Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #41734 > unrolled thread

Canon Cat Forth Source

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth

Contents

  Canon Cat Forth Source Mux <Yvo.Zoer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 12:51 -0700
    Re: Canon Cat Forth Source Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-04 14:32 -0700
      Re: Canon Cat Forth Source Mux <Yvo.Zoer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 14:44 -0700
        Re: Canon Cat Forth Source Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-09-04 15:31 -0700
          Re: Canon Cat Forth Source Mux <Yvo.Zoer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-04 20:50 -0700
          Re: Canon Cat Forth Source hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-04 23:52 -0700
            Re: Canon Cat Forth Source Mux <Yvo.Zoer@gmail.com> - 2015-09-05 06:52 -0700
              Re: Canon Cat Forth Source Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-09-05 16:26 +0200
              Re: Canon Cat Forth Source hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-05 21:11 -0700
                Re: Canon Cat Forth Source dunno <dunno@dunno.dunno> - 2015-09-06 07:17 +0000
                  Re: Canon Cat Forth Source rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 15:14 -0400
                  Re: Canon Cat Forth Source Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-08 14:31 -0700
                Re: Canon Cat Forth Source Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-08 14:31 -0700
                  Re: Canon Cat Forth Source "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-09-08 23:14 +0100
                    Re: Canon Cat Forth Source Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-08 15:30 -0700
                      Re: Canon Cat Forth Source hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-08 20:48 -0700
                      Re: Canon Cat Forth Source "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-09-09 14:53 +0100
      Re: Canon Cat Forth Source "David N. Williams" <williams@umich.edu> - 2015-09-05 10:31 -0400
      Re: Canon Cat Forth Source Matthias Koch <matthias.koch@hot.uni-hannover.de> - 2015-09-07 10:49 +0200
        Re: Canon Cat Forth Source hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-07 11:18 -0700
          Re: Canon Cat Forth Source rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2015-09-07 15:35 -0400
          Re: Canon Cat Forth Source "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-07 20:15 +0000
            Re: Canon Cat Forth Source dunno <dunno@dunno.dunno> - 2015-09-07 21:44 +0000
              Re: Canon Cat Forth Source Coos Haak <chforth@hccnet.nl> - 2015-09-08 00:50 +0200
              Re: Canon Cat Forth Source Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-09-08 01:47 +0200
          Re: Canon Cat Forth Source dunno <dunno@dunno.dunno> - 2015-09-07 21:36 +0000
    Re: Canon Cat Forth Source Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-05 09:13 -0700
    Re: Canon Cat Forth Source Matthias Koch <matthias.koch@hot.uni-hannover.de> - 2015-09-07 13:51 +0200
      Re: Canon Cat Forth Source hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-09-07 08:32 -0700
        Re: Canon Cat Forth Source "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-07 19:43 +0000
          Re: Canon Cat Forth Source borota@gmail.com - 2015-09-07 12:49 -0700
        Re: Canon Cat Forth Source "WJ" <w_a_x_man@yahoo.com> - 2015-09-07 22:00 +0000

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#41734 — Canon Cat Forth Source

For those of you interested, here's a link to the complete forth source code for the Canon Cat, a word processor from the late 80's created by Jeff Raskin.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/canon-cat/WCPRK8t3jIQ

and for some more information on the cat, here's the wiki link. You can still buy them on eBay too! If you happen to buy one, there's actually a way to boot straight into forth. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_Cat

-Mux

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#41735

Mux <Yvo.Zoer@gmail.com> writes:
> source code for the Canon Cat, a word processor from the late 80's
> created by Jeff Raskin.
>
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/canon-cat/WCPRK8t3jIQ

Wow!  Thanks for posting that.  It's around 30 KLOC of code, a lot of it
in assembler.  Both the Forth and assembler parts are impressive and
well-commented.  Do you know if there's a way to run the program on a
modern computer, e.g. using a 68k emulator?  The original hardware
used a 5 mhz 68000 with 256k of ram, so emulation should be feasible.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41736

> Wow!  Thanks for posting that.  It's around 30 KLOC of code, a lot of it
> in assembler.  Both the Forth and assembler parts are impressive and
> well-commented.  Do you know if there's a way to run the program on a
> modern computer, e.g. using a 68k emulator?  The original hardware
> used a 5 mhz 68000 with 256k of ram, so emulation should be feasible.

No clue. The code is definitely really well documented. The hardware itself wasn't all that impressive but they made a REALLY robust system that never really crashed. Ditto for the Apple II Swyftcard they made.

Imagine that :-)

-Mux

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41738

Mux <Yvo.Zoer@gmail.com> writes:
> No clue. The code is definitely really well documented. The hardware
> itself wasn't all that impressive but they made a REALLY robust system
> that never really crashed. Ditto for the Apple II Swyftcard they made.
> Imagine that :-)

I just looked on fleabay and those things still sell in the $1000-2000
range.  Wow.  I'm not in the market but I'd like to try one out
sometime just to see what it's like.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41742

> I just looked on fleabay and those things still sell in the $1000-2000
> range.  Wow.  I'm not in the market but I'd like to try one out
> sometime just to see what it's like.

Yeah, the're kinda pricey.. Next best thing would probably be an emulator OR... watching this cheesy marketing video :-)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_TlE_U_X3c

-Mux

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41750

On Friday, September 4, 2015 at 3:31:30 PM UTC-7, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Mux <Yvo.Zoer@gmail.com> writes:
> > No clue. The code is definitely really well documented. The hardware
> > itself wasn't all that impressive but they made a REALLY robust system
> > that never really crashed. Ditto for the Apple II Swyftcard they made.
> > Imagine that :-)
> 
> I just looked on fleabay and those things still sell in the $1000-2000
> range.  Wow.  I'm not in the market but I'd like to try one out
> sometime just to see what it's like.

I really really wanted a Canon Cat back in 1987, but the $1495 price tag was way beyond my means --- by comparison, the Atari-ST was $999 and had 1MB of RAM plus MIDI support, and you could get Forth for it as an option, so it was a much better bargain --- I couldn't afford it either though.

Everything was expensive back then --- I wanted the Atari-ST, but I ended up lowering my standards yet again and getting an IBM clone --- so I learned MS-DOS (barely better than CP/M, and it had those weird "terminate-and-stay-resident" utilities that always clashed with each other).

Now I can walk into WalMart and buy a dual-core 64-bit laptop for $400-$500 (about $150 in 1987 money) --- back in 1987 I would have predicted that we would have a lunar colony by 2015, but would not have predicted such inexpensive and incredibly powerful computers, and would not have predicted the internet either.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41756

> I really really wanted a Canon Cat back in 1987, but the $1495 price tag was way beyond my means --- by comparison, the Atari-ST was $999 and had 1MB of RAM plus MIDI support, and you could get Forth for it as an option, so it was a much better bargain --- I couldn't afford it either though.
>
 > Everything was expensive back then --- I wanted the Atari-ST, but I ended up lowering my standards yet again and getting an IBM clone --- so I learned MS-DOS (barely better than CP/M, and it had those weird "terminate-and-stay-resident" utilities that always clashed with each other).
> 
> Now I can walk into WalMart and buy a dual-core 64-bit laptop for $400-$500 (about $150 in 1987 money) --- back in 1987 I would have predicted that we would have a lunar colony by 2015, but would not have predicted such inexpensive and incredibly powerful computers, and would not have predicted the internet either.

It's amazing how expensive technology was in those days, especially if you account for inflation. Atari 2600 games were like $30 in those days. For 4k roms :-)

-Mux

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41757

Mux wrote:

>> I really really wanted a Canon Cat back in 1987, but the $1495 price tag
>> was way beyond my means --- by comparison, the Atari-ST was $999 and had
>> 1MB of RAM plus MIDI support, and you could get Forth for it as an
>> option, so it was a much better bargain --- I couldn't afford it either
>> though.
>>
>  > Everything was expensive back then --- I wanted the Atari-ST, but I
>  > ended up lowering my standards yet again and getting an IBM clone ---
>  > so I learned MS-DOS (barely better than CP/M, and it had those weird
>  > "terminate-and-stay-resident" utilities that always clashed with each
>  > other).
>> 
>> Now I can walk into WalMart and buy a dual-core 64-bit laptop for
>> $400-$500 (about $150 in 1987 money) --- back in 1987 I would have
>> predicted that we would have a lunar colony by 2015, but would not have
>> predicted such inexpensive and incredibly powerful computers, and would
>> not have predicted the internet either.
> 
> It's amazing how expensive technology was in those days, especially if you
> account for inflation. Atari 2600 games were like $30 in those days. For
> 4k roms :-)

If you weren't able to predict the current Internet and the use of it, you 
might want to read "The Shockwave Rider" from John Brunner

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shockwave_Rider

It was written in 1975, and it's prediction accuracy is stunning.  Not only 
did he predict the negative impact of Reagonomics (which didn't become big 
on the political agenda until 5 years later), or a global network similar to 
the Internet, he also managed to predict Wikileaks- or Snowden-like big 
leaks of secret state surveillance databases.

Ok, now it's too late, most predictions became true ;-).

-- 
Bernd Paysan
"If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself"
net2o ID: kQusJzA;7*?t=uy@X}1GWr!+0qqp_Cn176t4(dQ*
http://bernd-paysan.de/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41787

On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 6:52:58 AM UTC-7, Mux wrote:
> > I really really wanted a Canon Cat back in 1987, but the $1495 price tag was way beyond my means --- by comparison, the Atari-ST was $999 and had 1MB of RAM plus MIDI support, and you could get Forth for it as an option, so it was a much better bargain --- I couldn't afford it either though.
> >
>  > Everything was expensive back then --- I wanted the Atari-ST, but I ended up lowering my standards yet again and getting an IBM clone --- so I learned MS-DOS (barely better than CP/M, and it had those weird "terminate-and-stay-resident" utilities that always clashed with each other).
> > 
> > Now I can walk into WalMart and buy a dual-core 64-bit laptop for $400-$500 (about $150 in 1987 money) --- back in 1987 I would have predicted that we would have a lunar colony by 2015, but would not have predicted such inexpensive and incredibly powerful computers, and would not have predicted the internet either.
> 
> It's amazing how expensive technology was in those days, especially if you account for inflation. Atari 2600 games were like $30 in those days. For 4k roms :-)
> 
> -Mux

Mass production kills innovation --- now we have low-cost computers (mostly built in China) --- but we have had to lower our standards, similar to how I lowered my standards back then.

If everybody were to examine all the possible designs and choose the best for themselves, there would be a variety of systems in use, but Windows wouldn't be one of them (because Windows is nobody's idea of "best") --- MicroSoft got where it is because the federal government mandated that there had to be a standard for all government offices, and in their bureaucratic wisdom they picked MicroSoft --- now Windows swamps out everything else.

I was just thinking about how cool it would be to build a Canon Cat. Upgrade it to a ColdFire processor, give it a hard-disk, give it a small laptop to reside in, etc.. But cool or not, it would be hugely expensive --- likely $4000 (approximately the 1987 price adjusted for inflation) --- so, still a flop commercially.

Meanwhile we can get dual-core 64-bit Windows computes at Walmart for $400 (an order of magnitude less expensive) --- but the software is ugly and inefficient --- nobody enjoys working with Windows.

The economy is winner-take-all --- it is similar in music where we get mass-produced schlock such as Hanna Montana and now Justin Bieber --- but all innovation and talent is squelched.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41788

<hughaguilar96@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 6:52:58 AM UTC-7, Mux wrote:
>>> I really really wanted a Canon Cat back in 1987, but the $1495 price
>>> tag was way beyond my means --- by comparison, the Atari-ST was $999
>>> and had 1MB of RAM plus MIDI support, and you could get Forth for it as
>>> an option, so it was a much better bargain --- I couldn't afford it either though.
>>> 
>>  > Everything was expensive back then --- I wanted the Atari-ST, but I
>> ended up lowering my standards yet again and getting an IBM clone --- so
>> I learned MS-DOS (barely better than CP/M, and it had those weird
>> "terminate-and-stay-resident" utilities that always clashed with each other).
>>> 
>>> Now I can walk into WalMart and buy a dual-core 64-bit laptop for
>>> $400-$500 (about $150 in 1987 money) --- back in 1987 I would have
>>> predicted that we would have a lunar colony by 2015, but would not have
>>> predicted such inexpensive and incredibly powerful computers, and would
>>> not have predicted the internet either.
>> 
>> It's amazing how expensive technology was in those days, especially if
>> you account for inflation. Atari 2600 games were like $30 in those days. For 4k roms :-)
>> 
>> -Mux
> 
> Mass production kills innovation --- now we have low-cost computers
> (mostly built in China) --- but we have had to lower our standards,
> similar to how I lowered my standards back then.

Wow, wow, mister. Please keep your lower standards to yourself, and please
don't say "we."

Fortunately we in Russia are very open to innovations, and we always keep
our standards high. That's why American companies are buying things from
Russia even though there are supposed to be some sanctions. By the way,
it's funny, isn't it? Sanctions, lol.

> If everybody were to examine all the possible designs and choose the best
> for themselves, there would be a variety of systems in use, but Windows
> wouldn't be one of them (because Windows is nobody's idea of "best") ---
> MicroSoft got where it is because the federal government mandated that
> there had to be a standard for all government offices, and in their
> bureaucratic wisdom they picked MicroSoft --- now Windows swamps out everything else.

Mister Murrican forgot how Microsoft got it? I know pot and meth are very
popular in US, but I hope average people still can remember things.

> I was just thinking about how cool it would be to build a Canon Cat.
> Upgrade it to a ColdFire processor, give it a hard-disk, give it a small
> laptop to reside in, etc.. But cool or not, it would be hugely expensive
> --- likely $4000 (approximately the 1987 price adjusted for inflation)
> --- so, still a flop commercially.
> 
> Meanwhile we can get dual-core 64-bit Windows computes at Walmart for
> $400 (an order of magnitude less expensive) --- but the software is ugly
> and inefficient --- nobody enjoys working with Windows.
> 
> The economy is winner-take-all --- it is similar in music where we get
> mass-produced schlock such as Hanna Montana and now Justin Bieber --- but
> all innovation and talent is squelched.


-- 
dunno

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41826

On 9/6/2015 3:17 AM, dunno wrote:
> <hughaguilar96@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 6:52:58 AM UTC-7, Mux wrote:
>>>> I really really wanted a Canon Cat back in 1987, but the $1495 price
>>>> tag was way beyond my means --- by comparison, the Atari-ST was $999
>>>> and had 1MB of RAM plus MIDI support, and you could get Forth for it as
>>>> an option, so it was a much better bargain --- I couldn't afford it either though.
>>>>
>>>   > Everything was expensive back then --- I wanted the Atari-ST, but I
>>> ended up lowering my standards yet again and getting an IBM clone --- so
>>> I learned MS-DOS (barely better than CP/M, and it had those weird
>>> "terminate-and-stay-resident" utilities that always clashed with each other).
>>>>
>>>> Now I can walk into WalMart and buy a dual-core 64-bit laptop for
>>>> $400-$500 (about $150 in 1987 money) --- back in 1987 I would have
>>>> predicted that we would have a lunar colony by 2015, but would not have
>>>> predicted such inexpensive and incredibly powerful computers, and would
>>>> not have predicted the internet either.
>>>
>>> It's amazing how expensive technology was in those days, especially if
>>> you account for inflation. Atari 2600 games were like $30 in those days. For 4k roms :-)
>>>
>>> -Mux
>>
>> Mass production kills innovation --- now we have low-cost computers
>> (mostly built in China) --- but we have had to lower our standards,
>> similar to how I lowered my standards back then.
>
> Wow, wow, mister. Please keep your lower standards to yourself, and please
> don't say "we."
>
> Fortunately we in Russia are very open to innovations, and we always keep
> our standards high. That's why American companies are buying things from
> Russia even though there are supposed to be some sanctions. By the way,
> it's funny, isn't it? Sanctions, lol.

I don't know how long you have been reading posts here, but Hugh is a 
famous troll and is suspected of being not of sound mind.  He spends 
much time railing against Ms. Rather and her minions and the plot to 
destroy Forth.  Hmmm... could be a movie comedy.  Starring Jonathon 
Winters as Hugh and Ethel Merman as Ms. Rather.  Oh, wait, that was 
"It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World"...

Please don't generalize the actions of a few to represent all of us 
either in the US or here in the Forth group.


>> If everybody were to examine all the possible designs and choose the best
>> for themselves, there would be a variety of systems in use, but Windows
>> wouldn't be one of them (because Windows is nobody's idea of "best") ---
>> MicroSoft got where it is because the federal government mandated that
>> there had to be a standard for all government offices, and in their
>> bureaucratic wisdom they picked MicroSoft --- now Windows swamps out everything else.
>
> Mister Murrican forgot how Microsoft got it? I know pot and meth are very
> popular in US, but I hope average people still can remember things.

More generalizations...  Meth is popular in the movies while we *are* 
working toward having pot in the stores, but that's a way off still.  In 
the mean time we'll have to settle for imported Vodka... speaking of 
stereotypes...  ;)

-- 

Rick

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41861

On Sunday, September 6, 2015 at 12:17:42 AM UTC-7, dunno wrote:

> Fortunately we in Russia are very open to innovations, and we always keep
> our standards high. That's why American companies are buying things from
> Russia even though there are supposed to be some sanctions. By the way,
> it's funny, isn't it? Sanctions, lol.

Including rocket engines.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41860

On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 9:11:32 PM UTC-7, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:

> The economy is winner-take-all --- it is similar in music where we
> get mass-produced schlock such as Hanna Montana and now Justin Bieber
>  --- but all innovation and talent is squelched.

It's not just in the economy.  Its in everything.  That's just how
civilization works.  Civilization is an everything or nothing 
proposition.  That's why all churches are Christian churches. 
That's also why the only form of socialism is Marxism.  I used
to cook for Food Not Bombs both in San Francisco, and in Portland
Oregon.  I can tell you that with 99% certainty that 99% of socialists
are Marxists, even though socialism existed before Marx.

Must my .02 cents worth.

Jason

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41862

on 08/09/2015 22:31:09, Jason Damisch wrote:
> On Saturday, September 5, 2015 at 9:11:32 PM UTC-7,
> hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> 
>> The economy is winner-take-all --- it is similar in music where we
>> get mass-produced schlock such as Hanna Montana and now Justin Bieber
>>  --- but all innovation and talent is squelched.
> 
> It's not just in the economy.  Its in everything.  That's just how
> civilization works.  Civilization is an everything or nothing
> proposition.  

So which is it?

> That's why all churches are Christian churches.

Except those that aren't.

> That's also why the only form of socialism is Marxism. 

Except those that aren't.

> I used
> to cook for Food Not Bombs both in San Francisco, and in Portland
> Oregon. I can tell you that with 99% certainty that 99% of socialists
> are Marxists, even though socialism existed before Marx.

I'm sure you don't understand %ages. Or socialism.

> 
> Must my .02 cents worth.

I'll also add small fractions to the list of things you don't get.

> 
> Jason

You got that right at least.

> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41863

On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 3:14:21 PM UTC-7, Alex McDonald wrote:
 
> > Jason
> 
> You got that right at least.

Why so mean to me?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41876

On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 3:30:55 PM UTC-7, Jason Damisch wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 3:14:21 PM UTC-7, Alex McDonald wrote:
>  
> > > Jason
> > 
> > You got that right at least.
> 
> Why so mean to me?

Because you were agreeing with me.

Anyway, don't worry about it --- Alex told me that I have a "serious misunderstanding of how pointers work" --- I didn't burst into tears and sob: "You found me out!"

I downloaded the Canon Cat source-code and I intend to get it running in that MESS emulator if I can --- hopefully I will learn something --- Raskin's system went straight into the trashbin of history, but it may have had some good ideas in it that could be revived.

Most likely, the Canon Cat got killed not just because it was expensive (the Macintosh was pretty pricey too), but rather because Canon wanted to do business with Apple and Steve Jobs demanded that they kill the Cat --- personal grudges are a bigger factor in history than the history books say --- the history books describe all decisions as being rational, as if everybody were motivated entirely by an altruistic desire to improve society, whereas in reality most people just want to give their neighbor a boot in the ass.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41895

on 08/09/2015 23:30:54, Jason Damisch wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 8, 2015 at 3:14:21 PM UTC-7, Alex McDonald
> wrote:
> 
>> > Jason
>>
>> You got that right at least.
> 
> Why so mean to me?
> 
> 
> 

Didn't mean to be. I just don't do these: ;) ;-) :-) :) ::)) :( :-(( etc.

Although I will do [: ;] and {: :}

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41759

On 9/4/15 5:32 PM, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Mux <Yvo.Zoer@gmail.com> writes:
>> source code for the Canon Cat, a word processor from the late 80's
>> created by Jeff Raskin.
>>
>> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/canon-cat/WCPRK8t3jIQ
>
> Wow!  Thanks for posting that.  It's around 30 KLOC of code, a lot of it
> in assembler.  Both the Forth and assembler parts are impressive and
> well-commented.  Do you know if there's a way to run the program on a
> modern computer, e.g. using a 68k emulator?  The original hardware
> used a 5 mhz 68000 with 256k of ram, so emulation should be feasible.

Over much of the past year, I've been plugging away at a 68k project
which has made me somewhat familiar with 68k emulators for the
Macintosh, NeXT, Amiga, and Atari.  They emulate the corresponding
legacy systems, and work from legacy ROM images.

It looks like the Canon Cat has its own ROM and operating system?  If so
there's an interesting 68000 only emulator called F.A.M.E. (Fast and
Accurate Motorolo 68000 Emulation Library) that might be a good match
for it.  Unfortunately the original website has disappeared, but I've put
the files here:

   http://www.umich.edu/~williams/archive/m68k-emulators/

-- David

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41810

>> source code for the Canon Cat, a word processor from the late 80's
>> created by Jeff Raskin.

> Wow!  Thanks for posting that.  It's around 30 KLOC of code, a lot of it
> in assembler.  Both the Forth and assembler parts are impressive and
> well-commented.  Do you know if there's a way to run the program on a
> modern computer, e.g. using a 68k emulator?  The original hardware
> used a 5 mhz 68000 with 256k of ram, so emulation should be feasible.


Hi Paul,

yes, MESS emulates the Cat: http://www.mess.org/
(And the Swyft, too!)

Matthias

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#41820

On Monday, September 7, 2015 at 1:49:22 AM UTC-7, Matthias Koch wrote:
> >> source code for the Canon Cat, a word processor from the late 80's
> >> created by Jeff Raskin.
> 
> > Wow!  Thanks for posting that.  It's around 30 KLOC of code, a lot of it
> > in assembler.  Both the Forth and assembler parts are impressive and
> > well-commented.  Do you know if there's a way to run the program on a
> > modern computer, e.g. using a 68k emulator?  The original hardware
> > used a 5 mhz 68000 with 256k of ram, so emulation should be feasible.
> 
> 
> Hi Paul,
> 
> yes, MESS emulates the Cat: http://www.mess.org/
> (And the Swyft, too!)
> 
> Matthias

I'm definitely interested in trying out the Canon Cat --- that $1495 price tag was just too high (even today, I don't have $1495 burning a hole in my pocket) --- now I can finally have a Canon Cat that I wanted so badly in 1987!

Nowadays, the GUI seems to be the only option for a user-interface, but I remember I time when it was just one of several options, and not the best in anybody's opinion (other than Steve Jobs). In the 1980s, I considered the GUI to be only for graphical artists --- they could drag icons around on their drawing, similar to how they previously did cut-and-paste using an Exacto-Knife and bottle of glue --- besides that, most of them were semi-literate at best and were never going to master a command-line (they all declared themselves to be "right-brain thinkers" and despised text despite the fact that written language is humanity's greatest invention). In 1987 I did not predict that every computer and every piece of software would have a GUI within 5 years --- I still think of the GUI as being a throw-back to the pictures that cavemen drew on the walls of their caves in pre-literacy days.

On a related note --- we now have dual-core 64-bit computers, but a significant portion of the processing power is dedicated to the GUI, with very little being used for actual computing --- that is like using a jet plane to haul garbage!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth

csiph-web