HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: chris@cad.gatech.edu (Chris McClellen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Damned good recovery
Date: 13 Aug 92 18:51:50 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA

In article <1992Aug13.135134.19106@msc.cornell.edu> maynard@esther.msc.cornell.edu (Maynard J. Handley) writes:
>>Hangs every time unless you make the changes to SVGADATA.PMI as described
>
>I'm a Mac user who simply follows the competition out of interest, but
>something I wonder about. Isn't OS/2 supposed to come with HPFS which means
>you can use decent filenames that use upper and lower case and spaces, have
>file types attached and can be reasonably long? If so, why are you people

Yes, you can have up to 254 characters with HPFS as well as having
spaces, etc....


>all using these ridiculous names like SVGADATA.PMI? Do you realize how
>childish thsi makes your OS look? I might at some point switch to OS/2, but
>certainly not while all public evidence I see of it makes it look like ist
>still has all the gorgeous DOS file system features as far as the user is
>concerned.
>

Well, file names > than 8.3 get truncated to DOS tasks.  They usually
are INVISIBLE  (dir command doesnt pick them up).  However,
the SVGA program is a DOS app, not an OS2 app, so it is restricted to 
DOS's file name limit.


-------------------------------------------------------
| Chris McClellen      (chris@cad.gatech.edu)         |
| "If at first you don't succeed, redefine success."  |
-------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: bdubbs@cs.tamu.edu (Bruce Dubbs)
Subject: Windows NT 'Alpha'
Organization: Computer Science Department, Texas A&M University
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 23:26:51 GMT

As I read through the posts on this newsgroup, I see many comments
about the current Windows NT release being an 'Alpha' version.  I
believe this is a mangling of the term.  In everything I've seen,
actually quite a bit, the term 'Alpha Test' refers to a controlled
environment, usually withing the developing organization.  'Beta
Test' refers to a less controlled environment tested by someone other
than the original development team.

By the above definitions, the Windows NT version available on CD-ROM
is a 'Beta' not an 'Alpha'.  If the code causes a lot of errors (I'm
not saying it does or dosen't), the definition is not affected.  I
wonder just what the rationale for calling the Windows NT Beta an
'Alpha' version is?  In any case I don't thing a (possibly) marketing
issue should change the definition of established software engineering
terms. 

Please, let's call the Windows NT Beta what it is.

--
Bruce Dubbs                   |  Oxymorons of note:
bdubbs@neuron.tamu.edu        |  Honest Politician, Political Science,
bdubbs@sadis01.sa.aflc.af.mil |  Scrupulous Lawyer
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: bill@snoopy (Bill Poitras)
Subject: Re: OS/2, DOS, NT (Speculative) -- My Opinions
Reply-To: bill@msi.com
Organization: Molecular Simulations, Inc.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 02:54:01 GMT

Anton Versteeg (AV@vnet.ibm.com) wrote:
: In <1992Aug19.185043.10918@msi.com> Bill Poitras writes:
: >I'm not a fan of Windows NT, but I can see why Microsoft is doing what
: >they are.  They are basically doing what workstation vendors do (like
: >Silicon Graphics) when they are getting ready to release a new OS, they
: >pass it amoung the developers, the people who keep them in business.

: It makes you wonder though why this SDK is so much cheaper than
: the OS/2 SDK's MS used to sell for over $1000.

I believe that when OS/2 first came out, MS wasn't as good at marketing
and figured it would make its sales on the SDK.  Today it learns the best
way to make a great product is let everyone and thier brother develop for
your platform, and the applications sell the platform.  You cater to the
developers, you get more apps, meaning more customers for your platform.

--
+-----------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------+
| Bill Poitras    | Molecular Simulations Inc.    | Tel (408)522-9229       |
| (bill)          | Sunnyvale, CA USA             |                         | 
|                 | FAX (408)732-0831             | bill@msi.com            |
+-----------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------+

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: soh3@quads.uchicago.edu (min-woong sohn)
Subject: Re: pc week and nt
Reply-To: soh3@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago 
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 01:08:34 GMT

In article <19920813104812CSYSPCN@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU> CSYSPCN@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU (CSYSPCN) writes:
>In article <1992Aug12.221342.21192@microsoft.com>, on 12 Aug 92 22:13:42 GMT,
>petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Skelly) writes:
>
>>                                   Why are y'all complaining that MS dropped
>>you, when in truth, MS said that since MS and IBM couldn't get along any more
>>IBM's getting the "kid", so you are going to have to go to IBM for your
>>support of OS/2.
>>

What kind of divorce was it anyway?  Did MS and IBM separation result in
splitting all the kids they had?  IBM and MS both still support DOS.  So
if Pete's metaphor of divorce has any grain of truth, it's more like
MS abrogating OS/2 than an outright splitup.  So contrary to Pete, MS
did dropped its kid.

Min
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows NT 'Alpha'
Date: 21 Aug 92 15:47:52 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <1992Aug17.232651.23471@tamsun.tamu.edu> bdubbs@cs.tamu.edu (Bruce Dubbs) writes:
[definition deleted]

>By the above definitions, the Windows NT version available on CD-ROM
>is a 'Beta' not an 'Alpha'.  If the code causes a lot of errors (I'm
>not saying it does or dosen't), the definition is not affected.  I
>wonder just what the rationale for calling the Windows NT Beta an
>'Alpha' version is?  In any case I don't thing a (possibly) marketing
>issue should change the definition of established software engineering
>terms. 
>
>Please, let's call the Windows NT Beta what it is.

That would be all well and good if Microsoft called it a beta.  But
they didn't.  They're calling it a "pre-beta SDK".  This isn't even
"pre-beta NT", but just some development tools and enough of NT to run
them.  It certainly isn't a beta of the NT operating system!

This is according to the MS hype.  I don't know what they actually
shipped, but MS insists that this is NOT the NT-beta that will be
released when they get all the features implemented and past the
internal "alpha" stage.
-- 
   |)  David Charlap           "I don't even represent myself
  /|_  dic5340@hertz.njit.edu   sometimes so NJIT is right out!.
 ((|,)
  ~|~  Hi! I am a .signature virus, copy me into your .signature file.
From: "bill dehaan" <bill.dehaan@canrem.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: crashing wps
Date: 13 Aug 92 00:45:52 EST
Reply-To: "bill dehaan" <bill.dehaan@canrem.com>
Distribution: comp
Organization: Canada Remote Systems

In message <BsqBvC.54J#chinet.chi.il.us>, orac@chinet.chi.il.us (Paul J.
Giovacchini) writes:

BdH>Hmm. We trash our 2.0 systems about as often as our 3.1 systems. For all
BdH>of the talk about "crash-proof" systems, we can take out the WPS without
BdH>breathing hard.  We've already  got one  severity 1  APAR against IBM on
BdH>this. Maybe when IBM ships the [insert desired season] CSD, things  will
BdH>improve. But at a user level, we don't find OS/2 and PM to be that  much
BdH>more stable than DOS and Windows.

PG>        I too can take the WPS out if I wish.  Rememebr the WPS
PG> is a PM application.  When the WPS goes down, PM and OS/2 still are
PG> functioning.  When Windows goes down, it takes the OS with it.  So,
PG> OS/2 and PM are very stable, its the application-GUI-WPS that has
PG> a bad day every so often.  :-)  So, say you are running a comm
PG> program, the WPS does a "Phoenix", your session is still running.

Unfortunately, to the user, it is one and the same. We crash WPS and  PM
at least twice a  day, and I managed  to destroy a 300Mb  HPFS partition
which couldn't be restored through normal means. I had to tell IBM  what
I did to figure it out. By the way, if anyone else has experienced  APAR
PJ04052, I have a fix for it, but it's evil. :-)

----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
Deus Ex Machina                   | Internet:   bill.dehaan@rose.com
Software Consulting and Gator Pit | I'm a brain in a vat. What about you?
----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
---
  SLMR 2.1a  Seen on Pavlov's door: Knock. Don't ring bell.
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario/Detroit, MI
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
From: rhoward@matd.gatech.edu (Robert L. Howard)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: superVGA (and misc top-blowing)
Date: 14 Aug 92 20:11:22 GMT
Organization: Georgia Tech Research Institute

brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:

>I imagine if IBM actually had bothered to create a device driver kit for
>OS/2, then there WOULD BE an ATI driver already.
>I personally know of three different developers trying to write device/printer
>drivers.  IBM simply does not have sample code available and the documentation
                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^
>they do provide is very poor.  I don't see why you're blaming the video
>card vendors, when IBM hasn't even provided a rudimentary DDK.

Well, I can't comment on the documentation but I do seem to remember
reading that one of the things that held up the DDK was *Microsoft*.
Their lawyers were unwilling to let IBM put *sample code* into the
kit.  I don't know what (if anything) was the final outcome.

Robert
--
| Robert L. Howard              |   Georgia Tech Research Institute     |
| robert.howard@matd.gatech.edu |   MATD Laboratory                     |
| (404) 528-7165                |   Atlanta, Georgia  30332             |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
| "See, when the GOVERNMENT spends money, it creates jobs; whereas when |
| the money is left in the hands of TAXPAYERS, God only knows what they |
| do with it.  Bake it into pies, probably.  Anything to avoid creating |
| jobs." -- Dave Barry                                                  |
From: nevries@accucx.cc.ruu.nl (Nico E de Vries)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: os/2 and nt
Date: 13 Aug 92 13:30:19 GMT
Distribution: comp
Organization: Academic Computer Centre Utrecht

In <1992Aug13.2712.3558@dosgate> bill.dehaan@canrem.com (bill dehaan) writes:

>...
>Actually, no. Given the problems that OS/2 has with supporting backlevel
>OS (Windows, DOS) in addition to its own code, I'd say that the  efforts
>are probably about equal. OS/2 has the advantage in terms of the  amount
>of existing code; NT has the advantage of a considerably cleaner  design
>without having  to maintain  the campatability  with other  systems that

NT is SUPPOSED to become DOS, Windows and OS/2 1.3 (no PM) compatible. I
fail to understand the advantage of less compatibility than OS/2 you
mention. I have to admit MS limits itself to the to 100 Windows and DOS
apps but that leaves enough problems to solve.

>OS/2 does. Obviously, OS/2 was here first. But I'd say that NT is pinned
>at  about  a  year  behind  OS/2.  Given  that  NT  is considerably more
>ambitious, I'd put them at about an equal footing.

OS/2 is not standing still either. The Mach kernel planned to be used
will give it more platforms than NT, stuff like B2 security, multiprocessing
(symetric I believe) and POSIX compliance are in the queue as well. That
does make OS/2 as ambitious as OS/2 I think. 

>And from what we've seen of NT, porting an existing Win3[01] application
>to it is no worse or better than porting the same application to OS/2.

Correct. In both cases (in a while, not now) recompilation will be possible.
In both cases utilizing native features (especially Cairo/WPS) will take
some rewriting.

>----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
>Deus Ex Machina                   | Internet:   bill.dehaan@rose.com
>Software Consulting and Gator Pit | Eradicate Hunger - Eat the homeless
>----------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
>---
> ~ SLMR 2.1a ~ Kenneth, what's the frequency?
>--
>Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario/Detroit, MI
>World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044


Nico E. de Vries
_ _
O O  USENET nevries@cc.ruu.nl  FIDO 2:281/708.1  COMPUSERVE "soon" ???? 
 o   This text reflects MY opinions, not that of my employer BITECH.      
\_/  This text is supplied 'AS IS', no waranties of any kind apply.      
     Don't waste your time on complaining about my hopeless typostyle.

"I would admit my mistakes, if I had any ..."  (Bumper Sticker)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: tlim@nyx.cs.du.edu (Tihor Lim)
Subject: Re: Number of users etc.
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 12:49:18 GMT

philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:

>In article <1992Aug14.105922.13684@actrix.gen.nz> Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz writes:
>>In article <1992Aug13.235913.22546@hellgate.utah.edu> brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
>>> >And last but not least, is the number of NT betatesters (prerelease
>>> >users) known? 
>>> Microsoft just announced that 10,000 pre-release SDK's have been shipped.
>>
>>Do they send these to people who plan to use them? Or do they just pump them
>>out to a mailing list? I get all sorts of guff coming across my desk from
>>vendors trying to get me on board with respect to their products.....
>> 

>      You actually have to fork over money for the SDK - I'm not aware
>of anyone receiving copies for free, or being sent unsolicited copies. 
>I would estimate that a reasonable percentage of those SDK copies went
>to people who are either considering or committed to developing
>applications for NT.  And, of course, some of them went to people who
>just wanted to take a look.  But I would also venture to say that very,
>very few of those 10,000 could be described as "shelfware."

I have been sent information about a Windows Developers conference on in 
Melbourne.  It says that every person who takes the developers conference
($AUS 450) will get a free copy of NT and the SDK on CD-ROM.  There is also
a business sett which will give you MS OFFICE.
I notice that Microsoft charge for this sort of thing ($5) while Borland
sent me an ivitation to see Phillipe Kahne speak free of charge.

I am just an ordinary twelve year old with a 486 running os/2 so I would
have no intention of forking out money I don't have for something I dont
want or need.

Tihor
(edb998esys@vx24.cc.monash.edu.au or tlim@nyx.cs.du.edu)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: dab6@po.CWRU.Edu (Douglas A. Bell)
Subject: Re: What crash is a bad crash (was  Re: pc week and nt)
Reply-To: dab6@po.CWRU.Edu (Douglas A. Bell)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 19:17:59 GMT


In a previous article, craigdo@microsoft.com (Craig Dowell) says:

>It's been a while since I played with the WPS, but arent the applications
>you run under the WPS children of the shell?  Aren't they killed when
>the shell dies? 

I'm not sure what you are getting at, but I have seen the workplace shell 
desktop go down but windowed programs on the desktop continue to to run. 
The icons on the desktop all dissappear and then reappear over the course
of the next 20-30 seconds, just like when the desktop is started after 
bootup.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: maynard@esther.msc.cornell.edu (Maynard J. Handley)
Subject: Re: Release dates ( was Re: superVGA (and misc top-blowing)
Organization: Cornell-Materials-Science-Center
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 04:03:20 GMT

[Flames about quality of TeX vs Word deleted.]

Can I make a comment here. I have a Mac and (as some know) am an avid Mac
evangelist. But I use Alpha (an emacs like editor) and AMS-LaTeX (running
on OzTeX) for almost all documents, even letters to friends. It is my
considered opinion that NOTHING right now produces output with the quality
of TeX. I'm a graduate physicist. I see papers written by people using Word
etc. They suck. The spacing in the math is wrong. The sizes of the various
symbols are correlated with each other etc. 

I can see two groups of people thinking this is acceptable: 
1) People who don't understand complex math and who think that the simple
fact that all the symbols are there in approximately the correct place is
acceptable,
2) People who have no aesthetic sensibilities.
Knuth spent quite a few years of his life on TeX because he wasn't
satisfied with "good enough" and I think it shows. Consider something
simple: every other word processor output I've seen has italic words
bumping into the roman words that follow them because they don't know about
italic correction. Look at the way TeX varies the spacing between letters
and words with punctuation. Lots of little things add up to quality
output.

I agree that TeX is in many ways a pain. Using LaTeX is a big improvement.
Using AMS-LaTeX with the New Font Selection Scheme is another improvement.
But picture handling and lack of instant feedback are a big pain. I would
pay lots of money for a word processor that produced TeX quality output
with a decent Mac style interface and picture handling. Such a beast does
not exist yet. But I bought a Mac because I demand the best. And I use TeX
because I demand the best.

There ARE lots of things best done GUI style. Editing pictures, which I do
all the time, is one. Managing files (ooh this won't go down well) using
Finder rather than sh, csh , tcsh, ksh, bash or whatever is another (I use
tcsh and Finder everyday so this isn't a know-nothing opinion.) Reading
news with xrn rather than rn is a third. Using the TeX engine inside a
decent GUI would be better than what we have right now.

But to say that Word and competitors can produce simple text, let alone
math that is the equal of TeX is to reveal chronic ignorance or chronic
lack of aesthetic sensibilities.

Maynard Handley
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.misc
From: apas611@chpc.utexas.edu (David Boles)
Subject: Re: I've seen NT......and I'll take OS/2 2.0 thanks!
Organization: The University of Texas System - CHPC
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 92 23:07:55 GMT

In article <1992Aug15.011002.25592@microsoft.com> petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Skelly) writes:
>MS has officially release what is in the first release of NT.  IBM has not
>released any information really regarding the next release of OS/2.
>
>All the guy was asking is for people to post about what's planned for the
>next version of OS/2.
>
>petesk@microsoft.com
>My Opinions...
>

Just an interesting bit of history: Microsoft released the OS/2 2.0 SDK
in December of 1989 and was shipping them by mid February 1990.  So it
was more than two _years_ from the shipment of the SDK to release.  Is
this what will happen with NT?  Even if they do it in half the time, NT
won't be out until the summer of 1993.

Source: Byte from April 1990

Dave Boles
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows NT 'Alpha'
Date: 19 Aug 92 23:30:03 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <1992Aug19.180134.11375@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> dab6@po.CWRU.Edu (Douglas A. Bell) writes:
>In a previous article, scdorcy@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES DORCEY) says:
>>In article <1992Aug17.232651.23471@tamsun.tamu.edu>, bdubbs@cs.tamu.edu (Bruce 
>>Dubbs) writes...
>>
>>>Please, let's call the Windows NT Beta what it is.
>
>It would probably be best to call the current release an SDK.

Isn't that what MS calls it?  It's the "Windows NT pre-release SDK".
No mention of alpha, beta, or anything else.


-- 
   |)  David Charlap           "I don't even represent myself
  /|_  dic5340@hertz.njit.edu   sometimes so NJIT is right out!.
 ((|,)
  ~|~  Hi! I am a .signature virus, copy me into your .signature file.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.misc
From: petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Skelly)
Subject: Re: I've seen NT......and I'll take OS/2 2.0 thanks!
Date: 16 Aug 92 06:30:37 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1992Aug14.202253.33580@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.ibm.com writes:
>In  <SXMRP.15.0@orca.alaska.edu>  SXMRP@orca.alaska.edu (Michael R. Platzke) writes:
>>
>> NT has, I'm told, Win-32 and limited Win-16 support, today (my CD-ROM drive
>> has not come in so I have not had the chance to extensively test it).  In
>> addtion, it has a limited version of LANMAN and TCP/IP support,
>> *BUILT IN to the OS.
>
>And OS/2 has Lan Server and TCP/IP available as add-ons.  Those who want them
>can buy them.  The millions of stand-alone machines that have no use for them
>need not pay for them.
>
>Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)

Oh, so what you're saying is that these things should be optional modules.
That may be okay (hey, look, and IBM person and a MS person agreeing).
However, others on this group seem to think that it is absolutely necessary
that NT ship with these things, and the kitchen sink as well.

You may want to tell the folks upstairs this, cause I assume they are
rational individuals, and mean that both operating systems should absolutely
have these features.  (or maybe they were just trying to flame NT and MS)

petesk@microsoft.com
My Opinions...
From: gkushmer@jade.tufts.edu (Greg Kushmerek)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: superVGA  (and misc top-blowing)
Date: 19 Aug 92 18:02:44 GMT
	<1992Aug14.084203.26599@cam-orl.co.uk>
	<1992Aug14.152055.391@novell.com>
Organization: Roger Mellie Enterprises, PLC

In article <1992Aug14.152055.391@novell.com> chris@cad.gatech.edu (Chris McClellen) writes:

>   Not only copying files, but programming, doing communications work, and 
>   alot of stuff simultaneously that makes windows go crazy.  Compiling
>   a large application with other things running takes a long time.
>   You are right.  For users who just use word processors, and don't
>   do anything else, win 3.1 is fine.  
                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

That hasn't been what I have found here at Tufts.  Down the hall from
me there is a gentleman running Win 3.1 on his IBM PS/2.  The system
does not have the requirements for OS/2 2.0, but even if it did
Tufts wouldn't give it to him (that's another story).

The other day, he came up to me in the hall and asked me what advantages
there were to using Windows.  I prodded around to see what he was 
getting at, and he said two things:  he can't see the need for multitasking
but at the same time that's because his system is constantly crashing on
him.  

Windows 3.1 has given multitasking a bad name ->IN HIS EYES<- 
because it constantly kills his data and slows him down.  

Personally, if my office gets a new machine like they are planning to
do, then I will push REAL hard to get OS/2.  Then maybe I can establish
a beachead and my co-worker down the hall will have just reason to switch and
upgrade so that he can get some work done.

--gk