HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: vandendo@qucis.queensu.ca (Christian Vandendorpe)
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.0 GA - Impressions, Suggestions, Info
Organization: Computing & Information Science, Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 16:57:02 GMT

In article <rdippold.702593847@cancun> rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold) writes:
>Installation suggestions: I have a 106 MB hard disk.  I repartitioned
>and reinstalled three (3!) times before I found the setup I liked.  My
>suggestion: Make a bootable partition C: for DOS with enough room for
>you to put DOS and some DOS stuff on it.  Then make an extended
>logical HPFS partition for OS/2 2.0 with the rest.  I settled on 30 MB
>for the DOS partition (I want to have room for Ultima VII, and I don't
>know if it's going to run well under OS/2 2.0).  Then make it bootable
>on OS/2 2.0 by default.
>

How were you able to boot from a logical partition?? I thought you
could boot only from primary partitions (wether they be the active or non-
active primary partition).

Christian


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
= vandendo@qucis.queensu.ca		| "I only know that I know nothing" =
= vandendo@qucdn.queensu.ca		|		  - Socrates        =
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: gess@knex.Gwinnett.COM (Gess Shankar)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Manuals with OS/2 V.2 as shipped.
Date: 13 Apr 92 20:12:51 GMT
Article-I.D.: knex.5BR7iB2w164w
Organization: Knowledge Exchange, GA, US of A

rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain) writes:

> Providing them on CD is a good idea but they should still be available
> in print because they are one hell of a lot cheaper to produce on a press
> than on a bloody laser printer.  And how many have lasers.  I sure as
> hell don't wan't to spin them off on my DeskJet and then have to keep them
> from away from mere humidity.
> 
> Just having them online doesn't hack it in my opinion because they
> are too skimpy on theory and procedure in an attempt to conserve space.
> Fine as reference, lousy for learning.

I would vote for Docs on CDRom ALONG with print versions. I cannot buy the
argument that online docs have to be skimpy. If the delivery mechanism
is CDRom, you have enough space to put whole lot more than you can in a
book and make it more of a hypertext format.

All basics are covered in the print manual and more extensive documentation
delivered on CDRom. Re printing: while it is certainly not desirable to
print a whole manual, I would like to be able to collect snippets of
inter-related material and print a disposable copy for quick reference
or even make a custom manual of frequently used/needed material.

But I agree that print versions cannot be avoided.

GeSS
--
Gess Shankar      |<><>|Internet: gess@knex.Gwinnett.COM                |<><>|
Knowledge Exchange|<><>|{rutgers,ogicse,gatech}!emory!gwinnett!knex!gess|<><>|
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: jasonc@leland.Stanford.EDU (Jason Campbell)
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.0 Release: First Impressions
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 02:21:23 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.181653.28887@midway.uchicago.edu> sip1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>Would it be possible to add a facility to boot a system disk into a
>VDM from Drive B (more "better DOS than DOS")?  Right now only booting
>from Drive A is supported (as far as I can determine).

You mean setting "Boot from drive" in DOS settings doesn't cause a boot from 
drive b:?  I think you can just copy the "Boot drive A:" icon and change this
one setting.


I just tried booting from drive C: (my 2.0 is on D:) and it worked fine 
(after I remembered to add FSFILTER.SYS to the config.sys there). 

>-- 
>Timothy F. Sipples       Keeper of the OS/2 Frequently Asked Questions
>sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu  List, available via anonymous ftp from

Jason.

-- 
Jason Campbell | not talking for SU | "OS/2...saving the world thru software!"
1->  jasonc@leland.Stanford.EDU |2->  Prodigy: KSJB81e |3->  (415)497-3937
"Let us not go gently into the endless winter night..." -- Rush
From: des@frogland.inmos.co.uk (David Shepherd)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: PC Week Summary: 4/6/92
Date: 9 Apr 92 16:30:05 GMT
Organization: INMOS architecture group

In article <1992Apr9.033857.21011@news.Hawaii.Edu>, lauch@wiliki.eng.hawaii.edu (Chung Lau) writes:
>  "OS/2 2.0, it is so superior that we've sold 3 million copies before
>we even start to advertise it." - IBM ad.
>
>  What do you guys think? 8)

in the datamation article on OS/2 some months back there were comments
from IS managers from large companies saying that they would be putting
OS/2 on all their (386 and above) PCs and these were numbered in the
1000s per site. the reason - the (currently) run windows apps but
windows is too unreliable. 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
david shepherd: des@inmos.co.uk or des@inmos.com    tel: 0454-616616 x 625
                inmos ltd, 1000 aztec west, almondsbury, bristol, bs12 4sq
		"i speak latin to god,   spanish to men,   french to women 
		 and german to my horse."             - charles v of spain
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: jwh@citi.umich.edu (Jim Howe)
Subject: Program Groups under 2.0
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 92 11:53:14 EDT
Organization: IFS Project, University of Michigan
Reply-To: jwh@citi.umich.edu

