HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: TW.FY4@isumvs.iastate.edu (Timothy I Miller)
Subject: Re: OS/2 Computer Search
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 07:03:42 GMT

In article <1993Jan6.093512.1076@calmasd.prime.com>,
kjb@calmasd.prime.com (Ken Brucker) writes:
>In article <1993Jan5.201132.17054@athena.mit.edu>, mgrice@athena.mit.edu (Matthew Grice) writes:
>
> [ ... misc deleted about how difficult it can be to get what you want and
>       not what the saleslug wants to sell you ... ]
>
>>
>> That's what it is like, folks.  You want OS/2, you buy IBM ( if you
>> dont understand DOS/Windows/ISA/x86 (which I dont))
>
>Or you could find someone that does know something about OS/2 and system
>configureation to help configure a system that doesn't come straight from IBM,
>probably save quite a bit of $$$ and get the system much sooner.
>
>Ken
>--

     I've begun to see adds for OS/2 computers in some of the
magazines, so I'm beginning to get hope.  Although some of the adds
I've seen talk about OS/2 servers, I think soon adds will also be
for basic OS/2 desktop machines.
     Also, now that the PS/Valuepoint machines are out, I've advised
several friends of mine to buy IBM's, because they come preloaded
with OS/2 and have great service in all parts of the country.  Keep
in mind, these are people who don't know hardly anything about
computers, and just want a friendly computer which runs all
different kind of programs.  Of course, they also don't want their
computer to crash!

Timothy Miller

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: nap42487@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Nishith A. Patel)
Subject: Re: Letter to Byte Magazine
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 03:24:03 GMT

x90wardell@gw.wmich.edu writes:

>Here is a letter I sent to Byte Magazine.  I thought OS/2 users might find
>it interesting.  My subscription to Byte is about to run out.

[letter deleted]

>======================================

>	Just trying to do my part.  PLus, I am quite disgusted with Byte.

>							-Brad

Hmm, I am currently recieving a lot of "resubscribe letters" from DR. Dobbs
Journal. They had an issue on 32-bit programming recently, and OS/2 was no
where to be found. 

I have already resubscribed though, and din't think of this. But I believe
Brad has a good idea. If anyonedecides to no longer subscribe to a magazine
beacuse they ignore OS/2, write them telling them so. Maybe they'll realize
that they can get more readers being simply being fair to other products. They
can emphasize the mainstream, but at least be fair.

I myself originally believed the press in general was did not disservice OS/2
and its users, but after going back through a lot of the stuff, I was
convinced my original thoughts were wrong. So now I wouldn't think of
subscribing to PC Mag, which I did consider before. I am going to give Dr. Dobbs
another try for a year, but if they fail to mention anything about OS/2
programming, I will do what Brad did. My only problem though, is I don't
know of any programming journals that do consider OS/2.


Organization: Junior, Math/Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Date: Mon,  4 Jan 1993 16:08:08 -0500 
From: "Stephen M. Lacy" <sl31+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: OS/2 "fiesta" bowl


This New Year's Day, I heard an announcement for the "IBM OS/2 Fiesta
Bowl" (which was a football game, with ads by IBM) I missed the game,
but heard that there were going to be ads defending OS/2, and its
performance against Win 3.1.  Did anyone see these ads?  BTW, I did see
the last few seconds of the game, and saw an enormous OS/2 logo which
had been painted on the field.  I just about died laughing.

Steve


"Love is international, and if you stand or if you fall, just let them
know you gave your all, worry about it later!" -Aztec Camera
From: philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara)
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! : )
Date: 04 Jan 93 07:33:17 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1993Jan3.200721.4807@spang.Camosun.BC.CA> dbarker@spang.Camosun.BC.CA (Deryk Barker) writes:
>philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
>:     Trimming down some of the excessive quoting - apologies for any
>: important context lost.
>: 
>: 
>: In article <1993Jan2.191843.21694@spang.Camosun.BC.CA> dbarker@spang.Camosun.BC.CA (Deryk Barker) writes:
>: >philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
>: >: 
>: >:     If you claim to be 100% Intel compatible, and your processor
>: >: exhibits difference in behavior from Intel's, should Intel be
>: >: responsible for changing their product?
>: >
>: >A difference in behaviour I interpret to mean in external interface,
>: >*not* internal mechanics. If this were not the case then the 486 could
>: >not claim to be compatible with the 386....
>: 
>:      Identical in all ways used by external clients - this may
>: involve more than the external interface.
>
>Excuse me? Does this mean something, and if so could you explain it please?
>

     Yes.  Not all interfaces are documented.  If some application
is using one of those, it's clearly not covered by the functional
specification.  In this case, who's to say which product is more
compatible?  I suggest that it should be the original - the cloners
have the responsibility of correcting their own product to match,
or ignore the application in question.
     I honestly don't know if Intel has undocumented stuff on
their chips, though, so the analogy is not a very tight one.

			-Phil

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Lafornara         				1 Microsoft Way         
philipla@microsoft.com				Redmond, WA 98052-6399 
Note:  Microsoft doesn't even _know_ that these are my opinions. So there.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: Mark Kovarski <kovarski@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: Re: Bill Gates:  What a weenie...
Organization: ZOOiD BBS
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 07:14:43 GMT

tomh@wes.on.ca (Tom Haapanen) writes:
>Mark Kovarski <kovarski@zooid.guild.org> writes:
>> [A childish diatribe full of personal attacks deleted]
>
>Well, that does it for Mr. Kovarski -- he's the first one to earn his very
>own spot in my comp.os.os2.advocacy kill file.  Maybe he won't care, but
>at least it'll increase the signal-to-noise ratio in this group for me.
>
>[ \tom haapanen    "i don't even know what street canada is on" -- al capone ]
>[ tomh@wes.on.ca                   "trust the programmer" -- ansi c standard ]
>[ waterloo engineering software      "to thine own self be true" -- polonius ]


Interesting, indeed. I believe you were the person who send me several
"hate" mail messages a few weeks ago.

First of all, and most users will not know this. You are a Waterloo
student. Mr. Gates invests a lot of money into Waterloo since he
recruits many Waterloo students from there. Furthermore, some of the
users in your University are very obsessed with the idea that 
Microsoft buys their minds as well. No offense, I've been there and
I know how it works.

let me ask all Microsoft fanatics a question. Microsoft, as many of you
know, has recently introduced a news product called "Access." 
Microsoft claimed that this product went throught tremendous testing
and that it took over 6 years (Yes, 6 years) to develop. This is
the same story as with Windows NT, Windows, WFW etc. I have spoken to
one network administrator who was running the product and testing it
when it was released. As it turns out, and pointed out by other users
on Compuserve (Check, if you don't believe me) that the products is
_very_ unstable, crashes, and there are many people questioning the
truth about Microsoft's statement about its testing. May I remind you,
the same song appeared when WFW was released which as well has many
problems. Could you please explain to me, looking at the history of
Microsoft products, how much do you believe about NT's beta-stage
program and the user base testing it. Please, no numbers as it only
proves that someone can count. Numerous time Microsoft has thrown
numbers around which are _VERY_ questionable.

Best Regards,
Mark K.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar)
Subject: Re: Bill Gates:  What a weenie...
Organization: Naval Ocean Systems Center, San Diego
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 17:39:36 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.183230.17029@spang.Camosun.BC.CA> dbarker@spang.Camosun.BC.CA (Deryk Barker) writes:
>discar@nosc.mil (Joe Discar) writes:
>[....]
>: >I have watched how Microsofties like to re-define terms. They call Windows
>: >an operating system. 
>: 
>: WAIT A MINUTE!  Windows *is* an operating system (we can start that debate
>: again?)  There was no redefinition on "Microsofties" part... there seemed
>: to be a redefinition on "modern OS believer's" part... the same kind of 
>: people who would say "...a Stanley Steamer is not a car... now, the Ferrari
>: Testarossa--THAT'S a car..."
>
>I have no wish to get embroiled in a long-running debate again either,
>*but*: I'll accept that Windows is an OS when I see somebody running
>it on a system which doesn't have DOS (or DRDOS or something else) present.

The new Tandy VIS is based upon the Windows operating system (and it doesn't
even have a disk drive much less a keyboard).  Microsoft is also working 
on Windows in ROM for notebooks (or so I've read).  

However, I tend to agree that Windows (as it comes on disk) is not an operating
system until it is installed on a machine.  The result, "Windows" or to be
more precise, "Windows+DOS" is an operating system that is far different than
just "DOS."

>
>--
>Real:  Deryk Barker, Computer Science Dept., Camosun College, Victoria B.C.
>Email: (dbarker@spang.camosun.bc.ca)
>Phone: +1 604 370 4452

My opinions
Joe

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: dbarker@spang.Camosun.BC.CA (Deryk Barker)
Subject: Re: SGI-GL in Windows NT??
Organization: Camosun College, Victoria B.C, Canada
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 22:22:28 GMT

scdorcy@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES DORCEY) writes:
: In article <1993Jan7.063446.28539@ryn.mro4.dec.com>, 
: Peter.Mayne@cao.mts.dec.com writes...
: 
: >This is correct. It will be included in NT version 2.
: 
: This would be fascinating, since the initial release of NT will be version 
: 3.1 ;-)

Which means NT 2 must have been around for ages...... :-) (Is that the
one they called DOS?)

--
Real:  Deryk Barker, Computer Science Dept., Camosun College, Victoria B.C.
Email: (dbarker@spang.camosun.bc.ca)
Phone: +1 604 370 4452
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: hess@rzdspc14.informatik.uni-hamburg.de (Hauke Hess)
Subject: Re: <None>
Organization: University of Hamburg, FRG
Date:  7 Jan 93 08:37:46 GMT

sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples) writes:

>It has also added a slew of printers (Citizen PN48, more Panasonics,
>HP LaserJet 4, Compaq Pagemarq, IBM inkjets, QMS 1700, full line of HP
>DeskJets).  DPT SCSI support is now in the box.  So is SoundBlaster
>support for MMPM/2 (and MMPM/2 itself).  There's a real manual in the
>works (the beta CD-ROM comes with an online draft).  There's a new
>applet (FAX/PM, for one page incoming and outgoing faxes with DOS,
>Windows, and OS/2 programs).  The Win-OS/2 applets are all, by and
>large, included.  (The major exception is Windows Terminal; OS/2 comes
>with PM Terminal.)  If you have real Windows 3.1 on your hard disk
>(say, if you're a software developer) there's a new setting which
>keeps your Win-OS/2 and Windows Program Manager groups "in sync" --
>any update in one is reflected in the other.  Seamless drivers are
>provided for a large selection of SuperVGA adapters, right in the box.
>(The drivers support 640x480, 800x600, and 1024x768 in 256 colors.)

I think what we get with OS/2 2.1 is the real GA. If MS would not have announced
Windows NT and pushed it the way it did, public would never had seen OS/2 2.0
End of March `92, but only OS/2 2.1 a bit earlier than we do now (think
of all the time that would have been saved if noone at Boca had to work
on a CSD, 2.0 GA bug fix sharing etc.).

But now that 2.1 is coming, I hope it gets the audience it ought to: everybody
with a 386 and at least 4MB.

Hauke

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: os2man@panix.com (Larry Salomon Jr.)
Subject: Re: Programming journals
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 00:40:38 GMT

In <1993Jan11.191816.28924@kvamdata.no> ekl@kvamdata.no (Eirik Lygre) writes:

>Consider "Computer Language". In the January 1993 edition, Thomas Murphy,
>who is product review editor for the magazine, ends an article called
>"Speeding development with 32 bits" with the following quote:

>   "OS/2 is the best $100 a developer could ever spend"

>In general, I think "Computer Language" is one of the greates programmings
>journals around. Their stuff is first-class, and they've got some great
>columnists hanging around. Recommended!

>Eirik

Is the editor reachable via the Internet?  If so, could you please either
post his address or send it to me via email?  Thanks.

Cheers,
Q
-- 
"If you choose not to decide, you  | "My other body is in the shop" - seen
 still have made a choice" - Rush  |  on a T-shirt
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: bill@west.msi.com (Bill Poitras)
Subject: Re: SGI-GL in Windows NT??
Reply-To: bill@west.msi.com
Organization: Molecular Simulations, Inc.
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 05:59:00 GMT

Dan Cogswell (dlcogswe@vela.acs.oakland.edu) wrote:
: hatton@socrates.ucsf.edu (Tom Hatton) writes:

: Molecular modelling?  How many polygons and what shading algorithm??
: Seems to me you brought the CPU on the machine to a crawl, not the
: graphics engine.  Correct me if I'm wrong.  If that's the case, you
: wouldn't see much difference between to dissimilar machines with
: comparable CPUs.

A lot of molecular modelling lately has been using more and more
graphics.  I know, I work for a software company which does molecular
modeling.  And believe me having the hardware support to rotate a 7000
atom molecule in sphere mode (spheres are sometimes rendered as many
sided polygons) is very critical.

An example of an application which needs mostly graphics is one which
allows a chemist to do active site docking between a drug and some
other protein, such as an enzyme.  A program like this is very
grapically interactive and a lot of the interactive adjustments  is
done by sight.  Of course all structures must be minimized, but that
can be off loaded to a minimization engine on anther machine on the
network, like an IBM RS/6000 which is very good at computation.

--
+-----------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------+
| Bill Poitras    | Molecular Simulations Inc.    | Tel (408)522-9229       |
| (bill)          | Sunnyvale, CA USA             |                         | 
|                 | FAX (408)732-0831             | bill@west.msi.com       |
+-----------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------+

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman)
Subject: Re: Microsoft and Force continued.
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 00:36:41 GMT

In article <726581482rommel.root@jonas.gold.sub.org>, rommel@jonas.gold.sub.org (Kai Uwe Rommel) writes:
|> In article <1993Jan9.004117.29420@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman) writes:
|> >|> 	In 1990, Nintendo America would often threaten not to let stores
|> >|> sell Nintendo or Nintendo made cartridges for their popular game machine
|> >|> if the seller stocked competing systems.  This is wrong.
|> >
|> >Ever try buying a Frosty at McDonalds? 
|> 
|> The game store is not owned by Nintendo and the computer sellers are
|> not owned by Microsoft. But then, even Mercedes Benz dealers sell used
|> BMW and VW cars and vice versa.

A McDonald's restraunt isn't owned by McDonald's either.

|> >In a polite, decent society people don't gang up with the goverment and steal
|> >what belongs to others.  Microsoft owns windows, and a polite, decent person,
|> >even though they might not agree with what Microsoft is doing, will respect
|> >Microsoft's right to sell what belongs to them.
|>
|> Think before you write.

Don't patronize.

|> MS is trying to force independent dealers NOT
|> to sell competing products. Microsoft does not sell Windows directly
|> to end users.

McDonald's does the same thing to its dealers.

|> >Well, this is admittedly an extreme example, but I'll bet that there are
|> >as many men who want to sleep with Cindy Crawford as there are PC's running
|> >MS-DOS.  Can I set my self up as a "dealer" and use "customer demand" to
|> >justify pimping her?  After all, she is a monopoly supplier.
|> 
|> You got something wrong. Your example is reversed. Compare MS to if
|> C.C. was trying to force all men in the world to sleep ONLY with her. :-) :-) 
|> You would flame her for forcing competing women out of the market. :-)

Actually, I know a lot of women who won't sleep with a man unless she sleeps
only with her.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc
From: mortenk@dhhalden.no (MORTEN KNUDSEN)
Subject: Re: Better File Management??
Organization: Ostfold College
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 17:15:58 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.202900.28196@njitgw.njit.edu> dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
>From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
>Subject: Re: Better File Management??
>Date: 5 Jan 93 20:29:00 GMT
>In article <1993Jan1.213044.268@grebyn.com> mfraioli@grebyn.com (Marc Fraioli) writes:
>>
>>Does this mean that they have sped up the time it takes for the icons to
>>be drawn when you open a window?  This has always bugged me.
>
>The problem isn't in the icon draw time, but in the icon load time.
>After having written some code using bitmaps and icons, I can safely
>say that the speed to draw them is very very fast - faster than
>Windows 3.1, for that matter.  The problem with WPS is that it has to
>load the icons from each file in a folder.  This loading is what eats
>time.  I'm sure there's room for optimizing here, but it's more
>closely related to the speed to fetch EA's and resources out of files
>than to the speed of painting (which is, after all, related to the
>video driver).

Well, the OS/2 SVGA drivers suck anyway (one of the few things about OS/2
that does).
From: h198@hosp.med.umich.edu  (Gene Mangum)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: I've got the 2.1 beta, now what do I do with it???
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1993  10:13 EDT
Organization: Univ of Michigan Hospitals
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: condor.hosp.med.umich.edu
X-Newsreader: FTPNuz (DOS) v1.0

In Article <1993Jan8.135310.9076@choate.edu> "roland@margaret (David A. Braun)" says:
> 	I just received the OS/2 2.1 beta/PDK on CD-ROM today... Can someone  
> tell me whether I can install this directly off the CD or if I will have to  
> copy it to disks?  I have a Texel 3024 CD-ROM (This is compatable, I knoow) and  
> two SCSI controllers that I can use it on... a PAS-16 and a SCSI card made by  
> "Storage Plus Incorporated"... any help, pleeese...
 
  Assuming you have the CD driver installed, you can install directly from
  the CD.   Didn't you get any documentation?   Mine had doc which told
  how to install everything, as well as how to make install diskettes if
  you wanted to.

  Gene Mangum
  Univ of Michigan Hospitals
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz
Subject: Re: NT Destined to Succeed??
Organization: Actrix Information Exchange
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 11:14:35 GMT

In article <1993Jan3.205457.17495@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
> 
> 	Capability-wise, NT is equal to or greater than OS/2.  It offers
> 	things that OS/2 only offers when given some costly networking
> 	upgrade.  Most users don't need this stuff, though, so OS/2
> 	probably offers more bang for the buck.
> 
> 	It also offers more bang for the buck in terms of performance,
> 	but OS/2 is hardly more solid than the NT beta. 
> 
>  (recent fud to the contrary inthis base on an obviously misconfigured
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>   machine, ignored).
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

OUTBURST MODE ON:

The only thing misconfigured about my  NT-crashes-constantly
"FUD" was your brain. NT was installed on virtually identical systems and no
mods were made by manual means. But it ran poorly and spent the rest of the
time falling over.
 
Just for the record....it won't run at all, now. It stuffed it's file system
and won't even boot up. The guy in Auckland can't be bothered re-installing it
because he is happy with OS/2......and wants to get 2.1. He was really hanging
out for NT, too - until he actually used it.

If you are going to call me a liar, fine. But I get to say I'm no liar and
that I don't like you calling me one in a public forum. I don't for a moment
expect you to be big enough to apologise......but you do owe me one.

You refuse to believe anything bad about NT and ignore it. Then, since all
the bad things have been ruled out of order.....NT must be great! 

I'm not blinkered. Hell, I've posted half a dozen bug reports about the OS/2
2.1 beta in c.o.o.m. over the past few days.....

At least OS/2 runs.....
 
OUTBURST MODE OFF:
 

Steve

-- 
Steve Withers - Wellington, New Zealand |      
Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz         |        Space for rent.
+64 4 478 4714                          |   - cheap rates, nice location. 
**** Happy user of OS/2 b2.1 ****       | 
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara)
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! : )
Date: 06 Jan 93 22:29:25 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <8330@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>In article <1993Jan5.164051.3929@tc.cornell.edu> bai@msiadmin.cit.cornell.edu (Dov Bai-MSI Visitor) writes:
>
>>A better statement is that the _majority_ of individuals voted for
>>a certain law, and are imposing their will on the minority that
>>disagree. That does not make a law in any way more fair or practical.
>
>This is an argument against a majority-rule democracy. It holds little water,
>however, unless you can somehow provide a better solution.

    Of course, majority rule democracy gave us slavery, which
everone knows was a good thing because most people supported it
at the time.
    Just because most people believe it doesn't make it right.

				-Phil
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Lafornara         				1 Microsoft Way         
philipla@microsoft.com				Redmond, WA 98052-6399 
Note:  Microsoft doesn't even _know_ that these are my opinions. So there.
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is Microsoft the next Standard Oil?
Date: 4 Jan 1993 21:18:46 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1993Jan4.204009.25416@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman) writes:
>A company can't put another company out of business.  Only a company's
>_customers_ can either keep it in business or put it out.

Sure it can. To extend the metaphor, the customers are the bullets for the
company's economic gun. It's happened before, and it will happen again unless
the FTC stops them.
-- 
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.
      "Science is all in the public domain, and allows few secrets."
              -- Tom Clancy, _The Sum of all Fears_