Talk:Pfs:Write

Did "PFS" stand for something?

Alfred DiBlasi on youtube said he asked the publisher in the late80's-early90's, and said they said it meant "Pretty Fuckin' Simple" Colinstu 22:46, 17 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It definitely didn't mean that... or, if it did, that that was just the internal company secret, with a more acceptable meaning what SPC told the public. The unsigned (and, interestingly, not caught by the Sinebot) comment, below, is closer to the truth; though, as I sit here, thinking about it, I'm having trouble remembering. I'm an old-timer, with some nearly 40 years in IT as a programmer, consultant, systems integrator, etc., who was around during those old early desktop computing days; and I even helped beta test Software Publishing Corporation's (SPC's) stuff, back then; and installed it in way over a hundred, literally, companies and non-profit organizations. So I know these products, really well. To save my life, though, I'm having trouble remembering what "pfs" actually stood for... at least publicly. "Personal Filing System," as the below unsigned commenter wrote, might be correct.

Gregg L. DesElms (Username: Deselms) (talk) 21:25, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i remember reading it stood for Personal Filing System, at least publically

Late 2012 Updates

Viewing the history, I see that the last time anyone added to the article was in 2010. I stumbled onto it after looking-up Software Publishing Corporation (SPC) here, on Wikipedia, and then one thing led to another. Since I was, as I explain above, around in the desktop computer industry back in those days, I actually remember SPC's stuff, helped to beta test some of it, and installed tons and tons of it in many companies. I also wrote a surprising number of surprisingly sophisticated DOS custom database apps using the "Professional File" software. So when I read the article, here, today, I noticed all kinds of errors and misinformation. So I updated it all to at least make it accurate. The problem, though, is that it's all so old (it was all overwith -- history -- before the Worldwide Web part of the Internet was even conceived, much less actuated; and Wikipedia wasn't, yet, even a gleam in its founder's eye) that it's really difficult, I'm discovering, to find citations (though I have found, and set bookmarks to, a few). I'm going to try to add some citations; as well as further expland this, and other SPC-related articles to reflect some of the other products... with, of course, citations for those, too, if possible.

I write this, here, because it's vexing, sometimes, around here, at Wikipedia, whenever I know something, for absolutely certain (because I was either involved, or I'm simply old enough to remember it), yet I can't write it here because no original research is allowed, and I can't find citations to others writing it because it's either too old or too obscure. [sigh] Very frustrating. But, alas, I'm just venting; I'll figure it out. Still, I humbly request that no administrator start removing things because of the lack of citations. Trust me, what I've changed the article to, today, is dead-on accurate. I was there. So Wikipedia readers should at least have the benefit of that. But I agree that we need some citations, here. Gotta' find citations!
Gregg L. DesElms (Username: Deselms) (talk) 21:25, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: I decided to move all information about other SPC software products over to the SPC Wikipedia page, where it actually belongs. What's left, here, still needs citions, though.

Gregg L. DesElms (Username: Deselms) (talk) 06:12, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]