HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: singh@n3000a.ece.wisc.edu (bhaskar)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Do we need to upgrade to AmiPro3.0???
Date: 28 Jul 92 04:47:39 GMT
Organization: Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison; Electrical & Computer Engineering

Hi Folks

	As most of you registered users of AmiPro, I finally got the AmiPro 3.0 
upgrade offer letter in the mail today. Well they're charging 79 bucks for the 
upgrade, but my question here is if it is worth it?
	Let's see now, first it has fast format. It says I'll save some key-
strokes by copying one format, and applying it to other parts of the test. Nice 
but I don't think that is worth $79. Drag'nDrop looks like a nice feature for 
moving text, but it isn't an innovation, just a Drag'nDrop from MsWord.
SmartClick can give me a few more dialog boxes, but I already have them at a 
mere 2 keystrokes, so I may not even take rust off my right mouse button. 
I am a single user on a DOS machine so I don't think I need the SmartMerger for
the mail. SmartIcon creator, well I already create SmartIcons and associate 
them to keystrokes etc. Document and style sheet viewer? Well I have my 
StyleSheets documented in a file and at a click of a mouse, so I guess I can 
skip that. Automated label and envelop printing? Great, now I can get that 4/9in
envelop printed right at the first time, without all those trials and misprinted 
envelops. A grammar corrector? How about my free copy of Right Writer, can't I
live with that.
	How about a TrueType fonnts Disk? How about some foreign language 
dictionaries along with the basic package, since many of us might want to
write in Spanish or French etc. How about those innovations like SmartIcons for
2.0 release? Humm wondering why this isn't just AmiPro2.005?
	Well every thing from the upgrade letter seems so cosmetic that I am 
having second thought about spending 79 bucks, any way I dilled their 800 number 
and asked for the free  demo copy. They promptly informed that I'll get that by 
mid August, may be after that I'll change my mind. What do you guys think? Shell 
we jump in the sea just because everyone has got to lay their hands on that
X^3 upgrade? All opinions and critique welcome, including those from Lotus insiders...



Bhaskar Singh
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: cdent@europa (Christopher Dent)
Subject: Re: The response to Releases?
Reply-To: cdent@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu
Organization: Indiana University
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 14:40:06 GMT

In article <92204.074425SASTPH@vm.sas.com> <SASTPH@vm.sas.com> writes:
> In article <1992Jul22.021820.25739@athena.cs.uga.edu>,
> mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) says:
> >
> >Was "Windows 3.00a" the last release of Windows 3.0?  Or was
> >there a later one?
> 
> I assume this is a "joke" posting and therefore I am having my
> leg pulled...
> 
> Just in case this is a serious request, though:  Windows 3.1
> was released in early April, in one of the biggest media blitzes
> ever witnessed in the history of the solar system.

--
I think the question was Windows 3.0 not 3.x.

It is my understanding the 3.00a was the last release before 3.1. But I don't  
know for sure.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Dent                        | cdent@indiana.edu
"It's not that it was so bad...   | access@indiana.edu
 ...just that it could have been  | Access MicroCenter 
 so good" - a country song        | Indiana University
From: lanceo@cs.utexas.edu (L. Lance Obermeyer)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: W4W to FrameMaker conversion?
Followup-To: lanceo@cs.utexas.edu
Date: 24 Jul 1992 10:38:46 -0500
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: cash.cs.utexas.edu
Summary: is it possible
Keywords: framemaker, w4w

Hi netters.

Is there a way to convert Word for Windows v2 files (including
Draw objects) to FrameMaker.  I looked at the box of Word for Word
and it didn't mention FrameMaker.

Alternatively, I see there is now FrameMaker for Windows.
Is it any good?  Can it read/write Word files?

Thanks,
	Lance

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Lance Obermeyer                         lanceo@cs.utexas.edu
Graduate Student,  Computer Sciences    (512) 338-0817
The University of Texas at Austin       #include <disclaimer>
You say potatoe, I say potato.  Let's call the whole thing off!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: shenoy@iastate.edu (Shiva Shenoy)
Subject: Re: Windows locks on logo screen
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 13:29:21 GMT

In <cee1.711874622@Isis.MsState.Edu> cee1@ra.msstate.edu (Charles Evans) writes:

>chunks of the logo are missing, left with black (as around the logo) and
>it locks up., and i have to reboot. Sorta looks like some black on black
>ascii characters (in video mode still) were like typed over the logo,
>but everything is locked.. any ideas?

>never had problems.. i am planning to reinstall, but may wait.

Before you reinstall try this:
rename the win.com file in your windows dir to win.old .
copy the win.cnf file from your windows/system directory to your windows
directory. Now rename the win.cnf file in your windows directory to win.com

Try running windows now. You should be able to get into windows without that
darn logo popping up. If you still have problems, try starting windows with
the following command: win /b
This will create a bootlog.txt file in your windows directory which will
show you exactly where it bombed.

Hope this helps. Hope you have backups. All this should not delete anything
but who knows. You can always go back to where you were by renaming the
win.old file as win.com .

-- 
Shiva Shenoy                           | e-mail: shenoy@iastate.edu 
2066 Black,                            | Office: (515)-294-0082
Dept. of Aero. Engg. & Engg. Mechanics | Home  : (515)-296-7640
Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50010  |
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: plummer@hercules.cs.uregina.ca (Dave Plummer)
Subject: Re: What is Cairo?
Reply-To: plummer@hercules.uregina.ca (Dave Plummer)
Organization: University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 16:04:12 GMT

In article <8949@travis.csd.harris.com> leoh@hcxio.hdw.csd.harris.com (Leo Hinds) writes:
>In article <1992Jul19.204208.6374@leland.Stanford.EDU> gyugyi@leland.Stanford.EDU (Paul Gyugyi) writes:
>>|> Well, Alchin stated that Cairo derives from the quote "... all
>>|> roads lead to Cairo". Don't know about Chicago, though...
>
>Actually the "historical" quote is all roads lead to ROME (as in Roman empire).
>

I thought all road lead to 7-Eleven.


Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: tanu@beach.csulb.edu (     Tanu Kartawiria)
Subject: Is HIMEM.SYS public domain? 
Organization: Cal State Long Beach
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 19:55:57 GMT


Hi,
I heard that Microsoft has made HIMEM.SYS public domain, is that true? 
Or can we freely upgrade our HIMEM.SYS to
newer version without buying a whole bunch of MSDOS5 or Windows 3.1?

We currently have Windows 3.0, we have one copy of MsDos 5. We'd like to
upgrade all our machines' HIMEM.SYS with DOs5 version. We need to do that
because some of our software is compatible with DOS 5 version of HIMEM.sys 
but not Win30 version.

Thanks,
Regards,

-tanu-
CSLUB LIB AB COMP.
-- 
-tanu-
tanu@beach.csulb.edu
CSULB LIB LAB
From: rega@lagrange (Roger E Gregory-Allen )
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Problem with Old Logitech Mouse
Date: 24 Jul 92 04:11:05 GMT
Organization: Colorado State University, Fort Collins

I'm trying to install Win 3.0 on a machine with an older Logitech mouse.
Occasionally, the mouse will work, but the mouse cursor usually
disappears just about the time ProgMan finishes loading.  I went looking
for an alternate Logitech driver (on oak and cica), but found nothing.

This problem first appeared when trying to use a runtime version of Win2
that came with PageMaker (this machine and most of it's software predate
Win3).  I fully expected that installing a "real" version of Windows
would fix things, but no go.

When used in plain DOS, the mouse seems to be fine.

Any suggestions?

The machine:  386sx, NEAT chip set, AMI-NEAT bios
              Monochrome (as in Hercules) video 
	      1 meg of RAM (I'm trying to get them some more:) 
	      
	      The logitech mouse appears to have been made around '89, 
	      the model number is CC-93-9F and the DOS driver version 
	      is 4.10.  It's installed on COM1.


                        Thanks for any help,
                        Roger E. Gregory-Allen
                        rega@math.colostate.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: ryals@seq.uncwil.edu (Robert Ryals)
Subject: using mouse in dos apps
Organization: Univ. of North Carolina @ Wilmington
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 18:41:22 GMT

Can anyone tell me what to do to get the mouse to work in DOS apps running
under Windows.  Right now I get a message saying that the DOS app is attempting
to take over COM1 which Windows is controlling.  I can select whether I want
the DOS app or Windows to control the device, but either way it doesn't work
right.  Any ideas or suggestions ?  (I'm using Windows 3.1 with Norton Desktop
if that makes any difference.)

Robert Ryals
ryals@seq.uncwil.edu

Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: axa12@po.CWRU.Edu (Ashok Aiyar)
Subject: Re: Windows == OS (MOVE TO comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy)
Reply-To: axa12@po.CWRU.Edu (Ashok Aiyar)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 11:44:54 GMT


In a previous article, Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz () says:

>In article <Bs1D6B.Gp@brunel.ac.uk> Robert.Turner@brunel.ac.uk (Robert Turner) writes:
>> The subject line really says it all. To satisfy an argument here, can
>> someone please tell me (officially?)......  Is Windows 3.1 an OS, or
>> just another application running under DOS?
>> 
>> I think that the latter is true, but a number of people here do not
>> believe me. Could I be wrong?
>
>I would agree with anyone who claimed that DOS/Windows *together* form an OS.
>Windows - unable to stand alone - is not an OS. 
> 
>A parallel would be IBM's mainfram OS: MVS (Multiple Virtual System). This can
>stand on it's own. But to get any *real* work done, you also need (and get)
>JES2 (Job Entry Subsytem/2). JES2 can't stand on it's own. It needs MVS to
>provide system services to it. Together, they form the MVS operating system or
>environment. Of course, you also need VTAM to provide the network.
> 
>OS/2 is an OS. The various flavours of Unix are OS's. Coherent is an OS (as i
>understand it). DOS is an OS, though a pretty basic one. 

Move this thread to the comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy group
please.  The material would be more appropriate for that
group.

Ashok
-- 
  Ashok A. Aiyar   Department of Biochemistry   CWRU Med. School
   		       axa12@po.cwru.edu
		   aiyar@cwbio.bioc.cwru.edu
                Visit the IBM-PC Sig on Freenet
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: charlesk@fraser.sfu.ca (Charles Hak Kim)
Subject: Re: DOS Winodows under Win 3.1
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 02:10:21 GMT

morton@qucdntri.ee.queensu.ca writes:

>>BTW, does Win3.1 at 800x600x256 seem fuzzy to ya?  I have a 14" non-int.
>>monitor, but the win desktop looks kinda fuzzy ta me.  Any ideas as to
>>why?  Is it the card?  Is it the monitor?  Drivers?  Settings?

>Hmm.. 14" non-int sounds like a decent monitor. However, check the manual
>for it's spec's. Try to find what it's "dot-pitch" is. Most half decent 
>monitors have 0.28 or 0.31. Anything bigger than that _will_ look fuzzy.

The monitor has a .28 mm dot pitch.  I suspect now that the problem has
something to do with the refresh rate.  I'm working on it, but any suggestions
comments, advice, words of wisdom will be greatly appreciated.

Regards,

Charles H. Kim

charlesk@sfu.ca
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: thayne@unislc.uucp (Thayne Forbes)
Subject: Re: EMM386 error
Organization: Unisys Corporation SLC
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 16:38:11 GMT

From article <1992Jul22.202542.16490@uwm.edu>, by hardiman@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Paul V Hardiman):
> 
> After starting to use EMM386 lately, my machine has been crashing
> frequently with the following messages:
> 
>   EMM386 exception error #06 - press ENTER to reboot
> 
>   EMM386 invalid page fault
> 
> Can anyone tell me what these messages indicate in some detail?

The Microsoft Winders Resource Kit Readme file suggests that this is
probably a stack overflow.  It is probably not related to EMM386, just
that EMM386 found the error and faulted.  The WRK suggests that you
include the 
STACKS=9,256
line in your config.sys file.  This is more common when there are
applications/drivers/TSRs which chain the interrupts, and use up
the applications stack space.  I.e. your network drivers.  Try that
and see if it helps.

-- 
           "If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure."
                            -U.S. Vice President J. Danforth Quayl[e]
Thayne Forbes
thayne@unislc.slc.unisys.com
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: 31005_1650@uwovax.uwo.ca (Mark Bramwell 1-519-661-3714)
Subject: win31 or win31mm? how differ?
Organization: University of Western Ont, London
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 16:42:03 GMT

I just bought Creative Labs Multi Media kit.

It came with win3.1, cd rom player, disks, and a sound blaster pro.

I already win3.1 loaded, so I simply installed the mm drivers.

I can run all apps, and I can hear the sound, but I get a message box that
states I may not be able to play the files correctly.  The music / voices seems
to play but the message box is annoying.

What is the difference between win3.1  and win3.1 Multi-media other than
a few drivers?  

I don't want to crack open my 2nd copy of win3.1 and re-install.
-- 


..........................................................................
.  Mark Bramwell,    VE3PZR                                              .
.                                                                        .
.  The University of Western Ontario           Bitnet:  MBRAMWEL@UWO.CA  .
.  School of Business Administration           Packet:  VE3PZR @ VE3GYQ  .
.  London, Ontario, N6A 3K7                    Phone:   (519)  661-3714  .
..........................................................................
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: DOS Winodows under Win 3.1
From: edowdy@vax1.umkc.edu
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 19:42:35 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Missouri - Kansas City

In article <charlesk.712375821@sfu.ca>, charlesk@fraser.sfu.ca (Charles Hak Kim) writes:
> morton@qucdntri.ee.queensu.ca writes:
> 
>>>BTW, does Win3.1 at 800x600x256 seem fuzzy to ya?  I have a 14" non-int.
>>>monitor, but the win desktop looks kinda fuzzy ta me.  Any ideas as to
>>>why?  Is it the card?  Is it the monitor?  Drivers?  Settings?
> 
>>Hmm.. 14" non-int sounds like a decent monitor. However, check the manual
>>for it's spec's. Try to find what it's "dot-pitch" is. Most half decent 
>>monitors have 0.28 or 0.31. Anything bigger than that _will_ look fuzzy.
> 
> The monitor has a .28 mm dot pitch.  I suspect now that the problem has
> something to do with the refresh rate.  I'm working on it, but any suggestions
> comments, advice, words of wisdom will be greatly appreciated.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Charles H. Kim
> 
	I don't know if this will help. What type of card do ya have?
( I probably missed it so I'll go back up and look). At any rate, 
I had to change my refresh rate on my card. Even though it could go up
to 72Kh, I had to change the settings on the card cause it was set lower
when I got it.

E.D.
From: bwong@beach.csulb.edu (Bradley Wong)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: Ami Pro 3.0
Date: 29 Jul 92 14:49:49 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Cal State Long Beach

CompUSA has Ami Pro 3.0 and the upgrades. I picked up the "regular"
upgrade for $63 ($79 list).

Quick impressions:

  1. It's definitely NO slower than 2.0

  2. For me, the document preview feature is worth the price of the
     upgrade.

  3. Drag and Drop has possibilities.

  4. While I don't do any math equations, I noticed that the "help"
     menu "new products" listed two compatible add-on products
     that can be used with Ami Pro 3.0.

  5. Merging information is much easier

  6. Ami Pro macros have additional function calls

Gripes.

  1. No irregular frames
  2. No linked text frames
  3. No SGML filter  [8-)]
  4. Still have not found a Medical Dictionary compatible with Ami Pro
  5. 15 Mb of disk space for the whole package
From: yfwu@Uz.nthu.edu.tw (EE U780935)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: Windows == OS
Date: 29 Jul 92 03:39:26 GMT
Organization: National Tsing Hua University (HsinChu)

Windows 3.1 is not an OS. It is an "Operation Environment".

Because Win3.1 can't run without DOS, and some of its functions are run throhgh
DOS. So Win3.1 is not an OS.

But WIN3.1 is not a common application. Because many other application can be
run under it. So Windows 2.1 is an Operation Environment...........

It seems that Windows NT is a truely OS. Let us wait and see it!  
									Y.F. Wu
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: reimert@mamacass.etdesg.trw.com (Scott P. Reimert)
Subject: Re: PC-KWIK Power Pak and win 3.1
Organization: TRW Inc., Redondo Beach, CA
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 23:42:09 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.172718.599@mala.bc.ca> apland@mala.bc.ca writes:
>> Get yourself the PC-KWIK Power Pak.  It includes a ramdisk and a print
>> spooler which share memory (i.e., the ramdisk dynamically resizes itself).
>> It also includes a really good disk cache, which shares memory from the
>> same pool.  It's gotta be the most flexible package around for this
>> kind of thing.
>
>Anyone else have experience with this package (PC-KWIK Power Pak) particularly
>in Win31.  I looked at a package today and noticed that it is rated for win 3.0,
>not Win 3.1  I am looking for another disk cache and have heard over the years
>that PC-Kwik is good.  Besides the disk cache, the power pak has a video 
>accelerator and print spooler as mentioned abov  Are these compatible withth
>win 3.1?  
>
>Thanks in advance.
>
>Ron  

Ron,
     I've been using Super PCKwik for sometime now, and it works great! It
doesn't seem to have any trouble with Windows 3.1. Currently, I have it set
to load into the HMA managed by 386MAX. It makes a vast difference over
"SMART"DRV.

				Scott

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Scott Reimert  \    reimert@mamacass.etdesg.trw.com     /Standard disclaimer:
Redondo Beach, CA \______________________________________/"Blah blah blah ... "
__________________|Always store beer in a cool dark place|_____________________
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: Amiga features in Windows
From: edowdy@vax1.umkc.edu
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 16:38:17 GMT
 <1992Jul30.061615.3250@ugle.unit.no> <goudswaa.712480454@sfu.ca> <1992Jul30.080909.5021@ericsson.se>
Organization: University of Missouri - Kansas City

In article <1992Jul30.080909.5021@ericsson.se>, etxfln@eos.ericsson.se (Fredric Lonngren) writes:
> In article <goudswaa.712480454@sfu.ca>, goudswaa@fraser.sfu.ca (Peter Goudswaard) writes:
> |> mariusk@idt.unit.no (Marius Kjeldahl) writes:
> |> 
> |> >In article <1992Jul29.220350.9930@regina.cs.uregina.ca>, plummer@hercules.cs.uregina.ca (Dave Plummer) writes:
> [stuff deleted]
> |> >|> me continue!), but there is one major feature I miss:  the Amiga has
> |> >|> multiple screens on which to place multiple windows.  Although BigDesk
> |> >|> and programs like touch on the functionality, they are no where near as
> |> >|> convenient:  one key takes you a completely different desktop.
> |> >|> 
> |> >|> Is there anything available that will give me this convenience?  Anybody
> |> >|> want to write one :-) ?
> |> >|> 
> |> > I`ve read about a product called Rooms for Windows for a couple of
> |> >months, and it has that kind of functionality. I think it is released
> |> >by Xero. I think they`ve got advertisment in most "global" computer
> |> >magazines (Byte, PC-Mag.). Check them out...
> |> 
> |> Or how about the Windows 3.1 Resource Kit, which comes with a disk and
> |> some utilities, one of which is a fairly powerful program called
> |> TopDesk.  I never bothered using it, but at $20 for the Resource Kit is
> |> well worth the money, even if you don't use TopDesk.
> |> 
> 
> Or get it for free from simtel20. Docs ( 530 pgs) in WfW 2.0 format and 
> disks in ZIP. 
> 
>      == Fredric Lonngren       Mail : Fredric.Lonngren@eos.ericsson.se ==
>      ==  SWEDEN                                                        ==

	What is the ftp site for simtel120? 

Thanks.........Eric D.
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: Windows 3.1 on a 286 PC?
From: stefan@olson.acme.gen.nz (Stefan Olson)
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 07:29:38 +12

tgpt_ltd@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Tom Guptill) writes:

> In <y26eoB1w164w@banana.ithaca.ny.us> hansolo@banana.ithaca.ny.us (Chris Dutt
> 
> >On my machine, Smartdrive 4.0 runs considerably faster than
> >FAST!.
> 
> But in my experience, Smartdrv 4.0 causes some '286 based machines to crash
> within a few minutes of it's execution.  Anyone else had this happen?

It doesn't crash my 286, but it doesn't let my type on the 286...

...Stefan


------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Stefan Olson                     Mail: stefan@olson.acme.gen.nz
   Kindness in giving creates love.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: colello@cheshire.oxy.edu (Robert Colello)
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
Subject: Re: any problems with Win 3.0 or OS/2 on fast 486's ??
Date: 29 Jul 92 04:38:56 GMT
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA 90041 USA.

In article <1992Jul28.233454.14196@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca> kdorma@ravana.seas.ucla.edu (Kevin Dorma) writes:
>How's it goin', eh?
>I have a '486-40 and I cannot run Win 3.0 in 386 mode _OR_ install/run
>OS/2 unless the speed is cut to 20 MHz, all cache disabled and ROM shadowing
>disabled.
A 486/40?  Does such a beast exist?  I've heard of a 486/50 and a 386/40, but
a 486/40?  

Bob
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc
From: u8801686@cc.uow.edu.au (timothy napthali)
Subject: 16 or 32 ?
Summary: Help me comprehend.
Keywords: NT
Organization: University Of Wollongong
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 01:05:44 GMT

Ok, stress questions. I would love to get frank, correct, and informed
answers to the following.

	1) Is Windows 3.1 a 32-bit operating system in enhanced mode ?
	   ( I'm sure that it isn't, but I'm checking anyway )

	2) If Win 3.1 is not 32 Bit, and since NT requires an absolutely
	   mega machine to operate, how then does the average user
	   get to enjoy the benfits of low-end 32 bit technology (ie
	   my 486) without major hardware upgrades to enable use of NT ?

	3) Why would I need to have a 32-bit operating system anyway ?
	   Is it faster, more flexible, or what ?
	   ( Presently I use my computer for circuit simulation,
	     desktop publishing, and graphics work with ray-shading )

Thanks in advance.
Tim
u8801686@cc.uow.edu.au
Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.misc