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

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #71701 > unrolled thread

Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system

Contents

  Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-20 17:05 -0700
    Re: Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> - 2015-03-20 18:00 -0700
      Re: Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com> - 2015-03-20 20:23 -0500
    Re: Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 "D.F. Manno" <dfmanno@mail.com> - 2015-03-21 17:54 -0400
      Re: Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 Alan Browne <alan.browne@freelunchvideotron.ca> - 2015-03-21 18:05 -0400
      Re: Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-22 01:34 +0000
        Re: Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-22 12:24 +0000
          Re: Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-22 21:46 +0000
          Re: Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-22 17:09 -0700
            Re: Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-23 00:10 +0000
              Re: Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-22 17:29 -0700
                Re: Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2015-03-23 00:43 +0000
                  Re: Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-03-22 18:20 -0700
                    Re: Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-23 18:17 +0000
                Re: Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-23 18:15 +0000
              Re: Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-23 18:09 +0000
        Re: Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 "John Varela" <newlamps@verizon.net> - 2015-03-22 18:31 +0000
    Re: Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> - 2015-03-22 16:44 -0400
      Re: Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-03-22 21:47 +0000
        Re: Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0 nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-03-22 17:55 -0400

#71701 — Photoshop experts test Photoshop 1.0

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtA46JT2q_0>

-- Michelle

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#71707

On 2015-03-21 00:05:35 +0000, Michelle Steiner said:

> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtA46JT2q_0>
> 
> -- Michelle

Why was that not surprising?
Am I glad those days are long gone. I know that I would not be 
comfortable going back to PS LE, PS5, or PS7. Though PS7 was a major 
leap it cannot compare with the current version of PS CC, and as 
demonstrated PS1 would be frustratingly imposible. There are so many 
features I would miss if I lost what I have today. I am happy to pay 
that $9.99/month abd I feel I get very good value for every cent.

Thanks for posting that. It makes the path we have come all that more apparent.

-- 
Regards,

Savageduck

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

#71710

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

On Friday, 20 March 2015 18:00 -0700, 
 in article <2015032018003953800-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMme.com>, 
 Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

> On 2015-03-21 00:05:35 +0000, Michelle Steiner said:

>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtA46JT2q_0>

> Thanks for posting that. It makes the path we have come all that 
> more apparent.

+1

-- 
David Ritz <dritz@mindspring.com>
 Be kind to animals; kiss a shark.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iEYEARECAAYFAlUMyCEACgkQUrwpmRoS3usfagCfTa9KltP55ACgqr0OoZvP6HqI
9kUAn1pJP6+jDyO8Vosp2hQgCriyfEnU
=C3mh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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

#71768

In article <200320151705355695%michelle@michelle.org>,
 Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtA46JT2q_0>

I'd probably have the same amount of difficulty going back to the first 
word processing software I ever used -- WordStar 3.

Actually, the first word processing software I used was proprietary, 
part of the computerized editing system at my college newspaper. The 
computers took eight-inch floppies -- the only time I've ever seen them 
used.

-- 
D.F. Manno | dfmanno@mail.com
GOP delenda est!

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

#71770

On 2015-03-21 17:54, D.F. Manno wrote:
> In article <200320151705355695%michelle@michelle.org>,
>   Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtA46JT2q_0>
>
> I'd probably have the same amount of difficulty going back to the first
> word processing software I ever used -- WordStar 3.
>
> Actually, the first word processing software I used was proprietary,
> part of the computerized editing system at my college newspaper. The
> computers took eight-inch floppies -- the only time I've ever seen them
> used.

In the 80's our company had A.B. Dick word processing systems which used 
8" floppies at each workstation.  There was a room full of typists with 
stations.  You'd walk in with a markup (and a charge number) and they'd 
print up the edit (on green paper).  They also assured document numbers 
and revision codes and tables were properly issued for everything. 
Finals were printed on white paper then sent to have illustrations 
pasted in before camera work.  Made one much more disciplined about all 
docs.

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

#71775

Okay, so one time? In band camp? D.F. Manno <dfmanno@mail.com> was all, like:
> In article <200320151705355695%michelle@michelle.org>,
>  Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtA46JT2q_0>

> I'd probably have the same amount of difficulty going back to the first 
> word processing software I ever used -- WordStar 3.

> Actually, the first word processing software I used was proprietary, 
> part of the computerized editing system at my college newspaper. The 
> computers took eight-inch floppies -- the only time I've ever seen them 
> used.

I have no idea what the name (if any) of the word processor was on the
TSR-80, but that is the first one that I used. It was terrible (worse
than a typewriter). I used Wordsatr a little on a ][+ with a Z80 and
CP/M card. From there I used Appleworks, vi, and nroff/troff which
doesn't exactly count.

-- 
http://2blog.kreme.com

"Computers are useless. They can only give you answers." - Pablo Picasso

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

#71797

On 2015-03-22, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
> Okay, so one time? In band camp? D.F. Manno <dfmanno@mail.com> was all, like:
>> In article <200320151705355695%michelle@michelle.org>,
>>  Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>
>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtA46JT2q_0>
>
>> I'd probably have the same amount of difficulty going back to the first 
>> word processing software I ever used -- WordStar 3.
>
>> Actually, the first word processing software I used was proprietary, 
>> part of the computerized editing system at my college newspaper. The 
>> computers took eight-inch floppies -- the only time I've ever seen them 
>> used.
>
> I have no idea what the name (if any) of the word processor was on the
> TSR-80, but that is the first one that I used.

I wrote my own *extremely* basic word processor on my TRS-80 in Zilog
assembly. It used the screen buffer (partially) for storage. : )

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#71838

Okay, so one time? In band camp? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> was all, like:
> On 2015-03-22, Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:
>> Okay, so one time? In band camp? D.F. Manno <dfmanno@mail.com> was all, like:
>>> In article <200320151705355695%michelle@michelle.org>,
>>>  Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>>
>>>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtA46JT2q_0>
>>
>>> I'd probably have the same amount of difficulty going back to the first 
>>> word processing software I ever used -- WordStar 3.
>>
>>> Actually, the first word processing software I used was proprietary, 
>>> part of the computerized editing system at my college newspaper. The 
>>> computers took eight-inch floppies -- the only time I've ever seen them 
>>> used.
>>
>> I have no idea what the name (if any) of the word processor was on the
>> TSR-80, but that is the first one that I used.

> I wrote my own *extremely* basic word processor on my TRS-80 in Zilog
> assembly. It used the screen buffer (partially) for storage. : )

We didn't get to mess with assembly at all in school. Our teacher did
write a copy of a program we'd written in BASIC on the Atari 800 in
assembler. It was a wave simulator. A very primitive one,but it was
maybe 100x faster than our BASIC verison.

I think he only did it because he wanted the school to pay for the
assembler left cart (or was it right cart?)

-- 
http://2blog.kreme.com
Let there be songs to fill the air

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

#71853

In article <cn7qkaFpul6U3@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> I wrote my own *extremely* basic word processor on my TRS-80 in Zilog
> assembly. It used the screen buffer (partially) for storage. : )

I wrote an even more basic word processor on my Apple ][ in BASIC; it's
major limitation was that text could be entered only in 255 (or fewer)
chunks.

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

#71854

On 2015-03-23, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article <cn7qkaFpul6U3@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
><jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> I wrote my own *extremely* basic word processor on my TRS-80 in Zilog
>> assembly. It used the screen buffer (partially) for storage. : )
>
> I wrote an even more basic word processor on my Apple ][ in BASIC; it's
> major limitation was that text could be entered only in 255 (or fewer)
> chunks.

Neat! Wish I still had that code around. I'm sure I would cringe reading
it, but it would be fun. Unfortunately back then we stored them on tape,
and those are long gone (along with the TRS-80s themselves).

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#71860

In article <cn940iF6nbtU1@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> Neat! Wish I still had that code around. I'm sure I would cringe reading
> it, but it would be fun. Unfortunately back then we stored them on tape,
> and those are long gone (along with the TRS-80s themselves).

I wrote a perpetual calendar in BASIC for the Apple ][+ that also
produced a Julian calendar.  I later ported it to the Macintosh, also
in (MS) BASIC.

<http://www.mactech.com/articles/mactech/Vol.01/01.02/KnowingDate/index.
html>

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

#71866

On 2015-03-23, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> In article <cn940iF6nbtU1@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
><jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> Neat! Wish I still had that code around. I'm sure I would cringe reading
>> it, but it would be fun. Unfortunately back then we stored them on tape,
>> and those are long gone (along with the TRS-80s themselves).
>
> I wrote a perpetual calendar in BASIC for the Apple ][+ that also
> produced a Julian calendar.  I later ported it to the Macintosh, also
> in (MS) BASIC.
>
><http://www.mactech.com/articles/mactech/Vol.01/01.02/KnowingDate/index.html>

Nice!

-- 
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

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

#71873

In article <cn95tiF6nbtU3@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
<jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

> > I wrote a perpetual calendar in BASIC for the Apple ][+ that also
> > produced a Julian calendar.  I later ported it to the Macintosh, also
> > in (MS) BASIC.
> >
> ><http://www.mactech.com/articles/mactech/Vol.01/01.02/KnowingDate/index.html>
> 
> Nice!

Here is my piece de resistance in that Magazine:

<http://www.mactech.com/articles/mactech/Vol.01/01.13/PaintSimulator/ind
ex.html>

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

#71949

Okay, so one time? In band camp? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> was all, like:
> In article <cn95tiF6nbtU3@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
> <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

>> > I wrote a perpetual calendar in BASIC for the Apple ][+ that also
>> > produced a Julian calendar.  I later ported it to the Macintosh, also
>> > in (MS) BASIC.
>> >
>> ><http://www.mactech.com/articles/mactech/Vol.01/01.02/KnowingDate/index.html>
>> 
>> Nice!

> Here is my piece de resistance in that Magazine:

> <http://www.mactech.com/articles/mactech/Vol.01/01.13/PaintSimulator/ind
> ex.html>

"After making the picture, you have to copy it to the clipboard (which
limits you to the size of the Macpaint window, thus eliminating the
ability to make a full-screen picture)"

Yeah, I don't miss those days AT ALL.

-- 
http://2blog.kreme.com
If at first you don't succeed, put it out for beta test.

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

#71948

Okay, so one time? In band camp? Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> was all, like:
> In article <cn940iF6nbtU1@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
> <jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:

>> Neat! Wish I still had that code around. I'm sure I would cringe reading
>> it, but it would be fun. Unfortunately back then we stored them on tape,
>> and those are long gone (along with the TRS-80s themselves).

> I wrote a perpetual calendar in BASIC for the Apple ][+ that also
> produced a Julian calendar.  I later ported it to the Macintosh, also
> in (MS) BASIC.

Neat. I wrote a BASIC program to print calendars on an Imagewriter
printer with birthday data from the family. It never really worked well
though. There was some problem with calculating the length of the
strings to force them to fit between the lines, iirc. Apple BASIC was
very basic.

> <http://www.mactech.com/articles/mactech/Vol.01/01.02/KnowingDate/index.html>

26 October 84.

Oh, I remember that day. I was at a Halloween party.

I didn't even know there WAS MS Basic for the Mac.

-- 
http://2blog.kreme.com
Nine-tenths of the universe is the knowledge of the position and
direction of everything in the other tenth. Every atom has its
biography, every star its file, every chemical exchange its equivalent
of the inspector with a clipboard. It is unaccounted for because it is
doing the accounting for the rest of it. Nine-tenths of the universe, in
fact, is the paperwork. --The Thief of Time

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

#71947

Okay, so one time? In band camp? Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> was all, like:
> On 2015-03-23, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
>> In article <cn7qkaFpul6U3@mid.individual.net>, Jolly Roger
>><jollyroger@pobox.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I wrote my own *extremely* basic word processor on my TRS-80 in Zilog
>>> assembly. It used the screen buffer (partially) for storage. : )
>>
>> I wrote an even more basic word processor on my Apple ][ in BASIC; it's
>> major limitation was that text could be entered only in 255 (or fewer)
>> chunks.

> Neat! Wish I still had that code around. I'm sure I would cringe reading
> it, but it would be fun. Unfortunately back then we stored them on tape,
> and those are long gone (along with the TRS-80s themselves).

The only code I kept long term was from the late 80s. When I left
university I had my entire home directory dumped to the world's most
accessible and reliable long-term storage, a 9-track tape.

Sigh.

I did have one opportunity to read it several years later, but the
9-track I had access to in the early 90s was much older than the one
that had written the tape and it couldn't do it. Wrong density? I don't
remember the problem.

-- 
http://2blog.kreme.com
"But you read a lot of books, I'm thinking. Hard to have faith, ain't
it, when you've read too many books?"

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

#71825

On Sun, 22 Mar 2015 01:34:27 UTC, Lewis 
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> Okay, so one time? In band camp? D.F. Manno <dfmanno@mail.com> was all, like:
> > In article <200320151705355695%michelle@michelle.org>,
> >  Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> 
> >> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtA46JT2q_0>
> 
> > I'd probably have the same amount of difficulty going back to the first 
> > word processing software I ever used -- WordStar 3.
> 
> > Actually, the first word processing software I used was proprietary, 
> > part of the computerized editing system at my college newspaper. The 
> > computers took eight-inch floppies -- the only time I've ever seen them 
> > used.
> 
> I have no idea what the name (if any) of the word processor was on the
> TSR-80, but that is the first one that I used. It was terrible (worse
> than a typewriter). I used Wordsatr a little on a ][+ with a Z80 and
> CP/M card. From there I used Appleworks, vi, and nroff/troff which
> doesn't exactly count.
 
On the TRS-80 Model 1 I used a word processor called "Zorlof the 
Magnificent" (really!). I liked it.

www.trs-80.org/zorlof-the-magnificent

-- 
John Varela

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

#71833

On 2015-03-21 00:05:35 +0000, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> said:

> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtA46JT2q_0>
> 
> -- Michelle

No layers, and only ONE level of UnDo...  I remember we had to save a 
version of the file EVERY time we made even a single change.

If you forgot, you were boned.
-- 
Q: How do you know when <NoBody@nowhere.com> is lying?  A: Ubiquitous 
<weberm@polaris.net> fingers are moving.
<NoBody@nowhere.com> reveals himself to be a sockpuppet of sickpuppy 
Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net>

http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?STYPE=msgid&A=0&MSGI=%3Cmen81d%24lq0%241%40dont-email.me%3E

http://fc00.deviantart.net/images3/i/2004/181/4/a/The_Lurking_Sock_Puppet.jpg 

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

#71839

Okay, so one time? In band camp? FPP <fredp151@gmail.com> was all, like:
> On 2015-03-21 00:05:35 +0000, Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> said:

>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtA46JT2q_0>
>> 
>> -- Michelle

> No layers, and only ONE level of UnDo...  I remember we had to save a 
> version of the file EVERY time we made even a single change.

Layers didn't come along for a few versions, right? PS 4.0?

> If you forgot, you were boned.

I was only ever peripherally aware of Photoshop as it was what peope
used to give me images for Quark Xpress.

-- 
http://2blog.kreme.com
"I program Windows - of course it isn't safe." - Meski

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

#71840

In article <slrnmgue55.v69.g.kreme@kreme.eternal-september.org>, Lewis
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> > No layers, and only ONE level of UnDo...  I remember we had to save a 
> > version of the file EVERY time we made even a single change.
> 
> Layers didn't come along for a few versions, right? PS 4.0?

layers were in ps3. adjustment layers was ps4.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system

csiph-web