********************
QL
CLUB
INTERNATIONAL
********************
ISSUE 119
January 1999
MIKE KENNEALLY
E-MAIL MIKEKENNEALLY1@COMPUSERVE.COM
MIKEKENNEALLY1@BIGFOOT.COM
WWW.GEOCITIES.COM/SILICONVALLEY/VISTA/4807/
ANY AND ALL SOFTWARE SENT TO THE CLUB/NEWSLETTER WILL BE TREATED
AS PUBLIC DOMAIN UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED.
DEAR ALL,
AFTER THEPROBLEMS OF LAST MONTH AND I MUST SAY SOME OF WHICH ARE
STILL ONGOING,LET ME APOLOGISE FOR THE LATENESS OF LAST MONTHS
NEWSLETTER.NO DOUBT DUE TO THIS THAT THIS MONTHS IS ONLY A SHORT
ISSUE,I HAVE ASKED MORE PEOPLE TO CONTRIBUTE,BUT AS THE OLD SAYING GOES
ABOUT A HORSE AND WATER.
AS YOU WILL SEE ABOVE I NOW HAVE ANOTHER E-MAIL ADDRESS,SOME OF
YOU HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCING A FEW PROBLEMS GETTING MAIL TO ME FOR THE
NEWSLETTER,HAVEN'T YOU SPIKE?,NOW YOU CAN HAVE 2 BITES OF THE
CHERRY,BIGFOOT WILL FORWARD MY MAIL TO MY COMPUSERVE ACCOUNT,IT IS ALSO
FREE!
FRANK IN HIS LETTER BELOW HAS BROUGHT UP THE SPECTRE OF QPACII AND
HE WRITES SOME VALID POINTS.WHY CAN'T WE DO A MANUAL FOR THIS
PROG,ENOUGH OF YOU USE IT,SOME OF YOU EVEN KNOW HOW TO PUT IT
TOGETHER.IF NOT QPACII THEN WHY NOT PROWESS,BUT LETS START WITH QPACII
FIRST.I ALWAYS SEEM TO BE FALLING BACK ON THE GOOD WILL OF GRAHAM LUTZ
FOR THE ANSWER TO MANY OF MY AND YOUR PROBLEMS AND I FOR ONE AM VERY
GRATEFUL FOR HIS HELP AND ADVICE OVER THE YEARS,BUT THERE MUST BE
OTHERS OF YOU WHO KNOW THE SAME THINGS AS GRAHAM AND ARE WILLING TO
HELP.OTHERWISE YOU WOULD NOT HAVE GOT IN TOUCH WITH THE CLUB IN THE
FIRST PLACE! SO COME ON PASS ON SOME OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE TO THOSE OF US
WHO STILL STRUGGLE. I KNOW THE GATHERING OF SUCH WISDOM WAS HARD EARNED
AND TOOK A LONG TIME TO PIECE TOGETHER,BUT JUST THINK HOW GOOD YOU'LL
FEEL WHEN YOU HELP SOMEONE ELSE.
OVER THE YEARS OF USING A QL,THE NUMBER OF TIMES I HAVE ASKED FOR
HELP FROM PEOPLE AND THEY HAVE LOOKED DOWN ON ME AS IF TO SAY,GO AWAY
YOU IDIOT,IF YOU DON'T KNOW THAT WHAT ARE YOU USING A QL FOR? DON'T LET
US FALL INTO THAT PIT. WE ARE HERE TO HELP AND GUIDE EACH OTHER,FROM
THE STUPID LITTLE NIGGLY BITS OF INFO TO THE BIGGER ISSUES. OVER THE
YEARS I HAVE BEEN CALLED SOME NAMES FOR NOT KNOWING THE THINGS THAT
OTHERS KNOW,BUT OUT OF THE 100% OF PEOPLE ASKED,99% TREAT YOU AS AN
IDIOT BUT 1% TREAT YOU AS A QL USER WHO WANTS TO LEARN,AND MY FRIENDS
WE ARE THAT 1% AND I FOR ONE THANK YOU ALL.
SEE YOU NEXT MONTH.
MIKE.
FRANK MERRISON,
20-1-1999
GEAR includes 3 x JM QL's: Gold Card: Mannesmann Tally DMP: Epson
Stylus 800 printer: 2 x HD disc drives. 486 DX33.
Mike.... long time no see!
IT CERTAINLY IS FRANK,I WAS BEGINNING TO THINK I'D UPSET YOU.WELCOME
BACK MATE,I'VE MISSED YOU!
Sorry for the absence of any contribution from me over the last few
months but I had nothing to write about and I have been extremely busy
lately.
Over the years; prior to 1998 there had been an enormous amount of
discussion about Qpac2, both in the newsletter and the Quanta magazine.
Long discussions had taken place about the way the thing worked (or
didn't work) - how wonderful (or otherwise) it was etc. There seemed to
me to be two types of QL owners - those who used this facility
blindfolded and those, such as me, to who it was a complete mystery!
Towards the beginning of 1998 I wrote an article suggesting that ClubQL
might consider using it's collective brains to compile a new manual for
Qpac2 since the original was (in the opinion of many) pretty useless
unless you knew all about this program(s) before you started. At the
time one of the Quanta sub-groups (SEQUEL) had completed a number of
very useful project and I felt it would be a feather in the cap of
ClubQL if it could do something similar such as this idea of a new
manual.
Well; almost a year has passed by and, apart from a lot of talk, no
progress has been made towards achieving this target. At a meeting of
the London Quanta Sub-group, held on January 10th, the Editor, Colin
Baskett, handed me a very thick file of print-outs of articles that
have appeared in the QUANTA magazine over the past year following
publication of my original letter.
In view of this lack of action from club members I thought it might be
an idea to summarise all that I can find out of what has happened
during this past year and to ask "Is there any member prepared to take
on this task of compiling all the information that is now available and
printing it in some sort of order"? or should we now drop the subject
and move on?
I HAVE ASKED AND CONTINUE TO ASK IF ANYONE WHO KNOWS HOW TO USE QPACII
CAN RIGHT UP AN EASY TO USE GUIDE.GRAHAM LUTZ DID OFFER TO DO THIS,BUT
AS NO DOUBT WITH THE REST OF US TIME IS THE KEY FACTOR.ALTHOUGH I WILL
ASK AGAIN.
A Brief History
1) Feb/Mar 1998: Original proposal for the production of a new manual
for Qpac2
2) QL111: May 1998. I again wrote on this subject with a suggestion for
an index to previous articles in Quanta, and others, and spoke of
the difficulty of "Plowing through back issues"
3) QL112: June 1998. Martin Burke suggested that the new manual should
be split into clearly defined sections. There was a reference to an
article in QL108 about the "Stuffer Buffer" In my letter I mentioned
that I had received a reply to my correspondence from Wolfgang
Lenerz. This was mainly his final article that never appeared in
Quanta. He sent me hard copy
4) QL113: July 1998. Dilwyn Jones reported that he had converted "The
PE Idiots Guide" by Norman Dunbar and this was included on the same
disc along with a basic program to unzip it. Full instructions incl.
5) There was a reference to an article in Quanta by Rich Mellor;
"Summary of the Basic Structure of the PE"
6) On a number of occasions Mike made referrence to a member who was
planning to produce such a suggested manual. Twice in QL113. No name
given or further details.
7) QL114: August 1998. Terry Williams wrote of his findings when using
Qpac2 without a mouse.
While this discussion, in ClubQL, was proceding, with little progress,
strangely enough - as a result of Colin Basett re-printing my original
letter in Quanta - there has been a torrent of articles on this
subject, probably more than any other item since the beginning of the
magazine 13 years ago! Colin is no doubt pleased at having so much
material to fill it each month!
I'll try to summarise it all.
1) May 1998. My original letter printed page 4.
2) July. Page 8: Rich Mellor's article, as 5 above.
3) August. Page 23: John Terry reminded us of the splendid series of
articles by Bill Waugh that appeared in Quanta in 1995 beginning
in February. These are the definitive means of learning 95% of
Qpac2. He found them so good that he printed them all and he uses
them as his guide. He suggested that Quanta might consider
publishing them as a booklet.
4) Same issue. Page 24: Fabian Gaughan listed the dates & issues when
Bill's articles were published and when Wolfgang Lenerz's articles
appeared. Wolfgang was unlucky to have his welcome contributions on
the same subject printed at the same time as Bill's. As he felt that
his thoughts had been covered by Bill Waugh he never submitted the
final article.
5) A brief mention of an article by Stuart Honeyball in Nov/Dec 1995
issues of IQLR.
6) September. Page 18: Comments by Peter Tyler on Rich Mellor's article
as 5 above.
7) October. Page 8: Comments on the production of manuals that
beginners can understand. Possibility of a standard format to be
laid down by Quanta.
8) Same issue. Page 17: Dennis Smith explains Qpac1 & Qpac2 and the
various parts that make it up.
9) Same issue. Page 25: Steve Hall spells out the different types of
users. Problems with installation & configuration.
10) November. Page 14: David Bunbury writes about Lockable/unlockable
windows and the definition of the term "multi-tasking"
11) December. A flood of contributions! Page 14: Rich Mellor again
discusses the meaning of "multi-tasking" and how the Pointer
Environment contributes. Replies to issues raised by P.H. Tanner &
Peter Tylor. Latest version numbers of PTR_GEN, WMAN & HOT_REXT.
12) Same issue - Page 17: Peter Tylor replies to Dennis Smith's remarks
in October issue. Why he prefers to use the keyboard rather than a
mouse. "Multi-tasking" - again!
13) Same issue. Page 19: Peter Tylor refers to a possible later version
of the manual (does it exist?) Further discussion on multi-tasking.
14) January 1999. Page 34: John Gregory comments on "Things". Parameters
passed to Files. Use of a library program - "File Selector". Lack of
version numbers for programs.
15) And finally ... as they say ... Page 20: P.H. Tanner states that he
finds no use for the Pointer Environment. A man after my own heart!
After I first stirred up this hornets nest I did make a strenuous
effort to study Qpac2. The reason? - I was continually told how
wonderful it is and that I was missing out on the wonders of the QL
without it. I spent a lot of time going through Bill Waugh's
explanations and finished up with a method of running my usual programs
from within Qpac environment. I guess that if you are clever and need
to run several programs at the same time or, at least have them readily
available at the press of a button, then I suppose Qpac2 is for you.
I began with my QL, basically, to find out what computers were all
about. However; over the many years I have settled down to using it as
a tool for various jobs within my interests in local voluntary
organisations. My experience, like Mr Tanner, is that Qpac2 simply
makes things more complicated and "gets in the way" of doing simple
things.
So! to sum up! If all the available information listed above could be
compiled into my proposed manual and it is written in a readable manner
this ought to clear the mystery up for good. Second best - and it is a
"best" - would be for the novice or beginner to study Bill Waugh's
series in QUANTA beginning February 1995 along with Norman Dunbar's
P.E.I.G. - The Pointer Environment Idiot's Guide - and Wolfgang
Lenerz's articles that began in 1995.
A final note: The brief descriptions of both ClubQL & QUANTA items
above only give a rough guide to the wealth of information that they
carry. As I said earlier there is other news of Qpac2 printed earlier
than my lists. One of the problems with any magazine such as QUANTA is
the difficulty of searching through back issues to find the one thing
you know is there - but where? Same with my library guide. I have had
it for so long tha it is probably well out of date. How do I get an up-
to-date issue?
Hope this has aroused some interest as it has taken me many hours to
compile!
Frank Merrison.
I HOPE SO FRANK,IT MAY STIR SOMEONE INTO ACTION.ALTHOUGH I THINK A
LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE NOW GONE ONTO THE PROWESS TYPE OF PROG FROM PROGS.
Mike Dodd
27th January 1998.
Gear Now Working;
QL + TRUMP 896K JS
In a Mini Tower QL + Gold Card v2.49
Minerva 1.97
superHermes Lite 3.5
AT 101/2 style keyboard
SerMouse + TrackBall
214 mB Hard Disc Qubide 2.01
flp1 & 2 =3D 3.5" HD Drives
flp3 =3D 5.25" DD Drive
Plus a Sinclair QL Printer.
Dear Mike & Members,
Well I hope you don't have any more trouble. I am just expecting a SuperGold
card from Roy Wood and have a selection of Spectrum games ready , in
anticipation of the extra speed. Has anyone got any advice on getting more
Speccy games and is it possible to convert between FORMATS ?
I have the SPECTATOR from Carlo Delhez.
FROM WHAT I HAVE GATHERED OVER THE YEARS MIKE,THE ANSWER IS NO YOU CAN'T.THE
ONLY WAY TO RUN SPECCY PROGS ON A QL IS THROUGH A EMULATOR SUCH AS
SPECTATOR,UNLESS ANYONE KNOWS DIFFERENT!
All the Best,
Mike D.
Ps,
Could you please let me know the address of
Dave Walker, as I want to write to him about his DiscOver program.
ANYONE KNOW THIS ADDRESS?
#! Martin Burke,
24th January, 1999.
Dear Mike and Friends,
JM version + Trump 768 + HermesLite + twin 3.5" disks, JS +
Gold Card, Philips CM8833 colour monitor (under repair) and its
Tandy twin, 8056 printer, Epson RX80 F/T, and Brother HR10
daisy-wheel printer; PSION3a, Z88.
Sorry to hear you are having more troubles Mike. One of
these days I might buy myself a laptop for QPC or whatever and see
if I can have the same fun. (I think that's the word.) But I
don't think most PC suppliers will render the same level of
service as in the QL world.
THATS A FACT MARTIN,IN FACT I AM WAITING FOR A REPLACEMENT
PART FOR MY NEW COMPUTER AND HAVE BEEN FOR 3 WEEKS NOW.IF IT
DOESN'T ARRIVE BY THE END OF NEXT WEEK,I AM TAKING IT BACK TO THEM
FOR A REFUND.I AM SICK OF BEING FOBBED OFF BY A**EHOLES WHO KNOW
EVEN LESS THAN ME,IF THATS POSSIBLE!
I had somebody knocking on the boat a couple of weeks ago.
Looking through the windows I couldn't quite figure out who it
was. It turned out to be Bill Richardson. I had phoned him
before Christmas - about ED drives - and left my number on his
answerphone. Well it wasn't actually my number though I guess it
was close. It was no good to Bill though. But he eventually
managed to figure out who I was and where. He had come by a
couple of times before but the boatyard had been closed. That's
what I call service.
Also thank you JC. Now you mention it, I seem to remember
somewhere - in the manual, QL Today or QUANTA - talk about
differences between "copy" and "backup" in some system or other
but that important bit did not actually get through to me. As for
use of QPAC2: I am still ill at ease with it. Undoubtedly there
are parts of the tutorials/manual that I did not grasp but I can
use it ineptly. I know - I sense - it should be very useful but
achieving that level could be time consuming.
HAVE YOU BEEN TALKING TO FRANK?
Yours,
Martin Burke.
#!
P. McPHERSON,
25th JANUARY 1999.
Fraternal Greetings Everybody,
Current equipment: JM QL with Gold Card, Cumana disk drives
and an Amstrad DMP3160 printer.
So, the subject of copyright has raised it's head once again,
this should not really be an issue at all to anyone since there
can are very few ambiguities in British or international
legislation any more. (In Communist countries like China and Cuba
which do not recognise the concept of intelectual property or
copyright at all. As an aside, the famous iconic image of Che
Guevara, having been created in Cuba, is, in point of fact,
"copyright free", much to the regret of it's original
photographer, Alberto Korda, who should have made millions from
his work).
As far as British law is now concerned, whoever creates a
body of work, AUTOMATICALLY owns it's copyright for 50 years
beyond his or her death. After death, any monies gained
AUTOMATICALLY go to the estate of the author and are distributed
according to the authors last will and testement. This is the case
EVEN if the author of that work was created by an employee, or was
created on a commissioned basis! The only exception to this rule
is that if some, or part of the rights have been signed away to
another party as a part of a legally binding contract.
This may be a contract of employment, like those signed by a
newspaper staff photographer who assigns all the photographs
produced during working hours to the newspaper concerned in return
for a salary and possibly a byline. In the case of say, a wedding
photographer, copyright of the photographs ALWAYS remains with the
photographer, UNLESS he first assigns his rights over as the part
of a contract with whoever commissioned before the photographs are
taken.
The author of a piece of work, be it music, a painting,
photograph a book, letter, computer programme, software or
anything else, is therefore entitled to dispose of the rights to
that work in any way they deem fit. This might mean assigning
their rights to an agent, publisher or distributor to a specific
country or continent, be the full global rights or be conditional,
depending upon the terms of the contract agreed. For example, you
could sell the rights of a photograph on a worldwide basis, but
also include an exclusion clause in a contract that the photograph
can never be reproduced in a specified country or even a specified
magazine like, for example, "Pol Pot Weekly" or "Saddam Hussein
Monthly".
It therefore follows, that the author of a body of work, if
he so chooses, may assign his rights to the "Public Domain", BUT,
at the same time, is also entitled to attach any conditions he so
wishes to the use of that work. Such a condition might simply be
that he his credited for his work, that the work must be kept
complete and unedited or not be misrepresented in any way. It is
generally accepted practice, and a matter of smple common courtesy
to seek the original authors WRITTEN permission and approval
before reproducing their work, even if that work is in the "Public
Domain", is "Copyright Free", "Shareware", or "Freeware". The onus
whether a work is to be placed in the Public Domain or is
copyright free etc. is initially that of the works author, then
their beneficiaries. It must therefore always be assumed that
unless the author of a work specifically specifies otherwise, he,
or she, has retained all of their rights under copyright
legislation.
Incidentally, anyone entering into copyright contracts would
be extremely well advised to insert a "time clause" by which,
after a certain, specified length of time, all assigned rights
revert back to the author of the original work. This allows the
author to seek publication or distribution (and royalties)
elsewhere or renew the contract for another specified period of
time.
The problem with copyright legislation today is in actually
proving who the author really is and, just when the original work
was actually created. Harking back to he good old days when I was
a session musician, The Musicians Union, Equity, the Songwriters
Guild and the International Songwriters Association all
recommended that if you wrote a song, you should post it to
yourself via sealed REGISTERED POST and when it arrives back, do
not open it or break the seals, but carefully store it away for
the time when it might be needed, ie in a copyright ownership
dispute. A British court will accept this as proof of the date the
original song was written, by whom, and allocate the rights
accordingly. However, this approach may prove problematic when it
comes to software stored on magnetic media which deteriorates over
time and a court could well discover a blank disc or tape in the
Registered Emvelope. CD-Roms should be perfectly safe to store in
this way though.
There is still one very curious loophole remaining in British
copyright legislation which the government has promised to take
appropriate steps to try and rectify and is best illustrated in
terms of photography, but also applies to any other medium. If you
are sitting comfortably I shall explain as consisely as I can with
a hypothetical scenario, in which all the names have been changed
to protect the innocent:
An unknown photographer called Janet took a photograph of an
unknown artist called John posing next to one of his original
paintings last month without Johns permission. Today, John is a
famous artist whose paintings now sell for `100,000 each and
reproductions are much in demand and selling like hot cakes as
posters, jigsaws and chocolate boxes. Being an asute business
person Janet capitalises on Johns popularity and sells her
photograph of John posing in front of his painting and it is
reproduced in magazines and advertising hoardings all over the
country. John obviously holds the copyright to his original
painting and has assigned reproduction rights to the poster,
jigsaw and chocolate box makers. The interesting legal conundrum
is this: Who owns the legal copyright to Janets photograph, which
contains Johns original painting within the negative and was
taken, published and reproduced without his prior permission?
The answer is: regardless of it's content, since Janet took
the photograph, the copyright of that photograph is hers and she
may assign the rights to it as she so pleases. However, since John
owns the copyright to his painting. John is entitled to ATTEMPT to
sue her in a civil court for any loss of earnings he may have
incurred. However, John is very unlikely to win his (very
expensive) court case because Janes photograph is not solely
composed of Johns painting, but has him posing beside it. Indeed,
John is unlikely to win his case even if the photograph was a
"substantial" composition of his painting because she is the
author of the photograph which is regarded as a unique work in
it's own right. Janes case would futher be enhanced if she has
made sure to credit him as being it's creator in a caption. Since
there are currently no privacy laws in Britain, Jane did not need
Johns permission to take the photograph of him posing next to his
painting. However, she would have been wise to have got him to
sign a "model release form" at the time which would probably saved
her a lot of time, trouble and expense in the first place.
The lesson of this little piece of copyright fiction has it's
basis in a real case which went to court and currently applies to
any medium, including software. Another thing worthy of being
pointed out very LOUDLY, is that in the eyes of the law, there is
no such thing as copyright on an idea! Whilst you can not
copyright an idea, no matter how original it might be, you can own
the copyright a document that contains that idea.
In my opinion, for what it's worth, copyright and patent
arguments are relatively easy to resolve one way or another.
Software, firmware and hardware licence agreements are a
completely different kettle of fish though. I despise the very
concept that you can buy a piece of software, and more often than
not, never actually see the terms and conditions of the software
license until you have already got it home and open the box which
is AUTOMATICALLY ASSUMED to be your acceptance of those terms andcondi
tions, regardless of how unreasonable or unfair they might be
or how they might affect your statutory rights.
Whilst not advocating piracy in any way, I would love to see
this one tested in the courts, simply because I believe that an
agreement or contract should be FREELY entered into by all
parties, and that all parties involved should know what the terms
and conditions of that agreement are BEFORE they hand over their
hard earned money, not after they have broken the seal to the box
when they get home, which could be weeks or even months later. The
automatic assumption that by opening the box or breaking a seal,
you unconditionally accept a licencing agreement, without ever
being given the opportunity to read it's terms and conditions is,
to my mind, completely unacceptable, and needs to be challenged in
a court.
Hopefully, this would then lead to a situation in which
license agreements are printed on the outside of the box in a
comprehensable form, in advertising and on a shops notice board so
that potential purchasers know, in advance, exactly what terms and
conditions they must meet under such licence agreements. In this
way the potential purchaser has a fair opportunity to FREELY
accept or reject those terms if he so wishes BEFORE handing over
their hard earned cash and taking the product home with them only
to discover the terms and conditions of the license are wholly
unacceptable or unfair.
This is not such a great hardship for software copyright
owners, in fact it could have some benefits: Having read the
license conditions, a purchaser could then be asked to sign a
register to confirm they accept those conditions. This would not
only provide indisputable evidence in the event of a breach of
those conditions, but also go some way to help to trace the main
sources of piracy and act as a partial deterant.
And now for something completely different:
I have often read and heard that our QLs are completely
millenium bug free, and gleefully took it for granted that this
was the case. However, nobody has actually explained WHY this is
the case, or if this is also the case with QL software. I ask this
question because I have just used QRAM to check a file and noticed
for the first time that it gave the save date as "23:04 09 May
98", just two digits for the year, not four. So the question of
the month is: Will the millenium bug affect QRAM or any other QL
related software for that matter and if not, why not?
This little contribution should fill a bit of space for you
Mike, even it it is waffle!
BEST WISHES
PAUL
COME ON SOMEONE ANSWER THAT,I KNOW I HAVE TAKEN MY QL TO 2048
AND AS FAR AS I CAN SEE IT SHOULD NOT AFFECT THE PROGS BUT CAN
ANYONE EXPLAIN WHY? AS FOR THE EXPLANATION OF COPYRIGHT,I CANNOT
FAIL TO SEE THAT NO-ONE AFTER THAT CAN GRASP THE CONCEPT OF
COPYRIGHT IN THE FUTURE!
From: A Halliwell
Please Mike.
If you lose any submissions, try to e-mail me so I can send them again.
Here's the submission that *SHOULD* have been in QL118...
THE PROBLEM IS ANDREW,IF I DON'T RECIEVE A LETTER I DON'T KNOW IF ONE HAS
BEEN SENT
DO I?
Andrew Halliwell
Gear: SuperGold card QL with Minerva 1.97, QubIDE, Star 24 pin printer +
lots of nice free software (Fileinfo, etc).
And now... A 486sx running Linux. (It's a PC that *ISN'T* a Potential
Catastrophy... :)
YEAH,YEAH,HOW MANY TIMES HAVE I HEARD THAT ONE!
Well.... I didn't manage to write in last month, and this month, I might
be too late. Work, holidays, laziness, etc...
Well... New things...
I will admit not having messed with the ol' faithful for a few weeks. John
kindly gave me an old 486, which I promptly did what I always said I 'd do,
and formatted the harddrive and installed Linux. I've been playing with
that a lot since. Installing, uninstalling and recompiling it.
Anyone thinking of moving over to linux in favour of M$ rubbish? I strongly
recommend the SuSE distribution. It contains several programs that make it
extremely easy to install and configure Linux.
Oh.... If you DO want to try Linux, but don't want to get rid of all your M$
Winblows software, it is possible (and infact, quite easy) to set it up to
give you alternative OSs at startup, using a program called LILO. (LInux
LOader).
A new version of MicroEmacs has been put up on Thierrys page, as has another
further debugged version of Paragraph (The wordprocessor for Prowess). It's
not stable yet, but seems to be improving (Not that I have Prowess to try it
with).
And now...On with the show....
Only one little thing to say on QL116....
(Yes,yes, I know I'm being pedantic... It's a hobby, OK?)
Martin Wheatly said a couple of months ago....
"Possibly as a consequence of this turning down of permission Tony Firshman
has made the 1.89 version of Aurora freely downloadable"
If only... :)
I wish I could download a hardware addon like Aurora, but StarTrek
transporter technology is very primative at the moment. You did, of course,
mean Minerva....
On to QL117 Dilwyn said about Frank Davies...
"As to Frank Davies, he and I have managed to tread on each other's toes
once or twice too. Frank is a busy guy, he and his wife sell products for 3
or 4 different computers and in my experience he's reasonable if asked
politely (that WASN'T a dig at you BTW)."
Unfortunately, that wasn't how he came across on the list. He basically blew
his top. (All I did was ask "Why just not release the ROMs for emulator use
instead of insisting people ask?") and he replied by accusing me of being
rude, said it was none of my business, and then went into a long rant which
implied that I condoned software piracy. Not exactly polite, that, is it?
All he had to say was that he'd paid for it.
(Although that was pretty obvious from the outset). I tried to point out
that it is quite possible to sell the ROMS *AND* release the code, but to
no avail.
Anyway. That argument ended a couple of months ago, so that's the last I'll
say on it.
Hmmmmm...
Unfortunately, apart from saying "Ooops" to my comment on Q-Emulator being
Freeware when it's actually Shareware, there's not much more to add this
month...
Still... It beat Mr Wheatleys post for length...
:)
Happy New Year.
*!
Martin Wheatley
martinw@wheatleym.freeserve.co.uk
PC running PC Xchange and Q-Emulator
Hi everyone,
Hope you all ahd a good Xmas etc etc......
*************************
Can anyone tell me how to write a boot program to launch Archdev
for Archive?
Thanks - Basil Lee for Martin Jonzen.
*************************88
As far as I can remember Archdev was a kind of compiler for
Archive which produced programs where the user couldn't see or edit the
procedures. In other words a prog for producing commercial progs
written in Archive. Since the number of these could be listed on the
fingers of one hand (with a couple to spare!) there must be very few
people about who have ever used this. I certainly have never seen it.
************************************************
Mike wrote
WHAT SOME PEOPLE WILL DO TO GET FREE ADVERTISING! SERIOUSLY
THOUGH,DO YOU GET COMPUTER ACTIVE?,ONCE A FORTNIGHT FROM YOUR NEWSAGENT
OR BY SUBSCRIPTION AT 99p AN ISSUE.IN THERE THEY HAVE FOR THE LAST
FORTNIGHT BEEN DOING A STEP BY STEP GUIDE TO SETTING UP YOUR OWN WEB
PAGES,THEY HAVE BEEN USING ADOBE PAGEMILL AND YOU CAN DOWNLOAD A TRIAL
VERSION FROM WWW.ADOBE.COM IT SEEMS PRETTY STRAIGHT FORWARD,THEY EVEN
USE LANGUAGE I CAN UNDERSTAND.THEY EVEN EXPLAIN LINKS TO OTHER SITES
AND COUNTERS TO SEE HOW MANY 'HITS'YOU GET.VERY INTERESTING AND EASY TO
USE.
************************************************8
There are stacks of freeware and shareware HTML progs about for
the PC and loads of tutorials as well.
A very good free one is Arachnophilia at
http://arachnoid.com/arachnophilia
BUT WHAT DOES IT DO MARTIN,IS IT AN INTRODUCTION TO SPIDERS OR
WHAT?
**************************************************
Dilwyn wrote
Martin also wrote that Tony Firshman made V1.89 of Aurora
available for emualtor users in N. America as Frank Davies did
not give free permission to use Sinclair ROM versions over there.
Presumably you meant Minerva Martin?
***************************************************
All these Greek names sound alike to me - at least that's my
excuse anyway! Yes - Minerva 1.89 ROM comes bundled with the
new version of Q-Emulator
**************************************************
Ian Pizer wrote
Using PC and W98 and various ways of communicating I like to hear
what the modem is doing. With AURORA and QTPI this works fine and
I hear the modem chatting softly and I know when something has stuck
and I need to start connecting again. (The init modem (ZYXEL U-1496E)
code is ATZ&N0&R1 and the pre is AT&D0M3DT it is the M3 which controls
the speaker, M0 shuts it).
However, when I use Netscape all goes quiet and the text info does
not warn of a hitch so either one waits and hopes or cancel and
re-connect if the connection takes too long (much longer than with
AURORA/QTPI).
Some comms programs have a separate SCRIPT file to connect to the
modem. Netscape does not seem to have one.
I tried searching for M0 in Netscape files without success (using
a PC program called TextPad which will search in HEX or text). Any
ideas how to make the modem speak using Netscape? .
****************************************************
A Pc question which will cause consternation with some! What the
hell -it's something to write about!
Netscape doesn't deal directly with the modem. Like almost all
Win95 comms progs it just hooks into the Windows Dial-Up-Network (DUN)
which handles everything
If you want to look at the DUN entries you'll find a DUN icon in
'My Computer' beneath the drive letters
There should be an icon in the system tray which indicates when
data is actually travelling.
If you want to see more info than that run DIALMON.EXE from
C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM before connecting
*******************************************************
Mike wrote
IS CYRIL STILL GOING! I HOPE HE'S STILL NOT WANDERING ROUND WITH A
HANDFUL OF PRINTOUTS OF PICTURES HE HAS PRINTED OUT,ASKING PEOPLE
IF THEY LIKE THEM AS HE USED TO.NICE BLOKE,BUT IF YOU'VE SEEN ONE
MANDELBROT YOU'VE SEEN THEM ALL!
*******************************************************
Nowadays the thing to be afraid of is trying to get his PC
portable to work with QPC without corrupting everything. Most of us
spent nearly all the last London meeting trying it unsuccesfully
WHAT YOU WERE TRYING TO CORRUPT CYRIL'S PORTABLE,SHAME ON YOU
ALL.HE'S QUITE CAPABLE OF DOING THAT HIMSELF.PORTABLE MANDELBROTS,WHAT
NEXT!
***********************************************
Andrew Pratt wrote
Jochen, unfortunately, put a damper on my hopes for the continued
development of QL emulator on the Apple. He had spoken to the
author.The author, he says, has given up his aim of writing the
emulator in PowerPC native code(which perhaps wasn't necessary anyway).
But more worryingly, Jochen suggested that the author has also given up
writing the low level drivers, such as Apple directory support, needed
to make conversion of SMSQ worthwhile. This is a bit of a blow because
it means we won't be able to use all of the Apple screen and be limited
to the original screen sizes. Also, navigation round the Apple
directories will remain awkward.
THATS A SHAME BUT MAYBE IN THE FUTURE WHO KNOWS,I MEAN HE MUST
HAVE NEARLY FINISHED THE EMULATOR SO HE'S NOT GOING TO LET IT SIT
AROUND HALF FINISHED IS HE?
***************************************************88
Not exactly half finished. This seems to be the great divide with
emulators Small screen with no SMSQ like Q-Emulator or QLAY. The full
works like QPC or QXL. There is a great deal of work between the two
- more than an amateur might choose to do!
********************************
Paul McPherson wrote
I was a bit disappointed at the response to my suggestion in last
months newsletter regarding the creation of a series of QL related
video "tutorials". Of those voicing a view either way, thus far
being just 2 in favour, and 11 against the idea which hardy justifies
going ahead with such a project.
****************************
I think you should bear in mind that since there have been so few
mail contributors recently that means very few people have actualy
seen the last few issues of this newsletter except the Internet people
who aren't the obvious target for your idea. Perhaps you should
write it up for QL Today
Martin Wheatley
#!
Colin Baskett
5 February 1999
EQUIPMENT: QL FITTED WITH SUPERGOLD CARD; MkI MINERVA - version
1.82; SUPERHERMES; SMSQ/E; 170 MB HARD DISK; SINGLE 3.5" HD DISK DRIVE;
SINGLE 3.5" ED DRIVE; PHILIPS COLOUR MONITOR; SERIAL MOUSE; PRINTER
EPSON Stylus COLOR 200; XCHANGE 3.90L, etc..
Dear Mike,
Sorry to be late yet again !!
BETTER LATE THAN NEVER COLIN.
I don't suppose anyone feels drawn to writing a short note (or a
longish one!) for Quanta on (a) PIE, PICE, PEX or (b) on SMASH??
Cadge, cadge.
IF ANYONE DOES,LET US KNOW AS WELL.I KNOW WHAT SMASH IS(I KNOW
MARTIN,IT DOESN'T COME IN PACKETS AND YOU ADD WATER TO MAKE INSTANT
SPUDS!).BUT THE OTHERS WHAT ARE THEY AND WHAT DO THEY DO?
I am grateful to John Marcus for pointing out the difference
betwee "Copy" which will change the file date and "Backup" which won't
(QPAC2 Files Menu). I have often wondered why sometimes I preserve the
old file date and sometimes get a new one. Obviously something I ought
to have known. Very useful.
Also thanks to Mitch Ratcliffe for his interesting notes about the
harbingers in 1999 of the problems of Y2K.
Thanks also to everyone who sent or offered help with the EPSON
scalable fonts commands in response to my appeal in Quanta and CQLI on
behalf of my new Epson Stylus Color 200.
The most complete account of the use of ESC X m n1 n2 came from
Peter Tyler (who also gave me the critical parameters for ESC k n which
selects the fonts):
ESC X m n1 n2
For Epson Roman T and Sans Serif H fonts
m 3D 0 - no change of pitch
m 3D 1 - proportional printing
m 3D 18, 21, 24 to 72 STEP 6 - sets pitch 360/m cpi
n 3D n1 + (n2 x 256): point size in points 3D n x 0.5
n1 3D 0 (no change in point size), 16, 21, 24 to 60 STEP 4.
n2 3D 0
This all seems to work on my printer so far as I have checked it.
For other fonts:
n 3D 0 (no change), 21 (normal height), 42 (double height)
I haven't checked this out thoroughly yet but I think that the
Roman and Sans Serif fonts are more flexible than the above statement
implies. (The Courier font seems to behave differently). Possibly, I
did not take this part of Peter's instructions down accurately. I would
welcome corrections.
FONT SELECTION - ESC k n
n 3D 0 Roman
n 3D 1 Sans Serif
n 3D 2 Courier
n 3D 3 Prestige (not available on Epson Stylus 200)
n 3D 4 Script (not available on Epson Stylus 200)
n 3D 10 Roman T (similar to Times)
n 3D 11 Sans Serif H (similar to Helvetica)
Good Printing,
Best wishes
Colin B
#!
I AM SURE THAT OUT THERE SOMEONE CAN PUT THESE TO GOOD USE.
--29da0c2d-bf83-11d2-aaef-00805fea3ca9--
(
geocities.com/siliconvalley/vista) (
geocities.com/siliconvalley)