00:00:00 --- log: started forth/06.04.16 01:08:15 --- join: Ray-work (n=Raystm2@adsl-68-90-192-85.dsl.rcsntx.swbell.net) joined #forth 01:08:15 --- quit: Ray_work (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)) 01:15:43 --- join: Cheery (i=Henri@a81-197-60-217.elisa-laajakaista.fi) joined #forth 01:41:44 --- join: Raystm2 (n=Raystm2@adsl-68-93-41-15.dsl.rcsntx.swbell.net) joined #forth 03:06:35 --- join: Alterego (n=Alterego@88.202.136.178) joined #forth 04:05:26 --- join: PoppaVic (n=pete@0-1pool66-4.nas22.chicago4.il.us.da.qwest.net) joined #forth 05:46:20 --- quit: Alterego (Remote closed the connection) 06:11:08 --- quit: neceve (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 06:17:02 --- join: Alterego (n=Alterego@88.202.136.178) joined #forth 06:20:43 --- join: neceve (n=Clau@unaffiliated/neceve) joined #forth 06:45:12 --- quit: PoppaVic ("Pulls the pin...") 06:46:58 --- quit: Alterego (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 06:47:46 --- join: PoppaVic (n=pete@0-1pool66-204.nas22.chicago4.il.us.da.qwest.net) joined #forth 07:08:53 --- join: tathi (n=josh@pdpc/supporter/bronze/tathi) joined #forth 07:37:45 --- quit: PoppaVic ("calls it a Knight - and once a Knight is enough") 07:47:24 --- quit: tathi ("leaving") 08:36:47 --- join: JasonWoof (n=jason@c-71-192-33-206.hsd1.ma.comcast.net) joined #forth 08:36:48 --- mode: ChanServ set +o JasonWoof 09:55:49 --- join: TheBlueWizard (i=TheBlueW@ts001d0630.wdc-dc.xod.concentric.net) joined #forth 10:05:30 --- join: tathi (n=josh@pdpc/supporter/bronze/tathi) joined #forth 10:33:56 --- join: kitsune (i=kitsune@adsl-71-146-143-212.dsl.pltn13.sbcglobal.net) joined #forth 10:43:22 --- join: Lars_G (n=lars@unaffiliated/lars-g/x-000001) joined #forth 11:25:39 --- part: TheBlueWizard left #forth 12:08:22 --- part: Lars_G left #forth 12:16:44 --- join: snoopy_1711 (i=snoopy_1@84.58.185.65) joined #forth 12:25:06 --- quit: Snoopy42 (Read error: 145 (Connection timed out)) 12:25:06 --- nick: snoopy_1711 -> Snoopy42 12:36:10 hiho 13:24:34 anybody in tha house? 13:28:07 yes 13:28:20 hello.. 13:28:33 hi 13:28:36 jeff fox, oh my god. 13:30:13 how do you want to pimp your website? 13:31:06 i would like it to be clear 13:31:28 easy to navigate and uncluttered 13:31:53 and I would like to have a clearer context 13:33:10 it should be easier to do with 20/20 hindsight than with fifteen years of accumulation of stuff 13:33:33 the problem with accumution at a website is that things tend to be linked to older things 13:34:02 so taking a few links tends to get you to the oldest stuff not the most recent or most accurate 13:34:32 now exactly what all that means in terms of rebuilding a website isn't perfectly clear to me 13:34:45 but I will try to not make the same mistakes as I did before 13:45:23 video google does make the job of providing video content easier 13:46:27 i am working with a couple of other people to produce a look and feel and bring back some old content in some new forms 13:46:40 and I will add some new content 13:47:11 IntellaSys will be expanding our website soon too 13:49:08 I will just be documenting UT from 1986 to 2002 or so at my site although I will include Chuck's presentations to FIG and maybe some new stuff. But our work at IntellaSys will be presented by other people. Chuck is scheduled for his first public presentation very soon. 13:51:40 is there anything what ultratechnology is producing? iirc, it's a company? 13:53:21 --- quit: Cheery ("Leaving") 13:53:40 no, ultratechnology has not been producing anything since 2000 13:54:49 well, pretty dead, how do you get with it money? 13:54:58 It was my consulting company and did do some contract work for other companies, some of it with F21, some with aha or aha like stuff 13:55:55 there are companies which use them? I can't believe that. 13:56:48 Having developed the F21 and having worked as director of software at iTV got me some consulting work over the years after iTV went out of business. But after I spent all my money developing F21 and UT couldn't pay for anything anymore there were some slow times. 13:58:14 There were a few demos and prototypes for various things made with F21. Some classified. None in mass production today. 13:59:09 But I was one of the first hired into the new company Chuck formed this century and it has been fun taking the ideas to the next stage. 14:00:31 which company? UT? 14:01:44 ut was my company. I am the owner. Chuck was on contract to UT to develop F21 for UT and there were a few other people who worked with me on the software. 14:02:33 ok, when it was your company, what is it now? or will be? 14:03:28 iTV was started by Chuck and a couple of guys from NASA on a one million dollar NASA seed from an Incubator project to take NASA technology into consumer technology. Since they were working with NASA and the Air Force on Forth chips in satelites the idea of making Internet appliances with a variation of F21 was how ITV happened in 1995. 14:04:17 But they let the competition get control of their board of directions by selling them a controling amount of stock for about ten mil and they choose to keep the technology on the shelf. 14:05:01 I even brought in a customer who needed to buy two million boxes and was willing to pay what iTV said it wanted, but it proved that they really just didn't want to sell the product. 14:06:01 idiotic company 14:06:31 But a few years later Chuck started up a new one and it went through a couple of names including AsyncArray Devices and Intelasys although recently it became the IntellaSys Corporation. 14:07:57 ut was and is my company, and F21 was my, ut's chip. Aha was my invention and I was the director of software at iTV when we developed 4os and the applicance software we used there. 14:08:33 Today I am an employee at IntellaSys and have been working full time with Chuck again for the last few years. 14:09:51 http://www.intelasys.net has a bunch of information that will expand soon 14:10:52 I put some of our presentations to FIG at Forth Day last year at the google video site. follow the links from 14:11:54 http://www.ultratechnology.com/ to any of the videos at google and look at the list of other videos from this author if you haven't seen the intros from our presentations from last year and are interested 14:13:47 intelasys, founded 1988, first product 2006. ehm, well. 14:14:13 Does this mean they have dealt with the patent issues some way or another? 14:15:29 I'm asking myself how they financed theirself between 1988 and 2006. 14:17:01 well, hopefully it won't die, but I think it's probably the case that it will die or will lurking around like transmeta 14:18:21 it seems that intellasys would compete with transmeta, that will be difficult. 14:20:54 well I think transmeta has always been an example of what's wrong with the media, industry, and hype 14:21:37 heh 14:21:49 anyway, nice to hear that it's coming along well 14:22:03 transmeta got national press and tremendous hype for making what were actually pretty modest claims but which were even overblown as such 14:24:01 I think UT and transmeta were on opposite ends of the spectrum. one had lots of employees developing little with lots of hype before it existed. The other had a couple of people who developed something real and presented actual details after it existed. 14:25:11 I found the idea that transmeta was really going to out-Intel Intel, which is what the press claimed, was bordering on pure scam. 14:25:44 Of course in the real world there are hundreds or thousands of reasons why a company like Transmeta may fail. 14:26:57 Just the weight of their huge staff for years must have been a problem. But the idea that your companies success is based on replacing Intel is like saying you have to know off MS to survive. Not a good plan! 14:29:05 And I think the opposite nature of the directions of what companies like transmeta has done and what Chuck has done is that Intel didn't invite transmeta architects to teach courses to Intel designers or sign licensing deals to use Transmeta's technology. 14:29:41 and Chuck has done that? 14:30:24 But because Intel did recognize that Chuck had useful design ideas and did invite him to teach their designers and did license his technology we not only see Intel pushing some of the ideas that Chuck was pushing long ago, but indirectly funding his development of new technology. 14:31:12 --- quit: neceve (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)) 14:31:12 interesting 14:31:58 I had the impression for some reason that Chuck was just doing his own thing and mostly got ignored by everybody else. 14:32:13 everyone and every company will die someday. We do hope that the one where we work will live long and prosper of course. 14:33:03 well of course, many people have that impression. But of course there are many people who basically just make copies of what Chuck has done who like to give people that impression. 14:33:38 and some are reinventing that what Chuck did. 14:34:16 And there are a lot of vocal people who said for years that what Chuck was doing was fine, but that it wasn't going to influence other companies, sucessful companies were not going to pay any attention or use it and that it had little real value. 14:35:06 There is a huge list of people who have been saying that sort of thing for a very long time. 14:35:43 This was a popular opinion in the Forth community, so many people had that impression. 14:35:47 yeah...I guess I've just seen you talking about those people and thought everybody fell into that category 14:36:54 so Chuck is the puppet master 14:37:30 But in the real world, at places like Intel, state of the art design folks could recognize some good new ideas and did invite Mr. Moore to work with their designers. And later they licensed various innovative design ideas. 14:38:12 Chuck enjoys doing Forth and designing chips. he puts up with the rest of it. 14:38:24 I don't know how that makes him a 14:38:36 puppet master? 14:39:40 And Intel isn't making the kind of chips that Chuck wants to make, but they are using some of his ideas to make their kind of chips better. 14:40:02 Saying Chuck' 14:41:19 Saying Chuck's company is like transmeta is kind of insulting. Saying he is a puppet master sounds kind of insulting. Puppet master has a strong negative connotation, implies deception, and evil. What's up with that? 14:41:56 Why would you suggest that Chuck Moore is being deceptive or evil? 14:43:07 evil? no chuck isn't evil 14:43:27 What strings is Chuck pulling to pull off the deception? 14:43:50 I ask because 'puppet master' is a very nasty thing to say! 14:44:41 Who are you suggesting is a puppet? 14:45:39 why is this channel more often about the cult of Chuck than programming? 14:46:08 I think that was meant as moore working in the background - pulling some strings here and there (lectures to intel engineers) and affecting things without being in the spotlight *shrug* 14:46:12 slava: why not? :) 14:46:19 that was my question, is 'puppet master' suppose to be a reference to some sort of cultism crap? 14:47:04 And is this chat room really more about cultism crap than programming? 14:47:40 And I thouht it was a cultism crap free zone! ;-) Nevermind! 14:49:45 there are people in here - they don't sell these cult-free anymore, like they did back in the days ;) 14:50:32 can someone translate that? 14:51:16 'they don't sell these cult-free anymore' who are they? what are these? what is a 'cult-free'? 14:51:39 yet another silly joke gone bad *shrug* 14:56:07 Have I gotten the wrong impression of #forth? 14:57:14 I guess I just had no idea that anyone here would use a phrase like 'the cult of Chuck' or suggest that it was a regular subject of discussion here! 15:00:45 maybe I should study an archive before I comment here. Is there an archive to search? 15:01:12 http://tunes.org/~nef/logs/forth/ 15:20:39 chuck cultism? ehm, no no NOO! 15:26:33 --- part: tathi left #forth 15:29:00 a lot of his concepts are interesting and true but other ideas are just unrealistic and stupid. 15:33:25 I think the main idea of my website rebuild is context. I hate that people take things I put at my website out of context to turn them into something completely different, and label them as stupid. Of course the real problem with my website was that certain hateful people found that certain hate phrases like 'cult of Chuck' posted on the internet could make me the target of hate mail and death threats. 15:34:26 But I am currious. Can you give me a good example of what you consider a stupid idea that you attribute to Mr. Moore? 15:36:44 Oxygene, is the idea that the use of such phrases is the easiest way to prevent Mr. Moore or myself from reading or posting in this discussion group? Is that the why? 15:37:14 virl, can you expound on stupid and unrealistic ideas? 15:38:12 I don't like that he binds everything to the underlying hardware in colorforth, which makes it really a pain in the ass on todays computers. 15:39:19 I think he would say, programming is being able to control the hardware. He would agree that the fact 15:40:59 if colorforth would be a forth for an embedded system, then I would say ok, but its running on a modular system and so you can simply throw colorforth away, because of that unsensible design decision. 15:41:20 that most of today's computer hardware is hard to program is a pain for everyone. Once he has made it easy for him to program the hardware he doesn't feel the pain. 15:43:00 --- join: thin (i=thin@69.46.24.28) joined #forth 15:43:03 but he never intended, or could, take away everone else's programming pain. He thinks they too could learn to program well enough to get past the pain if they want to. He kind of quit weaning people many decades ago and expects them to take care of their own problems. 15:43:12 I agree with him that todays computer are a mess, but beside that fact, it's the wrong hammer for the thing. 15:44:52 we have a bunch of people using colorforth for productive work. We have varieties and flavors of colorforth where I work. What you say about colorforth seems like it comes from a different context than any I am familar with. I don't understand how you got to the 'so you can simply throw colorforth away' 15:45:50 we have some senior design engineers who used to work at Intel and other high profile companies. Some still use some of the high priced tools in addition to okad2 to do different parts of their jobs. 15:46:24 kitsune: do you know much about AMD buying the patent rights from patriot scientific? 15:46:31 colorforth has nice concepts, but it's unflexible and that is a thing I dislike. 15:46:56 Some are amazed at what okad2 does and insist that other people will also be excited about how it can do some things in seconds that normally take them all week on a room full of computers. They would question how throwing that all away would be a good and productive thing to do. 15:47:33 A hammer is not a good tool to do much with a PC except destroy it. 15:47:51 more than more people 15:48:00 well, forget it. 15:48:14 more than most people 15:48:59 how is colorforth unflexible, and what is an example of something flexible? 15:50:08 As I have said in my presentations I don't use colorforth for all the stuff I do, only where it fits best. 15:51:42 does colorforth support smp? 15:52:08 what does unflexible mean? brittle? The stand-alone version needs a subset of certain PC hardware, the windows versions need windows, the linux versions need linux, the misc versions need misc. 15:52:14 sure, that was why it was created 15:52:43 context 15:54:07 btw, you mentioned "we have some design engineers" who is we? and what are the design engineers working on 15:54:34 i'm out of date of the current forth news 15:55:44 colorforth is a pita to run, other forths are more likely that they run without. it's unflexible because it's a toy implementation of chucks ideas, it produces segfaults on linux, windows and so on. in raw mode it doesn't run. DOS is more likely to run than colorforth. 15:55:56 there were lawsuits involving patriot, chuck, tpl, intelasys, me, and just about every company making electronics at one time, and there is only so much I can say about those in a public forum. And Patriot negociated licenses with AMD as TPL was negociating licenses with Intel which was not a good strategy except for Intel and AMD. But Patriot and TPL came to an agreement about licensing of patents such as those for multi-co 15:56:06 --- join: Alterego (n=Alterego@88.202.136.178) joined #forth 15:56:32 it cut off what "multi-co" 15:56:38 er 15:56:41 it cut off at "multi-co" 15:57:08 virl: thats implementation issue, not colorforth itself 15:57:28 the implementation only runs on certain PCs with VESA support etc etc 15:57:37 in native mode anyways 15:57:40 and doesn't run at all on non-x86 machines :) 15:57:58 thin, some of the staff is listed at the website i mentioned earlier. the site will be the source for information on who is working on what etc. 15:58:17 multi-core architectures 15:59:03 ah 15:59:40 Chuck has done three colorforth implemenations so far, almost four. Some specifics that are true about any one of them are not true about all. Context. 16:00:17 other people where I work, and outside in the PD, have done other implemenations of colorforth. Some specifics that are true about any one of them are not true about all. Context. 16:01:33 i call other implementations of "colorforth" colored forths 16:02:15 aha is a form of colorforth, and it isn't for a x86 architecture. P21Forth can do a colorforth interface and it isn't a x86. I have colorforth inspired software on my pda. 16:02:47 thin, are all of Chuck's implementations of colorforth colorforth according to you? 16:04:52 virl, what is a pita? run without? without what? "Unflexible" means toy? "Toy" is bad because? 16:05:03 well consider colorforth to be chuck's colored forth 16:05:25 I think much of the idea of Forth was it was to be a toy, a fun toy. Few languages said that up front. 16:06:09 At one presentation about F21 an angry Forth programmer asked Chuck, "Is it a toy?" 16:06:27 I mentioned this currios thing to Chuck later. 16:06:48 he replied, "And he said it like it was a bad thing!" ;-) 16:07:19 heheh :) 16:08:56 I had described F21 in my 1993 Forml Paper as a "toy workstation on a chip." And I didn't think that meant it was a bad thing because it was a toy. It was a toy because it could cost $5 and be simple enough for children to understand. 16:10:26 I have had toy computers and real computers, toy race cars and real race cars, toy flying machines and real flying machines. Some of the 'real' machines were also 'toys.' 16:11:13 I love it when children ask me if my car is a toy car. I always proudly tell them that it is indeed my toy. 16:12:56 Toys can be educational. Toys can be fun. I don't think toy is bad. 16:13:03 Forth is suppose to be a toy! 16:13:10 yeah :) 16:13:33 That doesn't make it bad. It just means that you get paid big bucks to get to play with a fun toy if you are lucky! 16:14:29 any single implementation of anything is in/unflexible in that it won't run everywhere! What does? Nothing! 16:15:43 context. software is for hardware. hardware is for software. Chick and egg. Which came first in the Forth context? 16:15:47 Easy question. 16:15:56 software came first, before Forth hardware. 16:16:32 In the beginning the ideas was that the Forth programmer could change anything. he didn't have to live with someone else's compiler, assembler, OS, etc. 16:16:44 But he did have to live with someone else's idea of hardware. 16:17:25 But halfway through the history of Forth it's inventor declared 'the software problem solved' and said the remaining problem was hardware. 16:17:54 context, forth software. The sofware problem was solved, forth. Now he needed simple hardware to make Forth simpler. 16:18:37 Now he had the freedom to change the hardware. But it resisted. Why? Inflexible software that didn't understand the problem. 16:18:58 context, it wasn't Forth and it wasn't designed or suited to designing Forth chips. 16:19:37 So the designer of Forth used Forth to design Forth cad tools to design Forth chips to run Forth software. 16:19:53 well, for me toys in computer, mean funny implementations which can't do anything good. 16:20:51 Context, he calls this whole picture Forth. In this picture of Forth tools, Forth SMP hardware, and Forth software Forth has expanded to allow more freedom than what was allowed thirty years ago. 16:20:53 and are also fast implemented so spagethi code 16:22:44 virl, interesting. Define good in that context. 16:23:12 It looks like you are saying that if you don't understand it and can't use it then it isn't good for you. 16:24:00 I get a headache 16:24:21 f21 was called a toy because it was not designed to run C and Unix or Windows. 16:24:38 If good means C then Forth can't do anything good. 16:25:23 I mean that toy implementations are for me quick and dirty which also don't run, even when you try to make it run. that are for me toy things and colorforth is such a thing for me. 16:25:46 ok 16:26:37 good toys vs bad toys! good toys run and make playing easy. bad toys just frustrate you. me too. ok 16:27:54 in my context good toys aren't toys anymore. 16:29:11 when forth is described as a toy, its alluding to its fast, responsive, interative nature 16:29:20 interactive* 16:29:48 good stuff 16:29:49 thats good, speeds up the learning curve for newbies, and keeps the development time fast for experts 16:30:06 yes 16:31:42 virl, I think I agree. In my context good toys aren't toys anymore, they are better than toys. When the line between useful tool and toy blurs they become more than just toys. 16:32:37 They may be better than the "real" thing in many ways because they still retain some 'toy' properties like cheap, disposable, easy or fun. 16:33:10 I hate it more and more to get misunderstood. 16:33:58 what i'd like to see is forth used as a scripting language (in a forth-based desktop os perhaps) that allows for on the fly modification of programs even as they are running, and so simple and easily understood that my grandma could use it 16:34:45 forth-based desktop OS, would be cool, but I never ever saw something like that. 16:35:21 yes that sounds cool 16:36:13 i wonder how to make forth easy for the non-programmer/engineer 16:36:21 without limiting the power 16:36:25 I too think something with the source browsing of smalltalk and the inner simplicity of Forth would be a nice toy. 16:36:57 But PCs change so fast and so often that keeping up with doing an OS for a 'PC' platform is a big job. 16:37:05 Look at the number of people involved in Linux. 16:37:31 well, the source browsing of smalltalk and especially squeak, I wouldn't say that's easy, it's even for me a pita. 16:37:49 I think that is why Forth Inc. quit even trying to offer a stand-alone platform for PCs and just went with Windows hosted like most of the world. 16:39:36 I like the GUI design in smalltalk and have always done Forth GUI that way with a little bit of code. It is one thing to do it for P21 or F21 and quite another for a 'PC' which could have a near infinite number of combinations of hardware and firmware drivers to deal with. 16:42:46 Chuck and I have different ideas about user interface. he doesn't mouse. I put an f21 in a mouse with no keyboard! 16:43:24 of course we both would prefer to get away from keyboards and mice too! ;-) 16:44:29 probably I wont get further with my project to see it in action. 16:46:38 well thinking about ideas and projects and doing experiments can be fun and educational too and sometimes you can get paid to do it. 17:30:28 but I'd like to see it in action 17:34:48 --- quit: virl (Remote closed the connection) 17:36:24 --- quit: kitsune () 18:15:17 --- quit: Raystm2 (Excess Flood) 18:15:49 --- join: Raystm2 (n=Raystm2@adsl-68-93-41-15.dsl.rcsntx.swbell.net) joined #forth 18:35:57 --- quit: uiuiuiu (Remote closed the connection) 18:36:00 --- join: uiuiuiu (i=ian@dslb-084-056-236-086.pools.arcor-ip.net) joined #forth 23:58:54 --- join: neceve (n=Clau@unaffiliated/neceve) joined #forth 23:59:59 --- log: ended forth/06.04.16