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

Groups > comp.misc > #2793 > unrolled thread

Wordstar on DOS still rocks

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

Contents

  Wordstar on DOS still rocks RS Wood  <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-14 09:52 +0000
    Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks sail0r <sail0r@example.com> - 2014-05-14 23:31 -0400
      Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-15 07:02 +0000
        Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> - 2014-05-15 08:31 +0100
          Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-15 11:50 +0000
            Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks Rich <rich@example.com> - 2014-05-15 12:50 +0000
              Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-15 15:53 +0000
                Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) - 2014-05-15 17:27 +0000
                  Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks Rich <rich@example.com> - 2014-05-15 18:10 +0000
                  Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-16 03:53 +0000
        Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-15 15:59 +0000
          Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-15 17:08 +0000
            Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-15 23:31 +0000
              Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks David Harmon <source@netcom.com> - 2014-05-15 18:02 -0700
                Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-16 03:56 +0000
                  Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks David Harmon <source@netcom.com> - 2014-05-19 11:30 -0700
              Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> - 2014-05-16 06:06 +0000
          Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> - 2014-05-19 23:14 +0300
            Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-19 23:12 +0000
      Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-15 15:59 +0000
      Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us (Scott Alfter) - 2014-05-15 17:10 +0000
        Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks Rich <rich@example.com> - 2014-05-15 17:55 +0000
          Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-05-15 23:33 +0000
            Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks "John" <j@j.j> - 2014-05-22 10:32 -0700
    Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks Peter Percival <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2014-05-16 09:59 +0100
      Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-05-18 19:01 +0200
    Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks Peter Percival <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2014-05-16 18:10 +0100
      Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-05-18 14:11 +0000
        Re: Wordstar on DOS still rocks Peter Percival <peterxpercival@hotmail.com> - 2014-05-18 16:18 +0100

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#2793 — Wordstar on DOS still rocks

From the «nothing flashing at me» department:
Title: Wordstar and Old Software Too Good to Stop Using
Author: zafiro17@pipedot.org
Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 03:06:54 -0400
Link: http://pipedot.org/story/2014-05-14/wordstar-and-old-software-too-good-to-stop-using

Every day tech news is rife with stories about the latest and greatest, but
some people don't want the latest and greatest; they want their old faves.
The blogosphere is buzzing this week with the revelation[1] that George R.R.
Martin[2] , the much-admired author of the A Game of Thrones[3] and more,
actually does his writing on a DOS machine running the old, 1970s word
processor, Wordstar[4] .Should that matter? I don't think so[5] . Not one
bit. In fact, Wordstar and DOS have a couple of advantages over more modern
hardware and software: probably no Internet connection, no icons, nothing
buzzing or beeping or flashing at you. In sum, the perfect environment for
focusing on your writing. Judging by the success of GRRM's books, it's
working!What old software do you use? Which old technologies do you hang onto
even as the rest of the world chases the newest update?

Links:
[1]: http://theweek.com/article/index/261524/george-rr-martin-explains-why-he-writes-his-massive-books-on-a-dos-machine (link)
[2]: http://georgerrmartin.com (link)
[3]: http://www.goodreads.com/author/show/346732.George_R_R_Martin (link)
[4]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WordStar (link)
[5]: http://therandymon.com/index.php?/181-Whats-Old-is-New-Again-The-Quest-for-Distraction-Free-Writing.html (link)

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#2826

On 2014-05-14 09:52:55 +0000, RS Wood said:

> The blogosphere is buzzing this week with the revelation[1] that George R.R.
> Martin[2] , the much-admired author of the A Game of Thrones[3] and more,
> actually does his writing on a DOS machine running the old, 1970s word
> processor, Wordstar[4] .

When I read that I wondered just how he got the files to his publisher?
Is he running DOS in emulation and just otherwise emails the files?
If not, does he snail mail them a floppy disk? Dial up to some remote machine?
Anyone know?

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

#2828

On Wed, 14 May 2014 23:31:36 -0400, sail0r wrote:

> On 2014-05-14 09:52:55 +0000, RS Wood said:
> 
>> The blogosphere is buzzing this week with the revelation[1] that George
>> R.R.
>> Martin[2] , the much-admired author of the A Game of Thrones[3] and
>> more, actually does his writing on a DOS machine running the old, 1970s
>> word processor, Wordstar[4] .
> 
> When I read that I wondered just how he got the files to his publisher?
> Is he running DOS in emulation and just otherwise emails the files?
> If not, does he snail mail them a floppy disk? Dial up to some remote
> machine?
> Anyone know?

No reason why he couldn't email from DOS.

-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

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

#2829

On 2014-05-15 08:02, Bob Eager wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2014 23:31:36 -0400, sail0r wrote:
> 
>> On 2014-05-14 09:52:55 +0000, RS Wood said:
>>
>>> The blogosphere is buzzing this week with the revelation[1] that George
>>> R.R.
>>> Martin[2] , the much-admired author of the A Game of Thrones[3] and
>>> more, actually does his writing on a DOS machine running the old, 1970s
>>> word processor, Wordstar[4] .
>>
>> When I read that I wondered just how he got the files to his publisher?
>> Is he running DOS in emulation and just otherwise emails the files?
>> If not, does he snail mail them a floppy disk? Dial up to some remote
>> machine?
>> Anyone know?
> 
> No reason why he couldn't email from DOS.

He has another networked machine for email etc.

http://www.theguardian.com/books/booksblog/2014/may/14/when-is-it-time-to-give-up-on-a-book

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

#2832

On 2014-05-15, Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> wrote:
> On 2014-05-15 08:02, Bob Eager wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 May 2014 23:31:36 -0400, sail0r wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2014-05-14 09:52:55 +0000, RS Wood said:
>>>
>>>> The blogosphere is buzzing this week with the revelation[1] that George
>>>> R.R.
>>>> Martin[2] , the much-admired author of the A Game of Thrones[3] and
>>>> more, actually does his writing on a DOS machine running the old, 1970s
>>>> word processor, Wordstar[4] .
>>>
>>> When I read that I wondered just how he got the files to his publisher?
>>> Is he running DOS in emulation and just otherwise emails the files?
>>> If not, does he snail mail them a floppy disk? Dial up to some remote
>>> machine?
>>> Anyone know?
>> 
>> No reason why he couldn't email from DOS.
>
> He has another networked machine for email etc.


Here's an article on the Register, too:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/05/15/game_of_thrones_written_on_brutal_medieval_word_processor_and_os/

I was thinking the same thing, though.  Any machine still running DOS
likely has a floppy disk, for example.  So he transfers from the DOS
machine to the other (for laughs, I'll assume WinXP or equivalent) on a
floppy disk and mails from there?  And does Wordstar export to text or
something equally non-proprietary?  

Interesting thing is: the Register jokes his software is appropriate
because he's writing about an ancient, brutal time, and using ancient,
brutal software to do it.  Yet GRRM clearly feels the contrary, that
modern, 'helpful' word processors are actually the brutal, unusable
ones.  I'm forced to use the stupid Ribbon interface *and* the horrid
new Office2013 or O365 or whatever Microsoft calls it now, and I detest
it.  So I'm with GRRM on this subject.

BTW, Pete Peterson (founder of WordPerfect) published Almost Perfect,
the story of the rise of WordPerfect; it's got several sections about
how they competed against Wordstar.  Decent read, especially since you
now know the ending:

http://www.wordplace.com/ap/

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

#2834

RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
> And does Wordstar export to text or something equally
> non-proprietary?

WordStar had two modes.  "Document" and "non-document".  Non-document
turned WordStar into what could be called the "notepad" of the time. 
It edited simple, plain text, files, nothing more, nothing less.

Document mode got you the ability to add formatting to your words. 
However, a WordStar document file is very nearly a plain text file with
a few extra control characters thrown in here and there for the
"formatting".  So extracting the text of the document out of a
"document file" was not a hard prospect either.

It also, at least the version I used most for 20+ years (WS 7 for Dos)
had a "print document to text file" option, so it is possible he's
using that to output a plain text file for his publisher.


It is also possible, although this seems unlikely today, that he simply
prints hardcopy to send to the publisher.

