HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: heiland@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (david.j.heiland)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.0 "Buglet" Report
Date: 13 Apr 92 02:24:28 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Apr12.020044.596@midway.uchicago.edu> sip1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>(13)  Box selection of desktop objects too difficult.  Box 
>has to be drawn larger than expected. 

I seem to recall a post a few weeks ago by someone reposting a response
to a list of question by someone in IBM.  One of the comments concerned the
difficulty of selecting objects.  The response was that users in their
usability rooms found it too confusing when objects would be selected
when the box selection only partially covered the objects.

This seemed very strange to me at the time (and made me wonder who these
usability users were), since a box should not need to cover every last
pixel to select the object.

In addition to fixing all of the little buglets popping up, I'd like to
see IBM put out its own list of buglets fairly soon, giving workarounds
(maybe BBS patches for the bigger buglets) and stating that they'll be fixed 
soon.  This would just show that they are aware of user's problems and are
very willing to respond to them.  Of course, the media will have a field
day will all of this.

When the CSD is released, it looks like it will take a couple of disks.
Will IBM just provide update disks, or also a new set of install disks
(perhaps for media cost)?  It is a real pain when re-installing to have
to load update disks as well - not that re-installs are done too often.

Dave Heiland    djh@neptune.att.com
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Upgrading from 1.x-- I want to cry!
Date: 7 Apr 92 02:38:23 GMT
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago

In article <1992Apr7.011241.14628@prism.poly.edu> skanga@prism.poly.edu (Shiraz Kanga) writes:
>In article <92097.192929RONY@awiwuw11.wu-wien.ac.at> RONY@awiwuw11.wu-wien.ac.at (FLATSCHER Rony) writes:
>>I cry too. Upgrading from OS/2 1.x to 2.0 is not free in Austria/Europe
>>either (nor in Germany for that matter either) !
>What if these people mail their licenses to someone in the US to get a free
>upgrade (except mailing costs - how much does the entire box weigh?) Is this
>possible? legal?

It is legal and possible if (a) you are willing to pick up shipping
costs; (b) you are willing to pick up potential custom duties upon
arrival in your country; (c) you are willing to use the U.S.-packaged
version (i.e. with American English manuals); (d) you have a "Proof of
Purchase" card that is printed in American English (you'll have some
puzzled faces otherwise at the upgrade center); (e) you have a friend
in the U.S.; (f) you abide by the terms contained in the upgrade form.
-- 
Timothy F. Sipples       Keeper of the OS/2 Frequently Asked Questions
sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu  List, available via anonymous ftp from
Dept. of Economics       128.123.35.151, directory pub/os2/faq, or via
Univ. of Chicago  60637  netmail from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: s6883289@titan.ucc.umass.edu (Peter Hawkins)
Subject: Re: PC Magazine coverage
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 21:00:21 GMT

In article <CB.92Apr8121529@tamarack12.timbuk> cb@tamarack12.timbuk (Chris Brewster) writes:
>
>The new PC Magazine screams 
>
>         WINDOWS 3.1 
>
>in type that would be appropriate for the end of a world war.  Then, in
>type about 1/100 as big, it says "OS/2 2.0: great technology, but can it
>compete?".  The relation of these headlines is as brazen a bit of Microsoft
>promotion as I've seen so far: a minor release of an inferior kludge is
>treated like the beginning of a new era, but a major release of the real
>thing is mentioned only patronizingly.  The title of the OS/2 article
>inside is something like "Can OS/2 live up to its billing?"
>
>Why is OS/2 treated with snide rhetorical questions, while Windows is given
>the benefit of the doubt on every issue?  PC Mag's answer would be "because
>Windows has sold well and OS/2 hasn't", which means that the future is
>doomed to only continue the past: no fundamental change can occur.  This
>seems a poor assumption in high technology.  
>
>The OS/2 article itself isn't too bad, if it weren't dwarfed in size and
>presentation by the Windows article.  All in all a discouraging result for
>an important edition of the magazine.
>

don't worry, my subscription will expire soon...as a matter of fact, i reget
didn't make time to give them a call many months ago....



Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Subject: A Couple Glitches
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 00:54:45 GMT

Here are a couple of possible glitches that I may have uncovered.  Can
anyone confirm these?

Hardware: AMD386-40, Forex Chipset, AMI BIOS, Teac 5.25 inch high
density floppy (Drive B), Chinon 3.5 inch 1.44 MB floppy (Drive A),
DTC 7287 RLL HD/FD adapter, Microscience HH-1120 hard drive, Trident
8900C VGA card with 512K, Wyse two serial/one parallel I/O card (16450
UARTs), 8 MB motherboard RAM.

(1) Inserted a high density disk in Drive A (1.44 MB disk drive) (it
was the demo disk for DECWrite for Windows).  Double clicked on Drive
A desktop shadow.  Double clicked on DOS batch file (CINSTALL.BAT in
this case).  A window opened, cursor displayed, but no text.  Then
system froze and required CTRL-ALT-DEL.  (This symptom may be
consistent with general DOS session problems with the floppy drives.)
Batch file runs fine (as does demo) from full screen or windowed
emulated DOS session.

(2) Had active, OS/2 1.x character mode application (TE/2).  Selected
Shutdown from WPS.  System correctly prompted and asked if I wanted to
close the running application.  I selected No, then switched (using
CTRL-ESC) to TE/2.  I exited TE/2, then selected Shutdown again from
the WPS.  System shutdown properly.  Then, upon hitting CTRL-ALT-DEL
(and having the system come up again), TE/2 was started automatically.
It could be that I selected Shutdown the second time (after shutting
down TE/2) too "quickly," but shouldn't Shutdown flush any
applications in the process of shutting down?

(3) I cured the "jerky mouse" problem in a Windows full screen
session.  The Win-OS/2 Control Panel mouse tracking setting defaults
to slow which is obviously not that great.  However, the COM driver
doesn't seem to be as efficient as I'd like it to be (and causes
jerkiness in the Windows full screen session when downloading in the
background) with DOS session communications programs.

(4) Isn't it advantageous to disable the Win-OS/2 Print Manager (and
let OS/2's systemwide spooler take over)?  The Win-OS/2 Control
Panel/Print Manager seem to resist this mightily.  I'm curious how
these two spoolers interact -- double spooling doesn't seem to make
much sense.

(5) I switched to the IBMINT13.I13 driver.  Cured the grinding/whining
hard disk problem although there does seem to be a very slight
performance penalty.
-- 
Timothy F. Sipples       Keeper of the OS/2 Frequently Asked Questions
sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu  List, available via anonymous ftp from
Dept. of Economics       128.123.35.151, directory pub/os2/faq, or via
Univ. of Chicago  60637  netmail from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET.
From: max@underg.UUCP (Max Cray)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Effective 2.0 Demo: Reference Diskette in Window
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 92 12:17:12 EDT
Organization: Underground Computing Foundation

hafting@Lise.Unit.NO (Helge Hafting) writes:

> Open the folder with command prompts.  Make a copy of the dos-window
> object. (Or the dos-fullscreen object if you want that.)
> Then double-click with the rigth button on the new object, and select
> dos settings.  There is a lot of settings, and one of them should be
> "boot drive" or something like that.  This field is usually blank, so that
> Os/2 will use the dos emulator.  If you type A: in this field, then your
> new dos-windo object will boot a diskette with msdos when you use it.
> You may also type C: if you have a primary dos partition named C
> Msdos isn't the only diskettes you can boot this way, any real-mode
> boot disk will work.  If you want the booted msdos to be able to read a
> HPFS partition, you must copy a device driver to the diskette and put it
> in its config.sys file.  I don't remember wich drive, but you can find it if
> you select help for dos settings.

You need the FSFILTER.SYS file. Probably all this info should be in the new
FAQ.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                            -= Max Cray =-
 Net:     underg%max@uunet.uu.net                         Support
 UUCP:    ...!uunet!underg!max                            Free
 Data:    The Underground Computing Foundation BBS        Software
          401-847-2603 -=- 9600 baud (v.32)               (w/src)
 CI$:     76334,2203
From: william@pilikia.pegasus.com (William Kwok)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Diamond Stealth drivers for OS/2?
Date: 15 Apr 92 09:26:39 GMT
Article-I.D.: pilikia.1992Apr15.092639.19146
Organization: Pilikia, Honolulu


In article <1992Apr13.180436.3261@doug.cae.wisc.edu> you write:
>Hi,
>
>Someone posted an article a while back that said that Diamond would not be
>producing drivers for OS/2 2.0 for their Stealth board.  Is this true?  I
>want to get OS/2 2.0, but I really don't want to run it on a $260 (slow) VGA
>board.  The Stealth is really fast as a SVGA board, but the regular VGA has
>a little to be desired.  If Diamond is not going to support their board for
>OS/2, is it possible to run a driver from another S3 based graphics board?

I also have a Diamond Stealth board and I assumed Diamond would support
OS/2.  If this is not true, and if S3 will not support it either, I
have wasted my money on an expensive board since I only planned on using
Windows during the interim before OS/2 2.0.  Perhaps Stealth and OS/2
users should band together and call both Diamond and S3 to request that
they support (develop drivers) for OS/2.  I'm going to give Diamond a
call very soon.  Does anyone have the phone number to S3?

>Just my $.02 here - I find the performance of the most recent Stealth drivers
>for windows 3.0 excellent, but very buggy.  I've had to reboot as often as
>three times in about five minutes.  If they ever decide to support OS/2 I hope
>that they do a better job.

The only problem I had with the Stealth was that the screen didn't refresh
correctly when my Prometheus 2400 modem was set to com3 or com4 and using
the Diamond-supplied drivers.  Setting the modem to com2 cured the problem.

>Thanks,
>Terry
>
>terryh@cae.wisc.edu


-- 
William Kwok		| Internet: william@pilikia.pegasus.com
MicroAge Tech Support	| UUCP:     uunet!ucsd!nosc!pilikia!william
Honolulu, Hawaii, USA   | Voice: (808)524-6652
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: leo@hoss.unl.edu (Leo Chouinard)
Subject: More money wasted (Was: Summary ... from SLC, UT)
Reply-To: leo@hoss.unl.edu
Organization: University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 15:40:17 GMT

First, let me apologize to anyone who saw a note like this from me
already.  It hasn't shown up at my site, so I'm guessing it got eaten
somewhere along the line, and am redoing it.

In <1992Apr8.003429.21483@hellgate.utah.edu> brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:

>First some news that might possibly have only been announced here in SLC.
>A spokesman for Word Perfect (which is located in the Salt Lake area)
>said that there would not be a release of 32-bit Word Perfect for 
>OS/2 until the end of this year.  The good news is that not only
>will there be one, but this version will skip 5.1 and be at the 6.0
>level.  He also announced some changes in WP licensing, if I understood
>him correctly, anyone that has license for say 5.0 on DOS, can at
>will convert that to a 5.0 license on OS/2.  

Sigh.  First I buy OS/2 1.3 because IBM says that if I don't, I'll have to
spend more to get 2.0.  Then I buy the WPfW upgrade because I read that
the new license that comes along will give me the right to convert to the
32-bit OS/2 version for only a media charge.  Now WordPerfect says "Sorry, 
make that a full version upgrade charge.  And your old license would be just 
as good as your WPfW license."  And this is what is reported as "the good
news." 

There's got to be a lesson here somewhere.  Maybe something like "_Never_
buy a promise, _even_ if you think the company is reliable."  Had I not
bought into these two promises to "save" money, I'd have half the money I
need to increase my RAM to the recommended 8 Meg.  Sigh.
--
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
 These are my opinions.  Any similarities to the   |    Leo C.                 
 opinions of others are purely coincidental.       |    leo@hoss.unl.edu       
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: siggi@fml.tuwien.ac.at (Siegfried Hanisch)
Subject: GA can't read 360KB drives
Organization: Technical University of Vienna
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 11:18:51 GMT


I use a DPT PM2001/95 SCSI-host adapter which has an onboard floppy controller.
My A: is a 3.5" 1.44MB drive, and the B: is an old 360KB 5.25" drive (I
need it to copy files from my old pc to the new one). DOS can read the B: drive
without any problems, but OS/2 2.0 GA can't (6.177 beta could). Is this a
known problem? I guess GA does double-stepping when it recognizes a 360KB disk,
and can't find tracks >1.
I get a "Sector not found" message.

thanx in advance
Siegfried Hanisch

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
Selling skin                                ! Siegfried Hanisch
Selling god                                 ! -------------------------------
The numbers are the same                    ! siggi@ruble.fml.tuwien.ac.at
On their credit cards      QUEENSRYCHE      ! kdv_hanisch@eimoni.tuwien.ac.at
Organization: European Academic Research Network
Date: Wednesday, 15 Apr 1992 10:28:02 GMT
From: Turgut Kalfaoglu <TURGUT@FRMOP11.BITNET>
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Backup from FAT to HPFS?

Yes, you can BACKUP and RESTORE between HPFS and FAT without problems.
I have switched format on my drives often enough that I kick myself
every time I do it, but I NEVER had strange problems with BACKUP
and RESTORE like "Cannot restore file - drive format incompatible" or
anything similar.

Of course, keep in mind: RESTORE will not restore a file that exceeds
the naming convention of FAT to a FAT drive. In other words, if you
took a BACKUP of HPFS, and want to restore to FAT, RESTORE will not
restore the files that have long filenames - it displays an error
for that filename, and goes to the next file..      -turgut
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: bgm@cray.com (Bert Moshier)
Subject: Re: Windows as an OS Again
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 9 Apr 92 18:48:20 CDT

In article <1992Apr08.061734.1634@microsoft.com> jeffpar@microsoft.com (Jeff PARSONS) writes:
>I watched most of the IBM OS/2 2.0 introduction that was broadcast via
>satellite today, and thought I might point out IBM's own Fernand Sarrat
>referred to OS/2 with its integrated DOS and Windows support as "three
>operating systems in one".  I have no illusion that this will put an
>end to the pointless debate here, I just thought you might be interested.

Fernand is marketing.  When Lee got on the stage, he called Windows a
DOS extender.

>
>Another minor observation I made after watching Lee Reiswig demonstrate
>the DOS and Windows support was that I couldn't recall anyone using those
>tired phrases "better dos than dos" or "better windows than windows".
>Not even a demonstration of how OS/2 multitasked disk-intensive apps with
>cpu-intensive apps so well ( at least as compared to Windows).  I suspect
>Win31 has taken some wind out of those particular sails.

I don't believe this is true.  IBM is simply past these "slogans."  New
slogans are coming out.  At least Lucy Baney came up to me and said they
were going to my "________" slogan.  I leave it blank so not to spoil
the fun.  BTW, I did put it up on this conference.  All one has to do
is look back through my postings and see which slogan I really liked.

The show, though, was about a better DOS than DOS and a better Windows
than Windows.  IBM showed this fact time and time again.
 
As for multitasked disk-intensive applications, drop by Compuserve.  A
person is wondering who his Fox Software Database programs run faster
under OS/2 2.0 than under DOS.  Since Fox Software is a Microsoft company,
maybe you can help him.  The specifics are:

  - Under DOS it takes 17 hours to complete
  - Under OS/2 2.0 it takes 2.75 hours to complete
  - PC Week helped him tune his DOS environment and got the time
    down to 14 hours.

mmmm, I wonder.  PC Week spent quite a while helping him.  I wonder if
they will use his case in their upcoming performance review?

BTW, what do you think of IBM having seamless Windows 3.1 running in
24 hours after it hits the store shelves?

Bert Moshier
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 92 18:10:39 CST
From: gthome@ausvm1.VNET.IBM.COM
Subject: OS/2 2.0 for user groups
Reply-To: gthome@ausvm1.VNET.IBM.COM
Organization: IBM - Austin
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM
News-Software: UReply 2.0
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc

In <1992Apr7.234341.8174@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> Douglas A. Bell writes:
>I am in a user group that would like to compare windows 3.1 and
>OS/2 2.0 head to head.  The problem is that we have windows 3.1
>but we don't have a copy of os2 2.0 GA.
>
>I called the IBM hotline and they said that they are so bogged down
>with orders that they can't expidite.  Is there any way to get a single
>copy to promote OS/2 with?  I'd like to show it off, but 6.304 is
>not very stable, doesn't do svga, is a bit slow, etc.
>
>Does anyone have any suggestions?
>--
>
Try contacting your local IBM branch office and explain your situation.
They might be able to get some diskettes for you.  You may even get some
help from some local IBMer.  If you don't mind, please email to my
mailbox and I may be able to hook you up with some ibmers who are willing
to help demo to your user group.

Gerry Thome
IBM - Austin, TX
From: barker@snow.geology.wisc.edu (William Wayne Barker)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: IBM 800# ?
Date: 13 Apr 92 18:58:40 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: UW-Madison, Dept of Geology & Geophysics

Ok, I'm convinced from reading this newsgroup that OS2 is the correct
upgrade from Windows 3.0.  Could someone please post the 800 number for big
blue so that I can make the deal?  Thanks very much,
                                   Barker@ice.geology.wisc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: cmk57122@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Christopher M. Kmiec)
Subject: Hardware for OS/2
Keywords: OS/2 OS2
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 05:32:40 GMT

I have a choice between getting a 386/33 and S3 SVGA, and a
486/33 with generic SVGA.  Could someone tell me, which system
would perform better under OS/2 2.0 in the actual response time,
and the screen in general?  Thanks in advance.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|           Christopher Kmiec                  | Send E-mail to:             |
|           Atari, gotta have it!              | cmk57122@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu   |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: rcook@sleepy.helios.nd.edu (robert cook)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: DeskJet too slow
Keywords: Oh no! He's doing it again
Date: 8 Apr 92 21:11:56 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.1992Apr8.211156.1887
Reply-To: Cook.14@nd.edu (R. Kelley Cook)
Organization: Univ. of Notre Dame

In article <1992Apr8.083719.14415@rhrk.uni-kl.de>, atoenne@mpii02000.cs.uni-sb.de (Andreas Toenne) writes:
|> 
|> Howdy
|> 
|> Last night I tried to use Word for Windoze under OS/2, 304e beta.
|> Printing seems to be crawling (15 minutes per page :-(.
|> I use a HP DeskJet 500. How do I speed up printing ?
|> 
|> The same happened when I tried to print the REXX online docs.
|> There is a checkbox for printing in graphics (nice) mode.
|> Checking it stops printing instantly.
|> 
|> What's going on ?

Try changing the Port in the Windows Printer Setup to LPT1.OS2
instead of LPT1 worked wonders for my LaserJet IIIp

-- 
Robert Kelley Cook     << Cook.14@nd.edu >>
Univ. of Notre Dame     The future for Intel computers arrived March 31!
Physics Dept.            Long Live the new OS/2!  Time to close the Windows!
From: etl0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (ERIC TODD LANDRIEU)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: PC Magazine coverage
Date: 9 Apr 92 01:53:14 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

I agree with you about much of their coverage.  The OS/2 overview article was
good, though(IMHO).  I only wish they had a GA copy for it... they wrote the
article before GA was released using a beta.  Still looked great to me.  My
big complaint was in their "Decisions, decisions" sidebar(p. 115), listing 5
reasons to buy and 5 not to buy OS/2 and Win3.1.  The first half of their
reasons to buy Windoze apply at least as well to OS/2 2.0.  They also had a
couple of dumb reasons to buy OS/2(number one was my least favorite).  Their
first reason to not buy OS/2 was also baloney.  Their second one was
rediculous for most users, and the third was not realistic.

By the way, if anyone wants to flame a magazine, go after COMPUTE!.  Their
newest issue has the entire cover devoted to Windoze 3.1, the "Upgrade of the
year".  There was never so much as a mention of OS/2 on the page or the TOC.
And to think... I used to read the magazine(back before they made their major
format switch towards novice end users... when they had great articles which
went in-depth by Jim Butterfield, Charles Brannon, etc... and yes, I used to
own a Commodore).

All this and no OS/2 ad yet.
                                     Eric Landrieu

                                     
-- 

               ===============================================
               =   Eric Landrieu  =  ETL0@ns1.CC.lehigh.EDU  =
               ===============================================
"Of all the people I've ever met, you're certainly one of them."
                                                 -Ellis Fuls
From: easyrob@cs.utexas.edu (Robert Depew Reynolds)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Benefits of OS/2?
Date: 12 Apr 1992 18:51:24 -0500
Organization: U Texas Dept of Computer Sciences, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: coltexo.cs.utexas.edu

It is not made by Microsoft.

Yes this is an additude.  Why you ask?

Because when Microsoft says they are committing to the future, that 
commitment might only last a year or two.

When IBM commits something it almost gets laid in stone. (the one good thing
about the old IBM 8-).  I mean jeez, they are just now trying to stop
supporting the RT PC.

Sorry about the bitch, but I am tired of Microsoft trying to become (old)IBM
of the software world.  Competition will do us the users some good.  Maybe
it will motivate some company Micorsoft, IBM, mabey even Digital Research to
produce a good operating system that uses my hardware.  Right now I am happy
to use OS/2 2.0, because it runs more software and utilizes my hardware better
than any other operating system out there.  

Robert D. Reynolds
easyrob@cs.utexas.edu

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc