HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kitchin@lf.hp.com (Bruce Kitchin)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Discovered: Microsoft using undocumented calls in Windows NT
Date: 14 Dec 1992 21:54:31 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard Santa Clara Site
NNTP-Posting-Host: eden.avo.hp.com
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.2 PL7]

Brian Sturgill (brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu) wrote:
: 
: What is the source of this information?
I agree, we should know the source of the information so we can evaluate it.
: 
: Why do you believe they won't be documented?
: Do you really believe that all calls in a beta should be documented in advance?
: Should Microsoft not document these after release, why do you believe
: this will give them an unfair advantage?

This is an interesting point of view.  With all of the 100+ developers that
are busily producing NT applications, some of them in direct competition with
what Microsoft is producing, don't you think they would feel that they should
have a fair shot at using the same system calls that Microsoft can use.  If
the calls are worth using by Microsoft outside of the OS itself, there is
a reasonable chance that they will make the application using them better
(speed, functionality).  This has become apparent in Win 3.x where Microsoft
has been shown to hold back information that some competitors clain give
Microsoft an advantage.  In beta code, one should expect that some of these
extra calls are only going to be documented in readme files or the like, but
I think it is fair to expect them to be documented somewhere.
From: George_Marengo@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS/2 stopped selling
Date: 15 Dec 92 12:44:04 GMT
Reply-To: George_Marengo@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org
Comment-To: Lowell_Morrison@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org
X-FSC-PATH: 202/514

LM>the Egghead's in my neck of the woods can't keep it in stock.  Of
course,
LM>Egghead does their own advertizing, and ran an add with a pretty
decent 

 Speaking of EggHead, I recently recieved an Egghead Christmas 
flyer about two weeks ago and surprisingly enough they were
advertising
OS/2 2.0. 6 months ago my local store was giving a flat "no" when
asked
if they were going to sell OS/2 2.0. (at least they said no to me)

 It was pointed out that in the whole flyer, the OS/2 ad was the
only one in black and white. I can't verify, since I threw the flyer
away after a few days. 
___
 * MR/2 1.32 NR * Regardless of what you may think, this is NOT a
tagline.

--- Maximus/2 2.01wb
 * Origin: OS/2 Connection @ La Jolla, CA  <619-558-9475> (1:202/514)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: tomh@wes.on.ca (Tom Haapanen)
Subject: Re: Windows NT: The Other side of the coin
Organization: Waterloo Engineering Software
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 14:24:25 GMT

> timbol@netcom.com (Mike Timbol) writes:
>> 2. Requires lots of resources: The current beta requires a little over
>>    50 MB for a full install (including swap file).  It also requires
>>    8 MB of memory, but it'll be slow.  (Some guy on CompuServe had it
>>    running in 6 MB, but said that it crawled.)

mlevis@ringer.cs.utsa.edu (Mike Levis) (OS/2) writes:
> Slowness in 8 MB is bad news for NT.  As I (and others) stated in other
> posts the jump to 16 MB is expensive due to the four-way interleave in
> many motherboards.

This is also likely to be a short term issue; Microsft's stated goal is that
NT will run several applications well in 8 MB.  We won't know the final
result until it's released, though...

>> 9. No new shell: Windows NT comes with Program Manager.  However, the
>>    capability exists to add other shells such as NDW.  (NDW is planned
>>    for NT).

> This is more bad news for NT in the long term.  The point of buying GUI
> software is to use the GUI.  I think it makes little sense of advertising,
> say Windows 3.1, as a GUI system then having users dump the GUI for a
> replacement!  NT inherits this bad feature from Windows, unfortunately.

There are some people out there, though, who run a GUI-based system mainly
for the GUI apps, though, and not for the GUI system shell!  :)  For example,
my Windows shell is WinDock, a simple NeXT-style button bar down the right-
hand side of the screen.  It starts my apps -- that's all I want.

On Windows, minimized app icons appear at the bottom of the screen; on OS/2,
they appear in the Minimized Applications Folder (most of the time -- but
sometimes there is nothing there even after you minimize an app).  In OS/2,
you can get the system menu to pop up anywhere in the app, which is nice.
On the other hand, OS/2 doesn't have the nice common dialogs that Windows
has.  Once you're running an app, I don't think it really matters much
whether there is WPS or PM behind it.

As for file management, I personally don't think OS/2's Drives window is
any better than Windows' File Manager -- both are good enough to be useable,
but neither is excellent.  (Oh, and the OS/2 Enhanced Editor is better than
Notepad, but it certainly isn't what I'd consider an acceptable programmer's
editor.)

[ \tom haapanen    "i don't even know what street canada is on" -- al capone ]
[ tomh@wes.on.ca                   "trust the programmer" -- ansi c standard ]
[ waterloo engineering software      "to thine own self be true" -- polonius ]
From: George_Marengo@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Nt Smp Users
Date: 15 Dec 92 13:20:06 GMT
Reply-To: George_Marengo@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org
Comment-To: Mike_Timbol@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org
X-FSC-PATH: 202/514

> Gee boy, I can't wait to use this super wamperdyne OS on my 
>computer<G>. What a joke.

MT>You know, George, this is akin to taking a posting asking for
MT>help out of c.o.o.misc and posting it to .advocacy, then saying
MT>"look what a lame system OS/2 is!"  I thought even the most
MT>childish posters stopped doing this quite some time ago.

 You NT guys keep telling us how fantastic NT is. You only present
one side of the coin. That was the flip side. If you can't take it,
tough.
___
 * MR/2 1.32 NR * Your reality check just bounced.

--- Maximus/2 2.01wb
 * Origin: OS/2 Connection @ La Jolla, CA  <619-558-9475> (1:202/514)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill)
Subject: Re: Nt Smp Users
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 20:40:38 GMT

In article <2b29d934@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org> George_Marengo@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org writes:
>        I've read all about NT's fabulous SMP design on here and how
>        wonderful it's going to be. Please raise your hand if you are
>        running NT on an SMP machine. How many of you are out there?
>___
> X SLMR 2.1a X 386-33 8MB + 105 MB Toshiba + OS/2 2.0 = computing joy
>
>--- Maximus/2 2.01wb
> * Origin: OS/2 Connection @ La Jolla, CA  <619-558-9475> (1:202/514)

I suspect if you had included comp.os.ms-windows.{programmer.win32,advocacy}
you'd see a lot more hands.  I mean just how rational is it to ask such
a question in the OS/2 advocacy group.

Now if you asked the question, have you ever used NT on an SMP machine,
I could raise my hand.

Brian

-- 
C. Brian Sturgill                          NeXTStep 486 is for _YOU_!!!!
University of Utah                    Microsoft needs competition, but I want
Center for Software Science          to be one of the many running Windows NT!
brian@cs.utah.edu; CIS: 70363,1373    :-) :-) :-)  NT SDK: $69; (800) 227-4679
From: KENKAHN@PKSMRVM.VNET.IBM.COM (Kenneth A. Kahn)
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 92 12:10:56 EST
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why 512MB limit in OS/2?
Organization: Staff of IBM Fellow - IBM Personal/370
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM
News-Software: UReply 3.0
X-X-From: KENKAHN@PKSMRVM.VNET.IBM.COM (Ken Kahn)
            <1992Dec17.124352.12657@kub.nl>

In <1992Dec17.124352.12657@kub.nl> Jeroen Hoppenbrouwers writes:
>In article <1992Dec17.064426.7111@ryn.mro4.dec.com>, pjdm@chmeee.enet.dec.com (Peter Mayne) writes:
>|>
>|> Why does OS/2 have a limit of 512MB per application?
>|>
>|> PJDM
>
>Someone chose 512MB as an arbitrary border. This number is not to be
>found anywhere in the system, except for the

There is nothing 'arbitrary' about it.  The number 512M comes from the fact
that when using 16-bit 16:16 addressing, the number of valid LDT entries is
limited to 8192.  Since each LDT entry is limited to 64K, the total address
space addressable by a 16-bit 16:16 address is 8192*64K = 512M.  The decision
to not let 32-bit 0:32 'private addresses' go above 512M was to allow for
compatibility such that any address could represented by either a 16:16 or a
0:32 bit address.  This allows for easily mixing 16-bit and 32-bit addressing
in the same module.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara)
Subject: Re: Win bigots wait for NT...and wait..and wait
Date: 12 Dec 92 08:26:39 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1992Dec11.195631.7299@actrix.gen.nz> Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz writes:
>In article <1992Dec9.124657.18326@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>> In article <1992Dec9.054415.13627@actrix.gen.nz> Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz writes:
>> >Every registered OS/2 user in New Zealand received a letter about the Service
>> >Pack about 2 weeks ago. 
>> 
>> 	Interesting then, isn't it, that no on in the US that I 
>> 	know has.
>
>Well, to be fair...there may only be 4,000 OS/2 users in NZ (pop. 3.5
>million).
> 
>In the US, you would have the vast bulk of the 2 million copies. That's one
>hell of a lot of letters and stamps.....:-)
> 

     I heard they had to stop sending them out when Lee Reiswig's
tongue dried out.  Last word was that he was going to take a short
break, have some Gatorade, and get right back to it.

				-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.
From: Joe@twistor.dialix.oz.au (Joe Katnic)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re:  The Bottom Line
Distribution: world
Date: 11 Dec 92 23:00:54 PST
Organization: Not an Organization

In article <1992Dec9.230912.1065@fcom.cc.utah.edu> brian@jaguar.cs.utah.edu (Brian Sturgill) writes:
>
>Are you just slow, or just very stubborn?  The reason NFS is included in
>the OS/2 resource usage is because without it OS/2 doesn't have peer-to-peer
>networking.
>
   OH... A just what would you call APPC then ????

   Otherwise known as Advanced Peer to Peer Communication.

--
Joe Katnic  Perth, Western Australia  Joe@twistor.DIALix.oz.au      _--_|\ 
                                   (ALT: jkatnic@DIALiz.oz.au)     /      \
"A search for the ultimate              Phone: (+619) 474 3939 --->\_.--._/
 mathematical reality inevitably                                         v 
 creates fairy tales, not science".. E.J. Lerner.
Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.advocacy:10547 comp.os.os2.misc:39802
From: tedc@cs.ubc.ca (Ted Chen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: ATI driver support!
Date: 17 Dec 1992 15:15:01 -0800
Organization: Computer Science, University of B.C., Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: pacific.cs.ubc.ca

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: ATI support of OS/2
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering

In article <1992Dec17.083423.7419@netcom.com> timbol@netcom.com (Mike Timbol) writes:
>In article <1992Dec17.061904.23697@netcom.com> samiam@netcom.com (Scott Moore) writes:
>>The salesman at Comdex may have not been well informed, but I was told that
>>ATI is doing *ZIP* about ultra pro drivers for os/2 2.0, but only distributing
>>IBM written code. They were showing it off right next to their brand new (ATI 
>>written) NT driver.
>>
>>Scott A. Moore [SAM]  | "Cash is more 
>
>On CompuServe, someone from ATI said they were working on Ultra Pro
>drivers and were targeting 2nd Quarter '93.  They were "thinking about"
>or "looking at" doing drivers for the VGA Wonder cards.  By the way, a
>great many people on CompuServe are very very pissed at ATI.
>
>     - Mike

For all you ATI Vantage/Ultra/8514/a/Ultra Pro/+ users, why not send some
email to ATI to voice your displeasure at their absence of drivers for 
OS/2 2.0. 

I believe their email address at CIS is

74740.667@compuserve.com


---
Ted Chen   <tedc@ee.ubc.ca>
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: buhr@umanitoba.ca (Kevin Andrew Buhr)
Subject: Re: who is brian sturgill - really?
Organization: University of Manitoba, Canada
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 00:19:02 GMT

In article <gyan.724629368@unixg.ubc.ca> gyan@unixg.ubc.ca (Gyan P.
Sinha) writes:

|  In <1992Dec17.172701.2089@usage.csd.unsw.OZ.AU>
|  pendrith@spectrum.cs.unsw.oz.au (Mark Pendrith) writes:
|
|  >BTW: is it coincidence that BRIAN STURGILL is an anagram of NT BIG
|  >SLUR LIAR?  sounds like a Microsoft project code name to me...
|
|  God only knows this group deserved a dash of humor! Coming up with an
|  NT anagram for BS was the icing on it. Keep up the
|  speculation about multi-threaded Brians. We all deserve a chuckle
|  while advocating our favorite OS.

I'm trying to port Brian Sturgill to OS/2 because there are some
people here with 8 Meg machines and they want to run their own copy of
Brian.  (Brian NT is just too slow on these machines.  When they try
to access the network, Brian's writing starts breaking up.  It's like
running Windows multimedia under OS/2.)

Can someone point me in the right direction?  Can "Mirrors" be used to
port _NT_ applications to OS/2?  Is it a long-term solution?  Does it
facilitate creating a "real" OS/2 application?

Also, I'm not sure what documentation I'll need.  Can anyone suggest
anything?  Is the GNU compiler robust enough?  Brian is written in C++
using some spin-off on the foundation classes.  Brian also uses some
calls that aren't in the documentation, like "NtQuerySystemInformation"
and "NtQueryInformationThread".  What can I do about these?

One more thing...  Can multiple instances of Brian run safely on the
same NT machine?  If I can't get an OS/2 version working, I want to
set up a Brian server that everyone on the network can access.  Do we
need Windows for Workgroups to do this?

The Microsoft salesperson was no help at all.  The only OS/2 version
of Brian he had was a KBD/VIO version for OS/2 1.1.  He also said
Brian for Win32s would not be out until sometime in third quarter.  He
said it wouldn't have multiple threads, but added you'd be able to run
more than one Brian at once if you had enough memory.  The salesguy
then launched into some tirade about how Microsoft wanted to release a
stable Brian late rather than a buggy Brian too early.  He also kept
insisting I should go to the next Comdex to see Brian running on an
Alpha.

When I asked if we needed Windows for Workgroups to distribute Brian
over the network, he said yes, glanced furtively around, and leaped
behind his desk.  I couldn't get him to come back out, even when I
told him that Windows for Workgroups seemed like a good idea.

Anyway, thanks in advance for your help.

Kevin <buhr@ccu.UManitoba.CA>
Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.advocacy:10678 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:3331
From: furballs@sequent.com (Paul Penrod)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: FCC will proclaim Microsoft is run by Communists! :)
Date: 21 Dec 92 04:11:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: sequent.1992Dec21.041125.9052
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Inc.

In article <1h13t8INNj74@neuro.usc.edu> merlin@neuro.usc.edu (merlin) writes:
>>Well you can kiss American leadership in operating systems out goodbye.
>
>How much good software has been placed in the American or world market
>by the Japanese?  I can't think of a single package.  Why?

I can offer a couple of reasons why.

1. The Japanese work ethic and culture does not promote
individualism which is one of the key elements of creativity; hence
the plethora of unique software packages from US/CANADIAN/EUROPEAN
countries.

2. They have just started figuring out how to produce bullet proof
software on a cookie cutter basis. Once they have that down cold,
watch and see how the market is persued, just like the
semi-conductor industry.

3. The web of US software copyrights and patents, which are also
supported to a lesser degree in the international market, are a
deterant; only until they figure out how to work around them.

JMHO...

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
            Bureaucracy: noun, plural - Bureaucracies.
         The process of turning energy into solid waste.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: Why Windows NT will fail -----
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 20:07:16 GMT

In <8093@lib.tmc.edu> jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard) writes:

>In article <1992Dec11.211713.23323@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>>	Listen up you big boofer.  You just *confirmed* my point.
>>	Advocacy groups are inherently looking to find the slightest
>>	error--even if it is obviously a typo (see the thread--
>>	*thread*--that started because some bozo misread a sentence
>>	"MS Windows (Apps)" vs. "MS (Windows apps)"..)

>Thanks a pantsload, guy.

>Of course, it looks like you missed the original poster's followup where he
>said he wasn't as clear as he meant to be, and the other posting where someone
>else said they read it the same way I did...

Jay, I think you, I, and at least one other person have SAID that we
read it the same (wrong, according to the intent of the original
poster) way.  So much for 'boofers' and 'bozos'.  I believe that Mr.
Yamanari has just successfully classified himself . . . 

-- 
"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: Andreas.Kari%bbs@parrot.in-berlin.de (Andreas Kari)
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 04:24:12 MET
Organization: Parrot Public BBS
Subject: Printer doesn't print..
Distribution: world
Reply-To: Andreas.Kari%bbs@parrot.in-berlin.de (Andreas Kari)
X-Posting-Software: UniBoard 1.10a S/N 217921

Hi, guys!

I have a problem with my PANASONIC KX-P1123:

If I try to print something, my printer won't do, what it should do..
..it doesn't print...  

Some guys in Germany can't help me, so I need your help now..

Here's my configuration:
 The Printer (installed on LPT1, interrupt 7) 
 I tried (nearly) everything.. without an effect.. 

I'm not sure,that the driver have errors. I contacted IBM Germany and these
guys told me, that the driver works proper. They don't have any problems
with it... (should I believe it ??).

If one of you guys may help me, you'll make me happy...

  Thanks .. for everybody who'll help me..

P.S.:  Greetings from Berlin, Germany
       ..Merry X-Mas...

       Andreas (just call me Andy!) Kari 
       
--
Andreas Kari, user of the UniBoard System @ parrot.in-berlin.de
E-Mail: Andreas.Kari%bbs@parrot.in-berlin.de
..............................................................................
       PARROT-BERLIN, PUBLIC UNIX-BBS, TEL. 030-724467 (+49 30 724467)
   PUBLIC-DOMAIN FOR ATARI, PC AND MAC. NETS: MAUS, ZERBERUS, FIDO, USENET
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: ASI509@DJUKFA11.BITNET
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Can we get the details of the benchmark setup? Please!
Date: 16 Dec 92 12:13:41 GMT
Organization: Forschungszentrum Juelich

In article <1992Dec16.021708.18523@news.Hawaii.Edu>,
tholen@galileo.ifa.hawaii.edu (Dave Tholen) says:
>
>> This however was not Tim's message, that message made it
>> appear that MS had some evil plot to not work with OS/2.
>
>Perhaps you can provide some alternate explanation for the explicit
>check.  I'm willing to consider the possibilities.  Tim has raised
>one.  Until there are others that make sense, it's the only one we
>have to go on.

Please wait with that evil plot theories until NT is released. Why should MS
have to make a _BETA_ install together with every other OS in the world?
If you remember the OS/2 betas didn't even install over older OS/2 betas.

From the fact that NT _BETA_ doesn't install on a machine with OS/2 on you
only can conclude MS had better things to do than fixing installer probs. Which
is probably what NT beta testers expect MS to do. I guess NT betas are not
intended for us OS/2 users who want to compare it to our OS but for MS beta
testers who want to find bugs in the NT code.

If it doesn't work in the release version then .... ---> Flame on.

Michael Bode.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: jmalloy@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Joseph T. Malloy)
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.0 Application List 1/2
Organization: Hamilton College - Clinton, NY
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 15:19:19 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.175431.0247564@locus.com> lowell@locus.com (Lowell Morrison) writes:
>In article <1992Dec13.211119.10192@itsmail1.hamilton.edu> jmalloy@itsmail1.hamilton.edu (Joseph T. Malloy) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec11.051119.6473@zooid.guild.org> Mark Kovarski <kovarski@zooid.guild.org> writes:
>>>
>>>11/23/92                Shipping OS/2 2.0 Applications                
>>>                               (By Company)
>>>******************************************************************************
>>>
>>>
>>>Bitware, Software & Services        Nikon II                      61-6-2810175
>>>Boffin Software                     BOFORM
>>>Boffin Software                     Bufflo
>>>Boffin Software                     Cobra
>>>Boffin Software                     Dolittle
>>                                     ^^^^^^^^
>>Boy, does someone need help in choosing product names or what?  What
>>Gaswat and HIPO, too?!  Is this some sort of joke padding to make the
>>list look bigger than it really is?  And how many of these apps for for
>>narrow vertical markets?
>For your information Joe, Boffin Software is a real company.  And Yes,
>it is all vertical market Software.  They are a Big Name in Geologic
>Software.  You know, like Oil Companies, and Engineering Geological
>firms.  Yep, the ones who got the first deliveries of the CRAY and
>pronounced it TOO SLOW...
>
>--Lowell Morrison
>--Uncle Wolf
>

Thank you!  A real answer!  

I've just posted elsewhere the implied question I had hoped would be
taken from my wonderful humor (I mean, those *are* funny names, nicht?).
I'll assume these programs are the best in their class.  How useful is
it for the net to see this?  IOW, was this an attempt to simply make the
list of OS/2 apps seem long?  (I mean, honestly, how many PC users need
to geological modeling versus communications?)  And if the first Cray
was too slow for 'em, do they really think any PC based system is
suitable?

Season's Greetings...

jmalloy@hamilton.edu

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: tlilley@jarthur.claremont.edu (Thomas (Ted) Lilley)
Subject: Re: who is brian sturgill - really?
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 00:44:38 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.172701.2089@usage.csd.unsw.OZ.AU> pendrith@spectrum.cs.unsw.oz.au (Mark Pendrith) writes:
[Brian Sturgill droid theory deleted]
>
>BTW: is it coincidence that BRIAN STURGILL is an anagram of NT BIG SLUR LIAR?
>sounds like a Microsoft project code name to me...
>

ROTFLMAO!

Even though it's very insulting, it's very funny too:).

Ted
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy