HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: scls_ss@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Eric Scoles)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps,comp.misc
Subject: Re: DR-DOS Installation HORRORS! HELP....
Keywords: dr-dos, hell, ...
Date: 11 Apr 92 20:58:41 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

First, thanks for all the replies.  Haven't read them all yet, but thanks
nonetheless.

I don't know the origin of the INSTALL failure yet -- some people have
suggested that INSTALL wants everything in _just_ the right place, but
somebody suggested what now sounds right to me -- the volume label was
probably wrong (DUH!).

SETUP DOESN'T EXIST.  Problem here was that it indeed doesn't exist until
after install is finished.  INSTALL.EXE renames itself SETUP.EXE, and
behaves differently afterward.  (You can even rename it from the command
line and this will happen.)

DOESN'T LOAD HIGH.  Seems that the problem is that if you tell HIDOS.SYS to
scan upper memory for "free" blocks, and it doesn't find any, it will _load
DOS low_, and not into _high_ memory, which it will always be able to
access.  So you get rid of the scan parameter, and it loads high fine. 
SUPERPCK, though, still can't load high.

Again, thanks for the responses.
From: klund@athena.mit.edu (Kent H Lundberg)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps
Subject: exiting out of IBM basic
Date: 8 Apr 92 05:14:42 GMT
Distribution: comp
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology


I have a BASIC interpreter that starts up with the following message :

> The IBM Personal Computer Basic
> Version C1.10 Copyright IBM Corp 1981
> 62940 Bytes free
> Ok

I don't have any manuals for it, and I really don't care about it
expect one thing : Can someone please tell me how to get out of it?
I have tried : exit, system, quit, dos.  There is a way, isn't there?

--> Kent Lundberg	klund@athena.mit.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps
From: bodoh@xraylith.wisc.edu (Daniel J. Bodoh)
Subject: Re: QEMM 386 6.00 latest ver?
Organization: Center for X-ray Lithography, UW-Madison
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 13:16:49 GMT

In article <199204092236.AA03919@Joyce-Perkins.tenet.edu> emace@tenet.edu writes:
>Is QEMM-386 v 6.00 the latest version?

The latest version is 6.02.  However, 6.10 is shipping with DESQview/X but it
is not available separately.
-- 
Daniel J. Bodoh - bodoh@xraylith.wisc.edu or via Fidonet Daniel Bodoh 1:121/99
    "I'll be back!  You can't keep the Democrats out of office forever!"
 - Sideshow Bob, as he was being led to jail for attempted murder of Aunt Selma
From: cee1@ra.msstate.edu (Charles Evans)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps
Subject: Re: $50 for an UPGRADE!!!!! (MSDOS 5.1)
Date: 15 Apr 92 05:17:58 GMT
Organization: Mississippi State University

valley@gsbsun.uchicago.edu (Doug Dougherty) writes:

>The real point of all this is, of course, to bring Windows & DOS into
>version number compliance.  Surely a DOS 5.1 is just around the corner.
>If they had done as I suggest, they would be within 1.1 right now...

>And, as we all know, with Microsoft, quality is job 1.01...
>****************************************************************************
>The Slug		valley@gsbsun.uchicago.edu

Yep, MSDOS 5.1 is suposed to be out Sep/Oct 92.. and guess what it includes
to katch up with DRDOS 6.0.. stacker. believe it or not.

chuck

-- 
Charles E. Evans           /  o     / Whereforeseeingwealsoarecompassedabout
cee1@ra.msstate.edu       / ./|\   / withsogreatacloudofwitnesses,letuslayaside
cee1@isis.msstate.edu    /   /|'  / everyweight,andthesindothsoeasilybesetus,
cee1@msstate.bitnet     /    , ' / andletusRUNwithpatiencetheracethatissetB4us.
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps,comp.sys.ibm.pc.misc,comp.os.msdos.misc,comp.windows.ms,comp.windows.news,comp.windows.misc
From: thomasg@epx.hscs.umn.edu (Thomas Gasser)
Subject: Re: Does 387 speed up Win 3.1?
Organization: Department of Neurosurgery, University of Minnesota
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 20:05:11 GMT

It simple.  It can't.  The 387 will only help programs that have been 
written to take advantage of it, like Excel and autocad.


In article <1992Apr14.131332.25550@b11.ingr.com> bbrown@b11.ingr.com (Bailey Brown) writes:

>I read somewhere that a 387 coprocessor speeds up windows 3.1.
>Not just applications like Excel, but windows itself.  
>Is this true?   Why would Windows be using floating point
>anyway?

>------------
>Bailey Brown                               "Above all else, confusion reigns."
>Intergraph Corporation                                  
>bbrown@casca.b11.ingr.com                              P


*********************************************************************
*  Thomas D. Gasser                                                 *
*  Department of Neurosurgery                *******     ******     *
*  University of Minnesota                    ***  *** *** ***      *
*  (612) 624-4427                             ***   *****  ***      *
*  E-Mail:  THOMASG@EPX.HSCS.UMN.EDU         *****        *****     *
*                                                                   *
*********************************************************************
Xref: sparky comp.os.msdos.apps:2905 comp.windows.ms:12787
From: peryt@neurofys.uu.se (Per Ytterberg)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps,comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: WPG Conversion
Keywords: WPG convert
Date: 15 Apr 92 13:54:55 GMT
Organization: University hospital

In article <moore.689735382@pv34c0.vincent.iastate.edu> moore@iastate.edu (Brian J Moore) writes:
>Does anyone know of a program available via ftp that will convert a Word
>Perfect Graphic file to BMP, PCX, TIFF, GIF, RLE, etc...

Micrograx Designer can import and export several graphic formats, including
WPG. Maybe a bit expensive to buy a drawing program just do to some 
conversions.

Per
From: rfs0838@zeus.tamu.edu (SCHAFFTER, RODNEY FRANK, JR)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps
Subject: Re: Address of PKWARE, Inc.??
Date: 14 Apr 92 14:37:00 GMT
Followup-To: comp.os.msdos.apps
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <73924@netnews.upenn.edu>, yee@mipgsun.mipg.upenn.edu (Conway Yee) writes...
>>PKZIP 2.0 is $47.00 + $3.50 S&H
> 
>I take it then, that, PKZIP has gone commercial.  True or false?

	If you do not consider SHAREWARE comercial, it still is not!;-)

Rod Schaffter                                 	
Laboratory for Molecular Structure and Bonding	|Who cares if windows is or 
Texas A&M University Dept. of Chemistry		|isn't an opperating system-
Bitnet:   SCHAFFTER@TAMLMSB			|it barely operates at all!
INTERNET: SCHAFFTER@LMSBVX.TAMU.EDU		|
	"Standard Disclaimer, etc."		|An OOPerating system, maybe?
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps,comp.os.msdos.programmer,comp.windows.ms,comp.windows.ms.programmer
From: altman@sbpmt.cs.sunysb.edu (Jeff Altman)
Subject: Re: MS C/C++ v7 - need info
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 13:53:10 GMT

In article <1992Apr14.122159.5648@wes.on.ca> tomh@wes.on.ca (Tom Haapanen) writes:
>> In article <3535@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us> aki@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us writes:
>>> The best part about MS C/C++ 7.0 is the UPGRADE PRICE.  $139.
>
>dea@informix.com (Robert Dea) writes:
>> They did not tell you that if you want printed documentation you need
>> to come up with an additional $150.00. So if you add the two together
>> it comes out to $279.00. Not such a good deal after all!!!!
>
>The only manuals not included with C/C++ 7.0 are the Windows 3.1 SDK manuals.
>At least as of version 2.0, Borland didn't include them, either.

Actually, the only manual Borland does not include is the Windows API
manual.  It is of course online.  The cost of this manual is $30.

>An upgrade from BC++ 2.0 to BC++ 3.0 (including Application Frameworks) costs
>$199 US.  An upgrade from either MSC (any version) or BC++ (any version) to 
>C/C++ 7.0 (including MFC) costs $139.  

True.  Borland C++ contains working C++ Templates in the compiler, and a
set of integrated Windows Resource Editing tools.

MSC 7.0 has the Templates implemented as a separate pass with a macro 
translator requiring an extra compilation step.
The Windows Resource Tools are those of the SDK.  These are similar
in function to the 3.0 SDK tools.  MSC does come with the debugging
kernel which does cost extra from Borland.

>At the minimum, Microsoft is at least as good a deal.  And unless Borland now
>includes the (Windows 3.0?) SDK manuals, Microsoft is actually cheaper.

See above.  I would argue that it is a decent deal as well.  If the 
Error Handling functions of MSC 7.0 are decent then I might use it.

However, if you are going to consider looking at a new compiler do not
leave out WatCom 9.0.  WatCom 9.0 is a full 32-bit compiler for DOS,
Windows, Netware NLMs (with library from Novell), and OS/2 2.0.
Runs in 32-bit mode and produces 32-bit code.  You can't get that from
either Borland or MS.

Even MS's new database package, FoxBase, is compiled with WatCom C.
C++ is promised for third quarter.


>[ \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 ]


--
- Jeff  | Altmania Productions     |================================|
 ~   ~	| 322 Old Town Road        | jaltman    @ ccmail.sunysb.edu |
 * | *	| East Setauket, New York  | altman     @ sbcs.sunysb.edu   |
\_____/	| 11733                    | 71530.3252 @ CompuServe.COM    |
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps
From: tate@faxcsl.dcrt.nih.gov
Subject: PC/MSDOS X-Server Info Wanted
Organization: National Institutes of Health
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 14:50:18 GMT

I'm sure this is an FAQ, but I don't read this news group regularly, so here
goes: we are looking for information about PC X-server software. Please send
your replies by mail to the address below, and thanks in advance.
========================================================================
Ramon L. Tate                                   tate@faxcsl.dcrt.nih.gov
Computer Systems Laboratory, DCRT
National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892
         "So he asks me if I knew how fast I was going
          I said "No, but I knew exactly where I was."


Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps,comp.os.msdos.misc
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: SUBST -- is it really worth it?
Organization: Texas Instruments, Inc
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1992 20:35:46 GMT

In article <1992Apr05.025417.41460@yuma.acns.colostate.edu> knepley@CS.ColoState.EDU (Ranseus (Jim Knepley)) writes:
>In a endless quest to prefect DOS operations, I've been playing with SUBST.
>It seems that you can only substitute directories onto a drive that exists,
>so if your drives go up to E: (like mine), SUBST F: C:\WP51\FILES won't
>work.  So, 2 questions:

This works fine for me.  When you boot your machine, DOS reserves
drive letters up to one further than you have physical drives.  So, in
the case where your machine has a C: drive, DOS will allow you to have
drives with letters up to D.  This is the default behaviour.  Is your
E: drive a RAMDrive, by any chance?  If so, that eats the one letter
margin that DOS provides when it boots.

>
>1.  Is there a way to trick SUBST into allowing this kind of structure?

In your CONFIG.SYS file, put a statement of the form "LASTDRIVE=<x>",
where <x> is the last drive you want DOS to be able to 'create'.  For
example, to do the SUBST described above, you would put "LASTDRIVE=F"
in your CONFIG.SYS file.  The LASTDRIVE statement overrides the DOS
default of only providing a single available drive letter beyond what
your physical hardware supports.

>
>2.  Can I add "phantom" drives after bootup?

Only if you have a LASTDRIVE statement in your CONFIG.SYS to allow a
drive with the letter you want to use to be created.

>
>I know that Novel servers have drives substituted up the wazoo, and I like
>the technique.  I'm using DR DOS 6.0, by the way.

Novel servers also require their 'clients' to have a LASTDRIVE
statement in their CONFIG.SYS.  

>Thanks much,
>  Jim
>
>-- 
>**** knepley@cs.colostate.edu ************ Boycott Microsoft ****
> Jim Knepley         Magician, programmer, all around nice guy,
>   (Ranseus)                        usually.    
>******** CTHULHU IN '92! -- Why vote for the LESSER evil? *******


-- 
"Insisting on perfect safety is for people who don't have the balls to live
 in the real world."   -- Mary Shafer, NASA Ames Dryden
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fred.McCall@dseg.ti.com - I don't speak for others and they don't speak for me.
From: bodoh@xraylith.wisc.edu (Daniel J. Bodoh)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps
Subject: Re: 286 memory managers: Netroom, QRAM - INFO REQ'D
Date: 13 Apr 92 00:27:18 GMT
Article-I.D.: xraylith.1992Apr13.002718.13423
Distribution: comp.os.msdos.apps,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Organization: Center for X-ray Lithography, UW-Madison

In article <1992Apr12.200158.20506@klaava.Helsinki.FI> jliukkon@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Juha-Matti Liukkonen) writes:
>I'd like some info about 286 memory managers in general and especially
>about Netroom and QRAM.

From the DESQview Frequently Asked Questions list...

Q2:  Besides DESQview, what other products does Quarterdeck sell, and what
     are the current versions?

A2:  [Versions are the latest known as of the date of the FAQ.  If you see
     a newer version, please let me know.]

t     QRAM                2.0
          A memory manager for 8088 through 80286 machines.  QRAM will
          provide UMBs (Upper Memory Blocks, memory greater than 640K but
          less than 1024K). To do this requires either LIM EMS 4.0, EEMS, a
          memory management chip or a 286 motherboard with C&T's NEAT, LEAP          or SCAT chip set.  The UMBs can be used to load TSRs, device
          drivers, and DOS data structures into high memory in order to gain
          conventional memory for large programs. Manifest is provided with          QRAM.
-- 
Daniel J. Bodoh                          Windows is dead! Long live DESQview/X!
bodoh@xraylith.wisc.edu or via Fidonet: Daniel Bodoh 1:121/99
From: v999s3bz@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (---roach---)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps
Subject: Re: SuperStor 2.0
Keywords: SuperStor
Date: 7 Apr 92 16:39:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: acsu.1992Apr7.154024.28960
Organization: ---Roach Motel---
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <43095@as0c.sei.cmu.edu>, hms@sei.cmu.edu (Howard Slomer) writes...
> 
> 
>	A friend of mine has a small Toshiba lap-top computer with 640k, 20M HD
>and a single 3.5 floppy.  He bought a copy of SuperStor V2.0 from an Egghead
>salesman who claimed that SuperStor would solve his disk space problems.  
> 
>	Has anyone tried this program on this type of system?  Can this
>program be recommended for a novice user?
> 
>			Thanks in advance,
>			Howard

to a certain extent.  1 have drdos 6 with sstor, and it claims
it doubled my hard disk.  there is no doubt it will save disk
space, but how much depends on the program you use and the 
files you subsequently save.
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps
From: lindemaj@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (Andrew J Lindeman)
Subject: Re: Qemm v6.02 and Stacker 2.0
Reply-To: lindemaj@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (Andrew J Lindeman)
Organization: Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 19:29:43 GMT

In article <1992Apr11.191044.28924@cs.rose-hulman.edu>  
lindemaj@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (Andrew J Lindeman) writes:
> I just bought Qemm 6.02 and am trying to install it with my Stacked hard  
drive.   
> My problem is that the document which comes with Stacker, showing how to use  
> Qemm's Optimize, is applicable to Qemm 5.xx. 

In case anybody else has the same problem, I got a reply which pointed me  
toward a new version of sswap (written by Stac.)  It looks for Qemm's messages  
in the config or autoexec and will copy all of the files for you.  It works  
easily and gave me no problems!  The new version of sswap (v2.01 I believe) can  
be found on simtel or a mirror under /msdos/qemm and is named sswap.zip.

Andy Lindeman
lindemaj@nextwork.rose-hulman.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps
From: coulman@cs.Usask.CA (Randy Coulman)
Subject: Virus Protection Programs
Reply-To: coulman@cs.Usask.CA
Organization: University of Saskatchewan
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 03:34:15 GMT

I'm curious as to which Virus Protection Programs people use (if
any.  I have only limited experience in the area, but I've tried
the McAfee VirusScan program, and like it very much.  However, 
it's also rather expensive (as shareware goes - $85/year if you
want the clean-up and Vshield TSR).  I've heard of Central Point's
product, but have no experience with it.  I guess I'm wondering
what the best product is.  Part of the reason for this question is
that I just started a consulting business on the side, and I would
like to be "hired" to check clients' computers for viruses.  In
order to use McAfee's software to do this, I need to pay them $495
every two years for the VirusScan program and another $695 every two
years for the clean-up program.  On the surface, this seems fair 
enough.  If I'm making money off of their software, they should too.
Unfortunately, I'm not positive I'm going to get enough of this type
of business to make this worth the money.  So, I'd like to know if
there is a less expensive alternative that will still do a 
reasonable job.  I haven't read the license agreement for CP's 
Anti-Virus, but I assume it's the standard "only install it on one
computer unless the other one is your laptop and you only use one
copy at a time" agreement.  Correct me if I'm wrong.

You can post or e-mail.  I'll summarize what I hear.

Thanks in advance,
Randy

-- 
Randy A. Coulman                    |
Department of Computational Science | 
University of Saskatchewan          | coulman@cs.Usask.ca         
Saskatoon, SK   S7N 0W0             | coulman@skaries.Usask.ca
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps
From: jliddle@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu (Jean Liddle)
Subject: Linux
Summary: A Brief Summary
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 1992 05:14:23 GMT
Organization: Illinois State University

Greetings!  I have gotten several e-mails asking about LINUX, the free
(gnu copy-left) unix for PC-AT i386's.  As some of my replies have 
bounced, and their seemed to be some interest, I am posting a brief
summary of what it is.  Flames will be pointedly ignored :).

Linux is a free, i386/i486 Unix clone conforming to the POSIX standard,
available from tsx-11.mit.edu (source code + binaries).  Its current
version is 0.95a plus some patches, which some people are calling 0.95c.
Most gnu utilities have been successfully ported, and someone(s) is 
working on an X-windows port.  It coexists nicely with DOS (or so I hear),
with a small utility which allows one to select which partition to boot
from (DOS or LINUX).

It requires:

At least 2 Meg RAM
i386(sx) or better
AT-Bus (No MCA, EISA machines must have ISA Hard Drive controllers)

As I have an MCA machine, I have no personal experience to back up
any of its claims.  Those who are interested can find out more by
reading "comp.os.linux" or, if that newsgroup is not yet active where
you are, "alt.os.linux" (which is being phased out as the comp group
gets wider circulation).

Hope this answeres everybody's questions (for those who give a sh*t! :))

Jean.
-- 
Jean Liddle
Computer Science, Illinois State University 
e-mail:  jliddle@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu
         jliddle@katya.acs.ilstu.edu
From: werner@bio.nlm.nih.gov (Craig Werner)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps
Subject: Looking for Quantitative Micro Software
Date: 6 Apr 92 01:08:09 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: National Library of Medicine


	Looking for address and/or phone number of Quantitative Micro
	Software, makers of micro-TSP.

	Thanks in advance.
From: leadfoot@bigbootay.sw.stratus.com (Mark Curtis)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps
Subject: Re: MS C/C++ v7 - need info
Date: 17 Apr 92 02:27:34 GMT

Often they only carry upgrades to major applications, not languages.
But I have seen more upgrades for langauges lately.

Mark
From: kniaz@cat6.cs.wisc.edu (Joel Kniaz)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps
Subject: Re: DR-DOS Installation HORRORS!  HELP....
Keywords: dr-dos, hell, ...
Date: 14 Apr 92 14:48:41 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Madison -- Computer Sciences Dept.


	Why not try using SUBST to fool the installation utility?
	That's how I got around the same problem installing 
	Windows...
							-JOK
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps,comp.misc
From: berger@atropa (Mike Berger)
Subject: Re: DR-DOS Installation HORRORS! HELP....
Keywords: dr-dos, hell, ...
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 18:33:15 GMT

calb@edsi.plexus.COM (Calvin Bolwerk) writes:
>When I first got my disks (3-1/2) my A drive was a 5-1/4.  I 
>thought about using the assign command but then realized that as 
>soon as I rebooted the assignment would be gone.  So, I was 
>thinking that it would be a real hassle to move the cables.  I 
>thought about requesting the 5-1/4 disks but really didn't want to 
>wait.  I decided to swap the cables on the disk drives and run the 
>BIOS setup during boot-up.  The whole process was rather simple 
>and didn't take much time or effort.

>What I am trying to say is, why don't you save yourself all the 
>headaches with trying to get the correct files on the different 
>floppies and just change the cables and BIOS setup?  I think that 
>this would be MUCH easier!
*----
For a lot of people, probably MOST computer users, this would cause,
not prevent, headaches.  Most people are afraid to open their machine.
Those that aren't might not be inclined to swap floppy disk cables.
3.5" and 5.25" diskette drives often have different types of
connectors.  While the connectors may be polarized, they often
aren't.  Are you going to write a primer on how to identify which
way the connector goes, assuming they are interchangable in the
first place?  How do you know they'll reach?  Are you going
to instruct everybody on how to be sure their new arrangement is
properly terminated (what if they don't have the missing
termination resistor network for the drive?)?

This is not a good solution for the normal user, and I wouldn't
recommend it unless you know what you're doing.

--
	Mike Berger
	Department of Statistics, University of Illinois
	AT&TNET     217-244-6067
	Internet    berger@atropa.stat.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps
From: tweaver@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Tim Weaver)
Subject: Re: MS C/C++ v7 - need info
Organization: Kalamazoo College
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 18:27:51 GMT

While people are talking about C++.  I was looking at Borland C++ in a
software store and found two versions, one for $349 and one for $69.  The
sales person couldn't tell me the difference other than the expensive one
was more complete and probably had better developing tools.  I know the
$69 is not an upgrade, so what's the difference.  Or more to the point,
what can't the $69 version do?
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Tim Weaver  (tweaver@kzoo.edu), Database Programmer/Analyst, 616-383-5656 
   Snail:    Kalamazoo College    1200 Academy Street    Kalamazoo  MI 49007
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.apps