HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why Windows NT will fail -----
Date: 11 Dec 1992 21:45:44 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1992Dec11.211713.23323@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>	Listen up you big boofer.  You just *confirmed* my point.
>	Advocacy groups are inherently looking to find the slightest
>	error--even if it is obviously a typo (see the thread--
>	*thread*--that started because some bozo misread a sentence
>	"MS Windows (Apps)" vs. "MS (Windows apps)"..)

Thanks a pantsload, guy.

Of course, it looks like you missed the original poster's followup where he
said he wasn't as clear as he meant to be, and the other posting where someone
else said they read it the same way I did...
-- 
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.
  "All [Windows] NT has is a lot of journalists fooled." -- Brian Button
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: richs@microsoft.com (Rick Schaut)
Subject: Re: Rude behavior on this group.
Date: 15 Dec 92 05:42:39 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
Reply-To: richs@microsoft.com (Rick Schaut)
Distribution:  world,local

In article <1992Dec14.213730.28787@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>In <1992Dec13.200650.7979@microsoft.com> richs@microsoft.com (Rick Schaut) writes:
>>>"Freebies"?  Any computer seller who'll give you Windows for free is non-
>>>existant.  If they have to pay for the software, the cost  gets passes along
>>>to the buyer.

>>Not necessarily so.  In a competitive market, and "competitive" amply
>>describes the market for IBM compatible personal computers, vendors eat
>>those costs because passing the costs on would raise one's prices above
>>one's competitor's prices.

>Some of us have.  In fact, some of us have taken more than a few
>Economics courses.

Good.  Let's see how much you remember.

I've left the original quote I was responding to to make a distinction
between some subtly different statements.  In particular, I was responding
to the notion that "the cost gets passed along to the buyer."

>The reasoning about how getting DOS and Windows
>even when you don't want it is 'free' is, in my opinion, bogus.  I may
>only be paying a few dollars for it but I'm still paying for it.

Not true.  What you are paying for is other consumers' willingness to pay a
higher price for a system with Windows installed.  It's a bit of a subtle
point, but it is certainly not a case of vendors "passing the costs on to
the buyer" as is the common misconception.

As for whether or not Windows pre-installed can be considered a "freebie",
that depends upon one's point of view.  If you want it, it's considerably
cheaper to buy a system with Windows pre-installed than it is to buy a
system without Windows, buy Windows seperately and install the software
yourself.  For a number of people, this is very much a "freebie".


-- 
Rick Schaut
UUCP:...{uunet | uw-beaver}!microsoft!richs

Microsoft doesn't speak for me, and I don't speak for Microsoft.
From: unruh@physics.ubc.ca (William Unruh)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: \* IBM's OS/2 2.0 Scores Big \*
Date: 11 Dec 1992 19:33:02 GMT
Organization: The University of British Columbia
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: physics.ubc.ca

admiral@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Steve C Liu) writes:

>	Windows NT

>	15 million copies of previous versions shipped

So why don't you include the number of copies of CPM and of DOS as well?
What in the world does Windows NT have to do with Windows other than a
name, and maybe the "look and feel"?
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: jmalloy@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Joseph T. Malloy)
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! : )
Organization: Hamilton College - Clinton, NY
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 20:33:19 GMT

In article <BzHGFA.Boo@utdallas.edu> goyal@utdallas.edu (MOHIT K GOYAL) writes:
>Got this off the InterNet today:
>----------------------------------------
>
>REDMOND, WASHINGTON, U.S.A., 1992 DEC 18 (NB) -- Business Week
 ^^^
We knew it was a communist plot all along!

>magazine, in its December 28th issue, says FTC investigators have 
>concluded that the software company has engaged in anticompetitive 
>actions. The magazine also reports that the investigators are 
>preparing recommendations as to how to proceed against the company.
>
[deletia]

jmalloy@hamilton.edu

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: timbol@netcom.com (Mike Timbol)
Subject: Re: Nt Smp Users
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 02:00:47 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.212150.28121@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>In <1992Dec12.204038.332@fcom.cc.utah.edu> brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
>
>>In article <2b29d934@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org> George_Marengo@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org writes:
>>>        I've read all about NT's fabulous SMP design on here and how
>>>        wonderful it's going to be. Please raise your hand if you are
>>>        running NT on an SMP machine. How many of you are out there?
>>>___
>
>>I suspect if you had included comp.os.ms-windows.{programmer.win32,advocacy}
>>you'd see a lot more hands.  I mean just how rational is it to ask such
>>a question in the OS/2 advocacy group.
>
>>Now if you asked the question, have you ever used NT on an SMP machine,
>>I could raise my hand.
>
>Doing it on a MS demo machine doesn't count.  You could find people
>who have run OS/2 SMP and on Mach that way, too.  And I doubt you'd
>get a lot more hands, except perhaps from the group working on it
>inside MS.  And we seem to have our share of NT people here, so why
>include a Windows group?
>
>-- 
>Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.

Actually, you probably couldn't find people who have run OS/2 SMP unless,
perhaps, you asked IBM researchers.  By the way, was the OS/2-Mach demo
at Comdex a hands-on demonstration?  Did anyone from the audience actually
get to mess with it?

     - Mike
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Subject: Re: Why Windows NT will fail -----
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 04:06:01 GMT

In article <1992Dec12.204055.86164@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STACY JOHN BEHRENS) writes:
>>       Same as WordPerfect and WP6.0, right?  Come on, if you believe
>>       that, I have some, er, beachfront property to sell you in New Mexico.
>So how is this a lie?  That IS what they are doing.  I would much rather they


	Perhaps you are not familiar with the situation (either that
	or you are denser than lead--benefit of the doubt).  

	Wordperfect Corp, for months before and after the release of OS/2
	2.0 pledged, stated, bragged constantly that the new, super-duper
	version of WordPerfect (that is, 6.0) would be developed solely on
	OS/2 and released for that platform FIRST.  

	Now, in the press and at various conferences, WordPerfect has
	stated and confirmed (call'em) that WP6.0 will be released for
	DOS (in fact, the Dos version had been demoed and is right around
	the corner) and followed shortly ("2 to 3 months, with WPWIN5.2 
	being released now to help make up for it") by the Windows
	version.  The OS/2 version release date "is unclear, but it can
	be expected several months after that [the windows version]". 

	Here in the DC metropolitan area, you knw--land of politicians?--
	we call that a blatant, manipulative lie.  I consider it 
	akin to being spit on.  

	
>This has absolutely zero to do with their development to OS/2 2.0.  They


	A released OS/2 product, put out almost a year after the 
	Windows version, yet for all practical purposes
	is two years BEHIND that version has nothing to do
	with their OS/2 development?  It doesn't show a reflection
	of Corel's plans for OS/2?  Are you looney?


>produced a "mutant version" in order to get something new on the market quick.
>This esatblishes a presense and gives them quick market share, until they can
>get their new version out. That's not a lack of commitment, that is being
>smart about not losing market share by being stupid.


	It's called, "Let's sell those dopes another one--hell, they 
	bought the 2.0 version that was basically a straight port with
	no nice touches--what the heck, we'll get an upgrade fee.  It's
	a good thing they're too stupid to realize that they could run
	the 3.0 version just fine and get it for the same price.."

	Please.  I judge companies by their actions, because in the 
	computer world--and ESPECIALLY for OS/2--it has proven to be the
	only reliable way to do so.  

	How do you judge them?  By what they say?  Hell, I bet Brian 
	doesn't even believe all the sludge put out by MS.



-- 
 Snout: O Bottom, thou art chang'd!  What do I see on thee?          
 Bottom: What do you see?  You see an ass-head of your own, do you?  
 ---"I despise mystics, they fancy themselves so deep, when they----
 ----aren't even superficial"    --Nietzsche   ---------------------
From: Joe@twistor.dialix.oz.au (Joe Katnic)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re:   More Controversial Topics
Distribution: world
Date: 16 Dec 92 21:17:37 PST
Organization: Not an Organization

In article <8114@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
[deleted]
>
>(I should know about IBM's prowess; I've been managing SMP OSes from IBM for
>11 years. They've fixed a lot of bugs in that time.)
>-- 
>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.
>  "All [Windows] NT has is a lot of journalists fooled." -- Brian Button

   HERE HERE!

   I also manage IBM SMP OSes (MVS, MVS/XA, MVS/ESA).
   They have learnt a thing or two over the past.
   1. MVS is a SMP that dynamically alters the IO subsystem to be
      non-smp when thresholds are reached. Further, the more IO
      you do the more processors it will enable for IO.
      If you are not doing a vast amount of IO it will disable the
      processors for IO, only leaving one enabled.

      This means that the overhead of IO is limited to one processor
      leaving the other ones to get on with the computing load.

   2. What makes you think that OS/2 on a PS/2 295 has not benefitted
      from this experience. They may have decided that for a 486 based
      processor, it was better to split the load and not have it 
      flipping from processor to processor, thus reducing overheads.

   Just because we can do a thing, doesn't mean we must do that thing. 
--
Joe Katnic  Perth, Western Australia  Joe@twistor.DIALix.oz.au      _--_|\ 
                                   (ALT: jkatnic@DIALiz.oz.au)     /      \
"A search for the ultimate              Phone: (+619) 474 3939 --->\_.--._/
 mathematical reality inevitably                                         v 
 creates fairy tales, not science".. E.J. Lerner.
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: \* IBM's OS/2 2.0 Scores Big \*
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 19:33:40 GMT

In <724363062rommel.root@jonas.gold.sub.org> rommel@jonas.gold.sub.org (Kai Uwe Rommel) writes:

>Yeah, as long as it's 32-bit and little-endian. Both the R4000 and
>Alpha NT versions run as 32-bit OS'es on 64-bit CPU's. 

>And SGI made a special little-endian version of their R4000
>workstation series to run NT on, it doesn't run on the others, as far
>as I have read. Apparently, R4000 machines can be designed as both
>little and big endians.

The MIPS architecture chips can be told to operate either way.  For
example, the DECStation (R3000?) is little-endian while the same
processor in MIPS or SGI equipment is big-endian.

-- 
"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.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: philco@microsoft.com (Phillip Cooper)
Subject: Re: Rude behavior on this group.
Date: 14 Dec 92 18:04:16 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
Distribution: world,local

In article <8084@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>In article <11DEC199209480237@moose.cccs.umn.edu> rwh@moose.cccs.umn.edu writes:
>>In article <1992Dec10.154850.21295@Celestial.COM>, ray@Celestial.COM (Ray Jones) writes:
>>> It seems that a lot of people are attacking this practice.  The following is
>>> quoted from yesterdays (Dec. 9, 1992) Seattle Times.
>[...]
>>> Microsoft contracts give significatn price breaks to large-volume
>>> manufacturers who agree to install DOS on every machine they sell.
>                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>The FTC's concern was not with the practice or even the pricing; but rather, 
>>the length of the contract involved. Microsoft doesn't prevent you from
>>shipping another OS with your machine.
>
>Sure looks like they do...or at least require you to install DOS, even if you
>do ship another OS. Kinda makes it hard for a vendor to preinstall OS/2 if
>they're required to preinstall DOS.
>

Although I should probably not comment on an ongoing investigation, I do
think it is important to point out that this is just one of *many* options
available to PC manufacturers.  There is another option where they are
charged *only* for actual MSDOS installations.  It is up to the manufacturer
to determine which pricing plan best suits their needs.
 
Phil Cooper
From: pathak@mitre.org (Heeren Pathak)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: What about OS/2 2.1?
Date: 16 Dec 92 15:45:59 GMT
Followup-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Organization: Mitre Corporation

In article <1992Dec15.185422.6346@midway.uchicago.edu>,
sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples) wrote:
> 
> In article <1gl54kINNgee@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> dab6@po.CWRU.Edu (Douglas A. Bell) writes:
> >>A new version of the Beta Win3.1 has been floating around internally within
> >>IBM for some time now.  I don't know if this beta has been released for
> >>general consumption.
> >This new beta is also supposed to be able to run windows enhanced mode
> >applications such as mathematica.
> 
> Pure rumor, it should be noted.  A rather interesting rumor, but a
> rumor nonetheless.
> 

Not a rumor according to PC Week.  They stated that the new beta will
support windows enhanced mode apps.  Hopefully someone with the new release
can test this out with mathematica.

Does anyone know if IBM has the rights to Windows for Workgroups?  MS had
stated that IBM would never have Windows for Workgroups since it *required*
enchanced mode.  If IBM has solved the enchanced mode problem and has the
right to that code, maybe a Windows for Workgroups compatible version of
OS/2 won't be far behind???

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Heeren Pathak                      | Millions long for immortality who do 
pathak@mitre.org                   | not know what to do with themselves
Mitre Corporation                  | on a rainy Sunday afternoon.
(617) 271-7465                     |	               	-- Susan Ertz
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: Mine not Mitre's.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: wcn@cs.brown.edu (Wen-Chun Ni)
Subject: Re: Unicode - anyone knwos something ? (was Re: HPFS-386
Organization: Brown University Department of Computer Science
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 23:14:08 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.164804.82541@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STACY JOHN BEHRENS) writes:
>
>ISO did come up with a character set.  Unicode is a subset of the ISO
>standard.  (I forget the actual name of the ISO standard, it isn't something
>easy to remember like Unicode)  However given that there are apporximately
>23,000-25,000 characters in all the languages in the world combined and
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Unicode supports up to about 32,000 character the ISO set isn't likely to see
>much use.  The ISO standard can have up to 4,000,000+ characters.
>


Weird. I thought there are at leat 100,000 Chinese characters, 35,000
used in modern languages, and 10,000 commonly used, and 2,000 used
in law.



Wen-Chun Ni, wcn@cs.brown.edu         (401) 863-7669
-------------------------------------------------------------------
 I do more after 2 a.m. than most people do all day.
			 - from a T-shirt given by a friend.
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Subject: Re: Upgrade CD-Rom installable version?
Keywords: OS/2, Install, CD-Rom
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 22:21:01 GMT

In article <YcrLrAXOBh107h@billapc.UUCP> baustin@billapc.UUCP (Bill Austin) writes:
>Is there an OS/2 2.x (RELEASE VERSION) on CD-Rom yet?
>It would be kinda nice to be able to install (or re-install as the
>case sometimes might be) from a CD-Rom instead of stacks of floppies.

Yes, there is.  It is mainly intended for the IBM Ultimedia machines,
however, but it does exist.  See the OS/2 FAQ List for the part number
if you need it.

They also should be releasing a more "generic" CD-ROM version in the
future.

Also check the FAQ List for the "Remote Installation and Maintenance"
manual part number.  This manual describes how you can install OS/2's
disk images on a LAN server (Novell, TCP/IP NFS, LAN Server) and
install OS/2 2.0 (with or without CSDs) to any workstation on the
network with just two floppy disks.  You don't even need to answer
questions if you don't want to -- you can write response files.  It's
really a nice way of doing things.

>If so, how much?  can it be bought at a discount for someone that
>owns SEVERAL legit copies of OS/2 2.0 GA?  (15 FWIW)

I believe the CD-ROM version of OS/2 costs the same as the floppy
diskette version.  Additional licenses for OS/2 are discounted.  The
FAQ List has most of the details, I think.

>Of course, A major JAB would be to say that I'd like to have a
>CMS-Jumbo QIC-80 install tape instead.. but that would be too
>big a hint for CMS drives to be supported directly.. 
>[Yeah, I know.. CMS is supposed to be coming out with OS/2
>software soon.. can't wait]

I think supplying the operating system on tape would be a good idea.
However, unlike CD-ROM, there's really no standard tape format.  There
are a lot of competing formats.  IBM could, I suppose, send out
fifteen different tape formats, but you can probably guess what the
problems would be if they did so.

-- 
Timothy F. Sipples      | Read the OS/2 FAQ List 2.0h, available from
sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu | 128.123.35.151, anonymous ftp, in /pub/os2/all/info
Dept. of Econ., Univ.   | /faq, or from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET (send "HELP")
of Chicago, 60637       | [Read the List, THEN post to ONE OS/2 newsgroup.]
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: jmalloy@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Joseph T. Malloy)
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.0 Application List 1/2
Organization: Hamilton College - Clinton, NY
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 22:56:15 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.141650.9917@muddcs.claremont.edu> tlilley@jarthur.claremont.edu (Thomas (Ted) Lilley) writes:
>In article <1992Dec13.211119.10192@itsmail1.hamilton.edu> jmalloy@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Joseph T. Malloy) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec11.051119.6473@zooid.guild.org> Mark Kovarski <kovarski@zooid.guild.org> writes:
>>>
>>>11/23/92                Shipping OS/2 2.0 Applications                
>>>                               (By Company)
>>>******************************************************************************
>>>Boffin Software                     Dolittle
>>                                     ^^^^^^^^
>>Boy, does someone need help in choosing product names or what?  What
>>Gaswat and HIPO, too?!
>
>Funny, aren't they:).
>
>>  Is this some sort of joke padding to make the
>>list look bigger than it really is?
>
>Gimme a break.

If they are real and you know that for a fact, you might just state
that...Who is Boffin and where are they?
>
>>  And how many of these apps for for
>>narrow vertical markets?
>
>Probably quite a few.  Whoah, I guess they're not applications, then, are they?
>Business markets don't count for sales and support, as everyone knows.  
>(for the sarcasm impaired...)

I suppose that could count as sarcasm, though it's not a very good
attempt.  Who suggested that vertical apps don't get support?  That they
don't count for sales?
>
>Why don't you call them up and ask?
>
I'd be happy to, perhaps, if I had a clue as to where they are.  The
lister seems to have no idea either.   
.
>>>Boffin Software                     Gaswat
>>>Boffin Software                     HIPO
>>>Boffin Software                     Hiperflo
>>>Boffin Software                     Hogo
>>>Boffin Software                     Hornbil
>>>Boffin Software                     Managery
>>>Boffin Software                     Oilwat
>>>Boffin Software                     Pakiderm
>>
>>Well, I suppose HIPO describes the size of OS/2 (or NT for that matter)
>>and Pakiderm suggests OS/2 2.0's uh, um, celerity when running Windows
>>Apps!
>>
>>Are we sure "Boffin Software" really exists?  I mean, their name and
>>these products sound Monty Python (boy, there's a name they overlooked!)
>>to me!
>
>Again, why don't you call them up and ask, instead of making stupid
>(I'm sorry, make that judgmental and uninformed) implications?
>
>>>Boffin Software                     Pedriam
>>>Boffin Software                     Quikie+
>>>Boffin Software                     Reptild
>>>Boffin Software                     Spidre
>>>Boffin Software                     Trantula
>>>Boffin Software                     VHLOG
>>>Boffin Software                     Viperflo
>>
>>jmalloy@hamilton.edu
>
>
>Ted

Gee, you must be Ted Boffin!  So tell us!  Just what are these apps?

Viperflo indeed.

jmalloy@hamilton.edu

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Todd Walk)
Subject: Re: More Controversial Topics
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 20:33:34 GMT

rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>	It is my understanding, and this means that I'm draggin it out
>	of my memory, which is very poor these days, that this situation
>	really only occurs with some high number of processors--like
>	150 when you're talking about the Inmos T800 transputer.  However,
>	the last 20 or 30 processors add sufficiently little benefit
>	that it becomes almost pointless to add them.

This will happen WAY before 150 or so processors on a SMP machine.  You've
got to remember that the processors share a main memory, so it's memory
bandwidth that limits power and not the # of processors you can jam
onto a board.  About the most processors I've heard of on a SMP machine
is 16.  Computers with more processors basically all use a distributed
memory setup (each processor has it's own main memory) and communicate
by sending messages to each other.

 
					Todd Walk
					walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu