Well, it’s new but has a long history behind. Tomorrow, July 1, 2009, Classilla will be released. Classilla is a modern browser that should run on Mac OS 8.6-9.2.2. A brief FAQ is available here.

For more information, I decided to go to the source and write to Cameron Kaiser, the mind behind the project. He graciously replied and provided some clarifications:

Essentially, Classilla is an update to Mac WaMCoM (but you can’t download it from there anymore — see the googlecode site to get it if you want to play with it). It updates the layout engine and fixes several core bugs, and for the next version it will have JavaScript updates as well (right now the JS is at best basic, though much quicker than InScript in iCab).

Mac WaMCoM was based on Mozilla 1.3.1, after which OS 9 support ended. Because Classilla no longer corresponds to a particular Mozilla release despite being based almost completely on Mozilla code, it uses its own layout track named Clecko (instead of Gecko). If you forced me to say, I would call Classilla 9.0 roughly equivalent to Mozilla 1.6 (Firefox 1.0), but there are some bugs in Classilla that Firefox 1 does not have, and conversely some patches from as late as Moz 1.8 (FF 1.5) are also landed, so it is really a distinct engine despite its origins.

This version is deliberately unfinished because there is no source for WaMCoM anymore, so I assigned an arbitrary deadline of July 1st to myself to get an update out. It should be considered in that light. I think people will find the improvements noticeable, but no miracles should be expected from Classilla for awhile, and it still has a number of bugs.

The version numbers, by the way, are based on OS 9 releases. So the next one will be 9.0.4, and then 9.1, etc.

I’m looking forward to try Classilla on my original blueberry iBook G3 clamshell (with Mac OS 9.2.2) and PowerMac 9500 (with Mac OS 9.1). If I’m not completely drowned by work, expect a brief review in the following days. I’m really glad something is still moving in pre-Mac OS X land.

One of the few Newton developers still active, Eckhart Köppen, has taken the initiative to find a solution to fix this nasty bug that threatens to seriously undermine the health of our ‘evergreen’ Newton from next January 1, 2010.

After publishing a diagnostic software (Y2010 Diagnostic) a couple of months ago, on May 24 Eckhart announced in the NewtonTalk mailing list that he had prepared a proper system patch, called Patch 71J059, which should resolve the issue. (At the moment the patch only works with US-language MessagePad 2100s.)

Needless to say I’m amazed by Eckhart’s technical skills — he has practically done everything by himself. Several members of the NewtonTalk list have already installed the patch successfully, and for now there appears to be no problem whatsoever. Someone has even managed to install it on a MessagePad 2000. My MessagePad 2100 patch version is 710031, so I will have to downgrade first, but the process is extremely simple. Now 2010 is a little less scary for those who still own, use and love this historical PDA which doesn’t want to retire. As I often say, the Newton community is truly extraordinary and resourceful — even now, more than 11 years after the Newton has been officially discontinued. And I am really happy to be a part of it.

The August 1998 issue of MacFormat UK has a nice table with a timeline detailing the circa four-year interval when Mac OS was actually licensed to third-party manufacturers. I’m posting this as a sort of personal digital backup, more than anything. Anyway, I didn’t remember the clone period to have lasted so long. That’s why history is useful.

December 1994
Apple announces first Mac OS licence, awarded to Power Computing.

January 1995
Radius shows VideoVision Workstation prototype in public. DayStar Digital to make multi-processing Genesis MP.

February 1995
Pioneer announces desktop Macs for Japan.

April 1995
Power Computing is the first firm to offer clones for sale in US.

August 1995
Radius is first to offer clones for sale in UK.

September 1995
Parts shortages said to be restricting further licensees from signing up.

November 1995
Umax announces desktop Macs. CHRP (Common Hardware Reference Platform) officially launched; firms planning machines include Apple, IBM, Motorola, Power Computing and Umax.

February 1996
Motorola acquires sub-licensing rights and announces desktop Macs. Gil Amelio becomes Apple’s CEO. Research indicates that clones account for 10% of US Mac sales.

April 1996
Apple announces biggest-ever quarterly loss of $740 million.

May 1996
IBM acquires sub-licensing rights.

September 1996
Akia announces desktop and portable Macs in Japan.

November 1996
Spring launches announced for CHRP machines from Motorola and Umax.

December 1996
Apple’s purchase of NeXT Software returns Steve Jobs to Apple.

March 1997
Computer Warehouse launches desktop Mac range in UK. Vertegri Research announces portable Macs for US.

April 1997
Apple announces quarterly loss of $708 million. MacFormat 50’s round-up shows that 50 Mac models are on sale in UK.

June 1997
Research indicates that clones account for 25% of US Mac sales. CHRP machines now due for autumn; Motorola’s StarMax Pro 6000 announced. Motorola claims licence extensions agreed in principle.

July 1997
Gil Amelio… er, resigns; Steve Jobs adopts more prominent role.

August 1997
Apple buys back Power Computing’s Mac licence. Motorola postpones StarMax 6000 launch as licence discussions heat up.

October 1997
Licence talks fall apart; Motorola withdraws from Mac market and ends sub-licensing. IBM ends sub-licensing. Umax granted six-month extension.

December 1997
Motorola, Power Computing licences expire; all machines are sold out.

June 1998
Umax licence expires; other firms’ stocks dwindling.

Notes:
Other licensees included Gravis and US dealers APS Technologies, MacTell and PowerTools.

The Macs we never saw: firms which announced licenses but never produced machines include Acorn, Datatech, Everex, Redbox, Sonnet, Soyo and Tatung.

My vintage writing corner

With regard to creative writing, I can say that Internet has ruined my life. Up to 1999-2000, my production (poems, short stories, two novels — a short one and a longer, more complex one) had been quite prolific and without serious writer’s blocks. Then the Web, electronic mail, newsgroups, etc., began a slow but inexorable erosion process: of my time, my energies, my ability to concentrate on a story and forget about the world outside. The time devoted to writing has grown thinner and thinner and today it’s almost nonexistent. The cruel irony is that because of what I do for a living and also thanks to my many technology-related interests, I find myself reading and writing on my Mac(s) all day, something that frustrates a lot of my creative side.

I soon came to the conclusion that it is not possible — for me at least — to creatively write sitting at the same desk, in front of the same setup where I work, read news, manage email, navigate the Web. When your main system is capable of keeping multiple applications open, it’s easy to be distracted by incoming emails and updated RSS feeds. Not to mention the temptation to search the Web by following the spur of the moment — when that happens, the best case scenario is that I find myself two hours later digesting a lot of information I found following link after link, yet without doing anything really productive.

The solution is to configure a setup without an Internet connection. No browsers, no emails, no distractions: just me, my ideas, and the word processor. Now that I’ve acquired the Apple IIGS ADB keyboard you see in the picture, which is the most compact (and robust) of the smaller line of ADB keyboards manufactured by Apple, I connected it to my Macintosh Colour Classic, and I’m using this beautiful compact Mac as a creative writing setup. Its portable counterpart is the eMate 300, which can be easily connected to the Colour Classic for text file transfers. Another mobile solution I’m working on is the clamshell iBook purchased on eBay a while ago, which I’d like to keep as a OS 9-only machine, to act as an efficient bridge between the ‘old’ and the ‘new’ world.

Since I started using this setup on a fairly regular basis, the creative drought seems over, thankfully. The effect of returning to a Mac with a 10-inch screen and System 7.1 is certainly interesting. There’s calm and much less chaos in the old System 7; that, and having a single application in the foreground is almost enough to inspire the creative process. I have yet to decide which writing tool to use; Word 5.1, WordPerfect, an old version of Nisus Writer or WriteNow? They are all excellent candidates, each with its pros and cons, although I tend to prefer WordPerfect and WriteNow. For the moment, I’m taking notes with the good old SimpleText and familiarising with all of these word processors. I’ll probably stick with WriteNow — it has a negligible impact on the mere 6 MB RAM installed, and has a simple yet powerful interface.

Furthermore, I must admit that using a Mac that boots in 40 seconds is amazingly refreshing!

The following article was written by Chris Cain for Personal Computer World and published in the March 1996 issue of the magazine. For a more general overview of the OpenDoc technology and what that meant, the Wikipedia has an interesting entry about it. I’ve chosen to reprint this article because I find it to be a good, simple introduction to OpenDoc, which was in my opinion one of the most promising features of the Mac OS system. Sadly it was terminated even before it could grow and improve.


Apple recently released the first version of its component software architecture, OpenDoc, which plays a major part in the company’s future plans. OpenDoc could completely reshape the way in which we work with Macs, PCs and other platforms. In fact, it’s my Utility of the Month.

OpenDoc is officially described as a multi-platform, component software architecture that enables developers to evolve applications into component software, or create new component software applications. In more simple terms, it’s about breaking down today’s monolithic software apps into smaller, more manageable components that can then be mixed and matched to suit every user’s needs.

At the moment, if you wanted to create, say, a newsletter containing text, graphics and spreadsheet data, you would probably edit each piece of data in a separate application and either export it as a file and import it into your main application, or cut and paste info using the clipboard. Either way, you end up loading three or four different packages and using only a subset of the tools on offer. It takes a long time and you can experience problems such as unsupported file formats and lack of memory.

With OpenDoc you have “Part Editors” instead of applications and your work is based around documents called “Stationery”. Part Editors are small sets of tools for doing jobs like editing text, manipulating pictures and so on, and Stationery files are templates for doing certain types of work. Each different type of Stationery contains links to the Part Editors used for that type of job.

To prepare the same newsletter with OpenDoc you would use a piece of stationery that has been set up with links to text editing, drawing and numeric data Editors. You’d then create your data using these and if you wanted to import a file created with something else, you’d just drag it from the desktop onto your document. If you’ve set up a stationery file without a certain set of tools, you just drag the appropriate Editor onto your document and they appear.

The beauty of working like this is that you use only as much RAM as you need for the job, and all tools are available whenever you want them without loading lots of individual applications. Part Editors should also be much easier to develop and maintain than larger applications, and will give small developers more of a chance to compete with large companies like Microsoft.

There will still be room for big applications in an OpenDoc world, but they will need to support embedded OpenDoc parts.

Apple’s OpenDoc 1.0 contains a Control Panel for setting up associations between Editors and different types of data, a few sample Stationery files and some very simple Editors to accompany them. I’ve been putting these through their paces over the past few weeks and have successfully managed to build a document using this method. Although it’s difficult at the start, once you get into it everything begins to make sense.

If you want to see for yourself what OpenDoc is all about, you can download it from Apple’s World Wide Web support sites.

Anyone who has been using Macs for at least the last ten years will surely remember Viewpoint Corporation’s products. No? Well, Viewpoint Corporation was previously MetaCreations. Still doesn’t ring a bell? Maybe MetaTools will. Or the name Kai Krause. Or, even better, the names of the software products themselves — Kai’s Power Tools, Kai’s Power Goo, Kai’s Photo Soap, Bryce, Painter, Poser… See? Now we’re talking.

Browsing my good old magazine archive, I found a very nice and informative feature on the then-called MetaCreations in Issue 77 (Spring 1999) of MacFormat UK magazine. It’s a 4-page article titled MetaWorld and explores the origins of this company, the vision of its charismatic founder Kai Krause (a sort of Jobs-like figure), and the direction the company was taking at the time, with interesting excerpts of interviews with Kai Krause himself and Phil Clevenger (who was the first designer after Krause to join MetaTools, and was then Vice President of Software Development).

The article was written by Richard Hill. Below you will find some interesting bits I chose to reprint. Enjoy.


Origins

[...] Phil Clevenger explains: “Our company was really born on-line: it was born out of an on-line community. It was created around these graphical tips and tricks that Kai Krause did; and as a result, over the years, we made contact with lots of wonderful people. And as we’ve travelled the world and around the country, we’ve made friends with these people, and periodically we run into someone who really understands what we do and has the vision and has the talent to do it themselves. So over the years, the design team has grown.

“The things that became Kai’s Power Tools 1 began as a series of tips and tricks that Kai posted on-line, in the first year or two of America Online. It became the single largest downloaded file on America Online, and now it’s propagated all over the Internet”.

[...] Clevenger was inspired to seek out MetaTools because of the ideas Krause was advocating. “Kai had popularised a technique he called algorithmic painting, with the advent of Photoshop 2, I believe; he was doing all kinds of procedural artwork that people didn’t really understand [the way he'd done it]; he’d done this golden Da Vinci, and posted it on-line, saying I didn’t paint a stroke of this. He wound up getting 10,000 pieces of e-mail saying, ‘Well if you didn’t paint it, how did you do it?’. And so he outlined very deliberately how the channel operations work with luminosity values, and so on; this is stuff that all lived inside Photoshop, that was very difficult to access and very difficult to use”.

Art meets science

With MetaTools, Krause launched a mission to give more people access to the knowledge tied up in graphics software. Underneath the accessible tools of Kai’s Power Tools was some serious mathematics, says Clevenger. “Today that’s very common, but at the time that was extremely new. KPT’s Texture Explorer was one of the first programs I’m aware of that dealt with the notion of controlled randomisation. We’ve often been criticised by people for our approach, and there are certain sub-sets of people who will just never get it. That’s fine with me, that’s fine with all of us.

“But those people criticise us for not providing at times access to numbers and direct configurability by being able to add in numbers. But the rationale behind what we do is very meaningful; we never do anything just to be cute, ever.

“We could give people a dialogue box with a hundred values that they could enter and type in… and then, they could get the results, and so forth. With the notion of controlled randomisation, what we did was to put 12 things on the screen at once with the parent in the middle; you click on one of the mutations around the outside and it generates varieties for you, and you choose anything else from the outside ring, and it goes to the centre and generates another 12 or 15 or whatever it was. Then, by choosing the variables that you’re messing with — the colours, structures or whatever they are — you can then guide the results into a place that is meaningful.

“[...] I’d been working with computers in other capacities before, but once I saw Kai’s Power Tools 1, I actually saw an approach to interfaces that made sense to me. I didn’t have to look at a manual. I come from a creative background — I was a music major in college, a professional musician for ten years — so as a creative person, this approach to interface design really spoke to me. [...]“

Over to you

[...] After all [Clevenger] has watched the fledgling MetaTools evolve into its present form, giving him an understanding of how to make raw ideas into commercial prospects.

“The engineers here, even when they’re building projects, they’ve got all these little ideas bubbling,” says Clevenger. “So there’s this bubbling pot that’s going on all the time, and periodically we look through and take stock of what we have, and try to figure out how best to use it.

“For instance, the first version of [Kai's Power] Goo came about at a time when we had kind of a technology test bed called Amazon; it was basically a bucketful of everything we had, of textures, real-time 3D file stuff and, aw, all kinds of stuff.

“The thing is, you have to look at something like that and think: What’s smart? We could have taken it and done a Photoshop killer, a Live Picture killer; we could have done all of that, but how smart would it have been? We’d have to invest tons of engineering and development time to compete with these products that have been in the market for so long — Photoshop is up to version 5, all kinds of features and time to develop and mature the code. As well as the competitive nature of the advertising, and just scratching and clawing for customers.

“So what we did instead is, we said: ‘Well, we’ve got these brushes that do this funny gooey stuff and they’re faster than anything out there’. What do you do when you’re a first-time Photoshop user? You start cloning teeth into the forehead, you start doing all these childish goofy things; and there’s this little bit of a giggle factor inside somewhere. So we thought, ‘Okay, we’ll put this giggle factor up front, sell it for 49 bucks, and make it a happy thing’. That’s the smart thing to do with the technology as opposed to the obvious thing to do with the technology”.

Growing Pains

[...] While MetaTools built carefully on its Kai’s Power Tools reputation with products like the popular landscape builder Bryce, the whole graphics software industry discovered boom times, fed by fast-evolving computers. MetaTools had to grow bigger if it was to develop beyond the cult status it had won. The sea-change came in 1997, with the aforementioned sequence of mergers and takeovers [Fractal Design had acquired Ray Dream; MetaTools had acquired Specular; then Fractal Design and MetaTools joined to become MetaCreations] that kept the industry and customers alike on their toes.

[...] Kai Krause: “I must admit, at the same time as growing up, some of the things we do don’t easily scale up: in the old days, when we started with five, ten, twenty people, and I’d have some quickie idea worth three or four million dollars, everyone went ‘yeah, this is great’.

“Now, if you’re trying to be worth 67 million dollars, and you’ve got a three- or four million idea, it’s… noise; it’s annoying, and you can’t do that. You see, some of the potential projects we were working on had natural limits as to how big they could have been. In the old days when I did a project with Stephen Hawking — just because it was fun for me to work with Stephen Hawking — it barely had to pay for itself to be worth my time. But as a public company in the larger scope, you can’t afford to water down the overall marketing efforts and everything.

“The question we have to ask ourselves,” muses Krause, “is whether we want to water a lot of little bushes or a couple of big trees”.


For a chronology of MetaCreations’ activity, see this informative Macworld article from 1999. For a detailed profile of Kai Krause, the Wikipedia is your friend.

I didn’t. Well, I did, of course, but sometimes memory can’t retain all the details. Especially when it comes to yet another potentially brilliant idea Apple tried to implement, but dropped in a relatively short time frame.

PowerTalk was the later name of the Apple Open Collaboration Environment (AOCE) that was released in 1993 within the System 7 Pro bundle. There is quite an informative entry on AOCE in the Wikipedia, which will help in putting things in context. AOCE was created to solve a series of issues related to the electronic mail and delivery systems of that time, and the solutions it proposed were indeed promising. From the aforementioned Wikipedia entry (my comments are italicised in brackets):

At “one end” of the system, AOCE focused on the underlying delivery and addressing systems, generalizing the e-mail concept so the system could be used to deliver anything from e-mail to word processor documents to print jobs. Addressing was another issue the market was struggling with, so AOCE would offer a single universal addressing mechanism and address book, one that could support not only people’s e-mail addresses, but the “addresses” of things like printers and fax machines as well. These could be looked up in an interface much easier to use than the existing solution, the Chooser.

AOCE would normally store a user’s e-mail on their computer, as opposed to a server. This not only allowed the user to read their mail offline, but also removed the need for a single machine with huge storage space. Small networks could be set up simply by installing the standard “client” software; the machines would discover each other on AppleTalk and communicate directly. AOCE understood that users were not always connected to the network, so outbound mail was cached on the sender’s machine until both the sender and recipient were online. Even on a LAN this would be valuable, as many people turn off their computers at night and the mail would have to wait until the next morning for delivery.

Since the mail was stored locally, users with laptop computers would be able to read and compose mail while on the road. Everything would automatically update the next time they returned to the office and connected back to the LAN. AppleTalk Remote Access, Apple’s “standard” solution for supporting the AppleTalk protocol over modems, was also supported for those users who wished to sync up remotely. [This model can be seen today with services like MobileMe and the so-called 'Cloud computing', but it was 1992 when Apple had the idea].

For security over the potentially “open” phone lines, all communications could be secured using RSA encryption and digital signing, even on the local network. Additionally, Apple provided the Keychain, which stored various login credentials in an encrypted file. This allowed the users to use a different username and password on the various systems they used, placing them in the keychain for secure storage. This way they only had to remember a single password for the keychain; AOCE would retrieve the credentials for a particular service on demand. [Keychain has survived and it's part of Mac OS X].

I’ve found a nicely written breakdown of PowerTalk in the March 1995 issue of a vintage UK magazine called The Mac. In that issue, the main feature was a 16-page special on the then-new System 7.5. The excerpt on PowerTalk I’m about to ‘reprint’ is taken from that special (pages 74-75). It is written by Cliff Joseph. (For better readability I won’t be formatting it with the blockquote tab; the text will be in italics enclosed in two separating lines).

 

 


 

 

PowerTalk

PowerTalk isn’t just a single new feature, it’s an entire system designed to handle communications with other Mac users and with sources of information such as online services.

It’s easy to connect your Mac to a network or subscribe to services such as Cix and CompuServe, but in the past all these different connections had to be handled separately. You might get e-mail delivered to you from several different sources — from colleagues on your office network, from CompuServe and so on — but each set of e-mail would be stored in different parts of your hard disk. The network and each online service will have all their own passwords, and for business users there’s always the issue of security for sensitive information.

PowerTalk provides a central communications system that handles all these different sources of information, stores e-mail and network addresses for all the people you work with and controls passwords and security features.

Other software developers can design their applications to work in conjunction with PowerTalk so that you can share the information and documents you create within those applications. WordPerfect 3.1 supports PowerTalk, for instance, so when you set that program to type a memo you can instantly send that memo to a colleague without having to leave WordPerfect at all. Just select the e-mail option within WordPerfect and off it goes. [RM note: It's the same thing you would do today using Mac OS X Services feature.]

The following is a quick guide to the main features of PowerTalk.

Catalogues

Rather like a contact management program, a PowerTalk catalogue is simply a collection of ‘information cards’. Each card holds details about a colleague on your office network, or about anyone else to whom you send mail or other types of information. The card stores personal details such as the person’s name and telephone number, plus their e-mail or network address.

DigiSign

DigiSign is a program that allows you to attach an electronic ’signature’ to a file such as a spreadsheet or memo that you can send to someone via e-mail. Any PowerTalk user who receives that document can then ‘verify’ the signature to ensure that it is genuine. This allows you to authorise documents such as expenses claims electronically, without having to print them out and send them to other departments using traditional, slow mail systems. The verification process will vary, depending on your work set-up. Some organisations may decide to restrict the use of DigiSign so that ’signatures’ can only be allocated to specific users by a central authority such as the accounts or finance department.

Key Chain

A PowerTalk key chain stores all your different network and online service passwords and access codes.

For example, I have accounts with three different online services, and each one has a separate log-on procedure and its own password. With PowerTalk, I can type all these passwords into a key chain, and give the key chain a single password. By using the key chain I can instantly send e-mail via any of these online services, as all their passwords are stored in the chain and I no longer have to type them in myself. You may need ‘gateways’ to use a key chain with services such as CompuServe or eWorld (see MailBox).

MailBox

Once you install PowerTalk you will see a new icon appear on your desktop. This icon looks like a traditional In/Out tray, and double-clicking on it will take you into the mailbox, where you can sort through all the e-mail that has been sent to you.

PowerTalk also enables online services such as CompuServe to provide ‘gateways’ that connect with PowerTalk. These gateways connect the service to your mailbox so that any e-mail coming from the service is automatically routed into it. This way, mail from several different sources can be stored centrally, rather than being stored in all sorts of different places on your hard disk.

If you want to send a reply to an item of e-mail, the gateway will automatically direct your reply to the required service without the need for you to go and locate the separate communications program that you would normally use to log onto that service.

AppleMail

This is an e-mail application that allows you to send mail to any user who is included in your PowerTalk catalogue, whether it’s a colleague on your office network or just a friend that you send mail to over Cix or CompuServe. [RM note: So the name 'Apple Mail' has quite a long history...]

 


 

So, with all these fascinating ideas and concepts, why did PowerTalk fail? For a number of reasons. First, its system requirements, that were a wee too demanding for the Macs of that era. It required at least 2.5 MB RAM, but was really usable with 4 MB. Problem is, 4 MB was the maximum available RAM for Macs in the 1993-1995 years, and RAM was awfully expensive. Plus, it was impossible to use together with QuickDraw GX, another Apple innovative and promising technology of the time, again due to lack of memory. Other reasons included a not-really-thought-of user interface (which is strange, considering that we’re talking about Apple; but perhaps not that strange, since we’re talking of 1990s Apple, heh). The Wikipedia article I already mentioned says it all:

For instance, the addressing system was so deeply embedded into the core of the system that simply typing in a new address was an ordeal. First the user had to click on a button, select the address type, type it in, and then finally click OK to have it appear in the message. Disk usage was also a problem; each message was stored as a separate file, requiring 1k or more of space in an era where 40MB and 80MB disks were still common. Thus a few hundred letters would be enough to fill the free space on the drive. Backing up e-mail was likewise almost impossible as a side-effect of the design; the mail was spread out over the network, some of it remote and inaccessible.

Another annoyance was that the system could not know who a user was, because Mac OS did not require users to log in. Thus documents had to be delivered to a user’s machine. This did not work well when the user had two or more machines, making the concept of a universal mailbox difficult to achieve in practice.

Even the remote access functionality was doomed by feature interaction. To ensure that all messages were delivered in a reasonable time on a network where machines might appear and disappear at random (when they are turned on and off), AOCE had a 15-minute timeout in which it repeatedly tried to deliver pending messages. If the user in question was using a dialup connection on a modem, AOCE would keep the line open for a full 15 minutes before giving up on disconnected user, driving up huge long distance bills to deliver a potentially tiny message.

Many of these problems were intended to be solved with the PowerShare server, which acted as an always-on, always responsive “super-peer”. The basic AOCE protocol would notice these machines when attempting delivery, and send to them first, thereby eliminating the delays and centralizing storage and maintenance. Sadly the server was not ready in time for the release, and did not ship for another year. When it did it was likewise slow and resource hungry, largely a side effect of various features of the Mac OS that made it unsuitable for server applications (not that it was designed for this role).

What’s interesting to me about PowerTalk, anyway, is the fact that it shows how Apple was trying to veer toward a document-oriented approach for its system. PowerTalk was bringing that approach to email services, while the immediately following OpenDoc and CyberDog addressed, respectively, document creation/management and Internet browsing. I plan to discuss these in more detail in the future.

Personal Computer World magazine used to have (maybe it still has — I haven’t bought a copy in the last 10 years or so) a very nice Hands On section, with a lot of articles divided in various categories: 3D, 32 bit, Beginners, Computer Answers, DOS, Graphics & DTP, Multimedia, Networks, OS/2, Windows, etc., and of course a Macintosh category. I have several PDFs of this Hands On section from the 1995-1997 era, and I’m very glad I kept the old CDs where they were stored.

In the Macintosh Hands On articles of that time, there usually was a box with a short review of the Utility of The Month. And this is the review by Chris Cain taken from PCW’s December 1995 issue — the Utility of the Month is TattleTech, a very nifty application I always include in the set of utilities I copy throughout my vintage Macs.

Here is a little shareware number I pulled down from eWorld, called TattleTech. No sooner was it downloaded, it saved the day. TattleTech was originally known as “TattleTale”, a program I first encountered in my Mac IIsi days. Much improved since then, it is a semi-diagnostic program that investigates your machine’s configuration and reports the findings. TattleTech can tell you about general hardware, such as what kind of processor your machine has, what speed it is and how much RAM there is, and also about more complicated issues such as system patches, extension version numbers and open files. A complete list can then be printed for your records. TattleTech is ideal for keeping track of what’s in and on your system, seeing what parts are written in native PowerPC code, and for tracking down problems with extensions. It costs nothing to try out and could save you a lot of time if you have a software conflict. TattleTech currently resides in the ZiffNet Hot Downloads section in the eWorld Computer Center. It doesn’t support PCI at the moment. [...]

Here are a couple of screenshots of the latest (and last) version of TattleTech (2.84) taken on my PowerBook 5300:

 

The main TattleTech window, which usually opens the General Hardware section.

The main TattleTech window, which usually opens the General Hardware section.

 

 

 

All the information TattleTech can provide about your Mac is divided in various sections, accessible from this drop-down menu.

All the information TattleTech can provide about your Mac is divided in various sections, accessible from this drop-down menu.

 

 

Of course, TattleTech 2.84, being released in 2002, does support PCI and also runs in the Classic Environment under Mac OS X (up to Tiger), although the author John Mancino in the Read Me file warns:

TattleTech will run under Classic in OS X. However, due to Apple’s implementation of the Name Registry under Classic, some of the more important information related to hardware is no longer available. To regain this functionality would require a major re-write of the code to run under Carbon and I have elected not to undertake this effort.

TattleTech used to be shareware. I had the 2.81 version and thought it was the most recent. While researching prior to writing this post, I discovered that 2.84 is the latest and last, and also that it has been turned into a freeware application. Surprisingly, despite many search results in Google, a valid download link is quite hard to find. Sites like VersionTracker, ZDNet, Cnet, Donwload.com and the like all point to the homepage of TattleTech’s author, John Mancino (the direct link is this), but currently that website appears down.

I managed to find a copy on a Taiwanese university FTP site (direct download link). I usually don’t abuse FTP sites — some have bandwidth problems and usually prevent massive simultaneous access to their resources. So I’ll also provide a link here. (Disclaimer: I’m doing this under a ‘fair use’ perspective: if the author of the software doesn’t want me to distribute TattleTech this way, he can contact me and I will remove the link(s) provided).

Download TattleTech 2.84

[Update: link fixed, thanks Nicola!].

One of my most recent acquisitions is the Kensington ADB Turbo Mouse (version 3.0). Here is the best picture I found on Google Images (taken from this Japanese page):

turbomouse

As you can see, despite the name, it’s actually a trackball. Probably the picture shows a slightly later model, as my Turbo Mouse displays an older Kensington logo and the words “Turbo Mouse” are missing. I first saw a similar one when I used to collaborate with a graphic designer / photographer friend of mine. He was using it and was very satisfied with it. Then time passed by and I forgot about it. When my passion for vintage Macs reemerged vigourously, this beautiful object made by Kensington returned in my radar. My friend Tony in California was selling a couple of them for a very reasonable price, and I got one.

After a couple of hours using it, I was already in love. It’s possibly the best mouse I’ve used in my 20+ year experience with Macs. It fits perfectly under the palm of my hand, the big ball allows for very precise mouse pointer movements, and of course it works out of the box. A nice advantage is that you really don’t need much space on the desktop. Like every trackball, the logic is the opposite of that of any other mouse: you move the ball, not the whole mouse. So, no need of room to move the mouse around, no need of a mouse pad either. Here’s another picture to have an idea of its size:

Kensington Turbo Mouse

I’ve used it successfully with my main PowerBook G4, by way of the blessed Griffin’s iMate ADB to USB adapter, and it worked without the need of a driver, although it was not possible to configure the right button. Per default the right button showed an interesting behaviour: if I single-clicked on a file or folder with the right button, I could drag the file or folder wherever I wanted without having to keep the button pressed (as it would happen using the left button). To drop the item, I had to press the right button again. In some cases it proved to be quite handy.

Kensington has developed a driver for its trackballs to be used under Mac OS X. The software is called MouseWorks and can be easily found on Kensington’s website. The problem is that MouseWorks doesn’t support the old model of Turbo Mouse I have. From the driver’s Read Me file (emphasis mine):

This version of MouseWorks for Mac OS X supports all Kensington USB and ADB mice and trackballs except:

  • one-button mice
  • the older, 2-button Turbo Mouse models (versions 1.0–4.0)
  • ValuMouse (any model)
  • Orbit 3D

It may be possible to use older Kensington ADB devices on the USB port on newer Macs.  Although this setup is not supported by Kensington (we do not support 3rd party adapters), many customers have had positive success with the help of an ADB-to-USB adapter such as the iMate from Griffin.  Note that the iMate has its own set of drivers which can be downloaded from http://www.griffintechnology.com

Anyway, after a week of use with my main machine, I was considering giving the not-quite Mighty Mouse up and using the Kensington Turbo Mouse permanently, but the downside is that it takes away one of the two USB ports on the PowerBook, and I need them both (and no, I can’t use a USB hub because of the placement of the PowerBook and the jungle of cables already on my desktop) — so I’ll have to keep using my current configuration (Apple Wireless Keyboard and Wireless Mighty Mouse). But I could hook it up to my PowerMac G4 Cube…

The bottom line: if you stumble upon one of these devices (on eBay or similar second-hand markets), get it and try it out. Perhaps, if you never used a trackball before, it’ll take a bit to get accustomed to it, but chances are you’ll never turn back. Unless, of course, you also need a scrolling wheel. In that case my suggestion is to look for more modern trackballs.

The following article by Gordon Laing appeared on Personal Computer World UK magazine, September 1994, Volume 17 No. 9, pages 263-64. The magazine is obviously the copyright holder.

Apple QuickTake 100 Digital Camera
– If you need instant images for DTP-produced documents, this digital camera is a good choice. But if it’s image quality you want, Gordon Laing suggests you stick with your SLR. –

quicktake100good.jpg

Digital cameras come in all shapes and sizes. The higher end is catered for by Kodak/Nikon and Hasselblad, offering professional quality, high-resolution units at a cost of several hundred pounds. The other manufacturers are targeting the typical business user end at the lower price of around £500, offering reasonable quality. In the past we’ve had the Canon Ion and the Logitech FotoMan; now it’s the turn of Apple with the QuickTake 100, at around £535.

Digital cameras work along similar lines to conventional cameras, but where the latter store images on light-sensitive photographic film, digital cameras capture the analogue image electronically, then convert to digital for storage on, say, an internal hard disk or Flash EPROM. This information may then be downloaded to a PC at a later date, straight into potential DTP layouts, presentations or plain word documents.

The advantage of digital cameras is the speed at which an image is ready for use on your computer. Simply plug it in and you’re off — no messy developing or scanning. The image, usually in TIFF form, should be immediately usable. Better still is that when you’ve downloaded the images they can be deleted, leaving the camera fresh and ready for action again — no more popping to Boots to buy another film.

It sounds great, but there are downsides. The first thing is image quality, the one thing you’re unlikely to want to compromise on. The £500-ish digital cameras tend to manage resolutions up to 640 x 480 pixels, which is only really reproducible in print as a couple of inches square. Then there’s capacity. Digital cameras have a fixed amount of storage space which doesn’t go too far if you’re capturing colour images. So how does the QuickTake 100 measure up?

The QuickTake 100 is Apple’s début in the digital camera market and comes in two flavours: one available now for Macintosh at £535 and a forthcoming Windows version at £599, which should be around by the time you read this. This review specifically looks at the former, although the differences are expected to be minimal and in software only.

The QuickTake 100 kit for Macintosh comes with the camera, software for image downloading and simple editing, LocalTalk serial cable, three rechargeable batteries with AC charger, neck strap and documentation. It’s shaped a little like a chunky portable CD player with a rounded edge for a grip, and with batteries, it weighs 1 lb. The right-handed grip encourages the index and forefinger to rest on a large shutter release button, but this hasn’t proved a problem for any left-handers I gave the camera to.

The viewfinder and lens are on the smallest sides. Next to the viewfinder is a small square LCD display indicating number of pictures taken, number of pictures left, battery life, flash, self-timer and current resolution. Around it are three small buttons to alter resolution, auto-exposure and self-timer, and a fourth recessed one which wipes the memory.

The QuickTake only takes 24-bit, full-colour images, but these can be reduced in pixel depth or to greyscale within software at a later date. Two resolutions are offered: standard 320 x 240 pixels and high 640 x 480 pixels. An internal 1MB Flash EPROM is capable of storing 32 standard or eight high-resolution images, or a combination of the two. Apple claims the EPROM can store these safely for up to a year, although the longest I tried was for a couple of days.

The combination of the CCD imager and the fitted fixed focal length lens gives a filed of view equivalent to a standard 50mm lens on a 35mm camera: a safe choice, but I would have preferred something a little wider. The QuickTake auto-focuses from four feet to infinity. The built-in auto-exposure system works similarly to any other, picking a combination of aperture from f2.8 to f16 and a shutter speed of 1/30 to 1/175 of a second. If light levels are too low, the built-in flash fires, although this may be over-ridden if required; its range is four to nine feet.

Post photo-shoot, the camera is connected with the supplied LocalTalk serial cable to the Mac printer or modem port. I was surprised that no Chooser modifications had to be made for the supplied software to access the camera. Before I knew it, all my images were on screen and ready to be cropped, rotated and saved in TIFF, PICT or QuickTake formats.

The camera felt solid and fairly dependable in use. The downloading time was fast, with a full load dumped in less than a minute. The idea of 32 pictures over eight is severely tempting, but the resulting low-resolution images are of little use.

The higher ones are useful, but only, I feel, to a very specific area in the market. Take any situation where small Polaroids are taken for administrative or security purposes. Here the issue is not so much of 35mm or medium format quality, but one of high turnover. An ideal application would be to supply small mug-shots of staff for a corporate magazine — in fact, we used the QuickTake for this very purpose in VNU’s own Link 32 company magazine, and the images, reproduced at around 2in x 2in, looked great.

To conclude: digital cameras won’t compete with even advanced 35mm SLRs on price or quality, but this is missing the point. If you only require small images extremely quickly, ready to drop into your electronic document, then digital cameras are the absolute business — and the Apple QuickTake 100 is a perfect example of such a product.

* * * * *

I chose to ‘reprint’ this now 15-year old review mostly to give you an idea of the state of the digital camera market and technical capabilities of digital cameras in 1994. The QuickTake 100 didn’t have removable storage and even if it had been available it would have been quite limited. The only QuickTake camera with a media card would be the 200 (with 2MB or 4MB 5V media cards) introduced in 1997. Note also the limited resolution compared to present devices — today even the worst cellphone takes better pictures. RM

by Riccardo Mori

freelance translator, techwriter, freewheeling researcher, open to sources.

feedback: multifinder/at/gmail

Photography

Early Sunday evening

More Photos

Last tweet

I endorse


Get Camino!

Get Netscape
Powerful Blog Authoring Made Simple.