«

In article <r2z4f.4870$>, mnb
<j;> wrote:

> If you told somebody today that True Type
> Fonts were considered *desk top publishing* in the 80s/90s they'd think
> you were crazy.

And you would be, but TrueType did make a difference in the publishing
industry, it was significant, and it was good enough to continue to be
used today.
And it wasn't Microsoft at all -- it was Apple's development.
IIRC -- When Adobe was riding high on PostScript, Apple and Microsoft
got together to collaborate on a competing project. Apple developed TT,
and I think the Microsoft part of the effort was to be TrueDoc, a
layout standard which could have been a precursor to PDF. As far as I
know, Microsoft never did anything with their part of the project.

why? wrote:

> That's another thing that went to the sidelines , Bitstream
> Fonts, used to sell lots of that, along with XTree, PCTools,

Is Bitstream still known in the World Of Windows? I use Bitstream
fonts for all of my basic needs (serif, sans-serif and monospace) in
Linux.


--
Blinky
Killing all Google Groups posts.
http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

Mitch wrote:

> yIn article <ditpd0$436$>, aleX
> <> wrote:
>
>> I read an article online where some coders took a look at
>> Gates' code way back when Gates actually did the coding for MS
>> products. Maybe it was on the 'Eniac' machine for DOS(apologies
>> if this is completely wrong, I'm guessing the name) They were
>> impressed, he was obviously a very skilled programmer.
>
> I was programming back then, too, and believe me when I tell you
> it wasn't that complex a hobby.
> I can't imagine anyone being 'impressed' by code from back then
> -- it was too primitive, and there just weren't opportunities
> for cleverness.
>
> The only product I ever heard Gates was involved in programming
> was the alterations he made to QDOS before that IBM deal. I did
> hear it was clever and tight programming, but consider how small
> it would have been.

Didn't he and...er...was it Paul Allen code that traffic control
software for some city, that got them, IIRC, their first decent
(for the time and for a couple of youngsters) financial score?


--
Blinky
Killing all Google Groups posts.
http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

On 18 Oct 2005 05:46:38 GMT, Blinky the Shark wrote:

>why? wrote:
>
>> That's another thing that went to the sidelines , Bitstream
>> Fonts, used to sell lots of that, along with XTree, PCTools,
>
>Is Bitstream still known in the World Of Windows? I use Bitstream

Most likely very little. OOo 1.1.x on Windows has 3 BS fonts.

>fonts for all of my basic needs (serif, sans-serif and monospace) in
>Linux.

Went to generic font families on all webpages when I went XHTML+CSS full
conversion from poor quality messy HTML.

Me

why? wrote:

>
> On 18 Oct 2005 05:46:38 GMT, Blinky the Shark wrote:
>
>>why? wrote:
>>
>>> That's another thing that went to the sidelines , Bitstream
>>> Fonts, used to sell lots of that, along with XTree, PCTools,
>>
>>Is Bitstream still known in the World Of Windows? I use
>>Bitstream
>
> Most likely very little. OOo 1.1.x on Windows has 3 BS fonts.

I think there are four in OO Linux. That box not fired up right
now, awaiting some fixing and upgrading.

>>fonts for all of my basic needs (serif, sans-serif and
>>monospace) in Linux.
>
> Went to generic font families on all webpages when I went
> XHTML+CSS full conversion from poor quality messy HTML.

Oh, me too, and also XHTML/CSS. But I meant for my own rendering,
in my browsers.


--
Blinky
Killing all Google Groups posts.
http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

In article <>, why?
<fgrirp*sgc@VAINY!Qznq.fpvragvfg.pbz> wrote:

> On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 09:17:10 -0400, EW105 wrote:
>
> >Being the richest man in the world, was he just at the right place at
> >the right time or does he actually have the smarts to be in such a
>
> Right Place Right Time, Business Smarts,
>
> IBM looking for an OS, he didn't have one, someone else did Bill bought
> it.
>
> http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa033099.htm
>

A couple funny quotes from that article:

On November 10, 1983, Microsoft Corporation formally announced
Microsoft Windows
<snip>
Microsoft promised that the new program would be on the shelf by April
1984.
<snip>
Early MS-DOS diehards liked to refer to MacOS as 'WIMP' - the Windows,
Icons, Mice and Pointers interface.
<snip>
Microsoft finally shipped Windows 1.0 on November 20, 1985, almost two
years past the initially promised release date.

"Mitch" <> wrote in message
news:221020050250059349%...

> Microsoft finally shipped Windows 1.0 on November 20, 1985, almost two
> years past the initially promised release date.

And the world has gone down-hill since.


--
I filled a lightbulb with helium and got enlightened
http://www.dwacon.com

On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 12:49:40 GMT, Mitch wrote:

>In article <>, why?
><fgrirp*sgc@VAINY!Qznq.fpvragvfg.pbz> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 09:17:10 -0400, EW105 wrote:
>>
>> >Being the richest man in the world, was he just at the right place at
>> >the right time or does he actually have the smarts to be in such a
>>
>> Right Place Right Time, Business Smarts,
>>
>> IBM looking for an OS, he didn't have one, someone else did Bill bought
>> it.
>>
>> http://inventors.about.com/library/weekly/aa033099.htm
>>
>
>A couple funny quotes from that article:
>
<snip>
>Early MS-DOS diehards liked to refer to MacOS as 'WIMP' - the Windows,

Urgh showing my age, I used to that term, but the Xerox PARC version
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_GUI
(windows, icons, menus and pointers)

>Icons, Mice and Pointers interface.
><snip>
>Microsoft finally shipped Windows 1.0 on November 20, 1985, almost two
>years past the initially promised release date.

That's one is so standard for a release now it's not funny

Me