HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: add@newshub.sdsu.edu (James D. Murray)
Subject: Win3.1 and DR-DOS 5.0 problems...
Organization: San Diego State University, College of Sciences
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 08:22:28 GMT

I was installing MS Windows 3.1 on my 386 system and just after disk #2
when Windows starts up I got a "Standard Mode: Fault in MS-DOS Extender"
error message followed by a dump of the register contents.  I called up
Microsoft Tech Support (after 6 hours of busy signals) and they informed
me that there are some problems with running Win 3.1 in Standard mode
under DR-DOS 5.0 and they *think* some patches released by DRI will fix
the problem.

Well, I booted my system using that old MS-DOS 3.3 floppy I thought I'd
never use again and installed Win 3.1.  Under DR-DOS 5.0 I sure can't
run Win 3.1 in Standard mode, but everything seems to work fine in
Enhanced mode.

The tech support person also mentioned that Microsoft will be offering,
in a week or so, a reduced price upgrade offer so that us poor souls who
foolishly use DR-DOS can cheaply upgrade to MS-DOS 5.0.  Seeing as how I
remember reading something in Info World a few weeks (months?) back about
some probems DR-DOS 6.0 has with Win 3.1 that Microsoft wasn't planning
on fixing, I may just do that.

--
From: skelmir@rhi.hi.is (Mimir Reynisson)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Arcadia?
Date: 4 Apr 92 21:28:07 GMT
Organization: University of Iceland

Can anoyone give me information regarding a package called
Arcadia or something like that apparently evolved from an IBM
product called EZ-VU. I think the company is called Arcadia Technologies.

Any information would be most appriciated.

PS: Please email a response or don't I don't read this newsgroup except
maybe once a year or so and I apologize if this is not the right place to post
such a question.

/Mimir Reynisson (skelmir@rhi.hi.is)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms,comp.binaries.ibm.pc.wanted
From: colello@cheshire.oxy.edu (Robert Colello)
Subject: Unix Windows and fonts: Need small 7x7 fix spaced font.
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA 90041 USA.
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 01:40:56 GMT

  I am currently using UW for Windows while running in 640x480 mode. 
Unfortunately, with the fonts I currently have, I can only display Windows
that are a maximum of 78 columns wide.  Thus, I need a small fixed-spaced
ATM or Windows font which is about 7 pixals wide and about 7(or more) tall.
I've checked much of cica and haven't found anything yet. 
  Could someone tell me where such fonts exist and/or if a font editor exists
through which I can make them?  Any help would be greatly appreciated.
 
Bob Colello
Colello@cheshire.oxy.edu
From: drake@drake.almaden.ibm.com (Sam Drake)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Why I'm sticking with Windows
Date: 17 Apr 92 05:14:24 GMT
Organization: IBM Almaden Research Center

In article <950@esosun.UUCP> tanida@esosun.css.gov (Tom Tanida) writes:
>I'm of the personal belief that systems software companies (like MS,
>IBM, and Sun) ought to give away their OS's (at most charging just
>for media+docs+shipping+tiny profit- say $5).  

Before I was around, companies like IBM did exactly that...all software
was free (or, more accurately, bundled into the price of the hardware).

There was NO such thing as a software industry.  Why bother trying to
SELL software, when the hardware companies just gave it away?

The government decided this was a Bad Thing, and IBM signed the famous
"consent decree", and started charging for software.

And the software industry was born.

So, sorry, I don't think we'll be going back to the olden days.


Sam Drake / IBM Almaden Research Center 
Internet:  drake@almaden.ibm.com    BITNET:  DRAKE at ALMADEN
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: dew@turing.acs.virginia.edu (David E. Watson)
Subject: Win3.1/DR DOS 6.0/SuperStor/Smartdrv.exe 4.0
Summary: Incompatability problems installing Win3.1
Keywords: Win3.1 DR DOS 6.0 SuperStor Smartdrv
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 02:23:00 GMT

After reading all the articles in this newsgroup about the
incompatabilities of installing Windows 3.1 on a machine running DR
DOS 6.0, I decided to call tech support at Digital Research.  It took
a while for them to return my call, but they did indicate that there
is a problem and that because they were not allowed a beta version,
they had to wait until Monday (April 6th) when Microsoft released 3.1.
They are currently saying April 15th as a target date for some type of
fix.  They said all registered users would receive the fix, but he
also gave me their technical support BBS number (408)649-3443.

It was hard enough for me to wait until April 6th and I'm not sure
what my state of mind would be if I had to wait until April 15th or
later.  I decided to investigate what would happen if I switched to
MS-DOS 5.0.  I am currently using the SuperStor disk compressing
utility that comes with DR-DOS 6.0.  I found out from DR that the
version of SuperStor that comes with DR-DOS was crippled to only work
with DR-DOS.  The SuperStor driver will not recongnize another
operating system.  This was confirmed by tech support at AddStor (the
people who make SuperStor).  Now I had recently upgraded my version of
SuperStor to v.2.0 through AddStor.  According to AddStor, this
version will recongnize MS-DOS.

Next problem, AddStor says that there is a problem between the
SuperStor driver and Windows 3.1's Superdrv.exe 4.0 caching program.
They to have a fix already on their technical support BBS.  The number
is (415)324-4077.  The file name is WINSMDRV.ZIP.  Apparently, they
haven't had time to do a readme file for that yet thouth.

I also got a call back from the Addstor tech, who left a message on my
answering machine that there is a special procedure for changing from
DR-DOS 6.0 to MS-DOS 5.0.  Unfortunately, I wasn't able to get back
in touch with them.  They do have a FAX number though (415)688-0466.
Their voice line is (415)688-0470.

BTW, Digital Research's technical support line number is
(408)646-6464.  I was not too pleased with their response time.
Apparently, they have a third party that does the support... the
person who called me back, identified that he was with Consumer
Research. (that may be a division of Digital Research for all I
know).

I hope, this helps.  I'll post more as I find reliable information.

--David
-- 

***********************************(+)**************************************
 David Watson      Internet: dew@Turing.acs.Virginia.EDU      (804)295-6736 
 Pony Express: 2111 Michie Drive #77, Charlottesville, Virginia  22901-2872
***********************************(-)**************************************
From: mendelsohn@amber.mgh.harvard.edu (Andrew Mendelsohn)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Windows NT [was Re: Word for Windows...]
Date: 7 Apr 92 17:11:00 GMT
Organization: Molecular Biology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <7APR199209593168@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov>, scdorcy@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES DORCEY) writes...
>In article <1992Apr7.131856.20251@alw.nih.gov>, donnel@helix.nih.gov 
>(Donald A. Lehn) writes...
> 
>>Even more interisting, this suggests that this was produced by a 32-bit
>>version of Pagemaker running on NT.  Perhaps Microsoft may be closer to
>>dropping the NT bombshell on OS/2 2.0 than we have been led to
>>believe and with a whole slew of 'NT' specific applications at the same
>>time.
> 
>Which again raises the question regarding what market segment NT is gearing 
>for.  Based on previous threads, NT was going to be priced beyond the 
>"average" stand alone user (and functionally beyond the needs of the 
>"average" user), while OS/2 2.0 is offered as an alternative to the Windows
>-MS DOS combo.  With 3.1 on the streets, maybe more info will be 
>forthcoming on NT.
> 
>JD
Yes, I would like to know more too about NT's pricing.  I assume this has 
not yet been set, but from what I've been hearing (495-995), it is being
priced like MS OS/2 1.x was priced.  I hope MS releases some version of NT 
that is affordable for non-corporate desktop  users.  Since the system is
modular, maybe this would entail unbundling optional subsystems (POSIX?)
and removing security features (C2 security is likely to slow the system
down).   Perhaps someone from Microsoft can clarify this. 
andy mendelsohn

ps. win 3.1 is impressive.
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com (Russ Poffenberger)
Subject: Re: Eggheads "Cue" WIN3.1 Offer
Organization: Schlumberger Technologies, ATE division, San Jose, Ca.
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 21:31:28 GMT

jcmorris@mwunix (Joe Morris) writes:
: In article <1992Apr3.135631.29266@cbnewsi.cb.att.com> jimm@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (james.mumper) writes:
: >In the mail last night I received a brochure from Egghead outlining their
: >offer on WIN3.1.  The package included a catalog as well as a membership
: >in their new "Cue" (Custom Updates and Eggstras(sm)) program.  I am very
: >impressed with their package.  Highlights:
: 
:   [...]
: 
: >All in all, it's a good price for the software and an excellent marketing
: >job.  There are some good deals to be had if you combine your purchases.
: 
: Egghead often has good prices, but don't forget to check the other
: sources.  As of last night, the local Egghead was advertising Norton
: Desktop for Windows (V2) at $69 after the Cue discount, *and after you
: mail in for a $30 rebate*...in other words, you pay $99 plus tax, then
: get $30 back.  Two blocks away, CompUSA offers the same NDW V2 package
: (complete, not upgrade) for $67 cash (alas, plus tax)...and you don't
: have to hassle with a mail-in rebate.
: 
: Also, if you do find that Egghead has the lowest net price and want to
: use the rebate, be aware that most of the rebate offers require that 
: you send in the *original* sales receipt; a Xerox is not acceptable.
: If you scream loud enough, though, the Egghead store will provide you with
: a duplicate sales receipt you can use for this purpose.
: 
: Joe Morris
: 
: PS: if nobody's noted it yet (my newsfeed just came up after a 5-day
: outage) Egghead has the new versions of Excel and Project for Windows,
: both as upgrades and full products. 

Fry's here in the Bay Area reduced the Win 3.1 upgrade to $44.88, plus a free
Windows 3.1 T-shirt. I paid $48.95 on Monday, so I went back and got a refund
of the difference and a rain-check for the shirt (they ran out).

Russ Poffenberger               DOMAIN: poffen@sj.ate.slb.com
Schlumberger Technologies       UUCP:   {uunet,decwrl,amdahl}!sjsca4!poffen
1601 Technology Drive		CIS:	72401,276
San Jose, Ca. 95110             Voice: (408)437-5254  FAX: (408)437-5246
From: mechalas@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (John P. Mechalas)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: WINDOWS 3.1 SYSTEM ERROR
Date: 11 Apr 92 16:12:26 GMT
Article-I.D.: gn.1992Apr11.161226.7843
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <4044.87.uupcb@cccbbs.UUCP> henry.tan@cccbbs.UUCP (Henry Tan)  writes:
>From: cccbbs!henry.tan@uceng.uc.edu
>
>Recently I installed Stacker 2.0. A few days later when I tried to run
>Windows 3.0, it cannot run any programs on my floppies. Sometimes with
>the File Manager, I can read the directory of floppy drive A (5.25 HD)
>but not drive B (3.5 HD). I wanted to install my Word for Windows and
>therefore need to install it from the floppy but everytime an error was
>displayed "System Error, Cannot read drive A (or B)" and it hung up.
>However, from DOS or from PCTools I was able to run any programs
>residing on a floppy. COULD THIS BE DUE TO STACKER ? I had deleted my
>Windows 3.0 and re-installed it but the same thing happened. I will be
>getting Windows 3.1. When I get it, I'll install it and see if the
>problem can be corrected. If not, do I need to reformat by entire hard
>drive ? Any help and advise would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

I doubt Stacker is at fault...Stacker has nothing to do with the floppy 
drives.  Can you give us more information, though, just in case?  When did you
start having floppy troubles?  Immediately after installing Stacker, or did
the floppies work for a while under Windows before quitting?
   You may want to open your computer and see if your floppy cables are coming
loose.  Windows isn't as persistant as DOS in reading floppy drives (in my
experience anyway), so these kinds of errors show up first in Windows, where
as DOS will keep hammering away until it gets the data it needs.

-- 
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
|   John Mechalas      |   Send all fan mail to: mechalas@gn.ecn.purdue.edu   |
|   Purdue University  |   Send all hate mail to: someone else                |
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms,bit.listserv.win3-l
From: earleh@microsoft.com (Earle Horton)
Subject: Re: HELP! Win 3.1 dies in setup mode
Date: 14 Apr 92 01:11:34 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corp.

In article <1992Apr7.052129.28470@beach.csulb.edu> bwong@beach.csulb.edu
	(Bradley Wong) writes:
>I can NOT get past the 93% second diskette setup mode where win 3.1
>goes from DOS setup to windows setup. 
>
>All I get is:
>
>   Standard Mode: Fault in MS-DOS extender
>   EC=0000 CS=0053 IP=232F ...
>

Please include the full register dump in any report like this!

We have people here at Microsoft who can figure out almost exactly
what has happened in a situation like this, but they need all the
hex numbers in the register dump to do a good job of it.  We can get
a pretty good idea from "CS" and "IP," but gosh it would be good to
have the "ES" value, too!

Thanks for buying our product!

Earle Horton
SDE

Disclaimer:  The opinions expressed in this article are my personal
views and not those of Microsoft Corporation.
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: Brad Taplin <btaplin@silver.ucs.indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: AMiPro Questions
Summary: Ami Pro is great. :)
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 03:58:08 -0500

reed@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Perry Reed) writes:
>>Being frustrated with WPWin, I decided to get the working model..
>>1. How much Ram do you really need? I have 2 megs right now. WIll
GET ANOTHER 2 MEG for about a hundred. Your Windows will thank you.
Extra memory allows for a big cache, which many consider essential.
>>it be as slow as WPWin with only 2 megs?
>Yes.

DISAGREE! Our little 386sx16 loves Ami. See quote below. We
chose Ami as our upgrade from W4W 1.x because Word doesn't
provide a very pleasant page view mode IMHO and because the
cheap $99 upgrade includes ATM and a grammar checker. This
installed into 10 megs, and included EVERYTHING I'll desire,
including equation editor, configurable smarticons, more...

WordPerfect is supposed to be very good too, though NOT done
from the ground up as a Windows application. Ami Pro started
with a clean slate, and was constructed to take advantage of
Windows capabilities like OLE without a lot of overhead. WP
had probs this time, according to February Windows Mag, p.116:

"WordPerfect for Windows' one major disadvantage is that it's a
 first-generation Windows version of a DOS application, and not
 as stable as Ami Pro 2.0 or Word for Windows 2.0... number of
 problems... may not run well with less than 4 megabytes of RAM,
 it can cause hard disk "thrashing" activity on machines that
 are not heavily cached, and it may suffer more UAEs... than
 other word processors... Undoubtedly, WordPerfect Corporation
 will fix these problems - the question is when."

>>2. Can the ATM be used as iff you bought it separately? If so
Yes. Very nice package. Slows booting as much as a screen saver.
Our Deskjet 500 prints so well with ATM I'd swear it's a laser.

>>3. Amipro claims to import WP files.  I tried this...
I doubt any current package will easily import heavily
formatted WP files without some glitches. But this is
a big decision work-wise, and the shift might be worth
the effort of reformatting your existing documents.

Anyhow, every package has minor drawbacks. If you happen
to get both Ami Pro 2.0 and Win 3.1, install the Windows
first and Ami Pro will probably be happiest. We've been
using Win 3.0 and have found Ami Pro different but nice.
Good luck. :)
From: rfs0838@zeus.tamu.edu (SCHAFFTER, RODNEY FRANK, JR)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: When DR scams, it's ok?  Was Re: Win3.1/DR DOS 6.0/SuperS...
Date: 8 Apr 92 23:27:00 GMT
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <11320@mindlink.bc.ca>, Robert_Salesas@mindlink.bc.ca (Robert Salesas) writes...
> 
>Interesting.  I hope MS bashers take note.  While all the claims that MS
>"cheats" by placing code to check for OS/2 or DR-DOS, have been unfounded, DR
>plainly admits that it limits components of it's DOS to only work with itself.
>How many people are going to condem DR for doing that?  How many would if it
>was MS who did that?
> 
>Rob

	Why would you expect parts of DR-DOS to work with MS-DOS?
Just last night I tried to xcopy a disk that has XCOPY on it from MS-DOS
3.31( a lovely operating system in its day-probably MS's best work!).
Naturally, it tried to run the xcopy program on the disk, which didn't work.
Did I curse MS or DR for this "incompatability"? No!

	I wonder if the Mirror and Undelete in MS-DOS 5.0 will work
in any other version of DOS, since it is written by Central Point, who 
wants to protect its market for PC Tools. 

Best Regards,  
Rod Schaffter                                 	
Laboratory for Molecular Structure and Bonding	|Who cares if windows is or 
Texas A&M University Dept. of Chemistry		|isn't an opperating system-
Bitnet:   SCHAFFTER@TAMLMSB			|it barely operates at all!
INTERNET: SCHAFFTER@LMSBVX.TAMU.EDU		|
	"Standard Disclaimer, etc."		|An OOPerating system, maybe?
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: snowden@cray.com (Jim Snowden)
Subject: DR DOS 6.0 and Windows 3.1
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 8 Apr 92 05:08:03 CDT


In my PC magazine yesterday I noticed an advert from Digital Research
(this is in the UK, but I should think a similar arrangement exists in
the USA).  They are offering a free upgrade disk to existing users of
DR DOS 6.0 to enable it to work with Windows (just call a 800 number).
Quite a fast reponse considering Microsoft did not let them have
a beta and so they'd have to have waited until Monday to get a copy
of Windows 3.1 :)

ANyway, the advert reads pretty well (it is really aimed at new buyers 
of DR DOS 6.0) .....

"DR DOS 6.0 and Windows 3.1.  Not just compatible, but totally infatuated.
DR DOS 6.0 and Windows 3.1 were made for each other.  As the most advanced
operating system and GUI respectively, they're a match made in heaven.

DR DOS 6.0 is simply THE most powerful when working with Windows.  It will
unleash the hidden potential of your PC, doubling hard disk space (a vital
benefit for Windows users), and accessing data up to five times faster.

It will "free up" more memory for Windows applications and is wholly compatible
with all other DOS products.

And it will cost you just 79 (pounds in the UK).

Moreover, existing users of DR DOS 6.0 can obtain a free Windows 3.1
update disk by calling us, free, on 0800 666767 (UK phone number)."

I just phoned them up, they took my name and address and say they'll pop 
it in the post (today I presume).  :)

Jim Snowden (rather biased towards DR DOS 6.0)
snowden@hemlock.cray.com
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: lisbon@vpnet.chi.il.us (Gerry Swetsky)
Subject: Re: Ami Pro problems under 3.1
Organization: Vpnet Public Access
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 20:51:06 GMT

In article <89.29E28659@alpha.bgsu.edu> M..Scott.Carr@alpha.bgsu.edu (M. Scott Carr) writes:

>   After loading Ami Pro, open the file 
>printest.sam that comes with AMI Pro. Then 
>switch to faceing pages view. Ami Pro finishes
>the two page veiw but then reports an error in
>AMIFONT.DLL at 0002:2F9F. 

    I confirmed this, but don't consider it serious.  I'll send E-mail
    to Lotus to support your finding.

--
============================================================================
| Help stamp out stupid .signature files!           Gerry Swetsky  WB9EBO  |
|                 vpnet - Public access Unix and Usenet                    |
| Home (708)833-8122       vpnet (708)833-8126      lisbon@vpnet.chi.il.us |
============================================================================
Xref: sparky comp.windows.ms:11822 comp.os.os2.misc:10722
From: greenidd@CS.ColoState.EDU (danielle greenidge)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms,comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Tastes gross/more fattening (repost (last attempt only got ~1 site))
Keywords: (hex encoded ASCII) 3A 2D 29
Date: 7 Apr 92 19:56:32 GMT
Organization: Colorado State University, Computer Science Department

>>[much drivel deleted...]
>>don't see it.  Must not be able to do it. Guess it's not an operating sytem,
>>everyone hear that, IT IS NOT AN OPERATING SYSTEM!!. DOS is an operating system,
>some peoples kids....

No shit...some people (or their kids, in this case) need to move out of their
parents' basement and get a hobby.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mark Spence (in exile at):  greenidd@mozart.cs.colostate.edu

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky comp.windows.ms:11867 comp.lang.c++:6583
From: leadfoot@bigbootay.sw.stratus.com (Mark Curtis)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms,comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Zortech Debugger and Windows 3.1
Date: 8 Apr 92 04:51:47 GMT
Followup-To: comp.windows.ms

The samething happens with Microsoft's CVW 3.05.  A little disk
activity and then nothing, no crash just nothing happens.

Mark
From: jgay@digi.lonestar.org (john gay)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Why I'm sticking with Windows
Date: 15 Apr 92 20:36:41 GMT
Organization: DSC Communications Corp, Plano, TX

In article <0myjtxg.dyoung@netcom.com> dyoung@netcom.com (David Young) writes:
>From article <1992Apr14.194020.17446@ncsu.edu>, by linville@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (John W. Linville):
>
>>  I know NT will have C2, etc
>
>PCWeek reported in the 4-13-92 (yesterday's) issue that a Microsoft
>spokesperson said that C2 Security will NOT be in the early releases
>of NT.

Gee, and guess what else.  In the 4-13-92 issue of Info World it was reported
that Microsoft WILL support the OS/2 HPFS in the initial release and OS/2
Presentation Manager in the second release.  The article gave the info source
as Steve Ballmer.  Also, the price of desktop NT will be "less than $1000",
makes it sound closer to $995 than the rumored $400-$600...


john gay.                      jgay@digi.lonestar.org
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms