HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: morris@grian.cps.altadena.ca.us (Mike Morris)
Subject: Re: You know when you're hacking too long when...
Organization: College Park Software, Altadena, CA
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 17:26:56 GMT

mkkuhner@phylo.genetics.washington.edu (Mary K. Kuhner) writes:

>'Just a patty' is not that uncommon an order, according to my husband,
>an ex-McDonalds' employee.  He speculates that many are fed to dogs,
>though not all of them.  One wonders if this can still reasonably be
>described as a hamburger....'Just buns' also occurs.  Never had anyone 
>ask for 'just mayo' or 'just pickles', though.

Back when I was night manager for a local Jack-in-the-Box (would it
date me if I said they still had the clown - and pre-air conditioning?)
there was a standard item on the outside menu board - the "K9".  It was
three plain patties cooked medium rare and delivered in a french fry tray
(back when they had trays instead of bags).  Price? 49 cents.

About a year ago I went back to the same store with my collie and my
husky-lab in the back of my truck and ordered two K9s.  I got a blank
stare.  The manager happened to be on the counter and I remarked that
when I was manager we had a menu item called a K9.  He said he'd been
there for 5 years and had never heard of it....  I explained what I
wanted and got it - $2 each.  

BTW: Anybody find it <sarcastic funny> that Jack is supplied by
Foodmaker - a division of Purina?

-- 
Mike Morris   WA6ILQ   | This space intentionally left blank.
PO Box 1130            | 
Arcadia, CA. 91077     | All opinions must be my own since nobody pays
818-447-7052 evenings  | me enough to be their mouthpiece...
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
From: IQTI400@INDYCMS.IUPUI.EDU (macphil)
Subject: Re: The need for an assembler (was: Favorite CPU)
Organization: IUPUI
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 08:39:29 EST

In article <Q95JNID@taronga.com>
peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
 
>is... I've written code in Forth that's run without change on HP, DEC,
>Intel, and Signetics processors. And Forth certainly qualifies as a tight
>language... most Forth programs are *smaller* than assembly equivalents.
 
Especially considering the early Forth environments could fit everything
(incl. o/s) into 7K or less...we used to have contests to see who could
write a FORTH compiler the fastest on rainy days back in college...
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
From: adamsd@crash.cts.com (Adams Douglas)
Subject: Re: Urban Legend in the Makin
Date: 9 Sep 92 04:09:17 GMT

Both _Voyage_ and the _Time_Tunnel_ used mostly prop panels constructed
at the studio (20th Century Fox). I visited both sets in the 60's and
looked behind them. They were mostly just lights and sets of relays to
do the blinking, and motors mounted behind the fake tape reels.

The piece of paper always seeming to come out of a slot on the Voyage
computer had a simple sine wave drawn on it. The Time Tunnel master
consoles had real audio oscillators mounted on the so the wavy
lissajous figures on the monitors would visibly change when the actors
manipulated the controls.

Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.periphs,comp.unix.xenix.misc,comp.os.cpm,nz.comp
Subject: Unix on tired iron - info needed about Altos box
From: lesley@cavebbs.welly.gen.nz (Lesley Walker)
Date: Sun, 06 Sep 92 03:14:45 GMT
Followup-To: comp.periphs,comp.unix.xenix.misc
Organization: The Cave MegaBBS, Public Access Usenet, Wellington, NZ

sarr@sinshan.citi.umich.edu (Sarr J. Blumson) writes:
>
>In 1982 we were running Xenix on 8086 boxes from
>Altos (with an Altos proprietary memory manager) and their own UNIX
>port on the Onyx Z-8000 machines mentioned earlier.  Both were 512k
>machines, and both worked well.

That first one sounds like a machine I am currently trying to repair.

Does anyone have any technical information about the Altos 586?

My immediate problem is with the floppy drive.  I bought a replacement
floppy drive for the one that died while I was trying to replace the
crashed hard disc... 

The good news is, it is possible to boot up from the new floppy. 

The bad news is, the system will only read from the floppy if the drive is 
already spinning when the read attempt is made.  Eg, the first boot attempt 
fails, but the second works, as long as the second attempt starts while the 
floppy is still spinning from the previous attempt. 

The question: Is there some way I can wire up the floppy drive so that the 
motor is always spinning as long as the power is on?  (I realise this is a 
horrible solution, but it's the easiest I can think of) 

Or is there some sort of Drive Ready signal that I can fake somehow? Would 
any of the jumpers on the drive have anything do with it? 

The drive is 5.25" quad density made by Mitsubishi and it has jumpers on it
labelled MX, HS, HM.  There is a jumper in the HS position.


(I have cross-posted fairly widely, and redirected followups to comp.periphs
and comp.unix.xenix.misc, as this hardly qualifies as a folklore question)

Replies by email would be appreciated, as the system I am posting from
expires articles *very* quickly and I could easily miss something important.


-- 
  -=- The Leather Goddess (aka Lesley Walker) -=- Wellington, New Zealand -=-
        lesley@cavebbs.welly.gen.nz                      Vote for MMP!
   DoD#258 -=- Yamaha XV1000 -=- Yamaha XS650 -=- Ford Cortina -=- Altos 586
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.unix.misc
From: lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner)
Subject: Re: The need for an assembler (was: Favorite CPU)
Reply-To: lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 07:55:44 GMT

In article <MJN.92Sep5010951@pseudo.uucp> mjn@pseudo.uucp (Murray Nesbitt) writes:
>
>You are "apparently ignorant" of the fact that many people choose to
>run something a little more powerful than MSDOS on top of their
>powerful hardware.  I think this was Peter's point.
>
The argument is now apparent.  This group's "skewed" nature is such that it
believes by egocentricity that it is representative of the world.  In the
Real World (tm) the *vast* majority of PC's are running MS-DOS, DR-DOS, and
maybe Windows on top of either of them.  A small smattering of them are
running OS/2 as file servers for the DOS machines, typically running
Microsoft LANmanager, or alternatively Novell Netware as a server, or a
hodge-podge of other manufacturers' similar products (Banyan Vines, 3-COM,
Ungerman-Bass, IBM-Token-ring, etc., not in order of usage).  There are
*extremely few* machines running some flavor of unix/zenix.

Wasn't Peter the one who said he felt no need to have/use a PC?  He therefore
is the most appropriate person to ask about which software is used on which
PC's that are out there.

obFACT: most PC's are *not* on internet.

cjl
From: jimf@centerline.com (Jim Frost)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: The need for an assembler (was: Favorite CPU)
Date: 14 Sep 1992 19:30:17 GMT
Organization: CenterLine Software, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 140.239.3.202

"Joseph M. Newcomer" <jn11+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>(and before you start shouting "640K turkey machine", remember that
>a nontrivial performance problem in most modern machines is still the
>impact of the working set on the paging traffic, or at least it was on
>my 32MB RS6000)

Yea, but a lot of that's because of IBM's great skill in VM management
and their nifty tightly-coded kernel.

Please read this with the utmost sarcasm, and remember that it is my
own opinion (not that of my company or anyone else) after more than
two years of battling with AIX.

I never could understand why the machine thrashes when the entire job
set is smaller than available real memory.

jim frost
jimf@centerline.com
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.unix.misc
From: lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner)
Subject: Re: The need for an assembler (was: Favorite CPU)
Reply-To: lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 07:41:02 GMT

In article <YR3JPIG@taronga.com> peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>In article <1992Sep8.075544.25771@news.columbia.edu> lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner) writes:
>>The argument is now apparent.  This group's "skewed" nature is such that it
>>believes by egocentricity that it is representative of the world.
>
>Unfortunately, no.

But you are admitting that you would personally want to speak for it!

>
>>In the
>>Real World (tm) the *vast* majority of PC's are running MS-DOS, DR-DOS, and
>>maybe Windows on top of either of them.
>
>Frightening, isn't it. If IBM had chosen ANY other existing operating
>system they might be running something real.

Non-responsive commentary doesn't refute the post. The statement stands as
to what *is*, not your opinion of what you think *ought* to be.

>
>>A small smattering of them are
>>running OS/2 as file servers for the DOS machines, typically running
>>Microsoft LANmanager, or alternatively Novell Netware as a server, or a
>>hodge-podge of other manufacturers' similar products (Banyan Vines, 3-COM,
>>Ungerman-Bass, IBM-Token-ring, etc., not in order of usage).  There are
>>*extremely few* machines running some flavor of unix/zenix.
>
>>Wasn't Peter the one who said he felt no need to have/use a PC?
>
>An *IBM-PC*. I have three "PCs": two Amigas (a 3000 and a 1000) and a Mac.