I have an application that I wrote for OS/2 1.3 that
makes use of program groups.  For example, I have a
menu item that will display all the items in a program
group when the item is selected.  I used this as a way
of quickly launching applications that I might want
to access while running my application, without having
to find the program or group on my desktop.  Here's
my question, until I rewrite my application, how can
I accomplish the same thing under 2.0?  I've noticed
that when you 'migrate' applications, a thing resembling
a program group gets created.  However, you apparently
can't add new programs to these groups like you could
under 1.3, and I haven't found a way to create a program
group without using the migration capability.  Is there
a way to get program groups to work like they did in
1.3 under WPS without reconfiguring the desktop to be
a 1.3 desktop?


James W. Howe                  internet: jwh@citi.umich.edu
University of Michigan             uucp: uunet!mailrus!citi.umich.edu!jwh
Ann Arbor, MI   48103-4943
From: prao@ucsb.edu (Parik Rao)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Quick'n'fast Novell access
Date: 14 Apr 92 20:43:05 GMT
Reply-To: prao@bluemoon.ucsb.edu
Organization: U.C. Santa Barbara

I just purchased OS/2 v2.0 and am trying to access a few netware servers
with it.  Its not working out as well as I had thought it may.  I realize
the "proper" way is to purchase the OS/2 requesters from Novell in a month
or so ($30), but wouldn't this require supervisor intervention (he would
have to install stuff on the server, etc).  On some of the servers I
currently access, this is not a real possibility.

Sooo... I thought.... why not just open up a DOS box and load IPX and
NETX?  Sure!  Well, NETX comes up sometimes with the server name, but
no network drives show up (F:LOGIN, etc).  If I try to "CD SYS:LOGIN"
from the C:\ drive, I lose C (in the DOS box) but I do get to the novell
server.  Doesn't help much; I login and get "Unexpected error 9" and
never make it to my file-server directory.

Am I out in the cold?  Will it be necessary to install the OS2 stuff on
both the server and the PC's to access it? 

--
parik rao				                 prao@bluemoon.ucsb.edu
From: jmp1@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (JEFFREY MICHAEL PARSONS)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Mathematica or Maple under OS/2 2.0?
Date: 16 Apr 92 04:11:56 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

Does anyone know if these programs run in the OS/2 DOS emulator?  (Its hard
enough to run them with real DOS!)  Are Wolfram and Waterloo planning OS/2
versions of these programs?
-- 
 
"The more complex the mind, the greater the need for the simplicity of
play."  - James Tiberius Kirk
From: marten@feki.toppoint.de (Marten Feldtmann)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Does anyone have French OS/2 prices?
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 92 19:56:38 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Private, 2300 Kiel, Germany

TURGUT@FRMOP11.BITNET (Turgut Kalfaoglu) writes:

 Well, here in Germany the price for the upgrade from DOS 3.3 to OS/2 2.0
is about 146.- DM (something like $70), that's ok, I think!

 Marten


Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain)
Subject: Re: IBM OS/2 v.2.0 demo in Atlanta
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 06:09:56 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

smsmith@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Smith) writes:
: rhoward@matd.gatech.edu (Robert L. Howard) writes:
: 
: >The one thing that did impress me was that there
: >wasn't a machine more powerful than a 20 MHz 386DX in the bunch
: >and OS/2 ran just fine...
: 
: I've read about half a dozen posts that have said the same thing.
: I'm wondering if these machines had the new 386 SLC chip in them.
: At the rollouts I attended this week they had 2 machines with the
: 386 SLC chip, and they claimed that its performance was better
: than a 386/33 (yeah right).  Anyway, with its on-board cache and
: optimized instructions set (?) a 386 SLC machine performs much
: better than at least a 20 MHz machine.

In S.F. they were demoing on P70's with the SLC chip.

-- 
Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007

"There are some strings.  They're just not attached."
                                                    Victoria Roberts
From: TURGUT@FRMOP11.BITNET (Turgut Kalfaoglu)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Obtaining CDS disks...
Date: 11 Apr 92 15:40:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: FRMOP11.92102.154013TURGUT
Organization: European Academic Research Network

Hi all. I just bought OS/2 (yesterday) from an expo in Paris, which
was great, btw. It was a pre-release thing, as OS/2 is sheduled to
be released here next month. The instructions inside say 'register now!'
and there is a registration form, which says in small print
  "valid only in U.K."

So, what does this France-resident has to do? Not register his OS/2 and
not receive CSD (CDS?) disks? I most definitely would want to buy/steal/
get/beg_for the corrective diskettes.

My French is not that hot, so I am asking to the IBM staff on this
list instead of calling IBM-France for it.  Thanks!  -turgut
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: tholen@galileo.ifa.hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen)
Subject: Re: Word Processers For OS/2 1.3
Keywords: Word Processing
Organization: University of Hawaii
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 07:20:47 GMT

Mark Oehrlein writes:

> I am in need of a word processing program for OS/2 1.3.  (2.0 is not an 
> option quite yet...)
> 
> Does anyone have any suggestions/advice/recommendations?

DeScribe 3.0 runs under OS/2 1.3.  I was quite surprised by the power of
the product, given that the company is so much smaller than Wordperfect,
Microsoft, or Lotus, but they do have a very competitive product with
good technical support (in my limited experience).
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain)
Subject: Re: WHERE ARE THE TV ADS, WHERE ARE THE BANNERS IN STORES, WHERE IS THE MEDIA BLITZ???
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 92 03:58:21 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: usa

IBM's biggest customers are (you guessed it) business.  (You know, as in
International Business Machines).  Much as we would like it to be us
enthusiasts and much as IBM does too, they first and formost must serve
their traditional and their most loyal base.  If IBM came out now looking
like they were selling Rebocks, their image at the corporate levels would
take a major hit. This won't happen. We are second tier customers and that
is life.  It won't hurt us either.  Those big rollers are in fact who are
subsidising the cost of OS/2 so that you and I can afford to put it on
our $250 clones.  The last part of the name mentioned above is Machines.
*That* is what business is buying from International Business Machines.
They hope.  I don't know about other roll outs around the country today
but that was absolutely clear at S.F.  The demos and presentations were
aimed at business. The attendees, except for John Schubert, were business.
That is an exageration, John wasn't the only enthusiast there but you
could have counted them on one hand and the place was packed.  It for
sure was not a Mac-like crowd.  Just where in the hell were y'all?!

I really think that in this case Father knows best.  They want this market
of home buyers and students and enthusiasts but they will be careful going
after it.  Besides if they gave us what I hear expected, I wouldn't be too
impressed with their add folks anyway.  Let's give it a bit of time and see
how it develops.


Bob

-- 
Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007

"There are some strings.  They're just not attached."
                                                    Victoria Roberts
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: A Practical Question of OS/2 Performance
From: balesej@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Eric J Bales)
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 02:36:13 GMT
Organization: University of Cincinnati

In article <1992Apr10.092543.2028@burrhus.harvard.edu> kl@isr.harvard.edu (Kun Lee) writes:
>Hello, OS/2 users,
>I am sorry for cross posting this by accident.
>
>I am new to this group and thinking about moving to OS/2. I just upgraded
>to Windows 3.1 and disappointed. I am basically a DOS 5.0 user. I don't run
>any Win3 applications other than the ones provied with the pacakage. I use
>WordPerfect 5.1 for DOS, Quattro Pro 4.0 for DOS, PCtools 7.1 for DOS, and
>some other utilities. Whenever I tried to run these applications in Windows
>things were not smooth. It has not been reliable, cursor movement has been
>jumpy, screen scroll has been jumpy, and most of all floppy access has been
>too slow from the DOS applications. I've also used Desqview. This is not so
>much an exception either. All my movements in applications were jumpy. 
>Will these symptoms disappear if I use OS/2?

OS/2 multitasks DOS apps quite smoothly.  I run a BBS (DOS application)
all the time in the background, and most of the time I never know it's
there and the users of the BBS never know I'm using the machine for other
things.  You will have trouble running PCtools though.  This program
accesses the hardware directly and OS/2 doesn't like that.

As for floppies, they don't load the machine once at all.  Formatting
floppies while a user of my BBS is downloading slows down neither
process noticeably.  (2400 bps download)

>BTW, I am using a Dataworld 386DX - 20MHz, 4M RAM, 40M Conner drive (I
>know I have to upgrade the drive), and a 14" VGA color monitor with 
>Orchid ProDesigner Plus w/ 512K. Would you recommend an upgrade of the
>motherboard? 

Your machine is faster than mine (16MHz 386sx) and mine is (barely)
adequate for my purposes (light programming, the BBS and word processing
for the most part).  Memory is VERY important for performance issues.
-- 
at098@cleveland.freenet.edu                        -Eric Kirkbride-
balesej@ucunix.san.uc.edu
		        -The second dolphin-
Dolphins. Soon you will be one of us, and then you will understand.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: pwu@unixg.ubc.ca (Philip Wu)
Subject: Canadian Retail Stores will have OS/2 in late NEXT WEEK!!!
Keywords: OS/2 2.0 Canada
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 18:16:00 GMT


Well, I just got off the phone with Ingram/Micro in Canada, and they
say they will start shipping to dealers NEXT WEEK!! So hopefully,
everyone can get it by late next week.

I still haven't seen any ads yet here in Vancouver.

Philip Wu
pwu@unixg.ubc.ca

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: banz@umbc5.umbc.edu (Mr. Robert Banz; HONORS COL (U))
Subject: Retailers agains OS/2?
Organization: University of Maryland Baltimore Campus, Academic Computing Services
X-Wife: NOT!
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 04:46:29 GMT

Well, I've called around to my local retailers in the endless quest to find
someone locally that will be supporting OS2.  Much to my dismay, the first
two stores I called (Southwest Computer Warehouse and Egghead), seemed not
to be supporting it !  Southwest said that they would not be carrying it, 
and that they only carry DOS stuff...of course they sold Windoze, and had
all of the 3.1 publicity stuff all over the store.  Egghead said that they 
probably wouldn't carry it and if they did, it would be a warehouse item.  
Now how is OS/2 supposed to get out if one of the biggest software chains
(Egghead) isn't going to have it in stock!  Oh, well, I guess it's mailorder
for me.

If anyone out there in netland can point me to a store in the Baltimore area 
that will be supporting OS/2, I'd be grateful.  Please email.

Rob Banz

(banz@umbc5.umbc.edu)
From: dab6@po.CWRU.Edu (Douglas A. Bell)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: My OS/2 GA Won't Install!
Date: 9 Apr 92 21:59:52 GMT
Article-I.D.: usenet.1992Apr9.215952.22150
Reply-To: dab6@po.CWRU.Edu (Douglas A. Bell)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)


In a previous article, KEHN@CARVM3.VNET.IBM.COM (Dan Kehn) says:

>References: <matt.10@bss1.umd.edu>
>
>In <matt.10@bss1.umd.edu> Matthew Piermarini writes:
>>Help!
>>
>>  I finally get a copy of GA and it won't get past disk 1 during the install.
>>It fails with a FDISK error after displaying the Logo.  The INSTALL.LOG file
>>looks like:
>>
>>Model=FC
>>Submodel=01
>>Non-Abios Machine
>>Bus Architecutre=|0|
>>Disk Type=|0|
>>FDISK Unsuccessful
>>

>
>This is a SWAG, but try booting the install diskette, inserting disk 1, then
>press Esc to get to the command line.  Run FDISK from there (I think it
>is on disk 1).  Do your partitioning, let the system reboot, then start
>installing again.
>
>I only suggest the above because I have seen FDISK fail when invoked by
>the install program, yet work when invoked directly from a command prompt.
>

I did this to get 304 to install.  I was recieving a similar problem with
an IDE drive.

p.s. I recieved my official upgrade 1.3 -> 2.0 form today.
-- 
"We have developed Windows applications, but we didn't inhale."
          -Philippe Kahn, Borland International
From: jgay@digi.lonestar.org (john gay)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: ever changing NT (MS running scared...?)
Date: 15 Apr 92 19:08:11 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX

In article <1992Apr15.045643.4061@midway.uchicago.edu> sip1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <1992Apr15.023800.67016@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> ry01@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (ROBERT YUNG) writes:

>>12) What's MS's C-2 protection? How's it better?
>
>Newsflash: Microsoft just announced the ever-evolving NT won't have
>C2.
>
>But, if it did, it would be extremely unlikely to have any impact on
>your life.  C2 is a certification level (and a low one at that) issued
>by the Department of Defense.

I hadn't heard that yet, but...
In this weeks (4/13) Info World (that mavin of truth and facts...) the
headline article has a subtitle of "NT to include networking features, OS/2
support".  The article says "In addition, Version 1.0 of the Windows NT 32-bit
operating system will also support OS/2's High Performance File System (HPFS).
A second release of NT next year will offer compatibility with OS/2
Presentation Manager, said Steve [I'll eat a floppy] Ballmer, executive
vice president."

Now, why would MS bother including support for an OS that will only sell
[according to Gates or Ballmer I forget which] about 200,000 copies this
year. ;-)

Also, there will be 2 version of NT - a server and a desktop.  "NT for
desktops will cost less than $1,000, Walker [Dwayne Walker of NT marketing]
said."  So this has gone from an expensive [$400-600] product to a real
expensive [let me guess $995] product.  Oooooh, who do I call to give my
credit card number to (NOT!).


john gay.                      jgay@digi.lonestar.org

Crack the Window and see what you are missing.
From: amund@itk.unit.no (Amund Skavhaug)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: IBM, are you listening? (Was: Windoze 3.1 is here.)
Keywords: Yesterday(4 April) I saw Windoze 3.1 for sale here.
Date: 8 Apr 92 14:46:18 GMT
Organization: Norwegian Institute of Technology / SINTEF, Trondheim, Norway

In article <7APR199217092998@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov>, smbrush@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (Andy Brush @Sverdrup) writes:
|> In article <1992Apr7.084444.14910@cs.brown.edu>, wcn@cs.brown.edu (Wen-Chun Ni) writes...
|> [removed]
|> >C'mon guys. It's no big deal. Why should we care about the internal
|> >function of IBM itself? Does IBM give us its stock if we care enough?
|> >The late arriving OS/2 2.0 is no big deal. Just wait. Anyway, I'm
|> >locked by buying 1.3. So all I have is "waiting." If OS/2 2.0  does
|> >not make a success, how many dollars do you lose? 
|>                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|> Let's see... already spent $750 on development system which is useless with 
|> Windows, and will spend about $200 on manuals when they are finalized.  
|> 
|> Suppose I write a graphical front end for a mainframe analysis program 
|> using OS/2, multithreading, PM graphics, etc.  THEN, the Government (my 
|> customer) says "OS/2 didn't catch on... where's the Windows version?"
|> 
|> I don't think it will be as easy to port back to DOS!!!  I think it will 
|> cost me hundreds of hours to do a new version.
|> 
|> I, and other, far more serious programmers than me, invested in IBM by
|> PAYING FOR and PROGRAMMING in OS/2 development systems well before GA.  If
|> IBM drops the ball and lets OS/2 2.0 limp along as an internal-use system
|> like 1.3, this is costly to us.  I hope that end users will realize that
|> the people doing serious complaining about OS/2 marketing have more
|> invested than just the cost of the OS license. 
|> 
|> Andrew S. Brush             | SMBRUSH@LIMS01.lerc.nasa.gov
|> Sverdrup Technology         | 2001 Aerospace Parkway
|> NASA LeRC Group             | Brook Park, OH 44142
|> "Opinions are Mine, Only"   | (216) 826-6770

-- 
I agree ! But users will also loose more than the cost of the os2 2.0
copy if (God forbid) it should flop. There is a cost in changing 
environments. In Norway I have not seen any adds so far, but MS telling
that in Windows 3.1 windows apps cannot hurt each other anymore.......
My local IBM store don't seem to think there will be a problem that
windows 3.1 have big adds now, and they will not do anything before
23 April when the Norwegian version is released. (By the way, windows 3.1
 Norwegian will arrive in June.....)


Regards, Amund Skavhaug

Division of Engineering Cybernetics	: Phone +47 7 594376
The Norwegian Institute of Technology	: Fax   +47 7 594399
N-7034 Trondheim                        : Email amund@itk.unit.no
NORWAY
From: anto@dutetvd.tudelft.nl (Anto Daryanto)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Boot Manager
Date: 12 Apr 92 11:52:20 GMT
Organization: Delft University of Technology

Can I install Boot Manager on my second harddisk ?
From: alushiku@engws4.ic.sunysb.edu (Lushiku)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Question from the README file included with the release
Date: 13 Apr 92 00:32:40 GMT
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Originator: alushiku@engws4.ic.sunysb.edu


This is from the README file from OS/2 2.0:

 ] FORMATTING DISKETTES
 ] 
 ] If you have a non-Micro Channel system with a
 ] 5-1/4" drive and its 3-1/2" drives all support
 ] media sense, your 5-1/4" drive will format
   ^^^^^^^^^^^

Huh?  What's "media sense?"

 ] diskettes at 720MB.  Previously formatted 1.2MB
                   ^^
Heh...I wish.... 8)

 ] diskettes will read and write correctly.  A fix
 ] for this problem can be obtained from the
 ] electronic bulletin board described in the
 ] "Service and Support Information" section of this
 ] file.

I havn't heard about this "problem" as of yet.  As I haven't received my 
copy of OS/2 2.0 yet (nor do I expect to for weeks....sheesh), could someone 
elaborate on this?

Thank you....Lushiku

----
alushiku@libserv1.ic.sunysb.edu
Turn your 486/33 into an XT....just add MS Windoze!
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc