HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gt0040a@prism.gatech.EDU (Thomas Michael Sorensen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Re: General suite of apps
Date: 11 Apr 92 23:17:29 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In <1992Apr11.031502.10878@ncsu.edu> eagle@catt.ncsu.edu (Daniel L'Hommedieu) writes:

>Greetings, world!  I have recently been reading about Ami Pro for
>Windows.  Unfortunately (according to the man I spoke with today) there
>are no plans for an OS/2 version.  Does there exist a similar software
>package for OS/2, that is comparable to AmiPro?

Apparently your spokesman isn't in touch with Lotus- Lotus is porting
Ami Pro, Notes, 123, and cc:Mail to OS/2. Suspected release date? Next year.
As for other word processors- Describe's 32-bit version (release date is
sometime this summer) looks REAL nice. I might switch to it from Ami Pro.

>And what about spreadsheets?  I (unfortunately) use Windows at work, and
>have gotten used to Excel (it actually is a nice spreadsheet) and was
>wondering about a similar or (hopefully) better spreadsheet for OS/2.

Why not just use Excel under OS/2 then? It'll work flawlessly.
    Tom Sorensen
-- 
Tom Sorensen              gt0040a@prism.gatech.edu
Georgia Tech 
And no, I don't like this .signature.
From: teverett@jarthur.claremont.edu (Toby Everett)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Re: General suite of apps
Date: 11 Apr 92 07:13:36 GMT
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711

In article <1992Apr11.051730.3858@midway.uchicago.edu> sip1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>Which man?  He is wrong; Lotus has just announced that they'll port
>their entire suite of applications to 32-bit OS/2 2.0.  Some are
>already available for OS/2 (1-2-3, Freelance, and Notes).

	According to the woman I talked to at Lotus in L.A. they are not yet
in beta, but as soon as they are she will call about beta testing. :)  I
have been using Ami Pro for Windows, and have been very happy with it.  There
are many things I would like to see changed in it, though.  For instance, 
I have found no way to make the same change to multiple style (correct me if
I'm wrong).  This is a minor complaint, but it is the mark of a good program
that it deals with all the minor complaints.
        --Toby Everett
        --teverett@jarthur.claremont.edu
        "I'm rooting for Boca.  How about you?"
From: rdippold@cancun.qualcomm.com (Ron Dippold)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: WIndows 3.1 Apps don't run under OS/2
Date: 6 Apr 92 20:45:31 GMT
Article-I.D.: cancun.rdippold.702593131
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc., San Diego, CA

Well, I hooked up with a Windows 3.1 beta tester and tried to run
Windows 3.1 applets under OS/2 2.0 release.  Other Windows programs
run beautifully under OS/2 2.0, seamless or standalone.  However,
trying to run these applets comes up with "OS/2 does not support this
application."  I can't tell whether it's OS/2 or the applet popping up
that message.

It's not a big deal, as the ones that come with OS/2 are far superior,
but it is interesting.
-- 
It was a brave man that ate the first oyster.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: prs@turing.acs.virginia.edu (Phillip R. Scarr)
Subject: Re: ftp sites?
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 19:20:41 GMT

In article <1992Apr15.113632.1@tesla.njit.edu> fer9483@tesla.njit.edu writes:
>Is there an anonymous ftp site where I can grab some OS/2 files?  I want
>to have some stuff to run when 2.0 arrives in the mail.
>
>						Frank

novell.com after 5pm MST (or PST, I don't remember)

cnam.cnam.fr is the site where the comp.binaries.os2 files are kept
(uuencoded though).

wuarchive.wustl.edu has some and ftp.cica.indiana.edu might have some as
well.

	-Phil
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: brooke@cco.caltech.edu (Brooke Paul Anderson)
Subject: Sales bozo says "OS/2 is a dog" (was Re: IBM TCP/IP 1.2 for OS/2)
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 02:28:11 GMT

"What's going on?"  Well, my guess is that the sales bozo installed
the HPFS when the documentation specifically says not to do that
if you have only 4 MB of memory.  Nothing like not following directions
and them blaming a product.  "Damn, this car handles like a pig when
I let all the air out of the tires!" :)
From: gt0040a@prism.gatech.EDU (Thomas Michael Sorensen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Re: OS/2 Questions and Answers
Date: 8 Apr 92 18:39:47 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In <1992Apr7.190550.25494@hemlock.cray.com> bgm@cray.com (Bert Moshier) writes:

>Just my take on this from talking to some IBMers.  Things like:

>  - C2
>  - Portability

According to Comdex both of these are already in 2.0.
        Tom Sorensen

-- 
Tom Sorensen              gt0040a@prism.gatech.edu
Georgia Tech 
And no, I don't like this .signature.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: smsmith@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Smith)
Subject: Re: WordPerfect for OS/2
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 04:35:53 GMT

bgm@cray.com (Bert Moshier) writes:
>
>Timothy is correct.  WordPerfect decided against doing the OS/2 2.0 version
>at the 5.1 level and is instead doing it at the next level (6.0?).
>
>Bert Moshier
>
>Oh, the product is from the ground up and is a native 32 bit application
>and will exploit OS/2 native features.

Yeah!!!  That way the pc rags can have another new app to compare to
its DOS/Windows counterpart.  The only drawback is that it might be
buggy as a first generation PM app.

It would be great if WordPerfect makes their language supplements
available for their 32-bit version.  I'm dying for a true 32-bit
OS/2 word processor that can do classical Greek in WYSIWYG.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: bgm@cray.com (Bert Moshier)
Subject: Re: WIndows 3.1 Apps don't run under OS/2
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: 9 Apr 92 17:55:00 CDT

In article <1992Apr8.222959.7111@morrow.stanford.edu> GD.SAR@forsythe.stanford.edu (Sandy Rockowitz) writes:
>In article <1992Apr08.195923.23493@watson.ibm.com>,
>dwl@watson.ibm.com (David W. Levine) writes:
>>I chased this down. He was showing a modified OS/2 2.0+ (Beyond GA) running
>>seamless 3.1 on the OS/2 2.0 desktop. This is a rather strong statement
>>of intent and capability. This will be in the update stream. And you will
>>be able to run your Windows 3.0 applications that don't run on Windows 3.1
>>and your Windows 3.1 applications...  Thats more compatible with Windows
>>than Windows 3.1, you know.
>
>David,
>
>Thanks for tracking this down. Lots of us seem to have seen and
>heard different things in the Comdex broadcast.
>
>I certainly hope that OS/2's Windows support allows both 3.0 and
>3.1 apps to run.  (Perhaps a settings item for WPS desktop
>apps that indicates 3.0 vs 3.1 mode?)  This would make OS/2 very
>attractive to users with apps that don't run under 3.1.  This would
>give real meaning to the slogan "a better Windows than Windows".
>
>Sandy
>gd.sar@forsythe.stanford.edu

Sandy:

Just a guess, I'd say a future WINOS2 will support Windows 2.x, 3.0 and
3.1 applications not just 3.0 & 3.1.  A better Windows than Windows
example.

Bert Moshier
Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.apps:1551 comp.os.os2.misc:11217
From: pr@umiacs.umd.edu (Jesus Rodriguez)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps,comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: OS/2 Upgrade form
Date: 10 Apr 92 14:47:32 GMT
Followup-To: comp.os.os2.apps
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Maryland Institute for Advanced Computer Studies



	I have an upgrade form for OS/2 1.x -> OS/2 2.0.  I have decided
to upgrade from Windows and canceled my order of OS/2 1.3.  So now IBM
sent me a form and I would like to pass it on to someone who needs it.  I
will send it regular mail to you and will pay for the stamp.

	If you are interested email me at 

			pr@umiacs.umd.edu

						Jesus
From: gt0040a@prism.gatech.EDU (Thomas Michael Sorensen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Re: WIndows 3.1 Apps don't run under OS/2
Date: 10 Apr 92 21:25:24 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In <1992Apr08.195923.23493@watson.ibm.com> dwl@watson.ibm.com (David W. Levine) writes:

Growl... last post didn't make it anywhere- this news program has a horrible
default ditribution setting. Anyway:

>I chased this down. He was showing a modified OS/2 2.0+ (Beyond GA) running
>seamless 3.1 on the OS/2 2.0 desktop. This is a rather strong statement

Really? According to my friend on the OS/2 development team he did something
amazingly simple- just run PROGMAN.EXE under a DOS window and you'll have
exactly what he did. Remeber- he said that all the code being shown was GA.
Also, why the heck would they put the Windows info screen into OS/2?
      Tom Sorensen

-- 
Tom Sorensen              gt0040a@prism.gatech.edu
Georgia Tech 
And no, I don't like this .signature.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: fell@sol.UVic.CA (Stuart Fell)
Subject: Ami Professional for OS/2 2.0
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C. CANADA
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 22:38:15 GMT

Has there actually been "official" word that Ami Professional is being
prepared for OS/2 2.0?  I gave them a call and they told me that there has
been nothing announced regarding even "plans" to make such a version!

If there is such a version, does anyone know if they are looking for
beta testers???  If so, how do I go about becoming one???

Stuart Fell
University of Victoria

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: tazzzzz@sparky.eecs.umich.edu (Kevin Dangoor)
Subject: Re: OS2 and Stacker.......
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 16:52:31 GMT

In article <2321@accucx.cc.ruu.nl> nevries@accucx.cc.ruu.nl (Nico de Vries.) writes:
>
>It seems Stacker for OS/2 already exists. Egghead seems to start selling it
>in some days. Very positive surprise I must say. Can anyone confirm this?
>
>Nico de Vries (nevries@cc.ruu.nl)              
>

The people at the local Egghead don't even know if they're carrying OS/2 2.0!
(Though it's quite possible that they are simply uninformed). Stac Electronics
certainly hasn't been willing to commit any type of announcement to Stacker
for OS/2 (which is actually somewhat commendable... not promising something
before they can deliver).

One question I have though is: has anyone seen a GA copy of OS/2 2.0 yet?
Are the packages truly going out the door?

...Kev


-- 
Kevin (Tazzzzz) Dangoor          \ 
University of Michigan           /  You ever wonder?
Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA         \
internet: tazzzzz@eecs.umich.edu /
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: bgm@cray.com (Bert Moshier)
Subject: Re: Stacker and OS/2
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 9 Apr 92 17:59:51 CDT

In article <1992Apr8.225455.7469@sol.UVic.CA> fell@sol.UVic.CA (Stuart Fell) writes:
>Does anyone know if Stacker will support HPFS or will it be restricted to
>FAT?  I'm a person with a 105 meg IDE drive who will be pushing it's limits
>by the switch to OS/2 and upgrading his W4W to 2.0 and Borland's C++ to V3.
>
>I would be certainly interested in this rather than buying a new hard drive,
>which is what I just did back in September when my 42 meg drive was not
>sufficient anymore.....

While I need Stacker, I need HPFS facilities (eg: long filenames) more than
I need Stacker.

I heard Stacker will be FAT, only.  What I heard did not come from a good
source, though.  Really nice person but is not part of Stac Electronic.

It would be a REAL SHAME if Stack for OS/2 is only a half job.

Bert Moshier
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: quan@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Tony Quan)
Subject: Re: OS/2 Questions!
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University.
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 06:17:44 GMT

In article <1992Apr10.035924.10185@uwm.edu> tanith@csd4.csd.uwm.edu writes:

>> 4)	Does OS/2 support the Sound Blaster?
>
>If you mean 'support' as multimedia support like Windows, no not yet :)
>However, DOS/Windows programs that use the Sound Blaster run fine and
>there are even a few OS/2 Soundblaster/SB Pro programs out there
>(mostly .CMF/.VOC/.MOD/etc. file players and such at the moment)...
>

Creative Labs is currently working on an OS/2 SoundBlaster driver.
It should be ready in the next few months...

--Tony
From: ian@vnet.ibm.com (Ian Stirling)
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 12:22:48 BST
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: What are "database requesters"?
Reply-To: ian@vnet.ibm.com
Organization: IBM UK Laboratories Ltd, Hursley, England
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM
News-Software: UReply 3.0

In <rstanton.169.702853205@garnet.berkeley.edu> Richard Stanton writes:
>On the upgrade form it asks how many "database requesters" I have installed
>on my system? What are these, and if I don't know, can I assume I don't have
>to worry?
>
>Thanks
>
>Richard Stanton
>

I think database requesters are machines/users which request services
from a database server.  Similar in concept to Lan Servers and LAN
requesters.

The OS/2 DBM can be configured as a Remote Database Server.

Cheers,
Ian Stirling                      Internet: ian@vnet.ibm.com
CICS/ESA Systems Facilities         Bitnet: ian at vnet
IBM UK Labs Ltd, Hursley, England IBMIPnet: ian@stirling.hursley.ibm.com

Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM
From: fer9483@tesla.njit.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: ftp sites?
Date: 15 Apr 92 16:36:32 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology

Is there an anonymous ftp site where I can grab some OS/2 files?  I want
to have some stuff to run when 2.0 arrives in the mail.

						Frank
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: ballard@ucs.ubc.ca (Alan Ballard)
Subject: IBM TCP/IP 1.2 via SLIP
Originator: ballard@stilton.ucs.ubc.ca
Organization: University of B.C. Computing Services
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 07:29:07 GMT

Well, I finally got my TCP/IP 1.2 (IBM), after being backordered since
November (guess IBM Canada didn't expect to sell many...)
 
I want to use this via slip across a serial line.  I find it hard to
believe  anybody could actually figure out how to do this based on the
documentation and readmes provided.  So... can somebody tell me what I
need in my config.sys and protocol.ini (and any other file I need) to
make this work. 

(PS to IBM -- I know the guys who did this product watch this group
-- it looks to be a nice product. Maybe you could include
documentation on this in the next  update, along wih the readmes for
all the other interfaces....)

-- 
Alan Ballard                   | Internet: ballard@ucs.ubc.ca
University Computing Services  |   Bitnet: USERAB1@UBCMTSG
University of British Columbia |    Phone: 604-822-3074
Vancouver B.C. Canada V6T 1Z2  |      Fax: 604-822-5116
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: ffujita@s.psych.uiuc.edu (Frank Fujita)
Subject: Re: 4os2 bug.
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: comp
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 21:23:37 GMT

In article <TNT.92Apr14234102@netcom.com> tnt@netcom.com (Terry
Turner) writes:
>i found a bug in 4os2 piping on hpfs drives...

Is 4os2 shareware?  If so where is it kept?  If not, where does one
purchase it?

Frank Fujita
From: brdmar10@uctvax.uct.ac.za
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Simple Question (compatable?)
Date: 10 Apr 92 08:38:00 GMT
Organization: University of Cape Town

Will OS/2 2.0 be fully msdos compatible?
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: freeman@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Jay Freeman)
Subject: Re: Comm Programs for OS/2
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 13:55:27 GMT

Is it a PM app? And is it affordable?
Thanks,
Jay
-- 
*************************************************************************
* 73 de Jay, WT9S     Internet: freeman@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu                *
*                     Packet:   wt9s@w9yci.il.usa.na                    *
*************************************************************************
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel)
Subject: Re: General suite of apps
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 16:09:27 GMT
Organization: DAFCO: OS/2 Software Support & Consulting

rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain) writes:

>In practice the only DOS app that I can't make work is the MKS Korn Shell.

I have both the dos *and* the os/2 version of KSH running under 6.304.
What problems do you have with ksh?
-- 
David Feustel N9MYI, 1930 Curdes Ave, Fort Wayne, IN 46805. (219)482-9631
= Candidate Bush wouldn't recognize principle if he were standing upon it =
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain)
Subject: Re: General suite of apps
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 06:02:48 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

That's the neat thing about OS/2, you don't need an OS/2 version of anything
in theory! (Well, except device drivers.  Oh, how could I forget tape backup
software. Oh, and programs that use certain DOS extenders.)

In practice the only DOS app that I can't make work is the MKS Korn Shell.

I'm sure folks will follow up with a few others.  Please do by all means,
I'd like to get all known incompatable DOS or Windows apps FAQed.

Bob
-- 
Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007

"There are some strings.  They're just not attached."
                                                    Victoria Roberts
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: bgm@cray.com (Bert Moshier)
Subject: Re: MS Word
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 7 Apr 92 19:03:09 CDT

In article <1992Mar31.234753.40302@frodo.cc.flinders.edu.au> mmtl@hobson.cc.flinders.edu.au (T.Lampre) writes:
>In article <jpgj3ln.feustel@netcom.com> feustel@netcom.com (David Feustel) writes:
>>tcf9033@venus.tamu.edu (FREY, TONY C) writes:
>>
>>
>>> I saw in the back of the March 23,1992 InfoWorld that Microsoft is now
>>>advertising MS Word for OS/2.  Seems kinda strange that they would do that,
>>>maybe they've seen the light.
>>
>>I'm a registered owner of Word for OS/2 and I haven't received any
>>upgrade notice for the product.
>
>I asked the Australian Windows marketing director last year if WfW 2.0
>would be made available for OS/2 2.0. His response was "No, why should
>we when OS/2 will run winapps on the PM desktop?" Considering the
>lousy job they did on WfW 1.1 for PM I don't think I would pay for an
>upgrade anyway.
>
>Trevor Lampre.

Trevor:

At COMDEX, DeScribe had a handout showing the performance numbers between
WfW 2.0 and DeScribe 32 bit.  I don't have the numbers in front of me but
I remember one showed a big difference.  (eg: WfW 2.0 taking 60 seconds and
DeScribe 7 seconds for an operation)
 
I'll have to go through all my "goodies" and find it. 

Bert Moshier
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: mig@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Meir I Green)
Subject: Re: OS2 and Stacker.......
Reply-To: mig@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Meir I Green)
Organization: Columbia University and The Jewish Theological Seminary, New York
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 06:11:49 GMT

In article <92100.141314TURGUT@FRMOP11.BITNET> Turgut Kalfaoglu <TURGUT@FRMOP11.BITNET> writes:
>I don't think OS/2  Stacker could 'hook' itself into the IFSes (FAT&HPFS).
>Probably they will have code to duplicate the code in HPFS and FAT drivers.
>They must be choosing their disassemblers as we speak now :)

There really ought to be hooks in the HPFS and FAT drivers, since IBM is
supposedly working on their own version of compression which will be
in the next version of OS/2.  I sure hope IBM doesn't have to rewrite half
the drivers to do that, or they will be wasting programmer time and expense.
However, if they *really* want it to be fast, and didn't think it all the way
through *and* wrote the code in assembler to make it lean and mean, they just
may be doing this as we speak.  Hopefully they aren't going to wait until Stac
releases its version before releasing the IBM CSD with data compression.  That
just wouldn't be very nice :-)  On the other hand, if stac's version can be
compiled for OS/2 1.X, they may still have a market!

 * * * * * *  ================== Internet       mig@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu
* * * * * * * = Meir I. Green == up on occasion mig@asteroids.cs.columbia.edu
 * * * * * *  ================== UUCP Bang!     rutgers!columbia.edu!cunixb!mig
* * * * * * * ================== AmateurRadio   N2JPG@W2XO.PA.USA.NOAM
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Subject: Re: General suite of apps
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 05:17:30 GMT

In article <1992Apr11.031502.10878@ncsu.edu> eagle@catt.ncsu.edu (Daniel L'Hommedieu) writes:
>Greetings, world!  I have recently been reading about Ami Pro for
>Windows.  Unfortunately (according to the man I spoke with today) there
>are no plans for an OS/2 version.  Does there exist a similar software
>package for OS/2, that is comparable to AmiPro?

Which man?  He is wrong; Lotus has just announced that they'll port
their entire suite of applications to 32-bit OS/2 2.0.  Some are
already available for OS/2 (1-2-3, Freelance, and Notes).

>And what about spreadsheets?  I (unfortunately) use Windows at work, and
>have gotten used to Excel (it actually is a nice spreadsheet) and was
>wondering about a similar or (hopefully) better spreadsheet for OS/2.

Excel 3.0 does exist in an OS/2 version.  Wingz, Lotus 1-2-3, and
Multiplan are also available.  I use 1-2-3/G 1.1 and I like it.
-- 
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.
From: tanith@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Michael D Kretzer)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: OS/2 Upgrade form
Date: 13 Apr 92 16:01:11 GMT
Article-I.D.: uwm.1992Apr13.160111.14866
Reply-To: tanith@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Originator: tanith@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

I might as well jump on the bandwagon...I have a whole bunch OS/2 2.0 
upgrade forms that I'm not using also (I believe someone at our office just
made lots of photocopies of the original...however, it clearly states on
the form that photocopies are perfectly 'valid'...anyway, I can't tell the
difference between the 'original' and a photocopy anyway [no special paper,
markings, or such]).  I believe IBM is giving a good turnaround on mailing 
upgrade forms, but if not, anyone can mail me for my address, send me an 
SASE, and I will mail you one.

I would, however, suggest looking in the pub/os2/info directory of
hobbes.nmsu.edu (128.123.35.151) for the file 'UPGRADE'.  It is an
electronic version of the upgrade form which you can print out and send
in to get your free upgrade.
From: ersys!bking@agchem.redwater.iol.ca (Barry King)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.apps
Subject: Re: Databases for OS/2
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 02:05:00 MDT
Organization: Edmonton Remote Systems, Edmonton, AB, Canada

v106padf@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (MIKE CARGIAN) writes:

> I am currently thinking of moving to OS/2 and would like to know
> what relational databases are out there for OS/2.
> 

In addition to the SQL databases already mentioned, Btrieve is available 
for OS/2 as is the SQL interface to Btrieve, XQL.  You can get Borland's 
Paradox 3.0 (maybe 3.5??) but the API for the OS/2 version of the Paradox 
Engine is not published.  interestingly enough, when I queried a Borland 
tech on the phone on this point, he said "you could always figure it out, 
ya know...".  Cool.  Yes, you can, but I did point out to him that this 
was probably illegal and he just said "yeah, probably, but...".  Anyway, 
I digest...
 
You can also drop down to d(um)Base format with Sequitor's CodeBase (and 
a slurry of others) if you want to write program sto read .dbf compatible 
file formats.  Faircom has a SQL database product as well.  There are 
many, mant options depending upon your requirements.

Barry King              bking@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca
Edmonton Remote Systems:  Celebrating 10 years of service to Northern Alberta