93 lines
6.8 KiB
Markdown
93 lines
6.8 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
layout: post
|
|
title: Magware
|
|
date: 2017-07-09 22:00:00
|
|
permalink: /blog/2017/07/09/
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
You may recall from my [last post](/blog/2017/07/03/) that I had tracked down some useful Modula-2 test code,
|
|
originally published in [PC Tech Journal (October 1986)](http://www.pcjs.org/pubs/pc/magazines/pctj/PCTJ-1986-10/),
|
|
inside a ZIP archive at "[THE PROGRAMMER'S CORNER: BBS ARCHIVE FROM THE PAST](https://www.pcorner.com/list/MAG)".
|
|
|
|
It turned out that that archive was a rabbit hole I could not *not* go down.
|
|
|
|
First, I collected all the other PC Tech Journal ZIP archives there (from December 1985 through January 1989),
|
|
recreated them as a set of [PC Tech Journal Disks](/disks/pcx86/shareware/pctj/), and added them to the
|
|
[PCjs Disk Library](/disks/pcx86/), so now you can "Load" and "Save" them in any [PCjs Machine](devices/pcx86/machine/).
|
|
|
|
Next, since I was also a fan of PC Magazine back in the day, I decided to do the same for all the PC Magazine ZIP
|
|
archives. So now there's a set of [PC Magazine Disks](/disks/pcx86/shareware/pcmag/) you can play with as well.
|
|
|
|
I'm calling these disks *Magware* because I can't be sure exactly how to classify everything on them. Most of it
|
|
was probably considered free: source code was generally included without any restrictions. But it's possible that
|
|
the magazines also redistributed some third-party software that fell into more of a *Shareware* category.
|
|
|
|
> #### July 10, 2017 Update
|
|
|
|
> Out of curiosity, I looked through [PC Magazine Vol. 6 No. 8 (April 28, 1987)](https://archive.org/details/PC-Mag-1987-04-28)
|
|
> for references to the "PLAY" files contained in one of the older archived [PC Magazine Disks](/disks/pcx86/shareware/pcmag/).
|
|
> They accompanied the article "A DOS MUSIC GENERATOR", which included this disclaimer:
|
|
|
|
> > "The programs that appear in our Programming/Utilities column (as well as other programs we publish) can be
|
|
> > downloaded by modem from the PC Magazine Interactive Reader Service. There is no charge for this service, but
|
|
> > users are cautioned that these programs are copyright material and are made available only for individual,
|
|
> > noncommercial use. You may make copies for others (including placement on noncommercial electronic bulletin boards),
|
|
> > as long as no charge is involved. However, making copies for any commercial purpose is strictly prohibited."
|
|
|
|
> So it's clear we're not dealing *only* with "free" software, at least as it was considered at the time.
|
|
|
|
About these collections: I'm thrilled that they exist. Not everyone needs to be (or should be) a collector, but the
|
|
world needs at least a few dedicated individuals working in every domain (hardware, software, books, magazines,
|
|
photographs, recordings, etc) along with museums and libraries to support their efforts. So kudos to the folks
|
|
at [The Programmer's Corner](https://www.pcorner.com) for saving what they could and continuing to make them available.
|
|
|
|
Sadly, these collections are woefully incomplete. The people who could have done the best job of archiving
|
|
everything that PC Tech Journal and PC Magazine produced were the publishers themselves, but of course, we don't
|
|
live in a society where "archiving" is part of the corporate compact. Corporations care about assets and monetization.
|
|
Even if an asset is never used and gradually disintegrates over time, your average corporation is fine with that,
|
|
because the fact that no *other* corporation was able to use it is just another kind of monetization. Some corporations
|
|
do build their own archives, but you can never be sure they weren't edited in self-serving or promotional ways. And
|
|
other corporations are happy to see their old products archived, provided someone pays them for the privilege.
|
|
|
|
I'm also a little sad to see these collections being leveraged as a way of making money. For one thing, it goes
|
|
against the spirit in which the software was originally shared (ie, for free). For another, it's a real nuisance.
|
|
|
|
For example, if you visit [MAG Files from The Programmer's Corner](https://www.pcorner.com/list/MAG), you can't
|
|
simply download everything on that page. You have to click on a link to a ZIP file, which takes you to a second page
|
|
listing the contents of the ZIP file and a "Download File Here" link, which takes you to a third page with a tiny
|
|
"Click here" link that will finally download the ZIP file. And at every step of the way, you're also being asked
|
|
to "Donate".
|
|
|
|
So what should have been a quick ONE-click operation becomes a very slow THREE-click operation, giving you lots of
|
|
opportunities to stare at lots of ads. Three pages of them, with ads across the top, down the right-hand side, and
|
|
across the bottom. I understand that running a web server has a cost and that ads help defray that cost. But there
|
|
HAVE to be better ways to do this.
|
|
|
|
For starters, there are users like me, who are happy to support the preservation efforts of others. I opted to pay
|
|
the requested $40 donation for "unlimited access" to The Programmer's Corner. However, that merely allowed me download
|
|
more than 5 files per hour. I still had to slowly wade through endless pages of ads to get the roughly 200 files I was
|
|
specifically interested in. This isn't exactly endearing behavior, which means I probably won't return to The
|
|
Programmer's Corner by choice, but only out of necessity.
|
|
|
|
On a more philosophical note, I think it's important for a service to be clear about what we're paying for; ie, that
|
|
we're paying for an archival service and that the money being generated for that service (whether by ads or donations)
|
|
is purely in support of that service, and that the archived items themselves are not being held hostage ("ransomed")
|
|
in order to supplement that income.
|
|
|
|
It shouldn't be hard to create a compelling website with useful features and community benefits, apart from the content,
|
|
that people will *want* to support and revisit. And when people *do* support it, they shouldn't continue to be hounded
|
|
or stymied in their efforts to access the content.
|
|
|
|
The [Patreon](https://www.patreon.com/) model, where you try to get a handful of people to support your project with
|
|
small monthly contributions, seems like one possible solution. Of course, that usually requires working on the project
|
|
on a regular basis, and if a website like [The Programmer's Corner](https://www.pcorner.com) is more or less on auto-pilot,
|
|
that probably won't work.
|
|
|
|
I've thought about this problem in the context of PCjs, and what, if anything, I should do to help pay for its
|
|
monthly operating costs (which are currently around $30/month for hosting and bandwidth). I dislike the idea of using
|
|
ads, because they're both unsightly and unseemly, and it's unlikely they would cover even those small operating costs.
|
|
I've come to conclusion that you have to make money doing something else, and that projects like this just have to
|
|
survive on good will -- and lots of "free time".
|
|
|
|
*[@jeffpar](http://twitter.com/jeffpar)*
|
|
*Jul 9, 2017*
|