HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: spencer@shade.Princeton.EDU (S. Spencer Sun)
Subject: Re: No bootlegging hurts Unix
Originator: news@ernie.Princeton.EDU
Organization: Princeton Univ. Class of '94
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 01:01:13 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.170425.28401@sci34hub.sci.com> gary@sci34hub.sci.com (Gary Heston) writes:
>I won't buy or recommend copy protected software; I consider it both an
>insult (since I don't pirate) and a hazard--how do you reinstall when 
>something breaks?). I've dealt with systems enough to know that they
>fail, and something tied to a systems' hardware is too risky for my
>tastes. 

I don't like copy-protected software either, and your second point is a
good one, but I take exception to your first point.

Should safe drivers be insulted by the test to get a drivers' license?
I don't poke around other people's accounts, should I be insulted that
there UNIX accounts have passwords on them?
I wouldn't enter, steal from, or steal an unlocked car in a parking lot,
should I be insulted that people lock their doors?

It's silly for you to feel insulted since copy-protection, however silly
that might be, is not directed personally at you.  The producer of the
software apparently feels that enough people steal their software to
warrant such a reaction.

I disagree with the reaction, but I hardly feel insulted by it.
----------
Spencer Sun - Princeton Univ. Class of '94 - Dept. of Computer Science
Clockwork Orange (Princeton Ultimate) (when I bother to show up for practice)
"Horror?  Steckall, it's ignorance we fear.  Since when did truth and
knowledge become a horror?"

Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386
From: melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger)
Subject: Re: whining about "marketing" (was Re: Does every ...)
Organization: Penn State Computer Science
	<ADAMS.92Apr6022007@PDV2.pdv2.fmr.maschinenbau.th-darmstadt.de>
	<id.L5OO._ZG@ferranti.com> <1992Apr7.051813.748@talon.ucs.orst.edu>
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 20:11:58 GMT


In article <1992Apr7.051813.748@talon.ucs.orst.edu> martelr@kallisti.wtfd.orst.edu (Raphael Martelles) writes:

   Hey, ditto for me!  All of us here at Weatherford Networking would
   LOVE a cheap/free UNIX word processor--I hate using nroff/troff,
   and TeX is workable but painful--right now we download all our
   ascii stuff to the school's PC's and use Microsoft Word.  (Shudder,
   all you UNIX people!)  If you or anyone can show us a basic word
   processor, we'd all love it.  Please post on this one-- I'm sure
   there's a LOT of interest...  Hope I don't sound too mean--I'm NOT
   taking sides, and all flames go to /dev/null, I would simply love
   to see a UNIX word processor, especially one with text formatting
   capabilities (you know, something capable of spitting out
   postscript, and that you can tell what type and style of font you
   want?)

Do you mean like Edit that comes free with the NeXT computer?  There's
some clown at Penn State who thinks this is a Unix problem in general.
It's not, it's an X-Windows problems.  Word Perfect and WriteNow are
decent word processors for the Unix based NeXT computer.  In fact,
Word Perfect runs on Suns too.  If you are going to pay for PC
software, shouldn't you expect to pay at least as much for Unix
software?

-Mike
 
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386
From: mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst)
Subject: Re: whining about "marketing" (was Re: Does every ...)
Organization: The Programmer's Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 15:46:03 GMT

In article <ADAMS.92Apr6022007@PDV2.pdv2.fmr.maschinenbau.th-darmstadt.de> adams@pdv2.fmr.maschinenbau.th-darmstadt.de (Adams) writes:
>On Internet, waiting to be repacked and distributed ;->. No joke, even
>in Germany we have shops specialized to get Internet sources,
>compile(!) them, provide "install shells" and (re)distribute them ;->.

I just got a flyer from a place called "Ready-to-Run Software", which
has precompiled versions of most of the common free software
available.  They sell software in "paks" -- i.e., DeskPak, with things
like Emacs, TeX, groff, etc. in it; FunPak, with games; etc.  Each
"pak" runs between $150 and $275; for an additional $150/pak, they'll
send you the source for the software in a pak.  (I don't know how this
jives with the GNU GPL that a great deal of their software is covered
by.  Is $150 a "nominal charge for the cost of distribution"?)  They
offer binaries for SCO Unix machines, SPARCs, Sun 3s, and DECstations.

Note that I don't work for Ready-to-Run Software, or own stock in them
-- I just got hit by their junk mail.  (With addresses culled from the
UUCP maps, too -- the address on the envelope only appears in that
form in the UUCP maps.  But that's another issue...)

-- 
Marc Unangst                | You know that funny-looking bump on your
mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us   | leg?  It's your kneecap.  Leave it alone.
<backbone>!sharkey!mudos!mju|
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
From: peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: "Open Systems"
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 19:49:49 GMT

In article <ku6mpuINNm80@alhena.usc.edu> ajayshah@alhena.usc.edu (Ajay Shah) writes:
> On page 77 of the most-recent issue of Unix Today, it talks about
> people who did not like the change of name to Open Systems Today:

>         Clearly, they are all Unix bigots, not Unix purists. [...]

Since I'm one of those people, and since I was quoted on the very same page
as stating that UNIX may NOT be the only solution, I sent them a letter on
the topic that might be printed in a future issue.

I found it odd that a magazine with such a history of rabid UNIX bigotry
(which seems unabated... they flamed NT heavily in this issue) would use
the term "UNIX bigot" as an epithet.
-- 
/F{findfont exch scalefont setfont}def /S{moveto show}def /T{/Times-Roman F}def
8 T(Ferranti International Controls Corporation)24 28 S(+1 713 274 5180)24 12 S
(Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012)24 20 S 12 /Courier F(`-_-')320 32 S( 'U` )320 16 S
12 T(Peter da Silva)24 36 S 16 T(Have you hugged your wolf today?)358 24 S
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
From: peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: defining UNIX(R) (Was Re: "Open Systems")
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 14:25:46 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.003623.10395@decuac.dec.com> mjr@hussar.dco.dec.com (Marcus J. "will do TCP/IP for food" Ranum) writes:
> 	It's not for you to define UNIX(R). UNIX is a registered trademark
> of UNIX Systems Laboratories.

We're talking about "Unix", not "\s-2UNIX\s+2".
-- 
/F{findfont exch scalefont setfont}def /S{moveto show}def /T{/Times-Roman F}def
8 T(Ferranti International Controls Corporation)24 28 S(+1 713 274 5180)24 12 S
(Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012)24 20 S 12 /Courier F(`-_-')320 32 S( 'U` )320 16 S
12 T(Peter da Silva)24 36 S 16 T(Have you hugged your wolf today?)358 24 S
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386,comp.sys.sun.misc
From: fangchin@leland.Stanford.EDU (Chin Fang)
Subject: Re: No bootlegging hurts Unix
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 19:53:12 GMT

In article <id.FFXO.HS7@ferranti.com>, peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:

|> I'm talking about cheap applications. I don't see a cheap word processor on
|> the horizon anywhere, let alone a cheap spreadsheet or CAD application or
|> animation program.                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

ME CAD, absolutely NO!  EE CAD, a resounding YES!  Spice from UC Berkeley's
ERL.  It's used extensively in Silicon Valley, at Stanford and various
other places.  It even runs (Aaaaaaaahche!) on BG's DOS.  But normally people
use it in X on a UNIX machine.  

Chin Fang
fangchin@leland.$tanford.edu B-(
#include <sys/personal :->
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386
From: peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: whining about "marketing" (was Re: Does every ...)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 00:19:44 GMT

In article <1992Apr12.180723.4076@news.rn.com> larry@news.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:
> wait a minute -- Word Perfect for UNIX isn't much more than WP for
> DOS --  

Well, the street prices are about $200 apart. That's significant to me. Maybe
the distributors just don't discount the UNIX versions as much (or don't have
as much room to do so) but it comes out to the same thing for end users.
-- 
/F{findfont exch scalefont setfont}def /S{moveto show}def /T{/Times-Roman F}def
8 T(Ferranti International Controls Corporation)24 28 S(+1 713 274 5180)24 12 S
(Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012)24 20 S 12 /Courier F(`-_-')320 32 S( 'U` )320 16 S
12 T(Peter da Silva)24 36 S 16 T(Have you hugged your wolf today?)358 24 S
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
From: mjr@hussar.dco.dec.com (Marcus J. "will do TCP/IP for food" Ranum)
Subject: defining UNIX(R) (Was Re: "Open Systems")
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation, Washington ULTRIX Resource Center
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 00:36:23 GMT

ajayshah@alhena.usc.edu (Ajay Shah) writes:

>First, I'm defining Unix!!! Not "open systems".  I paused ten seconds
>to think of a good way to define Unix

	It's not for you to define UNIX(R). UNIX is a registered trademark
of UNIX Systems Laboratories.

mjr.
From: mccaugha@hydra2a.cs.utk.edu (William Douglas ( Doug ) - The Juggler ( me ) McCaughan)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: rcs -- Help wanted !!
Date: 17 Apr 92 04:10:21 GMT
Reply-To: mccaugha@hydra2a.cs.utk.edu (William Douglas ( Doug ) - The Juggler ( me ) McCaughan)
Organization: Computer Science Dept, University of Tennesee, Knoxville
NNTP-Posting-Host: hydra2a.cs.utk.edu

In article <etxkrjg.703349463@solsta-c>, etxkrjg@solsta.ericsson.se (Kristian Jorg  TX/DKL) writes:
|> sop@cci.dk (S|ren Overgaard Petersen) writes:
|> 
|> 
|> >Could anyone out there give me a pointer to where I can get hold of
|> >the rcs (revision control system) software?
|> 
|> >Is it public domain or how?
|> >Is there a ftp site to get it from?
|> 
|> It is not really public domain. It is free software under the GPL licence
|> that all the FSF (GNU) products obey. Rcs is a part of the FSF products.
|> 
|> You could get it from prep.ai.mit.edu, or any other ftp site mirroring
|> the GNU stuff.
|> 
|> Good luck!
|> -----------------------------------+  
|> Kristian Jorg                      !  
|> e-mail: etxkrjg@solsta.ericsson.se ! 
|> -----------------------------------+

RCS is wonderful!
-- 
...doug <mccaugha@cs.utk.edu> USA    | The past 22 years have been a |
                                     | helluva trip, but honestly, I |
                                     | am ready to come down now...  |
From: kenney@milton.u.washington.edu (Michael Kenney)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
Subject: Mac access to Unix printers
Date: 15 Apr 92 00:02:34 GMT
Reply-To: kenney@u.washington.edu
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

Does anyone know of any free software that will listen for AppleTalk packets
on Ethernet to allow Macs to access printers attached to Unix systems?

Please respond by email.

Thanks in advance.

Mike Kenney
UW Applied Physics Lab
mikek@apl.washington.edu
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.sys.hp,comp.misc,comp.periphs,comp.periphs.scsi,misc.wanted
From: gary@iastate.edu (Gary A Lee)
Subject: Unix-based scanner packages
Originator: gary@pv031e.vincent.iastate.edu
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 19:48:12 GMT


Has anyone seen, heard of, or known of any Unix-based (HP_UX specifically)
scanner packages?  Any software (OCR or graphics) for Unix?  My department 
is very interested in any responses to these questions.

Also, anyone had any experience with APunix products?

gary
-- 
Xref: sparky comp.unix.misc:2037 comp.unix.questions:6152 comp.unix.msdos:623
From: jshumate@wrdis01.af.mil (Shumate Jason)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.msdos
Subject: How many users will bog down UNIX on a PC?
Date: 13 Apr 92 18:02:07 GMT
Followup-To: comp.unix.misc
Organization: 1926CCSG Robins AFB

My office has a project coming up and we have several alternatives to 
choose from.  We have 3 CD-ROM discs that we need to make available to
several people.  On suggestion was to buy a 486 PC and run either SCO UNIX
with Open Desktop so we can run DOS under it to access the CD-ROMs or
buy Interactive's UNIX and use VP/IX to run DOS to access the CD-ROMs.
Let's assume for the sake of argument that we will buy some kind of CD
jukebox that we can use with the application.  Suppose also that all of
our users on the PC will only be running character-based applications, not
graphics-based such as X-Windows.  If we had 16 simultaneous users on the
PC, all running either Open Desktop or VP/IX so they can use DOS to get to
the CD-ROMs, what kind of response would we get?  Would response time be
really bad, tolerable or what?  I would suppose for sake of argument that
the 486 PC we would get would run at either 33 MHz or 50 MHz.  Any personal
experiences with running DOS under UNIX on a PC, even if it is on a 386,
would be very helpful.  We can't get anyone to tell us how many users would
cause a PC to start slowing down appreciably, and we really need some kind
of information to gauge whether this is a practical solution to the problem
or not.  Again, any personal experiences relating to this topic would be
greatly appreciated.
-- 
CUL8R,                                | "... you're living in a world of make
Jason Shumate                         |  believe!  With flowers and bells and
System Administrator, wrdis02         |  leprechauns and magic frogs with
jshumate@logdis1.wr.aflc.af.mil       |  funny little hats." -  Homer Simpson
From: peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: whining about "marketing" (was Re: Does every ...)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 19:43:04 GMT

In article <1992Apr8.063828.20163@lth.se> bengtl@maths.lth.se (Bengt Larsson) writes:
> In article <id.VWLO.MOE@ferranti.com> peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
> >In article <1992Apr02.072043.12182@Celestial.COM> bill@Celestial.COM (Bill Campbell) writes:
> >> Not to quibble, but the Amiga, Mac, and IBM prices are for single
> >> user progams.  The SCO Single-User price for MS-Word is $495, and
> >> multi-user is $1,495 so you're ahead with UNIX on 4 or more
> >> users.

> >This may be true, but it's not relevent. The subject line has wandered some,
> >but this whole thread started with a discussion of Univel's "Unix Lite"
> >product, and what it would need to be to successfully compete for the
> >single-user desktop market with Macs and DOS boxes. So the fact that you
> >can get a multiuser license for Word is irrelevent.

> It may be relevant if the current SCO UNIX is not specially targeted for
> single-user systems. I haven't used it so I don't know. 

That's the whole point of the distinctions between "SCO UNIX" and "SCO Open
Desktop". ODT is a single-user version.

> >of product for PCs. It's twice the price for Microsoft Word for the
> >Macintosh. And where are the $18, $56, and $37 products?

> The market is much smaller.

And why is that? Let's get to the point...

> Besides, those using Turbo Pascal or the equivalent may disagree.
  [ about the quality of UNIX tools ]

I've used Turbo Pascal. UNIX is a *way* better development environment.
A UNIX program is *way* easier to implement than a DOS version, let alone
a Mac one. For one thing, you don't have to rewrite the operating system.
-- 
/F{findfont exch scalefont setfont}def /S{moveto show}def /T{/Times-Roman F}def
8 T(Ferranti International Controls Corporation)24 28 S(+1 713 274 5180)24 12 S
(Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012)24 20 S 12 /Courier F(`-_-')320 32 S( 'U` )320 16 S
12 T(Peter da Silva)24 36 S 16 T(Have you hugged your wolf today?)358 24 S
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
From: eigenstr@nyssa.cs.rose-hulman.edu (Todd R. Eigenschink)
Subject: Re: NeXT WP gripes (was Really Misleading Subject)
Organization: Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
	<ae4Ht_ek6@cs.psu.edu> <id.I3RO.I0L@ferranti.com>
	<1992Apr12.180723.4076@news.rn.com>
	<EIGENSTR.92Apr12134437@nyssa.cs.rose-hulman.edu>
	<&#7Hu*!o6@cs.psu.edu>
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 02:55:20 GMT

In article <&#7Hu*!o6@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes:

   >  And WriteNow...please.  NeXT doesn't even support it anymore.  Doesn't
   >  that tell you something?  It was/is consistent, at least--it'll crash
   >  about every 10 minutes for me.

   Hmmm.  Sounds like you are a bit clueless.  NeXT doesn't give WriteNow
   away free anymore.  AppSoft will sell it to you for $200 though.  I
   haven't used WriteNow that much but somehow I get the feeling that you
   are exaggerating

Well, yeah...I would guess that they don't support it because they
don't give it away free anymore...at least when it was free, you got
what you paid for.  And I guess I might have been exaggerating.  11
minutes.  Tops.

   >   ...and who said that the NeXT was Unix-based?  Nonononono...it runs
   >   Mach...and Mach most definitely is NOT Unix.

   You are most definitely clueless.  BSD 4.3 is indeed running on top of
   Mach.  Most people will never know the difference.

You're right...call me clueless.  I always thought that BSD #.# was an
operating system just like Mach, and that one didn't run on top of the
other.  Oops.  Most people will never know the difference, true.  But
the people that give a damn, will.  I happen to give a damn.


   So, what are we suppose to conclude?  Most people at your school don't
   understand much about computers, or they're devout Sun weenies?

   -Mike

I'd rather be a devout Sun weenie than a NeXT-o-nut...at least Suns
don't come in such morbid colors (without the obnoxious logo plastered
in an obnoxious position on the mouse).

We probably don't understand much about computers, either.  That's why
they bought all those NeXTs in the first place.


--
Todd Eigenschink (eigenstr@CS.Rose-Hulman.Edu)
Assistant System Manager, News Administrator
Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, Terre Haute, IN
"G++ is to C++ as Turbo Pascal is to Pascal--it's a great compiler,
 but for a language other than C++."  -- Fred Sullivan
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386
From: fangchin@leland.Stanford.EDU (Chin Fang)
Subject: Re: whining about "marketing" (was Re: Does every ...)
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 06:43:25 GMT

In article <id.9GVO.JZE@ferranti.com>, peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
|> In article <1992Apr13.171434.25561@leland.Stanford.EDU> fangchin@leland.Stanford.EDU (Chin Fang) writes:
|> > In article <id.16VO.EJE@ferranti.com>, peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
|> > |> and then Interviews itself. Plus several weeks hack time. And when I'm
|> >                                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|> > Several weeks?  I don't believe it.  Maybe one week :)
|> 
|> For GCC, G++, X11 and Interviews? On System V release 3? You must have
|> an eaggerated idea of the portability of this software, or a LOT more hack
|> time. You're single, right?

Hey, I was teasing :)  Yes, depending on the speed of your home machine, you DO 
need a few weeks to build (if you are lucky) and/or to port (if not) for all 
these biggies :( 

I am still waiting for the latest InterViews, so no comments on that one now.
On our network, i.e. accessing my source tree via AFS, using any one of
our workstations (DEC3100s, IBM RISC 6000s, Sun SPARC 1+s),  building gcc 2.x
typically takes a few hours (stage1, stage2, and stage3) to almost a day.
Depending on net load :( This includes gcc and c++ (new g++) of course.  You
want to build libg++ afterwards.  That's another few hours.   OK. Afterwards,
if your disk space still accomodates, then maybe another 10 hours for building
X.  Of course, the total time easily exceeds 20 hours!  Of course, our 
loaded network is a culprit.  But even with local HDs and a high speed controller,
I don't see too much speed up.  They are just BIG pkgs :(  Especially X.
InterViews is no tiny thing eigher :(  Like most X toolkits :(

If you have a i486 with a good caching controller, I think you may be able
to cut down total *building* (not including porting) time to like 15 hours.
For some reasons, some CISC machines have very good compilation speed.  Like
NeXT (68040) compiles faster than SPARC 1+ on many occations.  

So, for a guy having a full time job, and doing all above on his spare time
or whatever he can bargain from his wolf :( YES, several weeks. No joke.

|> > [unless wolves takes too much of guys' spare time :] :] :]
|> 
|> Well, I *do* have a life.

Sigh... I don't :(  Maybe after graduation :(

Chin Fang
fangchin@leland.$tanford.edu B-(
#include <sys/personal.h :->
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386,comp.sys.sun.misc
From: gary@sci34hub.sci.com (Gary Heston)
Subject: Re: No bootlegging hurts Unix
Reply-To: gary@sci34hub.sci.com (Gary Heston)
Organization: SCI Technology, Inc., Huntsville, Al.
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 17:04:25 GMT

In article <id.OBTO.ULJ@ferranti.com> peter@ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
=In article <1992Apr8.141903.3507@sci34hub.sci.com> gary@sci34hub.sci.com (Gary Heston) writes:
=> Agreed. I think most software is overpriced, though, so if I can't
=> afford it, I don't have it. I can't justify $500 for a C compiler
=> to play with at home.

=So use a cheaper one at home. I don't know about your PC, but for the Amiga
=you have the choice of PDC, DICE, GCC, and Lattice 3.3.

That would be fine, if the cheaper ones would support all the BIOS calls,
for example. I've tried three--one ran out of capacity at 29K of object, the
other two did not properly support the calls I needed (and Mark Williams
doesn't mention that numbers in their manual are hex, so I wasted time
tearing my hair out until I realized that the "21" in the book equaled 
the function "33" decimal I was trying to use). I still have two of the
cheapie (eco-C 88 and MIX-C), I gave Let's C (from MW) to a college
student (books, discs, warranty and registration stuff; no copies retained).
 
>The problem with UNIX is these cheaper products don't seem to exist.

Well, there's also not a cheap Unix existing yet, but it's getting closer.
It's now possible to buy a port of SysVr4 and the development system for
about the list price of Microsuck C for DOS.

I won't buy or recommend copy protected software; I consider it both an
insult (since I don't pirate) and a hazard--how do you reinstall when 
something breaks?). I've dealt with systems enough to know that they
fail, and something tied to a systems' hardware is too risky for my
tastes. 

Regretfully, there's no easy solution to this; then again, neither the
music, print, or clothing industries have found a way to eliminate it
entirely, either.

-- 
Gary Heston    SCI Systems, Inc.  gary@sci34hub.sci.com   site admin
The Chariman of the Board and the CFO speak for SCI. I'm neither.
"Always remember, that someone, somewhere, is making a product that will
make your product obselete." Georges Doriot, founder of American R & D.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.sysv386