HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jmalloy@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Joseph Malloy)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: INTERESTING TIDBIT FROM S
Date: 9 Oct 92 21:56:51 GMT
Organization: Hamilton College - Clinton, NY

In article <7524@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>In article <1992Oct7.122244.9671@itsmail1.hamilton.edu> jmalloy@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Joseph Malloy) writes:
>>Your trust in Zachmann is, alas, sad.  Would you have as much faith in
>>him if he were a Windows booster?  No, I didn't think so.

>If he were a Windows booster, we wouldn't have heard about MS trying to
>silence him.
>
I'd love to see any *real* proof (Zachmann's ravings don't count!) that
MS actually did anything at all about him.h

I think all we've got is a "prophet" trying to make noise and thereby
enrich himself, but I happily admit I have no proof of that either.


Joe
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: wiegand@rtsg.mot.com (Robert Wiegand)
Subject: Re: MS's misconduct!
Reply-To: motcid!wiegand@uunet.uu.net
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 19:16:33 GMT

petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Skelly) writes:

>Okay, I guess I've had my head in the sand or something.  I have yet to
>see anyone use a multiuser system as you seem to think it is.  How
>does one hook 5 mice up to a computer so 5 people can use it.  How does
>one hook 5 keyboards up.

>THE SCREEN DEVICE OF NT ONLY ALLOWS ONE USER TO HAVE OWNERSHIP OF IT.

>Everything else is pretty much multiuser.  Each process has it's own
>user/security context.  I can run processes on someone elses machine
>when they're logged on.  These processes run under my security context.

>What is more multiuser than that?  having 5 keyboards and 5 mice
>hooked up and one screen so 5 people can type on the screen at one time?

How about 5 keyboards and 5 screens running on the same CPU. 
Almost any Unix can do this with ASCII terminals, and Unix with X-Windows
can use multiple X-terminals.


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Wiegand - Motorola Inc.
motcid!wiegand@uunet.uu.net            uunet!motcid!wiegand
Disclamer: I didn't do it - I was somewhere else at the time.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: scdorcy@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES DORCEY)
Subject: Re: I hate to tell you this, but...
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date:  7 Oct 1992 15:32 EST  

In article <1992Oct4.130704.8413@hellgate.utah.edu>, 
brian%jaguar.cs.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes...

>IBM no longer sells OS/2 for $49.  I believe the current upgrade
>price is $79, and even that price applies only to Windows users.

Well, technically Windows licensees.  You don't have to _use_ Windows, you 
just need the manual to get the lower price (and be willing to part with 
the title page).

JD
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: tzs@stein.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: Multiuser
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 04:23:34 GMT

motcid!wiegand@uunet.uu.net writes:
>Its usefull when you are at someone else's desk and need to check something
>in one of your files, which they don't have access to. Rather than having
>to log them out and log me in, I just log in in a window. I can then
>find what I need and just close the window.
>
>Not something I couldn't live without, but very handy when you need it.

What's wrong with "su"?
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: hochstae@allfiwib1.wiwi.uni-marburg.de (Christoph H. Hochstaetter)
Subject: Re: Multiuser
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.14 by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: hochstae@allfiwib1.wiwi.uni-marburg.de (Christoph H. Hochstaetter)
Organization: Techn. Univ. Clausthal
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 17:10:20 GMT

In  <1992Oct7.193521.10829@fcom.cc.utah.edu>  brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
> There is no problem at all with having users telnet in as different
> users.  Allistair Banks has explained this a million times... go
> grep through old news in comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32.
>

Yeah! I got it now! Pete's posting made it clear to me. The user on
the local screen is the owner of the screen device and therefore
looses the ownership, when he logs off. I really couldn't find
a posting from Alistair explaining this. Maybe I've missed something.

So, it should be clear now, that NT really has sufficient concurrent
multiuser capabilities, whereas OS/2 2.0 has not, at least not for me
and many others.

Christoph
--
Internet: hochstae@allfiwib1.wiwi.uni-marburg.de
Bitnet  : HAMPE2 AT DMRHRZ11
Fido    : 2:243/660
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Tidbits about NT and OS/2 from the trade rags.
Date: 10 Oct 92 16:38:09 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1992Oct09.174713.178@microsoft.com> philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
>      Still a valid interpretation.  OS/2 2.0, however, has shown
>that competitive pricing can really help to sell an OS - I expect
>Microsoft will learn something from that.

If it has, then why did it say "<$500"? I've already shown that there's
nothing to gain from it, and quite a lot to lose.
 
>     Why is Zachmann more credible?  He clearly has an agenda.  So do
>his editors.

Because he has little to gain by making up such an incident.

-- 
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.
    Vote for a REAL change on 3 November: Throw out the check-bouncing,
  tax-and-spend Democrat Congress! (obviously, not an opinion of UTHSCH)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: byer@adobe.com (Scott Byer)
Subject: Re: OS/2 and True Type fonts...
Reply-To: byer@adobe.com (Scott Byer)
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 20:56:26 GMT

Hans C. Masing writes

>  Will I be able to use these
>      applications with True Type in OS/2?  I have been told that
>      OS/2 supports Adobe Type 1 fonts, and I can (if needed) convert
>      these TT fonts to Type 1, but I have an HP Laserjet Printer
>      that can not be upgraded to Postscript.

These applications will work just as expected with ATM under OS/2
if you convert your fonts to Type 1 format.  You will be able to
print, view, etc.  just as you do now under Windows.  ATM under
OS/2 will be more than happy to print to your HP LaserJet, so you
needn't worry about upgrading to PostScript if all you need is
scalable fonts.  If you are used to the speed of ATM for Windows,
you will very pleasantly surprised by the speed of ATM under OS/2.

Be aware that fonts that are converted, rather than bought in their
native (TrueType or Type 1) format may not look as good on the
screen once converted - hinting is often lost in the conversion
process.  However, they should print out acceptably on a 300dpi
printer.

--
Scott Byer                             NeXTMail: byer@mv.us.adobe.com
Adobe Systems Incorporated               These are *my* opinions, and  
1585 Charleston Road, P.O. Box 7900        do not necessarily reflect
Mountain View, CA 94039-7900             the opinions of my employer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
From: garyng@gnct.com (garyng)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: I went ahead and did it....
Date: 15 Oct 92 21:01:15 GMT
Organization: Global Network Communication Technology Co.

mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:

> Well, you KNOW what apps he's going to list, don't you?  Stuff that
> requires the DLL from enhanced mode (Mathematica is the only one I
> know of, but there are probably a couple of others) and the Windows
> 3.1 specific stuff (which, other than the Applets that ship with it,
> is damned rare right now -- although some of the new stuff is saying
> it requires Windows 3.1).
> 
> This, to folks looking for flame bait in these groups, means that it
> runs 'some' Windows stuff.

Wrong. See my message on apps. I listed. I said all because I can't even have
the base system working.

Please, no one wants to flame OS2 for no reason. I am now working 15hour/day
just to make sure that OS2 2.0 work for me or I will lose a 1 million contract.

-gary
 
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STACY JOHN BEHRENS)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS/2 VS NT! The Future War Looms...
Date: 11 Oct 92 01:26:19 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1992Oct7.202607.14857@solaris.rz.tu-clausthal.de>, hochstae@allfiwib
1.wiwi.uni-marburg.de (Christoph H. Hochstaetter) writes:
>In  <195f1tINNofj@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>  dab6@po.CWRU.Edu (Douglas A. Bell) writ
es:
>> Wrong.
>>
>> IBM sells netware lite.  Netware lite runs under os/2 and only costs $79.
>>
>> And with a windows upgrade, I can get peer to peer OS/2 for $158 list price.
>> It is a messy, but it does give you peer to peer networking, and it is all
>> bought from IBM, so it nullifies your claim.
>>
>
>Sorry, but you are wrong. Netw*re lite does not run under OS/2 it actually
>runs in *ONE* DOS-Session. What use do I have of OS/2, when I can access
>Network drives in only one DOS-Session. I can use native DOS instead.

Hmmm, lemme get this strait.  I am running OS/2.  I am running a DOS based
program under OS/2.  This DOS based program is a networking program.
Therefore I do not have the ability to run networking under OS/2.  Makes sense
to me.  (NOT!)
There are other programs available.  This was an example.  Please keep that in
mind.  There are OS/2 based peer-to-peer networking packages expected to
arrive shortly.  Until then, these work quite well, especially if you already
own them before you bought OS/2 and would like to communicate with DOS based
machines running the same software.

>
>Christoph
>--
>Internet: hochstae@allfiwib1.wiwi.uni-marburg.de
>Bitnet  : HAMPE2 AT DMRHRZ11
>Fido    : 2:243/660
>
-- 
Stacy John Behrens
*===)-------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: jmalloy@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Joseph Malloy)
Subject: Re: Tidbits about NT and OS/2 from the trade rags.
Organization: Hamilton College - Clinton, NY
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 17:42:33 GMT

In article <7561@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:
>In article <1992Oct12.212507.28868@microsoft.com> philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
>>     The "hidden reason" crowd are those who actually believe in
>>some Microsoft/Ziff-Davis conspiracy to surpress Zachmann and his
>>ideas.
>
>Hardly. Microsoft and Ziff-Davis' reasons are transparent: MS wants to silence
>a respected critic, and ZD wants to keep getting MS ad dollars.
>-- 
>Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can

I doubt it and until there's a smoking gun (i.e., some proof that a) MS
complained more than any other advertiser would about bad press; and b)
Ziff actually trembled at the thought of losing the account) I suppose
we'll never know.

Whether the ravings of Zachmann make him a "respected" critic, however,
is also doubtful.  Having lost his sense of balance in his columns, he
became a liability for OS/2, at least as far as I'm concerned.  OS/2 can
do better than William Zachmann, I'm sure.

jmalloy@hamilton.edu
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Multiuser
Date: 8 Oct 92 20:36:54 GMT
Article-I.D.: njitgw.1992Oct8.203654.20028
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <1992Oct8.165938.24364@solaris.rz.tu-clausthal.de> hochstae@allfiwib1.wiwi.uni-marburg.de (Christoph H. Hochstaetter) writes:
>
>Also IBM used the old LAN-MAN 2.0 (not 2.1) HPFS386 and ported it to
>OS/2 2.0. So there is no real security. Just replace HPFS with HPFS386
>on the OS/2 2.0 Disk 1 and boot with it, you will get full access to
>your HPFS386 partition. The term "local security" is really misused
>here. Only the MS LANMAN 2.1 HPFS386 supports some real local security.

The MS package encrypts the entire partition, I assume.  Otherwise,
it's equally a joke.  As far as I'm concerned, local security will
always be a joke.  Your best security it to place the servers in a
room that not everybody has access to.  If anyone can get at your
server, you have no security.  In an extreme case, one can just remove
the server from the building and hack away at it at home.
-- 
David Charlap         |"there aren't 50,000 things for which it's worth writing
dic5340@hertz.njit.edu| software; and the computer industry doesn't have enough
----------------------+ programmers to create that much good software.
Therefore, most of it must be worthless" -- Boris Beizer "The Frozen Keyboard"
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: Hugh Whalen <HWHA@UNB.CA>
Subject: Re: Bundling and the price of NT
Organization: The University of New Brunswick
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 12:17:47 GMT

In article <1992Oct13.181339.5798@ais.com> bruce@ais.com (Bruce C. Wright) writes:
>In article <13OCT92.14357384.0207@UNBVM1.CSD.UNB.CA>, Hugh Whalen <HWHA@UNB.CA> writes:
>> Those challenging Pete are arguing that including networking will
>> increase the cost of NT because we must now consider the cost of
>> developingnetworking in the pricing decision. As Fred McCall says:
>>
>>> Because you have increased your value of X above (that floor price
>>> below which there is no profit in selling the thing) because now
>>> some proportion of the network stuff costs must be included in X.
>>
>> Good point but  *wrong*.
>>
>> The development costs of the product are IRRELEVANT in the pricing
>> decision. Yes I said irrelevant and I meant it. These development
>> costs are known as sunk costs. You have spent the money, you cannot
>> unspend it and if you consider the sunk costs you may make the
>> incorrect decision.  [...]
>
>You're right, of course.  But when you're thinking of developing a
>software product, you have to have some kind of idea what you can sell
>it for, how many copies you might be able to sell, and how much it
>will cost to develop, market, produce, and distribute it.  At that
>point you have no sunk costs (or at least very little ... planning
>discussions and maybe a simple demonstration project or two).  I've
>been assuming that MS has been planning on including networking
>support for quite some time (I don't think I've heard very many
>discussions of NT without the word `networking' being mentioned in
>practically the same breath), possibly from the beginning.
>

Possibly, but I think the feature set would still change as time goes
on. It is probably changing somewhat even now. But your point is
correct.

>At any rate, in these estimations that you make when you are first
>planning a product, it's my contention that in most cases, you'll
>plan that development costs _per se_ are going to be small relative
>to those other costs, and hence to the price level you plan to sell
>it at.  Or that's the way you'll plan if you expect to turn a profit
>on your enterprise.  :-)
>
>Of course, things may happen to upset your plan ... like increased
>competition that changes the elasticity of the market, so that you
>can't get as high a price as you initially planned -- then you may
>get situations such as the one you outlined where you could never
>recover your sunk costs but were still better off marketing the
>product because you could still sell it above your marketing and
>production costs.
>
>In fact this situation may well have happened to both IBM and MS :-).
>

I certainly believe that it has happened to IBM. If what I have read
is true and IBM has spent $200,000,000 on OS/2 (sorry this is from
memory, I don't have a source) then it is unlikely they will ever
retreive their sunk costs.

Microsoft may find themselves in the same boat. :) :) Who knows?

>Bruce C. Wright
>.
>.
From: bjorn@hal.ludd.luth.se (Bjorn Fahller)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why I have trouble with the c.o.o.a view of Microsoft.
Date: 16 Oct 92 13:03:54 GMT
Organization: Lule} Tekniska H|gskolas Datorf|rening - Ludd


Either you're a lucky man, Brian, or I'm an unlucky man.
I've had quite a few problems with C7. Those I can
reproduce, I've reported, no answers. Some I can't
reproduce, but they happen anyways, like the debugger
freezing my machine when entering some (random) functions.
Those I've explained to the net, with so far only the
response from a guy with a similar problem who said he'd
given up on it. Responses from MS? No. On their support 
line there was an answering machine, no one have called me
back. On the net, no one have said anything.

To give a counter example, I as late as yesterday posted
an article about errors in the on-line documentation for
Workframe/2. Only hours later Tim Francis of IBM wrote and
wondered what errors I had found, I gave him some examples
and he said that while they weren't part of the
WorkFrame/2, but rather the Toolkit, and thus not
belinging to his department, he understood the seriousness
of the problem and would report it to the fellows in Boca-
Raton. While I don't like that there are errors in the
documentation, I do like that kind of service.
   _
/Bjorn.
-- 
Bjorn Fahller     Phone:              |The opinions above are not necessarily
Trollnasvagen 3A  Intl:+46 920 226870 |those of... Hey! Wait a minute. Do you
S-951 61 Lulea    Natl:0920-22 68 70  |seriously expect Me, a student, to carry
Sweden            << space for rent >>|the official voice of the University?
From: jmalloy@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Joseph Malloy)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unprofessional Posts from Brian S.
Date: 13 Oct 92 17:38:14 GMT
Organization: Hamilton College - Clinton, NY

In article <1992Oct12.104158.24527@netcom.com> xtifr@netcom.com (Chris Waters) writes:
>
>Well, I'm not sure just who or what decided that "advocacy" == flames. 
>That certainly doesn't match any dictionary definition.  But that seems
>to be the net.definition of "advocacy" these days.  I have nothing
>against informed and enthusiastic (even overly enthusiastic) discussion.
>And I have no problem when clueless dweebs get involved in flamewars--I
>can ignore the clueless dweebs.  But I had developed higher expectations
>of Mr. Sturgill.  And I'm extremely disappointed at the tone and manner
>of his recent posts.

To advocate something at least suggests that what is being advocated is
not currently the way things are and that some wish to change that.
That presupposes others of a different viewpoint, those to whom
something will be advocated.  The natural result (in any free forum) is
going to be a clash of opinions from which sometimes useful information
will emerge.  Flames, if they do not involve ad hominum attacks and are
at least reasonably civil, are simply the result of two (or more, can't
forget the Amigoids!) points of view.

>
>And, more to the point, mud-slinging and name-calling is *exactly* what
>I see going on.  I'm not going to blame Brian for the existence of the
>m.s.&n.c., as I don't know (or care) who started it, but he's certainly
>been participating.
>
I admit that I do not read all posts here, but from what I've seen,
people may get hot under the collar, but there's been relatively little
name-calling.  (I don't have time to read all posts in their entirety,
so I apologize if I've missed whatever it is you're referring to).  It
may be simply that strong opinions here clash, with concomitant thunder
(noise) and lightning (illumination).  C'est la vie...(or: c'est le
guerre?  :)

Joe
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: I hate to tell you this, but...
Date: 8 Oct 92 15:06:58 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <168771486E.CIVENBAH@mizzou1.missouri.edu> CIVENBAH@mizzou1.missouri.edu writes:
>In article <1992Oct5.171752.23317@njitgw.njit.edu>
>dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:
> 
>>But MS was helping other companies debug their apps when porting from
>>3.0 to 3.1.  They refused to help DR simply because that product was
>>in direct competition with MS's mainstay: DOS.  Sounds a bit unfair to
>>me.  If you help one company, you have to help any who ask.
> 
>Why?

Because it's unfair business practice for a large firm to show
favoritism to a small number of developers and not to the rest.

Once you're big enough to dominate a market, you can't just give
favors to selected companies, because the companies you don't favor
get a severe disadvantage competing with the favored companies.
-- 
David Charlap         |"there aren't 50,000 things for which it's worth writing
dic5340@hertz.njit.edu| software; and the computer industry doesn't have enough
----------------------+ programmers to create that much good software.
Therefore, most of it must be worthless" -- Boris Beizer "The Frozen Keyboard"
From: garyng@gnct.com (garyng)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: I went ahead and did it....
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 92 21:24:46 GMT
Organization: Global Network Communication Technology Co.

scdorcy@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES DORCEY) writes:

> 
> This is the first I've seen you refer to "the base system working" - do you 
> mean that you can't open a WIN-OS2 session or what?
> 

I can open a WIN-OS2 or DOS session but if I switch back and forth 
from PM to WIN, the screen get mess up. Which is what I mean the base system
working(I don't have the luck to run my win apps. yet)


> Unless I missed another posting, you mention two apps - Word for Windows 
> 2.0 and Corel Draw! 3.0.  A previous posting (by someone else) responded to 
> your problem with Word possibly being due to not installing Word after 
> installing OS/2 2.0 (with the install process modifying the WIN.INI file in 
> the \OS2\MDOS\WINOS2 subdirectory).  As for Corel Draw! 3.0, I have heard 
> elsewhere that it will work in a WIN-OS2 session under OS/2 2.0, but forces 
> use of ATM, since TTF is not directly supported in the GA version of OS/2 
> 2.0.
> 

I don't know if you missed another post, but you have 'mixed' someone else
post with mine. But thanks for the information anyway which may save me
some times in the future(when I got the chance to try them).

> One question: Did you install OS/2 2.0 over DOS+Windows 3.1 and attempt to 
> migrate (probably the wrong word) your existing Windows workspace during 
> the install?  That would explain most of your troubles.
> 
> JD

No. I buy a brand new system(nothing on the hard disk) to install OS2 2.0. 
I have followed OS/2 2.0 for some time and I am well aware of the problems
of OS2 and Window 3.1.

-gary