HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mortenk@dhhalden.no (MORTEN KNUDSEN)
Subject: Re: Is OS/2 a dead end?
Keywords: So quoth Bill Gates
Organization: Ostfold College
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 20:31:37 GMT

In article <hatton.727755291@cgl.ucsf.edu> hatton@socrates.ucsf.edu (Tom Hatton) writes:
>From: hatton@socrates.ucsf.edu (Tom Hatton)
>Subject: Re: Is OS/2 a dead end?
>Keywords: So quoth Bill Gates
>Date: 23 Jan 93 02:14:51 GMT
>djg2@crux3.cit.cornell.edu (David J. Greenberger) writes:
>>tcscs!zeta@src.honeywell.com (Gregory Youngblood) writes:
>>>or so.  With OS/2, when it reboots, particularly after a crash or unexpected
>>>shutdown, it takes upwards of 5 to 30 minutes depending on your hard drive
>>>size and configuration.  One time of that happening and your average computer
>>>user is going to be disoriented.
>
>>Upwards of 5 to 30 minutes?!  How much RAM do you have?  I have 16 MB on a
>>486/33, and it *never* takes more than one or two minutes for OS/2 to boot up.
>
>It takes little time for an ordinary boot, but if you read his post, you'll
>note he's talking about "after a crash or unexpected shutdown" and he's
>absolutely right: if you have a crash, requiring a reset or cold boot, then
>the system will see that on boot, and examine the disk with chkdsk (don't
>remember what level, but I'll assume f3). 
> 
No, not level f3. It dowsn't take that long. 

>If you have a BFD (big disk) then the chkdsk is going to take a long time
>to go thoroughly through the partition(s). 
> 
Well, I have 2x200Meg, and it takes a whole lot less that 5 minutes, 
even after a _total_ crash. You will need about a zillion megs to 
get 30 minutes (at least).

>I disagree that it would "disorient" someone; alarm, potentially, and
>annoy, certainly. But it does tell you what it's up to while it goes at it,
>so I don't see anyone getting too confused. And it's nice to know that the
>file system is intact before getting the system going. Just painful waiting
>for that assurance.

The last UHPFS.DLL fix helps alot.

>-- 
>Tom Hatton
>hatton@cgl.ucsf.edu
>(415)-476-8693
From: clemens@faui8a.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Clemens Beckstein)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Texel CD-ROM support
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 09:07:15 GMT
Organization: Regionales Rechenzentrum Erlangen
NNTP-Posting-Host: faui8a.informatik.uni-erlangen.de

drkszk@ocf.berkeley.edu (Derek Suzuki) writes:

>	I know these are supported under OS/2.  However, I'd like to be
>sure this includes the new double speed drive.  Is CD Audio supported?

>Derek Suzuki
>drkszk@ocf.berkeley.edu

yes, it is supported... (I own one and like it very much)

Be warned though:  if you buy one make sure you get firmware revision
later or equal 1.07 (the one with multi session compatibility and
2 bugs fixed that make the drive work unreliable if there is another
SCSI device on the same SCSI bus as the Texel).

- Clemens
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Subject: Re: MMPM/2 and PC speaker
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 14:30:26 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.061042.15213@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au> sci240s@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au (Wey Jing HO) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan17.005410.1297@yvax.byu.edu> hayesb@yvax.byu.edu writes:
>>>I just installed the 2.1b and don't have any drivers for the PC speaker.  I
>>>don't have any type of sound card and was wondering if sounds can be played
>>>through the PC speaker in both MMPM/2 and a WIN-OS2 session.  Any help would be
>>>appreciated.
>	What about installing PC speaker driver fro Windows 3.1? I know this
>will let you play sounds in WINOS2 (maybe!!). You can ftp the PC speaker
>driver for Windows 3.1 from normal Windows ftp site such as wuarchive.wustl.edu
>and monu6.cc.monash.edu.au

No go -- that will not function in Win-OS/2.  The speaker driver
requires total control of the machine.

-- 
Timothy F. Sipples      | Read the OS/2 FAQ List 2.0i, 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.]
From: pat@berry.Cary.NC.US (Pat Berry)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Questions for OS/2.2
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 08:20:27 EST
Organization: Berry Communications

mew@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Merlyn) writes:

> I am thinking of switching from DOS/Windows to OS/2.2 but have some questions
> that i need answering.  Any reply would be gratefully received.

What do you mean by "OS/2.2"?  Do you mean OS/2 2.0, the version
currently for sale?  Do you mean OS/2 2.1, the version now in beta
testing?  Or do you mean OS/2 2.2, which does not exist?

-- 
Pat Berry - Cary, North Carolina, USA   | "Much to our dismay, the C compiler
pat@berry.Cary.NC.US                    | does not read the manuals."
**** Happy user of OS/2 2.0 ****        | Libes & Ressler, *Life with UNIX*
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: gus@deathstar.dell.com (Gus Campman)
Subject: 2.1 bugs
Organization: Dell Computer Co
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 03:34:10 GMT


welp, after messing around with the 2.1 beta, i have deleted it from the
hard disk, reformatted and gone back to what i have found to be the best
version of OS/2 so far, the first beta to include Win 3.1 support. (yeah, i
know that this is prob. expired, but it is temporary).
my main problems with the beta were these:
-my diamond SpeedStar 24X Windows 3.1 drivers were uninstallable.  I tried
to install them with both the original 24setup.exe program AND the
24setup.exe that comes with the new beta and to no avail -- it would crash
consistently with the error trap:000d location ##0160:fff60967-000d:9967
60000, 9084
038600d1
internal revision 6.479, 92/12/9

-
another problem i had was that OS/2 kinda seemed to just come unravelled..
what i mean by that is this:  it coul not locate some of its files any
longer, in particular, when i would start up a OS/2 full screen session, i
would get the message "could not locate Command Processor in the specified
path."

I guess tha tthis means that OS/2 could not find CMD.exe but i checked the
comspec and it was correct and cmd.exe was in the correct place.. go
figure. sure was mystifying. (and still is as a matter of fact --  even
though i have gone back to the previous OS/2,  i am still getting this durn
error !! what is the deal??  i re partitioned the disk that i keep OS/2 on
s there should be no trace of it on ther!!!)

-how DOES one delete the *. SF files on your harddisk?? i tried under OS/2
and it would have none of that. I then tried under native dos from a floppy
and it would not recognize these as valid deleteable files. i think that my
*. sf file or whatever keeps the extended attributes for my other data hard
disk is corrupt.  this could be why my desk top seems to kinda creep back
to my old, old, old desktop setup (colors and such) from when i first
started with OS/2.. how annoying to boot up and find your color scheme
altered slightly each time..

am i just going crazy or are these real bugs??
and how the heck and i supposed to get the WD90C31 drivers to work with my
SpeedStar 24X?? do the work?? no one seems to know.



As always, these are the opinions of the author and the author alone.
From: hayesb@yvax.byu.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Running 2.0 and 2.1 on the same machine
Date: 27 Jan 93 19:33:42 GMT
Organization: Brigham Young University

In article <1k6d7gINNmf5@srvr1.engin.umich.edu>, jwh@citi.umich.edu (Jim Howe) writes:
> I have a machine which has three disk partitions set up.
> One partition contains OS/2 2.0 GA+SP, one contains
> OS/2 2.1 beta and the third contains my user data.
> Can someone tell me if there will be any complications
> with alternatively running the 2.0 and 2.1 versions?
> Each OS/2 partition has its own Desktop directory, so
> I realize that any Desktop changes made while running
> one version will not be reflected when the other version
> is running.  I'm more concerned about the EA's that
> get stored with the directories in the common partition.
> If I add objects to a folder which resides in the common
> partition, what will happen when I run the other version
> of OS/2.  Will the system get hopelessly confused about
> which objects reside where?  Are there other potential
> configuration problems?  Experiences and comments
> are welcome.  Thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> James W. Howe                  internet: jwh@citi.umich.edu
> University of Michigan             uucp: uunet!mailrus!citi.umich.edu!jwh
> Ann Arbor, MI   48103-4943

I installed 2.1b on an HPFS partition, with OS/2 2.0+GA on a separate FAT
partition and DOS+Windows on my primary partition.  I just did this last night
and haven't had to use it too much, but it seems to work fine.  One thing I did
though was change the SWAPPATH= in the config.sys on the 2.0 partion to use the    
same path as my 2.1b partition.  Haven't tried it yet, but we'll see how it
works.

Bryan
hayesb@yvax.byu.edu
>
From: hacker@cco.caltech.edu (Jonathan Bruce Hacker)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: PSPM2 under 2.1 Beta
Date: 25 Jan 1993 05:20:03 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: punisher.caltech.edu

lmp8913@zeus.tamu.edu (PRESTON, LISA M) writes:


>Hi Folks!
>	Under the 2.1 Beta, PSPM reports any running DOS Programs 
>with the name "-zombie-".


It does this for me with OS/2 2.0GA + SP so I don't think anything has
changed.
-- 
Jon Hacker
Caltech, Pasadena CA
hacker@tumbler-ridge.caltech.edu
From: enk2@po.cwru.edu (Erik Kovach)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 Wish List
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 03:50:27 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University
NNTP-Posting-Host: b62711.student.cwru.edu

In article <1993Jan23.233249.15201@news.columbia.edu> fiv2@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Fidel I Villa) writes:
>Partial OS/2 release 2.1 wishlist:
>1. Password for all icons and folders with master password for everything
>   in case forgotten.
>2. Easier Text drawing in Icon edit.
>3. More beautiful 'wall papers', maybe some Van Gogh and Monet.
>4. Multi-font DOS/OS2 windows with option to reset all.
>5. A more elegant way to change settings (config.sys and autoexec.bat)
>   See SETUP of DR DOS 6.
>6. A real good book for REXX. Mr. Mike Colishaw, will you re-write your
>   book? BTW, your PMGLOBE program is EXCELLENT.

Add (for me):

7.  A Workplace Shell backup program (I know...I tried WPSBACK...I don't 
    like it).
8.  Fixing Win-OS/2 sessions (mine die sometimes)
9.  Improved DOS and OS/2 windowed session speed in 8-bit color. (may be the
    the drivers limitations, tho)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: dkennett@fraser.sfu.ca (Daniel Kennett)
Subject: OS/2 2.x removal HOW? Cannot boot hardrive!
Summary: MY Hdisk is ph*cked!
Keywords: OS2
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 08:10:39 GMT

	After finally getting the OS 2.1b disks installed and working I reattached my drive connectors in their original sequence (A=5.25 B=3.5) and found that they both just sat their wirring and doing nothing, my computer wouldn't recognize them anymore.  So reconnect with 3.5 drive as A, just spines..., reconnect wiht 5.25 as A and no 3.5 works (gee now I've lost my 3.5 drive! =() <and yes my CMOS is setup correctly.>
	
	So, I boot with a dos boot disk and wipe the entire hardrive clear of OS/2 2.1b, hidden files and all, I even went so far as to repelace my IO.sys and MSDOS.sys (or whatever) and COMMAND.COM with originals.  I then removed my config and autoexec replacing them with toned down versions.  I reboot and my computer doesn't even load just gives two OS2SYS (or something along those lines.
doesn't even load just gives two OS2SYS (or something along those lines.) errors. and freezes.

	My dillema (sp) is this, I have 70meg of data left on my hardrive, a good amount of it is data that I cannot afford to lose.  Since my B (3.5Highdensity) drive is out of action, and I do not have alot of 5.25 disks lying around is there any way of clearing up that message, and restoring my harddrive??????????

	oh, I _DID NOT_ select HPFS! 

	I really and truly need help, I do not want to have to reformat my hardrive! (btw if it helps it is a 130meg 15ms IDE).  I'm already enjoying the prospect of buying a new 3.5 High Density drive! NOT!

	*sigh* I am beginning to hate os/2 =(

		-Daniel-
		dkennett@sfu.ca


Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: gilem@rebecca.its.rpi.edu (Michael R. Gile)
Subject: where is trantor scsi driver?
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 04:40:02 GMT

I am looking for the os2 trantor scsi driver t128scsi.add, 
does anyone know where it is?

please respond by email
thanks

Mike
gilem@rpi.edu
From: uznerk@mcl.ucsb.edu (Andrew Krenz)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Support for Speedstar 24X clone?
Date: 24 Jan 93 07:28:10 GMT

Today I went to one of those computer show things and picked up myself an 
accelerated video card.  It's called a Paradise accelerator and it uses
the same Western Digital chip as the Diamond Speedstar 24X card.  With the 
drivers it comes with, it shows a significant increase in performance over
my old Trident 8900 card under Windows 3.1, so I was wondering if anyone
had any success in getting a card like mine to work under OS/2, especially
the 2.1 beta version.

Thanks, 

-Andrew Krenz
uznerk@mcl.ucsb.edu

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz
Subject: OS/2 must ship with systems WAS: Is OS/2 a dead end?
Organization: Actrix Information Exchange
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 12:22:18 GMT
Keywords: So quoth Bill Gates

In article <1993Jan20.170840.4662@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> jebright@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (James R Ebright) writes:
> In article <enk2.60.727548526@po.cwru.edu> enk2@po.cwru.edu (Erik Kovach) writes:
> >In article <1993Jan20.163847.26969@cbfsb.cb.att.com> feg@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (forrest.e.gehrke) writes:
> >>So, are we all working with a dead end?  Are we just 
> >>whistling while passing the graveyard before 
> >>Microsoft unloads NT around May of this year?
> >
> >I think that OS/2 will either explode in popularity, or, which is more 
> >likely, have a somewhat small but dedicated following comperable to the 
> >Amiga users...they will be there and have software and generally have an 
> >impressive operating system, but will lack mainstream support.  Who knows...
> >from what I hear 'bout NT I am not that impressed with it as I am with OS/2.
> 
> The history of the computer market shows leaders don't always hold the lead.
> NT will launch and a lot of folks will talk about it.  Then things will
> begin to sort out...
> 
> If OS/2 keeps improving, its usage will spread.  Right now, it's mostly
> by word of mouth :-()   OS/2 needs some end-user marketing.  Nobody
> who isn't a computer jock has ever heard of it...(Sounds like UNIX ten
> years ago).  "4 out of 5 computer jocks prefer OS/2!" is not as good as
> "4 out 5 PC users prefer OS/2!".

At risk of starting the FTC thing again.......i just read through most of the
ads in the December Computer Shopper (mine comes by boat...OK?).
 
"* includes MSDOS5 and Windows 3.1!" 
 
got pretty boring by the 300th ad. A couple mentioned other OS's being
available...usually OS/2 was first mentioned as an alternative. 
 
But why virtually NO vendors will offer OS/2 as an option has me wondering.
People who use OS/2 almost have to go out and *find* it. I don't blame IBM for
this completely. The MS lock on the mail-order PC market *is* a virtual
monopoly. No one else gets a look in. 

How can OS/2 get vendors to ship it with systems? I don't know what the answer
is: make it $10 a copy to OEMs like MS has done with their software? 
 
Steve
-- 
Steve Withers - Wellington, New Zealand |      
Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz         |        Space for rent.
+64 4 478 4714                          |   - cheap rates, nice location. 
**** Happy user of OS/2 b2.1 ****       |
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Opinions Please -- WPS "feature"
Date: 27 Jan 93 00:47:05 GMT
Article-I.D.: njitgw.1993Jan27.004705.14948
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <gershon.728026826@husc.harvard.edu> gershon@husc11.harvard.edu (Ethan Gershon) writes:
>I agree that it would be a good feature.  A more general version of that
>feature would be that bringing a window into focus doesn't necessarily
>bring it to the foreground (like X-windows).

And easy to do.  An application can make a window active and
underneath other windows.  Using the WinSetWindowPos command, you can
position a window anywhere in the "stack" of windows you want and
either activate or deactivate it.  I discovered this when my first
version of MineSweeper were coming up focussed but underneath
everything until I forced it to the surface.

-- 
  |)  David Charlap          | .signature confiscated by FBI due to
 /|_  dic5340@hertz.njit.edu | an ongoing investigation into the
((|,)                        | source of these .signature virusses
 ~|~
From: gkushmer@jade.tufts.edu (Greg Kushmerek)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Migrating Migraines
Date: 26 Jan 93 21:40:06 GMT
Organization: Tufts University - Medford, MA

Open the templates folder and drag a copy of the "Program" template out to 
the WPS or another folder.  Then you can go through the settings window
of that new icon and tell it where your program is stored.

--gk

--

"The early worm becomes an appetizer"
			
				-EN-
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: orville%weyrich@uunet.uu.net (Orville R. Weyrich)
Subject: Re: OS/2 must ship with systems WAS: Is OS/2 a dead end?
Keywords: So quoth Bill Gates
Reply-To: uunet.uu.net!weyrich!orville
Organization: Weyrich Computer Consulting
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 07:11:18 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.122218.13244@actrix.gen.nz> Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz writes:
>At risk of starting the FTC thing again.......i just read through most of the
>ads in the December Computer Shopper (mine comes by boat...OK?).
> 
>"* includes MSDOS5 and Windows 3.1!" 
> 
>got pretty boring by the 300th ad. A couple mentioned other OS's being
>available...usually OS/2 was first mentioned as an alternative. 
> 
>But why virtually NO vendors will offer OS/2 as an option has me wondering.
>People who use OS/2 almost have to go out and *find* it. I don't blame IBM for
>this completely. The MS lock on the mail-order PC market *is* a virtual
>monopoly. No one else gets a look in. 
>
>How can OS/2 get vendors to ship it with systems? I don't know what the answer
>is: make it $10 a copy to OEMs like MS has done with their software? 

I asked one local vendor [Hard Drives International] about machines coming
with OS/2 installed as an option and was told that they didn't do it because
it was too hard to configure for all their hardware options. Oh well.
They could have sold me a new computer with a wizbang SVGA if they had one
to show me that worked.

But I suspect that many hardware houses just don't think that OS/2 is worth
the bother to get to work with their systems. That will be their loss --
if the hardware houses don't add any value [OS/2] support they will have
nothing to distinguish themselves from the basement-priced clones that
dosn't add any value nor charge for added value.


orville

--------------------------------------           ******************************
Orville R. Weyrich, Jr.                           Weyrich Computer Consulting
Certified Data Processor                         POB 5782, Scottsdale, AZ 85261
Certified Systems Professional                        Voice: (602) 391-0821
Internet: orville%weyrich@uunet.uu.net                Fax:   (602) 661-0660
--------------------------------------           ******************************
From: unruh@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Unruh)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Focus moves with mouse?
Date: 28 Jan 93 18:10:45 GMT
Organization: The University of British Columbia
NNTP-Posting-Host: unixg.ubc.ca
Keywords: mouse, focus, foreground, background

In <1k77foINNrr4@chnews.intel.com> sstrazdu@vulcan.intel.com (Stephen Strazdus) writes:
]people, including me, are asking for.  With xfeel, the focus moves with
]the mouse *and* the window rises to the top of the stack.  What I would
]prefer is a way to have the focus move with the mouse, but not rise to the
]top.  This way you can type in a window which is partially obscured by another
]window.
...
]I think IBM should incorporate this feature.  If they don't, MS will
]probably put it in NT and act like they invented it.

Well hardly invented- It's standard on Sunview, the old Sun windowing 
system
Does anybody know, can the "foreground" be seperated from the "focus"
under OS2 WPS or are they linked in the guts of OS2?
From: klotz@x.cip.e-technik.uni-erlangen.de (Juergen Klotz)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: driver for canon bj300/330 required
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 12:38:49 GMT
Organization: Regionales Rechenzentrum Erlangen
NNTP-Posting-Host: cipx.e-technik.uni-erlangen.de




hi folks,


a few days ago  bought a canon bj300 bubblejet printer,
it does great prints from TeX (360x360dpi), so everything's ok!

but what i wander is :

is there a driver to use the printer with 360x360 dpi from the PM ??
of course i can use the ibmproprinter 4207 ?? or something like that,
but thatr driver only does 360x180 dpi

what the manual from the printer says :

   the BJ300 is compatible to the IBM 24XL proprinter, beside one point:
   you cannot use ESC g* (or somthing like that) from the 24XL to switch to
   high res. grphics (360x360) , but you can use the FS **** (couldn't remember
   what exacty)  from the 24XL.

so if anyone knows where to get a driver

please reply to
   klotz@cip.e-technik.uni-erlangen.de



bye,
    juergen klotz
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Can the IBM C-Compiler compile Windows 3.0 apps?
Date: 27 Jan 93 01:05:59 GMT
Article-I.D.: njitgw.1993Jan27.010559.15263
Distribution: usa
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <1k1l8cINNfoe@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu> sundaram@egr.msu.edu (Divya Sundaram) writes:
>I am also wondering if there is any ONE compiler that will compile DOS, WIN3.x
>and OS2 progs .... this will undoubtedly same me a lot of disk space ....

The only one I know of is the old Microsoft C 6.0a compiler, and it
won't produce 32-bit code.
-- 
  |)  David Charlap          | .signature confiscated by FBI due to
 /|_  dic5340@hertz.njit.edu | an ongoing investigation into the
((|,)                        | source of these .signature virusses
 ~|~
From: enk2@po.cwru.edu (Erik Kovach)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: A: != 3.5"
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 17:12:18 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University
NNTP-Posting-Host: b62711.student.cwru.edu

In article <1993Jan21.082447.1@univrs.decnet.lockheed.com> okamura@univrs.decnet.lockheed.com writes:
>Is there another way to install these software packages
>without having to swap drive cable cables and altering
>the configuration memory?

There WAS a program on hobbes.nmsu.edu that allowed the installation of
OS/2 2.0 with the B: drive, but I think that was it (NO to CSD, etc.).
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc