From: martin@datacomm.ucc.okstate.edu (Martin McCormick)
Subject: Re: IS UNIX DEAD?
Organization: Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 21:54:09 GMT

In article <0105002B.ibrvd6@digtype.airage.com> jeff@digtype.airage.com writes:
>Sun has also put their full documentation on CD-ROM--it's called Answerbook.
>It includes Postscript versions of all of the standard man pages,
>plus the full paper documentation set (normally 8 or so volumes weighing
>in at 80 or so pounds!). I also have hardware and configuration manuals
>for most of the desktop systems. It completely fills a 600 meg CD.

First, I completely agree with Jeff's enthusiasm for this system.  It is good
and probably is the wave of the future.  I do have one gripe, however.
As I have said, in other postings, Postscript is a half-finished job until
somebody comes up with a method for converting it back into standard ASCII
text like the lines you are reading, now.  The windows-oriented approach is
totally useless for those of us who are blind and use speech synthesizers.
We were able to cobble together a small C program to strip out all that
Postscript language and display a completely deformatted stream of data.
It beats nothing, though not by much.  I would love to help fix this problem,
but I need to find a document explaining Postscript in electronic form so
I can read it and figure out how to tackle this beast.

>
>All of these things are on-line, fully-indexed, cross-referenced and
>hypertext-linked, and just a command away. Just today, I was looking 
>for info on how the sticky bit affects directories. I just fired up
>the searcher and typed in 'sticky'. I had 3 hits, and found my answer
>in just a couple of seconds. I could have never done this with paper
>documentation.

To do that with the system I use, you look through the directory until
you find a likely-looking title and then strip the Postscript from it.
Next, use "less's" text finding capability to look for the string.  It works,
but it is as slow as molasses in January, and you run the risk of missing
important information which might be in files whose names don't betray
the knowledge, within.  
	As I have also said, before, I realize that not all formatting effects
could be duplicated on non-graphical terminals, but a good Postscript-to-ASCII
converter would simply do what it could with what it had.  Then, we could
all use the hypertext capabilities for indexing.

>
>Unix is a bit cryptic, and the sheer volume of documentation is overwhelming
>at times. Having it all shrunk down to a fully indexed CD where I
>have a prayer of finding what I want makes things a lot easier!
>
>CD-ROMs could be the saviour of UNIX.....

If handled right, they could be the answer to all kinds of problems.  So far,
for anybody needing non-standard output, they are just another headache.

This doesn't mean I disagree with anything said, here, or I hate Windows
or anything more than that we need to look long and hard at the slash-and-burn
approach which seems to have taken over the data I/O business.  We are creating
a Tower of Babyl which seems to be creating more and more specialized forms
of I/O rather than trying to create universal formats that have unlimited
utility.
	There are software solutions which are beginning to make Window formats
available to the blind, but my problem is that in order to use the "AnswerBook"
or any similarly formatted output, any user must have a graphics terminal
such as another Sun work station to access the data.  This is nice if you are
selling Suns, but quite limiting if you have a perfectly good PC/XT running
"Kermit" at home.

Martin McCormick WB5AGZ   Stillwater, OK
O.S.U. Computer Center Data Communications Group