HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kyl@polari.com
Subject: Re: Windows NT
Organization: Seattle Online Public Access Unix (206) 328-4944
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 06:41:49 GMT


In article <9792@bgsuvax.bgsu.edu> sarnold@bgsu.edu (G. Steve Arnold) writes:
>> Come on you guys!  How could anything exist before Microsoft invented it?
>> Don't you know that MS invented the operating system concept, semaphores,
>> multi-tasking, and all the other software technology ?  Quite
>> possibly they also invented C adn C++.  Ask any Microsoft employee.
>> Sounds like a good old days when IBM invented everything.
>
>
>	I'm sorry, I hate to be a bastard, but I just CAN'T let this 
>one by....

SIGH!  I forgot to include a pre-amble, "This article includes an
adult material.  Minors are not allowed to read it without a guardian."
I really did not think anybody would bite it.  Amazing world.

By the way, Steve, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell.  I will give you
a good price.  Oops!  I forgot!  Actually this was intended as a sarcasm.
I really do not have a bridge to sell.

>
>	UNIX, a Multitasking Operating system written IN C by the 
>folks at BELL LABS, was written  over 20 YEARS AGO -- before microsoft
>was a twitch in anybodies daddy's pants.
>

Thanks for the education.  I did not know that UNIX was developed at Bell
Labs.  I thought Ritchie and Thomson worked for Bowling Green University!
Oops!  That was also a joke.

>Win 3 now, will consider OS/2 when released. I'm just wondering what
>planet you took your CS classes on.
>

I was teaching CS courses, including operating systems, on the planet 
Krypton, presumably when you were struggling to learn RPG programming.

>
>steve
>-- 
>   The only difference between a Communist        G. Steve Arnold
>   and a Socialist is that the Socialist will     Dept. Math and Stats.
>   only confiscate the resources that are         BGSU
>   profitable.                                    sarnold@andy.bgsu.edu
>                        "Keep circulating the tapes"

No wonder!  Anyone who thinks the above (your quote, that is) is clever
or profound would certainly not understand what I tried to say.  What
a world!  It makes it interesting, I guess.

Grow up, Steve!

Kyu Lee
kyl@polari.uunet
From: ted@isgtec.com (Ted Richards)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Great Canadian Price for Windows 3.1 (& OS/2)
Date: 10 Apr 92 20:30:09 GMT
Organization: ISG Technologies Inc. Mississauga Ont. Canada

I found a great way to get Windows 3.1 cheap.  Apparently if you buy
Windows 3.0 now, you get a FREE upgrade to Windows 3.1 (I just
confirmed this with Microsoft Canada - you have to send in the proof of
purchase showing the date, along with the title page of the manual).
I don't know how recently you must have purchased 3.0 - my guess would
be Apr 6, when 3.1 was officially released, but I didn't ask.

For those in the Toronto area, a company called Mirage Systems
Corporation is selling Windows 3.0 for $45 Cdn (plus tax) at the
Computer Fest show at the Metro East Trade Centre (Brock Rd just north
of the 401 in Pickering) April 10-12.  The booth has no sign on it, but
it is located in the second last row of the show, to the right of the big
stage.

After buying my copy of Win 3.0 for $45, I walked two aisles up to the
IBM booth and bought my copy of OS/2 2.0 for $79 ($80 less than the price
to upgrade from DOS).

So for $124 Cdn plus tax, I got Windows 3.1, OS/2 2.0 and five extra
diskettes (with Win 3.0 on them).  Now if I can just figure out how to
get Desqview/X for $75 ... :-)
--
Ted Richards            ted@isgtec.com             [...!uunet.ca!isgtec!ted]
ISG Technologies Inc.   3030 Orlando Dr. Mississauga  Ont.  Canada   L4V 1S8
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Trident... The saga continues...
Date: 12 Apr 92 16:28:49 GMT
Article-I.D.: midway.1992Apr12.162849.12199
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago

In article <1992Apr11.235102.11190@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> prs@turing.acs.virginia.edu (Phillip R. Scarr) writes:
>I think the problem is one of modes and not drivers.  He is asking why
>he can't run his standard vga apps in a window on an svga desktop.  I
>don't think OS/2 supports the kind of mode translation required to adapt
>a game which is 640x480 to a desktop which is 800x600.  If it did, then
>I would REALLY be blown away...

Prepare to be blown away.  If you're using a real OS/2 2.0 driver, it
does.

The exception, of course, is trying to run a program which uses 256
colors on a 16 color desktop.  OS/2 2.0 makes a valliant effort to
dither the colors and run the program, but the results aren't always
aesthetically appealing.
-- 
Timothy F. Sipples       Keeper of the OS/2 Frequently Asked Questions
sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu  List, available via anonymous ftp from
Dept. of Economics       128.123.35.151, directory pub/os2/faq, or via
Univ. of Chicago  60637  netmail from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: william flusek <flusekw@silver.ucs.indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: Some peculiar restrictions on the OS/2 upgrade form
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 17:21:43 -0500

In article <1992Apr7.202628.2942@rice.edu> schafer@is.rice.edu (Richard Alan Schafer) writes:
>Someone here noticed a note at the tail end of the OS/2 upgrade form that
>causes a fair amount of concern to me.  The form says
>
>	Only one order form can be used per qualifying location (a single
>	building designated by a single mailing address in the United States
>	or Puerto Rico).  Photocopies of this form can be used to place
>	orders for additional locations.
>
>After reading that, he says he called IBM and verified that the restriction
>means that IBM will only take one actual upgrade from us, regardless of who
>sends it in or who bought or owns the copy of 1.x, and will ship some sort
>of "proof of additional license" to everyone else, who is then expected to
>go to the first person and make copies of the disk, I guess.  *NO* manuals
>will be shipped to the "additional license" upgraders.
>
>I'm sorry, but this is just brain-dead and *asking* for trouble.  This
>restriction was never in place before, nor should it be now.  If two
>people bought real copies of the product, then two people should get
>real upgrades, and not be forced to copy disks to get a system with no
>manuals!
>
>Somebody please tell me this isn't true.
>
>Richard

While this is indeed true, one needs only look at page one of the
upgrade form, in the section where you request the upgrades, and read:


                ___ OS/2 Version 2 Documentation Sets
                       (Up to the number of Additional Licenses ordered)

So you can get manuals for all or part of your upgrades.  It does sound
as though you will only get one full upgrade, but our IBM SE has said
that this means one set of disks and X Additional Licenses and Y sets of
documentation.  (Where X is the number of licenses upgraded after the
first and Y is how many sets of docs you want to have.)  While I think
that this is a bit of a pain for people who support themselves, it was
probably written with the larger organizations in mind.  Those places
where there is support staff to deal with questions arising from the
software.  

Personally, I will personally use the several addresses at my disposal
to get at least two full upgrades.  (For me at home.)  At work, we have
three addresses in town that will be upgrading, so we will get at least
three full upgrades, plus extra docs.

Bill Flusek, DOS Systems Specialist, Indiana University
Organization: European Academic Research Network
Date: Friday, 17 Apr 1992 14:28:37 GMT
From: Turgut Kalfaoglu <TURGUT@FRMOP11.BITNET>
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: COMPUTE!'s email address? (For flaming)

Does anyone have the e-mail address of this COMPUTE! rag?   -turgut
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: rafetmad@cheshire.oxy.edu (David R. Giller)
Subject: Re: An open letter to PC Magazine
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA 90041 USA.
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 04:48:42 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.173839.16211@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> william flusek <flusekw@silver.ucs.indiana.edu> writes:
>In article <1992Apr13.190429.25307@wes.on.ca> tomh@wes.on.ca (Tom Haapanen) writes:
>>bgm@cray.com (Bert Moshier) writes:
>>> Mr. Miller observes that, "From a technical standpoint, OS/2 2.0 does 
>>> appear to be a 'better DOS than DOS.'  Of course, the same can be 
>>> said of DESQview, which is simpler to install, or Windows." This is 
>>> complete nonsense! Does DESQview or Windows allow one to boot 
>>> different versions of DOS simultaneously? Virtualize device drivers? 
>>> Multitask sessions under the control of a preemptive time slice 
>>> multitasking system? Provide true protection between DOS sessions? 
>>
>>Wrong. Windows both virtualizes device drivers and preemptively multitasks
>>DOS sessions.  I believe DESQview also provides preemptive multitasking.
>
>Wrong again.  Both Windows and DESQview use cooperative multitasking,
>not preemptive multitasking.  For most people, all you have to do is see
>the difference once to truly appreciate preemptive over cooperative.  As
>for virtualizing device drivers, both of the other programs do this,
>they just don't do it as well as OS/2.   (Something else that really
>warrants a demo.  Mere words do not suffice here.)

This probably won't stem the tide, but Windows and DESQview do indeed
preemptively multitask DOS apps.

However, Windows' virtual device driver support is sketchy at best,
and really isn't trying to be a complete solution like the OS/2 system.

And, I'd like to point out that MS did not develop Xenix, nor any version
of UNIX, no matter whose name is no it.  UHC has a great SVR4, but did
theywrite it?  no, they just package it and customize a bit.

-Dave

PS:  However, don't forget that MS DIS have a great deal
to do with OS/2.


-- 
David Giller, Box 134 | Q: How many Oregonians does it take to screw in a light
Occidental College    | bulb?  A: Three.  One to replace the bulb, and two to
1600 Campus Road      | fend off all the Californians trying to share the
Los Angeles, CA 90041 | experience. ---------------------------rafetmad@oxy.edu
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 92 06:06:56 CST
From: gthome@ausvm1.VNET.IBM.COM
Subject: Diskless Workstations
Reply-To: gthome@ausvm1.VNET.IBM.COM
Organization: IBM - Austin
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM
News-Software: UReply 2.0
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc

In <1992Apr5.150042.1570@ramon.bgu.ac.il> Guy Zrachya writes:
>  I have been following this list for some time and I got the feeling that
>OS/2 is really good but I have some Qs.
>  What's seamless windows?
>
>  We have a LAN here with diskless workstations (386/33Mhz, 4Mb ram, Trident
>super vga card) that have drive a: 1.2 Mb and drive b: 1.44 Mb. Now, before
>I start nagging the net administrator here I'd like to now what support does
>OS/2 has for diskless workstations. Can I boot from a floppy and run os/2
>through the LAN ?
>
>Thx
>Zrachya
>

Remote IPL is possible.  You can remotely IPL (RIPL) a medialess workstation
with IBM LAN Server 2.0.  You can RIPL OS/2 2.0 or 1.3, or DOS.  The server
workstation can be running either OS/2 1.3 or 2.0 with LAN Server 2.0.

LAN Server 2.0 should be announcing any day now.

Gerry Thome
IBM - Austin
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: bgm@cray.com (Bert Moshier)
Subject: Re: Comdex Report: Not :-(
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 9 Apr 92 18:22:32 CDT

In article <1992Apr8.060905.11439@midway.uchicago.edu> sip1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>
>I missed almost everyone I expected to see.  There were so many people
>at Comdex that that wasn't surprising, I suppose.  I did bump into Jim
>Cannavino.  You were very helpful, Jim, thanks.

We are going to have to do something!  I was also looking for people
and found a few but not as many as I desired (which is everyone!).

>
>I can talk about the packaging with some authority.  :-) 

Well, actually OS/2 Monthly Magazine has a :-( on about the packaging.
Inside OS/2 has a subscription card but no OS/2 Monthly Magazine
card.  Joel (the publisher) says he asked IBM about getting a card
into the package.  I guess he did not ask the correct people.

Any IBMer have an idea who Joel might ask for inclusion in **future**
shrinkwrap packages????

Bert Moshier
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Benefits of OS/2?
Date: 13 Apr 92 18:06:55 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <1992Apr13.042414.29722@cis.ohio-state.edu> chawdry@dorothy.cis.ohio-state.edu (rehan nisar chawdry) writes:

>Multithreading, however, relies on the *COMPUTER* calling up several
>apps and *INSTRUCTING* them to perform a specific task simultaneosly.
   .....
>In OS/2, if you issue a print command, the cursor is returned *IMMEDIATELY*.
>The app will call a program that runs in the backround and instructs it to
>start printing page 1.  The app may then call another instance of that same
>program and instruct it to start printing page 2 *AT THE SAME TIME*.  That 
>app can call as many instances of that printing module and all of it happens
>in the backround.

You got the ends but not the means correct here.  With multithreading,
a program can do many things at once.  But it doesn't do it by
launching programs in the background.  That's the way a system like
Unix does "multithreading".  With OS/2, you run multiple parts of *THE
SAME PROGRAM* at once.

What's the difference?  To a user, not much.  To a programmer, quite a
bit.  A thread (as opposed to a process) is "lightweight".  Meaning it
doesn't have all the operating system overhead of an independant
program.  Each thread has its own stack, but it shares code and global
variables (data segment) with the "parent" program.  This saves time
and memory, and is easier to use in most cases where this kind of
performance is desired.



-- 
David Charlap                   Q:"Where do these stairs go?"
dic5340@hertz.njit.edu          A:"They go up"
----------------------------
Hi! I am a .signature virus. Copy me into your .signature to join in!
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.0 Release: First Impressions
Date: 10 Apr 92 18:29:45 GMT
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA

rm3@ornl.gov (MCBROOM R C) writes:
>In article <1992Apr9.181653.28887@midway.uchicago.edu> sip1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>>I miss command history in DOS sessions.  I'd like this to be the
>>default.
>>
>Just put "call doskey" in your autoexec.bat and you have it :-)

One thing they're missing... (All you OS/2 utilities programmers).  I
really miss my file name completion.  I can get it under DOS, of
course, but not under an OS/2 window.  It's incredibly useful.  You
just type a partial file name ("TES") and then hit tab, and it cycles
through all the files that match that (TEST.ARJ, TEST.GIF, TESTER.EXE)
in that directory.
-- 
Grasshoppotamus:  A creature that can leap to tremendous heights...  once.
From: ry01@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (ROBERT YUNG)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: OS/2 and my book of questions....
Date: 15 Apr 92 20:55:25 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

Many thanks to all you people who helping me out with my short list <gasp> of
questions! OS/2 sounds so good now! Go IBM, GO!
  Now I know why the undelete directory is on the same drive! It's FASTER to
rename a file's path to another directory than copying it to another drive! Am
I correct in this?
                                        And again.....THANKS!!!!
-- 
 (%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%)
  |  Off-campus address...                                          |
  |     first alley down this street, left refrigerator box. :-)    |
  |                                                                 |
   \_(Robert) Bobby Yung_______RY01@Lehigh.Edu________X-0471_______/
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Offline Mail Reader for OS/2
Date: 5 Apr 92 16:49:12 GMT
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago

In article <69813@ut-emx.uucp> mo@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Mohit Goyal) writes:
>Hello.  Does anyone know of any commercial or shareware software that will
>allow one to read mail from BBS' offline?  I am currently using SLMR for
>DOS, but I would like to switch to an OS/2 program.  Also, I was wondering
>if anyone has heard of Robocomm, and if they know whether their is an OS/2
>program like it.  Robocomm lets you specify a time and it will call any bbs
>or bbs' for you and do whatever you tell it to do and then logoff.  Very
>good for uploading and downloading mail packets at bbs' in the dead of 
>night.  Espescially boards that are long distance.  Thanks

Actually there is a large body of work in this area.  I've seen OS/2
offline QWK mail readers, for example, any many other types.

I haven't been sending such utilities along to hobbes.nmsu.edu because
they (usually) aren't of use to the typical Usenet/Internet reader.
However, I can recommend that you call the OS/2 Shareware BBS at
703-385-4325 and consult their list of such utilities.

If you do download something, please send it along to hobbes.nmsu.edu
via anonymous ftp, directory pub/downloads.
From: tcf9033@venus.tamu.edu (FREY, TONY C)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: IT'S FINALLY STARTED!!!!
Date: 14 Apr 92 22:10:00 GMT
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

NEWS FLASH!!!!!
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 In todays Wall Street Journal (4/14) there was actually a OS/2 Ad!  A
full page ad in the business section.  It's a picture of probably 100
different machines (i.e. IBM, Dell, AST, CompuADD, etc) all running OS/2
and on the side bar it says "Starting today everything your computer
has ever done, it will do better." And then it goes on to talk about
OS/2 and how great it is.  Not a real flashy ad but it's good for the
business sector I guess. But at least it's finally started!!!!! 
_________________________________________________
                         |                       |
Tony Frey                |  I love OS/2!!        |
Texas A&M University     |                       |
TCF9033@VENUS.TAMU.EDU   |  It's what Windows    |    
                         |  should have been!    |   
_________________________|_______________________|
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: dch2@engr.uark.edu (David Hobbs)
Subject: Re: Microsoft wins
Organization: University of Arkansas
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 19:52:04 GMT

tomh@wes.on.ca (Tom Haapanen) writes:

>It's not quite the same analogy.  Suppose Acme Inc. wants to include MS-DOS
>on the systems they sell.  What options do they have?  (Note: all figures are
>hupothetical and generally way too high!)
>

[ stuff deleted... ]

>Now, if 80% of the customers want MS-DOS anyway, the cost of option #3 is
>about $31 per copy of MS-DOS shipped.  It's still a lot cheaper than licensing
>individual copies from Microsoft (or whoever the vendor of the bundled
>software is).  And the deal is attractive to the software vendor as well, as
>they are assured that all the machines going out the door will have their
>software on the hard disk.
>
>And, sure, you will pay something for the bundled software included with a
>machine.  However, the contribution of the software to the cost of the 
>system is likely only between 20% and 50% of the cost of that software were
>you to buy it at the retail level.

But the original post said that people have to pay royalties to Microsoft
EVEN IF THE PC'S SOLD HAVE NO SOFTWARE BUNDLED.  Isn't that correct?  If so,
I'm sure as hell not going to pay for something that I'm not buying regardless
of what it costs.

Who knows, I might buy 386 to run Unix on (and have) and would not need DOS.
As an aside, I'm back to DR DOS and may be getting OS/2 any day now!  I've
got to go to IBM's Official Rollout and see if I can win one for FREE!!!

D.
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| David Hobbs, Graduate Student  |  dch2@engr.uark.edu          |
|  and Evil TA, CSEG Dept.,      |                              |
|  University of Arkansas	 |  #include <std_disclaimers>  |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| "Arkansas is 20 years behind everyone else, and by-golly,     |
|  that's where I want to be when the world comes to an end!"   |
|                                          - Joe Wrobel         |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: gulcu@masg1.epfl.ch (Ceki Gulcu)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Is a 16MHz 386sx with a 65 Meg HD enough for OS/2 2.0???
Date: 8 Apr 92 19:36:19 GMT
Reply-To: lbdsun6.epfl.ch
Organization: EPFL, Physics Department

In article <70000@ut-emx.uucp>, dans@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Daniel L. Schneider) writes:
|> OK, so I'm thinking about getting OS/2 2.0.
|> I have a 386sx 16 MHz with 2 Megs ram and a 65 Meg hard drive.
|> I know that I'll need more ram, at least 4 Megs total, but how much
|> hard disk space will OS/2 2.0 take up?  Certainly not 65 Megs, I hope,
|> but I'm worried that OS/2 may be twice the size of Win3 or something.
|> 
|> How much space will it take?
|> 
|> Also, is 16 MHz enough?
|> 
|> Reply via email if possible, as I can't keep up with this newsgroup.
|> 
|> Thanks,
|> Dan
|> dans@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu

The disk size question is a very important one. IMHO, it should be possible
to reduce the disk size of OS/2 by at least 30% by eliminating all the unused
(and never be) drivers that are copied during the installation. OS/2 drivers
are large (150 KB on the average). As an example, all mouse drivers are 
copied (7 of them) even though only one is necessary.

I beleive that a list of the indispensable files should be "published".
I would be ready to do this (as soon as I get a copy of GA), but would
greatly appreciate if you could give me a hand. I'm waiting for YOUR
reply.

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
| GULCU Ceki                            |  "It is not only fine feathers     |
| e-mail: gulcu@lbdsun6.epfl.ch         |   that make fine birds."           |
| Swiss Federal Institute of Technology |   AESOP,  6th century BC.          |
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Hi! I am a .signature virus. Copy me into your .signature to join in!
From: jeff@fang.clearpoint.com (Jeffrey J. Griglack)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Tape Backup ?
Date: 8 Apr 92 21:08:45 GMT
	<JEFF.92Apr2172456@fang.clearpoint.com>
	<brown.35@chinchilla.cc.ucf.edu> <sasdbh.702750777@fly>
Reply-To: jeff@fang.clearpoint.com
Distribution: usa
Organization: /home/jeff/.organization

On 8 Apr 92 16:32:57 GMT, sasdbh@unx.sas.com (David Horne) said:
D> Nntp-Posting-Host: fly.unx.sas.com
D> X-Bytes: 1407

D> Do you know if Maynard will have software for the Archive 5580i tape drive?
D> This is the only thing holding me back from switching over to os/2 2.0.
D> --

Maynard's number is 1-800-227-6296.  You can call them and ask.
Be prepared to be on hold for a while, though.
--

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Jeff Griglack             |  "The best kind of friend is like iron sharpening|
|jeff@fang.clearpoint.com  |  iron" -- "The Reptiles and I" by Shriek Back    |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------