HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rommel@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE (Kai-Uwe Rommel)
Subject: Re: PDK expiration notice
Organization: Technische Universitaet Muenchen, Germany
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 09:12:33 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.203127.70767@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STACY JOHN BEHRENS) writes:
>Just so everyone knows, if you have the origional OS/2 PDK, the code expires
>*tomarrow*  (Dec.15)  Your license is no longer valid and you must get the new
>version (november '92 version)

... which has no longer an expiration date.

Kai Uwe Rommel

/* Kai Uwe Rommel --- rommel@informatik.tu-muenchen.de */

DOS ... is still a real mode only non-reentrant interrupt
handler, and always will be.                -Russell Williams
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Distribution: world
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 16:24:12 -0800
From: George_Marengo@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org
Subject: Re: Survivability
Comment-To: Yamanari@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org
Reply-To: George_Marengo@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org
X-FSC-PATH: 202/514

Yam> from one another).  OTOH, it is a lot slower and somewhat
Yam> less stable than Win3.1, and has none of Win3.1's features.

 OTOH, I am using the WinOS231 subsystem (beta) and it is faster
in all regards compared to MS-Windows 3.1. It should be available for
general use (released) within a month or so. On file loads/saves it's 
faster, on scrolls it's faster, on Winbench it's faster than the MS
product. 
___
 * MR/2 1.32 NR * This is your sysop. +++i$ !s a usEg on dgug$.

--- Maximus/2 2.01wb
 * Origin: OS/2 Connection @ La Jolla, CA  <619-558-9475> (1:202/514)
Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.advocacy:10336 comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy:3215
From: hwhalen@jupiter.sun.csd.unb.ca (Hugh Whalen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Rude behavior on this group.
Date: 15 Dec 92 15:32:15 GMT
Organization: Faculty of Administration, University of New Brunswick

In article <1992Dec14.213730.28787@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>In <1992Dec13.200650.7979@microsoft.com> richs@microsoft.com (Rick Schaut) writes:
>
 
[lots of stuff deleted]
>
>>Just to head off the next argument that's headed my way, I want to point
>>out that a correlation between system price and the price the vendor pays
>>for bundled software doesn't prove that the vendor is passing the costs on.
>>That's because the causal link cannot be established.  The higher price
>>that the vendor is able to charge for the system with the bundled software
>>is more likely to be due to consumer demand (a computer which includes
>>system software is more desireable than a chunk of hardware on which one
>>must bootstrap system software) than it is due to a vendor trying to cover
>>costs.
>
>
>>I would suggest that a good number of the readers of these newsgroups
>>enroll in a few Economics courses before trying to argue about the effects
>>of licensing agreements on computer prices.
>
>Some of us have.  In fact, some of us have taken more than a few
>Economics courses.  The reasoning about how getting DOS and Windows
>even when you don't want it is 'free' is, in my opinion, bogus.  I may
>only be paying a few dollars for it (given rumours about some of the
>sweetheart deals that MS cuts with vendors who force it to be sold
>with the machine), but I'm still paying for it.  Anyone who believes
>otherwise should probably get outdoors with a bucket, lest it start
>raining soup and they miss it.
>
>

*WARNING Speculation and stuff from memory follows:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Microsoft Word for Windows contains a grammar checker. If you notice 
the copyright notice on the log on screen it appears that someone 
other than Microsoft wrote it. I would assume then that Microsoft pays 
a royalty for each copy shipped. I believe the next version of 
WordPerfect will also include a licensed grammar checker *without* an 
increase in price. If this is true then we have an example of a cost 
to the producer which is not passed on to the consumer because of the 
effects of competition. I also believe that the list price for the two 
products is the same. 

As I said the stuff above is my best recollection of the facts. Anyone 
with better data is free to flame .... er... respond. 



Hugh Whalen                     | Where all men think alike, no one
Faculty of Administration       | thinks very much.
University of New Brunswick     |               - Walter Lippmann			


DISCLAIMER: Neither UNB nor I care what the other thinks.
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: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 03:47:47 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.163148.0261104@locus.com> lowell@locus.com (Lowell Morrison) writes:
>

[re: Boffiniana]
>>
>
>Hmmm, I don't own a cray, but I do own several of the Boffin Products.
>Not Modeling software, but data reduction for such things as Electric
>logs, gravity surveys and the like.  Seeing as I live in a house whose
>construction had to be cleared with this software, and drive a car using
>a fuel who's production depended in part on this software, I would guess
>that it is of great importance to me wether I am a Geologist or not.  Wether
>the Software is Vertical Market or not.
>
>The Cray is of course too slow for the job it was intended (Geophysical
>Survey [seismic survey] of offshore oil prospects) when you need to do
>it in real time.  However, It is fast enough to get you to reshoot an 
>area while you are still in the field, instead of next year or the year
>after (those remobilization costs can really hurt).  Data Collection for
>this type of survey is on the order of Megabytes/second, depending on the
>number of systems deployed (typically 4 or 5 at a collection rate of 20-
>30 megabytes/sec).
>
>However, most needs for desktop systems are for relitively simply problems.
>Soil Compaction ratios and graphs (I wrote such a program a number of 
>years ago that ran on an osborne I), soil stablity calculations, Sheer
>Strength calculations.  And in the oil industry, calculations of where
>that drill really is (they do wander quite a bit)...

Thanks for the answer; it sounds like Boffin is far more important that
I'd guessed and I herewith happily withdraw my questions about their,
um, 'existence.'  I still think they need advice on how to name their
products, however, but if they're happy and their customers are happy
with Viperflo and Dolitte, hey, who am I to complain?

>And a listing of all available software should include all available software
>wether it is vertical market or not.  And certianly it should include software
>that is important to the every day man (wether he realizes it is important or
>not, [Do you know what package the IRS uses to calculate your taxes <grin>]).
>
>--Lowell Morrison
>--Uncle Wolf

Well, maybe, maybe not.  Where does one draw the line?  Should we list
every in-house piece of software written for every OS?  Why not? -- in
house use demonstrates the significance and applicability of that
platform, right?  Even if neither you nor I could possibly purchase
that software...

It seems to me pointless to try and argue that a platform (whether
Windows, OS/2, Unix, NT, Fred's OS, whatever) is well supported by
listing apps that are, to say the least, very, very narrowly focused and
pitched to a very few.  I'm not saying that the measure of success is to
be garnered only from sales figures for word processors and games, but
there has to be a happy medium somewhere.

Merry seasonally correct greetings!

jmalloy@hamilton.edu
.
 
>
>
From: gupw@uniwa.uwa.edu.au (Paul Wagland)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Here's some Advocacy for you.
Date: 14 Dec 1992 22:39:10 +0800
Organization: The University of Western Australia
NNTP-Posting-Host: uniwa.uwa.edu.au

rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:

>In article <1gh6jjINN9mg@uniwa.uwa.edu.au> gupw@uniwa.uwa.edu.au (Paul Wagland) writes:
>> OK, I'll explain what I mean.  Creative Labs have already released a
>> driver for their SoundBlaster CD interface, Trident have already
>> released 32bit drivers for their cards.

>	Is CL putting that on the package?  Putting those drivers in
>	the box?
>	<I hope not, I need someone else to complain about>
>	Oo, Trident.  There's high technology.  
>	:-(

I don't know if CL have got their drivers into the box yet, I doubt it
as it is still in beta....
and on the second point.....I aggree totally, but then they did call NT
New technology even though it is mostly just old stuff shoved together
in a new package. (ie VMS/Unix/etc)

Paul - Let the Flames roll on..... :)
-- 
Paul Wagland            | These opinions are mine and no-one elses
gupw@uniwa.uwa.edu.au   | Bingy Bingy Bingy Frogs Go round and round
------------------------+     -- Another silly quote from me  :-)
From: gyan@unixg.ubc.ca (Gyan P. Sinha)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: who is brian sturgill - really?
Date: 17 Dec 92 21:56:08 GMT
Organization: The University of British Columbia
NNTP-Posting-Host: unixg.ubc.ca

In <1992Dec17.172701.2089@usage.csd.unsw.OZ.AU> pendrith@spectrum.cs.unsw.oz.au (Mark Pendrith) writes:

		[Stuff Deleted]
>- Mark

>pendrith@cs.unsw.oz.au

>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.

Seasons Greetings!

Gyan.
From: finsys@cpva.saic.com
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.1 specifications, release date.- TBD
Date: 16 Dec 92 21:18:09 GMT
Organization: Science Applications Int'l Corp./San Diego


 nevries@accucx.cc.ruu.nl (Nico E de Vries) writes:
>Here the official specs of OS/2 2.1 directly from IBM:
>
>- more printer drivers
>- Windows 3.1 support
>- native Windows 3.1 performance with 8Mb RAM machines
>- improved performance for low memory configurations
>- 32bit graphics engine
>- multimedia support
>- portable PC support
>- CD-ROM version
With all of the commenting regarding release dates, I figure I'll throw
in the latest that I've heard.  I attended IBM's OS/2 seminar here in
San Diego yesterday (12/15/92).  I specifically asked a number of the IBM reps
about the next release.  I was told that a determination HAD NOT been made
as to the contents, or release date, of the next release.  Apparently a rather
large bug (I don't know the nature of it) has been encountered delaying the
WIN31-OS2 version (ie the one currently in BETA).  Expected release date is
some time in January, though quite possibly later. 
As to version number, well... it depends.  If the current BETA version is 
ready in say, January, then the version would be 2.01, upgrade same as CSD - 
ie nominal shipping charge.  However,  if testing delays things to 
march/april, then everything will be bundled into the new version- 2.1, 
which should be ready in that same time frame.

Lawrence Dee
internet - deel1@scvm1.saic.com
 speaking only for myself
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: jerry@msi.com (Jerry Shekhel)
Subject: Re: Some miscellaneous questions about os/2 from early info
Followup-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Organization: Molecular Simulations, Inc.
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 23:11:09 GMT
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
X-Posted-From: phoenix.msi.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

Michael R. Gile (gilem@aix.rpi.edu) wrote:
:
: 	1) it states that in os/2 2.0 the total code and data space available
: to an app is 512Kb, and that this restriction will be removed in later
: version.  Is this really true? or is it only for console apps?  In my mind,
: this is a *BIG* problem, reminds me of MSDOS.
:

Either there was a misprint, or you misread it.  The limitation is 512MB, not
512KB.

:
: 	2) it says later on that os/2 has a built in math emulation library
: which eliminates the need for each app to be compiled with emulation ""s
: This is a very good idea, and I don't know why ms didn't do it with windows.
: Is this still true?
:

Windows also has a built-in FPU emulator -- WIN87EMM.DLL, or something like
that.

:
: Mike
:
--
+-------------------+----------------------------+---------------------------+
| JERRY J. SHEKHEL  | Molecular Simulations Inc. | Time just fades the pages |
| Drummers do it... |     Burlington, MA USA     | in my book of memories.   |
|    ... In rhythm! |        jerry@msi.com       |         -- Guns N' Roses  |
+-------------------+----------------------------+---------------------------+
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Distribution: world
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 92 01:18:14 -0800
From: Craig_Swanson@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org
Subject: Re: NT is missing something major:  OS/2 32-bit compatibility
Comment-To: Mike_Timbol@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org
Reply-To: Craig_Swanson@f514.n202.z1.fidonet.org
X-FSC-PATH: 202/514


 MT> Oh really?  And which version do you refer to when you say 2.x? 
You
 MT> certainly don't mean 2.0 nor do you mean 2.01, right?  I'm kind
of
 MT> interested to find out where IBM announced this.  Care to fill me
in?

OS/2 2.x in some version past 2.1 will probably be able to run Win32s
applications as IBM is rumored to have started work on this a few
months ago.
I don't believe they made an "official" announcement yet, however.  I
don't believe that Microsoft has made an "official" announcement about
Win32s final ship date yet, either, but we all know that its coming,
right?


--- Maximus/2 2.01wb
 * Origin: OS/2 Connection @ La Jolla, CA  <619-558-9475> (1:202/514)
From: bjorn@ludd.luth.se (Bjorn Fahller)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Unicode - anyone knwos something ? (was Re: HPFS-386
Date: 13 Dec 92 00:28:34 GMT
Organization: Lule} Tekniska H|gskolas Datorf|rening - Ludd

In <92345.112949RONY@awiwuw11.wu-wien.ac.at> RONY@awiwuw11.wu-wien.ac.at (FLATSCHER Rony) writes:

>Sitting in Europe, having friends and relatives scattered all over Europe
>and Japan, Unicode is a very much deserved and needed feature missing at the
>moment in OS/2. This is very important for exchanging documents among different
>countries.

>Does anyone know (maybe from IBM) when Unicode is due under OS/2 ?

A remotely related subject. I read in a magazine some time ago, that ISO
found Unicode to be obsolete and that they're working on a 32 bit character
set. Does anyone know anything about that at all, or was I just dreaming?
I haven't seen Unicode yet, but I have a hard time understanding how 16-bit
shouldn't be enough for a character set.

BTW, I'm also hoping that OS/2 in a very short time will incorporate Unicode
(full out). This mess with code-pages is just not very good.

   _
/Bjorn.
-- 
Bjorn Fahller     Phone:              |The opinions above are not necessarily
Trollnasvagen 3A  Intl:+46 920 226870 |those of... Hey! Wait a minute. Do you
S-951 61 Lulea    Natl:0920-22 68 70  |seriously expect Me, a student, to carry
Sweden            << space for rent >>|the official voice of the University?
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: Printer doesn't print..
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 21:18:05 GMT

In <1992Dec12.042412.1629@parrot.in-berlin.de> Andreas.Kari%bbs@parrot.in-berlin.de (Andreas Kari) writes:

>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.. 

Have you ever printed with any other printer on this printer port?  If
not, it may be a port problem.  Some LPT ports don't do interrupts
correctly (OS/2 wants an edge triggered interrupt, I think).  If the
port doesn't do this correctly, you cannot print from OS/2 with that
port.  We had this problem on one machine here, but with OS/2 1.X.

-- 
"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: kumarad@ecf.toronto.edu (KUMARADAS JOSEPH CARL)
Subject: Re: Why 512MB limit in OS/2?
Organization: University of Toronto, Engineering Computing Facility
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 18:51:46 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.064426.7111@ryn.mro4.dec.com> Peter.Mayne@cao.mts.dec.com writes:
>
>Why does OS/2 have a limit of 512MB per application?
>
It is there to maintain compatibility with 16 bit OS/2 apps.  It will be 
removed once 16 bit apps are a thing of the past.

Carl.
From: rommel@jonas.gold.sub.org (Kai Uwe Rommel)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Re PDK expiration notice
Distribution: world
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 23:50:36 MET
Organization: Private

In article <1992Dec15.235334.42749@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STACY JOHN BEHRENS) writes:
>In article <1992Dec15.091233.10611@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE>, rommel@Informatik
>.TU-Muenchen.DE (Kai-Uwe Rommel) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec14.203127.70767@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> sjb5@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (S
>TACY JOHN BEHRENS) writes:
>>>Just so everyone knows, if you have the origional OS/2 PDK, the code expires
>>>*tomarrow*  (Dec.15)  Your license is no longer valid and you must get the new
>>>version (november '92 version)
>>
>>... which has no longer an expiration date.
>
>I wish it didn't.  Its expiration date is Febuary 15, 1993.  Second paragraph
>on the pack of the CD case.  (for the november CD)

Strange, my copy doesn't have one. No matter how hard I try, I can't
find one :-). Maybe european versions are different than US versions?
After all, the version I have was made in UK.

Kai Uwe Rommel

--
/* Kai Uwe Rommel                                      Muenchen, Germany *
 * rommel@jonas.gold.sub.org                       Phone +49 89 723 4101 *
 * rommel@informatik.tu-muenchen.de                  Fax +49 89 723 7889 */

DOS ... is still a real mode only non-reentrant interrupt
handler, and always will be.                -Russell Williams
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
From: pathak@mitre.org (Heeren Pathak)
Subject: Re: OS/2 2.1 specifications, release date.
Followup-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Organization: Mitre Corporation
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 16:45:38 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.140618.26776@kub.nl>, hoppie@kub.nl (Jeroen
Hoppenbrouwers) wrote:
> 
> (stuff deleted)
> 
> |> >In another posting somewhere (!) I read that 2.1 would include DPMI support.
> |> >Is that so?
> |> 
> |> Unless I am greatly mistaken, the current version of OS/2, the one which has
> |> been out for 8 months now supports DPMI.  It is VCPI (sp?) that it doesn't
> |> support.  DPMI has been there from the start.
> 
> Maybe first poster meant "Windows 3.1 rewritten such that it can use DPMI so
> 386 enhanced mode applications will work as well". I read that this feature
> would be included with the next release.

Since I was the first poster... let me clarify.  From what I understand,
Windows acted as a DMPI server in 386 enchanced mode.  However, it wasn't a
strict implementation of the DMPI specs.  Thus, OS/2's DMPI implementation
wouldn't work with Windows (even though it did work with DesqView's). 
Since the next release will provide 386 enchanced mode support, I assumed
the IBM must have fixed the DMPI implementation of Windows so it can
interoperate with OS/2's DPMI implementation.  Such a change probably
required quite a bit of effort and would explain why it took IBM so long to
provide Windows 3.1 support under OS/2.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Heeren Pathak                      | Millions long for immortality who do 
pathak@mitre.org                   | not know what to do with themselves
Mitre Corporation                  | on a rainy Sunday afternoon.
(617) 271-7465                     |	               	-- Susan Ertz
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: Mine not Mitre's.
From: lbv2@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (BRIAN PAUL VAN LIEU)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS/2 and Fast Modems Question
Date: 15 Dec 92 01:31:00 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <92347.153130TMW108@psuvm.psu.edu>, TMW108@psuvm.psu.edu (Tom) writes
:
>Dear Group,
>I am putting together my first PC purchase... I have used
>OS/2 and I think that it's pretty keen. I need a MODEM, but I read the
>following:
>
>     "You won't find any products faster than the <XYZ modem>, which
>      boasts transmission speeds of 14,400 bits per second for both
>      fax and data. But it's not speed alone that makes this modem a
>      a standout. BECAUSE PROBLEMS CAN ARISE WITH A HIGH-SPEED MODEM
>      RUNNING IN MULTITASKING OPERATING ENVIRONMENTS SUCH AS WINDOWS 3.1
>      AND OS/2 2.0, <company> DESIGNED A SMART COMPONENT TO BUFFER DATA
>      COMING INTO THE SERIAL PORT UNTIL THE PC CAN HANDLE IT." (Emphasis mine)
>
>                                                -PC Computing Dec 1992
>
>Now, just what are the effects of the data flood coming into the machine?
>Have any of you had any such experience? If so, can you suggest a Modem
>which won't have this problem.???
>
>Thanks... Tom.


    Hmmmm. Well, for starters, the best thing you can do is get a machine
    with a better COM chip, such as the UR16550 chip. Most boards have an
    older version ot the UR chip. THe 16550 has a data buffer that helps
    *loads* when dealing with transmitions greater then 9600 baus. (help me
    out here gang, I am new at communications..). This chip is >$20!

    I am commenting because I (thanks to Lehigh and my ridiculous tuition)have
    a 19200 modem in my room. I do not have the newer chip, and still function
quite fine. My friends down the hall both have them, and you do see the
performance jump...


   P.S How is NT coming along???

   Wouldn't we all like to know. I still say May-June, maybe. Others will
   quickly disagree. Hope your mailbox is empty =}


                                                cheers,

                                                bvl
>
-- 

  Brian P. Van Lieu
  Lehigh University-AXP
  lbv2@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu

            OS/2 2.0...anything else is just a DOS.