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

#2835

On 15 May 2014 12:50:34 GMT
Rich <rich@example.com> wrote:

> 
> It is also possible, although this seems unlikely today, that he simply
> prints hardcopy to send to the publisher.
> 

It's coming back!  Check it out: somebody at Soylent just linked to this: a modern version that hopes to re-implement Wordstar.  It's called wordtsar.
http://wordtsar.ca

Obviously a pet project, and as a Unix guy with lots of great text editors, I'm not that interested.  But I wish him luck; especially if - as it seems - he'll have a version that runs on the Mac.  That would be deliciously old school.  Wonder what he's using to develop with to ensure it's cross platform?

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

#2841

In article <20140515155348.022768f5.rsw@therandymon.com>,
RS Wood  <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
>On 15 May 2014 12:50:34 GMT
>Rich <rich@example.com> wrote:
>> It is also possible, although this seems unlikely today, that he simply
>> prints hardcopy to send to the publisher.
>
>It's coming back!  Check it out: somebody at Soylent just linked to
>this: a modern version that hopes to re-implement Wordstar.  It's called
>wordtsar.
>http://wordtsar.ca

The text editor that came with DR DOS 6 and up supported some of Wordstar's
command set:

http://www.drdos.net/documentation/usergeng/06ugch6.htm

>This chapter describes how to use EDIT, a menu-based editor which you can
>use to create and edit text files. You can use a keyboard or mouse, and
>there are shorthand forms for some of the common commands, including
>WordStar* compatible commands.

I had never used Wordstar, but EDIT was easy enough to pick up.  Upon
switching to Linux, I found that joe was eerily similar to EDIT, much
smaller than Emacs, and easier to use than vi:

http://joe-editor.sourceforge.net/

>JOE is a full featured terminal-based screen editor which is distributed
>under the GNU General Public License (GPL). JOE has been around since 1988
>and comes standard with many Linux distributions.
>
>JOE is a blending of MicroPro's venerable microcomputer word processor
>WordStar and Richard Stallman's famous LISP based text editor GNU-EMACS (but
>it does not use code from either program): most of the basic editing keys
>are the same as in WordStar as is the overall feel of the editor. JOE also
>has some of the key bindings and many of the powerful features of EMACS.

It's what I'm using right now to type this reply. :-) It runs on nearly
anything; I've run it on Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows.  Other than running
in a terminal window, I suspect it's pretty close to what WordTsar is aiming
to do.

  _/_
 / v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( http://alfter.us/            Top-posting!
 \_^_/                              >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

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

#2843

Scott Alfter <scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us> wrote:
> In article <20140515155348.022768f5.rsw@therandymon.com>,
> RS Wood  <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
> >On 15 May 2014 12:50:34 GMT
> >Rich <rich@example.com> wrote:
> >> It is also possible, although this seems unlikely today, that he simply
> >> prints hardcopy to send to the publisher.
> >
> >It's coming back!  Check it out: somebody at Soylent just linked to
> >this: a modern version that hopes to re-implement Wordstar.  It's called
> >wordtsar.
> >http://wordtsar.ca

> The text editor that came with DR DOS 6 and up supported some of Wordstar's
> command set:

> http://www.drdos.net/documentation/usergeng/06ugch6.htm

As did the text editor included in Borland's Turbo Pascal for Dos. 
That text editor (Turbo Pascal) is where I first learned some of the
WordStar keystrokes.

> It's [joe] what I'm using right now to type this reply. :-) It runs
> on nearly anything; I've run it on Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows. 
> Other than running in a terminal window, I suspect it's pretty close
> to what WordTsar is aiming to do.

Ah, a fellow Joe user.  I've used the joe editor in wordstar form the
time I first got "internet access" (which dates to about late 1991 or
early 1992, and it was at work).  A SunOS 4.1.3 machine with dialup
access.  The sysadmin had installed joe and recommended it for general
use.  I quickly found the "jstar" version, and stuck with it.

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

#2851

In message <ll2tdg$1r1$1@dont-email.me> 
  Scott Alfter <scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us> wrote:
> In article <20140515155348.022768f5.rsw@therandymon.com>,
> RS Wood  <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
>>On 15 May 2014 12:50:34 GMT
>>Rich <rich@example.com> wrote:
>>> It is also possible, although this seems unlikely today, that he simply
>>> prints hardcopy to send to the publisher.
>>
>>It's coming back!  Check it out: somebody at Soylent just linked to
>>this: a modern version that hopes to re-implement Wordstar.  It's called
>>wordtsar.
>>http://wordtsar.ca

> The text editor that came with DR DOS 6 and up supported some of Wordstar's
> command set:

> http://www.drdos.net/documentation/usergeng/06ugch6.htm

>>This chapter describes how to use EDIT, a menu-based editor which you can
>>use to create and edit text files. You can use a keyboard or mouse, and
>>there are shorthand forms for some of the common commands, including
>>WordStar* compatible commands.

> I had never used Wordstar, but EDIT was easy enough to pick up.  Upon
> switching to Linux, I found that joe was eerily similar to EDIT, much
> smaller than Emacs, and easier to use than vi:

> http://joe-editor.sourceforge.net/

>>JOE is a full featured terminal-based screen editor which is distributed
>>under the GNU General Public License (GPL). JOE has been around since 1988
>>and comes standard with many Linux distributions.
>>
>>JOE is a blending of MicroPro's venerable microcomputer word processor
>>WordStar and Richard Stallman's famous LISP based text editor GNU-EMACS (but
>>it does not use code from either program): most of the basic editing keys
>>are the same as in WordStar as is the overall feel of the editor. JOE also
>>has some of the key bindings and many of the powerful features of EMACS.

> It's what I'm using right now to type this reply. :-) It runs on nearly
> anything; I've run it on Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows.  Other than running
> in a terminal window, I suspect it's pretty close to what WordTsar is aiming
> to do.

Joe is not bad, but for people who want a simple editor I point them at
nano instead because it is simple like joe, but it also has a lot of
advanced features that you can use if you want them.

I use vim for myself, or BBEdit.




-- 
"A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely
foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools.: -
Douglas Adams

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

#2837

In message <btj751Fpd85U13@mid.individual.net> 
  Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 May 2014 23:31:36 -0400, sail0r wrote:

>> On 2014-05-14 09:52:55 +0000, RS Wood said:
>> 
>>> The blogosphere is buzzing this week with the revelation[1] that George
>>> R.R.
>>> Martin[2] , the much-admired author of the A Game of Thrones[3] and
>>> more, actually does his writing on a DOS machine running the old, 1970s
>>> word processor, Wordstar[4] .
>> 
>> When I read that I wondered just how he got the files to his publisher?
>> Is he running DOS in emulation and just otherwise emails the files?
>> If not, does he snail mail them a floppy disk? Dial up to some remote
>> machine?
>> Anyone know?

> No reason why he couldn't email from DOS.

The lack of a TCP/IP stack is a bit of a problem.

-- 
Clarke's Law: Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from
magic

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

#2839

On Thu, 15 May 2014 15:59:39 +0000, Lewis wrote:

> In message <btj751Fpd85U13@mid.individual.net>
>   Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 May 2014 23:31:36 -0400, sail0r wrote:
> 
>>> On 2014-05-14 09:52:55 +0000, RS Wood said:
>>> 
>>>> The blogosphere is buzzing this week with the revelation[1] that
>>>> George R.R.
>>>> Martin[2] , the much-admired author of the A Game of Thrones[3] and
>>>> more, actually does his writing on a DOS machine running the old,
>>>> 1970s word processor, Wordstar[4] .
>>> 
>>> When I read that I wondered just how he got the files to his
>>> publisher?
>>> Is he running DOS in emulation and just otherwise emails the files?
>>> If not, does he snail mail them a floppy disk? Dial up to some remote
>>> machine?
>>> Anyone know?
> 
>> No reason why he couldn't email from DOS.
> 
> The lack of a TCP/IP stack is a bit of a problem.

It would be if there was such a lackl. There isn't. I have a DOS boot 
floppy here with TCP/IP on it.

-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

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

#2848

In message <btkajhFpd85U17@mid.individual.net> 
  Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> wrote:
> On Thu, 15 May 2014 15:59:39 +0000, Lewis wrote:

>> In message <btj751Fpd85U13@mid.individual.net>
>>   Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 14 May 2014 23:31:36 -0400, sail0r wrote:
>> 
>>>> On 2014-05-14 09:52:55 +0000, RS Wood said:
>>>> 
>>>>> The blogosphere is buzzing this week with the revelation[1] that
>>>>> George R.R.
>>>>> Martin[2] , the much-admired author of the A Game of Thrones[3] and
>>>>> more, actually does his writing on a DOS machine running the old,
>>>>> 1970s word processor, Wordstar[4] .
>>>> 
>>>> When I read that I wondered just how he got the files to his
>>>> publisher?
>>>> Is he running DOS in emulation and just otherwise emails the files?
>>>> If not, does he snail mail them a floppy disk? Dial up to some remote
>>>> machine?
>>>> Anyone know?
>> 
>>> No reason why he couldn't email from DOS.
>> 
>> The lack of a TCP/IP stack is a bit of a problem.

> It would be if there was such a lackl. There isn't. I have a DOS boot 
> floppy here with TCP/IP on it.

What version of DOS, and by whom? AS far as I know, MSFT never released
a TCP/IP stack for DOS. Even under Windows they used winsock (via raw
sockets) to fake TCP/IP.

-- 
To read makes our speaking English good.

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

#2850

On Thu, 15 May 2014 23:31:03 +0000 (UTC) in comp.misc, Lewis
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote,
>In message <btkajhFpd85U17@mid.individual.net> 
>  Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> wrote:
>> It would be if there was such a lackl. There isn't. I have a DOS boot 
>> floppy here with TCP/IP on it.
>
>What version of DOS, and by whom? AS far as I know, MSFT never released
>a TCP/IP stack for DOS. Even under Windows they used winsock (via raw
>sockets) to fake TCP/IP.

Why fake?  I'm pretty sure I saw such systems communicating with
TCP/IP on the other end.

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

#2852

In message <UbednYOGo99-_ujOnZ2dnUVZ_hCdnZ2d@earthlink.com> 
  David Harmon <source@netcom.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 15 May 2014 23:31:03 +0000 (UTC) in comp.misc, Lewis
> <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote,
>>In message <btkajhFpd85U17@mid.individual.net> 
>>  Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> wrote:
>>> It would be if there was such a lackl. There isn't. I have a DOS boot 
>>> floppy here with TCP/IP on it.
>>
>>What version of DOS, and by whom? AS far as I know, MSFT never released
>>a TCP/IP stack for DOS. Even under Windows they used winsock (via raw
>>sockets) to fake TCP/IP.

> Why fake?  I'm pretty sure I saw such systems communicating with
> TCP/IP on the other end.

It was TCP/IP once it left the raw socket, but it wasn't TCP/IP locally.
It is why dialers were so terrible under Window 3 and why the various
ISPs did everything in their power to push people onto Windows 95 which
was still winsock, but much more like a real stack. At one point AT&T
Worldnet had about 20% of their dialup customers on Win 3 and that was
75% of their support calls.

-- 
The Piper's calling you to join him

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

#2882

On Fri, 16 May 2014 03:56:38 +0000 (UTC) in comp.misc, Lewis
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote,
>It was TCP/IP once it left the raw socket, but it wasn't TCP/IP locally.
>It is why dialers were so terrible under Window 3 and why the various
>ISPs did everything in their power to push people onto Windows 95 which
>was still winsock, but much more like a real stack.

OK, I never tried it before Windows 95.  And the hot tip there was,
if more than one program installed their own copy of winsock.dll,
you were absolutely screwed until you eliminated all but the one in
\windows\system.

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

#2853

On Thu, 15 May 2014 23:31:03 +0000, Lewis wrote:

> In message <btkajhFpd85U17@mid.individual.net>
>   Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 May 2014 15:59:39 +0000, Lewis wrote:
> 
>>> In message <btj751Fpd85U13@mid.individual.net>
>>>   Bob Eager <news0002@eager.cx> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 14 May 2014 23:31:36 -0400, sail0r wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> On 2014-05-14 09:52:55 +0000, RS Wood said:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> The blogosphere is buzzing this week with the revelation[1] that
>>>>>> George R.R.
>>>>>> Martin[2] , the much-admired author of the A Game of Thrones[3] and
>>>>>> more, actually does his writing on a DOS machine running the old,
>>>>>> 1970s word processor, Wordstar[4] .
>>>>> 
>>>>> When I read that I wondered just how he got the files to his
>>>>> publisher?
>>>>> Is he running DOS in emulation and just otherwise emails the files?
>>>>> If not, does he snail mail them a floppy disk? Dial up to some
>>>>> remote machine?
>>>>> Anyone know?
>>> 
>>>> No reason why he couldn't email from DOS.
>>> 
>>> The lack of a TCP/IP stack is a bit of a problem.
> 
>> It would be if there was such a lackl. There isn't. I have a DOS boot
>> floppy here with TCP/IP on it.
> 
> What version of DOS, and by whom? AS far as I know, MSFT never released
> a TCP/IP stack for DOS. Even under Windows they used winsock (via raw
> sockets) to fake TCP/IP.

As far as I recall, it was IBM. And it was real TCP/IP. I have an old IBM 
portable set up with it, and can use FTp, etc. I even have a boot disk 
somewhere that will do "NETBIOS over TCP/IP".



-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

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

#2885

Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> writes:

>> No reason why he couldn't email from DOS.
>
> The lack of a TCP/IP stack is a bit of a problem.

Why would that be problem? Old MS-DOS and PC-DOS were so bare that you
pretty much needed an add-on for everything. There wasn't even a halfway
decent text editor until MS-DOS 5.0 included "edit".

Besides, today FreeDOS includes TCP/IP anyways and a bunch of networking
apps, including email. Also, I believe computers have been sold with
FreeDOS in recent years. Or at least listed like that.

Besides which, if a PC has BIOS support for USB booting, DOS can see USB
sticks as hard disks. Just no hotplugging, sticks have to be in at
boot. At least it worked like this ten years ago in 2004 when I tried it
for whatever reason...

So it could just as well be GMMR uses a USB memory stick. Although
considering Wordstar 4.0 doesn't even support directories apparently,
I'd guess he's using floppies.

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

#2893

On 2014-05-19, Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> wrote:
> Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> writes:
> Besides, today FreeDOS includes TCP/IP anyways and a bunch of
> networking apps, including email. Also, I believe computers have been
> sold with FreeDOS in recent years. Or at least listed like that.

The "install FreeDOS" trick was to circumvent a Microsoft
agreement/policy into which most OEM providers entered, prohibiting them
from selling bare hardware devoid of an OS.  In the early '00s companies
like Dell trying to capture the market of Linux enthusiasts and others
who were reticent to pay for an installation of Microsoft Windows for
which they'd neither get a proper reinstall disk nor have any use for,
they resorted to selling machines with FreeDOS installed.  

Clever trick!  Also, that one guy who wanted a DOS machine on which he
could install WordPerfect 5.3 was probably thrilled! (provided he had
his own copy of 5.3) :)

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

#2836

In message <2014051423313693857-sail0r@examplecom> 
  sail0r <sail0r@example.com> wrote:
> On 2014-05-14 09:52:55 +0000, RS Wood said:

>> The blogosphere is buzzing this week with the revelation[1] that George R.R.
>> Martin[2] , the much-admired author of the A Game of Thrones[3] and more,
>> actually does his writing on a DOS machine running the old, 1970s word
>> processor, Wordstar[4] .

> When I read that I wondered just how he got the files to his publisher?
> Is he running DOS in emulation and just otherwise emails the files?
> If not, does he snail mail them a floppy disk? Dial up to some remote machine?
> Anyone know?

I bet he prints them out and puts them in an envelope then drives his
horseless carriage into town and sends the maniscript registered mail.

-- 
"Two years from now, spam will be solved," -- Bill Gates, January, 2004

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

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc

csiph-web