John Sculley was the ultimate champion of getting Hypercard from a research 
project to getting productized.



> From: Jecel Assumpcao Jr. <>
>To: Fundamentals of New Computing <> 
>Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2012 4:03 PM
>Subject: Re: [fonc] Apple and hardware (was: Error trying to compile COLA)
>Alan Kay wrote on Wed, 14 Mar 2012 16:44:33 -0700 (PDT)
>> The CRISP was too slow, and had other problems in its details. Sakoman liked 
>> it ...
>Thanks for the information! Just looking at the papers about it I had
>the impression that it would be reasonably faster than an ARM at the
>same clock frequency while having a VAX-like code density. I was going
>to suggest that implementing CRISP on an FPGA could be an interesting
>project for one of the grad students at my university, but that doesn't
>seem to be the case.
>A rather different processor for running C (for floating point intensive
>code) was the WM architecture:
>I only heard about it because it was the inspiration for the memory
>interface in the version of Chuck Thacker's Tiny Computer used in the
>Beehive multicore project. This, unfortunately, is probably too complex
>for a student in my group.
>> Bill Atkinson did Hypercard ... Larry made many other contributions at Xerox 
>> and Apple
>I know that Bill was the developer, but had the impression that Larry
>had done what was needed to move from project to product. He certainly
>was the one promoting it pre-launch in the old Smalltalk forums at BIX
>(Byte Information eXchange).
>> To me the Dynabook has always been 95% a "service model" and 5% physical
>> specs (there were three main physical ideas for it, only one was the tablet).
>2015 is almost here - time to move to the "computer in glasses" model
>(lame "Back to the Future" reference, but I know you will agree).
>BGB wrote on Wed, 14 Mar 2012 17:23:07 -0700
>> the TSS?...
>> it is still usable on x86 in 32-bit Protected-Mode.
>I was thinking about about the LDT and GDT (Local Descriptor Table and
>Global Descriptor Table). These still work, of course, but the current
>implementations are so bad that it is faster to do the same thing 100%
>in software. You do lose the security aspect, however.
>It is funny that the wish to put the TSS to good use was the big
>motivation for Linux. The resulting non portability (which is a lot less
>important now than then) was one of the main complaints in Andrew
>Tanenbaum's famous early rant about the OS. The first attempt to port
>Linux (to the Alpha, if I remember correctly) required completely
>rewriting that part and the changes were quickly brought back to the
>Intel version.
>Marcel Weiher wrote on Thu, 15 Mar 2012 15:33:07 +0100
>> I have a little Postscript interpreter/scratchpad in the AppStore 
>> (TouchScript,
>> ).  Admittedly, 
>> it
>> was mostly a trial balloon to see if something like that would be accepted, 
>> and
>> it was (2nd revision so far).  And somewhat surprisingly a (very) few people
>> even seem to be using it!
>> Sharing is via iTunes.
>Thanks for the tip! I see your description is "Use the Postscript(tm)
>language to express your ideas and see the results on your iPhone.
>Transfer your creations to your computer via iTunes sharing as either
>PNG or Postscript documents."
>It is likely that the reviewers considered that "Postscript documents"
>means a text file (like a .pdf or .doc). The user who gave you a bad
>review certainly did (another user corrected him/her). So this doesn't
>tell us what Apple would do with a language that allows you to share
>David Harris wrote on Thu, 15 Mar 2012 08:35:06 -0700 about
>Wolfram|Alpha mobile
>Thanks, but that is exactly what I was calling "just a terminal" and "a
>-- Jecel
>fonc mailing list
fonc mailing list

Reply via email to