HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539)
Subject: Re: Windows NT
Organization: Texas Instruments Inc
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 19:45:40 GMT

In <C04x4q.17E@vuse.vanderbilt.edu> drl@vuse.vanderbilt.edu (David R. Linn) writes:

>In article <C03I3E.10C@world.std.com> apl@world.std.com (Anthony P Lawrence) writes:
>>rstory@elegant.com (Robert Story) writes:
>>: 
>>: My understanding (which is very little, indeed) is only from press
>>: reports.  However, I thought that NT was only a single user system and
>>: as such would only make use of the console.  Ergo, why would one
>>: require support for dumb terminals ???
>>
>>Well, no, it's not single user.   NT seems (from my reading) to
>>be quite capable of supporting remote logons.

>That's odd.  Everything I've heard on this topic says that NT
>is a single-user, multi-tasking OS.  Can you give references to
>materials that say otherwise?

NT supports multiple users, but the software required to log them in
isn't part of NT (so they currently must either be at the console or
submit remote-style jobs).  In other words, NT out of the box is a
single-user-at-a-time multi-user-distributed-processing multi-tasking
OS.  If you don't believe that, ask Microsoft.  The contention is that
third parties will provide the login programs required to allow remote
machines running Windows to log in over a network.

-- 
"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.unix.dos-under-unix
From: ray@Celestial.COM (Ray Jones)
Subject: Re: Creating an Ascii file from binary?
Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 16:19:54 GMT

In <16832.9212171646@pine.eng.gla.ac.uk.udcf.glasgow.ac.uk> gnaa38@udcf.gla.ac.uk (Paul Porcelli) writes:


>Is there any public domain software for converting a binary file on a
>Dos 486 to an Ascii file which will be read by a Unix machine.
>Thanks in advance for any info.
>Paul Porcelli
>gnaa38@uk.ac.gla.udcf

You need to look for "btoa" (binary to ascii) and "atob" (ascii to binary).
-- 
INTERNET:  ray@Celestial.COM   Ray A. Jones; Celestial Software
UUCP:   ...!thebes!camco!ray   6641 East Mercer Way
             uunet!camco!ray   Mercer Island, WA 98040; (206) 947-5591
The probability of one or more spelling errors in this missive approaches
Newsgroups: comp.unix.dos-under-unix
From: drl@vuse.vanderbilt.edu (David R. Linn)
Subject: Re: Windows NT
Organization: Vanderbilt University School of Engineering, Nashville, TN, USA
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 17:41:14 GMT

In article <C03I3E.10C@world.std.com> apl@world.std.com (Anthony P Lawrence) writes:
>rstory@elegant.com (Robert Story) writes:
>: 
>: My understanding (which is very little, indeed) is only from press
>: reports.  However, I thought that NT was only a single user system and
>: as such would only make use of the console.  Ergo, why would one
>: require support for dumb terminals ???
>
>Well, no, it's not single user.   NT seems (from my reading) to
>be quite capable of supporting remote logons.

That's odd.  Everything I've heard on this topic says that NT
is a single-user, multi-tasking OS.  Can you give references to
materials that say otherwise?

	 David
-- 
David R. Linn, System/Mail/News Manager	| INET: drl@vuse.vanderbilt.edu
Disclaimer: I speak only for myself	| Phone: [+1] 615-343-6164
      "Some do, some don't and that's the way of the world."
Newsgroups: comp.unix.dos-under-unix
From: peterson@CS.ColoState.EDU (james peterson)
Subject: Re: msdos emulator for decstaton 3100
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 18:44:31 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Colorado State University, Computer Science Department

In article <1992Dec23.153618.16669@e2big.mko.dec.com> vsp@peewee.enet.dec.com (Vipul Patel) writes:
>
>
>
>	DEC sells and supports an MS-DOS emulator
>	that would work on top of its Ultrix and
>	VMS operating systems. DEC SoftPC emulates
>	a 286 PC. It would allow you to run Lotus 1-2-3,
>	WordPerfect, Harvard Graphics, Quattro Pro,
>	MS Word and Windows etc.
>

We tried this product a while back.  2 problems: 1) it will only
run on the console; 2) it is SOOOOOOOO  SLOOOOOWWWW you will faint.
Typically, anyone can out type the screen character echo, even hunters-
and-peckers........  I would instead start looking for Unix software
that do the same things (slowly but surely, it is happening), but
don't expect any of it to come from Microsoft (which, I predict, will
hurt them badly in the long run).
-- 
james lee peterson				peterson@CS.ColoState.edu
dept. of computer science                       
colorado state university		"Some ignorance is invincible."
ft. collins, colorado  (voice:303/491-7137; fax:303/491-6639)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.dos-under-unix,connect.audit
From: fredw@ibmpcug.co.uk (F K Weil)
Subject: Re: Windows NT
Organization: The IBM PC User Group, UK.
Distribution: connect
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 11:46:46 GMT

In article <C04x4q.17E@vuse.vanderbilt.edu> drl@vuse.vanderbilt.edu (David R. Linn) writes:
>In article <C03I3E.10C@world.std.com> apl@world.std.com (Anthony P Lawrence) writes:
>>: reports.  However, I thought that NT was only a single user system and
>>Well, no, it's not single user.   NT seems (from my reading) to
>>be quite capable of supporting remote logons.
>
>That's odd.  Everything I've heard on this topic says that NT
>is a single-user, multi-tasking OS.  Can you give references to
>materials that say otherwise?

As far as I can understand, having spoken to Microsoft, NT is a 

SINGLE USER MULTI TASKING OS.

It is able to work as a Database server handling multiple clients since
the Database Server handles the multiple access, not NT. It can not
handle multipl log ons itself.

My view is that it will not displace UNIX becasue it is only single user.


-- 
Fred Weil
Unix Rules OK
Newsgroups: comp.unix.dos-under-unix,connect.audit
From: fredw@ibmpcug.co.uk (F K Weil)
Subject: Re: msdos emulator for decstaton 3100
Organization: The IBM PC User Group, UK.
Distribution: connect
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 09:48:36 GMT

In article <Dec26.184431.43920@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> peterson@CS.ColoState.EDU (james peterson) writes:
>In article <1992Dec23.153618.16669@e2big.mko.dec.com> vsp@peewee.enet.dec.com (Vipul Patel) writes:
>>	DEC sells and supports an MS-DOS emulator
>We tried this product a while back.  2 problems: 1) it will only
>run on the console; 2) it is SOOOOOOOO  SLOOOOOWWWW you will faint.
>.....I would instead start looking for Unix software
>that do the same things (slowly but surely, it is happening), but
I would agree, DOS under UNIX is slow, it can turn an INTEL 386 box able to 
 support 10 UNIX users into a single user slow 286 equivalent.

Both Louts and WordPerfect are going into UNIX in a big way     .

Other products such as CA 20/20 area also arround.

Best of luck with your searches.

-- 
Fred Weil
Unix Rules OK
Newsgroups: comp.unix.dos-under-unix
From: rstory@elegant.com (Robert Story)
Subject: Re: Windows NT
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 18:14:56 GMT
Organization: Elegant Communications Inc.

In article <C015xq.E4J@world.std.com> apl@world.std.com (Anthony P Lawrence) writes:
> I just bought "Inside Windows NT" by Helen Custer (Microsoft Press)
> and have started reading it but immediately I have a dozen questions
> that (maybe) someone can answer.
> 
> My biggest objection to NT has been the lack of support for dumb
> terminals, and the absence of a command line driven shell.  I imagine
> the second is trivially easy, and I thought the first would be too, but
> now I'm starting to wonder.
> 
> According to my understanding of what little I've read so far :-)
> the logon process in NT is rather strongly linked to the Win32 Subsystem,
> and the Win32 Subsystem is what provides and controls the screen, the 
> keyboard, etc.  In other words, you get to any other subsystem through
> Win32, and that system has to use Win32 for it's user-interface I/O.
> 
> If I have understood that correctly (odds, anyone?), it seems that tacking
> on terminal support would be more than a little difficult???  Or could it
> be done in the context of something that starts up in Win32, spawns off
> terminal logins (but this assumes that the logon can be persuaded not
> to call Win32)?  I'm getting confused...
> 
> On the other hand, it would seem that porting Unix apps to this environment
> and running in something similar to an xterm window might be very easy.
> 
> And, of course, what this ulimately comes down to is where to place my
> bets for the next few years.  If there is a way to make NT support dumb
> terminals and present a "Unix" interface for those of us who love it,
> and if porting apps really is going to be as easy as it looks, then I 
> think NT is going to win... 

My understanding (which is very little, indeed) is only from press
reports.  However, I thought that NT was only a single user system and
as such would only make use of the console.  Ergo, why would one
require support for dumb terminals ???

				    -Robert.
--
 _________________________________________________________________________
 Robert.Story@Elegant.COM                      Elegant Communications Inc.
 Tel: +1 416 362 9772                        4 King Street West Suite 1101
 Fax: +1 416 362 8324                     Toronto, Ontario; CANADA M5H 1B6
Newsgroups: comp.unix.dos-under-unix
From: edw@sequent.com (Ed Wright)
Subject: Re: Windows NT
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems, Inc.
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 01:05:52 GMT

In article <1992Dec30.181456.7768@elegant.com> rstory@elegant.com (Robert Story) writes:
>In article <C015xq.E4J@world.std.com> apl@world.std.com (Anthony P Lawrence) writes:
>> I just bought "Inside Windows NT" by Helen Custer (Microsoft Press)
>
>My understanding (which is very little, indeed) is only from press

I often wonder why some ditz has to quote a 50 line article just to
follow up and say "beats the shit outta me"

-- 
-- I think I've got the hang of it now .... :w  :q  :wq  :wq! ^d  X exit ^X^C ~.
 ^[x  X Q  :quitbye  CtrlAltDel   ~~q  :~q  logout  save/quit :!QUIT ^[zz ^[ZZ 
 ZZZZ  ^H  ^@  ^L  ^[c $q ^# ^E ^X ^I ^T  ?  help  helpquit ^D  ^d ^C ^c help 
 ^]q  exit ?Quit ?q  anybackbone!sequent!edw edw@sequent.COM  KA9AHQ 28.340
Newsgroups: comp.unix.dos-under-unix
From: ray@Celestial.COM (Ray Jones)
Subject: Re: Windows NT
Organization: Celestial Software, Mercer Island, WA
Date: Sun, 03 Jan 1993 20:36:40 GMT

In <C04x4q.17E@vuse.vanderbilt.edu> drl@vuse.vanderbilt.edu (David R. Linn) writes:

>In article <C03I3E.10C@world.std.com> apl@world.std.com (Anthony P Lawrence) writes:
>>rstory@elegant.com (Robert Story) writes:
>>: 
>>: My understanding (which is very little, indeed) is only from press
>>: reports.  However, I thought that NT was only a single user system and
>>: as such would only make use of the console.  Ergo, why would one
>>: require support for dumb terminals ???
>>
>>Well, no, it's not single user.   NT seems (from my reading) to
>>be quite capable of supporting remote logons.

>That's odd.  Everything I've heard on this topic says that NT
>is a single-user, multi-tasking OS.  Can you give references to
>materials that say otherwise?

A Micorsoft "evangalist" (sp?) that gave a talk at one of our meeting
(Unix user group) stated that NT would be marketed first in the server
market, but was indeed capable of multi-user.  That feature would be
marketed 9 months to a year after introduction.  But, what the hell, its
just a rewrite of UNIX so they won't have to pay UNIX royalties, so why
shouldn't it be multi-user.
-- 
INTERNET:  ray@Celestial.COM   Ray A. Jones; Celestial Software
UUCP:   ...!thebes!camco!ray   6641 East Mercer Way
             uunet!camco!ray   Mercer Island, WA 98040; (206) 947-5591
The probability of one or more spelling errors in this missive approaches
Newsgroups: comp.unix.dos-under-unix
From: tsai@evax12.eng.fsu.edu
Subject: Need help with AT&T UNIX PC (PC7300)
Organization: Famu/Fsu College of Engineering
Date: 21 Dec 92 16:00:13 EST


     We have several AT&T UNIX PCs (PC7300) in our lab.  They have been
rarely used.  Recently, the chairperson wants them to run DOS and DOS
applications such as MATLAB.  Is anyone familier with the way to make it
work ?  Any help or advice is greatly appreciated.

Thanks,

Jack.
From: berk@techsys.UUCP (Berk Walker)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.dos-under-unix
Subject: Re: Dos binary files on Unix
Date: 23 Dec 92 19:02:18 GMT
Organization: Private for Now

gnaa38@udcf.gla.ac.uk (Paul Porcelli) writes:

> 
> Can anyone tell me if you can convert a Dos binary file to a Unix ascii
> file. I'm going to be transferring some Dos binary files recorded onto
> Dat tape, onto a SPARCstation10. I then need to be able to convert these
> files so i can do some number crunching on the data.
> Any help will be greatly appreciated.
> Paul Porcelli
> University of Glasgow
> Dept of Aerospace Engineering

btoa... or use uuencode to go from 8 to 7 bit, uudecode to go back.

Berk Walker                           berk@techsys.mcws.fidonet.org
From: gnaa38@udcf.gla.ac.uk (Paul Porcelli)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.dos-under-unix
Subject: Dos binary files on Unix
Date: 22 Dec 1992 07:06:32 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu


Can anyone tell me if you can convert a Dos binary file to a Unix ascii
file. I'm going to be transferring some Dos binary files recorded onto
Dat tape, onto a SPARCstation10. I then need to be able to convert these
files so i can do some number crunching on the data.
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Paul Porcelli
University of Glasgow
Dept of Aerospace Engineering
From: jaw@legendre.ucsd.edu (Jon A. Wright)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.dos-under-unix
Subject: msdos emulator for decstaton 3100
Date: 22 Dec 1992 23:48:28 GMT
Organization: Intstitute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: legendre.ucsd.edu



Newsgroups: comp.unix.dos-under-unix
From: apl@world.std.com (Anthony P Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Windows NT
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 21:37:14 GMT

mccall@mksol.dseg.ti.com (fred j mccall 575-3539) writes:
: 
: NT supports multiple users, but the software required to log them in
: isn't part of NT (so they currently must either be at the console or
: submit remote-style jobs).  In other words, NT out of the box is a
: single-user-at-a-time multi-user-distributed-processing multi-tasking
: OS.  If you don't believe that, ask Microsoft.  The contention is that
: third parties will provide the login programs required to allow remote
: machines running Windows to log in over a network.

So... any reason that a third party couldn't write a logon program
that was intended to display on a dumb terminal?  Or is the GUI stuff
too interwound with everything??  

That's what I can't figure out from what I've read so far...


		Tony   apl@world.std.com

Lawrence & Clark, Inc		(617) 762-0707	(206) 323-2864
Xenix/Unix support,etc 	 	 Boston		 Seattle
       Kevin Clark is embarrassed by most of what I say.
Xref: sparky comp.unix.misc:4808 comp.sys.novell:11037
From: marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Marc Rassbach)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.sys.novell
Subject: Re: Novell to buy USL !?
Date: 4 Jan 1993 01:40:43 GMT
Organization: Marquette University - Department MSCS
NNTP-Posting-Host: studsys.mscs.mu.edu

In article <C0AMMu.Lwq@queernet.org> rogerk@queernet.org (Roger B.A. Klorese) writes:
>In article <1hr3mmINN9cn@spool.mu.edu> marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Marc Rassbach) writes:
>>No, I think it's the rumor I've heard.  Goes like this.  A Novell promo
>>about how 'wonderful' this new Unix offering is going to be.  Simplifyed.
>>All those commands no one uses will be gone.  Like sed, awk, grep.
>>Perhaps 'hacked up' isn't a good word....how bout busted.
>
>Your rumor's a lie, then.  I've used UNIX, BSD and System V flavors,
>since 1984.  UnixWare *is* UNIX.  Nothing's missing; you simply can

Welp, the rumor is based on a conversation with a gent  in  tech support
for a vendor of unix and novell connection products (Hi Micheal!) and
he claims this was told to him 'by a buddy of his' and this happened over
a year ago.   Now, the novellian in question got lotsa funny looks from
the unix crowd in the room, and  odds are  they scrapped the  idea
BEFORE brining  Unixware to market.   

Still , to even SUGGEST such is a sin.   :-) 1/2

>do things without spelling out commands on a ouija board *IF* *YOU*
>*CHOOSE* *TO*...

I look at it as less typing, not some form of mystics.  :-)

(Ya wanna talk mystics, let's talk command switches in DOS)

-- 
Marc Rassbach    marcr@studsys.mscs.mu.edu    If you take my advice, that
MS-DOS - it's not   marc@milestn.mil.wi.us    is your problem, not mine!
my problem!     If it was said on UseNet, it must be true.
   Unix - It's a nice place to live, but you don't want to visit there.
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,uci.unix
From: jbotz@mtholyoke.edu (Jurgen Botz)
Subject: Re: Novell just bought Unix?
Organization: Mount Holyoke College
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 14:27:04 GMT

In article <2B360E6C.369@news.service.uci.edu> mwu@orion.oac.uci.edu (Matt Wu) writes:
>I just heard that Novell bought USL.

Not quite yet... they announced intent.  Will take a couple of months, but
seems likely to go through.

>What does this mean?

Good question... I'll offer some opinions...

+ Unix (actually SVR4... which isn't and shouldn't be called "Unix")
  sales will go up.

+ Novell can't possibly be any worse than AT&T.

+ Byte will publish an issue headlined "Is Unix reborn?"

+ Bill Gates is running around his $4x10^8 multi-media mansion screaming
  "Unix is dead! NT will triumph!" 

+ Microsoft stock will take a dip (if you own any, now is the time to
  dump it... the company is overvalued, and the recent revelations of
  likely pending anti-trust actions are going to hurt it a lot.  This
  Novell-USL thing isn't going to help them any, either.)

+ The "feature checklist" for corporate file servers will now include
  a little check-box for "Unix".

+ "Open Systems Today" will merge with PC-Magazine.

Other than that it doesn't mean much... USL has lost control of the 
operating system anyway, now that there are independent Unix implementations
and Unix-compatible OSes, including completely free ones.  One thing that
remains to be seen and that will have some significance is what happens to
the USL-BSD suit.  Novell could make a lot of friends by dropping it (and
firing the idiots responsible for it.)

--
Jurgen Botz                  |   Internet: JBotz@mtholyoke.edu
Academic Systems Consultant  |     Bitnet: JBotz@mhc.bitnet
Mount Holyoke College        |      Voice: (US) 413-538-2375 (daytime)
South Hadley, MA, USA        | Snail Mail: J. Botz, 01075-0629

From: errol@hpgnd153.grenoble.hp.com (Errol Inan)
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 09:36:30 GMT
Subject: Novell Buys Unix from AT&T
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, GND
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc


Can someone please post the official news on Novell buying AT&T Unix?

Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,alt.amateur-comp
From: patrick@Erc.MsState.Edu (Patrick Bridges)
Subject: Re: Irix info ?
Organization: /elienai-home2/patrick/.organization
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 21:06:26 GMT

In article <ralf.724701170@fester> ralf@fester.dell.com (Raymond La France - X2787) writes:

   semenoff@fraser.sfu.ca (Robert Semenoff) writes:

   >Can anyone give me any pointers to information about a Unix
   >implemtation called Irix ?
   >Thanks.

   IRIX is, I believe, an implementation of UNIX used on Silicon Graphics' IRIS
   workstations (if I'm wrong, y'all please scream).  So if I'm not mistaken,
   talk to SGI!!!
   --
   Ray LaFrance               | Don't sweat the petty things --
   ralf@ioscc.neosoft.com     | pet the sweaty things!
   (303)673-2787              | (Y)  (Y)  (Y)  (Y)  (Y)  (Y)  (Y)
   W.W. Kemmerer Consulting   | (The usual disclaimers apply...)

This is correct. Irix is SGI's SVR3 + BSD + etc... UNIX OS.
It has a lot of SYSV4isms, but is actually based of of r3 + BSD 
It also has alot of internal SGI stuff, such as some basic
multithreading stuff... Also I have heard of real time and secure
versions, although I haven't used 'em....

					Patrick Bridges
					patrick@erc.msstate.edu
Xref: sparky comp.unix.misc:4809 comp.sys.novell:11038
From: mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us (Marc Unangst)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc,comp.sys.novell
Subject: Re: Novell to buy USL !?
Date: 3 Jan 1993 22:13:32 -0500
Organization: The Programmers' Pit Stop, Ann Arbor MI
NNTP-Posting-Host: mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us

In article <C0AMMu.Lwq@queernet.org> rogerk@queernet.org (Roger B.A. Klorese) writes:
>since 1984.  UnixWare *is* UNIX.  Nothing's missing; you simply can
>do things without spelling out commands on a ouija board *IF* *YOU*
>*CHOOSE* *TO*...

Unfortunately this isn't true.  There are no on-line manpages, for
example, and I'm not even sure that you can get printed manpages.  I
didn't examine UnixWare much further to discover what else was
missing; for the purposes for which we were evaluating UnixWare, that
was enough to kill it.

-- 
Marc Unangst, N8VRH         | "Of course, in order to understand this you
mju@mudos.ann-arbor.mi.us   |  have to remember that the nucleus of the atom
                            |  is squishy."
                            |    -W. Scheider, from a Physics lecture
Newsgroups: comp.unix.misc
From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)
Subject: Re: What is lacking in UNIX? (Re: UNIVEL MUST BE KIDDING!!!!!)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 21:57:51 GMT

In article <1992Dec25.072643.20494@netcom.com> messina@netcom.com (Tony Porczyk) writes:
> CCGREG@mizzou1.missouri.edu (Greg Johnson) writes:
> >Here's what I want to know.  How many bytes are needed to make a
> >file-system+loader like MS-DOS gain Unix-like capabilities?

> When are we finally going to acknowledge that different tools have
> different purposes?  Every time I see something like "And my truck can
> haul more dirt than your Corolla" I say "And who the hell gives a shit?"

Assuming you're really driving a Corolla instead of a Harley:

My truck can haul more dirt, has better handling, a smoother ride, can carry
more passengers, gets better gas milage, and can fit into a smaller parking
space, than your Corolla. It doesn't have aerostyled sheetmetal, velour seats,
or a CD player standard. It also costs more, but I can drive it to multiple
destinations simultaneously so I only have to buy one for the whole family,
department, or class.

Oh yeh, it's also got door locks so I can park it outside.
-- 
Peter da Silva                                            `-_-'
Ferranti International Controls Corporation                'U` 
Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012 USA
+1 713 274 5180                            "Zure otsoa besarkatu al duzu gaur?"