HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: storm@cs.mcgill.ca (Marc WANDSCHNEIDER)
Subject: Re: Uh....
Organization: McGill University, Montreal, Canada
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 15:10:50 GMT

In article <1992Sep26.035240.7913@sequent.com> furballs@sequent.com (Paul Penrod) writes:
>In article <1992Sep25.185625.13951@ncsu.edu> dspascha@eos.ncsu.edu (DAVID SCOTT PASCHAL) writes:
>>
>>In article <1992Sep25.161726.21828@cs.mcgill.ca>, storm@cs.mcgill.ca (Marc WANDSCHNEIDER) writes:
>>
>>> WINDOZE SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>>etc...
>>
>>
>>hmmmm -- looks like some hacker hasn't been getting enough homework to keep
>>him busy!  :-)  Let's hope Marc WANDSCHNEIDER just forgot to log out...
>
>It's fall again...
>
>I agree, looks like the freshmen are not getting enough homework to
>keep them busy. No wonder, Professors do not believe in teaching
>any more. Something about it not being in vogue...

	Jesus Christ!

	It would appear that everybody's sense of humor has mysteriously
disappeared.

	This group has been so dead of late, I thought it would be kinda fun
to post something typical of most advocacy groups.

	However, it might appear that I would have been better off to just
post some interesting figures about the migration paths of Swedish Elk.

	Christ.


Toodlepip!
Marc 'em.


-- 
  storm@cs.mcgill.ca           McGill University         C program run.  Run  
  Marc Wandschneider           Montreal, CANADA          Program run! PLEASE!
    Frank Sinatra is allowed to make rude comments about anyone he wishes.
        S. O'Connor is not. This is the law. Learn it.   - Net Poster
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: ashaw@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (andrew.shaw)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS (NOT!)
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 20:35:42 GMT

From philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara):
> In mbk@lyapunov.ucsd.edu (Matt Kennel) writes:
>>
>> NT, now, one might think is innovative, but again, what does it do
>> that UNIX, a 70s technology OS, doesn't?
>>
>      This is speculation on my part, but I believe the answer to your
> question is "Sell more than a handful of copies."
> 
NT's shipping?  Or is it being pre-sold, in the manner of "custom-build
townehomes"?  Actually, just because the Suzuki Samurai outsells the
Rolls-Royce Silver Whathaveyou, it is not on that account a better car.

(Please note that my preference for UNIX(TM) is not due to the
affiliation in this post's header; the reverse is in fact the case).
From: rhode@ee.rochester.edu (Robert Rhode)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Why I use a Mac
Date: 6 Oct 92 22:35:41 GMT
Organization: Univ of Rochester, College of Engineering and Applied Science

Over the years, I have used a couple mainframes I couldn't identify,
a TRS-80, Atari 800, Atari ST, Sun 3, Sun 4, DecStation, NeXT '030,
NeXT '040, MicroVax (VMS), IBM 370 (VM/CMS), PS/2 (DOS), a couple
clones (Win 3.1), and Macs.

I have used SunView, X-Windows, Win3, Atari TOS, and Mac systems
3 through 7.

Frankly, the Mac fulfills my needs best of all of these, has MORE than
good enough performance for 90% of what I want to do (and good enough
for most of the rest), and allows me great convenience.

I, a dedicated Mac user, occasionally help DOS and Windows users figure
out what it is that they have done to F*** up their system and get it
working again.  I'm glad I don't have to live with that.

For most people, most of the time, the extra convenience of the Mac OS
suits their needs better than the extra MIPS of a 486DX50.  A $2000
Macintosh LCII will get them more productive faster with fewer worries
than a 486 system with approximately equal graphics and memory but
faster CPU.  When you're using a word processor, a 486 just does more
nothing faster than a slower CPU.  And it's well known that it takes
less CPU power to get the same responsiveness out of a Mac.

- Bob
From: Bob_Daye@mindlink.bc.ca (Bob Daye)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows == OS (NOT!)
Date: 1 Oct 92 06:29:38 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada

If everyone here has to try and justify Windows as an OS then it's not an OS.
Just because someone says it is don't make it so. If I said that (I heard
this somewhere) if I tell you that we are now going to call a dogs tail a leg
and then ask you how many legs does a dog have: the people who say Windows is
an operating system would say 5: the people who don't think Windows is an
operating system would say 4.
Windows NT WILL be an operating system - until then Windows is a marketing
tool.

--BOB
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: 925wardell@gw.wmich.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows == OS
Date: 28 Sep 92 22:44:46 EST
Organization: Western Michigan University

In article <1992Sep22.171509.17884@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, lcsmith@nyx.cs.du.edu (Lindsey Smith) writes:
> 
>>        That's ridiculous.  CP/M, DOS, etc, all could be booted
>>without something before it.  They controlled the File I/O of
>>the system.  WhenI can slip in a Windows boot disk then WIndows
>>will be an OS.
>>        I wouldn't hire a Windows programmer period.
>>
>>                                        -Brad
>>
> 
> If you would never hire a Windows programmer, why are you reading this
> newsgroup ?!?
> 

	I should clarify.  Knowing how to program Windows is useful,
but not if that is their primary programming forte.  
	Moreover, Windows is a nice medium to low end Dos shell/graphical
environment for people not familiar with computers.  It certainly has
great usefulness and has done more to speed up the PC revolution than
anything yet.  Before Windows, people were haning around with old
hardware and EGA graphics.  Thanks to windows, people are starting
to use better hardware.

						-Brad



Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
Subject: Re: Uh....
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 18:29:01 GMT

In article <1992Sep25.185625.13951@ncsu.edu> dspascha@eos.ncsu.edu (DAVID SCOTT PASCHAL) writes:
>
>In article <1992Sep25.161726.21828@cs.mcgill.ca>, storm@cs.mcgill.ca (Marc WANDSCHNEIDER) writes:
>
>> WINDOZE SUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>etc...
>
>
>hmmmm -- looks like some hacker hasn't been getting enough homework to keep
>him busy!  :-)  Let's hope Marc WANDSCHNEIDER just forgot to log out...

I suppose he hasn't figured out the capslock key yet either 9-)








-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iskandar Taib                          | The only thing worse than Peach ala
Internet: NTAIB@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU |    Frog is Frog ala Peach
Bitnet:   NTAIB@IUBACS                 !
Xref: sparky comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:2319 comp.sys.next.misc:20493
From: tzs@stein.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.next.misc
Subject: Re: Considering getting an SGI indigo
Date: 4 Oct 92 16:36:36 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Oct4.163636.12643
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

jhenshaw@microsoft.com (Jeff Henshaw) writes:
>In article 2043 of comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,
>| use at home, which rules out NeXT.  NeXT (at least, the ones that they
>| sell here at UW) only are FCC certified for office use.
>
>To the best of my knowledge, the *entire* NeXT product
>line is FCC certified as FCC class 'A.'
>I have several friends who have purchased, quite legally,
>NeXT boxes from the UW campus store for home use.  The

Class 'B' is what is required for home use, isn't it?  Anyway, there is a
sign right above the NeXT on display at the UW store that says that they
aren't to be used at home due to lack of FCC class 'B' certification.

--Tim Smith
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.next.misc
From: tzs@stein.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: FCC certification levels (was: Considering an SGI...)
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 07:17:22 GMT

>As long as my hair doesn't start falling out, I'm not too
>worried.  HEY, WAIT A MINUTE...what are these clumps of stuff
>on the floor ?!?  My dog must be shedding...yeah...thats what
>it is   :-)

You should post to alt.activism that your hair is falling out and that
you have recently discovered the NeXT uses ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION.
(Make sure to say electromagnetic radiation in all caps).

I bet that someone will call for a boycott!

--Tim Smith
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.next.misc
From: audley@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu (Christopher D Audley)
Subject: Re: Considering getting an SGI indigo
Organization: HAC - Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 19:16:54 GMT

In article <1992Oct4.163636.12643@u.washington.edu> tzs@stein.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith) writes:
>jhenshaw@microsoft.com (Jeff Henshaw) writes:
>>In article 2043 of comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,
>>| use at home, which rules out NeXT.  NeXT (at least, the ones that they
>>| sell here at UW) only are FCC certified for office use.
>>
>>To the best of my knowledge, the *entire* NeXT product
>>line is FCC certified as FCC class 'A.'
>>I have several friends who have purchased, quite legally,
>>NeXT boxes from the UW campus store for home use.  The
>
>Class 'B' is what is required for home use, isn't it?  Anyway, there is a
>sign right above the NeXT on display at the UW store that says that they
>aren't to be used at home due to lack of FCC class 'B' certification.

Here's what the "Setup and Tutorial" says:

"Warning: NeXT computer systems generate, use, and can radiate radio frequency
energy, and if not installed and used in accordance with the instruction manual,
may cause interference with radio communications.  The systems have been tested
and found to comply with the limits for a Class A computing device pursuant to
Subpart J of Part 15 of FCC Rules, which are designed to provide reasonable
protection against such interference when operated in a commercial environment.
Operation of a NeXT system in a residential area is likely to cause inter-
ference, in which case the user at his or her own expense will be required to
take whatever measures may be required to correct the interference."

So it looks like your OK as long as it doesn't cause a problem.  Its funny,
my roommate has a Mac right on the other side of the wall from my NeXTstation
and my monitor jinks a bit everytime he turns his machine on.  My machine
has never affected his.  I wonder if Mac's are Class B.

Chris

-- 
Christopher D. Audley
Elec & Comp Engineering
The Johns Hopkins University
Internet: audley@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS (NOT!)
Date: 01 Oct 92 19:10:39 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <15882@mindlink.bc.ca> Bob_Daye@mindlink.bc.ca (Bob Daye) writes:
>If everyone here has to try and justify Windows as an OS then it's not an OS.

     Oh, that's a good definition of operating system.  "An operating
system is something that you don't have to try and justify as an OS."


>Just because someone says it is don't make it so.

     Exactly.  And just because you believe something doesn't make
it right.


> If I said that (I heard
>this somewhere) if I tell you that we are now going to call a dogs tail a leg
>and then ask you how many legs does a dog have: the people who say Windows is
>an operating system would say 5: the people who don't think Windows is an
>operating system would say 4.

     Dog is fairly well-defined.  Operating system is not.  That's why
everyone is arguing - no one really knows what the term means, so
they keep redefining it to fit their own beliefs.

				-Phil
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Lafornara         				1 Microsoft Way         
philipla@microsoft.com				Redmond, WA 98052-6399 
Note:  Microsoft doesn't even _know_ that these are my opinions. So there.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS (NOT!)
Organization: GMD, Sankt Augustin, Germany
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 15:43:34 GMT

In <1992Oct3.060739.22116@u.washington.edu> tzs@stein.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith) writes:

>tomh@wes.on.ca (Tom Haapanen) writes:
>>Surprise!  Microsoft started development of Windows waaaay back in 1981,
>>and announced it in October (?) of 1983, before the Macintosh was announced
>>(but the Lisa was already on the market).

>Wasn't that version of Windows non-overlapped, non-graphical, with almost
>nothing except the name in common with the current Windows interface?  Is
>there anything in 3.1 that can be traced back to 1.0?

Yes, it was non-overlapped. No, it wasn't non-graphical. No, it 
had much more in common with the current Windows interface than just the
name. Almost anything in 1.0 still can be found in 3.1 (NT or DOS). Indeed, 
there is a lot of stuff in 3.1 which can't be traced back to 1.0. But
so what, the very same applies to MVS, OS/2, system 5, system 7
and to many other systems.

Wolfgang Strobl
#include <std.disclaimer.hpp>
From: karmira@natinst.com (Apostolos Karmirantzos)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows == OS (NOT!)
Date: 30 Sep 1992 18:02:16 -0500
Organization: National Instruments, Austin, TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: falcon.natinst.com

Mike Tierney <MBT3@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:

>  If Intel PC's had that kind of
>single architecture guiding it since the beginning, you'd find PC
 ^^^^^^ 
>software surpassing anything the Mac could offer in ease of use (instead
>of the simply better performance, which equivalent DOS machines have always
>had over Macs, Windows or not.)
  Excuse me but DOS machines are single architecture machines. The only 
difference between MAC and DOS is that if a programmer wrote a program that
violated the Apple specs, in the next release the program didn't run and
there was no problem, while in the DOS world, the programmer demmands 
combatibility to all the future DOS no matter what clever trick he decided
to use. That backward combatibility of DOS is a blessing for someones, but
I believe that has made DOS what is today (great in combatibility area
but very bad everywhere else)
	My $0.02
	Apostolos
-- 
Karmirantzos Apostolos		e-mail: karmiran@natinst.com
-- 
Karmirantzos Apostolos		e-mail: karmiran@natinst.com
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: ketil@linerle.ii.uib.no (Ketil M. Malde)
Subject: Re: Oberon
Reply-To: ketil@ii.uib.no
Organization: student of computer science at the University of Bergen, Norway
Date: 30 Sep 92 15:05:09

In article <1992Sep15.150157.26455@s1.gov> kab@s1.gov (Keith Benton) writes:

In article 17053@wuecl.wustl.edu, ppc1@cec2.wustl.edu (Peter Pui Tak Chiu) writes:
>hi everyone...
>
>someone said Oberon is going to be the main OS on Workstations and PC's
>so should we say bye to win NT and os/2?
>what do you think???
>
>pete
>

I think I'll stick with UNIX. :-)
Is there really any reason for me to change to, say NT or OS/2, or
Oberon for that matter?

With Unix (Linux) I get:
X11R5, Posix compliant os, Gnu and other free unix software, full
source code for *everything* (if I want it, and I do).
Also, a choice from several very poweful script/shell command
languages, the ability to combine simple building bricks to form
complex tools for almost any task, and, of course, it is an OS that I
know and feel familiar with.  Not to mention the networking stuff that
I don't really use (multiuser system, TCP/IP, X etc etc)

ALso Linux will probaly run DOS progs before NT does it (Dos emulator
{not really an emulator as the instructions are the same...} is in
Beta now, I believe)

And, of course, it is *free*  Maybe you have infinite amounts of cash
to burn, I certainly don't :-)

Now, what can OS/2 or NT offer?  Or Oberon?  All are supposedly the
"One True OS of the Future" (Yeah, right, I thought that was MV?)
OS/2 I suppose is tied down to the intel x86 architecture, and,
frankly, I don't see how that archaic design can keep up for much
longer.  Anybody actually run NT yet? 

-ketil

PS: If you think this is just a provocation to start a debate, you're
about 50% right.  But I *would* like to know what `the other' OS'es
can give me that I don't have already...

--
 = Ketil Malde                     In real life:  ketil@ii.uib.no =
 = Nuke the whales!                    Honk if you love unicorns! =
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: edwardsk@cuug.ab.ca (Kenneth Edwards 268-6500)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS (NOT!)
Organization: Calgary UNIX Users' Group
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 18:28:23 GMT


>In article <jbone.717778010@splat> jbone@splat.dell.com (Jeff Bone) writes:

>Yes, yes.  Byt *what* a marketing department they must have!  And the
>bean counters seems to swallow anything they [MS] produce, and
>actually believe an (unbelievable) kludge like Win is *great*
>

You gotta *LOVE* a marketing department that can sell $2,000,000 worth
of BETA test kits.  Not only do they get the software tested, they make
money doing it.


Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: ch@sg1502.chemie.uni-marburg.de (Christoph H. Hochstaetter)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS (NOT!)
Organization: Philipps-University Marburg
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 19:03:30 GMT

In article <1ao373INN86c@network.ucsd.edu>, mbk@lyapunov.ucsd.edu (Matt Kennel)
writes:
|> 
|> NT, now, one might think is innovative, but again, what does it do
|> that UNIX, a 70s technology OS, doesn't?
|> 
I fully agree, the UNIX 70s technology with all its enhancements is
still alive in /NT. In fact it very similar from the principles. But
you should ask also another question:

What does UNIX do, that OS/2 2.0 doesn't? And that's a lot

Christoph
-- 
Internet: ch@sg1502.chemie.uni-marburg.de
BITNET: HAMPE2@DMRHRZ11
Fido: 2:243/660
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: moncrg@aix02.ecs.rpi.edu (Gregory Donald Moncreaff)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS (NOT!)
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 16:12:41 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.182823.4978@cuug.ab.ca> edwardsk@cuug.ab.ca (Kenneth Edwards 268-6500) writes:
>
>
>You gotta *LOVE* a marketing department that can sell $2,000,000 worth
>of BETA test kits.  Not only do they get the software tested, they make
>money doing it.
>
>
wait a minute, you lost me...

which company are we talking about now, microsoft or ibm?

Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.next.misc
From: ntaib@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Iskandar Taib)
Subject: Re: Considering getting an SGI indigo
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 19:05:07 GMT

In article <1992Oct04.085731.4924@microsoft.com> jhenshaw@microsoft.com (Jeff Henshaw) writes:

>This is what the 1993 NeXT product catalog has to say on
>the subject:
>
>	"REGULATIONS
>
>	 - UL478, CSA 220, and IEC950
>	   (EN60950) product safety
>	   requirements
>
>	 - FCC Class A, VCCI Class 1, CISPR-22
>	   Class A (EN550022) EMI
>	   requirements"
>      
>What does all of this mean?  I'm not exactly sure, but it
>applies to the NeXT Cube, NeXTstation, NeXTstation color,
>and NeXTstation turbo models (ie - all of them).  I hope
>this provides more information...

Means you can't use it at home. 

Unfortunately.

Class A is for office and industrial use only.

Now you _could_ build a Faraday cage  9-)


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Iskandar Taib                          | The only thing worse than Peach ala
Internet: NTAIB@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU |    Frog is Frog ala Peach
Bitnet:   NTAIB@IUBACS                 !
From: thg@cam-orl.co.uk (Tim Glauert)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Oberon
Date: 1 Oct 92 12:13:56 GMT
Organization: Olivetti Research Ltd, Cambridge, England.

In article <KETIL.92Sep30150509@linerle.ii.uib.no>, ketil@linerle.ii.uib.no (Ketil M. Malde) writes:
|> Is there really any reason for me to change to, say NT or OS/2, or
|> Oberon for that matter?
|> 
|> ALso Linux will probaly run DOS progs before NT does it

Out of interest, NT already does it.

|> Now, what can OS/2 or NT offer? 

Applications.

|> Anybody actually run NT yet? 

Yes. I am one of the 20,000 people who have the Preliminary Software
Development Kit. The Beta will be out in a month or so and will probably have
even wider coverage.

Anybody actually *use* Linux yet? :-)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Skelly)
Subject: Re: Windows UI guidelines?
Date: 02 Oct 92 00:07:10 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corp.

In article <1992Sep30.193329.28932@athena.cs.uga.edu> ruben@pollux wrote:
> I think finally Microsoft published guidelines for the
> user interface.  If you check the programmers FAQ the
> name of the publication is listed there.

The Windows Interface: An Application Design Guide
pub: Microsoft Press...



> 
> I was reading a magazine the other day and came through
> an article about the lack of user interface guidelines
> in the world of GUI's.  There are already guidelines
> available for some the GUI's.  But right now MS is
> working on the next Windows generation called Cairo
> and this new system will sport a new interface.  Well
> this article got the person who wrote it promising to
> hear ideas on interfaces and submit them to MS and 
> other big players like Borland, Lotus, and so.  I
> want to hear about new and better ideas on interfaces
> in general.  Lets say we want to make the real users
> deciding what the future looks like and no people
> no connected to the real world deciding that.


Hearing ideas from end users is a good things, if you take
them as suggestions.  However, if you do this, you will tend
to get a lot of conflicting suggestions.  Some folk may want
a command line, some may not.  Some may want drag\drop, some
may not.  You can say that you can make that a user settable
option, but then all of the app writers have to support all of
the options and you end up with a big mess.

Also, users may say things like "I like drag\drop".  They won't,
however, give you the context in which they like drag\drop.  Putting
drag\drop into everything would possibly be worse that not having
drag drop.  So how do you determine the context in which drag\drop
is useful?

You can't just have end users design the interface, and you can't
just have developers design the interface.  You got to have a little
input from both.


petesk@microsoft.com
My Opinions...
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: mcdonald@aries.scs.uiuc.edu (J. D. McDonald)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS
Organization: UIUC SCS
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 14:26:55 GMT

In article <1992Sep27.224720.8645@mercury.unt.edu> jackson@ponder.csci.unt.edu (Bruce Jackson) writes:


>There is nothing inherently wrong with just supplying a file system and
>program loader and making the applications do more of the traditional
>operating system functions.  This works quite well for machines that
>are purchased mainly to run certain applications.

And there is something inherently very good about this ... it does not
constrain the programmer in the way that those dastardly "real" OSs
do.  So, for example, one can do real-time work with MsDOS with no problem, 
something that is essentially impossible with OS/2 or garden Unix variants
(and those Unix variants that "allow" it usually demand that the programmer
do it in a certain restricted way.) Also, for example, MS-DOS allows
itself to be extended in ways unimagined by the original programmers
(for example, to use native 386 mode). 

If restrictive OSs become really entrenched in the PC world you will see
a great stifling of innovation.

Doug McDonald