From: jacoby@pier.ecn.purdue.edu (David Jacoby) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Date: 21 Feb 1999 18:41:33 GMT Organization: Purdue University, W. Lafayette, IN Lines: 12 Message-ID: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: pier.ecn.purdue.edu X-Trace: mozo.cc.purdue.edu 919622493 6869 128.46.154.98 (21 Feb 1999 18:41:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@mozo.cc.purdue.edu NNTP-Posting-Date: 21 Feb 1999 18:41:33 GMT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!feed2.news.luth.se!luth.se!sunqbc.risq.qc.ca!newshub.northeast.verio.net!nntp.newengland.verio.net!news.pn.com!mozo.cc.purdue.edu!pier.ecn.purdue.edu!jacoby Years ago, before it was big, Bill Gates wrote an open letter to computer hobbyists, in part asking "How do you expect people to write commercial-quality programs without pay?" Since Linux and FSF have answered that question, I've been looking for this document online. But I can't find it. Any pointers? -- David Jacoby mailto:jacoby@ecn.purdue.edu Lead Web Technician, ECE http://pier.ecn.purdue.edu/~jacoby/ CS Major Hacking's just another word for nothing left to kludge --------------------------------------------------------------------- ###### Message-ID: <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> From: Tim Shoppa Organization: Trailing Edge Technology X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.03Gold (X11; I; OpenVMS V7.0 DEC 3000 Model 300L) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 74 Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 14:14:31 -0400 NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.232.144.27 X-Trace: audrey2.cais.com 919625004 198.232.144.27 (Sun, 21 Feb 1999 14:23:24 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 14:23:24 EDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!news.belnet.be!newsfeed.ecrc.net!newspeer1.nac.net!netnews.com!news-peer1.sprintlink.net!news-in-east1.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.nntp.cais.net!199.0.216.204.MISMATCH!audrey2.cais.com!not-for-mail David Jacoby wrote: > > Years ago, before it was big, Bill Gates wrote an open letter to > computer hobbyists, in part asking "How do you expect people to > write commercial-quality programs without pay?" Since Linux and > FSF have answered that question, I've been looking for this document > online. But I can't find it. Any pointers? From my usenet archives (note that it was "Micro-Soft", not "Microsoft", at the time): AN OPEN LETTER TO HOBBYISTS February 3, 1976 By William Henry Gates III An Open Letter to Hobbyists To me, the most critical thing in the hobby market right now is the lack of good software courses, books and software itself. Without good software and an owner who understands programming, a hobby computer is wasted. Will quality software be written for the hobby market? Almost a year ago, Paul Allen and myself, expecting the hobby market to expand, hired Monte Davidoff and developed Altair BASIC. Though the initial work took only two months, the three of us have spent most of the last year documenting, improving and adding features to BASIC. Now we have 4K, 8K, EXTENDED, ROM and DISK BASIC. The value of the computer time we have used exceeds $40,000. The feedback we have gotten from the hundreds of people who say they are using BASIC has all been positive. Two surprising things are apparent, however, 1) Most of these "users" never bought BASIC (less thank 10% of all Altair owners have bought BASIC), and 2) The amount of royalties we have received from sales to hobbyists makes the time spent on Altair BASIC worth less than $2 an hour. Why is this? As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, most of you steal your software. Hardware must be paid for, but software is something to share. Who cares if the people who worked on it get paid? Is this fair? One thing you don't do by stealing software is get back at MITS for some problem you may have had. MITS doesn't make money selling software. The royalty paid to us, the manual, the tape and the overhead make it a break-even operation. One thing you do do is prevent good software from being written. Who can afford to do professional work for nothing? What hobbyist can put 3-man years into programming, finding all bugs, documenting his product and distribute for free? The fact is, no one besides us has invested a lot of money in hobby software. We have written 6800 BASIC, and are writing 8080 APL and 6800 APL, but there is very little incentive to make this software available to hobbyists. Most directly, the thing you do is theft. What about the guys who re-sell Altair BASIC, aren't they making money on hobby software? Yes, but those who have been reported to us may lose in the end. They are the ones who give hobbyists a bad name, and should be kicked out of any club meeting they show up at. I would appreciate letters from any one who wants to pay up, or has a suggestion or comment. Just write to me at 1180 Alvarado SE, #114, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87108. Nothing would please me more than being able to hire ten programmers and deluge the hobby market with good software. Bill Gates General Partner, Micro-Soft ###### Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> Organization: University of Michigan, College of Engineering From: ftit@engin.umich.edu (Sergej Roytman) Lines: 131 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 05:27:04 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 141.212.106.44 X-Trace: srvr1.engin.umich.edu 919661224 141.212.106.44 (Mon, 22 Feb 1999 00:27:04 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 00:27:04 EDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.eecs.umich.edu!srvr1.engin.umich.edu!ftit In article <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com>, Tim Shoppa wrote: >David Jacoby wrote: >> Years ago, before it was big, Bill Gates wrote an open letter to >> computer hobbyists, in part asking "How do you expect people to >> write commercial-quality programs without pay?" Since Linux and >> FSF have answered that question, I've been looking for this document >> online. But I can't find it. Any pointers? > >From my usenet archives (note that it was "Micro-Soft", not >"Microsoft", at the time): > >AN OPEN LETTER TO HOBBYISTS > > February 3, 1976 > > By William Henry Gates III King of Newbies, Protector of Cruft, Lord High Muckymuck of the Golden Lawsuit, Knight of Ni!, General All-Around Protection Fault, Quasher of Things Quashable, Supporter of Athletics... > An Open Letter to Hobbyists > > To me, the most critical thing in the hobby market right now >is the lack of good software courses, books and software itself. You said it! >Without good software and an owner who understands programming, a >hobby computer is wasted. Any examples come to mind... ? > Will quality software be written for the >hobby market? Not by your lot, obviously. > Almost a year ago, Paul Allen and myself, expecting the >hobby market to expand, hired Monte Davidoff and developed Altair >BASIC. Though the initial work took only two months, the three of us >have spent most of the last year documenting, improving and adding >features to BASIC. Now we have 4K, 8K, EXTENDED, ROM and DISK BASIC. >The value of the computer time we have used exceeds $40,000. And we want it back, dammit! > The feedback we have gotten from the hundreds of people who >say they are using BASIC has all been positive. Two surprising things >are apparent, however, 1) Most of these "users" never bought BASIC >(less thank 10% of all Altair owners have bought BASIC), and 2) The >amount of royalties we have received from sales to hobbyists makes the >time spent on Altair BASIC worth less than $2 an hour. About what your current offerings are worth, methinks. > Why is this? Because we think you're a twit. > As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, >most of you steal your software. How refreshing! And now you pre-steal our software for us! Now _that's_ convenience. Sure thing. Worth each and every blue-screen, you bet! > Hardware must be paid for, but >software is something to share. Who cares if the people who worked on >it get paid? > > Is this fair? One thing you don't do by stealing software is >get back at MITS for some problem you may have had. MITS doesn't make >money selling software. The royalty paid to us, the manual, the tape >and the overhead make it a break-even operation. One thing you do do >is prevent good software from being written. Who can afford to do >professional work for nothing? What hobbyist can put 3-man years into >programming, finding all bugs, documenting his product and distribute >for free? The fact is, no one besides us has invested a lot of money >in hobby software. We have written 6800 BASIC, and are writing 8080 >APL and 6800 APL, Haha! 8080 BASIC! 6800 BASIC! APL! It's mine! Mine! ALL MINE!!! > but there is very little incentive to make this >software available to hobbyists. Most directly, the thing you do is >theft. And I'll get you for this! All of you! And your little dogs, too! > What about the guys who re-sell Altair BASIC, aren't they >making money on hobby software? Yes, but those who have been reported >to us may lose in the end. They are the ones who give hobbyists a bad >name, and should be kicked out of any club meeting they show up at. When I grow up I'll have a herd of lawyers to deal with these miscreants. And dungeons and torture machines to put them in. And the big guys who used to beat me up in elementary school and take my lunch money, I'll track them down too and make them write long documents on 386s running M$-Nerd, with 14-in. monitors that flicker, and that someone has put big, greasy fingerprints on. You just see! > I would appreciate letters from any one who wants to pay up, Before I _make_ you pay up! Mwahahahaha! >or has a suggestion or comment. Just write to me at 1180 Alvarado SE, >#114, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87108. Unmarked packages from small cabins in Montana excluded. > Nothing would please me more >than being able to hire ten programmers and deluge the hobby market >with good software. ...except hiring about a million code-monkeys to deluge it with tons upon tons of utter drek, that is. > Bill Gates > > General Partner, Micro-Soft ...Upholder of the Rules of Snot-Wrestling, Keeper of the Seal of Simon the Fender-Polisher, Wearer of Pocket Protectors and Thick Glasses, etc., etc. etc. Scary, no? -- Sergej Roytman, All-Around Geek and Linux User ###### From: alex*@*rockvax.rockefeller.edu (Alexandre Pechtchanski) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Organization: Rockefeller University Hospital (GCRC), New York Message-ID: <36d4a9de.359018320@Rockyd> References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.5/32.451 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 26 Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 19:05:54 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.85.24.56 X-Trace: rockyd.rockefeller.edu 919710383 129.85.24.56 (Mon, 22 Feb 1999 14:06:23 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 14:06:23 EDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newscore.univie.ac.at!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.nyu.edu!rockyd.rockefeller.edu!not-for-mail On Mon, 22 Feb 1999 05:27:04 GMT, ftit@engin.umich.edu (Sergej Roytman) wrote: >In article <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com>, >Tim Shoppa wrote: [ snip ] >>AN OPEN LETTER TO HOBBYISTS >> >> February 3, 1976 >> >> By William Henry Gates III [ snip ] >> Almost a year ago, Paul Allen and myself, expecting the >>hobby market to expand, hired Monte Davidoff and developed Altair >>BASIC. Though the initial work took only two months, the three of us >>have spent most of the last year documenting, improving and adding >>features to BASIC. Now we have 4K, 8K, EXTENDED, ROM and DISK BASIC. >>The value of the computer time we have used exceeds $40,000. > >And we want it back, dammit! Didn't he use the time on Harvard's PDP-10 from his student account, which conditions specifically forbid commercial use, and never paid for it? Wasn't it why he was kicked out of Harvard? [ When replying, remove *'s from address ] Alexandre Pechtchanski, Systems Manager, RUH, NY ###### From: fbi.gov@orion-com.com (Joe Thompson) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 00:49:31 -0500 Organization: Orion Computer Consulting Lines: 23 Message-ID: References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36d4a9de.359018320@Rockyd> <7at587$6bd$1@eve.enteract.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: cf.45.12.71 X-Server-Date: 23 Feb 1999 05:48:18 GMT X-Newsreader: MT-NewsWatcher 2.4.4 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.cwix.com!4.1.16.34!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!firehose.mindspring.com!fbi.gov In article , seebs@plethora.net (Peter Seebach) wrote: > In article <7at587$6bd$1@eve.enteract.com>, > David Scheidt wrote: > >This is one of the rumors. I don't think you will get harvard to talk about > >why he left, though. And Bill himself would deny being a thief or a liar. > > Both of them would, and I suspect they'd both happily do it at someone else's > expense without permission. In the US I believe educational institutions are legally forbidden from publically disclosing information about grades or, if a student was expelled, what the reason was for expulsion. Only those with an interest and permission to obtain records (i.e., potential employers or educational institutions, or parties paying for the student's education such as parents or organizations paying scholarships) are permitted to see that data. -- Joe -- Joe Thompson | http://kensey.home.mindspring.com/ fbi.gov@orion-com.com | PGP key: Finger joe-jobs@mindspring.com AFU Axolotl of Scorn | 0- He-Who-Grinds-the-Unworthy "Everybody stare at Rebecca's prowess." -- Cael ###### Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers From: bill@bilver.magicnet.netREMOVETHIS (Bill Vermillion) Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Organization: W.J.Vermillion - Orlando / Winter Park Message-ID: References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 01:52:17 GMT Lines: 54 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newscore.univie.ac.at!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.magicnet.net!bilver.magicnet.net!bill In article <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com>, Tim Shoppa wrote: >David Jacoby wrote: >> >> Years ago, before it was big, Bill Gates wrote an open letter to >> computer hobbyists, in part asking "How do you expect people to >> write commercial-quality programs without pay?" Since Linux and >> FSF have answered that question, I've been looking for this document >> online. But I can't find it. Any pointers? > >From my usenet archives (note that it was "Micro-Soft", not >"Microsoft", at the time): > >AN OPEN LETTER TO HOBBYISTS > > February 3, 1976 > > By William Henry Gates III > > > An Open Letter to Hobbyists > ... > The feedback we have gotten from the hundreds of people who >say they are using BASIC has all been positive. Two surprising things >are apparent, however, 1) Most of these "users" never bought BASIC >(less thank 10% of all Altair owners have bought BASIC), and 2) The >amount of royalties we have received from sales to hobbyists makes the >time spent on Altair BASIC worth less than $2 an hour. > Why is this? As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, >most of you steal your software. Hardware must be paid for, but >software is something to share. Who cares if the people who worked on >it get paid? I remember those days - coming in just a year later. The computer industry wasn't too fond of Gates, after he basically accused all hobbyists of being thieve. As I recall his software was $150 - while many other BASIC's were $50 to $75, and some less. Tiny BASIC in Vol II of Drs.Dobbs was there for the keing in of code at about the same time. A great many people then considered Gates as being someone who was trying to rip them off. He was really po'ed about the copy fest the computer clubs would have to bootleg his software, but I sometimes wonder if he'd priced that in $50 range how many would have become legitimate users. $150 in 1976 was a substantial sum. Or did I remember that figure incorrectly. I remember buying 16K of dynamic RAM for only $300 :-( -- Bill Vermillion bv @ wjv.com ###### From: David Scheidt Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Date: 23 Feb 1999 02:53:59 GMT Organization: EnterAct L.L.C. Turbo-Elite News Server Lines: 13 Message-ID: <7at587$6bd$1@eve.enteract.com> References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> <36d4a9de.359018320@Rockyd> NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.229.143.6 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.enteract.com!news.enteract.com!dscheidt Alexandre Pechtchanski wrote: : Didn't he use the time on Harvard's PDP-10 from his student account, which : conditions specifically forbid commercial use, and never paid for it? Wasn't it : why he was kicked out of Harvard? This is one of the rumors. I don't think you will get harvard to talk about why he left, though. And Bill himself would deny being a thief or a liar. David Scheidt -- dscheidt@enteract.com "[C]ows are extremely mammalian." -- Dr I. A. York ###### From: Dan Strychalski Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Date: 23 Feb 1999 04:56:07 GMT Organization: Cameo Communications, Inc. Lines: 18 Message-ID: <7atcd7$7b7$1@news.seed.net.tw> References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> <36d4a9de.359018320@Rockyd> <7at587$6bd$1@eve.enteract.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.72.104.4 Originator: dski@ Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.cwix.com!204.59.152.222!news-peer.