[Info-vax] Software used for diagrams in DEC documentation

[urbancamo]

I was just looking through a DEC printer manual PDF and noticed that
the diagrams are really quite fantastic, both in detail and quality.
The manual states that VAX Document V2.0 was used to prepare the
manual, I wondered if anyone on the list knew what software was used
to produce the diagrams?

Regards, Mark.

[ChrisQ]

Post by urbancamo
I was just looking through a DEC printer manual PDF and noticed that
the diagrams are really quite fantastic, both in detail and quality.
The manual states that VAX Document V2.0 was used to prepare the
manual, I wondered if anyone on the list knew what software was used
to produce the diagrams?
Regards, Mark.

Vax Document was a repackaging of Knuth's Tex typesetting package, for
which there were several drawing packages available. Leslie Lamport, a
sometime employee of Dec, was responsible for the LaTex macro package,
so perhaps there's a connection there...

Regards,

Chris

[Jan-Erik Soderholm]

Post by ChrisQ

Post by urbancamo
I was just looking through a DEC printer manual PDF and noticed that
the diagrams are really quite fantastic, both in detail and quality.
The manual states that VAX Document V2.0 was used to prepare the
manual, I wondered if anyone on the list knew what software was used
to produce the diagrams?
Regards, Mark.

Vax Document was a repackaging of Knuth's Tex typesetting package, for
which there were several drawing packages available. Leslie Lamport, a
sometime employee of Dec, was responsible for the LaTex macro package, so
perhaps there's a connection there...
Regards,
Chris

And besides, you can create your image files in whatever package
you like that supports the file formats supported by DECdoc.

[John Reagan]

Post by ChrisQ

Post by urbancamo
I was just looking through a DEC printer manual PDF and noticed that
the diagrams are really quite fantastic, both in detail and quality.
The manual states that VAX Document V2.0 was used to prepare the
manual, I wondered if anyone on the list knew what software was used
to produce the diagrams?
Regards, Mark.

Vax Document was a repackaging of Knuth's Tex typesetting package, for
which there were several drawing packages available. Leslie Lamport, a
sometime employee of Dec, was responsible for the LaTex macro package, so
perhaps there's a connection there...
Regards,
Chris

Repackaging? Yes, Document does use TeX under the surface and you even have
some TeX/LaTeX controls. However, there are a great many additions
above-and-beyond TeX. I don't remember Leslie Lamport's name being
associated with VAX Document but I wasn't that close to it.

I don't know what the printer manuals used, but for the language manuals the
diagrams were produced by a internal tool called RAGS. By the time, I saw
them, they were in .eps format.

John

[ChrisQ]

Post by John Reagan
Repackaging? Yes, Document does use TeX under the surface and you even have
some TeX/LaTeX controls. However, there are a great many additions
above-and-beyond TeX. I don't remember Leslie Lamport's name being
associated with VAX Document but I wasn't that close to it.
I don't know what the printer manuals used, but for the language manuals the
diagrams were produced by a internal tool called RAGS. By the time, I saw
them, they were in .eps format.
John

I would be interested in finding out a bit more about this, if only for
historical reasons. I used Tex on a variety of machines from the early
to late nineties, as it was quite portable and could (can) produce
output as good as or better than commercial packages costing thousands.
The downside is the steep learning curve, ameliorated a little by Latex,
but was eventually seduced by the convenience of Word and similar
graphics tools. It can also be usefull as a rough estimator of machine
performance. The microvax II in the lab compiled Tex at around 4 pages
per minute, while a later Sun 3/60 ran at around 12. The PC-AT at around
2-3, iirc. Probably lightning fast on more modern systems.

Can still easily recognise a cmr style font, and this was the giveaway
in terms of Vax Document's heritage, irrespective of the macro package
overlayed on top. Knuth's Computer Modern Typefaces is still a real work
of art, imho...

Regards,

Chris

[Bill Gunshannon]

Post by ChrisQ
I would be interested in finding out a bit more about this, if only for
historical reasons. I used Tex on a variety of machines from the early
to late nineties, as it was quite portable and could (can) produce
output as good as or better than commercial packages costing thousands.
The downside is the steep learning curve, ameliorated a little by Latex,
but was eventually seduced by the convenience of Word and similar
graphics tools.

Not in all circles. :-) I have a Professor here (not an old one, either,
young enough to be one of my kids) who still does all of his docs in LaTex.
And uses xFig for most of his diagrams.

bill

[urbancamo]

Not in all circles.  :-)  I have a Professor here (not an old one, either,
young enough to be one of my kids) who still does all of his docs in LaTex.
And uses xFig for most of his diagrams.

Thanks for all the responses. I hadn't really made the connection
between the CMR font and VAX Document based manuals. Using TeX as the
document engine was obviously a good choice given the quality of the
documents produced.

I still use TeX, although mainly via Lyx these days, however xfig
remains a highlight for me in a field of diagramming tools that always
leaved something to be desired for a perfectionist. The EPS xfig puts
out is exemplary.

Microsoft Word is quite possibly the worst piece of software I've ever
used (and I've used a good few versions now!) - bugs introduced early
on have to be treated as features to maintain compatibility over
sanity.

Mark.

[ChrisQ]

Post by urbancamo
Microsoft Word is quite possibly the worst piece of software I've ever
used (and I've used a good few versions now!) - bugs introduced early
on have to be treated as features to maintain compatibility over
sanity.
Mark.

Like much modern packaged software, word probably satisfies and
frustrates users to an equal degree, Providing you don't want to do
anything too clever, it gets the job done, but suffers from excess
featuritis, when all you want to do is write a letter. I use an older
pre uSoft version of Visio and other packages for drawing and they too
get the job done without too much drama. We might all bemoan the quality
of old, but the world has moved on and present day graphics intensive
applications would be unusable on older dec hardware. Sad fact, but true.

