[Coco] Glenside IDE Hard Drive Interface --- HOW-TO

[Joel Ewy]

Manny wrote:
> Bob Devries wrote:
>> It is my opinion that if a file or files is distributed in archived
>> format, be it .ar or .lha or .zip, then either the (de)archiver
>> programme should be included, or clear instructions should be
>> included to locate those (de)archivers.
>>
>> While this is not usually necessary for us *oldies*, it is often the
>> newbies that get into strife with this. I personally don't see any
>> reason for archiving files at all, especially since the advent of
>> .DSK files (although that is arguably a form of archiving in itself).
>
> We could do with a page that is a central source for things to help
> newbies start. I was thinking a page that would have a few tools and
> things with a description next to the download. I haven't seen such a
> page, and the FTPs that are around doesn't have the ease of use that I
> was just talking about.
>
It would be pretty easy to set up something like that at Allen Huffman's
CoCo Wiki site:  http://www.coco25.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page  I know
he'd be pleased to give you an account to get a CoCo Newbie Wiki page
started.  I'm not sure you could host file downloads there, but there's
no reason one couldn't link directly to the files on one of the FTP
archives.

And I bet Roger Taylor could be convinced to something for CoCo newbies
on coco3.com...
> I also don't see what would be wrong with putting an (de)archiver in to
> the NitrOS-9 package. lha, I believe, isn't all that big. If anything,
> an extra disk image with utilities that you could download from the
> project page might make things a little easier without adding bloat to
> the main disk image.
>
Whether or not it's distributed as a part of NitrOS-9, one could come up
with an 'essential utilities' disk image culled from the archives and
link to it from the CoCo newbie page.
>> I agree with Willard; a *decent* screen editor is something that is
>> sadly lacking in the public domain. While my editor of choice is Bob
>>  van der Poel's Ved, that program is a commercial product, and should
>>  not be distributed in this way, but what other (PD) editor comes close?
>
Sled is reputed to be buggy -- but the source is there.  Maybe it could
be fixed up and turned into something more like what you're looking for.
> A year or so ago, I did a big search for a public domain editor for OS-9
> that would be simple to use. I did find a couple that almost worked, but
> I found too many bugs to be able to use them efficiently. This took me
> into the idea of programming one myself based off of some of the old
> DOS-based text editor. (Using the arrow keys for movement and simple to
> remember commands like <CTRL><C>, etc.) But, I've been blocked by my
> lack of knowledge of the underlying operating system, some of the
> problems that I have encountered with the Microware's (?) C package, as
> well as a lack of a good public domain text editor. (Kind of a vicious
> circle, eh? :) )
>
Of course, we are no longer limited to editing our source files on the
CoCo.  With tools like Roger's IDE and OS-9 Toolshed, we can do quite a
bit of the development in Linux, Windows, or MacOS X, though if you want
to program in C (as I would), that doesn't address compiler issues.
> I suppose my last reason could be rectified by purchasing Ved. (Which is
> like Vi, right? Blech! I love my Emacs. ;) ) 
Wrong.  Rad Shak's TS-EDIT is Vi-like (even more so with that patch).  I
happen to have been corrupted to Vi in my youth by spending too much
time with Elm on an NCR Tower, so I don't mind it at all.  But Ved is a
completely different thing.  It bears more resemblance to Telewriter
64/128 than to Vi* or *MACS, and is a lot closer to a DOS EDIT, or a
Windows Notepad in that it's a full-screen editor where you can use the
arrow keys to move the cursor around, though you won't be using
<ctrl><c> <ctrl><v> to copy and paste.  The VPRINT formatter uses very
similar formatting codes to the ones in TW64/128.
> But I can't rationalize
> $25.00 (+ s/h) for a text editor for the CoCo right now. (Besides, my
> wife would find out and kill me for it! I just barely got by with buying
> Portal-9 a few years ago.) Also, no offense to Mark, but I think $25.00
> is a little steep for a text editor for the CoCo. $10.00 - $15.00
> would be a better range, IMHO.
>
At the time I bought it, I was using my CoCo on a daily basis, and it
was well worth the price.  I think I got it along with VPRINT for
something like $50.  At this point, like you, my budget for CoCo stuff
falls more under the "Fun and Entertainment" line item.  I would also be
more willing to buy CoCo software if it was in the $10-$15 range.  I
suspect that a price point like that would likely generate more software
sales -- especially for software that was written long ago and isn't
being actively developed -- but I only know about my own situation.  In
any case, VED (and VPRINT) is a good editor (despite the fact that it
isn't anything like Vi :-) ), and I certainly don't regret the money I
spent on it back in the day.

JCE
> One of these days, I would like to program one. But my current interest
> in the CoCo is falling off a little bit because of being 3000 miles away
> from my CoCo. (It looks like it will be that way for a few years to
> come, too.)
>
> I'll stop my rambling now.
>
> -M.
>
> -- 
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>