Jump to content
IGNORED

Looking for Five Apple II Books in PDF Format


ballyalley

Recommended Posts

Otherwise, tons would have been lost. The burden is put right where it should be, on the content rights holder. If they still exist, they are more than capable of speaking up.

 

I couldn't have said it better myself. If you don't own the copyright in question, it's none of your business. The only person who should care about copyright is the copyright holder himself. The only person who is even conceivably hurt by free copying, is the copyright holder. If the rights holder cares, he'll file a DMCA takedown. If he can't be bothered to do that, then obviously he's not losing anything of value.

 

Copyright was never meant to keep the past locked up anyway.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tons already *is* lost - And, because now, people think it's been properly archived; you'll never see better quality. Bwahahahahaaa!! Frakking idiots don't know how to use a scanner. ABBEY FINEREADER should require users be tested for intelligence before using. These are worse than the BYTE magazine scans. See for yourself!

post-4806-0-22890500-1364257832_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I couldn't have said it better myself. If you don't own the copyright in question, it's none of your business. The only person who should care about copyright is the copyright holder himself. The only person who is even conceivably hurt by free copying, is the copyright holder. If the rights holder cares, he'll file a DMCA takedown. If he can't be bothered to do that, then obviously he's not losing anything of value.

 

I agree completely.

 

The only reason I even brought up copyright, was to emphasize the situation where some Apple user (or whoever) is selling scans of other peoples' material. They have no moral right to object if the scans are shared, since they're not the copyright holder. Therefore, I see nothing wrong - morally - with sharing the scans.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ABBEY FINEREADER should require users be tested for intelligence before using. These are worse than the BYTE magazine scans. See for yourself!

post-4806-0-22890500-1364257832_thumb.jpg

 

The trouble with scanning is that often people who scan want the files to be a small file size. There's actually nothing wrong with that. It's not unusual for people to scan some files at low quality and share with a friend or family member. However, this same mentallity does NOT work for archival purposes. Which, nowadays, many people realize. And that's GOOD. The trouble is, that many of these scans that are probably being referred to here are older scans. This means that they need to be rescanned. Which, it's possible, may never occur.

 

I'm quite guilty of this scanning problem myself. My Bally Astrocade website, BallyAlley.com, was "born" in about 2001. Back then, if I'd uploaded pictures or scans in 300dpi I would have very, very quickly have filled up the space available to me. Also, it would have been impossible for many (most?) people to download quality scans because of the file size. Because of these two issues, I settled on what I THOUGHT were a good compromise. These were 300dpi B&W scans (actually, still acceptable when not compressed and is used only for text) and 100dpi scans or pictures for color pictures. It's these 100dpi scans that I feel have bit me. Remember though, I never expected my site to be one of the few Astrocade sites to archive documents. I thought that there would be a mini-explosion of sites for documentation purposes, and my site would just be one site among many that would have documents available. Also, I wasn't thinking of archiving these documents for future generations... but that IS the way that I think now. And yet, there is STILL a compromise between quality vs. Archive Quality. I find that it's pretty near impossible to archive documents in archive quality without using compression. Sure, I COULD make a 300dpi pdf without compression, but it's certainy not practical. Such files can run into the hundreds of megabytes quite easily. The difference now is that I create compressed documents, upload them to my site and KEEP THE ORIGINAL scans and even share the originals amongst others when requested. In the future, when a 100MB file is as commonplace as the size of a desktip icon, then there will be no need to rescan documents... I can just recreate the pdf (or whatever document format is popular at the moment) using the uncompressed scans that I've saved.

 

With all this in mind, I'm not at ALL suprised to find that even new documents that are archived don't come out well. Sometimes people send me scans of documents that I don't have. Pretty-much inevitably I expect these scans to be low-quality. I USED to explain how to do scan properly first and still get low-quality scans, now I wait, get some sample low-resolution scans and THEN explain how to set the proper settings to TIFF and 300dpi WITHOUT compression. Sometimes it takes several iterations of this before I get scans that I'm happy with. I've also learned that some people simply can't tell the difference between the quality settings (which always REALLY surprises me) and others can't find settings at all, or tell me the settings can't be changed. Sometimes I end up with compressed scans no matter what... and in these instances I have to settle for what I get. Which is a shame, but which is also better than NO scan at all.

 

Let's see if I can loop this posting again around to the topic of the Apple books that I'm looking for. I'll eventually get a few of them via InterLibrary Loan, which is fine, but when someone finally DOES scan these books (and these all seem common enough that eventually SOMEONE will scan them, but from what I've found and read now, I'm not holding my breath for when this may occur), what's the preferred method for archival scanning? Is it what I like for my website: 300dpi color TIFF in uncompressed format for color pictures and 300 dpi B&W uncompressed TIFF in uncompressed format for text-only documents (unless the original is hard to read, in which case it needs to be a grayscale scan)?

 

Adam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone considered that existing institutions, like libraries, are already preserving these materials? Just because something is not (freely) available online does not mean that it is forever lost.

 

I have worked as a librarian for 10+ years and in one collection that I managed, we had the ONLY known copy of some special items. There was no discussion of scanning them and making them available online (and copyright was not a consideration/impediment as it had long-since expired). Rather, our goal was to preserve the physical item in its original format. The material was (and still is) available to anyone who wanted to come to the library and request to see it (for obvious security reasons it was not available in open stacks).

 

Lasr year, I undertook a major research project that involeved reviewing business magazines from the early-1980s. None of these titles were scanned and/or searchable online. Thus I had to sit in the basement of the library for many hours to review microfiche/microfilm. The content was not "lost" by any stretch of the imagination, rather it was just preserved in a slightly less accessible format than a PDF file.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I trust that public libraries will be around much longer. Increasing anti-intellectualism and antagonism towards any sort of government service has led to libraries closing or cutting hours for many libraries around the country. There may be no more public libraries 100 years from now. But PDFs that are widely copied have the potential to exist forever. Especially as storage space continues to grow, moving them onto new media costs less and less as time goes by.

 

Also, I'm lazy. If I have to get off my ass and drive to the library to get it, it might as well not exist.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone considered that existing institutions, like libraries, are already preserving these materials? [...] I had to sit in the basement of the library for many hours to review microfiche/microfilm. The content was not "lost" by any stretch of the imagination [...]

 

The aim of a library isn't to preserve material, or else they would never thin their collections. I do understand why the collections are thinned: to make space for new material. However, since libraries DO thin-out materials, a library is therefore intrinsically not a method that can be used to preserve materials. That said, unfortunately, they just might be the best method that we have for older materials.

 

Books and magazines that have been put into microfiche or microfilm format have been permanently altered in a manner in which the original form can never be fully understood. Much like a scan isn't the same as the original. Normally microfilm is not color, and thus all of the color information is lost from a book or magazine scan. Also, like color film negatives, positives and pictures, color microfilm fades and the color distorts over time. B&W microfilm preserves much better... but it certainly doesn't last forever (and greatly depends upon the means on how it was stored). A B&W magazine on microfilm, although changed from the original and the color portion is "lost," the information itself is not lost. Still, for many people, this information isn't usable to them. Although libraries do have microfilm and microfiche collections, you'll be surprised to learn that many (most?) libraries no longer have the means to access this information unless it is transferred (by the library system) to a specific location (generally a genealogy branch, if available).

 

Adam

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I trust that public libraries will be around much longer.

 

I'd love to say that this statement is in error, but I believe that this may be true: at some point libraries may not exist in their current form. They already don't exist in the form that I remember from when I was growing up thirty-five years ago. Remember when going to the library meant keeping your voice down to a whisper else you'd be "shushed" by the librarian or even other patrons? That's not the case any longer. Some people actually talk on their cell phone in the stacks (oh, how that bugs me!). To these people I DO tell them to please hang up or go outside. And I'm considered rude. Also, over the past few years, computer access has had more people come in, mostly for the computers, but this gets at least SOME of them to go wander the stacks.

 

Part of the library problem, like "Hatta" stated, is because people would rather not get up and go to the library. Part of me can understand that, but part of me rejects that notion as unthinkable. It is MUCH easier to get scans from an online pdf-- no doubt about that. What we lose from not visiting a library is just how helpful they can be to us. I'm not just talking about access to materials either. Don't believe me? Think of a subject. Do as much research on the topic that you can. Exhaust all the possibilities that you can think of. Then, go to your local library's information desk. Ask for some help researching the topic. Ask for sources that you may have not have thought of already. These people are trained for this, and they will give you information that you never would have explored yourself. And, thankfully, the first place that they check is NOT Wikipedia.

 

Adam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The aim of a library isn't to preserve material, or else they would never thin their collections. I do understand why the collections are thinned: to make space for new material. However, since libraries DO thin-out materials, a library is therefore intrinsically not a method that can be used to preserve materials. That said, unfortunately, they just might be the best method that we have for older materials.

 

I guess my bias is showing here -- I have always worked in Academic or Special libraries where we do have a mandate to keep (most) things forever. The University of Alberta, for example, maintains a huge warehouse of old books, runs of obscure periodicals, etc. I once needed an article from like 1903 and I was able to hold the original, paper copy in my hand!!! This stuff may be accessed only once per century, but it will be there when someone else wants it. I personally worked on cataloguing several collections of obscure things that nobody is likely to ever want to see --- marine microbiology papers from Russia in the 1890s -- but they will be retained forever just in case.

 

Public libraries are rather different creatures. My local library maintains a decent historical/local interest collection that is maintained permanently, but for more "popular" sections things are regularly weeded. This, alas, does include computer books. I recall finding an Atari 2600 strategy guide in a public library in the mid-1990s. I was shocked that it had lasted so long on the shelf.

 

A B&W magazine on microfilm, although changed from the original and the color portion is "lost," the information itself is not lost. Still, for many people, this information isn't usable to them.

 

True, but of the multiple thousands of pages I have reviewed on microfilm over the years, I can think of only one time where the lack of colour was an impediment. There was an illustration in a magazine that was originally printed in dark colours. On the microfilm, it became an unrecgonizible blob. Again, I understand that other people may have need for more than the bare text/B&W illustrations.

 

I have never seen colour microfilm, though Fuji was supposedly working on something a few years back.

 

Although libraries do have microfilm and microfiche collections, you'll be surprised to learn that many (most?) libraries no longer have the means to access this information unless it is transferred (by the library system) to a specific location (generally a genealogy branch, if available).

 

This does surprise me. I know of one public library that was fund-raising to fix their single microfilm reader and so their historic newspaper collection was temporarily inaccessible. Every main-branch public library I have been to has a microfilm area, as so some of the larger branch libraries. Dedicated genealogy library branches are extremely rare in Canada -- I am only aware of one (in Toronto/North York) -- though such resources do tend to be centralized at a single branch.

 

On a personal note, I have amassed a very large (~6,000 volumes) personal collection of material in my area of interest, including numerous small-press and some antique/rare books. While it is curently only accessible to me, I eventually plan to donate it to an apropriate institution where it will be both preserved and made publicly available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a personal note, I have amassed a very large (~6,000 volumes) personal collection of material in my area of interest, including numerous small-press and some antique/rare books. While it is curently only accessible to me, I eventually plan to donate it to an apropriate institution where it will be both preserved and made publicly available.

 

until the place it is housed burns down or meets with some other untimely fate. You are a good example of someone who values the dead tree that contains the information more than the information itself (not a personal attack, I am a bibliophile also but when it comes to old technology I change my thinking. History books will always be preserved but books on coding for the c64 can easily be deemed not really important and lost). the dead tree is expendable. we grow new ones every day. the stuff written on the dead tree is the important part. Scanning and spreading to multiple locations are the only ways to preserve it. one book stored in one location is an exercise in futility that only accomplishes some "good feeling" on your part, a self-pat on the back if you will.

Edited by dudeslife
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that I'm looking around more Apple books, I'm REALLY beginning to see just how uncommon scans of Apple material actually is. It's pretty unusual. I can see that it brings up something of what seems just short of anger in some people. It certainly brings up gasps of "why?!?" from most people who are more accustomed to the Atari and C64 "scene" (is that a proper term that is still even used?). Just reading more of the post in the "Classic Computing" section makes the lack of Apple scans jump out at me.

 

Is there a "Wish List" of books that people would like to see scanned? I'm not trying to start a list here, I'm just curious if one already exists.

 

Adam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that I'm looking around more Apple books, I'm REALLY beginning to see just how uncommon scans of Apple material actually is. It's pretty unusual. I can see that it brings up something of what seems just short of anger in some people. It certainly brings up gasps of "why?!?"

Adam

 

I starting sounding this alarm nearly two years ago:

 

http://atariage.com/...sers-different/

 

It's easier to find an Apple IIe, Monitor, and Disk Drive than it is to find a pdf of a Computes book that tells you how to write programs for it. The neckbeards in the apple community see nothing wrong with this.

Edited by dudeslife
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

its really not that hard of a computer to deal with, its a 6502, some ram, a single bit for sound and a shift register for video. There are an uncountable number of documents that explain every aspect of the machine, and heck 70% of it fits onto this poster, even those core manuals can be loaded with info, right down to the schematics. (the GS technical reference even gives you every single detail about every protocol and procedure in the machine)

 

 

Archival wise I do think books should be preserved, but from a programming standpoint, every single little detail of the machine is out there and available if your looking, 3rd party books never give anything special to that, unless you live in pre 1990, dont have a modem and have no other means to learn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archival wise I do think books should be preserved, but from a programming standpoint, every single little detail of the machine is out there and available if your looking, 3rd party books never give anything special to that, unless you live in pre 1990, dont have a modem and have no other means to learn.

 

you are wrong. if you are trying to make learning to program fun for a kid, the third party books are essential. the apple neckbeards that think hunting thru a mountain of halfass pdfs is part of the fun of programming are part of the reason that there is no regeneration in the retro apple community. as they die off they will not be replaced. the apple community is a ghetto, whereas the commodore, amiga, and atari communities are vibrant and flourishing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in my heyday, I had *nothing* but the Beagle Bros. stuff, apart from tearing apart other programs to see what made them tick.

 

...needless to say, it was years after that that I actually started to get good at coding for the Apple ][.

 

And I've seen it: the Apple ][ community has always, since I remember, been moribund and more about reminiscence than about actually, you know, doing stuff. I was a gamer in the Apple ]['s heyday. I saw it the same way C=-users and A8 users saw their pet machines. The Apple ][ community as a whole, well, they're not like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you are wrong. if you are trying to make learning to program fun for a kid,

 

and if your reading the books your going to get a 30 year old asm listing with a discription on EXACTLY what that code does and nothing else, be realisitic

 

what can you do with an apple 2?

 

dude you have 2 screens a max of 64 K of native ram, and not much of anything else, its not really black magic and if you cant program a 30 year old computer based on the endless amounts of documentation then dang dude ...

 

btw what kids are you refering to? how many kids are going to program for a 30 year old platform, in raw assembley, too lazy to read plain text without a pretty picture, ask for info on the comp.sys.apple2 groups, and not take advantage of the C and pascal compilers they can write on their 18 core 9 ghz monster facebook machines?

 

blown out of proportion to the 10th degree

 

and in 2013 if I were to make programming fun for a kid I would choose lua (EGSL or love 2d to be exact), not something you have to diddle software toggle switches

 

the info is out there it just seems that unless its a amazon listing pirated for free its not worth reading to learn something, or am I wrong?

 

PS: IP piracy in the past has done a ton of good for commodore and atari users, cause look at where they are today... gone

Edited by Osgeld
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the info is out there it just seems that unless its a amazon listing pirated for free its not worth reading to learn something, or am I wrong?

 

I already told you that you were wrong. The Compute books on BASIC for the Apple II are awesome and written for pre-teen kids. There may be 2 python books for this same audience, but thats it. The older apple programming books are filled with "type this for instant reward" small programs. this type of learning which inspired a whole generation of programmers is hard to find today. If you don't get this, then you fit right in with the majority of the apple community.

 

dude you have 2 screens a max of 64 K of native ram, and not much of anything else, its not really black magic and if you cant program a 30 year old computer based on the endless amounts of documentation then dang dude ...

 

not talking about me.. you may want to catch up on the discussion from the beginning.. this thread is just the latest chapter.

 

kidsandapple.jpg

Edited by dudeslife
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...