HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tamu@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu (Todd Henderson)
Subject: Re: PC and Mac OEs (was Re: 1 Thing Windows can do but OS/2 can't.)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 12:54:10 GMT

maynard@ept.msc.cornell.edu (Maynard J. Handley) writes:

>>>>>Could you elaborate on this please ;)
>Aha- another bozo shows his/her ignorance. On my Mac the windows are
>colored. the buttons are 3D. The scroll-bars are double headed. The menu
>bar and menu panes are colored. I have a background picture. I did indeed
>add a faster motherboard to my Mac, to take it from 8MHz 68000 to 16MHz
>68030. I intend to upgrade again to a 50MHz 68030 in about a month. Mac RAM

Maybe, before you go spouting your mouth off about your great upgrade we should
talk about price.  How much did it cost you to upgrade?  Maybe ram prices,
monitors, etc. are similar, but I have yet to see a Mac sell for what my 486
was bought for.

>is commodity SIMMs- costs just the same as PC RAM, and cheaper than the
>various proprietary SIMMs used by some PCs- eg present price is about $28
>for 1MB, $100 for 4MB. Printers all cost the same since they're exactly the
>same technology. Similarly for drives and modems. You could buy a VGA

>Well that about shows what you know. What will you claim next? Mac users

I think you pretty much showed how arrogant(sp?) you are.

>have to pay more for printer paper? There's a premium for Mac 3.5inch
>floppies? The FCC forces modems connected to Macs to pay more for phone
>line usage? If you want to criticize Macs,  do some research and get your
>facts right.

No, maybe there should be stupid tax on Mac users! :):)

Chill out a little bit.

Todd
tamu@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu

>Maynard Handley
Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:1636 comp.os.os2.advocacy:3360
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Date: 29 Jul 92 14:57:48 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <1992Jul28.052006.15008@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.IBM.com writes:
>In  <1992Jul21.212437.25057@njitgw.njit.edu>  dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
>>
>> Compatibility:  While both will run DOS apps, Windows 16-bit apps, and
>> OS/2 1.x apps,
>
>Last I heard, NT was planned to run only OS/2 1.x text-mode applications.
>Did I miss an announcement?

I was in error.  NT will not run PM apps.  A MS advocate said so, so
I'll believe it :-).

-- 
   |)  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: petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Skelly)
Subject: Re: The NT file system
Date: 24 Jul 92 00:45:44 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
Distribution: na
Keywords: NT OS/2 Windows OS

In article <1992Jul21.205549.16885@njitgw.njit.edu> dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
>In article <1992Jul20.184003.26307@mdd.comm.mot.com> lmorris@mdd.comm.mot.com (Larry Morris) writes:
>>Now the robust NT file system on the other hand looks interesting.
>>If it becomes real, I may switch but for now, it ain't real and I
>>don't NEED it. 
>
>What will the NT file system offer that HPFS doesn't?  I believe I
>heard something about multi-user protection, but does that make sense
>for a non-networked computer?  And OS/2 supports file protection for
>LAN servers.

One of the neat features for those of you using dos as well, is that
NTFS will probably allow mirrored 8.3 filenames, so you can both have
long and 8.3 names for the same files.  Makes it really convenient to
access a server from a dos machine, and still have long names.

And the security everyone has been discussing is useful also, especially
if you're networked.

petesk@microsoft.com
My Opinions.


Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: mcmichel@ponder.csci.unt.edu (Lonny McMichael)
Subject: Re: Does NT's SMP handel processor failure?
Summary: Ask again in the Win32 group
Organization: University of North Texas, Denton
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 15:26:34 GMT

In article <19920724120703CSYSPCN@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU> CSYSPCN@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU (CSYSPCN) writes:
>The question is: On an N processor CPU, if one of the processor fails,
>does NT "catch" the failure, and eliminate that CPU from eligibility
>to run any other threads?
>
>The reason this is important is that if the answer is yes, then
>an N processor CPU should be N times as reliable as a 1 processor
>CPU( Since they would all have to fail before you completely lost
>function.)  If the answer is no, then it would be 1/N'th as reliable,
>since any one processor failing would garbage all threads scheduled
>to the failing processor.
>
>On Compuserve, someone said they had been trying and failing to
>get a definitive answer on this question.  Does anyone know for
>sure?

This question should be directed to the comp.os.ms-windows.win32 group.  I'm
sure Alistair or someone else can give you an answer.

Lonny
-- 
Lonny McMichael                      | You can do it your own way, if it's
The University of North Texas        | done just how I say.
email:  mcmichel@ponder.csci.unt.edu |      Metallica, "Eye of the Beholder"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:1614 comp.os.os2.advocacy:3332
From: guy@Auspex.COM (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Media coverage (Electronic Engineer Times) Portability?
Date: 24 Jul 92 04:46:59 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Santa Clara
Originator: news@auspex-gw.Auspex.COM

>Did everyone seem to forget that Sun has licensed Windows NT from Microsoft
>and plans to ship Windows NT with SunOS?

Really?  Where did you read this, and what Sun spokesperson said it?  ("I
heard it from a friend of a friend" doesn't count, unless your friend's
friend has a name like Scott McNealy or Ed Zander or Bill Joy or....)

And what precisely does it mean to "ship Windows NT with SunOS"?  If it
means "plans to ship software with SunOS that lets you run
Windows applications under SunOS", a better way of saying that is "plans
to ship software with SunOS that lets you run Windows applications under
SunOS".
From: ASI509@DJUKFA11.BITNET
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: 1 Thing Windows can do but OS/2 can't.
Date: 24 Jul 92 11:29:15 GMT
Organization: KFA  Forschungszentrum Juelich

In article <5143@krafla.rhi.hi.is>, karlth@rhi.hi.is (Karl Thoroddsen) says:
>
>Sell 13 million copies.
 ^^^^
  Really ? Sell ? To whom ? If in the cheapest computer shop in town I can`t
  get a PC without it? So if I leave it there I pay the same as if I take it.
  What`s the price then? Precisely ZERO $, DM or whatever. I wish they would
  sell cars :-)

>Iceland
>  \  UUCP:     ..!mcvax!hafro!rhi!karlth  \      Department Of Computer
>Science
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: lmorris@mdd.comm.mot.com (Larry Morris)
Subject: Re: The NT file system
Keywords: NT OS/2 Windows OS
Organization: Motorola, Mobile Data Division - Seattle, WA
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 01:51:43 GMT

In <1992Jul21.205549.16885@njitgw.njit.edu> dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:

>In article <1992Jul20.184003.26307@mdd.comm.mot.com> lmorris@mdd.comm.mot.com (Larry Morris) writes:
>>Now the robust NT file system on the other hand looks interesting.
>>If it becomes real, I may switch but for now, it ain't real and I
>>don't NEED it. 

>What will the NT file system offer that HPFS doesn't?  I believe I
>heard something about multi-user protection, but does that make sense
>for a non-networked computer?  And OS/2 supports file protection for
>LAN servers.


Well, from what I have read in trade rags, it appears that NT will support
a form of journaled file system.  That is, transactions are logged in a 
journal.  In the case of an ungraceful shutdown, the journal is examined at
reboot, usually preserving the file system.  IBM has such a system on the
RS/6000 with AIX, and I really appreciated this when I was busy writing 
device drivers (i.e. plenty of nasty system crashes ;-) )

I don't have many details, just generalizations.  But, if they can provide 
something equivalent to IBMs JFS then I would consider that an attractive
feature.

-- 
Internet:    <lmorris@mdd.comm.mot.COM>   |  Larry Morris
 ...uw-beaver!sunup-----\                 |  Motorola/Mobile Data Division
 ...uunet-----------------!mdisea!lmorris |  19807 North Creek Parkway
 ...van-bc!mdivax1------/                 |  Bothell, WA  (206) 487-5810
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: it1@ra.msstate.edu (Tim Tsai)
Subject: Re: The NT file system
Organization: Mississippi State University
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 21:00:00 GMT

petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Skelly) writes:
>In article <1992Jul29.010443.26016@seas.smu.edu> mikek@seas.smu.edu (Michael Kaply) writes:
>>In article <1992Jul27.193942.6938@microsoft.com> gordonl@microsoft.com (Gordon Letwin) writes:
>>
>>>	gordon letwin
>>>	not a spokesman for microsoft
>>
>>Yeah right.

>That's funny, everone who quotes gordon follows his
>.sig by the line
>"Yeah right".

>Just though it humorous.

  Not *every* one.

>>Mike Kaply

>petesk@microsoft.com
>I can't even speak for myself, why do you expect me
>to speak for anyone else.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: rick@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu (Richard Warner)
Subject: Re: Could some site please count the number of references to 0s/2 v Win3
Organization: San Jose State University - Math/CS Dept.
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 21:37:29 GMT

jim@jimmc.chi.il.us (Jim McNicholas) writes:

>Think about it this is a group advocating windows 3.1 from microsoft...or 
>at least windows from microsoft I'm not reading it to hear about 0S/2
>I want to talk about windows!!!
>AAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!

Ummmmm.  Check the title of the newsgroup.  It has 'advocacy' in it, does
it not?  Now, if this group is to 'advocate' MS-Windows, how can it
happen if there is no alternative?  Implicit in advocacy is that there
are alternatives.  The major alternatives to MS-Windows are (surprise)
OS/2, the Mac, and various systems running X Windows.

And, by the way, if we were to limit this to Windowing interfaces from
MS, OS/2 would still be included (esp. versions 1.1 and 1.2, but MS
still had a big hand in what shipped with 1.3 and 2.0- that's why IBM
is paying them the big bucks in royalties).

>____________________________________________________________________________
>|jim@jimmc.chi.il.us   |   ...And I believe in long, slow, deep, soft wet  |
>|Prime Time Productions| kisses that last three days...good night...OH MY! |
>|Aurora, IL. 60504     |        -crash davis to annie savoy in BULL DURHAM-|
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:1468 comp.os.os2.advocacy:3037
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Who actually NEEDS NT?  Speak Up!
Keywords: NT OS/2 Windows OS OE migration
Date: 21 Jul 92 20:51:34 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <dkbm!8b.timbol@netcom.com> timbol@netcom.com (Mike Timbol) writes:
>
>Something like this almost totally defeats the purpose of having the
>new API in the first place.  Suppose all applications are ported this
>way.  What happened to all the great multiple threads, etc.?  They
>don't write themselves, you know.  The applications will have to be
>enhanced (manually) to take advantage of most of the new API features.
>Doing this for Win32 (and Win32s) should be easier than doing it for
>the OS/2 2.0 API, since Win32 is closer to the Windows 3.1/3.1 API than
>OS/2 is.

The "closeness" is debatable anyway.  It'll take major restructuring
to use multiple threads, etc.  The restructuring efforts will vastly
outweigh the overhead of a new API.  And the big software houses
already have OS/2 versions availabele (albeit OS/2 1.x versions) so
it's more like adding features to an existing product.

>In any case, there are probably more developers working on NT apps than
>OS/2 2.0 apps.  (No, I can't back this up -- just a generally feeling
>based on what I've heard from others in the industry.)

I don't know your sources, but most of my "general feelings" about the
industry come from magazines and newspapers.  None of whom I trust.

>And since OS/2 2.0 has very few apps right now, most people can
>afford to keep waiting before making a decision.

True, nobody's going to lose their job by not switching immediately,
but that's no reason to remain where you are forever.  As apps arrive,
the reasons to remain with a DOS-based platform will get smaller and
smaller.


-- 
   |)  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.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: thg@cam-orl.co.uk (Tim Glauert)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: The NT file system
Date: 29 Jul 92 11:31:49 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.163004.3081@desire.wright.edu>, jstewart@desire.wright.edu writes:
|> 	I think the point he was trying to make was that if the computer is
|> sitting in the same room as you, you can boot into single user mode, or boot
|> off a floppy or tape and do what you want.

Most workstations can be set up to prevent this. Many PCs (mine included) can
be configured to boot only from C: and this configuration can be protected
with a password. You can get round this, of course, but you need to open the
box.
From: neilp@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Postlethwaite)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: PC and Mac OEs (was Re: 1 Thing Windows can do but OS/2 can't.)
Date: 31 Jul 92 10:06:03 GMT
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Heriot-Watt University, Scotland

In article <-!pm+vn@lynx.unm.edu> jfreter@triton.unm.edu (The Myth) writes:
>
>If you're so worried about performance, why are you on a mac?  I have run
>a few simple "benchmarking" tasks on a 386sx/20MHz with 4MB and an 80 MB HD
>and the same tasks on a mac iisi ('030/20) and found that the windows machine
>was significantly faster.  While the tests weren't comprehensive, they do
>contain much of the features that the average user would incorporate and need
>to do.  I ran only one app at once, so there were no delays due to multi-
>tasking (well, actually, I had the Clock program running on the real computer
>as well).
>

Comparison of USE of a Mac Classic 4/40 (8MHz 68000) v a Viglen Genie 4/50/
Ethernet (16MHx 386). The PC is more powerful (in raw terms) but under
a GUI the Mac strides ahead under real world loading with Apps like
Excel, Word, Hypercard/Guide ....

While the PC thrashes the hard disc to death, the Mac hard disc does a
little bit of work, the Mac thinks for a second and things then happen.
The PC catches up somewhat later after its s & M session with the hard
disc. Addmitted the PC drive is a wildly inferior IDE drive v the Mac's
SCSI one, but the better real-world performance of the Mac Classic shines
through.

Neil

P.S. Win 3.1 and System 7 were the OS's.
From: dpbsmith@world.std.com (Daniel P. B. Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Flame retraction: Win 3.1 File Manager DOES update
Date: 30 Jul 92 12:19:01 GMT
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA

<Gasp> I was <sob> WRONG. :-(  The Windows 3.1 File Manager
DOES detect file creation by other applications and DOES
automatically update the file window display when it happens
<pant pant pant hyperventilate>.

In penance, I will begin a series of postings IMMEDIATELY
under the subject "42 things an Intel processor can do that
a Turing machine can't."

--Daniel P. B. Smith
dpbsmith@world.std.com

P.S. Now if someone will just tell me how to print a directory
listing from File Manager or Norton Desktop -- or give a convincing
reason why nobody would ever want to do a thing like that..
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: mcnally@wsl.dec.com (Mike McNally)
Subject: Re: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Organization: DEC Palo Alto
Distribution: na
Date: 26 Jul 92 19:29:23 GMT

rommel@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE (Kai-Uwe Rommel) writes:
>... This allows to put some kind of "server" for a ressource
>into a DLL with shared data and have several clients connect to it.
>Now, what should happen if such a client forks? Should it be
>disconnected from the DLL? Difficult. Otherwise, how could the DLL be
>told that there is now an additional client? This at least is
>impossible.

Well, I'd say that if the DLL needs to be actively told that there's a
new client, something is wrong with the design.  This is a pretty lame
excuse for not having "fork()".




--
==============y=o=u='=r=e===a=l=l===s=t=e=a=m=e=d===u=p===j=o=e================
   Mike +   Software +   Digital Equipment +   Western Software +      mcnally@
McNally +    Laborer +         Corporation +         Laboratory +   wsl.dec.com
===============================================================================
From: guy@Auspex.COM (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Does NT's SMP handel processor failure?
Date: 26 Jul 92 04:09:42 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Santa Clara

>>The OS on such a system needs to be able to mark a process as having
>>to run on a particular processor the next time it runs.
>
>On a multiprocessor system, NT will correctly seek affinity for 
>the same processor that the thread was previously executing before
>the context switch.

In the previous poster's example, "affinity" may not be good enough -
the "stack puke" (to use Henry Spencer's term for the glop that the
68010/68020/68030 dump onto the stack on a bus error) dumped by the
processor when it took a page fault may not be in the right format for
processors other than the one that dumped the "stack puke", *even though
the processors may purport to be the same chip*.

I don't know what vendors of MP OSes for 68K-family-based MP machines
did; they may simply have assumed that Motorola wouldn't change the
format of the "stack puke" in mid-stream.

Then again, I don't know if Microsoft has bothered spending much effort
looking at a 68K-family port of NT, as I don't know if it'd be worth
their while to do so.

>This is primarily to better utilize the 
>large instruction (and data) cache that is present in certain 
>CPUs like the R4000.

How large is "large"?  I think the R4000's on-chip cache is relatively
small - probably somewhere in the range of 1K to 16K (1K is probably too
small; the TI TMS390Z50 has 20K I-cache and 16K D-cache on chip, and has
been touted as having the largest on-chip caches, at least for current
and near-future "mainstream" chips).

Is that large enough to make affinity a win?  Or were you thinking more
of R4000 machines with secondary cache?  If so, is there any win to
having different affinity policies based on the size of the cache?
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Skelly)
Subject: Re: The NT file system
Date: 30 Jul 92 09:18:18 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1992Jul29.010443.26016@seas.smu.edu> mikek@seas.smu.edu (Michael Kaply) writes:
>In article <1992Jul27.193942.6938@microsoft.com> gordonl@microsoft.com (Gordon Letwin) writes:
>
>>	gordon letwin
>>	not a spokesman for microsoft
>
>Yeah right.

That's funny, everone who quotes gordon follows his
.sig by the line
"Yeah right".

Just though it humorous.
>
>Mike Kaply
>

petesk@microsoft.com
I can't even speak for myself, why do you expect me
to speak for anyone else.


Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:1486 comp.os.os2.advocacy:3087
From: eletanjm@nuscc.nus.sg (TAN JIN MENG)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: The NT file system
Date: 22 Jul 92 16:08:00 GMT
Organization: National University of Singapore

CIVENBAH@mizzou1.missouri.edu writes:
: In article <1992Jul21.205549.16885@njitgw.njit.edu>
: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
:  
: >What will the NT file system offer that HPFS doesn't?  I believe I
: >heard something about multi-user protection, but does that make sense
: >for a non-networked computer?  And OS/2 supports file protection for
:  
: Sure, it does.  For example, how about a stand-alone computer used by
: many students at a school.  Each has his homework password protected from
: all other students.....
:  

That is **NO** protection at all! For secure systems, you need a
physically secure server storing all the sensitive data. Access is then
from client workstations. For file protection, you really need a
physically secure file server.

jin meng
From: karlth@rhi.hi.is (Karl Thoroddsen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: 1 Thing Windows can do but OS/2 can't.
Date: 23 Jul 92 09:12:14 GMT

Sell 13 million copies.



--

\Internet:     karlth@rhi.hi.is         \ Karl Thoroddsen University Of Iceland
  \  UUCP:     ..!mcvax!hafro!rhi!karlth  \      Department Of Computer Science
Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:1472 comp.os.os2.advocacy:3041
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Some more misconceptions regarding OS/2 and NT
Date: 21 Jul 92 21:24:37 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

MISCONCEPTION #3:

OS/2 2.0 and Windows NT are completely different

NO.  Although they are not (currently) compatible with each other, on
a feature-by-feature comparison, one will find them more alike than
different.  The end-user, with a suite of OS/2 2.0 apps on one
machine and a comparable suite of NT apps on the other machine, will
notice little difference.  Below are the major differences - note how
neither is really superior to the other - just different.

File system.  NT's proposed New File System is has more features than
IBM's High Performance File System.  The look-and-feel should be
similar, if not the same, to most users.  OS/2 supports similar
features when networked.  Both systems will continue to support the
FAT (DOS-compatible) file systems for compatibility and for floppy
disks.  So file-transfer between the systems will remain simple.

Compatibility:  While both will run DOS apps, Windows 16-bit apps, and
OS/2 1.x apps, there is no plan for NT to run OS/2 2.0 apps, and there
is no plan for OS/2 to ever run NT apps.  This may change if both
become popular.  NT plans to have POSIX (Unix) support as well.  IBM
currently has no announced plans to support Unix under OS/2.




MISCONCEPTION #4 - NT is a currently available product

No.  While many developers have gotten pre-release NT packages, the
packages being shipped are not the complete NT package, as Microsoft
specifies in their literature.  And they are only available to a
select corps of developers.  Microsoft claims that the full NT product
(including POSIX, DOS, Win-16, Win-32, and OS/2 1.x compatibility)
will be avilable by year's end, but (to the best of my knowledge) beta
copies of this complete system have yet to ship, so the actual release
date will likely be later.
-- 
   |)  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.