Article View: alt.folklore.computers
Article #621282Re: Old word processors
From: Dave Garland
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2018 02:10
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2018 02:10
43 lines
3369 bytes
3369 bytes
On 3/16/2018 6:07 PM, Charles Richmond wrote: > On 3/16/2018 4:30 PM, Scott Lurndal wrote: >> Andreas Kohlbach <a...@spamfence.net> writes: >>> I was writing a blog article about early word processors and >>> spreadsheets >>> <https://news-commentaries.blogspot.com/2018/03/history-of-wordprocessors-and-spread.html> >>> >>> but only covered early 8-Bit micros. Assuming Electric Pencil was the >>> first while WordStar or SuperCalc (spreadsheet) only really became >>> famous >>> in the early days of the late 70s to early 80s. >>> >>> I know that in offices before that era type writers were used, even >>> if an >>> IBM Selectric could ease the work. But they were hardware. They >>> hadn't a >>> display (monitor) to edit text and only when done print it out. >>> >>> Still I wonder if big machines like some IBM 360/370 did not have word >>> processors... By word processor I do not mean any text editor. A word >>> processor should at least be able to wrap a word into the next line >>> if it >>> didn't fit into the current line. And had some markup for defining >>> a bold >>> or italic character and sub- and superscript. >> >> UW (University of Waterloo) script. >> Digital RUNOFF >> Burroughs ADS (Automatic Documentation System). >> troff >> >> all used markup sequences >> > > These things like RUNOFF are "text formaters", not word processors. > And IBM selectrics *are* typewriters. > The MT/ST and MC/ST were not really "typewriters", they were standalone WP machines that included a selectric for IO. It's true that their capabilities were limited compared to later machines, but they could edit text (in a linear way, not random access), do word wrap, accept run-time insertions like mail merge (the operator manually provided the merge text), etc.
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<p8htf7$p24$1@dont-email.me>Path:
mbox-mo1.pugleaf.net!n24ni12544wmi.0!nntp.google.com!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mailReferences:
<87k1ub4vgf.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> <CHWqC.2203$0v5.1771@fx31.iad> <p8hio6$pqc$1@dont-email.me>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Received: by 10.28.8.17 with SMTP id 17mr459754wmi.25.1521252648512; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 19:10:48 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: alt.folklore.computers@googlegroups.com Received: by 10.28.139.200 with SMTP id n191ls629519wmd.11.canary-gmail; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 19:10:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.28.239.16 with SMTP id n16mr448650wmh.23.1521252647785; Fri, 16 Mar 2018 19:10:47 -0700 (PDT) Path: mbox-mo1.pugleaf.net!n24ni12544wmi.0!nntp.google.com!goblin2!goblin.stu.neva.ru!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Dave Garland <dave.g...@wizinfo.com> Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: Old word processors Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2018 21:10:50 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 43 Message-ID: <p8htf7$p24$1@dont-email.me> References: <87k1ub4vgf.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> <CHWqC.2203$0v5.1771@fx31.iad> <p8hio6$pqc$1@dont-email.me> Mime-Version: 1.0 Injection-Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2018 02:10:47 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="2645fbeda2f4497243aa81c196918a94"; logging-data="25668"; mail-complaints-to="ab...@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/ZIMAqI/jTMNW9TKBF4lpyv2e3e06e01c=" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 In-Reply-To: <p8hio6$pqc$1@dont-email.me> Cancel-Lock: sha1:V6tC99sdfzO0bwnqN0Sqrnd+JFQ= X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit