>> The prompt starts at the first field and <RETURN> (not <TAB> !) moves to the next.<p>This is hilarious to me, because times have certainly changed.<p>When we first started shipping Windows software the <i>big</i> complaint from users was the use of Tab to switch fields, while Return triggered the default button (usually Save or Close).<p>The change, for users used to DOS was painful - not least when capturing numbers as the numeric key pad has Enter not Tab.<p>Software developers either stood firm, convincing customers to learn Tab, or caved and aliased the Enter key to the Tab key. Even today I still find that option here and there in Software that's been around a while...
> not least when capturing numbers as the numeric key pad has Enter not Tab.<p>And “Enter” isn’t “Return”.<p>I don’t know how the PC and PC software did it, but the Mac, when it got a numeric keypad, discriminated between return (on the alphanumeric keyboard) and enter (on the keypad), and software did discriminate between the two.
Author here, and thanks for reading. I'm glad to hear stories from a developer POV about those days. It's interesting uncovering subtle interface changes as I investigate various applications. It makes sense to me to <i>not</i> use Return for fields, especially when fields could gradually accommodate longer and longer blocks of text. Being able to naturally type multiple paragraphs, say for a "Notes" field in a database, would make sense.
Yes, it makes sense when viewed like that, and was probably a necessary change.<p>DOS chose Enter though because in those days mist data capture was numbers. Lots and lots of numbers. Data capturers could track the left hand down the column (so keeping place on yhe paper) any type with the right. Enter is right there in the keypad so only one hand needed.<p>Switching to Tab means 2 hands needed on the keyboard, so difficult to keep track on the paper.<p>Typically also, on DOS screens there was very little multi-line entry. Addresses were multiple entry fields, and so on. Tab was pretty much not used (outside of word processing).<p>If I went back now, to design the standard keyboard, I'd add dedicated "Next" and "Previous" buttons on the numeric keypad. No need for Enter there.<p>But that's design with a <i>lot</i> of hindsight...
According to users of the Kaypro II from that time, it was a very robust machine. It was even used on the 1984 Paris Dakar edition.
In a moment of serendipity, I was about 30 minutes into watching this:
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYU3CQomE5M" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYU3CQomE5M</a><p>I had memories of Foxpro and Clipper on my mind, when I found myself in this rabbit hole.
This is awesome. Loved the training video as well.<p>It’s kind of cool to see people putting in the effort to learn 30 commands and becoming masters of their own destiny. I guess it’s the same sense of mastery that Excel users have today.<p>What’s the dBase II/III equivalent today?
> What’s the dBase II/III equivalent today?<p>Salesforce, firebase or Supabase etc., but, all are SAAS platforms. Not sure if there is any other platform where you can do database and applications that you can host yourself.
Thank you, I'm glad you liked the article.<p>Hopefully someone more learned than myself about modern database programming will chime in. I'm not sure what current system offers both the database <i>and</i> development features in such a seamless package. That said, on the Mastodon post for this article, I was told, "Learning dBASE isn't for naught" and was directed to <a href="https://xharbour.org/" rel="nofollow">https://xharbour.org/</a> as a modern dBASE/Clipper implementation. (haven't had a chance to try it yet, personally)
Love the guy trying to crush his red telephone handset in the CP/M-86 ad. I assume he’s just been told he has to reenter the Kermit assembler code and start again.
Love this
"Author here" is the new "You're absolutely right"