Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Windows don't remember positions
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 19:34:24 GMT
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Followup-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago

In article <15NOV199211175563@venus.tamu.edu> ebb7683@venus.tamu.edu (BLACKMAN, EDWARD B) writes:
>>Actually, they did provide several methods to prune the INI files.  In
>>the Redbooks, for example, they suggest making back ups of these INI
>>files, so that you can revert to the old one should you do something
>>you don't like.  They have issued rudimentary INI file editors as part
>>of the Employee Written Software program (look on
>>software.watson.ibm.com), and there are various third party efforts
>>(e.g. ShowINI, INIMaint, etc).
>What about the people who don't know about/have access to outside sources
>like bulletin boards and FTP sites?

I hardly think it likely that people don't know about at least one
BBS.  In every OS/2 package (at least in the U.S.) the telephone
number for the IBM National Support Center BBS is listed.  Every copy
of OS/2 includes PM Terminal, so the software isn't an issue either.
One might argue that lack of a modem is possible, I suppose, but in
this day of $39 2400 bps modems, it at least isn't a major expense on
a $2000 computer system.

But see below.

>>                                The ALT-F1 trick on boot up restores
>>the INI files and desktop from the install defaults.  And the MAKEINI
>>program, documented in the printed material accompanying OS/2, does
>>something similar.
>I'm sorry, Tim, but to suggest using Alt-F1 or MAKEINI to prune bloated INI 
>files is like saying "You want to trim your hair, eh?  Well, you've got a 
>perfectly good weed trimmer.  Why don't you try that?"  It does the job, but
>the damage it does is greater than the good.

True.  I am not suggesting those are acceptable methods for everyone.
I am suggesting that they are possible alternatives, in a fairly long
list of possible alternatives.

Let's step back a minute.  OS/2 is designed to be a general purpose
operating system to fit within certain constraints (e.g. DOS/Windows
compatibility, operation on 386 PCs, about 30 MB in size, etc).  I
have my quarrels with some of the design decisions.  (IBM didn't ask
me, but if they did I'd have more than enough comments on how to
improve the product.)  However, I can't really fault them for not
providing every conceivable feature, utility, etc.  Somewhere they had
to make compromises -- it is inevitable.  They decided that if you
needed an INI file editor you should dial up a BBS and get one (or
call a shareware diskette service, or enlist the services of a
friendly IBM SE, or order it on CD-ROM as part of the PDK) -- it
wasn't included in the base package.  The base package manuals explain
how to backup said INI files and how to restore them from a selection
of provided defaults, but to edit, well, you have to look elsewhere.

That was the decision.  I'm not sure I have an opinion on it one way
or the other, but I do want you to understand that there was a reason
for the decision, essentially that they did not feel the extra hundred
kilobytes was a penalty everyone should have to pay (either in terms
of the number of diskettes to shuffle or actual hard disk space).

Now, supposedly I'm a power user :-), but I must tell you that I
haven't edited my INI files all that much.  When I did, it was
essentially to test the INI file editors that had been released.  I'm
probably not alone.

I am certainly not arguing that an INI file editor would have been a
good thing to have, other things being equal.  But that's the point,
really, "other things being equal."

[Incidentally, the same applies to Visual REXX, extra typefaces, the
Service Pak, networking features, MMPM/2, EPM updates/toolkit, free
C/C++ compilers, newsreaders, mailers, and so forth.  There's an awful
lot of good material out there that didn't make it into the base
package.  My pet peeve, actually, is that IBM did not include a
"decent" disk backup package.  I understand BACKUP is enough for some,
but, if I had my way, I would have put in an adequate disk/tape backup
package and left out, say, Reversi.  I also realize most users prefer
to play Reversi and would give up the backup package -- most users
don't make backups, sadly.

While I'm at it, I also would have left out BASIC and BASICA (and
stuck with QBASIC), but some people go ballistic without BASIC and
BASICA.]

-- 
Timothy F. Sipples      | Read the OS/2 FAQ List 2.0g, available from
sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu | 128.123.35.151, anonymous ftp, in /pub/os2/all/info
Dept. of Econ., Univ.   | /faq, or from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET (send "HELP")
of Chicago, 60637       | [Read the List, THEN post to ONE OS/2 newsgroup.]