******************** QL CLUB INTERNATIONAL ******************** ISSUE 119 January 1999 MIKE KENNEALLY E-MAIL MIKEKENNEALLY1@COMPUSERVE.COM MIKEKENNEALLY1@BIGFOOT.COM WWW.GEOCITIES.COM/SILICONVALLEY/VISTA/4807/ ANY AND ALL SOFTWARE SENT TO THE CLUB/NEWSLETTER WILL BE TREATED AS PUBLIC DOMAIN UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED. DEAR ALL, AFTER THEPROBLEMS OF LAST MONTH AND I MUST SAY SOME OF WHICH ARE STILL ONGOING,LET ME APOLOGISE FOR THE LATENESS OF LAST MONTHS NEWSLETTER.NO DOUBT DUE TO THIS THAT THIS MONTHS IS ONLY A SHORT ISSUE,I HAVE ASKED MORE PEOPLE TO CONTRIBUTE,BUT AS THE OLD SAYING GOES ABOUT A HORSE AND WATER. AS YOU WILL SEE ABOVE I NOW HAVE ANOTHER E-MAIL ADDRESS,SOME OF YOU HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCING A FEW PROBLEMS GETTING MAIL TO ME FOR THE NEWSLETTER,HAVEN'T YOU SPIKE?,NOW YOU CAN HAVE 2 BITES OF THE CHERRY,BIGFOOT WILL FORWARD MY MAIL TO MY COMPUSERVE ACCOUNT,IT IS ALSO FREE! FRANK IN HIS LETTER BELOW HAS BROUGHT UP THE SPECTRE OF QPACII AND HE WRITES SOME VALID POINTS.WHY CAN'T WE DO A MANUAL FOR THIS PROG,ENOUGH OF YOU USE IT,SOME OF YOU EVEN KNOW HOW TO PUT IT TOGETHER.IF NOT QPACII THEN WHY NOT PROWESS,BUT LETS START WITH QPACII FIRST.I ALWAYS SEEM TO BE FALLING BACK ON THE GOOD WILL OF GRAHAM LUTZ FOR THE ANSWER TO MANY OF MY AND YOUR PROBLEMS AND I FOR ONE AM VERY GRATEFUL FOR HIS HELP AND ADVICE OVER THE YEARS,BUT THERE MUST BE OTHERS OF YOU WHO KNOW THE SAME THINGS AS GRAHAM AND ARE WILLING TO HELP.OTHERWISE YOU WOULD NOT HAVE GOT IN TOUCH WITH THE CLUB IN THE FIRST PLACE! SO COME ON PASS ON SOME OF YOUR KNOWLEDGE TO THOSE OF US WHO STILL STRUGGLE. I KNOW THE GATHERING OF SUCH WISDOM WAS HARD EARNED AND TOOK A LONG TIME TO PIECE TOGETHER,BUT JUST THINK HOW GOOD YOU'LL FEEL WHEN YOU HELP SOMEONE ELSE. OVER THE YEARS OF USING A QL,THE NUMBER OF TIMES I HAVE ASKED FOR HELP FROM PEOPLE AND THEY HAVE LOOKED DOWN ON ME AS IF TO SAY,GO AWAY YOU IDIOT,IF YOU DON'T KNOW THAT WHAT ARE YOU USING A QL FOR? DON'T LET US FALL INTO THAT PIT. WE ARE HERE TO HELP AND GUIDE EACH OTHER,FROM THE STUPID LITTLE NIGGLY BITS OF INFO TO THE BIGGER ISSUES. OVER THE YEARS I HAVE BEEN CALLED SOME NAMES FOR NOT KNOWING THE THINGS THAT OTHERS KNOW,BUT OUT OF THE 100% OF PEOPLE ASKED,99% TREAT YOU AS AN IDIOT BUT 1% TREAT YOU AS A QL USER WHO WANTS TO LEARN,AND MY FRIENDS WE ARE THAT 1% AND I FOR ONE THANK YOU ALL. SEE YOU NEXT MONTH. MIKE. FRANK MERRISON, 20-1-1999 GEAR includes 3 x JM QL's: Gold Card: Mannesmann Tally DMP: Epson Stylus 800 printer: 2 x HD disc drives. 486 DX33. Mike.... long time no see! IT CERTAINLY IS FRANK,I WAS BEGINNING TO THINK I'D UPSET YOU.WELCOME BACK MATE,I'VE MISSED YOU! Sorry for the absence of any contribution from me over the last few months but I had nothing to write about and I have been extremely busy lately. Over the years; prior to 1998 there had been an enormous amount of discussion about Qpac2, both in the newsletter and the Quanta magazine. Long discussions had taken place about the way the thing worked (or didn't work) - how wonderful (or otherwise) it was etc. There seemed to me to be two types of QL owners - those who used this facility blindfolded and those, such as me, to who it was a complete mystery! Towards the beginning of 1998 I wrote an article suggesting that ClubQL might consider using it's collective brains to compile a new manual for Qpac2 since the original was (in the opinion of many) pretty useless unless you knew all about this program(s) before you started. At the time one of the Quanta sub-groups (SEQUEL) had completed a number of very useful project and I felt it would be a feather in the cap of ClubQL if it could do something similar such as this idea of a new manual. Well; almost a year has passed by and, apart from a lot of talk, no progress has been made towards achieving this target. At a meeting of the London Quanta Sub-group, held on January 10th, the Editor, Colin Baskett, handed me a very thick file of print-outs of articles that have appeared in the QUANTA magazine over the past year following publication of my original letter. In view of this lack of action from club members I thought it might be an idea to summarise all that I can find out of what has happened during this past year and to ask "Is there any member prepared to take on this task of compiling all the information that is now available and printing it in some sort of order"? or should we now drop the subject and move on? I HAVE ASKED AND CONTINUE TO ASK IF ANYONE WHO KNOWS HOW TO USE QPACII CAN RIGHT UP AN EASY TO USE GUIDE.GRAHAM LUTZ DID OFFER TO DO THIS,BUT AS NO DOUBT WITH THE REST OF US TIME IS THE KEY FACTOR.ALTHOUGH I WILL ASK AGAIN. A Brief History 1) Feb/Mar 1998: Original proposal for the production of a new manual for Qpac2 2) QL111: May 1998. I again wrote on this subject with a suggestion for an index to previous articles in Quanta, and others, and spoke of the difficulty of "Plowing through back issues" 3) QL112: June 1998. Martin Burke suggested that the new manual should be split into clearly defined sections. There was a reference to an article in QL108 about the "Stuffer Buffer" In my letter I mentioned that I had received a reply to my correspondence from Wolfgang Lenerz. This was mainly his final article that never appeared in Quanta. He sent me hard copy 4) QL113: July 1998. Dilwyn Jones reported that he had converted "The PE Idiots Guide" by Norman Dunbar and this was included on the same disc along with a basic program to unzip it. Full instructions incl. 5) There was a reference to an article in Quanta by Rich Mellor; "Summary of the Basic Structure of the PE" 6) On a number of occasions Mike made referrence to a member who was planning to produce such a suggested manual. Twice in QL113. No name given or further details. 7) QL114: August 1998. Terry Williams wrote of his findings when using Qpac2 without a mouse. While this discussion, in ClubQL, was proceding, with little progress, strangely enough - as a result of Colin Basett re-printing my original letter in Quanta - there has been a torrent of articles on this subject, probably more than any other item since the beginning of the magazine 13 years ago! Colin is no doubt pleased at having so much material to fill it each month! I'll try to summarise it all. 1) May 1998. My original letter printed page 4. 2) July. Page 8: Rich Mellor's article, as 5 above. 3) August. Page 23: John Terry reminded us of the splendid series of articles by Bill Waugh that appeared in Quanta in 1995 beginning in February. These are the definitive means of learning 95% of Qpac2. He found them so good that he printed them all and he uses them as his guide. He suggested that Quanta might consider publishing them as a booklet. 4) Same issue. Page 24: Fabian Gaughan listed the dates & issues when Bill's articles were published and when Wolfgang Lenerz's articles appeared. Wolfgang was unlucky to have his welcome contributions on the same subject printed at the same time as Bill's. As he felt that his thoughts had been covered by Bill Waugh he never submitted the final article. 5) A brief mention of an article by Stuart Honeyball in Nov/Dec 1995 issues of IQLR. 6) September. Page 18: Comments by Peter Tyler on Rich Mellor's article as 5 above. 7) October. Page 8: Comments on the production of manuals that beginners can understand. Possibility of a standard format to be laid down by Quanta. 8) Same issue. Page 17: Dennis Smith explains Qpac1 & Qpac2 and the various parts that make it up. 9) Same issue. Page 25: Steve Hall spells out the different types of users. Problems with installation & configuration. 10) November. Page 14: David Bunbury writes about Lockable/unlockable windows and the definition of the term "multi-tasking" 11) December. A flood of contributions! Page 14: Rich Mellor again discusses the meaning of "multi-tasking" and how the Pointer Environment contributes. Replies to issues raised by P.H. Tanner & Peter Tylor. Latest version numbers of PTR_GEN, WMAN & HOT_REXT. 12) Same issue - Page 17: Peter Tylor replies to Dennis Smith's remarks in October issue. Why he prefers to use the keyboard rather than a mouse. "Multi-tasking" - again! 13) Same issue. Page 19: Peter Tylor refers to a possible later version of the manual (does it exist?) Further discussion on multi-tasking. 14) January 1999. Page 34: John Gregory comments on "Things". Parameters passed to Files. Use of a library program - "File Selector". Lack of version numbers for programs. 15) And finally ... as they say ... Page 20: P.H. Tanner states that he finds no use for the Pointer Environment. A man after my own heart! After I first stirred up this hornets nest I did make a strenuous effort to study Qpac2. The reason? - I was continually told how wonderful it is and that I was missing out on the wonders of the QL without it. I spent a lot of time going through Bill Waugh's explanations and finished up with a method of running my usual programs from within Qpac environment. I guess that if you are clever and need to run several programs at the same time or, at least have them readily available at the press of a button, then I suppose Qpac2 is for you. I began with my QL, basically, to find out what computers were all about. However; over the many years I have settled down to using it as a tool for various jobs within my interests in local voluntary organisations. My experience, like Mr Tanner, is that Qpac2 simply makes things more complicated and "gets in the way" of doing simple things. So! to sum up! If all the available information listed above could be compiled into my proposed manual and it is written in a readable manner this ought to clear the mystery up for good. Second best - and it is a "best" - would be for the novice or beginner to study Bill Waugh's series in QUANTA beginning February 1995 along with Norman Dunbar's P.E.I.G. - The Pointer Environment Idiot's Guide - and Wolfgang Lenerz's articles that began in 1995. A final note: The brief descriptions of both ClubQL & QUANTA items above only give a rough guide to the wealth of information that they carry. As I said earlier there is other news of Qpac2 printed earlier than my lists. One of the problems with any magazine such as QUANTA is the difficulty of searching through back issues to find the one thing you know is there - but where? Same with my library guide. I have had it for so long tha it is probably well out of date. How do I get an up- to-date issue? Hope this has aroused some interest as it has taken me many hours to compile! Frank Merrison. I HOPE SO FRANK,IT MAY STIR SOMEONE INTO ACTION.ALTHOUGH I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE NOW GONE ONTO THE PROWESS TYPE OF PROG FROM PROGS. Mike Dodd 27th January 1998. Gear Now Working; QL + TRUMP 896K JS In a Mini Tower QL + Gold Card v2.49 Minerva 1.97 superHermes Lite 3.5 AT 101/2 style keyboard SerMouse + TrackBall 214 mB Hard Disc Qubide 2.01 flp1 & 2 =3D 3.5" HD Drives flp3 =3D 5.25" DD Drive Plus a Sinclair QL Printer. Dear Mike & Members, Well I hope you don't have any more trouble. I am just expecting a SuperGold card from Roy Wood and have a selection of Spectrum games ready , in anticipation of the extra speed. Has anyone got any advice on getting more Speccy games and is it possible to convert between FORMATS ? I have the SPECTATOR from Carlo Delhez. FROM WHAT I HAVE GATHERED OVER THE YEARS MIKE,THE ANSWER IS NO YOU CAN'T.THE ONLY WAY TO RUN SPECCY PROGS ON A QL IS THROUGH A EMULATOR SUCH AS SPECTATOR,UNLESS ANYONE KNOWS DIFFERENT! All the Best, Mike D. Ps, Could you please let me know the address of Dave Walker, as I want to write to him about his DiscOver program. ANYONE KNOW THIS ADDRESS? #! Martin Burke, 24th January, 1999. Dear Mike and Friends, JM version + Trump 768 + HermesLite + twin 3.5" disks, JS + Gold Card, Philips CM8833 colour monitor (under repair) and its Tandy twin, 8056 printer, Epson RX80 F/T, and Brother HR10 daisy-wheel printer; PSION3a, Z88. Sorry to hear you are having more troubles Mike. One of these days I might buy myself a laptop for QPC or whatever and see if I can have the same fun. (I think that's the word.) But I don't think most PC suppliers will render the same level of service as in the QL world. THATS A FACT MARTIN,IN FACT I AM WAITING FOR A REPLACEMENT PART FOR MY NEW COMPUTER AND HAVE BEEN FOR 3 WEEKS NOW.IF IT DOESN'T ARRIVE BY THE END OF NEXT WEEK,I AM TAKING IT BACK TO THEM FOR A REFUND.I AM SICK OF BEING FOBBED OFF BY A**EHOLES WHO KNOW EVEN LESS THAN ME,IF THATS POSSIBLE! I had somebody knocking on the boat a couple of weeks ago. Looking through the windows I couldn't quite figure out who it was. It turned out to be Bill Richardson. I had phoned him before Christmas - about ED drives - and left my number on his answerphone. Well it wasn't actually my number though I guess it was close. It was no good to Bill though. But he eventually managed to figure out who I was and where. He had come by a couple of times before but the boatyard had been closed. That's what I call service. Also thank you JC. Now you mention it, I seem to remember somewhere - in the manual, QL Today or QUANTA - talk about differences between "copy" and "backup" in some system or other but that important bit did not actually get through to me. As for use of QPAC2: I am still ill at ease with it. Undoubtedly there are parts of the tutorials/manual that I did not grasp but I can use it ineptly. I know - I sense - it should be very useful but achieving that level could be time consuming. HAVE YOU BEEN TALKING TO FRANK? Yours, Martin Burke. #! P. McPHERSON, 25th JANUARY 1999. Fraternal Greetings Everybody, Current equipment: JM QL with Gold Card, Cumana disk drives and an Amstrad DMP3160 printer. So, the subject of copyright has raised it's head once again, this should not really be an issue at all to anyone since there can are very few ambiguities in British or international legislation any more. (In Communist countries like China and Cuba which do not recognise the concept of intelectual property or copyright at all. As an aside, the famous iconic image of Che Guevara, having been created in Cuba, is, in point of fact, "copyright free", much to the regret of it's original photographer, Alberto Korda, who should have made millions from his work). As far as British law is now concerned, whoever creates a body of work, AUTOMATICALLY owns it's copyright for 50 years beyond his or her death. After death, any monies gained AUTOMATICALLY go to the estate of the author and are distributed according to the authors last will and testement. This is the case EVEN if the author of that work was created by an employee, or was created on a commissioned basis! The only exception to this rule is that if some, or part of the rights have been signed away to another party as a part of a legally binding contract. This may be a contract of employment, like those signed by a newspaper staff photographer who assigns all the photographs produced during working hours to the newspaper concerned in return for a salary and possibly a byline. In the case of say, a wedding photographer, copyright of the photographs ALWAYS remains with the photographer, UNLESS he first assigns his rights over as the part of a contract with whoever commissioned before the photographs are taken. The author of a piece of work, be it music, a painting, photograph a book, letter, computer programme, software or anything else, is therefore entitled to dispose of the rights to that work in any way they deem fit. This might mean assigning their rights to an agent, publisher or distributor to a specific country or continent, be the full global rights or be conditional, depending upon the terms of the contract agreed. For example, you could sell the rights of a photograph on a worldwide basis, but also include an exclusion clause in a contract that the photograph can never be reproduced in a specified country or even a specified magazine like, for example, "Pol Pot Weekly" or "Saddam Hussein Monthly". It therefore follows, that the author of a body of work, if he so chooses, may assign his rights to the "Public Domain", BUT, at the same time, is also entitled to attach any conditions he so wishes to the use of that work. Such a condition might simply be that he his credited for his work, that the work must be kept complete and unedited or not be misrepresented in any way. It is generally accepted practice, and a matter of smple common courtesy to seek the original authors WRITTEN permission and approval before reproducing their work, even if that work is in the "Public Domain", is "Copyright Free", "Shareware", or "Freeware". The onus whether a work is to be placed in the Public Domain or is copyright free etc. is initially that of the works author, then their beneficiaries. It must therefore always be assumed that unless the author of a work specifically specifies otherwise, he, or she, has retained all of their rights under copyright legislation. Incidentally, anyone entering into copyright contracts would be extremely well advised to insert a "time clause" by which, after a certain, specified length of time, all assigned rights revert back to the author of the original work. This allows the author to seek publication or distribution (and royalties) elsewhere or renew the contract for another specified period of time. The problem with copyright legislation today is in actually proving who the author really is and, just when the original work was actually created. Harking back to he good old days when I was a session musician, The Musicians Union, Equity, the Songwriters Guild and the International Songwriters Association all recommended that if you wrote a song, you should post it to yourself via sealed REGISTERED POST and when it arrives back, do not open it or break the seals, but carefully store it away for the time when it might be needed, ie in a copyright ownership dispute. A British court will accept this as proof of the date the original song was written, by whom, and allocate the rights accordingly. However, this approach may prove problematic when it comes to software stored on magnetic media which deteriorates over time and a court could well discover a blank disc or tape in the Registered Emvelope. CD-Roms should be perfectly safe to store in this way though. There is still one very curious loophole remaining in British copyright legislation which the government has promised to take appropriate steps to try and rectify and is best illustrated in terms of photography, but also applies to any other medium. If you are sitting comfortably I shall explain as consisely as I can with a hypothetical scenario, in which all the names have been changed to protect the innocent: An unknown photographer called Janet took a photograph of an unknown artist called John posing next to one of his original paintings last month without Johns permission. Today, John is a famous artist whose paintings now sell for `100,000 each and reproductions are much in demand and selling like hot cakes as posters, jigsaws and chocolate boxes. Being an asute business person Janet capitalises on Johns popularity and sells her photograph of John posing in front of his painting and it is reproduced in magazines and advertising hoardings all over the country. John obviously holds the copyright to his original painting and has assigned reproduction rights to the poster, jigsaw and chocolate box makers. The interesting legal conundrum is this: Who owns the legal copyright to Janets photograph, which contains Johns original painting within the negative and was taken, published and reproduced without his prior permission? The answer is: regardless of it's content, since Janet took the photograph, the copyright of that photograph is hers and she may assign the rights to it as she so pleases. However, since John owns the copyright to his painting. John is entitled to ATTEMPT to sue her in a civil court for any loss of earnings he may have incurred. However, John is very unlikely to win his (very expensive) court case because Janes photograph is not solely composed of Johns painting, but has him posing beside it. Indeed, John is unlikely to win his case even if the photograph was a "substantial" composition of his painting because she is the author of the photograph which is regarded as a unique work in it's own right. Janes case would futher be enhanced if she has made sure to credit him as being it's creator in a caption. Since there are currently no privacy laws in Britain, Jane did not need Johns permission to take the photograph of him posing next to his painting. However, she would have been wise to have got him to sign a "model release form" at the time which would probably saved her a lot of time, trouble and expense in the first place. The lesson of this little piece of copyright fiction has it's basis in a real case which went to court and currently applies to any medium, including software. Another thing worthy of being pointed out very LOUDLY, is that in the eyes of the law, there is no such thing as copyright on an idea! Whilst you can not copyright an idea, no matter how original it might be, you can own the copyright a document that contains that idea. In my opinion, for what it's worth, copyright and patent arguments are relatively easy to resolve one way or another. Software, firmware and hardware licence agreements are a completely different kettle of fish though. I despise the very concept that you can buy a piece of software, and more often than not, never actually see the terms and conditions of the software license until you have already got it home and open the box which is AUTOMATICALLY ASSUMED to be your acceptance of those terms andcondi tions, regardless of how unreasonable or unfair they might be or how they might affect your statutory rights. Whilst not advocating piracy in any way, I would love to see this one tested in the courts, simply because I believe that an agreement or contract should be FREELY entered into by all parties, and that all parties involved should know what the terms and conditions of that agreement are BEFORE they hand over their hard earned money, not after they have broken the seal to the box when they get home, which could be weeks or even months later. The automatic assumption that by opening the box or breaking a seal, you unconditionally accept a licencing agreement, without ever being given the opportunity to read it's terms and conditions is, to my mind, completely unacceptable, and needs to be challenged in a court. Hopefully, this would then lead to a situation in which license agreements are printed on the outside of the box in a comprehensable form, in advertising and on a shops notice board so that potential purchasers know, in advance, exactly what terms and conditions they must meet under such licence agreements. In this way the potential purchaser has a fair opportunity to FREELY accept or reject those terms if he so wishes BEFORE handing over their hard earned cash and taking the product home with them only to discover the terms and conditions of the license are wholly unacceptable or unfair. This is not such a great hardship for software copyright owners, in fact it could have some benefits: Having read the license conditions, a purchaser could then be asked to sign a register to confirm they accept those conditions. This would not only provide indisputable evidence in the event of a breach of those conditions, but also go some way to help to trace the main sources of piracy and act as a partial deterant. And now for something completely different: I have often read and heard that our QLs are completely millenium bug free, and gleefully took it for granted that this was the case. However, nobody has actually explained WHY this is the case, or if this is also the case with QL software. I ask this question because I have just used QRAM to check a file and noticed for the first time that it gave the save date as "23:04 09 May 98", just two digits for the year, not four. So the question of the month is: Will the millenium bug affect QRAM or any other QL related software for that matter and if not, why not? This little contribution should fill a bit of space for you Mike, even it it is waffle! BEST WISHES PAUL COME ON SOMEONE ANSWER THAT,I KNOW I HAVE TAKEN MY QL TO 2048 AND AS FAR AS I CAN SEE IT SHOULD NOT AFFECT THE PROGS BUT CAN ANYONE EXPLAIN WHY? AS FOR THE EXPLANATION OF COPYRIGHT,I CANNOT FAIL TO SEE THAT NO-ONE AFTER THAT CAN GRASP THE CONCEPT OF COPYRIGHT IN THE FUTURE! From: A Halliwell Please Mike. If you lose any submissions, try to e-mail me so I can send them again. Here's the submission that *SHOULD* have been in QL118... THE PROBLEM IS ANDREW,IF I DON'T RECIEVE A LETTER I DON'T KNOW IF ONE HAS BEEN SENT DO I? Andrew Halliwell Gear: SuperGold card QL with Minerva 1.97, QubIDE, Star 24 pin printer + lots of nice free software (Fileinfo, etc). And now... A 486sx running Linux. (It's a PC that *ISN'T* a Potential Catastrophy... :) YEAH,YEAH,HOW MANY TIMES HAVE I HEARD THAT ONE! Well.... I didn't manage to write in last month, and this month, I might be too late. Work, holidays, laziness, etc... Well... New things... I will admit not having messed with the ol' faithful for a few weeks. John kindly gave me an old 486, which I promptly did what I always said I 'd do, and formatted the harddrive and installed Linux. I've been playing with that a lot since. Installing, uninstalling and recompiling it. Anyone thinking of moving over to linux in favour of M$ rubbish? I strongly recommend the SuSE distribution. It contains several programs that make it extremely easy to install and configure Linux. Oh.... If you DO want to try Linux, but don't want to get rid of all your M$ Winblows software, it is possible (and infact, quite easy) to set it up to give you alternative OSs at startup, using a program called LILO. (LInux LOader). A new version of MicroEmacs has been put up on Thierrys page, as has another further debugged version of Paragraph (The wordprocessor for Prowess). It's not stable yet, but seems to be improving (Not that I have Prowess to try it with). And now...On with the show.... Only one little thing to say on QL116.... (Yes,yes, I know I'm being pedantic... It's a hobby, OK?) Martin Wheatly said a couple of months ago.... "Possibly as a consequence of this turning down of permission Tony Firshman has made the 1.89 version of Aurora freely downloadable" If only... :) I wish I could download a hardware addon like Aurora, but StarTrek transporter technology is very primative at the moment. You did, of course, mean Minerva.... On to QL117 Dilwyn said about Frank Davies... "As to Frank Davies, he and I have managed to tread on each other's toes once or twice too. Frank is a busy guy, he and his wife sell products for 3 or 4 different computers and in my experience he's reasonable if asked politely (that WASN'T a dig at you BTW)." Unfortunately, that wasn't how he came across on the list. He basically blew his top. (All I did was ask "Why just not release the ROMs for emulator use instead of insisting people ask?") and he replied by accusing me of being rude, said it was none of my business, and then went into a long rant which implied that I condoned software piracy. Not exactly polite, that, is it? All he had to say was that he'd paid for it. (Although that was pretty obvious from the outset). I tried to point out that it is quite possible to sell the ROMS *AND* release the code, but to no avail. Anyway. That argument ended a couple of months ago, so that's the last I'll say on it. Hmmmmm... Unfortunately, apart from saying "Ooops" to my comment on Q-Emulator being Freeware when it's actually Shareware, there's not much more to add this month... Still... It beat Mr Wheatleys post for length... :) Happy New Year. *! Martin Wheatley martinw@wheatleym.freeserve.co.uk PC running PC Xchange and Q-Emulator Hi everyone, Hope you all ahd a good Xmas etc etc...... ************************* Can anyone tell me how to write a boot program to launch Archdev for Archive? Thanks - Basil Lee for Martin Jonzen. *************************88 As far as I can remember Archdev was a kind of compiler for Archive which produced programs where the user couldn't see or edit the procedures. In other words a prog for producing commercial progs written in Archive. Since the number of these could be listed on the fingers of one hand (with a couple to spare!) there must be very few people about who have ever used this. I certainly have never seen it. ************************************************ Mike wrote WHAT SOME PEOPLE WILL DO TO GET FREE ADVERTISING! SERIOUSLY THOUGH,DO YOU GET COMPUTER ACTIVE?,ONCE A FORTNIGHT FROM YOUR NEWSAGENT OR BY SUBSCRIPTION AT 99p AN ISSUE.IN THERE THEY HAVE FOR THE LAST FORTNIGHT BEEN DOING A STEP BY STEP GUIDE TO SETTING UP YOUR OWN WEB PAGES,THEY HAVE BEEN USING ADOBE PAGEMILL AND YOU CAN DOWNLOAD A TRIAL VERSION FROM WWW.ADOBE.COM IT SEEMS PRETTY STRAIGHT FORWARD,THEY EVEN USE LANGUAGE I CAN UNDERSTAND.THEY EVEN EXPLAIN LINKS TO OTHER SITES AND COUNTERS TO SEE HOW MANY 'HITS'YOU GET.VERY INTERESTING AND EASY TO USE. ************************************************8 There are stacks of freeware and shareware HTML progs about for the PC and loads of tutorials as well. A very good free one is Arachnophilia at http://arachnoid.com/arachnophilia BUT WHAT DOES IT DO MARTIN,IS IT AN INTRODUCTION TO SPIDERS OR WHAT? ************************************************** Dilwyn wrote Martin also wrote that Tony Firshman made V1.89 of Aurora available for emualtor users in N. America as Frank Davies did not give free permission to use Sinclair ROM versions over there. Presumably you meant Minerva Martin? *************************************************** All these Greek names sound alike to me - at least that's my excuse anyway! Yes - Minerva 1.89 ROM comes bundled with the new version of Q-Emulator ************************************************** Ian Pizer wrote Using PC and W98 and various ways of communicating I like to hear what the modem is doing. With AURORA and QTPI this works fine and I hear the modem chatting softly and I know when something has stuck and I need to start connecting again. (The init modem (ZYXEL U-1496E) code is ATZ&N0&R1 and the pre is AT&D0M3DT it is the M3 which controls the speaker, M0 shuts it). However, when I use Netscape all goes quiet and the text info does not warn of a hitch so either one waits and hopes or cancel and re-connect if the connection takes too long (much longer than with AURORA/QTPI). Some comms programs have a separate SCRIPT file to connect to the modem. Netscape does not seem to have one. I tried searching for M0 in Netscape files without success (using a PC program called TextPad which will search in HEX or text). Any ideas how to make the modem speak using Netscape? . **************************************************** A Pc question which will cause consternation with some! What the hell -it's something to write about! Netscape doesn't deal directly with the modem. Like almost all Win95 comms progs it just hooks into the Windows Dial-Up-Network (DUN) which handles everything If you want to look at the DUN entries you'll find a DUN icon in 'My Computer' beneath the drive letters There should be an icon in the system tray which indicates when data is actually travelling. If you want to see more info than that run DIALMON.EXE from C:\WINDOWS\SYSTEM before connecting ******************************************************* Mike wrote IS CYRIL STILL GOING! I HOPE HE'S STILL NOT WANDERING ROUND WITH A HANDFUL OF PRINTOUTS OF PICTURES HE HAS PRINTED OUT,ASKING PEOPLE IF THEY LIKE THEM AS HE USED TO.NICE BLOKE,BUT IF YOU'VE SEEN ONE MANDELBROT YOU'VE SEEN THEM ALL! ******************************************************* Nowadays the thing to be afraid of is trying to get his PC portable to work with QPC without corrupting everything. Most of us spent nearly all the last London meeting trying it unsuccesfully WHAT YOU WERE TRYING TO CORRUPT CYRIL'S PORTABLE,SHAME ON YOU ALL.HE'S QUITE CAPABLE OF DOING THAT HIMSELF.PORTABLE MANDELBROTS,WHAT NEXT! *********************************************** Andrew Pratt wrote Jochen, unfortunately, put a damper on my hopes for the continued development of QL emulator on the Apple. He had spoken to the author.The author, he says, has given up his aim of writing the emulator in PowerPC native code(which perhaps wasn't necessary anyway). But more worryingly, Jochen suggested that the author has also given up writing the low level drivers, such as Apple directory support, needed to make conversion of SMSQ worthwhile. This is a bit of a blow because it means we won't be able to use all of the Apple screen and be limited to the original screen sizes. Also, navigation round the Apple directories will remain awkward. THATS A SHAME BUT MAYBE IN THE FUTURE WHO KNOWS,I MEAN HE MUST HAVE NEARLY FINISHED THE EMULATOR SO HE'S NOT GOING TO LET IT SIT AROUND HALF FINISHED IS HE? ***************************************************88 Not exactly half finished. This seems to be the great divide with emulators Small screen with no SMSQ like Q-Emulator or QLAY. The full works like QPC or QXL. There is a great deal of work between the two - more than an amateur might choose to do! ******************************** Paul McPherson wrote I was a bit disappointed at the response to my suggestion in last months newsletter regarding the creation of a series of QL related video "tutorials". Of those voicing a view either way, thus far being just 2 in favour, and 11 against the idea which hardy justifies going ahead with such a project. **************************** I think you should bear in mind that since there have been so few mail contributors recently that means very few people have actualy seen the last few issues of this newsletter except the Internet people who aren't the obvious target for your idea. Perhaps you should write it up for QL Today Martin Wheatley #! Colin Baskett 5 February 1999 EQUIPMENT: QL FITTED WITH SUPERGOLD CARD; MkI MINERVA - version 1.82; SUPERHERMES; SMSQ/E; 170 MB HARD DISK; SINGLE 3.5" HD DISK DRIVE; SINGLE 3.5" ED DRIVE; PHILIPS COLOUR MONITOR; SERIAL MOUSE; PRINTER EPSON Stylus COLOR 200; XCHANGE 3.90L, etc.. Dear Mike, Sorry to be late yet again !! BETTER LATE THAN NEVER COLIN. I don't suppose anyone feels drawn to writing a short note (or a longish one!) for Quanta on (a) PIE, PICE, PEX or (b) on SMASH?? Cadge, cadge. IF ANYONE DOES,LET US KNOW AS WELL.I KNOW WHAT SMASH IS(I KNOW MARTIN,IT DOESN'T COME IN PACKETS AND YOU ADD WATER TO MAKE INSTANT SPUDS!).BUT THE OTHERS WHAT ARE THEY AND WHAT DO THEY DO? I am grateful to John Marcus for pointing out the difference betwee "Copy" which will change the file date and "Backup" which won't (QPAC2 Files Menu). I have often wondered why sometimes I preserve the old file date and sometimes get a new one. Obviously something I ought to have known. Very useful. Also thanks to Mitch Ratcliffe for his interesting notes about the harbingers in 1999 of the problems of Y2K. Thanks also to everyone who sent or offered help with the EPSON scalable fonts commands in response to my appeal in Quanta and CQLI on behalf of my new Epson Stylus Color 200. The most complete account of the use of ESC X m n1 n2 came from Peter Tyler (who also gave me the critical parameters for ESC k n which selects the fonts): ESC X m n1 n2 For Epson Roman T and Sans Serif H fonts m 3D 0 - no change of pitch m 3D 1 - proportional printing m 3D 18, 21, 24 to 72 STEP 6 - sets pitch 360/m cpi n 3D n1 + (n2 x 256): point size in points 3D n x 0.5 n1 3D 0 (no change in point size), 16, 21, 24 to 60 STEP 4. n2 3D 0 This all seems to work on my printer so far as I have checked it. For other fonts: n 3D 0 (no change), 21 (normal height), 42 (double height) I haven't checked this out thoroughly yet but I think that the Roman and Sans Serif fonts are more flexible than the above statement implies. (The Courier font seems to behave differently). Possibly, I did not take this part of Peter's instructions down accurately. I would welcome corrections. FONT SELECTION - ESC k n n 3D 0 Roman n 3D 1 Sans Serif n 3D 2 Courier n 3D 3 Prestige (not available on Epson Stylus 200) n 3D 4 Script (not available on Epson Stylus 200) n 3D 10 Roman T (similar to Times) n 3D 11 Sans Serif H (similar to Helvetica) Good Printing, Best wishes Colin B #! I AM SURE THAT OUT THERE SOMEONE CAN PUT THESE TO GOOD USE. --29da0c2d-bf83-11d2-aaef-00805fea3ca9--