HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wmporter@jetson.uh.edu (William M. Porter)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.mac.comm
Subject: Re: What is a .hqx file?
Date: 6 Oct 92 20:27:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: jetson.6OCT199215270746
Organization: University of Houston
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Oct5.144800.22752@rock.concert.net>, toddwall@rock.concert.net
(R. Todd Wall -- Catholic Diocese of Raleigh -- Computer Services) writes...

>	On many of the FTPable sites there are files labeled .sit ..  I've
>fiqured out how to unsit them.  However, receintly there has been a 
>number of files labeled  .hqx ..  How do you unhqx them???

Files with the ".hqx" suffix are in binhexed format. Binhexing is not a
compression scheme: it is a way of taking a binary file (one that has icons and
other resources in it, for example) and 'translating' it so that it is a plain
text file. (This almost always makes the file >larger<.)  Most of the files you
use every day on your Macintosh are probably binary files, but these are put
together in a way that not all networks can handle. So many files--actually
most files, in my experience--that are available here on the networks have been
translated into binhex format, usually AFTER having been compressed.

BTW, here is a practical consequence of 'hexing a file that may illustrate what
is different about a 'hexed file. Take a little program like Apple's
Calculator. If you open Microsoft Word (or your favorite word processor) and
poke around in the Apple Menu Items folder of yor System folder, you will not
normally be able to SEE the Calculator. It is, after all, not a word processing
document. But if the Calculator were translated into binhex format, you would
be able to "read" it in Word or any other text processor. You couldn't DO
anything with it in that format, of course! It's like a loaf of bread that has
been turned >back < into plain flour, salt, water, &c.

So when you download a .hqx file, you need to DE-binhex first, and then you
usually will need to decompress it as well. There are several programs that
will debinhex files, but I recommend the freeware utility DeHQX (pronounced
"De-hex") which is available at the sumex-aim.stanford.edu FTP site. (I can't
recall where: In "util" or "comm", I think.) It's fast & easy. You can then use
Stuffit Expander to decompress the file (whether it's in .cpt or .sit format).

Good luck! 

William Porter 
Internet: wmporter@jetson.uh.edu
Classical Languages: University of Houston
Xref: sparky comp.sys.mac:344 comp.sys.mac.hypercard:3616 comp.sys.mac.misc:17156 comp.sys.mac.programmer:16268
From: lake@cwjcc.INS.CWRU.Edu (Dr. Robin Lake)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.mac.hypercard,comp.sys.mac.misc,comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: X-Window???
Date: 29 Sep 1992 12:52:44 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve Univ. Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: lake@po.CWRU.Edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: cwjcc.ins.cwru.edu

In article <1992Sep28.185300.12461@news.nd.edu> dwalton1@bach.helios.nd.edu (david walton) writes:
>In article <9225917.3011@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> mtc@mundil.cs.mu.OZ.AU (Michael Trevor CUTTER) writes:
>>thaddeus@vuse.vanderbilt.edu (Thaddeus R. Crews) writes:
>>
>>>I have written a program that uses the X-Window interface and need to port it
>>>to a Mac.  I have no experience with Hypercard.  My question is, "Is there a
>>>version of X-Window for the Mac, and if so, where does one aquire it?"
>>
>>Try MacX, published by Apple as far as I know. It only works as a client, 
>>I think it is...you still need an actual X Station.
>
...
>MacX is available from APDA, whose address and phone number I unfortunately
>don't have handy at the moment.  One caveat:  documentation is pricey, and
>I don't it comes with the software.  (I could be mistaken about that.)
>
>David Walton
>--
>David Walton					david.walton.10.ndu.edu

Per the mailing that arrived yesterday, APDA is moving to Buffalo.
APDA Apple Computer Inc.
P.O. Box 319
Buffalo, NY  14207-0319
1-800-282-2732
APDA@applelink.apple.com

Effective 28 September 1992
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.mac.misc,comp.sys.mac.wanted
From: tai@maui.cs.ucla.edu (Ann Tai)
Subject: Looking for a tool
Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 21:02:25 GMT

	I am looking for a tool converting articles in LaTeX format to
Mac Word format.  I will sincerely appreciate it if anyone could provide
information about 1) if such a tool exists, and/or 2) where I can get it.

	Thank you very much in advance.

						Ann T. Tai
						tai@cs.ucla.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.mac.hypercard,comp.sys.mac.misc,comp.sys.mac.programmer
From: franklin@ug.cs.dal.ca (Steve Franklin)
Subject: Re: X-Window??? Consider eXodus...
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 20:56:55 GMT

In <1992Sep28.185300.12461@news.nd.edu> dwalton1@bach.helios.nd.edu (david walton) writes:

>>Try MacX, published by Apple as far as I know. It only works as a client, 
>>I think it is...you still need an actual X Station.

>MacX (currently version 1.1.7) is an X-Window Server that will let X clients 
>connect over a TCP/IP network (either directly over an Ethernet, or over 
>a LocalTalk network that is connected to a DDP/IP gateway).  You don't need 

No no no no no... I have to suggest Exodus as an alternative. MacX has
given me and our department such headaches that I cannot begin to 
describe them. yes, we are registered.
   First of all, their support was disappointing. We were using MacX with
CARIS, a GIS system well tailored to our hydrographic needs. We were
hoping to run it on MacX via ethernet. Well, no go. When we phoned 
MacX with the problem, their support was succing and evasive. Basically
to sum it up it said "It's not our fault, it's their's. No X-window
package could accomadate the problem you are encountering". So, we after
numerous wasted communication tries with MacX support we focussed our
effort on the creators of Caris. They were reasonably stumped, but tried
to make a fix which unfortunately came short. However, kudos for their
effort. 
   In any case, Exodus sent us a demo package of their product, and it
was SUPERB! Absolutely tremendous. Not only was it definitely faster than
MacX (there are two versions - one for slower machines(68000?) and one
for the II series. It ran flawlessly and speedily everything from
CorelDraw, Caris, and GRASS, to trusty ol' xv with reliable performance.
   It is highly customizable, with keypads, mouse action, and environments,
ready to be edited or altered. it is a cleaner and less clunky interface.
It was a snatch to install. The documentation was friendly. And a user
of both, I can only give Exodus a thumbs up.
   I can only hope that Exodus is receiving it's just fruits for it's
work, because it has more than exceeded the needs of our office. Scraping
the money to buy it will be a chore as we approach mid-fiscal year,
but it will be worth it. Maybe we can sell our copy of MacX somewhere...

steve franklin
-- 
aasdSteveFranklin-Subliminal Psychology Major.ks;dlasBlueJaysRULEkasdfeahsdbfl
sd;lfaswoq[eBuyMeAQuadra!!!mbnZMXCNdfsba;KdSPAMiuroqiyetIBMSuxiweuryth'ewr;mxn
qpuepriuPartyOneqtuj;,n.,xnc,kjasFlameMeNot!;lkj;lkgkjd;askElvisLivesjhfquweru
zx.cfranklin@ug.cs.dal.ca,sk;t;lrut[Superboy@ac.dal.cav.zx,Physics!eq3rwkh;oHA
Xref: sparky comp.sys.mac:361 comp.sys.mac.misc:17429
From: moon!cyberden!system@well.sf.ca.us
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Outbound Laptop Macs Any Good?
Keywords: Laptop Mac, Portable Mac
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 92 15:14:07 PDT
Organization: Indescribable Creations

dkw@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (David Wittenberg) writes:

> |> a couple days. You decide.
> |>      The Outbound's screen can't get bright enough for me, and more
> |> importantly, has moderate to severe ghosting. Again, I found it annoying
> |> over prolonged use. The PB170's active-matrix screen is beautiful, just

Hmmm... perhaps your model had a bad screen. My Outbound's screen is sharp
and crisp with hardly any ghosting. And with the correct contrast/backlite
combo, it is REALLY bright. (Is your backlight turned off in the control
panel?)


__________________________________________________________________________
   |       /         |\
   | H E   \ Y B E R |/ E N       [ moon!cyberden!system@well.sf.ca.us ]
From: karlth@rhi.hi.is (Karl Thoroddsen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why a Mac???
Date: 2 Oct 92 08:56:57 GMT

In <1992Oct1.083419.14819@tolten.puc.cl> eakaftan@isluga.puc.cl (Eduardo Kaftanski Arancibia) writes:


>		Karl: How can you say handles are horrible. I program macs
>on a serious base and find handles are one of it's strongest points.
>Handles make memory management in macs a very powerful feature, letting
>the os take care of object relocation to free space that in PCs get 
>scattered in holes around the heap.

(This is beginning to feel like a deja-vu experience, I'm saying the same
things again and again).

Windows 3.1 relocates/discards memory blocks just like the Mac.  The
big difference is that the Mac needs to use handles to implement this
but Windows uses pointers because the handle mechanism is implemented
with help from the CPU and thus is hidden from the programmer.  I say handle
objects are horrible because in Windows you don't need them.

Please note that even though Windows has the advantage here, it has many
flaws which are not present in the Mac.
 
>		If you want my opinion add handles to the list of given
>reasons to prefer macintosh. Macs have a REAL OS, MS-DOS does just what
>it name says: Disk management. Nothing more.

I'm not going to defend MS-DOS.

--

\ Internet: karlth@rhi.hi.is             \ Karl Thoroddsen University Of Iceland
 \ Respect...            , Peter Ustinov  \ Department Of Computer Science
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis)
Subject: Re: Why Macs are better (and the others aren't) (long)
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Tech Central
	<1992Oct5.213138.12576@times.aux.apple.com>
	<Bvq1xD.6CF@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 00:41:54 GMT

David> == David Lemson <lemson@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> 

 David> Once more, (I just posted another note to this effect in this chain,
 David> so excuse my redundancy, but certain peoples' stubbornness needs a
 David> dose of truth) - you were thinking about the Starting Point Kit,
 David> which is just  the docs, keyboard, and CD-ROM which is your backup
 David> of the system.  It is mostly for the cost of the keyboard and mouse,
 David> it is $225 list.  This is CHEAP for a keyboard and mouse, when you
 David> compare it to Apple's exorbitant pricing. (IMHO)

Docs, mouse, power cord, and OS disks come with the CPU.  The Extended
Keyboard II lists for $229.  Oh wow.  Four whole dollars more than the
SPK.  And a nicer keyboard, IMHO.

And that's list, of course.  And you can buy a third-party keyboard, or
the cheaper non-extended keyboard; since the NeXT cube (an '040 from an
'030) I have here doesn't have function keys or the inverted-T cursor, I
suppose we should be comparing the non-extended, which lists for $129,
not that anyone pays list.
--
Christopher K. Davis      |       NET.INSIGHTS INTO ARTISTIC CRITICISM:
<ckd@eff.org>   EFF #14   | ``[Y]ou don't cure bad art by locking it all up
System Administrator, EFF | in one museum, you cure it by throwing tomatoes
+1 617 864 0665  [CKD1]   | at bad artists.'' --Barry Shein <bzs@world.std.com>
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: nigel@rs733.GSFC.NASA.Gov
Subject: Re: Macintosh emulation on Amiga
Organization: Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Md, USA
	<1992Sep24.085259.6848@cgrg.ohio-state.edu> <6026.2ac1ab01@hayes.com>
	<1992Sep24.212630.8665@cgrg.ohio-state.edu> <6043.2ac350eb@hayes.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 19:12:49 GMT

In article <6043.2ac350eb@hayes.com> bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman) writes:

   > 
   > True, But I did not say that it is emulating Mac IIci. It is emulating a
   > Mac which ROMs one did put into it - usually Mac Plus. Thus please read
   > my sentence as "The 25Mhz Amiga emulating Mac Plus is more responsive...."

   You missed my point. My point was that you were comparing the speed of
   machines that aren't doing the same thing. Might as well compare the
   speed of a bicycle to a rickshaw. 

   When you can make your Amiga emulator do the same things the IIci is, then
   you can compare the speed.

   -- 
   Bill Coleman, AA4LR                ! CIS: 76067,2327    AppleLink: D1958


Fine Bill...pick a application you run daily and we'll run some tests.
Odds are you run VersaTerm and Word or WordPerfect to do most of your
work (or some compiler instead of a terminal package)...same as I do.

Frankly I can do anything on my Amiga at home that I do on my Quadra
on my desk for work.  Work involves word processing and terminal
applications with some spreadsheet/pert charts thrown in.  If my boss
ever gives me a syquest for the Quadra I can pop the drive and take
everything home with me.  It is that transparent.

BTW: Games don't count...after all the Amiga can simply kick into
native mode and run amiga games ;-).  If nothing else it wins out in
video and games.  'Sides there are things that the Amiga w/emulator
can do that the Ci cannot...like run Vista Pro.

Pretty landscapes. 

Nigel


--
Nigel Tzeng
.sig under construction
From: dvan@spumco.cts.com (David Vandeven)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Trepidations of a potential mac-user
Date: 1 Oct 92 21:59:39 GMT
Reply-To: whoever posted this thread first
Organization: SPUMCO:Better living through wasted time
X-Mailer: uAccess - Mac Release: 1.5


In article <1992Sep30.185125.18010@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>, ccw@prefect.uucp (26554-wood) writes:
> 
> When was this?  1978?  The Apple Lisa was preemptively multi-tasking in
                                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 

Apple Lisa PREEMPTIVELY MULTITASKING?  BULLSHIT!!!!! 

> 
> Chris Wood     Bellcore     ...!bellcore!prefect!ccw
>                          or ccw@prefect.cc.bellcore.com

Read inside mac volume I. 


 David Vandeven    ********************************************************
Systems Progammer  *   "I don't believe in Pinochle, I don't believe I'll *
    Deadhead       * try: I do believe in Captain Crunch, for I am the    *
    Cyberpunk      * Frizzle Fry!"  (dvan@spumco.cts.com)      *PRIMUS!*  *
Zen Agnostic Guru  ********************************************************
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: marquis@netcom.com (Roger Marquis)
Subject: Re: When is a CLI faster than a GUI?
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 19:56:18 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

>> |> --- MICE VS KEYBOARD
>> |> I find a heavy reliance on point and click menus to be insulting to
>> |> my intelligence.
>> 
>I think this is a reaction to the psycological reality that the graphic
>interface takes less cognitive effort than a CLI. QED.
>
>Really. It is like their subconcious is saying, "Hey, this is easy. That's
>not right. Using a computer is supposed to be hard. This must be childish.
>I'm insulted."

Bill, You really know how to come up with them don't you!  This
explanation is pretty out there.  I guess it's easy to come up with
self serving hypotheses if you're not in touch with reality.  In other
words I disagree.  The reason I find it insulting is that the
programmer has clearly ignored the desires of users who would prefer
to use the keyboard.  He is assuming that users are not capable of
remembering what options they wish to select and force them to pull
down the menu to select an option.  It's like WordPerfect asking "Are
you sure you want to quit" when you just selected 'File' 'eXit'.  The
programming is assuming that you need help every step of the way and
are likely to make a mistake if given too many options.  Pleeeasee.

Roger (marquis@netcom.com)
options they want to select
From: cj00+@andrew.cmu.edu (Carl B Jabido)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mac's Doomsday
Date: 4 Oct 92 13:37:57 GMT
Organization: Sophomore, Math/Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Excerpts from netnews.comp.sys.mac.advocacy: 4-Oct-92 Re: Mac's Doomsday
by Chris Trimble@uiuc.edu 
>  Whoa whoa whoa. As far as I've heard and seen (I have seen only the R4000
> alpha version of NT), NT is NOT - I repeat NOT a multiuser system like UNIX.
> That doesn't mean there can't be a server like Novell has now-a-days, but
> more than one person cannot be logged into the same machine. So why then is
> there a need for having a login?

I'm pretty it's supposed to be.  Read the latest Windows (propaganda)
Mad: October 1992.  It says that the first thing you get upon boot up is
a dialog box saying:"press ctrl-alt-del to login."  You can then press
c-a-d to logout, and the same dialog box pops up for the next user.  The
article also toots being able to add users much easier that in Unix. 
All you do is login as the administrator or whatever, and then you get a
bunch of apps which only the admin has access to: stuff like a user
database, etc.
You need a login even if there's only one person at a time on the
machine.  NT can assign security according to the userid etc, so that
means that in order for the computer to display which files are yours,
then you have to login anyway.
BTW, NT comes with telnet.  I'm not sure about a telnet daemon.  But
that's at least one way that you can get more than one person logged in.
 OS/2 isn't supposed to be a multi-user system, but because I have
TCP/IP and a telnet daemon, my friend across campus is using my computer
from a Unix box.
There's also Lan Manager which is built in.  This'll probably let you
run Windows programs over the net, so this'll let'em have more than one
person at a time too.

Carl Jabido
cj00@andrew.cmu.edu
carl@captainjack.ws.cc.cmu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: johnsd2@vccnw05.its.rpi.edu (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: What's Easier To Use (read "better")
Reply-To: johnsd2@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 21:08:19 GMT

In article <ibhan.718089305@husc8>, ibhan@husc8.harvard.edu (Ishir Bhan) writes:

[deletia- accuracy stuff]

|> I would prefer it if Apple just made the Finder look better. 
|> No, there are no practical uses for it, but it would be a nice bonus.  The
|> NeXT LOOKS COOL.  How about getting rid of that ugly Chicago font.  Give
|> us some standard 3D stuff.  Shading.  Cool stuff like that.  Or at least
|> make it an option.  What do you people think?

They did, in system 7. Except they didn't get rid of Chicago.
(well, I think Chicago looks fine but thats probably because I have
no taste)

But the scrollbars, grow boxes and window frames are all in 3-d now,
although not "very" 3-d if you like. But its shaded and all that.

-- 
			- Dan Johnson
And God said "Jeeze, this is dull"... and it *WAS* dull. Genesis 0:0

These opinions have had all identifiying marks removed, and are untraceable.
You'll never know whose they are.
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: How many "Macs" do you see doing important work?
Date: 29 Sep 92 23:10:53 GMT
Article-I.D.: convex.ewright.717808253
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <greg-270992203210@kip-55.apple.com> greg@applelink.apple.com (Greg Marriott) writes:

>In article <dpenner.717568208@ee.ualberta.ca>, dpenner@ee.ualberta.ca
>(Darren E. Penner ) wrote:
>> 
>> Even putting all else to the side, one has to admit the IBM are the INDUSTRY
>> standard control device.  How many major factories, power plants and process
>> control systems do you see macintoshes tied to ..
>> 
>> ALMOST NONE.

>Well, since your definition of "important work" seems to exclude everything
>in the world except process control, I guess your answer of "almost none"
>is right on the mark.

Well, American Rocket Computer used a Mac to control the firing and launch
of its hybrid-fueled launch vehicle.  Does that count?

Then again, maybe people keep the *good* computers for their offices, 
instead of stripping them down and shipping them off to the hinterlands
of the assembly line.  :-)
From: ASI509@DJUKFA11.BITNET
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: CUA. Yuck.
Date: 5 Oct 92 17:57:16 GMT
 <1aot96INNch@matt.ksu.ksu.edu> <Bvn5L8.8t7@rice.edu>
 <1apgi4INN4dg@matt.ksu.ksu.edu>
Organization: Forschungszentrum Juelich

In article <1apgi4INN4dg@matt.ksu.ksu.edu>, nan@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Nan Zou) says:
>
>jimwong@owlnet.rice.edu (Jim Wong) writes:
>>nan@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Nan Zou) writes:
>>>bcoleman@hayes.com (Bill Coleman) writes:
>
>>>>* Human Interface Guidelines and standards sufficient to form consistancy
>>>>  between applications (Not, Perhaps)
>>>
>>>HIG in IBM world is CUA (Common User Access), current spec is CUA 92.
>
>>Heh.  I did testing over the summer of a software product that was required
>>to be "CUA Compliant."  One of the interface niceties that resulted was
>>that the scroll bars in some windows ...
>
>[ funky scrollbar implementation ]
>
>I doubt very much what you saw was "CUA compliant", if you want to know
>what CUA really looks like, get the CUA demos from hobbes.nmsu.edu,
>directory /pub/os2/2.0/dos/demos.
>
Could be that it was. Perhaps it was CUA 89 compliant. That`s a very different
story from CUA 91. The big differenc between CUA and HIG is that HIG only
applies to a dozen or so PC class machines. CUA also applies to mid-range and
main frame systems. There are (or at least were for CUA 89) different levels
of GUI or GUI like interfaces. While you can replace a 386sx with a IIsi it
would be a bit difficult to replace a 3090 with a Quadra.

Michael Bode.
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (Stefano Pagiola)
Subject: Re: 7.1 vs. OS/2 and Windows NT
Reply-To: spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu
Organization: DSO, Stanford University
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 18:16:54 GMT

Mark Munson writes
>>>Apple better get on the ball.  System 7.1 lacks some of
>>> the basic features that define a REAL operating system.
>>>Where is Memory protection?  A system level scripting
>>> language that isn't third party?  Preemptive multitasking?
>>>  Command-line shells?  All these are things that Apple has
>>> been promising us for years.
>   
>>Why wait?  You can already get that combination in a NeXT.
> 
> Why Wait?  You seem to forget that the real reason to get
> a computer isn't for Preemptive multitasking, or system
> level scripting.  Sure these are nice features to have,
> but you need to have a large sofware base that supports
> the things you want a computer to do.
> 
> The NeXT is still a little short in this area, and some people
> just don't WANT TO WAIT for the NeXT application market to 
> improve.
> 

Ah yes.  Don't I remember hearing this argument from DOS people,  
sometime back in the mid-1980s sometime?  Something about the mac  
having nice features but not having many apps?

In any case, the argument is, for the most part, wrong.  Yes, there  
are still a few gaps, but there is no longer any shortage of NeXT  
apps.


--
-
Stefano Pagiola
Food Research Institute, Stanford University
spagiola@frinext.stanford.edu (NeXTMail encouraged)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy