HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu (Jay Maynard)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Damned good recovery
Date: 13 Aug 92 18:29:01 GMT
Organization: UT Health Science Center Houston


Maynard Handley writes:
>I'm a Mac user who simply follows the competition out of interest, but
>something I wonder about. Isn't OS/2 supposed to come with HPFS which means
>you can use decent filenames that use upper and lower case and spaces, have
>file types attached and can be reasonably long? If so, why are you people
>all using these ridiculous names like SVGADATA.PMI?

Because the HPFS file system is optional, on a partition-by-partition basis.
OS/2 can be installed equally well on either a standard DOS FAT file system or
an HPFS file system. Therefore, OS/2 operating system file names need to be
compatible with both. SVGADATA.PMI is an operating system file.

What's ridiculous about SVGADATA.PMI, anyway?
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu      | adequately be explained by stupidity.
   "This is a network here, right?  How about giving a little thought to
            interoperability?" -- John F. Woods, to Brian Kantor
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Hasta la Vista, OS/2
From: Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 10:45:21 GMT
Organization: Actrix Information Exchange

In article <1992Aug20.204830.29966@msc.cornell.edu> maynard@esther.msc.cornell.edu (Maynard J. Handley) writes:
> >
> >A power outage while in the moddle of updating a system file will result
> >in big trouble.....but that is true of any OS. I have found that at the
> > worst so far - the active files at the time I kicked the plug out
> > (big feet!) had allocation errors and - since they were usually temporary
> > or non-essential were easily recovered. I do see the potential for
> > bigger problems, but that is what we should have backups for - under
> > any OS.
> 
> No it IS NOT TRUE of any OS. There are plenty of mechanisms an OS can use
> to make sure power failture doesn't corrupt data. The simplest is to create
> a copy of the file, modify that, then change the name of the new file to
> the old file. Still a sensitive point where you change the one filename to
> the other. So the OS must be aware of the possibility that two file with
> the same name could exsits because of a power crash at this point and
> compare date/times or whatever.
> 
> Just because some OSs screw this up proves nothing. Do you think any
> company with a mainframe would accept losing their payroll database because
> the power went out and the auxiliary generators didn't kick in for some
> reason?

Having just spent the past 10 years working on mainframes......I will stand by
my statement above. I have restored enough corrupted databases and files to
know what I am talking about.
 
I've worked on DOS/VSE, OS/VS1, VM, MVS/SP, MVS/XA and a few others not worth
mentioning. If the power goes off, *every* OS is vulnerable......that's why
people spend millions on UPS's........so the power WON'T go off.
 
Steve


-- 
Steve Withers - Wellington, New Zealand | If you don't vote for MMP on 
Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz         |  September 19, 1992, then you 
withers_s@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz            |  must like things the way they 
**** Happy user of OS/2 v2!! ****       |  are.....can I live with YOU?
From: dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Who's problem \*are\* SVGA drivers?
Date: 18 Aug 92 16:32:34 GMT
Organization: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, N.J.

In article <1992Aug15.163232.6665@infonode.ingr.com> bbrown@infonode.ingr.com (Bailey Brown) writes:
>The generic SVGA driver with Win 3.1 is definitely fast, and beats
>many vendors' own drivers.

I don't think this is anything special.  Did you know that you can get
800x600x16 on an ordinary VGA board by tweaking some registers?  I did
it on a PS/2 model 80 using FractInt v15.  I suspect that this is what
MS did for their driver.

Does anyone out there have Win 3.1 on a standard VGA board (with a
multisynch monitor) to be able to test this theory?  I suspect that
even non-sVGA systems can use this driver.  In other words, it's a
souped-up VGA driver, not a generic sVGA driver.

Of course this doesn't explain why IBM won't do this, except that they
don't want to support "tweaked" video modes.  It may be pushing the
hardware a bit too far for their liking.

>I assume they used special case code to handle the instances where it
>was optimal to do things differently on different boards.  SVGA boards
>aren't *that* different, especially in the 800x600x16 mode, and it
>is not difficult to write software that runs well on a number of them.

My theory seems to make more sense.  I'll have to test this somehow.
-- 
   |)  David Charlap           "I don't even represent myself
  /|_  dic5340@hertz.njit.edu   sometimes so NJIT is right out!.
 ((|,)
  ~|~  Hi! I am a .signature virus, copy me into your .signature file.
Xref: sparky comp.os.os2.advocacy:4189 comp.os.os2.misc:27662
From: M05BC@CUNYVM.BITNET (Spartacus@Cuny)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: TELEVISION CAMPAIGN LAUNCHED TODAY FOR OS/2
Date: 19 Aug 92 00:48:40 GMT
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center


    If only they had started the television compaign two weeks ago
during the Olympic coverage.  They could have shown OS/2 in action
in Barcelona.  Oh well, at least they got off their asses 8-).
I wish the campaign success.

-------
------------------------------+      All The Best,
Reply To:                     |
                              |      Edward Galarza,
     M05BC@CunyVM.Cuny.Edu    |      Brooklyn College Of The
     M05BC@CunyVM.BitNet      |      City University Of New York
------------------------------+      "Que viva el OS/2!"
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: msmith@netcom.com (Martin P. Smith)
Subject: Re: I've seen NT......and I'll take OS/2 2.0 thanks!
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 04:11:30 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

In article <1992Aug17.194931.17023@mksol.dseg.ti.com> mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
>In <1992Aug15.142241.11149@actrix.gen.nz> Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz writes:
>
>>If OS/2 supports Win3.1, then a good number of Windows 3.0 apps will no longer
>>run under Win-OS/2.......so it isn't a matter of deciding whether or not to
>>cut a finger off....it's WHICH ONE do you cut off.
>I've seen this claim made before.  I guess my question is why that is
>the case.  After all, WIN-OS2 will run Windows 2.X and 1.X, won't it?
>So why should it suddenly lose the ability to run Windows 3.0 just
>because it gains the ability to run Windows 3.1?
>
>
>-- 
>"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.


Hey would that be fair. IBM supporting Win 1.X 2.X 3.0 and 3.1  with 
Microsoft supporting 3.1 and partial 3.0 ( if you forget internationalization)
(I would support it if I could spell it ( maybe it needs PETE.EXE )
:-) 


MArtin Smith
smith@netcom.com 
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: chris@cad.gatech.edu (Chris McClellen)
Subject: Re: Hands up! Who has deleted WinOS2?
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 12:54:42 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.115216.21898@actrix.gen.nz> Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz writes:
>The company I work for sells PCs with MS software (Windows), bundled. A
>reasonable proportion of users only want the PC and make very limited use of
>the Windows software. They don't actually delete it in most cases. They just
>don't really USE it either. That isn't because they don't like it
>necessarily.....they just avoid it......
> 
>I am surprised by the number of people who find multitasking concurrently a
>conceptually challenging thing. They just want to do one thing at a time......
> 
>Nothing wrong with that at all.....but it proves there is still a market for
>the XT and DOS 3.3.

This is true.  While there are people who don't want multitasking, there
ARE people who do.

There are still alot of XT's out there.  Of course, they cannot run OS/2,
and Windows isn't for them either.  NT certainly will not be.

I have WIN-OS2 installed and haven't deleted it.  I have BorlandcC++
(prof dev version) that contains a windows Hosted IDE.  Admittedly, I
don't use the Windows hosted IDE, because all It can produce is Windows
executables.  I dont use Win-Os2 at all (havent used a windows apps in
months), but I leave it on JUST IN CASE there is a program I come
across that I HAVE to have, and it has to be run under MSW.

Anyway, while some people avoid multitasking, I have seen others
who don't know lots about computers get excited when they see what
can be done with an MT [multitasking] OS.  There are others who,
of course, give the line "[insert program/OS here] has always worked for me,
I dont need to change, and I dont want to have to learn new keystrokes..."
There are the kind of people out there that are afraid of learning new things
and once the learn an app, or an OS, they don't want to learn anything
new.  However, in the future, I think that we will see less and less
of them, as inflexibility is not a selling point to employers.





Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: branham@binah.cc.brandeis.edu (Tom Branham, Biophysics Grad. Brandeis)
Subject: Re: Hasta la Vista, OS/2
Reply-To: branham@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Organization: Brandeis University
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 22:03:33 GMT

Hmmm.... I have used quite a few different operating systems on
a lot of different computers and at one point or another EACH of
them has undergone a catastrophic system failure of some sort that
has trashed the my disks.  Most of the times this has happened to me
it has been because of the application running at the time rather 
than the operating system itself.  Applications and operating systems
have improved alot since I started playing with them, but the world
is not perfect and the price you pay for that nice piece of equipment
is that it will not Always work perfectly.  That also goes for 
applications.  Only the very oldest of applications can be considered
completely bug free ( and who gives a hoot about using edlin???  :)
That is why software goes out unperfected, the developers do what
they can about everything they can think of, but there will always be     
something they have overlooked, forgotten, misplaced etc.  Now I am not
trying to be apologetic for the developers, I think that it would be    
stupid to go ahead and use something horribly buggy when there was         
another product that would perform the desired function without so much
agony.  But that leads me to this question ....Was it the operating      
system or the application?   What was the exact application you were
using?  WHat was happening at the time?  I don't ask this out of
idle curiousity....It happens to be important to the other people
here that may be using that application on this operating system.  Is it somet                            
that can be duplicated (a genuine bug) or was a file on you system 
corrupted?  The details do matter and we can not guess them, only you     
were there.  It would be nice to know if it is not too much trouble.
                             ..........Tom Branham
P.S.  I am sorry your system crashed.  Sounds like you are having
      a week very much like mine  %(   
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara)
Subject: Re: Number of users etc.
Date: 19 Aug 92 22:07:59 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <l-0m6g.msmith@netcom.com> msmith@netcom.com (Martin P. Smith) writes:
>In article <1992Aug16.005715.29881@microsoft.com> philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
>>
>>      You actually have to fork over money for the SDK - I'm not aware
>>of anyone receiving copies for free, or being sent unsolicited copies. 
>
>Phil,  Everybody who attended the NT conference here in S.F. got a copy
>of NT SDK gratis. Yea you had to pay for the conference but the NT SDK
>was free 
>

     In the case of the conferences, I was under the impression that
the cost of the SDK was included in the cost of the conference,
not that the SDK was free.  In any case, it's a question of semantics
here.  My basic point - that people aren't getting the SDK for
nothing - still holds.

					-Phil


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil Lafornara         				1 Microsoft Way         
philipla@microsoft.com				Redmond, WA 98052-6399 
Note:  Microsoft doesn't even _know_ that these are my opinions. So there.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.os2.misc
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: I've seen NT......and I'll take OS/2 2.0 thanks!
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 20:43:56 GMT
Reply-To: margoli@watson.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In  <1992Aug16.063037.3621@microsoft.com>  petesk@microsoft.com (Pete Skelly) writes:
> In article <1992Aug14.202253.33580@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.ibm.com writes
> >In  <SXMRP.15.0@orca.alaska.edu>  SXMRP@orca.alaska.edu (Michael R. Platzke) wr
> >>
> >> NT has, I'm told, Win-32 and limited Win-16 support, today (my CD-ROM drive
> >> has not come in so I have not had the chance to extensively test it).  In
> >> addtion, it has a limited version of LANMAN and TCP/IP support,
> >> *BUILT IN to the OS.
> >
> >And OS/2 has Lan Server and TCP/IP available as add-ons.  Those who want them
> >can buy them.  The millions of stand-alone machines that have no use for them
> >need not pay for them.
>
> Oh, so what you're saying is that these things should be optional modules.

I believe that a previous reference was talking about stuff that NT had and
OS/2 didn't, and I was mainly pointing out that both LAN Server and TCP/IP
are available today.  A secondary point is that people who have no use for
it shouldn't have to pay for it.

> That may be okay (hey, look, and IBM person and a MS person agreeing).
> However, others on this group seem to think that it is absolutely necessary
> that NT ship with these things, and the kitchen sink as well.

There are some on this group that don't think it necessary that NT ship
at all...  :-)

> You may want to tell the folks upstairs this,

What folks upstairs?

> (or maybe they were just trying to flame NT and MS)

Nah - something like that would never take place here.  :-)

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
From: bill@snoopy (Bill Poitras)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: It's OK for Windows to crash. It's not OK for OS/2 to crash.
Date: 21 Aug 92 22:14:50 GMT
Reply-To: bill@msi.com
Organization: Molecular Simulations, Inc.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

William Unruh (unruh@physics.ubc.ca) wrote:
: bill@snoopy (Bill Poitras) writes:
: >You mean to tell me VMS 1.0 NEVER CRASHED?  Unix SVR1 NEVER CRASHED?
: Actually, one critical difference is that on most of those multiuser
: systems you are not working on the console. In OS2, the console is all
: there is. So if a program screws up and takes over the console,
: everything could be running fine and well protected off the screen, and
: there is no way to get atthe operating system. If the console crashes on
: any of those "good" systems, it's bye bye just as with OS2. Another
: argument for multiuser?

1) 90% of all Unix systems at my company are mainly used on the console.
2) The console is not "all there is".  OS/2 like Unix can have networking
software installed on it, and then allow people to rlogin into it.  The
password protection and accounts may not be there, but there is remote
access.
3) The actual point I was making was that many OS's not only crash the
console, but the whole system goes down and halts.  If it does that 
still doesn't mean that its not a real OS.  

--
+-----------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------+
| Bill Poitras    | Molecular Simulations Inc.    | Tel (408)522-9229       |
| (bill)          | Sunnyvale, CA USA             |                         | 
|                 | FAX (408)732-0831             | bill@msi.com            |
+-----------------+-------------------------------+-------------------------+
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: potts@itl.itd.umich.edu (Paul Potts)
Subject: Re: OS/2 v2.0 SVGA Support
Organization: Instructional Technology Laboratory, University of Michigan
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 19:10:33 GMT

In article <Bt7Ez7.7yo@snuffy.wa.atk.com> pbinder@snuffy.wa.atk.com (Peter_Binder) writes:
>I would like to bring up one point with the "why didn't IBM include SVGA
>drivers (or help developers write them) in OS/2 v2.0." Starters, why would
>IBM waste the time writing 16-bit video drivers for a 16-bit graphics 
>engine, when they are working on a 32-bit graphics engine 
...
>Also, I've heard that OS/2 v2.01 will
>come with Tseng 4000 SVGA drivers, and possibly driver support for other
>cards.
>
>Peter Binder

This is all well and good, except I've got a Diamond Stealth VRAM card,
which BYTE magazine recently claimed was the speed champ among this class
of card. From an end-user's perspective, why should I care whether the
driver is 16 or 32 bits? My video card is very fast and it works great
with Windows 3.1 (not to mention Ultima 7). The card has been out for
some time, OS/2 2.0 has been out for some time, but I still can't use
the card with OS/2 to run Windows apps the way I want to. I don't care
whose fault it is, but it is a problem and I would like to see it 
resolved before I use OS/2 for anything other than experimentation.

-- 
"It'sVerySad / toSeeTheAncientAndDistinguishedGameThatUsedToBe / aModelOf
DecorumAndTranquilityBecomeLikeAnyOtherSportABattlegroundForRivalIdeologies
toSlugItOutWithGlee." (from _Chess_). -potts@itl.itd.umich.edu-
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: bdubbs@cs.tamu.edu (Bruce Dubbs)
Subject: Re: Windows NT 'Alpha'
Organization: Computer Science Department, Texas A&M University
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 02:42:33 GMT

In article <19AUG199211323349@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov> scdorcy@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES DORCEY) writes:
>In article <1992Aug17.232651.23471@tamsun.tamu.edu>, bdubbs@cs.tamu.edu (Bruce 
>Dubbs) writes...
>
>>Please, let's call the Windows NT Beta what it is.
>
>No problem.  Just let us know when the NT Beta is released.

It HAS been released.  Its just an (initial, early, beginning -- your
choice) beta.

   -- Bruce


--
Bruce Dubbs                   |  Oxymorons of note:
bdubbs@neuron.tamu.edu        |  Honest Politician, Political Science,
bdubbs@sadis01.sa.aflc.af.mil |  Scrupulous Lawyer
From: rick@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu (Richard Warner)
Subject: Re: Who's problem *are* SVGA drivers?
Organization: San Jose State University - Math/CS Dept.
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 17:48:46 GMT

cebarton@napier.uwaterloo.ca (Casey Barton) writes:


>    Time and time again, I see people visiting this group and asking why OS/2
>doesn't have SVGA drivers. (I was one myself). People usually respond by
>telling them that SVGA drivers _do_ exist, though seamless drivers exist only
>for Trident boards. Without fail, these responses rationalize the lack of
>full SVGA support from IBM by saying that "Video drivers are the video board
>manufacturers responsibility."

>    That's a cop out. One of the biggest flaws pointed out about OS/2 in 
>current publications is that "You'll have to run at 640x480 for the time 
>being." This is going to turn people who might otherwise have made the
>purchase away. IBM *could* write the drivers themselves. So why not? They 
>stand to gain alot from it. 

That is not a cop out, it is reality.  That is true for *every*  OS and
operating environment.  Who is responsible for the Orchid ProDesigner II
drivers for Win 3.1?  Orchid.  Who is responsible for the Diamond Stealth
drivers for SCO Unix?  Diamond.  Who is responsible for the Radius 24-bit
color driver for Apple System 7?  Radius.

The responsibility of the OS vendor is to convince/pressure/cajole the
peripheral makers into doing the drivers.  This is easiest *if* the
OS vendor can show a large market share and provide good tools for the
development of the drivers.  MS Win 3.1 had a lot of drivers at shipment
because of perceived market share and despite the poor quality of MS
provided tools.  OS/2 was lacking because the combination of skepticism
over market share and the relatively poor quality of development tools.

Peripheral makers are getting stretched thin in the device driver market
these days, with the spate of new and coming OS's.  

>-- 
>      Casey Barton (Mr.)   cebarton@descartes.waterloo.edu   (519)725-6861
From: bgm@cray.com (Bert Moshier)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: I'm stupid for telling you this, but here goes
Date: 19 Aug 92 22:21:22 GMT
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.

Everyone / Anyone:

I really mean the subject.  The following is from the Fall 1992 WordPerfect
Report (volume VI, Number 3).

------

Win the Computer Workstation of Your Choice

Announcing WordPerfect Corporation's Freedom of Choice Sweepstakes--
your chance to win a complete, state-of-the-art workstation.  The
choice is yours, but you've got to make it before September 25, 1992.

All you have to do to win is choose a winner.  There are no wrong
choices in the WordPerfect Freedom of Choice Sweepstakes.  Because today,
the right system for you is any system you like.  And soon, eight lucky
winnerss will walk off with the high-performance workstations pictured
here, each pre-loaded with the world's most popular word processor.

To be eligible to win, just send us a completed Official Entry Form,
available from paarticipating software retailers or by calling
(800)526-5166.  Details and Official Rules are on the Official Entry Form.

So check out the choices and entry today.

Ready of OS/2!  IBM PS/2 Model 90, IBM 14" SVGA Color Display, IBM
Laser Printer 6 From Lexmark, IBM Mouse, OS/2 2.0, and WordPerfect.

----

Now do you see why I am stupid!  The entry form asks you to specify which
group you wish to be in (OS/2, NeXT, MAC, Windows, UNIX, DG, DOS or VAX).
Since this is an OS/2 forum, my guess is most (not all) will enter the OS/2
drawing.  I am lowering my chances.

Bert.
From: thg@cam-orl.co.uk (Tim Glauert)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: superVGA  (and misc top-blowing)
Date: 14 Aug 92 08:42:03 GMT

In article <1992Aug13.185836.29983@novell.com>, chris@cad.gatech.edu (Chris McClellen) writes:
|> In article <1992Aug13.151742.18779@cam-orl.co.uk> thg@cam-orl.co.uk (Tim Glauert) writes:
|> >|> Or you can run OS/2 2.0 on a 386sx/20MHz with 6 megs of RAM.
|> >
|> >No thank you! It was a DOG on a 386/25 with cache and 8 megs.
|> 
|> I disagree.  It runs alot faster than Win 3.1 does on my 386/25 with 8
|> megs.  For example, if I have more than ONE app running on win 3.1
|> things start to go to a crawl.  For instance, try xcopying stuff
|> from a floppy to the HD, formmatting a floppy, copying stuff from
|> one subdir to another (stuff = like 100k+) and then try to do something
|> simultaneously in Windows.

Ah! I see the problem. Unlike most users, I spend most of my time browsing the
filing system and running applications such as Word and Excel on those files.
Perhaps I would like OS/2 2.0 if I was a typical user who spends all his time
formatting floppies and copying files around.

But then, I'm the sort of person who wastes his money by buying pre-formatted
floppies anyway.

|> Your observation doesn't hold.

Umm. How is it that your observations invalidate my observations?

|> I bet NT will be even worse when it comes to speed, but I will have to wait
|> for the final version to see.

The SDK is already more usable than OS/2 2.0, I expect the final release to be
better.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.advocacy