HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: robertre@microsoft.com (Robert Reichel ms2)
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! : )
Date: 25 Dec 92 23:13:20 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corp.
Distribution: na

In article <1992Dec25.045437.17261@nosc.mil> discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar) writes:
>The only thing I could think of slapping MS for is "dumping" their software.
>That is, Microsoft is selling their software for less than it costs to
>develop, maintain, and ship it.

MS can offer a lower price for DOS to volume purchasers because it
doesn't *have* to produce and ship it.  When a company like Gateway
signs a contract to install Dos on their machines, they get the rights
to duplicate Dos and its documentation as part of their installation
process.  This is a big win for the PC producer, because they can
tailor the installation however it best fits their manufacturing
process.  A common thing to do is to install onto disembodied hard
drives over a network before the drive is placed in its target
machine.  That's why most PC manufacturers can't produce customized
installations (like multiple partitions, etc).

It is also a win for MS, since we don't have to produce a packaged
product on our assembly lines and ship it and insure it and all that
garbage.
-- 
-------
Not even close to being a Microsoft spokesperson.
Don't believe a word I say.
Robert Reichel,		{decvax,uunet,uw-beaver}!microsoft!robertre
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: jmalloy@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Joseph T. Malloy)
Subject: Re: Microsoft and the American Dream
Organization: Hamilton College - Clinton, NY
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 19:55:45 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.073521.13343@bsu-ucs> 00gwmichelin@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu writes:
>Let me add my two cents worth to this long talk of how bad the American Free
>Enterprise System is.  It seems that we have gotten to a point in this country
>that we look down on people (or companies) who "make it".  And if the do become
>a success like Microsoft, we feel that they own the rest of us something.  This
>is America.  This is the land where we all have the chance to make it and end
>up in the gutter.  Mem and women died to give us that right.  I know I sound
>that Ross Perot but that's how I feel.

The so-called "free enterprise system" has worked miracles for us and
has yet simultaneously been an embarassment to us.  It's a good system
but not a perfect one.  It can be improved upon, IMHO.   

>
>On another note, people have been saying if you don't like Microsoft, don't buy
>thier products.  It reminds me of a similar situation here.  People were upset
>with the local cable company over rates.  Cable TV is a service--a luxury--not
>a necessity.  Bill Gates and his group offer a service.  He has some of the
>best products in town but not the only ones.  Microsoft created this software
>but they are not the only ones who can.

The cable TV analogy won't hold.  Microsoft makes, as far as I'm
concerned good products and I've purchased them gladly.  Even if they
didn't do well by me, however, I have always had alternatives.  In the
case of cable, that is a local monopoly (with atrocious service, a
'damn-the-customer' attitude, and arrogant practices and procedures) and
I'm all for regulating the living bejeezus out of 'em.  Once there is a
ready alternative service (even if it costs more!), I'll switch and then
be happy to let the market decide, but until then, I want them regulated
more tightly than they would ever like.  It's apparently the only way to
get them to pretend they care about delivering service. (Sure, it's a
luxury; but I'm paying for it -- does the fact that it's a luxury
somehow cancel the obligations they incur because I subscribe? I don't
think so.)
 
>There . . . I will now make room on the soapbox for the next speaker.

Thanks.  I now climb down, too!

Happy New Year one and all!

jmalloy@hamilton.edu
From: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Jim Mann)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is Microsoft the next Standard Oil?
Date: 31 Dec 1992 14:26:58 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
Reply-To: jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: gondolin.pubs.stratus.com

In article <1htv10INNp6c@tamsun.tamu.edu> bdubbs@cs.tamu.edu (Bruce  
Dubbs) writes:
> You still don't get it.  As soon as the competitors are forced to
> liquidate, the prices go up.  The best way for things to proceed as
> they are with competitive prices is to ensure the competition  
remains
> viable. 

Do you see any evidence of this happening, though?  In the
OS market, they have more competition then ever before. Until
a year ago, I never saw an ad for DR-DOS in the major
catalogs. Now, Egghead, PC Connection, Microwarehouse, and so
forth all offer it. Ditto for OS/2.

In the Applications market, MS doesn't control the market
(unless you count the Mac Applications market, where they
do control a significant share of the word processor and
spread sheet markets).

Do you really think MS can drive WordPerfect, Lotus, and
Borland out of business?  Would they even want to?
WordPerfect for Windows is a selling point for Windows (and
once you get the WordPerfect users to Windows, you can
then try to convince them that, while their, the spread sheet
to use is Excel). 

--
Jim Mann            
Stratus Computer   jmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com  

Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: scdorcy@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES DORCEY)
Subject: Re: SPA Data, was Gates Interview
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date: 21 Dec 1992 17:29 EST  

In article <1992Dec17.225027.13363@microsoft.com>, dwightm@microsoft.com 
(Dwight Matheny) writes...
>A lot of us at MS believe that the SPA data is the best snapshot of what's
>happening in the software industry. It's simply the best data we have 
>available to us. No data is perfect. SPA data is much better than say,
>data from distributors (Merisel's "Hot List" for example) because distributor
>data doesn't include direct sales, OEM sales, or international sales (which
>make up more than 50% of our revenues.)

Then do you agree that WordPerfect for DOS consistently outsells DOS 5 and 
Windows 3.1?
From: tracer@majestix.cs.uoregon.edu (Roger M. Wilcox)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Notice! OS2 will Execute Win3 programs Without having to have Win
Date: 4 Jan 93 00:50:23 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.1993Jan4.005023.26661
Organization: University of Oregon Computer and Information Sciences Dept.

In article <1i7p0mINNkkc@neuro.usc.edu> merlin@neuro.usc.edu (merlin) writes:
>>The only bad thing about the way Windows programs multitask is that the
>>task-switching is not pre-emptive.  It is cooperative.  
>
>One other really bad feature of MS-Windows multitasking is that there 
>is no concept of dynamic priority based scheduling.  As a consequence 
>background processes get a fixed percentage of cpu whether or not any
>other process (forground process) is using cpu at all.  At least that
>is the way the system seems to behave whenever I have used it.  OS/2's
>pre-emtive PRIORITY DRIVEN scheduler allows dynamic division of cpu's
>resources among multiple processes.

Hardly.

Process A calls GetMessage/PeekMessage.  The Windows kernel looks for event
messages destined for Process A in the system message queue.  The kernel finds
no high-priority messages for Process A (WM_TIMER and WM_PAINT are low
priority), but does find a high-priority message for Process B.  So, the kernel
switches tasks to Process B, places the message in Process B's appication
message queue, and returns the appropriate value from Process B's previous
call to GetMessage/PeekMessage.  Process B, upon reading the event message
in from its queue, can take AS MUCH TIME AS IT LIKES OR NEEDS to completely
handle the event message it has just received, and will continue to execute
without interruption until it calls GetMessage/PeekMessage again.

Thus, if a process needs a lot of processing time to handle an event, it can
take it; but if a process doesn't need to do anything (a "background" process
wouldn't have to do much) in response it a message, it can (and usually does)
yield control almost IMMEDIATELY to the next process that has high-priority
messages pending.  In a sense, this is a form of self-imposed priority-based
scheduling.


-- 
Roger *M.* Wilcox   (aka Jeff Boeing)
tracer@majestix.cs.uoregon.edu
Aleph null bottles of beer on the wall, aleph null bottles of beer, ...
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman)
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! : )
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 02:10:03 GMT

In article <1992Dec26.204958.11455@Celestial.COM>, ray@Celestial.COM (Ray Jones) writes:
|> 
|> NO-NO-NO It is not that they (the competitors) shot themselves in the foot.
|> Microsoft shot them.  That is why the FTC is getting into the act!
|> 

Stand by for some heavy-duty accusations....

|> They Cheat! 

Hmmmnn....when I use the word "cheat" I mean either that you don't deliver
what you promised to or that you steal something from me.  When has Microsoft
done either one?

|> they are bullies.  That is the whole point.

Hmmmnnn...when I use the word "bully" I mean someone who uses physical force
to try and get his/her way.  When has Microsoft used physical force
to get their way?

The word "bully" can much more accuratly be applied to the FTC.  They are
trying to use physical force to make Bill Gates, at the gunpoint of the
police, do what they want him to do.
Subject: Hebrew Font 
Distribution: world
Organization: Job hunters use Parachute
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 23:23:41 +0000


In article <Bzo7uA.Bts@world.std.com> gordy@world.std.com writes:

> Does anyone know where I can get a True Type Hebrew font.

I got one from one of the bigger ftp archives but sadly dont now remember
which of them it was. I do remember that it was in a very prosaicly named
file of HEBREW.ZIP! :-) I'd hedge my bets and so that it was from cica
rather than simtel20.

A pointer in the right direction :-) (sorry about the pun!)

Regards, Trevor.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trevor Jenkins                                                Re: "deemed!"
134 Frankland Rd, Croxley Green, Rickmansworth, WD3 3AU, England
email: tfj@apusapus.demon.co.uk                               radio: G6AJG  
phone: +44 (0)923 776436
From: steve.silverwood@filebank.cts.com (Steve Silverwood) 
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
Subject: COM3/4 non-support
Date: 21 Dec 92 06:24:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The File Bank BBS - Fallbrook, CA  619-728-4318
Reply-To: steve.silverwood@filebank.cts.com (Steve Silverwood) 

 >Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
 >From: jel8@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Jason E Levine)
 >Subject: COM3/4 non-support
 >Message-ID: <1992Dec11.025304.3252@news.columbia.edu>
 >Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 02:53:04 GMT
 >
 >Sorry if this has been answered a zillion times, but I have never quite
 >understood....
 >
 >I am running Procomm Plus, both for DOS and for Windows, under Windows.
 >ONLY Procomm Plus for DOS recognizes my modem in COM4; the Windows version
 >always reports that COM4 is not responding.  Is there anything that I can
 >do?
 >
 >				Thanks.
 >					Jason
 >
 >"There's a new sheriff in the West.        |          Jason Levine
 >Gonna be some changes round these parts."  |   jel8@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu
 >  -- Charles Barkley, to Karl Malone,      |   --  Columbia University  --
 >     about Barkley's new Phoenix home.     |     in the City of New York

Go into the Control Panel, select the Connections(?) option -- the one
with the two cable ends for the icon -- and configure the COM3/COM4
portion of the system for the appropriate IRQ and base address for
your system.

I am using a Toshiba 3100SX/80 with Windows 3.1, and Procomm Plus for
Windows is working fine with the internal modem configured as COM3,
with IRQ 5 (Toshiba doesn't give me any other choices) and a base
address of 3E8h.  Matter of fact, that system is right now doing some
stuff on CompuServe using that configuration while I write this.
Windows applications, unlike those in DOS, use the base configuration
for the overall Windows environment, rather than relying on their own
individual configuration files.  Once I made the above configuration
change from the default, not only PC+Win works but also CIM for
Windows and some other stuff I'm using, too!

//Steve//

/----------------------------+---------------------------------------\
|Steve Silverwood            |  Internet: 76703.3035@compuserve.com  |
|Computer Associates         |CompuServe: 76703,3035                 |
|300 Corporate Point, 2nd Fl.|     Voice: (310)348-4448              |
|Culver City, CA  90230      |       FAX: (310)348-7701              |
+----------------------------+---------------------------------------+
|The opinions expressed here are solely my own, mainly because nobody|
|else would want them....                                            |
\--------------------------------------------------------------------/

                         
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
From: claebaur@shell.portal.com (Tony S Annese)
Subject: Soundblaster
Organization: Portal Communications Company -- 408/973-9111 (voice) 408/973-8091 (data)
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 06:13:16 GMT

Just went out and bought a SoundBlaster Pro today and went to set it up in
windows so that I can get a better way of playing system sounds(in .wav format)
than my pc speak which sounds sick. When I went to load in the drivers it told
me it could not load in the Pro Wave and Midi driver because I have an old
version of windows 3.1. Does anyone know what that means? Anyone know what 
files I need to update or do I have to call Microsoft and get a new release?
My windows is from the first batch of commercial releases of Windows 3.1.
(bought it the day it came out)
--
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
Tony Annese                                            claebaur@shell.portal.com
                                                  -or- claebaur@cup.portal.com
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
From: wihuri@polaris.utu.fi (Pauli Wihuri)
Subject: Re: SPEAKER.DRV for PC speaker?
Organization: University of Turku, Finland
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 92 08:52:32 GMT

joho@pfbs.philips.se (Hans ter Horst) writes:
>I installed it by selecting 'Drivers' from the 'Control Panel' and performed
>an 'Add' of a 'Unlisted or Updated Driver'. Did the trick for me.

I tried that too. I tried also copying the driver into
system-directory and add it into SYSTEM.INI in drivers-section, but it
did not work either.

>Maybe your speaker driver is corrupt? You used the binary transfer when
>you ftp'ed it down?

Yeah I used binary FTP'ing when copying it into my micro. I begin to
suspect that the configuration on my micro has something odd in it...

-- 
Mr. Pauli Wihuri, Computing Centre, University of Turku, Finland, 
tel: +358-21-633-6518, fax: +358-21-633-6560
Hulluja pilkkaa vikauhri, mutta oikeamielisten kesken on mielisuosio.
From: hernandez@info-gw.UUCP (System Operator)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
Subject: Can't open multiple DOS windows
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 92 08:29:42 EST
Organization: Information Gateway BBS -- +1 404-928-7873


Hi,

I have a 386/33 with 4 megs of memory and Window 3.1/DOS 5.

Anytime I open a second DOS window, the system hangs on me to the 
point that I need to reboot to gain control of the system. 

Is there something I'm missing that is causing my problem?

Any hints appreciated

Manny

=======================================================================
Information Gateway BBS +1 404-928-7873  Public Access Newsgroups/Email	
Please reply to:   	gatech!willard!info-gw!hernandez	or
			willard!info-gw!hernandez@gatech.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: Notice! OS2 will Execute Win3 programs Without having to have Win
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 23:03:54 GMT

In <C017Kp.A1w@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu> mfprf@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (Paul R. Falzer) writes:


>I am an MS-DOS/MS-WIN user.  

I am an MS-DOS/Win31--OS/2--Solaris--VMS--IRIX--RISC/os--OS-9--MVS
user (I quite using VM/CMS a while back).

>I suppose that others of my ilk become incensed
>when they see or hear the mantra, "OS/2. . .OS/2."  I do not.  

Neither do I.  I simply think that newsgroups have charters and
staying in the charter is in everyones' best interests.  Otherwise,
why not just have one big newsgroup?

>Rather, I'm
>interested in any information or expertise that might help me, or others
>like me, to solve a problem or to learn something new about the operation
>and configuration of Microsoft Windows, which runs under a variety of
>operating systems.  

So you would favor a bunch of postings about running Windows under
SoftPC or under Solaris in this group?  Sorry, but I have to disagree.

>Any posting that even minimally meets this standard is
>just fine with me; but, slings and arrows, beer commercials, and testaments
>to the power of school spirit are not.  Any variation on a theme of "shut
>your ### mouth and go play in another sandbox" is arrogance, pure and
>simple.

And just what do you call your apparent belief that YOU set the
standards for what belongs where?  ;-)

[Don't bother answering that -- it's a no-win position.]



-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
From: rcmerrit@apgea.army.mil (Robert C. Merritt <rcmerrit>)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
Subject: Re: Notice! OS2 will Execute Win3 programs Without having to have Win
Date: 30 Dec 92 13:28:10 GMT
Organization: APG-Edgewood

In article <1992Dec29.225601.17262@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>In <1992Dec29.210143.2009@apgea.army.mil> rcmerrit@apgea.army.mil (Robert C. Merritt <rcmerrit>) writes:
>
>>By any chance, do you know if OS/2 plans to support the sound blaster pro's
>>CD-rom drive with the relase of version 2.10?
>
>I don't believe so, since the only CD support I'm aware of that's in
>there is for drives hung off of one of the supported SCSI controllers
>(Adaptec, etc.).  There are several people over in the OS2 groups who
>have the Beta.  You might be best served by asking this question
>there. 
>
>
>-- 
>"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
> in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.


Well, thanks for answering my question. As for OS2 groups. I don't seem to
have access to them. I've only seen like 2 dozen groups, 95% deal with
programing groups. I had access to one os group but now all it says is that
its no longer valid.
Rob Merritt
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
From: Rob_Mayhew@mindlink.bc.ca (Rob Mayhew)
Subject: Re: How Big a Perm. Swapfile?
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 00:37:12 GMT

> gary michael feldman writes:
>
> My question: SInce i installed windows on a pretty fresh drive,
> it suggested a Permanent Swapfle of 16 megs!!! I said ok, but
> now notice some hard drive spinning and mouse slow-down, which
> i never had before when i only had a 2 meg swapfile.
>
> My computer: 386sx 16mhz, 4 megs ram, DOs 5.0, win 3.1.
> Any help would be greatly appreciated! (Email would be great too)
>
> Gary.


It's already been remarked that a 16MB swapfile seems large for your system.
However, you also metioned more disk-thrashing in the new installation. Were
you using SmartDrive before, and somehow that didn't get set up in the
re-installation?

My previous machine was very similar to yours; I used an 8MB permanent
swapfile and SmartDrive caches of 2048KB outside Windows, and 768KB when
Windows was running. Those are a bit larger than recommended by Microsoft for
4MB RAM, but I'm not usually running apps which require huge amounts of
extended memory. Experiment with the parameters to get the best configuration
for your usage.

At any rate, SmartDrive (or another disc cache) should reduce the frequency
of disk accesses, and improve the performance of your swapfile.


--
Rob Mayhew
6437 Cambie St., Vancouver, B.C. Canada V5Z 3B2
Rob_Mayhew@mindlink.bc.ca
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
From: cm@ebpe.demon.co.uk (Colin Manning)
Subject: Problem getting mouse working in DOS windows
Distribution: world
Organization: Electronic Book Publishing
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 19:54:35 +0000


I have been trying to get the mouse working in DOS boxes (non-windowed
apps), under Windows for Workgroups. The DOS apps, which I know work 
correctly with the mouse when not run under windows, behave as if there
is no mouse.

I am using a ms compatible mouse, with the standard ms mouse driver as
supplied with w4w.

I have tried setting MouseInDosBox in the NonWindowsApp section of 
system.ini, with no luck.

Any ideas anyone ?

-
Colin Manning            | Electronic Book Publishing Europe Ltd
cm@ebpe.demon.co.uk  	 | Tel: +44-71-495-3801      Fax: +44-71-240-4138
From: joho@pfbs.philips.se (Hans ter Horst)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup
Subject: Re: SPEAKER.DRV for PC speaker?
Date: 21 Dec 92 14:49:18 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment BCFI AB, Sweden

wihuri@polaris.utu.fi (Pauli Wihuri) writes:
: I got the speaker.drv from nic.funet.fi and I wonder why it does not
: install at all into my machine. Has there been similar problems with
: anyone?
: 
: It only says that it cannot load the sound driver for PC speaker
: driver.
: 
: Am I right that this driver does not need any sound cards what so ever
: to work in Win 3.1? The sound is what it is... I was curious about it,
: but ....

I installed it without problems, and indeed, no sound card is required.
The sound isn't great however, but it beats the dull 'beep' anytime.

I installed it by selecting 'Drivers' from the 'Control Panel' and performed
an 'Add' of a 'Unlisted or Updated Driver'. Did the trick for me.

Maybe your speaker driver is corrupt? You used the binary transfer when
you ftp'ed it down?

Goodluck,

/Hans
--
 [ "Without realizing how it had come about, the combat men in the squadron  ]
 [ discovered themselves dominated by the administrators appointed to serve  ]
 [ them. They were bullied, insulted, harassed and shoved about all day long ]
 [ by one after the other."      Joseph Heller - Catch 22                    ]
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.setup