I was disappointed by the fact that DecWrite was never ported to other
os's. An old copy that I used on microvax seemed quite good, if a little
prosaic and slow in it's user interface. A good application trying to
escape, was the impression. It could have been a valid competitor to
uSoft with more development, especially with all the effort going into
Alpha at the time. There, dec had a machine fast enough to run it...

Regards,

Chris

[John Wallace]

Post by ChrisQ

Post by urbancamo
Microsoft Word is quite possibly the worst piece of software I've ever
used (and I've used a good few versions now!) - bugs introduced early
on have to be treated as features to maintain compatibility over
sanity.
Mark.

Like much modern packaged software, word probably satisfies and
frustrates users to an equal degree, Providing you don't want to do
anything too clever, it gets the job done, but suffers from excess
featuritis, when all you want to do is write a letter. I use an older
pre uSoft version of Visio and other packages for drawing and they too
get the job done without too much drama. We might all bemoan the quality
of old, but the world has moved on and present day graphics intensive
applications would be unusable on older dec hardware. Sad fact, but true.
I was disappointed by the fact that DecWrite was never ported to other
os's. An old copy that I used on microvax seemed quite good, if a little
prosaic and slow in it's user interface. A good application trying to
escape, was the impression. It could have been a valid competitor to
uSoft with more development, especially with all the effort going into
Alpha at the time. There, dec had a machine fast enough to run it...
Regards,
Chris

Never ported to what other OSes? It was available for VMS, Unix
(Ultrix, OSF/1->Tru64), Windows... feel free to find the SPDs and see
for yourself.

Of course, it's entirely understandable if you didn't actually know
this, as making customers aware of what was available wasn't always a
core DEC competency, and there was also a corporate reluctance to
deploy workstations internally for the then-newfangled Compound
Document Architecture stuff like DECwrite, not to mention tools like
DECdecision etc (and definitely not to mention DECpresent). The UK's
(and later European) DECdirect catalogues (and teams) were marvellous
tools in this respect - a catalogue that kept customers informed, and
a mechanism to order things, often at sensible prices.

[Paul Sture]

In article

Post by John Wallace
Never ported to what other OSes? It was available for VMS, Unix
(Ultrix, OSF/1->Tru64), Windows... feel free to find the SPDs and see
for yourself.
Of course, it's entirely understandable if you didn't actually know
this, as making customers aware of what was available wasn't always a
core DEC competency, and there was also a corporate reluctance to
deploy workstations internally for the then-newfangled Compound
Document Architecture stuff like DECwrite, not to mention tools like
DECdecision etc (and definitely not to mention DECpresent). The UK's
(and later European) DECdirect catalogues (and teams) were marvellous
tools in this respect - a catalogue that kept customers informed, and
a mechanism to order things, often at sensible prices.

Those DECdirect catalogues were indeed a mine of information, and the
prices quite good.

[ChrisQ]

Post by John Wallace
Never ported to what other OSes? It was available for VMS, Unix
(Ultrix, OSF/1->Tru64), Windows... feel free to find the SPDs and see
for yourself.
Of course, it's entirely understandable if you didn't actually know
this, as making customers aware of what was available wasn't always a
core DEC competency, and there was also a corporate reluctance to
deploy workstations internally for the then-newfangled Compound
Document Architecture stuff like DECwrite, not to mention tools like
DECdecision etc (and definitely not to mention DECpresent). The UK's
(and later European) DECdirect catalogues (and teams) were marvellous
tools in this respect - a catalogue that kept customers informed, and
a mechanism to order things, often at sensible prices.

As you say, another example of dec stealth marketing. Thinking back to
the time, dec had all the components and technology to cover the whole
field of computing, but don't want to get depressed again thinking about
the decline and fall.

You are right about the Dec Direct catalogs though. Well illustrated and
good descriptions, though some of the prices in europe were eyewatering
:-). I remember seeing a Dec Direct catalog page showing a dec cabinet,
3 ra60's high, ready for connection, at a price of 66,000 (Yes,
thousands). Eeek :-). A tad expensive for ~600 Mbytes of storage, but
those were the days.

I would love to find a copy of Decwrite other than for vax/vms, either
for Tru64 or windows. I doubt if one could buy a copy now, but still
have a Tru64 box to run it on. I wonder if anyone has a copy to trade /
lend / whatever ?...

Regards,

Chris

[Paul Sture]

Post by ChrisQ
You are right about the Dec Direct catalogs though. Well illustrated and
good descriptions, though some of the prices in europe were eyewatering
:-). I remember seeing a Dec Direct catalog page showing a dec cabinet,
3 ra60's high, ready for connection, at a price of 66,000 (Yes,
thousands). Eeek :-). A tad expensive for ~600 Mbytes of storage, but
those were the days.

I remember being told what an extension cabinet to our first PDP cost,
and having worked in a metal bashing shop during student holidays
thinking that my ex-employers could give them serious competition. This
of course is what a lot of OEMs did in the 1970s and 80s.

[John Wallace]

Post by Paul Sture

Post by ChrisQ
You are right about the Dec Direct catalogs though. Well illustrated and
good descriptions, though some of the prices in europe were eyewatering
:-). I remember seeing a Dec Direct catalog page showing a dec cabinet,
3 ra60's high, ready for connection, at a price of 66,000 (Yes,
thousands). Eeek :-). A tad expensive for ~600 Mbytes of storage, but
those were the days.

I remember being told what an extension cabinet to our first PDP cost,
and having worked in a metal bashing shop during student holidays
thinking that my ex-employers could give them serious competition.  This
of course is what a lot of OEMs did in the 1970s and 80s.
--
Paul Sture

"a lot of OEMs did [reboxing etc] in the 1970s and 80s."

One of them would be Systime, who I had the pleasure of visiting in
Leeds when my then employer was looking at buying their first VAX (in
the days of the 780->785 transition). There's probably a book for
someone to write about what went on between DEC, Systime, the UK
government and the US government; I had no idea at the time, and still
don't really know what to believe.. Work eventually bought genuine
DEC, by which time I'd moved elsewhere.

Eventually after Systime departed the Millshaw Park building, First
Direct moved in (the same First Direct referred to in another recent
post where you mentioned Cellnet).

[Paul Sture]

In article

Post by John Wallace
"a lot of OEMs did [reboxing etc] in the 1970s and 80s."

DEC UK seemed to alternate between pushing customers to OEMs and wanting
to sell to customers direct in that time. ISTR quite a few OEMs going
out of business because DEC suddenly tightened credit terms. It didn't
impress us when we were looking to upgrade, so we went non-DEC.

Post by John Wallace
One of them would be Systime, who I had the pleasure of visiting in
Leeds when my then employer was looking at buying their first VAX (in
the days of the 780->785 transition). There's probably a book for
someone to write about what went on between DEC, Systime, the UK
government and the US government; I had no idea at the time, and still
don't really know what to believe.. Work eventually bought genuine
DEC, by which time I'd moved elsewhere.

I too heard the rumours.

Post by John Wallace
Eventually after Systime departed the Millshaw Park building, First
Direct moved in (the same First Direct referred to in another recent
post where you mentioned Cellnet).

Asda moved into that building while Systime were still there, (filling
the space vacated by the latest round of redundancies).

[Hans Bachner]

ChrisQ <***@devnull.com> wrote:

<snip>

Post by ChrisQ
I was disappointed by the fact that DecWrite was never ported to other
os's. An old copy that I used on microvax seemed quite good, if a
little prosaic and slow in it's user interface. A good application
trying to escape, was the impression. It could have been a valid
competitor to uSoft with more development, especially with all the
effort going into Alpha at the time. There, dec had a machine fast
enough to run it...

In fact there was a DECwrite version available for Windows. I had (still
have) it running on my first PC, a DECpc XL purchased 18 years ago. I
think I used it with Windows (for Workgroups) 3.x, and with Windows 95
(and NT 4.0). It had several advantages over MS Word at that time, the
most important for me was working with the same software (and the same
documents) on the VAX in the office and the PC at home.

Unfortnately, much development effort was put into MS Word, while
DECwrite was cancelled :-(

Hans.

[Paul Sture]

Post by ChrisQ
I was disappointed by the fact that DecWrite was never ported to other
os's. An old copy that I used on microvax seemed quite good, if a little
prosaic and slow in it's user interface. A good application trying to
escape, was the impression. It could have been a valid competitor to
uSoft with more development, especially with all the effort going into
Alpha at the time. There, dec had a machine fast enough to run it...

DEC did produce a Windows word processor, but I can't remember whether
it was a DECwrite look alike or not. I tried a demo copy circa 1993 and
it was slick.

DECwrite worked well on an Alpha. I certainly don't recall any problems
with speed.

[urbancamo]

Post by ChrisQ

Post by urbancamo
Microsoft Word is quite possibly the worst piece of software I've ever
used (and I've used a good few versions now!) - bugs introduced early
on have to be treated as features to maintain compatibility over
sanity.
Mark.

Like much modern packaged software, word probably satisfies and
frustrates users to an equal degree, Providing you don't want to do
anything too clever, it gets the job done, but suffers from excess
featuritis, when all you want to do is write a letter. I use an older
pre uSoft version of Visio and other packages for drawing and they too
get the job done without too much drama. We might all bemoan the quality
of old, but the world has moved on and present day graphics intensive
applications would be unusable on older dec hardware. Sad fact, but true.

The problem with Word is that fundamental stuff that was broken in
early versions is still broken.
Put it this way, I recently tried to create a letter template with a
special header and footer on the first page. Doesn't sound too
complicated, does it?
You can't do it in Word. Bugs prevent it, and if you search the web
you find Microsoft employees who are equally frustrated that they
can't fix the bugs either, because it must remain backwards compatible
(probably for software that hooks into the word engine and creates
documents automatically). Of course this smacks of bad design. I had
to literally jump through hoops to get *anything* to look right, after
having to think creatively about what other features I might be able
to bring to bear.

Please note, I'm not a Microsoft hater - Publisher for example is a
good tool that does what you expect it to. What saddens me the most is
that people who use it don't know any better and accept such poor
quality software as the norm.

Mark

[seasoned_geek]

Post by urbancamo

Post by ChrisQ

Post by urbancamo
Microsoft Word is quite possibly the worst piece of software I've ever
used (and I've used a good few versions now!) - bugs introduced early
on have to be treated as features to maintain compatibility over
sanity.
Mark.

Like much modern packaged software, word probably satisfies and
frustrates users to an equal degree, Providing you don't want to do
anything too clever, it gets the job done, but suffers from excess
featuritis, when all you want to do is write a letter. I use an older
pre uSoft version of Visio and other packages for drawing and they too
get the job done without too much drama. We might all bemoan the quality
of old, but the world has moved on and present day graphics intensive
applications would be unusable on older dec hardware. Sad fact, but true.

The problem with Word is that fundamental stuff that was broken in
early versions is still broken.
Put it this way, I recently tried to create a letter template with a
special header and footer on the first page. Doesn't sound too
complicated, does it?
You can't do it in Word. Bugs prevent it, and if you search the web
you find Microsoft employees who are equally frustrated that they
can't fix the bugs either, because it must remain backwards compatible
(probably for software that hooks into the word engine and creates
documents automatically). Of course this smacks of bad design. I had
to literally jump through hoops to get *anything* to look right, after
having to think creatively about what other features I might be able
to bring to bear.
Please note, I'm not a Microsoft hater - Publisher for example is a
good tool that does what you expect it to. What saddens me the most is
that people who use it don't know any better and accept such poor
quality software as the norm.
Mark

You should download and try both OpenOffice and IBM's Lotus Symphony.
I have used both to layout my books in the past.

This book:
http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com/soa_book.html
Was written with OpenOffice and Gimp for the screen shots. I don't
remember which opensource answer to Visio I used for the system flow
on the cover, but believe it was the KDEOffice component.

This book:
http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com/xbase_book.html
Was also done with OpenOffice (later version) gimp for the screen and
the KDEOffice answer to Visio for the cover diagram.

This book:
http://www.infiniteexposure.net/order.html
was done with Lotus Symphony 1.x. I did hire out the dust jacket to
someone in Canada who did dust jackets for a living. No idea what
they used to size and layout, but I gave them the initial cover and
concept.

These three books were all done with WordPerfect and the last
sacrificial Windows partition I had.
http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com/logic_book.html
http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com/app_book.html (actually mostly
done with Lotus WordPro until I needed PDF for printing firms)
http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com/java_book.html

[Marc Van Dyck]

Post by John Reagan
I don't know what the printer manuals used, but for the language manuals the
diagrams were produced by a internal tool called RAGS. By the time, I saw
them, they were in .eps format.
John

RAGS was later made an official product, and integreated in
DECdocument.
You could activate it with the command DOCUMENT/GRAPHICS.

If I remember well, DECdocument, along with DECwrite, and a few others,
were transferred to a company named Touch Technologies. I have been
in relation with them when I wanted to buy DECinspect, another product
that got transferred. It stopped abruptly when I requested them to
show me their Integrity porting plans. None of those products were
ever ported and I don't know whether the company still exists. I still
regret DECdocument today.

Fortunately, I don't have too much work to with MS Word, as management
today only wants to see bulleted lists and green smileys. For that,
slides out of MS Powerpoint are largely enough. And for serious docs,
I reverted to Runoff...

[Paul Sture]

Post by Marc Van Dyck

Post by John Reagan
I don't know what the printer manuals used, but for the language manuals the
diagrams were produced by a internal tool called RAGS. By the time, I saw
them, they were in .eps format.
John

RAGS was later made an official product, and integreated in
DECdocument.
You could activate it with the command DOCUMENT/GRAPHICS.
If I remember well, DECdocument, along with DECwrite, and a few others,
were transferred to a company named Touch Technologies. I have been
in relation with them when I wanted to buy DECinspect, another product
that got transferred. It stopped abruptly when I requested them to
show me their Integrity porting plans. None of those products were
ever ported and I don't know whether the company still exists. I still
regret DECdocument today.
Fortunately, I don't have too much work to with MS Word, as management
today only wants to see bulleted lists and green smileys. For that,
slides out of MS Powerpoint are largely enough. And for serious docs,
I reverted to Runoff...

Good old Runoff. I was thinking of it with fond memories the other day
when trying to persuade Word to do a numbered list correctly.

[Richard B. Gilbert]

Post by Paul Sture

Post by Marc Van Dyck

Post by John Reagan
I don't know what the printer manuals used, but for the language manuals the
diagrams were produced by a internal tool called RAGS. By the time, I saw
them, they were in .eps format.
John

RAGS was later made an official product, and integreated in
DECdocument.
You could activate it with the command DOCUMENT/GRAPHICS.
If I remember well, DECdocument, along with DECwrite, and a few others,
were transferred to a company named Touch Technologies. I have been
in relation with them when I wanted to buy DECinspect, another product
that got transferred. It stopped abruptly when I requested them to
show me their Integrity porting plans. None of those products were
ever ported and I don't know whether the company still exists. I still
regret DECdocument today.
Fortunately, I don't have too much work to with MS Word, as management
today only wants to see bulleted lists and green smileys. For that,
slides out of MS Powerpoint are largely enough. And for serious docs,
I reverted to Runoff...

Good old Runoff. I was thinking of it with fond memories the other day
when trying to persuade Word to do a numbered list correctly.

Ahhhh!!!!! Memories. Runoff, ROFF for short, was my first word
processor. Back in the dark ages, text was entered via 80 column
punched cards. Card punches punched upper case only unless you
memorized the punch codes and could do tricky things with a keyboard
that was upper case only.

I wouldn't go back for anything!!!

[Johnny Billquist]

Post by Marc Van Dyck

Post by John Reagan
I don't know what the printer manuals used, but for the language
manuals
the
diagrams were produced by a internal tool called RAGS. By the time,
I saw
them, they were in .eps format.
John

RAGS was later made an official product, and integreated in
DECdocument.
You could activate it with the command DOCUMENT/GRAPHICS.
If I remember well, DECdocument, along with DECwrite, and a few others,
were transferred to a company named Touch Technologies. I have been
in relation with them when I wanted to buy DECinspect, another product
that got transferred. It stopped abruptly when I requested them to
show me their Integrity porting plans. None of those products were
ever ported and I don't know whether the company still exists. I still
regret DECdocument today.
Fortunately, I don't have too much work to with MS Word, as management
today only wants to see bulleted lists and green smileys. For that,
slides out of MS Powerpoint are largely enough. And for serious docs,
I reverted to Runoff...

Good old Runoff. I was thinking of it with fond memories the other day
when trying to persuade Word to do a numbered list correctly.

Ahhhh!!!!! Memories. Runoff, ROFF for short, was my first word
processor. Back in the dark ages, text was entered via 80 column punched
cards. Card punches punched upper case only unless you memorized the
punch codes and could do tricky things with a keyboard that was upper
case only.
I wouldn't go back for anything!!!

I doubt very many would want to go back to punched cards and uppercase
only terminals...

Johnny

[legalize+ (Richard)]

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by Johnny Billquist
I doubt very many would want to go back to punched cards and uppercase
only terminals...

Tektronix 4010 terminals are upper case only :-)

[glen herrmannsfeldt]

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by Johnny Billquist
I doubt very many would want to go back to punched cards and uppercase
only terminals...

Tektronix 4010 terminals are upper case only :-)

The 4012 and 4013 have upper and lower case, though.

-- glen

[Johnny Billquist]

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by Johnny Billquist
I doubt very many would want to go back to punched cards and uppercase
only terminals...

Tektronix 4010 terminals are upper case only :-)

I know... So are VT05.
I can't remember if the 4010 also ran in two columns, like the 4014.
Anyway, it's not a terminal for interactive sessions. But they are ok
for playing with graphics (if you don't mind static ones).

Johnny

[Bob Koehler]

Post by Johnny Billquist
I know... So are VT05.

So the ADM-3 was an advancement? (Caps lock was a dip switch under
a screwed-on cover.)

[Johnny Billquist]

Post by Bob Koehler

Post by Johnny Billquist
I know... So are VT05.

So the ADM-3 was an advancement? (Caps lock was a dip switch under
a screwed-on cover.)

Unless I remember wrong, the ADM-3 did not have cursor addressing, that
came with the ADM-3a. The VT05 do have cursor addressing. So,
advancement? Not sure.

Johnny

[Bob Koehler]

Post by Johnny Billquist
Unless I remember wrong, the ADM-3 did not have cursor addressing, that
came with the ADM-3a. The VT05 do have cursor addressing. So,
advancement? Not sure.

Maybe they were 3a, or a mixture of 3 and 3a. At least some of them
did direct cursor addressing, using sequences that started with ^G
(bell) instead of escape.

This caused havoc for folks who tried to use them with VMS, when
someone sent out a repl/all/bell. Like in SYSHUTDOWN.COM.

We also got some ADM-4, which completly failed to be VT100
compatable, even though that's what the purcahser though he was
buying. At least caps-lock moved to the keyboard.

[Michael Moroney]

Post by Bob Koehler

Post by Johnny Billquist
I know... So are VT05.

So the ADM-3 was an advancement? (Caps lock was a dip switch under
a screwed-on cover.)

Hah! I remember the ADM-3A's in the computer center lab at college. The
terminal was locked into all-caps mode. The Unix people, who needed lower
case, would open the cover, often prying it open with force because they
had no screwdriver, to put the terminal in lower case mode. Other
computers didn't understand lower case and those who used them put them
into upper case. I think the operators were told to keep the terminals in
upper case mode because the computer center's mainframe computers were the
ones which worked in upper case only mode, the Unix systems belonged to
the computer science department. Other groups (engineering, statistics
etc.) used the computer center's mainframe.

Those terminals quickly had those little covers bent or lost, and many
ADM-3A's failed because the little switch pack got damaged by being
repeatedly switched between upper and lower case modes without anyone
being delicate enough with those poor little switches.

A "Caps Lock" switch seems to be such a no-brainer these days...

[legalize+ (Richard)]

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by Michael Moroney

Post by Bob Koehler

Post by Johnny Billquist
I know... So are VT05.

So the ADM-3 was an advancement? (Caps lock was a dip switch under
a screwed-on cover.)

Hah! I remember the ADM-3A's in the computer center lab at college. The
terminal was locked into all-caps mode. The Unix people, who needed lower
case, [...]

Its possible to use unix from a upper-case only terminal. There are
stty modes to translate uppercase characters to lowercase characters
with an escape character for when you truly need uppercase characters.

[glen herrmannsfeldt]

In comp.os.vms Richard <legalize+***@mail.xmission.com> wrote:
(snip, someone wrote)

Post by legalize+ (Richard)

Post by Michael Moroney
Hah! I remember the ADM-3A's in the computer center lab at college. The
terminal was locked into all-caps mode. The Unix people, who needed lower
case, [...]

Its possible to use unix from a upper-case only terminal. There are
stty modes to translate uppercase characters to lowercase characters
with an escape character for when you truly need uppercase characters.

As well as I remember, if you login with your username all upper
case, then it turns on the case conversion mode, such that you escape
them if you want them to stay upper case.

-- glen

[Scott Dorsey]

Post by glen herrmannsfeldt
(snip, someone wrote)

Post by legalize+ (Richard)

Post by Michael Moroney
Hah! I remember the ADM-3A's in the computer center lab at college. The
terminal was locked into all-caps mode. The Unix people, who needed lower
case, [...]

Its possible to use unix from a upper-case only terminal. There are
stty modes to translate uppercase characters to lowercase characters
with an escape character for when you truly need uppercase characters.

As well as I remember, if you login with your username all upper
case, then it turns on the case conversion mode, such that you escape
them if you want them to stay upper case.

This was the case for Ultrix and SunOS.

It is no longer the case any more... Solaris and the last few NetBSD
revisions no longer support uppercase-only mode.
--scott

[legalize+ (Richard)]

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by glen herrmannsfeldt
(snip, someone wrote)

Post by legalize+ (Richard)

Post by Michael Moroney
Hah! I remember the ADM-3A's in the computer center lab at college. The
terminal was locked into all-caps mode. The Unix people, who needed lower
case, [...]

Its possible to use unix from a upper-case only terminal. There are
stty modes to translate uppercase characters to lowercase characters
with an escape character for when you truly need uppercase characters.

As well as I remember, if you login with your username all upper
case, then it turns on the case conversion mode, such that you escape
them if you want them to stay upper case.

That's what I remember too. I also remembering logging in that way
before I realized that the last person on the terminal left the CAPS
LOCK key engaged :-). Then you learn the stty modes to disable the
case conversion after you turn off CAPS LOCK.

I found documentation on the modes for stty but I couldn't find
anything in the current man pages about login's behavior, though.

[legalize+ (Richard)]

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by Johnny Billquist

Post by legalize+ (Richard)

Post by Johnny Billquist
I doubt very many would want to go back to punched cards and uppercase
only terminals...

Tektronix 4010 terminals are upper case only :-)

I know... So are VT05.

Oddly enough, I encounter many more Tektronix 401x terminals than I do
VT05s!

Post by Johnny Billquist
I can't remember if the 4010 also ran in two columns, like the 4014.

It does.

Post by Johnny Billquist
Anyway, it's not a terminal for interactive sessions. But they are ok
for playing with graphics (if you don't mind static ones).

I did lots of interactive sessions on it. Also, its a little known
fact that you *can* have dynamic graphics on a 401x terminal, just not
very many vectors can be refreshed fast enough for anything more than
a small moving graphic. Its done with the same mechanism that is used
to do the graphic crosshair cursor.

[Johnny Billquist]

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by Johnny Billquist

Post by legalize+ (Richard)

Post by Johnny Billquist
I doubt very many would want to go back to punched cards and uppercase
only terminals...

Tektronix 4010 terminals are upper case only :-)

I know... So are VT05.

Oddly enough, I encounter many more Tektronix 401x terminals than I do
VT05s!

Well. I haven't touched a VT05 in about 20 years now. I don't know if I
could locate one if I wanted to. I'd have to check with old contacts for
that... I've not seen any in the wild for a long time.

On the other hand, I can say the same for the 401x terminals...

Post by legalize+ (Richard)

Post by Johnny Billquist
I can't remember if the 4010 also ran in two columns, like the 4014.

It does.

Figured. Makes it weird when you go over the "middle". :-)

Post by legalize+ (Richard)

Post by Johnny Billquist
Anyway, it's not a terminal for interactive sessions. But they are ok
for playing with graphics (if you don't mind static ones).

I did lots of interactive sessions on it. Also, its a little known
fact that you *can* have dynamic graphics on a 401x terminal, just not
very many vectors can be refreshed fast enough for anything more than
a small moving graphic. Its done with the same mechanism that is used
to do the graphic crosshair cursor.

I know that you can have a vector or two that is dynamic (if you asked
me, I thought it was just one, but it's been a few years since I played
with this).
But I guess you could always switch between several vectors by software.
But that will really limited, since you run at rather slow serial
speeds, and the vector drawing itself is rather slow, requiring lots of
fillers if you draw long ones.

Johnny

[legalize+ (Richard)]

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by Johnny Billquist

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by Johnny Billquist

Post by legalize+ (Richard)

Post by Johnny Billquist
I doubt very many would want to go back to punched cards and uppercase
only terminals...

Tektronix 4010 terminals are upper case only :-)

I know... So are VT05.

Oddly enough, I encounter many more Tektronix 401x terminals than I do
VT05s!

Well. I haven't touched a VT05 in about 20 years now. I don't know if I
could locate one if I wanted to. I'd have to check with old contacts for
that... I've not seen any in the wild for a long time.

I'd love to get my hands on one. I got an LA30 and it would be great
to have the companion CRT model.

Post by Johnny Billquist
On the other hand, I can say the same for the 401x terminals...

I think I've just been lucky with these; most have been made available
to me by legwork. They show up on ebay occasionally, but they end up
being pricier there.

Post by Johnny Billquist

Post by legalize+ (Richard)

Post by Johnny Billquist
I can't remember if the 4010 also ran in two columns, like the 4014.

It does.

Figured. Makes it weird when you go over the "middle". :-)

Yep :-)

Post by Johnny Billquist

Post by legalize+ (Richard)

Post by Johnny Billquist
Anyway, it's not a terminal for interactive sessions. But they are ok
for playing with graphics (if you don't mind static ones).

I did lots of interactive sessions on it. Also, its a little known
fact that you *can* have dynamic graphics on a 401x terminal, just not
very many vectors can be refreshed fast enough for anything more than
a small moving graphic. Its done with the same mechanism that is used
to do the graphic crosshair cursor.

I know that you can have a vector or two that is dynamic (if you asked
me, I thought it was just one, but it's been a few years since I played
with this).

The limit to the number of vectors you can have is based on how
quickly you can transmit to the terminal. Basically you have to do
active refresh with dynamic vectors and at 9600 baud, that's not a lot
of vectors.

Post by Johnny Billquist
But I guess you could always switch between several vectors by software.
But that will really limited, since you run at rather slow serial
speeds, and the vector drawing itself is rather slow, requiring lots of
fillers if you draw long ones.

I never needed to supply any fill characters when drawing vectors, but
it could be because we typically had 300 baud connections.

[Johnny Billquist]

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by Johnny Billquist

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by Johnny Billquist

Post by legalize+ (Richard)

Post by Johnny Billquist
I doubt very many would want to go back to punched cards and uppercase
only terminals...

Tektronix 4010 terminals are upper case only :-)

I know... So are VT05.

Oddly enough, I encounter many more Tektronix 401x terminals than I do
VT05s!

Well. I haven't touched a VT05 in about 20 years now. I don't know if I
could locate one if I wanted to. I'd have to check with old contacts for
that... I've not seen any in the wild for a long time.

I'd love to get my hands on one. I got an LA30 and it would be great
to have the companion CRT model.

If I could locate any, it would be in Sweden. Probably not too practical
from where ever you might live anyway... :-)

Post by legalize+ (Richard)

Post by Johnny Billquist

Post by legalize+ (Richard)

Post by Johnny Billquist
Anyway, it's not a terminal for interactive sessions. But they are ok
for playing with graphics (if you don't mind static ones).

I did lots of interactive sessions on it. Also, its a little known
fact that you *can* have dynamic graphics on a 401x terminal, just not
very many vectors can be refreshed fast enough for anything more than
a small moving graphic. Its done with the same mechanism that is used
to do the graphic crosshair cursor.

I know that you can have a vector or two that is dynamic (if you asked
me, I thought it was just one, but it's been a few years since I played
with this).

The limit to the number of vectors you can have is based on how
quickly you can transmit to the terminal. Basically you have to do
active refresh with dynamic vectors and at 9600 baud, that's not a lot
of vectors.

You do not need to do active refresh on the one vector, or am I
remembering that wrong?
But in case you want more, then you need to redraw each one in turn all
the time.

Post by legalize+ (Richard)

Post by Johnny Billquist
But I guess you could always switch between several vectors by software.
But that will really limited, since you run at rather slow serial
speeds, and the vector drawing itself is rather slow, requiring lots of
fillers if you draw long ones.

I never needed to supply any fill characters when drawing vectors, but
it could be because we typically had 300 baud connections.

Heh. That could be the reason. At 4800 bps, you need several fillers if
you go from one end of the screen to the other.

Johnny

[legalize+ (Richard)]

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by Johnny Billquist

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
I'd love to get my hands on one. I got an LA30 and it would be great
to have the companion CRT model.

If I could locate any, it would be in Sweden. Probably not too practical
from where ever you might live anyway... :-)

I bought a PLATO terminal and local compute system from the UK. It
was pretty pricey, but it was unique enough to warrant the expense.
However, I think for DEC video terminals I should only be looking
overseas as an absolute last resort; they made enough of these (VT05)
for the US market that I should have a better chance of finding one in
the states.

Post by Johnny Billquist

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
The limit to the number of vectors you can have is based on how
quickly you can transmit to the terminal. Basically you have to do
active refresh with dynamic vectors and at 9600 baud, that's not a lot
of vectors.

You do not need to do active refresh on the one vector, or am I
remembering that wrong?

According to the User's Manual, pg. 1-9,
<http://bitsavers.org/pdf/tektronix/401x/070-1647-00_4014_UsersMan_Nov79.pdf>

"Write-Thru. A display writing operation that prevents
information from storing as it is being written, yet does not
change the viewing status of previously stored information. Once
Write-Thru is enabled, information being written must be
"refreshed" by the computer (or peripheral) to be useful.
Intensity of written data depends on the refresh rate and the
Write-Thru adjustment on the right side of the keyboard.
Write-Thru can be used in either Alpha or Graph modes. When in
Write-Thru Alpha Mode, the Terminal automatically increases its
maximum writing speed from the normal 1000 characters per second
to 4000 characters per second."

Post by Johnny Billquist

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
I never needed to supply any fill characters when drawing vectors, but
it could be because we typically had 300 baud connections.

Heh. That could be the reason. At 4800 bps, you need several fillers if
you go from one end of the screen to the other.

Interesting... I'll need to remember that as I'm not going to be
hooking these up over 300 baud lines :-).

[Johnny Billquist]

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by Johnny Billquist

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
The limit to the number of vectors you can have is based on how
quickly you can transmit to the terminal. Basically you have to do
active refresh with dynamic vectors and at 9600 baud, that's not a lot
of vectors.

You do not need to do active refresh on the one vector, or am I
remembering that wrong?

According to the User's Manual, pg. 1-9,
<http://bitsavers.org/pdf/tektronix/401x/070-1647-00_4014_UsersMan_Nov79.pdf>
"Write-Thru. A display writing operation that prevents
information from storing as it is being written, yet does not
change the viewing status of previously stored information. Once
Write-Thru is enabled, information being written must be
"refreshed" by the computer (or peripheral) to be useful.
Intensity of written data depends on the refresh rate and the
Write-Thru adjustment on the right side of the keyboard.
Write-Thru can be used in either Alpha or Graph modes. When in
Write-Thru Alpha Mode, the Terminal automatically increases its
maximum writing speed from the normal 1000 characters per second
to 4000 characters per second."

Ah! Thanks for the refresher. Yes, you're right. It just draws a line
that immediately disappears again. I'm starting to remember details. :-)

Post by legalize+ (Richard)

Post by Johnny Billquist

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
I never needed to supply any fill characters when drawing vectors, but
it could be because we typically had 300 baud connections.

Heh. That could be the reason. At 4800 bps, you need several fillers if
you go from one end of the screen to the other.

Interesting... I'll need to remember that as I'm not going to be
hooking these up over 300 baud lines :-).

You'll notice when you run, if nothing else. Your vectors will be
"truncated", when it starts processing the next command before the
previous one had time to complete.

Johnny

[MetaEd]

Post by Johnny Billquist
Well. I haven't touched a VT05 in about 20 years now. I don't know
if I could locate one if I wanted to. I'd have to check with old
contacts for that... I've not seen any in the wild for a long
time.

I have a VT05 that worked last I knew, and about three more that
have some parts scavenged out of them. They are very heavy. They
also truly deserve their nickname "glass ttys". Probably have at
least one manual too.

[Johnny Billquist]

Post by MetaEd

Post by Johnny Billquist
Well. I haven't touched a VT05 in about 20 years now. I don't know
if I could locate one if I wanted to. I'd have to check with old
contacts for that... I've not seen any in the wild for a long
time.

I have a VT05 that worked last I knew, and about three more that
have some parts scavenged out of them. They are very heavy. They
also truly deserve their nickname "glass ttys". Probably have at
least one manual too.

I don't buy the "glass tty" moniker. I don't know why you'd call them
that. They clearly have capabilities that goes beyond a tty, such as
cursor addressing and clear screen function, so you can do most things
on them. The main restrictions would be the uppercase only, and the
20x72 "resolution" (if I remember right).

Johnny

[MetaEd]

Post by Johnny Billquist
I don't buy the "glass tty" moniker. I don't know why you'd call
them that. They clearly have capabilities that goes beyond a tty,
such as cursor addressing and clear screen function, so you can do
most things on them. The main restrictions would be the uppercase
only, and the 20x72 "resolution" (if I remember right).

There are differences, yes. But the VT05 is specifically designed to
faithfully reproduce the limitations of a teletype, such as the 63
character set, 72 character positions, scrolling in one direction
only, and the need for fill characters.

Therefore, if you do not consider the VT05 a glass tty, then perhaps
your definition is quite narrow ... perhaps there are no glass ttys
at all by your account?

I concede that cursor addressing does not reproduce an ASR33
function, but I do not concede clear screen. Clear screen faithfully
reproduces the ASR33 platen knob and paper tearpoint. :-)

Cheers,

MetaEd

[legalize+ (Richard)]

[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by MetaEd

Post by Johnny Billquist
Well. I haven't touched a VT05 in about 20 years now. I don't know
if I could locate one if I wanted to. I'd have to check with old
contacts for that... I've not seen any in the wild for a long
time.

I have a VT05 that worked last I knew, and about three more that
have some parts scavenged out of them. They are very heavy. They
also truly deserve their nickname "glass ttys". Probably have at
least one manual too.

When you collect terminals and graphics systems, you get used to heavy
things: <https://picasaweb.google.com/legalize.slc>

I'd love to fill out the line of DEC terminals with a VT05. I've got:

- LA30
- LA36
- LA120
- VT100 + flavors
- VT220
- VT240
- VT320
- VT1300
- DECmate
- GIGI
- Selanar 3rd-party graphics for VT100
- RetroGraphics 3rd-party graphics for VT100

Ideally I'd like to get a VT55, a VT52 with monochrome graphics.

[Richard B. Gilbert]

Post by legalize+ (Richard)
[Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]

Post by Johnny Billquist
I doubt very many would want to go back to punched cards and uppercase
only terminals...

Tektronix 4010 terminals are upper case only :-)

Thanks for the warning. I will take care not to buy one!

[Paul Sture]

Post by Johnny Billquist
I doubt very many would want to go back to punched cards and uppercase
only terminals...

Discovering how to enable lower case input in the RT-11 editor was a
Eureka moment here. I used it for program comments ond a homespun
version of SYS$ANNOUNCE / SYS$WELCOME.

[Bob Koehler]

Post by Paul Sture
Good old Runoff. I was thinking of it with fond memories the other day
when trying to persuade Word to do a numbered list correctly.

Couple of GB of RAm on an older laptop, and Microsoft still can't
find enough fingers and toes to count to 10 reliably.

[Paul Sture]

Post by Bob Koehler

Post by Paul Sture
Good old Runoff. I was thinking of it with fond memories the other day
when trying to persuade Word to do a numbered list correctly.

Couple of GB of RAm on an older laptop, and Microsoft still can't
find enough fingers and toes to count to 10 reliably.

;-)

To be honest I don't think I've ever got a "modern" word processor to do
chapter/section/paragraph numbering sequences right through a document
the way that DSR or DEC Document did. Not without considerable effort
anyway.

Random sample from VMS documentation (Clustering):

1.1 OpenVMS Cluster ConÞgurations
1.2 Hardware Components
1.3 Software Components
1.3.1 OpenVMS Operating System Components
1.3.2 Networking Components
1.3.3 Storage Enhancement Software
1.3.4 System Management Software
1.3.5 Business Applications
1.4 ConÞguring an OpenVMS Cluster System
1.4.1 General ConÞguration Rules

[Phillip Helbig---undress to reply]

In article

Post by urbancamo
I was just looking through a DEC printer manual PDF and noticed that
the diagrams are really quite fantastic, both in detail and quality.
The manual states that VAX Document V2.0 was used to prepare the
manual, I wondered if anyone on the list knew what software was used
to produce the diagrams?

I think in general the documentation produced 20 years ago on VMS is
superior to most documentation today.

[V***@SendSpamHere.ORG]

Post by Phillip Helbig---undress to reply
In article

Post by urbancamo
I was just looking through a DEC printer manual PDF and noticed that
the diagrams are really quite fantastic, both in detail and quality.
The manual states that VAX Document V2.0 was used to prepare the
manual, I wondered if anyone on the list knew what software was used
to produce the diagrams?

I think in general the documentation produced 20 years ago on VMS is
superior to most documentation today.

That's because today's documentation is all on YouTube.