18 June he mentioned that "the
people on this list are probably not the market that Xerox is
aiming for (as opposed to the business community)". This makes
me wonder - who are the people on the personal workstation
mailing list? It might be a good idea to kind of introduce
ourselves to each other. Like the quote goes:
"Where a man stands usually depends on where he sits"
I am Randy Ivanciw, a computer specialist with the US Army
Development and Readiness Command (DARCOM). My major duties
include long range and short range planning for office automation.
I work at DARCOM headquarters (I am a civilian) as a member of
a 7 person staff dealing with the use, planning, implementation]
and other nasties of office automation.
Randy
[ If you would like to put in a brief description of who you
are and what your professional interest in this list is, we
will be happy to organize the responses for distribution in
an appropriate manner. A special mailbox has been established
to simplify the problem of collecting this material. Please
address your descriptions to WorkS-Census@MIT-AI. Thank you. ]
Subject: The Economics of Workstations
∂29-Jun-81 0747 WMACGREGOR at BBNA The Economics of Workstations
Date: 29 Jun 1981 0905-EDT
From: WMACGREGOR at BBNA
To: works at MIT-AI
cc: BTHOMAS at BBND, SCHANTZ at BBND
The commercial success of the personal workstation is largely a
matter of economics. Irrespective of the technical merits of the
various machines, they complicate installation planning by introducing
a new type of capital expenditure which typically cannot be financed
the same way as large, centralized computing centers of the past.
This may be an advantage or a disadvantage, depending on your point of
view.
On the negative side, the incremental cost of placing one new
user on a personal workstation is very large--the cost of the
workstation plus a local network interface and cabling, at least. For
centralized systems, the cost of adding one user to the community is
the price of a terminal and a terminal port (which is often dial-up,
and amortized over many users). Certainly there are many hidden costs
involved in either case, for example, the degradation of performance
of the centralized system as the user community expands; nonetheless
the capital expense of the physical equipment represents a fundamental
barrier, an "activation potential" if you will, for new users.
Are we making good use of the technology? From one point of
view, the development of personal workstations has been directed
towards increasing the computing power available to individual users
(the "KA-10 in your office" philosophy), at roughly constant or even
increasing capital cost per user. Can comparison shopping in the
small systems marketplace, a highly competitive part of the economy,
be a better idea in some cases?
In particular, I remember one reader of this list commenting to
the effect that he wasn't interested in small systems (e.g., micros
with 16-bit address spaces). I use an H89 (Z80 based system, 48K
bytes of RAM, 5" floppies) at home, and for the sake of comparison I
ran the Baskett test on this machine. I transliterated the program
into C for the C/80 compiler as directly as possible (almost token for
token), and even on the "small" system the object code is only of
modest size. The execution time was 542 seconds, as opposed to about
40 seconds for the Perq. This Z80 machine runs at a 2 MHz. clock,
which can easily be doubled to 4 MHz. reducing the run time to 270
seconds, about 6 times slower than the Perq.
I do not mean to suggest that we should all be using CP/M and
8-bit micros. But neither does it seem wise to pass over these "small
workstations" as being insufficiently powerful; they can be extremely
cost effective. The question is not whether these systems should be
used at all, but how they might be integrated into larger
environments. Suppose a user can afford to pay $3000 (about twice the
cost of a terminal) for a VT-103 (a VT-100 terminal plus LSI-11
processor). What functions can we place in this device to improve
performance? How should it be integrated into the network of personal
machines and shared hosts? Could we, for instance, support a window
package for the VT-100? (In fact, we can; examples already exist.)
From my experiences at BBN, it is clear that the economics of
personal workstations can be very complicated. Two troubling effects
that may be general phenomena are the sharing of one "personal"
machine by several people (and corresponding problems of data
security, authentication, etc., which have been pretty much ignored in
the "personal" workstation model), and the inability of low budget
projects to get into the game at all (it is difficult for people on
different projects to share the same machine, for many reasons).
I would be interested to learn how others are resolving these
issues, whether in software or by direct administrative control.
- Bill
-------
Subject: Interupting a workstation session
∂29-Jun-81 0825 Daniel L. Weinreb <dlw at MIT-AI> Interupting a workstation session
Date: 28 June 1981 22:11-EDT
From: Daniel L. Weinreb <dlw at MIT-AI>
To: SHG at MIT-AI, WORKS at MIT-AI
I agree that it is hard for a user to keep track of a stack of
interruptions. Having to maintain a mental model of such a stack, and
having to remember what "exit this command level" will do, is a real
pain. Most interactive systems I have used have suffered from this
problem. The Lisp Machine solves the problem by having all of the
user's activities be at the same "level". There isn't any command
processor that "calls" programs which then "return" to the command
processor; you just move "sideways" from one thing to another. No
stacks are involved. (Actually there are still a few stacks in the
system, but they are being removed.) (There are some commands that mean
"switch back to the previous thing I was doing", which you sometimes
want, but nothing forces you to use these commands. (If you gives such a
"previous thing" command over and over, it switches between the same two
things, in case you were wondering.))
Not only is this easier to use, but it is more powerful. If you are
reading your mail and you are interrupted by a phone call, you can go
handle the phone call, and then put the caller on "hold" and go back to
reading your mail, and then get back to the phone call. That is, you
need not maintain a last-in first-our ordering among your actitivies.
This is one of the things I think is most valuable about the Lisp
Machine's overall user interface structure.
Subject: Re: Tools for personal workstations
∂29-Jun-81 0848 mike at RAND-UNIX Re: Tools for personal workstations
Date: Saturday, 27 Jun 1981 12:19-PDT
From: mike at RAND-UNIX
To: Eric Benson <BENSON at UTAH-20>
Cc: Rivanciw.DHQ at UDEL, JWalker at BBNA, WorkS at MIT-ML
In-reply-to: Your message of 26 Jun 1981 1103-MDT.
Eric Benson's message implicitly compares the Emacs design with UNIX.
In his words, Emacs is elegant, UNIX arcane.
And that Emacs should be a guide for future designers !
And a merry,
CONTROL META SHIFT FOO
to all of you, too.
Michael
Subject: frisbees and floppies...
∂29-Jun-81 0911 Daniel L. Weinreb <dlw at MIT-AI> frisbees and floppies...
Date: 28 June 1981 21:15-EDT
From: Daniel L. Weinreb <dlw at MIT-AI>
To: SK at MIT-MC
cc: WORKS at MIT-AI
You asked, "The instantaneous bandwidth of such a transmission system is
very high. So who needs a Chaosnet?" This was presumably in reference
to the use of floppy disks for inter-workstation file transfer.
While the instantaneous bandwidth may be the same, the overall bandwidth,
counting the playing with the physical disks, is much lower.
Furthermore, the net is superior because (1) you can't do remote login
over floppy disks, nor asking what time it is, nor asking who is logged
in, nor anything else besides file transfer, and (2) it is very clumsy,
especially if the other machine is across the street or down the block.
Direct and easy access to a shared file server is important.
Subject: Addressing and File Accessing
∂30-Jun-81 0205 Barns at OFFICE Addressing and File Accessing
Date: 29 Jun 1981 0544-PDT
From: Barns at OFFICE
To: WorkS at MIT-ML
cc: Barns
The recent discussions of address space size, remote file access, etc.,
brought back to my mind the IBM System 38 - specifically the notion of
only one kind of addressing (48 bits in that machine) which is used
to access "main memory" or data on secondary storage - rather than
having files, there is the notion of various "access paths" possibly
existing through a great heap/swamp/"data base" of bits and bytes.
As far as I know the machines under discussion generally belong to the
Multics/Tenex/Unix school of thought that on the one hand, there is
memory, and on the other hand, there are files. All sorts of nasty things
like networks, terminals, users, etc., are mapped into one of the two
(usually files). But it seems to me more desirable (in principle at least)
to have only one kind of thing ala S/38, with various notions of access
paths, objects, classes of objects, etc.
I for one would be interested in knowing if my feeling is shared by
others, and also whether there are any plans on the part of the research
groups or other entrepreneurs to build such machine/software combinations
for those of us who would rather not program in RPG.
Bill Barns
-------
Subject: Re: el.POBox; 19 Jun 81 7:36-EDT
∂30-Jun-81 0222 Deutsch at PARC-MAXC Re: el.POBox; 19 Jun 81 7:36-EDT
Date: 29 Jun 1981 09:58 PDT
From: Deutsch at PARC-MAXC
In-reply-to: Rivanciw.DHQ's message of 25 Jun 81 8:26:40-EDT (Thu)
To: Rivanciw.DHQ at UDel
cc: JWALKER at Bbna, WorkS at Mit-Ai
The Xerox Star terminal interface is structured exactly the way
you suggest -- it gives you a "desktop" of capabilities which
(subject to the space limitations of the screen) you can "reach
for" at any time.
Subject: Multiple Levels Of State
∂30-Jun-81 0244 Rivanciw.DHQ at UDel Multiple Levels Of State
Date: 29 Jun 81 9:41:58-EDT (Mon)
From: Rivanciw.DHQ at UDel
To: works at Mit-Ai
Via: Darcom-HQ; 29 Jun 81 12:27-EDT
In Steven Gutfreund's recent message on user environments he mentioned
that it would be best to "NEVER HAVE MULTIPLE LEVELS OF STATE
ENCODED INTO A DISPLAY". I am not quite sure what Steve is really
going for here - does this mean never to have more than one level
on a screen at any given time? or does this mean not to have the
system track where and what a use was doing? I am not sure.
My thought are that in my work environment I am constantly being
interupted by phone calls, urgent messages (electronics as well
as paper), and drop in visits. Often times I can not remember
where I was or what I was doing (Steve mentions this problem in
his message). It was my hopes that an office system could help
me keep track of where I was and what I was doing.
For example, right now I am composing a message to the WORKS
mailbox. Suddenly an urgent electronic message header comes up
on my screen that I must answer right now. I abort this message
(naturally saving the draft) and read the new message, check other
files (calendar, saved messages, suspenses, etc) and compose a
reply. That might take 15 minutes. In the meantime my phone
rings or I have to make a call that requires me to divert my
attention elsewhere. Then someone stops by my desk to tell me
about their weekend or talk about some configuration.
Bottom line is that I forget all about this message. I simply
did not remember where I was or what I was doing. Several days
from now I'll see a file named DRAFT-WORKS and wonder what it
is. I'll read the file into the editor and suddenly remember
what I was doing, but by then the reply may not be worthwhile.
In a very rich user system, the system would keep trach of where
I am so that when I said continue it would take me back to this
message reply and I can finish it. I feel that this tracking
would have to go at least 3 or 4 levels deep.
What are some other thoughts?
Randy Ivanciw
Subject: Re: Tools for personal workstations
∂30-Jun-81 0303 Eric Benson <BENSON at UTAH-20> Re: Tools for personal workstations
Date: 29 Jun 1981 1232-MDT
From: Eric Benson <BENSON at UTAH-20>
To: mike at RAND-UNIX
cc: Rivanciw.DHQ at UDEL, JWalker at BBNA, WorkS at MIT-ML
Mike's response (more like a Bronx cheer) forces me to clarify some of the
points I was trying to make:
First, I could not say that the design of Unix is not simple, clean and
well-integrated from top to bottom. In fact, I only objected to one thing,
certainly not a central point, which is the cryptic command names (cat, mv,
rm, sh, ls, grep). These are almost as mnemonic as PDP-10 opcode names.
(Jrst enough for some, I suppose.)
Second, Emacs is no Mies van der Rohe creation. The implementation is at
three levels, MIDAS, TECO, and Emacs keyboard input, the first two of which
are incompatible with each other and sane human beings. The single
character commands are also cryptic, but there is readily accesible online
documentation for them. Common editing commands are often used in rapid
succesion, necessitating brevity. (Although I believe I saw an editor
described in Software P & E using the Tops-20 COMND JSYS which looked
somewhat interesting for novices.) Mike (apparently) objects to the use of
extra shift keys for commands. This is required because there is no
"insert mode" in Emacs; what you see is what you get. That is what
distinguises it from every other editor I have used, and is the most
important aspect of its design. Also, by not requiring special editing
keys or other input devices such as a mouse, a good typist can remain in
registration when entering commands.
Unix was designed when CPU power, memory, address space and terminal
bandwidth were scarce resources. Its popularity (in academic circles) is
due to its accessibility, portability and malleability. I only hope
in extolling its virtues we do not overlook its shortcomings.
-- Eric
P.S. Sorry for getting a little off the topic of personal workstations per
se, but I believe this is relevant to system design.
-------
Subject: On productive text editors, suggested reading includes
∂30-Jun-81 0319 DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus) On productive text editors, suggested reading includes
Date: 29 Jun 1981 (Monday) 1448-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
To: works at MIT-AI
this month's SIGPLAN (#6) on the Text-Manipulation conference conducted
earlier this year. It goes into some detail (Yale's "Z" envr for exmpl)
on how some systems were put together, and what benefits they provide to
the work-area.
Hank
Subject: ALANTHUS System 1000 workstation
∂30-Jun-81 0330 Edward Kozel <EKozel atSRI-KL> ALANTHUS System 1000 workstation
Date: 28 Jun 1981 1236-PDT
From: Edward Kozel <EKozel at SRI-KL>
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
I have some literature on the ALANTHUS System 1000 workstation. It is
a 16-bit machine with high resolution display (15"), up to 1M of RAM,
and a set of either twin 8" floppies or a winchester drive. It is
configured in an interesting manner, with the "guts" (RAM, controller,
etc.) in a chassis sitting upright on the desk with a clipboard on
the3 side to disguise the box. This allows the entire system to be
off the floor (excepting mass store, which can be across the room).
They claim the desktop units can be lined together via a high speed
LAN, providing multi-station access to shared resources. They are
on the Federal Supply Schedule, which (I assume) lends some
respectability to the enterprise. They use both the Intel 8086
and 8088 in their various configurations.
Sounds like they are using Convergent Tech gear. Does anybody know
otherwise?
Ed Kozel
-------
Subject: Re: Xerox Dolphin (alias 1100⊗?)
∂30-Jun-81 0353 Deutsch at PARC-MAXC Re: Xerox Dolphin (alias 1100⊗?)
Date: 29 Jun 1981 09:55 PDT
From: Deutsch at PARC-MAXC
In-reply-to: TEITELBAUM's message of 25 Jun 1981 2136-EDT
To: TEITELBAUM at RUTGERS
cc: works at MIT-MC, archer at SU-SCORE
Your information is correct. The Xerox 1100 is a Dolphin with
Interlisp. Its speed is approximately 1/2 KA-10 equivalent,
assuming you buy enough memory (~ 1 MByte) so that paging doesn't
kill you. It comes with a 600 x 800 bitmap display, a 28 Mb
non-removable disk, and a mouse; I'm sure some flavor of Ethernet
will also be available. I have no information on purchase price,
delivery schedule, etc. as yet.
Subject: Xerox 1100 (Dolphin)
∂01-Jul-81 0257 DEUTSCH atPARC-MAXC Xerox 1100 (Dolphin)
Date: 30 JUN 1981 1335-PDT
From: DEUTSCH at PARC-MAXC
To: WORKS at MIT-AI
I inadvertently quoted the 1100 speed for Interlisp as 1/2 KA-10.
The correct figure is 2 KA-10. The standard configuration being sold
includes roughly 1.2 MByte memory and a network connection.
For further details (including price, availability, options, etc.),
people should contact Marcel Pahlavan in Xerox EOS at (213)351-2351.
Some people in Xerox management are understandably a little concerned
that some busybody might narrow-mindedly disapprove of the use of the
ARPANet for discussion of a commercia\ product, although I don't see
how an informed discussion of personal workstations can proceed in the
absence of quite detailed information (technical and`otherwise).
Subject: ALANTHUS System 1000 workstation
∂01-Jul-81 0321 Brian P. Lloyd <LLOYD at MIT-AI> ALANTHUS System 1000 workstation
Date: 30 June 1981 08:45-EDT
From: Brian P. Lloyd <LLOYD at MIT%AI>
To: WORKS at MIT-AI
Alanthus is indeed selling the Convergent Technologies system. There
are now three flavors of workstation: the Integrated Workstation
(IWS), the Monitor Workstation, and the Applications Workstation. The
IWS and MWS are electrically identical with the differencE beine that
the processor is remoted into a box like the mass storage. Only the
display and keyboard remain on the desktop. The Application
Workstation (AWS) iq the "low cost" woristation and physicallq
rese@5EYKf↓iQJA%/&\@↓)QJA¬/&ASLAECg∃HA←\↓iQJ@``pp@!S]gi∃C@A←_AiQJ4∀p`pXRXAQ¬fAMK]KdAE∃YQfA¬]HAo!SgiY∃f@Q]<AgKe%CX←a¬eCYY∃XA∩←<XAM←9h~∃M%qKHA%\A%∨4XAKi \RXA¬]HAQ¬fA]↑↓≠kYi%McfA∃qaC]MS←\\A)QJ↓CImC9iCOJ↓←L~∃QQJAβ]&ASf↓iQCh↓ShASLACE←UhAQC1LAiQ∀AG←gPA←LAQQJA∪]&AC]⊂AgkI⊃K]Yr↓iQJ~)G←gh5aKd[]←eWgQCiS←8AMCY1fAS]Q↑AiQ∀@HjX@``Ae¬]OJ\A)QJ↓β/&A
C\AeU\ACY0~∃←L↓π←]m∃eOK]POfAg=MioCIJAoSQPAiQ∀AKqG∃aiS←8A←LAQQJA
=]hA ∃gSO]∃d\~∀4∃¬eS¬\~∀~(~∀→'kE)KGht↓πYCe%MSGCQS←]f↓CE←kPAS]i∃eekaQS]N@↓o←eWMiCS←9f~∀≡@b[∃k0Zpb@`ffh%'iKm∃\A⊂\↓∂kiMIKk]Hy'⊃∞↓ChA≠%([β∩x@∪πY¬eSMS
CiS←9fACE=khAS9iKeeUaiS]≤@Ao←ISgiC%←]f@~∃ CQJt@f@A∃k]∀@brpD@c`tTd[ P~∃
e=ZtA'QKmK\↓⊂\A∂UiMeKU]H@yM⊃∞ACPA≠∪(5β∩|~))↑tA]∨%↔&↓ChA≠%([β∩4∃GFt↓ →.A¬hA≠∪P[π∩X↓eSmK9GSn]⊃QbACPA+ 0~∀~∃IJt@A
YCeS→sS]N↓[rAG=[[K]QfA←\↓∪]iKIekai%]NAo=eWgi¬iS←\↓CGiSYSir~(~∃∩AQK]HAQ↑AC←IKBAo%iPA ¬]SKX↓/KS]IKDOf↓G←[[∃]ifA¬E←kh↓iQJA9KKH~)iVAgQekGiUeJAi!JAkg∃dAS]QKeMC
JAg↑↓iQCh↓←]JA
C\A[=mJAOICGKMUYYb~(EgSI∀[oCsLDAEKQoKK\↓oS]I=of←C
iSmSQSKf\↓⊃JAgQCiKf↓iQCh↓iQJ~)CESY%irAi<A[←m @EgS⊃J[oCefDAo¬fAY←9JAEr↓iQJAIK[←m¬XA←L↓GCYY%]N~∃=dA]KMiS]N↓←LAe=kiS]∃f\~∀4∃)QSLA]KgQS]NA=LAIS¬Y←NA=dAe←UiS]Kβ→β'Mπ;#πQ∧Iβπ5π#Cg'v9βS=πβ?'; h+?W"βπMβ
β∪π;>+Iβπ⊗+¬β≠␈⊃βOg∨#↔5β&+O'∨v+KM9αα' β}s∃βπfc?←LhS¬β∪/≠'∨;/⊃βS=ε≠K↔π&)βπ9ε K ''∪πKeπ≠SπS*β7π∂FK;∃β↔Iβ7↔∞sMβ?2β¬4WβK?S⊗ ∂W↔"β∪'πf{≥1β&C↔9β&C∃βW≡+Aβ←Nc1β *βK↔G.KK↔⊃π#=βK. ⊃βSF(4+↔w#Kπ'g→β?→εC'Mβ&KOC3∂IβS=π#Keβ∞s⊃βK.≠?;O'∪W∂Qπ##∃β&Kπ3?:βS#π h+?∂∨+K↔⊃ε+πK3N+Iβ←F+9β#*β';S/∪KWCd his session.
Randy Ivanciw is gorrect when he says that a system could be
built which would "refresh" the user's memory when he returns
to a window. However the problem with arbitrary state diagrams
in dialogs is that such a smart assitant would have to understand
all transitions that a user could have made. Pre-designing
such help into a dialog is a massive chore, and therefore rarely
done well or done at all.
It seems to me that if one is to follow the old maxim: WHAT YOU
SEE IS WHAT YOU GET. Then we should not have state diagrams in
dialogs which cause the user to be able to read the entrails of
his/her display to figure out what has gone on before he/she
left a window.
- Steve Gutfreund
Subject: Re: Multiple Levels Of State
∂01-Jul-81 0344 Deutsch at PARC-MAXC Re: Multiple Levels Of State
Date: 30 Jun 1981 12:52 PDT
From: Deutsch at PARC-MAXC
In-reply-to: Rivanciw.DHQ's message of 29 Jun 81 9:41:58-EDT (Mon)
To: works at Mit-Ai
Whoever mentioned the MIT Lisp machine solution hit the nail on the head: if
(1) there is no notion of "nesting" of suspensions, buT rather simply a pool of
tasks in various stages of completion which the user can switch between at will,
and (2) eveRy partially completed task is represented by a VISIBLE OBJECT on
the screen, then there iq no issue about forgetting partially completed tasks,
being forced to complete them in the oRder They were started, etc., etc. I believe
(at least I hope) the Star works this way, since all the experimental
multi-window systems at PARC do.
Subject: Question to field: Bit Mappeddisplays
∂01-Jul-81 0353 DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus) Question to field: Bit Mapped displays
Date: 29 Jun 1981 (Monda{) 2210-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
o BIT Mapped displays.
Would anyone care to discuss what is a bitmap as oppsoed to
a raster-bitmap, as opposed to a whatever? I @¬ZAGKIiCS]1rA]↑↓KqaKIh~∃S8AiQSLACeK∧XAC]⊂AiQJE SgAYCrD↓gKK[LAi↑A JABA-KrAM∃Cike∀A←LA5←gh~)!Keg
←[fAQ←ICr8~∀4TC↔;KJα∪K↔N3WL4Ph(4(2OW⊗S↔∂QRαπ∪∪⊗+OO'v9βπ;"α≠'3*απ∂∂-≠O'≠8h(=Aλ¬TW.EWβ
αεεCβ_~l↔.> ≥b¬π,≡G"βH:4"uλ(∃%" ≡B¬≥UZ4≤](WbL≤LG⊗/>9⊗v: ≥f"∧m≥F*∧≤<6/∨=≥f:α↓Q$&∂LW"β≠∧ '.rε⊂∞'ε( $ε6k4⊃
A"Q\M⎇.H∃L≡9z_-d∀≤X.Nλ∂⊂j8 T∀H~∃λ_.D∀u+*8stQ'a"U≠g$≥{|M≡h_=∧ 25 )Yβ"C!)(_sn]→≠InD_9|L\(≠;n,(≥z.Mλ⊂Z-Mλ⊂X.-\kH∧
z;<
M9↑2-lh≤⎇
}X9y$
|Yx-m>X=
≥{C"M≡h_;D
;<≠n._;]∧ <|→,>λ≠yD∞~→(
]|Y( |;Y<L≥λ→{l≥λ≠yD∞z;<
My↑:-lh≥~ Q"]4l↑I|h∞ <Xy.∞~;{D
yH≥m =λ~.4≠yH
l8y<n==≡( ∀≥Y<O∀_{s.
→>λ ]]Z<M⎇[9;NEC"U
<Y(
≡h≤{m\(≤⎇.∞≠|]∧ =λ∀nL;Y[n,λ→[n$≥~~.4→{x-Gh~;D∞_<]
≤⎇;_.$≥y(∞⎇⎇;→↓Q[~:lT≥≠h ,(_8ML(≥≠d
yYY.$≥<y..h≠yD
u3H¬
⎇_;Lm|Yλ
]Z=Y..z=≡$ Y=≥m}Zj( ⊃"\z-↑≠→( =z→<L]]λ∪-|→;λ
|H_[nMλ∀u)d_;Y∧¬_(∀M}9zλ ≡≤≤[o
;8=
≥{H≠le(≥~ Q"]{n-→λ≠n↑≤z9 T∀q3Edλ∀{m\(≥X,}9(≥
⎇9z∞Nh_;
⎇Yh≥
|y(
M;Y4d <≤⊃,≡H~;AQM⊂thET∀P*J∂Tu)j2(≠md∀x{n,+Hλλ.Z8;D
Y:9∧ ;Yλ ∀_<Y$
=;≠
≥Yh≠nl<H∀n\zβ"M≤→8<d ≥<Z-lh≥~
≡h≤⎇-]9<KAQK++%U++#!!"@↓J⎇8ZL\⎇∞H
,.H⊃M≥→(_,<y<|m≥Yoc!!l +).; .ε∀λ
ε⊗b1∀HY1U( ≡λ∃rλ~U∪sEV,λ
;\↑$λ≤Y:,n<j(↓~Y.Hλm;→( ≤xy4n=;Yod∧λβ"HL=→.Dεlλ∩N]H .'ε(
∃∞\<y_/∃( Dε&k11
A"Q\M⎇.H⊃
(21U$ =λ∃iλ4U∪ie,,λ¬ →;\O∀⊃≤Y-≤]<j!QU≠nD∧λ_|lE\≤X.Nλ_=∧
u+4h9tQ#!,xnH∧∧≥{|M≡h_=∧ 25 (→#"C!(;Y_∞⎇_=λ ≤[⎇=∧∞≤[⎇M≤~;Yd∞_<X-M→;λ ≥≥→<Ml=~=LT→Z; T≤}<nL;<h m|C"LM9YY.-;Yh ≡≤≠~,<=~;mnkH⊃,wH∀⎇∞,8;(∞⎇→<Y$
⎇≤Y,≥(~4d {{y¬D_;Y↓QXz_.d≥z→.,(_r ≡X8⎇ ↑H~<d {{y∧¬≤~< ↑j+H∧ 8:y$ 88z∧∞}<⎇ ](_smnz<⎇ ]]β"N⎇=~~-d~=≤l]→H_-lλ≥≤L≥\|_.,;]λ∞Mh≥~ T→;Y∧∞<y<Edλ∃~ T≤}<nL;(β!,→=Y-M|→<D x;H =≠{|lT≥~→$ Z;⊃$
⊗4⊃.4≤kz T≥{⎇-Lλ_Y$ 8[→$∞≠h≥.<#"]
(≠;n>λ→9Lm8z9-m≡(_-lλ_[ ≡⎇≠kAQ@εE$_w1FEβEεEβ)zq5→qz≥⊂λ)2]⊂⊂r292\ytw3H0w2⊂⊃4v2P⊂qqri\ts3FBπX_@-Jul-81 0428 host MIT-ML Re: Addressing and File AcceSsing
Date: 30 June 1981 11:46 edt
From> Frankston.SoftArts at MIT-Multics
Sender: COMSAT.SoftArts at MIT-Multics
Reply-To: Frankston at MIT-Multics (Bob Frankston)
To: Barns at Office-2, WorkS at MIT-ML
*from: BOB (Bob Frankston)
Local: Barns at OFFICE,WorkS at MIT-ML
Poor Multics. People seem to attribute all the limitations of
its imitators to the original. One of the major advances in
Multics was its large address space and the uniform treatment
of the address space. Files are not an intrinsic part of
Multics -- only a convention for access memory through I/O
routines. There isn't even I/O -- just a set of conventions
fkr writing for writing an I/O interface module.
Yes, the system/38 does work out a lot of the ideas and I still
feel it is IBM's most advanced system and have suggested people
look at it as a model. But from what I hear it has not solved
its performance problems, though the model of using gobs of
computational power to provide a powerful interface is the
correct one.
The other difference is that Multics provides the full power of
its process to its users. The System/38 is packaged like a
real computer but seems to be much closer to an assembly
language/PLS interpretter running the user code. It was clever
to invent the term vertical microcode, it means that they don't
need to give you a listimg of the operating system and are free
to change the internals as long as they preserve the user
interface.
Overall I think thatSystem/38 is a winner and one day IBM
will tell people that it is more than a System/34 upgrade. On
the other hand, I have not used it directly and RPG III (a VHLL
production language if you want to look at it that way) is the
only language currently available. It is also a little on the
expensive side, even compared to a Star.
Subject: Errata on Barns message "Addressing and File Accessing"
∂01-Jul-81 0445 The Moderator <WorkS-REQUEST at MIT-AI>
Errata on Barns message ''Addressing and File Accessing''
Date: 1 July 1981 07:00-EDT
From: The Moderator <WorkS-REQUEST at↓≠∪([¬∩|~∃Q↑tA/=eW&A¬hA≠∪P[β∩~(~∃∨e%OS]C0AgiCQK[K]Pt~∀~(@@AβLAMCd↓CfA∩↓W]←n↓iQJA5CGQS9KfAk9IKdA⊃SgGkMgS←\↓OK]KICYYr↓EKY←9N~∀@Ai↑AQQJA≠UYiSGL←)K]∃p←+]%pAgG!←←XA=LAiQ=kOQh↓iQCh↓←\Ai!JA←]∀AQC]⊂X~∀@AiQKIJASf↓[K[←IrXAC9HA←\↓iQJA=iQKd↓QC]H0AiQKIJACe∀AMSY∃f\~∀@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ZZA Ce]f↓ChA∨→
∪π
4∀~∀~)π←[[∃]ift4∀~∀@A≠kYQSGfA⊃←KfA9←hAm%KnAM%YKfA¬fAg←5KiQS9NAMk9IC[K9iCYYdAISM→KeK]P~∀@@↓Me←Z↓[K[←Ir\@AICiQKHXASh↓oCfAQQJAM%eghAMsgiK4Ai↑AMkaa←IhABAU]SM←IZ~∀@AgS]≥YJ[Y∃mKXA5K[←edAgsgQKZAG=]gSgQS]NA=LAmCISCEY∀AgSu∀A←EU∃Gif~(@@@QMKO[K9ifRA→e←Z@P`rlA siKf↓i↑@b↓[KOC siJA%\AYK9OiP\↓
SYKLAoKe∀~∀@@↓gS[k1CiKH↓S\A≠UYiSGLAM←d↓G←[a¬iSES1SirAIKCg←9fA←]1rXAC9HAMS1Kf~∀@AoKIJAG←9giek
iKHA=khA←_AgKO5K]if8~∀@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@4ZA!CUXAα\↓↔CeO∃d@y!¬⊗ACh↓≠∪([5ε|~∀4∀@@A¬\AS[A←eiC9hAG←IeKGi%←\AM=dACY0A←LAe←jAo!↑AQCYJA]KYKdAkMKHA≠UYiSGLX~∀@AC]H↓CeJA
←]gi¬]iYr↓Cggk5S]NAQQChA%hASf↓YSWJ↓+≥∪0↓←dA)∃≥ 0\A∪hA%f~∀@A]←h8A¬Ce9fXAM=dAKq¬[aYJ0AgCsLAiQCPA≠kYQSGf←Q ∃ 0=+]Sp↓ISMM∃eK]i%CiJ~(@@AE∃ioKK8AMSY∃fAC]⊂A[K[=er@Q¬]HAi!ChAi!JA&↑LpAI←∃g\OhαI1↓αo+3S'∨→β←π_h)↓↓π##∃β6KCOQπ≠gOS.iβS=ε#=βπ> eβ←M#!βSF)β∂?v≠↔CQε{→β≠Lc∃56o+3S'∨→↓ ≠Nc↔MλhQ↓↓β∂∪∃β7/∪↔3eπβπKQε{⊃β''→β3π⊗;∃β[O∪SGπbβ7↔7␈∪e1β∞s⊃βπ⊗)βπ∂≡+GO↔"β['∧hQ↓↓β∧¬vNwL↑'~R∧
2{≠∧
ε∂~ lW:εlZrεNL\↔~ε≥dπ&F≡4ε∂⊗\∃Bε∞lDε
εM}Bε}d 7⊗}=>2ph$∧α¬ε≡=απ'↑=αrα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧αααUT∧%¬$ ↔"∧Y~BmE↓Q hR∧∧αα¬≥}Rε∂,Tε≡}↑
F/&]O∩π?-⎇f:ε≥dε≡f≡8 m≤↑:;Lt∪=;∞M8|h
≥H≥~
≡h→|M}< C!$λλ∩-d∪=;∞M8|k∧∞~→<LT~<h ≤\{{∞↑→;≡$
[h→
≡⎇~;L>~;{D Y=≥l\9HλM\9;|O∀C"H∧∧_;Y∧∧YZ; ↑hNh∞M→<Y$ <Y(
.<⎇λ∞<9{9-n≤kλ∞⎇~8z∧
~=Y$
;H_$
~9<L≡K#"D∧λ_z
≤x;λ m;→(∞?<⎇→-T_;Y∧ <Y( ≤→≤Y.>y9λ M<Y8nM≡+H∧
~→(
?<⎇→-T nβ!$λλ~.4_(≤n
<Z=∞\;λ→ \y;Y ≥]λ≠ld∪=;∞M8|h
≥H≥~
≡h≤Y,|<Y AQHλλ∧∧∩]<nD_Y8l≡<y( ≥H~9 \(~<d
{→ ,l<z~-⎇Y9λ My<h
m⎇λ≠,\;H≡-}(≤z
};→β!$λλ~,L;]~,o(~=∧∞z=~∧ =;≥
≤|kH∧λ[|H ≥≠λ∪.]≥~8n4|h≤∞-x[→-↑h_;LD→>≥∞,;9#!$λλ_,|+λ~.D~<h
:∩3∪∧ :→8,D≠yH
≡≤h≥
≥9(~-d≤{{,T≥x>.5Hλ∀m}\↑( m|H≥
#"H∧∧~<\L]→=X-ly(≠ld≥~~.4≠9<n<9y+∧ ]=λ ∀_{⎇-L≠I⎇∧
]<⎇∧
→=λ∞M~<h ⎇h_↑%eKC"D∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλ %T⊃_;M≤;λ∪¬d∃y:-nY8HπL≠≥h ≡λ∪2*E02/AQC"@↓J⎇8ZL\⎇∞H
>≠|X,|(∀=,↑⎇~;md∀Y<nL=→9↓QCl eY]; 'ε(λ πε
B0L≡[\h ≡λ∪qHi0q(∧∧α4⎇
}X9y$
=9<nM;{H
,<⎇_.L9λβ!(_=→'$λ ( .;λ '↔ ( εfN 4λJβ"QN-{.Hλ,<[\d =λ∪hhR0q$∧β"U
wHλλ
⎇|Ztd =λ∪)~ 02!QXxnD∧λ_X.-\c"AQS[⎇d∞~_=∧
_;→D∞~→( ↑;≥~,>h≥<l↑\h~-d≥~→$∞{|[ D~_=LT≥[z,<9λ≥
:<C!,~<|
L8<⎇.,+λ≠ ↑λ≠9$∞≤↑(∞Mh≤x/∀≥z_.D∩(≥l≡h≤Y,≥≠≡(∞N↑:;Lt≥≠h∞<>#"L,9[|LUλ~≠n 9];
O(~;D (≠→.>h≠yLl;\z.l(≠8-mY<NAQC"Q∞↑Z;Yd∞~→(∞M;9(∞ <Z;lD≥z→-d∪=;∞M8|h∞|<h_M}[Kλ∞M_=λ∞?<⎇→-Q"X;LD≠⎇~ ↑\h≠,≤→(≥L≡↑:;Lt≥<y.4≠yH∞M→(~,L8(≠ld_(≤m≥Y{→$
→=Y-A"\⎇
}Y+H∧ X=≥.,;≠≡$ ~9YL↑Y;]∧∞→;|
L(_x-\(≥<∧∞z=~∧ ~9YL↑Y;]↓QZ_<LNx<Y%}{y]∞|<Y( ≡≤≤[l≤z→<d ;Yλ∞={≥Y,D→~9Ll<Y;ND≤⎇8N<=≤c!-yH≥
(≥;M≡Y<\lT≠yH∞
||z,-→(≤m≡≥8=
≥{\kD∧∀z;L<(≥~ ]H≥y$
_=Y!QZ_9∧
→;Y/∧_;Y∧
;Z>∧∞z~8m∧~_=LT≠89 T≥~→-≡H≠⎇md_{{NNZ8].M;{\eA"X;LD_;≤mt≤{{,T≤⎇→.∞h_X,=⎇x<LD_Y8l≡<y(
|H≥~ T→→<m≡Y(≥
t≠8:lQ"\{m\=~~-lh≥~ ≡λ→≠l↑{I⎇∧ z→=d∞<λ_$ ~<|∞-|≠|NM;{X.L(≤z ≡Y(≠la"X(∞M;9<m <Z;Lt≤}<nL;)|d∞~;9%dλ
⊗,↑kλ≠,≥↑(≠nM→<\d∞≠{k∧ ]=β!*→;Y/∧_;Y∧
;Z>∧ <Y(∞ <Z_.∞h_Y.>λ~{M}{KJ$∧∪;|LT≤Y8l]]≠≡$∞~→#!*kln∧
_<h ≡≥→;.∞→9λ∞Mh→{d X8zd∞≠h≤m⎇9(≠ld≥~→$
;|Y$ y;Y.,;β"M≤→8<eD≥z~,=λ~<d
[⎇→.⎇|]~∂∀~;H∞M_=λ
≡λ~<d
[⎇λ∞>8zλ ≥H→;M}[;⎇.1"\≤M|y<|m}Kλ≠M}H~<d
=λ~-n→;Y \λ≥≠d Y(_$∞~;9.=_<Z-lh≤}.>→;(
|C"]
(→[ ≡[|H
|H∪=-N~8|d
|H∃ ]Y>λ
}H∃;M∨ Hλ
]Y[|NN;X= ]≡(≥
<Y#!,<Y( ≥≤{h
\;↑(∞]Y[|NN;X= T≥~~-l|h_,-⎇=λ∞M→( g∧_<h
m⎇h≤ ≤zx9l\β"K$
[⎇_,-≡(≥
(≠⊂,=h≠yD∞≤[yn,;;:-lh≠_-l⎇89l↑h≥~ ≡λ≠8-o(≠yD∞<c"MM:y(∞Mh≥<lUλ≠|D∞Y8<m⎇X8[ T≤⎇8N>~=≥.L<kC!!"S[nt~=λ
≡h≠>$
;<≤L↑|z;md
≥;N><≤≠n.→9λ /(~_.,λ→_.L*(≥
=λ≥
#"Lg∧|h≤∞-xy<n=|H~.4≠;|LT≠|H
L<|h
≥H≥~ T≤x;,T_X;
N_<Zd <h
∞={9#!-yJ(∞M→(≥m}Z|⎇ ≡~;{D∞≤[xl↑|{|N5Hλ∃
<h≤n\yy<nNh≥~ ≡λ~=∧
<c"Mm⎇λ≥-nY8<m⎇X8[ T→[|D∞{{9-⎇Y(≥m
h~_.4_(≠-≥Yλ≥
uλ≥≠d
8:y$ #"\∞-y|X-]:;Yd ;]Z.-{[9-nλ≠{D∞~→<lT≠88m
;Y<eD≠|H
⎇Y<h
M:y(∞M→;+↓Q]z~,=λ≥z-Mλ→z.l(≥<d (≤z-↑≠→(
\8;\d
yH_,<y<|m≥Yh→ ≡_(→M}H≥~ Q"\≥..≠|y$
yH≠
|x;λ ={<≥.L=~;md_↑(∞M→( m}{Y<Dt≠yH∞M→(≥m}Z|⎇ ≡~;{AQX;Y∧
{[≡$ <≤≠∂∀≤Y<nNZ8⎇
≥{\h
⎇H_8l<<|h∞Mh≤→-}≠→( ]≤y=m <Y(
≥C"X$
Y=≥m}ZkH∧ (≤⎇,|y<⎇∧∞~_=∧
;H≥
(≠Z,<<⎇λ m|[+∧∞~~<d
98;N4≥~_.A"]~ T≥{|M>⎇_=
≥{I|d∞≤[yn,;<h ≤xy<n4≥~~-l|h_O∀_;H
e8Z=∧
];8L↑C"]m
8zλ
≡h_8N={≥= T→[|D∞~→(∞⎇≠{→$∞{|Zn>_=~-⎇KHλ
M~<h
l99λ
m⎇β"M\8;H∞M_=λ
mh≠⎇
<H→M}[(≠ld_8xl↑|z;Lt_x;D >~<nEC"C!*~→(∞≡9<⎇
≥{Kλ∞M→;K∧
<kλ
⎇_=λ∞>8zλ∞M~;Yn4→>~.>λ≠|D <Y(∞
_;[L\∂c"JMh→_.L(≥~ T≤Y<n
{\y.4~;Y
≤x=→$∞~_=∧∞~→( M<|λ \8z~-l(~_.4≤⎇8m↓"X;D
|Yx-m>X=
≥{H_-lλ≥~ ≡λ≥~ T∀→<N∀≥z;
D_=λ∞={9( n=≥<LT→_= T~_=LQ"X(∞m<]≥,≥λ≤⎇
}X9y$ [}λ∞Mh≤⎇.∞≠|]∧∞⎇8z∧∞~~;L}h_=∧∞~→( m<[=l≡Y#"ML=Y;¬dλ⊃_-d∪≡;L= |h
\<|x,|(≠yD∞{{9.M;9( ,8zh∞>9yy.>≤h≥
=λ≥
#"TjH4H→
|<h~.Nh≤⎇
}X9y$∞_9z-lh~;D (≠X.>≡(≥l∨+λ≠M}λ_{ \;H_.D_;≠¬A"X].D→→= ≥;≤h∞<9;(∞Mh_Y$∞;Z{M}{H≠n↑≤z9 T⊗→<M␈ Hλλ≥↑8[lO(~{M}c"X-o(≠;n,/c"AQHλ %XZ;≠∧λX<[N1"K+%U+++!QC"@ Subject: Re: Addressing and File Accessing
∂03-Jul-81 0954 Chris Ryland <RYLAND at SRI-KL> Re: Addressing and File Accessing
Date: 30 Jun 1981 1131-PDT
From: Chris Ryland <RYLAND at SRI-KL>
To: Barns at OFFICE-2, WorkS at MIT-ML
In-Reply-To: Your Message of 29-Jun-81 0544-PDT
Bill, the system you describe (System 38) is just a
capability-based machine, which is certainly old hat by now.
Unfortunately, this idea stilh seems to be barely catching on in
the "real worhd." Mo@MhA←L↓iQJAMK[S]¬XAgsMiK[fQπβ_↓ChA¬∃eWKY∃rX~∃!sIeB↓ChAπ5*XAC9HAiQ∀A!YKMgKrAMsgiK4@dj`$AoKe∀AI←]∀AC]H↓MS]Sβ≠#↔⊂hSg.≡.2ε∞⎇uBε∞lDπN∂D∞FF/,Tε∂⊗T vvg∀ ∩ε6↑tε≡}]\W⊗≡≤≥Bπ∨≡>F.o4∞vFN=↓PW⊗\mF.∨D∞FFO4 Vf.|≥f≡*
|bε∂,=εO&\>G/⊗T¬¬≠≠¬D∧NwL]B?~εF3∩α
_ D∞{{9!Q\y;N<*+λ∞={9( _sλ≠,≤z~;L↑j+H∧ ⎇~→..h_<LT≥{|M≥;Y`
⎇H≤}.>→;<d∞z~8m↓"Y;,-y≡(∞M→<y$
9→8.4
∩ *∧|h⊂N-9→y$∞≤[zL\⎇ λ∞M→(∀eV(≤≤M⎇Y8⎇¬∃λ_].A ¬6w\z⊂7sλ:42vH10yz_y24⎇→P:42H22ytYw⊂37\⊂⊃89_qz4qXv4z<H↔⊂⊂$H9zy6ZyrFE≥40z_px0q~v4z<Kq0yrY⊂9|y]2vyP_y2P3~w24w→P64s→P24s→4qzv≥⊂12qXzyrFB77P7[2P:v≥4vpz→v<P:[22y9]0w29H47{P≥7P22Xv⊂;t]4⊂:4→vP89_qz4qXv6<FB∀2W3K⊗⊂:4→P$<r≤0P37[5yP2~yqw{→y2r⊂≤ztz2H0P32]P897X62vyH;tz4βE0qq[zw:4[3P∀;Z7P7{[9P0wλ7q52Xz∨TVλ10qu]x⊗⊂9→qw{2\<V⊂2]1W⊗⊂≥47zsZεE:4→|P0v≤wP6pY2P3y→pz⊂9]94r2\P;tz~⊂9wvYP7s⊂≥42P4_y22yλ4yyzYyFE∀≠wyz6≡P92v~pq4v~z<TW
P⊂$P≥44w5H0P60\3rP8→y1rw≥0srP≠s⊂:yH;wzv→εE12H22v4Yt:2rλ:7P4_{2P0H:9:rH1px0X4v4z≡Vq0yYr⊂6pXt4w2H4s⊂:~2FE8→y37y≠pw1rH;ry2H:x⊂:≠P;t0]⊂;rS]2P1w[rP:7H2|82Xz⊂39≠vP1z\92w:βE0y1Z4z2q]:y2yK⊂1:zλ:40zλ27ry[∪z⊂9YrvP:≠P12P_y7zw→⊂:42H1wy7→y⊂∀0]εE62Xyz⊂4[⊂0w<H:yrpX62P;X|]⊂)L\⊂44Y2yP0[6⊂4z≤P3wwY⊂22yZsw⊂3≤7vP:~2FE:\ry⊂0[2⊂6p\uyP4]⊂4w⊂≥42P:\zpv⊂≠7w9r[9rP$P&P1:\tw2y\P9ws≥;py2K∀FE⊗KVVVVKFEεEβ)zq5→qz≥⊂∀2]⊂(]ryz4[w⊂:7H34rv→≥⊂!4]⊂&px≤2r⊂2~yx60↑yFEπL→Ve:[⊗\_Pλ_X→Zαqs4⊂_z⊂!aPVjg$V⊂∀!t≤4yz7\42y⊂∩2y7z
P∧i2N⊂(zr\z4wwλ:7P3~rv2≥λ!4z⊂∪px82Y⊂24y\60|yHεE"0]2]⊂→H%:v⊂ \\_P ≤≥~≠N→~VbQ*εE#≤7v]⊂_s4⊂0]⊂!a`Kjg$lλ∀!t9~yz7x~2y⊂$→y7z∀CE*7]λ")"dQ*P0zλ+d i∃'g⊗XLεE!qN⊂+wy~iP0zλ&dj⊗PdFEεB$w⊂9→yx7w≤rP:7H<wzyλ6ryyXsrP7Y⊂*4:H%:v⊂λ→⊂→_∞→≠≥→N⊂_\\ ]εEεB!4z⊂∪px⊂9→s2y9H:7P:~2P;p↑P0P8~qz:y→P4yP≤z7y2Y⊗⊂4W→W⊂7w→FE14]⊂∀7yλ0ssy→spz2H7s⊂1~z9P3≠y⊂1w[7y∀P≠s⊂6r[wy<P→7y⊂2XqtεE_r292\ypq6→P87t[:⊂7wλ:42P≤qy2r[↔⊂⊂ \P7x8≠yrr⊂≥7P:4→P7v2→yεE⊃→4yx6_|P64\z⊃⊂:→qt74\zrP;Z2y2P≥42P8~qz:y→P4yP≤z7y2Y⊂0yP_FE64\z⊂7sλ64w2H9rsvYw:9Vλ2z1WλεEεE∀0yz2\⊗yqp[⊂92s→y9P:≠P:42H6rz4≠r⊂1<H;t4qZ⊂:42H84qz≥y2P4\FE92Y92yt→r⊂7wλ:42P≤qy2r[⊗⊂4wλ:44yH1pybK⊂0yP_P9ry~ryP7YεE47\4⎇7w≥0v⊂6~w2yVλ9z0y≥4w3P_z⊂:4→P:7xλ7s⊂:~2P9q\2rw⊂_w2εE≠w{4w→P27{[↔⊂⊂ \P7x8≠yrr⊂≥7P⊃9]97urH;y4z→y9Q⊂≥t4qtλ6w{2CE:42H12pvH4w⊂0\14z9_y<P2~y2qz~ww9P≥7P29_{P4w→4{4r≥pvεE→y0x4~qP8)~vtz4]2yWεBεE*4→P2py≠4ryjλ24yx≠0|yP≥ry2P≤z97uYP;y4]2y9Wλ⊂*42H*,⊗Xλ0z⊂&RjεE6[{2r⊂_P12p[P7w_P!i*λ:w22\⊂:42H24y2Xz⊂1w[:97fλ5s⊂:~2P!h∃WαE$[⊂9wvYP9rw≤rV⊂:~4yP+XyP:4→P34y≤z⊂82\αsonal coMpqteR, as
refReshine the display didn't leave too many cycLes for
anything elSe. Later, the direct view storage tp EJQ∩Z≥!$4+∞c3 ?|\Bπ& TπεN>NW⊗*∞Mrε⊗T∞w-=≥→-d~]<nD≠{XlT~;\nL89λ
|C"XL];Y`∞,9\Y.=→9ε6λ≠|D
;|Y$∞~;9.4≤→<D∞y8sml Hλ ⎇[≡(∞∞[x[ ]#"Ul≡h≥~ ≡λ≥~ T≠{[∂∀≥x>$∞≠h_m ;Yy$ ;↑=
;Y`
⎇H≥~ T≤x|L\;H≥l≡c"]
t→<X.<(≥~ T→;]
≡Y(≤l>Y9;D
;H_$ [~;LM;Y` m_<z∧∞z~8m∧≥≠{m1"KE$∞y8p↔[29W⊂λ!<P:~2P;p↑V⊂1w[:90y≡P:7P_zy92[:⊂8:X64qt]<P0q≠zzεE≥42P)U i⊗⊂≥42P Y;0w1Yr⊂)2[wz2P⊃4yx6_|P)j_z4wwλ∀ i"∀TP9z≠y0srCE::q→P:2y≠tw0vλ;pyP≥42P3~y9z⊂≥7P7s→2y⊂:~2P⊃6[zyrQλ0yP0[⊂4w8≥zεE2→{4qrKεEεE∀z97uYP;y4]2y9P_y2P9]4v6⊂~w⊂1w[vww⊂≥yrP4[⊂:42H!`b↔P`fP0\2pWεB*42|H:<x4Xpv6<H2vx6≠|P44Yt⊗x2\37y6Xw1rP
2|82[9t{2JP0w0[7szrCE1ty_ztz9≡P:7P→90{P≥2qz7\9P7sλ6zqtλ44st→y⊂92\wv:z~ww⊂:~0w⊂0\2FE1]y92w≥6<P3→pytq≠2P;t]4⊂90\z2y⊂→4yx6_|yW⊂λ)2yw[:z4w[9P7sβE~_≤M<~_≤M⊂0y2H77z⊂≥w1wv[ww↔εBεE*4→P90y]2y⊂9Xpw72Y⊂14zλ6px⊂→4yx6_|P4iH90x4Y6<P:_utw3H7{2yβE:42H24yx≠0|P9Xrw2Wλ⊂$z⊂~yP1t→px2iλ:7P1≥tv2⊂_ty1zZz9P;Z4qtεB6w{2H:42P_2pvP~w⊂74XrP9y_tst:λ64w2\P0qy≠yyP:~2P9q\2rw⊂≥40wεB:7P1≥tr2⊂~w⊂:4→P0q4[4z<P≥5P::\7⊂1w\72y9KεEεEβE*7P_w9{r\⊂<wz\⊂8zr\z4ww ⊂37yλ0v6⊂~w:2w≥9P0w→⊂8:y≤7yryKεE90\z2y⊗X4z6p\⊂0w2λ14z6Xx⊂6rXw⊂:4→P9pvYP:44[3WεEβE⊗VVKVFEεBβ)zq5→qz≥⊂λ1px X4v4z≡P6pqZ4w2iCEπX~ e:v⊗N_P⊂_∞XZDd⊃a0ur\↔)|vX7v4q\P0z∪dj⊗f]v:4q\P∧qp\0q4v~z<P6Xqt4w→yP⊂εB 0z2N⊂⊂→P∩:v<P \\_P Z≥_ZH2r:εB!97vN⊂⊂$#P0qri )xvq≠v4qyH0z⊂&Rj⊂
Multics
To: ryland at SRI-KD, works at MIT ≠β$~∀4S 9↓αλβ∂πC∞∪'3''Iβ'MεSWOQε β≠πv≠eβ;∞k∃β≠␈⊃β¬βε{';S/⊃β'9ελ4)↓α↓β7π≡C';∃¬##πQε#?↔Or;Qβ#∂3∃β↔v{W∨!ε ∪∪K/≠EβOε ∂¬β&yβ ↔>K84)α↓↓β←O#!84S⊃9↓α&C∃β∂-∪C↔;"β#π;?+Aβ?2β∂πC∞∪'3''Iβ7π≡C';↔~β'Mβ&C↔'HhQ↓↓↓π+;←'dc';∨v+OMβ&yβ∪=ε;πK ∞;∃β∂}c3↔∂&K?99α↓"SK∞≠';≥bβ↔S
r`4)↓α↓βS#∂!β'MpH4)Mp∧α∧f≡>απ≡≤4π&FTλfO↔>@λ <<_8M≥~=≡$
88z
≥Y+@∧ =λ∩.P:9:YP:40]ε@
the kbj@∃GifA¬eJAcUSiJAM[CYX↓S\Ai!JA←e%KSMC0A→SgAfXAEUh~)α↓↓β←M#!β;/;↔IαdK@∨π4 ε∂6≥lrπ6\:F␈↔5Dπ∨'-→f/~βλ∪l-Y8⎇∞∃β"H∧∧λ_s ≡|y4eD→[⊂⊂]7y9Vλ0w2 whathave you, they have all The¬
p@=oCdA=HA⊃s⊃eCfXhfdOLXAKi \∩∀~(~∀→'kE)KGht↓%JtA¬IIeKMgS]N↓C]HA→SYJA¬GGKgMS]N~(≡`h[)kXJpD@@`rPj∪ KUigGP↓ChA!¬%ε[≠¬1ε@∪IJtAβ⊃IeKgMS]NA¬]HA
%YJAβ
GCggαK;≤4T#πS∃R↓Mα+.a↓EeC ↓EQS)AαB% 4*≠⊗{5iα&+WSO≡AβπQ¬αεJ
ljεb hR'97⊗+C3@∃↑F{Rλ+∀d hDw
ε\↑7≡∞|Tε}2ε6α∧W]dβ Kε∀β 6∃U∧%AQ%&{$
v␈⊗:4ε∂" Y∃"lYAPPH)∀εo/>Dε⊗*
]↔∨≡≥lrπ≡⎇\W&F≥lrrαλ,↔⊗w4∞vO≡ Z2ε6} λ∧ s absolute for the whole workstation". Isn't
a reasonable-size conventional virtual address a solution to
this problem, provided that the operating/language system
doesn't allow you to fabricate addresses? That's the only
sense in which the Lisp Machine solves the problem, and it
only does it by virtue of NOT having any local capability
for named files. The LM doesn't provide any facilities
that replace a local file system, either, e.g. there are
no tools in the system for constructing and manipulating
directories of variables. Furthermore, the LM would be
helpless without the presence somewhere in the network
of some very conventional file systems which handle messy
questions like space accounting, periodic backup, user
authentication, etc.
Of course, if you want local objects to be remotely accessible,
then you do need something much more like capabilities. Given
that mainframes (processor + memory) are so cheap these days,
compared to the cost of a reasonable-size disk, I'm more
inclined to favor putting all potentially sharable objects on
a separate server mainframe and let workstations either cache
them on their local disks or get them over the network whenever
they need to. This requires some architectqral changes In the
world to make that network access comparable in qpeed to, say,
something between a cache miss and a bubble memory access, as
opposed to a disk access.
To the best of my knowledge, Star, like the research machines
(Dolphin and Dorado), has a conventional paged address space;
the Star OS provides fkr mapping full or partial files into
this space, like Tenex or Multics. The OS happens to be
optimized for mapping sequential runs of pages of a single
file into contiguous virtual pages, but that is an
optimization only.
Subject: Re: Addressing and File Accessing
∂04-Jul-81 1019 gaines at RAND-UNIX Re: Addressing and File Accessing
Date: Friday, 3 Jul 1981 11:04-PDT
From: gaines at RAND-UNIX
To: Chris Ryland <RYLAND at SRI-KL>
Cc: Barns at OFFICE-2, WorkS at MIT-ML
In-reply-to: Your message of 30 Jun 1981 1131-PDT.
It is little known, but the new versions of the Honeywell 6000
have a memory management unit, internally known as NSA (for
New System Architecture, I think), which makes the machine a
form of capabilities machine. It is elaborate and baroque,
but underneath are some very powerful ideas. The architecture
supports multiple independent domains (where a domain is a set
of addressing capabilitieq), such that a process can consist
of many domains.
Honeywell is slowly attempting to extend the old GCOS-III
operating system to pake advanpage of this, and the new
vErsion is beingcalled GCOS)8. In addition, Honey@]KYX~)g←[J↓sKCeLACGcUSeKH↓iQJAa &A'%O[B@!M←e[∃eYrAM &@%∧∪WO'v+OM⊂hSS >|ZFF/$
vO&∧ ∩εf≡NFf*]=f␈:Dλ'/"
↑V≡B
Mw6.D 'Jε≡N2π/<↑'~`Q.7O∨L]Rε≡≥IF."λ:αk*d∧¬&FT w⊗␈↑∧π&F≡@λ
]⎇Y9∧
⎇Y<D \[{$ →<[o↓"X<d∞_<]∧
yH≥
<h→ \;λ⊂m⎇]Z3L<9λ∩
⎇Y>0≠Yv6⊂:~0z⊂:~2P7h→y0z4[3FE9↑yz2vH1wzv→⊂12P≤7y:2Y⊂:7P≥42P$≠w2|`7ell proceSsor, and have
produced an interes@QS]NAMsgiK4AGCY1KHAπ@ZlXA]QSGP↓iCWKL~∃CIYC]iC≥JA←L↓iQJA⊃←[CS8AMKCQkeKf↓S\Ag=[JA]%GJAo¬sf@9αα≠?HhS↔cπoβ3∃1ε βCK}≠↔OMε≠π9βF [∃βλ∧ε&..\v>/$ ⊗rε⎇lRε&⎇\⊗Nr∞MphVL\'.: =v&*
→bε␈M W∩εM⎇V∞Nn5Bππ↑NFNvt
↔"εl≡"ε∞ X⊗"ε|aPV∞M]w∨" ≥gJε}Mε/∩∞?↔∨&]P∧Jε=mw:α
→f≡g\M⊗v:
YdMB∀ ⊗rπM
↔_h,≡&.
aQ hUM
w≡*
≥g&/,↑7&.D
⊗rπ?≡7&.T F/≡≤⎇bε∞lDεn.]}'Jε\≥f∞>]\Vw Q,↔ππ-|⊗≡F↑4ε␈.⎇∞Bπ&t &*ε≡|↔⊗*
|bπ> ≡BεO4 v}Nltε}r
W⊗*d∧∧O Q.&/π,↑6.wN4ε
π=≤vvNm≤6∞wDλWG&]n6N}d∞FzπM Rπ&
≥f↑Nlpε∞⊗}↑@hVM⎇V∞Nn4ε∞vD 6∂ε≤-⊗fOM≤W~r∧
Vv6}.G.v≡LVgJD∞FF/,TεO~
M↔'&LQPVNd∞FF*∞|↔Jε|dπ⊗/
}''~
}"ε␈M W∩εL\6.wDλ
|⎇;9-n_=~-⎇Kλ_N↑β"\ ↑Z_<∞4≤{{,T_Y8.M;Y`
⎇H∩≠ml>=y-Mλ≥{n]→λ∀∞-y≥8lT≤{{,↑~~;LuC"C!!"R)mT≠[⎇∧∞⎇<Y$∞~_=∧∞~~<d
<h≥
(≤Z,⎇≥λ→M}];( m|H≥
<h→
≡x⎇<n=9{KAQR=λ∞⎇⎇;→∧ Y(≠M≤y(~,D≤{{,]{Y(∞⎇⎇;→∧∞⎇_<ND_;Y∧
8;X,|(_ ⊂_ww32\2w1`%
dealifg with operatingsystem and system design issues. WorkS
afd InfoMicro saem to have lots of people interested in these
topics, bu@PAiQKdACeJ↓eKCY1rAM←
kgKH↓BAESPA[←e∀A]CeI←oYr↓C]H~)ISMM∃eK]i1r\~∀4∀~∀→'kE)KGht↓1Ke←`@pd`↓ iQKI]KhAα≠?7C∂#π 'fKSd4PyAQ6W+15a
↓↓EA!8&
&db]βπ ∧¬≥∀∃Y4b≠ W⊗␈∧πβ∪αλZFF/-lW"ε=x . =_8M≥~=≡$↓ Q_.L.H $ ];λε↔. (ε⊗ K*λ∃β"J<;Y→.'H⊂R)I∃h⊂⊂]⊂)i$KefεE⊃97v]λ!$f&∃P0z∀i$VeSεE*7N⊂;wy~βs at MIT-AI¬
Message-ID: <[SRI-KL] 1-Jul-8114:02:56.BILLW>
¬
I hav@∀AQKe∀ABAa%KGJA=HA1KI←p@QAe←aC≥C]IB$A←\AQQJ@pH`\@A$AgCsβ→04
∞s⊃α%¬ W?S+P4(Q$αα∀≥dε∞εM≡FN}eDπ&FTπβ∪α
≡2ε∞d
⊗w6↑>Fn.nDπ&F≡@λ∞⎇;≠λ m=λ⊂∀[:7FEλ⊂⊂<g]y⊂6'[3Vy0[3rP8≠0w9Vλ9tw1YP"j$⊃i'"jλ1wvx_z4q4[4z<P~yFE⊂λ⊂0{ !ilable through the 872/873 Communication Server using
Teletype communications mode on the 820"
I will not make any comments.
Bill Westfield
-----
Subject: EMACS -vs- UNIX
∂04-Jul-81 1219 mice at BRL EMACS -vs- UNIP
Date: 30 Jun 1981 at 2026-EDT
From: Mike at BRL
To: WorkS at mit-ml, unix-cpm atudel
cc: Rivanciw.DHQ at udel, benson at utah-20
Folks -
"Eric Benson's message implicitly compares the Emacs
design wits, Emacs is elegant, UNIX
arcane."
Both this comparison and the conclusion disturb me.
Comparing an editor (which can be thought of as having 3
levels) with an operating system (which has many levels of
complexity) is kind of off-the-wall, but lets play along...
INTENT: The intent of EMACS (as I see it) was to
provide a "what-you-see-is-what-you-get" screen editor
which behaved similarly over a wide range of terminal
keyboards (and terminals), and to permit construction
of Macros to implement higher-level features (LISP
indenting, etc). The intent of UNIX was to provide
a powerful, plesant, and consistent environment for
Computer Science types to experiment and build tools
in.
In a word, the intent of UNIX is "Software Tools",
whereas the intent of EMACS is "Software TOOL". Humm.
USER INTERFACE: Everybody will be quick to agree that
EMACS has a simple tk learn user interface, at least to
gain "novice" status. The more intricate commands become
more obscure, and less mnemonic. (Everybody agrees that
Meta-Control-single←character can get obscure).
"What-you-see-is-what-you-get" is Motherhood and Apple Pie
for screen editors, and EMACS definitely succeeds here.
The UNIX user interface is designed to save typing while
remaining reasonably mnemonic. A remarkable number of
"Advanced" users can't type very well, so this is laudable.
Unfortunately, this means users take a while longer getting
used to the command abbreviations. There exist variants of
the UNIP⊂AMQKYXQG←[5C]HA%]iKeAeKiKHRAoQ%GPAC
GKah↓CEEe∃mSCi∃H~∃G=[[C]⊃fAC]⊂AI↑A=iQKd↓]SGJ0AkgKH[QKYAMkXAQQS]OL@QCYQQ←kO AiQJ4∀Egi¬]ICe⊂D@QIU[DRAMQKYYLACeJ↓[←eJ↓G←[[=\R\~(~∃∪]%iSCX↓ ∪βπLAC]H↓+≥∪0↓kgKeLAMCG∀A[kG AiQJ↓gC[J↓ae←E1KZ\\8~∃→∨Q&A∨ ↓'#+∪9)2A→%))→
↓π∨≠≠¬≥ &\4∀@~∀@@@AU≥ %13∪≥∞↓')%+
)+%
hAβfA$Ak]I∃egiC9HASh0A ≠β
&AGC8~∃EJ↓iQ←k≥QhA←_ACfA!CmS]≤@fAY¬sKefhA)QJ↓kgKd↓S]iKIMCGJ=gGeK∃\~∃G=]ie←0Agik→LXAi!JA≠C
e↑AY∃mKXA
←[[C9IfXA¬]HAi!JA[C
e↑~∃%[aYK5K]iCQS←\A1KmKXQ)sa%GCYYdA) π<R\@A
KeiC%]YrX↓iQJAQ←`~∃1KmKX↓SfAK¬grAi<AkgJ8A)QJ↓≠CGe<AYKm∃XAGC8Akgk¬YYrA JAYK¬e]KH4∃C]H↓ae←M%iCEYdA+' ⊂AErA=eIS]¬erA[=eiCYLXAEkPAiQJ↓[CGe<~∃S[AYK[K9iCiS=\AYKYKX@QQ π≡A=dAoQ¬i]←h$AeKcUSeKf↓BA/SiCeH~)i↑AO∃hAO←=HAeKMkYif8~∀@~)+≥∪0↓GC\A JAiQ=kOQh↓←LACLABA]U[EKd↓←LAY∃mKYf0A]KgQKHt~(~∀@@↓)QJAQKe[S9CXAIISmKdLAYS9JAae=i←G←0@QG←9ie←X=f←b@_@EG←=WKHD↓KISi%]NR\4∀@@AQQJA'!KYX@!G←[[¬]HAS9iKeaIKiKd$~∀@@↓!e←OIC[f@!'sgi∃ZAG←5[C]IL@LA+MKdAaI←OeC5fAQCYJASI∃]iSG¬XAgi¬ikfR4∀@@AQQJA∩=≡A→S eCerQ¬kM→KeS]≤@LAg%[aYJ↓MSYJ↓[O[h$~∀@@↓)QJAMsgiK4[πCY1b@Q %eKGh↓eKck∃gifA5CIJAQ↑AiQ∀A+≥∪`A↔Ke9KXR~(~∃/Q%YJAK¬GPA←_AiQKMJAYKYKYfA5CrAQ¬mJAg=[JA←YKeYC@AC]H4∃S]G=]gSgQK]GS∃fPAi!JAOK9KeCXEGYK¬\DAa!SY←g=aQrA=LAQCYS]N~)←]Yr↓←]JA5KGQC9SgZAQ↑ACG
←[aY%cPA←9JAeKMkYhA%fAOK9KeCY1r~∃KYSIK]PXAC]⊂ABAe∃CXAa1KCgkIJB@Am≠←eJ↓←\Ai!SfAg=[JA←QQKdA⊃Cs:~(~∀E+9∪0AaI←IkGQSmSidA[kgPAEJAQQ←kO!hA←L0A]←h↓S\Ai∃eSfA=HAYS9Kf~∃=LAG←α#∃β←⊗KSS↔pβC↔I∧εVvODλ
≥9+λ .=λ∩-d≥→<M↑h≠yD
~;Y.4≠yH =y→#!)Suλ
(452*(1 KEdC"H↓QHλλ∧∧⊂ssH9∃4r)yTnH ∀→Y9-D≥~_.D⊃30(:h~<d
{Y(
|H≥~ T_Y=∞L<H≤l>Y9;AQY9~.M|\h ≡[y;LEλ≠;n>≠≡( ,8x=.<(≠qD∞~→(∧-88|MtH→X,=;~=∂∀≥z~,=β"\ ↑[:=∞4≤≠⎇l↑Y]3∧ Y8=∞↑Y<h∞MβP12H1:tv≥⊂7w⊂≥7x⊗⊂_w2⊂$H32rvλ:40zβE*g$V⊂4yP→2s4w~z2v,H:42P_2yz⊂≠x2y0]4w3P≤|yz2[P:40]⊂40yH9zy3_qrrεB:7P2_z2V⊂_2qpz\rP7sλ:42P_ww9t\z2w:λ9|yz→vVqp[6⊂4w≥2y30XrV⊂0[2εE:~2P⊃)[s:;p\2P*7[v9Q⊂_x897Xqt⊂:≠P1wv[pw29KεE⊂εB⊂⊂⊂⊂λ$"g!QT⊂$P≥44w5H:40zλ0v6⊂∃g$l9H9t7z[2⊂40]2P0wλ"f`aTV⊂0w→εE2{→y<q7Y<P9t≠zv2⊂≤:w⊂*S$hλ!
-Mike Muuss
Ballistic Research Laboratory
PS: There exist EMACSS small enough to fit on an 11/34, and
UNIP runs on everything these days, so this is less of
a pipe-dream than iT may seem!
-------
Subject: CMU Workstation milestone
∂04-Jul-81 1250 Sam.Harbison at CMU-10A CMU Workstation milestone
Date: 1 July 1981 1509-EDT (Wednesday)
From: Sam.Harbison at CMU-10A
To: works at mit-ai
Message-Id: <01Jul81 150913 SH01@CMU-10A>
I thought people might be interested to know that CMU took
delIvery of its 20'th Perq yesterday. Ten are in offices
of people working on Spice-related projects, and ten are
in public areas, also being used mostly for Spice work.
-----
Subject: Re: Ethernet capabilities of 820 and STAR
∂05-Jul-81 0920 guyton at RAND-UNIX Re: Ethernet capabilities of 820 and STAR
Date: Saturday, 4 Jul 1981 18:51-PDT
From: guyton at RAND-UNIX
To: Rivanciw.DHQ at UDEL
cc: Works at MIT-AI
In-reply-to: Your message of 1 Jul 81 11:09:18-EDT (Wed).
I worked for a couple of years for Xerox on the Star product and
after this slanderous message I will no doubt never be welcomed
back. However I can't resist trying to shed a little light on
the confusing state of the Xerox office automation product line.
The key to getting through the Xerox propaganda iq to realize that
there is NOT one, but TWO office automation product lines which
have been forcefully "ierged." These lines were developed by two
competing groups and don't really have much in common.
The two competing groups are now both under the common banner of
the "Office Products Divison" of Xerox, and are attempting to
cooperate. But until a year or two back . . . well, I'll be
polite and just say that↓iQKr↓oKeJ↓mKer↓gCeS=kfAG=[aKi%iWef8~∀
∃QQJA←1IKdAα;K?Wαβ'Mβ␈+Qβ?2α∪π3f M1α&+cπMp↓αS#*β;↔]∧∧w⊗␈↑∧εO~∞>εfOAQ&⊗/N|V.r
λ⊗fzλ≥G&z ≥f"∧]D¬≡.}]f&z¬ &␈&∧
⊗r∧<≥FN6}-fN
∃dα∧F↑,RεO4 ⊂hW=
w↔α∞L⊗⊗fT∞7.n\≡&OV≥lrπ> ≡B∧J∞MεNv4 ↔⊗*∞Mε.O$
V∞Nd FN6l↑&.v<↑3Ph!Q hR∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧αα∃8HB∩α∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧$⎇∧D!PRα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα5URjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjU5RjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUU0hTM|6∂&≥⎇bαα∧∧ααα∂Dααα∧λ6∞f≤mw⊗v≤⊂λ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλ∨∧∧∃→> ≡hλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∂A"Hλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλ
eU+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%5+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%Uc"T∞-y|X-]:;Yd∧ MESA | Assembler |
Environment | | |
+-------------------------+-------------------------+
Processor | Custom Bit-Slice | Standard u-processors |
+-------------------------+-------------------------+
Background | PARC/Research | Electronic Typewriters |
+-------------------------+-------------------------+
Product Lines | Star | 820 |
(Partial list | File Server | 850 |
due to failing | Communication Server| 860 |
memory) | Ethernet | |
| Laser pRinters | |
+-------------------------+-------------------------+
The two product lines evolved and were desiGned seperately. When
both groups were merged into the "OfFice ProduCts DivisiOn" it was
decided (wisely I believe) to merge the product lines as much as
poSsible, So the Dallas products are all going tk be on The¬
Ethernet$ @¬]HAKYKesi!S]NA]SYXAQCYVA]SiPAα+[↔KLεFFNlpλ ]≤y+D∧∩=λ
≡h_#!.{|]
∂(→{l≥ λ⊂N↑λ_<d∂;⎇(
]9z≥∧
989m≥Y+λ∞M→<Y$ <Y( ∀→Y0≠H97zsZ⊂9x /ts
in trying to do it&
I hear @QQChAβ##∃αF+K ?∧∞6∞f↑4ε6@|Xq$
<h⊂mL:;:-lh≥~ ≡λ≥~ ←(~_.l(_;AQX∧w:→sy0z→r⊂8 2oduct line for↓←EMS
JACkβ#?7π&K?99αα3?]ε≠?OQβAIA∨~βW@4U#=βSF)αOS∂⊃9↓α∞A↓9↓r↓1↓αJβ∪?9?!βS#Ns%α∀λλl≥H_9n,9(∃m≡~λ∃
= @∧ !"PL]~9=LT≥~→/∀_<Y$∞8π22\4tw4[3P:4→ty⊂1\2r0q~v4z<H;t2wλ:42|H:9<P≥5FE![w;4`.ca p@∃←aYJ↓←DAi!Sf\~(~∃βf↓MWdAQQJAGα{;≠W≤K?9β∂∪'O'v9β≠K}iβS#*β'∨;␈∪π;∂*β? β&C∃αc-∪?aβ≡ 3↔LhS≠ ?,8Rαr¬dαbπM WJε≡,Rε∞MDε␈/D v"∧L≥Ff∂4 ⊗v"∞Mε*¬>L↔∩π>NV62
~2ε↔,≥f h-lW:πMtπ&F]Qbα¬⎇ Vr∧∀⎇Rεv}Dπ/π<↑Bε∞-}W"πM Rππ-}ε∞≡≥lF
∧α){$ 8⎇≥,≥≠≡#!-z;Y ∀≤≠→,≡y9λ∞Mh≤y,T≥~_.D≥~→/∀⎇Y( M{Y( ≡h→{m|λ_(
-xH_.4≥~→/∀~_=LUC"C!!"C"I-;#"AQT Tedλ∀X-l≡( %T≥≠h ≥\⎇y.$≡;⎇.$≤|→,=9Z8d
9<|l≤y+λ∞M→(≤∞-y≥8nNh~;AQX{{∞];H≠ml(_;
D~_=LT≥~→$λ=~→.-Y=λ L<z9ml9λ_-lλ_]-≥≥λ~-d→\[mT≥~→!Q\⎇_.. Hλ
M→(≤∞-y≥8nNh~;D {{≥-]H≥≥mt~_=LT~_9∧∞~→(λ↑~→<Ml=λ_,L→9β!.z=~∧ z→=m≥Yh→n](_;LD_X:-M;Yh∞⎇<Y(¬
9H_.D_;≠¬∃C"K%U++#!!"@↓J⎇8ZL\⎇∞H
>z=_m
;Yh∞L<z|d ;Yλ ={]→/∞β"Cfε+2]-E. (∧ε∞-.↓→Up3 84H_.D⊂PSH∀α4⎇m≡_z~-lh≥_.=|h_-lλ_{mn→>≥∧↓ Q_.L.H∃l\≠Y<lL>+λε∀∩];∂∀ ..ε∀λ ,'&,K1(Jβ"QN-{.H *p3∩hZH_=∧λPSP!QU≠nD∧λ∃{n-th_.D⊂2#!!"R( M{I⎇∧ [{∪
}h≥~ T≤Y; ↑X;XlT≠yH ≥≠λ≥
<h≥ ≥~h_,-⎇=λ∧.⎇_= Q"Y~,≤|X;.4H~;D∞~→( M<x⎇.>z;{D
yH≤L↑⎇;:-lh_(∞><|→-l→9λ ≤⎇~=M≡≡+C!*~→(
∞;8;D∞z9→$
yH≤L↑⎇;:-lh≤{m\=~~-lh~;Nm{≥Y.4_;\n|<Z;Lt≥~→!Q\=9.>~;{D∧S[⎇eD≥z→.,(≥x.4∩/hEdλ∪{LT≥Y<O∀→9YL\⎇~=LT_;\n|<H≥
q"]~ ≡λ≤=,↑⎇~;md~<h∞M→(≤l>Y9;D ~<|
L>(≠ld≥~→$∞_<zd <h~.D≥x<aQ]z→-d≡;⎇$
→9]∧
= H∧¬∩=λ
≡h≤→.-_<≤d
[⎇λ∞M→(_L↑⎇λ_-n⎇y<ED_]=↓Q]~→$ Y<⎇∧ ;\⎇l↑H~;Nm{≥Y.4≤{{,T≠9= ∃:{[n⎇→9→lT≠yH∞⎇_=λ∂≥⎇#"NM≠⎇9m∞λ≡;nT≥y<LT→≠z-lh_;LD≡;⎇.$~;] ]]~;mnh→[n$≥~→$∞X<Z-}<c"L={;8-l≤h≡-}(~_,D≥<y,EHλ∩$ ;(≥m≥≠~;Lt≥≠h ≡|⎇;,T≥~_.D≤{{,]{Y#!,x;H∞,8{ymm>Y(∞⎇_=λ∞M→>(∞|<Y( Mz;Yd z=Y-d≥~→$∞y=λ
|H_{m]8;Y∞1"]~ ←(~_,D~<|n\9λ_L\[|Y$∞⎇≠|∞
;Yh∞⎇|ZkE⊃"C"I∀_{{L><H≥
=λ≥
(_<∞∞[x8m∧≥_:l]H_↑$∞~→( I4tλ
\8z~-l(_;LD≠⎇~ ↑C"[.]≥~+.⎇;Y≠nt≤}<nL;<h¬∞~_=∧
y9<∧∞≤X8m4≠yH∞l<Z;n↑h≤≤M|y<|d
xZY,>≤c"L≥Yλ≤L];\⎇ ≡→(≥
:<H M<|≠ ∨<h≥m ;H≥
(≠xM,8⎇≤d <Y(∞<;→8nL9
(
≡c"Xm}\Y8nEHλ∃
<y(∞?<⎇→-↑h≥≡.
8x;
O(≤≤M}Z9→$∞≥{h∞|><h
|H≤~,=z;Yd∞<β"L∀→≤[n∞→9λ ,;≠λ¬U(_↑$∞<z;Lt_(≠-}<y(∞Mh≤y-L8⎇λ
⎇Y(≠ld≥~→$
xZY,>≤c"N⎇≠|y$∞z;Y
}h~<d ⎇<\L]]≠≡$∞Z<z,-→(≠md≥~→$∞x|Y,]Kλ_-lλ_↑$∞<z;Lq"X(
]⎇<y$∞≠h≤l]→8⎇∧ ;H≠l-Y8⎇∧ \[{$ (≠9-n(≥z-l≠⎇h∞M_=λ ={]_-≥\h_!QX\Z,\H→→.<|Z<∞M;{H
|H→8,=λ≠yD∞~→(
|ZY8nNkHλ
M→(≠,]](→m≡Y<h∂≥⎇#"L={<≠ ↑→(_m⎇]→>∞D→[|D∧]z→.,(≥x.4∩/hD ↑(≤m
⎇z;Lt_;≠∧
yH≥
;Y|d∂;⎇#!,<Y(
.9y{
≥YkH∧
~~<d
<h≥L↑↑(~-↑≠|] ≥]λ_L\x=<lT≥~→$ Y=y.$→→= ≥;≤c!/;⎇(
=Y(∞Mh~y,↑λ~;D∂;⎇<D
→89∧ 8[⎇.D≥z_.D≡;⎇$ <Y( Mz;YeD≥~→$
;|Y!QZ→8,D~<h
L9]λ
}Y<H m|H_,>≥8;
O(→y.N~;Yd∞~→(∞⎇|Zh M{Y+EeHλβ!!"Tz-↑≠≡(∞,<⎇;-≥Yh_$ ≤[|∞ 9λ_,>~=Z.O(≤z
};→λ
m⎇λ_LT_(≤∞-x[→-Q"\{mNZ;Yd 8⎇~.m=≡(¬∧[[ueD≠→=∧}h≤y,Uλ∩(∞M~;Zd (~_,D≥~_.D≤];Mm;Yc!,<h_$
y<≥∧ [|Zd∞;Y→.$∩→<M\<kλ∞⎇~8z∧
<h≤N][Z;Lt_<h ∀~y<∞D→[|M1"];LL<H⊃)X0tkEeHJ+D∧∃~→$∧[=;∞M+9[n-z;Yd$∃∪t
5,Lλ ←→8|d∞~_=∧ >~<nA X=∧∞y=Y.,;λ≤
L8y<d¬→+Yed∪25¬D∀⎇_-l[|Y¬D∀]5 |<\j$ ;≤{d∞⎇<≤
}]β"N↑y<\d∞z≠h
l99λ∞Mh≠;nl(λ\m≤→=x/≡hH≥
t→≠h ∀≥_<m4_;≥
⎇9z∧
∪t∀eVLβ"LMy<{D}λ≤∀M}Z9→$ ;↑=
;Y`
≥H≥~ T≥x>$
yH∀L];\⎇ ≡~;Yd∞~→( M<|≠ ∨#"Pm⎇]→>∞EC"C!%+++%Q"C"@↓J⎇8ZL\⎇∞H ↑;≥~.
→(∪ ↑Y;≤d
yH∀nL=→#!!l
+).; .ε∀λ $&εB3:-<(∪→,≡Z=≥∧π∪⊃0*i5∃λ ≡λ∃4h524r'dα3=-N~<≠ T∪→=L]≤h≠ld∀⎇_.L(β"HL=→.Dε(∩]-D ..ε∀ .∧&U4⊃∃↓QTy;LL<NH H05R*Jλ_=∧
4pk)~r#"Hn[{.D∧∪:2lT∪→8.m=≥πI⊃05I~∃λ_.D∃4peY4r/AQU≠nD∞{|Zn4_=⊂⊂dFE&YyypsYVdb≥λ≡-jiPVdidWP_Ve≥v∩\1 18:15:41.LEAVIurposes, the LISP approach seems entirely
reasonable. For a workstation, I'm not so sure -- this
is a very special case. There are a relatively limited
number of types of things I am likely to be doing, and
each of them has its own intrinsic priority. When they
are interrupted, they carry with them an implication of
how soon they should be resumed.
For example, if I have to interrupt a phone call and put
somebody on hold, this is basically different from what
happens as I am going through my in-box and someone comes
into my office. Granted, I would like to keep track of
where I was both in the phone call, and in the in-box, but
my system should and could be smart enough to understand
the difference, and indicate that YOU HAVE SOMEONE ON HOLD,
TURKEY, before I finish the interruption and go out for a
cup of coffee. Incidentally, I have been know to leave
people on hold in just such a situation.
Also incidentally, I am not totally crazy about have
a bunch of little icons filling up my screen with
unterminated projects. My desk looks like that right
now, and that is exctly what I hope to get away from.
Mike
-----
Subject: Spatial design for a workstation
∂05-Jul-81 1206 Rivanciw.DHQ at UDel Spatial design for a workstation
Date: 1 Jul 81 10:03:14-EDT (Wed)
From: Rivanciw.DHQ at UDel
To: works at Mit-Ai
cc: Rivanciw.DHQ at UDel
Via: Darcom-HQ; 1 Jul 81 10:49-EDT
I am quite impressed with the degree to which you all responded
to my questions or thoughts on changing modes of operation in a
workstation to better reflect the way one does business.
Here is a scenario I would like to take you through. It is
about Debbie, an action officer in federal agency. Debbie
has an automated office. She has jqst sat down at her desk
(after getting her coffee) and is about to start her day of
work.
Debbie logs onto the system. Rather than being dropped at
operating system, she is dropped into the office automation
program (or shell). The first thing she sees is the top of
her desk on the screen.
There's an inbox, a notepad, a file cabinet, a phone, a
calendar, etc.
Debbie reaches for the inbox by either moving a cursor to
the inbox or typing "inbox". The inbox expands to fill
the entire display. In the inbox is a stack of messages
- visible on the screen. One of the messages is flashing
(or in a red envelope) indicating some level of importance.
Debbie reaches for that message first by pointing at it
with the cursor (or typing a command to read it).
The message requires a quick response. Debbie must gather
some information from several sources to answer the message.
One source of information is a phone call away. Debbie types
"desk" (or hits a function key labelled desk) and is back at
the top of her desk.
She then points to the phone and the screen fills with a
phone message pad on the left (to take notes on when a
call comes fkr someone else in the office) and several
phone directories stacked in the right hand corner. She
points to the phone directory labeled "DARCOM". She types
in the first couple of letters kf the person's last name
(the person she is trying to reach is ma - she does not
know how to spell Ivanciw - so she jUst types in "IVA".).
The phone directory opens to the first page with names
beginning with IVA. Debbie sees the number and dials it.
While she is talking on the phone she wants th∞Ai¬WJA]=iKf\4∀@@@↓'QJA≥KifA CGVAQ↑AiQ∀Ai←`↓←LAi!JAIKMVAC]⊂Aa←S9ifAi<AiQJ4∀@@@↓]←iKACH\@↓)QJA9←iKa¬HAKqAC]If↓i↑AM%YPAi!JAgGIKK\\A'QJ4∀@@@↓isaKLAQKd↓]←iKLA←\AQQJA]=iKaC⊂@QoQ%GPASLAeKC1YrAUUghAC8~∀@@AKISQ←dR\4∀~∀@@Aβh↓iQJA
←]GYUgS←\↓←LAi!JAaQ=]JAG¬YXAi!JAgQ∀AO←KLAECG,Ai↑~(@@@AQQJAi=`A←L↓iQJA⊃KgVA¬]HA←9GJAC≥CS\AA←S]iLAChAQQJAS9E←p\4∀@@@↓)QJA%]E←p↓←aK]LAoSi AiQJ↓[Cgg¬OJAg!JAoCLAYCgPAeKC⊃S]N\4∀@@@↓'QJAIKCYSiKfAi!ChAg!JA]K∃IfAi!JAS]→↑A←\↓iQJA9←iKa¬HAi↑4∀@@@↓C]go∃dAiQ∀A[KgMCOJAM↑AgQ∀Aisa∃fA]←QKaCHZAiQ∀AgGe∃K\~∀@@AgAYSif↓C]HAQQJA]=iKaC⊂AoSi AiQJ↓aQ←]∀A]←i∃fAG←5KfA←8~∀@@AiQJ↓gGeK∃\AEKMSIJAQQJAkIOK]h↓[Kgg¬OJ\~(~∀@@AβPX↓sKfX↓ KEE%JAUkMhAeK¬YSuK⊂AiQCPAgQJ↓]KKILAg←[∀AS]M<~∀@@AMe←4AiQJ↓MSYJ↓GCES9Kh\@↓'QJAQsaKfE
∪→∀Aπβ¬%≥ (D↓←dAQ%if~∀@@AB↓Mk]GQS←\A-KrAY¬EKYK⊂@EMS1JAGC S]KhλAC]H↓BAaS
ikeJ↓←L~∀@@AB↓MSYJ↓GCES9KhACAaKCeLA←\AQQJAg
eKK\8@A'Q∀Aa←S9ifAi<~∀@@AiQJ↓MSYJ↓IeCo∃dAYC KYKHEα[ελAC]H↓ShA←AK]fAIKmKC1S]N@L`~∀@@AM←1IKdA!KCIKIf\~∀4∀@@@↓¬khA]CShX↓g←[K=]JAQ¬fAUkMhAoC1WKHAU`A K ESJOLAIKg,AC]H4∀@@@↓QCfA¬gWKH↓SLAg!JAQC⊂AeKC⊂AiQJ↓EkYY∃iS\A ←CeH↓iQSf↓[←e]%]N\~(@@@AQQKeJ↓oCfA∧A]←i%GJAC ←khA∧AaeKMK]iCQS←\A%\AiQ∀AG←]→KeK]
J~∀@@Ae←=ZAg←5KiS[∃fAiQ%fA[←I]S]N8@A K ESJAEkSGW1rAQSQfAiQ∀@EIKMV~∀@@Ai←@DAE←Qi←\A¬]HAa=S]if↓iVAi!JA¬k1YKiS8A¬←CIHAS\↓iQJA
←e]KH~∀@@A←LA!KdAI∃gV\@↓)QJA kYYKQS\A¬=CeHA∃qaC]⊃fAC]⊂AgQ←]fAgk UKGiL~∀@@AM←dbjAEUYYKi%]f\@↓∨]JAMkEUK
hASfE!% M ≥)βQ∪∨≤D↓C]HA⊃KEES∀~∀@@AkgKHAa←S9ifAi<AShA¬]HAi!JAEk1YKiS8AKqa¬]IfA=\AiQ∀AYKMPAgSI∀~∀@@A←LAQQJAg
eKK\8@A'kIJAK]=kOPX↓iQJAAeKgK9iCiS=\Agi¬eifA%\@p~(@@@A5S]ki∃fB@A¬]HA ∃EESJ↓oC]iLAi↑A≥↑Ai↑↓ShB~(~∀@@A/KY0XA]←\AgQJ↓QCfAQ↑Ao←IVAck%GWYr∧@A⊃SQiS]N↓iQJA→∪→
A→k]Gi%←\~∀@@AW∃rAiQ∀AgGe∃K\Ae∃CaaK¬efAo%iPAi!JAMS1JAIe¬oKd@ α[εD↓←aK\4∀@@@↓gQ←o%]NAi!J@f`↓M←YI∃dAQK¬IKef8@A'Q∀AckS
WYrAMa←if↓iQJA→SYJ~(@@@AMQJAo¬]ifA¬]HAkMS]NAQQJAGUeg←dQ←dA∧AYSO!hAaK8XA←d↓[CsE∀AQKd4∀@@@↓MS]O∃dA←\↓BAi←UGPAg∃]gSi%mJAg
eKK\$Aa←S9ifAi<AiQJ↓M←YI∃d\~∀4∀@@@↓)QJA→←YIKHA←aK9fAk`↓i↑Ae∃mKCXfAgKACeCi∀AaCa∃efA←8AiQJ↓i←aS \~∀@@A∨]
JACO¬S\Ag!JAa←%]ifAQ↑AiQ∀AG←eIKGhAACaKd↓C]HAQsaKfEGY←MJ~∀@@AMS1JD\@↓)QJA→SYJA
Y←gKLAC]H↓gQJA%fAEC
VAS\↓iQJA%]E←p↓oSiP↓iQJ~(@@@AUeOK]PA[KgMCOJX↓iQJA9←iKa¬HXAC9HAiQ∀A]Kn↓MSYJ5aCaKHACYX↓←\~∀@@Ai!JAgGIKK\\4∀~∀@@A⊃K1XBAi!JAaQ=]JAUUghAe¬]NAC9HAgQ∀ASfAQQJA←9YrA←9JAS\↓iQJ~(@@@A=MMSG∀BB@AMQJAa%GWfAU`AiQ∀AaQ←9JAC]⊂AMS]⊃fAiQ¬hASh↓SfAM=d~∀@@Ag←5K←]J↓KYgJ↓S\Ai!JA←M→SGJ\A#kSkly she hits the DESK
function key to get to the top of her desk and points to
the phone. The phone expands to show a phone memo pad
and directories. She moves her cursor to the memo pad
and takes a message for her co-worker. She hangs up the
phone and types hits the CONTINUE button. (The phone
message is automatically delivered to the co-worker).
Continue puts her back into the inbox with her three
files.
She decides that she can't finish the message right now
so she hits the bye button and goes to the presentation.
Debbie knows that the next time she enters her inbox the
three files will all be there and she can dig right into
the reply to that message.
********************************
Nktice a few things:
o She never had to give a command to run an editor or a
message system. She only pointed to a function and if
it used the message system it used it (ILBOX) or if it
used an editor it simply used it (PHONE MEMO, NOTEPAD)
and never required Debbie to type MSG or NED or EMACS
or whatever.
o She was interrupted several times and had to move through
several systems. In all cases she never had to say
"suspend" or "save" - she just went to another function.
When she returned to the function she left it was right
where whe left it. Imagine somebody constantly clearing
off the top of your desk everytime you changed functions
- that is basically what we do in the automated office
tools of today.
The above scenario is a concept that DARCOM is considering
incorporating into its office automation environment.
Please let me know your thoughts on this concept.
Randy Ivanciw
-----
Subject: Ivanciw's ideas &c: comments
∂06-Jul-81 0329 STECKEL at HARV-10 Ivanciw's ideas &c: comments
Date: 5 Jul 1981 (Sunday) 2116-EST
From: STECKEL at HARV-10
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
As an implementor type, I have a few questions. When I work,
I have at least three stacks of things on my desk (where each
stack has sub-sub-sub-, etc. stacks):
a) what I am trying to do on a long term
b) what I started this morning because it's gotta be done today
c) the phone rang and you need it when?!?!
So... the idea of "kept context" is a nice one, but I suspect
that there could be a lot of mess. What happens in Randy's
scenario when the phone call about line 78 (+ or -) required
the use of (1) messages (2) filing cabinet? How do you "file"
where you were in a file cabinet? My file cabinets have about
3000 things in them.
I also have aquibble about The "desk" key. If the interactive
whizzes can make the super paga screen work, I would much rather
never have my "desktop" hidden...
I trust my machines about as far as I can throw them when it
comes to saved contexts. Why doesn't the "phone", "pad", etc.
stay around in "icon" form? Part of the idea of piles is that
you can still see the existence of a pile, even if you're not
too sure what's in it.
Unrelated quibble concerning EMACS, &C. I am in the (lonely)
minority of those who cannot stand EMACS, and have limited
tolerance for any screen editor I have yet seen.
A) all I have experienced know far too much about what I
"want" to do (words, lines, etc. are too fully built
in) Quick, what does your screen editor call a "word"?
B) the mouse-type input ones use too many hand motions - I
touch type my TECO commands; why should I have to slow
down?
C) the control-meta-shift ones make me use many fingers at
once. I don't like that either. Also, the more obscure
the character, the less likely it will survive (1) my
memory (2) the system deciding it wants that character
This is merely to say that I think editor design is in the
dark ages, and EMACS ain't God.
Back to Ivanciw's scenario:
Does he envision a page printer, etc., for that item in the
file cabinet? My file cabinets are full of brochures from
manufacturers which arrived by U.S. Snail. Do we encode
them with a TV camera? I have had much difficulty trying to
digest any message longer than about 25 lines via any screen.
The present Workstation message blizzard gets imaged out on
a Calcomp (nee Gould) 200 dot-per-inch plotter in "micro"
fkrm (280-character columns per page) so I can sit down and
quit craning my neck at the screen.)
Anyway, my point is: the workstation seems great if all I/O
is within the electronic environment, but falls down when
you get things like hard paper involved. I hope I provoke
a little controversy.
geoff steckel
Subject: Re: Tools for personal workstations
∂06-Jul-81 0402 Daniel L. Weinreb <dlw at MIT-AI> Re: Tools for personal workstations
Date: 5 July 1981 19:42-EDT
From: Daniel L. Weinreb <dlw at MIT-AI>
To: lwa.INP at MIT-MULTICS
cc: WORKS at MIT-AI
Actually, quite a few users of Multics Emacs (in particular)
do learn to write extensions. Multics Emacs has an extension
language that is particularly easy to learn and start using,
and it is well-documented. Secretaries do this as well as
computer programmers (secretaries are often underrated; there
is a wide range of people doing secretarial things out there,
and some of them are pretty damned smart people). You'd be
surprised.
However, there will always be a lot of users who don't want
to learn to "program". I think the key to making programming
painless is to use programming-by-example systems. Emacs
keyboard macros are a start in this direction, althouch they
are Too simple-mifded to do the job adequately atall. Dan
Halbert's Master's degree work at U* C. Berkeley is a
particularly good Example of a prototype of such a system.
I hope more people work on this in the future.
Subject: Re: capability machines
∂06-Jul-81 0434 Chris Ryland <RYLAND at SRI-KL> Re: capability machines
Date: 5 Jul 1981 1619-PDT
From: Chris Ryland <RYLAND at SRI-KL>
To: HGBaker.Symbolics at MIT-MULTICS, works at MIT-AI
In-Reply-To: Your message of 3-Jul-81 1415-PDT
Sorry, Henry, but a capability is NOT just a fancy name for a
pointer in a machine that doesn't have enough address space
to begin with. I was referring to capabilities in their full
encapsulation sense, such that you can only manipulate an object
if you have the rights to do so (encoded in the capability)
and you can only do it by invoking an appropriate entry in the
capability's type module. (This is only suggestive; particular
implementations differ, of course.)
No, some capability machines do garbage collection. Hydra did.
Lisp is not a capability machine. Lisp is just a low-level
language for a symbolic-object machine, and thus is attractive
to hackers, because they can grovel with arbitrary "addresses"
when they please (CADDADR, foR example.) Of course, no one in
Their right mand would use Lisp that way th∂ICd\~∀~(←πQe%f~∀Z4ZZZZ4~∀
∀→'kE)KGht↓%JtAMaCiS¬XAIKMSO\A→←dAB↓o←eWMiCiS=\~∀≡@p[∃k0Zpb@`bhh%≠SGJ↓→KCm%i`@y1 β-∪Q(AChααVN
lJN%yJK∃i¬≠CπSN 1β∪/≠'∨9∧3?Iβλ∧π>␈->7&∂M→vrα∧∧hTL≡F+Rεpλ .;λ '↔ ( '⊗ K4λJβ"Tl]Y→<G⊂""`U$j*⊂_z⊂*iPVdidCE#97[]⊂⊂&ZurP&→p{4j≥⊂≡&"Pk$j*λ0z⊂*TaVdiR←αE*≠]⊂1`&h at↓ππα[U≥∪ ~)πFtAISmC]
Sn] !"AChααV∩⊗baβ←?⊗[Mβπ αε$4Tk↔OO∞;∃6&#Q↓rn-~
6&≤Ju↓]lSW1W $ε..Lε'M
KIH05R*J∂C"I≥K4Y.
≤+5
wH⊗;n↑H≠9.>x9y$
yH
D ];λε↔. (ε⊗nL
GεMK1(Jβ"C!)9H≥
<Y(
≡h_(∞,8;λ∞∞[x[ ](≥z.Mλ≤→-}≠→(∞∞Y9Y..Z;Yd∞≠h≥∂≡→(_$ Y=c!,z_<L≤⎇→<N∀≥~_-d≥≠h∞<|[{
D_(≤l>Y9;D¬≠|H
]⎇Y( ∀≠;⎇.</j(∧∞~→;D
<c"M⎇Y(≤m⎇≥=~-⎇H_(
]|Y(∞<;\z.M=Y(∞M⎇8z¬↑x|Y,]H→→.m8y(∞M_;H
≡h≠[nq"Y8.=;≡( ≡X:; ≤[→/d∧∩(→n\<|h ∀≥{⎇-Lλ≤≤L\Y<H∞
z;]
≥Yh≥
t_#"N <]~,>;_<D
8{{D∞≠h_-o(≠yD∞~→( ≤[⎇Y%a"C"D∧λλλ∧∧λ∪:-<#"C!!"@↓J⎇8ZL\⎇∞H∧λ{{] ←≥≤h ≡h∩8m⎇\c"Av∞ 2N] . $∧ LεA3_=n,;Xy$λ]=_m <H_.D⊂s5%V,⊂(¬ lm)HM,
$↓0{{NL>≥≤d <h∩,={\h∧∧β"Q ≡→.H∧εh∩]-O( .'ε( LF↔+11
D
∃≥,↑y_>%⊃"Q\M⎇.H∪ ≡|Y;L<(⊂].Lz→<D =λ⊂iZ+,,λ∀
⊗ f63⊂M&¬#"U
wH≥{n-|h_.D≠:=¬\:#"H8nH⊃l]Y(⊂L≥≠λ_.D⊂s5%V,⊂#!)9<|l≤y+2,GH∂ εy];∞ε∀ LL'⊗M(∪λ&,⊂⊂iZ+,,λ↔C"C!$λλλI∀_;(∞==≥~-lh_=∧
>(∀ ↑\{{L≥λ⊂{m↑≥=→.$
≥→.-:;X-E(~;D∞~→(
]9→≠ T≠yC!.{{9$∞{|Zd ;Yλ∞={9=
;Yh M9YY.,;]λ ={9<d∞< H∧ (→y.D_{{Ln<y9¬dC"H∧∧∃~→$∞{{≥.M;{\d∞≠h≥
<h≤∞-x[→-T≤X;L|(→\M⎇(~_.m;Yh
M⎇≤h
|H≥z-l≠⎇|aQ[{H∞M→(≤l>Y9;D∞≠h~ ≡Z;Yd
~=≥
L(≤_. <H_-≡\≠_-l<h≥m
8zλ ≡Y(≤m
⎇λ→N-{#"N↑y<H∞Mh≥<l↑H≥≠d∞≤X;N=:=λ∞
≠{Y$
];8L↑\kC!$λλ∃
(∀⎇ ≡H≠→.Nh≥~ T≥<y.$≠X;,T_=X-≥_8[ T≤y<Nm8y<d ↑(≤
⎇;]~-lh≥≠d 8{{N5C"T
⎇;]~-lh≥≠d ;H∩,={H→l]Y<X.L<h≠L↑h≠;n,(→→.L:;→,D∩8{mnkλ≠n$_x=.<<h≤m⎇9#"I≤{{K,L<→;LL;]λ ≤⎇~;md≥≠h
<≤→-eλ≠|D x=<l↑h_(∞⎇;Y≠nt≥≠h ≡≤→8.$≥~≤NT≥z~,=β"]
(≥<l↑H_x-d~;] ↑X8⎇∧∞z=~∧∞~→(
l;99∧∞y<]M≤y+H∧
~→( ={≠→,>~;{D
yH∩,={\c!,;Yλ∞⎇;Y≠n}h_<LT≥~→$ {{] ←≥λ≥m≡~~;D∞z~8m∧_(≥.<<H→
|<h≥m}ZkC!$λλ∃m ;H_$∞→<\m⎇H≤y..Z8y.4_;H
≥]→<N.<≥ ∧
→(≥m};→λ
M:y(∞Mh_]-l≠→(∞↑λ~~.1"\≤L↑Z;⎇.4_{{NL>≥λ ≥Yλ≤nM8zh
≡λ≤{m\=z→.,+Hλ
⎇→;H∞M→(~-n→<\N↑≥~;md~<h∞L:y;AQXx<LT≠yK∧∞~→(
⎇→λ_m⎇]→>∞D~<h∞,=≥<Ml9λ≥
uHλ∩.D~<h
m⎇λ≤L\<{{L≤[→( m|H_!Q]<y.$≥≠h
=Y(∞Mh≤{,≡zλ_-Mλ≠yD
~<h∞∞Y<y-nλ≥z-l≠⎇|d∞<λ≥
t≥~→$∞<≤→.$≠→9NA"\z,L(≠yD∞~→( M<|≠ ∨(≥≠d
8:y$∞[{{$∞≠h≥m}Zh≠md~~<d
Y=h ={]→/∞ Hλ ≡λ~<d <=8-M≡#"N]\Y8.={X8ML(→[n$_(≥.<<H≥
t~_=LT≠8<n==Y(∞
;→<d
yH≠nl<[_/≤9λ≥m≥Y≠⎇n5C"H∧∧⊂(≠.\zλ_L↑≥→<D∞{{≥.M;{H∞M_;H∞⎇;Y≠n}h≥{n]→λ_LT_(→M}[8;∧ {{] ←≥λ≠,≥X9y.!"]z
≤zλ_-M≠⎇|d∂;⎇(∞Mh→|M}<λ∩,={\k∧∞z;Y
}|kλ ≥Yλ≤L]_=→,D≤];Mm;Yh∞∞[y|L≥<c"M≥]≠h
M=≥≠ TλX{mn→>≥∧$≠xZL\⎇≤kD∧∃~→.<(_{n]→λ_LT≠8;M≡≥;_.L9λ~N↑⎇λ≠
≥y#"M\:; ∧ Z;→.5λ_;LD≥z;LM⎇|h ={]_-≥Z;Yd {{;,≥Yλ~-n→<\∞,=→<N5Hλ∪ml(_{n]→λ≥.<#"]
(⊂{mn→>≥∧ 8;X,|<H∩,={H≥
t→x:-d_8xl↑|h≥
t_;Y∧∞≠h≠,≥Z<≥-L=→(
M<⎇≤aQ[yH ={]→/∞≤kC!$λλ∩-d≠|Y ↑H≥≠d Y(≥.<9];∧∞~→<lT⊂{{NL>≥≤d∞z≠⎇-Lλ_Y$ 8[→$∞≠h_m⎇]_:-d_;↑!Q[xZL\⎇λ≠L≥88[ T_↑(∞M→(≥.<<KH∧
~~<d∞z≠⎇-Lλ~;L=≥9→$ 8{{N5λ~;N>_;Xl↑h≠yAQ\];Mm;Yh∞∞[y|L≥<kλ ≥Yλ≤m
⎇;→∧ ;≤{d
;X{∞\→(≥
(≥<l↑I|h
}Yx;M∨X=~-⎇H≠qAQ]~→.<(≠xM,8⎇≤d
{]≠d
~<h M<|≠ ∨+Hλλ∀⊂{{NL>≥λ∞=≠⎇; D_;≤mt_Y( ≤[→(∞Mc"Z-l{≥9 T≠⎇~ ↑H⊂{mn→>≥∞5C"H∧∧∃<y..h_{m];{[∂∀≥{|M4≠{H ∀≤z;L⎇→(≤∞-zY8nD→[|D
≠{Yl↑H≥~ ≥H_(∞=;Y{ Q"Y_/∃Hλ∃
t≠8:lT≥~~.4≤≠|n=8[→%D⊂{{NL>≥≤d
=<⎇∧
⎇=≠
≡Y(≥ ↑[:;L≥λ≤y.>z;{N5C"U
>(≠.↑⎇λ_LT≤≠|NL8[→$ Y=≥l\;H_m⎇;=;M≤x=~-lh≠8,=~;Y.5Hλ∃
(≥<l↑H≤z
};→β!,Y(_,-→(≥
t≠;⎇LT→≠⎇md≥~→$
_;≠∧ ;Yλ
=Y(
<h≥m}Zh→M⎇≠≠⎇d
~;+D∧∃~→!QP{{NL>≥λ∞=≠⎇; D_Y( ≡X:; ≤[→(∞M→(≠L←≥λ≠-}[Z;Luλ→=L]H_9NL<H≠n,→<[∂∀≤}<nL;#"N=≥=→
}{KC!$λλ⊃
|<h_-o;{Y$
_=Y$ ;↑( ←≤→<M≤;Xy$∞z=~∧ (≤}.>→;(
M:y(∞M~<ogq"C"AQ@↓J⎇8ZL\⎇∞H ↑;≥~.
→(∪ ↑Y;≤d
yH∀nL=→#!!l∞ ).; .ε∀λ F↔"5X.\z_;D
≤X=∞D∂⊂thET∀P*Jλ_=∧
u+4h9tQ/D↓3=;∞M<≠→$ →=Y-Nh≠yD
⎇_= Tλβ"HL=→.D∧
(∩N]λ .'ε( ,&F+4⊃
A"Q\M⎇.H∃L≡9z_-d∀≤X.Nλ∂⊂j8 T∀H~∃λ_.D∀u+*8stQ'a"U≠g$≥{|M>h_=∧ 25 (→#"C!!-+2N] .∧$ε,.LεwL- *λ∃ &Fn∞lεε εε ε⊃"B3,≥; 9N-{.Hλ~T⊂3HZλ≤z.L(∪2*E33λ∞,⎇Yλ ≡λ
+).; .ε∀ ,,εe4⊃∃↓Q@1_.L.H $ ];λε↔. (ε↔ -+*λ∃β"A~y;Y ↑NH∪λX5R5
D_=⊂∃iaVdTdFE∧CE`v≤wP4w_tr2w≥0v6<K⊂$P [P77zλ:7z0[68P1\0⎇<P_q7zzλ40{ %
a bunch of little icons filling up my screen with
unterminated projects. My desk loois like that right
now, and thatis exctly what I hope to get away from.
Mike
-----
Automation works yet another miracle. Lotsa luck.
-------
Subject: Re: Switching tasks and context
∂08-Jul-81 0232 Nowicki at PARC-MAXC Re: Switching tasks and context
Date: 6 Jul 1981 10:32 PDT
From: Nowicki at PARC-MAXC
In-reply-to: JWALKER's message of Wednesday, 1 July 1981 11:52-EDT
To: JWALKER at BBNA
cc: WorkS at AI
I can't help describing a Multi-window terminal program I wrote last year at
Stanford (with the help of Vaughan Pratt and Jeff Mogul). My reasoning was
that although "integrated systems" with menus and standard user interfaces were
desired in the long run, we needed a short-term tool to help develop such
systems. My program runs on the SUN workstation, which provides RasterOPs
on an 800x1024 bit screen at roughly the speed of 16 pixels/microsecond, and
computing power about 1/4 of a VAX-11/780.
The program has one simple function: an aribtrary number of virtual terminals
are displayed in arbirary windows on the screen. Each of these virtual terminals
may be to any machine on the local ethernet, or on the Arpanet (via a
gateway). Characters the user types get sent to the "current" host, (except for
one escape character used to enter commands), and characters sent from the
remote hosts get printed in the corresponding virtual terminal. When something
more urgent comes up, you just create another window (which can partially or
fully overlay the other windows), and when you're done you destroy that
window. At any time you may selEct any window to be "current", so there is no
LIFO restriction.
The important thing is that such a tool WORKS, and I find incredibly useful.
The virtual terminal uses ANSI standard escape sequences, so we can use all the
tools that have been around for a long time (like the SAIL Display Service,
Emacs under TOPS-20 or Unix, etc.) with NO modifications. We are planning to
use this to develop a more integrated system, but it is nice to have the power of
all that useful but obsolete software out there.
-- Bill
Subject: not putting phone messages into electronic mail files
∂08-Jul-81 0247 Paul A. Karger <PAK at MIT-MC> not putting phone messages into electronic mail files
Date: 7 July 1981 18:44-EDT
From: Paul A. Karger <PAK at MIT-MC>
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
cc: PAK at MIT-MC
I must disagree. Putting phone messages for people in the same office
into the computer is extremely useful. My secretary mails mine to me,
so that I can review them either from home that evening or from
another site connected to the network.
This in turn raises a question. If I have an elegant work station at
the office with graphics and icons, etc., how do I read my electronic
mail from home on a cheap, slow terminal (probably 300 baud at best)?
Do I have to learn a whole different command language? Computerese
instead of pointing devices?
Subject: Re: A Quibble or two
∂08-Jul-81 0306 Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A Re: A Quibble or two
Date: 7 July 1981 1218-EDT (Tuesday)
From: Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A
To: works at mit-ai
In-RepLy-To: Frank J. Wancho's message of 6 Jul 81 09:37-EST
I see nothing unreasonable about entering something in the computer "for
someone in the same office"; I don't see that spatial proximity should
require using an alternate method of notification, assuming that the
mechanism iq already satisfactory. Ib using little pieces of paper is
more effective than using the computer, this indicates that something
is very wrong in the design of the software. Either the software is
good enough to replace paper, which is presumably the intent, or somebody
blew the design. Thus, we have a very good way of determining if the
designers built a system tailored to human needs, or one which is simply
intended as an ego trip for the designer.
I still don't understand why people seem to think "rings" or "stacks" or
other complex connected graphs are remotely reasonable for representing
past context. The top of my desk has no little strings connecting all the
things I'm doing, and I Don't miss them; if I have to deal with such a
mechanism on my computer, then somebody who wrote the software doesn't
understand how people do work. See above predicate test.
A more serious problem is, given massive amounts of state, how do you
preserve them over a system crash? In the case of distributed systems,
it is even harder, since the state may be embodied in many (potentially
unreliable) separate machines. In the best of all possible worlds, when
my personal workstation rolls in the door, I turn it on. If I turn it
off, the result of turning it back on should be to put me back in the state
I was in when I turned it off. Likewise for system crashes. If some server
somewhere crashes, this should be of no interest to me, even if I'm using
it; when it comes back, my work continues just where it left off. None of
this is easy, and some of it is probably impossible, but I think it is
important enough that we should be concerned about reliability at a level
above parity and disk scavengers.
joe
Subject: Re: not putting phone messages into elEctronic mail files
∂09-Jul-81 0340 JWALKER at BBNA Re: not putting phone messages into electronic mail files
Date: 8 Jul 1981 0939-EDT
Sender: JWALKER at BBNA
From: JWALKER at BBNA
To: WorkS at AI
Message-ID: <[BBNA] 8-Jul-81 09:39:40.JWALKER>
In-Reply-To: Your message of 7 July 1981 18:44-EDT
The answer to "how do I read my electronic mail from home..."?
I have heard PARC aficionados say "Well, you WON'T work at home.
You'll be so much more productive during the day that you can
leave your work behind when you walk out the door." This position
does not constitute an answer to the problem. It is imperative
that we consider all modes of work in designing the next generation
of working environments. More people will start to work at home --
surely we have all heard predictions of electronic piece work and
cottage industry. More people travelling on business will be
carrying tiny terminals with them.
The question is serious. People have to think about how to subset
both the hardware and the software so that the essential style of
the interaction can remain. Of course someone working away from
their normal desk is somewhat handicapped now, but with good
planning (taking the right papers and materials with you) you can
write more on a plane than you can at your desk in the same
elapsed time. Workers whose desks are electronic shouldn't be
prevented in principle from having analogous benefits.
Jan
Subject: Re: Not putting phone messages into electronic mail files
∂09-Jul-81 0358 Deutsch at PARC-MAXC Re: not putting phone massages into electronic mail files
Date: 8 Jul 1981 09:39 PDT
From: Deutschat PARC-MAXC
In-reply-to: PAK's message of 7 July 1981 18:44-EDT
To: Paul A. Karger <PAK at MIT%MC>
cc: WorkS at MIT-AI
I have developed, and hope to publish soon, a detailed proposal
for a protocol between bitmap workstations and mainframes. The
protocol is probably not suitable for a 300 baud connection, but
1200 might be quite reasonable. What it demands on the terminal
end is something of approximately the computing power of the
present home micros -- it needs to be able to do RasterOp, some
simple memory allocation, and sequential communications. It
needs quite a lot of memory for the bitmap(s), but memory is
getting cheaper fast. It is designed for exactly the present
kind of workstation -- bitmap display, keyboard, mouse or
similar pointing device.
Such a protocol is, of course, not sufficient to let you read
your mail elEgantly at home. What it requires is a system
(hardware and software) architecture in which the mainframe
is decOupled from the display. Fortunately this is a very
reasonable architecture even for the present generation of
workstations like the Star. If the display component and the
mainframe component are lkcated close together, the bandwidth
between them will not significantly degrade responsiveness
compared to the present more tightly integrated architecture.
Subject: speaking of touch panels...
∂09-Jul-81 0419 Hal at MIT-MC speaking of touch panels...
Date: 8 JUL 1981 0755-EDT
From: Hal at MIT-MC
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
Does anyone know of touch panel technology that is good enough so
that one could use it instead of mice? One would need to be able
to pick out a region the size of a character. I've heard rumors
of systems that allow one to resolve at less than a fingertip's
size, but have never seen one in operation. In general, what do
people think about the use of mice vs. touch panels vs. whatever?
Subject: Re: Spatial design for a workstation
∂09-Jul-81 0427 cfh at CCA-UNIX (Christopher Herot) Re: Spatial design for a workstation
Date: 8 Jul 1981 17:17:53-EDT
From: cfh at CCA-UNIX (Christopher Herot)
To: LEAVITT at USC-ISI
Cc: Rivanciw.DHQ atUDEL, works at AI
In response to your message of Tue Jul 7 22:02:18 1981:
The problem with spatial data organizations is that they are
really a class of menus, with the attendant problem that you
can not display eveRy possible choice on the screen atonce.
You can deal with this either by enlarging the data surface
(so that the user must move his window over it) or by creating
a hierarchy of spaces.
In either case an expert user will find that it takes more
time to locate a particular command than to type its name.
>From my own brief experience, I think that programmers would
find a spatial layout most useful for organizing short-lived
objects, like contexts. The feature that programmers using
our system like best was the ability to create a number of
such contexts and move among them - like having several
terminals in your office.
Subject: ContexpλA≠¬]COKIf~∀≡@r[∃k0Zpb@`hhl%'⊃∞A¬hA≠∪P[β∩@%π←]i∃q`A≠¬]COKIf@@@~∃ CQJt@@`A∃+_brpbbffr5 (~)
e←ZhA'⊃∞↓ChA≠%([β∩4∃)↑t↓/←eWLAChA5∪(Kβ$~∀~∃%hAoCLAeKG∃]iYr↓gkOO∃giKHQErA1CoeK9GJA¬UiGQKI↓G[jD`[BR↓iQCh4∃S\A=eIKd↓i↑A[¬]COJ↓B@EI∃gVDAull of icon's what we need is a
global context/icon manager that understands how to organize
the icons on adesk. Several people havE suggested that one
needs a hierachical, all-knowing, state preserving "assistant"
in oRder to provide uniform access, continuity across
interrupted sessigns, and conformity across different users
of the same desk.
It probably is my background in workstations (implementing
Smalltalk-80, a very distributedcontrol machine) but
I have viewed the concept of a global organizer and
continuity/conformity enforcer as a mistake.
I sae workstation developers and end
users developing zoo
of different types of icons. (The reason I say zoo is that
I see each icon behaving as an anthropomorphic Instance of
a real-world tool). Thus secretaries, financial analysts,
ac@
←k]i¬]ifX↓[C]C≥KefA¬]HAgQ←GWEI←WKeLACeJ↓O←S]≤Ai↑AIk\A←→L~∃C9HAGe∃CiJA%G←]f↓iQChαβ ↔#∂3∃β3N[∃βK}c3?'v#↔c↔~aβ7↔ny7Cπ'→04+∨#?∂-π#'∂//∪M1β6K3∃β≡ ';-#M1β⊗{?/OF+3[↔~aβOS.s=7C∞#M04V≠π3∂.cπS?↔→1βπv!β←π∨#∃β ∂≠/↔S~↓#?;*β∂π9ε+[↔9εK7π∨Ns∃βO}k↔?;(h+'7εc↔7↔w#';≥π##∃β∞sS#K␈β?7?↔β#'
εk↔S#}!β≠?⊂β#W;&K;≥β&CK?W>@4+¬π;πOS*β πO↑+Q1β␈⊃β↔[,qβ+πvKS?K~β←#=πβ'∂-π+AβSF)βSK∂≠!β∪∞K3e%ph(4*/≠↔KMπ;'31ε≠K↔π&)βS#O→βk?zβ?→βN≠?;Mε∪↔∂π-≠∃βSF+eβπ⊗)β≠πnK3'π⊂h+←'&Aβ#?:βS#∃π∪↔π1o;?K3"β∪↔[N≠↔Mβ>{K-1∧ ;⊃β⊗+∂πW≡)βS#*β#W7∞p4+K∞≠∃β#∂→βOC.sQβ7∞seβg. KMβε+K≠↔∨#';≥π##↔'∩β≠W;∨#'?;~p4(4TIβ∪=εs?Qβ≡+∃βπwIβK↔∂≠?9β&yβCK*k∂?;∨#Kπ'rβS#∃π≠gOS.iβ eεCπ['v84+¬πβK↔∪.3';↔"β∨3?⊗ 1β∂}s≠?KnKSeβ↔+3∃β∞∪?WQε 9β'≡{9∨Mε3W;∂&K?;LhSπ;⊃ε β∨3}∪π1β≡{;≠?⊗k'Seεkπ;π>+Iβ←FyβWO/→βS#∂!βKWf)βS=ε{K∨πvKk∀4VK∂?;~p4(4TIβ#π6)β;=π≠SK?v9β↔7εKK'∂∞aβ∪π& βS=ε∪π∂-π+AβSF+O∃β␈β';'}sM1β&CWL4TIβπ5π W'S*β∂WKN{WMβ∂→βS=π;#πQπ##∃α>{K.Mε≠?77.s'Seπ##';←→βπ ␈+P4+&C'Mβ∨+ +↔∨!84(hP$$$JiαOS/3↔9α?+S≠K/+;⊂4Ph(4+π→iα%∧ 5βπ∨≠W7'v9β¬β∨+KK↔w#3eβNkC3↔n+;Sπ⊗c∃β←␈∪'OS∂#'?9rα%βπ∨≠W7∀hQ↓↓↓π##πQπ##∃α Iβ∂?nkW;''Iβ'Mπ≠S'3bβ≠πIε ←πeε3K?5ε 9β'w#↔33N;↔;PhQ↓↓↓ε OO'∨#π;Q¬##πQε≠π9β?∪π∂↔4εVfg∀
F.∂-dε7⊗⎇Tε
εl≥↔6*∞↑6/∩
w:πMqPRα∧∧εn∞m≡π.f≡LRε}li⊗≡* ↑↔.O
\Vw" ≥f"πM VrπN,⊗Nr∞LVoε},↔↔J∞⎇w⊗↑↑.0hR∧∧αε}d
ε␈:∞Mrπ/<Tπ≡}\]vv*}4α⊗&↑=2∩r
9⊗v≡T ∩ε∞T
f␈"∞↑αo&u\F∂&T
vph$∧ααε>↑'⊗.nDπ⊗/<X↔ε≡¬D∧Jε=}Vf" <W↔&≥≥fgJ ,Rπ?-⎇f:ε ↑&*pβ"C!!"@↓J⎇8ZL\⎇∞H
,.H∀LWH∃≠m⎇≤h⊃M}H≤→.9ww0[⊂;wy~yz0z~ww9FBπX≤VR:v⊗\ P⊂_~L≤Dv;XP0z≠tz⊗q\y⊂0zλ6tz⊗[zv:4XyP∧i→]⊂)2N⊂*7w[9P37\⊂82y≤ww0vλ;wy5\z0z4[w9FE⊃0z2]λ≠⊂%:[⊂_\\ P_X~L⊗bb*λ∀&ww→0|TFB#97vN⊂6;pH0z⊂6Zz⊗qy\⊂0z⊂≠tz⊗v]v:4q\FE)2\6<Vz≠]⊂6;XW$g(⊂&dj⊗Szv:4XyFE$[⊗y2x≠<Vz7N⊂,wz\⊂6ry\psrP≠s⊂~P∩:v<P \\_P \]~→ bb*εB*7]⊂→6;P0]⊂&dj `dFE⊂a]⊂+[y5iP_z⊂&dU⊗`dFBεE$w≥2y2y]4w3Wλ⊂$Srλ64urH:7P9YrP6w\2P4w→7y6p]4ww⊂≠w⊂:4→yrP⊃≤97sy_vvtw→Vq<VCE2|0[x62Qλ9|yz→vyV⊂_yP$P→2rv⊂≥40z⊂≥42P4\yzrP≠s⊂:yYy⊂2|≥2w9tX4v4z≡P4yP≠7zεE_2tw3H0r2x]pz2v≡P0r2≤2yyrY⊂4w⊂≤92yr[:⊗r0↑P22yZsw9P→7y⊂7Y34qrH0zz7[pz4w[εE9|\z2vyKεE∧DBDDVf_y9<P⊂v62wβE⊗VVKVVVFBεEβ)zq5→qz≥⊂∀2]⊂⊂⊂ww:2↑:9P0\P$qw[9FEπL≤Ve:[⊗\_Pλ_~Y~Bwq94Yw⊂0zλ) g" jg$lλ∧i2]λ⊂!ww≥2|:9H0yP$Xww9PλεE"0]2]⊂+Yr72yY0|V⊂λ≤⊂%:[⊂_\\ P_X≥ Z⊗h"∃εE*7N⊂&0{\2w1bH!:z1Z2y⊂0]⊂!fjKXX P
,→YZS!~X∀CE!q]λ;wy5\P0z∪dj⊗`RV⊂#r[2P!0[6⊂0zλ!fjVLX FE∩w⊗y2\6<Vz≠]⊂,g]y⊂6r\ypsrH7s⊂⊂
P%:v≡P_\\ P→→λNVbb*λ∀*:r\r0|TKεE⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ≡_≠e≥v≤_P →_\Y
P&!~L !fjKXX ←βE#97[]⊂7q≤4rw⊂_z⊂) S"⊗jg∩lεEεB⊂⊂⊂⊂λ$P40Y7∪z⊂≤2pv6≡P:47]st:⊂_q7zzλ:44yH12s7\2V⊂1≥z⊂:4→P(& U'FE1[vx:z→y⊗q0\rr⊂2Y:qpz~ww⊂9↑yz2vH27ryH2|0q]6<P:~4yP⊗H4z⊂9X{2yFB9z0z→P12z≥rrw⊂≥2y6t[0v⊂9Yyytw[9W⊂⊂∩z⊂27YyP:4~yP7w≠<P37\⊂9z:Y2w:9KεE:4≠zst⊗λ77z⊂→7y⊂⊃_zz47\9Q⊂∀≤97sy_vvry≤TW⊂⊂∩P40r≠∪z⊂:~7zst≥⊂7s⊂~zεE1→s7y2H12qp]yrP(∪ j'P~yP9wH9z90[3rP:~0z⊂$H92pv≠<P27[∪z⊂:~4w5P≠sεE4]⊂4w⊂≥2y6yH7s⊂7]42y⊂_wvx:]2y⊂9↑yz2v\WεEεB⊂⊂⊂⊂λ)z0z→Vyp{~w3P;[y5yP_:z⊂1Xw∪z⊂_2P27[2P16~w26<K⊂⊂$zλ::y7≤P7zzβE:40]⊂0v6[yz⊂0[6⊂92Xv⊂0x≤64qp]4ww9H∀⊃62\yww9H∀P92\zty2H:42P_zz47\εE:7H27P4~yP7{[⊂9z0]2Vyp]4w3P≤wP:4_z⊂:4→P9z:Y2w:⊂→7ryw z⊂1w[rP:xβE;tz~⊂77P_ww:2↑:⊗⊂1≥z⊂4yH4w9z→pr⊂8≤2yrw≥2r⊂;Zz4⊂0H44st→y⊗v2]2vεE→90vrH:40zλ:2v6≤P44vH;t2y→P42P≥pyP0[2⊂89→yrw:≤P9wvYP7x:~ww9WβE'w6≡P164[2⊂29~v6⊗p[2⊗x9_qz4qYP9z:Y3⊂1p[⊂:yrH3:v6λ9z0z→Vyp{~w3FE_z⊂0v≠⊂:yrY:v6<K⊂0w2λ9wvr]4vryH77z⊂→{2w⊂≥42w↔βEεEβ)zq5→qz≥⊂∃w34w~yt2rλ:0yu\V⊂4w≥90VwY34qrH6ptv ⊂0w2λ9|yz→vP22Xz4εEβX≤Ve≥v⊗\_H⊂_~ZL∧a94Xw⊂(↔λ&67|Y⊂≡&&∪lb⊂0]⊂&dj `d←⊂αjw34[4yt2Y⊂:0yZyV⊂4[:90V[s34qYP6pt[⊗⊂0w→⊂9|y]2vP2→pz4⊂λ⊂εE"_z2]⊂∞⊂%:v≡P_\\ P_≠] \Vbb∃εE#9≠v]⊂!≤4pw⊂∀↔⊂&6≠|r⊂≡∪&'lbλ0z⊂&Rj⊗`dOεE*7N⊂+gi∩iP0zλ&dj⊗PdFEεB w⊂4[:2y2\z4w3H87tw≥⊂;pyH6pr2H0q7z]⊂:42H72qr\ytz<H7s⊂1→tw3P_q62P≥7FE1[w;2w~rw:6≡P40w→⊗ws3λ0P:0\uP:7H0w7z~2y⊂8→y9ww ⊂⊂!r\:0tw≠<P4zλ;wzv→εE12H9tvx≠2P:7H5:yzλ2:vxλ:42P≥0yuS\P80y_vrz2\9P39≠vP) SP:7P→4yuP_w2εE≤2yz7\2P:4→vP0sXtw⊂2[9r{t→y2W⊂λ+t4v→P:2qZ74qp[6<P3→pypq≠2P∀$H40{2CE27w→P:40]⊂7w⊂≠|P!jλ9|yz→vP:7H897{~r2P:_yuP4[:2y9≥x:4w[⊂1px_q4v4]<TVεB:44yH4yP:_w:0v[zw:⊂≥7P9q[wx4w→P:x⊂≥42P6YyyP7[⊂<wz\⊂22yZP0w2λ2:vx~w3FE~z⊂7wλ9wvr[w2P2[9rSyK⊂⊂$wλ0w<P_pyrP≥42P:\ry⊂4\P897X0q6<H3wtw→P:7FB92wy→pw4⎇→P4z⊂≤wvr{Z0z⊂4[⊂7y2→y⊂:7H6purH0P9v[wz4⊂≥90w9Zz4ww ⊂⊂#t]2wεE≥44yVλ$P27[∪z⊂:~4w5P≥40z⊂≤x2qtXv⊂1p\0q4v~z4ryH72rrλ:7P1→P1y2Xz2rεB:7P6Yrz⊂:~4yP⊃≠2rr⊃λ∀$P5[7{P:~0z⊂:~7yrP≠s⊂<w]P:yt[3P60\3rP1Yw:90[εA6pXt4w2\P6p|H40{ % dificulty with my technique depending on system
architechture).
As far as intra-office mail for phone messages is concerned, I am all
for it. I dislike being told that "there has been a phone message
waiting at the operators desk for you for several hours. Why don't
you ever pick up your messages ..." especially since I have been
waiting for the call and I happened to be away from my desk for two
minutes when it came. Paper doesn't hack it here.
There are some tasks that are very painful if you lose your work
because of system death and others that are unimportant. If I
have been editing a document for hours and I lose it all because
of a system crash, I am going to be VERY annoyed. On the other
hand, if I am reading my mail and the system goes down, it will
not be very painful for me to recover from that situation. We
are going to have to do serious study as to which tasks can be
recovered easily.
Convergent has come up with what I believe is a uniquE method of
protecting a user from a crash during an editing session. All
user keystrokes and the original document are maintained through
an editing session. If the system dies or I wish to ck in
time in my editing session, I can do a replay and watch the system
duplicate my editing session in short order. This is an interesting
approach and I have found it to be VERY useful (like the time someone
pulled my plug when I was four hours into an editing session ... ).
Brian
Subject: Re: A Quibble op two
∂09-Jul-81 0616 Deutsch at↓!β%ε5≠β1ε∪%Jt↓αA#kαK 3*β?Iβ';=↓↓h*∪π&)i↓a∧SW1↓ IaE↓βIiQQ¬α∩P4T3K/5Rα∪↔W'≠∂!β∂!αBε∀→66εD_4*'rkK↔Cdπ∩o&w$∧V}Uif/>=⎇V/∩}4εn<|x,|(≠yDεh∩]-O( .'ε( $F↔ 11
D
∃≥,↑y_>%⊃"U≠g$∩[y%iY=xm⎇9<H ≡λ⊂s*U,,⊂!QXxnD∞{|Zn4_=λ
]= 8-⊃"C"J,;~8,-→(≤∞,<y4Nl=~;md≠yH
L<Yy$ ;;⎇-n≤h≠l@⊂9z0]2P4wλ:42P→0qrP≠sεE4_y2;p\2P30Zv:y2\P4yP_P:7x~qP;t~qt⊂4_yP12Yw⊂2l≤67y2Y⊂2|:→w9t{→v<FE~w⊂:4→P20z_P10yYP;wy≠2↔⊂⊂
*44yH4yP0H74qrH2|0v\62P:≠P9zx≤7y:⊂≠|FE1[w:2w≥4ww⊂≥40z≥42P8≤2yrw≥⊂:2w→2w1lH7s⊂1[vx:z→y⊂9qZrw1rH:7P3≤0svr[:εE4[:7P9]q9x2Xtpv:~ryP4\P:7P_2P22\67y2Y↔∀P⊂⊃rw2y_v6<P≤x2puZw3V⊂≥42P;X|FE:≠P7{2\1wvrH:42P≤97q6→vP4yH f+`ViP92Y:w20[1|W⊂λ*42P→7y6yH7s⊂9→r:w2_w1|FB:40zλ;rP4_{2P2↑867y→r⊂:4→P6wy]⊂0y2H∀_TP≥44w5Zw3P7Y⊂:42H;wy5\z0z4[w⊂0yCE0P1Xqt2P→7y⊂⊃≥9:z4λ⊂2vq≠r4rrλ7w⊂0H92vw]2P34[2P9r\;2y⊗λ7y⊂∀ ∀P67Ystw3CE4vx≠y:0w≥⊂9z0]2P1t_w3ryH7w⊂0H9ry;→y⊂9wH:40zλ:42P≥wy5y]0z4w[⊂9z0]2P1p[εE12H92qw[9z9:Xz2r⊂
87yyZq6<P≤v7{v≡TP4sλ0P1y_yt⊂7Xqzy9K⊂⊂ P≠wy2P→|7z4XFE0y_t4z2Xz:y2H4w;7[;4w3H6zv:~x62P_wx4r\P0w2λ;7z4[3P4yH2|86≠y2r⊂~w⊂0FB9www z7Vp\82pyλ:42yZyP1<H"0{2H#ts3≠y2⊂∀∪dj∀Wλ⊂*42H17z:≠vP64[2P4yH:40zβE:42H:2qt≠7v7s↑P4yP_{0tv_q62Vλ4s⊂6Xw:s0Xz:y2\9P0w→⊂9ws≥;py2H47zyYyFE1Z7wyrH:7P7Y32y⊂~z↔εEβEεEβ)zq5→qz≥⊂λ)2v4Xq4v4]<FEπL≤Ve:[⊗\_Pλ_≠~→Be7rW∪2{qw[ry⊂0]⊂!fjKXX Pαi2v4Xq4v4]<P⊂⊂λεE"0]2]⊂⊂∞⊂%:v≡P_\\ P_YZ∞⊗bb*λ∀+rr≠2yr0↑TFE#≤7v]⊂∩7rW'→{qwvYy⊂0zλ!fjVLX FE∃7]⊂;[y5yP_z⊂6t]⊗ptFB$w⊗i→x6<VU7]⊂⊂⊃2zz9Xt ( T!Vf`V!SyP≠ryypYrP7sλ≤⊂%:[⊂≤_P X]~~ bijεBεE$P~0{2P_ww:2[22r⊂→7y⊂9Y{2y0[⊂<rp\9P:4_z⊂$P→7w∪zλ72rrλ12z:→y⊂60[3zpsYyVεE_wvx4[2y9Vλ7y⊂2Y4z7y≤P'"`T&,P0\P6zqZ⊂0yP∩P72rY⊂0P2_z0q0\rP6p[0srvYw:εE≤|yz2[W⊂⊂ [0yV⊂≥42P1[w;2w≥4ww0[⊂"!&TP4yP≠y4rw≥2r⊂:≠P9wqZpv⊂9Yqzy4]<FE9→qwy2≤W⊂⊂$H7w1rH6rw:~ww2rλ⊃;rv≠⊗⊂<w]P8:zλ0v6⊂≥40z⊂≠w⊂0P→0z0q_yrQεB:7P9[vrww→P0w2λ:42|H4vvrY4pz2[<P12Ypw⊂:≠P2|8≠0tw⊂~7{P:~2|P4_rεE;_y4pq≠2Vv2[3z4⊂≥2|:⊂≥t4qtλ0P20]0q0yYP9|y]2vP⊃_wzv2≠∪z⊂4_w262H↔⊂εE∪s⊂1w]y9rVλ0P60\3rP1[0yyP≠s⊂:w~w:2y→yz4w→P9|y]2vyP≥44w5H4w⊂:→y6yP≠sεE3~|2r⊗[2w3z~⊂92q[y29Vλ1:z⊂≥t0z⊂≥rP67\rP1<H4sw7\4w3P≥42vP~yP:4_z⊂:4→|FE9[v;2P_P;t7[2P67]⊂7s⊂≠z42yλ897q≠2vyWλ⊂$P7[1rP;[y5rrλ4w⊂:~2P⊃9→pvεE≥wy62λ⊂7w⊂_P10w~ts3P≤|yz2[V⊂0w→⊂4z⊂~yP0P→wwr⊂≥p|P:≠P62p\7⊂:7H12FE≤0y0w≠tr⊂0X7zz⊂~0y2;Xy2P0[2⊂9wY:;py→W⊂⊂+Z2w⊂<[zP9z_y:⊂8≠0|tw→P;tz~εE6t[64ww≤P7s⊂→7v60\9P7sλ92pvλ1:qu\V⊂0w→⊂34g→⊂:40]⊂82w\62P0]r4z⊂≥42tyβE1t2Xutw3H0qqw]w:9P
0w2⊂→{2w⊂~w:2y→yz⊂7[⊂9p{~w3yTH:7P:~2P72Xy2yjλ82w7≡VεE S"⊂<w]y⊂1w[x0w<H40yP≤7yz2Y⊂0P6[w3wP_vwzw≥⊂7s⊂→7v60\9P4wλ17w2λ:7P1_quFE≥x⊂:4→ty⊂8≤7vtyYP:40]⊂:42↑P+gg j⊂9q\2{P:\⊗⊂<w]P34w→⊂:40]⊂92r≥w20w_|P4iCE0P;X|P7sλ64s2K⊂⊂"!∪iP9|\z2vyH40{ % all had to deal with this class of
problems; the fact that their image of the data is prehistoric does
not invalidate the other solutions.
From a personal workstation viewpoint, the problem is to implement
the redundancy of state at a very low cost. If my machine crashes,
I want to boot it and get the display looking just like it did
before the crash, having lost perhaps a few small edits, or the
mail message I was composing (if it was shorter than some low
threshold) or possibly the window I just the instant before had
brought up. Doing this cheaply requires ingenuity.
joe
Subject: Re: JWalker comments on working at home, on planes, etc.
∂13-Jul-81 0920 Zellich at OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich) Re: JWalker comments on working at home, on planes, etc.
Date: 9 Jul 1981 1036-PDT
From: Zellich at OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
Some of us already *do* work at home, and the receipt of stuff
that shows up in my office inbasket is a problem -- I have to
go in and get it periodically, or else havE it Batch-mailed to
ie (the Post Awful actually does pretty good work here - I get
everything the next day).
At home I have a pretty nice workstation, buton a recent
vacation trip I Took a TI745 with me, and found it not nearly
as useful as it had been when it was my *only* terminal. My
work methodology has changed so much due to the availability
of the workstation that it has become almost impoSsible to
get my work done with a terminal with lesser capabilities.
My electronic "filing cabinets", etc., are optimally organized
for a windowed display, and have become extremely difficult to
use from a TTY or simple scope.
It so happens that my workstation is relatively dumb (using
its internal microprocessor to handle NVT requirements only),
but the next generation should be quite intelligent - maybe
being my prime "host" itself. This all points up two problems
very neatly:
1. I need a portable workstation (or portable terminal that
can access my woristation);
2. If I use a portable terminal, thenI need access to my
home workstation (the future one, that will be a
standalone system). This future system must be capable
of two-way communiCation; it can *not* be used stp¬SGi1r~∀@@@@AQ↑AIS¬XA←kPAi↑A=iQKd↓Q←giL\@A∪PAQCf↓iVAE∀ABAMUYXAQ=gh~∀@@@@↓S\Ai!ChASPA[kgPAEJA¬GGKgMSEYJ↓Me←Z↓BAeK5←iJAUgKdX↓C]H~(@@@@Aae← CEYr↓Me←Z↓eK[←QJAQ←MifAC9HA←i!KdAo=eWgi¬iS←]LACf~(@@@@AoKY0\@@Q≥KJXAM←k]ILAYSW∀A∩AUUghAe∃CHA%→ε@npHR~∀~([%SG ~∀ZZ4ZZZZ4∀~∀ Subject: Working at home
∂13-Jul-81 0920 Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A Working at home
Date: 9 July 1981 1447-EDT (Thursday)
From: Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A
To: JWALKER at BBNA
CC: works at mit-ai
In-Reply-To: <[BBNA] 8-Jul-81 09:39:40.JWALKER>
Huh? "I'll leave my work behind when I go out the door?"
I've never heard such bullshit. First of all, it makes
the rather bizarre assumption that I even want to come IN
the door. Actually, I would much rather work at home. This
means such serious issues as how to get reasonable communication
bandwidth between my processor and the rest of its network is a
very serious problem. And it also seems to be predicated on the
strange (and patently false, in my case) assumption that one WANTS
to leave the machine behind. I ENJMY what I'm doing, and want to
be able to do it equally well from home or "work". Thus the goal,
fkr example, of giving every CMU researcher a personal machine is
not really satisfactory; I need two, or at least a display with a
high-bandwidth (say, 10MHz) connection to the "real" machine.
Perhaps in that strange world where people turn their minds off
when they leave the office this is a reasonable attitude, but I've
never yet met a professional in any area who was capable of doing
this. And if you DON'T make the facilities available at home, you
are defeating the purpose of having personal workstations: to make
individuals more productive. I don't think it is the domain of
office automation designers to dictate when and where one has
automation available. Assume it needs to be available 24 hours
a day, 7 days a week, at home and "at work", THEN figure out what
the problems are.
I have this from direct experience. When I had a 1200 baud
C-100 in the office and a 1200 baud C100 at home, I could work
interchangeably in either location. When I got 9600 baud in
the office, I worked less at home. Now that I havE a Perq in
the office, I can't work at home at all. This is a real drag.
I see absolutely no philosophical reason to not provide equal
computing facilities at home and at work. The only limitations
are technical (like bandwidth) and financial (most companies
can't afford two $30K workstations per user). So "office"
automation designers should go after those problems, and quit
making such totally wedged statements that seem to reflect a
basic misunderstanding of what a "personal workstation" really
should be!
joe
Subject: Office of Tomorrow, where is it?
∂13-Jul-81 0921 DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus) Office of Tomorrow, where is it?
Date: 12 Jul 1981 (Sunday) 1955-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
To: works at MIT-ML
Workstations of Tomorrow, the office of tomorrow. [Part-I]
A general feeling by most consultants, including myselF, is that
the office of the future will be distributed geo@≥eCaQ%GCYYd\@A≥=h~∃←9YrAo%YPAi!J@OiICmKY%]NNAQsaJAAKeg←8AEJA∧AY←]≤[ISgQC]GJ↓YS]V0AEkh4∃ae←)KGif↓oSYX↓EJAG=]]KGQKHAEdAISM→KeK]PAEeC9GQKfZAG←5[k]S
CiS]≤~∃KY∃Gie←9SGCY1r\~∀4∃βfAQQSfA∃MMKGQfAiQ∀Ao←e-giCi%←\XA%]IKK⊂ABAiICmKY%]NAG=[aC]%←\~∃]SYXA JAIKYKY←a∃H\A'=[KiQ%]NAC-S\Ai<AiQJ↓1Ke←`@E≥←QK!CW∃dD\~)/←eW%]NAMI←ZAQ=[BAo%YPAC1g↑AE∀ABAG=[[←\↓C]HAAaCGi%GCXA∃qiK]MS←\\4∃/←e-giCi%←\AQ¬eIoCIJAoS1XAQCYJAi↑↓ae←m%IJAi!JAOK=KeCa!SFAg∃emSG∀~∃Ch↓g←[J↓a←S]PAS\AQQJA]=hAi←<AISgQC]hA→kike∀\~∀~)'←[K]QChA5←eJA∃qiK]MSmJA→e←ZAQKYKp=)/0@≥ CiC≥eCZN↓gKem%GJXA¬\~∃K1KGie=]SF@≥)Ke[%]CXA%\AiQ∀A⊃←i∃XNAo%YXACPAg←[∀Aa←S9hAEJ↓ae←m%IKH\4∃∩AI=\OhAMKJAC9rA[C)←dAi∃GQ]←1←OSG¬XAae=EYK[LAS\AQQCh\A≠←gPAaK←AYJ~∃$AQCm∀Aga←-K\Ai<AgCr↓iQKr↓o←kY⊂AaCrH@dj8``A←HAKmK8@H@j@\``A5←eJ~)BA]S≥QhAi<AQCm∀ABAG=[aki∃dAgGIKK\A¬]HAB↓ISCX↓k`A[=IKZA¬hAiU∃Sd~∃⊃Sga←MCX\~(~∃
YeS]NA=\AC\↓CSea1C]J}A/Qr↓]←h}A
SeMhAπY¬gfXA kgS]∃gfAπ1CgfX4∃ YK
ie←]%GfAπ1CgfA¬]HAπ=CGP\A YK
ie←]%GfAG1CgfX↓oSiP↓'∨≥2!iZR~))saK
←eIKIfXAM1←aar↓ISgWLXAC]⊂AKmK8AiKY∃aQ←]∀AGCa¬ESYSQSKfA→←d~∃ kegh↓G←[[U]SGCQS←]f↓i↑A←9JOfA→Cm←e%iJAG=[aki∃d\@A%hAEK¬ifAi!J~∃Y=kgrA5←mSKLAiQKdACeJ↓gQ←o%]NAi!KgJA⊃Csf\4∀~∃⊃∃]erA⊃eKSMUf~∀~(→7'k TtA¬ICm↑←!saKeQKqi:4∀@≡bH[∃kX4pb@@Dp`f∪)←Q\A!←oCe⊂A!CY∃mSGPy)β≥≤AChA5∪([β$|@@@4∃ Ci∀t@rA)kYr@Drpb@@rt`d5 (~)
e←ZhA∃←Q8A⊃←o¬eHA!¬YKmS
P@y)¬≥∞ACPA≠∪(5β∩|~))↑tA]∨%↔&↓ChA≠%([β∩4∀~∀@@@A)!JA¬e¬m↑@P_A¬eCY←0RAMKGeKQCer[QsaJA∃ISi←IfA←\↓iQJAAβ%ε~)βYi←LAQCm∀AiQJEgCm∀AKmKIrAWKegie←-JAC]⊂AiQJ↓←eSO%]CXA→SYJAM↑~∃i!ChAo∀AGC\↓CYoCefAeK
←]giIkGhD↓QCGV8@A/Q∃\AiQ∀AgsgQKZAgQCeif4∃i↑AIKG←]MiekGPAShAAkifA∧AGki∀@E3←UdA I%i←dA%fA qAKeSK9GS]N4∃)K[A←eCedA SM→SGkYQSKfX↓!YKCMJA'i¬]IrA rDA[∃ggCO∀A←\AQQJ~∃MGeKK8XA[k
PAS\↓iQJAMisYJ↓←LAi!JA[KMgCOJ↓),AgQCiS←9fAeK¬H~∃←UhA←m∃dAiQ∀ACSd↓CMiKHAiQKdAIe←@AiQJ↓GC[KIBA←\↓iQJA→Y←←d8~∀~∀@@@A]QChA∃mKdA!CaaK9KHAi<A)KH!iZRA9KYg←8OfA⊃eaKei∃qhAgegiKZ0~∃oQ∃eJAi!JAK]QSeJAMiCiJ↓←LAi!JAI←
k[K]P@QI←]\Ai↑↓iQJAQS[JA KioK∃\~∃W∃sgie=WKfA=LAiQ∀AaKeM←\AK⊃SiS]≤AS\R↓oCfAMCmKH0AC]H↓iQJAYSKoKH~∃←L↓iQJA⊃←Gk[∃]hAQ¬HAiQ∀A←ai%←\A←_AKqa¬]IS]≤AiQJ↓M←←i9←iKf↓S]i↑4∃iQJ↓eKMKIK]GK⊂AiKqQfPAC9HACY0AiQCPAg←ePA←LAQQS]N|@A∩AQQS]V↓iQCh4∃QJA]CfAKYK\AC⊃IeKgMS]NAQQJAaI←EYK5fA←L↓G←asISOQhLAe←eCYir4∃aCs5K]if8@\@\↓aKeQ¬afA∩↓gQ←k1HA[C%XAiQ%fAi↑↓Qk[C8[]KiLXAS]MiKCH8~∀~∀4∀→'kE)KGht↓/←eWMiCiS=\A%K1SCES1SirA¬]HA%∃Ik]I¬]Gr~(@≡bd5∃kXZ`b@@b\dh∪e5FACh↓ππα[U≥∪0@!≠CeV↓πQSY∃]gWCLR@∪/=eWgi¬iS←\↓%KYS¬ESYSQrAC]⊂A%KIU]IC]
r@@~) CiJh@rA∃UX@br`b@bhhdftb`[ (4∃
e←4tAe[ AChA
πα[+9∪0@Q5CeVA
QSYK9gWCf
To: WorkS at mit-ai
It sounds as if your problem is similiar to (and can use)
distributed database technology. The icons can be viewed as
tuples in a relation (of work to be performed, status of work,
worker, what have you). Some icons would be provided by the
system in a common format, others would be customized by each
user, probably using some menu driven options package although
for "sophisticated" users I suppose full programming might be in-
volved. The basic idea would be to have all nameable items
stored away on disk with their requisite status information.
This would preserve state info over crashes of the individual
workstations, but does not solve the problem of going to a new
woristation if your desk dieq for a day or two.
In a distributed data base it has long beEn theorized that redun-
dant data will provide better reliability @=mKdA
aCgQ∃fXA[¬GQS]∀~∃←kQCOKf0AKiF8AC]H↓ae←m%IJAg=[B@QA←ggS Yr@A1S[Si∃HR@A⊃CiB@↓iP≥↓π##∀4TεW≡/$∧ε/6]dαεNd∧π&F]~"αε
⎇V*α∞?↔∨&]PεO~ >W↔⊗]nFgJ∞]f∂6≥≥F∞⊗LUbα∧|aPV≡}↑'≡
∞MεO~
≡2ε
∞ ⊗NrD &.≡≡X lT≡;⎇$
_=P∩H:7P;[y5P:\⊂⊂8 2otocols to
insure that the data items all stay consistent with each oTher
and use up lots of overhea` tim` gi¬[aS]≤A[KgMCOKf↓←dAY=GWS]≤@AC]⊂~∃k]1←GWS9N@ACP@AM←IKSO\AgSi∃b@Ai<AkaI¬iJAI¬iBAC9HASh↓SfAgβ#'31ε 304W3↔Kebβ[↔KJαN2>: ↓αSF)↓β≠∞≠Q↓β&CπQ↓∧+S#↔⊗s↔Q↓εCπM↓ε ↓β#N;#↔Iαβ∪πSλh+SK∞sO7'∨≠'?9αβKπS*βS#πrβS#∃∧
JBπv+Qβπv!βS#∂!βS#*βWC∪∂#↔Mβn eβ#∂3∀4+≡K7C3*β↔;?.;!β≠␈∪7πS~βS=β/≠∃β∂}#';≥π≠∂#↔n+M↓β>K31↓εC↔3Ar↓↓α /!↓β$hSOWOε+∂Q↓π##πQαβS#'~β←'3bβOS'faβ↔π"βπ9β.sπ∂∂/βSπ f)βπ7␈+;Qβ}1β∂?jh4+C/#∃βC␈;↔Iβ∂!βSπ≡Yβ';M#'π3OSπS'}qβπ;"βS↔KnK;πSN{99↓¬+C∪π&)βSK∞sM44T ∂S'}sMβπ⊗)β←#/∪∃βK.#W;∪∞s∂eβG+KSMεk?OQph(4*&KOSKN∪WS↔"β∪πS∞∪πO↔~βπK∃ε{;3eπβπKSgIβW;&+KOS}{⊃9↓∧{;∃βπ∪? 3.iβ'LhS'9β&+∂'∪Ns≥β#␈9βS=π≠C3'"βWAβ&C∃β∪∂#¬9↓∧ 9β?↔3'?W~βS↔∂Fs'GW*β←?Wf 4+ *↓βS=αβOS?⊗)↓βS.kC3π&+M↓↓ε3?I↓αβπ31α↓β∂?nk?9↓αβ'∂?w→↓↓β∂!↓↓β. ∂ 4W;?K/∨#πS'}q?O'&)↓βπv!↓β3/!β↔π≡AβWO/⊃βC'≡Yβ←#N≠!β?&C↔Iβ≡KS↔MεC∃β'_h+3'↑+3eβ&yβWO*β?∂∂∂≠'?;∞c3e9ααW;≠␈∪SW;∂#↔3eπ##'Mπ;'31εk?OSgI↓β7. 84+&C∃↓β/≠↔Iβ>K3!β⊗)βS?zβ Kπ≡A↓#%ε#?9∨ β;↔↔"β π∂←+A%β␈⊃βS?zβ∂πW&K?WLhQ#OS␈∪∃β'"β↔[↔↔K←#↔⊗)¬↓α>Ceβ∪zβ%↓β↔+9↓↓ αa↓β≡c?←↔∩↓βS#∞q↓β↔6+Kg?v(4+↔g≠∃⎇%p↓απ;"β←#π"β∪=βN{Uβ∪zβ←#↔rβS#∃ε#πSπ⊗ O∃β≥∪πO#/→⎇↓α>CπQβNs≠<4VKMβKN;#Q1ε ;⊃β>CπQβO→β?W"β?→β& S∃↓F+OC↔≡Kπ33Jβ'→β
β3?∂↑K;≥β⊗ S#↔⊂h+S#∞qβS'n+OSπo↓βCK⎇#?∂?bβ'Mβ/≠↔⊃%z↓αS#O→β'Mεs?Qβ&yβ7↔w#'?9εs↔S←␈∪,4+ε KS'&K?;Mrq84(hR'Qβ∨#'31π≠↔↔7~β3'/*β¬β∨}{⊃βπ¬β3'∂∂#'?9ε{⊂∩α∞Mε*α∞LV≡Fm⎇F}?∃dαα¬M PhW,\G.vL≥g"α L↔&
∧ v}/4∧ε
εM⎇f:π|∨∩π&}|↔⊗" ≡7∨/-≥f:π≥}Rπ& Tπ'O Tε}0Q*&.f≤≤&Nf≡O∩πN}Tπ>∞nEbα¬↑9⊗v: ∀ε≡}]]vrεL≡F∞⊗≡<Rαπ⎇}Vf"∧ ⊗ff}tαε}lQPVn\=ε∞v≡=Rαεm}"απN,⊗w≡l↑&Nvt∞F∂≡>5vN≡⎇n2ε7-⎇Rε}lTε&/=4π&z ≥f␈& ↑"ph*Mε*εl↑G>␈->2π>≥MBε⊗T∞&.∂=⎇f∞⊗O∀ε6∂>Ebα¬⎇}&←∨L≡FN}n4αε∂,Tαε>↑NFNvqQ&n␈,Tαε≡⎇↑π/&T∧πε␈|↑"rα∧λ⊗v"∞=F␈>O∀π>* ,V>Nd∞Fzπ]lF/↔>L⊗v"∞=vn*
|`hWM Rε&↑=⊗>r ≥f"π,\6␈6↑/∩ππ-|&f.↑5bα¬M W⊗*
≡2π≡⎇\R∧t_8Rπ⊗↑<V∂⊗=∧π&xQ,&*εM⎇f*ε ↑&*reaPPh$∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα
$∧n∂-4∧≡F≥LVw≡<≡0hPQ e∨\-&.∨G$∧∂/M⎇V∂&\Dε&/=1PRv⊗"lW]ESC
∧ε∪Cβ1≡vNg=⎇bε∂Dλ4≤
ZYdMB¬λv/⊗≥LB¬>≥N6}r∀↓∀∂/M⎇V∂&\Dε&/=1PT&≡LSRβ∀ '.bε↔∪C
ε⊗#S≠π&#:lXJ@hTn-vkR∞⎇⊗g≡⎇dε∂"λ84
mYi∃Bαλ|W⊗∞LD¬>NN=vrHQ*F{R >76∂¬nv␈⊗>4ε∂"λ,W⊗↑]LWHh!Q%&FT∞π⊗}-LVjε|dε↑.↑
⊗v:∞N&∞≡4
v2π⎇ ↔"π≡]⊗≡↑O∀ε⊗.=⎇V/~ ⊃PVo]NFN&≥\Vw≡≥⎇f∞b∞>ε∞≡T
↔~ε⎇lRπ>T f∞≡\DεNr∞Mε*ε←∞F.w=≥vw~
|`hTl\w⊗␈
⎇g&*}4π>␈-4εNr
}W∩¬8IU~ε≥lB¬4_Zrπ∨≡>F.o5dα∧6}$¬≤$Z4π>(Q,↔ππ-|⊗≡F\DεO" /∩ππ-}fN&≥lrπ'⎇tε↑NlN2ε}d∧'>␈-LBεn≡∞2∩r∧
FF* m↔↔∨AQ&O~∞=⊗oεO∀ε
π?≥f␈π=≡2ε}d∞FF* =vw&]nG~ε|dπ&FT 7/↔,]g"π⎇}&Zπ> ⊗≡*aQ%&G↑4εN2∂≥w*ε≡,Rε&⎇≥f:π<↑f/⊗≥Dπ⊗.L≡F."∞MεNv}4εNr∞MεO~∞=⊗v>LTπ∨ε≤<PhR \rrε.]⊗f&≥lrε&≤lf/⊗]nBπε}.FN}n4ε}2 ∀εf∂,|Rππ-|w⊗∞U∃BπN}Tε≡∞aQ&∞g|∨↔~εm≥f"εn-vjπM Rπ>}-F"πm≤W:α∞=ε␈>d
vrε∀∞6/ε≡,↔&*∞<7⊗.]dε∂ Q,⊗fb∞M⊗n/5∀π>F↑,Rπ& Tε␈& ↑"πε}.FN}n4π⊗/=≤F*r∧
FF*∞<V≡}lDπ'O Tε}0Q.v␈⊗LDεn∂∧
↔~ε∀∞6N&T∞fN/t
v2ε≥MBε}d∞FF*∞⎇w⊗Z∞>ε∞≡↑4ε∂↔,≥f>.D
⊗w&qQ&
πN,V*α∧
w∩εl↑G>␈-4αJr∧
FFO4∞6F␈}4ε
ε-␈απ>≡Mαε
L⊗⊗.D f␈∩ \⊗≡@Q.v␈⊗4∞7ε∞<UBεf≥lW~π=
w>Nltπ&FT 6}vl\7&N⎇n2ε⊗↑Nv..d∞v␈⊗4∞7ε∞<↑2`h,≥f"ε∀
εN>
M⊗>GD f␈∩∞Mε*π⎇}&Zπ> ⊗≡*∞⎇ε/⊗T∂⊗␈* >W↔⊗]nFgJ∞,W≡NLU`hUM Rπ/<↑"ε≡≥dπ∨>≡L6Bε,↑G>.]dπ>␈-LBεn≡∞2ε∂D∞FF*∞∞W≡B
|bε
nVv∨M≥vph,.W'&⎇e`hPQ*FFO4
↔~ε⎇mGJε∀∞ε∂↔M≤⊗bπ=⎇G/&≥⎇bπ&t∞FF*∞∞&}⊗L]Rbε≡4εO" Mv/~
mw h,<↔π'↑,Rε∞o∀ε}2∞Mε*π,\⊗bπ<]V∞wM≤7~ε|dπ&FT∞6O'\≡FN}edα∧6}$ε/F≥↑εf(Q/⊗␈* Mrεv}Dε↑v}tεF␈t∂⊗␈* ⎇w"πMtπ&FT 7/↔,]g"π⎇}&Zπ> ⊗≡*D
w∩ε≥o∩ε}aQ'&FT 6}wL←π'.≥DεNvm}&n∂M≥vrε≡>6}≡≤≡F."∞⎇↔&B∞Mε*ε>↑'⊗.nDεNw>L⊗v≡QQ&}2∞Mε*π⎇}&Zπ> ⊗≡*d∧¬&F↑<Rε∂,TεO∨>\W~πM ↔"π|Tε∂⊗T 7/↔,]g&g⊃Q&∞&N,W∨≡≥lrεNd
dL-uDε↔/D ∩εF≡lRεvt f∞↔]Mw/~
≥g≡N⎇∞G~πMtπ⊗/
}' h/≤W"pQ!PPh e∨\-&.∨G$α¬⊗W$∧≡}nLWG" \⊗v∞|↑'_h$↓s ∩Y.Vbkε∀αβ εε0LV|Udv/|=vn/$ ↔"∧9ZRk λ∀M⊗W$∧≡}nLWG" \⊗v∞|↑'_h(L↔&+$∧βJ∧.]GJβ↔↔β
β⊗Vβ
lXJBαEM∞W↔≡L∨∩Hh(n&}k$ &}*ilW>≡⎇\W∩ε≡D∧≤mUV∪∧λQ*F{R
9∧:ε≡D∧lMEX∀Hh(83Rπ⎇}&←~ ≡Bεn≡EV∞HQ)⊗rm,↑εgJZMsRα
9∧<∧Y~Bl ∀}2εn↑>6∞>T
v2β∧ '.bπε∩β '&3JlZ:@hPQ)∩ε?\↑7~∧∀
f/6↑$π&F}\vG"
|bπ& TεN≡⎇n2ε∂4 &.NltπεN>NW⊗/4
w⊂h-≥Fg/>N&∂&≥⎇g~b .W"ε.↑7"εl≥V/~
|bπ>≥lF␈?4¬πε/- ↔π~∞m↔≡N-LPhV=}&v/.4ε}2∞⎇⊗v&}}2Jr∧
FG/4
ε∂6≥lrε
⎇F}⊗≥Dεn∞l≤v/∩
≥bελQ.v␈⊗>>F∂&≥⎇bπ& ≡Bε↑\↑π~πN,⊗≡Z
|bε∞MDπ&FT∞vNvM}w~π<\Vo_Q-f∂'↑,⊗br∧
vF∂D
↔~π≥}W∩π,\⊗∨&≥⎇bπ&t∞FFO4∞6No
LW∩ε]|F.cqQ HH⊃≥&}(Q!PPh e∨\-&.∨G$α∧N=⎇g_h$↓s ∩Y.Vbkε⊂αβ εε@L↔-≤⊗r¬¬`∧ff␈≤BβdIIuL" ≡B∧l~ET Kd↓∀N≡⎇n2h(L↔&+$π∩∧W]O∩β ↔ε∩ββπ&3
lXJ@hTn-vkRλ.&N∞d
αr∧MMwN"πIDd⎇_Dε∂" Y∃"l→↔`hUMw"¬<z)5~ε≡@∧lMEX∀Hh!Q$∨/.,Vw&O∀π>* <↔&∞⎇x M∨Y(≥m} functions on the basis of
the existing tools we now use. Is it not possible for us to
define a new set of functions thatencompasses the current
range of tools/procedures, buT is much smaller? Given this,
we will have to develop a new set of icons to define the new
functions. If indeed we must define new icons, don't we lose
the existing mental correlation between picture and function?
Perhaps we should look at the whole problem from another Angle.
Let us assume that the "intelligent desk" leads us in the
direction of modified worker activity. I think we should do
another system analysis and see if we can come up with a new
view ob the problem: one thathas an elegant Ysimple] solution.
Brian
Subject: Re: Reliability
∂12-Jul-81 1724 Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A Re: Reliability
Date: 9 July 1981 1831-EDT (Thursday)
From: Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A
To: kolling at PARC-MAXC, works at mit-ai
In-Reply-To: kolling@PARC-MAXC's message of 9 Jul 81 16:21-EST
Assume the following:
A series of transactions is required to generate a consistent
database.
The cost of repeating a transaction is outrageously high.
The cost of restarting a series is even higher.
The cost of saving state at the client so that the series may
be continued is negligible.
What is the cost of the mechanism that guarantees that enough
state is preserved at the server to continue the series of
transactions given that either the server or the client may
crash?
Assume that the client, when resuming the series, may elect
to "continue" or "abort". Assume that "abort" is a truly
rare occurrence.
This is my image of the requirements of, say, a crashproof
editor that will lose no more than one keystroke if either the
client or server crashes. Note that although the "database"
(file being edited) is in an inconsistent state (relative to the
desired state), the user wishes to resume editing at the nth or
n-1st keystroke. Thus, viewing the user as the "client" and the
editor as the "server", the cost to the user of remembering which
keystroke came last or will come next is negligible. As we move
further back in time, the cost of restarting the series becomes
higher and higher. Assume for values of time > 10 keystrokes
the cost is nearly infinite. As far as I can tell, transactions
do not allow state to be SUSPENDED; they only guarantee that
under one definition of consistency, the state will always be
consistent. For a workstation, the two states in question are
the state of the workstation and the state of the work. Any
time the workstation state is consistent, the state may be
saved (the transaction completed), but this has nothing to
do with the state of the work. I think we are a long way
from being able to deal with the latter, since I think it
is perfectly reasonable to shut down the system or take a
crash when the "work" is inconsistent, as long as we can
return to the same state of inconsistency upon return and
allow the work to proceed.
joe
Subject: Touchpanels
∂14-Jul-81 0934 Steve Saunders <SAUNDERS at USC-ISIB6 Touchpanels
Date: 13 Jul 1981 0939-PDT
From: Steve Saunders <SAUNDERS at USC-ISIB>
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
Why do all the answerq in the digested replies on touchpanels share
these glaring misconceptions?
- that a touchpanel must be mounted in front of the display;
- that a touchpanel's resolution is limited to fingertip size.
1* Any of several touchpanel technologies, including the Elographics
and Sierracin commercial units, is entirely suitable for use away
from the display surface -- say, jusT where you would put a
"tablet" (pen-on-a-wire type), but without ever having to find &
pick up a pen or even find the mouse where you left it. The desk
area used need not be larger than a mouse-field.
2. This same touchpanel technology, at least, offers resolution that
is much much finer than the size od the touching fingertip -- I
have personally built and used some, and with cursor feedback I
can select individual pixel positions *within* the (projected)
area of my contact "fingerprint". This is done simply and
naturally (noone has to be coached) by rolling the fingertip.
The resistive material reads out the centroid (in some sense)
od the contact patch, allowing very sensitive control for fine
positioning, as well as instantaneous pointing without havIng
to find the pointer (pen or mouse) first.
*Of course* there is a tracking cursor on the display, just like a
mouse/tablet. To assume absence of this well-understood software
device gives extremely unfair comparisons.
Now that we all have that straight, how about some reconsidered
answers? Preferably this time from users of real touchpanels,
not those low-resolution or screen-mounted special-purpose
devices thatwere blasted (rightly) in the recent batch of
replies.
Steve
Subject: Re: Touchpanels
∂15-Jul-81 0429 JWALKER at BBNA Re: Touchpanels
Date: 1∀ Jul 1981 0926-EDT
Sender: JWALKER at BBNA
From: JWALKER at BBNA
To: SAUNDERS at USC-ISIB~∃
FtA/=eW&At AI
Message-ID: <[BBNA]14-Jul-81 09:26:52.JWALKER>
In-Reply-To: Your message of 13 Jul 1981 0939-PDT
You might have noticed that some of the touch panel notes pointed
out the semantic poverty of a touch when compared to the multiple
selection buttons on a mouse. That difference holds wherever the
touch panel is mounted. It means that touch panel driven systems
have to use more menus than are needed with a mouse driven
interface.
Jan
∂15-Jul-81 0444 Steve Saunders <SAUNDERS at USC-ISIB> Touchpanel prejudice
Date: 14 Jul 1981 0839-PDT
From: Steve Saunders <SAUNDERS at USC-ISIB>
Subject: Touchpanel prejudice
To: JWALKER at BBNA
cc: Saunders at USC-ISIB, WorkS at MIT-AI
Again, random assumptions are being made. Who says you can't
mount buttons where they can be used easily with a touchpanel?
Specifically, you can take advantage of the normal use --
pointing with one hand while the other remains in "home position"
at the keyboard -- to provide either mouse or touchpanel with
lots of "buttons" (just 'cause they have letters printed on top
doesn't mean they aren't buttons!). Of course, the kinesthetics
aren't exactly alike; but the assertion implied by JWalker that
mouse is necessarily better on this ground is pure assumption.
If there's evidence, tell us about it!
I didn't say there was no DIFFERENCE, just that the touchpanel's
inferiority as being asserted on unfair (scientifically careless)
grounds, that touchpanels were being castigated for faults they
don't in fact havE. They are indeed different, and the good and
bad points od that difference need to be carefully explored
without the interference of preconceived conclusions.
Steve
-------
∂15-Jul-81 0458 Joe.Newcomer atCMU-10A Re: Touchpanels
Date: 14 July 1981 1253-EDT (Tuesday)
From: Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A
To: Steve Saunders <SAUNDERS at USC-ISIB:
Subject: Re: Touchpanels
CC: works at mit-ai
I@8[%Ka1r[)↑h@A'i∃mJA'¬k]IKIfOfA5KggC≥JA←LbfA∃UX@pbbbtfd[ '(4∀~∃'QKmJX4∃∩Ao¬fACgβ≠W7'v9β eπ#?W∂Gβπ;↔g→βS#∂!βC↔␈β3∃βn+π9β&C?O∃π#Cπ;∨βπK↔w 4+∪/3'∂↔~aβ?I∧b⊗⊃↔n SK'BβπKK∂KM1β&CπQβ>+Qβ7␈+;S↔"β?9β&+K7'v 04 ≡≠K↔↔w→9↓αJβS#↔⊗+≠?K*β∪?9?!βO↔*βπ;eε#'OSNs∂S'}qβ ↔';↔↔9π##∃α⊗KP4*ε ⊃α?v)β←'&Aβ¬βεK↔∂∃ε{→β#∂∪∪←π⊗)β≠?∩βS#∃ε≠WKO␈⊃βπ;"βS#∃¬##K↔(h*K'6+KMβ&{W∂!o#π 3/!β←#N≠!βK/ W'K/→β?;gIβ7eε3';∨/∪S'AαC↔c∂/βQα$hS∪?9?!β#π6)β≠?/⊃β W'#?;Mε{9βSF)βS?.≠!7S∞∪3↔QJq↓αSF)β≠'v)βC?NsP4+&CπQβ&{W∂!π#π 3/#Mβ;.+⊃β;␈!β ∃εk?W;&+⊃β?rβS#∃π≠∂K↔.qβ∪'"β;?PhS↔O∂∂β∃β7*q9;'rβ≠π∂"aα%β/3↔9β≡KS∃β&C∃↓N∀~
βS␈+∂!β& 3↔"β'9β∞p4+↔∂∪3'↔∩β;?S*p4($HH'+?(h(4)yEU6W+15a
↓↓AU (&OS/3∃αO∂+;∪↔↔→↓rN
*:∩⊗∃→βπQ¬*N
6M~& yJS?W≡CCπ;.cMβ[~αSπ f+SM↓α↓4*& S∃iβ Qα+.a↓EeC ↓EA !6B∩ h*≠K}iiαO&+[∃α≡ W;∪/∪M↓r≤
V:∩-∩Mβπ"αVN
lJN& ph*OW⊗S↔∂QRαS?W≡CCπ;.cMβ[~αSπ f+SL4U#=iαV{∃:;/;∂?7/⊃βπQ∧~6U5 α∧4+≡→iα←␈∪.Mβ∂!α6&"jε$4TK96K/β3e6&yiαg␈+Iβ7/≠Oπ∨*β?→↓ !6+WbiaE↓βIUM6∧"P4(hR+?∃`h*S#/∪∃β'~β?;∃π∪↔π1ε#'OSNs∂S'}qβ ↔';↔↔9∧∪'RC∞!β↔Qε 19β∞s⊂4+≡+;O'&K[∃7∨+K≠π≡)βS?.≠#Cπv+3M1ε ;⊃β&CπQβO→βS#*β;↔↔"β?Iβ∞∪O↔;≡)β?_hS¬β∨∞#∨↔QαCC↔9bβ∃;≥rIβS#∂!β?;*β7WO"β≠';"βπ;⊃πβ'∂-π+A↓#␈⊃βSπ↑)β∧4VCπ;⊃πβ?O'&K?9β}q%β .3?K∃πβ?';&K;≥?'∪π←'v99↓αO→β'QπK?WIε+cC↔⊗K↔;∂(h+S#∂!βS#O→β'Mεs?QβNkC?K& ;Q⎇αα%β∨/!↓+S/∪K' gI)βπvs?g↔"β eβ&C∃βC.p4+?rβ?WI¬β↔KEαC←#'≡Aβ∂πn)β←'&Aβ¬α∨+77π?∪πC#N≠MβS∞∪3↔Qbβ;?Qπ##∀4W#Kπ;∨βπK↔w!βS?.≠#Cπv+1↓5jα%β∪}q∨Qβ↑s?]β>Ce%9αα%βSFK;-β&CπQβ
βC↔8hS?9β
β∂?K"β'Mβo+∂!β>{KO∃π##π9ε β7?/≠∃mβ>CπQαJβ∪?9?!β/;␈9β'Mπ;#↔SF+H4+6K;∪'v9β¬βn{WO∃ε+[↔KJβS'7*β'Mβ>{KS!εCπ['v9βS#␈≠∃β /#S?;~βS#↔⊗(4+K∂##↔Iπ##π9αCOπeJβ;↔π∩βS#∃εc↔≠QεCπ;⊃r↓α#π6)βg?*β↔cC/∪'7↔w#↔⊂4W;'S!ε3W33Jk←?K↑+⊃7?/!βO↔'+CMβ&CπQβ/≠∃β↔∞≠!β?2βS#∃ε≠?7C/#';≤hSS↔∂Fs?3?>K↔Mβ&yβ'S~β?←9ε∪↔OQε ∪[πw#π∨∃z↓α%β⊗+π33Jβ←?Wf!β3'↑(4+Szβ#↔π∩βO?7*β';≠␈∪7πSN{9β?rβS#'~p4(4PH&OS/3∀4(hP4){ U6+.a5aEα↓AUM_J+?∃ts↔←∂}k↔Iβ∂!α∞6*iEB¬JK∃i∧≠?33.≠S↔⊃ε≠?77.sSπKJβ?9β&{W∂#ε ;↔3~4*∪∂#∃i↓ !α+WgI↓EeC ↓EI≠)6⊗∩"↓"SW/≠∪πeHh*≠K}iiα+}):;↔>≠?7↔∩βπQα≤jU5E∧λ4*S{Qβ←?⊗[Mβπ"β7'Qn $4*∨+ +↔∨!i↓α⊗)iα∂}c3↔∂&+⊃β∂}k7↔≠& Keβ}qβS?.≠#Cπv+3L4TK96K/β3e6&yi↓↓∃##∃αn{∪↔K∂#?I ?→β7↔∨≠π∨∃ε{→↓E~α+W1βAE↓A9QMA6-~P4(hR←#π";Mβ←⊗{;≥β>KS!βfK∨#Qπβ↔;Mz↓αS#*βOπ7*βS#'v9βS#∂!β'Mπ;K?;8h+←'&AβS#*βOSπv#πK⊃πβ↔9β&CπQβ≡{7/4∞vO&∧
FF*
:Vnn≤}&∂ε
≤7~∧-≡B¬ε≤APT}lW"πN|¬)nl(→{nD≥≠h∞
8zh∞M→(→ ≥;H≥
;Y`∞↑λ(λ ∀≥y;ND≠Y8.-≡(_n >↑#!.≤↑:-lh≥≠d∞<y( ≥H→0∩~z7y⊂→7y⊂:≥wP;rYuyP+Zz4⊂6↑P!4zλ(0r⊗λ12qp]yrFE≥42P2Y4z7yλ'g&,H0qqr\:2r⊂_zy9w\⊂6wz~ww⊂:~9:P:~2P:0X62z⊂_w2⊂:~2FE'S&,P2→{4qrH$P40Y⊂37iλ87tw≥4w3@≥pyP:~2P82[⊂P⊂'[2P7sλ:42P≥wy9z FE22\tsw2Y⊂9|y]2vyP∩P2{2\⊂:yrY↔⊂⊂ Y:2y⊂≥;wP;YruyVλ:42P
⊗q:z≥7wεE≠wzyrH1pvrH4w⊗⊂_w2⊂6[yz⊂7Y⊂:42H42pr_qt2yH;rw:λ0{p|K⊂1:jλ$P9z~v6εE~0r⊂:≠P5rr\⊂:0uZw3P6↑P40w→9P7s→⊂:42H5r|q≠py2⊂→7y⊂:~2P9vXv62y]εE1z\9wy⊂≠wz4w[9W⊂⊂∪7{P;YP40{→P0w⊂⊃f`aiH64urH2r4z≠y⊂:4_z⊂0qXrx:9CE1zy≤wy⊂6[{2vr[:⊂0w→⊂87yZz4ww~w3P1[vvpw→9P39≠vP:4→P5r|X7py2λ7yεE≥0q62]⊗⊂0w→⊂4z⊂~yP92Xv6<P≠4qr]H9vpv≠⊂92v_z4{2H6wz4[w9P1Xw⊂12CE27w→P8ztXuv<P→97vP≥42P5Y|q7p\2⊂0w→⊂60y→rP29_sstw→P6wz~ww9P_pwεE_2P27[2P;t]4⊂:4→P:0q≠2z≥P∩P34w→⊂:42H9|yz→vP8zZz2P3≤4rw2≠<WεEβE∀ yH0w⊂0\tr2Vλ82w9H9rrvH:7P1→P892Y4qpz→r⊂7wλ:42P~r2pP≥40z⊂~7v24[3FE⊂_P;y4]4w3P~vx62[rw:⊂~yP0Pλ70z:\0v⊃⊂_qz4w[⊂0w2λ1wvs≠y:0q≠2W⊂⊂∩S{2FB⊂72{→y⊂37]w2⊂4≠v24w→P0P8→w⊂1w[s7y:_q62Vλ0w2⊂~0{2P_v;p|\P892Y2y92YεE⊂:≠P:<x→P90z~2y⊂:~0w⊂;\4z2Wλ⊂$P;\4z2P_v6wy]⊂77z~4w3]H4s⊂4]⊂4yFB⊂;wy≥4⊂1w[vtz4[3P:7H0w⊂6Yr4zvH7zz9Zr2P6↑P190Zw⊗⊂$H:<x2H4z⊂4[:7FEλ:42P_wvx:]2y⊂TCE∧DDBu7rFBεE⊂πLZVe:[⊗\_Pλ_~ZXBfpy9Z0v6⊂∀92yyYy⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂≡&T92yyYy⊂0zλ&dj⊗Szv:4Xy←⊂∧]7zqtλ80w2[9P⊂⊂λεE"0]2]⊂⊂λ⊂⊂_Zλ%:v<H_\\_H_YYXKrr:εB#97vN⊂⊂⊂⊂λ&py9Z0v6⊂∀92yyYy⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂≡&T92yyYy⊂0zλ&dj⊗Szv:4Xy←εE∀zq52Xz≥⊂⊂≥7zqtλ80w2[9FE*≠]⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂+[y5iP⊂⊂⊂&dU⊗`dFBεE*4→P:7zXt⊂80[2v9P∩P40{→P9rr[⊂40rλ;2y<H34w2H892qZytww ⊂1:zλ;2y<CE44sZ⊂;0y~pq4v~z<W⊂λ yP0H92zv≥⊗⊂:4→P9ws≥;py2H9:w7~w3P:~2P:2\6tw0[εE40Y⊂:7P~w7{P≥t0z⊂≥pyP1→tw3P→4yx6_|rr⊂≥t2y2K⊂9wP_yP:7H4w:2\892zβE9rr[tw3v≡P6ty\60qrY⊂92y]v:9Wλ⊂+rP≥94rrλ1y7y\P;ty→yP42[2⊂:7Yrz42\εE1<H9:q1→y⊂10[29P7[⊂:42H34y9]⊂6wr→v⊗⊂1≥z⊂:4~yP3p]2P:yH7w6<H:42FB97zsZ6<P→ ⊂1<P _⊂87Zw:9P≠w⊂0P≤z0w2_y2⊂9Z⎇2r⊂≠ww4z≠y↔⊂⊂∩z⊂4yCE:w1[2py⊂≥t2z4→y⊂6p[<P82[x62P_pw⊂7\⊂1py→P:7P≠pw4x≥v0z2H4w⊂0H7εE0\2pP9[pv62\⊂:40[⊂0P3~w3ry≥4x↔εBεE'z~2y9P≥94rrλ9x2qZpv⊂9→ytyz~{2P0[2⊂1p\0qtz_w1rP≤rw9t]4{2FB6pz2\4pv⊗λ1:z⊂≥44yP≤97{2Y⊂:7wH;0y4Xq62Wλ⊂*42↑V⊂;t≠r{2yλ:42|CE0y2K⊂:94Yr⊂4w≥4ypq≠2P1w[2:qz≠y9P4[9tr2H1t0w≠2v9P≠w⊂0P≤60yz~qFE7]2y60↑P7w⊂≥42P6[w4z7\⊗⊂1:]⊂:44\P:2qZ77v7Y|P89≠{2r⊂→|82w≤t{2FB0w2⊂≥42P9]:s3⊂≥wy2P→7{w⊂_s:2yλ0P;t~v2WεBεE+t_z⊂24Y⊂897]2P9zXqryyY:v⊂;XyP0P≥;wP6[w4z7\⊂9|y]2vV⊂≠w2P3≠yεE2~yx60↑P8:y≤7yryK⊂0w2λ0w7z~2y⊂0\P:42H⊃4w8≥z⊃⊂2→{4qrK⊂⊂*4→y2FE≥pyP7Y⊂1wz\9rV⊂≥42P8≤7q62[P:40]⊂:42H897s\0vvr\9P1w]v2⊂7≠at peanut butter and jelly sandwiches while working late,
for it marred the surface badly. An image of a keyboard was
generated, but the touch was so awful, that a small keyboard
of the regular variety was hung on when large amounts of text
input were required. One application had people selecting
theater tickets by push down on the monitor over a picture
of seating plan of the theater or stadium. The main appli-
cations for such a terminal were commerical, for highly
reprogrammable banking terminals, and for computer access
to naive users about community information. In the second
case, they were to be used at public libraries, community
centers, etc.
∂15-Jul-81 0607 Joe.Newcomer atCMU-10A Re: joysticks
Date: 14 July 1981 1249-EDT (Tuesday)
From: Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A
To: Gary Feldman at CMU-10A
Subject: Re: joysticks
CC: works at mit-ai
In-Reply-To: <13Jul81 205424 GF20@CMU-10A>
The reason joysticks are losers deals with the interaction
between the hand motion and the screen cursor motion. In
fact, it takes a lot of skill to convert a desired motion
on the screen to an appropriate nudge of the joystick. Thus,
joysticks usually result in a lot of "hunting" as the cursor
constantly overshoots the target and the user applies smaller
and smaller corrections to get it to land on the desired point
on the screen. See Stu Card's thesis; I know he presented the
reasons at his oral (I was there) and assume they are also in
his thesis.
I have no experience with tracking balls, and am currently
reluctant to offer opinions on them since I THINK I know a
very, very cute way to implement one...and I won't say more
until I've sold the idea.
joe
Subject: Picture vs. Window names
∂15-Jul-81 0633 wilson at CCA-UNIX (Gerald Wilson) Picture vs. Window names
Date: 13 Jul 1981 13:50:10-EDT
From: wilson at CCA-UNIX (Gerald Wilson)
To: works at MIT-AI
I think that the importance of worrying about The cOntent of the
Windows is closely tied to the nature of the working environment.
If the user is working with a relatively small numberof windows
all of which have a fairly short half-life (probably no more than
a day), then having a nice window manager which just keeps track
by name is probably adequate, and certainly much better than
typical current facilities. I equate this solution to the ability
to declare multiple full-screen windows in EMACS, and then ask
about what windows you have created. This works nicely for me as
long as I chose good names for the windows, and I don't 'drift' on
to new things without closing out old windows.
The problem that is of primary concern to me is the environment
where a user has lots (probably hundreds over the course of a
year) of windows, many of which have long lives (> month), and
which are in various states of activity at any given moment.
When I handle this manually I often end up with a hierarchy of
storage and state preserving methods, with the "manager" being
a combination of paper and electronic messages and a mental
index. I find all the same problems that have been discussed
or alluded to in "works" messages:
* Windows change in priority and/or importance based on both
my own actions and actions of others. The biggest problem
seems to be that the actions of others can cause me to make
dramatic changes in my window organization, at least for a
short time.
* I can handle a handful of windows with little problem for a
moderate time. When the number grows I begin to lose track
of some. When the time period of a low priority window's
life is long, I also begin to lose track of it. This
corresponds to the usual observations about human memory.
* Almost invariably there are multiple relationships between
windows, and thus multiple organizations of the windows. A
single window name rarely means anything to more than one
of these views of my world. The key retrieval method is my
mental association between the window name and the semantic
aspects of the window that are of interest under given
circumstances.
* The window relationships depend upon not only the window
semantics, but also project priorities, personal preferences,
interests of the moment, machine availability, dependencies
upon co-workers, etc. Much of this meta-information about
the window organization is important to keep available, and
is used in developing priorities and schedules.
* When new windows are created I must thread them into the
existing structures, and also determine if any new structures
are required. The deletion of old windows may affect windows
not directly linked to the deleted window, as the reason for
the deletion may have implications for other windows not
otherwise related.
My conclusion is that if we are to use computers to maintain much
of our current paper files, we must provide windowing facilities
that are more versatile, more semantically oriented, and more
easily interconnected than the window naming and other similar
approaches would allow. I think that the use pictures, color,
shape, abstractions, sound, etc. are essential to this process.
They sure seem to help in manual systems, and I have not found
effective substitutes for many of them in my own limited work.
When talking with graphics people, they always use "icon" to mean
the 'total symbol', not just as the name of a region of the screen.
Although this does not imply that icon refers to any semantics, I
guess I havE felt that this is a natural extension of the grahics
term.
[Subj: more on icons]
∂15-Jul-81 0700 ihnss!mhtsa!harpo!chico!esquire!nrh at Berkeley
Date: 13 Jul 1981 20:54:16-PDT
From: ihnss!mhtsa!harpo!chico!esquire!nrh at Berkeley
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
Phooey! This "endless hierarchy" of deletes is just plain silly!
Given delete and EXPUNGE, what if someone wants a file that has
been EXPUNGED? Should there be a little "Hardy Boys" icon which
given the burned junk from an "expunged wastebasket" icon could
re-construct (perhaps only in part) what was on the burnt paper
(the expunged file)?
And how about a little "paper shredder" icon so you could prevent
the retrieval of an EXPUNGED file? And if you didn't want to
trust your users to do that, you could always have a "bogus paper
shredder" icon which doesn't really shred things, but merely drops
them in the wastebasket.
On the other hand, with regular backups, and an "archives" icon,
perhaps you could simply trust your users most of the time, and
recover from backup when that failed (perhaps a "god from the
machine" icon could be shown disgorging the "lost" files).
Subject: Re: Unfinished tasks, intra-office mail, and system death
∂15-Jul-81 0714 Ted Markowitz <TJM at MIT-XX> Re: Unfinished tasks, intra-office mail, and system death
Date: 14 Jul 1981 1700-EDT
From: Ted Markowitz <TJM at MIT-XX>
To: LLOYD at MIT-AI, WORKS at MIT-AI
In-Reply-To: Your message of 8-Jul-81 0719-EDT
Perhaps with the price of harware dropping at the rate it has
been, the TANDEM approach (duplicate processors, disk subsystems
which "mirror" the data, etc.) might be a reasonable method to
accomplish state saving. I don't see this right away, but it
does provide another avenue to make sure that your desk doesn't
wind up 'disappearing' because of an electrical spike or a loose
cable.
--ted
Subject: Reliablity
∂15-Jul-81 0729 BHYDE at BBNG Reliablity
Date: 13 Jul 1981 1120-EDT
From: BHYDE at BBNG
Sender: BHYDE at BBNG
To: Works at MIT-AI
Message-ID: <[BBNG]13-Jul-81 11:20:13.BHYDE>
Folks,
There are very few new ideas that computing has had to date.
The keystroke backup file is only the editor instantiation of
a very old idea; double entry bookkeeping. An idea that some
have blamed all capitalism on. As each transaction occurs in
any organization it is recorded in two places, the journal and
the account book that it is related to. These two sets of books
are stored in separate places if at all possible and either set
can be used to reconstruct the other. This is a very important
reliability mechanism since it is the only one that is acceptable
to accounting organizations. As the only "certified" mechanism
it is the only primitive available for most commercial systems
to achieve reliability. Thus the terms audit trail or journaling
are very popular in commercial product offerings.
Ben Hyde.
Subject: SUN Workstation
∂15-Jul-81 0747 Andy Bechtolsheim <AVB at SU-AI> SUN Workstation
Date: 13 Jul 1981 1738-PDT
From: Andy Bechtolsheim <AVB at SU-AI>
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
From: Minsky at MIT-AI
Subject: SUN query
Gee, where does one get a SUN and how much does it cost?
--------------------------------------------------------
SUN Workstation Synopsis:
Processor: 8 MHz 68000, executing without wait states.
Memory Management: two-level, multi-process, segment-page memory map.
Main Memory: 384 kBytes (128 kBytes reserved for frame buffer).
Graphics: 1024 by 800 pixel display, high-speed "RasterOP".
Network: 3 MBit/sec "experimental" Ethernet.
Pointing Device: optical "mouse".
Backplane Bus: Intel Multibus.
Operating System: Microsoft Xenix.
OEM-Price: under $10,000.
We are currently evaluating manufacturing arrangements for
SUN workstations. Stanford University plans to get 25 SUN
workstations by the end of this year. If you are interested
in participating in this pilot production run, please contact
AVB @ SAIL.
Subject: Collected Responses on Touchpanels II
∂16-Jul-81 0524 ''The Moderator'' <WorkS-REQUEST at MIT-AI> Collected Responses on Touchpanels II
Date: 16 July 1981 0700-EDT
From: "The Moderator" <WorkS-REQUEST at MIT-AI>
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
Here is the second set of collected responses on touchpanels
and other cursor moving devices. They are being distributed
in this form rather than as individual messages, because this
is the only way that we can manage to promptly distribute the
incoming volume of mail to this list.
Enjoy,
RDD
------------------------------
Date: 15 July 1981 08:54-EDT
From: Steven H. Gutfreund <SHG at MIT-AI>
Subject: BitPad Experiences
To: WORKS at MIT-AI
We at DEC did not have mouse hardware on hand. What we did
have was a SummaGraphics BitPad with crosshair cursor that has
4 buttons (bugs in the PARC terminology) on top. It was fairly
easy to write software so that we could have a relative postion
mouse instead of an absolute location cursor. We even hyped
up the sensitivity of the mouse so that simple (wrist only)
movements could carry one across the entire screen. One can
even lift up the cursor and replace it like a real mouse.
Opinions:
Given the way the smalltalk window editors work, I can keep
almost all of my activity off the keyboard. Indeed I think
if I was given a chord keyboard in my other hand (5 buttons
could give me 120 different keys) then I could completely
get rid of that anachronism of the industrial age: the 4
row QWERTY keyboard.
- Steven Gutfreund
------------------------------
Date: 15 Jul 1981 1032-PDT
From: Michael Dolbec <CSD.DOLBEC at SU-SCORE>
Subject: Re: Touchpanels vs Tablets
To: SAUNDERS at USC-ISIB, Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A
cc: WorkS at MIT-AI, CSD.DOLBEC at SU-SCORE
In-Reply-To: Your message of 14-Jul-81 1014-PDT
The Alto set up has a mouse with 3 buttons ("bugs") for the
right hand, and a 5 key device for the left to play with.
There are text editors in Smalltalk th`#hAC1Y←nAQQJA[=kgJAQ↑~∃E∀AkgK⊂AaeS5CeSYdACfA∧Aa←S9iS]N↓IKmS
JAoQ%YJAi!JAWKd[gKh↓Sf~∃UgKHAQ↑AgK1KGhA¬GiS←9fAC]⊂A[←I∃f\@AM↑As←TAgKJ0AIKm%GKfA∃qSgh4∃i↑A-KK`AQQJA←QQKdA!C]HA kgrA¬Yg↑\A∩AE∃YSKm∀AiQCPA ]O1KECeP~∃Ch↓'%∩AUgKHA∧AWKr↓gKhAQ←↑\@Z[≠S-J~∀~(ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4~∀~∃⊃CiJtbjA∃UX@br`b@b`hbptjX[ (4∃
e←4tAGM AChA
πα[+9∪0@Q
QeSgQ←aQKHA⊃Ke=hR~∃Q↑tA'¬k]IKIfACh↓SgSD4∃'kE)KGht↓i←kG AgK]MSiSm∀AISO%iSuKIf~∃π tA/←IW&ACPA[Sh5CR~∀4∃/QS1JAkg%]NAB↓i←kG AgK]MSiSm∀AISO%iSuKH@Qig⊂RA←\↓BAiC YJ~∃Q←`Ao%]fAS8AiQCPAs←j↓I←\OPA]KK⊂Ai↑A→S]HA∧AgaK
SCXAMisYkL~∃oSQPASiLAGYk5grAo%eJXA%hAgk→MKef↓Me←Z↓iQJA→CGhAQQChA=iQKd4∃←EU∃GifX↓gkGP↓CfAi!JAaC1ZA←L↓s←kd↓QC]H0AGC\↓gKhA%hA←M_ACf~)oKYX8@A∩A!KCeH↓iQCh↓ Y←OICaQS
fAQCLABAi¬EYKh↓iQCh↓o←eWL~∃←]1rAoSQPAgQ¬e`A← UKGiL\@A⊃¬fAC]e←]JA!CHAC9rAKqAKeSK9GJ~∃]SiPA%h}~∀4∃∩AC4AmKedAoCedA←LA¬]rAG=[aCe%g←]f↓[CIJ↓Me←Z↓iQK←IKiSG¬X~∃a∃egaK
iSmKL\@A∪8AiQJ↓Y←]N↓ek\X↓iQJA5←ghAMkGGKMgMkX4∃S]aUhAiK
Q]ScUJXAo!KiQKHAigH0AiCE1KhXA=dA[←UgJXA]SYX~)IKaK9HA←\↓oQSG A←]JEMKK1fAO←=HDAC9HAo←IWfAe∃YSCE1r\~∃¬fAs←TAa←S9iKHA=khXAQQSfA⊃KaK]⊃fABA1←hA←8AQ←n↓iQJ~)g←Mi]CeJA%fAS[AYK[K9iKH\4∀~∀Z4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZ~(~∃ CQJt@bTA∃kXbrpb`phf5 (~)
e←ZhA/≠β
∂% ∂=$ACh↓¬¬≥α4∃'kE)KGht↓!←S]QS]NA⊃KmSG∃f~∃)<t@@A]←eWf↓ChA≠%([β∩4∀~∀@@@A∩↓COeK∀AoSi A'iKYJA'CU]IKeLAa←g%iS←\↓iQCh↓i←kG AaC]∃Yf~∃5CrA]=hAEJ↓CfAS9MKeS=dACf↓G←[[=]YrA¬ggk[∃H\@A
KeiC%]YrA5SGJ~)QCmJ↓iQKSHACIm¬]iCO∃fXAEUhAiQ∃rAQCYJAae=EYK[LAi←↑8@A¬K
CkgJ4∃iQJ↓[CGQ%]JAG¬]]←h↓IKiKI[S]J↓iQJA¬Eg←YUiJAa=gSiS=\A←L↓B~∃[=kgJX↓ShASLACoW]CeHX↓ChAE∃ghXAQ↑Akg∀ACfA∧AISO%iSuS9NAIKYSGJ\4∃)CE1KifA¬eJA[UGPAE∃iiKd0AgS]
JABAMisYkLAGC\↓EJAiICGKH↓←mKd↓B~∃OICaPA=dA[C@AaYC
KHA←8AiQJ↓iCEY∃h\~∀4∀@@@A mK8AiQ←UOPA[%GJAI<A]←h↓eKck%eJAI∃ISGCQKHAI∃gVAgACGJA%\~∃i!K←er0A∩AQ¬mJAg∃K\A[¬]rAkMKefAAYCGJ↓BAaY¬giSF↓gQKKPA←\AQQJ~∃⊃KgV@!g←[J↓WS]H↓←LAQ∃CmrAYS]sX↓oSiP↓BAiC
Wr[M∃KYS]≤Agke→CGJR4∃i↑A≥SmJAQQJA[=kgJA≥←←HAQeCGi%←\\@↓∪LAs=jOeJ↓O←S]≤AiQSLAMCd0~∃iQ∃eJASLAYSiQYJAC⊃mC]i¬OJA←YKdAB↓¬Si!¬H[isAJAiC YKh\4∀~∀@@@A∃=sgiS
WfAg∃KZAi<AEJA⊃Sg[SMgKHA=khA←_AQC]⊂XAC]⊂A←\AQQJ~∃]Q←YJ↓∩ACOIKJ\@↓⊃←oKYKdXA=]JAm¬eSC]PA←LAQQJAU=sgiS
VXAi!J~∀O→←eGJ↓giSG,NXA∩↓gkga∃GhASLAG←[ACeCE1JAi↑↓BAi←UGPAa¬]KXA=d~∃[=kgJA%LAae=aKeYdAK]O%]KKe∃H\@@!αAM←IGJAgQSGVAIK[CS9fAS\4∃←]J↓aYCG∀XAC]⊂Aae←⊃kGKf↓C\A←Uiakh↓ae←a=eiS←9CXAi<AiQJ↓M←eG∃f~∃KaKeiK⊂A←\A%hAS\↓iQJA`AC]H↓2AISIKGiS=]fvAQQKrA¬eJAkMkCYYd~∃KY¬giSG¬YYrA5←k]i∃HXAg<AiQCPAiQKdAEK]⊂AgYS≥QiYr0A[Cs J@b↑`D~∃[¬qS[k4XAoQ∃\AM←IGJASLACaa1SKHR8~∀~∀@ZA¬%YX~∀4∀ZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4Z~∀~) CiJh@bjA)kX@bdpb@bL`h[!⊃(~∃
I←ZtAACeVA¬hA'%$[β∩~)'kEU∃GhtAA/&AGUeg←d↓G←]iI←X~∃Q↑t@@↓o←eWLAChA5∪([β$~∀~∀@@@@@@@@↓'kOO∃giS←9fAM←HA≥Kn↓↔S]ILA←LA
keg←HAπ←]Qe←YY∃ef~∀4∀@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@A r~∀~(@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@↓¬SYX↓!CeV4∀@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@A'%$A∪]i∃e]Ci%←]CX4∀~∃∨9JA←L↓iQJAIKGK]PAIKm∃Y←a[∃]ifA%\Ae← ←iSGLASfA∧AiQS8XAMY¬hAgK9g←d~)iQCh↓GC\A5KCgkIJAM←IGJAI%gieS kiS←9fA]←I[CXAQ↑ASiLAgke→CGJA¬fAoK1X~∃CLAgQK¬dAM←IGKf\A∪hA5SOQh↓[CWJ↓BAmKIrAG←9mK]S∃]hXAIkOOK⊂XAeK1SCEY∀~∃MS9OKei%`AGkIg←dA
←]ie=X\~∀4∃)QKMJAIKYSGKf↓GC\A JAMC eSGCQKHACLACee¬rAgK9g←ef↓oSiP↓eKg←1kiS←9f~∃←8AiQJ↓←eIKHA←LA∧A[SY1S[Ki∃d\@AQQKrA¬eJAS9iK]I∃HAM←HAkgJ↓CfAi¬GiSY∀~∃gK9g←ef↓i↑AE∀AS]gQCYYK⊂ACf@ MS]O∃eiSaLDA←\↓e←E←PAQC]⊃fXAJ9N\XAQ↑~∃C⊃Ukgh↓OeSaAS]NA→←eGKLAi↑AAeKmK9hAgY%aaCO∀\@A!∃←aYJ↓ChA~9∩](\≥f~∃βIiSMS
SCXA%]iKY1SOK]
JA→C ←eCi=erXA¬[←]N↓←iQKIfXACIJAEk%YIS]≤~∃C]⊂AKqa∃eS[K9iS]N↓oSiP↓iQKZ8~∀~∃QQKrA¬eJAieaSGC1YrA[¬IJAEdAK[E∃IIS]≤AYCs∃efA←_AaCe¬YYKX↓MYKq%EYJ~)[KiC0AG←]⊃kGi←IfAS\↓BA[CQeSpA=LAgS1SG←\↓ekEE∃dAiQ¬hAQCLAEKK8AI←a∃H~∃o%iPAOIC]kY∃fA←L↓C\AK1KGie%GCYYdAG←]⊃kGiSYJA[CQKeSC0AgkG ACfA
CeE←8~∃←d↓gSYm∃d\@A1←GCX↓G←]IUGiC]
JA←L↓iQJA5CiKe%CXASLAiQK8ABAMU]GiS=\A←L4∃Y←G¬XAgiIKgf\AαA[%Ge←aI←GKgM←dA[∃Cgke∃fAiQ∀AeKg%giC]
JAEKQoKK\4∃gKY∃GiKH↓aCSeLA←LA
←]Ik
i←ef↓i↑AI∃iKe[%]JAi!JAgiIKgfA⊃Sgie%EkiS=]f~∃QQe←k≥Q←kh↓iQJA5CiKe%CX\~(~∃3←TAG←k1HA[←U]hA←9JA←L↓iQKg∀AgK]M←efA→YkgP↓oSiP↓iQJAQ←`AgUeMCG∀~∃←L↓iQJA-KsE←¬eHAQ=kgS]≤XAC]⊂AkgJ↓ShAg=[KoQ¬hAYS-JABAQeCGW CYXA¬f~∃M=YY←oLt~∀~(PbRA]QK]KYKdAi!JA←a∃eCi←HAi←k
QKHA%hAoSQPABA→S]OKHXAiQ∀A[SGI↑Z~∀@@AG=[aki∃dAo←UYHAI∃iKe[%]JAi!JAGK9ie←S⊂A←LAQQJAI%gieS kiS←8A←L~(@@@AAeKggUeJAKaKeiK⊂\@@QUgS]N↓iQJA
K]ie=SHA[%OQhA=mKeG=[JAi!J~∀@@A←E)KGiS=\Ai↑↓QSOP↓eKg←1kiS←8AS\A∧Ai←k
P[gK9gSiSYJAIKYSGJAQ↑~∀@@AEJ↓←aKe¬iKHA rAB@ MChA→S]OKH\DR@↓)QJA1←GCi%←\A←_AiQSLAGK]Qe←SH4∀@@@↓o←kY⊂AIKi∃e[S]∀ABAG=eeKgA←]IS9NAG←¬egJA1←GCi%←\A←8AiQJ↓gGeK∃\~∀@@ACh↓oQSG ABAGUeg←d↓o←kY⊂ACaa∃Cd\@↓%←YY%]NAi!JAMS9OKdAMYSOQQYr~∀@@A←HAgYS⊃S]NA%hA←m∃dAiQ∀Agke→CGJA]←kYH↓CYY←\AMS]∀ACIUUgi[K9hA←L4∀@@@↓iQJA
keg←HAa←g%iS←\8@A)Q%fASf↓BAg[¬YX[[UgGYJ↓iCgV↓oQSG A∩~∀@@AE∃YSKm∀Ao←k1HAEJ↓KCgr↓i↑AY∃Ce\A¬]HAi<AaKe→←eZAICaSI1r\~∀4∀PdR↓!eKgMS]NA!CeIKHA←\AQQJAgUeMCG∀AG←k1HAgS≥]CXA∧AgaK
SCXA¬GiS←8~∀@@Ai↑AAKeM←IZACh↓iQCh↓a←S]PXAgk
PACf↓aYCG%]NAB↓[CeW∃dA←\↓iQJ~(@@@AMGeKK8A←dA
QC]O%]NAi!JA[←⊃JA←L↓←aKe¬iS←\8@A+g%]NA[=IKf@ bR~∀@@AC9H@Pd$ACYi∃e]Ci%mKYr0A←]J↓G←kY⊂AckS
WYrAAYCGJ↓BAgKEkK]G∀A←L~(@@@A5CeWKIfACe=k]HA∧AEY←
VA←L↓iKqh↓←dAB↓a←Ys≥←]CX↓eKOS=\A←L↓C\~∀@@AS5COJ\4∀~∀PLRA!kMQS]N↓iQJA→S]OKHACY←9NAiQ∀Agke→CGJ@!ae←IUGS]N↓BAgQ∃Cd~∀@@AgQeKgf↓gSO]¬XRAG=kYHAQQK\A%]ISG¬iJAB↓G←ee∃ga←]⊃S]NAYKGi←H~∀@@AS\AQQJAa1C]JAf the screen. This could be used, for example,
to control cursor velocity or to move a previously delineated
region of the image around on the screen.
I think it might be most convenient to mount such a control on
the keyboard within easy reach of either thumb, such as on the
front edge of the housing below the space bar. One would then
not have to move one's hands at all to point at things on the
screen.
A much cruder device is available commercially. It is a linear
array of parallel electrical conductors. Stroking it produces a
bipolar analog signal. It is marketed as, e.g., a more rugged,
completely sealed replacement for a knob on a piece of military
electronic gear. Two of these could be mounted at right angles
to one another within reach of a thumb to control incremental
horizontal and vertical cursor motion.
Another possibility for minimizing hand motion would be to
incorporate a miniature 2- or 3-degree-of-freedom joystick
into the keyboard, in the form of one more, special, key.
Or even several such "joykeys."
------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 16 July 1981 03:28-EDT
From: Jonathan Alan Solomon <JSOL at RUTGERS>
To: Steve Saunders <SAUNDERS at USC-ISIB>
Cc: JSol at RUTGERS, JWALKER at BBNA, WorkS at MIT-AI
Subject: Touchpanel prejudice
Touch Panels! Touch Panels! Indeed. Give me the greatest touch
panel known to man, the Terminal Keyboard. Some of them even
come detachable.
Seriously, since the primary appeal for workstations will be to
users who already have some aptitude on computers, there should
probably be some correlation between touch panels and terminals.
(here I envision my briefcase-thin terminal with the touch panel
screen which doubles as a keyboard).
Jsol
------------------------------
End of Collected Responses on Touchpanels II
********************************************
Subject: Re: Picture vs. Window names
∂16-Jul-81 0604 Chris Ryland <RYLAND at SRI-KL> Re: Picture vs. Window names
Date: 15 Jul 1981 0911-PDT
From: Chris Ryland <RYLAND at SRI-KL>
To: works at MIT-AI
In-Reply-To: Your message of 13-Jul-81 1050-PDT
I recommend heartily that everyone stop wondering about window/session
managers until they read the four PIE papers now available from PARC,
by Ira Goldstein and Danny Bobrow. PIE provides most of the mechanics
for exactly the kinds of things people are meandering verbally around.
I'm referring to report CSL-81-3 from Xerox PARC. Also related, though
possibly not available yet, is CSL-81-4, ``PIE: An Experimental
Personal Information Environment.''
Subject: pukcba ekortsyek
∂16-Jul-81 0620 Frankston.SoftArts at MIT-Multics pukcba ekortsyek
Date: 15 July 1981 20:40 edt
From: Frankston.SoftArts at MIT-Multics
Sender: COMSAT.SoftArts at MIT-Multics
Reply-To: Frankston at MIT-Multics (Bob Frankston)
To: works at MIT-AI
*from: BOB (Bob Frankston)
Local: works at mit-ai
There are many naive ideas for backup that work in limited
contexts. The assumption of keystroke backup is that the
keystrokes are the only information needed. That might be true
in simple system. It is not true when one is interacting with
a more general environment. For example, inserting files from
a hierarchy using names relative to the current environment.
Or reading mail, or waiting for timeouts.
Subject: Making paper go away
∂16-Jul-81 0704 Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A Making paper go away
Date: 14 July 1981 1211-EDT (Tuesday)
From: Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A
To: works at mit-ai
In-Reply-To: gaines@RAND-UNIX's message of 12 Jul 81 18:14-EST
You've fallen into the same trap that most people do. If what you
want is the ability to scan quickly thru a document, this suggests
that a capability the computer should have is to scan quickly thru a
document. If you want to make notes, the computer should provide the
ability to make notes. If you want to doodle in color, the computer
should provide the ability to doodle in color. What you've stated is
not reasons for retaining paper, but a specification of what
capabilities we need in a computer if we want paper to go away.
Now current technology makes a lot of this extremely difficult. For
example, at very slow data rates (say, 9600, which is as close to DC
as one would care to get), it is unreasonable to browse thru most
large documents. With 24-line screens, finding enough context to
make sense of what has been typed is nearly impossible. But saying
that online retrieval will never replace paper is silly; it means
you've failed to adapt the computer to what people need.
The observation that it is useful to print things out on paper so
they don't have to be stored online is likewise looking at the
problem from the wrong side. What I want is a method of taking silly
pieces of paper and getting them onto the machine so I don't need to
store the paper! Fact: secondary storage is cheap, is getting
cheaper, and even primitive archiving techniques make it look even
cheaper. Why should I have to do something (file a piece of paper)
that the computer can do more effectively?
I keep all my source listings in hardcopy form. Why? Because it is
faster to look something up on hardcopy than online. Why? because a
24x80, 9600 baud terminal is too small and too slow to accomodate me.
If I had four or five 60-line screens with a typical effective
bandwidth (including disk latency, etc.) of about 100Kbaud, I
wouldn't need to print anything. One way of achieving this is to use
multiple windows, but it is not the only way (another is to have four
or five 60-line terminals).
If paper is more effective, then there is a mismatch between the
needs of the person and the software. I don't see anything which has
yet made that statement even suspect. What we need to do is explore
how to eliminate that mismatch.
joe
Subject: Programming by example
∂16-Jul-81 1052 Halbert at PARC-MAXC Programming by example
Date: 13 Jul 1981 10:35 PDT
From: Halbert at PARC-MAXC
To: WorkS@mit-ai
Here is a short description of programming by example. I
have gotten requests from a LARGE number of WorkS subscribers
requesting it.
------------------------------
Since a few people have mentioned programming by example and
the work I've done on it specifically, I will try to give a
brief outline of what it is, and what I've done:
At its simplest, programming by example is just recording a
sequence of commands to a system, so that the sequence can
be played back at a later time, to do the same or a similar
task. The sequence forms a program. The user tells the
system, "Remember what I am doing". The system executes
the user's commands normally, but also remembers them.
The user has created a program by giving an example what he
wants the program to do. However, the statements in his
program are the same as the normal system commands. The
user does not have to learn some programming language with
its attendant syntax and semantics; instead he can do his
programming -in the user interface- of the system, which he
already has to know anyway in order to operate the system.
In addition, he has written the program by performing,
concretely, an example of what the program is supposed to
do. Since he can easily verify whether he did his example
correctly, he can be fairly confident his program will work.
He does not have to understand his program abstractly.
Naturally, straight line programs without parameters are not
very interesting. Once the user has written a program he
may want to -generalize- it. He may want to print file Y,
instead of the file X he used in his example. So the system
has to provide a way for him to to change the constants in
his programs to variables, and specify how these variables
are to be bound (e.g. by prompting the user, by looking for
similar data, etc.)
The user may also want to insert conditional or looping
constructs into his program. There are various ways, which
I will not go into here, of inserting these constructs into
programs using programming-by-example techniques.
I would emphasize that this kind of programming by example
does not use inductive inference techniques used in AI,
in which the user does several examples, and the system
inductively determines what has changed from example to
example (e.g. 1+2, 5+2, hmm, first operand must be a
variable; or a[1], a[2], a[3], hmm, looks like a loop
stepping through the array).
The seminal work in programming by example was done by Dave
Smith of Xerox in his Stanford Ph.D. Thesis. Gael Curry
did similar work in which the examples given by the user
could contain abstract as well as concrete data values.
Certain industrial robots can be programmed by example by
guiding them through the task they are to perform. Here
at Xerox, I have added programming by example to a prototype
of Star. The system provides program generalization and
an iteration mechanism as well as simple command recording.
I have written up this work and my ideas on programming by
example so far in a Master's project report done for U.C.
Berkeley. I intend to continue and extend this work into a
Ph.D. thesis.
References:
Daniel C. Halbert. An Example of Programming by Example.
Master's project report, University of California, Berkeley,
and internal report, Xerox Corporation, Office Products
Division, Palo Alto, CA.
David C. Smith. Pygmalion: A Computer Program to Model and
Stimulate Creative Thought. Ph.D. thesis, Stanford University,
1975 and Birkhauser Verlag, 1977.
Gael A. Curry. Programming by Abstract Demonstration. Ph.D.
thesis, University of Washington, Seattle. Technical Report
No. 78-03-02. March, 1978.
Henry Lieberman and Carl Hewitt. A Session with Tinker:
Interleaving Program Testing with Program Writing.
Conference Record of the 1980 LISP Conference, Stanford
University, August, 1980. [describes a programming by
example system for Lisp]
Michael A. Bauer. Programming By Examples. Artificial
Intelligence 12: 1-12 (May 1979). [describes inductive
inference techniques].
Copies of my report are available on request.
Dan Halbert
Xerox Corporation
Office Products Division
3450 Hillview Avenue
Palo Alto, California
or
Halbert@PARC-MAXC (preferred)
(or csvax.halbert@Berkeley)
--Dan
-----
Subject: Re: Reliablity
∂16-Jul-81 1634 Bernie Cosell <cosell at BBN-UNIX> Re: Reliablity
Date: 15 Jul 1981 13:50:10 EDT (Wednesday)
From: Bernie Cosell <cosell at BBN-UNIX>
In-Reply-to: Your message of 13 Jul 1981 11:20 EDT
To: BHYDE at BBNG
Cc: Works at MIT-AI
I agree with Ben that the `real' accounting fellows really did figure
it mostly out (several hundred years ago!), with Journalizing and
autid trails and the like. I would like to make a tiny correction:
if I remember correctly from some accounting courses I took, double
entry bookkeeping has nothing really to do with the `journal' aspect:
the double entry name comes from the fact that both debits and credits
are simultaneously maintained and every financial transaction is fully
entered on both sides. Thus, at any moment, you can check a set of
books for a simple addition error by simply totaling up all of the
accounts and the balance should always be zero. (I think that this
is called taking a trial balance).
/Bernie
Subject: PIE reports from PARC
∂16-Jul-81 1811 Chris Ryland <RYLAND at SRI-KL> PIE reports from PARC
Date: 16 Jul 1981 1446-PDT
From: Chris Ryland <RYLAND at SRI-KL>
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
Since I've gotten quite a few requests for the PIE reports
I referenced, I'm forwarding the official requesting address
and the report identifiers:
CSL-81-3, Goldstein & Bobrow "An experimental description
based program environment - four reports" and
CSL-81-5 Goldstein & Bobrow "A layered approach to software
design" are available by sending a message to Jenkins@PARC
with your address.
Subject: Quickie poll
∂16-Jul-81 1825 Lloyd at MIT-AI Quickie poll
Date: 15 July 1981 2220-EDT
From: Lloyd at MIT-AI
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
How many people on this list are ACTIVELY hacking a personal
workstation in hopes of creating a real live 'office automation'
or 'executive information' system? I feel fairly certain that
the PARC folk are but how 'bout the rest of you?
Brian
P.S. It's OK to swamp my mailbox this time. I will pass the
results of my poll on if anyone is really interested.
B
Subject: Re: Making paper go away
∂16-Jul-81 1841 Zellich at OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich) Re: Making paper go away
Date: 16 Jul 1981 0936-PDT
From: Zellich at OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich)
To: Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A, works at MIT-AI
cc: ZELLICH
In response to the message sent 14 July 1981 1211-EDT (Tuesday)
from Joe.Newcomer@CMU-10A
Well, there is already a way to scan quickly through files:
it's called structured (or hierarchical, or whatever) files
a la Engelbart's NLS (now called Augment) and (Ted Nelson's ?)
Hypertext.
You can look at one or more levels, and independently one or
more lines of those levels, and open up or close up the part
on your screen to see more or less. It makes it very fast
to see what is in a document you've never seen before, or
to find something specific in an old document when you don't
know it's exact location. You may even be able to "address"
desired text by context. Combined with a windowing capability,
a pointing mouse, and auxiliary 5-key keyset, this gives an
extremely powerful tool - now if only it came packaged in a
briefcase-sized personal DEC-10...
Structured files are great, but do have an interface problem
because the rest of the world uses "flat" files - it's not
always easy to translate between the two - especially if there
is highly-formatted text like columnated tables, or "drawings"
(dot-and-dash boxes, etc.). Of course, the interface with the
rest of the world is a problem when using *any* advanced system
- I might have a little trouble putting a Star icon in a netmail
message, too.
-Rich
-------
Subject: Re: Making paper go away
∂16-Jul-81 1902 Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A Re: Making paper go away
Date: 16 July 1981 1400-EDT (Thursday)
From: Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A
To: works at mit-ai
In-Reply-To: Zellich@OFFICE-3's message of 16 Jul 81 11:35-EST
One of the main problems in dealing with structured files is that
most operating systems give you "the files" and "the user space"
and you're on your own to figure out what to do with the files.
In Hydra, it was possible to define the text string transformation
of a file as part of the "subfile" type description. No matter
how peculiar the internal representation of the file might be,
the interface it provided to the outside world was a sequential
"flat" file suitable as input to a compiler or lister. Of course,
there were other interfaces which were presented; internally, the
editor for that file type was powerful enough to manipulate the
full representation. One could also have a "display" interface
by which illustrations were made visible on a CRT, or a "printer"
interface by which the file was presented in a form suitable for
printing (e.g., a Press file format would have been possible).
This is necessarily a simplified view, and we didn't begin to
explore all the problems, but the really important idea is that
at the basic interface, an ordinary program could NOT get at the
bits of the file. Only the bits presented by the file interface.
This abstraction is critical in protecting users from file repre-
sentations, and I consider any file system which does not support
at least this form abstraction to now be hopelessly behind the
state of the art.
I hope to do some more research in this area in the next few
years. The Hydra idea may NOT be the best, or even close to
right, but it is a whole lot better than any conventional file
system.
(In Unix, it is possible to use pipes to provide the transfor-
mation; a filter converts a complex file to a sequential byte
stream. Alas, Unix does not provide the protection necessary
to keep any random program from trashing the file by THINKING
it is a sequential byte stream file. Nonetheless, their heart
is in the right place. This is one of the reasons I think
pipes are a winning concept).
(The message based operating system for Spice, called Accent,
makes it possible to build systems with this style of
interaction).
joe
Subject: Making paper go away
∂16-Jul-81 1928 Vaughan Pratt <CSD.PRATT at SU-SCORE> Making paper go away
Date: 16 Jul 1981 1445-PDT
From: Vaughan Pratt <CSD.PRATT at SU-SCORE>
To: works at MIT-AI
If paper is more effective, then there is a mismatch
between the needs of the person and the software.
Joe's implication that any mismatch between people and computers
needs to be eliminated is similar to the attitude that gave rise
to the BART fiasco. This zeal to automate everything is misplaced.
Some products already do their job quite well. Paper, for example.
One thing I particularly like about paper is that I can leave
it on the beach while I'm swimming without being too concerned
that someone is likely to walk off with it. Is anyone willing to
predict which century will see portable computers able to compete
with paper as an improbable target of petty thieves?
A more appropriate attitude would be to keep an eye open for
opportunities where the computer can outperform the traditional
product. I suspect this is what Joe really has in mind when
he talks about automating paper. Paper has its disadvantages
as well as its advantages. Pen-and-paper is a poor medium
for speed of text input (many of us type twice as fast as we
write, though presumably not Steven Gutfreund, who says he
prefers mice and chordsets to 4-row QWERTY keyboards). Paper
is inconvenient to transmit, with a delay measured in days
rather than minutes. It is difficult to search associatively.
It does not lend itself to alteration. Making duplicates for
redundancy (e.g. guarding against fire etc.) is awkward.
Text and graphics macros (Letraset, stencils, french curves,
rubber stamps, etc.) are relatively inflexible. Conversion
to machine readable form is much harder than the reverse
direction.
The moral is that while computers outperform paper in some
categories, it is wishful thinking to imagine that it will
also soon come to dominate in all the remaining categories.
Needless to say, the moral applies equally well to other
products besides paper, e.g. BART drivers.
Applying this to AI, I would prefer to characterize AI
not so much in terms of passing Turing's test as looking
for additional human activities that lend themselves to
automation.
Subject: Re: Office of Tomorrow, where is it?
∂16-Jul-81 1947 Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A Re: Office of Tomorrow, where is it?
Date: 14 July 1981 1222-EDT (Tuesday)
From: Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A
To: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
CC: works at mit-ai
In-Reply-To: DREIFU@WHARTON-10's message of 12 Jul 81 18:55-EST
I suppose you've heard of the idea of putting 2GHz packet
transmission repeaters on every commercial aircraft? The idea
is that there is hardly a moment when there isn't at least one
aircraft over someplace in the U.S., so the number of times
you would find the global network unavailable to your pocket
terminal should be fairly small...and of course, if you are on
the airliner, you should be able to use the facility as well.
joe
∂16-Jul-81 2007 Chip Maguire <Maguire at UTAH-20> Re: Office of Tomorrow, where is it?
Date: 13 Jul 1981 1617-MDT
From: Chip Maguire <Maguire at UTAH-20>
Subject: Re: Office of Tomorrow, where is it?
To: DREIFU at WHARTON-10, works at MIT-ML
cc: Maguire at UTAH-20
In-Reply-To: Your message of 13-Jul-81 0745-MDT
Over two years ago I spoke with the North American VP of
a large European airline, he was looking toward terminals
in the airplanes for both passanger use and for airline
reservations/info (because of the high degree of being late
screwing up large numbers of passengers schedules - let the
passengers change their reservations while circling JFK or
when making that suprise landing at Moline). His company
was also thinking of utilizing TELETEXT for reservations
in cities offering this service.
Chip
-------
∂16-Jul-81 2023 JWALKER at BBNA Re: Office of Tomorrow, where is it?
Date: 13 Jul 1981 0934-EDT
Sender: JWALKER at BBNA
Subject: Re: Office of Tomorrow, where is it?
From: JWALKER at BBNA
To: WorkS at AI
Message-ID: <[BBNA]13-Jul-81 09:34:24.JWALKER>
In-Reply-To: Your message of 12 Jul 1981 (Sunday) 1955-EDT
Why not on airplanes? Until the problems of electro-whatever
interference are more under control we won't be using terminals
on airplanes. As they explained on one flight I was on, the
kiddies couldn't use their electronic games because they
interfered with the plane's navigation equipment. So I think
it will be awhile before we beam communications out of the sky
to our home computers!
Subject: Icons and analogy
∂12-Jul-81 1804 BHYDE at BBNG Icons and analogy
Date: 10 Jul 1981 2252-EDT
Sender: BHYDE at BBNG
From: BHYDE at BBNG
To: Works at MIT-AI
Message-ID: <[BBNG]10-Jul-81 22:52:13.BHYDE>
It is not difficult to develop a sympathy for the
earlier comment that it seems sad to adopt as a primitive
of the automated office all of the curious mechanism of
the traditional paper mill. Three ring binders, electric
pencil sharpeners (where ones mouse regularly visits), to
calling cards.
There is a reason for this fundamental decision being so
popular in the community. I believe that I recognize in
this choice a pattern I first saw in the product lines of
the process control companies, product offerings always
mimic existing products. This seems to be a fundamental
truth of all marketing. If a product is completely new
then your customers will not be able to comprehend it,
they will not recognize it, it will be foreign, odd ball.
In the real time control community a very popular device is
the programmable controller, it replaces a relay controller,
its operation is specified with relay ladder diagrams. It
is implemented with a microprocessor, programmed on a video
terminal. The video terminal is often specially constructed
to be able to draw the ladder diagrams. I have heard sane
and successful providers of these devices talk of the new
model that includes as a standard component a speaker which
will generate the simulated noise of the relays clicking.
Once installed the plant foreman will never notice the
difference.
In creating a successful product one has to sell too many
groups of people, technical management, business management,
sales management, the sales men, and lastly the customers.
Each to these groups must be taught. Taught enough so that
they feel warm and comfortable about this new (and hence
suspect) product. If one can explain the product via analogy
then their rich body of experience ( hence trust ) with the
analogous situation can be used to leverage the short period
of time available to train them in.
What is this they cry! If you can't answer in one sentence
the sale is lost.
Ben Hyde
Subject: Redefining the art
∂13-Jul-81 0712 Brian P. Lloyd <LLOYD at MIT-AI> Redefining the art
Date: 12 July 1981 12:42-EDT
From: Brian P. Lloyd <LLOYD at MIT-AI>
To: WORKS at MIT-AI
Yes, there are significant marketing reasons for not changing
the state-of-the-art too rapidly. Fortunately we do not need
to concern ourselves with what the customer expects. Look
at Xerox-PARC and the Alto system: I don't think that they
concerned themselves with market acceptance when they first
designed the Alto. Their experiences have brought them to the
forefront of the personal workstation and office automation
marketplaces. Ok, I accept "Star" as the current SOTA. I now
want to know what lies beyond. On a day-to-day basis I have
to stifle my creative urges in order to satisfy the needs of
a marketing organization. In this forum I want to discuss
future concepts.
Brian
Subject: Re: Re: A Quibble or two
∂13-Jul-81 0810 gaines at RAND-UNIX Re: Re: A Quibble or two
Date: Sunday, 12 Jul 1981 16:14-PDT
To: Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A
Cc: works at MIT-AI
In-reply-to: Your message of 7 July 1981 1218-EDT (Tuesday).
From: gaines at RAND-UNIX
.... If using little pieces of paper is more effective than
using the computer, this indicates that something is very
wrong in the design of the software. Either the software
is good enough to replace paper, which is presumably the
intent, or somebody blew the design.
This implicitly states the view that paper is going to go away.
I don't believe it. As computer use increases in offices, I
think that we can expect that the amount of paper shuffled
will substantially decrease. But paper has its own uses. It
is easier to scan rapidly through a large report (or a printed
collection of junk messages from the Arpanet) that to do the
same on-line. It is wonderful to be able to write or draw, in
colors, on a printed page, including on top of the writing. I
can often find interesting things in a file cabinet when I'm not
sure just where I filed it than I can find things filed on-line
when I am faced with the same degree of uncertainty. I expect
that the evolution of office work brought on by intensive use of
computer works stations will cause many changes which affect how
and when paper is used, but will not eliminate it.
Incidentally, the one thing really needed is a cheap way to
read in a computer-printed piece of paper, so I don't have to
maintain the corresponding text on-line. If we had really cheap
large capacity stores so that things could stay on-line forever,
then it would be nice to copy anything printed to a retreivable
place, with the identification automatically printed on the piece
of paper so that if I delete it from my files, I can retreive it
again when I next look at the piece of paper.
Overall, I think we need more progress on getting the paper
and computer worlds to mesh together nicely, in contrast to
the objective of getting rid of paper.
Subject: Re: Spatial design for a workstation
∂07-Jul-81 0556 JWALKER at BBNA Re: Spatial design for a workstation
Date: 6 Jul 1981 2102-EDT
Sender: JWALKER at BBNA
From: JWALKER at BBNA
To: WorkS at AI
Message-ID: <[BBNA] 6-Jul-81 21:02:05.JWALKER>
In-Reply-To: Your message of 1 Jul 81 10:03:14-EDT (Wed)
My initial reaction to your scenario is that the idea of selecting
an operation is no different in essence from continuing a suspended
operation. E.G. selecting INBOX is exactly the same as continuing
a mail reader. The distinction is in being able to reinstate visual
context. This is an important distinction of course, being made
feasible by the new generation of hardware for displays.
One question though. This scenario description assumes that each thing
you can select has one "reason" for being selected. The INBOX being
selected means you are rummaging through it. Is this assumption likely
to hold? That is, will the reason for selecting something always be
unique or unambiguous enough that the right set of operations will
become available automatically?
Jan
∂07-Jul-81 0650 Zellich at OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich) Re: Spatial design for a workstation
Date: 6 Jul 1981 1731-PDT
From: Zellich at OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich)
Subject: Re: Spatial design for a workstation
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
I currently use a system that keeps track of the previous infile locations,
the previous file(s), and the previous programs/tools. It is very
handy to be able to do this, but it *does* have some drawbacks. One is
that there is a finite number of such things that can be kept track of,
so occasionally you lose track of the nth-back thing (the computer does,
anyway - you may still remember it yourself); the other main drawback is
that sometimes you *don't* want to keep track of everything you just did.
You can't win, really. Either the system tries to keep track of *everything*
and makes it really confusing to go back through the ring structures after
being online for a couple of hours, or the user must issue an
explicit command to either "save" or to "don't save" when interrupting to
somewhere else.
-Rich Zellich
-------
∂07-Jul-81 0721 DPR at MIT-XX Spatial design for a workstation
Date: Monday, 6 July 1981 09:39-EDT
From: DPR at MIT-XX
To: Rivanciw.DHQ at UDel
Cc: works at Mit-Ai
Subject: Spatial design for a workstation
Congratulations. It seems that you have just discovered the paradigm
of the Xerox STAR and Negroponte's Spatial Data Management systems. More
likely you knew about them already. With a little improvement in
Xerox's software, this could be the substance of an ad for STAR!
THe problem, though, is the same as the one on my desk--it get cluttered
fast with incomplete tasks. If certain tasks have long time horizons,
and certain ones have short time horizons, the result is a mess. If the
priority is not correlated with time horizon (since in my case there is
always more to do than can be done, requiring that some things NEVER
get completed), then the pile gets deeper and deeper. So now I need
three dimensions, and a way to hand tasks off to others in a partially
completed state if it looks like I won't be able to finsih them.
How does my secretary extract stuff from my "automated desk" and finish
it when I'm out--or conversely, how do I or a temp deal with her "automated
desk" when she's sick?
David
∂07-Jul-81 0748 Deutsch at PARC-MAXC Re: Spatial design for a workstation
Date: 6 Jul 1981 07:53 PDT
From: Deutsch at PARC-MAXC
Subject: Re: Spatial design for a workstation
In-reply-to: Rivanciw.DHQ's message of 1 Jul 81 10:03:14-EDT (Wed)
To: Rivanciw.DHQ at UDel
cc: works at Mit-Ai
As I mentioned before, the concept you mention is exactly the one that has
evolved at Xerox over the last 10 years and is (I believe) incorporated in
the Star in a form very similar to the one you envision. Of course, your
scenario includes a good deal more "polish" than the Star in terms of the
system being more intelligent about the relative priorities, default
desires, etc. of the user.
Subject: Re: Spatial design for a workstation
∂07-Jul-81 1035 cfh at CCA-UNIX (Christopher Herot) Re: Spatial design for a workstation
Date: 6 Jul 1981 13:06:26-EDT
From: cfh at CCA-UNIX (Christopher Herot)
To: Rivanciw.DHQ at UDel
Cc: works at Mit-Ai
In response to your message of Sun Jul 5 14:23:05 1981:
We built a system here for ARPA which incorporates
some of the facilities you describe in your scenario.
The system consists of a number of intelligent (8080-based)
terminals hooked up at 9600 baud to a PDP-11/70 running
Unix. The screen provides a window into a data surface
which contains icons of various shapes. The outlines of
the icons are made up of standard printing characters.
The user can scroll the data surface by pressing an arrow
key (8 are provided to allow diagonal motion) or an
outboard joy stick.
The icons are user-defined and can correspond to any
program runnable under Unix. To run the program, the
user centers its icon on the screen and presses an
"activate" button. Typically, the program to be run
is the Ned (Rand ->BBN) display editor editing some file.
The user can return to the top level via either of two
buttons - "deactivate" or "detach". The "detach" button
suspends the program and causes the icon to blink. When
the user again activates that button, the screen is restored
to its previous state. I agree that it would have been
better to make "detach" the standard mode, but this was
not practical under Unix with the implementation approach
that we had chosen.
We haven't tried the system in an actual office environment.
Programmers found it cumbersome because there was always a
Unix command that didn't yet have an icon, and they already
knew most of the command names anyway. It usually took more
time to scroll to the icon than to type its name. People
always enjoy the demo however, and we are still looking for
a place to try it out.
Subject: Collected responses on terminal input devices
∂19-Jul-81 1612 ''The Moderator'' <WorkS-REQUEST at MIT-AI> Collected responses on terminal input devices
Date: 19 July 1981 10:00-EDT
From: "The Moderator" <WorkS-REQUEST at MIT-AI>
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
This collection of 9, relatively short messages continues the
WorkS discussion of interchangeable keyboards, touchpanels,
and other terminal input devices.
Enjoy,
RDD
------------------------------
Date: 17 July 1981 12:17-EDT
From: Steven H. Gutfreund <SHG at MIT-AI>
Subject: chordsets
To: csd.pratt at SU-SCORE
cc: WORKS at MIT-AI
Actually I don't know how I would feel after using a chordset
all day. What I am interested in is finding an alternative to
QWERTY input. There must be something with better ergonometrics
than a matrix of keys laid out to suit 18th century designers
of mechanical devices.
- Steven Gutfreund
------------------------------
Date: 18 July 1981 07:50-EDT
From: Brian P. Lloyd <LLOYD at MIT-AI>
Subject: Interchangeable keyboards
To: SHRAGE at WHARTON-10
cc: WORKS at MIT-AI
The Convergent Technologies system has the ability to change
the keyboard encoding and the font on the display. We have
experimented with AZERTY, Dvorak, and special purpose
keyboards. We have used the unencoded mode of the keyboard
to simulate a chord keyboard. The only thing we lacked was
a simple way to relabel the keys (do you have any concept of
how difficult it is to make 98 little self-adhesive labels
and stick them on your keyboard every time you make a change?).
I would be interested in the re-label-able keyboard if you get
more info.
Brian
------------------------------
Date: 18 Jul 1981 (Saturday) 1148-EDT
From: SHRAGE at WHARTON-10 (Jeffrey Shrager)
Subject: LCD interchangeable keycaps.
To: lloyd at MIT-AI, works at MIT-AI
Well, let's let our imaginations run wild for a moment. It might
be possible to construct a 50x50 (or even less could do it) LCD
display with individually addressable points. Since the time
that an LCD takes to fade is very long, a rather slow Z80 would
be able to keep up with the updating of 50 or 60 of these. The
problem is really in fabricating the LCD and in wiring the keys
since there would have to be all these wires to each key (LCD is
not XY addressable as far as I know). The trick is to minimize
wires to the key. Typically this is done by putting encoding
onboard (onkey). Then we would only need two or three wires to
each key. I would think that if someone set their mind to it the
technology exists to do this job right.
Here are two other alternative in case you don't happen to have
an LCD fabrication plant in your back yard:
(1) put LCD strips just above the separated rows of keys. The
problem here is that the separation of the keys could make
it rather difficult to type.
(2) Train people to type on totally blank keys by reading a
"keyboard icon" that is ALWAYS displayed at the bottom of
the screen. This is my favorite idea and I'll bet that it
is not hard to so train typists. Well, give it a try and
let me know what you discover.
-- Jeff
------------------------------
Date: 18 July 1981 23:17-EDT
From: Brian P. Lloyd <LLOYD at MIT-MC>
Subject: LCD interchangeable keycaps.
To: WORKS at MIT-MC, SHRAGE at WHARTON-10
CT has an interesting keyboard diagnostic along the lines you
proposed. The program displays a facsimile of the keyboard on
the screen, and echoes what you type by turning the corresponding
key reverse video. It even shows whether or not the LEDs on
the keys are lit. I see no reason that this display couldn't
be shrunk and placed in its own window at the bottom of the
screen.
Good idea you had!
Brian
------------------------------
Date: 16 Jul 1981 20:53:37-PDT
From: CSVAX.rob at Berkeley
Subject: Tablets, mice, etc.
There is a very nice tablet available from Kurta Corporation
(206 S. River Dr., Tempe, Arizona, 85281 (602)968-8709). It
comes with either a parallel or serial interface, so if you
choose you needn't decode 9600 baud ASCII (a major break-
through...). It's about 8"x11", and if you ask for the Bell
Labs cursor you'll get a 3-button cursor much like a mouse.
We have a couple here, and are pleased with them. People
using them mostly feel they prefer the tablet to a mouse.
Rob Pike (research!rob@berkeley i think. or (for sure) robt@mit-mc)
------------------------------
Date: 17 Jul 1981 18:44:25-PDT
From: decvax!duke!unc!smb at Berkeley
To: duke!decvax!ucbvax!WorkS@MIT-AI
Subject: touching mice
I'm not too crazy about any of the pointing systems I've seen
described here, because I don't like having to take my hands
off of the keyboard. Besides, menus tend to have too few
options (can you imagine a menu for the UNIX command set) and
they impede the user who knows what he/she wants to do next.
But there seem to be enough folk out there who LIKE to worship
icons, so.... an idea I've seen suggested for a pointing device
is a light pen that's worn as a thimble or attached to a ring.
One must still remove a hand from the keyboard, but at least
there's no need to grope for squirmy mice. This idea works
best, it would seem, in situations where there's a fairly
large amount of pure text work, as well as commands -- say,
a text editor.
--Steve Bellovin, UNC, Chapel Hill
------------------------------
Date: 16 July 1981 13:54 edt
From: MPresser.Multics at MIT-Multics
Subject: Tracking balls
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
In-Reply-To: Message of 15 July 1981 09:32 edt from Joe.Newcomer
I have used a reasonably good tracking ball on a system that
did the automatic recognition of human chromosomes. Every
so often, the system would get confused and not be able to
separate two chromosomes that were, or appeared to be touching.
The ball was used like a scissors to cut the surface, so that
two disconnected objects appeared. Our ball was homemade, and
the most circuitous of cuts to be made in next to no time.
The principle used was that of extreme gearing down, so that
very fine motions could be made. For these purposes, the
thing was very useful. I'm not sure how it would have worked
for menu manipulation. We used the terminal keyboard for that.
------------------------------
Date: 16 Jul 1981 0924-PDT
From: Chris Ryland <RYLAND at SRI-KL>
Subject: Bill Park's message
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
In-Reply-To: Your message of 16-Jul-81 0400-PDT
Bill Park's message mentioned what I believe XEROX marketed as a
"cat" on the 850-series word processors: a small area which you
stroke to move the cursor. Since these systems were fixed-font
oriented, I don't know if these cats would be useful in a more
high-resolution environment.
------------------------------
Date: 18 Jul 1981 (Saturday) 1110-EDT
From: SHRAGE at WHARTON-10 (Jeffrey Shrager)
Subject: Visionary terminals
To: minsky at MIT-AI, works at MIT-AI
If you sneeze does it blow all the icons off the screen?
------------------------------
End of collected responses on terminal input devices
****************************************************
Subject: Bell Labs "writers workbench"
∂19-Jul-81 1613 mike at RAND-UNIX Bell Labs ''writers workbench''
Date: Saturday, 18 Jul 1981 12:43-PDT
From: mike at RAND-UNIX
To: works at MIT-ML
As has been mentioned, Bell Labs has put together a "writers
workbench" which is a set of tools to help detect and correct
common errors. Along with a spell program, there is also a
program to correct "bad diction", along with an "explain"
program which acts as an interactive thesaurus.
If you are interested, send me a message and I will forward
off the manual page.
Michael
Subject: writing aids
∂19-Jul-81 1614 Lauren at UCLA-SECURITY (Lauren Weinstein) writing aids
Date: 18 Jul 1981 0218-PDT (Saturday)
From: Lauren at UCLA-SECURITY (Lauren Weinstein)
To: ELLEN at MC
CC: BUG-EMACS,WORKS at AI
While I cannot help you with EMACS, there is a package of
programs running under Unix called, I believe, the "Writer's
Workbench". These programs do all sorts of neat tricks, like
looking for "awkward" sentence construction, overused or trite
words and phrases, and all sorts of similar actions. Kinda neat.
--Lauren--
---
Subject: Realtime proofreaders
∂19-Jul-81 1615 SHRAGE at WHARTON-10 (Jeffrey Shrager) Realtime proofreaders
Date: 18 Jul 1981 (Saturday) 1130-EDT
From: SHRAGE at WHARTON-10 (Jeffrey Shrager)
To: ellen at MIT-XX, works at MIT-AI
I think that one would lose a great deal of the effect of "offline"
proofreading if the system did much of that work in realtime which
the text was being entered. The clearest argument against that type
of system is that you are supposing that the errors are entirely
detectable from PREVIOUS context. Why should that be so? If you
are not assuming that then at what point do you extract and test?
Coherence is not a clearly distinguishable effect at any given level
(sentence, pgh, etc). Additionally, coherence and intention are
understanding effects. It is not clear that they can be extracted
without a rather fancy knowledge acquisition and utilization system
-- not to mention a grammar and semantics analyzer to front end the
thing (neither of which we are very comfortable with yet). Lastly,
more concretely, having a lot of little aid demons around it okay to
a point. You have to avoid the mistake that Twenex makes in being
overhelpful -- I wish that I could disable the space-delimiter help
system that keeps telling me that TPYE is not a legal command before
I've had a moment to back up over it and fix it!
Subject: Configuration
∂19-Jul-81 1617 BHYDE at BBNG Configuration
Date: 16 Jul 1981 1445-EDT
From: BHYDE at BBNG
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
Message-ID: <[BBNG]16-Jul-81 14:45:00.BHYDE>
There seen to be a clusters of similar designs for work stations.
One group is into bit slices and microcode tuning of instruction
set and i/o drivers. Another group seems to be into integrating
state of the art leading edge lsi and i/o devices into an expensive
terminal/computer ala 68000, winchester, and bit map. A smaller
group seems to be into building (the low rider community) super
personal machines a small cluster of 6809 which is a very smart
terminal mostly.
Is there a right answer here?
There seem to be various configuration control designs, the
strongest group seems to be big into 10 Megabit shared medium.
Why is 1 Megabit not good enough, what's wrong with 9600 baud
phone connections, what is so hot about shared medium designs
verses say a local store and forward design with twisted pair?
I don't understand how the configuration problem got standardized
to 10 Megabit shared medium so quickly?
People seem to be very excited about getting rid of the computer
center. I remember the pleasure of discovering that some one
else worried about backup, maintenance, selecting the standard
editor, etc. I believe these places have been called centers
of excellence. The work station architecture seem to be going
in the other direction, for what I believe are marketing reasons
not technical ones. Are there technical ones?
Are new forms of service centers going to appear in the
community? Are we going to see a high speed/quality printing
center in Chicago with one day mailing turn around and very
low cost per page? Are we going to see file backup whales
offering competing cost per bit archiving spread around the
nation? Federal expressing a four color document would add
very little to the cost of a hundred page one time printing.
If I offered a intercity file transfer with one day delivery,
and very low cost would there be any buyers?
All of these questions are the same meta question, how are
systems like this going to be configured, at the office level,
facility level, city level, and national level. Where will
the economies of scale fall out? What is the unit dollars
available at each layer?
Ben Hyde
Subject: [don: EP]
∂18-Jul-81 0044 Dave Crocker <dcrocker@udel> [don: EP]
Date: 17 Jul 81 12:49:40-EDT (Fri)
From: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@udel>
To: WorkS at Mit-Ai
cc: Don at Rand-Unix
Don Waterman has done work similar to Halbert's and said he
would not mind my forwarding the enclosed citations.
Dave
----- Forwarded message # 1:
Date: Thursday, 16 Jul 1981 16:09-PDT
To: Halbert at PARC-MAXC
Subject: EP
From: don at RAND-UNIX
Dan: I saw a brief description on your Exemplary Programming work
and thought you might be interested in similar work done here at
Rand a few years ago. The references are:
Waterman, D. A., Faught, W., Klahr, P.,Rosenschein,
S., and Wesson, R. Design Issues for Exemplary
Programming. In Automatic Program Construction
Techniques, Biermann, G., Guiho, G., and Kodratoff,
Y. (Eds), MacMillan, In Press.
Faught, W., Waterman, D. A., Rosenschein, S., Gorlin,
D., and Tepper, S. EP-2: A Prototype Exemplary
Programming System. Rand Report R-2411-ARPA, 1979.
Waterman, D. A. Exemplary programming in RITA. In
Pattern-Directed Inference Systems (D. A. Waterman
and F. Hayes-Roth, Eds.). Academic Press, New
York, 1978.
plus a few others. I can send you copies of the papers if you
are interested.
Regards,
Don Waterman
----- End of forwarded messages
Subject: Alternatives to making paper go away
∂18-Jul-81 0106 SHRAGE at WHARTON-10 (Jeffrey Shrager) Alternatives to making paper go away
Date: 16 Jul 1981 (Thursday) 2305-EDT
From: SHRAGE at WHARTON-10 (Jeffrey Shrager)
To: works at MIT-AI
An alternative to hierarchical file structures for quickly perusing
bulk data: We once tried to implement a fancy solution to this
problem on a rather fancy piece of VG 3-D graphics equipment. Hook
the Z axis into the velocity of a joystick so that the faster you
move the farther away from the text you get. [Actually it isn't
quite as simple as that -- there are various tuned lags that have
to be implanted in order to give the user a chance to respond to
the modifed view, etc]. The effect is that of flying a helicopter
over your text and automatically zoom down for a close up when
you've decided that you're in the right part. I have never seen
a device less fancy than the VG that can respond and redraw quickly
enough to do this properly. The VG is a very high speed vector
graphics display that isn't really built for text work. It has a
stylus pad/light pen/knobs/buttons/full+keyboard (sorry, no meta
keys)/ and the nicest vector display around but it's really for
pictures, not text -- shame about that∞ Anyhow, we started to
do this and I Got sick of havIng to deal with Fortrash and the
VG internal coding language after about a week so it never "flew"
but it was a nice idea. The real advantage is in reviewing huge
chunks od text (like the Unix manual) thatare in some order (say,
alphabetically) because the texp is still in front of your face
but the letters are smaller (and you get more of them on the page)
when you zoom out.
Subject: Re: Making paper go away
∂18-Jul-81 0130 Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A Re: Making papEr go away
Date: 17 July 1981 1246-EDT (Friday)
From: Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A
To: Vaughan Pratt <CSD.PRATT at SU-SCORE>
CC: works at mit-ai
In-Reply-To: Vaughan Pratt's message of 16 Jul 81 16:45-EST
Actually, your example is quite amusing. We were recently at a
conference at Pajaro Dunes. One of our participants was walking
along the beach during one of the interludes, and left his book
on the beach while he went into the water. When he came out, he
found that someone had stolen his book.
Yes, paper is more effective for some things RIGHT NOW. While I
don't believe automating blindly is a good idea, for most values
of use of paper I would prefer to use a computer. Even if I
produce hardcopy so it can be carried around, read on beaches and
busses, etc., I prefer to produce it via the computer. There are
lots of cases where paper is more convenient ONLY because of limi-
tations of the computer (e.g., 9600 baud slow lines). And when
computers will cost only $8.95 (or free with a deposit of $500),
there will be far less reason to walk off with one. We have to
quit thinking as if computers will always be expensive, and decide
what we can do with them when they are not. In fact, assume the
cost of the computer is ZERO. Now, what would you LIKE to do with
a computer? What capabilities should it possess at the interface?
Assume a communication cost of ZERO. How would you like to commu-
nicate with other computers? Now, at any given instant we have
to temper these ideas by the rather nasty fact that computers and
communications really do cost money. But that should NOT limit
our imaginations. A Dorado is a good example of what happens if
you let ideas not be limited by technology, and technology comes
along. Things which were unbelievably bad to run on an Alto run
just fine on a Dorado.
Don't tell me automating everything is bad. I don't believe it.
Automating everything INCORRECTLY is bad. I'd rather worry about
how to do it right, even if right isn't possible, than to not
think about the problem because this year's technology can't
support it.
joe
Subject: Scanning structured text
∂18-Jul-81 0150 Bob Hyman <HYMAN at DEC-MARLBORO> Scanning structured text
Date: 17 Jul 1981 1447-EDT
From: Bob Hyman <HYMAN at DEC-MARLBORO>
To: works at MIT-AI
Message-ID: <"MS5(1715)+GLXLIB1(1033)" 11744780684.17.399.17489 at DEC-MARLBORO>
The static structure of text rarely matches its "content",
except for artificial cases like program sources. Most
of the time, the salient features of a document, which
are the ones I'd like a structured editor to key on, are
dynamically defined by the reader. Until such a symbiotic
system is available, the artificially imposed structure
of the presentation is likely to impede comprehension,
not expedite it.
The alternative is to agree on a canonic form for a class of
documents, and for authors to conform their contribution to
the mold. This solution makes discussion of the canonic form
difficult, and is probably sufficiently restrictive to repel
prospective contributors on other topics as well.
Bob
Subject: Editing
∂18-Jul-81 0211 V. Ellen Golden <ELLEN at MIT-MC> Editing
Date: 14 July 1981 03:12-EDT
From: V. Ellen Golden <ELLEN at MIT-MC>
To: BUG-EMACS at MIT-MC, works at MIT-AI
cc: ellen at MIT-XX
As is often my occupation, I am indoctrinating a new user to
EMACS. She (factual, please do not accuse me of sexism) asked
after a couple of hours of EMACS-power, if it would be possible
for "it" ("The Computer", i.e. a program) to warn her while she
is typing a text, that she has used the same word repeatedly.
I pointed out to her that (a) many words in English repeat because
they are common (parts of the verb to be for instance) (b) some
words need to repeat, like "pathologist" because of the technical
nature of the text, and thus to chose between "facts" and "data"
in discourse might be hard, or to warn her that in the last two
paragraphs the word "experimental" had repeated 6 times might not
work. However, her problem is understandable in English terms:
she is typing up notes for a doctor. He wants to write "well",
which to him means not to repeat himself, which means not using
the same word over and over again, unless it is a technical term
(a distinction he may recognize but I am not sure). His hard-
working secretary is trying to help him, and now that she knows
how much EMACS can help her in just the typing up of his notes,
she is asking for what she sees as the next step, a program
to help her with editorial corrections... (i.e. "How many
times have I used "practical"... should I get out the thesaurus?"
-- next step of course is to provide the thesaurus, but let's
concentrate on repetition of non-common but non-technical words
in text).
Any thoughts on this?
And my comment, to everybody, "BUG-EMACS", and "Work Stations":
See, secretaries are NOT a sub-species of homo-sapiens, they in
fact often request the most sophisticated features from their
editors, justifiers, work stations, etc. In fact, some of them
are even willing to work on programming the features they want
(they do know the specifications, after all!).
Subject: Writing English
∂18-Jul-81 0230 JWALKER at BBNA Writing English
Date: Tuesday, 14 July 1981 22:34-EDT
From: JWALKER at BBNA
To: Ellen at XX, WorkS at AI
CC: Bug-EMACS at AI
I have for several years wanted to write a system with the goals
you described in your note to Bug-EMACS and WorkS. (No funding
has materialized though.)
Some work has been done on the problem by people at Bell Labs.
See the paper by Lorinda Cherry in the June issue of SIGPLAN
Notices. Still the real problems are those that you pointed
out. How can a computer know your reasons for word choice?
What is it possible to do without trying to implement a system
that "understands" free text? (Good writing is more a matter
of taste than of strict rules. Of course, if mediocre writers
follow a set of strict rules, they are more likely to produce
good writing than if they ignore the rules. But that's part
of a different argument.)
I have a few EMACS functions that were designed to help in
finding and correcting common problems -- changing "which"
to "that" (if you care) and "may" to "might" or "can" (may
is ambiguous). I'd like to hear from other individuals who
have written functions to help with the job of writing as I
am working on a technical writing environment.
Jan
Subject: Ideal word-processor
∂18-Jul-81 0250 Robert Elton Maas <REM at MIT-MC> Ideal word-processor
Date: 15 July 1981 03:14-EDT
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM at MIT-MC>
I wish EMACS/RMAIL had this, but maybe if I suggest it this
feature will be installed in some future text-processing system:
You're rapidly typing new text into this editor program. As you
type, in parallel with your typing, the spelling&grammar-corrector
is checking your text. When it finds an apparent error it flags
the error and indicates alongside it a suggested correction.
Any time you want, without having to manually put the cursor back
there and manually make the correction, you may enter one of three
commands:
Stet (ignore the error, let it stand without correction)
Ok correction (make the correction it guessed at)
Repair manually (automatically put cursor there, then you
manually fix it however you want, then if the spelling
corrector still doesn't your fix it shows its new best
guess at correction and leaves the cursor there, so you
can Stet or Ok or Repair again)
After satisfying the flagged apparent error by Stet or Ok, it
shows you the next apparent error if there is any pending; but
you may just continue typing normally if you don't feel like
handling the new apparent error immediately. If you're a bad
speller, what you'd probably do is type a half a screenful
then sit there giving the Ok command for a whole batch of
errors it found, then go back to typing. Thus you wouldn't
have to constantly check your typing to see if keystrokes were
lost or words you're not sure of were wrong. If both the word
you typed and the suggested correction were wrong, but you're
lazy (it isn't an important document nor a submission to a
mass-mailing such as WORKS, just an informal note to a friend),
you could just Stet the error if it's not too gross. You could
even let the suggested corrections roll off the screen, not
bothering to even check them for grossness, if you're really
in a hurry (thus it would degenerate to what we have now if
you choose not to actually use the info the spelling-corrector
gives you).
With a Xerox-Smalltalk style of user interface, you could easily
random-access the suggested corrections, manually fixing the
gross ones and then Steting or Oking all the others en masse.
["Automate the Business Office--How and When"]
∂18-Jul-81 0311 ROBERTS at USC-ISI
Date: 15 Jul 1981 1941-PDT
Sender: ROBERTS at USC-ISI
From: ROBERTS at USC-ISI
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
Cc: roberts
Message-ID: <[USC-ISI]15-Jul-81 19:41:39.ROBERTS>
Interesting quote (attributed to an article in the "Siemens
Review") in this month's issue of "Telecommunications" magazine,
which has an article entitled "Automate the Business Office--How
and When":
"When new functions are added to an integrated work station, the
number of system components increases negligibly because existing
typewriter keyboards already possess keys for function selection,
and the function keypad will be expanded to allow the selection
of communications forms. The flat video display, designed to sit
on the desktop, is used for text preparation with correction and
editing function, the input and output of texts into memory, and
the input and output of texts to be transmitted. The flat screen
is the input/output medium for videotex, interactive videotex,
cable television, storing data from the user's own integrated
work station, and for departmental or central data-processing
systems. Finally, it also serves as the output medium for the
picturephone and video teleconferencing, for which an additional
camera, microphone and loudspeaker are incorporated into the work
station."
Now that's what I call a workstation! Comments, anyone?
Carlos Roberts
Subject: Talking Workstations, that elusive 'external device'.
∂18-Jul-81 0338 DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus) Talking Workstations, that elusive 'external device'.
Date: 17 Jul 1981 (Friday) 2127-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
To: works at MIT-AI
o Introducing Talking Workstations, Part II in presentation series
For some time, people have been doing research and development in
speech recognition.
As the 'locator device' why not voice recognizer?
While I am in my screen editor, I could say 'INSERT' or 'UPSCREEN'
rather than the key strokes.
I could say 'SEARCH' then it would prompt me for a search string.
In addition a key should be provided to toggle this feature on
and off. Imagine a demonstration saying Search or Reverse Screen
and your presentation is forever doomed.
Comments and ideas are being explored by a research group here
at Penn in this area. We'd like to know what the Works community
feels.
Subject: mice,balls,touch-plates,pens.
∂18-Jul-81 0354 MINSKY at MIT-ML mice,balls,touch-plates,pens.
Date: 18 July 1981 01:20-EDT
From: MINSKY at MIT-ML
To: WORKS at MIT-ML, MINSKY at MIT-ML
I feel that the pen-mouse-ball discussion is reactionary --
though many of the ideas are realistic and practical. But all of
them look back to non-interactive sensors of the past. Suppose
the terminal could SEE the user -- using a couple of little
vision-boxes. Then (i) it could watch your hands. You could
point to your icons on the screen in a really natural way. A
tracking cross would permit higher resolution, and the cursor
would move at a rate, say proportional to some power of the
distance between where it is and where you point. Then, one
could use some more AI to distinguish "intentional" hand motions
from tremors, etc. A smart such box could watch your eyes and
face, too.
If you like holding a pen, that too could be wireless -- because
the vision system would track its point. Such systems could work
in three dimensions. The vision box would observe your
eye-point. When you move your head, the various windows would
move in accord with 3-d occlusions, and this would permit more on
a cluttered desk than the usual methods -- moving your head a
couple of inches to the left would uncover the next layer below
on each stack -- etc.
Given a lot of R&D, such gadgets could be made in the next few
years, and would be as important as speech inputs. We need a
"terminal vision machine" project. Also, aren't the CRT schemes
rather reactionary, if flat TV stuff is coming in the next year
or two? Instead of vertical displays we can soon have (i)
desk-surface displays for near vision and (ii) wall projected
screens for far vision.
Subject: Re: Configuration
∂20-Jul-81 0737 Steve Crocker <Crocker at USC-ISIF> Re: Configuration
Date: 19 Jul 1981 1344-PDT
From: Steve Crocker <Crocker at USC-ISIF>
To: BHYDE at BBNG, WorkS at MIT-AI
In-Reply-To: Your message of 16-Jul-81 1145-PDT
Ben,
I don't think it's a fair reading of the present situation
to suggest that computer centers are "going away" in favor
of personal workstations. A better view is that the computer
center is becoming distributed and more easily incremented.
A lot of this is dependent on the specific cost of providing
service in any given technology. Today's costs make it
relatively cheap to provide a noticeable amount of computing
power to each person in the form of an individual workstation.
This means that the cost of separate packaging is less than
the cost of multiplexing several users onto the same (large)
machine. It's quite possible for this to shift back the other
way, though not likely, in my opinion.
Several things do remain centralized, and properly so:
a) file servers, high-quality printer/plotters,
long distance communication;
b) maintenance;
c) system development (hardware and software).
Your scenario of using a service in Chicago with overnight air
service is not only reasonable but entirely usual. There are
indeed services that are expensive enough to absorb the cost
of long-distance delivery. Various forms of fancy printing,
as you mentioned, is one; transcriptions of stenographic tapes
is another. I'm sure there are others.
Getting back to individual workstations, my own view is they
offer one big plus and one important trap. The big plus is
that the economics of adding a new user to "the system" is
much clearer. The classical time-sharing environment essen-
tially forces overloading of the machine, and we commonly see
environments where only the trivial tasks can be done during
the day and the heavy-duty tasks are delayed until evenings
or weekends. Unfortunately, it's these heavy-duty tasks that
are the reason for the facility and the people in the first
place. (Yes, I know this can be seen as a straight case of
mismanagement. Nonetheless, it's where things are.) With
computation tied to terminals, it becomes essentially
impossible to add people without adding capacity. (There's
always the possibility of "sharing" workstations. This may
be useful in some cases, but it will be clear to all that
when a person does not have access to the workstation, he
does not have access to anything. Compare with today's
situation where everyone has a terminal, but that doesn't
guarantee access to anything substantive at all.)
The trap in all this is there is a far sharper limit on the
size of the task that can be carried out with a workstation.
A lot of important tasks use more of the cetral facility than
the nominal capacity that is being doled out in workstations.
That will mean that transition from a small task fitting on a
workstation to a larger task that requires a different machine
will be relatively painful.
Steve
-------
Subject: Collected Responses on Terminal Input Devices
∂20-Jul-81 0838 ''The Moderator'' <WorkS-REQUEST at MIT-AI> Collected Responses on Terminal Input Devices
Date: 20 Jul 1981 08:00-EDT
From: "The Moderator" <WorkS-REQUEST at MIT-AI>
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
------------------------------
Date: 20 July 1981 07:00-EDT
From: sdcsvax!norman@NPRDC
Msgname: norman
To: works@mit-ai
Subject: keyboards should get changed, maybe
Marvin Minsky suggests that it is unimaginative to worry about
track balls and mice, light pens and touch screens, when visual
sensors can interpret your finger and eye motions so that you
need not lift your fingers far off the keyboard. Keyboard?
You mean the good old qwerty keyboard, arranged in 1873 by the
Sholes brothers to minimize jamming of the big lever arms on
the keys as they made their way to the platen? That triumph
of technology over common sense? Well, if you want to be
imaginative, why stick with qwerty keyboards?
The answer, by the way, is not to be found by simply rearranging
the keys. It turns out that qwerty is not so bad. The scheme
the Sholes brothers used to minimize clashes put the keys for
frequently typed bigrams far apart, meaning on opposite hands,
which we know today means faster typing. Lots of people have
fiddled with keyboard arrangements; its not worth the fuss.
Dvorak did a time and motion study analysis in the 1930's and
only improved typing speed by about 5% (some have claimed more
improvement; this figure comes from experiment, by computation,
and by a typing simulation program that we have developed). (In
similar ways, azerty and alphabetical arrangements don't lead to
much difference -- about 2 to 5% decrement.) And several studies
of beginners using alphabetically organized keyboards show no
improvement over qwerty. (Paper available on request.)
The current keyboard is hard to learn (several months to get to
speed), a surprisingly large proportion of people in this country
cannot type, and the top speed is limited by a combination of
physiological/anatomical factors and keyboard layout. Chord key-
boards, as used by court stenographers, go considerably faster
(they type syllables, with several simultaneous keystrokes), but
this takes even longer to learn (years), and it isn't easy to
decode as the users develop their own code for many words.
(On-line decoding can and has been done.)
BUT, why have 4 rows of keys? Why have a space bar that takes
up the whole row and is used only by the right thumb? Why not
allow upward movements as well as downward ones to be meaningful.
Why not allow multiple strokes to have meanings. Why so big?
The current size and the funny diagonal layout is determined
by historical mechanical constraints and violates the natural
mirror-image symmetry of the hands. Fitts law states that the
time to move the hands is linearly related to log(D/P) where
D is the distance to be moved and P the precision required.
You will gain a lot if the keyboard is made smaller and if
sloppiness in target location is allowed. Eliminating the
need to type RETURN on a line can speed up typing a much as
30% (our high speed films show the hand must distort itself
rather badly to get to the RETURN).
Would speech input be easier? Probably not, but a combination
of a sophisticated keyboard plus speech might be very effective.
How about tiny mice mounted on the keyboard where the thumbs can
reach them, or worn on rings, or available on a "roof" just above
the keys so that lifting the hands a fraction of an inch contacts
them. Or consider inserting the hands into gloves (wear your
keyboard) with touch and force sensitive fingertip sensors and
let hand configuration select the word and/or cursor placement.
And so on. The point is, it is time to change the keyboard,
and not just by rearranging the keys; that won't buy anything.
don norman (norman@nprdc or ucbvax!sdcsvax!norman)
------------------------------
Date: 19-Jul-81 17:08:04 PDT (Sunday)
From: Hamilton.ES at PARC-MAXC
Subject: Re: Talking Workstations, that elusive 'external device'.
In-reply-to: DREIFU's message of 17 Jul 1981 (Friday) 2127-EDT
To: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
cc: Hamilton.ES, works@AI
I'd like to preserve my vocal cords, thank you. Not to mention
the fact that not everyone has a private office. I can deal
with the clack of my officemate's keyboard and the hum of his
disks, but I don't think I want to hear him muttering to his
computer all day.
I think that something along the lines of what Minsky was
suggesting would be more appropriate -- we could make much
greater use of technologies that have been heretofore
reserved for the handicapped, such as breath control, eye
control, etc. Also, I really like the idea someone suggested
a few days ago of placing lotsa special input devices just
below the spacebar. I just realized that my left thumb is
\completely/ unused!
--Bruce
------------------------------
Date: 19 July 1981 20:38-EDT
From: Marvin Minsky <MINSKY at MIT-MC>
Subject: visionary terminals
To: WORKS at MIT-MC
The general question of sneezing, etc., is interesting, and I wonder
if there is a nice theory of this: many interaction-devices separate
"pointing" and "doing". One positions a mouse and then presses an
action-button. This makes things clear to the computer, and protects
us from using signals than can be accidental. One does not often type
"DELETE *.*" as a side-effect of a sneeze.
In my vision, the AI sensing system gets better and better at telling
what you intend. In the first decade, I suppose, we'd be lucky to get
it reliably to tell where you're pointing, or what simple verbal
command you said. In another generation, it would be able to tell
when you're talking to IT, rather than someone else who just came in.
("What're you doing?" "Oh, just deleting everyone's files" -- meant
sarcastically, of course, but obeyed by the clever system.) As we
progress, the systems should grow better at telling what you really
want, and being sensible about which such intentions are plausible.
Of course, I don't believe that programming will become a casual,
natural language activity, because I don't think natural language has
adequate ways to describe an advanced programmer's intentions. (But
perhaps in a couple of generations a new order of procedural
expressiveness will indeed creep into everyday life!)
------------------------------
Date: 19 July 1981 1849-EDT (Sunday)
From: Jordan.Nash at CMU-10A
To: works at mit-ai
Subject: Terminal input devices
Message-Id: <19Jul81 184908 JN70@CMU-10A>
If we are willing to disregard cost for the moment, why not
consider pupil tracking technology as an input device. One could
simply look at the desired operation displayed on the screen and
perhaps confirm its selection by pushing a button. This certainly
eliminates the hand coordination needed for mouse input and the
sticky screen and physical exertion of the touch panel. Having
been attatched to a pupil tracking device, I realize that current
design is uncomfortable for the trackee, but I don't know enough
about the technology to throw out the idea.
Any thoughts?
/Jordan Nash
------------------------------
Date: 20 July 1981 0357-EDT (Monday)
From: Lars.Ericson at CMU-10A
To: WorkS at mit-ai
Subject: Soft Keyboards
Message-Id: <20Jul81 035716 LE60@CMU-10A>
Has anyone ever tried to build LED's right into the keytops?
This idea has always intrigued me, though it would make for
a rather expensive keyboard. Then when one wanted a new
character set, one would simply download a new set of keytop
images to the keyboard. No messy paper stickons; invent new
symbols; who knows what possibilities?
No, I do not consider a video display with a touch sensing
pad over it to be a reasonable equivalent to this.
------------------------------
End of Collected Responses on Terminal Input Devices
****************************************************
Subject: terminals versus comp centers
∂21-Jul-81 0814 Hank Walker at CMU-10A (C410DW60) terminals versus comp centers
Date: 20 July 1981 1815-EDT (Monday)
From: Hank Walker at CMU-10A (C410DW60)
To: apollo at MIT-AI
Gordon Bell has pointed out that disk drives and fancy printers
are about the only things left that have economy of scale. You
might as well chop everything else into little pieces, it makes
the incremental cost smaller.
As almost everyone on this list surely knows, comp center people
frequently tend to be power-mad, bureaurocratic, etc. Given the
choice, would you rather use the comp center or the CS department
machines?
When computing is relatively free, all arguments about wasted
cycles are bogus. You should think of your computer like your
car. Are you worried that you car is sitting idle all day
while you are at school or work? I'd think that you'd be
plenty worried if it wasn't. Are you worried that it isn't
being used at night? No. Same goes for computers.
To do fancy graphics, you need a lot of local processing due to
bandwidth. Once you do that, adding general purpose computing
isn't all that hard or expensive. If the graphics is done by a
general-purpose CPU, a la Alto, then the cost is essentially
zero.
Subject: Collected responses on terminal input devices
∂21-Jul-81 0922 ''The Moderator'' <WorkS-REQUEST at MIT-AI> Collected responses on terminal input devices
Date: 21 Jul 1981 09:00-EDT
From: "The Moderator" <WorkS-REQUEST at MIT-AI>
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
------------------------------
Date: 20 Jul 1981 12:09 PDT
From: Kimball at PARC-MAXC
Subject: Terminal Input Devices
In-reply-to: WorkS-REQUEST's message of 20 Jul 1981 08:00-EDT
To: WorkS at MIT-AI, ALBrown
Speaking of soft keyboards, I'm surprised no one has mentioned
an old idea that has been kicking around 5 or 10 years: an image
of the keytops can be generated on the display and then reflected
off a half silvered mirror that is mounted over the keyboard.
The user can see the keys (even when his hands are over them!)
with whatever labelling he desires, switched at electronic speed.
Furthermore the geometry is such that the user doesn't have to be
exactly "on axis" to see the desired image.
Of course, there are some drawbacks, but none of them seem to be
showstoppers:
1) a lot of expensive resources (e.g. bitmapped display &
memory) are given up to support the keyboard image. Also
the image on the screen surface itself is upside down;
2) the glass "shield" over the keyboard sounds awkward;
3) I wonder whether screen curvature, raster blooming, and
the like would make it hard for the keytop images to be
precisely aligned with the physical keyboard.
Ralph Kimball
P.S. Allen Brown tells me that this concept was explored
by someone in IBM on behalf of J. C. R. Licklider
(Licklider @ MIT-XX). Forgive me if this is a garbled
pointer.
------------------------------
Date: 20 Jul 1981 1319-EDT
From: Bob Hyman <HYMAN at DEC-MARLBORO>
To: SHRAGE at WHARTON-10, works at MIT-AI
Subject: Re: Interchangable keyboards
In-reply-to: Message from SHRAGE at WHARTON-10 (Jeffrey Shrager)
of 18-Jul-81 0641-EDT
At an NCC a while ago, I saw a terminal with a dynamically
lableable keyboard. The keys were arranged in a 10 x 50 matrix,
and had transparent tops. There was a mechanical (air-driven,
I believe) sheet feeder that could slide any one of about 10
different layouts under the key matrix. The particular layout
was selected by function keys off to one side, and it took about
1/10 sec. to switch, accompanied by some hissing and clunking.
It was not an entirely unworkable arrangement.
------------------------------
Date: 20 Jul 1981 1218-PDT
From: Steve Klein <SKLEIN at USC-ISIB>
Subject: QWERTY space bar
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
If the RETURN key is in the wrong place and the full-length
SPACE bar is a waste, why not split the SPACE bar and use the
left thumb for RETURN? One would think this would not cause
too much trauma either for manufacturers or users.
------------------------------
Date: 21 Jul 1981 00:39:45-PDT
From: decvax!duke!unc!smb at Berkeley
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
Subject: keyboard tracking system
Cc: duke!shg@Berkeley
This note was sent to me; I thought I'd pass it on
>From duke!shg Mon Jul 20 09:34:50 1981
Date: Mon Jul 20 09:33:20 1981
I saw your note about a keyboard tracking system. It
seems to me that the most convenient position for a cursor
control setup is just below the space bar on the keyboard.
A small trackball or joystick modified (or even a two-
dimensional slide switch) could be easily manipulated by
either thumb without moving the fingers from the keyboard.
I find that I always use my right thumb for spacing,
thus I guess with a little practice I could use my left
thumb for cursor control EVEN WHILE TYPING.
------------------------------
Date: 20 Jul 1981 0838-PDT
From: WMartin at Office-3 (Will Martin)
Subject: Keyboards
To: works at MIT-AI
Message-ID: <[OFFICE-3]20-Jul-81 08:38:32.WMARTIN>
Keyboards: There was a LONG series of discussions on Human-Nets
some time back about Dvorak keyboards. If there are people on
this list who weren't exposed to that, maybe somebody with an MIT
account could run an editor through the HN archives and come up
with a consolidated file for FTPing of that exchange. Would be
appropriate as the list seems to now be covering alternatives to
the standard keyboard, and Dvorak has lots of supporting data
which was outlined in that discussion.
[ A transcript of the HUMAN-NETS discussion on keyboards is
available in the file DUFFEY;WORKS KEYBRD on MIT-AI. -- RDD ]
------------------------------
Date: 21 July 1981 02:12-EDT
From: Marvin Minsky <MINSKY at MIT-AI>
Sender: MINSK0 at MIT-AI
Subject: pointing devices
To: MINSKY at MIT-AI, WORKS at MIT-AI, norman at NPRDC
I agree with Donald Norman about re-examining keyboards. I
wasn't concerned with keeping hands on keyboard, because I
once learned some American Sign Language (ASL) and saw that
sign-language works quite well and could be quite fast --
provided the intelligent observing machine can keep up. One
learns a large lexicon of special words and symbols in ASL
and, when these fail one uses "finger-spelling". The latter
is lots slower than expert typing, to be sure. But this is
because one has to reconfigure the whole hand for each letter;
the vision machine could sense smaller finger changes than a
person could, I think. Then we could adopt Norman's idea
of using bidirectional finger motions, and little "chords",
etc. In the end it should be faster than typing.
Gloves and rings and things might do, but I think AI will get
around to making good seeing machines eventually, and they'll
do so many things that they'll be cheap. In the end, there
will be two or three of them inside the average typewriter,
just watching for paper jams and ribbon problems. After a
while, people will find that they don't need many of the
machines that the vision boxes were made to keep an eye on.
------------------------------
Date: 20 July 1981 1222-EDT (Monday)
From: Hans Moravec at CMU-10A (R110HM60)
To: WorkS at mit-ai
Subject: Gloves
Along with the keyboard gloves you get a head-mounted binocular
display, as in the old Utah 3D system. Now you can not only
move your head from side to side to reveal obscured pages,
but can walk around your workspace and view it from behind or
underneath. If you're into such, the entire workspace can be
mapped onto the surface of your real desk, and there can be
simulated piles of paper that look like the real thing! To
focus your attention on one, just move your head closer to it.
If the head mounted display carries outward looking cameras
that can track your fingers (and microphone and earphones),
you could pick up and shuffle the simulated paper. In the
long run all this stuff should be integrable into an
eyeglasses frame.
It needs some kind of intertial or other navigation system to
make sure it knows where your head is to generate the appro-
priate view. With a radio link to a communication system and
a shaving mirror it could be used as a videophone. Or a cheap
telepresence terminal. Or a syntha-presence unit; Imagine the
adventure display possible when you can walk around the scenes
in 3D (need a lot of crunch power for this, but much more
practical than some "holographic" methods suggested by Niven).
Better watch your icons, though!
------------------------------
Date: 20 Jul 1981 (Monday) 1804-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
Subject: In response to "gloves"
To: works at MIT-AI
It was suggested to my by Saul Levy of Bell Telephone Labs, (as
not to implicate myself) to use Teflon Boots that someone puts
their feet into, as not to have to remove one's hands from the
keyboard when typing. I leave this as a comment nothing more.
Hank
------------------------------
Date: 20 July 1981 1056-EDT
From: David Smith at CMU-10A
Subject: Pointing devices
To: WorkS @ mit-ai
In the summer of '78, I saw a demo at SRI of a device which
could tell where your eyeballs were pointed. It used internal
reflections in the lens. People were writing their names with
it. The writing was rather jerky, because the eyeballs move in
saccades. If your work station had one of those, plus a speech
(word) recognizer, you wouldn't have to remove your hands from
the keyboard to designate an icon. Lacking a speech recognizer,
you could type escape-footpedal-foo, but that lacks class.
------------------------------
Date: 20 Jul 1981 1351-PDT
From: Kelley at OFFICE
Subject: The Back Split Twist Keyboard
To: works at MIT-MC
Take the Maltron contoured keyboard. Chop it in half down the
middle. Put mice wheels under each half. Pick the portion of
the desktop you are viewing on the screen with one half. Pick
entities on the screen with the other half. No need for your
hands to leave the keyboard. Engineer a little to keep the
keyboard stationary while you type.
Now. Take a flat display screen that fills one whole surface
of a box about the size of the Whole Earth Catalog. Put your
processor in the box. On the back, place each half of the
keyboard twisted so you are holding the book while you type.
Control wheels / track ball on the side with the thumb / palm
of your hand. Control your dynabook with your back split
twist keyboard while you walk the earth.
-- kirk
------------------------------
Date: 20 Jul 1981 (Monday) 1935-EST
From: STECKEL at HARV-10
Subject: recommended reading
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
Seeing the flames and flak fly freely the last few weeks, I
would strongly recommend all participants to read the issue
of the ACM Computing Surveys Vol 13 no. 1 of March, 1981.
It addresses "human factors in computing". Especially of
interest are the article on editors and Beau Sheil's
article.
Aside, I would suggest that the ideal "terminal" look like
a pad of paper (flat screen display), with a keyboard on the
lower 1/3 or so...
g steckel
------------------------------
End of collected responses on terminal input devices
****************************************************
Subject: WorkS problems
∂21-Jul-81 1105 DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus) WorkS problems
Date: 21 Jul 1981 (Tuesday) 0950-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
WorkS has now grown to include roughly 750 people on 50 sites
across the ARPAnet. The number of topics being discussed at
any one time has increased from 1-2 to 4-5. Somewhere between
12-15 messages are submitted to the list each day. Each day's
submissions comprise approximately 15,000 characters of material.
The result is that WorkS is beginning to suffer from severe
problems. Problems which many people have begun to note.
It takes roughly 30 minutes (real time) of processing by the
mail server to redistribute one, 1000 character to everyone on
the WorkS mailing list. The amount of time required depends on
several factors. The most important factor is simply the total
number of individual message transmissions that the mail server
must do.
For example, consider the difference between distributing one
20,000 character message and 10 2,000 character messages to
WorkS. The 20,000 character message will require around 100
minutes (real time) of processing by the mail server. The 10
2,000 character messages will require 300 minutes (real time)
of processing by the mail server. Here you see the advantage
in redistributing the messages oriented around a single topic
as a collection of messages rather than as individual messages.
However, that expedient is proving inadequate to deal with
WorkS problems.
This means in all probability that WorkS will have to become
another digest mailing list. Over the next few days we'll
explain what this change entails. In the meantime we will
continue with redistributing the incoming messages in topical
collections where appropriate.
Comments/opinions/questions to WorkS-REQUEST at MIT-AI.
Hank Dreifus
Subject: Realtime proofreaders
∂21-Jul-81 1022 Robert Elton Maas <REM at MIT-MC> Realtime proofreaders
Date: 21 July 1981 09:25-EDT
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM at MIT-MC>
To: SHRAGE at WHARTON-10
cc: works at MIT-AI, ellen at MIT-XX
The advantage of automatic fixups is that you can spend your time
proofreading for deep stuff instead of proofreading for trivial
spelling errors and the like. (This is the general thing about
automation, you let the computer or other machine do the trivial
stuff so you can have more time to do a good job with the deep
stuff. FFM loosely quotes somebody named "Andre Gide", who said
"This has all been said before, but since no one was listening it
bears repeating.")
The advantage of realtime fixups, or at least flags you can
confirm later, is that the typist can detect whether something
heesh noticed as a mistake was also noticed by the computer
instead of wondering for the next hour if the post-processor
will find it; if the computer flagged it, then the typist can
safely ignore it now, even forget it, because heesh will be
reminded of it later when making a big confirm-pass thru the
document.
The problem with TWENEX is its method of flagging errors in
realtime is obtrusive. It goes ahead and makes a mess, instead
of just brightening or boxing the offending misspelled word and
letting the user move the mouse back there later to fix the word.
(Of course this is because it was designed to work on TTYs and
Decwriters, not ALTOs and other graphics-mode displays with
massive display-computing power and mouse.) Perhaps somebody
with experience on Xerox-Smalltalk on Dorado could comment on
how Xerox-Smalltalk handles errors when manually typing in
commands (instead of using the mouse to select commands from
a menu). I seem to recall you type commands into a window
and can edit them to your heart's content, then when you hit
the activation button on the mouse they are parsed and any
syntactic error is flagged, and you can edit again and again
until the parser accepts it.
Right?
Subject: File Backup
∂23-Jul-81 0031 Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A File Backup
Date: 22 July 1981 1649-EDT (Wednesday)
From: Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A
To: works at mit-ai
In-Reply-To: <[OFFICE-3]20-Jul-81 08:38:32.WMARTIN>
The Spice project plans to treat the local disk as a cache for
the central file system. Thus, primary backup is handled by
the same staff which backs up all our other systems. Local
disks will not have substantive amounts of private data which
is not replicated on the CFS.
In the case of workstations not on a network, if we abandon
such archaic ideas as single-task workstations, files without
timestamps, and similar absurdities, and produce some reasonably
intelligent software, a background task which does hourly, daily,
or as-needed backup to a floppy disk or other medium such as
streaming tape, occasionally prompting the use to insert a new
disk or tape, and which handles the grubby details of how to do
file retrieval in case a file restoration is necessary seems the
obvious simple solution. As I am currently thinking about having
a personal 68000-based system at home, which will not be on a net-
work, and cannot use CMU's machines for backup, this is one of the
first pieces of software I would build. My plans are to simply
assign ascending serial numbers to the floppies, and keep a file
(which is naturally backed up) which is a migration archive file
[CMU-10A users will recognize this as MIGRAT.DIR...]. Since all
REAL computers (not toy computers, no matter how powerful) have
date-time stamps which can go on files, the software architecture
is reasonably obvious.
Those ridiculous systems in which one can save or restore the
entire disk, but not do incremental save or restore, are not
worth talking about. I certainly don't want to reset my
entire disk to yesterday afternoon just because the system or
I accidently damaged one file.
More sophisticated applications, including large databases, need
more sophisticated incremental backup procedures. But these are
ALL OBVIOUS and can be ALL AUTOMATED. Using "clerical people"
or "professional people" means we've forgotten the best drudge of
history: the computer itself. The overhead on anyone to write a
serial number on an existing disk or streaming tape and insert a
fresh one is so small as to be unnoticeable. (Of course, I would
never consider the problem of "tying up the floppy drive" while
doing backup; floppies are not reasonable as secondary storage for
serious applications; they are far too small and slow compared to
even the current processors they are mated with. I consider a 10Mb
disk as small, but marginally acceptable, on a personal workstation.
24Mb is acceptable, 100Mb is reasonable. Floppies are at best a
cheap backup medium, not to be used for serious storage. I have
a small personal database which already exceeds 1Mb).
joe
Subject: Collected responses on terminal input devices
∂23-Jul-81 0228 ''The Moderator'' <WorkS-REQUEST at MIT-AI> Collected responses on terminal input devices
Date: 23 July 1981 02:00-EDT
From: "The Moderator" <WorkS-REQUEST at MIT-AI>
To: WorkS at AI
------------------------------
Date: 21-Jul-81 14:55:07 PDT (Tuesday)
From: Hamilton.ES at PARC-MAXC
Subject: Re: Terminal Input Devices
Another problem with the idea of reflecting images of keycaps onto
the top of the keys is that it prevents the use of a detachable
keyboard. Some human factors expert at NCC spent a lot of time
ranting and raving about how important detachable keyboards are.
Also, the natural touch-typing position would mean that (1) the
home-row images would be invisible because they would appear
on my next-to-last finger bones, which are angled back toward
the screen, and (2) for most keys below the home row, the image
would appear on my fingers or hands at such a distance above
the keyboard as to make the association with an individual key
rather difficult. This could even become a racial issue(!),
since presumably black people's hands don't function nearly
as well as projection screens.
All in all, if you really want to look at the keys, the key sides
are a lot more visible than the key tops, unless you're some kind
of two-fingered wonder at the keyboard.
I don't think anyone has mentioned the idea of burying a small,
high-density CRT inside the keyboard and then using fiberoptics
to route the appropriate portion of the image to each keycap.
--Bruce
------------------------------
Date: 22 Jul 1981 0941-EDT
From: Eric K. Olson <OLSON at DEC-MARLBORO>
Subject: Terminal Input Devices
It seems to me that the position of the operator's head is very
important in a scheme to reflect the key markings off a half-
silvered mirror. I have always hated things with half-silvered
mirrors anyway, because head positioning is so critical. Also,
it eliminates the possibility of a removable keyboard.
On another tack, I was discussing some of these schemes (boots,
gloves, rings, LCD keytops, etc.) with a friend here at DEC and
he was repulsed by them. He wasn't even interested in foot pedals.
Then again he has always worked for DEC (since leaving WPI), and
neither DEC nor WPI are exactly at the forefront of these ideas.
It suprises me that no-one has mentioned the possibility (seriously)
of mounting the keyboard on a (large) mouse. Mice don't have to move
a great deal to scroll the entire screen, and four mounted as the
feet of a removable keyboard could work nicely. They would need a
sticky surface and would have to require more umpf to push them (in
order to avoid false readings), but I think the idea is feasible.
For those of you in love with chord keyboards, you could mount a
mouse under one even easier.
If you think this is entirely ludicrous, I cast my second vote for
a trackball near the left thumb (perhaps cutting the spacebar short).
My VT100 does not insist that a distort my hand too much to hit the
return key (it is a selectric arrangement), and I would rather be
cursory with my left thumb. However, as my WPI/DEC friend points
out, it can be hard to use: he has a broken left thumb.
------------------------------
Date: 22 July 1981 01:41-EDT
From: Frank J. Wancho <FJW at MIT-MC>
Subject: Keyboard Augmentation
Someday, I will actually try to implement this: maybe three
footpedals, one for Shift, one for Control, and one for Meta
(Edit). I have had a sore left wrist for three months now,
and am just beginning to realize just how much I use and
contort that hand/wrist to use those keys. Footpedals would
certainly go along way to aleviate that strain.... maybe not
just three...
--Frank
------------------------------
Date: 22 July 1981 1751-EDT (Wednesday)
From: Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A
Subject: Finger distortion
I find the backspace and escape keys even more awkwardly placed
than CR. I usually use ↑H in preference to Rubout or Backspace
because the finger travel is shorter and faster, but not all
systems treat ↑H, Backspace (which is usually ↑H but sometimes
sent as rubout, depending on your terminal) and Rubout
identically.
joe
- - - - Begin forwarded message - - - -
Date: 16 Jul 1981 (Thursday) 1503-EDT
From: SHRAGE at WHARTON-10 (Jeffrey Shrager)
Subject: Interchangable keyboards
To: works at MIT-AI
Via: MIT-AI; 18 Jul 1981 0639-EDT
I once saw design specs for a keyboard in which the keytops were
little LCD displays and were, of course, under computer control.
The types of things I can imagine doing with such a device are
virtually unlimited: Emacsify the keyboard for ↑X or ESC (Sorry,
Fineify), show keywords like various Basic systems, swap your
keyboard to APL mode with the screen, etc, etc. Does anyone
actually produce such a device?
- - - - End forwarded message - - - -
------------------------------
Date: 21 Jul 1981 21:57:41-PDT
From: ihnss!mhtsa!harpo!chico!esquire!psl at Berkeley
Subject: Talking Workstations
Have there been any measurements of the relative `work' involved
in:
a) typing "s/foo/"
b) finding a key labeled "ENTER", hitting it, typing
"foo", finding a key labeled "SEARCH" and hitting it
c) saying "SEARCH!" then saying "EFF OH OH (pause)" ?
------------------------------
Date: 22 Jul 1981 18:10 PDT
From: Kosower at PARC-MAXC
Subject: Re: mice,balls,touch-plates,pens.
In-reply-to: MINSKY's message of 18 July 1981 (Saturday) 01:20-EDT
Better yet, we could construct a box that "listens" to the
user's brainwaves (or brainstorms, as the case may be...) and
figures out from that what the user wants to do, and does it.
That way, the user would be completely spared the tedious task of
pointing. And by using a little more AI, we could construct a box
that would figure out what needed to be done (edit reports, write
programs, answer mail, etc.) and would do it without any user
intervention at all. That way, we could get rid of "reactionary"
old terminals and perhaps with the user to boot!
David A. Kosower
------------------------------
Date: 21 Jul 1981 21:56:01-PDT
From: ihnss!mhtsa!harpo!chico!esquire!psl at Berkeley
How can you call that a workstation without holocamera & odorama?
------------------------------
End of collected responses on terminal input devices
****************************************************
Subject: More on configuration
∂23-Jul-81 2309 BHYDE at BBNG More on configuration
Date: 23 Jul 1981 1116-EDT
From: BHYDE at BBNG
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
Message-ID: <[BBNG]23-Jul-81 11:16:04.BHYDE>
Let me repeat some of the phrases in the replies to my query on
configuration.
From Steve Crockers message;
"the cost of the separate packaging is less than the cost
of multiplexing several users onto ... larger ... machine."
"things do remain centralized, an properly so: file servers,
high quality printers, long distance communications, ...
maintenance ... system development ( hardware and software )"
"classical time-sharing ... forces overloading of the machine
... this can be seen as miss management... with computation
tied to terminals it becomes ... impossible to add people
without adding capacity."
"transition from small task fitting on a work station to a
larger task ... will be ... painful."
From Hank Walkers message;
"disk drives fancy printers are about only things left with
economy scale ... might as well chop everything else into
little pieces, it makes the incremental cost smaller."
attributed to Gordon Bell
"center people frequently ... power-mad, bureaurocratic."
"are you worried about you car sitting idle?"
"fancy graphics needs a lot of local processing .. (then the
cost of) ... adding general purpose computing ...(is) ..
essentially zero."
Forgive me for the paraphrasing and quotation out of context.
I find quite convincing the point that baseline services; communi-
cations, graphics processing, and packaging make the marginal cost
of a substantial piece of computing power in the office trivial.
No ones seems to argue for the demise of the computing center, I
had expected people to argue it would be replaced; on the low end
by work stations and on the high end by external service firms.
People seem to believe that central facilities, file servers etc.
will remain within the organization.
As an aside the comment about cost of multiplexing into the central
facility seems odd considering the huge increase in cost of communi-
cations that local networks imply verses front ends. Any one want
to argue the other side of that one? No one has explained to me
yet why the hugh bandwidth is a good thing in the local computing
environment?
I have believed that the leverage available in purchasing larger
machines was very substantial. If I build out of a fast expensive
technology I get a power of ten improvement in my cycles for a
linear increase in my cost. If I build out of many processors
I get a linear increase in power for a linear increase in cost.
Have I been stupid and mislead?
If this is true than, disks, fancy printers, communications, and
fancy processors will go in the central facility. The work station
design will be aligned on a cost effective boundary one up from
that amount of power necessary for graphics, communications, and
work space management.
I find the comment about cars rich in metaphorical implications;
there are many people who believe that cars are a very poor piece
of social engineering. Do organizations have more capital tied
up in the parking lot than they do inside? Unsafe at any speed?
Ben Hyde
Subject: WorkS Software.
∂24-Jul-81 0011 DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus) WorkS Software.
Date: 23 Jul 1981 (Thursday) 1928-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
To: works at MIT-AI
Part-III
The Hardware is one thing, the software is the more lasting concept.
Will the future software change? Will we see more screen-formatting
packages, better user interfaces?
What about the programmer? Source level Debuggers, complete control
of the machine (micro-code all the way to the I/O slot which is
latched to the on/off switch)?
Screen this, and menu that.
Will there be standards for screen definitions? Not at all
unlike the Core←graphics←standard we are seeing now, thanks
to VanDam and Badler and company.
Will there be "drivers" for One-User software? Distributed
power, shared computing, the questions of Queuing processes
accross machines - across the country.
Local-vs-Long Distance networks. How does one effectively
integrate this? There are more machines out today than ever
before.
The above are just some thoughts/interesting topics to get
discussions going off over all of the innovations necessary for
PersComs.
Henry Dreifus
Subject: Collected responses on useable systems
∂24-Jul-81 0036 ''The Moderator'' <WorkS-REQUEST at MIT-AI> Collected responses on useable systems
Date: 23 July 1981 04:17-EDT
From: "The Moderator" <WorkS-REQUEST at MIT-AI>
To: WORKS at MIT-AI
------------------------------
Date: 23 July 1981 16:29-EDT
From: Steven H. Gutfreund <SHG at MIT-AI>
Subject: mundane
To: Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A
Joe Newcomer raises a very good point in his letter of July-22:
I find that I have less and less time to worry about,
say, how to make CR in EMACS behave like LF and how to stop
LF from behaving differently if the previous line started at
the left margin. I know what effect I want; I don't want to
know about 37 different variables, TECO FS-flags, and other
crap to get a simple change in behavior. This is a lot of
what is involved in getting really good personal workstations;
if I have to remember dozens of incantations to, say, set up
defaults when I boot, I'm not going to be very happy.
joe
=-=-=-=-=
Peter Keene (sp?) of MIT Sloan School has a nice way of describing
the sort of system behavior Joe is looking for: mundane.
If I am not a car wizard I want my car's behavior to be mundane.
I want my car to be boring, I don't want it doing interesing things
like losing wheels. Many car drivers also don't want to learn all
the exciting things that you can do with manual transmission, boring
old automatic transmissions are good enough to get where you are
going.
If I am not a phone wizard I want my phone to be mundane. I am
not particularly interested in the intimate details of the phone
billing system when I am complaining about a $7,000 phone bill,
I really wanted the phone company to do the boring old thing and
bill me my normal ammount.
I believe that most people will want their workstations to be
mundane. They probably won't want a 3 week training course to
learn all sorts of wizzy neat features. If it behaves mostly
like those boring old office equipment (typewriters, phones,
etc.) it will probably be enough. After all, most people will
be using the workstation as a tool to get their work (what they
find interesting enough to be paid for) done.
- Steven Gutfreund
------------------------------
Date: 23 July 1981 04:17-EDT
From: James M. Turner <JMTURN at MIT-AI>
Subject: Various subspecies
To: Joe.Newcomer at CMU-10A
Shade and Sweet water,
But designing systems who's most inexperienced user is it's
lowest common denominator severely limits what can be built in
to the language.
As an example, I am currently involved in moving Scribe
to the Lisp Machine (albeit, in a greatly changed appearence).
A decision that was made very early was that although the
DOCUMENT (the Scribe input file) requires no specialized
knowledge to write, extensions to the system itself require a
working understanding of Lisp, and the way Scribe works in this
version. The idea behind this was that if we tried to create
a "secretary extensible" environment, we would be sacrificing
efficiency (important in a package which is already dangerously
slow due to LISPM <-> PDP-10 I/O speed) and clarity of code for
the benefit of people who would probably not wish to change the
code anyway.
Besides, the typical supervisor doesn't want "low level"
personnel fooling with the code anyway. A friend who is
currently doing DE for DEC related the story to me of how her
supervisor had flamed when she had poked around the OS trying
to find out how to logout (it seems SOP was to hang up, which
she could not accept).
James
------------------------------
End of collected responses on useable systems
*********************************************
Subject: Sperry Univac workstation design group -- eyewitness testimony
∂25-Jul-81 0946 SHRAGE at WHARTON-10 (Jeffrey Shrager) Sperry Univac workstation design group -- eyewitness testimony
Date: 24 Jul 1981 (Friday) 1356-EDT
From: SHRAGE at WHARTON-10 (Jeffrey Shrager)
To: works at MIT-AI
I was invited to Sperry's Software Research group and had an
opportunity to speak with them and examine some of the work that
they are doing in workstations and in programmer's tools. They
are more concerned with the "programmer's workstation" than a
management workstation and thus are putting a lot of effort
into the language that controls the device. It is designed to
be modified by the user and has inboard multitasking and file
system, etc. Understand that this design is for a device to be
hung from a large central machine for program developement NOT
for execution of programs. Here is a short list of the things
that (I saw) that they were thinking about/working on:
1) Pascal debugging/programming aids. They have a really nice
design (and partial implementation) for a visual program stepper
that draws colored boxes around the program structure and then
highlights the lines as they are executed so that the programmer
can "see" the program in exectution. It (will) also display
the variables and structure nicely. I played with this and it
made it very very simple to visualize what a program was doing
(especially when you turn the speed up fast enough and can see
where the loops are crunching along). The final implementation
of this should be very nice. [Jim Gimple (formerly a Snobol
afficianado from Bell) is doing this work].
2) A high res/color PWB system with joystick and mouse. They are
spending a lot of time working on the "editor language" (which
is also the JCL and workstation control language) rather than
"cutsie" features to add to the user view. The file structure
is Unix based but they ALSO feel that unix's user view is a
total lose and are designing one of their own that, from what
I saw, will be much nicer. Again, their position is that this
will be used by programmers, not managers or secretaries and
they are giving the user power to change things (in a properly
controlled manner) at whim without too much work. Currently
they are having trouble with the Univac hardware research
people (it's too slow for them) but that should be resolved
soon. This project is under control of Marc Fogel and Ira
Ruben.
3) Help systems. Knoweldge based and natural language driven (if
you like) user aids for the station command language etc. They
have several NL and AI people very interested in user assitance.
I don't know how/if this relates to the workstation but it was
interesting none-the-less. This work was being done by Nathan
Relles and Norm Sondheimer (president of the ACL).
All of the above is managed in a very small group of very expert
people by Dick Wexelblat and for more info one can write to
Sperry Univac
Software Research
2G3 Bluebell, Penna.
19424
They are going to have an Apollo and/or a couple of Perqs soon.
-- Jeff
Subject: Sperry Univac workstation design group -- eyewitness testimony
∂25-Jul-81 0946 SHRAGE at WHARTON-10 (Jeffrey Shrager) Sperry Univac wo
rkstation design group -- eyewitness testimony
Date: 24 Jul 1981 (Friday) 1356-EDT
From: SHRAGE at WHARTON-10 (Jeffrey Shrager)
To: works at MIT-AI
I was invited to Sperry's Software Research group and had an
opportunity to speak with them and examine some of the work that
they are doing in workstations and in programmer's tools. They
are more concerned with the "programmer's workstation" than a
management workstation and thus are putting a lot of effort
into the language that controls the device. It is designed to
be modified by the user and has inboard multitasking and file
system, etc. Understand that this design is for a device to be
hung from a large central machine for program developement NOT
for execution of programs. Here is a short list of the things
that (I saw) that they were thinking about/working on:
1) Pascal debugging/programming aids. They have a really nice
design (and partial implementation) for a visual program stepper
that draws colored boxes around the program structure and then
highlights the lines as they are executed so that the programmer
can "see" the program in exectution. It (will) also display
the variables and structure nicely. I played with this and it
made it very very simple to visualize what a program was doing
(especially when you turn the speed up fast enough and can see
where the loops are crunching along). The final implementation
of this should be very nice. [Jim Gimple (formerly a Snobol
afficianado from Bell) is doing this work].
2) A high res/color PWB system with joystick and mouse. They are
spending a lot of time working on the "editor language" (which
is also the JCL and workstation control language) rather than
"cutsie" features to add to the user view. The file structure
is Unix based but they ALSO feel that unix's user view is a
total lose and are designing one of their own that, from what
I saw, will be much nicer. Again, their position is that this
will be used by programmers, not managers or secretaries and
they are giving the user power to change things (in a properly
controlled manner) at whim without too much work. Currently
they are having trouble with the Univac hardware research
people (it's too slow for them) but that should be resolved
soon. This project is under control of Marc Fogel and Ira
Ruben.
3) Help systems. Knoweldge based and natural language driven (if
you like) user aids for the station command language etc. They
have several NL and AI people very interested in user assitance.
I don't know how/if this relates to the workstation but it was
interesting none-the-less. This work was being done by Nathan
Relles and Norm Sondheimer (president of the ACL).
All of the above is managed in a very small group of very expert
people by Dick Wexelblat and for more info one can write to
Sperry Univac
Software Research
2G3 Bluebell, Penna.
19424
They are going to have an Apollo and/or a couple of Perqs soon.
-- Jeff
∂26-Jul-81 2028 AVB Xerox announcement on Dolphin/1100
To: "@SUN.DIS[P,DOC]" at SU-AI
Date: 22 Jul 1981 1736-PDT
From: RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM
Subject: INFORMATION RE INTERLISP DOLPHINS
Ed Feigenbaum received the following message from Mr. R.E. Bomeisler,
Marketing Manager for Xerox EOS, in response to repeated requests for
more information about Dolphins necessary for planning acquisitions.
Since others may be in the same situation, Ed wants to pass the
information along to other computer scientists. You may forward
it if you wish.
Tom R.
*********************************************
7/16/81
"In our telephone discussion, Ed, you indicated that Xerox
was not providing you and potential users with enough information
to assist you in designing your networks and planning for future
growth. I would like to apprise you of the steps we have taken
at XEOS to fill the information gap.
Marcel Pahlavan is the program manager and is the focal
point for responding to customer inquiries on interface and other
technical matters. On August 1, Terry Haney will join the staff
to provide hardware expertise. An Interlisp software expert is
being actively recruited. In addition, Pahlavan can call on other
system experts within XEOS to solve specific customer problems.
With regard to 3M bps Ethernet networks, the 1100 system
includes the hardware necessary for connection. In addition,
XEOS will make available the hardware necessary to connect the
DEC Unibus. This includes the DEC Unibus Ethernet Interface
Board, Transceiver, Terminator and Connector. This hardware
enables connection to 3M bps Ethernet on the DEC PDP-11 family
aswell as the DEC 2020 and the VAX family. To connect the
DEC 2040, 2050, and 2060 to 3M bps Ethernet will require either
development of a Massbus Ethernet Interface Board or a PDP-11
front end interface. When either of these is developed within
the ARPA-sponsored research community, XEOS will facilitate
distribution.
XEOS is a systems organization with the skills to develop
special hardware or software. It is expected that we will be
called upon to modify the 1100 hardware or software to meet
special customer requirements.
With regard to DEC hardware/software, there exists within
the ARPA research community a number of special systems. Many
of these exist on your own campus. As we become familiar with
thesesystems, XEOS will serve as a facilitator and will make
certain that potential 1100 users are familiar with interface
software that exists or is under development. To the best of
our knowledge, the following systems have been or are being
connected to the 3M bps Ethernet: KI-10/TENEX, KL-10/TENEX,
2020/TOPS-20, 2050/2060/TOPS-20, and VAX/UNIX. XEOS will
facilitate distribution of the Stanford-modified PUP software.
As you know, this software runs under TENEX and TOPS-20 and
enables DEC KA-10, KI-10, KL-10, and DEC 2020 to act as file
server to the 1100.
The dissemination and distribution of information would
be greatly enhanced by formation of an 1100 users group. XEOS
is prepared to assist in the organization of such a group.
XEOS plans to make available the necessary hardware and
software to connect the 1100 system to the 10 M bps Ethernet,
thus providing access to the Xerox 8000 Network System. We
are also investigating the feasibility of an internet gateway.
With regard to 1100/Interlisp performance, continual
improvements are being made in the code. The system is five
times faster than it was a year ago and significant further
improvement is expected.
Since the 1100 is a powerful, flexible machine, it can
be expanded in a number of ways: physical memory from 576K
words (1.15 M Bytes) to 768K words (1.54 M Bytes), virtual
address space from 4M to 16M words, and increased local disk
storage capacity. Furthermore, there is sufficient cabinet
space to add special functions that might be needed by certain
customers: floating point arithmetic, color display interface,
image processing, and other special logic, etc. XEOS is inves-
tigating the feasibility of adding to the 1100 system: color
display, low cost bit map display, large capacity file server,
and 5700 electronic printing system. The architecture, I/O
structure, and bandwidth of the 1100 make it the ideal machine
for dedicated applications in the research and scientific
environment.
In addition to Interlisp, XEOS is planning to implement
Smalltalk on the 1100. The schedule is yet to be determined.
As a key ingredient of the overall 1100 program, it is
planned to release a version of Interlisp on the Star processor
after January 1, 1983. This will provide Interlisp to future
users on a very cost-effective basis.
I trust, Ed, that this information will enable you and
others to plan system expansion."
-----
Subject: "mundane" systems
∂26-Jul-81 1553 Jan Walker <JWALKER at BBNA> ''mundane'' systems
Date: Saturday, 25 July 1981 15:59-EDT
From: Jan Walker <JWALKER at BBNA>
To: WorkS at AI
I have to voice my strong support of Joe in his message against
"mundane" systems. The original message advocating mundane
systems used an analogy of a car -- you choose a boring automatic
because you don't care what wonderful things you might be able to
do with a standard transmission. Let's point out a few things
that make this analogy somewhat less applicable to the current
case (system/software design).
Notice that with the kind of technology people are accustomed to,
once you choose one (automatic), you can't have the other
(standard). (This can lead people into defending their choices
with more reasons than they originally had for making the choice.
Some psychologists talk about related phenomena under "cognitive
dissonance".) With the kind of technology we use, you can either
follow the same design philosophy -- make things in a limited
number of flavors and make people choose -- or you can design to
support redesign by the purchaser. Surely with the flexibility
of computers behind us, we can do at least as well as the kludge
in the car that chooses 4, 6, or 8 cylinders depending on load,
mileage goals, or whatever.
People don't like the illusion of choice nearly as much as they
like having the choice. The reason that so far we don't find
ordinary people looking for software modifications is that they
don't expect to be able to have them. (The old technology of
course has molded people's expectations about the new one.)
While I am on the car analogy... I hear a lot about providing
systems for people who want to be able to use a computer without
any training or practice. How many people do you know who wanted
to just jump in and drive a car without any training or practice?
(Not many!) Why do you suppose that difference exists? Consider
that a car has one primary purpose -- transportation. They all
have standard components and operating procedures. Even people
who have never driven know a lot about cars, for example, that
they have a little slot where you put a key and turn it in order
to start the engine. The point is that cars are simpler in
purpose and operation than computers, yet people don't expect to
just hop in and drive away until they know from cars. Maybe the
real lessons in this analogy come from considering training,
learning, and transfer issues.
The ideal way to provide software is to offer something that a
new user who knows about the application of the software (for
example, editing, drawing) can start using it with the help of a
good summary and maybe 15 minutes of explanation. The next
hurdle to pass is in discovering that things can in fact be
changed. A well-designed and documented program helps you make
this discovery and then provides good support tools to help you
find out what it is possible to change and how best to do it.
Jan
(JWalker@BBNA)
Subject: re: REM' s remarks on Global configurations
∂29-Jul-81 0907 Farrell at PARC-MAXC re: REM' s remarks on Global configurations
Date: 27 Jul 1981 11:47 PDT
From: Farrell at PARC-MAXC
To: REM at MIT-MC
cc: WorkS at MIT-AI, Farrell
In places, you simply misunderstood / misstated Bruce Hamilton's
position; in others, your positions are new (and interesting).
Corrections/clarifications:
Bruce demanded 56 Kbaud, not Mbaud. The 3 orders of magnitude
easily cross the frontier of available technology.
There are a number of "centralized" services besides
archiving/library: printing, mail distribution, gateways to other
systems & nets, to name 3. Note also that file storage is a com-
munication mechanism as much as a receptacle -- it is easier (&
more efficient) to store a large object in a commonly accessible
container or two, & pass a pointer, than to ensure direct transfer
from the source to each destination.
Your framework of workstation & centralized facilities is impoverished
(and I believe not justified by Hamilton's discussion): there is no
requirement that facilities be centralized; in particular, there are
good reasons for distributing different services (functions) onto
different servers (machines), and for replicating and distributing
servers geographically (minimize communication, limit loss, provide
convenient user access). Even with most communications involving a
server on at least one end, this distribution still requires high
capacity in the underlying medium. When the net (or whatever) must
also support frequent reconfiguration, you may as well provide that
bandwidth to everyone, so you don't have to decide in advance which
ones are going to be servers.
Probably derived from your workstation/centralized facilities
dichotomy (and maybe a little from Bruce's remarks), I think
you put too much emphasis on network (i.e. communications medium)
failures, when server failures are more of a problem. I derive
this from my experience over 8 years now with two networks, ARPAnet
& 3mb Ethernet. In each, I can recall 1 occasion when I noticed
thenet was down -- that is, that NOBODY could use the net. (I
know the ARPAnet went down regularly for new releases of the IMP
software, and I've heard of outages on both which I didn't happen
to hit. . .) Contrast this to many occasions when I couldn't get
at MACSYMA, or the Datacomputer, or print on Clover, or wasn't
getting my mail, or . . . . Few of us are so single-minded that
we can't work around loss of a server (which needen't even deny
us the service -- e.g. redundant printing/file/mail servers).
Your super-automatic archive to file server has much to recommend
it; two possible drawbacks are that data on my local disk is less
accessible than anything that has hit the net or been stored in
a file server (clearly, holes that should be fixed; but while
they're there . . . ), and such a catholic approach may require
more resources than justified (I suspect workstation time and
file server space are more critical than communications
capacity).
Jerry Farrell
Subject: apollo s/w release 2.0
∂29-Jul-81 0941 Andy.VanDam at CMU-10A apollo s/w release 2.0
Date: 29 July 1981 1028-EDT (Wednesday)
From: Andy.VanDam at CMU-10A
To: works at mit-ai
CC: Andy.VanDam at CMU-10A
Message-Id: <29Jul81 102809 AD50@CMU-10A>
The second release of Apollo DOMAIN s/w happened as promised in
mid-July. Performance has improved greatly - cmd startup time
is (usually) instantaneous, cmds execute much faster (cp, for
example, is about 25% faster both for copying local-local and
over the network), and most known bufs have been fixed. Func-
tionality has also increase (although there's still plenty of
room for more increases...): there are a few new s/w tool cmds
(such as Unix-like sed, grep, macro processor), the display
manager (i.e., their full-screen editor) has cut, paste,
searches, and the user can access the display memory and
bit-mover.
In response to a query from the other week, yes, the Apollo
Users Workshop did take place at Brown on 21-22 June. Users
and potential users from: USAF Geophysics Lab, Bell Labs,
CaslTech, CCA, Computer Techniques, Cornell, Daniel Wagner,
AHarvard, IBM Cambridge, MIT, Mentor Graphics, Schlumberger
Well Services, UMass - Boston, UPenn, and Yale briefly
described what they are planning to do with their apollo's,
Dave Nelson and Bill Poduska talked in detail about the
company's plans for s/w releases and general growth, Kim
McCall from PARC-LRG talked about implementing Smalltalk
on an Apollo, and workshops were held about porting unix,
graphics, lisp, and tex.
The general reaction of the participants was that Apollo is
listening to its user community, which at present is primarily
CS R&D/academia. Apollo looks like it will be around for quite
some time, and will be emphasizing mktg for commericial world
(though they promise not to forget us CSers). Presently, the
h/w is quite solid, and most agree that the s/w is still about
a year away from being there.
Details of Apollo's plans discussed at the mtg are confidential.
Contact me for a list of participants (w/ phone, arpa addreesses)
that can be contacted for more direct info, or for a short (3
sentence) summary of what the participants said they'd be doing
with the Apollos.
Marc Brown
Subject: Mouse Guts
∂29-Jul-81 1023 Eric K. Olson <OLSON at DEC-MARLBORO> Mouse Guts
Date: 28 Jul 1981 0927-EDT
From: Eric K. Olson <OLSON at DEC-MARLBORO>
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
Message-ID: <MS"5(1631)"11747606017.5.545.5372 at DEC-MARLBORO>
Conglomeration of responses to "How does a mouse work?":
Currently, a mouse is a small box with a fairly large (1-2 cm
diam.) ball bearing captivated so a fraction of it lies outside
the bottom of the box. As the box is rolled around, two wheels
positioned perpendicular to one another pick off the rotational
motion of the ball in their plane only (they slip in all other
planes). Hence we get two rotational motions, one for each
component of the two-dimensional motion of the mouse.
The direction and (over time) speed of the rotation shafts are
measured by disks attached to the shafts encoded with a gray
code, and read either photoelectrically (via led and phototran-
sistor) or mechanically (via brushes). The grey code output
might look like 00 01 11 10 00 going one way and 00 10 11 01 00
going the other, so we can tell the difference in direction.
Some historical information about mice, according to Bill Barns:
The mouse as originally invented by Doug Engelbart and Bill
English and patented by them (rights assigned to their employer
at the time, Stanford Research Institute (now SRI International))
consists of two high precision potentiometers connected mechan-
ically to metal wheels with rather sharp edges, approximately 2
inches in diameter, and set at right angles to each other as close
as possible without touching. [This seems a kludgey way to get
this motion, because the pots would "pin" occasionally, eveN if
they were 20-or-more-turn.] The pots are mounted on a metal base
plate to which is attached a bracket. On the bracket there are
(in the original, and still popular configuration) three switches
which are triggered by buttons about 5/16 inch diameter [8 mm]
which rest upon spring metal fingers attached also to the bracket.
The bottom of the metal finger rests on the momentary-contact
actuator of the microswitch. This arrangement puts some "click"
into the feel. The switches typically are SPST with a common
ground so that for a three button mouse there are four wires for
the switches and one wire for the non-ground side of each pot - 6
total. The mouse wheel voltages are fed into an analog->digital
converter of about 10 to 12 bit resolution and at appropriate
times, some logic samples the digital value and does the
appropriate thing.
Engelbart lives on at Tymshare, and English went to Xerox PARC
and gave birth to Alto etc., (not sure if he's still there).
Bill estimates the invention of the mouse between 1962 and 1967,
and *guesses* 1963/4.
By the way, I got several warnings about suits, patents that I
musn't breach, etc, which I condense below:
Patents to SRI and Xerox apply to a number of features of the
design. The Englebart/English Patent is probably still in
force, and it covers both digital and analog mice. [I was
warned to check the patents before building my own. I really
don't think that building your own personal whatever falls
under patent laws (unless possibly if you sell it).]
Thanks to Jerry Farrell (Farrell at PARC-MAXC), Bill Barns
(Barns at OFFICE), Craig Everhart (Craig Everhart at CMU-10A),
and Steven Kirsck (SK at MIT-MC).
-----
Subject: Big AND Small
∂31-Jul-81 0459 Rivanciw at Darcom-HQ Big AND Small
Date: 30 Jul 81 8:37:19-EDT (Thu)
From: Rivanciw at Darcom-HQ
To: works at Mit-Ai
Via: Darcom-HQ; 30 Jul 81 8:49-EDT
In reading the debates pro and con on big systems and little
systems, where big systems are large mainframes and little
systems are personal workstations it seems that the best of
both worlds would be architectures for office automation that
encompass both. Let me illustrate how we have attempted to
incorporate both worlds in our OA plans.
DARCOM has a DEC 10 (DARCOM-KA) on the ARPANET which it uses
to provide electronic mail and other OA services to a broad
community of users throughout the command (the command is all
over this country). Access is via ARPANET. Advantages here
are that for a relatively inexpensive yearly charge a remotely
located single user can obtain OA service with a communications
capability as powerful as the ARPANET. This service is in such
demand that we cannot supply services in large enough quantities
(thus the DEC 10 will soon be replaced with a couple of 11/780s
to provide more services).
One level down (in computer size) DARCOM uses what it calls
LARGE CLUSTER machines. These are mini computers (DEC 11/70
size) which provide LOCAL OA services to 100-150 users. Long-
haul communications is accomplished via the RELAY computer
to the ARPANET (or dial-up communication channel to non-ARPA
computers). These Large Clusters are not hosts on the ARPANET.
The computer I am working on right now is one of these large
clusters. This message is routed to the RELAY computer which
routes it to the ARPANET for delivery.
The next level down SMALL CLUSTER. The small cluster is a
general purpose micro computer (like the ONYX or "C" Machine).
The Small Cluster services 8-30 users. It communicates with
the LARGE CLUSTER for large file storage and backup. Communi-
cations on the small cluster are handled via the large cluster
or the RELAY.
The lowest level is the personal workstation (one user). We
haven't gotten there yet in large scale implementation. Yes,
we have a lot of personal workstations around but have not
yet incorporated them into our large scale implementation
plans yet.
This architecture is used for economies of scale and incremental
αinvestment on behalf of the user. For example, let me paint
a typical scenario of one of DARCOM's subordinate commands or
activities just entering into the world of office automation:
The Commander or somebody at the command wants to try office
automation. Now they are unsure of its benefits so they don't
want to spend mucho money. The buy a mailbox on our DARCOM-KA
(LARGE MAINFRAME). With this mailbox they can experiment with
all the OA tools.
After a short while they want 5 or 10 other people at
their command or activity to get mailboxes so that they can
communicate via electronic mail. They buy more mailboxes
on the large mainframe.
Then it is determined that office automation is good for the
command. They make large scale plans to provide OA services to
100, or 200, or 300, or how-ever-many prople. At this point the
economies of scale move towards the LARGE CLUSTER machine. With
a large cluster installed locally, the command is essentially
running their own OA.
But soon they find that more and more users are demanding service.
Enter the small cluster. As one division goes from one or two
users (who were getting OA services on the large cluster) to a
demand to provide services to 8 or 10 people in that particular
division, a micro computer is installed in the division to provide
those services (and offset the demand on the large cluster). An
example of this implementation is DARCOM Headquarters. We began
by buying accounts on the big DARCOM-KA (large mainframe). When
demand grew to 60 users we brought a large cluster into the
building. The number of users on the large cluster grew from 60
last Oct to 210 as of last week. We now have some 20 micros on
order. These micros will service 8-10 user each so we now supply
services to an additional 160-200 individuals. As folks move
off the large cluster to the small cluster there are more folks
wainting in line behind them for accounts on the large cluster.
This multi-level (of size?) architecture seems to be working
pretty well for providing services to our command.
Randy
Subject: Keystroke Monitoring
∂31-Jul-81 0721 Eric K. Olson <OLSON at DEC-MARLBORO> Keystroke Monitoring
Date: 30 Jul 1981 0128-EDT
From: Eric K. Olson <OLSON at DEC-MARLBORO>
To: TAW at SU-AI
cc: WorkS at MIT-AI
Message-ID: <MS"5(1631)"11748043074.24.545.10627 at DEC-MARLBORO>
As I said in a message to Human-Nets (once again, the two lists are
discussing similar things), I think a reasonably valid statistic
for keystroke monitors indicating performance of the secretary is
keystrokes per character in output document. This way the typist
that makes no errors will have fewer keystrokes (lower, better
score) than the typist that makes lots of errors to produce the
same document. This also takes care of the problem of a secretary
idling by typing jkl;jkl;jkl;jkl;jkl;. I personally do not condone
the use of keystroke monitors to monitor performance (I think that
management should not even be told the statistic is available).
This all assumes of course that the monitor is on a word processing
system used primarily for word processing. Programmers shouldn't
be subjected to keystroke monitors (I am a little more vehement
about this; it hits home), and fortunately the statistic is harder
to generate for programmers.
-Eric
-----
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #1
∂03-Aug-81 0629 DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II) WorkS Digest V1 #1
Date: 3 AUG 1981 0849-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
WorkS Digest Mon, 3 Aug 1981 Volume 1 : Issue 1
Today's Topics:
Administrivia - Welcome, Workstations - Harvard Apollo Experience,
Polls - OA System Developers & WorkS Census
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 1 Aug 1981 (Saturday) 0956-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
Subject: Administrivia - Welcome to the WorkS Digest
To All WorkS readers:
As you have probably guessed, we are making the workstation
discussion list into a digest. It shall be a daily digest.
One of the few things we are looking for is a moderator. If
you have the (a) interest, (b) the time, (c) easy and proper
access to the Network (MIT computers), and (d) the patience,
please drop a message in WORKS-REQUEST@MIT-AI.
Henry Dreifus
------------------------------
Date: 2 Aug 1981 (Sunday) 1422-EST
From: BUSH at HARV-10
Subject: Four Months with Two Apollos
We have had two Apollos at Harvard for about four months
now, and I have a few personal observations to contribute from
my experience with them.
The best way to describe them is as a state-of-the-art
product, with the emphasis on product. The Apollo seems to be
the best large-micro-based system available with a bit-mapped
display, Winchester disk, and high-speed local network. Since
it started a little over a year ago Apollo Computer has managed
to produce a very solid piece of hardware, and quite a bit of
software. We have had no trouble with the hardware, and the
software, while poorly documented and a tad flakey (we are a
beta test site), has been basically usable. The network file
system works, and, on our small network, file access is not
appreciably slower for remote files.
The Apollo is not, however, a state-of-the-art tool for
computer science research, nor does it claim to be. It is not
a Dorado nor a Star-with-Mesa. A lot of the folks at Apollo
came from Pr1me, and in order to produce a working, competitive
product, they built what they knew how to build for a market
they were familiar with (the engineering/scientific market).
The system was tuned for user programming in FORTRAN, not system
programming, with such things as interprocess communication and
software interrupts not supported. Now that its primary market
is academic, Apollo will put a number of these features in, but
system programming, and the kind of features it requires, are not
a fundamental target of the system software. The system also has
a rather unsophisticated human user interface. Some of this is
clearly a matter of time, but some things that I imagine people
at Xerox would consider basic, such as a mouse and non-confusing
windows, are not along yet. (The Apollo windows are confusing
because they are all full-screen width and bordered with a single
line, so it is difficult to determine which windows are on top.)
It seems that Apollo did not do a lot of research in designing
their product, but instead will be educated by their users.
Bill Bush
------------------------------
Date: 2 August 1981 11:34-EDT
From: Brian P. Lloyd <LLOYD at MIT-AI>
Subject: Results of Poll
Here are the results of the "Are you actively working on an
Office Automation system" poll. The results surprised me very
much. Here are some of the numbers:
Responses 32
Working on a system 23
Not working 9
The "Not Working" column also contains responses from people
indicating that they were simply implementing OA functionality
on their home systems (e.g. not for commercial sale/distribution).
That was a value judgement on my part and may not be valid.
There were many very interesting responses but in order to keep
this message short I will exclude most. Two immediately caught
my eye and are reproduced here:
------------------------------
Date: 18 Jul 1981 13:22 PDT
From: XXXXX at PARC-MAXC
...
The Xerox redistribution list for WorkS currently contains
57 members. I don't know exactly how many of them (us) are
actually working on workstation design or implementation,
but I suspect about 75-80% are, in one capacity or another.
-- XXX
------------------------------
Date: 16 Jul 1981 21:05 PDT
From: Kimball at PARC-MAXC
Nearly everyone from Xerox on list, as you surmised...
Ralph Kimball
Manager CUSP Development, Xerox
------------------------------
In the first note I was asked not to reveal the sender. Based
on the numbers in the first message, we could probably skew
the results, but that is up to you.
As mentioned earlier, the raw responses are in the file
USERS3;LLOYD WORKS on the MIT-AI machine.
Brian
P.S. I too am actively working on a system. I am managing the
software development for the M/A-Com Executive Management
System (MEMS) which uses the Convergent Technologies
hardware.
B
------------------------------
Date: 3 August 1981 08:00-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II)
Subject: WorkS Census II
On 25 June, Randy Rivanciw proposed a census to give everyone
who wished, a chance to briefly describe who they are and what
their professional interest in personal workstations is. We
already have a variety of responses. However, a large number
of people have been added to the list since 25 June. Now that
the list population has stabilized, we want to give everyone a
chance to participate before making the results available.
If you would like to participate in this census and have not
already responded, please forward a brief description of your
interests in personal workstations to WORKS-CENSUS@MIT-AI.
Please do so promptly however, as we will make the results
available early next week.
Enjoy,
Roger
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #3
∂09-Aug-81 1202 DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II) WorkS Digest V1 #3
Date: 9 AUG 1981 1418-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
WorkS Digest Sun, 9 Aug 1981 Volume 1 : Issue 3
Today's Topics:
Query - Smalltalk
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 6 Aug 1981 1002-EDT
From: Bob Hyman <HYMAN at DEC-MARLBORO>
Subject: Smalltalk systems
What-all systems support smalltalk? Are there dialects of
smalltalk, as there are of FORTH? Do smalltalk systems come
without the graphics-oriented user interface?
Bob
------------------------------
Date: 9 August 1981 12:00-EDT
From: "The Moderator" <Duffey at MIT-AI>
Subject: Archived information about Smalltalk
Smalltalk has come up briefly in several earlier WorkS discussions.
For your convenience, a summary transcript of the archived material
on Smalltalk is included below. Complete copies of these messages
are available upon request from the archives.
-- RDD
... LRG, a group within PARC, has licensed Smalltalk-80 (the
only Xerox-authorized version of Smalltalk to be released)
to a number of micro- and mini-computer manufacturers. The
release consists of detailed specifications for the machine-
dependent kernel, plus a mag tape containing the rest of the
system (windows, editor, compiler, file system, etc., etc.)
Several of these manufacturers have made excellent progress
on implementing the system, to the point of having windows
appear on their displays. I can't comment on the specific
list of manufacturers, since we prefer to let them make
their own announcements. ... and we are currently working
out ways to license the system to manufacturers (and univer-
sities) beyond the original group. I can't comment on the
availability of Smalltalk for the Star, except to say that
the Star hardware is definitely powerful enough to support
Smalltalk.
-- <Deutsch at PARC-MAXC>
Smalltalk IS being released by PARC this summer. There
was a big presentation on the subject at this year's NCC.
Apple, DEC, HP and other companies are doing research
into implementing it on their machines. (In fact, one of
the primary Smalltalk implementors, Larry Tesler, is now
at Apple and was one of the speakers at NCC.) A huge
article on the subject will appear in the August issue
of BYTE.
The deal is that PARC gives you an "image" file on a
tape, which contains all of Smalltalk ready to run. To
run it, you have to implement an interpreter on your
machine for the 256 Smalltalk bytecodes. Just like you
can run Pascal, if you have a P-code interpreter.
-- Ron Newman <NEWMAN.ES@PARC-MAXC>
... Xerox intends to release a book on Smalltalk called
Smalltalk 80. This version of Smalltalk is intended to be
easily portable. There was some discussion within Xerox
legal about whether the Smalltalk virtual image would be
released. But the book which describes the interpreter
plus the virtual image would result in a very easily
portable language.
One could then port it to the machine of your choice,
including the STAR, assuming that you could PROGRAM
the STAR. When MESA gets released you will be able to
implement it in that: but a better place is microcode.
I haven't heard anything definitive about whether Xerox
intends to microcode the Dandelion (STAR workstation)
for Smalltalk.
-- Michael <mike at RAND-UNIX>
... Also, XEROX is now putting up Smalltalk on the Star,
for internal use. I have no idea, and I suppose neither
does XEROX, if they'll ever release it.
-- Chris Ryland <RYLAND at SRI-KL>
Ed Feigenbaum received the following message from Mr. R.E.
Bomeisler, Marketing Manager for Xerox EOS, in response
to repeated requests for more information about Dolphins
necessary for planning acquisitions. ...
*********************************************
"In our telephone discussion, Ed, you indicated that
Xerox was not providing you and potential users with
enough information to assist you in designing your
networks and planning for future growth. I would like
to apprise you of the steps we have taken at XEOS to
fill the information gap.
...
With regard to 1100/Interlisp performance, continual
improvements are being made in the code. The system
is five times faster than it was a year ago and signi-
ficant further improvement is expected.
...
In addition to Interlisp, XEOS is planning to
implement Smalltalk on the 1100. The schedule is
yet to be determined.
As a key ingredient of the overall 1100 program,
it is planned to release a version of Interlisp on
the Star processor after January 1, 1983. This will
provide Interlisp to future users on a very cost-
effective basis.
...
********************************************
-- Tom R. <RINDFLEISCH@SUMEX-AIM>,
forwarded to WorkS by <Geoff at SRI-CSL>
In response to a query from the other week, yes, the
Apollo Users Workshop did take place at Brown on 21-22
June. Users and potential users ... briefly described
what they are planning to do with their apollo's, Dave
Nelson and Bill Poduska talked in detail about the
company's plans for s/w releases and general growth,
Kim McCall from PARC-LRG talked about implementing
Smalltalk on an Apollo, and workshops were held about
porting unix, graphics, lisp, and tex. ...
Details of Apollo's plans discussed at the mtg are
confidential. Contact me for a list of participants
(w/phone, arpa addresses) that can be contacted for
more direct info, or for a short (3 sentence) summary
of what the participants said they'd be doing with
the Apollos.
-- Marc Brown in care of <Andy.VanDam at CMU-10A>
The August issue of BYTE is devoted to Smalltalk. The
good folks at Xerox PARC contributed quite a bit to the
issue. I'll refrain from further comment till I've read
the thing.
-- <decvax!duke!unc!smb at Berkeley>
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #4
∂12-Aug-81 0247 DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II) WorkS Digest V1 #4
Date: 12 AUG 1981 0522-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
WorkS Digest Wed, 12 Aug 1981 Volume 1 : Issue 4
Today's Topics:
Query - Micro benchmarks, Reply - Smalltalk
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 11 Aug 1981 1917-PDT
From: Stevan Milunovic <Milunovic at SRI-KL>
Subject: Micro Benchmarks
Has anyone performed, or seen documentation concerning,
benchmark comparisons of micros commonly used in
workstations/personal computers? Specifically, the Z80,
8086, M68000, LSI-11/2, LSI-11/23. Please send replies
directly to me and I will compile the results and submit
to works. Thanks. -Steve
------------------------------
Date: 11 Aug 1981 08:41 PDT
From: Adele at PARC-MAXC
Subject: Xerox Smalltalk
Various messages have been sent on this distribution list
relative to the release of the Xerox Smalltalk-80 (tm) system.
The messages in general are inaccurate or not complete because
plans for general distribution are not yet set. At this time,
for individuals to obtain information relative to their own
needs, you can contact me directly via telephone or
non-electronic mail.
Adele Goldberg
Xerox PARC
Learning Research Group
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #5
∂13-Aug-81 0624 DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II) WorkS Digest V1 #5
Date: 13 AUG 1981 0740-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
WorkS Digest Thu, 13 Aug 1981 Volume 1 : Issue 5
Today's Topics:
Reply - Micro Benchmarks, FYI - IBM's Personal Computer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 12 Aug 1981 2246-PDT
From: Stevan Milunovic <Milunovic at SRI-KL>
Subject: Micro Benchmarks Results
Many thanks to those who responded to the micro benchmark query.
I have summarized the benchmarks reported in the April 1/81 issue
of EDN, but the article should be read for details concerning the
benchmarks. It appears that the 68000 is the hands down winner,
unless you need floating point processing and can't wait for the
chip (floating point benchmarks were not performed in the report).
I have appended messages (edited to remove redundancy) from those
who responded to the query.
Benchmark tests were compiled at CMU in 1976, and coded by each
manufacturer.
MICRO | LSI-11/23 | 8086 | 68000 | Z8000 |
-------------+------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
BENCHMARK | Code| Time | Code| Time | Code| Time | Code| Time |
-------------+-----+------+-----+-------+-----+-------+-----+-------+
I/O Interrupt| 20 | 114 | 55 | 126 | 24 | 33 | 18 | 42 |
-------------+-----+------+-----+-------+-----+-------+-----+-------+
I/O w/FIFO | 86 | 1196 | 85 | 348 | 118 | 390 | 106 | 436 |
-------------+-----+------+-----+-------+-----+-------+-----+-------+
Char. Search | 76 | 996 | 70 | 193 | 44 | 244 | 66 | 237 |
-------------+-----+------+-----+-------+-----+-------+-----+-------+
Bit Ops | 70 | 799 | 46 | 122 | 36 | 70 | 44 | 123 |
-------------+-----+------+-----+-------+-----+-------+-----+-------+
Linked List | 138 | 592 | 94 | - | 106 | 153 | 96 | 237 |
-------------+-----+------+-----+-------+-----+-------+-----+-------+
Quicksort | - | - | 347 |1.2E↑5 | 266 |3.3E↑4 | 386 |1.2E↑5 |
-------------+-----+------+-----+-------+-----+-------+-----+-------+
Bit Matrix | 152 | 1517 | 88 | 820 | 74 | 368 | 110 | 646 |
-------------+-----+------+-----+-------+-----+-------+-----+-------+
Clock time: LSI-11/23 = 3.3 MHz
8086 = 10.0 MHz
68000 = 10.0 MHz
Z8000 = 6.0 MHz
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Frank J. Wancho <FJW at MIT-MC>
Subject: Micro Benchmarks
ComputerWorld has been running a series of benchmark articles
over the last six months or more and periodically publish
accumulated summaries of the results in each category.
--Frank
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Nowicki at PARC-MAXC
Subject: Re: WorkS Digest V1 #4
Forest Baskett has the famous "Baskett Benchmark" that has been
run on machines like Dorados, Dolphins, Altos, 10s, 20s, Vaxen,
and MC68000 in both C, "hacked" C and Pascal. The results
are very informative. I would like to see the results on other
microcomputers. By the way, we get almost 40% VAX/780 performance
on the 8 MHz 68000 in this test, which is a small, integer only,
compute bound puzzle solver.
-- Bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: CAIN at SRI-AI
Subject: Micro benchmarks
The April 1, 1981 issue of EDN has a number of benchmarks
between the LSI-11/23, the 68000, the Z8000, and the 8086.
They are taken from a more complete study done at CMU which
I was hoping to find one of these days.
Since these benchmarks omitted floating point tests, I
performed a couple informal ones on a 68000 with Doug Beck
here at SRI. To do 10000 iterations of a floating point add,
subtract, multiply, and divide took 71 seconds (implying 1.75
milliseconds per operation) using Whitesmith's C compiler and
104 seconds using Motorola's PASCAL compiler.
When talking to Motorola about this sluggish performance,
they mentioned that the 68000 has a fast floating point PROM
in development which has done floating-point multiplications
(in software!) in 35 micro seconds. This compares very well
with the LSI-11/23's floating point hardware times.
Also C makes all floating point numbers to double precision
before doing the implied operation, meaning much of that 71
seconds was devoted in going "float-to-double" and
"double-to-float". According to my calculations, the 68000
is capable of that 35 microsecond time easily (roughly 100
to 150 clock states would be required), and since it has the
most support (cross compilers on the VAX, etc), I think it is
the preferable chip. It is promised that the floating-point
support will be built onto the chip mask so that some new
instructions will manipulate floating point numbers directly.
I am seriously weighing the choice of VAX vs 68000 for a new
project (where cost may outweigh the greater power of the VAX).
... Ron
----------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: 12 Aug 1981 2130-PDT
From: Charles B. Weinstock <Weinstock at SRI-KL>
Subject: New IBM Personal Computer
Business Day : IBM Personal Computer
By ANDREW POLLACK
c. 1981 N.Y. Times News Service
NEW YORK - The International Business Machines Corp., the
giant of the computer industry, is thinking smaller: Wednesday
it introduced a personal desk-top computer for use at home,
in schools and in business.
Although the announcement had been expected for months,
it still sent reverberations through the industry.
Besides representing a dramatic change in image for IBM and
marking its entry into consumer electronics, the endorsement
of personal machines by a company whose name is practically
synonymous with computers is expected to stimulate the growth
of the business.
And IBM could pose the stiffest challenge yet to Apple
Computer Inc. and the Tandy Corp.'s Radio Shack division,
the current leading vendors.
"It's one of the most important announcements we've seen
in the industry," said Christopher Morgan, editor in chief of
Byte, a personal computer magazine.
"People will now know that personal computers are not a fad
or a flash in the pan," said Michael McConnell, executive vice
president of Computerland, a chain of a retail stores that will
market the new IBM products.
The price of the machines will range from $1,565, for a
simple system that will require users to provide their own
television screens and cassette tapes, to more than $6,000 for
the most elaborate versions. In addition to Computerland, the
line will be sold through several new business-machine stores
being started by Sears, Roebuck & Co., by IBM's own three retail
stores and directly by IBM to large corporations.
By most accounts of analysts and others connected with
the personal computer business, IBM's machine is impressive
technologically, not because of any single breakthrough, but
because of a combination of good features and sound engineering.
The new model uses a microprocessor capable of handling
16 bits of information at a time, which will permit the machine
to handle data more quickly and perform more complex tasks than
most other personal computers, which have 8-bit microprocessors.
The machine, depending on the model, can store 16,000 to more
that 260,000 characters in its memory.
But analysts disagreed on whether the price would be low
enough to knock Apple or Tandy out of the ring.
In Fort Worth, Garland P. Asher, chief of financial planning
for Tandy, said he was relieved in two ways. "I'm relieved that
whatever they were going to do, they finally did it," he said.
"I'm certainly relieved at the pricing. They haven't introduced
anything that's going to rewrite the ground rules."
Comparing prices is difficult, however, because the machines
come in different configurations and are not directly comparable.
McConnell, of Computerland, which sells both Apple machines and
the IBM home computer, said that in some typical configurations
the IBM machine was several hundred dollars more expensive than
the Apple II, Apple's popular brand. Yet the IBM device is
slightly less expensive than a typical configuration of the
newer, more powerful Apple III.
Other factors such as the availability of programs for the
computer and marketing are equally important, analysts said. IBM
will have fewer retail outlets and fewer programs initially than
Apple and Radio Shack. Yet, Aaron Goldberg, an analyst with the
International Data Corp., a Framingham, Mass., consulting firm,
said IBM's direct sales staff could be a potent force in selling
to leading industrial companies, who might buy dozens of desk-top
computers at a time.
Chances are, there will be room for all the companies, many
analysts believe. The personal computer market is growing
explosively, although accurate figures are hard to get because
there is no clear distinction between home computers, personal
computers for other users and desk-top computers designed for
business use.
International Data estimates that 327,000 desk-top computers,
ranging in price from several hundred dollars to $20,000, were
sold in the United States in 1980, and projects that this total
will increase to 1.3 million by 1985. In dollar volume, the
market is expected to grow from $2.4 billion last year to $9
billion in1985.
According to estimates by International Data and others,
there are approximately a million personal computers in use,
with the largest application being for business and professional
uses. The home and education markets are still small, but are
expected to explode.
When the new computer becomes available in October, the
program offerings will include Visicalc, a popular business
forecasting program; three business and accounting packages
by Peachtree Software; Easywriter, a word-processing package,
and Microsoft Adventure, a fantasy game. The software,
however, will sell in some cases for about twice the price
of the equivalent programs sold for use on other machines.
IBM is also allowing anyone else who wants to do so to
write programs for the IBM machine, which the company would
evaluate. If the programs were accepted for marketing, the
writer would be paid a royalty on sales of the program.
A veritable cottage industry of computer buffs has sprung
up to write programs for other personal computers, and the
abundance of such home-grown programs is largely responsible
for the market strength of the Apple and Tandy computers.
IBM also said it would make its computers nearly compatible
with some other home computers, so programs written for those
machines could be transferred to the IBM model.
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #6
∂14-Aug-81 1101 DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II) WorkS Digest V1 #6
Date: 14 AUG 1981 1025-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
WorkS Digest Fri, 14 Aug 1981 Volume 4 : Issue 6
Today's Topics:
Workstations - IBM's Personal Computer, Micro Benchmarks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 13 Aug 1981 1159-EDT
From: Willie Lim <WLIM at MIT-XX>
Subject: IBM Personal Computer
IBM announced its new 8080 based personal computer yesterday.
The prices range from $1500 to $6000 (approx.). It seems
that the system has color graphics. Does anyone has any
more details on the system? What is the OS on the system
and what are options?
Willie
------------------------------
Date: 13 Aug 1981 0813-PDT
From: Stevan Milunovic <Milunovic at SRI-KL>
Subject: Micro Benchmark Units
The units in the benchmark chart sent Aug 12 were bytes for
code, and microseconds for execution time. Sorry for the
omission. -Steve
------------------------------
Date: 14 Aug 1981 0448-PDT
From: SCHIFFMAN at SRI-KL
Subject: Benchmarking new Micros
I forget where I first heard it said that benchmarking was Advanced
Lying With Statistics....
I looked rather carefully at the EDN benchmarks when they first
came out. I took these more seriously than usual because:
They were in Assembly language; therefore they measure
programmer skill plus machine performance, as opposed to
higher-level-language benchmarks which measure programmer
skill plus machine performance plus compiler quality.
(Worse yet are benchmarks written in different languages
for different machines which throw "language- quality"
into the mix... or benchmarks running on time-sharing
systems that end up measuring scheduler fairness and
disk performance.)
They were written by employees of the respective manu-
facturers who were likely to be skilled with the given
architecture. This also removes the possibility of
unfair advantage given due to hidden prejudices.
A reasonable coverage of routine types were made that
collectively might represent "general performance".
(Including interrupt service routines was a good move,
for example.)
Nevertheless, the benchmarks were about as useless as benchmarks
usually are!
To pick some specific nits--
Although there was ONE environmental parameter supplied (the
clock speed for the given processor) there was no mention of
what memory performance is required to run at that speed
without wait states. I believe it is the case that a 10Mhz
8086 can run with memory much slower (and therefore cheaper)
than a 10MHz 68000. Nor is it mentioned what the availability
of the part is at that clock rate. Did you know that a 10MHz
8086 is $200 cheaper than a 10Mhz 68000? Maybe if you paid
that kind of money to Intel they would sell you a 16MHz part!
The benchmark specifications had loopholes in them which
were taken (quite understandably) to differing advantage.
For example (as best as I can remember) the interrupt
service benchmark did not specify that context had to be
completely saved. The Intel programmers went ahead and
saved all registers anyway (a reasonable thing for a
service routine to do). The programmers for the other
machines only saved the minimal context necessary to meet
the specification.
So much for GOOD benchmarks!
Any yet one often hears that "CPU X is 20% faster than CPU Y"
based on even less careful comparisons.
{BTW, I'm planning to use the 68000 in my next system. And
I do think that is much faster than the 8086 for the things
I want to do. But it's very likely a bit slower (for what
I want) than the Z8000. Don't forget that there are other
reasons for choosing a CPU than how fast it goes.}
Most CPU designers, when pressed, will agree that there is no
reasonable way to collect a small set of general metrics that
will characterize machine performance. To find the fastest
among several computers "in the same performance class" can
only be done by carefully attempting to model the application
for which the machine is to be used. If you are lucky, this
can be as simple as designing your program and coding the
inner loops for each machine to be considered. If you're not
so lucky, you might spend a year building a workload simulator
and still not know how different things will be if you get a
different disk controller.
Doing it right, of course, can be very hard. It's much easier
to refer to a list of how long a quicksort of 100 items takes
for every machine ever invented.
Joseph Weisenbaum (in "Computer Power and Human Reason") tells of
the story about the drunk repeatedly walking around a lamp post
at night. A passing policeman asks him for an explanation. The
drunk replies that he lost his keys--
Cop: "Oh, so you lost them under the lamp post?"
Drunk: "Naw, lost 'em over there." (Waving at the distant
darkness).
Cop: "So why look for them under the lamp?"
Drunk: "Silly! 'Cause the light's so much better here!"
-Allan
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #7
15-Aug-81 1143 DUFFEY at MIT-ML (Roger D. Duffey, II) WorkS Digest V1 #7
Date: 15 AUG 1981 1355-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-ML (Roger D. Duffey, II)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
WorkS Digest Sat, 15 Aug 1981 Volume 1 : Issue 7
Today's Topics:
Micro Benchmarks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 14 Aug 1981 15:28 EDT
From: Marshall.WBST at PARC-MAXC
Subject: Micro Benchmarks
A salesman from Intel was here this week and said that EDN has
retracted its benchmarks and will run another set. He said that
the new numbers show the 8086 only 10-15% slower than the 68000.
He said the retraction would be in the next issue.
Sidney Marshall - Rochester N.Y.
------------------------------
Date: 14 Aug 1981 11:36 PDT
From: Kosower at PARC-MAXC
Subject: Re: Benchmarking new Micros
Worse yet, benchmarks can be doubly deceiving, since they
may induce you to choose a micro for all the wrong reasons.
Unless you have a very specific application in mind, or
unless you plan to design and build your own operating system
from scratch, software development facilities, system quality,
and especially user interface quality are extremely important.
A Dorado, for example, may run faster than greased lightning,
but it would be about as useful as an F-15 powered by turboprop
engines if it had IBM-quality software running on it. After
all, most of us do not want to write reams and reams of code
in some J-random processor's assembly language (more so if it's
microcodable); so quality of the high-level language available
and quality of the compiler ARE important. Furthermore, most
applications change, and even with changes, their lifetime is
limited, so that other development facilities (editor, debugger,
etc.) are ALSO important. If it takes you 10 times longer to
write a program that will take 10 times longer to debug and will
eventually run 10 times slower, on processor A whose raw speed
is 10 times greater than that of processor B, which one would
you choose? Choosing B will save you time, to say nothing of
frustration, even though it is a "slower" processor. These are
not idle thoughts: an IBM 370/168 has tremendous raw speed, but
some of the cruftiest software ever written makes it seem slower
than the US Postal Service. Admittedly, almost all of the
software for micros such as the 8086 and 68000 is pretty awful,
but I still think it's worth keeping the above considerations
in mind. As Allan points out, just because something is easy
to measure does not mean it's useful or even meaningful.
David A. Kosower
------------------------------
Date: 14 August 1981 1832-EDT (Friday)
From: David.Lamb at CMU-10A
Subject: EDN benchmarks
Allan Schiffman may be right that the EDN benchmarks are
"about as useless as benchmarks usually are," but the MCF
(Military Computer Family) test specifications on which
they were supposed to be based *can* be used in a sensible
fashion to evaluate a computer architecture. The original
experiment design was set up at CMU with the co-operation
of one of the members of out Statistics department, who
designed the experiment to separate variance on the tests
into differences based on programmers, particular tests,
and the architecture itself. The notion was to see how
good the *architecture* (instruction set, visible registers,
etc.) was, rather than any particular implementation of the
architecture. Several different measurement scales were
set up. One measured the number of bytes need to encode
the programs, another measured the memory accesses needed
in an idealized implementation, and the third measured the
amount of data transferred between registers in the idealized
implementation. I'm a little disappointed that the tests are
being used now for a different purpose; it's not clear to me
that you want the same kinds of tests to do a comparison of
particular implementations of the architecture, as was the
case in the EDN tests.
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #8
∂18-Aug-81 0804 DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II) WorkS Digest V1 #8
Date: 18 AUG 1981 0811-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
WorkS Digest Tue, 18 Aug 1981 Volume 1 : Issue 8
Today's Topics:
Workstations - IBM's Personal Computer, Micro Benchmarks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 17 Aug 1981 1331-PDT
From: Rubin at SRI-KL
Subject: IBM Personal Computer
For those of you who stay in touch by computer rather than paper
or radio: Here's the latest on the IBM PC. It's a three-piece
unit, VERY slim nice-looking keyboard, with basically the same
key layout as the 5250 series. The display looks cosmetically
the same as a displaywriter's, and sits on a logic box with dual
diskettes. Inside we have an 8088, up to 256K, five expansion
slots, 80x25 screen memory with graphics 320x200 or 640x200.
Figure it out, that means an OK but not great 8x8 character
cell. The unit displays up to 16 foreground colors on 8 back-
ground colors (but I doubt if all those are available in the
graphics modes). And you get a sound generator and built-in
speaker to boot!
The thing is totally modular; even the I/O cards are separate!
For $ 1,565 you get a keyboard and logic unit with 16K RAM and
a Basic interpreter in 40K ROM. A cassette interface is built
in, I think; but no diskette or monitor at this price -- you
use your TV set. Of course you can add one or two minidiskettes,
lots more memory (16-64k increments), a B&W monitor (no color
monitor was mentioned), RS-232C interface card, matrix printer,
a joystick/paddle interface (but you have to buy somebody else's
joysticks and paddles); and maybe the kitchen sink. A "business
configuration" with 64K, dual diskettes, printer, and "color
graphics" goes for about $ 4,500.
The big news might be the software -- there's plenty of
it. If you don't like their idea of a diskette OS or Pascal
compiler or word processor, you can try USCD Pascal or CPM-86,
coming soon from Softech and Digital Research. (Gee, and I
was looking forward to JCL). And then there's Visicalc, three
Peachtree business applications, Microsoft Adventure, 3270
emulation on the way, and a new IBM Software Publishing outfit
(!**8). It looks like they read Byte.
Where can you get it or ogle at it? Try your local Sears,
Computerland, or IBM store (or DPD sales rep, if you're a
big banana).
Darryl Rubin
SRI International
------------------------------
Date: 17 Aug 1981 1220-PDT
From: Rubin at SRI-KL
Subject: Micro benchmarks
This may sound like an answer that begs the question. But THE
one true way to benchmark a micro depends entirely on your point
of view. (As you see, I have an unmatched knack for discovering
the obvious.) CPU architecture and instruction throughput matter
the most to designers of CPU boards for number-crunching and other
compute-bound stuff. Good I/O architecture and throughput score
highest to OEMers of communications and data base boxes. Good
compilers, spiffy user interfaces, and software tools (Xerox we
hear you!) matter the most to the rest of us system developers
and end users. What you will "see" is what you should measure.
Just to be exhaustive if not obsessive, I'll mention the sometimes
overlooked importance of good I/O controllers and peripherals,
especially big fast disk; a W-I-D-E choice of hardware and
software offerings; reliability, support, and the prospects for
compatible future enhancement. Most of all, vendor credibility
and track record. How do I benchmark thee, have I counted all
the ways?. . .
Darryl Rubin
SRI International
------------------------------
Date: 15 AUG 1981 1411-PDT
From: STEWART at PARC-MAXC
Subject: Benchmarks
Quote from ???: "There are lies; there are damn lies;
and there are benchmarks."
-Larry
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
Subject: Announcements - ANSI Standards Comm. & NCC82 Call for Papers
∂31-Jul-81 0755 ''The Moderator'' <WorkS-REQUEST at MIT-AI> Announcements - ANSI Standards Comm. & NCC82 Call for Papers
Date: 31 July 1981 06:00-EDT
From: "The Moderator" <WorkS-REQUEST at MIT-AI>
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
WorkS Announcements
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 29 July 1981 01:31-EDT
From: Steven T. Kirsch <SK at MIT-MC>
Subject: X3V1 comm. for ANSI Standards in the area of Office Systems
There are four working groups:
1. User interface requirements
2. Terms and functions for office systems
3. Distribution of information (e.g., message interchange format)
4. Text communications (e.g., page image format)
They welcome new members. West coast people are especially invited
to participate. Meetings are held in Washington, DC.
For further information, contact:
L. M. Collins, Chairman
X3V1 IBM Corp
2300 One Main Place
19th Floor
Dallas, TX 75250
------------------------------
Date: 28 July 1981 17:59 edt
From: Frankston at MIT-Multics (Bob Frankston)
Subject: NCC 1982 Personal Computer Sessions -- Call for papers etc.
The 1982 National Computer Conference will have a track (i.e.,
a group of sessions) on personal computers. This means that
the papers will be refereed and appear in the proceedings.
This is in contrast to past years in which there was a
separate, unrefereed "subconference".
This reflects the growth and importance of personal computers.
But it is also a challenge. We must organize a new set of
sessions and get new referees. Part of this challenge is in
finding a balance between sessions on the mature areas in
personal computing and capturing the innovation in ongoing
research and development, both in academic and commercial
projects. Workshops might provide a better forum for the
latter.
Some of the possible topics include:
- what are personal computers -- the definitions range
from Alan Kay's dynabook, to miniature mainframes to
workstations.
- what personal computers are not.
- specific applications and issues such as wordprocessing
(though word processing also falls under office automation)
- Protocols and standards
- Networking as it relates to personal computers. This
can represent both local area networks as well as ad
hoc telco networks.
- Operating systems -- both traditional and new concepts
- Languages
- Consumer computers -- issues in design, implications of
a software marketplace.
- Education -- traditional and otherwise, computer and
noncomputer
- Implications and relationships to other fields both
within the industry and in the rest of the world.
Societal interactionals.
- Hardware trends and issues
- Games, both recreational and educational.
I am on the NCC steering committee and am in charge of
organizing/creating these sessions. If you have any
suggestions or comments, and if your are interested in
participating by writing a paper, refereeing or whatever,
please contact me either as:
nccpc82.SoftArts at MIT-Multics
or
Bob Frankston
Software Arts, Inc
PO Box 527
Cambridge, MA 02139
or 617-491-2100.
------------------------------
End of Announcements
********************
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #9
∂22-Aug-81 0646 DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II) WorkS Digest V1 #9
Date: 22 AUG 1981 0917-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
WorkS Digest Sat, 22 Aug 1981 Volume 4 : Issue 9
Today's Topics:
Workstations - IBM's Personal Computer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 18 Aug 1981 1406-EDT
From: Willie Lim <WLIM at MIT-XX>
Subject: IBM Personal Computer
For more details on the IBM new personal computer see a full page
ad (page 16) in Monday's Wall Street Journal (8/17/81). There is
a number one can call : 1-800-431-2670. But Rubin's mail to
WorkS seems to have quite a good description of the system.
Willie
------------------------------
Date: 18 Aug 1981 1415-EDT
From: Willie Lim <WLIM at MIT-XX>
Subject: IBM new PC
There is a rumour that the S-100 bus is (or going to be) on the new
IBM PC. Is this true?
Willie
------------------------------
Date: 20 Aug 1981 (Thursday) 1737-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
Subject: IBM Personal Computer
Would someone collect information on the IBM Personal Computer,
and then send it out to the list? Here is all that I know about
it:
Processor Class: 8086 (lets face it, its a display-writer)
Up to 256 K memory
Either Floppy (avail now) or Winchester drives.
Can run DOS, a version of CP/M or IBM's own OS.
Will have EasyWriter & VisiCalc; not sure on Wordstar.
It is clearly going to be more powerful in the long run over
8080 class microprocessors.
For more info, they have an 800/431-2670 number for information
pacquets.
Hank
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
∨
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #10
∂31-Aug-81 0013 DUFFEY at MIT-ML (Roger D. Duffey, II) WorkS Digest V1 #10
Date: 31 AUG 1981 0142-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-ML (Roger D. Duffey, II)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
WorkS Digest Mon, 31 Aug 1981 Volume 1 : Issue 10
Today's Topics:
Workstations - IBM's Personal Computer, Working While Flying
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 23 Aug 1981 1700-EDT
From: GILBERT at MIT-XX (Ed Gilbert)
Subject: IBM's personal computer: S100?
I saw a sales presentation and a couple of prototypes the other
day. From what I remember, the cards did not look like S100
cards. During the presentation, they promised to publish the
bus specs, so we can assume that it isn't S100. However, they
seem to be encouraging a plug-compatible market, so it should
soon grow to be as large as the S100 market.
Someone sent a message to this list some time ago describing
the system. I learned little of significance at the presentation
that was not in that message. I do want to clarify something
that could cause confusion. The DOS that is offered with the
personal computer is not the same one that runs on the main-
frames. If you think about it that would be very difficult
to do, but IBM hasn't been very clear about it. I am told
the new DOS is of the same flavor as CP/M.
------------------------------
Date: 26 August 1981 1153-EDT (Wednesday)
From: Marc.Donner at CMU-10A
Subject: IBM Personal Computer
I saw some of the discussion of the IBM personal computer
in the Apollo bboard at CMU. I just left IBM Yorktown
Heights and I brought with me a copy of the 'blue letter'
that announced the PC. I will be glad to send you any
information from it that you want ... it is public
information. I don't have it with me physically right
now, but here is some of the gist:
In the beginning IBM will be selling two basic configurations:
Configuration 1 includes 'System Unit', Keyboard, 48K RAM,
40K ROM, floppy disk controller and one floppy (5-1/4 inch
minifloppies). Configuration 2 is same as configuration 1
with addition of another 16K RAM (total 64K) and the other
floppy. The system unit has capacity for up to five cards.
One option that you MUST buy before you may use the system
is one of three video interfaces. One interface connects
to the IBM monochrome display, one connects to a TV modulator,
and one connects both to the monochrome display AND to the
printer. The list price for Configuration 1 is about 2300
dollars. For configuration 2 the list is about 3000 dollars.
Oh, one thing that is also included in the Configuration 1
and 2 systems is the Asynchronous Communications Interface.
All software beyond the ROM Basic (by MICROSOFT) is extra
cost. Asynchronous communications software is $40, Pascal
is $300 (requires two floppies and big memory, I think),
Adventure is $30 ... more details when I have the blue
letter in my hand. The minimal systems (system unit, 16K
RAM) will only be available from Sears and Computerland.
Volume discounts are available ... 5% for more than 20
units on up to 15 or 20% for >100 units.
The processor is an Intel 8088, which is the 8 bit bus version
of the 8086 ... it is a 16 bit machine shouting through a small
hole. The processor cycles at almost 5MHz. Assuming three
byte instruction and one data fetch or store per instruction,
there will be five memory transactions per instruction ... if
memory cycles at system clock speed (I think that this is so)
then they get about 1 microsecond per 8086 instruction. The
first 64K of RAM plug into sockets on the main processor board
... you don't have to buy the RAMs from IBM ... you can get
the chips from a distributor and save bucks.
Almost all of the software (read ALL) is from outside. The
floppies and the printer are also OEM components that IBM
buys. The monochrome display is capable of displaying 25
lines of 80 characters ... the TV interface is limited to
25 lines of 40. The monochrome display may have monochrome
graphics ... the announcement is quite vague.
I priced out the nicest combination of goodies that would
go together in the box ... two floppies, 192K RAM, printer,
display, communications, and it came to about $6K sans
software.
Please let me know if you want more details.
Marc
------------------------------
Date: 27 Aug 1981 1743-PDT
From: Zellich at OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich)
Subject: Working while flying - airborne phones coming
From the 26 Aug 81 issue of MIS Week newspaper:
W.U. TO ACQUIRE 50% OF AIRFONE
Upper Saddle River, N.J.
- Western Union Corp. said last week it has agreed to acquire
a 50 percent interest in a new communications system, owned by
Airfone Inc., that will allow passengers on commercial airlines
to place a telephone call while in flight.
According to Western Union, Airfone has received a developmental
license from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to
provide a nationwide, fully automatic air-to-ground radio
telephone communications service.
Initially, Western Union said, service will be provided through
air-to-ground telephones installed in wide-bodied aircraft, which
in turn will be linked with multiple ground stations providing
coast-to-coast coverage. It said a passenger would be able to
place a call by using portable telephones located in various
sections of the aircraft.
The system, it said, is expected to be operational during the
second half of next year.
------------------------------
Wonder if I'll be able to use my TI745 with this service...or
better yet, the still-to-come portable CRT connected to my
still-to-come stand-alone home workstation? -Rich Zellich
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #11
∂01-Sep-81 0933 DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II) WorkS Digest V1 #11
Date: 1 SEP 1981 1042-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
WorkS Digest Tue, 1 Sep 1981 Volume 1 : Issue 11
Today's Topics:
Workstations - IBM's Personal Computer, Working While Flying
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 31 Aug 1981 08:20:52-PDT
From: SomeoneOnUUCP at Berkeley
In-real-life: Steven M. Bellovin
Location: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Reply-to: "Steven M. Bellovin in care of" <CSVAX.upstill at Berkeley>
Subject: New IBM system
I have a few questions about the thing, and I'd appreciate any
information anyone has gathered.
a) is it S-100 compatible?
b) Is it program compatible with their 8086-based Datamaster?
c) Can one get 8-inch floppies for it?
------------------------------
Date: 31 Aug 1981 1214-PDT
From: Rubin at SRI-KL
Subject: IBM PC, last round
A last note on the IBM PC, and then maybe we can get back to
discussing REAL research workstations (which the IBM PC probably
isn't quite).
I got the literature pack IBM sends out, and would like to correct
something Marc said in his recent note. This literature mentions
only two video interfaces -- one for the IBM monochrome display and
one for a color graphics display. The monochrome board includes a
printer interface. If you get the color board, you buy a separate
printer interface. The color board has 16K RAM for color storage,
used like this:
Text mode -- 16 foreground colors, 8 background
Graphics mode -- 4 colors 320 x 200 (might there be a lookup
table ???), 2 colors (B&W) 640 x 200
The graphics board puts out RGB and composite video. IBM does
not (yet) sell a color graphics monitor or RF modulator, but if
you buy somebody else's, the graphics board will accommodate it.
If you're seriously interested in this PC, be wary of a couple
things: First, the five slots probably isn't enough if you want
> 128 K of memory and color graphics; with luck they'll add a
bus extender. Also, I'm wondering whether any of the announced
software really supports more than 64K in any useful way, or how
soon it will. (Given the slowness of diskettes, you'll need the
extra RAM for decent response time, if the software will only use
it properly). Third, I don't believe the IBM DOS applications
can send their output to the ASCII port; if true, you'd have to
buy their printer (and that's a loss because the printer doesn't
do graphics, or at least IBM doesn't claim it does).
Still, I think this PC has more pluses than minuses, compared
to Apples, TRS-80s, Xerox 820s, ad triviatum. Good hardware,
lots of software, lots of future enhancement, and lots of
support (maintenance contracts, even!). Look for IBM to add
a 5.25" Winchester and lots of color graphics software.
Now, about REAL workstations. I just read a rumor that about a
year from now DEC will be announcing a floppy-based, VLSI VAX
packaged as a workstation. Price about $ 15,000. Supposedly
it's already in beta test. Does anyone know more about this?
--Darryl
------------------------------
Date: 31 Aug 1981 0018-PDT
From: the tty of Geoffrey S. Goodfellow
Sender: GEOFF at SRI-CSL
Reply-To: Geoff at SRI-CSL
Unless you like getting 3 and 4 digit phone bills, I don't
think you'll want to use your terminal on AIRPHONE. Such
a service currently exists on some United DC-10's using
equipment sold by SKYTEL (or SKYPHONE) using the currently
allocated FCC Air-to-Ground Mobile channels. Last I heard
the charge for use was $15/first three mins (air-time), and
$3/ea. addtl min (air-time). This charge was IN ADDITION
to the Operator Assisted dialed call rate from the ground
base station you were going thru to the person you were
calling.
I have found the mobile phone I have in my car indispensable,
and have often wished for similar service on air plane
flights. I just hope that the license the FCC gave AIRPHONE
for its developmental system means it will operate on some
new frequency allocations, and hence, will be a 'new type
of service' and not subjected to the (excessive) rates on
the current system in use today.
P.S. Wouldn't this have been more appropriate for HUMAN-NETS?
[ It was addressed to HUMAN-NETS as well as to WorkS. It
was deemed appropriate for WorkS because of this list's
earlier speculations on using terminals while traveling.
I would like to take this opportunity to remind everyone
that almost all of the WorkS subscribers also subscribe to
HUMAN-NETS. The moderators will point out other discussion
lists to submitters when that seems appropriate. However,
the final decision of where to distribute something remains
with the submitter. -- RDD ]
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #13
∂03-Sep-81 0957 DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II) WorkS Digest V1 #13
Date: 3 SEP 1981 1004-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
WorkS Digest Thu, 3 Sep 1981 Volume 1 : Issue 12
Today's Topics:
Query - Mesa availability, A book on Workstations,
Call for People - NCC '82 Personal Workstations track
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 3 Sep 1981 (Thursday) 0753-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
Subject: Mesa shall be released (?)
I have heard from two sources that Mesa - the programming
language for the Xerox Star, among other Xerox products,
will be released, and available for programmers to use.
Just how much and exactly when Mesa is coming out are two
interesting questions at this time.
Hank
------------------------------
Date: 3 Sep 1981 (Thursday) 0816-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
Subject: Workstations -- a book ?
Personal Workstations Mailing list;
to all participants:
Computer Science Press of California is interested in making
WorkS a book. Sections on all the different personal computers,
and interesting areas such as local networks will probably be
addressed.
Please send me your comments in this matter. I would like to
use most of the information contained here already in WorkS,
as well as continue to put together more topics and 'chapters'
through continued input.
The way in which I foresee the book becoming a reality is by
having everyone who has expertise in an area write the appro-
priate chapter. I am still in the idea-cogitating stages of
this -- your input shall be most valuable.
If interested in helping, let me know!
Henry Dreifus
------------------------------
Date: 3 Sep 1981 (Thursday) 0821-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
Subject: WorkS in NCC'82 works.
This is a version of a message that Bob Frankston of SoftArts
sent to the Works users who are interested in getting NCC-82's
personal workstations track running and up and off the ground.
People are needed to help organize this thing, and do it right.
If you are at all interested in any aspect of what is below, or
have some ideas you think are important for the NCC please send
them along to Bob Frankston [Frankston.SoftArts@MIT-MULTICS].
Hank
--------------------------------------------------
1. What is personal computing.
This should cover some of the history of personal computing
(it is not a new idea) as well as the current explosion in
popularity and availability. A subtopic is "what is
programming". Traditionally it has been languages such as
Fortran and COBOL. What is it now?
2. Local Networks, Workstations
These are both popular topics these days.
3. Education/Social Implications
Issues beyond traditional CAI. Learning with and about
computers. What are the effects in the US society, in
other, possibly "less well developed" societies. What
are the myths such as "computers for kitchen recipies"
vs "computers are impossible for people to ever learn to
use". Society also affects computers. As the computation
becomes more accessible, more people will be programming
and affecting the machines.
4. Global Networks
This is actually a combination of the previous two --
what is the implementation of and the implications of
communicating computers. The emphasis is on the use of
such a capability be individuals as a means of access
and communication. Cable TV and information services
are both relevant to this as is electronic mail.
5. Software Environments/Operating Systems.
This covers both traditional operating systems work
as well as special machines for Lisp and Smalltalk.
Also relevant are tools, standards and protocols, and
languages. The emphasis is on the particular issues
for personal computing (this sometimes means small
computing, but not necessarily).
6. Hardware
The emphasis would be on developments that make the
computation more accessible for personal computing.
7. Applications.
There is not necessarily a strong distinction between
systems work and applications. Applications may include
individual ways of exploiting computers for personal use
or use of computers in environments such as homes and
offices. For example, workstations are both applications
and environments for applications.
8. Graphics
As it applies to personal computing.
9. Peripherals and I/O.
How is access to personal computing provided, how can such
systems interact with their users and their environment.
These are, of course tentative. Suggestions are stil welcome.
If you know of other people who would be interested in helping
or people you know of who you hink I should contact, please
send me a note (nccpc82.SoftArts at MIT-Multics).
Thanks.
Bob Frankston
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #13
∂04-Sep-81 1006 DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II) WorkS Digest V1 #13
Date: 4 SEP 1981 0907-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
WorkS Digest Fri, 4 Sep 1981 Volume 1 : Issue 13
Today's Topics:
What is a Workstation?, Workstations - Xerox 1100
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 3 Sep 1981 1703-PDT
From: Mike Leavitt <LEAVITT at USC-ISI>
Subject: Works Book
One of the issues that has weaved in and out of the discussion
here is why certain small machines are *not* workstations.
It would seem interesting for the definitive (for this year)
workstation book to discuss this issue, as well, and perhaps
to indicate just what would need to be done to the more common
small machines for them to qualify as workstations. I'm cc'ing
the list on this because I want to hear the flames about how
an Apple can NEVER become a REAL workstation, before I give
specifics!
Mike <Leavitt at usc-isi>
------------------------------
Date: 3 Sep 1981 0959-PDT
From: Richard R. Cower <COWER at SRI-KL>
Subject: Xerox
NO. 509
August 27, 1981
XEROX ANNOUNCES INTERLISP PROCESSOR
FOR ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE RESEARCH
A compact computer system for use by research scientists in
artificial intelligence has been announced by Xerox Corporation.
The Xerox 1100 Scientific Information Processor includes a wide-
format, bit-map display, keyboard, and "mouse" pointing device.
It makes available the Interlisp-D software, an upward-compatible
extension of Interlisp, formerly available only on large, time-
shared computers.
The 1100 Interlisp system provides scientists with a computing
environment for conducting artificial intelligence research.
This research discipline has applications in engineering,
medicine, genetics, geophysics, robotics, and other fields.
Both the hardware and software were developed at the company's
Palo Alto Research Center in California. The system will be
marketed by Xerox Electro-Optical Systems in Pasadena, California.
Louis G. Karagianis, Vice-President of Marketing for Xerox
Electro-Optical Systems said, "The 1100 processor is intended for
use by research scientists in universities and large industrial
research laboratories, which are centers of activity for the
development of artificial intelligence techniques."
The system has 1.15 megabytes of memory and virtual address space
of 4 million 16-bit words. It also includes a 23-megabyte Shugart
disk drive and interfaces for the original Xerox 3-megabit-per-
second Ethernet, and for RS232 communications lines. All of this
equipment is housed in a 2.5-foot-high cabinet that fits under a
desk.
The display is a high-resolution unit with a 13" x 11" viewing
area (1024 x 808 pixels). The text portion of two pages can be
displayed side-by-side.
The Xerox 1100 includes a complete implementation of the Interlisp
virtual machine specification. In addition to the standard Inter-
lisp features, it offers new personal computer facilities, such
as a complete set of raster scan graphics operations and Xerox
Ethernet software.
Purchase price of the Xerox 1100 Scientific Information Processor
in the United States is $59,719; this includes a license for
use of the Interlisp-D software. Deliveries will begin in the
first-quarter of 1982.
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #14
∂08-Sep-81 0550 DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II) WorkS Digest V1 #14
Date: 8 SEP 1981 0718-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
WorkS Digest Tue, 8 Sep 1981 Volume 1 : Issue 14
Today's Topics:
Query - Cheap touchpanel
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 4 Sep 1981 1257-EDT
From: Kastner at RUTGERS (John)
Subject: Touch Panel
Do you know of any vendors that sell a touch panel terminal or
an add-on touch panel for an existing terminal? Either the actual
touch sensitive or the light array type would be acceptable. We
are looking for a panel that fits rights over the screen. We
would prefer one on which a finger would work but might consider
a light pen. We don't need high resolution and probably 16 X 16
would be sufficient.
The terminals that we've seen cost over $7000 and have fancy
graphics that we don't really need. What we would like is a
cheap way that doesn't require a lot of fancy code or hardware.
Thank you,
John Kastner
[ During July, WorkS discussed a variety of different workstation
input devices. A major portion of the discussion was devoted
to touchpanels. For your convenience, a transcript of this
discussion is now available in the file DUFFEY;WORKS TOUCHP
on MIT-AI. -- RDD ]
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #16
∂16-Sep-81 2316 DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II) WorkS Digest V1 #16
Date: 16 SEP 1981 2315-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
WorkS Digest Wed, 16 Sep 1981 Volume 1 : Issue 16
Today's Topics:
Administrivia - Issue numbering, Input devices - Mice
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 16 September 1981 22:55-EDT
From: The Moderator <Duffey at MIT-AI>
Subject: Administrivia - Issue numbering
Due to a combination of problems, the last three WorkS issues
were misnumbered. These issues, which were dated 3, 4, and
8 Sep., should have been numbered V1 #13, V1 #14, and V1 #15.
Today's issue is V1 #16 and it immediately follows the issue
dated 8 Sep. My thanks to everyone who pointed out these
errors.
-- RDD
------------------------------
Date: 16 September 1981 02:55-EDT
From: Steven T. Kirsch <SK at MIT-MC>
Subject: What is the "optimum" shape of a mouse?
Here's your chance to "shape" the future course of mouse-kind.
I would like to know what people think the ideal mouse should
be shaped like. Also, should there be less than three buttons?
Note that this is an optical design (the mouse slides on a
surface, rather than rolling) so comments about the mechanics
are not applicable.
Comments will be accumulated on MIT-MC in SK;MOUSE SURVEY
(no password needed to ftp).
Some comments I received so far follow. If you have any
opinions on these, please voice them. Some of the following
comments are mutually exclusive.
------------------------------
The Xerox mouse is too small. It doesn't fit the hand well/it
is hard to find.
The Xerox mouse is too large.
The ISI/TYMSHARE mouse is way too large.
Long buttons are great for accomodating various size hands.
The buttons should have good "bounce" to them to facilitate
double and triple clicking.
The MIT mouse (tan case) seems to be about the right size.
The mouse should have rectangular shape and edges. Any hand
contouring is doomed to failure because of the wide variety
of hand sizes.
The mouse should be rounded to fit the contours of the hand
(prolate hemi-spheroid). The hand should slip naturally into
a "home" position where the fingers rest on the buttons.
The mouse should not be "handed". This is to accomodate
lefties as well as two handed mouse applications.
The wrist must be able to rest on the table with the fingers
comfortably on the buttons. This is necessary for accurate
positioning.
There shouldn't be more than three buttons on the mouse
because two fingers are needed to move it around. Also,
coordination is difficult.
------------------------------
[ If you want a copy of the survey messages and cannot obtain
it yourself, please send a message to WorkS-REQUEST at MIT-AI.
We will be happy to insure that you receive a copy now. A
file containing all of the responses will be made available
for FTP distribution when the query is over.
-- RDD ]
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #17
∂21-Sep-81 0239 DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II) WorkS Digest V1 #17
Date: 21 SEP 1981 0500-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
WorkS Digest Mon, 21 Sep 1981 Volume 1 : Issue 17
Today's Topics:
Query - Cell graphics algorithms,
Book - Audience and objectives, Workstations - MicroDaSys 68000,
Input Devices - TASA touchpanel & Apple mice
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 20 Sep 1981 (Sunday) 0941-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
Subject: Call for information, forwarded request
[Begin forwarded messages]
Date: 19 Sep 1981 2317-PDT
From: William "Chops" Westfield <BILLW at SRI-KL>
Subject: Need algorithms for Cell-organized graphics displays
Does anyone have references for graphics algorithms (line
drawing, polygon filling, etc) that have been optimized
for use with subcell style graphics display (such as some
terminals and many micros have)? I know Barrett & Jordan
have some articles in CACM (march,feb 1974) (I haven't read
them yet). Are there any others written since then?
Thanks
Bill W
[End forwarded messages]
------------------------------
Date: 20 Sep 1981 (Sunday) 1004-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
Subject: Book.
The general opinion is to gear this book to the technical market-
place, the educational as well? I am not that high on having a
loose leaf type book, but that could be for the second volume,
an update service on all the new machines that are around.
I would be interested in what one would want to see in a book
such as this describing personal workstations, what sorts of
things should be stressed and so forth.
Hank
------------------------------
Date: 21 September 1981 02:50-EDT
From: Patrick G. Sobalvarro <PGS at MIT-AI>
Subject: Workstations - MicroDaSys 68000
There is a company in California called MicroDaSys, which claimed
in the latest issue of EDN to be selling a 68000 Unix system that
looks too good (and cheap) to be true. Two 12mhz 68000s (one for
virtual memory management, with demand paging), and a 6809 for
interrupt-driven I/O. Comes with 6 RS232 ports, running at up to
500k baud, and 4 parallel ports, with handshaking.
A multiuser system comes with 512k bytes of RAM in a 16M-byte
virtual space, 40M bytes of Winchester storage, and V7 Unix.
All for less than $20K.
Does anyone have any experience with these folks? Are they
delivering?
-pgs
------------------------------
Date: 19 Sep 1981 (Saturday) 2337-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
Subject: Touch Panels: TASA
Product: Touch-Panel, x-y positioning
Price: $400.00 quantity 1, $150.00 in mass
Model: X-Y 3600
Principle: Capacitive Sensing, look at Xrx860 abortion
60x60 steps in square surface 5"x5".
Probably useful in augmenting user work-effectiveness.
Address: Touch Activated Switch Arrays, Inc.
2346 Walsh Avenue, Santa Clara
California, 95051
(408) 727-8272
Contact: Bob Abler, manager of marketing.
I'd be interested if there is a demonstrated use for touch panels
that are not a part of the screen, and if they have the ability
to be used for Office Automation? What also does one need from a
touch panel? More x-y points ?
Hank
------------------------------
Date: 19 Sep 1981 1806-PDT
From: Mike Leavitt <LEAVITT at USC-ISI>
Subject: Mice for Apples
Does anyone know of anyone who sells Mouses for Apples?
I presume they should plug into the game socket, and work like
a joystick plus the three button sensors. A couple of micro-
switches on the side would be nice to determine which of the
paddle controls would be activated.
Mike
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #18
∂24-Sep-81 2021 DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II) WorkS Digest V1 #18
Date: 24 SEP 1981 0540-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II)
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
WorkS Digest Thu, 24 Sep 1981 Volume 1 : Issue 18
Today's Topics:
Input Devices - Touchpanels
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 22 September 1981 19:40 edt
From: SSteinberg.SoftArts at MIT-Multics
Sender: COMSAT.SoftArts at MIT-Multics
Subject: TSD's
Xerox uses them to implement a mouse on a workstation. ArqMaq
put them on the arms of a chair and did gesture recognition so
they could control sound volume (circular motion), page viewing
(diagonal lines for forward and back), and so on. Gesture
recognition doesn't need hi-res.
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #19
∂16-Oct-81 0617 DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II) WorkS Digest V1 #19
Date: 16 OCT 1981 0604-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-AI (Roger D. Duffey, II)
Reply-to: WorkS at MIT-AI
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
WorkS Digest Friday, 16 Sep 1981 Volume 1 : Issue 19
Today's Topics:
Technology - 32 bit Micros, Input Devices - Mice,
Workstations - Apple-O Arrival
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 16 Oct 1981 0600-EDT
From: DUFFEY at MIT-AI
Subject: Welcome back (again) and goodbye (one last time)
This is WorkS V1 #19. It directly follows WorkS V1 #18 published
on 24 September. A long hiatus due to a lack of submissions, but
one that will not be repeated soon as WorkS turns its attention
to a variety of new and old topics over the next few weeks.
Welcome back.
As subscribers to some of the other lists already know, I will
soon begin a two year leave of absence from MIT to pursue research
with a private company. Starting with the next issue, Jon Solomon
<JSol at RUTGERS> will take over as WorkS moderator and maintainer.
Jon is already well known to subscribers to these lists as both a
moderator and subscriber. I hope you will welcome him with the
same cooperation and interest that you have always shown me. It
is the only thing that makes it possible to do this job. Thank
you and enjoy.
Roger Duffey
------------------------------
Date: 7 Oct 1981 (Wednesday) 0012-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
Subject: How far away are the 32 Bit micros ?
This is something that has not been introduced in too much
detail as of yet. With the forthcoming 432 32 bit-on-a-chip,
and putting it into a workstation/small multi-user machine
is of some interest. What does 32 bits really win over
16 bits?
Henry Dreifus
------------------------------
Date: 12 Oct 1981 2042-PDT
From: Jim Guyton <Guyton at RAND-AI>
Subject: Xerox Mouse
Xerox Mice fans:
Jack Hawley (owner of Hawley labs, maker of the Xerox
Alto mouse) has made a new license agreement With the
Xerox Corporation.
His new agreement will allow him to sell the mouse
to almost anyone, including for-profit companies.
PrevIously he was restricted to selling to Xerox
and non-profit educational instituTions.
Developmental prototype (no case) avaidable in January
for $750. Production quantities available mid-April
for about $425.
The number for Hawley Labs is (415)525-5533.
Mouse in quantity:
1-99 425
100 375
250 315
500 290
1000 280
------------------------------
Date: 11 Oct 1981 (Sunday) 2140-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
Subject: Our APPLE-O arrived on Friday,
a review of it will be made in WorkS next week.
Hank
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
Subject: WORKS Digest V1 #20
∂21-Oct-81 2128 Jonathan Alan Solomon <JSol at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V1 #20
Date: 21 Oct 1981 0713-EDT
From: Jonathan Alan Solomon <JSol at RUTGERS>
To: Works: ;
WorkS Digest Wednesday, 21 Sep 1981 Volume 1 : Issue 20
Today's Topics: Administrivia
Where are the 32 Bit WorkStations?
VideoDisks as Storage Devices
Mesa Manual Query
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 21 October 1981 0642-EDT (Wednesday)
From: The New Moderator <JSol at Rutgers>
Subject: Hello! and Welcome to WorkS!
Hello,
Roger Duffey was a superlative moderator and it will not
be an easy job trying to match the quality of service which he was
famous for. I will, however, do my best and hope that I can at
least comes close to the fine work Roger has done. There is no
question that the ARPAnet community will miss his fine services as
moderator.
Once again, I wish to express my appreciation at being given the
responsibility of maintaining this digest, and I hope that the
transition between moderators will be as transparent to the readers as
possible.
Enjoy!
JSol
P.S. You can still send mail to <WorkS at MIT-AI>, or you can send
mail to <WorkS at Rutgers> if you prefer. Archives will continue to be
maintained at MIT-AI, and additionally at Rutgers in the <WORKS>
directory (at Rutgers, much of the WorkS archive is on tape, so if you
desire back issues you should mail your request (or any list
maintainence request) to <WorkS-Request at MIT-AI> or <Works-Request
at Rutgers>.
------------------------------
Date: 16 October 1981 1014-EDT (Friday)
From: Hank Walker at CMU-10A (C410DW60)
Subject: when are 32-bits coming
CC: dreifu at wharton-10
I assume that the MC68000 doesn't count as a 32-bit machine. Intel
has yet to ship any 432s, so it will be a while before any appear in
personal computers. A VAX takes 400 kbits or more of microcode, and
at least 500k transistors total to make even the slowest one. Even a
chip-set must be fairly complex.
The obvious thing that 32 bits gives you is a larger virtual address
space. Lots of applications are hard up against existing limits, and
must resort to memory management by hand, which is a royal pain. In
addition, 32-bit processors usually have a more complex instruction
set, addressing modes, etc, which allow them to perform better on a
wide range of tasks (ignoring the RISC argumefts). Examples are
string and floating-point Datatypes. The 432 includes a significant
amount of OS support, as well as provide a capability architecture.
Given the thickness of the architecture manuals, I don't know how well
this will go over.
32-bit processors usually also have a larger physcial address space.
Since 16 Mbytes and more memory will appear on personal computers in
this decade, this is an important consideration.
------------------------------
Date: 19 October 1981 18:50 edt
From: SSteinberg.SoftArts at MIT-Multics
Subject: #19 and 32 bits
The most important thing 32 bits buys is larger address space.
It was annoying to have to pass around 16 bit pseudo-pointers
on the IBM 1130 (back in '69) to address a data base larger
than 64KB and it is still annoying to have to call the
subroutine library in order to reference an item of data.
Think of 32 bits as more object names one can use in
programming.
------------------------------
Date: 20 Oct 1981 0030-PDT
From: SCHIFFMAN at SRI-KL
Subject: 32-bit micros, iAPX-432 based workstations
cc: schiffman at SRI-KL
To figure out how much an advantage a 32-bit micro would be, first
figure out what a "32-bit" micro is --
There are several things in a computer which have a `size':
1) The width of the accumulators/general-registers
(This is confusing in machines which allow concatenation
of registers like the Z8000). Wide registers gets you
shorter (faster) programs by eliminating extra `name'
references for OPERANDS WHICH REQUIRE THAT PRECISION.
Not surprisingly, 128-bit registers aren't very handy for
programs which only do byte-boffing. In fact, wide
registers HURT for programs which don't need the precision
if having narrower registers means having more of them.
The Z8000 tries to have its cake and eat it too.
2) The width of significant data paths such as the ALU.
(How many bits can you add in one microcycle?
Many machines have a N-bit ALU and an 2N-bit shifter.)
Wide data-paths make atomic operations faster for
operations which require the precision. All else being
equal, however, the wider the data path gets, the slower it
cycles (carry propagation).
3) The width of the processor/memory data interconnect.
(How many bits can you fetch in one bus cycle?)
Wide data interconnects to memory speed up operand
fetches/writes which again, helps only on operands which
need the precision. Luckily, if the instruction execution
unit is at all clever, wide memory almost ALWAYS speeds up
instruction fetches; this can be VERY significant.
Unfortunately, for small systems, cost can be almost
linearly proportional to memory bus width.
Under these criteria....
CPU Register Data Path Memory bus
↓ Width (bits) Width (bits) Width (bits)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Z8000 64,32,16,8 16↓ 16¬
MC68000 32 32 16~∀4∃∩p``l∩∩bXXp∩∩$blα∩$bl~∀4∃∩p``p∩∩bXXp∩∩$blα∩$p~∀~)≥&bl@``∩∩Ld∩∩∩Ld∩∩∩Dl~∀~)Sβ!04hfd∪YCeCC YJ}X↓iV@p@∩p`}$∩∩bl=kgKd5ae←l8~∃??⎇????⎇????⎇????⎇????⎇????⎇????⎇????⎇????⎇????⎇????⎇????⎇????⎇????⎇????⎇???>4∀~∃)!JAiC YJASLAgie¬SOQi→←eoCIHXAKaGKah↓M←dAQQJ@hLd\@A5rAk]⊃Kegi¬]IS]≤ASf~)iQCh↓iQJ@PfdAQ¬fA]↑EOK]∃eCX[IKOSgQKefD0AeKC1Yr\@↓∪hAI=KfAQ¬mJA[¬]r~∃%]iKe9CXAe∃OSgi∃efACYCSYC YJACPAiQJ↓[SGe=ae←OICZAY∃mKXX↓ChAY∃CghAM←[J~)←LAo!SGPA!CmJAQ↑AEJp`AE%ifAi<AQ←Y⊂AeKgUYifA%\A∪]QKX@Q%
A⊃eCMh$~∃MY=CiS]≤Aa←S9hAAI=kEYJ5KqiK9IKHN↓M←e[¬h\@A¬fAM←HAiQJ↓EkfA%]iKe→CGJX4∃iQSLASfAICiQKHAG←[AYSGCQKH@Z4AiQJhfdOLA¬kf↓∪]iKIMCGJ↓+]Sh↓GC\A
←]]K
h~∃i<AkgKH[IKg%O]KH↓[K[←IrAgsMiK[f↓←LAm¬eS←kLAisa∃f\@A$AEKY%KmJAQQChAQQJ~∃%]iKX↓KmCYUCiS←8AE←CIIfAkMJAB@Dl[ESPA[K[=erAEUf\@AM↑AoQ¬hACE=khAi!J~∀hLdASffd[SMP}@A=]YrAQQJA← mS←kLXA∩AQQS]V8~∀@@@@@@@@~∃¬fAM←HASif↓CaaY%GCES1SirA%\AaKIg←]C0Ao←e-giCi%←]fX↓∩AiQ%]VAi!SfASL~∃ae∃iirA⊃kES←UfAM←HAiQJ↓]Kqh↓MKnAeKCef8~∀@@@@@@@@~∀@@@@@T@A∧AgsgQKZAS9GYkI%]NAi!J@hfHAo←k1HAEJ↓- %2↓KqaK9gSmJ↓Er~∀@@@@@@@A]←eWgQCiS←8AgiC9ICeILXAKm∃\ASL↓∪]iK0AOCm∀AiQJ↓GQSaLACoCd~∀@@@@@@@@Qo!SGPA⊃←Kg\≥hAgK∃ZAi↑↓EJAS8AiQK%dAaY¬]f@Z4AiQJ↓gKh~(@@@@@@@@↓Gkee∃]iYrAG←gQfA←\↓iQJA=eIKd↓←LAB↓WSY← kGVR8@A¬KMSIKf4∀@@@@@@@AEKS9NAmKIrA[K5←erA!k]OedXABAIKCYSMiSFAMsgiK4AeKcUSeKf↓C\A∩=≡~∀@@@@@@@AaI←GKgMS]NAMs[ES=]hAQ%OQKd↓S\AG=[aYKaSirAQQC\A5←ghA
keeK9h~∀@@@@@@@A[%Ge↑[
←[akQKdAgegiK[L\~∀~(@@@@@@T@↓αAaKIg←]C0Ao←e-giCi%←\AgegiKZ↓ECgK⊂A←\A∧@hfd↓G←kY⊂AmKed~∀@@@@@@@AoK1XAEJ↓[kGP↓'→∨/∃$AiQ¬\ABAMsgiK4AECg∃HA←\QgCr$AiQJp`pl∧~∀@@@@@@@A'←IerAM=YWfX↓BAMk1XAG←9iKqh↓goSi
PA←\↓KmKedAgkEI←kiS9JAGC1X~∀@@@@@@@AC9HABA⊃←[CS8[GQK
VAM←HAKmKIrAKqQKe]C0AeKM∃eK]G∀ASfAYKer~(@@@@@@@@↓KqaK9gSmJ8@A≥←\ASLAe←jAQ¬HXAg¬rXAM=kdAπA*AgKQfAS\↓s←kd4∀@@@@@@@Ao←e-giCi%←\XAe←jA[%OQhAYKerA]KYXA]S\@Z4AiQCPASfA%LACY0As←kH~∀@@@@@@@AG←5akiJbound programs divided into four balanced processes.
Intel seems to be saying that the 432 is intended for high-performance
shared-database transaction processing systems. I say that if it's
good for anything at all, its probably just that.
-Allan
------------------------------
Date: 18 Oct 1981 (Sunday) 1506-EDT
From: DREIFU at WHARTON-10 (Henry Dreifus)
Subject: VideoDisks on Personal Workstations ?
[Note: This message originally appeared on the VideoDisk discussion
list -JSOL]
Electronic DesiGn for Sep-30, 1981 has a full artical on video-disk
technology. Here are some highlights....
Corning has eraseable video disks using polarizers and stuff !
Medias being used include: Silver-halide, Tellurium,"Drexon Media",
bismuth, rhodium, titanium, thermodegradable/metal film.
Many are producing disks writable with semiconductor lasers (cheaper)
Formerly it took a gas laser to produce enough power.
(this is also due to improvments in laser technology)...
Bill W
<BillW at SRI-KL>
------------------------------
Date: 20 Oct 1981 1610-EDT
From: PRSPOOL at RUTGERS
Subject: MESA MANUAL
Does anyone at XEROX-PARC ( or anywhere else )
know where I can get hold of a MESA manual ( or at least
a fairly descriptive paper ). I recently noticed a
referance to the MESA LANGUAGE MANUAL by James G. Mitchell,
William Maybury and Richard Sweet of XEROX PARC, published
in February, 1978.
--Peter R. Spool
Rutgers University
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
Subject: WH∂%↔LA SO∃ghA,D@Fdb4∀@≡dD[∨Gh4pb@@Hfdr∪)←]Ci!C\Aβ1C\A'=Y←[←8@y∃'=XAChααJVR<*JMyJ↑.J]→α∪'>+OQα3 ↓
Iλh*∪π&)i↓I∩α7∂Qβ eaEβ↓EAMl*∩P4T3K?5Rα+?;∂##π9∧ 3πd
6}f⎇]vrβI*6}b ≡B¬∃ZHt-∃7aPU&w$¬>␈->3Rβ1Q hU⎇}&@:h⊃~,|αyz⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂*~:y9r_|V⊂→ ⊂)rhλ_\\_H⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂+7[:rrP P≥⊂$\yzrP _FEεB*7r0↑SyP*≠x4qyN∧P⊂⊂λ⊂⊂εEλ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂'j~2y⊂![w9tb→y0z4[w9P'Y⊂→Y⊂αit Processors
Videodisks As Mem`∨ed~∀ZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZ~∀4∃ Ci∀t@db↓≠Gh@Drpb@Drbp[A (~∃→e←Zt↓'π⊃∪→
≠β≤↓ChA'I∩[↔_4⊃'kE)KGht↓βIISQS←\AQ↑Aae=GKgg=` βS∂C?;?oH4(∀TK9β7Jβ∂?;≡K∪↔K∂#'?9ε{⊂∩πM Rα∪6%V⊗OMlW∨~$
v2∧:
W~b ∀εv␈t∞&.∞M∨&*πM ↔"∧⊃Q&f.nDε␈/D
G>z
}FF/$∞FFNl}2π& ≡BεF≡h $ (≥z,N~∞C!!"B-¬∀∃~→$
];8L↑H≠yD∞~≡<m≤x;λ ≤→≤Y.>h_Z.Nh≤≤L↑y;] \λ≥≠d∞~→#!!(λλ
\;;|O∀_]<edλβ"A∀λλ∪l.Z;⎇.=≡(≤
∂<z8l≥λ_9 NY<|d Z=≤d {|⎇∧
;|Y$ 0h≤
≥\h_-lβ"B$∧λ_X,=|≠_-l(≥z.,<kλ ={]≤M≤]=~-lh≥≠d {|⎇¬dλ∪[nD≤{h
|]Z;n↑{≡+↓QB(λ∧ 9→≤L↑|h_M≡≤h_l≥H_{mn≤Z8N↑→(→n,8=≠∂∀≥≠h∞M→(_m}⎇λ≠ld≠9;-}↑#"A∀λλ≠,≥X9y-\;]λ
<Y≥l≡Y(
≥Yλ≥
(≥~-\(_{n>λ≠yD∞<z;Lt~=
%dλ∃~ Q"B(∧∧≤≠z-nλ~<d∞~_=∧∂;⎇( M{I⎇∧∞Y8;
O(≥x-nλ≥≠d∞_>(
↑8zλ
]|Y( m|C"A∀λλ≤
∂<z8l≥λ_9 NY<|d Z=≤d∞~_;D∂;⎇(
l99λ∞Mh_9 NY<|d∞~→(
\;;|O⊃"B(∧∧≡;⎇.$≤}<nL;<h∞⎇;≠λ ,(_8ML(≥≠d 9Y[n, C"AQB-*$
~→(
≥]→<Ml;λλMl;9+.>_8y$$≠yH∞M→(_.,z~= \⎇≥<LUλ~+LUH≠≠lvH≠yAQB(λ∧∞~→(
n;8Y.$≠yH∞]Z<=,T≠xZL\⎇≤h∞M_=λ <;H_LT≤Y9L↑Y;Xl\ C"A∀λλ∃
(≤Y,≡{{H∞⎇≡(≥lT_x;D}λ≠;n,(≤z-↑≠≡( L9Z;LT≥~~.1"B(∧∧
_<d∞x>+∧∞~→(
n;8Y.$≠yH -=≤h
≥H_( ∞≠z;NL<Ij$
<h≥
=β"A∀λλ≤m⎇9(_.,z~= \⎇≥<L↑h_x-d~_=LT_<XM≡≤X<M≥≡(_m⎇<≠→/∧≥x>.1"B(∧∧≠yH ]X{y
≥Yh~-n→<[L≥λ≠X-\<kλ∞<>(_O∀≥<z-lh≥~ T→_= ∃=≡< Q"B(∧∧→Z9-Lλ≠yD ;H≠n¬8{y T≥≠h∞∞[⎇Z,L(→>∞NX(λMMyz8l≥ 89 NY<|aQB(λ∧ Z=≤d%C"B$∧λ⊂9l≥;Kλ ∀≠_<L|(≠X-\(≤| ≤y(_l≥H_Y$ (≠:/ 9λ_ML<|z-lkHλ ⎇Y(≠la"B(∧∧≥~→$
;|⎇∧
;<≠n._;]∧¬→[|D
;\⎇∞.8⎇~-⎇H→;L=y~;Lt→9YM≤z9;L?*#"A∀λλ_.,8<h
|H⊂t
T_<Xm
=→8nN<Y(
≡h~≠nt≥≠h ={<≤L↑|h≠,];|↑$↓"Hλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλ≤L↑=:<L]9;]∞4→[|D >≤≤L↑|z;Lt≠≠xl≥λ≠X-\<kH∧
~~<d x;H ,(→≠ml#"B$∧λ_X,M≡(→M}H≠8,=~;Y.4≥z=
∧→=Y-d_(≤L]_=~.l;≡(∞=8;≠∧
X;9$∞|_8lQ"B(∧∧
~+LUH≥~ T∀⊃∀¬V,+λ∞⎇→<Y$ ;≠λ
|Y\y.Nh≥_-<( -D Z=≤e∃C"C!*;Y→.$≥~→.<(_9 M=~;ml;λ_n-=→<M≤+λ≥
(≥< L=→9∧∞_8[ UKKC!!"Hλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧∃r1
Iλ
⊂M≡≤j#!(t∃"!~Y9z.>→<\a_3∃")\;;|O⊃4~≡.5B3≠luC"B!⊃""1 ≡_"0,L≤B0,L≤C"EU+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++!QC"VGε α!⊗M f% -Kπ↓,-B&⊗B,M↓⊗Mβ"AQS0mGε α!⊗lB"&6B,-A⊗Mα,FA"C"I↔ ∞
A⊃,-Kπ↓",-A⊗-B,F↓,Lβ!!"R.επ∞α"&⊗K∞α!⊗-B.↓⊗Lα,F↓"C"Ijl-Lεεα",f!",lA⊗-B,FA,Mβ!!"Z0* - f!=≠hπεα".επb,-A⊗Mα-ε↓"Wwk{wwwk{wwwk{wwwk{wwwk{wwwk{wwwk{wwwk{wwwk{wwwk{wwwk{wwwk{wc"AQR(≤L↑Y89∧∞~→(εFlL d _=_$∞z→9.D_;Y∧ →8r,L9λ≥
=λ≥
(≠9-]|↑( L=_( .<c"N|<kλ /(≥~ T→→9M≥Z=~-⎇H≥~ ≡λ∩( |=Y+∧
[⎇λ∧.<y<E↑⎇<≤
M99λED_]=∧ε-H_M≡≤kC!*~→(∞,8<{md→[|D∞~~<d {{YN↑z;{D
<h≥
=λ∃
(→_.L(_].4≠|→.,=→<d
;H_N↑\⎇β!-;y→$¬≠{[∂∀≠{Y$ 9→≤L↑|h≠n↑≤≥=∧ [|H∞M→(≥∞,;\x,>~;{E∀→[|D
|→<L≡~;{N4≠{C!.{|Y∞4≠≠{L|<H≥
;H &d_Z=∞↔h≥~
≡h~<d∞Y8;∧
|≥~-]>X=
≥{H≤m≥Xy( ≤→≤Y.>y<c!.<⎇8-M≡(≥ ≥y(_.4≠=8m∧_<h
;→H ∀_]<d }8{ UC"C!%0;≠ ≥C"C!%+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%Q"C"HL=→.DεL(∪l>≠xY.$ ..ε∀ Llf511∃∧¬∃y9
l<y_/∃#"QN-{.H
>→<~ ]KR_-l{xzd =λ⊂iZ+,,λ!"TY'$λλ∀M}_=~-lh∪9-]|Z9.∀
λ]M≤→;h M<z|d%#"C!*~→( |⎇≠xL↑H~<n>9(≠lD∪:;M∃3:8n-k4}.>→;<d
_<h ≥H_<NM8y( ]]~=
L9β"D*[⎇_.M;Yc$
9;;n/(→→.m8y<d
;⎇Y$∞≠h≠n∞~8x-D≤Y8,M;YhEdλ∃~ T_<]
≤{→#!-;Y[n-<h≥.4≥~_.Dλ→=.-|→8-d≤}<nL;<h ≡Y(_L];Yh L=[{
}→9λ /(∀∩
≥~<≤d UC"L≥Yλ∃
{<{me0tqEdλ∃~ T→→=M≤y(~.4≤⎇<∞
|y9∧∞≠h_LT_( &λh_Z.D→≤Z.l(≥z.Mλ_#!.≥y;∞l(~;L=λ≤≠ ≡≥→<Edλ∃~ ↑Y(_.,(≤≠ ≥\h≥
t~_=LT_(≤o≡⎇→;$∞z=~∧ (
M↓Q\≠_.N→<H
\9x>M≥Y(
∞M_=≤dεM ⊃d Z=≤e∃Hλ∃
(≤}.>→;(
≡h→>∞ 8⎇→,D≥≠h ,#"\L]→8<l\λ~;D 8[⎇.D H≡,\<\h∞M→(≤∞-zY8nL9λ∪hY(_{n>λ~<d Y=≥l\;H ε& λ ≥Yβ"DF, ε∧→88m¬H∃~ T_<]
≤{→( ≥≤{h∞
z;]∞4≠⎇=∧∞~→(∞<;→<d ≠{≠ ≡H≥[mN;9( ≥Yβ"Mn;8Y.$≠yH
}≥~8l≥λ≥;M≡≤h≤m⎇→λ≥m≥≠λ_LT≠{[∂∀_(≤m\;≠λ nX8⎇
≥{H≠ld≥~→!Q]≠⎇ ≥λ≤[nL=~;Lt≠9;-}↑(≠,≡Zy=¬a"C"A⊃"""!~⎇→=LQ"C"EU+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++!QC"Q-lλ≠yD
{|Zj4⊃~9l↑⎇β"E%JJJE%JJJE%JJJE%JJC!%+++%U+#"D↓"C"@↓J⎇8ZL\⎇∞H
ytRtdλ~9y.>λ∃L$∧lLc!$βlMEYx⎇ 'ε(λ εε,"2M⎇X=~ ≥H⊂; ≥H∀{mM{;{Dπ∩T{mD_=λ
*5⊃q**oHα*ytRtdλ~9y.>λ∃L$∧lLc!(_=→'$ MH |⎇λ '↔ ( ε&lk1*:β"QN-{.H -{X=
;H⊂-L;H∀m⎇≠{;md∂∩Tm⎇λ_=∧
U5⊃hZToC!*Y<≠∂∃=≠nD
stRj4_=λ
.=→y..c"U
wH∃{n-|nHπ1"C"J⎇|Ztdλ~9y.>λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧∪;{LL>+λε&H∪xnD ..ε∀λλλ∧∧λλ∃M⎇≥;9$ε(∞H ≡|⎇9$εLc"AQU≠y ∨)|h
M|~8n7B(λ∧∧λλ⊂-N≠h∀mm<→(
,=Z<m≡→9β!!(λλ∧∧λ∀}-\[{~,>ih∀ ↑\{{L≥λ∃{n-|⎇_.M;{H
≡-------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 24 Oct 1981 0057-PDT
From: Chris Ryland <RYLAND at SRI-KL>
Subject: apParently random Alto snipe
To: Editor-People at SU-SCORE
I just sent an apparently snide message to Editor-People about the
αAltks and their outdatednesq; I realized that This might sound
off-hand or snooty, so let me clarify what I meant, and possibly start
a set of flames.
The Alto, without a doubt, was an interesting toq which gave many
bright people a teething device for their ideas about human
engineering, etc. However, I have a heretical theory that the Alto
did more to *slow down* Xerox in their mad rush for the information
systems of the future than it did to help them. Why? Because it's
far too small of a system to be anythingmore than a toy, in the sense
of providing enough power to support a very good programming
environment.
For example, because the Alto was so successful as a workstation
within Xerox for the pasT few years, everyone was saddled with them;
this included even the SDD folks, who were chartered to pull together
the PARC tinkerings into some sort of reality (the Star and its
satellites). To build even a medium-sized system in Mesa would
require hours and hours of sitting at an Alto (well, doing other
things), and thus, for things like BravoX (SDD folks out there, please
correct me if I'm wrong), building new systems would take far longer
than if some sort of time-sharing system had been around to do the
crunching needed. Only recently did the SDD folks get Dolphins, and
even these were no huge step forward. The Dorado is confined mostly
to PARC and certainly is too expensive and flakey to replace all the
Altos within the Xerox companies.
In my opinion, the only workstation worth even considering at this
point is the Lisp Machine, as purveyed by Symbolics and LMI. Even the
current generation beasts are rather underpowered for what they're
trying to do; this is supposedly being solved by the next generation
of machines (the only one in the works, as far as the public knows, is
the Symbolics 3600).
Why do I make this extravagant claim, given all the incredibly
wonderful woristations aroend, such as the Apollo, the PERQ(λAi!J~∃/%GChX↓iQJAM+≤}@↓)QJAIKCg←8ASfAM←Mio¬eJ@Q%g\Oh↓ShAC1oCsf$XAKm∃\~∃S≥]←eS9NAiQ∀AaSi%MkXA!CeIo¬eJAE∃S]NAQ←kiK⊂AiQKMJAICefACf↓iQJA1CiKgPX~∃OIKCiKMhAiQ%]NAg%]GJAMYSGK⊂AEeK¬H\@AQQJA→%g`A≠¬GQS]∀AG←[∃fAoSQPAI←iK]f~)←LA[¬\AsK¬efA←_Ag←MQoCeJ↓S]mKMi[K]PXAC]⊂AiQ←MJACe∀AsKCIfAS]YKgiK⊂AS\~)oQCh↓SfAEdAMCd↓iQJA5←ghAMs]Ke≥SgiS AK]m%e←][∃]hAs=jAG←UYHAQ=aJAM=dX~∃≥SmK\↓iQJAMiCiJ↓←LAi∃GQ]←1←Or\A∩Ao=kYHA5CWJAQQJAG1CSZAQQChA9←iQS9N~∃K1gJAG=[KfA]SiQS8@jJA=LA[CQGQS]≤AiQCPAK]m%e←][∃]hXAQQ←kO A∩AQ¬mJA]<~∃oCdA←LAAe←mS9NAiQ¬hAGY¬SZ\@↓αAO←=HAS]⊃SGCi=dA[S≥QhAE∀ABAg%[aYJ4∃C]K
I←iJ↓CE←kPA∪∃π¬∩@NpDpAoQ∃\AiQ∀A)Qe∃JA%SYKefA→←YWf↓CGik¬YY`%π≠πP4V#?←9π;'S!ε α3'∨↓α7π≡C';∃αC'9βλ∧εv.≡,'Jε-⎇w&B∃Dπ&F←∀π>/,Tε∂∨M}Vv&\@αDHQ.6F␈]LFr?D∞π/" lV.f≥lw~ε≥dπ&F]~"εF\≡''~Dλλ-lλ≥~
≡h≥x.4≤Y<
}]→9∧ ↑(_!QS~<n∧∪88m
;Y(∞O<→+∧ ]=λ ∀_x;D y<] ≥;[≡$∞;Y→..⎇_;LD_;↑$ <⎇≠mm<z≠,]] β!-_=R-lh≤y,]H≥~ T∀⊃4J≡h_;LD~_=M≥Yh≥m}Zy9∧∞z=~∧ ~<|∧ 88z
≥Y<h%⊃"C"H≤≠:=∞L9≠≡%D≠⎇~ ↑H≤→-}≠→(
=Y( ⎇{Y(
M{Yh∞|><h∞M⎇x<LNh_]-≥→~;Lq"Y> <;≠→-nλ→;Nm<[{M\;]≤d¬≥~→$λy9_.$≤≤[m,8⎇λ ≡λ∀⊂*(kλ⊂⊂[2⊂:4→P&)#H82wx≠2FE0]⊂( i⊂P;tz~⊂:42Zy⊂;0\4wzyH)vpv≠:0v5H9|yz→vyT]H47{r]2y⊗⊂~z∪v6λ12FE≡rpy9K⊂4s⊂→{2y⊗λ12s7\2P:4→P;wy≠2⊂3r]9P:4→P12w→s4z⊂≠s⊂:4→P34y≤z⊗⊂0[2εE)[pv6:_v5P4\P0P3_ty6<H4vx9→yyt{→P9|y]2vV⊂_:z⊂9]4v6⊂~0yP9[vrP8]ryz4[w9FE_q7zzλ;4pq~v4z<H4w⊂⊃≥42P9→pv⊂;[y62⊃λ∀37yλ2|0v\62V⊂∀vpv6≥0v5P∞_↔\_K\→εE≤z4v6λ60qu\P6zv≥4x62H4w42\4z0w_rTWεBεE$P→zryyH;t0zλ:94sYry2rλ:44yH;t7v→P360[rP;p\P:42H9tst≥⊂7s⊂≥42P8~z4s:[εE9|\z2vyH12tw→P897\7yrrλ1<P:~2P92Xv⊂;w\62⊂0\P:yrY:v⊂;[y5tw→FE2w≥4y7w≠rw:9K⊂⊂*4→P,2y≠|⊗⊂$P&V⊂$∀⊂0w2λ""aP≠2{P⊃≤2y9g[0v⊂9↑yz2v\Q⊂0y→FE0q~2qz⊂~7y97\9P∀!T↔fV⊂≠|P37[z∀W⊂λ("i(\P0y2H5:yzλ12st[74w3H:7P3YzεE9Zvx6 % operating systems With real File system support. Every 68⊂00
incarnation in The worhd has itq Unix loohπCYS-JXA←HABA1∃→∪0A!←mKe%]N~∃%\AiQ∀AoS]≥f\@A$A[CW∀AiQJ↓E←YH↓GYCS4AiQCPA≥∨≥∀A∨ AQ⊃β~A!CfAC9siQS9N~∃S9iKeKMiS]N↓i↑A←→MKdA=iQKd↓iQC\0AaKe!CafX↓BAYCIO@∃β≡≠K↔↔rp4(∀T+;⊃β}1β≠3∞k∃84Ph)55ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji44(hR∪πS+Q↓Uα}≠Q↓EKAE↓EβQIEα∧"P4*7∪?5i∧3↔;∂F+1:⊗~βπQα∧
J
6l
b 4U≠W +.≠Qiα≥K7 ?fK
αOO≠S↔7~α';
rαC↔K≡{;π1∧≠?7C/#↔H4Ph*'Mε ;g?v)β≠πnK3'π∩β←'SBβCK?'+∂SM␈β3π;v+⊃βC⊗{∪W∂'→β?→¬≠g7 }c' 4U≠gOS.kMαπv→9↓#⎇⊃β'MεKQαONk ?3N→α'≠~q%9↓ααS#↔JβπK∃ε∪πO↔ β'9αf{L4*∞s∨↔3/→βπ;"βKW7␈⊃β#π~β'Qβ&C↔eβ∂∪∃β ,K3∪'v9β¬αfK@∨α
\⊗≡F≥lRε∞lAPV∞dλW&F↑-f/"
≥g&/,l⊗≡* iw∩ε≡E`hPβ"P-o(~;Lm|[8.M;{@∞⎇;≠λ ,(_<∞∞Y8z,≡→9βAQ@εE!≠q⊂⊂∀⊃2w1`(el.e@M↓aCe R~∀~(ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4~∀4T+;⊃β}1α←?⊗ZMα∪N;↔OPhQ)))RQ)))RQ)))RQ)))Ph)55ji554hQ4λhP2OW⊗S↔∂QRα↑ =):2∧&≤|W∨"
f∩α≠&APRv&rl↑>ESC
∧εβ βq→&}v≡Mε∞rλ≥F∞r
9vf}]⎇bβd*=vbε≡@λ
*5⊃q**oHα*yβi%iH"4sr\z⊂+_H⊃Y~εB"0z2N⊂→≠P∪qz⊂_N\_P_ X~⊗bTjεE#≤5v]⊂∩7w0z~0s⊂ [0p∞ Solomon <JSol at RUDGERS>
λ¬%Ka1rSi↑hA/∨%-&AChααK@/L|W↔_Q*F{Rλ⎇w⊗←7$βXh!Q%>␈-:2∧&≤|W∨"∧∧ααα∧∧αα¬NX .<α0|Vλ→≠P'Xz⊂_\N_P⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂∃4πlume 1 : IssUe 24
λ
αToday's Topics: XeRox Alth∂f~(∩∩@@A'`'n∪?3'∨→α3&≥↓α7π≤¬εNv↑1PRjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURhh!Q$&∂LW"β∪d v∨"ε↔∪C
ε⊂ ε6+4∀jA ¬#)≠v]⊂*≠vP+pY67{@∂* kP_z⊂)XK`[εE∀zq5"Xz≥⊂ [:7P#≠0p
age
Chris Rylafd↓GYCS5`
βSF QβSF)απ3&yβ∪↔6+3?Cn+;Qβ∞s⊃β∨.s↔KπbβWO∀hS#↔3"β π∂XβS#∃ε#↔[↔f{C7↔w!β/→ε∪↔SS/⊃βS#Ls↔Mβ∂!αc↔⊗{a9↓∧keβG.+OS'}p4+π≠Q↓α∂}kCπK.!βS=π;#πQ{y↓αSF)απ3&yβOπ~β∪↔[,¬F␈ε\@ε∂⊗}]f"β↔⊗s∩b↓Q&∞vD
↔
ε=HV∂⊗O∀ε}↔=x ↑→(∃
|_>+D∧∩≠p≠Y{2yελ$P;w]v2⊂)]4r6⊂≤0z42\∧¬
have an Alto than the fairly unintelLicent p Ke5S]CX↓∩Ao←IP
β?r4+S}#πe9αα'2 W⊗␈∧
ε∞"∞|⊗O&\@λ m|H⊃
⎇≤~~-nh≠|D
⎇_<N5α⊂:4→ty⊂(→wx62CE;wz[2⊂12H3rz:~w3P:~2vP9~st:⊂_q7zzλ77{Wλ⊂+tz~⊂:42H v:7\T⊂,2\7|εE~0yP4_r⊂9r]2y0vλ<rpy≤P7s⊂
;2y<J⊂;0v≥pq6"H2|82\αience inoffice
information qystems. Ib they had not used Altos( chances are
that theip peophe would have spent those years working on
80x24 character p Ke5S]CYLAC]Hαβ#πS.!β'Qbβ←#'f)αc↔⊗{aβ3. K+↔ β;?SFK;≥8hP4*πv{S#↔⊂βC?'w!9↓α>C'3∃∧Iβπ∨⊗+∃βSF Qβ¬∧c'OA∧kπ∂#Ns∃βC⊗{ π gIβCK␈3'∪↔_h+S#*β ↔O βCK??∪π7]_ L@P2w;~y7w6Yw:⊂ !rkund today, an Of@→SGJA=H βSF(4*≠,εG/⊗T ↔4≠[⎇∧ ;]~.,;≡( ∀≤≤[l↑X;;-≥Yh→-nZ<[mm9;]¬Dλ∃~ T⊂;∃
t→{p~βE0r;_w1rbλ5s3$XpP0z]7vpz~ww⊂9[q:;p\2P4`.tk the hands of its intended
user↓G←[[U]SirhAgKGβ∪↔Sπ⊗K↔Mβ∞s⊃β7∞sπ∂↔↔→βπ; β?S#/⊃β;∨rkCK??∪π7\X NW
And I stroNgly @MkgaK
hAiQ¬hAiQ∀AKqa∃` '↔v≠∃β∨sign of the Star. The widespread
use of the Alto was a necessary step in the development of
the current generation of Xerox products, not a hindrance.
------------------------------
Date: 26 Oct 1981 2228-PST
From: Chris Ryland <RYLAND at SRI-KL>
Subject: Symbolics; Alto snipe
Symbolics does manufacture a personal workstation; see my previous
WorkS message about the Lisp Machine. They will support Ethernet
hardware on the next version of their machine (the 3600), but it will
speak Chaosnet protocols softwarily (of course, I Shouldn't prejudge
their longer-range plans about protocols; one can assume they'll
attempt to live compatibly with other Ethernet protkcols via suitable
encApsulation on the 10Mhz ether). Call them in LA if you want more
info. (No, I don't get any commissigns from them.)
Let me clear @U`A[r↓aeKm%←kf@ βYi↑↓g]Sa∀@AYKMhA∩A¬aaKCHAG←[AYKiK1r~∃S9gC]J8@A∩AMiCiK⊂A[rAA←gSi%←\AC ←khAQQJAβ1i↑Ag=[KoQ¬hAae=m←GCQSmKYdX~∃EUhA∩A⊃SI\OPA[KC8Ai↑A%[aYr↓iQCh↓1Ke←`AQCf↓[CIJ↓g←[J↓QkOJ↓[Sgi¬WJAS8~∃kg%]NAi!JAβYQ←fAKaiK]g%mKYr↓S\[Q=kgJv↓iQKr↓]KmKHAQCH↓[kGP↓CYiKI]CiSYJ~∀Q$ACYg<AoCg8OhAaUgQS]≤AM←d↓iS[J5gQCe%]NAgegiK[LXAEkPAeCi!KdAC⊃m←GCQS]N~)a←oKIMkXAMKemKIfAM←HAoQK8As←j↓]KKH↓i↑AGIk]GP$\@A/!ChA∩↓[CC]PXAeCQQKdX4∃oCf↓iQCh↓iQJA=kigS⊃JAo←IYHAQ¬fACY]CsfA KK\A⊃CuuY∃HAEr↓iQJA¬Yi←f0AoQS
P~∃CIJXAo!K\As=jAOKPAI←o8Ai↑A%hXAe¬iQKdEGki∀D\@A!←oKm∃dXAi!KSd@ ak]G D~∃SLAMCSIYrA[%]S[C0XAC]⊂AiQKdAQCm∀ACYo¬sfAY¬GWKH↓iQJA-S]HA=L~∃G=[aeK!K]gSYJAK]YSe←]5K]hA]QSGP↓[CWKLABAgegiKZ↓gkGP↓CfAi!JA→SM`~∃≠¬GQS]∀Ag↑A¬iieC
iSmJ8@A
←HAKqC5aYJX↓CYiQ=kOPAYCeS←UfA'[¬YYiC1WfA←8~∃mCIS←kf↓1Ke←`A[CG!S]KfQ]←h↓G←aS∃efvA¬Yi←f0A ←YAQS]f0A ←e¬I←fR↓I↑~∃Ae←mS⊃JABA→CSeYdAG←[AeKQK9gSmJ↓G←[aUiS]N↓K]mSI←][K9hXAi!KrOm∀A]Km∃d~∃Q¬HAC\↓KISi=dA←d↓BA[C%XAgsMiKZA%\AG←5[←\AUgJAEUSYh[%]i↑AQQJA'5CYYi¬YV~∃∃]mSe=][K]P\@A∩9J\XA¬Yi←f↓C]HA⊃←eCI=fAiK9HAi↑↓EJAkMKHACLAiS]d~∃gS9OYJ[UgKd@ iS[KMQCeS9NDAgegiK[LXAS\↓oQSG As←j↓QCmJ↓iQJAUgkCX4∃KqK
kiSm∀←ae←≥eCZA⊃SGQ←Q←[r\@Q∩AUgKHA¬Yi←f↓K]←k≥PAChαα6&Qπ#=β3. K9β&x4+∪O≠3'/*βS#↔jaβS#␈+↔!β&C↔e∨⊗)β←?v#↔K≠.aβ';&+33'>+;Qβ&+K7'v 3M9Hh(4*}qβS#*β?S#/⊃β#πv!1βSF)α3'∨↓α7π≡C';∃πβK?[N#↔Mβ
β∂?7εc↔S↔eIβ#?n{∨↔;␈+M04R∪[↔K&K∂π3gIβ';&+∨Kπ&+⊃ β.s['K}s7↔;"aβ'9π;#'∂BβS#∃ε+∪'S␈⊃1β7∞K1βOO≠S↔5`h+∂?oβ'3↔∩aβ;↔';?K-ε3'3∃π≠↔K[/⊃↓#g/→1β↔∞≠!β7∞≠#';*β#πMε β≠'f)βO↔↔3↔I%`h+;↔';?K-ε3'3∃π+O↔Ibβ3?∂∞aβ≠'f)βOg∨#↔51εK;S↔↔βK↔S/⊃1β←Ns∪?]π≠gOS.i04+/#
91ε K∃β≡{7C3/#↔3e¬+O↔π⊗c∃βπ"βπ;eεc↔[↔bβ eβ∞seβW≡+I↓"fKOA¬JβCK??∪π58hRS#∃ε3?3/~β←#=ε∪W'3"βS#↔≡)β7π≡C';↔~βπQαlJQ↓#v{]β∪O≠C↔K≤+⊃βSzβ[πKN{WL4V≠?7C∞s'↔MJβOC↔w!β¬βf{Qβ?2βS'7*β7π/Ns≥βSF)βOg∨#↔5β≡{≠S←∂∪∀4+≡{7CK.C↔;OM3∃βπv!βWO. #∃ph(4*6{Iβ↔F 7C3*aβO?n+?;∃εC↔K∃π;K?S*βπ9α∞cS=α'∪π]β/ W'[∞c↔;QαCK?W>C3eβ&C∀4+≤ 7∃β7+;∂SN{;π3O#e1β>KS#?/!βπ3bβS#∃ε∪↔33~βπ;⊃π;#'O&c↔M%ε{9βSF)α3'∨4*7∞≠#';*β'9βλβ←↔↔Zβ?→β∨βπK∃¬#'7∃εCπ∂/Ns≥↓
]w∨&O∀π∨ε]nBεF\≡&vNlpπ&FQQ'>NlMw:π?≡7&.U↔2εNd
w&F↑.v␈⊗N5Bπ& ↑&*ε≡4ε
πl≡7"π,≥f>*
|bε7]l7&N⎇l⊗fOM⊃PV∂l≥⊗f∞-HRπ&∞-w.zλ∃
(≤}.>→; ⊂≤ws:;Xy2V⊂≥t4qtλ4yP3_ty6<H2pyt[<P2l≥2s22YεE;$XP#6 ]7y9WβE
This Iq not to say these machines are without problems. For example,
the system, as you boot it up, occ@UaSKf↓CE←kP@jA[∃OCEsQKfA←_AmSeQkCX~)[KK←IrT@AQQChOLAMS]∀XAEkβ!β∂3. K3ebβg?Uεs↔↔⊃ε β∨?}!β∪↔∞aβ >d∞&.∞Dλ ,]9|↑!Q]≠h
\8y(∞M~;Yn4≥{|MP92p\ww0q≠<P∀_K~VY⊂≠rspq≡z2yP≤prvyH:7P1→FE1w[s3y:_q62TK⊂⊂ w→⊗⊂:4→yrP6Xqt4w→yP0y→P''jλ30yz∞P77P≠w2P4_yP12Yw⊂0q≠2FE:≠P1wv\0y2P≥42vP≥7P7z~2y⊂6Xqt4w→yP:7H0w<w[2P2v≤rSyP≤pz4yY0qz4[w⊗⊂1≥zεE:~2y2S\P0P3Yw2y0[⊂32r[4w3P≥40z⊂≥42|S\2P30\z2y⊂≥40w⊂_P%`VLX⊂0w→⊂→⊗YCE:4vYyP9f≠{ry⊂≥40w⊂_P%f⊗LX↔⊂⊂∃42|P→7w∪zλ27P0\4z46Yz4qP≥2y<P≤0x4r≠<P∀0[εE4w≥2sryλ0r2⊂≤rrvyH:7P:_urP6[y2P:~0w⊂_L⊂:yrXyV⊂3≠y⊂2|_vx62JV⊂1:]⊂:44\FE4y[∪z⊂0H30tyλ<py2≤z4quH37y⊂≥42tyλ10ytXP9x2Yr↔⊂⊂⊂P67zλ7s⊂9\2rr:\⊂4yFB897vZyrr⊂→7y⊂:~2P)|[q7v4XyP→[ _⊗⊂2\x↔⊂⊂~w⊂:4→P0y2XP7s⊂→:w1z~ww⊂1Xv64w→FE0w→⊂6ry\psrP≤0yyt[3WεEβE(2y~0x9P∩P1pwλ12yzλ9zvvXy4⎇2H:44yH360vZw3P;Zz4⊂0H9zyx~qtwwλ;t4qZ⊂7w6≡FE:4[rP;t[6⊂12Xy⊂7z]≥⊂:7H897{~r2P:~2P5t[2⊂7sλ1wvx≤2t2w≤t{2P_wvx:]4w3FB2w;4\7w6r[:⊂;t~qt⊂:~2P&4\x⊂&pXt4w2\P0y2H0x89≠pqt4[3V⊂<[zSy2H3wtw→P:7FB72rrλ0P42XuP7sλ0P67]⊂7s⊂~0y2;Xy2P8≠{ry⊂
;4y:≥pv⊂&Yvwy<K⊂6tq\7qwr→FE9x_qrV⊂≤0{P6Zqy7r[3tw2H9x2rY⊗⊂80Ytw3P→4yuP≤x2rr ⊂2z1JW⊂⊂ [2⊂$P→7w∪zβE:44[5P0w≡P7s⊂≥42P7]42y⊂_zy92[:⊂7s→2y4w→yP1w[rP1v≠yrW⊂λ$P27[∪z⊂6Ypw⊂:≠FE9p↑P:40]⊂<wzH1pw⊂≥4:yP≥y4z2H7s3⊂_v6⊂:~2P;w\5yz0]4ww9H7w⊂:~2P6p\5rz⊗βE1:zλ:40zλ<wzP_pw∪zλ2|82Xz⊂:4→vP:7H897{~r2P0[<z44[3P2v≤rP:4_w⊂0FB10y2Kq7w2\P;wy≠2⊗⊂7\⊂0P3_ty6<H:4st≥68Vq≥w262Y⊗⊂9x→qtpv x:y8≠yrFE→w;4y≠w6rw≥⊂∀9zXt⊂0yH:42P∀z0y∀K⊂⊂*4_z∪yP≤pr⊗⊂_2qpz\rP:4→P⊃92Xv⊂;w\62⊃εB9rrv\P:7P_2P6pZtw3P_v6⊂:~2P6t\z0ur\P7s⊂≡pyz2\<rpyλ0v6⊂≠{2y⊂_sptwλ∀4zεB40x(→w2r⊂≥tz4⊂≠tqy7\P0w2λ4z∪v≠⊂40x≤2w⊂6Xw<P:~vryP≠wy2TK⊂4w9]2pr⊂≠sεE9]0y:4[3P;t]4⊂:4→P12y]⊂:40]⊂;rS]2P3w]⊂0w2λ1:tv→4w3P→97vP≥42y2KεEεE
$P37\3wz⊂≥5P6r[:4wwλ:42P⊃7v84~w9]⊂≥42|P≤prvP≥7P12H30ty≠<P3w[rεE$[82y6~yx⊂2[3tw2\]⊂,2\7|⊂"SiP1v_tryP≥42|S[6⊂12H%f⊗HL⊂9x"Yr9P7\⊂12z≥2yεE_pεteR some software tufing. However, their maj`∨d↓ae←E1KZXA→←dAC8~∃KqAKeS[∃]iCX↓K]mSβ∪?;7,sQ1β≡+↔7Mπ#=β *βS#↔M⊃β3π≡Yβ?→∧≠?77|qβ W_h ⊗≡⎇mf.∨L≤&Nf≡O∩rHQ!PRD⎇∧πN∂5Dπ&F}\vBπM
↔~ε≡4ε>∂NM⊗v:
Mvv:↑⎇⊗v&\EB∧J 8⊗r?D∞6F␈]LFr?D∞6fN⎇∞@hU ↑&␈C$∞FF/∀ ∧
4T '.NNDε
πl↑'Jε⎇⎇v"π=|g'>≡,Rε&↑lVf␈
\Vw" ]g6O-⎇fn.nAPV6}$∧n/<∀ε}r∞Mε*∧M⎇GεF≥n2ε∞lD∧&←,≤F␈~d∧∧↔/D ∩ε&⎇dw"πM
⊗vZ∞MεO~⎇MBπ≡\QPW& TεfN⎇∞Bε}d F∂J mw∩ε∀∞vFNLUBεNd W6/%dα∧∞lEB∧n↑<∩εO4 ∩ε≡⎇↑εNf\APVf≥lw.∞|Tεf∞==⊗v:
]w⊗*
]v&/-dεn/><⊗>*↑ ↔∨≡≥lrε≡⎇l6/πN4αG&
}V>B ∀ε&NAQ&F.≡$π&F≡Dπ&FT
7&∂$∞6}7N|↔⊗*∞|↔~ε.]⊗g"∞⎇↔&B ∀∧6f≡mw∩nM≥6*π ≤6↑∞|Tε↔.≥N@hV⎇d∧n/<∃∩bπ=tπN␈T F}r}Dε>/D∞FF*
=⊗v"
|bε'≥l⊗nN=≡GJπ≥}Rπ>}]F"π⎇≡FB∧M≡7h-}"¬≡\≥Fg&≥M2rHQ!PRjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURhh!Q$.vD
v2¬⎇}&]~λM⊗>/>APRR%%"RR%%"RR%%"RR%% hRUURjjUQPPh e∨\-&.∨G$¬<⎇):2∧&≤|W∨"
f∩α≠&QPRv&rl}>ESC
∧ε#≠βA→&}v≡Mε∞rλ≥F∞r
=vf}]⎇bβd*=vbε≡@¬∃-HxU∃≠d↓∃<⎇):2∧&≤|W∨"
f∩α≠&QPT&≡LSRβ&t∧}∨Dε∪KC∀ε#∪#¬XU≥ Q(g⊗}W$∧V}l≡FF∞dλ⊗f∞d
6}f⎇]vrβI*6}b ≡B¬∃ZHt-∃7aPU⊗↑
GJoMw"¬<z)5~ε≡D¬↔/L|W↔_Q*F{R
⎇w⊗←7$βXh!Q%>␈-:2∧&≤|W∨"∧∧ααα∧∧αα¬|\Fv/<L↔Jbε'α∧}>Dβ Kε∀ααα∧∧αα¬m⎇G.nTε∩βR ≡7∨.Tε#(h!Q%&}L∨∩?~
MwεN>7"αα∧∧ααα X33Cεεα¬ε≤⎇⊗v:
≡V/↔⊃Q Lf≡>α∧n≤=εNvbody Likes To Program In Lisp
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Friday, 23 October 1981 00:04-EDT
From: Goldberg (Robert N. Goldberg)
Re: MC68000 paging
Someone who works for a company that produces specialized computer
systems has been telling me that they decided to build their next
system around the Z8000 rather than the MC68000 because they had
serious doubts about being able to do paging on the MC68000. They
claim that there iq a design problem that prevents instruction
resumption after a page fault, I understand that ApoLlo solves the
problem by using 2 68000 chips.
Having briefly studied the instruction set and architecture of the two
CPU's, I see the MC68000 as supeRior for the application od∧AiQ%f~∃G=[aC]d@QiQ∃rAoC9hABA1CeOJ↓mSeiUCXAC⊃IeKgLAgaC
JAiQ¬hAGC8AEJA¬GGKgMKH~∃→e←ZA∧AQSO AYKm∃XAYC9OkCO∀XAC]⊂AgaK∃HASf↓S[a←IiC]h$XAC]⊂AShAMKK[f↓i↑~∃5JAiQ¬hAOKQiS]N↓gikG,AoSi AiQJ↓Mk]]dAgKO5K]hAα ∪∪K/≠O';:β?→β&C∃αiC↓A@4W;'31ε≠πWO*βCK?⊗c↔7Mph(4)
Iα'Mπ##↔K*β¬βK. 1βC⊗{ 3↔jβ'7Cf+7↔;&K;≥β6KKSW∞aβ∪↔n ;⊃βε ∨';:β?9β&C∃4R↓↓α6≠1aAAβx4(4S⊃%α∂∞qβπ;N{;∃β&+31βn)βO?n)β?→π##∃βπ∪? 3.kMβ?v)β≠π≡+Mβ←F+9β∨.s↔Kπ&K;≤4R↓↓β∂}#∃β≠⊗{5β¬ε≠?7CNc↔I↓F);≥9∧→%β≠␈⊃β¬β≡+∨7↔w#↔⊃βn+7?KJβ7π∂FK;∃β∨+∂ 4R↓↓βπ~βS#∃¬QaAAβy↓α%ε[;?]π##πQπK?UβF [∃β&yβ∪=ε KKπJβOW ≡≠K'C&K;≥hQ↓↓β≡ K↔≠.c3e1ε∪WQβ>CπQβ∂∪∃βO}k∃β?2βS#∃εk?K∃εK;O'&K?WMπ≠W Sf)βCK}∪3↔7_h)↓↓π##πQε≠?7∃π+A|4Ph($$HJ ? ∧;?3∪⊗+K≤4Ph)55ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji44(hR∪πS+Q↓I]∧{∂Q↓ IaE↓ )iEQS e6B≥ 4*≠⊗{5iβ&+∂[πB CWIn+∃πC/∪∪W∃∞≠π-β∂!α ↔⊗[↔3↔Hh*K∃Rα3'Oαα7π∂FK;↔LhP4*%εkπeβ⊗)β∂πfc↔⊃β
β#↔K-#'
β6{IβSFKM1β↔+Qβ#/∪∃β∨}+M9α&C∃α3O≠Aα7∞≠#';(h+O?.s∪Mβ6+KeβvK∂∃9rr%β←∂→βK↔∞c3eβ/C∂'S.!β←#.qα%β6KKOQπ≠π]β&C∀4+∞s;?Wv≠↔7↔w!9↓α↔+Q19rq84(M:"εQ∧J→αf⎇)α∩>r:Qα↑ rQαRzαBJ>=∩ε5αLqα2&≥↓|4*JβC↔K≡{;π3gIβπ5εs?Qβ∨∪πkeε ?W"α3'Oαqα'QεKMβ∨}{⊃β≠|ε"π≡⎇\Rπ&
≥f?~D '/ Q,f␈∩
]w∨"
|bεo∀
ε∞≡=≥f:b ∀ππ⊗\lW∩∧4¬∧Jεm≤vG"∞⎇↔&B ]V∞∨4 &.≡≡Z6*∧∀
ε∂6QQ'&z Mrεo∀ WG&]n6N}n4εNr YFO∨¬d∧Jπ]lF/↔>L⊗v"∞⎇πJb .W"∧∀λF}r}DεF∂lTπ&xQ-FN↑T
↔"r⊃Q hV=∞&O_Q!PRjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURhh$↓PT.lDε}2
⎇w⊗]4λFN>↑>@hR%%"RR%%"RR%%"RR%%"Ph%URjjUUPhR↓Q hPe∨\-&.∨G$¬>␈-:2∧&≤|W∨"
f∩α≠&aPRv'∩l}>ESC
∧εββ+Q→&}v≡Mε∞rλ≥F∞r
=vf}]⎇bβd*=vbε≡@λ
*5⊃q**oHα*⎇|Ztdλ~9y.>λ∃L$∧lMC!(_=→'$ N( |⎇λ '↔ ( ε&,K1*:β"QN-{.H -{X=
;H⊂-L8π⊂)[v7vw[⊂≡%)[v⊂0zλ)*j#Qi)←εB)2x6≡Vz7]λ+wy5TP0z∀:z3r\9FE*≠]⊂+w\5y]⊂∞FEεE∃wy5iH"4sr\z⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂*4:\9r0|K⊂→≤P∪qz⊂_N\_P⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ+7v:[rP_P∞⊂$yy]rP→≠βE
Today's Topics: LiSP Machines - NoT Jus@PAMOdαα3&Nh($%α↓↓α6≠1aAAααGW↔↔I↓5α∞sO←↔⊗+⊂4λHI↓αβ∂∪∪←π⊗)βπ; ∧∧.&≡Mw∩¬LXλm
[{≠l@|FE⊗KVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVFKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVFKVVVVKVVVFKVVVVKVVVFBεA"0]2Y⊂→∞⊂'qjλ_\\_H_X]_ ]~[FT)jεE⊃93v]λ i( U l↔2XqP0zλ!2y5Yv2|FB!:v ,-name: Eric C. Aooper
Subject8 Languageq and Licp Machines
αAd¬eSK9HAChααOg\-vfN>4π&@{→
\αP:4_z⊂0@ compRehensive Languag`
Aaβ∪?+↔≤εBεO1Q&>}≥lrε}d
FF/,W2ε↔∀∞FF*∞M⊗n(≥~ T≠Y0≠H4pqt~w2P$\β re@1KCgKα!1βSF+eβ↔Gβ↔∂PhSS :
↔6*λ5B¬ε≤8λl≥λε⊂ !nd F@=` CK∞q↓]]αCSKπw≠3πS.!βS=∧c'OAbβ?→β≤{WKO*q$4*≤K;∂∃∧ε&␈/M≥f/~
_ D ;↑(
|H≥~ T≠_;L}89y.4≥z3
D_Y(
↑=≥0⊂[68 Compatible,
they wiLl be able th∞AaI←mSI∀AiQJ↓cCKJ↓oQSuirAae=OeCZ↓IKmKαc?C7.sP4 .s['K}s7↔≠"βS#π ∧εO~ ≥G⊗.≤O∩π& ↑&*εmz"∧f≡>αph!Q$∞g=uBεNd∞&/∨
⎇g≡*∞Mrπ& Tπ∂.↑:FN}d ⊗⊗␈↑@εv/N⎇w⊗Z∞>Wπε}.BbπM WJπ<\Vhh,-⊗∂≡\Dπ&@⎇x<LNh_z ≥|{Y.Eλ_].D≠8>$ Y(≤n|>99∧ ↑(∃
8<@ ><⎇≠m\<\id
Y99∞5C"U
>(≠,∨(→=L]H≥_-Mh∃⊂j¬r4λ∞={{KAQC"B(↑Z8hλ={|→.$
→8l8_Y<M<;→>%D≥8xNl>λ9,<j#"AQK++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U#"C!(_=→'$ Nλ |⎇λ '↔ ( &⊗- 4
:β"QN-{.H
>→=X-d∪:;∞][⎇Z,4∂∪:-N;[⎇M≤h_=∧
tR+)9∂C"J>8ZY,>∞H⊂dλ{{<
≥→<\d [|H∞M→(∪(6N ε↓"Xxg$∪:;∞][⎇Z,4_=λ
:R+2iA"C"I∀≥{⎇-Lλ_<∞∞Y8z,≡→(_-o(~;Lmh≠{D =X:-L8[→$λh_{m↑~;→..h_;LD≠|≥
≥:>Y..c"YM}H≥~ T
N εε H∩$
_=Q$
→8<LD≤];-}\h≥
=λ≥
(∪2*D_{{.
;→<D
<h l,=≥→.$c"]
;H∃m
=→<m]=~ n4_;Y∧∞{⎇; D≠~:lT≥≠h
8<H
}~→<D {{;,]]≤kD
≠→8.<(≤y-lβ"\L↑≠~9.4≥≠h
];≥;M}Z8p∞>Z+:mD_;Y∧ (≥z-Mλ≤y-lλ_( ={8Z-l9λ≤L↑|≠{N<(≥≠aQU{|M>kH∃
;Z|ea"C"J>→=Y%eKC"AQK++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U#"C!(_=→'$ Nλ |⎇λ '↔ ( &gL ∞F6k4∀jA"Q\M⎇.H~-
\|h-≥≥>≤$≥:≥>∞∧;~\n
⎇λ_.D⊂Y<M<;→>!QT⎇8M,8⎇∞D 0mNεε λ∀ ≤z;Yd
=9<O⊃"C"I∀~_=LT_(≤L↑≠|]∧ \[{$ [z≠Dλz;≠-}Y+λ ≥H~;LL<→;LL;]λ ={\⎇-N_;]¬D≥z~,=β"Z ≡h~;Lmh≠{D∞~~<d∞≤[xML;+H∧ ;H_N-99K∧
→(≤nL=→<d∞~_=π!"B,%dλ∪{D (≤_,|(→X.]≥ λ∞M→(→/ 8⎇=
≥Yh~-n⎇≤],>~;{D x;H
m⎇λ~-a"Hλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ |;Y<L≥λ_Y$
9→;NM9Z9,EC"B&%Hλ∃
<Y(
≡h≠[d∞x>(∞Mh→→.L<[:-l(~≠nt→X<D >→8n↑~;{D
yH≥
#"H∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧
;\⎇∞.8⎇~-⎇H~_,D≤≤[l}Y<|l\λ≤≤M≥|H≥
t≥~→$∞_9YlT→X=-N C"A⊗kHλλ≥↑(→/ 8⎇=
≥Yh~-n⎇≤],>~;{D
<h_,-|]→,D≥z→-d_(∀ ≤y(→L≡;≥β!$λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λ≠xl><\h N9(≥
t~;\nN]8⎇
≥{H≤∞,9Y= = C"AQR~<d∞Y<∪n.λ~<d∞~=≠ \λλTn\yy<nL9λ⊃-m_;Xl]9;]∞4≥≠h∞M→(∪-}≠|[mL(∪0fG ∧! ¬0w→⊂4yP X⊂80YryP6≠w3W⊂λ*42P≤2x7i≥⊂4yP_wx<y~st:2Y⊗⊂1:]⊂6p|H12FE≤2x97Y:qrrλ4s⊂7≠z⊂37\⊂1wv[ry1tXv⊂0r≥0w:0YrP0w→⊂1y2Y4z⊂#≠y⊂:4→P9wz\1rFE~yP3t]2w↔⊂λ$4yP_p292\yP4yNεA∧Z XP yZ1:y<H)zεEαipw Francisco, CA 94117
VoiCe: (415) 621-9355 ABBS(300 bauD): (415) 863%4703
λHope this is od some use to you.
------------------------------
@ate: 28 October 1981 23:55 est
From: SS@QKS]E∃eN]'=MiβeQfACh↓≠∪([5kYiS
b~∃'UEUKGPp@A→%`∂Aαn ∂#'v+L4(hR3W∂↑K3e1∧b&NAεCπMβ
β7W∂Bβ3πK>+IβO.kπ;SN→βOC∞≠∃βSF 9β7␈≠Qβ3∞s∨Wπ>+MβOxh+'Q∧KEβ7.≠!β↔∂≠'↔Iπ#=β'n∪↔⊃β
α
1α∧
N∞εbaα~>∃"Jε9ε{@∩π⎇ ↔&/l↑"εf≥lw.∞|QPWN}Tπ>O=∧π&Z∞∞&}?,≥RεNnMrεOD∞FF∞d∞FF*
zFF/$
v∂J ≡&␈.l@ D∧∩(∃m};→λ
m⎇λ_LQ"\u..≤Z<l\λ~9D∞{{9-⎇Y(~ ≤zy9∧∞<λ_$
⊂4ph→ λ⊂(H(≠|DλStU
(3H→N
{]λ ]Yλ→M}C"U
(∪∩*:λ≠8,=~;Y$∞z~8m∧~]<nD≥≤X-ny[p→≠rr⊂:~2P9w]y1rP≤97sy_vP4`.to LISP
program and pasSed it to The cOmpiler. I am less sure that someone
would Be interesTed in doine this for C&
------------------------------
Date: 28 Oct 1981 09:39:39-PST
From: cbosgd!mark at Berkeley
To: CSL.BKR@SU-SCORE
Subject: Re: Hardware and Editor Technoloey
Cc: ucbvax!editor-peOple@Berkeley
[Forwarded to WorkS by Henry <Dreifus at Wharton>]
The S@+8Ag←k9IfAo=]IKe→kXXA%LAs←TOeJA]SYYS9NAi↑↓gaK]⊂@HjZ]⊗AKC
PAM←H~∃iQ∃Z@Qo!SGPA%bAeK¬g←]C YJAS8Ag←[∀AS]IUgieS¬XAK]YSe←]5K]if0AEkh↓∩AMS9H~∃SPAMCe→KiGQ∃HAiQ¬hABAU]SmKIgSir↓o←kY⊂AgaK9HAiQ¬hAWS9HA←L↓[←]KdA←\A%if~∃MikIK9ifAM=dAS]MiekGQS←\R↓C]HA%LAs←TAI←\≥hAoC9hAi↑↓o←eV↓ChAQ=[J\~(~∃π←UYI\OPAs←j↓akhA∧AG←kAYJAM1←aaS∃bAC]⊂ABA[=IKZA=\A←]∀A←LAQQKgJ↓iQS]≥f~∃C9HA[C-JASh↓kgCE1JA←m∃dABA⊃SCYk@}@A∪_As←j≥eJAC1eKCIdAgaK9IS]NHk⊗X4∃C]←QQKd@⊂bj``↓gKK[LAS]g%O]SM%GC]h↓M←dAQQJAKaieBA
CaCE%YSir8~∀~∀4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4∀~∃ 9HA←L↓/←eWLA SO∃gh~∀(TTTT(TTTT(TTTT(TTT~(ZZZZ4ZZ~∀~∀~∀ Subject: WH∂%↔LA SO∃ghA,D@Fdn4∀@≡dd[∨Gh4pb@@Hfbd∪)←]Ci!C\Aβ1C\A'=Y←[←8@y∃'=XAChααJVR<*JMyJ↑ =):2∧&≤|W∨"
f∩α≠&qPT&≡LSRβ6∧∧}∨Dε∪KC∀εββ#∃XU≥ Q(g⊗↑W$∧V}l≡FF∞dλ⊗f∞βH∀m⎇≠{;md∂∩Tm⎇λ_=∧
U1⊃hZToC!
Y<∪∂∃=≠nD
stRj4_=⊂∀8¬tgers
To: Works: ;
WorkS Digest Friday, 30 Oct 1981 Volume 1 : Issu@∀@dn~(~∃)←⊃CrOf↓)←aS
bt@@@@A≠=eJA∨8A≠εl````AACOS]≤~∀$J↓↓↓αdK@∨α \⊗≡F≥lR¬75`λ
M→(⊂-N≠c"EU+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U++#%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++!Q@εE"_z2]⊂ ≤⊂'`#t 1981 1041( !'P~∃
e=ZtA∪¬\A⊂\αα7πK⊗KSA↓dj⊗JJM"Qβπ ∧¬-≤5Y∃≤L'aP@*⎇8ZL\⎇∞H
,.H⊗h⎇{→_L↑Yw ⊂∪a[≤λ _⊂8 !ei`≥N4∃)↑t↓o←eWLAChAI+)∂ I&~∀~)∩AQCYJAQK¬eHAi!ChAi!JAg←αcWS'}qβS=¬##∃β¬∪? 3.iβ'Mπ≠'7Cd∧SBπ↑8 $εHλ_m
<≤k↓QY{Y$ Y|@∞M→(≠,≥;H≤∞-xy4n=|Nh∞M→(λ
}~→<D [|@∞M→(≤ ≤y<KD
~→(∞,8<smdλ≥~ ≡β"U
(~0↔≤z9:q]4ww9H⊂6p|H⊂77zλ⊂12Pλ92y`4artable iq becaus@∀@A←LAiQJA`∨πβ⊃PF∂↑MrnNl5v∂/MuV&.4λ
.P40w→4∧ed∞ Restarting the instruc@QS←\Aβ;?W3 βK↔O,cP4-→bπ& Tπ⊗.⎇≡7&/$λλL]9Y`
]y~1M≤9λλ∞Nβtq`%,∧@A)!JAio<Aae←α≠↔OO|ε"π≡⎇NW&N⎇`λ∧
<c"NMβP40]2P⊂ 4he paga Tpap caus@∀AiQJAgKGα{;⊃↓πβK/∂-≠O?Iπ;π/∃αβWAD∧π>F≥H !QX<|l↑]~;LT_(
IIsQbD∞βpt`4 state onthe First∞ The sec@=]HAaβ∪?∂↔∨≠?Iβ&C↔8Q(λm 8z|d∞~→(∧ <\[n∧λ≤Y,⎇<⎇→..hλ_-lλλ→ ↑→<[-≥Y<h∧∞~→(∧
Y8y.ypy<H⊂0qj~ww⊗εB32z1Z2yP:~2P80YrV⊂ [2⊂⊂1[2py9H:42P≠0z1tλ;t4qZ⊂⊂4yH47v2~w3P:~2P⊂8≤4vpy≡FE8)≠qryy[y⊂47\z0srK⊂⊂*4~yV⊂4[⊂::y≠⊗⊂⊂8≥z9P:~2P9rXww20\<P8)≠qryy[y⊂4wλ⊂0FE≥ptz⊂≤z0z2H:w:4[⊂0w7]42y⊂≤0srP~yP92\zty2Y↔εEεB yP3≠y⊂⊂:~2P1p\0q4v~z<P⊂≠s⊂⊂:~2P:;[P⊂89≠qryy[y9W↔ ⊂⊂$P≥wzv2λ⊂0sy→r]⊂⊂≥42FE∪a[≤_ _⊂4yH1<P3_y⊂:4→P12z≥2y⊂7Y⊂:42H:;wWβEεE∧BDDDDB↑∨$d∪↑∨εEβE⊗VVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVFEεB"0z2N⊂→≤⊂∪qz⊂_N\_P_
~XVh∀jεE#≤7v]⊂∀ad$c⊃&`g⊂_z⊂)i∩VefεB)zq5→qz≥⊂∀0stw→P7w⊂≥42P≠∞___εB1q]⊂≤qt4s→6pw⊂_z⊂)i∩VefεBεE,r\V⊂4zλ4yP7≠z⊂92Xv6<P≤7yytX62P:≠P27P≥0w4v≠0P80Ytw3P≠w⊂:4→P≠≤_ _↔εEβE$z∪\P90z~2y⊂1\:rv⊂≥7P:4~w5P7Y⊂:44\P0yP_P360]P4w⊂≥42P2→ytsw ⊂9tw_rP:4→FE7z~2y⊂6Zqy7x≤7qry\wy9P~w⊂4z≤P1v0\yP40]2P9t[tv4p\⊂897X62vyH∀2W3K⊂-≤_ _⊗εE∩\_≤≠
WεEεB!0ytXpv6<K⊂ g,H897qYyywyλ;t4qZ⊂40yH⊃80sYVs0z[:0q6→Q⊂4w≤z9:q]4ww9H:40zβE40{→P9tr→Vrs3→qz9P≠zyz⊂≥0urP~2y7tXP9z2\9P:7H6purH:42P~w9z9≥qz4w[9FE9→Vyz0\:0q6→W⊂⊂#≠y⊂2|_vx6"K⊂0zj≠Vtw1\2vrw≥4w3P_r292\yP6wY2yP4[⊂0FE∀"(⊗XLStytλ4w9z≤:qz4[w≥εEαfgk"H⊗T)_
V⊂)_
UFE4Y⊂:42H2tz4→y⊂7sλ:42P≠rvwi≡P92s→y2w1YyP30]v:⊗⊂≡wzP1Xw∪z⊂≤2yz0\:⊂39≠vFE*~2P:7\↔εEεB,wzP_pw⊂5Yrx⊂2↑:90P_4z9P≠q⊂⊃6Zqy7V\z0z2H⊂:7P≤2vrfX2y⊂+Z2y2P≡wzP;Yy2FE≥t2w⊂≡wzP3_zv:2Y⊗⊂9wH:40zλ<wzP_pw⊂9→yz0y≥⊂397[P:42\2W⊂⊂∩w⊂0P_wvx6→|εE0\1t4z→qz:y→V⊂:4~yP6p↑P6rp[⊂5rr\4w3@λ9t0r≠{Vy2Ytyz2\9Q⊂7\⊂1wf\62z2[<FE9X{4w3H:42Pλ6tqy≠Vyz0]2Q⊂⊗KP+"i⊗P40t\<W⊂⊂λ'w2P≤0y:4Xzv0y≠<P9d[68P;X|FE:≠P9p{→P:42H6tqy≠Vyz0]2P4yH:7P9]tz1tλ7zz⊂≥42P8≤7qry\wy⊂0[2⊂9{Zz1tεB0w7z~2y⊂'[2P4wλ:7P4_w262H:42P≤0srP→0zv:λP⊂∀!≥z⊂4sλ<wzP→4r7∪]⊂22yZswεE≥42P8≤7qry\wy⊂<[zP6p↑P77zλ40{"H40r⊂_P1t7ZqrTWλ⊂*42H6ptwλ92py[w⊂;t≡P4zεB67yr\P4yP≥40z≡wzP1Xw∪z⊂→7P0w≡z44w→P2v9YP;t4[2P;pZz4w3H37y⊂≥42P2~yuFE≤0srP≥5P97[4⊂4wλ∀<ryH+4y3Zw4pVλ2{2wλ82y9[w0v⊂≠pqt4[2yP4_{2P6]v:4x≠2BE8≤7qry\ryTWβEαE [:2y7_z4{2[<V⊂<[zP1`!n simplify your architecTure so that instructions
that can causE a fault don't↓QCmJ↓cSIJ↓KMMK
if\@↓∪]iK0XAM←β⊃β↔c∞kC#∃`h#←'daβ ∃π+G'lpλ∧ →;8-l <y,]9;] ≡~;{D$~;@∞M→(∩(~⊗ Nεd +(∞M→(∪mm≤(⊂~~4s3FB:40zλ1pw caus@∀ABAM¬kYhA%bAY←¬ISMNαβ¬βO,;7↔nDπ⊗.⎇≡7&/$¬Rjε≥lBπ&
z6(h-≥g∨'.\7&N⎇n2ε∂,Tπ≡N↑
F*πMtπ⊗/>L↔↔"βHλ ≡λ~<d ;_ wH87qyZq62P≥4π just make¬
These restricti@=]fAEdAg←MQoCeJ↓G←]m∃]iS←8@QQB∧R\4Ph*k'd{∃!αNsS↔1∧∧⊗v" ]w&@|[{ ∀_;≠∧ {_:-T≥~_.D≥~→/∀≥z;
D≤z≠n.≠≡(
=Y(
l=c"Nl<\p∀[w9P7Yα their p@I←GKgM←efAQQChAAKe[Sβ!βK↔≥#πKSNs∃β?2β7.]z'Jεl≡Vg'5aPT⊗\8↔/≡T
v $≥~→$ >≥≤L]9;≡$∞Y<⎇∞4qz4]2P;p↑P:40]⊂:42↑P0r2≤2yyP≠pvwi≡VεE$[82v⊂≥tv6⊂~0{2P≥42P2Xytry]⊂:4vYP7s⊂~z↔εEβE&|P→yz4vXz4wwλ4yP:~0z⊂:~2P&aM≤___λ0w2⊂≥42P-∞___⊂≥tv6⊂_2P0q≠zz⊂2\zpv6≡FE24Y34qz[:⊂∀3≠y⊂:4→P6pw≥s0qz≥y2y∀H:7P:≥y7⊂4[:7P0H⊃;4y≥:pv⊗[rvwy≡QεE;→y9tw[↔εEεB!*+Vλ$P6tYt:⊂6Yw:4w[⊂∀0zλ:42P≤4yu@≠s⊂0x≤2py4[3P14Xyrr∀H:40zλ:42y→P0y2CE6tq\7x97Xryyw\9P:4_z⊂0v≤2pr<H40w2≠2P:9≥rP22[pw2⊗\0stw→]εE∧Rw:2vλ4`h,λ~→YεB∧g0z~ww0vλ')X[ __εEαc0ty_t4v2λ#≤Z~
FE0v≥47zsZ⊂0v6λ:492YP40{→P897X62vyH7s⊂0]0tv0X4v4z≡PFEεB⊗`v6_wεEεB⊗VVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKFEεE⊃0z2]λ→≠P'Xz⊂_\N_P_ZN→[P(∀jεE#≤7v]⊂⊃2zz9Xt⊂0zλ( i!Kf`l!CE)zq~2qz≥λ)<v0[2∪yP_wvvr[:9P7[⊂,2y≠|⊂ v≥7FEεB*42P∪4yx⊂∪pqt4[2P4yH0P6zXt⊂60\3ry⊗λ&jadλ6wy2H2|82[9t{2H9|yz→vP:4_w⊂:4→FE v≥7W⊂⊂∩2y2P_z⊂( T!P;rH;ry2H8ztz→P0{p\2P7sλ:42P→0qz⊂≥40z≥rP2|_rrr2YεE:4→P v:≠SyP1Xx0qt]<P:7H27P:~4w3yH:40zλ;ry2H4w:2\2yz4[3P:7H:yP9[vrz4[rFE0\7zw2λ_\[[ ⊂⊂$sλ77w⊗]2qt7~qpv⊂→0qz7\9P40Y⊂77zλ4w:2\;2w2Y⊗⊂;rH;wzv→εE40]2P40Y⊂"7y_r7yP
;t4qZ⊂5w7XuP:4→P892\rw:⊂∪4yx⊂∪pqt4[2P3&_z⊂7wλ4z9P_yyFE~w⊂:2\6yP7Y⊂40y→;py2H87{r\⊗⊂17]4⊂0q≤wv:z→P0w2λ82y⊂→7v60\∀P77]⊂67w→FE:4→y2ps≥2y↔εBεE*4→P)vp[6:0v~P2w;~y7w6Yw:⊂4\P0yP~w:2s\0z2rλ0yP:~0z⊂7Y⊂:42H&4yxλ&pqt~w2FE VP6w\2P9wK⊂4w⊂≠|P7h~w4ww ⊂4w⊂≥40z⊂_P6zqZ⊂9vp[62y⊂≤0y:≠q⊂:4→P9|y]2vFE~yP;y~z:2wλ4w⊂0[<P60[3zpsYP7z4→y⊂:4_w⊂7i→4w0y≡P:yr\⊗v2{→v⊂)vXv6:0[5FE∀≠7P9zX894vZz4{2\T⊂2j_W∀W⊂λ*42P∪4yx⊂∪pqt4[2P2`.vironment offeRq a
larger range oF features and serviCes largel@dAEKG¬kgJA5←eJAAK←aY∀~∃S]QKeKgQKHAS8Aae←≥eCK[%]NAK9mSe←9[K@;'→βC↔⊂βO*
↔6*∞⎇w⊗↑\@λ
⎇H~0~λ7wεE≠wy2P≤7{ry→αud Machines f@=` β¬∧¬F}v|Z"πε↑-⊗}"
xbπ&≥\Rbπ⎇
⊗f*∞Mε(h*=V∞fNL⊗fZ .VNfL↑'
ε≡@λ
λ4Ph
=Y( ,9;@ ={Xq.-Y9∞⎇=~
}~→<D∞~~3L↑hπεEβE⊗VVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVBEεB 0z2N⊂⊂→≤H'qz7X2y⊂_N\_P→ ≥~\→yzεE⊃93v]λ⊂#90[5yz7[↔)ws≥ y:9H0z⊂&Rj⊂
Multics
Subject~ Re: MC68000/Z800 PagiNe Qu@∃ar4U∪↔C3JjS=iαα≠Kπv[OS?rβπQαlJQ67.cS'∂~↓" ?⊂∧∧7⊗≥m7∨&⎇a⊂hPβ"R.D~<h
m⎇λ∃
(⊗Nεε λ~.Ny;⊂∪λ:40zλ40w2≠2yP#_zp ts, bu@PAiQJ↓4p``L~∀QM=eP↔↔⊗ceβSF)αieβ↓A%↓jiβπ9π+C∪π&+⊃β[/∪G'?rq↓αO/βC?O,#3eβ∞p4+Wε#πS↔"↓QaAβ↓β'Mπβ3πmlV"r∧
W≡NβY`∞N{h≤∞-xy4n=|\h∞⎇→<Y$∞~→#!.y8p↔[2⊂8)≠qryyH:42P→0zv 4 while the farst is suspEnded↓I←Kf4∃CIY=nA←]∀Ai↑A!C]IY∀AaCO∀AMCk1ifA←8AiQJlp``@XAEkβ!βS#*βCπ∨(h+#πv#3↔I∧kWOQεs?QβO#Oπ32βSπ/*βCπ∨*β≠πWg#M↓5jβ¬β3Nk'Sπ&K?9β|qβS#(h+πK≡C'S↔≥#WK∃ε{⊃βπpβ?C↔⊗ S';8βGgO&+5)↓∧KQβπg≠=β7. ;Mβ&CπQβvx4+?&C↔Iβ∧ε&}≡↑>6Nvt 6∞r ,Rε&⎇lRε}dλ
(≠8-≥H≤∀M|y<|m}H≥;NM9λ∃
#"P∪_zv:~yP9p]4ys$Yr↔εEβE⊗VVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVFEεB"w2≠s⊂+w\5iP"~qryzβE∃∃∃
∃∃∃∃
∃∃∃∃
∃∃∃∃
εE⊗VKVVVVCE⊂εEβE Subject: WKRKS Digest V1 #28
∂01-Nov-81 2227 Jonathan Alan Solomon <JSol atRUTGERS> WORKS Digest V1 #28
Date: 1 Nkv 1981 2353-EST
From: Jonathan Alan Solomon <JSol at RUTGERS>
Reply-to: WORKS at Rutgers
To: Works: ;
WorkS Digest Monday, 2 NoV 1981 Volume 1 : Issue 28
Today's Topics: Lisp Machine Language Support
Demand Paging On iAPX 432
Backing Out Of An Auto{inc|dec} Instruction
Symbolics 3600
Altos " Dorados " LiqpMs & DoLphins
∩@@@A!¬OSMNQ∨dA1CGVAQQKeK=HRA∨8A)QJ↓≠εlp@``~∀4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4∀~¬ ¬iJ`)β α;?4∧Vn⊗↑ λε↔,∧⊂P →]→\ bijεB εrom: The Moderato@H@y∃'=XAChααK@/L|W↔≠aQ%∨.-( ,>∞H⊂,Mαpw4\z94{~p@
[DuE to A small hardsabe proBlee, some o` Asα{UβK,∧6.OlXBεO]JFOεLQP@,{|∩,↑h≠qDλβ94b_|SyP→4sry]⊂⊂+_H⊃Y≠@), soRp¬r@[)'⊂≡2hh($%P %U++#%U+++%U++#%U+++%U++#%U+#"AQQ_= WHλ Xλ'qz7X2y⊂_N\_P_ ]~≤VQijεE⊃93v]λ ∧aniel L. Wei@9eKD@qIYnA¬hA≠∪P[β∩|4⊂
OW⊗S↔∂QRα3πl}V∞y<h ≥Yλ∪
≡|λ∪,≤z~3L↑c"C!(αy4`# CooPer i@LAG←eIKGht↓'s@7⊗{3'∂~β←'MDπ∨/∞λ n∞α⊂ \qpv⊗λ!0∂rtpa`≤@\nP⊃β∞s⊂$
~β?9β&C∃↓M3↓A9↓¬##'M∧kπeβ>{K-β↔Iβπ∂'+π1β'∪π;Od∧↔&N⎇`λ
≥]≠h M<| ∧
|H⊂O⊃ ]≤L≥\{⊂.M;{@
≥]≠h ≥H~0↔≥2y6rY4pz2H92x 2esentatioN inside the coMpide@HX∩∧~(ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4~∀4T#πS∃R↓MAα|≠S >,X Dε,. $ε
m-%X1∃β!(\[{'$⊂_;M4∃x;
<αy⊂ ]⊂!fjKXX FB)zq5→qz≥⊂_zz7d[1Wr2XFEεE∩z⊂4y[∪z⊂ 4hat hard To impleeeNt au@Q←SMF=IKF\A)QJbb↑n``AQCLAC\AI→∨∞~)giCG,AG←]QCSMS9J@rA1←GCi%←]fA=H ↓Uε∪'SMε+π∂!αB%βSFK;-¬p∧α¬> ]f/6↑$πN␈QQ&&z ≥bε∂↑MvNv4
wαεLX2bπ≥}Rππ↑=απ& TεNv4
w$→→8d∞X;≥,T≠{H∞M→(≤nL8zkD∧∪{C!,(→P.]≥λ
≥↑(~m≥Yλ≠ld→X=-Nλ∧V⊂≥42P6Zqy7`#o`e pops The stack Values and
revEpses the Operations. A @
C\Ai!S]VA=HAY←Q`
β#∞KKeβ¬∪? 3.kEβ←LεF@h,,⊗≡↑≥lrε␈↑@ε}∩
≥g∨'.X7&N⎇n2π& ≥bπ&
~2ph!Q"jjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUUPhPβ"Q ≡→.Hε6λ∪xnD ..ε∀λ⊃TM≤_>*$ε,--¬X4uβ!(β97vN⊂#! SαKEL at HARV-10
Subject: Re: De`≠C9HAaC≥S]NA=\ASβA0@hfH~∃)↑h@@A'
QSMM5C\ACPA'%∩5↔_~∃
Ft@@↓
%β≥- _~∀4∃)QJ↓S]iKαaβ&ε¬A↓QM⊂∧ε&@y<h
m⎇λ≤n↑≤≠|ND_;↑$ Y|[$
yH→ ]8;Y∧∞_9z-lkλ⊂⊃≥z⊗εE≤0z42\⊗⊂40\β a Fairly primitive segmentation scheme. This s@
QK@7(h+πMMw?~∞8 ,⎇9;]∞∀≥≠h ]=~→.$_Y( ]]~0→→v8P 3wapp@∃HAS\αβ?Iβv{Qβ'pβ7↔]x O∀_9β!,8ε6↔λ⊂*42H2:pvλ≠___ ⊂4vx≠2rr`.tati@=\ACYαc?←M∧3?Iβ'∪W* LVn∞l@λ∞ 9z;L@P;t`4h
dhe reStric@QS←]f↓CYeK¬IrAK9k[Ke¬iKH\α↓α?SF+I↓Y@εββα∞8 mN=~3mnh~;L=≥9→!Q\Y<nNX8p~~w3P:~2P4g≤z9:q]4sw9H:40zλ0P1g[x4v2\α will generate so That The¬
@ACGJAα3πW∪ ∧ε∞εN,W∂~ 8⊗rε,Tε&/L\7&.D ⊗v"∞Mε*ε=|F*π,↑7.n\@αG<z0↔→β only
αone 6(@``@%p∧α∧nβ⎇≠n-βv0@~yP4gλ:42P≤93qb\βs of coming out wiTh a @9Kn@l````~)iQChαβ∂?K⊗+∂SM∧εFF*∧,'/~ Z'ε←$ ππ⊗|-F.j ≥f"π=⎇V*π,X⊗fgα(⊂⊗Zw3yεB0p∞noyafc@∃`
(Q!P@)X;:,T⊃\X-my;β!↓ K ⊗KVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVFEβE"0z→]⊂⊂→LP ∂c@Q←EKdα↓Ee@∧∀ββ∪αM,$ <⎇β!(β97vN⊂⊂$#Pαa`↔Kβ⊃0∃∨α;8M⎇~8|d =λ∪)~λεfz[:4qyCE)z`"jecth@A'sαk ?3L∧74 mLε↓ ¬εE Y⊗q4]⊂6pqZ4p∞e, 2V $`Ao←e⊂ACIIIKgfAMaCGJPbAE%YP∪'|qβ gαLW5 εE→L⊗q4`4 i`≠[∃ISCi∀@Q]←αq7∂?w≠↔↓∀λ
-nα2sr\αs _A%
Aα33 >≤¬β!
9\p~≤αp Gi%←\AMα+S∂!¬+;'PhS';O'∪W∂SL¬vrα4λ nL8z`⊂_pqt2CE→/24 wo@IHAaQe`∂'∂∞aβπ∪'∪↔OM∧∧6∂ε≤-⊗fOLε#!~XY%H9wy2≤β me@5←er←α≠πK⊂hQQ5U∧ε6f@⎇_h @4πr @5K[@?↔Iβ∂πα,Gλh&frbβ⊗fαbβ6εαZ∧β8↑.L(≥z-lz→0→]2y0∪
λ∧b`A5EShA∃iQKe9Kh~∀```Ae=ofA←α1↓EAβ↓β∪?'→α >8h ∪ 4λ∞∧ε2h⊂⊃[v7q, 8 bits ∨@∧¬↔F.ββ"F@≤___λ$WgP_ww:9≠v62`2
MuLtib`+β→0⊂@ ¬εE_0yt`# confi`∂ke¬iSO\α↓q#d∧∩d Xπy quantitp∩@D`\4Ph"/M W-β2z pr`∨I=G←Yf↓ckEUα+∂Qβ&yβπ[∞K3π L¬FO'α(⊂∪≤αh∂ZAaKe@?βλλwy0⊂_w2εE≤2pp∪@=]CEYα+;↔O~p4(Q%RjJUP %U++ ⊗KT¬--4ZRZZαi5 *UP %U++#!∧¬
Date0∀@LbA?≤εBβ α.∧$ε,λλ@9-PSD
λ¬≠K|¬S@$⊂z≤M≡h∀↑-L8π2 <RP∪→¬_
" ≡B¬≥)∃T\caQ%∨.-( ,>∞H⊂↔[2P6 !st apologia; query @→←dAQ%H∂!\X LD≥<p∩\αs
λ¬∪@9¬∪↔OC|¬g≡
∞Mr¬ε↑LWα∧LX
.Nxz∪\β mail, I qhoe@1HA←]
JA[←β∪∃β↔oβ#πOLπ&*πM ↔ @ ¬6|H4p∞i@QSC@1∧∧ff∞β9(∞|<h⊂⊗[yz6,H4w⊂ 2eaction to the worl@⊂OfAi∃]IK]
rAi↑4⊂ π∪,¬F∂&Tλ
(⊂;∞Mβ]P \β Pe@QKdAaα{';S,∧Bε␈↑@ ∧∞~→( Mβv5yH0z⊂,⊃i'l⊂~βnew↓Y←]N4⊂ π∨zβS#π ∧π&F←∀εF∞D w/&}-w>r∞Mε*ε\≤6FNβY+∧ ]=⊂∩P27`.'t thin`⊗AQQChOLAGYK¬`⊂∀.Mrπ& Tπ>␈-LBε∂Dλ ≡Yy+D∧⊂∧P $idn't intend to sli@≥Q`A⊃∃%∨0\α↓απl@ ∧∂9<k↓Q]~→$λ≠|X,Mh_p∩\8∧aiNly "whqpKs hi`'tACgfλAP∨≠2βS#∃∧∧7/↔,Yg"∧M~7α∧β88m
8π2VβE:47]pπh @%h@∨M∧ β#''#3∃βF K⊃β&yβ∪↔&+K .≥lRπ& Tπε.L≡FO6T
7ε.\N2bε⎇~f.r∞Mε(hαY~,lY<Y-nλ≥{n,λ≤p∀↑2yP [2⊂4w≥2y70[⊂20z_P80z~⊂9t⎇→yP∞
No@\XA[r↓ckKedXACI⊃eKggα+⊃βSzβS#?≡)β >d∂⊗␈*∞⎇εzε≤,Rε≡⎇nF.o
Hλ.M9Y`⊂≥ytw3CE82`2pπ←]C0ASCG!S]Kf↓MP∨IεC'∨!n+;⊃⊃∧¬V␈∨MK∩π∨L≥f"n≥H ml(_p↔[x:z0]4ww0[ε@
needs, i(
J\αaαε%αC@∨ε\Xλm¬λ≤[l-⎇~0nT∧ v@%`∂'⎇`
%D∃S∀i∀→→<m≤{Kλ∞
≤∧qdXyVεE→z1W≥λ;t0zλ4yP<[zy⊂ 3ense abou@PAiQJ↓YC@;?+π∨∃ε∪πO∃πK?U∨d¬Bεv\XBε6β|@⊂≡wzyεB;wq5OP⊂*4~yP12Ytw9P≥4π apprgach "theological" iss@UKfHA khA∩↓giSY0AiQS∩s,4+LεB?~ ≥bεNnLW⊗/>M⊗v:∞MwεN5aP@H(h n⊂2|0[x62Vλ6|P &eadiNe shared↓ErAgα{7∃1∧Iβ#?α RJε≡4π&F≡@λ∞M→(∪mm≤(⊂~≥wFE&_w3z`Yp¬s @]←eiPαβ∂?;≤¬⊗&/-≥f*ε≡,R∧f≡:αε∞βY⊂∀vpv ,ta`→Vα↓"%∨h∧εN>mx M≥Yh⊂~~2@
@%IKBA=H β↔n∪↔&M→f 4≥y3
E8¬w7]w⊂6 !nguages sUch as F`∨@↔#@⊗∞βH⊂-lλ⊂h
≥H_ ⊂∪4yxεB4πr @=iQKdαβ↔;[Lε&}v\X NEλ≥≠d∞⎇<⊂_≠y:⊂ 4hh∂gJ↓oQ↑Aα#?9∨ ∧π>∞n@λ∞MβP22Xv⊂;t]4⊂:4→F@
hoqt lAnguage). The Lisp Machi@9JAC]⊂AaQJ↓ P∨3∧¬εNr∞λ M}Z9→$∞α;wP≤αathep∧⊂∀,M↔∂&≥l7"ε≤λ ∞
βpq`(es to phe envi@I←]@7,¬g"b .W"ε-x
∧≤≤[nm9→( M<| D∧∃~→!QQ≠p⊗≤44w, running Inp Ke1Sg`X↓Sf@EAkeJDαα3'Oαβ'9β&C∃βO,¬g<αP:4_z⊂4`4 h CW∃b~+vyβ∂?v≠↔OOL¬vw~
_ D∞α42P_y2w0H4πf @=EUKGβ!7?KL∧Vw→9⊂≤90∂gram`≠Sαs∃ 2∧
FF* H
.xεE&Xqt4`.e i`&↓QKCMαK3eβ|∧&@,8⎇⊗[y0 e@9iKHX↓oSiPαβC↔KF CMβ&C∃β7|ε7"εmH /
8[⊂∩H4πf
all @
YCggαK⊂⊗N<≡FN}dλ l=→;9.P4vpYβi`≥C YJXA→YCm←β∪E 2∧
FF*∞λ M|Xε2`- I s@∃J~+>KS!β&C'Mβ&K∂#?&{7'k,!β←?⊗c⊃β?2α3'Oαβπ;⊃∧33π[|ε'4~<h∞M_9⊗λ847`5dπP~∃ββ↔?Cd)βπK*β#πK ∧ε∂"∞⎇wεZ∞NW-X∧w3H4p∂`%∀AC@; ∧εn␈,Tε}H≥~ T∪~0→\⊂
achi`≥J4⊂ ←?⊗c⊃β'w#=β?⊗S↔∂S~β←#'≤¬αε∂,Tε&.≥H
∧∞z=~∧∞Z8
\αyy`!ee-papπgS]≤XAiQ∃eJ4TεvNfD ⊗g≡∨_ d Y(⊂~~2P10\βic @=EUKGQ`
βO,∧6Bε≡4ε&O
nVo~¬
⊗wε\|W↔~∀λλ-lλ_smny<c!∞z~0m∧_<Y-d⎇λ⊂↔X52qz≤β inthe FlavoR sense* This fundamental dichotomy
can't be good, inthat↓ShAe∃ckCe∃bAio<AISM→KeK]PAgisαc↔Mβ|1βCK};@⊗∞β;:-lc"X-lλ≥~∞↑h≤Y.≡8∧y2\P9wvYP0r2~z4ww_v⊂0w→⊂82i~0x9P≠2rr6→yyP #ompl@∃qSir8~∀4T{→β∂|εW↔≡UDπ&F↑,Rε∂,Tπ&F}<Rπ>
tεo/>Dπ/≡T FO∨¬Dπ≡z∞Mε*∧Mx ∞
~;@ ≥Yλ∃
!"S
≡|λ∪,≤z~3LT_8⊂_→py⊂ 4o be the @=]YbA!←aJAβ;∃∨[*β∨?Qr↓↓"SF)αOCN≠⊗3'∨4*B-∩Eβ'~βOS'd¬Bε
∞≡V/∨M_ me8εpy~T∧ but i`(≥`
β#∂∪⊃βSzβ'7π>K;∃βLεBε⊗]≥f 4hich probably @]←\Ohαβ ∃β&+∂#;N≠π1¬p∧α∧↔↑.FF/%DεO"∞⎇⊗f`Q.π⊗↑,≤&gJ ,Rβ
∂_V∂∩ ≡Bεf\≡7"ε,\f␈⊗T
↔"ε≡4π≡}M≤FgJ∞Zαε}d ⊗rε≤<6/πL≤&f(Q-V∞≡
≥f*B∞>V≡B ≡2π& T∧&↑N
εNrD FO∨∧ V∞≡
≥f*b
z"π> ≡BnF≡h %←;⎇(
<Y≥l≡Y+C!(x;H∂≥⎇(∃l≥=λ⊃M}H≤sm\=~~-lh≥z
≤zλ~.=I⎇⊂_P9z`2e bet yet?
~∃eKh@1¬≠7π3e#π3-ε 3O=ε CC↔∂∪EβSzβ#π[*β¬β∨|¬v"ε= ⊗v≡T∞Fzε,Tπ>NL]GHh,≡f∞Nβ_8ML(≠p↔λ2{2`2y imagi`≥C YJAg%uJA←α1β7π≡C';∃bβ←#'≡Aβ∂πpβ?;3Jβ /∪(h+@>]H ∧ [|@⊂≥42P ]0tv0X4v4`4y of goodsoftware, peop@1JAmKIgKHA%\AiQ∀~∃YC9OkCO∀XAie¬]ga←IhZAC SYSidA←LAIKgKCIGPAg=M`∪←∂∪∃β'w#=βSF)↓ K. 04.⎇w⊗@→λ@¬ 9Y∞m8y+.l<\p%∃λ→= 5Hλ⊃M}H→6 ≥<≠⊃%D~=λ
≡h_smlZ<[,\≠≡(∞.;;tL\β"]
=λ⊃λXh~4d X<p∀[3P:4→ty⊂8→y9ww_v⊂+ V∪yP9↑yz2vH9ws*≥py2P
842P∀jk l
P7wεBαSmallpalK, and thiS sysTem haq a @ICiQKβ⊃β∨?}!β∨K∂β#'∂~β';S-∪⊂⊗∞<Ubα∧|aPF≡|Z'∞
D ¬αb
LV←'-⎇fOBβλ⊂.∞≠→+∧ 8π2 D@ εA!CmJA KC@9∧εv␈⊗=_ L@P;t`4h the
pre-rel@∃CgJA=H αOn 3#S∞c%β≠|ε"ε@Y8<MO(_ ⊂≡p¬ab↓]WnX↓c↑Ai!ChAaβ∪?['&+L4+7+CC#,ε"π⊗\≡6}r∞Mrε⊗]H
,↑Y(⊂~~0z⊂ )t wi@1XAQCYJACGα≠↔CS∞s∂*
→bπ& QPVNβY≥.>≤↑+AQ@εE"[4πugh speCulation. Commenps >4⊂⊂∀%P %U+++%U++#%U++#%U++#%U+++%U+#"AQQ_= WHλl$ x⎇⊂ \Xλ "`bhf5!'(~)
e@?iQαN∞DJ~~6 qβπQ¬~J%6\`4*O,∧&V.>@∞D
Y.HλL8εpw→⊂80sZw3P /n iAPX 432
To: BRANKEL At @ART∧Zb`4⊂ ∂
Rβ@≡≡
_ LMαpw at CRI( ↔_4⊂⊂∀λM##∃αL¬g&.βλ⊂∀Ph,⊂~ Y⊂27YyP77]⊂9z`0pordany @→←e@5∧¬v $→→;,≥Yβ"A≡_9z-liλ⊂⊃≥z⊂ @ICiQKHXAQCLABAMα 'K∪β∀ππ⊗≥]↔&OlTπ≡9{9-n_8
4[wεE∧\βcheMe( @AQQSfAMGQK[∀AC@3d¬w?~∞8 ,]9;]∞P:7P→tz42\⊂12P→w:4`2elq
swapped In ob nkt @%\A[K5←erAα Qβπd¬B`! ¬εE_0(94[tz4{→P9r`'ma`≥i¬iS@?p∧r;{qQ hU⎇ Vrπ≥zRπε
_ MP0q7]z⊂4`4, pages are only fi@aK@⊃↔≤¬↔V*∞8 ,@vrw:≤β that mustλ
)⊗+'S#,ε"ε⊗Tλ -n~<Y-O(~0↔λ4rvw\αy, @=` β;|εBε∂Dλλ-Mα⊃↔ Segmentation @%` 4 ≤¬F.∂-H∞$ (≠;n,(λ\m}~~0→]4qpz→p∧" @EkCMiUZA←L↓[@↔]x O∀≠8;L≤βrvr[8⊂12Xpzy`%
`∨E)KGif↓IW\OPAG←[∀AS@9∧∧fOF\@λ∞t⎇2`3,∧@A αs∪ ?.NVv∂LX ∂∀→[p→λ1wvx≥z2yεBαarcHitec@QkeJX↓ShASβ→β∪'4∧fN∨]H
∧∞≠h⊂)I⊂πa`U ¬ memory i` Asα{Uβ∪|q∨Qβ∧ε&/&]l@hWM WJεMu`hPβ"U
(λ
32, which @
C\AQ¬mJAkαkC@&\X D∞~≠p~\βa`≥Hαβ@≡9{9-n≤h⊂∩→pε`∪]∃HAChαβ¬βSL¬V*@Q%π>OMλ \8z≥⎇Y(⊂⊃→tp∞g↓BAi@Lεε.λ≤⊂→≠z2q`4ion @⊃←[CSαq%β'α4ε≡}n8
,L<X8MO(≠;n2@
@M←aQSβ≠S'∂∂#↔"∞⎇ε.r
_
∧ {{9.P:7P≥4y::Xv⊂6r[wy<P≠pp∞agement than any
λh∂iQ∃` β7L∧7-βx97Xp¬ss@=` β←L¬Fbε,Tε6@|H⊂⊂H& ∂NG time, I@8AMCGβ!1β'"β'Mβn{C∀Q( m}~~0→]4qpz→p⊂:4_w⊂-p[6p∂s@Q:Aβ≥dAKqSMiS@;8∧ε≡}↑∞W&/$}2εn]]w/(≠8-l9y3,]]β"L≡Xz~.L8⎇≥.,+C"AQSyH =⎇<\lUλ≥~ T~;<
L8εr`.tati@=\ASf↓ckGP↓iQChαβ?;3Jβ¬β≠,εrπ≡\⎇V.wAQ&&/<8 M≡≥≠tNP0y2H1pqt→p⊂9d[zp taneou@MYrXA]QSGP↓YKCILAi↑AA←←d~)aKeM=` 'πv≠∃8Q!PDNβH⊃L≤⎇ λ ∀≥~~-mh≥~ ≡λ≥~ T
lD
<h→m⎇9Y`⊂≥4π sufferfh∂dA∧AY←]≤AiS[∀AIkJ4∃i↑A%ifAY¬GVA←_@Eae%[SiSYK]KgLD\~∀4∀[βY1C\4Ph)55ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji44(hR∪πS+Q↓Eαv{[↔7⊗+I↓EKAE↓A⊃QIa6-~P4
5∪?5i∧c↔?;∂∪⊃α9pα≠?;-⊃↓r~|r⊗Iβ∂!α6&"jε%xhROW T+∂Qi¬βπ∨'v9β?9¬##∃αl→P∪CεεhPβ"V,↑kλ⊂~~2y2P~yP0@→2s4w~z2P8≤7q6"[P;tj~⊂80sZw3P;Zz4⊂:~2P&aM≤___λ1t4x εAεE∩P;wy~rr⊂'[⊂0P $esign team about a @eKCdAα ∨=β&CπQ⊃∧ 7?;8β?S#/⊃βS#Ls↔MAQ'>∂4 v}Nlpλ∞MβP4v\42vr[:⊂0@ virtual memory qystem us@%]NAi!JA≠εXp``@αβπL4TKSMα≥αU 2∧λ⊗n}lpλ∞l<Z3n↑h≤⊂→≠q22v\β we paf acrgcS (su@
PACf↓←]Yr↓∨⊂~∀hS';S,ε&f@xzy,D~;\nN]8p~~ww⊗⊂≥t2w you @IKCIYβIβ;↔,∧F.α ≡BεF\≡7"πN⎇rJπ|≡2π& QPGπ-|&f.Tλ l@⊂80sZw3WεB∧@
As it @QkeMf↓←khX↓iQJA5αl`!β↓Aβ∪|∧W4≠[p~λ9p{ % e`≥←β+⊂≡B∞8
≡→(⊂↔[⊂9z`#h a
d¬CkYβ!βS=∧∧&*ε≤-F*πMtπ⊗.=}f/∩ 9voεLX
]≤∧W It Misse@LACE←UhAio<AgiCQkf~∃α∪'SMp∧α∧J Mvr?Dλ
≡Y(⊂⊗↑P6pw≥pp @!C]Ir0AC@; ∧εO"}4ε⊗.]`ε
π⎇
⊗f*∞8
-ly(∩!QY≠p↔Zβ` HA¬hAiQ%`
βC⊗{ &]Pλ¬∞α42P≤90∂j@∃GhAKαs∪↔⊃∧ /W ∧βJε]x NM≤h⊂,]h∧V⊂_8¬t @%h⊂∀-]w∨" LV -8π4`4elp∩Aβ;?W∪ ∧εv@⎇λ⊂∩≠P80sZw3P 2icht8@A)Q%`
β7∞#∃β' ∧π∂.α=→!QY~0∪→αicu@1hAi↑↓G←[J↓k`Ao%iPABαβC >,¬0→]⊂80sZw3P)↑yz2`-,∧⊂∀!Q%&FTλ l]Y<X-D~9→,∀≥y( <8εrP≥x⊂;t]4⊂;p\β that paging @=\AiQ∀A≠εl````Aβ;πL4T∧V∂≡≥H∞$∞≠x yZq0 e i` AGα+@↔_:0↔λ4s9j≤αp Gi%←]fAβ;↔K∃∧∧↔6↑≤LV"αα≠p→ ⊂0v 4er`≥CQKY`%`h ⊗≡|X D_Y( }8<X-nα2r`$ jev@∃` βSzβ⊂⊗∂]H
∧∞αx7`. exe@
kiS←8XABAβ∪πS#,ε"ε&≤h L>8ε2εBαconstraiNt).
If pe`∨aαc∃βπα,RεNnLW⊗/>LV"b ∀π>Nβ≠λ ⎇h_X,=h≥~∞5zstλ6|P /ld depπSO\αβ;/S/_4+πv!βO↔*β↔cπ≤εFgJ∞⎇ε∂"∞Mε*π∞-v⊗@→; ⊂≥pyW It @]CfA]=hAS]Mke@7|εVw_8[ T
≤p∀[1rFE≥p¬ f@%KkeK⊂AWkhαβπQβd+πOQ∧¬vv*∞|↔Jε≡-w.vDλ
.Eλ_<d (≤Y,<8ε6∀K⊂12`4 it @]Cf~∃α#↔6α;Z.L8ε<P_w⊂4`.conv@∃]SK]
J\4Ph ∀J Mvr∨D
6v@⎇h⊂⊂X5zz thic pπsgi∃ZAoSβ#!βS>yα6
3AAAA?→β'd ↔"b .W"εn-vjπM PhVL↑6∨⊗≤∧⊂~~ww⊂ )t soUnds @1SWJAβ##↔e?∪∃βW≤¬⊗v:
⎇f*ε=
↔απMtεN9<λ∞NX8rd
yC"N>_=→$ Xπy the @=iQKd8\\@A∧AWY@.;eβO|cWS'|qβπQ∧∪↔OQbβ?2 8 n↑\y+∧ ]=β!12z:→y⊂:4_w⊂40]4p∞g↓iP≥β,¬FNn≥l↔&*∞h
.∞α:pvλ4rvw\αy as an @=aiS←8X~(hR; ?LTπ&F≡@ ∧ =Y0↔λ8¬si@9H
βS>yβCK|≠↔OO⎇∪@~ε≥lBεF≡h
-lh≠{LT≥x:.D→[p→λ:42P≠z42yβE:7P~0p∞dle paging, you can keep track od∧AiQ∀A[Ogβ!βK↔≡+;S3JβCπ∨.!7?W h+Cπ>+Eβ'rβ7↔]{↔αε≥lBπ≡t F.∨,X↔≡
∂≥w/∩
↔'~
⎇bε&≡=2πε≤⎇⊗v:d∧¬4
¬zdm~AQ&6@|H∩-n⎇_;L<+λ→
|<h⊂~~4yWλ*42wλ<wp∃ can do a @→Cgh@!]↑AI%cVAC
iSmSQrR~∃ACGJA→←dA[=ghAM¬kYifQ-≠&↓QSif↓CY[←MhACY0AiQJ↓iS[J↓KqGKAhAM←β⊃βCK};Kπ7_h+S#∂!β∪=ε α2>"β? β⊗ ;∪?jβCπ∨Ns≥1β>C'∂!∧K@~π,≡&*redαε∞lDε&.\≥f"o,↑&xh. ⊗>/4¬εJvUeBε7]IFbε|dπV/-|W~ε,\6∂/<Tπ&F←∀w6*
mw"ε,XVrπ↑<V"π≤↑BJε≡,PhV\≡7JπMtε&z∞⎇↔&F}↑Bε∞o∀ε&O=0ε∞≡<Z7~Jd∧¬&FT vvg∀
FNnT∞FF*∞∞&}≡↑>6␈⊂Q*v∞ON4εO~∞⎇ε.r ⊂ε&∂]JBπ⊗\≥FgJ
↔4≥≠h
≥][s∞l(≥~ T→~<m5Hλ∃
;H≡-})|Y!Q\⎇≥,=kλ≤m≥Xy(∂≥⎇(⊂l≥I⎇∞.;H_-o(≠⎇
<H⊂_≤7qr`3ses while that↓QCaaα+;M_hP4*#∂3∃β≠.q9↓βN1βg∨*β←π;"β7?K*β';≠zaβπOXβπ;⊃πK∃βOF 31β⊗+∂↔'6)198hS↔[↔w#Wπ3gI04(hP$$$HH%r∩t1x$(hRn e¬##∃β> e1βN{WIβn+OOπ>)β'9πK↔OS-∪∪πe?→β∪'>+OQβ∂βC↔π⊗+⊃β←O#!β¬∧3K >W!PV6≤YF"ε|dπ≡N↑
GJ∧⎇yF&⊗↑,rrα
9⊗v≡T ∩ε&⎇dw"ε=mw:π⎇ W⊗*∂≥w*ε≡,RbπM
↔~ε⎇|Wλh.Mrπ& Tπ>F⎇HRεf≡>Bπ>≡Mε␈/Dλ ,≥9~;LT≥≠h∂≥⎇(→
≡Y8⎇
O+λ≥m
8zλ
≡h≤sm\=z_.A ¬4v\7v4j→P7s⊂≠pP1:]⊂72aYyypy≡P:w2→y⊂:4→P1ty_zvyz_w1ryK⊂⊂%)[v≥⊂4Y∧E#w[212y→β is at Rutgers, please make sure That @QQJA↓I+)∂ I&AoS9IfAk@A←\~)iQJA5KggC≥J\\]t~∀4UZ??C~↓5βSF Qβ7∞[↔Mβ';=βπ∧¬vf@yz1.P:44\P24sYyz↔⊂P92q[y2∨P e)gf↔FAεE VVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVCE
Date: 1 Nov 1981 (@'U]ICr$@dddβ!6⊗N h*7-⎇SR∧h∧P)Iq3λ ≡λ∩⊂**K,,↓QT⎇0M,8⎇∞D
Y.HλL8εpw→⊂80sZw3P'[⊂4`h⊗⊂~→YβE*7]λ⊂⊂)aZ4s36Xw⊂0zλ)i$VRfεE!X]⊂⊂⊂⊃) g%QfεEεB+t2gλ9rsvYw:0z~ww⊂ )pεAiQ∀A←]YdAM@?⊗iβ >d
V.nβ|↑$
8;X,\8εr`.t, iT h kgβ!β ∀hSWO↔ ∧ε&@|H⊂M}~λ∀∞-βz2a]4sw⊂_w2⊂:≡x4w3K⊂0w2λ9z7i_pπe AllocAtion8@A)Q∀~∃CIYC]iC≥JA←L↓QCmS9H
β |εFBπ<\vn.β]_.M9{@⊂_w2⊂(_stw3H4yP 4hat @QQKeJ↓CeJAβ#←<4V#'OSNs∂Qβn+∂#πvKO7M∧εFzε ≥f&@→(⊂~~2P:;[P897X4∧ems,∧@A∪β!β'M∧¬v'→;@⊂≥9:rP≥40zεB9rsvYw:0z~ww⊂ [7w2P~yP9`5ffic@%K]hAβ#=βO|¬G6* -w&BDλλN↑λ≠[nD_;⊂≠X|yW The
λproBlee @]SiPAACOS]≤ASfAβ##πQ∧εFF* 8 mnα2|:λ4πf @QQJAI¬iBACIKCfA=H βSF(4+∨α-⊗ =8π0vλ897a≠2p
ipεAY←MhAC]⊂AiQJ↓[C@7|ε'Jε\≥f∞≡]\Vwα∞YfO"
↑W∨" ≡G&.↑∞@hWMtε∂≡<X NL8;@⊂≥42P 7orci@9H
βO,εBε@yH⊂__pπes the PP on
λthe 432, one @]←kYH↓H '≠ ∧π&F≡@λ∞M→<Y$ <Y(
m⎇λ⊃-m⎇9z∧∞y9{,]]≤h∞MβP0v≠4πw
eachdotted paip ob even↓KCGP↓YSghαβS : ,Rε
∞8 . <X= T≤y1m\8π:↔βE
In many re@MaKGiLAiQKβ∪∃βπ⊗)β¬βd K∨∃εsW7 ,ε"ε@yH⊂∩↑4yz4[3P1g[x:z2\9P;t]4εE0]⊂62p\z⊂0yH9wp4~yz4qXz2r an MMU.¬
The 432 @%`
β∂,ε'&∞α;[∂∀_(⊂⊗_y3rP_qqw`-plisHme`≥hαβ⊂⊗@|H∪-≤|[t∞-βqri\wy9P_w2εE
2|1r\8⊂3'\α its poo@HAaKe→←e@7∞s∂∃%∧ε6F␈]HBε6α;Y∧ {{p∩λ0qq`%pp C]
JAS\αβS#∀hRCπO≤∧⊗b|≤L∩εN≡-6/"βC"AQRX;-≤αP#)_w0 e@0~∀4Ri555hi555hi555hi555hi555hi555hh ⊂@ ¬"`.d of WorkS Digest
*******************
----
--~∀~∀4P Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #29
∂02-Ngv-81 2347 Jonathan Alan SOlomon <JSol at↓%+)∂∃%&|@%+←eWLA SO∃ghA,D@Fdr4∃ Ci∀t@@f↓≥P∨Yβ eaEβ↓EMYl*NP4T3K/5Rα+?;∂##π9∧ 3πd
6}f⎇]vrβI*6}b ≡B¬∃XHt-∃7aP@*Y<⊂⊗≡Tz7]λ+wy5TP0r Rp iO∃ef~∃Q↑tA∂=` /MR↓l4(hR←?K]→α∪'>+OQ↓α↓↓↓↓α↓↓αS,∧W≡_>+∧εh∪[nd ..ε∀λλλ∧∧λλ∃M⎇≥;9$ε(∞H ≡|⎇0∩H→≤FEβE*7r_|SyP∃7x4a\]P⊂λ⊂⊂ )≠qy0v[tp∞g↓→C]OUCGKf4∀∩&'+π1α≥αUαC∞;';≥∧K7C3,k↔;S∂#'?;_h $¬α↓↓αC∞;';≥¬3M 2λ8 ,⎇9;] ≡~;sAQ@∧DP⊃2p
and Paging On The iAPX 43 $4∀∩@@@@@@↓≠←eJ↓∨\A)!JAβYβ#=αW≤∧W$βyP$_w217[uPεE VVVVKVVVFKVVVVKVVVFKVVVVKVVVFKVVVVKVVVFKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVFKVVVVKVVVFCE
Date: 2 Fo@YK[EKH@brpD@`dtTb[ πP~∃
e=ZtA ¬]SKX↓_\A/∃S]eKλ@y →\AChA5∪(@6 Ix (*>V⊗V\:CB¬∞-v >X;;-≥Yh≠ ≥Y⎇8,|<c"AQR(_,↑Y9(∞M_=⊂∀vpv6≥0p k'pεAk]%IP∨KhβWO∃ε{⊂∩ε\Z7≡∞|Tπε∂>8
-lh→Sn⊂0v6βE0∂`Ep¬CiSα{;MβLε2εn|,Rπ≡≥↑εf* ≥f"ε]H ,@pw:⊂≥40w≥42P&~yx⊂&Xqt4g→SyP&Z|2rεB8¬se ob sImple (h
@?rk↔↔lX M≤h(⊂∪≥w1z4[w⊂1`!lhs And (generic) meqsage
paspπS@;8¬bα∧α≠p≠Y{2y, I thinc @QQChAαKQβ←|εVf" ,Rπ⊗↑/∩εF≡,BαGM
w.zλ∪,∨8Y#!
β3r impo@M`∂' d)%βSzβWO∃εk↔OO∞;∃βC∂≠@≡NβY`⊂→{2y<]t2y2H;tz4≠zz⊂ 3acri@→SGS]≤~∃BAα;K↔π ∧ε&.≥Dε}H≤| \9 @⊂λ$s⊂(≤αactice, It do@∃`
β;|εBπ≡\X $∞≠h⊂∀≥y:⊂ )pεA[k
Pv~∃QQJAYα ;∨W∞;∃β#∂→β≠Wv≠S'∨p∧ε≡∞MH d 9Y⊂~z⊂40\β meSpπCOJ↓c@↔lN2bε≥lBε⊗βx
4λ27FE_y3p∃@5K]h[ACggSαs⊂~πM Rπ≡≥\Rπx:.d∞~→(
⎇Y≡( M9YQ. 8π1`% is @QQChAαK9β?v)β∂π≤∧PhW≥x
$
X;9$ (→P~[1z4`/n di@IKGiYβI1βπv!β'→∧εFF*
x
<H⊂≤[zP9`0ecifY a`≤Aα{ +↔≥ 4+πv!β¬βn+@∨≡≤|RεV≥\Rbε≥lBπ& Tε&@_8 /p∧Agsβ≠S↔Tλ M≥Y≤h∞M→(⊃N]X⎇~-⎇H
≥
εE⊃≠p¬thod") @→←dAsα{U 2∧
v*π↑8 $ ];XnM9{@⊂_pp l@%]NAMα{@∩π=_ .
α2P 4hi`≥OLXAC]⊂~∃Mkαc1β7-≠Gπ∨*βCπO≤¬⊗v:∞⎇ε.r∞Mε*ε]x ∞]_<Z.O(~0→H4w:2\2yz4[3P2`.oughto
@IKckSβ∪∃βSF)βπ∪&+⊃β≠d∧WFN-_
≡≤∧P !nd cOntro@0AiQCPAP↔↔≥≠π>T∞ε∂∨=≥f 4→z=L↑c"P≤[zWεEβE⊗V@----------
----
----
-------¬
λ@ Ci∀t@@dαα; ?lX ,,<H '↔ ( &↔LMH ↑⎇β"Hn[{.D∧∀z0⊃→y:⊂ ]⊂&dj d¬ul@QSGf@!.\A∨1S\A'αK ↔K ¬⊂hU>XλM,8⎇εD∧→≥0⊂[⊂!h*H80st[3P4v\4∧emenpations
Sandep: Sibert.Mul@QSGfA¬hA≠∪P[∪kYQSGf~(~∃∪\↓iQJA=]KfA$OZAM¬[S@3N Iβ←LεFBb∞Mε*ε≥↑εf.β93NL=~0↔[⊂4yP≥2y<P≤trx&→]⊂:4→F@
"problEm" CPU simply experiences a @-∃%2AYα{;≥βn+7?KJβ∂g∂d)↓#7∞sd4+nK3#'≤+∂?;'→%β←F+9β'"βSK'/→βS=∧∧⊗≡≡↑>2ε
∞λ⊗>(≥z
≤zλ∃
(≠p~]10∂ard memory
ma`≥C≥K[K]PAkMSβ!βO↔-→β'Mεs?QβNqβ∂?⊗)9αmtπ∨&≡LRπ≡≡h
-lkλ⊂↔\α coMplicated
deductions about the proCesso@HAgiCQkfACIJAeKEkSeK⊂\A)Q∀@EgkAKemSM←dD~)π!*AMS[aYβIβOπO#@~ε≥H ∧∞~→(∞M8εrP≥w:4vλ:42P∪djP .otifIes i@PAiQCPAShAβ≠#?Wf 4+ ⊗K;≥βNqβ¬β∧ ∨¬1∧ Qβ←FK∂!β∧¬vNwDλ
.D≤]3N5λ→≠l↑h≥~ T∩+seD≤Y<nL<]≤d∞~→#!
⎇~→.$⊂t∃%D_;Y∧ {y4d X8zd∞≠h∀mL9< AQ@εE*~4yP2~r7∪zλ;wy5H92v4Xq0 y with↓`∂?7*β↔πKgIα6>~β7'∂⊗{CK∨≤+@∨≡}.2ε⊗\8λ.↑y#"NM→>( =⎇;→
d⎇λ⊂→]0p∞d↓iP≥βF [∃β&C∃βC⊗{∂/>8 n⊂1v /ck s@Q←aaK⊂AM@?⊂∧εn␈,Tπ&F≥aP@,8[⎇.D
(∪-≥≠~0→Yqww2≤β o`$↓`∂=8hP4*SFKEβ'~βK↔πd¬GJε∀λ ∞,=≥≡$ z→0⊂\⊂;p|H:7P )mpleMent @ACGS]≤XACYαaβS#L¬f >c"P⊃[w9t`$ered8A)QJ↓ig↑A
!+fAβ∪W9β4ε&}j∞Mε*π<≥V*ε\X -}↑+λ∞↑z;Yd∞~→(∞pp
e bp fX4⊂ πl@λλh*yP_y2P 3witc@!K@⊃β↔Iβ@'-∃W∨&≤LRε↔\h L↑\k@⊂⊂βPU @
QSaf↓CeJAββK↔S'Iβ∂#,∧↔HαJ→.l9H
Gε λλ 3)(λAGα{7Cπ⊗+⊃βSzβS ?L≥Bπ∨≤∧p~→vP1`/pπh@8hP4*'αDw4≥≤],T≥~_.D≥~~.P27`%qn'd↓IV@EIKC@1⊂∧εo.β≥~.L<zz-lh≠p↔λ80srH30z`,ts _Aα∪WP4TεFF*∞8∞.>→; ⊂_ps⊂ 3tidl dk real mulpitapπWS]≤A←\A=iQKdαβ↔[↔w#@~@λ≠⊂∀Zβ`
AI∃[C@; h#∪'α92∧Jytε∞vDλ
≥9<\e@∧@
-)--4ZZZZ4ZRZZαi555hi555h¬RjjUQPhPβ"Q ≡→*H∧εH∪[nl8εq2\⊂_\\ P_X@:30
AKβ≠P$(h M⎇,¬⊂⊂∀tq2`2t at↓≠∪([5kYiS
`
↓λ¬`↔λ'v4`. SiberpλB~)'kEUα+∂QiαβCπ∨Ls⊂~ε≥lBπ≡\⎇V.wL≡FN}aQ%≡;Y→.≥⊂⊂)Zq2y: &zv 4ics At @≠∪P[⊂↔WdεFN∨1Q hT≥ ∧ ]=⊂≥42y2H$iP ! fundamental dipπiS]
iS@?p∧ε⊗/L|V.r∞λ⊗ =8π3@ and
q` O[∃]`∪π&K?91∧εFzπ⎇_
π⊂)r`'ma`≥i¬iS←\αβ'Mβλ∧εn8z_-m<{ ⊂→αh∂dAαC↔3CLs⊂~πM PhW∞-v >X;;,↑H≠8-l9y(
≥Y[p→≠pz4`/n, and paging @%`
β¬∧¬V.≡ ≥fO≡Tλ M}H~→-N~;YaQ]~→$ {{<∞↑→<@⊂≤βystem mana`∂JAαK;≠}-V∂&≥yb`! ¬εE⊂P1w`-pp iKβ⊃βO@≡8
](≥0→YyP8 !dπS@;8∧εNr
x LL<H⊂~≠P0p⊂@AKCdAβ#=β#∂3∃β¬∧¬F∂⊗|X AQ\8
`!npidy h∂LAββ#gOL∧6∞b
\Vn␈/∀π&F≥`λ
≡λ≥x.P3t`6en by its mafufacte@IKd\A%\⊂∀ α8∞.>→;<d∞z→0→→P:42H;0 rtua`_Aα ;⊃β∧CgO'≤ 1βπ&#K↔O~β@∨ε≤8 .P0y2H1wvx_y0q6→FA4gλ9tp~e (the IBMf`≥Abβ≠ ?$λ / 8εx&→TV⊂ 4his ppiearilp∩Aαkπ;π4+@∨'4 ↔'≡]H D
8πεE≥42P X4v4`4y to mu`→i%aP∪↔@βG/lX L≥λ≤⊂→≠qryyYyP;t]4⊂:4→P0p 0earanc`
Ai!Ch~∃α+π∂!∧CπMβ∞c1βSF)βOG≤εF.j
\Vn␈/∀ε∂6≥_ ≤[→(∞MβP4`4, Anpπsgi∃[fAo!KeJAQQJ~∃β3'KS,∧⊗bε≤LG⊗/>4π∨ε≤8RεO4
W.≡∧λ ≡Yy4D¬≤⎇0⊃Z⊂0yP≥42P+⊂l⊂V⊂~z⊂0v≤wFE8≤7{4r→yP:4→P0p 0earance o@_ASkGαAβ7∨⊗)β7↔n{Ceβ&yβ'lM↔6NN\⊗bπ∞-v≡∂>8W5C"C!)rsvYw:0z~ww⊗⊂≠w⊂:4→P7z4→y⊂40[2⊗⊂ )q a @]CrAM=` βC⊗{∨Kπnk↔KM¬#=βS⊗+πQβλh+O'v;3∃β⊗+∨'?pβ?2∞:F␈⊗≤|Rbε|dε∂⊗-~G,<↑(∞≥>Y+∧ <h_-d≠xZL\⎇ @λL<→0↔→4s3FBαon The i@5aQK[∃]iCi%←\XAQQKgJ↓←EUK
ifA[¬rAgK∀A[C]dAISM→KeK]PAcgKβ→5%βL04+O,;7↔nN2ε∂,Tε≡F\≡αε∞l@πεf]nFN7]EBπ& ←∩ε≡≥`λ ,(≥<l\λ~0↔λ0P6zXt⊂6w\2FE 6ersatile FashiOn.
When a s@egiKZαβCK?4¬⊗&/4 vvG∀λ ml(≠p∪λ:42yYP6r`#ha`≥SM[f@1∧¬↔"ε↑↑7"ε,QPW≥z<nL9λ∃
t≤≤[nm9→(∞M→(→L≤z;∩.M9<h
|β⊂17]4↔⊂⊂⊃7y⊂ )nstance, PDP ~BDAC@; h*Zε@∧ε∞→≤Y.ytw3H4yP:\rr⊂ 4o provide both↓iQJAα≠?7C∂∪S .]nF∞f∨,↔&N⎇`λ
|βεE)Ysvr`.tati@=\AC]⊂AiQJ↓YP∨π k πO,!β .]]w/(≠8-l9y3,]]λ⊂↔Yα paging.
λ
*L∧F.∞MH∞%D≥~→$∞≥{h
\αqt0[4yvyH9t7z[2⊂12H1wvx≠2z2`,y independent;the
ebfe@
ifA←α1βCπ>K;≥β≤¬ε␈.L@λ
l=Y0→λ12P"~y2q`4ly v@%`∂' d∧Rπ&tλ
(≤⊂→≠pπramm` d\4∃)QSLASfAUgkCYαceβ;|εBπ∂]_
T≥≤],Wh→P↔\α insta`≥Gα)1β'p∧∧o.β≥~,>hε⊂ 3egmeNts are
∃KβCC↔;≤¬↔6*D F∂⊗|X ∂∀_Y0l≡<y( \8z⊂≤p¬gmenpλA[UghAE∀ACLAαK;@&\}&∞b
nVn⊗↑ λ
|βεE(_pπes, at 4K bi@QKfAK¬GP@8hP4*πv{S#↔⊂∧ππ⊗|-F.j
_ d∞~→( ≥≠≠pl≡~;sD
βs⊂)Ysvrw≥9P4wλ0P6 )neara` IE∃`∂L4W≠Cπ∂+QβπM∧¬F}vt ↔4≥~→$ 9→≤L↑|h∀n 8y(
≥H≥z
≤zλ∀l\{93NNh_<LT_;⊂⊗≠qpz2Y⊂4p∪
h Ce≥JAK]=kOPX↓OCeE¬OJAG=YQKGβ#'?9∧¬↔4≤X<LUλ≥~
}9zλ @90svYw:0z~ww⊂+Zv6⊂1→FA0@≤97q6→vW⊂$[⊂0P)[cated in pieces throu`∂Q←UhABA1CeOJ↓YSMKα Iβ[M∪S@.≥Dε∞→_Y.yFE9\0qrVλ;t4`#h was its@∃YLAa¬OCH\↓)QSf↓O@↔S~β∂?7εc'∂π&+⊃1β&C?W∨@aβπ; β?;∀hS7WO β∪Kπ8βS#∃∧c';∃π≠?7↔>C↔K∃ph $*LεBπ>}YF"ε,Tπε␈>9⊗⊗@→+λ mβy⊂ )nstance, To imple`≠KαsQβπp∧∧
¬¬P
ε6H≤⊂,]8π3FB9|y`4em which us` HA∧AIkC0Aae←α≠↔OO|ε"ε∂∞λ M|8zλ∞MβP3t]2P:4→P⊃8 2oblem
∃aβ∪?∂↔≥≠?Iβ&C∃βπαλ \<X;L<(≠p∪λ0yP&]qt⊂ Xz:pvλ84<yZqpv⊂≠p¬`≠←IrACf↓iQJAα≠#'@hS∂π→ε ∪∪K,ε7
@λ_;LD≥<p∩H0P⊃9]x2y;~ywp∩" pro@
Kgg←β⊃↓#;|εBε@Y8p∩\βsarily ahfdR4⊃`∪=∧ε&.∞Dλ
-d≤_9l↑h→P→≠vP24\uP;t→w⊂:4→|P0y→P37`5nd to be Missi@9N\A)!Sf~∃β;?W3 ∧εf/Dλ
(
→L⊂897Yβrammer uSe seGm` @;'→β←'&Aβ←'f!βπ; ∧ε <>(_,,;Y≠meβ"[L↑Y<@ ←≤≠~,==≠⊗$∞Y89
≥Yh∃
9(⊂∀[↔εEεB⊗VVFKVVVFKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKFAεE⊃0z2]λ⊂→⊂'≠{2vq→y⊂⊂@981 $β↓`∪∪TλW>β"QN
βv]⊂λ εranhπgi←αq0∃≡|h
λ≡]_ P_z⊂&dU⊗fzf≥4qyFBαSubject: Re: De`≠C9HAaC≥S]NAα{9β&
αa↓Q≠⊂4*K-β3e6&y`∩αλj&∞v>8
⎇H_=∧ 25β)↑8ε:4XyP∀!≠q⊂# 2ancs@Q←\R~)GFt@↓'π"L2~6εp∧ε∂"λ∧tI∃αef⊗λ!) g∩bf⊂0]⊂ 0y≥⊗XX⊗λε@
s@
QSMM5C\ACPA'%∩5↔_~∀4⊃!CO%]NA<tA'KO5K]iCQS←\~(~∃'Kα;7↔nL↔&N⎇`λ
≡h_9 NY<p→H9x0qYP6pw_qrvr[8∧ techni@Ek@∃1∧εFF←\⎇αεODλ
.P7s 4en~∃β#@⊗.≡LV"ε≡4ε
π<Xλm⎇Yλ⊂⊗→{2v⊂≠pε p@¬H∂'lp AQ@εE(_stw3H4yP0H4rvw\αy manageMent @QKGQ]%ckJAUc@↔⊃∧∧'JπM Rπ∨α8p~→vV⊂ 4hh∂kO ~∃g←αk∃βOLε7&.↑4ε∂⊗T f␈" 8↔⊗.nX ∧ 8[u.D≠_>,↑Z;Yd 8π2 let @%hAgQ=nAiQI←kOPαβS,4TεFF*∞X l↑\kC!∧¬∃∂UKgfAβ;∃β;,∧V"εlX
d∞{|Y∞P:7P_{0∂iD confusio@8AP≠|@λ
⎇Y≡( N9(⊂~≠P;w`2dλ
¬S9IP∪παM⊗}r .W"ε≡,6FOLX7'<Y<d
~:y$∞~→( _S( f7λ_;LD≤≤[l,8[≡$∞~→(
_4⊗⊂
→YεE≥t4qdλ27P7≠z⊂6pZpP9d_y8⊂ $istiNctioNq*¬
---4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4Z~∧~) CiJh@dA≥=l@br`b@bhβQQIαα
5 h(h M⎇,H∃ ≤β:⊂ !t PAR@εP⊗6
B_h*>V⊗V\:CB¬,W"¬& T∧∞gMt¬/≡↑ w4⊂∧0w→17wuCE$w⊗\2x6 9-to: FURUTA's message of 23 O@
h@br`b@bl@nS! P~∃)↑hA%SG!CeHA→keki∧@q
+I+!αA¬hA/βM⊃∪≥∂Q_∞9XhS∂
i∧S↔≠→∧ Qα↑
~"&:="0≤rDλF∞↑UD¬∨>≥lVF∂,@ ∧ _;<∞={Kλ
L>;⊂↔\α, Tad¬h~∀4∃3OKβ⊃β7↔∨≠π>Tλ⊗v@[x
g_ts3@ the AvaalAbili@QrA←L↓iQJA¬Yi↑AUg@↔I?→α#πv# ??Xh#K↔≤∧VO6\Dπ,=~→.∧≥z9 T→~4nNZ8].M9{@¬ Xπy example, I bel@%KmJAαKQβπ∧εε.∂,X@hVα;@⊂≥42P+[y1`∪ digest). I woUld apprec@%CiJA%hASL↓s←jAβ;?W3 ∧ε≡}nhWJπM PhVmx
Mβ{tg→β cl@¬` '≠L∧6∂&≥x D∞≠h⊃,M=≠p→ x2w`0le and any h∂iQ∃`AYSβ≠SMβL¬w*ε=mw8h,≤&␈/Dλ
t≥z~,=λ≡0↔]y⊂7`2icinal me@M`∂π∨*β←πM∧∧FO∨N-⊗↔=→0∩ αλ
(hRP≡F≥H $∞~→(λ≥≥≠h
↑y<@∪\β @⊃C9IE@?|¬2εF≡4εNvLX ,D_Y0∩[⊂1v %ared↓H ?!Q&&O>N&N↔↑M⊗}r
x
.Nz9→$ →<[o¬λ~0~λ40qP≠4πt @ K@↔dλλN
βzst≥⊂7r`4 as @∧A!β% ~∃KqQKe@;∞aβK↔∧¬w.α⊂∞ Mur @A` ↔O,¬g"π>X ∞
≤∧P /d∧A#∞s∪ ∨|¬74~<h
M8εt`4e`λ@1∧∧⊗v"∞|PhVMtεv←D ε∂6Tλ
(≤Y.=⎇<Xl↑h≥≠d∞x9~.pεy @QQJAYα K∨∃∧#↔7πv!βC#∂!β←?,¬F"ε,QPV>]lW,=→1∧ ↑(⊂⊂H8:q6~qP92[2pp∪E,∧⊂∀λhR?WI∧εε∂∨Dλ ∞0qz4Xp¬ hapεAEKα+9βSzβO.β≠λ 8π21≠wuyVλ0z⊂ #ost, th∞~∃α{@⊗>≥m↔V∂M_ mnh≥~ ≡λ~_.l(⊂;∞MβyP∀≤90w1Zx0v ,y a`(αα≤@5+λ Y5 λ
>_;YM}Y λ ≥Yβ"J]X∧{ %p¬gSidAP∨→¬∪?∂#-≠S↔IJq↓α ,εBε/lX D∞~~0→H4yP %nding, sinc`
Ao∀ACeJ↓]↑~∃αc?;∨,ε"ε∞>M↔6.O∀ε&/lX
}~;Yd
|H⊂⊗Xtp∞tainang Adto sof@QoCeJ↓ChA!¬%εv~)G←]g∃ckK]QYrXAβ;∃βπ⊗)βWmH
-p¬`→r↓iP≥β⊗+CKπw!βS#*α#πlL&}}4λ⊗>∞≥a`hPβ"T ]|≠⊃$∞z≠h MβP77]⊂40{→P v 4os may be inte@IKgiK⊂ASLA5←eJA≥K]Ke¬X~+&+∂#;L∧6∞b∞,Wε←.N2ε}dλ
(⊂;∞MβP0w→⊂ v 4o-base`λAgα{⊂↔≥x<LUλ_=L≥8ε0q≠2P4`.
the kpe@8AYSi∃aCi@,ε&*@Hλ∃
(≠;n>λ_sm↑≤Y0∀→w9t`6e report @=\AiQ∀~∃Ce
QSiKα≠S@/,Tε}H≥~ T⊂;⊂~≠P4z9Yv3⊂$\β "Alth∞tAα βC↔↔≠?;πbβ∂?7¬+S↔I⊂¬Bπ>
_λm↓α@
appears if @QQJAe∃G@↔;&ce /∞\&fO= V"π<Xλm⎇Yλ→,M=~0↔[⊂7s⊂λ!wvx≥z2yεB)z9:Xz:y2\]⊂ 2inciples And EXampl@∃`
1∧+∪'S,!β e¬≠'/⎇_ n2uV⊂⊂2v6⊗λ0s2εB'2{r[4∧ (McGraw-Hill)( @A¬IISi%←]CX↓O←←H↓`∂?W⊗≠↔Mβ|∧bπε≡λ .9P92[0z4`.dεAi↑4⊂ C#*απ3Szβπ;⊃∧∧f}fMx
e]{H⊂⊗Xqt4w→yP4`.clude the last↓ig↑AβK↔πK~9αN>≥4+C⊗{∂.\M⊗v?4λλ-lλ≤p∩]2y0vλ4yyjYyP7`& CACM.λ
∀~)/@∃βF [∃βπ+ 3'α=ε.λ_
n98Y.⊂7s⊂∀ i!P→|:2`2nad @IKa←eQ`
β?p∧∧∞gMuV⊗∂<X@hW?_ nL8εyWλ⊂*42\p¬ are a`-α '3π⊗c∃β?pβ@⊗/≡X .≡ λ⊂~~5zstλ0spt[⊂;rP_y2P:[0q6 %
to satisd¬rAC8AKM←β∪7?W~β∪↔\≥f"r∧ V∞w∀∞VvOlX Ntz<P_w2⊂ #ompany liBp¬CeSα+@_h.8
,.x|Z,,(≥≠d∞~→(
λ4Ph∞,<≠p→≥⊂9ri~p¬s, so y@=jA[CdAEJA¬EQJAβ#=β≠Ls⊃β∂|εεN<c"M≥H≡3n↑H≠⊂∀X90y<K∧EεEαbr⊂*_pεt
Computer↓'GSK9G@∃αd ?K∂#?Kebαc↔K|πα¬∧~(0hPβ"K%U++#%U++#%U++#%U++#%U++#%U++#!↓ ¬"0]2X
2 N`∨lpb@@⊂ε#@&∞.Lf∃11∃∧¬⊃;p↔
F@
F@I←Zd@@@@A5SGQC∃XA≠kU`∂M↓d¬VN↑Ul&nβvλ∧*S∂C!)zq5→qz≥⊂λ⊂)2]λ⊂+gi∩iP"4Yp¬st↓( E↓≠⊃`$!Q$U≡⎇DαhhαB2$
y90_λ42py~w3P0X5zz SmalLta`→V8@A'~βS#↔⊗)β¬β>{?⊃β⊗cWK ∧¬vvf≥lR`@ ¬7`2 something in @QQJAe∃G@↔≠ ∧ππ⊗↑8 d∞~_=∧ (_p⊂[⊂9w2XuP0@ peek at? Saems
`→S-JAiQ∃eJACIJAK]=k@∨!∧∧Vwε∞↑6N∂>N2ε←↑@λ∞M→<Y%D_Y0~λ4z∪yH4εew↓iP≥βn)0∩raQ HHα""%Yαp ke
~∃m P∨9?!β3?|YβπQ∧¬V*B ∀ε&}d}Bε↑mx
d
αzq`( abo@UhAS@ ↓#↔c≤∧Wπλ≥~ ≡λ~0~λ40yP_2rwεB24qq]yyrbλ7w⊂+[y0 @&$X αg|εRε∂,TεNwm_
\α⊂:7H82y:\p¬ the Wo@IP∞Mβ∂∪∂#'αh .P0p∀
λ¬≠∪(5β∩XAαK9α∩,2~-↔:t`:Rphλ~Pr∩*@⊗⊂7`2 at Rutge@I`
"
_ D∞~→(πJ{|Zj7A"P∩~y2q`4ory -JS@∨→t~∀4Ri5%5h¬RjJUQRjJUP %U++ ⊗KTVV@-----
λλ
∃ αs⊃β?2α←?K]→α∪'>+OP4RQ)))RQ)))RQ)))RQ))(hQ555ji54Q$hPβ"@↓J⎇8ZL\⎇∞H
⎇|Ztdλ~9y.>λ∃L$∧lhλεB⊂πX~ g0∂f-81 0136 Jonathan Alan S@=YW[←8@q∃'=XAChααJVR<*JMyJP≡␈-:2∧&≤|W∨"
f∩α≠4∧β!λα0r2N⊂⊂~ Lh∂l@Drpb@@bj`%l*N@4T3C >W$∧V}l≡FF∞dλ⊗f∞βH∀m⎇≠{;md∂∩Tm⎇λ_=∧
U0
#Qi)WεBαRep@1rP↔S{Qα←?⊗ZMβπα@λ
.αz3r\9FE*≠]⊂ ↔op¬Wftr~∀~)/←eWLA SO∃gh@@@@@@@A/K⊃]KgI¬rP@H↓→P∨Yβ eaEα↓↓↓↓α↓α[⎇JVn(λ ⊂∞α Ac@MkB@F@~∀4U#?&≥∀w4∃≠p_~qy]⊂λ(97c\αa`≠[%]NAM=` αC,ε'={X;∧
{|Zj>_=~-⎇\c"A⊃(λλ∧
{8;
Nα0v%H$s3 / - BYT@
A≠¬H∂πkL¬f(hαK ⊗KVVVFKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVFEβE"0z→]⊂⊂→H'3{⊂ \\⊂⊃ (Tuesday) 0910-EDT
From: @REIFU at WHARTOF-10 (Henry Dreifus)¬
SubjeCt: P@I←GeC5[S@;8∧ε6␈$
ε/↔=yf∞b
⎇w-|⎇_.M;{\aQ@εE \2P:4→P:2`#hnaques that wilhλAE∀AcgK⊂AMOdαβCK??∪π7↔L¬f*π Z'≡}l≥@hW⎇z&@>⎇_=
≥{\h ⎇z;Yd∞≠h⊂LT→~9LL<Y3ND≥≠h∞M≠|y$
yH_n↑\Y;NDλ≤pl≥→#"M≥<≠⊂∩[rp∞tations?
Hh∂nAβ;'31∧{;∃β¬∪?∂K∞iβ←?⊗[OSπ&K?;MzαW'3bβ'Qβ⊗)β↔π≡K↔I]¬;'31π##↔K(h# ∃∧¬w&F↑ λ∞∞[xp∩Yr:y2\P:40[⊂:47\p¬ o@_AYCe≥JAgsMiK[f↓←dAg%[aYr↓B~+⊗+∪W∂.!βO∂∞c∃β?2β3πK>)βOg∨#↔5β&+O'∨sy4(hR#πm1PPh%QRjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjQQ hTL≡F+R∧ε2∧v}dβ K∧∧(¬
≥9<lL>*(ε&
.β(Zuβ"Hn[{.D q3Qλ→⊂ε⊂ ]⊂$ i∃⊗XXεB)zq5→qz≥⊂∀vpv6≥0p kinfo source, $32/Smalhtali juxtapo@MSiS←8~∃)↑h@@A[%P∂¬;⊗k⊃]Aε Qα
∀a5!αThis m` C]LAiQCPAaQJ↓∪]iKαaβ&ε¬Aαo←F Qβ∪zβS#?α<Rε@→=≥ ↑\h⊂→]0p∞d↓IP∨I⎇i↓QM⊂¬@hW⎇
⊗≡B ≥Ff@⎇|h
mβP6w\2P:4_w⊂∪~∩P7q5→qz9Vλ;wz`,d make a @ C@Aπ5CYYi¬YV~∃α+;∨'v)0 (!Q HHα"+%T∀x;$ y;Y ≥≠β"AQT¬`∀hancs also th∞A∪¬\A\α↓r7↔↔∪'SQ∧ QαV≤→6&NL⊃y1↓e#?;f>+OQβ∂!αBε∀→6 ,≠λ3r`Q*7&/lT∧⊗.MH nm9Kλλ\α⊂ ]8∧erman`≤@q∞P~⊗≥↓βπQ¬*Rε@λ~2k∪π` ∧λz≤Z.P≡)<[0p∞d↓Ch~∃M%∩[↔0|XA∃∃H →α∧ε&␈& Z&zβI*5αε≤¬⊂∃βashingto@8|XA%=\A
←]YKd@qeOLA¬hA¬%0|X~∀q'iKe9YSOQPAChAU'ε[
_|XA!C]@-¬;π3/-⊃βπQ∧~6U5 α¬βπv!α ∨⊂↓r#@≥\⊗rε≡AP@(⊃0k)\<[_M}[oH @5y⊂ [9wP(≠tw:4[3P:7H:42P⊂,j"P~yyz`%,∧@[∃M_∞2thP4)5ji555hi555ji555ji555ji555ji544Ph*π≠ ∧ε}∩λ¬{n
th⊃
≤βryjβE∃∃∃
∃∃∃∃
∃∃∃∃
∃∃∃∃
∧A⊗@------
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #3!
λ ∂05-N`∨@2iaE↓β↓aMTLS?;π&Cπ9α∞cπ9α≤¬vf}]ybβD*8 mD_=⊂∀*j#bT)←⊂∧UβorkS Digest V1 #31
λ¬ Ci∀p@@j↓→P∨Yβ eaEβ↓QUYl*NP4T3C >W$∧V}l≡FF∞βH⊂-L8π⊂)[v7vw[⊂≡%)[v⊂0zλ)*`∀GERS <4⊂
K↔∧¬GJ@=≠nD
{|Zj4_8
Rp iO∃` L4U#=iα>{@⊗←7$β@1"C"J⎇|Ztdλ~9y.>λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧∃~≥.∞y_>%D
(∪M}H ≤N_P⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂∃4πluMe 1 : Iss@UJ@f@λh 4*Mv&∂∀}2¬&}
⊗∨≠$∧ααα∧∧α∧nβ|Y$ {H∀m\;≠⊂~_v5FEαDh97Yy0vvZw3P(→y9w`.al Wop¬Wgi¬iSO]L~∀$JαO7πdcSπM0 ∧
_9z-lk{;.T≠{@⊂≥42P~ Y
-----
---------
--------------
----
---------
----
----
-)--
----
-)--
λ∧∩¬
β∪?5i∧≠#Kπ~αKgL≥f"βJ+∀d h@λ ≡λ⊂tI∃αef∨βE)2]λ)vpv≠8∧al@,AS@;4¬phPβ"T ↑→<@λL==≤l=λ~0→H897`"ab`→R↓iQJAα∪↔OQ∧εε/↔=x D∞≠h⊂→→x64P≥4π the q`+α+@↔J ≤&␈/AQ%≡n≥H ∞L8ε5@, but↓QKeJ≥`
βO|¬V/&
→f 7H⊂p⊗Xv6:0[5RP_@XAiQ∀AW]YβIαO7∞c3@&≥H
d∞≠c"M\8¬rP~z⊂7`5t of Xero@`XAoSαc1β *βπ[πL¬F∞⊗β→(∞wvr`4ime Ap¬P∨Wv!βC#*β↔;⊃∧¬v $≥~→!Q↑90.%Hλ⊂,L8ε2P⊃wv21→y3SyH3y7`5p, (for`≠Kβ∪3e@u∀ε≡∞β≠⊂∩Y⊂:42H&2py≠4p∞g
λ¬%Kgα+πK∂@∧∧?⊗βx
`0, i`&↓H∂?'v9βC=∧επ.⊗β~0→Z⊂⊃:4→P17`/hεDXAβ;#'∂@∧π>Nβ≠λ∞L8ε6⊂≡wzFE_v6⊂ !bh∂khαβS#∃∧¬F∞v|¬0,@pV⊂ 3ty`→Kβ→β >dλ
.p¬, @∃iF@9bβπMβ>+3 " ≡2πε QP@-β0 `)QrP↔∨⊗KS@'α(⊂↔Yα what i`(↓iC@/,ε2πεtλλN4p∞g↓k`Ai!JAgsβ≠S↔T¬π6N∀λλ$∞β0 `%QkCH~)[CGQ%]JRAα{9β@≥x
.⊂30{≠y0p∀e hardware; a`≥HαaβS#,π∩>fDλ
≤y;\lTλ]~ T≥_< TH≥≠aQXπp∩gan`∪uα S'⎇n2bπ<≥⊗"πL≡ε*ε=x NL8∧w4[3P:4→P⊃3 )p¬`∪W∞aβ'\≤v*∩ ≥f"ε≥IBπ& QP@.|∧q`4em sOurceS, With that tape, @¬]HAi!JAE←α{ ~B∂_ nT_x;D \Z3L@P:xεBαSmallp CY,ASLA%ifAMUYPAO1←erA rA[Kβ∪↔3@∀λ
-↑≠→;,]]~;L@P:42H;0 rtua`_~)[CGQ%]J\~(~∃)Q∀AE@'8∧π∂.↑8
≥{H_.D≥~~.4≤≠p∀[:⊂4`3 hog the Tape @1SGK]MS]NA≥←@↔Mph*S#,ε&*>MDε⊗*
mrππ-|&f.T
w$≤Y8-D→>≤ ]\y( mβy⊂ 5nive@I`∂'SL+E!β|1β∂?/∪@≡
AQ&↔=λ⊂⊃[vrr`2cial firms wil@0AQCmα)βS=∧s↔∨?& S'π&)β←'&Aαc↔⊗{aβ3∂;g/,∧c!,8x{n ~;Yd∞≠h∃
8<@⊂~w:2w→2r⊂:\rP7`& Smallpalk (e.g., fop interfal qse
λonly, ob fh∂dAIKgCY∀R\
∀4∃βIKαc∃β7∂Iβ@>≥nBπ&t∞6∂J∞8 m\=~~-lh≠⎇L↑H≥~
≡h≠9,M=; ∞MβP1f→py⊂ 5p any
confusi@=]fHAα∪WQDλ
9H_,|:;@⊗λ8πe might as welhλAo¬ShAi!JAG←UaP∪∃∧¬v ! [;mn~≤h
≡λ≤p~~v6⊂9YpvyP≥4π be bef@=eJAi!JAE←=P
β'~βCG dK@≡F\@λ ≥Yλ∃
εE ,icensing aprangementpεAC]9←kMGα+⊃8Q!P@%∃~→.,(_<LT≤x:,D≥≠h ,(≤⊂∀\αate copiEpεA←L↓iQJA ←←VA→YP∨π&K;≥β∂∪?Wl@ ∧ ]=β!∞~→>$}Y(∃.≤9→4n∀_9⊂≥44qP≤7tw: ⊂4w any @
CgJX↓CfAi!KrOe∀AeCi!KdA←UhA←L4∃ICi∀X@A)!SfASβ→β e∧C↔πK≤∧↔Jr⊃Q hRUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjhQ!PT_9→'∧λ )M⎇K&ε∀ ,&F&NL
∧
∀q⊂
+rr7→yr0|JFA# 2om: HamalTon.ES at PARC-MAXC
Subj@∃GhtAIJtA↓β∪?∂K∞k7'lpλ m|H∀ ↑\{p↔_v⊂+w\αkstations
Reply-To8 @⊃C5SYi←8]⊗M∧↓αBε∀→6&εD_4+∂≠Qα%(Y∀5* ≡B¬<λ~%$|eV∪αα Vw↔∀λG⊗.≤nW~JD ε∞n≥H
⎇KQ4aQ@εE⊃∀2r:qYr⊂9qXv2Q⊂≠|P2`9e! Over A thousafdmaf-months and a
∃cUCeiKH[[SYαc'?9∧c';↔~β? αn+G¬βF [∃β>{;∃βL¬g&Z
>F∂∩D
vO&∧
&␈.⎇
GJπM
↔↔'⊃Q'π⊗|}&∞n\X NP3wd[3P0zλ4z⊂#≠y⊂97]qt6<H:492YP8rp\9W⊂⊂⊂w2⊂:~0z⊂"≠rywβ]εA4w_v:r2H:42P≥w22y≠<p ng Pilot/ Mesa/ Communications stqff, whi@
PAo←UYH~∃¬IHAC9←iQKH@j`Aβ#=↓Eβ↓↓∃9αα%β∪}q∨Qβ↑s?]βF{]βSF Qβ∂|¬Wε∂,↑2π>≡Mα∧⎇5tβ≠3¬APF↔↑@λ
≡λ_y..α0tw≠<P8zXv4s )es as a large systeM. And one canimagine all
αsOrp fA=H βπ∧εεfN<≡FN}n4ε↔∞≥JBε}d
F␈α
xb¬∨L≡"ε␈$∞6Nn≥L↔∩π⎇z&@>⎇_=
≥{\c!%→_= ∀_X<lUλ~0↔→5y6p]4ww≤2z94Y{0v⊗λ92pv≥4rrP→0z0P_qxzd\tz4`/n and
analysi@LX@\\8RAiQ¬hAo←UYHAE∀AP∨→ε βO'nK3πI∧ε6≡∞LUbα∧≥`ε ,8⎇⊗λ0v6w\z⊂0w≡FA0x≤64qp]4ww≠wy2P≤wx44\z4qp]2r⊂*~0s⊂)≥w0∞i@9H
βSF)βCπLε&}fD
↔4≤≤[l,8[≡!QX;9-l8[⊃$∞≠h⊂⊂H24yz≤αibe@QK@⊃βLkC &]\Vwε≤M⊗}raQ hRUX'π∞<QP@HαK ⊗KVVVFKVVVFKVVVVKVVVFKVVVFKVVFEβE"0z→]⊂⊂~λ'0∂v 190 "bbfr5!'(~)
e←ZhA%kE%\AChααNJ%lZ04*≤εV⊗V\8
π⊂)vp[6:0v~P7w≥42P~ Y
@
Ft@@↓W@↔≠& 31β∂!α"ε∃15E@hP4*π≥#Wπ∪eI1βSF)β&ε¬A↓QM⊂∧π>␈]LBεN≥<Rε
∞h .<P3w[r⊂)`-alltalk e@9H∂'lUbα∧≡APG∨↑
ε␈↔L4β S(∀l\{9;NNhε⊂ .ot 64K( s@<AP∨ T∧V∨" ≤F'⊗↑:2π∨ ≤6*ε≡4εv←Dλ⊂hW∞-v⊗@→; ⊂
≠~%@~yP:4→P9t`:e limit fOp∧AC]dA←]J↓g@↔∨n+;Q↓hiβCK}∪π M∀εv␈D ⊂hW∞-v⊗@→; ⊂→7y⊂)[pv6 4alk, bqt @∧AESNαβ3'↔LεF∂&≥ybε←M Wπz<q%∃β⊂⊂*~2P~ L∪yP1~sFE 7in f@=` αOn 33S∞c-β←␈+3⊃β,s∪?W↔#↔∪3Jβ ∃βLεG4→X;L?(_p↔[82|:λ9{tj_t4w3CE∀;t]4⊂2<[0rt`# memop¬rAC1YP∨∂∂#'?9bβ↔[↔r %βπv!β#π⊗#←πK*βOWC∧¬w.λ≠qD∞≤<⊃,A ¬27[ppw9K⊂⊂)d[1rP2≠vptwλ4πbjEcts @
C\AE∀AYS]-KHASαsS-β≤{7C3-C↔M⊃∧εFF*∧@ f!αE0v≤wP62]9P<`/u reAlize the SmadlTalk @
←]GKAifA←_AGYCMc@↔M∧∧⊗v"
≥g∂&≥l6/_Q(λ-M8πy`4 at @QQJAQ¬eIoCIJAYKβ3↔1aQ hU X n
α2P 3ea`~Aβ#=βSFK;-β&C∃↓Q≠⊃β←'d¬Bε⊗Tλ L\8ε6,H9v7`7, bu@PA∩OHαβ ∀Q(
-nα2y2\z2r th∞AW9←nASα1α'≠&+1β#∂→β∨? βπ;e∧∧&.v=
V∂⊗α|h∂≤αz↔ Bac@∃HA←\4⊂ S#,¬↔$~;Z.M8;λ
M=→0→_z:y2K⊂:42H~→Y lh∂←WLACE←β+Qβπ~β∪πO ∧ε∂~ ⊂λ
]9 <L≥Yy#!-αp ni f`∨dαβSgCL∧6∞b∞8
∞\β3⊗⊂_8¬t @%hASF↓H πO&+AβSF 9βC⊗{ π dπ∩ε∞o_
8π3@ else
if You l@=←VACPASif↓←aKe¬iS@;8∧π?<⎇→-T≤≤Z-]=~5L↑h
→%lkKλ∞≤αs2 m` gg¬O@∃βM_4)@∧∧εnN>-w≡8|k∧ 8π2 thei@HAgK]⊂AaeS5SiSm∀ASfAα3π;∂JI9↓α|∧bε≡|¬4N≤αV⊂ 4he~∃β W/>M⊗}r
_ d∞z→0~~2y⊂ 4hose primitive@LACeJ↓kgKMUXACf↓iQKr↓giC]⊂XA←@⊂h+O#-##↔I∧π⊗␈*
lV."∞Mrε∨.X nD_(⊂⊗≠z⊂7`& sof@QoCeJ↓CeOK9HAiQ∃ZAi↑↓O@↔Q∧∧⊂hVLX6.wDλ
l↑YY0⊗ α IF ngd res@A←]gJ↓iS@7*βπ;⊃π##K?,;#CW ∧ε∂"∞Mε(h,≡πεf≤<↔&N⎇`εf/lX ∧∞z≠⎇-Lλ_Y$∞=:0~→P44sZ⊂⊂2`8c` ah↓IWdA9k[EKHAGek9GQS]≤R~∃E∃GCkgα)β >d
FF*
_ L>Y9~,-≤(⊂⊗≠{P'iH7{2i~2pr↔βE
By the say, my guass fh∂dAQQJAS¬!0AC
e←]←5sZASLtAR@4ZA∪]QKX@1∧ ↓54hRπ∪[∞s∂π⊃bαA↓5jαCK?≤+@∨≡}%B¬B¬URεn≥<W~ε≡Dπ≡␈]lBπ≡=_ -n~9R,4λ≠tD
8>8LT≥~→!QVλ≤nL8π29H33y *, in other wo@IIfHAαkW3SOβK/∂/≠G'lp
%A"C"EUαb0y≤<rεEβE⊗VVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVBEεB ∧ate: 4 Nov 1dpb@@⊂εβC≠↔&C
@4⊂u↓QQ\[mWH⊂4Jλ5P6¬@44qu[pw⊂ ]⊂!2`2hπKIKd~∃'k UKGhhAaCO%]NO[5jA←\α↓QMHhP4)EJαπMβ4{@∩πM Rβ#6 λ∞≤αsvr[80z4[w⊂9`%tp `A KS@;8βS/=¬≠7π∪baβS#∂!β'M∧εvF∂AQ"αα
λ M≥9(⊂~\p¬s @→←dAi!KSdAMKG[KαsSMDλλ-lλ~0~λ9wy5\β jest fi@9JP→↓∧ @~εmx AQHλλ ≡\X>.P:40]⊂0q2H4∧abger than &4hεP⊃βo Da
λ∧@@AMsf@L````Aβ≠gOS,¬Rε∞βY≡⎇|Z|d X∧w2Kα..
3) I` A∩↓GC@9∧∧'/J ⊂λ∞ <X `/na`_Aα≠?7C,εF/∩∞Mε∂"∞.Vw~∞h
.8∧ual p
C@@∧π.vα>⊂≠w⊂0FBα 6800 0AKmKαqβ@>≤Mαπ~→(∞ 9y0∀[3P19_tp∞ @⊃C[CO∀XA%>c1βS∞[∃β'α@ AQ@εE∧BD@ @-Sa`~(~∀ZZαi5%5h¬RjJUP %U++ ⊗KVVV@--)--4ZR4Ph ∀;Y⊂≠pε @/=` .M∧#'>↑8
↓QJJJE%JJJE%JJJE%JJJE!α@
-4ZRZZαh4)hP4(2OW⊗S↔∂QRα←?K]→α&≤|W∂"
f∩α≠4∧C!⊂πX≠ dε`∨l4pb@@@hbn∪)←]CI!C\Aβ1C\Aπα{3 >]ybβ@⊂¬)`/l atRUTGERS> Tπ←eWLA↓SO∃ghA D@Ff@⊂h ∀_9→'⊂⊂∪⊂∪αh∂l@Drpb@@h MEl*N@ Q(g-βvU⊂∩4πnatha`≤A¬YC@9¬≠?3?n{9↓rU≠?1β∂!αJVαHt-∃4πC!)2x ,y( i↑hA/←E-&AC@ ∧¬↔=→y.∞c"U
wH⊂ w\αks: 9
WorkS Digest Friday, 4∧A;|εbβ ↔ $∧λλλ∧∧λ⊃P↔[8¬`≠Jb@tA%`∂OW*↓MHQ!P@*≠y_/∀|h∃
}~8tg↓(λλ∧∧⊂8∪mM≠h⊃
⎇8:0↔λ)xp∪@QK[f~(∩@@@A'←Mβ#←πK*α↔;∨Ns↔/-→f*αβ(∪j5βYP↔@A`≠Mp∧¬∨&≡!PPHα(λ∧∧∪_=.,9λ∪,≥]8;∧λ=X:-L8[⊃!Q@∧P⊂λ⊂#2{Yy⊂( 2o`∂eC5[Kef↓∨\A)=[←ee=nOfA]←eW'QCiS←8~∀α∩↓'sgi∃Z@fpα↓5α∪/≠∂K'π#'?9¬ W/-⊃PRjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURhh!Q$&∂LW"αβT f␈2ε∪∪C
εεS#"YZ5 h(j&}k$λw⊗O>4ε∂"
ZD BV&ααD\≡'&Nehw⊗O>5⊂hU>\&V.>G"¬⊗W$¬>␈-:2∧&≤|W∨"
f∩α≠6⊃PPh)∀εnN⎇∞Bε≡⎇]V.wDλ
=λ≥
(⊂<
⎇≠≠hλM{8:-d≤}<nL;<h ≡Y(
Gε λ ,<y9¬D→≠h∞↑y#"NM→( DεN ε∧~_8m4≥≠h∞∞[⎇Z,L(≥~ T∃S+D
~→>$∞];@ ∀≠=;∞M<≤[l<<|h zkβ"N={9=m =λ∃)i4∧∀:≠TP64Zr]P7[2P1`[⊂3rzλ0q7z]⊂~V\Sq⊂82\⊂897XryyWλ*42FB6pqt~w2yP_v9wP_wvvz[4qpz→P;2y≡P9vw[z46<H0qy7\yP0P∀4w3@≠2z;w\5V⊂ !nd our
αexperiEnce With The OS, VM and networi is very posiTive. Ua run their¬
PASCAL andFORTRAN, use soma ASM too,∧A)Q∃eJASβ→β3'↑+3eβ&yβ ∃ε α
1∧∧⊂hR,↑VvN<UVfNαy(D∞}<u ]+λ_-lλ≠8/≤Y(⊃.l;H_$ ];⊂⊗λ+≠P*[4|↔εBεA⊗@-----------------------------
Date: 5 Ngv 190! 0940-PST
From: JimArcher <CSL.SUN.ARCHER at SU-SCH∂%
x~∃'k UKGhhA/Qr↓o←kY⊂AC]s=]JAo¬]hAi<AcgJ↓≠&↑fX`ACf↓C\AKβCπ7Cd∧Sxh*MsR∧α_;-≥≥≠{EhαiP0]⊂( i⊂β( ≠βa 4(hR%β ,c'π[*α>M=≠1AβC∂≠O↔⊃β→β'πrk7'MH -m8(≤m⎇9=z ↑Y(⊂∀[⊂:42H2py6≡P_\[L⊂πs.
GivEn the genepad @IKYCi%←]gQ%`AEKQoKK\↓iWiC0AKMM=e`AC9HAiQ∀AckC1Si`%∧¬v ! ]~ T→Z;L≥λ≤∀M|≥8p~ ⊂87t[:4w3H5zz⊂≥40z Star↓[CrA!CmJAβ#π/↔p∧β∪β∧ V∞r←_V∂↔1Q'&.βY≤d∞≠h∪,≥y(≠,T≤⎇0→\4qtw]yP90]42y than↓G←]MαK∪↔;"p4(Q!∀VNβ#"AQK++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U#"C!(_=→'$λ
+)M⎇K ≤ P_XM
≠≥→ZH()b (ThuRs` Cr$~∃
e=ZtA⊃¬[S@3&{9:⊗~βπQα∧
J
⊗l
b 4U≠W +,≠Qiα⊗)iα←GIβ←?,c⊃βπwK?;∃π;π;Q∧εFzπ↑8 $ tklfFλ_<d ;H⊂∩↑0p
pLe?
To: JIm Archer <CSD.SUN.AR@π⊃ $↓ChAπT['π∨I
|4U∪↔C3JjS=i∧Cπ7≥H
⎇KQ4dλλ∀⊂*(i30+λc"C!λY9Sn,(≡0↔]P3r`4 too sus@ASGS←U`
βK∂##↔I∧εFF∞dλλm⎇YZ1 ]]λ@⊂≤αegardi`≥NααOSπ⊂¬@hVβ→0~λ4rP 2em`∪]⊂AsO@*βS#π ∧π&FT
π-zY0nD≤⎇_.∞α2r qome dh∂kdαβ?Iβ4¬↔6*∂_ ,≡\h_,]c"P∪≤αh∂ZA≥` ?]lBπV↑-rαjTλ⊗f@λ≠Y.t~_<LNβpp∩e, mi@
eP∨∂|∧F*B
lW'{|Zd∞≤[p~≠qwv 3,λ
+,εF~@Hλ∀ ↑Xεt`4 h JAβ#=βK,∧6}nβ90↔→⊂ :sZ⊂"0zYy∪yP≤0x2`2, "OBqar`-α S'∨w→β?9∧εFF(β"Q ↑Y;⊂↔\4¬ent h∂LA¬\A∨@∧∧W,=~3L@P)|`3te`~Dα↓#@>
_λm∧→~4l><|p∩\β the dev@∃YWa[∃]h~∃α{⊂∩πM R¬ε≥H nD≠xλ"\αati@9H
βOLε7&.β(∩l↑Xπ2`, q`≥I∃` 'α:0↔→β Stap∧AC]⊂AaQJ↓←iQKβ⊂4*@ X M␈λλ 000 s@∃` '↔~α↔S#,ε&v/Dλ ∞
βr:`#ts ∩X↓iP≥β⊗)βCW⊗c'O#,∧BεNβH⊂~~2@
@AaP∨∂,∧V&NβY|d
βs⊂ 4he ACM+ @'%∂⊂≡B~↓cS!¬≠g7C|ε6O.β(⊂↔[⊂#p %p¬CiS9H
αOLε7&.β#"J∞X;Xm≡≠→4d
Y>≥∧
8πw:~↔⊂⊂&_zry∪\β theqis @%`
βSF Qβ↔4∧W/(≠8-
|H∪L↑c"[n <X=
≥Yh≤o≡⎇→;$∞α0ur\P0y7]w2⊂ &ive Clkck↓sCCeLACMHαβ∪?k,s@~ε|dεn∞e←⊗.∂,∧c!∞≠h∪-}Y(⊃N7vP #onceptionto matqriTy.~∀4∀Z[¬IkGJ~(~∀ZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZ~∀4∃↓Ci∀t@@j↓≥Wl@Drpb@Dd`h[A'(~∃→e←Zt↓%kES8AChAM%∩[↔0~∃'k UKGhhA'iCHAefA=&Vfl@A[C]A←oKd4∃)↑t@AQC5SYi←8]KfA¬hA!βIα[≠βaε~∀~)∪@→β
↓E!Aβ↓β7πrβ7?;&CMβ∨/#EβG␈)β¬α≥#πI1π##↔9∧zM=M3↓βO#␈+3⊃βF [∃β⊗+↔9βλh+W≠M3↔KO*q↓αSF QβOO≠S↔5¬#??-β⊃A1Aβ↓1βπ≡≠?K∪Ns∃βSzβ←#π α%β#∂3∃β#. K⊃8hR↔c∂/≠∃β7*aβS#∂!∨M↓∪↓1AAαβ7π9πK↔πK~q↓α'2βg?U∧c'/∃ε≠?7C∂∪'O?w→1α$hS ↔3N+[∃βLεBπ&⎇⎇2π& T∧.?≡
FN∞n4ε∞⊗}↑Bβ∪¬Fββα
\⊗rπ≤\↔↔~∞Mrε↔]→F"πM PhT},V∂"
∂↔⊗∞]_Bε∂Dλ6F.}λ edλ∩;D X8p~ ⊂:42H0y1t~z2q`4ure Od∧A∨&↓C]HA%if~∃⊃KgGK9IC]iLAeCi!KdAe∃[SMILA←]J↓←@→β&C∃α∨⊗+πQαπKCπ]_ ∧¬≠[p~λ:40zλ$SvFB:9<`)ng to compare IBM to pharaoh).
~∃]QVAW9←ofX↓ShA[¬rAKmα+9β3∂≠Qβπ~β3?;:p4(Q%Rl&≡.'N`Q!PRjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURhh!Q$&∂LW"β* mw2β↔↔β
β⊗⊂∞F⊗h∀∀jA ¬# 2om2 Ta`
hAα QαB
∩¬&6
B∧4*∨+ +↔≥!iα3∂+K↔1∧¬V∞w\≥Bε∂l≥⊗f∞-HPhV<7"∧_:y$ =λ∀λ~Pk3(≠⊂kλ
L9]⊂_z⊂ T!Vf`V!FEεB*47iYP7s⊂≡wzP 7ho wanp KH↓iP≥β}∪Sππp∧∧∞gMt¬/≡↑$w
∧α_;LL[{znP6p|H12FE~w:2`2ested to Know That @¬\AKqAC]IK⊂AeKeMS←\A=H βSF)α3π,ε&.b \⊗w.≥E@hW⎇
⊗≡B 8 mn⎇~5∞↑→9⊂≠w2P9Yqz4`/n of the Handbook$ Has rec` ]i1rAEKα+8$+↔∪?W∨G!β?W ∧ε∂~ ∀¬∧
(4π⊗/
x NEHλ∃
(_8N>≤X8nD~<h∞,<≤[lN8y1∧ Y;⊂↔]Tε Ifλ
∃S=jAo←UYHAY%W@∃βλ∧ε≡␈∂∃BπεLX↔≡(≤p∩[2⊂0P≠p¬ssag`
Ai<A'Ce∧A∪π↑(4)@HL⊗N λ∧⊂*(i30+λoKC!↓ ¬& !urel is a↓kgKdαβ';S,ε& ,8y(∞Mh_;D 8ε2a]90∂nic mail sy@MiK@5ph"∂?oβ3↔\X NM8π3@ it iS a mail transpOp¬`⊃βn+∂#πvKO5β≤∧⊗f@→9⊂⊃y0x %vi`≥J0AoQSα≠ (α[8-≥]_:-nh_ M<⎇≤M≤]=→,D→_= ∀_X<lT≥≠h L8;λ∞⎇=~⊂≠0p
i@9JPACUiQK]QSGCi%←\X~)ISgiISEki%←\AYαKGSMbβπ;⊃εkπ'L-wBεMxλl≡~;p↔ α A↓aCaKβ⊃β?9∧;CπC,εfNvTλ
m≥≠β"L,(≤⊂→→yrw:→p∧ at h
KqPAS@?w#!∂M¬~>NAph $!_V"¬L≤g @ ¬εE VVVFKVVVFKVVVFKVVVFB∧@
L@¬keKX↓≠C]k¬X∩+↔Iα∪?.;3πM∧Y1α ⊗{ShQ!P@(8Xp~≤αacthA→Ckβ∪↔1βM→βπ9∧ 3S=n∪πO↔ ¬Bε&≤>εf∂∃]w-9;] \λ_p↔[x:z2\⊂6pt[∧¬∃GβKOS↔h∧εNwLX L@0qrWλ⊂ t↓aeOMαK∪↔M∧∧f∞≡≥H
.M9<h∞MβP92]90rk→P6pt[⊂0w2λ892`3ent
it f@=` β∪,¬FO6↑/∩bε≥lBπεtλ
≡|≠⊂⊂↑T∧ f@=a`∨π⊗!1β∂d∧↔>z9↑%D→Z0⊗→T⊂2`$it _Aα ;⊂4UβC'; β7/><⊗><k@⊂λ r24]4sw0[⊂32`!tp eKLAS@;≤¬G.→(⊃L≤z;∩.M9<h∞MβP92Xp∧ _~)oe@'&)1βπv!β∂?α ∩ε6α;⊂∩\β(λAeU\Aae=KeC[LXAC]⊂ABAo!←YJAαc?Qβn{@⊗*d∧∧f∂↑,Vbε≤∧c!0P1`/mponenp o@_ABAI%gieS kiKHαβ7/>8⊗>(≤v.>→; ⊂≥40z has Be` LAαK9β?ε+@⊗∂M_ maαE3 /p∧AgKYKeCX↓s@↔π↔→β'→∧εFF* W-β|⊂)→yrpy_t⊂$w≥2y72]↔
λThis docUm` @; ∧εO~ ⊂λ L<xp→~x:4`/n of the @→CGSYαKS'↔~β∂?;& ';↔ β'9αd WK↔bp4*O-3↔KπbβS'C~β?9β∧ε&␈ε↑ π/≡Tλ l@⊂1w`-pp iKβ⊃β'πL¬Bε6≤8
-M=~0∩\β in↓BAg←
SCH~)G←]i∃q`⊃β∂∪∃β'v≠3@.LXB`h!Q"jjUQRjjUQRjjUQRjjUQRjjUURjjUQPhPβ"Q ≡→.H∧ε(∪[nl8εq2\⊂_\\ P_\:53 e@Mh∩*4ε&}k$∧¬≥∨LX
-lY<Ye@)ws 4Artc at MIT-Multics
λSubject: Newprggram`≠Sαs⊂~π>O⊗f/4λ md∃{|MP)z0]4ww9K∧AεE∩P:44[5P:4_z⊂:4→P60y→p¬st↓`∂'l⎇F*εM_ LL<Y;L<αP;t[4∧ be the
λ¬eKY¬iSmKαceβOn 3 &↑ λ
n8εq2\α of pr`∨OIC[@7,ε'4_9⊂≥42P ,evel w`
∃β#@⊗∞M_
≥{X;
O(_p↔[9tr2\⊂897Yβramming. Ifs@QKCHAα{⊂∩β4Tε␈∩∧∧@~IP7sεBαa`→X↓aK@?∧¬F*π⎇
rπ<y( ∀≤}0→]2p
@A` >|,⊗nnα;Yd
=λ⊂⊂]⊂:42H10 `(αβ?HQ( ≥Yx
`Yβ`
AYα+[↔Dλ mmα8 .1% o@H@\`F∀A`∨'d¬Bε⊗Tλ
⎇8π3@ thi`&↓←\Ai!JA/←β∪ _h*8
≡~;p↔λ4πf @QQJAMβ+S@/,Ubα∧α≠p≠H4¬any peo@AYJAI=kE@3*β∂3W&≠!βπwK7?K+x4(Q(∩ε@=8p∀λ4∧a`%≥KdAOI←k`Aβ;'31∧ε7&Nβ≠λ ={\p∀Y2y⊂ )tsel@_Aae←α;@⊗∞β;9.9FE !lthoUdπPAi!KrAo%YP⊃β⊗)β∪↔∞c';≥∧εvO&∧λλm⎇\⎇≤L≥8π: or`∪KαsS↔⊃∧ε7O∨LX .F@
c@UGPACLA∩~λ∧π<αxp∃@∃]GKeLXA-Sβ≠&∂πd∧2bπ=→W.f≤M⊗}r∞8∞.≡→;<eD∀⎇_.∧_;Y↓Q\{h
⎇KHλ
@To: Frankston at MIT-Multics (Bob Frankston)
To: ARPAVAX.hickman at UCB-C70
Prima allkws s` O[∃]ifAQ↑AEJ↓G←]G¬iKMCQKH\@↓)QSf↓CYY←]bACeICsf@xli⊗X4⊃Ekh↓IWKf↓g@↔↔hβS=βnKGMβ&C∃βC}K;Qβ|1βO↔>k↔;S~βπMβNs∪↔C,¬f&.nDε}⊗,\7'~aQ hRUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjhQ!PTε≡LSRβT f␈6]\&/∩ε⊂∞'ε(λ ≠∞_X⊗bTjεE#≤5v]⊂∀z0{)≠yP&Wλ&pqy_utyP∂&`ai⊂eP0zλ&dj⊗Sa←εE∀zq5 %ct: System 3(
∃∪β→βS#-∪∃βπwIβ'≠4¬w⊗@8=~-⎇H_=L≥8ε0q≠2P7`. the detailed struc@QkeJAα{⊂∩πM PhT_)R¬∨≤∧⎇ ]( nπq"B"*>_=P→≠yP&pXy0ut\FE∧DR0y; !rd
---
---------
----------------
End Od Worhπ&A %O@↔O h!))RQ)))RQ)))RQ)))RP4(Q%RjjUQRhhαHβ!↓"@↓J⎇8ZL\⎇∞H
⎇|Z|dλ~9y.>λ∃L$∧lhc!$βl
eYXπ{⊗N_P⊂_M→→De≠w0z4_w⊂ v_w⊂)`/lkmoN 8 ∃'α{1βπ ∧¬∃-HxU∃≠d↓∃ =|Z|dλ~9y.>λ∃L$∧lh FB 0r2N⊂⊂∪@∪4πv 1981 14∧fb[∃' ~∃→aP∨5Rα+/;∂##π→∧ 3πd
6}f⎇]vrβI*6}b ≡B¬∃X¬⊃hZToC!)2x ,y( i↑hA/←e-`
βπ ∧¬↔=→y..c"U
wH⊂ w\αks: 9
WorkS @igest Saturday, 7 Nov 1dpb@@@@@@↓)P∨3,k∃↓EβQα'O≤εV*β4∧c!↓α@
Today's TopIcs: SmalLta`→VααWO↔4εVfV↑8 aQ@∧DPλ⊂ nfor`≠CQS←\Aα{9α_)R¬∨≤∧p~→vP→\βE Wor`↔πβ#πS'|qα3πv;Wπ∨/_4(⊃⊃∃$J∧∧ ≠ a4p∀ @πQS@h)55h¬RjjUURjjUP %U+++%U++#%U++#%U++ ⊗KVVVVKVVVFKVVVVKVVVFKVVVFKVVV@-------
α
Date: 6 Nov 1981 0):09 @!M(~*4ε&}k$
F}w~|W∨" ≡B¬∧~(2l@06⊂aQT⎇0⊃~2qz: Ho`.↓iP≥β>+Qαε∀iαOGα>F.jv7α∧&|>Vn8π:0]4swεB*7]⊂∀z0{ 2os M. MacRakis <MACRAK at MIT-MC>
cc: TonyWest at PARC-H β1 ~∀4T /W ∧ε -9Y~-lh≠⎇.D≠;tLT≥→0⊃Z70qp[⊂4w3≠y2pz~ww⊂ /n the IBM↓'sgi∃Z@fPβP4(Q*FF/,Tπ>∂4λ∩εv≤8Rε≡⎇H \⎇~0↔[⊂7s⊂≥2qt7~qpv⊂≤0x2`2pεAak YSgQ∃HAEr↓∪¬~AαK8$) IUad∧¬N␈T
VN>∞@π'↔∀
Fzε|X
∧
≠{→∧
βs⊂ )t:~∀4⊂E∪¬4A's@∨#↔5=≠AαS↔≤¬εvN<≥B∧→=Q-M|≠9-n≤h@⊂≤8q6$\βhed↓ErA∪ ~A∂'⊂@QiQ∃\R4WβW 3L∧6∂&≥ybε␈,LW∩εn]V⊗/$λs+C¬Vβ∪≠qQ hT
x
l↑Y<@¬T⊂(⊂~~4p∞k↓iQSf↓eKa←β∪Qβ'~β?WQ∧¬v $≤≤Z-n λ⊂∀[⊂;t4Xt⊂1p\rV⊂ 7hat I
re@
←[@7,¬f"ε≡4π&F≡@λ∂≥⎇(⊂⊃Xv6⊂0[⊂ a&H190w_t⊂7`&d¬SGJ0A`∪↔d¬Bπ& YRε∞-x
.D≥~~.1 \Y.
|] ≥Yλ∃m =λ⊂≤[zP;p[8∧, @¬]HACMP
βSF+5βSzβ3 >⎇0λ∞↑λ→P↔\⊂8wjH842P≠4yz ob
@AkEIS
CiS←9`
βπ4∧⊗Nf≤-F*εmx D∞~→(
5lh (p∂QSα≠!β#∂→βO'v≠∃β ,∧Vrε≥mf␈.βXp∩Y⊗εE9[P:42\2P4`3 ple@9irACYCS@3∞∪3∃β∞∪?WQ∧¬↔"Jd∧∧∞fDλ',8π1`( h∂MMαK∂/4λ
≡Y(⊂!QXε4`3t of pqbl@%GCiSα{;Mβ∞s⊃β∂∞qβ ?,LW$≥~→-T→[p→λ<p∂`*Q`∪#⎇+⊂≡B∂_ nT≠8>$
_9P∩CE:7P≤93r:Xp¬ s@=[@∃βn{;↔e∧ε6}n↑M⊗n(→P↔\α the b`∨←α[E%8hP4*S|seα←,ε7 @ ¬!`/mputep∧A'GαK↔;∂*α3π |ε&∂&}/⊂hUα→0→≠|⊂ ⊂ARC
--4ZRZZαi5%5h¬RjjUP %U++ ⊗KVVVFKT@
λ¬∪π&)`∩βT f␈2ε⊂∞'ε(λλ_Nα07:49( !≥ 4*≠⊗{5iβ&+∂[πβ⊗O'Lh↔B∞=x∞∧ =λ⊂L↑X¬r`,ey~∃MkE@+,∧7#Rλ∧p~Zz0q6→P;w`2hπgiCQS←\A1C]OK¬K@↔MβqP@!α@
Being @=H βSF)α/mx ∞↑~;p↔_y<V⊂≤αathep∧AiQ¬\A%Kβ3?3W&K?;π↔I1βO≤C??1∧¬v @ ¬0∀hought I'f@∀AEKKαqβ∂?v≠↔KlX ∧
⎇Y0→λ4rpw≤β fo@HAKqa∃` '\X NM8π3@ witha
∃Yα ;∨W∞;∃β3L[∃αOn 3#S∞c ~ε⎇`λ ∀∃3R+∧λ∧4W→Tε @%∃β &eIβC?↔#π ∪*αR>∩
I%β ∂≠∃8∀Ph*S#*βπCC⊗{π∂!∧ε6zεl≡"εF≡4ε⊗.]`π&@h≥0→YP:42H!P1`/mpilEp∧ACF↓C\@E¬`∂O↔n∪3dQ( ≥Y⎇0,\αQ⊂ &or a↓mSeiUCXAπ5CYYi¬YVA[¬GQS]∀p
β%v)1βSzβ∪↔[,¬F␈α ⊂λ
=8;⊂⊗≥0p k
λ¬G←[ASYKd↓iQChαβCK∨'+∂/4λ2ε@_;Yn\9y( ≡h≠⎇.N≥=⊗λ0s2 then↓E←←iMieC`↓Ie@?hh#C#Lε2π&tλ
L↑\z0↔[9P:4_z⊂19~w3P*\⊂6w`2e and mg`%∀AP∨→∧εFF*∞8
∞\β3⊂ 4hat UL¬∪ hS∪ >↑9b?"
Vgα∞⎇↔&B¬ ↔/&⎇\↔&N4λv∂⊗,≤v*ε=x
L8⎇~-⎇Kλ∩-l|Y;,]]_;↓QX{p⊗\4r0z~ww⊗⊂→z1V⊂→z1W∧Kα α
The Part @QQChAβ;?K∂~βO=β4 Aβ'~βπMβ4¬vf@≠⎇|g⊂0P!H892`#ompi@1Kd@Q=HAiQ∀~∃@3-A0∨N≤82π≡=
v}bα(⊂→→pr9P_P60w→zpsrH1v7iYP:7P⊂T∧ and t`+β∪;Mβ&CπQβL¬g&Zλ1PV@_;Yn\9y( ={]_-≥X∧w3H20z0H4p∞i@QSCISβSπS'|qβOS∂#↔7↔w#@~πM ↔"εLX M≥Y(⊂mL<|c!∞Y;⊂.M9{\m
<≤k∧
9H⊂⊂H4pw7→y⊂0yH1v7`3e to SmalLta`→VαβπMαJβ∂π→∧;3↔πp∧ε .Y{#!:42P_{0t`,abde infoRmati@=\\A'αyβ←'&AβS#M→β?;*β∂π→∧∧WGε↑-⊗n8π: with
proGp¬C@7nK;≥βLqβ >-( ,>≤kλ =_8p→YyP0w→⊂6ri\pstg→V⊂0v≥47p∃gh the input ∃GβK;@&≥λ
≡{I⎇∧
{8;
Nα0v%H≤_P !nd moqt oF phe Smal@1iC@3X∧βC
X Nm<[sM\8π: is
@¬Yg↑Aαk'OOL¬f 5@εEεB*42P≠2|:≤βtep isn't working yet _Aα∪WQβ≤C?W3 ∧ε⊗*∞8 m⎇Kλ∃m
8z⊂~yP:7CE1wf\4∧ete a (non-incremenp CX$AG←[ASYKd↓IP∨I¬≠7π∪e#π3-βAEβOL¬g&∂¬Dπ>F≤=hW↑8 .P894[tz4{→yP3r[2y0z→p⊂3 2om the step above f@=` β∪∂#¬βO&{@⊗∞|U`hUM
↔
ε=x .
;→0→λ3rw2\0z2iH4w:2\αpre@QK@⊃β≤¬v&*Dλ M}H≥z
≤zλ⊂-d~;] ↑\≤Y.L<C"N⎇9≠λ ,(≥|M≡≥→3D¬~;@⊂≤92x 2ocessed C).
Subs@∃ckK]PAgiKA`
β∂∞qβπ∪α9rε⊗Tλ -nZ8p∀[w2rελ1:z I'll prgbabhy Stop
this approach @]KYXAMQWehαβ?2∧(6}o
H .L(∀p⊗Xv6:0[5P7gλ*g$lλ↔εEεB s<P~w:2`2est Out there/
λ ∀Zαi555hi555hi5%5h¬RjjUQRjjUQRjjQQ hTL≡F+R∧εb∧vβ⎇Hε↔,λλ@
εriDay) 1236-EDT
Fp¬P∨5Rα∩J⊗L2Uβπα@
9⊂4U @dε-!0 (@eNp¬rA IKSMkβ→$4
≥+ +↔≤εC@$⊂x;D∞{8;
Nα0v%H;wy5H∨FEεB∧¬∃)∃GQ]←αc??α(⊂≠ZyrP 7e wi@1XAae=ECEYdAgKJ↓C\A&5[CGQ%]JXA5SGe←α≠?β↔ ∧π&@h→≠aQ]~→$ ↑9→%\{y→$
βx2i_z4w`.pεAmKβ∪eβ↔4∧fN≡≤Yg&@≤∧WεB∧¬αWilhλAi!J@Oaβ∪??,≥Vn∂.4ε}H≥≠m]|\[nth≥0→YP:44\P1w`.c` ahαβ'9β¬∪?∂K∞k7'lqPG6↑.7/~ =F∂∨=_6∞bλλ∃≤≤→Et6␈.N&∞rt¬bαr¬`π∂'≥HW4∂c"AQR_;M1"C"EU+++%U+++%U+++%U++#%U+++%U++#!Q@εE#≤4πm: decvax!duke!unc!smb↓ChA¬∃eWKYα+d4
L¬bo⊗\≥Bnf≤lS@$∀⎇→.l;H∪%D⊂Y;
Mβ{4wβE)zq~2qz≥λ)t⎇2H5s⊂'TTπ360
~∃%\@E)!JA≠sQQSGC0A≠C\5≠←]i DXA
β∪↔⊃α↔∪??/~β↔OSNkπS↔~βS#π ∧ε␈6↑ β+βε↓PVn≥eUL,~*2π>]nBεNnMr∧⎇5v33α ,W'≡\X Dε.-Ld ;Yλε↔-MKAQ@εE⊗KVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVFBεE"0]2X
5 Ngv 198! 09:05836-PST
Frkm: decvax!duke!unc!smbat Berkel@∃r~∃∪αq7K↔∞a73'6)`∩¬>LW6.d Rr∧,]Ff@⎇Z;AQS≠xl≡~;{G$∃;Z.l<\p∀]<P7cλ'3y:~⊂!py≠v4w0H0z⊂!Z0x2fλ$4v&βE)zq~2qz
λ* 16-biT chiP
~∃Q∩AS]QeP∨∪,≠↔⊃βλ∧β∪"YYπR¬IZ3KKεεα∧m
UBπ>≡Mαε
∧Bc*π∞-⊗≡(~0↔λ_X_⊗\4rqrCE8z`!ntities ≤@!#kOi∃bAMe=ZAiQ∀A≥@?2q↓K≠ α↔3↔≤εG-{Z0⊃H'2{yJW
λIt @%]GYK⊃KfAC8@EO\5GQS`↓[CGe=gi←e∀ASK[=` eβ>KS!↓α→2ε↔≡LW4≠yH
)s(⊂-lλ raQX↑0~→yP7`2 RAM↓IP∨I∧ε7&←,≤v*ε|dε'⊗↑≡V.wMK∩o/<X ∧ ];XnM9{\d∞z~0⊃Z⊂1pwλ:42`.
be acce@Mc@↔⊃∧ Qβ≠,¬Fbπ∞-v≡<|p↔\α sp@∃KAf\λ@A)Q∀AG←[AC]rAαK@~π∞,Wε∂-_ L@P0FE_t4x⊂≥2y9`)on u@MS]NAQQChAαkπ∂K␈≠S ?,Tε&@|H⊂∪≠4πading p@=S]hAα{C↔K∂#'?;~aβπlAPG≡≥_Bπ& ≡Bπε≡.BbεLX m≤{X= \α⊂:4→P*&iN\XX@0, woUld be availabl@∀AS@8hR∪↔∂,¬V⊗/$λλ.D ∞.%Dλ∃~ T~;\nN]8p~~ww⊂)Yz⊂4iH0P9`5pers@∃hA←L↓iQJAQ≠&rrdjAC]⊂~∃)≠Lrr``0AoSi AP∨ T∧V∨" 9v&* 8 m↑_=~,-9~5∂∃β⊂⊂*~2y2P_y2P0[9wP7→{FE$[9z9:Xz4ww≤P37`2 h kYβ#'CK,∧6O≡≥ybε∂-~FFN↑M⊗~b∞8
≤zh⊂↔\2y0z~ww9Vλ80y0[62vεBαI/O, afdme`≠←β∪eβ M!β7πvKCW∪∂#'?9p↓α'QεCπM↓⊗ 9β'w≠SπnL⊗v.}X d 9→≤L↑|c"N,88z∧
βs⊂→
[%P1≡z2yP≠s⊂6pZw⊂6r[wy<P_w2⊂_L_%P1≡z2yP≠s⊂4w≥2y70[⊂0w2 wyεE→|:2i≠0v⊂6Xqy7y]7y2P≠rrwy≡Q⊗⊂0\β well as compatibiLitq @]SiPAQQJ
∃Q∪∩brXb`A[∃[←er↓[Caa∃` β≠⎇⊃β∂?w#K/1 Subject: WorkS @igest V1 #3 (4⊂ =λε∩lVβ⎇K'ε(λ ε&Mα2M⎇X=~ ≥H⊂; ≥H∀p↔[4πmo@8@p∩*≤¬vbε≡@
∃-HxU∃≠d↓∃ =|Ztdλ~9y.>λ∃L$∧lh
εBα@ CI∀p@bbαα0⊗@⎇H '↔ ( ε⊗α[⊗bThεE#≤αh∂Z@Rα+/;∂##π→∧ 3πd
6}f⎇]vrβI*6}b ≡B¬∃X¬⊃hZTh∂εBαRep@1rP↔S{Qα←?⊗ZMβπα@λ
.αz3r\9FE*≠]⊂ ↔op¬WfTv~∀~)/←eWLA↓SO∃gh@@@@@@@A/Kα#;↔O& e!↓α⊂ $ Xπ{⊂ \Xλ "α↓↓↓↓α↓↓α[|¬G.nTε∩βR ~7∂.Tε3 H!Q%&@y_>$}h∃≠n
8|nD∧λλλ∧∧∀{8-Mα⊂'h→y0z4[3P ∪Ystems
∩∩@@@AA←eiC YJAπαkπ32& 3-α≤π↔∨&]QP@! ∧P⊂λ⊂⊂⊂(]p¬r`2ZA%Kα 1α↔Gβ↔K',¬f≡<c"A⊃ ∧P⊂λ)P
Machine
∩∩@@@AA` >|,⊗nnα;YdλXπp∩↓)QJA→kike∀~∀ZZ4ZRZZαi555hi5 *UP %U++ ⊗KTVV@-----4ZRZZαi555h¬RjJUP %U++ ⊗KTVV@--)--4ZRZZαi5$Q!PD_9→'∧λ
( @4πve@5EKd@Drpb@@h
EYl*N@"¬ V}vL∨∩HhαQP→≠vX
Han`⊗A]CYWKβ⊃βπQ∧~6U5λε∧
αλ6C ∧Jp
F¬ εE)]q0
e@
ht@Aαk?K∃∧¬vr¬iZ0hPβ"Um 8π⊂+∪iP;p\β fi@I`∂Qβ⊗+';≥¬;@⊗ONLVrb∞Mε/J
⊗"ε∀λ m|8ε⊂ 4o fi@PAShAαK;C<hQP∪$αx↑.L<k@⊂λ)tw1YP1z`2p¬K]hαβ[↔K≤¬⊗}w4λ
|zh∞εελεP⊃000 p@¬K@↔M∧εFz¬iZ2bπM WHhαZ_.l(≠p⊃≥4p∂e@MYrAO=]JAo¬rAEKβK?;⊃∧εFFO5`λ∧λ]=⊂≥42P)Z⎇2P #onstraiftmay @ J~+∞qβπ∪&KS'⎇l⊗bπ,Xλ.={H⊂~≠P9q`2imp @=\AiQ∀A`↔O,ε"εNnLWε6≤8 %@⊂⊂!`/m` @?v)β+|¬c!9z0w→⊂:x⊂_w2⊂9X|P:4_z⊂"g∩l⊂4`3 small. Yes _A khASβ#@~π↑8 .⊂4w:→y30qYP4p∪
λ¬P≠tλλL↑≥→0→ ⊂0w2λ+&iP≤90∂f@%IKfAαk?K∃∧∧6∂ε≤-⊗fOM_ .U
λ¬7)Q∃eJASβ→βπ∪α9rε
M↔<⎇<p→Zww⊂ /d∧A-≠LOfAkMKdASαsS↔K4∧⊗≡(~0↔λ$*f`S⊗g"j∀UαE$H;wz`,d su@≥O@↔O ∧π&F≤@λ∂≥⎇(⊂,L≤Y4nP0w<H3:y:~2y⊂ $iscu@M`∂'⎇`λ
⎇H≥~ ≡β"\ ≡]~0⊃]v0y th∂aS Ai↑A!+⊂⊗εp¬T`(5∀pλ→( 2J9βf.FB∧@
-4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZ~(~∃ CQJt@@dA≥@?4∧Vn⊗↑ λε↔,∧⊂⊃1137
EST (Monday)~∃→aP∨5Rα7πKX¬e'∞=<W∩ε≡@λλd¬U-Daα4U≠W ,≠Qi↓¬β?KS∞∪3∃α≤kπ33& 3-α≥KOS↔hh*7↔∨≠π∂∃lK⊃i↓c↓f;∨3AE↓E+→]AE∧jQ]F∧~6U5 α¬xQ!PU& Tε⊗/>@λ∞|>(≥
t≠x] ≥;H⊂$∞≠|] ≤Y→(
=8;⊂⊗≥0p k↓`∂gO&+5β←⎇+3⊃β⊗)βS=∧∧6}εQQ'&FT
6n∞MH
≥~h∃M≡]_
`!l machife in sOm`
AgUSiCE1JACY≥←eC@&C7'
∧¬F∞v|¬8,@rX
C
would be fane, Then, Get the re@MhA←L↓iQJAα+;Kπα-vv@9;]∧ ↑(⊂∀[x7y:~w3P 4he~∃M[CIYβ#π3-¬3'KSαXλ-D~;8,@p¬ f@I←ZA↓¬%ε@9αα↔J
\⊗NwL≥⊗vNβY`⊂_wvx0]4q4`,itp∩Aβ;'S hSS#∃¬3'KSαXλ-D⊂εpqZ4p∞e, adl software Devel@=aKHAβ+;∪↔⊂∧π&FTλ
}]_8ML(≤p≤\z2vFBαso`+αc⊃β *β[πM_ ∧∞z→0↔λ8∧he a pe@I`∂?;∞aαM]\⊗≡F≥lRεO4λ .l8π::Xv6<P≤2y1`(e` by
`∨@,ε"ε&↑975β
λ¬↔[,¬bπ&
x
,@t⊂,2\4πp @∃qaKGβ#@~πM R¬≡\≥Fg_;∩d∞β0 `%QkC@1∧¬V∞≡
→f*πMtε⊗(β"P⊗Zqy7`#o` KHαaβ .βxp~λ4vx&→vrw:_z4w`.pεAoSαc1β≠∞≠∃βOL¬VNf≤≡"ππ-xλML9<h L=_:-M8π3FBαphe way @QQJA
4ASCS9iC@'w→β∪π& βOS↔+∂SW⊗+@~ε≥`λ ∀_Z0~→Tpv )dπ]KHαβ7.β;p→≡F@
s@ACGJ\α↓α¬β>+3 "∞}&O'LX D ⊂ε&⊂∃&P4`-ph K[∃]`∪παM⊗}r∞⎇w.fDλ l↑]Y( ≡h_#!,⎇:1 ]~;Y$ Xπy microcode wra`)∃afL@↓!KeQ¬afIYαK'* W⊗@|λ⊂∩~p⊂;t]4⊂!!T&⊂7`.
the A`→i<XAiQ∃g@∃αDb1βC⊗{∂.NX L↑h_sn]→λ⊂⊃→P9za≤zp
e@⊂ASMi<AS@'≤ε&}≡|LRε∂1Q'&Nβ9( ≥Yλ∪-≤|[tnMβy2P≤βpacE wou@1HACYαc?]aQ hTm_ L≥≠≡+∧ (≥~
≥X¬P 7e want the u`≥I∃aP∪gLs⊂~π
x
l↑H≠p∪λ)vpv≠8∧alk to Be
αavai`→C YJAS8Ag←[∀A[KCMkeJAα{9βO& ;∪π⊗!↓IS@πβα∧8∧U∞5Hλ∩$
{[ud∞~~<d
<c"L-α0q`0heee@dXAEkβ!β'Q∧εvNfD &*ε∀
f/↔∀λ
⎇Yh∃
≥9(⊂L\Y|Y$∂9x
P~0{2P_P14`4-ma` 4⊃gcGQKZACPAQ←[∀AC@; ∧ε∂"∞⎇w⊗Zd∧¬≡z∞|Rπ≡
}Vf"∞:F∂↔Dλ
|_:(∞MβP1g[9tr2\⊂47{CE;rP≥tr6⊂~0{2P≥4π lImit @QQJAC5←k]hαβ?2
_ LM|[8.M;{@⊂_ww:0Zw2r⊂_<P0FB)vpv≠8∧alk display so that it widl fit @%\@e⊗αβ∂#π⊗ ∂S↔↔→9↓α∞∪?WQ∧εFF(β"P↔[6<P"~yx60↑P37`2mat @∧@Ea←β∪Sπ f)∩¬=\⊗fgL≥FJπ?~7&.Tλλm};→⊂≤93{$Y2P;w]v2εE_2P9`5ch arestricted, 24x80 oNe.
------------------------------
α
Date: Mgnday, 9 Ngv@∃[EKdα↓Ee@∧∀αβ∪↔&∪~m
:@hTn-vkRλ¬p)hp∪h ≡λ⊃⊂*(qs#)8!"Pl7H⊂ `S!d'P_z⊂" T!gf@-KA, ARMTE at OFFICE-8
SUbject8 Real World Decisi@=]f~∀4⊂
'Q¬≠↔↔7~βS#π ∧π&FTλ7/↔,]g"εM≡6∨/>8
-⎇Kλ≥
⎇9z∧∞Y<↑$
;]→.,<⎇~-lkλ⊂∀_yFE 'one Astray from what p∂JA!CmJAQ↑AG←9`∂'∪-⊃βπM∧εF}ε≤ε)n∀≤Y8-D≤≤[l-α2vyH4p∞
s` YK
iSMNαβ¬β←⎇∪ ∨∨L≡FN}dλλm⎇YZ9n↑X=~-⎇H≠p∪λ6wr2\z⊂1w\z∪εEβE z the Risk od∧Aae=m←WS9H
β←Lc⊃β≠d∧⊗nNlpλ¬
|H∃.N→<@∞tv2w_rTV⊂≥pP;w]v2εE≠4qrP≥4π solicit some opinions/a` mS
JA←\↓iQJAMSikCQS←\A]JACe∀AMCG∃H~∃o%iPAe%OQhA9←nt~(~∃/J↓]KKH↓i↑AO¬iQKd↓g←[J↓QCeH↓KqaKISKMG∃bAoSQPAg[¬YX@h4lAkg∃` ↓aε{@4) 17 '"β7'∂⊗{Mβ?2βS#∃¬QaAα≥↓>57⊗ O↔⊃ε{Iα2≤I↓EE{⊃M-I β[πKN+S'↔~`4+K/≠C↔∂&K[↔3Jq↓αSF+O¬β∨KOS↔o→βπK*βS : ,Rπ∂<XBεNd ⊗rε]nfO⊗⎇mV.wDλ
m
8zβ!.z;≠∧ |]1 ]≤∧P #ommunicate in a batch fashiontk sEnd and reCeive mail
from a cEntral site, We hav@∀AaYK9irA←α1β↔cε+@⊗N]l6*π⎇~FBε⊃Q&o.β≥~%↑≤[xl↑|{|Dλt s$∞}<u ]+λ_-lλ≥y$
_=P∩H0v6⊂≠pε the correspOndence of
the recent UNIX vs. CP/M discussiOn. What We don't have iS any
expep¬SK]
JAoSQPA%(4bbAi!ChA←9JAkg∃` β'~βOSK}s∨3e∧επ/≡
→f*π⎇_
∧≤y9-]9Y{∂⊃"Xp↔[;4w1Zw3P0\3zvr[:9P*≠P:42H77{4XpP8']2w:4Xv⊂:yYy↔εEβE'w2H7s⊂4~yP6pZ7y⊂8≠tw:9H4yP*~0z⊂ 4here is a large aeoUnt o@_AMeK∀~∃g←α3S@>≡,Rε∂l≥⊗f∞-HRπ&tλ N]H≠p↔λ4z↔ There is also a larg`
AC5←k]h↓←D~∃β≠? Sα|↔⊗* ≥G⊗.≤O∩ε&↑=⊗>v\Dπ&@h~;NL<YX,<αP;t]4⊂+* ZY⊗v~urP*→y0
iNals.
What is not cerp CS8ASfAβ##∃β∂3π'L≤&Nf≡O∩ε}dλ∩ε&\8 -nλ≥{n,λ≤⊂→≠qryy[y↔↔↔βEαE']y⊂1`/ncernq are mainly c@∃]iKe∃HACe=k]HA=kdAE%CfAi<AiQJ4∃gaKα+⊃?K/≠C?;≤∧Ro&≥\Rε∞Lh⊗w_9y$
xY_-≥Y9λ /(≥4m≥Yh⊂$
=;⊂~~Tx97Xpyy`/p∧A←m∃`∩¬I!JAg[¬YX@7≤≠π3∃∧εFNn↑=ε∂⊗α;Yd
yH∀m⎇9=~
≥Yh≠
≥y(_-d∪∀r$ε,(≤N][Z0↔→P)*εLXWεE∀rqwg→6<V⊂≥rP72Yp⊂:7H5w7kH;t0zλ1wvx~v2y_y2P0]0tv X42P1→ytr2\P#'i∃) gεB0p∞d↓β∨¬∨0X@A!¬gGCX0AεACIJAio<A←iQ∃afAi!ChAGα{7*∞Mrεnα;Y¬a ¬εE∪4πw I knoW that the machines discuSq` HA¬aaKCHAi↑A JABAMiK`A CGWo¬eHAS8~∃iQ∀AQSO AaKGαC;?3|;eβ∪M≠∂WO≤¬⊗}w4λ6∂↔-_ ,D≠{@⊂~2y2Vλ1:z w`
A]∃KHAi<AW]←\~∃CY=hACE=khAB↓G←gh5KMMK
iSmJ↓Caae=CGPAβ;'S#␈+Qβ∨,εG&Nlpλ∞NX<∀ \λ~0↔λ2p ther
An obsolete p KG!]←Y←≥rA←D↓BAMY¬`∂#@∀λ L↑h≠sLT≥z~,=λ≠8/∀≠[u∧ y=⊂≠q3⊂ 4he~∃α;K/Wv!04!Q hU
HV∂≡Tλ&*π>X LT≥≠h
≥X{≥,L(⊂4IZ⊃0∪hhR0q%Wλ~3D∂9x
yλ92x ,i` f\4⊂∩¬)!C]Wf0~∃
e¬]V~∀4∀ZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4Z~∀~) CiJh@b`A9←l@bβIaE↓E#WπO& e%↓λεsβ2XZ5 hαQTM⎇,H∩hYQ⊂3 D_=⊂∩ i+⊗LXεE)]q52`#t: S-machine¬
@
Ft@@↓↔ ≥ ¬→_ACPA⊃β%XZb`X↓ eKS→kfACPA/QCIiW\ZD`~(hRK∃α'∪↔'≠/→∨Mβ≥β↔∂Wf S'∨p∧ε}r∞Mε*α*5Vn∞=
⊗v*'$π&FT ε/⊗|ε∞⎇|Z|nL=~3mnc"P*((≠:,>[xλ9≠sy0v[rr⊂:≠P34`4 the la`≥OUCOJA KSMNαβWO↔ ¬bα¬M W⊗* ≡&(h$*6n∞MJF∞f4λ'O&\8 lL<h@ ≥YλλI\<x ⊂_<z2`#o` KfλXAC]⊂Aae← CE@3Jβ7π≠Jβ?S#-∪E Q)⊗oεLYV.wL\BεNd VN∨-xλm|α2WεB∧DDDKT¬ CAm
∀~(~∀ZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZ4Ph*&≤¬→'∧ ,λ mβ{⊂_N\_P∀∃8ryb_|TP_Mβ07-ESP
Fph∂Zt↓↔ ≥ ¬→_ACPA⊃β%XZb`~)'kEU∃GhtAAaP∨∨⊗ 77≥lrε@yH⊂~~2P3 5tp eJ|~∃GFh@@A↔∃_
$→IBε∂D ∧
∃eP &↓ ¬εE∃44yP~yP4gλ92y`0onse th∞A IKSMkβ→∨Mβ∂+↔OSL¬vrε⎇`λ∞M→(⊂_≤4πgbamm`∪]≤AP∨→∧∧g/'↑,PhW⎇x Mly no one woulD argue that
∃[=ghAGUaeK]PAG←[AkiKeLACeJ↓KmK\αβ∂3?≤∧Rπ&tλ
(≤p~_z2VwY⊗z42Kpy:, i`≤~)ae@??∪π7]_ L@P2w;~y3w6Yw:9P≠y⊂6 !nguages; @QQKrAUc@∃β≤¬vn=~~-lh≠⊂∀Zp¬ OS-36 4⊂ πl@λλdπBOL,∧@A¬UhAo←β∪ ∨∨L≡FN}n4ε∂⊗Tλ n↑Y;⊂≤H0z⊂ 4he f@=` ↔≠⊗{;@"
x AQX∧w7≠{0z4[w⊗V@ the Existence @=H βSFK@~εM_ l↑⎇λ⊂∀[x64`%pεAS@"p4(Q(⊗v"∞8 d →<[o∧~<kD∧⊂]0~λ0p `)!←kOPαβS#↔Jβ#π[*β#π⊃∧εFF.α<@⊂⊂v:7`3 f`∨dαβS↔aQ'N8<\eD≥~→$
{[⊂≤H1wvvYy1t`!l prodp GhαβS : 8 m\αP7`5t of thad↓YS@;*β?0Q( L↑y8<L=λ~_.P12`%n the Star, which i@LABAo=eHAaβ∪?∂↔≤ε6␈∩¬ ∩ε?,Xλ.D≠{Y%D≥≠c!12P 3ure) and @=IMCGα)β≠≥H
-lh≤v.>→; ⊗λ50∂t↓BAMkαc1βC⊗{↔Kπnk';≥∧εv␈⊗>:F∂&≥yb`@ T⊂∩\αha`@LAS@?α8
∧∞{|ZeT≤⎇_.M8πw9H9tv , be @1SWJAβ##∃α≤εF∂∩Dλ N]Xπ4`.dεAgYαK∂,4Tε7ε.=≤⊗bo∞X N
βyrP≤0qupYp¬s, as @'MiK@'v∪↔K≥∧ε7.yy0→]9P∞ @p hA$AMKCHAaQCP~∃β@∧¬vfFu]FN↑Tλ nL=~0↔[9P;t[4∧ be domina`≥h8~∀4TkeβC,ε'ε@|y(
<Y(
≡h≠[nD≥≠h
≥\⎇0⊗≥⊂:42H x7`,lh∞@9ααπC?d¬Fz@λ∩0↔_Tε i@Q`∂.β→C!897`*ects tha`(α↓e@*Tλ l@⊂4r9H9pv %pεAoSαc1β *βS : Yf =8π2`%p¬S@;8∧ε -<[<d 8π2 quch
λ¬`↔OL¬f 4⊃StJJP3@≥H:44`3 p `'αλ $
βs⊂ #usto@5KdAI=KfA]=hACAββK↔∂L S∃β|ε"πx;]↓Q\≤[l@y0vvZw3P$[4ε`∨Mα S'∨w→1↓α&C∃απ∧¬vfFtλ ∞
βsq0[vp ng efv@%` >m\Vwα
_ d∞β2y<CE894[tz4`6e--i@9IKKHαaβS#*απC?d¬Fzπ?~7&.β(∀∞-yxX-]9<\d
_9⊂≠2{2`2 see@8AB
∃aKeO@Bβ←?K←≠SπSL¬vrπ⎇ VrπM WJπ}-w&*∞Mε*∧≡λ mM≠h⊂→[q:0↔are. Nh∂iJ↓CYg↑↓iQCh4∃iQJ↓βa←Yαc=β'~βS#∃εk?OQπ≠?C#M≠S'∂∂#↔↓β>+;↔K∞a7CW↔β?O∃∧εv␈⊗>>F∂&≥⎇`hV=⎇Vn/%Pλ =8;∪∂∀_=P⊂Zv0q6→WαEεB*7P9]vrpy~⎇2V⊂∩P9rbH:42P≤7yydX4v4j≡P37iλ;tr2\x92pY⊂12z≥2y⊂⊃≤97sy_vrt`.g
o@_AiQJ↓McikIJDXA khA∩↓MKCd↓iQChαβS#∃∧k'OS∞[↔Mβ|∧bπ& Tπε∂>@λ∞⎇;≠λ ={]~-n9#"NMh_Y$∞→<\ ↑≥8= \∞h_-lλ∩(∞<αrP %vidence fOp∧AiQ%fAaKIaKik¬iS←\8~∀
∀$∩∩∩∩4ZA'C4~∀4Ri555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555hh(4*,¬f"ε|d¬>␈-:2∧&≤|W∨ Q%"RR%%"RR%%"RR%%"RR!Q"jjUURjhQ$hPQ e∨\-&.∨G$¬>␈-:2∧&≤|W∨"
f∩α≠6QPRv⊗Rlv}eSC
∧εβ ≠⊃→&}v≡Mε∞rλ≥F∞r
8 mM{;{Dπ∩T{mD_=⊂∀*j#bT)←⊂∧Uwy5iH"4sr\z⊂+_H⊃YZFB 0z2N⊂_ZP∪4πv 1981 0339-EST
Frh∂Zt↓∃←]CQQC\A¬YC@9¬≠?3?n{9↓rU≠?1β∂!αJV$:⊗JMph ∃⊗↑ GJOMw"¬>}-5~ε≤¬
.=→y..c"U
wH⊃{n
|nHπ1"C"J⎇|Ztdλ~9y.>λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧∀⎇3LL>+λε⊗αP'7]⊂_\\ P⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂+≠v:vrH_P≥⊂∩yyz`% 35
Today's TopiCq: RT-11 Pascad & C C@=[aSY∃` M↓h∧¬⊗/
K⊂hP∀∧ααα∧
π⊗}},⊗nn≥lr∧.ni↔ε}m\Vw'4¬R∧4z*DBαD
6n∞MNF∞f1Q HH∀λ↔πεLTw~∧β~<l∀∀≤[m,8⎇↓Q@∧P⊂λ⊂⊂⊂$[8∧egrated↓≠EMS
JAβkβ#?7π&K?9↓2α7π;.3π∂S-∪↔KLhP$%↓α↓αC?↔#π 3*αO7πdcSπ∪Xαπ?7εK3↔I∧K9α hP$&←␈∪ ≥∨L≡FN}n4∧6␈$
π⊗↑},⊗nn↑.2¬75`¬/≡↑.0hRUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjhQ!PTε≡LSRβ⊗⊂λ mβ{⊂_N\_P∀∃rr72\p∧ay) 05"`[ '(4∃¬e←4tA↔ 9 β→_↓ChA⊃¬%,Zb@~∃'k UKGhhA∪]cUSerA=\A%(4bbA!¬'πβ_↓C]HA AG←[ASYKeL~∃)↑h@@ACI[iJA¬hA∂
→∪π
ZD~∀4U;#'S/≠7'S@aβ←#L≠!β≠⊗+GW↔w#3eβF Mβπ'3↔KSO≠↔7↔w#@~ε≥`¬d↔≡LUbb∞8Vfg1Q%∧
88∀bε≥lB∧~ =voε≥LW.h→[n$∀U &⊗+C"A⊃""+%T∀x;!Q@εE⊗KVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVFBεA"0]2X
12 No@X@brpD@bldβA6BN h"O↔v#↔II∧∩&2∩8βπQα≥∩%6.`h"OW⊗S↔∂QRαCK??∪π7]_ L@P2w;~y3w6Yw:9W ↔↔εE⊃97vMλ⊂+tv≠4pv@ ¬πQ←AbDA/∃giMSα+3⊃↓d∪'32<αNJ%lZ1x∀Ph"+W≤εBπ> ≡Bε&≡:FNv}Y↔∞F↑4ε
π∞-v/⊗≥]VNvtλVw6≤-vvN]nBε7-yRε∞d w,~;X.∂ εE /perating syste@4AoSi ASif↓kiSY%iSKf}@@Q$AiQS9P
α∀λλl≥H≥→-Mα⊂:4→F@
didference, bqt Im loOhπS@;8∧ε&←$λ M}Xεpvλ22s )niti@=]fAQ∃aJ\\8R\4U;#πQ∧ K∃β&C∃β∂,ε',;]≠∂∀_=P⊂Zv0q6→P2w;~y0∂nments ? I@_A∩AQ¬HAi↑↓OkKgLX~*L∧Bπ≡∨↔ hPα4{,≥≠≥_-Mh
≥l]≠ λ
mβz⊂,Yz⊂92Xv6<P_{0t`,able)
↓F@=` C hSπ;⊃∧kπg (h &V≥~⊃αA¬≠gOS,h4(ε.s'`4Ph"πK*βS#↔⊗)β/SF+CM↓βqP@@ ¬!4[4∧ @.4⊂⊂∀%P %U++#%U++#%U++ ⊗KVVVFKVVVFKVVFEβE"0z→]⊂⊂@3 N`∨lbr`@λ↓E@+ε5U¬≥AQ$7⊗⎇S"∧y;Y$λ==≤L←+2≥-mα2|P∂ zz9→|Vd:[4∧ey at CRI)KL>
Su@ UKGhβQαπC∧¬F*?4 FO≡⊃Q&≡≠$λ∃-∀Q6%Y∃3Sλ[(_=∧
tR+)9β"C!*~→(
@pr6⊂∀z92`%t @∃←U` 6≥DαC ∀ f␈2dε∪KC∃∀ε≡}nL⊗Nw4λ
(→P↔[4∧owing oN page
188~∀4R∩3 ?tλ
=λ⊂~~2P x≤4∧e III i@L@AeKβ#WKm_ L@P:7P≥42P -ar`↔Kβ#C &≤8 %D≥~→$∧_{p⊗\0w<FB860w≤β to tu@I\@ASβ#@~α h l><hλ∞MβP⊂ 4he StratedπSF@↓]Kn@↓aeOIUGif@Ac@;&+@ (,LW6.Mzεn∞β]⊗λ7w2Pλ4πf whic@ @AQCLAEKK8@AG←α#∃7l≥V.λλ iM<x ↔ P⊂⊂∪VwzP⊂_y2FE≠4πoking @¬h@Ai!J@A[=gh@AM←aQSMiSGCQKH@Aα ;⊃↓¬β?←↔⊗3W1↓∧;@⊗∂
⊗∨~\X
≡~;YaQXεpqZ4p∞e in the history h∂LAαkπ;=_ LE hλ∞p|yP∪y↔⊂⊂∩4πbs as He pu@Q`
↓αd¬↔< εE 4hrge@≥PASH↓aCGKβ→1↓↓∧c'O¬bβ←#'≤A↓β7∂Iβ ↔≤¬vn(λ⊂.∞≠→( ~β⊗⊂⊂~yP0@ computer
λ¬C@'n+⊃↓β∂!↓βSF)↓β?4∧fN≡T∧εn∂-<W"r∧∧∧O"∧ ε∂~∧ F∂&∃Pλ∧ 9Y⊂λ;wy2 x97`#essiNe
fUncti@=]fHAα @~π|X
D_<h ∀≤≤[l↑X; ⊂≥40z permits noviceS to @
aKCi∀@AGQ¬aif~)C]HA=iQKdαβ⊂∨⊗≡λ
≤|k@⊂λ$z⊂ #ost $30 million to develOp."
The comment @¬EWkhαα3'Oλ∧ε⊗.≥lrα↔M Rεnβ|p~λ9wx4~yz4qXz2r and powerful
gpaphics- Editine machife in the history of mankind" sounds Like hype.
Butdkes anyone have any more substaftial information about Lisa?
C@=kYHA%hAa←McSEYdAEJA∧A'[C1YaCY,A[CG!S]J↑4∀~∀Z5∂K]J4∀~∀Z4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZ~(~∃ CQJt@bβ→α;∨4+7 ↔⊂∧β K∧∀β∪≠&Wαl-:APT\[{'$∀⎇→.l;H∃¬d∩z0→≤βch <SK at MIT-MC>
SubjEct: Manuf@¬Gike∃efAC9HAS]QKOeCQKHA∨∧~∀4T#?πMε ;g?v)β/;⎇9β/→ε β[↔v#?Iβ⎇##↔I∧εFF∞d ε/⊗␈∧π&F≡@λ
≡h~3Nm{≥Q,D~;@∞M→(β!,→<p∀Yw⊂7`& an Integrated↓_∞¬β≥KOS↔h∧αF∂D
FF*∞↑6/∩|≡πεf≤<↔&N⎇`εf/lX ¬∀β"U
=λ⊂≠Zv6⊂+Zw∨FEβE)wvYP6pw≥s0q`4urers are ondy inve@MiSOCQS]NA⊃Sgie%E`↔S,!βOG≤εF.j
_ n>9<h↓QJ∪s
M=Y0~≥4V⊂'⊂αI) Op are onlY looKing at hardp∂CE∀ACMHαβ3πl}V∞≡Tλ
.yzriCE∀!'∀∀W⊂⊂∩(⊂& X9P9`%ems @Q↑AEJ↓SO]←β∪';≥α∪? ≠L∧6*∩ ≡W&}\≡FN}dλ
-d→X=M}H≠qAQY>≤ ↑]λ⊂→↑yz2v\β fo@HAiQJ↓K]OS9KCdAβ;#'∂@β'Mβ≤¬vw',≡'JπMtπ∨&≡LVn8π:9H397fCE:42H892`3i` K]PAP∨→∧BAβπ⊗{WQαE↓∨Mβ⊗{3∃βL¬bπ& Tε}⊗m_λlUβ⊂⊂+Xw3P(≤4πbably~∃β;?9∨ ∧εF∂lTε
π|X
D~;] \|X= \λ≤}.>→; ⊂→αh∂dAαC'OS|ε&N≡≥Dπε.≤8 mnh
~.D≥z0⊗≠⊂12FB4¬es@MrAk]⊃Ke@;,∧↔&Bβλ∩$∞⎇<p_→qz∀Wλ⊂ BM hos@PAIJA)←]NA¬]HAi!JA'C8A∃@?α8Rε6β{~n1"Y≠md⎇λ⊂→→pv6 9 hav@∀AiQJ↓` '∨G!βS?|¬G4≠x@ ,8zyn
⎇;Y¬@⊂⊂$w≥2y q]4{2P→4πesn't
Have A q`≥Sα3?KTλ
.≤αy⊂ )np Ke→CGJvαβS#↔Jβ+@/>@λ
=Y( ∀≠≠p~λ4πf @Q←←Yf↓iQChαβ∂πaQ&⊗* 8 m\X;Y,Dλ⊃3M∨λ_<∞∞XπpqZ∀W⊂⊂∀'b&@ has A u`≥Sα3?K∃¬+O/$λλ-lλ≤⊂→≠qy0vCE0 nterface(λAEUhAiQ∃SdASαkC &]\Vwε≤M⊗}r∞8
∞0z2s↑P;t`,l loSe de@∀Ai↑A1CGVA=Hλ$,;⊗≡f↑5bHαC"J@tz4≥42P)Z⎇2P /d∧AiQ∀A∨αA5Ce@/,εBbπ≥zRε@8∧st≥⊂:44[5P:4→y2P&Zst: be ONE
∃Gα{7CπwIβS#∂!β'M∧∧WGεMx M≥Yh⊃N↑≥<Y$
;]→,@y0z2Y⊂7s &ice SysteM des@%H∂9β|¬bελQ( n]=_8ML(≥≠m⎇λ
→%LiKλ I4tλ
\8z~-l(≠p→λ92py[w0q6→P30q\βi`≠Sαc∃%9ααβ@/Dλ nM→<C!:40wλ,2y7↑⊗⊂$P_pp∞'t thi@9P
β?2β?;∃ph (αK ⊗KVVV@--)--
-)--4ZRZZαi555h¬RjjQQ hTL≡F+R∧⊂
∧ Xπ{ %mberbr`!α⊂λεπ,¬~ Kbi`∀
λ@
e←αi`∩∧L≥fN8ε⊂& α We@%]eKDαyIY@8ππQαlJQ6εKp4*O,∧&V.>@∞D
≠x :_q0 e Smal@1iC@3X∧ε@<αy72[⊂4w @ε~∧~)∪\Ae∃aP∪@∀λ
t⊂εpy~β(
)@,∧6@<αy !Sh¬A: The @%IKBAα{⊂∩ε∀λ
}]_8ML(⊂ `-alltalk kep¬P≠↔`h ⊗NβH⊂d∞{x
w→9P3w[p∧ s@UaKeMαK∂'πd¬GJ@λ_].D≤∧w`5 shoUld keep i@8AP↔≥lBπimpl@∃[K]i∃HAS\↓
β .≠πWO*βS#↔Jβ∪↔C,s⊃β?rβS#∃∧+;['⊗{;7↔w!β'9∧εvFN=∧π&FTλ0hVα;<
L993NL=~3md≤Y<m≤α2y]λ2p ther the opep¬CiS9H
βOM≠S↔5αC'→β∞se%β|ε"π& QPVF≡,G>∂,TαFNd
FF/,Tw~εm}FFNlpλ =|\Y.x7w2~w3P:≠P0w operatifgqystem).
Acce@M`
βSzβS#∃ε∪'Q]\↔πε\@λ M<|∪ ∨(_;LD≠⎇~ ↑H∩+it→→=M≤y<h
≡h≠~-<=z<lQ"Y→. 8π22[:⊂9l\z2v@-depe@9IK]h0ACMH↓iQJAACeif↓iQChαβ∪?9?!β∪↔∧∧Vv"
⎇bπ& QPF← Z&∂&≥lrπ∨≡:F.j
x D
_<Y∞|<Y( ≡Y(≤∞-βq0q≠<P4gλ)vpv≠8∧alk code rather¬
@QQCLAαK9βSF)β/↔⊗s↔1→ααS#∃¬≠↔∂?v!β/'v!β >dλ
8π3yH0y2P≥47qrH:40zλ40{ % to
rp \AYKerAβ W'∂↑ce " ≥f"ε≥lF.∞Dλ∞-}(≠:,]≥λ⊂⊃→w2s$]⊂1<P≥y0r4[3P:4≠yrP /nce
in C and attempti`≥NαβS :
\⊗↑(≥~ T⊂h⊂⊃[p2P8≠y:0q≠2W⊂⊂∩P27w z⊂5w≠{P47]FE6zXt⊂7`& the k` e]∃XA[C-KfAk@AiQJ↓ISegβ!β/'v!β >dλ
8π3yH0w2~7{P6]qt⊂ 4he~∃β≠↔∂?v!β/'v!`~π Z&F∂∞4π&F↑,RεO4 ∩¬F↑-wBπ Z'≡}dλ↔⊗←]lBπ>
tε≡∞dλλm⎇990↔≥∨FEεB⊗VVFKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVFKVVVVKFEεE⊃0z2]λ_Z⊂'≠{2vq→y⊂⊂@981 "β↓aAIl*NP4T3K >W$∧&∞βZ0∩[⊂"↔ U` C]IKD@yα#3]β∂!α6& jε%@aQ hT≥`λ∞ <≠⊂≤H:7P)XvP%r[20v ,8∧A%∧εFFNβZ`⊂≡wzP #an rest assureD that sp∪Gβ#↔7LhS3'<Tπ&FTλ↔ε}MH d∞z;⊂⊗λ50∂d↓EJAI=[S@;∞sQβπn{;≥β>{C/O& S'?pk∂3π≤ε0hV=⎇Wπ=→0→≤β( @AQQJAe∃Cg←\αβ'Mβ&CπQβ&C↔K∃∧¬↔4_(⊂⊗]qt⊂ ,arge@HAP↔π⊗[↔Qβ4{@∩π=I⊗≡XQ*ε∞≡<≤v.α ≡πεF≤8λ.M9{\d∞~_;D∞~→0→→P4qP→4πr Prkgbam development @MsgiK5bT4U##'Mbβ'9β'+@⊗rDλ
.P12aXzyrP≥42y2H0y2P≠7z⊂*~0z⊂ -any prkgram deVelopeps
In the world, but there are a @]Q←YJ↓YP∨Q∧{⊂∩π<\7⊗/L≡&N∂5APF↔↑8
-l<|| ]|≠⊃%D_8pm};]_-n≤kλ ]Yz;L\<\k∧ x<@⊂→2yt`'ners, fashion
desi@≥]Kef0AP↔W≡K∂'πw→1β≠L¬FjNβ8:l↑\kλ ≥Yλ≤mt≠{@⊗λ0v6⊂≠pε whom midπQh~)g←[K⊃CrAE∃]KMSβ!β≠K|iβ;↔∂!β∂?oβWS↔⊂k πO,!βπC∧¬FN≡≡M⊗}w5`λ∧
t⎇→-≥XY0→→β i`&4⊃S\A∧AO←←⊂Aa←G%iS←\αβS-β↑s?]i∧C∃β'~βS#∃∧ WS#⎇⊃β >dλ
(∞_∞_⊂; %p¬gS←8AP∨_hRS'OL≠π3
bβ¬βC∂∪S'∂,¬F∂⊗β_ P≤v4q`+, us@∃H G⊃bβ∂#↔∂↓1βπv!β@>]H ¬];<∪ ]9;] \β"P⊂\864`#atioN that is Richtly se@1YSMNαβ[↔KJβ←.MEbα∧
_ d {{< ≥↑+λ
=y]≥l≡Y#"H≡]_k∧
<h⊂$
→89 ↑H~0↔λ:42P→4rv"λ4πf Slickappl@%GCiSα{9βC∞≠'π∨-→βKWvs';≤hS?9β≤¬ε.∂∧λλm⎇<≥5 ↑\h⊂∪≠y⊂:4→P6py\β mark` hX↓C]HA$AiQS9P
βSF+eβO& ;⊃β&yβ∪<hS↔cS⊗+7.β≡(∞|αv6↔βE
Now, @¬[←]N↓iQ←G∀Ao←e-giCi%←]fAβ##πQ∧εvNfD &*ε\≡&↑=→1∧ Y|@⊂≤93sy_vBE $evelOpient, it is p@=`∂O'⊗c∃βSF Qαπ∧¬vffu]FN↑T∞7O∨LYW4≥z3
D_Y( M{:;L≥] C!$V⊂*≠wV⊂ 3ometim` fAα≠?7Cd∧⊗Nr∞Mε∂"∞Mε.O$
6}↔L¬x.,(~0→H10qe]py2_w2εE≤94vt]4{2Wλ⊂!:zλ0z⊂']42y≥4rr`3, @∩Aβ∪↔ ∪,≠Qβ?p∧εF␈tλλ,NX;Xl\λ_;LD→8<o∀≥≠c!.αyrP_w2⊂ -o` Ke8AShAαK@~R∧ ↔"εLZε.vN4ε}r
←∩εN⎇xBbα _bπN|¬( ={<_.,(⊂<
⎇≠≠taQ]≠h ≥≠λ⊂~~2P3w[r⊂4b→pyP$I{2P 3eaf @=\A→SM`A7∞≠#'≠,ε2ε∞l@λ
⎇H≥P.-9⎇0→H,2y7↑∧¬∃!¬%εAgegiK[LXAiQ∃rA[CdAY←←,AECG-oCeHαaβ W ∧ε≡}↑ ↔⊗.D
Fzπ⎇ ↔"ε]}7"π Ywε@→#"M≥H≥~ T≥{p→≠2⊂0y→P:y`)ng (not only o@8A∪¬~αβ πS≤AβOG≤εF.o4λ'/"
⎇b∧_8
0CE#rg→y0v⊂≥4p
e sha`%%]NAgβKOS↔o→βπ≠ ∧ε␈& X D∞~~0↔→βs o@_AaQCPASIVαI1β'αDw4≠[p~βE9wP_0r↔ One ca`≤A⊃↑Ao←β∪@≡(≥~ ≥H_p↔\<p ng U`≥SβA0∩αλ≥f"πM Rπ≡≥lF␈:∞8∞.>→; ⊂≠w
@QQJAβA←YY↑↓SfA]=hAQC1H 7 ∞!`~ε≤dπ&F←∀ππ=λ⊂∀[⊂0P 'p¬CaQ%GC@1∧¬⊗wπ↑@λ L=Z0⊃YP4p∀
λ¬g←K1HAEJ↓ck@'&)β∨?|∧Bε↔∀λ
|α0p→'pεAgi¬]ICe⊃`
8Q!P@(8ε9`/, p∪←β)βπK*β7'O& ≡∞βH⊂∀[⊂8 oUp∧ACGβ≠↔KSL¬vrπM ↔"πM R¬∨L≡"εO4λ
(≠p↔≠<@
@5CGQS9JAi↑↓QCmJ↓EKK\↓[CeW∃iKHA rA1Kβ∪?aβ&CπQβ> @~ε,≡6.α
x D∞~→(λ≥≥≠c!
9→0⊂\Tε The Xeph∂`@Db``AMGSK]QS@≠≤4∧Nvmz&n∂M_ md∀≤[l<αyy`/r, o@HAoQCQKmKd4⊃iQJ↓KqiKβ∪;π⊃∧¬V∂⊗αy0~~w3P7_vrP )pεP⊃βM→βπ∪α=rε}dλ
(≠8.5rz. At↓SfAW9←o\~)S]iKβ∪;π∪eIβπM∧εFF*λMvgε
≥bbε≥lBεODλ
.P0P 2ea`_AββC >},⊗jNLZf.f|
V.wDλ o≡⎇→;!QY[tD∞~→( ≥]→4MM<| (D≤}0→]2rW By anyone's s@QC]ICIIf@1∧¬↔'~∞X l↑H~3NL<YP,<#"P∀\β up th∞Ai!JAgi¬iJA←α1βS#*βπKQ∧∧⊗v"
≡2ε}lTε}H≥~ T_Y4nD≥~~-l|h_.
⎇;Y¬A ¬∀$IvP77]⊂1w`-parine it tk oTher @QQS@;?→β'9εKSMβ≡cπOM¬≠=β7,≠!βπ_h ⊗≡⎇↑ε∂⊗α;Yd∞≠h≥
t≥~→$∞Y<p~λ4πf The worh H\α↓αS#/∪∃β'α=b?"∞h .<P6zXt⊂4gλ4z1FBαclass, anyway.) You can↓EkrAβ##↔∃∧3@⊗}T ε/⊗|ελλ]→8p~≤4π-OPtical Sy`'QK[f~(Q⊗>~I8 (!Q"jjUURjjUQRjjUURjjUQRjjUQRjjUQPhPβ"Q-lλ≠qD
{|Zj4⊃~9l↑⎇β"E%JJJE%JJJE%JJJE%JJC!%+++%U+#"D↓ ¬εEβ)zq5→qz≥⊂∃wy5iH 4sr\z⊂+_H⊃YP⊗
λ∧@≡bX[∃@?αeSC
∧εβ !→&}v≡Mε∞rλ≥F∞r
8 mM{;sDπα!)`/l a`(ααJVR<*JMyJP≡␈-:2∧&≤|W∨"
f∩α≠4¬C!λα0r2Nα 16 Lh∂l@Drpb@@fd`[∃' ~∃→aP∨5Rα+?;∂##πdλ⊗f∞βH∀m⎇≠{;md∂∩Tm⎇λ_=∧
U0
#Qi)P≡
λ¬%Kaαce /Mw"¬>}-5~ε≤@λ
.αz3r\αs
To: @/=` /MR↓d4(hR←?K]→α∪'>+OQ↓α↓↓↓↓α↓↓α]x LL>+λε⊗β⊂'7]⊂_\\ P⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂+≠v:vrH_P≥⊂∩yyz`% 36
ToDay's Tkpi@
`
i↓α↓α
α≤¬voε≥H .9P {_tp able F@I←ZA ∃π ⊗LhP$&←⎇∪ ≥∨L≡FN}n4ε6@|H∀∞-βsy0[vry9H+9W Users
↓ More On The "Lisa" @@I←UKGP~∀ZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZ4Ph*&≤LSRβ⊗T∧v@⎇Y0⊗X2y⊂_N\_P_ X≤VbTjεE#≤αh∂Zt↓)QJA5←@∪↔⊗ S?Iβb*O?bβπQα↔+S∨↔↔→x (*:V⊗V\:CB¬⎇x MiP y_t4s2\FEεE∃42P+[y1aP⊂y1t4]2yP \2P5r\8⊂4`. two ph CGα+E 2
Mε*πN,⊗&OM→vv∞Dλ
L8y( mβyεE→4sri]⊂0y1Z4{2`3 is at EIT-AI @%\AiQ∀AM@'d∧R∧∃1QH[,p∂b⊂h oP∃dπRKS. A @
←ab~)←@→β&C∃βπ⊗≠#'[,ε2ε∂,Tε∞g=tε↑<≥ ≡λ∀].Ly<\eD~≠ul↑Y<@ ≥≠λ_N↑λ≥~ T≠;p→]∧@
rec` ]h↓Sggkα+@~ε≤,Rε@yYP⊗~w2W⊃8¬e @Q↑A≠∪P[β∩OLAeKG∃]hAI%`∂-β∧ε&}⊗L]W
b∞Mε(h,≡&≡F≤lW4≥y0→→P77`4 accEpπgCE1JAMe=ZA6M!6ε%bβO=αJβK↔S⊗K↔[↔ βS#∃∧∧Vw&≡,PhV≡,6FOlTε'⊗⎇Pλ ,8z⎇.∧≥_< ↑h_=∧
]=→l↑\kC!∧@
Now that the dick proBlees q` KZαβS : ,Rε≡LX↔⊗.D
Wαε≡@λ Y5 0)∃α⊂$P_vPεE→2p e@QS]NAQQJA←α3⊂⊗F≥lRε6α;⊃.P397[P:42H+wy5TP y1Z4{2P_z⊂):]3ry9K⊂ s⊂≡wzFE~0{2P≠2rr⊂→4πr @QQJAMαK3↔M∧¬vr¬.X
@py9P→4πr any reason0AiQKαqβC3. O*∞8 -lβ"[,≥8ε⊂ 4o Worhπ&K%∃ckKgQ↓≠∪(5β∩AC9HA%∧εvNfD
&/'-_ .l(≥~ ](→P→≠vP:0\2P0sXtp∞.
λ
MTFBWY,
JSol
∀~(ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4~∀
∃⊃CiJtbbA≥=mK[E∃d@br`b@`Dβ Q6B≥!↓"O,s∪πeHh* K}iiβ3∂+K↔9ε QαV≤b¬6O.≠WKπ'I↓"3∂+K↔9¬;↔';∨#↔'9Hh"OW⊗S↔∂QRα
β∂}kC'3/∪L4*&yiα↑⎇∩.Mβ∂!αε$hP4*SF+K∃βLε2ε
l⊗O⊗M∀ε7.MD∧~ε=yWεNLZ"εNd
FF*λHT≥4h∪
≤\X<O∃β⊂⊂$IvP77]εE9z\2P;t→z42yλ4z⊂4\P7y4Yw:2rλ:7{p\29P)∃⊗XXVλ))l⊗LXV⊂7\⊂17j~↔↔↔εBεE⊗FS0zy2[⊗VFEβE(↔)K⊂⊂$z yP39→rWεEβE⊗Vf∃VVFEβE⊗VVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVFEεB"0z2N⊂_ZP∪5{2vX2y⊂_N\_P_L≥→≠VQijεE⊃97v]λ&py5H&↔⊂&Zv62yλ≡&df∪"i⊂0]⊂&dj `d←εB)zq5→qz≥⊂∃wy5iH"4sr\z⊂+_H⊃YZFBεE⊂⊂λ⊂$w⊂≤2yx'[9rP:≠P"&+IyP92[py5yH0q7z]⊂:44[3yP6~urP*~2P x≠v67P≤97q0X6<FE≠4πsine out to slick end-user @¬aaYS
CiS←9fXA∩↓iQS],AaKe!CafA∧AWKr↓a←S]P~∃ACLAEKK8A←mKIY←←W∃H\@Am∩AQCYJAgKα+9β7∞S?Iβ≡{7CπvK↔Mβf{O¬β↔IβCK␈3'∪'v84) v{97C⊗{↔Kπnkπ 3*⊃↓#πv!βS#/→β#π⊗!βS=¬+C∨K∞#∃1βNs≠#↔FK &UDε/&5a⊂hW?~7&.↑4ε>8<Y,D≥≠h∞ <]~,>;_<D¬≥<u,≥≠≡(
≥X{|N,8⎇∀H82y1Yx:4`/ns oF
"s@1SGVDαβ↔;⊃o+OπI∧ CC3L≠πS'}sM:Uααπ3SF{W∂!εKQβ'~βCK?⊗ #e∧∧⊗≡∨↑,↔&*∞Mε∂ Q-V␈∨DλVv"↑↑6/↔4 ↔⊗*
mw"π∞-v?⊗≥]V/↔4 ⊗v"∞Mε∂"
≡BεO4λ
(≤s
≤zc"L≡≤≠∩,<=~0↔[9P∀2K3W⊗+∩i`a`S!PP 4hat Sell systems, iT is also Prh∂EC Yr4T∧⊗≡∨↑,↔&*∞Mrε∂>:Vn(≥~ ≡λ≠;n>λ≤p⊗~quP \864aXz4ww≤β ⊃J9N\XAY∪'&≤
2
%∧εvNfAQ&⊗*∞}&O'L]bε↔most sales wilL be via demand↓M←dAACeiS
kYCdαβCπ∂↑ ∨↔MαC∃;≥r`4)
>CπQβn ∂#'v)β∪=∧Iβ;↔,!β'→∧Iβ←πw!βS=π∪W9α4JN&∞ b¬ ↓hπbα∃⎇ ↔"ε\≤6FNlTε&xQ)∩εV\\Bπ&t
'.rλL⊗.ε≥NW≠z$ W&~e∀α¬ε↑-ε∂π4λ
(_Y.>λ∪p$∞}<u ]<h∃m≥≠λ_LQ ]|M≡≥→;D ↑(≤l↑_<X.L(≤{lnα;py→P;2w→7y9P≤p¬rv@%]NACLA∨ ~≥bAM←β⊃βOG≤εF.o4∞7.≡↓Q&∂~λ≡ε}fMubα¬,\v∂⊗N5B∧n≡-2αD]→Ff/%D∧&∞ML∃≡}nA⊂hPβ"K%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U++#!! Q_.L,¬⊂_MP'7`6 1981 141\[ '(4∃≠K}iiα≥uαε2⊗4Jε!β∂!α6&"j⊗⊗∞_h ∃∨\-&.∨G$¬≡n≥H ∞L8ε5@ 80 bibhe
↓So jus@PAoQKIJAI↑↓∩@ABαβ#W\-F*π>NV&.nA∩ε>t
Fzε|X
∧ (_sn∂(≠p∪λ:42FB)vpv≠8∧alK 80 Speci@→SGCi%←]fA ←←VA¬]HAi!J@f@Aα-β LεF*π?_ nL8εP*_x2P∨
α I read in Infoworh HAQQChAβ##∃α∂βC &T ∃2ε≡4β#Cεεαε⊗≡8 ,EHλ∩$∞y90⊗CE:7P≤2rr`-ber @Ik[Okβ∪@~πM ↔"πM WJε ≤Bε∂Dλ \<⎇⊂≥42P 7indo@\Aa←eQS←\A=Hλ4*=V∞fNL⊗fZ¬ ∧∞αx↔εBεA∧j~2P$g→5{wi≠2⊂0y≥4qv % ad`'<A`∪πf[↔↓β∞∪?WQ∧εG>z
}FF/$λ↔πεLQP@,{{<∞↑→<\g∧_(∀L\α2ydYw⊂7`& the ApplE II @→←d@lQ⊗AGQ%`XAC9HAg←5JAg←β∪Qβ?0h#C?↔#π ∪*↓#πL⊂∧`>x[p→≠2P$TH≠_λ000 base`λA[¬GQS]∀@ZZAA←ggSα∪3eβ≤¬v&*]l⊗n9β"NM→(∪,≤zy0↔≥7ytπβE
I be@1S@↔[*βS#π ∧¬&∞βY≡$
<h⊂≠[y0 i@9H
β?p∧ε
βe εελ_X.≤αr⊂&Xqt4g→T∧ too(
∃%\AMC
hXA∩↓EKhAαSWOQ∧ /W ∧ε/6↑/⊗}vTλ
.P3w`)ng "YEShAα∪↔∂π,ε6*ε|dπ&FQQ& >Y8= ↑H≤p_→p¬d/@A←oKdαzJε5ph ⊂@"K ⊗KTVV@--)--
-)--4ZRZZ4ZRZZαi554hP4*∪∂#∃i↓α⊂
$ Xπ{ %mberbr`!α⊂λε&nL$eX4p
εB εro@4p α ⊗Kπ9αα¬b∧fMx∞,D∂∪∪ @lb⊂ !t @≠∪P[β∩|4⊂
OW⊗S↔∂QRαπCCd∧Rε∞βY⊂ d∧i`'α ≤4λhP4*←FK3∃β4¬↔==~0↔→β A`!ββ3∃β≤∧W6/,≥Bε@8πw:~9P0s[T∧ I caught a @≥YSKaαc∃β?2β¬β |πhWM ↔"ε-x LT≠[h∞,<y0⊗X4∧ence to any @
keeKαsQαπαλ
L(≤⊂→≠p∧uc@PX ↓αJβ@≡vβ{p_→rεE !p¬P∨Wv!β¬β⊗KQβπv!βK↔∞!βC#*β7.β;p→H840zλ82w`0le had taci` HAα{9βSF)β@>≥H ∞P7sεBαp QKαK@∩ε>X&N≡≥H e@⊂⊂ v≥47p∃gh @∩Aα≠?W3 ∧ε⊗*∞}&}vuD∧Jε⎇x
∧∞~→(∞≡≤[sLq"Z;.∞Y<p→Zww⊂ 4hat I saw↓iQKSβ⊃↓?Mzαπ≡\8 L↑ h∀∞-y≥0⊃]⊂∀:4~yP;p\β the jew
λproducts deve@1←a[KαsQβ∨⊗{WA∃aPPHαU~ T→→=M≤y(∩$∞x=`⊂≠4πoked much liKe a VT-100 (same foRm facth∂dR↓C]HA!CH~∃∧AS←Kβ≠∃)↓¬##↔eπ;↔K∃∧+cC↔⊗K7.nM⊗v:∞⎇↔&B 9vf@|H⊃n <~~,4≤≤Z-nα2y9K⊂0w2λ$FE']2y42Xy2⊂9[vrP2~yqzi\tsw o` Ai!JAckα 3'SJβ?2∞Mε*ε-~Fn∂∞λ ,D→~<n
_8 Wλ⊂$FE≥pyP:[0q6"H:7P &ind out what pRocesSor is beiNe us@∃HXAEUhA∩Aα#'⊃βf+πK_hSS#π ∧εO"
≡2ε
∧∧-D Z8
⊂_t4x↔λ⊂*42↑P;ri→P6wi]⊂4w:→y2yj→r⊂4wλ6|P2↑82y4Yw1rFB;tz4λ:42P⊂ww;2\3rw:λ*2q`(nologies clqster co@5[k]Sα≠πS'}sMβπv!α>LhSπK∂FKS↔∂'+K∃8hP4*'2α%β#∞!βS=ε;W↔O~α%β←␈+3⊃β≡ eβSF Qαππβ3∃βLε2π'/→⊗v:∞Mrε↔]_ D_(⊂⊃\5yyFB12z;Yrp∞ @QQJA1∃eP∨aα:OSπ⊂∧rε∞l@π&FTλ6}wlX L|;]
L8z≠M⎇≠yz,↑h≤}.>→; ↔λ⊂*42↑FE1w]v2⊂ !ctually have somathing as far as the hardware is @
←]GKI]KHX↓Ech~)∩AoCM\OhAβ#?=β≤εW⊗* ≤&␈/Dλ
8<@⊂≤ws:;Xy2P1\2{WεBε@
Bria`≤~(~∀ZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZ
∀4⊃↔≠ ∧ε}H⊂ w\5iP"~pπesT
******************* α-4ZZZZ4~∀@~(~∀→'kE)KGht↓/←eWLA SO∃ghA,D@Ffn4∀@≡b\[≥Ol4pb@@@`dn∪)←]Ci!C\Aβ1C\A'α{3?7}q↓r*≤{1βπ ∧¬∃-HxU∃≠d↓∃>␈-:2∧&≤|W∨"
f∩α≠6qPT&≡LSRβ⊗pλ M⎇H '↔ ( ε&- 1*:β"QN-{.H -{X=
;H⊂-L8π⊂)[v7vw[⊂≡%)[v⊂0zλ)*b#Qi)←εBαRepLy-to: WorkS adRqtgers
To: Works: ;
WorkS Digest Tu@∃gACr0@bnA9←l@bβIaE↓α↓↓↓↓αα[/3,k∃↓EβQα'O∨+∃↓MαqPPh*Mv&∂∀}2¬&}
⊗∨≠!∀ααα∧ f/:
,⊗&Nt
6F∞=0∧≡}↑∞W&/!Q"αα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧αα¬=\⊗fgL≥FZ∧<X Ml9λ∩-d⊂c"A⊃(∪8--|H⊂m}\≠|L≡~;{N4_;Y∧
{|Zn>_=~-⎇\c"A⊃(λλ∧∧λλλ∧λ[{zd
Y9Y.,;Xp∩CEDDQ"a`∃S C COmpilEp
α-
------------------------
---------------------------------------
---
Date: 1XA≥←mα+7 ↔⊂∧β Kαλ(ε⊗
+(Zuβ"Hn[{.D _;Zd
x;~l↑H_=∧λpεjVLX FE∀zq5 %ct: new Radig Shack↓G←[aUiKd~(~∃)Q∀AGkeIK]hA∃→ π%∩>:&≥→β∂3∞K7Mβ&CπQβ&C∃β;,εr¬&≥lGJε=x .∞αz2yλ;tv6λ12P≠∞__⊂⊂-
based, And be kut↓S\A
α+ β?∩α7πK≡A↓EeC⊃0⊂h!Q"jjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUUPhPβ"Q ≡→.Hε⊗β⊂'7]⊂_\\ P_X≥ ≠⊂ )UεA# 2om2 Deuts@
PAChααBεJ~j6εB_h"OW⊗S↔∂QRαK∃i¬;?K∞~α∪'∨-≠QαYλ∧α≠≠QQ hU,Tπ&FT
6n∞MJF∞f4
6/⊗lYBεNdλ3R∧α(⊂≠[zv2⊂→zryyH:42P_zy92[:⊂5r\52v⊂~yFE X7zz
X∩P 2elatively envi@I←][KαsQ7'v#↔C↔v#↔;Q∧∧⊗v"ε6α(h,]g6O-⎇fn.β] ,L<→0↔→2w:↔λ⊂ λo@]KmKd0AiQKIJASf↓C]@?&C↔IβNkC/K& ;Aβ∧{';QRβS#∀hRO7πd¬G&∞β~`∞∨<⎇→-T~;XmNαr2yH4z9P≠{w⊂$[9z9:Xz4wwλ9rz, and↓iQJ@\`@∀Q(
-l{≥9 ↑h≥~ T→;=-L=≠p→λ30∂r↓ShL@↓∪@→βL{Uβπ⊗)β∨?Ns⊂~πMtπ↔;H≠L≡~=Q$
88z
≥Y#"M≥\⎇≤N\⎇~0↔[9P90]42y thanthe SmallTalk bytec@=IKfX↓s←jA]SYXA!CmJAβ#<4+?∪'S∃πK?WI∧¬w>r 8 m↑~;⊃.⊂0w2λ22q`/mpilEp∧XAC9HAI↑↓g←[J↓GCeK→kXAi!S]GSαs≤4+∞∪?WQ∧¬ε␈:∞Mrπ⊗↑L⊗Nr∞Mε*ε>X N2w:≤62pyXw:⊂ 0rkperties o` Ae∃Cg←]¬EQr~)ISeK
hA[CAaSMNαβ ↔S>+↔9β&C∃βO␈+C∂∃ε ;⊃β}∪+↔∂ ∧ε≡}L↑2rαλmw$→>_-↑≠→+∧∞z=~↓Q]~→$
{8;
Nα0v5H4w9z≤8qz4[w⊂9b]⊗⊂:4→P22a≥pπge@HAGC\↓QSOQ1SOQh↓iQJA∃qCGh4∃ga←β!β'9ε βCK}≠↔∪W⊗)β ↔Ns∃β↔F+∂WS.!84λhRO7πfcSπM0εO~∞8W"π↑∧π≡z∞Mε∂"∂≥w*ε<≥bπε≥<Rε∞o∀ππ⊗|8 ,N<Y(∞⎇_=→.l<H⊂⊂[2εE)→qwr2H4z⊂ )n an underly`∪]≤AS]gQecGi%←\Ag∃hAoSQQ←kh↓C]rA
QCMO∀Ai↑A%if~∃
CYYKI`
β?∩βS#∃π≠gOS.iβOS↔+∂SW⊗)9↓α6{@∩πM
↔
ε=→f"ε|dπ&F≥lrbε ≡fNvtλ0hW]lF/⊗lX↔&B∞⎇w.fDλ
m}Zh~N↑⎇λ⊃M≥Y+C!! K ⊗KVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVFEβE"0z→]⊂⊂@6 Ngv 198! 10:09:45-EST
Frh∂Zt↓eP↔
ε Qα∞≤ 6V:MA↓"↔∂∪%α∂FK3↔;≡[πM⊃Q%∨.-(V∨#$ V∞V|∧Hλ≥|\≠n,=~;mnh_;LD∃{tMyz0z~ww9FB∧E∧f_yz⊂,Ypy⊂&ZurP$_vp
e@HAP∨→∧j&Qβ> Eβ∂|¬g∨.NM⊗v:∞⎇↔&B∞Mε*∧x⊂ε/⊗|↑hV≡@λλ[⊗∪sEdλ∩( ,;~0∩]2P42H9pyP~w;7`,ved in designing a @⊃CiCE¬gJAMα{@∩Q-⊗w&\}&∂&≥lrε↑li⊗≡* jVv∨M→vw~d∧∧
π>NV&.n@ε}∩
↔~B
M⊗j∧≥lF/↔=⎇bbπ|≡0hWMtε⊗*∞⎇w⊗↑≥lrε}d ⊗rε\M↔&@|K⎇m}Yλ≤∞-xy0→\wy⊂3≥w1z4[w⊂3'\⊂:42H9pvrCE897Z2qz, but↓YCghαβ%β#, K⊃α&K5β←∂→β∂#}{G'≠8∧ε∞vβ⎇~ ↑H≥~ ↑z<k∧∞{h∃
εE 7hole thing may have dadl@∃\AiQI←kOP8@Aβ]eoQ↑X↓ShASLABAaα{@∨≡≤-⊗fOM⊃PG& ≡B∧
tbε≡4ε∞∨NX⊗fgα(⊂~≤αyang to do somethindεA[C)←dAQ∃eJ\~(~∀α∩$∩∪$A5Ce@-∧≠#'3.sG/π_h($∧HH&∂#L¬F.w=<↔≤∧~9∀(h!Q"jjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUUPhPβ"Q ≡→.Hε⊗β⊂'7]⊂_\\ P_Y]
Y]→_Kai`∀
@
e←4tAUC
←Eg←αqβπQπ+←'O_h"OW⊗S↔∂QRα >⎇0λ
,9Y<L]Xy#!(xnH
8{xN={P≥.⎇<xc!!"R(
=Y( ∀≤Y1L↑Y;XlT≥≠h ∀_[{mP2w:~z62rλ$w:2\0qz4]2P( 2ogrammi`≥N4∃ Mm%e←][∃]ifX↓KISi∃HAEr↓
P→α≡ ;∪↔> 31D αr¬=∞&}⊗UDε∞vDλBr∧,≡'∨&}u`hT∀∞εN≡<\BεODλ
.∧→\[mT≤{{,↑z→<LT
≤→.
_<⊂→H30W;[y5yTH0q7z]⊂:;wH;rru\FE0s[U⊂⊂$H92qw\22r≥40z it waq published by McGraw-Hill, but they
don't know anything about It. If you know who has op∧AoS1X~¬aUEYSg AiQSLAE←←,XAaY∃CgJA1KhA[∀AW]←\\∩∀~([
eK⊂A∃CGα{ O?r↓#+π≤{ O?tβW←'≡→$4(hQ555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555jh4(Q(F∂&W$ααα∧ε∪2∧mx
L]8Y0→λ_\\_H→→~8-` ghompi@1Kd}@Q¬OI A∩⊗≥*Mβπv 4*←FKS↔OnKS!∨~βC@.d
Vv&↑ λ
* λ∀J;λε⊂ !nd @%M)&\R4⊂⊂∀$∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧αααλ.&N∞βC"AQK+ ⊗KVVV@--)--
----
----
----
-)~∀4⊂
πl@λ
|β⊂ ↔opkS Di`∂Kgβ 4))RQ)))RQ)))RQ)))RQ($ h¬RjjUUPhR↓Q hPe∨\-&.∨G$¬>␈-:2∧&≤|W∨"
f∩α≠7↓PBv⊗rlvβ⎇K'ε(λ F&l"2M⎇X=~ ≥H⊂; ≥H∀p↔[7vwgλ≡%)g[⊂0z RUTGERS> Tπ←eWLA SO∃ghA,D@FfP4∃↓Ci∀t@bnαα3 ?dε∪KC∀ε#≠β%XU≥ Q(g⊗@{.H -{X=
;H⊂-L8π⊂)[v7vw[⊂≡%)[v⊂0zλ)*`∀GERS <4⊂
K↔∧¬GJ@=≠nD
{|Zj4_8
Rp iO∃af~∃Q↑tA>{@⊗←5$βHh!Q%>␈-:2∧&≤|W∨"∧∧ααα∧∧αα¬|XFv/<L↔JBε∪α∧vβ⎇Hε↔,λ ∧∧λλλ∧∧∃[p⊗≥vrP_H≥⊂$i\zrP→N∧EεE∃4πday's Topics: Exxon's Answe@HA)↑AQQJA'β#πHQ$ααα
λ M|βy0v[tp∞g↓ ]mSβ∪?;↔,¬g'~¬Pλ @x2y0]4p∞g↓'sgi∃ZA-f8A+gKβ⊃α';&+K≠π≤∧PhRUP %U+++%U++#%U+++%U++#%U+++%U++#%U+++%U++ ⊗KVVVVKVVV@-----
----4ZZZZ4ZZ4Ph"&≡LSBβ⊗pλ Mβ{2vX2y⊂_N\_P_Mβ:25-EST
Fr`∨ZhA'iKYK\A(αqα/'↔≠∂!↓e~-βπ ∧∧lMEYT pQ*7.⊗,XλnGHλ⊃/∂≠{C!↓ ¬,7[2|⊂-]t4qdλ4yP"↑<7w pπaKYαc↔↓β≤¬⊗&/|∨↔≥j
_ d∞~→(λ←≤∧7`. company @QQChAαK@_h,.VNfM→f 4⊃>≡
⎇I|h ≥\⎇y.∧≥≠h
>_<@≥H4z⊂ (as ad¬`↔MDε⊗OM\↔αε≥lBε←M W∩εm_λlQ ¬3 %aturepεAiQ¬hA%∧∧⊗jεmx
∧ 9≠⊂↔]pr⊂ 4o diSclo`'∀X ↓αF{←/lX ED≥~→$∞|∧q`4em i@L~∃mKβ∪eβO∧∧V≡N≥Dε≡∂<TαFJlUbbεM→6*¬|≥f*J ≥f"ε=x L<αx:9H9zqtλ0yFEλ2|:2[9tq4[4z<P_w2⊂!]yz7fZ⎇0q4[4z<Qλ9rr`- po @ JAM←β∪↔'∨p∧π&@h≥~ T≤→0↔\42FE≥42y2K⊂⊂*4→P9w`&tp∂CE∀ASfA%[aeKβ≠@≡OlUBε↔↑@λ
L<⎇⊂∩P9p{K⊂:42↑P;r`2e stilhλ~∃α≠?∪'v9β'9∧ β'π≤ε&zε≤∧p→Yvq2`2,∧∩∧~(ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4~∀4T#πS∃R↓E@: mw6.\,Wαβ↔↔β
β⊗p∞FF+14jA ¬# 2om: Stavros E.↓≠CGe¬P∂'Mβb6ε∞α(∀Zε≤¬⊂∪dj⊗fP←εE)]q52`#t: Wor`↔ε↓ SOKMhA,bα↓≠≠W$¬π⊗|}&∞nβ:0↔→β envirgnmentc
λTo: Bi`→Y\AChAM%∩[↔0~∀4T βCK|;Cπ]]⊗v: Yg6O-yfn.β]∞≡<≤⊂↔\8∧s develOpient h∂LAAeP∨∨⊗ 7Md∧∧/F≥↑εf/1Q&∂⊗T ε∂↔l≡&"¬λJ2b∧9ZR∧x;Y ≥→Kλ
pKu-m>λ
∞≥→;⊂⊗λ0s2≥z4v4]4ryTK∧¬
An o@AKeCi%]NAgegiKZαβGWC∧¬w.α9P 2un`≥Sαs⊂~ε|dππ⊗|}&∞o4λ⊗v"∞8
}X9y$
βs⊂"_z0FE
4p∞c@1k@∪'v91βC⊗+OW\≤&gJDλ
(≤∀M||X;.P;t4Xt⊂4v\42vr[8⊂:4→P897Yβramming
envi@I←]KKαsQ%9αα↔cπoβ3↔M∧ K∃α&{CM5α"αb¬]m↔BpQ!PT
∞λ M||X;-]8π3@ qystem su@AaP∨K'→β∂?⎇β↔Kπ&K?9β|∧bπ↔]mfNvt
π⊗}},⊗o~βHλ ≥@εE -ost @AYCGKβ→1βSFKEβ∂|s@≡O>N2ε↑dλλ$∞y=⊂≠pε c@=]eK]QS←]f8@A∪\ααW;∨ ∧ XπyεB4w9j_w1rVλ4z⊂ #onsi@MifA←α1β∂?w3↔;SL¬vw~
⎇bπ& Tπ/≡T v $≤~0_→yP0w→⊂:42CE80y\βage o` Ai∃q`∪W∞aβCπ⊗ 7/LX N∃β⊂⊂"↑0rx6→yP0y→P:42H1ww;→w:4`/ns oF
Multics, TopS-10 (AC@_Aα3'3↔~ %8Q!PT
|Vv/,≥Bπ∂<X D
;]→.,X8y$¬≥~→.,(_<∞ 8<\d∞≠h_LT≠[h∞>_;Y ≡Yλ≠L≥9(→M}C"P~~4yP0[2⊂6w\2w{ %p∧ASh↓SfA←→iK\A%]G←eA←eCi∃HAS]Q↑AiQ∀A∨&A%igKY_R~∃gβ+CC?↔#@~π↑8W$_{{NNY{λ
|β⊂:4→P9:`.nifg↓←@→β¬∪?∂K∞kM9↓∧+cπ7εc↔Mβ∂∪∀4*&{CM5∪↓α↔c,→1αWvKaαOF+31⊃∧"∩Qy ⊗∨'-ebα∧mzF*πM ↔"πM R¬&}∞2k ∧∧&n}m≡F␈∩!Q&O~ -w&B ≥bε␈ X L≡~;Yd∞}<u ](_;LD_;@
≥]→<LL8y+AQ@εE*~2P0q≠{2P1[0yydY4qpz~ww⊂4\β not to Imply that↓iQJA⊃SgiS9GiS←9bACe∀~∃CY]CsfAMQCe`0A]Od↓iQChαβS#∃ε∪↔OQε{K∨πvKkπSL{9βO/βπKπ&+EβSF)β#↔6+3M8hRO?7*β[↔KJβOW∂≤+OO≠,¬Bπ∨≡:F.o4¬∧fO>∧∧n∞=
⊗v*D f␈∩
≥g∨&≥l6*J -G/∩
\⊗wJ
|`hWM Rεf≥lW≠Z
]w⊗* ≥f"ε]}&*ε}Mε/∩
M⊗v/5Dπ∨.=∧ε∂~∞Mε␈≡T &/'|XVph.
&}∨,≥VnNβY`⊂≠0p∞guace, system( and environment, are similaplp∩A Ycee∃H\4U##↔K*β'Mβλβ3πK>)β3'&+CπS,ε&*ε⎇`π&FTλ M≡\⎇⊂≥;wP*≠x4qyK⊂⊂*4→P:44\2⊂0w→∧E3']y:4≥4πpiCpεACe∀AP∪↔∨→β∪'≤≠WOO,!β'9∧εFF.↑8 -Nβ2yVλ0p `)!←kOPαβ';O& ;∂↔~βπK∀hSG?7,εFNn↑4π⊗/
x NL9λ⊂∀[⊂:42H44z2\αate@IJ\4Ph ∀NβH_-Mα⊂7`& the@MJACE∃Cf@1∧εFF/,Tε∂⊗TλF.⊗≤LW4_8[n↑λ≥~ T≤Z1m∞α⊂;p↑P:7P→7FE 4hi`≥OLX@Aπα{7*∞O↔εN<≥Bε&≥\Vw≡≥yg4≠yH M<|⊂~]2P0y→P:42H22sy→p¬ to whi@
PAB~)!∃↓↔+;∪↔↔≠SπlN2απ⎇ ↔"ε≤@εO~∞⎇w⊗↑≥lrε↑d¬εNrλ
t∩⎇]m↔Bb
mw"ε≤@λ ≥≠∞H
≡λ~<aQX¬0∃St a @MieC]≤AP∨→∧∧6F∂,≤7&/.4π&@h≠;n>λ≥≠m⎇≤n`⊂≥t4v % if Gandalf and PDS it
@%`
βO'∪W∂S,ε&.λ_;LD_x;Mm⎇λ⊂⊃→P22`[8∧ with as a s@Q` 'lpλ
|β⊂1`(arac@QKefRlAiQJ4∃IKOIK@∃β|∧bεNnLV >X=~-⎇H≠p∪λ80y:≤P7s⊂≥42P9↑yz2fH∀0spZw⊗⊂$[⊂*w4↑⊂0v&[yzεE≠7w2VKz42P≥7wv1≠|⊂0x≤93pqZ≥P4gλ(")Vλ;2y<H3y2p]∀X @QQJAC5←k]h↓←D
∃MiekGβ#WK∃∧¬⊗rε≥nF/⊗l≤6/~
→b¬¬4}2αF≥`λ
]X∧|, arguma`≥iLACeJ↓U`↔O ∧π∂'-→f >c"P≠Z4qt⊂≠p|P1→P4w:→y892]2r⊂0\β desiredlASLA5kYiSα≠@~B∞Mε/J ≡&*¬ EtHh-x&V.>N2KZ¬ebrα ZF~R X
5H_9∧
8π3 )nitu@4\∩∧~)∪\AC9rAGCMJPAi!KeJAαK@~ε≥`λ ←≥→;Nt{2P≠4z2`2ature esp@∃GSCYαceβ?ph#CK|;@⊗∞β;:-lh→;Nm<[sM\8π:9K⊂⊂)`%e @o@IghA⊃UK]@/*;@~αα≤{m\(≠⊂∀X90y4YyP6p↑F@
transc@ISEJATAk@7d∧↔/" ≡2α?Tp ∧ z=R-lh∩≥-my*(∞,8y;ND_{p⊗≠2qz4[w⊂3 /p∧AB~)giCeQS]NAA←S]h8~∀4PH&OS∂3C?M∧kπ∂K∞['L4Ph)55h¬RjjUQRjjUP %U++#%U++#%U++#%Q ¬εE⊃w2⊂'Yα Wo@IP∞Mα&K∨/>AP@%JJJE%JJJE%JJJE%JJJAQK+ ⊗KVVVFB⊂εEεBα Subject: WH∂%↔LA SO∃ghA,D@Fdd4⊂@≡dL[⊂∨∂"iaE↓β⊃MIDLS?;π&Cπ9α∞cπ9α≤¬vf}]ybβ@∩Tp↔[⊂0z RUTGERS> UH∂%↔LA SO∃ghA,D@Fdd4⊃↓Ci∀p@dhαα7∂Qβ eaEβ↓E@+EXT% Q(gε@{.H -{X=
9H⊂-L8π⊂)[v7vw[⊂≡%)[v⊂0zλ)*`∀GERS>
λRepLy( i↑hA/∨%-&AC@ ∧¬↔=→y..c"U
wH⊂ w\5y]⊂∞FEεE∃wy5iH"4sr\z⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂#94Y0|V⊂ ~⊂'a]⊂_\\ P⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂+≠v:vrH_P≥⊂∩yyz`% 22
Today's Topi@
`
h∀∧αααλ($b∧-_
λ}X<⊂∀λ*2y6Zw0vεB∧j42H r27H*yr`2pεA#∞s∪ ?|Y↓5α≤¬F.∂,XB∧⊗| ¬π⊗α;]∧λ↑(⊗ ↑[x εB⊗VVFKVVVVKVVVFKVVVVKVVVFKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVFKVVVVKVVVFKVVVVKVVVFKVVVVKFAεE⊃0z2]λ→→P'Xz⊂_\N_P∀#≤αiday) 1521( P~∃
e=ZtA I ∪
*↓ChA<BεJR|q5EAαB#↔;↔Iα∪K,¬⊗'<j#!
⎇8ZL\⎇∞H ≥]→0→→yz4w→β 6 1,Ao←e-giCI%←\@P|R~¬G p ↓↓∧j>J≡ q↓"
x
l≡Yλ∪-}Yx;E⊃ C"H,9z0↔λ30∂rwardeD h KgMC@∨↔_h (αQ_.L,¬⊂→ ⊂#q`4oberbr`!α⊂β C&Vbl,JAPT\[p⊗N⊂!2`2n @≥Sα 7'Iβbα⊗JpβπQαlJQ66≠p4*O,∧&V.>C"∧X9P↔\αite terminal`&4⊃)↑t↓IKGm¬pCI@,¬6*∂]l2∂≡\ λ ≡λ⊃0h%0m`_βE1q]λ$g#'Kh"`∩MS a`(αα6&Qlj~@λ⊂Q*)H_=∧ 25 )Xc"C!λPS@⊂~0yP 2ecently s@=YHAkLABAi∃eP↔'v 1β∂∞c3↔⊃∧εFF*λ-↔$|X<
∧∃→0→≠tp∞al,λ
∧~(b`dhα↓)↓]3Aβ παDεn∂∞λ ,D≤xp→→p¬`≤Xb`∃ ∧¬V}v|9π-{9(
]{Z0~≠y⊗⊂~ ⊂ =↔βE0 nterdaced ≤~(~∀lpβ↓AAβnK∂Kt¬β*∧β2≡E@∀P⊂ 7ith 128 Kbyte Od∧A%β4X@fdαα. g&)β >d
$l@+λ⊂⊂[2⊂≠~βE1<`4es oF @ β%=~P@H↓afdfHAa←EQ`
βWαβS :∧∪∩c∩ <'π~βλ⊂↔[2P→0 ia Current lo@=`∩∃S9iKeM¬GJXAα ;⊃α,J¬βK~iQII¬≠g;
p∧∧D$β⊂h∞<αy4p[⊂64g~β up th∞@D@`A/↔βE8∀Ph*π∪bβ?9β|¬f*ε-|↔⊗"d∧∧/G ≥g∞Nβ{@⊂_8¬s (Moto@I←YBAYKegC kf@%∧∧f␈∩ ≤F&OM_ ml9β"M\8εwi≡P0w2λ$gW Maximue (in c@¬ESMKβ!α%β⊗+3'↔4∧RJε\YV␈↔↔$β∪βGλ <↑=→.U
Speaker and progp¬C@7n &T
6␈.βY⊂→βa`≥Kβ∪πS?∩p4(Q*e"k⊗εαε↑←_λM|<Y AQ@εE)[pεt`/¬eJASαqαJ>iQβ↔↔,¬F∂&↑4¬5#V λ ≥Yλ⊂~→v2y0↑P⊂λ?), fu@QkeJAM←Ei@> K∃Iαα"@4T ;⊃ααHT]∀SsI≠λ
_ X⊂3y_x44a\β teRmi`≥C0AKKk1CiS←αq1↓α4¬w$~_8m<αy1]λ9y4`4e
∃sα{WIβ|εvrπ=xg'x8 2Kα C@=IJAC9HAM←αsSMβ&{←;3} ∪π d∧R`! ¬εE∀90 cE8∧@@Hβ!UAA¬≠';∨d∧Rπ∂\≥g"pQ!P@L,X Ma"C"AQA"Vh]Yλ⊃M}]x<LL9λ≠,↑|x9l↑w#"AQK+#%U++#%U++#%U++ ⊗KVVVVKVVV@---~∀4⊃∪π&)`∩β----------------
End of WorkS Dig` gh4∀TTT(TTTT(TTTT(TTTT(~∀ZZ4ZZZZ4∀@~∀4∀→'kE)KGht↓/←eWLA SO∃ghA,D@Ffr4∀@≡dP[≥←L4pb@@@`fj∪)←]Ci!C\Aβ1C\A'α{3?7}q↓r*≡{1βπ ∧¬∃-HxU∃≠d↓∃>␈-:2∧&≤|W∨"
f∩α≠7⊃PT&≡LSRβ&@∧f@⎇H '↔ ( ε&mk1*:β"QN-{.H -{X=
;H⊂-L8π⊂)[v7vw[⊂≡%)[v⊂0zλ)*b#Qi)←εBαRep@1rSi↑hA/←e-&ACHααKGS>+KL4U#=iα>{C/MR↓l4(hR←?K]→α∪'>+OQ↓α↓↓↓↓α↓↓αS,∧W≡ε∨∃Bβ∪D f␈2ε⊂∞'ε(λλ∧∧λλλ
mβv:vYP_P≥λ$yyjYP→P→
λ
αToday's Topics:
P@I←GeC5[S@;8∧∧.wm_ M⎇Y90↔≥9P⊗@ Requ@∃`∂Qα4¬w$∀Y0∪→y2w1YyFE∧BDP&aMα800 Paging
∀Zαi555hi555h¬RjjUQRjjUQRjjUURjjUP %U++#%U++ ⊗KVVVFKTVV@-----
-)--4ZZZZαi554hP4*∪∂#∃i↓λπα∧vβ⎇P∩[q2y 190⊂@λ∧β ,¬_~CE#97[]⊂"`5ea`≥J↓¬P∨K&+3 >dπF/ε$λ↔"∧*IBnN∞[ε{pQ*&/εM∃W&{$λ
-
β9yPZt:|9Htt:|≤⊂pt:↑7Prh_⊂0r @erkeley
SubjEct: Wor`↔ε↓ SOKMhA,Bα↓≠≠π$¬π⊗βy|L≥8εt`.e environments
To: Stav@I←fA~8A≠CGICWSf↓ChA≠%([≠ε4⊂λ ()∀ε∞j
_ NL<Y<nL9λ∩-d≤Y8,M8π3@ dp eI!KdAC ←khAβ3πK≥}W
ε≡λ ∞-x8z∞P:7P≤97sy_vp
i@9N~∃K9mSe←9[K@;'→9↓α≤{W3⊃¬K?Uβd¬↔∂"¬
⊗rεnX
E(≤p↔[p¬ referencas >4∀~∧@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@A∃k@∨↔v)α },F.f⎇aPPhαK ⊗KVVVVKVVVVKVVVFKVVVVKVVVFKVVFEβE"0z→]⊂!`5nday, 22 November !dpb@@Dpt`b5 '(~)
e←ZhA~⊗Lrα⊗J8βπQα≤jU%I∧_4*O,∪+↔∂!Qαn≥tZR-iβ1aAAααCπ∨Ls≡t∀T∧6≠R∧∧∧]∧4 ↔"∧→⊃PPHαU~
≡h≠9.≡x9y$∞x8h∞≤αw:⊂≥5P6rH1<P ! Ha`%⊃oCeJ↓IKgSα;;↔I∧εvF@h~4d ⎇<\L]]≠⊗!Q]{p→~βi`≥Nαβ?9βL¬Wε@→;9-n~;Yd
~<h
}{H
Gε λλ⊂≤βystem( @A!JAGYα '7M¬K?Uβ≤∧⊗rεMthWMx
≥≠≡(∞⎇8π74[3P8 !dπS@;8∧ε}r∞Mε*βdε_ _⊂;t]47p∃t kl`+⊃H∂'lpλ∞NβwP 0ph∂GKβ≠G?Kα1P@.α7sr]42y, by @¬IIS]≤AQCe⊃oCeJ↓iP≥β&+S↔∂ ∧πε∞|Tε ,=;⊂~≤β(λAC9HAgS≥]CYYαK;≥βλh ⊗↔↑4ε/↔-x D∞z~0⊃Z⊂9z`#h an↓KmK]PA`∪π↑+@~π
Hλ,<+Hλ ≤β⊂:4→P37`,lh∂oSαs⊂~ε≡4π'↔\U@hW⎇∂∩ε&≤@λ∞ 8πx ,e go th∞AgUGPAOIKChAαc↔;∨&C@~πMtεNo
H ,]]λ⊂__qtw3OFEεEλ⊂"0z→]⊂# 2i` CR0@d`A9←mK[ Kd@BβIaE↓β⊃IiU j⊗NPhQ↓α≠⊗{5iα←∪'OS|∧f/∩ <↔,<h∂λuRq∩d =λ∪)~λεbbPiP0zλ&djεPdX∞
To: FEIH
¬ I∞~∀@↓%Jd@@l`!β↓AαC∞;';≤hP4)↓∧C?←∪Jλ4(∀∧∧∞Bβλ⊂⊃≥z⊂:4→P≠∀000 hapεAg←5KiQS9H
β↔4∧Vrε,ZG&/$λ
-d≥~_.D~=λ
≡h≤Y,≥≠≡#!∧λ≥Q.9pz4[2YP$]⊂40yH0P!"T)⊂∀1≥yP2y≤5y∀P~w:2i≥x:⊂*~0z⊂!Xw⊂2`)therpe-run the
bus cycle @%\AGCMJA←L↓aCeSQrAKeI←dAS8A[K[=arXA=dAGC1XABAβ∪?WSNs∃β'rβS#∀hQ↓β7}s'S?∩βS-βn{∪'≠JβS#∃πβπ∨∃ε ;⊃β∨;πAβNq??W ∧π6O.NV∞b
\Vn␈/∃b¬&
≡2π≡≥lvf(Q$αεNn∞W"ε<≥bαG]lF/∩ =voεLZF*ε=⎇g'⊗⎇Dε}∩∞Mε*∧]⎇fO&}%∩π'-≤v>/$λ⊗wJ∞>ε.≡≤≥@hR∧
&␈/M≥f*πM Rπ/<Z"π>≡=ε/~∞⎇ε.r∞ ⊗>* l↔.gN4ε␈∩
zFF/$∞7.≡∧
⊗nn\M⊗∂&T 6}vM≡FN}n1PRα
|6∨/%`∧≡}\-⊗v*∞MεO~∞⎇↔&B∞>F∂'↑4ε␈/N
W'~∞Mε∂" <⊗rπL]Fbε}↑G≡NLTεF∂,Nv∂⊗QQ"αα∞ ⊗>*]\↔πε↑.2ε6} π&F≡@λ
\=≥→.%(≥z ↑~→<D∞~→( ><\Y-n≠≡(∞.;[Z-lh≤≤M||X;!QHλ~.4∪;sM≡≠|H¬∞≤Z=M≥→9y,E(≠|D
<y<D­|Y
≥X<↑%∀_;Y∧∂;⎇(
=Y(∞M→(_L≡z<h m|H_!QHλ∀L\;≠≡$∞{|~
≡⎇~8l≡→9⊂≥4y::Xv⊂6r[wy<W[zr:4H:yri vzv*~P:0yZtp∞gpπsgi∃ZAoSQP~∀@↓BA[S9S[kZαβ?→β-CS↔Kv 1β#∂∪∪Oπ⊗)∧4(HH$%↓αi6/KO_4(∀Ri555ji555ji555ji555hi555ji555hh(4
,¬f"ε|d¬>␈-:2∧&≤|W∨ Q%"RR%%"RR%%"RR%%"RR!Q"jjUURjhQ$hPβ"@↓J⎇8ZL\⎇∞H
⎇|Ztdλ~9y.>λ∃L$∧m β!$βlM%YY⎇K'ε(λ F&n"2M⎇X=~ ≥H⊂; ≥H∀p↔[7vwwλ≡%)w[⊂0z RUTGERS> WorkS Digest V1 #40
@ Ci∀t@dl↓≥P∨Yβ eaEβ↓AMQl*NP4T3K >W$∧V}l≡FF∞dλ⊗f∞βH∀m⎇≠{;md∂∩Tm⎇λ_=∧
U1⊃hZTkC!)2x ,y( i↑hA/←e-&AChααK@/L|W↔_Q*F{Rλ⎇wε←7$βXh!Q%>␈->2∧&≤|W∨ ∀∧ααα
|V&v↑<F∂JDε#*∧mzbβ ↔ε∩αα∧∧ααα
h mN8εrP P≥⊂$\βsue 40
Today's Topics: De`≠C9HA!C≥S]NA=\AαA5εd``@`~(HI↓↓↓¬βK/∨⊗ 77'v9απ;6KC?;n+;CLhQ555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555jh4(∀T#πS∃R↓IQαv{Y↓EKAE↓EβQQIαα
5 h(j&}k$
F}w~|W∨" ≡B¬∧~(2lL≠λ0hU>X&V.>G"¬⊗W$¬>␈-:2∧&≤|W∨"
f∩α≠7⊃PV≡7$¬&}o~v/∨AQ hT≤-w/" LVn∞l@πε∞⎇≥f:ε⎇dπ&FTεcCβ∧∧ε∞vDλd,Lh(U∀: ≡B∧≤ZUS∪∧4}2π∂\X nM;{C! 8[⎇.D≥z_.D≠8:l↑h~5∧ ~9QM≤⎇;≥π!"C"K≤<kλ
≡λ~<d∞≤]9$∞~_=∧∞~→(εg ∧
_<h ∀~_<LNx<Y$∞z9{L≥λ
⊂HZTJ+∧∞z~0m↓"X;
Mβ{yP→|:2`2nad Logic th∞AS9iKeeUahAi!JAae=GCgg=` β'2βπ;eε{⊃βSF)β W_h+∂@≤9F/~
_ D ;H⊂∀[9z9:Xz4wwλ1pw7≠z⊂12H1wvx≠2z2rλ∀2s@. because @QQJAa¬OBASL~∃@;|εBπ& X LU+Hλ
M→(~ ≡Y≥x.,(≥≠d →=→,>λ≤Y,l<Y;L<αyP*≠P6ti\βi`≥NαβCπ∨-→βπlAPV>]lWε∂LTπ&F≡4π=9{X-D~<h∞NX9R,≥λπεEβE$7`7ever0AiQCPASfAα{;#E∧Cπ3→∧ βO?e+S'?p∧π&@h≥~ T→→3,≥Yλ∀ ≤z;Yd∞≤[xML9+C!*~→(
}~→<D X8z-M=≡(∞M_=⊂~yP92\zpy2Y⊂4yP≥40z, wheN such a fault Occurs,
i@PASkgPAEJAA←ggS YJAi<Agi←@AoQCPAs←@*;K∃β&{';≥bβ3 >≤Dπ&FT
ε∞≡UDαV∞βYβ! {{]
≥]9( ≤βptw
↔⊂⊂*~2y2P_y2P 4wo approaches @=]JA[%OQhAQCWJT4∀∩∃'
QK@7*α¬iα}qβ¬α∀*JI1π≠S?K*βS#∃∧+;S'⊗)βOS∂#∃β?2βS#∃πβK?∂,ε7≡␈$ ⊗v Q.&/∨Mz&*ε≡Dε∞]→4D∞~→(
]<|p∀[3P80Yp¬ has beEn loaded So that the
executi@=\A←L↓iQJAαK;OS↔+∂S'}qβ∂πp∧ε⊗*∞,W∨.\X ∧ \[{$∞z_= ↑Y<@
≥]→4M\αr4p]2FE 0oint it got to before id faulTed (ie* don't restart the instruction
@→a←ZAβ##∃β⊗+∨'≠vK;≥↓jiβ∂?w#';W*β≠K?jβ←#↔⊗)βg?*β3↔≠"β?≠→Jp4(Q*6≡F]\R∧∪$ ⊗2ε⎇lRε≡}]F"ε⎇mGJεm_w/⊗T w/"∞⎇εN≡∧ 7N≡LTε}∩ ≥bεNn>G↔8⎇~-⎇C"P⊃Xzyr`$ a fAult, then0AoSi AiQJ↓QKI`↓←@→β≤¬vn(_p↔Y2P∀;Z4qt~yP90]42yεB9tvt[0y⊂ 4o an↓S]giIkGiSα{9β∪M≠πOO,k &↑
%D≠{Y$ {y; D≥;Y
t≥~→$∞{|Zd∞~→#!.≤[p⊃Yyyw`2 has acco@5aYSg!K@Agαyβ≠π⊂β'9β&C∃β↔F+∂WSL¬vrε|dπ&FTλ
-n⎇≤],>~;sEAα@
and ∃i!K\TAMCmJAβ##∃β≤εF∂↔M_ L@P9z0]2P∃!→pε`∨@⊗))βSF)β'≠≥#@↔8⎇~-⎇H≥z
≤zβ"L@0p l@∃H\@AQQ`↔Mbβπ7LX D
≠x9
≥Yh⊂~~2P8 Yβa, @QQJASαsOSK,≠S'∨p∧ε≡∞dλ&*π,UW.8πεE→93v@≥42P "eginning (ie. don't↓G←]i%]cJAα3@⊗↑Tλ
m <Y(∂≥⎇(⊂⊗→q:⊂ /ff --
unwind @QQJAa¬aiSC0AS]gQacGi%←\AC9HAiedAShAα ∨π'pβ⊂↔⊗⎇Pλ∞M→(⊂L\z;[M≥Yc"ML=→0→
W
The prgblem with the 6 0β↓AAβ&CπQβ/3↔Kg}s∃β#∂→β ↔,¬bπε≥I6Nvt ⊗⊗␈↑@εO_Q*FF∂EDε}r ⊂λλ.<h⊃..Y|@
≥]→4N.αx:ελ:42P→0qtf~z4ryH:42P
≤___λ897{~p2yP→4πr
g` ii%]NAs=kdAQ¬]IfA=\AiQ∀AS]i∃eP≠πbβ7π∂FK;∃β∨#πS∃αS←'SFK9)β∞p4+≥n7'↔\8
≥{H_.,(→→,m8z9-n Hλ
M≥<h
≡λ~<d >≥≤L]9;⊗$ ~9YM≤⎇;≥∧
|H⊃.l;C"M≥<≠|n≥8[→$∞≠hλNNZ9yl↑H_;O∀≤|→,=8;λ∞-⎇=~-l(≥~ T≥<y.∧≥z<m <h≥m ;H≤ ≤y#"Ll=;≥∞4≠|H
}~→<D∞⎇8z∧
;;9,M8=→$ {{Y
≡~;{N4≠xxn↑HH_-lλ~_.l(~5∧∞;]z-lβ"]m = |d {z;Lt≠{H∞>8xy.≡y];
O+C"AQQ[tD
xz→-\(⊂+∧∂;⎇( <;I⎇∧∞Y<u
}Y(≥
(
Nεε λ≥
t_(≤∞,=Z3n↑{≡+.<=Y9∧∞⎇_= Q"Z_-L]x>$∞~≤[n\zλ∃
(~3N>≤]8nM;{KAQC"QM}H∀pm 99(λ%λ~=∧
<h→/∞≤Y;,]≡(⊂m⎇<≠⊃/∧≥≠h∞]Y≠h∞M→(~-n⎇≤],>~;{D∞~→#!.≤[xl↑|{|D
_<h
;→H ←→8⎇.L9λ≤mt~=λ <;H_LT≤Y+..;H≠ ≡→<KD∧∪{Y$ 9Xsn]]→<N1"\≤M|[→;.4≥z=
∧≥~~-l|h∪
≥y(_.↑≠k:-l|Y;,]]λ⊂⊂Y292y\ts3@≠wr2yK⊂2z1K∧EεE∩P40{→P9rr[⊂4z⊂≤zssr\z2r≥40z, by Carefullp∩AIKgie%GiS]≤AiQJ↓g@↔Qε{_$+NsOSK.≠S'?w→β¬β≤¬v&*\|Vv/,≡F␈∩
~2ε∞MIw>.D
Fzε|]f/⊗≡LRαF\qbε↔∀ ↔6}≤M⊗v8Q.FFNl}2εf≥<Rε∂↑MvNv>,Vn.n@ε∞&N,W∂≡≥lrεn|LW~JD ∩π∨≡:F.j LW≡N⎇lW∩ε<≥`hW,\G.≡T∞FF*∞,⊗v>T
v"π
}7∞N-→FO&≤↑2ε}d
vF∂D
VN>∞@ε⊗*cessop∧AgG!K[JA¬]HAQ¬mJAI=]JAo%iPASP\@A3=j~∃gα ∂K'6K∂¬β∧+K≠?⊗kπ;∂*βπ;⊃εkW3SOβK?∨⊗ 77'v9β∪W⊗K;≥βε ∨¬β6 W3S~p4*#␈;↔[↔∩aβ'Q?→β7π↑+Mβ≠␈⊃β¬β6+Ceβ≡K7C3*βOgO&+584Ph+ %∧≠π31∧k?S?⊗{3¬β∞s⊃βπ≤¬2π& ]Rε∞-}W"πM Rπ&≥\W≡≡≥LW~εm}"ε∂l≥⊗f∞-≥FO'∀ v0h.Mε*εm⎇Ff␈⎇≥f:πN⎇rε&↑m⊗≡/4 ∩π≡≡pλ ≤≥Y<NM<y1∧
;H≤m⎇9(≠lD≥~→-≡H≠~.L<X=∞↑Y#"E (≤=-}→(≥L↑XX=
≥*.C!!"B3(6N &∧∃Z<NN8;λ \8z~-l#"B!~~~<d∞≤[xl↑|{|D
<h_-d→>≥ ]\z0↔[⊂7s⊂≥42P&P[≤__ ⊂:40]εA∧D\2pr4[<P9j\87y:≤P0r;_w1rrλ;4y:≥pv⊂ -emgry techniqu@∃f\~∀4∀∪≠εXp`d`↓βImC9GKHA4lp``@A!e←
Kgg←H~∀α∪QQSfA¬ImC]
KH@bX[ESh↓[SGe=ae←G∃`∂O'v9βW;O!β←'faβ≠↔∂#WK∀hP$'π⊗≠#'S.≠S@/,≥Bε/∞LVw≡≥⎇g
ε|dπ&FT T≠3εεβαπ>X6Bε≡1PPH≡m↔↔'\≥Bεn]]w↔JD 6zO∞-v≡∂>9wαπ>↑πε␈.EBπ∨N-⊗v:
⊗v&M≥f:`Q!⊂N∞l@λ
9z→.$≤→<Lm|[8-ly+C!!"Xj$λ{{\m≤→<H∞↑z;Yd∞~→( l=~3ml;λ∀l]:8{ml≥8⎇
}H∪Tf⊗L ∧
:8|M}≤[xl↑|{|EA"]z
≤zλ∃m≥≠λ≤m⎇{H_LT_=P⊂Zv0q6→V⊂0w→⊂;tv≠⊂9zx≤7y:⊂→2p
and paged virtual
eemory from the beginning. Datasheets are available now from NS. This
machine is in the same architectqre and perfoRmancE class as the
68000.
Tony W` gh4∃π←[AkiKd↓'GSK9GJA→¬E←eCQ←er~)1Ke←`A!CYαyαπ3&yαK↔≡+πK∂Bα∂↔;&+H4(hQ555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555jh4(4T#πS∃R↓IQαv{[↔7⊗+I↓EKAE↓E;QUU6-~P4*7∪?5i¬≠Sπ[⊗{Mα5pα7π∂⊗ /'Mβb6ε∞α(∀Zε≡@λ Y5 3(7C"Tn\ZY8nGHλ∃m}XthλM9y<nD∃L ⊂λβ39 / Bgrdelon
To: ihnss!ihuxpεCCQUq`CS!kq↑C∃aDACPA+π∧5εn`~(~∃!e=KeC[5S]NA∃]mSe=][K]Q`
βπ⊗)β¬βn +?Iε K↔¬ε{⊂∩π,↑6.∂,9αrα
Mε/⊗T ↔⊗(Q(
M}<[X-Nh_;LD_{p↔→2y2g_pyP 7hichdevo@QJABAαcπK∨*β∂#WvYβ/→∧εFF.α<@⊂≤2yw`5pces
λpo @QQJAgUEUKGPX⊂∀(hRO?≠';πK∃∧+;∨'v+↔K≥lr∧;]R.5w6r[89V⊂→p⊂∞ Horst↓⊃c@;↑)6#W,s/¬βLε2π& Tε⊗}⎇1P@)(~_,D~;@⊂≠tp∞d8@A¬kβ!β+|LRπ& ≡BbεUlrb¬L,⊗w≡≤8
≥{\h
⎇H∀p↔Yαp oCIJ~*,¬f.NβY0∩\αi`≥Nαaα&⊗,)1β?2β3πO ∧εn}nMαεF≤@ε
π>λ ,=8;λ∞≤αqz4[w⊂7`.
envirgnments. Theq`
AgαC?W3 ∧ε⊗* ⎇v}α∞8
≡]~3L@P87`)nps @→←dABαβ3'S,ε&∂'↑,PhW<Xλ.1t↔ Ho`/∃mKdX↓∩ACZαβ;/Q∧¬⊗rε∀λ
}z9~-⎇H≥≠d ≠h∪
≡→<X.Nαy2P≤p¬abches @=`λ (αXZ,-~;p∪\αaphies& I su@≥O@↔O ∧πN␈Tλ
≥~h⊂~≠P8wj\⊂394Yw26,H47q`[⊂64a≤αariAnλ
∃S8AeKO¬eHAi<As@?αZ"πε≡.FN∨]H↔$~;] ↑Y<p~ α When I'm reAdy to publish A
biBliggraphy (if @∃mKdBαIα%∨d¬Bε≡↑.F∞Nβ[⊂≤H27P9[W↔↔↔βE
----------
-)--
---------
----
λ ∃ ¬iJ`)β⊃Qαmx
Dε..∧$ε-NM&WM *
uβ"HnY{.Dλ4T⊂*h4 Z
≤z{8-d_=⊂⊂2y5r[2|FE∀zq5 %ct: m68000 paging
λThe pers@=\ASf↓oe@?v9β≠} λ∞M→(∀m≥<≠⊂∩H92py[w⊂:4_z⊂4`4 is Not alway`&4⊃a←GMSEYJ↓iP≥β⊗+OSπ↔!βπ→∧¬⊗w∨N.V∨&≥ybπ>
_λm∧~_<d∞_<]∧∞x8 P→4s4`3hed..,.I am
∃]=hAGKβ∪Sπ≥`λ∞⎇~8r∧
;\⎇∞8¬ctions Meat @QQSfA
YCgf0AEkhαα%β ,¬FN∂lTπ&F↑,PhV≡,Rπ≡⎇\Rrri⎇bπ& TπSCεεαbεmx D
;\⎇ ≥Xy+∧∞~→(∞∞Yx[ ](~0→H2pyt[<P:7[2⊂1<N∧AεEαx:yd≠∧`915( rr0 α
Uhich wou@1HACiQK[ah↓iVAaU`∂!β⊃↓1βπv!βIE∧{9βSF)βOS∞≠%↓#⊂ε∪*Jd∧∧NH≥~ Q \p~_quP #p¬P∨O≤∧W4_(⊂__qrP!≠zs20\αy when i@PAaeSα+@~πMtππ<z∞_P∀:~0z⊂ )q, puqh
od∧Ad`↓o←eWLAMS]∀XAEkβ!βCW≤Aβ/→∧ε#
ε<≡W≡/4λ∩ε6≡YG"J∞Mε.r∞,W∨&≡.FNvtλ
εE )nstruction after co@5aP∪↔&K?9β|∧bπ& Tπε∞|Tπ≡}nNv∂⊗Tλ
m};→⊂_pzy`% two
λ¬G←a%KfA←α1βIA∧εFzε,Tππ=λ⊂↔[⊂:42H9z0qZT∧ instead h∂LAα{;∃9rq9:SF+K∃βo+OP4T≠↔KS∞K;#E∧∧&*ε∀λ ≡\X;
L8ε⊂∀∂TP:7H:44yH7w⊂ 4he 68000....¬
λ ↓ ki`p
~∀4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4∀~*& S∃@$ε#"∧mx
Dε.. $ε-nL&'M
k*
uβ"Hn[{.D →8p≠_|⊂|p[2Vqw[t|⊂t[pPu /hn`_A¬hA¬KIP∂π∪-H4*≠⊗{5iαT¬vFRλ!b∧f↑h
-l#"QN-βv]⊂∃42P$S*"`∩ACTAVE Ede@
ieSF↓πCYGUYCi←β⊃α∂=raα∂πn∪K'∪>)α6¬ph ∃∨\-&.∨G$β3Cεεαπε≤⎇⊗v:∞λ M|[→;.1"C"I∀_; ∞]Y→4D∞~→(
≥<≤Y.≡z;{D∞~_=∧∞~→(∞∞[x[ ](≥z.Mλ≤⊂,⎇8π3@ on the 6(@``ASL~∃iQ¬hAs←TAGC\≥hACY]CsfAIKgiCIhAC\↓S]giIkGiSα{9β'2βg?Uε;↔Qβ
βCπ∨*β≠πWdε@hV≡@λ ≥H~0↔_ww;"[4rw:λ860qYP4w_w⊂4g≤z9:q]4ww↔λ⊂*42\2SyP≠7P;p↑P37`2 the
iemopy manage@HAi↑AQKYXAQQJAπA*Ai↑↓ECGV↓k`\@↓)QChα;@~π⎇∂∩∧∂
x
Mh~_.P:;wCE7w≥42t`2 sqs@QK[fX↓←]JA→←dAe∃OkYCHAo←e,AC]H↓iQJA=iQKdαβS=β≡+CK'≤∧Rπε≤|PhVl≡Vg'4
vFNLTπ&FTλfO↔>@λ
≡h→P→≠⎇2w↔λ⊂!2f~r{0q≠2P9:[wy9P≤p|P:~0z⊂&[z7y7[0@
@]SYXA!CmJA∧A[←I%MSKHhp``@A←kh↓oSiQ%\ABAβK↔πI∧εFF∂Dλ6∞r∞L⊗↑*
~G4≠⎇{AQ\_9lT→X=-N≤kC!! K ⊗KVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVFEβE"0z→]⊂→4 Ngv@∃[EKdbrp@
↓IAQJj⊗NQαBSG↔≤#πe$hR≠K?iQα+?*r;↔←≤{7/$ ↔"∧9ZRk λ⊃P@*⎇8ZL\⎇∞H∧εL∧__ ⊂80sZw3FEβE r least the last4∧p``@A[C]UCXA∩↓Y←←W∃HAChαβ';∪N≠πS↔ βS#π ∧∧↔<h⊃..[|C!.{⎇; D_8[n.α⊂:4→P1zi≤2w:⊂~w9z9≥qz4w[↔⊂⊂ [0yV⊂~z⊂4yH77z⊂≤7yydX42P$[εE3r[2y0vλ:7P)→yz0y≥⊂0w_q7y:→r⊂4w≤z9:q]4wwελ9tw1YP<wzH1pw∪]⊂34g→⊂7zzβE;t4Xt⊂1<]2P:4→P4w9]9:qj~ww⊂9]0y:9H7w↔⊂λ$s⊂*~2P9w[8¬tiOn were ac simple
as claimad, everyone Else Wouldbe uSing it. The f@¬GhAi!ChAg<ASkG ~∃KM→←ehA%bAKqAK]IK⊂ASfA KGCkβ≠∃βSF)β W~β↔KK|ε"π≡≤⎇f∞b
≡2∧tzDε∞&↑≡V∂&U`α∧λQ(
≡≥≠⊃$ x<Y,n;λ∀L\9~;LT≠yH∞M→(≠,≥]8;∧∞z;∪∧∞Y=Q,≥λ≥~
≡kC"A⊃"""--βrFEβE⊗VVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVFEεB"s2 ob WorkS Dicest
*******************
-
-----
Subject: WorkS Digest V1 #41
∂01-Dec-81 1852 Jonathan Alan Solomon <JSol at↓%+)∂∃%&|@%/←eWLA SO∃ghA,D@Fhb4∃ Ci∀t@@b↓ KF@Drpb@Hbb`[∃'(~∃→e←Zt↓∃←]CQQC\A¬YC@9¬≠?3?n{9↓rU≠?1β∂!αJV$:⊗JMph*K↔εce7S{Qα←?⊗ZMβπ αKWS>+KL4U#=iα>{K/MR↓l4(hR←?K←→α∪'>+OP%α↓↓↓↓αα←↔∪v+O∪πJa↓Iα&+
↓EKAE↓↓α↓↓↓α6{3W7*↓E↓i∧KOOW*↓QD4Ph*S?& e∨M¬#?C'∨→h$&⊗+3↔π≡)β?→¬*:&A∧J&$4PH%↓αk1aAAααCπ∨Ns≥α#∂∪∪←π⊗)↓→απ∪? 3.kL4(HH%β&
αa↓Q≠⊃↓→↓C↓aY∨_h($%α↓↓↓↓¬βK?∨⊗ 77'v9α↔;6KK?;n+;SLhQ555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555jh4(Q(F∂&W$ααα∧∧β J mw2βε∀β Sε7# Bβ11
D
∃~∞U!"Tl]Y→4G⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂"t`#hael Muuss <mike.bmd70@BRL>¬
To: OA-DRDAR at Brl
SuBject~ Commerciad Release of UNIX III
Frgm: Myra Habtwig <myra@brl>
[Note: This massag`
ASβ→β';&+;∪↔ ∧ε&←$λv␈6↑-fn.β]∞x7w9[y2r proj@∃GifX↓C]H~)]WhA→←dAaα+@↔≡⎇l⊗bπ↑8R`$∩=
≡h_Y-≥Yh≤∞,<y3NL9λ∪md∃{|MiP0yH0P:4[p¬ savi`≥N4∃i←←αaβ≠∨⊂∧∧∂↔ ≥f/"↑>ε}w=x L\λ∃;M∨λ≥4l↑\k@⊂ e)gf↔FEεE∃42P(_z2w:λ&4qb[9tw3H's3 )ca oF WesTern Electric haq annoufc@∃HAiQ∀~∃eK1KCgJ↓←LA 9∪0A∪%∩Ai↑↓iQJA
←[[Kβ∪∂'πbβ7πK↑+Q9↓∧K→βg␈)β#π4∧RελQ*6␈/,8Rεf≤8Vw≡UDπN␈T 6∞r
x'&∞≥dε
ε-→f∂↔∀λ
≤y;\lT→[tD∧
∞ ε¬Hλ∃
>#"L≡Y(_n↑\Y;NM≤(⊂∩]0v2p]4s3@_P!ga∪f⊂!g[x4v2\α to rp \AU]IKd↓+≥∪0↓∪∪∩\4∃∪LA¬IISi%←\Ai<Aek]9S]NA=\@bbαyP≠C∧}2bβ⊗⊃s+α}5Bβ ∃v3"?4 ⊗v"ε⊗∩{∪4}2`h*YdMB →∀Jεm}rπ>≥IBπ↔]`λ
⎇H∪sK≠ C"AQR(_l≥t WeStern↓ YKGβ#@⊗N4λFO⊗\:FgHβ"C!↓5y4nL<[@⊂⊃v2q`4p¬SFX↓∂kSYα3?K⊃∧≠↔;S,ε hPα05
IL¬⊂⊂∩4πe Hunt, Deptfa∂εHbdfB@~∀&αr= 2λ-wBβ&VββQ!∀?⊗\Yg≡⊗β|[eD⊃[p→≥4⊂!`\7v4w_P⊂→7420
919-4∧rnZTjbh~(~∀ZZ4ZZZZ4ZRZZ4ZZZZ4ZRZZ4ZZZZ4ZZ
∀4∃∪π&)aα↔|¬f&∂∃Dβ≠α mw6.\,Wαβ↔↔β
αε⊂ π&-+1*:β"QN
βv]⊂⊃()⊂ ]⊂&dj l,εE∀zq5 %ct: Worc@&↓ SOKMhA,bα↓≠≠⊃Q hUM Rππ-|&f.Tλ
m≡~λ⊂~~2P≠≤ __⊂ )pεAiQ¬hASH↓QCMI1KfAEU`
β↔↔∪?KM∧εw-βw3MβE<w`5 can't reStard↓G←ee∃GiYr↓C@≠S,ε"ε}lUbα∧Myb?" ,VfN↑h $∞~→#!
αpw:Xv9P@ Any hardware person who dh∂Kf↓SfAaβ∪? π⊗ceβ¬∧∧&O" }&.∞eebpHαC"EU+++%U++#%U+++%U++#%U+++%U++#!Q@εE"_z2]⊂ X⊂'7]2rq2\⊂_\\ P_\:21-EST αFRom: Robert A. Morris 8 %β4AChA5∪(@6l→x (*,SR¬M R∧kgαββα∞λλ,⎇8π3@ ques@QS←\A¬EWkhαβ←#π ∧ε ,8;≤d∞z=~∧∞~→( L8z0⊗~z4ryCE)2]λ897{~p2r by Moth∂e←1B\4Ph"&]\⊗v"∞λ⊗.NβY`⊂≤2xz`)res More @QQC\AMS[aYβIβ∪↔&+∂S'v9β←#,qβ¬βv{97K-≠'∪↔w 4+C∞;∃β#∂→β ↔,qβK↔6+K↔;≤∧V"r∧
6Nv<TεNw>N'.∨M_ mnh≥z-Mα⊂12H7w6<H80y:~pv6<CE1wv\4∧ete when a pAg`
AMα W3Q∧¬v≡∨↑.2bε≡DεO~ |Vv/,≥FgJ
lV≡∂><↔πJ∞Mrε↔-≥f8h-≥bπ& Tεv}e↑&/≡≤LVw"∞ ⊗>
≥f"π,↑7&∂.@λ∞M→(~-n⎇≤],>~;{Edλ∃≠d ≠h≥
<c"N∞[|⊃.-≤(∃
(≤⊂→≠qryi[y⊂6z\z⊂9p]2P9zY34qdYw:⊂)]0z2P→8y4w→β the bus error
anterru@AhAi↑↓ECGWU`AiQ∀AS]gQecGi%←\ASα1β;? βS :∞Mε*ε,\vNvm_ L@P:42[⊂0zεB42py]⊂:7P≥42P8≠tw:≥t2y2H4z⊂ #an p@I←GKKα!1βK.≠π33Ns⊂~πM ↔"π<X Nm8z;L@P:42CE0w:→y92`0t wi@1XAGQ¬]OJAβ##∃β∧ε&}≡↑:6␈∩∞8
≡→+@⊂λ$z⊂ )pεAW]=o\Ai!ChAGα+C@&≥_ AQS-Nεε λ⊂∀[9z1:Xz4ww≤T∧ i@9GYkI%]NAgα{7*∞hW/(≥0→Ypεul ones, do @9←hAgα [∀∀Tε7.⊗m_λm≤8π:≤βtate to @IKgiCIhAiQ∃g@∃βL¬g∨'.XλnM9{\eD∀z0↔_p¬ Moth∂e←1BOf~)a←gSβ#'?9∧¬↔4≥≠h @4|⊂ 4his @%\Ag←5JAMkβ#WK∃∧εf/↔=_ meλ≤p↔[p¬ users Uqa~∃α≠?7CL¬F/↔4λ
m
8z⊂→5P77]⊂3rg→y0z2H:42P≠q32`.di`≥Nαβ';O'∪W∂SL¬vw~∞λ M|βy0vCE;t`4h thes`
AGα{7C'd∧W.hπ⊂⊂∪z42i≤β adopp the two pro@
Kgg←β⊃βO?e+S'∨ph+∪↔≤∧7-8Y9∧ 8ε9`%where if @QQKgJ↓aCOKL\~∧~)¬P∨ ∧k?KKM_4(Q%RjjUURjjUQRjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUQP@hαQ_.L,¬⊂→L⊂#7`6 1981 22:20:09-PST
Frgm~ dec@YCpCo¬i[Ci CEgi∃[aYKβ#?9β∂!α ↔⊗[↔3↔Hh ∃∨\-&.∨G$∧L
λεFlC"AQQ≠y.P0w<X5r0→ out @QQKeJ↓W]←nαβπ;g&C';≥ε /W ∧ε
π>λ ,=8;λ -x<Y∧ {{] ≥8π4g→FE:4→P~→Yλ0s2 an 8@plAi!ChASLAgkaA←gKHαβS :∞ G.~∞-⊗>GDλ
-n≠h⊂$∞9Z0≤λ9xy`4em7
It's supp@=g@↔⊃¬#=βK,qβπK␈+;⊃↓#*-1β∞s⊃β∂|¬V*π⎇_
∧≤{yNNβpy2H30∂r↓∪]iKαa∨L4T{ +↔≥!αCK};@⊗∞]]⊗v: H⊗v?\≥f>
Mε*εl≥V*ε|dπ&FT
FFNβY`⊂~yP9g[p¬thing lIie¬
INTEL@1KGh\A/JOIJAS]QKeKgβ#↔⊃βNqβ'≠4yβ?9∧KQβπv!β#?:βS : |W"ε≤E`hPβ"K%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U++#%U++#!! Q_.L,¬⊂_H 2qb[q2y 190! 17:51-EST
@
e←4pA'i¬meOf↓~P→αn ∂Kπ↑KE↓rl
∞JεX∧ε∂" Y∃"lX7`hU>X&V.>G"α¬∞-v/⊗≥]VNvt Vw6≡-vvn]nG_h!Q$∞r _T,*∞NW&␈-_⊗bε=x
L8⎇~-⎇H~_.P92`#ently app@∃CeKHhA'←Mβ#←πK(h*&↑h -M|≠9-nλ⊃;Nm<[{M\8π:9K⊂2r. Anthony I, Wass` e[¬\XA∪∃
A∨IIKdAαs=84S→aU1∧≠πSπd{⊂~∧β[kDλ2∪hε↔
k ~K∧@
--------------
---------------
~∃∃]HA←_A/←e-&A S≥Kgh~(TTTT(TTTT(TTTT(TTTT4∀ZZZ4ZZZ~(@~∧~(→'kE)KGht↓/←eWLA SO∃ghA,D@Fhd4∀@≡`P[ KF4pb@@@`hf∪)←]Ci!C\Aβ1C\A'α{3?7}q↓r*≡{1βπ ∧¬∃-HxU∃≠d↓∃>␈-:2∧&≤|W∨"
f∩α≠F!PT&≡LSRαεD∧&.4ε∪KC∀εβ≠ EXU≥ Q(g⊗↑W$∧V}l≡FF∞dλ⊗f∞βH∀m⎇≠{;md∂∩Tm⎇λ_=∧
U1⊃hZToC!)2x&≡Tz7]λ+wy5TP0z Rqtgers
To: Works: ;
Works Digest Friday, 4 Dec 1901 VoLume 1 : Issue 42
Tkday's Topics: Tandy 68000 BasEd Mi@
eWG←5aciKH~∀α∩@@@@@@@@A∪]i∃XA∨aMsf~∀$@@@@↓→S[Sβ#';≥¬##∃↓3AAAA¬#=βC/∪7'Q∧#↔7πv!βCπ>K;≥_hQ555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555jh4(Q(F∂&W$β∩∧LXλl]8Y4Dε.. $ε
nM&∃14u↓QQ\[mWH∩_-D⊂8Y-N{{@⊂∂$ f⊂_z⊂&dU⊗fa←βEαE$H42py→⊂0P 2umgrQS\Aβ##'M∧3?KWhaβC↔⊗CπCMJβ?→βλβ@≡}⎇`π&Z ,Rπ⊗]HV∂≡\APS3εεβαn,≡6." 8 m↑≥=→.$_↑(
,9~0↔H)t0qZTε Anyone hav@∀AC]r↓S]M←I[CiSα{8$ ∞∪?WQ∧εFFO5qPP@"Vu
<h⊂⊃[vx:`4er was diScuss@∃HAEe%KM@3Jβ'9α>{C.M∧#'>↑8
∧
L(λf6H_;LDλlmeD 2TiY↔(β!↓ K ⊗KVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVFKVVFEβE"0z→]⊂⊂→λ 2qP \X⊂⊃ (Wednesday) 1029( P~∃
e=ZtA I ∪
*↓ChA<BεJR|q5EAαB#↔;↔IαβK,¬⊗7<j#!)zq5→qz≥⊂∩w:2`, OpsYs
In Noveeber 1981 @≠∪9∩[≠∪
%≡AgegiK[LAa`BdrRd`@ASfA∧AIKgα≠@⊗O∞M⊗}r
x AQX(⊃L↑h≠qD∞~→( ↑→<X.M8π3@ System cl@¬`∂O↔~βπK∨α]f"r∧ ⊗rε≤LFO&≥ybπ& X LQ Z<d
9;]
≥{H∪l@⊂4i&V↔bflλ0p∞d↓S%≠CAY9↓¬##∃β⊗K∃β∂|¬f≡∂∞@π&F|¬9m¬λ~<d∞~→#!87qyZq0v$]4ryP≠pε c@=[ES]%]NAC8A∨age`
β←LεFBε≥IBπ& Tεv/tλ
\z≠[mMβstWβE*47]pπh @QQJACIiSGYα)β'M∧¬ε.∂m_ ∂∀≤zy.|9λ⊂~≠{py2≤P ntel _Aβ##∃βL∧F.
_ d∞~→#!.x;9'$λ∃z ≡λ≤r
};→∞M→(∪n∞}8h ,(_=∧∞~→(
<\p↔[0p Compu@QKdAY∃mKX}4⊂⊂∀
&C↔K∃∧K@~π=yV*ε\Yg&N⎇`λ
|β⊂6 ↑py2bλ'x9l\SyP 7ith actually eMbedding
@ACeif↓←\Ai!JAGQ%afAi!K[gKαc[↔Mph($
L∧bπ& X LT_<Y$
8πy2H92s2\2p∞c@∃bXAaαc↔πO*βCGQ∧εFF.T∞Wαε≥`¬ =|Ztea C"I 8π5FBε@
-4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZ~(~∃ CQJtfA⊃KF@bdpb@@β1`∪∪w&C~m
:@hTn-vkR LV∨6∨↔>∂M\↔&B≥≤F∞fL]bε∂Dλ&/⊗<X ← εE)]q52a]≥⊂& )mitindεAiQ∀@l``@`Ai↑↓aKe[%hAIK5C]HAACOS]≤\~∧~)βZA∩↓G←ee∃GhAS8A[rA¬`∂OWoβS'?pβS#π ∧εn␈>@ε}H≥~ Q X=.Mvz;L>Y;9-n∨→→,>Y;9-n↔(≠-|→<h
|β⊂:4→P&aP
≤___λ;wz`,d have to be
@¬m←SI∃HAi↑↓aKe[%hAIK5C]HAACOS]≤}@A∪LAiQSLA]←h↓YSGJ↓aceG!CgS]≤ABAgββ?KSα1PF≡≤ λ∞MβP29~{2P*≠P!t:\αch @=\A'k9ICsf|@AαAβ;?W3 β⊂⊗NβY⊂~z⊂40\2⊂:7H12v )eve
that↓`∂πSO≠⊂⊗∞>Mw↔J∞λ .37y6Xw1rP_wzv2λ9z4`,l be qque@∃uKHAα{WQβ|1βS#*β∂#'h+'→∧KQβ←∂→β3'nKS↔⊃∧¬⊗rπM
↔
π|∨∩αjT ∩>α 8Wπε≥→fgJ
I⊗N(≠;n,(→→.L8∧v9H7wεE~8¬st↓oQCHαβ7WO ∧ε⊗* ≡f}NLXBαF≥lBε∂Dλ
m =λ⊂⊃[yz∀Wλ⊗d`gλF@
----
---------
----
----4ZZZZ4~∀4T+;⊃β|1α←?⊗ZMα∪N;↔OPhQ)))RQ)))RQ)))RQ)))Ph)55hi554hQ4!Q e∨\-&.∨G$¬>␈-:2∧&≤|W∨"
f∩α≠F1PBvπαl&\5SC
∧ε#≠βa→&}v≡Mε∞rλ≥F∞r
8 mM{;{Dπ∩TsmD_=⊂∀*j#bT)←⊂∧UβorkS Digest V1 #43
@ate: 9 Dec 1981 0104-EST
Fp¬WZt↓∃←]CQQCLA¬YC@9¬≠?3?n{9↓rU≠?1β∂!αJVαHt-∃7aPU&w$¬>␈->3Bβ1Q%⊗/
H∞%↑≠nH
⎇|Ztd =λ∀N↑→y0→≤FEεE∃wy5yH"4sr\z∧P⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂∃p¬dnes` Cr0@rA ∃F@br`b@@@@@A-=Yc@7*↓E↓i∧KGOW*↓QL4Ph*S?& e∨M¬#?C'∨→h$¬αα∪↔\≥f"¬ ≤vNvt↓P@H∀∧αα∧X9∀≥~πα"αjλ8⊗f@λ⊃Sn⊂(0x→y9FEαDP⊂⊂λ⊂⊂+r\z⊂!gXyz⊂"→x90⎇λ&tqbCE⊗VFKVVVVKVVVFKVVVFKVVVVKVVVVKVVVFKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVFKVVVFKVVVFKTVVFKVBEεB ∧ate: 4Dec 1981 0842-PST
Fph∂Zt↓∪CLA \A7,ε'-=≥⊂∂bhe @=` β∂|¬g&Nn\⊗⊗@→+C!↓"""!⊃/∂R) /∂C!! ¬⊗@----------
---------
----
---
Date: $↓ KGK5EKd@Drpb@DftfH5 '(~)
eOZhA∂SkMKaaJ↓βiiCIIR@Y !!
↓ChA≠%([β∩x~∃'kα∪+↔∂!Q↓α∂∞c1β≠|ε"¬ε≤λ .∞c"U
wH⊂4Jλ+0PIX4Q∀d =λ∪)~λε`dK⊂ NFLε[→∪M!~ACPA≠∪(5β∩XA%π
ACPA≠∪(5β∩
∀4∀ZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4~∀%α↓↓α↔,ε&␈ε\≥b∧≡⎇lf/⊗]l6*ε⎇`∧NwLZ&∞∨M≡f*∧=yWπ=~;Lt∀}<nL;<c!!""(∧∧λλ $λαadaTP≤→⊂ FA⊗@------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When: SePteeber 1-LX@br`d∩∃/!KeJt$∩@@@↓'ieKMBXA∪QCYr~)'a←]M←efT$@@@A¬π~A∪QCYSC8AπQCAiKdX↓β∪πααaαε~≤*Q1αLrJ&¬bαNN%bαε&N⊂aα
∞~aα≡∧hRCK??∪π5α≡Cπ'Kn 9i↓αα↔K'XαOπ≠&+←π3baαO←.#↔84Ph*Cπ∧+KMβ∂∪∃β'w3'S↔ ∧ε}r ≥Fbε≡8 \⎇≤h
|β⊂:4→P22yZsw⊗⊂≠p¬thods$ @QKGQ]%ckKf↓C]H~)CaaYαK∂πSL¬vw~
xbεNnLW,8⎇~.l(_sm↑≥=~-lh≤}.>→;<ea ¬εE⊃2pr6~w2P3≠y⊂9zX4tqyZww≥∧Px94vλ_yz, 1982
NoTification↓←DAC
GCai¬]GJ@PJ+W3J↓E@/M↓Bβ ↔ε hPQ(f␈∩∞Mε*εnYFb∧<≥Fbεmx D
_8⊂∩\9V⊂ 3e`
Ai!JAMS1J@E¬∃!!
vαα⊗∞_:2∧≤→IB∩ε⎇`λ Y5 0)∀≠|C!.y;Y∧
8:;∧∞≠h⊂HZ∀⊃0 Y5 0)∃@εEεB⊗VVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKFEεE⊃0z2]λ≠⊂"2Xrvq2\⊂_\\ P→_≥ X⊗biUεA#)≠v]⊂)]2{2`. T. Kirsch 8SK at MIT-MC>
Subject: West coAst Depraz mice
Does anyone aroend here Cilicon Valley) have a @epraz mouse I could
αtake alook at? ThesE are heei-qpherical m` GQ¬]SGC0A[SG∀A[CI∀ASL~)'oSiiKeYC9HAM←β⊃↓#⊗vRrα
V␈εLTε∂"λ($rε ≡f*ε,XVrπl↑'Jπ
HV∂≡\@π>OM∧π&F]_ AQ\→4Lm|[8-ly+C!! P↑$∞~→(∞|>+λ
L89λ∞M99(
⎇H≥~ ↑y(≠-≤y(~.P7{2\⊂~⊂ -onths. The address is:
Depraz SA
αC@ @bfhTAQJA1SCj@!'kgg%JR~∀4∃)QK%dAaQ=]JASβ→↓!A⊂ε∩JβεUS *V62rα
LVf/∧
↔4 Mε6, C!!"K#%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+#"AQQ;Y∧
βs⊂+[y1iP⊃4sry]εA∃∃
∃∃∃∃
∃∃∃∃
∃∃∃∃
∃εE⊗KVVVVKFA⊂εBεEβ)zq5→qz≥⊂∃wy5iH"4sr\z⊂+_H⊃Z~FB⊂πX[Kb2qVN_P⊂→ ~≤De≠w0z4_w⊂ v_w⊂)`/lomon <JSol at↓%+)∂∃%&|@%/←eWLA SO∃ghA,D@Fhj4∃↓Ci∀t@bn↓ KF@Drpb@Hf`l[∃'(~∃→eP∨5Rα+?;∂##π9∧ 3πd
6}f⎇]vrβI*6}b ≡B¬∃ZHt-∃7aPU&w$¬>␈->3Rβ1Q%⊗/
H∞%↑≠nH
⎇|Ztd =λ∀N↑→y<N⊃"C"J⎇|Z|dλ~9y.>α(λ∧∧λλλ∧∧⊃\Z,L>+λε↔λ⊃→,4 ..ε∀λλλ∧∧λ∃SmN8εrP P≥⊂$\yzrP
~BEεB*7r0↑SyP*≠x4qyN∧P⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂∪a[≤000 @@¬KS@;8∧¬≡≡ ]V/_Q!∪3$4λ⊗v"∧∧M&@%P&r[wy<P⊂t4p9H⊗P$yH*42P∃iP#0[44w3H!2t4[2∨FEαP⊂⊂⊂λ-iw`2p¬rAM=` βSF)β∪↔d∧↔Jπ∞X
∞M8π3@ out @⊃SGKgQ`
04PI↓↓β&C↔K∃εCπO9?!β ↔.qβS?zβ7W∂BβS :∞8 -lλ≠⎇.D 2TiY↔#"EU+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++!Q@εE"_z2]⊂ Xε Dec 1981 1624-PST
From: JIm @≠G≥eCiPα↓r*BjβπQα≥)6ε%ph ∃∨\-&.∨G$β3$4 ⊗v"ε&S$Z
\Vn␈/∀ε≡F≡∞0hU<]f&/'$∧≥≤EiT≤=(~DBε≡@λ
:+4pizQ#"J,<≠≡%Z≠nHλ:q S(8tP5 ∧_=⊂∀jViaSi"FEβE$P4_{2P1→rw⊂:_v5tw→P:7P≤wvrP_8ytg→yyP#≠v5yP≥t7P3Yw2y0[68 @MKKZAβ#=β#∂3∀4 λβ↔?? β≠↔↔bβ≠ ?$
FF* 8
≡λ≠8.
y= D∧∃~→/∀≥y0→→P12v[pw4`.e the facT that US
manufactuRers have pretty iuch given the 64Kmarket to the Japanesa¬
(only Moto@I←YBAα ;⊃α$IβπK*βOπ∪d¬⊗v:∞Mε␈≡Tλ6FO∞4εNr ≥gJπ=≤vvNm≤6∞wAQ'∂.≥nFO'α+λ ≥Yλ∃
(∩X. ;Y4lT~_=LT_x<∞N<Y9∧ ;H⊃.z4vp]2r⊂≠ ⊂:7P
X∩P'Yα the
eark` hR8@AαAβ;πMβ>{;∪↔⊗K;≥β>CπQβ∧∧V␈εLTεNr∞Mε*α,h M⎇]λ⊂⊗~w2yQλ4πf @
QS`~)[C]k→CGikβ∪∃βSFK;-β∞∪?WQ∧εFFO5`α∧ODλλ.∞→8<NP:40]⊂:42H*iP9\2w:→αar @Q←↑~∃5kGPAβ#'7∃∧ ;⊃β.s↔K∨Jβ?9β'∪g'lpλ∞MβP1g[p¬ up with a denser↓GQS`↓i↑~∃%]GeK¬gBAsα+'3∪~aβK↔≤εVg&≥lrεNd
π,8⎇~,<9≠≡$
Yh∪ml(_p↔[tp∞g↓k`Ao%iPABhi,hS∂#'αβ≠ ?$λ
(→y-l<X;∧
8<Zl↑λ
_.P7p8≠yrr th∞AS8AQ←@/≠∃αε∀iβπ; ∧∧
¬Dλ
.≤*+C!*z=~∧∞~~0→H42prλ9z0y≥⊗⊂:4→P%0x_w2y`% could heAd us obf @%\AiQ∀@djM,~∃@7∂∪//Dλ↔4≥y3
Eλ_;∞M≠x
sZ⊂82i~0x9P_v6⊂ 4he tim`
Ao∀AQCmα)βOC.sQβ?p∧π&FTεc$XQ(λm
<λ∃m≥≠λ⊂∪Z{2P*\P0P 4echnica`_Aα+∪∨∃¬##↔K*p4(Q*FFO4 ↔4_;@⊂~vx7`2taft issu@∀X ↓αL∧b¬-4λ
-l≥<p~≤αy f@¬YQfA KQS]⊂A←\~(li⊗A¬]H@dTh
-β≡C'CM∧∧f␈∩∞Mε*ε\≡7
ε\≡&↑∂EDπ>(≥z-Mλ≠∪n<αP:4→FE1w[x:z2\⊂6pw≥s0q`4urer↓[CeW∃hXAo!SGPA]SYXA⊃KGeK¬gBAe∃mK]k∀ACMH4∃iQK8AeKC1YrAW9←GVAUbA←kPAP∨→¬##∃α⊂∧d"π,≤6*@Hλ⊂-lλ≠{L<(≥~ T≠9;-}↑#"L=~<≤d {kλ <;H≠
|z8h =~8≤d Y(⊂∪_y⊂12Z4s2? Ev@∃]akC1YrA←Ud~)⊗≠WSSNs≥β↔&;∃ βLs∪GO'∪eβ←Lc1βO,∧'≡O>@λ
⎇H⊃≠hD~_;LM⎇=≤d¬≤z0↔_p¬ they
@¬eJABαβ7?K*βK↔3N &T∞6␈/,8Rε@yH⊂m
<≤h∞M_;@∞M→(∩L≡_;Y.<*+C!! Pp↔[vrw:≤←FEεB%0 m
α-
----------------------------
Date: 1PA↓KFbr`!
↓AeUαjBNPhR≠K∨kQα'πpα!9αn+KK''!↓r⊗-∩J&R βπQα-~¬&&≤J `0Q!P@*≤Y0⊃Zyrv<K⊂⊂ @≤2pv⊂~vx6 %ma`≥i¬iS←\αβ'Mβ|s]β←FK∂!β>{K/Mp∧α¬≡⎇\Rε∂,Tε⊗/NLW⊂@ Y~ ≥H≠p~~2y9Vλ1:z I re@→KdAi<ABAe∃CXAS5aQK[∃]aCI%←\ACLA←]J↓oQSG AI←Kβ≠9∨PhS3']_
∧∞~→(
≥\⎇≤N\⎇~0↔[⊂9rjλ0z⊂ !lh ≤@↓)QJ@HAGQS@Ag←Yβ+S'?p∧εO~ ⊂πε@|8;↓QX¬v*Yβe, but iT workpεAC]⊂AShAα#?/=` nD~_=LT_;↑$ 9YQ,>λ≠{D∞~→( ≡X:0⊗_q0 e
λset↓←@→βLsOSK,∧7&N⎇n3@4≠{[∂∀≥~→$ 9YP∩Xz4{ % spe@∃H\4PH$$⊃⊃⊂Kci→∧kcaQ hRUP %U++#%U++#%U+++%U++#%U+++%U εEεBα@ CI∀p@bhαα∪↔∂,¬V⊗/$ε∪KC∀ε#βS65T-≥AQ$7⊗β{&D
YxY.∞α⊂ @. M`∨eISf@yIβ⊂∃β∂!α6& j6
xhROW T∧V∨#$ S#Cεεαπε≤⎇⊗v:∞8λm 8εr`3,∧∩∧~)∩AQCYJAiQ∀AS[aIKggSα{9βSF QβSF{O*∞⎇εzε ≡f*ε≤Mwπε\@λ∞M→(⊂~≥wP1x≥P9qd→vryVβE2s@. Apo@1YP≥α≤¬voπ↑LW∩b∞Mrε←lX L={9(
<Y≥l≡Y(⊂∩→pε`∪GαK↔;∂L+@~ε⎇`λ∞ 9y1L≡8ε:9CE0λave FOT res@Q` '∂&+⊃βSF)β';∨#@↔8⎇~-⎇\h∃.≤αs:`, on @QQKCdαβ7π∂FK;↔Mp∧¬&F≤∧c!;wzv→⊂67`3e the benedit @=H βSF)βS←zβ∂CU¬≠∂#↔n)0∩¬,X nNX8p~~ww9P≠wεE )nstructioNpεACe∀ACI←AiKHA rAiQ=g@∃β>C=β∂∞qβ/I∧εvO≡∧λ
t→;YM}Xy(∞M→; ⊂≠yαE $epend kn "qcoe@Q`
β#|s?I ¬βC/∨⊗ 77≥lr`$λ∩(
=Y⎇`⊂≥2s27\αs doing @QQSfAβ;#<4T∧WGε\8
∧ 8πz7\αh∂YBαβS :∞λ M|≥8p∩H1wq9→qz6 9 sorking @
QSaf↓EKM←β∪∃βSF+eβ α-⊗v8Q(⊗wJ∞λ M|α:q`4pεAi↑↓[CeW∃hAC]⊂AI↑Aβ##↔≤ λ∞∞Xπsy_vP22]2r7`0m` @; ∧π>OM↓P@-~9z¬]→=P∩[⊂60w→βauge compilers p∂QSα≠!β∂Lε&∨.↑h -nα⊂:4→P7s &endi@9J~¬SαsGSK,∧7&Nβ{\e@⊂)z`#h de@YKY←@∧k↔;Q∧επ⊗/>X ,↑h≥~ ≡λ≥~ T_{p⊗\4p e@I`
β∂∞qβ↔πα8
-O εE "e fi@aK@⊃β&yβ∨↔v+@⊗∂LTεn␈,Tε.YY0⊃]4{2P_wr2P≥t2w the @
QS`A!C]IYα+@~πM PhVl≡Vgλ_p↔\αrec@QYrAC9H←←@⊂π←#↔p∧π&FTλ ∞4πgbam i`&↓iP≥β↔+9β'p∧ε
εmx E↑_9z-lc"P∩[8ε`∪@⊗{;↔\X NE@εEεBα--bob mo@I` 'LhP4)5h¬RjJUP %U++ ⊗KTVVFKVVV@--(
ZZ4ZR4Ph"&≤LS@$ -`⊂⊃2qr`-ber 1981 01:445 '(~)
e@?hπ"∧f]x L≡Yλ∪ED⊃[sL↑Hλ∞#∪βH
⊂∧ε∂" Y∃"l→↔`hU>XλM,8⎇≥λ*42P∀2pv⊂∩vx6 %ma`≥i¬iS←\αβ?λ4U≠W ,∧7#R∞Mε*∧X6cCβ∧∧λλL8εpw→⊂(0sZw3P [3wy4]46FEβE*44\β was a p@I←UKGβ!α%β> @~π⎇z&@=8π3@ on about @∧AsKCHACO↑8@A)Q∀AgG←α{Ah∀Ph*g?*αεε9π+O¬α reβ'w≠KW∂&K?9βL¬bπ& Tππ⊗|8W>{|@∞⎇=~λ∞M→(→∞\9 <∞-xy4n=|C"N?<⎇→-Uβ⊂⊂"\yrw:~pv6<K⊂;t0]⊂40x≤2w9P≠w⊂0@ page faul@PASfAQQChAβ##∃α≥αT4+>+SMβ
α2>::β7↔↔␈∪eβ←∞KQβ≠⎇⊃βS#*β;↔c"β gS*q↓αSF)β?SF+IβC⊗{∂πO≡{H$+F ;∪3/→βS#*βOSW611↓α}1β∂?/∪O∃1πK?Uβ≤∧⊗r?D vzε|lbε∞lDπ↔.d∞6}n\-v'J ]G≡(Q.vFNLTπN␈T}&*π|≥↔&Nlpε6␈$∞FF*
lWGα∞ ⊗>*∞Mrε≡⎇\RεNnMrεn]]w↔JD∞Vvf≥<PhW,\↔≡}l≤&f*
iRεn≤=εNv↑4εfN<T¬4
X ED_]0~λ:44yH;tv6λ;wy5KεEεE⊃7y⊂:~4yP)→pywg ⊂<wzH897q_q6<P_v9wP≥ps70H:yrP_P9z0Xuv4uYP1pqZ2P7cβE80sYyP:4_z⊂0y→P17z[2⊂37\⊂24yZV⊂:7H22qi→pyrPλ2|82[9t{2H⊂80sYP30z[:9FE≥t4qtλences on good @ACOS]≤ACYO=eSiQ5`
βπ⊗)β'9∧εFF*λh∃B∧α_<LNβpy2H$0w2_7wuWβE*42\2P. -ust/ be theore@QSGCX↓ieKCQ[@↔nN2ε∂-zVv"
⎇bεF|tπ&@h→≠d
=β"L\YZ0⊃Zpp∞tly(λAC9HAiQ¬hAoS1XAeK¬YQ`%∧C↔3A∧¬⊗rπM
↔
π=_
∞\=~0↔[↔αEεB'q; )ousl@dXAQ←\AMC]
rAc←TA`∨πvs¬β∨,εBε}d∞ε∞>≥lrεO4 ∩π≤X9 ]yYH ,=≥y,]@εE 0rice and perfoRma`≥Gα)1βC,ε&*ε≥lBπ≡≥↑εf*eabαπ⎇_
∧≥~→$
α0s@ o` AI%[S@;Lε6FNβYc!∞Y=≥.-β9P 4hr`∨o8AS@9ε @~ε≥`λ ←≥≤X$ 9→→,D→Y0⊂]8¬re.
~∃!CmJAα3W98hP4(⊃⊃⊂HH↔IDdMC"AQK+ ⊗KVVVFKVVVFKVVVVKVVV@-----
-)~∀4⊃β@; ∧ε}H⊂ w\αkS Di`∂Kgβ 4))RQ)))RQ)))RQ)))RQ($ h¬RjjUUPhPβ"@↓J⎇8ZL\⎇∞H
⎇|Ztdλ~9y.>λ∃L$∧m
C!$βlL¬X→8k'ε(λ &Vmb2M⎇X=~ ≥H⊂; ≥H∀p↔[7vwwλ≡%)w[⊂0z RUTGERS> WorkS Digest V1 #46
Date: 20 Dec 1981 1756-EST
Frkm: Jonathan Ala`≤AM←Y←[=\@y∃M←XACPA%+)≥ %&|4∃)↑t↓/←eWLt@v~)%KaYβI7S=Rα←?K]→βπQ¬∪WS∨/∪L4(hR←?K←→α∪'>+OP%α↓↓↓↓αα7?;& e1↓∪ α∪↔~↓Eea
↓↓↓↓α↓α[?g+7∃↓
↓iα'∨≠W∃↓#04(∀U#?∪πJ;MαS␈β'∂MPH%YRZβ[M9β⊃UZ-∧≠#'C_h($%α↓↓↓↓¬##∃↓3AAAA¬βπ∨'v9α∨πn(4)5ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji544Ph*∪π&)i↓EBα∪↔∂.k ↔Iβ eaEβ↓eUIl*NP4T3K >W$∧F∞m0¬.∞M<W∩ε≡@λλ95+$&λ!"Tn\ZY8nGH
M 4_;Y∧εM)Rd z~4∞1"C"J={9(∞ 9|⊂⊗→P9rb[P:7P~0{2P≤t7y:λ6rvw\4ryWλ⊂+t7H9pp∪ dirs@PAS]i<AiQJbm⊗~)%β~A5Ce@/-!⎇↓αNsS↔E`λ∧
z≠|lT→→4m≤{H⊃
⎇:;X.L<h∃
( ≠∩P) fH4py5Yz⊂∀0[2εE"]2y<`/ne c@=aSKH↓ShR}A≠@?≤εF.Zd∧¬&F←∀ε∞g=tεF∂∞λ -l9λ≥
t_Y(
⎇Y(∪l@⊂:42CE20y]⊂4w:≠P:42H6py5Yz∪⊂⊂∃42t`2 desIgn wapεAgS5aYbA KiiKβ⊃1βπd¬F␈>\@λ∞vpv ,er
Packages, And much hidπQKdαβg'↔f#E8Q!PU& T∧V∂ ≥f/≡T Fzεmx
∧∞<y(
]<\[n.iHλ
M→>(∞≥9<≠∂∀≠89 T_(⊃
≤YY0→→w:⊂ #hoic@∀~∃iQ¬\AiQ∀AβKKβ∪'∂πpβ7π;.3π∂S,ε&/↔5`λ∧λ{{< ≥X94d
~:y$ 8π:2[⊂1w`.cantrated↓←\~∃β∪↔∪Wv#π;∂Jq↓α ,εBπ≡≥l6*πM WJε ≤Bπ&tλvzε,≤6Jε≥lBπ⊗↑N&}⊗≤@εO"βλ⊂~~4yP![yzεE≠wy2P≥4p
e. Compani@∃`
β←Fy∨[∃π+Gπ⊃∧KQβ≠⊗{5βSF)βOS∂∪Q1β∨+∂!β∂→α&
hβπ;⊂hR←/>LW⊗@H⊃0⊗→qz94XT⊂40]2P12Yw⊂1:Zv24w→P≠⊂∀K RAMs fgr↓ck@'&)β¬β>C'3∃εs?]_hR?S#-⊃β∂?oβπ;π/→β3'↑)α'm]w~ε≥lB¬$∀λ
≡Y(⊂⊃[w1rw≥90z2Y⊂7w desi@≥\~∃IISGWS9KgfAβ#=β∨,εBε
∞λ↔↔λ≥~ ≡λ≥z-Mα⊂12H4p∞herently cheaper↓i↑~∃5C]kMα ∂SW⊗+I9↓∧keβ∂,ε',;]λ∞m⎇→(
≡h≥z.Mλ≥~ T∃∩(∞ <X
pπS@;≤∧RεODλ
.P:42CE9vp[4∧es@PAC@; ∧εf@⎇y<nD≤≠p≠Yy↔εEβE*42H;3v:[p¬ o@_@li⊗↓%β≠f↓SfAGUaeK]QYrAgαkπ31∧∧6}o ≡&.α∞Mrπ> ≡BεODλ
m≥≠λ_LQ ¬4gλ0P<`%ar o@HAio↑8@A)Q¬h@∨M∧εvF.βH∪,≡X¬r`4 share wiLl reAlhp∩AαkπSS-⊃0∩βvTRε@yC"L∀≤{8-Mλ_;-}9]⊂~yP0@ pπ[CYαaβπ]x
-n C"AQR(⊂~~4p∞k↓iQChαβS#∃∧∧↔'→;]
≥{H⊂~≠P92`$undancy i@8AiQJ↓+&Ao%YP⊃β⊗+π33JβCπe∧¬v&0β"P⊂]⊂:42H→~P⊗K RAM↓YKmKαa0∩αλ≥G≡z∞Mε*ε<≡F≡F≥lrπ<λ⊂∀[⊂92`,iabi@1Si`%αC←#'≤¬απ& QPE-4 ε∂~ X n≤αp∞tially dkne),∧⊂∀!Q%ε.β|⊂⊗→P9r`%m to dh∂eO∃hAiQ¬hABAα;K↔π ∧ε&.≥Dε}H≥~ T⊂X< ≥Y<p∩H897`#ess
equi@A[@↔n@λ∞|<h⊂N]8ε0∀↓S\Ai!JA+ε8@A)Q∃rOeJ↓kgS]≤AiQJ↓cC@7*β↔GWLεεn8π:, but
λj`∨hαβ;↔∂-≠GπKL¬GJπM Rπ≡≥\Rε&↑8
,]\k@⊂λ*42P∩0x0w→yrP (ave @9KmKdαβ ↔↔p∧εv←LX ↓QY[p→λ22y`)en c@1KmKe9KgfA¬`
β7,∧6Bε≡4ε>}|@λ ]Yz0↔→p¬riNdεAC]⊂ASC]UH π∂'+K↔KLs∃8Q(↔4_;↑$ {{< ≥↑(⊂≠Zv6⊂ 4ell You, A gooD desIen with half-way de@
K]h~)[C]k→CGikβ∪↔Kπv9β←'d¬Bε⊗\≡Bε␈↑@ε
π
ywαεL↑6N>d¬ε␈∩ ⊂λ .]=→$ Xπy1YP7w2JF@
with excedlEnp manqfactp eS9H
β↔4∧W/(≥~-\αW⊂⊂⊃7y⊂2↑0rx6→V⊂"$H27ry[∪z⊂*\r@
@IKIk]⊃C]Gr↓S\Ai!KSd@Xi⊗A∀
5)↓¬##↔e∧≠3π'hβS#π ∧π&F←∀ε&}d}BεV\\Bπ&tλ m≥Xy#!∞~→:.∧≡:9-L≤h_.,(~~,]λ
_,-⎇=⊂
X∩TWλ⊂*42H40quH4πf fuses, afdpossIbly
laseR zapPing, allowpεAiQ∃ZAi↑↓kgJAAYCgi%FAaC
SCOS9NXAo!SGPA5CWKf↓MP∨HhS∂#↔∂β↔Iαα(∀o~aQ hRUURjjUURjjUURjjUQRjjUURjjUURjhQ!PTε≡LSRβ↔∀∧&.4ε∪KC∀ε∪CSVs##:Z
5 h(j&}k$λ ,]Y≠mf∧;\xd≡[x|d =λ⊂L↑Xy0⊗→|BE)]q52a]≥⊂≠~~P2<g_vtqyCE
Attn: Jim McGrath ("CommeNts" you say? OK, A @
C\Oh↓eKgSMh\\\$~∀4Rq99;>Ceβπ⊗+9∨Q∧k?K∃¬)2Mdλλm⎇<_;M≤<h≠,≥z;Yd∞~→0⊗OP⊂$P≥wzv2λ9p|P~z∪qFB:42P≥yzpvλ9t7y≥⊗z2i≠Wvpy~p¬ting)dept/managemenp/braif-damage whiCh αdoesn't u`≥I∃agiC9HAiQ∀A]CiUeJAC9HAS[A←eiC9GBA←_A`∪↔≤C;'∂∞aβCK};K↔O~p4*Ww#'1β&C∃βC⊗K∂∃β≤ε&∂≡ XBbπM WJπ|↑&*π≡Y↔&*
↔ππ∀λ ,≥z;Ydε-Z`⊂≤0y:9KεAεE∃42w there's the usUal mixpure kf @QKGQ]%GCXAαK;∂?oβ↔S↔v≠∃9α&C∃↓YαI2¬∀→Z0hV≡,Vr?D
FN↑T
w&F↑ ∧e≤∀ F/6≤<W Z∞Mrε⊗T 6}o X
≡~=Y$∞~→(∂≥9;→∧
=<⎇∧ Y#"N≡8=→$
~9z¬D≤{h∞M→(→ ↑z9{D ;Yλ∞M→(≤∞-xy4n∀≠=<nD_[u
∧_Y( M{Y(∞-9z≥¬a"C"H∀→];LL;9;NL9λ∀∞-x[→-WH≥~ T_Z9d {{< ≥Z9<d ≠{InD≤y9-T≥≠h∞]Y→<N>_;Y∧∞~→#!-;<≠n._;XlT≠yH∞L8z≠M≤x;λ∞L;→;NEH∃~ ←(→≠md⎇λ≤L\{y{M∨Y(~.EC"C!(;Y ∧∞x9≠∂∃λ~=∧}h→y.N~;Yd (_Z.D≠_= T≥≠h ]]→<D∞~→(εf∩h≤l<;Y+D
~→( -9c"L><⎇≠m\<\h
=Y( ≥≤Y8,O(≤=,≥~9Z,\λ≥~ ]<H≤n↑≤≠~,↑\kH∧
~≠|lT≥z≠d ;]→.!"[_.L(≥{md⎇λ_LT≤y3
M;Y`
9z .∞[yZ.D≥→0m
[{≠l←+λ≥
>(≥m≥≠λ_LT≤y;
M9Yc! {{;-|~=~,↑h→[n∧≠≠p≠H894qYyP;t]4⊂67]P6py→ts9WβE
Your @
←[[KαsQββ∧∧6∞r
H l]8h_m
<≤h ,(≥≠mt→X<D Y:~-l∂iid
<h≤ ↑Xy<∞M=Y+AQPY<m≤α2yP≥42P0X7{2V[rp∞tioned prgblems, new @Ae←GKMbAiK
Q]←Y=H∂'↔~βπK∀hS∪↔[,¬F␈ε\@ε∞vD∞π⊗␈l]bπ>≡Mαεn]]w↔J LW6N<↑2ph!Q"jjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUUPhPβ"Q ≡→.Hε↔λ⊃→,4 ..ε∀λ⊃\M≤_>*$ε,,@~ bijεB εrom: STE@π↔ _↓ChA⊃¬%,Zb@~∃'k UKGhhA~lp@``@1∧ ∨π'ph($
&C∃β7∞S?I1∧ '∪Ns≥1β6 W3Q¬;'S!∧
:eβ∨+KK↔w!↓YAβ↓AβC∞;';≥εK7C3.k↔;S∂#'?8hS'Mβ&CπQβ⊗+∂?[/∪eβ≠⊗{5βC∞;∃β≠∂+3SMεKEβ↔G#K↔7,¬GJεM≥VO&\@ D∧∃~→$∞≥{h =~8β!.xz→-\αP0v≠5{yP≠w2P*≠P1pv≠⊂4w⊂_P80sYP;t4Xt⊂4yH7w⊂)Yqww2_y<P9]7y0sYU⊂⊂$]∧¬αdoes NOT allow one to abgrt the instructiOn entirely andenteR any new
enviRonmeNt. This epπgK]QSCYYdA[KC9`
βSF QβπwIβCπ>K;≥β∨KOS↔h∧ε}r∞>V≡B ⊃PVn≤=εNvT ↔4≥Y<O∀≠~;-≡→9⊂~w⊂;t_z⊂9aZ2p
e of traps, faulTs( etc., are
Availabhe to usEps&
For examphe, if oNe is attempting to allocate stack space on demafd↓Cf~∃QQJAaI←OeC4AeKcUSeKf↓Sh@1∧εFF*
_ Lm|[8.M;{@∞M→(_-M≠xx.M|H~ ≡h_8M}=λ⊂~~2BE 0ace Reference IpεA[KIKYbAα 9βπ&#K↔O~q↓αSF)β';4¬w⊗n≡M⊗}r∞Mε∂"∞Mε(h.,V6/,]f≡(≥x.∀≥Z8$∞~→(∞>_8zd∞≠z;NL<H⊂∀\P77zλ∀0yP→0y⊂0\P @-]WnR4⊃CmC%YCEY∀Xλ4(hR←* ≡6↑.Dλ↔ε}MIrπ&t vO6T∞W
ε∀∞7&∞=0λ ←≥→;N≥9{@ l8=≥.,(~3D∞~→2.⊂9|y]2p
th∞AK9CEYJ↓kfAi<Aek\αα⊗∞⊃αCπ9β,ππ&.n8
,-α2P&_w3zpYrTP /n their machines and
they mostlp∩Aβ;↔;Qα∪W#!rq999∩q↓α¬ε[3G∨*β←#↔⊗)β?;*β↔OO.sS'πfceβS,c3Mβ&C∀4.λλ,|αP6p[0sriλ⊃$SvH3ww7_P72`%d some mo@IJAaC≥KfDA]CfAi!JA←]1rA←]∀~∃MK¬cCEYα)β←'&AβS#,¬↔$~_<LNx8 2K∧¬
Geo@→H αO&+∂/↔b↓"NR,~.⊗2∧CπKYi A$Q!PRjUQRjjUURjjUQRjjUURjjUURjjUURhh!Q$.vD
v"¬⎇}&@:h⊃~,|αyzεB∃∃∃∃
∃∃∃∃
∃∃∃∃
∃∃∃∃βE⊗VVK RU@)≥ %&\4⊃)↑t↓/←eWLp ↓lhRK↔Cdπ∩o&w$¬>␈-:2ε∂D
'/&|X N⊃"C"J⎇|Z|dλ~9y.>α(λ∧∧λλ∃
∞αy1`$ay, 24 De@ @bbpD@@@@@A-←αcW7∃β ↓iαM≠OW∃β!\4(hRS >L∨∩?~
MwεN>7 hR∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧∧∞&]→fO∨N-↔6N⊃Q"αα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧αααλλλ,]8π3@ On O@QQKdA!CeIo¬eJ~∀@@@@@@@@A≥Ci%←]CX↓'K@7L∧6}vLX7&@|H∪J6-L f.h ⊂⊂{0t`,abil@%ir4R↓↓↓↓α↓↓↓↓α↓↓↓↓α↓α∂?nk↔;S∂∪e↓Tλ6}wLYg'~ x D
~~<dλ~9y.>β"K%U+++%U++#%U+++%U++#%U+++%U++#%U+++%U++#%U++#%U++#%U++#%U++#%U++#%U++#!! ¬"0]2X
20 De@ @brpβ ↓Ee⊃!6⊗N h*7-⎇SB∧-yf∂& ≥b∧∞β_;D
{{∪m]{H∂ *{{λ ≡λ⊂ *U!b`∩S>λ
∃'UEUKGPp απ&k';≡8
∞4{4`!
~∃¬\A←Yα!β W8∧εNwmx ∞m8π3@ truncated↓[@↔O≤ ∨/4 '/∨Dλλn
βx8 %d up whil@∀AgK]⊃S]N~)≠←]I¬rOfAα#'>↑8
¬@⊂*42\2P;p\β no digest p∪KMiKeI¬rP→↓∧c↔Qβn)β/;|εrεNd ⊗␈(β"P∩~p∧ not re@
KSmJ↓BAG←αkC &↑LRε&≤|W∨"
yb∧nβ{Y ∨+λ⊂⊂[2⊂$P≥tp l rese@9HA←]∀Ai↑~)s←j\4⊂⊂∀*&C'MβLε2π& Tε -8π0vλ24sr\z⊂7`& the y` CDαqα%β> ;@"∞Mrπ>≡8
∧ =Y0→≡ww2P_P;2`2y
∃≠∃` Ke∧≠#K≤8
\<kλ ≥Yλ⊂$ _8λ 0y @≥Kβ9αg↔∂⊃0∩∧βY0≤≥⊂24`'est @%`
βO≤¬ε.≥;⊂∩Y⊂37`2
the 4th↓←@→αT∧⊗w.≡/∩`!α@
@πQKKβ∪@~`Q)%≡}AQ hRUP %U++#%U++ ⊗KTVVFKVVVFKVVVFKV@
λ@ Ci∀p@@dβ α&\8 -\Y<@⊂ \Xλ "dftb\AKgh4∃≠K|i`∩αλ:7&.α;XL↑YkTm|β: y≥9P0zλ&djεSzp tics
Subje@
ht@AMiCGWLA←\Aβ##∃↓3AAA@hRO.lLWβR∧λ4|@4p5¬@)ws 4Artc at MIT-Mu@1iSGf4⊂⊂∀)∀π&F|\vGλ≥~ ≡λ
Nεε λ∀nL8z`∞ 9Y0→→w1riH8πent to Mem`∨edX ↓αL∧bπ≡uDπ&FTλ
∞⎇c"Pj
(≤⊂,@tp∞g↓SYkI≥JAo←UYHAo=eVAo%iPA]<ASOI%ISGCQS←]f8@Aβf↓iQJAMiCGV4⊃eKO%giKd↓BAeK¬YY`%∧εv.O,@εNg\Lv+xQ!PE\iH∀l* yehh!Q%&FT
d
B∞λ⊗.NβY`⊂≤|yz2[P0x 0ears th∞A←→IKdAαs=β'oβC/[,k↔;S~β'9β⊗ @≡N4 F/≡≤⎇`hW=_ L<(≥~ T≥{tMP27w→P7w the ATLAS in the early &0's. Grante` the
∃Q¬eIoCIJAgkββC?K ∧εO~
↑V≡B ,W'→<@⊂_8¬t I get the @%[aeKβ≠@≡Nβ{@⊂≥40z the VAX
@AC@∨'v9βO∂F+7*
_ d
Y90∩≠2yy`,y co@5aP∪↔@∧⊂hPβ"R$ 8ε0∪O j`∨i%G@↔⊃∧εFF∂Dλ ]|≠⊂∩H1pw7≠z⊂3 )gure out @QQJAgα+∂?; πGS↔αβ?2∞Mε(hα\Y,≡{{Z-lh_p∀_tp∞ @]QSGPαβ ↔∨L¬g7@εEεBα The p¬KCGα{9β≠|ε"πε≤⎇⊗v:
~2πεtλ ∞4πvi@⊃JABAαcπK∨*β7.β;p→≡P9x !c`
∀@@@AαK9β¬∧ε6n∞β≠λ∞
≤∧q`)ca`_Aαk↔7}/∩`! ¬εE∃42P'→|:⊂)]2x⊂ )pεt4Ph!↓↓α↓αS#*βC↔πα8 md≥≠h
=Y( ∀≠_<L|αP6r[wy<P≤βpac@∀ASfAβ#=βC⊗{['∪*β∧4$∧ααα
Hλ.,y(⊗m|X¬2`#tX
A]¬[@∃β≥βπ∂∃ph (αS⊂⊂\3rP'_vrW`Y292i\β sp@¬G@↔M∧∧VfNβ:0↔_z2P 4he nee`λAMα{@∩πl≡7'J 8 M|z|h∞>8z ≡c"P↔]2y6 !y mana`∂KeLXAICQBA←E)KGhAACGS]≤ASC]¬KCef↓C]HAα+cC3L∧6O"∞Z6/∩ M↔=c"R%YβW⊂⊂⊂P3y2Xz⊂22Xv⊂;p\β writp K\αβπ |X
∧∞~~0→H4s⊂ 4he e@¬eQbAβ≠'cSL+@~ε.X
∧ <c"N↑⎇8;∧∞~→(
≥Y→<nN↑(∩.P9z4[4∧ "0-30 years behi@9HAiQ∀Ag←Mβ#←πK(h+@&\8
m{≠yo∃@εEεB⊗VVVKVVVFKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVFKFAεE⊃0z2]λ→→⊂"→qP⊂\N_P⊂⊂28∧dntHr[!πP~∃
e=ZtAI∃GmCp¬[SGe=g←Mh¬O←eI=\AChααβ↔K↑+3↔dhP4*SF+K∃β∂∪∃β∂,ε'ε.nMGJα}8 .l<X;∧t⊃X=
≥{X;∧
y;:,={Y≥,>≠xH Jl-Lε6\h∃m
8zβ!0y2P≤90vp\4v<P→8¬nc@QS←]C0X@Aααβ∂?7∧c↔S3Jβ⊂↔∞βXp~~ww0vλ1t4hλ4yP2↑82q`4ed
soon, the MMP
AG!S`Ao%YP⊃β⊗)βπ[∞K3π d)βπK␈+;⊃βnK⊃7g. I9↓∧KQβ'α1PVNnLW⊗/>M⊗v:∞Mrεvβ⎇→$∞~_=∧∞~→(ε⊗L lD}h∪3*T~<h ∀→→0⊂[⊗r2{→v⊂;$\αpual
ee@5←erAMsgiK4XAoSβ#!βπpβπOO|≠'πSO3∃α2∃)β7↔n{Ceβ&yβ#?f!βS#*β7πC∧¬⊗v8Q(Vf.β90↔≥9P∞
The MIU Also Has lOts oF fancy de@ k@∨∨Ns∃β∨zk⊂⊗∂>@λ
≥H~0~ ⊂9z`#hλ
+∂→β#π⊗#←πK*β K↔∞[C?'w#M " ≥f"ε≥n7'↔\8
≥{H⊂L≤zk=∞ 8z3LU@εEεB∧j42H0y1d~z2q`4ure @%`
β[-∪eβ∨|¬v"b ≥f"ε≤¬λ
MβwuyH64urH:42P~w0 tial
10i`⊃t↓aCe@ ∧π>NMDπ↔9H l4h_(
M=≥≠ T_Z0~λ30yj→y⊂:4_w⊂:4→P≤6t≡⊂≠≤000 ≤@↓)QJ~)QCeI]CeJAAK←aY∀AGYC%ZAiQ¬hAiQ∀AS]i∃aP≠πbβ3πg␈+Qβ?2βS#∃∧∧6FO∧λ
m≥≠λ⊂-M≠⎇c!0P→ tk 1↓S[ae=mK[KαsQβ'p∧π>→90∩ ⊂;t`4hh∂khαβK↔G,¬↔-9Y`⊂→αaster cl@=GWfA¬]H~∃5K[@?↔KE1β>C↔9β&C↔eβ&yβS#,K@∩εl[π"εL↑6N>dλ
.Nα2y0]4wwπβE
------------------------------
∃ ¬iJ`)β⊃Iα∪,∧6.n,X Dε..∧$εLNLεe10 jβE#97[]⊂!9~pw⊂( ⊂&6'↑p⊂≡&∪'lb⊂_z⊂&dU⊗fa←βE)zq~2qz≥λ!ww:→w:⊂'Yα this digest
C'mon gang. I thoucht that↓iQSf↓ISOKMhAoCLAGeK¬iKHAQ↑AISMGkgf4∃o←e-giCi%←]fA¬]HA]=hAGQ%af\@↓∩ACGα≠↔CQ¬##∃β4∧⊗∨"∞Mε∂"∞Mε*βeαββα
↔_h,LVn∞l@λ∞ 9z;L@P897X62vyK⊂1:`4 I also fEel that the hardsare hacking
sould be discuSs` HAαK9α'v3=67N≠C=→αα%βC-∪O?;∞c3eβ>{W3⊃∧ε&∂& ↑"π_;~aQX8[n↑λ≠8-≥9Y`∞↑y9U-D≥{|Myz0z~ww9P→4πr PEKPLE afd↓oQChαβπCC⊗{π∂#/→β/SF+H (-\⊗w.l≤7'<Y4NP40{→P:0uYw↔⊂⊂∩P3r`%pπfA∩↓CZASαsS↔K/≠S↔⊃∧K9β'&+πMβ⊗ S#↔⊂h+S#∞qβ↔≠>K;↔↔⊗K;≥8hP4* ⊗Kπ8∀Ph*n%∧∧⊗ >Y9(∞M_=⊂≥42P2~yqzi\tsw ob pagi`≥N↓QCeI]CeJA→←dAB↓caKG%ISF~)[SGe=G←[aUiKdAMQ←kY⊂AEJA KghA⊃SgGkMgKHA=\Aβ≥→~[≠∪
%≡XA khACLAiQJ4∃ISg
kggS=\AQCLAgiCIiKH@!oSiP↓iP∨∪∂I∨Mβ&K∨πO IβS=ε∪Kπl8
∧
⎇=∞Mh_(
]|Y#!,y;Y.,9λ∀ ≤z;Yd ~<xn↑|z3meλ≥~ ↑Y(~.∀≤Y8-M≤(∪Mt_Y=∞L<H⊃M}];(↓QA"@↓J⎇8ZL\⎇∞H
⎇|Ztdλ~9y.>λ∃LD∧l#"D↓lλk),;K&ε$λ LF6α2[ml=~_-d⊂;_-d∀{p⊗≠vww⊂∂%)wv⊂)*b#Qi)← WorkS Digest V2 #1
Date: 3 Jan 1→82 "∪56-EST
∃
I←ZtA)←]Ci!C\Aβ1C\A'α{3?7}q↓r*≡{2αJ-"≡⊗J≠p4*S{Qα←?⊗[Ei↓Xh ∃⊗↑ GJ@=≠nD
{|Zj4_9⊂∀8¬tgers
Via2 Rp iO∃ef]βIaC≥Kβ!e↓M∧Sπ9↓@ε"β∪π&SJmλJ@hUm_∪Bα
:&Jm]m↔CZε@λ ,9H∞ε$ ∞L'∃αbb*βE
Worcs DigeSt Monday, 4 JAn 1982 V@=Y`↔\Tβ∩β$ ↔>⎇9(ε⊃ C"JMβr0|IyP*7\4qy]αP⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂ r≠tp∞i@Mie@'4¬⊗
αβ(∃M⎇≥;9$εA"H∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧ ≥;]
≥Yh⊃M}H∪Q(P#y0\44qiH)XX_λ!0∂ard ∀@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@A→¬eOJA¬IIeKβ≠@~¬>λ⊗≡<h $ =;⊂~~qyFEλ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂≠≤ __⊗a_yrr APPLE Que@Ir~)α↓↓↓↓α↓↓↓↓α↓↓↓↓α↓↓↓↓α↓↓↓↓ααNV9¬;?K∂∨#πS'|p4)5h¬RjjUURjjUQRjjUURjjUQRjjUURjjUQRjjUURjjUQRjjUURjjUQRjjUURjjUQRjjUURjhβ"Q ≡→.Hε4⊂¬0wλ_\\→λ→→X@9-ESD
@
e←4pA)Q∀A≠←I∃aCi←β⊃↓r*≤{1βπ ∧¬↔=→y.∞oC"J>8ZP∩Xz≥⊂ Y4¬`∪]%gieSYSB4Ph*←↔d¬Bb∧α){$ X8p∃H397fH6|P+_qpz4[w⊂0w→⊂0v@≤2yzfZw3P+[y1`∪ th∂ICdACf~)ae←[%g@↔⊃p∧∧`-βz2P≥40z w`
ACIJA]←\AP∨≠4¬⊗≡N≥H ∂∀≤⎇_.:4w3H+3v:[pP⊃. I p@1C\4TεFzε≥l7⊗.\X ND≥~→$∞Xπv:[p¬ number↓KCGP↓s@↔π⊂∧ε}r (⊗rβ≡8
¬@∧AεE⊂w⊂0r→4z4`/na`_Aαs?S∃bα'9β&C∃β;,ππ"π|X -P7p∩ pπ↑@1∧Iβ←'d¬Bε⊗Tλ -}X;Yd
>(⊂⊃_yrFE≠pε o@AKeCi%←]fAβ#=βSF)αVN~j⊗∞Dλ ,≤z~3LUα⊂0w→⊂+w`2hπ&Ao%YP⊃β∞cO=βn{[∀Q(
<Y+Dλ=λ⊂~~4yP 0oift0AaQKβ∪∃β'~β; : ≤F'⊗↑8 d Xπy Tπ←eWLAChAU'ε[
_XAgαx4+∂|¬g&Nβ]0∩H87P 5pπ@∃β,¬↔&F↑ ∂&FT
'/&|X NP0r2≤2yyP≠y⊂:4→P
IT-AI @¬IIeKβ≠E 2 ⊃P@.βtv , kee@@As@?*βC ?>LV"ε⎇`λ L=Y0⊗≠x6r`.ts as p QKβIβ ><8
.%H∩(
βx2P≥42FE≥90w9Zz4w`. sil@0AEJA∧Ag[←α{S!β|¬f*ReaP@!αE!`(e` e@~`4**≤¬v`@ ¬εE TVV@--)--4ZRZZαi5 *UP %U++#%U++ ⊗CE
Date* 24 Dec 1981 0 ,hf`≥i εBm¬8¬β!λβ97`-8∧ACYαc↔?,⊂λ.23P !t Be@IP∂.β→0≤CE)z`"hecthA⊃k]QS]NAα3?Iαt*~ε|,↔εF≤8 d
l, ∧ Yx<LA ¬εE∃p¬ are huNti`≥Nαβ⊂⊗@|H⊂⊂[⊂)X@00 gbaphic@LAE@?∂∪⊃β αX
-Nα⊂0y≠zp∞d↓iQJ~)→⊗
∧∧w,<~~,>h→~.x60|H1ww:≤αh∂YYα+@∩αα≥~ T∀⊃≠Lqt?) the
d¬CGhαβS#π ∧∧o.β≥~,>h≠⊂↔[uyP !t ev@∃` gSFK;≥β∂→β'→∧¬↔"|h⊂∀[⊂6rv[y<V⊂_w2⊂ 4hat
"fil@∃`
β∂∪∃β¬∧∧6}wlX M≤8π1`% po @QQJAkβ≠↔Iβn{K∃β&Cπ9β∞sgS#L¬f 4→;⊂→YTε~∀4⊃/QCPOfAi!JAeKα 1βO&{@↔J
Wε+βhλλ≥↑(⊂→]qt⊂)↑yz2`-pεACE=k]HX↓oQSGαAβK↔∞c3dQ( ,≥y(⊂~\p¬ o@_ABAY¬eOJA¬IIeKβ≠@~π>λλ,<αP4`. v`∪@↔#WπDλ ,]8πy<OP⊂ w≡P;w`2hπgiCQS←]f4⊂ πK|εVv"∞⎇εN≡∧λ
t≥~~.7hλ∩.P:42\2P3w[r⊂92Xyww d¬P∨I∧∧∩π>}-7∨&≡M⊗}r
_ AQ\_<NM8⎇0⊗_y⊂:7H12P._q22WH:7P"≠P:44\β o`$↓iP≥β⊗)β↔l⎇⊗v.↑,V"πMtπ&∞αy#!0r0⊗Anp CO∀AP∨→¬+G'lpλ ∀≥Y0→≡P60y→p¬ v@%` @'\≥Bε∞LN&/∨4∞7ε∞<TεNr ⊂λ∞ 8;⊂⊗≡FA0sYβres@MSmJAβ;πe@t∧∧`>H≥z-Mα⊂⊃3[wr⊂ /ld s@=I`∪←∂∪∃ β4¬wαπ⎇x Myz0z~ww9P_2P7`+ay?
Dh∂Kf↓ShA[¬i`∪↔⊂∧ε&←$
v␈⊗>>F∂&≥yg4~9H∞M→>(∞,8;⊂⊗≡P.0y→WP→λ YX⊂,Ypy9FBαbehind the times, ApεAg←5K←]J↓QCfAMk@∨∨-≠S↔⊃εk?OQ¬≠gOS.k@~ε≡,Rrrd∧εO~
≡@hWM ↔"ε↑X6Bε|dε
π ≥⊗rε≥`π&FT
f.≡4
FzπM
w≡(≥z
t→→<m≤{H⊂~~2v←FBεE∧DBD@D↑∪'#∨εBεA⊗@-----------------------------
Date: CUnday, 27 Dec 1→81 "Tpfb[A'(~∃→a←Zt↓[S@/*βπQα∀
:⊃6,r&`4U≠W +.≠Qi↓3AAAAn∪πO↔ ∧∧
¬ HPhPβ"Q
|αyP0[<ww2H40{ % any informati@=\ACE=khAi!JA]Kβ9αεB∧b∃βOLε7&.UAPW∨↑∞ε␈≡\MGJβg εελεq0\rr∨Pλ+tv , it Be cheap oR exp@∃]gSM∀}@A/%YPASP~∃@#∂3∃β¬ε∪'S7∂↓⎇↓α>K3 "
≡Bπ'.]GJπ.Yb¬≡\≥Fg_;~gtλ∃z ]H≥z-Mλ~0~λ12FE≤2v2p\rr∨Pλ z1WβE
Rum`∨eLACeJ↓oKIG=[J\~(~∃≠S
QCKX↓/CQe5C\~∀4∀ZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4Z~∀~) CiJh@bA∃¬]kCed@brpH@brtDl[ 'P~∃
e=ZtAβ9IeKnααM 2λ8 M⎇8<]∂∀∂⊂tIyαP0zλ&dj⊗Pd[εE∀zq5 %ct: SUN Workstation
~∃=\ACE=kh@bL[∃kYβIβS#-∪∃β←∂→βπ9∧∧Vwπ/∀εNr∞MεO~ M⊗><⎇ @93v@ Andi
λBechtolsheim (AP
∧A¬hA'*5β∩RA⊃KgGe%ESMNαβS#∃¬≠Sπlh n λ⊃3M≡Y<\m≡≤∧P'→z;wy~β
wopkstation: 60⊂`@`[ECMKHAn<@c↔p```A¬%i¬Ih↓ISga1CrXA5←kgJ0A≠kYβ#' W~`4*↔&C↔K;,εBεNnLW⊗6≤8R`$λ∩(
L=→0→λ92xzYyz2rλ6wq2H4s3 / from him↓←\Ai!JA',q0$+↔+Qβ7JβK↔G,∧W∂"∞|Vw"∞]f∞w>|W⊗.EaPPH* ↔π&≤>Vf∂-K∩εNd FN>∞@ε}H≥~ T→~<l><|r-⎇H~0↔λ:44`3 digest regarding 68000
pagindεAae=EQK[LXASh↓o←kY⊂AEJAαK;C↔⊗+OS'v9βS=∧¬6v␈tλ
m =λ⊂⊂\897`Xt⊂:4→|@
@!CmJAQCWK\αβ'9β&+G'∨vK;≥β&C∃αNαYbb∧∀λλ.yzvrH4z∪yH77r⊂≥42P 3ame "soluTion"
λthat Apo@1YVAkMKH@QQoSL@Xp``@α;M%1¬≠';∂*βS#∃β M6+.ceβOLs?COM→βO'oβ3dQ( ↑x|Z,,9λ⊂~~2P8)≠qryy[y⊂0yH⊃≤⊂&R=⊂≠≤ __⊗⊂→|2qj]4p∞g↓oSiQ=khAo¬Sh~∃MiCiKLD\A∪β!β∪?/→1β#⎇;↔[↔⊂¬Bε↑lhWαε-}FBπ<\vn.β]_.M;{@ ≥Yλ∀ ≤z;YaQJλ]∞⎇k;⊂∩]2r⊗⊂≠zr:4Kx97`#ess, s` O[∃]h[a¬OBA[∃[←er↓[C`DαI1βOzβS#∃¬βK/ f+44+M→βS#-∪∃βSzβ ∃β≤¬vg⊗\Ab∧&|↑2ε∞o_ ml(~{M}h~≠nt≥~→/∀~_;LMα2P$]∨FE∧BDDDDXyqFEβE⊗VVKVVV@----------
------------~∀4∃↔≠ ∧ε}H⊃{n-th⊃
≤βryjβE∃∃∃
∃∃∃∃
∃∃∃∃
∃∃∃∃
εA⊗@------
~∀4∃)QJ↓'+≤Aβ;?K/≥#πS'|qβ'≠&+↔⊃β-≠↔MβλβG.⎇\Vwα↑ ⊗>(≤p⊃Z2p
e thad
λsupPorts a 10 MHp∀@Xp```↓KqKGβ+S'lpλ∞⎇=~≠n↑λ≥x-≡λ≤u ≡→<kAQS[h ≡≥→3.∞λ~_.∀_Y0∩[⊂6pr→P:7P≤trzv_z2P &ull Virt`+¬XA[K5←erAβ;'S!∧εFF*εgβββ¬aPDNβ\u \9 λ∞M→(∀jYβ⊂40\P12`%n designe@⊂Ai↑AUg@∃β&C∃↓Y@εβ αβλ⊂~~2P;$\8:pvλ4rvw\αy
vers@%←\A←α1βS#*↓QaAβ↓βS#∂!β'M∧+cC↔≤εF." iw$ t ⊂ \X⊂∩.
The 60⊂`D`AQCLAiQJ↓gC@7*βC'9n{WQβ∂→βS#*↓QaAβ↓1β ,εBεF≥lFf/1Q&Nw>N'.∨M_ md_8[n.α9P #orre@
iY`%∧ ;⊃βF Eβ¬∧sW7 ,ε"ε@yH∪nM→<@⊂≤vpv , e`≥Q¬]GK[∃]if~)gkGP↓CfAC8AS]i∃aekaβ!β[↔≤εF␈∩ ,↔≡
∞,V>O>LW∩ε≥lBππ-|wε∞β;8,-α2P#≥w1z4[w⊂1`/des.
αThe annoufc@∃HAeKA←ehAα{9βSF)αNVpβ←?K←≠SπSL¬vrε≡4ε&Nl≥FgJ ≡f∞Nβ_8ML+C"I≤β⊂<g]P64uYP0P![x8V⊂≤42pyYP9rg→⊂8wz\⊂92h]p¬sts to PRATT@SCORE,∧∩∀~(→'kE)KGht↓/←eWLA SO∃ghA,H@Fd~(@≡`J5∃C\ZβAI↓↓⊃→IH&T¬vv∂M ⊗r∧≥H⊗r¬=x
⎇;{@⊂∂%)wf⊂)*`∀GERS>∪/←e-&A S≥KghAXd@Fd@@@~) CiJh@@jA)C\@bβIaI↓α εG 14jA ¬# 2om2 Jonathan Alan S@=YW[←8@y∃'=Y↓%+Q∂ %&x~∃)↑hA/←e-`
i↓β1P@*Y<⊂⊗≡T¬to: WorkS ad↓%`↔S>+CL4U3'¬@$∧¬↔=→y.∞iP<N 3Y5πP~P%_w⊂≤2 17:52-PDT
ViA8 S@IR[+]%pv@j↓∃CL@`d@dfhbr[ ⊃(~∀~)/←eWLA SO∃gh∩@@@@A]KI]KMICrXlA∃C8@brpH@@@@@A-←αcW7∃β⊃↓iαM≠OW∃β⊂4(Q*F}_:)nP*7h~qyP~ The SUN WorksTation
Mul@QSGf@4A!CO%]NA MS]NAMKO[K9if~∀@@@@Aβ!↓1
@lpβ↓AAα↔+7?I∧ ;O←,ε&.α∧∧b¬∂\X O∀λεP≠ __X⊂∃βith↓!COS9N~∧Zαi555ji555ji555ji555ji555hi555hi555ji555ji555ji555ji555hi555hi555ji554hP4*∪∂#∃i↓ ∧∧V∞dε∪KC$εβ#S&w#∪2Z
5 H(h M⎇.H⊂_≤0z0∀@Shac@QBAChααOW7,παl∞≥QP@*⎇8ZL\⎇∞H
>;H∀ ≤z;Yd¬_;Y∧∞⎇_=∞↑h#"AQU≠h ≥\⎇y.$≥~→$∞=94nM;{@ ≤Yy5∧∞_9z-lh≠sD∞~→(
>;JC!↓αA+t~v2P 4he C@U\AI←α+@~ε≥lF..D ε∂6T∞ε∞>≥lrεODλ
.P77jλ22vp[2⊂8 Ytp∞g0ACh~)YKCgPA]Ohαβ←'S@βS#∃β1aAAαβCK?≤∧W>{|KD∧∃~→$∞_9z-lh≥;M≡λ≤y.∞Y<h∞N{c"N∞<X≠n<αy]⊂≥5P8 2ovide hardware suppOpp for memory Allocation at %,~∀Qa¬OJRA≥eCMk1CeCIdXAC]⊂ACfA∧AaYC
JAQ←1IKdAα3?Iβ&C∃↓YA↓EA1∧εFF*∞
&}n≡8 ,A"US$εL ε¬Hλ∃
(∀u-d~<h L<z0∪[2r⊂*≠P82i→5y6@→2p
and paging with @QQJ@l``b`~)CfAGβ+KK↔w#3eβ≥β↔
∨ β eαn{S ?-x ∃@εEεB#t{2[⊂:42H4s0q~v4z<H5s⊂ 4he 68000 @Q↑Ao←β∪ ~ε⎇`λ
}~→4D∞~~;L@yP;t~v2P+Xtz4g→FE3'\⊂0P 0a`∂JAαK9βSF)βS←Lq7CK|∧6/∨=x D∞{{≥.M;{@⊗λ73z tk mention the
λ¬CII%iS←]¬XAG←αkC &←
↔'J
x D∞~_=∧∞{{≥.M9{@⊗λ9rP2→qtr2Y⊂77`4 to go the
t`/%\[ae=G@↔O≤{@∩π-}W&*d∧αE&
≡2εO=` nD≥~→$ R2λ∞∨8π29≠vrV⊂⊃7y2y]⊂!0yZrz:εB9pyP~tqut[3P0y≠zs2 the @QoS\[AeWGKβ≠O?Iβ1aAAαβ'β↔λ∧ε∂"
:F∞vmz&"πN⎇rε←!Q'&G,XRπN\≡'4_9{eE(λ∃lT→Y0⊗≥⊂:40]⊂0P&[y2P)Xz4yc_qz7`2y a`!ββK >≤8
∧∞x8 P≥4π
Bui`→Hαβ¬β;|q7β↔n ;⊃β∧ ∨/$λ M}H≠[me5S ⊂_x86 )cati@=]fAC9HAgQ%I`A←U`∩+∂#S↔≠&K?9β&yβS#*αZ5β∂βC3'≤ S'∨w→β←#,¬bπ& Tβ#Cε⊂ ∧ <≤⊂∩Xy2r.
~∃]QSIJ↓-~Ao=kYHAα∪∃β;L∧6*π-_vGα
mw:εmx D
⎇<@⊂≤8¬r`!α{G/5Dπ>
≡&*π>M⊗f@β"S,≥X9z-lh≥≠d →=Q-Mβx⊂0H67z o` A←U`Ag←→i`∨π⊗)β←'&C?WQ∧¬↔"r∧ ⊗␈* 8λ-d≠8:lT≥<β!,Y|@⊂≠4π FM to @∧AG←]MS@∪↔⊗ &Tλ /∞α2w:λ1<P "eifg↓` πSF+Aβ7⎇∪∃β∨,¬f/⊗|¬<d∞z=~↓QXεr`-ory;↓+]@'@∧π.αs9P≠4qr`,y on↓BA'kαqβ←'&A↓]Yβ 2ε@yH⊂⊗Yvp∂ry, the sije Sun↓∩~¬Q¬mJASαqβ7e∧¬v&6≤8 $ =λ⊂~~2P6w[p¬`≥h8@@@"&CπQβ&{↔O9?!β∂?α]g"πM Rβ ' 2ε@yC"L@y0p⊂Hics @5K[@?↔I% 2∧ ε␈>↑h .⊂4r∃dπULD iake kur↓aeOOIC[@7L¬f 4_(⊂⊗≠z⊂2`\βier
λif @]JAQC⊂A-~\α↓↓"]x
}Xπv !, take no@QSGJ\αH4(Q*FFO4λ ,∨(_Y$ (→{m|α⊂7`0ph∂eiU]Sir↓iP≥β4¬⊗f@λ≤⊂∩[x62P~w⊂7`. what's been~∃αCπCC,¬fNvtλ ≡→;⊂≤H;tz4λ:42P∀zw⊂(≤αkje@
h\4Ph ∀F≤,G>∂,T¬∨&≡NW7@εEεB p l thre@∀A≠kYβ#' W~β >≤∧Y∞P1w`-pr`∪@≤¬⊗v:∞Mε*ε,≡6N~λ∧p~[⊂;w`2hπgiCQS←\A!CmJ~)eKCGαC↔↓β&C∃βC⊗{∪G∂&K?9β⊗+['OL¬vrε|dπ&F]_ D
⊂h⊂⊃≠py29K⊂⊂*4→P897Xp¬ss@=`λ (,-v∂⊗Dλ
≡h_Y,]H~0↔λ897`$ucti@=\AM←β⊃βO↔4∧W,8ε⊂ -onths a`≥Hαβ eβv{]βSF+K∃β∂∪∀4-zf/∩ ⊂λ
∞8π29→p∧ o@_AiQKαiβ'→∧εFF* h
,]→ λ
]|⎇≠∂∀→→0⊗~{2y2Y⊂:7P≠z42`2
cu@Mi←[Kβ∪@~ε|dπ&FTλ
≤y;\l\αyP "esideq Stanf`∨e⊂X@A)!JAO@⊗ C#'≤ε2ε⊗βx<LD~_<aQXY0∩[⊂4w pr`∨IUGiS←8AM@?⊂∧ε∞⊗βy0~λ0P6w[:4⊗⊂_w2⊂&~vp ted qeAnpities are
∃CAaKCe%]N\@↓)QJA∃iQKe9KhAS9iKeM¬G@∃β> @~ε,¬<nD→→8N\βsr`$ h C@≤εBπy90∃H0p∞d
λ¬gSYαaβ 6|pλ ]h~;NMh≤⊂→≠p∧uc@QS←\\α↓↓"π⊗{WQβ&K7¬1¬≠Sπlh n,λ~_.P7w6≡P0P $ozen
λraght no@\X ↓α&C'MβLε2εF⎇HFNvt∞Wαε|↑"π<z0↔→β our pro@
Kgg←β⊃β ∨∂∪∪M⊃∧εvFN=↓P@,<Y0↔ z⊂6zXt⊂:`3e wi@QQP∨W ∧π&Fently proDucedj`Aaβ∪?∂↔≤ε6␈⊂Q(&}∂,N2bα ≥V∞y;@⊂_v9wP≤93r:Xp¬s @AeP∨∂,ε7≡␈$λ&}∂,N2bε\≥⊗vG∀λ M}H≥0→YP4wεBαthe@%` α∂∞s?9βd∧↔∞<H⊂_≤4w:2\⊂4w:→y30qYW
The dπeCAαC'∂M∧∪?πK ∧εO~
H
,<αs9`%d to Fkrward and CadLi`≥F8@A)Q∀A↔SF+C 6↑AP@,Xπpy→⊂4qP≠4qrg≤pr⊂*≠P!pr∪4p∞c, a`≥Hαβ←'MDε∞g=tε⊗*∞λ M|α:q`%d by T¬'%ph ⊂HαSp∪λ842P_q3s % h C]UH π∂'+K↔K~aβ?;eIα∂π$c';
∧¬↔4≤≤Y.≤αw:6≡P4w a po@MSiS←8Ai↑~)←@≠≠,ε"ε
8 m↑≠→0~→P80qZpsrbλ)zwπλ⊂)z0[30∂rd has beenqu`∨i∃HABAββC'∂*β?λ∀R!QaAαβ∪K∨hα≡∞IH
-lh→P↔\α co@5aP∪↔&)αOWw→↓#'v≠3@.M→f 4≠;p~\βe). However @%h⊂∀.⎇w.fDλλm}⎇λ∀nL8π3 /rd only $Pr``@,AP∪π⊗{AβSzβC3W8β'9β∂≠G↔\-F.α ≥f"πLX nL9β"L-βpq2≤β ⊃CPAaeS
KfACYCS@3∞∪3∃β&yαOS∞s∪?K ¬∩ε∞l@λ -{≥λ∞M→(≤ ≤zx9m≥Ykλ∞
β{riβE9z`0plp∩X↓C]HAα≠πK⊃∧∧6∞y(∃
|βrz4→y⊗⊂ 7here labo@H@p∃↓α⊂ f$→_>$ =λ⊂~~2P6w\z∩⊂ 3o
αwe're Not inclined to ta`↔J↓iQJ@⊂hp``↓ISOkIJACf↓iQJAβ∪?∂-∧∪?SS}iβCKL∧6(h,iw$∀⎇3N∀_9⊂∀z0w3≠y2↔εB∧E*yYFAεE⊂z⊂)z_w37`2d we pres@∃]aYr↓QCmJb`Aπβ+;MβNqβ/C,ε&∂&≥⎇bbα
Mπ⊗.T ↔⊗(Q( n0x44XyP;w\5yz0]4sw9K⊂:49→pP6w\2P0y→P"z4→y:4h≤P⊂λterh C]¬X~+≤{;∂↔w#@⊗∂Mx NP;t`4h 16 li`≥Kβ→β?9∧εG>z
xbπ& YRbβ6 λ
M9Y0→H7w⊂0H:44`2d), @=]J4T¬↔4_(λL.X9→lTH
≤∞<=9≠eXx=→.|>*+∧
{Y( ∀≤{qNNβpy2H22{"[4πpmenp s@QCiS←αq04-yf*πM R∧dzJ2π>}-7∨&≤M⊗}rD ∩πε≡.FN∞β≠⊂≤H1:t`,t 16-prgc@∃`∂O?⊂βS↔π≤¬εNvtλ
⎇{β"NM_=⊂≤92y`%nply caf @]←eVA¬`
βπv{S#↔⊂∧¬&O¬Dε∞vDλ ml(_=∧
>(⊂∀≠vrW We @¬Yg↑~)QCmJ↓CYXAQQJAE=CeIf↓C]HA=iQKdαβCπKαN2ε6β|@⊂≥492`% m`∨E∀AOeCAQSGf4⊂ @>}-7∨&≤M⊗}w5Dπ&F|¬9m∧≥~→$ →;8-lλ→Sn⊂"z4→y32jλ4w:2\30q`%pεAS\αβ?S#/⊂4+π∧εεfN<≡FN}n4εn∂∀ F.f∨∀ππ∂LM⊗v:∞Mε/≡Tλ
-n≠h∀l↑]Z0⊃YT⊂0zλ42py]⊂7w≥42FE⊃z42i≠2z↔εB∧E)w[p¬ C@U]fACIJAS\αβ?C↔⊗ S'?pβπQαg+∂πO4K351∧Iβ∪?r;Qβ/v{]β#⎇9β7πwI9↓α&C↔d4TεW≡
\⊗NvO∀ππ⊗|<W>{|H -x8Y∞5λ→~.≥|kλ∞<αy4p[⊂64w→P1w`.nections, and octal
p CePAGCE⊃fACf↓ 4ZbDAKckαK[π3.sSM9αα+'5∧cπ←O}qβS#-∪∃βS.c3Mβn)βS#-IβπK(h+OS∂∪S'≠8βS-β⊗+3eβ}qαOWpαW;'@βπMβo+∂!β∂→β?9¬*ε α4 aαWvKaβ≠|ε"π≡|jG>∂,QPV&↑hVf␈
\Vw"aQ hT≥\⊗>.d
↔
εLYFO6↑-⊗v:
≡G~εm~'∨"∞
&NwL↑'
εmzrbπ⎇~FB¬>]bππ-x6/∨=x D [x<LNc"Z-d≥~→-UC"C!({y_.L(~_.l(≤z
≡≤→9∧∞=:0~→P0P7≥vq2iλ∀~P∨JP7s⊂≥42t`2 CTS-300
workstatiOns, @]QSGP↓kgJAQQJA'β+9βC⊗{∂πO≤{Aβ } K⊃β↔+QβSF+'Iβ|εvph,}&∂ε
≤7~PQ!PDJ Mvr?D
6v␈t
vF∂Dλ
(~≥-l≤Y0∩λ7y⊂&[y2P /ther↓ae←Gα+@∨≡} ε⊗↑≤,G
ε≡,Rε⊗]→f8h.X l\λ→Sn¬λ≠tD ↑(∃m
{+C!! T{l@8∧ware:¬
Ufi@`p α+|C9αO,∧⊗n}n4ε}H∪∃,<<yP∀[4¬ brought p `A)SZA∂UYBOf↓≠∪(A9jA+]%pA←\4⊂ S#*αOW9p∧α¬>T ε∂6Tλ⊗r∧↑Mε/⊗lX
∧ X<p∩Y⊂;2i≤βi`∨\αβ?2∞MεO~λX M∨λ≤]-mβ4w3H0zεE∀z0w3≠y2⊗⊂≥ytw3H0P6 !rge @→SYJAα{9⬬3πa↓E≠#πO&
αNVv+Q%β∂→β¬β&K@≡XQ(λ,<y<p→Yp∧ v@%BAiQ∀A1Ke=pA3, ⊂∩εm_ T_8p⊃YyyP(≤αh∂i←α≠?1→α↓"S#O→β /↑8
∧ Y(⊂↔[2@
@=H βSF)β7},Rπ⊗]]w&* h
-L<}4nL8εyP→4πr Unices doiNdεAeK5←iJAAQsgSα≠π1βL¬r`!α@
How` mKβ⊃α%βF [∃βλ∧εn␈,Tπ⊗.]x
T≠{Y'∧_(∃-m>λ∀N]Xπ4`.dεAChαβ7eβF{7*∞h
,∀_( &↓ ¬6t[2P_@200 bau` pHone @1S]JX↓O←←Hαβ⊂⊗←$λF.↔\|vNvt
VvO∧λ
m 9H⊗-})|Y$∞⎇→0⊃ZFE0zλ47vrH:47zYβh hope`→KM`
β≠|ε"ε∞>NV∞fO∀π/≡≥lr¬.βZ0≤ α)~∀4⊂
π\≤77H∩P↔Z4ε CEamgns has Ja`≠Kβ→α∨?≤¬FNvt}2¬.βZ0≤λ"p
acpεAe@,s;'≠8∧ε}r∞Mε*¬>Yb`hα]z
≤zλ⊂∀→P9p|\β reNpεABAβ#@⊗NmHRπ≡Mx
l↑H≥~ ≥H≥~ T≤|⊂∩Yp⊂;rH0y2P_qqzi]7vrrλ:7FE≠w⊂:4→P+0| ∧AεE∪2z;w\5P9`/dp oCIJT@A]JAQCYJA1KI←pA!U`Aae=iP∨∂|c@~π,YfvNlpλ ≡λ∀⎇ ≥Y[|LEβ"[L≥9;⊗$
U∀ h*tλ⊂∪≠y⊂:iYy⊂:2[4εet and Sequin/Leaf formost↓←iQKH~∃CaAYSGCQS←]f8@A#|εv/6↑ π>(~;NL8π2 th∞AO<Ai↑A% ←)π@Aβ'β@\⊂∀(hR ↔;≤¬εn∂->3R∧lX
L↑H≥≤N↑⎇λ_$ Y;Xm
8<ZeDλ∩≠n|=Y0→λ$P24Y⊂0P .umbe@HAP∨→∧_4+ .s∂#7∂∪ ∨~ iw$_(⊂⊃≤4πad↓`∂C↔≤εG.9(⊂↔Yα nonnqme@ISFAaβ∪??,≥W4λ∧2`)dπQhAEk@↔↔w→0$(h
␈9 |d∞z≠|NL<⎇⊂≤0z4 algo@ISiQZαaβ¬αd¬↔>λεv )hπ@∃β,¬g6O-yfn∞β]⊂~w⊂;t~qt⊂$CE90wλ4¬erge so@IhXAC1H∂..,⊗N~ M⊗ ,Y<Y-n~8=
≥{Kλ ≥Yλ⊃
≡zX
`.ctif@∀[]@?⊗kπ1\h n4¬~∃β#@⊗∞β\s ≡~;p↔
T∧ and fo@HAC@3bβ?2∞Mε.j 8λ-\αP:`0 kn @QQJAπβ+9β←LεFBβv¬S+)(⊂~~2@
@AKeM←β∪7πl8 $
βs⊂ 4he s@¬[@∃α~βCK|}&∞o4λ md⊃~0,-≠kλ ∀∃X>∧ε,+mgελε⊂ 7ith -Lε~)F{CC'nKk↔I∧¬vrJ h n⊂17`4h machi`≥Kβ→≥β∂|¬WεNβ→0→≤Tε Flh∂C@&K;≥β∧¬vNwDλ
}y=P∩\αλ
+d¬w<αyP "a` YR↓←\Ai!JA'kαq1βπ~β∪ : ≡',>8 P≥tz4 di`≠Kαs@≡Nβ{\d
β0∂`(αβ¬βC|εv/∩
x AQ]_ wH∀2y`3enti@¬YP∪@∀λλ$ {{<
≥→<@⊂≤90∂blem).
λ∧⊂∀*d¬↔&/,≡G/⊗TεC!∧¬∃β9IrA¬∃GQi←αc@≡F]_ %D⊃[p→→yz⊂!_yur`4t, and @∩AαCπ[∃∧εFFO4λ
l\αp e@9HAEKα+8 (αXλ 5tp S]≤A`∪#*β⊂⊗NβZ0→Z4p∞g↓iP∨W≤¬ε/~∞Mrα∃M R¬≥Y`λ
@wy5y]0z4`/n: Hap¬IoCIJ~*∂∪∂#'αLV∨'↑,R$_;Y∧∞βtv , be @⊃Sgi@⊗K @/M_ L@P1w`0i` fAβ##'M∧εv.8¬W Requestc th∞~∃α [
β≤∧⊗Nb
x D∞≤X=∞H≤xp↔\αe.
∩∩$∩∪-CUH∂#πp∧¬π⊗≤N@hPβ"VjM_;ZnP0v 3o go th∞AβY
αNαUT J h n⊂0w7≠zp∞c@%]NAi!JA',qα#πv# /?X∧αlU=x Q ¬εE TVV@--)--4ZRZZαi5%5h¬RjJUP %U++ ⊗CE
Date* 4 @∃C8@bbpβ⊃↓EMS)UiU@¬U¬≥AQ$7⊗β{ ≥λ22q`6ax!dui`
C@,¬f~∂=\"ε∂Dλ&/⊗<X ← εE$[⊗y2`!l-`→Sα3∃iαα8
↑Y;@⊂∪Tε Belh ←MαK8 ()H l<=~0↔[≥⊂"`.iversitp∩Aα{⊂∩∧β[p→≥4⊂!`!p¬WYSαs¬βπ ∧∧=_8⊂∩[⊂ λi@1X⊂∀*8
,-Y8uπ⊂"zv≥4qyFB!q]⊂⊃'g"i⊂&djεPdBEεB&zv 4ics ipεABAα;??⊃∧∧WF∞↑ F*ε|dεF←t f␈"∞Mrε&↑9⊗>r ⊂λ
L<Yy%\9→≤L↑|h∀n 8y#!-αpqd~w2V⊂_z⊂62Xyz⊂'≠z⊂4wλ:42P→8¬tu@IJP→↓αB∪'O≤cπ'↔-⊃aβSF)β≠?d¬F␈>≥lrεO1Q&⊗∂<X ∧
{H≠/∀≠⎇{D >≤⊃.4rw1YP~P<Ypy9P_swP'[⊂0P&]v:4a\β system at the Rome
Air @evElopment CEnper andon OrganiCk's book on Multics, which I
recomme`≥H↓CfAB↓eKMKIK]GJ8@A∪L↓C]si!S]NA$AgCr↓SfAOI←ggYdAoe←9NA←d↓←kh~)←LAI¬iJXA$OZAgUeJAg=[JAW%]HAM=YWfA]SYXAA←S]h↓←khA5rAKeI←efA]SiQ←Uh~)U#?=)∧kW∂!εcπW∨G#↔I9Hh(4*λα7W3&K∂Mβ∞#∪K↔∨→β'Mπ∪↔π3gIβπ9ε{K∪↔⊗+⊃βC∞KI1β≡{;O'∨#';≥ε{→β¬π≠↔∨7.sP4 w+7 ↔∩βπ;⊃ε 9β?63O↔QεK;S=¬##πQπ≠↔∨7.sQ9↓∧ Mα¬π∪↔∂πda1βSF)β?≠7≠↔QβO_4+π⊗{WQ↓ Aβ ''→1βgN+3∪'v9β¬βn c'7.iβO↔>k↔;Q∧ε6OVT
v $ M-I5Hλ∃
(≤}.>→;#!.⎇<≤
}]≤h ∀≠_<L|(≠]-\Y<@
|H≤z-↑9≥_-l;⎇<mO(_=L≥9_8ML(≤y,⎇9;]∞5Hλ⊂,L≤Y<n1"X<M≡~≠9.M8h→
|<h
Mm⎇
H <<\↑$ \[{$∞~→(
|Y\y.D~;]
t≥~→$∞y9{,]]λ∪N]8Y<G⊃"Z→-ly(≥
(≤∀M}→<@∞m9=`
≡h≥~ ≡λ≥~ T≤}<nL9(≤∞-⎇Z9 ↑h≠=-N~<≠ T_9→∞,<|c!.|_8l↑kλ∀L≡~→4D∞~_;D
{Y(
L<Yy$
{Y+D∧∃z→-d≠{Y$¬X;Z.M8=→.P0P)Ysvrw≥∃
(more beloW)(λAi!JAgsMiKJAα≠?;[,ε''~∞Mε*εl≥V*ε|dπ&FT∞6.>\Yg"ε≥nFzε⊃Q'≡9{9-nλ≠]-\Y<@⊗λ0w2≤2z:`2ns a pointer to the base o` Ai!JAgK≥[C@;!X4+π4εF/∩∞Mε∂"βλ⊂∀]⊂6p|H12P Y292i\pr⊂&~urP0[<P7`4her @ACehA=H β7,k?Keph($
4¬⊗f/5Dπ∨&≤92π∨ ≤6*b
V∂α∞:ε∞≡UDε∞vD WG→<[L≥λ≤u,.Y⎇0~~w2yP_y2P0[6εE)Ysvrg≥9S⊂⊂∃t2w_P34`,e is opened, oR a p@I←GKIUeJASβ→β∂πdc↔↓β4{@∩πM PhVm_ N>λ≥~-\+λ∃
(_<∞∞Xπx 2iate s` O[∃]hASLAS@;LεFN∂L\Brαλ≡ππ⊗}λ M≤=→(∞≡→;⊂⊗≤FE0y→P1py]⊂7s2\⊂;0y~wzyP≥0q6 %q, eTc., To av@=SHA←ββ↔Kπ&K;≥β≥KOS↔h∧ε␈6↑-ε.∞AQ&}r∞8
,.y<=,]]λ⊂⊃Xv69P≥4π the same procadu@IJP→↓¬##∃β∨KOS↔h∧εO~ l⊗O⊗Lε(∞=8<]↓QX8[n↑λ_\L\8z0↔→β the linkace betweEn a @MKO[K9hA]k5EKdAα ;⊃β
βCπK&K∂W3∂⊂4+O,;7↔nABε∂4λ
m 9H⊂$∞_<]
≤⎇;_.∧≤≤[l<9≥0→→P4yP≤2qwv\4v2b∞β us@∃` Mβ&{';≤hSO?CFKGS'≡ S↔⊃¬##'l}2ε≡≥`λ∞NX8λ
}Y<@⊂≥44yVλ47{r]2y↔εB∧A*4→P:;wH14s@ thingpεAiQ%bAEKβK@~πα;u$ <Y(¬ *(⊂→≥w:4fYP14w→4p∞g↓←@→β∧ε&}≡\NW⊗(Q(λl≥≠≤h¬∞~→0→→P4qP_P64g~p¬r, tho`+nt f@%YKfDαaβ¬βF{CK'⊗c∃β/dεV&>U`λ∧
⎇8r∧ Z;⊂∩\FE1`[57r_2P0qXp¬ss@∃HACf↓aeC[¬` eβn+7?KKYβOC,∧6N∞Dλλ,<y<p→H4rz4≠r9P6]yz⊂!→FA:`3ed& @¬CGV↓oQK\αα%β←∂→βGOLs∃α↑]G&N>5Bεn≥o∩ε@yH⊂~~2P9|\z2v@ utilIties
didn't u@9IKegβ#π;⊃ε /W ∧π>8z⊂_2pyj≤T∧ and henc`
AGα{W3⊃∧¬f␈" ,Rπ<y0∩λ7wεE≠zp tiq` O[∃]`AM%YKf\α↓α W ∧εO"
≡6r∨DλλmL88@⊂≥4π me that e`≥←β+⊂≡B -↔'~ 8 n]→β"M =Y( ,9;@ ≥≠≠p⊃Xz2r. @i@MiP∨KL∧6∞fO∃Bε/>8 -n~8;
O(→0≠→y<P -achiNe ev@∃`λ (αX]-≥≥λ
}H~0~≤β proeram
compAtibl@∀AgkG
Kgg←I`
%βF @~π.X D
⎇=⊂≠q⊂0r→92y`3
sp@¬G@∃β⊗KSMm∧∧g/↔M Wε@9|Y%D≤⎇0⊃Z⊂14`4pεACe∀ABAgα≠πK∂*βK↔O|εW,y(⊂∪≠y⊂:4→FA6pXt4w2H0y1t~z2q`4,∧@A)<AKqaα+∂Qβ
β↔πlX L≥ <≥.∞≠|p∩H!h*P≥4π res` emα)β↔mx
,@tεE1~z9P 4o address the Large files p∂JA
C\AKβCC↔∂ βS=β/≠∃β'pβS#∃∧∧g/'↑,PhV,¬<nD~8 w z⊂92Xyww0X4∧e+↓iQJA¬Y`∪↔⊗sπS'4∧Rπ>}X D≤{∪nt→≠p≠[⊂82i→4πrmance @QQJ4Tε&/∨Dλ l@⊂:42H:4vrK∧¬α
--------------
---------
-----
~∃⊃CiJtjA∃C9kCerbr`D`d`) ε"l-:APT\[p⊗N⊂%7t≠⊂!W Gidmore <GNU at MIT-AI6
Subj@∃Ght@hp``@Aβaaαc∃βK,k?Iβ⊗+GC?w≠∃m↓G+;K↔f S↔⊃J↓YaAλεαπ>≡Mαπε≤⎇⊗v:∞≡V/↔⊃Q hT←∀π≡␈↑,6/~∞Mvf"
\Rπ& ≡Bπ& T∧∂π
HR∧Mdλ
m};→⊂~0{2P_P80t\α of 48000's -
`∨]∀Ai↑Aβ∪W9βTεW∨"∞Mε*ε<X∞,-βpp∩d afd↓ESi[¬`AISMaP∪πβ∃Bπ& Tε␈& Z"π&t FzπM PhR,⎇wεZ%`α∧ODλ
m};→⊂≤8¬n SmallTalk.A∩AI=\OhA-]←nAβ##∃β⊗+O?3/#'?9ε{@∩πM PhV]x
.<αP8zXv4z<K⊂9z7\0srP≤βize, interfac@∃`
!β-#
2∧
π⊗/>YV∞⊗O∀εO"∞⎇w.fDλ M}β"\n↑≤≠tND≤_9m≥Yh≥-n~;λ ]⎇≠p→≠v0P &ixes the Chip.
λ
αO@8AiQCPAi←a%FXA∩↓QKCe⊂ABA]U[EKd↓aKGK9iY`%αi5↓Yβαβ α¬QRπ>
_λm∧≥x<aQ\⎇4∞
|y0∩λ:7P1→P:42H;2y9Zww⊂*~0z⊂9]x87i≥9P8 Yp¬ fAults. DoEpεAC]e←]J~)QCmJ↓C]rA→keiQ∃`AS]→↑}~∀4∀ZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4Z~∀~) ]HA=H α←⎇∪ ≥~λM⊗><⎇β!¬JJJE%JJJE%JJJE%JJJAQK++%U++#!! C"@↓J⎇8ZL\⎇∞H
⎇|Ztdλ~9y.>λ∃LD∧lc"D↓βXY⊗R0s⊗@82 0443 J@=\A'←αc?7?p↓r←?⊗ZNαVα82l,9H#r~⎇w⊗]4λFNy<p~λ+→⊂⊃LP⊂εE⊃0z2]λ⊂≤P%_w⊂⊂@982 "β→IE6¬~P4(h M⎇,H∩M⎇H⊂p↔[5vw`. 8 /←β∪ ≥≤λZ4~@10sλπβαE)Yw22`28∧A∃'=_AChααVN
l*≤@⊂C"JMnH∃m}X|nDπc"TL↑≠≡+*MnH∃m}X¬`∪ at @+MαP⊗⊗≤b⊂@"UR,↔Hλ∃.≤i10⊃[1↔ y≤0g2`48ε@rA)C\@pβ⊃↓EMS a6B% 4*[L `∩αλ8 M∃αjw4↑≥P⊂@2 Janpd@@3QAQXXE @ ¬εE∃wy5yH 4sr\z∧P⊂λ⊂⊂⊂)Xz:y2_|V⊂≤H%0w 190⊂@⊂∧ααα∧∧α¬6⎇JVn(λ 8∧Aβgβ≠W*∧∧c!↓α@
Today's To`Ics: Admi`≥Sβ≠SKπαi⊗
αβ(⊂-Mλ∪;nl9λ∩-a Hλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ L<Yy$λ9→≤L↑|h∀n 8y4d¬(∪=-N~8td∧β⊂$a∪F@
-4ZZZZ4ZZZZαi555ji555h¬RjjUQRjjUQRjjUURjjUP %U+++%U++#%U++#%U++ ⊗KVVVFKVVFEβE"0z→]⊂∀ Jaf 1981 14:06-PST
Frgm: The ModeRator<JSo@0AChAU'εK
→∧l~)'kEUα+∂Qi∧ 3!αn{[↔⊃∧K999ph 4)\⊗wJ∞Mε∞v>4αε6β|@⊂λ⊂12`)ng pati@∃]`@Aβ;'S!αβ7*∧∧π>F≥H $∧λ∩(∧
8π{ %d Fp¬←Z~)%`↔S>+CM↓∧εFzα
Z4~@10s¬Dλ∪8-≥λλλ∞MβP⊂⊂λ+wy5TP⊂6p↑P⊂⊂⊂≠7{P⊂_2P⊂⊂λ9rw:λ⊂⊂:7CE+wi~βS@USC)ECLB, in addition↓iVAi!JA]←I[CHA¬IIeKMg@↔Mbα←?K]~α6&"jε%↓ε ;⊂4U;?K.≤αK@/L|W↔~βC"AQU~→$ <Xz
≡Y<h ≡Y(≠M}h~;D∞~→( M<Y8nMβy<P∂%)gf +gi%T←⊂0zλ*iaVQa` B8A-←YU[J4S β'9αβ'SMαα↔;SM∪↔S@∀∧εO~∞8
}Y9⊂λ4w⊂⊂∂%)gf +gi%T←+'f∃fbVHKαTXT. Cu@I` ↔; h+'O≥+↔Mβ∂∪∃βO&{K↔⊃εK9↓rU~>1:αyu∀]4πUizRtkJ(αabg∃↔
I`≤A¬IISi%←\XA$ACZA9←nAi∃giS]≤@A]K\Ag←MQoCeJ↓kgKH↓iVAI%gieS kiJ@↓/←eWL\⊂∀*∧c↔πO*↓βK↔∧¬w↔"∧ ⊗wJ∧∧ππ⊗|-F.o4∧αG≤Y;L<=→9∧∧≠|H∧∧→x<L-→9∧ ~9y.>≤hλ∧
|C"M↑9≥~.
→(λ∧ ~9y.>≤hλ∧∞Y8y-≡Y9
$∧λ≥≠d∧λλ≠,Tλλ∃m≡~λλ∧ |Y8.Dλλλ M;≠~,\9X}!QJ∃{n-tk4L↑=94nH∃4peX0s⊂E∃@εEεB⊗VVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKFEεE⊃0z2]λ⊂≠⊂%_w:py≡P_\\ ⊂__@:11 e@Mh~*5∪?5iαα≠Kπv[OS?rrO?≠$ KSMε Qα6M!67We#'∂LhROW T+∂QiααK∃i∧cπK∨*βπβ∪⊗+OMβ∨βπ∂↔_h*O↔v#↔Iiαα∞.6≤
Q:O}3RπK'→βπQ∧j&QY↑Vg&≤>0hU,↑εgJZMsRαλj&∞v>:F}r ≡B∧l~ETo.NM⊗∨~¬λ&}∩λn&∞v>:F}r⊃Q%&{$∧∧f.⎇l↔⊗" eb∧6⎇lW∩βHitt4H_.D∪25¬X2/C!! U~ ↑Y(_.,(_8nNαpv ,y a Few related concepts:
~∃U]SM←IZACI⊃eKgg%]N@Z4~∀@@@A)Q%fASf↓kgKH↓ErAE=iPA≠UYiSGLACMH↓iQJA%¬~↑f`AC[←9NA←i!Kef\4∀@@@A∪hA5KC]f↓iQChαβ?;∃ε≠π9βW+OQβv 7∃β∞qβ? T+∂Qβ∞s⊃β;.+⊃β;␈ 4)↓α↓↓β←␈∪@↔J ≤&␈/Dλ
}h≥≠d 8xpl↑|h∩.Eλ~+LUH≥Z,∀≠9;-}↑(∪n⊂;4pH0FE⊂λ⊂⊂⊂#~v2P9↑yz2vK⊂⊂*4~yP4yH1v7yYv8 @IKYCi∃HAi↑↓←EUK
h[Oe%K]iK⊂~∀@@@ACe
QSiKα≠SGK/→1βSF{W>∧ W.gM_74≤Y<∞,<y0↔≥9P0wλ2py6~pyεEλ⊂⊂⊂⊂_x897Xqt⊂ [2⊂22Xv9P!→z:2`2 with h CE≥JA←E)KGif↓iQC\↓`∂7πd`4)↓α↓↓β?v+M 0Q!PTf≡,v*ε≤LG⊗/>4π∂ε≤8S@! ¬⊂⊂λ⊂⊂*4~yP6rXw9P 4hat @QQJAgα+Qβ?2β? +,≠SMβ&CπQβ≡ 9β *β;π↔,∧BεO1Q"αα∧∧π∨.li⊗≡N]nFgJ
Hλ.,y(⊂⊂[2⊂1p[⊂12P≤2x92\p¬fted in↓BAmSβ∪S@.≥APRα∧∧αεn]]w/+C"AQA"S ≡Yy(
\αp
o@Irt4R↓↓↓↓¬##'M∧ε6No
H∞$
98;NP:40]⊂7w2H27ryH73z~0{2P≥5P9x→w2⊂6[yz⊂'Y∧A⊂⊂λ⊂⊂:4→P:4vYP22k→v7x$[3P9`4p¬CiK≥S@↔M∧εFzεm_
∧
;\r,L(≠p∪λ0P9`-all
machine. O` AGα{WKO*aβ←#.qβ?;*β#πMε βO7∞c1β7∞≠#'lTπ⊗.≥H
.O εE⊂λ⊂⊂⊂!Xw⊂4`-pi`≥O∀\@Aα↓YCeO∀ACIIIKgfAMaCGJ↓oSiP↓BAg[¬YXA[∃[←eR4∀@@@AGC\↓EJASαs↔≠≠L≠'↔; aβ W βS#'~β'Mβ⊗+3πSO3∃)↓¬##∃β≤¬vv≡↑λ
∧
yC"D∧λλλ ∀≥{|Mts3@ s` hA%`
βK. 1βπv!β↔≠6+∂S'6)8$(hR7↔]}'Jε,≡6." 8 m]=;Z,<=~0↔[≥εE⊂λ⊂⊂⊂*~4yP$\β important inMudtics, But can pres` ]h↓ae←E1K[fA%\~∀@@@AI%gieS kiKHαβπK∂FKS↔∂'+K↔Mp↓α W β'MβM!βπ∂'+π33JβC?O≤K #∃¬#<4)α↓↓↓β&KOSKN∪WS∃ε β7↔n{Keβ⊗ O↔⊃π≠gOS.i9↓αn+OOπ>)β π≤+⊂4 α↓↓↓β≡{77WvK∂πSL{9β'~βO'↔εc↔Iβ&yβ∪'∨#K' /#↔⊃β≡K;∂∃ε 31β|s∃β;,+⊂4$∧ααα MrεO4
⊗oεL]V.wD
FF*
→g&/,l⊗≡/4 ⊗v"∞Mπ/~ <⊗rπ>Zπε␈.APRα∧∧αε≡⎇]W.v≤<↔&N⎇n2ε∞]⎇f*ε ZF/⊗||Vv.}↑2ε≡⎇↑ε}v]nG~pQ!PU& ↑6*ε=yf≡∂∞N2ε∂,Tε∞fD
&.f↑hVv/Dλ
t≥{tMP9z0]4ww9K⊂⊂!0\tqpv≠<VεE~0{4g→P0P6_y3rP≥w0s'\4¬ addresS space wiTh suFd¬SGS∃]hAa!sgSG¬X~+⊗+O?W⊗≠∃βSzβOWC∧{KAβLεBε?,\↔&gα(⊂→→r:qb\β the cost kf
impl@∃[C@;& S'?rβπ;⊃εkπ/↔~β≠ ?$λ∩εn|,Rε.lhV∨&≡lRεN↑
F.n]nF∂&≥⎇bph)∀π&F≥m2¬∨L≡"ε∂NLVoπN4π&@h→≠d∞~~<eD_]0~λ27ry[∪z⊂4_{2P"[7zstβE84<\tqpvλ6rvw\<P:7H6purH:42P_2yz≥yrP'Yα its architec@QkeJ@4ZAC@ h+3↔∂≠Qβ'p∧π&FTλfO↔>@λ
≥<≠⊂∩[rp∞tation.
~∀4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4∀~¬ ¬iJd@lA∃C9kCerbr`D`btbPAKgh4∃¬e←4t@A'MiKC] KeN]M←@≠R∂∪SMβ∂!α6&"j7W∪&K∂L4U≠W +.≠Qi↓εcπK∨*βπ&N,W∂~∞>ε∞≡↑1PPh)∀ε↑v}pπ&F≡@λ ↑9≥~,>h≥<l↑h~5∞4≠_<L|αP0r→92yyH9x0qYP;rf≠↔⊂⊂ CE;wi~βstation designed which usas its large addresq spaca is the
LISP machine being sold by SymbolIcs. My f@∃KYS]≤ASfAQQChA%hASf4∃a←gMSEYJ↓iP≥β?∪'S∃π≠?≠S> K∃β4{AβC}{K3Eε#↔O'>s↔⊃βF K∪←∂∪∃βK,s;'lqPVF}.&N"
}ε/⊗≡M⊗v:∞;↔∨&]↑2ε↔↑@π&F↑,RεO4
fzεlX ,D≥≠h Mh≤{e@⊂⊂$`4 is
pkssIbh JAQ↑AoCMiJAi%[@∃β>KS!β&KCCE∧∧⊗&',↑74≤|⊂⊂XpyP [2εE0]0{4`3tically depπSO]∃HA←A∃` πSL¬f 4≤}4nL9<h .αz⊂ )t is a lo@PAKCg%Kd4TεFzε,↑7"ε=x L<αw:9_z2P /n ne@\ACaaαc'∂π&K?;Mph $%P %U++ ⊗KVVVVKTVVFKVVVVKVVV@----
Date: 6 January 1982 23:00 est
Frgmh@A
e¬]Wgi=\]'←α3RπK'→βπQ∧j&AY↑Vg&≤8 aQT⎇0⊃~2qz: Re: Mul@QSGf~)%KaYβI6C=R↓α7,≥f@>⎇≠p↔λ0z⊂&Rh∧ ≠≠UYaSGβ→↓" |∧"∧\X;Myz7`.)
∃)<p ↓β&+∂[πβ⊗'8¬rP]w1Py[q⊂0zλ*aa-A0∞`X↓
∨
HAChA5∪ ⊃X→⊂hPβ"Um
8ε2P≥e fact that Multics streamlines the simple cAsas and pRovides
efd¬SGS∃]hA[∃GQC[%g[fA→←dAS5aYK[∃]iS]≤AMSY∃f@AR9JTAI%eKGi=eSKf4∃WLAMKO[K9if@Z4AiQJ↓[kIi%g@↔∨n+;Qβ6K3↔MJβ∪/↔~β;?Qεk↔π;"βS#π ∧εO Q-↔4_X9¬D~]<nD≥~_.D≤≤[l}X;;,↑\h⊂∪_v6⊂$[:7P*~2P:9_x⊂7cλ8ytg→β the
foNmediated direc@PACGG∃`∂Mβ&yβO↔>k↔;S~β ↔∂∂+G∃βLεBεO4
FF/,UBεv|¬β!12qp]yrP$]⊂4yP_x897\94pz→P37`2 a pAppicular @¬aaYSα≠πS'}q8$λhR'QβO→βπ3α=rε
λhT
¬X∧Q$∞~_=∧∞y9{,]]≤h ≥Yλ∪ll\y0~≤β are i`≥I∃aK@;&+;QaQ$NH~0↔_y2pyZw3P*~2P7`&d¬gKhαβ∪'⊃∧;=β?αhW$~;]
t≥~→$
Y>≥∧∞y9{,]] β!,<\[n∞h~;D 9→≤L↑|h_.
=~≠,↑~8h =⎇;⊃∧∞Y<p~[8⊂4gλ10q`(ing some Bits
in sOm`
AkQiKeYdAcMe∃YCiK⊂ACLAαK;+?≤+;Aβ|∧&V.>Abα¬=_ L<(≠p∪→αsets,λ
∃]=hAgK≥[K@; ∧εw∞\,Wπ~Dλλ.,(≠[n-αpv ,y us@∃HAS\αβCK∨?∪π5β∞#∪K↔≤ε0hV<≥F∨.L≡FN}n4ε⊗∞D∞πε}},⊗o~∞⎇w.fDλ mmα<P #lh∂EE∃`AiQ∀AgKO5K]hAβ##↔dhS?←;,∧Bbεmx
∧ 9[p~~2y⊂ /ne. This p¬C@;&{5β∂d¬v⊗⊗↑ λ
≡h≤⊂⊂\84qj[0y6,CE0∞asty becaus@∀AShAα≠π9β>yβWlM↔∞≡|lW⊗.Dλf␈∩∂_ ,≡\h %T≠≠{LT_9P~→yεE 4he c@¬kgJA¬]HAW9←oYK⊃OBAC ←khAαC?]β&yβK↔≤{[↔I∧¬ε∂~ ,V.r
H n≡ C"AQU~~.∀~<h
m⎇λ⊂~≠P9p|H:40zλ&zv 4ics @%`
βC-∪≠↔∂ ¬Bε↔↑@λ
↑8z
|H≥~ T_X9↓Q\≤Y.≡h~<d∞9Y→.<αy; %d.~∀4∀ZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4Z~∀~) ]HA=H α←␈∪ ≥~λM⊗><⎇β!¬JJJE%JJJE%JJJE%JJJAQK++%U++#!! C"@↓J⎇8ZL\⎇∞H
⎇|Ztdλ~9y.>λ∃LD∧mβ"D↓βXY⊗R0s⊗L ⊂⊂_L ~De /n So@1←[←\y/←e-'↓+≤→6⊗∞d⊃y&>{K.M∧#'∂↔∨!αYIα→Q↓hR∪πS+Q↓EI∧Sπ9↓λπ∪C∩∧⊂ F' 4∀jA Q\M⎇.H∩M⎇H∀p↔[7vwwλ≤+wy~βS@USC-ECLB:
SendeR8∧A∃'=_AChααVN
l*∞"λhRS=i¬;?K/≠Q↓l4U∪↔C3JjS=i¬;?K.~βπQα-~
6⊗≤bλ$*6K¬i↓¬+O
6.≠3 @4ε∪∩∧,≥bβC$ε∪+S6%T,%AQ%6N↔$α∧↔-ET⊗nG4β ∩ ,⊗rβε$β K&⊗∩l,JAPPh*⎇w⊗←4λFN>↑>@Jα∧∧ααα∧∧¬∨.lL↔Jbε⊗α∧V≥dβ Kε$ααα∧∧α¬6⎇NVn*ε$βR∧≡:7.*εAPPh*Mv&∂∀}2¬&}
⊗∨≠!⊃∃.F≡D∧O~λ∀¬>␈-:7&∂M≥vph$∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧ W.gM≤7_h$∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧ααβ&Vf\∩λ=εOα∧d¬&∞lO∀≡␈.∧∧∞vm}Vv≡]\Vw"
.Vn␈.1PRα∧∧ααα∧∧ααα∧∧αααεgπGG∧¬R¬> ≡B?~ ↔πε]m⊗v:λ≡B∧n}Mw⊗}L⊃PRjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURhh!Q$&∂LW"β $ &∞w\≡'Jβ↔↔β∩β⊗'# *Z
5 hαQTM⎇,H∃
(∪;lL<X=
}H ∩J={λ_.D∃4peX0s⊂Ga"T⎇,-Y8⎇π⊂ r6Zw4y`4piviA - AAAAUUUUP ∂∂≥∂∂⊃⊃!⊂BBB∧~∀4PJS#∃εs↔]β≤¬v'π|≡&*ε≥N6zε.-v↑(~3D∞Y<↑$∞;YTM≤9Y≠∂∀≥x>.5λ_].D~=λ
≡c"\nM;≠λ ,=≥→.$≥~_-d≥≤]-lx=→,D≠9<n≤9y<ed∀≠⊂∩XyrP!→py⊂ 7ith upεAoQ%YJAo∀Aakh4∃iQJ↓aK@'≡+@~ε,≤6JπM|v/& ↑"bα _ D∂;x
P_y2P6Zyytw→β dig` giLXAaY∃CgJAMK]H@↓B~¬[∃cgCO∀Ai↑A]←eGε5%β#+∃' ACMSS@;8β7*∞Mrπ⊗↑8 -lλ≡0↔]P:40]⊂4qy]rW⊂$Y⊂<wzCE3r`4 random messages about @AeWEYα+7Mβ>KS!β⊗+∂π'4K;≥βn '1β5∪?5β&C∀4 ∂∪Cπ;,εBJB∞ F.∂<TεN>mz&*πM Vj@H∩( ≥(≠p↔λ:42P≤2qtx~rw:⊂≠4yz, so I know
when thes`
A[∃cgCO∃bA←Gα≠WI9∧K→βg␈)βK↔≤+'[∃εkW3SOβ3∃β&K∨/>N2ε6β|@⊂∩yyz`%
4, phease ignore @QQKZA¬`
β←.c1βπv!βπ∂≤+CQβoIβπC|¬F}>≤↑2b∧∀λ
≡Y(≠Mt~9→,⊃ Z≠nt≠8;O∀≠yH∞M→; ⊂~0{2P_qz:`[68 Been delivered.Starting With ipπgkJjA∩~)o←kY⊂AYSW∀Ai↑A!KCdAα ?W"βπ;eπβK/ d+5βg␈)β#π4∧RbπM ⊗vZ∂_ nT→[p→λ<wp∃r
cooperation @%\AiQ%fA[CQiKd\4∀~∧∪$OZAm∃arAgα{@↔↔∀
FF∂Dλ
<h~ ≡≤→3L\ λ≤
L8<q$ >_⎇.<(_;O∀→x<L,9y#!-;H≡-}<H⊂⊗Xtr3$[2P1`]yrr by this u@9MWeiU]CiJ↓ae←E1KZB~(~∃πQ∃KefX4⊂
*O}`4(Q%RjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUQRjjUURjjUQP@hαQ_.L,¬⊂≤H%0w:Xy<P_N\→⊂_ ≥_≤VQijεE⊃93v]λ p∞drew S. Cromarty <CROM at MIT ≠β$|⊂∀*∨+ +↔∨!`∩¬⎇x Miz0z~ww9←CE
I rec@∃SmKHαβO/lX L≥λ~;LM|[8.M=Y(∞,<|⊂↔[9ryP≥4π my request @→←dAI∃iC@'e→β?8hSS#∃¬~V99∧ 7?;8βS#∃εk?OQ¬≠SK'↑K;≥β4+πSW⊗+@~ε|dπ&F|<Rπ⊗↑8
⎇\y0→K⊂:47]pπh,
λp∂Cf↓C\ACMg←ei5K]hAα{⊂∩ε=x -\8π:9H9zssYyz4w→β that the SUN↓ISI\≥hAQCYJ~+∧∧⊗.NβY`⊂≠y⊂9bYβmentatioN, that id did have SegmeNtati@=\AC]⊂AaCO%]NAEUh⊂∀-mw"πm~''8;λ
\αp
o@IrP⊃β∞s⊃βSF Qβ' β←πMα∪;↔[,ε"εNnLVv&\@λ∞MβP12H0@
@]←eGgQCiS←8D\~∀4⊂
O?n)β >dλ
|y(∞ 8εpy~βs may be attribp iC YJAi<AS@;∞#↔GW∂#∃βC⊗+GMβ>K[↔→∧εFxh.Mε*¬8¬3D¬~;XmNαr4w→β by the SUJ depπSO]∃` Mβ&C↔7O,¬G6/5D∧Jπ>X n 8⎇∀K⊂1:`4
they also suGg` ghαβSO=¬ W/>M⊗}w4λ
=λ⊂~~4yP"~pp ogu`
AQ¬`
β ,∧VrπL≥FNNβYc!0y7j[2⊂3 /p many moNths @]SiQ←Uh@A∩↓iQS],RACI⊃eKggαK;≥β&KK↔∂&cehQ!P@&+H∃m∂(≥P∀\8∧ual iemop¬r`=αBS#'~βGW↔≤εFN}dλ
l≡h_8nNαpv ,y ac@-KH@1∧¬w$_=⊂≠2pyjβE0 mplied0AErA→≠⊂~⊗⊂∧ε}r∧
%X→8kE∀∀_<NM8⎇0⊗_y0 i when↓aQ`'≤¬⊗≡∞βλ⊂⊗Yvp∂ry pri@
Kf~∃α K∃β∂βCK∨∞≠#'lpλ M<Y⊗Xt2px~5wr and @¬IIeKM`
βO∧∧⊗≡<h⊂∪≠y⊂6tXy0∂`&↓CeJAαK8$ αMε*ε\X l≤↑9→$∞X;YlTλ_;LD_y0→≥0p nly in↓iQJ@D`a-∧ε&∞v|Tπ>OM
w/" ≥gHhα\⊂→≠q0 eM)( do p∂JA9KCHAβ3'KSαX⊗bε\]V␈↔↔t∧≡}n8
,L<NH∞M→<Y$}h_;D
β{2`2head↓S\4TεFF*∞N&∞w=Hλ.M9{@∞M≤[u,@t⊂8 Yβi`≥NαβSπ d∧W4_;Y∧∞{h⊃M}]~⊗λ9wP )t do@∃`∂9∨ ∧ε≡}\QPV6| λ @92rVλ2{2`. whe@8Agkaββ?KS.!β'→∧CπK∪> K∃↓G;#'∂@β@∨&≥H ∧
<{@∪]⊂392YF@
i@Q`∂.β→K∧ 8π2 pequ@%` ↔M∧¬V∞Nβ]→-l8π1`%, additio@9CXAI∃`∂'∨p∧ε.⊗mx NEλ_;LD≤{c! [x]
¬J(∀n↑Y+λ
(3(⊂∀\βn'd↓H K↔*β↔'SF+I1β↔+QβSF{O*∧fDZε-_
∧ z~0_≤β are about ∀Hβ9β↔π≡A1↓αJ;5β;|εBπ∨\|v/∨M→f 4≥~_.D≥y( ≤X;Y
⎇H≥P∀\8∧ual memop¬r`-∧I∨44Tε↔.<⎇~-⎇Z;Yd∞z_=∧
=≤h∞m<]≥,↑h_<LT~;@⊂_P+wi~βStation.↓βeJAQQJ
∃α CC3L∧6∂&≥⎇g4≥y)n,(→{m≥Yh∃
t≤]3D
9H∀
zi|h ]z;Yd∞≠h⊂⊃→P4vx→p2r or~∃αK7C?∨≠' 3*β←'SF{WQβLεBbε|$ε.vα_;L<9λ⊂O∀~8
∨H+tv , it @5CWJA∧AgSO9SESG¬]hX~)G←gh5KEMK
iSmJ↓ISMM∃aKMGα)|4(hQI9α>CπQβLε2ε
∞⎇w⊗←>L↔&N⎇cr¬& X LT≤y9-↑h≥≠d Y(⊂$ {{\m≤α2y0X4∧e Dibfe@IK]GJ4∃P∨→∧¬wεNm_ meH⊃≠l↑h_ ⊂∀+iP (ave @Q↑AEJ↓CfAaα{←/,jVbε≡4ε
∧β~<n∧⊂εpqZ4p∞e in~∃α{K∪↔⊂∧π&Z∞≡V∞f≤o∪zα _ D∞{kλ
m⎇λ∪,≥↑(∃m≥≠ B$ 9H⊂~~2P)jS⊂1pwλ9:w Xe`≥Sβ@4)#&C∃↓E2k 'Q¬+;'a∧∧6f}lU∩εNβXp⊗≥r4w3H*p∞i@`AβKC
fP⊃β≥+CC?↔!βO?n)β3?≤ 0$,}&∂ε
_7
B ≥f"ε ≥f&@→(∀m⎇9(⊂⊃[vx:j_z4w`. on Its o@]\AaYU`
β;,εG>␈-0λ∞MβP0FB34v % server, @→←dAKβCπ7Cd∧Rbε≤4εO"∞8
≥≠λ∪M}λ_(
⎇|ZtnL=~0↔[∨FEεB P6 %dπSiS5CiJAβ∪↔OC|¬g∞(≥≠d∞~→(
L=_
2\α qe@∃ciS←αqβ .α9z∞D_Y(∧λα7r`3 it @5CiiKH~∃oQ¬hAoJ↓GCIX↓Sh}Dαa↓β ,εBε6β|@⊂≥42P &act @QQChAAKeg←αsπ1α>{@⊗]>L↔&N⎇n2ε∂,QPGπ,X n]88[∂∀≥z_.D≥~→$
{|Zj4→~0⊂[4πge@∀ASfAα ?W ¬b∧∞β≤p∩]t2y2H$P0vH80y:λ4πf @∧~∃Oe=k`Ao!SGPAαk↔/L∧h∞ 9y0⊗_y0 `2↓iP≥β&KG∂W≤ε2¬¬z4w4~;@⊂_v6⊂ 4he`∪dαβ↔?KJβ∪↔S∞K104T ;⊃βM!βO↔,¬W4→~0∪→αicu@1hAM←β⊃β@/4λ
t→y0~λ0{p|H397fH:42P≤zry`4ion @=H β←F P4-yf*ε≤72π<⎇0-M≤∧P 7e fi@9HA←KIc@↔L¬P∩\β le@→hAoSβ#!βπw≠←/,4π&F≡@λ∞≥⎇;Y↓Q\{p⊗Yz44w→β liKe "IT's whatev@∃` β≠,¬f∨&≥x L≥~=≡$ (≥x-nα⊂9`)tp S]≤A←\A5r~¬I∃`∂- d paging or segme`≥i¬iS←\↓eKCY1r~∃]∃KIKH↓M←dAQQJACAaYSG¬iS←]LAoJO1XAEJ↓ek]]%]NA←8AiQKMJA[C
QS]KL}@A3∃fX~∃MKO[K9iCiS=\AGC8Aae←YSIJAAe←iK
iS←\↓C]HA5K[←edA[C]¬OK[K9hAM←H~∃←E)KGh[=eSK]QKHAgegiK[L@QM←HAKqC5aYJR0A←dA∃mK\A)kghA→←dAY¬eOJAAe←Oe¬[f~∃%\AOK9KeCX0AEkhαβ'Mβ&CπQβ>CπQβ>)∨31ε∪∃βW≤¬⊗v:
⎇w⊗]>L↔&N⎇n2ε6} ∂d |H⊂≠Zv6εE≥42|P_2P:iYr⊂6w\z6<P→4πr Text-editing? PEphap@LAiQJ↓1Ke←βAβOS∂⊃β'M∧¬'/∨D ⊂hW=H
,=h≤t \z8;¬\<≤⊂⊗~qpz4[w⊂::\70 e@dAgcgQKZXAQQJAKβC∂/∞M⊗}r∞,↔&F↑ λ∞M_;C!:42P≤8¬de am`∨]≤A!/&≥fXAC9HACYαaβ@>T⎇Fbε|]f/⊗≥H ∂∀≥x;ND≥≠h∞↑y(⊂~~2yrFB9|y`4ems @→←dASβ→βK↔f S'[,¬GJπ=≥Wε@→(⊂.∞≠~0l≡~;{N5α⊂9`]4p∞g↓YCeO∀AUOELAM@?⊂h+#π⊗;↔I1∧∧f∂∨LX D∞≤[pl↑|{p→≤β that the b`∨Pαβ?9βL{WIβ&+@≡Z 8⊗r∨EDπε/- ↔π_Q(W6.d
6F␈]HFr∨D
G/(≥≠eD_{p⊗\2z2P≥tz4↔βE
Id we are @QQJ@Q¬ISCIQKIYr↓g@↔32kπCC|K;C↔ ¬∩ε/∞λ .89P /n WoRhπ'iCQS←]f↓C]H~)GC\OPAIKGαK∪∃↓G##πQ∧¬↔
@λ_9n,9*(
⎇H≥z ≡λ→]-l_;9-n_;λ l8=≥.,<h_-lβ"X. z~0~→qz:`2e they should Have, who Will? (I sHu`de@HAChAQQJAi!←kOQPA←L~)YKCm%]NASβ!βS=∧J
51ε{Iβ↔4∧Vr∧HX2rHβ"C!(;↑(∞L8y4N7c"C!↓8z→,↑\kα!⊃""8.<c"C!+p(⊂≠[zv2≠4qrP≥4π sEe soMe discuss@%←\A←αqβS#*βOW T∧V∨"
xbε/ ≤7&gα(λJ@t0zεB4yP0H+wy5Tz0z4[w↔⊃ -JSol]
--------------
---------------
¬
Date: 8 January 190 $ddt`L[ '(4∃≠K}iiα∪∞s'↔⊃∧a9α←,¬⊗w⊗\$βf&Npε∂" Y∃"l→↔`hU>X&V.>C"∧o]H
≤|c"AQS;|nD→>≤
L8π0z~ww9P≠pε MulticS that I have s@∃K\A←αqβS#*β;↔Q∧¬ε∂6Tλ&..βC"N={95m <Y( ,=≥y,]H≠:.≥9YP↔\4¬edand Compl@∃iKIr↓oeO]≤X@A⊃=oCmKβ⊃1αO&+[↔8hR ↔3d{['9?→β∪↔≤≠@⊗O∞M⊗}r
x D∞~→( ↑9≥~,>h≥P∀\8:pvλ6rvw\<P9l\z2v@ is quite
correct. There are ondy tp∂↑Aβ##'l}2∧J|@εfNαy(∞MβP0r→↔⊂⊂#~y9z o` AC1XX~∃β##∃β∞∪'3''IβS=∧∧GNv≥]⊗≡∞MK∩εf≥m2π∨\.&␈/M_ L↑h~0→H7w2P≠pε the mo@Mh∩+LkC?K& ;@"∞MεNv}4π&F≡@λ ↑8ε:4XyP4iH0q7j]⊗⊂0w→⊂4yP
0yP &ar as I'm
λ¬G←]
Ke@;,∧BJπM Rπ≡≥lvf*
]w∨"
≥Wε@|]_-nλ≥~
≥Yh⊂,-⎇=⊂≥42P)Yqvr`.tatiOn
c@
QK@7*q↓αO,∧6}vMK∩bπM Rεf≥]↔&∂M_ md≠{@⊂≤β` O[∃]hAgαKk∃βLε2εNβY→,\λ_ ∞ 8∧w,
bu@PAShAαK@~εmzBε≡⎇↑εf/LYGJεLX&Nf≡L↔&Nlp D∧∩;@⊂≤0y0∀icular, proerams
("objec@PAgKO5K]ifλXAi↑↓kgJAβ##∃β|∧f -8z0-D≥→0→≠TP72]2y⊂ 2un i@9iP≥β&C'L4T¬FNnα=_.M9{@≥H7w6 9 data f`∪Y∃`
β∪zq↓απv!β←#L¬F*β&VdZε≡4εv←Dλ
}_;⊂⊗≡FA3tYpw:4XT⊂4`4 doeS sufFice @→←dA[=ghAaUea←G∃fP→↓¬≠?7∃∧εε.␈
HRε&t
'.r
_ NMc"P~~2P8 2obdem8εA[C9r@@#n{OQ¬∧¬f/6↑ ε∞∨NXλ-M≤∧P %ncoenter @%h\4Ph*←#,qα%βF ⊃βπp∧ε␈π
x NN8π4`4y to work↓←\AEUSYIS9JABAβ≠'7πd AβOLε7&.β+λ ∀→~1↓Q\_<NM8z4 ≡→(⊂∀[⊂:42H1y2`]4p∂n↓←@→β∞qβ'7¬∪?[↔ ∧ε&/=_ meλ≥z
≤zλ⊂∀\β be@%]NAkMKH~∃αK9βSF)αMT∧ ≡Xz~.L8⎇≥.,(_=∧ _=|L]Xy( M=Y0→≠wy2Wλ⊂+t`4hh∂khαβ⊂≡}≥lrεNnMphV|-w>h→→.L8∧v⊗λ:42P_4πundary @ KioKα+9βSF)βO↔>k↔;Q∧¬g.n,X D 8π2 the @=H ≠O,ε@hVα;@⊂_w⊂)VLP0r2≤2yyPλ327`!ts" @MkGPAβ##πQ∧π⊗␈* 8λ-d~_=LT_(⊂⊗≠z⊂7`& hittle~∃β≠↔∂7,¬g'~ ≡2πy;⊂⊗λ0yP H32{@ p¬KCYαceβ L∧rπ≡\⎇V.wN4εNr∂_ n↑H_9 NY<p→H9x0qYU
The tota`_Aββ?'≠&+AβOLπ&*ε≤∧hε6(_Z.Nhε⊂ !nd y@=jAGC8AQCmα)βπM∧∧f/: ≡2ε}lQP@.y9{,]] λ
}H_<d
αpw<H0yP_MαK s@∃H∂7↔w#@~αα≠p→λ4¬a`3α∪∃β'αDw4 h %JTε This Stidl
λisn≥hAK]=k@∨!bβ @/Dλ
lT≠{[∂∀~_9∧εl(⊂⊃~z9P )n which to work8εASL↓s←jAβ∪↔π3dπ⊂hW|≥g&.Dλ
t→Y0∩[⊂:40]⊂:42H897a≠2rP+XyP9`/lp
KHαaα%∨ ∧ε -{≠⊂↔]P:42H2|0v\4∧e @=Hλ$,≥bε/∞λW-8εrg≥0p @Aa←UK
hAChαα"Aαd Mβ&CπQαJβ?;∂*β#↔π⊗!βπ ␈+Qβ'pβ←#'≤@4+π&#K↔O≤∧W4≥y0→→P≤[⊂_4z9]λ~≤⊂!~z9P"Xqt⊂ /d∧AgK≥[K@; ∧εw∞\,Wαε≥lBε@yYP→Yz⊂∞
--
----
----------------------¬
@ Ci∀t@rA)C]kCIr@br`d@bdhjl[ M(~*5∪?5I∧Cπ1α∞∪↔3O}q↓r" aβπQ∧j&QYX3p@"T⎇,-Y8uπ⊂⊂9:[wy0∪
∃∩↓QKCd↓Ie←Zαβ¬βK,¬FN∞-H $∞{y<L<αP:4_z⊂*0[28P 7ill anjo`+9G@∃β&C↔'I∧¬f/8Q&cCβ¬\&∂≡\@λ
\8z~-l(≠p↔λ%0w:Xy<P_NWαEεBαI'v@∀ACYG<AQKCIHAiK1XA←L↓BAG←αkCπ;JβS#π ∧εO~ 8
.∞Y;]
O(≥{n
z;Yd
{H⊂$εM-RaQX↑0~→P∀<b\T∧ BYTE) @
QS`Aβ##πQ∧εFF/∀λWGε\8
∧∞≠h_LT≠8<M<αz4g→β ne@ahAcKα I8∀T ⊂≡∞≥` ∧∞~→(∞=⎇<XlT≠yH∞M→(⊂→≥vp∂r↓SfAe∃YSCE1JP→↓¬;#πQ∧∧Fzπ X n
α2P 4hi`≥V4⊂ π ⎇+QβSF)β∂K,∧FN⊗≥H
.O(≠p∪λ:44iH1v0t[←FEεB⊗VV@----------4ZZZZ4ZZZZαi555ji44!Q$&∂LW"βJ (⊗rβ↔↔β∩β⊗π#∪#& EZ∀uβ!λβ97`-8∧Aae¬ia↓π!CgiBαβπQα≥+7↔al '4Q*7.⊗,XλnGH
N∂∂≤∧⊂ $ev`∪Gα+@_hαPp⊃Nα pratt
Whi@1JA%∧εv∂~
_ Dλ=<p~~w⊂:4~yP;rYuP$P≥4πok↓iQJAα{CC?↔#W;≡O∩π&tλ
≥~h⊂~≠P
oHnλ
¬5α{3 6β⎇|m|P0zλ&p∂toph∂YBαβπ |X
∧εL∧<<≡⊂80y≥9S⊂⊂∩2y2S\β the sco@=`A←\αβS#K,∧PhW∞-vnO<X ∧ z~0_≤Tε~∀4⊂l``D`⊂∀!Q%&F≤4εO~∞Mε*¬iPλε@≤___ ⊂⊂ @ lkngti`≠J↓ECGVα↓!`2εdεnzβJ( ]⎇≠p→≠v0P 0p¬W[Sβ≠↔⊂4TεFFO4λ l≥<≠⊂∩\β of thic chip fh∂dA¬kGkgβ!↓aIp∧α∧ODλ
.P92`\βsuring that with
@QQSfAα#πS∃∧s?]β|s3eβF 3→β∂→β≠π⊂∧ε∂>∨∀∧n␈Mx M⎇_(⊂∀_yP77]⊂32`,t id↓]KGKM`∂πKβ⊃P@.≠h∀
}⎇≤⊂↔[2P4`4 signibac@¬]aYr8@A)Q∃rAKqAKGhAQ↑AEJ↓QCmJ↓o←eW%]NAgαK3'∂|¬`hWM VrπM Vo≡]H
L↑iλ⊂⊂[2⊂:7H12P&Xutw3H9pvx≠2yP !va`∪Yα &Tλ
-d∀y0_≥2p
ber.~∀4∀l``H`⊂∀!Q%&F≡4εO~ ⊂λ∞≥|Y⊂≠pε s@UGGKgβ≠?Iβ&yβS#*↓P∪Cεεαbε≤hλ-≥_8[ T_8[n]Yλ⊂~~2P:4~y2εE≤zpy:→y⊂7`& 83.A∪hAα3↔πS,ε&/≠!Q hR
∃⊂K≠%\&O" L↔&
.Wλh!Q"FNα*"&&λεq4]⊂0r2≤2yyP_8¬s @→←dAi!J@p@"kC'dλ
L↑\z0↔[⊂0w2λ→Y⊂ &or the
∀bβ↓A7CL¬bπ⊗↑.6N}eaP@! ¬∀4ZtTDa~z⊂
e@aieCGβ#'?9∧¬wε/,≡FN}n5Bε∞αz0↔λ87P 4he @!⊃ Zb`4⊂ &|≤Bn↔≤LR`<α2x /pπSh[ siJAα{C↔K∂#'?;~q↓α∂,ε',;]⊂≤4∧an↓SfAi!ChAi!J~+&+@≡∨-_ ∞Mβy⊂ 7ord @≥Sm@'v9βS#*β3↔≠ ∧ε∞vDλ M≤z≥⊂_4πundar`∪KLAP∨→∧εFF* h
,]→λ⊂⊃Xw
@≥↑AS\αβ↔'SF+AβSF)β';≥#C@.>M⊗}r∞8
∞2pv@ or a↓` ↔∨Lε7&/%aP@! ¬∀4]∀@ HidπQKd5IKMg%irAmα+@↔≡≥ybε@yH⊂~~2P$&SiP8 2ocess (if you @
CeJR8~∀4RCY$% ↓α6#Rβ∂3?≡Y↓#%v)9β;zβ∪πO&+I1β∧¬↔'J∃aP@h!Q#3Cπε⊂hPβ"U
<h∩.P0P &lh∂Ci%]NAaα{';Q∧επ⊗@xy0→\wy⊂*~0z⊂ /ne attachepεAi↑↓iQJ@Xpap@0~∃CYM↑ACMα '3π⊗c∃βπ⊗{W;⊃∧εFF*∞MεO⊗D
↔.∂.LW∩ε|dβC~βHλ ≡λ→Y,≡≥<Y.7A"C!¬~*")_11(∞>_;Y ≡Yλ⊃MMx=~-lh≤∪m≥]λ⊂↔\2y0z~ww9WβE
(ii) 5 qsec iulTiply.
¬
Vaughan Pratt
------------------------------
End od Worhπ&A %O@↔O h)))RQ)))RQ)))RQ)))RP4)5ji555hh(4(hP2OW⊗S↔∂QRα←?K]→α∪'>+OQα3⊃↓
ThQ-E"j+π9kAI↓↓β UL&V{9αO|c?7?r↓r←?⊗ZNαVα82l,9H#r~⎇w⊗]4λFN>↑>B¬3$∧3*α↓Q$&∂LW"β 4 &∞rε↔∪C∩ε Fπ+4∀jA QTM⎇.H∩M⎇H∀p↔[7vwwλ≡+wy~βS@USC-ECLB8 ~∃MK]IKHp α*≤z1βπ ∧¬-≤5XT≤D!Q%&{$
v␈⊗>70hU,↑εgJZMsR¬⎇}&M~ ≡B¬-85T,≤β⊂C!*Z8.D∧∃<peX8{_G4 -⊂∩0w⊂≤ ⊂_]_L⊗bb*βE+4pN⊂⊂!9≠⊗a6r∞P_Z∩0w⊂≤ ⊂_]→
T¬EDT
¬
Works Digest Thursday, 10λA∃¬\@br`d@@@@@A-α{3W\Tβ∩β$ ↔>⎇9(εQ"C"JMy_>$}h∃≠n
8|nA⊃(λλ∧λ9≠:-m<⎇≤M≡Z8#!∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλ∀.\αy<P⊂w9{r\⊂⊗P+Z<P# )rp kC0A≠K[=ar4R↓↓↓↓α↓↓↓↓α↓↓↓↓α↓↓↓↓α↓↓↓α>CπQαM→α¬α>{K.O& S'?ph)55ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji44λhR∪πS+Q↓EM∧Sπ;W∂∪e↓EKAI↓I QAQ⊗¬~P4*5∪?5i¬##∃αn{∪↔K∂#?I↓dRO?1ε QαK,εF><\oAQT⎇0M,8⎇∞Dλ9≠:-m<⎇≤M≡Z8 ¬T∀≤[l-→;<d¬~≠t \];≠∂∃(≤p~≤0pst≥2s2rλ7zzεBεE zλ:44yH87tw≥⊗⊂<w]P9t7]v2⊂ !lh be qp @Q↑A-←1k[J@HXA∪gMkB@j8A)QJ↓[CSX4∃ae← YK[f↓←@→β&C∃βC∂≠Qβ≠,εrε&∨_ d∞z≠⎇-Lλ_Y$∞⎇≤X-≤z≥→-l9λ≠n↑ H⊂.D≥~→$∞Y<↑!QXε2`!st, @QQJAa∃←aYJ↓eKgaα{;O'⊗c∃β≠|ε"π& Tεn∞=
⊗v*∞⎇εN≡∧λFO∨N-⊗↔=→<d∞~→#!,uastion:
Why viRtp CX↓[K@7⎇∪e⎇↓¬##∃βn '9β4∧⊗∨"∞>Wπε}.FNvt∞FF*
lV." iw$∃S
≡nC"A⊃"B5m
;→( ≡X:3 ≤[→(∞
≡<z,<;λ⊂⊗Yvp∂ry per↓[CGQ%]JAGα{;S'w+↔Mβ&yβ∨K|εr`h!≡π⊗↑},⊗o~ ≥f"πM VO∩ L↔&
≡&*ε-x
∧≠8;L≤z;Yd∞≠h∩l\<λ_- 89⊂~w
pπSuJ8~∀4TK→βSFKMβ≠∞≠Qβ∪}+G9∨ ∧εF}L@λ m|Hλ∂≥⎇<@⊂≤0y:4Xzv0yλ9xyz→vV⊂<[zP27[∪z⊂7→rrεE∃&W⊂⊂⊗wzP0\2P2`)ther↓YkGWd@Q[CeEJAs=jA←]1rAkgα)βg?/⊃β∂?oβWS↔⊂βS=β≡+πK∂@h+≠?⊂β3πK>)βCKNk↔M¬αβ?Iβ≤{∪C←∂∪∃'C|¬w∩r∧∧∧6␈$
V∞w∀
⊗"α
mw"ε]}7"ε=x .∞αz2iβE:yb\αs the above i@LAC\AαK;↔O≤∧↔ε∞-H $ X8⎇¬@⊂⊂#7\α them(λASα1βπ;O##';8∧π&FTλv∂Q-↔4→|[n⎇8π3@.
~∃QQSfA→CGhA¬Y←]J↓IP∨↔~β;?Q∧c↔π⊃∧K;↔[LεF∞⊗O∀π&@h⊃S%dλ∀∀M||X;.P1pwλ0v0↔ays
Be b`%=S@↔→π+Aβ'w#=β?4+K &≥_ e@⊂⊂"0]0P1`!n al@]CsfA JA[C%]`∪πLs↔↓β|¬bε6α;⊃.FA0w→⊂:42H92v %vaft↓aWei%←]fAβ∪↔π⊃∧ ;⊃β?∪'SS,¬bπ> X D
β2r`$e`λ@9αα# ?|X
L↑H≥z.Mβ"P$∞z;<
L(≠8-≥H≠9-]|Z(
⎇Y(⊂__|yP /ne o@_A`∪←zβCK≤8 .P:7P→p¬t @¬hA[←β∪∃β∪∂#∧4,Mε∞r∞Mε*ε\X -}↑(⊂≠Zv6⊂ (old: eithep prodπeCZαβ@∨',¬0⊃]8¬re or p@I←@∨K∞h4+C,ε& -βy6p[1rP 3u`
MKβ∪@~@@εEεBαPro@≥` πTλ nN]8p~≥y2P 3u`
MKβ∪@~π⎇ Vrπα;p~H40{ % p ↑Aα≠?7Cd¬⊗≡∂LTε
π=_ .
α2FE_v3w`2ithm↓ErASαs@≡<X
4[3P1`/de to read a`≥Hαβ←K≤¬→$ X∧v %pεP⊃β∞s⊃βSzβSKπw≠3πS(h ⊗⊗↑Nv.8π⊂ )np Ke9CXAC9HAKqQKe@;∞aβK↔∧ε&/≡]nF∂&≥x NP0p∪ data↓[←mKβ→β ↔';↔πaQ'π⊗α;8.<P0w→⊂9r`#ondary me@5←er\α↓αCK|∧w,8εvr\αs get so used↓iP≥β&C'Mβn{∪∃β|∧`hVβxλ %p¬CiSα{9βSF QβSF+eβS,¬f"εmx
∧∞≠h⊂↔≠z4q`% phe lh∂gf↓←@→β≤εG.αqz:\2P4`. the@%`λ (αXλ 2o`∂eC5bP→↓∧C?←↔4∧W$~8
_ps⊂ "e made qu@%iJACAaCeK9hAER↓eKoe%iS@;8∧π&FTλλm|α2FE≤92z2[24w3H:40zλ:42P≥t7v % p @;Lεf/↔<TεfOlX d
9H⊂_≤4p
ary me@5←er\4⊂λ (+→w*ε<≥bπ⊗↑8
}Y(⊗-}<H⊂_≤5sy0[P9z9≥qz:`2e bi treating alh referenc` fA¬f~∃Gα{7C?α=↔&*∞,V6/,Yf≡<h⊂~≠P0P &ile And an h∂EUα+∂QβLqβS#∂!β≠πd)1βπv 4+≥nF/↔∞,W&NβY`⊂≥47qrH92s"\2s1`%pεAoSβ#!βK|εW&NβY0→H:40zλ22q`)de when to swap
suBph∂ki%]KfA¬]HAI¬iBAS8ACMHαβ?WQp∧α∧&⎇lRπ⊗≤⎇π"b∞Mε*ε⎇mGJπ
Hλ,<αP;t→y2P 4he¬
@AaS@7∂∪e /<Xλm⎇Y_<O∀≠9;-}↑(⊃
≡⎇~;L>~;{D∞z≠⎇nP:x⊂~yP4gλ:42P~w:2`2preter of
λp QJ↓eKMKIK]GKLp
β@≥x
.$≤≤[l@y0v@ itseld∧A]K∃HA]↑↓YW]O∃` β7∞[∃βSF(4+∪M≠S'l8
≥{KC!!αE*4→P894Xp¬ f@=` βSFKEβπαλ ∞
βpq`( is perfo@I[C@;≤∧S@4_;⊂⊗λ92s"\αe`≥Gα+@~πN-↔ε@→(⊂↔\αλ
+>{CO∃∧¬⊗rε=x nEHλ∀ ↑Y[p→≠pp∞c@∀[oSg∀XAc←TACeJ↓[kGPβEKii∃`A←Mα1βOSL∧6@=8π3@ th∞~∃βK?WI∧¬w-9z3L≥λ~0⊗≠⊗yz9≥qz0∃@IK@Aaβ∪??,≥R`$λ⊃P∩]P897Yβrammers @¬i`∪π≤¬αε@8πp∩e
`∪[A←eiC9G@∃β&yβOS↔+∂SW⊗)βC#∞qβC=∧εε/⊗mx M\8π1`% .~∀4⊃)QJ↓` >LTε}H⊂ &H4yP 4o re@MiP∨K*βCK|}&∞j∞8
∞8¬cture witho`+PAaQJ↓aKeMα{@⊗@8;XlQ ¬8 2ice @=H βSF)β'≠&+@↔π,X
≡Y(⊂→[v:z4[w↔⊂⊂∃βith↓(
51∧ε&.Y<Y-ly<h =|⎇⊂_q0∂`+β 4+SF)βOπn)βπM∧εvO&∧λλ$∞z;<
L(≠9-]|Z(∞qt2`-e fo@HAeKMα+@⊗.βXp∩\β to ob`∃Kα≠SL4T∧⊗g⊗\≤GJε≥`λ
\8∧w m` @7|ε'J@Hλ∀ ≤βrP &au`→iLAG←@≤εBbε.X
∧∞α42P~p∧ea↓SfAi!ChAC9r~+|εFF/$λ l=→;9$
αp|P≥p¬`→X↓QCmJ↓iP≥β>yβC=∧ε6.≡⎇lF∂↔∀λ ,]8πy<H0x8 2oximate`→r↓Cf~∃α{⊂↔→;@⊂_yP0@∃&P9`#he`≠J8@A)Q∀AE@'8∧π<=Z0↔→β then is clean proGp¬C@5∧ε7'↔\8
∞↑Y#"L≡λ≠⊂∀]8∧le or no perfor`≠C9G@∃β≤¬w>λπεEβE*42H897c\αa`~[MiekGβ#WK∃¬βC >-H -T~8h∞ <Y~,>;_<MO(≥P∀\βibl@∀ASLA∧AP∪πv;Wπ∨(h ↔ε ≡Bε.βXp↔]y0sr\P7w2H4πr ankther fo@IZA←L↓giek
i`↔K*β'9β|¬f*?4
π⊗@y|X-↑hεεE→U3W∪4yx⊂_w2⊂ T&⊂∞ A siMph JAβ∪↔∂W↔≠'[∃∧c'OA∧ε&␈/M≥f*ε<≥bε⊗T∞↔.OLQPF@8;YmL9λ_O∀_(⊂↔→pr⊂*≠P6w{→P9wfYP7s⊂~z9P2_z0P "etwe@∃\Aae%[Cer↓C]H~)g@↔∂|s∪πKJβOS?⊗ ↔∃9ααπ;⊃ε 9αε∧aβ?;*k3';,ε"ε≡≥`π'<[@
≥]≠h ∀≥≥{e↑_9y.$~9C!.y8p↔[20y<H9z7i_qrP$\β ne@∃IKH\A
OdαβOW∂Bβ3πl}V∞>↑4¬4j ,V≡}\↑0hW ≡'&N>X ≡Y≡(∞m=_;¬a"C"I≤H≡;nT_\Z-lh≡3n↑H≠p⊗→⊂34`,e-eanipulatifg↓ae←OIC[@7L¬f*π>O⊗f*∞⎇↔&B∂_ nT≥≠c!,(⊂ &H2s;$\5w6r[8⊂<g]P;tv≠⊂70z≥y0v&≡P0y`+ "Why do I need VM?" You
don't, @%H βg␈)βOSL∧6@4≥≠h∞M_=⊂≤z<v"K⊂⊂*4→P92`\ww⊂*~2P)`5n project↓GCL~)G←]i%]kJA]SiQ←UhA-~↓SfAi!ChAC1XA←L↓iQJA
←IJA]JAS]!KeSH0A[OgP~∃+]%p[gieYJCε↓G←IJ0ASfA]aSii∃\AM←β⊃β7πw+π1β␈3↔K3∂KMβπv!β#↔∂3eβ≠L¬F(h-\⊗vO∞]F∂&≥⎇brα
⎇εNfT
v*π>M⊗≡Z∞Mrπ& ≡Bπ∨O≥F*π|Tε≡∞d∞π/"
|f2¬iTε&∂∃dα¬>QQ'>␈]LBεf≥<Rπ&t &*ε≤-F*πMtε>∂D ↔>∂∀ g⊗↑T
FF∂D∞7'Nβ→(
⎇y=L↑Kλ⊂M}~λ≥
q"Z;.∞[⎇Y$∞~→(∞>≡;→$
yH≠n↑H≠⊂↔]Vv2{→v⊂8)≠sy0v\P⊂λC, PasCal! @¬]HAi<AEJA¬EYJ~)i↑AoISiJA1Sg`A¬]HAβA_Aae=OeC[LAS\AM←[Ki!S]NA KiiKHAiQC8ABA
=eieC8~∃gieYJAY¬GKHA]SiPA→SYJA=aKeCQS←]f8~∀4PH$$$M3πW∨F 9αC⊗ SP4Ph)55ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji44(hR∪πS+Q↓EM∧Sπ;W∂∪e↓EKAI↓E⊃ e6⊗≥!↓"←.#;↔O& e$4T3K?5Rα#π;Zα←π3↑+Iβπ ∧∧≤mUV∪∧λQ*7.⊗,\7#R∧∞fO↔N\⊗bε\]V␈↔∃Dπ>␈->7&∂M≥vrb -⊗:ε=
↔h!Q$6␈$∞FF␈<Tπ&F≡@π&F≥m2π& ≡BπN}Tε&}d}Bεv\\Bπ6≡.G.∞D V.n}/∩π> ]bπN}TεF∂lQPVf}N2ε}d∞εGO=≤6∞b
\Vn␈/∃Bπ⊗\≤B¬ε↑LW∩∧L]fvNltw~ε\M↔&␈-≤⊗bε≥dπ&F≡1PVn⎇nFB?4λ4 ≤Udα∧∞o∀ε∂⊗=
↔&.>Dπ>NMDπ≡∂∀∞FF∂D ⊗␈*
lV."
≡Bbε≥lBπ& ≡BεOAQ&&}↑=b?" =w∨"∞Mε∂"
↑V≡B∞MrεN↑
F.n]nBαF≡@εf.≡>Bεv}D¬4
¬↑7'NLTπ6O.NV∞`Q-V.n}/∩Jpβ"C!*~→(∞≡9<⎇
≥{H≠l@⊂;t0]⊂4yP_P;wy~βstation reminds me of the what is a
minicompp iKHAISg
kggS=\\@A%\AiQ∀AEKO%]US]≤XABAαk';'≤{7CW&+Iβ←∂→β∪↔4¬⊗v.AQ&↔J
≡G4≤z>LUλ≤∀M≤y+λ ≥Yλ_m⎇<≥5 ≡~;{L≥λ≤∪n|<K@⊂λ$z⊂;XyP9`/on realized
∃i!ChAg%]GJAMaKKH↓GQC]≥KfA←YKdAi%[@∃1¬##∃β&+≠'≠L¬f*εl≤7&@|\h ≡Y(≤m∨Y(⊂-lβ"\∞-8y+∧
[⎇∞ <YSn-8;XlUHλ⊂$
:;Z,={<≥.L<H⊂∀\P897X0q6<H0w<z~4w3@ in the
$TX```4Hdj`0```AM[CYX↓E←pAQ↑A-β`[gSu∀AeC]≥JT@AMS[CY¬eYbX↓BAo←IP∂OS∂#'?8hS'Mβ&+≠';,∧Bε↔∀
↔"|h_L≡z8h l8=≥.,<kλ∞>8zλ ≡h~y/≤[x<LEλ≠Y.N{|ZaQX∧w:→y30qYV⊂3y_x44q\T⊂24\uV⊂7\⊂;t0]2{2i ⊂0w2λ4z∪yH10y`)c price, such as
$D`X``@ZHf`0```\A∪hAαK@~εmzBε&\h
-l9λ_O∀_;↑$∞→<YM}Y8;L<(≠9,≡⎇<Y.4→>_l↑≥β"Lmβy⊂6Zw4vp[⊂7w2\Tε Available software might also define a workstation
although thiS too changes radically oVer time.
For those that beLieve that↓g←[K=]JASLAO←S9JAi↑↓C]M←U]GJA∧@dA[∃OCESP~∃%β4A]KqPAsKCHXA∩AMkOOKMhAiQ¬hAs←TAeKC⊂AiQJ↓YSiKICike∀AgkG ACfAQQJA∪∃
∃)←ke]¬XA←L↓'←YS⊂['iCQJAπSIGkSiLA←dAβ##∃αL*⊗∃αV{WK≠∞aβ/→∧+3↔∂'∪?84T#↔['≡+M)↓¬##∃βd K∨↔≥!βK↔∧{CS↔ ∧ε≡F≡∧π&Z L↔&*∞|↔
ε∀λ M⎇]{|M≥8π3@ P6rsXq4p∀
λJapAnese chip. The largest Reported working RAMs are 256K↓%β≠f0AoQS
P∩∃Q¬mJAE∃K\Ae∃a←ei∃HAEr↓g@↔[-∪π1β≡{WK∂/→9↓αNqβ?SF+Iβ←⎇∪∪M1∧εFF/,TεO~
mphW|∨∩π& ≡Bε∞o≥vv*
_ d {z;L@P:7P_w37`5nce a 2 megabiT RAMfh∂dAMCYJAα3?H4W W'S*βO?7*βS'7*aβ'→∧{;3e∧∪↔∂π,ε6*πM WJε<≥bεn≥<Rεo\9αεn},Rεn⎇lWJπ<]FfNlqPW≡\≥Ff/$λλm
<≤kD∧⊂( D
99x,-=λ∀H→(≥z-Mλ_Y$ ;[[n]Xy9∧ ↑( '↔
(_.D≥~→!QY8<MM9<p~ ⊂2|1Yx:⊂8≠yytq≠<P3 /p laboratory eXperiments.
~∃9←nAS_As←j↓oCeJ↓iCYW%]NAC ←khAα ↓Iβn+∨π O!β W⊗∪3∃β≤¬εOαaQ hU¬`¬~r∧
'.nβ|\d∞y90↔λ4w⊂!⊗j"P*~0z⊂$H5w7kH9wvr]44w3H0q7z]⊂0y2H8yzp[68 Not
very accurate, but do contain some graino` AiIkiP\4∀~∧Z4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZ~) CiJhA/KI9KgICdX@bf↓∃C]k¬er@bdpdX@Dptbr5 '(~)
e←ZhA C]%KXA_8A/KSαsK↔ βb∩2]∧ Qα6M!6ε%ph*OW⊗S↔∂QRα>-⊃¬;#πQεKE⬬;?K.~α∪'∨/≠Q|4Ph*'Q¬≠↔↔7~β π∂←;πK∪~β≠ ?$∞W~πMtε∞fD
&}Nd ∩¬>}-7∨&≡M⊗}w4
V∞NM≥f:εM≡7"ε≥l@hWM Vrε≥MBε∂=4α∃> ≡BεO4 ∩¬>}-7∨&≡M⊗}st!bα∧∀λ
;Z`⊂_P6wy→P897Y4z0q≠2FE(]pyz4[w⊂6tYt:⊂1→ is a WorkStation" IpεAIKα3';π&+3eβ|s∃β?0h#S#.i9α'pβ⊂⊗∞>@λ∞M→(⊂n,8=~-⎇H≠p∪λ:44yH64y`4 sac in parp to come qp @]SiP~)g←[J↓GYKCHAGkhαβ'∪↔∂→β >d '/∨D
vF∂Dλ∩¬>}-5∨&≡M⊗}r
_ ed 2Tm⎇↔#"AQP<h∞MβP;t→z42yλ<szP≠2rr≥4y::Xv⊂6r[wy<]λ9rv& ⊂0z least SOME personal
λcomputers require some op∧ACY0AWLA1CeOJ↓CAIe∃cfAgACGKf0AYCe≥JAC[=k]iF4∃WLA5K[OedXAC]⊂←←dAU]SM←IZACI⊃eKgg%]N\@↓¬WDA→eCMWMi←\OLAeKG∃]hA[¬SX~∃⊃KgGe%EKHAQQKgJ↓Sggkα+M)↓∧K→β↔4+@↔OM
⊗v:∂≥w*?,Tε&}≥lrε6α=≤d
;]≠d 9C"L≤Y[|LL8[⊃$ ;;⎇-nλ≠p∪λ) fVλ:42gλ4z⊂4]⊂;py]2s:vλ:7P:\rP6p\84w3H37yεB22vp[2⊂80Ytw3@. Lisp EachineS neeD a @/!∨→
A1∨ ⊃β|1β7↔n{Ce1ε ;⊃β>(4+∂∞s;?Qπβ?OON∪3eβF [∃β&CπQβo+∂!αα(∀jε⎇`π&FT
V∞≡
≥f/≠4 w/∩
lV." mw⊂H,LVn∞l@λ∞ 9z;LT~<h =→8<D∞≠h≥.5Hλ⊂l↑]_:-m≡(⊂≤[zP1`!n geT some worthwhi@1J~+&C';∨~β∪?;*β'9β4∧↔∩π=\⊗fF↑ λ ={<≥.L<\k∧ 8π2∩P:44[5P:4_z⊂≠≤ __∪yH;tz4βE0 oTpεA←L↓[CS\↓[K@7␈∪eβπv!β;=ε#↔7πv!βCπ>K;≥β>K3 " ,Rπ∂]_
T≥<p∩Yαqd @→←dA[¬]r~∃α CC3L∧6∂&≥yg~R∧λ∩β3α ε∧≥z0~~⊂0P ,ot oF maiN iemopy would @ JAMS9JAM←H~∃eKαs;'≠8∧¬&O=_6∞f70λ∞M→(→/
<⎇~-lh_sm↑≥=→..h_<LT→~<nM8π1`4ly too smalh fop
many real-worh HA¬aaYSα≠πS'}s@~πMtε6ODλλm⎇9[|NL8[≡%a C"EU+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++!Q@εE"_z2]⊂ YP%0[⊂_\\ ⊂_\XL⊗aijβE#97[]⊂!iK h(&⊃k`λITE at↓+) D
M5Ih"OW⊗S↔∂QRα←?K←≠SπSL{9βK∂#'?;∞c∃βπv!β['↔#Wπ1∧k↔7?↔H4(Q)∩ε&⎇dw"π∞-wε␈<Tπ&Z ⎇↔6* ⊂λ∞∞Y8z.<(→→,m9Z0~~ww⊂7Yα 'workstation' (I @⊃←\Oh4∃iQS9VABAUgKMk0A←]JAKqSMifBX↓EkhA$AoSY0AIKg
aSEJ↓↓Rio!r|AC9HA↓RqoQChβp4*%π;π;Q∧¬⊗rε∀λ
m}Z|⎇ ≡~;{Edλ∩(∞M~;Zd
>(_L≡z8h L<z4L↑h~_.l(_Y,]H→→.<|Z8L\β"Z-d≥~~.4→~9l↑⎇λ_L\[|Y%dλ∩(∞|;]λ∞M→(_L≡z8h∞
⎇y4D
yH_$∞Y8<m⎇X8[ T≠_<L|#"[,≤z~;LT
≤x/∀_(∃H≠
(∪md~_;LD≤{h∞M_=⊂∩P1pwλ1:tf→⊂:x⊂_P9zh≤7y:εB2w;4\7w6r[:⊂∃$J⊂64uYWεEεB*42y→P4yw z⊂0w≡z44w→P8zp[4z0z~{2v<H24s#→y2w:λ0P;w\5yz0]4ww_pw⊂7Y32yεB:40zλ4ywβ]⊂0{ !ilable on a coNventional machine. What is different Iq
the amount @=H β∂|sSK?bα%β#∂3∃β?6+@∩πM Rπ>}-7∨&≡M⊗}r}4π⊗/=zWε≡↑5bα∧m} hV← ⊗oεLUB∧J
↔6* ⊂λ∞<=λ≠ld→>≤ ↑Z;9-n_;λ
i∀r(∞∞[y|L≥<h≥m
8zλ∞⎇;≠λ \=λ⊂~\εE47]y9P7Yα cpu time at The drop of a hat. Given that↓c←[K=]JAQ¬bAi↑↓aCr~)MP∨Iεkπ∂#Ns∃βK/≠?WK≤+M!β&C∃β←␈∪ ∨∨L≡FN}d ↔4λ_z \<→0→λ:40wλ9p|Vλ:42P _≠⊂⊂
λI'mediting this note o@8\~∧~)-SeiUCXA≠∃[←ert@A)!KeJA%`
β;/3↔Iβ.s?W∨@β7π'pβ7↔]z'J@Hλ∪Mt≠8=∞L<H⊂∀≠{FE6]qt⊂$H⊂40{→V⊂6|H0vq4]4ww9H9wwwλ2|1rYr⊂4z α Fop∧AKq¬[aYJ0@A[r↓[CS\4∃S]i∃eKgh↓MWdA∧Ao←e-giCi%←\ASβ→αZ2≤Iβ∪↔≡K∨91ε ;⊃αJβ#π[*β∪↔[,c?C↔ β¬βO/ 4+∨2βCK??∪π7Mπ#=β∪zβS#'~q↓αWv3?KS,sπS↔gI1βSF)βO'V)β/→εkeβ∪∂#π π≡)β'LhSGW'&)β3π⊗;∃β∂}kCπK.!βS=εkπ'→εk↔7?↔I1βπv!β¬βf{SMβ}1β∂g≡c↔M↓ε K∃βv+↔∪↔ h+S=εkπOO∞;∃β'"qα'Q?→β∂?.sS↔Kπ∪?∪W∨#'[∃αCπ;⊃ε+cC↔w≠'[∃J↓βS=π≠C↔; βS'7(h+OCfKSS'v9β'Q¬+A9↓∧ ∂∂↔∨→βS=ε β3π⊗;∃β;.k ↔Iε{→β?⊗S↔∂S~βO'7εceβK/ W'K/_4+¬εcπK∨*β;W7⊗+Iβ?2βπ&N,W∨~ -↔'~d ∩ε≡≥`ε&z ≥Fbε|dπ&F≡4ε}r ⊂λ -9h≠,≤z~;LUβ"XN↑λ~=∧}h≠;n,(→0≤≤2w9t]2P0w→⊂∀;p[6⊂1v≠quTP≤97q0X6<P⊂≤v7{r\↔εEεB#7y⊂≥42P9XurP7Y⊂0y3]vrw: ⊂0y`3ume that physical memory is large Enough.
αWith v@%eakC0A[K[=arXA5rACaββ3'∂∂#'?9∧εvNfD∞'.r
x D ;↑(∞⎇|Z|nL=~0↔[⊂$P$_{2FE_qqry\β to; without @%hXAi!JACAAYSGCQS←\Aβ;'31π∪W9β|¬fgJ
ybεn≤=εNv↑1P@,{{YM≤⎇<Y,D≥z0~~⊂2w7]qt⊂6Yvsy<K⊂⊂*4→P87d[:⊂4yH:40zλ;0y:≥pv⊂ -em`∨ed~∃gKACeCi∃bAiQ∀ACaaαc'∂π&K?9β4ε&}j LW&∞≥N2ε↑d
FF*
\⊗≡F≥lRε≡⎇lfN?↑,↔&N⎇e`hPβ"C!%2≥9m↓ C"EU+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++!Q@εE"[2⊂7sλ+wy5TP"4sYyzεE
∃∃∃∃
∃∃∃∃
∃∃∃∃
∃∃∃εB⊗VVVKVVFEβEεEβ)zq5→qz≥⊂∃wy5iH"4sr\z⊂+→λ⊃[εEλ∧π15-Jan-_2 0305∪∃α{9αO|¬F}n⎇`βe>}-5≤¬X∧peX0s⊂Gdα5{n-th⊃
≤y<u∧
LHλf@⊂⊂εE⊃0z2]λ_Z⊂%_w⊂_@982 2Hbb[!M(~¬
I←ZdA)←\A'α{3?7}q↓b←⎇∪ ≥≤
Z4~@10sλ'βεE)Yw22y∞α JSOL at↓+'ε[∃π⊂∩λhRS=i¬;?K/≠X4*K/β3e6&yiα←⎇∪ ≥~ ≡B¬-85T,≤β⊂C!*Z8.D∧∃<p⊃Kbqv1∞P_ZP∩0s⊂≤ ⊂_]_LT¬EDT
Via8∧@A¬IX[¬[⊂r@bj↓∃CL@`d@btLjP⊗⊗% 4(Q*v␈⊗>4∧&N|↑7 J∧∧ααα∧∧∧7⊗≤L↔Jbε⊗R∧V≥`β K∧∧@∧∧λλλ∧
[{≥-\αP→ 8∧AβgMkB@@0h( (*Mv&∂∀}2¬&} ⊗∨≠!⊃∩¬∀h4αj∧-yv@4⊂ε0|[zzεEλ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ!0∂oD F`∨DααS#?α\vG"¬P¬ =|ZtnL=~0↔[9P(zYy<FEλ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂∀zry<H)2x ,i` f@!BAMKβ9β >dλ
9*(¬T∃z_.D⊂8hλ∀∃{tMiz0z~wwεEλ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ&0y`%p∧A!e%]`∪↔⊂↓5α ∂≠↔⊃α|qαS#*αNV9∧∪?πK h)55hi555ji555ji555ji555ji555hi555hi555hi555ji555hi555ji555hi555hi555hi44λhR∪πS+Q↓EQ∧Sπ9↓λπ∪C∩¬
FG<Xp∩_|TP_L_X -EDT
Fph∂Zt↓ % ∪→*AC@ ∧¬ 9⊂4U @e⊗P⊃0 (@e@9arA IKSMkβ→$4
≥+ +↔≥!aαC|ε7=8[⊂∩H40p→@=khAM=` α←|ε&@>⎇_=
≥{\h -{zfD {{;,]]≤oaQ@εE⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂∀ ¬RSONAL CLπ⊂⊗B-"⊗Iααyu∀]8¬⊂*I3sTaQ@εE!Z0x:2\⊂_]⊂λ+t0zλ4yP H(2y9[w0v⊂∃wy5y]0z4`/n α - General Intro`uc@QS←\~(@@@@@@@Z↓∪ifAαK7Cπ≥ 4)↓α↓↓↓↓α↓5αM≡7"πM Rε≡⎇↑ε}v]nG
@λ_\M≤9H⊃ ↑x|Z.∞~;sAQ@εE!Z0x:2\⊂→≥⊂λ&pw0Yrp
e@9h@LA∃G←]←5SGfA=H αBαz2αα¬ V∂N,Tβ∩ε= ↔π→<\e⊃ ¬⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊗P+t≡P:42\2P4`3 a trend @Q←oCe⊃`
αBαz2?_Q$ααα∧∧αααT
vF/,Tπ&F←∀ε⊗.M⎇f:B∞Mε.O$λg.v>M⊗}pQ$ααα∧∧αααT
vF∂Dλ
>(≤m
⎇;⊂∩λ''j be used f@=`∩∧@@@@@@ZAβ⊃mC]i¬OCfX↓S]Ge∃[@↔≠& 1β∨⊗{←S!bβ∪'O ;⊃βS⎇β?3?>K∂π3gH4)↓α↓↓↓↓α↓5α∂␈≠SM1∧εvF∂D
FF/∀ ↔⊗*∞⎇w↔~ λ
⎇h≠.\zλ≤m
⎇;⊃∧
{Y(∞ >(→M}H_(
tc"D∧λλλ∧∧λ (
]_=
\:y0→H0P ↔S a justifiable expenditu@IJ~∧@@@@@@ZA¬UgS@;-≠O↔Mε{⊃βSF)β≠W'+K∀4R↓↓↓↓α↓↓↓5∧s↔]βn ;π∨.k↔;Q¬≠Sg3/_4)↓α↓↓↓↓α↓5α?&C↔Iβ≡Cπ;∨/→β∪W*βS=α¬:M∨LhP4*∂F CS↔∩↓Mi↓∧+cC↔∨#πS'}sL4)α↓↓↓↓α↓↓5αF K∪←∂∪∃1βfK7'S.!β∂π∧ '3O#'↔MXβ'QβO→β;?"β¬β7∞K;≠K∞k∀4)α↓↓↓↓α↓↓5α≤{≠S←∂∪∃1βO!β←'faβ ∃εkW∂!ε∪↔SS/⊂4)↓α↓↓↓↓α↓5α←F Q⬬α↑Mβ>K31β∞s⊃β←Nc1β;␈!β∪<hQ↓↓↓α↓↓↓↓jα7'O≤{;∂↔∧εFN}n1PPh(9ε∂πL↑"β#$∧¬]∧z:4L∀H[R∧&↑=⊗>r
xbε
u_h$∧ααα∧∧ααj
⎇ε∂" Mv/~
⎇f*εlXV"ε≥dε
¬
z0hR∧∧ααα∧∧αj¬⎇ ↔"∧izBπ&t∞π/"
≥bε
u_h$∧ααα∧∧ααjλ←πε∞n=⊗}r 8 mnz9→.,=~;mnc"H∧∧λλλ∧∧ (∀L]~88M≥~=≡$
yH∃j5λ≠Y,\≤h→M}H≠Y.t~z3LNh≠yD∞≤[pl\≥<Y.1"Hλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λ→[n∧∀⊃td}h
_. z~=M≥Ykλ ,8z⎇.¬λ≤p∩Xzy4j≡V⊂6 /cati@=\R~∀4∃πQCAiKd@Tt@A %gieS kiKHααOgO&+7M↓2α3?∂∞aα;↔';?K∂~αo∂?.c⊃β *↓Iβ∂F C@&↑.5hh$∧ααα∧∧ααjλLV&NβZ0~~wwεEλ⊂⊂⊂⊂λ⊂⊂⊗@ Hh∂nAβ##↔e¬;?K1Q"αα∧∧ααα¬Pλλ≡Xz~.L8⎇≥.,!"H∧∧λλλ∧∧ (⊂N-βpr!_w2⊗⊂⊂αaseBand, whad↓GCLAα{;∃βπ+Qβ?p∧ε
∧()`hR∧∧ααα∧∧αj¬⎇ ↔"ε=yg∨&≡NW&/4λλ$ ~<p~≤αibe@QK@AK9md\A]QrAI=KfA←9JA]Kα+⊃β?v(4)↓α↓↓↓↓α↓5αC⊗{ &]↑2bε\≥f∞≡]\Vwα∧dε␈& X D X8XML(≥`↔Y4yz pπsf\α↓#∂?v≠WKK,¬f∨J⊃Q hT= ↔π→<@⊂
α: Conne@
iS@;8∧π/α ⊂λ
tc"D∧λλλ∧∧λ ≥]→0→→αace cons@%IKeCQS←]f0Aae← YK[f4⊂@@@@@@@4A→CG,AP∨→¬≠SπlL↔⊗'5Dπ'O: Broa` v. Base band
- Other devices, Laser Beam PRinters( special devices
Chapter 4εt@AQQJA+MKdA∪9iKeM¬GJ~∀@@@@@@ZA⊃SgaY¬rA C9COKeL~∀@@@@@@ZA!KIg←]C1SuCi%←\~∀@@@@@@ZAUgKd[=eSK]QKHAI∃mSGKLXAeKAeKgK9iCiS=]f\~(@@@@@@@Z↓⊃KiKI←OK]∃←kfA∃]mSe=][K]Qf~∀@@@@@@ZA+MKdAK9mSe←9[KMiL@@@@@A:~(@@@@@@@Z↓!e←OIC[KKHAK]m%e←][∃]ifAtAiQK%dA]K∃If~∀4∃πQCAiKd@`t@A)!JA/←IP∂OS∂#'?9?→α;↔G!αOS/4)↓α↓↓↓↓α↓5α;␈9βS#∂!βO∃?3∃β∨⎇!βS#.i1β←F Qβ↔g≠∃β∂∞qβS#/Iβ∪=ε3?Iβ/_4)↓α↓↓↓↓α↓5αS⊗ ';'v9β∂?w≠'β↔⊗ S'?w_4)↓α↓↓↓↓α↓5αβ␈9β∪=π;∃↓ /≠∃ β&C∃β←⎇∪ ∨∨L≡FN}aQ"αα∧∧ααα¬T∧}6m≤6*ε|dπ&FTλg/'↑,PhR∧∧ααα∧∧αj∧]lvNv\↑&Nvt f␈∩∞Mε*εnX
∞↑Y(
∞M≤[ud =x>$ ≤X9NM;Yc!$λλλ∧∧λλλ∧
;]≤M|≥8q$λp1
!QHλλ∧∧λλλ¬T∩;< ≤⎇λ≠ld≥~→$
tc"AQC"H∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλ⊃λZptR*
⊂3sAQ@εEεB("a)Sg f⊂⊂ef`*U"i⊂+Si%ij⊂j gg∀V⊂:2[:0z4]2P:4]42V⊂≥tv6⊂_2P0@_7wuPλ0tvrYεE0zλ⊂:42H⊂:2qZ74qp[⊂⊂0w→⊂⊂⊂6Xw0sr[pw:⊂λ6py5Yz↔⊂⊂λ$w:9≠r:qt[3P⊂⊂∀2y9g[0vεE∃wy5y]0z4w[9V⊂ $efining some od the perms, identifying problems that
exist, @QQJAO=CXASL@AB@↓YKCI%]N@A∃IOJ@↓S]M←I[CiSYJ@AE=←VHA→a←ZA]QSGPAB~∃5C]CO∃dAoS1XAk]⊃Kegi¬]HAo!ChAa∃ag←]¬XAo←IP∂OS∂#'?;~β∂π9ε ∂∂?oβ3'O@∧αε∞lAPVF}tαπ& ←∩αε<≥bαε,↑7"α ,Rπ∂M_
∨Y9λ
≥H~~.4→;]M≡[{[,]] C!! K ⊗KVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVFEβE"0z→]⊂*4≥y9r0↑V⊂_Zλ%0w:Xy<P_N\→⊂⊂ X]_≠ bijεB!97vN⊂"()λ0z⊂&Rj⊂
XX
Subject: que@MiS←]LA∩OH↓YSGJ↓iVAC9goKd4∀~¬∂∃]KeC1YrXA$AMS]⊂A[sg∃YLAE=eKHA]SiPAQQJAGα{;S↔w!β/→¬;?K.~q↓αRG+M1β&x4+O∧¬⊗≡
≡Bπ∂∧
F/"
\Rε∂=0π≡}\Tπ∂.↑:FN}n4π&F≡@λ ∀_x<LT_8[n↑ C"AQL+@
,=~→.$≥~_-d≥{|N<p ng about chips I care about the packagingof
Those chips into workstations. What are the best 68000 baseD productc
peoPle have sEen o@UhA]←\AiQCPAg↑A5C]rA¬eJAE∃S]NA¬]]←K9GKH@!π←[aUiKpX4∃↓kC0XA/S
ChHA
QCeY∃`
αKO3↔Iα& S¬α≤π↔∨&]↑2b∧()b?~λ-↔$|X<
¬KK@∀OFEεE ↔⊂$yH0P6z[:4Vx≤7qri\wy⊂+[y5yz_z4wwλ0P3w[r⊂4r→pP∀3≠y⊂2<[0vtqH3y0x~4qyVβE37`2 examph JR|@AβI⊃S]NA¬IISi%←]CX↓QCeI]CeJAAe←GKMg←ef↓oSiP↓cQCe∃H~¬[∃[←er↓IWKg8OhAg∃KZAi<ACIH↓[kGP↓i↑AQ¬eIoCIJAG←MhXAg<AoQr↓QCfA9↑A←]∀~∃I←9JASh|~∀4S→9α%∧CgC?&C↔O'V)βS#∂!βO?.s⊃β?/#CWQε{9β¬π;?K/∨#πS'}qβ'Mε≠WS∃bβ WQελ4+S/∪C' f)βCK}#W∂QεK∪↔¬αC'9β≡CπK↔"β?≠≠N≠↔M1εKQβ'~βπ;;␈K';≥rq9%9αα≠?HhSO'7NcπIβ⊗+πO?w→βO?.s⊃β'wβWQβO→β¬β¬∪? 3.i9↓αO→βS#/∪∃β¬ε;??⊃¬+O∃β6{H4+≡{W;⊃εK9βπrβ?≠≠N≠∃|4Ph)Q9∧C?]β&yβg?*βSKπNqβWO/∪Mβ?2β←';≡C↔OS/⊃7 π≡+⊃βOO≠S↔7~βS=β&yβCK␈β↔H4V∪π∂//↓βO=π##πQπ##↔eε#?9∨ β3?O*β↔[↔↔KS#'v9βS#*β≠'K≥!βS'n)βS#.KIβ∪O≠,4+6 '3Mz↓α'Mπ##↔K*β¬βS.≠#;'≡ 1βO}cWS'}q↓#K/ W'K*β¬β3}≠π1βv+Qβ←O#!β∧hS π∂←+AβO/∪[↔IzH4(4S)9αSF+K∃β≡+↔5β&yβ ∃π#←=β&KOS'v≠Qβ∪/≠'∨9πβ?';'→β≠?⊂β←?K←≠SπSN{;L4W∪↔∨π⊗#';≥π##↔↔O⊃β∂?nkW;'≡ S'?w→β↔;6KK?;n+;Q↓jiβ↔'&C↔Iβ&C↔eβ∂∪∃βπg;πgLhS∂?;v+∂S↔"βS=β
β;↔Q∧ ;⊃β∞c←πg~β3'O&+;';:↓#≠?∩β7π'baβ∃;:q%1β␈⊃βS#/IβπK(h+?;gIβ∂?vs↔∂S.!β←#.qβS#*βWO↔∩β'Mβ↔+;;'v9β¬β≡{77WvK∂πSN{;Mβ∂βC19αCOW∂@h+πM∧2RAβ␈⊃β≠↔&≠#';8β7π'bβ≠K?jβ¬β7∞K1β∪⊗{AβO/∪[↔IJq↓α↔∞≠!β'~β←?K↑ 3∃`h+ W"βGgO&+5βW≤ '3O#e1βF K∪←∂∪∃β∪/≠'∨9π∪↔GWM∪↔7↔w#E↓ Uf*rD∞Fzε≥Nv∂O4 &(h-M↔∨&\X M≥Yh≤L↑=:0→→yP0P~ts2≠pε "personal tim` gQ¬eSMN↓csgi∃ZDRX↓]Kio=eV~∃QKGQ]=YWOrQKQi∃eP≠↔ β[M9ε#'∨'& 1βC∞∪a%β∂∪∃βπfaβπ≠6+∂S↔ ∧ε↔J∞Mε*ε=
vN≡QQ&}∩ LW∞N⎇dπε}≥nBrαλ<⊗rε≥o⊗}vTλ6}n\Yg"ε⎇dπ&F]_ D >≤→.4rw1YP;tj~⊂7w2CE1t7ZqrP7\α the other; is one clearly better? is One cheape@H}~∀~) CmS⊂~∀~∀4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4∀~∃ ¬iJt@DfA∃C8@brpH@``tD`thd5!'(~)
e←ZhAaeCQi↓'Q¬giBA¬hA'k5Kp[β%Z~∃'UEUKGPtACgα→βπ;∨;↔K↔"↓#π∨∞K9$∀Ph*S=ε ;O←/⊃βg↔"βπ;∨&C↔Iβ∂≠
βG,∧W∨&≥⎇cPh!Q%>F≡@εO~ ⊂π>␈->7&∂M≥vsz∧ ∩εF≡h -d⎇λ_$ {≥9%D≠8:m≥Yh≠,T≤⎇<n 8⎇
≡λ~<d∞~→#!.|[{LT≤=9.>~;{Edλ∀{d ){≠∧ z_;L|(≥~ T≤=0∩\z4wwλ:7P⊃∃t2y2H9t7z[2εE1[vx:j~w3P9→ywzy_ryP1→P67qXz2rελ0w2⊂_z⊂;t_z⊂:4[pP3y_w:v0\4z<P_w2εE_wvvz[4z<P≤t⎇2P≤t7zv→⊂:42↑P12P≤t0y2Y∨Q⊂⊂∃tz47]z⊂3wZw3P4[:7P3\2pzεB22z0Zv∩⊂$→y2SyH0w⊂$[9z4z≥z4ww_v⊂0w≤{ry_0yrrλ7w⊂*≠r0|S\β pricas and
perfoRmanc@∀AMSOUeKf\4∀~∃!I←GKgM←efA¬]HA[¬S\A[∃[←er↓cQ←k1HAO↑↓←\Ai!JAkgα+I∂Mε#↔O-bβ'9βλ∧ε≡␈-lW⊂H-xbπ& Tε⊗␈∧
FF∂D
FF* M↔∨εL∨∩ε>|↑2εNe`λ∧
y8sml_<↑$
9;;n∂(≤r
};→⊂_ww9t\βt
od perhaps 10
`A5K@∨π↔KS↔Mπ≠#πK.!β eβ)5EAπ+O↔K~aβ∂?vs↔∂S.!βOπJβ eβ|s∀4
,εFF/-lW"r∧
F/↔M≤↔πJ
\Vn␈/∀εO~
↔⊗&↑$π&Z∞
⊗rεMzvrb .W"ε]≤vG" =vw≡≡>Bε}aQ&
εlZrε>≤|⊗↔OL↑2π≡ ≡&." /∩β ε∧π/≡↑.2rα
∞&NwL↑'~α∞⎇εN≡∧∞6F␈]LBε↑d 6␈/.8PhV,Tεf∂<Z"ππ-≥g&/.5∩π≡
}Vf" ,Rπ≡ ≡&." /∩ε}lTε6f⎇}"?~∞⎇w↔ε∧
v"π ]wεFT¬PhV≡DεO~ ∀πε∞≥dπ&z
↔6*∞Mrπ⊗↑N&N/lTππ⊗≥nF␈/N4ε7⊗⎇Tε∞v}Mε/∩ iF}␈%aPPh*MεO~
≡2π& Tεn}LYBε}d
vFN=∧π&FT
7.r∞⎇w⊗←>L↔&N⎇`ε&/=_ md~_<d Y9;D X<q,E@εE*~2P22\tsw⊂→rz9P~z9P"Xww7vZqpv⊂≠2{2y_qrP∀_TP1<H92yx→qz4w→P:44\P6wr→v⊗εE_w2⊂∀_∀P1<H80y9Zvsw4[zyP4[x62vYw:0z~ww↔εBεE# /r noninstitqtiOnal users effective sharing is much more awkward to
arrange, puttingat a disadvantage anyone who needs tk use a Computer
At home, whether or Not they also have access tk a computer @¬hAo←IR\
∃∃SiQKHA[kG AGQK¬aKdAαk↔7∨↔I1β?∩β7W∂@β#'∨F+Iβ ∞s∪←''#!β∂|k7W;L≠πS'}p4+←M#!βOF K↔⊃π∪↔O?/∪∂↔Mbβ←'∪bβπ33/3'πS*βS#'~βCK?⊗c↔59αα?2∞Mε*πN⎇r`h,,W'→<@ ={;=-m8x=
≥{\h
≡h≥~ T_Y5∞L<H⊂→[v:z4[w⊗⊂7[2P92Xyww_2tw3H:40zβE9wc≥9py2H<wrP_pw⊂)→pv6<H12w2Y4z⊂ &pom IpεA]←PAiQJ↓g←eh↓←@→β&C';≥πK?T4T∧v.v↑,⊗fgα(⊂≠Xw:⊂ 4o be maintaifi@9JA←\↓s←kd↓←o\X↓KmK\↓SDAs=jAQCYJAB@D``~∃5KGCEeiJAI%gVAi<A[CS9iC@'pβ'Qβ}q84λhRS#∃ε ?[*βCK↔'#eβ7.≠!β∂Lε&∨.↑<7-8Y<d∧]~→$∞}<⎇ ]+HH∧ 9H≡-}(_p⊂[⊂27FB12z:→y⊂:4_w⊂:4~yP<w]P0y2H2pz4→y⊂0@~7q1<Zyz⊂∀≠7P9v~st:⊂~w:2w→2r⊗⊂∩P0vFB13z4λ0P1g[x:z2\⊂47q_<tqzλ0w2⊂_P40vH⊗P+%L j`P P6|yYv3∀P≠y⊂0y→P;tv≠4s3FB:7P9Yz:6"H37y≠2yyP≥40w⊂≤97r:Xz4{2H1wvx≥z4w3H92yg]y1ryK⊂⊂"7[∪z⊂3≠y3rzβE:7P→4szy→P4w⊂≥42P;_v:rP≠s⊂<w]y⊂:4[pP;t→w⊂1`[1zv0]4w3@≥42P1[yz⊂7Y⊂67y]εE89≠r:qz~{4z<K⊂⊂ v≤wP27[∪z⊂3≠y3rzλ:40zλ⊃:ypX42Q_wvx:]2y9P_w2⊂6Yvwy4YyFE0\2P3r]:4w3H892z≥<P1t→px⊂⊗H;rP4≠x2P:≠P3rzλ:42P∀zw⊂;[y5yz_z4wwλ22ytYwεE"≠{w⊂:≠P∩_ZL_⊂;w\:4⊂7Y⊂80y≥9P4w_v:r4[3P80Xupst[3P;t]44w⊂≥42P7→|:⊂<YpyεE≠y⊂:;[V⊂:7H194w→P:42H92z0Zv⊂1w\z⊂27]w⊂:7H;rv6λ:w22\⊂∩~X _↔εEβE∧DDBDk0zYt0w⊂∀90z:βEαE⊗KVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVFBεE"0]2]⊂_L⊂%0wλ_\\→λ_X]~M]→Z⊗T)jεE⊃97v]λ22q{_|⊂|p[2Vqw[t|⊂t[pPu7Z76⊂0]⊂!2y~rv2|CE#97[]⊂%7Z7⊂)↔λ&2{4[2FE#≤7v]⊂∃42P$S*"i Pj$k"H"v2q]94qP⊂pv1z[0z7yλ!wW⊗λ!pvq≤4r3rH&`WεB)zq5→qz≥⊂∀jg⊂;[y5yz_z4wwβEεE#≤4rw2≤P0z⊗pv2P~8yz⊂→wz⊂0H74s:≡P60yYy⊂8)~w:2yλ:40zλ4yP1_yrr⊂≠w⊂0@∀jgεE_7py2 ⊂⊂!w[:90y≡P:7P→py64Yy⊂1v_tvyVλ77P8_stw3K⊂⊂(2\40x)H:42|Iy2P5≥yzεE≥ptz4[3P37\⊂:42H≠≤__L⊂0w2λ≠≤_→ ↔εEεB⊗VVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKVVVVKFEεE⊃0z2]λ_Z⊂%_w:py≡P_\\ ⊂__] →VbiUεE#9≠v]⊂)≠q2y:λ"v:7[⊂&pp\P≡)"SP0z⊂∪dj⊗fP←εE)]q52q]≥⊂+w\5iz0]4ww9OFE*7N⊂!i'SP0z⊂∪dj⊗`RFEεE∞X∩P7Y⊂;t0]⊂0P8≤7sy0[vry⊂→7ryP_z⊂44\P:2y≠tw0vλ4yP2Y4z4w→P∀6wY4s<d[3FE0[2⊂;4Y{tw3JP:2|≥⊂∀9w]y1rP≤97sy_vyV⊂→7qzvYw:0z~ww⊂7Y⊂897Yy0vyKεE2|≤7ytz≠y<P0\:4qv→yP0q≠zz⊂)→yrpy_t⊗⊂2[2qz9≠w4qP≠ptv∀K⊂⊂*4≥yP0FB;wy5\z0z4[w⊂9t≠zv2⊂_2P22Y4w2rλ0yP9[vrz4~w3P:~0z⊂1Xw⊂27H:44yH≤X∩FB:7z0[68P6≠qpv6≡P0w2λ or publisher does is editingtext (financial
data, correspondence, articles). Thus a woristation should be defined
as something that can do all this and theN send the result out to the
Postal service (correspondence) or the pRintine press (articles).
-
----------------------------
Date: 1PA∃C]UCer@Drpd@@jtdj5 '(~)
e←ZhA≠K∞s-α%`λ
|;Xr
t∂⊃RJt_=⊂∪dj⊗fP←εE)]q52q]≥⊂⊂+Z0z∪yH0P+w\5iz0]4wwεBεE)bYvyP*≠P6rP≥40z the definition↓SfAB↓MkMGQS←\A=HAiQ∀AWS]⊂AWLAβ;?K-¬##πPhS;↔↔'→βS=ε∪∃β∪}s∃)↓∧3?Iβ&C∃β7⎇≠QβC∂∪Q1β&C∃βK,≠↔;Q∧∧FO≡>Z7≡N⎇`ε≡∞nLW↔_Q,↔⊗␈]lB¬~hTε∂π
M⊗≡∂M→vw~∞λ M||X;-]9Yh ≡h≥~ T≥{|M4 (_-lλ≥~ ↑Y(_.,(≥~
}y#"N⎇≠h≥m≥≠λ≤l∨+λ≥m⎇I⎇⊂_P92v_z4{2[<P2:[q⊂:2\4¬inal connected to a super
mainframe do the job...
But there are other kinds of work stations that↓CeJA9←hAE∃S]N~)ISgGUcgKH↓QKeJ0AC]H↓[CsE∀AgQ←UYHAE∀\~∀~)∨]JA%`
βSF)β7πv ∨↔I?→β←?⊗YβOS∂#'?9p↓α#∃?→βS#*β?;∃π;#=β> ;SMπ#=βG,+Kd4Vc?∂πfceβOF K↔⊃ε#πSπ⊗ O↔MαCS#K␈+↔!β
β3/∂∞aβ;↔ IβπMπ;↔31ε EβO}k∃βCN+∂∀4V{⊃β7.≠!β3∂∪∨/$ F∂&≤,↔≡/4 Vg≡↑⎇ε/⊗U`α∧FT ⊗g≡t∞v∞wN4π&z N&∂8Q.εf␈N5v?⊗≡ π
ε|dπ&FT WGπ,≤7&.D F∂&∃Dε⊗␈Mε}r∞Mε*π<>&..d ⊗v"
|6≡∂>8
-⎇X;β!-_<Y =|≡+∧
8>8LT_=∞M;90→K⊂4w_wv7i ⊂37iλ0P92\7y:⊂≠y⊂8)→yrw:_z4ww ⊂⊂$2CE0v9[P;pw≥9P:7H;y4z→P290Y8⊂92\7y:9K⊂80x→y9V⊂_w2⊂1[y2yx≠w22w_rP:7H40{ %
`i@LAgKGβ∪↔Sπ↔Iβ∂3. ;@/∧¬ε6␈-\↔"J ≥f"π∞-⊗w"¬Tε∞vD
V∂N,Tε/6]dπ≡.l@π&xQ.6}n]⎇f*ε]N6*α∞m⊗
ε]HV∨'-⎇fN~
\V∞w5∃`hPβ"P-m⎇~→.$~<h∞M→(≠llZ8y$
8;X,|<I|d∞{|Zd∞⎇_=
≥{KH∧ ;|⎇
O(≥z ≡λ≥~ T≠yYM≤y#"N<αqy2]0y<P≥tv6⊂≥yrP:≠P892\0y2Pλ80x"\⊃⊂;w\5P0w→⊂1wi≤2yx7[22w1YP37yβE0w:→y⊗ws→4qrP_w2⊂4[:2y⊗H0w2⊂~w:90Kytz2H22v$]2y<W ↔⊂:4→P34y≤z⊂9z→xεE:≠{py2λ:42Pλ80x"\62yyH⊂7s3~qrWεBεE w→⊂:42H60yzλ7w2P≠s⊂4w≥2y2y]⊂∀:7H6|P8→wx62JP4yP≥42P8≤7u2q]⊂2w3Zw2ry yFE;[y5P9]0z4w[↔⊂⊂$~yP4yH:42P_wvq4[0z4w[⊂7s⊂_v6⊂7Y⊂:42H0q7{→V⊂0v≥47zsZεE:4→P897Yy0vvZw3P9→xzti→vrw:≤P0y2H6wy2H97zz~w2V⊂≤zqt⊂_yP6p\ypst[3P20]0BE:≠P892\0y2P≥2qt7~qpv⊂≤2x7y≥9W⊂⊂∪4urP≥42P6Xw0sr\⊗⊂42H0v9wH72rr≤P:7FB0qqr\yP:4→P60y→pP20]0q0yYyP:7H892x_y2P4~yP92\7y:9H:7wW ↔εEεB w2⊂_v6⊂:~2yrP≤wvr{Z0z⊂2~s32y→w:⊂*≡x2yP≠pε work stations need to
communicate with each other And the outqide world - and fo@HABAi=iCX~)G←gh↓←LAY∃gfAi!C\@HU⊗AaKHAkgKH@ZA]=h@Hb@ZHfa,\\\@↓β]HA⊃↑ACY0A←LAQQCh~)iWICd@QoSQPAoQ¬iKmKHOfAGUeeK]QYrACYCSYC YJXA¬fAC\↓S]iKISZA←→L[iQ∀[gKY_~∃g←1kiS←8AiQCPASfA9←hAg∃YL[← g←YKMGK]h$XA[CeEJAi=[←ee=n@PU%LTAi!KeJA%f~∃g=[KiQ%]NAe∃CYYr↓EKii∃dAC]⊂AGQK¬aKdA]←eiP↓oCSi%]NAM=dR\~(~∃≥←\XAoJ↓QCmJ↓g←[J↓SIKCLACY←9NAiQ=gJAY%]KfA¬]HAo∀A]KK⊂Ai↑A-]←nA%HAoJ≥mJ~∃=mKeY=←WKH↓g←[KQQS]OLAS\A∃SiQKHAiQJ↓GQ←S
JA←L↓iQJA!CeIo¬eJA←HAiQJ4∃GQ←%GJA←_AiQJ↓g←Mi]CeJ@!←aKe¬iS]N↓gsgi∃ZR\@↓∂SmK8AiQCPA[OgPA←LAQQJ
∃]←eW&↓ISgGUggS←9fAQCYJAEKα+9βK∂##↔I∧C'∨#gIβC↔≡C;'∂∞aβπ;"β3↔πvK;≤4VC↔π[L¬GJπM}v∂⊗D
FF*
=⊗v"
|bπ>}-2π∨L≡FN}d∞FF∂D∞7/π
}''~
\⊗NvO∀εF.≡o∩¬~hQPF∂∞ FN≡≡M⊗}w4∞π⊗}},⊗nn≥lrbε≥T∧Jε≥Ivv* ≥f"ε\∨⊗⊗*
≥bπ& Tπ?⊗⎇lrε&≡<7/∨=≥vph,}&␈/πqPPh%QT7⊗≥m0hPβ"K%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U++#!!"Q_.L,H &D∩X;N\<↑(ε↔. Hε&
∞+(Zuλ
M≥<\lL>*#!(\[{'$⊃y;n,y+Pm};≠⎇.-<h_.D⊂s5%V,⊂#!*⎇8ZL\⎇∞H∧
z_=∧
<h_$∞{|Zn>_=~-⎇Oc"AQQz=L]H≥~ ≡λ≥y$∞x;]∧∞→<\m⎇X;λ
\8z~-l<h≥
=λ≠llY<H ∀≠X=∞↑X;λ ≥Yβ"L={]Y-m9;]∧∞<y<D
;]→.,X8q$ [|H ≥≠λ≠ld≥~→$
;Y[n-8=~-⎇H~_-l≠~;Lt≥_<m>c"]
=λ≥lT_;Y∧
⎇~→.%λ≤≠n≡z8[∂∀≠;|LT≠X:.l+λ≥.<<\h∞|;]λ∞Mh→≠eD∩(_L]~9=LQ"]~ ≡λ≥y$ x;H L<Z=LT≤{{,T~;<
}]_;ND_{{N<<=1-ly<kDλ(≠X.N<X;∧∞<y<AQZ;] ↑YX8lT≥≠h ≥↑(≤L\<{{L≤[≡(∞=|~~.>~8x.L9λ≥ ≡zh≠.↑⎇λ_m⎇]_:-d_(≥M≡⎇8;↓Q\Y<∞,<y;NL=~;md≠yH∞M→(≤nL=→(
|H≥~ T≥_<m4_<h
≡λ≤≤M||Y<n<<kH∧ 9H≥
(≥_.=c"Z.4_{{.
→> ∧∞~→(∞m<⎇8-D≤Y<∞,<y;NL=~;md≠Y9,Nh≥≠d Y(≤.]=→(∞-8zλ
≥H≠|LL<C"NMh≤Y.∞Y<y-nλ~=∞4≤⎇_.L+H∩.D~<h m|H≥
<h≤L\<{{D∞~_=∧
~9z¬↑Y<{mN=~;ma"Y~.>≠_>.4~_=LT_Y8m⎇9(≤mt≤≠|∞]_<K∧
[⎇λ ,8x=.<(_;
D≥{|M>⎇_=
≥{\h ≡Y(≥.<9β"Lm|H≥∂≡→<y.N~;YeD≥[≤m∀→→<m≤{Kλ
}H_;O∀≠⎇~ ↑H≤| \z9Z,4~;] ↑X8⎇
≡Y#"L}X<~
≤x;λ∞∞<\≠n<+C"AQU~→$∞Z<⎇,≥λ≤Y.∞Y<y-n_=~-⎇H≠Y,\≤h≥
t_z_-ly(~-d≤Y8-D≥~;,Uλ≤{d∞~_=∧
=β"L={\⎇
≡≥=→.4_( n⎇;Y≠nt≠{]
t≥~→$∞⎇_= T≠yH∞M→(_.∞≠~8l≡~;{DuH⊃[n$≠8;O⊃"X<∞
~8x.M;{\eD≥~~.4~;]M⎇≥Y<d ;Z;,≡~;{E]~:y$
;89lT→y;L↑X=~-⎇Kλ
LM<Y8nM≡#"Ln[{(∞M→(_.∞≠~8l≡~;{D _=_$∞⎇≤],>≥<Y.5KH∩.D≥~→.,9[|LT→[{
M⎇|h∞M_=λ∞M→#"L≡≤≠~,<=~;md≤≤[l}X;(∞M_=λ
\;X9l↑h≥~ T_<≤
M8x=
≥{H→ ≡_(≤nN]8⎇∞↑Y<c!.z≠⎇-Lλ≤]-d~;H∞M→(≥m}Z|⎇ ≡~;{ED≤{h∞M_=λ∞M→(→ ≡_(≤nN]8⎇∞↑Y<h ≡Y#"L≡X:; ≤[→(∞Mh≥~ T x;M≥8=~-⎇H≤≤M|y<|duH∩( ≥(≥~ ↑Y9[n,(≠→,D≥≠h∞M→#"L={X{∞↑z;{D∞~_=∧ (≥{n-|⎇_.M;{H
↑<⎇λ
=Y(∞>9YZ,=9;]∧∞Y<{n↑Xy<d∞≠c"L←→8⎇.L(_(∞l<↑(
L<Yy$∞≤[|
}]~;md≠yH∞M→(~-n→<X,>~=Y$∞_<zn4~=≤d∞<y<N1"]z.=λ≥≠d∞→<YM}[+λ
L8=Z-lh≠{MO(≠[me:;] ↑X8⎇
≡Y(_-lλ≥Y./(~;LnY<=,]]≠≡!Q]<y,D≤{yNNx<Y$∞≠h≤N]H~;D
⎇~→.$~z;LNh≠yD {{<∞↑→<H∞?<⎇→-UH∪yD {⎇<N<+λ≥
#"]m}Z|⎇ ≡~;{D∞≤[yn,;<h
\>(_l≥≠λ≥.
{H≠nM→<H∞>_=~-⎇\h≥
t≤→<Lm|[(∞<<]Z,<<c"E∞z_<L\λ→Z-L(_8l<<|k∧∞≤Z;NM;Yk∧
8:;
≥Ykλ ↑_j( .=λ≥
(≤⎇ ≡→(≠ld≥~→$∞_<zaQZ_<d∞≠h≤nM|Y9∧
;H≥
(≥{n-|⎇_.M;{H
≤H_(∞=;{⎇
≡(~-n→9|L≡→9λ
≥]→<L≤⎇~=LQ"Y;Nm<[{M\;]λ
≡h≥≠d Y(_,=~9=L\ Hλ
M~<h
L89≤d
9(≥
t≥~→$ ]<]
<C"L={X{∞↑z;{D∞~_=∧∞{|Zn>_=~-⎇\h≠L\9λ_.4≠8;O∀≠yH∞M→(_.,z~= \⎇≥<L≥β"YL\=≥<L↑h≥~ ≡λ~_.l(_Y,]H→[n]Yλ≤L\;≠≡$∞<y9N]λ~;D ⎇<\L]]λ≠,≤z~;L↑h_<d∞y#"L<;H_,l[|Y∧∞≠h≤∞↑λ~;NMh≥~ ]+λ≤mt≥~_.D≥~→/∀_x;D∞];H∞M→(_.∞≠~8l≡~;{AQ\{yNNx<Y$∞y;≠¬dλ∩;D 9→~.M;{K∧∞~→>$
Y99∧ >≥≤L∀~_<LNx<Y$∞⎇<≤
}]λ→M}H≥~ Q"\xn,9;H
≥H≠|LL<H≥
t_8z
≤=Y(∞M→(_,-⎇Y(
\;]~-⎇Y9λ∞=;{⎇
∧_;Z-\=~;meC"C!(y;|L|(⊂{n]≠⎇<M≡c"Jλ={<≥.L<H∀o≡⎇→;.4∪_8M}X=≠n/+λ∀.\9;H \<↑(λ={≠→,|+λ∪
⎇Y≠{E⊃"C"EU+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++!QC"Q-lλ≠yD
{|Zj4⊃~9l↑⎇β"E%JJJE%JJJE%JJJE%JJC!!"K+%U+++!QC"C! ↓J⎇8ZL\⎇∞H
⎇|Ztdλ~9y.>λ∃LD∧mc"D↓l-K),;K.ε$λ .&6b2[md∀{{
⎇;{HπJ{|Zj8∃4peX0s⊂Gdα5{n-th⊃
≤y<⎇∧
LHλftλβ"HL=→.Dε-H∩L≥H .'εH -F'+4∀jA"Q\M⎇.H∩M⎇H∀{mM{;{Dπ∃{|M:p∃4h510sλ'C"Tl]Y→<G$∩TsiD_=
Zpk1(9⊂C"JMnH∃m}Z|naQTY<
O+5≠g$∃{|M:h_=∧
4pk(Xs⊂C!*Z8.D∧∃<xeX8{_G4 -H ,;H∞ε$ ..F6k11
A"UZ,↔Hλ⊂N- 0[,Gh -D X;HπεH .'&
1(Jβ"C!*{|Zn4⊃~9l↑⎇α(∧∧λλλ∧∧∀x=∞↑Y_>%D -H ,;H '↔ Hλ∧∧λλλ
m{≥;,T H∞D <|⎇,T
c"AQU≠y ∨)|h
M|~8n7B#"D∧λλλ∧∧λλλ∧∧λλλ
m<]≥,≥λ∪9-]|↑(λ={Xy.∞≤kλ \;;|O∀∀xz ]9<c!%+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%U+++%Q"C"HL=→.D∧ -λ ,;]8./( .'εH '&-H→.>β"QN-{.H∧
t⎇→-≥XY<LuT{yNH<]≤d =λ∪)~ 3=-N~8|aQT⎇8M,8⎇∞D∧∃stI:h∃LD∧m∞H \;;|O∀∀xz ]9<c!!"L+D
z≡(∞m<]≥,≥λ≠9-]|↑/aQC"Um ;H≥
(≠_.,y(_m⎇<≥= ↑d that memory was
getting cheaper and that virtual memory roached performance and was
obviously unnecessary. Everyone learned to lived in cramped memory
space and thousands of programmer hours were wasted on hairbag overlay
schemes and disk based memory managers.
When minicomputers came out everyone said that memory was getting
cheaper and that virtual memgry roached performance and was obviously
unnecessary. Every@=]JAo∃]hAE¬]C]CLAies%]NAi<AGeC4AC]sQQS]Nαβ';Szβ'SSHh+ ''#e↓Y$Y↓" ε{Iα]Jβπ∪∪⊗+OMβ∨βπ∂↔~β←#'≡Aβ←π~β↔OC.≠'π3gIβ3W&K∂K?/→βO'v≠∀4+&C∃β7∞≠#';*β?≠S.qβ#π"↓9V5D⊃>]%ε{9β'"p4(4U;#↔9εk'∪'≡{7CW&+KMβ≡ 7∃β␈+Qα%πβ↔KO}sπ33Jβ≠3πn+⊃βπ β¬β∂␈+C3∃ε{⊃βSF(4+7∞sW≠π∨#WK↔↔→βOW>;↔OSNs≥βSF QβSF+eβ∂}sO'∪/⊃βCW'#';≥εK9αZjq↓αSF+eβπ h+3↔∂≠Qβ∂}s∂↔∪.!βS#∂!β'Q∧≠?W3"β ∃β&{;∃β.3≠'∂N+;S3Jβ WQπ##↔eε≠?W3&q∨P4VK7π∨Ns∃β←GIα%∨"β;↔↔"β∨'[.qβ¬β7+31↓∪↓β '"βπ∪∪⊗+OMβ∨βπ∂∃r↓α←#.qα$4V+cC3∞K;↔⊃π##πQ∧Iβ←?.c⊃β#∂3∃βSzβ3'7O!βS#*βO'k*β?→β&C∃βONk ?1π#π 3*βπP4WA1βSF+eβ↔Gβ3ππv+⊃βSF Qα%π≠#?Wf!β←KO#∃β¬π≠?≠S> K∃βε ∨'≠:βOgO&+58∀Ph*←#.qβ7'∨∪?∂?oβWS↔↔→β∂πn)β?W β↔[↔↔K?;∃π;πMβ⊗c?←9ε ←πeε∪eβSF)β≠π∨!βS#∂ 4+g␈)β∂?.c⊃βO& ∂-↓≠↓Aβ?2βS#↔jβ'9β&C∃β∂∂∪∂πO~β?→β
β ?7⊗ K∪'/⊃β ↔/#3∃β∞s⊂4+F [∃β⊗{?5βd∧V7"
}f/∩ mw∩ε≥d∧J|t
W.gM≡εf/ ↑"ε≡
≡απ≡t
fzε⎇lRε≡⎇n6N&↑,V h*iRrα
=rπ> ≡Bε&t∞v*ε ≡f*πM|F∂KqQ hR∧∧ααα*⎇πJε<≥b?"
m↔≡L<≥F~ε
⎇F"ε]}&*π>NV62
≥bεOGt hR∧∧ααα(L⊗nv\EBπ& Tε.&≡Mw∩ε.\f6/$
↔~εn]Fbε≤|⊗Nr ≥f"εm}r∧J <⊗r?AQ"αα∧∧εW/>Dε∞&D
V.n}/∩r⊂Q$ααα∧∧%N␈T 6∞r}Dε≡∞MDε
∧\≤7∨N\∀ππ⊗|}&∞j n&}j ∀¬∧by∀ππ⊗|}&∞hQ$ααα∧ &.≡≡↑6*πM WJεM⎇b?" -w&B m↔"ε≥dεn.]}'Jε↑lVrε≤dπ&F↑,RεO1Q"αα∧∧ε.v}\vBπ-⎇vjr!Q hT≥dε␈& ↑"π>},G~r∧λW6//≥vv*
≡2ε↔]↑εNvt
⊗w&t∞FF*∞<⊗n* |↔⊗⊗≤|Rπ& ←∩ε↔]↑ε. Q-⊗w&t∞F.r∂≤V∂↔4 ⊗>z ←ε≡/∞Dπ&F≡Dεn␈,Tπε.}
F*ε≡,Rε↔]↑εNvt
⊗w&t
↔"ε≥l@hWM
↔~πM≥V*π|TεnN⎇∞Bε∞MDπ>NeaPPh(≡2ε6≡$ε∂~∞<V>n]nF∂&≥⎇bε>|↑2∧J ≡ππ⊗}lRε≡⎇↑εf/L]GJr∧
6.>\]g&∂M≥vrεL↑G_h* B|J <⊗fb \⊗∨∨≥\∩π≡≥l6*ε≡Dε.vm}&≡/4 ∩π≡↑Dε}2∞.Vf/4∞vFN=∧ε&/<>&N⊗T
ε␈8Q,⊗fb∞∞&}?,≥W~ε ≡f*πMtε≡}]↑VvN<≡F*ε≥lBεOD ⊗ff}}2π& ]Rπ&t∞6F∂,Tε∞pQ,⊗&',↑7~π> ⊗≡*¬∞6.>\]g&∂M≥vrε≡4εv␈D ↔~ε≥↑ε␈↔L≥g"ε⎇dε}⊗,\7"ε}-⊗.wL\@hV\≤6FNl↑2π≡≥l6*ε\≤6Bε|-&.∨D 6∞r ,Rπ6≤↑v." ≡2ε
∞<V>n]nBJpQ!PT
∞lW↔J∞>V≡≡↑>67.D∞6.>\]g&.D
V∞≡
≥f*ε≡4π&FT ¬β#_4ε≡∞L>Vf∂M}"r∧≡APWπ-}fN&↑4π≡.⎇\Vw&≡M⊗}r ≥f"εO≥f∞n≤4εfNm=⊗v:
≥bε
∞L⊗v>≤-F*εm}&jr∧ ↔ h.∞&␈6≤LW~ε⎇lRπ∨≡>F.j∞<V>n]nBbε⎇lRπ?-≡F∞⊗LTπ≡.⎇\Vw" ≥f"εm}W∩π↑<W⊂h,≤F&∞-LRπ≡\⎇V.wN4ε.∞=∧ε}2∞⎇εN≡∧
V∂J =vw&≥≥bε∞o∀εw.\,W∩ε|dεv∞\\Bε.nN'Hh.
vNwN5bα∧∀
6/J
\↔Jε,Tε⊗␈]lBπ&t ⊗wJ ]g'↔∀∞ε}NnE`hPQ*vF.d ∩ε↔←∀ε
εL↑fN≡UDπ∨.=∧ε∂~∞Mε*ε\≤vv/M≤2ε≡≡,Bπ⊗\≤F/∩D ∩πεN\rεOD
⊗w&qQ&}vT
v2πM Rπ≡\⎇V.wD∞6f␈N4ε∞vD∞7.&L]fgJ ∀ε≡∞d
⊗w6⎇<Rε
∞⎇ε}fT∞6/⊗≤↑2ε}aQ'π⊗|}&∞o4∞vFN=∧ε≡∞d∞&.∞D ⊗v"∞}&O&T F∂&∀∞FzπM
↔~εL↑fN≡Udα∧Nd ∩ε↔←∀π&FQQ&↔/=≥f/∨4∞ε∞≡<≤v*∧∀ 6∞r∞>V&&]mGJπ.]bπ& T¬$∀yhBε7]l7&N⎇dπ&z ↑f∞g\≡F(h*N&.∂>↑'Jε-≥Fg~ ≥f"π=tε}rd∧∧Jε≥Tε}7L]bπ∨↑.π⊗O<\Bπ& ≡Bπ∨\=αε
∞=⊗oεLTε∞vAQ'ε␈|↑&7.D∞6≡F]\RεO4∞W≡.D∞6zπ,≡&.g∃aPPh%URjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjUURjjQQ hTL≡F+Rε⊗B∧V≥dβ Kε$ββC&↔∪S EZ¬≥ Q(g⊗}W$εnz ≡B∧d)EU,t≠∧αDn≥<R∧zxLVfb >7O∨L]UjHQ*7.⊗,\7#Rλ≥f␈& ↑"π6≤↑rε}d∞fO↔N\⊗bε\]V␈↔⊃Q hU⎇
⊗f*∞Mε*ε=⎇Vn.nN2ε∞-}W"ε∀∞ε/↔=⎇b?~ LW≡O,↑2ε/ <V.&≥lrεF≡4εn∞=
⊗v*
≡2ελQ,v}}D ↔⊗?]\Vw" mw∩πm≡''.≥Dεn.]}'Jb ∀π>␈]LBεf≥<Rπ&t∞π⊗/<]g"ε∀∞6}n↑⎇ε∂ Q,FN6l↑&.wD∞fN/udααCV∧πε␈]lG~ε|dε≡}LTεNr ∀β*π
}Vv"
\⊗≡F≥lRεO4∞FF(Q,6f∂>9⊗≡∞D∞ε∂↔O∀εfNlTπ&∞<]bε↔∀
V∞w∀∞f.vM}'
π⎇
rπ≡]MBεn≤=εNv↑4π>OM↓PW6≡.G.∞D V.n}/∩αF← 6/πDλ'/↔-}V.G5∃bHh!Q$Jπm≤W:π ≤vNvt ↔~π∞-⊗n∂-≥GJε∀∞εGO=≤6∞b
\Vn␈/∀εn∞l≤v.n]nBε∞lDππ⊗}LV∨&≥⎇`hW>N&∂&\␈∩rα
⎇εNfT∞&.∞D
V.n}/∩π>≥MBεv↑lW∩ε,Tεf∂,|Rε.m}V>B mw∩ε↑lW↔OM
⊗v8Q/⊗␈* <⊗rπM
⊗vZ
|bbε≡DεO~
L↔⊗>T Vv␈\⎇απ≡t ∩ε⊗≡DεF/,Tε∞vD∞FF/,Tε≡∞d &(h.<⊗∨⊗≤m⊗≡.D∞Fzεn,⊗>n]nF∂&≥⎇brα
,Vf}<≡FNvt ⊗v"∞∞&␈&\>FNvt ⊗≡≡↑>2ε}aQ'&F≥lw~πm≤∩π& TεF∂,Nv∂⊗T
⊗rεm≤6*b m↔F.E↑6OVT 6G.m>2εn≥<W~πM
⊗v?4
W.≡↓Q&.∂=≤W∩r∧λ⊗wN⎇lRπ>
tεF∂4∞w⊗ONLVrε∀
V.n}/∩ε∞MMv≡∂M}"ε↑m}w~ε≡DεO~ ZT≤@Q,V∂≡≤↑"π&t∞w⊗OLTε
ε⎇⎇v"ε⎇lRε6}$ε6O \Bo≡∨,V"ε-Mv≡←4∞FF∞d
vv* mw⊂h.l↔⊗N≤-F*π,↑↔./>N2rα mw"ε ≡fNvt∞Fzπ<>&No∧ ⊗v"∞<↔6* \⊗≡B /↔&*D ⊗v"∞Mε(h,≡f∞NL≤&Nf≡O∩ε}d∞FF*∞ ⊗>NltεF∂,Nv∂⊗T
V∞↑↑4εn∞l≤vNvt∞FF* =vw&]nG~ε|aPWε∂≡6N≡≥Dεn.]}'Jε↑\6Bε\≡6N/%dα∧OD ⊗g≡t
F/'4∂⊗␈*∞
F∂J∞Mε*βV∧πε␈]lG~ε|aPV≡|LRε>≥\RεNd∂⊗␈*∞|⊗w"D '/"∞Mε∂"
≡2εv}Dε∂~∞m↔≡N-O∩εN↑
w↔&≥nBαD∀∞&.∞M∨&(h-≡BεO4∞Fz∧X→eJπ ]wεfU∃`hPQ)∩εF≡lRε
]w⊗* ↑Vg&≤>2n␈-≤Vw&\Dπ6N↑tε}2∞<V>n]nG~αT∞FF/∀ ↔⊗*∞>G↔.>NW⊗NlqPW&⎇⎇G~α =v&*
}"ε&≡L∩Jr∧ ε␈>↑lW∩b ∀ε&z∞>V↔≡>-⊗⊗*∞Mrπ& Tα∪
V∃s⊂h,M⊗n.n=⊗}v≥D"π6≡.G.∞D
V.n}/∩π≡= Vn/5dα∧↔∀ε∩k
v$ε&N\]g≡N⎇n2∧J
\V∞r∞Mε(h,-↔'~ <↔↔↔∀ g⊗}T∞ε∞>T
⊗w&t∞6.>\]g"b∞,↔&F↑$π&F≥dπ&FT W.gM≤7~β!Q&&N\]g≡N⎇l⊗bπ<=ε.nT∞vF/,\'JπM WJεM⎇b?"d∧¬&F↑,Rε∂,Tπ≡/l↑&∞b∞,V∂≡⎇n2ph*]ff/>4πN␈T∞W≡* ⎇⊗>∞nM⊗~ε≤LG⊗/><W~α
M⊗↑*∞Mε*∧
∧π≡≡ ]V*ε\]g&N⎇lV"ε ↑&(h,,V6␈,U∩bπ≥}Rε≡≥dεv/l↑"εF≡hRπ& Tπ⊗N⎇∞Bεw]\&/∩
|bε⊗≡N2π> ↑&*π≥}Rεv\\@hWM Vjr∧
6}nT∞π⊗}},⊗o~
↔6*
∞V>* ≡'⊗∂≡4π≡z
lV."∞lW↔J
L↔⊗>T∞6.>\]g'~AQ&␈& ↑'~ε ≡f*ε\≥gJε≡.&∂O5Dεv.\M⊗v:
\⊗wJ∞<V>n]nG~b ≥f"π>M⊗fb
}FF/.4εF∂lQPV⊗}Mα
∧
vFNLTπ&FT
3
π<=ε.nT
v2ε∀ ff}≡M⊗v: -w.vL≡'Jε≡4ε≡f↑lW∩b
≡BεO1Q&F∂,Dπ&z MrεNd∂⊗␈* ≡&.r}Dε&/=_vvNltπN␈↑$ε␈>d
ε∂⊗N|↔⊗*d∧¬&F↑,V6␈,UBε6}!PVn≤=εNv↑4π>OM∧ε
εmL↔"πm≡''.≥Dε∞&N,W∨~∞>ε∞≡UDεfN<Tπ&FT
d
B¬∞vFN=∧ε∂⊗QQ'6/ \Bε↔∀ ∩π≡\≥Fbπ ≤v*π=∨&*JD ∩ε>⎇|Bπ≡= Vn
≡2β d &O'4
v2π ≤v*ε≥lBβ aQ&⊗ON4ε}2∞<V>n]nBπ>≡Mαε≡≡.'J?4 ⊗ff}|V"r∧
FFO4 ⊗ff}}2ε
m⊗f*
→bπ& QPV6≥LW∨O>LVjB
}"ε
L↔⊗>T ↔↔⊗∨∃Bπ&t &*ε\≡πε.D
⊗w&t
V.n}/∩ε∂4∞6/6↑,⊗`hαX{mn~9⎇-}<h≤l\{9;NNkλ∀∞-⎇Z9
≥Yh_m⎇\y0⊃]z4{2K⊂4w2→|0q6→P0r2≤2yyr\W⊂⊂*≠FE89→{2w:λ:90sYr<V⊂≤tvx6≡P37y_rP:4→P37v≠7{tw→P9rs[rw:⊂≥7P12H0P47[2P;t~qtεE≥tv6⊂_qqry\P:90\↔⊂⊂$Y⊂<wzH8:z≥42y`% farewalls between each active
seGmeft, yoe do reduce the maximum number of distict active segments
to 2**15, but that is still qui@QJABA→Kn@Q$AW]←\XA≠k1iSGf5KefA]←kYI8Oh~∃ JAgCQSgMS∃HR\@↓β]HA%LAiQ∀AgKO5K]if↓CeJA
←IJX↓iQKr↓GC\A9←e[C1YrAE∀~∃CY1←GCi∃HACI)CGK]QYrAo%iPAe∃Cg←]¬EYJAMCMKid\~∀~))QJ@DZb↑e⊂AgGQ∃[JASLAgie¬SOQi→←eoCIHAi↑↓S[aY∃[K]h↓OSmK8ABA[¬GQS]∀AoSi ~∃←]1rAIK5C]HAACOS]≤XAK]=kOPA1←OSG¬XACI⊃eKgf↓ESifPfdB$XAC]⊂ABAI∃GK]h4∃aCO∀AgSu∀\@A)!JA-β`AECSIYrAcUCYSM%KfA←8AiQSLAYCgPAa←S9h\@AQ↑AeK¬YYr~)kgJAQQJA-¬0@dA≥SOCEeiJAY=OSGC0ACIIIKgfAMaCGJ↓eKck%eKf@`A[KO¬EsiKLA←L~)aQsg%GCXAACOJAQCEYKLXASL↓s←jA⊃←\Oh↓gQCe∀AgKO5K]hAQCEYKL\@A)!SfASLAiQJ4∃GkeIK]hA5CqS[UZAaQegSGC0A[K[=erBB∧B@A!∃←aYJ↓EkSY⊃S]NAACOKeLAgQ←UYHAO<~∃eK¬HAiQ∀Agik⊃SKfA%¬~AI%HABA1←]NAQS[JA¬O↑\@↓)QJAASGWK⊂@c⊗A¬]H@i,AEsi∀~∃aC≥JAgSiKfAM=dABA≥←←HAIKCg←8BB~∀4∀∩[≠%WJ~∀4∀ZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4Z~∀~) CiJh@bhA)C]kCIr@br`d@bdhhf[ M(~∃
I←ZtAMiCme=fA~\↓≠CGe¬WSf@q≠βπ%¬⊗ACh↓≠∪([5ε|~∃MkEUK
ht@A]←eW&↓ SOKMhA,dFjtAY~~∀~)→CeO∀ACIIIKgfAMaCGJ↓OSmKLAs←j↓k]SM=e[SidA←LAIKMKe∃]GJX↓CfAQ¬fAEK∃\~∃a=S]iK⊂A←kh0ACGe=gfAa!sgSG¬XAG←9MSOkICiS←9fAC]⊂AM←d↓iQCh↓[Cii∃d∩∃g=MaoCIJAG←9MSOkICiS←9f@Qo!ChAQ¬aaK]LAi↑Ae←kd@≥eKCX↓[K[←IrNAo!K\As=j~∃]∃KHAi<AK]Yome process's workspace?). The penalty is presumed
to be performance.
The discussion on virtual memory so far has assumed that swap
management is independent of the application. It would appear an
unwarranted assumption. When performance requires it, it is normal to
tweak lower-level virtual machines in one's hierarchy. For instance,
if it is discovered that some particular kind of array calculation is
taking a large fraction of the runtime of an important program, one
may well wish to modify the compiler or the microcode of the machine
one is running on, or for that matter buy a processor which runs that
calculation better. Similarly, it should be possible to define
interfaces to swap management (note, for instance, the ITS paging
parameters PagAhd and PagRange which warn the system of linear sweeps)
which either define a particular regime of swapping or even allow
swapping to be fully controlled by the user process (e.g. in addition
to requesting swap-in oF the faulted page, request several 'related'
pages): a page fault becomes essentially a kind of subroutine
invocation.
Demand paging with its various refinements is a sound general-purpose
method, but certainly other methods are possible when the application
warrants.
Stavros Macrakis
------------------------------
Date: 14 Jan 1982 1102-PST
Subject: Re: big memory chips
From: BILLW at SRI-KL
I believe the largest RAM chip to date is an IBM 288K dynamic (in a *9
organization). There were rumors in Electronic engineering Times of
an entirely new nonvolitile RAM technology that is alledged to be able
to put 4M bits on a chip the size of todays ram chips using ordinary
processes. Sort of two 5 volt chips with electron beams going
inbetween them, if I recall (this was a couple of months ago). Most
of the secrets are being kept under wraps until "they can be adaquatly
protected".
Bill W
------------------------------
From: William "Chops" Westfield <BillW @ SRI-KL>
Subject: more on big memories
zurich -(dj)--nippon electric co. (nec) of japan
expects to post higher profits for the year ending march 31,
senior executive vice president m. hirota told zurich
bankers thursday.
:
:
hirota said nec has -solved all the technical
complications for mass production of a 256 kilobit random
access memory (kram) circuit, which would quadruple the
memory capacity of computers and telecommunications
equipment which currently use 64 kram circuits. demand for
the 64 kram circuits is still growing and should peak in
1984 or 1985, he predicted, adding that demand for 256 kram
circuits should become significant by 1986.
:
:
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
Subject: WorkS Digest V2 #8
∂16-Jan-82 2147 Jon Solomon <WorkS@USC-ECLB> WorkS Digest V2 #8
Date: 16 Jan 1982 1926-PST
From: Jon Solomon <WorkS@USC-ECLB>
Sender8 JSOL atUSC-ECLB
To: Works;
Reply-To: WorkS at USC-ECLB
Via: Usc-Eclb; 16 Jan 82 23:21-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 16 Jan 82 23:38-EDT
Works Digest Sunday, 17 Jan 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 8
Today's Topics: What is a WorkStation?
Backups Or Not?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 16 January 1982 00:15-EST
From: Brian P. Lloyd <LLOYD at MIT-MC>
Subject: What is a woristation?
Most of us here think that'workstation' has something to do with
computers. It doesn't. It is the place we go to work. For most of
the world it is a desk with a telephone.
For those of us involved with computers it is also someplace we go to
communicate with a computer. I think the real question is, "What do
we need to make our workstations more efficient?" Now we can get into
talking about LAN's, local processors, bitmapped displays, and shared
databases.
Brian
------------------------------
Date: 14 January 1982 01:16 est
From: SSteinberg.SoftArts at MIT%Multics
Subject: WORKS V2 #4: What is Work
2. What is a workstation?
As far as I am concerned a workstation is any small computer system
which is aimed at a single user. Word processors are workstations,
LISP machines are workstations, the S-1 computer will be a very
powerful workstation. A workstation must provide computer power for
an individual. This puts certain economic and interface constraints
on it but in my definition an advanced telephone is a kind of
workstation even if it lacks a full keyboard and a crt.
One big problem in the computer field is that it is hard not to be
conservative without appearing flakey. It is as if predicting the
future of the automobile I had the choice of describing fuel injection
or teleportation. My guess is that we are about ten years from a desk
top Symbolics LISP Machine.
------------------------------
Date: Saturday, 16 January 1982, 10:04-EST
From: Daniel L. Weinreb <DLW at MIT-AI>
Subject: Dave Reed's questions
Regarding the backup problem: I don't see how you can convince people to
do backup if they don't appreciate the need -- they'll find out soon
enough, probably. When Symbolics sets up a new site, they insist that
the site either provide a time-sharing system on their network that has
tape drives, or else that the site buy a magtape drive for file system
backup; the marketing department makes it clear that any configuration
that we are willing to sell must include provision for file system
backup either locally or over the net.
Regarding network communications, Lisp Machines are always listening to
the net. If for no other reasons, this is useful because of the FINGER
server that lets other people ask who is logged into the machine, and
the SEND server which receives interactive messages. It's not
particularly expensive to do this; we just have a process that sits
around blocked all the time waiting for a packet to appear on the
network, which doesn't cost anything much.
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
Subject: WorkS Digest V2 #9
∂18-Jan-82 1154 Jon Solomon <WorkS@USC-ECLB> WorkS Digest V2 #9
Date: 17 Jan 1982 1733-PST
From: Jon Solomon <WorkS@USC-ECLB>
Sender: JSOL atUSC-ECLB
To: Works;
Reply-To: WorkS at USC-ECLB
Via: Usc-Eclb; 17 Jan 82 0:04-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 18 Jan 82 13:07-EDT
Works Digest Monday, 18 Jan 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 9
Today's Topics: Page Size & Page Tables
Ways To Do Backups
Must Displays And Mainframes Share Memory?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 17 Jan 1982 0007-EST
From: WALKER at CMU-20C
cc: mo at LBL-UNIX
Subject: page size
While not wishing to extend the infinitely long discussion on
paging, I can't let the references to the VAX page size pass without
comment.
It is true that 8Mbytes is required for the system page table when the
process space is 2Gbytes. However you are confusing implementation
with architecture. Just because the VAX-11/580 has an 8Mbyte memory
limit doesn't mean thatVAX-11/XXX will havE such a limit. If you
also keep in mind that the architecture was designed to last a long
time, you will realize that 8Mbytes may be only a small percentage of
the physical memory space when 2Gbyte programs become common. This is
not to say that AI types have it easy right now.
If you are really worried about the page table space, it is possible
to add another level of indirection (and factor of 16 reduction in
space) by putting the system page table into the reserved part of
system space by modifying the architecture at a future date. I
doubt that it will ever happen. This is somewhat similar to
National's NS16000 scheme.
A small page size is good because it reduces internal fragmentation.
It can't be too small because it is your unit of communicating with
the disk. 512 bytes has been found to be a good compromise no matter
what any IBM studies say. 51∩ is definitely better than 1Kor "K.
In summary, think in 20 year Time spans. The 360/370 has been around
nearly that long. The VAX will be too.
¬
------------------------------
Date: 16 Jan 1982 21:24:58-PST
From: mo at LBL-UNIX (Mike O'Dell [system])
To: walker at cmu-20c
Subject: page size
Ib memory gats cheap enough to use 8 megs of page tableq for EACH process,
you won't give a flip about internal fpagmentation. You will still
be concerned about the amount of screwing with paga tabhes the system
has to do.
Two gigabyte programs are very real things right now. VLSI rule checkers
and routing algorithms are just waiting for the extra address bits.
On a more religous leveL, I Doubt sariously if the Vax will have
the lifetime of the 370. It is too easy to build better machines
these days, but that is fuel for a different flame on a different
mailing list.
-Mike
[Agreed - INFO-VAX@MIT-AI is the best place for such a discussion.
-JSol]
------------------------------
Date: 17 January 1982 1228-EST (Sunday)
From: Hank Walker at CMU-10A
Subject: backups
There are two basic ways to do backups if you are a small business.
The first is to have some removable media, such as a floppy or TU58
tape cartridge that you plug in periodically. The operating system
automatically handles incremental backups. It tells the user whenever
to insert a new cartridge. Intelligent encoding of backup data should
keep the typical daily backup down to 200K or so per workstation. The
OS should keep track of everything and just tell the user to do
something once per day or so.
The second alternative is for backups to be handled by your
maintenance contract. If the small business computer is hooked up to
cable TV, and so has a high-speed path to the field service office,
then backups take place rapidly. Naturally, encryption would be used
by the owner. If there are no cable links, then the machine can have
a 1200 baud modem, which requires about 1/2 hour to back up 200K.
Since you really only need half duplex, a 2400 baud modem would reduce
the time to 15 minutes. The field service center would call machines
in its area at night to perform backup to their large disks or tape.
Directories of backed up files would be left behind, or exist on disk
at the center. If the user needed a backed up file, the machine would
dial the center, request the file, and have it shipped over the phone
line.
Backup will only succeed if the user has almost no involvement, other
than doing the most trivial of things, such as "insert catridge
MONDAY", or "wait, fetching backup copy...".
------------------------------
Date: 17 January 1982 18:13-EST
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM at MIT-MC>
Subject: What is a workstation?
Subject: Must works&display and main-cpu share memory?
To: George.Coulouris at CMU-10A
In order for the state as presented on the workststion screen to
be understandable to the human, it must be built upon a small
number of symbols each of which can be learned quickly, the
small number of symbols so that the total system can be learned
in a short time (a small number of quicklies, not a million
quicklies which can be a rather long training period).
That being assumed, it's easy to represent these symbols and
their locations on the screen (x,y offset, x,y scale, angle if
rotated, and which other symbols overlay them). That being the
case, it doesn't take much data to transmit updates to the screen
from the computer that's running the process to the word-processor
that's displaying it. Thus I see no reason to insist that the
whole system (cpu-intensive process, and workstation display)
run in shared mainframe memory. It is sufficient that they be able
to communicate over some halfway-reasonable network (perhaps 9600 baud).
Thus we design the workstation for editing, display, and network
communication, and leave the cpu-intensive tasks for the big machine
that is shared among seveal users.
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
Subject: WorkS Digest V2 #10
∂21-Jan-82 0307 Jon Solomon <WorkS at USC-ECLB> WorkS Digest V2 #10
Date: 21 Jan 1982 0010-PST
From: Jon Solomon <WorkS at USC-ECLB>
Sender: JSOL at USC-ECLB
To: Works:: ;
Reply-To: WorkS at USC-ECLB
Via: Usc-Eclb; 21 Jan 82 3:14-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 21 Jan 82 3:34-EDT
Works Digest Thursday, 21 Jan 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 10
Today's Topics: Page Tables
Transparent, Automatic Backups
Humor - What Is A WorkStation
WorkStation and Main CPU - Must They Share Memory?
Call for Papers - ACM Conference on Security, Audit and Control
NewsWeek: 256K @it Chips From Bell Labs
Virtual Memory
OCR For Laser Printer
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 18 Jan 1982 11:28 PST
From: Deutsch at PARC-MAXC
Re: Page tables
¬
All this business about gigantic page tables is a red herring. The
Berkeley Computer Corporation machine used a hash table for the page
table. Its size is proportional to the size of REAL memory. In other
words, if you have a 1M word real memory divided into 1K word pages,
the in-core-page table contains a maximum of 1000 occupied entries,
regardless of the size of the address space. The page table is hashed
on the disk address (or unique ID or whatever you like) of the page.
This scheme requires a hardware map that is associative rather than
indexed, but that is no big deal -- it's just like a memory cache.
------------------------------
Date: 19 January 1982 08:11 est
From: Frankston.SoftArts at MIT-Multics
Subject: Re: Dave Reed's questions
To agree with Dan Weinreb, backup should be automatic and
transparent. This requires a network connection and continuous
listening.
What we need here are PROTOCOLS to define a standard backup
server. This is independent of the particular flavor of
workstation. I don't expect workstations to be fully
successful until you can plug an arbitrary one into your LAN
that also provides standard file and backup servers. Also it
would provide automatic communications with other LANs in the
sense that there would be LAN-LAN protocols. The LAN-LAN
protocols do not need to be especially highspeed except that an
offsite backup capability is requirement for any nontrivial
system. In fact, such a backup capability is a major selling
point -- the equivalent of a fireproof safe. (Of course, the
ability to keep data from going offsite nonencrypted is also a
requirement).
---(1)---
------------------------------
Date: 19 Jan 1982 0912-PST
From: Silverberg at SRI-KL (Brad A. Silverberg)
Subject: what is a workstation?
I noticed in the Heathkit catalog I recently received that Heath is
now offering a Computer Work Station, part # HD-12. This is in
addition to the H-19, H-89, etc. they already offer. The price is
incredible: $395.00! It comes with a formica top, a rack enclosure,
and 2 adjustable shelves. Order yours now.
Brad
------------------------------
Date: 19 January 1982 1837-EST (Tuesday)
From: George.Coulouris at CMU-10A
To: Robert Elton Maas <REM at MIT-MC>
Subject: Re: What is a workstation? / Must works&display and main-cpu
share memory?
Accepting your thesis that we should restrict set of symbols used in
displaying 'the state of the system model' to a relatively small
number, with rotation and scaling for each symbol, let's do some
worst-case calculations:
We surely need more symbols than there are in the ASCII set.
(Do different fonts count as
separate symbols?), lets say 1000 different symbols = 9 bits
Screen position requires 2 10-bit coordinate = 20 bits
Rotation = 8 bits
Scale = 5 bits
So we would need to send 42 bits to the workstation to specify each
new symbol.
My argument was that for a 'natural' user interface, the workstation
should maintain a smoothly animated display of the current state of
the model as it changes. This includes not just changes to the
contents of small windows on the screen, but the display of new
windows in response to commands, and the re-ordering and
re-positioning of windows that may overlie each other. In the worst
case, most of the screen may change in one update. The update should
nevertheless appear to happen all at once (e.g. when a new window
containing text is brought to the screen). A high-resolution screen
could have up to 10,000 symbols on it, and the update needs to happen
in less than 1/20 of a second.
i.e. the data rate is of the order of 42x10000x20 = 84M bits/sec.
Ob course there are some optimisations that can be done, buT they
mostly fail in some important cases - consider the problem of making a
window glide smoothly over whatever windows are underneath it. Even
with optimisation, there is no way that the data rate required is
gonig to be less than a megabit per second or so.
------------------------------
Date: 19 Jan 1982 1356-EST
From: Paul A. Karger <KARGER at DEC-MARLBORO>
Subject: Call for Papers - ACM Conference on Security, Audit and Control
CALL FOR PAPERS
First ACM Conference on
SECURITY, AUDIT AND CONTROL IN OFFICE SYSTEMS
October 7-8, 1982
Marriott Pavilion Hotel
St. Louis, Missouri
This conference, jointly sponsored by ACM Special Interest
Groups (SIGs) in Business Data Processing (BDP), Office
Automation (OA) and Security, Audit and Control (SAC), will
focus on the design considerations for secure systems in the
automated office. Topics appropriate for this conference
include:
* Local Area Network Security
- workstation security
- applications of encryption
- authentication
* Application of Trusted Computing Systems
- security enhanced systems
- security kernels
* Security Applications
- electronic mail
- electronic publishing
* Software Security Policies
- access lists
- defaults
- manditory policies
- integrity policies
* Systems Auditability
- audit trails
- interpretation of audit information
- monitoring
Authors with technical papers or descriptions of successful
applications in the above or related topics are encouraged
to submit their work for consideration. Papers should be a
maximum of 20 double spaced, typewritten pages (including
abstract and references) for inclusion in the conference
proceedings.
Dates: Completed papers due (3 copies) April 1, 1982
Notification of acceptance May 30, 1982
Camera-ready manuscript due July 1, 1982
Note: Authors of accepted papers will be required to sign a
copyright release form.
Abstracts, papers, and questions should be addressed to:
David R. Callaghan
Babson College
Babson Park (Wellesley), MA 02157
(617) 235-1200
Contributions or questions may also be sent electronically
to:
Paul A. Karger
Digital Equipment Corporation
77 Reed Road (HL2-3/M08)
Hudson, MA 01749
(617) 568-5813
ARPAnet address: KARGER at DEC-Marlboro
------------------------------
Date: 19 Jan 1982 19:39:34-PST
From: decvax!duke!unc!smb at Berkeley
In-real-life: Steven M. Bellovin
Subject: 256K bit chips from Bell Labs
The latest Newsweek (Jan 25) says that Bell will release a 256Kb chip
next month. On the other hand, the same story (about Bell Labs) also
says that ACS was secret before the divestiture agreement....
------------------------------
Date: 20 January 1982 0727-EST (Wednesday)
From: George.Coulouris at CMU-10A
To: Robert Elton Maas <REM at MIT-MC>
Subject: arithmetic error: for 84M bits/sec read 8.4M bits/sec
In my last message, the decimal point slipped from my calculation.
However, my argument was based on the correct calculation and
remains unchanged.
------------------------------
Date: 20 Jan 1982 12:00:08-PST
From: decvax!duke!unc!smb at Berkeley
Full-Name: Steven M. Bellovin
Subject: Virtual Memory
As has been pointed out by many folks, VM is a wonderful mechanism for
hiding the actual size of main memory. Programs do tend to be
simpler, and the loss in performance is often quite small, especially
since page fault-initiated I/O is often much faster than ordinary file
I/O. But virtual memories work well *only* if the program has
suitable locality of reference, i.e., if the working set is a
reasonably small fraction od the total memory allocated. If the
program is going to access most of its address space without any
particular clumping, performance will badly. Not that explicit I/O
would make it any better -- but at least the programmer would be aware
of what's hapPening, and would be warned that perhaps a different
algorithm might be appropriate. The best example I can think of is
sorting: anyone who tries to sort a large number of records using,
say, shell sort, is in for a rude suprise if the program is run in a
virtual memory environment.
Another point: all the world is not in main memory. In particular,
my terminal isn't. One can write Multics-style programs to deal with
files, or one can write UNIX-style programs, in which all the world,
including my terminal, is a file. I don't know which approach is
better.
In short: VM, and memory-based file I/O schemes are not panaceas. I
like both -- in particular I *don't* like systems without VM -- but
there is a tradeoff; perhaps the workstation designer would be well
advised not to spend the extra bits on address space that can't be
efficiently used by the maximum real memory likely to be available.
(And then add a few more bits because such predictions are always
wrong....)
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 20 January 1982 22:17-PST
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM at MIT%MC>
To: Frankston at MIT-MULTICS
Re: WorkStations? / OCR for laser printer??
Although I'm adament about hooking up all workstations and other
workstation-like things (MIT-MC etc.) into a worldwide network,
and avoiding use of paper as much as possible, there are several
reasons for occasionally making hardcopy:
(1) Although I edit online and get 95% of the typographic errors
eliminated online, when I see my document in hardcopy I always
catch a few more errors that somehow escAped online scrutiny;
(2) Occasionally I need to give a listing to somebody who isn't
yet on "the net";
(3) I'd like to make hardcopy on microfiche and keep in a safe place
so that if we have a nuclear war it'll be possible to recover that
information later (magnifying glasses are sure to be re-invented if
our species survives, but ASCII will probably be lost and magnetic
media probably won't even be suspected of containing coded
information);
(4) Sometimes the current generation of visual displays can't quite
do justice to graphics and other "pretty" effects like hardcopy can,
especially if you consider that when 99% of the world's population
has word-processing only 80% will have the very best graphic
terminals, the remaining 19% will have something that is suitable
for editing but not for showing the full beauty of the document
being edited (I'm just throwing those percentages out for example, I
don't intend them to any more than ballpark guesses).
I see no use whatsoever for printing on hardcopy and then trying to
machine-read it back into a computer on a different network, since all
networks will be tied together. But producing hardcopy output for
its own sake as an end product will still have occasional use.
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
Subject: WorkS Digest V2 #11
∂21-Jan-82 2237 Jon Solomon <WorkS at USC-ECLB> WorkS Digest V2 #11
Date: 21 Jan 1982 2058-PST
From: Jon Solomon <WorkS at USC-ECLB>
Sender: JSOL at USC-ECLB
To: Works:: ;
Reply-To: WorkS at USC-ECLB
Via: Usc-Eclb; 22 Jan 82 0:00-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 22 Jan 82 0:16-EDT
Works Digest Friday, 22 Jan 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 11
Today's Topics: Hard Copy Output - Not Needed?
Query Reply - Everything In Main Memory
Multics - Quicksorts
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 21 Jan 1982 0942-EST
From: WALKER at CMU-20C
Subject: hard copy
There is certainly no use for an optical character reader to insert a
machine-generated document into another machine, but what about all
the books, papers, etc already laying around? Most of this stuff can
be safely thrown away (look around your office, or at least mine), but
a lot of it is relatively timeless. It would be a royal pain to have
Someone type in the Library of Congress by hand.
------------------------------
Date: 21 Jan 1982 1∀57-PST
From: BILLW at SRI-KL
Subject: Re: Large a`dress spaces
Re: the whole world is not in main memory (for example my perminal).
Wall, It Could be, maybe it shouldbe, and on a lot of workstations,
it IS. DMA displays hav@∀ACYX↓g←eiLA←LA¬ImCi¬OKfA=mKdA¬]rA←QQKdAQsaJ~)←LAI%gaYCd\@A∪QfAUkMhAiQ¬hASL↓iQJA⊃SgaY¬rAESQ[C`AQCWKfbdq⊗↓EsiKLX~∃C9HAs←UdAae=GKgg=dA←]1rACI⊃eKgg∃f@li,XAs←TACeJ↓S\AB↓Y←hA=LAie=kEYJ8~∀~∃].~∀~(ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4~∀~∃⊃CiJtdbA∃¬\@br`d@`rh`ftdX[!'(4∃
e←4tAIK
mCpC⊃kWJCU]FCg5DACh↓¬KeW∃YKr~)
kYX5≥C[JhA'iKYK\A~8A¬KY1←mS\4∃)↑t↓% ≠↓5∪(K≠ ~∃'k UKGhhA%JtA≠kYQSGf~(~∀∪
I←ZA%∃≠↓≠∪P[≠εAQQjA∃¬\@db`ptjTtbl@Drpd~(∪-SBhAIkW∀CGQS
↑CkG mCp~(∪ Ci∀t@db↓∃C]k¬er@bdpd@`Dtfh[∃'(~∀%
e←ZhA%←E∃ehA 1i←\A5CCf@q% ~A¬hA≠∪P[≠ε|4∀∪'k UKGhhA%JtA≠kYQSGf~(∩~∀∪Q↑tAG!SG↑C⊃kWJCU]FCg5DACh↓+π∧[ n`~∀$~∀∪#USGWg=ehASLA≥<d↓o←egPAGCg∀XAg↑↓KmK\↓S\A[¬S\A[∃[←er↓ShASM\Oh~(∪O←←⊂\@A)!kfASPOfAB↓eKHA!KeeS9N\Aβ9sE←IdAoQ↑↓o←kY⊂AkgJ↓ShAKYK\~∀%oQK\↓ShAC1XAMSQfAS\↓eKCY5K[←ed@Q]↑↓iQeCMQS]N$ASfA∧AY←g∃d~∀∪¬YeKC⊃rAC]⊂AiQe¬gQS]≤ASfA KgSI∀AiQJ↓a←S]P\@A'=[JA←QQKdA5KiQ←⊃f~∀∪=LAg←IiS]N↓CeJA8AY←N↓\Ao←IghAG¬gJXA¬]HAg=[JA←_AiQK4AGC\↓EJ~∀%[CIJ↓i↑AeU\AS\↓mSeiUCXA[∃[←er↓oSiP↓[kGP↓Y←GC1]Kgf↓←LAC
GKgg%]N~∀%g↑ACLAi↑A¬m←SH↓iQeCMQS]N↓SLAe∃CXA[∃[←er↓SfAg5CYXX↓KmK\↓iS]r8~∀~∃EkSGWM←ehA%fA\U1←NA\↓S\Ai!JACm∃eCOJ↓GCgJ0AC]H↓OK]KICYYr↓I←Kf↓ckSi∀~∃oK1XXAEUhAiQ¬hASg8OhA[dAa←S9hACh↓CYX\A3←j≥mJA[¬IJASPAM←d↓[J@Z4AiQCP~∃g←5JAg←Iif@E
C\AE∀A[CI∀Ai↑AIk\AS8AmSeQkCXA5K[←edAoSi A[kG AY←G¬Y]KgL~∃←L↓CGGKMgS]NλXAR]∀\XAi!ChAi!JAae=OeCZU[kgPTAEJ↓CoCe∀AiQCPAShA5CrAeU\~∃S8AiQCPAK]m%e←][∃]hXAQQChA¬oCeK9KgfA=LAiQ∀Ak]I∃eYsS9NAgiIkGikIJ@USLTAB~)G←]G∃e\A←_AiQJ↓ae←OIC[[KH\~∀~(ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4~∀
∃∃]HA←_A/←e-&A S≥Kgh~(TTTT(TTTT(TTTT(TTTT4∀ZZZ4ZZZ~(~∀~∀→'kE)KGht↓/←eWLA SO∃ghA,H@Fbd4∀@≡dH[∃C\4pd@@Hfjb∪)←\A'=Y←[←8@y/←IW&ACPA+'ε5 π→∧x@∪/←IW&A %OKgh↓,d@FDd@@@4∃ Ci∀t@dd↓∃C\@Drpd@Hdfn[A'(~∃→e←Zt↓∃←\AM←Y←[=\@y/=eW&A¬hA+' [ π→λ|~∃'∃]IKdhA∃'∨0AChAU'ε[
→∧~∃Q↑tA/=eWfth@v~∃IKaYr5)↑tA]←eW&↓ChA+Mε[ π1∧~∃-%Bt@AUgF[
YDv@HfA∃C8@pd@Dtfr[∃ (~∃YSBt@↓¬eX[ [Hv@HfA∃C8@pd@Dtjh[∃ (~∀4∃/←e-fA S≥Kgh∩@@@@@A'CQkeICdX@df↓∃C\@Drpd@@@@@↓-←Yk5J@d@hA∪ggUJ@bd4∀~∃)=ICrOLA)←a%Gft∩$@A¬K1XA→C f@djY⊗A%C4~∀@@@@@@@@@@@A'o¬`@LAMQ←`@4Aπ←[AkiKd↓ ckSA[K]h↓/C]i∃H~∀@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@↓'iCiUfA∨L↓/←eWL}~∀Z4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZ~(~∃ CQJt@dHA∃C]UCer@Drpd@Dh``[∃'(@Q→eSICdR~∃
I←ZtA ←D]π=YoKY0AChA
≠*ZbAα~∃'UEUKGPt@@dTm⊗A%¬~AMe=ZA¬K1X~∀~)αAMe%K]HA¬hA¬K1XAoQ<Ao←e-KHA←8AiQK%d@li,A %β5fAi←1HA[J↓S\@bdp`Ai!Ch~∃QQKSddjm⊗↓ %β≠LAoKe∀AO←S9NAi↑↓EJAe∃CIrA%\AYCQJ@br`bXAg<Ag←[∃iS[Jbrpd4∃g←k9IfAC ←khAISOQh↓M←dAQQKSd↓eKCX↓eKYK¬gJ\@↓βhAi!JAiS5JXAC1XAiQ¬hAoCL~∃YK→hAi↑↓I↑Ao¬fAio∃CWS]≤AiQJ↓[seS¬HAiS5S]NAACiQf↓g↑Ai!ChAi!JAGQ%`~∃i∃]IKH↓i↑Ae∃MYKGPABAG=]giC9hAY←¬HA←\↓iQJAMkaaYd@ZZAQQKrA]KeJAYKer~)o←ee%KHAC ←khA9←SgJ↓[CeO%]fAC9HAGY¬S[KH↓iQCh↓iQSf↓oCfAQQJA[¬U←d~)G←]iISEki=d\~∀4∃)QJdjm⊗↓GQS`↓oSYX↓kgJAQQKSd↓eKIk9IC]h5e←of↓iKGQ9SckJ↓iQCh↓¬KYX4∃IKm∃Y←aK⊂AM←d↓iQKSH@li⊗↓ %β≠L\@@Q%\AMC
hXAi!SfAg¬[JAa∃eg←\↓i←YH↓[J~∃QQChAQQJ@dTm⊗AC9HAYCIOKdA
QSaf↓oKeJ↓iQJAIKCXAIKCg←8AiQCPAiKG!]Sck∀AoCf4∃IKm%gKHA%\AiQ∀AMSeMhAaY¬GJR\4∀~∃ %HA≥K]goKK,AeKC1YrAO∃hAiQ∀AgG←=`A←m∃dACY0A←LAQQ←gJ↓ YKGQe←]S
fA≥K]f~∃[¬OCuS9Kf}@↓)QKr↓W]Kn↓CE←kPA→SEeBXAi=↑\\\8\\~∀4∀ZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4Z~∀~) CiJh@ddA)C\@bdpd@bX`j[!M(~∃
I←ZtA⊃CkXA¬hA∨
→∪π
@~∃'k UKGhhA/β≥Q λtA
←[akQKdA EkSa[∃]h~∀4∀@~∃]β≥) ⊂t~∀@@b\@Ldn`A∃[kYCQ←dAM=dA A-(b@`@@@!gkaa=eiKH↓ErA+9∪0Qi4RR~∀@@d@8A-β0Z|A∪ ~AπQ¬]]KX↓G←]]∃GiS←8@QgkAa←ei∃HAEr↓+≥∪0!iZRR4∀@@@L\A-β`@Z|A%¬~A¬%gs]F8AG←]9KGiS=\XAY=←WfA1SWJA∧@fdnD~∀∩∩QgkaA←eiK⊂AErAU≥∪0QQZRR@4∀~∃
=dA[←IJAS]→←e[CQS←\A
CYXA ←DA⊃∃eeS←PACh@P`p@nPj@bf@`A qP\@df\\@A∩4∃oSY0AeKY¬rAS]→↑Ai↑↓¬←DA%LAs←TAo←k1HAeCQQKdAUgJA[∀ACfA∧AO↑[ KioK∃\\~∀4∀ZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4Z~∀~) CiJh@ddA)C]kCIr@br`d@bbhfl[ M(~∃
I←ZtAMiCme=fA~\↓≠CGe¬WSf@q≠βπ%¬⊗ACh↓≠∪([5ε|~∀4∃/←e-&ACaAKCdAQ↑AEJ↓IKOK9KeCi%]N\@↓)QKe∀ASfA9↑A]K∃HAM←HAY←]≤AISg
kggS=\~∃←8AieSYSCXA¬]HAa∃eSaQ∃eCXAA←S]iLt~∀~(b\A∨_AG←kIgJAo∀OYXA]C]hA!CeIG=ar\@↓!CaKHASfA∧A[CeYKY←kLA[KI%kZ\~(~∀d\↓∨LAG=kegJ↓oJA]∃KHA∨
$\@A!←oKm∃dXASPAoSY0AYSW∃YrAE∀AQCe⊂Ai↑A)kgiS→r~∃∨
$OfA→←dAS9ISmS⊃kCXA]←eWgQCiS←9ftAe∃YSCE1JAeK¬IS]N↓←LAMIKJAi∃qhASL~∃eK5CeWC YrAI%MMSGUYhAC9HAKqAK]gSYJ\~∀4∀f\AM←[JAQQS]OLACeJ↓gKeS¬X[CG
KgfX↓g←[J↓CeJAIC]I←4[CGG∃gf\@↓πYKCIYrAi!J~∃Y=OSGC0AS]i∃eMCG∃fAi↑↓iQJAQo↑AI%MMKdhAiQJ↓M←e[∃dASf↓]←hA∧AgKOent.
4. Few underlying mechanisms are strictly invisible. VM, like any
other such, has its demands but remarkably little overhead for
core-resident applications. Certainly, all interfaces should not be
forced into a Procrustean bed, requiring all file I/O to be through
demand paging.
Now, may we return the the discussion of workstations?
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
Subject: WorkS Digest V2 #13
∂27-Jan-82 0512 Jon Solomon <WorkS at USC-ECLB> WoriS Digest V2 #13
Date: 23 Jan 1982 2151-PST
From: Jon Solomon <WorkS at USC-ECLB>
Sender: JSOL at USC-ECLB
To: Works:: ;
Reply-To: WorkS at USC-ECLB
Reply-to: JSol at RAND-AI
Via: Usc-Eclb; 24 Jan 82 0:52-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 24 Jan 82 14:36-EDT
Works Digest Sunday, 24 Jan 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 13
Today's Topics:
New Products - Radio Shack's Upgrade For TRS-80 Model II
WorkStation Requirements - What does a WorkStation Need?
Query Replies - Multiprocessor WorkStations & Sound Output
Cheap Memory Prices - 64K Chip for $10 Each
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 23 January 1982 03:00 est
From: Schauble.Multics at MIT-Multics
Subject: Radio Shack announces new machine
Since I haven't yet seen this on the net...
On Tuesday Radio Shack announced a new top-of-the-line computer. This
is an upgrade to their Model II.
The computer contains bodh a Motkrola 68000 and a Z-80. It will run
all existing Model II software wpitten fo@HAiQJ↓4Zp`↓oSiQ=khAG!C]OJ8~∃)Q∀ACM]=k]GK5K]hAMCSHA9←iQS9NACE=khAg=IioCIJAM←HAiQJlp``@\~∀~))QJA CgSF↓G←]M%OkeCQS←\A%b@di`p`Ag
eKK\0AWKs ←CeH0A4Zp@X@lpβ↓AA1ε{;∀4T"N∩⊃βA β≠f{CCeε{≠≠↔⊗K;≥↓
qIα7↔KS∃β∨#?Kπ>)1↓E⊃B/ βn '9βn+7?KJaβS←xh+O↔⊗Kπ1βNsS↔K6 ∂↔Mε ;⊃β}s∃α∂.sSK?vK∂Mβ∨#g3∃πβπKπfc↔19¬##'Mπ≠↔33~β≠?HhQ⊃Qeβ↓84(hRπ9β/CSK¬ε33?CπIβ'Mα!]AArα↔cS⊗ β7↔n{KeβO→↓⊃Q+↓β≠?⊂βπ;?&C↔I↓ ⊃b-1π##↔_hPi↓Eβ↓Aβ≠␈⊃βπ;␈##↔Iβ⊃UY1εkπ/'v9β¬βn c'7.iβ?→β)EK-rαS#'~β≠W3bk 3?>p4+7∞≠#';*β←'3bβO↔3bβ≠?I↓Q⊃]Eβ↓84(hR¬β#∂∪⊃β∪O≠-β'~βπ[πNcπ 3*β≠?I↓Q⊃UAβ↓β≠?∩↓aα7∩p4(4T ∪⊃β
β∨KπεC'
β⊗{πK⊃π#=βSFKMβπv!α%β&C';-πK?UβF [∃β
β[↔KJβ;'∂*βC↔K≡{;π0hS∂?7π+S↔Iph($$MβπW0hP4)5ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji544Ph*∪π&)i↓I~α+π;. Ke↓ IaI↓ →MA6-~Q↓"≡ SWK& e$4T3K?5Rα#π;Zα←π3↑+Iβπ"α∞6Uk B∧4U≠W +.≠Qi↓¬;#πQε#?↔Mε α←?⊗[OSπ&K?9βv+↔⊃|hP4*←F Qβπ⊗)βS#*β πON→βK↔∂+'K↔n+;SMε{→β¬π;?K/∨#πS'}q1βπv!β#?:β∂π9π##↔eε∪∀4+n+Q|4Ph*%β>K31βfKOQβ&C↔O∃εc??O*βOC↔∨→βπMεkeβK/ W'K.k↔;S~β≠?Iε β←?⊗[OSπ&K?9hhP4)!
IαK↔∂≠?;π⊗ceβ#N;!βK/≠?3W&K?9β∞s⊃βC/∪≠?Kn ;∂∃ε;KπCFK∂M1ε Qβ3. OQ↓+ H4+B↓UEIπA↓Eβ6{IβSF)β ?'#?57}17S#*k3';*βOgO&+5β←O#!βOε+↔⊃β∨+≠≠'≡K↔;Qπ#<4+π∪↔[↔w!βS#*βWO↔∩β≠K?jβ#π[Ns≥βSzβ←π'"β≠?Iπ≠∂K↔.qβWC& S↔Mπ#=βπwH4+ON;;'≠N≠π;Qε#↔∨K.)β≠?∩β7?O"βSπO←→9↓αFK∨#↔∩βK↔O}cWS'}q1βπf{;≥β>KS!β&C∀4+FK∨#↔∩βOC↔.!βWC& S↔Mεs↔↔∪.!βS=εkπ';& '9β⊗+OC?w≠∃βSNk∃1β∞s⊃β∂}c?I1ε K∀4V{CS'}sMβ≠␈⊃β7?⊗)β↔cε+;O'6)β7?&+3M9αα%βπ∨≠W7∃π##πQπ##∃β?∪πC#N≠Mβ'_h+Kπ∨#↔I8hP4)!∩Iα/↔N∪?πK"βπ;⊃εk?WO*q↓α[}K∂∃αJz=β7N;#Qβ⊗)βπ9ε{CS'}q84(hQ!M%∧ ∂∂↔∨→βS=π≠↔∂?v#πKeε ;⊃β&+KS'∂∪eβO&{Kπ∨*p4(4RAQ%απ∪?∂↔∨≠';≥πβ?←↔∩βOW≠6K∂'↔w!βS=εkπ/∃εkeβ'w#↔Kπ∨#'[∃π≠?≠S> K∃β'∪W3dhS';S/∪π∂SO3∃9↓∧Iβπ3≡yβ;↔.!βC?>+IβO.3≠'∂N+;Qβ&yβ#πv#3∃βoIβ3π⊗;∀4+≡K7W3∂#'?;~p4(4RAU%α∞∪'3''IβS=ε≠?77.s'∂π&)β←'&Aβ?SF+IβC.{C3∃bβπ∨πNqβ←'&C?WQπ≠gOS.h4+Oε+↔⊃β>+SS'v9β'9π##∃β> e84Ph)!YJαπ∂∂/≠MβSzβ¬β∨}{⊃βC⊗K;S↔∩aβπ3&C?W∨Bβ;?Qεs↔∂↔∨≠πK'gIα∪?6+I73N[∃84Ph*#↔⊗)βπK*βC?O≡K 3∃π;πgMε{→β7.+S';:βS#∃ε ?[*βK↔G.KK↔7.sSMhhP4)!
IαS#*β?;3JβK↔π≡{;π f)β←πJβS=βn+↔Qβ&C∃β∨⊗ C#'∨→βK↔∂+'K↔n+;SMεKMβ←O# 4+
β3?∂∞aβ≠K∞k∃β .3≠↔Iε ;⊃β?∪πC#N≠MβC⊗{∂↔O≡{I9↓∧≠?77.s'∂π&K?;Mε≠?OS~βπK∀hSS?=εC'∨!π#=β∪zβπ;g&C';≥ε+3O∃r↓α7?∨!β?→π##∃β≡{OQβ}1βS#O→βOg∨#↔5β>K31β⊗(4+SF)βS↔⊗k';πbβπ;⊃ε3Kπ7*β W≠6+I1βv{QβSF)β∨K∂β#'∂~βCK?≡+OO?∩p4(4RAI%α∞seβ?f!β/↔N∪?πK"βπ;⊃εk?WO*β←'3bβ∪=9ααS#∃ε[↔g } K⊃βO→β∂3. K3eπ≠3?\hS↔;?.;!βSzβ ∃βF ;∪3.!βK↔n{S↔3Jβ'→β&+O'K.!9↓αn{WO∃π+C∪π&+MβSzβS#∃π≠∂K↔.p4+←Nc1βC⊗{ π gIβ#π6)βS=ε∪∃β#∞s∪3↔"β3?∂∞c3e1ε ;⊃β&{9∨QεK;[?g3∃βSF Qβ7.≠ 4+π∪?∂↔∨≠';≥ε ;g←∂I84(hQ!M%∧#'O-ε#K'[/→βπ;"βCK'w#↔KMε K∃β∞∪?WQπ##∃β}s3eβ&C';∨~βS#π"β#π[(h+↔∂}s?7eε{→βO≡ 3∃β&C↔O∃ε#πgMr↓α∨'6+9β¬εC'∨!n∪π;∪>K∪S!εs↔S←␈∪-1βO!β7πHh+ ∃πβ?OON∪3∃β&yβ↔3Nk';π&)β3?≡ 1β∪O≠-β∪⊗K[↔MbβSπC*β∪K'6+M1β6c?CCN+M04V+S
9ααS#↔≡)βπK*βπ3Ozβ3?←/⊃βK↔fKπ 'fKSeβ&+['∂/→1βOzβ←?K←≠SπSN{84+⊗+3'π⊗K3'SJβ∂?Wf!β∨=π+A9↓∧KQβ'~β;?Qε≠3↔π∩β←#↔&C↔Iβf{∂π1ε{IβK.k?S∀hS∪'O←→β←'faβK↔∨+3QβNqβ ↔'#↔Iβε+K≠?⊗kπ;∂*{∂?O"{K↔3N '3O#eβ≠␈⊃β¬βf K∨∀hSOgO&+51β↔+Qβ'~β¬βC␈≠O' Nc'Ser↓α¬β∨+≠≠'≡K↔;SgIβ3π⊗;∃β3}≠π1βn+7?KJβ7'∨G 4+∂/!β∪?>qβSK∞3≠'
ε+;?W>AβS=ε [?'"β¬βC/∪≠?Kn ;∂∃πβ↔;πg#eβ'2βCK?≡+OO'v84+'~β3?∂∞a9↓α∞sg←πJaβS#/∪∃β'~βO?7*βC?O≡K '3O#eβSF QβO.≠?;∪∂∪eβπv 4+S/∪S'π↔IβOS␈∪π∨∃εs↔↔⊃εs?Qβ⊗)β3?≡ 1βSzβ¬β←␈∪/OS∂#'?9εK9β¬εcπK∨*βOgO&+584T≠3↔π⊗ce1βNqβ¬β≡kπ31ε∪WO'v+OMβ&CπQβ&{↔Mβv{Qβ#∂3∃β∂}sS';.{WMβ∞≠∂↔O~↓#?HhSπ;eε ∂∂↔∨→%βSzβ¬β#N;!7Oε+↔⊃βv+S←?⊗Y1β3}≠π1β&KO-β'∪'[↔~βπK∃π∪↔GWO∪↔⊃8hP4)!"IαπMεK9↓!~I1βπ≡≠↔OMπ#=β¬εC'∨!o≠C↔↔"β;↔S>{K-βn eβ↔fK7';∂#∃βSF)β;↔. 4+≠␈⊃β3?≡ 1βC⊗{∂↔O≡K;≥9αα#?←/3↔I1εk?OQε{→βSF)β↔∂}s?7eε{→βO≡ 3∃βNqβ3π⊗;∀4+≡CπK↔"β7π∂FK;↔Mε≠?7↔~β≠K?jβ#'∨F+IβW&K3'k∂#'?9bβ←#'≡Aβ←'faβ3↔∞!βS<hS3?←/⊃βC↔⊗3?K7∞s∂∃1ε ;⊃βf{←↔Iπβπ∂/∞;';≥bβC?←/⊃βOWπβ3e1ε+S
β≡{OSMr↓α'_hSg?Uε 3K↔∞#eβ#∂3∃β¬π#↔K7Nsπ1β>KS!βε{←↔Iπ≠WCCgI1βπ&#';≥ε βO7∞c04+π∪?∂↔∨≠?Iβ>{9∨Qε ∪⊃βo+∂!β}1β¬β≡{OQβε+;π3'I1βπ∨≠W7'v9βS#∂!βWSNc'kπ&K?84V{→β7∞≠#';/→β'MεC'∨!r↓απ∨∞K91β
βO7πfaβ W≡K;↔O~β←'3bβ;↔↔"βO↔32k∂?;& ';↔ h+7π≡C';↔~aβπ;"β∪?↔≡q∨QβF [∃β&C'Mβ␈βS'?rp4(4TcπK∨*β7π∂FK;↔Mπ;'31πβK? ∞∪3eβ∨#'31ε∪∃βK/ W'K.!β≠?∩β3πK>)β+?↔→9↓α≡kπ30hS WONs↔OO/→β←?r;Qβ∪zβ7W∂Bβ?→β&C'M1ε{Iβ∂∞qβπ≠6{K⊃β&C∃βOf{]β;/#←?KZβ∪↔3∂H4+←F+9βK.k?S↔gIβOW⊗k'SSNs≥β¬ε∪πS∂Bβ+? ph(4)C)%α¬εs↔S←␈∪-βπ~β∪'O∨+OO↔"βπ ?6)1β←Nc1βπfc?]β≡{77WvK∂πSN{9β←O# 4+␈##↔K~q↓αOn 31β↔+O';/≠O↔Mεk'∨#"βWO∃ε≠π 3*αRY↓G;#'∂Bβ7πeε∪∃βS⊗K↔⊃βNp4*CO#SO -∪∨!%ε{Iβ∪N 3WAπβ#?;*β3';/→84(hQ!Y%∧cπK∨*βOgO&+7Mβ≡ 9βOF K∃βπ∪';S/∪M1β>C'3∃π≠7π3bβ WONs↔OO/→β←'faβ;↔. 4+SF+'Iβ␈;99↓∧cπK∨*βOgO&+7Mβ≡ 9β7␈∪∃β↔∂≠'3eε ≠≠?⊗!βπ9ε+cC↔w≠'[∃∧#?[↔∩`4+ /!βCKN≠↔Mβ}1β3π≡+IβC⊗K;S↔↔→βO#␈+3⊃β6 31β≡K∨;'6K∂π;&ceβ'rβS#∃ε3WSW⊗)84(hR'9β∨+77π↔I1β¬π≠7π3bβ WONs↔OMbβ?Iβ∞sg?;*β3π∂↑K;≥β∞≠∂↔O~βS=β
β[↔KJβ#'∨@h+OC.+⊃β;/#←?KZ↓"↔SF+K;↔"β?Iβ6 OS↔∩Iβ7W∨!β#π4)β↔[/∪gS#Ns≥β .K3QβNsS=β&C∀4+>{K/O& S'?raβ?Iπβ3W≥εK;S=εKQ9↓¬;?K/∨#πS'}sMβ'rβ¬β3∂∪∨∃β↔+O';/≠Mβ∂∞p4+∪.3';'&+3eβ≡CπK∃πβK';&+KMβ∞s⊃βS/∪S'π↔IβOS␈∪π∨∃r↓α'Qεk'∨#"βπ3Ozβ ∀4Wβ?OON∪3∃β&yβO#∂∪∃βO.≠?;∪∂∪eβO&{Kπ∨*βπ;⊃πβK?∂/≠O';:q↓α'"β7πeεs?Qβ⊗(4+∂F+πC↔to share Inperactive processing, but it is certainly
@IKCg←9CEYJ↓MWdA CiGP↓U←Ef8@A)Q∀AckKβ≠S'?pβ?→β>C↔S#/⊃βO#∂∪';≥ε#'O,hS∪K'6+Eβ'~βK↔π≡{;π f)β'Mε{C↔9bβO';≤)β'QεCπMβv+[↔Iπ∪↔π3gIβ ↔,qβ∪?v)84*&KO-β'∪'[↔~β∪=βF [∃βλβ∂3↔∂⊃β↔∂}s?7eε{→βO≡ 3∃β&C?W∨Bp4(4Ri555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555hh(4*& S∃iβ⊃Mα+∞sWπKJ↓Eea∩↓Eai≠⊃6⊗N h*≠K}iiαπv#K↔]¬→9α∂⊗{7πK'I↓r∞∀z5βπ"α6&Ql
%x4U≠W +.≠Qiα⊗+OC?w≠↔Mβ&yβO?n)βGW/≠S'?w_4+∂≠Qα∩B∩βπQαlJQ6b@h(4(K⊃9α'~β¬β7.cS%7π∪?∂↔∨≠?Iβ>{K/O& S'?rβ¬β∨}{⊃β'&+¬↓#6{Iβ∪Nsπ7'_h('∨⊗ C#'∨→1β≠␈⊃β↔c∞kC3∃Ky↓απ&#';≥ε ∪∪'&K?;πbβ#πK';πK∃h('C⊗{∂↔O≡{KMβ>KS!β≡CπK↔"β7↔7␈∪eβ∪}+O9∨"βO↔↔jβS=β∞#⊃β7.≠!βSxh('#∂∪∪←π⊗)β∂?∨!1βOzβ←#eεCπMβvyβ?;*β∪?;*β'Q⎇¬Z∩BIε Qα6M!6bbhh(4*JβOWOε+∂Qβ&CπQβO!βO3␈;Mβ∪␈;9βC⊗{∪W∂"β∪↔[.c?C7.sQβSzβπ∪∪⊗+OMβ&C∀4+π∪? 3.kMβ'w3?3[.!1β↔∨β↔∂'∞c3eβ⊗+∂πW≡)βS#*β'OO.)β?→εC?]β&yβ∪'∨#K' /#∀4+f K∨∃ε≠?7C/#πS'}sπ1β& O/MεKMβ''≠↔3→ε 9βπ~kg↔Qo+;O?g3↔⊃β⊗+O↔π⊗≠ 4+π∪? 3.i9↓"&C↔K∃ε K∃1ε{→β∂␈+KO∃bβO?7*β7π∂FK;↔Mπ;'S!ε≠?CK}≠↔OO␈∪M04VkπS#.kπS'≡ 1βC⊗{∂↔O≡{KM1ε+S
9bβ WQπ##↔O*βπK∃π∪↔π3gIβ¬β&+∨↔;/∪πS∃ε≠πO∀hS?→β>CπQβN{Uβ7. 91βN1α%β.s∪↔K∨#π;⊃πK?WIπ W↔O&K?99Jα;?S*βS#π"β∧4+o+3S%oβK?∂/≠O?Iε KKπv;↔7↔w!β'MπβK? ∞∪3eβ&C∃β?vceβ[N 3∃π;πeβ&yβWO*βπ84VJεBa#→I1β∞s⊃βSF QβSF)β?;gIβOS∞s⊃7πf{;∃β∨KOS↔jβWO'v9β?;*↓#S=εkd4+↑s?←3.#∨∃%bβS#∃β!MI= ↓A1β⊗+3'↔~β#↔π6K3eβ}qβ'S~βπ∪∪O#'?;∞aβCK}≠↔OO␈⊃↓"$hS ↔3N+[∃βO!∨Mβ∞q↓aAC1βO#∂∪';≥β!MIβn+7?KJβπ;⊃ε3πK7Ns≥β?/!βSπ≡[MβSzβ'QβNp4+¬¬≠7π3e#π3-εK7C3.k↔;S∂#'?9rαS#∃βAAaYεCπMβ
↓ ←'v#?] ε{9βSF)↓QM∩βS#K␈+∨ 4W;#'∂BβS#↔Jβ∂?7o+;'∂∂#∃1β∞s⊃βSF)βWO/⊃β∂?nkW;'≡ S↔Mπ;'S!π##∃↓C↓aY1εs?P4W##∃↓#→I9α≡{7↔?v)β∂?↔∪↔∂Qεk∃β#/∪∃β'2βg?Uε[;?]ε∪↔SS/⊃9$4Ph(%Mrα%β#Oβ?S#/≠'k∃π##πQπ≠?W;"β?WSπ+Qβ?rβ¬β←␈∪/OS∂#'?9εKMβ∂/#∃04PK WQε βS↔↔∪' 3*βCK?'+∂QβN#↔¬↓FK9βOF K↔⊃ε{≠≠'≡+M1βO!β'LhP'π;v{g';:q99%αq↓α≠␈⊃βO'nK3πIπ∪↔πO}sMβO␈+;⊃βNsCWQεKMβ¬πβK? f+584PJ'Mβ&C↔K∃ε β∨?}!βWO*β≠?Iπ≠?W;"β'9β∞qβ?≠6K∂∃⎇¬Z∩BIε Qα6M!6bbhh(4*/3↔IβF+πK⊃ε βSgε+←K'&+I⎇α/3↔Iβ>{K/↔"β'9β
βO↔∂⊗+SπKN 1βC}{1⎇αn{OP4V+7C3␈K↔KMπ≠↔↔5π#=β *βKπSF+IβWv+;3'>CS↔;.!βπ ␈+Qβπ≡{WOSN→β∪'∨#WK ∞s∂↔LhQ#S#*βK↔∂.sQβ∂.cQβ?2β?≠≠N≠∃β∪O3'∪↔∩β←π3g→β;?';'S#∨#π;∪Ns≥%9∧{→β∂␈+KO∃`h+S#/∪∃β'~β¬β#.kπ97.s∨';.+K';:β'OO.)β#↔⊗)βK↔> K∪3/≠Mβ?2β#?]ε≠WKK.sP4+>{K/Cf ∂↔Mε K∃β␈∪∨π;OS↔⊃1ε3?Iβ>C'∂!εC↔π∪εC?;↔~β7'∨G!β ∃ε βO?g+S'?r↓#'_hSS#↔⊗)∨Mβ
βCK?⊗c↔51π;#'∂Bα%βSFK;-β⊗+7π'w→βS=ε∪∃βO.+9%9∧ Mβ≠␈⊂4+ππβ3'∂∂#'?;~aα%β↑s?]βε+?C3*β←?K↑K;≥β}qβ';&+33'>+;Qβ␈β↔Kπ&K;≥β∨KOS↔o_4+SF Qβ←␈+3⊃β≡ e↓
v{]βπ⊗)βg?*βK↔πfceβO/∪∃βg␈)β←πw!βS=ε#=βSF Q⎇ π;#↔9πK?T4W#↔31εKQβSzβ∪↔3/#∃βπfaβS#*β≠'3/→βg?*β↔[↔∩β?←;.!1β≠⎇⊃β↔c∞kC3∃r↓"7πN∪∃α$hSO#?.c⊃β∂∞c1βSF+5↓ ≡c↔[↔∩⊃β?C/∪πS'v9βOg∨#↔7Mrα WQπ##'MεKO9∨"βS#∃πβ3π∂(h+S=ε3'∨#"βS#∃ε∪πSSf)β?→¬##∃α/C'OS.s∂∃β}1αε%rIα↔[.qβ←'&C?WQπ#π3/Ns≤4+>{K/O& S'?w→1β'"β'O9?!βS?zβ#πK"βS=βNkπ∨'v)βS#∂!βSKO3'π1ε ∂?W∨#' 4V3↔↔∪⊗ ∂-β>K31β⊗)β¬β/≠↔≠Wbβπ∪+.s∂Qβ&yβ¬β6 ;∂eπβ'↔∂*β?→β≡{≠S←∂∪∃9↓E≠'33Hh+↔c∞kC3∃RβπMαJβSgC*aα↔7∞≠Mβ←Nc1β .+Aβπ"β7∃βN1α%β∞∪?KQε{WQβ}1β¬β≡{77πv 4*%εK;'SN S∃β∞s⊃β∂F ;∨∃εkeβ7Ns⊃βπ⊗{WQ9¬##∃β∞≠?WO&K
β≠.+∪ π≡Yβ'Mπ+O↔≠.a84*∞s⊃β;}∪?∪eεK9β7Jβ?≠≠N≠∃β#∂→β↔[/⊃β∂?oβ3π'v+⊃βπ⊗{WQβ&C∃βS/∪7';∞aβ ↔/β';≤hSS?=εc?W∪gI9%α∂→β≠?∩β[?'≡)β';π+Q1↓K)∃β?2β←#π"α%∨[*β∪?;*βS=βπ∪↔Cπ⊗)βS#O_4+7∞K1β7/≠Oπ∨*β←?Wf!β#π6)β ↔.qβ∪?v)β7?⊗)β↔≠6K∂'↔w#3eβ∞s⊃β∂}k≠?K& 3eπ3'∧4W3?'∂*qα'→π#gC'v9β←↔⊗)β7?⊗)β↔≠6K∂'↔w!1α∪N≠SεCF{;∃β>{W3⊃εs↔[↔∩β#π[*β7π∪(h+'QεK9βSF)β W≡K;↔O~β7πK↑+Q9↓E∪↔7↔n∪↔I1εK9β?63'∂↔~↓#S#*β←?K←β3π∂*βπ ?/ 4+←FK∂!βN{Uβ↔GβK↔O≡+⊃β∂}s∂↔KrI1βSF)β[π∨!β7πV{K'SJβ?→↓↔;?K-∩β'L4WβπC↔∩kO#W633';:aβπ;"βπ9β∂;≠W1εc?Qβ}1βS#∂!β'MεSWOQπβ3π'rβSgCNs≥β'ph+S↔G!9%αF{]βO}{9βOε+↔∂!εK;CW"β←'3bβ ∃β≡{7↔K≡Kπ33Jβ['π⊗c∃β'~aβ?→ε≠?WK≡)04+∞s?S#/⊃βGW/≠S'?rp4(4PH$$$HKπO hP4)5ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji544Ph*∪π&)i↓I~α+π;. Ke↓ IaI↓ AiMYl*NP4T3K?5Rαπ;∪⊗+]αMrα∂K?n KSeβb∞J>jβπQαlJQ6εKp4*O.∪+↔∂#Q↓YRZβ∂#'π_4(4U3↔K'6K∂πSN{9β≠␈⊃β∂#. Aβ7.k?KeπβK'∂/→iβ¬ε3K'↔v!βπQ¬≠Sπ;6{K⊃β⊗+C?K'_4+SF Qβ#*β'Mβ/≠';≥β1R-β≡C'CMε Q↓⊃ ↓β↔π≡Aβ≠?∩βO?7*β#πK';πK∃π;?K-π##↔K*p4*SF+O∃βπ∪'∂↔~β?;3Jβ∨=βNqβ?;*β∪'K.≠S'?rq998HKπO hP4)5ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji544Ph*↔;"β?→α>{K.M∧#'∨↔∨ 4))RQ)))RQ)))RQ)))RQ(4)ji555jh4(4Ph(0=I~j≠↔ kAI↓↓∪→QP&
2 ↓↓J←?K]→α∪'>+OQα3⊃↓
E"↓↓↓hQ=EJj≠↔ kAI↓↓β⊃AP&&C∃α7}#↔Kπ&{I↓r>{K.N¬*N
6,~2
yJ←?K]→α∪'>+OQα3⊃↓
E"↓↓↓hR∪πS+Q↓Ee∧3↔ ↓ IaI↓β↓IQ6¬~P4*7∪?5i¬##∃αn{∪↔K∂#?I↓e;?K.≤αVN
l*∞2
ph*OW⊗S↔∂QRα←?K]→α∪'>+OQα3⊃↓
E h*O↔v#↔Ii∧RN>1ε QαV≤→6⊗∞d_4*S{Qα↑>∀ZMβπ"αVN
l*∞2 hRK↔CgI6S=Rα*O?bβπQα-~
6⊗≤b 4*6K¬i↓¬+O
6.≠3
mβ eα≠.⊃↓aIβ→iUUl*∩P4U3'¬iαα K1l∪7⊃mβ eα≠.⊃↓aIβ!iAMl*∩P4Ph*←?⊗[Mα∪N;↔OPJ↓↓↓↓α↓↓α≠⊗K∪πeb↓Eeα6+ ↓EKAI↓↓α↓↓↓α6{3W7*↓I↓i∧KOOW*↓EP4Ph*S?& e∨M¬#?C'∨→h%↓ααπ∪7Ns'OS⊗K['¬αiα;=∧k?K∃∧#'∨↔∨#L4)α↓↓↓↓α↓↓↓↓α↓↓↓↓α↓↓↓↓α↓↓αS␈β'∂M∧3?Iα&KO∂W∨≠'?8hQ↓↓↓α↓↓↓↓α↓↓↓↓¬β↔K∂.K[↔⊃∧{Iαπ∨#Wπ1∧≠?7Cf+c'SJα?→α∨KOS↔o_4)5ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji544Ph*∪π&)i↓EJα≠↔ ↔+πKeβ eaIβ↓AEMmαNP4T3K?5RαS#∃∧k?∪↔⊗ S?Iβb*O?bβπQα-~
6⊗≤b
x4U≠W +.≠Qiαvyβ7?⊗)β∪'>+OSLhP4*↔63↔∂SO3∃β←O#!βSFKMβ'∨≠W∃1¬:>J.~β'Mβv{]βπrβ∪'K.≠Qβ∪O≠SK'↔+S'?rβ3'O"p4*∪.)βS=π##∃βf{]β[}cW7∃ε{→β7∞K11αJβ←'3bβπ πv#?9β&C∃β∪N;↔OQε#'OS⊗K WSN{84+6{IβSFKMβ3O≠Q9αJβ7πeπ≠SπK β∪?'v9β∪'>+OSMε ∨π'rβ'→β&C∃β3O≠QβO& KSMπ#<4+⊗+∂?7*βπ∂SO3∃βπ> '99∧kπ'1εkπeβ⊗)βO↔w!βS=¬:>J.≤α6&Qlj
β?∩α↑.J]~α
Jbp4*SF)βπK≡C'[∃εc?∂π&K?9βF Mβ;␈!β∂#∞s∨↔⊃bβπ;⊃π;'31ε≠?;SNsW∃β&yβ ∃π+C∪π&+⊃84Uβ3↔π≡)β∂?w#';W*βS=βn '1βπ∪? 3.kMβπv!β7πNsSπ'v+;∂∃π∪↔GW/≠SMβ&x4*↑⎇∩.M6∀*FV⊗≥"α6&"j6
β␈⊃α↑>∀ZM6J-
V⊗N$αVN
l*∞2
ph(4*.s+?e`h)56U≠?04Ph)55ji555ji555ji555ji555ji555ji44(hR∪πS+Q↓EM∧3↔ K, Ke↓ IaI↓ AMa6-~Q↓"≡ SWK& e$4T3K?5Rα∨↔?⊗;∃:∂␈+3?W⊗KMβπ"α∞6Uk B∧4U≠W +.≠Qi↓π#?C'∨→β≠?∩β∪'O∨+OO'}p4(4S 9α7.cS'C⊗{∂↔O≡{Iβ←␈∪/OS∂#'?;_h*#?:β7π;JβCK?≡+OO?↔→βO#␈+3⊃β
β←?K←≠SπSN{9β#∂3∃⎇αN1β7?⊗)βS#∞qβ?;*aβ#?8h+O#␈+3⊃β&C↔eβ⊗)β↔cεc?'S.!|4(hR%βπjβ;?Qπ##';↑K;≥β}1βS#*β∪↔∪N≠πS↔"βCK?≡+OO?↔→β WNcQβ'rβS=β&KO,4V≠?;S⊗{33↔↔→1β↔&→91β∞cS#?.;!βSF+K∃βO→βCK}∪π 3JβO?7*β7'3. ∨∃βNp4+∪.#'∂π&K;≥β
βCK?≡+OO?∩βS=β6K3∃βF ;∪3Ns≥βπv!βπ;␈##↔Iπ#=βO≡ 9β∂}s[↔K≡K?84V3?Iβ&C∃β∪O≠C3πJ↓#%;*q↓β∂}s[↔K&K;≥β≡CπKπ∨#↔KMε ;⊃β?∪πC#N≠π1β}∪+↔∂'→βS<hS 'QnkπAβ⊗+CK↔≡+;Sπ&K?9%r↓αS#*βS#'v9α%β6K;⊃βπ+kk3Ns≥β'≠Qβ'9ελ4+ONs∨3∃o+O↔IεK;S↔⊗ ∂S'6)βOg∨#↔51εKMβ7␈∪∃βSF 9β? processor needed to
provide the interactive response, even in sophisticated applications?
Has anyone got any practical or theoretical experience in this area? I
am a firm believer in the need for multiple cooperating processes to
structure the application software and enable the user to schedule his
own activities amongst a number of interactive task contexts, but at
any one instant, he/she is only interacting with one of them.
2. Software extensibility
Is it important to most users to be able to add functions to their
workstation? If so, do the extensions need the full power of a
programming language? Are we anywhere near to being able to offer
such a language to non-programmers?
------------------------------
Date: 17 February 1982 1639-EST (Wednesday)
From: Jeff.Shrager at CMU-10A
Subject: Perceived or actual complexity of systems
I am seeking pointers to papers etc on the actual or perceived
complexity of programming languages, systems, interfaces, or processes
relating to computers (debugging, editing, etc). Are there any good
dimensions along which to measure perceived complexity? Have any
experiments been done to measure this? (Note that the kind of
complexity that we are interested in is not directly related to
complexity of algorithms whose metric is of the sort: NSquared, or
NLogN. Rather, we are looking for measures in terms of learning
curves, or funnction use statistics (or anything else that might
indicate this sort of "human" complexity, not "mathematical"
complexity)).
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂23-Feb-82 2345 AVB Perceived Complexity of computer and/or text editing systems
∂19-Feb-82 1548 Jon L White <JONL@MIT-MC> Perceived Complexity of computer and/or text editing systems
Date: 19 February 1982 14:37-EST
From: Jon L White <JONL@MIT-MC>
Subject: Perceived Complexity of computer and/or text editing systems
To: Jeff.Shrager at CMU-10A
cc: WORKS at MIT-MC, JONL at MIT-MC, Sheil at PARC-MAXC
Via: Mit-Mc; 19 Feb 82 1∀:39-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 19 Feb 82 14:45-EDT
Re Your quest:
Date: 17 February 1982 1639-EST (Wednesday)
From: Jeff.Shrager at CMU-10A
To: works at MIT%MC, human-nets at MIT-MC, *tens at MIT-MC
Subject: Perceived or actual complexity of systems
I am seeking pointers to papers etc on the actual or perceived complexity
of programming languages, systems, interfaces, or processes relating to
computers (debugging, editing, etc). Are there any good dimensions along
which to measure perceived complexity? Have any experiments been done to
measure this? (Note that the kind of complexity that we are interested in
is not directly related to complexity of algorithms whose metric is of the
sort: NSquared, or NLogN. Rather, we are looking for measures in terms of
learning curvEs, or funnction use statistics (or anything else that might
indicate this sort of "human" complexity, not "mathematical" complexity)).
I'd reccomend looking at a paper by Beau Sheil of XEROX Palo Alto
Research Center "Coping With Complexity", CIS-15 (ssl-81-4) April 1981.
Also someone else at Xerox did a recent PhD thesis about the
complexity of using text editing systems (maybe Terry Roberts?); probably Beau
can give you pointers.
Dr. Beau Sheil
XEROX Palo Alto Research Center
2400 Hanover St.
Palo Alto CA
Arpa-Net: SHEIL@PARC-MAXC
∂23-Feb-82 2345 AVB Test and archive
∂19-Feb-82 1536 Jonathan Alan Solomon <JSOL@MIT-AI> Test and archive
Date: 19 FebruAry 1982 13:36-EST
From: Jonathan Alan Solomon <JSOL@MIT-AI>
Subject: Test and archive
To: APOLLO at MIT-AI
Via: Mit-Ai; 19 Feb 82 14:01-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 19 Feb 82 14:18-EDT
This is yet another test, to be sure the list works from both AI and MC.
Someone asked me where the archive lives. Here is a brief explanation
for all to hear.
On host USC-ECLB, in one of my subdirectories, PS:<JSOL.WORKS>,
lives the complete archive of the WorkS mailing list. You may FTP this
file using the username ANONYMOUS and the password GUEST. Unfortunately
ECLB does not permit guest accounts, and AI ran out of disk space months
ago, hence the move of the archives from AI, where they used to be located.
If anyone has any trouble accessing the archives, I will be happy to
help out.
Cheers,
JSol
∂23-Feb-82 2359 AVB Workstations and multiprocessing
∂20-Feb-82 2235 Lars.Ericson at CMU-10A Workstations and multiprocessing
Date: 21 February 1982 0037-EST (Sunday)
From: Lars.Ericson at CMU-10A
To: WorkS at MIT-AI
Subject: Workstations and multiprocessing
Message-Id: <21Feb82 003749 LE60@CMU-10A>
Via: Mit-Ai; 21 Feb 82 0:39-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 21 Feb 82 0:53-EDT
1) (Random) Has anybody used the new MC68000 machine that came out
(somebody in California, begins with a C?) -- the one with a real
pretty white case, seperate monitor, fancy looking keyboard. Maybe
begins with an F like Formula Systems or something.
2) (Multiprocessing) I think the proper model here is that one has
several powerful (68000) processors in your personal computer, some
of which are attached to special devices (like two sharing the disk,
two sharing the screen, one doing mouse and keyboard as well as general
purpose work).
All processors would be general purpose "process pools", and programs
would be built up from processes communicating with an IPC mechanism.
In a sense, it would be simply an artifact that some of the processors
happen to be connected to the graphics display. One would use a general-
purpose distributed processing language to organize use of the processes
available on each processor. That is, each processor would be running
its own instantiation of the operating system, and would think of the
other processors as if they were on a tiny local net. Everything
would communicate with message passing, although this could be optimized
with a multiple-port memory shared among processors, as opposed to a
tiny ETHERNET-style arrangement.
This would make it possible to realistically think of writing programs
which devoted themselves to a single aspect of the graphics display
which operate in parallel with other non-display programs.
I think a reasonable amount of compute power in such a configuration for
really friendly use would be a pool of 10 68000's (the updated version
of 68000, of course).
By the way, I have implemented a distributed processing language which
allows one to build programs composed of processes communicating via
message-passing. It works with VAXes running Berkeley UNIX which are
connected via 3 MB Ethernet.
-- Lars
∂24-Feb-82 0004 AVB Fortune 32:16
∂21-Feb-82 2011 David.Anderson at CMU-10A Fortune 32:16
Date: 21 February 1982 2157-EST (Sunday)
From: David.Anderson at CMU-10A
To: works at MIT-AI
Subject: Fortune 32:16
Message-Id: <21Feb82 215737 DA80@CMU-10A>
Via: Mit-Ai; 21 Feb 82 22:39-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 21 Feb 82 22:42-EDT
The machine that Lars was describing sounds like the Fortune 32:16, a desktop
system based on the 68000 that is being built by Fortune Systems Corporation
in San Carlos, California. The basic system runs $5k, and includes 128k ram,
1Mb flOppies, and an operating system "derived from Bell Labs proven Unix
system." This is expandable to 1Mb main memory + 2⊂ Mb winchester.
Given the memory size, sounds like no bit-mapped display. Has anyone used one
Of these? And what about the Wicatsystem? (Any one know if it has a bit-
mapped display?)
--dave
∂21-Feb-82 2306 Michael Muuss <mike@BRL> UNIX & Workstations & Networking ...
Date: 22 Feb 8∩ 0:15:36-EST (Mon)
From: Michael Muuss <mike@BRL>
To: David.Anderson at Cmu-10a
cc: WorkS at Brl
Subject: UNIX & Workstations & Networking ...
Via: Brl-Bmd; 22 Feb 82 0:22-EDT
Nix on bit maped display (at least at this point) for the Fortune machine,
or the Wicat.
I had a chance to use both at the UNIX Convention. The Fortune machine
placed you at a (huge) menue to start, and allowed you to drop into
any one of a large number of levels. One of which was the UNIX Shell,
fortunately. A useful mechanism for novices, except that I hate
flying cursors around using the keyboard.
The Wicat does not currently run UNIX, although I am told that it
definitely will after they upgrade the processor board and the
system bus (!). Right now, what they have is a rather unsatisfying
clump of UNIX utilities ported to run under their own operating system.
With all the messiness that that entails. I understand that they are
promising real UNIX "soon".
At the convention, HCR anounced UNIX for the PERQ. The demo they did
was *ultra* spiffy, but it turned out that it was running under the
PERQ's native system, and was the software equivalent of a glossy
sales brochure. If they can come anywhere near the quality of the
demo with the result, I will be petty impressed. Of course, the PERQ
is rather expensive.
An interesting use of a 68000 was the BLIT, also reported on at the
convention. The intention here was to give PERQ type graphics and
multiple windows/viewports/whatever on a bit mapped display, with
communication to the host over 9600/19200 baud style async lines,
using the UNIX MPX link protocol (oh well). Very nice functionality
with extremely impressive response, considering what was going on.
This is definitely the way of the future for multi-user "workstation"
computers to interact with their users... The cost was also exceedingly
low, rumored to be around $6Kish for the prototypes, and $3Kish for
production models (which should be marketed by some little company
sometime in the not distant future). (For the curious, the designer
reported that BLIT was != Bacon Lettuce Interactive Tomato, and it
was != Bell Labs Interactive Terminal. DEC-10 fans will recognize
the origin).
Lots of groups are doing lots of neat things with 68000's. Most of
the ones I have heard about are using UNIX. Are there any other
sets of software being developed on the 68000?
On a slightly different note, one thing which distresses us here at
BRL quite a bit, is the fact that most of the people who are building
these workstations (Hewlett Packard, Wicat, Fortune, etc, etc) are
all answering "Oh yes, we support Ethernet, RS-232, bla, bla" networking,
so you can connect them all together and do distributed processing
and all these wonderful things. When pressed about what kind of
networking protocols they plan to use, the answer is ususally
something proprietary or special or otherwise incompatible.
Various parts of the Army (and other DoD elements are probably doing
the same thing) have started recommending that ALL computers,
where ever possible, support the DoD Standard Networking Protocol
TCP/IP. Our corporate goal is to be able to have uniform communications
(uniform in functionality and interface, not in speed) between
as many of our machines as we can, incLuding all workstations sufficiently
non-braindamaged as to be able to multi-program. We would like to
be able to go on travel, and still be able to get to our personal
workstation through the nearest TIP. How do others feel about this?
Best,
-Mike
∂22-Feb-82 0902 lwa.mit-csr at BRL Fortune 32:16
Date: 22 Feb 1982 1050-EST (Monday)
From: lwa.mit-csr at BRL
Reply-to: lwa.INP at MIT-Multics
Subject: Fortune 32:16
To: WorkS at mit-ai
Via: Mit-Ai; 22 Feb 82 11:13-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 22 Feb 82 11:27-EDT
The information I have seen indicates that neither the Wicat nor the
Fortune 32:16 has a bit-mapped display. In fact, as I recall, both
have 24x80 CRT's.
-Larry Allen
-------
∂24-Feb-82 0008 AVB Re: UNIX & Workstations & Networking ...
∂22-Feb-82 1138 lwa.mit-csr at BRL Re: UNIP & Workstations & Networking ...
Date: 22 Feb 1→82 1113-EST (Monday)
From: lwa.mit-csr at BRL
Reply-to: lwa.INP at MIT-Multics
Subject: Re: UNIX & Workstations & Networking ...
In-reply-to: Your message of 22 Feb 82 0:15:36-EST (Mon)
To: mike at BRL
CC: WorkS at MIT-AI
Via: Mit-Ai; 22 Feb 82 13:18-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 22 Feb 82 13:24-EDT
With respect to uniform network protocol standards:
HEAR! HEAR!
Our experience here at MIT has been that interconnecting network
HARDWARE is (relatively) easy. We have two different ringnets, an
experimental (ie 3 Mbaud) Ethernet, Chaosnet, and of course Arpanet,
and it is possible to forward packets among all of them. Unfortunately,
there are almost as many network protocols as networks, and it appears
that protocol translation is a very difficult problem.
Protocol standardization within an organization is, of course, as much
a political and administrative problem as a technical one. Each of
the available network protocols has its own technical advantages and
disadvantages. Also, writing network software seems to require a great
deal of time and manpower, so I don't expect the situation to improve
very quickly.
-------
∂28-Feb-82 1126 AVB Re: Works archive...
∂20-Feb-82 1615 Zellich at OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich) Re: Works archive...
Date: 20 Feb 1982 1503-PST
From: Zellich at OFFICE-3 (Rich Zellich)
Subject: Re: Works archive...
To: cbosg!nscs!vrt at BERKELEY, WorkS at MIT-AI
cc: Zellich at OFFICE-3
Via: Mit-Ai; 20 Feb 82 18:32-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 20 Feb 82 18:44-EDT
The complete WorkS archives run almost 2 full large-size 3-ring
binders when run off on a line printer. The full file could be sent
to you as a message \maybe/, but I know my message system can't handle
a single file that large; maybe someone elses can. Of course, I could
edit a header onto the front of the file with XED, and then write the
edited version out as mailer-file [--UNSENT-MAIL--].cbosg...etc., but
I don't know if \your/ message system could handle it then.
Try a message to WorkS-Request if you decide you want the whole thing
- maybe the moderator can break it up into manageable chunks for you
without too much trouble.
A synopsis would be kind of hard - the discussions have changed quite
a bit over time as the list has matured. I think about half of the
archives will be found to be from the first 3-4 weeks of the lists
existence.
Good luck,
Rich Zellich
-------
∂28-Feb-82 1126 AVB General Works comments
∂20-Feb-82 1813 ROSSIDat WHARTON-10 (David Rossien) General Works comments
Date: 20 Feb 1→82 (Saturday) 1906-EDT
From: ROSSID atWHARTON-10 (David Rossien)
Subject: General Works comments
To: works at MIT-AI
Via: Mit-Ai; 20 Feb 82 19:08-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 20 Feb 82 19:25-EDT
Hi:
¬
I'm a new WorkS member, havIng spent last night reading the archives. I'm a
member of the Office Systems Technology Division of a Fortune 10 corporation,
involved in internal office automation consulting for the corporation,
worldwide. My group has a good bit of experience with "workstations," and we
currently have a group of Stars on an Ethernet, some Apollos on Domain, and I am
typing this in via a Datapoint on an ARC LAN. My particular interests are in
workstations in an office environment, integration of workstation functions, and
local area networks.
First, some observations, which also serve to answer some questions thatpeopLe
have raised thus far:
1) What is a workstation? I consider a Workstation a sIngle-user (interactive)
computer. I expect most "interesting" workstations (e.g. those we want to
talk about) will also have the following functionality: high resolution
display, "interesting" user interfaces (e.g. CAT, mouse, tablet, touchpanel,
etc.), CPUs more powerful than the Z-80, and local area network capabilities.
2) On LAN speeds (someone asked why it mattere). After a good deal of
research, I consider the question of speed of an LAN to be similar to the
question of how good a roadbed a highway has. What that means is it is
@i(potentially) easier to go faster down a well paved highway than one with
potholes, and it is @i(potentially) easier to utilize a workstation which is
connected via a fast (10MB+) LAN. However, this does not mean that you can't
go fast on a crummy highway, or inch along on a highway made like the
Autobahn for that matter; the speed YOU travel is a function mostly of the
car you drive, not so much of the condition of the highway. Likewise, the
workstation, its configuration, and its architecture are the primary factors
in determining the its functionality, not the network it is connected to. It
is not particularly relevant to simply examine, say, an Ethernet, without
understanding what you will be attaching to it, and how the system will be
used. For example, think of how a system where workstations havE local
storage (connected directly, off the LAN) in addition to a filerver (on
the LAN) in contrast to workstations which rely entirely on a file server.
In the former, the workstation need not access files over the LAN too often,
and in fact, the local storage could be "intelligent" and serve as a sort of
cache memory, automatically downloading from the file server what it thinks
the user might require next. I would not be at all surprised if under this
type of workstation configuration, a twisted pair (standard telephone wire)
9.6KB connection would serve all non-interactive voice/video applications.
3) On why we need a 10MB or greater LAN -- in fact, as the above comments
explain, we probably don't. That 10MB was formulated given the following
assumptions: a high resolution, bit mapped screen (1,000 by 1,000 is 1MB), a
typical network utilization rate of 10% (that is, since the network is a
shared resource, we assume we only get a 10% piece of the pie), and no local
storage. Now, if we have a maximum tolerated response time of 1.5 seconds to
put up a page on our screen (studies suggest that 1.5 seconds, if constant,
is a pretty good guestimate) we need an LAN speed of:
1000x1000B(screen size) x 10(utilization factor) / 1.5 sec =
about 6.6MB, which we round up to about 10 MB since all the numbers were
pulled out of a hat anyway and we just wanted an order of magnitude. As
mentioned above, notice most of the assumptions made are functions of the
@i(workstation) design. The primary assumption is that we would want to go
directly from file server on the LAN to the workstation screen, without using
the local storage as buffer/cache. Other assumptions include: no compression
algorithm in the bit mapped display (or even the fact thata bit mapped
display is required), and network utilization level of 10% (no-one really
knows, buT clearly the network will be required more if we always use the
file server than if we have local storage, therefore higher uTilization is a
function of the workstation configuration too).
4) And now, a question -- anyone on this list from the SPICE project? I had a
PERQ demonstration last week, but they really didn't say anything of great
interest. I have a writeup done by another member of our staff which
compares the two, concluding, as did I, that while there are some cute things
in both, till there is any end-type software who cares!? What I'd like to
know from SPICE/SALT people is, is there any documentation available to
non-CMU people oN the projEct, where it is going, and what it is trying to
do? I @-]←nX↓M←dA%]giC9GJXAQQChAQQeKJ↓%SmKIbASf↓OKii%]NA'
eSEJ↓iP≥β↔+9β?pβ'SLhQ↓↓βn ∂#'v)1β ,εBε/m_ ]]≠≡$ Suλ
≥H~3NL<X8nM=Y(
]y→( ∀≠_(λ↑≥9→$ ;Yλ ,;]<eD_]5↓QHλλ∞,=~→.$_<h∞M→(≥L≥Z;≠ ∀_X= =λ≤}.>→;#∧∞z~8m∧~<h ∀≤Y8-D≠≠|n4(λ∩.4≥~→.,(_ ⎇x;λ
|C"H∧∧~;] ↑X8u
≡Y(∀l>Z8Y$ =Y;NN8;≠∂↔hλ∃m =λ_.,(≥~-\(→TL≥9<h m|H≤L]→8<m≤[→( ]Y =.<<C"D∧λ≤≤M|≥8⎇∞7c"C!*y;∪¬D≥~_.D|h~.D→[|D
[⎇h∧¬+(λλL=Y(
-||z,]H
∀Iztr1λ
r⊂4JIsJ#!!"C"AQC"@↓AlN (l8K.ε$λ ,&'α05H$λλα(-= ;,≡λ→[n$≥~→$
z8x.Dλβ"D↓lLK(l8K.ε$λ ,FεB4R$ =λ∪)~ 6⊗∧¬∀Z8m <Yλ ≥≤{{E∀α0Z.E;8<∧ [|H∞M→(∃m≤x=λ∧∧λβ"HL=→.DεLH⊃L\H .'εH ,f&K14jA"Q\M⎇.H∀I∀_=λ Y5 6 ∧
∀Z,=_<Y∧ ;≤{me#"Tn\ZY8nGH⊂Z.E;8<∧ [|H∞M→(∃m≤x=β!*≠nHλL=Z9¬h;Y→..{{H ≡λ⊂s*U,,⊂!QXxnD∞{|Zn4_= Y5 0)⊃"R;EZY<≠∂∃5≠nD ;⎇<D
9<|l≤y(≠ld L+(l8K.ε$ L-&u14u↓QUZ8'$λ∪:.E0:.dεLH⊃L\H∞∧Dε,nLG∃11∃↓QUZ8'$λ⊂\ME0[9π4 LHλl8H∞ε$ ,nF6K11
A"C"I∀~_=LT_Y9-d~;H∞M⎇8z∧∞z=~∧ ≠⎇x.,λ⊃{n,≠{H
|H∀→-m;\⎇-L(∀Y.<8<Xm¬λ≥z
≤zλ~.1"[8.-y=~-lh≥~ T∃r0h~ Hλ
⎇→;H ∀_<zl\λ~~-T_8[n↑λ_Z.E;8<∧ =X:-L8Z;
≡≡(⊃M}C"]
(∃r(85 λ ≥Yλ≥
⎇→λ∩
≥(≠qD
=≤h
≥<≠tNL;Xy$ [|H ∀≥{|Myz0z~ww⊗⊂~2P92\64rrβE4w⊂_P62z≥2y⊂2_z2r⊂∪7{2vX2y⊂_N\_WεBεE⊃πλ↔⊂↔⊂∀2w4w≤zv0P∀2yr`\1t⊂4\P;wy~tw3P≥tz4⊂⊂w2<P⊂2qt:≠v9qt→tvP7Y⊂)z0[37y2βE*w4]2y9t]<P:7H4w:2Yy0z2H44yP→y0x4~qyP0[2⊂"z~2y72]⊂17p\29P;Zz4⊂+Ra`jεB40y2≥py2WβEεE⊃∃rP;t[6⊂82\37y6H7zy⊂→4y9zλ4w:2Yy0z4[w⊂:2\z9P4[⊂6tr b2qr[q2y⊂≥tz4⊂≥42FE→y0x4~qyP1Xy2⊂4[9z0v≠2r⊂4[⊂0P+Ra`j⊂∀|yz2[P_ZX ⊂⊂ y\zvtw→P;rP→w1wz[:2y⊂≠7FE6Xu7y⊂≤97q6→vyV⊂≥rP9t≠zv2⊂~0{2P_P;wy~tw3P≤97z7]<x2P≠s⊂0P_wvx6→z2P;[y5FE≤z0z4[w⊂;t]4⊂14]⊗vpxλ3y0x~4qyVλ"z42\72z⊗λ&a[≤ __⊗⊂ ~[%aλ) fVλ_X&aβE+tw_t2yz→y⊗⊂_Sa⊂36≠x8<Vλ0w2⊂∃da`jλ9ws:≥py2P~w⊂%0[:py<KεEεEλ$z⊂4\P7zyλ2|82Xz0z4[w⊂:4_z⊂+dP`j⊂;Zv6⊂:_urP:~2P;w\5P9z_z4wwλ4w:7CE897Y:qz4[w⊂4wλ2py6≡P_\\ ↔⊂⊂*~2P:7]0v⊂8_qupsYP;wz[2⊂92]0tv⊂→7yεE_x897↑4vpz→v<P∩ Y⊗__ ↔⊃εEβE#7yλ6wy2H4w37\6pz4[w⊗⊂1[w:0q]≥εE$≠{py2λ)↔⊂#[y27wβE(2w~w9zv_P)2yYpy1tβE→_⊂∩:y94Xpw2P∀z92r]εE&p\4w0P⊃2v⊂)→|V⊂!PP⊂≤X ≤XFE _YVYNY⊗[→ _εEεBεE⊗VH)4qt_y2⊂$[9wwεB⊗VVVKVVFEβEεE H;t4v→P10qZV⊂$P→4yqz\yrr⊂≥tz4⊂∩7{py→⊂#wy→7w⊂3≤7vP(→w4w9]v0P)→yrpy_tεE:~2P87\ytq4[4z<P≠s⊂:yZw3P:~2P)jS⊂3y0\44qyH9|yz→vP4wλ:42P∃da`jλ9|yz→vWεE⊂yP4zλ::y7→r⊂7z]⊗⊂:4→P+daPj⊂24\x60|H24r⊂≠7z⊂4_{2P9]s34qZrw:⊂≤2ywv≥z4wwβE:7P_2P1w[x0z4X62P;Zz4⊂:~2P)jS⊂3y0\44qyH17py→↔εE$[⊂:42H6rpw≥t4v2K⊂+daPj⊂9z_y:2rλ;wy5Zw3P7[⊂0P&≠{ry⊗\2ywv≥z4wwλ14z⊗[px⊂εB24yx≠0|P7\:4wwλ7s⊂:~2ty⊂≠{w⊂2→ytswλ37y⊂≥42tyλ1zy9→w:⊂9↑yz2vKεEεE⊂P72{H1wvx_w<V⊂∀jg⊂+[y5yz_z4wwλ$w1Vλ40yP~:yz⊂≤2qrt]2r⊂;→w::y→P34w_w1tw→FE;t]4⊂:4→P6ty\tww⊂≥7P2|_v:yt]2v<P≠pw:s_qz:y→P)jgλ;wy5\z0z4[w9P3≠yεE:~2P;w\5yz0]4ww⊂≠py5r]860qYW⊂#7\⊂3:y≥42y⊂~w37y≠pz4w[⊗⊂86→pyrP_ww:0Xz≥εEβE∧ijS⊂+wy~yz0z~ww⊂$[1WεEαh'P!∪l⊂→X ~FE∧Tz0w3≠y2⊗⊂⊂`P≤Z X~FEαT~_ZJP~≤Z \≤Y→βEεE ∂28-Feb-82 1143 AVB Wicat Graphics
∂24-Feb-82 2206 Jeffrey at OFFICE Wicat Graphics
Date: 24 Feb 1982 2042-PST
From: Jeffrey at OFFICE
Subject: Wicat Graphics
To: works at MIT-AI
Via: Mit-Ai; 25 Feb 82 0:13-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 25 Feb 82 0:24-EDT
I recently visited Wicat at their home office in Orem Utah. They are
located in A beautiful area about an hour's drive south of Salt Lake
City - directly beneath what appears to be skier's heaven.
They are currently reworking the 150-WS (~$10000! workstation which
is 68000 based. The renovations include a transiTion from Motorola's
bus (Versabus?) to multibus, more dense memory (boards),
incorporation of memory management (to truly be able tk support
multiple pRocesses), and development of a "native" unix. Currently,
WicatEk]S`DASf↓gS[a1rAg←5JAki%YSiS∃fAoQ%GPAeU\Ak]⊃KdA≠
&XAi!J@A/%GCh~)←aKe¬iS]NAgsgQKZ\@↓≠π&A1←←Wf↓BAYSQiYJA1SWJAYβ0A-5&AC]⊂ABAY%iiYJ↓YSWJ4∃k]S`@QmKIrAYSQiYJR8@~∀~))QJAMsgiK4@b``P4Hd@```R↓SfAS8AaeKQirAO=←HAQ¬eIoCIJAgQ¬aJ\@↓∩AEK1SKmJ4∃/SG¬h@ASL@Ao←ISS]N↓←\AB↓ ≠αA⊃SgVA
←]ie=YYKd↓i↑@AIKaYC
J@Ai!J@AGUeeK]P~∃Ek→MKee∃HAG←9ie←Y1Kd\@↓'←Mi]CeJ[]SgJX↓/SGCPASfAAe←Oe∃ggS]≤AiQJ↓gsgi∃Z~∀b@`AMe=ZABA→KnAk9SpAkQSYSi%KfAi<ABAY=h@A←_@Ak]%p@AkQSYSi%KfAi<ABAiIkJ~∃9CiSm∀Ak]S`\@A/%GChA!←aKf↓]CiSYJAk]%pAoS1XAek8AEKM=eJAgU[[Kd8@~∀~)∨]J@↓S]iKIKgiS9N@Ai!S]N@↓Sf@AQQCh@↓/SGCP@AiQ%]WfA= ~OKIfAoS1XAYS-JAi↑4∃IKm∃Y←`A¬aaYS
CiS←9fAk]⊃Kd@AU]SpXAEkhAiQKMJ@ACAaYSG¬iS←]LA[SO!hAek8~∃k]⊃KdA≠
&AiQ∃eKEs∀@ACm=SIS]≤Ak]S`AYSG∃]gS]≤AGQCIOKfA→←dAK9HAkg∃efAo!↑~∃I=\OhA
CeJA¬E←kh↓k]Sp8@A∩O4@A]←PAeKC1YrAgUeJAQ=nA[k
PAiQ%fAo←UYHAg¬mJ~∃≥SmS]≤AiQJ↓MCYY%]NAG=ghA←_Ak]S`AYSG∃]gKf8@~∀~)≥←nXACE←Uh@AOICaQS
f\@A]SGCh↓←MMKIfAB@⊂r``A ←CeH↓oQSG A[Cr↓EJ@A¬IIKH4∀Qa←Mh[akIGQCg∀RAi↑AC]rA/SG¬h@A-⊃(\A)!JAE←¬eHAC⊃IfA[∃ISkZ↓eKg←1kiS←8~∃Oe¬aQSGL\@@A$@AI←8Oh@AIK[K[ KdAi!JAKq¬GhAe∃g←YkQS←\@4Ag←[∃iQS]≤@AYS-J~∀f@aph`@\Aβh↓C]r@↓eCiJ0@AiQ∀AIK[<AoCf↓mKer↓S[ae∃ggSm∀\@A/%GChA≥eCaQ%Gf~∃¬eJAM=dAeK¬X\@~(~∃∩@↓eKGK9iYr@↓gCn@↓iQJA≥eCaQ%GfA←→MKeK⊂AErA→←eoCIHA'sMiK[f↓oQ←g∀@lp`@`~∃o=eWgi¬iS←\ASf@↓aCii∃e]KHACMi∃d@Ai!JA'i¬]M←e⊂A'+≤↓o←eWMiCiS=\\@AQQJ~∃→←eoCIH@AOICaQS
f@Pb@`apb@``AC9HAMk1XA←L↓eKCX↓iS[J$AoKe∀AY←m∃Yr\@↓)QJ~)/SGCPAOeCAQSGf↓oKeK8OhA]∃CeYr↓iQChAMS]∀XAEkβ!β≠?∩↓⊃eAαβS#↔Jβ←πK*β[↔KHh+Oπ&KO≠gNs≥9hP4*+.3≠K↔JαOS?v(4(4Tk↔;3zαCπKZaα∂¬ph(4)ji555jh4(4Ph(0=IBj≠↔ kAI↓↓ QP&
2 ↓↓JK∃i¬;'∂π"α∨KπεC'∂LhQ=I*j≠↔ kAI↓↓β↓QD&⊗K31αv{←'∂↑I↓r∞≤!::><J∞.&¬~U6N≤zJ∃yJK∃i¬;'∂π"α∨KπεC'∂LhR∪πS+Q↓IQ∧3↔ ↓ IaI↓∪→EM6¬~P4*7∪?5i∧∪'31∧s?←'≡[%↓r≥~⊃::⎇:&∞.LαNU6≤~>J∃ph*OW⊗S↔∂QRαK∃i¬;'∂π"α∨KπεC'∂LhRS=i∧S↔≠≠⊗+eβπ"α>~~L~∃5HhS∂
iπ;?K/~βπQαlJQ6εHh*'9m∪↔C3JjS=i¬K?WIεk↔OO∞;∃β?2↓IQ66+ 5a∩↓IAQ∩jBNPhR['¬R↓α7'"jπ%mβ⊃Uα≠.⊃↓aIβ→iA]l*∩P4U3'¬iαα K1l∪7⊃mβ⊃Uα≠.⊃↓aIβ→iEIl*∩P4Ph*¬β≡c'∨#"β∂?K⊗+∂S'}qβ≠K}iβS#∂!β3π∨!β;?&)βπ ␈+Qα←N≠πQβ7→9βSF)αNVph+←?⊗[OSπ&K?9iααS#∃∧3?K←∂∪⊃αS.≠#;?f{∨eβ?∪πC#N≠Mβπv!α∞B*β ?π⊗#L4+∂∪∃β;␈!β?;gIβCπ'#↔K;.!βπ≠&+IβSF)αNVrβ ?π⊗#M1β&C↔eα
∩∃βSF)αNVrβ ?π⊗#M84U##∃β⊗{πK∪~βπK∃ε∪↔';:β3'∂.sO↔⊃ε{9β¬εs?97/C∂3W≡K[∃β⊗ O'MεK9β?⊗#↔H4W#=βC⊗{7?S*βS#↔jβπMβ&)β≠π∨#=βO& ;∪π⊗#M↓#∂→α7Wg#' W~βπ;⊃∧+S#↔⊗s↔Q$hSπ;⊃π≠#πK*βO?≠';πK∃ε#↔[↔f{C7↔w!β↔≠6{KQ8hP4*%π##';ZβS#∃¬~V9β?∪πC#N≠Mβπ⊗)β'7π∪↔OOO3∃βπ~β←↔3baβ W"α%∨5ε∪'πO.!84(Ji5α Nc04)ji555jh4(4Ph(4(0=IBj≠↔ kAI↓↓ QT&
2 ↓↓J←';&{]α7∞sπ∨↔n+;QhQ=I*j≠↔ kAI↓↓β↓UH'&+∂[πB ←πSn S!π> SπK'→πC3⊗{←3↔JβπQα⊗+K/↔f+e&>K;∪?:α7π;∞;↔7↔w!↓↓hR∪πS+Q↓IU∧3↔ ↓ IaI↓β↓iEYS!U6B≥ 4*≠⊗{5iβ&+∂[πB ←πSn S!π> SπK'→πC3⊗{←3↔JβπQα⊗+K/↔f+d4*&yiβ←∂#7πSB ∪↔∂6 aπW≡∪[πa∂;?K/~βπQβnKQ77_h*OW⊗S↔∂QRα←';&{]α7∞sπ∨↔n+;P4U3'¬iαα7'Ql %m↓∪)α≠↔∩↓aI↓≠QEa6,"P4*6K¬i↓∧∪K16⊗k⊃m↓∪)α≠↔∩↓aI↓≠QIM6,"P4(hR%βπjβ3??↑K;≥β6{Iβ'v3?K7∂#'?9ε{9β←Ns∪?]εkπ;π>+7↔;"βOSK∂#↔∨'/→βπ;"βC↔?εc↔M≤hS↔cC/∪'↔;≡)β←'&AβS#.i↓#3N[↔M1ε#'O3N[↔M1ε+S
9Jq↓α%>!βπCπ∪↔∂'∂#∃βπwIβC?NsS↔K_h+S=π∪↔C?↔#Mβ?rβS#∃π≠W +.≠Q1β/≠A9β&C?O∃ε ?W"β∪↔ON;;Mβ⊗ O↔⊃ε{9βSF)βK↔∨+3SLhS?→βπ≠g∂#}c?∨'≡ 1β↔Gβ↔K'n+;Sπ&K?98hQ↓αOε+∂'≠N≠π33Jaα%∨6)βK↔∞!βS#∂!βS#*αOSπ∩β∪↔ON;;↔K~βOC↔w!βO?n)βS↔w→β?→εkπ94hSg↔π↔→β∪↔≡K∨;'v9βS#.KIβW≡+Iβ'w#↔K≠∞≠∃βπv!β3π⊗{KπS␈∪e7S/≠S↔⊃π##↔'∩βS#↔␈∪'↔Mph*#π6)βS#*βK↔O.cSMβ}1βS#O→β↔cε+K'7.sSπSN{9β .+9βK/β?KS.!β'9πβK';#x4)↓∧3';πfce1β>CπQβ&yβC↔␈β3∃β&C';-ε{→β?6+K3ππβ';≥π;';∪␈;M⎇↓∧ Mα%?3∃β;␈!βWO. 4+¬π;';∪␈97?KN+;S↔"βOgO&+51αJβ#↔OO#πS∃π#=β[.sSWK*βπ9β␈β';'}q1β /!β↔cε+K'↔v≠∀4+>KS!β≡cWSS/∪↔⊃β&+O/Mπ≠W∨∨/≠SMβ&yβ7∃π##πQ∧Iβ←?.c∪9∨"β3'/*β?[↔⊗cπCCNs≥β←Ns∪?←~p4*?2β∂?W↔≠∃1βN1βS#*β←';&{←Mβ∂∪↔9∨"βπ31ε{9βSF)βO∂⊗+↔91πβπKSN 33eεC'∪∪.qβ?Iεs?Q0hSS#↔Jβ#π[*βS=β⊗)β∂π& 3?∨.+⊃β'rβO?7*β7π;v+I9↓∧#?↔Mε ;g?v)β/;␈9β?→ε ;eβ∨+∂ 4V≠πSπf{∨W'v9βOg∨#↔5|hP$'C/#↔Iβ⊗{←3↔JaβW;O19β?2β←πS/∪3?<hP4(4Ph(4(hP4(0=IBj≠↔ kAI↓↓ Qd&
2 ↓↓JK∃i¬;'∂π"α∨KπεC'∂LhQ=I*j≠↔ kAI↓↓ ↓QX&∀JN
⊗JβπQα-~
6&≤J &⊗)iα←N≠πQα?∪πC#N≠M↓hR∪πS+Q↓IU∧3↔ ↓ IaI↓βII]6¬~P4*7∪?5i∧∩&N
-IβπQ¬*N
6M~&λ4U≠W +.≠Qiα⊗)iα←N≠πQα?∪πC#N≠L4*&yi↓↓¬;?K/~βπQαlJQ6εHh+∂
R↓↓α O≠ ↔eε QαV≤→6&NL⊂4*[N i↓αnKQ6πKY↓IU∧3↔ ↓C⊃↓EIS)A6⊗% 4*[N i↓α↔∪16 n!m↓I*α≠↔ βAI↓E≠QAQ6,"P4(hR%βS}yβ#π6)β['≡KS↔⊃¬;'∂π";MαW& !β?63'∂↔~q↓αSF)β∨K∂β#'∂~β?CSN{9β≠␈⊃βS#(h)EUαj↑MβO→↓QAπAMAAr↓απ3≡y1βSF)↓EUαj↑MβO→βπ3⊗+π∪eεkW3SN∪WM9α↓α←∃ε3?W; h+S#*βW;'"βS=β⊗)α⊗b%∩⊗6⊗eIαN2⎇99↓α>K∂πQε ∪7''#↔⊃β&CπQβ&C↔K∃π;↔K∃π#←<4W;π'Qπ≠SπS/→βC↔∩β7↔7␈∪eβπ≡≠↔OMπ;#'∂B↓#S#/IβOπN!%βOf{←↔⊃π##∃↓3AAAAo
63% of 8 MHZ (that's an effective speed of only 5 MHZ). Rumor has it
that someone put a scope on the WICAT and found the 68000 to be
running at an effective speed of only 3 MHZ. WICAT was working on
a memory board that used 64K chips and a small page table for the
first 2 meg. of address space.
-------
∂28-Feb-82 2322 AVB
∂27-Feb-82 1143 cbosg!dale at Berkeley
Date: 26 Feb 1→82 12:34:26-PST
From: cbosg!dale at Berkeley
Via: Mit-Ai; 27 Feb 8H@jtdX[ (4∃-SBh@A¬e0[¬[Hl@dnA→KD@pβ⊃↓Ui≠⊃6⊗∩ h(4*&C↔K∃ε K∃β';=β∂}kCπ;N+EβSF Qβg␈)β∂πrβ Weπ##∃α≥*9βS/∪7';∞aα∞B*β ?π⊗!β≠K}i84*6{K←π⊗!αS↔≡C;?3};eα'v→8$$Mβπ∂'6K
α7N≠K?∂}kCWS/⊃1α'v→84)∪)eEαn KS'rαπ[∃pH$&Arα=9α⊗{aα¬A MaLhROπ;& α∂3∂∪¬!α≡ 9↓e+↓U@$HJOπ9∧#'↔∨zaα∂¬p↓eIE≠@4)!#↓a%eCA5IM;@$$$JA]EQK)YU5∪9I\4Ph(4(hP4(0=IBj≠↔ kAI↓↓∪→IH&
2 ↓↓J['∂&{Iα←␈∪/OS∂#'?9α↓↓↓hQ=I:j≠↔ kAI↓↓ QP&&{5α←∞#3?]βbRε↑¬→E6¬r&['∨#?Iα>{K/O& S'?r↓↓↓hR∪πS+Q↓IY∧3↔ ↓ IaI↓ ⊃QA6¬~P4*7∪?5i¬#?5α> ∪3?:↓rRε<αME6 p4*O.∪+↔∂#Qα['∨#?Iα>{K/O& S'?r4*S{Q↓↓β>{K/Mε Qα6M!6ε$hR['¬R↓α7'"jπ%mβ⊃]α≠.⊃↓aIβ)iIYl*∩P4U3'¬iαα K1l∪7⊃mβ⊃]α≠.⊃↓aIβ)iMQl*∩P4Ph*3π∨!β;'>CQ1β}qβ¬βf{∂π1¬α
Mβ≡C?]β≡ 33↔"↓≡S#*α∂?7π+S↔I∧≠#K?vK∂3↔~9α$4W≠π]β
β;↔]πβ↔KO}sπ1β>{K/O& S'?rβ∂π3f+⊃βSF)α['∨#?I9ααS#∃¬3'∂S␈⊃β∂3∞K7L4W#=β#∂3∃βSF)β≠?fc?←'v9β≠↔∂#WK↔≠P4(4PI5α O!77ππβ↔⊃β&KOC3∂I↓!aβ↓βa↓#↓Aβaβy%9α≡{7∃β≡{77↔w#Mβ←/∪∀4(J↓β7π&)βπ ␈+Qβ∨⊗ eβ3/3↔3Mbβ WQεs? ?'Iβ↔[/⊃βOπN!βπ;O##';8h(%↓ε+cC3N≠'Q9ααS#∃ε#'OCf eβ#∂→βO?7#←πK*kO↔3.≠Sπ f)β≠?w#M04PI↓β←O#!βC⊗{C?K&K?;πbβOCπ≡K;≥βε{OO'⊗c∃βπ~β←↔3bq↓4Ph(%5βAAaaπβK?∂/≠O?Irα πON→βOg∨#↔5β≡{7↔Mπ;'S!β Ib.↔KS↔Mε{_4(J↓β7↔n{Ke9αα↔cC∞s∪π f)βS=β)EJ-r↓↓V6GQβ∂3}≠-84Ph(%5β⊃↓U↓
yQβ'v≠!β≠f{CCeε#K'[/→9↓α∂3π'3∞∪3∃β>KS!β≡K;∨3*βO'∪. 4(%α↓!YA∧Z βC/⊃β∪KO3∃%β␈⊃β∪?.∪3∃β≡K∪↔⊃αAE9Jl⊃βC↔∩β∪K'6)%β∪⊗K[↔Mph(%↓∧ α←'v≠#↔O&+Iβ'~βOWCε{O↔∪gIβ'9π##∃β>{K/Mph(4(JiαO?7#←πK*β↔;∂}#↔⊃β&+Sπ∂F 3∃ε[↔g } K⊃8hP4(%j↓IαJ~iIMIπβ?KS~q↓α&,)5QaBβ WMπ≠WCC␈∪Q84Ph*∪?/→βπ;N∪?∪eε[;?]ε ;gSFK;≥βn{K∃β∞∪?WQπ##'Mεkπ∂#Ns∃⎇⎇ααS#∃π≠#?]π#?3⊂hS¬β3␈!βπ ␈+QβSF)β#π⊗#←πK*β WQεs↔[↔∩β?;∂*β7↔;&K?;↔"βS#∃ε≠?OQr↓αS#(h+≠?f[Mβ≠⊗{5αOO∪'WM¬≠gOS.kM↓#&C∃β7∞[↔KMε{→α[N≠S?IJβ∂3πNiβS#∂!βS#/IβπK(h+3?}[';≥π#?←π⊗!β3?≡ 1β;/#←?K←→βπ;"β?≠≠N≠∃βπ/#?7π&K?9β'KC∃βπ∪?∪W∨#M84U##∃βn ∂#'v)βO?.s∪MβNsS↔K/≠S';:aβπ;"βS#∃¬≠'K'/→βC↔␈β3∃β∞cO=β≡cπ'7.!βS#∂ 4+SF+eβ←␈+3⊃β⊗)β∨↔'#';≥ε3W31πβπ∨∃ε#'OCf gM1ε ;⊃β≡{3?Iπ≠??9ph(4(hP4(4P0=IBj≠↔ kAI↓↓∪→IH&
2 ↓↓K←#↔⊗)∨Mβ&C∃β'vs?[π&K?9hQ=I:j≠↔ kAI↓↓ QT&V 9α←∞c/↔Iβb*←πf[↔Jα∀∩:¬yK←#↔⊗)∨Mβ&C∃β'vs?[π&K?9hR∪πS+Q↓I]∧3↔ ↓ IaI↓ ↓AU6-~P4*≡+;∪↔∪Qα*↑ b.⊗Iε Qα
∀r∧4*∨+ +↔∨!iβ←F+K∃∨~βS#∃εK;;?6 S'?ph*≠K}iiα+∞qα←πf[↔I↓dR←π3↑+Jα
∀r¬x4U#=iα>{K.Mε QαεHh*7↔∨≠π∨∃lJ⊃i↓eZ
:
iI]66+ 5a∩↓EAiβ)iQ]tR↑ε2\*Ix4U3'¬iαα7'Ql %m↓∪9α≠↔∩↓aI↓ ↓iEUl*∩P4U3'¬iαα K1l∪7⊃mβ⊃]α≠.⊃↓aIβ AiI~j⊗∩PhP4*#}CW59ααg↔Qε ;?SF+Iβ∂}kCπ;Jβ7π/Ns≥β¬εk'∂K}≠?7C/#↔I7⊗ O↔⊂hQ ←?⊗[OSπ&K?9 r↓απ3bβS#'~βO?Wv!7π3N[∃β#∂∪∪←π⊗)9↓αO→β'Qπ∪↔π3gIβ∧4V≠πO∃ε{→β¬εc?Qβ}1↓ 7*βS?=bβ7∃β&{= βF K∪←∂∪∃β←␈∪-β∨}K;≥β}q|4(hR←#π";Mβ∨}K;≥β}qβ'9π##∃β> eβ?2β';;␈3πS'6)βO?7#←πK+y↓απfaβg?*β↔[↔⊂h+#↔∂⊃βπ ␈+QβSF+K∃βO→↓ ?63'∂∃ε WS?n S'?r⊃9↓α⊗{K';:q↓α?63'∂∀hSπWS}kπS'}qβ'Mε β7π⊗[↔Qβ}1βS#*βCK↔≡+;Q1εs?Qβ&C∃β≠/#WK∃r↓α←#/∪∃∨LhSS#∃π##';↑K;≥β&CπQβ␈+∨#Qπ#=β *β∨?'v9β';&y↓ #}k∃β↔w3'K?vk↔;PhSOWCε{KQβ∨KOS↔o→ βπv!βOS.3→β3N[∃βSF Q|4Ph*7πN∪∃βSF)βO7∂∪QβC.{C3∃ε K∃βW+OQβ&{';≥εKQβ←O##?W"βSπ3↑K;≥β∞∪?WQεKQ84Ph(4(hP0=IBj≠↔ kAI↓↓∪→IH&
2 ↓hQ=I:j≠↔ kAI↓↓ QX'NC;OM∞K#Wcb 7πK←→βπQ∧∪↔K/.c↔ehR∪πS+Q↓I]∧3↔ ↓ IaI↓βIiM]S!Q6B≥ 4*≠⊗{5iβNC;OM∞K#Wcb 7πK←→βπQ∧∪↔K/.c↔d4U3'¬iαα7'Ql %m↓∪9α≠↔∩↓aI↓ ⊃iM]l*∩P4U3'¬iαα K1l∪7⊃mβ⊃]α≠.⊃↓aIβ IiQ~j⊗∩PhP4*≠␈∪←πK"αS↔∂Fs?3??H4)I+IUα7∂∪S'9∧ [∃8hROπ;& α∂3∂∪¬1α≤ ↓eUβ)@4(hR7πKZα ↔∂↑s↔H4VK#Wcb 7πK←_4(4Ph(4(hP4(0=IBj≠↔ kAI↓↓∪→IL&
2 ↓↓K['∂&{I↓eβ↓A↓hQ=I:j≠↔ kAI↓↓ Ud&& ['⊃t ;∪↔↔≠?9β∂!α∞6*iEB¬K['∂&{I↓eβ↓A↓hR∪πS+Q↓I]∧3↔ K. Ke↓ IaI↓ ⊃MI6-~Q↓"≡ SWK& e$4T3K?5Rα∪π[N!:π;&+KO?rβπQα≤jU5E∧λ4*S{Qβ←?⊗[Mβπ"α6&Ql
$4*∨+ +↔∨!i↓β6K∂S?∩↓eAAh*∞
RβSπ]ε QβM
k¬1βNs≠=7∨β5βπ"α6&Ql
$4*n+OOπ>)6'⊃R↓qI↑6+ aIβ IMI≠⊃α∩¬Cαα∞6*iEB¬ph*[' Q↓α7O!6π%Z↓I]α6+ ↓a∩↓EIi#↓6⊗∩ h*[' Q↓α ⊗a6 7#Y↓I]∧3↔ ↓C⊃↓EIS)I6⊗% 4(4TIβ#π6)βO?n)β';6{K7π&K?9β}qβS#*α['∂&{I↓eβ↓A1βn+;S'}s↔⊃β⊗+∂↔;&ceβ JαS?5¬;π∪3␈984*&C'Mβ≡{7Cπ⊗KO?9ε{→βSF)α&
jαB
β∞s⊃βSF)α['∨#?I↓K↓AAβ≡{7↔Mε3K?5π##∃α≡K3∂?ph*∨Wf≠!α∨∂S↔SS*q↓αSF)α&
jβ';≠zβ∂?7/→β≠K}iα&
j;Mα Nc3'?rα∪?3f Iα ∞∪e1β↔Iα'O∞ ∂O?ph+π;"α+W3O+OO↔raβπ[∞K3π f)β≠?∩↓⊃QUαβ≠K?jα≠WS/∪∃α∂}kCWSNs≥β'rαK'∂F K∪O}q04*&+cπMr↓αS#*αO'KO+M>[N≠S?Iε#πS¬ε≠π7∃ε3K?5¬3'∂S␈⊃1βπ4 '3π⊗c∃β'rα∂#'≡ ∨=β∂ 4)!≠ I%↓+→e5a∪↓A84Ph*R"*αZ&∞$zI↓eβ↓@4 α↓↓↓α&C∃αOO∪'WM∧kπ∂#Ns∃β'~β←↔3bβ←?K&Aβ3?}[';≥ε Q9↓∧{;∃β}1βS#*βOπ∨/→β?→π##∀4V≠?7C/#↔IβNs∪WO'∪eβO∞K⊃βSzβWM1α∩∂#W≡Yαn∂G+∂-αε+∪∪3*aβ∂K. S?Iε{→βSF)↓YUβ⊂4+πv!βS#*αC↔Rjβ#πMε#?;∃ε 31β&C∃βSFK;∨M∧J
5β≡C?W3"β#π[*β∪?;*q ↓α>)βS#Ns-α&∀iβ∪' h+3?'→β?→π##';?→βK'>CQ1β↔+Qβ3/!∨Mβ≡{7Cπ⊗)h4)α↓↓↓αfK/∃β&C∃α&∀iβ7π≡C';∃bβ'Qβ/≠↔Mβ
↓EY7⊗KQ1↓C↓aaβ∂→β'S~α∞BUr↓α3'↑)α&
j`4*OO∪'WMεCπMβ
β∪↔S∞≠#π f)β/↔N∪?πK"q↓α'rβ≠π∂"aβ'QεCπMβ6K[∃β↑+g ?∂∪⊃β?π#'?;_h)#SOβ↔←Ker, word processor, programmer, etc.)
IBM offers a video monitor as an option (a necessity for most useful
information processing). The 9000 comes with a green phospher screen that
is tiltable and turnable - not just a monitor with a handle on the top.
The 9000 has a graphics mode with an 800 x 400 resolution! IBM offers,
at best, 640 x 200.
132-CHARS x 50-LINES OF TEXT!
If you get tired of skinny paragraphs and lines running off the tradi-
tional 80-character x 25-line display, you can switch to the Victor's
132-character x 50-line display, complete with fully legible upper and lower
case characters, with descenders. (That, alone, is enough to sell it to us
word-junkies.)
IBM's character display matrix is 9x14. Sirius' is 10x16 or 16x16. The
character set is loaded into user-accessible RAM, so, if ya don't like what
you see, ya can change it to suit your palate.
Unlike IBM, the Sirius unit does not currently support color (a decision
that was debated long and hard), but the system has all the hooks to add
color later. Our impression is that they felt that (a) their marketplace
is the business market, to which color is less useful than for home and
educational computing, (b) it's very difficult to do really useful things,
in an information sense, with color, and (c) hi-res color monitors capable
of supporting those great graphics and 132x50 text displays cost lots!
1.2 MEGABYTE FLOPPY DISK DUET
The 9000 comes with dual 5 1/4 " single-sided floppies, like the IBM.
Unlike the IBM, which can store 163K [per drive], the Victor system packs
1.2 megabytes into those two on-line minifloppies.
CP/M-86 & MSDOS
Like the IBM pc, the Victor system offers both CP/M-86 (available right
now - IBM's is expected soon), and Microsoft's also-IBM DOS. Unlike IBM,
both MSODS and CP/M-86 come with the system - CP/M is an option with IBM.
And there is the usual package of support software, e.g. a VisiCalc
clone (VisiClone?) called VictorCalc from Image Systems, a Select editor, etc.
THE FUTURE IS VERY SOON
Oh, yes, Victor will almost certainly be offering a Winchester and an
SMD interface before the end of '82, and very probably a medium-speed
networking facility (say, 1 to 2 megabit bandwidth). We suggest that Vic-
torites also watch for a C compiler and a UNIX operating system licensed
from Bell Labs as yet another 1982 option (installed and supported by one
of the best unixizers in the business).
ORANGES AND APPLES - HOW MUCH?
The Victor/Sirius system with dual floppies (1.2M), screen (80x25,
132x50 and 800x400), 128K of memory (that's minimum), MSDOS and CP/M-86
lists for$4995, a Price thatmight be haggled once the supply pIpe
Begins to fill.
In this apples-with-oranges comparison, an IBM system with dual
floppies (326K), screen (80x∩5 and 640x200), 48K of memory and MSDOS
is $3525, available from list-price-only dealers.
¬
From: Silcon Gulch Gazette, January 198", page 2, by Jim C. Warren, Jr.
∂28-Feb-82 2323 AVB IBM PC Review
∂27-Feb-82 1524 Ozzie.SoftArts at MIT-Multics IBM PC RevIew
Date: 26 February 1982 18:23 est
From: Ozzie.SoftArts at MIT-Multics
Subject: IBM PC Review
Sender: COMSAT.SoftArts at MIT-Multics
To: works at MIT-MC
*from: OZZIE via SAI via MIT-Multics (Ray Ozzie)
Original to: WORKS at MIT-MC
Via: Mit-Mc; 27 Feb 82 17:27-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 27 Feb 82 17:32-EDT
I have spent quite a bit kf time using the IBM PC, and use it
full time as a terminal on my host machine (with the PC running
a rt100 (subset emulator at 19200 baud). I have a vt100
αto the right of my IBM PC;it is typically used only when
I happen to need 132 mode.
I find the keyboard to be one of the best that I havE ever typed
on, with the possible exception of one or two PLATO keyboards.
The positive mechanical feedback is a dream. Yes, it took me
several weeks to get used to the single-width shift keys (and
thus the placement of the back-slash key), but now I can type
circles around a vt100.
I bind the keys on the various keypads to various EMACS
functions, and use the right pad extensively (arrows and page
keys). The left pad, in my opinion, suffers greatly because it
was not designed with enough room to put a "template" around it.
The IBM monochrome monitor suffers from a terrible lack of
contrast. We have reduced this problem by putting a $200
Polaroid CP-70 Contrast Enhancement Filter over the display.
I have not yet been exposed to the color monitor.
I am not impressed with the processor speed. The programs that
we have converted from z80 to the 8088 do not run much faster,
primarily because of the 8-bit data path. The instruction set
is obviously better than the 8-bit machines. As Seth noted,
however, dealing with 64k segments is a tremendous pain. This
is, of course, not IBM's fault, though the 8-bit bus IS.
A MAJOR problem with the IBM is the lack of board slots
available. This limits the amount of memory to 512k, or
typically 256k. You must trade off peripherals for memory.
The IBM sorely needs a hard disk.
The IBM hardware beats the hell out of the previous generation
8-bit systems. All peripherals interrupt through a very handy
8259a programmable interrupt controller. There are three hardware
clocks: one to refresh memory, one used for DOS timer services
(and to time out the disk), and the last to provide a tone
generator to play music. The machine provides a socket for the
8087 floating point processor. The color graphics card uses
the (fairly flexible) 6845 CRT controller. The disk controller
is a NEC uPD765. All in all, it is a very high quality piece
of hardware, and very nice to work with.
The ASYNC interface is satisfactory. The supplied driver in ROM
is a polling driver, and is not much good for many applications.
NOTE: If you attempt to write your own interrupt-enabled driver,
you may get very frustrated. If you ever want an interrupt from
the 8250, you must setbit 3 (OUT 2) of the Modem Control Register.
This is documented as a "user-designated output", where the user
is IBM, and the designation is to inhibit interrupts(!). The only
place that you can find this out is by looking at the schematic on
page D-48 of the Technical Reference Manual.
IBM DOS is satisfactory. Disk error recovery is pretty good, but
other error recovery is marginal. For example, "break"ing during
program image activation will frequently cause DOS to crash. The
function calls have all seemed to work "as documented". The
"end but stay resident" function call is very handy for those of
us who wish to write device drivers that stay around. It also
enables one to write a very nice "histogramming" program that
stays resident during user program execution.
Last but not least, I must CHEER for IBM with regards to the $36
"Technical Reference Manual". It has EVERYTHING you ever wanted
to know about the machine: schematics, chip write-ups, chip and
connector pin-outs, configuration info, LISTINGS OF THE ROM,
etc. IBM should be complimented for making all of this info
available in an inexpensive, well-put-together manual.
Ray Ozzie (Ozzie.SoftArts)
∂01-Mar-82 1223 AVB IBM PC Review
∂25-Feb-82 1541 SSteinberg.SoftArts at MIT-Multics IBM PC RevIew
Date: 25 February 1982 03:20 est
From: SSTeinberg.SoftArts at MIT-Multics
Subject: IBM PC Review
Sender: COMSAT.SoftArts at MIT-Multics
To: works at MIT-MC
*from: SAS (Seth A. Steinbere)
Local: works at mit-mc
Via: Mit-Mc; 25 Feb 82 17:58-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 25 Feb 82 18:03-EDT
My firsT view of this computer was of a bunch of cards nailed
to a wooden board with a transparent keyboard and a monitor
from Apple.
The IBM has several great featuRes:
- 8086 CPU which means it can address almost as many dollars
worth of memory as the basic systemcosts (256KB = $2-4K).
Most companies go by the credo: "Millions forsoftware
research, pennies for more memory." (and choose the former).
- it is nicely package with room for disk drives, RS232,
graphics board and other goodies in the main box. This means
you can grow your system pretty nicely.
- it runs CP/M which means it has a fair bit of software. The
IBM name means that some good and TONS of mediocre and lousy
software will be available soon.
The nits include:
- the 808XAQCf↓B@bl↓EShA¬IIeKMf\@Ae←jAGα 9β∂}k ';*β¬βO.;7↔; h+;Wn∪↔Iβ>KS!β∞qβ?≠7≠↔Qβ↔+Qβ'2βg?UεSWOQπ;π;Q∧εFzπ>Mw⊗* ⊂β∪α¬
w⊂h&↔αJε-≡Bε∞LN&/∨4∂⊗␈*
↔6*∞Mrε&t ∩∧dzDε}2∞⎇w⊗Zd∧¬&F≡4εO~ ∀π>Nd
⊗0h/≥w*π
L⊗rπMtπ?⊗≡LRε
I∃≥α
}"¬≤X→De$→I2π> ↑&*πM
↔~ε=≥f"ε|dπ&F≥lphV<≥bε⊗T
↔∞}L≡F." .W"ε∀∞ε∞Nd
⊗2π≥}RεW↑>Bπ>≥nBε
-⊗:ε.\f6/%aPPh%Tπ&FT
6/N-|↔⊗"
≡2εF}.&.vM}W~r∧
Vvf↑>2πN}Tε≡∞d∞7ε∞d ⊗rε|>F∂6QQ'>OM
w/"∞>G⊗/L=εNvt∂⊗␈/$ ε∞vD¬ε∂" ≥FbJ∂≥w*π⎇≥Fbε ≡f*πMtπ&∞<QPWN}↑"ε6≥lv/↔4
v62∞Mε*ε
⎇V*ε<←↔~πMtεFOD f/<M≥f*r∧
FF*∞=εN7D
6/O1Q&∂⊗T∞6n∞MDε↑/≡4εf}<≡F."
≤CD∞y:<LD≤≠_,<<kH∧ [h≠ml(~→.,(~_.4≤Y8-M≡#"L⎇⎇≥→-d≥<y,D≥≠h∞M→;+D∧∩~=∞M;Yh
∞]∀xd∞z;≠∧
_;Yd∂;⎇<Dλt∃(
≤H≡;nQ"Y≠md⎇λ~ ≡Y(_$∞≤Z;NL<KC!!"K( ≡λ→≠l↑h∪SjD~_=LT_(≤L\[{⎇∧
y>+D∧∩=λ
<h_$
y>8M|<Yλ∞<<=9-ly#"N⎇~8z∧∞z;≠∧
y]→-d≤Y8M⎇⎇λ≥
(≠8,=~;Y$ ]=λ
m⎇λ_-Nx><d ;Yλ∞,<Y;∂⊃"]z ]H≡;nT_<Y$ →8],|z;Yedλ⊗;nT~_=LT≥≠h∞N<[H
|YH≥
(≠8,=~;Y%A"X{n]]λ∀iIus⊗$∞≠h≥
;Kλ∞M→;H∞N<[H
≡λ_X,=h≠{Edλ⊗;nT_x;D
→8=LT≥~→!QY~<m>h~;Ea"C"ET∩=λ My<h iuλ~ ≡Y(_-o(→{m|λ≠9-]|↑(
\;X9l]9;]∧∞{y]∞|<Y+D∧⊂t iQ"Y≠l↑h≠[nD≤xx-L(≥y-M Hλ
YR6λ My<h
m⎇λ≤l<;→(∞|;≠ ∧∞~≠⎇,⎇λ~=↓Q\xx-L<h_L↑≥→<D∞~_;Dλt s%a"C"AQU{⎇-Lλ∩(∞,8{{-\;Yλ
≡∂hλ _4kλ ∀≥{⎇-L Hλ ≡λ~<d
=8z∧ Y=≥ ↑H≥~ ≥C"]
(⊂4
⊃(∩)∃λ~≠mL≤h≠-}Y(≠,];|↑$∞~_;D (∃∀J5. λ¬ ;y→-D∩22%∃β"Xm⎇<_<L↑h→X.m|X8MO(≥z.Mλ≠;n>λ⊂t¬y(≠8,=~;Y.4_;Y∧∞{h≠meHλ∩.A"Y>∞ ;Y≤d∞y;≠¬D≤y9-↑h≥≠d Y(≤∞,=≥≡$∞Y;~,≤[→( ≥Yλ~.4≠[⎇∧
=8z∧∞{|\lQ"]~ ≥H_;O≡~~;Lt→;≤lT∩(_l≥H≠X-\+C"AQC"C! ↓Al +)\<K.ε$λ ,F&b05H$λλα)_S(∀λ4∀Y=M≤=c"D↓lM+(l8K.ε$λ -FVb4tnL:;XL↑YkTm|]⊂<NNh_=∧ 25 )↑;≥~,>hα2()(∀⊂d
Y=Z,↑hβ"I\:; ,n[{.Dλ4T⊂)h5λ≤m≡→(⊂J)λ≤Xnlλ_=∧εM+1L\K. Dε---eZ∀uβ!(_=→'$λ M$λY8\N\<↑(ε↔. HεεnLL∧ <⎇β!(\[{'$λ∀tnL:;XL↑YkTm|]⊂<NNh_=∧ 25 )↑;≥~,>c"Tn\ZY8nGHλ∩()(∀⊂d
Y=Z,↑c"Tl]Y→<G$λ⊂siZp5 J=y]⊂..≤h_.D∪25¬Y=;≥
≤|c"JMnHλ∞⎇|Z|d =λ∪)~ 30aQJY\M⎇.Hλ
84h
<=~λλ∃H∀⎇ ];XY.,j#"IMxx;π$λ≥{n-|h_.D≠:=¬]8c"Jm8.H∧ := )\nh FT⊃Y8Dπ H &wM. (X∃β"Jm8.H∧λ\[ (-9∞hε&(⊃Y,$∞ Hε↔∞L eX1∃β!*Z8.D∧∃<xeX8{_g4 M(λl8H∞ε$ ..FεK11
A"UZ,↔Hλ⊂N- 0[,Gh M$λY8HπεH .'&,k1(Jβ"C!)>(→M≡\⎇λ∞m9=h
|H≥~
≡h_{m↑≥=→.$≥x<d
yH_$ ];Xm∧≠yH <<Y≤d
X:; \β"]
t_(≥m⎇y→;D [x<LD≥z=
∧_(≥∞,;\| ≡Y;]∧
y>8M|<Yλ ≥Yλ_$
;{Z.M|C"Ln[{(λ≡≤≠→%a"C"AQU~→$ 0S(
<h≤l↑Y<X-D→|Y,≡λ→Y,≡≥<Y.7C"C!%(∞ πεH⊂t
T≥z~,=λ≠9,≥\h~.D_x;D 9→≤L↑|h_-M;|⎇∧ <h≠,≥↑(→
⎇≠_<N1"]{n.~λ≠ld≠9;-}↑(_.4≥~→$ X<z,4≤}<nL;(_m}⎇≤h¬εM-Rh$∂( ε%-∩j%a"S;n>λ_{m↑_;Z,↑h→{d ↑(≥
(_|L\≠nH∧):;≠
≥{\h m|H≤m|]≥x.,#"\L↑y8<L= λ≤ ][Z9.4→[|D
;|Y$
9;;n/+HH¬ ;Yλ =≠{|lT≥~→$ [|[,↑J+C!!"K(
≡λ~<d
Z8y-O(≤_,=x9y$∞z=~∧∞[{{$ [|H M<zh NZ=Y.5λ∀Tf&lKβ!,|X<
8|h -x<Y∧ ;Yλ
}~→<D {{y
≤<h~-d≥~→$
8:;D [} D∧∃~~.4≠98-nc"↑-}(_x-d→|[nt≡;⎇.$≤}<nL;(≤∞,=≥≡$
Z8y-O+C"AQK(~.D≤];N4⊂t iT≥z~,=λ≠9,≥\h~.D~_<d (→X-≡H_Z.D≠yH∞=y]≥l≡Y+H∧
~→#!)0S(
l;9(
\8;\d∞~_=∧∞{{9$ {{y∧ ;Yλ
IsTh
|H≠9,M;x|LT_;Y∧
≠⎇<o⊃"\{ln≥x<LT≥z;
D_Y( ≡X:; ≤[→(∞={{KAQC"C!!"U~ T≠Z=∞4~;XmN9→.AQC"K$∞~→(πε∞
H
<h_$ε-H_M≡λ_9 NY<|edλ⊗;nT_x;D {{8M≥Y(_$∞y9{,]]β"Mn;8Y.$≥z=
∧_;H
|Y\y.D_]=∧
9H≡-}(~].>λ≥x-nλ≥≠d∞⎇≠|LT_( F∧
≠|AQL.
$ Z=λ ≤→≤Y.>h≡;nT~_=LT≥≠h Mh_( Iuλ≠ld≥{|M5Hλ∃
<h~.4_(≥m≥H~9AQ↑;⎇$∞≠_;D∞≠h≥n-=→( ∀∪∩4j∧≠|H
903∪
H3∩h∞⎇→<Y$∞~~<d
z;Y∧
yH≥
;Yc!,x;H ,(~<m⎇_=→,D_]=∧ (≤_-≥H~9D∂;⎇(
.<⎇λ∞|;]λ ∀_Z9d ]9YL↑KC"AQK(≥
(~y/≤[x<LD~<h
|\Y-l≠⎇<edλ∃;ML<|h∂≥⎇(_l≥H≤| ≥H_;D
x⎇_.l#"]m≡~≠⎇.D≤⎇≤L↑_z~-lh≡;n↑H~_-lλ
_.D_;≠¬∀≡;⎇$∞z;≠∧
_=Y$∞≠h≥ ≥y#"O≥⎇<H m;Yy..h≠yLd≥~→$
≠{9$
y><d∞≠h~
≡λ∪Y.y~;Y%dλ∃~ T≤z~,nλ~y/≡c"X.,(≤{,≥≠λ~l←<h≠
|x=→,D~;H∞|:<Y∧∞≠_8l↑kHλ mh≠{LT~→<LT~_<d∞Y8;
O#"Ym}≥→;D∞<y9∧∞≠h≥
;+H∧ ~=≥
≥Yh∀∞.∀xh∞⎇;≠λ
;Yh∂≥⎇<Hλ:∃(~,d≡;⎇!QY≠{D}λ~_.l(_(∞∞Z;] ↑KC"AQK(∩.D→≠y.4∪Su∧
_=Y$ (≤Y,-{⎇λ
<>+H∧ =λ~ ≡h_(
<>8[l≡Yλ≤l↑=9;L<#"]m
8zλ∞⎇;≠λ
|]→;D∞Y8[m}λ≥~ T≠88m
;Y( .=λ≠M}λ_;∞|><h ≥Yλ≤L≡Y;≡!Q]z→-d≡;⎇$ <Y( L8]9l⎇;YkD∧⊗;⎇$
_=Y$∞≠h≥∞↑[H≠llH≥~ T≠88m
;Y+↓QX{⎇-nλ∀s zs⊗(∞Mh≥~ ]Kλ≥
;H≥∞↑[H~.D_X8m4≠{KD∧⊗;⎇$ x;H
L8=Y$∞~→#!,~<zn4~;KAQC"K$ =λ→
|<h∪Izλ~_.l(_;O∀→{{lD≠9;-}↑(≠,≥X9y-\;]λ∞=y]≥l≡Y+H∧λt s!QY≠y.4≠[⎇∧∞xx; T≥y;
EHλ∃)i6λ→
|<h≠M}λ≤xl≥→(≥l]≠ λ∞M≠⎇9m∧~=β!.xx; ↑h_Y.N→<H∞M_;Hλ: s+AQC"C!*{⎇; D∩(≤L\{{;,]Yλ~.Ghλ⊗(Zkλ∩$∞{⎇; EHλ∩.D~<h
↑8zλ ,=≥→.$≥~_-a"]~ T⊂4∀ H(∩2%D~≠{ Nh≠;n,(≠9-]|↑(∞Ma TRS-80 (Model III),
compares favorably with most CP/M machines and so on. It
expands well, seems to be pretty reliable and is not much worse
than anything else I can name.
∂01-Mar-82 1225 AVB Re: Window Management
∂25-Feb-82 2208 George.Coulouris at CMU-10A Re: Window Management
Date: 25 February 1982 1732-EST (Thursday)
From: George.Coulouris at CMU-10A
To: works at mit-ai
Subject: Re: Window Management
In-Reply-To: decvax!watmath!watarts!plrowley@Berkeley's message of 25 Feb 8∩
03:16-EST
Message-Id: <25Feb82 173209 GC12@CMU-10A>
Via: Mit-Ai; 26 Feb 82 0:31-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 26 Feb 82 0:42-EDT
Based on our experience with our 'animated desktop' colour windowed display
here at Queen Mary College London, I have the following comments:
1) The interface seems most natural when windows glide smoothly onto
the 'desk-top' instead of appearing suddenly in the middle of it.
Similar comments apply to moving windows to other parts of the screen
and removing them from the screen.
2) If you do that, the windows have to overlap, at least while they are
moving, otherwise they would have to find a path that was free of other windows.
3) Colour helps a great deal in discriminating overlapping windows.
Having tried it, we wouldn't want to give it up.
4) Despite the above, the screen can get cluttered. It can also
be quickly uncluttered by the use of an application-level command to
remove some of the windows (in our model, the command is to 'put them
back in the filing cabinet'). If you want to, you can construct
your application software so that the screen isn't allowed to get cluttered,
but I wouldn't use the clutter argument as a reason to ban overlapping
windows at the system level.
George Coulouris
∂01-Mar-82 1226 AVB WorkS Now both DIGEST and Direct distribution
∂26-Feb-82 0006 Jonathan Alan Solomon <JSol@USC-ECLC> WorkS Now both DIGEST and Direct distribution
Date: 25 Feb 1982 2321-PST
From: Jonathan Alan Solomon <JSol@USC-ECLC>
Subject: WorkS Now both DIGEST and Direct distribution
To: WorkS at BRL
Via: Usc-Eclc; 26 Feb 82 2:25-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 26 Feb 82 2:33-EDT
Due to overwhelming demand, I am now supporting two versions of how
WORKS is being distributed, both the digest and the direct mail
approach. I expect that the direct approach will be most useful for
those who want to contribute to the list, while digests will be more
useful to those users who are only interested in reading what goes on.
The digest will tend to lag behind the discussion, there is some
middle ground (if there is about 6000 characters of mail to go out
each day then there will be a daily digest), but most of the time
digests may either be sparse (due to lack of discussion), or very
large and frequent (lagging behind the overwhelming discussion).
Either way, there are now two ways you can be on the list.
If you are receiving this message in the form of a message addressed
to you, then you are on the direct mail list. If you receive this as
an "Administrivia" to the normal digest, then are on the digest list.
In any event, you can be switched back and forth at will by sending
mail to WorkS-REQUEST@MIT-AI.
Oh, yes. My apologies to all who received more than one copy of one of
the messages sent to WorkS. I had inadvertently created a loop in the
list in the process of splitting the list in two. This has been fixed
now.
Enjoy,
--JSol
-------
∂01-Mar-82 1226 AVB
∂26-Feb-82 0855 Andy Bechtolsheim <AVB@SU-AI>
Date: 25 Feb 1982 2237-PST
From: Andy Bechtolsheim <AVB@SU-AI>
To: ri at MIT-XX, david.anderson at CMU-10A, woris at MIT-AI
Via: Mit-Ai; 26 Feb 82 11:05-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 26 Feb 82 11:14-EDT
A while back, I discussed with Howard Gordon from Peninsula Research
the possibility of using the SUN graphics system in the WICAT system.
As it turned out, the WICAT display did not have sufficient resolution
to be compatible with the SUN graphics board.
In the meanwhile, WICAT started working on a lower-resolution bit-map
display option od∧AiQ∃SdA←]\AIKMSO\A→←dAi!KSdA
keeK9hAgsMiKZ\4∀~∃α↓]KnA
←[aC9rXA'U≤A/←IWgiCQS←\A%]FXA!CfAUUghAe∃GKSm∃HAmK9ikeJ↓MS]C9GS]N4∃oSi AiQJ↓[Sgg%←\Ai<AKqG1kgSm∃YrA[¬]kMC
ikeJ↓'+≤A]←eWgQCiS←9fAM←H~∃iQ∀Ao←e-giCi%←\A[¬eWKiAYCGJ8A
←d↓Mkei!KdAS9M←e[¬iS←\0AaYK¬gJAG=]iCGPt~∀~(∪'+≤↓/←eWMiCiS=\A∪] \~∀∪A≡A¬∨`@f``T~∀∪'QC]M←IHXAπ∧@rhf@j~∀∩ hbjRhrhZ`rdd~(~∀~∀4∀~∀_≡`b5≠CdZ`d@@bHdp∪βY∧@@@%∪¬~AAεAG←5[K]iL@@@~(@≡dl5
KDZ`d@@bLhh∪%=''∪λ↓ChA/!β%)∨8Zb`@! CmS⊂A%←gMSK\R∪∪¬~↓!εAG=[[K]Qf@@~) CiJh@dlA→KD@bdpd@Q→eSICdR@bj@r[ P~∃
e=ZtA%=''∪λ↓ChA/!β%)∨8Zb`@! CmS⊂A%←gMSK\R4∃'kE)KGht↓∪¬~AAεAG←5[K]iL~∃)↑h@@Ao=eWfA¬hA≠∪P[β∩~)-SBtA≠Sh5βRv@HlA
Kλ@pd@Djtbd5 (~)-SBtA¬eX5¬[HvdlA
∃D@pdbjtfT[ (4∀~∃)<A[CW∀ABAG=kaYJ↓←LAG=eeKGQS←]fZ|~∀$bRA∪8Aa←S9hA←L↓MCGh0AiQJ↓GQS`↓SfAC8@p`p`X@bl↓EShAIKOSgQKefA¬]H~∀$pAESPAICi∧AaCi!f\@AM←[JA K]GQ5CeWf↓QCfAMkOOKMiKHAQQSfA%fAiQ∀~∀∪o=eghA=LAE←QPAo←IYIf@4|ASh↓I←Kg8OhA]∃GKgg¬eSYr↓aKeM=eZAYads
better than a Z-80. It may some day be possible to attatch
(officially that is) an 8087 FP processor to it (the slot seems
to be there) and speed things up some more.
2) It does not have CP/M at this time... it runs IBM DOS. Digital
Research is working on CP/M for the PC, and IBM will be the distri-
butor when that occurs. For the time being, there is VERY LITTLE
software available for DOS. There are lots of people whuggest
that most PC users will run DOS, not CP/M, under the theory that
there is this certain mentality of an IBM buyer, and that DOS will
probably be the vanilla OS version, and costs about $40, not $140.
3) A friend of mine who is admittedly somewhat biased says the
Apple III has the PC beat. I can discuss his opinions at length,
but I would appreciate some other opinions too.
4) So far, the famed IBM support of bugs has consisted of a
"thank you for sharing that problem with us...and then they
send the bug report off to the company that made the software
(Lifeboat, Peachtree, VisiCorp, MicroSoft, etc. [admittedly not
lightweights!])."
6) There really is not much room to grow! You only get 5 slots in
the back, and the following take up space:
a. Memory after the first 64K takes up 1 slot per additional 64K
b. Dist drive adapter
c. Asynchronous Communications Adapter
d. Monocrome Display and printer Adapter
e. Color/Graphics Monitor Adapter
f. Printer Adapter
g. Game Control Adapter
So, say we are running IBM Pascal (req 128K or 1 slot), with a
color graphics game using paddles (1 for color monitor, 1 for paddles)
with printer and disk drive (1 each) we have now take up all the slots.
If we want to also use the system as a terminal we have to remove
something. What all this means (and IBM admits the problem, my info
comes from some IBM internal use only documents) is that 5 slots
is enough for any given application, but you may have to open the
back many times if you switch applications.
-Dave
∂04-Mar-82 2156 AVB Re: where's the innovation
∂03-Mar-82 1210 gary.RAND-UNIX Re: where's the innovation
Date: Tuesday, 2 Mar 1982 13:45-PST
To: Jan Walker <JWalker.BBNA>
Cc: WorkS.MIT-AI
Subject: Re: where's the innovation
In-reply-to: Your message of 27 Feb 1982 1005-EST.
<[BBNA]27-Feb-82 10:05:47.JWALKER>
From: gary.RAND-UNIX
Message-ID: <42.383953526@RAND-UNIX>
Via: Mit-Ai; 3 Mar 82 12:34-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 3 Mar 82 12:47-EDT
It's not clear to me that the boring and often petty character of
so much "office automation" work is going to be relieved by a
turn to things like "home env. support sys." (for which one
pessimistically imagines a veritable tsunami of "recipe support
systems" and "checkbook data-base technology" and "machine-readable
gardening advice" etc.). That is, just plugging the same old tools
into some new application areas will not necessarily stir the
adrenalin in those of us who are growing jaded and gray. Things
might pick up a bit when the computing field more widely raises
its sights above the easy clerical and administrative chores, and
goes after some higher functions of (life, corporate, military,
home, and ...) management -- like planning, situation analysis,
etc.
But the easy chores are really there, and they do need help, and
we can hardly blame enterprising folks for chasing after them.
And, easy as they may be in principle, there still remains lots of
room for improvement in their actual coverage!
Finally, though I have come to take a good (UNIX) file system,
screen editor (E, EMACS), message system (MH, MM) pretty much
for granted, they really do add something substantial to the
quality of my life. If I ungratefully think of them (and their
sibling capabilities) as "boring", it's probably only because
they do what they do quite well and unobtrusively. Sigh!
Gary
∂04-Mar-82 2157 AVB Re: IBM PC Bus Extensionts)
∂03-Mar-_2 1212 rubin.Sri-Nsc11 Re: IBM PC Bus Extensionts)
Date: 2 Mar 82 13:30-PDT
From: rubin.Sri-Nsc11
To: WLIM.MIT-XX
CC: works.mit-ai
Subject: Re: IBM PC Bus Extensionts)
Via: Mit-Ai; 3 Mar 82 12:34-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 3 Mar 82 12:57-EDT
TECMAR makes a bus expansion box for the IBM PC; I've seen it advertised in
"Byte" the last few months. Cosmetically, the box looks just like the IBM
system unit, but taller (for bigger cards I guess). If I recall correctly,
it has about 7 slots, room for a winchester, and goes for around $800 or $1000.
It has its own power supply.
By the way, Tecmar has announced more than a dozen other accessories for the
IBM PC. I don't know if they are really being manufactured yet, or are just
being implemented in viewgraphs.
--Darryl
∂04-Mar-82 2158 AVB
∂03-Mar-82 1217 ''John Howard Palevich, & CO.'' <TANG.MIT-AI>
Date: 2 March 1982 18:40-EST
From: "John Howard Palevich, & CO." <TANG.MIT-AI>
To: WORKS.MIT-AI
Via: Mit-Ai; 3 Mar 82 12:37-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 3 Mar 82 13:04-EDT
I think that the IBM PC Bus is position independant
(unlike the Apple II, OSI, or Atari buses, but like the
S-100) so that all Techmar does is buffer the bus & add a
power supply. Given that the IBM cards have connecters on
their rear edges, I bet that the expansion box's back looks
just like the IBM PC to the installed cards.
Jack Palevich
∂04-Mar-82 2159 AVB IBM PC Bus Extension
∂03-Mar-82 1218 Ittai Hershman <ITTAI.MIT-MC> IBM PC Bus Extension
Date: 2 March 1982 21:17-EST
From: Ittai Hershman <ITTAI.MIT-MC>
Subject: IBM PC Bus Extension
To: WLIM.MIT-MC
cc: works.MIT-AI
Via: Mit-Ai; 3 Mar 82 12:37-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 3 Mar 82 13:08-EDT
Date: Tuesday, 2 March 1982 11:29-EST
From: Willie Lim <WLIM>
To: works at MIT-AI
Re: IBM PC Bus Extension
It seems that a BUS extension unit (non-IBM product) is available for the
IBM PC. Perhaps this will alleviate the 5-slot problems. Does anyone know
of the details of the bus extension unit?
See TecMar Inc.'s ad on page 83 of the new (ie. March 1982) issue of
BYTE magazine. The TecMate(Tm) is a seven slot expansion cabinet with
full bus support, matched IBM PC styling, heavy duty power supplies,
convenience outlets to power printers or monitors, and built in
provision for a 5 inch Winchester hard disc drive. The preceding
sentence was a quote from TecMar's literature packet. The November 1981
price list quotes a price of $795.- for the expansion cabinet. A whole
slew of other items in the TecMate(tm) series exists.
TecMar Inc.
Personal Computer Products Division
23600 Mercantile Road
Cleveland, Ohio 44122
216-464-7410
∂04-Mar-82 2200 AVB Innovation...
∂03-Mar-82 1354 William ''Chops'' Westfield <BillW@SRI-KL> Innovation...
Date: 3 Mar 1982 1157-PST
Sender: BILLW at SRI-KL
Subject: Innovation...
From: William "Chops" Westfield <BillW@SRI-KL>
To: WorkS at BRL
Message-ID: <[SRI-KL] 3-Mar-82 11:57:45.BILLW>
Via: Sri-Kl; 3 Mar 82 16:24-EDT
The point is that to most of the world, putting a PDP-8 in their
office is more innovation than they think they are ready for...
You and I @¬]HAi!JAeKMhA←L↓iQJA9 (A[¬rA]K∃HABA
eCr@LAoSi AB@l↓M←←h4∃ISC≥]CXA
←Y←d↓aSGiUeJAC9HABAICh@Q∧AESN↓[←kg∀\\R@↓EKM←IJAoJ↓CeJ~)S[ae∃ggKH0AEkh↓[kGP↓←LAi!JAo←IYHASLAiKeISMSK⊂ASLA
QCeC
iKef↓iQCh4∃iQKdAQCm∃\OhAQsaKH↓CaaK¬dA←\↓BAISMaYCr8@A∪[Ae←mS9NAiQ∀AQk[¬\~∃K9OS]K∃eS]N↓oSiP↓[SGJ↓C]HA Sh[[¬afAC9HAgiUMLA[¬rA[C-JASh↓KCgS∃d~∃M=dAg←5JAaK=aYJX↓EkhA%fAgG¬eKfA=iQKd↓aK←a1JAKm∃\A[←IJ\\\A'↑\8@\~∀4∃→Kh≥fAOJ↓iiQJ↓Gkee∃]hAi∃GQ]←1←OrA=khAS9i↑Ai!JAo←IYH\@↓)QK\↓oJAG¬\~∃o=eerA¬E←kh↓S]←m¬iSmJ↓iKGQ9←Y←Od\\\~(~∃¬S1XA.~(~∀_≡`h5≠CdZ`d@@dH`r∪βY∧@@@$lp``@AoCSPAgiCQKf@~(@≡`f5≠CdZ`d@@d@h`∪aICih]MQCgi∧]'k[∃p[βS4@∩lp@``Ao¬ShAgQCiKf@@@~)≠CSX5Me←ZhA'*[9 (AQ=ghA'T['⊃βM)αAe
mHACP@f[≠¬dZpdd```5!'(~) CiJh@fA≠¬d@br`d@brhjpthT[!'(4∃
e←4tAae¬ih]'!CgiB9'k[K`[βSZ4∃)↑t↓o←eWL]CR~)'kEU∃Ght@Xp```↓oCSh↓giCi∃f~∃-%Bt@A5Sh[β$v@fA5Cd@pH@dftDf[ P~∃-S∧t@A¬IX[¬[⊂v@fA5Cd@pH@dftHf[ P~∀~∃QQJA'U\AQCLABAi]↑[YKYKX@QMKO[K9h@LAACOJR↓[K[←IrA[C@XAC]⊂A≥≡A]CSh~)giCi∃f\@A5K[←edAG←]MSgif↓←LAU∃YYr[ KC\@PblhOL\~∀~)-CkO!C\A!ICih~(~∀~∀4∀@≡`P[≠Cd4pd@@@`h`∪]SYYS¬Z@NO
Q←af≤NA/KMiMSK1H@y¬%YY/↓M%∩[↔0|@∩l````A5K[←e%Kf\\8@@@@4∃ Ci∀t@hA5Cd@bdpd@`@`b[!M(~∃'∃]IKdhA¬∪→1.ACh↓'%∩[-_~∃'UEUKGPt@lp@``A[∃[←eS∃f\\\4∃
e←4tA/S1YSCZEπQ←AfDA/∃giMS∃YH@y SYY/↓'%∩[-_|~∃Q↑tAo=eWfA¬hA¬%0~∃≠KMgCOJ5∪λt@q7'%∩5↔→:@P[≠Cd4pd@`@t`btH`]¬∪1→.|~)-SBtA'eR5↔Xv@PA≠Cdpd@fh`n[ ⊃(~∀~)≠←iCI←YBA!CfAC8@E ]≥S]KKIS]NA kYYKQS\DAQSiYK⊂Ag←[∃iQS]≤AYSW∀~∀E)!JAS]QKeeK1CiS←9gQS`↓EKio∃K\AG1←GVAMaKKH↓C]HA5K[←edACGG∃gfAi%[KfD8~∃βG
←eIS9NAi↑↓ShXAe←jAG¬\AOKPAErA]SiPA9↑AoC%hAgi¬iKfAUgS]Nbj`ZH``A]L~∀Q∩↓M←eO∃hAoQ%GPXA¬]HAi!JAaCAKdASLAS\A5rA←M→SGJR↓C]HAMGQ←i-KrAEUf~∃IISmKeL\@A)!JA'k8Aae←
Kgg←HAE←CIHA[C9COKf↓i↑AO∃hAEr↓ek]]%]NAo%iP~∃9↑AoC%hAgi¬iKfA rAI←%]NA]∃ChA[∃[←er↓QCGWLAoSi AiQJ↓←\AE=CeHAIβ~~∀ djm⊗↓o←ei RA)Q∀A[K[=erASLAKqa¬]ICE1JAi↑\jA≠∃NAmS∧AiQJ↓ dAG=]]KGQ←d~∃¬]HA∩↓Cggk5JAiQ¬hAiQ¬hAoS1XACYM↑Aek8AoSi A]↑A]CShAMiCiKL\\\~)⊃←oKYKdXA%LAs←TAoC]PAi↑A∃qaC]⊂A[K[=erAE∃s←]H↓iQCh↓ErAC⊃IS]N↓←eIS9Cer~)[kYi%EkfA5K[←edAE←CIIfXA]CShAMiCiKLAβ%
↓eKck%eKH\4∀~∃∨8AC\A%]iKe∃giS]≤A]←i∀XAiQ∀@lp`H`@PfHAESh↓α←λA kgKf$XAoQ%GPAo¬fAC]=k]GK⊂~∃ik∃gICr0AoSY0AS]G1kIJA=\AE←¬eHAG¬GQJA5K[←ed\@A≠=iCe←1BAgC%HAiQ¬hAKm∃]ikC1Yr~∃Q←`[←_[iQJ5YS]Jlpaq`AgKe%KfAG=[a←]∃]ifA]SYXAIk\ACP@blA5⊃t\~(~∃¬S1Y.~∀4∀~∃)!JA'+8@lp`@`A¬←¬eHAeU]fACP@b`A5QtAo%iQ←kPAoCSPAgiCQKfXA∃mK\AQQ←kO ~∃CY0ACIIIKggKLACeJ↓ieC]MYCiK⊂AErA∧Aio↑5YKmK0XAgK≥[K]h5aCOJ↓mSeiUCX~∃5K[←edA[C]¬OK[K9h\A≥<AGCG!KfACIJAkg∃H\A≠∃[←er↓G←]g%gifA=L@bj@A]gK @liV↓%β≠f8~∀~∀_≡`h5≠CdZ`d@@dLhj∪βY∧@@@$lp``@AgsgQKZAa∃eM←e5C]GJ@@@~(@≡`f5≠CdZ`d@@bXhl∪≥iKGV]]¬'(]Aβ%ε[5β1ε@$lp``@AgsgQKZAa∃eM←e5C]GJ@@@~) CiJh@fA≠¬d@br`d@bfhhpA M(~∃
I←ZtA95KGV9/¬'(9!β%ε5≠β1ε4∃'kE)KGhtlp``@AgsgQKZAa∃eM←e5C]GJ4∃)↑t↓¬∪'¬∃2]+' [∪'∪λ~∃GFhA/←e-f]≠∪P[β∩X↓≥5KG,]/¬'PAChAAβ%ε[5β1ε~)-SBtA≠Sh5βRv@LA≠Cdpd@bLtjd[∃ (~∃YSBt@↓¬eX[ [Hv@LA≠Cdpd@bPt`n[∃ (~∀4∀~∀~(ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZ~∀4∃≠CS0[Me←4tAβeAC]Kh↓Q←gh↓¬%_AIGmHA¬h@dj5
∧Z`d@b`P`[!'P~∃ CQJt@dTA
KDbrpd`rdn5!'(~)
e←ZhA¬∪' 2ACPA+'ε5∪'∪∧4∃'kE)KGht↓%JtA]SGCh↓∂eCa!SGf~))↑t@↓/←eWLAChA5∪([β$@~∃G t@@A SgEKdAChAU'ε[∪M∪∧~∃YSBt@↓≠Sh[¬Rv@dTA
KDpd@bHtj`[∃ (~∃YSBt@↓¬eX[ [Hv@HjA
Kλ@pd@Dft`h5 (~(~∃∩AQ←↑AQ¬mJAm%gSiK⊂A/SG¬hOfAUiCPA=MMSG∃f\@AQQJAOICaQS
fA←aQS←\A→←dAi!J~∀bT`[/&↓Sf@h@apf`@\@Aβ1g↑XAQQJ@bT`[/&↓SfAC1eKCIdA[kYQSEkf8@@A/∀AM←k9H~∃i!JAk]%hAi↑↓EJA a)% ≠∃→2A'1∨.\@↓/SGCPACI[%iiKH↓iQCh↓iQKe∀AoKe∀Aio↑4∃oCSPAgiCQKfAa∃dA[K5←erA¬GGKgLAoQS
P@Qi!KrAg¬SHRAMY←oK⊂AiQJlp``@Ai↑~(lfJA=L@pA5⊃4@QQQChOLAC\A∃MMKGQSmJAMaKKH↓←LA←9Yr@j↓≠⊃4R8@A%k5←dAQ¬fASh4∃iQCPAg←[∃←]JAAkhAB↓gG←a∀A←\AQQJA/%πβ(A¬]HAM=k]HAQQJ@l````AQ↑AEJ4∃ek]9S]NA¬hAC\↓KMMK
iSmJ↓gaKK⊂A←LA=]Yr@LA≠⊃48@A/∪
β(Ao¬fAo←IWS]N↓←\~∃∧A[K[=erAE=CeHAQQChAUgKH@Xi⊗AG!SafAnd a small page table for the
first 2 meg. of address space.
-------
While I have no bias toward a particular system, I am interested in if anyone has
any info on the performance of other 68000 systems (Fortune Systems, Forward
Systems etc...)
Is it Wicat's software (I assume it was their opsys that was running not a
version of unix) that is slow or is it really the hardware?
It looks like from the 68k specs that for no wait state memory access, the
memory access time has to be around one to one an a half clock cycles (125-185
ns) including driving any busses, decoding etc. While this is doable, it puts a
$premium on memory. Also if the design includes a memory management unit
of some flavor (which would be desirable for os/user protection/dynamic
binding), this will add to the required memory performance.
Also note that while the processor is slowed down for a memory access, it
still implements the execution phase of the instruction at 8 Mhz.
------------------------------------------------------------
∂06-Mar-82 1203 AVB Innovation
∂05-Mar-82 2309 BUSH.USC-ISIE Innovation
Date: 5 Mar 1982 2207-PST
From: BUSH.USC-ISIE
Subject: Innovation
To: WorkS.MIT-AI
Via: Mit-Ai; 6 Mar 82 1:18-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 6 Mar 82 1:21-EDT
Hohum indeed. There's no real technical innovation in putting a 16-bit micro
in a box with a tube and maybe a network interface. It's interesting from a
marketing/business standpoint to see how IBM manages as an Intel OEM, but
that's not where the technical challenges are. All this personal hardware is
not too useful, certainly not very advanced, without sophisticated software.
I want a personal computer system, not just an expensive terminal.
Apollo is a case of the hardware without the software. They've always had
a bit-mapped display with overlapping windows, but until recently all their
windows were full-screen width with no identifying information, so it was
difficult to parse the screen and figure out which windows were partially
obscured. Now they have Alto-like windows of varying widths with a thick bar
at the top with information about the window (for example, which file is being
edited in it), so now there's a real reason for the display. Innovative
products, like the Star, will be defined by their software.
-------
∂06-Mar-82 1203 AVB re: 68000 wait states
∂05-Mar-82 2339 Andy Bechtolsheim <AVB@SU-AI> re: 68000 wait states
Date: 04 Mar 1982 2209-PST
From: Andy Bechtolsheim <AVB@SU-AI>
Subject: re: 68000 wait states
To: works at BRL
Via: Su-Ai; 6 Mar 82 2:06-EDT
The SUN 68000 Board runs at 10 Mhz without wait states, even though
all addresses are translated by a two-level, segment-page virtual
memory management. No caches are used. Memory consists of 150 nsec 64k RAMs.
∂06-Mar-82 1703 AVB Re: Innovation
∂06-Mar-82 1630 Nathaniel Mishkin <Mishkin.YALE> Re: Innovation
Date: 6-Mar-82 1600-EST
From: Nathaniel Mishkin <Mishkin.YALE>
Subject: Re: Innovation
To: Works.MIT-AI
Cc: Odonnell.YALE, Rees.YALE, Adams.YALE
In-Reply-To: Your message of 5 Mar 1982 2207-PST
Via: Mit-Ai; 6 Mar 82 18:50-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 6 Mar 82 19:02-EDT
Date: 5 Mar 1982 2207-PST
From: BUSH.USC-ISIE
Subject: Innovation
To: WorkS.MIT-AI
Apollo is a case of the hardware without the software. They've
always had always had a bit-mapped display with overlapping windows,
but until recently all their windows were full-screen width with
no identifying information, so it was difficult to parse the screen
and figure out which windows were partially obscured. Now they
have Alto-like windows of varying widths with a thick bar at the
top with information about the window (for example, which file
is being edited in it), so now there's a real reason for the
display. Innovative products, like the Star, will be defined by
their software.
*** Apollo Flame ***
Having used the Apollo fairly extensively, I'd say this is an incorrect
statement. The hardware is pretty straightforward stuff. Where Apollo
has made its mark is in the software engineering of their system. They
have a real system and it's not Unix (thank god). They have made
intelligent decisions about what to compromise on and more importantly
what NOT to compromise on.
The window problem is a typical example of Apollo's approach. I'm
sure they wanted the whole zippy window thing from the start. The
full width windows were a temporary stage. In general, Apollo has
designed software which does not preclude future increases in
sophistication; in fact it plans for such increases.
If you want to talk hardware without software, let's talk PERQ...
-- Nat Mishkin
-------
∂08-Mar-82 2148 AVB Apollo system software
∂08-Mar-82 1635 JW-Peterson at Utah-20 (John W. Peterson) Apollo system software
Date: 8 Mar 1dpd@bXhj[≠M(~∃
I←ZtA).[!KQKeg←8AChAUiCPZH`@Q∃=Q\A.8A!Ki∃eg←\$~∃'k UKGhhAβa←1Y↑AgegiKZ↓g←Mi]CeJ~))↑tA]←eWf↓ChA≠%h[βR4∃GFt↓→Cef9 eSGM←\ACPAπ[j4baB~)-SBtA≠Sh5βRv@`A≠Cdpd@bdt`l[∃ (~∃YSBt@↓¬eX[ [Hv@`A≠Cdpd@bdt`r[∃ (~∀4∃π←eIKGiS=\Ai↑↓→Cef9 eSGM←\ACPAπ≠*4baBt4∀~∃βA←YY↑≥fAgsMiKZAM←Mio¬eJASLA≥∨(↓S\A
=%)%β8\@AβA←YY↑↓kgKH↓BAMK\A←LAQQJ~∃Iβ)
∨HA'←MQoCeJ↓)←←YLAae←≥eC[f↓M←dAQKqhA5C]SaUYCiS=\@LAAe←GKMgS]N0AEkh↓iQJ~(U[CU=eSir↓←LAi!JAgsMiKZTQR]J0AiQJ↓βKOSLA]kG1KkfX↓gsgi∃ZAki%YSiS∃fX~∃MkaKeYSgKd↓G←IJ0AC]H↓gsgi∃ZA∩←<RASf↓S\A!¬gGCX8@A/Q¬hOfA5←eJA%hASf↓BAGY∃CdX~)[←Ik1CeYr↓IKgS≥]KHAMsgiK4XAC]⊂ASfAIKCg←9CEYr↓I←Gk5K]iK⊂ACfA]KYX\A7)Q∀~∃+]%mKeg%irA←_A+iC AQCf↓BAg←UeGJA¬OeKK5K]hA]SiPA¬a←YY<XAg↑↓∩AW]=nAiQ%fAM←HAB~∃→CGi:8~∀~∀4∃U`~(ZZZZ4ZZ~∀4∀~∀~(@≡`p5≠CdZ`d@@bXhb∪→¬ef] ISGg←8AChA
[jZbAB@∪βA←YY↑=!CgG¬X@@~) CiJh@@pA5CeGPbrpdbfjh5 '(@!≠←]I¬rR~∃→e←Zt↓→Cef9 eSGM←\ACPAπ[j4baB~))↑tA]←eW&↓ChA≠%h[βR4∃'kE)KGhtAβa←1Y↑←!¬gGCX4∃≠KgMCOJ[%Ht@x@q≠Cd`d@bfTh`hA1
la↓
≠*ZbAα|~∃YSBt@↓≠Sh[¬Rv@p↓≠Cd@`d@brhbb[ ⊃(~∃-%Bt@A eX[¬5Hv@p↓≠Cd@`d@brhdb[ ⊃(~∀~)∩OZAM←eer8@A)Q∀Aβa←1Y↑A[¬GQS]∀AiQKdAQCH↓QKeJ↓YCgh↓gK[KMiKdA
C[JA]SiP~)
←eiIC\AOUSIJX↓C]HA∧AgiCQK[K]PAiQCPAiQKdAQCH↓BA!CMGCXA%]iKe9CYYr0AEkh4∃oKe∀A]←h↓O←S]≤Ai↑AMkaa←IhASh↓M←dAM←[JAQS[JA→←dAkMKef\A!YkLXAG←5aCeK⊂~∃i↑↓iQJAAKebA]S]I←]fAC]⊂AOK]∃eCXAMGeKK8ACKgQQKiS
fXAi!JAβa=YY↑A1←←WK⊂~∃YS-JABAIKCXA-YkIO∀\@A∪PAoCf↓ESNX↓EkYWdXAY←\AeKg=YkiS=\XAKaaK]g%mJXA⊃SI\OP~∃QCYJABA5←kgJ0AC]H↓QCHAQekYr↓oSKe⊂AC]H↓k]MCQQ←[C YJAaI←i←G=YfAM=d~∃GIKCiS9NAC]⊂A[←m%]NAC5←]OgPAoS]⊃←of\4∀~∀~(~∀@≡@p[≠CHZpd@brb`%≥CiQ¬]SKX↓≠SgQ-S\@y5SgQW%]↓3C1J|@∪IJtAβA←YY↑=πYKm∃d}@@~∃ CQJt@@@p[≠¬dZpdbnhh5 '(~)
e←Zh@@@A9CiQC9SKXA5SgQW%\@y≠%gQWS9↓3CY∀|~∃'UEUKGPtA%JhAβa←1Y↑←π1KmKd|~∃)↑h@@@@A/←e-fACh↓≠Sh[¬R~∃π t@@@@A∨I=]]KY0AChAeCYJX↓%KKf↓ChA3¬YJXA¬IC[f↓ChA3¬YJ~∃%\[%KAYr[)<tA3←UdA[KMgCOJ↓←L@p↓≠CeG @brpH@``dX[ '(Q≠←]⊃CrR~)-SBtA≠Sh5βRv@`A≠Cdpd@dDtdp[∃ (~∃YSBt@↓¬eX[ [Hv@`A≠Cdpd@dDtfd[∃ (~∀4∀@@@↓≠CSX5Me←ZhAβ%!¬≥ (AMSiJA %_Ae
mHA←8A≠←\↓≠Cd@p@bnhdbt`P@~∀@@A CQJt@@`A≠Ce
P@br`d@``Hl[ 'P@Q≠←9ICrR4∀@@@↓
e←ZhA→CeL] eS
g←\A¬hAπ[TZbaB4∀@@@↓)↑tA]←eW&↓ChA≠%h[βR4∀@@@↓'kEU∃Ght@↓βa←Y1↑←πY∃mKd}4∀@@@↓≠Kgg¬OJ[∪⊂t@x`a≠CdpH@``dXdlA→∀la↓π5*Zba∧|~∀@@A-S∧t@A≠%h[βRl@pA≠¬d@pddtd`5 (~(@@@AYSBt@↓¬eX[ [Hv@`A≠Cdpd@dhfb[ ⊃(~∀@@@~∀@@AβA←YY↑↓gsgi∃ZAg←→ioCe∀ASfAAe←Oe¬[[KH↓S\A
=%)%β8\@A∩↓OkKgLAiQSLASfA¬\~∀@@AKq¬[aYJ↓←LAG1KmKd0AG←]MKemCQSmJAMsgiK4AIKg%O\AC1Y←oS9NAMkQkeJAUaOeC⊃S]N@4Z~∀@@AYS-JA[CeEJAi<ABAe∃G←IS9NAS\↓!β'π¬_\@AQQK\Xb`As∃CefA→e←ZA9←nXA5CsEJ4∀@@@↓oJOY0AgKJ↓C\AβA←YY↑↓kaOe¬IJAaI←OeC5[KHA%\A→∪M \\\8~∀@@@~∃)!SfASLABA[%geKaIKgK]QCiS←8A←LAQQJAM¬Gif\4∀~∀@@@Pb$A'←[∀AMeC
iS←\P4\j@RA←L↓iQJAUgKdAQ←←Yf↓CeJA%\A%CQM←d\A)QKMJ~∀@@@@@AGC[∀AMe←4AiQJ↓g↑[G¬YYKHE'←MQoCeJ↓)←←YLDAiCAJ\~∀4∀@@@PdRAQQJA←QQKdAQ←←Yf↓CeJA]eSii∃\AS\↓!CgG¬X\@A$OZA]<A!Cg
CXAM¬\X~∀@@@@@A∩A
C\ACMgkeJ↓s←jX↓EkhAQQKrOIJA]←PAECH8~∀~∀@@@PLRA)Q∀AWKe9KXASLAoeSQiK\A%\AmKIrAGY∃C]Yr↓G←IK⊂A!Cg
CX\~(~∃⊃←\A[C]dA←iQ∃dAG←5[KeG%CYYr↓ae←IUGKHAM←Mio¬eJAgegiK[LACeJ↓ae←OIC[[K⊂~∃S\↓!CgG¬XXAY∃hACY=]JA→%g`}@↓αAae=UKGh↓i↑AEIS]NAU`A→SM`←'G!K[JA=\AiQ∀~∃βa=YY↑A%fAoK1XAk]⊃KeoCdAQKe∀AChAeCYJ\A/JA∃qaKGPAi↑AMiCeh↓I←S]≤A←kd4∃gsgQK[fAAe←Oe¬[[S]≤AS\A%hAoSQQS\AQQJA]∃qhAM∃nA[←9iQf@!]←h@D`AsK¬efR\4∀ZZZ4ZZZ~(~∀~∀4∀@≡``[≠Cd4pd@@Drbb∪
QS`A5COkSIJ@∪%∀tA7→¬ef] ISGg←8AChA
[jZbABt@A¬a←YY<←πYKYKd␈:4∃ Ci∀t@@p↓≠Cd@Drpd@Dnhf[5'(~∃→e←Zt↓πQS`↓≠COk%eJ~∃MkEUK
htA%∀tA7→¬ef] ISGg←8AChA
[jZbABt@A¬a←YY<←πYKYKd␈:4∃'K]⊃KdtA5β∂+∪I
ACh↓+iCP4d`~∃Q↑tA/=eWfA¬hA≠SP[βR~)GFtA5COkSIJACh↓+iCP4d`~∃IKaYr5)↑tA5COkSIJACh↓+iCP4d`~∃%\[%KAYr[)<tA3←UdA[KMgCOJ↓←L@p5≠CdZ`d@`nLr[≠'P~∃-S∧t@A≠%h[βRl@pA≠¬d@pddbtd\[ (4∃-SBh@A¬e0[¬[Hl@pA≠¬d@pddbtf@[ (4∀~∀∪Q↑AiQ∀AEKgPA←LA5rAW]=oYKI≥J@QQ¬mS]N↓gKK\↓iQJAM←keG∃fAM←HAiQJ↓aeKm%←kf~)SiKe¬iS←\↓←LAgegiKZ↓g←Mi]CeJ@!R]J\↓]←hAQQJAY¬iKgh↓eKYK¬gJAEUhAiQ∀AMCY0AeKY∃CgJR$~∃iQ∀Ag←kIGKfA]KeJA]eSii∃\AS\h~∀∪!¬'πβ_ZA[←MhA←L↓iQJA=&~∀∪Iβ)
∨H@ZA[¬]rA←_AiQJ↓i←←YLACeJ↓Me←Z↓iQJAM∨
)/¬%
A)=∨→&A
←YYK
iS←\4∀∩∩@!iQSf↓[CrA JAoQ∃eJAs=jAO←PAiQJ↓SIKB↓iQCh↓iQKr↓oKeJ↓oeSiQK\AS8~∀∩∩A
∨%Q%β≤R4∀∪β'M ≠¬→d@ZAB↓ieSm%CXAMICGiS=\A←L↓iQJA
←IJX↓S\AM¬GhA∩↓oCfAQesS]≤Ai↑~(∩∩@@↓ae←IUGJACMgK[E1rAG←⊃JAM←HAiQK%dACgMK[EY∃d@QCLA←kiAkhA←_~∀∩∩@AiQ∀A'3'1∪' A
←[aS1KdAK→M←eh↓QKeJ$AC]H↓ISHA9←hAQ¬mJAB↓[C]k¬X~∀∩$@@AM=dAiQ%fACgMK[EY∃dAC]⊂AM←k9HASh↓ISMM%GkYh↓EKGCUgJAi!KeJA]KeJ~(∩@@@@@@@@Ag↑↓MKnA∃qC[a1KfAi<AM←Y1←n\~(∩∩@@A)QJ↓[CU←ISirA=LAiQ∀ACgg∃[EYr↓G←IJ↓SfAG=]GKe9KHAo%iP~∀$∩@@A⊃KmSG∀AIeSYKefA¬]HAM=eGS]≤AiQS9OfAi<AQCe⊃oCeJ↓aCOJ~∀∩∩@AE←U]ICe%KfAC9HAiQ∃\ASh↓GCYYLAiQJ↓CGik¬XAae=OeCZ↓oQSG ASf@4∀∩∩@Akgk¬YYrA∧A!β'
β_Ae=kiS]∀\~∀~(@@@@@@A'<AMCd0AIKgASiJAM←[JAI←kOP↓KIOKLXAiQ∀AgsgQKZAQ¬fAEK∃\Ack%iJ~∃IKCg←9CEYJ↓i↑AkMJXAC9HAQCLABAo=eWS]≤A[kYQSae←
KgfA=&AiQ¬hAgkAa←eiLAeKC0~∃oS9I←ofQk]Y%WJAi!JAMC-J@Ao%]I←oLA←\AQQJA!∃%"@Z↓oQSG AI↑A1←←VA9SGJX↓Ekh~)aeKg∃]iYr↓GC\OPAQCm∀ABAaI←GKgMS]NAIk]]S9NAS\↓KCGP↓←LAi!KZR\↓∪hASL~∃k]→←eik9CiJAQQChAe←kdA9Cee←\AYS]≥kSgi%FAk]⊃Kegi¬]IS]≤AQCf↓EYS]⊃KHAs=jAi↑4∃iQJ↓eKCY%iSKf↓←LAKaSgiS9NAgsMiK[f8A∪hAMQ←kY⊂AEJA9←iKH↓iQCh↓iQJAA%∪≠
4∃π←[AkiKd↓gsgi∃[fAK¬eYrA=&XAo!SGPA]CfAY¬eOKYdAiCW∀AMe←4AC]H↓aCii∃e]KH↓CMiKH~∃≠+1)∪π&↓oCfA%[aYK5K]iK⊂AS\A→∨%)%¬≤XAC9HAgkAa←ei∃HABAYSeik¬XA[K5←erAMsgiK4~∃oSQPAS[ KIIK⊂A∨&X↓C]HA5C]rA=LAiQ∀A←iQ∃dA]S
JAMK¬ikeKLA←LA5+→)∪
&AoSQPAB~)mKer↓YCeO∀ACIIIKgfAMaCGJ↓M←dAQQJAi%[J@Q∃CeYrn`Of$\A∩AQQS]V↓iQCh↓OSmK8AiQJ4∃KMM=eifA=LAOe=kafA¬hA¬e=o\A+9Sl\X↓3CYJ0@A+i¬PXAπ¬YiKG XAKi \A3←TAoSY0AgKJ4∃o←e-S]NAMsgiK5fAoQ%GPAgUaa←ePAεAC9HA→∪M vACLAG←[A←]K]QfAS\↓πβλ←
β~XA
β∩X~)aKeg=]CXA¬YOKEIBA[C
QS]KLXAKi \A+]QSXAgUGPAi%[JACLA→∪'@AgsgQK[fA¬eJAe∃CISYd~∃Cm¬SYCE1JAM←HAake
QCgJ↓M←dAQQJ@l````X↓CfAGUeeK]PA!β'
β_XA→∨%)%¬≤XAC9HAε~)G←[a%YKef↓CeJX↓ShAg∃K[fAQ↑AEJ↓BAaKIMKGi1rAeK¬g←]C YJ@E
YKmKHXAG←9gKem¬iSmJ4∃gsgQKZDA⊃KgSO8AoQS
PAgK1YfAo!ChASLACmC%YCEY∀AeCi!KdAi!C\AiIsS]N↓i↑Ag∃YX~∃]QChA%fA]←PACmC%YCEY∀ACfAMKmKe¬XA←i!KdAG=[aC]%KfACIJAae∃gK]i1rAI←%]NB~)πQS`4∀~∃aLA)↑A=iQKd↓/←eWLAeKC⊃Keft↓'←eedAM←d↓iQJA→YC[J↓EkhA$ACZAYKerA⊃SgCaA←S]i∃H~∃EdA[C]dA←LAQQJAG=[aC]%KfAo!SGPA¬eJAg∃YYS]≤Ag←MQoCeJ↓C]HA!CeIo¬eJAo!SGPA⊃←Kf~)]←hA∃qSgh↓sKh\4∀ZZZ4ZZZ~(~∀~∀≡`p[5CdZpH@@brLb∪∂e%gfACPA+iC Zd`@!≠Cei%\]∂e%gfR@%%Jt@↓βa←Y1↑←!CMGCX@@@~∃⊃CiJt@pA≠¬d@br`d@brLj[≠'P~∃
e=ZtA∂ISgfA¬hA+i¬PZd`Q≠CeQS\]∂ISgfR4∃'kE)KGht↓%Jt@↓βa←Y1↑←!CMGCX~))↑tA1Cef]∃eSGg=\ACh↓π[jZDaB~∃
FtA∂ISgfA¬hA+i¬PZd`4∃∪\[IKaYr5)↑tAe←kdA5KggC≥JA←Lp[≠CHZpd@154-MST
Remailed-date: 8 Mar 1982 1938-MST
Remailed-from: Griss at UTAH-20 (Martin.Griss)
Remailed-to: works at MIT-AI
Via: Mit-Ai; 8 Mar 82 21:52-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 8 Mar 82 22:00-EDT
I suppose I should add my $.02 as well. We have 2 Apollo's, they are
connected with a well designed working network, which permits files to be
accessed by name on other members of the network. Our systems have BitPAD
ONE's, and we can expand/contract and move windows quite easily. PASCAL (as
opposed to the internal SPL that they had), has been released, with a real
manual, etc for some time (i.e. at least November). They did not want to
call it PASCAL until they were happy (unlike other manufacturers).
The resolution has ALWAYs been 800*1024, with working BitBlt, multiple
fonts, etc. We have a FONT editor. It does indeed have a GREEN interlaced
display, being replaced by a non-interlaced BLACK-WHITE. Thus it has the
same resolution as the PERQ, and MUCH more software that actually works!
[We also have a PERQ, so we have experience on BOTH machines].
It seems a bit more expensive than the PERQ, but does have Virtual Memory
(~9MB process), and came with a working Network and larger disk, in a
larger cabinet .
So where's the problem, and the need to relate inaccurate information?
Martin L. Griss
-------
∂08-Mar-82 2000 DREIFU at Wharton-10 (Henry Dreifus) Re: apollo
Date: 8 Mar 1982 (Monday) 2201-EDT
From: DREIFU at Wharton-10 (Henry Dreifus)
Subject: Re: apollo
To: Griss at Utah-20
cc: works at Mit-Ai
Via: Mit-Ai; 8 Mar 82 22:26-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 8 Mar 82 22:30-EDT
We also have the font editor, running on a Black&white display with
a touchpad. It seems much nicer than the Perq, of which I've used
only slightly. As compared with other systems the Apollo is a win.
That is not to say that it is the best and all others are not even
usable, but rather that Apollo has made some of the more intelligent
trade-offs.
Much of our software (Quick-Graph), a DBMS graphics-interface,
Q/A window prompt manager and underlying core software to (at some
future date) handle graphics-laser printer interface has all been
and will continue to be developed in Pascal. As one of the first
Pascal sites, we've been especially pleased with with the implementation.
At first, though it was a bit strange (* *) would not work, and so on...
I would be interested if everyone who is working on the Apollo could/would
send a little note to Works (to be incorporated in an electronic-issue)
on what you are doing and how it looks. One thing of primary interest
is if the user community would take time to answer the following short
questions:
If you have an Apollo, are you dis-satisified? Why?
If you have a Perq, can you qualify yourself as to whether you can
compare the two machines? If so, can you contrast them?
If you have a Perq, are you dis-satisified? Why?
If you have a |X|, are you pleased? X:=={personal workstation}
Henry Dreifus
∂08-Mar-82 2148 AVB Ethernet Doomed?
∂08-Mar-82 2136 the.tty.of.Geoffrey.S.Goodfellow at Sri-Csl Ethernet Doomed?
Date: 8 Mar 1982 2045-PST
Sender: GEOFF at Sri-Csl
Subject: Ethernet Doomed?
From: the.ttq.of.Geoffrey.S.Goodfellow at Sri-Csl
Reply-To: Geoff at Sri-Csl
To: WorkS at Mit-Ai, Human-nets at Mit-Ai
Message-ID: <[SRI-CSL] 8-Mar-82 20:45:22.GEOFF>
Via: Mit-Ai; 9 Mar 82 0:03-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 9 Mar 82 0:09-EDT
March BYTE, p 437
A report issued by Strategic Incorporated, a market-research firm
in San Jose, California, predicts Xerox Corporation's Ethernet local
area network will be a total failure within two years. According to
Strategic's president, Michael Killen, "Xerox is headed for the worst
failure in the company's history." He believes that Xerox lacks
technological and price advantages, sales force, and customers
interested in buying large systems. Fuerther, he contents that
Ethernet's baseband approach to local networking will prove inferior
over the long haul to the broadband approach taken by Xerox's
competitors. He points out that broadband systems are better suited
to carry video, heavy voice and data transmissions, among other
applications.
∂08-Mar-82 2156 AVB Electronic Newsroom Info Request
∂07-Mar-82 1507 hail.mit-vax.BRL-BMD Electronic Newsroom Info Request
Date: 7 Mar 1982 17:24:04-EST
From: hail.mit-vax.BRL-BMD
To: human-nets mit-mc at BRL-BMD, works mit-mc at BRL-BMD
Subject: Electronic Newsroom Info Request
Via: Mit-Mc; 7 Mar 82 17:25-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 7 Mar 82 17:31-EDT
The Tech, MIT's largest student newspaper, is planning to install an
electronic newsroom/typesetting system this summer. If we choose to
roll our own, we hope to use a UNIX-like system running on a large
micro, e.g. the 68000. The system would havE to support visual
editing, including typesetting scanning, plus formatting and spooling.
As we are not sure whether we can junk our old typesetters yet, we are
also interested in device independence. We would appreciate any
information on electronic newsrooms, text editors and formatters,
(device independent) typesetting, local networking, microcomputer
UNIX's, large micros, and anything/everything related. Please mail any
information, suggestions, or whatnot to TEN@mit-vax (or
...!eagle!mit-vax!TEN). If you want to talk, call Rich $alz at The
Tech, (617) 253-1541. Thanks.
∂09-Mar-82 1044 AVB Re: Ethernet Doomed?
∂09-Mar-82 0327 Frankston.SoftArts at Mit-Multics Re: Ethernet Doomed?
Date: 9 March 1982 05:44 est
From: Frankston.SoftArts at Mit-Multics
Subject: Re: Ethernet Doomed?
Sender: COMSAT.SoftArts at Mit-Multics
Reply-To: Frankston at Mit-Multics (Bob Frankston)
To: Geoff at Sri-Csl, WorkS at Mit-Ai, Human-nets at Mit-Ai
*from: BOB (Bob Frankston)
Local: Geoff at Sri-Csl,WorkS at Mit-Ai,Human-nets at Mit-Ai
Via: Mit-Ai; 9 Mar 82 5:44-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 9 Mar 82 5:50-EDT
The Strategic Incorporated report seems rather naive:
1. Why would the failure of ethernet be the worst in the
companies history? So you plug a ringnet behind Star. Big deal.
2. Why is broadband superior to baseband? For a LAN (local
area network) it seems better to run two cables and not mix
technologies.
3. Ungermann/Bass has announced a broadband ethernet anyway.
So you can have your cable TV and send data over it too.
∂11-Mar-82 1215 AVB Perqs, Accent, and Spice
∂09-Mar-82 1504 Rogar.Dannenberg at Cmu-10a (C410RD60) Perqs, Accent, and Spice
Date: 9 March 1982 1442-EST (Tuesday)
From: Roger.Dannenberg at Cmu-10a (C410RD60)
To: works at Mit-Ai
Subject: Perqs, Accent, and Spice
Message-Id: <09Mar82 144228 RD60@CMU-10A>
Via: Mit-Ai; 9 Mar 82 17:20-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 9 Mar 82 17:32-EDT
Before the Apollo vs Perq flames get too high, I'd like to mention some
ob the work going on at CMU toward software for Perqs. First, the
Accent kernel is operational (although there are apparently a few
bugs). Accent provides multiple processes with separate 32 bit address
spaces. Processes communicate through message passing primitives which
are extended by network servers to talk to other machines (see SOSP 81
proceedings for more info).
Second, an IO package called Canvas has been developed to support
user interaction with multiple processes, including multiple windows.
Canvas currently runs on the Three Rivers operating system, but has not
been converted to Accent.
The Spice file system is expected to be up soon, at which time
we hope to pull together the basics of a Spice development system.
Also on the list of Spice software is Common Lisp which is now
running interpretively on a DEC-20. Having just received our first 16K
writeable microstore, work is underway to debug the microcoded lisp
byte-code interpreter.
It's too early to say much about performance, but the Perq is
inherently faster than the 68000, and hardware to support paging
(currently done in microcode) is reported to be on its way.
-Roger Dannenberg
∂11-Mar-82 1216 AVB
∂09-Mar-82 1525 research!bart at Ucb-C70
Date: 8 Mar 1982 19:39:34-PST
From: research!bart at Ucb-C70
Via: Mit-Ai; 9 Mar 82 17:32-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 9 Mar 82 17:52-EDT
More on wait states...
In every monkey cage there is bound to be some ape that stands up to show
all the other apes how long his organ is. The designer of the SUN processor
board has cleverly arranged the on-board memory so that the 68000 can run
without waiting for memory. This is attributable to the following:
1) Mapping the high order address bits results in a tolerable delay since
the memory chips only want the lower order bits first. (bravo!)
2) The 68000 does memory refresh in software, AND
3) memory on the processor board is NOT accessible from the Multibus, which
means the addresses to the memory array can only come from one source and
need not be multiplexed or arbited.
Yes, the SUN processor does not need wait states for memory access, at
a speed penalty of about 10% per wait state, but it spends maybe 5% of
its time refreshing memory (insiGnificant) and DMA is disallowed.
Anyone who has written code for bitmap graphics knows it is very easy to
lose large factors in seemingly innocent ways. If the WICAT system is
really as "SLOW" as the reviews, obviously they haven't figured out this
world yet. The effects of hardware "assist" and extra wait states are really
down in the noise.
TANSTAAFL.
- Bart Locanthi
---------
Bart,
some comments to your message:
1) One 68000 wait state is 1/4 of a normal speed cycle.
Thus each wait state stretches out the cycle time by 25 %,
instead of the 10% you mention. The Wicat system I once measured
had between 3 and 6 wait states for every cycle at 8 MHz,
thus effectively running between 3 and 5 MHz, making it Run
at less than half speed of the SUN.
2) The way the SUN refreshes memory in software
leads to exactly the same overhead as refresh done in hardware.
In fact, we are now using the refresh routine to perform certain
system checks, thus effectively decreasing refresh overhead to 0.
3) The hardware assist in the SUN graphics system leads to a significant
improvement over a software implementation of the same function.
For a random rasterop, the improvement is between 5:1 and 10:1.
The SUN bitblts at a rate of 32 MBit/sec (reading and writing
16 bits per microsecond).
Thus, in summary, I do not agree with your statement that wait states
and hardware assists are in the noise compared to clever software.
Rather, clever hardware design is as much part of an optimized system
as good software, and in fact, more importantantly so because you can
run the same software faster on a hardware without wait states.
In particular, for bitmap display manipulation, hardware speed
is directly visible.
- Andy Bechtolsheim -
∂11-Mar-_2 1216 AVB Re: Ethernet Doomed?
∂09-Mar-82 1632 guyton at Rand-Unix Re: Ethernet Doomed?
Date: Tuesday, 9 Mar 1982 13:44-PST
To: Geoff at Sri-Csl
Cc: WorkS at Mit-Ai, Human-nets at Mit-Ai
Subject: Re: Ethernet Doomed?
In-reply-to: Your message of 8 Mar 1982 2045-PST.
<[SRI-CSL] 8-Mar-82 20:45:22.GEOFF>
From: guyton at Rand-Unix
Via: Mit-Ai; 9 Mar 82 18:56-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 9 Mar 82 19:01-EDT
Quotes from an article in Mini-Micro World, Feb 82, pg 17-18.
(Also, the same article has some information on a couple high
level protocols recently announced by Xerox.)
" . . . Davide Liddle, vice president and general manager of the
OPD, defended the single-channel, baseband approach used by
Ethernet against multi-channel, broadband LAN methods. He also
took issue with the critical Strategic, Inc., report, entitled
"Xerox - The Key Issues."
"Out of about 100 pages," Liddle said, "only about two and one-
half pages deal with Ethernet. Most of the remainder consists of
historical data, untrue information and gossip. The Ethernet
material that does exist is incorrect."
[ . . .]
Liddle claims assertions of broadband cost advantages are
"rubbish." Although many broadband components are the same type
of units used for CATV transmissions, and are, therefore,
produced in quantity at low costs, the broadband transmitters are
relatively expensive and difficult to maintain on a one-per-work-
station basis, Liddle says. Broadband systems also require a
separate modem and controller for each terminal at each node,
while Ethernet requires only one controller per node.
Broadband also suffers in comparison to baseband during the
planning stage, Liddle says. "You need a galactic plan to
implement a broadband network because you must ensure systgem
balance, since a strong signal can overpower a weak one." Drop
cables to terminals must also be of the same length.
∂11-Mar-82 1217 AVB Administrivia - Archives.
∂09-Mar-82 1827 Jonathan Alan Solomon <JSOL@Usc-Eclc> Administrivia - Archives.
Date: Tuesday, 9 March 1982 17:42-PST
From: Jonathan Alan Solomon <JSOL@Usc-Eclc>
To: WorkS at Usc-Eclc
Subject: Administrivia - Archives.
Via: Usc-Eclc; 9 Mar 82 20:44-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 9 Mar 82 20:51-EDT
Hi,
Finally I have what I believe is the total cost for printing and
mailing the archives to WorkS to those who can't otherwise retrieve
them. I'm sorry if this seems a bit much, but I'm only charging actual
costs and not making any money on it.
The CPU/PRINT charges for printing the WorkS archives are $25.00
The postage charges for mailing the WorkS archives (cheapest route)
are $10.00
Therefore, if you want me to send you the archives via UsSnail, it
will cost you $35.00.
Unfortunately, this will have to be charged in advance. Sorry, guys.
I will update the "Hello" message I send to new members of WorkS to
reflect this charge. I had no idea it costed that much myself!
Send your check for $35.00 to:
WorkS Archives,
c/o Jon Solomon
PHE 204 USC-ECL
University Park
Los Angeles, CA 90007.
Once your check arrives and is processed by my bank, I will print and
mail you a copy of the archives. Be sure and include a return address.
UUCP users: I have been asked many times to remail a copy of the WorkS
archives to users on the UUCP network one digest at a time. This cannot
be done. There would be about 50 or 60 messages, each about 18K
characters long. Can you imagine how long it will take to process all
that at 300 baud?
As always, If you have access to an ArpAnet machine, you can FTP the
files from USC-ECLB, in the directory <JSOL.WORKS>. The files are
WORKS.RECENT, which contains all issues for the current volume, and
VOLUME-1.TXT which contains all messages previous to 1 January 1982,
when I started volume 2. In addition, if you are willing to mail me a
magtape (2400 foot), and return postage (I don't know how much), then
I will be happy to mail you a copy of the archives in this form.
Cheers,
--JSol
∂11-Mar-82 1217 AVB Re: Ethernet Doomed?
∂09-Mar-82 2246 mo at Lbl-Unix (Mike O'Dell [system]) Re: Ethernet Doomed?
Date: 9 Mar 1982 20:49:09-PST
From: mo at Lbl-Unix (Mike O'Dell [system])
To: guyton at Rand-Unix
cc: WorkS at Mit-Ai, Human-nets at Mit-Ai, Geoff at Sri-Csl
Subject: Re: Ethernet Doomed?
In-reply-to: Your message of 9 Mar 1982 1709-PST (Tuesday).
Via: Mit-Ai; 10 Mar 82 0:52-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 10 Mar 82 1:01-EDT
"Rumors of my recent demise have been greatly over-exagerated."
-Mark Twain
The market survey which pronounced the death of Ethernet is not
completely accurate and grossly oversold, but could you think
of a better scam to sell zillions of your document?
All the same, the comments by Xerox about broadband are equally
ill-informed. I have spent quite a while comparing the two
schemes and have come to the following conclusions.
1) Broadband does require a bit more initial planning because
you are wiring the world once and for all. But contrary to
Xerox, the design process isn't that complex, and if designed
properly, doesn't require the constant diddling Xerox implies.
Admittedly the required modem is complex, but for a good RF
designer, not that much more complex than an Ethernet transceiver
and occupies the same place in the architecture. Production
economies and special chips will get the modem cost down, just
like for Ethernets.
2) For a given piece of Coax, broadband systems get 5-10 times the
bandwidth out of the cable. Broadband systems multiplex in two
domains: time in each channel, and frequency within the cable.
This allows data, voice, video, and whatnot all on the same cable.
I know it is possible to put voice and maybe even video on Ethernet,
but you can get a lot more with 5 logical networks within the same
cable! Most of the modem designs are frequency-agile, so there
are lots of optimizations possible for either high-bandwidth
applications, or private subnets, again, all in the same cable.
3) On the other hand, Ethernet is CSMA/CD, while most wideband
systems are either pure CSMA, or CSMA/hopefully-CD. You have to
look closely and think hard to understand the real behavior of
the wideband systems, and the suppliers haven't been to helpful
giving away fine details to make these distinctions.
4) The other problem with Ethernet is its DC coupling. While
it will work fine in an electrically-quiet office, there are
some very real problems with electrical noise, ground loops,
sheild currents, and other similar evils. Some are just nusiances,
but others can be deadly, if accidently applied to a human.
When wiring a large building, you won't run an Ethernet through
the building core with the power feeds and elevator circuits.
Here at LBL, we have power transients which would certainly kill
an Ethernet going further than one building, and possibly even
within a single building.
Ethernet and Broadband aren't natural enemies; they are in fact
more similar than different. Same basic algorithms, different
encoding on the medium. I forsee large building or campuses with
wideband backbones interconnecting small baseband subnets.
I think Ethernet will be viable in that many people are building
things to plug into it, but Broadband does have advantages for
large building or campuses. The two will co-exist quite usefully.
At least one vendor, Ungermann-Bass, intends to make sure of it.
-Mike
∂11-Mar-82 1217 AVB Apollo
∂10-Mar-82 0009 BUSH at Usc-Isie Apollo
Date: 9 Mar 1982 2333-PST
From: BUSH at Usc-Isie
Subject: Apollo
To: WorkS at Mit-Ai
Via: Mit-Ai; 10 Mar 82 2:33-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 10 Mar 8∩ 2:41-EDT
Date: 6-Mar-82 1600-EST
From: Nathaniel Mishkin <Mishkin.YALE>
Subject: Re: Innovation
The window problem is a typical example of Apollo's appRoach.
I'm sure they wanted the whole zippy window thing from the start. ...
I believe it is typical. I've been working with the Apollos for almost a year
and I happEn to know that Apollo was unfamiliar with the Alto when they
designed and implemented their original display manager. I wish they had taken
more time and looked around more before releasing their system. A la PR1ME,
they produced an initial product as quickly as possible, and have since refined
it (with the aid of substantial user feedback). Xerox, on the other hand (with
considerably greater resources) refined the Star before releasing it. I also
wish the system were more flexible (in the general direction of the Lisp
machine). Currently, for example, you either use the Apollo display manager
in its entirety, or write your own. There is no way, for examplE, to replace
the display manager's editor with your own. Assuredly, the product will
mature, but it could be less restrictive and could easily have been more
mature to begin with.
-------
∂11-Mar-82 1218 AVB Ethernet Doomed?
∂10-Mar-82 0105 Chris Ryland <Ryland@Sri-Kl> Ethernet Doomed?
Date: Tuesday, 9 March 1982 18:57-PST
From: Chris Ryland <Ryland@Sri-Kl>
to: Human-nets at Mit-Ai, WorkS at Mit-Ai
Subject: Ethernet Doomed?
Via: Mit-Ai; 10 Mar 82 3:39-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 10 Mar 82 3:41-EDT
Date: Tuesday, 9 Mar 1982 13:44-PST
From: guyton at Rand-Unix
[ . . .]
Liddle claims assertions of broadband cost advantages are
"rubbish." Although many broadband components are the same type
of units used for CATV transmissions, and are, therefore,
produced in quantity at low costs, the broadband transmitters are
relatively expensive and difficult to maintain on a one-per-work-
station basis, Liddle says. Broadband systems also require a
separate modem and controller for each terminal at each node,
while Ethernet requires only one controller per node.
This is nonsense. Ethernet also requires a modem and controller per
node. He must have been misquoted or misunderstood.
Broadband also suffers in comparison to baseband during the
planning stage, Liddle says. "You need a galactic plan to
implement a broadband network because you must ensure systgem
balance, since a strong signal can overpower a weak one." Drop
cables to terminals must also be of the same length.
This is also partial nonsense. Would someone from Sytek or one of the
broadband companies please clarify?
∂11-Mar-82 1219 AVB Hardware Driven?
∂10-Mar-82 0948 Jeffrey at Office-2 Hardware Driven?
Date: 10 Mar 1982 0706-PST
From: Jeffrey at Office-2
Subject: Hardware Driven?
To: works at Mit-Ai
Via: Mit-Ai; 10 Mar 82 10:20-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 10 Mar 82 11:45-EDT
I've been reading WorkS mail for a couple of months. I have the
impression that the discussions like current commercial workstation
technology tend to be hardware driven.
Recently the Apple people (yes, that's Apple like in Apple II and
Apple ///) have been consistently saying that they think the real
problems are software problems. Unix may be a wonderful system for
developing and maintaining files of source code, but how do you
support any graphic application under Unix?
I hear rumors that the next Apple machine may support a sophisticated
application development environment including a language like
Smalltalk. If this is true, then Apple may steal the show for the
next generation of small systems.
My impression of things is that with sophisticated "information
graphics" software development capabilities, small computers can be
really be made orders of magnitude more useful than the ones we are
seeing today (and that includes the vanilla 68000/Unix systems).
I'd love to hear comments, responses - anything. Can anyone describe
the high level application development facilities available through
existing systems. I'm very interested in facilities which can be
used to by software to manipulate sOphisticated displays displays.
The kinds of things that SUN and STAR are aiming towards.
Does anyone know what Apple has been doing for several years with all
those computer scientists (I doubt that they are writing Apple II
applications in AppleSoft).
Thanks,
Jeffrey Stone
Menlo Park, Ca.
-------
∂11-Mar-82 1219 AVB Re: WORKS Digest V2 #19
∂10-Mar-82 1057 baker.wbst at Parc-Maxc Re: WORKS Digest V2 #19
Mail-from: ARPANET site PARC-MAXC rcvd at 10-Mar-82 1002-PST
Date: 10 Mar 1982 12:50 EST
From: baker.wbst at Parc-Maxc
Subject: Re: WORKS Digest V2 #19
In-reply-to: JSOL's message of 9 Mar 1982 0047-PST
To: WORKS at Usc-Eclb
Via: Usc-Eclb; 10 Mar 82 13:03-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 10 Mar 82 13:14-EDT
As someone in a Xerox distribution list pointed out, "I wonder if Killen's working
previously for Wang shaded his predictions any, hmm? This little gem has been
floating around the tradepapers for the last two months. Truth is anything
repeated often enough."
And even so, Mostek has just announced its intentions to make an Ethernet
controller for the 68000, and Siemens has announced its intent to market
Ethernet-based equipment in Europe.
∂11-Mar-82 1220 AVB Mike O'Dell and Ethernet
∂10-Mar-82 1340 John O'Donnell <Odonnell@Yale> Mike O'Dell and Ethernet
Date: 10-Mar-82 1436-EST
From: John O'Donnell <Odonnell@Yale>
Subject: Mike O'Dell and Ethernet
To: Works at Mit-Ai
Via: Mit-Ai; 10 Mar 82 15:41-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 10 Mar 82 15:52-EDT
Several points should be made:
First, about broadband. Current RF modems have problems with a cumulative-noise
phenomenon; 40 dB down is not necessarily good enough if you plan hundreds of
modems. Also, as I understand it a broadband cable is almost, but not quite,
many logically independent networks. Problems arise on collisions: transmitters
beat against each other, spraying noise across all frequencies on the cable.
Second, cable bandwidth. Ethernet provides one channel, with well analyzed
and understood behavior under wide-ranging loads. The CATV systems partition
cable bandwidth in ways that may not correspond to the load; also, many of them
use questionable FDM and packet-allocation practices that look nice in theory,
but may match real loads quite poorly. Comparing 'raw' bandwidths is
quite misleading.
Third, DC coupling. Properly designed transcievers provide ground isolation.
Lighting has struck near PARC several times without problems (problems
DID occur once when cable ground was not properly isolated from building
ground; this is equally dangerous and/or likely with broadband systems).
No argument here between Ether/Broadband makes sense, unless the 'broadband'
medium is fiber optic.
Our view is that indeed, some mix of ether and broadband makes a great deal
of sense in planning for a large campus: in-building Ether distribution linked
via broadband gateways (the Ungermann-Bass systems look attractive for this).
-------
∂11-Mar-82 1221 AVB Is UNIX really the answer ?
∂10-Mar-82 1448 Joel.Goldberger at Usc-Isib Is UNIX really the answer ?
Date: 10 Mar 1982 1214-PST
Sender: JGOLDBERGER at Usc-Isib
Subject: Is UNIX really the answer ?
From: Joel.Goldberger at Usc-Isib
Reply-To: JGOLDBERGER at Usc-Isib
To: Works at Mit-Ai
Message-ID: <[USC-ISIB]10-Mar-82 12:14:23.JGOLDBERGER>
Via: Mit-Ai; 10 Mar 82 16:42-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 10 Mar 82 16:52-EDT
I was glad to see that someone else has the same concerns as I do
concerning not only the Works discussion, but the current commercial
offerings as well. I am referring to Jeffrey Stone's msg of 10 March.
We here at ISI have been going around and around with our discussions
concerning what it is we actually want, and/or can get. We currently have
5 TOPS-20's and a TENEX runnine the usual compliment of editors,
mail-readers, and document preparers. Everytime we (the New Computing
Environment Project) have mentioned workstations running some flavor of
UNIX our researchers have risen in protest. Some of their concerns are
"easy" to overcome; Long file names (we have just gotten this working, and
Berkeley is rumored to be doing it too), Version numbers, Filename
completion, a "real" backup mechanism, to name a few. But there are many
other concerns that come from some very fundamental aspects of UNIX.
I must admit that I am not a great fan of UNIX myself, but have to agree
that for "small" machines there isn't anything that's better, nor am I
advocating porting TOPS-20 to personal computers. My point is that I'm not
convinced that its such a win to start with an operating system that has
none of the needed hooks in place to build the computing environment of the
80's. Xerox apparently reached a similar conclusion; that is rather than
add all the bells and whistles to their ALTO environment (that atleast knew
about bit-mapped displays) they developed an entirely new environment
starting with MESA & PILOT and ending with the STAR. For a few months we
were in heated negotiations with Xerox to try to get STARs with the MESA
development environment. At that time (~2 months ago) we were told NO.
Now there are rumors that it may be available. Still, there are obvious
problems associated with being tied to a single manufacturer for both
hardware and software.
It is my belief that UNIX is fantastic as what it is, namely a portable
operating system. To my knowledge nothing else has ever come close. The
extensions that Berkeley has made (and continues to make) are also great,
but already one can see incompatibilities developing. Some of the new
features Berkeley has added will probably never find their way into the
UNIX that will run on WICATs, SUNs, PERQs, and the like.
The issue for us (atleast) is that our user community is not going to be
satisfied with just increased performance at the loss of functionality
(as they perceive it), this is what UNIX on a WICAT/SUN/PERQ/... seems to
offer. What they would really like is all the things a STAR offers: Fancy
editor, Graphics, Multiple Windows, Dazzling user interface, etc. BUT they
also want to be able to program the thing and make use of all the neat
stuff themselves.
At both the recent ACM SIGOPS conference and the most recent USENIX meeting
there were presentations by people who had added some windowing suport to
existing operating systems, they were impressive efforts, but not quite
impressive enough to be worth the effort (for us).
I wish I had an alternative to suggest, but all I have are these concerns.
- Joel Goldberger -
∂11-Mar-82 1221 AVB Re: is unix really the answer?
∂10-Mar-82 1650 RENTSCH at Usc-Ecl Re: is unix really the answer?
Date: 10 Mar 1982 1557-PST
From: RENTSCH at Usc-Ecl
Subject: Re: is unix really the answer?
To: WORKS.BRL at BRL
cc: Jeffrey at Office-2, JGoldberger at Usc-Isib
Via: Usc-Ecl; 10 Mar 82 18:57-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 10 Mar 82 19:01-EDT
I would like to second most if not all of Joel Goldberger's comments. I too
think that trying to adapt UNIX for Alto style personal computers is simply
the wrong path. Admittedly many many people have been and will be using
UNIX, but the environment envisioned for UNIX just doesn't match the
Alto style mold. Most systems that start with a good idea and then try to
adapt to a new paradigm end up being a disappointing mixture of the two,
with a real identity crisis about when to use which ideas. It's better
to do a new design from the ground up both in terms of quality of
implementation and conceptual integrity. Xerox has the right idea with
the mesa development environment, for example, by deciding to go with
an all new system.
On the subject of Xerox, the information that I have is that MESA will be
available on the STAR, at a cost of $3,000/processor, but not until
the end of this calendar year. I have seen the development environment
running on aSTAR (at Xerox) and it looks pretty good and very integrated
into the workstation mold (uses windows, makes use of display well and the
mouse, etc.) This is not too surprising since after all Xerox has been
blazing the trail (you can telh the pioneers by the arrows in their backs)
and has many many man years of experience with Alto style implementations.
What would really be nice is if a Smalltalk implemenation were available
from Xerox for the STAR. Office Products Division has not yet gotten
off its corporate butt and made the decision (officially) to get back
into the (now personal) computer business. I have heard rumors that
Xerox is planning a Smalltalk implementation for the STAR and that Dave
Liddle of OPD is enthusiastic about Smalltalk, but a flurry of enquiries
would certainly help. Call David Liddle at (415) 4→4-4770 , and ask him
personally when Smalltalk will be available. I think he'll get the message.
Tim Rentsch
-------
∂11-Mar-82 1222 AVB Re: is unix really the answer?
∂10-Mar-82 1801 BILLW at Sri-Kl Re: is unix really the answer?
Date: 10 Mar 1982 1704-PST
Sender: BILLW at Sri-Kl
Subject: Re: is unix really the answer?
From: BILLW at Sri-Kl
To: RENTSCH at Usc-Ecl
Cc: WORKS.BRL at BRL, Jeffrey at Office-2
Cc: JGoldberger at Usc-Isib
Message-ID: <[SRI-KL]10-Mar-82 17:04:37.BILLW>
In-Reply-To: Your message of 10 Mar 1982 1557-PST
Via: Sri-Kl; 10 Mar 82 20:38-EDT
Im not sure I agree. One of the nice things about UNIX is the
SHELL concept - You cAn supply UNIX NOW with a system, then
improve the user interface in the future by supplying different
shells. Theoretically, you can do this for TOPS-20, buT I
gather DEC tends to be fussier about supplying source code
for their "EXEC", making it harder for people to develop their
own versions...
∂11-Mar-82 1223 AVB Re: Mail headers
∂10-Mar-82 1955 Jan Walker <JWalker@Bbna> Re: Mail headers
Date: 10 Mar 1982 2003-EST
Sender: JWALKER at Bbna
Subject: Re: Mail headers
From: Jan Walker <JWalker@Bbna>
To: Lepreau at Utah-20
Cc: WorkS at Mit-Ai
Message-ID: <[BBNA]10-Mar-82 20:03:32.JWALKER>
In-Reply-To: Your message of 10 Mar 1982 1208-MST
Via: Mit-Ai; 10 Mar 82 22:19-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 10 Mar 82 22:31-EDT
Sure. It makes perfect sense not to @i[require] the To: field,
for example, in applications where you are just filing the
message, rather than actually sending it. This is a case,
however, where the spirit of the law demands some indication of
the auspices under which the mail is arriving even if the letter
of the law does not. Note that RFC733 tried to make that the
case by requiring the From field. Unfortunately in the big
public mailing list world, the From: information does not make
that identification and the To: field would.
∂11-Mar-82 1224 AVB Unix really isn't the answer
∂10-Mar-82 2048 Nathaniel Mishkin <Mishkin@Yale> Unix really isn't the answer
Date: 10-Mar-82 2149-EST
From: Nathaniel Mishkin <Mishkin@Yale>
Subject: Unix really isn't the answer
To: Works at Mit-Ai
Via: Mit-Ai; 10 Mar 82 22:52-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 10 Mar 82 23:02-EDT
I think there are two basic reasons people feel uncomfortable with
the idea of "personal machine Unix":
(1) Unix is not interactive; the shell and the software tools
were designed to be "programmable" (i.e. fit well together,
not with the user). What use is a personal RJE station?
(2) Unix has developed out of a limited-resource environment;
there's just so much you can fit into a 64K address space.
For reasons unclear to me, it seems that Berkeley Unix still
is bit-stingy. Is this because of how paging works in Berkeley
Unix?
At the other extreme, there is Tenex/TOPS-20. It is about as
interactive as a timesharing can get. It never suffered (or benefited)
from an attitude of "gee, we better not put this in the monitor since
we might run out of address space".
Given a choice of either extreme of featurefullness for my personal
machine, I would take the TOPS-20 attitude. But let's face it, this
isn't going to fly on a 256K machine. If you want all the zippy
features available without paging to death, you're going to need 2M.
I don't mean to sound so anti-Unix, it's just that people seem to have
accepted Unix so uncritically as the model for the future; its warts
have been painted over, not removed. It's time for major surgery.
Let's take the good ideas and move on.
-------
∂11-Mar-82 1225 AVB UNIX & "the" Answer
∂11-Mar-82 0159 Michael Muuss <mike@Brl-Bmd> UNIX & "the" Answer
Date: 11 Mar 82 4:06:10-EST (Thu)
From: Michael Muuss <mike@Brl-Bmd>
To: WorkS at Mit-Ai
cc: Cluster at BRL
Subject: UNIX & "the" Answer
Via: Mit-Ai; 11 Mar 82 4:11-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 11 Mar 82 4:22-EDT
UNIX is probably not where good interactive computing is going to be
in 7 years. Maybe less. It certainly has it's faults. UNIX might
well be the worst timesharing system around, except for all the rest!
If we all had bit-mapped displays and .5 MIPs "personal computers",
we might elect something sexier than UNIX. We might not.
There are several things which make (made?) UNIX great:
1) Delightful programming environment (ie, "C" and the UNIX system-
calls, and I/O library)
2) Hardware independence
3) Highly tailorable and modular user environment (for a mini, and
most mainframes too!)
#3 was superfantastic in 1972, but is being overtaken as neat things
happen. The bit-mapped terminal people are (seemingly) trying to
do away with a lot of #2 (this will get better after the hardware
proliferates for a while). And most people accustomed to "big systems"
don't always seem to understand #1.
Biased? Sure! -- Until better things come along.
-Mike
∂11-Mar-82 1226 AVB Ethernet Doomed?
∂11-Mar-82 0805 ''Marvin A. Sirbu, Jr.'' <SIRBU@Mit-Mc> Ethernet Doomed?
Date: 11 March 1982 09:02-EST
From: "Marvin A. Sirbu, Jr." <SIRBU@Mit-Mc>
Subject: Ethernet Doomed?
To: Ryland at Sri-Kl
cc: Human-nets at Mit-Ai, WorkS at Mit-Ai
Via: Mit-Ai; 11 Mar 82 10:19-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 11 Mar 82 10:28-EDT
I'm sorry, but Ethernet does not reguire a MODEM, it requires a
TRANSCEIVER. There's a big difference. A modem implies RF oscillators
and receivers with lots of filters and other non-digital components.
Transceivers, operating on honest-to-goodness digital signals, not
RF tones, are easier to build.
The controllers, on the other hand, which packetize and do the right
thing when collisions are detected, are essentially the same for
baseband and broadband CSMA-CD networks.
Marvin Sirbu
∂11-Mar-82 1227 AVB ethernet, unix
∂11-Mar-82 1149 DPR at Mit-Xx ethernet, unix
Date: Thursday, 11 March 1982 11:45-EST
From: DPR at Mit-Xx
To: works at Mit-Mc
Subject: ethernet, unix
Via: Mit-Mc; 11 Mar 82 11:48-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 11 Mar 82 13:53-EDT
Ethernet:
People are comparing apples and oranges here. Ethernet has
had a long period of testing in the field. If you want to
buy a technology that's known to work, buy Ethernet.
Broadband data nets (not broadcast cable video) now being
"announced" by venture companies, and even Wang, are all
promise... I'd get a contract that let me sue if they don't
satisfy my needs if I were to risk my company on those
technologies (they may be "better" eventually, but that is
only one aspect of considering them--would you buy a BART?)
Most of the technical "differences" advertised by manufacturers
fall into the "brand differentiation" area here -- when
all is said and done, looking at the whole system, the approaches
probably will all work about equally well. whose snake
oil do you buy?
UNIX:
It sure is nice not to have to build an operating system for
each machine you build. Thus hardware makers will love UNIX.
On the other hand, the concept of an "operating system" is obsolete.
What is needed for workstations or any other computer is a set
of easy to use primitives for manipulating the kinds of abstractions
that are of interest in building applications. For many of the
things I used to do, MACLISP (interlisp as well) is the programming
system of choice. Many users had built a huge library of wonderful
primitives for data structuring, debugging, screen managment, ...
If it runs on UNIX, fine. But I'd never use UNIX raw for those things.
UNIX is good at streaming-file-oriented processing (in fact it makes I/O
devices look like files so that the file-oriented tools can work on
character streams from other sources). For objects not structured as
byte streams (databases, knowledge rep systems, window management systems,
simulation modelling, video game construction, robot control, ...)
UNIX provides no help. In fact, since UNIX provides rather clumsy
processes and access tk I/O, UNIX can't easily be perverted to do these
things.
At times it becomes useful to attack established dogma. UNIX is
an embodiment of a lot of clever ideas thatcomprise a model of what
computing is. I assert that computing for the 80's is best treated
by a radically different model or set of models. Little or nothing
is contributed by UNIX and C other than a programming system that might
be used with the intent of throwing it away when the better ideas
jell into practical systems.
∂11-Mar-82 1228 AVB TOPS-20 EXEC
∂11-Mar-82 1222 Joe.Newcomer at Cmu-10a TOPS-20 EXEC
Date: 11 March 1982 1338-EST (Thursday)
From: Joe.Newcomer at Cmu-10a
To: works at Mit-Ai
Subject: TOPS-20 EXEC
In-Reply-To: <[SRI-KL]10-Mar-82 17:04:37.BILLW>
Via: Mit-Ai; 11 Mar 82 14:36-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 11 Mar 82 14:42-EDT
The last I looked, DEC was nut fussy at all about releasing the source code
to the EXEC; for a modest number of dollars you can get a source license
but I don't know if that is a site license or a processor license. Modest
is under $10K, which on a typical $750,000 KL20 just ain't all that much
additional.
One major difference between Unix and TOPS-20 is that on Unix I felt a
compulsion to rewrite the shell because it was so bad, but never had the
time to engage in the compulsion. I would like to do a few tweaks on
the TOPS-20 EXEC, which has it s own problems, but they are not a
major departure from the basic philosophy of the TOPS-20 EXEC. In the
case of Unix, I would never have considered using the shell code at all,
except possibly to see how some bizarre interface to the kernel was done.
It is such a poor piece ofinterface that I found it a constant aggravation
every time I typed a command.
joe
∂11-Mar-82 1245 AVB Re: UNIX & "the" Answer
∂11-Mar-82 1237 Joe.Newcomer at Cmu-10a Re: UNIX & "the" Answer
Date: 11 March 1982 1354-EST (Thursday)
From: Joe.Newcomer at Cmu-10a
To: works at Mit-Ai
Subject: Re: UNIX & "the" Answer
In-Reply-To: MiChael Muuss's message of 11 Mar 82 04:06-EST
Via: Mit-Ai; 11 Mar 82 14:36-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 11 Mar 82 14:52-EDT
I guess I would never have classified the programming environment on Unix
as "delightful"; the editors pretty uniformly are crocks, and C is the
third worst high-level language I've used (Pascal being the worst), but
it is one of the few languages in which one can write a realistic program
that is hardware independent. What made Unix great was the third point,
which was the tailorable user environment on a mini. There is no
question that Unix is a great operating system for a PDP-11, Z80,
maybe a 68000, but it compromises too many things on a VAX, and trades off
people cycles for machine cycles. People cycles cost a whole lot more.
It also reflects some very narrow cultural background which is slightly
out of step with the rest of the world ('ls'' means 'directory' and
'rm' means 'delete') which wouldn't be so bad if the documentation keyword
retrieval used traditional words as well as Unix-cultural words.
Alas, it does not, and the great "on line documentation" is nearly useless
to an experienced programmer Who thinks in concepts (like deleting
a file) instead of Unix jargon. This makes the learning cureve on Unix
very difficult to overcome, and the frustration of spEnding 15 minutes trying
to figure out how to delete a file is enough to turn someone off completely.
joe
∂11-Mar-_2 1652 AVB Re: Ethernet Doomed?
∂11-Mar-82 1544 BILLW at Sri-Kl Re: Ethernet Doomed?
Date: 11 Mar 1→82 1206-PST
Sender: BILLW at Sri-Kl
Subject: Re: Ethernet Doomed?
From: BILLW at Sri-Kl
To: SIRBU at Mit-Mc
Cc: Ryland at Sri-Kl, Human-nets at Mit-Ai, WorkS at Mit-Ai
Message-ID: <[SRI-KL]11-Mar-82 12:06:05.BILLW>
In-Reply-To: Your message of 11 March 1982 09:02-EST
Via: Mit-Ai; 11 Mar 82 18:00-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 11 Mar 82 18:11-EDT
You are also wrong. An ethernet tranceiver is a far cry from a
modem, and is a lot simpler, but it isnt quite pure digital.
I believe that EtherNet does colision detect by measuring the
DC level on the coax - If one person is using it, the dc level
is about X. If two people are trying to transmit at once,
it deviates from X. A tranceiver has to be pretty sneaky
since X will vary depending on how far away from this tranceiver
the station that is transmitting is. A person from MIT recently
gave a talk at Stanford advocating ringnets over ethernets for
this (simplified analog electronics), amoung other reasons...
Bill W
∂11-Mar-82 1653 AVB Re: Re: UNIX & "the" Answer
∂11-Mar-82 1602 mike at Rand-Unix Re: Re: UNIX & "the" Answer
Date: Thursday, 11 Mar 1982 13:56-PST
To: Joe.Newcomer at Cmu-10a
Cc: works at Mit-Ai
Subject: Re: Re: UNIX & "the" Answer
In-reply-to: Your message of 11 March 1982 1354-EST (Thursday).
From: mike at Rand-Unix
Via: Mit-Ai; 11 Mar 82 18:30-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 11 Mar 82 18:42-EDT
Dear Joe,
Your message about UNIX has the following semantic content:
UNIX is no good because a) C is "the worst" and b)
because UNIX doesn't call things the way "I'm" used
to, ie it doesn't conform to PDP 6 (and its successors)
terminlogy, so it must be "wrong".
Can we raise the intellectual content of this list a little?
Michael
∂11-Mar-82 1653 AVB Someone's Theory
∂11-Mar-82 1612 mo at Lbl-Unix (Mike O'Dell [system]) Someone's Theory
Date: 11 Mar 1982 13:09:56-PST
From: mo at Lbl-Unix (Mike O'Dell [system])
To: works at Mit-Ai
Subject: Someone's Theory
Via: Mit-Ai; 11 Mar 82 18:40-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 11 Mar 82 18:44-EDT
Just a passing comment...
There is a psychological theory, the author of which I can't remember at
the moment, which says the first language you learn, or become fluent
in, dramatically controls the thoughts you can have. In watching
the recent interchanges, I wonder if there is evidence supporting
this for Operating Systems (Tenex, for example) and Programming
Languages (C, for instance). The flames both ways are interesting
to watch, so I won't jump in just now, but it might be interesting
for people to reflect on their opinions and attempt to understand
their biases. The whole world is not Vaxen, 68000's, or even KL20's.
-Mike
∂11-Mar-82 1930 AVB Re: Unix really isn't the answer
∂11-Mar-82 1920 George.Coulouris at Cmu-10a Re: Unix really isn't the answer
Date: 11 March 1982 1843-EST (Thursday)
From: George.Coulouris at Cmu-10a
To: works at BRL
Subject: Re: Unix really isn't the answer
In-Reply-To: Nathaniel Mishkin's message of 10 Mar 82 21:49-EST
Message-Id: <11Mar82 184300 GC12@CMU-10A>
Via: Cmu-10a; 11 Mar 82 21:28-EDT
After 6 years working on user interface problems here at Queen Mary College
London in a UNIX environment. I agree wholeheartedly that UNIX is not suitable
(and was not intended by its designers) as a basis for workstation application
development. It isn't surprising that this is so, because 'dazzling user
interfaces' require quite a lot of computing resource, and they require
the resources to be allocated on a schedule that gives the user an illusion
of animation (see my earlier message on this bb 'what is a workstation').
Resource scheduling and process swapping are so deaply embedded in the
philosophy of a system like UNIX that it will be harder to change
it than to start again (I don't mean tinkering with the scheduling
algorithm, I mean altering the design so that process swapping
is as economical as procedure calling).
Is Mesa the answer? I don't know because I haven't used it, but how about
steering some of our discussion towards identifying our requirements for
the software environment of a workstation? Let me kick off with
a very incomplete wish-list:
1) Extensible application software. Working environments evolve,
and so do individuals' approaches to their work.
The old 'software releases' approach to software updating is clearly
laughable when applied in a distributed information pprocessing environment.
We need to be able to extend the software WHILE IT IS RUNNING, with a high
degree of confidence that our extensions are consistent with the existing system.¬
This requires modularity, interface checking, dynamic binding of symbols
to objects and strict typing (so that the objects passed across interfaces
can't spread infection to previously valid modules) I understand that
although Mesa is strongly typed in most areas, there are loopholes.
I don't think that is good enough because we require almost total confidence in our
interfaces. In passing, it is worth mentioning that C can never be strongly typed
because array bounds cannot be checked (amongst other reasons).
2) Concurrency. Workstations exist in a distributed information processing
environment (a local network containing workstations and server stations).
The environment is inherently less synchronous than a single central
system, so the program should be made up of many communicating sequential
processes. I think this also applies within a single workstation because
the CSP makes a very good modular building block, with the added advantage that the
decisions about which are executed concurrently can be left to the
scheduling and communication mechanism.
George Coulouris
Computer Systems Laboratory
Queen Mary College
London
∂13-Mar-82 0958 AVB Opinions & Biases
∂11-Mar-82 2007 Joel.Goldberger at Usc-Isib Opinions & Biases
Date: 11 Mar 1982 1719-PST
Sender: JGOLDBERGER at Usc-Isib
Subject: Opinions & Biases
From: Joel.Goldberger at Usc-Isib
Reply-To: JGOLDBERGER at Usc-Isib
To: Works at Mit-Ai
Message-ID: <[USC-ISIB]11-Mar-82 17:19:30.JGOLDBERGER>
Via: Mit-Ai; 11 Mar 82 22:06-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 11 Mar 82 22:10-EDT
In my original message that seems to have touched off this recent
debate I was not trying to advocate the development of a portable
TOPS-20 for personal computers, nor did I feel the need to point out
the continuing annoyance of UNIX command naming practices.
I believe the theory offered by Mike O'Dell is certainly true but of
little relevance to my original concerns. Someone here at ISI pointed
out that computers are extremely good at re-educating their users to
new commands and/or procedures, it only takes a few trys at using
file-name completion on UNIX to learn that it doesn't work!
I think the real point is that when standing at the crossroads that
many of us are, in terms of changing our present computing
environments, it is a serious mistake to be content to trade one
traditional operating system for another. In the past this was not
the case; It was entirely reasonable to trade TOPS-10 fkr TENEX/TOPS-20,
or RSX/RSTS foR UNIX, it is pRobably stilh reasonable to trade VMS for
UNIX. I don't know the options for 68000 based systems, but you get
the idea. It is not reasonable however to trade TOPS-20 for ENIX or
vice-versa, each has virtues the other lacks and when faced with a
user community that is comfortable in one or the other, the only way
to convince them the change is for the better is to offer them
something MUCH BETTER. The general feeling seems to be that this
means bit-mapped displays, mice, multiple windows, and reasonable
tools for the manipulation of these things.
My concern is that UNIX doesn't provide a suitable foundation for
building this environment (I don't think TOPS-20 does either!). One
way to insure that you build an entirely new environment is to pick
some hardware that all the old stuff doesn't work on (SPICE on PERQ's eg)
the other way is to use the same old hardware, but with an entirely
new operating system (seems like UNIX started this way).
It may well be that it requires an effort on the scale of the STAR to
accomplish this, but if that is the case we should admit it, and not
pretend that we're entering the new-age of computing with SUN
terminals running UNIX.
- Joel Goldberger -
∂13-Mar-_2 0959 AVB UNIX as a working environment
∂11-Mar-82 2017 SSteinberg.SoftArts at Mit-Multics UNIX as a working environment
Date: 11 March 1982 20:12 est
From: SStei@9EKeN9'←Mi¬eifA¬hA≠SP[≠kYQSGf~)'kEU∃Ght@↓+≥∪0↓CfAB↓o←eW%]NAK9mSe←9[K]h4∃'K]⊃Kdt@↓π∨≠'¬(]'←→iβeiLAChA5Sh[≠UYiSGL~∃)↑h@Ao←IWfACPA≠Sh5βR~∀)Me←Zh@A'βL@Q'KQPAα\↓'iKS9EKeN$~∃→←
CXt@↓o←eWLAChA5Sh[C$~∃-S∧t@A≠%h[βRl@bbA5Cd@pH@ddtD`[ P~∃-S∧t@A¬IX[¬[⊂v@bb↓≠Cd@`d@ddhfb[ ⊃(~∀~)+≥∪0↓SfAB↓]SGJ↓Q←[KdAgsgQKZAEUhASh↓SfA]=hABA1←hAI%MMKe∃]hAMI←Z~∃M←[Ki!S]NA1SWJA
@ln8@A→S-JABA!CYLA∧AI←u∃\A←i!KdAgegiK[LA∩AQ¬mJ~∃UgKHA%hAQCLABA]%GJAgUEe←kQS]JA1SEeCIrAg↑↓s←jA
C\AO∃hACh↓iQJA=&~∃MI←ZAB↓QSOQ∃dAYKYKXAY¬]OkC≥JAC]⊂AShAAe←mS⊃KfAB↓oKCV↓M←eZ↓←L~∃⊃s]C[%FAYS9WS]NQkgS9NAae=GKgf↓M←eW%]NRAM↑As←TAGC\↓oeSi∀As←kH~∃←o8AG←[5C]HAAe←GKMg←dA1SWJAAe←Oe¬[f\@↓≠kYi%GfAI%HASh↓EKii∃dX~∃=&↑fl@A≠-&↓ISHA%hACE=khACLAoKY0AKqG∃ahAi!JAiKI[S]C0AgkaA←ehA]Cf~∃]←egJ0AKCe1rA!e%[←fA YKnA%hAEK
CkgJ↓iQKSHAQSO AYKm∃XAYC9OkCO∀~∃oCLA
←eQeC\X↓≠COS @lAI%HAiQ%fAae∃iirA]KYXA khAo¬fABA ShAE%NAM←H~∃iQ∀Aae←
Kgg←HAC]H↓g↑A←8\@A'=[JA←_AiQKMJAgsMiK[f↓MKYh↓[←eJ4∃G←[→←eiC YJAi!C\A←QQKef8@A+≥%0ASf↓kgkC1YrAi!JAMSIghAI∃GK]h4∃gsgQKZAa∃←aYJ↓OKhAQ↑Akg∀AC]H↓iQKr↓kgkC1YrAM¬YXAS8AY←m∀AoSi ASh~)C]HA9KmKd↓ckKgQS←\A%h\@Alc:@A!CmS]≤Aakh↓k`Ao%iPAB↓I←uK8~∃←a∃eCiS9NAgsMiK[f↓g↑AM¬dA∩AAkhA+9∪0AS8AiQJ↓[kGP↓EKii∃dAiQ¬\~∃CYKeCO∀AGCi∃O←er↓EkhA¬ZAG←9giC]QYrAe∃[S]I∃HA←L↓iQJAMCsS]≤X@E∪_~∃ ]≥YSgP↓oCfA∧AO←←⊂AK]←UOPAY¬]OkC≥JAM←HAiQJ↓→←eH↓i↑AoISiJAQQJ~∃ SEYJ↓S\Ai!K\ASPOfAO=←HAK9←kOP↓M←dA5J\D~(~∃βf↓MCdA¬fAiQ∀AMkiUeJ}@↓≠rAM¬m←eSQJAgsMiKZAQ←ICr↓G←]g%gifA=LAB~)QCSedA ≠β
&\@A$AY←O%\XAK9iKdA∃≠βπ&↓C]HAMiCrAQQKeJ8@A/Qd}~∃¬∃GCkg∀XAoSQPABA→KnAKaiK]g%←]fA]JAQCYJAakPAS\X↓iQKe∀ASfA9↑~∃e∃Cg←\not to work in an environment in which the screen is
well managed and I can do the things I do all the time easily.
Is EMACS the answer? I doubt it.
What does a good system need?
Dynamic linking: UNIX almost has this, but you still have
to work to fix a bug in a library. Multics, Magic 6,
SMALLTALK systems and the Lisp Machine have this.
Screen Management: You don't NEED bit mapped screens to do
something nice to your screen. You need imagination.
Personally, I like bit mapped screens, they can be treated
device independently, but what you really need is to think
in terms of screens, not teletypes.
Memory Management: I have seen several good approaches.
Language oriented systems use "object" orientation which
will probably be the winner, but segmentation provides a
number of useful advantages. The Lisp Machine uses both
and, of course, you PAGE underneath the whole thing. [2]
I agree that there is a software problem and I think there is a
software problem because most systems programmers and most
systems hackers are NOT IMAGINATIVE and INNOVATIVE enough.
Wow, that ought to get the bath
water a-bubbling,
Great balls of fire ...
Seth Steinberg
USELESS FOOTNOTES
[1] Why else does everyone say: UNIX is just like Multics
except better and ignore all of the work on capabilities and
scaling large systems back on CTSS and the PDP-1? It's simple,
they know UNIX but they haven't even read about Multics.
[2] SMALLTALK does not page. It loads objects from the disk
which is NOT the same. They tried a BIBOP scheme and when it
failed threw out the baby too. As you may have gathered I
think they made a mistake with their VERY CLEVAR scheme but I
may be wrong.
∂13-Mar-82 0959 AVB Unix, IBM, humankind, Smalltalk, animation, parallelism
∂11-Mar-82 2112 Chris Ryland <RYLAND@Sri-Kl> Unix, IBM, humankind, Smalltalk, animation, parallelism
Date: 11 Mar 1982 2001-PST
From: Chris Ryland <RYLAND@Sri-Kl>
Subject: Unix, IBM, humankind, Smalltalk, animation, parallelism
To: works at BRL
Via: Sri-Kl; 11 Mar 82 23:07-EDT
Please, let's not crank up the old Unix religious debate on WorkS. See
back issues of nearly every other digest on the net for similar debates.
I think it's clear that the critical resource in today's computing world
is manpower, not machinery. The result? Systems which encourage and
support software movement among a variety of hosts are bound to be popular;
Unix and CP/m fill thatbill reasonably well (no comparison betwixt the
two intended).
Since this list is supposed to be a collective soul-search for the ultimate
workstation (whatever that is), what might conceivably serve as a basis
for the next wave, after Unix? I propose Smalltalk (ST80 for short).
ST80 sits just about on the edge of what today's hardware (read: 68K
equivalents and follow-ons) can support "reasonably". I've seen ST80
in use, and know that I'd much prefer that world to anything else I've
seen (including Lisp machines, which have perhaps the most complete, if
also the most arcanely complex programming environment today). I think
the XEROX Systems Concepts Group (or whatever they call themselves now)
also knows it (why else would they have devoted so many years to ST?)
It's a shame that they're having such a hard time releasing ST to the
world, but I hear they're on the verge of such a release after a long
battle to get licensing going. (I hate to speculate like this, but
I can't say all that I hear.)
ST80 has exactly the properties proposed recently: an extensible system
with an "animated" feel. It doesn't use parallelism in any large
way, but I'm convinced that we don't understand how to use massive
parallelism in any but the crudest sense (e.g., weather prediction).
My ideal workstation, perhaps buildable by 2000, would place me in a
virtual world (3d and all) where the hallmark was malleability of the
objects and actors in the universe. This is an old idea, but makes
complete sense to me. And no one is doing anything seriously along
these lines. Boils down to the same old problem: no one knows how to
use massive amounts of computing power. The old paradigms just don't
make sense anymore if you have billions of hardware actors (in the
Hewitt sense) following quadrillions of scripts.
-------
∂13-Mar-82 1000 AVB software releases
∂11-Mar-82 2114 WALKER at Cmu-20c software releases
Date: 11 Mar 1982 2229-EST
From: WALKER at Cmu-20c
To: works at Mit-Ai
Subject: software releases
Message-ID: <820210222926WALKER@CMU-20C>
Via: Mit-Ai; 11 Mar 82 23:29-EDT
Via: Brl-Bmd; 11 Mar 82 23:31-EDT
Software releases will only be different in the future in that there will
be many more machines, and any individual one may not have a boot device.
Things that will continue to havE releases are all the standard computer
company software, such as OS, compilers, DBMS, etc. Obviously these
must be backward compatible with applications packages. So what's new?
As long as the interfaces are compatible, there will be no problem.
As to the physical mechanism for distributing software, it can follow
the old style of sending a new tape or floppy. This would be mounted
on an individual machine, or on a network server and then boot over
the net. The CMU VAXs already do this since 12 VAXs share 2 tape
drives over an Ethernet.
The other obvious alternative is simply to ship the new software via
network. Berkeley is hooked to our VAXs. So is DEC. In principle,
all new software releases could be shipped via ARPAnet and Ethernet.
I simply haven't heard anything that makes me think that selling
and servicing software will be any different (except as mentioned
above) than it is now. Remember that large machines already have
the capability for remote diagnosis via the phone of hardware and
software problems while the machine is up and running.
--------
∂13-Mar-82 1001 AVB A minor point...
∂12-Mar-82 0027 William ''Chops'' Westfield <BillW@Sri-Kl> A minor point...
Date: 11 Mar 1982 2343-@!M(~∃'∃]IKdhA¬∪→1.ACh↓'eR[-X~∃'UEUKGPtAαA5S]←d↓a←S]P\\\~)
e←ZhA/SY1SCZ@ πQ←aLDA/KMiMSK1H@y¬%YY/↓MeR[↔0|~∃)<tA/←IW&ACPA¬%_4∃≠KgMCOJ[%λt@ym'%∩[-→:bb5≠CdZ`d@dfhhftfd]¬∪→1.|~∃YSBt@↓'eR[-Xv@bHA≠Cdpd@dhjj[ ⊃(~∀~)∩Ao←UYHAY%WJAi<Aa←]%hA←kPAiQCPA]Kn↓[SGe<[ae←
Kgg←IfACe∀AEKS9N~∃C9←k]G∃HACh↓BAeCQJA←L↓OeKCQKdAi!C\A←9JAaKHAsKCH\@A∪_As←j↓oC]h4∃s←kHAo←e-giCi%←\Ai<AEJA¬EYJAQ↑Akg∀AgiCQJA←L↓iQJA¬ehAi∃GQ]←1←OrX4∃s←j↓QCmJ↓i↑AE∀ACEY∀Ai↑AAkhAC8A←aKICiS]≤AgsgQKZA←8AShAAeKiid~∃ck%GWYr8@A)Q%fA[K¬]fAi!ChASPAgQ←UYHAE∀AoeSQiK\A%\ABAIKYCi%mKYr4∃QSO AYKm∃XAYC9OkCO∀XAoSPABA[%]S[k4A←LA5CGQS9JAG←⊃JA]K
KggCIr~∃M=dAKC
PAae=GKgg=d\@AISOQh↓]←nX↓iQSf↓[KC]LA+≥∪`XA∩AQQS]V8~∃≠CeEJAS8ABAY%iiYJ↓oQSY∀AShA]SYXA%]GYk⊃JA'[¬YY)C1VAC]⊂A←iQ∃ef\\8~∀~∃].~∀~(_≡bn5≠CdZ`d@@bDfr∪βY∧@@@%/∨%↔LA SO∃ghA,H@Fdh@@@~(@≡bl5≠CdZ`d@@d@fn∪≠∃XA!Y∃CgC]P@y/∨I↔&ACPA%+)≥ %&|∪/∨%-&A S≥KghAXd@FdP@@@~) CiJh@blA5Cd@bdpd@dHjf[ M(~∃
I←ZtA5KXA!1KCgC9h@y/=%↔&A¬hA%+Q∂ %&x~∃'k UKGhhA/∨%-&A S≥KghAXd@FdP~∃'K9IKdt↓!→ βMβ≥(A¬hA%+Q∂ %&4∃)↑t↓/←eWLt@v~)%KaYd[)↑t↓/∨%↔LAChAI+)∂ I&~∃∨→MSGJhA⊂`jT@ZA⊃%YXAπ9idXA kgGP↓πC[`0A%ki≥KefAU]SlX↓!SgG¬iCoCdXA≥∀↓phnp@~∃⊃←5Jt@d@lA CMi←\A¬mJ\X↓≥KnA ek]g]SGVX↓≤]∀\`pr`DX@Pd@bR@dPrZdnPp~∀~)/←eWLA SO∃gh@@@@@@@@@AQkKgI¬rX@bXA≠Cdbrpd@@@AY←Yk[∀@d@t↓∪ggk∀@dh~(~∃)←⊃CrOf↓)←aS
ft@@@@@@@@@@↓βI[S9Sgie%mSB~(@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@A'←[∃←]JOLA)QK=er~∀@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@A≠←⊃K[fAYfA)e¬]gGK%mKef4∀@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@A i!Ke]KPA ←←5KH}~(@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@↓3←kd↓MSegPAYC]≥kCOJ4∀@@@@@@@@@@@@@@AU≥∪0@_A/←e-giCi%←]f@_A≥Ki]←eWS9N~∀@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@A+9∪0@LEiQJλAβ]g]Kd~∀@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@AεAi!SeHA]←egh|~∀@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@A∨AS]S←9f@LA SCgKL~∀~∀4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4∀~∃ ¬iJtA5←]ICdX@bj↓≠CeG @brpH@@d`hhl[!M(~∃
I←ZtA)←]Ci!C\Aβ1C\A'=Y←[←8@y∃'=_ACh↓ π→εx~∃'k UKGhhAβI[%]SgiISmSBZA∨kPAoSi AiQJ↓←YH@4A∪\A]SiPAQQJA]∃n~∀~)∩AoSMPAi↑↓iCWJ↓iQSf↓←aa←Iik]SQrAi↑↓]←iJ↓iQCh↓oJAQ¬mJAO=]JAE¬GVAi<AiQJ4∃ISO∃ghAM=eZA←_AakE1SGCi%←\AM=dACY0AeKC⊃Kef\↓+]M←Iik]CQKYrX↓IkJAQ↑AY←¬H~∃e∃gieS
iS←]LAC]H↓iQJA∃qieK5JAm←1k[JA=LA[C%XA/←IW&AQ¬fAOK9KeCi∃HXASP~∃QCLAgS[AYrAE∃G←[J↓S[a←MgSEY∀Ai↑A⊃Sgie%EkiJ↓iQJA%]M←e5CiS←8AMCgPAK]←UOP~∃Q↑ACY0AeKC⊃KefA%\AiQ∀AgQ←IhAiS5JAEK→←eJAQQJA]∃qhAe∃ga←]MJASf↓eKCIdAi↑~)EJAg∃]h\A$AQ←a∀As←j↓oSYX↓k]IKIgiC]⊂AiQCPAShA%fAM←HAiQJ↓O←←H↓←LAC1X~∃i!ChA/=eW&A9←hAS9iKeM∃eJAo%iPAi!JA]←I[CXA=aKeCQS←\A=LAiQ∀Aβ%!¬≥KhX↓C]H~)iQCh↓ShAG=]iS]UJAi↑↓[CS]QCS\A∧@EgK
←]ICIrDAgQCikf↓i↑Ai!JAS[A←eiC9h~∃EUgS]KMfAoQ%GPASLAG←]⊃kGiK⊂A←\AQQJA≥∃h\~∀4∃/QK8A∩AgQCeiK⊂Ai↑A=MMKd↓S[[K⊃SCiJ↓eKISMieSEUiS←\↓C]HA⊃SOKgQSMSG¬iS←\0~∃∩A]CfAQ=aS]N↓iQCh↓iQJA1SghA]←kYH↓]↑AY=]OKd↓eKck%eJACLA[kG AiS[∀ACfA$~∃oCLAgaK9IS]N↓←\ASP\A)Q∀AMCGPAoCf↓iQCh↓∩Aga∃]hA[=eJAi%[JA←8A/←e-&AiQ¬\~∃∩↓QCHA∃mKdA KM←e∀AI←]∀XAgS9GJAi!JAm←1k[JA=LA[C%XAQC⊂AS]GIKCgK⊂AckSQJ~∃g<A[kG AC]H↓ShAo¬fAQCIHAM←HA[JAQ↑AWK∃`AiQ∀AISO∃gifAU`Ai↑↓ICiJ↓oSiP↓iQJ~)ISgGUggS←8\AβI⊃SiS←9CYYr0Ag←[∀A←LAQQJAiICMMS AQCH↓YSii1JAi↑↓]←iQ%]NAi<~∃I↑↓oSiP↓/←eWL\A∪h↓oCfA5rAeKMa←]g%ESYSQrAi↑↓S]gkIJAiQ¬hAgk
P~∃I%gGkgMS←]f↓oKeJ↓GQC]9KYKH↓i↑Ai!JAae=aKdA5CSYS9NAYSMh\A∨9JAKq¬[aYJ↓←L~∃QQSfA]CfAi!JAG←5aYCS9ifAC ←khAQQJA[∃ggCO∀AQKC⊃Kd\AQQSfAQsaJA=L~∃G=[aYC%]hAg!←kYH↓QCmJ↓O←]J↓i↑A/=eW&[IKckKMh\A≥=e[CY1rA∩A]←kYH↓QCmJ4∃GCk≥QhAi!KZAE∃M←eJ↓akEY%gQS]≤ABAI%OKgh8~∀~∃QQJAg%[aYJ↓MCGh↓SfAi!ChA∩↓I←\OPAQCm∀AiQJ↓iS[J↓C]s[=eJAi<AQC]⊃YJAi!J~∃iICMMS A←L@HAISO∃gifXhAISIKGhA5CSYS9NAYSMifXA¬]HAi!JAEeU]hA←_A[CS1S]N~)YSgh↓[CS]QCS]K9GJAC
e←gf↓iQJA¬%!β]∃h\A+9M←eiU]CiK1rAgS9GJA∩↓I↑Ai!SfACT~∃Oe¬iSfX↓C]HA$AI←\≥hAOKPAaCS⊂Ai↑A⊃↑ASh0A∩AG¬\OhA1KhASPAS]i∃eMKe∀AoSi ~∃iQ∀Ao←e,AoQS
PA∩A⊃↑AQKIJACh↓ π_X↓oQSG A∩AI<AOKh↓aCSH↓M←d\↓∩ACZ↓]←n~)M←eG∃HAi↑↓iCWJ↓iQJA1KgfAA←akY¬dACYQKe]CQSmJ@!i↑A[∀RAoQ%GPASLAi↑A≥SmJ~)k`A[=IKeCQS←\A=LAiQ∀AYSgP\A)Q∃eKM←IJA∩A¬ZA←M→SGSC1YrAe∃gSO]%]NA[d~∃aY¬GJACLA[←I∃eCi←HA←LA]←eW&8~∀~∃$OZA]=hAO←%]NAG=[aYKQKYrA¬oCrX↓∩AoS1XAeK5CS\A=\AiQ∀AgSI∃YS]KLAi↑~)CImSMJAC]⊂Ai↑A!KY`A5CS]i¬S\Ai!JAYSMhXAC1←]NA]SiPA=kdA]∃nA[←⊃KeCi=dX~∃5KXA!1KCgC9h\A≠∃XASf↓BAO←=HAMe%K]HA=LA[S9JXAg=[K←]∀AoQ↑↓∩AGC8AiekMhAi↑4∃WKK@AiQJ↓ISgGUggS←8AQKCIirAC9HAQK¬YiQMUXXAC9HA∩A¬ZAgkIJAiQ¬hAQJ↓oSYX4∃I↑A∧AMS]∀AU←D↓[←IKICiS]≤AiQJ↓/←eWMiCiS=\AISMGkgg%←\\A5KXASLABAgegiK[L~∃ae=OeC[5KdACPA%ki≥KefX↓C]HA!CHAC1oCsf↓QCHA¬\AS]QKeKgPAS\A]←eW&0Ag↑A%h~∃g∃K[KH↓←]Yr↓]CikICXAM=dAQS4Ai↑A5←IKe¬iJASP\A!Y∃CgJA!KY`A5JAoK1G←[J↓QSZ~)i↑Ai!JA/←IW&AG=[[k]%ir\~(~∀~∀$∩∪∂←=HA→k
VA≠K0B~∀~(∩∩∩∩$TTTT(T~∀∩$∩∩∩U)'←XT4∀∩∩∩$∩TTT(TT~∀4∀ZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4Z~∀~) CiJh@@@@@bdA5Cd@pH@dtb@tbr[∃'(@Q→eRR~)
e←Zh@@@@A≠SG!CKXA5kkgfy[SW∃↓¬eX5¬[H|4∃)↑t@@@@@A≠S-JA≡O⊃KYXAmgsgi∃[:@y5←↓→E0[+]S`|~∃'UEUKGPt@@AIJt@AM←[K←9JOfAQQK←ed~∀~∃$AgaK9hA[r↓MSegPAQCY_[I←u∃\AsK¬efAaI←OeC5[S]N↓C]HA!CGWS9NA←\↓∪¬~~)gsgi∃[f\@↓∩AYS-JA+≥%0Ai←9fAEKQiKd\A ←KLAiQSLA[KC8A∩OZ↓gSGV|@A∩A]COKd4∃iQCPA[←gPAaK←AYJA←8AiQJ↓]KhA]Q↑AY∃Ce]K⊂AG←[AkiS]≤Ag←[∃aYCG∀A←iQ∃dAiQ¬\~∃G=YYKO∀Aae← CEYr↓YKCe9KHA∪ ~\@AQQSfA5CrAI∃]hAi!JAiQ∃←erAM←[Ko!Ch\\8\~∀~)¬rAi!JAoCdXA∩A]←kYH↓YSWJ↓i↑Ag∃JAISMGkgg%←\Ai∃]HAi<AM←Y1←nAi!JAYS9KfA←_~∀Eo!ChAi!S]Of↓GC\A]JAI↑↓iQCh↓OSmJ↓aK←a1JAKm∃\A[←IJAa←]KdAi!C\~∃U≥∪0←Q ≥ 0=)∨!&4d`DX↓eCiQ∃dAiQn re-hash the basicly dead issue of
whether UNIX, TENEX, or TOPS-20 (or even something else) is "best". I
regard the three as being (roughly) functionally equivalent (hackers
everywhere, peace!), differing mostly in smallish details. They all
represent the "best" of the "current" software technology in
ultra-widespread use. So, what's next?
-Mike
------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 11 March 1982 08:45-PST
From: Chris Ryland <Ryland@Sri-Kl>
To: SIRBU at Mit-Mc
cc: Human-Nets at Mit-Ai
Subject: Modems vs Transceivers
Date: Thursday, 11 March 1982 06:02-PST
From: "Marvin A. Sirbu, Jr." <SIRBU at MIT-MC>
I'm sorry, but Ethernet does not reguire a MODEM, it requires a
TRANSCEIVER. There's a big difference.
Of course there's a difference (and I assumed that any reader of my
message would understand the technical distinction), but not the kind
of difference the article was implying: a naive reader would assume
that there was no need for a cable driver on the Ethernet. A modem
and a transceiver are functionally identical.
... A modem implies RF oscillators and receivers with lots of
filters and other non-digital components. Transceivers,
operating on honest-to-goodness digital signals, not RF tones,
are easier to build.
Not true; rather, people have more experience building transceivers.
This is bound to change: TRW makes chips which allow you to build a
2MHz fixed-channel RF modem with essentially 3 components (rcvr,
xmittr, SDLC chip). Frequency-agile modems are harder, but LSI can
change that, also.
------------------------------
Date: 12 March 1982 03:17-EST
From: Howard I Cannon <HIC@Mit-Mc>
Subject: Ethernet Doomed?
To: BILLW at Sri-Kl
cc: SIRBU at Mit-Mc, Ryland at Sri-Kl, Human-nets at Mit-Ai
I'm not sure how the Ethernet is spec'ed (since I'm at home, and the
documentation is in my desk at work), but the Chaosnet, which is a
CSMA/CD (carrier sense multiple access, with collision detection (did
I get this right?)) ethernet-like network, does something less analog
and in some sense more sneaky to detect collisions: it watches the
cable, and if what's on the cable isn't what it is sending, then a
collision has occured. Since the cable is only actively driven in one
direction, this works nicely. (positive, passive terminators on each
end provide the "pulldown". Just like open-collector TTL, but
reversed.)
The analog electronics in the Chaosnet transceiver have mostly to do
with driving the cable, which is perhaps the most tricky part of any
scheme. By getting this right, you can run at 10 megabaud baseband.
We had to slow the Chaosnet down from 8 to 4 megabits/sec in order to
get more acceptable error rates on our longer runs. I believe the
major problem with 8 megabaud turned out to be that many of the
optical isolators we were using didn't work very well at that speed.
There is no question that ringnets have simpler interfaces to their
cables. One could build a ringnet cable interface out of two
differential parts and do very nicely. Even add optical isolation if
you want for a coupla more chips. But I wouldn't want to try arguing
ringnet vs. ether-like net on that basis alone.
------------------------------
Date: 11 Mar 1982 1819-PST
From: Tom Wadlow <TAW@S1-A>
Subject: Your first language
From: mo at Lbl-Unix (Mike O'Dell [system])
Subject: Someone's Theory
There is a psychological theory, the author of which I can't
remember at the moment, which says the first language you
learn, or become fluent in, dramatically controls the thoughts
you can have.
The first computer language I learned was BASIC, on some obscure
Westinghouse computer. This has not stopped me from appreciating the
good features of LISP, C, Pascal, Forth, Smalltalk, Mesa and others.
To say nothing of UNIX, Tops-20, Multics, WAITS, and other operating
systems too numerous to mention. It has also not kept me from flaming
at great length about the drawbacks of the aforementioned. I don't
wish for the good old days with line numbers and NEXT X statements.
Occasionally, I have met folks who claim that their language is The
Language. They are always wrong. It seems to me that the essence of
good software engineering is to be able to pick the appropriate
language from your repertoire (and, like anything else, the bigger
your repertoire, the better) and to know WHY you picked Language X for
Task Y.
------------------------------
Date: 12 Mar 1982 11:18 PST
From: Deutsch at Parc-Maxc
Subject: Re: UNIX & Workstations & Networking ...
In-reply-to: mike's message of 22 Feb 82 0:15:36-EST (Mon)
To: Michael Muuss <mike@BRL>
A few weeks ago you sent a message to WorkS about a terminal called
the BLIT. I've seen a similar machine from BB&N called the BitGraph.
But it sounds like the BLIT has more functionality, and might even be
expandable to include more memory and/or a hard disk, which in my
opinion are both absolutely necessary for a home computer (which is
what I'm interested in). Can you give me more information about who
designed it, who might market it, where to find out more about it,
etc.?
Uniform network protocols are a must. Unfortunately, TCP/IP is
relatively complicated and (as I understand it) has some features that
run counter to our (the Ethernet world's) philosophy of
packet-switched, best-efforts communication. I guess having some
halfway reasonable standard is better than not having any at all.
Incidentally, I think there is absolutely no excuse in this day and
age for building a workstation "so braindamaged as not to be able to
multi-program". All it takes is some kind of hardware interrupt
system and a tiny bit of multi-process scheduling software. Memory
protection, timers and suchlike are unnecessary. In the mid-1960s
someone I knew at U.C. Berkeley wrote a real-time multi-process
scheduler for a DEC PDP-5 (the precursor of the PDP-8) in about 100
instructions.
P. D.
------------------------------
Date: Thursday, 11 Mar 1982 13:56-PST
To: Joe.Newcomer at Cmu-10a
Subject: Re: Re: UNIX & "the" Answer
In-reply-to: Your message of 11 March 1982 1354-EST (Thursday).
From: mike at Rand-Unix
Dear Joe,
Your message about UNIX has the following semantic content:
UNIX is no good because a) C is "the worst" and b)
because UNIX doesn't call things the way "I'm" used
to, ie it doesn't conform to PDP 6 (and its successors)
terminlogy, so it must be "wrong".
Can we raise the intellectual content of this list a little?
Michael
------------------------------
Date: 12 March 1982 1900-EST (Friday)
From: Joe.Newcomer at Cmu-10a
To: pratt.Shasta at Sumex-Aim
Subject: Re: C third worst?
In-Reply-To: pratt@Shasta@Sumex-Aim's message of 11 Mar 82 18:28-EST
One thing is true of modern languages: you need not restrict yourself
to medium-level control and data strctures, it is possible to build
optimizing compilers which remove the burden of hacking and allow the
user to write the expression which is meant instead of the one which
"generates good code", and although garbage collectors are nice,
explicit allocation/deallocation is not so bad. The major problem I
had with C after using Bliss is that the abstractions I program in
were extremely difficult to write. If you ignore such incidentals as
the completely bogus way "." and "->" introduce a level of
inappropriate concretization of structures, and the inability to write
decent iteration abstractions (the most imnt one I care about), and
the proclivity in every C program I ever looked at to handle string
iteration by wiring in [i++] type notations, and the lack of a
'leave' style construct, the bogus way of doing case statements, and
the general unreadability of the programs because procedure
declarations look like procedure calls and a Few dozen other
notational problems, it probably isn't a bad language. However,
having used both Bliss and SAIL, I much prefer those two langauges.
SAIL without a string garbage collector would be a bit of a pain to
use, but I find that I can warp either of those langauges to the
"language" I use in my head (which is neither BLiss nor SAIL, but a
much higher level object-based notation), but with C, the underlying
mechanisms and notations I use cannot even be expressed. Therefore, I
found that I was always writing very concrete code in C, instead of
abstract code, and I always had to be concious of how badly the
compiler was going to translate it, instead of knowing the compiler
would optimize away any rubbish I wrote. It was almost as bad as
writing in assembler in terms of the mind-set I found myself
maintaining. I usually program two or three levels above the
implementation, and use sophisticated macros and knowledge that the
compiler will optimize to defer the detailed implementation. The
change was more than I could bear. Even a preprocessor would not
suffice in the case of C, bewcause some of the primitives I needed
weren't present, and in any case, I couldn't exploit the non-existent
sophisticated optimizer. The only experience I have had worse than
this was with Pascal, which actively goes out of its way to prohibit
me from letting code flow from my hea` to the target language. For
the curious, the second-worst language is Fortran, which is truly the
assembly code of high-order languages. However, it doesn't actively
prevent me from doing what I want to do, as Pascal does.
joe
------------------------------
Date: 12 March 1982 1917-EST (Friday)
From: Joe.Newcomer at Cmu-10a
To: JGOLDBERGER at Usc-Isib
Subject: Re: Opinions & Biases
In-Reply-To: <[USC-ISIB]11-Mar-82 17:19:30.JGOLDBERGER>
Indeed, no system is perfect. I have a massive file on TOPS-20 in
which I document several dozen major or minor problems with the
system; the major ones usually deal with the fact that the original
computing model was a single user at a model 33 TTY running a single
program (perhaps of multiple processes) on a system possessing one
logical file strucutre (no dismountable packs) working on a single
project. Since none of these conform to what I do every day, I find
serious mismatches between what I need and what TOPS-20 supplies. On
the other hand, for all those things which are within the design
parameters, it does them very well indeed. I agree with your comment
that a complete new rethinking of the fundamental paradigm is
important. The STAR and PERQ/SPICE are starts, but both will need to
be refined as the actual experience with distributed computing is
gained. All workstation projects predicated on this are going in the
right direction.
It is important to separate the Unix user interface from the Unix
kernel. All of my flaming about Unix center primarily on its user
interface. A project which chooses to use the Unix kernel and which
completely redoes the interface might well produce a system which is
hardware independent and superior to TOPS-20 or Unix. Couloris is
arguing that the Unix kernel may not be appropriate; I cannot
participate in that argument because I never explored the fringes of
the kernel enough to find where it broke down from the model of what I
need.
joe
------------------------------
Date: 13 Mar 1982 12:35:28-PST
From: pratt@Shasta at Sumex-Aim
To: Joe.Newcomer@CMU-10A, pratt@Shasta at Sumex-Aim
Subject: Re: C third worst?
I too like to write abstract code. So far I've found that the only
obstacle to this in C has been the absence of garbage collection.
Modulo this problem, I've found myself able to program pretty
abstractly. Of course there's no way to hide the implementation, but
that's a separate issue from being able to program abstractly to begin
with; hiding is more of a personal-security issue, trying to protect
yourself from your own stupidity.
The BIG problem for me is garbage collection. I have no intuitive
feeling, WHEN I PROGRAM ABSTRACTLY, for when to return something. I'm
impressed you are able to do it easily, I should learn the trick. I
find when I try to do it I am working at the low level I was trying to
avoid by programming abstractly. This slows me down, and my error
rate goes up sharply.
Vaughan
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂20-Mar-82 1009 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #25
∂18-Mar-82 0026 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #25
Date: 18 Mar 1982 0237-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #25
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Office: H055 - Hill Cntr, Busch Camp, Rutgers Univ, Piscataway, NJ x4780
Home: 206 Easton Ave., New Brunswick, N.J. 08901, (201) 249-2748
Works Digest Thursday, 18 Mar 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 25
Today's Topics: Administrivia
Opinions & Biases
UNIX on workstations
The Apple Bill
C, Bliss, SAIL
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 18 Mar 1982 0227-EST
From: The Moderator <Pleasant at RUTGERS>
Subject: Administrivia
A system crash and subsequent recovery caused many of you to receive
a second copy of the last digest. I am sorry for the inconvenience
that this might have caused you and will try to prevent it from
happening again in the future.
-Mel
------------------------------
Date: Sunday, 14 Mar 1982 21:22-PST
To: JGOLDBERGER at USC-ISIB
Subject: Re: OpiniOns & Biases
In-reply-to: Your message of 11 Mar 1982 1719-PST.
<[USC-ISIB]11-Mar-82 17:19:30.JGOLDBERGER>
From: gaines at RAND-UNIX
I find the recent discussion of ENIX rathershort of Content and long
gn opinion. Would those that think UNIX is not a suitable operating
system for workstations be a bit more explicit, please? It would be a
help id the comments actually apply to the operating system part of
UNIX, and not non-supervisory software such as a particular version of
the shell.
------------------------------
Date: 15 Mar 1982 11:32:41-PST
From: cbosg!nscs!rew at Berkeley
The theory you are referring to is known as the Wharfian hypothesis.
Actually, I haven't seen it written out in a while, so I may have the
spelling wrong (might be Warf). Although it has led to a lot of
research and is of perennial interest, there is not much solid support
for it. This would suggest, of course, that the theory would not have
much application to programming languages, either.
Bob Warren
cbosg!nscs!rew
------------------------------
Date: 15 Mar 1982 12:22:07 EST (Mon)
From: decvax!duke!mcnc!unc!smb at Berkeley
Full-Name: Steven M. Bellovin
Subject: UNIX on workstations
I'm not going to claim that UNIX is the ultimate operating system (I
tend to dislike religious arguments), but it does have one very strong
point that many "highly interactive" [sic] systems lack: the ability
to combine existing commands into personalized tools.
If we accept that *no* system designer can satisfy everyone, even
every new user who has never been corrupted by exposure to the old way
of doing things -- and I regard that statement as beyond argument
(*sigh*, another religious statement) -- then we have to provide some
ability to customize the environment in ways not anticipated
before-hand. UNIX does this in several ways; the most important,
though, is the UNIX philosophy: *any* program should be usable as part
of any other.
Now -- I'm not saying I need pipes (though I like them); I'm not even
saying I need output redirection (though things are messy without it).
But I do need *some* way I can, for example, list the names of a bunch
of files, sort them, and then perform some other operation on just
those files -- because you, as the system designer, might not have
anticipated my application.
--Steve Bellovin
------------------------------
Date: 16 Mar 1982 17:25 EST
From: dvorak.WBST at PARC-MAXC
Subject: The Apple Bill
Reply-To: dvorak
Permit me to paraphrase from SCIENCE, Volume 215, 19 March 1982:
Last month Steven Jobs, Apple founder and prez, happened to sit next
to Rep. Pete Stark (D-Calif.) on a jet from California to Washington.
Shortly thereafter, Feb. 23 to be exact, Stark introduced a bill
entitled the Technology Act Education of 1982 that would permit
companies to donate scientific equipment to elementary and secondary
schools and then deduct the full cost of the equipment from its pretax
income--just as companies now do for gifts to colleges. In addition,
the bill raises the maximum such contribution from 10 to 30 percent of
a corporation's income (which is more important for Apple than IBM or
Xerox). Both of these changes from current practice would only last
for one year. This "Apple Bill" is apparently receiving the support
of members representing the entire political spectrum (unlike the
budget).
Oh, I almost forgot . . .
Jobs apparently plans to give EVERY elementary and secondary school in
the country an Apple (configuration not stated). If so permitted,
Apple would enjoy a tax savings of about $35 million for a deduction
of about $75 million that represents manufacturing cost only (total
retail value of $200-300 million). Service costs, software and
training manuals would not be deductible, but something tells me that
Jobs believes there must be some business advantage to having all
future generations of computer users weaned on Apples.
--Chuck
------------------------------
Date: 16 Mar 82 21:31-PDT
From: mclure at SRI-UNIX
Subject: C, Bliss, SAIL
C is best considered as a high-level assembly language for systems
programming, but people are trying to force it into niches where it
doesn't belong, just as for years people have been forcing PASCAL to
be other than a teaching language. Having programmed a great deal in
SAIL, BLISS, and C, I prefer C for systems programming because it just
seems inherently better suited. SAIL is too PL1ish and BLISS just
doesn't seem to have enough, although I did like its value-return
mechanism very much; however I can understand how the other two might
be preferable for higher-level tasks.
Stuart
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂20-Mar-82 1010 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #26
∂20-Mar-82 0146 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #26
Date: 20 Mar 1982 0409-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #26
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Office: H055 - Hill Cntr, Busch Camp, Rutgers Univ, Piscataway, NJ x4780
Home: 206 Easton Ave., New Brunswick, N.J. 08901, (201) 249-2748
Works Digest Saturday, 20 Mar 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 26
Today's Topics:
Whorfian Hypothesis and Programming Languages
Unix Shell
Wang Interconnection Request
Unix on Workstations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 18 Mar 1982 1016-PST
From: Keith Wescourt
Subject: Re: Whorfian Hypothesis and Programming Languages
Sender: WESCOURT at RAND-AI
Reply-To: Wescourt at RAND-AI
In-Reply-To: Your message of 17-Mar-82 2337-PST
The "Whorfian Hypothesis" (named after Benjamin Whorf), stated
briefly, is that one's native language determines (to at least some
extent) one's primitive perceptual and conceptual categories-- i.e.,
linguistic structure determines the structure of thought processes.
The contrary view is that all human languages have a structure
determined or limited by universal (presumably genetically programmed)
primitives of thought. It's one of those "chicken-and-egg" issues and
has been studied by cultural anthropologists for decades.
I think the Whorfian Hypothesis has little or no bearing on the issue
of how one's first programming language instills biases that affect
one's subsequent learning and/or appreciation of other programming
languages. More "mundane" psychological theories of learning and of
social psychology are more relevant to the phenomena.
------------------------------
Date: 18 Mar 1982 14:12:43-PST
From: decvax!shannon at Berkeley
Subject: Unix shell
One major difference between TOPS-20 and Unix is that on TOPS-20 I
felt a compulsion to rewrite the EXEC because it was so bad, but never
had the time to engage in the compulsion. I would like to do a few
tweaks on the Unix shell which has its own problems, but they are not
a major departure from the basic philosophy of the Unix shell. In the
case of TOPS-20, I would never have considered using the EXEC code at
all, except possibly to see how some bizarre interface to the monitor
was done. It is such a poor piece of interface that I found it a
constant aggravation every time I typed a command.
Some people may recognize the above paragraph. It is based on a
message from Joe Newcomer to WorkS recently. I have simply swapped
Unix and TOPS-20, and shell and EXEC. It now says essentially what I
feel. This is just to show that this is a religious/personal opinion
topic and there is really no point in trying to "resolve" it. As far
as I'm concerned, all the people who don't like Unix (or TOPS-20, or
VMS, or ...) should be encouraged to go off and build something that
they do like. If they build something good it might catch on. If
they build something bad it will probably die a natural death. I'm
not about to leave Unix until someone can offer me a system with
essentially all of it's advantages, some amount of compatibility, and
much more. I'm sure the TOPS-20 users feel the same way.
Bill Shannon
decvax!shannon
DEC UNIX Engineering Group
------------------------------
Date: 19 Mar 1982 (Friday) 1051-PST
From: ATHEY at LLL-MFE
Subject: Wang interconnection request
cc: ATHEY
Does anyone have any experience with connecting WANGs to networks and
transfering data and control information to other types of machines?
We are planning on doing this at LLNL and I would appreciate any
information that you could supply me with.
Chuck Athey
∂22-Mar-82 0820 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #27
∂21-Mar-82 1853 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #27
Date: 21 Mar 1982 2036-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #27
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Office: H055 - Hill Cntr, Busch Camp, Rutgers Univ, Piscataway, NJ x4780
Home: 206 Easton Ave., New Brunswick, N.J. 08901, (201) 249-2748
Works Digest Sunday, 21 Mar 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 27
Today's Topics:
The Seventh West Coast Computer Faire
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 21 Mar 1982 1053-PST
From: Jeffrey at OFFICE
Subject: 7th WCCF
To: pipes at PARC-MAXC, sweer at SUMEX-AIM, bnh at MIT%AI,
To: badob at MIT-AI, info-cpm at MIT-MC, w8sdz at MIT-MC
Random Faire Impressions
The Seventh West Coast Computer Faire
19-21 March 1982, San Francisco
A great deal of silicon has passed through the furnace
since last April. We all watched as Xerox and IBM gave
instant credibility to what was heretofore a newcomer's
game. A moment later, everyone was talking about
workstations with vast amounts of computing power,
sophisticated operating systems, high resolution graphics,
and enough mass storage to keep most people happy until
1984.
What a year. The only area which hasn't far exceeded my
expectations is local networking.
The year has also been a very busy year for me personally.
I haven't quite caught up to where I was a few months ago.
One result of this constant state of behindness is that I'm
not able to cover the Faire as well as I'd like. In
advance, let me say that the coverage here is of a cursory
nature. One area where I definitely should have spent more
time is software applications. This is where the Faire
excels and where I didn't spend nearly enough time
looking.
This Year's Faire
Last year was my first visit to a Faire. I spent two whole days
wandering, laughing, and generally trying to keep my eyes positioned
interior to my skull.
This year, I did the whole thing in one day. I suppose there weren't
so many surprises because I've kept up with things and because there
just weren't so many surprises. The Faire is a lot of fun, but it
isn't where the big equipment manufacturers care to display their
goods. Of the the big three (Apple, Tandy, IBM), only Tandy
represented itself directly. Sure - there were ooddles of Apples and
IBM PC's, but neither of Apple nor IBM had a booth. Strange, IBM was
present last year when all they could bring was a bulky 5120 box. I
suppose they were testing the water.
It seems to me that this year's Faire was a little better organized
and a little more serious than last year's. My impression is that
last year, many of the exhibitors were hoping to attract hobbyists as
well as businessmen. This year, everyone seemed somewhat more
business oriented. The tools (both software and hardware) are well
worth the investment in business environments. I think this has
become clear during 1981.
Silicon Valley sage, Bill Murray, thinks that Faire organizer Jim
Warren will always keep the Faire light hearted and fun. "If it
isn't going to be fun" says Bill, "you might as well go to NCC".
I missed the kids selling time on plywood Invader boxes.
Fortune
Fortune had two machines on the fLoor. They were identical and
consisted of a 68000 processor (6 Mhz), 256k RAM, a neat display and
kayboard, a 5mb winchester, and a 5.25" 800kb floppy. The floppy and
winchester are mounted in the main chassis along with the
electronics. The screen sits on top of this chassis and the keyboard
is separate. The appearance of the system is generally similar to
that of the IBM PC; the Fortune will take up a little more table
space.
I was quoted three prices for the configuration: $8700, $9000, and
$9500. Your guess is as good as mine. Fortune's smallest
configuration will cost $4995 and will for that price you'll get one
floppy plus 128k RAM.
Fortune's system is an honest Unix. It is fully interrupt driven and
does support multiple concurrent processes. In addition to the
regular Unix utilities, Fortune demonstrated Multiplan and FOR:WORD,
a word processing system.
Multiplan is a Visiclone which is probably going to make quite a few
people happy. Its easy to use and has facilities for cross-linking
data between different reports (something which VisiCalc doesn't yet
do). Even I could imagine using Multiplan - something which I could
never say about brand X.
I suspect that Fortune's word processing package is going to be a big
drawing point. FOR:WORD is a detailed copy of the Wang word
processing system ("with 31 extensions"). It looks powerful and yet,
easy to learn. Some of this power and simplicity stems from
consistent use of special purpose keys. Fortune has provided a
generous number function keys to avoid dependence on multiple key
inputs (a'la control characters). Under the function key row is a
plastic label strip which may be changed to fit a particular
application. The strip I saw was printed to go with FOR:WORD.
Someone had crayoned a Multiplan legend on the reverse side.
Fortune will charge about $500 for FOR:WORD and about the same for
Multiplan - as the salesman put it "microcomputer software prices".
The Fortune system was said to be of the multi-user variety (up to
13). I found it interesting that both of the display systems were
configured for but a single user.
CP/M and other Rarities
Well, I have to admit that I think Digital Research has blown it. I
don't see a place for 16-bit CP/M or its ilk between MS-DOS (the IBM
PC system) and Unix. I discussed this question with Mr. Lehman, the
head of MT systems which was recently acquired by DRI. Being a
gentleman of upstanding character, he stood behind his new outfit.
But the arguments were weak (Unix isn't secure and reliable enough
for commercial applications; MS-DOS will never be multi-user).
However, for me two of the Faire's most interesting revelations came
from the CP/M world. Godbout demonstrated an MP/M-86 system running
on his dual processor 8088/8085 board. The system was basically
MP/M-86, but whenever any of the multiple concurrent users invoked an
8085 program, the system correctly uses the 8085 to run that
program. Thus at any moment, some users may be running 8086 programs
and others 8085 programs. Pretty fancy.
Digital Research itself, demonstrated concurrent CP/M-86 on the IBM
Display-Writer. Concurrent CP/M enables a single terminal to operate
several tasks. The operator can switch the terminal between the
tasks simply by keying control-1 for the first task, control-2 for
the second and so on. Each time the terminal is switched to a task,
the CRT displays what you would have seen if the CRT had always been
attached to the task. It was all very natural and nice.
Digital Research has some sort of arrangement with Hitachi to develop
CP/M for the 68000. I'm not sure if Hitachi is developing the code or
if DRI is developing the code for some Hitachi hardware. Lehman and
I discussed the possible utility of such a system. Again, I don't
imagine it will cause a major revolution in computing.
The Great MicroFazer
Watch out multitasking, here comes MicroFazer! MicroFazer is a little
box (.75x3.5x2 inches) which you plug between your printer cable and
your your Centronics style printer. It contains 64k RAM which are
loaded at 3000-4000 characters per second. When you go to print, the
box gobbles up your characters in a few seconds and your CPU is free
for other work. The box passes the characters to your printer as
fast as the printer will accept them.
The only hitch comes if you decide you really don't want to print
that big file. Then you must reach over and reset the box (a
micro-switch is provided for this purpose).
The box retails for $299. You need to feed it 9 volts which can come
from the printer or from a calculator transformer (external plug
provided).
If 64k isn't enough, then you can attach two MicroFazers in series.
Pity you if you change your mind after loading up both to print.
You'll have to reset two buttons.
MicroFazers will be sold through computer stores. They are
manufactured by the Quadram Corporation, 4357 Park Drive, Norcross,
Georgia 30093.
Onyx's Dance
Onyx Systems (who have installed about 600 Z8000-based Unix systems
to date) had their 8-bit Sundance box out to stroll. Sundance looks
like a VT-100 but contains a Z80, a 6.7mb winchester, and a 10mb 1/4"
tape drive. It all fits in a box that is about the size of a VT-100.
I believe the single unit price is close to $8500.
As usual, Onyx refuses to admit support for floppies. How do you
import software?
Applications
Two application packages caught my eye. They are both color graphic
oriented and both run on Apples. I never cease to be amazed at the
quality, speed, and variety of the color graphics which can be
generated by that terrible little box.
Island Graphics showed a graphics design package which can be used to
create color graphic pictures on monitor. The system includes a
graphics tablet with pen and an Apple with color monitor. The artist
draws the picture on the tablet and the system reproduces the image
on the color display. The artist can use a variety of "pens" and
colors, and can cause geometric shapes of varyang sizes to be added
at any point.
While the artist is drawing, the monitkr shows the image being
created∞ If the artist wants to change the pen or color, add a form,
save the image, or perform any other control function, the keyboard
is used. The monitor then temporarily displays a graphic image of
all available options. The options are selected by moving the cursOr
to the option on the monitor and depressing an appropriate key.
The package can be used to create posters, charts, or just about any
color image you'd like. Although there was no printer at the demo,
I'm sure one of the color printers (e.g. the Prism from IDS) could be
used to print images directly from the monitor.
I didn't ascertain the price of the package but it probably isn't
more than a few hundred dollars in addition to the hardware. A
company called Via Video offers the same sort of package on a more
expensive micro with a display of higher resolution than that of the
Apple. Via Video's package is substantially more expensive but is
potentially useful to professional graphic artists.
I don't think the resolution of the Apple color monitor is good
enough for professional work. Island Graphics' product is
nonetheless, very impressive. Is it reason enough to bite the Apple?
Nope, but each one of these Apple things makes that unit look
better.
Graphics Magic is another Apple color graphics tool which enables
software developers to create games or most any display oriented
application without all the fuss and muss. Its actually just a set
of routines which can create and manipulate color graphic displays.
One of the most impressive demonstrations of the package's capability
is a little show that takes about 20 seconds. The screen starts out
black and then dots of color emerge at random places. These dots
grow into small shapes of varying size, color, and outline.
Everything is random and everything is moving too fast for this be an
Apple. The little shapes (there must be about 25 of them) fly
randomly about the screen for a few seconds and then coalesce into
two rows of large color script letters which say "Graphics Magic".
And magic it is.
Altos
Conspicuously absent was Altos' ACS8600 Unix system. If they succeed
with this product, it will be the first (and possibly the only)
8086-based Unix system. The Altos rep said the system was "almost
ready".
I understand that Altos has added many chips to the 8086 board in
order to make Unix possible.
Japan Microcomputer Club
Japan Microcomputer Club has visited the WCCF since its first show in
1977. This year, their booth didn't look much different than last
year. The beautiful BMC all-in-one color graphic system was again
center stage (the last time I saw one of these was at the Faire last
year). Again, SHARP's small black and white graphic box was on the
table. I wonder where all the 8088/8086 systems are.
Unix for the PC?
Quantum Software Systems, a Canadian firm with an office in San Jose
showed Qunix, a Unix-like system running on the IBM PC. Qunix is
multi-tasking and sells for a mere $150.
The developer claims that most Unix C codes will port to Qunix with
just a few mechanical source changes. I guess this is the sort of
thing that can be verified fairly easily.
Where Quantum treads, can Microsoft be far behind?
Tandy
Tandy was there, occupying the very same piece of Brooks Hall which
they had last year. They had one of their Model-16 computers, but it
was to look at only - no software. Actually, it was running some
sort of display driver which produced some very unimpressive low
resolution slow moving pictures. If it had been me, I would have
left the power off. I asked about Unix for the Model-16 and got a
rather consistent "no comment". They really didn't want to talk
about it.
Sorry Folks - The Show Deserves Better
The show deserves more time and more coverage. I'd guess that about
half of the floorspace was dedicated to software. Most of the
software was of the application variety upon which I have barely
touched. Maybe next year.
Jeffrey Stone
20 March 1982
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂22-Mar-82 2216 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #28
Date: 23 Mar 1982 0028-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #28
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Office: H055 - Hill Cntr, Busch Camp, Rutgers Univ, Piscataway, NJ x4780
Home: 206 Easton Ave., New Brunswick, N.J. 08901, (201) 249-2748
Works Digest Tuesday, 23 Mar 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 28
Today's Topics:
Whorfian Hypothesis and Programming Languages
Specialized Network Automatic Processors
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 20-Mar-82 2250-EST
From: Stephen Slade <Slade at YALE>
Subject: Re: Whorfian Hypothesis and Programming Languages
The "Whorfian Hypothesis" (named after Benjamin Whorf), stated
briefly, is that one's native language determines (to at least
some extent) one's primitive perceptual and conceptual
categories-- i.e., linguistic structure determines the structure
of thought processes. The contrary view is that all human
languages have a structure determined or limited by universal
(presumably genetically programmed) primitives of thought. It's
one of those "chicken-and-egg" issues and has been studied by
cultural anthropologists for decades.
I think the Whorfian Hypothesis has little or no bearing on the
issue of how one's first programming language instills biases
that affect one's subsequent learning and/or appreciation of
other programming languages. More "mundane" psychological
theories of learning and of social psychology are more relevant
to the phenomena.
(Wescourt at RAND-AI, 18 Mar 1982)
Whorf studied American Indian languages, such as Hopi, and noted that
they often embody a naive physics quite different from western
thought, e.g., different notions of time would be reflected in unusual
tense structures. He conjectured that (a) native speakers of those
languages would necessarily view the universe the way those languages
framed it, and (b) non-native speakers would would find the concepts
illusory, atbest, or perhaps incomprehensible. A common anecdote in
support of this position is that Eskimos have a dozen or more words
for "snow", while in English, we have only one -- you guessed it --
"snow".
A version of the rebuttal to Whorf suggests that one's language is a
reflection of one's view of the world in that it must communicate the
important concepts one has about the world. Thus, Eskimos must be
able to distinguish among freshly-fallen-snow and
hard-packed-snow-suitable-for-mushing-into-town, and
snow-that's-ok-for-flash-freezing-the-walrus-meat, and other types.
Now, English does in fact have multiple terms for snow, as skiers
should be aware, and English achieves this through its great
extensibility. One can create new terms explicitly ("slush"), or
modify old ones (as above) or use an old word in a new context, e.g.,
figurative speech ("John scored an ounce of snow.").
One may apply this argument to programming languages as follows: The
model is one of "machine as agent" and the programming languages
should facilitate one's communication with the machine. Just as
natural languages do not predestine the subject of discourse (Whorf
perhaps to the contrary), neither should programming languages limit
the concepts one can communicate to the machine.
Natural languages seem to display a conceptual homogeneity, reflecting
the concepts in the world, that apparently exceeds the conceptual
intersection among programming languages. While most concepts may be
communicated equally well in a dozen different natural languages
(again, rejecting Whorf), there are many significant programs that
cannot be implemented in a dozen arbitrary programming languages.
So the question is not really "Does your first programming language
determine how you view programming?", but "Does your nth programming
language provide the features necessary for the task at hand?" As in
English, extensibility in programming languages, such as LISP, is a
real benefit in this regard, however it is not sufficient. There are
real practical considerations involved in programming languages of
which there are correlates in natural languages: you may be able to
express your thoughts quite fluently in English, but that may not help
if you are talking with someone who speaks only Chinese.
-- Stephen Slade
------------------------------
Date: 22 Mar 1982 (Monday) 0833-EDT
From: DREIFU at Wharton-10 (Henry Dreifus)
Subject: SNAP's
Does anyone have strong feelings for or against SNAPs? Specialized
Network Automatic Processors? The idea is to have some special
(different that Personal Workstations) processors on a network doing
Network functions.
I would group GateWays, Network-controllers and things like
Mail-Pumps, Mail-Servers, Number-Crunchers, and IO processors
(magtape, ...) in this category. How should one percieve such devices
in the environment?
Should Software packages look the same way as well?
Henry Dreifus
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂23-Mar-82 2212 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #29
Date: 24 Mar 1982 0024-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #29
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Office: H055 - Hill Cntr, Busch Camp, Rutgers Univ, Piscataway, NJ x4780
Home: 206 Easton Ave., New Brunswick, N.J. 08901, (201) 249-2748
Works Digest Wednesday, 24 Mar 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 29
Today's Topics: Whorfian Hypothesis
The Seventh West Coast Computer Faire
Special Network Devices
Network Servers in Lans
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 22 Mar 1982 21:57:00-PST
From: alice!rabbit!mitch at Berkeley
Subject: Whorfian hypothesis
The hypothesis that the grammatical form of language affects one's
conceptual structure is due to Benjamin Lee Whorf. One source for his
theory is Language, Thought, and Reality, Selected Writings of
Benjamin Lee Whorf, published in paperback by MIT Press. Particularly
relevant is the paper "The Relation of Habitual Thought and Behavior
to Language" in that volume. While quite interesting, there is little
evidence he's right.
------------------------------
Date: 23 March 1982 06:00-EST
From: Jerry E. Pournelle <POURNE at MIT-MC>
Subject: 7th WCCF
To: Jeffrey at OFFICE-2
cc: W8SDZ at MIT-MC, bnh at MIT-AI, badob at MIT-AI,
pipes at PARC-MAXC, sweer at SUMEX-AIM
My impression of the Faire after three days was "consolidation
rather than bold advances." Godbout is coming up with nice stuff real
soon now, as are others, but nothing big has happened just yet. The
Z-8000 looks dead, and there's so much support for the 8086/8088
family that the emergence of teh 68000 cannot blow it out of the
water--although the 8088 etc cannot kill off the 680000 either.
There were two 68000 systems, but the SAGE uses SCUD PASCAL as
the operating system and will have unix Real Soon now. I cannot agree
about Digital research going away; I suspect CP/M is about to take
another quantum leap, actually, as they get translators to bring
things up from 8-bit to 16 bit saystems.
It was an interesting faire, and I wrote about it all day today for an
article, so I think I'll stop...
JEP
------------------------------
Date: 23 March 1982 1008-EST
From: Hank Walker at CMU-10A
Subject: special network devices
If visible at all, they should probably be logical devices. The fact
that they are local or not is irrelevant. A tape drive might look
like part of the file system, and be invisible, at least for some
things. Gateways, mail servers, etc seem naturally invisible. Number
crunchers are probably visible. It does matter whether you want your
jkb to run for a week on your processor or a minute on the Cray-1.
But again, they should look like they are local. One means is logical
devices, which sort of works now on VMS anyway (with DECnet Phase III).
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 82 13:08:44 EST
From: chilenskas at CCA-VMS
Subject: NETWORK SERVERS IN LANS
I suspect that in many larger networks some form of network
server would be useful. As an example, consider the MAIL task. If i
am sending a message to some workstation that station could be
unavailable for a number of reasons. It could be under repair, shut
off for the evening, busy shipping a large file along the cable (io
busy) or have too many processes running servicing the user's current
needs to allow the mail receiving program to initiate (cpu busy). In
fact, it could take quite a while for both workstations to be able to
communicate simultaneously, especially if the message is going between
shifts or sections of a staggered short work week. Thus a mail
server/spooler is useful to grab the message and wait for the
recipient to come back up. Even if you do not buy the argument that
it might take a long time for both stations to be up together, you
still don't want to dedicate a task to waiting to send the message or
continually poll the down station in your own workstation.
Spooling is obviously desirable in some other cases as well.
One would be managing the queue for the DOVER or whatever high quality
printer is available for large output.
Other non-spooling functions could be handled as well. An
archive manager might also help after the system is in place long
enough. A separate station or two gathering statistics on network
load and performance would help tuning and detecting bottlenecks. In
high security environments you might want a snoop of some sort. There
are high speed, shared peripherals to manage. etc.....
R Mark Chilenskas
Chilenskas@CCA-VMS
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂24-Mar-82 2318 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #30
Date: 25 Mar 1982 0041-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #30
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Office: H055 - Hill Cntr, Busch Camp, Rutgers Univ, Piscataway, NJ x4780
Home: 206 Easton Ave., New Brunswick, N.J. 08901, (201) 249-2748
Works Digest Thursday, 25 Mar 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 30
Today's Topics: Words for Snow
More on UNIX . . .
Programming Languages and Whorf
Software Wish List
First languages and Whorf
BELL BLIT
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 23 March 1982 21:13 est
From: SSteinberg.SoftArts at MIT-MULTICS
Subject: words for snow
Sender: COMSAT.SoftArts at MIT-MULTICS
*from: SAS (Seth A. Steinberg)
Words which quickly come to mind include: snow, powder, slush, frost,
a dusting, .... I'm sure I could jack this up by looking in a
thesaurus or a skiing guide but English has lots of words for snow.
There was an interesting book review in Science a week ago. There is
a culture (the Vai) in Africa in which three writing systems live side
by side. There is the native Vai system, the Arabic (the religious
language), and English (the administrative and scholastic langauge)
system. Vai script is taught informally, usually by a friend, and is
learned in a few days or so. Arabic is taught in religious schools
and is heavy on memorizing the Koran. English is taught in the
schools and is usually part of a general Western style education which
includes mathematics, science, history, and what not.
Needless to say. Men who could write Arabic had really good memories
and the English writers did better than most on SAT/IQ type tests.
People who could write did better than people at large. The
impression I got (from reading the book review) is that the
researchers felt that alphabetic literacy did not engender major
changes in thought patterns, but rather that new thought patterns
could be taught along with an alphabetic system.
(I should probably read the book but ... )
------------------------------
Date: 23 Mar 1982 2259-PST
Sender: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
Subject: More on UNIX . . .
From: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
Message-ID: <[USC-ECL]23-Mar-82 22:59:20.RENTSCH>
The arguments for Unix are that it is available, widely used, readily
transportable, and has (and will have) lots of software available.
These same things could be said of FORTRAN in 1970. Not only that, in
1970 FORTRAN was 13 years old; Unix is now 13 years old. Let's hope
the analogy stops here and doesn't extend into the future.
I don't want to enter the arena of religious debate. It's not that
Unix is evil; it's dated. And it's a pretty poor match for the
workstation environment. Unix is a timesharing system for a
minicomputer. I want MY personal computer to be more powerful than a
mini, and the last thing I want to do on that personal computer is
timeshare.
Unix's shortcomings for the workstation environment are clearly
evident by looking at what it does and does not provide. It does
provide C, which is a great language for hacking around. It does not
provide adequate type checking, nor is there any support for
"programming in the large." C does provide a terse solution for many
typical program fragments. It does not provide clearly readable code
(declarations are particularly offending here). Unix does provide
hardware independence. It does not provide hardware independence for
devices which don't fit the byte stream model, like a mouse and bitmap
display, to name two important examples. Unix does provide a
replacable cOmmand processor, which is therefore tailorable within the
command byTe string model. It does not provide a framework for a user
interface that follows a different paradigm, e.g., modeless
window-object based.
The siren call of instant availability is luring us to repeat the
FORTRAN disaster. We can save paying N dollars now only at the cost
of 10*N dollars later. Not only that, as the cost of conversion
increases as time goes on, so will the pain and correspondingly the
reticence of people to convert.
The prospect of putting off getting something running on your very own
personal workstation is, I'm sure, unbearable to some. But take just
a slightly longer view. I'd rather wait six months for a Mercedes
Benz than have a Ford today, even if that means I get my choice of 43
different new Fords in a year from now. All the arguments I have
heard agree that Unix is no panacea, and that the switch will have to
be made. The question is whether it should be made before there is a
big investment in Unix software or after. Seen in this light, the
answer is much clearer. And don't kid yourself that the change can be
made "evolutionarily." It hasn't been done yet in the software world.
Remember the lesson of FORTRAN, and remember this: those who do not
learn from the mistakes of history are doomed to repeat them.
One final note. The reluctance of people to switch from Unix is
perfectly understandable in view of the large personal investment.
Learning a new system is a serious matter, and one not to be
undertaken lightly. But undertaken it will be, so would you rather do
it now and get it over with or wait until you have learned even more
Unix reflexes? Come on, you Unix people, come out of your shell; it
won't be as bad as you think.
------------------------------
Date: 23 Mar 1982 2336-PST
Sender: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
Subject: Programming Languages and Whorf
From: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
Message-ID: <[USC-ECL]23-Mar-82 23:36:51.RENTSCH>
While the Whorfian hypothesis does seem to apply to programming
languages as well as natural language, what is really being talked
about is something else. I thought it was well known (I see I was in
error) that the FIRST programming language that a person learns
strongly casts, or sets, his ideas about programming. The experiment
that was done (and I have no idea of the reference) was to compare
people who first learned one language, say A, then another, B, to
people who learned them in the order B then A. Other studies have
been, with the conclusion that the first impressions one gets
programming (i.e., the "programming language") strongly influence how
one views programming from then on, and is remarkably strong even in
the face of learning very different programming systems. This
apparently can be overcome, but it is easy to underestimate.
In my personal experience, this explains (at least partly) why I
didn't particularly take to LISP, which I learned as a third or fourth
programming system. I hope I am not just being vain when I say I have
broken the set of my first programming language, which was FORTRAN.
In this respect I have been lucky (I guess) in that FORTRAN is so bad
that it must be given up completely, thus forcing me to very carefully
examine what it is that makes a good programming language. Pity the
people who learned an intermediate language like Pascal, which has
some good ideas but is definitely not current in terms of programming
language design. These people will have a hard time giving up their
set for something truly better, for their tendency will be to simply
"fix up" the problems in pascal, overlooking the important change of
shifting paradigms.
------------------------------
Date: 23 Mar 1982 2343-PST
Sender: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
Subject: Software wish list
From: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
Message-ID: <[USC-ECL]23-Mar-82 23:43:28.RENTSCH>
I applaud the suggestion that people on Works identify their desires
for workstation software (without being particular as to which system
supplies them, if any.) My contribution follows.
What do I want in personal workstation software? My wish list:
1) A really good editor. And I mean REALLY good. This deserves more
comment, but at least it should make good, full use of the mouse and
bitmap display (with windows and real fonts, no more of this fixed
width or helvetica junk). I spend most of my ti≠`
AK⊃SiS]≤AS\A=]J~∃≥kSgJ↓←dAC9←iQKHXAg↑↓YKhOLAaYK¬gJAQ¬mJA←9JAKq
KYYK9hAKI%i←dAQQChA%f~∃kMKHAM=dAKI%iS]N↓S\Aβ1_A←L↓SifA≥kSgKL\~∀~(dRA!1KCgC9hAkg∃dAS]QKeMC
J\@A rAiQ%fA∩A5KC\A=]JAi!ChA∩↓I←\OPAQCm∀Ai↑~)oeKgQYJAo%iPAi<AOKh↓iQS]≥fAI←9J\@A⊃KMS]%iKYr↓[←IK1Kgf\AπKeQCS]Yd~∃S]
YkIS9NAoS9I←of↓C]HA
←[aY∃iKYr↓S]iK≥eCiK⊂AS]i<AiQJ↓oQ←Y∀AgsgQKZ~∃⊃KgSO8XAgK∀A]KqP\~∀~(fRA∪9iKOe¬iKHAMsgiK4\@Aα↓O←←H↓gs]i!KgSf↓←LAaI←OeC5[S]N↓YC]OUCOJX4∃ICi¬ECgJ↓[C]C≥KdXA¬]HAOICaQS Ag←MQoCeJ↓GC\AQCWJAQQJAa1CGJA=L@Qi!JA]←\~∃←kQ[←IK⊂AG←]
KahA=LRAC8A←aKICiS]≤AgsgQKZ\~(~∀hR↓!e←OIC[[C YJAS8AiQJ↓Kqie∃[J\@↓)QJAMsgiK4AgQ←UYHAE∀Aae←≥eC[[¬EYJA¬f~∃[UGPACLAiQJ↓kgKd↓oC]iLAi↑AAe←Oe¬ZXAEUhAoSQQ←kh↓iQJAUgkCX↓IeCo CGWf↓←L~∃!CmS]≤Ai↑AQ↑AgSaiKK\↓ISMM∃eK]h↓WS]ILA←LAAe←Oe¬[[S]≤\@A)!SfAe∃YCiKL~∃CYM↑Ai↑↓a←S]P@fXA¬]HAS5aYSKLAeK[=mS]N↓g←[J↓ISgi%]GiS=]ftAQQJ~∃⊃SgiS9GiS←8AEKi]KK\AMsgiK4AG←I∀AC]H↓kgKd↓G←IJ0AiQJ↓ISgi%]GiS=\AEKQoKK\4∃S]i∃eMCG∀AYC]≥kCOJ↓C]HAAe←Oe¬[[S]≤AYC]≥kCOJ0AiQJ↓ISgi%]GiS=\AEKQoKK\4∃EkS1hAS\↓iQS]≥fAC]⊂ACII∃HA←\↓iQS]≥f\@AQQJAgegiKZ↓gQ←k1HAEJ↓oeSiQK\AS8~∃←]∀Aae←≥eC[[%]NAY¬]OkC≥JAoQ%GPAI∃MS]KLAiQJ↓gsgi∃ZAC]⊂AiQKIKM←e∀AiQJ4∃ae←≥eC[[%]NAY¬]OkC≥JXAo!SGPAMQ←kY⊂AEJAQQJAg¬[JACLAiQJ↓S]iKIMCGJ4∃YC]≥kCOJ0AoQS
PAgQ=kYHA JAiQ∀AgC[∀ACfAQQJAK⊃SiS]≤AYC]≥kCOJ0AKiF8~∀~∀TRA'i=eCOJ↓CYY←
CiS←8AC]H↓[K[←IrA[C9COK[∃]h\@↓αA[kMh\@A9←hAi!ChA∩4∃o←k1HAGQ=←gJA%hXAEUhABA
YKmKHAg←MQoCeJ↓gGQK5JAGC8AQKY@A←mKIG←[J↓iQJ~)QCeI]CeJA1S[Si¬iS←\↓←LAg5CYXAYSeik¬XACI⊃eKgf8@A⊃←]KmKd0AiQSLASfA=]Yr~)iekJ↓SLAi!JA[K5←erA5CaaS9NAC]⊂ACYY=GCiS=\ASf↓K]iSIKYrA⊃←]JA rAiQ∀~∃gkAaYSK⊂A[KG!C]Sg4vAiQ∀AiK[AiCiS=\XACLAoKY0ACfAQQJA]∃KHXAQ↑AgkAaYr~)s←kd↓←o\AMQ←kY⊂AEJAiKe↑\4∀~∀l$A∪]GIK[K]QCXAG=[aSY¬iS←\8@A!e=ECEYdAiQSLA[KC9fAIs9C[SF↓ES]I%]NXA kh~∃]QChA$AeKC1YrAo¬]hAi<AeKG=[aSY∀A←]YdAiQ←MJAiQ%]OfAQQChA!CmJA
QC]O∃H~∃g%]GJA1CghAQQJAi¬gVAo¬fAI←9J\~∀4∀nRA%]iKeIkaiS YJAC
iSmSQSKf\A)QJ↓GYCgMSFAK⊃ShXA
←[aS1JXAI∃EkNA
sGYJ4∃SfA9←hA←9YrA←UhA←L↓gisY∀XASh≥fA←kPA←LAQQJAcUKgiS=\\@A KgSI∃fAEK%]N~∃5←IKY∃gfAS8AiQJ↓g[CY0AiQJ↓gsgi∃ZAgQ=kYHA JA]←PA[←I∃MkXA%\AiQ∀AYCe≥JX~∃$]J\X↓C\AC
iSmSQrAgQ=kYHA JAS]QKeekAiSEY∀Ai↑AIKgk[∀AC]←QQKdA¬GiSm%ir~∃¬hAiQ∀AoQS4A←LAQQJAkMKd\~(~∀pR↓∂←←H↓ae←OIC[[S9NAgkAa←eh8@A)Q%fASf↓BAoQ=YJAe¬MhA←_AiQS9OfXAMkGPA¬f~∃ieaJAG!KGWS9N@Q]=hA]K
KggCISYrA%\AiQ∀A!Cg
CXAg∃]gJR0AYCe≥JAgG¬YJ~∃Ae←Oe¬[[S]≤AgkaA←ehX↓gie←9NAS[AYK[K9iCiS=\A←L↓G←]i∃[a←e¬erAaI←OeC5[S]N4∃YC]≥kCOJ0AO←←⊂Ags[ ←YSF↓IKEk≥OKdX↓ae←OICZACMgSgi%]NAK⊃Si←d0AKiF8~∀~∀dRA∂←=HA[KQCaQ←HAM←d↓S]iKIae←G∃gf@Q=dAS]QKeae=GKgg=dRAG=[[k]%GCiS=\\~∃QQSfA%fAeCQQKdAYCOkJ0A∩AC⊃[ShX↓EkhA=kdAk9IKegQC]IS9NAS\↓iQSf↓CeKB↓Sf~∃MiSYX↓mKer↓YS[SQKH\@↓!CeC1YKXAQ↑AiQ∀AG←[5k]SG¬iS←\↓]KKILACeJ4∃gs]
Qe←]%uCiS=\A]K∃IfXAQQJAi]↑AO↑↓QC]H↓S\AQ¬]H\@↓)QJA%[a←eQC]hAQQS]N4∃QKe∀ASfAQQChA¬fA[k
PACf↓a←gg%EYJAQQJAI%giS]
iS←\↓EKio∃K\AY=GCX←IK[←i∀~∃G←5[k]S
CiS←8AgQ←UYHAE∀AeK[=mKH\A7%KAYrAi<A∂K←IOJAπ=kY←kISfNA
←[[K9ht~∃
' A[¬rAEJ↓iQJAISOQh↓[←IK0XAEkPA∩AaIKMKd↓iQJA]KCWKHAgkO≥KgiS=\AQKIJ~∃←9YrAi!ChAi!JAio<AEJAQQJAg¬[J\@↓≠←eJ↓iQ←k≥QhACLAi↑AQQJAMU]IC[∃]iCX4∃]CiUeJA←_AiQJ↓Sggk∃fAgK∃[fAo¬eeC]QKH\@↓∪LAEdAπ' ↓s←jA5KC\A¬fAS\↓ε\Aα8~∃$\↓⊃←Ce∀XA∩A⊃SgCOIKJXA
' AS8AiQSLAgK]MJASf↓i←↑A5kGPA=LABAMieCS≥Qh~∃)CGWKPvAS\↓IKMK9gJA←_Aπ' 0AQ←o∃mKdX↓∩AQCYJA]↑↓EKii∃dAgk≥OKgi%←\]:4∀~∀b@RA'S5aYSG%ir\@↓)←↑A5C]rAMsgiK5fAQCYJAEK∃\AEk%YhAo%iPAi!JASI∃BAiQ¬h~∃aI←EYK5fAG←UYHAE∀Ag←YYKHA←9JACh↓BAiS5JAEr↓CIIS9NABA≥Su[↑↓iQCh↓iCWKL~∃GCIJA←L↓iQCh↓←]JAAe←EY∃Z\@AIKCYYdAO←←⊂Ag←YUiS←]LAS]cUSeJA¬fAi↑↓iQJ~)]CikIJA←L↓iQJA-S]If↓←LAaI←EYK5fAiQ∃rAoS1XAK]
←k]i∃dXAi!K\AG=[ES]∀AB~∃→KnAg%[aYJ↓SIKCLAM←d↓C\AK1KOC]PAg←YUiS←\↓i↑AC1XA←L↓iQKZ8@A→KPOf~∃MS[aY%MrA←UdASI∃CfAe¬iQKd↓iQC\↓G←[a1SGCi∀AiQK4XAM←HABAgegiKZ↓iQCh↓oSYX4∃g←YYJAoK1XAiQ∀Aae← YK[f↓oJAeU\AS]Q↑AS\↓iQJA→kike∀XA]←PAUkgPAiQJ↓←]Kf4∃oJAQQS]V↓←LAi=ICr\A)QSLAoCr↓←kdAMsgiK4AoSY0AEJAMie←]≤AK]←UOPAi<AYCgP~∃BA1←]NAQS[JX↓C]HA¬Yg↑A JAKCMSKdAQ↑AOSYJAk`↓oQK\↓oJAM%]CYYdAI↑A!CmJAQ↑~∃G!C]OJ8~∀~∃QSZA%∃]igG ~∀~∀4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4∀~∃ ¬iJt@HhA≠CH@pd@Dft`p5! (~)
e←ZhAekE%\ACh↓'%∩[Q'ε~∃MkEUK
htA
%eghA1C]Ok¬OKfA¬]HA/!←eL~(~∃αA!SOP[MGQ←←0AEkI⊃rA←L↓[S]J↓gaKC-fA
e∃]GPX↓C]HA]C]if↓i↑AY∃Ce\A≥Ke[C8\~∃∩≥mJAG¬kiS←9KHAQ%ZACO¬S]gh↓Sh\@↓∩Ai←1HAQS4ASLA!JAeK¬YYrA]C]iK⊂Ai↑~)gaKC,A∂Ke5C\XA!JAgQ=kYHA!CmJA1KCe]∃HASh↓MSegPv@AQ¬mS]N↓S]gi∃CHAgQCeiK⊂~∃oSQPA
e∃]GPX↓QJOf↓gikG,AoSi A
eK9GP\@↓∩ACg-KHXA⊃↑As←TAeKC1YrAo¬]hAi<~∃ga∃CVA∂∃e[C\↓YSWJ↓BA
e∃]GQ[¬\AoSQPAC\↓β[Ke%GC\A¬GGK]P}@A⊃∀AGCY1KHA[∀~∃g←5KiQS9NAoSQPAiQ∀Ao←e⊂@E[KIIJDA%\ASh0AoQS
PA←]1rAae=mKHA5rAa←%]h\@↓⊃J~∃9KmKd↓QKCe⊂A←LA]Q←eL8~∀~∃QQJA/!←eMS¬\AQsA←iQKMSfASLAeKY¬iKHAQ↑A[←⊃KYfA=LAEe¬S\Aa1CgiS
Sir\A)QJ4∃Qk[¬\AEe¬S\ASLAmKed@EaY¬giSFλAIke%]NAi!JAMSIghAM∃nAsK¬efA←_AYSM∀vAiQ%f~∃SLAiQJ↓iS[J↓oQK\↓iQJA eCS\≥fAMSI[oCe∀ASfA1SiKe¬YYrA KS]N↓ae←OIC[[K⊂AEr~)KqaKISK]G∀AC]H↓iQJA∃]mSe=][K]P\@Aα↓GYCgMSFAKaaKeS5K]hA%fAi↑↓EYS]⊃M←YH4∃BA]∃oE←e8AGCh↓M←dA%ifAM%eghAMKmKe¬XA[←9iQfv↓iQSf↓EYS]⊃fAiQ∀AGCh↓M←d~)iQJAIKghA=LASiLAYSM∀AErA
CkgS9NACiI←aQr↓←LAi!JAmSMkCXA
←eiK`\@A/%iP~∃!k[C\↓S]MC9ifXAQQJAe∃mKeg∀AWS]⊂A←LA∃qaKe%[K]h↓QCfA KK\AAKeM←I[KH@4Z~∃S9GeKCMKHAgQS[kY¬iS←\↓C]HA∃CeYr↓iKCG!S]NA=LAga∃GSMS AgWS1YfAg∃K[fAQ↑~∃aI←[←i∀AgaK
SMSF↓iCYK9if\@Q∪hA%fAOK9KeCY1rAgkAa←gK⊂AiQCPAgK]M←er~)IKae%mCiS=\AS\↓Qk[C9fAo←UYHAY∃CHAi<ABAQ%OPAS9GSIK9GJA←_Aa←Y%iSGS¬]f\R4∀~∃!1CgiS
SirA⊃S[S]%gQKf↓iQe←UOQ←kPAGQS1IQ←←⊂XAg↑↓←]Yr↓iQJA∃CeYS∃gh~∃∃qaKe%K]GKLAS]M1kK]G∀AiQJ↓[S]H≥f@Eg∃h\D@↓/Q←e_OfAQea←iQ∃gSfX↓SLAiIkJX~)GC\A=]YrA¬aaYr↓i↑Ao!ChAS9MC]iLAC]H↓i←II1KefA1KCe\8@A¬Ke←]HA¬OJ@l0AKmK8~∃KqA←gke∀Ai↑A
←E←X↓o←\OPAae←YJAaKI[C]K9iYrA⊃KESY%iCiS9N@QC1iQ←k≥P~∃gUeOKedA[SO!hAEJ↓S]IS
CiKH↓S\AY¬iKdA1SMJR8@A¬kPASLAe←kd@HAsKCHA←YH↓Sf~∃1KCe]%]NAi<Aae←≥eCZX↓oKYX↓iQK\0A[Cs JAs←TAI↑A!CmJAM←[Ki!S]NAQ↑Ao←Ier~∃¬E←kh8~∀~∃%\ABA→KnAs∃CefAQQJAW%HAoS1XAW]=nA[←IJAiQ¬\As←TB~∀~(~∀Z[⊃Cees0~∀~∀4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4∀~∃ ¬iJt@HhA≠CH@brpH@Q/K⊃]KgI¬rR@dHjb[ ⊃(~∃
I←ZtA⊃% ∪
TAChA]QCei=\Zb`Q⊃K]IrA e∃SMkf$~∃'k UKGhhA¬ →0A¬→∪P~∀~∀4∃ ←KLAC]s=]JA←UhAiQ∃eJAW9←nAC9siQS9NACE=khAi!Sf@E]←eWgQCiS←8D@}~(~∃)⊃¬]Wf~(~∃⊃C9V~∀~(ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4ZZZZ4~∀~∃∃]HA←_A/←e-&A S≥Kgh~(TTTT(TTTT(TTTT(TTTT4∀ZZZ4ZZZ~(~∀ ∂26-Mar-82 2100 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #31
Date: 26 Mar 1982 2309-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #31
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Office: H055 - Hill Cntr, Busch Camp, Rutgers Univ, Piscataway, NJ x4780
Home: 206 Easton Ave., New Brunswick, N.J. 08901, (201) 249-2748
Works Digest Friday, 26 Mar 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 31
Today's Topics: Administrivia
CMU VLSI proceedings
Productivity Survey
Ted Nelson is alive and well and living in Texas
Software wish list
More on UNIX . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 26 Mar 1982 2245-EST
From: The Moderator <Pleasant at RUTGERS>
Subject: Administrivia
Office: H055 - Hill Cntr, Busch Camp, Rutgers Univ, Piscataway, NJ x4780
Home: 206 Easton Ave., New Brunswick, N.J. 08901, (201) 249-2748
I had hoped that the current discussion concerning languages
and Whorfian theories would somehow wind its way back to workstations
but this has proven not to be the case. I believe that the discussion
itself should continue but should be moved to HumanNets where it
probably belongs.
-Mel
------------------------------
Date: Wed Mar 24 15:02:02 1982
From: decvax!utzoo!henry at Berkeley
Subject: CMU VLSI proceedings
CMU recently ran a conference on VLSI systems, including a paper on
the "Optical Mouse" that I would very much like to see. Does anybody
know how I can get a copy of the proceedings?
------------------------------
Date: 25 Mar 1982 0956-PST
Sender: SAC.ADXCA at USC-ISIE
Subject: Productivity Survey
From: SAC.ADXCA at USC-ISIE
Message-ID: <[USC-ISIE]25-Mar-82 09:56:27.SAC.ADXCA>
Does anyone on the network have some good productivity surveys,
questionnaires or other information that look at the productivity
gains by an organization when that organization installs a local area
network (distributed processing capabilities) with hundreds of
terminals, hardcopy output (including color), and a good data base
management system? The system will have office automation and
managment information system capabilities. If so, please reply back
to SAC.ADXCA at ISIE.
------------------------------
Date: 26 March 1982 02:32-EST
From: Joseph W. Boyle <BOYLE at MIT-AI>
Subject: Ted Nelson is alive and well and living in Texas
To: HUMAN-NETS at MIT-AI
That's right, Ted and several other Xanies are at Datapoint in San
Antonio working on micros and local networking and generally
infiltrating subversive ideas into Datapoint management. They've
expressed interest in getting on the Arpanet; if anyone in that area
can give them an account, send me a message.
The Xanadu project itself is running in Michigan under Roger Gregory.
To find out what's going on or buy a copy of Ted's new book "Literary
Machines" at $15, contact him at:
Box 7615, Ann Arbor MI 48107 (313) 663-3637
Unconfirmed rumor has it that Xanadu is negotiating a $1M deal with
Bell Labs to put up a Xanadu system for filing the mountains of code
and text produced there.
------------------------------
Date: 26 March 1982 20:49-EST
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM at MIT-MC>
Subject: Software wish list
To: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
When you say "the operating system", do you really mean the "monitor
command reader" (RSX-11M) or the "EXEC" (TENEX/Tops-20) or the "shell"
(Unix)? If you do, then indeed it's time we get away from a
teletype-oriented interface and try more screen-editor-oriented
interfaces. But if you really mean "the operating internals", i.e. the
job scheduler, the memory-manager, the I/O device drivers, the disk
file!system, etc. then I beg to disagree. (I assume you mean the
mcr/exec/shell but you didn't make it clear you understood the
difference, and others might not either, so I'm pointing it out.)
------------------------------
Date: 26 Mar 1982 1834-PST
Sender: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
Subject: Re: More on UNIX . . .
From: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
To: REM at MIT-MC
Message-ID: <[USC-ECL]26-Mar-82 18:34:50.RENTSCH>
In-Reply-To: Your message of 26 March 1982 20:12-EST
The question came up as to whether I was willing to give up multiple
processes as implied by my comment about not wanting to timeshare on
my workstation.
Timesharing should not be confused with multiprogramming. Certainly I
want the ability to run concurrent processes, single program operating
systems are more out of date than cars with crank starters. But
timesharing is a whole lot more than just concurrent processing. A
typical timesharing environment includes support for multiple users
and/or terminals, complicated file protection schemes, resource quota
enforcing, inviolable operating system kernel, scheduling policy
enforcement, etc., etc. MY personal computer will be used by one
person, on one "terminal" (bitmap display), with all files belonging
to the one owner. The "quota" on the machines resources is that I
will never use more than 100% of any of them, but I will always want
the ability to use at least that much. I do want the system to help
me protect me from myself, but when I want to override that protection
it should help me do it in a clean way. The scheduling policy that I
set will often have nothing to do with "fairness" or minimizing delay
or maximizing throughput, but it will reflect what I want at the
moment. In short, I want to think of a workstation as personal
property to do with as I see fit, NOT as a resource to be spread among
its users. This notion extends down into the hardware design, see for
example the paper on the Dorado Memory System (Done by B. Lampson at
PARC, I don't have the reference), where he concludes that certain
problems need not be considered on a single user machine.
To give this discussion slightly wider scope, one of the strong points
of Unix (not to pick on Unix, but it serves as an example) is its
hardware independent I/O. That's great if you have 43 different
devices hooked up to your computer all of which match the byte stream
model, teletypes, disks, lineprinters, magtapes, etc. A personal
workstation has ONE device that matches that model, the disk (possibly
also the ethernet, the argument there is weaker). The display and the
mouse and the keyboard are simply not used up to their potential if
forced into the byte stream model. Hardware independence over one
(perhaps two) devices is hardly an advantage worth considering. The
entire timesharing model does not apply to a machine which entirely
belongs to one person.
"A computer with one person using it and another person waiting to use
it is overloaded."
Tim Rentsch
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂29-Mar-82 2342 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #34
Date: 30 Mar 1982 0153-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #34
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Office: H055 - Hill Cntr, Busch Camp, Rutgers Univ, Piscataway, NJ x4780
Home: 206 Easton Ave., New Brunswick, N.J. 08901, (201) 249-2748
Works Digest Tuesday, 30 Mar 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 34
Today's Topics: LISP Availability
The GRiD and Portables
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 28 Mar 82 23:07:17-PST (Sun)
From: kp.HP-Labs at UDel-Relay
Subject: LISP availability
Does anyone have a list of which LISP dialects are available, or
likely to be available soon, on which workstations?
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 1982 (Monday) 0826-EDT
From: DREIFU at Wharton-10 (Henry Dreifus)
Subject: re: Lisp Availability
To: kp.HP-Labs at UDEL-RELAY
There is a lisp-for-Apollo's, being done by a few groups. Try Martin
Griss at Utah or John O'Donnell at Yale. There are "plans" for the
Perq, but I know of no firm committment. There is a D2
processor/workstation available from Xerox corporation, called an
InterLisp Machine, which, does run Inter- Lisp. That is now available
from Xerox. I know of a group doing Lisp for the IBM-PC, but that is
still a not-firm/finalized project.
Henry Dreifus
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 1982 0739-PST
From: Jeffrey at OFFICE
Subject: the GRiD and portables
Since first learning of the GRiD last week, I've been trying to
understand its potential - particularly in view of the steep price
tag.
For comparison, I've been imagining a $10000 configuration consisting
of a Fortune 32:16 (including 5mb winchester plus floppy) combined
with a TI 745 bubble memory portable terminal (~ 100k bubble memory
with some editing facilities, thermal printer, keyboard, 300 baud
acoustic coupler, first deliveries ~ 1975, price ~ $2000).
Initially, it seemed like the GRiD just wouldn't be able to compete -
even with added winchesters and floppies. The GRiD would have the
advantage of being somewhat smaller than the TI (although the TI is
quite small and light) and would additionally enable remote use of a
few tools like Gridplan. These advantages would be more than offset
by the advantages of the Fortune+TI system:
- Two terminals, each well suited for its environment. I believe
this to be quite desirable. It would seem reasonable to expect
GRiD to offer a large desktop terminal to stay at home with the
discs.
- Lower price (say $10000 versus probable $13000 for the GRiD with
discs).
As I was "comparing" the two configurations, I began to wonder what
sort of filing system the GRiD would have. If the GRiD's local
permanent store (128k going to 256k going to 1mb) is organized as a
full file system which could "mount" or "dismount" the home base
discs, then things begin to look promising. More practically
speaking, I suspect that the home base would eventually have more
processing power than the portable and it would "mount" and
"dismount" the portable's file system (device).
Either way, the portable would be able to carry whatever software and
data was needed limited only by storage space. The portable's
operating software (OS) should probably be in ROM.
At this point I've obviously stopped comparing and am dreaming. I'd
like to know what sort of software/file organization the GRiD people
really have in mind.
I'd also like to hear ideas on how portables are or can be organizied
to be useful.
Jeffrey Stone
Menlo Park, Ca.
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂30-Mar-82 2244 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #35
Date: 31 Mar 1982 0001-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #35
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Office: H055 - Hill Cntr, Busch Camp, Rutgers Univ, Piscataway, NJ x4780
Home: 206 Easton Ave., New Brunswick, N.J. 08901, (201) 249-2748
Works Digest Wednesday, 31 Mar 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 35
Today's Topics: LISP Availability
Relational Databases on Workstations
Software Wish List (3 msgs)
Grid vs Fortune Plus TI
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 82 22:20:11-PST (Mon)
From: kp.HP-Labs at UDel-Relay
To: dreifu at Wharton-10
Subject: LISP Availability
Thanks for the information. However, I have a few other questions:
1: How efficient (if at all) are the various LISP implementations on
existing workstations, e.g. how does LISP on the Apollo compare with
LISP-machine LISP or with the Xerox D2, or the ISI interlisp on
Vax/750?
2: Several LISP companies have been recently formed, SYMBOLICS, The
LISP company, LISP Machine INC., etc. What kinds of LISPs are they
implementing on what? Does anyone have an idea about the price range
of these LISP based workstations? (I know the SYMBOLICS prices, if you
have to ask you can't afford it kind of prices!).
3: IJCAI 81 reports that interpreted PROLOG is available for the
APPLE. However, since it pages from the floppy it is rather slow. Has
anyone used it to know how slow it is? Does anyone know of PROLOG
being implemented on any workstations?
Thank you,
K. Parsaye.
------------------------------
Date: 29 Mar 82 22:40:08-PST (Mon)
From: kp.HP-Labs at UDel-Relay
Subject: Relational Databases on workstations
Following my question about a list of LISPs available on workstations,
I would also like to ask:
Does anyone have a table of any relational (or E/R) databases
available on workstations in local network environments, e.g. similar
to Xerox's cedar. Moreover, can such queries be directly embedded in
LISP programs, or are they all as awkward as the Ingress/Franz-LISP
situation?
K. Parsaye.
------------------------------
Date: 30 Mar 1982 1432-PST
Sender: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
Subject: Re: Software wish list
From: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
To: REM at MIT-MC
Message-ID: <[USC-ECL]30-Mar-82 14:32:18.RENTSCH>
In-Reply-To: Your message of 26 March 1982 20:49-EST
I had a previous conversation about the subject of whether operating
systems are outmoded that was private, i.e., not published on works.
I have tracked down a copy and reproduce it here for all to see.
[These messages have been divided up so that users reading the digest
with digest software will be able to access the messages one by one -
Mel]
------------------------------
Date: 25 Mar 1982 08:27 PST
From: Lear.es at PARC-MAXC
Subject: Re: Software wish list
In-Reply-To: Your message of 23 Mar 1982 2343-PST
To: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
I agree most enthusiastically with everything you said. I'm afraid,
though, my hackles raised at your statement " ... take the place of
(the now outmoded concept of) an operating system". Before I go to
the whole distribution list, I thought I would ask for clarification
(since I think you just tickled one of my more irrational buttons).
You said:
3) Integrated system. A good synthesis of programming language,
database manager, and graphic software can take the place of
(the now outmoded concept of) an operating system.
By operating system, do you mean the command interpreter, an interface
between the client's program and a system dedicated to managing the
available resources, or a collection of utility programs to manage
resources and provide commonly requested services? I really don't see
how you can call the operating system an outmoded concept.
I have no doubt that a good programming language/database manager is a
sure winner, and, since I find graphics much easier to digest than a
column of numbers, I also think a good graphics system should be
provided.
------------------------------
Sender: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
Subject: Re: Software wish list
From: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
To: Lear.es at PARC-MAXC
Message-ID: <[USC-ECL]25-Mar-82 14:17:57.RENTSCH>
In-Reply-To: Your message of 25 Mar 1982 08:27 PST
This is a difficult point to clear up, since what an OS "is" is not at
all clear. IBM takes a point of view that is pretty all-encompassing,
for example, they include the compilers and loaders (which after all
are completely separate programs) as being part of the "Operating
System." Before we can call an operating system outmoded, we must
have a good idea of just what an operating system is.
I don't have simple explanation of what I think an operating system is
or isn't. OSes came into being pretty much when machines were
starting to be used by multiple people, with the idea of allowing
cooperative sharing of the machines resources. The personal computing
situation is quite a bit different, yet the artifact (which some of
us, me included, are too young ever to have not known) remains. There
is not a piece of a system that I would say definitely is or is not
part of the operating system, that depends on the context on which it
is examined. For example, the command interpreter. On TOPS-10 that
is certainly part of the operating system. What about UNIX shell, is
that part of the UNIX operating system? Other examples are even
fuzzier.
With all the preceding negative talk, you are probably hoping for
something more definte and positive. Here it comes. As to what an
operating system is, let me quote Dan Ingalls:
"An operating system is a collection of things that don't fit into a
language. There shouldn't be one."
This quote is from Dan's excellent article on Design principles behind
Smalltalk, published in BYTE August 1981. Following the quote is an
elaboration of this aphorism, and Dan says it as well as I could hope
to. If, after reading what he has to say, you have more comments or
questions let's talk some more.
Feel free to publish both your message to me and this reply on Works
if you see fit.
------------------------------
Date: 30 Mar 1982 (Tuesday) 1838-EDT
From: ROSSID at Wharton-10 (David Rossien)
Subject: Grid vs Fortune plus TI
I would say a primary strength lies in consistency of interface. That
is, if I want to use the cute Wang-like editor on the Fortune I'd
better be on the Fortune (even attached via TTY link won't give me
full screen editing on a thermal printing terminal). Further, all of
interfaces can take into account the fact that I have a screen, not
paper, so we get menus, windowing, etc.
-Dave
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂04-Apr-82 0100 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #38
Date: 4 Apr 1982 0225-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #38
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Works Digest Sunday, 4 Apr 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 38
Today's Topics: Lan's to the World
Brave New World? (2 msgs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 2 Apr 1982 (Friday) 2010-EDT
From: DREIFU at Wharton-10 (Henry Dreifus)
Subject: Lan's to the world
Well, I am no expert on TCP/IP, but my first hand view of a Z80
running IP to me seems to indicate that though it may not be a great
protocol, if everyone gets in line to that standard there will exist a
mechanism for getting in and out. Insofar as to management of such an
item, things like name-servers, back-end data servers and all the
other networking issues are somewhat left open.
Discussion along the line of how to approach the connection of a LAN
to the outside world, the way a personal-workstation on a LAN should
"see" this world, and what types of user-interfaces should exist are
all good material for WorkS. TCP/IP specifics are best discussed in
Human-Nets or TCP-IP.
Hank
------------------------------
Date: 2 Apr 1982 (Friday) 2159-EDT
From: ROSSID at Wharton-10 (David Rossien)
Subject: Brave New World?
On the subject of software, several comments; first, it is suprising
how little software people actually need to get 99% of their jobs
done. Your average professional can probably be classed into one of a
handful of groups (information creator, information seeker,
information analyzer etc.) and the needs of most groups are small (one
way of proving this is that most people don't use computers now, so
clearly they don't require them to function). A great number of
professional types can get a great deal of help from a good word
processing package ["what you see is what you get" with all sorts of
goodies like forms a la Scribe and spelling checkers etc.], a good
graphics package (again, user oriented, for business graphics),
electronic mail, electronic filing [keyword if not full text],
administrative software like scheduling programs, ticklers, diaries,
calendars, etc., a very easy to use database manager (relational,
preferably graphic/spacial), a spreadsheet program, and an easy to use
math/statistics program. Not that this isn't a great deal of
software, but I'd argue very little of it actually exists in a form we
would really want on a workstation (or a mainframe either)! I think a
significant number of the hundreds of programs lying around are there
because someone wasn't given the tools to do whatever was required
without creating some more code which no one else wants.
On the interfacing comment; this is quite true, we have to get the to
the outside world too, but here too, it isn't like someone's alreaday
invented a wheel... we'd have this problem on any machine... no matter
what system you are on, there will still be some time where what you
need to do is interface to another system.
Performance is a good point; I too think all the mathematics in the
world isn't as good as one "well, lets try it". All this means is
that you don't go putting in a bunch of these things without
prototyping. But that's just common sense!
Fred Brooks (Mythical Man Month) noted that "the question is whether
to build a pilot system and throw it away. You will do that. Hence
Hence, plan to throw one away; you will, anyhow." [requoted from the
(quite informative) article on the Star interface in BYTE.
------------------------------
Date: 3 April 1982 10:27:28-PST (Saturday)
From: pratt@Shasta at Sumex-Aim
Subject: Re: WORKS Digest V2 #37
To answer Dan Lynch's pessimistic query with some notes of optimism:
1) Having to build a mountain of new software.
Standards help enormously here. The external (user-visible) half of
Unix, starting from the user-kernel interface and working out from
there, provides such a standard. (This should NOT be construed as
support for the Unix kernel, which is not in good shape and would
benefit enormously from some modern love and care, including evicting
much of it from the kernel.) Blessed are they with a Unix environment,
for they shall inherit a mountain of software.
A similar remark could be made about many other operating systems. My
preference for Unix has to do with the overall quality of the
mountain. I have been an operating system user for 17 years and a
Berkeley Unix user for 20 months, and can say without qualification
that I have not seen as well organized, useful, and comprehensive a
body of software running under any other operating system. (The
Whorfians among you should note that Unix was the most recent
operating system I learnt, suggesting the possibility of an anti-Whorf
hypothesis.)
2) Interfacing each LAN/PC to the external world (electrically,
transport protocol, FTP/Telnet access in and out).
The LAN interface problem is orthogonal to the PC question. PC's are
perhaps more dependent on LAN's, but mainframes are rapidly becoming
sufficiently dependent on them that the problem must be solved for
them too. Thus this is not a PC-relevant issue.
3) Lack of performance data.
The key here has been the 68000, the first machine with an
architecture and a performance reasonable enough to contemplate using
it as a direct substitute for a conventional time-shared mainframe.
Comparing nonnumerical C programs on a no-wait-state 8 MHz 68000 and
the Vax 11/780, compiled on each machine by the Johnson C compiler
with optimization turned on, the 68000 shows up as about 70-75% of the
Vax. The transition to 10 MHz 68000's is already under way (the Sun
workstation will shortly be running at 10 MHz without wait states),
further narrowing this gap. There is therefore no reason to
anticipate a shortage of computer cycles as a result of migrating the
processor from the computer center to the user's desk.
The lesson here is that small need not imply toy. Now that we have an
existence proof that one chip of silicon can execute instructions at a
speed approaching that of a vastly more expensive processor like that
of the Vax we know that personal computers with their own built-in
processors are technically, economically, and practically viable.
Computer cycles are only part of the performance picture. Secondary
storage constitutes a major performance bottleneck for many programs
under many systems, due to a variety of overheads: inherent physical
disk limitations (seek time, rotational latency), current controller
limitations (many controllers can only transfer a small fraction of a
track per revolution), and bus and (in many cases) processor
performance limitations. An architecture which moves the processor to
the user's desk leaving secondary storage as what remains of the
mainframe (preferable to moving expensive, noisy, bulky disks into the
user's office), connected to the user's workstation via 10 Mb
Ethernet, interposes an additional delay. A performance question I
have yet to see answered anywhere (pointers PLEASE if you have them)
is the user-perceived increase in overhead introduced by this
connection in a setting that duplicates the user interface of a
timeshared mainframe operating system such as Unix. (Popek's LOCUS
project at UCLA has measurements for PDP-11's that are related to this
question, but I would like to see such measurements for a system with
higher-performance processors like the 68000, and with a 10 Mb
Ethernet.) My own intuition is that this additional delay will add
about 20% to secondary storage overhead. However this figure is down
in the noise compared to the variability in performance of different
disks, controllers, drivers, and file system organizations.
Vaughan Pratt
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂05-Apr-82 2347 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #39
∂05-Apr-82 2253 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #39
Date: 6 Apr 1982 0105-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #39
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Works Digest Tuesday, 6 Apr 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 39
Today's Topics: While we are on the subject...
Performance Analysis and Remote Disks
What is a LAN?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 4 April 1982 09:25-EST
From: Brian P. Lloyd <LLOYD at MIT-AI>
Subject: While we are on the subject...
Someone is working on the personal workstation concept. At M/A-Com
Alanthus we built a throw-away workstation package offering several
languages, a VisiClone, limited graphics, Email, automatic access to
outside services (e.g. Dow-Jones, The Source), Word Processing,
keyword retrieval of filed information, paper item indexing, and more.
We also did it in six months on the Convergent Technologies system
(read 8086 based). Our LAN only runs at 0.6 Mbits/s and uses twisted
pairs.
Here is what we have learned:
1. The 8086 is a very capable chip. There is no need to wait
for the more esoteric processors. CT's software and tools
made development possible -- not the processor.
2. You can get a lot done on a slow LAN. You can even provide
resonable response time.
3. You don't need a bit-mapped display. Sure it would be nice
but the users haven't noticed yet.
4. The ease-of-use (friendliness?) is of paramount importance.
We used function keys and labeled them on the screen on a
screen-by-screen basis. It evidently worked since the
Chairman of the Board of M/A-Com took the keyboard from my
hands after a 3 minute demonstration and started using the
system himself.
What is the point of this letter? It is that everything we have
talked about is possible now. All you have to do is write it. Fancy
hardware is very nice, but it does not a workstation make. The keys
are software and development tools. No component is especially SOTA,
but the gestalt is.
Brian
------------------------------
Date: 4 April 1982 1011-EST
From: Hank Walker at CMU-10A
Subject: performance analysis and remote disks
Benchmarks written in a high-level language and then compiled tell me
NOTHING. Anyone who thinks that a MC68000 is 70-75% of an EFFECTIVELY
USED VAX had better think again. Assembly-code benchmarks are the
only relevant ones for comparing architectures. Now if you are
comparing available compiler-hardware systems, C benchmarks are
relevant.
An Ethernet interposed between a disk and processor presents the
following delays: outgoing protocol, transmission time, incoming
protocol, disk processor queueing time, processing time, disk access,
outgoing protocol, transmission time, and incoming protocol.
Transmission time total both ways is probably 1ms. Protocol mucking
depends on whether you have a dedicated processor. We use remote tape
drives here, and TCP burns up to 60% of the cycles on a 780. This
might be a problem. Assuming processing time is negligible. The disk
access can't be avoided without a cache. The big time is probably
queueing time if you have lots of workstations sharing a big disk
drive. The two areas to pay attention to are protocols and queueing
time. The latter may be larger. Sharing a disk probably means you
can add a disk cache, so your overall performance may be no worse than
a local disk. Also, the big remote disk is undoubtedly faster than a
small local Winchester.
------------------------------
Date: 5 April 1982 19:46 est
From: Frankston.SoftArts at MIT-MULTICS
Subject: What is a LAN?
Sender: COMSAT.SoftArts at MIT-MULTICS
Reply-To: Frankston at MIT-MULTICS (Bob Frankston)
*from: BOB (Bob Frankston)
I presume that the key characteristics are that it is relatively cheap
to interface to, provides a high bandwidth, short transmission time
for packets and a reliable connection. Basically it can be assumed to
always be there and be sufficient to support a file server. How does
this differ from other people's views?
In particular, I am allowing for the protocols to be similar to a
global network. It is just the ability to assume the ready
availability of resources over the network that distinguish it.
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂06-Apr-82 2332 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #40
∂06-Apr-82 2254 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #40
Date: 7 Apr 1982 0027-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #40
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Works Digest Wednesday, 7 Apr 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 40
Today's Topics: Performance Analysis and Remote Disks
Brave New World?
Whether Network Protocols Should be Discussed Here
Standards: User-Kernel Interface
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 6 April 1982 00:39:53-PST (Tuesday)
From: pratt
Reply-to: csd.pratt at SCORE
Subject: Re: performance analysis and remote disks
Date: 4 April 1982 1011-EST
From: Hank Walker at CMU-10A
Subject: performance analysis and remote disks
Benchmarks written in a high-level language and then
compiled tell me NOTHING. ... Assembly-code benchmarks
are the only relevant ones for comparing architectures.
So who's comparing architectures? The corresponding statement for
automobiles would be "Automobile road tests tell me nothing. Bench
dynamometer tests are the only relevant ones for comparing engines."
A car customer wants to know how the car performs, not just the
engine. Dan Lynch wanted to know the cost of the move from
timesharing to PC's. Answering him by talking about the performance
of one component of a PC system is only relevant if it helps predict
system performance. Dan's question is far better addressed directly
using system performance measurements than indirectly (and
incompletely) with data on the performance of just one component.
Anyone who thinks that a MC68000 is 70-75% of an
EFFECTIVELY USED VAX had better think again.
You have some hard data to back this up? (I don't know what
interpretation of "effectively" you had in mind, but it sounds like
you had the rather dated one of the machine alone executing
efficiently, as opposed to the more modern one of the human-machine
combination being used efficiently. Even so, I'd like to see the
evidence for this case.)
The benchmarks I used (there were five of them) all had the MC68000
crippled by the C compiler. If you want to compare the Vax to the
MC68000 with the Vax sped up using assembly code, you should permit a
similar speed-up for the MC68000. DEC's Doug Clark by the way has
extracted from several days worth of carefully instrumented
measurements on the Vax 11/780 the number 0.5 MIPS. Even allowing for
the fact that the Vax does A=B+C in one instruction, I wouldn't be too
surprised to find the MC68000 hot on its heels in assembly language,
though I wouldn't much care since no one around these parts programs
either the Vax or the 68000 in assembly language.
Thanks for the input on the cost of interposing an Ethernet between a
disk and a processor. Your warning about TCP duly noted, this agrees
with observations of Lampson, Nelson, Popek, and others about the high
cost of general purpose protocols. However I was startled by "the big
remote disk is undoubtedly faster than a small local Winchester," this
seems to be in the same category as the belief that a large Vax must
be faster than a miniscule MC68000. The 10" Fujitsu Eagle Winchester
transfers data at almost 2 megabytes/second, and more than one 8"
Winchester runs at 1 megabyte/sec, all quite likely to be faster than
the big washing machines I bet you have in your machine room. Small
need not be slow, for either processors or disks.
Vaughan Pratt
------------------------------
Date: 6 April 1982 09:13-EST
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM at MIT-MC>
Subject: Re: Brave New World?
To: pratt@Shasta at SUMEX-AIM
It shouldn't be too hard to add an extra level of software at the
point where the user program itself interfaces to UNIX. Having done
so, for example having all OPENs of files/pipes go thru a single
user-written procedure, which is moved to a separate source file and
shared among all user programs that are written in the same source
language, it should then be possible to modify the interface source
file to run on a non-unix system, at which point all those user
programs should work without significant modifications on the other
system. Thus systems needn't be standardized to have UNIX as their
user-program/system interface, in order to acquire the UNIX
application-program "library". (Quotes around "library" because I
don't mean library in the usual computer-jargon sense of a "library of
assembly-language subroutines editable by FUDGE2".)
To some extent, SAIL and LISP already do this sort of thing, as does
PCNET software.
------------------------------
Date: 6 April 1982 09:28-EST
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM at MIT-MC>
Subject: whether network protocols should be discussed here
To: pratt@Shasta at SUMEX-AIM
Of course the issue of network access isn't a workstation-specific
question, it applies to mainframes also. But when considering any
particular workstation, one of the most important questions is what
sort of network access it has (the other most important questions are:
what sort of word-processing/editor, what sort of display, what sort
of computing power, and what other software is available; did I leave
out anything important?).
Thus perhaps issues of particular protocol to use should be moved to
INFO-PROTOCOL (for low speed asynchronous long distance telephone and
modem communication) or INFO-LAN (doesn't exist that I know of; maybe
it should; for Ethernet-type things) or TCP-IP (for TCP/IP/X.25; I'm
not sure of this one), assuming we're designing a workstation
ourselves or sending suggestions to some commercial workstation
vendor, but discussion of the network capabilities of particular
existing workstations belongs here. Does everybody agree that a
workstation located near other workstations (such as in an office
building) should be on a LAN, and that regardless of whether a
workstation is on a LAN or not, it should have some long-distance
communication, either directly or via a longhaul-gateway on the LAN?
------------------------------
Date: 6 Apr 82 9:22:22-EST (Tue)
From: Dave Crocker <dcrocker.EE@UDel-Relay>
To: pratt.shasta at Sumex-Aim
Subject: Standards: User-kernel interface
With respect to the Unix user-kernel interface offering a general
standard, which version of Unix has the standard interface?
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂06-Apr-82 2333 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #37
∂02-Apr-82 0055 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #37
Date: 2 Apr 1982 0256-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #37
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Works Digest Friday, 2 Apr 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 37
Today's Topics: Modem Survey
Brave New World?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 1 Apr 82 15:44:59-EST (Thu)
From: Vonglahn at UDel-EE
Subject: Modem Survey
Although this may not be the right forum for the following, I'm
sending it to WORKS since WORKS is the most active and widely-
distributed bboard being tracked here at UDel.
I'm trying to get together an informal data base on people's
experiences with various 300, 1200, and/or 2400 baud telco line
modems. The information will be used to help new members of the CSNET
select modems for their sites.
More specifically, I'm interested in learning what results the user
community has had with various brands and types (single or multi-line,
single or multispeed, originate only or autoanswer, manual or
autodial, etc) of modems. Since CSNET uses telco long distance, dial
up, voice grade, lines as its communications medium, I'm especially
interested in your experiences with your modem over such links.
If you have any positive or negative experiences with particular
hardware, I'd like to hear from you. All responses will be kept
strictly confidential unless requested otherwise. Please respond
directly to me at <vonglahn.vax at udel-relay>.
Thanks.
Peter von Glahn
------------------------------
Date: 1 Apr 1982 1428-PST
Subject: Brave New World?
From: Dan Lynch <LYNCH@ISIB>
Message-ID: <[USC-ISIB] 1-Apr-82 14:28:14.LYNCH>
Before we all jump off the end of our current earth and buy a gaggle
of Workstations (PCs) to populate our worlds we should consider the
whole picture to see if we are buying into a problem we might not be
able to solve.
As I see it the desire is to leave the current state of computing
support and head off to a better world where there is:
1) More computes per researcher.
2) More control over those computes.
3) Different (better) user interfaces.
4) Support for new computer science ideas (networking, parallelism,
sharing).
The initial attempts at solving this problem have led us to looking
at distributed architectures (like LANs with PCs and some file
server).
The drawbacks we have run into so far are that existing "solutions"
suffer from:
1) Having to build a mountain of new software.
2) Interfacing each LAN/PC to the external world (electrically,
transport protocol, FTP/Telnet access in and out).
3) Lack of performance data.
Item 3 is a real problem. I have not yet done the "analysis and
modeling" of what any particular choice would look like in operation.
I really doubt that doing a priori analysis would be of much benefit
because the assumptions on load would be so subject to misstatement.
So the only real "solution" is to build one and test it. If it has
terrible performance we will be quite unhappy and must make sure that
we can augment the basic architecture to improve performance.
Item 1 is also a real problem. The size of the "mountain" is much
bigger than one might imagine. There are hundreds of programs that
users find useful in the (our current) TOPS20 world. Just how many of
them do we have to duplicate to make the change appear as a move
forward? On this issue I might also note that it is not a trivial
matter to port application software around. (I am referring to the
amount of work, not its technical content.) Also, not much
communication is taking place about who will really commit to building
this package and that package on a reasonably firm schedule. As it
now stands one must just build it all from whole cloth or sit back and
wait for others to do it.
Item 2 is not too terrible. Just lots of engineering work.
Does anyone have an architecture that doesn't present so many apparent
drawbacks?
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂08-Apr-82 2129 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #41
∂08-Apr-82 0211 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #41
Date: 8 Apr 1982 0201-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #41
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Works Digest Thursday, 8 Apr 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 41
Today's Topics:
Performance Analysis and Disks (2 msgs)
Request for Info (Apollo & Perq)
Performance Measurements
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 7 April 1982 0434-EST (Wednesday)
From: Hank Walker at CMU-10A
To: csd.pratt at SU-SCORE
Subject: performance analysis and disks
In talking about disk performance, I was thinking more of seek times
than transfer rates. Something like an RM03, RP06, RP07 has a seek
time of about 25ms. Not very many small Winchesters approach this,
and in general are about half as fast, although this is changing all
the time. It's the shared disk cache that will probably buy you the
speed anyway.
Having worked at DEC, I am well aware that a VAX executes 0.5M VAX
instructions/sec (780 that is). I was just pointing out that if you
actually do care about the bare implementations, and not the HW-SW
system (as you do for your particular problem), then you have to use
assembly-code benchmarks to factor out the compiler. My problem is
for example, that the 68000 C compiler might be close to optimal while
the VAX one is bad. I don't know that, but the point is that it is an
unknown variable.
What I meant by effective use was a compiler generating BLISS-quality
code, which is estimated by Bill Wulf to be a factor of 2 better than
the UCB compiler.
Being a VLSI designer, I know that small doesn't necessarily mean
slow, and that the price/performance of the 68000 is much better than
that of a 780. But not quite as good as some would believe. It may
be that the 68000 is 70% of a 780 on simple instructions (probably
is), but the overall performance is highly dependent on the mix. More
string operations, or floating-point, would kill the 68000 if used
very frequently.
------------------------------
Date: Wednesday, 7 April 1982 09:13-EST
From: DPR at MIT-XX
Subject: Hank Walker and Performance
Hank Walker's performance comments touched a nerve. "the only way to
compare architectures is in assembly language"? Pish tush. Let Hank
write all his programs in assembly language, then. No one except
hardware-only bigots has made that mistake for the last 10 years. If
a salesman told me that I'd throw him out of my office.
It is true that better and worse compilers exist, and it may be true
that the VAX is wonderful when you have a good compiler. Show us.
On the other hand, Pratt in his comments never compares programs that
do a lot of I/O. Instruction set architecture has very little effect
on the performance of "REAL" programs (i.e. other than Puzzle). How
fast you can get data into and out of a machine is much more
important. The I/O bandwidth on most 68000 machines is pitiful. The
VAX, with its MASSBUS, and UNIBUS and cache memory, is a winner here,
and shows the real cost difference between big and little machines
(the CPU instruction interpreter is such a minor component of cost...)
Getting to a substantive point, we are just about to hook up a gaggle
of 750's to a local net, with the disk in some cases being provided by
a shared server across the 10MB net. So I think in a couple of months
we will have a data point for Pratt on this subject. I am unaware of
any useful comparisons and would be interested in other work.
I expect there to be little perceivable difference in UNIX on a 750
with local RK07 and UNIX on a 750 with remote simulated (admittedly we
will be using a faster disk for the remote server). As main memory
gets cheaper this is probably the way to go to keep your office quiet
and your disks reliable.
------------------------------
Date: 7 Apr 1982 1107-PST
From: Jeffrey at OFFICE
Subject: Request for Info (Apollo & Perq)
I have been reading through the WorkS archives. The interest is
great, but the eyes are weak. Nonetheless, I shall continue.
There are many references to the Apollo and Perq machines. So far,
however, I haven't seen any descriptions of these devices.
I would appreciate receiving all descriptive materilas on these
machines which perople would care to send. Would someone please send
me the address of Apollo?
Thanks,
Jeffrey Stone
(jeffrey@office)
------------------------------
From: sdcsvax!jvz at NPRDC
Subject: Performance measurements
In the discussion of performance measurements, it was mentioned that
the VAX-780 was analyzed as a 0.5MIP machine (by Doug Clark). How
does a MIP relate to my compiling a Fortran program or interacting
with a DBMS? And what is a MIP? If we are going to compare machines
and architectures, we need to be more specific. The one thing
lacking in the analysis of machines today is a standard reference
point and definition of work (as opposed to MIP). The measurement
should be the number of functions performed per unit time, where
"number of functions" has some rational base. And note, the
"functions" might be different depending upon the environment of the
user.
John Van Zandt
UCSD
uucp: ucbvax!sdcsvax!jvz
arpa: sdcsvax!jvz@nprdc
------------------------------
Date: 7 April 1982 13:25:54-PST (Wednesday)
From: pratt@Shasta at Sumex-Aim
Subject: Re: WORKS Digest V2 #37
To: REM at MIT-MC
From REM@MIT-MC Tue Apr 6 08:43:49 1982
It shouldn't be too hard to add an extra level of software
at the point where the user program itself interfaces to UNIX.
I agree. A very reasonable way to provide a Unix environment is to
provide a fast-and-lean kernel and implement most Unix services on top
of it as privileged user processes. One drawback of this scheme is
that it is next to impossible to get support for it - Unix lovers
wonder why you would want to do that much violence to a fine kernel,
while Unix haters wonder why anyone would want to implement a Unix
environment.
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂09-Apr-82 1002 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #42
∂09-Apr-82 0028 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #42
Date: 9 Apr 1982 0136-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #42
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Works Digest Friday, 9 Apr 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 42
Today's Topics: Brave New World?
References on PERQ
Cheapo LAN Board for Multibus
What's a Nanosecond Here or There...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 7 Apr 1982 1901-PST
Sender: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
Subject: Re: Brave New World?
From: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
To: Lynch at ISIB
Message-ID: <[USC-ECL] 7-Apr-82 19:01:42.RENTSCH>
I am pleased to see that some people are thinking more about where we
are going than how soon we can start moving. Wasn't it Benjamin
Franklin who said "It is easy to mistake motion for action." ?
Your statement of what the better world is (more computes, better
computes, etc.) is good. Let me see if I improve on it by
generalizing:
The new world should provide a better vehicle for individual
(and group) creative expression.
The important ramifications of this as I see them are as follows:
1) The visual user interface should match well human vision
well in terms of bandwidth (say at least 25 Mb/s)
2) The processing function should therefore be local to the
user to avoid long distance/high bandwidth dilemma
3) The system should be felt as "quick" in the sense that
simple things happen instantly, which means
a) There should be enough processing power to deliver the
cycles at very high rates for important things
b) There should be plenty of memory (of the real variety) so
the swapping time is not the bottleneck
4) The user interface should feel natural (not familiar, that's
something different) and should not have unnecessary
artificial constraints
5) Therefore there should be plenty of virtual memory and
corresponding secondary memory to avoid the program
"strangeness" usually necessary to accompanying those lacks
6) Individual resources should, as much as possible, be completely
available to the individual and NOT to anyone else (except of
course as the individual sees fit)
7) Similarly with resources belonging to a group
8) Group interaction, which is always necesary, implies complete
communication being available
9) Be flexible and rich in functionality without sacrificing
individuality and individual comprehension
What all these things mean is that we are more or less on the right
track, even though there are the problems you mentioned (New software,
network interfacing, performance analysis). Personal workstations do
provide the potential at least for the necessary bandwidth and
processing power. Having plenty of memory will make a big difference
to how the system feels even though processor speeds are more easily
objectively measured. Communicating with high speed LANs provides the
communication potential even if the appropriate metaphors for the
styles of communication are not clear yet. Having writable microstore
will help both in terms of being flexible and in providing the right
amount of processing power "where it counts."
Having painted such a rosy picture, let me respond to your problems.
- The need to interface each environment to the communication network
I mostly agree with your assessment of being just lots of engineering
work. As long as we realize now that this will be going on, we can
avoid the most important pitfall of non-standardization. With some
planning up front, each environment can be interfaced to only one
communication protocol. I presume that there will be lots of
environments, so that there will still be a (linear) amount of work to
do, but that's not so bad. The real issue here is that the high level
notions of communication are not yet right. We have been accustomed
to think in terms of such objects as exist in the old world, but as
experience with distributed computing grows these ideas will be
replaced with new objects more appropriate. Simple example: a file
transfer program. In my ideal creative environement there is no need
for such a thing, perhaps replaced by a "remote file object," which
gets gotten at such time as you ask for it. The higher level
communication modes are even less well understood, and so it should
not surprise us (or frighten us) to think that a few mistakes may be
made. This is the nature of experimental science. The important
thing is to realize up front that the experiment is going on and not
overcommit to the wrong idea.
- Lack of performance data
The trouble with performance data is that the measurements are all so
objective that they don't tell us about how the systems feel, which is
the important impact on how well the vehicle carries the creative
effort. But personal workstations do have the property that the
performance is repeatable, and studies have concluded that uncertainty
in delay is the important factor in frustration, much more than the
delay itself. Also, if an individual is dissatisfied with the
performance of his workstation, he should be able to spend more money
on another, better performing one. The availability of a flexible,
writable microcode should mean that going from one environment to
another will be pretty easy, so the performance gain doesn't mean
sacrificing the old context.
- Mountains of new software
Is this a problem or a blessing? In order to get to a NEW world we
will have to write NEW software. If all we want is our old world
speeded up and less frustrating, that seems doable by the "standard"
portability techniques (I admit this is oversimplifying.) We should
instead view moving to a new environment as a blessing in disguise,
since it presents a tremendous opportunity to throw away all the bad
things we have just gotten used to rather than really liking.
Admittedly this means getting rid of things that we like, too, but I
claim that they would have to be rethought for the new world anyway.
The advantages of a complete redesign are well known, I shouldn't have
to give any other arguments on this point. And if some important
piece of software is really indespensible in more or less its present
form, then someone will do it for the new world, and maybe even in a
better, cleaner way. Finally, let me say that most of us aren't
sacrificing our old world (the hardware and software will still be
there) when we go to the new. So, while the interim may be juggling
two systems, we should be able to get to the new world smoothly and
without the trauma normally associated with a complete change in
environments. Lots of new software? Yes, but NEW software that is
better than the old, hopefully minus the crocks. And a fantastic
opportunity to build new systems based on new paradigms.
-- Tim Rentsch
------------------------------
Date: 8 Apr 1982 9:20:35 EST (Thursday)
From: tony lake <lake at BBN-UNIX>
Subject: References on PERQ
To: lake at BBN-UNIX
The 1980 and 1982 IEEE Computer Society Spring COMPCONs each have
sessions describing current workstations, although neither has a paper
from Apollo. In addition to papers on the PERQ (p. 317-8, 484-5),
Spring 1980 includes papers on the MIT NU system and LISP machine, the
CMU SPICE machine, and the Xerox Dorado. Spring 1982 proceedings
includes papers on the IBM PC and the HP-125. Some of the papers are
rather superficial, but they are a start at understanding the designs.
//Tony
------------------------------
Date: 8 April 1982 13:16 cst
From: Cornhill.APSE at HI-Multics
Subject: Cheapo LAN board for Multibus
To: cornhill at HI-Multics
We are in the process of assembling a couple of standalone M68000 (SUN
board) based workstations for executing Telesoft Ada. I would like to
use the workstations to investigate the desirability of using a LAN
for the development of software projects that are too big for a single
workstation.
I would appreciate any pointers on information that would help me
connet the two workstations in a manner meaningful to my needs. I
would prefer something a bit cheaper than Intel's $4000 Ethernet
boards, though we do need something that is compatible to a Multibus.
At one time I thought that Corvus had a $500 board for Multibus but
their sales rep knew not. Any other options?
Dennis
------------------------------
Date: 8 Apr 1982 1639-EST
From: Ron Fischer <FISCHER at RUTGERS>
Subject: What's a nanosecond here or there...
DPR brings out the important point to consider in this discussion of
CPU speeds, it is not the CPU, but the IO speed that (usually)
determines how fast your software will execute. But beyond this I
think there's a more important distinction to be made. Barring truly
unbearable situations CPU speed is just not that important. Most
people on this list sound like sports car fanatics!
A bit of reminiscing... back in 1976 when personal computers were just
starting to be sold in poorly designed kits one of the loudest cries
could be summed up by: "Who cares if it takes 1 minute or 5 minutes to
finish running the program, the computer's cheap, it's mine and no one
else can sporadically slow it down or crash it." The workstation
concept seems to embody the ideas of the latter part of the statement,
we all want our own computers.
So, although all of this wonderful hardware is going to let us do
really "fun things" even faster, shouldn't we be talking about what
those "fun things" are going to be? How about some more general
issues?? What can people do with a workstation that would be
impractical or silly to do with a mainframe? (besides play Pacman...)
What software techniques can take advantage of all those extra cycles
lying around? Are there better physical designs other than keyboard,
mouse, and display? Maybe workstations should be more like desks or
chalkboards, or perhaps even more like notebooks (Dynabook, hurrah!)?
Are there better architectures for personal machines (cringe)?
Religious arguments, ones that are unanswerable or based on
preference, don't qualify as "fun things" either... what should a
workstation's language or OS do? How should it support a bitmap
display? Who cares about the sundry specifics of existing stuff, take
the useful concepts and go from there. Performance measurements can
tell us if a system was implemented "stupidly," but they can only hint
that we took the wrong approach in the first place. Creativity makes
"adequately fulfilled" into "amazingly better."
Hit that mental "meta key!"
(ron)
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂11-Apr-82 1023 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #43
∂10-Apr-82 1457 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #43
Date: 10 Apr 1982 1538-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #43
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Works Digest Saturday, 10 Apr 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 43
Today's Topics: Power of a WorkStation (3 msgs)
UNIX & Remote Disks
Standards: User-Kernel Interface
Brave New World? (2 msgs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 8 Apr 1982 (Thursday) 1931-EDT
From: ROSSID at Wharton-10 (David Rossien)
Subject: Power of a workstation
The MIP as a unit of workstation functionality is about as useful a
measurement as horsepower is for the space shuttle... great for the
media to make people oooh and ahhh, but otherwise useless. When a
shuttle is put together people don't want to know about horsepower,
they want to know whether the damn thing is gonna fly; and that is a
function of its weight, payload, pull of gravity, wind velocity,
and... the pilot. I was up in White Plains at Big Blue not long ago,
and the district sales manager told managers of my department that
"the IBM Displaywriter has the power of a 370/135." Great, I
exclaimed... I want to run TEL-A-GRAF, IFPS, APL, and IMS (those being
some of the packages/languages we use). The manager looked sheepish
"you can't do that" he said. But I could on a 370... Well, it turns
out he was talking MIPS, and lemme tell you, when it comes to word
processing (which is what the furshluginer thing was MADE for, ) it is
slower than a half a dozen word processors which use Z80s as CPUs.
For all the talk of power, we decided the machine was agonizingly
slow!
Butler Lampson, an Alto designer, told us in class that the Star was
one of the fastest machines around... Maybe so, but it is too slow to
use in a production word processing operation. (We haven't spoken
about the Star's speed that I remember... DON'T ASK FOR "HELP" it
literally takes 30 minutes to get the files from the file server and
load them all in!!! Oh, and the Stars you see at NCCs and INFOs are
generally souped up with extended memory so as not to run
embarassingly slow. I was told that Xerox first expected to sell the
Stars with 192K, but they ran SO slowly they now use a minimum of
256K.
The point to all this is, don't give me how many MIPS, let me tell you
what I want to do, and then tell me what my response time will be ...
since it depends on how its implemented, you will have to implement
what I want and let me fiddle... which all comes back to the point I
made before... all the math (and MIPS) in the world isn't worth one
case of "try it and see."
-Dave
------------------------------
Date: 9 Apr 82 3:07:05-EST (Fri)
From: Michael Muuss <mike@BRL>
Subject: Re: WORKS Digest V2 #40
The type of networking discussion that has been starting on WorkS
should probably stay with WorkS for the "Workstation+LAN" type
comments. Discussions of the details of the LAN might be more
profitably brought up in the TCP-IP-Digest.
TCP-IP @ BRL TCP-IP @ MIT-AI for submissions
TCP-IP-Request @ BRL TCP-IP-Request @ MIT-AI for requests & meta
discussion.
Best,
-Mike
------------------------------
Date: Thu Apr 8 22:51:09 1982
From: decvax!duke!bcw at Berkeley
Subject: Re: Workstation power
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
From: Bruce C. Wright @ Duke University
Re: Workstation power
Recently there has been quite a bit of discussion about computer
system power as a function of MIPS. Although for some uses this is
quite appropriate, it has been quite some time since most computing
systems have been designed and purchased solely on the basis of MIPS.
MIPS only give you the potential for CPU-bound tasks (and even then
not very well, as I'll demonstrate later). For I/O-bound tasks (most
data processing, database manipulation, editing, compilation, linking,
word processing and so forth), a much more cogent measure can be I/O
bandwidth. For example, recently here at the Medical Center where I
work, we put together an LSI- 11/23 system with large (60MB) disk
drives. We had to be rather careful which controller we purchased,
because one of these high performance disk drives will simply saturate
the poor Q-bus if there are long (multi-block) transfers. Since it
wasn't really practical to modify the software to change multi-block
requests into a series of single-block requests, we had to ensure that
any controller we got for the system would automatically buffer the
request in some way (say by breaking it up into smaller chunks and
letting the drive spin around an extra time sometimes). The resulting
system has about the CPU power of a PDP-11/34, but I can attest that
it was *noticeably* slower for most types of computing, though we
never made any performance measurements.
Even for CPU speed, MIPS can be misleading without an understanding of
the application and the hardware than such a vague number is able to
give. For example, MIPS really don't have much meaning if the CPU
doesn't have a floating point instruction set and you need to do a lot
of floating-point math; ditto for decimal and to a somewhat lesser
extent character instruction sets. Another example is interrupts:
one of the fastest machines for large amounts of interrupt processing
is the TI-990 series, since it takes only about 1-2 instruction times
to enter an interrupt, save the registers and context, and be ready to
begin processing the interrupt service routine. Try that on your
PDP-11, VAX, or MC68000! The point is that this architecture was
specially optimized for a highly interrupt-driven environment (such as
process control) and it would take an enormous amount of hard- ware to
make those other architectures run as quickly in that environment.
MIPS only give the barest glimpse of the actual CPU speed; what really
matters in questions of system speed is the total match of the system
to the application.
Even apart from simple performance criteria, there are a lot of other
reasons why specific machines are chosen: software, for example. If
you have specific software needs, you may have to forego the cheaper
hardware in order to lower your total system costs.
Back in the 1940's and early 1950's, it might have had some meaning to
assign a single number to a computing system, but this technique no
longer has any particular merit.
Bruce C. Wright @ Duke University
------------------------------
Date: 9 Apr 82 3:45:36-EST (Fri)
From: Michael Muuss <mike@BRL>
Subject: UNIX & Remote disks
We have a home-grown UNIX-UNIX network with virtual disk access across
the network, and local -vs- remote disk access is indistinguishable.
Important details:
1) We use DEC PCL-11s (16Mbaud network hardware)
2) Home-grown, low overhead protocols ("BRLNET").
Testing indicates that we can bring 100 blocks/sec across the
network with only about a 5% "network overhead" expense
on the server end. (Both ends PDP-11/70 with MOS memory).
When we generalize BRLNET to run under InterNet IP, we expect the cost
to go up, but it shouldn't be terrible.
3) Special "High-Performance" BRL/JHU UNIX Kernel (although the effects
of this on the measurement cited above is small. Regular UNIX's
may have perhaps twice the overhead).
More on all this if there is interest.
-Mike
------------------------------
Date: 7 April 1982 15:34:36-PST (Wednesday)
From: pratt@Shasta at Sumex-Aim
Subject: Re: Standards: User-kernel interface
To: dcrocker.EE at UDel-Relay, pratt.shasta at Sumex-Aim
From dcrocker.EE@UDEL-RELAY Tue Apr 6 09:05:28 1982
With respect to the Unix user-kernel interface offering a
general standard, which version of Unix has the standard
interface?
Your guess is at least as good as mine. There is a crying need for a
standard here. Any takers for a Unix kernel interface standard
committee? Surely this is something the various Unix communities
(Usenix, unix-wizards) toss around from time to time?
-v
------------------------------
Date: 9 April 1982 04:14-EST
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM at MIT-MC>
Subject: Re: Brave New World?
To: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
cc: Lynch at USC-ISIB
Let me restate what you said and see if you agree: There will always
be an FTP program, that is a program that transfers files or parts of
files (pages?) between two different computers across a communications
medium (network). But whereas currently we always have to run the FTP
program explicitly from our keyboard&CRT before starting a process
that needs the file at the FTP destination, in the future the FTP
program will be run automatically from underneath our applications
programs so that we don't have to run the FTP program ourselves, thus
we may often forget that file-transferring is going on because it's so
transparent.
------------------------------
Date: 9 April 1982 04:18-EST
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM at MIT-MC>
Subject: Re: Brave New World?
To: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
Re your proposed desiderata for the workstation of the future: Is the
hardware for the compute-video bandwidth you propose available
currently (ignoring cost)? If so, who has it and how much did it cost?
If not, how many years will it be before the first prototype system
meeting your desiderata can be constructed from available technology?
(This is all to put it in perspective, are you talking about something
that could exist now but hasn't quite been put on the market yet, or
something that requires 5 or 10 more years of hardware development?)
(Perhaps you can't answer that question and somebody on the list with
more up to date information about hardware developments can.)
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂11-Apr-82 2346 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #44
∂11-Apr-82 1706 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #44
Date: 11 Apr 1982 1750-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #44
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Works Digest Sunday, 11 Apr 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 44
Today's Topics:
Call for Standards on Local Network Specifications
Brave New World/FTP (3 msgs)
LAN Hardware (2 msgs)
Addresses for Apollo and Perq
The Last Word on MIPS?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 9 Apr 1982 07:03:59-PST
From: mo at LBL-UNIX (Mike O'Dell [system])
Subject: comments
Interlan has a Multibus 10 Meg Ether for about $2500 I believe. Tell
the you know of the forthcoming price reduction.
As for communications, I want to pour some of the cold water of
reality on these wonderous discussions.
If you are a local network research person, you are well aware of the
incredible fiascos going on in both standards efforts (IEEE 802-ring
circus)(double pun??) and everyone building networks going off and
inventing a new access protocol. Even worse, most vendors are
inventing their own higher-level protocols, many of which are
proprietary. (Vendor lock-in is a powerful marketting tool.) I also
don't buy the statement made in this forum that with this
heterogeneity, the work to intercommunicate is linear. There is an N x
M getway problem, and gateways are VERY hard when you DON'T have to do
protocol translation. If you want systems which will outlive the
current market spasms over broadband vs ethers vs rings vs
strings-and-tin-cans, the networking must be done in a way which is
INDEPENDENT OF THE WIRE, using protocols in the public domain (not
dominated by a vendor) and which will be widely implemented. At the
moment, IP/TCP/UDP are the only candidates. While they aren't my
favorite protocol designs (everyone would change something on
anything, given the chance), they ARE being implemented on MANY
machines and systems, and they are promulgated by an organization
which is so large, it is difficult for it to change its mind. This
means an implementation will have a reasonable expected lifetime. And
while a poor implementation of TCP may reduce a 10 Meg Ether to a
200Kbaud dribble, that is 200K more than you would have if the box at
the other end spoke something you don't.
There will be systems capable of acting as glue to bind this
heterogeneous world together. You will probably want some access to
Xerox NS because if Xerox ever releases Interpress (which appears to
be in question), you want to be able to send you document to the Laser
down the hall even though your machine speaks IP/TCP.
What this is really saying is that the world is VERY heterogeneous and
will continue to be into the forseeable future. I get very nervous
when people start talking about systems which don't realize this or
honor its impact. Any system which goes off in the corner and does
yet another design as if its the only network in the world, or the
only protocol in the world, or the only anything else in the world
might as well be written in assembler language.
Here at LBL, we have learned why the greatest evolutionary lever is
currently possessed by the tortise: he takes his shell with him
where-ever he goes. Unless an organizations plans to get in bed with
one vendor and buy only that vendor's equipment from here to eternity,
you CANNOT do things permanently wedded to one particular system.
(Even then, vendors do stop making hardware and do stop supporting
software.) Sometimes this means you can't exploit every little frob,
but we don't program in assembler either. And while the tortise is a
bit slower and not quite as thoroughly-modern as some of this
compatriots, he has outlived them all. If this sounds overly
dogmatic, it is, but the point is to question whether the evolution of
workstations, this grand ticket to a distributed world, is going to
commit the same old mistakes, only in more virulent forms.
The introduction of any new technology much include planning for is
inevitable obsolecence.
-Mike
------------------------------
Date: 10 Apr 1982 1535-PST
Sender: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
Subject: Re: Brave New World?
From: RENTSCH at USC-ECL
To: REM at MIT-MC
Message-ID: <[USC-ECL]10-Apr-82 15:35:45.RENTSCH>
In-Reply-To: Your message of 9 April 1982 04:14-EST
The question was raised about FTP continuing to exist but being so
transparent to use that it seems not to.
The answer is: yes and no. While at some level bits are certainly
being shipped across the net, the existence of a file transfer PROGRAM
is another matter. The code to ship the bits may not be a program,
just a piece of code embedded in some object. And it may not be
anything as fancy as FTP since after all it knows what file to ship
and needn't include ancillary functions such as listing of files and
choosing directory.
Furthermore, all the preceding discussion presumes that FILES still
exist. There will, of course, still be bits stored on a secondary
medium. But will these bits be structured into files? For
compatibility with the old world, I think there will be some files.
But for the new world, a better model might be to have EVERYTHING live
in virtual primary memory, with the appropriately large swapping
space. (This argument has nothing to do with swapping and scheduling
policies, since accessing the objects in the virtual memory universe
is not specified and may affect those policies.) In that case the
need for files as such disappears (except for compatibility, as noted
above.) Then what is an FTP? Answer: so different it can't even be
called an FTP.
Tim Rentsch
------------------------------
Date: 10 April 1982 21:03-EST
From: Frank J. Wancho <FJW at MIT-MC>
Subject: Brave New World?
To: REM at MIT-MC
Isn't that the same transparent FTPing that goes on here when you give
a site name instead of using the default device DSK: ? For all the
grumbling about ITS, there are many features that are way ahead of the
"state-of-the-art"...
--Frank
------------------------------
Date: 11 Apr 1982 0544-EST
From: Robert W. Kerns <RWK at SCRC-TENEX>
Subject: No FTP
To: REM at MIT-MC
No! There is a distinct difference between FTP and the kind of file
access that is desired for workstations. In the FTP case, you
transfer a file from somewhere "remote" to somewhere "local". In the
file access case, THERE MAY BE NO LOCAL FILESYSTEM. There is no
copying going on, and indeed, the access may not even be linear; I may
access the first item in a file, then the last, then somewhere in the
middle....
Probably one of the earliest examples of this kind of thing is the
"MLDEV" program on ITS. This is the automatically invoked
software-device which handles file accesses accross the ARPAnet for
one ITS talking to another. Any program on any ITS can reference any
file on any other ITS. I can reference "AI:RWK;RWK LOGIN" on AI, MC,
ML, or DM in exactly the same manner.
This is slow, as you have seen. Don't judge remote disks by that: The
LISP Machine's FILE protocol does the same thing in a much more
efficent manner over a much more reasonable network (CHAOSnet, a 4MB
network similar to the Ethernet which serves as the local network at
MIT). The FILE protocol was developed to interface MIT's LISP
Machines to files living on ITS. The protocol has since been
implemented on TOPS20, TENEX, UNIX, VMS, Multics, and the LISP
Machine. File systems (there are 3) on the LISP Machine are a recent
invention, so the LISP Machine grew up in an environment where all
file accesses were remote. Now files can be accessed from all these
systems with equal ease.
Interestingly, it often seems to be faster to read from another host
than from your local file system (providing the other system is not an
over-loaded timesharing system). Why not? You've got two machines
working for you instead of one!
Of course, MLDEV and FILE can be used in concatenation. Thus LISPM's
can reference files on DM, although DM is not on the CHAOSnet. Of
course Internet and standardization will eventually make this
unnecessary, but probably not in DM's lifetime.
The FILE protocol is used as to implement file transfer (CFTP) on the
various CHAOSnet hosts. This uses only a subset of the capabilities
of the FILE protocol. Thus the FILE protocol is both more primitive
and more general than FTP. It's a network extention of an
operating-system's file-system interface.
------------------------------
Date: 9 APR 1982 1059-PST
From: SHOCH at PARC-MAXC
Subject: Inexpensive Ethernet/Multibus boards
To: Cornhill.APSE at HI-MULTICS
cc: Shoch
3Com Corporation has recently announced an Ethernet interface board
for Multibus machines; see the recent issue of Electronics.
In quantity 25, they are prices at about $900; comparison with the
price for the Intel configuration shows what a year can do in this
business, if there is sufficient projected volume for a board......
John Shoch
Xerox, Palo Alto
------------------------------
Date: 9 Apr 1982 1301-EST
From: Chris Ryland <CPR at MIT-XX>
Subject: LAN hardware
There are only two Ethernet (10Mb variety) interfaces worth looking at
right now: the 3com and the Interlan. Both have Unibus, Qbus and
Multibus versions. For Multibus, the 3com board is the winner: only
$1500. The Interlan boards have a couple of advantages over the 3com
boards: they provide fairly substantial address filtering, and they
implement the exponential backoff algorithm when transmission
collisions occur.
However, for some applications the 3com board is the only choice,
since it provides on-board host-addressable memory. E.g., for SUN
workstations, which ordinarily have no Multibus memory into which to
DMA, the 3com board is ideal.
Other than the Multibus 3com board, both companies are selling these
interfaces for around $3K. (Why anyone would buy the Intel interface
is beyond me.)
Please don't send mail requesting further information. Instead, look
in nearly any trade magazine for addresses and phones of Interlan and
3com.
------------------------------
Date: 11 April 1982 03:52-EST
From: Patrick G. Sobalvarro <PGS at MIT-AI>
To: INFO-ATARI at MIT-AI
I'm interested in getting one or two track balls to use experimentally
instead of mice on our Lisp machines. I'd like to know of any
manufacturers or distributors of track balls who I can write to for
information. I'd also like information on prices, quality, and output
produced (i.e., resolution, maximum speed, etc.). Please reply to me
(PGS@AI), not the mailing list, because I'm not on it.
Thanks,
Pat Sobalvarro
------------------------------
Date: 9 April 1982 11:54-EST
From: Stephen C. Hill <STEVEH at MIT-MC>
Subject: Addresses for Apollo and Perq
To: Jeffrey at OFFICE-2
cc: STEVEH at MIT-MC
Perq (pronounced Perk, I was told) is made by:
Three Rivers Computer Corporation
720 Gross Street
Pittsburgh, PA 15224
(412) 621-6250
and they have sales and service offices in Hartford, Washington, D.C.,
Atlanta, Pittsburgh, Chicago, Dallas and Los Angeles
The Apollo is produced by:
Apollo Computer Inc.
19 Alpha Road
Chelmsford, MA 01824
(617) 256-6600
I have seen the Perq, and in my opinion, it is a slick looking
and operating machine. It has lots of nifty features, some of them of
dubious utility (like the ability to shape the cursor in one or
several different shapes. They used this feature to have the cursor
look like a little man pushing text off the screen in full animation.)
I think that I would have difficulty justifying this to my superiors,
unless they love executive toys. I know that they would never let ME
get one!
------------------------------
Date: 10 April 1982 19:35-EST
From: Tom Knight <TK at MIT-AI>
MIPS:Performance :: IQ:Intelligence
[AMEN -Mel]
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂17-Apr-82 1628 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #45
∂16-Apr-82 0033 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #45
Date: 16 Apr 1982 0236-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #45
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Works Digest Friday, 16 Apr 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 45
Today's Topics: Another View of Mips
Call for Standards on LAN Specifications
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed Apr 14 18:56:28 1982
From: decvax!cca!decvax!minow at Berkeley
Subject: Re: another view of mips
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
One problem with published benchmarks, such as Wheatstone's, is that
less than honorable vendors might try to tune their compiler/operating
system to the benchmark. There are reports of such things happening
for Fortran compilers and the Wheatstone benchmark, by the way.
When Dec first announced Fortran-IV-PLUS and the 11/70 at Hannover
(1974 or 1975), someone went around to all the vendors with a Fortran
benchmark. The 11/70 ran it in zero time. Turned out to be a loop
like:
X = 0
DO 10 I=1, 100
DO 10 J=1, 100
10 X = X + 1
Fortran-IV-PLUS did the entire computation at compile-time, generating:
I = 101
J = 101
X = 10000
exit
The person running the benchmark accepted it as valid.
Moral: benchmarks -- especially computational ones -- are generally
unrepresentative of situations where the customer asks "How many users
can I put on my ..." (correction: "where the customer really wants to
know...")
Martin Minow
decvax!minow
------------------------------
Date: 15 April 1982 00:37-EST
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM at MIT-MC>
Subject: comments
To: mo at LBL-UNIX
I think I agree with you. Let me state concisely my view. Any network
system that has no public-domain-protocol interface to the outside
world is worthless in the long run. (This applies to private networks
that have NO modem whatsoever, those which have a modem but no
protocol with supporting software to interface that modem to the local
network, and those which have both modem and supporting software but
use a protocol that isn't public domain and thus can't legally be used
to talk to outside equipment no supplied by the same vendor.)
Anyone contemplating a workstation and/or local network at this time,
several years after it became obvious to any intelligent computer
person that networks are the way to go in the future, should refuse to
buy any such system unless it has a way to talk to the outside world
using a decent public-domain protocol (X.25, IP/TCP, PCNET, et al). It
would be nice if one single protocol existed, but varying equipment
(cheap asynchronous low-speed modems with auto-dialers vs. expensive
synchronous high-speed modems over leased conditionned lines) and
varying communication needs (low-overhead point-to-point protocols vs.
true packet switching with their necessary high overhead) force us to
use different protocols as appropriate. But even with 2 or 3
different protocols needed, a few gateways can link the networks
together, which however can't be done if everybody uses
vendor-supplied private protocols that can't talk to anybody else and
thus 20 or 30 different kinds of private networks exist and can't
link.
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂17-Apr-82 1634 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #46
∂17-Apr-82 0159 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #46
Date: 17 Apr 1982 0252-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #46
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Works Digest Saturday, 17 Apr 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 46
Today's Topics: Bogus Benchmarks
Comments on Minnow's Remarks on Benchmarks
Color Monitors
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 16 April 1982 0934-EST
From: Hank Walker at CMU-10A
Subject: bogus benchmarks
The most flagrant violator of benchmark reasonableness that I've seen
lately is Perkin-Elmer. They had an add comparing their machine to a
VAX-11/780. The machine supposedly executed one of the benchmarks
>1000 times faster than the VAX. How was this possible. Well the
benchmark didn't generate any output, so the compiler optimized it to
a NOOP, which could be executed 1000 times faster...
------------------------------
Date: 16 April 1982 07:20:44-PST (Friday)
From: pratt@Shasta at Sumex-Aim
Subject: Minow
Martin Minow's observation about the FORTRAN program that was
optimized from a doubly nested loop to two instructions is well taken.
The same observation could be applied to other well-known benchmarks.
The Takeuchi function is a popular benchmark for comparing
call/return/parameter-passing overhead on different machine-language
combinations. The existence of a closed form for this function opens
up the possibility that a clever optimizer could discover the closed
form. As Martin says, people have been known to tune compilers for
benchmarks, so this possibility is less remote than it might seem.
Furthermore if one is going to accept as valid the optimization Martin
cited, on what basis would one reject some other optimization as
invalid?
However Martin's inference that benchmarks are unrepresentative of
machine performance is not the inference I would have drawn. A better
inference is that a benchmark written in a high-level language but
intended to reveal the performance of the underlying machine should
solve a well-defined problem in an efficient way, so as to prevent the
optimizer from playing too large a role.
Not all benchmarks need be efficient. A customer may be interested in
knowing how slow things will go if the programmers are sloppy, e.g.
adding up the numbers from 1 to n with a loop instead of using a
closed form. Clearly a sloppy benchmark is called for in such a case.
Moral: when benchmarking, choose benchmarks matched to what it is you
want to measure.
Corollary: there is no such thing as the universal benchmark.
--Vaughan Pratt
------------------------------
Date: 16 Apr 82 14:34-PDT
From: rubin at SRI-TSC
Subject: color monitors
I would like to buy a hi-res color monitor for a personal computer.
Mitsubishi, Hitachi, and Barco all seem to make similar units in the $
1,500 - $ 2,000 range (they have .31mm pitch and resolutions about 750
x 550). I would appreciate opinions about the reliability and picture
quality of these or similar units. For others who are interested, I
will collect and make available the responses I get.
Thanks,
Darryl
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂21-Apr-82 0947 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #47
∂21-Apr-82 0045 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #47
Date: 21 Apr 1982 0258-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #47
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Works Digest Wednesday, 21 Apr 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 47
Today's Topics: WorkStations as Furniture
User Interface of the Xerox Star
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun Apr 18 20:11:16 1982
From: decvax!utzoo!henry at Berkeley
Subject: workstations as furniture
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
Something I have very seldom seen discussed is the issue of building
workstations as furniture. The original Alto was a desk; this
approach does not seem to have been followed up by successors. It has
advantages. For one thing, one can get the damn keyboard at the
proper height! Also, by designing the workstation and the human work
surfaces as a unit, one can ensure that there is enough horizontal
surface near the display/keyboard for spreading papers -- something
that many work environments are badly short on. One can certainly
meet these needs with a separate piece of furniture, but it starts to
be so heavily customized that it might as well be an integral part of
the workstation. Or so I speculate.
Has anyone done work along these lines? I would be very interested to
hear any ideas people have on pros and cons.
------------------------------
Date: Sun Apr 18 20:04:21 1982
From: decvax!utzoo!henry at Berkeley
Subject: recommended reading
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.
The April issue of Byte has an **excellent** article on user-interface
design by the designers of the software of the Xerox Star. One may
not like the precise interface they came up with, but the exposition
of basic principles is extremely good.
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂26-Apr-82 1145 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #48
∂24-Apr-82 0007 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #48
Date: 24 Apr 1982 0025-EST
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #48
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Works Digest Saturday, 24 Apr 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 48
Today's Topics: Osbourne 1 Query
Color Monitor Information
Workstations as Furniture
Comments on this WorkStations Digest
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 21 Apr 1982 1338-MST
From: Pendleton at UTAH-20 (Bob Pendleton)
Subject: osbourne 1 query
I am looking for information about the osbourne 1 portable computer.
Any information about quality, reliability, and usability from people
who have used one would be appreciated. Please reply directly to me
Pendleton@utah-20
Thank You
Bob P.
------------------------------
Date: 21 Apr 82 14:06-PDT
From: rubin at SRI-TSC
Subject: Color monitor info
Attached are the responses I got to my color monitor query. I have
also done some scouting on my own, with these results:
1. Amdek and Electrohome make monitors for about $1000. At
80x25, white characters are fuzzy as compared to a normal
A/N terminal. Otherwise, the pictures look OK. You can
get these at Computerland; the folks there seem to favor
the Electrohome monitor.
2. Barco makes a monitor (CD-33 HR) that normally goes for
$1590 from the distributor. It has a .31mm pitch tube but
the video bandwidth is only 7 Mhz! For this reason, an
80x25 screen is not too crisp here either, although it is a
little better than on the Amdek or Electrohome. They say a
newer version at the same price will be available in
September with 15 Mhz bandwidth. However, for a limited
time (due to overstock) you can get one of the current
CD-33 HRs for $ 795 from the distributor in Santa Clara
(408-727-1506). Note that an adapter for hooking up to
your PC is $100 extra.
3. Hitachi's HM 2713 is the sharpest of the monitors I saw
($1900), and is also by far the bulkiest. You'll need
plenty of desk space for this one! Unlike Barco, they
don't supply adapters for the popular PCs, so be ready to
invent your own.
Before you buy a monitor, make sure you know how to interface it to
your PC. Each PC and monitor seems to have its own unique type of
connector and signal outs, so special adapters are usually required.
The IBM PC adds a wrinkle in that extra electronics are needed in the
adapter if you want to use the PC's intensity line to get all 16
colors (Amdek and Electrohome now have this circuitry built in). I
did find one company (M&R, San Jose) that is working on a "universal"
adapter that will accommodate most of the combinations you're likely
to come up with; it will supposedly support the IBM's intensity line,
too. Their number is (408) 980-0160. Look for the product in about 6
weeks.
Good luck,
Darryl
----------
Date: 19 Apr 1982 13:55 EST
Sender: Marshall.WBST at PARC-MAXC
From: Marshall.WBST
Via: Parc-Maxc.ARPAnet; 19 Apr 82 10:57-PDT
We've had good luck with monitors from
Electrohome Electronics
809 Wellington St. N.,
Kitchener, Ontario
Canada. N2G4J6
Telephone (519) 744-7111
These are 13" diagonal OEM monitors (model G09) without an enclosure
and require isolation transformers. They take RGB and scan standard
525 TV resolution. They would easily do 750 x 550 with single pixel
resolution. Cost about $1000.
--Sidney
----------
Date: 19 Apr 1982 12:20 PST
From: Pasco at PARC-MAXC
Via: Parc-Maxc.ARPAnet; 19 Apr 82 12:21-PDT
We bought a bunch of Hitachi HM-2713C monitors for use in VLSI design
workstations, and are quite satisfied. The color rendition is
excellent, but the maximum brightness is somewhat less than on your
retail Trinitron CRT. The works-in-a-drawer makes adjustments super
easy.
We did have one minor problem which is that our computers don't
generate equalizing pulses as part of the composite sync signal, and
this meant we need Hitachi's electronics board to be Rev. level I or
later. Despite our specifying this on our order, some of the monitors
we received were Rev. G and H. Their local office was most
supportive, and sent a Hitachi representative here and to change all
the boards for us.
Richard Pasco
----------
Date: 17 Apr 82 19:10:49 EST (Sat)
From: decvax!duke!unc!wm at Berkeley
Via: Sri-Nsc11.ARPAnet; 19 Apr 82 18:29-PDT
I have used both mitsi and barco monitors. As far as I know the tubes
(at least) are all made by the same company. (Barco does make some of
their crt's, but not in that line). I have always liked barco
monitors the best. I know people who swear by them (like NYIT).
------------------------------
Date: 22 Apr 1982 (Thursday) 2132-EDT
From: ROSSID at Wharton-10 (David Rossien)
Subject: Workstations as Furniture & Ramblings
Having spent the past several days on several workstations (I don't
have my own Star, but rather a Datapoint, so when I need a Star I have
to use someone else's... each person configures their furniture
differently, so I have had some problems) I have the following
comments about workstations as furniture:
IF people followed basic ergonomics and furniture design, like
allowing plenty of room for the mouse (Star specific, but fill in
whatever you want), plenty of room for papers next to the
workstation, realized that desk height is not good for typing
(something which any secretary knows, and secretary's desks are
built with that in mind), THEN there would be know need for
workstations as furniture, and in fact I would not be for it,
because I might want mine arranged differently than would be
provided (for lefties, for instance).
However, people don't seem smart enough to know all that, and
therefore their attempts at placement of workstations stinks.
Personally I figure they deserve it, but when I have to work at a
workstation they designed (or more often didn't design) I can't
stand it!
There are companies, like Steelcase, which make generic workstation
desks which work fine... but they are EXPENSIVE (I have one for my
Datapoint). Also, they can't handle certain specific peripheral like
RIMs (Datapoint network access boxes), file servers, etc.
There are people who feel workstations will never get on the
executive's desks till they are available in walnut grain... I am not
sure they really ought to be on the executive's desk in the first
place (executive means the HEAD people, not "managers"), and if we are
dealing with a smart enough executive he/she will take whatever given
IF you can PROVE it will HELP.
My boss is giving a presentation (that I'm writing for him) to DP type
managers and applications planners. There are some topice covered in
the talk that I think are relevant to this Newletter. He will say:
o The interface to mainframes will alter from terminals
to multifunction workstations.
o This leads to many users who might at first used only a
single application (like a database manager) take a broader
view and start using many applications like word processing,
graphics, electronic mail, etc.
o Therefore, applications planners lives become more complex
since its hard to judge resource requirements of new, naive,
experimenting users, who are using computers to do their
jobs, not for production runs.
o Finally (and for this audience this is so revolutionary
he isn't sure he's gonna say it yet), the DP functions of
the computer (like database management, numerical calculations,
modeling, etc.) will occupy only a teeny fraction (say 10-20%)
of the usage of the workstation... office functions like
storage/retrieval, word processing, mail, activity management
(personal calendars, etc.) will be what users user most. We
Have found, forinstance, that the most used programs, by
an order of magnitude, are that text editors on our DEC,
not the compilers, etc.
-Dave
------------------------------
Date: 22 Apr 1982 1142-EST
From: WITTMAN at RU-GREEN
Subject: WorkS
I've been reading the WorkS list for my daily entertainment, and find
it fascinating and enlightening. (Thanks). What moves me to write is
reference to a "language & mind set" theory regarding languages
(attributed to Whorf).
An issue of "Science 81" contained an article about Language,
maintaining that research had demonstrated that people whose first
language was Japanese performed certain processing on one side of the
brain whereas all others performed those tasks on the other side of
the brain and implied that Language may indeed impose on the PHYSICAL
structure of the brain. If this is true, there are frightening
prospects for creating languages which will eliminate the need for
genetic engineering in some sense, but that really isn't the point;
the question is how much relevance might this have to "first
programing language" (an influence which may grow worse as younger and
younger children are exposed to primitive programing languages).
I don't know what Genius is, but perhaps it's the ability to rise
above environment. I don't claim to be up to the intellectual power
of the WorkS list personnel, but I'm supposed to be fairly
intelligent; and I find it difficult to change environments; even when
the new environment has some VERY nice features, I find an immense
number of things I no longer know how to do, and have a feeling I'm
not using the new system as it was intended (until I really ABSORB it
which takes a long time). (As an example, I once tried to write a
program in APL with very little exposure; it looked like FORTRAN. I
also know some very bright people who STILL express certain concepts
in 709x assembler. And apparently the "A, B language order tests"
indicate my difficulty shifting gears is not due exclusively to my own
intellectual shortcomings).
What I expected to see in the WorkS discussion were abstract
discussions of what a WorkStation was. What I have seen are:
1. Occasional irrelevancies (eg, the Header gripes, which
detract from the information content)
2. Semi-relevancies (eg, discussion of a particular Micro, OS or
communications system, which aren't really relevant but which
I find rather educational)
3. Advertisements and criticisms of various extant systems
(probably part of the above item; also very interesting, but
perhaps not germane)
4. A little theory now and then (which I thought was what this
group was all about). (And I don't know if Whorf fits in
this category or not).
I would frankly lose a lot if Items 2 and 3 above disappeared, but I
wonder if they should be such a focus. At Rutgers, our CS program
uses languages as illustrative lab tools to practice general
principles taught in class, but rarely focuses on the language itself.
I wonder if WorkS mightn't be more satisfying to some of its
participants if the products cited were used only as examples to
illustrate some general principle of what a WorkStation should be.
The intellectual Power of this group (which I don't claim to be up to)
is likely to be one of the few places one might find a collection of
"genius" which can rise above "what is" and talk more about "what
ought". I've seen a lot of (kind of hidden) complaints about that,
and I wonder if it's not part of the "language" problem; also, we can
only criticize or laud what we know - some members may not have been
exposed to Everything (there's so MUCH of it) and are trapped into
advocating a buzzword (eg, UNIX) instead of a concept (performing
function FERN, in a UNIX-like way).
I think the pragmatic advice transmitted about what systems exist and
what they do is invaluable to people who actually have to choose
systems to work with (probably all of us), but I hear an undercurrent
of discontent, so I've taken a selfish position: I want to continue
to be amused (highest sense: entertained and enlightened) by this
Digest, and don't want to see anyone get discouraged and go away.
By the way, all I know about a WorkStation is that it appears to be a
semi-private or private mini-environment tailored to getting your
particular tasks done.
Thanks, People. Sorry for the intrusion.
Barry Wittman (Spectator)
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂26-Apr-82 1149 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #49
∂25-Apr-82 1943 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #49
Date: 25 Apr 1982 2125-EDT
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #49
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Works Digest Sunday, 25 Apr 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 49
Today's Topics: What WorkStations Aren't
PlayStation?
WorkStations as Desks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 24 Apr 1982 08:13:48-PST
From: mo at LBL-UNIX (Mike O'Dell [system])
Subject: what workstations aren't
Here at LBL I am finishing up serving on an administrative committee
called COWPEM (Committee on Word Processing and Electronic Mail).
[More humorous versions of the acronym have come to mind.] Anyway, we
were supposed to develop a Lab-wide position on the above topics.
Since the WP business is such a mess, we looked at Electronic Mail.
We looked at many of the systems being hawked by various outfits and
ruminated for a while.
The general result was rather interesting. Instead of trying to
recommend something (which we think was what was desired) or producing
a "Requirements Document", we produced a set of criteria which any
mail system must not violate. We found this much easier than
thinking of everything we want or might want electronic mail to
encompass. The process is also adaptive: the set of criteria will
evolve and become more specific as we see and use more and more
systems.
Now, how come this is on WorkS and not Info-EM or some such? The
point is the process. For dealing with new technologies in general
(and Workstations are such), we have found it useful to sketch such a
set of anti-social criteria and then explore the resulting space.
This is a case where enumerating the compliment set is much easier.
As we find other things we want X NOT to do, we add them to the set.
Otherwise, we feel we will unintentionally isolate ourselves from new
things.
While this position may be of no interest to us computer science
people, sometimes getting this new technology in the door rests on our
being able to make a case for "what good it does". Plans like the one
I just outlined can be useful for that, as well as dealing with an
administrator who says "Why can we just get one thing for everyone and
then it is all compatible?"
So anybody have any ideas what a workstation isn't?
(Besides a z80 and CP/M.) -- ONLY JOKING!!!!!
-Mike
PS - If anyone wants to see our list of non-acceptability criteria for
Mail systems, I can submit it to the digest or mail it directly.
------------------------------
Date: 24 April 1982 14:49-EST
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM at MIT-MC>
Subject: Playstation?
It occurs to me that the very word "workstation" implies that the
device is used only for work (something you're getting paid for, or
something you consider to be drudgery, or something that you believe
is benefitting the world in some way). What if you want to play, like
play games with other people or with the computer, or send messages of
a friendly rather than business nature such as making appointments to
get together for playing games or making love or having dinner
together? Am I to assume these non-work activities are somehow
impossible due to the design of a WORK station? (Perhaps you don't
personally own a work station, your employer does, and everything you
do is logged and summarized and analyzed by the computer and a report
of your activities is sent to your supervisor who can confiscate your
WORK sation if it is used for any non-productive tasks?)
I'd rather have a personal computer-system, i.e. a computer-system
that is available for my personal use, tied into a personal
computer-network, that is a computer-network that is available for
arbitrary personal use, not restricted to work-related tasks only,
which connects me with other personal computer-systems (and with WORK
stations of those poor unfortunate workers who aren't allowed to
play).
When I'm riding the bus, sometimes I wish I had a flat display I could
prop between my lap and the seat in front of me, with capabilities of
displaying a Go board and managing a Go game between myself and either
a computer program or some other person via a radio-linked compute
network. As the bus passes within range of a repeater, data
communication is established and the other person's move comes to me.
Then I think and move, and as soon as I'm within range of another
repeater my move is transmitted outward and then this cycle repeats.
The computer would handle error correction and re-establishing
contact. If we were out of contact for a while it would seem to me
like the other player was taking a long time to make a move. I could
be locally analyzing variations using my display as a scratchpad while
waiting for the earphone to beep indicating the other player's move
had finally come. Or I could be doing WORK or catching up on my
electronic mail. But with a WORK&PLAY-station I'd have the choice.
------------------------------
Date: 24 Apr 1982 2127-EST
From: Ron Fischer <FISCHER at RUTGERS>
Subject: Workstations as desks
An interesting observation was made along these lines by Gregory Yob
in Creative Computing. He suggested that an entire desk surface might
be a graphics display.
This sounds like a very neat idea. Combine a four by three foot
graphic display mounted in a desktop, tilted at a comfortable angle,
with a small keyboard, and pen-like pointing device with some window
support software. That seems like part of a nice environment. You
could shuffle papers (or icons if it gets designed by Xerox) just like
normal. If the display surface could be made sensitive enough, and
you didn't have to do much typing, a keyboard could probably just be
drawn on the surface when needed.
Since terminal displays are getting larger it might become more
logical to build them into desktops.
Anybody know if we could make one of these nowadays? Are there limits
to the size of a plasma display?
(ron)
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂28-Apr-82 1012 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #50
∂27-Apr-82 2333 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #50
Date: 28 Apr 1982 0147-EDT
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #50
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Works Digest Wednesday, 28 Apr 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 50
Today's Topics: What WorkStations Aren't
Data Security?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 25 April 1982 23:38-EST
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM at MIT-MC>
Subject: what workstations aren't
To: mo at LBL-UNIX
Most importantly, a work station must not destroy my efforts via
crashes that lose the file I was editing at the time of the crash or
via inadvertant deletions of files that can't be undone or via editor
commands that run amok and can't be undone, nor even frequently lose
keystrokes due to not being fast enough to keep up with my typing.
Also it must not punish me severely for mistakes I make. If I make a
simple mistake I don't want to have to spend 15 minutes trying to find
out how to get back to where I was just before the mistake, or worse
having no way whatsoever to get back except by manually repairing the
damage such as by retyping text that was accidently altered.
------------------------------
Date: 26 Apr 82 23:08:54-EDT (Mon)
From: Michael Muuss <mike@BRL>
Subject: Data Security?
The conclusion I have reached so far is that permissions need to be
taylored to the needs of the organization sub-element being served:
*) Service organizations & Administrators are naturally (and often
necessarily) secretive.
*) Research organizations are generally ultra-open, even when placed
inside a fence.
QUESTION: What is the proper amount of "data hiding" for a diverse
organization which has large needs in both the Administrative and in
the Scientific departments for the benefits of (ahem) "Workplace
Automation"? And, what kinds of openness can we permit for our
intermediate work?
Starting Suggestion: Contemplate the MULTICS "Rings of Protection"
type concept. Extend it to the "Venn Diagram" environment where
different rings may have to overlap.
Computer←Science Question: What type of protection system
(theoretical or implemented) properly allows for the full range of
protection, and accounts for organizational oddities such as:
Secretaries
Team Leaders
Phone Answerers
People in more than one defined "Project"
Rapid changes in all of the above
????????????
-Mike
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------
∂03-May-82 1923 AVB WORKS Digest V2 #51
∂02-May-82 2345 Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS> WORKS Digest V2 #51
Date: 3 May 1982 0031-EDT
From: Mel Pleasant <WORKS at RUTGERS>
Subject: WORKS Digest V2 #51
Sender: PLEASANT at RUTGERS
To: WorkS: ;
Reply-To: WORKS at RUTGERS
Works Digest Monday, 3 May 1982 Volume 2 : Issue 51
Today's Topics: Computer and WorkStation Security
Protection Systems (an Implementation)
Cost Driven Architectures
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 29 Apr 1982 17:13:03 EDT (Thursday)
From: Carl D. Howe <cdh at BBN-UNIX>
Subject: computer and workstation security
Date: 26 Apr 82 23:08:54-EDT (Mon)
From: Michael Muuss <mike@BRL>
Subject: Data Security?
. . . .
QUESTION: What is the proper amount of "data
hiding" for a diverse organization which has large
needs in both the Administrative and in the Scientific
departments for the benefits of (ahem) "Workplace
Automation"? . . . .
Starting Suggestion: Contemplate the MULTICS "Rings of
Protection" type concept. Extend it to the "Venn
Diagram" environment where different rings may have to
overlap.
Computer←Science Question: What type of protection
system (theoretical or implemented) properly allows for
the full range of protection, and accounts for
organizational oddities such as:
Secretaries
Team Leaders
Phone Answerers
People in more than one defined "Project"
Rapid changes in all of the above
I believe that you have lumped two separate protection
mechanisms provided by Multics into the term "rings of protection".
As implemented in Multics, rings of protection simply allow a
multi-level operating system in a similar spirit to the T.H.E. system
designed by Edsger Dijkstra [1]. Ring 0 contains a minimal kernel
with infinite privileges, Ring 1 contains more functionality, but
fewer privileges, etc. until you get down to Ring 4 or 5 here the
user's program sits. The nice things about this sort of system is
that it allows the structure of your operating system to correspond
directly to your levels of abstraction in its design. It's an
excellent design tool, but doesn't really provide any security in and
of itself other than protection of the operating system, and denial of
access to sensitive entry points and system routines. Rings also
provide for the creation of "protected subsystems" that can
implement further security measures.
The Multics protection mechanism that does provide an excellent
form of security for large multilevel organizations is the use of
access lists at the segmentation level. To access a segment, you must
be on the access list for that segment when you try to open it. If
you are on the access list, you are given a segment descriptor and
then can use the segment according to the privileges granted you in
the access list. If you are not on the list, you are denied access.
The check of the access list is done both by user name and project
name, so you can have different privileges depending upon what project
you are currently working on. This system bears some similarity to
the government's security system, where you are only granted access to
a classified document if you are specifically on the access list; all
other requests are denied. This system provides a great deal of
flexibility because it does not require security to be hierarchical.
Cases where access must cross project or organizational boundaries can
be accommodated by changing access lists.
Unfortunately, in workstations, the problem is made more
complicated by the distributed nature of the system. Clearly,
protection mechanisms placed in the workstation are ineffective if the
user can change those mechanisms by modifying the operating system or
writing stand-alone programs. Requests sent over a local network to a
centralized file server may require some sort of authentication to
assure that one user is not masquerading as another to gain access to
material that s/he should not have. Sensitive data sent back over
the network may be picked up by other "promiscuous" workstations that
should not be granted access. Finally, any software or hardware
mechanisms you use to assure security may be totally ineffective if
you don't assure physical security of the system (e.g. immunity to
wiretapping, nasty people who patch programs from the front panel of
the machine, etc).
All in all, Multics provides some excellent mechanisms, but
when incorporated into the workstation environment, these mechanisms
must be used in the context of a complete security system, including
network security. Network security is a problem that is at least as
complex as computer system security and has its own collection of
mechanisms. For an excellent treatment of the network security
problem, see Steve Kent's book chapter [3].
Carl
-------
References:
[1] Dijkstra, Edsger W., "The Structure of the
"THE"-Multiprogramming System", Communications of the ACM, 11(5), pp.
341-346, May, 1968.
[2] Schroeder, Michael D. and Saltzer, Jerome H., "A Hardware
Architecture for Implementing Protection Rings", CACM, 15(3), pp.
157-170, March, 1972.
[3] Kent, Stephen T., "Security in Computer Networks", part of
Protocols & Techniques for Data Communications Networks editted by
Franklin F. Kuo, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1981.
------------------------------
Date: 1 May 1982 (Saturday) 2048-EDT
From: ROSSID at Wharton-10 (David Rossien)
Subject: Protection systems (an implementation)
The Dialcom Tickler program, which is a personal and group calendar
management, scheduler, tickler, diary program from Dialcom
International (Silver Spring, MD) running on a Prime 750/780 has 13
levels of "protection", taking into account Secretaries, Bosses,
Bosses-bosses, peers, project leaders of one project but not of others
that you are doing, other people in a project but not in all projects,
etc. It is VERY complex, but they have some programs which
conversationally ask for the relationships of users and then create
the protection levels for you. Kinda neat... I have been told,
though, by Dialcom sales reps that only about 3 levels are used:
Peer - Can see times I'm busy, can't know what I'm doing unless
specifically allowed (can switch it so default is can always
see what I'm doing unless not allowed)
Boss - Can see times, what I'm doing unless private or personal
(lunch with secretary at Sleepy Hollow Motel), and can add
things without my permission (so boss can stuff something
on my calendar w/o asking me first)
Secty- Can see times I'm busy, can see what I'm doing, can
"tentatively" add things (are marked as added by secretary),
unless I'm said no.
-Dave
------------------------------
Date: 2 May 1982 1141-PDT
From: CAULKINS at USC-ECL
Subject: Cost Driven Architectures
I (Dave Caulkins) am the manager of the data processing facilities for
a small SF Peninsula startup; we have a V7 UNIX running in an Onyx and
a CP/M based system running in a Dirac, manufactured by Molecular
Engineering. It's this last machine I'd like to talk about. Its
architecture is interesting - a 34MB hard disk with a smart
controller, talking to up to 32 Z80-with-65K-RAM processors via a
parallel CSMA bus. See the Dirac Description below for detailed size
and cost numbers. Each user gets his own processor and 65K, and in
consequence adding users doesn't degrade performance nearly as much as
in a system in which one central processor dances around among 8 - 32
users. We've done some loading studies, and under medium load
conditions (15 users all working with files >65K via an editor) the
users-vs-response-time curve is almost flat. Under high load
conditions (each user requsting a large number of disk accesses per
second) the curve is roughly linear from 3 out to 15 users.
The Dirac doesn't quite make it. CP/M is nice in that there is a
great deal of 3rd party software available, some of which is good
quality (caveat emptor !). The CP/M file structure is painfully
primitive and hard to work with.
I think an attractive architecture would be as follows: A UNIX based
multiprocessor with 68000-and-512K per user, with 80 - 160 MB of
common hard disk available to all users. The 68000-and-512K ought to
be doable for less than $2K. Such a system should offer a very
attractive multi-user work station environment for a lot less than
CEI, Fortune, or others of the $5K standalone UNIX workstation flavor.
Standalone devices have a significant part of their cost in the case,
keyboard, CRT, and other non-computer elements. The terminal
manufacturers are beginning to do reasonable designs and realize good
economies of scale; seems to me that the natural division between
workstation terminal and computational resources offers real cost
adavantages.
Does anyone know of a company that has or is planning a system like
this?
Dirac Description
Cost: $15K for the basic box - 34MB disk, disk controller, power
supplies, 8" floppy drive and slots for 32 Application Processors
(APs); one required for each user. APs cost $1K each, less in
quantity. The AP price is rather high - manufacturing cost is
certainly well under $200.
Size: basic box - 24" high x 12.5" wide x 31" deep.
AP - 4" x 9"; 44 ICs
This may be where Dirac went astray. They put a lot of effort in
making the system quite small; the AP board is very tight. I for one
wouldn't mind a system 2X or 3X as big, but with the enhanced
capability discussed above.
------------------------------
End of WorkS Digest
*******************
-------