Re: [libreoffice-users] Intentionally crashing LibreOffice when frozen/LibreOffice will not start.
Hi :) Try Gnumeric; http://www.gnumeric.org/download.html It's a dedicated spreadsheet program with a tiny footprint that uses minimal resources, so it's faster, lighter and more robust than Excel or Calc. Many people find Gnumeric to be better than Calc or Excel for serious or hefty spreadsheets and/or for handling many more spreadsheets in a shorter time-frame. It can be installed alongside LibreOffice and/or MS Office. It uses the same format as LibreOffice natively so most spreadsheets can be bounced between the 2 programs quite happily. Part of the advantage of LibreOffice is that it fits well into a wider eco-system and co-operates well with a wider range of programs and suites allowing you to tailor individual machines to specific use-cases and yet still retain the ability to share files between different machines and different people using different OSes and programs. Regards from Tom ) On 5 April 2014 06:43, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak and...@pitonyak.org wrote: On 04/04/2014 07:44 PM, andrewH wrote: I am working with a data set that keeps causing my LibreOffice to freeze. I am pretty sure that this is only because it is big. It is a pipe-separated text from the US Economic Census imported into Calc, about 30 columns and around a million rows. (The actual data set is bigger, but Calc quits at a million-odd. The complete file is about 0.8 gig.) I suspect but can not prove that this is related to file handling somehow, e.g. breaking down during auto-saving. The first time I saved the data as a Calc file it took nearly an hour with the soffice.bin *32 process running at 25 percent of CPU time and using about 825 meg of memory the entire time. (Not sure why this is showing up as a 32-bit version). And when Calc freezes, all the LibreOffice programs freeze. So I can't just switch to another file and noodle away while waiting. It looks to me as though Calc cannot handle more than 1048576 rows of data, Do you have more rows than that? If yes, then I think that you cannot open the file. If you have less than that, and, if you think that you are simply running out of memory if you can figure out how to get the data to me, I can run a test on a 64 bit version (running on Linux). My machine has 32 GB of RAM... -- Andrew Pitonyak My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Do Macros run serially or in parallel?
Hi, Sorry I've been slow to respond to all your posts. It has taken me a while to sort out what I think is happening. Fernand, thanks for your code suggestion. I pasted it into the start of my macros and the Wait() statement worked perfectly. Then I incorporated it into my Init macro and discovered that none of my Wait() statements worked. The same applied to the AccName macro. I was really puzzled and probably spent longer than I should have on the problem, but I felt I really needed an answer. Finally, through much trial and error I found which macros Wait() worked in and which it didn't. My testing was not exhaustive, but it seems that Wait() doesn't work in any macro that is called from one of the Form's events. When I got back to reading my emails, I discovered that Andrew was predicting that this might be the case! Then it occurred to me that, rather than use separate text files for printing out the Now() values, if I used just one file, it would give me the order of processing, and the exact times would not be so important. So I did that and also added System Ticks / 1000. The result was as follows - Init 1. 05/04/2014 23:20:37 43421.801 Init 2. 05/04/2014 23:20:37 43421.801 Init 3. 05/04/2014 23:20:37 43421.817 Init 4. 05/04/2014 23:20:37 43421.833 Init 5. 05/04/2014 23:20:37 43421.848 Init 6. 05/04/2014 23:20:40 43424.36 Init 7. 05/04/2014 23:20:40 43424.375 Name 1. 05/04/2014 23:20:40 43424.625 Name 2. 05/04/2014 23:20:40 43424.625 Name 3. 05/04/2014 23:20:40 43424.625 This demonstrates that macro Init ran before macro Name. From this, and a number of other tests I ran, I believe that - 1. Macros are always processed serially on a first come first served basis. 2. If macro A calls macro B, then Macro A waits until macro B has completed before the remaining code of macro A is processed. These were the conclusions that I was hoping for. As well, I now have a mechanism for checking out other timing situations where I'm not sure what is going on. So thank you all for your input - it has been an interesting journey! Noel -- Noel Lodge lodg...@gmail.com PS Alex, Yes you are right - the account name needs to be fetched from another table. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Do Macros run serially or in parallel?
On 04/05/2014 09:13 AM, Marion Noel Lodge wrote: Hi, Sorry I've been slow to respond to all your posts. It has taken me a while to sort out what I think is happening. Many of us are very busy and totally understand when it takes time to respond! Fernand, thanks for your code suggestion. I pasted it into the start of my macros and the Wait() statement worked perfectly. Then I incorporated it into my Init macro and discovered that none of my Wait() statements worked. The same applied to the AccName macro. I was really puzzled and probably spent longer than I should have on the problem, but I felt I really needed an answer. Finally, through much trial and error I found which macros Wait() worked in and which it didn't. My testing was not exhaustive, but it seems that Wait() doesn't work in any macro that is called from one of the Form's events. When I got back to reading my emails, I discovered that Andrew was predicting that this might be the case! So if you really wanted wait to work inside an event handler, you would need to write your own and then simply perform a busy wait. Something like this code that won't work as written (too lazy to look up syntax and such) tempLong = getSystemTicks() StopWhen = tempLong + someDeltaValue Do While StopWhen getSystemTicks() Do something to eat a bit of time For i = 0 To 1000 For j = 0 To 1000 doubleTemp = i + j Next Next End Then it occurred to me that, rather than use separate text files for printing out the Now() values, if I used just one file, it would give me the order of processing, and the exact times would not be so important. So I did that and also added System Ticks / 1000. The result was as follows - I purposely suggested two different files because if things were not serial, then you might have two places attempting to write to the same file at the same time (concurrency problem). My concern was that: 1. Macro A updates the form and control returns to Macro A that continues to run. 2. The form event is triggered calling Macro B before Macro A finishes. So, if one macro updated a field on a form, which caused an event to be triggered, then the triggered event might be running in a separate thread (at the same time) as the macro that updated the field. In fact, if this was not the case, then I expected that the behavior would always be the same, and it sounded like the behavior was not always the same for you. Init 1. 05/04/2014 23:20:37 43421.801 Init 2. 05/04/2014 23:20:37 43421.801 Init 3. 05/04/2014 23:20:37 43421.817 Init 4. 05/04/2014 23:20:37 43421.833 Init 5. 05/04/2014 23:20:37 43421.848 Init 6. 05/04/2014 23:20:40 43424.36 Init 7. 05/04/2014 23:20:40 43424.375 Name 1. 05/04/2014 23:20:40 43424.625 Name 2. 05/04/2014 23:20:40 43424.625 Name 3. 05/04/2014 23:20:40 43424.625 This demonstrates that macro Init ran before macro Name. From this, and a number of other tests I ran, I believe that - 1. Macros are always processed serially on a first come first served basis. 2. If macro A calls macro B, then Macro A waits until macro B has completed before the remaining code of macro A is processed. These were the conclusions that I was hoping for. As well, I now have a mechanism for checking out other timing situations where I'm not sure what is going on. So thank you all for your input - it has been an interesting journey! Noel -- Noel Lodge lodg...@gmail.com PS Alex, Yes you are right - the account name needs to be fetched from another table. -- Andrew Pitonyak My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Microsoft Revisits the '80s With MS-DOS, Word for Windows Source Code,
On 04/04/2014 05:56 PM, CVAlkan wrote: Not sure if my recollections are correct, but I don't believe either DOS (before 2.x) or the DOS version of Word were written by Microsoft. I seem to recall that both were purchased and re-branded. Word for MS-DOS was typical of the approach Microsoft would perfect over many subsequent years. Its success (actually not all that great) was based almost entirely on marketing. In its heyday, almost all word processors for the MS-DOS / PC-DOS platform were at least as good as Word, and many were far superior. WordPerfect (4.x and later) were far more suitable for anyone actually attempting to create a document. Word, for instance, took up fully half of the available (80x25) screen space with typically intuitive menus (isn't it obvious to a new user that Esc-File-Transfer is the appropriate sequence for saving a file? - and weren't most users pretty new back then?). PC-Write had more text space and less menu space. And as for printing, one needed to have a Microsoft approved (as opposed to supported; even then, arrogance was one of their hallmarks) printer (nothing wrong with Epson and Okidata, of course, but remember when the HP LaserJet first appeared?) to get any output. Most of its competitors supported many more devices. My recollection is that Microsoft Word's support for the LaserJet (we had both where I worked when that first appeared) came a good six months after WordPerfect's. I use to write printer driver files for PC-Write. So any printer with a good manual could have a printer file made for it. Every office seemed to have ordered a different printer so I was kept busy for a month of so, along with my computer center gig. I remember training secretaries on an IBM standalone word processor machine (can't recall the model, but it used 8 floppies); this effort went quite smoothly. When we later began introducing those PC things, I had a devil of a time training those same secretaries on Word (we fell for the OS-WP compatibility argument), it was a disaster. We then shifted gears to WordPerfect which had an even higher learning curve initially, but most caught on to its way of thinking very quickly. Do not remember 8 inch ones. I remember 10 inch, and then the 5.x inch ones. [single sided and then double sided] When WordPerfect 5.x arrived, there was even the ability to display a graphic preview (almost WYSIWYG) display of the printed output on a normal character screen - and this was available not only for DOS versions, but on a wide variety of platforms such as the then popular DEC and DG terminals. Since most other machines had standard VT-100 emulation, life was good for WordPerfect users. WordPerfect and PC-Write were the standard for the places I worked till Word 95 came along. In those days as I recall, I only ran into a minority of businesses that used Word. There were a good number of other pretty capable word processors in use, a number of which also included database and other such modules (too primitive to call them suites, I suppose, but the idea was there. But I think the combination of WordPerfect and Lotus 1-2-3 was far more common than Word and (uh-oh, Excel didn't come along until later). Sorry for the trip down memory lane, but I agree that this is undoubtedly some sort of publicity stunt. Call me cynical, but I can't help wondering what's up their sleeve with this. If we do not remember the past, we are bound to repeat it was a popular quote for a while. MS needs a good publicity stunt or two to help with their mess with Win 8.x I read an article today that they are now going to add a function where it will look more like Win7 and be better at keyboard/mouse operation. They are also going to offer Win8.x to device makers [not desktops or laptops makers though] for free, since they can get Android for free. MS really is hurting over Android's market share for these hand held devices. Well there is also a movement to port Android to the Laptop. That would really mess with MS's market share. What is up their sleeve? A billy club, knife, gun, and many other items that they can try to convince the public that they are the best to know what the market needs and what people have to have to be a happy computer device user. Their OS and office suite monopoly is over and they do not like it. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Microsoft-Revisits-the-80s-With-MS-DOS-Word-for-Windows-Source-Code-tp4103960p4104153.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Modifying Styles
Dunno if you're talking to me or to the OP, anyway, here goes :) Le 04/04/2014 18:01, CVAlkan a écrit : Just a thought: In the Tools|Options dialog, there is a section under LibreOffice|General titled Document Status. Under that is a check box labelled: Allow to save document even when the document is not modified On your installation, is that box checked or unchecked? On my PC, this is unchecked, as it is by default after LibO install. -- Jean-Francois Nifenecker, Bordeaux -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Microsoft Revisits the '80s With MS-DOS, Word for Windows Source Code,
Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: On 04/04/2014 05:56 PM, CVAlkan wrote: Not sure if my recollections are correct, but I don't believe either DOS (before 2.x) or the DOS version of Word were written by Microsoft. I seem to recall that both were purchased and re-branded. DOS was bought from Seattle Computer Products and it was originally intended to be a hardware test system, while waiting for CP/M-86, rather than a proper OS. Do not remember 8 inch ones. I remember 10 inch, and then the 5.x inch ones. [single sided and then double sided] The first floppies, as invented by IBM, were 8. There never were 10 floppies. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Bar chart extending from a low to a high value?
People, I want to create a chart from a table that has just a low and a high value for each category - so each end of the bar, for each category, corresponds to the low or the high value for that category - this does not look possible as far as I can see? Thanks, Phil. -- Philip Rhoades GPO Box 3411 Sydney NSW 2001 Australia E-mail: p...@pricom.com.au -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Microsoft Revisits the '80s With MS-DOS, Word for Windows Source Code,
On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 13:57:48 -0400 James Knott james.kn...@rogers.com wrote: Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: On 04/04/2014 05:56 PM, CVAlkan wrote: Not sure if my recollections are correct, but I don't believe either DOS (before 2.x) or the DOS version of Word were written by Microsoft. I seem to recall that both were purchased and re-branded. DOS was bought from Seattle Computer Products and it was originally intended to be a hardware test system, while waiting for CP/M-86, rather than a proper OS. Do not remember 8 inch ones. I remember 10 inch, and then the 5.x inch ones. [single sided and then double sided] The first floppies, as invented by IBM, were 8. There never were 10 floppies. 8, 5-1/4, then 3-1/2. The first Winchester drives were 10, IIRC. DOS *was* originally designed and written by SCP, but I do not recall it being a test system. Digital Research was essentially ignoring the new Intel processors, and the people that formed SCP finally got tired of waiting for something that showed no signs of ever happening, and created what became DOS. That was half of a double-screw up by Gary Kildall, who formed and led DRI. The 2nd screw-up (this story is apocryphal) was him leaving visitors from IBM to meet with his wife, rather than him. IBM decided DRI was not serious, stopped in to see Gates, Gates bought DOS, and the rest is history. So is DRI. I still have a well-thumbed and somewhat yellowed CP/M 1.4 User's Manual on my bookshelf :) Says Distributed by Lifeboat Associates on it. Anybody remember them? Regards, Jim -- Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Bar chart extending from a low to a high value?
At 04:00 06/04/2014 +1000, Philip Rhoades wrote: I want to create a chart from a table that has just a low and a high value for each category - so each end of the bar, for each category, corresponds to the low or the high value for that category - this does not look possible as far as I can see? The Stock chart type will do this for you. You can adjust the width of the bars. I trust this helps. Brian Barker -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Microsoft Revisits the '80s With MS-DOS, Word for Windows Source Code,
On 04/05/2014 03:05 PM, Jim Seymour wrote: On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 13:57:48 -0400 James Knott james.kn...@rogers.com wrote: Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: On 04/04/2014 05:56 PM, CVAlkan wrote: Not sure if my recollections are correct, but I don't believe either DOS (before 2.x) or the DOS version of Word were written by Microsoft. I seem to recall that both were purchased and re-branded. DOS was bought from Seattle Computer Products and it was originally intended to be a hardware test system, while waiting for CP/M-86, rather than a proper OS. Do not remember 8 inch ones. I remember 10 inch, and then the 5.x inch ones. [single sided and then double sided] The first floppies, as invented by IBM, were 8. There never were 10 floppies. 8, 5-1/4, then 3-1/2. The first Winchester drives were 10, IIRC. Maybe I got confused. I thought my 10 inch was from a DEC system. It was sure big. Maybe they used a different type. I donated it to a college teaching staff for demoing old tech, along with my samples of a punched card program, and some paper tape. DOS *was* originally designed and written by SCP, but I do not recall it being a test system. Digital Research was essentially ignoring the new Intel processors, and the people that formed SCP finally got tired of waiting for something that showed no signs of ever happening, and created what became DOS. That was half of a double-screw up by Gary Kildall, who formed and led DRI. The 2nd screw-up (this story is apocryphal) was him leaving visitors from IBM to meet with his wife, rather than him. IBM decided DRI was not serious, stopped in to see Gates, Gates bought DOS, and the rest is history. So is DRI. I still have a well-thumbed and somewhat yellowed CP/M 1.4 User's Manual on my bookshelf :) Says Distributed by Lifeboat Associates on it. Anybody remember them? Regards, Jim I hated CP/M and had to deal with an early college computer center that had IBM [brand and not clones] PC-XTs and a few of them actually had a graphics card and not the original 80x40 characters type of display. They all were double single-sided floppy 5.25 inch. The other rooms had old Apple [before Macs] and they had CP/M OS options, and the next room had DEC terminals to the mini-mainframes. While I was there a math professor brought in the new Apple computer called a Macintosh. We also a 10 inch screen portable PC-AT or XT that weighted over 40 pounds. The next college center had both DEC terminals and a few dual floppy PCs that were connected to the DEC system via a terminal emulator called Kermit, if my memory is correct. I used its upload/download abilities to save all my work for that college onto the floppies and also did some editing at home. My first PC I had at home was a clone from a kit that cost about half of the IBM prices. Those were the days of the early home PC market and the beginning of a PC in every home idea. Before them, most home computer devices were toys. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] RE : Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Microsoft Revisits the '80s With MS-DOS, Word for Windows Source Code,
The first floppies where 8, single sided, single density and were lade for punch card substitute: the 80kB capacity was then equivalent to a rack of 1000 80 columns punched cards. That was in the early 1970's. Before that, there was 14 amovible HDD, with a capacity of 2.5 MB, made by several manufacturer, IBM, CDC... The DRI CP/M80 then CP/M86 were nothing but vaporware, only the MP/M86 (multitasking variant of CP/M86) never had a real existence. When Microsoft bought DRI, they were only able to add some bugs to a perfectly healthy OS. Sadly, they were a lot better in marketing, and they took over the market. You know the rest of the story :-( Best regards, Jean-Louis Oneto Envoyé depuis un mobile Samsung Message d'origine De : Jim Seymour jseym...@linxnet.com Date :05/04/2014 21:05 (GMT+01:00) A : users@global.libreoffice.org Objet : Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Microsoft Revisits the '80s With MS-DOS, Word for Windows Source Code, On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 13:57:48 -0400 James Knott james.kn...@rogers.com wrote: Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: On 04/04/2014 05:56 PM, CVAlkan wrote: Not sure if my recollections are correct, but I don't believe either DOS (before 2.x) or the DOS version of Word were written by Microsoft. I seem to recall that both were purchased and re-branded. DOS was bought from Seattle Computer Products and it was originally intended to be a hardware test system, while waiting for CP/M-86, rather than a proper OS. Do not remember 8 inch ones. I remember 10 inch, and then the 5.x inch ones. [single sided and then double sided] The first floppies, as invented by IBM, were 8. There never were 10 floppies. 8, 5-1/4, then 3-1/2. The first Winchester drives were 10, IIRC. DOS *was* originally designed and written by SCP, but I do not recall it being a test system. Digital Research was essentially ignoring the new Intel processors, and the people that formed SCP finally got tired of waiting for something that showed no signs of ever happening, and created what became DOS. That was half of a double-screw up by Gary Kildall, who formed and led DRI. The 2nd screw-up (this story is apocryphal) was him leaving visitors from IBM to meet with his wife, rather than him. IBM decided DRI was not serious, stopped in to see Gates, Gates bought DOS, and the rest is history. So is DRI. I still have a well-thumbed and somewhat yellowed CP/M 1.4 User's Manual on my bookshelf :) Says Distributed by Lifeboat Associates on it. Anybody remember them? Regards, Jim -- Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Microsoft Revisits the '80s With MS-DOS, Word for Windows Source Code,
On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 16:43:46 -0400 Kracked_P_P---webmaster webmas...@krackedpress.com wrote: [snip] I hated CP/M [snip] It was nearly indistinguishable from DOS, or DOS was nearly indistinguishable from it, depending upon ones perspective. The other rooms had old Apple [before Macs] and they had CP/M OS options, ... [snip] No, they didn't. Early Apple PCs ran the MOS Technologies (later: Mostek) 6502. CP/M never ran on anything but the Intel 8080 and Zilog Z80. (And only on the latter because it was a superset of the former.) Eventually, Kildall realized the 8-bit processors' days were numbered (duh) and created CP/M-86, but, by then, it was way, way too late. The shame of Kildall's mistake was that going from the 8080 to the 8086 instruction set would have been a boringly trivial exercise, since the 8086/8088 family was essentially an 8080 on steroids. Those were the days of the early home PC market and the beginning of a PC in every home idea. Before them, most home computer devices were toys. People did some truly useful things with those toys. My toy computer ran inventory and purchasing control for the company for which I worked, at the time ;) Regards, Jim -- Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Microsoft Revisits the '80s With MS-DOS, Word for Windows Source Code,
Thanks for all the comments - By the way, are you the same Jim Seymour who used to have a column in PC-Mag (I think that was it - along with Dvorak and others)? Frank -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Microsoft-Revisits-the-80s-With-MS-DOS-Word-for-Windows-Source-Code-tp4103960p4104262.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] RE : Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Microsoft Revisits the '80s With MS-DOS, Word for Windows Source Code,
On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 23:04:42 +0200 Jean-Louis Oneto jl.on...@free.fr wrote: The DRI CP/M80 then CP/M86 were nothing but vaporware, I think you must have CP/M and CP/M-86 conflated with something else. CP/M-80 was anything *but* vapourware. In the mid-70's to early 80's, 8080- and Z-80 systems ran on nothing *but* CP/M. Oh, there were a few other also-rans, but they didn't amount to much. Micropolis, for example, had its own OS (MDOS), for example. I ran both CP/M-80 1.4, CP/M 2.2 and CP/M Plus (aka: CP/M 3) operating systems, and, in fact, wrote quite a good deal of code for CP/M-80 systems, including contributing to the original XMODEM and MINICBBS projects. I ran one of the first, if not *the* first, 24x7 RCP/M systems in the state of Michigan. Nor was CP/M-86 vapourware. It was short-lived, because Kildall was way too late to the game, but it did exist. IIRC, the DEC Rainbow dual-booted CP/M-86 and DOS? only the MP/M86 (multitasking variant of CP/M86) never had a real existence. I think I ever only saw a single MP/M system in the wild. When Microsoft bought DRI, [snip] Microsoft never bought Digital Research International. (Looking...) It was acquired by Novell in 1981. Regards, Jim -- Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Microsoft Revisits the '80s With MS-DOS, Word for Windows Source Code,
I have to correct myself... On Sat, 5 Apr 2014 17:14:12 -0400 Jim Seymour jseym...@linxnet.com wrote: [snip] No, they didn't. Early Apple PCs ran the MOS Technologies (later: Mostek) 6502. CP/M never ran on anything but the Intel 8080 and Zilog Z80. (And only on the latter because it was a superset of the former.) Eventually, Kildall realized the 8-bit processors' days were numbered (duh) and created CP/M-86, but, by then, it was way, way too late. [snip] As I was checking my dates, I was reminded there was also a CP/M-68k. But I don't *believe* Apple ever ran CP/M-68k on their computers. Searching for it, I'm reminded of the Sage 68k system, which did, and how I wanted one of those in the *worst* possible way at the time :) Regards, Jim -- Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Microsoft Revisits the '80s With MS-DOS, Word for Windows Source Code,
On Sat, 5 Apr 2014 14:20:24 -0700 (PDT) CVAlkan fobe...@enteract.com wrote: Thanks for all the comments - By the way, are you the same Jim Seymour who used to have a column in PC-Mag (I think that was it - along with Dvorak and others)? Somebody *just* asked me that question, here, a couple weeks ago. No. That Jim Seymour passed on a few years ago. Regards, Jim -- Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
