HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara)
Subject: Re: MS ready to release 32-bit Word & Excel?!?! Read on...
Date: 07 Oct 92 18:58:21 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <92280.103413ASI509@DJUKFA11.BITNET> ASI509@DJUKFA11.BITNET writes:
>In article <1992Oct5.201950.27362@u.washington.edu>, tzs@stein.u.washington.edu
>(Tim Smith) says:
>>
>>philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
>>>      You're going to upgrade it anyway.  In two years your hardware
>>>will be approaching obsolescence and your software will already be
>>>there.
>>
>>[reply deleted]
>I would take the above as a serious warning from an MS insider that exactly
>these things could happen.

     Take the above as it was intended - as my personal observations of
the PC industry (hardware and software) as a whole.  It isn't company
policy, and in fact doesn't even refer to Microsoft specifically.

					-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.os2.advocacy
From: strobl@gmd.de (Wolfgang Strobl)
Subject: Re: OS/2 vs. NT
Keywords: OS/2, NT, Windows
Organization: GMD, Sankt Augustin, Germany
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 13:06:08 GMT

In <1b89omINN81c@gap.caltech.edu> scratchy.caltech.edu!kasturi (Tejaswi Kasturi) writes:

>I challenge the Windows NT advocates out there to tell me why I should  
>switch from OS/2 2.0 to Windows NT.

I'm not a Windows NT advocate, I'm just somebody who develops on and
for NT in his spare time. But I'll give you my piece of advice, nevertheless.

After reading the description of your environment and what you
do with it, my conclusion is that there is no reason why you should
switch from OS/2 2.0 to Windows NT, at this time.

Wolfgang Strobl
#include <std.disclaimer.hpp>
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Multiuser
Date: 8 Oct 92 18:32:46 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <1992Oct8.15852.11153@ms.uky.edu> sam@ms.uky.edu (Mike Mills) writes:
>
>Ok, Phil.  Have you ever administered Unix?  It is EXTREMELY useful to have
>multiple users logged into separate xterms.  I can be logged into my account
>in one (actually, several) windows, root in another, and operator in another.
>All doing their little tasks, with their appropriate privileges.

Or without administering.  I do this semi-regularly.  When I'm at an
x-term at NJIT, here's my setup:  X-terminal does a telnet to the cis
department (ROM telnet package in the X-terminal).  From there, I log
in and run the window manager (Motif).  The telnet window gets
minimized and is my console.  I then open up xterm windows to the cis
department computer (second session) for my work, and I open a window
to hertz, where I have my mail.  I then launch xbiff to notify if mail
arrives on hertz while I'm working elsewhere.  I also launch a clock
program to let me know when I've missed a class with all this
multitasking. 

So I've one terminal, two logins, and about five programs running.
There are always three active programs (not counting the window
manager, which is a user-mode app that's always running) - the xbiff,
the clock, and a terminal.


-- 
David Charlap         |"there aren't 50,000 things for which it's worth writing
dic5340@hertz.njit.edu| software; and the computer industry doesn't have enough
----------------------+ programmers to create that much good software.
Therefore, most of it must be worthless" -- Boris Beizer "The Frozen Keyboard"
From: hatton@socrates.ucsf.edu (Tom Hatton)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: C-quality (Re: Tidbits about NT and OS/2 from the trade rags.
Date: 15 Oct 92 01:14:16 GMT
Organization: UCSF Computer Graphics Lab

RONY@awiwuw11.wu-wien.ac.at (FLATSCHER Rony) writes:
>Brian:
>Please stop kidding the people about the quality of compilers or telling
>them the IBM one is so "poor". See, like you, I am around quite some time
>and used MS-C (from 4 on), Aztec, Watcom, Borland.

>There was no compiler so far, which did not have (serious) bugs!
>I know you as every developer know that better than anyone not being a
>C-programmer.

>The service of IBM on presenting bug fixes to their customer on such a large
>scale and in such short reaction-times as IBM does is without precedence on
>the market ! Have you ever been helped out as an average developer by anyone
>else with your troubles as IBM does ?

[...deletions...]

>No C-compiler I know of is without bugs. The pace at which bugs are solved by
>the producers is different. IBM certainly holds the world-record in solving
>their bugs ! It is so far unmatched by anyone else. You as a developer profit
>directly !

One question you might put to Brian - did he use Microsoft C 6.0? If so,
did he rant and complain about wasted time from several bugs to MS? And
even more to the point - did anyone from MS ever offer to deal with his
bug reports? But then, that would require more objectivity than he 
has yet shown, so I doubt it.

Tom
From: tlilley@jarthur.claremont.edu (Thomas (Ted) Lilley)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM, Microsoft, and OS/2 -- a history.
Date: 9 Oct 92 23:02:36 GMT
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711

In article <1992Oct9.004641.12214@fcom.cc.utah.edu> brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
>
>As to the developer kit costing $2,600... you PAID that much?
>Sheesh.. I certainly wouldn't have.

MS made it very clear that OS/2 was the future...and also that $2600 was
dirt-cheap for their SDK.  If you bought their line, you bought the product.
Then, you got shafted.

I hope for your sake that MS is going to play NT better.  I think they'll
have to, because this time around there's competition to think about.

Ted
From: cnadler@vnet.ibm.com (Cliff Nadler)
Subject: Re: Password protected folders (Was: Re: Lost a possible NT person)
Date: Thu, 08 Oct 92 00:05:41 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.14 by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: cnadler@vnet.ibm.com (Cliff Nadler)
Organization: IBM T. J. Watson Research

In  <1992Oct6.192153.3210@solaris.rz.tu-clausthal.de>  ch@sg1502.chemie.uni-marburg.de (Christoph H. Hochstaetter) writes:
>In article <1992Oct02.171717.23461@watson.ibm.com>, cnadler@vnet.ibm.com (Cliff
>Nadler) writes:
>|> FYI, IBM has a package available for purchase called the RESTRICTED SHELL.
>|> What this package does is create a folder class that enables password access
>|> and a few other features. Call your local IBM rep (not the OS/2 numbers) to
>|> get more info.
>|> 
>What a poor attempt to reach some sort of security. All you have to do is
>boot OS/2 from diskette. This RESTRICTED SHELL is exactly as useful as some
>tricky batch programming in AUTOEXEC.BAT on DOS-Systems

You seem to miss the point. It is a SHELL, not a security feature of the disk.
It is there mostly to keep a common environment for all users, yet only let
users be able to use what they need. Rather useful in a large LAN environment
when you have your sysadmins doing some trouble-shooting.

Cliff Nadler (cnadler@vnet.ibm.com)
IBM Federal Systems Company - TEAM OS/2

Disclaimer: This post represents the views of the poster, not IBM Corporation.
From: philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara)
Subject: Re: Interesting tidbit from September 7, 1992 PC Week
Date: 07 Oct 92 18:46:21 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1992Oct6.083838.22969@netcom.com> xtifr@netcom.com (Chris Waters) writes:
>In <1992Oct05.185642.23419@microsoft.com> philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
>
>>     Every piece of software being run anywhere is being "tested"
>>by its users.  Now, here's the distinction:  The primary purpose
>>(note - _primary_) of a beta is testing.  The primary purpose of
>>the SDK is applications development.  Any questions?
>
>Yes.  Who says that the primary purpose of a beta is testing?  Maybe for
>some betas, but this is by no means an industry-wide standard.

     "Beta" comes from "Beta-test".  I think that the term is used
more or less the same way industry-wide.


>  I know
>lots of people that get betas because they need features that are not
>available in released versions of programs.

     The intent of the user of the beta software is irrelevant to
the primary purpose of the beta.


>  I know of many betas that
>have been released to people simply so that people could use new
>features (this assumes that these people are willing to put up with the
>bugs in a beta system for the sake of those new features).

      Can you provide some examples of betas wherein the primary
purpose of the release was putting new features in the hands of the
users while not providing any testing?

				-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.os2.advocacy
From: jokim@jarthur.claremont.edu (John H. Kim)
Subject: Re: 32-bit OS/2 Apps List
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 20:41:22 GMT

brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:

>Remember that the list contained not existing apps, but rather
>_existing_ and _planned_ apps.
>If you consider that list is likely a best case scenario for the OS/2 2.0
>apps in the next 2 years, then no I don't think they're even close to
>adequate.

Before everybody goes off basing conclusions on this list, when is
this list dated?  The last such list I remember was just about a year
old, released before OS/2 2.0 GA (or LA for that matter), and had a
couple hundred vendors on it.  I have a hard time believing the number
has only doubled or so since the release of OS/2 2.0 GA, and the opening
of the DAP to anyone in the world.
-- 
John H. Kim                 | (This space to be filled when I
jokim@jarthur.claremont.edu | think of something very clever 
uunet!jarthur!jokim         | to use as a disclaimer)
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: Unprofessional Posts from Brian S.
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Distribution: world 
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 16:30:08 GMT

In <1992Oct13.051516.5047@fcom.cc.utah.edu> brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:

>In article <px6-Xy#@engin.umich.edu> spexet@math.lsa.umich.edu (D. Robert Spexet II) writes:
>>In article <1992Oct12.230138.274@fcom.cc.utah.edu> brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
>>>I went back and checked the last 1,000 posts to c.o.o.a, your assertions
>>>in this tirade are largely unfounded.  Via e-mail, I'm sending you
>>>a copy of all my posts in this last 1,000 messages.
>>
>>No offense to anybody, but if *anybody* tried to pull this kind of stunt on
>>me, I would send an immediate complaint to the system and network admini-
>>strators that are responsible for the network connections of
>>jaguar.cs.utah.edu.

>I only posted 56 of the 1,000 messages... i.e. I sent him the text
>of 56 messages... it's not a small file... but it's not that bad either..
>What's your problem with it?

Well, I can't speak for anyone else, but I can tell you MY problem
with it.  It's generally called 'mail bombing' when people do this
sort of thing, Mr. Sturgill.  It is a gross waste of bandwidth.  It
could be excessivly expensive for the person at the other end, if they
happen to have a system that is paying by the amount of traffic.  Not
to mention that if someone is reading this group they have probably
already seen everything you just wasted time and money to send.

It is, in my opinion, something only the most fatuous, opinionated,
and self-important ass would do.  Consider alternatives, next time.
Did it, perhaps, occur to you to simply point out the actual numbers
(as in you only wrote 56 of the last 1000 posts over X days in this
group)?  If you wanted to be REALLY snide, you might have gone so far
as to send a 56-line file containing the date and subject of each of
your posts for the past 1,000 posts.  However, you did neither of
those things.  You instead sent a message containing the full text of
56 posts THAT THE RECIPIENT HAD ALREADY SEEN IN PUBLIC GROUPS.  Even
if we assume that each of those posts is only one screenful (and we
know a number of them are much longer), that is over 100k sent to
someone as a mail message.

Frankly, Mr. Sturgill, that is the sort of thing I wouldn't expect
from someone who is supposed to be a professional.


-- 
"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.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: hochstae@allfiwib1.wiwi.uni-marburg.de (Christoph H. Hochstaetter)
Subject: Re: MS ready to release 32-bit Word & Excel?!?! Read on...
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.14 by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: hochstae@allfiwib1.wiwi.uni-marburg.de (Christoph H. Hochstaetter)
Organization: Techn. Univ. Clausthal
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 23:22:21 GMT

In  <1992Oct5.214507.22035@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE>  rommel@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE (Kai-Uwe Rommel) writes:
> FYI, I have just unofficially been informed, that Microsoft already has
> C/C++ 7.00 for OS/2 2.0 ready but just doesn't want to sell it.
>
> Please don't ask me where I got this news from. Feel free to consider
> this as complete rumour if that makes you feel better, but the source I
> got it from makes me rather sure that this is correct.
>
> Kai Uwe Rommel
>

This wouldn't surprise me. Microsoft sold an OS/2 2.0 pre-SDK with a
32-bit version of C 6.0 for OS/2 2.0. So not too much work to implement
C/C++ 7.0 for OS/2 2.0

But the question should be, if products for OS/2 2.0 from MS ever will
be sold, not what they have in their safes.

Christoph
--
Realname: Christoph H. Hochstaetter
Internet: hochstae@allfiwib1.wiwi.uni-marburg.de
Bitnet  : HAMPE2 AT DMRHRZ11
Fido    : 2:243/660
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: xtifr@netcom.com (Chris Waters)
Subject: Re: Unprofessional Posts from Brian S.
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 10:41:58 GMT

In <5412@krafla.rhi.hi.is> karlth@rhi.hi.is (Karl Thoroddsen) writes:

>In <1992Oct12.062257.18201@netcom.com> xtifr@netcom.com (Chris Waters) writes:

>Mr. Waters, this is an .advocacy group.  If the posters refrain from mud-
>slinging and name calling and discuss matters related to OS/2(Yes I consider
>NT to be very much related to OS/2) then I for one see no reason to object to 
>them.

Well, I'm not sure just who or what decided that "advocacy" == flames. 
That certainly doesn't match any dictionary definition.  But that seems
to be the net.definition of "advocacy" these days.  I have nothing
against informed and enthusiastic (even overly enthusiastic) discussion.
And I have no problem when clueless dweebs get involved in flamewars--I
can ignore the clueless dweebs.  But I had developed higher expectations
of Mr. Sturgill.  And I'm extremely disappointed at the tone and manner
of his recent posts.

And, more to the point, mud-slinging and name-calling is *exactly* what
I see going on.  I'm not going to blame Brian for the existence of the
m.s.&n.c., as I don't know (or care) who started it, but he's certainly
been participating.

-- 
Chris Waters    | the insane don't | NOBODY for President!
xtifr@netcom.COM| need disclaimers | Because Nobody's perfect!!
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: hochstae@allfiwib1.wiwi.uni-marburg.de (Christoph H. Hochstaetter)
Subject: Re: Bundling Networks, OS/2 v. NT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.14 by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: hochstae@allfiwib1.wiwi.uni-marburg.de (Christoph H. Hochstaetter)
Organization: Techn. Univ. Clausthal
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 19:20:46 GMT

In  <1992Oct06.213627.3688@microsoft.com>  petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Skelly) writes:

> I'm a bit curious about why people don't want networks bundled.  This is
> regardless as to whether the network is more integrated or not.
>

I agree, also on private installations, it will be desirable to connect
2 or 3 computers together. Also consider, what advantage you have, when
you connect to Internet via a slip line instead of a terminal emulation.

I think networking will be available as a standard feature soon

Christoph
--
Internet: hochstae@allfiwib1.wiwi.uni-marburg.de
Bitnet  : HAMPE2 AT DMRHRZ11
Fido    : 2:243/660
From: eguerrino@email.bony.com
Subject: Re: Shutdown failure (?)
Organization: ***
Date: 6 Oct 92 12:11:30 EDT

In article <ccc.2.718126491@williams.edu>, ccc@williams.edu (CCC) writes:
> 	I have recently started having a strange bug: when I select 
> Shutdown, OS/2 asks if I really want to close the WPS (and any windows still 
> open), as usual. Th drive light comes on for a short bit, then goes dark. If 
> I try to shutdown again, there's no drive activity. This means I power down 
> at the end of the day without a "real" shutdown; every morning I have to 
> deal with CHKDSK searching my disk for errors. Why?
I have encountered this bug on a few occasions, as have many others.
If the system refuses to shutdown after I have done shutdown twice,
I wait for all disk i/o to stop and then do a ctrl-alt-del. The
C-A-D does most, if not all, of what shutdown would have done anyway.
Once the warm-boot clears the screen, i power-off the system.
At least you don't have to wait for chkdsk to complete the next time
you start up. Also, since you are doing a somewhat normal shutdown, 
whatever maybe causing the shutdown to be ignored might get cleared
up. I don't usually see this problem two days in a row if I warm-boot.
I also have restartobjects=no in my config.sys to ensure that the 
system does not autostart any programs that could be causing the problem.
eric
eguerrino@email.bony.com
From: mfraioli@grebyn.com (Marc Fraioli)
Subject: Re: John Dvorak comment on the future...
Organization: Grebyn Timesharing
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 15:48:32 GMT

In article <1992Oct12.054210.29612@utdallas.edu> goyal@utdallas.edu (Mohit K. Goyal) writes:
>Here is a paragraph written by OS/2 lover(for the moment) John Dvorak:
>
>"As it now stands, OS/2 faces an uphill battle.  The failure of...Windows,
>Unix, and the long-forgotten CP/M-86...shows the staying power of plain-
>vanilla MS-DOS.  Fans cite the millions of installed PCs as a Rock of
>Dibraltar forever maintaining the viability of MS-DOS.  Of course, 
>something similar was said about the Model-T."
>
>I'll leave it up to those of you who make a living out of reading all
>the computer rags to figure out where and when he said this...
>
>

Was it in PC Week? Or PC/Computing? Or PC-Magazine? Or Computer Shopper?
Or DEC Professional? Hmm, what other pulpits does this guy have? ;-)
-- 
Marc Fraioli
mfraioli@grebyn.com	        	(So I'm a minimalist...)
From: loflin (Don Loflin)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT Multiuser? (WAS: MS's misconduct!)
Summary: NT is multiuser one-at-a-time
Date: 13 Oct 92 16:40:40 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin

In article <1992Oct6.081922.27668@netcom.com> msmith@netcom.com (Martin P. Smith) writes:
>
>What he is quite clearly and correctly saying is that NT AND OS/2 2.0 are not
>CONCURRENT multi user systems. NT allows you to set up profiles so that more
>than one person can use ( IF THEY WAIT THEIR TURN LIKE A GOOD LITTLE BOY /GIRL )
>this workstation with their files being protected
>from the other users. ( Hardly multi-user in the traditional sense )
>
>MArtin smith
>msmith@netcom.com

I like to phrase this as "NT is multiuser, one-at-a-time" :-)

-------
Don Loflin
loflin@emx.cc.utexas.edu
(512) 471-3241 x413
Just my opinions...
From: philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara)
Subject: Re: MS ready to release 32-bit Word & Excel?!?! Read on...
Date: 13 Oct 92 18:44:39 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

     I'm not sure why I'm bothering to reply to this, but here goes...

In article <1992Oct13.012811.17402@muddcs.claremont.edu> tlilley@jarthur.claremont.edu (Thomas (Ted) Lilley) writes:
>In article <1992Oct12.205821.27887@microsoft.com> philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
>
>>>>     OS/2 is indeed selling - but neither of us has any clue how well.
>>>>We have some numbers from IBM, and we have some conflicting numbers
>>>>from Microsoft.  Who's to say which is closer to the truth?
>>>
>>>Just curious, how can Microsoft have any numbers regarding the sales of OS/2
>>>2.0?
>>>
>>
>>     Microsoft gets royalties on every copy of OS/2 2.0 sold.  Either
>>IBM is currently misrepresenting the number of copies sold, or they
>>are cheating Microsoft out of royalties due.  Or the royalties just
>>haven't caught up to the ship numbers yet.  Or some combination of
>>the three.
>
>Wow, it's lucky you put in that third option.  Of course there's going
>to be lag time between sales and royalty payments - do you think IBM
>makes out a check to  MS every time a sale comes in?  Can you say you
>know the terms of delivery of royalties in the agreement between MS and
>IBM?

     No, I don't.  Do you?


>  Has MS said anything other than "Well, we've only gotten this many
>copies worth  of royalties," without specifying whether they're supposed to
>have more at the present time?

     Not that I'm aware of.


>  I don't see MS going out and suing  IBM
>for misrepresentation and non-payment of  royalties, in regard to IBM's
>*publicly announced* figures.  If that isn't court-case fodder, I don't
>know what is.

    If you look back over history, you'll see that Microsoft has a
fairly long history of not suing people for trivial reasons.


>Your other accusations are just plain low - and if they were true, I'm sure
>MS would be taking action against being cheated out of their money.  Instead,
>they're just spreading BS, like you.

     Ah, thanks.  I was wondering what I was doing.

					-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.os2.advocacy
From: genie@netcom.com (Gene Choi)
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.x will loose its battle against NT if .....
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 06:05:01 GMT

In article <1992Oct9.003603.1793@news.Hawaii.Edu> lkan@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Linus Kan) writes:
>
>o [old stuff deleted]
>
>I'm sure Microsoft is reading the OS/2 newsgroups and get user
>evaluations and problems plus tips and ideas so that they could
>improve their NT code.  And since NT and OS/2 are similar in code,
>Microsoft is learning its mistakes from the release of OS/2 2.0
	^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>--us OS/2 users did all the test Microsoft needed for the NT kernel.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This comment makes no sense whatsoever.  How in the world are the
NT and OS/2 codes similar?  I doubt this very very much.

Microsoft is learning about all the bugs in the NT kernel from
OS/2 users????  HOW???  I doubt IBM is releasing any info to
Microsoft!  Does Microsoft magically obtain info from IBM central
headquarters?

The bugs in OS/2 2.0 are very specific problems.  Your rambling
about bugs in OS/2 and Windows NT crossing platforms is
totally incredulous and unfounded.

> [rambling info about price of Windows NT deleted]
>

Gene
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy