HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dicks@cfsmo.honeywell.com (Richard D. Schlotfeldt)
Subject: Drivers for CD Technology with AHA-1542B
Keywords: driver, Toshiba, Adaptec AHA-1542B, CD Technology
Reply-To: dicks@cfsmo.honeywell.com
Organization: Honeywell Systems & Research Center
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 20:32:41 GMT

I am waiting for the October release of NT, hoping that it will
run decently with 8 megs of RAM. Meanwhile I am trying to get
access to the CD-ROM under MS-DOS. I suspect there may be others
in the same boat, so here is what I have learned along with
some questions.

I have used an AHA-1542B for a couple years without need for
drivers so I ordered the CD Technology CD-ROM drive without
knowing I would need drivers to use it with MS-DOS. The drive
arrived without drivers but I soon figured out that I needed
some.

A search of ftp sites and mail to a few people were fruitless
but I picked up a few clues searching through old news. More
searching today produced solid info: the phone number of the
Adaptec BBS is: (408) 945-7727. From the BBS I learned that the
drivers are sold by Adaptec through distributors. If you have
the drivers, free updates are available from the BBS.

I am still not certain exactly which driver packages I need. It
looks like I need ASW-1410 and either ASW-410 or ASW-500: I
am not clear on what support is in each. A couple dealers gave
quotes in the $75-$100 range per software package.

My questions:

  - Which drivers package(s) do I need to access the CD-ROM
    drive (in addition to my hard disk) under DOS?

  - Does the software for the Microsoft Developer Network
    CD-ROM work under Windows NT without the DOS drivers?
    In other words, am I barking up the wrong tree? Can I
    just forget about DOS drivers and rely on Windows NT
    completely?

  - Are DOS drivers needed for use of the CD-ROM drive by
    DOS programs running under Windows NT?

Dick Schlotfeldt     dicks@cfsmo.honeywell.com
From: Alistair.Banks@f1.n100.z60.wlink.nl (Alistair Banks)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32
Subject: Multiuser NT???
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 02:43:12 -0100

Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1992Oct9.104010.7972@cam-orl.co.uk> thg@cam-orl.co.uk (Tim Glauert) writes:
>
>I suggest that you take three
>experienced NT programmers and give them the task of implementing telnetd,
>rshd and ftpd respectively. 

>Then announce that these services
>will form part of the base NT product, or release them into the public domain.

>Can't MS afford a few weeks of programmer time to tackle this problem
>once and for all?

Simply, if we do this, then those guys, by definition, are no longer doing the
thing they were doing before - and importantly, if we do this, then at
one blow we'd stop the third party market from doing a better job, since
the revenue opportunity is lost, or considerably diminished - if we're not
motivated to do a great job of something like this, its much better to let
the 3rd party market do a great job, and let them make money - also, Microsoft
is onto a "loser" each time we implement something that's not a "feature"
but rather an imperfect hack, into our core product. 3rd party companies
get great credit for adding onto our products, while we'd get blasted for
not doing it "right" - As I've explained before, while Windows NT has alot
of the functionality needed for multi-user systems, the graphics server
is lacking some functionality, and the security is lacking some extra features
we want, in its first release. I believe that Microsoft should work on doing
things "right" and encourage a healthy 3rd party market to grow by making
money filling in the pieces

Also, it must be obvious, that if we took "three great programmers" to do
each thing that appears "simple & quick" we'd never get any products out!

>Failing that, how about an effort among some developers to get PD versions of
>these services out as soon as possible?

I'm much more in favour of this second route - There should be public domain
versions, and there should be new and even greater "branded" and supported
versions

Let me know about all such efforts, please -- Alistair

Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32
From: tal@netcom.com (Tal Dayan)
Subject: Win/NT RPC questions (remote callback,  nesting)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 04:37:40 GMT



This question is concerning Win NT Remote Procedure Call (RPC) tool.

I need to port a distributed client/server system to NT and am looking into
ways of using MS RPC for the interprocess/intersystem communication.

A typical interaction between a client  and a server looks like this

1.  Client establish a connection with the server.

2.  Client requests asynchronous report (in a form of callback function) on
event monitored by the server.

3.  Whenever such an event occurs, the server calls a client function with
parameters that describe the event.

As the callback mechanism of MS RPC is an extension to the DCE/RPC standard,
I would like to avoid it.  To get the callback functionality, the server and
the client establish a be directional RPC connection such that each is both
an RPC server and client (i.e. two .IDL files, one for each direction).  I
have implemented a working prototype and it seems to work.

My questions to you are:

1.  Is this is the 'right'way to have a callback RPC from the server to the
client.

2.  I have tested the prototype with recursive calls (i.e. the client calls
the client which calls the server which ..., up to some termination
condition).  I have found however the maximum nesting level is one even
though the first argument in RpcServerListen() is 30 (max number of remote
calls serviced at the same time.

3.  When the client establish the connection and the reversed connection, it
starts a thread which performs RpcServerListen() and then (remote) call the
server to establish a the reversed connection.  This remote call should be
started only when RpcServerListen() has done the initialization and is ready
for incoming calls.  I could not find however a way to tell when it is ready
to accept the incoming calls.

If you have any other comments/hints regarding RPC or can share your
experience with me, please let me know.

Thanks in advanced

Tal

-- 

 =======================================================================
 Tal Dayan (TM)             tal@netcom.com              tal@cse.ucsc.edu 
 =======================================================================
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32
From: jkf@Franz.COM (Sean Foderaro)
Subject: Re: Multiuser NT???
Organization: Franz Inc., Berkeley, CA
	<d9mikael.718715262@dtek.chalmers.se>
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 16:05:55 GMT


>> They weren't interested in distributing the Windows NT SDK for free,

 I don't know about Sweden but here in the US the software is 
effectively free (ok it's $60 without paper documentation but that is 
so close to free that there is no use quibbling about it.  I'm sure
that microsoft is losing money on each cd distributed this way but of 
course hopes to make it up by creating a huge set of applications that will 
sell NT).
From: sasdxk@skyhawk.unx.sas.com (Dave Kolb)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32
Subject: Re: How do I connect to an NFS drive?
Date: 7 Oct 92 19:13:14 GMT
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.
Originator: sasdxk@skyhawk.unx.sas.com


In article <KEVIN.92Oct6092947@loneranger.edscom.demon.co.uk>, kevin@edscom.demon.co.uk (Kevin Broadey) writes:
|> Would some kind soul point me to the document that tells me how to
|> access NFS drives from my NT machine.
|>
|> It's connected to a network of Sun SPARCs that share drives left, right
|> and centre, and I can ftp with then all quite happily.

There is no native NFS capability.
-- 
David Kolb                    Opinions are my own not SAS'
SAS Institute, Inc.           EMAIL:      sasdxk@unx.sas.com
SAS Campus Drive - J206       Phone:      (919) 677-8000 x6827
Cary, NC  27513-2414 USA      FAX:        (919) 677-8123
From: dsouza@hplred.HP.COM (Roy D'Souza)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 23:13:25 GMT
Subject: User processes and wiring down memory
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Laboratories
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32


Page 31 of the 'Programmers Reference: Overviews' states that "..it is not
possible for a process to lock a page so it cannot be swapped out..."

However, the 'Programmer's Reference: Application Programmers Interface,
Part 2', page 347 describes a function in Win32 called 'VirtualLock' which
"...locks the specified range of the processes address space into memory.
This range is present whenever the application is running...."

Is this contradictory, or do I misunderstand the use of lock ("wire in
memory"?) in these cases?

Thanks,

Roy
------------------------------
Roy D'Souza dsouza@hpl.hp.com

Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32
From: riley@sac.enet.dec.com (Steve Riley (UK Windows NT Program Manager))
Subject: Re: Multiuser NT???
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 19:18:15 GMT


In article <d9mikael.718740193@dtek.chalmers.se>, d9mikael@dtek.chalmers.se (Mikael Wahlgren) writes...
}>>> They weren't interested in distributing the Windows NT SDK for free,
}paper documentation it costs about 500 USD though.  Not much that either,
}but as I said before, I simply won't pay Microsoft for any beta/pre-release
}software.  And if there is no use "quibbling" about 100 USD why don't
}Microsoft give it for free then?
} 

These sums are undoubtedly just nominal;   which should not
discourage the serious developers, corporate users etc. In actual
fact it should be obvious that this is a significant bargin given
the fact that one ends up with a real V1.0 release {as well as the
beta copies} in the end.

Have YOU considered the cost in other terms of missing out on THE 
operating system of the future!!!

-Steve.

- - -
Steve Riley                    (Generic Disclaimer ... I speak for myself only)
Digital Equipment Corporation  Inet: riley@larvae.dec.com 
The Crescent, Jays Close,      X400: C=gb;A=Gold 400;O=digital;P=digital;OU=eur
Basingstoke, Hampshire,        Work: +44 256 370000    Cell: +44 850 717513
England RG22 4BS                FAX: +44 256 371371
From: sasdxk@skyhawk.unx.sas.com (Dave Kolb)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32
Subject: Flexboot flexability
Date: 8 Oct 92 14:08:33 GMT
Organization: SAS Institute Inc.
Originator: sasdxk@skyhawk.unx.sas.com


In article <1992Oct8.024618.17756@solaris.rz.tu-clausthal.de>, hochstae@allfiwib1.wiwi.uni-marburg.de (Christoph H. Hochstaetter) writes:
...
|> >  On a different note, have you heard that WinNT won't load at all if you
|> >  have OS/2 2.0 Boot Manager loaded anywhere on the disk?  OS/2 2.0 can
|> >  be loaded after WinNT, however.  Guess who's in the "we don't have to
|> >  be compatible with anyone because we *ARE* the standard" camp?  :-)
|>
|> This has also been discussed before, of course you can install NT after
|> you have installed OS/2 2.0. NT's flexboot just gets a little confused
|> about the drive letters. So change the x:\WINNT to
|> multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(x)partition(y)\WINNT and flexboot will work perfectly.
|>
|> Christoph
|> --
|> Internet: hochstae@allfiwib1.wiwi.uni-marburg.de
|> Bitnet  : HAMPE2 AT DMRHRZ11
|> Fido    : 2:243/660

Christoph,

            "So change the x:\WINNT to ..."

Are you referring to modifying the boot.ini file or what?  How does this work?

What is the drive letter scheme for primary and logical partitions?  Same as OS/2's?

I've gotten OS/2 2.0 and Windows NT to live together using a primary partiton for
MOST, a primary for NT and a logical for OS/2 2.0 and I had to temporarily delete
MOST while installing NT and then put it back.  Works OK but sometimes I can't
select the OS and MOST or FLEXBOOT time when presented with the choices.  Usually
it works OK and when it doesn't I can just wait or wlse power off the amchine if I
don't want the choice hightlited and I can't switch.

Thanks,
-- 
Dave Kolb                     Opinions are mine not SAS'
SAS Institute, Inc.           EMAIL:      sasdxk@unx.sas.com
SAS Campus Drive - J206       Phone:      (919) 677-8000 x6827
Cary, NC  27513-2414 USA      FAX:        (919) 677-8123
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32
From: tracyb@bnr.ca (Tracy Blomquist)
Subject: Re: Multiuser NT???
Organization: Bell Northern Research
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 14:04:52 GMT

Mikael Wahlgren (d9mikael@dtek.chalmers.se) wrote:
: riley@sac.enet.dec.com (Steve Riley (UK Windows NT Program Manager)) writes:
: 
: >These sums are undoubtedly just nominal;   which should not
: >discourage the serious developers, corporate users etc. In actual
: 
: Well, anyhow it discourage me.  I simply won't pay for beta/pre-release
: software.  I have no problem paying 1000 USD for a released version (if I need
: it), but paying 100 USD for a pre-release from Microsoft, is something I
: never will do (again).
: 
: >Have YOU considered the cost in other terms of missing out on THE 
: >operating system of the future!!!
: 
: Well, I am not quite so sure that it is "THE" operating system.  And I won't
: miss it, just because I don't buy the pre-release SDK.
: 
: Mikael Wahlgren

I don't understand why you wouldn't just buy the pre-release when it
gets you THE FINAL RELEASE FOR FREE (which is supposed to cost much
more than $100USD).  You said you wouldn't have a problem buying the
final release for up to $1000USD, but why would you throw away up to
$900USD when you can avoid it? 

You do know that if you buy the pre-release you get all updates,
including the 1st official release, for FREE don't you?

--
,----------------------,------------------------.---------------------,
| Karl Tracy Blomquist | E-MAIL: tracyb@bnr.ca  | Fax: 1-613-765-4018 |
| P.S.C. Consultant    | ENVOY: T.BLOMQUIST     | Ph:  1-613-765-4886 |
`----------------------'------------------------'---------------------'
| Bell-Northern Research, P.O.Box 3511, Stn C, Ottawa, Ont., K1Y-4H7  |
`---------------------------------------------------------------------'
From: atam@zeus.calpoly.edu (Alexander W Tam)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32
Subject: SCSI-1 CD-ROM
Date: 7 Oct 92 06:45:35 GMT
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo

I have a NEC CDR-84 internal CD-ROM drive. It was used to
install NT on my machine. However, the pre-release version of
NT doesn't support SCSI-1 CD-ROM for audio playback. i.e. I
cannot listen to musical CDs under NT right now. Anybody knows
whether the next version, may be beta release due in the end
of October, of NT will support SCSI-1 CD-ROM so that I can use
the "CDPlayer" utility?

By the way, does anyone have a SCSI-2 CD-ROM successfully play
musical CDs under NT using the 'CDPlayer' program?

Alex
atam@poseidon.calpoly.edu
From: d9mikael@dtek.chalmers.se (Mikael Wahlgren)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32
Subject: Re: Multiuser NT???
Date: 10 Oct 92 18:03:13 GMT
Organization: Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg Sweden

>>> They weren't interested in distributing the Windows NT SDK for free,

> I don't know about Sweden but here in the US the software is 
>effectively free (ok it's $60 without paper documentation but that is 
>so close to free that there is no use quibbling about it.  I'm sure
>that microsoft is losing money on each cd distributed this way but of 
>course hopes to make it up by creating a huge set of applications that will 
>sell NT).   

In Sweden the CD cost about 100 USD, and agreed that isn't much.  With
paper documentation it costs about 500 USD though.  Not much that either,
but as I said before, I simply won't pay Microsoft for any beta/pre-release
software.  And if there is no use "quibbling" about 100 USD why don't
Microsoft give it for free then?

Mikael Wahlgren
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32
From: rrohbeck@kboeng.enet.dec.com (Ralf-Peter Rohbeck)
Subject: Re: WIN NT Beta?
Reply-To: rrohbeck@kboeng.enet.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment Int. GmbH
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 12:13:16 GMT


In article <1687A897B.IANR009@UNLVM.UNL.EDU>, IANR009@UNLVM.UNL.EDU (D. Kirk Darnell) writes:
>Can someone tell me what the latest news is on the Windows NT beta?
>When will it ship, etc?
Presumably, it'll be identical to the second SDK, minus some tools?
That is, it should appear at the end of October?
Will the preliminary SDK users be beta sites as well?
How will the reporting channels for the beta program look like?
Compu$erve only?
--
===============================================================================
Ralf-Peter Rohbeck          rrohbeck@kbomfg.dec.com         Product engineering
Digital Equipment Int. GmbH rrohbeck%kbomfg.enet.dec.com       Disk drive plant
Sudetenstrasse 5/POB 1356   ...!decwrl!kbomfg.dec.com!rrohbeck)      Kaufbeuren
W-8950 Kaufbeuren           (+49) 8341 / 91-4473                        Germany
#include "disclaimer.h"
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32
From: jones@hal.uvm.edu (Mike Jones)
Subject: Telnet Slow
Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 22:41:09 GMT

I have a 20Mhz 386DX and I find my TCP/IP telnet window about as fast
as my 12 Mhz 8086 with a 2400 baud modem.

It appears that window scrolling is very slow under Windows.  Is it
still slow under the faster 486/33's ?  I have seen X/UNIX running on a
486/33, and it wasn't slow at all.  So, are we talking slow computer,
or slow window system/OS ?

Mike
From: rmeester@ncrcan.Canada.NCR.CA (Richard Meesters)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32
Subject: NT and Network Cards
Date: 8 Oct 92 19:19:47 GMT
Organization: NCR Canada Ltd. Mississauga, Ontario

The System:  NCR 3433 (486 33MHz Micro channel)
		with an IBM T/R Adapter /A

I've experienced a problem where the system was unable to run any dos programs
under NT.  When running anything DOS, the system came back with a function 
failed message in a popup window.  This problem goes away when the IBM T/R 
card is removed from the system.

This looks like a conflict in the 640K - 1Meg range of memory.  I had a similar
problem with OS/2 2.0 (DOS sessions worked, but you couldn't get any Expanded
memory) which was solved by making the memory settings as contiguous as 
possible in the D0000-DFFFF range (Leaving C0000 areas free for what I think
must have been the necessary page frame, but I'm guessing).

Does anyone have an explanation for what's happening here?

Regards,
Richard Meesters.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32
From: leehart@microsoft.com (Lee Hart)
Subject: Re: Win NT, some simple questions
Date: 08 Oct 92 23:58:56 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corp.

In article <1992Oct7.110624.1416@andersen.co.uk>, aroby@andersen.co.uk (Tony Roby) writes:
> I asked Microsoft about this when I was in the States recently.  They will
> not sell a copy to go outside the US since it infringes the license
> agreement.  It probably contains top secret data encryption code which
> would endanger US national security if anyone got their hands on it !

The truth is not quite as exciting.    One major issue is getting things
through customs - it's easier in the large batches we send to our
subsidiaries.  Another is that letting the subsidiaries do the distribution
allows them to keep more in touch with our customers.

Lee Hart
Not a spokesman.
From: mendels1@husc4.harvard.edu (Andrew Mendelsohn)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32
Subject: Multiuser NT???
Date: 8 Oct 92 21:51:56 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Oct8.175157.16182
Distribution: world
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

The recent articles about NT's multiuser capability have been confusing.
Early articles in this newsgroup suggested that the Windows NT API had
not yet been fully designed to exploit multiuser capability, but that
enhancements were in the works (though not necessarily for the initial
release).  Others have suggested that it is possible to have many virtual 
consoles under NT connected to the same machine, ie, given 5 monitors and
keyboards connected to one computer, 5 separate logins would be possible
providing full access the the NT GDI in true concurrent fashion.  Is this 
true?  On a related note, would it be possible for 5 users on dumb 
terminals to login (via telnet) to an NT command line and launch (text)
applications?  This latter possibility seems at least plausible given the 
current state of the system.
From: edwardm@hpcuhe.cup.hp.com (Edward McClanahan)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 02:05:50 GMT
Subject: Re: EISA vs local bus
Organization: Hewlett Packard, Cupertino
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32

> I'm leaning towards an EISA system anyway, but if the video drivers
> are still going to shuffle data to the card via buffers below 16MB,
> then I might as well get an ISA version of the ATI UltraPro rather
> than an EISA version and save a few $$.

Why not get a VL-BUS version of the new ATI UltraPro?  This card may
not be announced but it is currently being OEM'd through DELL and TriStar(?)
and has supposedly been slated for general release RSN...
From: jim@applix.com (Jim Morton [ext 237])
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32
Subject: Re: Is it time to split this newsgroup?
Summary: newsgroup reorganization
Date: 12 Oct 92 18:28:37 GMT
Organization: Applix, Inc., Westboro, MA

In article <1992Sep30.144658.7367@microsoft.com>, Alistair Banks) writes:
> So I think comp.os.ms-windows.nt.setup or comp.os.ms-windows.stup.win-nt
> might be appropriate - we should think ahead and design a hierarchy that
> can handle windows 3.x series, windows nt, "Modular Windows" series,
> and be ready for other future versions of Windows. In general I
> think its probably best to keep the .setup's together, and the
> programmers sections together, rather than seperate things by the
> particular product packaging, since the product packaging will change
> more often than the pieces of technology contained within those
> products - and I just left our "Windows for Workgroups", how could I?

why don't we use a new heirarchy that mimics the Compu$erve Forums and
subgroups, so when Microsoft officially sanctions Usenet support it will 
be easier and intuitive what the parallel newsgroup/forum names are?  :-)

(and that would make it sooo easy to feed into their fancy SQL system!!!)

--
Jim Morton, Applix Inc., Westboro, MA
...uunet!applix!jim    jim@applix.com
From: Francis.Hogle@f1.n100.z60.wlink.nl (Francis Hogle)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32
Subject: Telnet Slow
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 00:26:08 -0100

Organization: Monsoon Software, Inc.

jones@hal.uvm.edu (Mike Jones) writes:

> So, are we talking slow computer, or slow window system/OS ?


Probably SLOW DRIVER.

francis