As I said, ask the man who doesn't have one to give an opinion about them.

Your majority of one response is as consistent.  Don't resort to a pedantic
terminology argument; no one else is trying to redefine what the term
"pc" means in this world.  Whether any of us like or don't like the use of the
word, the argument has nothing to do with your preference for how you want
to label things.

>I don't have any interest in wasting my time trying to get that damn
>abortion that calls itself an operating system to do what I need. I spent
>several years on it, and that's enough. There are enough talented individuals
>out there willing to reinvent the wheel over and over and over again to
>ensure that the supply of MS-DOS software will never dry out, but that
>doesn't mean MS-DOS is anything but an obscene parody of CP/M, without
>even the excuse of limited resources to account for its essential barren
>nature.
>
>The green revolution has proved that with enough effort even dtrip-mined
>and poisoned deserts can be made to flower, but I prefer not to live in one.

No one's asking you to; just admit that the vast majority of the real world
of PC's and your opinions have no common basis in fact.

>
>>obFACT: most PC's are *not* on internet.
>
>Most *anything* is not on the Internet.
>-- 
>                                                                `-_-'
>                         Have you hugged your wolf today?        'U`
>
>Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  +1 713 568 0480/1032

cjl

Xref: sparky alt.folklore.computers:13722 comp.dcom.modems:13080
From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Disconnect Phantom
Keywords: Knock it off!!
Date: 7 Sep 92 16:21:43 GMT
Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.

rdippold@qualcom.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) writes:

>gsroka@leland.Stanford.EDU (Gregory Sroka) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep4.091759.4300@nntp.hut.fi> tsand@vipunen.hut.fi (Tapio Sand) writes:
>>>                                                           tsand@vipunen.hut.fi
>>>TEX disconnects, dial again for another session.
>>>D;+vC)?iH%"
>>>NO CARRIER
>>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>Keep this crap out of your posts!!

>>For those not dialing in on modems - it makes my modem think the session
>>has ended. When I reconnect - I find that the session is still active.
>>Has this caused anyone else any problems, like disconnecting without properly
>>logging out and closing the session? 
>>Flames, jokes, sarcasm, etc. are the expected hazards of participating
>>in the newsgroups, but keep your posts off of our hardware!!!!!!

>Good lord - it looks like we have actually found a terminal program
>that's stupid enough to think "NO CARRIER" really means the connection
>has ended.  It's been talked about here, but nobody thought anyone was
>still using one.

I ran into someone with the same complaint a few years back on a local BBS.
After much back and forth, we determined that it was more a matter of his
having *massively* misconfigured his terminal program. 

-- 
Leonard Erickson		      leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com
CIS: [70465,203]			 70465.203@compuserve.com
FIDO:   1:105/51	 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)
Xref: sparky alt.folklore.computers:13627 comp.unix.misc:3516
From: dnichols@ceilidh.beartrack.com (Don Nichols (DoN.))
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: The need for an assembler (was: Favorite CPU)
Date: 5 Sep 92 02:28:17 GMT
Organization: D & D Data

In article <1992Sep3.091928.22081@news.columbia.edu> lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner) writes:
>In article <id.7MVS.5EK@ferranti.com> peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug31.162630.23913@news.columbia.edu> lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner) writes:
>>> This is patently wrong.  I write for the 8086/8088 model as do most people.
>>
>>I see. You give up about a decimal order of magnitude in performance when
>>dealing with objects larger than 64K in a protected mode O/S so you can save
>>a factor of *maybe* 2 over C, for the compute-bound portion of your code only,
>>on MS-DOS.
>>
>>> It runs on 8088, 8086, 80186, 80188, 80286, 80386SX, 80386DX, 80486SX,
>>> 80486DX, 80486DX2, and about 20 non-Intel clones from AMD, NEC, ULSI, TI,
>>> and a few other cpu clone maker's cpu's.
>>
>>I can guarantee you it won't run on *any* of my 80286 or 80386 or 80486 systems.
>>
>>But Ckermit will.
>
>Totally incorrect; just setup the descriptor tables and change the directives
>and a tiny amount of code and it does run in less time than it takes to
>recompile C-Kermit.  BTW, you are apparently ignorant of the dual .EXE files
>that implement the hack of dynamically making the changes so programs like
>this run under either real or protect mode.  PKZIP, which is largely written

	I suspect that what he is running is various unix implementations on
those Intel processors which he listed, and I suspect that you need more
than just the tweaks described above to make it work with the unix
filesystem and system calls in place of the MS-DOS/OS-2 versions.  I know
that I have had excellent experiences getting C-kermit to run on all my unix
platforms from old v7 through SysVr2 to BSD-4.2 and SunOs 4.1.1.

-- 
Donald Nichols (DoN.)     | Voice (Days): (703) 704-2280 (Eves): (703) 938-4564
D&D Data                  |  Email: <dnichols@ceilidh.beartrack.com>
I said it - no one else   |         <nichols@nvl.army.mil>
	--- Black Holes are where God is dividing by zero ---
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.unix.misc
From: peter@NeoSoft.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: The need for an assembler (was: Favorite CPU)
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 12:41:58 GMT

In article <1992Sep15.074102.25760@news.columbia.edu> lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner) writes:
> In article <YR3JPIG@taronga.com> peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
> >>Wasn't Peter the one who said he felt no need to have/use a PC?

> >An *IBM-PC*. I have three "PCs": two Amigas (a 3000 and a 1000) and a Mac.

> As I said, ask the man who doesn't have one to give an opinion about them.

> Your majority of one response is as consistent.  Don't resort to a pedantic
> terminology argument; no one else is trying to redefine what the term
> "pc" means in this world

OK, if you want to be a literal minded idiot:

I used to have an IBM-PC clone. I spent 6 years programming for it. I still
find myself forced to deal with them.

Anyone who actually prefers that programming environment must have a non-
technical reason for it. It has no technical merits whatsoever. If you want
a technical discussion, I'll be happy to engage in one. If you want to get
into political and marketing reasons for the dominance of the IBM-PC clones,
take it somewhere else.

I'm not the one who keeps pulling the debate off the technical merits of
C versus assembler or IBM-PC clones versus computers shipped with real
operating systems and decent hardware design. I do have a machine based
on the IBM-PC hardware. It's not a PC, though: it's a timeshared UNIX box.
Thanks to intel finally abandoning its attempt to force people to use
segments, it's possible to hide many of the worse aspects of the machine...
though I'm not at all happy with the hardware. You have to engage in really
obscene activities or spend lots of extra bucks on special hardware to do
basic things like support multiple disk controllers.

> No one's asking you to; just admit that the vast majority of the real world
> of PC's and your opinions have no common basis in fact.

Why? It'd be a lie.
-- 
Peter da Silva.  <peter@sugar.neosoft.com>.
 `-_-'   "Have you hugged your wolf today?"
  'U`
From: lowen@lorc.UUCP (Lamar Owen)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: Renumbering BASIC programs (was Re: Branching in HLL vs. Assembl
Date: 9 Sep 92 16:42:42 GMT
Organization: LORC Enterprises

rmtodd@servalan.servalan.com (Richard Todd) writes:

> jimf@centerline.com (Jim Frost) writes:
> >I could see his BASIC being from the TRS 80 I or II (both of which had
> >RENUM if I remember right) but it certainly wasn't Applesoft; you
> 
> Not the TRS-80 Model I (either Level I BASIC or Level II BASIC, nor any versi
> of Disk BASIC I ever saw from Tandy) as shipped from Tandy/Radio Shack.  
> Some third parties did have addons to the BASIC interpreter to add RENUM 
> (in addition to other things), notably Apparat as part of their NewDOS+ 
> package, but I don't believe it ever came standard from RS.

RS included a renum facility (as a CMD something) in model 3 TRSDOS 1.3. Or
maybe it was called NAME....  Apparat did a good job on NewDOS (yes, I
remember it... Remember the Greene Machine BBS???)... Eric Greene was my
neighbor in Atlanta for awhile....

> did.   Thinking back on it now, what Apparat sounds sorta familiar, sorta
> like the history of the development of BSD as an alternative to AT&T 
> Unix.  Fortunately for Apparat, Tandy never had the sort of lawyers AT&T
> does, though....

No, Tandy's problem was not lack of lawyers, but the arrogance that what
they did was the pinnacle of perfection and that any 3rd party OS would simply
be so totally inferior to what they were doing as to be ludicrous.  And
then they about-faced and turned the Model 4 OS over to LSI, who had been
producing LDOS.  Why did Tandy go with LDOS instead of NewDOS80 or Dosplus??
One very simple reason: LDOS was closer to what TRSDOS already was in terms
of syntactic philosophy (the use of parenthetical comma delimited random
order parameters instead of ordered comma delimited non-named parameters that
NewDOS uses).  Of course, LDOS could have used some of the flexibility of
NewDOS, such as the PDRIVE command or an equivalent.

> Richard Todd	rmtodd@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu  rmtodd@chinet.chi.il.us
>   rmtodd@servalan.uucp  New Improved Domain: rmtodd@servalan.servalan.com


--

Lamar Owen, Systems Consultant, GE Lighting Systems, Hendersonville, NC
***********************************************************************
 Opinions expressed herein are the author's and do not reflect policy
   or opinions of the General Electric Company or its subsidiaries.
***********************************************************************
From: dik@cwi.nl (Dik T. Winter)
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: Thoughts
Date: 15 Sep 92 01:07:52 GMT
Organization: CWI, Amsterdam

In article <1992Sep14.191821.5712@sei.cmu.edu> ae@sei.cmu.edu (Arthur Evans) writes:
 > "Joseph M. Newcomer" <jn11+@andrew.cmu.edu>, who usually gets things
 > right, said:
 >     Yes, Beechwood Boulevard connects to Forbes Avenue in three places
 > 
 > Well, no, it doesn't.  Beechwood crosses Forbes once and then swings
 > around and runs briefly (sort of) tangent to it, but there's not another
 > crossing.  "connects to" ??  Well, maybe...
 > 
 > On the other hand, there are two intersections of Beechwood and
 > Foreword.  And Monitor St has both ends on Beechwood and crosses it in
 > between.
 > 
I think it is time for a Postscript map of Pittsburg for all of us that
never have been there.
-- 
dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj  amsterdam, nederland
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn  amsterdam, nederland
dik@cwi.nl
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: Renumbering BASIC programs (was Re: Branching in HLL vs. Assembler)
From: alanb@sdl.mdcbbs.com (Alan Braggins)
Date: 10 Sep 92 09:23:00 GMT
Organization: Shape Data (Division of EDS), Cambridge UK
In-reply-to: david@cs.uow.edu.au's message of Thu, 10 Sep 1992 00:53:55 GMT

>>>>> On Thu, 10 Sep 1992 00:53:55 GMT, david@cs.uow.edu.au (David E A Wilson) said:

> dhembrow@eoe.co.uk (David Hembrow) writes:
>>stefang@isy.liu.se (Stefan Gustavson) writes:
>>: don@zl2tnm.gen.nz (Don Stokes) writes:
>>: >jeremy@sw.oz.au (Jeremy Fitzhardinge) writes:
>>: >> Ob brain twitch:  how can
>>: >> 1000 LET N=1000+A*1000
>>: >> be made to use less memory on a ZX Spectrum?

>>1000 LET N=VAL("(A+1)*1e3")

> 1000 LET N=VAL("A*1001") looks even shorter to me.

Yes, but it also gives the wrong answer.
--
Alan Braggins, Shape Data (A Division of EDS Ltd), Cambridge, UK +44-223-316673
   "Any technology distinguishable from magic is insufficiently advanced."
 "My employer does not necessarily share my views - but I'm working on it."
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.unix.misc
From: peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: The need for an assembler (was: Favorite CPU)
Organization: Taronga Park BBS
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 12:56:29 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.042704.21287@news.columbia.edu> lasner@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Charles Lasner) writes:
>The non-portability of code to incompatible architectures is well known and
>usually an acceptable tradeoff to writers of assembly code.

Translation:

	People who write applications in assembly code are people who
	are willing to trade off a factor of 10 or more in a few years
	for a factor of two in a portion of the code today.
-- 
                                                                `-_-'
                         Have you hugged your wolf today?        'U`

Peter da Silva, Taronga Park BBS, Houston, TX  +1 713 568 0480/1032
Xref: sparky alt.folklore.computers:13822 comp.unix.misc:3613