From: johnsd2@jec324.its.rpi.edu (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: 7.1 vs. OS/2 and Windows NT
Reply-To: johnsd2@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY.
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 18:56:20 GMT

In article <8enZ=qC00iUxE4moVI@andrew.cmu.edu>, Carl B Jabido <cj00+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
[deletia- CUA stuffs]
|> >  
|> > If you have one of these "real" apps, perhaps you could explain their
|> > interface to me.
|> 
|> Sure, one of the standards set is the use of the second mouse button. 
|> In OS/2 the second mouse button either brings up a menu of actions,
|> settings, something to that accord.  For example, in PM Chart by
|> Micrografx (it's one of the free apps that comes with 2.0) when you have
|> a chart on screen, right-clicking will bring up the worksheet of numbers
|> used to create the chart.  This follows in Describe.  Example: Select
|> text.  Then when on that block of text, you can right click, and up pops
|> a toolbox of different style settings like font, fontsize, superscript,
|> bold, etc.  You can even do this on a picture, graph, etc.  Appropriate
|> toolboxes popup according to what is clicked on.  Unfortunately, there
|> aren't many apps which take advantage of this.  Supposedly the new apps
|> are coming this or the next quarter: Wordperfect 6.0,  Lotus Ami, Lotus
|> 1-2-3, Freelance Graphics, you know, the basic "bread and butter" apps. 
|> They all claim to support the new standards.  We'll see then.  
|> Another standard is the notebook which is used for settings and what
|> used to be called control panels.  These are used by more apps, but
|> again, not enough.

Ok, 3 points. You are talking about additions, but to what interface
are you adding? I am not familiar with the "old" CUA guidlines as such.
Are they what windows uses? I didn't think PM had an equivalent for
the Multiple Document Interface, origionally... does it now?

Also, You say that in PM Chart "right-clicking will bring up the
worksheet of numbers used [etc]".. doesn't sound like a menu. Perhaps
it brings up a menu which you can use to do this? Or is it inconsistant?
Or do I just not get it?

Lastly, how do the notebooks work in apps?

|> Workplace shell is just another app just like the Finder.  Can't you
|> theoretically replace Finder?  Likewise, you can make OS/2 boot up into
|> >EEK< a command line prompt.  Rumors claims replacement shells are
|> actually being made by third party developers for those who >like<
|> *EEEEEEEEKEEKK* _WINDOZE_.  That'll be a leap backwards.

The Finder is an App, and you can replace it (tho this is rare); I
was just saying that it sounded like WPS == Finder, but Finder !=
Mac GUI, so WPS != OS/2 GUI. Get it? :)

[deletia- color picker]

[deletia- pre-emptive multitasking]


|> Eventually though, I hear Apple is going to a pre-emptive style, so the
|> point is moot.  (Please inform me if I'm wrong)
|> 

You're right; Apple sez they are giving the MacOS a microkernal, and it
will hav epre-emptive multitasking, multithreading and memory
protection. Nifty. I dunno when it will come out, or if Apple will
want money for it. :( [there are rumors that system 7.1 will cost money,
no confirmation yet tho... We'll see...]

[deletia- networking]
|> >  
|> > I didn't know OS/2 had any facilities here. What's it got?
|> 
|> Nothing comes standard for networking.  By network-aware, I mean that if
|> Lan Manager or some thing is on the system, and you're connected to a
|> server, then you see all the mounted drives, just like how a little
|> "hand with hard drive" icon shows up for Mac's network-mounted drives. 
|> There are no networking services built in however.  For user
|> authentication, IBM has a "restricted shell" extension which will let
|> you login etc.

Ok, but you gotta have LAN manager or something?

|> In the OS/2 world, the current preferred way of peer networking is
|> TCP/IP, but Lan Manager 3.0 will have peer-networking available.  
|> Don't forget that a Macintosh is a hardware/software package.  That
|> means that the maker of the OS can assume that the computer running it
|> will have the same networking hardware.  Therefore, they can add the
|> network stuff to the OS.  OS/2 is separate of the hardware, and so they
|> have you buy the package separtely. (Although I wish they would still
|> give it to us as part of the system)

I haven't forgotten this, but it isn't relevant. The "hardware" that
you are refering to is a serial port. The network support is all in software;
The services (File Sharing, anything else you want to buy, find, or write)
are based on various protocols in the AppleTalk (Apple events, the Program-
to-program communcations toolbox, the Appletalk data stream protocol,
the Appletalk Transaction protocol, the Name Binding Protocol the Datagram
Delivery Protocol, and others); The trick is that teh lowest
level protocol- the one that does the "work", is variable. On a localtalk
network its the Link Access Protocol, on an Ethernet networks its something
esle (I forget teh name), etc. These (non-localtalk) protocols
are provided in drivers. Apple includes Ethernet and Token-ring drivers
with the system. Replacing them lets you use different hardware, instead
of just the serial port. Of course, all the higher level thigns see
is a very fast Link Access Protocol if you do this.

This trick is done entirely in software, as you can see, and it is NOT
hardware dependant. The main drawback is that you can only communicate
with one species of network at a time; You can switch between them with
a control panel but you coulnd't (say) have disks mounted from
a Localtalk net AND an Ethernet.

I see no reason why this could not be done under OS/2; it would simply
mean that network hardware provides would have to give drivers for
OS/2. Video card manufacturers already must do this. It would also
make it pretty simple to arrange a localtalk-like serial port
based networking; Slow but cheap.


[deletie- COMMAND LINES! NO NOT THAT!]
|> > |> 
|> > |> In a previous post I say: OS/2 has its equivalent of aliases:shadows. 
|> > |> Same thing, but I don't want a 100 or so aliases/shadows in some folder.
|> >  
|> > (gad, this arguement gets repeated a lot)
|> >  
|> > Now then, you dont need 100 aliases at all. Put alises up there for
|> > your commonly used drag&drop utilites. Maybe leave less common ones
|> > in a folder which has an apple menu alias. Make a fodler with stationary,
|> > or aliases, to create new documents. (put common stationary, or aliases
|> > to it, on teh desltop or in teh apple menu); you dont need the apps
|> > themselves out because you can just double click the document and let
|> > the Finder do it. Im pretty sure the Workplace shell can do ALL of what
|> > I just descibed. (I think, Stationary=Templates, no?)
|> 
|> Stationary?  I never heard of this in a Mac.  I'm sorry, please
|> enlighten me. I'm not a power user on a Mac, but I used them all of last
|> year and previous to that too.  I know them well enough that I probably
|> could never again take a course which required Macs. (A IIsi crashed
|> five times on my four hour final exam, thus giving me a C in the course.)

But you never ran into stationary? Poor you. [ps tossing around
anecdotes about how unstable Macs are wont do a thing to convinces
us happy Mac user types, you know.]

Stationary is a document which loads into an untitled window as if it was
new. An example: I like to write in New York 12 point text, double spaces
(Im just such a rebel that way... :) ); So I have a stationary document
on my desktop. Its just an empty document, with New York 12 point, double
spaced as the current font, style and spacing, but its saved as "stationary"
[in the save-as dialog]; when I double click it my word processor loads and
I get an untitled document which has those current settings. So I can go
type, wo/ messing with the font, size, etc.

This is part of the standard interface, but it didn't become an official
type part of the system until System 7.0. Lots of programs had it anyway
tho. Now there's finder level support too.

[deletia- I bash the chooser]
|> 
|> What's wrong with Chooser?

It has a very bizzare interface- there's no way to see what the current
printer is, it is mixed weirdly- ya got printers and file servers in teh
same place. It doesn't mesh at all with the finder (you'd exect to double
click the printer icons and have a window show up containging the
settings, but that's not how it works); Its just a blotch on an otherwise
nifty system. It would be MUCH better to intergrate it with the finder,
like they did with the Font/DA mover. Also integrate teh Print Monitor,
imho.

Oh, and the localtalk controls are in there too. Its just too weird for
me, it could be so much better. :(

Now Im all depressed.
-- 
			- Dan Johnson
And God said "Jeeze, this is dull"... and it *WAS* dull. Genesis 0:0

These opinions have had all identifiying marks removed, and are untraceable.
You'll never know whose they are.