HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is NT vs OS/2 really the subject?
Date: 10 Sep 92 17:03:22 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <1992Sep9.131538.25269@hellgate.utah.edu> brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
>
>Symmetric multiprocessing isn't very useful to the home user yet, but 5
>years from now I'm not so sure.

In five years, if the hardware becomes that popular, you can bet that
OS/2 will have it, too.  Five years is a long time, and everybody will
be developing new things in the meanwhile.  of course, if NT has it
now, it'll probably lose all its bugs in two years, and will be more
competitive than the others in 5 years.

>In the end I would have to say it is designed for a personal workstation
>that's connected to the world.

It'll be nice in the home market when global networking becomes
popular in the home.


-- 
   |)  David Charlap           "LECTURER, n.  One with his hand in your pocket,
  /|_  dic5340@hertz.njit.edu   his tongue in your ear, and his faith in your
 ((|,)                          patience."
  ~|~                              --- Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary
From: pfr@drsrv1.hmi.de (Fritsch_Wolfgang)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Hard future for OS/2 2.0 ....
Date: 14 Sep 92 06:45:39 GMT
Organization: Hahn-Meitner-Institut Berlin GmbH

rommel@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE (Kai-Uwe Rommel) writes:

>Yes. The testers/journalists at german computer journals usually don't
>know much about computers and software, with one real exception, the
>german c't magazine (which has rather favourable articles about OS/2).
>The ComputerWoche newspaper is usually called the "Bild-Zeitung" of the
>german computer press and has been known for a very long time already
>as "anti-IBM" biased.

>Kai Uwe Rommel

There is another quality computer journal in this country, the German
version of PC Magazine ('PC Professionel'). They had the usual OS/2 vs.
W3.1 battle feast but in two separate articles about the two respective
OS's. The part on OS/2 2.0 has been fairly accurate, in my oppinion.
In the next issue then (Sept.) there has been completely silence about
OS/2 except for 1 paragraph in the gossip column. I would have expected
the start of a regular column like they carry for DOS and Windows, of the
type Tips and Tricks...

Well, I guess they reflect big brother in the U.S. ( for those who otherwise
may miss is: this _is_ an allusion
to the remarks by a certain gentleman about the question of operating
systems, German immigration laws and German xenophobia). I have entered 
this group too late to know what exactly the approach has been of quality
U.S. magazines to OS/2. I believe all one can do is: protesting to the 
journalists in writing, as individuals, and eventually stopping reading
journals that are not helpful from one's own perspective.
 
Wolfgang Fritsch
pfr@psun2.hmi.de
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: Tom Christiansen <tchrist@convex.COM>
Subject: Re: What REXX does
Originator: tchrist@pixel.convex.com
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 18:39:47 GMT
Reply-To: tchrist@convex.COM (Tom Christiansen)
Organization: Convex Computer Corporation, Colorado Springs, CO
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

From the keyboard of rick@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu (Richard Warner):
:AND REXX scripts can actually be read by mere mortals [ try reading
:most perl scripts - 

Well, *I* never had much of a problem with it :-), although 
sometimes Randal's obfuscated perl JAPHs are challenging.

:even mine (he says with a crimson cast to his
:complexion) ].

Now, just whose fault is that? :-)

--tom
-- 
    Tom Christiansen      tchrist@convex.com      convex!tchrist


I love California, I practically grew up in Phoenix  --Dan Quayle
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: Ari.Huttunen@hut.fi (Ari Juhani Huttunen)
Subject: OS/2 2.0 + Mach 3.0 ?
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Distribution: comp
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 00:01:36 GMT

I just heard a rumor about this, any comments?

When you think of it, it would be a perfect match. Using the Mach kernel
would give OS/2 the same advantage NT is claiming, to be portable across
many processor types and to support symmetric multiprocessing and in the
near future also distributed multiprocessing. It would have as the added
advantage that Mach is already known to be working reliably and this would
attract also Unix-users that trust Mach. And by using Mach IBM would save
most of all time. (I do _not_ believe NT will be able to function reliably
for quite some time, but I'd be gladly proved wrong.)
--
...............................................................................
Ari Huttunen   			       Any similarity to other alien life forms
				          is purely coincidental.
					      <Alien 3 misquote>
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Hercules bashers - You guys just don't get it!
Date: 14 Sep 92 15:28:12 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <1992Sep12.191654.3618@unlinfo.unl.edu> latenser@unlinfo.unl.edu (Latenser) writes:

>Why would I want an OS/2 driver for Hercules -- so I can abandon the kludge
>of Desqview/Windows.  Would I pay -- you bet!   Am I a nut?  - I suppose.

Your complaint is with Hercules.  You're in the same boat as those
Paradise owners that Western Digital is blowing off.  When asked about
OS/2 drivers, Hercules responds with the coporate equivalent of "piss
off".  It seems that Paradise is doing the same thing.

I suggest that you complain loudly to them and maybe others will do
the same.



-- 
   |)  David Charlap           "LECTURER, n.  One with his hand in your pocket,
  /|_  dic5340@hertz.njit.edu   his tongue in your ear, and his faith in your
 ((|,)                          patience."
  ~|~                              --- Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting tidbit from September 7, 1992 PC Week
Date: 11 Sep 92 21:25:00 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <1992Sep11.202537.1981@tamsun.tamu.edu> bdubbs@cs.tamu.edu (Bruce Dubbs) writes:
>But the reason they want an app base is for competitive reasons.  They
>didn't do this for win 3.0.  How long was 3.0 out before we had decent
>apps and drivers?  IMO the only reason NT is available to the general
>public via now is to pursuade the common user (not the developers)
>that they can hold off from buying OS/2 because NT will be here "real
>soon now."

And they weren't selling Windows 3.1 pre-release SDK's for $70 last
year, either. 
-- 
   |)  David Charlap           "LECTURER, n.  One with his hand in your pocket,
  /|_  dic5340@hertz.njit.edu   his tongue in your ear, and his faith in your
 ((|,)                          patience."
  ~|~                              --- Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting tidbit from September 7, 1992 PC Week
Date: 13 Sep 1992 03:12:48 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1992Sep13.015544.21070@actrix.gen.nz> Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz writes:
>In article <1992Sep12.162609.14785@wes.on.ca> tomh@wes.on.ca (Tom Haapanen) writes:
>> And I thought that Zachmann had denounced PC Week and quite in a public huff
>> earlier this year (because they didn't want him praising OS/2 and denouncing
>> Windows).  What happened?  Is he still there?  (I don't get PC Week myself...)
>So did i.....what happened? Is he back at PC Weak? (spelling intentional)

I understood that he would not be renewing his contract with Ziff-Davis when
it ran out in September. Apparently, it hasn't run out just yet...

[BTW, it's not necessary or desirable to quote others' .signatures when
following up...I've seen it a LOT lately, and thought I'd mention it.]
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
 "Keep in mind that Amateur Radio As We Know It Today will cease to exist
            at midnight tonight." -- Dave Newkirk, WJ1Z
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: tlilley@jarthur.claremont.edu (Thomas (Ted) Lilley)
Subject: Re: Marketing idea for OS/2
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 02:20:52 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.175236.20261@njitgw.njit.edu> dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
>There already exists a package which does this.  It's called VM/386.
>I forget who makes it, but I think it sells for $150.  It uses the
>ALT-SysReq key (that everyone else ignores) to call up a system menu.
>It creates DOS virtual machines that are so robust that they can be
>individually rebooted.
>
>Does anyone know about compatibility with DOS apps?  This has been
>around for quite some time, but I only saw one ad a few years back
>when it was first released.
>

I'm supposedly getting a brochure on this exact system, I believe.  I talked
to a guy who sells software, and he runs on VM/386 or something that sounds
like your description.  He claimed "100% dos compatibility", although I'm a
little skeptical of that because dos isn't even 100% dos compatible (with all
the different memory managers, different versions of dos, etc.).  I'll let
you know if I ever get the brochure he said he'd send me.

Ted
From: ts@cup.portal.com (Tim W Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Micro$oft claims a 4Q92 delivery for NT
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 02:39:15 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

Of course they can ship a debugged and well-running NT 4Q92.  That's one of
the big advantages of a micro-kernel approach.  Just release whatever you
have on the deadline, and claim that the rest is not really part of the
system! :-)

--Tim Smith
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: db3l@ans.net (David Bolen)
Subject: Re: Brian, your bias is showing ( was Re: OS/2 vs NT features
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 17:21:55 GMT
	<wiegand.715613319@lido16>
Organization: Advanced Network & Services, Inc. - Elmsford, NY

In article <wiegand.715613319@lido16> wiegand@rtsg.mot.com (Robert Wiegand) writes:

>eletanjm@nuscc.nus.sg (TAN JIN MENG) writes:
>
>>Come to think of it - how can the file system code be pageable? (...)
>
>Actually its not impossible if the hardware supports it (I don't believe
>Intel micro do). You need a two level address lookup with a small page
>table that is always present. This is used to page the main page table.
>This is somewhat slower than a single level lookup, but can be usefull
>for computers with very large memories where the page tables are too
>large to keep in memory.

Just as a tidbit - VMS does work something like this.  If you leave your
process idle for long enough on a busy machine, not only will your process
space be swapped out, but all of your paging tables and other control
structures as well.  You end up taking like a single page of memory as a
marker that let's the operating system page in all the other control
structures and then page in your process.

--
-- David
--
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------\
 \              David Bolen             \  Internet: db3l@ans.net      /
  |   Advanced Network & Services, Inc.   \   Phone: (914) 789-5327   |
 / 100 Clearbrook Road, Elmsford, NY 10523  \   Fax: (914) 789-5310    \
\-----------------------------------------------------------------------/
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: ckincy@mcs213c.cs.umr.edu (Charles Kincy)
Subject: Beware of _ad populum_ (was:  Interesting tidbit...)
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 08:30:33 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Rolla

In article <1992Sep12.071313.8580@fcom.cc.utah.edu> brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
>So there! :-)
>
>Now, since you've volunteered... answer the rest of the questions in the list!
>
>Why did the NT developers conference have 4,600 and IBM is hoping
>for only 800 at their October conference?
>Why is half my e-mail from this group requests from people on how to
>get NT?  If OS/2 is not having ISV trouble, then why is Zachmann
>complaining about all those vendors "following Microsoft down the
>garden path"?

Don't bother, Tim.  I'll handle this one.

Buzz.  You lose, Brian.  You, and everyone else, have fallen victim
to the _ad populum_ fallacy.  So much for objectivity.

Sure, the industry as a whole seems to be an engine that uses 
_ad populum_ as fuel.  Maybe that's the problem.  Maybe that's
why grad school is looking good right now.

Ever read the old fable "The Emporer's New Clothes?"  I think
that would be good reading for everyone in the industry at this
point.

And, while you're at it, read "The Mythical Man-Month."  Don't
post again until you have.  :-)

cpk

"But Bill is walking through the streets of Redmond naked!!"
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: linville@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (John W. Linville)
Subject: Re: OS/2 VS NT! The Future War Looms...
Organization: Computer and Technologies Theme Program, NCSU, Raleigh
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 16:35:27 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.193753.3287@fcom.cc.utah.edu> brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
>PM screen drivers have  a lot to do with windows if you want seamless ones,
>and personally, I'll not use it any other way.  I'm far from alone on this...
>even in this narrowly focused group, one sees others complaining about that.

You'll not use it any other way?  I guess you never ran Windows on DOS, since
(the last time I checked :-) ) DOS doesn't run Windows programs seamlessly
either.

John W. Linville



----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  John W. Linville                Amateur radio:  KD4KHC                  |
|  #include "std_disclaimer.h"     E-mail:  linville@catt.ncsu.edu         |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: TW.FY4@isumvs.iastate.edu (Timothy I Miller)
Subject: Sound Blaster Driver Info
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 00:57:54 GMT

  A sales rep at Creative Labs told me that the drivers *may* be
available at the end of the week, but she has been telling everyone
the end of the month 'just in case they're not done.'  Maybe MS
could learn a lesson from them :-).
  The bboard number is (408) 428-6660, and customer support/sales is
(800) 998-5227.  It's hard to get through, though.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: NT guys OUT!!!
From: ghdai@vax1.umkc.edu
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 16:50:37 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Kansas City


>This is has really gone to far.
>Why don't all of you NT zealots start up comp.os.nt.advocacy and get the
>hell out of here.
>
>Or perhaps comp.os.os2.anti
>
>Glen - R

I totally agree with you.  You dammed NT guys are undermining our OS/2 groups.
Why not Kick yourselves out of here!!!

G.H. Dai
-- 
GHDai@VAX1.UMKC.Edu   |**** Happy user of only OS/2 2.0!!/HPFS entire HDD ****|

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Subject: Re: Given NT and OS/2 I choose Neither!
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 02:34:11 GMT

Byron:

Agreed.  Fine post.

In the past I've related how I came to use OS/2 1.3, and it is
probably illustrative of how the casual user will approach this
decision.

In the past I've also related how I believe Windows 3.x is useful to
the success of OS/2 2.0.  I've been shot down on that one, but I
maintain that argument.

-- 
Timothy F. Sipples      | The OS/2 FREQ. ASKED QUESTIONS LIST is avail. from
sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu | 128.123.35.151, anonymous ftp, in /pub/os2/all/faq.
Dept. of Econ., Univ.   | Or from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET (send "HELP").
of Chicago, 60637       | Family Values Means a Job
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Organization: Wirtschaftsuniversitaet Wien, Vienna, Austria
Date: Thursday, 3 Sep 1992 16:07:27 CET
From: FLATSCHER Rony <RONY@awiwuw11.wu-wien.ac.at>
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Extremely week performance on updating INI-files

While working on a REXX-program which dealt with OS/2-INI-files it came
to my attention that writing (updating) OS/2-INI-files are **extremely**
slow, especially OS2.INI and OS2SYS.INI, on a 486/33MHz, 16MB of memory.

All OS/2-applications writing/updating OS/2-INI-files are therefore
hampered by these slow operations to such an extent, that end-users feel
it.

As an example for what I mean, take SHOWINI.CMD, which allows for peeking,
backing up and restoring of OS/2-INI-files.

Will the fall-CSD improve that shameful performance-penalty ?

---rony
Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.advocacy:5039 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:2117
From: db3l@ans.net (David Bolen)
Subject: Re: >16Mb support
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 14:18:06 GMT
	<1992Sep11.102439.10364@ugle.unit.no>
	<1992Sep11.145639.7234@njitgw.njit.edu>
Organization: Advanced Network & Services, Inc. - Elmsford, NY

In article <1992Sep11.145639.7234@njitgw.njit.edu> dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:

>OS/2's method is to use the >16MB memory as cache space.  This has the
>same effect you speak of - it avoids disk accesses.  Disk writes are
>written to high-memory, and are committed to disk when there are some
>free CPU cycles (thanks to lazy writes).  Reads are fetched from
>memory whenever possible.

Of course, that begs the question - just how does that data that is placed
in the upper memory cache ever reach the disk.  In order to DMA the data to
the disk to commit it, the data must be moved back down into the <16MB range,
no?  I'm sure it's still faster than swapping, but it sounds crufty.

--
-- David
--
/-----------------------------------------------------------------------\
 \              David Bolen             \  Internet: db3l@ans.net      /
  |   Advanced Network & Services, Inc.   \   Phone: (914) 789-5327   |
 / 100 Clearbrook Road, Elmsford, NY 10523  \   Fax: (914) 789-5310    \
\-----------------------------------------------------------------------/
From: sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STACY JOHN BEHRENS)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting tidbit from September 7, 1992 PC Week
Date: 12 Sep 92 05:08:36 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1992Sep11.232349.8400@u.washington.edu>, mhuth@byron.u.washington.ed
u (Mark Huth) writes:
>In article <7300@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes
:
>>In article <1992Sep10.211055.11590@fcom.cc.utah.edu> brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu
(Brian Sturgill) writes:
>>>Also if you want to read something really sick, check out Zachman's NT bashin
g
>>>article.... I think he's finally come completely unhinged.
>>
>>Oh, yeah? What, exactly, did he say that's not truthful, and that hasn't been
>>said here in this very newsgroup?
>>(Yes, I've read the article.)
>Well Jay, earlier this week Will asked, over on Compuserve, how he could get a
>copy of NT so he could give it a try.  Doesn't seem to me that he's doing a
>very good job evaluating NT before talking about it.  Perhaps he is writing
>his articles based on hearsay???  In any event, I view Will's evaluations with
>considerable doubt.

I guess that answers my question as to whether Zachmann has tried it.  I have
a hard time respecting the opinions of journalists that do that even when it
theoretically benifits my system of choice.  I got POed at the journalists for
blasting OS/2 without trying it and relying on rumors and past reputation and
for them blasting the alpha copy of NT.  If this is the kind of journalism we
can continue to expect, then the system that will eventually be the most
successful might as well be determined by who has the prettiest box or some
such stupid thing.

Stacy John Behrens
*===)-------------
Organization: University of Maine System
Date: Friday, 11 Sep 1992 17:23:20 EDT
From: Andrew T. Robinson <ANDY@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Interesting tidbit from September 7, 1992 PC Week

From: brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill)
>Page 134 -- Late News
>
>Aldus has stopped marketing and development of its 16-bit OS/2 version
>of PageMaker and will not commit to a 32-bit version for OS/2 2.0, officials
>confirmed last week.
>
>---------
>Anybody know more?
>
  Nope, but in this case Aldus is the exception.  Every vendor I've called
  is falling over themselves to support OS/2.

>Also if you want to read something really sick, check out Zachman's NT bashing
>article.... I think he's finally come completely unhinged.
>
  NT is a sieve.  It deserves to be bashed, just as much as OS/2 deserved/
  deserves to be bashed :-)

Andy
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: btf57346@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Byron "Bohr" Faber)
Subject: Given NT and OS/2 I choose Neither!
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 22:02:11 GMT

I have noticed that this group has gone from OS/2 vs Windows 3.x to 
OS/2 vs. NT.  Well let me tell you.  The arguments that people are 
useing here are completely invalid for the average user.  I can point
to 1000's of computer users who don't give a damn about telnet ability, 
editing an ini file or tremendous system security.  All they want is a 
program that will get "x" job done and that is it!.  I mean with os/2
being 30meg and NT being 100, no common user will want them with drives
still being quiet small for these os's.  Alot will just stay with Dos, 
and with there typical old Word Processor.  I think everybody in this
news group has gotten so far from reality that he doesn't know what
REAL users need anyway.  *I* don't need telnet ability, or to be able 
to edit ini file, in fact my whole BLOCK doesn't need that ability.
And I'm sure I could find a county or large city that would claim the same.

Now I will most likely be told that "Computers and memory are cheap now".
Well look at the rate of growth of the average os in the past year.  We have
went from 2 meg for Dos5.0 and 7-8 for Windows 3.x, to 100+.  AND THIS 
DOESN'T EVEN INCLUDE PROGRAMS.

I'm sorry, but let's argue about what the real user will want. I'm afriad I 
do use os/2 and love it.   But I know and understand that alot of people like
Windows 3.x.   Why?   It was small, now has alot of programs, and has the user
friendly capabilites of the Mac.  Nobody every bought it because it was
going to be some kind of awesome multi-tasking machine.  (At least most didn't)


I'm not putting down any programers... just IBM and MircoSoft and the whole
industry in general.  I do however applaud the programers who have ported 
many utilities to os/2.  I now run on 80% Shareware products.

Never before have I run so much.   Thanks

Byron Faber
-- 
Please Note:  Some Quantum Physics Theories Suggest that When the Reader   
              Is Not Directly Observing This Message, It May Cease to Exist
              or Will Exist Only in a Vague and Undetermined State.
Internet:  btf57346@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu  & btf57346@sumter.cso.uiuc.edu