HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Mike_Quigley@mindlink.bc.ca (Mike Quigley)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: 3.1 & TrueType problem
Date: 11 Apr 92 05:19:30 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

> Brian J Moore writes:
> 
> Msg-ID: <moore.702931266@pv34c1.vincent.iastate.edu>
> Posted: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 18:41:0
> 
> Org.  : Iowa State University, Ames IA
> 
> In <1992Apr8.193712.2652@vax1.umkc.edu> ebath@vax1.umkc.edu writes:
> 
> 
> >I am sorry if this question has already been brought up, but I have been
> >away playing with 3.1 for a couple of days now (instead of keeping up with
> >my NEWS).  When I print a TT font under 3.1 to my Epson 7000 laser printer
> >(with "real" driver finally) the fonts don't come out at the right size.
> >Perhaps I am just a bit too anal retentive, but when a font is labeled 72
> >point I feel that it should be 1 inch tall.  Considering some of the feats
> 
> When a font is 72 points, that means there is one inch from the top of the
> tallest letter in the font to the bottom of the lowest 'descender' letter,
> (eg
> a small y, g, j).  There usually won't be any letters that are as tall as the
> total point size.
> 
> Not sure if that's what you're talking about or not, but a 72 point font
> usually doesn't have any 1 inch letters in it.
> 
> --
>    ______________________________________________________________________ __
>   /                                  / /
>  /  Brian J. Moore                  /                  moore@iastate.edu /
> /__________________________________/____________________________________/


If you want to get capital letters which are one inch high, you should divide
the point size you want (72) by .7. This will give you approximately 103 point,
which should be just about right (at least it is with the typesetting equipment
I use every day).
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you're going to reply in E-mail, please don't quote my whole message back to me -- it costs me money!!! (so does this extra line)
Mike Quigley, Vancouver, B.C., Canada             Mike_Quigley@mindlink.bc.ca



Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: blj@kepler.unh.edu (Brian L Johnson)
Subject: need help installing soundblaster driver in win31
Followup-To: comp.windows.ms
Keywords: soundblaster win31
Organization: University of New Hampshire  -  Durham, NH
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 17:47:43 GMT

I have a soundblaster v2.0 (from test-sbc) and have had no luck installing
a driver for windows 3.1.  I chose the driver for 1.5 since they didn't
list one for 2.0 (I notice that they call the driver sndblst2.drv, however).
When windows restarts I get a error message complaining that there is a 
problem with the hardware/configuration for the soundblaster.

The card works with other programs, and goes through test-sbc with no problems.
It is set up with default settings (220,7,1).

I get this problem after doing a full install of windows (not just the upgrade
of existing win 3.0).  Upgrading my 3.0 resulted in either being able to 
install the driver for soundblaster and using it with windows or being able
to use it with my windows applications, but NOT both (which caused windows
to hang when it wanted to use sound AFTER the application used the card, or
the application to have no sound after windows used the card).  Doing the
upgrade, however, I was able to restart without the error message after
installing the v1.5 driver.

My assumption is that I am doing something wrong.  Has anyone encountered this
and solved it.  

Thanks in advance
Brian Johnson
blj@mithrandir.cs.unh.edu
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms,comp.os.os2.misc
From: jeffpar@microsoft.com (Jeff PARSONS)
Subject: Re: Tastes gross/more fattening
Date: 14 Apr 92 04:43:23 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corp.
Keywords: (hex encoded ASCII) 3A 2D 29

In article <1992Apr8.224400.10885@twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com> stoen@katana.eng.hou.compaq.com (Rick Stoen) writes:
>I think you are missing the point. In Windows when you get a UAE or
>whatever they are calling it in 3.1, the only safe thing to do is shut
>everything down and reboot your machine. Under OS/2 you just close the
>application, or exit Win/OS2 and start it up again. There is a BIG
>difference between restarting an application and rebooting your machine.

I think people are painting the robustness issue far too black and white.
In Windows 3.1, you'll hit far fewer faults, and a much higher percentage
of them will be non-fatal (as compared to Windows 3.0).  The percentages
are better with OS/2, but you pay a price for that (in terms of size and
speed of the operating system).  Don't delude yourself though, OS/2 is not
bullet-proof.  There are things like shared memory and other shared objects
running around in the system which, if misused or abused, can subtly or
non-subtly hose your system.

Jeff Parsons
Not a Microsoft spokesperson
From: leadfoot@bigbootay.sw.stratus.com (Mark Curtis)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Ami Pro 2.0 w/win3.1
Keywords: win31 amipro
Date: 9 Apr 92 22:38:17 GMT

I just got off the phone with Lotus.  They claim that NOONE has
reported the vanishing cursor problem yet.  They say they tested
2.0 with beta-win3.1 and found no problems.  They don't beleive
there is a problem.  I have seen other people in the past two
days post about it.  Call Lotus if you are having this problem
too.

800-223-1662

Mark
From: tanida@forseti.css.gov (Tom Tanida)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Why I'm sticking with Windows
Date: 17 Apr 92 17:48:20 GMT
Reply-To: tanida@esosun.css.gov (Tom Tanida)
In-reply-to: drake@drake.almaden.ibm.com (Sam Drake)

In article <1651@rufus.UUCP>, drake@drake (Sam Drake) writes:
>In article <950@esosun.UUCP> tanida@esosun.css.gov (Tom Tanida) writes:
>>I'm of the personal belief that systems software companies (like MS,
>>IBM, and Sun) ought to give away their OS's (at most charging just
>>for media+docs+shipping+tiny profit- say $5).  
>
>Before I was around, companies like IBM did exactly that...all software
>was free (or, more accurately, bundled into the price of the hardware).
>
>There was NO such thing as a software industry.  Why bother trying to
>SELL software, when the hardware companies just gave it away?
>
>The government decided this was a Bad Thing, and IBM signed the famous
>"consent decree", and started charging for software.
>
>And the software industry was born.
>
>So, sorry, I don't think we'll be going back to the olden days.

Too bad, too, given how big my credit card bills are these days. :-)

I don't believe software should be given away at all (especially
since I'm a Software Engineer and I'd probably be working for peanuts
if it was).  What I meant in my original post was that the *operating systems*
should be (almost) given away.  In fact, given you can get MS-DOS for
$39 in some places, and often times bundled with your computer,
it just about is given away now.  Windows 3.1 upgrades (and I don't want
to restart the debate about whether or not it's an OS) are almost
there too.

My opinion is based on the idea that software *shouldn't* be given away-
that's how OS companies like Microsoft and IBM recoup their
development costs.  Getting back to the original point- if MS is going
to charge me $500 for NT (not to mention the costs for site licenses),
I'll be rather un-inclined to use it.  No users => no app purchases =>
no profits on the 32 bit versions (and upgrades :-) ) of Microsoft
Excel/Word/C++/Project/Powerpoint/other MS apps for NT.

-Tom
tanida@esosun.css.gov
From: ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis)
Subject: Re: PC is cheaper than MAC (Yeah, right.)
Organization: Electronic Frontier Foundation Tech Central
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 1992 06:05:52 GMT

 Stefan> == Stefan Olson <stefan@olson.acme.gen.nz> 
 mathew> mathew@mantis.co.uk (From A to B) writes:

 mathew> Easier to modify?  I *still* can't find a PC program to compare
 mathew> with ResEdit.

 Stefan> Borland's new Resource Workshop is *great*, have you seen it, I
 Stefan> know a bit about ResEdit, and they sound similar...

Yeah, but what can you modify with it?  An editor that doesn't work with
everything seems pretty useless to me.  Since everything on the Mac uses
resources (even if Microsoft usually uses bizarre mutant forms of the
usual stuff), you can change just about anything without learning to
reprogram binaries with a debugger merely by using ResEdit.

Simple example: adding a slash-0 to a font like Monaco was trivial,
creating M0nac0 which worked in *anything*, Word, PageMaker, TeachText,
et. al... even the Finder.  Try that with Borland's Resource Editor on
the PC (well, ok, assume I mean the DOS COMMAND.COM interface instead of
the Finder then ;-).
--
Christopher Davis <ckd@eff.org> |    ECONOMIC OBSERVATIONS DEPARTMENT
System Manager & Postmaster     |  "There's always something going out of
Electronic Frontier Foundation  |      business in Central Square."
+1 617 864 0665  NIC: [CKD1]    |   -Rita Marie Rouvalis <rita@eff.org>
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Thursday, 9 Apr 1992 20:15:42 EDT
From: Jeffrey S. Payne <JSP105@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: WinQVTnet for Token Ring??

Use the clarkson IBMtoken.com packet driver.  Can someone help me and tell him
where to download it from?

Jeffrey S. Payne        JSP105@PSUVM(.psu.edu)
Penn State Ogontz Campus / Woodland Computer Center

"Any significantly advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"
    -A.C. Clarke,Murphy,Jean-Luc Picard, and other significant intellects
From: terryh@cae.wisc.edu (Terry Henning)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Win 3.1 drivers for Stealth, yet?
Date: 13 Apr 92 22:51:50 GMT
Article-I.D.: doug.1992Apr13.175150.3050
Organization: College of Engineering, Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison
Originator: terryh@sun-18.cae.wisc.edu

Hi,

Does anyone know if Diamond has released the new drivers for Win 3.1 yet,
and if so, has anyone uploaded them to an FTP site yet?

Thanks,
Terry

terryh@cae.wisc.edu
From: ST802200@BROWNVM.BROWN.EDU (Rob Ryan)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: SoundBlaster and DSP v1.05
Date: 9 Apr 92 17:59:15 GMT
Organization: Brown University

Given all of the responses saying that my SoundBlaster should work, I
checked the settings.  I noticed that interrupt 2 was set in the Control
Panel, and when I tried to set it to interrupt 7 (which is what the board
is set at) it said that this didn't match the hardware settings.  So, I quit
from Windows, took a look at my SYSTEM.INI and noticed that it was trying
to use interrupt 9 (which doesn't make sense since 9 isn't an option).
Anyway, I manually changed the setting to 7 in my SYSTEM.INI and it now
works.

Thanks for all of the help.

-- Rob
From: lisbon@vpnet.chi.il.us (Gerry Swetsky)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Gates - Comdex - Windows 3.1
Date: 7 Apr 92 05:34:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: vpnet.1992Apr07.053416.7257
Organization: Vpnet Public Access

The multi-media presentation at Comdex today announcing the release of
Windows 3.1 was FABULOUS!  Bill Gates had was an actor in the
presentation.  All the people in it seemed on the verge of busting out
laughing, they were having so much fun.  Bill was visibly elated.

If Windows is one tenth as good as the presentation made it out to be,
Microsoft has a real winner on its hands.  Everyone at the show was
raving about it.  I didn't hear one bad word anywhere (well, perhaps at
the Quarterdeck and IBM booths). 

On the other hand, IBM wasn't doing nearly as well with OS2 2.0.  No
hoopla, no splash, no interest.

What's the other package to watch?  I stood watching a demo of Deskview
X and I was suitably impressed.  This is a package to watch.  Just as
an example, you bring up a spreadsheet showing 8 columns and 15 rows.
You shrink the window and you STILL have 8 columns by 15 rows!!  You
shrink it to the size of a postage stamp and you still have 8 columns
by 15 rows.

Well, this isn't the appropriate newsgroup for Deskview, but it is a
package to watch.

--
============================================================================
| Help stamp out stupid .signature files!           Gerry Swetsky  WB9EBO  |
|                 vpnet - Public access Unix and Usenet                    |
| Home (708)833-8122       vpnet (708)833-8126      lisbon@vpnet.chi.il.us |
============================================================================
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: cdonnell@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Chris E Donnell)
Subject: I love windows, but OS/2 kills it.
Organization: The Ohio State University
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 22:04:17 GMT


I just installed OS/2 today and it is the most amazing thing I have yet seen.  
While I am typing this, I am also formatting in drive A, running windows 3.1, 
page maker, and playing solitare.  It is unfortunate that I must go and buy 4 
more Mb of memory to speed OS/2 up but I think it is worth it.  Also if you do 
a lot of diskcopying get OS/2 because it only needs to make one pass at each 
disk unstead of 3 with dos.  Amazing is the only word to describe it.
From: Andrew.Carpenter@f501.n914.z8.rbbs-net.ORG (Andrew Carpenter)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: help! win 3.1 dies in
Date: 11 Apr 92 06:27:00 GMT

KA>|> All I get is:
KA>|>
KA>|>    Standard Mode: Fault in MS-DOS extender
KA>|>    EC=0000 CS=0053 IP=232F ...
KA>|>
KA>I'm using a Gateway 486 (33Mhz genisis/microcronics) with 8m memory.
KA>300 Meg ESDI harddisk.  I'm currently using DRDOS 6.0 with QEMM 6.0.

I think you need to install Win 3.1 under MS-DOS. I got the same error
under DR-DOS. I re-installed MS-DOS and then installed Win 3.1 under it.
Once Win 3.1 was installed I re-installed DR-DOS and everything seemed
to work.

That's a bit of a kludge, but I guess the alternative is waiting until
DR comes out with an update for DR-DOS 6.

 * KingQWK 1.05 # 6 * FV7&v&@&


 * Origin: SeaHunt BBS, PCBoard / HST-DS 1-415-431-0227  (8:914/501)
From: hzh@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Trident Drv versus Win 3.1 DRV
Date: 14 Apr 92 19:34:54 EDT
Distribution: comp
Organization: Cornell University

I finally got the Trident drivers for Win 3.1. (Beta release)  They are 
available now at wuarchive in MSDOS_UPLOADS.  But just one question:
How come they are unbearably slow (After using the SperVGA driver that
Windows 3.1 shipped with.)  Even the 800X600 16 color version is
noticebly slow than the SuperVGA driver supplied with Win 3.1!  Isn't
the driver from the vendor of the Hardware suppose to use specific
features of their products so they can be more efficient?  Surely,
this is not the case with Trident.  One more disadvantage:  when
using the Trident drivers for Windows 3.1, windows required me
to have QEMM 6.02 exclude the monochrome addresses.  Even using
monoumb won't work.  (If someone get this working, please let me know.)
In other word, I have less high RAM available.  What a drag.
I wonder when will the guys at Microsoft write a fast 256 color driver
for the super VGA group.............
From: twong@civil.ubc.ca (Thomas Wong)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Why I hate [insert here] Re: Pause before you consider OS/2
Date: 12 Apr 92 05:44:05 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Civil Engineering, U.B.C., Vancouver, B.C., Canada

In article <1992Apr11.191032.12661@cs.mcgill.ca> storm@cs.mcgill.ca (Marc WANDSCHNEIDER) writes:
>In article <1992Apr10.210418.26317@muddcs.claremont.edu> jokim@jarthur.claremont.edu (John H. Kim) writes:
>>Correction of more OS/2 misinformation, etc., etc.:
>>
>>If you want to fully utilize your 386 or 486 *NOW*, not in a year or so,
>>If you waste time waiting for your apps to spell check, search, repaginate,
>>   or anything else that could be multi-threaded,
>>If you don't mind learning a very intuitive shell that many people are
>>   claiming is *better* than the Mac (I agree btw),
>
>>And if you don't mind an occasional crash forcing a reboot (that is,
>>   more occasional than under OS/2 2.0),
>
>	Can we please stop this patronizing bullshit please...?  A hell of a 
>lot of people here are starting to sound like MacIntosh users...
>
>	Both OSs have their strong points, both have a lot of problems.
>
>	Please don't make this another comp.sys.amiga.advocacy where they
>sling bullshit and competely unfounded facts around like the french did to
>midgets until they passed laws banning it (which pissed a lot of midgets making
>big cash off...)
>
>	Nobody minds a good debate/argument, but this is just stupid.
>
But Marc. He did give his reasons. In fact, if you have been reading
this group, there has been plenty of reasons why OS/2 is techincally
better than Windows. And because OS/2 is a true OS so that all the
process run independently, OS/2 can dump just that process if it crash
than what Windows can. So please stop swearing. And why don't you
practice what you preach by giving us some "facts". You can even get
down to the low levels of how OS/2 works, and how Windows has to work
around DOS if you want to. Thank you.
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: paul@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Paul Lalonde)
Subject: Re: Why Windows is a better bet than OS/2 2.0...
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 02:13:24 GMT

In <1992Apr15.201637.27169@eng.umd.edu> toddf@eng.umd.edu (Todd Fine) writes:

>Some final comments:  OS/2 2.0 is a great product. I've ordered it myself,
>along with Windows 3.1. OS/2 2.0 has a lot to offer, but, in my opinion
>(repeat, *MY* opinion), it's only benefit over the Windows line is that
>it is "here right now". 

Even though I'm somewhat a more staunch OS/2 2.0 supporter than you, I agree
with this philosophy 100%. I don't buy an operating system because of the
company that writes it: I buy it because it is the best right here and right
now. OS/2 2.0 is, *in my opinion*, superior to anything you can get with DOS
and Windows together. But, the minute a better operating system arrives (be it
NT or otherwise), I'll *definitely* consider it without hesitation. I think IBM
has pretty much defined how large an operating system *can be* (OS/2 2.0
requiring 4 MB or so), but is there any need to make an operating system like
this BIGGER?  What would have to be included that would increase the memory
ante to 16MB+ just to run one?  I sincerely don't know!

>With Microsoft's long term strategic plans for multi-platform Windows
>development, along with it's different versions of Windows for high-end
>vs low-end markets, along with it's parallel plans for DOS 6.0 and up,
>along with it's superior marketing abilities, along with the huge
>momentum and customer base for Windows programs (and DOS, too),
>I think that Windows is the way to go, the way of the future.

This is the only part of your post that I have a little trouble digesting.
Your phrase "Microsoft's long term strategic plans" gives me heartburn. Their
previous "long term strategic plans" was to promote and develop OS/2 with
IBM. I don't like their sudden shift of priorities. It could happen again.
What's next?

>Again, this is my opinion only, and I am not trying to put down OS/2 2.0.
>In fact, I've been *very* impressed with IBM's effort and results with
>this product; I just don't believe that they can keep up with Bill Gates
>and his plans for Microsoft and Windows...

Agreed. Microsoft has quite the visionary to invent new goals, and because of
him, they usually achieve and surpass them.  I'm hoping that the "new IBM"
abolishes the old-style mega-tier management system where your office manager
has to consult with his ten superiors just to let you use the washroom. In
this regard, more can be done.

>Good luck,

>		Todd Fine
>		toddf@eng.umd.edu

-Paul


-- 
------------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
Paul Lalonde                        | Q: What's the difference between a 33MHz
Student - Dept. of Computer Science |    386 and a 4MHz XT?
Laurentian University, Sudbury, ONT | A: If you use DOS, nothing.
From: linville@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (John W. Linville)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: : -)
Date: 14 Apr 92 01:16:09 GMT
Organization: NCSU CATT Prog

In article <3610@caslon.cs.arizona.edu> merrill@cs.arizona.edu (Darren Merrill) writes:
>In article <1992Apr13.182127.2035@news.iastate.edu> arakins@iastate.edu (Andrew R Akins) writes:
>>In article <1992Apr13.170655.8546@wam.umd.edu> pr@wam.umd.edu (Jesus M. Rodriguez) writes:
>>>	WINDOWS SUCKS!!!   Irritating isn't it!! Also Win 3.1 sucks too. :-)
>[stuff deleted to shorten post]
>>unproductive and useless. I have no problems with OS/2 users DISCUSSING
>>or EXPLANING why OS/2 is superior to Windows. I am not familiar with
>>OS/2, being a loyal Win 3.x user, but I am interested. And if OS/2
>[more stuff deleted]
>
>YO!! Who ever said this was an OS/2 user?  Just because the guy said
>he hates windows *automatically* labels him as an OS/2 bigot?!?  Come
>on now.  This is all getting out of hand.  

I second that!  I know that I hated Windows long before I discovered OS/2.  I
was even saving my money to run a Unix with X-Windows and VP/IX!

John W. Linville




----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  John W. Linville                Amateur radio:  KD4KHC                  |
|  #include "std_disclaimer.h"     E-mail:  linville@catt.ncsu.edu         |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: victor@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (V Menayang)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: TrueType in different directory?
Date: 16 Apr 92 05:03:15 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

In article <1992Apr12.093538.1@acad2.alaska.edu> angab@acad2.alaska.edu (Gerry Busch) writes:
>Is is possible to install the True Type Font Pack into a different directory
>than Windows is in?  I couldn't figure it out from the manual.  If so, how?
>
>Gerry Busch


I didn't read the manual either (who does ?:-)
but if you go to control panel/fonts/add there's a check-box
asking you whether you want to "Copy Fonts to Windows Directory."
Leave this box unchecked and install the new fonts (assuming,
of course, the fonts are in a directory in your hard disk).
If you already installed the fonts in your Windows/system directory you
can just move them to a new directory and re-add them (I believe you
have to first remove them from control panel).


-- 

-------------------------------------------------------------
Victor Menayang                     victor@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu 
=============================================================
From: cosmo@cherry.ucsb.edu (Burtin;Boris;;;;COMS;Undergraduate;920630;;;8-402525-19906-7;1000)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Yet another "Windows Crashes" story
Keywords: windows, crash
Date: 8 Apr 92 23:21:24 GMT

At first, I thought that it was just a Turbo C bug, but it turns out that a lot
of applications don't want to run on my system:

	- Turbo C for Windows (from Borland C++ 3.0)
	- Wired for Sound
	- Adobe Type Manager
	- some of the After Dark savers

Basically, what happens is that the system locks up, gives me my mouse cursor
back, and doesn't allow me to do anything but move the cursor around.

I have a 386/25  (American Megatrends BIOS) with 4 megs of RAM, running 
Stacker 2.0.  I'm running in enhanced mode, and it tells me that I have over
13 megs of memory left--I'm not sure if this is supposed to be so.
I don't know if there may be a problem in the extended CMOS setup, as I 
can't figure too much of it out.

If someone has _any_ ideas, PLEASE respond!  I'm sorry that this message is
so vague--I'm clueless about what to do.


--
     - Boris
(cosmo@cs.ucsb.edu)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms