HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: curts@TMPCU.MDC.COM (Curt Schroeder)
Newsgroups: comp.os.cpm
Subject: Moving files between Apple operating systems.
Date: 8 Sep 92 13:29:50 GMT
Organization: The Internet


There is a shareware utility called Chameleon that can move both text and
binary files between DOS 3.3, Prodos 8, CP/M, and Apple Pascal.  Works great!
If you are using a super serial board and find a CP/M executable that talks
to it, I would like to know.  I have MEX and the SSB overlay, but have never
gotten around to trying to get it working.

Curt

Curt Schroeder | McDonnell Douglas Missile Systems Company      |
----------------------------------------------------------------|
These opinions are mine, mine, mine!  I  | curts@tmpcu.mdc.com  |
am not an instantiation of Std_Employee! | - Apple II Forever - |
From: zebee@sirius.ucs.adelaide.edu.au (Zebee Johnstone)
Newsgroups: comp.os.aos
Subject: mac to mv
Date: 14 Sep 92 07:22:32 GMT
Organization: The University of Adelaide
NNTP-Posting-Host: sirius.itd.adelaide.edu.au

G'day.

ONe of our dept. heads has become a Mac convert, and wants to hook his
Mac into our MV30.
  
We run a netwrok consisting of asyc connections (terminals and PCs with 
terminal emulators) running through termservers, and ethernet connections
for PCs with ethernet cards (3Com Etherlink IIs) through DG Multiport
Tranceivers.  (all gear is really re-badged #Com stuff).
  
So, what I need is info about:

1) DG terminal emulators for Mac which can emulate D200 terminals or better.
  
2) Ethernet cards/software for both ends that will allow a Mac to connect
to our tranceivers (best case) or to some other type tranceiver on our
backbone and allow 
	terminal emulation
	file transfer.

I looked into PacerLink, but it cost megabucks.  Anyone know of
any others?

  
Email or post, and I'll summarise.

Thanks!

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
     Zebee Johnstone  DoD #605   | You don't own an Italian motorcycle 
     Adelaide City Council       |  - you merely have the privilege 
    zebee@itd.adelaide.edu.au    |    of paying its bills....
From: guru@flora.wustl.edu (Guru Parulkar)
Newsgroups: comp.os.research
Subject: Distributed OS: request for help
Date: 5 Sep 92 16:56:51 GMT
Organization: Washington University,  St Louis MO
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.cse.ucsc.edu
Originator: osr@ftp



Folks,

I am teaching a graduate level course on Distributed Operating
Systems, for the first time. I would like some help from people in
this research community. 

1. I am looking for ideas for course projects. We have decided to have
5 teams of 3-4 students each, and each team would do a semester long
project. We also have 6 NeXT machines running MACH for the course. 
If you have taught a similar course, and have ideas for the projects, 
please let me know. 

In case you care, we are using the second half of Tanenbaum's Modern
Operating Systems and Goscinski's books as texts.

2. I am also looking for 8-10 what people would consider classic
papers in distributed operating system that everyone must read. I know
there may not be consensus on this, but please your favorite list. 

Please send your replies directly to me.

Thanks very much.

-guru 

Dr. Guru Parulkar
Asst Professor, Computer Science Dept		guru@flora.wustl.edu
Campus Box 1045, Washington University		wucs1!guru@uunet.uu.net
One Brookings Drive            			FAX: (314) 935-7302
St. Louis MO 63130-4899       			(314) 935-4621
--
Dr. Guru Parulkar
Asst Professor, Computer Science Dept		guru@flora.wustl.edu
Campus Box 1045, Washington University		wucs1!guru@uunet.uu.net
One Brookings Drive            			FAX: (314) 935-7302
From: danh@quantum.qnx.com (Dan Hildebrand)
Newsgroups: comp.os.research
Subject: Re: Please move the WINDOWS/NT discussion?
Date: 11 Sep 1992 23:11:23 GMT
Organization: Quantum Software Systems
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.cse.ucsc.edu
Originator: osr@ftp

In article <18o43kINNp29@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> jbone@splat.dell.com (Jeff Bone) writes:
>Guys.  This is a fine discussion, and there are lots of fine places to
>have this discussion;  the .*advocacy groups, for instance.  However,
>Windows/NT  probably does not belong in this group --- how much new
>or interesting OS research and innovation do you think is going into
>it?  In any case,if we're going to talk turkey here, let's deal -w-
>NT's technical aspects...  the other arguments border on religion.

Exactly.

At the USENIX "Microkernels and Other Kernel Architectures" workshop, Dave 
Cutler delivered a presentation on WNT. One of the first questions asked 
from the audience was "Where is the new technology ? None of this is 
anything new...".  Paraphrasing loosely, his answer was "Believe me, if 
you'd seen some of the code around Microsoft, you'd agree that this is new 
technology". The audience appreciated his sense of humor. :-)

Also, he made it very clear that WNT was being discussed at the workshop 
because it fit into the "Other Kernel Architectures" category. Some of the 
Microsoft marketing staff seem to disagree with him...

% Can anyone provide a technical summary of NT?  --DL
-- 
Dan Hildebrand                     email: danh@qnx.com
Quantum Software Systems, Ltd.     QUICS: danh  (613) 591-0934 (data)
(613) 591-0931 x204 (voice)        mail:  175 Terrence Matthews          
(613) 591-3579      (fax)                 Kanata, Ontario, Canada K2M 1W8
From: pope@walnut.kpc.com (John Pope)
Newsgroups: comp.os.research
Subject: Re: WINDOWS/NT
Date: 11 Sep 1992 16:59:57 GMT
Organization: Kubota Pacific Computer, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.cse.ucsc.edu
Originator: osr@ftp

>	Solaris 2.0 (Sun want its cake and eat it too in that
>	     they say they are a "standard" SVR4, yet "better")

The idea is to comply with the standards definitions (SVID3, etc) but
provide a better implementation of those interfaces and to provide
features that customers want that are beyond the standard ones. With
standardization leveling a lot of the playing field, these are some of
the things vendors have to do to provide differentiation (real or not)
from their competitors.

>   BTW, what is the view of the POSIX standard(s) in the comp.os.research
>   community? If these standards are real and sufficient, and if
>   NT is POSIX compliant and UNIX is POSIX compliant isn't the point 
>   sort of moot? 

If the standards were sufficient, then it would be moot, but they
aren't (fortunately for the employment prospects of OS engineers). A
strictly compliant 1003.1 program can't do a whole hell of a lot...

--
John Pope
pope@kpc.com
Kubota Pacific Computers, Inc.
(408) 987-3362
From: aboyd@quantum.on.ca (Andrew Boyd)
Newsgroups: comp.os.research
Subject: Re: WINDOWS/NT
Date: 10 Sep 1992 18:29:01 GMT
Organization: Quantum Software Systems
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.cse.ucsc.edu
Originator: osr@ftp

In article <18lnnmINN78b@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> gthaker@fergie.dnet.ge.com 
(Gautam H. Thaker) writes:
>In article <18iq26INNe58@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> rminnich@super.super.org 
>(Ronald G Minnich) writes:
>
>   Okay, folks, how about that Windows/NT? Judging by the reactions of the
>   trade press and the vendors the game is over in operating systems. 
>
>Can't say for sure, but NT will likely be the #1 selling OS in 93 (or at
>least 94.) I have never liked MS-DOS at all, but I hope NT will be better.
>NT will likely out sell others because ...

Replace "NT" with "OS/2".  Thumb back a few of years through your old
and now obviously forgotten magazines.  Any articles look familiar to
what you're hearing right now from the industry "experts"?

If I may be so bold as to quote the start of the Foreword from
_Inside OS/2_, by Bill Gates:

	"OS/2 is destined to be a very important piece of software.  During
	the next 10 years, millions of programmers and users will utilize
	this system."

I don't doubt that microsoft can write applications for bean counters.

It remains to be proven that they can write an operating system.  And
even if they finally do write a decent os, the question remains, is it
too late?  Has the market window closed?

----
#include <std.disclaimer>
From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)
Newsgroups: comp.os.research
Subject: Operating systems like cars... (Re: WINDOWS/NT)
Date: 13 Sep 92 23:35:07 GMT
Followup-To: rec.humor.funny
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.cse.ucsc.edu
Originator: osr@ftp

Is NT solid enough to add it to the "if operating systems were like cars"
thread, yet?

If NT was a car, it'd come with a rotary engine, a piston engine, a sterling
engine, and a steam engine. The door locks seem to actually work (they didn't
on the previous model), but it's got a stearing wheel for every seat and no
seat-belts. The trailer hitch is square, but they're promising a round one
in the next version...
-- 
Peter da Silva                                               `-_-'
Ferranti Intl. Ctls. Corp.                                    'U` 
Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012
+1 713 274 5180                                   Har du kramat din varg idag?
From: columbus@cs.utwente.nl ([Studiereis Interactief])
Newsgroups: comp.os.research
Subject: Multimedia Study Tour from the Netherlands to the USA
Date: 14 Sep 92 18:50:17 GMT
Organization: University of Twente, Dept. of Computer Science
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.cse.ucsc.edu
Originator: osr@ftp

COLUMBUS A Must is the name of a study tour committee from the
Netherlands.  We are planning to visit the States in October 1993,
where we`ll study the subject of MULTIMEDIA.

In the USA we travel to New York, Boston and San Fransisco. If you have
information about interesting projects at Universities or Companies in
or near those cities, or know people that work in that area, we would
be very glad if you would be so kind to mail us your information.

The subjects of our interest are e.g.
  - Gigabit networks
  - Distributed operating systems
  - Graphic and sound interfaces
  - Object oriented databases
  - etc. etc.

The whole project will be supervised by prof. S. Mullender of the
University of Twente.  Thirty students will participate.

Other interesting stuff is hotel information, the quality of public
transportation in contrast to renting cars, and possible sponsors.

Yours Sincerely,

On behalf of the study tour committee Columbus A Must,

Arjen de Vries
(chairman)

Our full address is <columbus@cs.utwente.nl>. We are members of the
students association Inter-Actief of the Department of Computer Science
of the University of Twente, and this project is supervised by prof.
Sape Mullender.

-- 
=============================================================
|  Columbus, A Must: America Multimedia Study Tour Committe |
|  full adress: COLUMBUS@CS.UTWENTE.NL                      |
=============================================================
From: rminnich@super.super.org (Ronald G Minnich)
Newsgroups: comp.os.research
Subject: Re: Please move the WINDOWS/NT discussion?
Date: 13 Sep 92 23:29:31 GMT
Organization: Supercomputing Research Center (Bowie, MD)
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.cse.ucsc.edu
Originator: osr@ftp

In article <18o43kINNp29@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> jbone@splat.dell.com (Jeff Bone) writes:
>Windows/NT  probably does not belong in this group --- how much new
>or interesting OS research and innovation do you think is going into
>it?  In any case,if we're going to talk turkey here, let's deal -w-
>NT's technical aspects...  the other arguments border on religion.

ok, i was hoping for a technical discussion but have not yet seen one :-(

I have to date heard one technical tidbit:
it is a "micro-kernel", but the rest of the important stuff is in a very 
large blob that sits just outside the micro-kernel. In other words, process
managment, file systems, etc. are in one module. 

So, anybody know the breakdown? Is the structure reminiscent of the old Apollo
OS with process control in a module, file system in a module, etc.?
Any timings on process creation, i/o throughput from process to process, etc. ?
Anybody written a driver yet? What's it like? 

ron
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
satisfaction: the feeling you get when you        | rminnich@super.org
run newfs on a DOS disk so you can install 386BSD.| (301)-805-7451
Now if only I could do this to AIX on the RS/6k ...|
From: rminnich@super.super.org (Ronald G Minnich)
Newsgroups: comp.os.research
Subject: WINDOWS/NT
Date: 8 Sep 92 02:42:24 GMT
Organization: Supercomputing Research Center (Bowie, MD)
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.cse.ucsc.edu
Originator: osr@ftp

Darn, the group got quiet again.  Time for another hand grenade ...

Okay, folks, how about that Windows/NT? Judging by the reactions of the
trade press and the vendors the game is over in operating systems. 
There is a standard OS in your future, and it's built in Washington state,
and it has it all over Unix or anything else. You will never see the 
innards of it, thank you very much, and no one will care either. 
Oh, and yes, an OS monopoly seems to be fine with everybody. We can 
trust one multi-billion dollar company to look after our interests. 

The current deal is hard to pass up: a CD-ROM for just $69. 
you get the os, compiler, library, 7600 pages of documentation. 
I have ordered my CD-ROM. Anybody else out there getting it? Anybody actually
know something technical one way or another? Have you used it? Have you
written code for it? 

ron
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
satisfaction: the feeling you get when you        | rminnich@super.org
run newfs on a DOS disk so you can install 386BSD.| (301)-805-7451
Now if only I could do this to AIX on the RS/6k ...|
From: greg@coombs.anu.edu.au (Greg Price)
Newsgroups: comp.os.research
Subject: Wanted: Papers on journaling filesystems for UNIX
Date: 11 Sep 1992 17:00:15 GMT
Organization: Computer Services Centre, Australian National University
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.cse.ucsc.edu
Originator: osr@ftp

If anyone has, or knows of any papers about journaling (sp?) filesystems
under UNIX would you please drop me a line at greg@coombs.anu.edu.au

Thanks,
Greg
From: keller@cse.ucsc.edu (Jeffrey Keller)
Newsgroups: comp.os.research
Subject: Re: WINDOWS/NT
Date: 11 Sep 1992 17:00:37 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz (CE/CIS Boards)
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.cse.ucsc.edu
Originator: osr@ftp

Can anyone tell us something concrete about the architecture and
capabilities of Windows/NT?  For example, although I know almost
nothing about Windows/NT, I expect it to resemble OS/2, and I do
know something about what that provides:

	virtual memory (address space of 2GB or something)
	dynamic link libraries
	preemptive multitasking (processes have distinct address spaces)
	threads (sharing data segment)
	adjustable priorities for threads and processes
	semaphores
	the ability to trample most anything in a device driver
		(for example, allocating physical memory)

It does not provide fine gradations in privileges: device drivers
run as superuser and all other processes are mundane.

It does not provide memory-mapped files or sophisticated real-time
support such as system calls to pin pages into physical memory, but
such things could probably be added without major redesign.

It does not provide multi-user support (ownership and restricted
access to files, processes, etc.).  There may be hooks somewhere to
allow this to be fixed, but I haven't seen them.

In short, it's a respectable single-user operating system, but
it's crippled with regard to sharing resources among users.  You
could add, say, kerberos and AFS and access resources on a network
in a reasonable fashion, but when it comes to sharing the machine
or enforcing accounting or any other restrictions on local processes,
you lose.

So, on this level, what can be said about Windows/NT?

--
Jeff Keller <keller@cse.ucsc.edu>		CIS Board, UCSC
"If X is the answer, what was the question?" --David Fuller
From: brtmac@maverick.ksu.ksu.edu (Brett McCoy)
Newsgroups: comp.os.research
Subject: Re: WINDOWS/NT
Date: 13 Sep 92 23:30:51 GMT
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.cse.ucsc.edu
Originator: osr@ftp

>> [...]
>
>Replace "NT" with "OS/2".  Thumb back a few of years through your old
>and now obviously forgotten magazines.  Any articles look familiar to
>what you're hearing right now from the industry "experts"?

When OS/2 came along it needed at a minimum, 2M of RAM, and you
couldn't really do anything with less than 4M.  It also needed
something like 10M or 15M of disk space.  At this time a typical
machine as a 286 with 1M of RAM and a 40M hard drive.  OS/2 just would
not run on it.  A system with 100M disk and 4M or more of RAM was
beyond the general user.

There is an add on TV right now for Best Buy selling a 486SX-20 with
4M of RAM, 100+M hard drive, SVGA, etc, for $1200.  Today's average,
or even below average machine can run OS/2, Windows/NT, 386BSD, Linux,
or just about anything else.  You may want something faster to get
good performance, but at least you *can* run it enough to decide that
you like it and want to get a bigger machine to run it better.

This is why NT is likely to replace DOS now while OS/2 couldn't do it
a couple years ago.

++Brett;
From: alvin@eyepoint.com (Alvin Starr)
Newsgroups: comp.os.research
Subject: Re: WINDOWS/NT
Date: 15 Sep 92 16:25:01 GMT
Organization: eyepoint
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.cse.ucsc.edu
Originator: osr@ftp

gthaker@fergie.dnet.ge.com (Gautam H. Thaker) writes:

>BTW, what is the view of the POSIX standard(s) in the comp.os.research
>community? If these standards are real and sufficient, and if
>NT is POSIX compliant and UNIX is POSIX compliant isn't the point 
>sort of moot? 

Posix is not yet complete enough to be called an OS specification. Hell
it is possible to wham a Posix interface onto DOS, does that mean that you
can then use that interface to create an Xwindow based transaction processing
package? The point is will NT conform to the intent of Posix(part of an
ongoing OS definition) or the letter of the spec(just a batch of procedure
calls in C and screw the other other functions)

And as for Posix's accptance in the real world just try to sell a Posix
compatable OS. You may be in for a real let down. Most end users do not
even know what POSIX means and what that translates into for the manufacurers
is that "If Posix will not increse my sales today then I don't care about it".

I do not mean to be a cynic but we have been trying to push a hosted POSIX
OS for over a year now and have had a response that has been amazingly cool.
-- 
Alvin Starr                   ||   voice: (416)513-6717
Eyepoint Inc.                 ||   fax:   (416)513-6718
alvin@eyepoint.com            ||
From: Damon <dhd@exnet.co.uk>
Newsgroups: comp.os.research
Subject: Re: WINDOWS/NT
Date: 13 Sep 1992 23:32:39 GMT
Organization: ExNet Systems Ltd Public Access News, London, UK
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.cse.ucsc.edu
Originator: osr@ftp

>> [...]
>I know that it would be a single-user system, which is something that I
>personally don't like about it.

Abso-bloody-lutely.  All my prejudice says, NT is DOS/Windows wrapped
up to looked like more.  It's still single user.  A single-user system
is not the same as a multi-user system being used by just one person
either.  You get a whole load more functionality, not to mention
protection from silly mistakes and better accounting in a multi-user
system, however many people use it.  Remember with DOS you are always
`root'.

% Several people have said NT is single user.  Can we get an authoritative
% answer?  I'd also like to know what kinds of protection it supports.  --DL

UNIX dead?  Well, who knows...  But not killed by NT.

Damon
-- 
Damon Hart-Davis | Tel/Fax: +44 81 755 0077 |1.24|| Cheap Sun eqpt available.
Internet: dhd@exnet.co.uk | Also: Damon@ed.ac.uk || US high-perf motor groups.
--------------------------+----------------------++ >12 mail&news polls / day.
Public access UNIX (Suns), news and mail for #5 per month.  FIRST MONTH FREE.
From: rminnich@super.super.org (Ronald G Minnich)
Newsgroups: comp.os.research
Subject: Re: WINDOWS/NT
Date: 10 Sep 92 18:25:18 GMT
Organization: Supercomputing Research Center (Bowie, MD)
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.cse.ucsc.edu
Originator: osr@ftp

In article <18lc72INN47e@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> khaled@zeus.csc.ncsu.edu (Khaled El-Sayed) writes:
> [regarding windows/nt]
>I know that it would be a single-user system, which is something that I
>personally don't like about it.

what would lead you to believe that windows/nt is a single user system? 
are you thinking of windows 3.1? be advised that nt is a different barrel 
of monkeys. 
ron

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
satisfaction: the feeling you get when you        | rminnich@super.org
run newfs on a DOS disk so you can install 386BSD.| (301)-805-7451
Now if only I could do this to AIX on the RS/6k ...|
From: khaled@zeus.csc.ncsu.edu (Khaled El-Sayed)
Newsgroups: comp.os.research
Subject: Re: WINDOWS/NT
Date: 9 Sep 92 17:28:02 GMT
Organization: North Carolina State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.cse.ucsc.edu
Originator: osr@ftp

rminnich@super.super.org (Ronald G Minnich) writes:

>The current deal is hard to pass up: a CD-ROM for just $69. 
>you get the os, compiler, library, 7600 pages of documentation. 
>I have ordered my CD-ROM. Anybody else out there getting it? Anybody actually
>know something technical one way or another? Have you used it? Have you
>written code for it? 


I know that it would be a single-user system, which is something that I
personally don't like about it.

-- 
Khaled M. F. El-Sayed              |     e-mail: khaled@science.ncsu.edu
Department of Computer Science     |     Voice : 919-515-7533 (Office)
North Carolina State University    |             919-515-7346 (Lab)
Raleigh, NC 27695-8207, U.S.A.     |     FAX   : 919-515-7382
From: gthaker@fergie.dnet.ge.com (Gautam H. Thaker)
Newsgroups: comp.os.research
Subject: Re: WINDOWS/NT
Date: 9 Sep 92 20:44:38 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: ftp.cse.ucsc.edu
Originator: osr@ftp

In article <18iq26INNe58@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> rminnich@super.super.org (Ronald G Minnich) writes:

   Okay, folks, how about that Windows/NT? Judging by the reactions of the
   trade press and the vendors the game is over in operating systems. 
   ...
   The current deal is hard to pass up: a CD-ROM for just $69. 
   you get the os, compiler, library, 7600 pages of documentation. 
   I have ordered my CD-ROM. Anybody else out there getting it? 

Can't say for sure, but NT will likely be the #1 selling OS in 93 (or at
least 94.) I have never liked MS-DOS at all, but I hope NT will be better.
I too was tempted to spend $69, but I believe that while you do get the
final release of OS you do not get the final version of the compilers, etc.
Also, the documentation is not in printed form, only on CD. So instead I
have been running Linux on my 486/33 and must say it is great. 

NT will likely out sell others because: 

1) It will be relatively cheap.(prob. cheaper than all others,
   SOlaris, SVR4, etc.)
2) Tons of applications (which is the only reason most people buy
   computers.)
3) Fragmentation of Unix sources in to:
     Solaris 2.0 (Sun want its cake and eat it too in that
                  they say they are a "standard" SVR4, yet "better")
     OSF (How many years have we waited for a vendor to start 
          shipping OSF/1 as their one and only OS?)
     USL's Unix "Lite"
     UNIX SRV4.
     Many others.

4) Continued confusion in Unix world because of going legal
   fights between USL/BSD/386BSD?BSD386/.
     

As I see it Solaris will be the major comp. to NT.

BTW, what is the view of the POSIX standard(s) in the comp.os.research
community? If these standards are real and sufficient, and if
NT is POSIX compliant and UNIX is POSIX compliant isn't the point 
sort of moot? 

   --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   satisfaction: the feeling you get when you        | rminnich@super.org

Gautam H. Thaker (gthaker@atl.ge.com) 609-866-6412 (fax x6397. Dialcom 8-777)
GE Adv. Tech. Lab.; Route 38, MS 145-2; Moorestown, NJ 08057.  767-4396 (home)
--
Gautam H. Thaker