[X-Unix] Why didn't Apple change the line break??

[David Ledger]

>From: Brent Baisley <brent at landover.com>
>Subject: Re: [X-Unix] Why didn't Apple change the line break??
>To: "A place to discuss Mac OS X from the perspective of the command
>	line."	<x-unix at listserver.themacintoshguy.com>
>Message-ID: <16D4FFC5-0B37-11D9-BE2C-000A95CD828E at landover.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>Both the terms line feed and carriage return are kind of antiquated.
>Derived from the type writer. A line feed "scrolled" the paper to the
>next line, but left you in the same spot vertically. A "carriage
>return" returned the "carriage" back to the left. So if you think about
>it, Windows is the only platform that got it right using both a
>carriage return and line feed. When you press return you are brought to
>the start of the next line. Then there is the vertical tab, which
>FileMaker using as a return within the database. Go figure.

Long before Windows (or DOS), systems saved storage by one byte per 
line by only using either CR or LF.  Terminal drivers could be 
configured to o/p CR then LF when seeing whichever one the system 
saved, and different terminals had configuration switches to make 
either perform both functions.  You had to set the two to match or 
you got over-typing, staircasing (no return between lines) or double 
spacing.  Real terminal drivers allowed you to add a number of null 
characters after a newline to give time for the printhead to get back 
to the left under spring power.

CR LF was probably the first example of Microsoft bloat.

David


-- 
David Ledger - Freelance Unix Sysadmin in the UK.
Chair of HPUX SysAdmin SIG of hpUG technical user group (www.hpug.org.uk)
dledger at ivdcs.co.uk
www.ivdcs.co.uk