HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: paul@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Paul Lalonde)
Subject: Re: Pause before you consider OS/2 (was Re: Win 3.1 not THAT great.)
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 23:57:07 GMT

In <DEMILLO.92Apr10140113@egeus.juliet.ll.mit.edu> demillo@juliet.ll.mit.edu ( Robert DeMillo ) writes:

>OS/2 2.0 will *not* be compatable with Windows 3.1

Incorrect, IBM has slated June/July for Win 3.1 upgrades (free).

>OS/2 2.0 will *not* support SVGA or XGA graphics modes. (The
>	 above poster's comments about OS/2 supporting a 32-bit 
>	 SVGA engine, notwithstanding.)

Incorrect, OS/2 2.0 currently *does* support SVGA and XGA graphics modes.
Video card manufacturers have not made their custom DRIVERS available yet.
The support is there, the drivers are not.

>OS/2 2.0 Windows emulation will support only one Windows application
>         per Window, and they are several orders of magnitude slower
>	 than just running in Windows. You can switch OS/2 2.0 to
>	 full screen Windows mode, and your Windows performance
>	 goes way up.

Incorrect.
You can only run one seamless Win app per Window (running two in the
same space wouldn't make sense!) and in the fullscreen Windows session,
you can run as many as you want.

>OS/2 2.0 will not support full-blown pre-emptive multitasking for
>         another 12-18 months. (Not sure what they meant by this,
>	 but it didn't smell right.) At that time, Windows NT
>	 will be on the scene.

Incorrect. Preemptive multitasking and multithreading has been available since
the earliest versions of OS/2 1.x.

>Moral: If you are buying OS/2 for OS/2...great. Do it..multithreading
>       is a good thing, and OS/2 has it. If you are buying OS/2 
>       'cuz you want to run mostly Windows applications in OS/2's
>       PM...you might want to rethink that.

I realize that the points you made were taken from Infoworld and not made
up by yourself. However, they are still incorrect statements. My faith in
computer magazines has been declining for years.

-Paul




>--
> - Rob DeMillo			| Internet: 	 demillo@juliet.ll.mit.edu
>   MIT Lincoln Lab 		| Also Internet: rjd@brown.cs.edu
>   Weather Sensing - Group 43	| Reality: 617-981-2105 (office)

>"Operation Goofy now in effect!"
>	--- Tom Servo, "Gamera vs. Gaos," Mystery Science Theater 3000
-- 
------------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
Paul Lalonde                        | Q: What's the difference between a 33MHz
Student - Dept. of Computer Science |    386 and a 4MHz XT?
Laurentian University, Sudbury, ONT | A: If you use DOS, nothing.
From: pgleason@ncratl.AtlantaGA.NCR.COM (Pat Gleason)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: 3.1 and OEM VGA Drivers
Summary: PC Mag article about using OEM drivers w/3.1
Date: 15 Apr 92 12:21:46 GMT
Organization: NCR Engineering and Manufacturing Atlanta -- Atlanta, GA

An article in the current (4/28/92) PC Magazine (p. 206) says:
...*To get Windows 3.1 to recognize your 3.0 (OEM) driver pack, rename any
file called SETUP.INF on the OEM floppy disk to OEMSETUP.INF.*
I haven't tried this yet (I'm having the Trident 8900 problems noted in
several other postings) but thought I'd pass it along.
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: gwpoulos@athena.mit.edu (George W. Poulos)
Subject: Re: Win 3.1 PC speaker MM driver?
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 05:10:04 GMT

In article <202@bsc835bsc.edu> ehunt@bsc835bsc.edu (Eric Hunt) writes:
>In article <2030@transfer.stratus.com>, leadfoot@bigbootay.sw.stratus.com (Mark Curtis) writes:
>> what happened to sndtool.  Sndtool 2.4 gave me a GP error, 2.5 said it
>> couldn't load the driver said "Bad Karma".
>
>Great!! I'm glad someone found this out. I thought the drivers in Sndtool 2.5
>were bad or something. I'll try that too see what happens.....[hmmmm]
>
>Does anyone know if the PC speaker sound driver can change frequencies  
>dynamically? ...

To anyone whom this may concern.  It seems that you CANNOT use the PC
speaker driver AND Soundtool at the same time (you get the "Bad Karma"
message).  The original Sounder program (from the guy who wrote
DSOUND.DLL) seems to work OK, though.  So I guess if you want to use
SoundTool, you'll have to remove the driver and restart Windows.






--
George W. Poulos *Ad hoc, ad loc,   - Jeremy  *jiffy pop, nuclear 
      aka	 *and quid pro quo.   Hillary *fission, i know  
    Captain      *So little time.     Boob    *there's a connection 
Caaavemaaaaaan!! *So much to know.    PhD.    *...there must be...
From: nan@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Nan Zou)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: :-)
Date: 14 Apr 92 05:28:04 GMT
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

pr@wam.umd.edu (Jesus M. Rodriguez) writes:

>	WINDOWS SUCKS!!!   Irritating isn't it!! Also Win 3.1 sucks too. :-)

Jesus (and I'm referring to you, not the other more famous character), the
first joke was ok, but once is enough, more posts like this will not serve
any constructive purposes but will just agitate the Windows users.

-- Nan
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: paul@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Paul Lalonde)
Subject: A note to OS/2 2.0 users posting to this group
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 07:57:13 GMT

I'm as guilty as anyone when it comes to "informing" the readers of this
newsgroup about incorrect OS/2 2.0 information posted here.

However, even being one of the stubborn, OS/2 2.0 user types, I can still
see that we are agitating a number of readers on comp.windows.ms.

It's my suggestion that, if in the future, someone poses a question about
OS/2 2.0 or provides incorrect information about it on this newsgroup, that
we follow up via Email, along with a reference to resume the discussion in
either of the comp.os.os2.XX newsgroups.

I don't remember who mentioned it, but it is true that us OS/2 users are
filling up this newsgroup with rebuttals (mainly). While it may be justified,
I think for all concerned that it would be best to simply refer the discussion
to the OS/2 newsgroups.

Let's prove to the Windows users that we aren't all hostile pushovers.
(At least not on Mondays :)

-Paul

-- 
------------------------------------+-----------------------------------------
Paul Lalonde                        | Q: What's the difference between a 33MHz
Student - Dept. of Computer Science |    386 and a 4MHz XT?
Laurentian University, Sudbury, ONT | A: If you use DOS, nothing.
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: mcdonald@aries.scs.uiuc.edu (Doug McDonald)
Subject: more bugs in 3.1
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 14:58:13 GMT


More bugs:

1) a bad one: the clock appears to only run once, no multiple copies,
   and, far worse, you can't make it the active window by clicking
   just anywhere on it - you have to use the "move bar" area.
   Whoever at microsoft that did this, it was dumb.


2) the Tseng 4000 drivers that are on the various servers are not 
   anywhere free of real bugs - the worst being that sometimes as
   you switch between full screen and windowed text modes the **full screen**
   mode loses the thing syou type on the screen, though they do go
   to the program.

Doug McDonald
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: jimm@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (james.mumper)
Subject: Re: HELP! Win 3.1 dies in setup mode
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 11:53:28 GMT
Followup-To: comp.windows.ms
Summary: Virtual Memory Screams!

In article <1992Apr13.162332.16400@coopsol.com> gordons@coopsol.com (Gordon Storga) writes:
>their own software...
>
>Also, I haven't noticed one bit of performance improvement.  In fact, it
>takes 2 seconds longer to load MS Word2.0 than it did with 3.0.
Gordon,

Neither did I until I set the Virtual Memory to use 32-Bit Access.  Then I saw
a much improved response time.  Try it.
>
>Gordon
>-- 
>
Jim Mumper

Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: todd@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Todd Ogasawara)
Subject: Re: Tseng ET4000
Organization: University of Hawaii at Manoa
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 17:09:57 GMT

In article <1992Apr5.215140.27134@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> nsus_cif@troi.cc.rochester.edu (Nick Susch) writes:
>I have a ET4000 based cards, and (I believe) the latest drivers for Windows
>3.0. I am wondering if these drivers will work with Windows 3.1? Does anyone

I just installed Windows 3.1 over my existing Windows 3.0 yesterday (4/6).
I have a Gateway 2000 386/33 purchased early in 1991 with the Tseng 4000
SVGA drivers provided by Gateway. This driver seems to work fine with
Windows 3.1.
--
Todd Ogasawara, U. of Hawaii
UUCP:		{uunet,ucbvax,dcdwest}!ucsd!nosc!uhunix!todd
BITNET:		todd@uhunix
INTERNET:	todd@uhunix.UHCC.HAWAII.EDU
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: admiral.uucp!fsaleem@uunet.uu.net (Farzan Saleem)
Subject: Corel Draw and Win 3.1 problem
Reply-To: admiral.uucp!fsaleem@uunet.uu.net (Farzan Saleem)
Organization: The Grid/Waffle BBS, 203-661-2873, -1279, -0450, -2967
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 21:35:56 GMT

Greetings!   I recently upgraded from 3.0 to 3.1 (although I am seriously
considering os/2) and everything seemed fine until I ran one of my
favorite programs, Corel Draw.  Everytime I try to blend two objects,
I get a "WALDO" error, which then asks me if I want to abort out of
the aplication or ignore the error. 
 
Does anyone know if this is a compatibility problem, or what? I can't
figure out what it is. 
 
Thankx.
FS! 

ps..if possible, please email me since I need to fix this right away
or restore my win 3.0 files!   (OS/2 here I come?!)

--
admiral!fsaleem@uunet.uu.net (Farzan Saleem) <uunet!admiral!fsaleem>
The Admiral's Public UNIX - Greenwich, CT - System Administrator: Doug Fields
(HST/V32) (203)661-2873 -- (PEP/V32) -1279 -- (V32) -0450 -- (V29/MNP6) -2967
>FREE!< Unix shell accounts, Usenet access, and Internet-style mail available
From: jbreeden@netcom.com (John Breeden)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Fastdisk or 32 bit access in Win 3.1
Date: 17 Apr 92 00:07:12 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Somewhere in the S.F. Bay Area

In article <14387@pitt.UUCP> cap@mb5000.anes.upmc.edu (chris pilewski) writes:
>WHAT IS FASTDISK?
>FASTDISK is not a 32bit disk cache.  It is not even a utility.
>FASTDISK is a 32 bit disk accessing protocol.  It allows disk
>access with 32bit device calls that bypass the computer's bios
>and communicate directly with disk controller. This method is
>MUCH faster.
>
>WHAT IS FASTDISK FOR?
>At the moment, FASTDISK is used only in 386 enhanced mode for
>fast access of virtual memory (the swapfile).  FASTDISK will
>not speed up any disk operations that don't use virtual memory.
>

Wrong, FastDisk is a 32-bit Windows virtual device driver for WD 1003 
compatable controllers, it directly accesses the disk - not just the 
swap file. The MAIN reason for the speed is access to the disk in
protected mode, Windows no longer needs to switch to a virtual machine
to access BIOS (this is the meathod that Win uses to access DOS drivers
(and DOS and BIOS), it switches OUT of protoected mode, into the first
virtual machine (where all that "dos" 'stuff is stored, lets dos, bios
or the driver "do it's thing" then switches back to protected mode. That's 
the reason many people say that Windows "replaces" dos in protected mode.


-- 

 John Robert Breeden, Hughes Lan Systems
          jbreeden@kailua.hls.com, johnb@hls.com, jbreeden@netcom.com

 ------------------- cut here and you'll break your monitor -------------------

      "The nice thing about standards is that you have so many to choose 
      from. If you don't like any of them, you just wait for next year's 
      model."
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: HF.RME@forsythe.stanford.edu (Bob Elmore)
Subject: Adlib Card and Win3.1
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 16:41:32 GMT

Help in advance -

I have an ADLIB sound card with v1.5 drivers.  I'm having
difficulty determining what I can expect from WIN3.1 and,
consequently, if its working or not.  Not being well versed in
sound cards and their various intricacies, I would appreciate a
quick lesson and any advise.  For instance, do I need new drivers,
and if so, should I be contacting ADLIB or MICROSOFT for them.  Any
and all help is greatly appreciated.

Bob Elmore
hf.rme@forsythe



Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms,alt.cad.autocad,comp.sys.ibm.pc.software,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
From: mepstein@csws15.ic.sunysb.edu (Not On Our Customer File)
Subject: Epson 2500?
Organization: State University of New York at Stony Brook
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 20:44:28 GMT

I was looking for a good cheap printer and some
new epson came across as being good
it was 2500 or something
it has tray feed paper and prints at 250 cps
it also has built in fonts
anyone know if this is any good in general or in compatibility
with windows, word perf, and any other progs
also how does it print graphics and acad drawings
any info would be helpful
please email
mepstein@ic.sunysb.edu
From: S6200776@deimos.ucc.umass.edu (s6200776)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Trying to set a printer default that doesn't want to stay.
Date: 7 Apr 92 19:35:34 GMT
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Amherst
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20

I have a question regarding printer setup in windows 3.0.  I always have to
print my papers and things to a postcript file so that I can download it to my
school's LPS40 postcript printer.  My problem is that every time I restart
windows, the settings for the printer default back to 'print to printer'
instead of 'print to file', in the options menu for the setup of the printer.
It's a pain to have to set it every time.
Does anyone know how to make 'encapsulated postcript' the default?

Please respond to s6200776@deimos.ucc.umass.edu.
thanks,
Kevin Mocklin
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: u8801686@cc.uow.edu.au (timothy napthali)
Subject: TrueType and Windows 3.1
Summary: Converting Adobe 1 to TrueType
Keywords: TrueType
Organization: University Of Wollongong
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 92 02:01:00 GMT

I have a lot ( about 250 ) Adobe type 1 fonts that I use in my DTP
pursuits under WIN3.0. When I/We at Oz finally get 3.1 I'm hoping to
upgrade ( since 3.1 is supposedly faster ), but I need to know:

	a: whether there is a way to get TrueType to use Adobe 1 fonts, or
	b: is there some way to convert them, or 
        c: will I just have to stick with ATM

Thanking you in advance. Pope Tarquin I ( Timothy Napthali )

	Reply:	u8801686@cc.uow.edu.au

PS: 	I also posted the letter about the BJ10ex. Sorry I left out
    	my email address in the script. I'm still very new to this.
From: cchapman@matd.gatech.edu (Charles H. Chapman)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Speak.exe  - Where???
Summary: Where is this program?
Keywords: Speak
Date: 15 Apr 92 13:14:16 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <1992Apr14.235621.18094@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> ddennis@isis.cs.du.edu (Dave Dennis) writes:

>I don't have a sound card, and I hear that speak.exe will run 3.1
>.wav sounds through the pc speaker.  A previous post said the file
>was at Wustl.... but the the path he gave was /MSDOS_UPLOADS/speak.exe.
>I'll be darned if I can find that path on Wustl!


Try /pub/MSDOS_UPLOADS.


Chuck


Charles H. Chapman  (GTRI/MATD)             (404) 528-7588
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp:     ...!{allegra,amd,hplabs,ut-ngp}!gatech!matd!cchapman
Internet: cchapman@matd.gatech.edu
From: gonzalm@prism.cs.orst.edu (Mario Gonzales)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Win 3.1 and SimCity problems...
Date: 10 Apr 92 01:54:23 GMT
Article-I.D.: CS.1992Apr10.015423.4301
Organization: Oregon State University, Computer Science Dept

Has anyone one else with SimCity for windows experrienced any problems?

I am getting alot of Software Protection Faults and such from win 3.1.

Also How do you make double buffering work with QEMM 6.02 ?

I put the command in the config.sys and it says that double buffering is   
installled but the /s switch shows only read and write as yes.

what gives?

Thanks 

mario gonzales
gonzalm@prism.cs.orst.edu
From: bruce@ais.com
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: 3.1 & TrueType problem
Date: 17 Apr 92 11:14:57 GMT
Organization: Applied Information Systems, Chapel Hill, NC

In article <o4L7iB3w164w@upchrch.UUCP>, joel@upchrch.UUCP (Joel Upchurch  ) writes:
> bruce@ais.com writes:
>> I took this up with Microsoft, their response was basically that since a
>> TT font is really a sort of program, they didn't feel that there was much
>> they could do - if there were "bugs" in the font that corrupted the GDI
>> engine, then that can crash Windows 3.1.  My understanding is that this is
>> basically a performance tradeoff - they feel it would take too much CPU
>> time to check for attempts to corrupt the GDI continually every time a
>> glyph is rasterized, & apparently feel it isn't important enough to set up
>> the segments and protections so that the font can't corrupt GDI (say by
>> starting up an internal "virtual task" of some type).
> 
> Sounds to me like we need a program to check out the Truetype fonts
> before we try to run them.

Since a TT font can contain what amounts to a small program to do the
hinting, such a program is not possible in the general case.  You could
write a program that did fairly rudimentary checking for whether the
font did something really horrible in every case or some obvious common
cases (and in fact Windows 3.1 does do some checking at this level ...
don't know just how much so I can't comment on whether they could add
some additional checks to it), or you could have the program throw a lot
of cases at the font and see if any fail.

But it's a pretty elementary proof to show that you can't find all the
possible bugs that might reside in arbitrary code that you're presented
without actually executing it on all possible cases...  and even then
you only know that if/when the program terminates (which, again, it is
impossible to prove in the general case even *if* it terminates).  I
agree though that anything that would catch more cases than Windows 3.1
and mark the font as bad would be A Good Thing and worth doing for the
good of the community ...

Bruce C. Wright
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: dch2@engr.uark.edu (David Hobbs)
Subject: Why go to 3.1 if 2.0 works
Organization: University of Arkansas
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 13:25:41 GMT

Ok, I know I'll probably start a religious war on this one, but I just
have to get some other opinions.  

I've been reading the OS/2 newsgroups the last week where everyone is
just ga-ga over 2.0.  IF (and the key here is IF) OS/2 will multitask
DOS, Windows, and OS/2 Preemptively, why should anyone upgrade to Win 3.1?

At the rollout at my local IBM yesterday, I saw the film at Comdex where
IBM was running 3.1 in a OS/2Win along with DOS and other OS/2 programs.
Reiswig(sp?) joked and said something to the effect of "Look what we've
done just 24 hrs. after 3.1 was released..."

The demo was impressive.  If for no other reason, why should anyone
continue to run MS-Dos 5, DR-Dos 6, Windows, Qemm and Desqview, etc.
when OS/2 can do them all in one time?  Plus, I can upgrade to it for
$49 which is about 1/2 of what I can sell my copies of Dr-Dos, Qemm, and
Desqview for.  Why shouldn't I?

Feel free to post, flame, email, etc.  I'm just looking for some opinions.

Thanks,

D.
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| David Hobbs, Graduate Student  |  dch2@engr.uark.edu          |
|  and Evil TA, CSEG Dept.,      |                              |
|  University of Arkansas	 |  #include <std_disclaimers>  |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| "Arkansas is 20 years behind everyone else, and by-golly,     |
|  that's where I want to be when the world comes to an end!"   |
|                                          - Joe Wrobel         |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: *** HELP WITH PRINT_AREA IN EXCEL3 ***
From: plaut@sc2a.unige.ch (Olivier PLAUT)
Date: 16 Apr 92 14:07:12 +0200
Organization: University of Geneva, Switzerland

Hello !

I would like to do:

SELECT($A$1:$G$1,$A$5:$G5)
SET.PRINT.AREA
PRINT

and to have both lines on ONE SINGLE page, but...

in EXCEL3, if you do a multiple selection in your Print_Area,
EXCEL prints each part of the selection on a separate page.

Is it possible to force it to be printed on a single page?

Thanks in advance...
Olivier.
-- 

-----------------------------------------------------------------
| Olivier Plaut. University of Geneva.      Geneva, Switzerland |
| INTERNET: plaut@sc2a.unige.ch         BITNET:  plaut@cgeuge52 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: Changhao_Boh@mindlink.bc.ca (Changhao Boh)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
Subject: Re: Win3 and QEMM
Date: 7 Apr 92 11:19:17 GMT
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Distribution: world

NR> Org.  : FidoNet node 1:140/43 - U of S Computing Se, Saskatoon Sask
NR>
NR> Hi,
NR>
NR> I was wondering if it is worth my money to purchase the QEMM
NR> memory manager for DOS when running MS-Windows 3.0 or 3.1?

It provides much more functionality than the HIMEM/EMM386 combo.
Quarterdeck claims that QEMM is much faster too !

For example, QEMM includes optimize.  This gem of a utility optimizes your high
memory space by loading your device drivers and TSRs contiguously thereby
saving memory.  Also, QEMM also provides STEALTH RAM, increasing your himem to
a claimed 200+ K.

However, it you don't mind, IF YOU HAVE THE NECESSARY HARDWARE (8Mb RAM and a
60Mb harddisk), the real solution to your problem is OS/2 2.0 which manages
memory much more effeciently than QEMM and cost only $49 with the Windows
Upgrade deal while QEMM cost about $69.

** Disclaimer ** Please guys, I am only offering what I deem as a viable
solution, NOT touting OS2 2.0.

Good Health.

Changhao
Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms
From: lhughes@b11.ingr.com (Lawrence Hughes)
Subject: Windows to NT Upward Compatibility
Organization: Intergraph Corp. Huntsville, AL
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 21:11:10 GMT

> Windows NT is becoming 'real' (complete and stable) because of
> the experience and careful design by the team, and we're already able
> to demonstrate an impressive number of Win32 applications, because the Win32
> API really is upwardly compatible with today's Win16 apps.

First off, I have a legit NT beta, and I don't believe I'm giving anything
away here, since the Win32 API manuals are available from MS Press at my
friendly neighborhood bookstore... everything I say here could be deduced
from those manuals.

I have converted a Windows 3.0 app (graphics performance) that I wrote to NT,
and MOST of it worked fairly well - two main areas of problems were:

1. It wound up being simpler to strip off the existing WIN-16 "template"
   routines and graft the remaining code onto a WIN-32 "template" than to
   modify the existing "template" stuff to WIN-32 (initialization is quite
   different due to WIN32 instances being really in different address spaces)
   Conclusion - couldn't have done any better myself, given the difference
   in OS's.

2. The dialog box code was different in some subtle and annoying ways.
   Conclusion - couldn't see why THIS had to be incompatible (may yet find
   out why as I continue to debug).

Overall, it took about two days to figure out enough about the WIN32 API and
NT to find the things that had to be changed, and change them. Not TOO bad.
Also, not what I would call transparently "upward compatible" from WIN16.
On the other hand, I expect to spend more than two days porting this code to 
OS/2 2.0 PM32 (on the other hand, I've got EMACS there!)

And before anyone asks, it WOULD be fudging on our NDA to tell the results
of the performance comparison. Sorry.

Not that this was a major piece of code, though.

> Alistair Banks, Microsoft Systems Division

'ello Alistair!

Larry Hughes - Intergraph Corp. - Huntsville AL


Newsgroups: comp.windows.ms