From owner-freebsd-questions Mon Dec 15 16:39:54 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id QAA02951 for questions-outgoing; Mon, 15 Dec 1997 16:39:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-questions) Received: from zippy.dyn.ml.org (garbanzo@ghana-152.ppp.hooked.net [206.169.228.152]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA02945 for ; Mon, 15 Dec 1997 16:39:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from garbanzo@hooked.net) Received: from localhost (garbanzo@localhost) by zippy.dyn.ml.org (8.8.8/8.8.7) with SMTP id QAA03084; Mon, 15 Dec 1997 16:40:55 -0800 (PST) X-Authentication-Warning: zippy.dyn.ml.org: garbanzo owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 16:40:55 -0800 (PST) From: Alex X-Sender: garbanzo@zippy.dyn.ml.org To: Greg Lehey cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: DELETING WINDOWS 95, Please Help In-Reply-To: <19971216092045.30501@lemis.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk On Tue, 16 Dec 1997, Greg Lehey wrote: > > No, I have 64mb ;-) And no I'm not gonna try to get 32 more. > > 64 MB will do. Sometimes I wonder, perhaps it's just my window manager eating up ram. > > I like it because it's graphical and somewhat less awkward than emacs > > (for me). > > I hate it because it's graphical and much more awkward than Emacs (for > me :-) Emacs is great, and I love it for source code highliting, but I like a GUI or support for more formatted text when doing word processing. > > If I had my way, I'd like to see a [free] version of WP 5.1 (for > > DOS) ported over to some *nix with long file name and perhaps lpr > > and ghostscript support. Rumor has it that was written in > > assembly. ;-) > > I can't believe that. I used to write a lot in assembler in the old > days, but I don't know anybody who's written anything significant in > assembler on an -86 platform. Either way, WP 5.1 was one of the best written programs I've ever used. It was blazingly fast (on a 486 none the less), so I wouldn't doubt that a lot of it was written in assembly. It even came with a little task swapper thing, that while not as powerful as DeskView, it certianly worked nicely and came with a nice bunch of integrated apps (calendar, mini database, spreadsheet, etc..). Those Mormons sure knew how to code DOS apps back then ;-) - alex