I could use Sam, I used a slightly hacked version of ed. I added what the Labs called the "b" command. I had use some other character. Dennis Ritchie sent me a 8th Edition Unix manual, and I saw they had added almost the same thing and called the command by the second letter. Vi called it the last letter, "z." I've never found ed slows me down. Some things I would have used awk/sed for that I now use Sam's command window for, but that's a bad thing. I still use ed a lot along side Sam.

Typo. Worry. Not a bad thing.

On Monday, March 29, 2021, Brantley Coile <brantley(a)coraid.com> wrote: If ed(1) had cursor positioning and full screen capabilities along with line oriented editing (similar to Atari 8-bit default editor) it would be perfect. I still love it though and use it pretty often. --Andy

Andy Kosela <akosela(a)andykosela.com> wrote: Try out the 'se' editor, see www.se-editor.org. Arnold

* Clem Cole <clemc(a)ccc.com> [2021-03-29 11:37:57 -0400]: I appreciate the kind advice Clem! I'm dipping my toes into heirloom doctools these days, and am delightened by the simplicity, modularity, and speed compared to latex. However, much to learn still so thanks for the nudge. Anders

On 3/29/21, Clem Cole <clemc(a)ccc.com> wrote: +1. It is still my all time favorite Unix book, but the best ed(1) tutorial I read has to be UNIX Programmer's Manual for Version 7. Still highly recommended. --Andy

I think you can only truly appreciate ed when you were forced to use a DECwriter as your terminal because all the VT100s were in use. (Undergrad student lab) — Michael Usher Network Operations Manager University of California, Santa Cruz musher(a)ucsc.edu 831-459-3697

Technically, the DEC DECwriter series were dot-matrix printers, not line printers. They differed from their Teletype predecessors only in print-head technology, but both printed a single character at a time. Daisywheel printers were similar. Line printers are distinguished not by the width of the paper but by the printer having enough print heads to print an entire line of output at a time. That speed advantage made them the preferred output device for many-page program listings, as opposed to a teleprinter terminals which were more suitable for interactive computing. There were dot-matrix line printers of the late 1970s made by Printronix, which is apparently still around. Erik Fair

On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 5:16 PM Erik E. Fair <fair-tuhs(a)netbsd.org> wrote: Right.... There were originally two styles, the drum printers which DEC sold(e.g. LP20) and the chain printers that IBM offered (e.g. 1401). The drum had all the characters in each of the 132 columns (the upper case only printers were faster because the alphabet was on the drum in two places). The IBM ones has slugs on a rapidly spinning chain that was horizontal (and parallel) to the line being printed. The chain was easily replaceable by the operator - which was one of the duties we would have. When a user queued a printer a set of symbols (*i.e.* the chain of the needed output characters) was specified and the system queued it until the printer had been properly provisioned. For instance, CMU printed checks with a special chain and film ink, so once a night the operator would configure the printer, and tell the queue to print them). Some chains were faster than others, the standard one had N copies of each character. In common to both schemes is that each both styles had 132 hammers and when the proper character was in the position needed, the hammer fired to make an impression the ribbon on the paper, which was caused the noise people associated with computer printers. The high-end IBM 1401 had a hydraulic cover that came down over it and was controlled by the channel processor (it would auto-open when it needed to be serviced - like a new box of paper). But even with the cover down it still loud. The original DEC ones were OEM'ed from Centronix and were noted for always being a little random on the hammer timing and thus the print on the paper often looked like the characters bounced on the line. I remember the ones we had on the PDP-10s were awful and the issue with BLISS is that the dot operator is extremely important to your code and the dots were sometimes notoriously missing. Cabling could be difficult too. They were parallel devices and were supposed to have shorter cables (*i.e.* in the machine room). IBM used its own interface, but by the mid-1970s the Centronix printers were pretty standard on the mini-computers and their parallel interface became the standard (in fact the IBM PC supplied a Centronix parallel interface). IIRC, in 1979 the Printronix cost about $5K, plus another $300-$500 for an Arduino sized parallel to serial converter that they sold so the printer could be remote on a 9600 baud serial line. Until the cheaper lasers came about, these were often the standard printers that UNIX sites had [I was told once that the original Lion's book was printed on one]. They were about ½ the cost of the DEC printers and since it will all pins, did not have the bounce issue the drums had. When the UNIX boxes started to appear at CMU we used them, and IIRC @ UC Berkeley, we had a number of them around Cory Hall also. ᐧ

Night operators were known to nap on top of the 1401s. When there was a need for more paper, they would be gently awakened. -rob On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 9:30 AM John P. Linderman <jpl.jpl(a)gmail.com> wrote:

As I recall, the Dataproducts band printers BP1000, BP2000 only had a single hammer per column. But the band containing the full character set moved so quickly into position for each column that the print speed was incredible. We had both models at one point and the 2000 was an absolute screamer. Paper just flew over the paper guides to the collection basket in the rear. It was impressive and incredible to watch in action. The bands were easily replaceable via a release lever. So you could change fonts, replace damaged bands, etc. Sharp as heck as I recall on the edges. You also had to make sure it lined up just right before engaging the tension lever. With cover down, they were remarkably quiet in comparison to other "high speed" printers I had been around. Real good at multipart forms at making clean clear impressions on the backmost layer. On Mon, Mar 29, 2021, 5:16 PM Erik E. Fair <fair-tuhs(a)netbsd.org> wrote: