From: johnm@cory.Berkeley.EDU (John D. Mitchell)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.pcgeos
Subject: Re: patch for os/2 fails
Date: 30 Aug 92 21:17:14 GMT
Organization: University of California, at Berkeley

In article <1992Aug29.070028.17258@ennews.eas.asu.edu> ejohnson@enuxha.eas.asu.edu (Eric R. Johnson) writes:
[...]
>Again, I acknowledge that it wasn't designed to run under os/2.  Again, so
>what?  os/2 uses v86 to emulate multiple 8086 dos sessions.  geos will run on
>an _8088_.  Where is the conflict?  This is meant to be a technical, not a
>political question.  I'm getting hassled for raising a legitimate technical
>question, and voicing my opinion that I was treated poorly by geos tech 
>support.

Your original posting certainly came across as pointing a big finger to
GeoWorks rather than merely asking why (technically) the two products don't
get along with each other to well.  As someone else has already stated, did
you think to go complain to the designers (and implementors) of OS/2 that
they produced a product that was not "100% DOS compatible"?  OS/2 (and for
that matter, anything that uses Intel i386 Virtual 86 mode to emulate good
ol' DOS (e.g. DOS extenders)) have a pile of technical shennanigans that
must take place for everything to work.  One good set of (very technical)
documentation for this stuff are the manuals for Phar Laps 386 DOS
Extender.

Since this is an imperfect world, instead of just complaining to one group
or the other and blaming them for all of the problems...  It's important to
(politely :-) pester both (all) parties involved that you would like to be
able to do such and so.  You see, in this industry, it's much easier to get
really neat/cool/difficult/etc. things done if many people agree to work
together to get it done rather than demanding that one poor group must
perform miracles.  :-)

[...]
>I made no such request.  I can aftp _beta_ comm drivers (among many others)
>for os/2 and apply them myself.  I don't _need_ an interim version, I need
>an appropriate two line patch!

You're trying to equate apple's to orange's I'm afraid.  GeoWorks too has
provided updated/fixed/whatever printer and video drivers to it's user
through AOL.  The crux is that an operating system kernel is a very
different beasty then a handful of device drivers.

As I tried to say in my previous article, the technical hurdles have been
overcome and 'the fix' is part of PC/GEOS v2.  Also, for the same reasons
that I wrote regarding a potential plethora of versions, releasing binary
patches only makes things even worse.  GeoWorks would end up trying to
support eight gadzillion different micro/patch versions and wouldn't ever
be able to get any real work done.

>It means I can't use geos.  That means something to me, hence this discussion.
>And contrary to your statement, the tech I spoke to claim no personal
>knowledge of the patch (after some discussion, he admitted he had _heard_
>of one).  

As another poster already noted (but that I'll reiterate anyways :-), OS/2
v2 has a pretty nice and fairly easy to use 'Dual Boot' feature.  It
certainly isn't a seamless solution to your situation but it will most
definately work.

[...]
>I disagree, and think you are putting words in my mouth.  I think that they
>could care _less_ about my problem.  I _am_ a customer.  The attitude of the
>tech I spoke to was almost hostile.

Hmm... In looking over both your original post and my reply I think that my
conclusions fit the tone and implications of your remarks quite clearly.
Obviously, I did read things into your post.  For that I'll just remind you
that if you post very hostile remarks then it's very easy for the reader to
interpret everything you say in that light.

[...]
>I make generalizations based on my _experiences_, the same as you, I'm sure.
>This is the same attitude I've been handed each time I've been able to break
>through during the proper time-frame.  I have not had to talk with tech
>support often, because geos is (IMO) such a good product.

Well, how about this...  You send to me, privately, all of the details
regarding your contact with GeoWorks.  Give me all of the times, dates,
names, issues, gut feelings, etc. and I'll look into things.

Thanks,
	John D. Mitchell
	johnm@cory.Berkeley

P.S.	These are, of course, just my *personal* opinions and in no way
	whatsoever do they have any correlation to anything.  :-)
	GeoWorks speaks for itself.  (But an occasional helping hand is
	certainly nice. :-)