>>> I'm told back in the days of the old mainframes, /all/ user output was
>>> through a printer. It literally didn't /have/ a video display /at all/.
>>> So the PRINT command in BASIC? It used to actually *print* stuff! :-D
>>
>> Yup. Heard that, too. Haven't ever seen any proof with my own eyes
>> though, so it must be urban legend :-P
>
> I've personally operated a green-screen terminal where there's a
> 2-second delay between pressing a key and seeing the character on the
> screen because it's a dumb terminal connected over a modem link to a
> mainframe somewhere. After keying in several /very/ cryptic commands,
> the line printer next to be sprang into life. And let me tell you, those
> things are LOUD! I was using it to print benefits cheques for the local
> county council, in around about 1997 or so. I doubt that their
> infrastructure has been modernised since then...

Even most dumb terminal had local screen management.  That's why on most 
of them you had separate RETURN and ENTER keys.  RETURN would simply 
move the cursor down one line, and ENTER would transmit the entire page 
(or all the filled-in filed, depending on your terminal).

Yes, hitting ENTER on a partially filled-in screen would display the 
behaviour you saw, since the host end would simply tell you "hey, you 
didn't finish filling this screen!"

-- 
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/*    flabreque    */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/*        @        */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/*   gmail.com     */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }

Post a reply to this message