HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: peter@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Peter Wu)
Subject: Re: CONFIRM: Animation is slow under OS/2?
Reply-To: peter@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Peter Wu)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 05:28:06 GMT

>>You'd probably want to run the flight simulaters in a DOS full screen
>>session.  16 colors does work, but is a little slower.  If the program
>>is 256 colors, say goodbye to animation since OS/2 has to dither the 256
>>colors to 16 colors (slow).  All of your programs continue to run if you
>>run the game in the DOS full screen session (you can have multiple full
>>screen sessions).  It helps to set DOS games to no background execution
>>so they pause/stop stealing cycles when you switch away from them
>
>This concerns me alot since it suggests that I can't play any
>high-performance simulators (eg: Red Baron, Falcon 3.0, etc) under
>OS/2 2.0.  Could someone please confirm or (hopefully) deny the truth
>of this situation.

I played Wing Commander II under an early beta 6.147 (?) and it was
very responsive.  You can certainly programs with more than 16 colors
in the DOS fullscreen mode, and you should even be able to take
advantage of your SVGA card if the game can handle it.  I'm not sure
about the performance in a window though .. it was pretty slow when it
was in a DOS window .. I believe it had to dither stuff as well.  But
then that was with a old beta.  With the 32bit engine coming and the
256 color drivers for SVGA cards coming .. I see these problems
alleviated somewhat.  I.e. I'm sure you can play your games .. just
don't run too many things in the background and make sure that you set
your DOS session with no idle detection as that makes OS/2 steal some
extra CPU time to process other programs.

PQ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pedro Quien?		peter@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu		Peter K. Wu
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ce1zzes@prism.gatech.EDU (Eric Sheppard)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: WPS won't shut down
Date: 17 Apr 92 06:11:30 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

Title says it all.  This began only recently.  Suggestions? Every
process in the windows list has been closed or killed, with the exception
of the desktop.
-- 
Eric Sheppard      Georgia Tech    |   "Of course the US Constitution isn't
Atlanta, GA                        | perfect, but it's a lot better than what
ARPA: ce1zzes@prism.gatech.edu     |             we have now." -Unknown
uucp: ...!{allegra,amd,hplabs,seismo,ut-ngp}!gatech!prism!ce1zzes
From: wally@netcom.com (Wally Schwarz)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Paradise OS/2 2.0 Drivers
Date: 16 Apr 92 02:11:40 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

From article <1992Apr15.123550.21232@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU>, by prs@turing.acs.virginia.edu (Phillip R. Scarr):
> That was 6 months ago.  Things may be a little brighter today (although
> compared to the folks at Trident, the Paradise people are total
> neanderthals (not to insult neanderthals, though)).  I have seen rumor
> of some drivers for 2.0 which may be available this summer MAYBE.  I
> have trashed my Paradise card in favor of a new Trident card because
> they have demonstrated a consistent commitment to OS/2 and are the
> farthest along in driver development.
> 

A friend of mine is the chief VGA engineer for Western Digital in Mountain 
View, CA.  According to him, IBM has sub-contracted a company in Texas to write
the drivers for the Western Digital video chipset cards.  The ball is in IBM's
hands.  Given that, I doubt if they will ever make it. IBM still refuses to ship
ANY OS/2 2.0 on 5.25" distribution. What a joke!  Not all DOS programs run in
the DOS box.

-- 
Wally Schwarz                               Wally World BBS
2228 S El Camino Real #40                   415/349-6969/Free Line - 2400bps
San Mateo, CA 94403                         415/349-8408/Contributor Line
                                            V.32 and V.32bis available
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: rafetmad@cheshire.oxy.edu (David R. Giller)
Subject: Re: HPFS logical drive size
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA 90041 USA.
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 00:41:37 GMT

In article <54004@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt6493c@prism.gatech.EDU (gt6493c FLUHR,ERIC J) writes:
>Hello there.  Sorry for the rather basic question, but I've been wondering
>about this for a while.
>I was told a long time back that you shouldn't divide your hard drive
>into partitions longer than 32MB, since performance would be worse the
>larger the size over 32 (this is for FAT).  I wasn't sure how to take 
>this, since I thought the reason many systems kept to the 32MB limit
>was because of DOS < 4.0.  

Under DOS, this is partially true.  Seek times aren't that much of a problem,
because as the disk capacity increases, the heads move less to get to any
particular piece of data.

The FAT filesystem is to fault.  Large partitions usually mean large
directory structures, and these are slow under DOS, which was designed around
a 180k floppy disk!  Under HPFS, which uses distributed structures like the
Berkeley UNIX Fast File System, this is not a problem.  I have in the past
used a single 340Mb partition on my hard drive, with no problems.  In fact,
I find this better because it is much easier to manage than several drives.

This brings up the point: why doesn't OS/2 provide the functionality
of DOS's JOIN (or UNIX MOUNT)?  I for one would much prefer to have all
my partitions on one logical directory structure, but that's just me.

-Dave
-- 
David Giller, Box 134 | Q: How many Oregonians does it take to screw in a light
Occidental College    | bulb?  A: Three.  One to replace the bulb, and two to
1600 Campus Road      | fend off all the Californians trying to share the
Los Angeles, CA 90041 | experience. ---------------------------rafetmad@oxy.edu
From: ian@vnet.ibm.com (Ian Stirling)
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 12:05:00 BST
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Questions B4 I Take the OS/2 Plunge
Reply-To: ian@vnet.ibm.com
Organization: IBM UK Laboratories Ltd, Hursley, England
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM
News-Software: UReply 3.0

In <1992Apr10.070054.15626@news.iastate.edu> Steven M. writes:
>Do I have to reformat my HD to allow OS/2 to boot or can I
>use an already existing partition for OS/2? I would like to keep
>my setup as it is until I decide on OS/2, Windows, or both.
>Whenever you install a Win App, such as WFW, Quicken4W, etc, your
>win.ini files are updated to specify your particular setup. Do
>you have to reinstall these WinApps for OS/2?

You can install OS/2 on top of DOS/Windows without reformatting.  If
you do this you will gain
  1.  Dual Boot - Can select to boot either DOS or OS2, but only once
      the current selection has booted.

  2.  Your Windows desktop can be migrated, along with all your Windows
      apps to the WIN-OS2 desktop.

Part of the WIN-OS2 installation asks if you wish any changes you make to
the WIN-OS2 desktop to be reflected back to your original Windows
desktop.

>I have all of the partitions on my HD Stacked except for my bootable
>partition. Will OS/2 run with Stacker 2.0?

Not yet.  Stac has commited to a beta test of OS/2 Stacker for later this
year.

>How about OS/2 screen drivers, printer drivers, etc. How easy are
>they to come by?

Some drivers come with the system.  Some are available from manufacturers
Some are available on BBS and FTP sites.

>Does OS/2 really take up as much as 35MB? Why so hefty? How in
>the hell could you afford to run OS/2 on a notebook?

I think a maximum installation is about 32Mb.  For this you get
  OS/2 32bit support
  OS/2 16bit support
  Windows 3.0 Real/Std Support
  DOS support
  ATM & some fonts
  Games
  Prductivity Aids
  Preemptive Multitasking

>Will OS/2 run with PCKWIK Disk Cacheing software?

Don't know, but you don't need it anyway.  OS/2 comes with HPFS and FAT
caching programs anyway.

>Just thought I would look before I leap. Thanks in advance,

Now - leap !!!!
>

Cheers,
Ian Stirling                      Internet: ian@vnet.ibm.com
CICS/ESA Systems Facilities         Bitnet: ian at vnet
IBM UK Labs Ltd, Hursley, England IBMIPnet: ian@stirling.hursley.ibm.com

Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM
From: gs45@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gregory  Scobee)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: boot manager
Date: 14 Apr 92 04:32:06 GMT
Reply-To: gs45@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Gregory  Scobee)
Distribution: comp
Organization: Columbia University

In article <1992Apr13.1480.12095@dosgate> "stephen dawson" <stephen.dawson@canrem.com> writes:
>Anto Daryanto writes
>
>AD>Can I install Boot Manager on my second harddisk ?
>
>No.
>
>I think that OS/2 could start from the second drive, though.

Could some one confirm this?

>
>    STEPHEN
>    ^^^^^^^    :-)  Look through the Windows and you will see OS/2!
>
> stephen.dawson@canrem.com
> Entered 04-12-92 at 7:36pm in Downsview, Ontario
>
> * DeLuxe2 1.21 #3969 * Live long and prosper.
>--
>Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario/Detroit, MI
>World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044

-Greg
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: dougb@novell.com (Doug Barlow)
Subject: Re: Diamond Stealth drivers for OS/2?
Organization: Novell Inc., Provo, UT, USA 
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 14:46:22 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.180436.3261@doug.cae.wisc.edu> terryh@cae.wisc.edu (Terry Henning) writes:
>
>Someone posted an article a while back that said that Diamond would not be
>producing drivers for OS/2 2.0 for their Stealth board.  Is this true?  I

I was the person that posted the original thread.  Todd from Diamond's
technical support told me yesterday that  the OS/2 drivers are currently
being written and that we should call them back in about 2 weeks.  He also
told me that there is a new BIOS for the board, version 2.31.  The older ones
had problems with 1280x1024 in certain applications.

I do enjoy their Stealth board.  It is very speedy in Windoze.  It's just too
bad that they had Windoze 3.1 drivers out when 3.1 released but OS/2
drivers are still being written 2 weeks now after the GA date.

Doug Barlow


--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doug Barlow                   Email: DOUGB@NOVELL.COM
Novell, Inc.  Provo, UT
            The opinions expressed above are solely my own and
	    do not in any way represent the opinions of Novell, Inc.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: jokim@jarthur.claremont.edu (John H. Kim)
Subject: Re: PM Terminal Buglets?
Organization: Harvey Mudd College
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 06:59:21 GMT

tanith@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Michael D Kretzer) writes:

>But, hey, what do you expect in an 'applet'?  The PM Terminal 'applet' is
>a full-featured communications program in it's own right...and it is
>far better than Windows Terminal and such...

At 1.5 MB, I consider it an app, not an applet.  I chucked it to save
disk space.  (check out its size via selective install)
-- 
John H. Kim                 | (This space to be filled when I
jokim@jarthur.claremont.edu | think of something very clever 
uunet!jarthur!jokim         | to use as a disclaimer)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: jpollard@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
Subject: OS2 SIMM Question
Summary: mixing 3 and 9 chip SIMMs is not recomended, but will it work ?
Keywords: SIMM
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 22:33:23 -0500

The mixing of 3 and 9 chip SIMMs is not recommended, but can I expect
it to work ?

Regards,

-- 
Jack Pollard, private citizen
jpollard@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: rafetmad@cheshire.oxy.edu (David R. Giller)
Subject: Re: Infoworld Headlines
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA 90041 USA.
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 01:44:12 GMT

In article <1992Apr07.190935.12183@atl.scscom.com> chris@atl.scscom.com (Chris Boaro) writes:
>Well, my April 6th Infoworld showed up today. The good news is that OS/2
>2.0 had 2 front page headlines, the bad news is that they were:
>
>"OS/2 2.0 Stumbles but Shows Promise", which goes on to say a few nice 
>things about 2.0, but harps on the current absence of a netware requester.
>It does say that the 2.0 desktop puts the Windoze interface to shame. The
>closing comments say that users wanting a mature, "robust" operating system
>will have to wait a bit longer.

OS/2 is being criticised for not being robust?  My god, my buggy LA is still
more stable than the Windows that it replaced.

>Other mentions of OS/2 still talk about it as being a server or high end
>operating system. I think IBM needs to work on OS/2's image - get it down
>to the desktop. Explain to potential customers and to the press why it
>is such a valuable tool for -any- desktop. Personally, I never understood
>why anyone would want to waste a fews megs of RAM and disk space putting
>an operating system with a GUI on a server in the first place. And as
>for this "mission critical" myth, if I loose an hour's worth of data
>because my operating system crashes, and you say it's okay because I
>wasn't working on anything "mission critical", it's very possible that I
>may hurt you.

To quote a favorable article about 1.3 in BYTE (yes, BYTE) when 1.3 was
released:  "So OS/2 will give you a rock-solid base for mission-critical
applications.  And hey, my mission is critical, too."

-Dave
-- 
David Giller, Box 134 | Q: How many Oregonians does it take to screw in a light
Occidental College    | bulb?  A: Three.  One to replace the bulb, and two to
1600 Campus Road      | fend off all the Californians trying to share the
Los Angeles, CA 90041 | experience. ---------------------------rafetmad@oxy.edu
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: FAQ List Status Report
Date: 12 Apr 92 17:54:51 GMT
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago

Release 2.0 of the OS/2 Frequently Asked Questions List is still in
the works and will be for some time yet.  I'm hoping to get it done in
the next week, but there's so much ground to cover, so many things to
double check, etc., that it is going to take a bit more time.

In the meantime, the "old" version (1.9g) is still available via
anonymous ftp from hobbes.nmsu.edu, directory pub/os2/faq, filename
os2faq19g.txt.
-- 
Timothy F. Sipples       Keeper of the OS/2 Frequently Asked Questions
sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu  List, available via anonymous ftp from
Dept. of Economics       128.123.35.151, directory pub/os2/faq, or via
Univ. of Chicago  60637  netmail from LISTSERV@BLEKUL11.BITNET.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: ballard@ucs.ubc.ca (Alan Ballard)
Subject: Re: GA directory move bug?
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 16:53:21 GMT

In <1992Apr9.230540.20974@muddcs.claremont.edu> jokim@jarthur.claremont.edu (John H. Kim) writes:

> < detailed description of problem moving a directory using WPS
>  deleted >

>After I cleaned this mess up, I tried it again.  Same result.  Is
>this a bug?  If it's a feature, I'd sure like to know what it's for.
  
Probably a bug.  Practically every problem I've found so far with GA
has involved the "drives" object, directly or indirectly.  It is by
FAR the worst part of the release.  

Considering what a disaster it was in the first release, it's come
a long way, but it is still bad. It was obvious back at 1.677 that
drives needed a complete rewrite, which it didn't get.  They should
have put the 1.3 file manager  back in for GA, and redone drives for a
later release.

Anybody notice that a lot of the multi-threading support they added
to "drives" for 6.304 seems to have dissappeared for GA?  And that it
is system modal during file copies/moves?  

I've had it crash WPS twice so far.  And I've had it use up (and fail
to release) some resoufce such that all I could do was shutdown. 
etc. etc....

-- 
Alan Ballard                   | Internet: ballard@ucs.ubc.ca
University Computing Services  |   Bitnet: USERAB1@UBCMTSG
University of British Columbia |    Phone: 604-822-3074
Vancouver B.C. Canada V6T 1Z2  |      Fax: 604-822-5116
From: sip1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Timothy F. Sipples)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: OS/2 v2.0 GA includes SVGA support for Windows!!
Date: 5 Apr 92 16:42:42 GMT
Reply-To: sip1@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Dept. of Econ., Univ. of Chicago

In article <dmmjl7+.rcain@netcom.com> rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain) writes:
>mo@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Mohit Goyal) writes:
>: Well, I was talking to a friend of mine who owns 2.0 GA and he is running
>: it in 1024X768w/256c using Tridents new GA drivers.  He says that he can
>: run everything in this mode, including Windows windows!!  I had thought they
>: wouldn't be able to include SVGA support in GA for Windows windows, but
>: appartently the guys in Boca did it.  
>This is incredible news!  Could we double, triple, or even better have
>Timothy check it?  ;-)

This is not the information I have.  Mohit is correct, that the
drivers seem to work fine.  However, in modes other than 800x600 with
16 colors the Trident drivers do not yet support Windows programs
running in windows on the Workplace Shell desktop (so-called "seamless
Windows").  Extending the support to encompass that last bit is in the
works.

To flesh out the SuperVGA story a bit more (to follow on to my
previous post) apparently there is a way to get OS/2 2.0 to run the
Windows desktop in high resolution, beyond VGA (or to run DOS programs
that use beyond-VGA modes as well).  It involves running the SVGA
program that comes with OS/2 2.0.  Apparently the base video handler
does not need to be aware of the specific adapter using this approach.
So the support is even a bit better than I first posted.

Again, second hand information.  I have to double check things to give
more than a speculative answer.
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: bbm@po.CWRU.Edu (Brian B. Mathewson)
Subject: Cleveland Rollout of OS/2 2.0
Reply-To: bbm@po.CWRU.Edu (Brian B. Mathewson)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 21:34:52 GMT


IBM's rollout of OS/2 took place today at Executive Caterers at Landerhaven,
a very nice location.  They rented the whole place out, including two
rooms full of IBM computers (not too much in the way of clones).  One room
had about 20 computers for anyone to play on, and people from a number of
hardware/software vendors/stores showing them off, giving demos, and       
answering questions.  The other room was full of about a dozen software
developers and consultants, all showing their products and support for
OS/2 (even someone from WordPerfect was there).

The main event was held in the grand ballroom, where some people who
have used OS/2 a lot gave some testimonials, and we saw an edited version
of the Comdex demo (very impressive!)  In addition, every 45 minutes
they gave presentations on four subjects (installation, newtorking, OS/2
vs. Windows, and the Workplace Shell), each in separate rooms.  They had
about 30-80 people in each room when I was there, which didn't include
those who attended the main event.  The OS/2 vs. Windows session was
packed...

In all, 700 people registered to come, and they gave away 50 copies of
OS/2 GA to every 14th (or so) person who registered.  I was surprised
so many people were interested, and how many people came!

A man from LDI Superstore said they were supposed to get a shipment of
OS/2 today, but didn't know if they were upgrades or not.   They'll be
getting at least one call tonight...


-- 
|  \  |  \  | V |   "Maybe you ARE smarter than me, but can you do THIS?"
|  \  |  \  |   |                                -Chris Knight, Real Genius
|  /  |  /  |   |    Brian Mathewson   bbm@r2d2.eeap.cwru.edu

Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
From: bgm@cray.com (Bert Moshier)
Subject: MN OS/2 Celebration!!
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 9 Apr 92 17:25:01 CDT

				OS/2 CELEBRATION!

				OPEN TO THE PUBLIC

   Come celebrate the arrival of OS/2 Version 2.0 in Minneapolis/St. Paul!

			     Tuesday, April 14, 1992

			     8:30 a.m. to 12:00 Noon
			 Registration begins at 8:30 a.m.
		Continuous software demonstrations until 12:00 Noon
		 	 Guest Speaker, Mr. Mark Elliott,
		      Assistant General Manager of Marketing,
			     IBM Programming Systems
			   at 9:00 a.m. and 10:30 a.m.

Bloomington Marriott
2020 East 79th Street
Bloomington, MN

Call IBM at (612) 397-6444 to reserve
	your seat today!

There will be:

  Entertainment
  Refreshments
  Software Vendor Demonstrations
  GIVE-AWAYS!
From: dv7@msr.utk.edu (David Skyberg, 615/482-1999)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: Not all press coverage has been bad...
Date: 17 Apr 92 03:01:33 GMT
Reply-To: dv7@msr.epm.ornl.gov (David Skyberg, 615/482-1999)
Organization: Oak Ridge National Lab

The Wall Street Journal today, April 16, dedicated its Personal
Technology column to OS/2 2.0.  It was mostly favorable.  The
criticisms were fair (OS/2 requires 4 MB RAM and 6 MB if you are
doing any real work, it requires 15-30 MB of your hard disk).  For
those of you who do not subscribe I include some of the more
interesting comments below:

"But MS-DOS is old and increasingly inadequate."

"Since 1990, Microsoft has been wildly successful selling Windows,
a 'grapical user interface' ...  
But Windows isn't a full-fledged operating system."

"OS/2 is, in contrast, a true graphical operating system, designed from
the ground up to make PCs more powerful and easier to use."

"I'm convinced that it is a technical success....  Indeed, OS/2 is
more sophisticated and robust than even Apple Computer's Macintosh
system software, long the model for graphical computing."

"Where OS/2 especially shines is in handling multiple applications."

[a long section about RAM and HD requirements, the total number of
diskettes it takes to install (21)]

"All this may make OS/2 most suited to corporate use, where it can
be installed on huge server PCs....  That would be a shame, because
IBM has built a first-rate product that deserves a wider audience.
But until more people own really powerful PCs, OS/2 won't be ubiqitous."



All-in-all the article is about as knowledgeable and fair as one
could expect from a general circulation newspaper (and quite a
change from the usual crap found in the Personal Technology column).

Now if we can just get the computer press to give OS/2 a fair shake
:-(.
From: tching@caldwr.water.ca.gov (Tracy Ching)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Does 2.0 support multi-windows with diff. video modes?
Date: 16 Apr 92 19:33:05 GMT
Organization: Calif. Dept. of Water Resources, Sac.


	Sorry if this is a FAQ, but....

1)	Does the -release- version of 2.0 support multi DOS windows which
	are running at different video modes?  (I was told by someone
	that -his- beta 2.0 ran as stated below...)

	For example, I want to run 4 windows with each having a virtual
full size DOS screen.  One screen would run a GIF viewer, one screen
would run a BASIC program in the "mode 40" mode, one screen would have
the standard old DOS prompt with 25 columns and 80 rows, and one screen
would run 320 X 200 ega type video.  All of this would be running on
a 1280X1024 video (with os2 driver).

Please e-mail, I have a hard time reaching this news, thanks

Curious..........
               _______________________________________________________
______________/    tching@water.ca.gov || Standard disclaimer:
== Tracy Ching          (916) 653-HOLD || All of my opinions are mine,
== Electrical Engineer                 || otherwise they're yours.
== California Dept. of Water Resources ||
Organization: Wirtschaftsuniversitaet Wien, Vienna, Austria
Date: Saturday, 11 Apr 1992 14:58:20 WUT
From: FLATSCHER Rony <RONY@awiwuw11.wu-wien.ac.at>
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2.misc
Subject: Re: All GUIs are not alike

The workplace shell is closer to Mac, but surpassing it in many
respects IMHO. The showdown will be ultimate if the first SOM-
aware 32bit OS/2 applications surface (WPS is built on SOM).

---rony