HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rwh@moose.cccs.umn.edu (RICHARD HOFFBECK)
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! : )
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Reply-To: rwh@moose.cccs.umn.edu
Organization: Colon Cancer Control Study, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 15:33:00 GMT

In article <1992Dec29.004640.2498@noose.ecn.purdue.edu>, helz@ecn.purdue.edu (Randall A Helzerman) writes:
>  
> Instead, they are going after Microsoft because their OS programmers talk to
> their Application programmers.  I don't see anything wrong with that at all.
>  

That's not the hangup that the FTC has with MS's business practices.  And as
BG pointed out the MS OS folks talk to Lotus's Applications Group and Borland's
Applications Group, so why shouldn't it talk to MS's Applications Group.

FWIW, the rumor is that BG went ballistic when he found out that the
applications group was using undocumented calls.  Not because they got caught;
but rather, because the application will quit working if that specific function
is removed from the next Windows release.  In effect, the applications group
is imposing standards on the OS group, i.e. "Remember that incredibly ugly
kludge you had to make to get version x.x out the door?  Well it will now haunt
you for life because some clown in apps decided to cut a corner".

My impression is that most undocumented calls (regardless of the OS) are there
for use by the OS in doing its thing.  A good programmer would no more use one
of these calls then he would reach into a C++ class definition to call a munged
private function directly.  I'm working with a utility that uses a couple of
undocumented DECNet and VMS functions to carry out a specific task. The notes
specifically say that the call is unsupported and the hooks will go away in 
the next release.  Is DEC being predatory?  Should I go ahead and use the call
even though I'll need to resolve the problem again in 6 months or a year, or
should I take the time to do it right the first time?

BTW, Borland and Lotus supposedly also use some of these undocumented calls in
their Windows software.  My impression is that anyone with a copy of the debug
version of Windows, a decent debugger and a little OS background can start
making direct calls to the OS rather than going through the published API. 

Now when Win 3.2 comes out without one of these key calls and my copy of QPro
quits working, who do you think I'll blame -- I suspect that MS will get the
first call :-) Then we can all get down on MS because they used the 'inside
information' that these calls would go away to  their competitive advantage by
not using them in the first place!

--rick

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: mig@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Meir I Green)
Subject: Re: 32 Bit HPFS
Keywords: HPFS
Reply-To: mig@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Meir I Green)
Organization: Columbia University, New York
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 07:23:41 GMT


Actually, it would seem that file protections are useful for many OS/2 users.
ownership, for example, is a useful concept.
Does OS/2 have a concept of process ownership in LAN-server?
I share this machine with other members of my family.
Furthermore, many people run a BBS on their system.
It would be really nice to have the added protection of file ownerships.

Meir

 * * * * *  =================== Internet   mig@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu
* * * * * * == Meir I. Green == AmateurPkt N2JPG@W2XO.PA.USA.NOAM
 * * * * *  = mig@columbia.edu= Amateur IP N2JPG@uhm.ampr.org
* * * * * * =================== BC-Goliath green@smtplink.barnard.columbia.edu 
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: bai@msiadmin.cit.cornell.edu (Dov Bai-MSI Visitor)
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! :)
Organization: /usr/local/lib/news/organization
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 14:41:51 GMT

In article <BzoytD.H4p@csulb.edu> sichermn@csulb.edu (Jeff Sicherman) writes:

>   Instead of all this the 'sky will fall' rhetoric, please explain how
>Microsoft will be so disasterously hobbled if its applications divisions
>are required to be and operate separately from its operating environments
>(OS, WIndows) ones. According to the word from g., they already do so,
>therefore one must conclude there will be no negative effects.

What you fail to understand is the psychology and actions of some 
entrepreneurs. If you want to have successful entrepreneurs you have
to look at what drives them. Otherwise, they may just disappear. Maybe
you are not bothered by this, but many people do.

BG is not doing these things because he does not have enough money
for living. He does it because for him it is a game that _involves_
money. It is fun for him to develop new software. But to play
a game and enjoy it, you must have some fixed set of rules. Otherwise,
even playing chess would not be fun. 

From a programmer's point of view there is no real separation between 
applications & system software. Almost every application involve
some interaction with the system or system calls. This separation 
exists only in the mind of the FTC. Now, when entrepreneurs start
the game, they usually have some long-term goals. They dont know 
ahead of time that some government committee is going to enter into
the picture later on and arbitrarily change the rules. If that
occurs too much in new areas they will simply not start to play 
the game. 

>Jeff Sicherman
>up the net without a .sig

Dov
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: bai@msiadmin.cit.cornell.edu (Dov Bai-MSI Visitor)
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! : )
Organization: /usr/local/lib/news/organization
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 17:14:11 GMT

In article <1ha4sqINNeu1@hpscit.sc.hp.com> kitchin@lf.hp.com (Bruce Kitchin) writes:

>In most other industries, you do not have a situation where a competitor
>controls another segment of the market that is able to give them an
>advantage and you a disadvantage.  Attempts to do this have usually 
>brought the FTC around and resulted in changes by the company doing it.
>Whether the case has merit or not is yet to be seen.  But I believe
>that it is to the disadvantage of us the customers if we return to the
>days of the robber barons and uncontrolled monopolies.

All this is a speculation of yours. It did not yet happened and there
are no indications that it is going to happen in the direction
you describe. It does not make sense to penalize MS because something
_may_ happen. You dont suggest that we accuse any gun-holder of an
intent to murder and put him in prison, do you? 

Dov
Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.advocacy:11189 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:3540
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! :)
Date: 30 Dec 1992 14:18:13 GMT
Followup-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston

In article <1992Dec29.232921.22559@tc.cornell.edu> bai@msiadmin.cit.cornell.edu (Dov Bai-MSI Visitor) writes:
>Like many other haters, MS-haters don't care what else they destroy.
>The only thing they care about is destroying their object of hatred.
>They may even destroy themselves in the process. 

What else, pray tell, would be destroyed if the FTC were to force MS to quit
forcing system vendors to sell a copy of Windows and DOS with every machine
they ship, and to force MS apps to quit using undocumented OS calls, besides
Bill Gates' monopolistic dreams?

>Unlike haters, the constructive critics just go and build something
>better. It does not look like MS-haters are going to sit and develop
>a better OS. It is much easier to use the government.

The critics have gone and built something better. It's called OS/2.
-- 
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.
 "Brought to you by the letters O, S, and by the number 2." -- Mike Levis
From: fles0092@rz.uni-hildesheim.de (Frank Leskova)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: who is brian sturgill - really?
Date: 21 Dec 92 09:45:16 GMT
Reply-To: fles0092@rz.uni-hildesheim.de
Organization: Universitaet Hildesheim, RZ

Finally it is clear to me, why the OS/2 versions before 2.0, the ones
that came out while the IBM-MS cooperation was still working, were
not called OS/2 here in Germany.
Actually, they were called: BS/2... :-)

Seasons greetings

Frank

---
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- Frank Leskova        -- E-Mail: fles0092@rz.uni-hildesheim.de         --
-- Oderstr. 10 B        --   or  : fles1092@rz.uni-hildesheim.de         --
-- 3000 Hannover 71     --                                               --
-- Germany              -- Tel.  : ++49 - 511 - 51 22 16                 --
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: os2man@panix.com (Larry Salomon Jr.)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: More advertising
Date: 31 Dec 92 15:08:06 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC

In <1992Dec31.101220.19875@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> mlevis@ringer.cs.utsa.edu (Mike Levis) (OS/2) writes:

Finally, someone decides to respond with something that the original purpose
of this thread intended to provoke.  To the rest of you, I didn't ask for a
critique of my wording (big #%@!ing deal about the word "all"...drop it?
Ok.  If that idea even gets considered for publication, much less having a
wording dispute, then I'll be surprise.).  Can't you find better ways to add
to this newsgroup?

Yes, I realized that 4M RAM and 30M DASD was pushing things quite a bit.
However, you'll note that nowhere in there did I state it was a full
installation.  In fact, with the default installation, minus some of the more
useless stuff (like the games...I did say useless, not "funless"), OS/2 fits
nicely in 30M of DASD.  Also, I claim that 4M RAM and 30M DASD is *not*
unrealistic for any computer purchased in 1992; given the Microsoft Windows
explosion in 1991 and 1992, I also claim that there were significant numbers
of computer purchased during this timeframe.  So nyah, nyah nyah nyah, nyah.
:-P

Here's the next mag ad idea I came up with while stuck in traffic last night:

(big bold font) "Why put off until tomorrow what you can do today?"

(not-so-big font) At IBM, we believe that you shouldn't have to wait until
tomorrow to use new technology, especially when it is already available today.

(insert OS/2 logo)
(caption) "Tomorrow's technology today"

(fine print) OS/2 2.0 with Crash Protection(tm) provides all that you need
with its capability to run any DOS(tm), Windows(tm), or OS/2(tm)
application.

Minimum hardware required:  Intel 80386 or compatbile CPU with 4 megabytes
of memory.  An 80486 or compatible CPU with 6 megabytes of memory is
recommended.  To order, call 1-800-3IBMOS2.  Available on 5.25 and 3.5 inch
media.

------------------------

How 'bout the rest of you come up with some of your own ideas instead of
concentrating on taking a scalpel to my admittedly non-professional idea?

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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky comp.os.os2:506 comp.os.os2.misc:40770
From: fiv2@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Fidel I Villa)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2,comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Beta 2.1 in IBM-BBS
Date: 1 Jan 93 01:13:37 GMT
Organization: Columbia University


Why don't IBM put it also in software.watson.ibm.com like the service
package? It would save us a lot of $. Just a suggestion.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.networking
From: chbeck@anl.gov (Chuck Beck)
Subject: LANMAN & IBM OS/2 TCPIP v1.2.1????
Followup-To: comp.os.os2.networking
Organization: Argonne National Lab
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 17:31:42 GMT

Is it possible to run IBM's TCP/IP package concurrently on a 
system also running Microsoft's LAN Manager server software?

IBM said at Interop that it was possible, although after 
purchasing it, of course, there are no instructions relating
to this in the doc set.

Has anyone done this?

These thoughts are only my own. CHBeck@anl.gov
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.networking
From: A1.MCL@isumvs.iastate.edu 
Subject: Re: Lan Server 3.0
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 18:24:26 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.155956.13635@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au>,
sci240s@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au (Wey Jing HO) writes:
>Does anybody know whether Lan Server 3.0 limit number of users
>at anyone time? For example, for Novell, you have to buy for example
>20-users licence for 20 concurrent users. Is LS 3.0 similar?
>
>--
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>Wey Jing Ho    Tel: 61-3-573-2567   E-mail : sci240s@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au<
>>Physics Dept., Monash University ( Caulfield Campus ), Melbourne, AUSTRALIA<
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I do not beleive LAN Server has a limit of the number of users
loged on at any one time.  You should be able to get up to 250+
users logged onto each adapter, up to 4 LAN adapters.  If YOU want
to limit the number of users logged on you could by settings in
the IBMLAN.INI and/or in NTS/2 LAPS configuration.

Mike Long
Iowa State University
From: bob@comlab.gatech.edu (Bob Baggerman)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.networking
Subject: Re: LANMAN & IBM OS/2 TCPIP v1.2.1????
Date: 21 Dec 92 21:28:56 GMT
Article-I.D.: hydra.78700
Organization: GTRI Communications Lab

Chuck Beck writes:
>Is it possible to run IBM's TCP/IP package concurrently on a 
>system also running Microsoft's LAN Manager server software?

Yea, I'm currently doing this.  It's neat and costs about 10 to 13 dB less
than Novell's product.  It took a lot of fiddling around to discover the 
correct pieces to keep but this is the general approach that ended up 
working.

1) Install LanMan and MS OS/2 1.3.
2) Comment out the LanMan related stuff in the CONFIG.SYS file
3) Install IBM TCP/IP.
4) Uncomment just the server, workstation, and other protocol statements
   in the CONFIG.SYS file.  Be sure to keep the IBM NDIS stuff instead of
   the Microsoft NDIS stuff.
5) 'Merge' the IBM TCP/IP and LanMan PROTOCOL.INI files.
6) In STARTUP.CMD I start the LanMan stuff before the TCP/IP stuff.

I know this is a little general, especially the part about merging the
PROTOCOL.INI files.  If anyone is interested I'd be happy to send along
or post my CONFIG.SYS and PROTOCOL.INI files.  So far almost everything 
has been real stable and worked real well.  Our LanMan server now supports
ftp access and acts as an NFS server for our Suns.  The one piece I 
haven't gotten working yet is LPD.

I archive LanMan related utilities and documents on the LanMan server,
"lanman.gatech.edu".  The programmers libraries are there as well as a
number of issues of Microsoft NetNews.  I'd be interested in more LanMan
related utilities.  Contibutions can be put in the UPLOADS section.

Bob

-- 
Bob Baggerman                         !  bob.baggerman@gtri.gatech.edu
Communications Laboratory             !  bob@comlab.gatech.edu
Georgia Tech Research Institute       !  qseclrb@prism.gatech.edu
Atlanta, GA  30332  USA               !  404-894-3525
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.networking
From: br.pct@RLG.Stanford.EDU (Peter C. Tamm)
Subject: NTS2 LAPS VDD 802.2 w DIS_PKT9.DOS
Organization: Research Libraries Group, Inc.
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 07:04:43 GMT

	I have been trying to install DIS_PKT (NDIS<->PacketDriver) over
VDD 802.2 NDIS. The trouble seems to be: LTSVCFG.COM has to be executed
first before the DIS_PKT9.DOS, but since DIS_PKT9.DOS is executed thru
DEVICE= command in CONFIG.SYS, I cannot find a way to do so. DIS_PKT9.DOS
keeps on complaining about not able to GetProtocolInfo & RUN= command in
CONFIG.SYS cannot run LTSVCFG.COM because it is a DOS program. Is there 
anyone who has encountered this yet? Thank You!

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.networking
From: altman@cs.sunysb.edu (Jeff Altman)
Subject: IBM SQL Server over TCP/IP?
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, State U of NY at Stony Brook
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 20:33:37 GMT


Okay, so I have Extended Services with DB Server installed on a machine
with Novell Netware Requester and IBM TCP/IP.

The local network is part of a larger network which transports all
packets via IP.  How should the communications drivers, protocols
be setup to allow workstations on other networks to access the DB 
Server on my network?

Is it possible to use TCP/IP instead or in addition to NETBIOS?

--
- Jeff  | Altmania Productions     |================================|
 ~   ~	| P.O. Box 849             | jaltman    @ ccmail.sunysb.edu |
 * | *	| East Setauket, New York  | altman     @ sbcs.sunysb.edu   |
\_____/	| 11733                    | 71530.3252 @ CompuServe.COM    |
From: backman@vaxeline.ftp.com (Larry Backman)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.networking
Subject: Re: IBM's "rsh" still broken, what's the story ?
Date: 21 Dec 92 12:31:13 GMT
Organization: FTP Software, Inc., Wakefield, MA
Nntp-Software: PC/TCP NNTP

In article <92350.224934RONY@awiwuw11.wu-wien.ac.at> FLATSCHER Rony <RONY@awiwuw11.wu-wien.ac.at> writes:

 >> At our site we are trying to backup the OS/2-machines using GTAK's tar,
 >> which even backups extended attributes. As the present implementation of
 >> this GNU tar does not allow utilizing a remote tape via IBM's TCP/IP (A.
 >> Kaiser told me today in a note, that the implementation is 4 to 6 months
 >> away, at least), I tried to follow K.U. Rommel's advice to pipe the
 >> OS/2-tar-output via "rsh" to the tape in question, which resides on a Unix-
 >> machine. He mentioned problems in respect to IBM's "rsh".
 >> 
 >> Guess what, "rsh" still does not work (have TCP/IP 1.2.1, CSD UN29511). We
 >> get the SYS1805 ("The process tried to write to a nonexistent pipe.") error
 >> (US version of OS/2 plus golden SP).
 >> 
 >> What is the story with this issue? The developers should be aware of this
 >> problem for months now and in the latest CSD for the base-kit the problem
 >> still is not fixed ?? This is upsetting !
 >> 
 >> Being on the issue of bugs. The present NFSD-implementation (CSD 1822) is still
 >> useless. In order to get our OS/2 machines backed up to the Unix-streamers we
 >> tried to attach all OS/2-drives via NFS, which works o.k. but still is not
 >> fast. But restoring from the Unix-streamers to the attached OS/2 drives is
 >> aggravating, timeouts, slow-motion writes etc. It is simply useless!
 >> 
 >> So what do IBMers suggest ? We desperately need a possibility to backup our
 >> OS/2 machines onto Unix-streamer tapes ! Now. Including extended attributes.
 >> 
 >> What about FTP, Inc.? We used to use the DOS-implementation, which had a tar
 >> supplied, back in the DOS-days. Does their TCP/IP-implementation for OS/2
 >> allow for backing up and restoring OS/2-machines on Unix-streamer tapes ?
 >> If so, what about extended attributes?


 This is not a duplicate.  I don't trust the post mechanism in my DOS toy.
 Ignore if you saw this previously...

 PCTCP for OS/2 has a tar which will stream all files that it can get at
 to a tar file or a tar device; ie. the tape you mention. It will *not*
 pick up EA's at the current time.

 Our rsh does not exhibit the problems IBM's has.

 I have a suggestion which might make everyone happy.  How about some
 enterprising programmer porting the GTAK tar previously mentioned to
 both IBM & FTP's socket interface? I'll donate a Devkit for PCTCP to
 the first lucky caller.

 Larry Backman
 FTP Software

 
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.networking
From: rogers@hal.emba.uvm.edu (Jeffrey K Rogers)
Subject: Adding OS/2 wstation to netware
Organization: University of Vermont, EMBA Computer Facility
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 16:41:38 GMT

Hi,

  I've been reading the messages on Compu$erve and this group for
information on setting up an OS/2 based workstation on an existing
Netware 3.11 network.  Does anybody have a list of all the patches
required to make this work?  Both Novell and IBM patches.   I also
understand that there is a problem with the last CSD and netware, is
this true?

Thanks -JeffR

-- 
 Jeffrey Rogers                |  Internet: rogers@hal.emba.uvm.edu
 University of Vermont         |  Compu$erve: 76467,575
 Burlington, VT                |
From: John.Cocula@f347.n109.z1.fidonet.org (John Cocula)
Sender: Uucp@blkcat.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.networking
Subject: Re: Video board, Beta 2.
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 19:20:10 -0500

Quoting from Cott Lang's recent message:

 CL> >Please clarify : How does the 32-bit graphics engine work when you have
 CL> >a 16-bit video card? Are there any 32-bit video board around?
 CL> 
 CL> The same way 32 bit serial drivers work on an 8 bit device.

Not quite.  While it's true that communication with the device over slow
8- or 16-bit interfaces is not helped by having 32 bit code, it is not true
that a 32-bit graphics engine or video driver won't help performance.  32-bit
code can be extremely helpful in bitmap manipulation and graphics calculations.

John
From: hawat@hawat.abg.sub.org (Andreas Kellner)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.networking
Subject: NCSA Telnet & Slip 8250 - a (little?) Problem - Please help !
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 92 22:17:23 GMT
Organization: APL II Host Augsburg, Germany


I have already installed the Slip 8250 Packet Driver and the NCSA Telnet
Programms (also known as CUTCP Stuff).

I am able to login at the host. The connection over the serial line
seems to work (i can do e.g. remotehelp).

But If I try to transfer Files (with ftpbin) - or even if I try to get
the directory from the host - the message : "Packet received for invalid
port - Res send" occours at the server (486/50 OS/2 2.0 GA).
The Node (386/40 DOS 5.0) crash in this moment.

If I try to "telnet hostname" the same things happens.

What could be wrong ? Is there anybody out there who could help me ? - Thanks !


For the netters who asked for a shareware network solution : If i (or anybody
else) can solve this problem, the shareware network solution *exists*.
I post more details then.

Bye and merry x-mas


Andy

--


                   Andreas Kellner (hawat@hawat.abg.sub.org)

                          APL II - Beyond the future
From: traub@rtf.bt.co.uk (Michael Traub)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.networking
Subject: OS/2 NFS Server doesn't convert case?
Date: 29 Dec 92 09:01:50 GMT
Organization: BT Customer Systems, Brighton, UK

I installed the OS/2 NFS Server but noticed that from Unix all the
files on my FAT partition come out in upper case. Is there a way to
alter this behaviour? When I run Dos Merge under Unix I cannot
access my files on the OS/2 NFS mounted drives as all the names
have been mangled. Surely the OS/2 Server should convert the case
of all file/directory names on a FAT partition to lower case?


-- 
Michael Traub
BT Customer Systems, Brighton Systems Centre. traub@btcs.bt.co.uk
From: assela@aix.rpi.edu (A. Andre Asselin)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.networking
Subject: Re: IBM TCP/IP NFS & Extended Attributes
Date: 2 Jan 93 04:12:19 GMT

platinum@montage.UUCP (Doug Swallow) writes:
>If EA's are not supported, will they be supported in a future release?

Doug,
   IBM understands the need to be aable to exchange EA's over NFS, and this
past Summer, I posted a draft copy of an EA exchange protocol that would be
able to enhance NFS to do just that (I was a co-op working for IBM at the
time).  NFS in and of itself doesn't have support for anything like EA's, so
an additional protocol like this would have to be used.
     - Andre Asselin (assela@rpi.edu)
Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.networking:2598 comp.os.os2.programmer:7276