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!spring.edu.tw!feeder.seed.net.tw!news.seed.net.tw!!dski David Scheidt posted -- > Alexandre Pechtchanski wrote: >: Didn't he use the time on Harvard's PDP-10 from his student account, which >: conditions specifically forbid commercial use, and never paid for it? >: Wasn't it why he was kicked out of Harvard? > > This is one of the rumors. I don't think you will get harvard to talk about > why he left, though. And Bill himself would deny being a thief or a liar. The following was my introduction to this matter: http://www.boston.com/globe/metro/packages/harvard/partone.htm Others might find it enlightening as well. Dan "The keystrokes tell all" Strychalski dski at cameonet, cameo, com, tw (no _x_) ###### Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36d4a9de.359018320@Rockyd> <7at587$6bd$1@eve.enteract.com> Organization: Plethora . Net - More net, less spam! X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test70 (17 January 1999) From: seebs@plethora.net (Peter Seebach) Lines: 14 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 05:39:20 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.166.146.8 X-Trace: ptah.visi.com 919748360 205.166.146.8 (Mon, 22 Feb 1999 23:39:20 CDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 23:39:20 CDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!chippy.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!ptah.visi.com!not-for-mail In article <7at587$6bd$1@eve.enteract.com>, David Scheidt wrote: >This is one of the rumors. I don't think you will get harvard to talk about >why he left, though. And Bill himself would deny being a thief or a liar. Both of them would, and I suspect they'd both happily do it at someone else's expense without permission. -s -- Copyright 1999, All rights reserved. Peter Seebach / seebs@plethora.net C/Unix wizard, Pro-commerce radical, Spam fighter. Boycott Spamazon! Will work for interesting hardware. http://www.plethora.net/~seebs/ Visit my new ISP --- More Net, Less Spam! ###### From: genew@shuswap.net (Gene Wirchenko) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 07:31:48 GMT Organization: Okanagan Internet Junction Lines: 55 Message-ID: <36d24350.44841627@news.shuswap.net> References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> Reply-To: genew@shuswap.net NNTP-Posting-Host: salmonarm1-28.shuswap.net X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/32.230 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cyclone.bc.net!felix.junction.net!not-for-mail bill@bilver.magicnet.netREMOVETHIS (Bill Vermillion) wrote: [snip] >> Why is this? As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, >>most of you steal your software. Hardware must be paid for, but >>software is something to share. Who cares if the people who worked on >>it get paid? > >I remember those days - coming in just a year later. The computer >industry wasn't too fond of Gates, after he basically accused all >hobbyists of being thieve. Yes, but he was pretty much correct. During the TRS-80 / Apple II days, I remember the copy fests that went on for software that sold for $20 Can. and less. Speaking with one retailer, he made the comment that his software sales dropped severely after user groups got going. I don't wonder why. One user group said that they were going to give away copies of a text processing program. They apparently meant one that was PD, but used the name "Electric Pencil" in describing it. EP was a commercial program and the software company apparently got word of it. The user group had to retract their statement and state that they weren't referring to illegal copying. I remember the president of the group repeatedly stating their no illegal copying policy in a wink-wink-nudge-nudge tone. He apparently resented having to state that the club didn't tolerate stealing. >As I recall his software was $150 - while many other BASIC's were >$50 to $75, and some less. Tiny BASIC in Vol II of Drs.Dobbs was >there for the keing in of code at about the same time. A great >many people then considered Gates as being someone who was trying >to rip them off. > >He was really po'ed about the copy fest the computer clubs would >have to bootleg his software, but I sometimes wonder if he'd priced >that in $50 range how many would have become legitimate users. I saw many people justify their stealing of *$20* programs. No wonder they were irritated. How would you like it if you were correctly described as being a petty thief? >$150 in 1976 was a substantial sum. Or did I remember that figure >incorrectly. I remember buying 16K of dynamic RAM for only $300 >:-( Sincerely, Gene Wirchenko Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation: I have preferences. You have biases. He/She has prejudices. ###### From: bill_h Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 11:22:58 -0800 Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarQ.com - Discussions start here! Lines: 72 Message-ID: <36D30012.5423@sunsouthwest.com> References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> <36d4a9de.359018320@Rockyd> <7at587$6bd$1@eve.enteract.com> <7atcd7$7b7$1@news.seed.net.tw> Reply-To: bill_h@sunsouthwest.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 169.197.39.31 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: 919794349 W4NEQTDLS271FA9C5C usenet57.supernews.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@remarQ.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (Win16; I) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsgate.cistron.nl!het.net!news.tele2.nl!newsfeed1.swip.net!swipnet!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!remarQ73!supernews.com!remarQ.com!remarQ69!not-for-mail Dan Strychalski wrote: > > David Scheidt posted -- > > > Alexandre Pechtchanski wrote: > >: Didn't he use the time on Harvard's PDP-10 from his student account, which > >: conditions specifically forbid commercial use, and never paid for it? > >: Wasn't it why he was kicked out of Harvard? > > > > This is one of the rumors. I don't think you will get harvard to talk about > > why he left, though. And Bill himself would deny being a thief or a liar. > > The following was my introduction to this matter: > > http://www.boston.com/globe/metro/packages/harvard/partone.htm Well....... This Boston Globe article says Gates HIMSELF put the code he was working on "for a New Mexico company" in the public domain IN ORDER TO AVOID EXPULSION. It appears he was being accused not only of mis-using Harvard equipment, but also Federal funding for it. UNDER OATH ("Affidavit of William Gates.....Comes now William Gates, having been first duly sworn upon his oath, and for his affidavit states:") it appears he told a somewhat different story: "35. Paragraph 6 of the License agreement requires MITS to secure secrecy agreements from all third parties to whom it sells the Basic Program. H. Edward Roberts, President of MITS, unilaterally discontinued using secrecy agreements some time during October or November of 1975 without prior consent from Paul Allen or me. "36. I personally asked Mr. Roberts to continue to use the secrecy agreements but he continued to refuse to employ them. "37. After the secrecy agreements were stopped, I received reports of large scale program swapping of the Basic Program among computer club members, thus diminishing the value of the Basic Program." So, according to this affidavit, signed 9th May 1977, it doesn't appear Basic was "in the public domain", Harvard agreement or no Harvard agreement. But Gates' attorney went a step further. MITS sued over the claims by Gates and Allen upon which they sent (dated 30 April 1977) Notice of Intent to Terminate their licensing agreement. In the "Answer and Counterclaim Answer" dated 16th June 1977, Attorney Mines stated: "Third Defense "Plaintiff MITS by its own actions has publicly disclosed the computer program defined in the license agreement .... and by such action has put such program in the public domain. Plaintiffs are therefore barred, estopped or have waived any right to institue these proceedings". Maybe somebody oughta ring up ol' Ed Roberts and see if HE knew Basic had been placed in the public domain..... BY GATES..... to AVOID EXPULSION!!!!! ###### Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> <36d24350.44841627@news.shuswap.net> Organization: University of Michigan, College of Engineering From: ftit@engin.umich.edu (Sergej Roytman) Lines: 22 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 15:05:14 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 141.212.106.44 X-Trace: srvr1.engin.umich.edu 919782314 141.212.106.44 (Tue, 23 Feb 1999 10:05:14 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 10:05:14 EDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newscore.univie.ac.at!europa.clark.net!205.231.236.10!newspeer.monmouth.com!news.eecs.umich.edu!srvr1.engin.umich.edu!ftit In article <36d24350.44841627@news.shuswap.net>, Gene Wirchenko wrote: >bill@bilver.magicnet.netREMOVETHIS (Bill Vermillion) wrote: >>I remember those days - coming in just a year later. The computer >>industry wasn't too fond of Gates, Hm, what else is new? >> after he basically accused all >>hobbyists of being thieve. > Yes, but he was pretty much correct. During the TRS-80 / Apple >II days, I remember the copy fests that went on for software that sold >for $20 Can. and less. To touch on a different topic (and sort of relate this to the you- can{'t,}-decompile-a-binary thread, what about copy protection? I have heard stories about some clever copy protection schemes and their breaking. Or not-breaking. Any interesting stories from those days that scene? -- Sergej Roytman ###### Message-ID: <36D304CE.4AC9@compuserve.com> Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 11:43:10 -0800 From: Sam Yorko X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: exosecure-symbol.psd.symbol.com X-NNTP-Posting-Host: exosecure-symbol.psd.symbol.com Organization: news://newsread.exodus.net : Crossing the Invisible Line Lines: 13 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newspump.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!news2.best.com!news1.best.com!kiowa.exodus.net!207.82.39.214.MISMATCH!newsread.exodus.net!exosecure-symbol.psd.symbol.com Bill Vermillion wrote: > > As I recall his software was $150 - while many other BASIC's were > $50 to $75, and some less. Tiny BASIC in Vol II of Drs.Dobbs was > there for the keing in of code at about the same time. A great > many people then considered Gates as being someone who was trying > to rip them off. > Wasn't the first issue of Dr Dobbs a one-off that was nothing but a Tiny Basic source, and then it continued on from there on a regular basis? Sam ###### From: dpeschel@u.washington.edu (Derek Peschel) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Date: 23 Feb 1999 21:50:33 GMT Organization: University of Washington, Seattle Lines: 28 Message-ID: <7av7r9$if4$1@nntp1.u.washington.edu> References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <7at587$6bd$1@eve.enteract.com> <7atcd7$7b7$1@news.seed.net.tw> <36D30012.5423@sunsouthwest.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: saul3.u.washington.edu X-Trace: nntp1.u.washington.edu 919806633 18916 (None) 140.142.17.38 X-Complaints-To: help@cac.washington.edu NNTP-Posting-User: dpeschel Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!209.98.98.32.MISMATCH!chippy.visi.com!news-out.visi.com!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!news.u.washington.edu!dpeschel In article <36D30012.5423@sunsouthwest.com>, bill_h wrote: >Dan Strychalski wrote: >> The following was my introduction to this matter: >> >> http://www.boston.com/globe/metro/packages/harvard/partone.htm >Well....... > >This Boston Globe article says Gates HIMSELF put the code he was >working on "for a New Mexico company" in the public domain IN ORDER >TO AVOID EXPULSION. It appears he was being accused not only of >mis-using Harvard equipment, but also Federal funding for it. > >UNDER OATH ("Affidavit of William Gates.....Comes now William Gates, >having been first duly sworn upon his oath, and for his affidavit >states:") it appears he told a somewhat different story: I'm confused. I skimmed the Globe article about Harvard. I don't recall it actually identifying the code which was put into the public domain. Perhaps it was Gates' 8080 simulator which got him in trouble at Harvard, and not BASIC itself? In that case, therre's no contradiction with the affidavit. Where did you get the affidavit? Did I miss something in the Globe article? -- Derek ###### Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers From: bill@bilver.magicnet.netREMOVETHIS (Bill Vermillion) Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Organization: W.J.Vermillion - Orlando / Winter Park Message-ID: References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> <36D304CE.4AC9@compuserve.com> Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 01:42:30 GMT Lines: 34 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!isdnet!howland.erols.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!news.magicnet.net!bilver.magicnet.net!bill In article <36D304CE.4AC9@compuserve.com>, Sam Yorko wrote: >Bill Vermillion wrote: >> As I recall his software was $150 - while many other BASIC's were >> $50 to $75, and some less. Tiny BASIC in Vol II of Drs.Dobbs was >> there for the keing in of code at about the same time. A great >> many people then considered Gates as being someone who was trying >> to rip them off. >Wasn't the first issue of Dr Dobbs a one-off that was nothing but a Tiny >Basic source, and then it continued on from there on a regular basis? It was a compliation of much of the stuff from PCC (I may have a copy or two of that burried deep somewhere). Issue 1, vol 1 is 19 pages long - I just counted. (reprint in the published volume 1). The one that made it understanable for me, becuase of the extended comments was Palo Alto Tiny Basic by Li-Chien Wang. I just noticed something intersting. He predated Stallman as the code has this notice at the top. 10 June, 1976 @copyleft All wrongs reserved. I never noticed that before. -- Bill Vermillion bv @ wjv.com ###### Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers From: eric@fudge.uchicago.edu (Eric Fischer) Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" X-Nntp-Posting-Host: fudge.uchicago.edu Message-ID: Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (News Administrator) X-Newsposter: Pnews 4.0-test51 (15 Jan 97) Organization: The University of Chicago References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> <36D304CE.4AC9@compuserve.com> Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 02:38:28 GMT Lines: 15 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.cwix.com!128.174.5.49!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uchinews!not-for-mail Sam Yorko wrote: > Wasn't the first issue of Dr Dobbs a one-off that was nothing but a Tiny > Basic source, and then it continued on from there on a regular basis? According to the editorial in issue 2, they had originally planned to do three issues and then stop, but public response to the first issue convinced them it should be a continuing series. Of the 16 pages in issue 1, two and a half are source code, two are octal, and the remainder are in English. One page is even an article that's not about Tiny Basic -- it's about using a calculator as a math coprocessor for a computer. eric ###### From: jsavard@ecn.ab.ca () Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Date: 24 Feb 99 03:58:37 GMT Organization: Edmonton Community Network Lines: 20 Message-ID: <36d378ed.0@ecn.ab.ca> References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> <36d4a9de.359018320@Rockyd> <7at587$6bd$1@eve.enteract.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: freenet.edmonton.ab.ca X-Trace: news.sas.ab.ca 919829309 25972 198.161.206.2 (24 Feb 1999 04:08:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@sas.ab.ca NNTP-Posting-Date: 24 Feb 1999 04:08:29 GMT X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2.6] Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newscore.univie.ac.at!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cyclone.bc.net!rover.ucs.ualberta.ca!sas.ab.ca!ecn.ab.ca!jsavard David Scheidt (dscheidt@enteract.com) wrote: : Alexandre Pechtchanski wrote: : : Didn't he use the time on Harvard's PDP-10 from his student account, which : : conditions specifically forbid commercial use, and never paid for it? Wasn't it : : why he was kicked out of Harvard? : This is one of the rumors. I don't think you will get harvard to talk about : why he left, though. And Bill himself would deny being a thief or a liar. I've wondered about that...but if it had any substance, why wouldn't Harvard be interested in suing for, say, a 30% interest in Microsoft? Actually, though, although Mr. Gates may have had some opportunities not everyone had, I'd be more inclined to call this showing initiative than theft. But then, while I think that it *is* wrong to take advantage of people who produce creative works under the encouragement our copyright laws provide, I don't think the term "theft" is precisely appropriate for that either. John Savard ###### Message-ID: <36D3805D.E37A44F6@home.com> From: Ed Thelen Reply-To: ethelen@home.com Organization: @Home Network X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.05 [en]C-AtHome0402 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 122 Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 04:30:41 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.1.72.212 X-Complaints-To: abuse@home.net X-Trace: news.rdc1.sfba.home.com 919830641 24.1.72.212 (Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:30:41 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:30:41 PDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp.abs.net!newshub2.home.com!newshub1.home.com!news.home.com!news.rdc1.sfba.home.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Thanks for the view of "the letter" (below) I notice a lot of animosity in many follow-up posts Here is (a little of) my experience - I was a regular at the Home Brew Club near Palo Alto, CA in the '70s - about the time "the letter" came out, it was regarded as a public service to copy software and give the copies to other people - someone had (8?) paper tape copies of BASIC (for Hp2100 or MITS or ???) and said he would give a copy to anyone who would make more copies and bring them to the next meeting - in the spirit of public service, I promised, and got a copy. The paper tape was a spool about 5" in diameter. Went to my employer's computer and used "his" tape and made 5 copies. - took the 5 copies back to the next meeting and made the same announcement - however, I was shocked by the people that rushed over, mobbed me, and even stole my "original". I felt violated - raped - and made a fool of - no one else had brought any tapes. - the public service fad seemed to have died in a burst of red eyed lust and give-me-a-free-tape feeding frenzy. I never provided free copies to strangers again. - I now try to reward those who spend their time doing shareware - and even commercial ware. I feel guilty that I have never contributed to those kind people that did gnu projects. Been there, done that Ed Thelen P.S. I wish Linux well. My son helped port it over to the PowerPC. However, somebody eventually has to pay for the pizza, beer, and electricity (maybe even the phone, car, server and apartment). If nobody gets paid for software, most people I know will go on welfare or beg or pick grapes, or ...) The server for gnu.org is "Connection refused" right now as I write. :-( Tim Shoppa wrote: > > David Jacoby wrote: > > > > Years ago, before it was big, Bill Gates wrote an open letter to > > computer hobbyists, in part asking "How do you expect people to > > write commercial-quality programs without pay?" Since Linux and > > FSF have answered that question, I've been looking for this document > > online. But I can't find it. Any pointers? > > From my usenet archives (note that it was "Micro-Soft", not > "Microsoft", at the time): > > AN OPEN LETTER TO HOBBYISTS > > February 3, 1976 > > By William Henry Gates III > > An Open Letter to Hobbyists > > To me, the most critical thing in the hobby market right now > is the lack of good software courses, books and software itself. > Without good software and an owner who understands programming, a > hobby computer is wasted. Will quality software be written for the > hobby market? > > Almost a year ago, Paul Allen and myself, expecting the > hobby market to expand, hired Monte Davidoff and developed Altair > BASIC. Though the initial work took only two months, the three of us > have spent most of the last year documenting, improving and adding > features to BASIC. Now we have 4K, 8K, EXTENDED, ROM and DISK BASIC. > The value of the computer time we have used exceeds $40,000. > > The feedback we have gotten from the hundreds of people who > say they are using BASIC has all been positive. Two surprising things > are apparent, however, 1) Most of these "users" never bought BASIC > (less thank 10% of all Altair owners have bought BASIC), and 2) The > amount of royalties we have received from sales to hobbyists makes the > time spent on Altair BASIC worth less than $2 an hour. > > Why is this? As the majority of hobbyists must be aware, > most of you steal your software. Hardware must be paid for, but > software is something to share. Who cares if the people who worked on > it get paid? > > Is this fair? One thing you don't do by stealing software is > get back at MITS for some problem you may have had. MITS doesn't make > money selling software. The royalty paid to us, the manual, the tape > and the overhead make it a break-even operation. One thing you do do > is prevent good software from being written. Who can afford to do > professional work for nothing? What hobbyist can put 3-man years into > programming, finding all bugs, documenting his product and distribute > for free? The fact is, no one besides us has invested a lot of money > in hobby software. We have written 6800 BASIC, and are writing 8080 > APL and 6800 APL, but there is very little incentive to make this > software available to hobbyists. Most directly, the thing you do is > theft. > > What about the guys who re-sell Altair BASIC, aren't they > making money on hobby software? Yes, but those who have been reported > to us may lose in the end. They are the ones who give hobbyists a bad > name, and should be kicked out of any club meeting they show up at. > > I would appreciate letters from any one who wants to pay up, > or has a suggestion or comment. Just write to me at 1180 Alvarado SE, > #114, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 87108. Nothing would please me more > than being able to hire ten programmers and deluge the hobby market > with good software. > > Bill Gates > > General Partner, Micro-Soft ###### From: bill_h Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 07:06:17 -0800 Organization: Posted via RemarQ, http://www.remarQ.com - Discussions start here! Lines: 55 Message-ID: <36D41569.307F@sunsouthwest.com> References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <7at587$6bd$1@eve.enteract.com> <7atcd7$7b7$1@news.seed.net.tw> <36D30012.5423@sunsouthwest.com> <7av7r9$if4$1@nntp1.u.washington.edu> Reply-To: bill_h@sunsouthwest.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 169.197.33.98 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: 919866105 W4NEQTDLS2162A9C5C usenet54.supernews.com X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@remarQ.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.04Gold (Win16; I) Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!isdnet!logbridge.uoregon.edu!remarQ73!supernews.com!remarQ.com!remarQ69!not-for-mail Derek Peschel wrote: > > In article <36D30012.5423@sunsouthwest.com>, > bill_h wrote: > >Dan Strychalski wrote: > > >> The following was my introduction to this matter: > >> > >> http://www.boston.com/globe/metro/packages/harvard/partone.htm > > >Well....... > > > >This Boston Globe article says Gates HIMSELF put the code he was > >working on "for a New Mexico company" in the public domain IN ORDER > >TO AVOID EXPULSION. It appears he was being accused not only of > >mis-using Harvard equipment, but also Federal funding for it. > > > >UNDER OATH ("Affidavit of William Gates.....Comes now William Gates, > >having been first duly sworn upon his oath, and for his affidavit > >states:") it appears he told a somewhat different story: > > I'm confused. I skimmed the Globe article about Harvard. I don't recall it > actually identifying the code which was put into the public domain. Perhaps > it was Gates' 8080 simulator which got him in trouble at Harvard, and not > BASIC itself? In that case, therre's no contradiction with the affidavit. I guess you have to rely on the many accounts of what happened - the tape loader may have been written on the way to MITS, but the actual Basic code was done at Harvard. Also, I think I read Paul Allen did the 8080 emulation. I have a large collection of every book I can find about the evolution of the personal computer (I'm still looking for Forrest Mim's book - "Siliconnections" - if anybody has one....). It helps to put various "versions" side by side. Not necessarily that somebody isn't telling the truth, but it helps to illuminate the frequently totally differing points of view. > Where did you get the affidavit? Did I miss something in the Globe article? I spent about three hours in the basement of the Bernalillo County Courthouse fighting with a recalcitrant microfilm machine, at 40 cents a page, making a copy of everything MITSian...... Can you believe they THREW AWAY the papers, including a number of now famous signatures? What a loss of artifacts! Bill Tucson ###### From: korpela@islay.ssl.berkeley.edu (Eric J. Korpela) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Date: 24 Feb 1999 18:18:04 GMT Organization: Cal Berkeley-- Space Sciences Lab Lines: 25 Message-ID: <7b1fos$cgb$1@agate.berkeley.edu> References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36d4a9de.359018320@Rockyd> <7at587$6bd$1@eve.enteract.com> <36d378ed.0@ecn.ab.ca> NNTP-Posting-Host: islay.ssl.berkeley.edu Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!masternews.telia.net!feed2.news.luth.se!luth.se!news-peer-europe.sprintlink.net!Sprint!news-peer1.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!agate!islay.ssl.berkeley.edu!korpela In article <36d378ed.0@ecn.ab.ca>, wrote: >Actually, though, although Mr. Gates may have had some opportunities not >everyone had, I'd be more inclined to call this showing initiative than >theft. Basically, if a computer owned by the government or the university is used to develop software, that software belongs to the university or the government. Every bit of code I write on the machines at work gets a "Copyright 1999, UC Regents" put on it (should they desire the protection). Things that I write at home are mine. If I showed Mr. Gates' type of initiative, there would be big trouble. > But then, while I think that it *is* wrong to take advantage of >people who produce creative works under the encouragement our copyright >laws provide, I don't think the term "theft" is precisely appropriate for >that either. Apparently, in the view of Mr. Gate, it's not theft when he steals, only when others do so. It surely shows how the "entreprenuer" got its name. Eric -- Eric Korpela | An object at rest can never be korpela@ssl.berkeley.edu | stopped. Click for home page. ###### Message-ID: <36D47E86.54C0@compuserve.com> Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 14:34:46 -0800 From: Sam Yorko X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01Gold (WinNT; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> <36d24350.44841627@news.shuswap.net> <1dnqyv3.zxdgxxppk8qoN@usr244-edi.cableinet.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: exosecure-symbol.psd.symbol.com X-NNTP-Posting-Host: exosecure-symbol.psd.symbol.com Organization: news://newsread.exodus.net : Crossing the Invisible Line Lines: 42 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newspump.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!news.idt.net!kiowa.exodus.net!207.82.39.214.MISMATCH!newsread.exodus.net!exosecure-symbol.psd.symbol.com Lars Duening wrote: > > Sergej Roytman wrote: > > > To touch on a different topic (and sort of relate this to the you- > > can{'t,}-decompile-a-binary thread, what about copy protection? I have > > heard stories about some clever copy protection schemes and their > > breaking. Or not-breaking. Any interesting stories from those days > > that scene? > > I wonder if anybody is bold enough to admit in public that he/she broke > copy protections :-) I am. Had to; the company that I worked for was making "IBM-compatible" computers that were not 100% IBM compatible. Invariably, it was the copy protection scheme that gave us the most fits. I would have to use an Intel ICE and look through the code to find out what the problem was. Let's see: there was the scheme that burned a hole into the floppy in a random place, and then check to make sure that the area was still unwritable. Another scheme mixed up the order of the sectors in a track, and then checked to make sure that the sectors were still in that order by timing the delay between sectors. Another took advantage of the software single-step feature of the chip to scramble the order of instruction execution (the single-step monitor would take the instruction pointer, and throw it through an algorithm to get the real next IP). Then, if you want to talk dongles; I found one program that accessed this big super-complex dongle (from Rainbow Technologies) to verify that the dongle was present; the problem was, it only checked for existance at the beginning, and then never again, so if the check at the beginning was defeated, the program would run. Another program used a dongle as a hasher for access to it's internal parts catalogs; the program would take it's reference number and run it through the dongle hasher to get the catalog index. It turned out that the dongle was nothing more than two chips (we X-Rayed it), and I figured out it was nothing more than a 7486 and a 6 bit shift register connected as a CRC generator, and wrote a program that would try out all possible CRC algorithms to get the correct connections. That's all I remember for now..... Sam ###### From: lars@bearnip.com (Lars Duening) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 22:08:50 +0100 Organization: Federation of Independent Wizards Lines: 18 Message-ID: <1dnqyv3.zxdgxxppk8qoN@usr244-edi.cableinet.co.uk> References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> <36d24350.44841627@news.shuswap.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: usr244-edi.cableinet.co.uk X-Trace: news1.cableinet.co.uk 919894012 5161 194.117.152.18 (24 Feb 1999 22:06:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@cableinet.net NNTP-Posting-Date: 24 Feb 1999 22:06:52 GMT User-Agent: MacSOUP/2.4 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!newsfeed.wirehub.nl!newspeer.clara.net!news.clara.net!news5.cableinet.net!cableinet-uk!news1.cableinet.co.uk!lars Sergej Roytman wrote: > In article <36d24350.44841627@news.shuswap.net>, > Gene Wirchenko wrote: > > Yes, but he was pretty much correct. During the TRS-80 / Apple > >II days, I remember the copy fests that went on for software that sold > >for $20 Can. and less. > > To touch on a different topic (and sort of relate this to the you- > can{'t,}-decompile-a-binary thread, what about copy protection? I have > heard stories about some clever copy protection schemes and their > breaking. Or not-breaking. Any interesting stories from those days > that scene? I wonder if anybody is bold enough to admit in public that he/she broke copy protections :-) -- Lars Duening; lars@bearnip.com ###### From: Mike Swaim Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> <36d24350.44841627@news.shuswap.net> <1dnqyv3.zxdgxxppk8qoN@usr244-edi.cableinet.co.uk> Organization: PointeCom User-Agent: tin/pre-1.4-980818 ("Laura") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/2.2.8-RELEASE (i386)) Lines: 20 Message-ID: <9o%A2.11128$yv3.6956@news2.giganews.com> Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 22:51:49 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.127.0.130 X-Trace: news2.giganews.com 919896709 209.127.0.130 (Wed, 24 Feb 1999 16:51:49 CDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 16:51:49 CDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!newscore.univie.ac.at!howland.erols.net!news-out.digex.net.MISMATCH!dca1-hub1.news.digex.net!digex!nntp.giganews.com!news2.giganews.com.POSTED!gemini.c-com.net!swaim Lars Duening wrote: : Sergej Roytman wrote: :> To touch on a different topic (and sort of relate this to the you- :> can{'t,}-decompile-a-binary thread, what about copy protection? I have :> heard stories about some clever copy protection schemes and their :> breaking. Or not-breaking. Any interesting stories from those days :> that scene? : I wonder if anybody is bold enough to admit in public that he/she broke : copy protections :-) I wasn't directly involved, but some friends of mine in High School got copies of Ultima ][ that they'd run by bloading it into memory, and then jumping to a spot in memory. Towards the end of my career there, they'd figured out the memory locations of their characters' attributes, and started playing with them. Most of the characters had flashing names. -- Mike Swaim, Avatar of Chaos: Disclaimer:I sometimes lie. Home: swaim@c-com.net Alum: swaim@alumni.rice.edu Quote: "Boingie"^4 Y,W&D ###### From: bhahn@spam-spam.go-away.com (Brendan Hahn) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Message-ID: References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> <36d24350.44841627@news.shuswap.net> <1dnqyv3.zxdgxxppk8qoN@usr244-edi.cableinet.co.uk> Organization: Transoft Corp Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Reply-To: bhahn@transoft.mangle.net (unmangle address to reply) X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.4.0 Lines: 55 Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 01:43:16 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.180.87.35 NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 17:43:16 PDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!netnews1.nw.verio.net!netnews.nwnet.net!nnrp2.ni.net!not-for-mail lars@bearnip.com (Lars Duening) wrote: >Sergej Roytman wrote: >> To touch on a different topic (and sort of relate this to the you- >> can{'t,}-decompile-a-binary thread, what about copy protection? I have >> heard stories about some clever copy protection schemes and their >> breaking. Or not-breaking. Any interesting stories from those days >> that scene? > >I wonder if anybody is bold enough to admit in public that he/she broke >copy protections :-) Sure, why not? Strictly for personal archive purposes, of course. Actually I never broke anything very fancy--my favorite was always reverse-engineering games so I could make myself invincible, edit scenes, etc. There's a lot in common between the two, though, not least that doing the crack or the edit was often more fun than playing the game itself. The last crack I did was a couple of years ago for the game Marathon (technically uninteresting--just a registration code thing) and I still haven't played past the first level. I found myself recalling those old days not too long ago. A certain major developer of specialized application software was preparing a new release of their main package. This company is also in the business of reselling OEM hardware, both as integrated systems and as add-ons for their software customers. A big part of our business was providing similar hardware setups to these software users. Turned out a new feature of the next release was an extensive system of hardware "validation"--provided, of course, to ensure that users didn't suffer any difficulties due to inferior or otherwise unqualified hardware. Would the company qualify our hardware? No. Would they provide the criteria, or otherwise explain why not? No. Was there any possible thing we could do to achieve this state of grace? No. They were quite hostile about it, actually. Nothing else for it--crank up the disassembler! Actually there was more to it than that: I had all the hardware drivers, so I could make versions that traced all the software activity, interrupted at interesting points, and so on. Most of the job was working backwards from disassembly printouts, though. I was fortunate to have a beta copy of the software that didn't seem to have undergone heavy optimization. That was offset by the inconvenience of being unable to step or place breakpoints in the running code; the software installed its own exception handlers over the system debugger hooks, so the only way I could get a look at it in action was to invoke the debugger directly from one of my drivers and go back up the stack. I suppose with enough frustration, I would have worked out how to repatch the exception vectors, but it turned out not to be necessary. The disassembly was enough for us to fake out the validation system from our software. The interesting thing was, I was in the middle of this--late at night, staring at the system monitor, pages of marked-up assembly code everywhere--and it suddenly struck me: "Damn--this is exactly like cracking Ultima V". And it was, the technique was identical. It was nice to feel my misspent youth hadn't been *completely* in vain. bhahn@transoft.mangle.net <-- unmangle to reply ###### From: "AndyC" Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 14:41:22 -0000 Organization: University of East Anglia, Norwich, Norfolk, NR47TJ, UK Lines: 12 Message-ID: <7b3nir$b3j@cpca3.uea.ac.uk> References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> <36d24350.44841627@news.shuswap.net> <1dnqyv3.zxdgxxppk8qoN@usr244-edi.cableinet.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: oak6d.vlg1.uea.ac.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 4.72.3110.5 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3110.3 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!enews.sgi.com!newsfeed.berkeley.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!rill.news.pipex.net!pipex!server1.netnews.ja.net!cpca3.uea.ac.uk!news Lars Duening wrote in message <1dnqyv3.zxdgxxppk8qoN@usr244-edi.cableinet.co.uk>... :I wonder if anybody is bold enough to admit in public that he/she broke :copy protections :-) Well I removed the protection on Jet Set Willy. Does that count? AndyC ###### From: lars@bearnip.com (Lars Duening) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 01:42:08 +0100 Organization: Federation of Independent Wizards Lines: 65 Message-ID: <1dnt2cm.1admjcm1fndofmN@usr286-edi.cableinet.co.uk> References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> <36d24350.44841627@news.shuswap.net> <1dnqyv3.zxdgxxppk8qoN@usr244-edi.cableinet.co.uk> NNTP-Posting-Host: usr286-edi.cableinet.co.uk X-Trace: news1.cableinet.co.uk 919993206 4519 194.117.152.60 (26 Feb 1999 01:40:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@cableinet.net NNTP-Posting-Date: 26 Feb 1999 01:40:06 GMT User-Agent: MacSOUP/2.4 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!newsfeed-zh.ip-plus.net!news.ip-plus.net!News.Amsterdam.UnisourceCS!skynet.be!news.belnet.be!news-raspail.gip.net!news-lond.gip.net!news.gsl.net!gip.net!diablo.theplanet.net!news5.cableinet.net!cableinet-uk!news1.cableinet.co.uk!lars Brendan Hahn wrote: > lars@bearnip.com (Lars Duening) wrote: > >Sergej Roytman wrote: > >> To touch on a different topic (and sort of relate this to the you- > >> can{'t,}-decompile-a-binary thread, what about copy protection? I have > >> heard stories about some clever copy protection schemes and their > >> breaking. Or not-breaking. Any interesting stories from those days > >> that scene? > > > >I wonder if anybody is bold enough to admit in public that he/she broke > >copy protections :-) > > Sure, why not? Strictly for personal archive purposes, of course. > Actually I never broke anything very fancy--my favorite was always > reverse-engineering games so I could make myself invincible, edit scenes, > etc. *smile* long ago, in my underage Apple-][ years, I too did the occasional crack. Not many, and they never left my machine. I also found the mere cracking of a protection pretty boring, so I went a step further and tried to put the program into normal DOS files. That, or extracting the flashy intro from the boring main program into a standalone binary. But that too became boring after a while - writing my own programs was much more fun :-) I vividly remember how I tackled Archon II, and how this program nearly defeated me. After the usual bootstrap phase it used not one, but two virtual machines to do the initialisation and check the copy protection. Furthermore the bytecodes were dynamically masked: the currently executed instruction determined how to demask the next. And the copy protection (it tried to read a specially formatted halftrack) was somewhere in this mess. But I was lucky: somehow, and up to today I don't know how, I found a vm instruction which just incremented a memory location. And it was this memory location where the copy protection code counted its number of failures to read that halftrack. I just had to deactivate that increment and I was done. The program still tried to read that halftrack, but it didn't matter anymore. Archon II also contained the fastest disk reading routine I have ever seen on the Apple. Oh boy, that one was _really_ fast. And one day I also took a look at Karateka - I never went past those first looks, but Karateka was impressive. Not only did the program use almost all of the disk - even in memory it was so big that it couldn't keep its own disk routines loaded. The solution was quite ingenious: after loading one part of the program, the disk head was settled on a certain track of the disk. This track contained a bootstrap loader for the disk routines, so when it was time to load the next part of the program, it copied the bootrom, deactivated the track recalibration in the copy and then performed an almost normal bootstrap with it. > [...] > The interesting thing was, I was in the middle of this--late at night, > staring at the system monitor, pages of marked-up assembly code > everywhere--and it suddenly struck me: "Damn--this is exactly like cracking > Ultima V". And it was, the technique was identical. It was nice to feel > my misspent youth hadn't been *completely* in vain. Mhm, I also don't think that the time spent on that is wasted. Even though I never tried nor wanted to break any program ever since, I find that the techniques and a kind of acquired intuition come in handy when dealing with dodgy code. -- Lars Duening; lars@bearnip.com ###### From: jvarela@mind.spring.com (John Varela) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Date: 26 Feb 1999 02:16:13 GMT Organization: MindSpring Enterprises Lines: 13 Message-ID: References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> <36d24350.44841627@news.shuswap.net> <1dnqyv3.zxdgxxppk8qoN@usr244-edi.cableinet.co.uk Reply-To: jvarela@mind.spring.com NNTP-Posting-Host: cf.45.27.fd Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Newsreader: ProNews/2 Version 1.00 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.maxwell.syr.edu!cpk-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!firehose.mindspring.com!not-for-mail On Wed, 24 Feb 1999 21:08:50, lars@bearnip.com (Lars Duening) wrote: > I wonder if anybody is bold enough to admit in public that he/she broke > copy protections :-) I had a copy of Microsoft "Original Adventure" for the TRS-80 and wanted to make a back-up copy, but couldn't because the protection scheme used a non-standard diskette format. I cracked that by figuring out the formatting and then duplicating it. But just so I could make a back-up. -- John Varela (delete . between mind and spring to e-mail me) ###### From: gleason@mwk.com (Lee K. Gleason) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Message-ID: Date: 26 Feb 99 08:29:12 CST References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <1dnt2cm.1admjcm1fndofmN@usr286-edi.cableinet.co.uk> Reply-To: gleason at mwk.com Organization: Control-G Consultants Lines: 24 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!feed2.news.luth.se!luth.se!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!atl-news-feed1.bbnplanet.com!news.gtei.net!mwk!gleason In article <1dnt2cm.1admjcm1fndofmN@usr286-edi.cableinet.co.uk>, lars@bearnip.com (Lars Duening) writes: > > Mhm, I also don't think that the time spent on that is wasted. Even > though I never tried nor wanted to break any program ever since, I find > that the techniques and a kind of acquired intuition come in handy when > dealing with dodgy code. I spent many an hour learning to reverse engineer VAX/VMS code, working on the Dungeon game, learning how to disable the light going out, figuring out how to access the Game Debugging Tool, and the like. Years later this experience was invaluable in dealing with a vendor who was adamant that a problem we were experiencing with their product was caused by our environment, rahter than their code...the same methods I had used to look at subroutine calls in Dungeon enabled me to tell them that Fortran subroutine FLOW_GAS was missing an argument when called from routine CALCPRESS...they were taken aback, and wanted to know where I learned to do that...I told 'em it was a long time ago, in the land of Zork. Lee K. Gleason N5ZMR Control-G Consultants gleason@mwk.com ###### From: slavins.at.hearsay.demon.co.uk@localhost (Simon Slavin) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 21:57:00 +0000 Organization: First Sirian Bank Message-ID: References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> <36d24350.44841627@news.shuswap.net> <1dnqyv3.zxdgxxppk8qoN@usr244-edi.cableinet.co.uk> <36D47E86.54C0@compuserve.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: hearsay.demon.co.uk X-NNTP-Posting-Host: hearsay.demon.co.uk:194.222.24.177 X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 920152610 nnrp-07:19425 NO-IDENT hearsay.demon.co.uk:194.222.24.177 X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net Lines: 43 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!bofh.vszbr.cz!dispose.news.demon.net!demon!news.demon.co.uk!demon!hearsay.demon.co.uk!user In article <36D47E86.54C0@compuserve.com>, Sam Yorko wrote: > Lars Duening wrote: > > > I wonder if anybody is bold enough to admit in public that he/she broke > > copy protections :-) > > I am. Me too. But in those days I was still in school. We learned lots about machine-code by cracking the copy-protection on several games for the BBC micro. The bit I liked was that we never saw the same copy-protection method twice: every company seemed to have developed its own system and none of them worked. By far the most popular method found depended on rendering one sector of a floppy disk unwritable, usually by physical means. To simulate this we patched the drive writing routines so that they would do something non-standard when told to write to that sector. Occasionally we found some kind of thing we just couldn't work out and this eventually forced us to patch the keyboard handler so that a key-combination dumped memory (all 20k of it !) and chip-state to disk. It's very difficult to write a routine that dumps the PC, the stack-pointer, and all the accumulators when that routine isn't allowed to store values in any of the value-holders it's dumping ! Okay, so it was unethical. But because we knew we'd all be able to play the game we were happy to form a club and buy one copy of lots of different games. And learning machine-code when you're still in school does tend to force you to work really hard at understanding computing -- my A-Level project was a disassembler but I doubt my teacher understood why it was almost complete so quickly. Simon. -- No junk email please. Simon. Simon. -- No junk email please. | What a story ! | I can't wait to embellish it. | -- Elaine from _Ally McBeal_ ###### From: lars@bearnip.com (Lars Duening) Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 14:39:55 +0100 Organization: Federation of Independent Wizards Lines: 40 Message-ID: <1dnx0se.oufqa41ea8zy8N@usr276-edi.cableinet.co.uk> References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> <36d24350.44841627@news.shuswap.net> <1dnqyv3.zxdgxxppk8qoN@usr244-edi.cableinet.co.uk> <36D47E86.54C0@compuserve.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: usr276-edi.cableinet.co.uk X-Trace: news1.cableinet.co.uk 920212665 23334 194.117.152.50 (28 Feb 1999 14:37:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@cableinet.net NNTP-Posting-Date: 28 Feb 1999 14:37:45 GMT User-Agent: MacSOUP/2.4 Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!news.belnet.be!news-feed.inet.tele.dk!bofh.vszbr.cz!newsfeed.nacamar.de!newsfeed.nacamar.de!nntp.news.xara.net!xara.net!news5.cableinet.net!cableinet-uk!news1.cableinet.co.uk!lars Simon Slavin wrote: > By far the most popular method found depended on rendering one > sector of a floppy disk unwritable, usually by physical means. Didn't that method die out after it was found that the damaged parts of the disk tended to wear down the r/w heads? But you just reminded me of one neat copy protection I found on one Apple disk. It looked like a normal disk - you could read it, write it, no half tracks, no damaged sectors. And yet the program would run when booted from a copy only if the copy was made with one of the nibble copiers. The protection used the fact that Apple DOS stored to disk's volume number in every sector. Usually, every sector on one disk has the same volume number, but, you guess it, on this particular disk each sector's volume number was different. Normal (non-nibble) disk copiers didn't check for this and produced copies with equal volume numbers in every sector. I can imagine that this protection was quite efficient against the casual coporate pirate (you know, department head buying one copy for n employees) while costing hardly anything to implement. > And learning machine-code when you're still in > school does tend to force you to work really hard at understanding > computing -- my A-Level project was a disassembler but I doubt my > teacher understood why it was almost complete so quickly. At least you got to do a project where you could use your knowledge. For my friends and me there was just a voluntary 'work group', supported but not graded by our school. I tried to compensate by entering one of my programs into a nationwide 'computer science at schools' programming competition. Bloody lusers - I had to call them to find out how I scored (not very good, but they didn't tell my why - I can just guess that for the jury a disk editor was not educational enough) and that it might be a good idea to send the disk and manual back to me. -- Lars Duening; lars@bearnip.com ###### Message-ID: <36DB277F.FFF80C1F@flash.net> From: Richard Lamb Reply-To: lamb01@flash.net Organization: Earth X-Sender: "Richard Lamb" (Unverified) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en]C-FLASHNET (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers Subject: Re: "Open Letter to Hobbyists" References: <7apk0t$6ml$1@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> <36D014C6.13E456C@trailing-edge.com> <36D304CE.4AC9@compuserve.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 39 Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 23:39:51 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 209.30.91.56 X-Complaints-To: abuse@flash.net X-Trace: news.flash.net 920331591 209.30.91.56 (Mon, 01 Mar 1999 17:39:51 CDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 17:39:51 CDT Path: chonsp.franklin.ch!pfaff.ethz.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!news-ge.switch.ch!feed2.news.luth.se!luth.se!news-peer-europe.sprintlink.net!Sprint!news-peer1.sprintlink.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.maxwell.syr.edu!nntp.flash.net!news.flash.net!not-for-mail I've got a copy of that here... What assembler will work on it??? Bill Vermillion wrote: > > In article <36D304CE.4AC9@compuserve.com>, > Sam Yorko wrote: > >Bill Vermillion wrote: > > >> As I recall his software was $150 - while many other BASIC's were > >> $50 to $75, and some less. Tiny BASIC in Vol II of Drs.Dobbs was > >> there for the keing in of code at about the same time. A great > >> many people then considered Gates as being someone who was trying > >> to rip them off. > > >Wasn't the first issue of Dr Dobbs a one-off that was nothing but a Tiny > >Basic source, and then it continued on from there on a regular basis? > > It was a compliation of much of the stuff from PCC (I may have a > copy or two of that burried deep somewhere). > > Issue 1, vol 1 is 19 pages long - I just counted. (reprint in the > published volume 1). > > The one that made it understanable for me, becuase of the extended > comments was Palo Alto Tiny Basic by Li-Chien Wang. > > I just noticed something intersting. He predated Stallman as the > code has this notice at the top. > > 10 June, 1976 > @copyleft > All wrongs reserved. > > I never noticed that before. > > -- > Bill Vermillion bv @ wjv.com