🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Dec29.064438.24211@physiol.su.OZ.AU>, john@physiol.su.OZ.AU (John Mackin) writes...

>I don't know about the merits of TPU in the abstract.  I just want to
>discourage everyone from using nu/TPU.  It is a real pain in the bottom.
>It has very restrictive `oh no, you have pirated me' code built into
>it.  Now I have _not_ tried to pirate the damn thing, all I have
>tried to do is support it for my users in a distributed computing
>environment, and the pirate-detction stuff is very flakey: all
>you have to do, just about, is breathe on the environment it's
>installed in, and the damn thing decides it's been pirated and
>refuses to run any more.  And naturally, they've taken the
>security-through-obscurity approach (probably because they
>couldn't make it secure any other way), so there's not a
>shred of documentation on this stuff to help you figure out
>what it was you did `wrong', or how to fix it or avoid
>doing it in the future.
> 
>Set knows I'm opposed to commercial software in general, but
>this sort of thing really needs to be stamped out.  Please
>do not buy nu/TPU.
> 

   I do know about TPU's merits in the abstract, and in the practical. I have
had no problems of any such manner with nu/TPU, and the problems I have gone
through have been well worth the result.  A great full screen, character-cell
as well as X11 compatable editting interface, especially for those moving from
a VMS to UNIX or DOS environment already knowing DEC's EDT, or EVE, or
progamming in TPU. And an extension language specifially designed for writing
text editors (talk about the right tool for the job).  There are, of course
competitors to nu/TPU in the TPU arena, as well as in the EDT-only arena which
should be considered before spending money.  We consider our purchase as money
well spent, and intend to do so again in the future.