[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Tim Newsham]

just for fun, you might want to run your
ancient unix in simh using this terminal:
https://github.com/Swordifish90/cool-old-term

-- 
Tim Newsham | www.thenewsh.com/~newsham | @newshtwit | thenewsh.blogspot.com

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Dave Horsfall]

On Thu, 31 Jul 2014, Tim Newsham wrote:

> just for fun, you might want to run your
> ancient unix in simh using this terminal:
> https://github.com/Swordifish90/cool-old-term

Gadzooks - that takes me back!  Curved screen and everything...

-- Dave

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Dario Niedermann]

Tim Newsham <tim.newsham at gmail.com> wrote:

> just for fun, you might want to run your
> ancient unix in simh using this terminal:
> https://github.com/Swordifish90/cool-old-term

Cool! I've been waiting for ages for something like the Cathode terminal emulator
to appear on Linux too. Cathode is Mac OS X only, unfortunately.
Homepage:   http://devio.us/~ndr/
Gopherhole: gopher://retro-net.org/1/dnied/

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Andy Kosela]

On Friday, August 1, 2014, Dario Niedermann <dnied at tiscali.it> wrote:

> Tim Newsham <tim.newsham at gmail.com <javascript:;>> wrote:
>
> > just for fun, you might want to run your
> > ancient unix in simh using this terminal:
> > https://github.com/Swordifish90/cool-old-term
>
> Cool! I've been waiting for ages for something like the Cathode terminal
> emulator
> to appear on Linux too. Cathode is Mac OS X only, unfortunately.
> Homepage:   http://devio.us/~ndr/
> Gopherhole: gopher://retro-net.org/1/dnied/
>
>
I still prefer my old Digital VT terminal though.  Nothing will beat CRT
screen when it comes to low resolution text-only mode.

--Andy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20140801/a42e960a/attachment.html>

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Milo Velimirović]

On Aug 1, 2014, at 10:13 AM, Andy Kosela <akosela at andykosela.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> On Friday, August 1, 2014, Dario Niedermann <dnied at tiscali.it> wrote:
> Tim Newsham <tim.newsham at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > just for fun, you might want to run your
> > ancient unix in simh using this terminal:
> > https://github.com/Swordifish90/cool-old-term
> 
> Cool! I've been waiting for ages for something like the Cathode terminal emulator
> to appear on Linux too. Cathode is Mac OS X only, unfortunately.
> Homepage:   http://devio.us/~ndr/
> Gopherhole: gopher://retro-net.org/1/dnied/
> 
> 
> I still prefer my old Digital VT terminal though.  Nothing will beat CRT screen when it comes to low resolution text-only mode.

With a keyboard that has the CTRL key in the location where $DEITY intended it to be.

 - MV

> 
> --Andy 
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20140801/e9c2c256/attachment.html>

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Mary Ann Horton]

Yes!

The Sun 5c US/UNIX Keyboard (USB) is widely available and reasonably  
priced, and many of them have Control and Esc where God put them!

I bought a lifetime supply (a pack of 5) on ebay several months ago.

Nobody else can stand to use my keyboard :)

Quoting Milo Velimirovi? <milov at cs.uwlax.edu>:


> With a keyboard that has the CTRL key in the location where $DEITY  
> intended it to be.
>
>  - MV

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Cory Smelosky]

On Fri, 1 Aug 2014, Mary Ann Horton wrote:

> I bought a lifetime supply (a pack of 5) on ebay several months ago.
>

Hehe. ;)

> Nobody else can stand to use my keyboard :)
>

Really? Aside from the extra keys and a couple being in different 
locations I can't imagine anyone having too many issues!

> Quoting Milo Velimirovi? <milov at cs.uwlax.edu>:
>
>
>> With a keyboard that has the CTRL key in the location where $DEITY intended 
>> it to be.
>> 
>> - MV
>
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

-- 
Cory Smelosky
http://gewt.net Personal stuff
http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Tim Newsham]

coincidentally both keyboard design and music
composition reached their pinnacle during my
formative years.
(... and editors!)

On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 7:59 AM, Cory Smelosky <b4 at gewt.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Aug 2014, Mary Ann Horton wrote:
>
>> I bought a lifetime supply (a pack of 5) on ebay several months ago.
>>
>
> Hehe. ;)
>
>
>> Nobody else can stand to use my keyboard :)
>>
>
> Really? Aside from the extra keys and a couple being in different locations
> I can't imagine anyone having too many issues!
>
>
>> Quoting Milo Velimirovi? <milov at cs.uwlax.edu>:
>>
>>
>>> With a keyboard that has the CTRL key in the location where $DEITY
>>> intended it to be.
>>>
>>> - MV
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> TUHS mailing list
>> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
>> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
>
>
> --
> Cory Smelosky
> http://gewt.net Personal stuff
> http://gimme-sympathy.org Projects
>
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs



-- 
Tim Newsham | www.thenewsh.com/~newsham | @newshtwit | thenewsh.blogspot.com

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Dave Horsfall]

On Fri, 1 Aug 2014, Mary Ann Horton wrote:

> The Sun 5c US/UNIX Keyboard (USB) is widely available and reasonably 
> priced, and many of them have Control and Esc where God put them!

Personally I've yet to think of a single use for Caps Lock and Num Lock.

Whenever I get stuck with a M$ keyboard (which seems to be most of them) I 
prise off a few irritating keys so that I don't hit the poxy things by 
mistake.

Best keyboard I ever used was the PC-101, with the runner-up being the one 
with the function keys down the LHS.  Can't remember the Sun keyboards, 
but they did have some pretty ghastly ones, such as the first one; it was 
so heavy that you could've used it as a lethal weapon.

-- Dave

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[John Cowan]

Dave Horsfall scripsit:

> Personally I've yet to think of a single use for Caps Lock and Num Lock.

It was essential in the transition period when keyboards had acquired
upper and lower case but operating systems only understood upper case.
Since then it has been nothing but a nuisance.

> Whenever I get stuck with a M$ keyboard (which seems to be most of them) I 
> prise off a few irritating keys so that I don't hit the poxy things by 
> mistake.

The echt-MS keyboard I am using right now under Windows 7 has a driver
that lets me disable Caps Lock, and so I have done.

-- 
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        cowan at ccil.org
We do, doodley do, doodley do, doodley do,
What we must, muddily must, muddily must, muddily must;
Muddily do, muddily do, muddily do, muddily do,
Until we bust, bodily bust, bodily bust, bodily bust.  --Bokonon

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Dario Niedermann]

Dave Horsfall <dave at horsfall.org> wrote:

> Personally I've yet to think of a single use for Caps Lock and Num Lock.
>
> Whenever I get stuck with a M$ keyboard (which seems to be most of them) I 
> prise off a few irritating keys so that I don't hit the poxy things by 
> mistake.

CapsLock has its use, it's just that on a typical PC keyboard the key is
unnecessarily large and easy to reach. But it's simple enough to swap it
with -say- Esc. I've been doing just that on X11, Linux console and
OpenBSD console.

See: X11: xmodmap(1); Linux: loadkeys(1), keymaps(5);
     OpenBSD: wsconsctl(8)


-- 
Gopherhole: gopher://retro-net.org/1/dnied/     Homepage: http://devio.us/~ndr/

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Warner Losh]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1090 bytes --]


On Aug 1, 2014, at 3:32 PM, Dario Niedermann <dnied at tiscali.it> wrote:

> Dave Horsfall <dave at horsfall.org> wrote:
> 
>> Personally I've yet to think of a single use for Caps Lock and Num Lock.
>> 
>> Whenever I get stuck with a M$ keyboard (which seems to be most of them) I 
>> prise off a few irritating keys so that I don't hit the poxy things by 
>> mistake.
> 
> CapsLock has its use, it's just that on a typical PC keyboard the key is
> unnecessarily large and easy to reach. But it's simple enough to swap it
> with -say- Esc. I've been doing just that on X11, Linux console and
> OpenBSD console.
> 
> See: X11: xmodmap(1); Linux: loadkeys(1), keymaps(5);
>     OpenBSD: wsconsctl(8)

The one true key to the left of the ‘a’ key is Control. All other keyboards are heretical.

Warner

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20140801/a7592574/attachment.sig>

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Dario Niedermann]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 303 bytes --]

Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:

> The one true key to the left of the ‘a’ key is Control. All other
> keyboards are heretical.

To each their own. As a Vi user, nothing beats having Esc on the
home row.


-- 
Gopherhole: gopher://retro-net.org/1/dnied/     Homepage: http://devio.us/~ndr/

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Dave Horsfall]

On Fri, 1 Aug 2014, John Cowan wrote:

> > Personally I've yet to think of a single use for Caps Lock and Num 
> > Lock.
> 
> It was essential in the transition period when keyboards had acquired 
> upper and lower case but operating systems only understood upper case.

Hadn't really noticed; I went straight from CP/M to Unix, giving MS-DOS a 
miss.

-- Dave

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Tim Bradshaw]

On 2 Aug 2014, at 02:49, Dave Horsfall <dave at horsfall.org> wrote:
> 
> Hadn't really noticed; I went straight from CP/M to Unix, giving MS-DOS a 
> miss.

MS-DOS understood lowercase: it just didn't care in the common way.  Did filenames have case at all? I can't remember.  Interestingly, other than minority systems (Unix!) the modern standard for filenames seems to be to remember but not care about case: this is what the Mac does (with the default FS options) and I am pretty sure what Windows does too.  I've been bitten several times by Mac things which fail horribly because there's a README and a ReadMe in a tarball.

Did FORTRAN understand lowercase, always?  I suspect it didn't officially, until Fortran 90, although obviously many F77 compilers accepted lowercase.  More to the point for quite a long time, whether or not the system would accept lowercase, people actually *wrote* un uppercase and caps lock was probably useful for that.  Also COBOL I suspect, and probably SQL?  There was a lot of code written in those languages.

--tim

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Greg 'groggy' Lehey]

On Saturday,  2 August 2014 at 11:49:02 +1000, Dave Horsfall wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Aug 2014, John Cowan wrote:
>
>>> Personally I've yet to think of a single use for Caps Lock and Num
>>> Lock.
>>
>> It was essential in the transition period when keyboards had acquired
>> upper and lower case but operating systems only understood upper case.
>
> Hadn't really noticed; I went straight from CP/M to Unix, giving MS-DOS a
> miss.

While I'm not convinced I agree with John, this would have predated
CP/M.  After all it, and MS-DOS after it, *did* understand lower case.
And the CapSlock key was there on the earliest upper/lower case
keyboards I've seen.

Greg
--
Sent from my desktop computer.
Finger grog at FreeBSD.org for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
This message is digitally signed.  If your Microsoft MUA reports
problems, please read http://tinyurl.com/broken-mua
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20140802/4a0c36a3/attachment.sig>

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Greg 'groggy' Lehey]

On Saturday,  2 August 2014 at  4:27:50 +0100, Tim Bradshaw wrote:
>
> On 2 Aug 2014, at 02:49, Dave Horsfall <dave at horsfall.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hadn't really noticed; I went straight from CP/M to Unix, giving MS-DOS a
>> miss.
>
> MS-DOS understood lowercase: it just didn't care in the common way.
> Did filenames have case at all?

Only in the sense that all file names were upper case, and lower case
names were upshifted.

> Did FORTRAN understand lowercase, always?

No.  It was first implemented on the IBM 704, which had a 6 bit BCD
character set.  No lower case.

> I suspect it didn't officially, until Fortran 90, although obviously
> many F77 compilers accepted lowercase.  More to the point for quite
> a long time, whether or not the system would accept lowercase,
> people actually *wrote* un uppercase and caps lock was probably
> useful for that.  Also COBOL I suspect, and probably SQL?

Basically, until the introduction of ASCII, there weren't many systems
with lower case.  IBM had lower case characters with EBCDIC, but
didn't seem to use them.  I wrote code in FORTRAN and COBOL before the
introduction of lower-case, but later compilers I've seen for both
languages accepted lower case.

I think the real reason for the retention of upper case in these
languages was because it made people feel leet.  "We're computer
programmers, we write in upper case".  It's like the disregard for
normal punctuation that some style guides require( like putting spaces
on the wrong sides of parentheses, or omitting them where required ).

Greg
--
Sent from my desktop computer.
Finger grog at FreeBSD.org for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
This message is digitally signed.  If your Microsoft MUA reports
problems, please read http://tinyurl.com/broken-mua
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20140802/8d312510/attachment.sig>

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Dave Horsfall]

On Sat, 2 Aug 2014, Tim Bradshaw wrote:

> MS-DOS understood lowercase: it just didn't care in the common way.  
> Did filenames have case at all? I can't remember.  Interestingly, other 
> than minority systems (Unix!) the modern standard for filenames seems to 
> be to remember but not care about case: this is what the Mac does (with 
> the default FS options) and I am pretty sure what Windows does too.  
> I've been bitten several times by Mac things which fail horribly because 
> there's a README and a ReadMe in a tarball.

One of my irritations was "Makefile" and "makefile"; I could never 
remember which had priority.  I standardised on "Makefile", but oddly
enough "makefile" was/is popular; I prefer my metafiles to stand out.

-- Dave

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Warner Losh]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2170 bytes --]


On Aug 1, 2014, at 9:27 PM, Tim Bradshaw <tfb at tfeb.org> wrote:

> 
> On 2 Aug 2014, at 02:49, Dave Horsfall <dave at horsfall.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Hadn't really noticed; I went straight from CP/M to Unix, giving MS-DOS a 
>> miss.
> 
> MS-DOS understood lowercase: it just didn't care in the common way.  Did filenames have case at all? I can't remember.  Interestingly, other than minority systems (Unix!) the modern standard for filenames seems to be to remember but not care about case: this is what the Mac does (with the default FS options) and I am pretty sure what Windows does too.  I've been bitten several times by Mac things which fail horribly because there's a README and a ReadMe in a tar ball.

MS-DOS was strictly upper case  (with lower case converted) until Win95 expanded the lengths and case restrictions (but case was preserved, but not significant). Mac followed the same convention, although today it depends on the filesystem options for case being significant or not (for some programs it matters, strangely enough).

> Did FORTRAN understand lowercase, always?  I suspect it didn't officially, until Fortran 90, although obviously many F77 compilers accepted lowercase.  More to the point for quite a long time, whether or not the system would accept lowercase, people actually *wrote* un uppercase and caps lock was probably useful for that.  Also COBOL I suspect, and probably SQL?  There was a lot of code written in those languages.

FORTRAN III and IV compilers for the PDP-11 RSX-11 / RSTS-E / RT-11 system accepted lowercase, but in the LST files it produced it always converted to upper case. But the terminals of the time had sensible caps locks keys that weren’t directly to the left of the ‘a’ key… and the few that did had the control key to the left of it rather than relegated to its “modern” place below the shift key...

Warner

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20140801/dba3354a/attachment.sig>

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Dave Horsfall]

On Sat, 2 Aug 2014, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:

> While I'm not convinced I agree with John, this would have predated 
> CP/M.  After all it, and MS-DOS after it, *did* understand lower case. 
> And the CapSlock key was there on the earliest upper/lower case 
> keyboards I've seen.

Now you're taking me back to the 2741 and ye olde 360/50...

The Teletype on the PDP-8 was upper-case, as was the 2741 with the APL 
goofball.  I never saw a Terminet.

-- Dave

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Greg 'groggy' Lehey]

On Saturday,  2 August 2014 at 15:45:29 +1000, Dave Horsfall wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Aug 2014, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:
>
>> While I'm not convinced I agree with John, this would have predated
>> CP/M.  After all it, and MS-DOS after it, *did* understand lower case.
>> And the CapSlock key was there on the earliest upper/lower case
>> keyboards I've seen.
>
> Now you're taking me back to the 2741 and ye olde 360/50...

Heh.  I never used a 2741, just a 735, which I interfaced to a Z-80 in
the early 1980s.  Its native code was neither BCD nor EBCDIC, just two
tilt and 4 (I think) rotate bits that mapped to a position on the
ball.

> The Teletype on the PDP-8 was upper-case, as was the 2741 with the
> APL goofball.

Yes, that was my first machine too, with the cheaper ASR-33 without
lower case.

Does anybody who used the ASR-35 recall if it had a CapsLock key?

Greg
--
Sent from my desktop computer.
Finger grog at FreeBSD.org for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
This message is digitally signed.  If your Microsoft MUA reports
problems, please read http://tinyurl.com/broken-mua
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20140802/fe9bc6b3/attachment.sig>

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Dave Horsfall]

On Sat, 2 Aug 2014, John Cowan wrote:

> > Hadn't really noticed; I went straight from CP/M to Unix, giving 
> > MS-DOS a miss.
> 
> I was actually thinking about OS/8 and RT-11.

Ahh...  RT-11 and TECO...  Who here hasn't typed their name into it to see 
what it did?

I was thinking of home systems.

-- Dave

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Tim Bradshaw]

On 2 Aug 2014, at 04:45, Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog at lemis.com> wrote:

> Only in the sense that all file names were upper case, and lower case
> names were upshifted.

Yes, that's what I meant: you could type at it in lowercase and it didn't care, it just translated to uppercase for you.  So you didn't need a caps lock key.

> 
> I think the real reason for the retention of upper case in these
> languages was because it made people feel leet.  "We're computer
> programmers, we write in upper case".  It's like the disregard for
> normal punctuation that some style guides require( like putting spaces
> on the wrong sides of parentheses, or omitting them where required ).

And actually that's the only reason for needing a caps lock key really: for systems which *had* no lowercase, then you wouldn't need a caps lock key because you couldn't *type* lowercase!

As a (possibly now dry) Lisp person, case was a very sensitive issue.  Lisp originated on systems without lowercase (indeed, on the IBM 704, of course, like all good things) and most implementations used uppercase symbols.  Common Lisp is fully case-sensitive (symbols can contain mixed case, and in fact can contain any character known to the implementation), but all the standard symbols are uppercase.  However by default the reader translates lowercase to uppercase for symbol names (not for strings of course), and you can also persuade the printer to *print* symbol names in lowercase except where that would be ambiguous, so the language looks as if it is case-insensitive lowercase-preferred, except it isn't at all.  Very much smoke and flame has been produced about this topic, especially among adherents of some of the more extreme sects (Lisp being more correctly thought of as a religion than a programming language).
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20140802/753b62ae/attachment.sig>

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Nemo]

On 1 August 2014 23:27, Tim Bradshaw <tfb at tfeb.org> wrote (in part):
> I've been bitten several times by Mac things which fail horribly because there's a README
> and a ReadMe in a tarball.

As a side note, I run OS X on a case-sensitive fs and had only one
bother when an installation script had mixed case.

N.

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[random832]

On Thu, Jul 31, 2014, at 18:59, Dave Horsfall wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Jul 2014, Tim Newsham wrote:
> 
> > just for fun, you might want to run your
> > ancient unix in simh using this terminal:
> > https://github.com/Swordifish90/cool-old-term
> 
> Gadzooks - that takes me back!  Curved screen and everything...

Of course, curved screens aren't that far back compared to the rest -
PCs had them into the early 2000s.

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Bill Pechter]

RT11 was my first home system... Got to love those DEC employee purchase
PDT11/150's.
Slow as hell but the OS was miles beyond DOS and CP/M.

VT180 was next followed by an AT&T 6300 DOS/Xenix box.

Bo;;

--
  d|i|g|i|t|a|l had it THEN.  Don't you wish you could still buy it now!
 pechter-at-gmail.com


On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 2:17 AM, Dave Horsfall <dave at horsfall.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 2 Aug 2014, John Cowan wrote:
>
> > > Hadn't really noticed; I went straight from CP/M to Unix, giving
> > > MS-DOS a miss.
> >
> > I was actually thinking about OS/8 and RT-11.
>
> Ahh...  RT-11 and TECO...  Who here hasn't typed their name into it to see
> what it did?
>
> I was thinking of home systems.
>
> -- Dave
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20140802/fb15d346/attachment.html>

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Milo Velimirovic]

I've got a PDT11/150 and VT100.

I wonder where the 8" floppies went. Anyone willing to duplicate a bootable PDT11  RT11 floppy?

 - Milo

On Aug 2, 2014, at 8:35 AM, Bill Pechter wrote:

> RT11 was my first home system... Got to love those DEC employee purchase PDT11/150's.
> Slow as hell but the OS was miles beyond DOS and CP/M.
> 
> VT180 was next followed by an AT&T 6300 DOS/Xenix box.
> 
> Bo;;
> 
> --
>   d|i|g|i|t|a|l had it THEN.  Don't you wish you could still buy it now!
>  pechter-at-gmail.com
> 
> 
> On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 2:17 AM, Dave Horsfall <dave at horsfall.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 2 Aug 2014, John Cowan wrote:
> 
> > > Hadn't really noticed; I went straight from CP/M to Unix, giving
> > > MS-DOS a miss.
> >
> > I was actually thinking about OS/8 and RT-11.
> 
> Ahh...  RT-11 and TECO...  Who here hasn't typed their name into it to see
> what it did?
> 
> I was thinking of home systems.
> 
> -- Dave
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
> 
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20140802/cecd6d8f/attachment.html>

[TUHS] Lisp is a family quarrel

[John Cowan]

Tim Bradshaw scripsit:

> And actually that's the only reason for needing a caps lock key really:
> for systems which *had* no lowercase, then you wouldn't need a caps
> lock key because you couldn't *type* lowercase!

As I said, it allows you to adjust to a mismatch: a keyboard that types
lower case by default, software that rejects lower case.

> (Lisp being more correctly thought of as a religion than a programming
> language).

	"Do you know the saying, Karhide is not a nation but a family
	quarrel?" I haven't, and suspect that Estraven made it up;
	it has his stamp.
		--Le Guin, _The Left Hand of Darkness_

Lisp, too, is a family quarrel.  Scheme is even more so than Common Lisp;
CL is a language, but Scheme is a family of languages, perhaps 80 of them.
The minimalist R5RS standard of 1998 was case-folding, like all standards
before it, but perhaps half of all implementations ignored this and were
case-sensitive.  In practice, case-folding implementations folded to lower
case, and where case was not folded, the standard identifiers were lower
case.  The latter position is a feature of the case-sensitive R6RS (2007)
and R7RS-small (2013) standards.  At present, case-sensitivity dominates
in the 40+ implementations that I use for test purposes by about two to one.

-- 
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        cowan at ccil.org
After fixing the Y2K bug in an application:
        WELCOME TO <censored>
        DATE: MONDAK, JANUARK 1, 1900

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[John Cowan]

Dave Horsfall scripsit:

> Ahh...  RT-11 and TECO...  Who here hasn't typed their name into it to see 
> what it did?

In my case, it's trivial: it jumps to the start of the buffer (J) and then
crashes by trying to go to (O) the label "HN COWAN" and failing.

-- 
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        cowan at ccil.org
Where the wombat has walked, it will inevitably walk again.
   (even through brick walls!)

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Greg 'groggy' Lehey]

On Saturday,  2 August 2014 at  9:04:12 -0500, Milo Velimirovic wrote:
> I've got a PDT11/150 and VT100.
>
> I wonder where the 8" floppies went. Anyone willing to duplicate a
> bootable PDT11 RT11 floppy?

Not really, but I have a couple of drives it you want them.  I gave my
PDP-11 away a couple of years ago.

Greg
--
Sent from my desktop computer.
Finger grog at FreeBSD.org for PGP public key.
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.
This message is digitally signed.  If your Microsoft MUA reports
problems, please read http://tinyurl.com/broken-mua
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20140803/3ad22e41/attachment.sig>

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Dave Horsfall]

On Sat, 2 Aug 2014, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote:

> Basically, until the introduction of ASCII, there weren't many systems 
> with lower case.  IBM had lower case characters with EBCDIC, but didn't 
> seem to use them.  I wrote code in FORTRAN and COBOL before the 
> introduction of lower-case, but later compilers I've seen for both 
> languages accepted lower case.

ISTR that the mighty 1403 printer had the "text train" - type TN, if 
memory serves.  It slowed down printing (not as many duplications) but you 
got lower case and a few more symbols.  You quickly learned to never leave 
a cup of coffee on the lid, because it lifted automatically...

> I think the real reason for the retention of upper case in these 
> languages was because it made people feel leet.  "We're computer 
> programmers, we write in upper case".  It's like the disregard for 
> normal punctuation that some style guides require( like putting spaces 
> on the wrong sides of parentheses, or omitting them where required ).

I had a boss once who had this annoying habit of writing "(\ blah\ )" in 
his Nroff documents.

-- Dave

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[scj]

Remember that writing programs on terminals was a relative latecomer --
FORTRAN was designed for punched cards.  Their 6-bit character set has
"numbers" and "letters" (no case need apply).  The printers and other
supporting peripherals printed capital letters, probably because you could
get legibility with fewer dots that way and didn't have to worry about
descenders.

At Bell Labs (before Unix days) programmers wrote their programs on coding
sheets and handed them in to a room full of keypunchers.  They would punch
the program up on cards, and then a second person would repeat the process
using a verifier, a piece of hardware that took in a punched card, and had
a keyboard, and would verify that what the person typed in was what had
been punched on the card.  Then the punched and verified deck of cards was
returned to the programmer, who could submit it to the mainframe to run
it.

Although the coding sheet had little tick marks to indicate the column
positions, the keypunchers took advantage of FORTRAN syntax to simply
ignore spaces (they did know enough to respect blanks in Hollerith strings
and to start typing the program in the appropriate column).  Leaving the
blanks out not only made the process go faster, but also reduced the
number of false failures in verification, where the original keypuncher
and verifier disagreed on how many spaces should be inserted.

The model 33 Teletypes that were the most common terminal attached to Unix
in the early days had only a single case, as I recall, being primarily
used with paper tape with a character set closely related to the character
set used on punched cards (although with some features that eventually
become supported in ASCII).  Unix, however, interpreted the "letters" in
the character set as lower case by default, which was highly unusual at
that time, since there were almost no printers or terminals that would
print upper and lower case.


> On Saturday,  2 August 2014 at  4:27:50 +0100, Tim Bradshaw wrote:
>>
>> On 2 Aug 2014, at 02:49, Dave Horsfall <dave at horsfall.org> wrote:
>
>> Did FORTRAN understand lowercase, always?
>
> No.  It was first implemented on the IBM 704, which had a 6 bit BCD
> character set.  No lower case.
>

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Tim Newsham]

On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 8:04 AM,  <scj at yaccman.com> wrote:
> Unix, however, interpreted the "letters" in
> the character set as lower case by default, which was highly
> unusual at that time, since there were almost no printers or
> terminals that would print upper and lower case.

years later those same rabble rousers would force
unicode on us :)

-- 
Tim Newsham | www.thenewsh.com/~newsham | @newshtwit | thenewsh.blogspot.com

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[John Cowan]

scj at yaccman.com scripsit:

> capital letters, probably because you could
> get legibility with fewer dots that way and didn't have to worry about
> descenders.

According to legend, Teletype's own legibility studies showed the
opposite, that all lower case was far more legible in the presence poor
light, a weak ribbon, dirty paper, and other noise sourcess, but this was
overridden by management on the grounds that it would make it impossible
to spell "God" correctly.  Untrue, but amusing.

> The model 33 Teletypes that were the most common terminal attached to Unix
> in the early days had only a single case, as I recall, being primarily
> used with paper tape with a character set closely related to the character
> set used on punched cards (although with some features that eventually
> become supported in ASCII).  

The model 33 was released in 1963 and was one of the first devices to use
(the 1963 version of) ASCII.  System/360 was originally supposed to use
it, but the effort to make ASCII-compatible printers and card readers
in time for its release was a failure.

The Unix treatment of LF as newline shows, however, that you folks had
model 37 TTYs; the model 33 still required CR+LF for newline.

-- 
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        cowan at ccil.org
Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis vom dies!
Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau,
Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau,
Und trank die Milch vom Paradies.

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[John Cowan]

Tim Newsham scripsit:

> years later those same rabble rousers would force unicode on us :)

Hah!  Unix had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the Unicode age.
Microsoft and Apple were well ahead on internationalization and mostly
still are.

-- 
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        cowan at ccil.org
Winter:  MIT, / Keio, INRIA, / Issue lots of Drafts.
So much more to understand! / Might simplicity return?
                (A "tanka", or extended haiku)

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Tim Newsham]

On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 8:29 AM, John Cowan <cowan at mercury.ccil.org> wrote:
>> years later those same rabble rousers would force unicode on us :)
>
> Hah!  Unix had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the Unicode age.
> Microsoft and Apple were well ahead on internationalization and mostly
> still are.

I was referring to the bell labs guys who wrote linux and later plan9...

> John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        cowan at ccil.org

-- 
Tim Newsham | www.thenewsh.com/~newsham | @newshtwit | thenewsh.blogspot.com

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Milo Velimirović]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1057 bytes --]


On Aug 4, 2014, at 2:10 PM, Tim Newsham <tim.newsham at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 8:29 AM, John Cowan <cowan at mercury.ccil.org> wrote:
>>> years later those same rabble rousers would force unicode on us :)
>> 
>> Hah!  Unix had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the Unicode age.
>> Microsoft and Apple were well ahead on internationalization and mostly
>> still are.
> 
> I was referring to the bell labs guys who wrote linux and later plan9...

LINUX? surely you jest... or your fingers have a mind of their own.


> 
>> John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        cowan at ccil.org
> 
> -- 
> Tim Newsham | www.thenewsh.com/~newsham | @newshtwit | thenewsh.blogspot.com
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

--
Milo Velimirović
Network Specialist - ITS Network Services
608.785.6618 Office -  608.386.2817 Cell
University of Wisconsin - La Crosse
La Crosse, Wisconsin 54601 USA   43 48 48 N 91 13 53 W

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Tim Newsham]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1312 bytes --]

ack, slip of the keyboard.. no insult intended...

On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 9:13 AM, Milo Velimirović <milov at cs.uwlax.edu> wrote:
>
> On Aug 4, 2014, at 2:10 PM, Tim Newsham <tim.newsham at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 8:29 AM, John Cowan <cowan at mercury.ccil.org> wrote:
>>>> years later those same rabble rousers would force unicode on us :)
>>>
>>> Hah!  Unix had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the Unicode age.
>>> Microsoft and Apple were well ahead on internationalization and mostly
>>> still are.
>>
>> I was referring to the bell labs guys who wrote linux and later plan9...
>
> LINUX? surely you jest... or your fingers have a mind of their own.
>
>
>>
>>> John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        cowan at ccil.org
>>
>> --
>> Tim Newsham | www.thenewsh.com/~newsham | @newshtwit | thenewsh.blogspot.com
>> _______________________________________________
>> TUHS mailing list
>> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
>> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs
>
> --
> Milo Velimirović
> Network Specialist - ITS Network Services
> 608.785.6618 Office -  608.386.2817 Cell
> University of Wisconsin - La Crosse
> La Crosse, Wisconsin 54601 USA   43 48 48 N 91 13 53 W
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Tim Newsham | www.thenewsh.com/~newsham | @newshtwit | thenewsh.blogspot.com

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Jaap Akkerhuis]

On Aug 4, 2014, at 20:04, scj at yaccman.com wrote:

> The model 33 Teletypes that were the most common terminal attached to Unix
> in the early days had only a single case, as I recall, being primarily
> used with paper tape with a character set closely related to the character
> set used on punched cards (although with some features that eventually
> become supported in ASCII).  Unix, however, interpreted the "letters" in
> the character set as lower case by default, which was highly unusual at
> that time, since there were almost no printers or terminals that would
> print upper and lower case.

I vaguely remember the DEC LA 30(?) we had as a console to the
11/45.  It would only print Upper Case.

Related to this is the stty -lcase option that mapped lower case
char to upper (or the other way around, I forgot)

	jaap
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 235 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://minnie.tuhs.org/pipermail/tuhs/attachments/20140804/edaf99da/attachment.sig>

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[Dave Horsfall]

On Mon, 4 Aug 2014, Jaap Akkerhuis wrote:

> Related to this is the stty -lcase option that mapped lower case char to 
> upper (or the other way around, I forgot)

Wait until you've used a VT-05 as the console; 72x20, upper case on 
display with few symbols (so Unix showed "{" as "\(" for example), a 
switch that told it to send lower case, and another switch that echoed 
locally (useful for passwords).

And the upper-case printers that overstruck "{" as "(\b-"....  Those poxy 
things were about as Unix-hostile as you could get.

-- Dave

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[arnold]

John Cowan <cowan at mercury.ccil.org> wrote:

> The Unix treatment of LF as newline shows, however, that you folks had
> model 37 TTYs; the model 33 still required CR+LF for newline.

I think I'd trust the memory of the Bell Labs guys here. The tty driver
(and stty(1)) had options for translating LF to CR+LF on output and
CR to LF on input.  I've seen mention here and in other places of Model 33
too many times to believe that it was really a Model 37.  :-)

Thanks,

Arnold

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[John Cowan]

arnold at skeeve.com scripsit:

> I think I'd trust the memory of the Bell Labs guys here. The tty driver
> (and stty(1)) had options for translating LF to CR+LF on output and
> CR to LF on input.  I've seen mention here and in other places of Model 33
> too many times to believe that it was really a Model 37.  :-)

That shows that they did have Model 33s, as was confirmed for me in
private mail.  At first there were only a few Model 37s, but they
did exist; after nroff, they became more common.

-- 
John Cowan          http://www.ccil.org/~cowan        cowan at ccil.org
To say that Bilbo's breath was taken away is no description at all.  There are
no words left to express his staggerment, since Men changed the language that
they learned of elves in the days when all the world was wonderful. --The Hobbit

[TUHS] terminal - just for fun

[arnold]

John Cowan <cowan at mercury.ccil.org> wrote:

> arnold at skeeve.com scripsit:
>
> > I think I'd trust the memory of the Bell Labs guys here. The tty driver
> > (and stty(1)) had options for translating LF to CR+LF on output and
> > CR to LF on input.  I've seen mention here and in other places of Model 33
> > too many times to believe that it was really a Model 37.  :-)
>
> That shows that they did have Model 33s, as was confirmed for me in
> private mail.  At first there were only a few Model 37s, but they
> did exist; after nroff, they became more common.

Interesting that they had both - I don't remember hearing about the 37
but that doesn't mean much. :-)

Thanks,

Arnold